There it is. >> Doesn't work. Oh, now it does. >> We got it now. >> Yeah. So, here we'll go. >> Let's make sure that he said he's ready. Good evening and welcome to the regular
commission meeting for March 16, 2026. I'd like to call this meeting to order. Now, if we could please stand for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the
republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> City clerk, would you please call roll? >> Good evening. >> Vice Mayor Vasquez >> here. Commissioner Clark >> here.
>> Commissioner Sison >> here. Commissioner Dicki >> here. >> Mayor Doctor >> here. >> Thank you. >> All right. Approval of regular and workshop agendas. Does anybody have any changes? >> I do have two changes that uh I would
like to discuss. The first one being I five. Uh, Commissioner Sesan has put on here summer camp break even revenue and expense projections from recreation D
department. Uh, we have just above it I4 which is the second and final reading of ordinance 2026 which is the fee schedule. So, um, what I'd like is to eliminate
uh I5 Commissioner Sison, >> I would like to keep it. >> Okay. >> Combine them so you can do them at the same time. >> Um, well, >> no, I don't think so. >> What if we put I5 in front of I4? Uh, it
seems like a logical discussion to have. >> Yeah. Not in favor of that either to be quite honest. I mean, but this has needs to be a consensus. >> Yeah. I mean, I I I don't understand what the difference is. It seems like we're be talking about the fees and I4, right? >> Yes. Yes.
>> Yeah. saw fine with that. >> So, >> so are we >> Well, >> what's the consensus? I didn't I was a little confused. Was it to just run through I4 and eliminate I5?
>> Oh, got it. Okay. Yeah. I mean, I would say we could probably do that. >> Okay. So, I think we have consensus to do that. >> Yeah. >> Um and then the other is uh I8 results of city manager performance reviews by
commissioners. Um, that one as well. Uh, I think that most everybody has probably concluded their uh performance review. >> I'm the only one that did one, so I'm I'm not sure why it was concluded.
>> Uh, I don't think you're the only one that did one. I think that uh all four of us uh besides yourself have done them. It's that uh we used the the form that uh that was to be used, but uh we had one-on-one discussions is what we
had. >> So, I'm not sure that uh that we need to have anything u here. Did every >> I did a one-on-one discussion and I wasn't prepared to really talk about it publicly. Yeah. I I privately did it with Charlie. >> I did the same. >> I did as well.
>> Same. Okay. So, I I think we all have the same thing. It was a one-on-one and uh if we're comfortable on that, and it sounds like at least four of us are comfortable with it, that uh that we'd eliminate that one as well. >> So, okay.
>> What's the consensus? >> Uh the consensus is 4 to one. >> I didn't hear anything, Billy, or or I didn't hear them say anything. Would you be would you be okay with having a private one, a private discussion with him like the rest of us?
>> I've had I don't get any responses from Charles. I send out emails all the time. I think he's waiting for a pellet court update before he sends me an email, which is pretty frustrating. So, >> okay. So, all in favor of eliminating it, I
>> I Okay. >> All right. So that takes care of that item. Uh we now we have no proclamations, recognitions, but we do need to square in for Commissioner Chris Clark and Commissioner Ardan Dicki.
>> Are we done discussing uh the regular workshop agendas? >> Um yes. Well, I'd like to say that I think we should put away our cell phones because I get a lot of constituents who tell me that commissioners are texting away during the meeting. I put mine away
in my bag. >> I don't have mine. >> I have mine. >> Mine's there. >> Thank you. >> All right. Thank you. All right. So, how are we going to do this on swearing in?
>> Okay. Thank you. I'm just going to leave that there. >> Yeah, whatever. >> I do swear >> I do solemnly swear >> that I will support and defend >> that support and defend >> the Constitution >> the Constitution
>> and the government of the United States >> and the government of the United States >> and of the State of Florida >> and of the State of Florida >> that I am duly qualified >> that I am duly qualified to hold office >> to hold office >> under the constitution of the state >> under the constitution of the state >> and that I will well and faithfully >> and that I will well and faithfully
>> perform my duties of city commission district >> perform my duties of city commission district >> Thank you very much congratulations Thank you. I do solemnly swear >> I do solemnly swear >> that I will support, protect and defend >> I will support
>> protect and defend >> the Constitution >> the Constitution >> and the government >> and the government >> of the United States >> of the United States >> and of the State of Florida >> and of the State >> that I'm duly qualified >> that I'm duly qualified >> to hold office >> to hold office >> under the Constitution of the state.
>> And I will >> and >> I will well and faithfully >> perform the duty >> of district >> you had him going. Congratul That's the hardest, easiest thing.
>> All right. Uh, now we move on to public comments for non-aggenda items. >> Uh, we didn't have any minutes. Yep. All right. The first is Merl Decker. Good evening, Merl Decker, 1280th
Terrace. And I'm just uh want to say that I hope you continue the master plan and slow down on uh PD and I vote no for the height and density. Thank you. >> Thank you,
Derry Smith. Hi, Derry Smith, Sunset Beach. And I just wanted to say that uh big buildings aren't what bring people here. They oftent times look to see they they search for quieter, emptier beaches. Not
that we want our beaches empty, but they like the they don't like the traffic and all that. And I just hope that you all would consider that when you think about PDS and all that. So, thank you. >> Thank you, Jerry.
Mari Wden >> or is it Mary Wden? >> Mary. >> Okay. With an I. Okay. Thank you. >> Hi, Mary Wden. I'm reside 135 122nd Treasure Island. One, I'm against more of the height and density. Two, I would
like to support a nomination of Ardan Dicki for vice mayor. Also, I hope that we can find investors that will embrace the uniqueness of our island and find that that's what they want to invest in. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you, Mary.
Jeff Banan Jeff Bannon Palms. I uh I'm talking tonight because uh I am against the height and the density and uh I would support Arden Dicki to be our vice mayor. So please consider it. Thank you.
>> Thank you Jeff. Kathy Melon Melan Milan >> McCann. All right, we'll go with that. answer. >> Good afternoon. I am totally against the high density in our city of Treasure
Island. I bought here in the '9s and I bought here because of the low buildings here. Reminds me of the Jersey Shore where we don't have tall buildings and hotels and that's why I've been here for over 30 years. I'm in District 2 on
Alakapri. Thank you. Thank you Kathy Diane Gardner Redan. >> That's me. >> Yes, I live in um Suncatch Tree 3. I
came here in 1985. I had a time share in Jamaican on the Gulf and I purchased my condo in um 2012 and I enjoy the low density and the low
heights. So um that's my stance. >> Great. Thank you, >> Laura Beovven. Hello, my name is Laura Bukovven. I have lived in Treasure Island for 19 years. I have lived in the city of St.
Petersburg. I was born here 68 years, so I'm very familiar with Treasure Island. Back in November of 2016, Treasure Island actually had a referendum where we voted on height and density. And we voted no on that. And I'm very
disappointed that we're still this place in the city where we're questioning how we want to build our city. So, I'm against the increase of height and density in our city of Treasure Island. Thank you.
>> Thank you, Laura. Barbadoms. Barb Adams, Isa Palms. Um, the last two days I've shown properties to people from Canada, um, New Hampshire, um, Massachusetts, and every one of them said the reason
that they're focusing on Treasure Island is because we're not St. Pete Beach and we're not Clear Water and they I mean they talk about how friendly like we were looking at some condo building and you know a woman with her little dog is
like hi and she's trying to talk and she's going I don't see this you know I love this this community it everybody is so nice and so friendly and it feels like a small town and she said I don't really like the other communities
because it doesn't feel that way and she says There's a there's a vibe. There's something. And she goes, "And I know the place is a mess. And I can see the messes everywhere. And something needs to be done about these messes, but there's something different about
Treasure Island that's really special." And these people had never, you know, had never been here before. And they were looking at all the different beach communities, and that was their feeling. Um and um I mean I know we all desperately want development
desperately. Um our downtown is horrible. We all love love love the Thunderbird. We want the Thunderbird back. But we do need to as has agreed by everybody. We do need to do start on the master plan and then bring
the PDS in. Not the other way around. we all everybody that was agreed on and the PDS can be brought in quickly but not first and that's the way we all you know that's the way it was supposed to be. Um, so I just hope everybody will listen
to the residents and not just think of developers. And you know, we want development and we want them to make money, but you know, there are communities that make money that are cool and um aren't
giant. And I also would support Ardan nomination for vice mayor. Thank you, Barb. Mark Hoey. Uh, >> good evening, folks. Mark Hoey, 225 104th Avenue, District 3. Just a brief
public service announcement for the benefit of the District 3 residents. On April 21st, there will be a special election to determine the outcome of the recall effort uh with city commissioner Arthur Saison. A couple of key dates to keep in mind.
It's treated like a regular election. So, it's 7 to 7 voting over at the community center. But for you district three and district 3 only residents, uh the deadline to register if you're not current on your registration is
March 23rd. That's coming up quickly. Uh there will be no early voting as is with the municipal elections. And if you choose to mail in, and particularly those folks who are off island, still in recovery mode, please request your
mail-in ballot request by April 9th. Get that by April 9th. So, uh, I'll continue to remind everybody of this, but please be ready to plan and vote. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mark. West Evans.
West Evans, Isisle of Palms. Uh, first I want to say I'm disappointed that we took uh I5 off the agenda. I believe that the summer camp uh revenue uh and expense discussion needs to be had. I know last year we went over this
and there was uh the revenue was being mixed with standing ovations and it made it look like the summer camp was costing uh way more than what the uh public work or not public works the
uh Kathy said it was actually costing. So we actually do need to see a breakdown on that. So I'm disappointed to see that actually taken off the agenda. I think that's very important. Uh but really what I wanted to get up here and say is um I've seen a lot of talk in the community. Uh some of it
coming from uh the board here, a lot of it from developers and um and the people who agree with them um where it seems like everyone's constantly running down Treasure Island and they talk about how
bad Treasure Island is and uh they don't see what's great about Treasure Island. We constantly hear that it's nothing but parking lots and caution tape fences and dirt lots, but there's a lot more to Treasure Island than that, even though that's what's happening right now. Uh there is some of that going on. But we
have uh one of the most beautiful beaches in the world here. We have the greatest neighborhoods, the greatest neighbors, fantastic families in these neighborhoods. We have off the top of my head on the way home from the last meeting uh was counting how many bars
and restaurants we have on this island and I counted 25. It's a three and a half mile long island. We have 25 bars and restaurants. We have coffee shops, ice cream shops, we have realtors, we have all kind of businesses here. But if we listen to a lot of you guys, we
listen to a lot of the developers, they'll tell us there's nothing here. They run it down. They don't appreciate it. They don't respect it. They think they need to run it down only to prop up their plan for big development. And that's
that tells us all we need to know about some of these guys. I'm not against development. I backed I went door to door for John Doctor. I went door to door for Chris Clark because they were prodevelopment and I wanted to see good development in our island. I don't want to see
concrete walls that can be found anywhere in the country. You can see that anywhere. You can go anywhere, any suburb, pick a drop a pen on the map, you'll find your Applebees and your chilies and all of that. What we have here is a gym.
This is a treasure and we want to keep it that way. That doesn't mean we have to have empty abandoned two-story buildings. There's people that are building within a 50 over1 all over this state. They're doing it in within this county.
I'm not even against PDs. I'm for a master plan. I'm for using PDs within a master plan. I would love to see the Thunderbird be the Don Cesar of Treasure Island. I would love that. In fact, the Thunderbird, of all the
developers I've heard get up here over the last few months, the manager of the Thunderbird is the only one that seems to appreciate Treasure Island. All the other ones just run it down. And I'm sick of hearing you guys run down Treasure Island. Why can't you be proud
of Treasure Island? We We're proud of it. It has some flaws right now, and we'll work through that. But why don't we hear you guys promote Treasure Island? You want to bring people here. You don't have to build a skyscraper. Sorry, I use the word skyscraper. I know it's not a skyscraper, a huge building
to get people here. That's not what people come here for. You watch, you walk along the beachwalk, you'll hear people from all over the country that come here because this place is Americana. It's a piece of American culture that is being wiped off the map.
There's very few places like this left. Almost everywhere in America is being taken over by big business, big money that only care about their temporary what they can make right then and there. The value in this place is what we have
here, what it can be if we keep it quaint, not jammed with traffic, with beaches that aren't shouldertoshoulder. That's what makes this place valuable. You guys need to see the treasure that
it is. Thank you. >> Thank you, West Marie Barbara. >> Um, good evening, Commissioner Board and uh, residents. Um, the initial discussions regarding
LDRs, including statements from the LPA suggesting that the city was required to comply with the county height and density maximums. This happened a few months ago. Subsequently, the commission board adopted a similar position during the first reading. Unfortunately, the
present commission board has not addressed the potential consequences of these proposed increases for the city. There has been no discussion or interest coming from the commission board about methods for collecting data to determine whether the density increases are
feasible throughout all temporary lodging zones rather than just within a single parcel in the hotel zone which is the Thunderbird. Numerous residents have commented that these increases were proposed for just one parcel. Don't be fooled because if one parcel in a
particular zone is awarded this these benefits, all parcels in that said zone are entitled to the same. I believe this is called spot zoning and all the other parcels in the same said zone can challenge this successfully. Recently the commission board indicated a
preference for feasibility studies focus exclusively on the financial aspects of the proposals. This approach appears to prioritize the interests of developers and property owners while giving limited consideration to resident sentiment. Additionally, there has been no
directive for conducting traffic studies at various density increase scenarios such as what about if you increase it by 25%, what about if you increase it by 50%. Or how about the 100% that the developers are proposing? We have nothing showing this. What would how it
would impact our streets? We cannot build another street Gulf Boulevard be and you should do this before proceeding with any other vote in this matter. It is concerning concerning that support for maximum increases seems aligned primarily with business interest associated with this board. Currently
there are numerous lawsuits challenged throughout Florida challenging Senate bills and this is particular uh the Senate bills 180. Uh currently there are 61 organizations currently challenging that. It's not directly impacting our city as I have read it. It is to
demonstrate that resident groups have the ability to contest the Senate Bill 7118 enacted in March of 2023. This bill amended section 163.3167 of the Florida statutes concerning local government comprehensive plan. The key provision of bill 7118 is prohibition on
future referenda. Cities and counties can no longer hold voter referenda on LDRs or amendments to comprehensive plan which outline the long-term community growth strategies. Only cities with charters that as of June 1st, 2011
contains specific language explicitly allowing referendum are exempt which we had that language in our charter. Um in 2005 it was voted and enacted by this board. This is there is a legal counsel representing a group of treasure island residents challenging the city legal
council. That treasure line cannot hold referendum pertaining to LDR changes due to 718. The residents are ready to challenge this due to our charter language that was adopted in 2005 amending our city charter. We stand firm that any changes to the citizen
initiative referendum ordinance of 20204 which restricts the building height or density changes without voter approval cannot be amended by future commission board or this current board. Only registered voters have the authority to approve modifications to height and density limits. If the comm commission
wishes to seek such changes, it must propose an amendment to city charter to the city charter that article 7.07 07 specifically talking about one ordinance. It's appointing and referencing one ordinance only with which is initiate. You cannot do this
anymore according to the the bill, but we already have it in our language in our charter. The legal challenge will seek to restore the community's ability to plan responsibly for growth, infrastructure, and environmental protection for our comprehensive plan in the city of Treasure Island. The city
and in the city of Treasure Island, the city charter. Thank you. Thank you, Marie. And that is all the cards that I have for non-aggenda items. So, we'll close the public comments.
Uh, we do not have any minutes for approval. So, we'll move on to the consent agenda. >> I move to approve the consent agenda as presented. >> Second. >> We have a motion and a second. Is there any discussion?
All right. On consent agenda, do we need to go to uh any public comments? >> I don't think so. >> No, that would have been during general com. >> Okay, great. Thank you. All right.
Hearing no uh discussion up here as well. We'll do uh a can uh please do do a roll call. Vice Mayor Vasquez. >> I, Commissioner Sison, >> I. >> Commissioner Clark, >> I. >> Commissioner Dicki, >> I. >> Mayor Doctor, >> I. >> Thank you.
>> Now, we're moving on to nomination one. This is I one nomination and election of a vice mayor. How we're going to be doing this is that we will ask for nominations. Once we have uh the nominations, we'll
close nominations and we'll actually take a uh a vote. So, do we have any nominations? >> Um I'll nominate Ardan based on all the emails and stuff I've received over the last few days.
>> Okay. And I will nominate Vice Mayor Bazquez. So, are there any other nominations? We'll close the nominations and we'll we'll do it this way. Um, since the the first nomination came in for Ardan
Dicki, uh, we'll do a vote for Ardan Dicki. How many folks are for Ardan Dicki? We have two. How many for the election of Vice Mayor Vazquez? I I we have three
so that uh we can close this. >> Want to make a a motion to solidify it. I make a motion someone to appoint Tammy Vasquez as >> I make a motion.
>> I make a motion to validate uh Tammy Vasquez as vice mayor. >> Okay. So, roll call, please. >> Second. >> We have a second. Second. Second >> roll call, please. >> Commissioner Sison, >> I. >> Mayor Doctor, >> I.
>> Commissioner Clark, >> hi. >> Vice Mayor Vasquez, >> I. >> Commissioner Dicki, >> no. >> All right, moving on. Um I two second reading and final public
hearing of ordinance 20264. >> An ordinance of the city of Ker Island, Florida amending the fiscal year 2026 general fund budget >> recognize insurance proceeds of $386,799.50 for flood damages providing for
severability conflict and an effective date. I move to approve ordinance number 2026-04 at this second and final public hearing. >> Second. >> We have a motion and a second. Is there any discussion? >> Yes. I'd like uh to instruct uh I need
some information from Charles if I can. Uh if you could please provide a report on all flood and hurricane claims, amounts collected, and amounts outstanding. Please. I will look and see what we've provided the body. I know we're about done with
the insurance proceeds, but I'll go back and listen to your u comment tomorrow, Commissioner Saison, and and see what we have. >> Thank you. >> All right. Public comment. Is there any public comment hearing?
>> Pleaseard McKenna. Um, in in regard to the question that that Arthur just asked, I remember a while back, a long time ago, we were in a situation where it was going to take us a long time to clean up and it was going to cost us x amount of
dollars uh for FEMA to do it and do it that way. And then we voted to uh to subvert that, go with our own private um collection people and it was going to cost like an extra million or whatever. um and and but be done a lot sooner and
a lot faster. How did that whole process work out? Did that run according to budget similar to what you just asked, Arthur? >> I'd like to add that question to >> we uh we don't communicate back and forth. >> I'm communicating with Charles. >> Okay. And but someone was up there.
Okay. >> Can I communicate with Charles now? >> Yes, you can. >> Thank you, Charles. I'd like to ask that question as well if you could get an answer for me. >> I appreciate it. This is a budget amendment on the revenue side to acknowledge the receipt
of the insurance proceeds of approximately $387,000. So, this is acknowledging the proceeds coming in on the revenue side. >> Thank you, attorney. All right. Um, do we uh have a roll call, please?
>> Are we closed with public comments? >> Yes. >> Thank you. Vice Mayor Vasquez I. >> Commissioner Sison. >> I. >> Commissioner Clark. >> I. >> Commissioner Dicki. >> I. >> Mayor Doctor. >> I. >> Thank you. >> All right. Second and final reading of
ordinance 20250. This is an ordinance of the city of Treasure Island, Florida, amending the fiscal year 2026 general fund budget to recognize additional expenses of $334,000 for the expense of the dune walkover
repairs providing for severability conflict and an effective date. >> I move to approve ordinance number 2026-05 at this second and final public hearing. >> Second. We have a motion and a second.
Do we have any discussion? Do we have any public comment? No public comment. We'll close public comment and we will take a roll call, please. >> Vice Mayor Vasquez, >> I. >> Commissioner Dicki, >> I. >> Commissioner Clark, >> I.
>> Commissioner Sison, >> I. >> Mayor Doctor, >> I. I4, second and final reading of ordinance number 2026-06, >> an ordinance of the city of Treasure Island, Florida, amending the citywide fee schedule and adopting appendix A as
the city of Treasure Island's fee schedule, providing for severability, providing for conflict, providing for codification, and providing for an effective date. I move to adopt ordinance 2026-06 amending the citywide fee schedule at
this second and final public hearing. >> Do we have a second? >> Second. >> We have a motion and a second. Public comment. I do have a card for Sarah Penton. >> Hi Sarah Pennington. Sorry if I sound
shaky. It's so cold in here. I'm actually shaking. Um, I also agreed with Commissioner Sison that we should have had a discussion about the summer camp. We had the discussion last year and I specifically remember that it was costing us around $14,000 per week just
in personnel to run this summer camp, which I thought like how could that even be anywhere close to what it would cost to run a summer camp, especially when you have people volunteering. It was bizarre. And I spoke about it last year and then we determined, oh, it's because there's people that are working at
standing ovations. Somehow their uh personnel expenses have been added into the summer camp, which makes zero sense to me. Um, we need to have a breakdown of that so we actually know the numbers that we're dealing with and if this summer camp is costing us money. We also
know that a large percentage of people that are attending this summer camp are not even Treasure Island residents. So, are the residents of Treasure Island actually subsidizing people from outside of Treasure Island to come to our summer camp? I'm I mean, I'm not saying I'm not
a generous person, but that doesn't seem like really good spending of our tax money. And so, to have that discussion removed from the agenda tonight, I think was very improper. Thank you. >> Thank you, Sarah.
All right. Um, we've got the motion and we've got a second. Is there any further discussion? >> There is further discussion. Thank you, Wes and Sarah, for the support. Um, ironically, I came prepared. I was expecting Mayor Doctor to remove my item. So, uh, ironically, my comments to
I uh, four include what my comments for I5 was. So, uh, I'd like to know what the expected expenses are. I'm waiting for the expenses. I sent many emails to Charles with no response. We said it
last year when Ardan brought it up with Chuck Anderson as our city manager. Uh we all agreed that we need to break even. We decided that in a meeting, it's in meeting minutes. I just haven't had an opportunity to look for them. Uh
reducing the scope of the program, we need to break even. We got to make it great for our residents and for the children of our employees. So, those are my comments. >> All right. I uh I don't have all my
notes from the original discussion we have on here, so I'm basing this from memory. If I'm off a little bit, I apologize for it. But, uh, my recollection is what when we agreed, uh, to to the fees that that we're getting ready to, uh, approve in a second second
reading that, uh, the the, uh, business model for the summer camp was about $33,000 short of breaking even. Uh, but but that's even with increasing the rates by 32% for non-residents and 42%
for residents. So that was a pretty aggressive uh move and and uh yes I would have liked to break even but but I thought you know pressing it too much harder than those big increases was a bit much in one year. Uh so I think my
rec again my recollection was I think we only we needed 25 more uh participants in the program uh to break even. So last year's uh last year's attendance I think was uh understated not understated but
probably below normal levels because we were it was just you know months after the hurricane so there were fewer people here. Anyway, I'm fine with approving these fees uh as listed. Uh that's a pretty big increase. Uh let's see what the attendance is this year and let's
get this uh work to get this to to a break even in the in the next year. >> Yeah, I I was under the impression we got it pretty close to break even. But it's impossible to tell, right, if it's going to be break even or not because you don't know how many people are going to sign up or not sign up, right? If no
one signs up or very few, it's not going to break even. If a whole bunch do, then it very well may. So, um, like what Ardan said, I think if we monitor it after this year, then we could dial it in even more, uh, next year. >> Agree. >> And you pretty much answered what I was
going to ask is about where I mean, it makes sense that it was less than, um, you know, last year was less, but yeah, I would agree that this year is going to be a good gauge to figure it out, but I definitely support the the fees the the
fee schedule we're on. Mayor, doctor, could I be recognized? >> Yes, please. >> So, it's been said twice now by Commissioner Saison and that I never respond to his emails. That's emphatically just not true. >> I'll over send them.
>> I'm have the floor, sir. Go through the mayor, please. Um, the second thing is that I did ask our parks and recck director to reply to Commissioner Size on with everything she could that we could stand on factually. and cautioned
her against giving estimates that we can't know until the five of you by majority vote vote on the fee schedule and we get um applications and deposits in for the summer camp. That exactly what Commissioner Dicki and the rest of
you have kind of said that is going to determine how close we're going to get to breaking even. Um it was a substantial increase in rates this year. That is fine. you're about to vote on the rate schedule. Um, but just because
Commissioner Sison asked for something doesn't mean that information already exists and a lot of what he asked for isn't within his scope in the charter or the board rules or any other current document for an individual city commissioner uh to direct me or my
staff, which has happened often. And he's not hearing any of this for the first time. Um, so I just wanted to clear the air on that. Thank you. Thank you. Appreciate that. All right. Um, we need to take the vote.
Yeah. >> So, roll call, please. >> Vice Mayor Vasquez, >> I. >> Commissioner Sison, >> I. >> Commissioner Clark, >> I. >> Commissioner Dicki, >> I. >> Mayor Doctor, >> I. >> I six, first reading of ordinance
2026-9. This ordinance >> the city of Treasure Island microphone. An ordinance of the city of Treasure Island, Florida amending the fiscal year 2026 general fund budget to recognize additional expenses of 4
million for the expense of construction of a public safety building providing for severability, conflict, and an effective date. Do >> we have a motion, please? >> I move to approve ordinance number 2026-09
at this first public hearing and to schedule it for a second reading at the April 7th regular commissioner board meeting. >> Second. >> We have a motion and a second. Any discussion up here? >> Yes. I have a couple questions.
>> Okay. I'd like to ask the city attorney if this contract locks in the design builder to go to a maximum of $8 million. >> Yes, sir. I'll um ask Mr. Volneck to answer that question to the best best of
your ability. Um, >> this is a contract. It's a budget amendment, but if you could try to answer that question >> about the related contract. >> Fine. >> Good evening, Mayor Commissioners. Gary Volenik, public works director. Um the
agreement that was signed, approved and signed at the at the last meeting uh basically uh provides for the design team that was selected the construction design team to proceed with the design development of of a new public safety
facility. We just happen to have our kickoff meeting this morning going over a lot of the details. An hour and a half of of really up and down as far as all the the logistics, the design parameters, the needs and and and uh desires of the city. Um I was emphatic
about our $8 million budget that we had. However, until the design drawings are actually completed, um they can't uh actually we're giving them a 4month period to do what's called the early
design package where they will be able to give us a guaranteed maximum price. Until that point, we don't have that in writing. That is the intent. That's the budget that we're establishing. Um it really as we talked about this a this morning um it really depends upon
finishes fit things compromises things that we may need or may not need uh to go forward. So, uh, both the, uh, chief of police and and fire chief are, um, are in agreement that we are going to
look very closely at minimizing, um, uh, the needs, uh, but yet still, uh, uh, accommodating our our safety uh, requirements. So, um, it's that's a long answer, but we don't have that in writing. The agreement calls for that as
the budget. It calls for that as the target. um until that actually gets they can't say yes because we may ask for you know extra extravagant finishes or something. So it really depends upon when we get down to it what the finishes
are going to be but we made we had a a very good productive meeting this morning and uh uh all parties are in agreement to work for that goal the $8 million budget. >> Thank you. I have one more question uh for Gary. If are we really going to
spend $4 million for this fiscal year 2026? >> No, I I I uh I I would but I can't guarantee it. I think that the the the decision was just to go ahead and allocate 50% now and 50% for the following year. So, it just sort of
split it in half. But u um I think that you know you know any monies we're getting from the state obviously that's a reimbursement we have to pay upfront. So, we wanted to make sure we had enough money. Um, if they get if they can go fast, we might spend it. I hope they do, but uh uh we we wanted to make sure we
had enough money, but we're only going to spend I mean pay what they've they've completed to date. >> Thank you. Thank you for answering my questions. I know my emails don't get answered by the city manager, so I ask you here. Thank you. >> All right. So, uh, I do have, uh, I6
Mark Hoey. >> Uh, good evening again, Mark Hoey, 225 104th Avenue, District 3. And, and maybe it'll be answered, but, uh, I was expecting to hear from Victor possibly to you about how that 4 million was
being accumulated out of what. The only thing in the handout was it was said from CIP. So, I was hoping we can get a little more clarity on where we're accumulating those funds in order to make that payout in this calendar or fiscal year. Thank you.
>> Thank you, Mark. All right. Any additional discussion? >> I would like Mark's question answered. >> Uh, we don't answer it. You should be the first one to know that we don't answer directly during >> an important question. Can Victor come up and answer that question?
>> No, you're not asking Victor either. If you would like to have Victor take take it the approach here. I will ask Charlie to uh to call upon Victor. >> Sure. >> Okay. >> Want to call upon you want to ask Charlie to call upon Victor to answer
that question? >> Okay, I'll do that for you. Charlie, would you please uh get Victor for us? >> Thank you. >> He didn't see me. He could have asked >> that. Yeah. Good evening, commissioners
and major. So uh the the four as I expressed in the last uh quarterly u finance update we still have money set aside for for these four million. So we're taking it out of the reserve. Now about the spending strategy, I planning
to present in I believe it's April 7 um the steps to get along just if if we are going to take a loan. Uh I'm going to bring uh what the steps are and what my recommendation is going to be for financial strategy. So right now we have
the money on the set aside reserve. We're using the reserve for now but we may pay this out of the loan is h is depend of what the the commission decides. Victor, does that answer the question? >> Mayor, may I be recognized? >> Yes, please.
>> Victor, while you're up there, this $4 million is currently invested in some kind of investments where we're earning uh interest off of it, I assume. So, you're not going to take it out of I'm I'm assuming you're not going to take this money out of an interestbearing account and put it in a non-interest
bearing account to cover this budget. This this is just a internal transaction. It doesn't affect where the money currently resides. we we are allowed to keep our uh CIP money uh on on the investment because our investments right now I'm investing in
in products that uh that we every three months we we free up some cash. So I I'm using that strategy. We're going to have a enough cash flow for for paying for this. And when when the time come that we have to pay a big amount, we're going to know ahead of time because we're planning as Gary said, we met this
morning and we we're going to plan all of these dispersements. >> Mayor, can I be recognized? >> Yes, please. >> Thank you, Victor, for answering the question. >> You're welcome. Thank you. All right. Uh, so we have
closed the public comment. We have already read the motion and a second. >> Roll call, please. >> Vice Mayor Vazquez, >> I. >> Commissioner Dicki, >> I. >> Commissioner Clark, >> I. >> Commissioner Sison, >> I. >> Mayor Doctor, >> I
moving on to I7, resolution 2026. This is this is a resolution of the city of Treasure Island, Florida, adopting an amended city commission rules of procedure, providing for conflicts, providing for severability, and
providing for an effective date. And in your package, you'll have a resolution um that adopts the rules. The resolution date we had before for March 3rd needs to be changed if we adopt it tonight to March 16th. Um also the attached um
rules have a list of resolution amendment dates and that would be need need to also be changed to um March 16th, 2026. >> We have a motion, please.
>> I move to approve resolution 2026-02 adopting the updated rules of procedure. Second. >> We have a motion and a second. Do we have any discussion up here? >> Yeah. I want to know what started this
review and why. >> The review of the >> rules of procedure. >> Oh, the rule of procedure, putting stuff on the agenda. >> I think it was just a like an almost like an overview is what I understood. But it was almost like an overview
to look at it, you know, from I mean that's what >> that's what I took it at is just like a overview of checking it out and see if it needed any changes because I guess it had been a while since it had been reviewed to my knowledge. That's what it was.
>> Yeah. Don't recall it either exactly how it got there, but there is. So >> any additional discussion? >> Okay. We do have a uh a speaker uh that Andrew Vasey.
>> Thank you. Andrew Vasey, District 2. Um I think this is kind of the Arthur Seaison rule that they're trying to put by you today because um they're trying to limit commissioners to two agenda items uh per meeting. And that's one of
the writeins that was in there. I believe you put forward 15 19 items. >> 25 >> 20 is up 25. >> And you know, shockingly, I'm in agreement with you on several of
them um that were there. And um so I think this is a really bad idea. I think in the future it could be somebody else sitting in this position where you had a number of items you want to bring forward and you can't. Um, so I think as
commissioners, you know, if you you're voting on this for the future commissioners, the body as well, why would you impose this? I think the question about where this came from is a great question. It just fell out of the sky. It's just sort of like the um last
time they tried to rewrite procedures, you know, about a month after you all took in and one of the commissioners is like, "Oh, I was just trying to kind of refresh and see what was going on." And they were hacking out public speech and they were hacking a bunch of other stuff up. That's when Jennifer Cow was still
here working with our esteemed vice mayor. So, I think that you uh this is a terrible idea. you should be voting against this for the future commissioners as well. There's no reason to limit this as a body. You control the agenda. So if there's 25 things on there
and you want to move them, you know, you work together, you work through here. I think you got some sort of bad advice from your your lawyers about three of you being able to take things off. I don't I I mean everybody sort of works their agendas in ways, but trying to
limit it to two is just you you know it's it's not something that you should be doing to commissioners now and as a body you shouldn't be doing it to future commissioners. And I would hope that if you if three of you get together and vote this in that the next round of
commissioners undo this one right away because it's really bad idea. Thank you. >> All right. Any other public comment? I see none. West >> West Evans xyla palms. I agree. What you're doing right now is uh something
that you think uh uh it's a temporary fix or it's a permanent fix for a temporary problem. You guys are trying to kneecap Arthur. Uh in his list of 25 things, I agree with Andy. uh there's so large portion of them that I think
almost everyone in here would probably agree with. Um and uh you know it's you're you're pulling a Patriot Act. You're uh taking uh something that's looks bad right now and you're going uh
taking a great leap to fix it so it doesn't happen anymore. And in the meantime, you're tearing down the order of how things should work and you're uh you're going to, you know, there's going
to be regrets for that in the future. God forbid another hurricane or flood come through and we need uh people adding things on the agenda to get things important things done. You just you took that ability away from yourself because you're mad at one person right
now. And once again, I still think it's wrong that you took the discussion about uh the summer camp away. Just want to add that. Thank you. >> All right, we'll close public comment. Any additional discussion up here? >> Yeah, I'm in absolute shock.
But yeah, it looks like it was revised uh May 3rd, 2026 and June 17, 2025. So um I'm against any changes of the rules of procedure. Uh, the reason I emailed the 25 items is because we had a
canceled workshop because there was apparently nothing coming up and I gave 25 suggestions and of course we had no workshop today and I'm sure in the next couple months we'll have another day with no workshop. So there's plenty of things to discuss but you know my
messages are I got to check with it because I don't think my emails are working. So, >> and I would just like to clear up that I by no means speaking for myself, this is by no means a attack on you or anyone
else. Um, this was just I know most of the things that we discuss the staff ends up putting on the agenda. So, that's really why I didn't have a a problem, you know what I mean? like we may bring it up to the city manager um
and then just by proxy the staff ends up putting it on or the city manager ends up putting it on the agenda. Um but um that's the only reason why I just it was not a personal thing at all. And if I am correct, and I can refer to the city
attorney on this, um, to my knowledge, before there were any changes to this, if three commissioners agreed to remove something from the agenda, hasn't that always been I mean to my knowledge and I mean the mayor probably would even know that he's been him and
>> changed it. They say we can't do a majority. >> If a majority that's there that day during changes to an agenda have changed, then it can be approved by motion, second, and a vote of the majority of the quorum. it. Um could you explain that again? Chris was just asking or I'm sorry.
>> Commissioner, >> you remember in the beginning of our agenda, we have changes to the agenda. Um during that time, if someone wants to remove an item from the agenda um they can make a motion, a second, and you take a roll call vote, and it can be removed by um simple majority of the
quorum who are present. >> Okay, that's what I thought. >> The idea is we want to do that in a public meeting, >> right? instead of the phone calls if we wanted to remove something. >> Okay. I just wanted to clarify that. Thank you. >> And and I think from your discussion
last time, you also added that if a particular commissioner put an agenda item on that particular commissioner could remove that agenda item, correct? >> But not another commissioner's item and not the city manager's item. And the city manager could remove uh only his
own items. Say that again. >> This the city manager can can add items to an agenda and the city manager can remove a city manager's added item from the agenda. >> So the can the city manager remove a commissioner's agend agenda item?
>> No, it has to be done at the commission if it's going to be removed by consensus or vote of the rest of the commission. >> Interesting. Thank you. >> All right. Anything else? Roll call, please. If we get a motion to approve but with
correcting the dates of approval would be March >> 16 or 3-16 2026. >> You said the date was what? >> Today March 16, 2026 if we're going to adopt. >> This has been back and forth a couple of times and there's also a typo about the
date. So I want to correct that that date. >> All right. Correct me if I do this wrong. I move to approve resolution 2026-2 for the date of March 16, 2026 adopting
the updated rules of procedure. >> Second. >> Correct. >> We have a motion and a corrected second. Um, so once again, uh, roll call, please. >> Vice Mayor Vasquez, >> I. Commissioner Clark, >> I.
>> Commissioner Sison, >> no. >> Commissioner Dicki, >> I. Mayor Doctor >> I. >> Thank you. >> All right. Moving on. I nine, purchase of shade structure for Roselli Park Playground.
>> Is Kathy here by any chance? >> I'm honestly not sure. Yes, >> there she is. >> Yes, I'm here. >> Awesome. So, um, thank you for all the hard work you've done on this. I know
I've bugged you about it a lot. Um, we've received emails, you know, again, parents talking to me, grandparents talking to me about the urgency on this. Um, I know there's a very slim chance
that we might, but this is the last ditch effort to try and get it done before the heat of the summer. Um, and I know you've worked very hard trying to find more affordable options. Um, but as um as the emails that we've all received
over the last few days have stated, you know, this is not a vanity project. This is a health and safety thing and we have a beautiful park. Um the shade tree didn't shade all of it, but it shaded a large percentage of it. And um the uh
you know, I still have had people say, "Well, the city insisted on taking it down." Unfortunately, there was talk about that back before. However, um we didn't have the city didn't have a choice because um the storms actually took that big beautiful tree out. Um so,
um all that being said, uh I would like for you if you don't mind just kind of going over for the really general public in that way if any of us also have any questions on the different options. Okay. >> Um I'll be 100% honest. I still like the
first one because of the um ease of the take down and you know in storms and such. Um I don't feel like the cost difference is significant, but I'm you know what? If we can get it covered, I'll I'll take any of them, but I do
like that one for the ease of it. So, I'll kind of let you take it from there. So, in addition to the um three options that were provided, um Commissioner Vasquez, Bobby Shaye, and I met with um Caroline Benz from Advanced Green
Technology and James Wolf from Advanced Roofing to look at solar options. Um one of the things was is since 2022, we've only spent about $10,000 for one meter out there, 5,000 for another. So they
didn't feel that um shade structures were viable for that project. So we were trying to look at an alternative. Um we did come up with two additional alternatives. One is a mega span shade similar to what is at um Sunset Beach
that's over that play structure, but this would cover the entire playground. Um, I put a photo in there that Robert Bazo took for me at Gulfport um of their shade structure, which is the same um shade that we're looking for for that
particular option. And that one will cover the entire play area, which it's a larger play area. And the cost for that is 137,80. And that's plus additional cost which is another 28,400
to move the um two shade uh stingray uh shade structures we have there. But to relocate those to where the standalone swing is. Um if we don't need both for the swing, then maybe to put over another bench around the pickle ball courts to give some additional shade
there. We do have $14,000 budgeted in this year to put up a shade structure for the play swing standalone swing area and we could use that money towards the 28,000. And then what we have now are two
stingray uh shade structures. Those used to be adequate, not perfect when we had the tree that covered most of the playground, but just to have those two remaining ones are not um they don't provide the coverage that needs to be for the playground. We could add
additional ones around the playground, but that would come to 177,572. So that option's a little bit higher. And then you have the original quote of the different shade sales one and that
being 184,626. So if with this um first option the mega shade it would come to a budget amendment of 151,580 compared to the original for the shade structures of 178940.
Could you give me that number one more time? >> The budget amendment. >> Yes. >> Um for the mega shade it'd be 150 151,580 for the first option compared to the shade sales of 178940.
And that's using the 14,000 that's already budgeted in the budget. >> And I know you and I discussed it, but for the benefit of everyone. So, the difference is they're both going to give basically full coverage, but when it comes to because this was a question I
got asked about the mega shade. Um, everyone knew that the original offering was basically shade sales that were fairly easy to take down and put up um when storms are coming so that they wouldn't get damaged. Um, and then we
spoke about the mega shade and you told me that it could be done. Um, but it's it's not going to be easy and I'll let you expand on that. >> It'll definitely have to be done before the wind start because it's going to take staff in all of the four corners to
release it and roll it up. Um, but it is very similar to, like I said, the Sunset Beach. much smaller at the Sunset Beach location, but we do take down all our shade sales before any hurricane and then we actually pay the company to put them back up. So, it's just a lot of
work to put them back. >> Got it. And do you feel like one or the other gives more shade? No, I know the stingray one doesn't, but >> I think they're both equal. >> Okay. Um, and like I said, I I put a photo in there that Robert Boso took for
me at while he was at um, Golfport one day, so you can kind of see what it looks like. Like I said, no different, just a larger version than what's at Sunset. >> All right. Thank you so much. Again, I'm I'm perfectly fine with
either one. Um, now the 151 um, is that without moving the stingray or is that with >> No, that's included. That would be the budget amendment. >> Okay. Thank you. >> The actual cost is like 165 but minus the 14,000 already in the budget.
>> Got it. Okay. >> Uh I originally was opposed to this because of uh the expense. I thought it was a bit extreme. And uh you'd mentioned several times, Kathy, the Sunset Beach Pavilion uh shade. And I I recall when that came up on the agenda
and it was $30,000 and I was thinking, "Oh my gosh, I hope this gets approved cuz $30,000 seem seemed a lot." Uh I think when we looked at this the last time it was like $196,000 and uh that is what caught I think all of our attention. Uh so that was that
was the main reason I that caught my attention was the extreme difference in cost of this one versus the one that I was most familiar with. Uh the uh other thing is that we didn't have it budgeted and at that time we really don't didn't know how we were doing financially uh as
far as revenue coming in and and uh expenses. We we hadn't had the third first quarter report yet. Uh so those were my original objections. Uh, let me add a little bit to that now is yesterday as I was driving on West Golf Boulevard and I was driving past the
pavilion, I know this is around 3:00 in the afternoon and I noticed some uh look appear to be grandparents pushing their kids on the swing set there on the pavilion which is not covered by that shade. And and I thought well you know it's good to see that it's in the you
know heat of the day and of course this is still spring or winter. uh it was uh that they were still using that at that particular time and even though it wasn't uh shaded. Uh I also took a drive out earlier today to Treasure Bay to check that playground out and there's we
have quite a few shades there but the main part of the structure is unshaded. So my question and it's more it's rhetorical a rhetorical question I would say is it looks like if we're trying to cover cover using shade all of the
playgrounds we've got more than just a roselli park issue we'd have to cover the uh swing set at pavil the pavilion and we would have to cover the main structure at the treasure bay. So, so that's my my argument at this point in
time is I think we need to it's nice to have lots of shade and I and uh and I would encourage that but I but it is on budget. I would like to see us budget these things for uh the next fiscal year. I would like to see us be able to do something for Roselli Park because
they have practically zero shade. So, I would like to see us do something, but I don't want to see us spend 196,000 or close to it of unbudgeted uh money at this time. Yeah, I think my opinion is the same as
the last time, which is um and I and I actually heard this today when I was walking across our um across our um causeway or you know on 115th. I I don't I I really don't want to approve any unbudgeted things for any
commissioner, for any district, for my own district, unless we get critical infrastructure things done first. Um I mean, I got a couple of emails last week about our seaw wall. Um, I know that
Gary, you've said it's fair condition, but um, you know, I was walking today and there was two residents out there and there's a huge hole behind it. You can see a pipe down in there. I mean, someone can fall in there. We keep putting pearl behind it. And I and
there's other um there's other seaw walls beyond just the one in my district that need to be replaced. And the people actually brought this up that were out there today. They're like, "Why are why are we spending money on, you know, sun shades? It could be something else." I mean, could, like I said, could
be any district, could be anywhere. Um, and I I just until I start see our critical infrastructure, I'm not going to prove anything for my own district or any district that's unless it, you know, is critical infrastructure.
And um yeah, like I said before, we could have Disneyland over there at Relli Park completely covered and when our seaw wall washes out, none of the kids from my neighbor could could get there anyway. So, I mean, that's just my my my feelings on it.
>> Going to have to agree with Commissioner Dicki and Commissioner Clark. Um I think it's a lot of money. I mean, I posed an idea to our city manager. What would it cost to put a big tree where the old one was? You know, uh, implant a tree. I'm
And it's something for kids to climb on as well. Um, I don't know um what that would cost, but uh that's a lot of money that's unbudgeted and in my district there's a seaw wall that's caving into the inter
coastal. So, and don't get me wrong, my kids have been burned on uh playgrounds that were too hot. Um, so it although I understand how important shade is, especially in our hot hot sun, but it's
just too much money right now. So, I'm not in favor of it. >> All right, let's uh take some public comment. West >> West Evans Isa Palms. I have to agree with Commissioner Clark, Commissioner Sison, Commissioner Dicki. Uh I believe
last time this came up, it wasn't just 190,000. I could be wrong about this, but I believe with install and other things, it was actually closer to 220. I think that might not have been from the city's budgeting uh but from people who have a good track record of actually
digging into this stuff and doing the actual numbers of what it comes out to. Uh obviously we would all be foolish to approve $200,000 sun shade. Uh the fact that it can get down to 130, 150, whatever, uh that shows that
the first atbat on this was uh uh not a good atbat. And uh those of you who voted it down did the right thing because it can get cheaper. And uh like Commissioner Clark just said, we have critical infrastructure in our town
that needs to be taken care of. For 70 years, children have played on playgrounds without shades on them. Uh they can continue to do that uh a little earlier in the day, a little later in the evening, and let's be honest, most people don't even take their kids out at
noon because it's just too hot in general anyway in the summer. So, uh let's focus on uh building the seaw walls and uh taking care of our sewage and uh water treatment facilities and things like that before we worry about
um a dozen uh children who have done all right up until now. I feel for them. I probably got a little sunburn when I was a kid as well. Uh but they're going to have to wait a year or two to get fully shaded. My personal opinion. Thank you.
>> Thank you, West John Peterson. >> Hi. Uh my name is John Peterson and I live on the Alapri uh right across the street from Roselli Park Suncatch One and I've lived there for 40 years, my family and I. And we
have seen what happens there. We had this great beautiful shade tree. The kids were playing all summer long, running around playing. The tree went down. The sun got harder. They can't use it. I mean, he's talking about 12 kids. I'm talking about dozens of kids.
They're there all summer long. And that in the in the daytime when kids are out of school and they want to play, they can't do it. You can't touch it. You guys should go over there in July and put your hand on that equipment and you're going to come away blistered. The
astro turf heats up. You can't even walk on it. We definitely need the shade and I really would suggest all of you that we need it now. I understand critical infrastructure very important but uh let's think about our kids too. Thank
you. >> Thank you John. >> And yes I'm sorry. Is there any more? >> Yeah. Any more public comment? >> Yes. Um I feel bad for the kids I have to say. Sorry. But um is there I we
should be planning this I guess for the next fiscal year and probably put that into that. But I mean it would have been maybe prudent to just have certain areas of the playground, you know, covered in that. I had a son I raised my son here
too and I just don't like seeing it myself. So I'm sensitive to that. Thank you. >> Thank you. I I did like uh Commissioner Sassan's suggestion. I don't know if it's practical or not, but I would like the city manager to if if this is rejected to look into that because I, you know,
it doesn't have shade and I and I understand if we can do something with trees or something uh and even something interm planned on taking those down and relocating them, maybe you can relocate them to a better place than than you
know where they are right now. But it but I would like to do something. I'm just not prepared to go the full uh the full uh way on this. >> Okay, we're going to close public comment. >> Okay, city manager.
>> So, the planting the tree idea is not lost on me. I It might have been Vice Mayor Vasquez. I can't remember. I had the same situation happen 2011ish. huge shade tree on a playground where all the kids with special needs and
physical maladies used and big March storm actually took it out and so I went twisted arms in the community and this is just my community. We didn't expect that the government was going to go spend a lot of money for us. So, I
had a local plumber, couple of people on the education foundation, and we moved the four biggest trees that the tree farmer told me I could move. And I forget what the diameter was, but it wasn't huge, and it took a few years, but that little playground is well
shaded now, but it it it takes some time. So, I don't mind looking into the the tree option if um it doesn't appear that the sun shades will fit into this year's budget or possibly even next year's budget. Um we've got a pretty
lengthy list of capital things, but believe it or not, I like kids. I have a background of spending lots of time and money on lots of people's kids. I I think that uh what we need to do is put this into uh the budget come August
and uh and move forward from there. >> Like I said, this was like my last, as Kathy and I said, this was our last ditch effort to try to possibly get it for this summer because the parents and grandparents have really really been asking for it. And thank you, John. John
is part of the ICCA at um Isa Capri and he's heard all of the parents and grandparents at the meetings asking for the shade. So I appreciate it and I appreciate the consideration and it was you and I that were talking about the trees because I was all for still am
because I grew up myself climbing that tree. So I um I appreciate the trees, no doubt about it, but it's definitely a a longer term solution. Can we all agree to see if the city manager could look into how much that would cost?
>> Absolutely. >> Agreed. Yes. >> Yeah. Absolutely. >> All right. We still have the motion and are out there. So, we need to >> I actually did not get a motion on it to discussion. >> All right. So, we're not going to go
with the motion. And uh >> So, would we need to technically table that, Ralph, or what do we need to do with that? No, I think this was more of a >> I think this was more of a discussion item and the city manager will need time to go >> we'll think something together and bring it back to you all. Then you can we'll put a formal agenda item on.
>> Okay. Thank you. >> Great. All right. Moving on. Item number 10, direction to staff to draft an ordinance establishing plan development regulations for public hearings before the local planning agency and city commission.
>> This is an item I guess I can talk about. I was at the planning and zoning board meeting and they made a recommendation um that we consider a plan development enabling ordinance. So not a particular uh proposal for a
development just having a category available in our code for planned development. It's an enabling ordinance. So it's kind of like I would say a floating uh zone or an overlay floating zone that doesn't come down and attach
to any particular property until an applicant wants to apply for a PD. The PD enabling ordinance would say what has to be in that application. Um so it would establish the ability to do that. Now this is something that
would provide um more flexibility for development proposals that can adequately demonstrate extraordinary planning um um benefits to the public. public benefits, extraordinary planning, public benefits, and in exchange they
would establish their own schedule of uses, their own setbacks, their own ISRs, as long as those were still consistent with the county's comprehensive plan, which has the future land use designations for each parcel. You'll remember there's the Flum map,
and then within the Flum map, there's a zoning map. The Flum map has its own designations. Um they're all in policy uh or objective 1.1. Um and the future land use map is in LU4
land use map 4. You know you were your RU, your RM, your RFM 30, RFM50, RFM high, CGPOS-U. All these are available land use designations and every property has one.
So, a PD would only be a zoning category. It would not change your comp plan. So, any PD that's created has to be consistent with the comp plan of the city and consistent with the comp plan of the county, the countywide plan. Um, so we're only talking about the zoning
designation, but it does allow them to an applicant to establish their own planning parameters within the maximums that are created by the city and county comp plan. So it doesn't establish any particular density, no particular height. Those are
all controlled by the city's comp plan um as maximums. And under um the law, Snyder versus Breard, Florida Supreme Court, you don't have to approve the maximum density that's in your comp plan. You can approve something less and
you can retain the existing zoning. So if someone were to come with a PD um within RM, you can say, "Nope, I think we this doesn't provide enough public benefits. I don't see any extraordinary planning here. All I see is enhanced incompatibility.
Um so we're going to keep the existing RM and you can say no to a PD." So you can say no to a reasonzoning at any time for any legitimate public purpose. As long as it's a legitimate public purpose, you can say no. Um, so it just creates an available tool to go
into the toolbox um that the master planner can use when evaluating parcels for feasibility and for the master plan, but also that an applicant use can use to gain greater
flexibility for extraordinary projects that are in the public interest. This would just be creating the enabling ordinance, not saying any particular parcel is going to get the PD or establishing any particular planning
parameters. Um, for example, the plan development enabling ordinance would have the criteria, the very first criterias must be consistent with the city comprehensive plan and the countywide comprehensive plan. And then two, um, must establish a schedule of
uses. three uh must contain a development agreement. Um and those criteria would be worked out as we go through this plan development enabling ordinance public hearings. So that's what it would do. It's just establishing the ability to have that as
a zoning category that someone could utilize to ask for. It doesn't mean they automatically get it and you can still say no if they ask for it. >> All right. And I know that uh >> the plan development >> one more thing. >> Okay. >> I'm sorry. There's a lot of questions from the public about timing. When do
you want to initiate this? So, it takes some time to create one. Um it doesn't take long to write one, but you have to go through the LPA first and you've got to go through first and second reading at city council and then you also have to send it to the forward panels to make
sure they review it for either tier one or tier two to make sure it's consistent with their comp plan. But we're going to write in there the PD must be consistent with the countywide comp plan. So it shouldn't be too long there, but it it does have to go somewhere else um and come back to us. So that could take some
time. Um you could do it now as a in a parallel process with the master plan. There's pros and cons. The pro would be that the master planner could take that into account when they're saying, "Well, we wish you could design here, but the there's this has this current zoning
category, and these are the only other zoning categories that are available, where a PD allows you to create a whole schedule of use and all your planning parameters in there within the maximums allowed by the comp plan. So, it allows greater flexibility. um
you probably want this um to be done uh so they can use it in the master plan, but um you don't have to say yes to them. And you could say uh even in the criteria um for uh an
enabling PD um that a master plan be effective first that there must be an effective master plan. Um, so you could you could there's various ways of handling the timing of it, but it's a separate process from the master plan. It does take some time. It would be useful to have with a master plan
and that would be a policy determination for you guys about when you want to start it. I think it could take anywhere from three three months, four four months, five months. It might take that long to do. And you could always delay the second
reading until you have the master plan if you wanted to do that, too. >> Yeah. One of the the things that I did when uh the folks were here, the three companies that were here for the master plan. First of all, I I want to say I'm I'm in favor of the master plan. I'm not
opposed to the master plan at all. Uh I think that uh you know, they're going to be able to give us a lot of good work whether or not the PD is there or not. But uh one of the things is is that uh I asked each one of them if you could run
it at a parallel the PD uh and getting that ready and as well the master plan and all three of them said yes. A matter of fact all three of them were kind of surprised that we did not have a PD
available in our toolbox. Uh and but the the answer is is that yes, this is this can go and it still it takes multiple uh multiple visits to uh to get things done. We're uh where we're going to pull
the master plan from and the sherats that they're going to do. Um you know, and so we're going to pull it all together and that's really what we're working for. And like I said, it it could be it could be four months, it could be six months, it could be eight months. Uh this is a process that uh is
not quick. Uh it's got to go back and forth and back and forth several times. U but I think that it's it's a tool that that we need to have. We're one of the few matter of fact if you look on go on uh Google and goo do your uh AI um it
it'll tell you that u most most the vast majority of the cities in the state of Florida have the PDS. And there are some cities that that don't and uh and some of those are like the the one Readington that doesn't have any commercial
businesses. Well, they they wouldn't go for a PD cuz it's all residential. So, but it it it's important to realize that we need to have the tools and there there's a lot of checks and balances as well. Matter of fact, I I'll tell you
one of the things that if I was still here and when we do a PD, um you know that that what I'd be looking for is to negotiate. And that's what it is. It's you're negotiating with the developers. And I would like to negotiate with the
developers for parking and maybe even uh a lot that uh you know some space that that we could could be purchased or the price too for us to purchase uh additional parking in the city. You know, there's a lot of things that it
goes into uh into effect when you go to the PD. And the biggest one is you get to negotiate. And what we're going to try and do is if that this all comes together and happens, we'll negotiate. And we'll we'll negotiate what we feel is best for the city. And if if they're
not willing to provide that, then we tell them no. It it's truly is a negotiation. It is not anything else. So, anyone else? >> Yes, sir. >> I would like to speak a little bit. Uh,
I did watch your presentation uh that you had regarding this subject with the LPA uh last week and it was very informative. I appreciate that. Prior to watching that, I was under the impression that PDS uh under PDS, you couldn't negotiate heightened density
beyond what was in the comprehensive plan, which was which was an incorrect assumption on my part because you did say that they could ask for higher density and higher more height by asking but they would
require a comp plan amendment I think is a separate process. So, so through the >> zoning and comp plan is a comp plan amendment, >> right? But, but but if a developer came by and wanted to build a larger structure here, larger than our current
code, they could uh while they're doing the PD, they would ask for a comp plan amendment and we could, if I understood you correctly, uh we could approve that uh and that would only affect that particular location. It wouldn't affect other locations,
>> but we could have approved a higher >> was a small scale plan amendment that would get processed, but it could be processed concurrently with the resoning which they allow concurrent plan amendments and then resoning. So your PD would be a zoning category and the plan amendment would be handled separately
but they could come together at the end. >> Okay? >> Or one after the other. Now comp plan amendments are legislative and you could say no for any reason. And then the reasonings are under the Snyder test. First, they have to show they're consistent with the comp plan, the duly adopted one. Um, and then you still can
say no if you have a legitimate public purpose to say you don't get the maximum that's allowed by the comp plan. >> Okay, let me uh let me go through this. I've got seven quick slides. I say quick, I I'm not sure how quick they are, but I'll I'll go through them as quickly as I can. Uh Sarah Pennington at
at that same meeting that I was referred to made a very good point. and she says, you know, we keep hearing about all the benefits of zone planning. Even on the agenda uh for the LPA, the the title of that particular session was the benefits of of PDS. Uh there there she suggested
and I thought it was a a good suggestion that we should have been the pros and cons of PDs. I thought that was probably a more so I did my own pros and cons. Uh but I I'll start out with the positives real quick here and these are things everybody knows about. So the one of the the single biggest thing it is does
improve developer devel developers profitability and consequently drives new development. So that's that's a good thing. It can improve architectural design uh and to air doctor's point and and others encourages public amenities such
as street cape streetcape improvements or public access on uh on on big projects on smaller projects not so much. uh but it also can provide some flexibility uh to solve uh drainage and infrastructure challenges. So there's a
lot of good things about PDS and and just so everybody at this DISA understands I'm not inherently opposed to PDS. I just want to make sure that we do it with some some appropriate safeguards and guardrails. Okay, so that'll be my that's the that would be my my point here. So let's talk a little
bit about some of those disadvantages. Uh the first it does give the developer an ability to seek higher density than what we when than what the voters have approved. Okay. So I know they have to go through a comp plan amendment but right now there's no way until we change
our our comprehensive plan if I understand it correctly Ralph. Right now there's no way for somebody to build higher than what our code uh states. So if it's 60 ft they can't build 80 ft right now. All development has to be consistent with your comp
plan. That's the high. >> Exactly. So, but and the new procedure with PD's ask for comp plan amendment give us >> separate separate process, >> right? But but it's same same time. It does open the uh opportunity up for
that. Uh it can create a perception of special deals or favoritism. So, it's a case-bycase bargaining can look like favoritism and residents may feel like the standards are being made up as you go. So, it's a a bit here's another thing. I hate to even bring this one up
because I doubt that would ever happen here and I say that sincerely, but it does increase the risk of corruption. when you're talking about millions of dollars of of by code changes by ch approving PDs that it can significantly increase the value of that property, it
does open uh o open things up to the possibility of of uh of corruption. Uh case by case negotiations uh reduce the pred predictability for residents. So a resident really never does know what can
be built on the property next to them. uh and that thing because it can it can all be negotiated. Uh the thing that concerns me about especially what I after I've seen this in the last two weeks, but each PD request each and every one would result in the same
intense ugly public debates and community and commission divisiveness that we're seeing right now in our in in this room and also, you know, on social media. It's it's ugly. It's it's residents are going at each other's
throats, commissioners go going after each other's throats on this and with imagine that every time we have a PD request would do we do this all over again. Uh and PDs do require more staff time, more legal oversight, more
monitoring, uh and that translates to increased and ongoing calls for the city. that monitoring to make sure that that the developers are doing what they said they're going to do and when they said they're going to do all that requires constant monitoring and and it's not just a one-time expense
uh locking in once you lock in on a on a PD agreement it's very difficult to change it later and the the uh precedent pressure and I know we've said time and time again just because you approved you know 80 ft on this project doesn't mean you have to do it on the next project
and I understand that, but it's really, you know, it's hard to tell somebody, "No, you can't do it," when we just told your your neighbor that uh they could do it. So, anyway, those were some of the possible uh negatives that I saw. Uh I
asked uh and one of my uh best friends is AI. I like I like I think AI is a unbiased source. It's it's I of course it depends on how you ask the question to but I asked AI a simple question and that was where do PDS work the best and
this is what AI tells me this isn't me this is what AI says so it said PDs work best in communities that have strong professional planning staff that have clear public benefit expectations and have firm comp plan ceilings that cannot
be exceeded all right where do they and it's I didn't ask where where they don't work. I just said but but AI gave this to me nonetheless. PDS are not good when the community trust is fragile. Staff
capacity is thin. The zoning debate has already become politically charged and height and density are the most sensitive issues. I'll let you figure that out on your own where where Treasure Island falls under one of those two categories.
uh not uh you know we've heard over and over again that almost every city in Panellis and in the state of Florida has has uh PDS and that is uh a fairly true statement but a lot of them have PDs and
they they they control very tightly Santael uses plan development tools but strictly caps heightened density so so so a developer can't come and say okay I know your your maximum height is 60 ft, but I'll promise you I'll build you this
give you these extra parking spaces if you give me another 20 ft on top of that. For Nand Dena Beach, uh same thing, you can't exceed the comp plan limits. Uh Juno Beach uses uh PDS mostly for architecture, parking layout, and
landscaping. And Boca Grande uh uses it, but but not on heightened density. And then there's other cities that have rejected PDs completely or have them very limited. Anamaria Island, Indian Rocks Beach, Captiva Island,
Longboat Key, just to name a few. So anyway, I did this and I have a little a little I know people love to fact check everybody. I have a little little uh uh note down here disclaimer. This is chat GPT. It's unverified. I did
verify some of these, but but not all of them. But I asked chat GP could tell me what other Florida coastal cities are doing. So Anamarie, Captiva Island, Boca Grande, their height limits are two to three stories about 30 to 35 ft.
Santael, Indian Rocks Beach, Greatton Beach, 2 to three stories, 35 to 40 ft, so forth and so on. I don't need to go through all of these with you, but you can see Treasure Island is here at 60 ft. So, of the Florida coastal communities, we're already kind of in
the high end of of the other Florida coastal communities. Okay? You've got you've got uh Longboat Key, St. Pete Beach that have 60 to 65 to 70 ft uh seven stories and of course the more extreme ones like Miami Beach, Clearwater Beach, Sunny Isles over here.
So I just ask ask you uh uh one question here and that is where do you want Treasure Island to be? Who do you want Treasure Island to be more like Seaside, Deneden and Rosemary Beach or do you want to be more like St. Pete Beach? So
I ask I ask that you give that uh some thought. I also want thought another interesting observation in this and I promise I only have one other slide after this one. Uh I also asked myself when I looked at this I said you know what if you buy into the theory that
developers can't make a profit on anything other than five over one then you would also have to assume that there is zero development going on in any of these communities and that seems to me
kind of hard to believe. So, what I've been wanting all along, and I had hoped that, and I think we had agreed to do this at one point in time, is that we hold off on PDS incorporating those into our code until we get the master uh planner uh in here until we get their
guidance on it. So, that's again, that's what I I'm suggesting. Those safeguards that I mentioned, I've mentioned these from day one, the first day that we ever heard about PDs or I ever heard about PDS. I I this is my final slide. I put
this in here. Uh and I I said these are how things that I would these guard rails I think that I would could support PDs and and and I'm okay I'm say this to my fellow uh commissioners. I'm okay with moving forward with the PD if we do have these
guard rails. Uh one is that we limit it to the to the areas that we've talked about all along. RFH50, which is the west side of Golf Boulevard, the PRMU Core, both sides of 107th Avenue, PRMU Golf Boulevard, which is roughly from
Publix up to where the uh McDonald's used to be, uh the area that used to be known as Gators Property down at Greenleaf property near John's Pass and the Central Avenue corridor over by the Treasure Island Yacht Club. That's where I would like to see if we do have PDs
that they're restricted to those areas. Uh, I would like the I think Ralph you called it the document uh PD enabling ordinance to specifically say PD zoning is prohibited in the following areas. Uh
prohibited in residential zones which is RU75 and RM15. It's prohibited in uh multi- uh family neighborhoods such as RFM30 and prohibited in any parcels that are
less than one acre or with less than 200 ft of continuous street frontage. And then finally, and this is my last statement on here is the PD overlay district shall not be used to increase height through density beyond the maximums permitted in the city city's
comprehensive plan. So if we have these guidelines and we have as a as a as a group as a commission agreed to these before and I would just like to see if the the the my fellow commissioners are still comfortable with these guard
rails. >> So I have a question. Um, how is >> Oh, I'm sorry. >> Go ahead. Okay. >> I up. I apologize. Go next. >> I I just have a question. So, the Thunderbird came to us
um before any of this before PD talk. And that's actually how I started learning about PDs um and why the second vote that I actually ended up going the other way because I wanted to negotiate public benefit.
um they came to us with the request of doing 80 feet. They went through LPA, they went through PNZ, they you know went through all that they needed to do and if we would have approved it without PDS, without a master plan, without anything, it would
have been approved and they would be building. So am I correct that a PD had nothing to do with them? It was still even without the PDS, without anything, it was still basically up to the commission on
whether to approve that or not, with a PD or not. So, if I am correct, city attorney, PDS don't have to be allowable in order for a builder or a developer to come to us and ask for higher height. Am I correct?
>> That's right. They could just ask for comp plan amendments or resonings. >> And that's exactly what happened. another category. >> Okay. And that it was one of the things in the you know and you're and it was very thorough. I I definitely appreciate
that and I know heightened density in any community is always going to be at the top of the list of most contentious things discussed. Um so absolutely no doubt about it. But I just want to be clear that PDS have no effect on whether
a developer can come to us requesting a height increase or a density increase. They can come to us and ask for that today just like they did then. Again, that's how I started learning about PDS because when I was talking trying to
just figure out, okay, because I wanted them to rebuild. I loved the idea. I loved what it was going to look like. However, there wasn't really any public benefit and with infrastructure and everything being so important, um that was one of the things that I wanted to
negotiate. And then to what you said to parking as well. Um you know, certain amount of public parking spots, certain landscaping, greenscape, beach access, infrastructure, um traffic
lights, so on and so forth. and we didn't have that, which was the literally only reason why I voted no on the second one was I wanted to have the public benefit from um being a a
negotiated deal. So, I just wanted to be clear that that was the case that that and that everybody understands a developer can still come to us and ask for that in a comp amendment. We don't have to have PDs for that. Thunderbird's proof of that. So, just to be clear, the
PD is for public benefit and that's why I brought it up way back and that's why I believe I don't know who brought it up first, but that's when we started talking about it was for that main reason. But it does not change the fact whether we have it or we don't have it,
a developer can still come to us and ask for that. So, that's one of the the big things on that. I don't disagree on residential zone. I mean, I I wouldn't want PDS in residential zoning either, personally. Um, I don't disagree with
you whatsoever on that. I don't know off the top of my head exactly what those zonings are. I mean, I know you have them up there. Um, but again, I I don't want to assume that a developer, if a developer, if if we get a feasibility study from our master planner and it
says they can build and they have the numbers behind it, um, and it says they can build at our current codes, I'm all for it. I'm 100% for it. Let's keep it the way it is. If they say it isn't,
then we have to look at that. if we want if something other than you know a fence around hotels which is sad you know um so yeah I I just wanted to to state that that we don't have to have that in order
for them to come to us and that's why I was so emphatic about wanting a master planner that had a huge chunk on the feasibility study because that is important and hope you know hey it would be awesome if they came back and and found a way to make it work. I hope it
does. But um that's that's all I have to say. >> Um so I'm still confused about one thing. I think Ardan, you started to ask the same thing of Ralph, but um you're saying if we put these PDs in tomorrow,
you still couldn't build over the five over one height. Is that what is that what I heard or is that not? >> That's that's so um if you had a PD enabling ordinance, you would say here's a PD zoning category. It's in your code, but someone has to
apply for it and safeguards and guard rails are and this is just the law. All zoning must be consistent with the comp plan. So anytime the first the first number of the
enabling ordinance criteria number one the PD must be consistent with the comprehensive plan. Boom. Number one that has to be in there. >> Yes sir. >> Now the problem I think that Ardan was pointing out is that people can always
apply to amend a comp plan. So that could happen but this is about zoning and zoning has to be consistent with the comp plan. The comp plan itself is a separate issue, separate pro problem. >> Yeah. >> Separate planning. >> Okay. So, yet that makes no sense to me
because if if people are telling us today that they can't make money at 50 over one, there's no way they can make money at 50 over one and give us a whole bunch of stuff that just doesn't make any sense. Um, secondly,
I I just want to comment on your thing up there. I know. I don't know what slide it was on, but Rosemary Beach. Um, I've been there. Um, it's probably one of the most beautiful places I've been in Florida. Um, and it caters to I know a big crowd of the
Midwest cuz they're able to drive there, you know, versus driving all the way down here. And, um, I guarantee you if you go online right now, it will be impossible for you to find a place to stay there between now and the end of the summer. That's how popular it is. And it looks like a part of it looks
like you're in Germany. I mean, it's it's unbelievable. But I don't think that the height. So, but what I was under the impression that we were doing um with the master plan was this. We were going to do a feasibility study. We were going to find
out, you know, what was needed to be able to to to really get an answer on what can be built here. Very similar. I think you just said the same thing. And um then um you know we're going to get input from the community and hopefully
hopefully finally we would be able to find some sort of common ground between the residents and the people that want to build. Okay. And I um I uh you know I mean and that's what I think that we
need here. And then we would rewrite the plans, our our comp plan or whatever to say this is what we've all agreed to. This is kind of how how high you can go. And I will say this, I've told my residents this that if we hire a master
planner, they come back and say it needs to be 60 over one, I'm going to agree to it because that's what we all said we were going to do. Um, but I don't I don't understand why we we would go do this right now.
Let's go let's have the let's have the feasibility study. Let's have the resident input. Let's hopefully find common ground between everybody in the town and then let's go gang busters. You know, I I I want to see a marina
over here. Um, you know, I was with I was at a party on um, uh, Saturday night with one of the guys from St. Pete Clearwater, and he was just saying how great it would be if someone could, you know, you could dock your boat here and do all that. And so there's tons of stuff we can do. I also agree that that
um, uh, I also think that we really need um, we need we just need that agreement amongst everyone and I think we can get there. And um I also think that we can't just I want all developers to succeed. Um
but I also think we're going to need to bring in development besides just the ones we have from outside, you know, of Treasure Island in order to build what we really want to build. Um, so I actually this email today was sent to
all of the commissioners and it was I don't know that you can all look I I I don't know who these people are. I don't um I confirm they live in Treasure Island. Um I don't think they've ever spoke at a meeting. I don't do much
social media, but I don't never seen them on there. But they wrote the absolute perfect thing I thought and it was what I was going to write up. And so I'm just going to read what they wrote. You all you all got this email today and it says, "I'm writing in hopes that each of you will vote no on PDS until the Treasure Island master plan is complete
or at least started and PDs are recommended as part of the plan. I do not oppose development, but I do feel that development without a comprehensive plan will lead to an overcrowded patchwork looking city built on a stretched infrastructure." I was going to use the
words hodge podge, but he used the words pat. They use the words pat work. Patchwork. I like that better. Please listen to your constituent majority and vote in a manner consistent with their wishes. Each time this subject refer resurfaces after it appears to have been
decided that a master plan come first, it erodess trust from your constituents regarding PDs. If our representatives aren't honoring the majority opinion that the master plan should come first, how can we trust that our input on specific details requirements associated
with a particular PD project would be honored? Please keep your continued focus on a master plan and make every effort to facilitate its rapid progress and tell the advisory boards to stop overstepping their authority and challenging the established vote of the
commission. So that's exactly how I feel. that person I wrote it better than I would have. Um and again I think I think we can get to common ground and I really hope that uh you know we can and
I I think that um that comes by by doing some of the other steps first before we do this. >> Let's uh let's open up uh >> I'll wait for public comments. >> Okay. Let's open up public comments. we'll have an opportunity to come back
to it. And so, uh, first one, Richard Harris. >> Good evening, Mayor and Commissioners. First up, uh, Richard Harris, 374 Bay Plaza. First off, I'd like to thank Ralph Brooks for giving a great explanation of what plan development
zoning actually is. We're not talking about any approvals tonight. We're just talking about preparing the ordinance, the plan development enabler. There's no reason not to go forward with this. There is still a lot of processing that has to be done. This just helps move
things along. I really don't think anybody can say, "Hey, I really like our central business district. I really like seeing the Thunderbirds sitting empty. I really like to see these sands sitting empty." This just provides
the plan development. And in my career, I worked on about with about six municipalities that had plan development zoning categories. It unleashes creativity. It unleashes flexibility. I mean, one of the items
that Mr. Brooks brought up was the fact that if we wanted to have something like John's pass village on our side of the pass, land development is the perfect device in order to do that. Right now, we don't have it. Nine years ago in 2017
and the current CDD at that point, I said, why don't we have plan development? We tried. It did not pass. And it was back when referendums were required. You know the thing about plan development is if you go forward tonight
this is not the end all be all. It puts the application in the hands of the uh developer in the hands of the landowner. They got to come in and make application and once again it comes before the planning and zoning board for
our approval and we'll make a recommendation to the city commission and then you vote on it. The one thing that I learned about my experience with plan development is if you ask for something outlandish, something absolutely crazy, it won't even get past
the the the planning and zoning board. If you come in with something uh reasonable, you know, something that's not really stupid, then you're going to uh possibly get approved. And the thing is, yeah, we uh got asked for a lot of
extra stuff. we want you to build sidewalks all around uh your project and down the road and my client at that time did it know but it is a zoning category. It is a actual reszoning of property
that you have to do right now. The only places that it would even be feasible is what uh Commissioner Dicki was saying in the commercial areas in the RFH50 district and in the two planned
redevelopment areas that we currently have and throw in a couple more. We'd all like to see something happen at the club because that's a hideous site that you see as you drive in. But it's up to the applicant. He's got to make the application. And one of the items is, is
it going to cost more money? Of course, but they're the applicant. Charge them for it. You know, make them pay for it. But, uh, you know, the main thing that I want to make sure of, and part of the misinformation that was spread back in 2017 was, oh, we're going to have
planned development down in the re uh in the residential areas. No. If somebody came in and asked for a planned development in Palms, Capri, Paradise, or Sunset Beach, you just say no. You know, I mean, we wouldn't even
consider that. And uh they're not going to go through the expense and the pain of going through trying to reszone a residential area to plan development. There are very few pieces of property where on this island where plan development would work. I was going
through them the other day. There's only about six or seven. And uh you know, I hope that the uh commission can just work their way through this verbiage standpoint. I mean, you're not approving anything. And the one thing that Mr.
Brooks uh and Mr. Dicki brought up is it doesn't make it easier, it makes it harder. I mean, they've got to go through all this uh all these proofs, all these studies, and it does make it harder. I did about a half a dozen.
Well, I worked in about a half a dozen municip municipalities that had them and probably did about 20 of them. And it's a lot of work. So, I hope that Treasure Island can get into the uh 21st century and actually have this ordinance on their on their books. As the planners
last Tuesday, I guess it was said, "We're surprised you don't have such a thing." and most of the I mean a town like the city of Bradenton had a great plan development and uh got one approved. Thank you very much.
>> Thank you. Richard Diana Crarel is she's still here. >> Diana had to go to the meeting. >> Okay. >> You want to read the letter? >> It's up to the mayor. You can read it. I >> prefer not. Do we need to take a and
>> turn in the letter >> for public record for public record? >> Turn in the letter to the clerk and then >> Yeah, >> we've got lots of folks here as it is. Grant Smith. >> If you turn it in, we can pass it down the row. Okay.
>> Okay. >> Thank you all. Good evening. Grant Smith, 5579 Terrace, Sunset Beach. Um, there's a lot going on this evening that I hadn't intended to comment on, but some of the activities and the outcomes from earlier in the meeting, I think,
bear on my comments here. So, I'm going to fold them in. I was reading the Treasure Island budget recently to look at what the contribution, the net contribution of commercial tax revenue was. Found it to be around 6%. pretty low actually. So
what I was really interested in though is what I came across was an organizational chart that's published in the budget that shows the hierarchy of individual categories within Treasure Island. And at the very top of it, are
you aware what sits at the top? It's Treasure Island residents. They sit at the very top of the hierarchy above the commission, above the LPA, above uh the parks and recreation, everywhere else on the hierarchial chart. They sit at the
top. So, with that in mind, are some things that occurred that kind of puzzle me. Ardan, I want to thank you. Since you've been here, you've brought a level of objectivity, you've brought facts, you've brought professionalism, and you've brought honesty and integrity in
an attempt to educate citizens as well as the commission. Which is why with a plan development ordinance, it's interesting because ultimately the decisions on approval will be made by the LPA in this commission. This is the very same
commission that just approved a vice mayor that's 180 degrees from those characteristics that Ardan brings here. So the judgment that's being shown here this evening concerns me when developers come forward and ask for approval on
this. A tool in the toolbox is what we call it. I think that's a great analogy. The thing is I wouldn't give a jackhammer to my grandmother because she's not trained to use it. she doesn't have the skills, she doesn't have the background. So, when we're talking about
a planned ordinance, I think it's critically important that you develop the criteria for approval for three reasons. One is it's transparent. Two is it provides the developers with specifically what they need to do to
obtain approval. But most importantly, it allows you a measure of objectivity in evaluating these proposals as they come forward. The purpose of a plan development, I thought Mr. Brooks summed it up beautifully in our LPA meeting. It's to
promote exceptional design. Another definition is it's intended to provide flexibility with Richard Harris mentioned, but flexibility only works when it's guided by clear standards. If you don't have specific criteria, which
I'm hoping the master planners will provide us with, including the feasibility analysis, whether this is even needed. If you don't have that specific criteria, what happens without standards, the ordinance in the ordinance, the decision is not guided by
rules, but it's guided by the personalities, whoever happens to be sitting on the board in approving it that night. That's problematic. So the criteria has to be exceptionally specific. If this
move towards planned development is merely an end run to back in higher height and density, those who support it, I wish you'd have the courage to say it, to stand up and say we are pushing for plan development because we want
increased height and density. Don't backdoor this. put the criteria out there that's transparent that can be evaluated that's objective that doesn't increase heightened density put it in the standard
it's critically important that we have transparent criteria if we want to maintain trust and you have the the um support of those who are at the top of this hierarchy which is the citizens the last thing I wanted to say is a
comment went to West. I told you this is a salad bowl. West said he's kind of tired of hearing Treasure Island get beat up. I'm tired of hearing that there are no amenities here, so no one's going to come here. Keep in mind, this is a coastal community, a beach community.
They're not making anymore. The fence around the Thunderbird won't stay there long. Ultimately, something will happen there either by the Thunderbird owners or a new developer. I can stand on my porch and without the amenities. There are five new homes being constructed
within two blocks of me. There are four constructed within one block of me. That's nine. There's an 8-unit apartment building being rehabbed across the street. And there's an 8-unit hotel being built at the end of my block. That doesn't sound like no development to me.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you, Grant. Donna. >> Um, good evening, Mayor, Dr., Vice Mayor, Vasquez, City Commissioners, uh, city staff, and residents. Um, I have to follow Mr. Smith. Um, the initial, uh,
plan development joint meeting, um, hosted by the city happened over four months ago. Um last week all three final master planner final master planner candidates stated that the plan developments are important tools to have available. Each of them recommended
beginning the implementation process while the broader planning effort is underway. Um establishing the PD framework is simply means um placing the necessary tools in the city's uh planning toolbox. It does not represent the site plan approval or approval of
any specific project. Um, not establishing the PD framework now will add approximately two years to an already three-year rebuild process. We understand people have different perspectives. Um, but this timeline for rebuilding cannot reasonably be described as rushing. Um, if we are not
able to move the process along, unfortunately the owner team ownership team will have to go to the next steps and assess the other uses for the property to move forward whatever that might be. Uh, that is not the direction that ownership prefers to go. However, the property cannot sit for this long
without generating revenue. Thank you. >> Thank you, Donna, Marvin. Uh Marvin Shavelin, LPA, PNZ, but speaking as an individual tonight. Um, Mayor Vazquez or Vice Mayor, excuse
me, Vice Mayor Vasquez, you mentioned about the um, Thunderbird and your vote, you voted against it because of the parking. I have to tell you, I I was under the impression that the way that was supposed to work, I mean, I thought
you were supposed to make the deal because they you didn't even have plans at that time, did you? You're not allowed to talk to me. Okay. I don't think there was even any plans drawn at that point. And my understanding was the way it works was you make a deal with them. You you you approve everything and then they have to
perform. There's a lot of things they had to go through. And at the end of the day, if you didn't get what you wanted, you say, "Hey, this isn't going to work. We're we're going to turn you down." So, I really think we could got there and you probably could have worked out a
deal. And I'm very disappointed about the Thunderbird as I'm sure a lot of people are. Um, so you know where I stand on plan development. I'm for it. Um, I think it's the greatest development tool in
the city's toolbox. We need it and unfortunately we don't have it and we really need it now. Um, and so what I want to talk about is timing and you know the master plan. Okay, it's
going to take 18 months. Okay, Madiraa Beach took 16. You guys are adding more stuff on it. I mean, I think we need to be realistic about that. Um, and then you've got another six months to add a P if you're going to add the PD ordinance and amend the the LDRs
and the comprehensive plan. So, basically, Treasure Island is going to be a virtual de in a diver virtual development freeze for two years. And I don't think that's a good thing. So, here's how it would lay out for a larger project.
Master plan 18 months. Got to then you got a good deal. Once you get that in place, then you got to go work on the LDRs, the comp plan. You got to amend that, assuming you make some changes, PD ordinances, six six months. Then you got to do the architectural
drawings, the PD process, the permitting, that's probably 18 months. And then you got 24 months of construction. This is for a larger project. So we're talking five and a half years. The way things are going, we're going to see a new hotel in five
and a half years. the PD process. I mean, the way I envisioned it is you would have the ability to start immediately once you got it in place. And if we were able to do that, then you know, somebody like
the Thunderbird, instead of waiting three and a half years to start construction, they could start it in two years. Grand Scissor is not going to be a fence around them for long. It is going to be a fence around it for long. You know, it's it's a lot of time. I
mean, and I feel for the owners. I mean, Thunderbird, I don't know how they can. That's a big nut to hold on to. So, I'd like to see you put this PD in place and let's start immediately for for people
that are really ready to go. There's not a whole lot of people that are ready to go and the Thunderbird happens to be one of them. And they're the most iconic property in the city. and we're going to let it sit and sit and sit. So, please
approve the ED ordinance, the enabler ordinance. Thank you very much. >> Thank you, Marvin. Ingred, >> Ingred Rabo, Isa Palms. Nice to see you this evening. I just wanted to say something a little different on all
this. We seem to be spinning wheels a lot. Um, putting the cart before the horse, putting the horse next to the cart. Um, what ever happened to Jim Brainard? Whatever happened to him? I think was it you, Andrew, who brought
him? And I know it might have rubbed a few feathers or twisted a few twirled a few skirts, twisted them up a little bit. He was good. I don't know about you, but I thought he had really good ideas. He knows how to
cohes a group. He knows the builders. He knows the developers. He knows the people that live here. He took a cornfield. We might as well say we have a corn field. It looks like it could be. It's just a piece of dirt at this point,
but it has a wonderful gem of the Gulf of Mexico right there for us to enjoy every day. Where is he? Can we not have him back? Unfortunately, due to some personal problems, I wasn't able to be here for the last meeting or two when you decided
on a group of master planners or maybe picked one. I'm behind on that and I apologize for that. But I certainly hope there's still room for his input. He was able to do it out of a cornfield. Everyone says, "Oh, it's just some some
dirt here and parking lots and fences." It's a blank slate of opportunity. It's a beautiful thing if you look at it like that. We have a chance to take open air, open ground, green space, plan
it well, and use it for us, the next people, the people after that. It's the next 80 to 100 years that we could do this if we do it right. We don't want to be like everyone else. We have something different. I came 60 years ago, grew up
in Tampa. I've been here for 10. I picked Treasure Island because it's unusual because we have that village on the on the Gulf. There isn't another. Indian Rocks was closed, but their downtown isn't on the water.
>> Please address the commission. I'm >> sorry. >> One of the things is the microphone microphone only picks up if you're >> Ah, it's okay. >> Okay. >> All right. I will, but I feel like I might back to them. I'm not used to that. Sorry. And um I would appreciate then u Mr. Saison that I'm over here
speaking to you. >> I'm listening. Thank you. >> Thank you. In any case, I think there's an advantage to bringing in people who have been successful at this and know how to organize all kinds of groups. And
I'd like to suggest that he comes back. I think if you're interested in how to get him here, there are ways that this community would like that. And I think he has some good ideas. Of course, he doesn't have uh he had
underground parking. That was the reason that we didn't like it. That's not true from everyone's perspective. There's other ways to handle it. He really had a good idea of how to mix space and keep the green. And everyone has to make money here. That's true, too. The people
that have invested in those properties need to make their money >> and they will. The green space is worth the same or more than a condo on on Clearwater Beach with no green space and
it remains even more and more valuable as time goes and that becomes less and less there. It's scarcer as the time goes. I just wanted to say think before you act. There's no rush
here. There really isn't. It's the next 80 years at least. And I I I want to be careful and I hope you do, too. Please don't rush on this. Why is there a rush all of
a sudden? We've been sitting here for a year and a half and it's a good thing that we have this blank slate to work with. Look at it as a positive. Please, it's a beautiful thing that we have. It is a treasure. And the more we realize it and see it as an advantage
and not a hurry up and do it, the people who bought the the hotels around here, uh, for instance, the Thunderbird, my favorite, came when I was 10. They didn't buy it because they weren't making money. This Treasure Island Beach Resort is
making money. Five over one. The uh, Thunderbird wasn't even 50 over one. Why can't they go ahead and build then? That's really not our problem. We have our guidelines and that needs to be in the comprehensive plan that five overrun restriction. Thank you very much.
>> Thank you, Ingred. West Evans, >> West Evans, Isa Palms, I'd like to remind the commission that in September Jim Brainard uh came before you and gave a presentation on what he's done in Indiana. And uh he told you that uh you
know give him 60 90 days he could have the framework of a master plan just the framework of it already worked out uh and include in that how to get the the Thunderbird what
they want. he uh set forth plans on tax incentives and different financial uh uh things that could be brought forward, but because they have underground parking in Indiana,
people here said that doesn't make sense here. It's like, yeah, there's other ways to do it besides underground parking. He was just showing what had been done other places. uh a few minutes ago, Richard Harris got up and said if people who want PDs come forward uh with
something ridiculous, then they'll be voted. They'll be thrown out. They wouldn't even they never give that any consideration. But uh at the LPA meeting a few days ago, I watched Marvin Shavelin sit and talk about 12story buildings here, 10story buildings there.
We need this because they're doing this down here. Everyone's doing it. It's like he's handing us a crackpipe in the 80s telling us that's what everyone's doing it right now. I don't want to get on that. A lot of people don't want to get on that. If someone came forward with a 12story plan to the LPA, I don't
know if they would throw it in the trash bin right now. If you listen to the meeting, they don't act like they will. So, we didn't we chose who we're going to go to for a a to get a price from a a firm
on a master plan. We haven't even done that yet. They might come back with something ridiculous and you guys say no. But you're trying to do the PD thing right now and you didn't even get the master planner yet. We don't even have that. In fact, I don't even know if I back that now because the whole thing's
been done in some roughshot way. That's completely it's not no one trusts any of you guys. We don't trust the LPA. We don't trust you guys. We don't trust half of the city staff now because every step of the way there's some kind of back deals,
backstabbing, something going on. So, it's hard to trust that someone comes forward with a PD in front of you guys that you'll do the right thing. We just watched you not do the right thing at the beginning of this meeting when you chose Tammy Vasquez to be vice mayor
again. We've watched her lie to people. She lied about her emails. She anonymously attacked residents. You chose her for vice mayor again. Someone who I don't even agree with half the time. Ardan Dicki. I backed him for vice mayor because even though we disagree, I know
he does the right thing. He puts together a presentation to inform us and you guys because I believe not many of you actually know what the ramifications for these things are. He puts that together. Did anyone else do
that? No. And that's why people trust Ardan in a position of vice mayor. Whether they think he agrees with their position or not, we just know he's a trusting person and he puts work into what he's going to do and
we don't trust the rest of you guys anymore. I'm ranting yelling at clouds. I'll leave you guys be. Thank you. >> Brie Barbara, >> this is going to be a little hard to follow.
Um, well, I'm I'm a little confused and my head gets a little bit explode. It explodes when I see this circular logic and I see PDS and then I read the PDS overlay district shall not be used to increase height or density beyond the maximum permitted in the comprehensive
plan which the LDR sit under and the comprehensive plan have a definitive height and density and then I hear the commissioner say well if they want a six over the parking then I would give it to them. So, I'm like, you know, does this make any sense? And why do we even need a PD or any of this if you're not going
to pay attention to our comprehensive plan and the land development regulations that come with it, which specify specifies what it says. And as soon as the vote is taken anyway, there's going to be a challenge to if you go six over or anything over in the
um the LDRs, which is sits under the comprehensive plan, there's going to be a challenge here anyway. As soon as that vote's taken, let's get this clear. So what I don't understand also in 200
I don't remember the dates that that my recollection of all these dates back in 2005 2008 when the voters gave the um the pirate square the district downtown was is now pirate square. when we gave
them the uh by referendum the density of uh rooms at 22 uh units per acre. 22 units per acre. They didn't have that. All they had was the commercial shops. That's all they had. They were zone 4
commercial zone. No density at all. We voted that in. So, it can be done. It can be done with the p with the public but I but I have seen no effort in this from this commission board most well not everybody but the commission board as a whole
after following that we we came upon upon we uh paid for a master plan the master plan I think was uh designed I don't know if it was created in 2000 and we paid hundreds of thousand I thought back then and a lot of us didn't like that but I think it was um around 2005
or 2008 we had the master plan and that's when uh downtown said okay well um we want density we they only had the commercial at that time and they said no we want uh to put con mixed use so that we can have condos and uh shops we thought okay well
maybe downtown ought to have that because at the time we we still have a low-key density here in the in the island so we didn't think it was that bad of an idea so they went to um ask for the that density. They got that density when they went to when they put
out a PD. I believe they put the PD ordinance and I think you remember some of you remember this that were here. They put that PD and I think Art you probably remember this very clearly when they put out that PD and they went from 22 units they asked for 66. So it's
about 200% shall we say increase in the densities. Not even 20%. They went to 20 percentage. Okay. And they asked for that. that was voted down. Thank goodness somebody was thinking here. So, because we cannot have that across the
whole island. We can't live here like that. So, my point is I'm I'm a little confused about the whole paying for all this to be honest with you and I don't even know where this is going to end up because what are you trying to get from
this? That P that master plan is sitting you still have that master plan. I thought it could be added to it. But if we go into um this getting a master plan, getting the PDS in there with the assumption or the premonitions that
we're going to have height or density increases, you may not. >> That's all I had to say. >> Thank you, Andrew Vasey. All right, Andrew Basy, District 2. I'm
going to pick up on Wes's comments on trust. Um, for the city attorney, if you want the residents to trust us, please put the comprehensive plan in context. Uh, going to the state for a comprehensive plan can be done on an expedited basis in 30 days. This is
something that we've wrestled with many times. So instead of making it sound like the comprehensive plan is some huge impediment to a PD that many of the residents don't want, be honest with us and say, "Well, you can go there 30 days." We've already done it once.
Ironically, we did it for RM50, which was all about the Thunderbird. And so we had to do RM50 to do the Thunderbird because the Thunderbird is the greatest place on earth as we all know. So, um, what many of you don't know is that the
first vote for RM50 for the Thunderbird, Jim Brainer was in town and Jim Brainard had a conversation with the lawyers from the Thunderbird because the Thunderbird was out ahead of the process. And so the conversation that
Jim Brainard had with the lawyers from the Thunderbird revolved around one, would you be interested in access to lowterest financing through a tiff? We'll get to that in a second because we have a CRA expert sitting up among us here on your board. And then two, would
you want to take infrastructure improvements around the site as part of it in a trade for community benefits? Now, somebody asked about Jim Brainer. Jim Brainer negotiated 78 transactions in public private partnerships to obtain
um community benefits. 78 transactions. Half of what's built there um the city didn't pay for. And we get these fools who are financially illiterate among us going, "Oh, well, he loaded it up with debt." If anybody knew anything about debt, it's nonreourse debt. What does
that mean? It means it doesn't come back to the taxpayers. It means it stays with the development. the development fails, the bank takes the asset. Okay, that's what was going on. Nobody wants to sit across from Jim Brandard and negotiate community benefits when all the Thunderbird is proudly displaying is a
tradeoff my toys fund and a I'm going to give you access to the beach, which we already have. And if you look at the whole list, the one thing that's of most interest, parking. They don't say anything. Oh, we're going to give you 20 parking spaces. Jim Brainer built entire parking garages off of negotiating
community benefits away on PDS. None of us are inherently opposed to PDS. Gators property needs to be rebuilt. We've talked about this, even the Thunderbird. But you got to have some competence in negotiating across the table from these
developer snakes and they're very adept at what they do. I've been on both sides, so I'll label myself on one and the other. Okay? It all depends on what hat you're wearing that day whenever you're there. Um Marvin doesn't know what he's talking about. That was a vote on RM50. It was
not a PD for the Thunderbird. What's interesting is that you took the first vote and then somebody up here flipped her vote the second time. Everything that was said about that second RM vote tonight is a lie. Okay? It's an outright lie. That commissioner was instructed by
Bill KS to vote against RM50 on the second vote. Okay, that scheme is laid out clearly. Three items. Oppose Jim Briner. Why? Nobody wants to sit across from him at the table and negotiate
community benefits. Two, vote down RM50. Why? Keep the price along the beach down until somebody buys the land. And then what? Three, PD. Negotiate the height and density up. Okay, that is what has happened with a certain
commissioner up here who oddly gets voted in to be vice mayor again. Now, what's amazing, unfortunately, John, is that myself and others have sat with you and explained this to you ahead of time.
There were at least 10 people that knew that she was going to flip her vote that night on the second ordinance of RN50. this idea that, oh, I didn't know anything about PDs. I was just learning about it. BS. Bill Kins told you to flip your vote and you did it. There were 10
of us in the room, including the gentleman sitting next to you on both sides, who knew you were going to flip your vote that night. So, you can shake your head, but you cannot hide from the facts. And the facts will come out, and you have no facts on your side to um
to support anything that you'll say about it. So now what do we do John? We're sitting here with half a master plan. We need to get the scope of Rafelis done so they could be the financial uh
breaks on the uh on on the financing and then you'll have somebody on your side to negotiate against those benefits. Thank you. >> Thank you, Andrew. Sarah Pennington. Hi, Sarah Pennington, Isle of Palms. Um, a couple things that have been brought
up tonight were things that I actually was thinking too. Uh, Grant Smith, I mean, everything he said was so intelligent and eloquent and something that's been weighing on me tonight. And Andy also mentioned, um, Ardan Dicki, you went through and you made the pros
and cons of PDS. And in one of the sections of it, thank you for doing that. It mentioned to me what the number one problem is, and that is they don't work well in communities that the public does not have trust. And we are reaching
a new low every day in trust around here. It's it's almost unbelievable. Tonight with the vice mayor situation, I'm not being mean, but the fact is our current vice mayor did anonymously attack residents online. That's a fact. Our current m vice mayor got caught
lying about emails. Yes, you did. You can shake your head, but you 100% did. Ardan Dicki has sat over here being a perfect professional this entire time, but somehow he is the only person that brings up cons of PDS, and somehow he has not voted as the vice mayor. From
the outside, it appears sketchy. I'll just leave it at that. It doesn't it doesn't sit right with me. And it's one more layer to the lack of trust. It's not the PDS, it's the people that are on the dis that would be negotiating the PDS. Residents, I mentioned this at the
last LPA meeting. Residents um are told constantly on Facebook by developers that um if we want to have an opinion in this land, then we should just buy it ourselves. Uh residents are told constantly um it's not your property, so
you should have no say in it. residents are continuously put down and told that their opinion should not matter because they are not owners of the property. But now we are supposed to magically think that our opinion is going to count when we put in these PDs. I'll just say I'm
glad that tool in the toolbox is not a drinking game tonight because that is the little go-to saying that everyone has to try to downplay what's really happening. The problem again is the actual trust. Our attorney tonight said,
"Oh, I I'll list out the pros and cons of doing the PDS right along beside the master plan. You never even listed the cons. You just listed the pros." The only person up here that is actually being unbiased about the situation is
Ardan Dicki and then he's pushed to the side for vice mayor. I I it is shocking and again it's just adding to this layer of distrust that is just reaching a new low every day. and I'm just sad to see it.
>> Thank you, Sarah. All right, that concludes our public comments. Bring it back here. Um >> I was wondering if I could address my comments. >> Sure. >> Thank you. >> Uh let's let's take uh the motion first.
>> The motion. What a motion. >> We have a motion tonight. >> Motion. >> Yeah. >> And then we can go to discussion. >> Yes. And then we'll go back to discussion. >> Okay. I move that the city commission I I move that the city commission direct
the city manager and city attorney and staffed to draft a proposed plan development enabling ordinance and to initiate the required review process including public hearings before the local planning agency and the city
commission. >> Second. >> We have a motion and a second. Do we have any further discussion? >> You said you had some things. >> Yes. Yes. Thank you. I thought you said take the motion out of it. We should definitely take the motion out of it.
>> The syndicate would be proud, whoever that is. But anyway, um I've always said it publicly that I'm against the master plan all along. I think it's a waste, colossal waste of money and time. If we're going to get it done, and it needs to be done, it has to be the whole city,
and the money should come from the county. When I say the whole city, it shouldn't include just the five parcels that we all know are private uh private property. Uh and uh one of the gentlemen that I think that we selected, he said
he's never done a uh master plan for private property before. So that that's a whole new realm. Uh when I say the whole city include it should include the two acres on the 108th uh it should include uh West Causeway uh the Basio
Bridge to Golf Boulevard. It should include Treasure Bay. It should include the downtown park and east of G Boulevard. I think the money uh to pay for it should come from the county and it needs to be secured before we move on. Uh I me I remember someone
mentioning that um at a commission meeting like to see the money before we move forward but of course we're moving forward with it. Um I think I agree with Mayor Doctor on this one where it should work in parallel um since we're moving
forward with the master plan. Um and I don't see anything wrong with this. So >> Okay, Commissioner Dicki. Um, I do see several things wrong with. One is that our residents don't want us to do this
uh without the master plan in place or at least having gotten started. So, if we don't care what the master what the residents think, then you're right. There's no problem with it. Uh, but anyway, getting back to this, the uh I've said from day one, I support PDs
with these safeguards. Are is anybody at this table not okay with those safeguards? Then then I would suggest uh or or recommend that we ask the city attorney when we vote on this to include these safeguards in uh what he writes up as
our uh what do you call a PD enabling ordinance? >> I'm not uh sure that uh that I agree with that. >> Tell me what you don't agree with. I I >> Yeah. So, okay. Um, let's go back a
little bit. >> These are the safeguards I was asking for to be incorporated. >> Okay. I would like to I'm not an expert on this by any means. I'm not an engineer. I'm I'm not So, for you to come in and say, "Okay, I drew up these
safeguards." adopt them or otherwise you lose faith in the the audience. Okay. So, um yeah, I I I'm just not comfortable picking up yours. I don't know uh what what
is in the backside of all of this. >> It's they're in plain view. >> Okay, you got me. But, uh, no, we we've got a, um, a motion on the table. Um, and I'd like to, uh,
to call, uh, for a vote. Do Do we Can we hear from the other commissioners on their feelings about this? >> Sure. >> Well, I Yeah, I mean, I'd be fine with those. >> Sorry. I'd be fine with those. Um, the
question I have, I'm still somewhat confused. Um I think it was Mr. Shavelin that came up and said that if we pass this, you know, tonight or PDS that the Thunderberg could start building tomorrow, but then I thought I heard earlier or very quickly, very quickly,
let me just say. Okay. Is that is that fair? Okay. So, but I thought we just agreed earlier, Ardan, I think you mentioned it, I think Ralph, you mentioned it, that they would have to build, if we did that, they'd have to build on their current five under one, five over one.
They've already told us that they can't they can't make that work financially. So, how are they going to be able to start building quickly um if we pass this? I just doesn't make that makes no sense to me, especially when they have to give
us a bunch of free stuff along with it. So, a lot of these a lot of these arguments just don't add up. Um and I will I will um say the same thing that Ardan said. Um, I ran to to do this job
on a resident's first platform. It it it is it is beyond apparent to me that my residents want to do the master plan. Again, I I said it before, we do a feasibility study. We we get we
get involvement from the community. Hopefully, we can come to a common ground and move forward. And unfortunately, the reason that we have to do that is the trust issue that a lot of people have talking about. And I don't blame I don't blame the residents
for for having that. So, um, yeah, that's where I'm at. >> I think the the comment on the Thunderbird um was instead of it taking three years, it would take maybe two years. But as far as the math doesn't work out, I don't disagree if if that's
the case. But I I think most likely and I'm maybe speaking out of turn for the Thunderbird is they would come back with the same ask that they did most likely it the difference would be if PDS were part of it that would be able to allow
us to negotiate for the uh public benefit. So I think that was more the intent. I don't think the intent was for them to you are correct. They do have to come back for a comp amendment which they can do right now. we don't have to pass anything in order for somebody to come to us to do that like I stated in
the earlier argument. So I think that was the plan onto that. Um I did want to say a couple of things. Um even the Thunderbird owners knew how I was going to vote on the second one. So just because conspiracies are put out there um that 10 people knew how I was going
to vote. for um a particular developer who happens to be a friend of mine um has been a friend of mine for a very long time, mine and my husband's. Um first of all, again, anyone who knows me longer than five minutes knows nobody tells me what to do. I don't care who they are, including my husband, he would
tell you the same. And um many people knew how I was going to vote on the Thunderbird. Um, I I didn't because it was something that I was discussing with people because it was killing me to vote the way um that I voted. And I believe I
don't know if Donna is still here. I don't see her, but I believe Donna would attest when I was talking to her the day before. I'm like, "This is killing me, Donna." But I don't feel like I'm doing the city of Treasure Island and the residents justice if we can't negotiate
these things in the deal. Um, so you know, the repeated the same thing being repeated over and over again by by a particular set of people doesn't make it true. And I and I have to giggle at this point because, you know, we're
over a year into this and um I'm working my butt off trying to do what's right for the residents and do what's right for the city that I love, that I grew up in. And if you think I want 20 foot or
20 story buildings, not true. What I want is to start moving parallel with the master plan. Um, you know, I brought the master plan up to bring it to to let's start moving
forward because everybody wanted it. Okay. So, we did it. We went through the proper legal procedures to find a master planner. We went through the whole process of it and because a particular
group didn't get who they wanted, well then the whole thing has to be a sham and a scam and there's backdoor deals and it's just it's I have to laugh and and when I say I'm laughing, I'm not laughing at people. I'm laughing at the the
conspiracies and quite frankly it it's amazing to me that grown people come up with the syndicate and the lies and the backdoor deals and follow the money trail. Follow the money trail
because there isn't one. And all this is 100% all this is tonight is deciding on telling the staff hey we want you to start drafting something for us to
review to work in parallel that all three everybody's like well if the master planner says we need PDs as the mayor stated all three master planners stated PDS will definitely be part of this they were all surprised we didn't
have them and exactly what he said. Yes, there are a few beaches, the Readingtons, Belair that don't have PDs. They're residential. They're residential beaches. They're not commercial beaches. They don't have a lot of hotel or any some of them um hotels and retail and
and such. So, that is correct. There are some that don't have it, but all this is is for us to start moving forward in a responsible way. So that when the master plan, when the financials are done, when everything's done, we're ready to start
rolling. And it's the responsible thing to do. This does nothing to increase heightened density. All this does is get the ball rolling so that when we do get the master plan, we're ready to roll and we're prepared. >> Vice Mayor Vasquez, are you okay with
these safeguards? >> Can I say something about the safeguards? >> Yes. Um, so we've categorized these as zoning categories, but they're also uh land use designations in the comp plan. So it would be appropriate more to say
the PD zoning would be available for these land use categories. The RMA, RFH50, PRM, MU. >> You can worry about that. >> We could word it that way. These would be locationational criteria. It looks like, you know, and it looks like here you're not going to allow it in the
residential land use categories, which is RU and RM. Zoning is R75 and RM15, but in the comp plan, it's called RU and RM. And then the only other one that seems like it's left out that would maybe make sense is CG,
>> commercial, >> commercial general. Maybe we could allow it in there. But again, these would be just the beginning. We will put this in as standards in uh locationational standards criteria and that will go in the initial draft. Then it will go through LPA. Then it will come here for
first reading and then you could have more background from staff and maybe maps and the mayor and others look at what are the uh what is some of the backup you know for this but it gives you plenty of time but at least it gives you a starting point to get started
with. Uh and then the other thing is you know when you initiate something doesn't mean that's when you're going to adopt it and it's going to become effective. You can always initiate it and you kind of hold off on the effective date. So you could go through LPA do first reading and then when you're comfortable
then you can do the second reading adoption. Okay. >> Yeah. So, I think that um Commissioner Dicki, I think that when when you bring something in, >> couple of things that I said in the earlier slides really weren't accurate,
but um I I don't know what I don't know. That's what I'm saying. I don't know. and and you don't know what you didn't know either because the attorney is giving you all these additional >> and I don't know what the Gator's property land use designation is or the Treasure Island Yacht Club but that's
something I find out and and we'll put in our drafting so that we include them somehow as locationational criteria you could even do just a separate map and then you could work with a map >> right >> and as Miss Mr. here has mentioned I mean there's a lot of checks and balances
that still have safeguards as well. >> That's all. >> Can I make one more comment real quick? >> Okay. >> Um I just want to clarify one thing that you stated. You said that >> nobody wants a master planner anymore
because of who was chosen uh or didn't get chosen. I think three of us up here. I Okay. I think myself the mayor said he wants a master plan still and I think Ardan >> No, I don't I didn't mean the I didn't mean the commission. I'm I'm glad you brought that up because No, I that's not
at all what I meant. I was talking about the you know everything that's being put out and things that were said about oh we can't even trust the master planer that was picked now because blah blah blah whatever reason they didn't like the way it went. But that was I did not
mean the commission by any means. >> Okay. So would uh say clerk, would you please read back the uh the motion? >> I did not catch the entire motion. Move the city commission direct the city manager and the city attorney and staff
to draft a proposed plan development enabling or an ordinance and initiative. And that's where I've lost it. And then u bring it back before the LPA and the city commission. >> I can reread it. >> Okay, please reread it. Yes, absolutely. I move that the city commission direct
the city manager, excuse me, I move that the city commission direct the city manager, city attorney, and staff to draft a proposed plan development enabling ordinance and to initiate the required review process, including
public hearings before the local planning agency and the city commission. Okay. So, we have a motion and a second. Um, we'll conclude our discussion and let's take a roll call vote. >> Vice Mayor Vasquez,
>> I. >> Commissioner Sison, >> I. >> Commissioner Clark, >> nay. >> Commissioner Dicki, >> no. Mayor doctor >> I All right. All right. Do we now will move on to city manager and city attorney reports
followed by the commissioner reports. >> I prepared a 45page PowerPoint presentation. I kind of expected tonight would be long, so I will be extremely brief and if you you forget about it all, you can call me tomorrow and I'll tell you what
I said. Um, so a couple items of consistent interest. Uh, we have a meeting scheduled uh for this Wednesday with uh some St. Pete Beach officials to discuss the uh oceanfront uh property
that St. Pete Beach owns within Treasure Island. So, more to follow. Um, the legislature, as I'm sure you all know, uh, left last week after eight weeks of session with no budget. Um, the best I can gather, the budget will be finalized
in a special session yet to be determined exactly on the calendar. Um, that kind of bleeds into the budget amendment that you guys supported tonight. Thank you for that. We are underway with our public safety
uh building uh notice to proceed. >> Can I interrupt you for a moment? Can we please wait and uh discuss that later? >> Thank you. >> So I thought the meeting with the
architects, engineers, city staff this morning was extremely productive. We covered a lot of ground as uh Mr. Volnick mentioned in about an hour and a half. Um, so we'll spend as much of that $4 million um as we need to to get us through this budget year before we do
the budget in September. we'll know what the legislature did or did not contribute to this and that'll give us better definition and how much it's coming out of capital outlay and um you know we'll get into um whether it's
a a good idea and why why it might be a good idea to take a loan for that particular uh project on April 7th in our workshop. Um, the restoration of the pavilion and restrooms at Sunset Beach is coming
along very nicely, as is the rehab of the windows and other items you guys approved at Treasure Bay at the Treasure Bay Clubhouse. Uh, we did conduct the first meeting of our negotiating team to negotiate with Ralph Tillis, the master
planner you guys selected. Um, and more to follow on that. You won't hear me say a whole lot of that as we go through the negotiation. That's all. >> Thank you. >> Nothing this evening. >> Okay. >> Vice Mayor Vasquez,
>> may I ask a question real quick on the um I I thought I saw an email on a possible groundbreaking for the pavilion or a ribbon cutting for the Sunset Beach Pavilion. Did I I think I'm right on that, but I'm not sure. I
>> That's okay. I'll send an email. >> I'll send an email. >> I don't I don't remember if I saw it. >> Okay. No worries. No worries. I will make it quick. Um first of all, tomorrow I think I'm the only one that got the green memo. Oh, nope. I think I think Commissioner Dicki got it. The green
memo for St. Patrick's Day tomorrow. So, so happy St. Patrick's Day to everybody for tomorrow. Um and I just want to say how awesome it's been um with the spring break starting and to see the beaches full. It has been so great. Um, we've
gone out a couple, we went and listened to a band the other night at Ricky Te's and it was so cool because it reminded me of back a few years ago before the hurricane because we were surrounded by tourists and it was really cool to um to have visitors back and talk to them and
and it was just it was great to see and it's been wonderful seeing them walking up and down the sidewalks as sunburnt as they are. But, um, I just wanted to say, you know, it's just it's really been great and, you know, hopefully again,
my goal is to move this city forward and and it's always been a great city. I still love it. I'm still proud of it. Um, it could definitely definitely be better, but um, I don't love it any less, and I will always strive to do
what's right for this city. >> Um, in interest of time, I do not have one tonight. Okay. >> Um, I would like to request uh, sorry, I'd like to request uh, I don't know if I tell to Charlie or Lisa that my item
I5 be put on the next agenda. Uh, summer camp break even revenue and expense projections from the recreation department. Uh we had some support from a couple speakers uh that supported uh us as a
commission discussing that uh to try to make sure we break even and don't subsidize uh uh just make it really good for our residents uh children and employees. And then I would like to ask uh the city attorney for clarification.
We had a phone call after last commission meeting regarding commissioner comments. uh what I could discuss, what I can't discuss. I know it was shut down by the mayor uh at the last commission meeting. Can you go over the rules of the quorum and uh I was
having a conversation regarding Treasure Bay and it was shut down. Uh I think it was >> I think you um under the rules did could do that and you went ahead and did it anyway. It might have been some misunderstanding about what you were presenting but it seemed to be uh on topic.
>> Thank you. So, yep, that presentation will probably come again in the future with more information. So, we'll have to put our uh residents through that again. And then I got to reach out to uh Chris Pagan because I think someone hacked my email because I'm obviously not getting communication from the city attorney or
city manager. That is that's all I have to say. Thank you. Uh, having been sworn in today, I just wanted to thank the residents of District 4 for their continued uh, support, and I promise to continue to do everything I can to represent you and
your views uh, while I'm while I'm here for the next two years. Thank you. >> All right. I'll tell you what, I uh, I have enjoyed talking with the the college students that uh, are walking up and down the the beach, the streets. Uh
uh everybody seems to be enjoying themselves and uh I'll tell you what uh I've heard from more than 50 people that uh that this beach is a one-of-a-kind beach and uh I I was proud to say yes, it is a one-of-a-kind and that uh we
really enjoy it. So with that being said, we will now adjourn. I think I need a paper towel.