Good evening and welcome to the regular commission meeting for June 3rd, 2025. I'd like to call this meeting to order. Now, if we could please stand for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge algiance 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. See, clerk, please call the role. Vice Mayor Vasquez, here. Commissioner Clark, here. Commissioner Sison here. Commissioner Dicki here. Mayor Doctor
here. Thank you. All right, we're up to approval of regular and workshop agendas and I would like to uh take the opportunity here to move that or to move commission reports to the end of the agenda. This would be a permanent change. Moving the
commission reports to the end of the agenda allows the commissioners to hear the public's comments and concerns before we address uh all of our residents. Both the county commission and the big C use this approach. Do I
have a motion? I make the motion to say exactly what we just said. I'll second. We have a motion and a second. Do we have any discussion? Hearing none. Would you please call the role? Vice Mayor
Vasquez. I. Commissioner Sison. I. Commissioner Clark. I. Commissioner Dicki. I mayor doctor I thank you. I would like to request that we move consent agenda H1 to regular discussion
a regular item of business. I actually agree with that. I I don't I didn't think we had decided everything on about that to for that to be able to going to where it's going. So I would actually agree with that. And when I looked through all the documentation and I'm just a little
unclear. Okay, that can be done. Uh so did you make a motion? Uh I make a motion to uh relocate consent agenda item H1 uh to uh
I 10. I second. All right, we have a motion and a second. Uh, do we have any public comment? Hearing none, we'll close public comment. Do we have any
discussion up here other than what's been said? No. Okay. Uh, would you take the role, please? Commissioner Sison, I. Commissioner Clark, I. Vice Mayor Vasquez, I. Commissioner Dicki, I. Mayor Doctor, I. All right. So, we have the consent
agenda now has three items. And do we have any staff or chief how is we going to handle these three items with approval of minutes
for the consent agenda? You can just make a motion to approve the consent item. I do this every time I go right past the approval of minutes. So we're going to go back to approval removal or approval of minutes. The approval is for the following minutes. May 6th regular workshop
meetings and May 13th workshop and meeting minutes. I move to approve the minutes of May 6th, 2025 regular and workshop meeting, May 13, 2025 workshop meeting. Second. We have a motion and a
second. Uh do we have any uh the discussion up here? No. Hearing none. Uh would you call roll please? Vice Mayor Vazquez. I, Commissioner Dicki. I, Commissioner Clark. I, Commissioner Sison. I, Mayor Doctor, I. Thank you.
Okay. Now, moving on to the consent agenda. We now have three items on the consent agenda. Thank you, Pardon. Mayor, um, we missed public comments for non-aggenda items. We sure did. Boy, that's uh I'm wanting to race through this today. You're
excited. There are two. There are two. Uh Carrie Arbach. Hi everybody. Hi. So I only have four quick items to talk about and um basically I'm looking for volunteers. Um as you may know there is a second
Saturday cleanup every month. The location is at Sun Coast Sailing. That's on the north side of the Waffle House building, directly across from uh the municipal lot, St. Pete Municipal Lot. Um the next one is this Saturday, June
14th, 8:30. All supplies, parking, everything's free and it's a lot of fun. Would love to see you guys, any of you, all of you. Um, the second thing is I'm looking for local volunteers, people who can get to the beach or ride their bike to the
beach on July 4th because parking is kind of a nightmare. But what we're going to do on that day is an annual event. We're going to distribute a thousand koozies stuffed with trash bags and it's been a real success every year. Uh, these have been donated by Keep
Penelis Beautiful and paid by a generous contribution by Mayor John Doctor. Thank you very much. Um, I'll get about 20 volunteers every year and they get about 50 of these and I'll drop them off at your house and on July 4th later in the
day anytime you want go out in the beach and maybe we'll assign from where you live certain areas to just hand out these koozies and say hello to our visitors. Remind them to fill in holes, knock down castles, it's turtle season. uh just be engaging and and kind and
say, "Here's a trash bag for later on when you clean up. Please please help yourself to this and take them up to the trash bags. They may be the trash cans may be full. Put them to the side." Um we started out at 250 one year. We went up to 500 a couple years. In the last
two years, we've handed out a thousand. And people who have done this have had a blast just meeting people. And you're in and out in less than an hour. So, it's uh something I'd really hope that um I get some volunteers for. Um the big thing on Fourth of July, as you know,
there are no fireworks, personal fireworks allowed on the beach. So, we have three ordinances that cover that. If anyone wants more information on that, I can tell you about it. But last year, it worked really, really well. So, if you're out on July 4th and you happen
to see someone with a truckload or wagon load of fireworks, just kind of make a note of where they are and you can report it to the non-emergency police number or to me and we'll get someone out there to get them off the beach. Um, I think that was a great uh thing we did
last year and um it really worked well. So, um then the day after July 5th is our major beach cleanup and that will be right across the street on this parking lot because um that way we can cover more of the beach and that's kind of
where the fireworks from the uh the commercial fireworks will be. So, there will be a lot of debris on the beach as usual and need as many people um out there that morning. Again, free parking, free supplies. Uh reminding you all that
it is turtle season. We've seen quite a few nests. I actually found a nest before Clear Water Marine Aquarium the other day about 6:00 a.m. and it was really exciting for me. Um, it's a beautiful site. Um, and if you're out there and you see holes in castles,
again, please remind people that turtles can't back up and they can't get out of the holes. Um, about 60 days after a nest is is uh made, the hatchlings are uh come out and they try to go to the Gulf, but they get uh sidetracked by
improper lighting. So, I'm working with code enforcement to find lights that are um improper and to educate people on using amber lighting. Sometimes all of this can feel overwhelming and um it's a lot of work
that I do volunteerism and um I really appreciate the volunteers that come out. I get frustrated and sometimes I just want to give it up all up but um I I work hard because I love it and when people show up it just makes me feel so great and motivates me to do more. Um,
so I'll keep going, but please help where you can. And I think almost everybody knows how to reach me. Uh, treasure island adopt a beach atgmail.com. And, um, go ahead, email me and come on out. Thanks a lot. Thank
you, Rick Matthew. Rick Matthew, District 3. Where's my timer? Oh, there it is. Get it from me. All right. First of all, I am not talking about uh the Live Local Act. Um I'm talking about Senate Bill
718. And I want to know what the status is because there's some there's people here that know what the status is. In 19 or in 2016, 72% of the residents voted for a height restriction on buildings. And I don't think that's really changed,
but Senate Bill uh 718 changed that. And it appears that it's retroactive. to take out our height restriction on buildings and I think the commission knows it to the public who I think the vast majority is under the understanding
we still have a height restriction and if that's not the case you guys need to come clean and tell the public you can do it Facebook whatever the case but this same thing we got into with Elevate TI it was months into the making before we even heard the term so if that's the
case and It's really been resolved like that. Need to tell the public. Thank you. Thank you, Marie Barbara. Good evening, mayor, commissioners. It's been a while since I've been
here. Um, this is to address the billing permit and the um problems and the issues that I've been having. Still no permit. and I followed as much as I could of the process. So I want to explain to you and um what the problem I think is or that I'm having. So it's
been five months since I initiated the process of obtaining a permit to rebuild the damage caused by Helen and now we're approaching a new season season. I discovered the excessive length of time required to secure a building permit is
not solely due to the inexperience related to the hurricane damages, but to the unreasonable demands from personnel that are unrelated to FEMA requirements. The process of obtaining a building permit is arduous, but the permit number
itself is what I'm getting at is is essential to initiate the permit process through the TI online tool ops. I began my application on OPS as a owner builder using my email address.
However, I was not successful without a building permit number which appears to be a standard procedure. This should have been clarified on the website or during one of the city meetings that I attended. I've sent it attended a few. I
sought assistance to schedule a meeting with one of the reviewers of the substantial damage review board but was not able to find this assistance. There seems to be a reluctance to meet with anybody anybody on that board. So this is not the first
review board. This is the second one called the Stamp Show Damage Review Board, which I thought wasn't even supposed to be taking place. Um, but this has been my obstacle for over, I don't know, six weeks, eight, eight weeks, you know, whatever they deem. Um,
while I understand the challenges of addressing the damages following a major storm, I find it difficult to comprehend the lack of a robust robust process with clear procedures for future improvements since the storm. Compounding further hardship by homeowners obtaining a
permit are the arbitrary requirements by city personnel. While meeting all of the FEMA requirements, that's already challenging enough. Addressing the city demands for appealing these damages are virtually unprecedented, and I'll explain what
that means. I began my initial application on January 3rd, 2025, but was unsuccessful due to the unavailable building permit number. As I mentioned, you need that to go onto that tool. And this process was explained to me not by
the city personnel, but by other contractors that say you have to have the building permit number in order to go into the tool. Oh, finally March 11th, 2025, I received my permit number after numerous visits to the permitting
department and city meetings. Additionally, I I engaged in the independent appraiser, which I had to uh hire myself to ensure my damages complied with the 50% rule. After uploading my appraisal report with my application, I anticipated a
straightforward process moving forward. However, this turned out only to be a challenging task, but also an unrealistic endeavor due to arbitrary demands imposed by personnel of the stential damage review board.
Additionally, the st this review review board requested additional specifications to windows and sliders which I never put in my application because I had no damages. Ironically, the city has these specifications in their database because I pulled permits
for these the prior last two years. I pulled permits for all my windows and sliders. So, they have these specifications, but they're they're requesting this more than one time for me and denying me. I repeated the repeatedly responded to the substantial
review board that I had no damages and that you have these specs but to no avail denied. Next, I had repeated requests from Valerie Evans about my pre-torm pictures. The pre-torm pictures I submitted were taken by my son when he
removed the flooring to install new floors. This happened before the storm hit. This was all before the storm hit. Like I just said, I was out of town. He took pictures to send to me and that's why we had these pictures as he progressed with the flooring. I explained this to Miss Evans because she denied my permit. She insisted that I
keep searching for other pre-torrn pictures. She suggested I obtain maybe the latest Zillow pictures. I responded, "I've owned my house since 1980 and I had no intentions of selling my house, so therefore I don't have any real estate pictures." Since I could not meet
these unrealistic demands, I submitted renditions of my pre-torm pictures addition with additions to the flooring that I had and the furniture. Again, my permit my permit was denied because of the denial denial of the substantial damage review board for actual pre-torm
pictures that were deemed inadequate and not having any other pictures. I needed to res I need to resort to legal counsel if I find no other resolution. My pre-torm pictures denial is baseless because I met all criteria. In conclusion, this denial lacks a premise
and appears arbitrary and capricious. I would appreciate a response from the city manager. I know that we're in the midst of getting a new city manager. So, Mr. Bar, you're not Mr. Fant. We we need Charlie. I will be reviewing reading my
remarks. Okay, I'm reading my remarks here, but I also believe that we should get the statistics of building permits in review that are in review for the last two major storms. We need to keep up with the process of how fast we're doing this. Why is Treasure Island so behind? Why is my appraiser telling me
that TI is starting to be present a problem? Not not St. Pete Beach, not St. Petersburg, Treasure Island. Thank you. Thank you, mayor. Yes, I I can address her some of her questions if you'd like. Go ahead.
Okay. First, um let me just say thank you for sending an email to give us some time to to get some information here for you and I believe we have some answers. Um first, and also let me also say that, you know, we empathize with your situation. Uh no, it's not a back and forth. I'm
just going to give you the information. Um, so I'm not sure what happened back in January, but uh, your first permit application was on March 11th this year. So that's when the city first became involved. Um, it's been back and forth
with corrections requested five times. Um the most recent set of corrections requested and this is normal as it goes through the different um different reviewers flood plane appraisal and building and that kind of stuff. Um most recently as of May 8th
corrections request was sent and it has not been addressed since. So um you know the ball's in your court to get back with the requested information. I'm not sure who um the substantial damage review board
is. I don't that there's no such item no such thing. There's there is no review board. Oh yes. It's maybe maybe we're disconnected somewhere and it's and it's calling some called something else. But
damage, we have no board that reviews substantial damage. That was done by a private contractor through the state. Um it can be reviewed by my understanding is it can be reviewed by um if if you have an appraiser that you want to get a
private appraisal if you don't agree with the state's assessment and that can be submitted. Yeah. So um I would suggest coming in. We have folks in community development who would absolutely take up your case and explain exactly where we are and
what's needed to move it forward. Um uh the office hours for building department for permit intake are 9 to three weekdays second floor of city hall
here. So yeah, I don't I don't know what to say either. We we want to get through it for you. We, you know, we're putting all of our effort into getting people back into their homes. So, um, I receive calls and comments regularly. Why aren't why aren't you looking at Miss Smith's grass
and how come my neighbor has a car on blocks in their yard? Not literally, but you know, these non um life safety issues, not getting people back into their home issues that we're addressing. That's where all of our energy is focused. So, if you'll come in and talk to someone, we'll get
you where you need to be. Thank you, mayor. Thank you, Morgan. Hi, I'm Morgan. Um, the only concern we had on Sunset Beaches, we live across from Caddies, and my neighbors were kind of wondering like what are they going to do with like the tents and all that
stuff if another storm comes? Like, are they going to take it down and stuff like that? I can address that as well. What was our neighbors concern? All of us. So, in an effort for recovery, we've allowed normally we don't allow food trucks clearly on the beach or tents past nine
days. Um, we've waved those requirements and allow um basically an indefinite renewal. Part of that renewal is they have to have provided us a plan for how they or a contractor will remove it from the area. Okay. If we do come under a storm, if another storm's kind of
Absolutely. We don't want that winding up in your living room. No. And Morgan, what is your last name? Barbara. B A RBA. Okay. Thank you. All right. Thank you. All right. So, we'll close this uh
Yes. West Evans. Isa Palms. I just want to say that uh the I it's not on the agenda. Hasn't been spoken about. Um, I just want to keep it on everyone's mind that the seaw wall on 115th is still continuing to cave in and if the
commission looks behind them, they'll see a big storm cloud rolling in that direction and it only takes a few of those before uh all of that's washed out under that seaw wall. So, I hope that comes up at some point tonight and we can get on that. Thank you. Thank you. Yes, please. Step in again if I may, Mr.
Mayor. Yes. Yeah. Um, thanks, Wes. Um, city crews from public works are actually out there this week. What we found is where the concrete uh pieces of seaw wall come together. It's supposed to have a backing behind it to keep the dirt out from washing out. That's
deteriorated over time. So, what our plan is is to excavate those out, fill that with um uh waterproof concrete that can go underwater and then back fill it and compact it back to normal. So, that should be done this week. Could I ask a question about that?
Because I get calls on the seaw wall every week on 115th and what I've seen them do is I mean I appreciate that they're trying to do something but they come out and they dump premix they much dunk concrete bags of concrete in there and then it just takes only a week and
all the concrete washes back out and you can see the concrete down in the water like it's starting to like actually build the the floor of the of up. So, I mean, I I appreciate that we're doing that. Maybe what you're talking about today is different, but right now, all
we're doing is just pouring good concrete after bad because it just goes in there. And I've had multiple residents call me and I came out and looked at it and it just gets poured in and then goes out. Yeah. And that um that goes out into the water and we're making a living reef there.
Okay. Okay. Y'all got it. Actually, I've got director um of public works here. he can explain the process. I forget the name of the concrete you were saying that you paste on there. Well, is it water? Gary Volenik, director of public works. Um to address your your concerns,
um basically my understanding was in the past they would just pack dirt in there and the dirt wasn't going to do anything. They've dug down. They were out there today. I've got photos on my phone. I could show you, you know, after the meeting. But, um the the uh they go ahead at the joint. They clean it out.
They pack it with concrete on in the back and the front uh the water side with a with a waterproof grout. And so those they finished up quite a bit of the work on I believe the south the north the north side today and uh or
vice versa, but they're going to be out there again tomorrow. Great. Thank you, Gary. Thanks. Good evening. Start of palms. I actually uh I didn't come to the last meeting because I was feeling a little bit like maybe some of us weren't wanted here um
because I felt like I don't know we were told that we were the problem for all all we were the reason for all the problems going on at the city um with staff and whatnot. That being said um this last week was really good for me in a number of ways personally and so I've decided to step up here and do a little bit of gratitude stacking for you. Um I
want to thank the police. Um I have noticed them out a whole lot more. I've noticed them giving warnings to people, which I I hardly ever saw before. I I've just I've really noticed them stepping it up. So, thank you to the police, all of our emergency services. We've had a number of things going on lately. You know, a near drowning, we had a fire
down in St. Pete that I know it wasn't us, but they went down there. Thank you all for stepping up and absolutely showing up for that kind of thing. Um, city staff from the front desk, the permitting texts that I know are contracts and, you know, contractors who are here for us right now. But, thank you guys. I have a very unique situation
that I'm not get going to get into, but they listen to me and help me at least start to edge my way forward and I really really appreciate it. Um, finally, I want to thank all you commissioners. Um, you guys have a tough job. You're really representing a bunch of micro communities because Treasure Island, we're not all the same. You
know, even of Palms isn't all the same. I know it's a really tough job what you guys are trying to do. So, I just want to acknowledge or thank you for acknowledging the differences between those micro communities and working together to figure out a good balance and how we can move forward. Thank you very much. We appreciate
that. All right. Anyone else for comments? Okay. We'll close the public comment and we'll move forward. Uh Chief, you have introduction of several new city employees. Thank you, Mayor. Um yeah, just to bring
everybody up to speed and to introduce them before the public and the the commission as well. Um, we've hired two new department directors in the past couple weeks and an assistant director. If I could ask those three to come up or at least stand up, I would like to introduce them. Um, Victor Ortiz, our
director of finance, uh, new director, David Green, uh, assistant director of finance, and Bobby Shay Lee is going to be heading up our community development department. So, if we could we could welcome them. And these folks are here to serve you. They bring a ton of
expertise and uh kind of round out our our the filling out of our staff director position. So, welcome and uh thank you guys for your service. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Chief. All right. Now, as I've always wanted to
do, our consent agenda. We have three items on the consent agenda. And um do we have anybody from staff that's going to read anything here? Apparently we hadn't planned on
it. I can I can run through what they are, but by nature of being on consent, you've already been discussed and Okay. If you like a motion, please. All right. I move to approve the consent agenda as written.
We have a second. Second. We have a um motion and a second. Do we have any public comment? Hearing up. Kimberly Stewart. I love Palms again. Um I just hope that for this next
storm season, we have a better plan in place to protect our uh city-owned vehicles. Thank you. Thank you very much. Okay, we'll close public comment. Do we have um any comments here? I have something
to say. So, I asked the chief to send me uh updated pricing on like a drone show and it's still very expensive. It's like $30 $80 per drone. 180 per drone. So, is Oh, 180 per drone. Little off there. Uh
but it uh 21 minute show depending on how many drones anywhere from 30 to 180,000. So technology is getting cheaper, but not this year. Not yet. All right. Thank you very much. Could we use those drones to monitor the
drum circle after we're done with the uh I like that idea. All right. We have a motion then a second. Uh any additional comments? Hearing none. Please call roll. Vice Mayor Vasquez. I. Commissioner
Dicki. I. Commissioner Clark. I. Commissioner Sison. I. Mayor Doctor I. Thank you. And now we'll move into items of business. The first is a request to approve resolution 20250.
Do you read the resolution? Jen used to read the resolution title. More than happy to do it. Yeah. Different cities have different preferences. Uh we're on the first one, right? 259. Yes. So, resolution 259, a resolution of the city commission of the city of Treasure Island to temporarily reduce the
building permit fees for the elevation of an existing single family home by $1,000 and to reduce the building permit fees for the replacement of new construction of a storm damaged single family home by $2,000 for property owners who were the owner of record as
of September 25th, 2024, beginning June 3rd, 2025 through and including September 30th, 2025 and providing an effective date So if you guys recall, this was uh discussed at your special workshop. Um the resolution was drafted at your request. Um the one thing I will mention
is if you check the whereas clauses, this is retroactive to uh back to September 25th, 2024 for the storms. So it would apply to anybody that applied after that date as well. All right, any questions? I just have a couple questions. I was not at the
meeting, so I just want to ask I tried to go back. I watched it, but I just had a couple questions. So, one thing I found is I'm finding a lot of residents who um have not pulled a permit because they needed to wait to
get their insurance money before they could, you know, hire a contractor and they're just getting that now. So, now they're just getting around to pulling a permit. So, I'm just curious if any conversation came up. I didn't see that it did around, you know, extending that
for the regular rebuilds through September also because a lot of people don't have the luxury like I did to just fix my house before I got my money and get my permit and everything and just float, you know, the money. So, I was curious as to why that possibly was if
if that was discussed and why that maybe didn't take off. It absolutely it actually was discussed and that was a tough one for us. We um were the last city that extended it to that May 31st.
Um most places um Bair for example ended it in December 2024. Most ended it in April. And to be able to discount these um there was I mean literally I mean this is breaking us even doing this. But
in order to do this, we um we had decided, but it was discussed pretty much at length um about what to do as far as extending that out. But um the county and Treasure, excuse me, the county and Treasure Island was the last
two who had extended out those free buildback, let's call them buildback permits, I guess, for lack of a better word to call them. And um it just fiscally it was nearly impossible to give a reduction here and extend that
further. So but it was and I if I recall it was unanimous if I recall. Yeah it was that's what I thought. And then I have one other question. So I understand that the building fund is not in good shape right now financially. Right. So
my question is is next year, let's say when we get se 60 new home building permits, right? So every 60 building permits is over a million dollars in fees and revenue plus all of our other
um all of our other normal permitting revenue. So, we're going to wind up at some point building up this huge surplus right in this account because we would never normally have 60 70 new building permits. And so, you can't use that
money by statute, and I'll have to defer to this. I I believe because I read it today, you can't use that money for anything else. You can't use it to build a new lift station or you can't use it to build a new public works facility. And then you can only carry that money,
I believe, for so long. So, I guess my point is I understand that the building fund is in bad shape now, but at some point it's going to be in amazing shape because we're going to have so many new builds that we would never normally have at one period of time. So, what are we
going to do with that extra money? Are we going to wind up giving people free permits a year or two from now or uh because I don't believe we can just keep that money in there forever and we can't use it for anything else outside the building department. So, my point that I'm
getting at is, you know, I understand we're in bad shape now, but even if we had to borrow a little bit of money from the general fund to help residents out and then pay it back later when all of these fees come in and we don't have any place for them to go, I just feel like
we could be doing a lot more for the residents because we're going to get all that money back. And that that's not even that's not even taking into account the the all the money you're going to get in tax revenue from these giant houses. But I I just think that I feel like we could be doing a little more.
That's just my opinion. I know I wasn't here so I didn't get to say that. Mike can uh shed some light on this. Okay. So the building fund is a special fund. Now what you're thinking of is an enterprise fund. If it were enterprise then what
you said was absolutely correct. But a special fund is part of the general fund, believe it or not. And so consequently, when I said earlier weeks ago, we could loan money from the general to the building, we can do it
the other way. It's totally funible. So you could pay back a loan. Yes. But but can you you could you're telling me that you can use this extra money from the building fund to to build a building or do something? make allowances for that. Yeah. Okay. I don't think that's
that's not the way I interpreted what I read, but I might be wrong. So, okay. Follow up, but I think I'm on solid ground. Okay. Any other comments? No. The the only comment I'd like to add uh and I agree with Commissioner Clark's
uh concern. I do think this account will be a wash in uh cash down the road. Y and and I think that'd be a good problem to have. we can probably discuss at that time how best to to use that money uh to help the most people. But uh somebody
did mention who whoever wrote this up uh this motion in the in the funding. They talked about, you know, being overly concerned that we're going to run out of money in this account and uh by giving this $1,000 and $2,000 and I don't think that that's not a concern at all because
all this is incremental. No, this was not planned. It was not budgeted. So giving $1,000 and $2,000 credits on on uh permits that are coming going to be, you know, 10 $20,000 I don't think is a concern. So I think we I think we're
safe to proceed with with uh this proposal. Yeah, I agree. I think we're safe to proceed. But um you know, if we go back four or five meetings, we had $132 $132,000 uh or 130 is right in there. and that
was for extra help uh in the permitting department and everything else. And that was actually turned down the first time. Um which made no sense to me because I agree that it is going to be a wash at some point uh in the near future. So I I didn't understand that. But fortunately
uh we came back and we actually did bring on the additional employees and uh we'll hear later today. We'll hear talk about the permitting and how things are moving along because when we uh took that vote and it was not decided it was
negative. All of a sudden, you know, the permit shot up and as soon as we put that $130,000 back into the marketplace, the permits came right back down. So, uh, I mean, we're talking a lot about all this money that's there, but, uh, it it just
kind of blows my mind that, uh, we wouldn't approve the $130,000 on the first time through, which would have helped us move things along quicker. just comment. But, uh, and another issue that I might bring up too for commission's consideration is if we're
moving towards a prodevelopment stance, um, you know, that more development means more permits, which means we're going to need to hire more more reviewers and processors. So, agree. So, can I just ask the city attorney, is it correct that you you can
use this excess money for anything we want? we can put it to the new fire station or to the lift station out of the building fund. Is that correct? If what he's saying about it being a special fund is part of the general fund is correct, which I think it is. I just haven't seen it yet. A little new here.
Um, it is part of the general fund. So therefore, it's funible. It can be moved around the different projects etc. It's different than an enterprise fund and a restricted fund like something you would see in a utility fund, etc. or a certain type of permitting where it has to be used within a certain sector. But I I will have to take a look and review it.
And of course, I'm happy to Well, that's the case. And I'm sure we can find plenty of ways to use the money. We're not going to have it just sitting there. Right. Problem solved. There's our funding for this public safety building. All right. Uh so, we have a a motion and
a second. Uh do we have any other discussion? We didn't do the motion yet. We did not do the We were just discussing. Let's go ahead and read it. It's a big one. Thank you. I move to approve resolution 2024-09 with author uh which authorizes
a reduction in building permit fees for the elevation of an existing single family home by $1,000 and a reduction in building permit fees for the replacement new construction of a storm damaged single family home by $2,000 for
property owners who were the owner of record as indicated on the property deed as of September nomber 25th, 2024 through September 30th, 2025 and retroactive to September 20 to September
25th, 2024. Second. We have a motion and a second. Please call roll. A comment real quick. It is just a small technicality. Uh the motion it is as is written in as vice mayor of Vasquez read it said resolution
2024-09. It's actually 2025-09. So, just for the official record. Thank you very much. Please call a roll. Vice Mayor Vasquez. I. Commissioner Sison. I. Commissioner Clark. I. Commissioner Dicki. I. Mayor
Doctor I. Thank you. All right. Next item of business. I two. Public safety facility engineering design RFQ. Staff rang approval to uh to negotiate. Thank you, mayor. I'll handle this one
from the dis if you don't mind. Thank you. So, um, we put out the RFQ, um, which was, um, for an architecture and engineering firm to help us design our public safety
facility. Came back with seven responses, five of which were complete and reviewed um, by a committee of staff. uh wound up ranking them and um most most responsive to least responsive and and what we looked at was
coastal building experience for this type of facility. Um team availability, so their architects, draftsmen, how many other projects should they have going on at the time and um you know what their availability to us would be over the
near term while we're engaging them. Um several other things we looked at references and the the ranking came out with Sweet Sparkman number one by far in points. Um it's distant second was WMaker Jensen and then the third one was
um American Structure Point. So we did have them all back to to do presentations for us and um again the committee they're stuck with our ranking. They you know they they ined up a little closer after that the presentations but um as as a committee
we are recommending and requesting permission to negotiate with Sweet Sparkman. They just have a ton of experience building coastal properties or coastal buildings um in the flood plane. Uh their team was most available. They partner for engineering services
with Kimley Horn who the city has you know a long-standing relationship with. Um, and just what sold it for me was just looking at some of their designs and then speaking with the chiefs in uh uh Chief Desi and Longboat, Chief Graham here in Leilman. I know that's not
Coastal, but I I just wanted to get a feel for their how they worked with this with this firm and they said they were just a delight to work with. Uh, Chief Pitman in Largo, who uh they designed the Bell Air Bluff station as well. Um, beautiful stations, easy to work with,
good availability. Um, so that's our recommendation and our ask is if we could begin negotiations uh to to get a contract with them and if we're successful, we would bring that back to commission for acceptance of that contract. Um, again, nothing would
happen again until we issued a notice to proceed once we had a contract. So, um, including tonight, we have basically three different bites at the apple on this. Um just confirming the the commission has um addressed that we are
going to be next door here. If that's going to change um before we do a notice to proceed, we would have to let these folks know. So if that's something that's um on your minds and under consideration uh doing a different location, um you know, I'd say we get
that on the agenda for an item and and see where that goes. But we can certainly move head ahead with negotiating a contract at this point. Um because this the number of hours required and the costs for their different specialties wouldn't change.
Um but once they do start design, we need to know exactly where we're going to be. So with that, I'm here for any questions. Okay. Do you know when you would bring this back? How long will it take to negotiate the contract and the RFQ? Um, you know, we would meet with them as soon as we're authorized and as
soon as we have time. Uh, Gary, about how long do these normally take? It's my first one. I would say four weeks. Okay. So, two to four weeks. Okay. So, it'd be our uh first meeting in July probably. Yes. Okay. And um, as you
know, we're we're sitting on pins and needles deciding whether or not we're going to get anything from the state to help us build this. So, um, being in the July, that would work. Absolutely. So, if we don't get the
money and we decide we need to put it somewhere else that that we won't be wasting any money here. I think that's what you were just asking, right, by doing this? Correct. Yes. Okay. Absolutely. The design money is in this budget and, you know, once you know until we issue a notice to proceed,
we're not spending any money, right? Yes. Okay. Uh, any public comment? Okay. Hearing none, we'll close public comment. Can I have a motion, please? I move to direct the staff to proceed with the contract negotiations
for our public safety facility design and engineering with Sweet Sparkman. If successful, contract will be brought before the commission for approval and notice to proceed. I second. We have a motion and a second.
Any further discussion? Hearing none. Roll, please. Vice Mayor Vasquez, I. Commissioner Clark, I. Commissioner Sison, I. Commissioner Dicki, I. Mayor Doctor, I. Thank you. All right. Moving on. Uh, this is I3, appointment of
interimm city manager. And what I'd like to do here is I'd like to get a motion to uh to o reopen and extend for 10 days uh the uh the recruitment of
uh trained and focused f people on the interimm city manager position. Okay. I would second that. I guess I'd like to add a couple of things or if we could discuss a couple things beyond that. We haven't done the first yet. So go ahead and discuss them and then we
can include them right into your motion. So like I mean number one I think we need to you said 10 days. We need to have a cut off though of like when they have to have resumes and by so we have time to inter interview interview them you know. Correct. And we talked to Jess
and she can come up and help us with that because I don't want it to be a contest if there's only six hours left and you know correct. we're working on. One one guy can do it and one guy can't. That you know that that gets to be Yeah. Exactly. Okay. So, what we discussed um is just looking at the timeline is that
we could open this up until Friday the 13th. Right. Uh so, Friday the 13th and then at that point um you would have access to everyone who uh submitted interest in their applications, resume is really just going to be rums and any additional information they would like
to submit. Uh then on the 17th you can narrow down the list at that meeting and after the 17th then you would go ahead and do your interviews with the potential for a special meeting on the 24th to make a selection. Okay. Yeah.
And then the other thing I was going to add is, you know, in my meeting with um the chief on Friday, it was that we only apparently directed them to look into the what was it? The ICMA managers and training managers and
training. I mean, can we go after the Florida ICMA also and anyone that's ever put in for this job before that was a finalist and try to just get as many possible people as we can in the pool so we can try to find the best person? We can certainly put it out to a lot more
places than we were able to last time given the time frame that we have now. Absolutely. And if we uh if you have some that you think we're going to miss, please give them all to Jess cuz I I we want to get to as many sites as possible. There's municipal sites in
Florida, there's Florida sites just for managers, there's ICMA and so we've got it it all and we'd like to make sure everybody is got it covered. So, one thing, if we're going to do that and um basically narrow it down on the 17th,
obviously that cuts us very short on the July 1st. Um can we put I mean, how could we word it basically? I mean, we can't have somebody we're going to it's going to take four weeks for him to get here. Um or how how can we Well, so that
is something that we can put in that we basically have a July 1 start date and that's the expected date. So, what I'm learning throughout this process is that those folks who are somewhat used to doing this, for lack of a better word, the interim, the temporary, kind of the
short contract role are prepared to move a little faster than those who are looking for a more permanent position. Okay? So, I can put that information out there when I speak with each candidate. I can also basically just create like um a form email that says, "Hey, these are
all the additional things that you probably should know. And if you're still interested, great. This is when we're going to start reviewing uh resumes. If you're not interested, thank you for your time." So, great. So, I have no idea what that motion's going to say now, but I mean,
we we we have time to interview and we're going to look at all places. I don't know. Yeah. I I think that uh the biggest thing is the uh opening date. We're going to do 10 days and closing date would be the Friday 13th. Yes. And if I could just ask you all to just keep
bear that in mind for your calendars after the 17th that I will be starting to schedule interviews for whoever you select to move forward in the process. So just something to keep in mind when you're looking at your calendars and scheduling different things. And do we have a backup plan?
Well, and I'm only asking that because if I mean it's four to hire. So, I'm just asking that in the event that I mean because we don't know. We may get 20 applications and we may get two. So, um
just kind of a a whatif scenario. So really at that point, you're still back to your same two options that you have now, except you're not going to have uh chief bars as an option. So if it's an acting position and there's someone that
can go into the role of that acting, then you would have to then extend uh city manager Anderson's contract because we have to still have him on staff in order to have an acting. or you would go ahead and sever his agreement and just
simply appoint somebody for that temporary role. And those are the same two options that that we have. Okay. Yeah. I mean, that could be as little as two weeks or something, right? If the person couldn't possibly start right on the correct. Oh, you're saying if we didn't find anybody at all, but Well,
either or, honestly. Either or. If we find somebody who's good, but they can't start, right? You know, it's kind of an eitheror. Okay. So, your motion My motion is to uh direct staff to uh reopen the process with a deadline of
Friday the 13th. Um and we're going to look at all avenues to find new applicants. Great. I appreciate that. Do we have a second? Second. We have a motion and a second. Do we have any public comment hearing? None. Do we have any
uh up here? Uh yeah, I'd like to make sure that uh it's a full-time uh city manager uh with five to uh 10 years of experience uh Florida experience, coastal ICMA certification, and economic
development experience. Okay. For the interimm position. Yep. Okay. That just a point of clarification that's going to severely limit the number of applications we get. Well, just to be clear, that was a a motion to amend the motion, right?
Because you had a motion and a second, if I'm not mistaken. Okay. So So there would be a vote on his amendment to the motion and then and then we go back to the original motion if it's amended or not. Just a heads up. It's like two
different competing, right? Okay. I mean, I don't I think I was saying just to be clear. So, you had a motion. It was seconded and then you moved to amend his motion. You're going to you're going to hold a vote on adding those extra stipulations to the search. And if that fails, let me go back to and tell me those stipulations one more
time. Um had to be a full-time city manager for a minimum of 5 years, uh preferably 10 years of experience. need Florida experience as a city manager, coastal experience, MA certification, and economic development experience.
Yeah, I don't think we're going to get anything, especially for a temporary position. Yeah. And so, I mean, I think that's for the for the full-time definitely. I mean, for our normal guy, but Yeah, it could be. Well, let's vote on it and let it fail and then we go back to his motion. Yeah. And staff
could staff could accept all all resumeums and applications and then the commission could sort them based on that criteria if they chose just to just to broaden the pool to make sure we get good point a good good fair amount of applications for you to look
at. Okay. City clerk, do we have a second? Do you have a second? That is what did we receive a second? I didn't really amended motion. No. Okay. So on the first Yeah, we didn't. We just had a motion. So the amendment dies for lack of a second. Now we're back on the
original motion. Okay. As long as it's on record that that's what I wanted. Okay. And so now we need a second. And you second. Okay. Great. All right. Uh any further discussion? All right. Uh roll call. Uh
Commissioner Clark. I. Commissioner Dicki. I. Vice Mayor Vasquez. I. Commissioner Sison. I. Mayor Doctor I. Motion carry. All right, moving on to I4. And this I don't know where we are. Uh severance agreement with Charles
Anderson. That pretty much dies tonight. Correct. Yeah, we we can't do that as long as we don't have a a temporary city manager. And we're working with if we're going to have an acting city manager, we need to keep him on the payroll. Okay. And we're
working with Chuck on that. Yes. Okay. Continue to work with him. Okay. As far as I know, there's been no change. He he's negotiated an agreement. The former city attorney um has approved it and Chuck has signed it. We're we're holding
it, not executing it at this point. And we don't have and and I guess this would be for the attorney. So we do we need to extend his um his leave technically.
Um I think once we sign it then the right well just because it was it was like a set date originally. I just want to make sure that we don't have to legally extend that just because it was a set date just to be certain you can just to be safe. You say I I move to
extend until until he's properly left the city and you can just do that right now and that's totally fine. That would be an amendment to the agreement. I'm sure he's fine with it. Okay. unilateral amendment. So that date would be the 30th and we we're going to correct the 30th of June.
I make a motion to extend uh let's see here extend the severance agreement with Charles Anderson to June 30th. Correct. Second. It wouldn't be severance. It would be his um his administrative leave
with pay till June 30th. Yes. As stated by Chief Bars. And I second it. Okay. Do we have any uh any public comment? Hearing none, we'll close public comment. Uh and we have our
motion and and the second and a second. Okay, let's call the RO. And just one one thing I just just to make it easy for you, mayor. Um calling the role is totally completely fine, but if you ever did want to shorten it, especially on ministerial stuff, and just say all in
favor say I. You could quicken it that way, especially on things there's probably not too much disscent. Okay. And then any and then you would say any opposed and somebody might say nay, but if it's clearly one person, Lisa Marie pointed out is that the decorum rules? Okay. So,
we're going to go ahead and amend those down the road. So, that way I just want to save you guys time because you'll know when you're really debating something and it's going to be a three to two and it's going to be a five to zero and you're going to know. So, we'll come back with an amendment and get that done. Just scanned them again, but somehow I missed that. So, thank you.
Thank you. Okay, ready for roll call? Yes. Commissioner Sison, I. Commissioner Dicki, I. Commissioner Clark, I. Vice Mayor Vasquez, I. Mayor Doctor, I. Okay, moving on. Approval of resolution
20250. I think we skipped over I5. Did you So, we did have one. Uh, the grants manager position at I5. I'm sorry. I I5. I thought I read I5. Not yet. No, I didn't read the grants
man manager position. Right. So, I believe it was I5 moved so that they would be together. Must be an older. Are we going to hear from staff on item I5? Yeah, this is basically the update on signature authority. So, Mike, yeah, this that's what we call My apologies.
cuz I had an outdated uh agenda. Oh, okay. Yep. Yeah, please. Well, what what this does these two basically it uh is getting signature authority with their banks. Thank you.
Those with signatory ability will be Mayor Doctor, uh, Mayor, Vice Mayor Vasquez, uh, William Bars, who will, I believe, still be assistant city manager post July 1st, and our new finance
director, Victor Ortiz. Okay. So, this is just a it's a resolution and just cleaning up the uh the update on the signature authority. So, do we have a uh a motion? I move to approve resolution
2025-08 allowing William Bars, Victor Ortiz, Mayor John Doctor, and Vice Mayor Tammy Vasquez to be added as signers on the city's financial accounts. I second. We have a motion and a second. Do we have any public comment?
Hearing none, we'll close public comment. Any uh additional discussion. All right, let's uh have the role. Vice Mayor Vasquez, I. Commissioner Clark, I. Commissioner Sison, I Commissioner Dicki, I Mayor
Doctor, I. Thank you. Now moving on to I6 grants manager position. All right. Hi again. So, the Rebuild TI group uh brought it to my attention that they were interested in uh researching a
full-time grants manager position. So, that's what I did. I reached out to all the different municipalities and received probably about a good 90% uh response from everyone. and I also reached out to Santael. So, basically when it comes down to the grants
manager, uh it really takes a lot of time to uh write the grants, submit them, manage them, that type of thing. So, that's why they're interested in this. Uh what I was able to provide to you was the cities who currently have at
least a position dedicated to grants. Might not be a grants manager position, but it's a it's a position dedicated to grants. So right now from my findings it's the county, Clearwater, St. Pete, Dun Eden and Tarpon Springs. Uh other than that we are there no other city
that I was able to locate or who who responded has a grants manager position or a position dedicated to grants. So the essential functions uh are primarily like I said to write the grants uh apply manage that whole thing work very
closely with the department heads. MadiRaa Beach recently entered into a contract with Grant Works uh as well as we also conducted an RFP to find uh a grant a company who can do grants as well storm related uh to help with our
recovery and we've also assigned grants management to the assistant finance director as well as the budget and management analyst. So, uh, you can some funding for the grant position can be reimbursed up to about 10%. Uh, from what I'm being
told, those are for the administrative fees. Uh, sometimes the re uh the process requiring this is pretty extensive. So, one person kind of manages them as well. So, uh, the overall decision obviously is is
yours, but if you have any questions, let me know. There's anything else I can add. All right. Do we have an idea of um what the cost to have a full-time um I know it says here, but just Yeah,
I'll go ahead and talk about it. So, I graded it out at a pay grade G, which is currently the pay range is about 74,000 to 111,000 would be the max. And the salary would be negotiable just based on the experience that we currently need.
And so for that, you go out, you kind of we need to figure out exactly what experience we're going to need now in order to basically hit the ground running with this. Uh so you've got that and then plus the total cost for an FTE is also the 8% employer contribution for
the 401, 7% for FICA, and whatever health insurance and additional benefits that the city puts in. Thank you. You're welcome. Yeah. So, I mean, Ardan, I know you're on that committee, so you can probably answer my questions. I mean, I
think that it's a no-brainer that we want to try to get as many grants as we possibly can, right? I guess my only question is is, you know, a full-time person, that's like 2,000 hours a year. So, are we going to
have enough work to keep this person busy doing that? And by the time you pay them what I think what I saw in the thing, 111,000 plus benefits and everything, you're up to 150 160 grand a year. Um, so that question number one.
And then question number two, these guys like Grant Works and other people are like experts at this. I mean, do we try to go after some of these grants with those guys and see if it works before we just jump into a full-time position? I mean, once you got a full-time position in there, you're kind of locked in with,
you know, this salary. So, I mean, again, totally forgetting grants. Um, I just again I do you walk before you run, I guess, is really my question. You know, that's a a good question. And the and the rebuild TI uh committees talked
about that back and forth quite quite a bit. And we talked with the city staff about the possibility of even doing a a part-time position on here. You heard uh just uh a minute ago that that there were only about a three or four cities
uh that are doing this. According to the county's local mitigation strategy, they they identified uh I think it was 11 cities and in their thing uh that they said uh uh we've looked into that and some some of those have said no.
Somebody on our staff does that. Anyway, what our experience has been is there there the amount of grants that are available out there are are mind-boggling. There's lots of grants and we have already missed out on
some grants because we we don't have anybody looking at it and and the best example is the Florida small cities uh small communities grant. Uh that was that was a deadline. I I don't remember exactly. I'm going to make this date up, but it was deadline of April 1st and
like the day before we realized that, hey, we missed the window on applying for that grant. We were just looking at some other stuff uh where we missed or claim close to missing deadlines. And uh another good example is the local mitigation strategy where there's $400
million up for grabs from the county. uh a bunch of uh cities had put in a list of uh it came to about 139 projects and when it when when it came down to deadline to getting your projects in in
the backup uh only 90 projects got in. So some of these cities missed that deadline and are not going to be eligible. We didn't miss it. We've got our four projects in on that on that list. But I I can tell you if it wasn't for the rebuild TI committee, we would
have probably missed those deadlines and not been even eligible for that. So, uh my sense is these this position pays for itself. All it has to do is get maybe one grant a year and and most of these grants allow up to 10% of the amount of
grant to go for administrative uh uh uh duties or or or administering the contract. uh the grant rather and uh so even just you know one you know decentsized grant a year is is a good
thing. We need this now more than ever and I do I truly believe the city of Santael has it. They're the ones you you know that you've you've heard that where they've got 134 million in grants that they're sitting on right now. I don't think we'll get anywhere near that. But I do know this that none of these people
that that that give grants they don't come to you. you got to go to them and you've got to stay on top of it. And even after you've been issued these grants, if you don't meet the internal deadlines within those grants, you will lose the money that you that you thought
you had been allocated. So, I think this position uh is is extremely important and needed and will more than pay for itself uh certainly in the in the short run. I say the short run in the next three years. Uh, but in the long run, I think it will be good because we'll be
on the front end of of getting the these grant monies when they become available that many other cities won't even know is available to be applying for. And don't some of these cities also have like either their finance director, assistant finance director do this or
their economic development director or I'm just trying to make sure that we're going to get I understand you get one or two grants you pay for it but if you get one or two grants through grant works you you it pays for even less than a full-time position. But that's just what I'm trying to figure out, you Yeah, it's
uh I I understand both of the the the the new finance director and assistant finance director that we've hired, both of them have considerable experience at writing grants, but this isn't just about writing grants. It's about managing them. And the and the real workload comes in managing these grants
and working with the department heads and giving the grantor uh updates on on on our progress and stuff like that. So uh again when we went to Santael we met with one of the people we met was the grant manager and uh in the amount of
work this guy was now again they got 134 million in grants but he uh he takes off a lot of workload from the other uh department heads that were otherwise having to be doing a lot of this documentation and keeping the uh keeping
the granters informed of our progress of the progress on those. So again, it's uh I I think of it as a small investment for the amount of return and I I get where you're completely get where you're coming from and I was looking at it both ways as well. But the
problem when you have like grant works in in my opinion, you know, they represent several small municipalities. So, are they going to give us that focused attention and going after a grant that they're going to give Madera Beach or Readington or And I'm using I
don't know if they have Readington. I'm just using that as an example, but um because I kind of went back and forth to the same thing. It's like, okay, why don't we? But then it's like we have missed so many grants that is definitely a full-time job. One, finding them, two,
babysitting them, and three, getting getting the money to come home. I mean, that is definitely a full-time job. No doubt about it. And, you know, to to ask our already overly taxed employees to be
responsible for going after as many as we can possibly get. Um, I think is that's a big ask. And to babysit them. So, you know, because you do I mean, we all know that the one in front of the face is the one that's going to get the
money. So, you know, having somebody to solely represent us as a city, I think is going to more than pay for itself, um, especially with, you know, what we're going to be needing in the next 3 to 5 years. Um, especially specifically, um, because of the storm and everything
else. I think that it does make sense and I've actually um I've actually thought that for a very long time. So, I was glad to see this in the agenda. Okay. I agree with you. I think it does make sense. I think that uh everybody knows how much money is out there and it
it truly is out there and available and uh you know that uh the the writing the grant isn't as difficult as the like I said the babysitting of the grant money and making sure that it it moves through and so it's probably
uh oh 25% of the time writing them and and I heard that it could be as much as 80% of their time babysitting them. So, I think we're leaving money on the table and I think in this situation, we have to sprint. Okay.
In that case, I'd like to I'd like to make a motion. I'd like to move to authorize a city manager to recruit and hire a full-time grants manager for the city. Second. We have a motion, a second. Do we have any public comment? West.
West Evans, Isa Palms. I agree with Commissioner Clark that uh if there's a firm out there that this is what they do. Um that we should probably look at working with them first. Uh we do we have any numbers from these other
cities, what their percentage of what they pay out for a grant manager to what they bring in is. Uh that should be public information. We can look into that and see what the numbers are. uh as for um you know will we be in competition with these other
municipalities if we go with grant works will they be putting their focus on us I would say we have more of a chance with them uh because that's how they make their money by getting grants for people they're hungry to get that money into as
many people as they can whereas if we have a paid person on staff they're paid their their income is coming in, uh, they get benefits, they're good to go. So, they're not hungry like a person who gets paid by how much they bring in.
So, I would say look into that. Try to find out what the percentages are, what people bring in as opposed to what they're paying out. And honestly, uh, we're moving into a time when I personally, you know, when it comes to federal grants and things like that, I hope there's an end to those
coming soon. Obviously, I want Treasure Island to do as as well as it can, but you know, I'm hoping we're getting to a time in our country where we're not just uh have depending on the federal government throwing money out the door.
So, we shouldn't depend on that coming in constantly. Uh I think going with something like Grant Works or whatever, another firm at least for a short time to see how it works is probably the smartest thing for our city to do. Thank you.
And mayor and commission, just to uh touch on that comment, there is checks and balances with all city staff. In particular, a new employee would get a six-month and then an annual evaluation. And if the grant manager isn't bringing in grants, they're not going to make it much past six months on my watch.
Marie Barbara, hello. Um I would like to also support this measure and I think well I'm thinking uh specifically about the treasure bay didn't we get the grant money for that? So that is a real time um you know example of what we can have
especially some of us that have supported the tolls coming back to get that revenue because I come from that era when we had we had the lowest tax base rate of any of the municipalities on the barrier islands on this coast of
Penllis County because we had that money for repairs on our bridges. So, we're giving away, you know, this resource asset. As much as I don't like the tolls, that was a great, you know, source of revenue. Maybe there's some grant money out there for that. So,
thank you. All right. Anyone else? Uh, Sarah, Sarah Pennington, Isa Palms. Um, I do understand the value of getting these grants in and I think that would be wonderful to have, but I also do believe
that once you're hiring a full-time, just brand new position, new employee, it's a lot easier to bring someone in than to get them out. And so, it sounds like, oh, if they don't bring it in, then we're just gonna, you know, get rid of them. But I see how that works. It's
a slow process. It's hard. think about um with Chuck Anderson, we're now paying him, you know, 5 months severance. It takes a long time to to get rid of a person in my opinion and um and I think we just need to be really thoughtful about what we're doing with this. I want
to see the grant money come in if it's available, but I would love to see something a little more of a conservative approach, either trying Grant Works or trying a part-time position just to make sure that this is going to pan out for us and that we
actually are going to get grant money coming in. Thanks. Thank you, Carlos. Hello, commissioners. My name is Carlos Mirror. I'm with uh uh District 3 Paradise Island. And um yeah, I just uh want to mention that u Commissioner
Dicki, I I agree 100% that we should be doing something to uh pursue grants. Um but I also want to speak in in um support of uh Commissioner Clark's fiscal restraint. I I I think this commission um often doesn't really
consider the fiscal reset training of things and and what uh was just spoken about uh part-time. You know, you I know you all probably re know that we do have Treasure Island does employ a social worker half time. We share a social
worker with Gulfport, you know, through Lyft, the uh Lyft TI organization. So, um I think that's a model that we can consider is um maybe hiring someone part-time and sharing with another u uh
municipality. Um and and and chief, I I I I really like that you said that under your watch, you know, that person has to to um produce in six months. Unfortunately, you're not going to be here in six months. So, um, we we need to it would be good for us to if we're
going to create a new position, um, you know, let's let's maybe be sure that in 6 months, whoever the the city manager is at that time, we we come in, come back and said, "Okay, this person has gotten these grants. Uh, certainly been
worthwhile." Uh, or say, "Yeah, we haven't gotten any grants, you know, but we're still trying, you Well, so I I would I would really u and I know the commission is probably going to go ahead and approve this full-time position, but um I think fiscal restraint is a good
thing to to consider. U Thank you so much. Thank you, Carlos. All right. Anyone else? Hearing none, we'll close the public comment. I'd like to just add add a little bit if I could, Mayor. Sure. Uh I I appreciate
the the uh you know, believe me, I don't like adding positions and I and and I thought long and hard about doing this. Uh but this position probably more so than any other position we could we could talk about adding. Uh it's pay for performance. You know, you you bring the
money in, you you keep your job, and if you don't bring the money in, you don't. And I was glad to hear Chief Bars uh add uh his comments, and I would hope the new city manager would uh would do the same. But this is a time we we've got this window of opportunity here and if
we try to go too conservative on this I I'm afraid we you know we'll we'll we'll lose grants that otherwise would uh uh that we might be able to get. I did think Carlos uh I did think about what you had suggested. I thought about why not go to St. Pete Beach and say, "Hey,
why don't we do a joint uh thing here?" But part of getting these grants is competition. It's going after So, we're competing against these other municipalities and and going after these grants. So, if if we hear of something that's that's available and we go after
it, you know, I'm betting that some of these other cities that don't have uh full-time uh grant uh support staff don't even know that these grants existed. So they don't even know they missed missed an opportunity. Anyway, I just wanted to add that. Thank you.
Okay, we have a motion correct and a second. Please call roll. Commissioner Dicki, I. Vice Mayor Vasquez, I. Commissioner Clark, hey. Commissioner Sison, I. Mayor Doctor, I. Thank you. Okay, moving on.
Could I could I don't know how I do this, but I could I just ask a question here? I sure back to I know we can't do anything about it because it's already been voted on, but the ben the um the permit thing before I read that statute
today and I just had three people text me, two people I don't even know with the statute and the information that was given out earlier is wrong. That money cannot be used for anything. I I got the statute on my phone. I left it at home today. That's fine that the vote went
the way it did. I just can't stand when faulty information is given out up here and that information is just I just want to be on record. The information is not accurate. The statute does not does not say what we said that it said and that money can't just go be used for
anything. I have the statute right here and I I should have brought it with me because I read it at home and I just I just I just think it's false and I'd like I'd like for someone to give us the the true ruling on that. Okay, moving on to I7. Hold harmless agreement with St.
Pete Fire Department for use of their fire department training facility. Good evening, mayor and and council. Um through your approval of this hold harmless agreement with St. Pete with your signature. Um you all voting him to to go ahead and authorize this allows us
to meet the minimum training that we need annually. ISO, which is the insurance service office, requires certain training such as 192 hours of company training, 60 hours of new driver training, 12 hours of existing driver training, but more importantly is 18
hours of facility training. And a facility is defined as a three-story tower on two acres of property with a burn room. We don't have that here. So, we need to partner with other agencies such as St. Pete Fire and um agree with this whole harmless allowing us to meet
these standards. Great. Do we need a motion for the hold harmless agreement? Yes. Okay. So, uh, let's have a motion, please. I move for the commission to approve the hold harmless agreement between the cities of
Treasure Island and St. Petersburg. This agreement authorizes Treasure Island Fire Rescue to utilize the St. Pete Fire Training Facility at zero cost with the mayor signing the agreement as Treasure Islands representative. All right. Do we have any public
comment? I second the motion. Hearing none. Uh that will close that. Any discussion up here? No. Call a roll, please. Vice Mayor Vasquez. I. Commissioner Dicki. I. Commissioner Clark. I. Commissioner Sison. I. Mayor
Doctor. Thank you. All right. I8 permit review. Uh, this will be short. Um, I've got the statute as well and I just was alerted
to it and if I made a mistake, I'll own it. I'm not saying you did. I'm just saying the way I read it that so I'll own it. But in in all fairness, what I read on the statute very much describes an enterprise fund. And if that's the
case, then we've got we've got an accounting issue on our side. Then if it's if it really is an enterprise fund, it should not be a special fund. It should be an enterprise fund. And that would make it totally compliant with the statutes. But I need to study this.
Obviously, we'll have touh take a look at it. Hold up. But u and I want to address and let you know if if I hosed it. I studied it all day. Maybe I'm wrong, too. But I just, you know, that's But thank you. I just want to make sure we have the accurate information out to
the public and and Commissioner Mayor, if Mr. Ortiz could uh shed some light on this for us. This is my session with here. Good evening uh commission. H basically with these funds you are correct. You cannot use it for other
purposes just plan review inspections uh related with that but that includes also the the staff uh time and the staff. So basically what you do is that you take the last four years of the average of operating expenses that is correct and
you can forward that is correct to the next year. You can do that. What he was referring to is that there are also inter funds loans. I will have to read about it. It's not to use it for other purposes but just to get the No, but we just said earlier today that we could
use it and even vice mayor said, "Oh, yeah, we could use this for a new fire station." That's not correct. Maybe that was a misunder the the other thing that's going to happen is is that I spent I spent my whole day on this. So the the the other thing that's going to happen
is we're going to bring in more than the average of four years because we're going to have so many permits. So it says you can't hold more than the average of four years. So what are we going to do with that other money? Yes. Now before doing a budget amendment for
expense, you need to have the the revenue on place. You have to do the expenses at the time that you have the the the I understand, but I don't know that. I mean, we're going to have to hire a few more people, but I don't know that our expenses are going to be so much more from all the revenue that we're going to
bring be bringing in from all those permits. So, so if you I just want the accurate information to be, you know, be given out up here. You are correct. Yes. Okay. Income budget time. We can look at that too. Um, you know, we can't we
can't expend the revenue as Victor was saying, excuse me, if we don't have it yet. So, let's build the fund up. um pay what we need to to get that permit backlog down, hire if we need to hire for our building, our potential development boom, and we go from there.
And if permits cost $2 in the next, you know, a year and a half from now, so be it. But I think we should build the F fund up. And I'm sure that's what we'll hear from our our finance folks um before we start cutting it down again. All right, let's get back to permit
review. Okay. We have two data points. Um it continues to go down. Uh but for you is a real trend. But um I will say that this was before the cuto off date for which was
the 31st I right 31st. So we've got we indications are we've we had a surge you know beat the clock type of thing. So, um I wouldn't be surprised to see it, you know, temporarily bump up a little bit because of the last minute rush to
get it in, but um that may be a blip, but we're seeing things going in the right direction. And how many additional folks did we ultimately end up hiring? Was it six? Six. Six. Okay, great. And are they all
still on board? Pardon me. They're still all important. Thank you. All right, moving on. I enterprise funds research and direction. As far as discuss discussion here this evening, what I'd like to do
is just open up that that uh the Department of Public Works manages our enterprise funds. These funds consist of our storm water system, our wastewater system, and our solid waste system. And I think we all agree that well-run uh uh
systems, enterprise funds such as these are important to the quality of life and our safety of our public. Um, in the short time I've been here, I've had a chance to meet with and work with the staff that we have that provide these services. And I want to tell you
that [Music] um they are hardworking, they care about the citizens, and they really do a good job with very little. And I can attest to that. I've I've been around for a while and I've
seen personnel. These are good folks. And so I just wanted to kind of set the tone there that that what we're talking about is is services that uh I think um I kind of use the term we we provide concierge service because we are going back to people's houses to pick up
things that they may have forgotten to put out that uh they're late getting their cans out or something. We really go the extra mile. Um recently we've entertained the uh we've exercised a letter of intent to talk with Penllis County about
um providing wastewater service outsourcing that service and since then I've received comments or or emails or uh folks have stopped by asking me about what about the other other uh funds that
we have um and and also about the rates that we charge. Now, I've I did a quick Google search on on the internet and um we are not the most expensive garbage collection in in the coastal re uh
towns. We're not the the le least expensive. We're we charge a reasonable fee and provide good service. Um I think it's the same with the wastewater and and uh and storm water rates, too. So, um, in in regards to putting this item
on the agenda, what I wanted to do was because I get these mixed in mixed, uh, signals as far as specifics, what would you like staff to do in as far as investigating the other two enterprise funds that we have?
Because um, we want to make sure you have the information to make good decisions. Um, if you have goals and objectives you'd like to achieve, I'd like to if we could enumerate those so that we can then set set um our our work activities to get the information you
need to make the right decisions for the community. You know, we all care about providing cost-effective services. Um, I just want, you know, before we get too far, it's it's easy to to get rid of a service. it's impossible to bring it back if you if you decide at a later
date that maybe we shouldn't have done this or that. So, I'd like you to go ahead and give me direction so that I can investigate and provide the the information and and maybe prioritize which services that you'd like us to look at next. Um, you know, right now
the wastewater system is a very large large uh part of uh of the enterprise funds of public works. Um, do we want to tackle all of them at one time or do you want to just let's wait and see how the wastewater system plays out? Uh, but
those are the kind of things I'd like you to discuss and then give us direction on how I can prioritize, make best use of our time. I'll start if you go ahead. Okay. Uh, I'm going to talk specifically about solid waste. Uh it is something we've been talking about for a long time and
I'm a bit surprised I think even at this point I shouldn't be surprised at anything anymore but I'm a bit surprised that we're that we're that somebody's not already working on the study to determine what our cost would be outsourcing commercial and residential
solid waste versus what we're doing right now. that that that I the last time we met with I forget the gentleman's name, but he was going to go I thought he was going to go forth and and uh and do the uh that's just Mitch. I thought he was going to go forth and
do that work for us. And again, I don't have I don't have a preference. I don't care. You know, my preference actually is to keep it in house, but I want to be able to to to say, okay, this is this is either the cost of keeping it in house or if we outsource, you know, we'll
save, you know, a little bit of money, but but that's when we would have to make the decision is is the whatever incremental amount difference there is, is it worth the specialized service that we get uh ourselves? But but we've been asking for since I've been on the
commission, we've been asking for a review of solid and commercial waste. And I would agree, we were led to believe that that was being done by our former city manager because I asked that very question. I'm like, I thought that was already being done to do a comparison. Not your fault. Um, but we
had all asked for that comparison a long time ago. I reviewed the records. I saw that Mitch Mitch had done I think a presentation to you in We don't need Mitch. in in April March or April. I think that that they they cost analysis. Okay.
Yeah. There was there's not been any cost analysis because we can't make an informed decision until we see numbers. So, and that's what we were promised, but we never got them. Agreed. And and Gary and I both inherited this. So, Oh, exactly. Yeah. This is neither one of your fault. The um but we'll we'll own it. We'll we'll take on that
responsibility. I guess what we're looking for is direction. We we think the best way to to get you numbers to to evaluate apples to apples is to put out an RF a request for proposal RFP and see who responds and we just need to know is
it for uh commercial waste pickup, is it residential, is it either or or both. I I actually disagree with that. Um Ardan, I am I'm with you on the fact that I can't believe that we're still kicking this around. This should have been done
a long time ago. We don't need Mitch. We don't need anybody. All we have to do is I'll I'll um you know, I will uh volunteer to do it. All we got to do is get a what we want as far as all pickup or
just residential or whatever. I think it we should get all and how many homes we have, how many businesses we have, this that get it out to the five waste pro and the five people and then have a workshop. They'll all five come in here. They will tell us what they can do for
us, what their services are pretty basically what it's going to cost. We could probably just from that workshop be able to tell whether or not it's going to be cheaper or not. And I used to hear, "Oh, we can't do that. That's not allowed." That's that's not true.
We're not to an RFQ process yet. So, if they all come in, we could then we could decide, hey, this looks like it might be a lot cheaper. Let's go out to an RFQ. then we can get an RFQ. This is so simple. These guys will be begging to come in here and give us a presentation.
And just every single city manager, interim city manager that I interviewed said that waste is the easiest one to outsource. And every single one told me, you will save money. Maybe they're wrong, but we don't even know because we
can't even get anything done. So, I mean, this this could be done in a matter of weeks, and it's been going on for months and months and months and months. So, I asked this uh to be put on the agenda uh last week um because this kind of fizzed in my opinion. Um whoever
you want to blame. Uh but I would like to give staff direction uh to have them figure out a way forward. So, is that done in the form of a motion? Not yet. I think we also discussed it.
And let me just I think that that's what's what we've been getting a lot is is let staff figure out what we want to do. Right. And it's a lot it's a lot more difficult than that and I beg to differ. Commissioner Clark, what I they will not they want to see a package of
what you you are going to give them as far as a scope and that usually is put together. It it's usually put together by I'm not saying you have to use Mitch. I've never used a garbage consult, a solid waste consultant, but it's not quite as easy as it sounds really. I'd
be happy to call up. I know waste management. We can call Service Pro. We can get somebody to come and talk to us, but the the getting a contract and all that and turning over your franchise forever, it's a big deal. Yeah. And
again, we're not at this stage, we're not suggesting that with the We're just trying to figure out what the possible cost might be. So, well, is the objective to lower your costs because you're right now you're paying how much how much you paying. We like I said, I called up and and I mean I Googled and I
found out how much that you know what are the monthly bills for residential in the communities. That's not that doesn't take a lot of work. And I saw that we were in the middle. So for me that's not what it was about. It was all the upkeep, the trucks, the new trucks, the staff. I mean that's the most turnover.
That's all covered by the fee. None of that cost comes so it's an enterprise fund which pays for itself. So the cost of the trucks, the cost of the There's no general fund money that comes into this. Yeah. What what did I think remember u I recall bringing this up a
year ago was the there was $830,000 uh in our capital improvement uh budget for for solid waste to buy two new uh garbage trucks. So that's kind of what raised the issue. And before we go to to do that, we just want to take a look at
again, I don't think anybody up here has made a decision we want to outsource. I'm trying to explain to you so that you you can you can give us the right direction because that's what we're trying to everyone has the same information. Those garbage trucks are budgeted with funds that are collected from the garbage that people pay.
Nothing comes from general fund. I understand that. I I So it's not like there's extra money that, you know, it's costing us. whatever your rates are, if you want them to go down, I don't think you're going to get it to happen with waste management or ser they don't they
they do it for profit. So, I'm just letting you know that that that expectations we're happy to check it out for you. I don't think it's going to be quite just a workshop. We won't use Mitch Kesler, but I do think we need to put something out there so we get an apples and apples bid from the different
the the different uh entities that could provide service to us. Right. And if you want to look at just commercial, I personally would favor us looking in that direction because commercial has the biggest injury
potential for our our personnel of any of the commercial side of it because we have to manhandle the dumpsters. We don't have a front end lo uh a front loader truck. So, they have to get out there and wheel the dumpsters around. But the the residential, I think the I
think the the public enjoys having the city people there. Now, again, it's your call. If if we're going to lower rates, we're going to have to maybe go to once a week pickup. Well, that's what we've been asking for for months is to look at
all of those numbers. We can't make a decision in that. If I could, if I could just interject, it doesn't seem like that you're interested in looking to the outside. I mean, I think that we are. I don't I don't know why we can't look to discuss if I could just interject one second. Commissioner, it sounds like what you're looking for is develop a
scope of work. This is what we want. Twice a week pickup for commercial, once a week pickup for residential. That way we get apples to apples because these folks, if you just invite them in here to talk, they're going to tell you what you want to hear. And then when we go to write a contract, it's not going to be there. No, you have to give them a scope
of work for them to come in here to know what they're talking to us about. But we do a request for proposals and they come back and say, "I propose to pick up twice a week and charge you X." Once we do an RFQ, we can't talk to them, right?
That's a commission. RFQ and RFP are two different things. Okay. So, no, you you do a request for proposals and then we bring the commission can be the one that decides. We bring all the requests for proposals back to the commission. You all evaluate them, discuss it amongst
yourselves, rank them and select. I mean, I like to have these guys come in and talk to us to understand what they can do. You can have them do presentations, but just the process that's done in municipal government is you request
proposals and go from there. Yeah. Well, that that's what I meant. We can have them come in before we do an RFQ, right? So, RFP. RFP. Yeah. Yeah. Two different types of services. So, I mean, I don't make that many suggestions from this position, but I would suggest that one of you make a motion to direct the city
to advertise an RFP, you know, in the at the soonest possible date. Is that what you want for commercial, residential, and or both? Okay. And one other uh qualification to what whatever that motion is going to be. Uh Commissioner
Sison mentioned and I think he got agreement with with everybody on the commission at that time about excluding beach uh waste pickup. Did do you still feel strongly about that? I'd say we go out
for the RFP for exactly what we have now and see what the savings would be and start there. Okay. I agree. Okay. I I think the other thing though is I think at some point we have to um this I guess if you're going to do apples to
apples, you have to do what we have today. But I think some point we need to have the the discussion on do we really need two times a week pickup. I mean we have more and more younger folk I mean more and more people moving in here. And I I I don't see half the time I don't even put my trash out, you know. I mean
twice a week I only do it once. I think we Yeah. to what you're saying. I think we did discuss that originally and I think that's we were going to kind of look at it both ways too to kind of look at that. So we can do in the proposal request add alternates. Let us know what you'd charge for once a week, twice a
week. Yeah. Just commercial, just residential, both. We can add all those into the RFP. I'm on the flip side. I actually borrow my neighbors cans because I'm on the garbage I have. But however, you got a bunch of kids stuff. However, what I'd like to add is uh for them, whatever company we use to take
our uh to take whatever garbage trucks that we have are new, you know, maybe buy it out or uh also take our employees, you know, or the the employees that do uh sanitation, right? So, in the in the contract, certainly a discussion we could have once we come to contract because we don't want to
obviously lay them off. So, Well, yeah, we talked about that. They they they very well may take our employees. They also very well may take our old trucks, right? you know, which I know is common in that. And so, but we're not going to know any of this until they come in and talk talk to us. The one other thing is
I think in my mind, we have to get away from this. You know, that if your washing machine um you know, conks out that you call and someone from Treasure Island's there in two hours to pick it up. I mean, I I I've never heard of
that. I mean, I lived I lived all over this country and a lot of times they you your washing machine goes out on a w Thursday and they you call them and they say we'll be to pick it up next Wednesday and and the same with you know well they have to be able to go behind
someone's house and get their can and bring their can out. I mean they've never done that with me. I don't know. Mine Mine's They don't ever come back. But I mean, this is becoming Do we can we can can that money be spent somewhere else better than having someone come behind my house and pick up my can? I
mean, so can we get a motion so that we can move it forward and hear from the folks out there? Okay. Thank you. Tell me if I forget something. Um, I move to instruct the city staff to go out for RFP
on commercial and residential uh trash for twice a week and once a week pickup recycle and re well we have already recycling outsourced. But do you have to say beach too or not? And apples to apples comparison. Apples to apples
comparison. Yes, beach pickup as well. I would suggest you include a date, cuto off date for them to apply. Got it. Um, what do you want to do? July. July. I don't know how long it takes. A month. Just do six weeks. What's six weeks?
What do you think, Gary? For a date to develop to develop your We'll try and get the out two weeks and then if we six weeks, I guess that's four weeks to respond. Four weeks to let us know. Let's do July 15th. July 15th. Okay. Do we have a second? We have a second. Do
we have public comment? I've got a card from Andrew Vasey. Welcome back. How are you? Andrew Vy is of Palms District 2. Uh on this topic, um as was covered on the solid waste, it's been going on since August. Um so
glad to see it moving forward. It would be useful for you to have a workshop before you go into an RFP so that you can speak to the industry. We call it industry day on a lot of what we do. So, it's not a bad idea to do it. You have six weeks you just gave yourself. So,
you could do a workshop ahead of the proposal. Um, other of these enterprise funds that are out there, storm water, uh, there's been issues about that. We had a $17 a month rate. It's now going to $39 a month. One of the big drivers
on that were capital projects. And the big capital project in that is the West Causeway. The West Causeway um came under a very large cost estimate that has been um at least in my opinion debunked as a massively excessive cost
estimate tied to Elevate TI. Um, they looked at rebuilding the whole West Causeway, tearing out the reinforced concrete pipe. I mean, just going crazy versus just overlaying and raising it two inches. And so, you came up with this $8 million estimate that then they
fed into the storm water fee. Then they produced a report to jack the storm water fee from $17 to $38 to pay primarily for that project. So if you were to go in and and one of the things about directing staff is this has become
a very tricky thing with this commission and with staff that goes back to last summer. And as some of you know, you said let's do uh sol let's look at outsourcing the trash. Well, apparently that wasn't directive enough. If there isn't a motion, if you don't cross every
tea and dot every eye, then the staff says, "Oh, that wasn't um I wasn't directed to do exactly that, so I'm not doing that. I don't do this." And where do you end up? You end up in June from last August with no outsource trash work
at all. So you in your motions, I suggest you be very very careful about what you're directing the staff to do and very explicit because it's been very problematic. And before our former city manager got dismissed, I got a strange
outreach from him, somebody who I spoke to maybe once or twice during the permitting to to have a sit down with him to talk about um to talk about these things and and um and all of a sudden,
you know, I said, "Why didn't you do the outsourcing? We're trying to do public works. You can't size the public works building without doing the outsourcing." And well the commission he he literally told me the commission never directed me to do that and you know many comm there
were four of you at the time I believe that did that and and and that didn't get done. So you've got the direction that you give staff needs to be very explicit on the stormwater fund. You should be looking at the capital programs and readjusting the rates that
were set up by that consulting report and those rates can be lowered on the outsourcing. you're on the right path um to do that on the sanitary fees. It's similar to the capital cost. If you start unwinding some of the elevate TI things that got put in on the capital
projects that go to these enterprise funds, then you can do that. Um and then the last thing on that is you should be looking at the permitting um as part of this study as you're looking at these enterprise funds. The permitting is not an enterprise fund per se. The statute
is very clear. You can only collect what you use and you can only carry forward the average of your past four years. Right now, the average of your past four years is about 750,000. So, that's what you can carry forward. Otherwise, you either refund it
or you build yourself a uh permit department building. You're allowed to do that. I don't think you're going to wind up doing that, but please read the statute under section 553. It is very clear. Thank you. Thank you. Is there anyone else for public
comment? Hearing none, we'll close public comment. I was going to talk about storm water, too, and he jumped he he got stole my thunder. Um there was a question about that that uh the storm water rates and I reviewed the the consultant report that was done. My
understanding is that the rates that are in effect for the citizens um residential is $25 right now and that was approved by the commission. So, I don't think it's 39. I think there was some projected suggested rates to go that would get as high as $39, but right
now I the rate that's on the books that I was able to determine was 25. Um, so it it it is it isn't uh 39, but you know, I wanted to ask that because there was, you know, there questions about the rates. What what would you like us to do? Um, you have
the ability to raise or lower the rates. Obviously, the amount of money that's collected in this in whether you agree with um the uh uh a lot of the hardening and sustainability projects that that were included in there. Um uh we we can
always tone the projects down to meet whatever monies we're able to collect. So, that's up to you all. Um and we, you know, we'll take your direction on storm water. Um a couple of things. I'm pretty sure that that entire uh every ordinance that they suggested was um accepted. So
the rate is 25 now, but I believe that we agreed to the entire stair step. So it will be going up to 39. I might be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that that's what took place. I also read their entire uh Retellis was who the company
was. I read the entire thing. [Music] Um, it does clearly say in there that the and it was also in a memo from Stacy that this extra this money was made for what Andy mentioned with the West
Causeway, but then it's also said any other resiliency projects, which that just means for Elevate TI. I mean, let's not let's not joke around. That's what it's for. So, we're not doing any of that anymore. I've had residents, I've
had businesses here who don't even have a business open that are sending me their water bills and they're just they're outrageous. And if you look around, we're not just a little bit more than other communities around here. We're a lot more. And you know, because
we're not moving forward with Elevate Tiana, I think we got to go back and look at this and see if we can bring these rates down. I just don't I I don't I I just don't understand why I guess I do understand why the fees are so high, but to me they should not be. Well, I'll
be h I'd be happy to report back to you know what sort of monies come in under the 20 the current rate of $25 um and the capital improvements that were projected for that. We aren't going to build anything that doesn't get approved by the commission. I mean, we can't go forward
without your approval. So, none of that money is getting spent. And if there's money not being spent, then obviously we can readjust the rate. So I I'll I'll be happy to get back to you uh with more information specifically on the storm water capital improvement program and
what I what I believe if you just hold the $25 where it is now and don't have it progressive to 39, what that would be able to fund. I'm I'm almost 1,000% positive that we it's that we approved the rates going up to $39. Commissioner
Clark, would you like to sec make a secondary motion and give staff direction? Uh, let me suggest this. Let's wrap Let's wrap this one up about solid waste. Let's wrap that up and then we can move over to the other other ones if you'd like. Oh, we didn't finish the solid
waste. Hi. Any other discussion on the solid waste? All right. Roll call, please. Vice Mayor Vazquez. I, Commissioner Sison, I, Commissioner Clark, I, Commissioner Dicki. I, Mayor Doctor, I, thank you.
Okay. The one thing I'd like to do is I agree with the gentleman's suggestion about maybe maybe seeing if we can get a workshop within a couple of weeks while we're working on the the RFP. We can get feedback from them and and possibly use that to further enhance the RFP that we
do put out. So, I'd like to them to know what they're getting into, what we want and expect from them, and then um make sure that our RFP, you know, is is tailored correctly. That can be the kickoff meeting for the RFP. Okay. Absolutely. Okay. I I like that.
And if I could add one more thing about the the uh well wastewater um prior staff was was proceeding and moving ahead as directed in our strategic plan
which was very environmentally friendlyheavy very much geared towards sustainability. Um, and I'll mention that in my my city manager discussion points later, but um, you know, you can't fault staff for doing what's in the strategic plan that was approved by
the city commission at the time. So, that's where that came from. There is, Mr. Vasy, no ill intent by staff to raise your rates. Um, these were commission approved items that that we were directed to pay for out of that enterprise fund. So, yes, there was an
escalating cost to pay for those. If the sentiment has changed and you're directing us that it has um that's something we can do in house, uh the director can absolutely look at that proposal and that um study that was done for wastewater and we can scale back
those projects and bring you options to you know keep the rate way it the rate it is or possibly even lower it. Just need that direction from commission. Well, yeah. And I mean, you and I have talked about this in our meetings every week that I agree with you. The the
old whatever you want to call them, guard was 100% environmental. And I think you've even stated to me and we all agree that I think we're moving away from that. We want to do development. So again, the this stuff was to pay for all that stuff and now we're not going to be
doing that anymore. And I the the rates do continue to go up to 39 and I just think that that's just ridiculous. I've had like seven people text me their water bills. They're right here on my phone. So, we'll absolutely look at those. I mean, I think that we need to I guess I want to make a motion to direct
staff to analyze our uh you know, storm water water bills and see if we can lower the rates based on the fact that we're not doing all these environmental resiliency projects anymore. I'm a little confused though. We don't provide water service. That's
not part of our I'm talking about the storm water rate is what we're talking Okay. Okay. Storm water. Storm water. That's what we It's going up to $39, right? I I would suggest you Yeah, I would suggest you include in your motion
uh an agenda item on the strategic plan so you can amend the strategic plan from Yeah, we're the plan actually expires this year, expires, and we are in negotiations. I'm going to mention it here in a minute, but with collaborative labs to redo the strategic plan going
forward. What's the date on that? Just curious. Um, I want to say it expires end of fiscal year, but don't quote me on that. Um, it's close. Well, that's good. You get to do another five-year plan.
Sounds good to me. What's that going to be? A lot I know that we don't have a lot of employees that are just sitting in chairs. We got everybody out working. Um, is this taking away from what we're going to be able to do or is it simple? Is it an office kind of function? Well,
it's an office function, but um, nothing ends up being simple. Uh, we just need the reason I part of this is we need your direction so that we can prioritize. We are we do have limited staff. So if we if we're focusing on this and then it's yanked to
this and that and the other, you know, right now, you know, to me the biggest thing is wastewater is a big ticket item that's already been approved. Now we've been instructed to go ahead and get an RFP out for solid waste. And I want to try and investigate more on the excuse me, more on the storm water and get a better handle on when the rates do
adjust if they do and how we can look at flattening that out or or reducing it to to better match what projects we will be bringing for you to construct. I'd recommend that we not put a motion forward on storm water at this time. Uh
because like I said, he's if we're at 25 and it's at 39, where is it going to be adjusted or has should it already have been adjusted one direction or the other which would be probably down. One of us will at the next meeting address the understanding of the rates as as what
was approved by the ordinance and how you know when they are going to raise if if they are. I mean I know for a fact that it goes up to 39 but I'll wait a week for you to tell me that but I don't I don't I mean this can come after the solid waste but I don't know why we still don't want to look at this. We can
we're not saying don't look at it. I think staff will look at it internally and find out what those increases were were programmed to to do and if we still need to do those or not. The uh I I this commission would approve the any budget
uh the budget that's going forward. We we would approve it and in that I'm sure the city would have to come forth and convince us that this is the right way to go in terms of a rate increase. So, so even though some previous commission agreed on a schedule that would
eventually get us up to $39, uh each subsequent commission has an opportunity with each budget to take a look at that and see if that's if if that's the right thing to do. But we will be part of the budget process is approving the rates that we charge for
wastewater, storm water, and garbage pickup. All right. I think that uh we don't have anything else on that one. So, I'm on the north end of the island
and I was retired in 2023. They cut my land in half a long time ago, but First Street West is always flooded with just a rainstorm. In 2023, I saw those trucks draining the sewer drains and the drainage. I have
not seen one in 2024. And I walk seven miles around this island every day. I I sit on my porch and that's where I would see him draining. But I haven't seen him at all in 2024. And we have been flooded
again. But just a rainstorm. So I want to know where it goes if they're doing this. And it was trucks that had bees on them. Lucia or something like that that were doing all the draining in 23. Yeah, I believe you're referring to the
Vector trucks that suck the debris out of the storm drains. We have backflow flow preventers to keep the sea water from coming in. They often get clogged with oysters. They're not very effective. Um any sand that came from the storms has already been sucked out.
So, they're clean just on lagoon. Okay. And there's drains that are full of sand and they're brown weeds. Okay. and we can certainly look at those, but um we have a regular maintenance schedule and and often times when the rain comes at a period of high tide, the outflows are
covered by tidal water and that they're not going to drain. But they did in 2023 all year long. I can even show you we had a we had a cat one hurricane hit us August 30th. Not any water, not a puddle. I got pictures. Okay. So, Clark,
do you have a motion? No, they died. Yeah. I think that we're not going to present a motion on this one. I think staff has ample direction. Thank you. I also just want to clarify one thing that the public works director said that
we don't do the water bills. Well, the storm water is on the water bill. So, I just want to make sure that when people say their bills are high, it's because the storm water rate is very high and that's all on the same bill. I just want to make sure everybody knows that. Oh, thank you.
All right. So now we move on to H1 which is turned into I10 and that is the negotiated contract with Kimy Horn for the design of the new uh master pump station and um so do you want to start with that?
Sure. So I think we have to discuss that because one of the agenda items was solid waste. I know this is specifically the master pump station. [Music] Um, and that's going to be directly next to the public works building, right? So,
uh, I think we should discuss it before we just immediately vote for it. Well, I think what you're trying to say possibly is I, you know, from my understanding, and I could be wrong, but the public's works building and the lift
station were all sharing a wall and it was all one building. I think there was talk about splitting those apart. Um, but from what it looked like I read as we were just going out for to do this on the entire big building. Uh, first of
all, I am 1 million% in getting a lift station done as soon as humanly possible. Um, I don't feel like, you know, cleaning sewage out of my bathtub again after we have a uh actually I think my wife did most of it, but um um
anyhow, uh so but I think like we talked about and and and Arthur said, if we don't need trash trucks, do we need as as big of a public works building? So, can I I I think we almost need to agree to split these things apart. See if we
can get the lift station going. Yes. Um on its own and as soon as humanly possible and then deal with the public works a little bit later. So, what I was seeing in this motion that we were just going to approve was just the entire whole big thing. And I don't I don't
think we want to move forward with that. I think I'd rather look at us split it apart and let's try to get a lift station going ASAP. getting tired of seeing me this evening. Um, the intent is to totally split it apart. This is going to be a lean and
mean pump station only. It's going to be welldesigned. I've got a meeting scheduled with Kimley Horn um tomorrow to I was hoping that it gets approved today to just start the conversation and take it away from it being it was it was originally I think the it was it was a
an architect had the contract and Kimley Horn was a sub doing some of the design work. This is just just strictly I want to try and get it to take the least amount of space over there so that we have potential use. The city can decide what they want to do with the rest of the room, but we do not need a big
building or anything. It's going to be submersible station. Only thing that'll be elevated will be the controls and a generator. Make sure it operates uh in in storm events. So, it's going to be just as you suggested, Commissioner Clark, a splitway pump station project.
In full transparency, I just wanted, you know, the explanation so the public could hear as well. I was actually on the other coast and I was walking kind of by a master pump station for a coastal city and it was pumping out oranges. So, it smelled like orange like
instead of the smell sometimes you get when you walk by that place. So, I want to make sure we get something maybe of that sort. Um, yeah. Yeah, the technology on that is far greater than what we have over here. So, thank you for explaining that. That's really all I
had. I just needed a discussion. I guess I my question was and it's the reason I brought this up. Was I supposed to be able to deduce from these attachments that it was just a pump station only because everything in there look like to me it was a combined
RP the RP was just for a pump station. Yeah, Commissioner Clark, I think, and I and this we could have done this before uh before the new commission came on, but I know that the the commission that I was part of it. I just don't remember if it was with with uh you guys or the
previous commission, we did uh instruct the city to do to do the uh uh pump station only, the lift station only, and and to separate it from the public works facility. That's weird reasons that you're saying. That's weird because I talked to Chuck about that and he said,
"No, we can't. It's it costs too much. We can't split them apart." Yeah, we that's what they told us for quite some time and we we uh kind of said we needed to proceed with the lift station now. We'll worry about the public workstation later. I mean, if this is lift station only, I'm all for it. So, I wasn't, you
know, Yeah. It didn't seem That's what this is, correct? Workstation only. Okay. I move for the city commission to approve the authorization for the city manager to negotiate a contract for the design and permitting of the new master pump station with review by the city attorney.
Second. Okay. Uh we have a motion, a second. Do we have any public uh let's Okay, Andrew. Um ju just real quick on the separation.
Um, if you look in the proposal, uh, if you look in the RFP or Q, the title of it says public works building and lift station. If you look in the proposal, for example, page 4-6 says in there they're going to program the public works building. So
again, under the caution of what you say or what you motion and what happens, it's very clear from the RFP. It's very clear from the proposal and what's in there that this is for both the public
works building and the lift station. I'm not saying you can't separate it out and you can't direct only to do that and the meeting with Kimley Horn for example tomorrow. Can't just be on the lean mean pump station and all that. But I just want to be real clear the documents are
very explicit in what they're for. The proposal is very explicit on including on that page um 4-6. That's what it says. Okay. Thanks. Thank you. Again, I think direction to staff is
clear. Okay. And it's pretty clear on the um agenda item too that it's just for the Do we need the motion of the documents that were attached? Yeah, because we added some more public read. Yes,
West Evans palms. Uh I just want to say two things. I suggest anything be made a motion because we've been burned in the past by uh when motions weren't made and then we get the excuse of well we didn't get the direction from the commission on
what to do. So uh anything at this point uh I think needs to be put forth that way. Uh but I would like to commend the commission on doing a great job at uh making things clear to the staff. Uh I remember the
first meeting of this commission March 17th, 18th some around then whenever the first one was uh Commissioner Clark actually suggested splitting the projects of the public works building and the lift station and
the attorney and the city manager at the time basically laughed and the staff that some who are no longer with us in the back of the room actually laughed at him for saying for suggesting that those could be split as if that was absurd. And I once again just want to commend you guys for putting your foot down uh
standing with the residents and trying to get something done and making it clear to the staff what we want and we want it quick. We want it done right and uh you know keep it up. Thank you. Thank you. Is there any other public
comments Stewart is of palms? I guess I am a little confused too and I just want to make sure maybe I'm understanding this correctly. So, even though this consent agenda item that has a link to something that verely very clearly states this RFQ was for more than the master pump station, that's what I read
all day. Yeah. You're saying that although it states that you're authorizing staff to only move forward with the aspect of this RFQ that involves the master pump station, anything to do with the public works facility is not going to be negotiated
with Kimley Horn at this time. I'm hoping that I understand that correctly and I just thought I'd bring that forward because I've been trying to to sort through what's being said. So, thank you. It's the way I understand it. That's the direction I received from staff and I from commission and I did hear it three times repeated by
residents. So, it's pretty clear and the motion does say just the lift station or I'm sorry, the master pump station. So, okay. So, we have the motion. We have a second. Just I just I apologize because you're absolutely correct. It does say on the cover, I did not have anything to
do with putting these documents together. I was part of the selection process, but um the the motion as vice mayor mentioned and all the documentation, the cover memo was specifically just master pump station. So, I can see the confusion and I apologize for that, but it's it was
always for my intent. You're just building pump station. Well, that again that's why I was confused coming into this meeting because all the documents that were attached that I was reading today talked about the entire thing and I thought that we were going to talk about splitting them apart and I'm even
more confused because you guys say we always wanted to split them apart and Wes actually just reminded me I did ask that in a meeting to the city manager and if it could be split apart and both him and the city attorney said that nope couldn't be done. So yeah, I mean
there's been a lot of confusion around this. So yeah, and and prior to even our former city manager, the discussion at one point was master pump station coupled to a public works building with bathrooms facing the open area where city hall used to be and public or
public works administration and fire administration and police department and that would all be a park. So things do change and we are happy to roll with the punches and roll with the changes. Just give us the direction. All right. So, we still have a motion
and a second. And any additional discussion up here? No. Roll, please. Commissioner Sison, I. Commissioner Dicki, I. Commissioner Clark, I. Vice Mayor Vasquez, I. Mayor Doctor, I. Thank you.
Okay. Now, we're going to move on to our final item, and that is commission reports. Now what I I would like to do here is um to limit commissioner reports to five
minutes. If it's there's something that is necessary to continue on. We can uh approve for five additional minutes for a total of 10 minutes. And this is a uh a permanent change. Uh and I'll ask for a motion.
I motion that we uh for future meetings that we restrict uh commissioner comments to 5 minutes unless otherwise pre-approved at 10 minutes. Second. We have a motion and a second. Do we have any comments from the public? Uh
Wes has hand up first, but then Brandy, you'll be right behind. Wes Evans, Isa Palms. Uh we elected in my district uh Chris Clark to be our representative. And of course you guys were all elected in your districts to represent uh your constituents. And uh
we did that because uh we want to hear we want to tell our our commissioner uh the concerns we have and we also want to hear back from our commissioners and we want to hear from
all of you and uh I don't think that should be limited. If there's something that needs to be said, whether that takes 2 minutes or an hour, I I don't want that. I don't think that should be limited, especially with
something as um uh vague as 5 minutes and if anything else needs to be added that's important, we can get an additional five minutes. It's just wrong. Um, the whole reason this exists is for us to for you guys to
hear our concerns and for us to hear from you on what's going on. And I just want to hear from the commission no matter how long it takes. I'm just saying thank you, Brandy. [Applause]
Hi, Brandon. Long District 2. No, I think it's a bad idea. I I can appreciate hearing from all the commissioners of what's going on in the different areas of Treasure Island and I really appreciate hearing that. I think that it's an important part of our community and I don't think it should be
limited. We have really hard we have a lot of hard work to do and we've got to be able to have this dialogue with our commissioners. Our commissioners have to be able to inform us of what they're hearing, how things are going, um any kind of presentations they want to put
together to inform us of what is happening because they're hearing from their whole district, you know, for the entire time. It's just I don't think it should be limited. I don't think it's fair. I think that a bunch of people are
depending on the leadership of Treasure Island and it definitely shouldn't be limited. Thank you, Mary. Yes, please. Mary D. I just wanted to find out what's behind this. Why is this coming up now?
Because I have been to a lot of commission meetings and I've never thought, gee, that commissioner is really taking too long to talk. Never. No, not really. I mean, I you know, I mean, I I I wouldn't relish sitting here for you guys to each talk an hour about
something, but I also wouldn't want to limit you if there was something that needed to be said. And so, why are we changing that? Why are you asking to change that now? Has there been a problem? Yes. You know, there there's too much
give and take and too much, you know, going back to former agendas or things that should be on the agenda. If if there's something really that's that important, it should be on the agenda and everybody up here has the ability to put it on the agenda so that when we get
to here that we're not sitting through and I'm I'm sorry, but we're not sitting through 20 minute powerpoints when it's supposed to be a report. If we're going to do that, then it should be a full agenda item which any, like I said, any one of us can can put on there and and
go through it. So, it's really not about the amount of time. It's about qualifying what is being said in a commissioner report. It's it's about that the commissioner reports have very limited scope. Uh when we're giving
reports, if if like I said, if if this is a full-blown issue, you know, it can be there on the agenda itself. Sure. But what what is the purpose of a commission commissioner's report? to give small hits, you know, that are
what are take what's taking place. Like I said, PowerPoint present presentations are not appropriate in a a report commissioner report. Maybe you're just saying that you don't want to have PowerPoint presentations maybe and that maybe that if it's if it warrants a
PowerPoint presentation and maybe you should have it as an agenda an agenda item. Is that what you're saying? Well, I'm saying forget the PowerPoint. It's the it's the time that it takes and that that it really is about the time. I mean, it's it's not that we want to go
through and have, you know, every night that we have a meeting, it's three or four hours and uh and that's just too much. I mean, it it truly is. And uh so if there is a if somebody's got a point, you know, that was uh you know, about
the storm water, you know, and that going up, that would have been much more appropriate on the agenda than on a a report, a a commissioner report. But isn't it true that a lot of times these things come up because of what's been brought what's been trans what's
transpired in your conversation? Because I understand that you all don't meet behind the scenes. like this is your first time to be here to talk about what's on the agenda today. So, as that conversation's happening, I mean, I don't know that the storm water thing was something that
anybody thought they were going to get down and dirty on, but when something was mentioned, um, and that wasn't even during the commissioner's remarks, right? It wasn't it wasn't that was brought up in response to what was going on here at the podium.
It's it wasn't it wasn't prepared remarks that the commissioner was making on his time her time to talk now. So, I guess I just don't understand I don't I don't I just don't understand the limitation though. Okay. If a commissioner has something to say, you
know, if Ardan has something to say and it's important and he's reporting on his district and it's going to take him more than five minutes, I don't think he should be limited to five minutes or have to ask permission for I don't I don't I've never been offended by how much time Ardan's taken to give this commissioner.
I just wonder where it was coming from, but I I get no PowerPoints on the commissioner report. Uh Sarah Sarah Pennington, Isa Palms. Um I also want to echo what everyone has said up to this point. Um if if the purpose of
these meetings is to inform the residents and all of the residents that are here right now are telling you, we want to hear what the commissioners have to say no matter how long it takes. Why wouldn't you allow us to have that opportunity? Uh especially during after
the hurricane. I mean, Ardan came in here um after the hurricane with a lot of really valuable information. and you did a lot of research, a lot of digging, and some of that information took longer than 5 minutes. And I don't think a commissioner should have to get special
privileges to speak longer than 5 minutes. I could see that becoming um a little bit of a gray area where who gets to decide what becomes valuable enough information to discuss for more than five minutes. And I think it's more
fair to just let the commissioner speak. I actually love the powerpoints. I think visuals are very very helpful in informing the residents of what's going on and I really strongly disagree with limiting any time for what the
commissioners can speak for. Thanks Andrew. Um I think this is a really bad idea. Um, mayor, I know there was a time when you were in the minority and you fought with the commission to get your points
across trying to get agenda items on. I know a couple commissioners on here in the beginning had an issue with trying to get items on the agenda. Um, I think free speech is really important and while there are certainly tests of
reasonleness of how long you can go for something, I think trying to just come up and impose a uh a motion like this to put a time limit on it is a bad is just a bad idea. And I think given the history that you encountered as you
dealt with some other commissions on here that that I'd like to ask you to re really reconsider doing this because um it's fair to the residents that they can hear people and I think that reasonleness test and maybe the city attorney can advise you on that relative
to free speech because if you recall we had an incident back in August where the residents had to send a letter from a lawyer to the then city attorney regarding um the uh mayor at the time
trying to restrict free speech and we cared about it on our side as the residents and we took the time spent the money to bring that point forward and we're doing it now on behalf of all the commissioners because today it might be one commissioner and next round of
commissioners it could be somebody else. It's just not a good idea. Thank you, Chris. Uh Chris, Chris Downing, Isa Palms. Uh if you are going to um go forward with a limitation on timing for the
commissioners to give their report, uh you're going to have to probably do the same thing for the city manager's report or for any other report that you ask a city staff person to come up and also give. So I wouldn't go forward with
limiting the commissioners on a time like this. Just run the meeting. use Robert's rules. That doesn't mean you have to limit that time. It just you can you can have the hand in moving forward. It's a bad idea to restrict this.
Anyone else? Closed public comment. Um we've got a motion. Yeah, I'd like to make some comments if I could. Absolutely. One thing I'd like to remind the mayor is is that for my first four, five, six meetings, the city
manager would not allow me to put anything on the agenda. And I was told the only way that I could speak to my residents was through my commissioner report. So that was not my fault. Um, you know, and I think we've all deduced
that that was true. He was telling us we could not put anything on the agenda. was the only way that I had to speak. The other thing I will say is is that um one thing that's kept me going in this is the amount of emails I've gotten from
people about my commissioner reports from people from Sunset Beach. I have no idea who these people are saying that's the best report I've seen keep going. And what I'll close with is with all the things we have going on in this city, people aren't really interested
about hearing when the next big sale or car show is. They want they wanted some real We got a lot of real decisions to make and they want to hear about some of those things. I also hold a monthly forum every single month, which I said I
would do during my campaign to hear from the residents. And a lot of the stuff that I bring up in my commissioner report are things that they have asked me to bring up. So, uh, I mean, you know, that's that's all I have to say.
Um, mayor doctor, I'd like to jump into I I've uh even though I made the motion, uh I I after hearing uh some very sound arguments for being opposed to that, I'm going to have to uh to to withdraw my motion because I I I agree with the
concept and I agree that that we should try to keep it to five or 10 minutes, but there from time to time I believe there could be good uh reason for uh going beyond that uh time frames. So, uh, either I I know we've had a motion
and a second. So, either we can vote on it or or can I withdraw my motion? I think technically on the rules, the person who second is supposed to withdraw theirs and then you would withdraw yours. Okay. I withdraw. That's how I read it. Okay. The the second's been withdrawn, so I'll withdraw mine as
well. Um, okay. But I also think uh that we shouldn't filibuster these meetings uh these commissioner comments. I mean, I agree that, you know, I I fought hard to put stuff on the agenda. Um, whether I was told not to, I said, "Put on the
agenda, please, over and over again." But, uh, I think we should put some of this stuff on on a workshop. So, if if it goes overtime, if you you're thinking you're going to take an extended period of time, put on the workshop so it could be discussed and we could give city
staff direction. You know, you bring up the seaw wall all the time. Uh across the water from me is a seaw wall that has collapsed. Uh and it's uh causing the easement to collapse and I've reached out, you know, and it's in the water. I mean, it's creeping uh it's
continue to creep and we shouldn't be chasing waterfalls, but you know, we should uh definitely uh continue with uh commissioner comments. Yeah. And that's actually in my go. Yep. And I would I I would agree with that. I think just
having uh being conscious of how much time and I one of the things that I think the mayor mentioned and I if I took it correctly is the if it's an extended commission report we can't comment on it we can't have conversation
about it so I think having one that's really in depth that maybe could use some staff guidance would be better served in a a workshop for sure and I 100% agree. We we all went through that where we couldn't get anything um put on the agenda, but that issue has been
remedied, thank God. So now we can actually get our stuff put on the agenda, whether it's for a workshop or not. So I would agree there's times that it it's I know I've taken longer. Um, but I just think we all need to be conscientious of time and if it's
something that really would be better discussed amongst all of us and maybe to give staff guidance or something, I think we just need to kind of decipher what a report looks like or what something that needs to be discussed looks like. But, um, that's kind of
where I would stay. I would agree with Arthur on that one. We have no motion. So, let's uh move forward. Commissioner Clark, please uh give us your report. I thought that um district one goes first.
Yeah, I think that uh it was lined up to uh to basically just by how the seats go. Boom, boom, boom. But if you want, we can change it. Well, I like just go in the order we've always gone with district one going first. Commissioner Vasquez, I have no report. No report.
Okay, Commissioner CL. Hey, for those who know, I've been I was in the hospital for a week and I just got out not long ago, so I apologize. Normally I have a report, but thank you. I appreciate it. Um, so for my report, I only had two items, but after this
debacle, I think I'm going to have four. But, um, so I'll try to make it quick though. Uh, so on the Isop Civic Association pizza party is going to be on June 20th. Doors open at 5:30, Pete's
at 6. Yes. At 6:30, um, I will give an update on, uh, what we have going on in the city and listen to feedback from residents on what's important to them, um, and what they would like to see. Um, last time we had this meeting, we had
about 35 people there. We talked for about 45 minutes. I brought back multiple items to the commission. Um, this was a campaign promise of mine that I would hold these residents forms. I think it's super important uh that I
hear directly from the residents. So, if you're in district 2, please come to the Isa Palms Pizza Party June 20th, fifth floor of the um city hall and um I'd love I'd love to hear from you.
Um, the second item is I spoke to the city manager at our meeting on Friday and I hope that other commissioners will agree and actually Arthur, you kind of just set this up for me. You said that I talk about the seaw walls every single
week and and and you're right because I hear about it from residents every single week. I hear about the lift station. I hear about the seaw walls and we're now back into hurricane season. And as far as the residents know, we're no farther along on the seaw walls and
lift station than we were this time last year. Now, that might be wrong. So, what I ask is, is it possible for the city manager to give us a update each week or every meeting or at least once a month on where we are
with these critical infrastructure products projects because when they don't hear about them, they just assume that nothing's going on. I mean, maybe we're about ready to break ground on the seaw walls tomorrow. I don't know. I don't think that's the case. I mean, Chuck
told me last time about they'd be they'd be started on in a month or two, and I don't know that that's even true. So, my point is, again, there's a lot of residents that don't want to clean, you know, sewer out of their house if we have another hurricane. They don't want
their seaw wall to collapse if we have another hurricane. So, I think they just like an update on where we are with these things. And I believe that we all kind of agreed in the one budget meeting we had up on the fifth floor that we all had like the same five things that we
thought should get done. And um and so I think we need regular updates on those. I mean I think that that the residents deserve that. So I don't know if we can do that. I know we talked about that in our meeting on Friday. Um the next uh
thing I have is I'm going to skip because I think that um the chief took care of it for me. Um and then the next thing is uh I have is again I I I made a statement earlier when we were talking
about the um we were talking about the um permits and I I said that I didn't agree with that statute and I just wanted to make sure that we had accurate information coming from the dis and so I want to
make sure that we have accurate information coming from the dis on um the search for a new city manager because in the last meeting um I was reprimanded for reaching out to
past applicants for the city manager job and and that it was said that I was putting our contract in jeopardy. So I just want to let everyone know that that is completely and utterly false. me
calling a someone who may have interviewed for the past uh CM job uh you know the last time around and maybe made it to the finals and I call them up and say, "Hey, I want to let you know our city manager is no longer here.
We're going to um be hiring a new city manager. If you're interested, contact SGR and throw your name in the hat." So there is actually nothing wrong with that. I have a copy of their contract
right here. It says client promises and agrees to refer all prospective applicants to SGR and not to accept applications independently during the recruitment process. So that's exactly what I was doing. I was calling past applicants saying, "Hey, if you're
interested, please throw your name in the hat." And I was told to stop doing that. And I was putting the contract in jeopardy. I got emails from residents telling me, "Well, Chris, hey man, did you really put our contract in jeopardy?" No, I didn't. I also asked
the city man, city attorney, did I put the contract in jeopardy or did I do anything illegal by reaching out to these people and trying to send them to SGR? And his answer was no. So, I just want to make sure that the proper
information is is out there on that. And then the last thing is a newspaper was held up and it was said that Chris Clark, Commissioner Clark told this newspaper that the town was
broke. Okay, so I first of all had never in my life heard of this newspaper. I went to dinner at a Turkish restaurant, tiny little Turkish restaurant up in Indian Rocks Beach on Saturday night. And I walk in and I see a bunch of these newspapers laying there. And I I look
open it. I open it and I go, "Holy cow, that's me in there." And um but the funny thing is I don't agree I don't disagree with anything in this article, but I have never spoken to this publication ever in my life. I didn't
give them a quote. I didn't give them an interview. I have no idea who Natasha Collazo is that wrote this article. I've never spoken to her in my entire life. So to say that I told this this
publication that the town was broke is ridiculous and it's it's I I don't I don't it's unfortunate that that was said. I'm not here up here looking for press. I'm up here trying to help the residents. So I I I never spoke to anybody. And it's pretty clear to see
what happened here. They watched one of my commissioner reports and they took they took I got the slides here. They took this stuff and they made an article out of it. But I just want to make it incredibly clear. I didn't make any of this stuff up. This stuff is directly
out of our budget and financial workshop. All I did is add the circles and the lines. So the fact that our taxes went from 6 million in 2019 revenue to 11 million, I didn't make any
of this stuff up. This is this is facts. Same with this. I didn't make up this chart. It came right from the from the uh from the from our you know from our packet budget packet. So the fact that taxes have gone up
91% in since from 2019 to 25 and we still have no seaw wall, no pump station, that's not my fault. And I never said the town was broke. Actually, what I said is I spent a lot of time with Mike Howard back there trying to figure out how much free cash we really
have. His best estimate was, you know, I don't think anybody here still knows. I think we're supposed to get a financial report. Hopefully we'll find out tonight. But I don't think anybody knows exactly. Arthur said we had 38 billion. I said, Arthur, I I I I tend to agree
with that. But do you know how much is restricted or or how much we have to keep in reserve? He said no. I said I don't know either. Mike guessed we had 10 to 15 million. And my my my my what I said at that time was if we have 10 or
15 million I go back to why don't we have a seaw wall or a pump station. So I never said the town was broke. I never spoke to this publication ever. I I don't really like have it being said that I told this publication we were broke. And so all I want to do is have
AC accurate information come from up here on the dis. And what's funny is we have commissioners up here all the time talking about inaccurate information being out on social media. Well, I mean I don't need to go to social media to
have inaccurate information. I just can come sit up here and it will come from the dis. So thank you commissioner Sison. Thank you. So, thank you uh Mayor Doctor for adding the commissioner reports at the end of the meeting. I think that was a wise move.
Um, second, uh, I'd like the city attorney, uh, to look into the purchasing RFPs for Treasure Bay tennis, uh, fencing, tennis and fencing, Rosselli pickle ball, um, and fencing to see if we could
expedite them, uh, for saving money by eliminating the engineering requirement that the former city attorney imposed. I could email that to you, too. All right. Um then number three would be a doozy. So uh we have uh always had a very bad
reputation in the Treasure Island building department uh over the years. Uh with so many homes being demolished, we need to once and for all uh overhaul the community development department for effective efficiency and work with the public. Uh I hope and I I hope I share
the same sentiment with the commission. We hope that uh Bobby Shaye uh welcome uh can bring some leadership to the department. So I wish her well. Um I would like also the commission to maybe discuss setting some uh goals uh for the
city uh to be implemented by the end of the year or maybe by the end of next year. Um, I realized as a commissioner and I'll I'll be honest uh full disclosure uh after like my third meeting I called uh former uh commissioner Bob Mining and I apologize
to him because I gave him a lot of crap uh for going slow um you know for uh not moving you know like why are you making these decisions and you know going this way but I realized early on that the government is designed to work slow. So,
uh, not the way I operate and it's very frustrating. Um, yeah, that's it. All right, Commissioner Dicki, I've got a couple of or three or four items here. Uh, some bad news on the erosion control line.
Uh, on January 2nd, the county hosted a public hearing on the new erosion control line during which no objections uh on the to the line were made. On May 11th, uh the county printed a public notice in the Tampa Bay Times. Had there
been no formal complaints within 21 days of that public notice, the proposed new ECL would have become official. However, I checked with the county yesterday and was told the state did receive one formal complaint. Uh the county is waiting to hear back from the state
about who filed the complaint and the nature of it before they decide what the next steps are. Uh, as most of you know, the new erosion control line is required prior to the construction of the beach restoration project. Uh, so this will
this will be a setback for us until we can uh find out from the county what the next steps are and and as soon as I learn something on that, I'll I'll certainly pass it on to to you all as well. Uh, another topic, uh, on May 15th, I attended a Florida Department of
Emergency Management training session for local elected officials at St. Pete College in Clearwater. It covered topics like the role of elected officials before, during, and after a hurricane to ensure their communities receive the assistance they need. Uh, this 4-hour
session was probably the most informative training session I've ever been to, regardless of what the subject matter was. It was hosted and moderated by Kevin Guthrie, executive director of the Florida Department of Emergency Management. He is one of 12 members of the newly appointed presidential
committee committee to look at reforming FEMA. Lots of good ideas and suggestions came from this meeting. Uh perhaps one of the more uh most important ones at least that that we need to be made aware of is director Goth Guthri's comments
that the days of 100% reimbursement for category A and B FEMA items which include debris removal are over. In the future, FEMA will expect the municipalities to have some skin in the game and cover 25% of the cost following
a natural disaster like that. that uh what this likely means is that cities will need to have larger reserve budgets than we've historically had. Uh I wanted to read a an email from a resident. Uh he asked me to read it. As
a matter of fact, it was a compliment for one of our employees, a welldeserved one. And and if it was just one compliment from one resident, I wouldn't read it. But I've heard so many positive things coming uh made about uh Renee Taratan Tano that I think she it's well
worth taking the time to do this. But anyway, uh Gary Dion, resident and business owner from District 4. He writes uh I am writing to formally commend Renee Tosana for her outstanding dedication and exceptional customer service in the aftermath of hurricanes
Helen and Milton. Navigating the permitting process during such a critical time has been an ex an extraordinarily or extraordinarily difficult with numerous barriers and frustrating delays. Despite the challenges, Renee has stood out as a one
person consistently trying to move things forward. Her professionalism, patience, and sincere desire to help made a tremendous difference. Uh that's not the full email, but but you get the gist. And what's interesting is I had originally planned to include this in my
commissioner comments. This morning I came in and applied for a permit for some work at my house and a lady recognized me on her way out and she stopped me and she was raving over how much Renee had helped her. So, you know, I I know I forwarded this email to you.
Uh this is this she has done an extraordinary job and very difficult times and I just want to make sure everybody's aware of that. And then the last thing I have is uh Rick Ma Matthew uh talked about the height and density requirements. And I think this is
another thing I'm going to I'm going to ask the new city attorney to take a look at. There is some confusion uh out there and even amongst the commissioners about whether or not uh do we based on the state's uh uh new uh re regulations do
we or do we not have a heightened density uh uh requirements for the city of Charizard. There's a sense that that law that was passed negates completely that uh our former ordinance uh limiting
height to five floors over the garage level. So, if we can help us maybe understand that issue at next at the next meeting, I'd appreciate it. You got it. Thank you. Commissioner Dicki, do you still have that packet from the FDEM uh that you probably got from the
meeting? Uh I I don't have it with me. Oh, should that'd be something awesome to present to the commissioner. Okay. Sorry. Thank you. All right. Just real quick, u because one of the uh the one of the issues that
came up uh is there heightened density. Um yes, there it is what it appears to be, but we'll let the uh attorney give us a report. We also uh give us a report on live local. Sure. live local
basically is an extension I I will call it an extension of what it was you know on heighten density. So what they did is they did this heighten density thing and took away the referendum and everything else and they thought that that was
going to get a lot of cities booming for housing is what they thought that it was all about. So then they came back a year later with what's called live local. And live local takes a step further that basically says it it cuts the e
commission out of if they do it right it cuts the commission out of what's going to be built and it it's all done based upon uh all the different levels that they set in place. So it's very interesting but if you so if you'd add
live local to that as well. will do. Um, one of the things that uh that I keep pushing off and uh and waiting until we can get into July is the state budget. And the state budget uh we have we when we went up to uh Tallahassee, there was
nothing in the state budget. And uh and actually um Tammy went up, I went up. Um and and what we were looking for is to get money put in for the safety building and uh so the Senate uh they put in for
a million dollars and but the House didn't do anything for us. But now you have to go into reconciliation. And so that reconciliation because there is a million dollars in the in the Senate budget, we could end up with possibly a
million dollars, $2 million, three million up to six million, which which is what we requested at the time. And uh but the reason we have to wait is because the budget is not final. And even when the budget becomes final, the governor will get a shot at line item
veto. So we we don't know. And we're we're still I'm I'm hoping and I think the chiefs both chiefs are hoping everything else that we're going to get uh something more than a million. Uh it'd be nice to get the million, but something more than a million and uh and that we could put together a a great
safety building and and move forward in the community as well. So, uh that's all I have for mine. And uh with that being said, we will adjourn, but we will be back at 9:00 for uh hopefully a couple
of quick workshop items. So, thank you everyone. [Music] That's weird. Good evening and welcome to the commission workshop for June 3rd, 2025. I'd like to call this meeting to order.
The first item of business is city attorney and city manager reports. You want me to go first? Yes, please. Okay. So, yeah, just a couple things. Uh, the rules. I want to just talk very briefly about the rules. Some cities don't have rules. They're good. They're guidelines, but they're not really rules
in the sense that they're like some permanent thing like an ordinance that takes a bunch of work to to repeal. They're really just a suggestion guide. Why? Because there's a rule, section 11, of the rules that says at any time a majority of the commission can wave the rules. Um, and so really, what do you
have there? You have rules that at any given time, three out of the five of you guys can be like, "Hey, we're going to wave that rule." In fact, you can based on its openness to interpretation. You can permanently wave a rule. So, I'm going to bring to you the idea of a new rule. I'm going to amend the rule that
says everything must be a roll call vote to say everything must be either a voice or roll call vote and you get to choose. Great. Um, so you'll have that rule. Now, can you do that already? Yes. Because right now you can say I move under section 11 that we wave the rule saying we have to do a roll call and if three of you agree then now it's
permanently waved even if it's not written in there. It's the way it is. So look at as aspirational. So like with that said like going back to like how how long should be certain segments do we have commission comment be longer or shorter or this and that. Understand at the end of the day you're not affecting a substantial rule that can't be
changed. just it's all suggest suggesting and um you know you could be in the middle of something that based on the rules must be a certain length and then you can just be like hey I want to wave that and change that and the three of you can so it's like a guidepost um just so you understand the other part of the rules that we're going to I'm going
to bring to you for a resolution next two weeks from now um to change is not just that so you can do things by voice but also um to move the commissioner's reports to the end because as you saw tonight you guys did it so you you you essentially waved a rule and change the order, but in your rules, it says it has
to be the second thing. It says this must be the order. Again, it's not a real rule because you can wave at any time. So, I know it's silly, but it's like that's how rule these rules are. They're not like an ordinance, right? It's not like a statute or a law where it's like permanent and you're going to be in trouble if you break them. You can
wave them at any time. So, with that said, um those are those rules. Yeah. So, those are two things that we're going to bring to you next month and then I'll give you a presentation on live local. Uh we'll see what it looks like because uh they're back in session. Started literally today. They'll be done
in two weeks. So hopefully by the next meeting, session will be over. They'll have a budget and we'll know what actually passed or did because they could revive any of the bills. Um or majority of the bills. Not all. Some are permanently dead. Um and then what else? Um and then I'll give you an
answer on um on uh the other issue that I just drafted down there. So, and then if you guys have anything else, cuz something's sort of popped up in the middle of the meeting, like, hey, you know, what about this in the building fund? Anything you guys want me to review and give you a written or verbal opinion on before the meeting, feel free to do it. So, that way, you know,
obviously um you have as much tools as you possibly uh can have. And then, uh that's it for me. Thanks, guys. Thank you, Chief. Thanks, Mayor. Um, first I wanted to
report out on a few things that staff got done this week. Um, drum circle had about 300 participants. There were zero ordinance violations. Yep. They are policing themselves. Um, I actually received a report from police chief that
uh folks were actually supportive of the police as they walk through. So nice. Yeah. Much much better to use use the carrot than the stick, which seems to be working. So kudos to those folks for stepping up. The uh commission
gave us uh direction to work with uh St. Petersburg on their municipal beach lot. The park the trash was accumulating weekends and on holidays when their folks didn't come to dump it. So, our parks and recck director Kathy Haduk reached out to theirs and we've since
completed an interlocal agreement with them to where our staff will empty the trash on nights or weekends and holidays and just bill direct for time to St. Pete. So, staff is covered. So, take care of that eyesore. Um, as Commissioner Clark mentioned, we talked
in our meeting about uh the top five projects or priorities that the commission identified months ago. Um and I can absolutely bring updates on those. Um as Commissioner Dicki motion or commissioner Sison mentioned, government does move slow. So don't expect a whole
lot of change from two week to two week. But um we do have processes we follow designed to be transparent, not always efficient. But um just that being said, I will start the updates with the baseline here. our public safety facility. You gave us direction to um go
ahead and negotiate for design, a contract for design. I just want to uh reaffirm to the commission that you know the scope of that project and the location will need to be decided before we issue a notice to proceed. Um so that's that's something you guys can put
on your radar. The master pump station, thank you for the approval. We will uh get that uh design process uh negotiation as well going seaw walls. Um so staff is making the repairs on the you know proper repairs on the 115th
Avenue. Um the greater municipal owned seaw wall project is part of our um HMGP submission through the LMA. It's about a$8 million project. Correct. About five and a half. Five and a half. Okay. And
um you know, we're we're very very uh optimistic about the the chances of of us getting some of that funding. So um that will proceed once we know uh the status of that.
Um I know Commissioner Sesan also mentioned private seaw walls across from his home. The city does have a process to um to evaluate a collapsing seaw wall that's privately owned that's affecting the neighbors property. Uh we hire one
of our consultants. My understanding is it's you know about $2,000 for the evaluation and they can make a determination of imminent um danger. So it's imminently going to destroy another person's property. Once that is made though, however, the city has to act and
then we would be on the hook for replacing that seaw wall um whatever seaw walls cost $30 to $50,000 and then we'd lean the property. A lot of these properties are abandoned or derelict. We don't know if we'd ever get that money back. So just keep that
in mind if that's the direction we're given to go. the public's works facilities, the temporary facilities, um the police police one is actually built and can be develop or delivered as early as a week and a half. The fire one
takes a little bit longer to be built out. So, we are moving forward with that. Our public works is going to do the utilities connections to save us some money on that and get us up and running in our temporary facilities. Uh beach reourishment. So,
as Commissioner Dicki mentioned, um there's a bit of a hiccup. I believe that one complaint did come from a Treasure Island business, if I understand it correctly. Um so, that could put a hitch in the giddy up there.
Uh good news before that the board of county commissioners um in their June meeting was going to uh talk about this topic and potentially as early as May of 26 authorized when we have a John's Pass dredging project that
sand to be put on the beaches. So hopefully this um complaint process works its way out before then and makes some headway on on the ECL and the the beach reourishment projects. The CDD director, Bobby Sheay,
who you met this evening, um has an extensive background in government affairs and legislative affairs as well. For that reason, I have named her as uh the assistant city manager. completed that paperwork with HR today. Um that
gives us um another backup because now I'm the city manager acting. Um I don't have an assistant. So um we have a history of having several assistant city managers at the same time. It's a small stipen monthly and it's already in the
budget. So went ahead and did that just to give us more options moving forward. commission had mentioned uh and I think it was two meetings ago or maybe last meeting but um concern about the dam damage to our pavement from the storms.
So, um, I saw an email today, and this is still pretty fresh, but public works is looking at a a company that installs monitoring devices on our city vehicles that take analysis of the pavement, and
they're compared for settling and and am I getting that correct, Gary? Um, settling or or changes in the payment over time. So we can do a good evaluation ourselves of the status of payment and know what's deteriorating, what needs to be fixed
first. That's my understanding of it. Just a fireman. Um the strategic plan does expire. I looked it up while we were here. Um it's a five-year plan and it was uh approved on November 17th of 2020. So coming up uh what staff
proposes is is engaging St. P college collaborative labs who did our last plan um to do a one-day workshop. It would be open to the public. Uh the commission, the public and and executive staff would all meet in the morning and we would
take a 360 degree analysis of uh where we think the goals should be for the upcoming 5-year period. Um get those down, kind of hash those out, find everyone's perspective. Staff and the public would be excused. It would be the
commission only in the afternoon and you folks would uh basically prioritize those goals, select your top ones and then develop enabling um objectives to get to those goals that would drive you know basically every every decision the
staff brought before the commission would have to tie to one of those goals in the strategic plan. So very important cost is um you know about 11,200 potentially a little more depending on what options we choose but very reasonable considering it gives us
a 5-year road map to where we want to be. If we're looking at going prodevelopment that can be all your goals. So um just give that some thought. We're currently the mayor um myself at finance are working on setting that up and and we'll have more details
coming soon. Um, I mentioned during the afteraction review last commission meeting that we did put out a survey to residents. We left that up for two weeks. That's been closed. We have 51 responses, which I thought was a pretty good response rate.
So, we're going to pour through that, do the analysis, and um see where from the perspective of the residents we have gaps and can improve. So, we'll be working on that as staff as well. um from public works. Just please note
that the Treasure Island Causeway Bridge will be closed on June 11th from 10:00 p.m. till 6:00 a.m. the following morning. This is to replace a master cylinder uh routine maintenance. Parks and Wreck, uh they have completed installation of the new
ballfield lights at Rosselli Park and the school bus has been ordered. Estimated delivery mid to late this month. So two to four weeks on the school on the new bus. Summer camp has started. You see the kids running around. Looks like they're having a great time. So, that's good to see. Um,
from our public information officer, due to a concerted campaign uh by Jason Bisel, um, and votes by residents, staff, and everyone else we could get to vote. Um, Treasure Island has been rated the number three best beach in Florida
by US Today, USA Today's top 10. Yeah. So, yeah, great stuff. It was also National Public Works Week, uh, May 18th to the 24th. So, they were recognized in our posts and social media for all the work they do keeping the lights on, the sewer flowing, and all the work they
they do daily that we probably don't always recognize. Um, as Carrie mentioned earlier in public comment, it is sea turtle nesting season. uh keeping the beach clean, making sure the lights are out at night, and flatten your sand
castles, fill in any holes. That's important. Also, uh June 1st began the countywide fertilizer ban. So, no more fertilizer containing nitrogen on the lawns. Um they should be getting plenty of water this time of year. We don't want that to wash into the storm water
system and out into our our aquafers and and bay and the go and the Gulf. And uh finally, the Treasure Island Fire Department is uh partnering with other local departments uh to host their first ever ever pickle ball
tournament. If you're interested in uh either donating prizes or enjoying a good game and coming out for some competition, um you can be an event sponsor, raffle donator, or or competitor. uh reach out to our
Lieutenant Steven Roland here at the fire department and the email there is afflocal 4966@gmail.com and uh they can get you set up for whatever you want to do. Our uh commissioners prevented from winning that do you know or not at all. Okay.
It's a full contact sport too. I understand. Game on. Thank you for your interest. End of end of report from me. Could I just ask you a quick question? I really appreciate the update on the top five things. I'm not a builder. I can help you if you have diabetes, but I'm not a
builder. So, do do like when you've now approved the lift station to go out for design. So, I mean, does that mean we're 6 months away, just a ballpark, a year away, two years away? I I don't know that. I don't think the average resident does. And same with the seaw walls. I
didn't deduce like any type of time frame from from that. I'm not asking for guarantee. I'm just saying ballpark. You know, I think people just it will put people's mind at ease if they can just kind of know. So, I think with the seaw walls, we're waiting for the funding source to come available before we move
forward on that. Um, as far as the negotiations to um you we you basically authorized us to meet with the design firm to negotiate a contract for design, not to actually do
design. So, we would bring that contract before you again, excuse me, and and you would approve that. Then, we issue a notice to proceed. And I'm not sure how long design on something like that would take. Gary, any ideas? He said four to six months.
Yes. Good. So potentially 18 months we're in. Yeah. To uh to get it up and running. And then the seaw walls. So again, I'm not trying to go backwards and I'm not trying to point fingers, but So when Chuck told me that that they're going to
start working on the seaw walls in a month or two, that obviously was probably not accurate. Not that I'm aware of. Okay. Um I'm I'm not privy. I can look into that and we can get some more information, but All right. I I I haven't seen anything
that there's no proposals out there that I'm aware of. And let me uh just add a little to that. Uh the the uh the grant uh request that we've asked to replace uh all of our seaw walls and and now
that we have filled dirt, we're going to be asking for grants to to uh increase the height of all of our seaw wall city-owned seaw walls. And one of the requirements of of getting that getting that grant money is not to have already
started the project. Now having said that I don't if there are seaw walls that are in desperate need of repair like we've heard on 115th that's a different that's not replacing it's repairing it and stuff but as far as uh you know at as as far as replacing
uh any seaw walls we need to be just be a little careful about how we proceed because we don't want to risk losing that that grant money but again repairing a severely damaged seaw wall that's in an imminent danger of collap collapsing. Uh I think we'd be okay to
to to make that happen. And I think we're going to see when we get into the budget here that we have uh we we budgeted a half million dollars a year for seaw wall repairs. So the money is there right now for for that type of work. Yeah. Incremental work on it and
it is a big project. Uh and the public safety facility is the same way with the grant. We did not put that in our grant proposal because they typically frown on new construction. So, we didn't want to waste one of our our grant projects on something that would very likely not
even be considered. A grant manager would know all this if we had one. Just saying. All right, let's move on to our discussion. Financial update. Here it's parking.
is on the second. So, the permanent one you just did that it was a ballot point. You uploaded it. We only have three. I did not put one in the All right. But it's in Granus. You have it with you.
[Music] Oh, my chart keeps coming up. All right. It's this guy. Yeah. Can we Let me just do that. Is that it? That's it. Okay. Make it bigger.
There. That's good. There we go. Then you can just when you move down it. Okay. I apologize in advance for my my stuff here because this is uh I'm not good tech on this stuff. Anyway, um
this is uh as of uh the end of March. So the halfway point, this is a top line. Essentially, total revenues uh year-to date were 22.1 million and about 700,000
below budget and 800 below prior year. Expenditures uh to date were 16.5 favorable to both budget plus 175 and prior year plus 760.
So the surplus deficit was 17.1 million slightly below prior year of 54. So those are the details. I'm not going to spend much time on this because we're going to dive
into the funds individually. Okay. On to the general fund. So year to date the general fund uh like I said was 16 million. This gives you the breakout. Obviously the taxes are
the biggest piece mostly driven by the advalorum. Um it is uh favorable to budget and about little favorable to prior year. Um like I mentioned before the reason for the extreme favorability
against budget is that the adalarmms were budgeted flatline and the way adalarmms work they're frontloaded. So in other words there's high payments adalarm tax payments earlier in the year
and as uh the year progresses they become progressively smaller. The last payment we had what was number 13 was about a quarter of a million dollars and so those funds are going to be diminishing. So at towards the end of
the year they'll be zero will not be getting anymore and that gap will will narrow. Also, it's another reason for just we are monitoring the cash and our spending constantly because we know that those
revenues are going to be going down and we want to make sure that we're not going to be caught, you know, in a in a bind there. So again, there's the details of the variances. Like I said, there's the ad valorum, there's lower franchise
fees, event cancellations, a whole laundry list of uh of things that accounted for uh the u um the variances. Miscellaneous revenues were high because we did get a million and four in uh
insurance proceeds that I presented earlier in the year. So on the spending side um again high favorability and I'll just cut to the
chase and it's in capital. Um the budget year to date the act we've spent in the general fund 345,000 against a budget of a little over 4 million.
So, doing walkovers, uh, public works, garage yard, it goes all the way down the line. And again, I I think that most of the favorable variance or the lower spending is a
result of the storm. We just got flatfooted and we're in we still in recovery mode. So fund balance. So this is a little government 101. So there's several categories.
There's the non-spendable fund balance which means that's a classification that are inherently non-spendable uh inventory prepaid prepaid rent legal contractual provisions that type of thing. There's restricted and that is
spent only for specific purposes uh stipulated by either the constitution resource providers or legislation. And then there's the big ones, the committed. Um, I'll let you
read that, but it's basically uh those funds that are uh using satisfying any kind of contractual uh requirements assigned and then the unassigned. So, let's get down to it. So, we've all
heard the $17 million. Um, we have unassigned right now $10 million in the general fund. Unspendable, non-spendable is $30,000. Restricted is 13,000. We've got
a committed which is the three mills for the bridge and that's a million4 and all the all the rest of it $6.7 million are assigned. So, beach improvements, some professional services, and it's all all
related to items or projects that have been approved in the past by by the commission. And I think as part of the budget process, we uh we're evaluating all of those to ensure
that those are the right numbers and are those the right projects to uh to present back to the commission for any kind of modification. the amount here Mike the 17,371 or 17 million rather uh that
we're looking at that's very close to the amount of carry forwards we had from prior years. So is this it it it's just a coincidence. Yeah. Yeah. Thank you. Mhm. So into the special revenue funds um
we've got penny for panelis which is the local options tax um and essentially it is uh you know just the local options tax. So we get the revenue detail of the of the taxes. There's some EMS support
interest had some fixed asset disposition and essentially it's we use this for a lot of our capital projects. Uh as you can see the what we have spent money on is uh is is vehicles um police
especially. So again, that was a result of the storm and again you can see we still have a favorable variance. Um obviously I don't know that we're going to be spending much on the Treasure Bay facility this year. Um as well as uh the
kayak law, some other things like that. So, I think the Treasure Bay really stood out because there's been much discussion about the fate of Treasure Bay and what what going forward what what does Treasure Bay look like? Uh this account is one of those ones where
there we have some money for seaw wall rehabilitation. There's we we have for the full year $345,000 budgeted for seaw wall rehabilitation. Uh and we haven't used any of that to date. Zero. So, that's that's uh again
when we were talking about having money to to pay for this, there's the there's the money for that. And same thing for pavement management. We've got uh $515,000 budgeted for seaw wall or for pavement management. Uh and we haven't
spent any of that this year as well. Right. So, that's uh and we all know those are two things that we need to be spending money on. Correct. Uh the county gas tax, it's a share of the local option motor fuel act beginning in ' 85. Uh not a lot to it
right now. Um about 34,000, you know, revenues to date. Uh there was a a budget which was quote pavement management and I believe this is almost like a reimbursement type fund, but I'm not 100% clear on that.
Either way, we haven't spent anything against that. Again, it's pavement management. Our friend, the building fund, um right now, year to date, we have uh
584,000 in uh in revenues. Again, this is through this is through March. So we really hadn't uh commenced the refunding process yet. Um but through March uh you can see that the revenues for 584
uh versus the budget of 404 and against last year. Obviously a lot of the permitting was a result of the storm. And on the expenditure side, that went that went the other way as well because of all the additional not only staffing,
but we had to get additional computer licenses, that type of thing in order to uh support the additional staff required to uh to support the uh uh the effort. uh uh debt service. Um
essentially this is um to administer the required word reporting on a a taxexempt loans. As you can see um we've had yearto date about 900,000 in uh in debt service. Uh the reason that the revenues
aren't there is that we need to do a just an intergovernmental transfer. It's just a It's just an accounting entry. Doesn't have any effect on cash, but we need to do that to balance that out. So that's we're just on track to spend the
million or so that uh we were budgeted to do in the first place for the two for the two notes that we do have which are um we've got a we've got a series two from 2011 which is the aisle of Capri and the Palms Bridges and
those those guys are gone in uh fiscal 27 and The remaining note is uh we've got about 5.6 on this building which was the uh acquisition and renovation of this building and that uh that note
expires in FY35 uh capital projects fund. Um this is uh spend and then get reimbursed. Um there was u a budget of one and a half and we
haven't done anything with it. Yeah. Yeah. That's that one is really concerning because uh for G Boulevard uh undergrounding and beautifification. This is money that it's lose it or use it or lose it type of stuff. If we don't we don't use this, we're going to we're
going to lose this money from the county. Is that correct? I'd have to double check that. I don't know for certain uh what the expiration date is on that. Yeah. Any anyway, it's another one of those accounts that and I'm not
blaming you or or the acting city manager, but here clearly we've got uh a million and a half dollars uh budgeted here to do that do this cleanup and it's not showing that we're making any progress with that. We've been in touch with Spectrum. I
mean, the cable company, we have been in touch with them in the past week or two. We've been staying on top of them. They keep they keep pushing us back, but we have gotten some positive information, and I'll have something for um the city manager report the next meeting specifically, but we have been in touch
and they've given us some some data on that. Okay. Thanks. uh the capital projects fund. Uh this can be explained fairly quickly. Um the budget originally called for the
public works building and yard uh which was uh a spend of $6.7 million. uh at the same time in the budget was the uh they were going to raise debt, raise a note and get debt
in order to pay for that. So you'll see that the revenues in the budget are 6.7 and that reflects the the proceeds from taking taking a note out on that uh on that project. Obviously neither have happened and obviously that 6.7
contributes to the overall uh revenue delta that we see you know earlier earlier up. Okay. Enterprise funds uh the wastewater. Whoops. Well, so revenues um they were they were
way off in the first quarter and uh things are starting to recover really on all the enterprise funds now that we're getting back to some degree of normality. Um we have uh 2.8 8, which is
off still off by about $960,000 off of uh off of budget. Um again, uh we've got a favorable delta on the expenditures and that is because again uh we have uh the capital outlay
uh budget of uh nearly a little over $10 million of which we've spent about 186,000. And those are those are the that's the list of of the projects that we budgeted. Scroll up just a minute on
that uh the top of the Yeah. As far as revenues, revenues show they're down 768,000 from prior year. And uh the two explanations that you put underneath there for revenue uh budget miss uh and
for uh difference in last year the of the 768,000 only 112,000 is for charge of services. So I for the prior year difference. So I really wonder where the other I mean that's a big difference.
Uh, we've got 655,000 of year-over- revenue loss not explained here. And I don't know if it's something that happened last year or or or what. I'm glad to see the total uh uh wastewater revenue isn't down by 768,000. It's only
down 112. But I'm I am curious what the you know, I'll have to get back 155,000 100%. I'll get back to you. And and also on there it's showing on the top uh showing grants EPA federal. We have a $1.2 million grant. Do you
know anything about that? Is that something that we are at risk of losing since we're not spending any of that money? Uh good question. I'll follow up with you on that one as well. All right. Thank you. Down at the bottom, I think this
helps. Uh you you show the capital outlay and sewer sewer relining programs 1 and a.5 million we have budgeted for that and 1.19 million uh for uh forest main rehabilitation. Again we're not
spending we're hardly spending any of that money and it just seems like uh things that uh we should be doing. So and again and I'm not laying blame on anybody. I know there's been a lot of turnover, but Yep. but we need to
we've got this money, so we should be taking care of our taking care of what needs to be taken care of here. Uh solid waste. Um again, we're about a million two. Uh the budget and prior year deltas are
about the same reason as you know, the storm and usage so forth. Um overall, it's um It's favorable. And again, it's uh we had uh scheduled for two automatic side
loaders for $830,000 and we've not purchased those side loaders as of this date. Storm Okay, I've got a footnote for prior year, but um
essentially the again we're showing a positive uh surplus of 509,000 versus the budget. uh slightly slightly better than budget on on uh uh
the revenue side and u very favorable on the spending side. And again uh just highlighting you know that that again you're catching the theme now. It's it's the capital that we've uh that we've uh not not been able to uh get our arms
around as far as uh executing against because you know mainly because of the storms. And I would I would agree with that and that's why I hate to be critical but our our experience has been every year we're doing the same thing even when we didn't have storms like that's why we had 17
million and carry forward this year is because the things that we budgeted to do in 24 that we didn't do and now we're not you know just a vicious cycle and I'm sure when you're finished with the budget for this year it's going to show that that carry forwards you know
exceeded well 20 million probably I think I don't want to get too far ahead of my skis here, but I think that's partially true. But during the budget process, uh, the team here will be re-evaluating the cost of a lot of these
projects. So in other words, if the the lift station is 6 million and Gary's and his team can arrive at a solution that is sign significantly lower than that, then obviously that that will have a
positive impact on not only the financial health of of the uh community, but it would in fact lower that carry forward that we're having to deal with. Good. Okay, cash. I love cash. Um, so right
now we have uh 20 million in uh in hard cash which is comprised of about 8 million in the checking and about 12 in the money market. Um I know this isn't this part isn't
government accounting. This is me private equity guy accounting. I look at burn rates and based on the $20 million that we had have in the bank now. Our average monthly burn rate of expenditures is
about 2.7. So if we didn't collect a dime from here on out, we could go seven and a little over seven months. Now, I know that's not going to show up in formal government accounting stuff, but that's that's my personal take. So,
yeah, I appreciate you adding that uh that to the analysis. So, don't blame Victor on this one. Blame me. Okay. Um then on the investment side, we have um a couple uh couple uh different
investments. uh one is uh the Florida safe which is a surplus asset fund. We have about 5.9 million there and then we have uh some strip treasury notes uh that roll up to about 12 a little over 12 million. So the investment accounts
then are $18 million and not to get too wonky on accounting side those investments are equity on the balance sheet. They're not an asset. it's equity. So, you can almost equate that
to uh uh owner's equity or net worth if you wanted to make a real loose interpretation of that. And lastly, just some obligations out there. We've got um right now uh about 8 and a half million
of incumbrances which are uh those are POS that we've actually got in they're approved POS. we just haven't executed against them yet. Uh some AP and then debt service and then of course the carry forward items, but I don't think
we're going to we're not going to come close to that. Why would uh accounts payable not not have be a negative because it can go both ways. Accounts payable can go both ways. Yeah. Yeah.
Yeah. That's it. So that's the number that we all keep talking about up here is, you know, 38 million, 40 million, whatever million. So we're saying that there's like 40
million minus 8 million and then all the rest is that that is spendable cash or that's I guess I've been trying to get to the bottom with the general in the general fund we had $10 million. Let me
go back to it. We had $10 million Find it here. I kind of like doing it this way. This is neat. Um, where are we? Oh, here we are. Let's go, go, go,
go. Yep, here we are. So, from a fund balance perspective, our total fund balance in the general fund is $17.3 million. And um it's not it it's not strictly
cash, right? It's it's it's a blend, but it's a rough approximation. But uh right now, like I said, we have uh the vast majority is
the assigned pro assigned areas of $7 million. So ballpark, we've got about 10 million of unassigned unassigned uh balances out there. So um I don't want to I don't
want to equate that to cash. That that would make it a it'd be a very difficult calculation to start with, but it gives you a ballpark of uh of where things sit. when you uh look at your last page that you were showing us on page 14 uh
you had the you know the checking account, the money market, right? And then the investment account. So we had a 38 million in in cash. Uh we had 27 million. Well, no, we had we have 12 in
we have you're just calling all that cash even though it's Yeah, I mean I understand what you're saying. I'm just losing. that. But but if you take away the incumbrances and the and the carry forward items, which is a not necessarily a given, but if we take that, we're we're left over with about
11 million cash. That's kind of what I thought. Yeah. And that and that roughly equates back to that 10 million. Yeah. You know, like I said, it's not it's not it's pretty much apples and oranges, but maybe, you know, red apples versus green
apples. I don't know. That's why I've been saying that when we say we have 38 or 40, we really don't. I mean, somewhat. Right. Right. Yeah. Well, you know, you think about it like your checking account. You know, I've
got I've got $1,000 in it like right now, but you know, by the end of the week, you know, I may have When the check's clear, you only have 200. Right. Exactly. Exactly. But but like these aren't these aren't we haven't we haven't written checks against it. Yeah.
But even 17 of that 38 million is carry forward items which we still have some discretion. We could not do any of them I guess. But yeah. Oh just look at all the numbers before. We're not even close to 17 million. We're not even close
if you look at the total spend. So bottom line, we're doing better than you would have expected at this point in time. I'd say bottom bottom line, we're doing we're doing better than I would have anticipated when I walked in the door several months ago in uh beginning
of November when frankly it was a well, you know what kind of show it was and and it was very difficult. There was uh a everybody everybody in this building was emotionally and physically hurt.
They were tired. It would have broken your heart if to to see it. But the the the guts that this staff has shown me because I'm an outsider. I'm I'm still a consultant.
So you'll have to shoot me for saying the c word. But the the the character of the people in this building have really touched me. They are, you know, I'd walk over bare glass
for any of them. They're really good people. They bust their ass every single day and and they just they deal with it. they work hard and I am very proud to be uh have any kind of remote association
with them. I appreciate you saying that and I agree with you completely and I appreciate your contributions over the last several months. But let me just before we pull but financially we're better off than I would have expected.
Um we have uh we are working with FEMA. we have put in claims for the disaster funding uh for the debris removal um which is progressing. I won't give you a date on that because I won't give you a
date on that. Um so you there's that. Uh we're still working with the insurance carriers on things. So um we have uh we have another budget amendment coming up as a matter of fact. So, do you have any
red flags or anything you're in the financials that you're concerned about? The only the only thing that that I mean on a macro basis I'm I'm uh thinking about is is just the decline
for the rest of the year on the atarms. We know that's going we know that's going to go down. I'll give you a sneak peek uh into next year is that originally I had we had forecasted uh for the city to be adors to be down
in the next fiscal year by about 7%. And that was preliminary discussions with with Mike Twitty and um we just got the information back uh last Friday and
uh the the their preliminary number for Treasure Island is to be down 5.54% or 5.56%. Um so um and that and and dollar-wise
uh the 7% translates to about an $800,000 haircut off of our advalorum base. So getting getting that point and a half back gives us back about 200,000. So net net we're down about 600
yearover-year on on that. So, all things considered, you know, I'm feeling uh I'm feeling pretty good. Okay. And one last question, the audit, financial audit that's uh taking place, when is that expected to be completed? Uh we've got
meetings on that this week. Um we're uh the audit firm has it and they're they're they're doing their magic on it. Uh we're expecting to have the whole thing wrapped up by the end of June. Okay. And just uh to add one thing where you
you say it looks like the loss that we were expecting to get in terms of property taxable revenue is going to be down6 to $800,000 is what we were kind of expecting. Bul well we were I was expecting 800. The problem with that is that we're used to it being up a couple
of million. So So instead of we getting instead of us getting a windfall of a couple of million dollars in property tax revenue, we're going to lose 800,000. So, it's going to be a it's going to be a pretty big swing that we're going to have to deal with, right?
But but from a budget standpoint, I mean, the team is we're we're trying to to build as not optimistic or pessimistic. We want to build as realistic a budget as we possibly can.
uh knowing that there's like so many unknowns out there because we don't know what we don't know out there. So, so yeah, uh we're looking forward to presenting that budget when the time comes. All right. Thank you.
All right. Appreciate it. You bet. I lied to you, mayor. I took too long. Hello. Last one. Good evening. Joan Goodrich from your office of economic development to talk tonight about parking and
possibly moving forward with a request for proposals for uh Treasure Island comprehensive parking study. I just put up this screen to show how parking actually hits a lot of our quality of life, financial health, economic future
as we move forward. Um and thus re the recommendation for a comprehensive parking study. In the past, um the city has looked at parking um a little bit in silos. We looked at uh the feasibility
of a parking structure back in 2013. um the team in 2022 and 2023 started to look at the parking codes and how it impacts our ability to encourage um redevelopment. Um of course since I've
been here in January as I've talked to some of our small business owners, parking is an issue especially for um our employees um that come that work downtown and how they find parking. Um so again um it is as we look at parking
not only from um city financial health because it is one of our larger revenue sources um into the general fund um but also I'm suggesting that we look at our parking as part of our infrastructure
and economic redevelopment moving forward. So, if you were to um give me direction to move forward with a request for proposals, I would um begin to prepare um that opportunity uh
to uh complete a comprehensive parking study that would um have several elements to it. Um first and foremost I think um we could do I would ask um those interested in working with us on
this study we could phase some of it. We have the opportunity to look at what we're doing from a city operation point of view the program the functional review some of our pricing. I've I've heard um um some of you all talk about dynamic pricing and what those
opportunities are. So such a study could incorporate that also as we look forward to the um uh what's happening in parking conditions really have changed um here on the island. So, not only does the city provide um parking opportunities
for our residents and our visitors and our customers and our shoppers, but also um our the our private operators here on the island and the impact that they have as um we support um our customers and
shoppers, etc. Um the study could possibly um include in its scope again looking at um the feasibility of a parking garage since land is um precious and and limited here on the island. How
we might look at um the efficiency or effectiveness in going up or in a mixeduse um situation um for parking as we move forward. So, um I know again I'm at the end of the night, but I am
suggesting um with your permission since parking uh parking studying wasn't part of the fiscal year 2025 business plan, it certainly wasn't part of um the fiscal year 2025 um budget. That's why I'm here in front of you tonight
suggesting that now would be a good time to possibly put this opportunity out on um the streets, get some of this data and information back um to you so you can make some strategic um uh decisions as to what we'd like to
do with our own parking assets and then how we plan forward um for parking as we continue to rebuild and recover. So, I don't know what you all think about that. I I have two questions. Um,
number one is I guess kind of wondering how we go ahead and do a parking study when we haven't changed all of our zoning, LDR, storm water plan, comprehensive plan. Is that something we can still do without doing that first? That's question number one.
Question number two, would this tell us I mean, and I might be wrong, but what I've seen these days when I go to like Midtown Tampa or I go to Columbus a lot where they have Eastston, which is Les Wexner from the guy who found a Victoria
Secret built his whole entire shopping plaza and you know, they they all have parking built into the to the mixed use so you can walk everywhere and it you don't see it as much. I mean, is that all stuff that would be looked at during
something like this? Yes. Um, absolutely. So, part of that for the parking requirements um for uh regulations, we'd look at um review and propose those. So, as our community development department um begins some of
its look forward for the land development regulations here in the downtown and the Gulf Boulevard area that parking um would have already been um recommended through this potential study. So, um I I talked um with the
community development um department, not not our new director yet. So, I I'm kind of overt talking her at this point, but if the study were to hit the streets um by the end of um the month or the request for proposals and we start to
work on this, that that would be incorporated into the study and then that could be handed off to the community development department for some of the work that they'll be doing on our behalf. Because yeah, I know I've heard at times like, you know, people say, "Well, let's just build a garage
over here or over here." Well, what if the downtown builds up and wherever we built it, people don't can't walk to downtown and they don't want to use it. So, I just think we have to make sure we kind of know what we're doing before we so we can integrate this and have it all
work with what we're going to build. Uh Joan, I I agree with you and I appreciate you bringing this forward. Uh, I think it's it's uh there's so much revenue potential here and this has lots of legs in terms of helping, you know,
helping people get around the city. I can't tell you how many times I've heard we've heard even in these meetings that somebody didn't want to come to standing ovations or something like that or July 4th because they didn't you they didn't want to deal with the parking. So, I'm glad we're looking at this. At this
point in time, you just want direction from us to go to put an RFP out. We're not approving any kind of dollar amount or anything like that. Uh do you have any idea what these types of uh parking impact reviews cost? Um yes, the range
right now with um uh is from 50 to 90,000 and of course that would come from the user fees from the parking fund um that's already um there in in the general fund. that would come from the
the user fees. Again, it's it would be based on the scope of services and it would be my intention again. Um, in the past when we've looked at parking, we've only asked for, you know, like one thing. So, I had planned if I got a
green light from y'all that I'd put out a pretty comprehensive scope of services, but asking um the firms that responded to be able to see that if we just wanted to do this scope, this one piece of the scope at this point, it
would just be X. So, um yeah. Does that make sense? So, if we just want to look at like our pricing and look at city um city parking assets and how we do that more efficiently and um more effectively, that would be one part of
the scope as as we build in um some of the studying that we might want to do for land development regulations. That could be another part of the scope, but we could kind of pull it out depending on what type of um pricing that we see that comes back through the I was I was
with you until you said $50 to $90,000. That that uh that caught my attention. Uh I I'm thinking as as you were talking about this something in the 12 to $15,000 range. But anyway, uh it it you know, as far as I'm concerned, and we'd have to hear what the rest of the
commissioners think, but I think it's worth uh going out for an RFP, but but again, 50 to 90,000 for something like this is I'd rather do something, you know, citizen driven, grab a few people. We've got a parking lot expert that lives here in Sunset Beach that owns a
lot of parking lots. There's a there's people that we can business people that we can get uh on something similar to rebuild TI that can that can probably uh get us something at uh at a lot less uh cost. So just something to consider.
Well, and I'm just wondering if it's a bit premature. I mean, we don't know how much retail restaurant space. So, how do we know how much parking that we're going to need? Um, you know, I mean, I understand there we need parking for beach, the beach, and for the this, but I I don't know. I
I'd say we uh I saw our new CDD person shaking her head, so I I like her already. She agreed with me. So So So we can look at density and see if everything were built out to density, what type of parking we would need. And I I from my understanding, we're about
deficient five 550 spaces currently. uh that I don't know, but that was one of the um to the commissioner's point and looking at the future development and how that was expected to intensify. That was just one of the things I was
going to add to the to to the scope. I've heard the numbers anywhere from 250 to 550. So, I'd say we cap the uh amount to spend to about 50,000. And to help pay
for that, um you know, this is something that um I've talked to several people about. And uh you know we could e im immediately implement uh zones like zones A, B, C, and D with of course uh
right on uh uh west of G Boulevard uh zone A, zone B here at city hall and then farther you go away C and D. Uh we could right now city parking is $4 a spot an hour. Uh, zone A would be $10
for Beachside. And I'm probably going to get a lot of uh, emails for this, but no residential parking in zone A, kind of like Madira Beach implements. Uh, zone B, $8, zone C, uh, six, uh, D, uh, $5
away. We could easily with dynamic pricing uh do Independence Day uh Labor Day 50% increase on actual Fourth of July. Uh Sanovations, we could probably do a 100% increase um on select days.
You sound like you're part of Florida parking. Yeah, I'm not. But we're definitely not utilizing it to nearly its fullest potential. So, uh I don't know if I shared this before, but uh I was in St. Augustine. Last Christmas,
uh, I went to a parking lot, uh, to go to downtown to pick something up. I paid $8, uh, 2our minimum. So, I was there for 15 minutes. I paid uh, like almost 20 bucks. But, uh, later on that night, I I I walked by that same parking lot
and uh, someone was yelling at the machine and it was $25 per hour, 2our minimum, and max charge on your card is 225 for the day. So, we are nowhere near utilizing uh at $4 per parking spot. So,
that's my two cents. Another part that we need to look at uh as well is the side street parking issue down in Sunset Beach that we launched about a year ago. We haven't we didn't enforce it for the months following uh Hurricane Helen and Milton
uh and just recently started enforcing it again and uh I'm getting calls and matter of fact I spent almost an hour uh earlier today talking with a resident that was upset that they got a parking ticket uh for parking in front of their
house. But uh anyway, we we need to take a look at the whole side street parking issue in Sunset Beach. see how much revenue is generating and see if it's worth uh the inconvenience that uh that is causing uh
residents. Thank you. What What zone would I be in if I park right out in front of city hall here? B. Okay, good. So, what do you all think about
proceeding with then the RFP I idea? Is that a a yes? A no? Again, I don't think we're committing to any money right now. So, I think uh getting an RFP, but setting expectations
early on because, you know, any big price tag I'm gonna I'm gonna push back on perhaps using a citizen-driven uh approach with this is that's how I feel. But again, I think we need to hear from other commissioners. Well, there's
no doubt that parking is necessary for us to get started uh on all the redevelopment. Uh then matter of fact, um Vice Mayor uh Tammy Vazquez and I
when we were up at um Tallahassee for legislative days, they uh they had one breakout session for the mayors and the vice mayors and everybody to a tea that put a presentation said you start with a
a a drawing and a rendering and everything else and but before you do anything else you build parking And um and so it is important. It is that important. And you know, we do know that at maximum buildout, we're we're short
$250 to $550 parking spots. So, I mean, I think that it's it's worth looking at. Um I I don't like the $90,000 price tag. You know, I' I'd hope it would be more the $50,000 price tag. Um, but I think that
uh, you know, we do have things where we could A, B, C, and D. We could say, let's take a look at what the A needs to be and, you know, don't worry about B, C, and D right now or, you know, do something along those lines. But I'm in
favor of of doing it. We we need to move forward. And um you know, a lot of our folks uh when I say our folks, people that are visiting our city, um when they do get some of those tickets that are $20, $25, I mean, it it really chases
them away. They don't want to come back. It's it's a bad taste in in their mouth. You know, it's if you check social media about our reputation for parking, um it's it's not good at this point, right? again, at least, you know, beginning to
look at it um holistically. And like I said, we know that, you know, 550 is is is the number that we'd need to satisfy all the parking. I'm in favor of pushing it forward. Thank you all very much. Yep. I was
Thank you. All right. Any uh public comment, Andrew? C couple of things on the budget.
Um the uh the 17 million general fund and then the 10 million on hand. I'm assuming that because you're six months in, the remaining money is the money in the checkbook to cover the next six months of draw on operating expenses.
Does that seem right? That I mean that makes sense to me, but the gentleman the last Mike could you come forward. How you doing? Good. How are you? Good. Uh the last slide we had I think going off memory how so need a little help. Uh
we had 2.7 million a month is our burn rate and we had about you just 12 no 12 you said 7.4 four months, right? Yeah. We had no revenue coming in in cash. So, yeah. Yeah. Seven and a half
months in if the ticket stops and all we do is earn money and our burn rate. Sure. That's your seven. We've got seven and a half months to go. Your operating, right? Yeah. It's not it's
not accounting stuff, but I'm I'm like I'm just trying to reconcile on your six months into your 12 months right you're running ahead of Can you talk in the mic please? Yes, sir. that
that yeah look condition it a conditional yes but that ballpark okay so so that 10 million is not free cash in the sense that it is going to pay the or it's going to pay the bills for the
next six months so of the of the money the 38 million how much of that is unrestricted that's the 10.5 million if if they wanted to go They want to go out and direct pay all the seaw walls right now. They could
pull that out of the $10 million. Well, the seaw walls are already budgeted. So, but they're not built. No, but they're they're already assigned. They could be already assigned that I
don't have all the details underneath that assigned number. That assigned number had a number of things broken down, right? Yeah. So the assigned are how much of the assigned are under contract and how much of the assigned or not under contract? I don't I don't have
that number. So right. So so so what you have is we're just trying to get to the bottom of the free cash. The free cash that's not either committed under a contract or being held for operating expenses. And it seems to be somewhere
in the $10 million. That's probably unrestricted, unencumbered. Yeah. Unassigned. I mean, if you kind of triangulate it, it seems to kind of gel around the 10 million. Okay. So, we're we're not broke.
No, not yet. So, how are you going to pay how are you going to pay for the bonds to be issued? This is not a chance for for citizens to question staff. Your comments need to be directed. He made a comment, so I just asked.
Okay, thank you. Thank you. Any other public comment, West Evans? Isa Palms. Uh, I just want to say, uh, when it comes to the parking thing, um, Arthur, you talked about you came out, there was a guy yelling at the
machine, $25 an hour. We don't want people here yelling at machines. Uh, everyone, uh, oh, I guess I shouldn't say everyone. It's common knowledge to people in my world that the number one way to drive tourists away from an area
is to uh start milking them for every penny they have before they even make it onto your beach or make it into your shops or anything like that. So, I think whatever we do, it needs to be a reasonable situation. And uh, of course,
also we need to look at what's going to be happening with Treasure Bay, what's going to be happening with downtown before we even start talking about that other stuff. But yeah, don't kill everyone on parking. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Anyone else? Okay, let's
close the public comment. And with that, we will adjourn.