THIS RECOVERY SUMMIT THIS RECOVERY SUMMIT THIS RECOVERY SUMMIT IS JUST FOR OUR INFORMATION, RIGHT? THIS RECOVERY SUMMIT IS JUST FOR OUR INFORMATION, RIGHT? THIS RECOVERY SUMMIT IS JUST FOR OUR INFORMATION, RIGHT? WE DON'T NEED TO ATTEND. IS JUST FOR OUR INFORMATION, RIGHT? WE DON'T NEED TO ATTEND. IS JUST FOR OUR INFORMATION, RIGHT? WE DON'T NEED TO ATTEND. SEE WHAT'S GOING ON. WE DON'T NEED TO ATTEND. SEE WHAT'S GOING ON. WE DON'T NEED TO ATTEND. SEE WHAT'S GOING ON. DID THAT WITH THE CHAMBER? SEE WHAT'S GOING ON. DID THAT WITH THE CHAMBER? SEE WHAT'S GOING ON. DID THAT WITH THE CHAMBER? DID THAT WITH THE CHAMBER? DID THAT WITH THE CHAMBER I think we're starting to start. Are we all ready? All right. Good evening, everybody. Welcome to the City Commission meeting of Monday, November 18th. At this time, I would like to call Pastor Mark Weir from Anchor Church at Safety Harbor to come forward and lead us in the invocation. So if everyone would please stand up and then remain standing for the pledge to the flag. Let us pray. Dear Heavenly Father, As we gather today to discuss the matters of our community, we humbly ask for your guidance and your wisdom. May all deliberations be marked by compassion, fairness, and a deep commitment to your well-being and the well-being of all citizens. God grant us the strength to listen to any diverse perspectives and make decisions that reflect the needs of our community. And God always seeking what is just and equitable. We place our trust in your divine providence tonight. We ask for your blessings upon the city council. In Christ's name we pray. Amen. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you, Pastor. All right, so we're going to move to the presentations. So this time I'd like to ask Autumn Pearson to please come forward. Good evening. Good evening. I have a proclamation to read in honor of Native American Heritage Month, and I'll give you a chance to say a few words if you like. So again, this is a proclamation in... recognition of Native American Heritage Month, whereas during National Native American Heritage Month, we celebrate the rich tapestry of indigenous peoples and honor their sacrifices, which we recognize as inextricably woven into the history of our country. And Native Americans are descendants of the original indigenous inhabitants of what is now the United States. And Native Americans have moving stories of tragedy, triumph, and perseverance that need to be shared. with future generations. And Native Americans have enriched our heritage and continue to add to all aspects of our society through their generosity of culture and the continued practice of teaching economic, environmental, and cultural sustainability. And our country is blessed by the character and strength exemplified by the Native Americans who have answered the call of service in our armed forces in greater numbers than any other group in the United States. We honor their Native American veterans and those who serve an active duty for their bravery and sacrifice. And during the month of November, we honor our Native American people and recognize their continued contributions in strengthening the diversity of our society. Now, therefore, I, Joey, Mayor of the City of Safety Harbor, and on behalf of the entire City Commission, do hereby proclaim November 2024 to be Native American Heritage Month. So, Autumn, thank you for being here. I'm representing the... I'm Autumn Pearson. I'm the Vice Chair of the Diversity Advisory Board, and it is a real honor for me to accept this proclamation. I am one-sixteenth Potawatomi, so I have a little bit of Native American blood in me, which I feel very proud to have. My first memory was of a Yebeche dance on the Navajo Indian Reservation, and my first teaching job was on Zuni Pueblo, where I was adopted into a family and given the name Akyatola Binal Iya. which means wild tulip dancing in the wind. So the roots and the culture of Native American history runs really deep. And I feel very strongly about how we need to consider the Native American population within our country. They were the first people here. We are just visitors on their land. And I think it's very important that we remember that as we navigate our decisions and show our respect for who was here first. So on behalf of the 3 million Native Americans that are in the United States representing 574 tribes, I'm very honored to accept this proclamation tonight. Thank you all for recognizing that. Thank you. Welcome down. All right, now we have Chief Andrew Hawkins here to do a Medal of Valor presentation. Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Commissioners, and City Manager. Andrew Hawkins, Fire Chief. We are here tonight to recognize and present the Fire Chief Unit Citation to accrue for their actions during a structure fire in October. On Sunday, October 13th, at approximately 8 p.m., Engine 53A shift was dispatched to a reported structure fire at the Gallaire Village Mobile Home Park. En route, it was determined that we had a working structure fire with a reported paralyzed victim trapped inside. Engine 53 was first on scene. Captain Justice and Firefighter Paramedic Weiler made entry into the structure, started a primary search, located the victim, and brought her outside. While Engine 53's crew was inside conducting the search, driver operator Trask pulled an attack line, charged it, and placed it at the front door. After rescuing the victim, crews were able to get water on the fire. So this was the picture that I have up now is what they had when they first arrived on scene. And then after they pulled the victim out, that's how the fire advanced. So the heroic actions of the crew that day saved a life and prevented further injury and property loss. Through their actions and leadership of Captain Justice and the training, experience, and dedication of the entire crew, there was a positive outcome that day for the victim and the fire crews. So here are a few statistics of that night. Engine 5-3 had a 4 minute and 50 second response time with the average response time being 7 minutes and 30 seconds. The victim was rescued within seven minutes of Engine 53 arriving on scene. In 2023, there was approximately 350,000 structure fires. Of that, approximately 1% of those fires had fire victims. Of those 3,500 fire victims, only 414 of them were rescued, and only 70% of them survived. So firefighters can go their entire 25 year plus career without ever making a victim rescue. We are always training and preparing for when this time comes. I would now like to present this crew with the highest honor given by the Safety Harbor Fire Department and in the fire service, the Medal of Valor. The Medal of Valor is an award given to individuals who risk their lives to save and protect others. So to my left, I have Captain Rick Justice. To my right, I have Firefighter Paramedic Travis Trask. And to his right, Firefighter Paramedic Austin Wyler. All right, so now we're going to move to the audience to be heard. So if there's anyone in the audience that wishes to be heard on an item that's not on the regular agenda or that's on the consents agenda, please come forward, state your name and address, and you'll have three minutes to address the commission. We have some Cub Scouts here that want to learn a little bit more about elected officials and how we make decisions and do things. Do more want to come up? You can bring the whole group up if you want. There are shy groups within my league. Okay. He's speaking on behalf of the group. I'm Riker. I live in Tampa Bay. And Safety Harbor. And Cub Scout Pack 43. I want to know how you guys became elected officials. That's a tough one, Nancy. Can you handle that one? A lot of it started with volunteer work and being interested in the community. And then people met us and said, hey, why don't you run for office? We did. You have to get a lot of votes from people in the city. And a lot of us, we knock on a lot of doors. We put up yard signs. I've been in that area. We're focused on them. Why do you guys like being city officials? Anyone else want to take a stab? I absolutely love getting to help people. And I love being a part of the city and seeing how it works behind the scenes. And I love meeting great people like you more often like this. But most of all, it's because we have candy in our drawers. You might not know that, but we do. Does anyone else want to come up and ask a question? Someone else can come on up. Come on. We're pretty friendly up here. FOR HAVING US AND FOR LETTING US SEE HOW A CITY COUNCIL MEETING IS RUN AND HOW IT GOES. WE'RE GOING TO SIT AND WATCH AND SEE WHAT IT'S ALL ABOUT, RIGHT? THANK YOU FOR LETTING US BE HERE. OH, IT'S YOUR RIGHT TO BE HERE. NICOLE, DID YOU WANT TO DO A PICTURE WITH US? YES. YOU WANT TO DO ANOTHER GROUP PICTURE? All right. Everybody say back 43. Back 43. You guys all look so tall. All of you. Bye. Thank you all. Keep it up. Keep it up. Yeah, nice meeting you. Thanks for coming out. Does anyone else wish to be heard? ALL RIGHT, WELL, YOU DID ALL RIGHT, WELL, YOU DID ALL RIGHT, WELL, YOU DID A GOOD JOB. ALL RIGHT, WELL, YOU DID A GOOD JOB. ALL RIGHT, WELL, YOU DID A GOOD JOB. I'M THE ONLY FAVORITE ONE. A GOOD JOB. I'M THE ONLY FAVORITE ONE. A GOOD JOB. I'M THE ONLY FAVORITE ONE. ALL RIGHT. I'M THE ONLY FAVORITE ONE. ALL RIGHT. I'M THE ONLY FAVORITE ONE. ALL RIGHT. HOW ARE YOU GUYS? ALL RIGHT. HOW ARE YOU GUYS? ALL RIGHT. HOW ARE YOU GUYS? HI, MY NAME IS JULIE SCOTT, HOW ARE YOU GUYS? HI, MY NAME IS JULIE SCOTT, HOW ARE YOU GUYS? HI, MY NAME IS JULIE SCOTT, AND I LIVE HERE IN CITY HARBOR HI, MY NAME IS JULIE SCOTT, AND I LIVE HERE IN CITY HARB Bayshore towards Gulf Bay. I looked over to the right. City of Clearwater commutes a little urging. It's horrible over there, and I feel really badly for them because it's just been sitting there for months now. So anyway, thanks very much. Total kudos to all of you for getting that done because I know it was really difficult. There's a lot of groups to jump through. I've jumped through them. I've worked in crisis disaster myself, so I know. all the boxes that have to get checked and the lines that have to get drawn. So it's really hard. And I don't know that a lot of our citizens realize that. And I know you all got a lot of pushback on, come on, get out here. Get out here. We need our stuff picked up. I don't think people realize that. And I suggested this to Josh the other day. Maybe even put it in the next newsletter just to let people know, look, this is what we had to go through to get this done. And great thanks to FEMA, actually, helping to reimburse the city. So the other thing that I wanted to, again, thanks to Mayor Ayub and to Josh Stefanik for doing the Cup of Joe on Saturday. I think we had a really good turnout, which is one of the better turnouts that I've seen in the times that I've gone. We had lots of good questions, lots of good suggestions. We have our new city manager. We have our new community development director. Kind of the feeling is that, and the sense that I'm getting out in the community, is that it's time, it's really time for some new visions, some new ideas, some new pushes forward. I was just reading an article in the Tampa Bay Business Journal the other day. We're looking at, last year, in 2023, there were 90,000 people that moved to the Tampa Bay area. That's a big area, but a lot of them are coming and looking at Safety Harbor, and we want to be the place that has the charm and the sustainability that brings them here and brings them to our community. Because we need that. We need that lifeblood of new people coming to town. We might not have so many with all of the hurricanes that we've had. They may not be so encouraged. But I think that's not going to make that much difference to people. As a matter of fact, I think people are going to be buying up homes left and right of people that have decided to leave. As I mentioned, there were lots of good ideas and suggestions. ONE OF THEM, ONE OF THE ONES THAT I WANTED TO BRING TO THE ATTENTION OF THE COMMISSION TONIGHT WAS THE IDEA ABOUT OUR NEW PEER. WE LOST OUR PEER IN THE LAST THREE STORMS THAT WE HAD, AND IT'S NOW TIME TO BUILD A NEW ONE. AND I WOULD REALLY ENCOURAGE THE CITY COMMISSION AND THE CITY MANAGER TO LOOK AT REACHING OUT IN OUR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR TO to reach out to the community for input on what kind of pier we would like to see. There are all kinds of ideas out there. There are all kinds of possibilities. Now is the chance to build it better, build it in a much more feasible fashion for all of the citizens of Safety Harbor. One of the ideas that was brought up was the idea of having, of course, a fishing pier, but also perhaps having an observation deck for people to just hang out on and people that aren't involved in fishing, but just want to go and look at the water, look at the manatees, and the rays, and all the other beautiful wildlife that we have there. And they're not really necessarily big fisher people. So I really think it's important to get public input on this really important venture. I mean, this is your legacy as city manager and commissioners, and it's our legacy. It's what we're known for. It's what we're going to be known for forever. So let's get it right. And I'm done. THANKS, JULIE. THANKS, JULIE. APPRECIATE IT. THANKS FOR COMING OUT. ANYONE ELSE WISH TO COME FORWARD AT THIS TIME? ALL RIGHT. SO NOW WE HAVE ONE ITEM ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. WE'RE LOOKING FOR A MOTION TO APPROVE THE NOVEMBER 4TH WORKSHOP AND REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES. SO MOVED. SECOND. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Motion passes 5-0. Next up, public hearings. The first item is adoption or denial of Ordinance 2024-15. An ordinance of the City of Safety Harbor, Florida, amending Article 13, Administration and Enforcement of the Safety Harbor Comprehensive Zoning and Land Development Code by creating Section 240, Live Local Act Development. TO PROVIDE FOR THE CITY'S REVIEW OF LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS AUTHORIZED UNDER THE LIVE LOCAL ACT PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. AND THIS IS PRESENTED FOR SECOND RATING. YES. ANYONE FROM THE AUDIENCE THAT SHOULD BE HEARD ON THIS? ANY DISCUSSION, MOTIONS? MY FEELING IS THE SENTIMENT IS STILL THE SAME. I CAN'T SUPPORT THIS. I THINK IT'S AN EROSION OF HOME RULE. And if people in the audience knew what they could do with what the state is trying to do in operating cities, I think they'd be floored by the adoption of this Live Local Act. So again, I can't support it. And that's my position. I'd rather take it on without passing it if we were forced to do it. have our day in court. I'm sure the citizens would support fighting this. So I would urge everybody to vote against it. And I want to reiterate what I said about how my passion is also against this, but it is not against staff, because I know your hands are tied. We have been preempted in this area, and you are forced to do something. But I'm not forced to vote for it. So thank you for your work. So I don't think any of us are for it, but on the first reading, it did pass three to two. But, Sarah, if I could just ask you to help me remember, you know, what voting for this is doing, because, I mean, I'm persuaded by the Vice Mayor, what he's saying here. I'm tempted to vote against it, too, this runaround. But help me understand a little bit about it. Yeah, so we are preempted as it relates to affordable housing. in certain districts in the city. And part of that is we need to have certain, we have to administratively approve it, certain applications. And what this does is essentially just gives, puts in our code some parameters for that. So that way when somebody comes in, we're not now forced to debate and argue what the process is, or just administratively approve it without having some sort of process in place. So this is just, giving the city a certain amount of procedures in an area that we are preempted. So without them, we have less control. Except for the fact that this is a situation where within a mile of the spa, they can build the same height, which I think is a little bit offensive. Seven stories. A little on the fence here, too. And I hear you, Vice Mayor. I think we're in a better position not passing it And if it should happen, although I don't think it's going to happen, but should something like this happen, to me, we're in a better position to take it up and, I guess, challenge the constitutionality of this act. I just think by passing it, we're kind of going along with it. I think we have less ability to challenge it once we pass it. That's all. I get that. I guess my understanding was the state preemption law was a little vague in how it was presented to us. And this allows us to put some details in there that we might be able to live with. We're likely going to be forced to have to live with it anyway. If we didn't have this in place, I mean, the chances of us winning, on principle, I agree with you that I'd love to say, let's not have this and let's fight them in court and try to get what we want, which is not a 65-foot condo building on the corner. I guess I'm just afraid that we're going to risk losing more than we can protect ourselves through our own ordinance adoption. Can I say something too? From what I'm understanding, you will have to administratively approve things. So this gives you some parameters. But what I'm saying also is they will be able to do what they want without going before us. We'll have nothing to say. nor will planning and zoning have anything to say. It will simply be administrative approval if they meet the state's live local parameters. And some of our code provisions, right? There's certain things that they still have to meet or setbacks, those types of items. But there is a lot of ambiguity in the state statute. I think this helps us narrow it down a little bit. So I've seen some, you know, attorneys that represent private developers interpret it much more broadly than us. And so this kind of helps us to narrow it down. I don't necessarily agree that having this puts us in a weaker position to defend against it. I think it actually helps us direct it a little better. But again, it hasn't been directly challenged yet. So I'm curious how you say it does not put us in a weaker position to defend it. But I'm kind of hearing the vice mayor that, I mean, we're saying it's now part of our ordinance, right? We're taking the Live Local Act and kind of ratifying it here. No, we're saying there's this act. We're preempted. It's passed. It says this. And what it means for our city is this. Sarah, wasn't there a requirement from the state that we had to post that on our website about how that is supposed to happen? I didn't get that. Could you try again? But if it's ambiguous at the state level, and we're trying to define it, and we could be challenged with our definition of how we define it if it's ambiguous at the state level. I think the argument could go both ways. I mean, if it's already ambiguous, and we have a better chance of fighting it as an ambiguous, unconstitutional mandate, to me. Well, there are cities that are much more proactive with litigation and they've adopted procedures that are opposed to this as well. Can you provide some color on what the procedures are? Are we making it as difficult as possible in these procedures? Does it need to come to the commission for approval or is it procedures that just lead to administrative approval without us weighing in on it? Just for a little background, when we were looking at the Live Local Act, we did get free technical assistance from the Florida Housing Coalition and ask them very specific questions about how it would apply in Safety Harbor. And in particular, we were concerned about if there were certain uses proposed as part of a mixed-use residential development that otherwise would have required a conditional use waiver or variance that would become before the City Commission, did we still have the authority TO REQUIRE THOSE ASPECTS TO COME IN FRONT OF THE CITY COMMISSION. THEIR ATTORNEY'S OPINION WAS YES, AND THAT'S WHAT WE PUT IN THE ORDINANCE. SO WE'RE MAKING IT CLEAR THAT IF SOMEONE PROPOSES A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT AND IT HAS A COMPONENT IN IT, LET'S SAY A SOCIAL CLUB THAT OTHERWISE IN THAT DISTRICT WOULD BE A CONDITIONAL USE, THE CITY IS RESERVING THE RIGHT TO BRING THAT TO PUBLIC HEARING. defining a floor of what mixed-use residential is. The statute doesn't say that. So if you have to be mixed-use residential, does that mean that you have 300 apartment units in a 500-square-foot non-residential building that sells ice cubes? I mean, so we're saying, no, you truly have to be mixed-use. It has to be 20%. You have to follow these procedures. You have to come in front of the city commission if you're otherwise required to do so. But Ultimately, the site plan itself would go through our technical review committee and then to the city manager for approval. And part of the feedback I got from the commission in the first reading was making sure that we were informing people of the application, putting it on the website, and creating some transparency so that people were aware of the review process that was going on. I don't mind taking a defiant position on this one and making it as hard as on people that are trying to come in and do a project in the city under the Live Local Act. That's just my personal. I just don't know what the best way to do it is, and I'm not familiar enough with the procedures that you put forth, and if they are stringent enough to dissuade or make people to jump through as many possible hoops as possible to get something done. I think we put... much constraints as we could without a lot opening ourselves up to be challenged just by either not having procedures or by by violating the preemption you know by saying okay everybody has to come in you know come to the City Commission well that's circumventing the express preemption and so on it on its face we would be open to a challenge as opposed to here we're saying now if you meet all of this very specific criteria, then there's the administrative process. However, for the conditional uses, because there have been private development attorneys who have argued that they don't have to because they're going under live local. They don't have to go to city commission. They don't have to do any of these things. We're saying, yes, you do. And they're arguing that, but that's just them privately. That's their interpretation. That doesn't necessarily open us to a direct express. We're not expressly in violation of live local. We have an opinion. from the state to support that. So we are adding in as many constraints as we can. I understand what you're saying in terms of to, we don't like live local, so we want to kind of go against it, but we're saying, okay, you're preempting us, but we're still trying to protect the city and ensure that the development meets all of our requirements and that it's development that's appropriate for our city and compatible and consistent. So that's what we're looking to do. What tools does the city have if somebody does propose a plan that we know would be very unpopular in the city, but that the procedures lead to administrative approval? Can we put anything in there that says, yeah, deny it, and then let's see what happens in court? No. Usually that's not what you put in your ordinance. But we are notifying everybody, so they're on notice. So we're making it as, you know, because part of the other, you know, some of the issues and concerns that have been raised is that it sort of circumvents our government in the sunshine mantra, you know, by saying, okay, now it's this whole administrative. So we are going to notice it. It's going to be, you know, as widely noticed as we can make it. It is on the manager, but, you know, by having conditional uses and putting in certain constraints and limitations on it, it's the best we can do. And that's where I'm confused. The more I listen, the more I'm against it, because I feel we do have those constraints in place, even without this, because we have the conditional use process. And so if they come and they want that social club, it seems to me you already have the power on the team to say this goes against our ordinance. The law is ambiguous, and as Attorney Johnston said, attorneys are arguing both ways around the state. There's a lot of discussion in the legal arena about whether, in fact, we have the authority to do that. So the advice that we've been given is the city should reserve that authority up front, put it in our code so that it's very clear that's the city's position. Otherwise, there'd be a development come through, and without it, we'd be notified, probably need to take a vote in a meeting right away to decide whether to take action. That's my feeling. Well, you'll be notified right away under this. This doesn't take out you. We can't take any action other than just voting at that point. So for me, I'd rather just not acquiesce and vote for it versus voting for it because, WHETHER WE HAVE A PROCESS OR NOT, I THINK IT'S JUST OPEN FOR DEBATE BECAUSE IT'S AMBIGUOUS. I APOLOGIZE. I DIDN'T MEAN TO CUT YOU OFF. BUT JUST BY NOT HAVING ADOPTED PROCEDURES, WE ARE VIOLATING THE LAW. SO I THINK, LISTEN, IN PRINCIPLE, I AGREE. I'M TOTALLY AGAINST THIS LIVE LOCAL ACT. YOU KNOW, I THINK THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT SHOULD HAVE A LOT MORE CONTROL. THE STATE KEEPS INFRINGING ON OUR RIGHTS TO GOVERN THE PEOPLE. The people here have direct access to us. They vote for us directly. They see us. We eat at restaurants next to them. So we understand what everybody wants here. In this situation here, if we don't vote for this, we are opening up. We're targeting ourselves. There's going to be a lot of people out there targeting Safety Harbor because it's going to be out there that we voted against this, opening ourselves up to, to legal lawsuits for development, just for the hell of it. I just feel as though it's an end run around us. I feel it's adding insult to injury. It's saying, OK, you're preempted. You can't do anything. But now it's also against the law if you don't do procedures. So we're violating the law. If we don't say yes. So the statute requires us to have procedures in place. We have proposed codifying it so we're able to clarify. If we don't, my backup recommendation is that administratively we promulgate some procedures just so that we're not on its face in violation as opposed to violating an interpretation. That's one thing we're... somebody challenges our interpretation of it as opposed to on its face, we're not in compliance. Okay. Well, I understand better. So it's not against the law to say no to this. We're not violating the law if we say no because you can't do it administratively. Just by not having procedures. That's the violation. Okay. Yes. Because you could do procedures without this, but this codifies them. And if we don't have procedures, we open ourselves up more? By not having procedures, we are in violation of what? was in that statute. That statute requires us to have administrative procedures. Our recommendation, based on the clarifying the conditional use and certain components where we want to be more stringent in how we interpret it, is to adopt a code section, to have it in the code, just so it's clear. But if this commission chooses not to adopt this, I'm just letting you know that we will then probably recommend that the manager adopt some procedures that were at least not in just thumbing our nose at it. So at least we've complied with those mandates. And then if a project comes in and this commission wants to take direction to say no, then it's still within your prerogative. So if a development came in and wanted to challenge our limitations on conditional use, we'd be in a better position if it was in our code, as opposed to just administrative procedures. Maybe. There are certain questions I don't really want to answer on the record, because this is just going to be replayed back to us. But I will tell you, you have an attorney here that represents the city giving a recommendation. So I'm going to say this. I think we all agree. We're on the same page on this one. I think we have two. not great choices, either don't vote for it or vote for it. I think the lesser of the two, in my opinion, is to put the procedures in place. If it happens to pass, I would ask the city manager to, if anything, any application comes across, keep us posted timely so we know what our options are in real time and we don't hear about some approval after the fact that maybe we can take some action during it. I'LL VOTE FOR IT FOR THAT REASON, EVEN THOUGH I DON'T SUPPORT WHAT THE STATE IS MAKING US DO WITH THE LIVE LOCAL ACT. CAN I SAY ONE MORE THING ABOUT WHAT YOU JUST SAID? LET US KNOW ABOUT IT SO THAT WE CAN TAKE SOME ACTION, BUT WE CAN'T TAKE SOME ACTION BECAUSE WE'RE OUT OF IT. PLANNING AND ZONING IS OUT OF IT AND WE'RE OUT OF IT. SO IF IT'S ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL, THAT'S WHAT IT MEANS. IT'S ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL. IT DOESN'T COME BACK TO US UNLESS IT HAS A CONDITIONAL USE, CORRECT? There's some. If it doesn't comply with all of our setbacks and all of our other code provisions, then it doesn't mean it gets approved. They have to meet everything. The only, basically, exclusions are the density and the use. And height. And height, right. But it has to meet everything else. Anything based on what you're hearing is if that application does come across, we need to make sure they're dotting every I, crossing every T, and using every tool. Yeah, absolutely. And I think I can work with the community development director that, you know, have an administrative policy which supports the newly adopted code and ordinance just to share how we communicate with the board and what comes into the city. So that way, whether it's, you know, with this group or future groups, that request is still honored by the board that you're notified ASAP. All right. Anyone from the audience who should be heard on this? I think I already asked. All right. Make a motion to adopt ordinance number 2024-15. I'll second. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed say nay. Nay. All right. Motion passes three to two. Next up, resolution 2024-23. THAT IS A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAFETY HARBOR, FLORIDA TO TOLL THE 90-DAY PERIOD FOR AN ADDITIONAL 60 DAYS FOR PAYMENT OF LEAN REDUCTIONS AUTHORIZED BY RESOLUTION NUMBER 2011-18 AS AMENDED BY RESOLUTION NUMBER 2021-02 AND RESOLUTION 2024-02 AND PROVIDING FOR AUTHORIZATION AND FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. GOOD EVENING. CAROL STRICKLAND, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR. THIS RESOLUTION WOULD EXTEND THE PERIOD OF TIME THAT RESPONDENTS HAVE TO PAY A LEAN REDUCTION DUE TO THE STATE OF EMERGENCY. ACCORDING TO THE RESOLUTIONS PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED BY THE CITY COMMISSION, WHEN A LEAN IS REDUCED, THE RESPONDENT HAS 90 DAYS TO PAY THAT REDUCED AMOUNT OR IT GOES BACK UP TO THE ORIGINAL AMOUNT. DUE TO THE STATE OF EMERGENCY FROM THE STORMS THAT WE HAD, WE'RE REQUESTING THAT THAT 90-DAY PERIOD BE EXTENDED for the extent of that state of emergency, which would be until December 4th, to allow people to make payment on lien reductions. Okay. That would expire on December 4th? Yes, sir. Anyone from the audience wish to be heard on this? Any discussion or motion? I'll move adoption of resolution number 2024-23. Second. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. AYE. MOTION PASSES 5-0. MOTION PASSES 5-0. MOTION PASSES 5-0. NEXT UP, RESOLUTION 2024-16. 2024-16. 2024-16. 2024-16. 2024-16. 2024-16. 2024-16. 2024-16. 2024-16. 2024-16. 2024-16. 2024-16. 2024-16. 2024-16. 2024-16. 2024-16. 2024-16. 2024-16. 2024-16. 2024-16. 2024-16. 2024-16. 2024-16. 2024-16. 2024-16. 2024-16. 2024-16. 2024-16. 2024-16. 2024-16. 2024-16. 2024-16. 2024-16. 2024-16. 2024-16. 2024-16. 2024-16. 2024-16. 2024-16. 2024-16. 2024-16. 2024- COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAFETY HARBOR FLORIDA, AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR COMMENCING OCTOBER 1, 2023, AND ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2024, BY ALLOCATING FISCAL YEAR 2023-2024 PROJECT CARRY-FORES INTO THE FISCAL YEAR 2024-2025 BUDGET, BY APPROPRIATING REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES WITHIN THE GENERAL FUND, STORMWATER, STREET IMPROVEMENT, MARINA CAPITAL PROJECT, WATER AND WASTEWATER SANITATION, WATER AND WASTEWATER RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT, MULTIMODAL IMPACT FEES, PARKLAND, And CRA and corresponding increases in fund reserves providing for publication and providing for an effective date. And 2024-26, sorry, is a resolution of the City Commission of the City of Safety Harbor, Florida, amending the budget for the fiscal year commencing October 1st, 2024 and ending September 30th, 2025 by allocating fiscal year 2023-2024 PROJECT CARRY FORWARDS INTO THE FISCAL YEAR 2024-2024 BUDGET BY APPROPRIATING REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES WITHIN THE GENERAL FUNDS, STORMWATER, STREET IMPROVEMENT, MARINA CAPITAL PROJECT, WATER AND WASTEWATER SANITATION, WATER AND WASTEWATER RENEWAL, AND REPLACEMENT, MULTIMODAL IMPACT FEES, PARKLAND AND CRA, AND CORRESPONDING INCREASES IN FUND RESERVES, PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. AND FOR THIS ITEM, WE'LL NEED TWO SEPARATE VOTES. JUST TO CLARIFY. THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS. A NEED EXISTS TO AMEND THE FISCAL YEAR 2024 AND FISCAL YEAR 2025 BUDGETS FOR PROJECT CARRY FORWARDS IN BOTH FISCAL YEARS. PROJECT PURCHASE ORDERS IN PLACE CARRY FORWARD ON SEPTEMBER 30, 2024 TO OCTOBER 1, 2025, AND THOSE TOTAL $5,268,965. Those are not included in the amendment we're doing tonight. That is just a notification item. Those automatically carry forward. In addition, staff identified projects not yet started or that were in progress but not moved forward during the process and need to be carried forward to fiscal year 2025. Projects identified total $16,829.60. The breakdown of those projects include $207,800 in general funds, $1,969,931 in stormwater fund, $286,634.43 in street improvement fund, $47,763 in marina fund, $4,579,960 in Capital Projects Fund, $30,000 in Sanitation Fund, $9,275,172 in Water Wastewater Renewal Replacement Fund, $400,000 in Multimodal Impact Fees, $17,100 in Parkland Fund, and $14,700 in the CRA Fund. EACH LINE ITEM WITHIN THE EXHIBIT PROVIDES FOR DESCRIPTION OF THE BUDGETED ACTIVITY, AND YOU WILL SEE THAT THE EXHIBIT A ON EACH OF THE RESOLUTIONS IS A MIRROR OF THE OTHER, REMOVING IT FROM ONE YEAR INTO THE NEXT YEAR. I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. ANY QUESTIONS FOR VICKI? ANYONE FROM THE AUDIENCE WISH TO BE HEARD ON THIS? So just in summary, you're moving, money wasn't spent in the last fiscal year, so you're moving it forward to this year? Correct. Any of the projects that were on the budget for fiscal year 2024 that did not at least have a PO in place by the end of the fiscal year are now being moved into fiscal year 2025. Those projects could have moved to be moved for a variety of reasons. We did have the two storms at the end, which I'm sure delays the start date of some of the items, as well as just delays in the increased lead times and all those things. Great. Okay. All right. Does anyone want to make a motion? Move approval of resolution number 2024-25. Second. Second. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Motion passes 5-0. Thank you, Vicki. Moving to new or business. We still have the other resolution. Sorry. 2024-26. Do we have a motion on that one? Move approval of... Resolution number 2024-26. Second. All those in favor say aye. Aye. That motion passes 5-0. So now we're moving to old business. We have one item. It's a discussion about Hurricane Helene Mountain recovery and restoration. It's an update from our public works director. Actually, I'm going to take this one, Mayor. And Renee's going to put a slide up on the monitor for us. As a reminder, on September 23rd, 2024, the state of Florida declared an emergency for Pinellas County based on projected community impacts from Hurricane Helene. And on October 5th, 2024, the governor declared a state of emergency for Pinellas County based on projected community impacts from Hurricane Milton. The post-emergency recovery period is ongoing by a majority of city staff and has been extended to the end of November and is subject to extend based on organizational needs. So I want to recap the commission on the board here and those in the audience on our current objectives. I'm going right now for post recovery, which includes repairing park features throughout the community and working to reopen the boardwalk, completing storm debris disposal. So storm debris has been picked up. A majority still of that debris is at Public Works and now must be transferred out to third party locations so that all those debris types could be properly finally disposed of. We're working to manage our obstructive flows in the creeks. Some of those, we've had some flow issues with sediment buildup following the storm, so Public Works is working on that. Managing the permitting processes with community development as the board has previously edited some permit applicant fees so we could help those affected by the storm return to normalcy sooner. We're completing substantial damage assessments, and when I wrap up here in a couple of seconds, Carol is going to give us a further, deeper update on that ongoing process in the community. Finance is working to manage FEMA reimbursements. We had a FEMA kickoff meeting today, I believe, for Hurricane Milton, Hurricane Helene, as well as Debbie. We're also starting to budget and plan for repairs ongoing. Hurricane Helene caused $9 million in damage to city's infrastructure, cost us with $9 million in damage to infrastructure, which also includes overtime costs. And then Hurricane Milton caused $5 million in damages. Rachel, our interim HR director, is coordinating with PRM and our insurance for covered damages, if any. And in coordination with Chamber of Commerce, I know some of them are in the audience this evening, we've worked with them to establish a recovery summit, which we hosted here on Monday, November 25th at 3 p.m. for our small business community so they can meet with small business administrative representatives and those from FEMA on what next steps they could pursue to help them get back to normalcy. At the request and urging of the City Commission, staff has worked at some well-being initiatives for our staff Um, we are working with our, um, insurance provider to which we pay for, which included our package to get some debriefing per each disaster. So we're looking to schedule some debriefing sessions, uh, for those impacted by the storm. We're working with our, um, uh, mission, um, our investing firm who manages the employees 401As about an opportunity for self loans. if people needed some money to help with some projects at home to take a loan from their 401A. We've also reminded all staff about EAP assistance that's available. And also we're working with finance on creating a temporary policy to allow vacation sellback for those who are unable to take vacation during their work during the storm, as well as those employees who may have been affected by the storm and could use some cash from their vacation accounts. That money is booked in our budget, and we account for that money. With that being said, that's my update, and I'm going to ask Carol to give an update on substantial damage assessment, and then staff is available for any questions, comments, or concerns from the board. Thank you, Josh. Carol Strickland, Community Development Director. A few meetings prior to this, I had given you a presentation on the substantial damage process. That's a process where properties in the special flood hazard area IF THEY ARE DAMAGED MORE THAN 49% OF THE VALUE OF THE STRUCTURE, THEY ARE REQUIRED TO RETROFIT THAT STRUCTURE AND FLOOD PROOF IT. FORTUNATELY, WE ONLY HAVE A HANDFUL OF PROPERTIES THAT RECEIVE MAJOR DAMAGE IN SAFETY HARBOR, BUT THEY ARE GOING THROUGH A PROCESS OF DAMAGE ASSESSMENT. AND WHERE WE ARE NOW IS WE'VE SIGNED AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH PINELLAS COUNTY, WHICH THE COMMISSION RATIFIED AT YOUR LAST MEETING, where they are sending out teams of inspectors to do detailed damage estimation. And we're starting to get those results in as of last week. So we anticipate within the next few weeks, we'll get the results of all of the inspections in Safety Harbor and be able to determine if there are structures that meet that 49% threshold. If it's determined that they meet that threshold, there is a reassessment or an appeal process. We're also working on setting up the resources to do that through the state. But it's going well. We have a very good cooperative relationship with Pinellas County, and we expect to start permitting for those structures when those determinations are finished. Would we anticipate any conflicts to the retrofitting to our current codes? That's a good question. I actually came up with somebody that's sort of anticipating this that I talked to that's looking at building, would actually like to have to rebuild and everything, but it may also put them a little higher than our height restrictions. We do have a provision that takes into account the minimum flood elevation so you don't get penalized for that. Okay. Yeah, so. TODD BANDUCCI- So if they retrofit to a new flood elevation, that's where you start the measurement for our current code anyway. OK, that's good. TODD BANDUCCI- For those that can't afford to rebuild, I think I got an email a while back from someone. It just seems they got notice. It just seems kind of cold. Is it county or the state? Anybody reached out to them? I think I conveyed that to Josh. They just got this notice. And they're kind of like, they have no money to rebuild. Is there a way? And we're talking about 41 homes, I think, initially, I think is what you conveyed. In the major damaged category, we have about 15. So they are doing those detailed assessments on a larger number of them. But we think that we'll only end up with a very few that meet that criteria. For those, I mean, some people probably can't afford to rebuild, et cetera, but there may be some that can't. Are we able to give them information so at least they kind of know where to turn? I mean, I'd hate to be in that situation where my house is destroyed and I can't afford to build, and where do I go at this point when I don't have enough savings to – start all over do we are we providing that information to people we are working with the residents individually our floodplain manager Troy Wilcox in engineering is very hands-on with each of the individuals and in trying to kind of walk them through the process I will say that there's not a an appeal process if you meet those criteria you appeal go through a reassessment you're still substantially damaged there's not a not really a waiver process because it's, you know, it's a FEMA-driven process, but we'll do everything we can to assist people. Are we able to give them info, though, to reach out to what, I guess, the county or the state or FEMA, who they can reach out to for, I guess, further assistance financially or, I guess, if they've been displaced? So we're working on that, and I think the first step is to get the final data report back from those that are determined to be above the 49%. And then once we get the results of that data, we can ensure that we continue to reach out and communicate and then put them on the path for agencies or organizations that they could reach out to for some assistance, if any. Mayor, unless there are any other questions, that concludes our report. All right, thank you. So moving on to new business. Looking for approval of a contract for dredging Mullet Creek at Harbor Lake Drive with Stan Sisilski for $39,000. Good evening. Renee Cooper, Public Works Director. So we're going to talk about a section of creek THAT BELONGS TO THE CITY, WHICH IS LOCATED... THERE IT IS. LOCATED RIGHT HERE ON HARBOR LAKE DRIVE. SO THIS IS IN THE INDUSTRIAL PARK. SO THIS SECTION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY WAS ACTUALLY DEDICATED TO THE CITY IN THE 70S WHEN THE INDUSTRIAL PARK THERE WAS PLATTED. SO THIS IS CITY INFRASTRUCTURE. THIS IS CITY PROPERTY FOR US TO Dredge. FOLLOWING THE COURSE OF THE SUMMER AND THE COURSE OF THE SUMMER STORMS WE HAD, INCLUDING THE THREE HURRICANES, WE HAVE AN ACCUMULATION OF SOME SEDIMENT IN THIS AREA THAT NEEDS TO BE REMOVED. SO WE HAVE THE QUOTES HERE. WE OBTAINED TWO. WE ACTUALLY REQUESTED SIX FROM SIX DIFFERENT CONTRACTORS. WE RECEIVED TWO. ONE WAS FROM STAN SOSILSKI AND THE OTHER FROM SOLITUDE. STAN WAS THE LOW BIDDER, $39,120. And we propose removing at least a foot of sediment from the bottom of the creek and any other vegetation and invasive species we find. We also expect that this will be just a maintenance permit through swift mud. Any questions for Renee? Essentially, will this help with the flow of water through the creek so it reduces the potential for flooding? It should in reducing the potential because we're removing the sediment that was deposited there that wasn't there before the events over the three different hurricanes. And also we had a meeting today with FEMA and it's possible that this type of work on the city property could be reimbursable because a lot of that sediment, if not all, was caused by this series of storm events. ALL RIGHT. DOES ANYONE FROM THE AUDIENCE WANT TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? WE HAVE A MOTION. MOVE. GO AHEAD. MOVE APPROVAL OF THE DRUDGING CONTRACT. SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. MOTION PASSES 5-0. NEXT UP IS A CITY COMMISSION CONSENSUS ON A WORKSHOP SESSION AGENDA. THANK YOU, MAYOR. AND RENEE'S GOING TO PUT UP ANOTHER SLIDE FOR US. THANK YOU, RACHEL. MAYOR, VICE MAYOR, AND COMMISSIONERS, CITY COMMISSION GOAL THAT WE WORKED ON THIS PAST MAY INCLUDED THE OBJECTIVE OF UPDATING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. CITY MANAGER IS CURRENTLY WORKING TO SCHEDULE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT WORKSHOP WITH THE CITY COMMISSION AND WORKING TO PROPOSE THE FOLLOWING AGENDA ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED AT THE UPCOMING WORKSHOP. SO FOR THIS AGENDA ITEM TONIGHT, I JUST WANT TO ALLOW THE BOARD TO SEE WHAT ITEMS THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT OR DISCUSSED. SOME ITEMS, MYSELF AND THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR HAVE HEARD FROM THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY OR OUR RELATIONSHIP WITH THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. SO, COLLECTIVELY, THOSE ITEMS ARE ON THE PROPOSED AGENDA THAT I PUT BEFORE YOU TONIGHT. THE IDEA IS REALLY, IF THERE'S ANY 50,000-FOOT VIEW QUESTIONS, WE'RE HAPPY TO ENTERTAIN THEM, The idea was to see, are we capturing some of the items you want us to discuss in a workshop? Is there anything missing? Is there anything you'd like to take off? I'll start from the top just as we go through it. Adding childcare to M1 is an accessory use. Alleyway improvements and maintenance requirements. Balcony and porch setback requirements clarification. Review of wet zone regulations. Review of specific development standards and community redevelopment zoning districts, including destination resort development standards. landscape buffer standards, food truck schedule and regulation updates, provide for accessory retail food sales in the SC2 district, and various updates to the tree ordinance, adjust protected tree species list, define boundary trees, review fee in lieu of provisions. Once again, these are just ideas to put out there for us to discuss at a workshop or upcoming workshops, and to then... put in the queue of updates to our land development code. I've reached out to the group on possible dates, and I will reach out again with this final date, but I believe the proposed workshop date would be February 24th, 2025, which is a Monday at 6 p.m. So I'll follow up with the group again, too. I'd like to, in light of, I guess, some text messages I've gotten recently, I'd like to... of discuss situations where a developer comes in and clear cuts a lot, where there are multiple trees that aren't even in the way of the blueprint. I'd like to see a process where some of those trees that are not going to be necessarily in the way of the development itself, We're not talking about a resident who needs to take down a tree to add a pool. We're talking about someone that is here purely for profit to clear-cut a lot and build whatever home they want to build on it. I'm not trying to stop them from building it, but I think to kind of, I guess, so that the community is not so stunned when their neighbor just clear-cuts because a developer purchased a lot and clear-cuts it to put a home on it. It's just stunning to some of the people that live in the south side when that happens. So I don't know if there's something we can do to address that issue. It's more the developer than just a homeowner that lives in Safety Harbor because you just don't see that typically from homeowners. It's someone coming in and just for profit. So I'd like to address that somehow. And that would fall under the last bullet item. We actually had a good discussion with the Planning and Zoning Board last Wednesday about tree protection. They're very interested in continuing that discussion, specifically with regard to tree replacement and tree removal. So certainly we can add that to that topic. I've got one. We're assessing trees that are on our right-of-way that are endangered, right? We're compiling a list. Correct. We have a tree inventory. We do have a tree inventory that was done a few years ago that has a GIS location for all of the map of all of the trees and their condition. Okay, because I'd like to be proactive rather than getting the hysterical call that this tree has fallen and the city has to take it because it's the city's. I'd like to know ahead of time what trees are in danger and proactively take care of those trees before getting that anguish call that it fell on the car. If it's ours. Sure. We'll work on that. So I'd like that to be part of this goal. OK. That we'd be informed what we're doing about city trees that are in danger. OK. All right. Thanks. Yes, ma'am. Just a couple that I know. I assume it falls under this, but when we were approving the use of the residence on 2nd Street South that was turning into a commercial, we had a lot of discussion around fee in lieu of parking spaces. Would that be something that's brought up here just so we're on the same page? I feel like it might come up again. And then the... The accessory retail food sales and SC2, is that the crooked thumb area? Do I understand that right? Yes, sir. Okay. Okay. We can get into details when we get there, so I'll make sure that was on the list. Understood. Thank you. Well, whatever happened to the, we were talking about back in May or so about the social media, you know, having the harassment and stuff. Where is that at? That's. There is an amendment I will be bringing forward to your policies and procedures that is sort of about that, but also as a result of a litigation. But internally, that's really with updated HR policies. And so there's just been a little bit of a change. So I thought it might make sense to wait with the new HR director for the internal policies. But for the board approval, there's a change for obscenity. We have to add a definition and stuff. So it's coming with that. When's that? When the HR person is coming in? Well, that's the internal policy. So I was just trying to have them align. I'd say I'm still about one to two months from finalizing that. So I can look at doing the policy. separate from that for the board? Yeah. I have a draft that I just haven't shown you. So are you looking for consensus on that date? February 24th? If the group wants to do that now, that's fine. Or I could follow up with each of you. We have time. Pretty much this agenda item was just to see if there was anything I was missing from the items you wanted to discuss at the workshop or anything you wanted to add or any edits. But I feel like we're getting some good direction. Okay. You can just send us an email and we'll coordinate through that. Absolutely. Okay. All righty. And last item, I guess we have a discussion and feedback on the compensation and benefits. Yes, sir. Mayor and commissioners, the city authorized the pay study to be completed by a third-party vendor in early 2024. PayPoint HR LLC was hired to conduct the pay study in the summer of 2024 and finalized their project this past fall. The pay study and the benefit study was shared with the city commission and all staff. A representative from PayPoint HR reported out to the city commission during a workshop session on November 4th. The purpose of this agenda item is to allow further discussion and feedback from the commission and to allow the city manager to gain consensus on next step desires of the commission, if any, at this time. Mayor, I'm happy to, you know, I know when PayPoint was last year, it was a workshop, it ended, and I know there was some discussion from the board. So that's why I put this agenda on here this evening. IF I HAVE IDEAS, IF THE BOARD NEEDED ME TO THROW OUT SOME STRATEGIES THAT I HAVE, TWO STRATEGIES THAT I'VE IDENTIFIED AND SOME TACTICS TO GET THERE TO HELP THE DISCUSSION START FLOWING, I'D BE HAPPY TO DO THAT. I THINK THAT'S A GOOD IDEA. OKAY, GREAT. THANKS. SO, MAYOR, I THINK A LOT OF THIS, FIRST OFF, APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR PAYPOINT TO COME IN. YOU KNOW, WE HAD THIS FORMAL SURVEY I will tell you, department heads have done ongoing informal surveys as well about pay. So I think on behalf of staff, I don't think we were really shocked about where we were in the report that we got back. And I think the overarching two strategies that I would recommend to the commission to discuss, and happy to receive any feedback if you have it, is I feel some of these strategies I have are sustainable, and we didn't get here overnight. And it's not going to be solved overnight. And I think this gets solved over time, or not necessarily solved, but improved upon, that we pursue continuous improvement and as the budget allows. So two main strategies really at the 50,000 foot view I'd like to throw out there are reviewing the pay scales and editing pay scales with a target, a bull's eye, where we were at the 40% discussion with PayPoint where they say we're 40% And that's what I'm basing, that's sort of my reference point. But focusing on bullseye, a target of 50%, but also understanding how fluid and dynamic that could be, that if we have a target goal of 50%, but we have an acceptable range of 45% to 55% that we're, hey, this is, you know, we'd like to be there, we'd like to go that way, we may not be able to hit that benchmark exact, but we know we as staff, know where the board would like us to be with our pay plan. I also think, and more so in the immediate right now, is identifying critical function jobs in the city that are experiencing long-term vacancies and low applicants and work to correct those. And there are some various tactics we could use to do that regarding pay. Some itemized tactics I feel to support those two overarching strategies are updating policy on evaluations and merit raises, reviewing and updating policy on future COLAs and pay scale edits as they relate to the consumer price index, monitor for needed equity adjustments for current employees, considering the need for across-the-board adjustments at times. I think we should review our benefits. I think there's things that we have. I will tell you I believe we have great medical insurance. great benefits, but there are some that could use some improvements, such as tuition reimbursement and maybe even our leave policies. But I think outside of that, too, right, there is a cost, there's a lot of demand, there's a lot of other projects and programs going on, and I think, as I said in the beginning, we do this over time, what is sustainable and what the budget allows, and that we explore revenue streams over time to support these changes, and we do that to support minimal change to the millage rate. And to support minimum rates, to support the idea that we're very conscious of our great millage rate, that opportunities, there may be some low-hanging fruit opportunities, such as pursuing a cost recovery, getting more aggressive with our cost recovery and grants outreach to bring in some available funds that are out there. Evaluating our historical use of reserve funds to help us out. And then also recognizing, as I said, it's really a multi-year implementation plan. The biggest takeaway I got from PayPoint was, and I think you've seen this as we've been working together over, I know it's only been two months, and then there is, you know, since May, is that I think I would like to bring the board to a decision that lasts, you know, a decision that isn't a six-month or a one-year fix, but something that lasts five to seven years and that we're comfortable with, that the budget supports, and that, you know, I've talked about nudge and push during my interviews, and I think this is a worthwhile nudge and push and a good target. Those would be my bullet points. Thank you, Mayor, for letting me share those. Thank you. I'll take a crack at it, too. Thank you, Josh. Thank you for a lot of that. I think we've got... a couple of decisions to make. First and foremost is, what are we going to do now that we have this information in our hands? And what are we going to do with this year's budget according to that? And then we can make decisions on how we fix it for the long term as the next budget cycles come up. So I'm going to repeat some of what city manager said. But the study targeted 50th percentile. I agree with the 50th percentile target. I think that fits. I appreciate your suggestion of creating a 45 to 55 percentile tolerance. That's probably good, mostly because not all of our positions are going to fit one-to-one with other municipalities. The guy that did the study said exactly the same thing. So if we hit the 40th percentile overall and had 10% to go, that 10% equaled about $1.1 million. Since that study, we've had a 3% COLA and we're scheduled to have a 4% merit increase. I have to imagine that We made up some ground on that 10% towards that 50 percentile with those adjustments that were already budgeted. And then we've got $300,000 set aside this fiscal year to react to this study. I noticed on the phase implementation, it suggested kind of the first three steps would cost around $328,000. I have to think that the ground we made up with the COLA and the merit increase might drop that 328 down to around 300, and we can still get the objectives of that phase one approach for this year. And I think that would just align really well by following the study that we paid to have done, using the money that we allocated for it without overreaching. And then what I'd like to see in our next budget cycle is sort of this option to say, what's it going to cost to get us the second phase as recommended by the study? or what's it going to cost to go ahead and get us all the way through and square, it might be worth spending the money on the next cycle as opposed to dragging this out a few more years. Now, on that phase one implementation, it mentions about, I think, 81 positions that are substantially low that would need to be addressed. And I agree with you. I think we should put a priority on vacancies that haven't been filled. Now, that will ripple to some. compression issues, so kind of target, I think a lot of them are in public works, that mostly are frontline folks that we're recruiting for, but they're leaving a short staff because we're advertising too low. I'd suggest taking a look at those first so that we get staffed up and can serve the community better. All right, that's my thoughts. Is he correct that the COLA and the MERIT were not factored into the PACE study, and that once they're done, that will help make up ground? I'd have to look at that. My thought would be is that when the pay study came out in fiscal year 24, that once fiscal year 25 comes in, everything shifts. Yes, our pay, our merit, but my question would be is should not the pay study numbers also shift when you came into a new fiscal year based on when that study was done? I guess it's, you know, is the study old? At what point does the study, is it old? Or at what point does, you're saying, you're almost saying like, let's assume all the other cities are doing the same thing. So that, you know, everyone's rising at the same rate. So we're still at the 40 percentile. Is that what I'm hearing? Right. You would have that. So, but I think to honor the commissioner's prompt there is that, you know, we could check that out mathematically. and see where we sit based on the study, where people are at now, where positions are at now, and see, you know, how much ground was caught up. I'd imagine you'd have to do a whole other study, though, to find out if we made up any ground to see what... Yeah, I think we'd probably have to do another study within probably three years or something like that, something just to find out where we're at with the numbers. Well, I wasn't proposing another study. I was just saying to check that theory... I think you could use some informal, not necessarily that whole formal survey, but you could do some comparisons with like-for-like in the county that we use for informal surveys. And we also, Commissioner Burnett, we do have finance running some of those options already looking at future costs and expenses. I think we can, and we paid for this study, and they created a structure, and they chose the municipalities that they wanted to compare us to. That could be our shortcut. to go do some of our own research and see where we're at. TODD BANDUCCI- Right. Could be just simple reaching out of, hey, for fiscal year 25, what were your budgeted adjustments? TODD BANDUCCI- I guess the question is, would to do a third, would the 320, you spoke about 328,000. TODD BANDUCCI- Yeah, 328 is what the recommendation was for the three objectives on the phase one. TODD BANDUCCI- Nice to implement that now. and then kind of see where we're at with the implementation of the COLAs and everything else we did just to see how far away are we and to target those positions that we're having difficulty with to increase that and make sure we stay ahead of the curve because obviously we're not filling those positions because we're underpaying in comparison with other municipalities in the county. I think that's probably, I'd like to see it jump into that because we did pay for the study and kind of conveying to our staff and employees we're going to jump into it and we're going to try and be competitive countywide. I think it would be appropriate to try and figure out how to get there within our budget. So would it work for you if we gave you a number of how much we want to bite off of that? and then you figure out the best way to allocate it right now or? I think, let me interject here, because we're falling into the same trap that we've fallen into since I've been on this commission. Up here, this commission here is dictating everybody's increases through COLAs and MERITs. This should be something natural between the city manager, the supervisors, and the actual staff. We're going out and saying, okay, We're going to give everybody a call of 3%, a merit of 3%, right? And everybody's whatever. We get it out of our hands and stuff. Now we're doing the same thing. I think it's got to be done on an individual basis based on merit and based on the supervisor's objectives. We need to empower the people that are doing the management, the people who's – this is a relationship between management, the supervisors, and the employees. The best employees – get a higher increase than the ones that aren't performing. But wasn't this your understanding of we're on the lower side and we're just trying to be 45% to 55%? Let me finish. I do understand we've got to get to that 50%, so there has to be some adjustment. But we haven't really addressed what the issue is. The issue is that... We need, you know, there needs to be a better program to keep the employees on track. So what are we going to do after we do this, right, in four years? They're going to fall behind again, and then we're going to pay for another pay study, and then come up, you know, just start doing the same thing. It needs to be a natural flow. That's great, but you need a number to that. First of all, the rate is going to be modified. The ranges need to be modified. They need to be increased by CPI every year so that we maintain everybody within at least living conditions. We also need to empower the supervisors, managers, directors on scaling individuals. you know, the more talented individuals will get compensated, get higher raises than the ones that are falling behind. Obviously, with reviews, you know, people that, you know, you review somebody, you ask them to increase their performance. So those kind of things, I think, need to be in place. As far as going forward, catching up is like, What are we, a million dollars or something? 1.1. Yeah. I mean, I'm all for going 300, 300, 300, you know, over three years. And, you know, to get them up to 50%. You know, you can go, we can go the merit. Also, like, from my personal perspective, I'm against colas. I think everything should be a merit. Right. Instead of saying 3% cola, 4% merit, just say 7% merit, you know. and empower the supervisors to compensate, increase people as they see fit. So, you know, saying that, I mean, obviously there's some priorities here. You know, there should be, you know, obviously the first batch should be based on priorities on whether you're short or whether we're short. you know, what department is the shortest, is below the average or the median. So with all that said, and understand I'm in a state of complete relaxation right now, what do you propose we get the money for all that? So there's three things that should be done, right? There's three ways. The first thing is that we should employ a grant writer. We do have lobbyists in place right now, but the problem is the lobbyist doesn't know what to chase. So we need a grant writer. And that grant writer, not only can he do grants, but maybe we should put a central procurement, make that person also the central procurement person. So not only is he going out looking for grants, but he's also centralizing the procurement department. We have right now, we have a lot of, Obviously, the city has a lot of assets, trucks, stuff like that. What do we need? What don't we need? How can we maximize everything? The second thing is efficiencies. Efficiencies within each department. Where can we find efficiencies? In fairness to the City of Safety Harbor, we contracted and we employed everybody. We didn't trick anybody. There was basically... a salary negotiated, and the person came. There's a position that person has to abide by. We want to make sure that position is the person is adequate enough to fulfill that position. So there's efficiencies. There's also, I think initially, we may have to dip into reserves. And then the last one is the higher millage rate. But I think that the millage should be the last one. So grant writing, procurement efficiencies within each department. Then we got reserves. And then lastly, we got the millage. This is not, I mean, listen, at the end of the day, this is not going to be easy. It's not going to be easy. see what other cities our size have a grant writer position. I haven't heard of any, but does it mean there aren't? Because there's the Goldsmore, Dunedin, Tarpon. I've had experience when I worked for City of Lario. They had a grant writer. It is a common position or part of an existing job, but I'd be happy to explore that. I think it would be worthwhile for someone to consider. I also think revenue-wise, beyond millage rate, the fees for services was the largest piece of the pie for our revenue. And it would make sense if we're paying our staff more, that our fees for services is going to go up along with it. And we do have staff. I know Public Works does a lot of good work internally in their department seeking out grants. But there are other opportunities out there that if we had a dedicated person, it would help. And I do feel that would be an approach where it would be as we do the budgeting process for fiscal year 26. The way I'm writing my notes and capturing the feedback from the group is really those that I tie a lot of this. The way I think, I'd like to have not just for me, but who follows us down the road and just a clear policy on our compensation classification policy. We have an existing one. And a lot of these items I'm capturing I think will be great to edit to move forward. There's the immediate, and then there's the long-term. So items I'm hearing for long-term, looking at our evaluation program and how we do it, how our supervisors are trained and how they're evaluating others, how we do our raising the pay scales via the CPI, and then staff's in the room and listen to the ideas, too, about how the board feels about ways we could generate revenue in future years via the budgeting process, whether it's via fees or by positions. In the immediate, I'm seeing sort of some homework for us that we come back. Obviously, as I say, the numbers we got from the report, we also have, you know, the consultant did work where we know us in finance, every employee position and what they're paid at that snapshot when we got that study. Well, obviously, it's been a couple months, so a lot of that has changed. Some employees aren't here. Some employees are still here. People have gotten raises. So I think in the immediate for this fiscal year, I think we have some homework to do. Mayor, what I'm hearing is sort of the option of looking at a third of the program to see how far we can get with the current 300,000 we booked and come back. If you'd like, I'd be happy to come back to the group on how that looks. CAN I THROW IN SOMETHING? AN OBVIOUS POINT, PROBABLY, FROM DISCUSSIONS THAT WE'VE HAD, IT'S POSSIBLE THAT WHEN WE DO NEW HIRES AFTER RETIREMENTS, WE CAN LOOK AT THE SKILL SET, AND WE CAN ADD GRANT WRITING INTO THE SKILL SET OF SOMEBODY WHO WOULD COME IN TO RUN THE DEPARTMENT. LOOK FOR SOMEBODY WHO HAS EXPERIENCE WRITING GRANTS FOR PREVIOUS DEPARTMENTS. RIGHT, I THINK, YOU KNOW... IT'S OBVIOUS. WITH THAT AND SEEING WHERE WE WOULD HOUSE THEM, WORKING WITH FINANCE AND WHAT OPPORTUNITIES ARE OUT THERE, Typically, a type of grant person really needs entree into every department. They need to be here, sitting in the room, hearing the flavor of the city, knowing the budget, knowing the CIP, working with our lobbyists, building that relationship. And then as items come up through various agencies, whether they're federal or from the state, or even private grant opportunities to be able to strike when the iron's hot to pursue those. I know in the fire department, we did those in the past couple years. Public Works is doing them. But there are opportunities out there that You know, you look at the time, like, well, it's only $5,000 to $10,000. Right now, the amount of work to go into a $5,000 grant doesn't behoove some departments because of the labor needed. Well, if you had that dedicated person who could do multiple small grants, or even if you had somebody working on a fire truck grant for $1.5 million, that would be a great grant opportunity. But just trying to find the capacity where somebody's on it every day, I think, is something worthwhile for us to consider down the road. Legitimately, if you think a grant writer will get $1 or $2 million with our lobbyists a year. We got money. It was all vetoed. A lot of it was vetoed. I'm open to seeing if we have a position that can also take on that responsibility rather than hiring a full-time person. I mean, maybe we just need someone writing Mackenzie Scott some emails and letters. She's, like, throwing around a lot of money these days, giving away money to organizations that haven't even asked for it. I think Red Cross got $50 million or something in Tampa Bay or something. But anyway, yeah, I think that's an avenue to explore. But I guess you need some immediate feedback on the pay study. So I think that maybe perhaps the short term is, you know, what is the group's, what is the board's pleasure on looking at the short term? I'm hearing... You know, the pay study, I'm sorry, Mayor, did I interrupt you? The pay study, the multi-year is three years, or, you know, looking at how can we implement year one and then providing options to the board for future budget years, whether it's, you know, does the remaining two-thirds take two fiscal years, or what does it look like for cost projections to implement it, you know, the total package, the rest of it in fiscal year 20? six, and then seeing how that affect the overall budget. But I think the immediate is looking at a third of that, seeing how far that $300,000 could get us this year. I'd be happy to work on that and bring that back. TODD BANDUCCI- And as Jacob pointed out, that's on top of the coal and merit that we've already agreed to. Is everyone good with that? All right, so that concludes the regular meeting. Moving to commission reports. Commissioner Diaz? COMMISSIONER DIAS- Yeah, I want to reach out to Liam Branham. a member of the fire department who took sick last week. And, you know, our prayers with him. I think he's finally pulling through, but yet he's pretty severe, his sickness. And best wishes to him and his family during that time. On that, it was the third Friday. Had a pretty good time. Spent some time with the commissioners with the RE-MAX grand opening and also at Paula's Accent, a soft opening. also. And then lastly, I tell you what, the last one I'm just going to skip. I'll just talk privately on that one. I'm good. CLIFF HANGER. Commissioner Burnett. Thank you. I got to see commissioners and Commissioner Diaz out there at the RE-MAX party for Third Friday. I thought that was really great. Got to pop into Paula's. If you haven't been to Paula's, it looks great. Great new place. And she's actually building this outdoor patio with the idea that it's a pass-through for anybody that wants to kind of take that behind the, you know, Tinto's route. Nice welcoming place. So really appreciate it when our local businesses want to beautify and provide space for all of our residents. So kudos to her. Made it down to Third Friday right after that. My favorite thing about Third Friday is still that kids run around like crazy and have a good time and they're safe at the gazebo. I know we get a lot of feedback, people worried about how big the Third Friday can get and everything else. But, you know, we still see our kids running around the gazebo and feel comfortable with them being downtown in this community and just always appreciate that. I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR MENTIONING, IT WAS ON MY LIST FOR THE REPORT, BUT THE CASH ACCESS FOR EMPLOYEES, YOU TOUCHED ON IT ON THE HURRICANE RELIEF, SO REALLY APPRECIATE YOU AND ALL THE STAFF THAT WORK ON FINDING WAYS TO ALLOW EMPLOYEES TO TAKE CARE OF THEMSELVES, JUST GIVING THEM ACCESS TO CASH THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE ANYWAY BY JUST ADJUSTING A FEW POLICIES. SO I REALLY THANK YOU FOR THAT. It has the ability to help some employees that need it. I want to commend all the firemen that were here today and received their Medal of Honor. Their feats that day were quite heroic and incredible, so I was really proud to have them a part of this city and proud to be a part of their receiving that medal. I was at the Great American Teach-In last Wednesday at Safety Harbor Elementary. I also, I think I saw Deputy Davis over there. Okay, I thought so. You know, I live right across the street and I heard y'all throwing those sirens on while I was up there working, but it was fantastic. The kids had a great time. I also saw fire department there showing off for the kids. I had an opportunity to go... They combined my two daughters' classes, first grade and third grade, into one big class, and I opted to teach about local government to these kids. So it was fun to see the scouts out here today as well. We had a mock city council meeting. We put together a commission out of the students. We let the audience be heard. We went through the proposal and voting process with all of them. They had a great time. I had a really great time teaching them. We came up with a recommendation for a new event in Safety Harbor that would be a puppy adoption, puppy fashion parade. This is what Ms. Halstead and Ms. Matthews' class would recommend, so we'll save that for another time should we want to put it on as a real agenda item. Josh has got it on his to-do list. That's all I've got for you today. Thanks. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Thank you. Great. Thanks go out to our veterans. We had Veterans Day last week. And so thank you for all those who have served to keep this country free and great. Was going to ask earlier, someone brought up the pier. As far as a timeline, people keep asking, when's the pier coming back? I'm like, I don't know. Any idea? I mean, we're talking one year. We're talking two years. I mean, forget a design and changes. I mean, just getting the funding, getting the insurance, help from FEMA. We're kind of just looking out a window at the horizon. Are we talking about two years out? Yeah, I would say adding in, I go by the fact that once we have a bid secured by somebody to build it, Their estimate is 12 to 18 months. So I think two, I'll say two, two and a half years. Are we going to have to re-permit regardless of whether we build the exact to the T what was there or change it? I mean, we still need to have it re-permitted because we're probably going to have to. I'm going to say no, and I'll let Rene jump in to fill in any gaps if I'm missing any. One of the issues right now is we're waiting on a firm to come from Texas to help us with the salvage and debris removal. They'll bring scuba divers, a barge. They'll look for debris in the water. Because of how that was built and what it's soaked with, they consider it a hazardous material and it has to be disposed of somewhere else. So that's one project. The other project is the build project. The city commission in August of 2022, I know we've done some research, and I appreciate the Leisure Services Director for doing this, is the board approved the design for the pier, because I know that's been discussed. We've been hearing, you know, we'd like to weigh in on the design. That was approved in August of 2022, actually, before any of this happened. We're more than welcome to go back and look at those documents. Anything we do to go back and look at the design, which edits... the proposal to go out to bid will add a lot of time to that timetable. And then you may, I'm going to look at her, you may risk having to get new additional permits because you're not doing like for like. So yes, if you're looking for a timeframe, I'll throw out a very rough one of two to two and a half years. It's just keeping it all the same because I know we did set aside quite a bit of money. to redo the pier. We weren't going to change it. We were going to basically just keep it the same, is my understanding. I believe the walkway would have been a little bit wider. Do you mind if I jump in? Go ahead. So I had that town hall event on Saturday. And some people suggested, and Julie from the audience was here, and she's suggesting getting community input on the design. And is that something we want to entertain? I'm not sure how I feel about that. But I just thought the question needed to be asked of the commission if we want to go down that road or not. So I think initially I wanted, I was pushing to kind of create something more than what we were going to do to refurbish it. And the cost, I think that's the biggest issue. I mean, we're talking about just implementing the pay study to increase pay across the board for employees and staff. But now you're talking about, you know, so I'm all for creating something grandiose, but I think you've got to figure out what's the cost going to be. And I think, you know, it was huge just to refurbish the pier. And if we change anything, it's going to be more than two, two and a half years. I mean, you're talking about, like, design. We're going to have to... put out to bid, you know, we're going to have to get public input, put out to bid a design, get that in, and then the permitting and everything else. We could run parallel tracks. Like while we're working on the demolition of it, which could take six months, in theory we could put it out to the city and say, do we want to keep the design or improve it? I mean, these things are tricky, though, because I can wait for my commission report to expand. No, no, but I just, my fear at this point, because I remember talking about, well, let's do something a little bit more grandiose. Let's change it up. And the cost is such a huge driver, I guess. If the community is prepared, you know, essentially to raise the ad valorem rate, I mean, because we're going to end up having to raise it. So it's either that or you've got to borrow. But I think that's going to be so expensive that... The other item with permitting is we did the design in 2022. It was requested to design the permitting. So we have permits in place. So it would be re-permitting, which a year to re-permit it. So anything outside of what we've already approved would add to it. There is no peer right now. So yes, if there's the option to go through the whole design, we'd have to get community input, then redesign, then re-permitting based on that new design. We could give you a timeline on what that would look like if we were to do a public charrette, bring people in, and how that would look, and community input, all the way to re-permitting. But I think you're ahead in about a year and a half if you did that. I'm not against it. I just think that you might be opening Pandora's box for cost. I would love to hear community input on this, but I remember it was before, y'all decided on it before I got elected, but I was in on it from the Parks and Rec board perspective. So I've been talking to residents for a really long time about what's going to be the new pier, and it's the same pier with a wider walkway. And I've gotten almost no disappointed reactions. Everybody says, that sounds great. That sounds nice. If we're not going to be the new St. Pete Pier and have a restaurant and everything else, that sounds nice, put back what we had. I think the time frame is where we're going to get a lot more people upset if we drag this on for five years or more. And then if it drags on for five years, it really better blow them away when it gets here. If any of us are sitting around, yeah. I did say, you know, feedback at Saturday. received and getting the same feedback here and I know staff is hearing it too that you know the desire for input from residents and build as we identify projects going forward I don't think is missed on any on anybody this one the timing is definitely a challenge but items down the road we think you heard in you know from that from the town hall meeting we did was we want you know the I RECEIVED SOME CRITICISM FOR THE DESIGN, WHETHER IT BE A MALL AT CREEK PARK, THE LIBRARY, THE PIER, PROBABLY SEVERAL OTHER THINGS. BUT I APPRECIATE YOU REMINDING ME THAT WE DID DISCUSS THIS IN 2022 ALREADY. SO ONE OF MY FRUSTRATIONS WAS, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE WERE ON THE TWO-YARD LINE ON THE LIBRARY, AND THEN THEY CAME TO THE MEETING AND SAID, HEY, THE DESIGN SUCKS. YOU NEED TO LOOK AT IT AND SAY, HOLD ON, WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THIS DESIGN FOR LIKE TWO YEARS ALREADY. Like, where were you at the beginning of the process? And now it's like, so I appreciate you reminding us that we had this discussion on the design. We already did it. We already got permitted for the design. And so it's like, all right, now that you visually don't see the peer anymore, it's like, hey, what's going on with the design? Well, we already had that discussion. And if we operate like that moving forward, every decision we make, we're going to be going back and saying, oh, now that the public's engaged, at the very last step in the process, and now they want to change it. It's like, well, somehow we need to get the, I don't know if it's a communication thing or just a paying attention thing. I haven't had anybody ask me about changing up what was there. All I've had is people say, when's it coming back? They don't care. They just want to, everybody loves strolling out there. They love being on the bay. They don't care what, it's a pier. People fish on it. People hang out. People, you know, go out there and, you know. Enjoy a coffee or a beer or whatever they do, but I just think I haven't gotten any complaints about that. It's such an iconic piece of our town, too. I think we will draw far less criticism for replacing what we had than trying to come up with something new. Because something new is going to be... Which is going to delay it. Look what happened to St. Pete here. They argued for years, and it was these past... I think now that I'm listening to the commission, I'm good with where we are. We should share. If I might throw in, the fishermen share with the manatee watchers who share with the walkers. We're used to a multipurpose stretch, and people are just missing the stretch. They want the boards back. They don't need anything fancy. I used to go out there all the time, and I've never seen a conflict where the fishermen's competing for space with somebody who just wanted to gaze out at the manatees or anything like that. Anyway, that's all I have. Thank you. Thank you for letting me join in. Nancy? Yes, thank you, Mayor. I was very appreciative of the veterans program. I always am so happy to see Mr. Cooper, Joe Cooper, get our equipment, our sound equipment out there. And, Mayor, I'm always very appreciative when the mayor gives words, speaks to the veterans assembled. I think they really like it. We often see the same faces, but sometimes we see additional faces out there on Veterans Day. And I was so happy to see the kids, Ms. Carstensen from Safety Harbor Elementary. She brings out these kids, and they're just so lively. They're so full of just energy, and they just love being out there performing and honoring. And I also had some contact with children at a tree planting event at Mullet Creek Park. A company called Accenture from Tampa offered a volunteer opportunity for employees. And they partnered up with a group called Take Mar. And Take Mar organized it. Accenture paid for the trees. And they must have had at least 60 trees. And they had about 50 people out there. And so very large trees, they put two or three people on them. And small trees put people like myself on them. And we're going to be able to see that action. We're going to be able to see those trees grow. And I kind of smiled because a young guy said, I'm going to bring my firstborn out here to see this tree. He was taking a picture of the spot where he put the tree. And I thought, wow, that's just optimism. That's just really nice. It wasn't even that he was bringing his little children out to see. And one little boy wanted his picture made with me. And I thought, wow. I was feeling a little discouraged that day. The timing just happened to hit on a down day for me. And I thought, well, this is really good. I might be dirty, but this kid wants to see even a dirty commissioner. And so I just thank you, Accenture, and thank you, Take Mar. I wanted to say that. And I also have a compliment. Thank you, Commissioner Diaz. because you got on the email in a very tactful way. You answered a resident who was disgruntled, and you really helped me because after reading your response, I was able to craft a response that was much better than the Irish coming out because you know I have the fist. I really, and poor city manager Stefancic has to hear the first version of what I might respond, but... These are pressure times, is what I wanted to say to everybody out there. Please think before you type an email, because really, you don't want, there's that cliche, you never know what walk somebody's walking or what somebody's experiencing until you kind of scratch the surface. So you really don't know. So you don't know about all that Ms. Cooper has been doing for Hurricane. recovery and what her people have done staying up what was it 23 hours in a row so before you respond to your immediate concern of that second it might be very smart to reflect and i just liked your offer come in and talk to us and call me but please be respectful and that was a very very good way to say it so thank you specifically and that's my report Thank you. And you all mentioned the Veterans Day ceremony, so I'll just add a different angle and thank the American Legion Post 238 and the VFW Post 10093 for hosting the event. You all did a great job. And the American Legion had an event afterwards dedicating a parking spot there at their building that I was happy to be a part of. I want to thank everyone that came out to the Cup of Joe with Joe and Josh Town Hall Several people pointed out that it was a much greater attendance than in the past. And I can only just assume it's because the only thing that I changed was I brought Josh along with me. So I'll just call a couple of Joe and Josh or something next time. I don't know. But thank you all. It's good feedback. And it was good for us to hear it. And I appreciate the comments, the concerns, the constructive feedback. And we'll see what we can do on all of that. Third Friday was great, great weather. The RE-MAX opening was great. And I'm just happy to be a part of all that. So thank you. That's my report. Josh? Yeah, just two quick items. Just a reminder to the group, if you choose to participate, the Ugly Holiday Sweater Commission meeting is fast approaching December 16th. So you still have time to go shopping. And I just want to say I wish everybody a happy Thanksgiving. Two things. I want to say I'm thankful for the commission I get to serve. And also, I'm thankful for the department heads and staff. They have the privilege of leading and working with and the great work they do for us and for the community. And whether they're here, whatever department they're in, this was a busy season. And they do great work and continue to do great work. So I just want to say that. Thank you. That's my report. Just I am going to keep track of Live Local more than I already have been for everybody. There is some litigation but there's not been any real action but I'll give you a summary on those between Pasco County and the Village of Val Harbor and why they were challenged and just keep you abreast of any changes. I know last year there was like a glitch bill. We're hoping this year that there's a glitch scale back bill. I'm not sure that's going to happen quite yet but It is something I've been watching, but I'll start giving you updates as they come and if they are anything meaningful. So I understand the concerns with that. Thank you. All right, everyone. Thank you. Meeting's adjourned.