[00:00:04] YES. KRAMER'S GOING TO DO IT. WILL YOU DO THE INVOCATION? GOOD MORNING AND WELCOME TO THIS CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING. [1) CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL] WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 24TH, 2025. IT'S A VERY SPECIAL DAY FOR US AND COUNCIL. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. COUNCIL MEMBER BARTON HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER CRISMON HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER KRAMER. HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER. PENNIMAN HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER. PETRANOFF HERE. VICE MAYOR HUTCHINSON HERE. MAYOR. HEITMAN HERE. THANK YOU. THE INVOCATION TODAY WILL BE GIVEN BY COUNCIL MEMBER KRAMER, FOLLOWED BY THE PLEDGE LED BY VICE MAYOR. [2) INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE] DO YOU WANT ME TO JUST DO IT FROM HERE? WHEREVER YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE. OH, I DID, I DID NOT SEE YOU. THANK YOU. SAY HI. BUT WE WERE ADJUSTING THE THE THE THE LOOK, MADAM JAMES HENDERSON, THANK YOU FOR JOINING US. MADAM MAYOR, MEMBERS OF COUNCIL, WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE. WE KNOW IT'S NOT EASY WHAT YOU DO AND WE THANK YOU FOR IT. LET'S PRAY. HEAVENLY FATHER, WE'RE GRATEFUL TO PAUSE AT THE START OF THIS MEETING AND ACKNOWLEDGE YOUR PRESENCE. THANK YOU FOR THE GIFT OF LIFE, FOR THIS BEAUTIFUL CITY OF NAPLES, AND FOR THE PRIVILEGE OF CALLING IT HOME. AS WE GATHER HERE TODAY, WE REMEMBER THAT REAL WISDOM COMES FROM YOU. WE ASK THAT EVERY WORD SPOKEN, EVERY DECISION MADE BE GUIDED BY YOUR TRUTH AND YOUR GRACE. LORD, WE LIFT UP THESE LEADERS WHO SERVE ON THIS CITY COUNCIL. THEIR ROLE ISN'T EASY AND THE CHOICES THEY FACE OFTEN AFFECT SO MANY LIVES. GIVE THEM CLARITY IN THEIR THINKING. STRENGTHEN THEIR CHARACTER AND COURAGE TO DO WHAT'S RIGHT. LET THE LEADERSHIP ALWAYS REFLECT HUMILITY, INTEGRITY, AND COMMITMENT TO SERVE THE ENTIRE CITY. WE ALSO PRAY FOR THE PEOPLE OF NAPLES, THE FAMILIES, THE WORKERS, THE BUSINESS OWNERS, AND EVERY NEIGHBOR WHO MAKES THIS COMMUNITY WHAT IT IS. REMIND US THAT GOVERNMENT IS NOT JUST ABOUT POLICIES AND LAWS, BUT ABOUT PEOPLE AND RELATIONSHIPS. HELP US TO SEE ALL THE IMPORTANCE OF WORKING TOGETHER WITH FAIRNESS AND COMPASSION. AND LET US NEVER FORGET THAT WHEN WE SERVE ONE ANOTHER, WE REFLECT YOUR HEART. AMEN. PLEASE JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE. 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. MR. YOUNG. [3) SET AGENDA (add or remove items)] ITEM NUMBER THREE. SETTING THE AGENDA. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. A COUPLE ITEMS. THERE WAS A SUPPLEMENT THAT WAS PUBLISHED ADDING AN AGENDA ITEM, AND IT WILL BE HEARD IT'S ITEM 12 D AND IT IS A FOLLOW UP DISCUSSION REGARDING DREDGING OF LAKE EIGHT AND NINE. WE ARE HEARING THAT AS A TIME CERTAIN 2 P.M. AND IN ADDITION TO THAT, THE ATTACHMENTS INCLUDED AGENDA MEMORANDUM, ENERGY RESOURCES LETTER AND INDEPENDENT ENGINEERING REVIEW. IN ADDITION TO THAT, WE DO HAVE A TIME CERTAIN FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 1230. SO WE WILL BE BREAKING FOR THAT FOR RISK MANAGEMENT ITEM. AND THEN FINALLY THERE WAS AN EXHIBIT A THAT WAS NOT ATTACHED TO ITEM SEVEN. AND IT WAS IT WAS SENT OUT LAST NIGHT BY CHRISTINA TO MEMBERS OF COUNCIL. IT WAS PROVIDED TO THE CITY CLERK FOR INCLUSION IN THE RECORD MINUTES OF THE MEETING. AND THIS IS IN RELATION TO SEVEN I AS IT PERTAINS TO ONE DIGITAL INVESTMENT ADVISORS. AND THAT WILL BE ALL, MA'AM. I'M SORRY, DID YOU SAY ALSO TIME CERTAIN FOR 13 D? 12 D I MEAN, FOR 12 D. YES, MA'AM. IT WAS 2 P.M.. TIMES, SIR. THANK YOU. SORRY, I DIDN'T HEAR THAT. OKAY. COUNCIL ANY CHANGES TO THE AGENDA. OKAY. YES. VICE MAYOR. MADAM MAYOR, IF YOU'RE READY, I'LL MAKE A MOTION. YES, PLEASE. I MOVE TO INCLUDE IN THE OLD BUSINESS. [4) ANNOUNCEMENTS AND PRESENTATIONS] ITEM 12 D IS A TIME CERTAIN AT 2 P.M.. ALSO A TIME CERTAIN FOR AN EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 1230. AND THIS IS DEALING WITH A RISK MANAGEMENT ISSUE. AND MR. CITY MANAGER, WHICH ITEM IS THAT? SORRY. 1313 1313 D AS IN DAVID. YEAH. 13 D AND THEN SEVEN I A MATTER WITH ONE DIGITAL INVESTMENT ADVISORS AND AN ATTACHMENT FOR THAT. THAT'S ALL. MADAM MAYOR, I SECOND THAT. OKAY. I HAVE A MOTION BY VICE MAYOR AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER PETRANOFF. ALL IN FAVOR? SIGNED BY I. OKAY. THANK YOU. PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. [00:05:05] TODAY IS A VERY SPECIAL DAY. AS WE RECOGNIZE THE HEART AND SOUL OF OUR CITY, THOSE WHO SERVE OUR CITIZENS AND ACTUALLY [4.A) Service Awards Recognition. ] MAKE OUR CITY AS BEAUTIFUL AS IT IS. SO BEFORE THAT COUNCIL MEMBER PITTMAN, YOU HAD SOMETHING YOU WANTED TO. THANK YOU. I DO, BUT I WOULD MUCH RATHER DO THE IMPORTANT THING AT THIS PARTICULAR TIME, WHICH IS RECOGNIZING ALL THESE WONDERFUL PEOPLE THAT HOLD THIS CITY TOGETHER. SO THEN I'LL BE HAPPY AFTER THAT. IF IF I COULD HAVE JUST A MOMENT OF YOUR TIME. PERFECT. WHEN WE COME BACK AFTER THE AWARDS PRESENTATIONS, WE'LL TAKE FIVE, TEN MINUTE BREAK, AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK, AND YOU CAN DO THAT, AND WE'LL GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT AFTER THAT, AND PUBLIC COMMENT FORMS ARE IN THE BACK OF THE ROOM, THEY CAN BE FILLED OUT AND GIVEN TO THE CLERK. ALL RIGHT. WITH THAT, IF I COULD HAVE OUR DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES COME FORWARD, CHARLOTTE LOWELL. LOWELL, WHO'S LOYAL. YES. GOOD MORNING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL, CHARLOTTE LOWELL, HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR. TODAY WE HAVE THE PLEASURE OF RECOGNIZING AN AMAZING GROUP OF EMPLOYEES WHO HAVE REACHED A MILESTONE RANGING FROM FIVE YEARS TO 40 YEARS. IT'S NOT EVERY DAY WE GET TO CELEBRATE THIS KIND OF DEDICATION. THESE COLLEAGUES ARE THE REASON THE CITY OF NAPLES IS SUCH A SPECIAL PLACE. THEY SHOW UP, THEY WORK HARD, AND THEY CARE DEEPLY ABOUT SERVING OUR COMMUNITY. AND IT SHOWS IN EVERYTHING THAT THEY DO, WHETHER IT'S BEEN FIVE YEARS OR 40 YEARS, EACH ONE OF THEM HAS MADE A REAL DIFFERENCE. WE'RE INCREDIBLY GRATEFUL FOR THEIR COMMITMENT AND THE IMPACT THEY'VE HAD ON BOTH RESIDENTS AND THE VISITORS OF NAPLES. THEY TRULY DESERVE OUR THANKS AND APPRECIATION TODAY AND EVERY DAY. BEFORE WE BEGIN THE SERVICE AWARDS, WE WANTED TO TAKE A FEW MOMENTS TO RECOGNIZE FOUR EMPLOYEES WHO RETIRED FROM THE CITY BETWEEN DECEMBER 2024 AND SEPTEMBER OF 2025. LEAD MECHANIC BILL HAMILTON WITH 22 YEARS OF SERVICE. PLANT OPERATOR TWO. THOMAS WALSH WITH 14 YEARS OF SERVICE. POLICE OFFICER PABLO DEBIENNE WITH 20 YEARS OF SERVICE. AND FIRE DRIVER ENGINEER GREGORY BRUNER WITH 23 YEARS OF SERVICE. AND WITH THAT, I BELIEVE THE MAYOR WILL KICK IT OFF TO RECOGNIZE OUR CITY CLERK, PATRICIA RAMOS. THANK YOU. THE COUNCIL HAS THE 33 CHARTER MEMBERS AND THE ONE CHARTER MEMBER IS THE CITY CLERK. AND TODAY WE WANT TO RECOGNIZE MRS. HRABOWSKI FOR 40 YEARS OF DEDICATED SERVICE TO THE CITY, INCLUDING 28 YEARS AS A LEGAL COORDINATOR, 12 YEARS AS THE CITY CLERK. AND THROUGHOUT THIS TIME, PAT HAS EXEMPLIFIED PROFESSIONALISM GOOD CHARACTER AND INTEGRITY, AND STEADFAST COMMITMENT TO PUBLIC SERVICE. ON BEHALF OF THE CITY COUNCIL, I APPRECIATE AND EXTEND OUR APPRECIATION AND GRATITUDE, AND FOR YOUR CONTINUED WAYS OF LOOKING FORWARD AND HOW WE CAN ALWAYS IMPROVE OUR PROCESSES. SO THANK YOU AND CONGRATULATIONS. THANK YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH. IT FEELS LIKE JUST YESTERDAY. AND I'M HERE TODAY TO RECOGNIZE SOMEONE IN MY OFFICE WHO TOGETHER. WE HAVE 70 YEARS TOGETHER HERE IN THE CITY OF NAPLES. SO IT IS MY PLEASURE TO RECOGNIZE AND CONGRATULATE CARMEN HERNANDEZ ON REACHING A REMARKABLE, WELL-DESERVED MILESTONE OF 30 YEARS OF DEDICATED SERVICE WITH INCREDIBLE CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE CITY. CARMEN COULD NOT BE HERE TODAY, BUT I KNOW SHE IS LISTENING. CARMEN IS CURRENTLY THE RECORDS AND FISCAL SERVICES MANAGER IN OUR OFFICE, AND SHE HAS WORN MANY HATS OVER THE YEARS. THE ONE CONSISTENT THING THAT HAS NEVER CHANGED IS THE WAY THAT CARMEN SERVES WITH KINDNESS, PROFESSIONALISM AND ALWAYS A SMILE. SHE TRULY EMBODIES WHAT CUSTOMER SERVICE MEANS IN PUBLIC SERVICE. SO ON BEHALF OF THE CITY, CARMEN, WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR 30 YEARS. THANK YOU CARMEN. MR. YOUNG. MADAM MAYOR, BEFORE CHARLOTTE GOES ON WITH THE PRESENTATION I WOULD LIKE TO RECOGNIZE CHARLOTTE LOWELL. SHE IS CELEBRATING 15 YEARS OF SERVICE. AND CHARLOTTE BEGAN WITH THE CITY IN 2010, IN THE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT. [00:10:08] WENT ON TO THE ACCOUNTING DEPARTMENT, IN THE FINANCE IN THE FINANCE DIVISION AND WAS PROMOTED IN 2012 TO ADMINISTRATIVE COORDINATOR WITHIN THE HR DEPARTMENT. SHE BECAME A GENERALIST IN 2014, PROMOTED TO EMPLOYEE RELATIONS IN 2019, AND WAS PROMOTED HR DIRECTOR IN 2020. SO CHARLOTTE IS MARRIED TO BRETT, A FIRE CAPTAIN AT NORTH COLLIER FIRE DISTRICT, AND THEY HAVE TWO BEAUTIFUL BABIES BECKHAM, WHO JUST TURNED THREE, AND ONE YEAR OLD BLAIRE BLAIR. CHARLOTTE IS A CONSUMMATE PROFESSIONAL THAT REPRESENTS THE HR DEPARTMENT. HAS TAUGHT ME A LOT OVER MY TIME HERE. EVERY ONE OF MY EMPLOYEES WILL TELL YOU I'M MORE ABOUT WORK THAN CHEERLEADING. SO WHEN IT COMES TO THESE TYPES OF THINGS IN PRESENTATION, I DO THINGS ONE ON ONE AS OPPOSED ALL THE TIME AS OPPOSED TO CEREMONIAL TYPE THINGS. BUT COMING FROM THE HR BACKGROUND, CHARLOTTE IS THE CONSUMMATE PROFESSIONAL WHO ALWAYS WANTS TO STRIVE TO MAKE THE EMPLOYEES BETTER AND DO THE RIGHT THING BY EMPLOYEES. AND FOR THAT, I'LL BE ETERNALLY GRATEFUL. SO I JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR YOUR 15 YEARS OF SERVICE, AND I LOOK FORWARD TO MANY, MANY MORE TOGETHER. SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND NEXT WE HAVE CHAD MERRITT WITH THE COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT. GOOD MORNING, MR. MERRITT. GOOD MORNING, CHAD MERRITT, COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR. IT IS MY HONOR TO PRESENT THE SERVICE AWARDS AS MY STAFF OR MY TEAM COMES UP. COME ON UP. DON'T BE SHY. I GET TO BE IN FRONT OF THEM ALL THE TIME. WHILE THEY COME UP. IT IS AN HONOR TO BE ABLE TO WORK BESIDE THESE INDIVIDUALS. THEY DO ON A DAILY BASIS. THIS BEAUTIFUL CITY. A LOT OF THEM HELP SERVICE PROVIDE THESE SERVICES TO THE COMMUNITY AND ALL THE BEAUTIFUL LANDSCAPING THAT YOU SEE, ALL OF THE PROGRAMS THAT ARE OFFERED EVERYTHING, THE FACILITIES, THIS BEAUTIFUL FACILITY THAT WE HAVE ALL OF THAT STUFF IS MAINTAINED BY THIS GROUP AS WELL AS THE COLLEAGUES. SO FIRST, I HAVE FIVE YEARS, GUADALUPE PABON. VARGAS. SHE'S A CUSTODIAN. WE'VE GOT MATTHEW RAMBO, IRRIGATION TECH, ALSO FIVE YEARS. YES. HE'S GOT A VERY COOL LAST NAME. ROXANNE NIETO, ADMINISTRATION OR ADMINISTRATIVE COORDINATOR? AND THEN TEN YEARS OF SERVICE. WE HAVE CRYSTAL DOHERTY, RECREATION COORDINATOR. I WILL MENTION THAT SHE DID WORK PART TIME WITH US PRIOR TO FULL TIME. SO SHE HAS ABOUT FIVE YEARS ON THAT. SO 15 YEARS TOTAL. SO WE'RE GIVING HER TEN YEARS FULL TIME. BUT SHE'S SHE HAS BEEN WITH US FOR A WHILE. NOT HERE WITH US IS CRYSTAL ASTERIS BECAUSE SHE WAS NOT ABLE TO COME. NOT ANYTHING BAD. SHE WAS A CAMP COUNSELOR. TEN YEARS SERVICE. DOROTHY MARSHALL, CAMP COUNSELOR, TEN YEARS OF SERVICE. JASON ALFANO. CONSTRUCTION PROJECT MANAGER. TEN YEARS OF SERVICE. ZEFF. JEFF. ZABLOW. LANDSCAPE TECH. TEN YEARS OF SERVICE. RAUL. ZAMORA. EXCUSE ME. MIRANDA. TRADES WORKER. SENIOR. 15 YEARS. CORNELIUS MASON, CAMP COUNSELOR AND 20 YEARS OF SERVICE. KELLY LEE, RECREATION SUPERVISOR. SO I APPRECIATE EVERYTHING THAT THEY'VE DONE. AND AGAIN, I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE ABLE TO TO RECOGNIZE THESE INDIVIDUALS. THEY WORK HARD FOR THIS COMMUNITY DAILY, AND THEY WILL CONTINUE TO DO SO. AND THEY'VE ALL COMMITTED AT LEAST ANOTHER 30 YEARS PLUS. SO WE WE SHOULD BE GOOD FOR A WHILE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE. ARE THEY GOING TO COME FORWARD? THANK YOU. CONGRATULATIONS. THANK YOU. CONGRATULATIONS. CONGRATULATIONS. DON'T BE SHY. I WONDER IF YOU ASK A COUPLE OF YEARS FOR A COUPLE HUNDRED. A LOT. YIKES. [00:15:10] ONE. TWO. THREE. ONE. TWO. THREE. BIG SMILES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I COULDN'T SEE YOU. I'M GLAD YOU CAME FORWARD. GOOD MORNING. MAYOR. COUNCIL STEVE BECKMAN, THE DIRECTOR OF BUILDING SERVICES. I HAVE THE THE HONOR AND PRIVILEGE OF RECOGNIZING TWO OF OUR STAFF HERE TODAY FOR FIVE YEARS. AND FIRST ONE IS CINDY. CINDY JOINED THE CITY IN 2020 AS A PERMIT TECH IN THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT. SPENT ABOUT TWO YEARS, MAYBE A LITTLE OVER TWO YEARS, AND THEN WENT TO THE UTILITIES DEPARTMENT. CINDY JUST REJOINED THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT IN JUNE AS AN EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT. SO SHE'S SHE'S COME IN AS A PERMIT TECH. SHE PROMOTED INTO UTILITIES. AND WE HAD A POSITION PROMOTED HER TO THIS POSITION. WELCOMED HER BACK HERE RECENTLY. THE ONE THING I'LL SAY THAT WILL BE A REALLY GOOD INDICATOR OF HOW CINDY IS IN OUR DEPARTMENT FOR THE CITY IS IS WHEN WE HAD A LOT OF APPLICANTS FOR THE EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT POSITION SHE'S IN NOW. AND WHEN OUR STAFF HEARD CINDY WAS ONE OF THE APPLICANTS AND BEING INTERVIEWED THEY WERE OVERJOYED. AND THEY WERE ALL ALL INDICATED TO US. IT'S LIKE, OH, BOY, IT'D BE GREAT IF WE COULD HAVE CINDY BACK, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE SHE'S A LOT. A LOT OF OUR DEPARTMENT HAS BEEN THERE A LONG TIME. AND, YOU KNOW, WE'RE WE'RE A GREAT TEAM. AND EVERYBODY WAS EXCITED TO HAVE CINDY BACK. SO I AM AS WELL. AND SHE'S DOING A GREAT JOB WITH THE CITY AND LOOK FORWARD TO MANY MORE YEARS. SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU. CINDY. AND MY OUR SECOND ONE IS DON MALDINI. SO I'LL TAKE A FEW EXTRA ANOTHER EXTRA MINUTE TO EXPLAIN, DON, BECAUSE HE'S. SORRY. JUST DON'S A LITTLE SPECIAL. NO, HE IS, AND IN MANY WAYS. BUT, SO IN OUR INDUSTRY LICENSED PROFESSIONALS PER FLORIDA STATUTE, ARE VERY SPECIFIC IN THE REQUIREMENTS TO GET LICENSED. AND, AND THEN YOU HAVE TO BE APPROVED BY THE BUILDING CODE INSPECTOR, ADMINISTRATOR, INSPECTORS, BOARD FOR LICENSURE PASS TESTS. AND THEN YOU'RE YOU'RE ISSUED LICENSE. AND DON, AS MANY IN IN OUR PROFESSION HAVE YEARS OF EXPERIENCE IN THE PAST. BUT IN FLORIDA, IT'S VERY CHALLENGING BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO VERIFY YOUR EXPERIENCE FROM A LICENSED DESIGN PROFESSIONAL, ARCHITECT, ENGINEER, BUILDING CODE ADMINISTRATOR, OR A CONTRACTOR WHERE THEY SIGN AN AFFIDAVIT AND THEY SAY, I PERSONALLY AM AWARE OF THIS EXPERIENCE AND THEY VOUCH FOR IT. AND WHAT OFTEN HAPPENS WHEN PEOPLE HAVE EXPERIENCE FROM YEARS AGO AND OTHER STATES IS, IS IT GETS HARD TO VERIFY BECAUSE SOMEONE'S, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN'T FIND THEM, THEY'VE PASSED AWAY OR ALL KINDS OF REASONS. AND SO, YOU KNOW, DON IS ONE HE JOINED THE CITY IN 2020 AND FACILITIES MAINTENANCE. HE WAS HIRED IN THE BILLING DEPARTMENT IN 2023 AS A CONSTRUCTION SITE COMPLIANCE INSPECTOR. AND AND THEN JUST AUGUST 27TH, I THINK IT WAS THE DATE WE DON WENT BEFORE THE BUILDING CODE ADMINISTRATOR'S BOARD AND WAS ISSUED A PROVISIONAL LICENSE FOR A PLUMBING INSPECTOR IN THE INTERNSHIP PROGRAM. SO WE HAVE A PROGRAM ADOPTED BY THE STATE WHERE EVERY ONE OF OUR LICENSE POSITIONS, YOU CAN COME IN WITH ZERO YEARS OF EXPERIENCE AND DO FOUR YEARS INTERNSHIP OR MINIMUM ONE YEAR. IN DON'S CASE, HE HAD TWO YEARS THAT WE NEEDED TO FILL IN THE GAP FOR VERIFYING EXPERIENCE, AND WE WERE ABLE TO DO THAT, AND HE WAS ABLE TO BE PROMOTED TO A BUILDING INSPECTOR THROUGH THAT INTERNSHIP PROGRAM. SO DON IS THE SECOND PERSON IN OUR DEPARTMENT VERY PROUD AND VERY HAPPY TO HAVE HIM ON OUR STAFF AND AND THANK HIM FOR HIS SERVICE AND LOOK FORWARD FOR MANY MORE TO COME. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MORNING, CHIEF. GOOD MORNING. PHILIP. PHILIP PENNINGTON, FIRE CHIEF. [00:20:05] IT'S MY DISTINCT HONOR TO RECOGNIZE MEMBERS OF THE FIRE RESCUE DEPARTMENT WHO, FOR THEIR DEDICATED YEARS OF SERVICE, START WITH OUR RECORDS AND FISCAL MANAGER, TERRY NAGLE. TEN YEARS OF SERVICE. NEXT UP IS DRIVER ENGINEER GARRETT O'CONNOR. TEN YEARS OF SERVICE. THANK YOU. NEXT, LIEUTENANT WILLIAM THORNTON. TEN YEARS OF SERVICE. LIEUTENANT KYLE RAMOS, 15 YEARS OF SERVICE IS UNABLE TO ATTEND TODAY. LIEUTENANT PAUL FERREIRA, 20 YEARS OF SERVICE. NEXT IS LIEUTENANT CHRIS CLISSOLD. 25 YEARS OF SERVICE. THANK YOU. ALSO UNABLE TO ATTEND IS DIVISION CHIEF STEVEN KOSKI. 25 YEARS OF SERVICE. UNABLE TO ATTEND IS DRIVER ENGINEER ABEL ORTIZ. 25 YEARS OF SERVICE. AND THEN WE HAVE BATTALION CHIEF ADAM NADELMANN. 30 YEARS OF SERVICE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. CONGRATULATIONS. THAT'S FIRE RESCUE. THANK YOU. MADAM MAYOR. BEFORE WE TAKE PICTURES WE ALSO HAVE ANOTHER SERVICE AWARD. AND THAT WOULD BE CHIEF PENNINGTON HIMSELF WITH TEN YEARS OF SERVICE. PRIOR TO THAT TIME, HE SPENT 21 YEARS IN THE FORT LAUDERDALE DEPARTMENT AND SIX YEARS AT THE BROWARD COUNTY EMERGENCY SERVICES. GOING DOWN THE LIST OF POSITIONS HE'S HELD OVER THE YEARS IS VIRTUALLY EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM. BUT HE'S BEEN OUR CHIEF NOW SINCE JUNE OF 2023. AND PROBABLY THE ONE THING THAT I WILL SAY ABOUT THE CHIEF IS HE HAS IT DOWN HERE AS AN INSTRUCTOR FOR EMERGENCY MEDICAL TECHNICIANS AND PARAMEDICS. HE IS A TEACHER FIRST. AND SINCE BECOMING CITY MANAGER, I THINK THAT ONE OF THE THINGS HE'S EMPHASIZED IS ABOUT TRAINING, KNOWING WHAT YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO DO, GIVE THEM THE TOOLS TO KNOW THAT AND GIVE THEM THE TOOLS TO DEVELOP. AND SO FOR THAT, CHIEF, I JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU VERY MUCH AND THANK YOU TO ALL OF YOUR TEAM FOR FOR EVERYTHING THAT YOU DO EVERY DAY. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. CONGRATULATIONS. THANK YOU. OKAY. AND CAN ONE MORE. OKAY. THANKS. THANK YOU. THANKS, GUYS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. GREAT. GREAT. I'M NOT SURE YOU WANT TO, BUT THANK YOU SIR. THANK YOU SIR. OOPS, SORRY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. I'M NOT GOING TO MAKE A REFERENCE TO SECOND FIRST RESPONDERS, OKAY? I APPRECIATE THAT. THEY DON'T GET A REBUTTAL. THAT'S A GOOD ONE. SIR DO A TRAFFIC PROBLEM. WAIT, IS THE MICROPHONE? WE SEEM TO HAVE A TRAFFIC PROBLEM, BUT I'M GOING TO HAVE THE TRAFFIC PEOPLE HERE IN A MINUTE TO MAKE SURE THIS WORKS OUT. AGAIN, SIR. DOMINGUEZ. CHIEF OF POLICE. AS YOU ALL KNOW I LOVE MY PEOPLE. WE HAVE THE FINEST POLICE DEPARTMENT, POUND FOR POUND, IN ANYWHERE IN THE CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES. AND WITH THAT SAID, IT'S A TEAM OF TEAMS. WE HAVE FOLKS HERE THAT ARE THAT ARE ADMINISTRATIVE COORDINATORS, PROPERTY EVIDENCE CREDIT ACCREDITATION AND GRANT ACTUALLY GRANT IN PARTICULAR SINCE WE'VE BEEN GETTING, YOU KNOW GOING AFTER MORE DONATIONS AND GRANTS POLICE OFFICERS, SUPERVISORS AND EVERYTHING. AND IT'S A WHOLE HOST OF FOLKS. SO AND I KNOW WE'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO GO IN TOO MUCH DETAIL AND TO MOVE IT ON, BUT HOW THIS POLICE DEPARTMENT WORKS AND THE SENSE OF, OF URGENCY AND OWNERSHIP ON SOLVING PROBLEMS AND FINDING PROBLEMS, LYING IN WAIT IS, HAS EVERYTHING TO DO WITH THE MEN AND WOMEN THERE, AND VERY LITTLE TO DO WITH WHAT I ADD TO THE MIX, BECAUSE NONE OF THIS HAPPENS WITHOUT THE CATS AND THE ANDES AND THE ANDES AND EVERYONE ELSE, ALTHOUGH EVERYBODY'S LENDING IN A VOW AT THE END FOR NO FURTHER ADO, I LOVE THEM. [00:25:04] I AM SO GRATEFUL FOR THEM. AND THANK YOU FOR HONORING THEM TODAY. SO KATE, FIVE YEARS. WE HAVE KATE'S. LEO'S NOT HERE THAT I KNOW. FIVE YEARS. SERGEANT OSBORNE, TEN YEARS. EMILIO MARTINEZ, SERGEANT. TEN YEARS. TY FORTUNE AND TESSA, THEY'RE KIND OF TOGETHER. TEN YEARS, ANDY. TEN YEARS. NOTHING GETS DONE WITHOUT ANDY. OF COURSE I WILL. SORRY, DAVE. MISSION CONTROL, I'M BACK ON AND AGAIN. AND MARIE AND MARIE. WHEN? PRETTY SOON YOU'LL SEE OUR OUR HIGH WHEEL VEHICLE, WHICH IS A SWAMP BUGGY THAT WILL BE GETTING SOON HOPEFULLY BEFORE ANYTHING ELSE COMES OUR WAY WITH WATER. BUT SHE IS ONE OF THE VERY MOST IMPORTANT PERSONS THAT GOT THAT DONE. SHE PURSUED A GRANT AND GOT IT ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE FINISH LINE. SO SHE'S 15 YEARS AND ALSO OUR ACCREDITATION MANAGER. DETECTIVE. HOLMBERG. 20 YEARS. KYLE BENNETT, 20 YEARS. ANDY'S NOT HERE. HE'S NOT HERE, IS SHE? 20 YEARS. LIEUTENANT SETH FINMAN. THERE HE IS. EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT GUY. 30 YEARS. HE'S ANOTHER PERSON THAT JUST GETS EVERYTHING DONE. TONY, 30 YEARS IN THE COMM CENTER. AND I CANNOT OFFER ANY MORE THAN. THANK YOU FOR BEING BOTH A RIGHT HAND MAN AND A FRIEND. MATT FLETCHER, 35 YEARS. THIS IS JUST AN EXAMPLE OF THE QUALITY OF MEN AND WOMEN THAT THAT SERVE THIS CITY AND WORK FOR YOU ALL. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING. CONGRATULATIONS. OH, YEAH. YEAH. YEAH. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. HI. HOW YOU DOING? GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING, BOB MIDDLETON. PUBLIC WORKS. TODAY IS MY HONOR AND PRIVILEGE TO PRESENT THE SERVICE AWARDS TO THE PUBLIC WORKS EMPLOYEES. AND KEEP IN MIND, WHAT PUBLIC WORKS DOES FOR OUR CITY IS COLLECT GARBAGE. WE MAKE SURE YOU HAVE RUNNING WATER TO YOUR HOUSE. CLEAN RUNNING WATER WHEN YOU FLUSH YOUR TOILETS. HOPEFULLY THEY FLUSH POTHOLES IN THE ROAD. WE'VE GOT A LOT OF THEM AND WE TAKE CARE OF THEM AS SOON AS WE CAN. OUR WATER TREATMENT PLANT OPERATORS, OUR WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT OPERATORS, AND I MENTIONED OUR SOLID WASTE EMPLOYEES. AGAIN, THOSE ARE THE GUYS YOU SEE ON THE STREET THAT PROVIDE THE SERVICES THAT MAKE NAPLES GREAT. YOU KNOW, I GET CONSTANT COMPLIMENTS FOR FOR THE SERVICES WE PROVIDE. AND I PASS THOSE ON TO THE EMPLOYEES. AND, AND, YOU KNOW, THEY REALLY BENEFIT FROM THOSE. THIS MORNING WE'LL BE RECOGNIZING 11 OF THOSE EMPLOYEES. I DON'T THINK THEY'RE ALL HERE TODAY BECAUSE THEY'RE OUT WORKING. IF THERE'S THINGS GOING ON, YOU KNOW, THEY KNOW THAT THEY'RE THEY'RE LOVED AND THEY'RE THEY'RE WELCOME AT THE CITY. SO I WILL RECOGNIZE THEM. ONE THING YOU'LL RECOGNIZE WHEN I GO THROUGH THIS LIST OF 11, THEY'RE ALL DOUBLE DIGIT YEARS EXCEPT FOR ONE. SO THAT JUST GOES TO SHOW THE LONGEVITY OF OUR PROGRAM AND HOW EMPLOYEES LOVE WORKING WITH THE CITY. AND THEY'RE WILLING TO DEDICATE THEMSELVES TO THIS SERVICE. SO I'M PROCEEDING ON WITH FIVE YEARS OF SERVICE. CARLOS. AURORA. HE'S A SERVICE WORKER A CREW LEADER. THREE IN SOLID WASTE. AND I DON'T BELIEVE HE IS HERE TODAY. NEXT TEN YEARS OF SERVICE. ALLISON BICKET. YOU KNOW. ALLISON, COME UP HERE. WHERE ARE YOU? YOU KNOW, ALISON IS OUR. [00:30:04] ALISON'S OUR DEPUTY CITY ENGINEER. BEEN WITH THE CITY FOR TEN YEARS, AND SHE MEETS WITH YOU QUITE OFTEN. SO YOU'RE AWARE OF HER CAPABILITIES. NEXT. JOSE FERRER, TEN YEARS SOLID WASTE SERVICE WORKER THREE. GURLEY. DOMINIQUE. DON'T BE SHY. TRADES TRADES WORKER AT OUR WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT. TERRY SAVAGE. TERRY SAVAGE ISN'T HERE 15 YEARS OF SERVICE. HE'S OUR WASTE. OUR WATER TREATMENT PLANT SUPERINTENDENT. HE OPERATES THE PLANT HE GREW UP AT THAT PLANT. OBTAINED ALL OF HIS CERTIFICATIONS STATE CERTIFICATIONS AT THAT PLANT. AND WE ARE VERY HAPPY TO HAVE HIM WITH THE CITY. JEAN, DIVERGE WASTEWATER WATER DISTRIBUTION, 20 YEARS OF SERVICE. HE'S A SENIOR UTILITY TECH. HE'S ONE OF OUR OUR SENIOR UTILITY TECHS OR OUR CREW LEADERS IN THE FIELD DEALING WITH OUR WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM. SO IF YOU SEE A HOLE IN THE GROUND AND A HEAD POP OUT OF THAT HOLE, IT'S PROBABLY HIM. CRAIG ELMER, 20 YEARS OF SERVICE, WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT OPERATOR. FOR HIGH CERTIFICATION, YOU CAN RECEIVE TO OPERATE A WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT ISSUED BY THE STATE. BRAD BENNETT, YOU PROBABLY HEARD THAT NAME IN THE PREVIOUS DISCUSSION. 25 YEARS ACROSS. HE'S A COORDINATOR IN WATER DISTRIBUTION, SO HE'S THE MID-LEVEL SUPERVISOR THAT MAKES SURE ALL THE JOBS IN THE FIELD GET COORDINATED AND GET COMPLETED IN A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME. MARK, 25 YEARS OF SERVICE. OPERATOR THREE AT THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT. FRED GLIME, 30 YEARS OF SERVICE. HE'S OUR CROSS-CONNECTION CONTROL TECHNICIAN. IF YOU KNOW, IF YOU'VE CALLED AND NEEDED ONE ON ONE PERSONAL ATTENTION, HAND HOLDING AND SOMEBODY TO LISTEN TO, THAT WOULD BE FRED. LAST BUT NOT LEAST, 30 YEARS OF SERVICE. JEFF STRICKLER AND OUR EQUIPMENT SERVICES LEAD MECHANIC. A LOT OF THESE FIRE GUYS AND POLICE GUYS KNOW HIM BECAUSE HE'S THE METICULOUS MECHANIC. EVERYTHING'S GOT TO BE SQUARE, PERPENDICULAR AND PARALLEL. SO HE'S VERY METICULOUS WITH HIS WORK. WITH THAT, I'LL CONCLUDE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. TAKES YOU TO IT. YEAH, YEAH. WHAT'S THAT? ARE YOU? OKAY. DO YOU WANT TO GET A PICTURE? YEAH. MRS. RAMOS WOULD LIKE TO GET A PICTURE. I DON'T THINK SHE GOT ONE WITH COUNCIL. NEITHER DID CHARLOTTE. OH, YEAH. GARY WANTS TO TAKE A PICTURE WITH ME. NO. DO YOU WANT ME TO GO WITH HER? YEAH. I'LL GO. OKAY. I'LL GO. OH, I JUST STARTED. I'M SORRY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OKAY. AND THAT CONCLUDES OUR SERVICE AWARDS. THANK YOU. AND THANK YOU FOR HONORING OUR EMPLOYEES. THEY ARE THE HEART AND SOUL. SO THANK YOU FOR ALL YOU DO. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. COUNCIL. WITH THAT, WE WILL TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK. WE HAVE A VERY FULL AGENDA TODAY, SO LET'S COME BACK SO WE CAN GET STARTED WITH THE AGENDA ITEMS. OKAY. WE'RE BACK FROM OUR SHORT BREAK AFTER OUR SERVICE AWARDS PRESENTATION. AND COUNCIL MEMBER PITTMAN, YOU HAD SOMETHING YOU WANTED TO. THANK YOU FOR THIS INDULGENCE, I APPRECIATE IT. COUNCIL. IT WASN'T TOO LONG AGO THAT ONE OF OUR CIVIC LEADERS APPEARED BEFORE US TO INTRODUCE A CONCEPT THAT I THOUGHT WAS ABSOLUTELY WONDERFUL, CALLED THE NAPLES WAY. AND THE NAPLES WAY, AS I INTERPRETED IT, WAS THAT WE. IF THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF A MISUNDERSTANDING THAT WE SIT TOGETHER AND TALK IT OUT, HASH IT OUT, COME TO A CONCLUSION. I THINK WE'VE LOST OUR WAY. [00:35:06] WE'VE GOT A LITTLE SITUATION RIGHT NOW WHERE I SUGGESTED THAT PERHAPS ONE WAY TO GET OVER THE HURDLE WAS TO PICK UP THE PHONE AND CALL SENATOR PASSIDOMO. AND THAT WAS REJECTED, SO I DID. I GOT HER ON THE PHONE. SHE WAS ON HER WAY TO TALLAHASSEE, AND SHE'S VERY WILLING TO COME BACK AFTER SESSION. COME BEFORE US, LET US TALK TOGETHER. SHE INTENDS TO CALL THE CITY MANAGER. I REMINDED HER THAT THERE WAS A TIME WHEN OUR REPRESENTATIVES CAME TO COUNCIL AND REPORTED TO US AS TO WHAT WAS GOING ON IN TALLAHASSEE, AND SHE'S VERY WILLING TO DO THAT. SO I JUST WANTED YOU TO KNOW THAT WE NEED TO COME TOGETHER. THE NAPLES WAY IS THE WAY THAT WE SHOULD BE CONDUCTING BUSINESS IN THIS TOWN TODAY. SITTING AND TALKING TOGETHER IS THE BEST WAY, THE ONLY WAY TO COME TOGETHER. SO THANKS TO SENATOR PASSIDOMO, SHE'S GOING TO COME AND FACILITATE THAT AS WELL. SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR INDULGENCE, I APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. AND IT'S ALWAYS GOOD TO REMIND OURSELVES THAT WE HAVE TO WORK TOGETHER AND NOT AGAINST ONE ANOTHER. SO THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER PENMAN. WITH THAT, THAT CONCLUDES FOR A MOVING TO FIVE PUBLIC [5) PUBLIC COMMENTS] COMMENT. I HAVE TWO PUBLIC SPEAKERS. FIRST PUBLIC SPEAKER, IF YOU'LL COME FORWARD AND STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD. ROB STONEBURNER. WELCOME BACK. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. AND ESTEEMED MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL. MY NAME IS ROB STONEBURNER, FOR THE RECORD. I'M NOT HERE AS MY IN MY CAPACITY AS TAX COLLECTOR. I'M HERE AS WITH A MUCH MORE IMPORTANT TITLE OF NAPLES NORTH ROTARIAN. I'M HERE TO REPORT ON THE NAPLES CRAFT BEER FEST. THE 2025 EVENT. WE RAISED JUST SHY OF $108,000 FOR CHARITY. I'M PROUD TO SAY THAT SHOULD THIS ESTEEMED BODY CHOOSE TO OUR PERMIT APPLICATION FOR 2026, AS ON IF IT IS APPROVED, AND WE HOPE THAT IT IS, SINCE THIS WILL BE OUR 15TH ANNUAL. WHEN WE HIT OUR 15TH ANNUAL, WE WILL BREAK THE MILLION DOLLAR MARK RAISED FOR CHARITY OUT OF THIS LITTLE TINY NAPLES NORTH ROTARY CLUB. WE'RE VERY PROUD OF THAT. A PROMISED I WOULD GET DONE QUICK AND NOT TAKE A LOT OF TIMES. I KNOW YOU HAVE A LOT OF STUFF ON YOUR AGENDA, BUT QUICK LITTLE NAPLES CRAFT BEER. FEST.COM. THERE'S 171 TICKETS LEFT OUT OF 1350. SO, YOU KNOW, WE'RE WE'RE. AND WE REALLY HAVEN'T SOLD ANY BECAUSE WE'RE NOT REALLY ADVERTISING THAT RIGHT NOW, EXCEPT FOR I JUST DID. SO I THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND IF I LOOK FORWARD TO ANOTHER GREAT EVENT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS JAY HARTINGTON. GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS JAY HARTINGTON. BORN AND RAISED IN NAPLES, FLORIDA. NAPLES HIGH GRADUATE. UNFORTUNATELY, I DID NOT GET TO EXPERIENCE THE COACH CRAMER ERA, BUT I WAS I PREDATED THAT. I'M GOING TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT A COUPLE OF THINGS. I'M KIND OF DOING THIS OFF THE CUFF, SO I'M JUST GOING TO READ A LITTLE LETTER THAT I HAD WRITTEN, BUT COUNCILWOMAN, I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS ABOUT SENATOR PASSIDOMO. ACTUALLY, THIS IS IN REFERENCE TO SOMETHING THAT SHE SPONSORED AT A STATE LEVEL, THE LIVE LOCAL ACT. SO I'M GOING TO START HERE. DEAR COUNCIL MEN AND WOMEN AND MAYOR THANK YOU FOR YOUR THOUGHTFUL COMMENTS DURING THE AUGUST 20TH MEETING REGARDING WORKFORCE HOUSING. IN THE PROPOSAL FOR 210 NINTH STREET NORTH MARK MCLANE'S PRESENTATION FROM MHCC ESSENTIALLY MEETING TO HELP HIGHLIGHT BOTH THE OPPORTUNITY AND THE NEED TO FIND A CREATIVE SOLUTION IN AFFORDABLE HOUSING. AND I GREATLY APPRECIATE THE THOUGHTFUL ENGAGEMENT FROM COUNCIL. AS YOU KNOW, THIS PROJECT REPRESENTS A MEANINGFUL STEP FOR ADDRESSING OUR COMMUNITY'S HOUSING NEEDS, AND I BELIEVE IT ALIGNS WITH THE CITY'S BROADER GOALS. THE TWO QUESTIONS I'M REALLY ASKING ALL OF YOU ARE HOW DO YOU THINK THE COUNCIL AND THE CITY SHOULD APPROACH AFFORDABLE HOUSING INITIATIVES AND WHAT STEPS DO YOU SEE MOST EFFECTIVE IN MOVING THIS PROJECT FORWARD? YOUR LEADERSHIP WILL BE ESSENTIAL IN ENSURING THAT THE CONVERSATION AROUND OUR UP AROUND UPDATING AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND PRIORITIES REMAIN ACTIVE AND CONSTRUCTIVE. I VALUE YOUR COMMITMENT TO GETTING THINGS DONE FOR THE CITY, AND I WOULD BE GRATEFUL FOR YOUR GUIDANCE ON THIS PATH. I USUALLY DON'T LIKE WRITING OR READING SOMETHING THAT I WROTE, [00:40:05] BUT I DO THINK IT WAS A BIT SERENDIPITOUS THAT WE WERE HONORING ALL OF THESE GREAT PEOPLE TODAY. AND I, I DO THINK WE'RE AT AN INFLECTION POINT THAT WE HAVE SOME OPPORTUNITIES TO DO THE RIGHT FOR THIS COMMUNITY. AND, OH, I GUESS I HAVE 50S MORE. AND AS SOMEONE WHO WAS BORN AND RAISED AND WHO PLANS TO BE HERE MY WHOLE LIFE, I DO THINK THIS IS A A SCENARIO THAT WE SHOULD WORK TOGETHER. THANK YOU FOR SAYING THAT. TO FIND A SOLUTION OR SOME GUIDANCE. HAVE A WONDERFUL DAY. TAKE CARE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. FROM ABOVE. THAT CONCLUDES ITEM FIVE. GOING TO THE CONSENT AGENDA. [APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA] YES. MADAM MAYOR, IF I COULD FOR A MINUTE. YES, SIR. THERE WAS A FEW MINOR UPDATES TO AGENDA ITEM SEVEN AFTER PUBLICATION THAT WAS PASSED OUT BY THE CLERK'S OFFICE AND WILL BE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IF THE CONSENT AGENDA GETS APPROVED, IT'S WITH THE UPDATED ONE THAT WAS PROVIDED PRIOR TO THIS MEETING. I THOUGHT THERE WAS 77I. SEVEN II WAS AN ATTACHMENT. BUT SEVEN G WAS ACTUALLY A FEW CHANGES TO THE FIRST TWO WHEREAS CLAUSES IN THE RESOLUTION. OH THANK YOU. WE DID HAVE A COPY OF THAT. THAT WAS OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE IT WAS. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE ELSE GOT A COPY OF IT. I DID NOT. NO, I KNOW I GOT EVERYTHING WAS HERE. I GOT SEVERAL COPIES OF SEVEN I. AND I THINK SOMEBODY DID NOT PUT A SEVEN COPY IN FRONT OF ME. THAT'S ALL. G OR J. I'VE J. ALSO MY APOLOGIES. IT'S SEVEN J. YEAH. OKAY. FOR THE FOR THE RECORD. FOR THE RECORD, I HAVE SEVEN I AND I HAVE SEVEN J. THANK YOU. SORRY IT'S EARLY. OKAY. COUNCIL QUESTIONS ABOUT THE CONSENT AGENDA. ANYTHING? IF THERE ARE NO SUGGESTED CHANGES, I'LL MOVE THAT. WE APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER KRAUSE. A SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER PITTMAN. DISCUSSION. YES, SIR. YES, MR. CITY ATTORNEY, FROM A MATTER OF PROCEDURE ON THIS ITEM OF SEVEN J. BECAUSE WE SET THE AGENDA, NOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT APPROVING THE CONSENT AGENDA. ARE WE IN ORDER BY JUST APPROVING THE AGENDA WITHOUT SPECIFICALLY ADDING SEVEN J. GREAT QUESTION. THE ANSWER IS YES, BECAUSE IN MY OPINION, SETTING THE AGENDA IS MOVING THINGS AROUND, SETTING TIME CERTAIN, OR ADDING THINGS. BUT AT THE MOMENT WHERE YOU'RE MAKING A MOTION FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA IS THE MORE APPROPRIATE TIME TO EITHER PULL THINGS OFF, SUPPLEMENT, ETC.. GOOD. MADAM MAYOR, AND MY POINT WAS TO TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR ACTIONS INCLUDE SEVEN J SO THAT THERE'S NOT A PROBLEM LATER. SO I FEEL GOOD ABOUT IT. THANK YOU. OKAY. SO THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND. YES. ALL IN FAVOR FOR SETTING THE AGENDA. SIGNED BY APPROVING THE AGENDA. CONSENT AGENDA. AYE. AYE. AYE. OPPOSED. THANK YOU. PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. THAT TAKES US TO ITEM 1111, A MR. [11.A) A Resolution Determining Conditional Use Petition 25-CU4, Relating to a Conditional Use Pursuant to Section 50-102(b)(2) of the Code of Ordinances, City of Naples, to Allow Required Parking Within 600 Feet of a Lot to Accomplish Shared Parking on Property Owned By Hygate Properties, LLC., and Located at 1795, 1801-1841 9th Street North, More Fully Described Herein; Providing Findings and Conditions; and Providing an Effective Date.] MCCONNELL. YES. THANK YOU. MAYOR. A RESOLUTION DETERMINING CONDITIONAL USE PETITION 25 DASH QUEUE FOUR RELATING TO A CONDITIONAL USE PURSUANT TO SECTION 5102, SUBPARAGRAPH B, SUBPARAGRAPH TWO OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, CITY OF NAPLES. TO ALLOW REQUIRED PARKING WITHIN 600FT OF A LOT TO ACCOMPLISH SHARED PARKING ON PROPERTY OWNED BY HIGHGATE PROPERTIES, LLC AND LOCATED AT 17951801 AND 184 ONE NINTH STREET NORTH. MORE FULLY DESCRIBED HEREIN, PROVIDING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THANK YOU. FOR ALL THOSE INTENDING TO OFFER TESTIMONY, PLEASE RISE AND RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU'RE ABOUT TO GIVE BE THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? YES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. WE'LL MOVE TO COUNCIL. DISCLOSURES COUNCIL MEMBER PITTMAN. NO CONTACT. BARTON. NO CONTACT. JUST SOME COMMUNICATION WITH STAFF. CHRISMAN FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE? VISITED THE SITE MANY TIMES. [00:45:02] BRIEFED BY STAFF ON THE ISSUE. AND COUNCIL MEMBER KRAMER, VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE AND TALK WITH STAFF ABOUT THIS. FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE. SPOKE WITH STAFF. NO COMMENT. VICE MAYOR FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE. VISITED THE SITE. SPOKE WITH STAFF ON THIS MATTER. NO OTHER CONTACT. I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE. VISITED THE SITE AND SPOKE WITH THE PETITIONER'S NURSE AGENT. WITH THAT, NO FURTHER DISCLOSURES WILL MOVE TO THE PETITIONER'S AGENT. GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS THOMAS SCANGARELLO. MY CREDENTIALS ARE ON FILE WITH THE CITY PLANNING STAFF. WE ARE HERE TODAY FOR TWO THINGS. ONE IS A CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL FOR PARKING WITHIN 600FT OF A PARTICULAR USE, AND A COMPANION APPLICATION, OR THE APPLICATION IS MARRIED TO AN APPLICATION OR A PETITION FOR OUTDOOR DINING. AND THIS IS A LITTLE BIT CONFUSING. SO I'D LIKE TO START WITH GIVING YOU A LITTLE BIT OF OVERVIEW WHILE WE'RE HERE, IF YOU WILL PERMIT ME. AND THERE IS A SCREEN IN FRONT OF YOU. OF COURSE, YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH THE MOORINGS PLAZA, AND IT'S ONE OF ITS OCCUPANTS IS JIMMY PEPPERS, WHO'S HERE TODAY, AND THINGS HAPPENED OVER THE COURSE OF EIGHT YEARS THAT WE HAVE OR HE HAS INHERITED ONE. THERE WAS A RESOLUTION AND AN AGREEMENT PREPARED BY THE CITY MANAGER AND THE CITY MAYOR, AND EXECUTED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY BACK IN 2017 FOR REMOTE PARKING, WHICH IS LOCATED. HERE. THAT WAS FOR 11 SPACES. WHEN THAT RESOLUTION WAS PREPARED, THERE WAS A SURVEY DONE, AND ON THE SURVEY WAS A RECTANGLE THAT SAID, PUT THE CARS HERE AND THERE WAS A PLAN THAT WAS PREPARED AND DESIGNED. THIS PARTICULAR PARKING LOT WAS NOT REVIEWED NOR APPROVED BY ANYONE IN THE CITY. AND I DID SPEAK WITH ALLISON ABOUT THIS, AND SHE SAID SHE NEVER APPROVED IT. AND IN FACT WHEN CARS PARK IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA, PARALLEL PARK AND CARS ARE PARKED HERE, IT'S IMPOSSIBLE FOR THESE CARS TO GET OUT. AND THERE ISN'T A K TURN, WHICH NORMALLY YOU WOULD HAVE IN A PARKING LOT. SO THREE THINGS HAPPENED. THAT'S ONE. THE SECOND THING THAT HAPPENED IS THERE WAS AN AGREEMENT PREPARED WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR TEN PARKING SPOTS IN THIS LOCATION. THOSE TEN PARKING SPOTS WERE INSTALLED. THERE WAS A DRAINAGE DITCH THERE. THERE WAS LANDSCAPING IN THAT PARTICULAR AREA. AND THE CITY CITY, AS FAR AS I CAN TELL. AND AS FAR AS OUR RESEARCH, THE CITY WAS NEVER WAS NEVER, NEVER REVIEWED THE DESIGN OR APPROVAL OF THAT OF THAT LOT. THESE THINGS ARE ALL GOOD. THEY HAPPEN. THERE'S NOTHING WE CAN DO ABOUT IT. THE THIRD THING THAT HAPPENED IS THAT JIMMY TOOK OVER MAMA MIA'S PIZZA. AND IF SOME OF YOU MAY RECALL, I THINK MAMA MIA'S PIZZA HAD MAYBE EIGHT BOOTHS IN THERE. MAYBE SIX. I'M NOT SURE. HOWEVER, THE PARKING CODE FOR MAMA MIA'S PIZZA AND FOR THAT RESTAURANT WAS ONE PARKING SPACE PER 1000FT². SORRY, FOR 100FT² PER 100FT². AND I AM MAKING A GENERAL ASSUMPTION THAT LET'S SAY THERE IS 1000FT² IN MAMA MIA'S PIZZA. THERE ARE 1000FT². THAT'S TEN SPACES. AND JIMMY TAKES OVER THE RESTAURANT. AND NOW THERE ARE 35 SPACES, 35 PLACES FOR PEOPLE TO EAT, MAYBE 40 PLACES FOR PEOPLE TO EAT. SO ALL OF THESE THINGS KIND OF TOPPLED. AND WHAT HAPPENED IS THE CODE THAT WE NOW HAVE THAT I'VE ARGUED ABOUT FOR YEARS, EVEN WHEN I WAS ON DRB AND PAB IS INAPPROPRIATE, BUT IT'S THERE. SO YOU CAN HAVE A RESTAURANT THAT HAS EIGHT SEATS IN IT AND NEEDS TEN PARKING SPACES. AND YOU COULD HAVE ONE IN IT THAT HAS 35 SEATS IN IT AND STILL ONLY NEEDS TEN SPACES. [00:50:01] SO THOSE THREE THINGS HAPPENED. AND WHAT HAS OCCURRED IS WE HAVE A A PARKING SITUATION HERE WITH A CURB CUT HERE, WHICH HAS INGRESS AND EGRESS TO ROUTE 41. THIS ONE HAS INGRESS AND EGRESS TO ROUTE 41, AND IN FACT, THERE IS NO OTHER STRIP CENTER ON ROUTE 41. IN NAPLES WHERE THEY HAVE, YOU HAVE TWO CURB CUTS WITH IN AND OUT ALONG ROUTE 41. YOU HAVE OTHER CURB CUTS. YOU HAVE OTHER STRIP CENTERS WHERE YOU HAVE A SIDE ROAD THAT HAS A DRIVEWAY AND A SIDE ROAD FOR AN ENTRANCE AND A SIDE ROAD FOR AN EXIT. AND THOSE TWO HAVE OF OF OF TWO WAY TRAFFIC. BUT THERE ARE NONE THAT ARE AS UNIQUE AS THIS. SO WE'RE FACED WITH A BUNCH OF THINGS GOING ON. AND WHEN I WAS APPROACHED BY BY THE APPLICANTS, BY THE PETITIONERS, I SAID TO THEM I'D BE GLAD TO GET INVOLVED IN THIS, BUT YOU GOT A BIG PROBLEM. BIG PROBLEM IS YOU HAVE ISSUES WITH CONGESTION. YOU HAVE ISSUES WITH CONFLICTS, YOU HAVE ISSUES WITH THAT PARKING LOT. AND I AND I ADDED A FOURTH ADJECTIVE THERE, WHICH WAS IT'S DANGEROUS. AND WHY IT'S DANGEROUS IS BECAUSE THERE'S SO MANY TRAFFIC MOVEMENTS. AT 11:00 YESTERDAY, THERE WAS A FEDEX TRUCK IN THERE THAT WAS STUCK TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHICH WAY TO GO BECAUSE THERE WAS TRAFFIC TRYING TO PULL OUT AND PULL IN. WE HAVE CARS AND TRUCKS THAT ARE NOW BIGGER. WE HAVE AN AISLE IN THIS, AND WE HAVE AN AISLE HERE LOCATED THAT IS ABOUT 24FT WHEN AN AISLE SHOULD BE 25FT AND THAT DOESN'T MATTER MUCH. IT'S ONLY 12IN. BUT WHEN YOU HAVE CARS THAT ARE 24IN BIGGER AND TRUCKS THAT ARE 24IN BIGGER, AND NOW I WANT TO BACK IN AND BACK OUT, YOU GET CONFLICTS. SO CONSEQUENTLY I MENTIONED THIS TO THE APPLICANTS AND THE APPLICANT SAID THAT THEY WERE DETERMINED TO MAKE IT BETTER IF IN FACT, THEY ARE GOING TO SUBMIT ANOTHER APPLICATION TO PAB FOR CONDITIONAL USE. AND THEY ARE GOING TO SUBMIT ANOTHER APPLICATION THEN TO YOU ALL FOR OUTDOOR DINING. THEY HAD TO DO SOMETHING TO MAKE THE SITUATION BETTER, OR THEY WERE GOING TO FAIL AND THEY WERE NOT GOING TO GET IT DONE. SO HAVING SAID THAT WE TALKED ABOUT MAKING SOME CHANGES TO THE SITE. AND WE TALKED ABOUT DOING FIVE THINGS. THE FIRST THING FOR THE OUTDOOR DINING, WHICH WAS DISAPPROVED BY THIS COUNCIL, WE TALKED ABOUT WIDENING THE AREA. SO IF I MAY INTERJECT FOR A MINUTE SO OBVIOUSLY A, B AND C ARE ALL RELATED. BUT FOR THE RECORD, I'M HEARING SOME DISCUSSIONS ON OUTDOOR DINING. SO I'M JUST PREFACING THIS WITH THE FACT THAT ONCE WE GET TO THE OUTDOOR DINING, WHICH I BELIEVE IS THE NEXT ITEM, I WILL PROBABLY ASK YOU ALL TO ADOPT SOME OF THE TESTIMONY GIVEN BY THE APPLICANT INTO THE RECORD. BUT AT THE END OF THIS ITEM RIGHT NOW, THE MOTION WILL BE SPECIFIC TO ONLY THE SHARED PARKING FOR CONDITIONAL USE. OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. MCCONNELL. AND ALSO IT'S JUST ITEM 11 A 11 B, NOT C. YEAH. CORRECT. I UNDERSTAND I'M JUST TRYING TO GIVE AN OVERVIEW BEFORE I GIVE THAT TESTIMONY. OKAY. SO JIMMY SIGNED A LONG TERM LEASE. HE'S NOT GOING ANYWHERE. HE'S GOT A PROBLEM. BASICALLY, ON TWO DAYS A WEEK WHEN HE HAS STEAK SPECIALS AND THEY'RE NOT GOING ANYWHERE. SO THE FIVE THINGS THAT I SAID TO THEM THAT WE HAD TO DO, WHICH THEY COMMITTED TO DO, WAS ONE WE HAD TO PUSH OUT TABLES THAT WERE THERE AND ALLOW FOR FOUR FEET BETWEEN THE WALL OF THE BUILDING AND THE TABLES, AND WE WOULD INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF TABLES FROM THE THREE THAT ARE THERE, NOT TO THE NINE AND 26 THAT WERE BEFORE THIS BOARD LAST TIME, BUT FIVE TABLES AND 20 SEATS. TWO WE HAD TO MOVE OUT [00:55:04] THOSE TABLES TO WHERE THE PLANTER BOXES WERE AND GET RID OF THOSE WOOD. WOULD DETERIORATED PLANNING BOXES AND THE DEAD PLANT MATERIAL IN IN THE BOXES AND GO TO A RESIN BOX WHICH IS WHICH IS BLACK AND PUT IN NEW PLANT MATERIAL. THREE. WE HAD TO MAKE CHANGES TO THE BUILDING. PLEASE GO THE WRONG WAY WITH THIS AND TO DRESS IT UP TO MAKE IT MORE ESTHETICALLY PLEASING. AND THAT'S NEW PLANT MATERIAL. AND AN AWNING. AND THE RESIN BOXES. THE BIG CHANGE THAT WE HAD TO MAKE WAS IN TRAFFIC FLOW. AND IN DOING THE TRAFFIC FLOW, WE TALKED ABOUT DOING A ONE WAY DESIGN WHERE YOU COME IN FROM THE CURB, CUT ON THE NORTH SIDE. WHICH IS WHICH IS HERE. IT'S A ONE WAY TRAFFIC MOVEMENT. YOU CAN EITHER ENTER HERE. YOU CAN COME UP HERE AND YOU CAN ENTER INTO THE MAIN PARKING AREA HERE AND PARK. YOU GO OUT HERE, YOU CAN COME IN HERE. YOU CAN'T DO THIS. YOU CAN COME IN HERE AND EITHER PARK HERE OR YOU CAN PARK HERE. OR IF YOU CHOOSE TO, YOU CAN GO OUT HERE AND YOU CAN COME IN HERE. WE HAVE AN ISSUE WITH A CURB CUT LOCATED TO THE NORTH OF US WITH THE CHEVRON STATION. CARS ARE PARKED THERE ALL THE TIME, BUT NONE OF THESE THINGS AND I DON'T KNOW WHY. I REALLY DON'T KNOW WHY. WHEN THIS WAS INSTALLED, NONE OF THESE ISSUES ABOUT CURB CUTS, NONE OF THESE ISSUES ABOUT SAFETY, NONE OF THESE ISSUES ABOUT WHAT ARE THESE SPACES GOING TO DO EXCEPT INCREASE THE NUMBER OF SPACES. HOW IS THAT GOING TO HOW IS THAT GOING TO GO INTO EFFECT? THERE'S NEVER A REVIEW BY ANYONE IN THE CITY THAT SAID, OKAY, THIS MAKES SENSE OR IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE AS A RESULT. WHAT WE HAVE IS THE CONGESTION THAT'S IN THE PARKING LOT, NOT BECAUSE OF THIS, BUT BECAUSE OF THE MOVEMENTS GOING BACK AND FORTH IN THIS AREA. WE UNDERSTAND THAT THERE COULD BE SOME MERCHANTS THAT MIGHT SAY, WELL, THAT'S GOING TO HAVE A BAD EFFECT ON WHAT I WANT TO DO BECAUSE BECAUSE I NEED TWO WAY TRAFFIC HERE. AND THE OWNER HAS SAID THAT IF THERE'S TWO WAY TRAFFIC THERE AND YOU HAVE THE AND YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO, TO, TO TO SAY TODAY WE WANT THE TWO WAY TRAFFIC BACK. YOU CAN DO THAT. AND I DON'T HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE LAB. AND THE OWNER HAS SAID, IF YOU DO THAT, I'LL PROVIDE A PARKING LOT ATTENDANT, A UNIFORMED POLICE PERSON, TO DIRECT TRAFFIC IN THAT PARKING LOT. I GO THERE TWO, THREE, FOUR TIMES A WEEK. I'VE LIVED ON MANDARIN ROAD FOR 15 YEARS, AND I CAN TELL YOU THAT AIN'T GOING TO WORK. BUT IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT CITY COUNCIL SAYS WE NEED TO CHANGE, THEN WE'RE OKAY. WE'RE OKAY WITH CHANGING IT. SO THAT'S THE OVERVIEW OF WHAT HAS HAPPENED AND WHAT WE HAVE. OR THEY JIMMY HAS INHERITED WITH RESPECT TO THINGS THAT HAVE HAPPENED IN THE PAST AND THINGS THAT NOW WE ARE TRYING TO DO CURRENTLY TO IMPROVE IT AND TO MAKE IT BETTER AND TO GIVE HIM SOME MORE TABLES FOR OUTDOOR DINING. SO GETTING BACK TO THE THE ISSUES AT HAND AS FAR AS THE CONDITIONAL USE APPLICATION, AND I'M SORRY IF THERE ARE ANY IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS ANYBODY HAS ON THAT OVERVIEW. LET'S, LET'S, LET'S, LET'S DO IT NOW. YEAH. LET ME LET YOU FINISH YOUR PRESENTATION AND THEN WE'LL TAKE. OKAY. AS FAR AS THE CONDITIONAL USE, I THINK YOU ALL UNDERSTAND THAT THE THE CODE ALLOWS US TO ASK FOR A CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL, PROVIDED THAT WE ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHICH ALLOWS FOR, [01:00:03] FOR FLEXIBLE PARKING THAT WE'RE CONSISTENT WITH THE FLORIDA LAND USE ELEMENT AND THAT WE'RE CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, ESPECIALLY FOR THAT INCLUDES MOORING PLAZA AND ALLOWING US TO HAVE PARKING THAT IS ASSOCIATED WITH THE BUSINESS BUT IS WITHIN 600FT. IT'S CALLED SHARED PARKING. SO WHEN WE HAVE PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES THAT DO NOT ALLOW US TO HAVE PARKING IMMEDIATELY JUXTAPOSED TO WHERE THE BUSINESS IS WE CAN USE SHARED PARKING AND WHICH IS WHAT WE'VE DONE IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE IT'S ALSO CALLED SOMETIMES FLEXIBLE PARKING. SO WE THINK WE'VE SATISFIED THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF THAT AND THE POLICIES. AND WE THINK WE'VE ALSO SATISFIED THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE RESIDENTIAL IMPACT CRITERIA BY PROVIDING THE NECESSARY MEANS IN NECESSARY NUMBERS FOR PARKING. I THINK WE HAVE THERE ARE 93 PARKING STALLS THERE AND WE ARE REQUIRED, AND JEFF WILL CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG ON THIS. 83 OR 84 RIGHT? I THINK 85 IS WHAT'S NEEDED AND 94 IS WHAT IS OFFERED. OKAY. SO THOSE ARE THOSE ARE THE ISSUES RELATIVE TO THE APPROVAL NEEDED FOR THE CONDITIONAL USE. AND I'VE GOT TO TELL YOU THAT THEY STAFF DID A GREAT JOB ON THEIR REPORT AND ON COOPERATING WITH US AND GETTING THROUGH THIS. AND WE CERTAINLY CAN RELY UPON. I KNOW JEFF HAS A REPORT, SO I'LL LET HIM READ HIS REPORT. AND I DON'T HAVE WE DON'T HAVE ANY ISSUES OR ANY DEBATES WITH ANYTHING THAT HE SAID IN THAT REPORT. IF YOU WANT ME TO GO OVER IT ONCE AGAIN, WHERE THE OUTDOOR DINING TABLES ARE, I'LL BE GLAD TO DO THAT. BUT JUST SO THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS A DENIAL FOR NINE TABLES WITH 26 SPACES. WE'VE REDUCED THAT TO FIVE TABLES WITH FOUR SPACES. THERE'S AN APPROVAL FOR CHARD RESTAURANT, FOR JIMMY P'S, FOR THREE TABLES WITH SIX SPACES. WE'VE ALSO ELIMINATED THE LAST APPLICATION. THERE WAS ALSO DINING TABLES THAT WERE NEAR THE THE STORE, THE DELI STORE, AND WE'VE ELIMINATED THAT. WE'VE SPENT WE'VE HAD THREE ITERATIONS OF THE LIFE SAFETY PLAN. WE'VE WORKED CLOSELY WITH COREY ADAMSKI TO GET A LIFE SAFETY PLAN. THAT IS ABSOLUTELY STATE OF THE ART FOR THE FIVE TABLES THAT WE WANT TO PUT IN, WHICH AND IF JIMMY COULD SPEAK AND HE CAN SPEAK, HE'S HERE, HE'LL TELL YOU THAT THIS ISN'T GOING TO CREATE MORE PEOPLE COMING IN. IT'S JUST GOING TO ALLEVIATE PEOPLE STANDING OUT TO THE DOOR, TRYING TO GET IN LINE TO COME AND SIT AND GET A SEAT. SO THAT'S OUR PRESENTATION ON THE CONDITIONAL USE PART OF THE APPLICATION. AND I KNOW THERE'S A STAFF REPORT ON THAT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION. COUNCIL, DO YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE PETITIONERS AGENT? YES. MR. BARTON, I JUST GOT A QUICK CLARIFICATION QUESTION, WHICH I THINK I ALREADY KNOW THE ANSWER TO, BUT THE I'M LOOKING AT AN OVERHEAD, WHICH IS PAGE 23 TO 25 IT'S A SCHEMATIC AND IT SHOWS THE LAST FIVE PARKING SPACES AND WHERE THE TABLES ARE. AND THOSE PARKING SPACES ARE SHORTENED. RIGHT? IS THAT ALREADY IN PLACE THAT THE SIZES ARE ALREADY IN PLACE? OR IS IT? THAT WOULD BE A CHANGE TO THOSE SIZES OF THOSE SPACES. THOSE SPACES. THOSE SPACES WILL BE THERE, BUT THEY'LL BE EXTENDED OUT BECAUSE THERE'S ROOM TO EXTEND THEM OUT. THAT WAS THAT WAS KIND OF WHERE I WAS GOING WITH THIS. OKAY. SO SO AS OF RIGHT NOW, THE THE DINING AREA HAS NOT ENCROACHED INTO THOSE SPACES, BUT THIS CHANGE WILL BE AN ENCROACHMENT INTO THOSE SPACES. BUT YOU'RE TELLING ME THAT THERE'S ENOUGH ROOM TO DO SO AND EXTEND THOSE SPACES? THERE'LL BE NO DINING IN THAT EXTENDED AREA. CORRECT? OKAY. SO YOU'RE YOU'RE YOU'RE ASSUMPTION IS CORRECT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. OKAY. FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE PETITIONER'S AGENT. OKAY. WE'LL MOVE TO THE STAFF REPORT. GOOD MORNING, MADAM MAYOR AND COUNCIL, JEFF BRAMMER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THE FIRST PETITION THAT WE'VE HEARD ABOUT IS A CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST TO ALLOW SHARED PARKING TO ACCOMMODATE THE USES IN THE PLAZA. THE REQUEST INCLUDES SHARE PARKING ON FOUR CONTIGUOUS PARCELS, THE MAIN PLAZA AND THREE ABUTTING PROPERTIES. OF COURSE, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT JIMMY. PEAS. CHARD. [01:05:01] THIS IS A RESTAURANT IN THE MOORINGS PLAZA, WHICH IS LOCATED ON NINTH STREET NORTH. WE'VE HEARD SOME OF THE HISTORY OF THE SITE AND THE CONDITIONS FROM THE PETITIONER. THIS HISTORY IS ALSO DETAILED IN THE STAFF REPORT. I WILL ADD THAT THIS SITUATION IS ALMOST IDENTICAL TO TWO YEARS AGO, WHEN THESE PETITIONS WERE PREVIOUSLY HEARD BY COUNCIL. THAT PROPOSAL WAS DENIED. AT THE TIME, COUNCIL CITED CONCERNS OVER CONGESTION AND CIRCULATION AND SAFETY IN RENDERING ITS DECISION. SO FOR THE CONDITIONAL USE, BASICALLY THE REQUEST IS PARKING. SO HOW DOES THE PARKING BREAK DOWN? WELL, THE TOTAL COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL USES FOR ALL THE PROPERTIES INVOLVED. AND THIS INCLUDES THE PENDING REQUEST FOR OUTDOOR DINING. REQUIRE 85 SPACES, AND THIS INCLUDES 72 FOR THE MOORINGS PLAZA AND ALL THE BUSINESSES THERE, 11 FOR THE REAL ESTATE OFFICE PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH AND TWO FOR THE OUTDOOR DINING. SO THAT'S THE 85. THAT'S WHAT'S NEEDED. WHAT'S PROVIDED AND HOW THE PETITIONER PROPOSES TO SATISFY. IT TOTALS 94 SPACES, AND THIS INCLUDES 63 SPACES THAT ARE PHYSICALLY IN THE MOORINGS PLAZA IN THE FRONT AND THE BACK, TEN SPACES AT THE REAL ESTATE OFFICE PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH, 11 SPACES IN THE CITY OWNED LOT TO THE SOUTHEAST, AND TEN SPACES IN THE FDOT LEASE LOT TO THE EAST. SO THEY NEED 85. THEY PROPOSE A COMBINATION OF THESE PARCELS TO REACH 90 FOR THE FIRST TWO PARCELS, THE PETITIONER OWNS THE SECOND TWO PARCELS. THE PETITIONER HAS RECEIVED LEASE AGREEMENTS FROM OWNERSHIP IN THIS CASE THE CITY AND THE STATE. THE ABUTTING PROPERTIES ARE WELL WITHIN THE THE 600FT. THAT'S ALLOWED FOR CONSIDERATION FOR SHARED PARKING. THIS PETITION WAS NOTICED TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 1000FT. TO DATE, STAFF HAS RECEIVED NO OFFICIAL PUBLIC CORRESPONDENCE CONCERNING THIS REQUEST. THE CONDITIONAL USE PETITION WAS HEARD IN JUNE, BEFORE THE SUMMER BREAK BY THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD. THE PAB RECOMMENDED APPROVAL WITH A VOTE OF 4 TO 3. THERE WERE TWO CONDITIONS ATTACHED. THOSE ARE THE FIRST TWO CONDITIONS THAT I'LL READ. THERE'S A THIRD CONDITION THAT'S BEEN ADDED SINCE THEN. BUT SHOULD COUNCIL CHOOSE TO APPROVE THE CONDITIONAL USE PETITION TODAY, I'LL READ THE CONDITIONS INTO THE RECORD AGAIN. THE FIRST TWO WERE PART OF THE REPORT. SHOULD COUNCIL APPROVE PETITION 2508 FOR OUTDOOR DINING ON PRIVATE PROPERTY FOR JIMMY P'S CHARRED RESTAURANT, LOCATED AT 823 TO 840 ONE NINTH STREET NORTH, WITHIN THE MORNINGS PLAZA. THE WRITTEN AGREEMENT REQUIRED BY CODE OF ORDINANCES SECTION 5102 B2, MUST BE RECORDED WITH THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF THE EXPANDED OUTDOOR DINING AT THE RESTAURANT. NUMBER TWO SHOULD CITY COUNCIL APPROVE PETITION 2508 FOR OUTDOOR DINING ON PRIVATE PROPERTY FOR JIMMY P'S CHARRED RESTAURANT, LOCATED AT 823 TO 840 ONE NINTH STREET NORTH WITHIN THE PLAZA, THE PETITIONER SHALL RECEIVE THE REQUISITE CITY AND FDOT APPROVALS TO MAKE NECESSARY SITE CHANGES CONCERNING CONTROLLED ACCESS, CIRCULATION, ONE WAY MOVEMENTS AND DIRECTIONAL SIGNAGE. NUMBER THREE, WHICH HAS BEEN ADDED, THE CITY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO REQUIRE MODIFICATIONS TO THE SITE PARKING LOT DESIGN. SHALL THERE BE IDENTIFIED TRAFFIC CIRCULATION PROBLEMS OR DEFICIENCIES? SO THAT WILL CONCLUDE MY COMMENTS. OBVIOUSLY I HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL COMMENTS FOR THE OUTDOOR DINING, BUT IF WE'RE TAKING THESE ONE BY ONE THAT'S IT FOR NOW AND AGAIN. AND I APOLOGIZE BECAUSE I, I FORGOT TO MENTION THAT INCLUSIVE OF THAT PROPOSAL WOULD BE APPROVAL FROM FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO MODIFICATIONS FOR THOSE CURB CUTS, THOSE DRIVEWAYS TO MAKE THEM IT'S A MESS. WE'RE TRYING TO GET IT SAFE. WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE IT WORK. AND THE APPLICANTS ARE COMMITTED TO MAKING IT WORK AND MAKING IT SAFE. AND WE KNOW THAT'S ALL PART OF IT. AND OKAY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION. WE'LL GO TO QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL. MEMBER KRAMER. NOT REALLY A QUESTION. JUST TO CLARIFY. AND I. YOU TALKED ABOUT THERE'S THAT'S THE ONLY PLACE IN THE CITY WHERE THAT'S THE CASE FOR EGRESS TWO DIRECTION TRAFFIC OFF OF 41. AND I JUST REMEMBER I, I'VE BEEN IN NORMAN LA FORCE A NUMBER OF TIMES AND THAT THAT AREA HAS THE SAME SITUATION. [01:10:02] AND THERE MAY BE MORE BEYOND THAT. THAT'S JUST ONE. YEAH. IT'S IT'S YOU'RE YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. AND IT'S THE SAME SITUATION EXCEPT THE CURB CUTS ARE FURTHER APART. OKAY. I WOULD MAYOR I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN'T. I'D LIKE TO HEAR THE WHOLE ENCHILADA BECAUSE IT ALL. IT'S SUCH A PACKAGE THAT'S GOING TO FIT TOGETHER. IF. CAN WE FINISH THIS PART ABOUT THE OUTDOOR DINING AND SEE HOW THIS IS SUPPOSED TO ALL WORK? AS LONG AS THE LIKE THE CITY ATTORNEY SAID WE WILL TAKE EACH ITEM SEPARATELY FOR THE RESOLUTION AND APPROVAL. CAN WE HEAR THEM ALL AND THEN TAKE THEM ONE BY ONE. TWO MOTIONS OR SOMETHING. I HAVEN'T READ THE OTHER TITLES, SO RIGHT NOW WE'RE JUST ON THE SHARED PARKING. BUT IF YOU IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS JUST EVERY TIME WE DO THIS, IT GETS VERY CONFUSING FOR THE RECORD. SO I WOULD PREFER TO KEEP THEM SEPARATE. BUT IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS ON THE OUTDOOR DINING, I MEAN, I THINK THE APPLICANT STARTED OFF WITH A VERY HIGH OVERVIEW OF THE ENTIRE PROJECT. SO YOU CAN ASK AWAY. YEAH. WELL, I WOULD LIKE TO I JUST I THINK THERE'S SO MANY I DON'T KNOW HOW IT'S GOING TO WORK, AND I DON'T SEE A REASON TO APPROVE THIS IF I DON'T KNOW HOW THE REST IS GOING TO WORK. EXCUSE ME. I DON'T SEE A REASON TO APPROVE THIS. IF I DON'T SEE HOW THE OUTDOOR DINING IS GOING TO WORK, AND I DON'T SEE HOW THE OUTDOOR DINING WORKS. SO I'M WONDERING IF WE COULD. IF YOU COULD COACH US UP ON THAT. IS THAT LEGAL? I DON'T YES, YES, IT'S LEGAL FOR SURE. I JUST LIKE TO KEEP RECORDS. BUT THIS IS ONE OF THOSE SITUATIONS WHERE THEY'RE PROPOSING TWO DIFFERENT THINGS PURSUANT TO THE CODE RELATED TO ONE REQUEST. REALLY? WHICH SHARED PARKING SATISFIES THE OUTDOOR DINING REQUEST. SO I CAN UNDERSTAND WANTING TO UNDERSTAND BOTH. YEAH, I GET, I GET WHY? SO WHAT YOU'RE ASKING IS OKAY. OKAY. CAN YOU TALK TO US ABOUT THAT? SURE. TELL ME WHAT YOU DON'T. WHEN YOU SAY DON'T. YOU DON'T KNOW HOW IT'S GOING TO WORK. CAN YOU JUST GIVE ME GIVE US MORE DETAIL ABOUT THE OUTDOOR DINING? THERE'S A THERE'S A THERE'S A THERE'S A DRAWING IN THE PACKET, WHICH IS. YEAH, I'VE GOT IT. OKAY. AND THERE WAS ORIGINALLY A PROPOSAL TO DO NINE TABLES WITH 26 SEATS. AND WHAT WE'VE DONE IS WE'VE REDUCED THAT TO FIVE TABLES WITH 20 SEATS FOR FIVE FOR TOP TABLES. AND WE'VE. AND THERE WAS A PROBLEM WITH THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE ACTUAL WALL OF THE BUILDING AND THE TABLES BECAUSE IT WAS TOO NARROW WITH THE LAST APPLICATION, WE'VE WIDENED THAT TO ABOUT A LITTLE OVER FOUR FEET. AND THERE'S A DOORWAY. THERE'S ALSO A DOORWAY THAT YOU CAN SEE. I'VE GOT MY ARROW POINTED TO IT. NOW, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S SHOWING. I'VE GOT IT ZOOMED IN ON MINE. IT'S RIGHT THERE. THAT LEADS TO THE TO THE TO THE INSIDE WHERE FOOD COMES FROM. AND THE OTHER APPLICATION CALLED FOR THIS AREA HERE TO BE ALL GO ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE TO THE SHOP, SO TO SPEAK. SO WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN HERE IS THESE TABLES. THESE FIVE TABLES WILL BE HERE. THERE'LL BE NEW PLANTERS HERE WITH NEW LANDSCAPING IN THE PLANTERS, AND THEN THEY'LL BE PARKING HERE. THERE'S AN END CAP HERE, WHICH MEANS YOU CAN'T WALK. YOU CAN'T WALK THROUGH HERE. AND THE WAY INTO THIS IS THROUGH HERE OR THROUGH HERE. AND WE'VE HAD I'M TELLING YOU, WE'VE GONE OVER THIS THREE DIFFERENT TIMES WITH WITH CORY ADAMSKI, AND HE HAS FINALLY ISSUED THE LIFE SAFETY PLAN THAT SAYS THAT WILL WORK. AS FAR AS SAFETY IS CONCERNED, WE THINK IT WILL WORK. AS FAR AS ACCOMMODATING PEOPLE THAT NORMALLY WILL COME IN TO THE RESTAURANT HERE AND IF THEY WANT TO SIT OUTSIDE OR EVEN INSIDE, THEY'LL BE STACKED UP TO HERE. I KNOW RIGHT? RIGHT. AND AT THIS POINT IN TIME, THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT STILL WANT TO SIT OUTSIDE. AND THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF TALK ABOUT, WELL, IT'S GOING TO BE HOT UP THERE, HOT OUT THERE. THAT'S WHY WE PROPOSED THE THAT'S WHY WE PROPOSED THIS AWNING. AND QUITE FRANKLY, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S GOING TO BE BLACK OR A DIFFERENT COLOR, BUT IT'S AN AWNING AND IT'S SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU TALKED ABOUT THE USS NEMO. OKAY. HOWEVER, THIS PLANT MATERIAL IS, IS MORE HEDGE LIKE. AND THESE PLANTER BOXES ARE RESIN. THEY'RE NOT WOOD. AND WE THINK ADDRESSES WE THINK IT DRESSES UP THE WHOLE CENTER. YOU KNOW, WHAT HAPPENS IS AND PEOPLE, OTHER MERCHANTS COMPLAIN ABOUT ABOUT ABOUT WELL, IF SOMEBODY CAN KNOW THAT THERE'S A WATCH, I'M A WATCH REPAIR SHOP OR I OR I AM A TAILOR, AND WHEN SOMEBODY CALLS THAT WATCH REPAIR SHOP OR THAT TAILOR AND SAYS, WHERE ARE YOU LOCATED? THEY DON'T SAY, I'M LOCATED AT 1840 NINTH AVENUE. [01:15:05] YOU KNOW WHAT THEY SAY? I'M ACROSS FROM COASTAL MALL IN THE SHOPPING CENTER. JIMMY P'S IS THE. IT'S THE PULL, IT'S THE DRAG, IT'S THE ANCHOR. THAT'S WHAT EVERYBODY. THAT'S WHAT EVERYBODY GOES TO. AND FOR HIM TO BE ABLE TO IMPROVE THIS AND IMPROVE THE PARKING FLOW AND IMPROVE THE CONGESTION AND MAKE IT SAFER AND IT'S NOT. IT'S NOT A DEAL. IT'S NOT A DEAL THAT SAYS, GIVE US THE OUTDOOR DINING. WE'LL DO EVERYTHING ELSE. IT JUST MAKES SENSE BECAUSE IT IS SO CONFLICTING AND DANGEROUS RIGHT THERE, RIGHT NOW THAT SOMETHING'S GOT TO BE DONE. WELL. SO JUST ONE QUICK THING, BECAUSE WITH THE PEOPLE AT HOME, WE'RE LOOKING AT THAT PICTURE THAT IT DOESN'T HAVE THAT WOULD HAVE EGRESS RIGHT THERE, PROBABLY UNDERNEATH WHERE IT SAYS JIMMY OR MAYBE PEAS. THAT. CORRECT. YEAH. FROM THE PLANS. JUST SO ANYBODY WATCHING WOULD KNOW. THAT'S THE LIFE SAFETY PART. AND I THINK CLOSING IT OFF ON THAT END MAKES SENSE. THERE'S NO THROUGH TRAFFIC. I THINK THAT'S THE POINT WE MAKE THERE THAT YOU DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT PEOPLE TRYING TO WALK THROUGH TO GET WHATEVER. RIGHT. EXACTLY. OKAY. THANKS VERY MUCH. OKAY. YOU'RE WELCOME. COUNCIL MEMBER PETRANOFF. YES. THANK YOU. I WAS READING THROUGH THIS AND READING THROUGH SOME OF THE HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS, HOW IT ALMOST FEELS LIKE TO ME AND I AND JIMMY PEAS, WE LITERALLY GO THERE EVERY WEEK. YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE A GOOD PRODUCT. IT'S A YOU KNOW, IT'S GREAT FOR LUNCHTIME. IT'S PACKED FOR LUNCHTIME. I ALMOST FEEL LIKE YOU ARE TRYING TO FIT. WHAT WAS IT, TO QUOTE YOU, 100 POUNDS INTO A 50 POUND SACK? AND THIS IS AN INCREMENTAL AMOUNT THAT YOU'RE PUTTING IN THAT THAT SACK. YOU'VE SOMEHOW WORKED OUT A DEAL WITH FDOT TO LEASE THIS ON A QUARTERLY BASIS TO GET MORE PARKING FOR YOUR SUCCESS STORY. AND THEN I YOU KNOW, BEFORE THAT, YOU GOT A WHAT WAS A PUBLIC PARK, OPEN AREA AND CHANGED IT INTO A PARKING LOT IN EXCHANGE FOR SOME IMPROVEMENTS IN THE BACK TO GET MORE PARKING FOR YOUR SUCCESS AREA. NOW YOU'RE ASKING FOR ANOTHER. ANOTHER PARKING OR RATHER, ANOTHER MORE MORE ROOM TO GROW AND MORE PEOPLE TO SEAT WHEN THERE IS ALREADY A RECOGNIZED PROBLEM THERE. WHEN YOU GO IN, PARTICULARLY IN HIGH SEASON, BUT IT'S EVEN BUSY DURING OFF SEASON LUNCHTIMES ARE PARTICULARLY BAD. AND YOU KNOW, I GUESS YOU ARE SHORTENING THESE PARKING SPOTS OUT IN THE FRONT OF THESE BUSHES, IS THAT CORRECT? WE'RE NOT SHORTENING THEM. THEY'LL BE THEY'LL THEY'RE THEY'RE THEY'RE GOING TO COME OUT. THERE'S PLENTY OF ROOM TO COME OUT IN THIS AREA TO MAKE THEM THE REGULAR SIZE. WE'RE NOT SHORTENING THEM AT ALL BECAUSE RIGHT NOW IT'S A CONFLICT OF PEOPLE BACKING OUT. IT'S HORRIBLE. AND SO I GUESS I'M I'M A LITTLE UNCLEAR ON HOW IT'S GOING TO FIX THAT AND HOW IT'S NOT GOING TO BY ADDING MORE PEOPLE TO SIT IS NOT GOING TO MAKE IT WORSE. THE CONFLICT IS THAT PEOPLE WILL PEOPLE WILL COME INTO THIS WHOLE PARKING AREA. THEY'LL COME IN FROM BOTH DIRECTIONS AND FOR SOME REASON I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS, BUT FOR SOME REASON, THE IN THING NOW IS FOR EVERYBODY TO BACK IN. NOBODY CAN PULL IN. THEY GOT TO BACK IN. SO WHEN PEOPLE ARE BACKING IN AND GOING IN DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS, YOU GOT PEOPLE, YOU GOT CARS BACKED UP. THERE'S NO QUESTION ABOUT IT. THERE'S IT. THAT'S THE PROBLEM. THE PROBLEM IS THE CONFLICTS IN THE PARKING LOT IS BECAUSE OF THE WAY TRAFFIC MOVES. AND YOU CAN GET AND YOU CAN GET TWO PARKING ATTENDANTS TO GO INTO THAT PARKING LOT AND KEEP IT THE WAY IT IS NOW. AND IT'S STILL GOING TO HAPPEN. IT'S STILL GOING TO HAPPEN. AND JIMMY'S STILL GOING TO HAVE THE SAME AMOUNT OF PEOPLE COMING TO HIS RESTAURANT. WHETHER HE GETS THIS APPROVED OR HE DOESN'T GET IT APPROVED, IT'S GOING TO BE THE SAME WAY. IT'S GOING TO HAVE THE SAME FLOW, THE SAME PEOPLE COMING IN. THE DIFFERENCE IS HE'S NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THAT MANY PEOPLE. HE'S NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO HAVE TEN MORE PEOPLE SIT OUTSIDE AT NIGHT, OR EVEN DURING THE DAY OR AT NIGHT. AND HE'S WILLING TO DO IT JUST AT NIGHT. BUT UNLESS YOU CHANGE. GET THAT PARKING TO WORK. YOU'RE STILL GOING TO HAVE. WE CAN DO NOTHING HERE AND GET THIS APPLICATION DENIED. AND THINGS ARE GOING TO STAY THE SAME WAY THEY ARE. THEY'RE NOT GOING TO CHANGE. AND THE THINGS THAT YOU TALK ABOUT ARE ABSOLUTELY ARE ABSOLUTELY REAL. AND WHY? THIS DRIVES ME CRAZY AS A PLANNER FOR 45 YEARS. OKAY. AND REPRESENTING MUNICIPALITIES AND DOING PLANS LIKE THIS FOR HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS OF THEM, WHY NO ONE FROM THE CITY EVER SAID WHAT YOU JUST SAID FIVE MINUTES AGO WHEN THEY CAME IN TO DO THAT PLAN IN THAT PARK AREA [01:20:10] TO TO TO RECTIFY SOME ISSUES WITH PEOPLE ON MANDARIN ROAD. WHY DIDN'T SOMEBODY SAY, HOW'S THIS GOING TO WORK? THIS ISN'T GOING TO WORK, OR WHEN OR WHEN THEY CAME IN TO DO THE 10 TO 10 ADDITIONAL SPACES BECAUSE NO ONE, NO ONE FROM MANDAN ROAD PARKS THERE, AND THE EMPLOYEES DON'T PARK THERE EITHER. AND WHEN THEY DID THE THE DOT SPACES. WHY DIDN'T SOMEBODY SAY, HOW IS THIS GOING TO WORK? MAYBE THIS DESIGN COULD BE BETTER. MAYBE THIS DESIGN CAN BE A LITTLE BETTER, BECAUSE NOW YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TWO WAY TRAFFIC GOING IN ON TWO CURB CUTS WITHIN 200FT OF EACH OTHER. BUT NO ONE EVER SAID THAT BECAUSE NO ONE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO SAY IT. I'M THINKING MORE. THEY ALSO DIDN'T SAY, WHY WOULD WE GIVE UP? YOU KNOW, THE GREEN, GREEN SPACE AND OTHER THINGS TO ACCOMMODATE A PRIVATE ENTERPRISE? I HAVE NO IDEA. BUT BUT IT IS. IT IS WHAT IT IS. IT'S ALMOST SCREAMING THE FROM TEN YEARS AGO THAT THIS IS A SUPER SUCCESS STORY WITH DELICIOUS FOOD. MAYBE THEY SHOULD MOVE TO AN AREA EITHER TO TAKE MORE OF THE OF THE BUILDING, WHICH I DON'T KNOW IF IS A POSSIBILITY, OR OPEN ANOTHER WE OPEN OR RELOCATE WHERE THEY CAN EXPAND, BECAUSE IN A NEW YORK MINUTE THAT PLACE WILL FILL UP TOO. HE JUST RENEWED A LONG LEASE. SO HE'S NOT HE'S NOT. WELL HE CAN. WHY DON'T YOU LET HIM? OKAY. I'VE BEEN HERE FOR 23 YEARS, SO IF YOU COULD POSSIBLY GET US WHERE YOU GOT TO BE SWORN IN, OKAY. YOU'RE NOT GOING TO SEE ME ON AIR, BUT I'LL PEEK AROUND THE CORNER HERE. YEAH, WELL, YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN HERE 23 YEARS, AND JUST GETTING UP AND MOVING AND RELOCATING ISN'T REALLY AN OPTION RIGHT NOW. THAT'S WHERE WE'VE ESTABLISHED OURSELVES. AND WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE IS ALLEVIATE THE PARKING PROBLEM THAT WE KNOW WE HAVE. WE'RE WE'RE ASKING FOR 14 MORE SEATS. YOU KNOW, WE APPROVED FOR SIX. WE'RE ASKING FOR 14. AND IF YOU THINK ABOUT THE CONCEPT HERE, WE'RE PEOPLE THAT COME AND THEY COME EAT AT OUR PLACE AND THEY WAIT 30, 45 MINUTES AN HOUR SOMETIMES TO GET A SEAT. IF WE CAN SIT THOSE 14 MORE PEOPLE. WE CAN TURN TABLES QUICKER TOO, SO PEOPLE AREN'T STANDING AROUND WAITING. SO YOU MISS PETRANOFF. YOU SAID THAT YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE'RE NOT ADDING 2030 MORE TABLES. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 14, WHICH I THINK WILL HELP THE FLOW ANYWAY. AND WE'RE TRYING TO DO ONE WAY IN, ONE WAY OUT PARKING BECAUSE WE KNOW WE HAVE HAVE AN ISSUE. SO WE'RE WE'RE WORKING WITH THE CITY TO TRY TO MAKE THIS BETTER. AND I'M JUST I'M ASKING FOR A FEW MORE, A FEW MORE TABLES OUTSIDE, YOU KNOW, TO HELP MY BUSINESS. YEAH, WE ARE REALLY BUSY ON THURSDAY STEAK DAY THAT, THAT THAT THAT LUNCH IS TWO HOURS A WEEK. YES. FOR SURE. YOU KNOW, BUT RIGHT NOW, ESPECIALLY IN THE SUMMER, NO, I MEAN, WE'RE NOT DOING THE SEASONS DIFFERENT. YES. IN THE EVENINGS, NO ONE'S EVEN OPEN. SO WE HAVE NO TRAFFIC PROBLEM AT ALL. BUT WE'RE TRYING TO JUST ADD A FEW MORE TABLES. AND, YOU KNOW, OUR BUSINESS HAS GROWN, AND I KNOW ONE IN THE PLAZA IS OPPOSED TO IT AS FAR AS THE OTHER BUSINESSES. AND WE'VE TALKED TO ALL THE NEIGHBORS AROUND, AND THAT'S JUST WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO WORK ON. AND ESTHETICALLY, I THINK OUT FRONT, YOU KNOW, LIKE, LIKE NEMO'S SWAN RIVER. I THINK WE CAN MAKE THAT PLAZA LOOK A LOT BETTER, TOO. BUT WE WANT TO GET APPROVED FOR THE 20 SEATS BEFORE WE START INVESTING A TON OF MONEY INTO, YOU KNOW, OUR FUTURE IDEAS. SO THAT'S KIND OF THE POSITION THAT THAT I'M AT RIGHT NOW, YOU KNOW, THANK YOU. FOR THE RECORD JAMES PEPPER THANK YOU. MAYOR, I WASN'T I HAD ONE MORE QUESTION BEFORE I. YES, SIR. IF YOU GO TO SLIDE 14 FOR ME, EXCUSE ME, SLIDE 14. CAN YOU LOOK AT SLIDE 14 IN YOUR DECK? WHY AREN'T NUMBERED? YOU GOT TO TELL ME WHAT IT IS. IT'S THE SITE PLAN. IT SHOWS THE TRAFFIC PATTERN. OH, OKAY. OKAY. OKAY, SO I'M ON THE NORTH END. OKAY. THERE'S AN ISLAND, AND THEN THE FIRST ARROWS START TO GET INTO YOUR PLAZA. THIS ISLAND. NO, NO, NO, JUST NORTH OF THAT. KEEP GOING. THAT. YEAH. THAT'S THIS ISLAND. YEAH. SO? SO AM I TO UNDERSTAND THAT WE'LL HAVE I DON'T KNOW IF IT'LL BE ONE WAY TRAFFIC GOING INTO CHET'S AS WELL FROM THERE AND TAKING AND GOING NORTH ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT ISLAND. WE CAN'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT CHET. NO. MY QUESTION IS, WHAT HAPPENS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT ISLAND? DO YOU KNOW WHAT HAPPENS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT ISLAND IS RIGHT NOW? CHECK PARKED CARS RIGHT HERE. WELL, NO, IT'S STILL. I STILL GO THERE. I GET GAS THERE EVERY WHEN I GET GAS. SO YOU KNOW. OKAY, YOU BRING UP A REALLY INTERESTING POINT. NOTHING WILL CHANGE WITH THIS CURVE. THAT WAS MY QUESTION. OKAY. AND AND WHAT'S INTERESTING, THAT IS, YOU KNOW, THIS THAT CHECK. PUT A CHECK, PUT UP CONES HERE. YOU CAN'T YOU CAN'T GO THROUGH HERE. IT'S HARD TO GO THROUGH THERE. YEAH. IT'S TRUE. ESPECIALLY IN A TRUCK. RIGHT. AND HE DID IT FOR A REASON. HE DOESN'T WANT PEOPLE GOING THROUGH THERE. [01:25:05] YEAH. AND HE'S HE'S A CLIENT OF MINE AS WELL. AND, YOU KNOW, HE. WELL, YOU KNOW, THAT'S A CUT THROUGH TO GET TO PUBLIX. IF YOU'RE COMING FROM THE SOUTH AND YOU DON'T WANT TO GO TO THE LIGHT. SO THAT'S WHY IT'S ONE OF THE REASONS THAT CONGESTS ALL. YEAH, WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO ELIMINATE THOSE, BUT THAT WILL STILL HAPPEN IN THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT ISLAND. NOTHING WILL CHANGE. THAT WAS JUST THAT WAS MY ONLY QUESTION, RIGHT? YEAH. THANKS VERY MUCH. OKAY. WE'RE STILL ON QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. WELL, YOU WANTED TO YOU WANTED TO GO TO THE OUTDOOR DINING APPLICATION. I THINK WE'VE COVERED A LOT. A LOT OF THAT. BUT THERE IS A. AND I'VE GIVEN YOU A LOT OF TESTIMONY ON THAT, BUT THERE IS A STAFF REPORT ON IT. I'M SORRY. NOT YET. I HAVE BARTON AND VICE MAYOR AND THEN CRISPIN. SO THE PROPOSED TRAFFIC FLOW. ONE WAY IN CHANGES. HAVE THOSE ALREADY BEEN ESTABLISHED OR THOSE. THOSE ARE THOSE ARE THOSE ARE OFFERINGS THAT WE THAT WE ARE GOING TO POTENTIALLY IMPROVE. WHAT'S GOING ON OVER THERE FROM A TRAFFIC FLOW STANDPOINT? THE LATTER, SIR. OKAY. IN REFERENCE TO THE I WILL SAY THAT IN REFERENCE TO THE PARKING SPACES THAT I MENTIONED A LITTLE EARLIER WHERE THEY'RE, THEY'RE, THEY'RE THEY'RE NOT SHORTENED, I REALIZE, BECAUSE YOU CAN LENGTHEN THEM. THE REASON YOU CAN LENGTHEN THEM IS BECAUSE THERE'S NOT ACTUALLY PARKING ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE THERE. SO IF YOU LOOK AT THAT AERIAL SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHY THAT'S YOU'RE ABLE TO STILL HAVE THE SAME LENGTH ON THE PARKING SPACES BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT ENCROACHING ON PARKING ON THE OTHER SIDE BECAUSE IT'S THE ENTRANCE THERE. I THINK THAT THE REALITY IS, IS WHAT WE'RE DEALING WITH HERE IS YOU'RE RIGHT, A VERY CONVOLUTED PARKING LOT THAT HAS ISSUES. I THINK THE CHANGE IN TRAFFIC FLOW MAKES SENSE, AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT PROBABLY SHOULD BE DONE. THE REALITY AND IN MY OPINION, IS THAT ADDING THESE SEATS AREN'T GOING TO MAKE THAT MORE CONVOLUTED. IT'S NOT GOING TO MAKE IT LESS CONVOLUTED, BUT IT'S NOT GONNA MAKE IT MORE CONVOLUTED. SO, I MEAN, IT'S THE ISSUES WITH THE PARKING LOT ITSELF ARE NOT WHAT WE'RE HERE TO TALK ABOUT. WE'RE HERE TO TALK ABOUT THE, THE CONDITIONAL USE OF PARKING AND THE ADDITIONAL SEATS. SO IF WE STAY FOCUSED ON THAT AND IN MY OPINION, IS NOT GOING TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE TO THAT PARKING LOT. SO LET'S MOVE ON WITH OUR LIVES AND TACK IT. THANK YOU. I HAVE VICE MAYOR AND THEN COUNCIL MEMBER KRISTEN. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. A FEW QUESTIONS RELATED TO THIS AS I TRY TO UNPACK IT A LITTLE BIT. AND CONGRATULATIONS ON THE SUCCESS OF THE RESTAURANT. THAT'S KIND OF YOU DON'T WANT THESE KIND OF PROBLEMS, BUT YOU'RE NOT REALLY TRYING TO INCREASE YOUR BUSINESS BY A LOT. BY A LOT OR A SUBSTANTIAL PORTION JUST TO STAY AFLOAT. SO YOU'VE GOT THAT SOLVED WITH GREAT PRODUCTS AND GREAT SERVICE. SO CONGRATULATIONS. SO LET ME GET RIGHT INTO THIS. THE LANDSCAPE PLAN. YOU KNOW, FOR THE PLANTERS THE RESIN PLANTERS AS YOU DESCRIBED THEM. CAN YOU CONFIRM THE THE LANDSCAPE PLAN THAT IS INTENDED TO BE USED? I SAW A FEW SLIDES, AND I'M LOSING TRACK OF WHICH ONE IS DESIRED. LET ME TELL YOU A LITTLE STORY REAL QUICK. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. STORY WHEN I SAT DOWN WITH WITH THE PEOPLE FROM THE SHOPPING CENTER. THE OWNER, NOT JIMMY. AND THEY HAVE A PERSON THAT DOES SOME MANAGEMENT WORK OVER THERE. AND I PRESENTED THAT LANDSCAPE PLAN. SHE SAID, YOU KNOW, THAT STUFF'S GOING TO BE ARTIFICIAL. I'M NOT GOING TO WALK AROUND WATERING THAT STUFF. AND I SAID, WHAT? WHAT? WHAT DID I JUST HEAR? SO I'M GOING TO ASK YOU IF, IN FACT, YOU ARE INCLINED TO PUT A MOTION UP FOR APPROVAL OR DENIAL, WHATEVER IT IS, HOPEFULLY APPROVAL. YOU SPECIFY EXACTLY THAT. YOU WANT A LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR THOSE PLANTERS, THAT IS, THAT HAS TO BE IRRIGATED PROPERLY BECAUSE I'M HAVING TROUBLE WINNING THAT BATTLE. BUT THAT'S WHY I SHOWED IT'S PODOCARPUS. WHAT'S ON THERE RIGHT NOW. AND YEAH. YOU KNOW ONE OF THE THINGS I'M UP AGAINST. OKAY. I'M NOT PREPARED. I'M NOT GOING DOWN THAT PATH OF THE IRRIGATION OF THE PLANTS. WHAT I'M ASKING THOUGH RIGHT NOW IS CAN YOU SHOW ME THE THE LANDSCAPE PLAN USING PLANTERS IN FRONT OF THE PARKING [01:30:05] SPACES. SHOW ME WHAT IS PROPOSED. I SAW ONE PLAN WITH A SPLIT IN THE PLANTERS, AND I SEE ANOTHER PLAN WITH NO SPLIT. IT'S A SOLID WALL OF PLANTERS. SO JUST JUST TELL ME WHICH ONE IS THE ONE WE'RE CONSIDERING. SEE, THAT'S A SOLID WALL. IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S ONE THAT IS A THE PLANTERS ARE NOT SOLID. THE PLANTERS ARE RIGHT. WHERE IS THE PATHWAY IN BETWEEN THOSE? OKAY, THIS PLAN DOES NOT SHOW THE PATHWAY IN BETWEEN THEM, BUT THERE WILL BE A PATHWAY IN BETWEEN THEM. SO. SO WHY DOESN'T IT SHOW THE PATHWAY? BECAUSE THE LANDSCAPE PLAN WAS DONE BEFORE WE EVEN BEFORE WE EVEN GOT THE LIFE SAFETY PLAN APPROVED. OKAY, THAT'S A PROBLEM FOR ME. I I'M LOOKING FOR THE PLAN THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE APPROVING. OKAY. AND IN MY OPINION, IT NEEDS TO BE PART OF THE PACKAGE. OKAY. IT NEEDS TO BE CLEAR NOW. SO WE AGREE THAT WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT DOESN'T SHOW WHAT IS INTENDED. SO NOW SHOW ME WHAT'S INTENDED, PLEASE. WELL, WE IN A DIAGRAM. OKAY. THIS PLAN SHOWS THAT THIS IS. THESE ARE SOLID PLANTERS THAT COME ACROSS. OKAY. THIS IS A SOLID WALL. YEAH. AND THE WAY THAT YOU GET INTO THIS AREA IS FROM THIS THIS LOCATION HERE. OKAY. THAT'S WHAT THIS PLAN SHOWS. AND IF, IN FACT YOU WOULD LIKE THAT CHANGE, WE WOULD ACCEPT THAT, AND WE WOULD PREPARE A NEW PLAN THAT SHOWS AN ENTRY HERE. WE DON'T PARTICULARLY THINK. THAT MAY JUST BE ANOTHER CONFLICT AREA. I DON'T KNOW, BUT IT JUST SEEMS TO MAKE SENSE TO CHANNEL EVERYBODY IN THROUGH HERE. MR. SCANGARELLO, CAN YOU SHOW ME THE PLAN? ILLUSTRATIVELY IN A DIAGRAM THAT SHOWS WHAT YOU DESIRE TO HAVE, WHAT'S INTENDED? I DON'T HAVE THAT PLAN. THIS IS WHAT I HAVE TO SAY. THAT THIS IS WHAT WE DESIRE TO HAVE. BECAUSE THIS PLAN, THIS PLAN, OKAY, THAT I'M SHOWING NOW, SHOWS THE PLANTERS HERE AND SHOWS THE PLANTERS HERE AND SHOWS A WALKWAY RIGHT THROUGH HERE. THAT'S THE PLAN THAT WE HAVE PRESENTED. AND I'M SORRY THAT THE OTHER PLAN DOESN'T REFLECT THAT, BUT THIS IS THE PLAN THAT WE HAVE THAT'S IN COUNCIL. THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO RESOLVE. I SEE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS IN THE PACKET. I'M TRYING TO FIND OUT WHICH ONE IS THE SERIOUS ONE? THIS IS THE. THIS IS THE PLAN THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE ACCEPTED OR APPROVED, BECAUSE THIS IS THE LIFE SAFETY PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED. OKAY. I'LL WAIT FOR STAFF, MAYBE. OR MR. SCANGARELLO, I'D LIKE TO COME BACK TO YOU, BUT IF CITY STAFF HAS A COMMENT ON THIS. YEAH. GOOD AFTERNOON. GOOD MORNING. COREY DAMSKY, DEPUTY FIRE CHIEF. THE PLAN WITH THE EGRESS PATH THROUGH THOSE PARKING SPACES IS NOT THE PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED BY ME OR ANYONE ELSE IN THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. LET ME MAKE SURE I'M CLEAR. THE PLAN THAT'S ON THE SCREEN RIGHT NOW THAT SHOWS A SPLIT PLANTER ALIGNMENT WITH ABOUT A FOUR FOOT. FOUR FOOT INGRESS AND EGRESS FOR DINERS. THAT HAS NOT BEEN APPROVED BY AS PART OF THE LIFE SAFETY PLAN. NOT WITH THAT OPENING. NO, SIR. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT. NOW THE. SO THERE'S NO ILLUSTRATIVE DESIGN OR IS THERE. THAT SHOWS A CONTINUOUS WALL OF PLANNERS THAT HAS BEEN APPROVED AS PART OF THE LIFE SAFETY PLAN. YES. THE LIFE SAFETY PLAN THAT I REVIEWED AND APPROVED HAD THE CONTINUOUS WALL OF PLANTERS AND THE EGRESS PATH MOVING ALONG THE FRONT OF THE STORE. SO THANK YOU FOR THAT, MR. ADAMSKI. SO, COUNCIL, I'VE GOT A PROBLEM WITH THIS. I'M NOT SURE WHAT I'M VOTING ON. I'M NOT. IT'S I'M NOT PREPARED TO MOVE FORWARD AND AD HOC ALTER THIS WHEN IMPORTANT ISSUES LIKE LIFE SAFETY PLANS, WHAT THE PETITIONER'S BRINGING FORWARD, IN MY OPINION, WERE NOT. I'M NOT PREPARED. BECAUSE IT'S SUCH IT'S GOING TO BE CONFUSING. FOR THE RECORD, IT'S GOING TO BE CONFUSING IN SO MANY DIFFERENT WAYS, BUT I APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING THAT FORWARD. [01:35:01] MADAM MAYOR, I'VE GOT A LOT MORE QUESTIONS, BUT I CAN'T GET PAST THIS, SO I'M GOING TO BE QUIET. THANK YOU. I WANT TO CONFIRM WHERE. WHAT? LIFE SAFETY. CHIEF PLAN IS IT IN ITEM A OR ITEM 11 A, 11 B? ON. SLIDE 23. THIS IS THE ONLY PLAN THAT I HAVE THAT THEY APPROVED. THIS IS THE PLAN. DID YOU GIVE ME A FEW MOMENTS? I CAN FIND IT AND PULL IT UP. THANK YOU. OKAY. LET ME JUST KEEP GOING WITH I HAVE COUNCIL MEMBER. CRISPIN COME BACK. THE I'M FOCUSING ON THE CONDITIONAL USE PETITION 11 A I WANT TO THIS IS DIRECTED TOWARDS STAFF. I THINK THERE THERE ARE 94 SPACES, CORRECT? IN TOTAL AVAILABLE. CORRECT. THEY'RE AVAILABLE NOW. CORRECT. SPLIT ACROSS THE PLAZA, THE PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH, THE CITY LOT AND THE FDOT LOT. THAT'S CORRECT. THE CURRENT PATRONS OF JIMMY P'S, WITH THE CURRENT OUTDOOR DINING ALLOWANCE THAT THEY HAVE, OF THOSE. THEY CAN PARK ANYWHERE IN THOSE FOUR AREAS. THIS IS THE AGREEMENT THEY HAVE IN PLACE. YES. I MEAN THEY CAN PARK THERE NOW. CORRECT. THEY CAN PARK ON THE PLAZA. THEY CAN GO DOWN TO THE SOUTH. REAL SO-CALLED REAL ESTATE PROPERTY. THEY CAN GO TO THE FDOT PIECE, THE CITY PIECE. THEY CAN PARK ANYWHERE. YES, SIR. IF YOU'RE A CUSTOMER. YES, SIR. AND SO CAN THE OTHER CUSTOMERS OF THE OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE PLAZA. YES. SO, AS A PRACTICAL MATTER, IF WE WERE TO APPROVE THE THE ADDITIONAL THE ADDITIONAL OUTDOOR DINING, WHICH, WHICH CARRIES WITH IT AN ADDITIONAL PARKING REQUIREMENT. RIGHT. THAT MEANS THAT THOSE PEOPLE WOULD BE PARKING IN THE SAME AREA WHERE AREAS WHERE PEOPLE ARE CURRENTLY PARKING. CORRECT. AND THE REQUIREMENT FOR ADDITIONAL PARKING IS HOW MUCH? AGAIN, JUST TO REMIND US, IT'S TWO ADDITIONAL SPACES, SIR. THAT'S RIGHT. TWO ADDITIONAL SPACES. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TWO ADDITIONAL SPACES OUT OF NINE WITHIN A AN AVAILABILITY OF 94. CORRECT. OKAY. SECOND QUESTION. THE CIRCULATION PLAN THAT'S BEEN TALKED ABOUT, THE IMPROVED CIRCULATION PLAN. IS THERE A IS THERE A IT'S NOT CLEAR TO ME WHETHER THERE IS A. SO I'LL JUST USE THE TERM IMPROVED CIRCULATION PLAN THAT HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND ACCEPTED OR APPROVED BY CITY STAFF. NO, SIR. THERE IS NOT. THERE IS NOT. THERE IS NOT. SO THIS IS A PROPOSAL FROM THE PETITIONER TO MAKE THOSE IMPROVEMENTS. THAT'S CORRECT. SECONDLY, OKAY, JUST TO CONTINUE HERE, I'LL I'LL BE DONE TO THE CONDITIONS. AND AGAIN I'M STAYING WITH 11 A CONDITION NUMBER ONE THAT THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, THE AGREEMENT WRITTEN AGREEMENT REQUIRED BY THE COURT MUST BE RECORDED WITH THE CLERK OF CIRCUIT COURT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT. THAT THAT'S KIND OF. I'VE NEVER MAYBE I'VE SEEN IT BEFORE AS A CONDITION, BUT NOT TO MY RECOLLECTION. IT'S KIND OF AN UNUSUAL CONDITION. I MEAN, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT'S NORMALLY REQUIRED? IF IT'S NOT NORMALLY REQUIRED, WHY ARE WE REQUIRING IT IN THIS SITUATION? IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING WE RECORD PARKING, SHARED PARKING AGREEMENTS WITH THE CLERK OF COURT. IT'S IN OUR CODE. OKAY, BUT SO IT'S, IT'S IT'S A CUSTOMARY KIND OF AN ACTION FOR US TO TAKE ON THESE SORTS OF MATTERS. CORRECT. AND CLERK OF COURT IS JUST THE PROPERTY APPRAISER'S WEBSITE OR PROPERTY. SO IT'S RECORDED AGAINST THE PROPERTY AND OUR CODE DOES REQUIRE IT. SO YEAH, I THINK IF CONDITIONS IS SOMETHING THAT'S ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT WE WOULD NORMALLY TYPICALLY A CONDITION OF SOMETHING THAT'S ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT WOULD NORMALLY HAPPEN [01:40:05] ANYWAY IN MY MIND. BUT THIS IS MAYBE TO PUT AN EXCLAMATION POINT BEHIND IT. THAT'S WHY THE PAB RECOMMENDED IT, I DON'T KNOW, THEY RECOMMENDED THIS OR THESE WERE THE INITIAL STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WERE ACCEPTED BY PAB. SO YOU'RE YOU'RE JUST INCLUDING THIS, EVEN THOUGH IT'S A NORMAL ACTION THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED BECAUSE OF OUR CODE. JUST TO PUT AN EXCLAMATION POINT BEHIND IT. THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. THE SECOND CONDITION WHICH IS THE PETITIONER SHALL RECEIVE THE REQUISITE CITY AND FDOT APPROVALS TO MAKE NECESSARY SITE CHANGES CONCERNING CONTROLLED ACCESS, CIRCULATION AND SO ON. SO THAT'S WHAT THAT'S BASICALLY SAYING, IS THAT THE GETS BACK TO THE CIRCULATION PLAN I'M TALKING ABOUT. THIS IS THIS IS THE CONDITION THAT WOULD ADDRESS THE THE FACT THAT WHICH SAYS THE PETITIONER SHALL RECEIVE. SO, SO BASICALLY WHAT IT'S SAYING IS THAT THE CITY WOULD, WOULD, WOULD SAY THESE ARE THE THESE ARE THE CHANGES TO THE CIRCULATION PLAN THAT ARE REQUIRED AND PRESENT THOSE TO THE PETITIONER, AND THE PETITIONER WOULD ACCEPT THEM. OR IF A PROPOSAL WAS PROPOSED, THAT WOULD BE REVIEWED AND RECEIVE THE APPROPRIATE APPROVALS TO BE ACCEPTED BY THE CITY AND BY THE STATE. YOU KNOW, IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY HAVE A FEW YOU KNOW, OPTIONS THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE, WHETHER IT'S CHANGES IN CIRCULATION OR SIGNAGE CONDITION WOULD BE THAT ANY IMPROVEMENTS THAT WE MAKE WITH FLORIDA DOT IS CONDITIONAL UPON THEIR APPROVAL AND CITY APPROVAL, BECAUSE CITY APPROVAL WOULD BE A CONDITION OF THE APPROVAL OF THE PETITION. YEAH, I JUST DON'T THINK THAT'S WRITTEN VERY CLEARLY. I MEAN, BECAUSE ONE OF THE CONDITIONS IS THAT IN MY MIND AND I'M SIMPLIFYING IT, I'M SURE, BUT IS THAT THERE WOULD HAVE TO BE AN ACCEPTABLE IMPROVED CIRCULATION PLAN THAT'S DEVELOPED THAT WOULD BE CERTAINLY SOMETHING THAT THE PETITIONER SHOULD INITIATE AND WOULD HAVE TO BE AGREEABLE AND DEVELOPED IN CONCERT WITH THE CITY AND ACCEPTABLE TO FDOT AS WELL. AND WE UNDERSTAND THAT, AND I'M NOT IN MY MIND. I'M NOT SURE THAT'S WHAT THAT SAYS RIGHT NOW. JUST A COUPLE MORE QUESTIONS. THE THIS IS PERHAPS A MR. SCANGARELLO OR MR. PEPPER. THE IMPROVEMENT OF THE PROPERTY AND THE AND THE MAINTENANCE OF THOSE IMPROVEMENTS. AND I'M TALKING ABOUT TWO THINGS NOW, REALLY. THE LANDSCAPE PLAN AND THE PHYSICAL STRUCTURES, THE AWNING OR WHATEVER ELSE IS GOING TO BE DONE. WHERE DOES RESPONSIBILITY LIE RELATIVE TO MR. PEPPER AND JIMMY PEASE AND THE OWNER OF THE PLAZA FOR BOTH THE INSTALLATION OF THESE IMPROVEMENTS AND THE MAINTENANCE OF THEM? I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH HIS LEASE. I THINK HE SHOULD ANSWER THAT. I THINK YOU HAVE TO COME UP HERE, MR. PEPPER. MR. ARENA, THE OWNER OF THE PLAZA MYSELF, HAVE TALKED ABOUT WITH WE MAKE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE OUTSIDE. WE'RE GOING TO SPLIT THE COSTS ON THE DINING AREA AWNING AND BUT AS FAR AS THE DOT AND THE SIGNS AND THE DIRECTIONAL STUFF IN THE PARKING LOT IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT HE'LL BE TAKING CARE OF THAT SIDE OF IT IN TERMS OF. AND WHAT ABOUT MAINTENANCE? AND MAINTENANCE IS ON THE LANDLORD. I'M JUST A TENANT. I'LL TAKE CARE OF MY AREA IN THE FRONT, IN THE DINING AREA. BUT HE'LL TAKE CARE OF THE PLANTERS LIKE HE HAS BEFORE. AND ALSO THE PARKING LOT. ANY MAINTENANCE ON THE PARKING LOT? YEAH. WHICH AGAIN, I THINK GOES BACK TO YOU KNOW, BEGS SOME QUESTIONS FROM MR. HUTCHINSON'S COMMENT, WHICH IS THAT ON THE LANDSCAPE PLAN, WHICH IS YOU KNOW, AND AND ALSO MR.. SCANGARELLO, YOUR COMMENT ABOUT YOUR EXPERIENCE WITH WITH THE LANDLORD'S STAFF? I MEAN, WE WE CAN PUT I'M NOT SURE IT'S. IT SEEMS TO BE REALLY GOING A STEP TOO FAR TO BE PRESCRIBING THAT A PARTY HAS TO WATER PLANTS IN ORDER TO APPROVE A PETITION. [01:45:03] WELL, I'M. I'M NOT TRYING TO BE. I'M NOT TRYING TO I AND I'M AND I WAS BEING A LITTLE BIT FACETIOUS HERE, BUT I'M ASKING YOU TO BE I'M I'M ASKING YOU TO BE DILIGENT. YEAH. WITH THE WITH WITH THE CONDITION. YEAH. OKAY. OKAY. WELL, THOSE THOSE ARE MY QUESTIONS FOR NOW. AND I GUESS SINCE WE HAVEN'T DONE YOU KNOW, I TOUCHED UPON THE OUTDOOR DINING. BUT BUT ONLY RELATING TO 11 A AND I DON'T KNOW WHEN WE'RE GOING TO DO SWEARING IN AND ON THAT, BUT THE TWO PROPOSALS REALLY ARE INTERRELATED. SO, MAYOR, CAN I ASK A FEW QUESTIONS AND THEN MAKE A STATEMENT? YES, SIR. THANK YOU. QUESTION. BECAUSE TO COUNCIL MEMBER KRISEMAN'S SIR, TO COUNCIL MEMBER KRISEMAN'S POINT ON SOME OF THE CONDITIONS. WOULD THE APPLICANT MOVE FORWARD WITH JUST A SHARED PARKING IF THE OUTDOOR DINING WAS NOT APPROVED? SAY THAT AGAIN. WOULD YOU MOVE FORWARD WITH THE SHARED PARKING IF THE OUTDOOR DINING WAS NOT APPROVED? SHARED PARKING? WE HAVE SHARED PARKING. NOW THE CONDITIONAL USE. WOULD YOU MOVE FORWARD WITH THE CONDITIONAL USE IF THE OUTDOOR DINING WAS NOT APPROVED? OR ARE THEY BOTH? WOULD YOU NEED THEM BOTH APPROVED IN ORDER TO MOVE FORWARD. WE. THAT'S A STRANGE QUESTION. WE WOULD BE. NO NEED TO MOVE THROUGH. MOVE FORWARD WITH THE CONDITIONAL USE APPLICATION. CORRECT? CORRECT. YEAH. IT'S. YOU CAN'T MOVE FORWARD WITH THE OUTDOOR DINING WITHOUT THE OFF SITE PARKING, BUT YOU COULD MOVE FORWARD WITH THE OFF SITE PARKING WITHOUT THE OUTDOOR DINING. AND THE REASON I'M ASKING IS BECAUSE IF THIS GOES FORWARD, I'M THINKING ABOUT HOW TO CRAFT SOME OF THESE CONDITIONS. NUMBER TWO, WHILE THE APPLICANT WHILE THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS AUTHORIZED THE APPLICANT TO FILE THIS APPLICATION, I FEEL HIGHLY UNCOMFORTABLE WITH A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER NOT BEING HERE TO AGREE TO CONDITIONS THAT WE'RE PUTTING ON THEM. IF WE DECIDE TO DO THAT WITH LANDSCAPE, I WOULD FEEL A LOT MORE COMFORTABLE IF THERE WAS A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE OWNERSHIP GROUP HERE TO ACTUALLY CONFIRM ON THE RECORD THAT THEY'RE WILLING TO DO CERTAIN THINGS. AND THEN IF THIS I JUST WANT TO MENTION IT NOW, THERE'S A LOT OF TALK OF THIS 2017 TEMPORARY USE AGREEMENT. I BELIEVE IT HAD A FIVE YEAR RENEWAL. I WAS NOT THE CITY ATTORNEY THEN. SO IF THIS DOES GO FORWARD, I WOULD LIKE AN OPPORTUNITY AND I WOULD MAKE IT A CONDITION THAT I GET TO REVIEW THAT, MAKE SURE IT'S UPDATED SO THAT I CAN ENSURE IT'S LEGALLY SUFFICIENT SINCE IT IS A CITY OWNED LOT. AND WITH THAT I WILL THERE IS A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE OF THE PROPERTY OWNER HERE. IF YOU WANT TO COME FORWARD. MR.. STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD. GOOD MORNING. FOR THE RECORD, MY NAME IS NORMAN TREBILCOCK. I'M A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER, PROFESSIONAL TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ENGINEER, AND ALSO A CERTIFIED PLANNER WITH OVER 35 YEARS OF LOCAL EXPERIENCE. I HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN THIS PROJECT OVER THE YEARS, AND I COULD MAYBE SHED SOME LIGHT ON SOME OF THE THINGS FOR YOU ALL TO IN TERMS OF INFORMATION OF WHAT REALLY DID TRANSPIRE. AND REGARDING THAT, I WAS HERE ORIGINALLY JUST TO READ A LETTER FROM MR. ARENA. YOU KNOW, HE'S 97 YEARS OLD, AND HE WAS HE'S RESTRICTED FROM TRAVELING RIGHT NOW. HE LIVES IN MASSACHUSETTS, AND HE COMES DOWN HERE. HE IS INTENDING TO BE DOWN HERE, AND HE'S NOT ABLE TO IN HIS LETTER. AND I'LL PROVIDE THIS TO THE CLERK AS WELL. BUT, YOU KNOW, IN HIS LETTER, HE, YOU KNOW, IN LISTENING TO HIS OTHER TENANTS, HE IS OFFERING TO PROVIDE A TRAFFIC CONTROL OFFICER DURING PEAK PERIODS IF COUNCIL DEEMED THAT WAS A SUFFICIENT SOLUTION, BUT TO JUST, YOU KNOW, MAYBE SHED SOME LIGHT ON SOME OF THIS STUFF FOR YOU ALL. THE WHOLE REASON THAT CITY PARK AREA PARKING LOT WAS INTRODUCED AS AN IMPROVEMENT WAS NOT NOT MR. ARENAS DOING DIRECTLY. IT CAME FROM THE CITY BECAUSE WHAT WAS OCCURRING IS THE FOLKS ON MANDARIN WERE CONCERNED WITH THE CONDITIONS. THERE'S THERE WAS ON STREET PARKING ON MANDARIN FOR THIS CENTER BECAUSE IT'S AN OLD DESIGN CENTER. AND SO WHAT? MR. THE CITY CAME UP WITH A VERY INNOVATIVE CONCEPT OF SAYING, LET'S, LET'S PUT THIS PARKING, LET'S CREATE A PARKING LOT IN FRONT OF WHAT WAS THE OLD GOODWILL BUILDING. AND MR. ARENA DID NOT OWN THAT BUILDING. HE DID NOT OWN IT AT THE TIME. AND SO WHAT THE CITY SAID IS WE CAN WE CAN HAVE A LEASE ARRANGEMENT WITH YOU TO PUT THAT STREET PARKING THAT HAD OCCURRED ON MANDARIN TO GET THAT AWAY, AND THEN IMPROVE THE CONDITIONS IN THE BACK OF YOUR BUILDING TO MAKE CONDITIONS BETTER FOR YOUR IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORS. AND MR. ARENA SPENT A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF MONEY TO MAKE THOSE IMPROVEMENTS. [01:50:03] THAT'S PERVIOUS PARKING. HE LANDSCAPED THAT AREA AND HE DID THAT TO ELIMINATE THAT PARKING. AND AND YOU CAN SEE FROM NONE OF THOSE NEIGHBORS BEING HERE TODAY THAT HE HAS REALLY SATISFIED THOSE FOLKS WITH THAT. IT WAS AN EXTRA EFFORT THAT HE MADE TO TRY AND SATISFY HIS NEIGHBORS. IN ADDITION TO UNDERSTANDING THE SUCCESS OF JIMMY P'S. THE ADDITIONAL RIGHT OF WAY. THAT'S NOT A PARKING AREA OUT IN FRONT OF A OF A WINJE PLAZA. LET'S PUT IT IN PROPER CONTEXT. THAT IS FDOT RIGHT AWAY. MR. ARENA WAS WILLING TO ADD ADDITIONAL PARKING TO HELP ALLEVIATE, BECAUSE WHAT HAD BEEN OCCURRING IS FOLKS WERE PARKING THERE WILLY NILLY ALL THE TIME, AND HE WANTED TO HELP IMPROVE THAT. AND SO IN TWO YEARS AGO, WHEN HE CAME UP HERE FOR HIS PETITION THAT HADN'T BEEN BUILT YET. AND SO FOLKS ARE SAYING, WELL, PUT THAT IN AND LET'S SEE HOW THINGS GO. WELL, IT CERTAINLY HAS IMPROVED THINGS. THOSE TEN ADDITIONAL PARKING SPACES NOW ALSO IN CONTEXT, THAT PARKING LOT THAT WAS BUILT ON CITY LAND THAT WENT BEFORE CITY COUNCIL, CITY STAFF DID REVIEW IT AND MAY NOT HAVE BEEN MR. PICKETT AT THE TIME, BUT IT CERTAINLY WAS. CITY ENGINEERING STAFF DID REVIEW THAT IT WASN'T BUILT IN A VACUUM AWAY FROM THE CITY. AND AS A MATTER OF FACT, THE FDOT PARKING LOT THAT WAS BROUGHT FORTH TO THE CITY AND THE CITY TRAFFIC ENGINEER AT THE TIME SAID, THAT'S IN THE FDOT RIGHT AWAY. IT'S NOT OUR REVIEW OR CONCERN. SO AGAIN, HE'S NOT WORKING IN A VACUUM. HE'S TRYING TO MAKE IMPROVEMENTS TO HELP CONTINUE THE SUCCESS OF JIMMY P'S, WHICH IS AN AWESOME CITY OF NAPLES RESTAURANT, BUT ALSO TO ALLEVIATE THINGS. HE'S EVEN OFFERED TO THE NEIGHBOR DIRECTLY NORTH OF HIM TO ELIMINATE HIS DRIVEWAY. THE REASON WE NEED THAT DRIVEWAY IS THERE'S A NORTHBOUND LEFT TURN LANE THAT GOES IN THERE, AND HE'S WILLING TO ELIMINATE HIS DRIVEWAY AND EXTEND THE TURN LANE UP. IF THE GAS STATION WERE WILLING TO HAVE A SHARED CONDITION, WELL, THEY'RE NOT INTERESTED IN THAT. OKAY. BUT HE'S LOOKING FOR SOLUTIONS. SO SO MY NEARLY 100 YEAR OLD CLIENT IS LOOKING TO HELP IMPROVE THINGS. HE'S BEEN A RESIDENT OF THE CITY OVER 20 YEARS. HE CARES ABOUT THE CITY, CARES ABOUT CONDITIONS IN HERE. HE'S WILLING TO DO A TRAFFIC CONTROL OFFICER IF NECESSARY TO HELP IN THOSE PEAK PERIODS. TO THE QUESTION, THOUGH, BACK I THINK THE CONDITIONAL USE DOES MAKE SENSE TO ADDRESS BECAUSE DE FACTO YOU'RE SHARING ALL THESE AREAS, AS COUNCIL HAD MENTIONED, BUT IT'S REALLY NOT CODIFIED THAT IT'S TO DO. AND CITY CITY STAFF HAD IDENTIFIED THAT. SO I THINK IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO ADDRESS THAT. AND WHETHER YOU NEED TO CONTINUE THE OTHER ITEM OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT SO THAT YOU GET THE SPECIFIC ANSWER. BUT I THINK IT JUST MAKES SENSE BECAUSE MR. ARENA, AFTER HE BUILT THAT PARKING LOT, HE DIDN'T OWN THE GOODWILL BUILDING. THE GOODWILL MOVED ELSEWHERE, HE PURCHASED THAT. AND SO NOW WHAT YOU SEE IS HE'S MADE THOSE BUILDINGS LOOK MORE UNIFORM. HE'S IMPROVED THE ESTHETIC, YOU KNOW, HE'S IMPROVED ANYTHING HE CAN. HE'S PUT STREET LIGHTING. HE'S PUT SITE LIGHTING ON THE PARKING LOT TO MAKE IT SAFER AS WELL. IT'S DONE WITH LOW LOWER KELVIN TEMPERATURE FIXTURES AND ALL THAT STUFF AS WELL. SO, YOU KNOW, HE'S REALLY MADE A LOT OF GREAT EFFORTS, I THINK, TO, TO HELP THE SUCCESS OF THE BUSINESS AND THE BUSINESS OWNER. AND IT'S AN IMPORTANT BUSINESS HERE IN THE AREA. BUT FROM A STANDPOINT OF ANSWERING THE QUESTION REGARDING GOING AHEAD, IF COUNCIL FEELS COMFORTABLE WITH THE CONDITIONAL USE TO CODIFY THAT SHARED USE OF ALL THE PARKING, WHICH MAKES A LOT OF SENSE, I WOULD SAY YES, HE WOULD BE FOR THAT. OKAY. AND THEN IF YOU NEED TO CONTINUE THE OTHER ITEM OR SOMETHING, THAT'S UNDERSTOOD AS WELL. BUT THERE IS REALLY A SEPARATENESS BECAUSE YOU GOT THESE DIFFERENT BUSINESSES, WHETHER IT'S JIMMY OR WHATEVER, BUT YOU GOT A LOT OF FOLKS THAT ARE SHARING PARKING, AND IT WOULD MAKE SENSE TO ME TO HAVE THAT CODIFIED AS FAR AS THAT GOES. SO I HOPE THAT HELPS. THANK YOU. MAYOR. CAN I SAY SOMETHING? YES. COUNCIL MEMBER CUSHMAN. FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU FOR THOSE COMMENTS, MR. TREBILCOCK. AND I THINK THEY WERE VERY HELPFUL. YOU KNOW, WE'RE SPENDING A LOT OF TIME ON THESE TWO ITEMS AND A LOT OF OTHER THINGS TO TALK ABOUT. I, I VIEWED THIS BEFORE ANY PRESENTATION WAS MADE TODAY AS A FAIRLY SIMPLE AND STRAIGHTFORWARD PROPOSAL. I MEAN, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT JUST A COUPLE OF PARKING SPACES OUT OF 94 BEING ALLOCATED IN THEIR SHARED PARKING AND AND A RESTAURANT ASKING FOR A RELATIVELY MODEST INCREASE OVERALL IN TERMS OF OUTDOOR DINING. AND YOU KNOW, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT 20 CHAIRS AND, AND AS FAR AS I WAS CONCERNED, YOU KNOW, [01:55:04] AS LONG AS THE FIRE MARSHAL SAID THAT THOSE OUTDOOR DINING COULD BE ACCOMMODATED SAFELY. AND YOU KNOW, THAT WAS GOING TO BE MY MAIN QUESTION WHEN WE GOT TO THAT THE, YOU KNOW, WHETHER WHETHER I OR ANYBODY ELSE THINKS THAT THE FRONT SIDEWALK OF JIMMY P'S IS A PARTICULARLY APPETIZING PLACE TO SIT AND EAT IS NOT REALLY WHAT'S GERMANE HERE. IF PEOPLE DO IT, THEY'RE GOING TO WANT TO DO IT. THEY'RE GOING TO DO IT. WHAT WHAT WHAT I'M PERPLEXED BY IS THAT. WHAT IS BEING SAID BY THE PETITIONER ON BEHALF OF MR. PEPPER AND ALSO BY MR. TREBILCOCK ON THE BEHALF OF MR. ARENA, IS THAT WE WANT WE WANT TO DO THIS AND IMPROVE THE LARGER SITUATION AND AND WE WANT YOU KNOW, WE WANT A LANDSCAPE PLAN. THERE'S A CIRCULATION PLAN, BUT THERE REALLY ISN'T YET, YOU KNOW, AND AND THERE THERE'S AND THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THIS IS STILL MURKY TO ME AS TO BOTH INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE AND, AND SO THE CONDITIONS TO ME, ANYWAY, ANY CONDITIONS WE PLACED ON THIS WOULD BE IF WE DID APPROVE IT, WE'D APPROVE IT, BUT WE'D NEED TO HAVE IT COME BACK TO US TO SEE THAT THESE PLANS ARE ACTUALLY BEING IMPLEMENTED SATISFACTORILY. AND SO I WOULD HAVE EXPECTED WHEN THIS CAME TO US, THAT THOSE PLANS WERE IN PLACE AND THERE HAD BEEN AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN OUR CITY STAFF AND THE PETITIONER THAT, YES, THIS IS THE REVISED CIRCULATION PLAN. THIS IS THE YOU KNOW, THIS IS THE LANDSCAPE PLAN. AND IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE EGRESS AND INGRESS THROUGH THE PODOCARPUS. THIS IS WHERE IT'S GOING TO BE. AND THE FIRE MARSHAL SIGNED OFF ON THAT. BUT HE HASN'T YET. IF THAT IS INDEED THE FINAL PLAN. SO THERE'S JUST SO MANY. THIS IS NOT A BIG, COMPLICATED PROPOSAL, BUT EVEN GIVEN THAT THERE ARE ALMOST ALL THE PIECES TO IT ARE UNCLEAR AND MAKE IT DIFFICULT FOR US TO, FOR ME ANYWAY, TO TO APPROVE IT. AND I'M JUST WONDERING IF THIS ISN'T SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE CONTINUED. AND THOSE ISSUES I'VE JUST ARTICULATED, DEALT WITH AND THEN BROUGHT BACK TO US WHEN WE WOULD HAVE SOMETHING THAT'S FULLY BAKED. IT WAS OUR IT WAS OUR INTENTION TO HAVE TO COME BACK WITH THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT RELATIVE TO THE RELATIVE TO THE CURB CUTS, INGRESS AND EGRESS, HOW THAT WAS GOING TO WORK. WE NEED TO HAVE SOMEBODY APPROVE THAT, WHETHER IT BE CITY COUNCIL, WHETHER IT BE STAFF, SOMEBODY, BECAUSE IT WASN'T DONE THAT WAY BEFORE. SO IT CERTAINLY MAKES SENSE THAT THAT'S, THAT WAS IN MY NOTES THAT THOSE ARE THINGS THAT THIS IS CONCEPTUAL. THIS IS WHAT WE WANT TO DO. IF WE CAN GET THE APPROVALS FROM YOU, IF WE CAN GET THE APPROVALS FROM THE STATE OF FLORIDA, THEN THAT'S WHAT WE'LL DO. BUT IT WAS NEVER OUR INTENTION NOT TO GET THOSE APPROVALS. IF THERE'S A PROBLEM WITH LIFE SAFETY, THE I DON'T OH SORRY. I APOLOGIZE I NEED TO ACTUALLY CORRECT MYSELF ON THE RECORD. THE I PULLED UP THE INCORRECT A PREVIOUS PLAN. AS HE SAID, WE WENT THROUGH NUMEROUS RENDITIONS OF THE PLAN. THE PLAN THAT IS ON THE SCREEN IS THE ONE THAT WAS REVIEWED AND APPROVED AS PART OF THEIR LIFE SAFETY PLAN. SO THAT IS GOOD TO GO. I APOLOGIZE, I WAS PULLED UP THE WRONG PLAN AND NEEDED TO MAKE SURE IT WAS CLEAR FOR THE RECORD THAT I WAS THAT THAT IS THE ONE THAT IS APPROVED. AND I WOULD JUST SAY IT'S IN 11 B TWO, BUT I WENT TO 11 B AND LOOKED AND YES, IT IS IN THERE. IT SHOWS THE INGRESS THERE. JUST IF WE'RE GOING TO MOVE FORWARD, THAT NEEDS TO BE IDENTIFIED AS AS AN EXHIBIT. YES. IT'S IN THE THAT'S THE PLAN I'M SHOWING, RIGHT? YES. THIS PLAN THAT'S ON THE SCREEN RIGHT NOW, THAT IS IN 11 B, IT IS THE ACCURATE LIFE SAFETY PLAN THAT WAS REVIEWED THROUGH THE PROCESS. SO MY EARLIER STATEMENT WAS INACCURATE AND I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAD THAT CLEAR. NO PROBLEM. AND I APPRECIATE THE CLARIFICATION. AND JUST TO BE CLEAR, THE PLAN WITH THE PLANTERS IN FRONT OF THE PARKING SPACES THAT HAS A SPLIT OPENING, FOUR FOOT OPENING THAT HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND APPROVED AS A LIFE SAFETY PLAN. YES, SIR. AND THE. AND THE PLAN? THE ILLUSTRATION OF PLANTERS. [02:00:07] A SOLID ROW OF PLANTERS IN FRONT OF THE FIVE PARKING SPACES THAT HAVE BEEN SOMEWHAT NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE OTHER PARKING SPACES. THAT IS NOT PART OF THE PLAN. CORRECT. THE WALL OF PLANTERS IS NOT PART OF THE APPROVED PLAN. UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. I WANT I DON'T WANT TO BLUR THESE LINES BECAUSE YOU'RE ASKING QUESTIONS ABOUT 11 B, AND UNTIL WE CAN ME? YES. NO, THIS IS THIS IS PART OF A PARKING. THIS IS CONTIGUOUS TO AND PART OF A PARKING SOLUTION. THE THIS OPENING IN THESE PLANTERS. EVEN THOUGH 1ST MAY THINK THAT IT ONLY DEALS WITH OUTDOOR DINING, THIS HAS TO DO WITH PARKING, INGRESS AND EGRESS. SO I'M I'M ASKING QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT PORTION OF IT. RIGHT. SO IN ITEM 11 B THERE IS A FLOOR PLAN THAT IDENTIFIES SEATING AND PLANTERS. YEAH. SO I WANT TO GO INTO 11 B. CAN I MR. MCCONNELL I THINK THIS IS A VERY GRAY AREA. SO CAN WE GO INTO THE PRESENTATION FOR 11 B AND ASK SPECIFIC QUESTIONS ABOUT 11 B? WELL, IT'S BEEN HAPPENING. YES. THIS WHOLE HEARING. BUT I THINK YOU'VE HEARD FROM THE REPRESENTATIVE. FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER. HE'S CONFIRMED THAT 11 A THERE WOULD BE SOME MERIT IN DECIDING THAT WITHOUT THE OUTDOOR DINING. MOST OF THE FOCUS THAT I'M HEARING IS ON THE OUTDOOR DINING, INCLUDING THE LIFE SAFETY PLAN. I PERSONALLY WOULD PREFER WE MAKE A DECISION ON 11 A AND THEN MOVE ON TO 11 B. WELL, MY CONCERNS ARE AN 11 A, AND THAT'S REALLY JUST THE DETAILS THAT NEED TO BE IN THE RESOLUTION THERE IN THE STAFF REPORT. BUT THEY'RE NOT IN THE RESOLUTION. THOSE ARE THE AND THAT'S NOT YOU, MR.. SCANGARELLO. THAT'S FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY AND THE CITY MANAGER, BECAUSE THOSE ARE ITEMS THAT ARE AGREEMENTS THAT JUST NEED TO BE REFERENCED IN THE RESOLUTION. I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'VE HEARD THE STAFF REPORT ON THE OUTDOOR DINING. NO, WE HAVEN'T, WE HAVEN'T. OKAY. SORRY. WE'RE GOING TO GET TO THAT. WE'LL GET THERE. OKAY. GO AHEAD. CAN I JUST MAKE A MOTION THEN WITH. THE ADDITIONAL. SO JUST TO CLARIFY, BECAUSE THE CLERK AND I THEN HAVE TO GO BACK AND WRITE THESE CONDITIONS AT TIMES. SO IF THE APPLICANT'S AGENT REAL QUICK CAN COME UP BECAUSE I JUST WANT CONFIRMATION AND THEN IF COUNCIL DOESN'T AGREE, THEN YOU CAN TELL ME YOU DON'T AGREE. BUT WITH ONE AND TWO THAT ARE SPECIFICALLY IN HERE, I BELIEVE WE TAKE OUT THE REFERENCE TO THE APPROVAL OF THE OUTDOOR DINING PETITION, AND WE CLARIFY THAT SPECIFICALLY FOR NUMBER TWO, THAT THE CITY HAS TO APPROVE ANY NECESSARY SITE CHANGES CONCERNING CONTROLLED ACCESS, CIRCULATION, ONE WAY MOVEMENTS AND DIRECTIONAL SIGNAGE. AND IF COUNCIL WANTS, WE CAN ADD THE CONDITION THAT THAT HAVE TO COME BACK TO COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL. NUMBER THREE REMAINS AS IS NUMBER. I'M GOING TO ADD ANOTHER CONDITION RELATED TO AUTHORIZING OR DIRECTING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO REVIEW THE CURRENT TEMPORARY USE AGREEMENT AND WORK THROUGH THAT JUST TO ENSURE IT'S UPDATED, BECAUSE I KNOW THERE WAS A SIMPLE RENEWAL BACK IN 2022. SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT'S ALIGNED AND THAT'S REFERENCED IN HERE. AND YEAH, I DON'T SEE THAT. MR.. MCCONNELL RENEWAL. THE ORIGINAL RENEWAL WAS THE ORIGINAL APPROVAL WAS THE 20 AND 21. IS THAT AN ANNUAL RENEWAL? IS THAT A FIVE YEAR LEASE? IS IT 2017 IS A FIVE YEAR TERM WITH THE ABILITY FOR BOTH PARTIES TO RENEW FOR ONE FIVE YEAR TERM. LOOKS LIKE THERE IS A A WRITTEN LETTER SIGNED BY THE THEN CITY MANAGER IN 2021. IT'S A IT'S A DOLLAR A YEAR, SIR. IF YOU DON'T IF YOU DON'T MIND ACKNOWLEDGING THAT IT WAS EXTENDED FOR THE FIVE YEAR TERM, WHICH WOULD TAKE IT TO APRIL OF 2027. HOWEVER, IF WE ADD A CONDITION, THEN I WOULD LIKE AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW IT, POTENTIALLY MODIFY IT IF NEEDED. BUT I CAN ONLY DO THAT WITH YOUR CONDITION SINCE WE ARE CURRENTLY IN THE TERM. VICE MAYOR. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE. THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY HERE FOR 11 A TO. IT'S APPROACHING A DECISION POINT. [02:05:08] AND EARLIER I TALKED ABOUT RESOLVING THIS PLANTER ISSUE. NOW, AS PART OF ITEM 11 A, THERE IS AN ATTACHMENT I BELIEVE IT'S CALLED I'M GOING TO MAKE SURE I GET THIS RIGHT. SITE PLAN. OKAY. 11 A SITE PLAN. AND IF YOU LOOK AT 11 A. I'M GOING TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S CONSISTENT WITH WHAT I'M SEEING ON THE SCREEN. THERE IS AN ILLUSTRATION. IF YOU COULD GO TO THE FIVE PARKING SPACES, AND I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN BLOW THAT UP FOR THE PUBLIC TO SEE THE FIVE PARKING SPACES ON THE NORTHERN SIDE OF THE LOT. IF YOU COULD EXPAND IT ANY MORE, SPECIFICALLY THE FIVE PARKING SPACES ON THE NORTHERN SIDE. WE'RE GETTING CLOSE. NOW. RIGHT THERE. IF YOU LOOK IN FRONT OF THE PARKING SPACES, THERE IS ONE CONTINUOUS AREA OF PLANNERS. DO YOU SEE A BREAK IN THOSE PLANNERS? DO YOU SEE A BREAK AS ILLUSTRATED? THERE'S NOT A BREAK. OKAY, SO WHAT ARE WE WORKING OFF OF? IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO BE ACCURATE. SO, MADAM MAYOR, I'M GOING TO. THIS ISN'T RIGHT. IT'S MAYBE A MISTAKE, BUT IT'S NOT ACCURATE. SO I'VE GOT A PROBLEM WITH IT. I JUST WANTED TO POINT THAT OUT. IN 11 A. SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT PLANNERS, I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT THE OUTDOOR DINING. I'M TALKING ABOUT IT'S PART OF 11 A. LET'S GET IT RIGHT. THEN. I'M GOING TO THE PARKING SPACES THEMSELVES. AND IF WE'RE GOING TO TABLE THIS OR, OR MOVE IT TO A DIFFERENT TIME, I WANT TO JUST MAKE SOME STATEMENTS. THAT'S PART OF THE RECORD FOR THE STAFF AND THE CITY ATTORNEY, WHOEVER TO LOOK BACK ON AND SAY, OKAY, I SEE WHAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT, BUT I'M CURIOUS AS TO WHY THOSE FIVE PARKING SPACES ARE NOT CONFORMING TO THE OTHER SPACING REQUIREMENTS FOR PARKING SPACES TO THE SOUTH OF THOSE FIVE PARKING SPACES. IF WE MOVE THOSE FIVE PARKING SPACES BACK THEN, WHAT'S TO SAY WE CAN'T JUST MOVE ALL OF THEM BACK, RIGHT? WHY DID WE DO THAT IN THE FIRST PLACE? AND ARE WE OKAY WITH THAT KIND OF WITH THE WITH THE TRAFFIC ISSUES IN THIS LOT? ARE WE OKAY WITH THAT JUST BEING EXTENDED DOWN THAT BUILDING? SOMEONE NEEDS TO ASK THAT. AND I'M ASKING IT. AND ARE THE FIVE PARKING SPACES PRESENTING EITHER A TRAFFIC ISSUE INGRESS AND EGRESS? IN OTHER WORDS, DOES IT CONTRIBUTE TO THE PROBLEMS WITH TRAFFIC INGRESS AND EGRESS OR A PEDESTRIAN SAFETY ISSUE. AND WHEN I TALK ABOUT A PEDESTRIAN SAFETY ISSUE ON THOSE, JUST THE FIVE NORTHERN PARKING SPACES, WHEN A VEHICLE IS PARKED THERE AND WE HAVE THAT FOUR FOOT SPACE, IT'S NOT REFLECTED ON THIS DRAWING, BUT WE HAVE PEOPLE. GO AHEAD. I'M SORRY. NO, I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T MEAN TO INTERRUPT, BUT I CAN ADDRESS WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT AFTERWARD. YEAH, SORRY. SO WHEN PEOPLE GO THROUGH THAT INTENDED FOUR FOOT SPACE, THEY'RE COMING IN AND OUT OF THE RESTAURANT. SOME ARE GOING TO WALK IN FRONT OF THOSE FIVE VEHICLES THAT ARE PARKED THERE. FROM A LIFE SAFETY. FROM A PLAN. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE OKAY WITH THE SPACING REQUIREMENTS, BECAUSE WHEN YOU PARK AT A PARKING STOP, THAT CONCRETE PARKING STOP WHERE THE WHEELS GO. ARE WE PROVIDING ENOUGH SPACE BETWEEN THOSE? WHAT ARE GOING TO BE RESIN PLANTERS AND THE VEHICLES TO ENSURE THAT PEOPLE AREN'T GOING TO BE HIT IN A PATHWAY THAT WE'RE ENCOURAGING THEM TO USE. SO, AND THEN I WANT TO MOVE TO THE FDOT APPROVED PARKING LOT THAT'S PARALLEL TO HIGHWAY 41. [02:10:06] IN THE INITIAL PRESENTATION AND THEN SUBSEQUENT TO THAT, I'M ASKING FOR A CONFIRMATION OF THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES PROVIDED BY FDOT. IS IT TEN OR IS IT 11? SO I AND I HEARD TEN SEPARATE TIMES, BUT I ALSO HEARD 11. IT'S IT'S IT'S 11. THE OTHER PARKING LOT THE SATELLITE LOT IS 11. THIS ONE IS TEN. OKAY. SO THE SATELLITE LOT IS 11. AND THE STATE IT'S A QUESTION. DID THE STATE APPROVE THAT SATELLITE LOT AS IT IS BEING USED? SATELLITE LOT BEING THE PARK LOT, THE ONE FURTHERMOST FROM JIMMY P'S. NO. SAY THAT. OKAY. SO MY QUESTION IS THIS DID THE STATE APPROVE THE SATELLITE PARKING LOT AS IT IS BEING USED? THE SATELLITE PARKING LOT IS THE PARKING LOT THAT'S FURTHEST TO THE NORTH IN WHAT'S CALLED THE PARK AREA. FURTHEST TO THE WHAT? I'M SORRY, FURTHEST TO THE SOUTH. OKAY. THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE ASKING? YES. IT'S NOT WITHIN THE FDOT RIGHT OF WAY. SO THEY DIDN'T HAVE JURISDICTION, BUT THEY'RE AWARE OF IT BECAUSE THEY'VE SEEN IT IN THE DESIGN. WHEN IT WAS PRESENTED. AND THE CITY REVIEWED AND APPROVED THE THE PARKING LOT IN THE PARK, THE CITY PARK IN THE CITY PARK, BECAUSE. YES. THERE'S NOTHING. THERE'S NOTHING WRITTEN ANY PLACE ABOUT THE CITY APPROVING THAT PARKING LOT? NOTHING WRITTEN. THERE WAS AN AGREEMENT PREPARED. THERE WAS AN AGREEMENT PREPARED BY THE CITY, BY THE MAYOR AND THE CITY MANAGER. AND THEN THERE WAS A RESOLUTION 2017 ONE. I HAVE IT WITH ME. OKAY. AND THAT SHOWED A RECTANGLE ON A PIECE OF LAND ON A SURVEY AND SAID THAT'S WHERE YOU PUT THE PARKING LOT. IT WAS THEN DESIGNED AND I COULD NOT WE COULD NOT FIND ANY REFERENCE, ANYTHING WRITTEN THAT SAYS CITY APPROVED THE DESIGN OF THAT PARKING LOT. I'M SORRY. NO, IT'S FINE, THANK YOU. REAL QUICK, JUST TO JUST TO CLARIFY HIS QUESTION, HAS FDOT APPROVED THE USE OF THE ADDITIONAL PARKING ON THEIR PROPERTY? YES, SIR. YES, SIR. THERE'S AN APPROVED LEASE. YES. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. OKAY. SO FDOT APPROVED USE OF THEIR PROPERTY FOR PARKING. AND THAT IS PART OF THAT SATELLITE LOT. NO. NO, SIR. NO. THE THE TEN SPACES IN FRONT OF MORAN'S PLAZA PROPER THAT WAS REVIEWED AND APPROVED. AND THAT'S AN ONGOING LEASE WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. BUT IN THE PLANS THEY WERE PROVIDED, THEY WERE AWARE OF THE OTHER 11 SPACE SATELLITE LOT, BECAUSE IT'S NOT IN THE FDOT RIGHT OF WAY. IT WOULDN'T BE IN THEIR DIRECT JURISDICTION, BUT THEY DIDN'T HAVE ISSUES WITH, YOU KNOW, CONFLICTS AND PROXIMITY TO 41 OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. AND THE CITY HAS, ACCORDING TO YOUR STATEMENTS, THE CITY HAS APPROVED THE SATELLITE LOT AS IT IS BEING USED USE TODAY. IS THAT CORRECT? YES, SIR. THE SATELLITE LOT IS THE SOUTHERNMOST LOT. IT'S MY. WHAT I'M SAYING TO YOU IS THAT THERE'S NOTHING THAT WE HAVE FOUND IN WRITING THAT SAYS THE CITY HAS APPROVED THE DESIGN FOR THAT PARKING LOT, NOR THAT PARKING LOT. THERE WAS AN AGREEMENT MADE AND A RESOLUTION PASSED BY CITY COUNCIL IN 2017, WHETHER OR NOT ALLISON REVIEWED IT. I DON'T KNOW. I KNOW THERE'S AN ADMINISTRATOR THAT MR. SCANGARELLO. SO NOW WE'VE GOT TO GET THAT RESOLVED. IT SOUNDS A LITTLE IT SOUNDS LIKE THE CITY HAD ENOUGH INFORMATION AT THE TIME TO PASS A RESOLUTION. RIGHT. BUT YOU'RE SAYING THERE'S NOT. YOUR OPINION IS THERE'S NOT SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION IN THE DESIGN OF THAT. ALL I'M SAYING IS, I SAW NO DOCUMENTATION ON THE DESIGN AND INSTALLATION OF THAT LOT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU Q, SIR. GOOD MORNING. ALISON BICKET, DEPUTY CITY ENGINEER FOR THE RECORD. THE THAT PROPERTY AFTER THE CONDITIONAL USE, I BELIEVE THAT ALSO CAME IN AS A RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT. SO THE DEPARTMENT DID. OUR DEPARTMENT DID REVIEW THE PARKING PLAN FOR THAT CONDITIONAL USE. THAT'S WHERE THERE WAS THE AGREEMENT FOR THE PERMEABLE PARKING AND ALL THAT TIME. SO I KNOW OUR DIRECTOR AND I THINK THE TEAM WE DID EVALUATE AND LOOK AT THAT LOT AS WELL. [02:15:01] AND I THINK THERE IS A RECORD I'M SORRY IF THERE WAS ANY CONFUSION IN THAT INFORMATION, BUT THERE I DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT NUMBER OFFHAND. BUT ALISON, THANK YOU FOR THAT. ALISON, IN YOUR OPINION, HAVE WE DOTTED ALL THE I'S, CROSSED ALL THE T'S NECESSARY FOR THIS SATELLITE PARKING LOT? IS THERE UNFINISHED BUSINESS, IN YOUR OPINION? THERE'S SOME THINGS THAT I'D LIKE TO SEE CHANGED MOVING FORWARD THAT I TRIED TO COMMENT ON WITH THIS REVIEW. HAD MENTIONED AND PERHAPS YOU KNOW, WE COULD WE COULD DISCUSS FURTHER WITH THEIR TEAM, BUT I DID RELAY SOME OF THE MY CONCERNS. YEAH. THANK YOU. CITY COUNCIL WE'RE HEARING FROM A SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT ON OUR STAFF THAT THERE'S SOME THINGS RELATED TO THE PARKING PLAN THAT I'M USING, THE WORDS UNFINISHED BUSINESS THAT NEEDS TO BE TIGHTENED UP AS PART OF THIS PROJECT. THIS IS ANOTHER ONE OF THE REASONS THAT COUNCILMAN KRISEMAN DIDN'T SPECIFICALLY ARTICULATE. BUT I PUT IT IN THAT BASKET OF ITEMS THAT WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO GET CORRECTED. SO THANK YOU, MISS PICKETT. THANK YOU FOR THAT. ONE OF THE THINGS ABOUT THE SATELLITE LOT I WANTED TO BRING UP. AND, MISS BICKET, IF YOU WOULD JUST KIND OF PUT. I'M NOT GOING TO ASK YOU FOR COMMENT, BUT FOR THE COMMUNITY AND FOR COUNSEL IN THE ORIGINAL STATEMENTS AS THIS ITEM WAS SET UP, SET UP FOR OUR CONSIDERATION WHEN THOSE VEHICLES, THOSE 11 VEHICLES PARK, THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT ARE PARKING IN A FASHION THAT THEY'RE NOT IN THE 11 SPACES, BUT THEY'RE PARKING PARALLEL TO HIGHWAY 41, AND IT'S PREVENTING SAFE INGRESS AND EGRESS TO THAT PARKING LOT. I EXPLAIN THAT TO YOU, AND THERE'S NO K TURN SO THAT, YOU KNOW, I GET IT. YOU KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT. SO THIS IS A SPECIFIC IT'S A DETAILED ISSUE THAT THE PUBLIC'S BRINGING. IN FACT, THE PETITIONER, THE PETITIONERS AGENTS BRINGING FORWARD THAT IT'S NOT SAFE. IT'S PROBLEMATIC. WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS IT AND CORRECT IT. WHY WOULDN'T WE? BUT WE DON'T WANT TO GET INTO THE WEEDS OF THAT TODAY, I DON'T THINK. NOW HANDICAP PARKING. THIS IS GOING TO BE. THANK YOU, MR. SCANGARELLO. ON HANDICAP PARKING, I'LL ASK YOU. AND THEN I THINK STAFF IS GOING TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY. I BELIEVE THAT IN FLORIDA, HANDICAP ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACES MUST BE LOCATED ON THE SHORTEST, ACCEPTABLE, ACCESSIBLE ROUTE TO THE ACCESSIBLE BUILDING ENTRANCE. AND IF THERE ARE MULTIPLE ENTRANCES, SPACES MUST BE DISPERSED TO SERVE EACH. SO HANDICAP PARKING. AND IF WE COULD I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE WAS AN ILLUSTRATION THAT WAS ON THE SCREEN, NOT THE ONE THAT'S ON THE SCREEN NOW. THERE WERE IT'S ANOTHER SUBJECT OF TWO DIFFERENT ILLUSTRATIONS. DAVID, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN PULL BACK AN ILLUSTRATION THAT IS A MUCH SHORTER VERSION OF THE PARKING IN FRONT OF JIMMY P'S OR THE ENTIRE BUILDING. BUT GO AHEAD. NO, THAT'S A SURVEY. BUT IT SHOWS THE HANDICAPPED PARKING IN A DIFFERENT LOCATION. NOT THAT IT'S AN ILLUSTRATION. STAND BY. RIGHT THERE. NOW, IS THIS ILLUSTRATION ACCURATE? IS THIS WHAT WE'RE WORKING WITH? THE ONE THAT'S ON THE SCREEN? IS THIS THE ILLUSTRATION THAT WE WOULD BE APPROVING? DOES ANYBODY KNOW WHERE I'M GOING WITH THIS? I DO. JUST TO CLARIFY, THIS WOULD BE THE LIKE THE ILLUSTRATION APPROVED FOR THE OUTDOOR DINING, NOT FOR THE SHARED PARKING. WELL, IT'S PART OF THE PARKING PLAN AND IT SHOWS THE HANDICAPPED PARKING IN DIFFERENT LOCATIONS AS COMPARED TO ANOTHER DRAWING THAT WAS JUST ON THE SCREEN. THE SHARED PARKING IS IS A CONDITIONAL USE BECAUSE IT'S THE USE OF THE LOT, RIGHT? WHICH ONE SHOWS THE PARKING, THE HANDICAPPED PARKING? [02:20:01] THE CONDITION WAS THAT THEY WOULD COME BACK ONCE THEY FIGURE OUT THE DIRECTIONAL ASPECTS OF HOW THE PARKING WOULD WORK, AND THE OFFER WAS AT CITY COUNCIL WOULD APPROVE THAT AT A LATER TIME. BUT RIGHT NOW, IT'S JUST THE USE OF THE SHARED PARKING THAT'S BEING REQUESTED BY COUNCIL. I UNDERSTAND WHERE MR. HUTCHINSON IS COMING FROM. AND IT'S PROBABLY BEST THAT IF WE CONTINUE THE APPLICATION TO MAKE SURE THAT THE LIFE SAFETY PLAN AND THE SITE PLAN ARE IN SYNC, BECAUSE WHAT HAPPENED IS WHAT HAPPENED IS THE SITE PLAN WAS PREPARED AND THEN THE LIFE SAFETY AND THEN THE LIFE SAFETY PLAN WENT THROUGH SEVERAL ITERATIONS TO MAKE SURE THAT IT WAS RIGHT. SO THE TWO THINGS DIDN'T JIVE. YEP. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MR. SKINNER, IF IF IF IN FACT, IT'S GOING TO MAKE MAKE YOU BE MORE PEACEFUL TO YOU AND MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING IS IN JIVE, IT'S INCUMBENT UPON US TO MAKE THOSE PROPER REVISIONS IN THE SITE PLAN TO REFLECT EXACTLY WHAT THE LIFE SAFETY PLAN INDICATES. COUNCIL, DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT? OKAY. I APPRECIATE IT. I DON'T UNDERSTAND. OKAY. THAT'S ALL. DOES IT? OKAY. THERE'S THE COVERED WALKWAY. YOU HAVE TWO HANDICAPPED SPACES RIGHT THERE IN FRONT. AND THAT'S WHAT THE SITE PLAN SHOWS. AND THEN IN THE BACK OF THE BUILDING, THERE'S ONE HANDICAPPED SPACE. THEY THEY HAVE FIVE HANDICAPPED SPACES. CODE REQUIRES FOUR. THEY DID PUT IN AN ADDITIONAL ONE IN IN THE FRONT TO ACCOMMODATE. BUT THESE LOOK CONSISTENT TO ME HANDICAP WISE. OKAY. I'M SORRY. THAT'S. THAT'S ALL. NO, IT'S A GOOD QUESTION. AND SO ON. WHAT'S ON THE SCREEN NOW? THE FRONT HANDICAPPED PARKING IS WHAT I'M REFERRING TO. YOU SEE THOSE? THAT'S OVER BY THE 11 FOOT COVERED WALK. YOU SEE THOSE? YOU SEE THE SPLIT IN THE BUILDINGS? YES. YEAH, EXACTLY. YOU SEE THE HANDICAP PARKING THERE? RIGHT. AND THAT'S WHERE THEY ARE. OKAY. BECAUSE THERE'S THERE'S A DIFFERENT SLIDE UP. OKAY. WHEN I STARTED THIS COULD WE GO TO THAT SLIDE? OH. THAT. MAYBE I HAVE IT WRONG. YEAH, I THINK THAT'S. THAT PART'S OKAY, BUT I GET YOUR OTHER POINT. YEAH. YES, SIR. CAN WE GO TO THE SLIDE? IT'S AN ILLUSTRATION, AND IT SHOWS THE PLANNERS RIGHT THERE. IT SHOWS THESE TWO HANDICAPPED SPACES RIGHT HERE. SORT OF THE COVERED WALKWAY. THOSE ARE THE SAME THAT ARE ON YOU. GO TO THE BARBER SHOP. RIGHT? SO WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT IS THE COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAW. YEP. WHERE SHOULD THE HANDICAP SPACES BE PLACED? IF YOU HAVE TWO ENTRANCES TO A BUILDING. SO THE OTHER IS AN EMERGENCY EGRESS. THE, THE THE ONE THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT THAT IS NOT INTENTIONAL AS THE IN AND OUT FOR FOLKS. IF THERE'S A FIRE AND YOU GOT TO GET OUT OF THE BUILDING. YOU'RE SHOOTING STRAIGHT OUT. THAT'S WHY THEY NEED THAT GAP IN. MY QUESTION WAS GOING TO BE AND THIS I ASKED THE QUESTION TO YOU, BUT ALSO TO STAFF. STAFF IS THE ACCESSIBLE HANDICAP ADA COMPLIANT PARKING SPACES. ARE THEY IN THE RIGHT SPACES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAW? THAT IS NOT REVIEWED BY THE BUILDING CODE, BUT WE'LL MAKE SURE THAT IT'S A FLORIDA BUILDING CODE PROVISION. BUT WE'LL WE'LL DO YOU FIND OUT. OKAY. AND I BELIEVE WHAT MY RESEARCH INDICATES THAT IF YOU HAVE TWO SPACES, TWO ENTRANCES, THEY NEED TO BE IN THE SHORTEST ROUTE POSSIBLE, PLACED IN THE SHORTEST ROUTE POSSIBLE. AND I HAVE CONCERNS THAT WE'RE NOT DOING THAT. JIMMY PEASE ISN'T THE ONLY ENTRANCE, I UNDERSTAND. I MEAN, THERE ARE MULTIPLE. AND SO IT'S IN THE CENTER OF THE BUILDING. I MEAN, IT'S A VERY LOGICAL SPOT IN MY OPINION AND BELIEF. YEAH, THAT'S MY QUESTION. ARE WE COMPLIANT WITH THE LAW? SO THAT'S IT. THAT'S ALL I HAVE. MADAM MAYOR, REAL QUICK. DURING ALL OF THAT, I THINK I HEARD A REQUEST FROM THE APPLICANT TO CONTINUE THE ITEMS. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY. YEAH. I THINK IT'S NECESSARY TO TO TO PLEASE COUNCIL. AND I THINK THAT MR. HUTCHISON HAS ALWAYS HAS CONCERNS ABOUT. PROPER PLANS AND PROPER SAFETY AS LONG AS I'VE KNOWN THEM. AND SO IF THAT'S WHAT WE NEED TO DO TO TO GET THIS PASSED, THAT'S WHAT WE NEED TO DO. I'M ONE OF SEVEN COUNCIL. EVERYBODY ELSE MAY BE OKAY WITH IT, BUT I'M JUST I JUST HAVE SOME CONCERNS THAT WE HAD CONCERNS, [02:25:05] SO IT IT DOESN'T MATTER. LET'S DO IT THAT WAY. I'LL ADD TO THAT. IT NEEDS TO BE CLEANED UP. IF HOW MUCH TIME WOULD YOU NEED? I WILL BE BACK TOMORROW. NO KIDDING. THE QUESTION IS. NO, SERIOUSLY, THE QUESTION IS DO WE WANT TO FINISH THE RECORD ON THE OUTDOOR DINING OR JUST HOLD THAT OFF AS WELL? NO, I WOULD GO BOTH, BUT I DO NEED A DATE BECAUSE WE DID HAVE TO SEND NOTICES OUT. AND IF WE CONTINUE TO A DATE CERTAIN ONCE I OPEN THE NEXT ITEM, THEN WE CAN THAT WILL SERVE AS OUR ADVERTISEMENT. SO I BELIEVE THE SECOND MEETING IN NOVEMBER IS. 17TH OR IS THAT A WORKSHOP? 19TH IS THE REGULAR MEETING. IS THAT THAT'S OKAY WITH COUNCIL THEN THE MOTION ON 11 A WOULD BE A MOTION TO CONTINUE. WHAT IS THE MEETING DATE? NOVEMBER 19TH. WHEN'S THANKSGIVING? 24. FIFTH. 27TH. OKAY. THAT'S THAT'S THAT'S FINE. AND NO, RE NOTICING THIS. THIS WILL SUFFICE FOR RE NOTICING IF COUNCIL WISHES TO PASS THIS MOTION. THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH. I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION. YEAH. SO THE MOTION WOULD BE TO CONTINUE ITEM 11 A A RESOLUTION APPROVING A DETERMINING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO NOVEMBER 19TH. COUNCIL. I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE CONTINUE. ITEM 11. A 2ND TO NOVEMBER 19TH. THANK YOU. I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTMANN FOR CONTINUING ITEM 11 A AND A SECOND BY VICE MAYOR. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE PULL THE COUNCIL. COUNCIL MEMBER. CHRISTMANN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. MARTIN. BARTON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. KRAMER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. PETRANOFF. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. PENNIMAN. YES. VICE MAYOR. HUTCHINSON. YES. MAYOR. HEITMAN. YES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. PETITIONER AND COUNCIL WILL MOVE TO 11 B AND READ THE RESOLUTION. [11.B) A Resolution Determining Outdoor Dining Petition 25-OD8 Establishing Outdoor Dining on Private Property to Include Five (5) Tables and Twenty (20) Chairs for the Restaurant Known as Jimmy P's Charred on Property Owned by Hygate Properties, LLC, and Located at 1833 9th Street North; More Fully Described Herein; Providing for Scrivener's Errors; and Providing an Effective Date.] CORRECT. A RESOLUTION DETERMINING OUTDOOR DINING PETITION 2508. ESTABLISHING OUTDOOR DINING ON PRIVATE PROPERTY TO INCLUDE FIVE TABLES AND 20 CHAIRS FOR THE RESTAURANT KNOWN AS JIMMY P'S, CHARRED ON PROPERTY OWNED BY HIGHGATE PROPERTIES LLC AND LOCATED AT ONE 833 NINTH STREET NORTH. MORE FULLY DESCRIBED HEREIN, PROVIDING FOR SCRIVENER'S ERRORS AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. JUST NEED ANOTHER MOTION. THE PETITIONERS ASKED FOR A CONTINUANCE. SO, COUNSEL, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO MOVE 11 B TO NOVEMBER 19TH. CONTINUANCE SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER BARTON, AND I HAVE A SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER CHRISTMAN. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE PULL THE COUNCIL. VICE MAYOR HUTCHINSON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. PENNIMAN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. CHRISTMAN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BARTON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. CRAMER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. PETRANOFF. YES. MAYOR. HARTMAN. YES. THANK YOU. AND WE WILL CONTINUE THIS TO NOVEMBER 19TH. COUNCIL BEFORE. JUST REAL QUICK WHILE WE'RE IN THIS, JUST TO CLARIFY FOR THE RECORD, 11 A AND 11 B, I DON'T BELIEVE WE HAD PUBLIC COMMENT, BUT WE WILL HEAR PUBLIC COMMENT ON NOVEMBER 19TH WHEN THIS MATTER IS HEARD AGAIN. THANK YOU. OKAY. WITH THAT COUNCIL, WE NEED TO TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK. AND WE'LL CONTINUE WITH 11 D C 11 C. OKAY. WE'RE BACK AND CONTINUING ON WITH 11. SEE MR. [11.C) A Resolution Determining Outdoor Dining Petition 25-OD15 Establishing Outdoor Dining on Private Property to Include Two (2) Tables and Six (6) Chairs for the Restaurant Known as Yacht Club Subs on Property Owned by F A B S Holdings, LLC, and Located at 847 4th Avenue South, More Fully Described Herein; Providing for Scrivener's Errors; and Providing an Effective Date.] MCCONNELL. YES. THANK YOU. MAYOR. A RESOLUTION DETERMINING OUTDOOR DINING PETITION 2501 FIVE. ESTABLISHING OUTDOOR DINING ON PRIVATE PROPERTY TO INCLUDE TWO TABLES, SIX CHAIRS FOR THE RESTAURANT KNOWN AS YACHT CLUB SUBS ON PROPERTY OWNED BY PHAB HOLDINGS LLC AND LOCATED AT 847 FOURTH AVENUE SOUTH. MORE FULLY DESCRIBED HEREIN, PROVIDING FOR SCRIVENER'S ERRORS AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THANK YOU, MADAM CLERK. SWEARING IN FOR ALL THOSE INTENDING TO OFFER TESTIMONY WHO ARE NOT PREVIOUSLY SWORN, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. LOOKS LIKE EVERYBODY WAS SWORN IN EARLIER. OKAY. DISCLOSURES. COUNCIL MEMBER FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE. NO CONTACT. BARTON. FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE? SOME CONVERSATION WITH STAFF FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE. DISCUSSED IT WITH STAFF. KRAMER FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE. SPOKE WITH STAFF ABOUT THIS. FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE, SPOKE WITH STAFF BRIEFLY. [02:30:02] NO CONTACT. VICE MAYOR. I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE. SPOKE WITH STAFF AND NO OTHER CONTACT. I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE. DROVE BY THE SITE AND NO FURTHER CONTACT WITH THAT. GOOD MORNING. MR.. GENERAL THOMAS SCANGARELLO, ON BEHALF OF FOURTH AVENUE SOUTH YACHT CLUB SUBS. FRANK PALADINO, WHO'S IN THE AUDIENCE AND HIS WIFE IS IN THE AUDIENCE, TOO. I'M GOING TO SWEAR PEOPLE IN OR NOT. YEAH. YOU WERE ALREADY SWORN IN. OKAY. HOPEFULLY THIS WAS A LITTLE BIT EASIER. HOPEFULLY THIS ONE'S A LOT EASIER. THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT FOURTH AVENUE SOUTH. THE APPLICANT HAS SUBMITTED A PETITION FOR OUTDOOR DINING ON PRIVATE PROPERTY ON AN AREA LESS THAN 100FT², WHICH REQUIRES NO ON SITE PARKING. THERE IS PARKING ON THE DAVID DOING THAT. THERE IS PARKING ON THE. THERE IS PARKING ON THE STREET, AND THERE IS PARKING IN THE REAR OF A PARKING LOT AND ACROSS THE STREET AND A PARKING LOT. THE PETITION IS FOR TWO TABLES AND THREE CHAIRS. THERE ARE TWO TABLES AND THREE CHAIRS THERE. NOW, BECAUSE THERE'S A TEMPORARY PERMIT THAT'S BEEN ISSUED BECAUSE THERE WERE TABLES AND CHAIRS THERE FOR DIVINE COFFEY, WHICH WAS A SHOP. BEFORE THAT THIS IS A PHOTO OF WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE WITHOUT ANYTHING THERE. IT'S IN THE DOWNTOWN DISTRICT, AND WE'RE HOPING THAT AT LEAST THE TWO TABLES AND THE THREE CHAIRS OR SIX CHAIRS THAT YOU HAVE SEEN THERE, IF YOU VISITED THE SITE, WILL CERTAINLY GIVE THAT STREETSCAPE SOME IMPROVEMENT. THE PETITIONERS HAD A SHOP ON 12TH AVENUE, WHICH THEY MOVED TO THIS PARTICULAR SPOT BECAUSE THEY WANTED TO BE CLOSER TO TOWN. WE HAVE WE THINK WE'VE MET THE CRITERIA FOR THE OUTDOOR DINING WITH RESPECT TO PEDESTRIAN AND VEHICULAR TRAFFIC ON THE ADJOINING STREETS AND THE CIRCULATION, WE HAVE NOT INHIBITED THAT. THE OWNER AND OPERATOR IS GOING TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING THE OUTDOOR DINING AREA. THE THERE'S NO PROPOSAL TO PROVIDE ANY FORM OF ALCOHOL. THERE'S NO ADDITIONAL SIGNS THAT ARE PROPOSED OTHER THAN WHAT'S THERE. THE HOURS OF OPERATION ARE FROM 10 TO 10:30 A.M. TO 3:30 P.M., AND ON SUNDAY, 11 A.M. TO 3 P.M.. PMS. THERE IS A AS I SAID, IT'S LESS THAN 100FT². IT'S ACTUALLY 70FT². THIS THIS THE OUTDOOR DINING WILL NOT INTRUDE ON ANY COMPONENTS OF THE OF THE NEIGHBORS OR ANY COMPONENTS OF THE OF THE PROPERTY ITSELF. AS YOU KNOW, PK, PJ CHINESE RESTAURANT IS LOCATED TO THE, TO THE WEST. THERE'S NO PUBLIC PROPERTY INVOLVED. IT'S ALL ON PRIVATE PROPERTY. AND THERE'S NO LANDSCAPING THAT IS PROPOSED AT THIS POINT. UNLESS MR. HUTCHINSON FINDS OUT THAT WE MIGHT NEED SOME, I DON'T KNOW. AND THERE'S NO FENCING RAILINGS OR PLANTINGS OR OTHER BARRIERS. THERE'S NO OUTDOOR ILLUMINATION. THERE ARE NO SPEAKERS FOR ENTERTAINMENT OR MUSIC. AND AS I SAID, THERE'S SOME PARKING IN THE REAR THAT'S AVAILABLE IF NECESSARY. AND THERE'S NO HAZARDOUS OR ADVERSE IMPACTS TO ANYTHING THAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO DO. WE THINK IT'S A PRETTY SIMPLE APPLICATION. AND WE HOPE IT'S SOMETHING THAT THAT'S A PICTURE OF THE CHAIRS AND THE TABLES THAT THEY ARE THAT THEY HAVE THERE. NOW, AS A MATTER OF FACT. SO THAT'S THE ESSENCE OF THIS APPLICATION. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION. COUNCIL MEMBER PETRANOFF. I GUESS I'LL DEFER MY MY COMMENT, IF I MAY. MAYOR TO AFTER THE STAFF REPORT. OKAY. IF THAT'S OKAY. THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE PETITIONER'S AGENT? OKAY. WE'LL GO TO THE STAFF REPORT. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING AGAIN. MAYOR, MADAM MAYOR AND COUNCIL, JEFF BRAMER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. PETITIONER IS REQUESTING APPROVAL FOR OUTDOOR DINING AT YACHT CLUB SUBS. THIS IS A NEW LOCATION FOR THE SANDWICH SHOP, NOW LOCATED AT 847 FOURTH AVENUE SOUTH. THE SHOP IS OPEN MONDAY THROUGH SATURDAY. POSTED HOURS OF 10:30 A.M. TO 3:30 P.M. AND SUNDAY, 11 TO 3 P.M. REQUEST IS FOR TWO TABLES AND SIX CHAIRS. [02:35:06] SEATING IS LOCATED IN FRONT OF THE BUILDING. THERE'S NO TABLESIDE SERVICE. ALL ORDERS ARE PLACED AND RECEIVED INSIDE THE SANDWICH SHOP, AS THE PETITIONER SAID. THE TOTAL AREA FOR OUTDOOR DINING IS 70FT² PER CODE. THIS IS LESS THAN 100FT², THEREFORE, IT DOES NOT TRIGGER THE REQUIREMENT FOR ADDITIONAL PARKING. THE ESTABLISHMENT HAS BEEN OPERATING UNDER A TEMPORARY PERMIT SINCE JULY. THE PREVIOUS TENANT, DIVINE COFFEY, RECEIVED ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL FOR OUTDOOR DINING IN 2019. PETITION IS REVIEWED BY CITY DEPARTMENTS AND THE FIRE DEPARTMENT HAS APPROVED THE LIFE SAFETY PLAN. LAST MONTH, LETTERS WERE MAILED TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 1000FT OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. TO DATE, STAFF HAS RECEIVED NO PUBLIC CORRESPONDENCE RELATED TO THE REQUEST. PURSUANT TO LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, CITY COUNCIL REVIEW AND APPROVAL IS REQUIRED FOR OUTDOOR DINING PETITIONS AND SHOULD COUNCIL CHOOSE TO APPROVE THIS PETITION, STAFF HAS ONE RECOMMENDATION OR ONE CONDITION RECOMMENDED. AND THAT IS THAT THE OUTDOOR DINING IS LIMITED TO 70FT², WITH A MAXIMUM OF TWO TABLES AND SIX CHAIRS, AS CONFIGURED IN THE APPROVED LIFE SAFETY PLAN. ANY FUTURE EXPANSION, MODIFICATION, OR ENHANCEMENT OF THIS OUTDOOR DINING SHALL REQUIRE CITY COUNCIL REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CONCLUDES MY COMMENTS AND I'M AVAILABLE. THANK YOU, COUNCILWOMAN PETRANOFF. IF THERE ARE NO QUESTIONS, I'D LIKE TO MOVE FOR APPROVAL. SECOND. ONE SECOND. I LIKE THAT. NO OTHER QUESTIONS. OKAY. I JUST HAVE ONE. AND IS THERE AN INTENTION TO USE UMBRELLAS? THEY DID NOT PROVIDE THAT. THAT'S. YEAH. SO IF THEY DECIDE TO USE UMBRELLAS, WHAT WILL BE THE PROCESS? THEY WOULD HAVE TO AMEND THEIR LIFE SAFETY PLAN. AMEND THE LIFE SAFETY PLAN. BECAUSE THOSE UMBRELLAS CAN'T ENCROACH INTO AN EGRESS PATH WHERE THEY WOULD HAVE TO BE APPROVED FOR LIFE SAFETY. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THAT'S IT FOR STAFF. I DO NOT HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT. PETITIONER'S AGENT LIKE TO HAVE CLOSING REMARKS. NO, MA'AM. THANK YOU. DISCUSSION OR EMOTION? COUNCIL MEMBER PETRANOFF. MY. THERE'S ACTUALLY ALREADY A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THE FLOOR. WELL, I COULDN'T TAKE IT BECAUSE WE WEREN'T COMPLETED WITH THE HEARING. BUT YES, ONCE IT'S MADE, IT'S MADE. I DIDN'T HEAR IT. OKAY. SORRY. SO RIGHT NOW, WE JUST NEED TO DO A ROLL CALL. I DIDN'T HEAR IT. OKAY, SO THEN CAN YOU WITHDRAW YOUR MOTION? AND THEN I WITHDRAW MY PREVIOUS MOTION. AND I PUT FORWARD THE EXACT SAME MOTION TO APPROVE THIS PETITION AS IS. AND I PUT WHAT WE'RE GOING TO WITH THE CONDITION THAT THEY DON'T THEY CAN'T EXPAND IT. THAT STAFF RECOMMENDED WITH THE CONDITIONS THAT THAT STAFF OUTLINED. THANK YOU. I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER PETRANOFF AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER KRAMER. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE PULL THE COUNCIL. COUNCIL MEMBER. CHRISTMANN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. PETRANOFF. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BURTON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. KRAMER. YES. VICE MAYOR. HUTCHINSON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. HENMAN. YES. MAYOR. HARTMAN. YES. THANK YOU. COUNCIL PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. THANK YOU. GOOD LUCK. OKAY. AND WITH THAT, WE ARE MOVING ON TO ITEM 11 D. [11.D) A Resolution Determining Fifth Avenue South Parking Allocation Petition 25-PKAL1 for the Purpose of Allocating Eight Public Parking Spaces Pursuant to Section 58-1134(d)(2) of the Code of Ordinances to Meet the Parking Requirements for a New Mixed-Use Development with a Restaurant and Three Residential Units on Property Owned by AG Naples, LLC, a Florida Limited Liability Company, and Located at 472 5th Avenue South, More Fully Described Herein; and Providing an Effective Date. ] MADAM CLERK, PLEASE SWEAR IN. MAY I READ? OH, YES. I'M SORRY, MR. MCCONNELL. THESE GUYS ARE GOING. I'M GOING. THEY ARE. THEY'RE READY. SO ALTHOUGH WE TRIED IT FOR A AND B, I ACTUALLY SUGGEST THAT I'M GOING TO READ 11 D AND 11 E SO THAT WE CAN JUST HAVE THE RECORD BE ONE AND THE SAME. CONSIDERING THERE'S ONE PRESENTATION AND ONE AGENT IF THAT'S OKAY WITH COUNCIL. OKAY. THANK YOU. 11 D A RESOLUTION DETERMINING FIFTH AVENUE SOUTH PARKING ALLOCATION PETITION 25 PCA L1 FOR THE PURPOSE OF ALLOCATING EIGHT PUBLIC PARKING SPACES PURSUANT TO SECTION 50 8-1134, SUBPARAGRAPH D TWO OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES TO MEET THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR A NEW MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT WITH THE RESTAURANT AND THREE RESIDENTIAL UNITS ON PROPERTY OWNED BY A G. NAPLES, LLC, FLORIDA LIMITED LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY AND LOCATED AT 472 FIFTH AVENUE SOUTH. MORE FULLY DESCRIBED HEREIN AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. ITEM 11 E RESOLUTION DETERMINING OUTDOOR DINING PETITION 25. ODD ONE SIX. ESTABLISHING OUTDOOR DINING ON PRIVATE PROPERTY TO INCLUDE 27 TABLES AND 66 CHAIRS FOR THE RESTAURANT KNOWN AS AVENUE 31 ON PROPERTY OWNED BY AG NAPLES LLC AND LOCATED AT 472 FIFTH AVENUE SOUTH. MORE FULLY DESCRIBED HEREIN, PROVIDING FOR SCRIVENER'S ERRORS AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THANK YOU, MADAM CLERK, FOR ALL THOSE INTENDING TO OFFER TESTIMONY. PLEASE RISE AND RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM OR AFFIRM THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU'RE ABOUT TO GIVE [02:40:08] BE THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? I DO. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. COUNSEL. DISCLOSURES. PENMAN FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE. NO CONTACT WITH SITE. SPOKE TO STAFF FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE. DISCUSSED THE PETITION WITH STAFF. NO OTHER CONTACT. KRAMER FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE AND TALK WITH STAFF ABOUT THIS. FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE. SPOKE WITH STAFF. NO CONTACT WITH PETITIONER. FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE. BEEN TO THE SITE. SPOKE WITH STAFF. NO OTHER CONTACT AND I AM FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE. WENT TO THE SITE AND NO FURTHER CONTACT. THANK YOU AND GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING, MADAM MAYOR. COUNCIL. FOR THE RECORD, MARK MCLEAN MHK ARCHITECTURE, 2059 TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST. WE BRING BACK WHAT SHOULD HOPEFULLY BE A FAIRLY FAMILIAR SITE WITH A VERY FAMILIAR BUILDING, BUT WE'VE MADE SOME MODIFICATIONS BASED ON THE LAST TIME WE WERE HERE. VERY SIMILAR BUILDING TO WHAT WE BROUGHT BEFORE. THAT WAS A TRANSIENT LODGING BUILDING, BUT WE HAVE TURNED IT INTO A CONDOMINIUM BUILDING SO THAT THE OWNER CAN THE USER CAN THE OWNER CAN PROCEED WITHIN A GRANTED USE VERSUS PURSUING CONDITIONAL USE. BUT EVEN WITH THIS BUILDING AND THIS SITE CONSTRAINTS, WE BRING BEFORE YOU TODAY A PARKING ALLOCATION REQUEST. THE OVERALL PARKING REQUIRED FOR THE PROJECT IS 15 PARKING SPACES. WE HAVE A FAIRLY SMALL SITE, AND THAT 15 PARKING OR THE PARKING SPACES ARE ALLOCATED AS TWO PER CONDOMINIUM UNIT. AND WE HAVE THREE CONDOMINIUM UNITS, SO WE GOT SIX PARKING SPACES ON SITE TO ACCOMMODATE THOSE CONDOMINIUM UNITS. THEN WE LEFT THE ADA SPACE ON SITE FOR THE RESTAURANT, AND THEN THERE'S A LOADING ZONE IN THE BACK. THAT WAS ONE OF OUR TOPICS THE LAST TIME WE WERE HERE. THAT IS JUST A PURE LOADING ZONE. IT DOESN'T SHARE AS PARKING SOME OTHER PART OF THE DAY. SO THAT'S WHAT TAKES UP THE BACK OF OUR SPACE IS THE SIX PARKING SPACES FOR THE UNIT OWNERS. THE ADA SPACE FOR THE RESTAURANT AND THE LOADING DOCK. WITH THAT, THE ALLOCATION THAT WE'RE REQUESTING IS EIGHT PARKING SPACES OUT OF THE CITY'S GARAGE. SO THE EIGHT PARKING ALLOCATIONS ARE THE WAY WE INTERPRET THE ALLOCATION OF PARKING FROM THE GARAGES FOR THIS USE, FOR A USE WITHIN THE FIFTH AVENUE OVERLAY DISTRICT. AND WE'RE DOING A RESTAURANT WITHIN THE FIFTH AVENUE OVERLAY DISTRICT. SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE REQUESTING THE EIGHT ADDITIONAL PARKING SPACES. THE SECOND PART OF THIS IS THE OUTDOOR DINING APPLICATION THAT GOES WITH THE RESTAURANT. THE PROPOSED OUTDOOR DINING APPLICATION WILL SERVE ON THE NEW GROUND FLOOR OF THE RESTAURANT, WHICH WILL HERE IN BE IDENTIFIED AS AVENUE 31. THE RESTAURANT WILL OPERATE DAILY FROM 8 A.M. TO MIDNIGHT, ACCOMMODATING 66 OUTDOOR SEATS WITH 27 TABLES AND 30 CHAIRS, AND 36 OF THE SEATS WILL BE CUSHIONED SEATS. WE WILL INCLUDE SOME NICE CEILING ELEMENTS, LIGHTING FIXTURES AND WE HAVE THAT TO SHOW YOU HERE IN THE PLANT. SO HERE'S THE LOCATION OF THE PROJECT, WHICH YOU ALL MENTIONED YOU WERE FAMILIAR WITH. AS WE START WITH A SITE PLAN, I'VE GRAYED OUT THE ENTIRETY OF THE SITE PLAN WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE FRONT AREA THAT IS THE OUTDOOR DINING. SO THE WHITE AREA IN THE FRONT HERE IS THE OUTDOOR DINING. I DO WANT TO POINT OUT AND NOTE THAT THIS IS THE EDGE OF FIFTH AVENUE. THIS IS WHERE THERE'S A PARKING SPACES IN HERE. THIS IS WHERE THE SIDEWALK IS. YEAH. SO THE SIDEWALK AND PLANTERS RUN A LOT ALONG THE FRONT HERE. BUT WHAT I'M POINTING OUT HERE IS OUR PROPERTY. OUR BUILDING IS COMPLETELY LOCATED ON OUR PROPERTY, AND WE BASICALLY WENT INTO THE BUILDING TO CREATE TO CREATE THE OUTDOOR DINING SPACE. SO NOTHING IS ON PUBLIC PROPERTY. IT'S ALL ON PRIVATE PROPERTY. SO EVERYTHING EXISTS WITHIN THE PRIVATE PROPERTY. IF WE MOVE TO THE SOUTH SIDE OR THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY BACK HERE, YOU CAN SEE THE SIX DESIGNATED PARKING SPACES FOR THE UNIT OWNERS. THE ONE ADA SPACE TO GET SOMEONE INTO THE RESTAURANT, AND THEN THE LOADING ZONE THAT IS ON THE BACK END OF THE ALLEY HERE. OUR DUMPSTER AND COMPACTOR AND EVERYTHING IS COMPLETELY ENCLOSED BACK HERE. WE KNOW WHEN WE WERE HERE THE PREVIOUS TIME, THERE WERE SOME NEIGHBORS THAT WERE CONCERNED. WE'VE CONTINUED TO MEET WITH THEM AND ADDRESS THEIR CONCERNS FROM THE STANDPOINT THAT THIS IS WHERE OUR OWNERS ARE GOING TO BE PARKING. YOU KNOW, THE RESTAURANT'S NOT GOING TO HAVE A BAD BACK OF HOUSE OR A DIRTY BACK OF HOUSE, BECAUSE THE PEOPLE THAT OWN AND LIVE IN THE BUILDING WILL MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S TAKEN CARE OF. SO THESE ARE OWNERS NOW, NOT TRANSIENT LODGING TENANTS. THESE ARE OWNERS THAT ARE GOING TO SAY, HEY, THAT'S MY PARKING SPACE, CLEAN UP YOUR BACK HOUSE. SO WE EXPECT IT TO BE WELL MAINTAINED AND WELL CLEANED. ZOOMING IN, WE'VE GOT A LIFE SAFETY PLAN FOR THE OUTDOOR DINING THAT'S IN THE FRONT. THIS HAS BEEN THROUGH FIRE AND IS FIRE APPROVED. AS YOU CAN SEE, THE SPACES LAY OUT HERE. NOW, ONE OF THE THINGS WE IDENTIFIED WHEN WE MOVE INTO OUR PLAN IS A TABLE THAT GOES IN HERE. SO WE'VE GOT SOME NICE HEATERS, FANS, SOME NICE CAN LIGHTS, SOME NICE WALL SCONCES. WE HAVE THE HARDY CEILINGS THAT ARE GOING IN HERE AND WE IDENTIFY A SOFA HERE. BUT ONE OF THE COOL ELEMENTS OF HERE IS ALTHOUGH THE SOFAS WILL ALL BE FROM THE SAME MANUFACTURER, THEY'LL BE DIFFERENT COLORS, THERE'LL BE DIFFERENT PATTERNS. IT'LL BE A REALLY UNIQUE, REALLY NICE SPACE. AS WE MOVE INTO WHAT IT'LL LOOK LIKE FROM FIFTH AVENUE, NOTE THAT IT'S BETWEEN TULIA AND DELMAR. SO THOSE ARE SOME SIZABLE BUILDINGS. SO WE'RE GOING TO BE IN THE SAME CALIBER AND SCALE OF THOSE BUILDINGS. [02:45:02] NOW THE GROUND FLOOR, AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, WILL BE THE OUTDOOR DINING IN THE RESTAURANT. THERE WILL BE AN ACCESS FOR OWNERS ALONG THAT SPACE. THE SECOND FLOOR WILL HAVE A FRONT FACING CONDO AND A REAR FACING CONDO. AND THEN THE THIRD FLOOR IS ONE CONDO. SO THAT'S HOW WE GET TO THREE OF THE ENTIRETY OF THE THIRD FLOOR. AGAIN, JUST SHOWING SOME ILLUSTRATED SPACES. THIS IS WHERE YOU CAN SEE THE COUCHES START HAVING SOME DIFFERENT COLORS. HERE. WE'VE GOT SOME PLANTERS THAT WE'RE NOT ENTERTAINING OR INTERACTING WITH THE EXISTING FIFTH AVENUE SIDEWALK. WE HAVE SOME NICE SOFT WOOD FEATURES IN HERE, SOME LIGHTED TREES AND EVERYTHING. BUT AGAIN, THIS IS ALL ON OUR PROPERTY WITHIN THE PRIVATE PROPERTY SETBACKS OR BOUNDS OF THE BUILDING. THIS IS THIS CAN BE A PLACE TO WALK IN AND GET INTO THE BUILDING, INTERACT WITH THE HOST. AND THERE'S A THERE'S ANOTHER EXIT AND ENTRANCE ON THE OTHER SIDE. AGAIN COMING TO THE BACK OF HOUSE, THE SECOND FLOOR UNIT HAS A REAR. THE THIRD FLOOR UNIT HAS A FRONT AND REAR BALCONY. BUT AGAIN THIS IS WHERE OUR PARKING IS. BACK HERE, OUR DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE. WE'RE GOING TO SCREEN THAT AND REALLY MAKE IT LOOK NICE BECAUSE AGAIN OUR OWNERS THIS IS THEIR BACK OF HOUSE. JUST ANOTHER NICE VIEW FROM THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY. AND THERE IS AN IMAGE OF THE SIGNAGE THAT WE WILL PLACE ON THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING FOR AVENUE 31 CAFE. WITH THAT, THAT'S THE ENTIRETY OF MY PRESENTATION FOR OUTDOOR DINING AND THE REQUEST FOR THE PARKING ALLOCATION. I'M AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION. THERE ARE THE PARKING FOR THIS BUILDING WILL BE IN THE BACK OF THE HOUSE FOR THE OWNERS OF THE UNITS. YES, MA'AM. OKAY, SO WHERE WILL SO YOU'RE GOING TO BUY PARKING OUT OF THE GARAGE, BUT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE EMPLOYEES FOR THE RESTAURANT. WHERE WILL THEY PARK? SAME PLACE IN THE PARKING GARAGE. AND. DO WE KNOW HOW MANY EMPLOYEES ARE GOING TO BE? NOT AT THIS TIME, BUT A RESTAURANT. THIS THIS SIZE IS USUALLY 10 TO 12 EMPLOYEES. OKAY. AND THEN JUST TO CONFIRM, YOU SAID THERE'S GOING TO BE IN THE OUTDOOR DINING. AND THAT'S THE IF YOU COULD JUST PUT THAT ON THE SCREEN. IS THAT SC2? YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU. SO CAN YOU TELL ME HOW MANY SEATS ARE OUT THERE AND TABLES. YES, MA'AM. THERE'S, THERE'S THERE ARE 20. I HAD IT IN MY NOTES HERE. WE HAVE WANTE. SEVEN TABLES WITH. SO THERE'S 27 TABLES AND THEIR TWO TOPS. SO IT'S LIKE ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR. SO THERE'S 27 TABLES AND THEN THERE'S 30 SEATS. AND THEN THE WAY THE COUCHES ARE CALCULATED, THE COUCHES ARE CALCULATED AS 36 SEAT SPACES. SO THAT'S WHAT WAS CONFUSING. SO THOSE ARE COUCHES. YEAH. SO SO AND THAT'S WHERE I WAS KIND OF IF I CAN GET THIS ONE IMAGE HERE, IT'S A LITTLE CLEARER TO SEE. SO YOU CAN SEE THERE'S A TABLE HERE WITH A CHAIR. AND THEN THERE'S A COUCH HERE THAT SPANS THE TWO TABLES. SO THERE'S TWO TABLES TWO CHAIRS AND A COUCH. BUT GOT TO KIND OF COUNT THAT COUCH AS THREE SEATS, EVEN THOUGH MOST LIKELY THERE WILL ONLY EVER BE TWO PEOPLE SITTING THERE BECAUSE AND I THINK WE DISCUSSED THIS AT THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING ABOUT LENGTHS OF SEATINGS AND THE WAY FIRE CODE INTERPRETS LENGTH OF SEATING VERSUS AN ACTUAL CHAIR WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A BANQUETTE. SO THE COUCH IS KIND OF DOING THE SAME THING TO US HERE. SO THE LIFE SAFETY PLAN MUST BE IN THE DO YOU HAVE THE LIFE SAFETY PLAN THAT IS SC2? YES, MA'AM. IT'S THE OUTDOOR DINING BUT IT'S REAL SIMPLE. EVERYBODY EGRESSES THROUGH THE ONE SPACE HERE. THE OCCUPANCY IS LOW ENOUGH WITH THIS 44 WITH 44 INCH WIDTH. EVERYBODY CAN KIND OF MOVE TO THE EGRESS PATH AND OUT OF THE BUILDING IN AN EMERGENCY. THE THE INDOOR DINING AREA SMALL ENOUGH THAT OUR OCCUPANCY IS LOW ENOUGH. THE MAJORITY OF THIS, AS YOU CAN SEE, THE MAJORITY OF THIS DINING WILL BE OUTSIDE. ONCE YOU'RE IN THE RESTAURANT ITSELF. THERE'S A BAR OVER IN THE CORNER AND THERE'S, YOU KNOW, JUST A HANDFUL OF TABLES INSIDE THE RESTAURANT. I DON'T SEE THAT. I SEE A LOT OF TABLES INSIDE THE RESTAURANT, IF THAT. WELL, THIS IS KIND OF A CENTRAL TABLE THAT HAS TWO, FOUR, SIX, EIGHT, TEN, 12 IN HERE. AND THEN THERE'S FIVE, FOUR TOPS HERE, SIX TABLES OVER HERE. SO I MEAN, FOR A 2800 SQUARE FOOT RESTAURANT, IT'S 20 TABLES AND 20 TABLES AND 40 CHAIRS, PLUS A DOZEN AT THE BAR. BUT THAT'S KIND OF SEPARATE FROM THE OUTDOOR DINING REQUEST. OKAY. I'LL ASK STAFF WHERE THE. YES, MA'AM. ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE PETITIONERS AGENT? OKAY. MAYOR. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER CUSHMAN. MR. MCLEAN. I NOTED THE ON THE ONE DRAWING YOU HAD. RENDERING. YOU HAD THE BACK OF THE HOUSE, THE DUMPSTER SHIELDING OR WHATEVER. IS THAT THE PROPER WAY TO THE ENCLOSURE? ENCLOSURE? YES, SIR. I'M JUST CURIOUS. IS THAT SOMETHING? [02:50:02] THAT IS. YOU KNOW, YOU KIND OF UNIQUELY DESIGNED FOR THIS PROPERTY, OR ARE THERE GENERIC ENCLOSURES OF THIS KIND THAT IT'S IT'S IT'S UNIQUE FOR THIS PROPERTY, BUT, I MEAN, IN ITS SIMPLEST FORM, IT'S A CONCRETE BLOCK ENCLOSURE THAT WE'VE KIND OF CHAMFERED THE CORNERS. WE HAD TO MANIPULATE THE LOCATION OF THE BOLLARDS THAT PROTECT THE TRUCK FROM DROPPING THE DUMPSTER ON IT. BUT AS FAR AS THE THE ESTHETICS ON IT, THE VINES WERE GROWING UP THE SIDE OF IT, THE ARCHITECTURAL, ARCHITECTURAL APPLICATIONS. I MEAN, THAT'S THE CUSTOM DESIGN OF THIS, THAT WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR UNIT OWNERS ARE NOT DRIVING PAST. AND YOU'VE OBVIOUSLY THOUGHT THROUGH THE WHOLE ISSUE AROUND THE DUMPSTER BEING EASILY ACCESSED BY, BY THE IT IS REFUSE TRUCKS. YEAH. I MEAN, WE HAVE SITE PLAN APPROVAL. SO WE'VE MET WITH STREETS AND STORMWATER ON THIS. THIS HAS A COMPACTOR IN IT TO TO TRY TO HELP MITIGATE THAT. IT WILL PROBABLY BE PICKED UP DAILY, BUT THAT TRASH TRUCK COMES WEST TO EAST DOWN THE ALLEY. SO AS YOU CAN SEE IN THIS IMAGE, AS IT'S AS IT'S ANGLED THERE, THE TRASH TRUCK WILL COME DOWN THE ALLEY, TURN, PICK UP THE DUMPSTER, DUMP IT, AND CONTINUE DOWN THE ALLEY. YEAH, I THINK IT'S IT'S ALL POSITIVE AND COMMENDABLE. THE REASON I BRING IT UP I WAS JUST INTERESTED IN LEARNING A LITTLE MORE, BUT I'VE BEEN WORKING FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS AS A COUNCILMAN WITH THE THE RESIDENTS WHO ABUT THAT ALLEY. YES, SIR. PARTICULARLY THE WESTERN END OF IT. AND, YOU KNOW, SORT OF FROM FIFTH STREET ON DOWN TO THIRD AND THE BOTH THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE ON SPRING LAKE AND SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND THEN I THINK IT'S CALLED FLAMINGO HIDEAWAY, THE BIG CONDO. YES, SIR. AND THERE'S BEEN A THERE'S BEEN A CHRONIC PROBLEM FOR EVER WITH, YOU KNOW, THE COMMERCIAL USES OF THAT ALLEY AND THE CONFLICT WITH RESIDENCES. AND A LOT OF IT RELATES TO DUMPSTERS AND THE LOCATION OF DUMPSTERS, THE MAINTENANCE OF THE DUMPSTERS, THE SCHEDULING OF THE REMOVAL OF TRASH. AND YOU KNOW, IT JUST STRUCK ME AS I LOOKED AT THIS THAT YOU KNOW, WE CAN'T MAKE IT A REQUIREMENT. BUT IF EVERY DUMPSTER ON THAT ALLEY WAS IN A SIMILAR KIND OF AN ENCLOSURE, IT WOULD MAKE A HUGE DIFFERENCE FOR FOR THE ESTHETICS OF THE ALLEY. AND I KNOW FROM YEARS AGO WHEN WE STARTED THERE, THERE USED TO JUST BE INDIVIDUAL DUMPSTERS. THEY DID GET TO A COMPACTOR AND THEY'VE TRIED TO COME TOGETHER THERE. BUT ON THE OTHER SIDE THERE IS. YEAH, ON THE, ON THE OTHER END, BUT NOT ON THE, THERE'S, YOU KNOW, I'VE HAD THAT CONVERSATION WITH CITY STAFF, UNFORTUNATELY. HAVING A SINGLE COMPACTOR IN THE ALLEY IN QUESTION HERE IS THERE'S SOME PRACTICAL CHALLENGES TO IT. YES, SIR. THANK YOU FOR THANK YOU FOR YOUR INFORMATION ON THAT. YES, SIR. SO IT'S NOT A SHARED DUMPSTER? NO, MA'AM. THANK YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE'LL MOVE TO THE STAFF REPORT. GOOD MORNING, MADAM MAYOR AND COUNCIL, JEFF RIEMER AGAIN WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. WE HAVE TWO REQUESTS HERE FOR THE SAME PROPERTY. FIRST IS FOR PARKING ALLOCATION FOR EIGHT SPACES IN THE MUNICIPAL GARAGE. PURPOSE OF THIS IS TO ACCOMMODATE PARKING FOR COMMERCIAL RESTAURANT. THE SECOND REQUEST IS FOR APPROVAL FOR OUTDOOR DINING FOR THAT RESTAURANT. BOTH REQUIRE COUNCIL REVIEW AND APPROVAL. SOME CONTEXT THE ADDRESS IS 472 FIFTH AVENUE SOUTH. IT'S A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY. CAME BEFORE YOU LAST SPRING. AT THE TIME, IT INCLUDED TRANSIENT LODGING. THAT WAS DENIED SINCE THEN. THE TRANSIENT LODGING ELEMENT HAS BEEN REMOVED. IT'S NOW UPPER LEVEL RESIDENTIAL. FIRST FLOOR INCLUDES A ROUGHLY 2900 SQUARE FOOT RESTAURANT. SECOND FLOOR INCLUDES TWO CONDO UNITS, AND THE THIRD FLOOR INCLUDES ONE LARGER CONDO UNIT. IN TOTAL, THE DEVELOPMENT REQUIRES 15 SPACES. THAT'S SIX SPACES FOR THE RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT AND NINE SPACES FOR THE RESTAURANT. RESIDENTIAL BREAKDOWN IS TWO SPACES PER CONDO. THE DEVELOPER HAS PROPOSED ONE ADDITIONAL ADA SPACE. THESE SEVEN SPACES ARE ON SITE AT GRADE LEVEL UNDERNEATH THE SUPERSTRUCTURE, SO THAT WILL PARK THE CONDOS PLUS ONE SPACE ON SITE PARKING. THE RESTAURANT REQUIRES THREE SPACES PER 1000FT² OF COMMERCIAL SPACE. THE RESTAURANT IS ALMOST 2900FT². WE DON'T DO FRACTIONS, SO IT ESSENTIALLY IT'S NINE SPACES AGAIN, ONE SPACE. THE ADA SPACE HAS ALREADY BEEN PROVIDED ON SITE IN ADDITION TO THE RESIDENTIAL REQUIREMENT OF SIX. SO THEY NEED THE ALLOCATION FOR THE REMAINING EIGHT SPACES. CODE ALLOWS COUNCIL TO MAKE PUBLIC PARKING AVAILABLE TO MEET THE NEEDS OF NEW DEVELOPMENT IN THE FIFTH AVENUE OVERLAY DISTRICT. [02:55:06] EIGHT SPACES WILL BE PROVIDED FOR IN THE SIXTH AVENUE SOUTH AND EIGHTH STREET SOUTH PARKING GARAGE. THE GARAGE IS A SHORT DISTANCE FROM THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THERE ARE 329 SPACES IN THAT GARAGE. THE CURRENT REMAINING BALANCE IS 222 AVAILABLE SPACES. AT THE MOMENT THERE ARE THREE BUSINESSES AND ONE RESTAURANT WHICH HAVE RECEIVED PARKING ALLOCATIONS IN THE GARAGE. THAT BREAKDOWN IS IN YOUR PACKETS. ALSO NOTE THAT PARKING ALLOCATIONS CARRY A FEE BORNE BY THE DEVELOPER, CALCULATED ON A PER SPACE BASIS PER SPACE BASIS. CURRENTLY, THE FEES ROUGHLY $43,500 PER SPACE. PETITIONER WILL BE REQUIRED TO PURCHASE ACCESS TO EIGHT SPACES AT A TOTAL COST OF $348,000. THIS REQUEST WAS REVIEWED LAST MONTH BY THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ADVISORY BOARD. THAT IS THE FIRST STEP IN THIS REVIEW PROCESS PRIOR TO COMING BEFORE YOU DURING THAT HEARING. THE BOARD RECOMMENDED APPROVAL WITH A SIX TO NOTHING VOTE. PETITIONER IS ALSO REQUESTING APPROVAL FOR OUTDOOR DINING. THE RESTAURANT WILL BE NAMED AVENUE 31. RESTAURANT WILL BE OPEN DAILY FROM 8 A.M. TO MIDNIGHT. SPECIFICALLY, THE REQUEST IS FOR 27 TABLES AND 66 CHAIRS. OUTDOOR DINING IN THE FIFTH AVENUE OVERLAY DISTRICT IS EXEMPT FROM THE ADDITIONAL PARKING REQUIREMENTS. SO AGAIN, THE ONE SPACE ON SITE IN THE PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED ALLOCATION WILL PARK THE RESTAURANT THE REQUIRED NINE SPACES. BOTH PETITIONS HAVE BEEN NOTICED TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 1000FT. TO DATE, STAFF HAS RECEIVED NO OFFICIAL PUBLIC CORRESPONDENCE REGARDING THE REQUEST. SHOULD COUNCIL CHOOSE TO APPROVE THE PETITIONS? STAFF HAS NO SPECIFIC CONDITION RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE PARKING ALLOCATION REQUEST. HOWEVER, STAFF DOES HAVE ONE CONDITION RECOMMENDATION FOR THE OUTDOOR DINING PETITION, AND THAT IS THAT THE OUTDOOR DINING AREA IS LIMITED TO 1600 19FT², WITH A MAXIMUM OF 27 TABLES AND 66 CHAIRS, AS CONFIGURED IN THE APPROVED LIFE SAFETY PLAN. ANY FUTURE EXPANSION, MODIFICATION OR ENHANCEMENT OF THE OUTDOOR DINING USE SHALL REQUIRE CITY COUNCIL REVIEW AND APPROVAL. THAT CONCLUDES MY COMMENTS. I'M AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS. WELL, COULD THEY ACTUALLY EXPAND ANY MORE DINING OUTSIDE? NO. WELL, NO. NO. I MEAN, IF THEY WERE TO CHANGE, YOU KNOW, THE LIFE SAFETY PLAN AT ALL. ADD, YOU KNOW, UMBRELLAS OR MOVE TABLES AROUND OR SOMETHING. ANY MODIFICATION, ANY EXPANSION. ANY. THAT'S THAT'S WHAT THE LANGUAGE IS FOR. SO THE OUTDOOR DINING, WHICH IS 66 SEATS AND 1600 AND 19FT² REQUIRE HOW MUCH DON'T REQUIRE PARKING BECAUSE THEY'RE OUTDOOR IN THE FIFTH AVENUE OVERLAY. YES. AND THEN ON THE INSIDE WHICH IS SHOULD BE PART OF THE LIFE SAFETY PLAN OR IS IT JUST OUTDOOR? SO THERE'S THE YES, THEY WILL HAVE A LIFE SAFETY PLAN FOR THE INDOOR PORTION OF THE RESTAURANT. THAT IS NOT THE LIFE SAFETY PLAN THAT IS APPROVED BY COUNCIL TODAY. THE LIFE SAFETY PLAN FOR THE OUTDOOR DINING IS WHAT IS APPROVED WITH THE OUTDOOR DINING REQUEST. BUT THERE IS ALWAYS AT THE TIME, A BUILDING PERMIT. THE FIRE DEPARTMENT WILL REVIEW A LIFE SAFETY PLAN FOR THE WHOLE BUILDING. RIGHT. SO WHY WOULD WE WHY WOULD WE TAKE THIS IN PIECES? IF THERE'S CHANGES TO THE BUILDING OR ANYTHING AT THAT POINT, IF THERE ARE CHANGES TO THE LIFE SAFETY PLAN IN THE INTERIOR OF THE BUILDING THAT DO NOT AFFECT THE OUTDOOR DINING LIFE SAFETY PLAN, THAT WOULD NOT REQUIRE COUNCIL'S REVIEW AND APPROVAL. IT'S ONLY IF THEY CHANGE THE LIFE SAFETY PLAN AS IT AFFECTS THE OUTDOOR DINING, AND WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE A LIFE SAFETY PLAN. IF IT'S INDOOR DINING, YOU YOU DON'T APPROVE A LIFE SAFETY PLAN IF IT'S INDOOR DINING. BUT AS A AS A PART OF THE REVIEW OF THE BUILDING PERMIT, THE FIRE DEPARTMENT DOES REVIEW LIFE SAFETY PLANS FOR ALL OF THE EVERYTHING ON SITE. SHE'S ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. GOOD AFTERNOON. AND SO THOSE THAT WILL BE THE 1300 AND SIX SQUARE FEET IS NOT THE TOTAL RESTAURANT. IT'S JUST FOR THE INDOOR DINING. INDOOR DINING, FOR THE 70 SEATS. AND HOW MANY TABLES INSIDE? FIVE. SIX. SEVEN. EIGHT. NINE. TEN. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. COUNT THEM. SO THERE'S 21 TABLES INSIDE. [03:00:04] OKAY. THERE'S 21 TABLES. HOW MANY TABLES, THEN, ARE IN THE OUTDOOR DINING? I SEE THE SEATS. WHAT ARE THE TABLES? THE TABLES ARE THE LETTER C IN THE IMAGE THAT'S ON THE SCREEN RIGHT NOW. SO THE B'S ARE THE COUCHES, THE C'S ARE THE TABLES AND THE A'S ARE THE CHAIRS. RIGHT. SO I HAVE THAT THERE ARE 66 SEATS. HOW MANY TABLES. 27, 2727. AND THEN THERE'S 21 TABLES. I MEAN, HOW MANY TABLES INSIDE, 21, 21 TABLES INSIDE AND THEN 70 SEATS. THERE'S ALSO A BAR SPACE THAT NEEDS TO BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT FOR THE INSIDE SPACE FOR 54 MORE SEATS INSIDE WITH THE TABLES. THERE'S BAR SPACE THAT COUNTS FOR THE SEATING AS WELL. I'M SORRY. CAN YOU SAY THAT AGAIN? SURE. SO ON THE BOTTOM PART OF THAT, THERE'S A BAR AND THERE'S SEATING AROUND THAT BAR, WHICH IS CALCULATED INTO THE SEATING CAPACITY FOR THE DINING SPACE. OKAY. SO THE TEN SEATS AT THE BAR. YES, MA'AM, ARE PART OF THE 70 SEATS. YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU. AND THEN DO WE HAVE A STANDARD FOR HOW WHAT THE DISTANCE IS FOR THE TABLES AND CHAIRS? ABSOLUTELY. ALL OF THE LIFE SAFETY PLANS ARE REVIEWED AGAINST THE FLORIDA FIRE PREVENTION CODE, SPECIFICALLY CHAPTER SEVEN OF NFPA 101 AND THE TRAVEL DISTANCE. THE WIDTH OF AISLES IS ALL SPECIFICALLY SPELLED OUT IN THAT CODE. IS THAT DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE HAVE IN OUR CODE? NO, MA'AM. THAT'S ADOPTED BY THE CITY OF NAPLES AS OUR PREVENTION CODE. OKAY. SO WHAT'S. DO YOU KNOW? I'M SORRY, BUT DO YOU KNOW THE WIDTH THAT IT HAS BETWEEN THE TWO TABLES? IT VARIES BASED ON THE SITUATION. IF I IF I MAY, MADAM MAYOR, IF YOU LOOK AT THE PLAN THAT'S ON THE SCREEN NOW, THE THE EGRESS DISTANCE LIST LENGTH IS THE DASHED LINE THAT RUNS DOWN THE CENTER OF THAT SHADED AREA, THE SHADED AREA WHEN YOU GET TO THE END OF IT, WHEN YOU'RE OUT BY THE SIDEWALK, YOU CAN SEE IT SAYS A 44 INCH AISLE WIDTH. THAT'S WHAT'S REQUIRED FOR A RESTAURANT. SO THAT SHADED AREA ON THE PATH IS, IS US DESIGNATING THAT THERE'S NOTHING INTERFERING WITH THAT EGRESS PATH. IF YOU GO UP TO THE TOP END HERE, WHERE IT SAYS TRAVEL DISTANCE 92.6, THAT'S FROM THE DOT AT THE END, ALL THE WAY OUT TO THE SIDEWALK. THEN WHAT HAPPENS IS FROM SHOULDER TO SHOULDER BETWEEN TWO CHAIRS, THOSE ARE MEASUREMENT TABLE TO TABLE. BETWEEN TWO TABLES. THERE'S A MEASUREMENT TABLE TO TABLE. IF THE CHAIRS ARE TURNED 90 DEGREES TO EACH OTHER, OR IF THEY'RE TURNED 45 DEGREES TO EACH OTHER. THEY'RE ALL DIFFERENT MEASUREMENTS THAT ARE SPELLED OUT IN THE NATIONAL FIRE PREVENTION CODE AND THE FIRE PREVENTION CODE THAT. CHIEF ADAM AND I HAVE SPENT COUNTLESS HOURS REVIEWING FROM TIME TO TIME. HE. HE TAUGHT ME EVERYTHING I KNOW. A DECADE AGO, ON CHAIR PLACING FOR THIS. SO WE SPEND A LOT OF TIME MAKING SURE IT WORKS BEFORE YOU SEE IT. GREAT. AND BECAUSE I CAN'T READ IT. BUT CAN YOU JUST TELL ME, DOES IT SAY THE DISTANCE THERE IS FROM THAT, FROM THE BLACK DOT THAT'S IN THE TOP RIGHT. IF YOU WERE ON THAT TABLE OR CHAIR, YOU WOULD COME DOWN THIS EGRESS PATH DOWN HERE AND OUT. BY THE TIME YOU GOT TO THE SIDEWALK, YOU WOULD TRAVEL 92.5FT. BUT IN BETWEEN THOSE CHAIRS, WHAT ARE THE NUMBERS THERE BETWEEN THE COUCH AND THE TABLE? FROM FROM THIS TABLE TO THIS TABLE IS 74IN. IT'S SIX. IT'S SIX FEET TWO. THAT'S WHAT THE CODE REQUIRES US TO MEASURE, IS FROM THE EDGE OF THE TABLE TO THE EDGE OF THE TABLE, WHICH IS 74IN OR 6FT. TWO. OKAY. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COUNCIL? YES, I HAVE VICE MAYOR AND THEN PETRANOFF. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. I'M LOOKING AT THE CUSHIONED SEATING. AND JUST TO BE CLEAR, IT'S EACH OF THE CUSHIONED SEATING AREAS HAVE SIX SPACES. THREE, RIGHT. IT WOULD BE A COUCH. SO IF IT IS BETTER TO SEE IT ON THIS NUMBERED PIECE HERE SO YOU CAN SEE BETTER BE HERE IN THE TOP. THAT'S KIND OF A SOFA. SO IT HAS THREE SOFA SPACES ON IT. THE LETTER C OR THE TWO TWO TOP TABLES. AND THEN THE LETTER A OR THE TWO CHAIRS THAT GO WITH IT. YOU COULD PUSH THE TWO TABLES TOGETHER AND MAKE IT A FOUR TOP. OR YOU CAN KEEP THEM SEPARATED. BUT I DOUBT IF THEY'RE SEPARATE. YOU KNOW, NO ONE'S GOING TO SIT WHERE THE LETTER B IS. THERE'S NO TABLE FOR YOU TO SIT THERE AND EAT. SO IT'S EITHER TWO COUPLES OR YOU PUSH THE TABLE TOGETHER TO OKAY, A FOURSOME. AND WE DON'T HAVE A CUTAWAY OF JUST ONE OF THOSE SETUPS. RIGHT? IN OTHER WORDS, WE SEE IT ON THE DIAGRAM HERE, BUT YOU DON'T. YEAH. I MEAN, I CAN ZOOM INTO IT IF YOU WANT ME TO, IF YOU DON'T MIND. SURE. IT'LL PROBABLY HELP FACILITATE THE QUESTIONS. [03:05:06] OKAY. THERE YOU GO. YES, SIR. LET'S JUST GO TO THE ONE IN THE CORNER. YEP. THERE YOU GO. YES, SIR. SO I SEE THE C IS THE THE TABLE. THAT IS THE TABLE AND THE B ARE THE SEATS ON THE CUSHIONED AREA. THAT IS A SOFA. YES, SIR. AND OF COURSE THE A'S ARE THE CHAIRS. YES, SIR. THE SPACE IN FRONT OF B, THIS IS FOR STAFF. IS THAT PART THAT DISTANCE? IN FRONT OF B, IS THAT PART OF THE LIFE SAFETY PLAN THAT SPACE FOR. YES. SO THERE'S THERE'S ALL SORTS OF DIFFERENT REQUIREMENTS FOR AISLES AND AISLE ACCESS. AND IF A SPACE IS TYPICALLY USED BY LESS THAN FOUR PEOPLE, THERE IS NO DIMENSIONAL WIDTH REQUIREMENT FOR THAT SPACE. ONCE YOU GET ABOVE FOUR PEOPLE, IT GOES TO 12IN FOR AN AISLE ACCESS. AND THEN AFTER A CERTAIN LINEAR FOOT OF TRAVEL DISTANCE, IT GOES UP BASED ON HOW FAR IT IS. BUT THE WITH THE SPACE THAT WE HAVE, WE HAVE 36IN. IF YOU TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE CHAIRS THAT ARE THERE, THE AISLE ACCESS THAT ARE HERE ARE ABSOLUTELY ADEQUATE FOR THAT SPACE. OKAY. SO THE QUESTION THE STATEMENT WAS MADE, WE COULD PUSH THESE TABLES TOGETHER. IN THAT CORNER. I WANT TO GO TO THE CUSHIONED SEAT CLOSEST TO THAT CORNER. SO THAT'S TO THE RIGHT OF THAT. EVEN MORE RIGHT TO THE CURSOR. THERE IT IS. THAT'S THAT'S THE ONE. SO THAT INDIVIDUAL GAINING ACCESS TO THAT SEAT, WOULD THEY USE THAT AISLE IN FRONT OF SEAT NUMBER B? AND I KNOW B IS INTENDED TO SHOW ALL THREE OF THOSE, BUT THE ONE THAT'S DIRECTLY IN FRONT, THAT PERSON IN THAT RIGHT MOST CORNER, ARE THEY INTENDED TO USE THAT AISLE BETWEEN THE TWO TABLES, OR ARE THEY EXPECTED TO SQUEEZE ALONG THE EDGE? BETWEEN THE TWO, THAT WOULD BE AN ASSUMPTION OF BETWEEN THE TWO. BUT AGAIN, BECAUSE THERE'S LESS THAN FOUR SEATS, THEY'RE USING THAT SPACE. THERE'S NO SPECIFIC WIDTH THAT IT MUST BE. SO IT COULD BE LESS THAN A FOOT BETWEEN THOSE TABLES TO SQUEEZE THROUGH. NOT THAT ANYBODY WOULD WANT TO DO THAT TO ANYBODY. NO. RIGHT. BUT IT'S POSSIBLE IF YOU'RE GETTING TO POTENTIALLY LIKE AN EGRESS DISTANCE, YOU KNOW, THE EGRESS DISTANCE FROM THAT SEAT IS THE 92.5FT AS WE SPECIFIED, BECAUSE THIS IS FULLY SPRINKLED IN AN EMERGENCY SITUATION, WE'RE ALLOWED UP TO 150FT, SO WE'RE REALLY ONLY TWO THIRDS OF THE DISTANCE. THAT IS BEFORE WE HAVE TO START MAKING MODIFICATIONS. SO WE'RE IN A PRETTY GOOD DISTANCE OF TRAVEL. OKAY. AND THEN I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT ONCE WE SQUEEZE THOSE TWO KEYS TOGETHER, THE TWO TABLES TOGETHER, NOW WE'RE NOW WE'RE ENCLOSING THAT CENTER MOST GUEST. RIGHT. SURE. IF YOU MOVE THIS SEE OVER NEXT TO THIS SEE, THEN THESE TWO FOLKS WOULD SLIDE DOWN THE COUCH AND OUT, AND THERE WOULD BE A BIGGER SPACE BETWEEN THIS SEA AND THE SEA ONCE YOU SLID IT OVER. SO IT ACTUALLY PUSHING THEM TOGETHER IMPROVES THE SCENARIO. AND LIKE CHIEF SAID, UNTIL THAT GETS TO SIX PEOPLE, IT DOESN'T BECOME AN ISSUE. CHIEF, THAT'S THAT'S WHERE I'M HEADING WITH THIS. IT'S IF THAT ANYTHING YOU CAN IMAGINE WILL HAPPEN THERE. BUT THAT'S GOING TO BE A COMMON SCENARIO. YOU'RE GOOD WITH THE LIFE SAFETY PLAN IF THESE TABLES ARE SQUEEZED TOGETHER. AND YES, SIR, THAT IS SOMETHING WE HAVE TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT WHEN WE REVIEW THAT IS THERE MIGHT BE THERE ARE PROVISIONS IN THE CODE WHICH ALLOW THEM TO SLIGHTLY MOVE TABLES CLOSER OR FARTHER APART TO ACCOMMODATE LARGER PARTIES. THAT IS ABSOLUTELY ALLOWED IN THE CODE, AS LONG AS THEY DO NOT ELIMINATE EGRESS. AND THERE'S NOT A SITUATION THERE THAT I COULD SEE THEM ELIMINATING THAT EGRESS. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. THANK YOU. SO THIS IS A MIXED USE BUILDING. HAS THIS GONE TO DRB? IT DOES HAVE PRELIMINARY DRB APPROVAL. YES, MA'AM. OKAY. I DON'T HAVE INFORMATION ABOUT THE DRB HEARING IT BECAUSE I DON'T SEE HOW PEOPLE GET TO THEIR SECOND FLOOR. I KNOW THIS IS A RESTAURANT, BUT HOW ARE THEY GETTING TO THE SECOND FLOOR? THEY WOULD PARK IN THE BACK SO THEY WOULD WALK IN THE BACK. IF I GO BACK TO THE SITE PLAN HERE, YOU CAN SEE AN OWNER WOULD PARK BACK HERE AND THEN THERE'S AN OWNER'S DOOR HERE THEY COME IN THE OWNER'S DOOR. HERE THEY COME AROUND. THERE'S AN ELEVATOR THAT TAKES THEM UP TO THE UNIT, OR THERE'S A FLIGHT OF STAIRS THAT IF THEY WANTED TO WALK UP THE UNIT, WE DO HAVE ACCESS TO THE RESTAURANT THROUGH A RAMP HERE. YOU COME UP IN THE HOSTESS STATION IS HERE. AN OWNER COULD WALK IN THAT RAMP AND IN THEIR FRONT DOOR. THEY DO HAVE A RESIDENTIAL LOBBY THERE, BUT THE MAJORITY OF THE OWNERS, UNLESS THEY'RE WALKING UP AND DOWN FIFTH AVENUE, WHEN THEY COME AND GO, THEY'LL PARK IN THE BACK AND WALK IN THE BACK. SO WE DO HAVE OWNER ACCESS IN THE REAR AND OWNER ACCESS IN THE FRONT. [03:10:05] SO THIS IS A MIXED UNIT BUILDING. COUNCIL DOESN'T HAVE TO REVIEW THE BUILDING ITSELF AS A MIXED USE AND UNDERSTAND THE HEIGHT AND THE ENTRANCE OF THIS BUILDING. NO, MA'AM. THE REQUEST BEFORE COUNCIL TODAY IS FOR JUST FOR THE OUTDOOR DINING. AS IF THIS WAS NOT. I MEAN, YOU YOU REVIEW OUTDOOR DINING REQUESTS ALL THE TIME FOR WHETHER IT'S NEW DEVELOPMENT OR EXISTING DEVELOPMENT. YOU KNOW, ON THE PREVIOUS ONE, YOU HAD A REQUEST FOR TWO TABLES AND NO INFORMATION RELATED TO THE INDOOR, THE INDOOR PORTION OF THE BUILDING. SO THIS IT'S AN OUTDOOR DINING REVIEW. OKAY. BUT THE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT PERIOD WILL NOT BE APPROVED BY COUNCIL, WILL BE APPROVED BY STAFF AND DRB. IT IS BY RIGHT. CORRECT. THEY ARE PROPOSING TO DEVELOP THIS PROPERTY. WITH THE EXCEPTION OF OUTDOOR DINING. OUTDOOR DINING IS NOT, BY RIGHT, OUTDOOR DINING IS A PERMIT, A CONDITIONAL PERMIT ISSUED BY CITY COUNCIL. BUT THE THE DEVELOPMENT ITSELF. THE RESTAURANT ON THE GROUND FLOOR WITH TWO LEVELS ABOVE IS IS BY RIGHT IN THE FIFTH AVENUE OVERLAY DISTRICT. I AND I UNDERSTAND IT'S BY RIGHT. I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WE'RE DOING AN OUTDOOR DINING BUT I DON'T SEE HOW IN THIS BOTTOM FLOOR PEOPLE ACCESS THE TOP TO RESIDENTIAL OR THE THREE RESIDENTIALS ON THE GROUND FLOOR. I MEAN, THE THERE'S THE FLOOR PLAN. SO, MADAM MAYOR, IF I MAY, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN SEE MY SCREEN. RIGHT. WHAT I HAVE ON THE SCREEN HERE. SO IF YOU'RE AN OWNER AND YOU DRIVE IN THE ALLEY AND YOU PARK YOUR CAR HERE, YOU WOULD GET OUT OF YOUR CAR AND WALK IN THIS BACK DOOR, AND YOU WOULD WALK IN THIS DOOR AND IN THE ELEVATOR, AND THE ELEVATOR WOULD TAKE YOU UP TO THE SECOND OR THIRD FLOOR, DEPENDING ON WHERE YOUR UNIT WAS. IF YOU'RE HAVING DINNER AND YOU WANT TO GO DOWN THE STREET TO A DIFFERENT RESTAURANT, YOU COULD GO DOWN THE STREET, WALK DOWN TO A DIFFERENT RESTAURANT, HAVE DINNER, GO OUT THE BACK. YOU COULD YOU COULD GO OUT THE FRONT. YOU COULD WALK DOWN THE STREET AND WALK RIGHT IN THE FRONT DOOR HERE AND WALK INTO THE RESIDENTIAL LOBBY AND UP YOUR ELEVATOR. SO THERE'S A FRONT DOOR FOR THE OWNERS AND A BACK DOOR FOR THE OWNERS, DEPENDING ON IF THEY'RE WALKING UP AND DOWN FIFTH AVENUE OR IF THEY'RE PARKING THEIR CAR IN THE BACK IN THEIR ASSIGNED PARKING SPACE. OKAY. SO THAT LOBBY IS JUST THAT'S A THAT'S A RESIDENTIAL ONLY LOBBY. THANK YOU. YES, MA'AM. AND WHAT'S THE HEIGHT OF THIS BUILDING? 42FT. I'M SORRY, 42FT. NOT. NOT AN INCH MORE. INCLUDING EMBELLISHMENTS. THERE ARE NO EMBELLISHMENTS ALLOWED. THERE IS NOTHING OVER 42FT ON THIS BUILDING. WHERE'D YOU GET THAT NUMBER? YEAH, I THINK I DREAM IT. AND SO AGAIN, THIS WON'T BE GO THROUGH COUNCIL. THIS WILL GO THROUGH DRB. AND THEY'VE ALREADY GONE THROUGH PRELIMINARY AND REVIEWED. YES, MA'AM. WHAT DID THEY APPROVE? THE BUILDING THAT'S BEFORE YOU. FROM A FROM A RENDERING PERSPECTIVE, THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THIS RENDERING AND WHAT DRB SAW FOR PRELIMINARY WAS THE AVENUE 31 SIGN WASN'T ON IT AT THE TIME, BECAUSE IT WAS QUITE SOME TIME AGO. WHEN WE GO BACK FOR FINAL, BECAUSE WE HAVE TO HAVE THIS APPROVAL BEFORE WE CAN GO BACK FOR FINAL, WE HAVE TO HAVE THE PARKING ALLOCATION. APPROVAL WILL GO BACK FOR FINAL. WE WILL NOT CHANGE THIS RENDERING. THIS WILL BE THE RENDERING THAT DRB SEES BECAUSE YOU'VE SEEN IT. WE DON'T WANT TO CHANGE IT. OKAY. THANK YOU. I HAVE COUNCIL MEMBER JUST A COUPLE QUICK QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. I SEE ON THE ONE ON YOUR FIRST REPORT, THAT IS ITEM 11, D PAGE. I GUESS IT'S PAGE THREE WHERE THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES ON THE SOUTH SIDE IS R-1 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE. AND THEN THERE'S SOMETHING DIFFERENT ON THE REPORT THAT THAT I BELIEVE MR. BROOKER HAD HAD DONE WHERE IT'S SAYING THE SOUTH SIDE IS C1 A WHICH ONE IS IT? WHEN I LOOK UP ON GIS, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S R1 IN THE STAFF REPORT. AND THE REASON FOR MY QUESTION IS BECAUSE IN SECTION 58 568 IT SAYS IT STIPULATES THAT EXCEPT THAT THE DEVELOPMENT ON ANY C1, A ZONED PROPERTY ADJACENT TO OR ACROSS FROM THE STREET TO ANY R1 ZONED PROPERTY SHALL BE LIMITED TO TWO STOREYS OF HEIGHT. [03:15:02] AND THEN MAYBE, WELL, ONE OF YOU IS RESEARCHING IT. MY SECOND QUESTION JUST TO MOTOR THIS ALONG IS WHEN YOU SEE THE RENDERING, THERE LOOKS LIKE TWO CHIMNEYS THAT ARE ON TOP OF THAT. ARE THERE IS IS THE TOP OF THAT CHIMNEY. THE TOP IS 42FT. YES, MA'AM. WOW. IT'S 42FT. OKAY. AND THERE THAT TOP LOOKED LIKE IT HAD SOME CUTOUTS, YOU KNOW. ARE THOSE. THOSE ARE NOT ACCESSIBLE BY RESIDENTS. NO, MA'AM. THE RESIDENTS CANNOT GET TO THE ROOF OF THIS BUILDING. THERE'S THERE'S THEIR AIR CONDITIONING. EQUIPMENT'S UP THERE, AND THERE IS AN ACCESS FOR MAINTENANCE, BUT THERE'S NO ROOFTOP DECKS OR ANYTHING ON THIS. OKAY. NO, MA'AM. SO MY ONLY QUESTION IS REALLY THE DISCREPANCY IN THE TWO DIFFERENT ZONING CODES TO THE SOUTH, BECAUSE IT IT CREATES LIMITATIONS IN OUR ZONING CODES ON TWO STORIES VERSUS THREE STORIES. I'VE CONTENDED WITH THAT IN THE PAST, BUT I BELIEVE THE FIFTH AVENUE OVERLAY DISTRICT IS THE EXEMPTION TO THAT IS THE EXCEPTION TO THAT. SO THE FIFTH AVE OVERLAY, I THINK IT'S ONE OF THE FIRST. YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. IF I'M GOING TO SEE IF I'M IN A COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT NEXT TO A RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT, BUT THE FIFTH OVERLAY OR FIFTH AVENUE OVERLAY DISTRICT GIVES ME THE EXCEPTION FOR THE THREE STORIES. OKAY. BECAUSE IN THE REPORTING, IT'S CALLING OUT THE TWO DIFFERENT ZONING CODES. YOU'RE SAYING IT'S ONE. WELL, IF WE IF WE LOOK AT THE IMAGE HERE AND IT MIGHT JUST BE A TYPO. CLAY'S HERE. HE CAN SPEAK TO HIS IMAGE IF WE WANT. BASICALLY, YOU CAN SEE THE ALLEY RUNS LEFT TO RIGHT BEHIND THE PROJECT. ANYTHING. IMAGE. SOUTH OF THE ALLEY IS THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. ANYTHING EAST AND WEST OF THE ALLEY OR EAST AND WEST OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS IN THE C-1A, WHICH IS THE FIFTH AVENUE OVERLAY DISTRICT. SO IF THAT'S WHAT IT SAYS IN THE STAFF REPORT OR IN CLAY'S REPORT, IT MIGHT BE A TYPO. MY CONCERN WAS WHAT IS TO THE SOUTH? AND THEN WHAT IS THE LANGUAGE IN THE OVERLAY THAT ALLOWS FOR THE LANGUAGE IN THE OVERLAY? IT'S IN 58 DASH. 1133 A SAYS CONFLICTS WITH OTHER LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS. THE PROVISIONS OF THIS DIVISION, WHEN IN CONFLICT, SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER OTHER PROVISIONS OF THIS LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. AND SO THE FIFTH AVE OVERLAY AND THEN 58 1134 SPELLS OUT THAT WE CAN HAVE THE THREE STORIES. YEAH. SO, SO GIVE THOSE CITATIONS AGAIN PLEASE. CAN YOU ACTUALLY POP THOSE UP ON THE SCREEN. I WOULD LIKE CRYSTAL CLEAR CLARITY BECAUSE OF THE HEIGHT. IT'S GOING TO TAKE A LITTLE WHILE. IF ANYONE HAS ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. OTHERWISE, WE'RE JUST GOING TO BE STARING AT ME. I MEAN, NOT NOT TO BE REVISIONIST, BUT IF THAT WAS THE CASE, THEN THERE WOULD BE NO 42 FOOT BUILDINGS ON FIFTH AVENUE ANYWHERE AND JUST ABOUT EVERY HIGH CEILINGS. WELL, I THINK WE ALL KNOW THAT MOST OF THE BUILDINGS ON FIFTH AVENUE ARE THREE STORY BUILDINGS, NOT TWO STOREYS WITH HIGH CEILINGS. MY GOAL IS NOT TO, IF WE HAVE A ZONING CODE, ZONING THINGS IN PLACE, THAT WE DO NOT REPEAT MISTAKES BECAUSE WE'VE SEEN A LOT OF THEM. MY MY GOAL IS NOT TO REPEAT MISTAKES, BECAUSE WE'VE SEEN A LOT OF EMBELLISHMENTS ON FIFTH AVENUE, WHERE IT REALLY WAS NOT INTENDED TO BE THAT WAY. BECAUSE WE DO HAVE THE WHOLE CHARTER AMENDMENT THING. BUT I WANT TO SEE THE CODE LANGUAGE THAT. OKAY. NOW CAN TAKE ME TO THE ONE CODE THAT SAYS THAT WHERE IT'S CONFLICTING. WELL, IF YOU JUST DROP DOWN TO 1134 RIGHT THERE, MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF THREE STORIES AND 42FT. 1130 4A1. OKAY. SO THIS IS ALL THE OVERLAY LANGUAGE. AND THIS THIS SUPERSEDES OUR CODING, OUR OUR CODE STATED IN A WHEN THIS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE, WHEN IN CONFLICT THIS THE OVERLAY SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER THE OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE CODE. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION. SO IT LOOKS LIKE WE'RE SET THERE. AND THEN THE TOP OF THE ROOF OF BOTH OF THOSE FIREPLACES OR THE CHIMNEYS. IT'S JUST A IT'S JUST A STEP IN THE PARAPET. AND IT'S JUST FROM THAT ANGLE FROM THAT, FROM THAT ABSTRACT ANGLE IN THAT GRAPHICS, IT LOOKS LIKE A CHIMNEY, BUT IT'S NOT. IT'S JUST IT'S THE WAY THE ROOF STRUCTURE COMES TOGETHER AND IT'S JUST A STEP IN THE PARAPET. THAT'S ALL. AT 42FT. OKAY. YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SO WHAT WILL. IT'S ALREADY GONE TO PRELIMINARY DRB FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE BUILDING. THESE ARE CONDOMINIUMS OR LODGING BECAUSE THREE CONDOMINIUMS. [03:20:05] OKAY. AND I JUST WANT TO CHECK AND MAKE SURE THAT IT'S THAT THAT'S CLEAR, BECAUSE IN ONE PART, IT SAID THAT IT WAS LODGING. THERE'S A DIFFERENCE, IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY, BETWEEN LODGING AND CONDOMINIUMS. SO THE THE DIFFERENCE THAT IN THE DEFINITION IN THE CODE IS NOT A PHYSICAL DIFFERENCE, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO SEE A PHYSICAL DIFFERENCE. IT'S A IT'S A UNIT. THE THE DISTINCTION IS THE LENGTH OF STAY AND RENTAL OF THE PROPERTY. SO THEY COULD RENT THESE PROPERTIES ANNUALLY. THEY COULD RENT THEM BIANNUALLY. THEY CANNOT RENT THEM LESS THAN 30 DAYS, MORE THAN THREE TIMES A CALENDAR YEAR. RIGHT. BUT THEIR LODGING OR CONDOMINIUMS, THEY ARE CONDOMINIUMS. THEY ARE RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS. AND THAT'S WHAT'S ALLOWED. SO IT FALLS FOLLOWS OUR TRADITIONAL RENTAL CORRECT CODE. CAN I GET CLARIFICATION ON SOMETHING? YES. ON THE RENTAL. YOU USE THE TERM LESS THAN THREE TIMES PER YEAR. THEY COULD NOT RENT THEM LESS THAN THREE TIMES LESS THAN 30 DAYS. MORE THAN THREE TIMES IN A CALENDAR YEAR. THERE YOU GO. THANK YOU. AND THAT'S OUR STANDARD THROUGHOUT THE TOWN. RIGHT? THAT'S THE DEFINITION OF TRANSIENT LODGING. YEAH. SO UNLESS YOU ARE SPECIFICALLY APPROVED FOR TRANSIENT LODGING, IT'S A RESIDENTIAL UNIT. AND THOSE ARE THE PROVISIONS. SO IN THE RESOLUTION IN THE WHEREAS CLAUSE, IT SAYS THERE'S A MINIMUM OF THREE OFF STREET SPACES FOR EACH 1000 FOOT OF COMMERCIAL USE AND TWO SPARK PARKING SPACES FOR EACH RESIDENTIAL UNIT AND ONE FOR EACH LODGING UNIT THAT'S IN THE RESOLUTION. BUT THERE ARE NO LODGING UNITS. WELL, IT'S IN THE RESOLUTION. THOSE ARE JUST THE PARKING STANDARDS IN THE FIFTH AVE OVERLAY. WELL, THERE'S DIFFERENT PARKING FOR LODGING VERSUS RESIDENTIAL, RIGHT? WHY IS IT, SAY ONE FOR EACH LODGING UNIT? THAT'S JUST THAT'S JUST TAKEN STRAIGHT OUT OF THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS IN THE FIFTH AVE OVERLAY. SO THAT'S JUST PROVIDING ALL THE DIFFERENT PARKING REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE APPLICABLE IN THIS CODE, NOT NECESSARILY TO THIS DEVELOPMENT, BUT TO ALL DEVELOPMENT IN THE FIFTH AVE OVERLAY. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COUNCIL FOR STAFF OR I HAVE NO PUBLIC COMMENT. MR. MCLEAN, WE WOULD APPRECIATE YOUR SUPPORT ON BOTH APPLICATIONS. THANK YOU. CAN I MAKE A MOTION? YES, SIR. AND CAN WE DO THEM SIMULTANEOUSLY OR NOT? YES. NO. NO. OKAY, THEN. THEN I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 11 D. WAS THERE A CONDITION FROM STAFF ON THAT? I DON'T RECALL, WE NOT ON THE PARKING ALLOCATION. OKAY. TO APPROVE MOTION 11 D RESOLUTION ALLOWING THIS PARKING ALLOCATION. SECOND, I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER KRAMER AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER PETRANOFF. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE PULL THE COUNCIL. COUNCIL MEMBER. PENNIMAN. YES. VICE MAYOR. HUTCHINSON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. PETRANOFF. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. MARTIN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. CHRISMAN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. KRAMER. YES. MAYOR. HARTMAN. YES. THANK YOU. COUNCIL PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. AND DO YOU READ BOTH RESOLUTIONS SO HE CAN MAKE A MOTION FOR THIS? [11.E) A Resolution Determining Outdoor Dining Petition 25-OD16 Establishing Outdoor Dining on Private Property to Include Twenty-Seven (27) Tables and Sixty-Six (66) Chairs for the Restaurant Known as Avenue 31 on Property Owned by AG Naples, LLC, and Located at 472 5th Avenue South; More Fully Described Herein; Providing for Scrivener's Errors; and Providing an Effective Date.] A COMPANION, CORRECT? I DID. SO THE RECORD WAS COMBINED. DISCLOSURES HAPPENED AT ONCE. THE RECORD WAS WHAT IT WAS. JUST FOR CLARITY PURPOSES. THANK YOU. SIR. DO I NEED TO STATE THE CONDITION FOR THIS ONE THAT WAS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF? YEAH, JUST STAFF CONDITION. IT WAS JUST THAT IF IT WERE CHANGED, THAT IT WOULD COME BACK. CORRECT? CORRECT. OKAY, THEN I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 11 E WITH THE CONDITION THAT STAFF REQUESTED, WHICH WAS THAT IF THERE IS ANY CHANGE TO THE LIFE SAFETY PLAN, IT WOULD COME BACK. SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER KRAMER AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER BARTON. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE PULL THE COUNCIL. COUNCIL MEMBER PETRANOFF. YES. VICE MAYOR. HUTCHINSON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. CHRISMAN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. MARTIN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. KRAMER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. PENNIMAN. YES. MAYOR. YES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UNANIMOUSLY. THANK YOU. AND COUNCIL? WE HAVE A 1230 TIME CERTAIN. HOWEVER, I HAVE AN ITEM THAT IS 12 A I THINK WE COULD TRY. AND MR. YOUNG GO WITH 12 A BEFORE WE GO TO OUR EXECUTIVE SESSION. [03:25:03] SO RESOLUTION, MR. MCCONNELL. OH. THIS IS MISS DEAN'S HOUSE. YES, YES. RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION 202515610, APPROVING [12.A) A Resolution Amending Resolution 2025-15610 Approving Modifications to the Plans Prepared by Southeast Texas Windstorm Inspections Allowing for an Increase in the Elevation of the Finished Floor to 13.89 Feet NAVD for the Previously Approved Nonconformity Petition 25-N2 Which Allowed for the Vertical Expansion of a Nonconforming Single-Family House on Property Located in the R1-7.5 Residence District at 508 13th Street North, and Owned by Jackie L. Dean; More Fully Described Herein; Providing Findings and Conditions; and Providing an Effective Date.  ] MODIFICATIONS TO THE PLANS PREPARED BY SOUTHEAST TEXAS WINDSTORM INSPECTIONS, ALLOWING FOR AN INCREASE IN THE ELEVATION OF THE FINISHED FLOOR TO 13.89FT. AND AVD FOR THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED NONCONFORMITY PETITION 25 AND TWO, WHICH ALLOWED FOR THE VERTICAL EXPANSION OF A NON CONFORMING SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE ON PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE R-1 7.5 RESIDENCE DISTRICT AT 508 13TH STREET NORTH AND OWNED BY JACKIE ALDEAN. MORE FULLY DESCRIBED HEREIN, PROVIDING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THANK YOU. ORDINARILY WE WOULD HAVE A PETITIONER PRESENTATION, BUT IF YOU WANT, I CAN INTRODUCE THIS REALLY QUICK. REAL QUICK. ALL RIGHT. WE NEED TO SWEAR IN IN DISCLOSURES. YES. NICE WORK FOR ALL THOSE INTENDING TO OFFER TESTIMONY WHO WERE NOT PREVIOUSLY SWORN. PLEASE RISE AND RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. JUST IN CASE. DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU'RE ABOUT TO GIVE BE THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? THANK YOU. THANK YOU. COUNCIL DISCLOSURES. PENMAN FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE. I'VE HAD NO CONTACT WITH THE SITE. CHATTED WITH STAFF. PERSON FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE. I'VE HAD MANY CONVERSATIONS WITH STAFF AND THE PETITIONER OVER THE COURSE OF THIS PROJECT. CREAMER, FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE, SPOKE WITH STAFF, SPOKE WITH PETITIONER AND FOLKS FROM THE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION. FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE. SPOKE WITH STAFF. NO CONTACT. I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE. I'VE DRIVEN BY THE SITE SEVERAL TIMES, TALKED TO STAFF, NO CONTACT AND I AM FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE AND NO CONTACT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. THIS IS JUST A CORRECTION TO A RESOLUTION THAT WAS PASSED BY CITY COUNCIL. YOU APPROVED A RESOLUTION ON MAY 7TH APPROVING A HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL EXPANSION OF A NON CONFORMING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE FOR MISS JACKIE DEAN. THE VERTICAL EXPANSION OF THE PROJECT ALLOWED FOR THE ELEVATION OF THE STRUCTURE. AND IT WAS IT WAS AN EXISTING NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE. THE THE DISCREPANCY HERE IS THAT ORIGINALLY THE FINISHED FLOOR WAS CALLED OUT AT 11FT. NABBED. THE HOUSE, THE CONSTRUCTION HAS BEEN DONE. THE HOUSE HAS BEEN LIFTED. WHEN THE ELEVATION CERTIFICATES AND THE FINAL SURVEYS WERE SUBMITTED, THE FINISHED FLOOR IS 13.89FT. NAVY. AND SO WE JUST WANT TO CLARIFY, BECAUSE THE RESOLUTION HAD SPECIFICALLY CALLED OUT THAT FINISHED FLOOR. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT IS CORRECT. SO THE FINISHED FLOOR HEIGHT, THE CORRECTION HERE IS THAT THE FINISHED FLOOR HEIGHT IS 13.89. AND WE WILL INCORPORATE THE THE CORRECTED PLANS INTO THE RESOLUTION. THAT'S THE ONLY CHANGE. THANK YOU. DO I HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? OKAY. THANK YOU, MADAM CLERK. COUNCIL QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? VICE MAYOR? YEAH. JUST 11FT VERSUS 13.89. YES. SAME LOCATION, SAME. EVERYTHING. JUST LIFTED UP HIGHER. YEAH. AND I, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, I'VE DRIVEN BY THIS PLACE SEVERAL TIMES. IS THERE ANY UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES, ANY REASON WHY THE DISCREPANCY? WAS IT JUST AN ERROR? IT WAS AN ERROR JUST WHERE THE FLOOR HEIGHT WAS CALLED OUT ON THE PLANS. IT'S PROBABLY A GOOD THING TO HAVE EXTRA HEIGHT, IN MY OPINION, AS LONG AS IT'S OKAY. THAT'S ALL I HAD, MADAM MAYOR. OKAY. THANK YOU. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? DO I HAVE A MOTION? MOTION TO APPROVE. AND A SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER PETRANOFF AND A SECOND BY VICE MAYOR. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE PULL THE COUNCIL. COUNCIL MEMBER. MARTIN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. PITTMAN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. CHRISTMANN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. KRAMER. YES. VICE MAYOR HUTCHINSON. YES. MAYOR HARTMAN. YES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, COUNCIL, FOR YOUR INDULGENCE AND GETTING THAT ACCOMPLISHED BEFORE WE GO TO OUR EXECUTIVE SESSION. [13.D) Executive Session regarding Lamonda, Joseph v. City of Naples, Case No. 2024-CA-001301, 20th Judicial Circuit, in and for Collier County, Florida (12:30pm Time Certain).] MR. MCCONNELL, THANK YOU. 13 D SO AT THE SEPTEMBER 3RD, 2020 PUBLIC MEETING, PURSUANT TO FLORIDA STATUTE SECTION 286 .011, SUBPARAGRAPH EIGHT, CITY ATTORNEY ANNOUNCED HIS REQUEST FOR AN EXECUTIVE SESSION IN CASTILE. AMANDA JOSEPH VERSUS CITY OF NAPLES, CASE NUMBER 2024CA001301, AND IN FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. CITY COUNCIL AGREED TO MEET IN AN EXECUTIVE SESSION AS REQUESTED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY AT 1230. DURING A CITY COUNCIL MEETING ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 24TH, 2025, IN THE CONFERENCE ROOM ON THE SECOND FLOOR OF CITY HALL. PUBLIC NOTICE OF THE EXECUTIVE SESSION WAS POSTED ON SEPTEMBER 4TH BY THE CITY CLERK. DISCUSSION DURING THE EXECUTIVE SESSION IS LIMITED TO SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATIONS OR STRATEGY RELATED TO LITIGATION EXPENDITURES. [03:30:02] THE ENTIRE SESSION IS RECORDED BY A CERTIFIED COURT REPORTER WHO RECORDS THE TIMES OF COMMENCEMENT. TERMINATION OF THE SESSION. ALL DISCUSSION AND PROCEEDINGS. THE NAMES OF ALL PERSONS PRESENT AND THE NAMES OF ALL PERSONS SPEAKING. NO PORTION IS OFF THE RECORD. NO ACTION IS TAKEN DURING THE EXECUTIVE SESSION. IF ANY ACTION IS REQUIRED, IT WILL BE TAKEN WHEN WE RECONVENE OR AT A FUTURE PUBLIC MEETING. THE FOLLOWING INDIVIDUALS WILL BE PRESENT DURING THE EXECUTIVE SESSION MAYOR TERESA HEITMANN, COUNCIL MEMBERS TERRY HUTCHISON, RICK KRISEMAN, BETH PETRANOFF, BILL KRAMER, LINDA BYRNE, BARTON CITY MANAGER GARY YOUNG, CITY ATTORNEY MATTHEW MCCONNELL, ATTORNEY JEFFREY HARCOMBE, AND A REPRESENTATIVE FROM DION'S COURT REPORTING, AND THE EXECUTIVE SESSION IS APPROXIMATELY GOING TO LAST AN HOUR. HOWEVER, WE WILL RECONVENE IF IT IS SHORTER. THANK YOU. OKAY. AND WITH THAT, WE'RE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION. OKAY. WE'RE BACK FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION. CONTINUING ON WITH ITEM 13 E. [13.E) Any Action taken following the Executive Session regarding Lamonda, Joseph v. City of Naples, Case No. 2024-CA-001301, 20th Judicial Circuit, in and for Collier County, Florida.] YES. MAYOR. THANK YOU. THERE IS NO ACTION BEING PROPOSED IF COUNCIL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. SO THIS TAKES US TO ITEM 11 D F F. [11.F) A Resolution Determining Outdoor Dining petition 25-OD17, Pursuant to Section 56-126 of the Code of Ordinances to Allow Sixteen (16) Tables and Ninety-two (92) Chairs On Private Property for the Restaurant Known as Prime Social Reserve, Owned by 5th Ave South Investments, LLC, a Florida Limited Liability Company, Located at 837 5th Avenue South; and More Fully Described Herein; Providing Findings and Conditions; and Providing an Effective Date.] SORRY. I'M TAKING US BACK A RESOLUTION DETERMINING OUTDOOR DINING PETITION 2501 SEVEN PURSUANT TO SECTION 50 6-1 26 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES TO ALLOW 16 TABLES AND 92 CHAIRS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY FOR THE RESTAURANT KNOWN AS PRIME SOCIAL RESERVE, OWNED BY FIFTH AVENUE SOUTH INVESTMENTS, LLC, A FLORIDA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY LOCATED AT 837 FIFTH AVENUE SOUTH AND MORE FULLY DESCRIBED HEREIN, PROVIDING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THANK YOU, MADAM CLERK. SWEARING IN FOR ALL THOSE INTENDING TO OFFER TESTIMONY WHO WERE NOT PREVIOUSLY SWORN, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU'RE ABOUT TO GIVE BE THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? THANK YOU. THANK YOU. DISCLOSURES. COUNCIL VISITED THE SITE WITH THE PETITIONER, AND OTHER THAN THAT, NO CONTACT. BARTON VISITED THE SITE WITH PETITIONER, COMMUNICATED WITH STAFF AND CHRISTMAN VISITED THE SITE WITH THE PETITIONER AND DISCUSSED THE PETITION WITH STAFF. KRAMER SAME VISITED THE SITE WITH PETITIONER AND TALKED ABOUT THIS WITH STAFF FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE. SPOKE ABOUT IT WITH STAFF. VICE MAYOR I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE, HAVE VISITED THE SITE, SPOKE TO PETITIONER AND HAVE SPOKEN TO STAFF. I VISITED LOOKED AT THE OUTSIDE OF THE BUILDING. I DID NOT GET THE INSIDE TOUR AND SPOKE WITH STAFF. OTHER THAN THAT, NO CONTACT. THANK YOU AND GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. MCLEAN. GOOD AFTERNOON. MARK MCLEAN FOR THE RECORD. MHK ARCHITECTURE, 2059 TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST. AND MADAM MAYOR, MORE THAN HAPPY TO WALK YOU THROUGH THE SITE ANYTIME YOU WANT TO GO. WE BRING BACK IN FRONT OF YOU TODAY PRIME SOCIAL. I'M GOING TO KEEP THIS REALLY SIMPLE BECAUSE WHAT'S HAPPENED HERE HAS BEEN REALLY, REALLY SIMPLE THROUGH THE COURSE OF CONSTRUCTION AND THE APPROVAL PROCESS OF THIS BUILDING, A LOT OF TIMES OUR CLIENTS WILL PROCEED AT RISK AND TELL US, GO AHEAD AND DRAW THE PLANS. WE HAVE A GOOD, COMFORTABLE FEELING. WE'RE DOING EVERYTHING WITHIN OUR USE, RIGHT. AND EVERYTHING. SO BUT IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, WE WENT THROUGH THE PUBLIC APPROVAL PROCESS ON OUR SCHEMATIC SET OF PLANS. ONCE WE GOT OUR APPROVALS IN PLACE, WE DID ALL OF OUR CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS AND WE PUT EVERYTHING TOGETHER THROUGH PERMITTING AND START BUILDING. WE HAD EVERYTHING IN PLACE, AND WHAT WE REALIZED IS ONE OF THE AIR CONDITIONING UNITS GREW A LITTLE TOO BIG, WAS GOING TO VIOLATE AN OVERALL BUILDING HEIGHT, SO WE HAD TO COME UP WITH AN OPTION OF HOW DO WE FIX THIS AIR CONDITIONER? SO AGAIN, THIS IS THE ENTIRE LAYOUT OF THE BUILDING FROM WHAT YOU'RE SEEING. IF WE LOOK AT IMAGE FOUR HERE IN THE LOWER RIGHT HAND CORNER, THIS IS WHAT WE'RE ADJUSTING. TODAY ALL WE'RE ADJUSTING IS THIS SPACE USED TO BE OPEN TO THE BAR AREA AND WAS AN OUTDOOR DINING AREA. BUT BECAUSE THIS PIECE OF AIR CONDITIONING EQUIPMENT KIND OF GREW ON US, WE HAD TO MOVE THAT PIECE OF AIR CONDITIONING EQUIPMENT OUT TO THIS SCREEN IN THIS ENCLOSED AREA. SO IT'S NO LONGER OUTDOOR DINING. SO WHEN WE COME AROUND TO OUR PLAN AND SHOW YOU THE PLAN, THIS WAS THE SPACE BACK HERE THAT YOU PREVIOUSLY APPROVED AS OUTDOOR DINING IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE OUTDOOR DINING ALONG THE FRONT SPACE HERE. SO WHEN YOU SEE IN THE APPLICATION THAT WE REDUCED THE NUMBER OF TABLES AND REDUCED THE NUMBER OF CHAIRS, THAT'S WHY WE REDUCED THE NUMBER OF TABLES AND CHAIRS, BECAUSE THIS AREA BACK HERE IS NO LONGER OUTDOOR DINING. THE FRONT AREA ALONG THE FRONT IS STILL THE SAME OUTDOOR DINING IT WAS BEFORE. SO IN THE REDUCTION YOU CAN SEE WE REDUCED THE NUMBER OF TABLES SUBSTANTIALLY 16. BUT WE ONLY REDUCED THE NUMBER OF CHAIRS BY TWO. REASON BEING IF WE COME BACK TO OUR FIRE ISSUES, WE'VE GOT SOME BENCHES IN HERE THAT WE HAD TWO TABLES AND TWO SEATS, BUT NOW WE HAVE TO COUNT THAT SPACE IN BETWEEN. SO AGAIN, BASED ON EARLIER CONVERSATIONS, EVERY PIECE OF THIS OUTDOOR DINING HAS BEEN REVIEWED WITH THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. [03:35:04] ALL OF THE LIFE SAFETY PLANS AND EGRESS PLANS THAT ARE SHOWN HERE, ALL OF THE EGRESS OFF OF THE BUILDING, THROUGH THE RESTAURANT, OUT THROUGH THE ENTIRETY OF THIS SPACE ABSOLUTELY WORKS. ONE THING THAT WAS A TYPO ON MY APPLICATION THAT WE SUBMITTED, I THINK IN MY APPLICATION I SAID 1440 FOUR SQUARE FEET OF OUTDOOR DINING. BUT YOU CAN SEE DOWN HERE PATIO A IS ACTUALLY 1413. SO IT'S A LITTLE SMALLER THAN WHAT WE PUT ON THE APPLICATION. THE PLAN IS CORRECT AT 1400 AND 13FT². OTHER THAN THAT FROM THE STREET HERE. FROM FROM THE FRONT ON STREET HERE, FROM THE AERIAL LOOKING DOWN ON IT, WE'VE CHANGED NOTHING OTHER THAN WE HAD TO PUT THAT PIECE OF EQUIPMENT IN THAT SECOND OUTDOOR DINING AREA. AND WE'VE ELIMINATED THAT SECOND OUTDOOR DINING AREA THAT WAS BACK HERE ON THE LEFT OF THIS SCREEN. THE LANDSCAPING. WE MADE SOME CHANGES THAT WERE REQUIRED BY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD. THROUGH THIS CHANGE TO COME BACK TO YOU. WE'VE BEEN THROUGH FINAL DESIGN REVIEW BOARDS. SO THEY'VE PRE REVIEWED ALL OF THIS. AND WE HAVE FINAL DESIGN REVIEW BOARD APPROVAL. SO JUST REDUCING THIS BACK OUTDOOR DINING AREA AS OUR ASK TODAY. AND YOU ARE THE FINAL APPROVAL FOR IT. SO WITH THAT I WOULD REQUEST YOUR SUPPORT FOR US TO CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD. I'M HERE FOR QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. AND THERE'S BEEN A CHANGE TO THE SQUARE FOOTAGE. THERE HAS NOT BEEN A CHANGE. OR HAS THERE BEEN? NO, MA'AM. THIS PATIO THAT WAS BACK HERE HAS ALWAYS BEEN THERE. IT'S JUST BEFORE IT WAS COUNTED IN THE OUTDOOR DINING. NOW IT'S JUST A MECHANICAL PLATFORM THAT THERE'S A PIECE OF AIR CONDITIONING SITTING ON. AND WAS THAT AREA WHERE THE FROM THAT OUTDOOR DINING THERE WAS A WALKWAY. DO WE CALL IT? YES. OR IF YOU SEE HERE, MADAM MAYOR, THIS IS THIS IS ONE OF THE INDOOR BARS. SO IF YOU COME OFF THE ELEVATOR AND YOU WALK INTO THE RESTAURANT, THERE'S A BAR HERE, A CASUAL LOUNGE AREA. AND THIS SPACE OF THE LOUNGE AREA DID OPEN TO THAT OUTDOOR DINING. NOW IT DOESN'T OPEN TO IT. SO FROM A LIFE SAFETY PERSPECTIVE, THIS GROUP OF PEOPLE THAT WERE EGRESSING THROUGH THE BAR AND OUT ARE JUST NO LONGER IN THE COUNT. THEY GOT REMOVED FROM THE COUNT BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT THERE. IT'S A MECHANICAL DECK NOW, SO THE PEOPLE THAT ARE IN THE BAR, IT ACTUALLY IMPROVES THE LIFE SAFETY AREA BECAUSE WE'VE GOT LESS PEOPLE IN THE SAME EGRESS PATHS. AND HOW MANY ARE IN THE OUTDOOR DINING? HOW MANY TABLES AND CHAIRS? I SHOULD KNOW THESE NUMBERS, BUT I DON'T OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, SO PLEASE BEAR WITH ME ONE SECOND. WE HAVE A TOTAL OF 173 SEATS. BUT THAT'S INSIDE. OUTSIDE. SO PATIO A HAS 70 SEATS IN THE OUTDOOR DINING. I'M SORRY. HOW MANY? 77. ZERO. SO 70 SEATS IN PATIO A WHICH IS BASICALLY THAT FRONT NOW, WHICH IS THAT FRONT DINING? YES, MA'AM. AND TABLES. OUTDOOR DINING REQUEST IS FOR 16 TABLES AND 92 SEATS. I'M SORRY, 16 TABLES AND 92 SEATS. WELL, AND THIS THIS AREA IS COVERED HERE. SO YOU'RE CORRECT. IT'S IT'S 16, BUT THAT'S AN OPEN OUTDOOR AIR AREA. SO IF I BREAK THE TWO AREAS DOWN. YEAH, BUT IT IS 16 TABLES AND 92 SEATS BECAUSE THESE TABLES UNLIKE THE PREVIOUS APPLICATION I HAD HERE WHERE IT WAS A BUNCH OF SMALL TWO TOP TABLES, YOU CAN SEE THESE ARE LARGER BANQUETTE TYPE TABLES THAT WILL SEAT 6 OR 8. SO THESE ARE MUCH BIGGER TABLES. THAT'S WHY WE GOT A LOWER TABLE COUNT AND A HIGHER SEAT COUNT HERE. AND THEN INSIDE WHICH I KNOW. IN DINING ROOM A IS 66 AND DINING ROOM B IS 36. OKAY, COUNCIL, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE PETITIONERS AGENT? PETRANOFF. THIS IS THIS IS NOT DIRECTLY QUESTIONING QUESTIONING THIS AND THE NUMBER OF SEATS. SO I'M NOT SURE IF THIS IS THE RIGHT TIME, BUT I AM STILL UNCLEAR WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS A PRIVATE CLUB. THAT IS SUBSTANTIALLY DIFFERENT CONCEPT THAN WHEN THIS FIRST CAME FORWARD, WHICH IS ACTUALLY BEFORE I CAME ON COUNCIL. OR IS IT A PUBLIC CLUB? BECAUSE UNDER NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES, IN A PRIVATE CLUB, IF I BELONGED, I CAN BRING GUESTS AND THAT'S STILL A PRIVATE CLUB. IT IS A PUBLIC RESTAURANT, SO I CAN GO AS A NOT PAYING THE THE $25,000 FEE OR WHATEVER TO BE A I CAN GO AT ANY TIME AND DINE THERE. YES, MA'AM. WITH RESERVATIONS. BUT YES, WE'RE HOPING TO BE BUSY ENOUGH. WE ALWAYS NEED RESERVATIONS. BUT YES, IF, IF, IF IT'S A A WEDNESDAY EVENING AND YOU COME UP THE ELEVATOR AND THERE'S EMPTY SEATS, YOU'RE MORE THAN WELCOME TO HAVE DINNER AT THE RESTAURANT. OKAY. AND BUT THEY WILL CONTROL RESERVATIONS IN SOME MANNER FOR. I CAN'T SPEAK TO THAT. I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT. AND IT'S ONLY BECAUSE WE ARE TAKING THE PARKING OUT OF A PUBLIC PARKING GARAGE, AND I'M NOT SURE WHAT OUR PHILOSOPHY IS. [03:40:07] I COULD NOT FIND ANYWHERE IN OUR CODE OF ORDINANCES HOW WE FEEL ABOUT PRIVATE PRIVATE CLUBS. IF IT'S PRIVATE CLUB TAKING UP PUBLIC PARKING SPOTS. I MISSED THE THE OPENING OF THIS. I THINK I NEED TO BE SWORN IN. I'M PRETTY SURE YOU DO. DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU'RE ABOUT TO GIVE BE THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? I DO THANK YOU. CLAY BROOKER, FOR THE RECORD, 820 ONE FIFTH AVENUE SOUTH OF CHEVY THE APPROVAL IN 2023. THE CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL FOR A RESTAURANT. IT IS A RESTAURANT. NOTHING CHANGES ABOUT THE RESTAURANT. IT IS A RESERVATION ONLY HIGH HOSPITALITY AND THE APPROVAL FROM 2023 SPECIFICALLY REFERENCES AN OPERATION PLAN WHICH IS ATTACHED TO THE RESOLUTION OR REFER TO A RESOLUTION WITH A PREFERRED ACCESS PROGRAM. THAT ACCESS PROGRAM GUARANTEES RESERVATIONS TO PEOPLE WHO PAY FOR THE THE HONOR AND PRIVILEGE OF BEING A VIP. THAT VIP CAN INVITE ANYONE THAT PERSON LIKE WOULD LIKE GUEST NON GUEST FRIENDS NON-FAMILY. BUT IT IS A RESERVATION ONLY RESTAURANT SO IT'S JUST LIKE A COUNTRY CLUB. IT IS NOT A CLUB PER YOUR DEFINITION IN YOUR CODE. OKAY, I GUESS I'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM MISS MARTIN ON YOUR PERSPECTIVE ON ON THIS. AND I'M GOING TO BE HONEST, I'M NOT FULLY FAMILIAR WITH WHAT THE OPERATIONAL PROGRAMING IS OF THIS RESTAURANT. IT WAS APPROVED AS A RESTAURANT WITH INDOOR AND OUTDOOR DINING. THAT WAS. THAT'S THE APPROVAL THAT WE HAVE. SO I DON'T ACTUALLY KNOW THE DETAILS OF WHAT I'VE HEARD THROUGH MULTIPLE. AND IF YOU GO ON THE WEBSITE, YOU KNOW, I HAVE THAT MUCH THE MARKETING INFORMATION AND WHAT I'VE AND I HAVE FRIENDS THAT HAVE FRIENDS THAT ARE JOINING ON THIS AS WELL. BUT THE WAY THEY DESCRIBE IT TO ME IS REALLY WORK, SORT OF LIKE A COUNTRY CLUB. THEY PAY A FEE AND THEY, THEY CAN THEY, THEY GET A MEMBERSHIP, THEY GET EXCLUSIVE ACCESS, THEY CAN BRING FRIENDS, JUST LIKE I WOULD AT A COUNTRY CLUB. BUT BECAUSE IT'S TAKING, YOU KNOW, AND I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE A PHILOSOPHY OR IF I MISSED A POLICY OR A CODE IN HERE ON A USING PUBLIC PARKING GARAGE, A PUBLIC ASSET FOR A CLUB LIKE THIS, IT DOESN'T ADDRESS IT AT ALL. SO IT'S SILENT AND WE'VE NEVER HAD IT'S NOT SOMETHING WE'VE CONSIDERED IN THE PAST, BUT IN THE 19 YEARS THAT I'VE BEEN HERE AND I DON'T KNOW HOW ANYBODY ELSE FEELS ABOUT IT, I DON'T KNOW IF IT MATTERS. IT'S JUST THAT IT IS DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WAS SUBSTANTIALLY DIFFERENT ON THE WAY THAT IT WORKS THAN THE INITIAL CONCEPT. YEAH, I DID GO ON THE WEBSITE AND FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, IT IS REALLY ABOUT YOU CAN HAVE THESE PRIVILEGES IF YOU WANT TO BE A MEMBER OR, YOU KNOW PRIORITY SEATING AND IT THE WEBSITE. NOR DOES THE CAMERON MITCHELL AGREEMENT SAY THAT THIS WILL BE A PRIVATE CLUB. BUT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS TYPICAL THROUGHOUT THE CAMERON MITCHELL RESTAURANTS. IF I UNDERSTOOD THE WEBSITE TO BE SO MAYOR, I ASKED IF I COULD ADD COUNCILWOMAN PETRANOFF BUILD ON WHAT YOU SAID WITH A QUESTION BECAUSE I HAD A DISCUSSION WHEN I WITH THE PETITIONER ON THIS, AND IT'S ONE POINT, IT'S STILL NOT CLEAR TO ME. MR. BARKER, IF YOU ARE IF YOU ARE NOT A MEMBER. SO-CALLED VIP MEMBER, CAN YOU MAKE A RESERVATION? CAN YOU CALL AS A NON MEMBER? AND I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT HAVING DINNER THERE AS A, YOU KNOW, THROUGH A MEMBER WHO HAS INVITED YOU. THAT'S NOT THE QUESTION. THE QUESTION IS CAN A NON MEMBER EITHER WALK IN AND IF THE, IF THERE'S TABLES AVAILABLE HAVE DINNER OR MAKE A RESERVATION WITHOUT BEING A MEMBER. RESERVATIONS ARE FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF A VIP. THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT. I JUST I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT. SO AND AGAIN I ALSO, JUST AS PART OF MY DILIGENCE, ASKED THE QUESTION AS TO WHETHER THERE'S ANYTHING IN OUR CODE OR IN THE ORIGINAL RESOLUTION THAT WE, WE PASSED TO FACILITATE THE TEXT AMENDMENT. AND, AND THERE'S NOTHING THAT I'M AWARE OF LOOKING AT MISS MARTIN AND MR. MCCONNELL THAT PREVENTS THIS, BUT I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT YOU KNOW, IT'S, YOU KNOW, IF IT LOOKS LIKE A DUCK AND QUACKS LIKE A DUCK, I MEAN, THIS IS A THIS IS A MEMBER, ESSENTIALLY A MEMBER ONLY FACILITY. [03:45:10] SO I THINK WE NEED TO CLARIFY, BECAUSE MR. MCLEAN, I BELIEVE, SAID SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN WHAT YOU JUST SAID. THAT'S WHY I'M RAISING IT. THAT'S THAT'S CORRECT. AND I'M CORRECTING HIS TESTIMONY. SO THE TESTIMONY IS A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC CANNOT MAKE A RESERVATION IF THEY ARE NOT A VIP MEMBER, NOT A VIP. AND THAT WAS EXACTLY WHAT WAS APPROVED BY THE COUNCIL IN 2023. THE OPERATION PLAN EXPRESSLY STATED THAT THIS WOULD BE A PREFERRED ACCESS PROGRAM THAT WAS APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL IN THE RESOLUTION ITSELF. IF THERE'S ANY CHANGES MADE TO THAT RESOLUTION TODAY, I WOULD RESPECTFULLY CONTEND THAT THAT WOULD BE DONE WITHOUT NOTICE AND DUE PROCESS TO MY CLIENT. WELL, MR. BARKER, I HAVE TO DISAGREE WITH YOU TO A POINT, AND I'M BASING IT ON RECOLLECTION. IT IS TRUE THAT NOT AT THE BEGINNING, BUT AS IN 2023, THE AS THIS PROJECT EVOLVED AND THE BUSINESS MODEL EVOLVED, THE PETITIONER TALKED ABOUT HAVING A. MEMBERSHIP. I WOULD I'LL JUST SAY COMPONENT TO THE CLUB. BUT YOU KNOW IT WAS THIS IS EVOLVED AND AT THAT TIME IT WAS THAT IT WOULD BE IT WAS DESCRIBED AS SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE PARTLY THESE ARE MY WORDS A MEMBERSHIP, A VIP MEMBERSHIP. IT WOULD HAVE THAT COMPONENT, AS MANY PLACES DO. THE WARRANT IS AN EXAMPLE OF SOMETHING THAT AT LEAST DID HAVE. I DON'T KNOW IF IT STILL DOES THAT THAT COMPONENT TO IT, BUT IT WAS IT WAS ADVERTISED AS TO AT THAT POINT OR DESCRIBED TO IT AS THAT AT THAT POINT, AS SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE A KIND OF A HYBRID. IT'S OBVIOUSLY EVOLVED. I'M NOT TAKING EXCEPTION TO IT, BUT I THINK FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD, WE OUGHT TO HAVE A CLEAR UNDERSTANDING AS TO WHAT IT HAS EVOLVED INTO TODAY. AND BASED ON YOUR ANSWER, I THINK WHAT HAS EVOLVED INTO TODAY IS ESSENTIALLY A MEMBERSHIP, VIP MEMBERSHIP ONLY FACILITY. THE OPERATIONAL PLAN REFERENCES A PREFERRED ACCESS PROGRAM, NOT A RESTRICTED ACCESS PROGRAM, BUT A PREFERRED. THE PREFERRED THAT IS ONLINE AND THAT WAS IN THE PLAN. IT IMPLIES THAT THERE'S A NON PREFERRED WAY TO MAKE RESERVATIONS IF YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE PREFERRED. YEAH, AND THAT'S WHAT IT DOESN'T. YEAH. THE OPERATIONAL PLAN THAT'S THE MENTIONED IN THERE IS THAT GUESTS WILL PARTICIPATE IN A PREFERRED ACCESS PROGRAM, BUT IT DOESN'T TALK ABOUT MEMBERSHIP OR ANYTHING. YEAH. I JUST I THINK WE OUGHT TO JUST, YOU KNOW, UNDERSTAND WHAT IT IS FROM A YOU KNOW WHAT THIS YOU KNOW, HOW THIS FACILITY IS GOING TO OPERATE. THAT'S ALL. BECAUSE IT HAS CHANGED OVER TIME. OVER TIME IT'S CHANGED. IT'S EVOLVED. AND, YOU KNOW, AS I SAID, I'VE I'VE LOOKED INTO THIS AND THERE'S ABSOLUTELY NOTHING IN OUR CODE OR IN THE RESOLUTION THAT PREVENTS THE BUSINESS MODEL THAT'S BEING. PROPOSED, NOT JUST PROPOSED WILL BE IN PLACE HERE. AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S IT'S HOW THEY WANT TO OPERATE THE RESTAURANT AND THAT'S THEIR CHOICE. THE ONLY THE ONLY THING GOING BACK TO PUBLIC PARKING GARAGE, AND I DON'T KNOW HOW, HOW YOU ALL FEEL ABOUT HAVING A PUBLIC PARKING GARAGE FOR THIS PRIVATE CLUB. WELL, AGAIN, I JUST MY FEELING IT'S AN EXCELLENT POINT TO RAISE THE QUESTION, BUT WE'VE NEVER DEALT WITH THAT. THERE'S NOT I MEAN, FOR THIS FOR THIS PETITION. I DON'T SEE HOW WE CAN, YOU KNOW, GO BACK AND DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT. BUT IT IT MAY BE, YOU KNOW, CERTAINLY FOR ME, I THINK IT'S A, YOU KNOW, A, A WARNING SIGN, IF YOU WILL, OR SOMETHING THAT WE MAY WANT TO ADDRESS IN SOME WAY IN THE FUTURE. I THINK THESE KINDS OF FACILITIES ARE RARE IS THE RIGHT WORD. THEY'RE, THEY'RE THEY'RE CERTAINLY NOT COMMON. SO YOU DON'T WANT TO SPEND TOO MUCH TIME DEALING WITH SOMETHING. THAT'S KIND OF A RARE EXCEPTION, BUT CERTAINLY FROM A PUBLIC POLICY STANDPOINT, I WOULD AGREE WITH YOU. YEAH. BECAUSE I'M THINKING THAT, YOU KNOW, I'M SEEING SAYING THIS ONE. IT'S PROBABLY TOO LATE, BUT AND I DON'T KNOW IF I'D WANT TO CHANGE IT ANYWAY, BUT I'M SEEING A TREND OF THESE PRIVATE, PRIVATE CLUBS AND PRIVATE. EVERYONE IS IS INCREASING GREATLY INCREASING THEIR PRIVATE COUNTRY CLUBS. AND SO THERE'S ALMOST THIS SORT OF COCOONING FROM THE 80S IS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW WHERE PEOPLE ARE CLOISTERING IN THEIR, IN THEIR DINING CLUBS AND, YOU KNOW, AS A, AS A COMMUNITY WITH COMMUNITY ASSETS. HOW DO YOU KNOW IS THIS, IS THIS WHAT WE'RE SHAPING UP TO BE? YOU KNOW, ONE DO WE CARE? TWO CAN WE DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT? I JUST WANT TO FLAG IT. THANK YOU. I HAVE KRAMER, AND THEN. [03:50:02] AND THEN SORRY. AND AGAIN, I THINK. I THINK IT'S IRRELEVANT, BUT PERHAPS IT. IF IT GIVES YOU PEACE. IF SUGDEN THEATER OR THE GULFSHORE PLAYHOUSE SOLD EVERY SEAT TO THE WHO? TO PEOPLE WHO BOUGHT SEASON TICKETS, AND THERE WAS NO SEATS AVAILABLE, YOU'D HAVE THE EXACT SAME SITUATION. AND THE PUBLIC. I MEAN, EVERYONE'S AFFORDED AN OPPORTUNITY IF YOU WANT TO SPEND THE MONEY. AND IF THEY SOLD IT OUT, THEY SOLD IT OUT. I THINK THE SAME CASES HERE. AND I WAS LED TO BELIEVE EXACTLY WHAT RAY WAS MAKING A DISTINCTION BETWEEN. I WAS LED TO BELIEVE THAT I WOULD BE ABLE TO EAT THERE SOMETIME, AND IT WASN'T GOING TO BE LIKE THE BUTCHER, WHICH IS EXACTLY I'D JUST BEEN TO. AND IT WAS THE EXACT EXAMPLE I USED. SO THAT'S FINE NONETHELESS. THEY'RE DOING WHAT THEY SAID AND WE ROLL WITH IT, I THINK. I THINK ANYTHING ELSE IS JUST KIND OF BEATING A DEAD HORSE. THANK YOU. PENMAN. SO WHEN THIS PETITION CAME BEFORE YOU EARLIER, HOW WAS IT ARTICULATED? I IT WAS, IT WAS IT ARTICULATED AS A AS A. IT WAS A NEW ROOFTOP RESTAURANT IS HOW IT, HOW IT WAS APPROVED IN THE RESOLUTION. BUT THEN THERE, THERE IS A REFERENCE TO AN OPERATIONAL PLAN. AND THE OPERATIONAL PLAN, LIKE I SAID, SAYS GUESTS WILL PARTICIPATE IN A PREFERRED ACCESS PROGRAM. PREFERRED ACCESS. BUT I CAN WALK OFF THE STREET AND AND HAVE A DRINK AT THE BAR. I THINK THEY'RE TESTIFYING THAT YOU CANNOT. OKAY. UNLESS YOU ARE A VIP. OKAY. OKAY. A VIP COULD COULD EASILY SAY, MISS PENNIMAN, PLEASE. OR LINDA, AS YOU TOLD ME TO CALL YOU IN THE PAST. PLEASE. THANK YOU. ON MY BEHALF. JOIN THE RESTAURANT FOR THE FOR THE NIGHT. AND YOU CAN ATTEND WITHOUT THE VIP. PRESENCE. OKAY. THANK YOU. SO WAIT A MINUTE. WAIT. I DON'T THINK YOU REALLY WANT TO SAY THAT. INVITED. ESSENTIALLY, YOU'RE EITHER A VIP OR YOU CAN INVITE GUESTS. ESSENTIALLY HOW YOU GET THERE. BUT. AND I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ALL ARE SAYING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, AND WHAT THE RESPONDENT'S ATTORNEY IS SAYING IS IT'S PART OF THE OPERATION PLAN. BUT THE OPERATION PLAN IS VERY VAGUE. DOES NOT SPECIFICALLY SAY IT'S RESERVATION BASED. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE TESTIMONY AT THE HEARING WAS, BUT IF THIS WAS ALWAYS THE INTENT AND IT WASN'T STATED RESPECTFULLY, IT SEEMS A LITTLE DISINGENUOUS AT BEST. SO IF YOU REALLY WANT TO LOOK AT THIS NOW, THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT THEY'RE ASKING RIGHT NOW, BUT I WILL GLADLY LOOK INTO THIS AND SEE IF THERE'S A WAY TO BRING IT BACK, IF THAT IS NOT WHAT CITY COUNSEL INTENDED WHEN IT APPROVED IN 2023. MY ONLY COMMENT TO THAT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, ARE WE GOING TO ARE WE GOING TO RECOGNIZE THESE CLUBS AND THEREFORE, DO WE NEED TO CHANGE ZONING SOMEHOW TO ACCOMMODATE THEM? I GUESS I DON'T KNOW. IT'S A NEW ITERATION. WELL, CAN I YEAH. OKAY. WAIT, I WANT TO. YEAH. DON'T. KRAMER, ARE YOU FINISHED? I'M SORRY. OH, CERTAINLY. SO, WAIT. I MEAN PARDON? PARDON? GO AHEAD. I FEEL LIKE THIS THING. IF THEY WEREN'T REDUCING THEIR OUTSIDE DINING, WE WOULDN'T EVEN BE HERE RIGHT NOW. WELL, ACTUALLY, YEAH, I'LL JUST SAY SO, MEMBER KRAMER, THE COUNCIL HAS ASKED THAT QUESTION. WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN AN ANSWER. WHICH QUESTION? WHETHER IT WAS A PRIVATE CLUB OR NOT. THAT'S COME UP AT LEAST 12 TIMES DURING CORRESPONDENCES. NOW, AGAIN, WE ARE HERE ON THE OUTDOOR DINING. WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT IS SEPARATE AND APART. THERE ARE DIFFERENT CRITERIA FOR WHAT'S BEFORE YOU. BUT I'M JUST OFFERING TO LOOK INTO THIS BECAUSE I JUST READ THE OPERATION PLAN AND IT DOES NOT SAY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC ARE NOT ALLOWED WITHOUT A VIP. THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN A LITTLE BIT MORE CLEAR. SO TO RELY ON THAT BASED ON WHATEVER WAS DISCLOSED AT THE RECORD. I JUST PERSONALLY THINK THAT I WOULD PREFER TO LOOK INTO IT. SO MOVING ON. BUT WE CAN I THINK IT'S REALLY FIRST OF ALL, IT'S NOT WHAT THIS AGENDA ITEM IS. IT'S AN ENTIRELY SEPARATE ISSUE. AND SECONDLY. TO GO BACK AND REVISIT WITH THIS NEW COUNCIL LIKE THAT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE. THAT SETS SOME REALLY BAD PRECEDENT. EXCUSE ME SIR. I WASN'T ASKING FOR THAT. I'M TALKING IN A GENERAL SENSE. DO WE NEED TO? YES, AND WE MAY. BUT I'M TALKING ABOUT FOR THIS SPECIFIC ITEM THAT WE NEED TO GET DONE. THAT WAS NOT MY INTENT. OKAY. SO IF WE WANT TO LOOK AT IT FOR FUTURE, I'M ALL FOR IT. JUST THESE TYPES OF ITERATIONS. I UNDERSTAND, I UNDERSTAND. THAT'S ALL. THANKS. I THINK. OKAY. WAIT, WAIT. I'M SORRY. BARTON, MY SOLE PURPOSE FOR WANTING TO SPEAK BRIEFLY WAS SIMPLY TO REITERATE WHAT WAS JUST SAID. AND THAT IS, WE'RE HERE TO TALK ABOUT OUTDOOR DINING. [03:55:01] THIS IS THE AGENDA ITEM THAT WE'RE HERE TO DISCUSS. IF WE WANT TO DISCUSS IN GENERAL HOW THIS TYPE OF OF ESTABLISHMENT FITS INTO THE FIFTH AVENUE OVERLAY THAT MAYBE WE SHOULD HAVE THAT DISCUSSION AS A COUNCIL, I EMBRACE THAT. BUT NOW THIS IS NOT THE TIME TO DO IT. AND WE SHOULDN'T BE PICKING SPECIFICALLY ON THIS CLUB IN REFERENCE TO A PLAN THAT'S ALREADY BEEN APPROVED, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT'S NOT AN AGENDA ITEM THAT THAT ADDRESSES THE, THE OPERATIONAL ASPECT OF, OF THE, OF THE, OF THE PETITIONER. SO I'M NOT DOING THAT. AND MAYBE WHAT WE SHOULD DO IS WHEN IT COMES TIME TO, TO HAVE COUNCIL COMMENTS AT THE END OF THE MEETING TODAY, WE COULD GET A CONSENSUS FROM COUNCIL AND TO STAFF TO BRING IT BACK IN FRONT OF US SO THAT WE CAN TALK ABOUT THIS ZONING IN GENERAL AS A WHOLE, AND HOW THESE TYPES OF CLUBS AND OPERATIONS WILL FIT INTO OUR OVERALL GAME PLAN. BUT AGAIN, WHAT WE SHOULD BE DISCUSSING HERE, AND I'LL TAKE IT ONE STEP FURTHER. WE SHOULDN'T BE EVEN DISCUSSING THIS BECAUSE WE'RE REDUCING THE NUMBER OF SEATS AND TABLES FOR THIS. THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN AN ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED. AND WE SHOULD WE SHOULD EVEN HAVE IT ON OUR AGENDA ITEM. AND NOW WE'RE 45 MINUTES INTO THIS TOPIC. WELL, I WOULD LIKE TO GET INTO THAT. AND THAT'S WHERE IF STAFF COULD DO THE STAFF REPORT. GOOD AFTERNOON, ERICA MARTIN, PLANNING DIRECTOR. YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU TODAY AN OUTDOOR DINING REQUEST. THIS IS 25 ODD ONE SEVEN. AND THIS IS FOR. THIS IS A REQUEST FOR OUTDOOR DINING TO ALLOW 16 TABLES AND 92 CHAIRS FOR THE RESTAURANT, KNOWN AS PRIME SOCIAL RESERVE, ON PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNED BY FIFTH AVENUE SOUTH. INVESTMENTS, LLC AND LOCATED AT 837 FIFTH AVENUE SOUTH. THIS IS THE FIRST AND I BELIEVE. YEAH. AND FIRST AND ONLY OF THE ROOFTOP RESTAURANT CONCEPT THAT WAS APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL FOR A VERY SPECIFIC AREA OF THE FIFTH AVENUE SOUTH SPECIAL OVERLAY DISTRICT. THIS RESTAURANT CAME THROUGH IN 2023 AND WAS APPROVED FOR OUTDOOR DINING. THEY HAVE AMENDED THE OUTDOOR DINING PLAN. SO TO BE CLEAR, KIND OF HOW WE GOT HERE THEY DID HAVE AN APPROVED OUTDOOR DINING PLAN. THEY REQUESTED THEY SUBMITTED AN APPLICATION FOR A LIVE ENTERTAINMENT APPROVAL. WHEN THE FIRE MARSHAL, THE DEPUTY FIRE CHIEF, ACTING FIRE MARSHAL, REVIEWED THE LIFE SAFETY PLAN FOR THAT LIVE ENTERTAINMENT REQUEST. HE NOTICED THAT THE LIVE OR THE LIFE SAFETY PLAN WAS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE APPROVED LIFE SAFETY PLAN FROM THE 2023 OUTDOOR DINING. SO HIS REQUEST WAS THAT WE NEED TO MAKE ALL OF OUR LIFE SAFETY PLANS CONSISTENT. THEY ACCORDINGLY SUBMITTED AN OUTDOOR DINING REQUEST TO MARRY THOSE TWO PLANS. THEY THEN DIDN'T WITHDRAW, BUT HAVE INDEFINITELY CONTINUED THE LIVE ENTERTAINMENT REQUEST. AND NOW WE HAVE THE OUTDOOR DINING. SO IT JUST SO YOU KNOW HOW WE GOT HERE, IT WASN'T, YOU KNOW, NOBODY WENT OUT AND SAID, OH, THIS IS DIFFERENT. YOU NEED TO COME BACK IN. SO THEY'RE HERE FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE REVISED LIFE SAFETY PLAN FOR THE OUTDOOR DINING REQUEST ON THE ROOFTOP. THEY HAVE REMOVED FIVE TABLES AND 22 CHAIRS IN THAT BACK PATIO AREA THAT MR. MCCLAIN SHOWED YOU. BUT WHAT YOU WILL SEE IN THE NUMBERS IS THAT WHILE WE HAVE REMOVED FIVE TABLES AND 22 CHAIRS DUE TO A RECALCULATION AND THIS IS IN THE BOOTH SEATING. THE BOOTH SEATING WAS ORIGINALLY REPORTED AS FOUR TOPS, IF YOU WILL, AND THEY'RE ACTUALLY BASED ON THE FIRE PREVENTION CODE CALCULATION. SIX TOPS. SO WHAT YOU SEE IS EVEN THOUGH YOU'VE REDUCED FIVE TABLES AND 22 SEATS, THE OVERALL NUMBER HAS ONLY GONE FROM 94 CHAIRS TO 92. SO THIS IT'S NOT THEY DIDN'T INCREASE PHYSICALLY THE SIZE OF THOSE BOOTHS. NOTHING CHANGED IN THAT AREA PHYSICALLY. IT'S JUST THE WAY THAT SPACE IS CALCULATED WITH RESPECT TO THE FIRE PREVENTION CODE. SO THOSE THOSE ARE SIX TOPS. AND THAT'S WHAT YOU SEE THERE. SO THE REQUEST THAT THE OUTDOOR DINING THAT WAS APPROVED ORIGINALLY IN 2023 WAS FOR 94 CHAIRS AND THAT WAS FOR PRIME SOCIAL. WHAT YOUR REQUEST IS TODAY IS FOR THE 16 TABLES AND 92 CHAIRS FOR PRIME SOCIAL RESERVE. AND WE DID NOTICE EVERYONE WITHIN 1000FT². WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY WE DIDN'T I DON'T THINK WE DIDN'T RECEIVE ANY CORRESPONDENCE. WE DIDN'T RECEIVE ANY CORRESPONDENCE IN RESPONSE TO THE MAILING. AND WE REVIEWED THE THIS AGAINST THE CRITERIA FOR OUTDOOR DINING, FOUND THAT IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE OUTDOOR DINING CRITERIA. JUST TO BE CLEAR THAT WITH RESPECT TO THE PARKING WHEN THEY CAME THROUGH ORIGINALLY WHILE PARKING IS NOT REQUIRED FOR OUTDOOR DINING IN THE FIFTH AVENUE SOUTH SPECIAL OVERLAY DISTRICT, THEY DID ELECT TO BUY IF YOU WILL ALLOCATE THOSE SPACES OUT OF THE PUBLIC PARKING GARAGE. SO THEY DO ACTUALLY HAVE PARKING FOR BOTH THE INDOOR AND OUTDOOR DINING PORTIONS OF THAT RESTAURANT. I WERE YOU COMPLETE I YEAH. SO I DID NOT SEE THE PARKING THAT WAS TO BE IMPLEMENTED. SO THE PARKING WAS APPROVED THROUGH A PARKING ALLOCATION AT THE TIME THAT THE CONDITIONAL USE WAS APPROVED. [04:00:02] SO THEY ALLOCATED 24 SPACES OUT OF THE PUBLIC PARKING GARAGE IN 2023. AND THERE WAS ALSO A CHANGE FOR THE VALET. WAS THERE A CHANGE SOME CHANGES THAT WERE PROPOSED TO BE DONE IN THE PARKING LOT? YEP. THIS IS NOT GOING TO BE MY AREA OF EXPERTISE, BUT MATTHEW KNOWS MUCH MORE ABOUT THIS THAN I DO. I THINK YOU'RE REFERRING TO THE RIGHT OF WAY BEHIND THIS RESTAURANT. AT THE TIME THAT THE RESTAURANT WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED, THERE WAS A COMMITMENT BY THE PETITIONER TO MAKE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE RIGHT OF WAY. WE ALSO HAVE THE DEPUTY FIRE CHIEF HERE WHO CAN WEIGH IN AS WELL. AND THAT IS BECAUSE WHEN THIS RESTAURANT WAS ORIGINALLY PROPOSED, THE FIRE DEPARTMENT IDENTIFIED THAT FOR PUBLIC SAFETY REASONS, IF WE'RE ADDING THIS MANY, WE HIT A TIPPING POINT. THE THE ALLEYWAY BEHIND THIS IS CONGESTED AT BEST IMPASSABLE AT, AT MANY TIMES. AND THAT IS A PROBLEM FOR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT AND POLICE DEPARTMENT AND ANY OF OUR FIRST RESPONDERS. SO IN ORDER TO ENSURE. LIFE SAFETY AND ACCESS FOR THEM IN THAT ALLEYWAY, THEY REQUESTED THERE'S A VALET STAND. THAT'S. THIS IS THE CONGESTION. ALSO IS DUE PARTLY TO A VALET STAND. AND THIS IS A VALET STAND FOR THE DISTRICT PERMIT. NOT JUST THIS IS NOT PRIME SOCIAL'S VALET, BUT FOR THE DISTRICT PERMIT FOR VALET. ONE OF THE STANDS IS IS IN THIS THIS ALLEYWAY BEHIND THIS RESTAURANT. SO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT SAID, IF, YOU KNOW, WE'RE ADDING THIS IS THE TIPPING POINT WHERE WE'RE ADDING HUNDREDS OF MORE SEATS OF OUTDOOR DINING, BRINGING MORE PEOPLE. WE NEED TO CLEAR THIS UP. SO THE PETITIONER COMMITTED TO SOME RIGHT OF WAY IMPROVEMENTS IN THAT ALLEYWAY. AND WHERE ARE WE ON THOSE? RIGHT AWAY, I AM GOING TO LET MATTHEW CHIME IN ON THAT ONE. I DON'T KNOW, BUT I CAN GET BACK TO YOU. OH, OKAY. SORRY. THAT'S OUR BUILDING. AND I CAN ATTEST THAT THE CONSTRUCTION IS UNDERWAY RIGHT NOW AS WE FEEL IT REVERBERATING THROUGH OUR BUILDING. SO THE THE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE PARKWAY ARE UNDER OUR UNDER CONSTRUCTION RIGHT NOW IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE DEPUTY FIRE CHIEF'S APPROVAL OF THOSE PLANS. I GUESS I DON'T I COULDN'T FIND THEM OR IDENTIFY THEM. YEAH. OH, YEAH. THEY'RE NOT IN THIS PACKET. IT'S A IT'S THROUGH. DONE THROUGH A RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT, A BUILDING PERMIT, BUT A RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT. CORRECT. BUT I COULD NOT IDENTIFY THEM WHEN I VISITED THE SITE. THE IMPROVEMENTS. I DON'T KNOW HOW WHEN YOU SAY THEY'RE UNDER CONSTRUCTION, I DON'T KNOW HOW FAR ALONG, BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT OF WAY. PERMIT OR REQUEST IN FRONT. YES, MA'AM. SO THE REQUIREMENT WAS TO ENSURE THAT THERE WAS ADEQUATE WIDTH AND TURN ABILITY FOR FIRE TRUCKS THROUGH THE BACK FIFTH AVENUE PARKWAY. WITH THAT INCLUDED, IN ORDER TO ADD THE KEEP THE VALET STAND IN THAT SAME LOCATION, THEY HAD TO REMOVE SOME OF THE CURB AND SIDEWALK ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE ALLEYWAY TO HAVE A LOADING ZONE DURING THE DAY. SLASH VALET STAND IN THE EVENING AND STILL MAINTAIN FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESS ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PARKWAY. SO THERE USED TO BE STORAGE IN THAT FIFTH AVENUE PARKWAY. IS IS I DON'T KNOW IF THAT IS APPROVED. THE STORAGE SHEDS. CORRECT. IS THAT PROPANE TANKS? SO YEAH, THOSE CHANGED A BIT SINCE I SAW IT LAST EVENING, BUT NOT THIS. I WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK AND CHECK AND SEE IF ANYTHING'S CURRENTLY IN THE ALLEYWAY. LAST TIME I DROVE BY, IT WAS ALL UNDER CONSTRUCTION. NOT JUST WITH THE BUILDING ITSELF, BUT THE ALLEYWAY IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION. AND THAT TURNING POINT FOR YOU ON A FIRE TRUCK. HOW WERE YOU GOING? I CAN'T MAKE THAT TURN IN THE FIFTH AVENUE PARKWAY WITH MY CAR. HOW DO YOU GET OUT OF THE FIFTH AVENUE PARKWAY? GO. SO WE DID HAVE THEM PUT TOGETHER AN AUTOCAD PROGRAM WITH THE DIMENSIONS OF OUR LARGEST VEHICLE, WHICH IS TOWER TWO. AND WE WERE ABLE TO AND WE ACTUALLY BROUGHT THE TRUCK DOWN TO DRIVE THROUGH THERE. AND WE WERE ABLE TO TURN INTO THE ALLEY THE PARKWAY AND THEN TRAVERSE THE WHOLE WAY THROUGH. AND IT IS WIDE ENOUGH TO SET OUT THE OUTRIGGERS AND USE THE AERIAL DEVICE IN THAT ALLEYWAY. AND TO GET OUT, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO GO STRAIGHT. YES, MA'AM. STRAIGHT, STRAIGHT THROUGH ONTO FIFTH AVENUE OR ONTO 41. BUT THAT'S NOT ALLOWED BY CURB. NOW THE GETTING THROUGH THERE WASN'T THE ISSUE WITH THE CURB. THE CHALLENGE WAS ACTUALLY DESIGNATING IT AS A FIRE ACCESS LANE SO THEY COULD NOT RUN A VALET STAND THERE OR HAVE LOADING IN THAT AREA. THE COMPROMISE THAT WAS REACHED WITH EVERYBODY WAS TO REMOVE SOME OF THE CURB SPACE, TO CREATE A LOADING ZONE SLASH VALET STAND SPACE, IN ADDITION TO THE 20FT REQUIREMENT FOR THE FIRE ACCESS ROAD. RIGHT. OKAY. IT MIGHT BE A RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT, BUT IT WAS ALSO PART OF THIS APPROVAL PROCESS. SO I THINK COUNCILWOMAN KNOW WHAT THAT RIGHT AWAY FROM IT IS ACTUALLY GOING TO BE THROUGH THE CONDITIONAL USE PROCESS. [04:05:03] ORIGINAL CONDITIONAL USE PROCESS. CORRECT. OKAY. I JUST HAVE A QUESTION. I THINK I GIVE HEADS UP. HAS THE OUTDOOR DINING SPACE CHANGED IN ANY WAY? IT'S THE OUTDOOR DINING SPACE HAS BEEN REDUCED. BECAUSE OF THE REMOVAL OF THAT BACK PATIO SPACE. THE ONLY CHANGE TO THE OUTDOOR DINING IS THE CALCULATION OF THE BOOTH SPACE. AND I THINK THERE WAS THE TINIEST, MOST MINUSCULE CHANGE TO ONE OF THE BOOTHS IN THE WEST RIGHT NORTHWEST AREA. BUT I MEAN, TINIEST CHANGE. SO ON THE LIFE SAFETY PLAN, IT DOESN'T SHOW WHERE THE UMBRELLAS ARE. AND IT SAYS IN THE STAFF REPORT THAT THERE'S A CLEARANCE AND I'M NOT GOING BY THE DRAWINGS. DRAWINGS ARE NOT THE ACCURACY OF THE PETITION. THEY'RE PRETTY, BUT THEY'RE NOT THE ACCURACY. AND THEY SHOW THOSE AWNINGS AS BEING COMPLETE. ONE STRIP AWNINGS. IS THAT WHAT'S BEING APPROVED? AN AWNING AND AN UMBRELLA ARE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT. THE AWNING WOULD BE REVIEWED AND APPROVED AT THE BUILDING PERMIT PROCESS, NOT THE OUTDOOR DINING PROCESS. IF THEY WERE UMBRELLAS THAT TOOK AWAY FROM SQUARE FOOTAGE OR AISLE ACCESS DURING IN THE OUTDOOR DINING, THEN IT WOULD BE THOSE WOULD BE REVIEWED DURING THE OUTDOOR DINING PROCESS. WELL, IT SAYS IN THE STAFF REPORT THAT THE OUTDOOR DINING ON PUBLIC PROPERTY OR PRIVATE PROPERTY, I'M ASSUMING, IS GOING TO BE 50% OF THAT OUTSIDE AREA, OR THIS DOESN'T PERTAIN TO THE DISTANCE WITH UMBRELLAS AND CHAIRS TO ALLOW PEDESTRIAN MOVEMENT. SO HAS IT CHANGED FROM UMBRELLAS OR ARE THEY AWNINGS? YOU CAN'T TAKE THAT UP. BEAR WITH ME A MOMENT WHILE I PULL IT UP. SO CURRENTLY ON THIS PLAN, I DON'T SEE ANY BASES FOR UMBRELLAS, UNLESS YOU CAN POINT THEM OUT THAT I CAN'T SEE THE UMBRELLAS MOUNT. IF YOU. IF YOU. SO FROM THE FROM THE RENDERING HERE, YOU CAN SEE WHERE THEY ARE. YES, MADAM MAYOR, IT IS A PRETTY PICTURE, BUT IT'S ACCURATE TO WHAT IS ACTUALLY. PLEASE. OH, SORRY. YEAH IT IS. IT IS A PRETTY PICTURE, BUT IT'S ACCURATE TO WHAT? WHAT IS ACTUALLY WHAT IS ACTUALLY DRAWN. THIS IS ALL DONE IN A BUILDING INFORMATION MODEL. SO THE MODEL IS ACCURATE. SO YOU CAN SEE HERE ON THE SIDE OF THE UMBRELLA THERE'S A POLE. SO THE UMBRELLA ISN'T LIKE A TABLE IN YOUR IN A PATIO WHERE THE UMBRELLA GOES THROUGH THE CENTER OF THE TABLE. THIS IS MOUNTED ON THE WALL COMES OVER AND IT'S LIKE A UMBRELLA THAT THE THAT THE ARM COMES OVER ON. SO YOU CAN SEE THAT THE ARM IS LOCATED HERE AND THE UMBRELLA CANTILEVERS OVER. SO IF YOU GO TO THE LIFE SAFETY PLAN, LET ME ZOOM IN ON IT A BIT. IF WE GET TO THIS LIFE SAFETY PLAN AND ZOOM IN ON THIS, I'M GOING TOO FAR HERE. SEE HERE? I PROBABLY ZOOMED IN TOO FAR. IT'S GETTING THERE. WHILE HE'S LOOKING, MISS MARTIN. SO WE DID OR DID NOT APPROVE UMBRELLAS OR AWNINGS AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS PETITION. UMBRELLAS HAVE SHOWN ON THIS FOR THIS RESTAURANT PREVIOUS IN PREVIOUS ITERATIONS. THAT'S WHAT. SO. SO HERE THE BLACK DOT IS HERE. AND YES, THE UMBRELLAS ARE THERE. HERE YOU CAN SEE THE SHADED LINE FOR THEM THAT REPRESENTS THEM AS FAR AS AN EGRESS OR A LIFE SAFETY ISSUE IS WHEN THE UMBRELLA IS EXTENDED OVER THE TABLE. IT WOULD BE JUST LIKE A CORRIDOR OR HALLWAY IN A BUILDING. THERE'S A MINIMUM HEAD HEIGHT THAT WHEN THEY REVIEW IT AND THE UMBRELLAS ARE EXTENDED, THAT SOMEONE WILL HAVE TO BE ABLE TO WALK UNDERNEATH. SO THOSE THOSE UMBRELLAS HAVE TO BE AT A MINIMUM OF SIX FOOT EIGHT HIGH SO SOMEONE CAN WALK UNDERNEATH THEM, [04:10:02] WHICH THIS IS ALL AGAIN, WE'VE REVIEWED THEM. THEY'RE ON THIS PLAN. THEY'RE JUST SHADED OUT BECAUSE IF THEY WERE DARK, IT WOULD IT WOULD REALLY MAKE THE THE UNDERSTANDING OF THE PURPOSE OF THE EGRESS OF THE LIFE SAFETY PLAN DIFFICULT TO READ. BUT IT'S ALL HERE AND IT'S ALL BEEN IN THE PACKAGE THE ENTIRE TIME. WELL, SO WAS THE MURAL, BUT COUNCIL DIDN'T APPROVE THE MURAL. WELL, AND COUNCIL IS TO APPROVE MURALS. WELL, IT'S TRULY NOT A MURAL. IT'S A IT'S IT'S NOT ARTWORK. IT'S IT'S OWNER. ERIC, YOU MIGHT WANT TO HELP ME OUT ON THIS. IT'S NOT LIKE IT'S NOT ARTWORK THAT'S GOING THROUGH THE ART COMMISSION TO GET APPROVED. IT'S JUST A PAINTING ON THE BUILDING. PUBLIC ART. IT'S NOT ARTWORK TO SATISFY THE PUBLIC ART REQUIREMENT. YEAH. SO WE'RE NOT WE'RE NOT. WE WEREN'T LOOKING FOR PUBLIC ART FUNDING FOR THAT. IT'S JUST PART OF. IT'S NO DIFFERENT THAN PAINTING THE BUILDING BLUE. WE PAINTED THE BUILDING WITH WHAT IS A REPRESENTATION OF A POSTCARD, BUT THAT'S BY THE WAY, IT'S BEAUTIFUL. BUT NO, I GET IT. BUT THAT'S NOT THAT'S NOT PART OF THE PUBLIC ART PROCESS. BUT THAT WAS SCRUTINIZED AND REVIEWED BY THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD, WHICH, AS I UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, PAINT COLOR ESTHETICS IS IS KIND OF WHAT THEY REVIEWED BECAUSE THEY DID COMMENT ON IT. SO IN THE HANDBOOK. MURALS ARE ALLOWED ON THE FACADE OF BUILDINGS. THE DESIGN REVIEW HANDBOOK. SO WILL THE HANDBOOK IS JUST A GUIDELINE IN THE ACTUAL STANDARDS IN CHAPTER TWO. IT DOESN'T WE DON'T ADDRESS MURALS SPECIFICALLY. SO WE DO NOT ADDRESS MURALS IN CHAPTER TWO, WHICH IS THE ADMINISTRATION PART. CHAPTER TWO, OR THAT'S WHERE THE STANDARDS FOR APPROVAL OF DESIGN REVIEW ARE FOUND. SO FOR TWO, FOUR, SEVEN NINE IS WHERE YOU'LL FIND THE STANDARDS FOR APPROVAL FOR DESIGN REVIEW. SO THEY APPROVE IT. BUT THEN IN THE AUTHORITY FOR APPROVAL OF ANY MURAL OR ARTWORK FOR OUR BOARDS AND COMMITTEES, IT SAYS THAT COUNCIL APPROVES MURALS. WAS THAT THE. IT'S IN ACTUALLY TWO DIFFERENT SECTIONS. I THINK 46 IT SHOWS THAT IT DEPICTS THAT MURALS AND IT ALSO BUT IT GETS INTO WHERE DRB IS SUPPOSED TO REVIEW CERTAIN ASPECTS. AND JUST BECAUSE IT IS A A PICTURE DOESN'T DENOTE THAT IT IS NECESSARILY ART. THAT'S THE WAY THAT IT DEPICTS IT SAYS MEANING ART DOES NOT NECESSARILY MEAN A PICTURE ON THE SIDE OF A BUILDING OR AND IT'S THAT CRITERIA WHERE. BUT IT DOESN'T GIVE DETAILED EXPLANATION OF MURALS, IT JUST HAS IT IN A LAUNDRY LIST OF THINGS THAT THEY ARE INCLUSIVE OF EVALUATING, BUT IT DOESN'T GIVE ANY CRITERIA FOR IT. AND I THINK IN 4642, THAT IS THE PUBLIC ART SECTION OF THE CODE. AND SO PUBLIC ART TO SATISFY THE PUBLIC ART REQUIREMENT IS ADDRESSED IN THIS SECTION. I THINK WHAT THEY'RE SAYING IS THIS ISN'T PUBLIC ART TO SATISFY ANY SORT OF REQUIREMENT. THIS IS JUST THEY'RE JUST ELECTING TO DO THIS AS THE DESIGN OF THEIR FACADE. RIGHT? WHICH WE TALKED ABOUT THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE A STANDARD WHEN WE WHEN MISS DAHMER WAS HERE ABOUT HOW WE WOULD DETERMINE WHETHER WE WOULD HAVE MURALS ON BUILDINGS OR NOT. SO IT'S IN THE DESIGN REVIEW HANDBOOK OR. THE APPROVAL PROCESS. I MEAN, THE APPROVAL PROCESS FOR PUBLIC ART IS CLEARLY LAID OUT IN 46, BUT THERE IS NOT AN APPROVAL PROCESS LAID OUT FOR JUST ARTWORK THAT SOMEONE WANTS TO PUT ON THERE. IF SOMEONE WANTS TO PUT A SCULPTURE IN THEIR YARD, I DON'T HAVE THERE'S THERE'S NOT A PUBLIC APPROVAL PROCESS FOR THAT. OR IF SOMEONE WANTS TO, YOU KNOW, IF THEY ARE DOING THIS TO SATISFY A REQUIREMENT, THEN THERE'S A PROCESS LAID OUT. IT GOES TO DRB AND IT GOES TO COUNCIL. BUT THERE ARE VERY CLEAR PARAMETERS ON WHAT CONSTITUTES PUBLIC ART AND WHAT DOESN'T. WE DON'T HAVE THAT SAME LEVEL OF DETAIL FOR JUST ARTWORK. AND AND THAT'S WHERE I WAS REFERENCING MAYOR, WHERE THE DRB, ONCE YOU TURNED AROUND AND PUT THE PUBLIC ART BACK UNDER UNDER DRB AND INSTEAD OF HAVING A SEPARATE BOARD, THAT'S WHEN YOU HAVE THE THEY'RE ACTUALLY LOOKING AT THE MURAL WHEN IT'S JUST A PAINTING OF IT AS A FACADE, NO DIFFERENT THAN ANYTHING ELSE, AND AT THE SAME 46, THEN TIES THEM IN UNDER A PUBLIC ART AND SAYS YOU CAN MAKE APPLICATION FOR A MURAL TO BE CONSTITUTED AS PUBLIC ART DOESN'T MEAN IT IS. AND SO THAT'S WHY I WAS TRYING TO REFERENCE THE TWO, IS WE'VE ACTUALLY ASKED DRB TO WEAR TWO DIFFERENT HATS AT TWO DIFFERENT TIMES, AND I WAS JUST TRYING TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN THE TWO. RIGHT. BUT AS WE TALKED YESTERDAY AND THIS IS WHAT I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND UNDER THE FINAL REVIEW UNDER CHAPTER TWO, IT'S UNDER I DRAWINGS OF ANY ARTWORK THAT IS TO BE PLACED ON THE SITE, SUBJECT TO FINAL APPROVAL BY THE CITY COUNCIL. [04:15:08] THAT DOESN'T SAY PUBLIC ART. THAT WAS WHY THAT WAS WRITTEN IN THERE, THOUGH, BECAUSE THAT IS THE PROCESS THAT COUNCIL WOULD APPROVE IT. NO. FOR PUBLIC ART, IT'S THEY HAVE TO INCLUDE IT IN THE SUBMITTAL IF COUNCIL APPROVAL IS REQUIRED. THAT'S HOW IT'S WRITTEN. SO MAYBE I CAN ADD SOMETHING TO THIS. I MEAN, FROM FROM THE WAY WE INTERPRET THE CODE OR THE WAY I'M READING THE CODE HERE, IS THAT MURALS AS A TYPE OF PUBLIC ART WOULD COME IN FRONT OF YOU. SIGNAGE IS A DIFFERENT THING. WITHIN THE SIGNAGE CODE THERE IS AN ALLOWABLE FOR WALL SIGNS. SO THEN WHEN YOU SCROLL FORWARD INTO YOUR DEFINITION OF HOW BIG A WALL SIGN CAN BE FOR A BUILDING OR A TENANT SPACE, YOU CAN TAKE UP TO 20% OF THE TENANT SPACE, OR 80% OF THE BUILDING FOR THAT WALL SIGN, AS LONG AS IT'S DEEMED A WALL SIGN. SO. SO THERE IS NOMENCLATURE IN THE CODE THAT ALLOWS FOR SIGNAGE OF THAT NATURE. THAT'S NOT SIGNAGE ADVERTISING THAT WE COULDN'T PUT A SIGN THAT BIG ON THE SIDE OF THE BUILDING THAT SAID PRIME SOCIAL, BECAUSE THAT SIGNAGE INDICATING THE BUILDING. SO THIS IS CONSIDERED A WALL SIGN, AND THERE IS PERCENTAGES OF BUILDING FACADE THAT WE HAD TO KEEP IT WITH CONSTRAINED WITH. THIS IS JUST CONSIDERED FACADE DESIGN. CORRECT. THIS WOULD NOT MEET THE SIGN REGULATIONS. IT'S NOT WITHIN THE SIGN BAND. IT'S NOT. SO YOU'RE ALLOWED ARTWORK ON YOUR SITE IN THE SAME WAY A MURAL IS THE SAME AS YOU'LL SEE ALL OVER ARTWORK. I MEAN, I THINK THE FLAMINGO, RIGHT? THAT'S JUST ARTWORK. THAT'S JUST ARTWORK. I MEAN, THERE'S THERE'S WE DON'T LIMIT SOMEONE'S ABILITY TO PUT ARTWORK ON THEIR SITE. ELECTIVELY. YOU KNOW, IT IS REVIEWED IN THIS CASE, THE ARTWORK IS REVIEWED BY THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD BECAUSE IT IS PART OF THE FACADE, IN THE SAME WAY THAT THEY WOULD REVIEW THE COLOR OR IF IT WAS FAUX GREENERY WALL OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. OKAY. REVIEW THAT. YEAH, I DON'T WE NEED TO GET CLARITY ON THIS. THIS IS BECAUSE THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD SAID THAT THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD EXPRESSED THEIR SUPPORT FOR THE MURAL DEPICTED ON THE PLANS PROVIDED FOR PRELIMINARY REVIEW. HOWEVER, THE BOARD SUGGESTS CONSIDERING THE REMOVAL OF NAPLES IN THE MURAL ON THE EAST SIDE. SO WE NEED TO GET OUR, OUR DEFINITIONS ARE VERBIAGE AND AND HOW WE ARE APPROVING OR ALLOWING OR NOT ALLOWING. IT'S A MURAL OR ART OR IT'S PART OF THE WALL DESIGN BECAUSE TO ME IT LOOKS LIKE A BILLBOARD AND A NICE BILLBOARD. BUT SETTING THE TONE IS EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DEAL WITH WHEN IT COMES BACK NOW, IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN IN THE VERY NICE PRESENTATION LONG AGO, BUT IT WAS NOT. IT WAS IN THE STAFF REPORT THAT THERE WOULD BE A MURAL, BUT IT WAS NOT IN THE RESOLUTION FOR APPROVAL. THAT CONSISTENCY HAS TO HAPPEN FOR OUTDOOR DINING FOR THIS PROJECT. PERIOD. 23 YES. SO I BRING IT UP BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO BRING IT UP AGAIN. AND THE APPROVALS OF THESE MATTERS AND IT'S ALREADY GONE TO FINAL DESIGN REVIEW BOARD. CORRECT. SO A COUPLE OF THINGS. THIS THE OUTDOOR DINING DID GO TO THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD BECAUSE ON THE IN THE FIFTH AVE OVERLAY THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD REVIEWS OUTDOOR DINING. IT DIDN'T GO. SO YES THE YOU HAVE IN YOUR PACKET THIS THIS REQUEST THIS OUTDOOR DINING REQUEST DID GO. THAT'S OR IT WILL GO. IT DID GO. IT DID GO. SORRY. SO THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD ALSO WEARS TWO HATS IN THAT SENSE THAT NOT ONLY DOES THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD REVIEW THE FINAL DESIGN OF DEVELOPMENTS AND BUILDINGS, BUT THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD ONLY WITHIN THE FIFTH AVE OVERLAY ALSO REVIEWS OUTDOOR DINING. AND THAT'S BECAUSE TABLES, CHAIRS, LANDSCAPING, ETC. SO THEY'RE NOT A THEY'RE NOT REVIEWING IT TO SAY, SHOULD WE ALLOW THE OUTDOOR DINING? THEY'RE APPROVING IT TO SAY, DOES IT LOOK NICE? IS THIS A GOOD ADDITION TO THIS BUILDING? SO. AND THEY APPROVED THE UMBRELLAS? YES. SO IT'S NOT THAT THEY APPROVE THE UMBRELLAS, BUT THE UMBRELLAS WERE IN THE PLAN THAT THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD, THE IMAGE THAT I HAVE INCLUDED HERE WAS INCLUDED IN THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD PACKAGE. SO IT THIS THIS THIS IMAGE FROM AN ESTHETIC STANDPOINT HAS DESIGN REVIEW BOARD APPROVAL. BUT THE OUTDOOR DINING IS YOUR GOVERNANCE. YEAH I KRAMER I AGREE THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN AN EASY TASK. BUT WHEN YOU ARE LOOKING AT THE APPROVAL PROCESS AND WHAT'S HAPPENED, YOU'RE SAYING IT HAS BEEN APPROVED BY DRB FOR FINAL FOR OUTDOOR DINING. THE THE NOT NOT NOT NOT OUTDOOR DINING, JUST THE ESTHETICS OF THE OUTDOOR DINING HAS BEEN APPROVED BY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD. [04:20:07] THE ESTHETICS OF THE WALL MURAL OR THE WALL ART HAS BEEN APPROVED BY OUTDOOR DINING HAS BEEN APPROVED BY DRB. I'M SORRY BY BY DRB SEPARATE FROM THE OUTDOOR DINING. SO THE OUTDOOR DINING IS YOUR APPROVAL. BUT THE ESTHETICS OF THE OUTDOOR DINING, INCLUDING THE UMBRELLAS, THE PLANTERS, THE RAILING, THE LANDSCAPING, THE TYPES OF SEATS, THE COLORS OF SEATS, OUTDOOR DINING SAYS THAT'S ESTHETIC, OR DRB SAYS THAT'S ESTHETICALLY PLEASING TO OUTDOOR DINING, BUT THEY DON'T HAVE AN APPROVAL ON THE CAN WE HAVE IT OR NOT? THEY JUST SAY TO YOU THAT ESTHETICALLY IT'S IT'S ACCEPTABLE. SO WHO APPROVES IT? YOU DO. THE OUTDOOR DINING IS YOUR APPROVAL. YEAH. YOU APPROVE THE NUMBER OF CHAIRS, YOU APPROVE THE LOCATION. YOU APPROVE THE UMBRELLAS AND THE CORRECT FIRE. YES, YES. SO ARE THERE ANY FIRE HEATERS? NOT HEATERS. NOT FIRE SPACE HEATERS. SPACE HEATERS ON THIS. THEIR CEILING MOUNTED. THEY ARE THEY ARE CEILING MOUNTED WITH WITHIN THIS THIS INTERNAL AREA HERE IS A RETRACTABLE AWNING SYSTEM AND THEY'RE MOUNTED IN THE AWNING SYSTEM. I REMEMBER THAT FROM THE BEGINNING PRESENTATION, BUT I DIDN'T ACTUALLY SEE IT AS ON THE LIFE AND SAFETY PLAN. AND THEN MY LAST QUESTION IS I FORGOT. I'LL TAKE QUESTIONS FROM OTHERS AND THEN I'LL COME BACK TO ME. I HAVE VICE MAYOR. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. JUST A COUPLE BRIEF COMMENTS HERE. TRYING TO MAKE SURE WE'RE STAYING WITHIN THE FOCUS OF THIS IS 11 F, RIGHT? AND THIS IS OUTDOOR DINING AND ALLOWING 16 TABLES, 92 CHAIRS. THIS WHEN YOU BACK AWAY FROM THIS, THIS IS A REDUCTION IN SEATING, NOT AN EXPANSION, BUT A REDUCTION A REDUCTION. OKAY. AND THEN YOU SAID IT'S CONSISTENT WITH OUTDOOR DINING CRITERIA. YES. OKAY. NOW SO THAT THAT MAKES IT PRETTY SIMPLE FOR ME. BUT I HAD A COUPLE OF CLARIFICATION MATTERS, ESPECIALLY GIVEN SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE. NOT SURE WHERE WE ENDED WITH THE PARKING. THE THE DESIGNATION OF THE ENTITY. RIGHT. AND MR. CITY ATTORNEY, THAT'S NOT TO BE CONSIDERED TODAY. IS THAT CORRECT? TALKING ABOUT THE RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT? NO. THE SPECIFIC BUSINESS ENTITY AND THEIR BUSINESS PLAN. THAT'S NOT PART OF OUTDOOR DINING TODAY. IT'S NOT. OKAY. SO BECAUSE THERE'S SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS MIGHT CONTINUE. I'M JUST GOING TO PUT A FEW THINGS ON THE RECORD. INVESTMENTS BY THE PETITIONER HAVE BEEN MADE TO ACCOMMODATE PARKING FOR THE BUSINESS WITH NO FINE PRINT. AND THIS IS A QUESTION WITH NO FINE PRINT RELATED TO THE SPECIFIC TYPE OF RESTAURANT BUSINESS MODEL THAT THEY MUST USE WHEN THEY PURCHASE THAT PARKING. DID WE SAY YOU NEED TO ADHERE TO THIS CERTAIN BUSINESS MODEL? NO. SO I DON'T KNOW IF I KNOW THAT WHEN THE CONDITIONAL USE WHEN THE RESTAURANT WAS APPROVED, IT WAS APPROVED AND REFERRED TO THE OPERATIONAL PLAN. SO THE OPERATIONAL PLAN THAT WAS SUBMITTED PREPARED BY CAMERON MITCHELL RESTAURANTS DATED 623, 2023. THAT IS THAT WAS PART OF THE SUBMITTAL FOR APPROVAL OF THE CONDITIONAL USE. I DON'T THINK IT WAS FOR THE PARKING, THE PARKING ALLOCATION. SO I DON'T THINK THE PARKING WAS DEPENDENT UPON THAT, BUT THE CONDITIONAL USE WAS. BUT WE SOLD PARKING SPACES. DID WE TAKE THEIR MONEY YET? WE ALLOCATED THEM AND YES. YEAH. OKAY. NUMBER THREE. SO THAT'S A JUST THINK ABOUT THAT. IF WE'RE GOING TO GO DOWN THE PATH OF INSISTING THAT A BUSINESS MODEL THAT WAS BROUGHT FORWARD AND DOESN'T CHANGE. CONTINGENT UPON THE PARKING, WE NEED TO THINK THAT THROUGH CRITICALLY. NEXT. DO YOU KNOW ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT WE'VE PLACED ANY RESTRICTIONS ON ANY OTHER RESTAURANTS AS TO CONDITIONS WHICH PROHIBIT THEM FROM DEVELOPING ANY PERCENTAGE OF THEIR CUSTOMER BASE INTO A SPECIAL DESIGNATION, SUCH AS A CLUB, A FREQUENT DINER PROGRAM, OR ANYTHING ELSE PROVIDING SPECIAL PRIVILEGES. I'M GOING TO BE HONEST, THIS IS THE ONLY RESTAURANT, THE ONLY ROOFTOP RESTAURANT APPROVED BY CONDITIONAL USE IN THE FIFTH AVENUE SOUTH SPECIAL OVERLAY DISTRICT, SO I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER RESTAURANT TO COMPARE IT TO. SO WHAT? I'VE DONE A LITTLE BIT OF RESEARCH. YOU MIGHT BE SURPRISED TO KNOW THAT CHOP CITY GRILL, [04:25:01] THESE ARE THESE ARE ESTABLISHMENTS THAT HAVE SPECIAL CLUBS THAT PROVIDE SPECIAL BENEFITS AND PRIVILEGES. SO IF WE WANT TO GET THAT GRANULAR WITH OUR BUSINESSES, I CAUTION YOU TO BE CAREFUL HOW FAR DOWN THAT PATH YOU WANT TO GO. CHOPS. POZZO CUCINA ITALIANA. DID YOU KNOW THERE'S AN AVENUE CLUB MEMBERSHIP PROGRAM RUN BY THE FIFTH AVENUE SOUTH BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT OFFERING SPECIAL BENEFITS. CAFE MILANO, BEACH RISTORANTE AND LA TRATTORIA. THERE'S JUST AN EXAMPLE OF SPECIAL BENEFITS GIVEN TO PEOPLE THAT THAT PATRONIZE THOSE BUSINESSES. SO I WHO KNOWS, IN THIS DAY AND AGE HOW BUSINESSES MORPH AND RESPOND TO TO BUSINESS CHALLENGES. AND THAT'S WHAT OUR BUSINESSES DO. AND WE NEED TO PROVIDE THEM WITH THAT FLEXIBILITY. WE'VE GOT A LOT TO DO HERE AND I DON'T SEE ANYTHING. I UNDERSTAND THAT MAYBE SOME THINK THIS CAME TO US AS A BUSINESS. IT WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. I READ SOME MATERIALS HERE THAT THERE WILL BE SOME KIND OF ACCESS. I HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING. MAYBE. MAYBE YOU SAID SOMETHING EARLIER THROUGH THEIR ATTORNEY. BUT I JUST THINK THAT IT'S KIND OF OUT OF OUR LANE. IF YOU WOULD. WHEN WE START TALKING ABOUT HOW THEY KEEP THAT BUSINESS VIABLE AND RUNNING. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. THANK YOU. SO I AGREE. IT WAS A QUESTION, AND WE WON'T DISCUSS IT FOR THIS OUTDOOR DINING. I THINK THERE'S RELEVANCE IN THE QUESTION, THOUGH. AND, MADAM MAYOR, I'LL END UP I. I SUPPORT THIS PETITION. YES. OKAY. I HAVE KRISEMAN WELL, TWO THINGS I JUST. I'M PREPARED TO MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL THIS WHENEVER WE'RE FINISHED TALKING ABOUT IT. BUT I HAVE TO JUST TRY TO MAKE SURE I CLARIFY A COUPLE OF THINGS. I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO CONCERN, CONCERN OR OPPOSITION TO WHAT THE PETITIONER IS PROPOSING TO DO WITH RESPECT TO THIS TO THIS RESTAURANT AND FROM AN OPERATIONAL STANDPOINT THE QUESTIONS AND POINTS I WAS TRYING TO MAKE EARLIER WERE SIMPLY TO HAVE TRANSPARENCY AND CLARITY AS TO WHAT THIS RESTAURANT'S BUSINESS MODEL WAS GOING TO BE BECAUSE IT HAS EVOLVED. IT BEGAN, AND I'VE BEEN HERE SINCE THE BEGINNING. A FEW OTHERS HAVE HAD ON THIS PROJECT. IT STARTED WITH A REQUIREMENT THAT WE DO A SPECIAL TEXT AMENDMENT TO CREATE A PILOT PROGRAM ON ONE BLOCK OF FIFTH AVENUE FOR A ROOFTOP DINING ESTABLISHMENT. IT STARTED AS JUST A REGULAR RESTAURANT, IN FACT AN EARLY ITERATION OF IT. IT WAS MORE OF A SPORTS BAR. AS SOME OF YOU WILL REMEMBER. WE WERE CONCERNED IT WASN'T UPSCALE ENOUGH. IT EVOLVED INTO A PREFERRED MEMBERSHIP, BUT NOT EXCLUSIVE MEMBERSHIP. THE PETITIONER FORMED A PARTNERSHIP WITH CAMERON MITCHELL. IT'S NOW EVOLVED INTO BASED ON THE TESTIMONY OF THE PETITIONER'S AGENTS, A VIP ONLY MEMBER ONLY RESTAURANT. THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE NOW. I'M NOT OBJECTING TO IT. I'M SIMPLY I'VE GOTTEN A LOT OF CALLS AND QUESTIONS ON IT. I JUST THOUGHT FOR THE SAKE OF TRANSPARENCY AND CLARITY, WE OUGHT TO AT LEAST UNDERSTAND WHAT IT IS. AND I HOPE THEY'RE EXTREMELY SUCCESSFUL. AND AND IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE OUTDOOR DINING APPROVAL, WHICH I'M HAPPY TO MAKE A MOTION ON WHEN WE'RE READY. YEAH, I DO HAVE A QUICK. YEAH. TWO QUICK. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU. AND THAT WAS THE LIVE ENTERTAINMENT. YOU SAID THAT THERE WILL NOT BE A DISCUSSION ON LIVE ENTERTAINMENT OUTSIDE. IT WAS SUBMITTED. AND THEN IT WAS THEY REQUESTED TO CONTINUE THAT NOT TO A TIME OF DATE, CERTAIN, BUT CONTINUE IT INDEFINITELY. SO I DON'T AT THIS MOMENT, I DON'T KNOW IF OR WHEN IT WILL, IT WILL COME BACK TO CITY COUNCIL, BUT IT WILL BE RENOTICE AND RE-ADVERTISED IF IT DOES. OKAY. AND YOU HAD TWO QUICK CORRECTIONS. THERE'S A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF OUTDOOR DINING IN THE APPLICATION AND WHAT IS SHOWN ON THE PLANS. THE SQUARE FOOTAGE IS ACTUALLY 1413FT², NOT 1444. SO LESS THAN WHAT IS SHOWN IN YOUR RESOLUTION. AND THEN THE DATE OF THE APPROVED LIFE SAFETY PLAN IS AUGUST 8TH, 2025. I HAD JULY 30TH LIFE SAFETY PLAN CHANGED A FEW TIMES, SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE THOSE CORRECTIONS IN THE RESOLUTION. [04:30:02] I DON'T SEE THAT ON THE RESOLUTION. IT'S IN SECTION THREE. SORRY. 1413. SO THE CHANGE WILL READ. THE OUTDOOR DINING AREA IS LIMITED TO 1413FT² INSTEAD OF 1001 1444. AND THE APPROVED LIFE SAFETY PLAN WITH UMBRELLAS. AND WHERE IS THAT? SO THE WAY SECTION THREE WOULD READ WOULD JUST SAY THAT APPROVAL OF THIS OUTDOOR DINING PETITION PURSUANT TO SECTION 56 120 6D2 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, CITY OF NAPLES RELIES UPON THE CONSISTENCY WITH AND ACCURACY OF THE LIFE SAFETY PLAN PREPARED BY DESIGN COLLECTIVE DATED AUGUST 8TH, 2025, A COPY OF WHICH IS ON FILE WITH THE CITY CLERK. WHICH IS SUBMITTED WHERE IT'S THE DATE OF THE ONE THAT'S ON YOUR SCREEN. I WROTE THE RESOLUTION BEFORE I HAD THE FINAL APPROVED PLAN. G3 ONE IS THE LIFE SAFETY PLAN. YES. SO G3 ONE IS A LIFE SAFETY PLAN. SHOULD BE NOTED. YEAH. AND ATTACHED? YES. OKAY. I HAVE NO PUBLIC COMMENT. WE WOULD APPRECIATE YOUR SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NO FURTHER DISCUSSION. I HAVE A MOTION. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION. DETERMINING THE A RESOLUTION FOR AN OUTDOOR DINING PETITION FOR PRIME SOCIAL RESERVE TO ALLOW 16 TABLES AND 92 CHAIRS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY. SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL BY COUNCIL MEMBER CUSHMAN AND WITH WITH EXCUSE ME, WITH THE ADDITION OF THE TWO MINOR CHANGES TO THE RESOLUTION THAT MISS MARTIN MENTIONED. THANK YOU. SECOND REMAINING. THANK YOU, MADAM CLERK. VICE MAYOR HUTCHINSON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. PENNIMAN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. CUSHMAN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. MARTIN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. KRAMER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. PETRANOFF. YES. MAYOR. HEITMANN. NO. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. THAT TAKES US TO. ITEM 12 D MAYOR. WE HAD A TIME CERTAIN AT 2 P.M.. OH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YOU'RE WELCOME. SO, 12 D D MR. MCCONNELL, OR. I GUESS IT'S NOT A RESOLUTION. WE'LL START WITH MR. YOUNG. YES. THANK YOU. MAYOR. SO, AS YOU KNOW, THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING, WE HAD THE ITEMS ON, ON A CHANGE ORDER RELATED TO TRANSPORTATION COSTS OF LAKE EIGHT AND NINE. THERE WAS SOME CORRESPONDENCE OVER THE SUMMER, AND THEN AT THE END OF THE MEETING WELL, THERE WAS LIMITED CONVERSATION ABOUT THE OVERALL DREDGING DURING THE ACTUAL ITEM AND THEN DURING COMMUNICATIONS, IT WAS BROUGHT UP AGAIN. AND SO WE DID A SUPPLEMENT TO ADD THIS ITEM TO IT SO THAT ALL PARTIES COULD BE HERE AND WE COULD HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS THIS ITEM. AND SO WITH THAT I WOULD TURN IT OVER TO MR. MIDDLETON TO OPEN IT UP AND START WITH A BRIEF THERE. AND I ALSO HAVE GRANTED THE RESIDENTS CONSULTANT ENGINEER TIME TO SPEAK. SO AFTER YOU DO YOUR PRESENTATION, I'LL ALSO LET THE OUR ENGINEER HAVE HER TIME, SO THANK YOU, SIR. YOU'LL START. THANK YOU. BOB MIDDLETON, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR. I HATE TO BE REDUNDANT, BUT I'M GOING TO KIND OF GO OVER WHAT THE CITY MANAGER ALREADY MENTIONED IN SEPTEMBER. ON SEPTEMBER 3RD, 2025, THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED A RESOLUTION TO HAVE THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACTOR SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH OUR DREDGING CONTRACTOR ENERGY RESOURCES, INC., TO HAUL ADDITIONAL MATERIAL THAT WAS DREDGED FROM THE LAKES IN THE AMOUNT OF $290,580 THAT INCREASE THE TOTAL CONTRACT TO $2.98 MILLION. DURING THE CORRESPONDENCE AND COMMUNICATION, THE VICE MAYOR WAS CONCERNED THAT A MISTAKE WAS MADE RELATED TO THE DESIGN AND PERMITTING FOR THE DREDGING OF STORMWATER LAKES OR LAKES. EIGHT AND NINE. CONCERNING THAT, THE VOLUME OF SAND AND MUCK TO BE REMOVED FROM THE LAKES. JUST SPEAKING ABOUT WHAT THE INTENT OF DREDGING IS, IS TO REMOVE THE ORGANIC MATERIAL FROM THE LAKES TO ALLOW THE LAKE TO PERFORM BETTER ON REMOVING TOTAL NITROGEN AND NUTRIENTS FROM THE LAKES, THAT IT WILL PERFORM BETTER OVER A LONGER PERIOD OF TIME. [04:35:04] TO SPEAK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE DESIGN OF THE LAKE DREDGING PROJECT, THE WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT ISSUED A PERMIT TO REMOVE ABOUT 17,290 279YD³ OF MATERIAL FROM BOTH LAKES. AT THE TIME WHEN WE PRESENTED THIS TO YOU ON SEPTEMBER 3RD, WE HAD NOT RECEIVED THE AS BUILT SOUNDINGS FROM THE CONTRACTOR. WE HAD ONLY RECEIVED THEM FROM ONE LAKE ON SEPTEMBER 5TH. TWO DAYS LATER, AFTER THAT COUNCIL MEMBER COUNCIL MEETING WE DID RECEIVE THE AS BUILT POST DREDGE SURVEYS FOR NORTH LAKE. SO IN COMPARISON THE WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT ISSUED A PERMIT FOR 17,297YD³ OF MATERIAL TO BE REMOVED, AND ACTUALLY, THE POST DREDGE SURVEYS INDICATED THAT WE REMOVE 17,447YD³ FOR A DISTANCE, A DIFFERENCE OF 168YD³. ADDITIONAL MATERIAL THAT WAS REMOVED. I DID ADD SOME INFORMATION ON HERE TO SHOW YOU HOW THE NUTRIENT MATERIAL, THE MATERIAL THAT WAS REMOVED, HOW THAT RELATES TO A VOLUME OR A, A UNIT FOR DESCRIBING THE TOTAL NITROGEN AND PHOSPHORUS. SO THERE ARE SOME PRETTY SIGNIFICANT REMOVAL OF NUTRIENTS FROM THE LAKE OF THE MATERIAL THAT WAS DREDGED MUCK SPECIFICALLY INCLUDED IN YOUR YOUR PACKET. WE DO HAVE A DOCUMENT THAT WAS CREATED BY OUR CONSULTANT, ENERGY RESOURCES, THAT DESCRIBES REASONING TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL DREDGING TO THE LAKES. IN THAT IS PART OF THE PUBLIC RECORD HERE FOR TO BE REVIEWED AND CONSIDERED BY CITY COUNCIL. ALSO LAST WEDNESDAY NIGHT LATE, WE RECEIVED AN EMAIL FROM MATTHEW EARHART WHO'S WITH PREMIER PROPERTIES THAT REPRESENTS THE PROPERTY NEXT TO THE EASEMENT WHERE THE DREDGING EQUIPMENT WAS STAGED. THAT EMAIL WAS NOT SENT TO CITY STAFF. I DID RECEIVE IT FROM A COUNCIL MEMBER THE NEXT MORNING, THURSDAY. IT IS AN INDEPENDENT ENGINEERING REVIEW OF THE DESIGN AND PERMITTING THAT OUR ENGINEER OF RECORD PROVIDED AND RECEIVED A PERMIT FROM THE WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT. THE INDEPENDENT REVIEW WAS PERFORMED BY A COMPANY KNOWN AS AECOM OUT OF PALM BEACH. AND WITH THAT, I'LL END. AND JUST TO INTRODUCE OUR CONSULTANT, GREG CORNING WITH WSP IS SITTING NEXT TO ME. IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE OF US, OR GREG CAN GO OVER AND GIVE THE HIGHLIGHT OF WHAT THE DESIGN IS ABOUT OVER AND ABOVE WHAT I PROVIDED. SO IT'S AT YOUR PLEASURE HOW YOU WOULD WANT US TO PROCEED. I THINK YOU SHOULD KEEP PROCEEDING. OKAY. GREG CORNING. HEY. GOOD AFTERNOON. NICE TO SEE YOU ALL AGAIN. GREG CORNING, WSP PROJECT MANAGER, SENIOR ENGINEER. AS BOB HAD MENTIONED, AND I THINK I HAD ALLUDED TO ON THE SEPTEMBER 3RD MEETING, WHEN WE DO THESE PROJECTS, WE FIRST EVALUATE THE SEDIMENT CHARACTERISTICS IN THE LAKE. BY DOING THIS, WE GO OUT AND DO SEDIMENT CORES. WE ALSO DO PRE BATHYMETRIC ANALYZES. TO DO THAT BATHYMETRIC ANALYSIS. AND THIS IS A KEY POINT THAT WAS BROUGHT UP IN THE LETTER FROM THE CONTRACTOR, WAS THAT WHEN WE DO OUR BATHYMETRIC SURVEY, WE USE A US ARMY CORPS METHODOLOGY, THAT US ARMY CORPS METHODOLOGY IS ACTUALLY USING A FOOT ON THE BOTTOM OF A ROD. YOU PUT THAT BOTTOM OF THAT FOOT ROD INTO THE BOTTOM OF THE LAKE. IT ACTUALLY GETS THE HARD COMPACTED SEDIMENT. SO YOU GET A TOP AND THEN YOU GET A BOTTOM. AND THEN YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT DIFFERENTIAL IN THAT SEDIMENT CHARACTERISTICS IS, SO THAT YOU CAN CALCULATE THE VOLUME NECESSARY FOR THE LAKES. AND THEN WHAT WE DO IS WE TAKE THAT VOLUME ALONG WITH THE SEDIMENT CORES AND ALONG WITH THE PHYSICAL AND THE CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS THAT WE PULL FROM THAT. AND WE'RE ABLE TO UNDERSTAND THE PERCENT SOLIDS THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THAT SEDIMENT. AND THEN FROM THAT, WE'RE ABLE TO THEN CALCULATE BASED ON THAT DISTRIBUTION HOW MUCH SAND AND HOW MUCH MUCK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO REMOVE FROM THE LAKE. AND THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HOW THE PROCESS OF DEWATERING IS GOING TO OCCUR, BECAUSE THEN WE HAVE TO START CALCULATING HOW MANY GEOTEXTILE BAGS DO WE NEED? HOW MUCH POLYMER DO WE NEED? WHICH I TALKED ABOUT LAST TIME WITH THE POLYMER AS IT COAGULATES WITH THE MATERIAL, IT HELPS TO CONSOLIDATE THE ORGANIC MUCK MATERIAL. AND THEN THAT IS HELPFUL IN THE GEOTEXTILE BAGS. AND IT ALLOWS THAT WATER TO DECANT. AND SO THEN YOU CAN DISPOSE OF IT AT THE FINAL DISPOSAL LOCATION. [04:40:05] ANOTHER POINT THAT I'D LIKE TO MAKE IN REGARDS TO THE SURVEY METHODOLOGY IS THAT SO WE DO THE US ARMY CORPS METHODOLOGY, WHICH JUST HAS THAT FOOT. IT'S ACTUAL MANUAL PROBE. RIGHT. YOU GO DOWN TO EACH LOCATION. WE HAVE MULTIPLE CROSS SECTIONS THAT WE TAKE ACROSS THE LAKE TO REALLY UNDERSTAND THE CHARACTERISTICS. AND WE'VE BEEN DOING THIS FOR, I DON'T KNOW, THIS IS OUR SIXTH LAKE. NOW, I THINK WE'RE ON TO IN TERMS OF RESTORATION. AND SO WHAT THE CONTRACTOR DID IN THEIR PRE BATHYMETRIC SURVEY IS A HYDRO SURVEY. AND SO A HYDRO SURVEY, IF YOU CAN THINK OF IT AS IT PENETRATES WITH LASERS BASICALLY HITTING THE BOTTOM OF THE SEDIMENT. AND SO SOME OF THE REASONING WHY THE US ARMY CORPS DOESN'T USE THIS METHODOLOGY IS THE CONSOLIDATION OF THE MATERIAL THAT'S ON TOP OF THAT CONSOLIDATED MATERIAL THAT YOU'RE ACTUALLY REMOVING FROM THE LAKE DURING THE DREDGING PROCESS. AND SO WHAT HAPPENS IS THEN YOU OVERCOMPENSATE FOR THE AMOUNT OF VOLUME THAT'S IN THE LAKE. AND SO WHAT HAPPENS IS WHEN THEY FINISH THESE LAKES, AS WE TALKED ABOUT LAST TIME, DREDGING IS NOT AN ART OF COMPLETION. IN REGARDS. YOU'RE GOING TO GET EVERY INCH OF MATERIAL OUT OF THE LAKE. YOU'RE GOING TO LEAVE SOME MATERIAL IN THE LAKE. THAT'S JUST A KNOWN FACT WHEN WE'RE DEALING WITH DREDGING. AND SO WHAT WE DO IS WE UNDERSTAND THAT METHODOLOGY IN REGARDS TO HOW TO LOOK AT THAT PRE BATHYMETRIC SURVEY SO THAT UNCONSOLIDATED MATERIAL WHEN THEY REMOVE THAT WHEN THEY DON'T REMOVE THAT FROM THE LAKE AND WHEN THEY FINISH THE DREDGING THAT'S STILL THERE. RIGHT. SO YOU ASSUME THAT YOU STILL HAVE THIS UNCONSOLIDATED LAYER, BECAUSE YOU HAVE THESE LITTLE PARTICLES OF SEDIMENT IN THE WATER THAT'S STILL OCCURRING BECAUSE THESE LAKES ARE NOT CREOLE. CLEAR. CRYSTAL CLEAR WATER WITH TURBIDITY NOT EXISTING. SO YOU STILL HAVE THAT TURBIDITY THAT YOU THEN ASSUME IS STILL GOING TO BE THERE WHEN YOU LEAVE THE LAKE. SO WE CAN'T DOUBLE COUNT FOR THAT WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT OUR VOLUMETRIC ANALYZES. AND SO THAT'S WHY WE WHEN WE DO AN APPLES TO APPLES COMPARISON, WE LIKE TO LOOK AT IT AS A BASIS OF THE METHODOLOGY THAT WE HAD ASSUMED USING THE US ARMY CORPS. AND WE WE TALKED WITH THE CONTRACTOR ABOUT THIS, AND WE WENT THROUGH THAT ENTIRE PROCESS DURING NOT ONLY THIS PROJECT, BUT PREVIOUS PROJECTS. AND USUALLY THAT'S THE CASE THAT WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH IN TERMS OF EVALUATING THIS SEDIMENT CHARACTERISTICS. AND THEN I THINK THERE WAS A QUESTION OR A COMMENT THAT WAS MADE IN REGARDS TO THE DEPTH. AND BOB TOUCHED ON THIS VERY CLEARLY. SO THE PURPOSE OF THESE PROJECTS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH A DESIGN DEPTH. WE'RE NOT TRYING TO GET THESE LAKES DEEPER. WE'RE NOT TRYING TO ACHIEVE ANY SORT OF GOAL WHEN IT COMES TO A FLOOD IMPROVEMENT. OUR GOAL IS TO IMPROVE THE LAKES ON A WATER QUALITY BASIS. SO WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS REMOVE THAT CONSTITUENTS THAT ARE ACCUMULATING IN THE LAKE, AND IT SHOULD BE KNOWN THAT THAT'S GOING TO ACCUMULATION IS GOING TO CONTINUE TO OCCUR, BECAUSE THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF THESE LAKES IS TO CAPTURE. NOW THAT CONTINUATION OF THE NITROGEN AND PHOSPHORUS AND YOUR OTHER CONSTITUENTS THAT ARE RUNNING OFF THE ROAD, AND SO THAT NOW WE'VE PROVIDED THAT ADDITIONAL CAPACITY IN THE LAKES TO NOW PREVENT ANY SORT OF IMPACTS TO THOSE SURROUNDING WATERWAYS, WHICH ULTIMATELY THESE LAKES ARE ATTACHED TO. ALLIGATOR LAKE. AS YOU GUYS KNOW, AND THEN ULTIMATELY GOES OUT TO THE PUMP STATIONS AND GOES OUT TO THE GULF. SO THAT'S WHAT THE PURPOSE OF THESE PROJECTS ARE, IS TO PROTECT THE WATER QUALITY. AND THEN I THINK THERE WAS ANOTHER COMMENT THAT WAS SAID THAT, WELL, YOU SHOULD IMPLEMENT BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES, BECAUSE THAT'S VERY CLEAR TO, YOU KNOW, WE WANT TO PREVENT AS MUCH AS WE CAN GETTING INTO THESE LAKES IN THE UPSTREAM FACTORS AS POSSIBLE. AND IN FACT, WE HAVE WE ACTUALLY IMPLEMENTING INLET FILTERS IN SURROUNDING THE LAKE. SO THAT'S ALREADY PART OF THE PROJECT AND WILL BE IMPLEMENTED. WE'RE NOT ONLY ADDING THAT, BUT WE'RE ALSO ADDING LITTORAL SHELVES. WE'RE GOING TO ADD A LITTLE SHELF ON THE NORTH SIDE OF NORTH LAKE. AND THE PURPOSES OF THAT IS TO HELP WITH NUTRIENT UPTAKE. SO THOSE PLANTS AND OTHER THINGS ARE GOING TO HELP CREATE A BETTER WATER QUALITY HABITAT. AND THEN WHAT WE'RE DOING IS WE'RE CREATING A WATER CONTROL STRUCTURE. A WATER CONTROL STRUCTURE IS GOING TO GO ON THE NORTH LAKE AND IS GOING TO GO ON THE SOUTH LAKE. THE PURPOSE OF THESE WATER CONTROL STRUCTURES ARE GOING TO HELP TO RETAIN MORE WATER OVER TIME WITHIN THE LAKES, TO HELP WITH THAT DROP OUT OF THE SEDIMENT AND THE CHARACTERISTICS WITHIN THESE WATER BODIES. BECAUSE, AGAIN, THE PURPOSE OF THESE LAKE PROJECTS ARE TO REESTABLISH WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO, WHICH IS CREATE THEM BACK TO A STORMWATER SYSTEM THAT WILL HELP IMPROVE THE WATER QUALITY UPTAKE THOSE NITROGEN AND PHOSPHORUS AND OTHER CONSTITUENTS OF CONCERN. AND THEN FINALLY, I'LL JUST MENTION IT WAS TALKED ABOUT IN THE REPORT IS SAYING, WELL, WHY DON'T WE DO ADDITIONAL WATER QUALITY MONITORING? WELL, IN FACT, THE CITY HAS BEEN DOING WATER QUALITY MONITORING FOR THE PAST, I WOULD SAY AT LEAST TEN YEARS, BECAUSE I THINK WE'VE BEEN INVOLVED FOR THE PAST FIVE. AND WE DO OUTFALL MONITORING AT EACH OF THESE LAKE RESTORATION PROJECTS TO UNDERSTAND THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THESE LAKE [04:45:06] SYSTEMS AND HOW THEY'RE PERFORMING, SO THAT THE CITY CAN MAKE A DETERMINATION ON WHICH LAKES WOULD BE MOVED FORWARD IN THAT LAKE MANAGEMENT PLAN THAT YOU GUYS HAD CREATED AND MOVE FORWARD WITH IN TERMS OF RESTORATION. AND I'LL ANSWER ANY OTHER QUESTIONS THAT ANYONE HAS. YES. ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME? COUNCIL MEMBER PETRANOFF. I HEAR A LOT ABOUT WATER QUALITY, BUT, YOU KNOW, THEY SERVE TWO PURPOSES. ONE IS FLOODING. AND I WANT TO KNOW WHAT AT THE BEGINNING OUTSET OF THIS PROJECT, WERE THERE METRICS THAT WERE IN PLACE THAT WERE NOT REMOVAL OF NUTRIENTS, BUT THAT ACTUALLY REMOVED MATERIAL FROM THE LAKE SO IT COULD FUNCTION AND HOLD MORE WATER? SO TWO PURPOSES. ONE IS TO HOLD FLOOD WATER. TWO IS TO IMPROVE WATER QUALITY. WHAT WAS WHAT WHAT DID WE WHAT DID WE CONTRACT WITH FOR THIS. YOU WANT TO ANSWER? OH SORRY. I DIDN'T KNOW IF YOU WANT. YES. SO WHEN WE LOOK AT THE PROJECT, AS I MENTIONED, WE LOOK AT THE WATER QUALITY AS THE PRIMARY FOCUS OF THE RESTORATION PROJECTS IN REGARDS TO THE OVERALL CAPACITY AND THE PERFORMANCE OF THOSE LAKES. WE'RE NOT CHANGING THE PERFORMANCE IN TERMS OF HOW THEY CAPTURE, HOW THEY TREAT AND HOW THEY ROUTE THAT WATER WITHIN YOUR CURRENT SYSTEM. SO THE PURPOSES OF THESE PROJECTS AREN'T TO EXPAND THE FOOTPRINT OF THESE LAKES. WE'RE NOT TRYING TO MAKE THEM LARGER. WE DON'T HAVE A LEVEL OF SERVICE ISSUE THAT WE'RE EVALUATING WHEN WE COME TO THESE WATERSHED IMPAIRMENTS. HOWEVER, YOU GUYS ARE DOING BASIN MANAGEMENT ACTION PLANS, AND YOU ARE LOOKING AT WAYS TO IMPROVE STORMWATER SYSTEMS WITHIN YOUR SYSTEM. THAT IS SOMETHING, BUT IT'S NOT PART OF THE LAKE RESTORATION PROGRAM. LAKE RESTORATION PROGRAM IS LOOKING MORE AT THE WATER QUALITY CHARACTERISTICS. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANTED TO ADD IS IT EXCLUSIVELY THE WATER QUALITY CHARACTERISTICS, AND IS THAT WHAT WE CONTRACTED FOR INITIALLY? THAT'S WHAT WE CONTRACTED FOR. THIS IS A WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT INITIATIVE. THIS IS A WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT IMPROVEMENT INITIATIVE TO ALLOW THE LAKES TO PERFORM BETTER FOR WATER QUALITY. AS FAR AS STORMWATER MANAGEMENT. IT DOESN'T MATTER HOW DEEP YOU MAKE THE LAKE, IT'S THE FREEBOARD ABOVE THE LIQUID LEVEL IS WHAT YOU. IF YOU'RE ABLE TO CONTROL THAT, TO DRAW THAT LAKE LEVEL DOWN, TO HOLD MORE WATER. AS GREG SAID, THOSE OUTFALL STRUCTURES AT NORTH LAKE AND SOUTH LAKE ARE BEING REPLACED SO THAT WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO THAT. THIS IS ALSO IN COMBINATION WITH THE BEACH OUTFALL PROJECT. ALL THE LAKE LEVELS AND AND AND HEADWALLS THAT ARE BEING INSTALLED IN THE TWO LAKES BASED ON THEIR ELEVATION IS CONSISTENT TO WORK WITH THE STORMWATER OUTFALL. THE BEACH OUTFALL PROJECT AND THE. WE'RE ON ALLIGATOR LAKE. OKAY. BECAUSE MY UNDERSTANDING WAS IT WAS IT WAS CLEARLY TWO THINGS. ONE IS TO IMPROVE WATER QUALITY AND TWO IS TO REMOVE SAND AND AND MUCK FROM FROM THE LAKE TO ALLOW MORE CAPACITY TO HANDLE WATER. I KNOW I'VE BEEN IN MEETINGS LIKE THIS THAT HAVE TALKED ABOUT THESE TWO THINGS. YEAH. SO THE THE REMOVAL OF THE SAND IN THE MUCK AND REALLY SAND IS NOT THE GOAL. REALLY. AT THE END OF THE DAY, IF WE COULD JUST REMOVE THE MUCK, WE WOULD REMOVE ONLY MUCK. THAT WOULD BE OUR ULTIMATE GOAL FOR THESE RESTORATION PROJECTS. HOWEVER, WHEN WE DO REMOVE THE SAND, AS I MENTIONED IN THE HYDRAULIC DREDGING PROCESS OR THE MUCK, YOU DO MIX UP THE MATERIAL, WHICH THEN BRINGS UP THE SAND, AND THEN YOU HAVE TO SEPARATE THE SAND FROM THE MUCK, BECAUSE YOU DON'T WANT TO BE PUTTING ALL THIS SAND IN A GEOTEXTILE BAG. THAT WOULD INCREASE THE COST OF THE DEWATERING PROCESS AND OVERALL NOT BE EFFECTIVE. BUT THE REMOVAL OF THAT SEDIMENT IS ONLY TO DO WITH THE OVERALL CAPACITY OF THE WATER QUALITY OF HOW THAT LAKE IS PERFORMING IN TERMS OF ALLOWING FOR THAT NOW, ADDITIONAL CAPTURE OF THAT NITROGEN AND PHOSPHORUS AND OTHER RUNOFF FROM THOSE SURROUNDING ROADWAYS. NOW, SECONDARILY, AS I MENTIONED, THAT'S A PRIMARY PURPOSE IS WATER QUALITY. SECONDARILY, WE ARE PROVIDING, AS I MENTIONED, THOSE OUTFALL STRUCTURES WHICH WILL HELP THE CITY PROVIDE ADDITIONAL CAPACITY. WITHIN THESE LAKES. YOU WILL HAVE A FEW EXTRA, YOU KNOW, A FOOT OR SO TO MITIGATE SOME OF THAT WATER QUALITY OR WATER QUANTITY WITHIN THE LAKES. WE DID LOOK AT THAT AS A SECONDARY MEASURE WITHIN THESE SYSTEMS, BECAUSE NOT ONLY IS THE WEIR STRUCTURE IMPORTANT WHEN IT COMES TO OVERALL JUST BEING ABLE TO MANAGE THE SYSTEM. SO LET'S JUST SAY YOU HAVE A LARGE STORM EVENT THAT'S PREDICTED. WELL, RIGHT NOW YOU REALLY DON'T HAVE A WAY TO DRAW DOWN THESE LAKES TO PROVIDE ANY SORT OF BENEFICIAL BENEFIT TO THE COMMUNITY IF YOU WERE TO HAVE THIS INCREASE IN RAINFALL [04:50:02] RUNOFF. AND SO NOW WITH THE WEIRS THAT WE'RE INSTALLING, THE CITY CAN NOW DRAW DOWN THESE LAKES A LITTLE BIT FURTHER, PROVIDE ADDITIONAL CAPACITY BEFORE THAT STORM RUNOFF COMES, AND THEN ALLOW FOR THAT ADDITIONAL WATER QUANTITY WITHIN THESE LAKE SYSTEMS. OKAY. I GUESS I UNDERSTOOD IT A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY. I UNDERSTOOD THAT WE WOULD BE SCOOPING OUT MUCK IN ORDER TO CREATE MORE CAPACITY IN THAT BULL AND REMOVE NUTRIENTS TO INCREASE WATER QUALITY. THAT THEY WERE BOTH THEY BOTH HAD. I ASSUME THEY BOTH HAD MEASUREMENTS IN THE CONTRACTS OF REMOVAL THAT WERE REQUIREMENTS IN THE PRICING THAT IN OUR CONTRACT WITH YOU, THAT WE WERE PAYING FOR BOTH. REALLY. WELL, AGAIN, YOU'RE, WE'RE WE'RE MIXING THE THIS IS WHERE IT GETS LIKE WATER QUALITY VERSUS WATER QUANTITY. SO THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT FACTORS. SO WHEN WE DEAL WITH WATER QUALITY, WE'RE LOOKING AT IT AS THE REMOVAL OF THAT MUCK MATERIAL TO IMPROVE THE WATER QUALITY EFFECTIVENESS OF THESE LAKE SYSTEMS. SO SAID ANOTHER WAY. YOU DID NOT HAVE IN ANY OF YOUR CONTRACTS ANY, REQUIREMENT OF HOW MUCH YOU WERE REMOVING, HOW MUCH MUCK YOU WERE REMOVING. YES WE DID. OH YEAH, WE HAD. THAT'S WHY WE HAD QUANTIFIED THE AMOUNT OF VOLUME IN THE LAKES TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT REMOVAL WOULD BE. BUT AGAIN, WE'RE NOT TRYING TO WE WEREN'T TRYING TO SAY, WELL, THIS THIS ROADWAY OR THIS WATERSHED DOESN'T MEET A CERTAIN LEVEL OF SERVICE WHEN IT COMES TO STORMWATER, WATER QUANTITY. SO IN TERMS OF THE OVERALL WATER THAT FALLS WITHIN THAT WATERSHED CONTRIBUTES TO THAT AREA, WE'RE NOT SAYING THAT WE HAVE A FLOODING PROBLEM. RIGHT. WE DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH A FLOODING ISSUE WITH THESE PROJECTS. THAT'S NOT THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF THESE PROJECTS. THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF THESE PROJECTS IS TO IMPROVE THE WATER QUALITY BEFORE THEN IT GETS DISCHARGED TO THE OUTSTANDING FOR WATER OR OUTSTANDING WATERS IN YOUR AREA. I MUST HAVE BEEN IN DIFFERENT MEETINGS BECAUSE I WOULD SAY WATER QUANTITY WAS TALKED ABOUT EVEN MORE SO THAN WATER QUALITY IN SOME OF THESE DREDGES, LIKE, OH, WE'VE GOT MORE CAPACITY NOW TO HOLD MORE WATER FROM. YOU KNOW, THEY WERE BOTH THEY'RE BOTH IMPORTANT. BUT THIS THESE WERE THE WATER. HOW MUCH THE BOWL COULD HOLD WAS ALSO VERY IMPORTANT. AND MY SECOND QUESTION WAS, YOU KNOW, ARE THERE TIMEFRAMES ON WHEN YOU KNOW, WHEN IN OUR CONTRACTS ON WHEN THEY HAVE TO BE STARTED AND FINISHED AND, YOU KNOW, KICKERS FOR, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW, PENALTIES FOR DUE DATES THAT ARE MISSED, ETCETERA, SO THAT THESE DREDGES DON'T GO ON AND ON AND ON. THERE ARE, THERE ARE TERM LIMITS IN, IN A CONTRACT AND PENALTIES IF WE SO DEEM TO ENFORCE LIQUIDATED DAMAGES. AND IN THIS CASE WHAT, WHAT WHAT WHAT. NOW I'M NOT I HAVEN'T HAD ANY RECOMMENDATION FROM MY STAFF TO PROCEED WITH LIQUIDATED DAMAGES. EARLY ON IN THE PROJECT. WE JUST STARTED THE PROJECT EARLIER THIS YEAR. I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE BEHIND OR NOT. YOU KNOW, I'M JUST I'M JUST TALKING ABOUT THE WAY WE DID CONTRACTS AT LIKE LIKE GE. WE'RE A LITTLE BIT BEHIND. BUT TYPICALLY IF WE HAVE A CONTRACTOR THAT'S DILIGENT IN DOING THE WORK AND THEY RUN PAST THE THE END OF THE CONTRACT, FROM MY STANDPOINT, I'M NOT GOING TO GO IN THERE AND DEMAND LIQUIDATED DAMAGES, LIKE IF THERE'S BEEN YOU KNOW, A CONTRACT FAILURE TO TO OR A BREACH OF CONTRACT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT THAT EXTENDED THE, THE PAST THE DEADLINE OF THE CONTRACT. YEAH. WE WOULD CONSIDER LIQUIDATED DAMAGES JUST JUST BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I'M HEARING TWO THINGS. ONE IS I'M HEARING THERE'S A GAP WITH WHAT? YOU KNOW, WE'RE COMING OUT AS THE OUTPUT NOW FOR WHAT WE'RE SAYING. YOU KNOW, THESE LAKES THIS LAKE DREDGE WAS FOR. AND IT SEEMS TO BE MISSING CAPACITY IN WHICH I, I KNOW I'VE BEEN IN MEETINGS WHERE WE TALKED ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF CAPACITY. THE SECOND PIECE IS, YOU KNOW, THE COMPLAINTS OF, YOU KNOW, IT'S IT'S LOUD, IT'S DIRTY, IT'S UGLY. I THINK WE ALL GOT THE PICTURE OF THE DUNE WITH THE PALM TREE GROWING OUT OF IT. YOU KNOW, HOW LONG IS THIS GOING TO GO ON? WHAT HAPPENS WHEN MACHINERY IS IS BROKEN? WHICH I GUESS WAS THIS CASE EARLIER LAST YEAR? WHAT IS THE BACKUP PLAN ON THAT SO THAT IT DOESN'T DRAG ON FOR 2 OR 3 SEASONS? BECAUSE REALISTICALLY WE WANT TO GET THEM DONE, BUT BECAUSE THEY'RE IT'S GOING TO BE 80 YEARS BEFORE WE DREDGE THEM AGAIN. I MEAN, I HOPE THAT'S NOT THE CASE, BUT THAT'S THE REALITY OF WHAT YOU'RE PULLING OUT RIGHT NOW. AND SO WE WANT IT DONE RIGHT, BUT IN A, IN A TIMELY MANNER. AND I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANY TEETH TO TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT HAPPENS. [04:55:01] THERE ARE. OKAY, THERE'S LIQUIDATED DAMAGE CLAUSES IN THE CONTRACT. AND WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? WHAT IT SPECIFICALLY THE. GO AHEAD. LIQUIDATED DAMAGES. SO I KNOW THE DEFINITION OF IT. BUT WHAT IS IT IN THIS? I WASN'T YEAH I WASN'T GOING TO GIVE YOU THE DEFINITION IN THIS CONTRACT. I'D HAVE TO GET BACK TO YOU. I DON'T HAVE THE CONTRACT IN FRONT OF ME, BUT GENERALLY SPEAKING, YOU UNDERSTAND, RIGHT. THERE'S THERE'S A TERM IF YOU GO PAST THAT DEADLINE, BECAUSE TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE IN ALMOST EVERY CONTRACT THAT WE HIRE, THAT WE HAVE FOR WHATEVER INFRASTRUCTURE WE'RE DOING OR LAKE RESTORATION, YOU NAME IT. THERE'S A CERTAIN CHARGE THAT WE CAN CHARGE THE CONTRACTOR OR THE SERVICE PROVIDER PER DAY UNTIL THE PROJECT IS COMPLETED. OKAY. SO USUALLY THE WAY IT WORKS IS YOU GET PAID, YOU GET INVOICED IN INCREMENTS. SO AT SOME POINT IF YOU ENGAGE LIQUIDATED DAMAGES, YOU WOULD WITHHOLD ONE OF THE PAYMENTS, DO THE MATH. AND THEN IF ONCE THE PROJECT IS COMPLETED, YOU WOULD FINALIZE THE CONTRACT. AND I HAVE TO ASK YOU, ARE, YOU KNOW, IN THIS PROJECT, IT SEEMS PERHAPS THAT THIS IS MORE COMPLICATED OR MORE MUCK THAN YOU ANTICIPATED. I'M NOT SURE IF I'M. IF THAT'S TRUE OR NOT, OR IF. BUT ARE YOU UNDERWATER ON THIS PROJECT? YEAH. SO I GUESS I NEEDED TO CLARIFY. WE'RE NOT THE CONTRACTOR ON THE PROJECT. SORRY. YEAH, WE'RE THE WE'RE THE ENGINEER WHO'S JUST PROVIDING VERY LIMITED OVERSIGHT. SO I KNOW, I MEAN, WE'RE NOT THE ONES WHO ARE OUT THERE, SO YOU WOULDN'T BE NECESSARILY COMING AFTER LIQUID DAMAGE, BUT. WELL, THAT THAT PROBABLY IS MORE OF A QUESTION THAN FOR FOR BOB ON DEALING WITH, YOU KNOW, YOUR I ASSUME THAT YOU'RE MANAGING THIS, THIS PROJECT. IS ARE WE IN TROUBLE OR IS YOUR IS THE VENDOR THE DREDGER IN TROUBLE? LIKE WITH THE WHAT? MEETING THE GOALS AND STILL MAKING A FAIR PROFIT. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEIR PROFIT MARKUP IS. ALL I KNOW IS THE VOLUME OF MATERIAL THAT NEEDED TO BE REMOVED. AND WHEN WE CAME TO YOU ON SEPTEMBER 3RD, THERE WAS A, A THE HAULER FOR THAT MATERIAL THAT THEY ORIGINALLY ANTICIPATED TO USE BALED OUT. THEY WENT AND FOUND ANOTHER CONTRACTOR TO HAUL THE MATERIAL OFF THE GEO BAGS AND THE SAND, AND HIS COST WAS HIGHER THAN THE PREVIOUS. SO WE KNOW WHAT THAT VOLUME WAS AND THAT THAT UNIT PRICE DIFFERENCE. THAT'S WHEN WE CAME BACK TO YOU ON SEPTEMBER 3RD AND REQUESTED A CHANGE ORDER FOR $290,000 TO MAKE THE CONTRACTOR WHOLE ON WHAT HE PAID THE HAULER. SO AS FAR AS IS THE CONTRACTOR UPSIDE DOWN? DID HE NOT MAKE ANY MONEY ON THIS? THAT'S NOT A CITY CONCERN. OKAY. WOULD YOU ONE MORE QUESTION. YOU KNOW, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THESE HURRICANES EXACERBATED THIS DREDGE. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S CORRECT OR NOT, AND BROUGHT IN MORE MATERIAL THAN WHAT WAS INITIALLY IN THAT LAKE. IS THAT CORRECT? SO YOU YOU ALL DID EXPERIENCE STORM SURGE DURING HURRICANE IAN. THAT DID CAUSE SOME ACCUMULATION OF THE SAND. HOWEVER, WHEN WE DID OUR PRE BATHYMETRIC SURVEY, WHEN WE WERE DOING THE DESIGN, THAT WAS AFTER IAN. SO WE WERE ABLE TO ACCOUNT AND ACCUMULATE AND UNDERSTAND THAT CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SEDIMENT. AND AS I MENTIONED, I THINK WE PROVIDED SOME INFORMATION ON THIS. BUT I CAN ALSO SEND TO YOU. SO IN THE SEDIMENT CORES IT'S ACTUALLY AN INTERESTING THING. YOU CAN ACTUALLY SEE THAT THERE WAS A LAYER OF SAND THAT HAD ACCUMULATED JUST OVER TOP OF THE ORGANIC MUCK. IN SOME INSTANCES. AND SO IT ACTUALLY WAS A SHINING LIGHT THAT SAID, OKAY, NOW WE KNOW THAT WE HAD SOME SAND TO DEAL WITH ON TOP, BUT WE HAVE TO GET TO THAT MUCK LAYER THAT'S ON THE BOTTOM. AND THEN WHEN WE GET TO THAT BOTTOM LAYER, WHICH IS THAT DESIGN ELEVATION. WE THEN HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THAT WHEN WE GET THERE, WE MAY PULL UP SOME ADDITIONAL MATERIAL DURING THAT PROCESS ON THE BOTTOM OF THE SAND. SO THERE WAS A KIND OF AN INTERMIXING OF THAT MATERIAL. THAT'S WHY YOU HAVE, YOU KNOW, SO MUCH SAND VERSUS SO MUCH MUCK. SO THAT'S WHY THAT DISTRIBUTION OF DE-WATERING AND HOW WE LOOK AT THAT PERCENT SOLIDS IS VERY IMPORTANT. OKAY. AND MY FINAL QUESTION IS HOW MANY MONTHS, IF ANY, ARE WE BEHIND ON THE DREDGE. I DON'T I DON'T THINK WE'RE MONTHS BEHIND. I THINK THE CONTRACT ENDED. I THINK WE WERE SO THIS YEAR. YEAH. SO THE THE CONTRACTOR IN THE BEGINNING OF THE PROCESS HAD SOME MECHANICAL DELAYS. AND I THINK THAT DELAYED THEM ABOUT A MONTH OR SO. AND SO THEY GOT A LITTLE BIT OF A LATE START IN REGARDS TO THEIR PROCESSING. SO I WOULD SAY THEY'RE PROBABLY ABOUT TWO MONTHS BEHIND. AND THEY'VE ASKED AND REQUESTED A CHANGE OF TIME EXTENSION OF. THINK OF 90 DAYS TO ACCOUNT FOR THE ADDITIONAL BMP. [05:00:03] MEASURES THAT THEY STILL NEED TO IMPLEMENT WITH THE LITERAL SHELVES AND. THE INLET FILTERS AND THE WATER CONTROL STRUCTURES. BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THEY'RE. THEY'RE DONE WITH THE DREDGING YOU KNOW, DEPENDING ON THIS CONVERSATION. OKAY. I'M COMPLETE FOR RIGHT NOW. THANK YOU. YOU JUST SAID THEY'RE DONE WITH THIS DREDGE. AND CONVERSATION. I WAS SAYING THEY WERE DONE WITH THE DREDGING IN THE CONTRACT THAT WE HAD SPECIFIED FOR THEM TO REMOVE. UNLESS THIS CONVERSATION SAYS THAT YOU ALL WANT THEM TO GO OUT AND REMOVE MORE MATERIAL. OKAY. THANK YOU. AND JUST TO LET YOU KNOW, I DID TELL THE CONTRACTOR NOT TO DEMOBILIZE. THAT EQUIPMENT HAS BEEN SITTING THERE SINCE SEPTEMBER 5TH WHEN HE WAS READY TO DEMOBILIZE, AND IT IS STILL SITTING THERE. SO IF HE'S IF HE'S UNDERWATER ON SOMETHING. YEAH, HE'S PROBABLY UNDERWATER ON THAT BECAUSE HE CAN'T MOVE THAT EQUIPMENT TO THE NEXT JOB. YEAH. OKAY. MADAM MAYOR, CAN I JUST ADD A COUPLE ITEMS? SO I THANK YOU FOR DELINEATING BETWEEN THE CONTRACTOR AND OUR ENGINEERS. AND WHAT YOU HAVE TO REALIZE IS UNDER THE CONTRACTING AGREEMENT, IT WAS 365 DAYS WHICH INCLUDED. THEN THERE'S AN ADDITIONAL. AND. SORRY, I'M GOING TO READ FOR A MOMENT JUST TO GIVE IT TO YOU. AN ADDITIONAL 60 DAYS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE PROJECT CLOSEOUT AFTER THE PROJECT IS DONE. AND AS MR. MIDDLETON INDICATED, WHEN THE QUESTIONS WERE ARISING AS TO THE QUANTITY REMOVED AND THE THIRD THIRD ENGINEER'S OPINION, IN ADDITION TO THE CONTRACTOR'S OPINION, WHICH YOU HAVE THAT LETTER IN THERE AS WELL, IT SAID LET'S JUST SEE IF WE CAN LEAVE THEM THERE. DON'T DEMOBILIZE UNTIL WE'VE HAD THIS CONVERSATION. ULTIMATELY, ONE OF TWO THINGS IS GOING TO HAVE TO OCCUR IS, IS THAT FIRST WE'D HAVE TO DEFINE SCOPE IF THERE'S GOING TO BE ANY MORE. BUT IN COMPLIANCE WITH WHAT WE'VE ASKED THEM TO DO, THERE'S EMAIL STRINGS ALREADY THAT EXIST THAT SAY, YES, YOU'VE MEASURED WHAT WAS ASKED TO BE REMOVED AND IT'S BEEN SATISFIED. SO WE'RE AT THE CLOSING HOUR NOW OR ARE WE STARTING OVER IS REALLY WHERE WE FIND OURSELVES TODAY BASED ON THE OPINIONS OF OF THE OUTSIDE ENGINEER RESIDENTS AND OR STAFF. THAT'S WHAT BROUGHT THIS AFTER YOU ASKED ME TO, IN THE COMMUNICATION PART, TO BE BACK BEFORE YOU TODAY. SO I JUST WANTED TO DELINEATE THOSE THINGS FOR YOU. SO 365 DAYS PLUS 60 DAYS WRAP UP. THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. YEP. AND AGAIN, AS THEY INDICATED, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE YOU HAVE TO DECIDE OR WE HAVE TO DECIDE AS AN ADMINISTRATION. IS THE JUICE WORTH THE SQUEEZE IF THEY'RE TWO MONTHS AWAY I'M NOT GOING TO BE PUNITIVE AND THEN START TO, TO TO SAY I, YOU KNOW, I WANT TO EXERCISE THIS CLAUSE INSTEAD OF GETTING OUR FIRST OBJECTIVE IS TO GET IT DONE, CLEANED UP AND FUNCTIONING CORRECTLY. SO I JUST WANTED TO SAY THOSE THINGS BEFORE WE WENT ON. SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I HAVE COUNCIL MEMBER. THANK YOU. SO I HAVE A NUMBER OF QUESTIONS TO TRY TO CLARIFY SOME THINGS. BUT I'LL START BY JUST SAYING, AS I DUG INTO THIS, AFTER THE DECISION WAS MADE TO BRING THIS BACK TO COUNCIL AGAIN, I'M THIS WHOLE MATTER HAS MADE ME VERY UNCOMFORTABLE FROM A NUMBER OF STANDPOINTS. FIRST OF ALL, IT'S ONCE AGAIN AN EXAMPLE OF US REVISITING A MATTER THAT I THOUGHT WAS HAD REACHED CLOSURE IN THE 11TH HOUR AND TALKING ABOUT PERHAPS EVEN REVERSING ACTION ON SOMETHING ON A PROJECT THAT'S ESSENTIALLY COMPLETE. SECOND, THERE ARE SOME AND I'LL GET TO THIS IN A MOMENT. WHEN YOU GO THROUGH ALL THE CORRESPONDENCE, IT RAISES ISSUES THAT I THINK ACTUALLY HAVE CONCERNING ETHICAL IMPLICATIONS. AND SO I THINK THIS IS A VERY UNFORTUNATE SITUATION THAT WE'VE GOTTEN OURSELVES INTO. BUT WE'LL TALK IT THROUGH AND SEE WHERE PEOPLE COME OUT. THE FIRST THING I WANT TO ASK IS, AND I THINK YOU SORT OF ANSWERED THIS, BUT ALREADY MR. MIDDLETON AND MR. CORNING IS THAT THIS PROJECT IS VIRTUALLY COMPLETE. ON SEPTEMBER 3RD, WHEN WE HAD YOUR LAST PRESENTATION, YOU SAID. I WROTE IT DOWN. ALL DREDGING WILL BE COMPLETE BY SEPTEMBER 30TH, AND ALL OTHER WORK, LITERAL PLANTINGS, ETC., BY BEFORE THE END OF THE YEAR. SO THIS IS THIS PROJECT IS YOU STAND BY THAT STILL. CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. AND NUMBER TWO, UNDER THE THE PERMIT WE HAVE WITH THE SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, BASED ON THE YOUR MEMORANDUM, MR. MIDDLETON'S BOTH PRIOR THAN THE ONE FOR THIS MEETING. [05:05:04] WE HAVE MET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THAT PERMIT. CORRECT. IN TERMS OF THE REMOVAL OF MATERIAL FROM THE LAKES. YES. THAT'S CORRECT. YEAH. AND AND THE BENEFITS. AND IS THAT REALLY THE KEY METRIC? YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF SATISFYING THE PERMIT REQUIREMENTS? YES. THAT IS AND I'LL ALSO SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, MY OWN I AGREE WITH COUNCILWOMAN PETRANOFF THAT IN THE CASE OF ANY LAKE, WHERE WE'RE DREDGING, THAT THERE IS AN ISSUE OF, OF OF WATER QUALITY AND AN ISSUE OF INCREASING CAPACITY TO SOME DEGREE. AGREE. BUT THIS, THIS, THIS PROJECT IN MY MIND, WAS ALWAYS CONTEMPLATED IN ASSOCIATION WITH THE PEACH PROJECT. AND AS WE REMEMBER WE HEARD IT. WE HEARD IT ONCE. WE HEARD IT 30 TIMES IN VARIOUS MEETINGS OVER THE YEARS. THIS WAS THE THREE LAKE WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT SYSTEM, THREE LAKE, NORTH SOUTH ALLIGATOR WITH WATER MOVING FROM LAKE TO LAKE AND IMPROVING THE WATER QUALITY BENEFITS THAT WOULD BE ASSOCIATED. BEING A KEY CONTRIBUTOR TO TO THE WATER QUALITY BENEFITS THAT WE'RE GOING TO SEE WITH THE BEACH OUTFALLS PROJECT. SO I'LL JUST THAT'S YOU KNOW, WHAT WHAT WHAT IS WAS FOREMOST IN MY MIND. THE. THERE ARE MANY ODD THINGS HERE. WE HAVE A LETTER FROM MR. REINHARDT, WHO'S THE OWNER OF ENERGY RESOURCES, OUR CONTRACTOR, CORRECT. OUR CONTRACTOR WHO DOES THE DREDGING. AND IN THIS LETTER ABOUT VOLUME OVERRUN NAPLES LAKE NINE, I'M NOT SURE. BUT, YOU KNOW, BASICALLY, YOU KNOW, IF YOU READ THIS, WHAT HE'S SAYING IS THAT WE DIDN'T REMOVE ENOUGH MUCK AND WE NEED TO REMOVE MORE MUCK. YET WE REMOVED ALL THE MUCK WE NEEDED TO DO. YOU'RE TELLING ME UNDER THE PERMIT THAT WE RECEIVED, HE DID THAT, AND THEN HE ALSO, IF YOU GO THROUGH THE WHOLE THING WITH THIS LETTER, SAYS WE NEED TO REMOVE MORE MUCK, BASICALLY, WE'LL DO THAT. AND WE'D EVEN BE WILLING TO NEGOTIATE LOWER PRICING IF FUTURE LAKE PROJECTS CAN BE CONTRACTED WITH US, WHICH I FOUND TO BE A VERY DISTURBING SUGGESTION FROM AN ETHICAL STANDPOINT. AND, YOU KNOW, THAT WAS JUST A REAL RED FLAG THAT WENT UP FOR ME AS TO WHERE THIS WHOLE MATTER IS COMING FROM OR WHERE IT'S GOING, AND I'VE JUST GOT TO PUT THAT ON THE TABLE. BUT LET'S GO BACK TO WHAT THE CONTENTION. BASIC CONTENTION. IS HE SAYING THAT, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE OF HURRICANE EVENTS AND OTHER THINGS, THERE'S A LOT MORE MUCK TO BE REMOVED. I ASSUME THERE IS MORE MUCK TO REMOVE. PROBABLY DIDN'T GET EVERY EVERY CUBIC YARD OF MUCK, BUT THIS IS OUR CONTRACTOR WHO WAS WORKING UNDER A PERMIT THAT WE RECEIVED WITH A CERTAIN SET OF GOALS. THOSE GOALS WERE MET. AND WHY IS THAT CONTRACTOR NOW SORT OF SAYING, YOU KNOW, WE DIDN'T DO AS MUCH AS WE NEEDED TO DO IF, IN FACT, WE MET THE GOALS OF THE PERMIT. CAN, CAN CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT TO ME? NO, AND I WOULDN'T TRY TO. OKAY. I JUST WANT TO PUT THAT ON THE RECORD AS AS AS AS A, YOU KNOW, AS A DATA POINT. WE'LL PUT IT THAT WAY. NOW LET'S GO BACK, MR. CARNEY, TO YOUR ROLE. AND AGAIN, LET'S MAKE THIS VERY CLEAR. YOU WERE HIRED TO PROVIDE SO-CALLED CEI SERVICES. YOU BEING WSP YOUR COMPANY, YOU'RE THE CONSTRUCTION, ENGINEERING AND INSPECTION. IN OTHER WORDS, YOU'RE PROVIDING THE OVERSIGHT FOR THIS PROJECT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S GOING AS IT SHOULD. AND YOU'RE ALSO THE ENGINEER OF RECORD. THAT'S CORRECT. SO YOUR PERSONAL PROFESSIONAL AND YOUR FIRM'S PERSONAL PROFESSIONAL REPUTATION IS ON THE LINE WITH RESPECT TO YOUR TESTIMONY TO US, I WOULD ASSUME. YEAH. I HAVE TO CERTIFY THAT THE PROJECT MET THE GOALS AND THE EXPECTATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PERMIT. SO AT THE END OF THIS PROJECT, I'M THE ONE SIGNING AND SEALING THE AS BUILT CERTIFICATION TO CERTIFY THE PROJECT. THANK YOU. I WANTED TO MAKE THAT CLEAR AS WELL. SECOND. NOT SECOND, BUT NEXT I WANT TO TALK ABOUT AND I KNOW WE'RE GOING TO HEAR FROM OTHER PARTIES, BUT THIS IS WHEN I HAVE THE FLOOR. SO I'M GOING TO ASK THESE QUESTIONS. WE HAVE I'M HESITATING BECAUSE I'M NOT SURE WHO, BUT THERE ARE [05:10:08] ONE OR MORE RESIDENTS WHO ARE REQUESTING THAT WE HIRE ANOTHER FIRM. OR I GUESS HIRE ANOTHER FIRM TO DO FURTHER ANALYSIS AND SURVEYING TO DETERMINE WHAT MORE CAN AND SHOULD BE DONE WITH WITH RESPECT TO MUCK REMOVAL. AND THERE'S AN INDIVIDUAL NAMED MATTHEW EARHART WHO I WHO WORKS FOR PREMIER PROPERTIES GROUP AND REPRESENTS, I GUESS, THE PROPERTY OWNER WHOSE LAND WE STAGED THE DREDGING ON WITHIN AN EASEMENT THAT WE HAD. AND HE'S REPRESENTING, I GUESS HE'S A HE'S A REAL ESTATE BROKER AND HE'S REPRESENTING THAT INDIVIDUAL. MR. MEHOS, IS THAT RIGHT? AND AND AND THEY AND THEN MR. REMINGTON ALSO COMMUNICATED WITH US MANY TIMES BY EMAIL. SO, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, I THINK WE NEED CLARITY ON THESE THINGS. ARE MR. MEHOS AND MR. REMINGTON INDIVIDUALLY CONTRACTING PERHAPS THROUGH PREMIER PROPERTIES TO ENGAGE. CAN YOU ANSWER IT? CAN ANYBODY ANSWER THAT QUESTION? I CAN'T, YOU CAN. I CANNOT. I CAN I WOULD DEFER TO THEM TO DEFINE THEIR THEIR RELATIONSHIP. OKAY. SO WE'LL HAVE TO ASK THEM WHEN THEY COME BECAUSE AGAIN, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT EKSTASIS. I DON'T KNOW WHO ACTUALLY CONTRACTED THEM. AND YOU KNOW WHAT THEIR EXPERIENCE OR CREDENTIALS ARE, BUT I GUESS WE'LL HEAR FROM THEM. THERE IS A IN HERE INFORMATION ABOUT ADDITIONAL WORK THAT COULD BE DONE BY SOMEBODY. RIGHT. AND YOU KNOW, I GUESS, YOU KNOW, THE, THE MOST. REASONABLE THING I CAN THINK OF HERE. I CERTAINLY I DON'T SEE ANYTHING HERE THAT SHOULD CAUSE US TO WANT TO DELAY COMPLETING THE WORK ON THIS PROJECT, MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF OUR PERMIT, AND CONTINUING TO MAKE SURE THAT THE GULF SHORE BOULEVARD BEACH OUTFALLS PROJECT REMAINS ON SCHEDULE, WHICH I THINK IS VERY IMPORTANT TO THE COMMUNITY. IF THERE IS MERIT TO DOING ADDITIONAL WORK IN THE FUTURE ON LAKES EIGHT AND NINE, BASED ON ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS OR SURVEYING OR WHATEVER, I THINK THE THE MORE REASONABLE THING TO DO WOULD BE TO AND NOT TODAY, BUT IN THE FUTURE, HAVE OUR STAFF DETERMINE WHETHER THAT KIND OF ANALYSIS WOULD BE MERITED. AND, AND IF IT, IF, IF IT DEMONSTRATES THAT ADDITIONAL WORK, WHETHER IT'S DREDGING OR OTHER KINDS OF IMPROVEMENTS TO LAKE EIGHT AND NINE IS WARRANTED, THAT WE WOULD THEN HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE USUAL PROCUREMENT PROCESSES AND BUDGETING PROCESSES THAT WE WOULD FOR ANY PROJECT, AND IT WOULD BE ESSENTIALLY A PHASE TWO IF YOU WANT TO LOOK AT THE WORK DONE TO DATE AS A PHASE ONE, IT COULD BE A PHASE TWO THAT COULD BE DONE AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE IF MERITED. BUT WHAT I FEEL WOULD BE AN UNFORTUNATE DECISION ON OUR PART IS IF WE USED IF WE AT THIS POINT ATTEMPTED TO DELAY, EXTEND, PUT US IN A POSITION WHERE WE HAD TO REAPPLY FOR THE PERMIT UNDER WHICH WE'RE OPERATING, WHICH I UNDERSTAND CAN TAKE CONSIDERABLE TIME AND AND, AND REALLY IMPAIR THE WORK AND OBJECTIVES THAT WE'RE TRYING TO UNDERTAKE, PARTICULARLY GIVEN THAT WE HAVE WE, WE HAVE FACTUAL EVIDENCE THAT WE'VE MET THE GOALS OF THIS PROJECT TO DATE. WE HAVE OUR ENGINEER OF RECORD ATTESTING TO THAT, AND WE HAVE ACHIEVED SUCCESS THUS FAR WITH THE WORK THAT WE'VE DONE. THAT'S THAT'S NOT LOSE THE MOMENTUM AT THIS POINT. I HAVE QUESTIONS FROM VICE MAYOR. HE SAID HE HAD THREE, BUT I DO HAVE PUBLIC SPEAKERS. I'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM THEM. AND THEN WE CAN CONTINUE OUR DIALOG. [05:15:05] OKAY. THANK YOU, VICE MAYOR. YEAH. THANK YOU. I'LL BE QUICK. FIRST OF ALL, IT WAS GOOD NEWS TO HEAR THAT WE HAD CONTRACTED FOR 17,297YD³ FROM BOTH LAKES. THAT'S LAKES EIGHT AND NINE. IS WHAT WE'RE SAYING, CORRECT? AND THEN WHEN THE DATA CAME IN, THE FINAL DATA, THE FINAL NUMBERS MEMBERS AT 17,465. THAT MEANS THAT WE REMOVED IN EXCESS OF 168YD³ OF MUCK MATERIAL. RIGHT? YEAH. MATERIAL? YEAH. AND WHEN DID WE GET THAT LATEST CONFIRMATION DATA? THAT WAS, I THINK, SEPTEMBER 5TH. SEPTEMBER 5TH. TWO DAYS AFTER THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING. WHEN DID THE PROJECT. WHEN DID WE THINK THE PROJECT ENDED? WHEN WAS IT DONE? AS FAR AS THE DREDGING GOES, AS FAR AS I WAS CONCERNED, ONCE WE GOT THIS, THESE NUMBERS, THOSE NUMBERS, THESE NUMBERS, ON SEPTEMBER 5TH, TWO DAYS AFTER THE SEPTEMBER 3RD CITY COUNCIL MEETING. IN MY OPINION, THE DREDGE WAS DONE. WE DIDN'T KNOW UNTIL THOSE NUMBERS CAME IN. OKAY. SO THAT'S GOOD NEWS. THAT'S CORRECT. SO JUST THREE QUESTIONS REAL QUICK. WELL, FIRST AND THEN A STATEMENT. THE DEPTH, RIGHT. THE DEPTH OF WHAT WE ACHIEVED BY DREDGING. IF I TOOK A QUART CUP OF SEDIMENT AND NUTRIENTS, WHATEVER WE CALL IT, POURED IT IN A GALLON JUG, IT'S GOING TO DILUTE TO SOME EXTENT A GALLON JUG OF WATER. RIGHT? HERE COMES STUFF. MUCK DUMPING IT IN. IT'S GOING TO DILUTE. AND IF I TOOK THAT SAME QUART AND DUMPED IT IN A BATHTUB, THE DILUTION IS GOING TO BE DIFFERENT. IS THAT CORRECT? YES. THAT'S CORRECT. FOR EVERYBODY, THE DEPTH OF THESE LAKES INFLUENCES THE ABILITY TO DILUTE SEDIMENTS AND NUTRIENTS. YEAH. SO THAT'S THAT'S WHY WE CREATE THE ADDITIONAL CAPACITY SO THAT THEY CAN, AS I MENTIONED, START TO SETTLE IN THE LAKE AND HAVE MORE CAPACITY TO BE ABLE TO BE HELD, BECAUSE IF IT'S NOT, THEN WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN? IT'S JUST GOING TO KEEP ON GOING DOWNSTREAM. YEAH. YEARS LATER, ALL THAT SEDIMENT JUST FILLS UP AND WE'RE SKIMMING THE TOP WITH WATER. RIGHT. AND WE GET WHAT WE WANT. WE GET WHAT WE GET. THE THREE LAKE SOLUTION IS COUNCILMAN CHRISTMAN, DESCRIBED AS IT IS INTEGRATED WITH THE BEACH OUTFALL PROJECT. RIGHT. IT'S PART OF A TREATMENT TRAIN. RIGHT. AND AS WE WORK TO BRING THE STORMWATER OUTFALL PROJECT ONLINE BY REMOVING THE MUCK AS PERMITTED, BECAUSE WE HAD TO HAVE A PERMIT, WILL THE NEWLY DREDGED DEPTH OF LAKES EIGHT AND NINE IN ALLIGATOR LAKE MEET THE WATER QUALITY EXPECTATIONS AS PART OF THAT ENTIRE TREATMENT SYSTEM? IN OTHER WORDS, THE DEPTH THAT WE'VE GOT TO. RIGHT. WE'VE GOT THE NUMBERS, THE DEPTH THAT WE'RE NOW AT AT. IS THAT GOING TO MEET OUR EXPECTATIONS FOR WATER QUALITY FOR THE ENTIRE TREATMENT TRAIN? YEAH. SO AND THIS IS A I WANT TO CLARIFY THIS POINT BECAUSE I THINK IT WAS MENTIONED IN ONE OF THE LETTERS AS WELL. BUT SO WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT STORMWATER LAKES, STORMWATER LAKES DON'T HAVE THE SAME REQUIREMENTS WHEN IT COMES TO WATER QUALITY CHARACTERISTICS, WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT IT FROM A REGULATORY STANDPOINT. SO WHEN I WHEN YOU DEVELOP A PROJECT AND I DISCHARGE TO, LET'S JUST SAY THE GULF OF MEXICO, I HAVE VERY STRICT REQUIREMENTS THAT I CANNOT EXCEED THAT BACKGROUND LEVEL OF WHATEVER IS IN THE GULF OF MEXICO BEYOND IT. WELL, THE STORMWATER DON'T HAVE THAT RIGHT. SO THE STORMWATER LAKE IS SUPPOSED TO BE DIRTY. THE STORMWATER LAKE IS SUPPOSED TO HAVE HIGH CONCENTRATIONS BECAUSE THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF IT. IT'S SUPPOSED TO START TO LET THAT SEDIMENT SETTLE DOWN AND CREATE THAT BENEFIT FOR THOSE SURROUNDING WATERWAYS. SO SO ABSOLUTELY, THAT'S THAT'S THE ROLE THOSE LAKES PLAY, RIGHT? RIGHT. OKAY. AND NOW JUST A FEW QUICK QUESTIONS. FIRST, WHO ISSUES THE STORMWATER RULE UNDER WHICH WE OPERATE. IS IT DEEP OR SO? THE SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT ISSUES THAT THEY ISSUED A NEW RULE IN JUNE 2024. RIGHT. IS THAT RIGHT? AND THEY INCREASED THE REQUIRED NUTRIENT REDUCTIONS PROVIDED BY STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS. AND GIVEN THE WORK THAT PERFORMED THE WORK, OUR WORK IT'S COMPLETED PURSUANT TO A DESIGN PERMIT ISSUED UNDER THE PREVIOUS CRITERIA. DOES THE WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS CLEARLY SATISFY THIS NEW CRITERIA? SO THE NEW WATER QUALITY REQUIREMENT, AS YOU HAD ALLUDED TO, HAS AN INCREASED AMOUNT OF, I'LL CALL IT RESPONSIBILITY. [05:20:03] SO IN THE PAST DEP HAS AND DEP IS ANOTHER REGULATORY AGENCY. SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT IS BASICALLY AN ARM OF THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION. AND SO WHAT HAPPENED WAS A LOT OF FOLKS WERE INSTALLING STORMWATER SYSTEMS. LET'S JUST SAY A SWALE IN YOUR BACKYARD TO ACCOUNT FOR THAT WATER QUALITY AND WATER QUANTITY. WELL, OVER TIME, AS WE ALL HAVE DONE, PROBABLY WHEN WE ISSUE THAT CEO WILL GO AND BACKFILL THAT THAT SWALE IN OUR BACKYARD BECAUSE, HEY, WE DON'T NEED IT ANYMORE. WHAT WAS THE PURPOSE OF IT? AND SO WHAT THIS NEW REQUIREMENT IS SAYING THAT YOU HAVE AN OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITY. NOW WE'RE GOING TO MAKE SURE THAT UNDER THIS NEW RULE, YOU HAVE TO SHOW US A VALUE OF WHAT YOU'RE PUTTING ON THAT SYSTEM SO THAT WE CAN ENSURE THAT YOU HAVE THE DOLLARS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT, TO CONCURRENTLY MAINTAIN THAT AND OPERATE THAT SYSTEM AS WE PERMIT IT. SO IT'S IT'S REALLY GOING TO BE A BENEFIT FOR ALL OF US WHEN IT COMES TO IMPLEMENTING THESE. AND I DO BELIEVE THAT THESE PROJECTS THAT WE HAVE AND UNDER THE CITY'S CURRENT RULES, YOU GUYS HAVE ALREADY BEEN MEETING THOSE REQUIREMENTS BECAUSE YOU HAVE AN OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE TEAM THAT GOES OUT AND CONTINUOUSLY LOOKS AT YOUR STORMWATER SYSTEM. BUT WITH THE LAKES, THE LAKES, WITH THE LAKE WORK THAT WE'VE DONE SPECIFICALLY. IS IT CONSISTENT WITH THE NEWEST RULES? YES. OKAY. VERY GOOD. THAT'S THAT'S AN IMPORTANT POINT. AND THE LAKES, AFTER DREDGING AND RECOGNIZING THAT WE'VE EXCEEDED OUR EXPECTATION OF OF MUCK REMOVED. DO WE KNOW WHETHER THESE LAKES ARE NOW IMPAIRED OR NOT? SO, AGAIN THE LAKE SYSTEMS DON'T HAVE AN IMPAIRMENT THRESHOLD, BASICALLY. SO THEN IT DOESN'T APPLY TO IT WOULDN'T APPLY TO TO YOUR SITUATION. IT'S REALLY THE DOWNSTREAM. SO NAPLES BAY, THE MOORINGS BAY, THE GULF OF MEXICO, ARE THOSE IMPAIRED? THAT'S WHAT THAT'S WHY THE CITY HAS AN MS4 PERMIT. BECAUSE YOU GUYS HAVE A STRICT REQUIREMENT TO ENSURE THAT YOU'RE MEETING THOSE REQUIREMENTS FROM THE STATE. OR IF YOU DIDN'T HAVE THAT, THEN THE STATE WOULD COME DOWN AND TELL YOU, HEY, START MANDATING BEST MANAGEMENT ACTION PLANS, AND YOU BETTER SHOW US HOW YOU'RE DOING IT AND SHOW US WHERE YOUR FUNDS ARE COMING FROM. BUT YOU GUYS ARE PROACTIVE IN THAT REGARDS WHEN IT COMES TO STORMWATER. WELL, BOB, I THINK TODAY YOU GIVE US MORE INFORMATION THAT WE DIDN'T PREVIOUSLY HAVE CONCERNING THE CUBIC YARDS. SO THAT THAT CHANGES SOME THINGS AND I APPRECIATE IT. BUT SPECIFICALLY, I THINK IT'S BEEN ASKED AND ANSWERED, BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE. HAVE WE MET THE WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS MEETING THE PROJECT'S INTENT? YES. OKAY. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. AND JUST TO BE SPECIFIC. ACCORDING TO WHOM? ACCORDING TO THE THE METHODOLOGY THAT WE'VE ESTABLISHED FOR THESE LAKE RESTORATION PROJECTS WITHIN THE CITY, IN TERMS OF, WE UNDERSTAND BASED ON OUR ANALYSIS AND WHAT WE DID IN THAT FEASIBILITY STUDY, IS THAT WE HAVE THIS AMOUNT OF SEDIMENT IN THE LAKE THAT'S NOT ALLOWING THAT LAKE TO PERFORM AT ITS MAXIMUM CAPACITY. AND SO BY REMOVING THAT ORGANIC MUCK MATERIAL, WE'RE ALLOWED TO RECHARGE, I WOULD CALL IT THE LAKE SYSTEM, TO NOW ALLOW IT TO BE A BETTER TREATMENT CHAIN FOR THE UPTAKE OF THOSE NITROGEN AND PHOSPHORUS AND OTHER CONSTITUENTS, AS WE'VE SEEN IN THE OTHER LAKE RESTORATION PROJECTS, THROUGH THE WATER QUALITY MONITORING THAT YOU GUYS ARE DOING. AS YOU RECALL, WE DID LAKE MANOR. THAT'S BEEN A REALLY SUCCESSFUL PROJECT. WE'VE ALSO DONE SPRING LAKE. WE DID EASTLAKE. IF YOU'VE BEEN OUT TO THAT ONE, I KNOW THAT WAS A THAT'S A GOOD LOOKING LAKE. NOW WITH THAT WETLAND RESTORATION. AND THEN WE GOT NORTH LAKE OR LAKE 19 UP THERE BY FLEISCHMANN. SO. THAT WAS LAKE MANOR, SPRING LAKE EAST LAKE, WHICH IS A LAKES CELL PHONE RIGHT HERE, RIGHT NEXT TO YOU GUYS. AND THEN YOU GOT IT'S IT'S CALLED MULTIPLE THINGS. IT'S CALLED LIKE LAKE 19 B, BUT IT'S ALSO CALLED FLEISCHMANN PARK LAKE. GOT IT SOUTH OF FIFTH AVENUE. 15TH AVENUE 15TH. AND WHICH IS THE ONE THAT WE HAD TO GO BACK AND DREDGE MORE IN. DIDN'T WE DO SO THE ONE YOU'RE PROBABLY REFERRING TO, AND I DON'T MEAN TO BRING UP BAD IDEA, BUT THE EAST LAKE IS THE WETLAND RESTORATION LAKE. REMEMBER LAKE SOUTH ON THAT WE TURNED IN, WE CREATED SOME ALTERNATIVE MEANS OF ADDITIONAL TREATMENT. WITHIN THAT. THERE WAS SOME CONCERNS ON HOW THAT LOOKED ESTHETICALLY. BUT IF YOU'VE GONE OUT THERE. I JUST WENT OUT THERE WHEN I WAS DOWN HERE LAST TIME AND IT'S LOOKING VERY BEAUTIFUL. THE FLOWERS AND THE PLANTS ARE STARTING TO REALLY TAKE GROWTH, WHICH WE WERE HOPING FOR, AND I THINK IT'S REALLY SHOWING GOOD PERFORMANCE NOW. I HAVEN'T HEARD MUCH ON THAT SO HOPEFULLY IT'S POSITIVE. YEAH. WE WON'T GO DOWN THAT ROAD. WE'LL STAY ON THIS ONE. OKAY I'M GOING TO GO TO SOME PUBLIC COMMENT. I HAVE FRED SCHULTZ AND THEN JOHN RAY, IF YOU'LL COME TO THE TO THE SPEAKER AND STATE YOUR NAME. [05:25:11] MY NAME IS FRED SCHULTE. I LIVE AT 440 PALM CIRCLE WEST, WHICH IS ON EXCUSE ME, SOUTH LAKE. WE PURCHASED OUR RESIDENCE THERE IN 1995 AND HAVE FOLLOWED THE NORMAL PATH OF MANY PEOPLE, OF HAVING IT FOR A FEW DAYS TO A FEW MONTHS, ULTIMATELY BECOMING FLORIDA RESIDENTS. AND WE NOW ARE BECOMING PERMANENT NAPLES RESIDENTS. SO I HAVE A LOT OF EXPERIENCE AND TIME ON SOUTH LAKE. OVER THE YEARS THE RESIDENTS ON SOUTH LAKE UNDERTOOK A VERY PROACTIVE PROGRAM TO ADDRESS THE WATER QUALITY OF OUR LAKE BECAUSE IT HAD DETERIORATED AND THERE WERE FISH KILLS AND THE LIKE. WE FORMED A LOOSE VOLUNTEER NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. WE FUNDED THE INSTALLATION OF A AERATION SYSTEM. WE HIRED A LAKE MANAGEMENT CONTRACTING FIRM TO TREAT THE LAKE ON A MONTHLY BASIS. AND IT HAS, HAS HAS RESULTED IN SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENT IN THE LAKE. SOMEBODY MENTIONED TEN YEARS WORTH OF QUALITY DATA. AND AS I GO BACK AND LOOK AT THOSE NUMBERS, YOU CAN SEE IT'S A PROGRAM THAT WORKED. THE PERSON WHO INITIATED THIS PROGRAM MOVED OFF THE LAKE IN 19 OR IN 2015, AND I WAS ASKED TO TAKE OVER THE PROJECT, WHICH I DID. AND THAT HAS LED ME TO HERE, BEING HERE TODAY. WHEN THE NORTH LAKE SOUTH LAKE PROJECT WAS ANNOUNCED IN 2023, I WAS ASKED BOTH BY THE CITY AND THE NEIGHBORS TO ACT AS A LIAISON WITH THE RESIDENTS OF NORTH SOUTH LAKE DURING THE PROJECT. I AGREED TO DO IT FOR A COUPLE OF REASONS. ONE IS I'D BECOME VERY ATTACHED TO THE WORK WE HAD DONE AND I WANTED TO SEE IT CONTINUED. SECONDLY, IN 1968, I GOT A DEGREE FROM THE COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES AND MINING ENGINEERING, AND THAT HAS LED ME TO A ALMOST 4550 YEAR EXPERIENCE IN THE MINING INDUSTRY. I'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN THE DEVELOPMENT AND OPERATION OF MAJOR MINING PROJECTS ALL OVER THE WORLD. AND AS THIS PROJECT WAS DESCRIBED, THE EQUIPMENT AND THE PROCEDURES USED ARE SIMILAR TO A LOT OF THINGS THAT GO ON IN A MINING OPERATION, PARTICULARLY IN THE MINERAL PROCESSING. SO I TOOK ON THAT PROJECT, AND MAINLY WITH THE THOUGHT OF MONITORING THE CONTRACTOR'S ACTIVITIES TO MAKE SURE THE BEST INTEREST OF THE NEIGHBORS WERE PROTECTED. I MADE IT VERY CLEAR THAT THE TIME I WAS INTERESTED IN PROCEDURES OF THE DREDGING OPERATION AND THE CONTRACTOR. I LEFT THE TECHNICAL EVALUATIONS TO THE ENGINEER OF RECORD, AND I CONTINUE TO DO THAT. THERE WAS SOME PUSHBACK INITIALLY BY THE NEIGHBORS ON THE PROJECT. I KIND OF DID SOME CHEERLEADING TO CONVINCE THEM IT WAS GOOD AND EVERYBODY GOT ON BOARD. HOWEVER, IT WAS NOT WITHOUT SOME DIFFICULTIES AND ROUGH TIMES WITH THE CONTRACTOR, WITH THINGS LIKE VIBRATION ON PROPERTIES, CONTAMINATED WATER LEAVING THE SITE AND A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT ISSUES THAT FORTUNATELY WE WERE ABLE TO GET TOGETHER WITH THE HELP OF THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT TEAM AND THE COOPERATION OF CONTRACTORS. MOST OF THESE ISSUES WERE SUCCESSFULLY RESOLVED AND THINGS MOVE FORWARD. THERE IS AN UNDERCURRENT, AS YOU'VE MENTIONED, OF PEOPLE WANTING TO EXPAND THE PROJECT. I'VE CANVASED THE THE NEIGHBORS ON SOUTH LAKE, AND I CAN ASSURE YOU I CAN'T SPEAK FOR ALL OF THEM. BUT THE CONSENSUS OF OPINION OF OPINIONS IS WE HAVE HAD ALL THE DREDGING WE WANT TO HAVE. IT WAS INCONVENIENT. IT'S BEEN NOISY. IT'S BEEN A REAL IRRITATION. AND AND PEOPLE ARE TALKING ABOUT ANOTHER MONTH OR TWO OF DREDGING, WHICH TAKES US INTO ANOTHER LOSS OF THE GOOD SEASON IN NAPLES. SO ANYWAY, I'M GLAD TO HEAR THAT THE ENGINEER OF RECORD HAS MADE A STRONG RECOMMENDATION, AND I HOPE WE MOVE IN THAT DIRECTION AND GET EVERYTHING TIDIED UP. LIFE BACK TO NORMAL ON SOUTH LAKE. SO I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY KIND OF SKIP THROUGH THINGS QUICKLY. SO IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR ANYTHING ELSE, I'D BE HAPPY TO DO IT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR JOINING US THIS MORNING AND BEING HERE FOR MOST OF THE DAY. THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS JOHN RAY. GOOD AFTERNOON. GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. MIKE. JOHN. YES. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TODAY. MY NAME IS JOHN RAY. MY RESIDENCE IS 561 PALM CIRCLE EAST. I'VE BEEN A RESIDENT ON THE LAKE FOR 17 YEARS, SO I'VE SEEN EVERYTHING THAT'S HAPPENED ON THE LAKE. I WANT TO CONGRATULATE FRED SCHULTE FOR MANAGING A LOT OF THIS, BUT EVERYBODY ON THE LAKE, [05:30:04] YOU KNOW, WATCHES THE LAKE, IS CONCERNED ABOUT THE LAKE. LET ME GIVE YOU A LITTLE HISTORY OF THIS PROJECT BECAUSE I THINK IT IS RELEVANT. I BELIEVE THIS PROJECT SHOULD HAVE COMMENCED IN MID 2024 ON OCTOBER 1ST. THE CONTRACTOR WAS OUT ON THE LAKE, STARTED UP HIS MACHINERY. I WAS OUT THERE IN MY BACKYARD WATCHING IT ALL WITH AMAZEMENT. MASSIVE AMOUNTS OF SMOKE WERE POURING OUT OF THE THE BARGE COMPLETELY SHUT DOWN. PROBABLY A RISK OF FIRE. 90 DAYS. DIDN'T SEE THAT CONTRACTOR. 90 FULL DAYS. NOBODY CAN TELL YOU ANYTHING DIFFERENT BECAUSE I WAS OUT THERE EVERY SINGLE DAY WAITING FOR THAT BARGE TO COME BACK OUT. BARGE JUST SAT THERE. JANUARY 1ST, NEW YEAR'S DAY, NEW YEAR'S DAY. I JUST LOOKED AT IT ON MY PHONE. NEW YEAR'S DAY, THE CONTRACTORS OUT THERE FIRING UP THE BARGE. NOW, IF A PRIVATE CONTRACTOR DID THAT ON NEW YEAR'S DAY, SOMEBODY WOULD BE OUT THERE FINDING THEM. NEW YEAR'S DAY STARTING RIGHT UP. FITS AND STARTS, BUT BASICALLY SIX DAYS A WEEK FOR AT LEAST FOUR MONTHS OUT ON SOUTH LAKE. 07:00 IN THE MORNING. THIS THING WOULD FIRE UP EVERYBODY IN THE HOUSE WOULD WAKE UP. GRANDKIDS WILL WAKE UP. SIX DAYS A WEEK, 7 TO 330. A HUGE, YOU KNOW, INCONVENIENCE TO PEOPLE. I'M VERY OBVIOUSLY APPRECIATIVE OF THE GOALS OF GETTING THE LAKE CLEANED UP. I HAD ASKED THE CITY TO PUSH IT OFF. I CONTACTED A FEW OF YOU. I CONTACTED THE CITY TRY TO PUSH THIS OFF THE HIGH SEASON. THERE WAS PUSHBACK. IT WAS ALL COST RELATED. I GUESS THERE'S A GRANT ASSOCIATED WITH THAT. I SORT OF BACKED OFF. FRED PROBABLY CONVINCED ME, ALONG WITH OTHER PEOPLE, JUST TO CALM DOWN, LET THE PROJECT GO FORWARD. AND OBVIOUSLY THE LAKE WILL GET IMPROVED. EVERYONE'S GOOD SITTING OUT THERE. I JUST WAS LOOKING AT THE LAKE, YOU KNOW, IN PREPARATION FOR THIS MEETING. I THINK THE LAKE IS THE LOWEST LEVELS THAT I'VE EVER SEEN. THIS LAKE. AND WE'RE AT THE END OF THE RAINY SEASON, BUT IT'S AS LOW AS I'VE EVER SEEN IT. AND WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO THE ENGINEER, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THERE'S NO CONFUSION HERE THAT WE TOOK A LOT OF SAND OUT OF THAT LAKE. MASSIVE AMOUNTS OF SAND. THERE IS A ONE STORY LEVEL HOUSE OF SAND, YOU KNOW, OUT ON THAT LOT, RIGHT? THAT TOOK HUGE VOLUMES OUT OF THAT LAKE. THAT LAKE IS AS LOW AS I'VE EVER SEEN IT. CONSEQUENTLY, IF YOU LOOK AROUND THE LAKE, YOU WILL SEE WEED GROWTH NOW AT THE BASE OF ALL OF EVERYONE'S LOTS, BECAUSE LIGHT'S COMING THROUGH AND WEEDS ARE NOW GETTING GENERATED. AND THIS IS STEP ONE TO CREATING A SWAMP. AND I DON'T WANT TO SEE THAT WE LIVE IN THAT LAKE. WE DEAL WITH MIDGES. WE DEAL WITH MOSQUITOES, WE DEPEND ON A HEALTHY LAKE AND WE JUST CAN'T HAVE IT DROP ANY FURTHER. I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE AERATORS, BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S A KEY POINT THAT MR. SCHULTE RAISED. WE'VE HAD THOSE ON THE LAKE. WE'VE HAD FIVE OF THOSE ON THE LAKE. THE RESIDENTS PAID FOR THAT OUT OF THEIR OWN POCKETS. THEY WORKED TREMENDOUSLY WELL. THE BENEFITS OF AERATION ARE IMMENSE FOR PURPOSES OF WATER QUALITY. WE'VE BEEN WITHOUT THOSE NOW FOR MORE THAN A COUPLE OF YEARS. OBVIOUSLY WITH THIS PROJECT STARTING, YOU KNOW, MID 2024, WE HAVEN'T HAD THOSE AERATORS OUT THERE FOR 18 MONTHS. WE NEED TO GET THEM BACK ON THE LAKE, GET THE GET THE POWER HOOKED UP AND START THE AERATION. THAT IS THE MOST VALUABLE THING WE CAN DO. NOT DIGGING A BIGGER HOLE OUT THERE. I WILL ALSO TELL YOU THAT I'VE BEEN AROUND LONG ENOUGH TO TO REMEMBER EVERYTHING AROUND THE LAKE. AND ONE OF THE THINGS ON THE LAKE, IF YOU REMEMBER, AND YOU'VE BEEN AROUND THIS CITY LONG ENOUGH. THE ORIGINAL OWNER THAT MR. SCHULTZ REFERENCED, WHO HE TOOK OVER TO FROM IN 2015, HAD MULTIPLE CYPRESS TREES OUT THERE. THEY WERE PLANTED IN THE 1950S WHEN THE LOT OWNER WHO'S GOT THAT SAND OUT THERE TOOK OVER THAT LOT. ALL THOSE CYPRESS TREES WERE CUT DOWN. NOBODY EVER INVESTIGATED THAT. NOBODY SAID ANYTHING ABOUT ALL THAT. AND HERE WE ARE, SITTING HERE IN THAT SAME PROPERTY OWNER IS TALKING ABOUT IS CONCERN FOR THE ENVIRONMENT. WHERE WAS HE WHEN HE CUT DOWN THOSE CYPRESS TREES? THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO KNOW. AS FAR AS THE COST OVERRUNS, YOU'VE HAD $300,000. I USED TO DO MUNICIPAL CONTRACTING YEARS AGO. I DON'T KNOW WHAT PASS THROUGH SUBCONTRACTOR WHERE YOU GET. JUST PASS THROUGH ALL YOUR CHARGES THAT YOU DON'T LIKE. THAT'S INTERESTING. INTERESTING CONTRACT. I HAVEN'T GONE BACK TO LOOK AT IT, BUT IT IS WHAT IT IS. YOU GUYS APPROVED THE CHANGE ORDER. THIS IS ANOTHER 8 OR $900,000 AND IT ASSUMES THERE'S NO CONTRACT MOD. THERE'S NO THERE'S NO PERMIT MOD. THERE'S A PERMIT MOD. YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO ACTUALLY HAVE REVISED ENGINEERING REPORTS. HE'S GOING TO SPEND SOME TIME. THIS ISN'T GOING TO BE 8 OR $900,000. IT'S GOING TO BE 1,000,002 OR 1,000,003. THAT'S MORE THAN A 50% OVERRUN ON THIS CONTRACT. SPEND THE MONEY SOMEWHERE ELSE. WE'RE DONE. HE SAID THIS IS DONE. WE'RE ALL DONE WITH THIS PROJECT. SPEND THOSE DOLLARS ON LAKES THAT NEED IT, NOT THIS LAKE. I'M NOT GOING TO GET INTO THE INDEPENDENCE OF THIS REPORT BECAUSE IT'S NOT INDEPENDENT AT ALL. IT'S FRAUGHT WITH ASSUMPTIONS AND AND SPECULATION. [05:35:08] IT ISN'T. YOU COULDN'T USE THAT REPORT TO ACTUALLY MODIFY A PERMIT. IT'S JUST A PIECE OF PAPER. IT'S AN ADVOCACY PIECE. IT'S NOT INDEPENDENT AT ALL. IT'S BEING ADVOCATED FOR ONE REASON OR ANOTHER BY A CERTAIN PROPERTY OWNER, AND IT IS WHAT IT IS, BUT IT CERTAINLY IS IN EVIDENCE. YOU KNOW, LASTLY, IN SUMMARY, THE GOALS OF THE PROJECT, YOU KNOW, I THINK HAVE BEEN ACHIEVED. IT'S TIME TO MOVE ON. YOU KNOW, IF THE CITY COUNCIL AT SOME POINT WANTS TO DO A MORE THOROUGH STUDY OF THAT LAKE, YOU KNOW, FINE. BUT LET'S NOT RUIN ANOTHER SEASON ON PURE SPECULATION AND PURE AGITATION OF OF A CERTAIN OWNER OF THE PROPERTY. I THINK THIS REQUIRES A LOT MORE IN-DEPTH REVIEW IF PEOPLE WANT TO TAKE TAKE A FURTHER REVIEW OF IT, BUT I DON'T THINK YOU'VE GOT ENOUGH HERE, YOU KNOW, TO ACT ON IT OTHER THAN TO SHUT THIS DOWN AND THEN MOVE ON TO THE NEXT THING. AND AND, AND I THINK PUT THESE AERATORS BACK TO WORK, BECAUSE THAT IS THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT THING THAT WE CAN DO ON THAT LAKE. AND FRANKLY, OTHER LAKES SHOULD BE DOING THE SAME THING. WITH THAT, I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. YEAH. NEXT SPEAKER IS ANSLEY TILLER. MADAM MAYOR. I'M SORRY. NO, I JUST WANT TO MAKE A QUICK COMMENT, BECAUSE CAN YOU JUST I IT'S KIND OF OUT OF ORDER, BUT IF YOU CAN JUST STATE YOUR NAME. AERATION SYSTEM HAS BEEN APPROVED TO BE. THE CITY IS PUTTING THE AERATION SYSTEM BACK IN. IN FACT, I JUST PUT THE CONTRACT IN PLACE UNDER MY NAME WITH FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT TO GET THE HOOKUP. SO I AGREE WITH JOHN. IT'S A KEY THING AND WE'RE UNDERWAY WITH IT. THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER IS AINSLEY TAYLOR. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS AINSLEY TILLEY. AND FOR THE RECORD, I AM WITH ECHO STASIS LLC OUT OF PALM BEACH. AND TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND ABOUT WHO I AM. I KNOW THERE WERE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT AND THE CREDENTIALS. I'M GOING TO TRY AND MOVE QUICKLY. SO I HAVE A FEW THINGS WRITTEN. I WILL BE AS QUICK AS POSSIBLE FOR YOU. MY NAME IS AINSLEY TILLEY. I SERVE AS THE FOUNDER AND PRINCIPAL ENGINEER OF ECHO STASIS, LLC. WE ARE A FLORIDA BASED ENGINEERING FIRM THAT SPECIALIZES IN WATER RESOURCES, NATURE BASED INFRASTRUCTURE, AND ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY SOLUTIONS. I'M A LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER IN FLORIDA AND VIRGINIA, AND HAVE BEEN FOR MORE THAN 21 YEARS WITH EXPERIENCE IN DESIGN, IMPLEMENTATION, WATER MANAGEMENT, AND EVALUATION OF COMPLEX WATER RESOURCE PROJECTS. I HAVE WORKED IN BOTH THE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTORS. MY PUBLIC SERVICE INCLUDES THE SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, WHERE I SERVED AS THE CHIEF OF STATE POLICY FOR THE EVERGLADES DIVISION, AND THAT ROLE I ROLE, I DIRECTED OVER $300 MILLION OF LARGE LANDSCAPE RESTORATION, WATER MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES, IMPLEMENTATION, PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS, AND PROGRAMS ACROSS THE EVERGLADES WATERSHEDS COLLECTIVELY IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR. I HAVE CONTINUED THAT WORK BY LEADING MULTIDISCIPLINARY TEAMS FOR BOTH PUBLIC AGENCIES AND PRIVATE LANDOWNERS, STRUCTURING SOLUTIONS THAT RANGE FROM REGIONAL WATER QUALITY TREATMENT PROJECTS TO MITIGATION, BANKING AND FLOOD RESILIENCE INITIATIVES. MY FIRM IS OFTEN SOUGHT AFTER TO DIAGNOSE AND RESOLVE SITUATIONS WHERE ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS ARE EITHER NOT PERFORMING AS INTENDED, WHETHER IT'S ENGINEERING, HYDROLOGY OR REGULATORY CHALLENGES THAT CAUSE THE PROBLEM BEYOND TECHNICAL EXECUTION. I'VE ALSO CONTRIBUTED SIGNIFICANTLY TO FLORIDA'S ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY FRAMEWORK. I HAVE BEEN REQUESTED BY LEGISLATORS TO ADVISE ON WATER RESOURCE POLICY, AND WAS THE AUTHOR OF THE WATER QUALITY ENHANCEMENT AREA LEGISLATION ENACTED IN 2022 WITH BIPARTISAN SUPPORT, WHICH CREATED A STATUTORY PATHWAY FOR MARKET BASED ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS. AS A COMPANY, WE SUPPORT LARGE SCALE, NATURE BASED, INVESTABLE WATERSHED SOLUTIONS THAT DELIVER MEASURABLE IMPROVEMENTS IN WATER QUALITY, HYDROLOGIC FUNCTION, AND CLIMATE RESILIENCE. OUR PROJECTS INTEGRATE HYDROLOGIC AND ECOLOGICAL SCIENCE WITH FINANCIAL AND REGULATORY STRATEGIES TO ACHIEVE COMPLIANCE, OPTIMIZE PERFORMANCE, AND SECURE SUSTAINABLE FUNDING FOR THOSE CLIENTS WHO SEEK IT. OUR EXPERIENCE SPANS STORMWATER TREATMENT SYSTEMS, AQUIFER RECHARGE PROJECTS, ECOLOGICAL RESTORATION AND NUTRIENT REDUCTION INITIATIVES ACROSS THE STATE, AS WELL AS THE GULF SOUTH. WE ARE OFTEN CALLED IN TO EVALUATE WHETHER SYSTEMS ARE WORKING AS DESIGNED. WE IDENTIFY THE BARRIERS TO PERFORMANCE AND DEVELOP CORRECTIVE STRATEGIES WITH THOSE TEAMS TO ENSURE THAT WATER QUALITY AND ECOLOGICAL GOALS ARE MET. IN THIS MATTER, I WAS ENGAGED BY MR. EHRHART OF PREMIER PROPERTIES GROUP GROUP, WHO I'M ALSO REPRESENTING IN A SEPARATE ISSUE CONCERNING FLOODING IN ANOTHER PART OF THE STATE. MY TESTIMONY TODAY DRAWS ON MY TECHNICAL EXPERTISE IN HYDROLOGY, NUTRIENT PERFORMANCE EVALUATION AND WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM OPERATIONS. AND MY POLICY REGULATORY EXPERIENCE IN FLORIDA'S WATER MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK. THAT IS WHO I AM. THAT IS WHO MY COMPANY IS. WE WERE HIRED BY MR. EHRHART. MR. HERBERT, I UNDERSTAND, REPRESENTS MR. NIEHAUS. I HAVE NEVER MET MR. NIEHAUS. I HAVE NEVER MET THE CONTRACTOR. [05:40:04] I AM NOT LOOKING FOR A CONTRACT WITH YOU. THIS WAS INDEED A THIRD PARTY INDEPENDENT REVIEW. IF YOU WERE ADVERTISING FOR AN ENGINEER RIGHT NOW, I WOULDN'T KNOW YOU WERE, BECAUSE I HAVE NOT SOUGHT TO. LOOK WE DO HAVE A RELATIONSHIP WITH WSP AND OTHER PLACES, AND WE'VE HAD A VERY GOOD RELATIONSHIP WITH THEM, AND WE RESPECT THE WORK THAT THEY DO. SO WE ARE CERTAINLY NOT HERE TO DEBUNK ANY OF THE WORK THAT THE ENGINEER OF RECORD HAS PERFORMED. HE CERTAINLY HAD SOME VERY GOOD EXPLANATIONS FOR WHAT HE EXPLAINED EARLIER. I BELIEVE WE JUST HAVE SOME MATERIAL DIFFERENCES ON SOME OF THE COMPONENTS. AND SO THAT'S WHAT WE WILL WALK THROUGH TODAY. IF YOU ALLOW ME IN MY MY REVIEW MAY I PROCEED. YES PLEASE. THANK YOU. OKAY. SO I THINK THE FIRST THING WE WANTED TO TALK ABOUT IS WE STEP BACK A LITTLE BIT FROM THIS DISCUSSION ON VOLUME, AND WE TALK ABOUT WHAT WERE THE ORIGINAL GOALS. SO IN THE DOCUMENTS THAT WE REVIEWED, AS WE PROVIDED IN THE DOCUMENT WE PROVIDED TO YOU, WE STARTED WITH THE FEASIBILITY STUDY THAT WSP PERFORMED, AND WE LOOK AT THE VERY FIRST INTRODUCTORY PARAGRAPH, AND WE MOVE TO THE STATEMENT OF THE FUNCTIONS OF NORTH LAKE AND SOUTH LAKE ARE TO STORE DIRECT STORMWATER INTO THE GULF OF MEXICO TO MITIGATE FLOODING AND REDUCE PEAK FLOWS DURING RAINFALL EVENTS. AS SUCH, THESE LAKES PROVIDE VALUABLE SERVICES TO THE CITIZENS AND THE CITY OF NAPLES, PARTICULARLY THE RESIDENTS ADJACENT TO NORTH AND SOUTH LAKES. CITIZENS DESIRE AN ESTHETICALLY PLEASING LAKEFRONT WITHOUT NUISANCE ALGAL BLOOMS OR OTHER OBJECTIONABLE CONDITIONS THAT MAY RESULT FROM TEMPORARY WATER QUALITY VARIATIONS THAT ARE INHERENT TO THE DYNAMIC NATURE OF STORMWATER LAKES, AND AS SUCH, YOU AS A AS A CITY ELECTED TO USE THE DREDGING OPTION THAT WAS IN THE FEASIBILITY STUDY TO MOVE FORWARD, TO IDENTIFY HOW YOU'RE GOING TO REMOVE OR IMPROVE THE NUTRIENTS WITHIN THOSE LAKES. YOU SELECTED DREDGING, YOU HIRED WSP, YOU DREDGED. BUT IN ORDER TO DO THAT, YOU HAD TO SEEK A PERMIT. AND THE PERMIT WAS THROUGH THE STORM. THE SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, IT WAS AN ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE PERMIT. PERMIT NUMBER 20240624. AND IN THE COVER LETTER OF THAT PERMIT SIGNED BY THE SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT. EXCUSE ME, SECTION ADMINISTRATOR, IT STATES THAT THE PERMIT IS SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING ONE. NOT RECEIVING A FILED REQUEST FOR A CHAPTER 120 FLORIDA STATUTE ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING. IT WAS NOT PROTESTED. THE ATTACHED GENERAL CONDITIONS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE PERMITS, WHICH ARE CONSISTENT WITH PRETTY MUCH ANY PERMIT RECEIVED. THE ATTACHED SPECIAL CONDITIONS, WHICH ARE WHICH ARE TYPICALLY SPECIFIC TO YOUR PROJECT. AND ALL REFERENCED EXHIBITS, SPECIFICALLY EXHIBIT 2.0, WHICH IS THE DRAWING SET THAT SHOWS THE BOTTOM ELEVATION TARGET IN THE CROSS SECTIONS CLEARLY, AND ESTIMATES THAT AN APPROXIMATE VOLUME WILL BE REMOVED. THE REFERENCE TO VOLUMES THROUGHOUT THE PERMIT ARE APPROXIMATE AND REFERENCED AS APPROXIMATE, BOTH IN DRAWING AND PERMIT. WE DO NOT ANTICIPATE THAT. AND I THINK MR. CORNYN SAID THE SAME, THAT YOU DON'T ANTICIPATE IT TO BE AN EXACT NUMBER. IT'S NOT FEASIBLE TO KNOW AN EXACT QUANTITY THAT'S GOING TO COME OUT OF THOSE LAKES. YOU WILL LEAVE SOME. YOU WILL MAYBE NOT LEAVE SOME. MAYBE YOU'LL TAKE MORE THAN YOU SHOULD HAVE. BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, THERE IS SOMEWHAT OF AN ART TO A DREDGE, TO A DREDGE PROJECT. HOWEVER, WHAT ISN'T THE ART IS THE MODEL THAT WAS USED TO CREATE THE UNDERSTANDING OF HOW MUCH STORAGE EXISTS IN THAT PROJECT, OR SHOULD BE EXISTING IN THAT PROJECT. THE MODEL CREATED A BOTTOM ELEVATION. THE BOTTOM ELEVATION TELLS US AT THE END OF THE DAY, IF WE SEEK THIS BOTTOM AND AS THE I'LL SAY, THE BASIN OR THE POOL FILLS UP, YOU SHOULD HAVE A TOTAL NUMBER OF VOLUME STORAGE AVAILABLE TO YOU, WHICH IS PROVEN IN THE MODEL THAT WSP PROVIDED WITHIN THE ERP, WHICH WAS THE STRUCTURE FOR DETERMINING ONE. HOW DEEP SHOULD THEY GO? AND IT ALSO DROVE THE THE MODEL THAT WAS PROVIDED IN ORDER TO PROVE YOUR WATER QUALITY REDUCTION. THAT'S NECESSARY IN ORDER FOR YOU TO GET AN ERP PERMIT. THAT IS THE REQUIREMENT FOR AN ERP PERMIT ALONE. ALL LAND DEVELOPMENT GETS AN ERP PERMIT. EVERYONE WHO COMES IN HERE AND PRESENTS TO YOU A NEW PROJECT ON NEW LAND WHERE THERE IS A FOOTPRINT CHANGE IS LIKELY SINKING AN ERP PROJECT. THERE ARE VERY, VERY FEW EXCEPTIONS THAT YOU WOULD NOT NEED ONE. SO THAT SAID, THE STAGE STORAGE VOLUME IS WHAT WE CALL THAT WAS ESTABLISHED BY MODEL AND BY PERMIT. BECAUSE THAT STAGE STORAGE EXISTS. YOU CAN ESTIMATE THE AMOUNT OF VOLUME THAT YOU SHOULD BE REMOVING BASED OFF YOUR BATHYMETRIC SURVEY THAT WAS TAKEN, AND IT'S LIKELY IT'S GOING TO BE OFF. RIGHT. IT'S DREDGED. YOU'RE NOT DOWN THERE MEASURING EVERY LITTLE INCH, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, THE BOTTOM ELEVATION IS DETERMINED IN THE PERMIT THAT IS THE DRIVER AND IT IS NOT THE VOLUME THAT DRIVES YOUR PERMIT. THEREFORE, WE DISAGREE THAT BECAUSE YOU REMOVE THE AMOUNT OF ANTICIPATED OR APPROXIMATE VOLUME THAT YOU HAVE SATISFIED YOUR PERMIT. [05:45:02] WE DISAGREE. BECAUSE WHAT IS CLEAR IS IT REFERENCES EXHIBIT 2.0, WHICH HAS A VERY CLEAR BOTTOM ELEVATION. THE BOTTOM ELEVATION TELLS US YOU'VE YOU'VE ACHIEVED YOUR STAGE STORAGE, WHICH IS THE REQUIREMENT TO PROVE THAT ONE, YOU'VE HELD ENOUGH WATER LONG ENOUGH IN ORDER TO MEET YOUR ATTENUATION, WHICH IS THE TIME IN WHICH THAT WATER IS STORED TO MEET YOUR WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS. THAT IS YOUR ERP. THAT IS WHAT EVERY LAND DEVELOPMENT ENTITY HAS TO HAVE AS A GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY. YOU ALSO HAVE THE STANDARD OF MEETING CHAPTER 403.067 FLORIDA STATUTES. THAT IS THE ESTABLISHMENT OF TMDLS AND THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PRACTICES ASSOCIATED WITH THOSE THINGS. THE 303 D VERIFIED LIST. THIS IS ADMINISTERED BY THE DEP. THE DEP SAYS HOW MANY PLACES IN IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA DO WE HAVE THAT ARE IMPAIRED WATER BODIES? THESE TWO WATER BODIES IN PARTICULAR, AS MR. KOENIG SAID, ARE NOT IMPAIRED THEMSELVES. HOWEVER, THEY ARE CONSIDERED CONTRIBUTORS TO AN IMPAIRED WATERBODY. THEREFORE, AS AN ENTITY, YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR CREATING SOLUTIONS THAT IMPROVE THE CONDITIONS DOWNSTREAM. AND THEREFORE, WHEN YOU'RE MAKING DECISIONS ABOUT LAKES LIKE THIS, THE CONSIDERATION FOR BOTH SATISFYING YOUR ERP PERMIT AND 403.067 SHOULD BE ACCOMPLISHED IN THE EVALUATION. DO WE KNOW IF THAT HAS BEEN MET? I CANNOT TELL YOU WHETHER OR NOT THAT HAS BEEN MET. BASED OFF THE INFORMATION THAT WE HAD AVAILABLE TO US TO REVIEW. FURTHER, THE ERP THAT WAS PERMITTED WAS BASED OFF OF A PREVIOUS RULE IN JUNE 20TH. ON JUNE 28TH, 2020, FOR A NEW RULE, UPDATED RULE WAS ESTABLISHED THAT RAISED THE BAR, AS MR. CORNING SAID, ON WATER QUALITY STANDARDS. THAT WAS A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN THE AMOUNT OF WATER QUALITY OR NUTRIENT REDUCTION THAT HAS TO BE PROVIDED FOR EACH PROJECT THAT COMES FORWARD. WE ARE UNAWARE FROM THE DATA THAT WE HAVE, WHETHER THAT IS MET AT THIS POINT. HE WAS NOT OBLIGATED TO MEET THAT AT THAT TIME. HOWEVER, IF YOU WERE CONSIDERING TRYING TO RAISE THE BAR ON YOURSELVES, WHICH I BELIEVE YOU ARE BASED OFF OF THE WORKSHOP THAT I LISTENED TO THE OTHER DAY, YOU'RE MAKING SOME BIG MOVES AND ALL THE STORMWATER MONITORING YOU'RE DOING THAT SHOULD BE AT A MINIMUM BAR YOU'RE TRYING TO SEEK NOW, AT LEAST UNDER A DEVELOPMENT PERSPECTIVE. BUT YOU ALSO MUST BE CONSIDERATE OF HOW EACH OF THE IMPROVEMENTS YOU ARE MAKING IS CONTRIBUTING AND IMPROVING TO YOUR LONG TERM OVERALL OBLIGATION UNDER 403.067. SO I'LL STOP THERE FOR A SECOND. I DO HAVE A COUPLE MORE THINGS, BUT I WANTED TO KIND OF LAY THAT OUT BECAUSE IN OUR OPINION, THE PERMIT HAS NOT BEEN MET BECAUSE THE BOTTOM ELEVATION IS UNCLEAR AS TO WHETHER IT'S BEEN MET. AND PLUS, WE DO NOT SEE THAT THAT ELEVATION IS CONSISTENTLY BEEN MET ACROSS THE LAKES. WE BELIEVE SOME OF THE SIDE SLOPES HAVE NOT BEEN THE 4 TO 1 SLOPE HAS NOT BEEN MET. SO OUR RECOMMENDATION WAS CONTINUE UNTIL YOU ACHIEVE THE POINTS WITHIN THE EXISTING DESIGN NOT TO REDESIGN. WE BELIEVE THE DESIGN IS SUFFICIENT. AND DOES THE JOB IT'S SUPPOSED TO. COUNCIL. SO INAPPROPRIATE. DID YOU HAVE MORE THAT YOU WANTED TO SHARE WITH US? I THINK THAT'S THAT'S PROBABLY ENOUGH FOR NOW. THANK YOU. YES. SO DO YOU MIND SAYING WHO HIRED YOU AND WHY YOU'RE HERE REAL QUICK? YES. I WAS HIRED BY MR. MATT EARHART. MATTHEW EARHART WITH PREMIER PROPERTIES GROUP. I AM REPRESENTING HIM ON SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. IN A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT PLACE. SO I THINK HE REACHED OUT TO ME BECAUSE OF A CONCERN OF ONE OF HIS CLIENTS. AND THAT IS, I DON'T KNOW, THE CLIENT. SO IS MR. EARHART A PROPERTY OWNER, OR IS HE NOT? THAT I'M AWARE OF. I BELIEVE HE IS BUILDING A HOME FOR SOMEONE. THAT'S WHAT I UNDERSTAND. I DON'T HAVE THE DETAILS. I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE RELATION BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE THIS IS VERY. OKAY, WELL, LET ME LET LET ME. I'LL BE HONEST. WE HAVE A CONTRACT WITH SOMEONE. WE HAVE SOMEONE THAT'S NOT ASSOCIATED WITH THE CITY IN ANY WAY STATING THAT OUR PERMIT IS INEFFICIENT OR NOT BEING COMPLIED WITH. THERE'S SOME LEGAL RAMIFICATIONS THERE. I HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO DISCUSS ANY OF THIS, AND I JUST AM VERY THROWN OFF RIGHT NOW. DID YOU NOT SEE THE LETTER THAT WAS GIVEN TO COUNCIL AS PART OF THE AGENDA FROM THE COMPANY? WHAT COMPANY ARE YOU WITH? ECO STASIS LLC? SO LET ME TELL YOU THAT I ALLOWED HER TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF JOHN REMINGTON. TO ME, THIS GOING BACK AND FORTH WITH EMAILS, IT'S BEST THAT WE'RE HERE. WE GIVE THE INFORMATION, THE OPPOSING INFORMATION, AND US TO DECIDE WHAT TO AND HOW TO MOVE FORWARD. SO THIS ISN'T A LEGAL ISSUE. THIS IS MAYBE, FROM YOUR POINT OF VIEW, THE THE COMMENTS THAT SHE'S MAKING THAT IT MAY NOT POSSIBLY BE, [05:50:04] BUT THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT IS COMING FORWARD AS A LITIGATION. IT IS PURELY QUESTIONING FROM THE ANOTHER SIDE, ANOTHER POINT OF VIEW OF THE COMMUNITY ABOUT THEIR CONCERNS FOR THIS DREDGE. AND TO BE CLEAR, WE ARE NOT ASSERTING THAT YOU ARE IN NONCOMPLIANCE AT THE MOMENT. WE ARE SAYING THAT WE DO NOT BELIEVE THE PERMIT CONDITIONS HAVE BEEN MET TO CLOSE THE PERMIT WITHOUT A MODIFICATION. REMINGTON IS A PROPERTY OWNER ON ONE OF THE LAKES. THAT'S THE THAT'S THE CONNECTION. SO THANK YOU, MR. MCCONNELL. COUNCIL DO YOU HAVE QUESTIONS? YES. VICE MAYOR. AND THEN. OH, WAIT, LET ME GIVE IT A MINUTE. AND THEN VICE MAYOR. I THINK MY BIGGEST CONCERN ABOUT THIS GENERALLY DREDGING OF LAKES IS THAT SO FAR AS I CAN TELL, WE'RE NOT FINDING WHAT THE SOURCE OF THE POLLUTION IS. SO IF I USE A WOUND TYPE SITUATION, I'VE GOT A I'VE GOT AN ARM THAT'S BLEEDING AND I KEEP BAND-AIDS ON IT. YES, MA'AM. BUT I DON'T KNOW WHY IT KEEPS BLEEDING. DOING SO. IN MY OPINION, WE'RE DOING HALF THE JOB WE SHOULD BE DOING UNTIL WE FIND WHAT THE SOURCE OF THE POLLUTION IS. WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO DREDGE. SO THAT'S I BASICALLY HAVE A PROBLEM WITH JUST THE PROCESS WE'RE USING AS A COMMENT. SO THAT WAS A COMMENT. BUT IS THAT WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO IS FIND THE SOURCE OR WE WERE TRYING TO DREDGE. SO THAT WE COULD HAVE A BETTER WATER QUALITY. AND WE ARE. WE DEFINITELY ARE. OKAY. WE DEFINITELY ARE. BUT WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO PAY TO DREDGE. IF WE DON'T FIND OUT, FIND THE SOURCE OF THE POLLUTION AND TRY TO EXACERBATE THE SOURCE. THAT'S ALL I'M SAYING. AND THAT'S THROUGH TESTING. BARTON AND VICE MAYOR AND THEN KRISEMAN JUST TO TRY TO GET SOME CLARIFICATION ON THIS. FIRST AND FOREMOST, IN REFERENCE TO COUNCILMAN KRISTEN'S CONCERNS. AND THEY'RE THEY'RE LEGITIMATE. HOWEVER, WHAT I WILL TELL YOU IS THAT DUE TO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RECEIVED I WANTED TO HAVE THIS CONTINUE THIS CONVERSATION SOME TO MAKE SURE THAT WE AS A COUNCIL, WERE, IN FACT, DOING THE JOB PROPERLY AS WE NEEDED TO BE DOING IT. SO, AND THIS IS NOT TO SUGGEST THAT IT WASN'T DONE PROPERLY. IN FACT, THE THE TESTIMONY WE'VE RECEIVED HERE TODAY I'M VERY HAPPY TO HEAR THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY MEETING WATER QUALITY REQUIREMENTS AND THAT WE HAVE MET THE PROJECT OBJECTIVES BASED ON ON TESTIMONY FROM OUR OUR ENGINEER. NOW, WITH THAT SAID, WHAT I'D LIKE TO TO KNOW IS SPECIFICALLY ON LAKE NINE. THE INITIAL ESTIMATE WAS THAT WE NEEDED TO REMOVE SOME SPECIFICALLY 12,000. AND I UNDERSTAND THIS IS THIS IS HARDLY AN EXACT SCIENCE. YOU KNOW, WE'RE DEALING WITH MUCK AND MUD AND YEAH, I GET THAT. BUT ANYWAY, THE INITIAL ESTIMATE WAS THAT WE NEEDED TO REMOVE 12,457YD³. NOW, MR. MIDDLETON, OUR CONTRACTOR, IS THE THE THE CONTRACTOR THAT'S ACTUALLY DOING THE DREDGING IS ENERGY RESOURCES INC.. YES. OKAY. SO WE RECEIVED AND HE'S HIRED BY US. OR IS HE. OKAY. SO WE THAT'S OUR CONTRACTOR. OUR CONTRACTOR PROVIDED US WITH A LETTER THAT SUGGESTED THAT THE INITIAL ESTIMATE WAS INACCURATE, AND IT SHOULD BE. IT SHOULD BE SPECIFICALLY 20,278 YARDS CUBIC YARDS OUT OF LAKE NINE. SHOWN BY. AND I'M USING QUOTES HERE. ACCORDING TO THE LETTER, I JUST THAT I'VE READ THE ACTUAL SURVEY IS TELLING US THAT THAT NUMBER SHOULD BE 20,278YD³ REMOVED. WHEN OUR INITIAL ESTIMATE WAS AGAIN, ONLY 12,457. WAS THERE A NEW WAS THERE A VISION OR AN ADJUSTMENT DONE AT ANY POINT IN TIME IN REFERENCE TO THE AMOUNT? AND THESE ARE THIS QUESTION IS FOR YOU GUYS TO THE AMOUNT THAT NEEDED TO BE REMOVED IN ORDER TO, TO PROPERLY FULFILL THE PERMIT REQUIREMENTS. DID WE EVER, AT SOME POINT IN TIME SAY, OH, THAT INITIAL ESTIMATE OF 12,000 AND CHANGE WAS TOO LOW AND WE NEEDED TO BE PULLING MORE OUT? I'M GOING TO ANSWER AND BEFORE YOU ANSWER, I JUST WANT TO SAY I WANT TO EMPHASIZE ONE MORE TIME THAT THAT THAT THIS IS NOT COMING FROM A THIRD PARTY SOURCE OR A NEIGHBOR OR A PROPERTY OWNER. THIS IS COMING FROM OUR HIRED GENERAL CONTRACTOR, OUR HIRED CONTRACTOR WHO'S DOING THE JOB FOR US. AND SUPPOSEDLY ONCE HE GOT IN THERE, HE CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THERE WAS A LOT MORE THAN WHAT WE HAD ESTIMATED THAT THERE WAS. THAT IS MY CONCERN. MY MY ISSUE HERE IS DID WE PULL OUT THE RIGHT AMOUNT? I'M HAPPY TO HEAR THAT WE'RE MEETING REQUIREMENTS AND OBJECTIVES, BUT WE'RE DOING THAT WITHOUT PULLING OUT THE RIGHT AMOUNT. [05:55:05] I MEAN, IF YOU COULD JUST WALK ME THROUGH THAT BECAUSE I'M JUST A DUMB INSURANCE GUY. I APPRECIATE IT. YEAH. SO AS I MENTIONED, AND I WROTE A STATEMENT BACK TO THIS LETTER THAT WAS SENT I THINK BACK IN JUNE. BUT I THINK THE CONTRACTOR HAD MENTIONED THE 2.2FT OF A DIFFERENTIAL. AND AS I ALLUDED TO IN THE BEGINNING, THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT METHODOLOGIES WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT DOING THE SURVEY. SO THERE'S A METHODOLOGY OF DOING THE HYDRO SURVEY, WHICH IS BASICALLY PENETRATING WITH LATER RADAR AT THE BOTTOM, AND IT GENERATES AN ELEVATION BACK TO THAT PIECE OF EQUIPMENT. AND SO HE DID THAT SURVEY USING THAT METHODOLOGY. HOWEVER, OUR ESTIMATE WAS USING THAT METHODOLOGY THAT YOU ACTUALLY PUSHED DOWN THROUGH THAT UNCONSOLIDATED MATERIAL THAT I'LL CALL IT, THAT FLUFF OF MATERIAL. AND SO WHAT WE HAD TOLD THEM DURING THE PROCESS, WHEN THEY HAD PROVIDED US THAT SURVEY, IS THAT YOU'RE COMPARING APPLES TO ORANGES BECAUSE WE DID OUR METHODOLOGY THIS WAY. YOU'RE DOING A METHODOLOGY THAT WAY. AND BASED ON OUR RECOMMENDATION, WE SAID, WELL, THAT WAS NOT THE METHODOLOGY THAT WE ACCEPTED IN REGARDS TO HOW WE WERE GOING TO EVALUATE THE QUANTITY OF MATERIAL TO BE REMOVED. BECAUSE AGAIN, AS I MENTIONED RIGHT NOW, IF I GO OUT TO THE LAKE AND I TAKE A CORE SEDIMENT, I'M GOING TO SEE THIS UNCONSOLIDATED LAYER ON TOP OF THE REAL SEDIMENT CHARACTERISTICS. AND IF YOU TOOK A HYDRO SURVEY RIGHT NOW, YOU WOULD PICK UP THAT UNCONSOLIDATED LAYER OF SEDIMENT VERSUS IF YOU ACTUALLY PUSHED A ROD DOWN, YOU'D ACTUALLY GET THE REAL BOTTOM OF THAT ELEVATION. SO THERE WAS A DIFFERENTIAL IN THAT QUANTITY. AND THAT'S WHY THAT 20,000 CAME UP AS A QUESTION. OKAY. SO WHAT YOU'RE TELLING ME IS THAT THERE WERE TWO DIFFERENT METHODOLOGIES USED FOR MEASURING WHAT NEEDED TO BE PULLED OUT. AND THE METHODOLOGY THAT THAT YOU USED TO GIVE US, THAT 12,457 WAS, IN FACT, ACCURATE IN THE AMOUNT THAT WE PULLED OUT OF THAT LAKE WAS IN FACT DID IN FACT MEET OUR PERMIT AND HAS AND HAS GIVEN US THE OPPORTUNITY TO ACCOMPLISH OUR REQUIREMENTS AND PROJECT OBJECTIVES. OKAY. THANK YOU. THAT'S WHAT I NEED TO KNOW. I HAVE KRISTEN. THANK YOU. THE JUST ONE, ONE ADDITION OR MINOR CORRECTION, THE I THINK THE REPRESENTATIVE FROM EKSTASIS HAD HER INITIAL COMMENTS HAD INDICATED THAT IT WAS HER SUPPOSITION. I'LL SAY THAT IT WAS MR. MIHAS, THE PROPERTY OWNER ON THE LOT WHERE WE HAVE AN EASEMENT AND THE DREDGING WAS BEING CONDUCTED THAT POSSIBLY RETAINED MR. EARHART, WHO THEN RETAINED EKSTASIS. THANK YOU FOR THAT, MR. REMINGTON. OBVIOUSLY HAS ALSO BEEN INVOLVED IN THIS EFFORT AND AND AND RAISING QUESTIONS ABOUT WHERE WE STAND. THE AGAIN, I JUST I CERTAINLY APPRECIATE AND RESPECT THE OUR OUR VISITOR FROM EKSTASIS. AND SHE'S, YOU KNOW, BASED ON HER TESTIMONY, I'M NOT TECHNICALLY COMPETENT ENOUGH TO KNOW WHETHER TO AGREE OR DISAGREE WITH HER CONCLUSIONS. SHE HAS HER POINT OF VIEW ON THIS. ALTHOUGH OBVIOUSLY BASED ON JUST IN THE NATURE OF THINGS, LIMITED OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE KNOWLEDGE OF WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING HERE. AND AND SHE DISAGREES ON ON SEVERAL POINTS WITH OUR CONSULTANT. THE THERE IS A WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS A COUPLE OF RESIDENTS WHO ARE SEEKING TO EXTEND THIS PROJECT AT THIS TIME AND WHO HAVE CONTRACTED WITH A CONSULTANT TO ARGUE THAT WE HAVE OUR CONSULTANTS, OUR STAFF AND OUR CONSULTANTS WHO HAVE A DIFFERENT POINT OF VIEW. WE'VE HEARD TESTIMONY FROM RESIDENTS WHO RESIDE ON THE LAKE WHO WHO, BASED ON THEIR TESTIMONY, ARE SAYING THAT THE VAST MAJORITY OF RESIDENTS ALL ALONG THE LAKE LAKE NINE SOUTH LAKE ARE YOU KNOW, READY TO BRING THIS PROJECT TO, TO A CLOSURE AND MOVE ON AND BEGIN TO GET THE LAKE BACK IN PROPER WORKING CONDITION. [06:00:04] THE OTHER ODDITY OF THIS, AND I WANT TO SAY IT MORE EXPLICITLY BUT, YOU KNOW, ENERGY RESOURCES, WE CONTRACTED WITH THEM. WE'VE HEARD TESTIMONY FROM RESIDENTS THAT THERE HAVE BEEN ISSUES WITH THEIR PERFORMANCE. THEY OBVIOUSLY MADE A MISTAKE IN HOW THEY HANDLED THE AND CONTRACTED WITH THE PARTY ON THE WASTE DISPOSAL. WE STEPPED IN AND DID A CHANGE ORDER, $300,000 MORE TO MAKE THAT GOOD FOR THEM. AND WHAT WE GET IS A LETTER SAYING YOU KNOW, WE THINK WE THINK YOU NEED TO REMOVE MORE OF THIS MUCK AND, YOU KNOW, PAY US MORE AND WE'LL DO IT. AND BY THE WAY, WE WON'T EVEN CHARGE YOU ALL THAT IT WOULD COST RIGHT NOW IF YOU PROMISE US A CONTRACT ON FUTURE LAKES. LIKES. OKAY. YEAH. LET ME JUST FINISH. AND THAT'S WHAT IT SAID. SO IT DOESN'T LEAVE ME WITH A LOT OF CONFIDENCE. AS ON THAT, ON THAT FRONT. AND THAT'S WHY, AMONG OTHER THINGS, I FEEL WE JUST NEED TO FOLLOW THE ADVICE OF OUR STAFF AND OUR CONSULTANT AND MOVE FORWARD. THANK YOU. I REALLY WAS JUST TRYING TO. I HAVE ONE MORE PUBLIC SPEAKER, AND I THOUGHT THERE WAS A QUESTION FOR MISS TILLEY. I HAVE PAUL REINHART, AND THEN THAT'S ALL THE PUBLIC SPEAKERS I HAVE. AND THEN I'LL PUT YOU ON. PAUL REINHART AND I OWN ENERGY RESOURCES. MAYBE PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT OF CLARIFICATION. WAIT, IS YOUR MICROPHONE ON? NO IT'S NOT. SHOULD THE RIGHT ON THE ON THE PEDESTAL TURN RIGHT? NOT YET. THERE YOU GO. IS THAT IT? THANK YOU SIR. OKAY. I'M PAUL REINHART WITH ENERGY RESOURCES. I OWN ENERGY RESOURCES, AND HOPEFULLY I CAN PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT OF CLARITY HERE. FIRST OF ALL, I'M SORRY ABOUT THE LATE START UP ON THE PROJECT. WE HAD AN ENGINE FAILURE ON THE DREDGE, AND AT THAT POINT, WE IF WE COULD HAVE SIMPLY BOUGHT ANOTHER ENGINE THAT HAD BEEN FINE, BUT WE WERE TOLD WE NEEDED TO REPAIR THAT ONE. WE TRIED TO REPAIR IT HERE. THERE WAS NO ONE HERE. KELLY BROTHERS WOULDN'T DO IT. MY PARTNER IN SAINT LOUIS, WHO OWNS ONE OF THE BIG MINING COMPANIES, COULDN'T HIRE FABRIC TO DO IT. WE HAD TO PHYSICALLY CARRY THAT ENGINE UP TO A COMPANY IN VERSAILLES, MISSOURI, TO REBUILD THAT ENGINE AND BRING IT BACK. AND I'M SORRY FOR THE DELAY, BUT THAT'S WHAT CAUSED THE DELAY. AS FAR AS THE EXTRA TIME WE HAD, SOMEONE ASKED ABOUT THE EXTRA TIME TAKEN TO DO THIS PROJECT. WHENEVER YOU GET TO BID A PROJECT LIKE THIS, YOU LOOK AT ALL THE INFORMATION AND THEY PROVIDE YOU COINS THAT TELL YOU HOW MUCH SAND IS IN THERE AND HOW MUCH MUCK IS IN THERE, AND THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE THAT THOSE COINS ARE CORRECT. NOW, IF YOU LOOK AT ALL THOSE COINS AND ADD THEM ALL UP, WE WOULD ONLY HAVE MAYBE ONE DAY OF WE WOULD ONLY HAVE MAYBE 10% OF IT BEING MUCK AND 90% OF IT BEING SAND. I MEAN, IF YOU LOOK AT THAT, THAT THAT'S IN THE BID SPECS, WELL, THAT ISN'T WHAT HAPPENED. BUT WE KIND OF ANTICIPATED THEY MAY BE OFF. WE JUST DIDN'T THINK THEY WERE THAT FAR OFF. SO THIS EXTRA THING FOR TRUCKING THAT YOU APPROVED. WELL, WE WERE ONLY SUPPOSED TO BE AVERAGING 15 YARDS IN A TRUCK. THAT'S WHAT THEY DESIGNED IT FOR. WELL, AND THEN SO MANY TRUCKLOADS. WELL, IT TURNS OUT THAT IT WAS, YOU KNOW, 40% MORE TRUCKLOADS OR 30% MORE TRUCKLOADS. SO IT DID TAKE EXTRA TIME. AND WE APOLOGIZE FOR THAT. WE DIDN'T CLAIM EXTRA TIME. WE COULD HAVE CLAIMED EXTRA TIME, BUT WE DIDN'T. OKAY. SO, YOU KNOW, I JUST WANTED TO ADDRESS THAT AS FAR AS THE TIME, AS FAR AS THE VOLUME. THIS ISN'T OUR FIRST RODEO. WE DID LAKE MANOR. WE WERE THE SUCCESSFUL CONTRACTOR TO DO YOUR VERY FIRST PROJECT. AND WHEN YOU DO YOUR SURVEYING ON THESE PROJECTS, WE YOU'RE YOU HAVE A PRE DREDGED SURFACE AREA AND THEN YOU'RE, YOU HAVE THE BOTTOM AT THE END. AND SO WHAT THEY GAVE US FOR INFORMATION AT LAKE MANOR, IT WAS WE WENT OUT AND CHECKED IT AND IT WAS VERY CLOSE AND THERE WAS NO BIG DEAL. IT WAS NEVER AN ISSUE. WE CAME TO DO THIS PROJECT. I HAD MY MAN. I HAD A SURVEYOR, LOCAL GUY COME OUT. GIVE US AN ELEVATION. PLEASE JUST WRAP UP. THANK YOU. [06:05:03] GIVE US AN ELEVATION ON THE LAKE, AND THEN WE GO DOWN. AND MY MAN MEASURED THE SURFACE, AND HE CALLED ME UP AND HE SAID, HEY, INSTEAD OF TWO FEET OF MATERIAL, THERE'S 3.5FT OF MATERIAL. I SAID, I CAN'T BE RIGHT. IT CAN'T BE THAT MUCH MORE. I SAID, WELL, WHAT I'M GOING TO DO, I'M GOING TO HIRE PARKS SURVEYING TO GO OUT AND SURVEY IT, BECAUSE THEY'RE THE ONES WHO ARE GOING TO HAVE TO DO THE FINAL SURVEY WITH. I TOLD THEM, DO NOT USE OUR BENCHMARK. START IT FROM SCRATCH. WHAT DO WE HAVE? THEY WENT OUT, THEY SURVEYED IT AND HE CAME UP WITH THE SAME THING. IT'S 21,000 YARDS. IT'S 12,000 YARDS. SO WE GAVE THIS INFORMATION TO THE CITY. NOW, WE DIDN'T REQUEST A CHANGE ORDER, BUT WE'RE TELLING THEM THERE'S A LOT MORE MATERIAL TO DESIGN DEPTH. AND THAT WAS IN NOVEMBER. I WROTE A LETTER IN FOUR MONTHS LATER ABOUT ALL THIS CIRCUMVENTING THE CHAIN OF COMMAND, BECAUSE I DIDN'T THINK WE WERE GETTING ANYWHERE WITH THE CITY. THEY'VE HAD THIS FOR FOUR MONTHS. WHY AREN'T THEY TELLING US WHAT TO DO? BUT, YOU KNOW, THEY DIDN'T. SO SOMEONE ASKED, WELL, HOW COME MYSELF AND MY SON MICHAEL, WHO'S THE PROJECT MANAGER, DON'T AGREE ON THIS PROJECT? AND WE DO AGREE. WE AGREE THAT ONE, THE DESIGN WAS SEVEN FEET OF WATER AND 4 TO 1 SIDE SLOPES. WE AGREE THAT THEY CHANGED THE SCOPE OF WORK BECAUSE THAT WAS THE SCOPE OF WORK. THEY CHANGED THE SCOPE OF WORK AND IT BECAME NITROGEN AND PHOSPHORUS. WE AGREE ON THAT. WHAT WE DON'T AGREE ON IS MICHAEL IS ALSO A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER IN FLORIDA, LICENSED, AND HE'S A LICENSED GENERAL CONTRACTOR. HE SAID IF THE ENGINEER OF RECORD TELLS YOU TO CHANGE SOMETHING, YOU CHANGE IT AND THAT'S IT. I CAN NEVER ACCEPT THAT. THAT'S WHAT WE DON'T AGREE ON. YOU DID NOT GET THE LAKE THAT YOU WANTED. YOU GOT THE VOLUME YOU WANTED AND IN THE TIME FRAME THAT YOU WANTED A LITTLE BIT LATER. WE'RE SORRY ABOUT THAT. BUT AGAIN, THIS THIS ISN'T OUR FIRST PROJECT. AND YOU KNOW, THE FACT THAT SOME PEOPLE WHO LIVE ON THE LAKE WANT IT DONE TO WHAT THE DESIGN WAS, YOU KNOW, THAT. AND OTHER PEOPLE ON THE LAKE WANT TO GET RID OF US. WELL, THAT'S FINE. YOU KNOW I SENT MEMOS TO OTHER PEOPLE IN THE CITY TRYING TO CONVINCE THEM THAT MAYBE THEY OUGHT TO GO AFTER IT ALL. IT WAS OBVIOUS THAT THEY DID NOT WANT IT. THEY JUST THEY WERE GOING TO GO WITH THEIR ENGINEER OF RECORD. AND AT THAT POINT, I WROTE HIM A LETTER AND I SAID, LOOK, I'M NOT CREATING ANY MORE WAVES. WE DEFER TO THE ENGINEER RECORD. LET'S JUST MOVE ON. SO THAT'S WHERE WE ARE TODAY. THANK YOU. AND THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. I, I, I THINK IT'S MOST IMPORTANT THAT WE HAD THIS CONVERSATION BECAUSE THERE ARE VARIABLES THAT EXPECTATIONS. AND WE DON'T WANT TO DO THIS. AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO THIS FOR ANOTHER. HOW MANY YEARS? IT'S ALREADY BEEN 40 YEARS OR MORE THAT WE'VE NOT DONE THIS WORK. SO GETTING IT RIGHT WAS, IS REALLY, I THINK, THE WHOLE REASON THAT COUNCIL PAID ATTENTION TO THIS STRING OF EMAILS AND CONCERNS. SO NOW THAT IT'S COUNCIL HAS HAD THE TESTIMONY FROM OTHERS. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE TODAY. I WILL NOW FINISH WITH VICE MAYOR AND THEN KRAMER. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. FOR OUR ENGINEER OF RECORD. FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU, EVERYBODY, FOR THE STATEMENTS THAT THEY'VE MADE. AND I CAN I CAN SENSE A LOT OF PASSION AND COMMITMENT TO THE CITY TO TRY TO, YOU KNOW, WE'VE GOT A LOT OF LAKES. I THINK I SENSE THAT EVERYONE WANTS TO GET THE JOB DONE. RIGHT? RIGHT. WE DON'T WANT TO. WE DON'T WANT TO STOP SHORT. WE DON'T WANT TO DO MORE THAN WHAT'S NECESSARY. WE JUST WANT IT DONE RIGHT. THAT'S IT. THAT'S. THAT'S WHAT'S IN MY HEART. DON'T WANT, DON'T WANT TO PUT ANY BLAME ON ME. I'M NOT UP HERE HEAD HUNTING. THAT'S NOT WHAT THIS IS ABOUT. SO, FOR OUR ENGINEER OF RECORD, ARE WE COMPELLED TO VERIFY THE BOTTOM ELEVATION AS PART OF OUR PERMIT FOR THE WORK ON LAKES EIGHT AND NINE. YEAH, SO I'M GLAD YOU ASKED THAT QUESTION BECAUSE I WANTED TO ANSWER IT. SO WHEN WE GO AND DO AN AS-BUILT CERTIFICATION, SO WHEN WE TAKE ALL THE INFORMATION ASSOCIATED WITH THE CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, AND SIMILARLY, AS I MENTIONED IN A DREDGING PROJECT, IT'S NOT AN EXACT SCIENCE, RIGHT? [06:10:03] WE'RE NOT SAYING, HEY, WE'RE GOING TO BE EXACTLY AT THIS ABOUT A VOLUME AMOUNT, AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE EXACTLY AT THIS, BUT WE'RE GOING TO BE PRETTY CLOSE TO THAT VOLUME THAT WE ESTIMATED WHEN WE COMPLETED THE PROJECT. AND I, AS I HAD MENTIONED, I BELIEVE IN BASED ON MY LICENSE, THAT I WOULD SIGN OFF AND SAY THAT THIS PROJECT MET THE INTENT OF THE DESIGN AND THE PLANS AND THE SPECIFICATIONS AND THE PERMITS, AND WE CAN CLOSE THE PERMIT AS SUCH. OKAY. DOES THE THE SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, DO THEY COME CHECK IT THEMSELVES OR DO THEY JUST DEPEND ON YOU? SO THEY WOULD ASK FOR OUR AS BUILT SURVEYS, AND WE WOULD PROVIDE THEM OUR AS BUILT SURVEY, SHOWING THEM THIS IS THE AREA THAT WE REMOVED. AND THEN WE WOULD SHOW THEM THE ADDITIONAL CLARIFICATION ON THE PRE VERSUS POST BATHYMETRIC SURVEY METHODOLOGY, WHICH AGAIN, I THINK I'VE DONE ABOUT 30 OF THESE PROJECTS AND THE SAME TYPE OF CONVERSATION HAPPENS AND THE SAME TYPE OF INFORMATION IS PROVIDED IN TERMS OF HOW WE VERIFY THAT WE'VE COMPLETED THE PROJECT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE. DO WE NEED TO DO ANY MORE WORK ON THESE TWO LAKES TO COMPLY WITH THE NEWEST STORMWATER RULES ESTABLISHED AFTER JUNE 2024? NO. AS I MENTIONED, THE THE STORMWATER RULE REALLY WOULDN'T HAVE AN EFFECT ON YOUR EXISTING STORMWATER SYSTEM BECAUSE YOU CAN'T YOU CAN'T EXPAND INTO PRIVATE PROPERTY. IF I IF YOU TOLD ME, HEY, DON'T WORRY ABOUT THE PRIVATE PROPERTIES AND YOU CAN DO WHAT YOU WANT, THEN I WOULD TELL YOU TO TEAR DOWN THE HOUSES AND LET'S ADD LITERAL SHELVES AND LET'S ADD A LOT MORE, YOU KNOW, WATER QUALITY, TREATMENT EFFECTIVENESS. AND THEN WE CAN WE CAN MEET AND EXCEED SOME OF THE THRESHOLD COMPARISONS THAT THEY'VE PUT OUT THERE. BUT SINCE WE'RE MEETING AND WORKING WITHIN THE CONSTRAINTS THAT WE HAVE. THANK YOU. CITY ATTORNEY. YOU'VE HEARD STATEMENTS RELATED TO THE CONTRACTS ON BOTH LAKES EIGHT AND NINE BY THE ENGINEER OF RECORD. YOU'VE ALSO HEARD FROM AN EXPERT HERE. WITH THAT, THERE ARE CONCERNS RELATED TO VERIFICATION OF CERTAIN METRICS BEFORE WE STAMP THIS PROJECT AS MISSION COMPLETED. THOSE ARE MY WORDS, RIGHT? JUST SOME CONCERNS THERE. WE'VE ALSO JUST HEARD FROM THE CONTRACTOR WHO WHO DID THE WORK AND THE CONCERNS THAT THERE'S UNFINISHED BUSINESS. CONTRACTS ARE IN PLACE THAT WERE AGREED TO. WE'VE GOT PERMITS THAT ARE IN PLACE THAT WE NEED TO PERFORM UP TO EXPECTATIONS THESE PERMITS. DO YOU NEED ANY DIRECTION FROM CITY COUNCIL ON THIS SUBJECT TO SATISFY THAT WE'VE DONE THE RIGHT THING AND WHERE WE'RE WHERE WE NEED TO BE? IT'S A GOOD QUESTION, BUT I THINK IT'S UP TO COUNCIL. I MEAN, WE HAVE AN AGREEMENT, WE HAVE AN ENGINEER, WE HAVE A PROJECT DEADLINE. WE ISSUED A CHANGE ORDER. WE HAVE A COMPLETION DATE. SO IF YOU NEED ME TO LOOK INTO SOMETHING FURTHER, I WILL WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT I'M NOT AN ENGINEER. I'M NOT A WATER QUALITY EXPERT. SO THERE'S ONLY SO MUCH THAT I CAN DO AS AN ATTORNEY, BUT HAPPY TO DO IT. ARE WE AT RISK HERE? IS THE CITY AT RISK HERE, BASED ON WHAT YOU'VE HEARD TODAY? RISK FROM WHAT? THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING. ARE YOU. DO YOU SEE ANY A WEAK POINT HERE OR ARE WE AT RISK? DO WE NEED TO ASK YOU TO TAKE CERTAIN STEPS TO DO VERIFICATION. I DON'T KNOW IF I CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION. I THINK IF YOU KNEW THAT, YOU WOULD TELL ME. AND THAT'S BASICALLY COUNCIL THAT'S WHERE I'M AT ON IT. I JUST, YOU KNOW, WE'RE JUST I'M JUST TRYING TO DO THE RIGHT THING. I'M LISTENING. I'M JUST TRYING TO TAKE THE INFORMATION AND DO THE RIGHT THING. SO, MADAM MAYOR, I THINK I'VE HAD MY ANSWER. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THIS IS WEIRD FOR ME. I GOTTA BE HONEST WITH YOU. THIS WHOLE DEAL, MISS TILLEY, YOU ARE CREDENTIALED BEYOND BELIEF. GOD BLESS YOU FOR BEING HERE AND DOING WHAT YOU'RE ASKED TO DO. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THAT HAPPENED. WE HAVE A DIRECTOR WHO'S IN CHARGE OF THIS, AND THE ONLY CHOICE IS, DO WE BELIEVE HIM OR NOT? THAT'S ALL WE'RE ASKING. THAT'S THE ONLY QUESTION UP HERE RIGHT NOW. AND I LOVE JOHN REMINGTON. HE'S BEEN A FRIEND FOR NEARLY 30 YEARS. HIS DAUGHTER WENT TO OUR SCHOOL, THEN TAUGHT AT OUR SCHOOL. THEY SPECTACULAR FAMILY. COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT. AND WHATEVER THE EXPERT FROM WHEREVER COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT. THE QUESTIONS WERE. WE HAD A CONTRACT THAT WE AGREED TO WITH A VENDOR, AND ALL OF THE THINGS THAT WERE IN THAT CONTRACT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED OR ARE ABOUT TO BE COMPLETED. IS THAT THE CASE? YES. THEN WHAT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT? AND IF THERE WAS AN ISSUE, THEN BOB WOULD TELL US WHAT THE ISSUE WAS. IT'S LIKE THE WORST JOB OF MONDAY MORNING QUARTERBACKING I'VE SEEN SINCE I COACHED. [06:15:05] AND TUESDAY MORNING AND WEDNESDAY MORNING AND EVERY MORNING. I MEAN, I JUST DON'T GET IT. I HONESTLY DON'T GET IT. I WITH RESPECT TO JOHN AND ALL THE BEAUTIFUL PEOPLE HERE IN THIS ROOM IT'S WHY WE HIRE EXPERTS WHO HIRE. HE'S HE'S A HE'S A COACH. HE GOT THE COORDINATOR AND HE GOT DONE WITH THE QUARTERBACK. GOT DONE WHATEVER EVERYBODY'S SUPPOSED TO DO. THERE'S REALLY, TO ME, NOTHING TO TALK ABOUT, REALLY. IT'S JUST A QUESTION OF OF OF BOB MIDDLETON'S EXPERTISE AND OR INTEGRITY. AND NEITHER SHOULD BE QUESTIONED. THANKS. I'LL JUST SAY I DON'T THINK THAT WAS WHAT IT WAS. I BELIEVE THAT IT WAS WHAT I HEARD, AND. WHAT I HEARD WAS COULD WE HAVE DONE IT IN A DIFFERENT WAY AND MET DIFFERENT STANDARDS? FOR THIS DREDGE? I DON'T, AND THE ANSWER IS, OF COURSE. YES. YOU COULD ALWAYS DO IT IN A DIFFERENT WAY AND MEET DIFFERENT STANDARDS. AND THAT'S WHAT I HEARD FROM THE OPPOSITION OF OF THE RESIDENTS. BUT IF THAT WERE THE CASE, WE'D HAVE PEOPLE IN HERE FOR EVERY SINGLE PROJECT WE DO. IF SOMEONE HAS A DIFFERENT OPINION, A DIFFERENT WAY OF DOING IT, AND THAT'S A FACT. AND BY THE WAY, I THOUGHT OF IMMEDIATELY WHY WE DREDGE. I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT IT. I'M NOT THAT GUY. ENTROPY. THE SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS. I'M GUESSING THAT'S WHY WE'RE GOING TO DREDGE FOREVER. BECAUSE STUFF'S GOING TO KEEP FILLING UP ALL THE LAKES AND PONDS, NO MATTER WHAT YOU DO. JUST A GUESS. OKAY. THANK YOU. AND THERE'S NO FURTHER QUESTIONS. NO FURTHER COMMENTS. I WANT TO THANK EVERYONE FOR BEING HERE. THANK YOU, MR. YOUNG. YEAH. I JUST WANT TO LAY OUT EXPECTATIONS. FROM THE STANDPOINT, AS WE SAID, THE PROJECT IS IS FROM A DREDGING PERSPECTIVE, THEY WERE READY TO DEMOBILIZE AND REMOVE THAT. WE STILL HAVE SOME SOME WIRE WORK TO DO AND OTHER THINGS. AND SO WE WE WILL BE GOING BACK AND LOOKING AT THE CONTRACT TO MAKE SURE. BECAUSE AGAIN, THE CONTRACTOR'S BEEN VERY DILIGENT IN TRYING TO GET THE WORK DONE. SO WE'RE NOT TRYING TO HOLD THEM TO THE 365. WE JUST WANT TO GET THE REST OF IT DONE. AND SO I JUST WANT TO KIND OF LAY THOSE EXPECTATIONS OUT FOR YOU. AND THEN GET THIS ITEM WRAPPED UP AS QUICKLY AS WE CAN. SO THANK YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU AGAIN. THANK YOU, STAFF, AND THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. AND THAT CONCLUDES THE DISCUSSION ON LAKE EIGHT AND NINE. WE NEED TO TAKE A BREAK. PLEASE. FIVE MINUTES AND WE HAVE A FEW MORE ITEMS WE NEED TO FINISH UP. SO WITH THAT. WE'RE IN. OKAY. COUNCIL, I AM GOING TO DO A LITTLE BIT OF CHANGING OF THE AGENDA. WE'RE GOING TO DO 13 B, WHICH IS THE FIRE STATION APPROVAL. OUR CONSULTANTS BEEN HERE ALL DAY. THEN WE'RE GOING TO GO 12 C, WHICH IS LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES. 13 A, 13 B, 13 C AND THEN 12 B TO COMPLETE. SO WE'RE AT 13 B. [13.B) A Resolution Ranking the Top Three (3) Consulting Firms to Provide Professional Services for Architectural and Engineering Services Associated with the Replacement of Fire-Rescue Station #2; Approving a Professional Services Consultant's Agreement Between Wannemacher Jensen Architects, LLC and the City of Naples in the Amount of $1,175,412.00, which Includes a Five Percent Design Contingency; Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Professional Services Consultant's Agreement; and Providing an Effective Date.] THANK YOU. MAYOR. RESOLUTION RANKING THE TOP THREE CONSULTING FIRMS TO PROVIDE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR ARCHITECTURAL AND ENGINEERING SERVICES ASSOCIATED WITH THE REPLACEMENT OF FIRE RESCUE STATION NUMBER TWO, APPROVING A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONSULTANTS AGREEMENT BETWEEN WAYNE MAKAR JENSEN ARCHITECTS LLC AND THE CITY OF NAPLES, AND THE AMOUNT OF $1,175,412, WHICH INCLUDES A 5% DESIGN CONTINGENCY AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONSULTANTS AGREEMENT AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THANK YOU. MR. YOUNG OR MR. MIDDLETON? I'LL JUST START OUT WITH ONE BRIEF OVERVIEW. AS FAR AS YOU KNOW, WE ALL KNOW THE ISSUES AND THE THE AGE OF FIRE STATION TWO. WE ALSO KNEW WE HAD APPARATUS THAT COULDN'T FIT INSIDE OF FIRE STATION TWO WITHIN THE THE BAYS THERE AND CERTAIN THINGS. SO WE WERE AT A POINT WHERE WE WERE LOOKING AT A REDESIGN OR EXPANSION OF THE BAYS, AND WE WERE UP TO THE VICINITY OF AROUND 3 MILLION JUST TO PUT A BAND-AID ON IT. AND SO THIS IS WHAT PROMPTED US TO, ABOUT 18 MONTHS AGO, TO SAY, LET'S WORK IN THE BUDGET TO BEGIN DESIGN. AND THAT'S WHAT'S BEFORE YOU TODAY. NOW THIS DOES CONTEMPLATE THINGS. IF YOU'VE HAD A CHANCE TO READ THROUGH IT, EVERYTHING FROM HAVING THE ACCOMMODATIONS OF ANOTHER EOC IN THAT FACILITY. AND THAT BECOMES IMPORTANT GIVEN THE NATURE OF OUR FLOODING AND WHAT HE AND YOU KNOW, CONVEYED TO US IN TERMS OF WATER RESILIENCY HERE AT THIS FIRE STATION. SO IT MAKES SENSE TO IT'S NOT AN IT'S NOT AN OVER DESIGN. IT IS A PRUDENT DESIGN. AND SO I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT BEFORE I TURN IT OVER TO MR. MIDDLETON. SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON. ACTUALLY, I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO OUR CITY ENGINEER, DAN LOEWENSTEIN. HE'S BEEN WORKING WITH THE ENGINEER AND HAS BEEN WORKING ON THE PROCUREMENT OF THIS. [06:20:03] SO I'LL TURN IT OVER TO DAN. THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON. COUNCIL DAN ORENSTEIN, CITY ENGINEER. FIRE STATION TWO WAS BUILT IN 1974 AND EXPANDED IN 1989 TO INCLUDE THE NAPLES FIRE TRAINING CENTER. RENOVATIONS WERE DONE IN 2004 AND 2018. THE BUILDING, HOWEVER, IS AT THE END OF ITS USEFUL LIFE, SO THE CITY ADVERTISED AN RFP FOR DESIGN SERVICES FOR DEMOLITION AND REBUILD OF THE FIRE STATION. 11 FIRMS RESPONDED TO THE RFP. THE EVALUATION COMMITTEE PICKED THREE FIRMS TO INTERVIEW. OF THESE THREE, WANNAMAKER, JENSEN AND ARCHITECTS LLC, ALSO KNOWN AS WJ, EARNED THE HIGHEST RANKING FROM THE COMMITTEE. THEY WERE SELECTED FOR RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNCIL GIVEN THEIR EXPERTISE IN FIRE STATION DESIGN. A CONTRACT WAS NEGOTIATED WITH WJ WHICH APPEARS IN THE AGENDA. MATERIAL DESIGN SHOULD TAKE 12 MONTHS AND THE AGREED UPON FEE IS WITHIN BUDGET AT 1.175412 MILLION, WHICH INCLUDES A 5% DESIGN CONTINGENCY. THE AGREEMENT INCLUDES THE OPTION TO ACTIVATE CONSTRUCTION PHASE SERVICES AT A LATER DATE, WHICH WOULD REQUIRE AN ADDITIONAL FEE. THE NEW FACILITY WILL APPROPRIATELY HOUSE ALL OF THE SERVICE VEHICLES AND FIRE TRUCKS AT THE FACILITY. IT WILL HAVE 14 BUNK ROOMS, CONTAIN A NEW EMERGENCY OPERATION CENTER, AND PROVIDE A NEW FIRE TRAINING TOWER SO THAT THE NAPLES FIRE RESCUE DEPARTMENT WILL RETAIN OUR ISO RATING OF ONE. BEST PRACTICES FOR INDOOR AIR QUALITY AND OCCUPANT COMFORT WILL BE PURSUED. THE LATEST HEALTH AND SAFETY STANDARDS FOR FIRE RESCUE STATIONS WILL ALSO BE INCORPORATED. EARLY ON, WE WILL PREPARE AT LEAST THREE CONCEPT RENDERINGS WITH DIFFERENT ARCHITECTURAL STYLES FOR THE COUNCIL'S CONSIDERATION. THE CONSULTANT FIRM WILL ALSO DEVELOP A FULL COST ESTIMATE SO THAT FUNDING OPTIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION MAY BE PURSUED. A REPRESENTATIVE FROM WJA MR., ARTURO LOPEZ, IS PRESENT AND HAS BEEN PATIENTLY WAITING. IN CASE YOU ALL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, THANKS VERY MUCH. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YOU'LL COME FORWARD. PLEASE JUST STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD. THANK YOU FOR THANK YOU. MR.. IS OFF TO THE RIGHT ON THE PEDESTAL. THANK YOU. GOT IT. ARTURO LOPEZ WJ ARCHITECTS. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE OR EXCITED TO WORK ON THE NEW FIRE STATION AND COME UP WITH SOME OPTIONS FOR YOUR EVALUATION, AND ALSO FOR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. PLEASE TELL ME THIS IS NOT YOUR FIRST FIRE STATION. NO. WE'VE DONE NUMEROUS FIRE STATIONS ACROSS THE STATE. WE'VE HAD MULTIPLE. OKAY. AND HYDRAULIC SYSTEMS FOR FLOODING. THAT WAS INTERESTING. INTERESTING. NOT A LOT OF EXPERIENCE WITH. OH. I'M SORRY, I THOUGHT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT THE PREVIOUS. YES. NO. HYDRAULIC. HYDRAULIC? I WAS STILL IN STORMWATER AND WATER QUALITY. DO YOU HAVE ANY SOLUTIONS FOR US ON THAT ITEM? NO. I'M SORRY. YES. IT WOULD BE IMPLEMENTED INTO THE NEW FIRE STATION DESIGN. ALL THE LATEST FLOODING TECHNOLOGIES WILL WILL LOOK AT AND PROVIDE OPTIONS ON HOW TO SOLVE THOSE ISSUES. GREAT. AND MY ONLY QUESTIONS WERE EXACTLY WHAT MR. YOUNG JUST ADDRESSED ON WHETHER WE NEEDED ANOTHER EOC. AND I KNOW AND RESPECT THE FACT THAT YOU'RE GOING TO BE PRUDENT IN THIS DESIGN, AND I APPRECIATE THAT INFORMATION. SO, COUNCIL ANY QUESTIONS? COMMENTS. I HOPE YOU ENJOYED YOUR DAY TO HEAR THAT. I DID IT LEARNED A LOT. OKAY. WE ARE SO SORRY YOU HAD TO SIT THROUGH ALL THAT. NO, IT WAS ACTUALLY VERY INTERESTING BACKGROUND. IT'S GOOD BACKGROUND INFORMATION. THANK YOU. HAVE A GREAT DAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SIR. WE HAVE A RESOLUTION. MAYOR, I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE RESOLUTION TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH WANNAMAKER JENSEN ARCHITECTS TO DESIGN OUR NEW FIRE STATION. MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTMAN. SECOND. I HAVE A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER BARTON. COULD YOU PLEASE PULL THE COUNCIL. MADAM. CLERK. COUNCIL MEMBER. PENMAN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. KRAMER. YES. VICE MAYOR. HUTCHINSON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. CHRISMAN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. MARTIN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. PETRANEK. YES. MAYOR. HARTMAN. YES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NOW GET IT DONE IN ABOUT SIX MONTHS. THANK YOU. STAFF. JUST FOR THOSE WHO MIGHT NOT HAVE HEARD, WE TOOK IT A LITTLE BIT OUT OF ORDER. 13 B FOR THE FIRE STATION. WE'RE GOING TO GO TO 12 C LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES, AND THEN 13 A, [12.C) Update on the September 15, 2025, Collier County Legislative Delegation Meeting and Discuss Possible Revisions to the City’s 2026 State of Florida Legislative Priorities.] B AND 13 C AND END WITH 12 B IF I'VE GOT THAT CORRECT. OKAY. WITH WITH THAT. 12 C THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. I, I'M JUST GOING TO BRIEFLY ON SEPTEMBER 15TH, CALL YOUR COUNTY LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION MEETING TOOK PLACE. [06:25:07] AS YOU KNOW, WE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT OUR PACKET. WE HAD PUT THAT TOGETHER. MONIQUE DID A WONDERFUL JOB ON THAT. AND AS IT TURNS OUT, SHE ALSO PINCHED IT FOR ME BECAUSE I WAS ILL THAT DAY AND DIDN'T I HAD ALREADY TESTED POSITIVE FOR COVID, SO I APPRECIATED HER TAKING CARE OF ALL OF THAT. AND SO WITH THAT, I WANT TO TURN IT OVER TO MONIQUE TO TO GO OVER THE DAY'S EVENTS AND THE ITEMS THAT WERE COVERED IN THAT ITEM. THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING. NO, I MEAN, GOOD AFTERNOON. THANK GOODNESS IT'S NOT EVENING. GOOD AFTERNOON, MONIQUE BARNHART TIBERIO, COMMUNICATIONS MANAGER AND PIO AS GARY STATED, I WENT TO THE SEPTEMBER 15TH COLLIER COUNTY DELEGATION MEETING. A WEEK PRIOR, WE RECEIVED THE AGENDA, WHICH HAD A LOCAL BILL THAT WAS PROVIDED BY REPRESENTATIVE BOTANA, AND WE DISTRIBUTED THE LANGUAGE TO ALL OF YOU PRIOR TO THAT. THAT BILL WAS HEARD BY THE DELEGATION AND APPROVED. SO WE JUST WANTED TO DISCUSS WITH YOU ALL IF YOU WANTED TO PUT ANY INFORMATION AND UPDATE OUR LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES TO REFLECT THIS BILL. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY OTHER INTERESTING THINGS THAT NEED TO BE DISCUSSED ABOUT THE DAY? IS THERE ANYTHING YOU WANT TO ADD, MR. MCCONNELL OR PETRANOFF? I WAS JUST THERE IN SUPPORT. MET SOME DELEGATES, HAD SOME CONVERSATIONS. THAT WAS REALLY IT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER PETRANOFF FOR BEING THERE. THANK YOU. WELCOME. IT WAS, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE WE THIS BILL LANDED IN OUR LAP AT THE LAST MINUTE. WE DIDN'T HAVE A CHANCE AS A BODY TO EVEN TALK ABOUT IT. SO I PREFACED IT BY SAYING THIS IS I'M ON THE COMMITTEE. THIS IS THIS IS MY OPINION. THESE ARE MY STATEMENTS. I'VE NOT HAD A CHANCE TO TALK ABOUT THIS WITH MY COMPADRE, SO I'M HOPING THAT WE WILL BE ABLE TO TALK ABOUT IT A BIT TODAY. IT WAS MY IMPRESSION. IT WAS DEFINITELY PRE. IT WAS DEFINITELY PRE-DECIDED BECAUSE THERE WERE PRE PREPARED REMARKS READ OFF OF TELEPHONES AND THINGS. SO THERE WERE THERE WAS DEFINITELY PRE STATEMENTS THAT THIS THING WAS GOING TO FLY THROUGH BY ALL FOUR OF THEM. OKAY. VICE MAYOR YEAH. THANK YOU THANK YOU MONIQUE. MATTHEW AND BETH, THANK YOU FOR ENGAGED TO THE EXTENT THAT YOU WERE ENGAGED, I JUST WANTED CLARIFICATION. SEPTEMBER 15TH WAS THE MEETING FOR THE DELEGATION. THE LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION? YOU SAID THAT YOU RECEIVED THE MATERIALS A WEEK BEFOREHAND, RIGHT? I DON'T HAVE THE EXACT DATE. I DON'T HAVE MY COMPUTER. BUT LISA HURLEY PROVIDED THE BILL LANGUAGE THE WEEK PRIOR THAT WE DISTRIBUTE. I BELIEVE MATTHEW DISTRIBUTED IT TO COUNCIL IMMEDIATELY AFTER WE RECEIVED THAT EMAIL. OKAY, SO 12 DAYS PRIOR WAS A DAY THAT CITY COUNCIL WAS MEETING. THAT WAS ON SEPTEMBER 3RD. SO I WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT THAT INFORMATION CAME IN AFTER OUR SEPTEMBER 3RD LAST MEETING DATE. CORRECT? YES. OKAY. SO I'VE GOT A CONCERN WITH THAT BECAUSE IF IT CAME IN SEPTEMBER 3RD, THIS IS THIS IS REALLY SERIOUS LEGISLATION, IN MY OPINION, TO DO IT RIGHT, TO DO IT IN THE NAPLES WAY. AND I'LL GO OVER THAT MORE COMPLETELY. BUT WE SHOULD HAVE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO PUT THAT ON AN AGENDA, TO LET OUR COMMUNITY KNOW ABOUT IT. TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS IT IN THE SUNSHINE. RIGHT. THAT'S THE PROPER WAY TO DO THINGS. YET WE WERE NOT AFFORDED THAT OPPORTUNITY. AND IF WE'RE OKAY WITH THAT, THEN GET READY BECAUSE THAT'S HOW WE'LL CONTINUE TO GET THESE SUCH ITEMS. IF YOU'RE OKAY WITH THAT, THEN JUST GET READY. BUT I'M NOT OKAY WITH IT. SO I JUST THANK YOU. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I HAVE MY DATES CORRECT, MY THE TIMELINE CORRECT AND DRAW IT TO ATTENTION. AND AT A LATER TIME I'LL ON THIS ITEM, I'LL HAVE A COMMENT. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. OKAY. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COUNCIL MEMBER. CHRISMAN, ARE WE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE WE'RE TALKING WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE PROPOSED AIRPORT AUTHORITY LEGISLATION. CORRECT. CORRECT. SHOULD, I DON'T KNOW, FOR THE PUBLIC PURPOSE. [06:30:04] THAT COULD BE READ IN OR JUST A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL ABOUT WHAT? THAT BILL. AND ACTUALLY GIVE A VERY BRIEF OVERVIEW. THANK YOU. IT'S NOT A VERY LONG BILL. I BELIEVE IT'S FIVE PAGES. ESSENTIALLY, WHAT IT DOES IS IT TRANSFORMS THE NAR FROM AN APPOINTED BODY TO AN ELECTED BODY, MAINTAINS THE MEMBERSHIP OF FIVE. HOWEVER, THREE WOULD BE CITY RESIDENTS AND TWO WOULD BE RESIDENTS OF THE COUNTY. ULTIMATELY, IT LAYS OUT SOME REQUIREMENTS OF WHAT'S NECESSARY TO BE ON THE BOARD, BUT HIGH LEVEL, THAT'S ESSENTIALLY WHAT IT DOES. I THINK I THINK THE MOST IMPORTANT AND MOST EGREGIOUS THING THAT THIS DOES FOR OUR CITIZENRY IS THAT BECAUSE THESE FIVE OFFICIALS, REGARDLESS OF WHERE THEY LIVE, ARE BEING ELECTED. WE GO FROM THE CITY OF NAPLES THROUGH US APPOINTING 100% OF THEM TO A POPULATION OF 20,000 IN THE CITY VERSUS 400,000. WE GO TO A 95% DILUTION OF THE CITY'S APPOINTMENT, OR PICKING THE PEOPLE ON THE NA TO THE COUNTY. SO IT'S ESSENTIALLY MAKING THIS A, A STRIPPING THIS OUT OF THE CITY BECAUSE THAT 5% OF THE POPULATION THAT WE REPRESENT IN COLLIER COUNTY, GIVEN THE GROWTH RATES THAT I'VE SEEN ON THE DEMOGRAPHIC DATA, IS ONLY GOING TO BECOME LESS AND LESS THROUGH TIME. AND CAN I, CAN I CONTINUE AND THAT THAT'S THE MOST THAT TO ME IS THE MOST CONCERNING TURNING POINT. THANK YOU. I JUST WANT TO. MR. MCCONNELL. THAT WAS ALL ABOUT THE THE LEGISLATION THAT'S BEING PROPOSED. WAS THERE ONE POINT OR MAYBE I DIDN'T HEAR YOU. IN SUMMARY, IT'S CONVERTING THE NA FROM AN APPOINTED BODY OF CITY COUNCIL, MAKING IT AN ELECTED BODY OF CITIZENS. THREE MEMBERS BEING CITY OF NAPLES, TWO MEMBERS BEING COLLIER COUNTY. OH, I KNOW WHAT WAS MISSING IS. AND BY DOING SO, IT'S OPENING THE ENABLING ACT THAT WAS CREATED FOR THE CITY OF NAPLES. CORRECT. THIS IS A PROPOSAL TO AMEND THE AIRPORT AUTHORITY ACT THAT WAS CREATED BY THE STATE WHEN THE NA WAS CREATED. SO IT'S AN AMENDMENT TO THAT ACT FOR THE NAPLES MUNICIPAL AIRPORT, NOT THE NAPLES REGIONAL AIRPORT. AND THAT'S WHAT THE DOCUMENTS STATE. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT CLEAR. I'D HAVE TO READ IT TO CONFIRM THAT. YEAH. OKAY. OKAY. I MEAN, THEY MAY HAVE CHANGED IT. THE COUNTY MAY. I MEAN, THE NA MAY HAVE CHANGED IT TO BE A NAPLES AIRPORT, BUT THE ENABLING ACT IS THE CITY OF NAPLES MUNICIPAL AIRPORT. THAT'S THE KEY IN THIS WHOLE THING IS IT'S A MUNICIPAL AIRPORT. YES, SIR. PLEASE. THANK YOU. YEAH, I JUST WANTED I JUST. THAT'S FINE. SO, YOU KNOW, MY MY THOUGHTS ON THIS ARE AS FOLLOWS. THE THERE'S LOTS OF THINGS TO GET WORKED UP ABOUT REGARDING THIS MATTER IN TERMS OF PROCESS AND HOW IT WAS INTRODUCED. AND NO, NO, NO CONSULTATION WITH THE CITY, HE OR EVEN ADVISING US OF OF IT AND AND AND EVEN BEFORE YOU GET INTO THE IMPACTS THAT, THAT IT WOULD HAVE CHANGES. IT WOULD, IT WOULD HAVE MY, MY YOU KNOW, IN THINKING ABOUT IT, MY, MY FIRST OF ALL, MY MY BELIEF AND, AND COUNSEL TO ALL OF US, INCLUDING MYSELF, IS TO TRY TO PUT THAT ASIDE AND RECOGNIZE THAT YOU KNOW, WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS A REPRESENTATIVE WHO LIVES IN OUR REGION, WHO HAS ENTERED, WHO HAS PUT FORWARD. THIS LEGISLATION HASN'T EVEN BEEN INTRODUCED YET. YOU KNOW, THERE'S NO SESSION TO INTRODUCE IT YET. AND HE'S, YOU KNOW, WENT THROUGH THE PROCESS OF GETTING GETTING IT BLESSED BY HIS COLLEAGUES IN THE LOCAL DELEGATION AND AND HE SAID PUBLICLY, FROM WHAT I READ, THAT HE'S HE'S [06:35:07] VERY OPEN TO TALKING TO TO PEOPLE, TO ANYONE ABOUT IT. AND I THINK WE OUGHT TO TAKE HIM UP ON THAT AS A FIRST STEP. AS A NEXT STEP. AND PUT ASIDE ANYTHING ELSE AND JUST SIT DOWN WITH REPRESENTATIVE BOTANA AND AS APPROPRIATE. I THINK, YOU KNOW, I'M THINKING OUR CITY MANAGER, OUR CITY ATTORNEY, OUR LOBBYIST, YOU KNOW, AND TALK TO HIM ABOUT IT. TO ME, THERE ARE A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT ARE PARTICULARLY OBJECTIONABLE AND WOULD BE AT THE TOP OF MY LIST ANYWAY OF CONCERN. ONE IS THE APPOINTMENT, WHETHER IT WOULD BE THE, THE, THE HAVING BOARD MEMBERS, WHETHER THEY'RE APPOINTED OR ELECTED. LET'S PUT THAT ASIDE FOR A MOMENT. BE BE COMPRISED OF REPRESENTATIVES FROM COLLIER COUNTY IN ADDITION TO THE CITY OF NAPLES. YOU KNOW THAT THE AIRPORT IS IS THE MAYOR JUST SAID IT'S A CITY AIRPORT ALWAYS HAS BEEN. THE LEGISLATION WAS CREATED UNDER THAT. WE IT'S LOCATED ON CITY LAND ENTIRELY. WE PROVIDE SERVICES TO THE AIRPORT. THE COUNTY DOES NOT. THE COUNTY CONTRIBUTES NO SUPPORT TO THE AIRPORT'S AIRPORT AND HAS MADE AND ACTUALLY HAS MADE CLEAR, THE COUNTY LEADERSHIP HAS MADE CLEAR IN THE LAST YEAR, DURING THE LONG DISCUSSION THAT OCCURRED AROUND THE POSSIBLE RELOCATION OF THE AIRPORT THAT IT REALLY HAD NO INTEREST IN THE AIRPORT, AND THIS WAS NOT A PRIORITY FOR THEM. SO TO SUDDENLY, JUST THROUGH A LEGISLATIVE FIAT, GIVE THEM 40% OF THE MEMBERSHIP ON THE BOARD, SO TO SPEAK, DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO TO ME ANYWAY. AS A MATTER OF PUBLIC POLICY, THERE'S NO RATIONALE THERE THAT I CAN SEE. AND AND I THINK WE OUGHT TO. AS A, AS ONE OF THE FIRST ARGUMENTS SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS IS A NAPLES AIRPORT. AND SO LONG AS IT'S HERE IN THE CITY, IT OUGHT TO BE LED BY CITY RESIDENTS. HOWEVER SELECTED. THE SECOND THING THAT BOTHERS ME MOST ABOUT IT, AND I THINK WE OUGHT TO EMPHASIZE, IS THE REQUIREMENT THAT AND AND THIS IS SORT OF A KIND OF A SLEEPER CLAUSE IN THE, IN THE, IN THE BILL, THE REQUIREMENT THAT ALL MEMBERS HAVE QUOTE UNQUOTE AEROSPACE EXPERIENCE. YOU KNOW, JUST AS A PRACTICAL MATTER, AGAIN, WHETHER PEOPLE WERE APPOINTED OR THEY'RE ELECTED THAT IS SO NARROW AND CONSTRAINING IN TERMS OF GETTING A POOL OF PEOPLE WHO ARE WHO YOU WANT TO HAVE APPLY FOR THE JOB OR RUN FOR THE JOB, AS THE CASE MAY BE. SPEAKING FOR MYSELF, I SEE NOTHING WRONG OR BAD. AND I KNOW SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES HERE HAVE OBJECTED IN THE PAST WHEN WE HAVE CANDIDATES BEFORE US FOR THE AIRPORT AUTHORITY BOARD THAT THEY HAVE TIES TO THE AVIATION INDUSTRY OR IN SOME WAY, I DON'T THINK THAT'S A BAD THING. I THINK IT'S A GOOD THING. DO I WANT EVERYBODY ON THE BOARD TO COME FROM THAT BACKGROUND? NO. I THINK YOU WANT PEOPLE WITH GENERAL BUSINESS EXPERIENCE, WITH FINANCIAL EXPERIENCE, WITH GOVERNMENT EXPERIENCE. LOTS OF CRITERIA THAT YOU WANT TO HAVE. AND DIVERSITY IS GOOD IN TERMS OF THE KIND OF PEOPLE YOU WANT TO HAVE ON THE BOARD. SO I THINK THAT CLAUSE OF REQUIRING THAT AND IT'S NOT EVEN DEFINED WHAT'S IT'S TIED TO SOME SORT OF FLORIDA STATUTE AS TO WHAT AEROSPACE INDUSTRY EXPERIENCE MEANS. BUT I THINK THAT'S REALLY, AS I SAY, NO MATTER WHETHER THE BOARD'S ELECTED OR APPOINTED, I THINK IT'S JUST A BAD THING FOR THE FOR THE THE ABILITY OF ANY BOARD TO FUNCTION IN AN EFFECTIVE WAY. THE, THE, THE OTHER COMMENTS I WOULD MAKE ARE AND AGAIN, THESE ARE JUST COMMENTS FOR US TO BE THINKING ABOUT AS WE TRY TO YOU KNOW, SIT DOWN WITH REPRESENTATIVE BOTANA OTHER STATE LEGISLATIVE LEADERS AND TRY TO COME TO SOME SENSIBLE OUTCOMES ON THIS. YOU KNOW, THIS IS STATE LEGISLATION THAT CREATED THIS, THIS AIRPORT AUTHORITY BACK IN 1969, ALMOST 60 YEARS AGO, THE CITY OF NAPLES ASKED THE STATE TO DO THIS BECAUSE THE AIRPORT WAS BLEEDING MONEY AT THE TIME FOR THE CITY. AND AND SO STATE LEGISLATION WAS CREATED TO, TO CREATE THIS AUTHORITY IN THE WAY IT WAS YOU KNOW, STATE LEGISLATORS YOU KNOW, HAVE EVERY RIGHT AND ABILITY TO TO, TO LEGISLATE. [06:40:05] THAT'S WHY THEY CALL THEM LEGISLATORS. YOU KNOW, THEY PROPOSE BILLS ALL THE TIME. AND I THINK IT WOULD BE A MISTAKE TO JUST IN A KNEE JERK WAY, YOU KNOW, GET ANGRY ABOUT THIS OR I MEAN, SURE, WE'RE NOT HAPPY ABOUT IT FOR ALL THE REASONS I STATED EARLIER, BUT LET'S TRY TO STEP BACK AND APPROACH IT IN A MORE STRATEGIC WAY AND SIT DOWN, AS I SAY, WITH REPRESENTATIVE BOTANA FIRST AND OTHERS, AND HAVE A, HAVE A, HAVE AN ADULT CONVERSATION ABOUT THIS AND WHAT OUR CONCERNS ARE THE ISSUE ABOUT ELECTIONS OF BOARD MEMBERS, WHETHER THEY'RE ALL FROM NAPLES OR THEY'RE A MIX OF NAPLES AND COLLIER COUNTY OR WHATEVER THEY ARE, IS A TRICKIER QUESTION THAT WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT, TOO. YOU KNOW, THE BEDROCK CONSERVATIVE PRINCIPLE IS THAT THE GOVERNMENT THAT GOVERNS BEST IS THE GOVERNMENT THAT'S CLOSEST TO THE PEOPLE. RIGHT? THAT'S LOCAL GOVERNMENT. BUT A COROLLARY TO THAT IS THAT GOVERNMENT IS BEST WHEN PEOPLE HAVE A DIRECT VOTE AND ROLE IN ELECTING THAT GOVERNMENT. AND IT'S NOT BY ANY MEANS UNUSUAL TO HAVE INDEPENDENT AUTHORITIES ELECTED SCHOOL BOARDS. FOR GOODNESS SAKES. THE MOSQUITO CONTROL BOARD IS ELECTED RIGHT HERE IN COLLIER COUNTY. IT'S NOT JUST HERE, BUT ANYWHERE. IT'S NOT OUT OF OUT OF THE ORDINARY TO HAVE BOARDS ELECTED. AND AND YOU CAN MAKE AN ARGUMENT EITHER WAY. YOU CAN MAKE AN ARGUMENT THAT APPOINTED BOARDS THROUGH ELECTED OFFICIALS WILL HAVE A BETTER CHANCE OF GENERATING, YOU KNOW, QUALIFIED, EXPERIENCED PEOPLE AND THEN ELECTED BOARDS WILL PEOPLE CAN ARGUE IT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. BUT BUT THE POINT IS THAT IT'S A DOUBLE EDGED SWORD WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU START TALKING ABOUT ELECTIONS VERSUS APPOINTMENTS AND WE JUST SHOULD BE CAREFUL ABOUT THAT. I THINK THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUES ARE THAT WE WANT TO KEEP THIS BOARD COMPRISED OF PEOPLE FROM NAPLES, HOWEVER THEY'RE, THEY'RE SELECTED AND BECAUSE IT'S NAPLES AIRPORT AND THAT WE WANT TO HAVE FLEXIBILITY, NOT NARROWNESS IN TERMS OF THE BACKGROUNDS AND EXPERIENCE OF THE PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO BE ON THAT BOARD AND TRY TO KEEP IT OPEN TO, YOU KNOW, THE BROADEST SET OF QUALIFIED PEOPLE. SO I THINK WE OUGHT TO AGREE ON ON WHAT OUR YOU KNOW, I'VE JUST EXPRESSED MY VIEWS ON IT, HAVING THOUGHT ABOUT IT FOR THE LAST WEEK OR TWO SINCE THIS FIRST CAME OUT. AND I THINK WE OUGHT TO AGREE ON WHAT OUR POINT OF VIEW IS ON THIS AND, AND CHARGE OUR, OUR OUR TEAM TO TRY TO SIT DOWN WITH REPRESENTATIVE BOTANA FIRST AND THEN PERHAPS OTHERS, INCLUDING OTHER MEMBERS OF OUR DELEGATION, AND CONSULT WITH LISA HURLEY, WHO WILL, I'M SURE, HAVE A VERY GOOD IDEA ABOUT WHO THE KEY PEOPLE ARE IN IN MORE BROADLY IN THE HOUSE AND SENATE ON THIS AND TRY TO AND TRY TO HAVE A. PRODUCTIVE CONVERSATION ABOUT HOW TO TAKE THIS BILL. AND IF IT IF IT IF IF THE LEGISLATURE IS ABSOLUTELY CONVINCED THAT THEY'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO PURSUE IT, AT LEAST TRY TO MODIFY IT IN A WAY THAT CAN MAKE IT MORE PALATABLE TO US. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON I HAVE PETRANOFF. JUST A QUICK COMMENT. I DID SIT DOWN FOR AN HOUR AND A HALF WITH REPRESENTATIVE BOTANA AND SPOKE WITH SOME OF THE DELEGATION AFTER THE MEETING, AND IT IS A NONSTARTER FOR THEM TO TO HAVE IT JUST IN NAPLES AND HAVE THE AND, YOU KNOW, FOR ME, THE BIGGEST ISSUE REALLY GOES BACK TO THE DILUTION OF THE VOTES FOR COLLIER COUNTY, BECAUSE IF WE OPEN THIS UP AND LET ALL COLLIER COUNTY RESIDENTS VOTE. I LIKEN IT TO, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE IN NORTHERN GEORGIA THAT MIGHT HAPPEN TO WORK THERE, WORK IN FLORIDA, NORTHERN FLORIDA, COMING IN AND VOTING ON OUR GOVERNOR. AND I THINK IT'S INAPPROPRIATE. I THINK IT SHOULD BE NAPLES PEOPLE VOTING FOR NAPLES PEOPLE AND NOT COLLIER COUNTY, OR WE'RE GOING TO, YOU KNOW, IT JUST IS INAPPROPRIATE. THE SECOND THING THAT IS SO I DON'T THINK THEY'RE MOVABLE ON ON THAT THAT IS THAT'S A BIG STICKING POINT THERE. [06:45:03] OKAY. WITH TALKING ABOUT BOARD OF DIRECTORS, AND I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH YOU, COMMISSIONER OR COUNCIL MEMBER KRISEMAN, THAT I DON'T KNOW OF ONE BOARD THAT TRIES TO NARROW IT DOWN THEIR BOARD SO MUCH. AND I LOOKED UP, YOU KNOW, GENERAL DYNAMICS. I LOOKED UP A BUNCH OF AEROSPACE AND ALL OF THEIR BOARDS ARE FROM, YOU KNOW, LIKE YOU KNOW, BIG COCA-COLA, PEPSI, DIFFERENT KINDS OF THINGS BECAUSE THEY WANT A, YOU KNOW, A RICH GROUP OF PEOPLE FROM FINANCE, FROM HR, ETC. DOING GOVERNANCE, WHICH IS SORT OF, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE'VE BEEN ELECTING. AND THEN WE WE ALSO HAVE A MIX OF PEOPLE THAT ARE ACTUALLY PILOTS AND FROM THAT INDUSTRY AS WELL. AND I THINK IT MAKES FOR BETTER DECISION MAKING. SO THAT BUT THAT PIECE I THINK THEY WERE WILLING TO BUDGE ON THAT WAS SORT OF A GIVE ME THE OTHER PIECE IS NO, NOT SO MUCH. NOT AT ALL. AND I THINK THAT MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO TALK TO HIM AND IF YOU WANT BUT I, I WOULD REALLY HIGHLY RECOMMEND THAT WE CONSULT A ATTORNEY AND, AND SEE WHAT ALL OF OUR. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT OUR WHAT OUR RIGHTS ARE. WE REALLY DON'T ON THE CONTRACT. WE'VE GOT THIS LEGISLATION THAT CREATED THIS NA WE ALSO HAVE A LAND LEASE THAT THAT IS SACROSANCT. THESE ARE THESE ARE PROPERTY RIGHTS. THESE ARE TWO PARTIES ENTERING INTO A CONTRACT TOGETHER. WITH ITS THE NA WITH THE CITY OF NAPLES, AND WE JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT OUR RIGHTS ARE. AND I THINK WE'RE IN A MUCH BETTER POSITION TO TALK TO LEGISLATORS OR NEGOTIATE IF WE KNOW ALL OF OUR OPPORTUNITIES THAT WE HAVE WHERE OUR POSITIONS OF STRENGTH AND WE DON'T HAVE ALL THOSE QUESTIONS ANSWERED YET. THANK YOU. YES. BECAUSE THIS LEGISLATION IS I MEAN, I AGREE WITH YOU ON THE SECOND PIECE, BUT WE REALLY NEED TO STAY FOCUSED IN ON THIS. THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TO MEET WITH US. BUT I WANT TO GET THE REST OF THE OPINIONS AND KRAMER. I AGREE WITH RAY. AND IT'S HARD NOT TO BE FIRED UP ABOUT IT. AND THE WAY. NOW, HAVING SAID THAT, LET ME LET ME START WITH THIS INSTEAD. MEA CULPA. I HAD SOMETHING SCHEDULED. IN RETROSPECT, I SHOULD HAVE SHELVED EVERYTHING I HAD AND BEEN THERE. I THINK ALL OF US SHOULD HAVE. I'VE HEARD A LOT OF TALK UP HERE. AGAIN, I'M GUILTY ABOUT US NOT HAVING CONVERSATIONS WITH OUR REPRESENTATIVES. AND BY THE WAY, OUR REPRESENTATIVES, WHO MANY OF THEM OVER WHEN? BY WIDE MARGINS, THE SEATS THAT THEY HOLD, LIKE THE PEOPLE THAT VOTE FOR US, ARE VOTING FOR THEM. WE SHOULD BE ON THE SAME TEAM. AND THEN WE HAVE ONE MEMBER THAT GOES TO THAT THING. AND I'M GUILTY. SO I HAVE MY QUESTION IN READING. ALL OF IT IS WHAT ARE WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH IN CHANGING IT? I MEAN, WHAT DO YOU REALLY WANT? I DON'T SEE THAT IN THE LEGISLATION. I DON'T KNOW IF I'M MISSING IT SOMEWHERE. I MEAN, THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT A THAT ALL THE STAKEHOLDERS OR WORDS TO THAT EFFECT AND. OKAY. GOTCHA. WHAT DO YOU REALLY WANT TO ACCOMPLISH WITH THIS? IF WE KNEW THAT, THEN IT'D BE EASIER TO HAVE A CONVERSATION AND DEVELOP A STRATEGY TO ROLL THIS, THIS THING BACK. I THINK WE DO KNOW. I FEEL LIKE I HAVE A PRETTY GOOD HANDLE ON WHAT WE CAN DO WITH THE LEASE, AND IT'S NOT MUCH. THE FAA IS INVOLVED. I MEAN, THERE'S SO MUCH INVOLVED IN THIS THING. IT'S COMPLICATED. IT'S A PORT OF ENTRY, FOR GOODNESS SAKE. YOU'VE GOT BORDER CONTROL THERE. LIKE IT'S NOT A IT'S NOT A LITTLE NAPLES MUNICIPAL. WE CAN THINK OF IT HOWEVER YOU WANT, BUT IT'S IT'S INTERNATIONAL WITH BORDER CONTROL. AND I ONLY SAY THAT NOT FOR SCALE, BUT FOR OTHER ENTITIES THAT ARE INVOLVED AND WOULD HAVE TO BE INVOLVED IF WE WANT TO MAKE ANY BIG CHANGES. IT CONVOLUTES IT SOMEWHAT. HAVING SAID ALL THAT I THINK WE NEED TO MAKE A CONCERTED EFFORT TO GET WITH HIM. I GUESS WE CAN'T. WE'D HAVE TO DO IT INDIVIDUALLY. THEY DON'T HAVE TO DO THAT, THOUGH, RIGHT? THEY CAN TALK. ISN'T THAT SOMETHING THAT'S WILD TO ME? [06:50:02] YEAH. BUT REACH OUT, DO THE OUTREACH, FIND WHAT ARE THEY TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH? AND THEN WHAT LEVERAGE DO WE HAVE IF IT'S IN TERMS OF THE LEASE? AND BY THE WAY, I WOULD WITH RESPECT MAYOR, I WOULDN'T GET CAUGHT UP IN THE WEEDS OF WHAT THEY'RE CALLING THE AIRPORT, THE SPECIFIC TYPE, THEY'LL FIX THAT AND THAT'LL JUST PISS PEOPLE OFF. SORRY. THAT'LL THAT WILL NOT HELP OUR CAUSE. IF WE WANT TO GET TECHNICAL AND NITPICKY ON WHATEVER VERBIAGE THEY USE, THE REALITY IS ONE OF THE BIG THINGS YOU WANT DONE THAT AREN'T BEING DONE AT THE AIRPORT, I THOUGHT DID A GREAT JOB AS A PILOT THERE. APOLOGETICS FOR THE AIRPORT AND THE LETTERS THEY SENT WERE ASTOUNDING. SHOCKING. AND WELL DONE. AND IF WE'RE GOING TO USE ADHESIVE LEVERAGE, THEN WE HAVE TO KNOW WE HAVE TO GIVE SOMETHING. AND THE ONLY THING WE HAVE TO GIVE THEM IS EITHER LAND, SOME SORT OF LAND, USE CHANGE, OR EXTEND THE LEASE. I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANY OTHER LEVERAGE IN THE LEASE. IF THAT'S NOT A STARTER, THEN THAT HAS TO BE DETERMINED THAT WE'RE NOT GIVING ANYTHING AND THEN FIND ANOTHER WAY. HOPEFULLY COMMON SENSE CAN PREVAIL. AND WHY? THIS IS A REALLY BAD IDEA. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'LL BE THE CASE. THERE IS A HIERARCHY, AND AS MUCH AS WE MIGHT NOT LIKE IT, THEY CAN ABSOLUTELY SHOVE THINGS DOWN OUR THROAT. THAT'S THE REALITY OF IT. WHICH IS WHY I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT FOR US TO GET FACE TO FACE WITH WITH WITH ALL OF THEM, ALL OF US, WITH ALL OF THEM, AND SEE IF WE CAN FIND SOME MOVEMENT, SOME COMMON GROUND AND A WAY IF IT AIN'T BROKE, DON'T FIX IT. IT'S THRIVING. IT'S BY EVERY MEASURE, IT'S ELITE. AND THAT ALONE FOR ME, IS A GOOD REASON NOT TO MESS WITH IT. I WON'T, I WON'T EVEN GET INTO HOME RULE STUFF. BUT THAT ALONE IS A GOOD REASON NOT TO MESS WITH IT. THAT'S MY THOUGHTS. THANK YOU. AND JUST SO THE REASON I BELIEVE THAT NATE, THE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MEANS SOMETHING IS BECAUSE WORDS MATTER, AND OUR. THE NAME IS THE NAPLES MUNICIPAL AIRPORT, WHICH THE FAA CHOSE TO DROP. AND I THINK IT'S VERY MISLEADING LEADING WHEN WE BECOME A REGIONAL AIRPORT AND FORGET THAT WE ARE A MUNICIPAL AIRPORT. AND I AGREE WITH YOU WITH YOU KNOW, ACHIEVE WHAT WHAT WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH? AND I FIND IT VERY DISAPPOINTING THAT, YOU KNOW. YES. THE DELEGATION HEARING, WE COULD HAVE BEEN THERE, BUT UNFORTUNATELY, I THOUGHT IT WAS KIND OF BEING BLINDSIDED BY THE NOT INFORMING US OF THE FACT THAT THERE ARE GOING TO INITIATE LEGISLATION. AND IT APPEARS AND IT SADDENS ME, BUT THIS IS WHAT'S HAPPENED FOR YEARS WITH THE AIRPORT IS IT HAS BECOME TWO SIDED, THEM AGAINST US GROWTH VERSUS MAINTAINING A BEAUTIFUL MUNICIPAL AIRPORT THAT BENEFITS THE COMMUNITY AND DOESN'T DISRUPT OR CAUSE DETRIMENT, WHICH IS IN OUR VISION AND IN THE VISION THAT EVEN THE NIA HAS. SO I DO FIND IT DISAPPOINTING THAT WE DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT IT. AND IF THERE WAS A CONCERN, I WHOLEHEARTEDLY BELIEVE WHAT ARE THEY TRYING TO DO? BECAUSE CHANGING THE PEOPLE WHETHER THEY'RE VOTED ON OR NOT WHEN THE COUNTY'S ALREADY SAID THEY HAVE NO INTEREST IN HAVING THE AIRPORT IN THE COUNTY, BUT THEY WANT TO CON, YOU KNOW, HAVE A SEAT THERE. WHAT IS IT? THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE. SO AND I WOULD SAY ALL WE CAN DO IS SPECULATE AND AND WE CAN SIT HERE FOR HOURS AND DO THAT. I WOULD DISCOURAGE US FROM DOING THAT. BUT THESE ARE THE THINGS THAT I THINK WE HAVE TO PUT FORWARD AND PUT ON PAPER AND MOVING FORWARD AND IN OUR CONVERSATIONS. AND THEN THE LAST PIECE TO TO YOUR I DON'T THINK THAT I THINK WE SHOULD INVITE THEM OR MR. TO A REPRESENTATIVE HERE TO TALK TO US. ONE ON ONE IS GREAT. BUT WHY DID YOU START THIS LEGISLATION? WHERE DID IT COME FROM? AND YOU KNOW, HOW DO WE DO THE NAPLES WAY OF WORKING TOGETHER SO THAT THIS DOESN'T HAPPEN? AND I BELIEVE IT WOULD BE RESPECTFUL OF HIM AND FOR US TO HAVE THAT DIALOG IN PUBLIC TO KNOW WHY. I JUST DON'T KNOW. IF YOU ALWAYS GET CANDOR IN THAT INSTANCE, I CAN TELL YOU THAT IT MIGHT NOT BE A COINCIDENCE THAT A WEEK BEFORE THAT, WE DECIDED TO SUE THE STATE. I'M SURE IT'S NO COINCIDENCE THAT FOR YEARS THEY'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT MOVING THE AIRPORT AND SPENT HUNDREDS OF THOUSAND DOLLARS ATTEMPTING THAT. [06:55:01] IT'S THAT'S WHEN I WAS RUNNING TWO YEARS AGO THAT THOSE WERE MAJOR ISSUES, HOT TOPICS. AND SO THIS DIDN'T HAPPEN IN A VACUUM. AND THE IMPETUS FOR THIS, THIS THING THAT JUST HIT US AND WE FELT LIKE WE GOT BLINDSIDED FROM. HOW LONG HAS THAT BEEN BEING WORKED ON AND THE VERBIAGE BEING WORKED OUT? OF COURSE, NOW AGAIN, IT GOES BACK TO US NOT HAVING A RELATIONSHIP WITH THE PEOPLE THAT WE SHOULD BE WORKING WITH. AND SEVERAL OF US WERE KIND OF PLEADING, LET'S DO THIS. KNOWING THAT, YOU KNOW, WE COULD STAND ON PRINCIPLE AND WE'RE GOING TO FINALLY SAY NO AND ALL THAT STUFF. BUT THE REALITY IS WE'RE IN A WORSE POSITION RIGHT NOW THAN WE WERE TWO WEEKS AGO. AND IT WOULD HAVE BEEN, I THINK, BEHOOVED US. AND IT'S NOT TOO LATE TO OPEN UP DIALOG AND TO ESTABLISH THE NAPLES WAY OF WORKING TOGETHER AND OF HOPEFULLY STOPPING THIS TRAIN. RIGHT. SO AS TO TAKE ON FROM COUNCIL MEMBER KRISEMAN. YES. WE NEED TO, AS A BODY COME UP WITH WHERE WE WANT TO THESE QUESTIONS I THINK ON SO THAT WE CAN GO BY, YOU KNOW, AN OUTLINE THAT WE WANT TO PUT IN A LETTER, PUT IN PHONE CALLS, PUT IN AS A BODY. WE ALL CAN HAVE OUR OWN OPINIONS OF, YOU KNOW, INDIVIDUAL. BUT I THINK AS A BODY WE NEED TO COME UP WITH WITH WHAT WE WANT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH AS WE WE ADVOCATE FOR THE CITY. AND ON THIS LEGISLATION THAT I I'M HEARING WE DON'T LIKE. WERE YOU COMPLETE? NO, I WOULD JUST SAY THAT MY TWO QUESTIONS WOULD BE WHAT IS THE IMPETUS AND WHAT ARE THE DESIRED OUTCOMES? YES, THAT'S THAT'S REALLY THE ONLY QUESTIONS I HAVE ABOUT THIS. WHAT IS THE IMPETUS AND WHAT ARE THE DESIRED OUTCOMES. BECAUSE OFTEN IF YOU CAN UNDERSTAND THE IMPETUS, YOU CAN FIND SOME WAY TO AMELIORATE WHATEVER THAT AGITATION WAS. AND ALSO ON THE OUTCOME SIDE, IF MAYBE WE CAN DO IT WORKING TOGETHER AND NOT WE DON'T HAVE TO CREATE NEW LEGISLATION TO GET THE DESIRED OUTCOMES. MAYOR CAN I JUST MAKE ONE POINT REAL QUICK? THEY DID NOT PROPOSE TO CHANGE THE NAME OF THE CITY OF NAPLES MUNICIPAL AIRPORT. JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM THAT. I IT JUST DIDN'T SAY CITY MUNICIPAL AIRPORT. IT SAID NAPLES AIRPORT. IN THE LETTER, THEY'RE NOT PROPOSING A CHANGE. IT SAYS FACILITIES AT THE CITY OF NAPLES MUNICIPAL AIRPORT. I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY. YEAH. THANK YOU, BUT THAT'S I DIDN'T I THOUGHT I SAW JUST NAPLES AIRPORT. THAT'S THAT'S SIMPLY AN OVERSIGHT. IT'S IT'S IN, IT'S IN. IT'S TWO DIFFERENT WAYS IN TWO DIFFERENT PARAGRAPHS, MA'AM. PARAGRAPH ONE HAS IT WITHOUT THE WORD MUNICIPAL PARAGRAPH. SECTION THREE HAS IT WITH CANTON OR CITY OF NAPLES MUNICIPAL AIRPORT. SO IT IS TWO DIFFERENT WAYS IN THE SAME DOCUMENT. JUST WE WANT WORDS MATTER. THANK YOU. VICE MAYOR. GO AHEAD AND THEN I'LL. PENMAN. OH, WAIT. HOLD ON, I GOTTA GO. PENMAN, DID YOU HAVE ANY COMMENT? OKAY. PENMAN. BARTON AND THEN WE'LL WRAP THIS UP. YOU KNOW I THINK IT WOULD BE INTERESTING TO GET THE DOCUMENTATION ON A, HOW MANY HOURS THE NA TALKED ABOUT MOVING THE AIRPORT, HOW MUCH MONEY WAS TALKED ABOUT RELATIVE TO THAT. THEY MUST HAVE SPENT, I DON'T KNOW, THE BETTER PART OF TWO YEARS TRYING TO MOVE THIS BLOODY THING. AND THERE'S NO PLACE TO PUT IT. SO I DON'T UNDERSTAND. I MEAN, I THINK THAT'S THE ARGUMENT WITH WITH THE REPRESENTATIVE. THERE'S NO PLACE TO PUT THIS THING. THE NA HAS BEEN THROUGH THAT. THEY'VE SPENT THOUSANDS, PROBABLY A MILLION BUCKS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHERE WE COULD POSSIBLY PUT THAT BLOODY THING. AND THEN NOTHING EVER SURFACED. SO I DON'T. I DON'T GET IT. IF I COULD. YEAH. PLEASE. YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. BUT IT'S MORE THAN THAT. THE CONCLUSION WAS NOT JUST THE CHALLENGE OF FINDING AN ACCEPTABLE SITE. IT WAS THE COST $2 BILLION. I MEAN, WHO WHO IS GOING TO PAY FOR THAT? AND AND SO, YOU KNOW, IN THE SHORT TERM ANYWAY OR MEDIUM TERM, IT WOULD BE A DAUNTING TASK TO LOOK AT THIS AIRPORT BEING EITHER RELOCATED OR WITH COUNTY PARTICIPATION FINANCIALLY. AND I MEAN, THEY LOOKED AT THEY LOOKED VERY SERIOUSLY AT THE PICAYUNE STRAND. I'M SORRY. THERE WAS THAT THERE WAS FEDERAL MONEY INVOLVED IN THAT EVENT INITIALLY, SO THEY'D HAVE TO GO GO TO THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT. THEY'D HAVE TO GO TO CONGRESS AND SAY, COULD WE PLEASE HAVE THAT? BECAUSE THE CONGRESS WAS INVOLVED AT THAT TIME, BECAUSE THEY RELEASE FEDERAL MONEY TO BUY THE PICAYUNE STRAND BECAUSE IT WAS THERE FOR AN [07:00:03] ENVIRONMENTAL PURPOSE. SO IT'S VERY COMPLICATED. SO THERE'S REALLY NO PLACE FOR IT TO GO. THEY REALLY LOOKED AT EVERY POSSIBLE SITE. AND I THINK THE LEGISLATURE SURELY A LEGISLATOR WOULD UNDERSTAND THAT THAT WE'VE BEEN THERE, DONE THAT. TALK TO THE NOAA. LET'S SEE HOW MUCH MONEY THEY SPENT AND THEY THEY HAD. WE'VE ALL BEEN SAT THROUGH THOSE MEETINGS. THEY HAVE BY THEIR INITIATIVE. BY THEIR INITIATIVE. THEY HAD A MULTIPLICITY OF CONSULTANTS. WE'VE WE'VE WE ALL SAT THROUGH THAT. RIGHT. THANK YOU. PARDON. YEAH. NOT ONLY THAT, BUT NOW ALL OF A SUDDEN WE'RE IN DISCUSSING LEGISLATION ABOUT ADDING IN COUNTY VOICES INTO AN AIRPORT THAT COUNTY COMMISSIONERS HAVE PUBLICLY SAID THEY WANT NOTHING TO DO WITH. SO THAT'S ALSO RATHER FRUSTRATING. I'M NOT GOING TO BEAT A DEAD HORSE HERE. I AGREE WITH, FRANKLY, EVERYTHING, EVERYTHING EVERYBODY SAID UP HERE. I UNDERSTAND THE VICE MAYOR'S FRUSTRATION AND IRRITATION WITH HOW THIS WENT DOWN, AND I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH IT. AND IT'S IT CAUSES HACKLES ON THE BACK OF MY NECK STAND UP. AND IT IRRITATES ME AS WELL. I THINK THE THE RIGHT WAY TO GO ABOUT TRYING TO RESOLVE THE ISSUE THAT WE HAVE IN FRONT OF US IS, IS TO AGGRESSIVELY OPEN DIALOG WHICH WHICH AGAIN, WE'VE ALL BLAMED OURSELVES HERE. I'LL PUBLICLY BLAME MYSELF, TOO. I HAVEN'T MADE THE EFFORT THAT I NEEDED TO MAKE AS FAR AS COMMUNICATING WITH OUR WITH OUR DELEGATES. SO THAT'S, THAT'S ON ME AS MUCH AS, AS ANYBODY. SO I EMBRACE THAT WE NEED TO AGGRESSIVELY DO THAT. I BELIEVE, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, WE WERE THE DIRECTION THAT WE WERE LOOKING FOR HERE IS FROM A STANDPOINT OF AMENDING OUR LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES. AND AS FAR AS THAT IS CONCERNED, YES, WE NEED TO ALL OF A SUDDEN HAVE TO ADD THIS BACK INTO OR AND ADJUST OUR OUR APPROACH HERE. I DON'T KNOW IF IT GETS TACKED INTO PROTECTING HOME RULE AUTHORITY, BECAUSE IT CERTAINLY FEELS LIKE HOME RULE IS GETTING ATTACKED. IT'S COMING. THE ATTACKS COMING SEEMS LIKE IT'S COMING FROM A DIFFERENT DIRECTION, EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT. BUT OR IF IT NEEDS ITS OWN SPECIFIC LINE ITEM. BUT YES, THIS NEEDS TO BE PUT INTO THE DOCUMENT AND, AND MADE A PRIORITY FOR US MOVING FORWARD. SO I HEAR THAT WE HAVE A CONSENSUS THAT THIS IS TO BE PUT INTO UPDATED LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES. JUST I'VE KIND OF SHARED ALONG THE WAY AS YOU'VE SPOKEN I I BELIEVE THAT THIS MEETING AND HAVING A GRASSROOTS EFFORT, I THINK NOT JUST FROM US, BUT FROM THE CITIZENS AND YOU KNOW, FOR ADVOCACY AGAINST THIS LEGISLATION IS VERY IMPORTANT. BUT I ALSO KNOW WHAT IT FEELS LIKE TO HAVE HOME RULE TAKEN AWAY THROUGH LIVE LOCAL SENATE BILL 250 AND SENATE BILL 180. NOT BEING HEARD. NOT BEING ANSWERED TO WHY SENATE BILL 250. MULTIPLE TIMES REACHING OUT. I'D LIKE TO SEE IT CHANGE. I'D LIKE TO SEE THE DIALOG CHANGE. BUT I'M NOT GOING TO STAND ON HOPE ANYMORE. I HAVE TO STAND AND PROTECT OUR COMMUNITY, AND I HOPE THAT'S WHAT OUR INTENTION IS WITH THIS CONSENSUS THAT WE WILL MOVE FORWARD WITH UPDATING OUR PRIORITIES AND SOME COMMUNICATION ON HOW WE'LL DO THAT THROUGH OUR VOICES HERE AT THE DAIS. I APPRECIATE LISA HURLEY. UNFORTUNATELY, I BELIEVE THAT WE NEED A SPECIFIC HOME RULE. AIRPORT AUTHORITY LOBBYIST. AND I KNOW THEY'RE AVAILABLE. I KNOW I SPOKE WITH ANDREW BARR ABOUT THIS OVER A YEAR AGO. AND HAVE SOMEONE THERE REPRESENTING US BECAUSE THESE BILLS ARE GOING TO GO THROUGH AND THEY'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH QUICKLY. AND WE NEED TO KNOW THAT ONE LOBBYIST IS GOING TO HAVE OUR BACK. WE NEED TO DISCUSS THAT. SECONDLY, WE NEED TO BE PREPARED TO HIRE AN ATTORNEY THAT IF THIS LEGISLATION HAPPENS, THAT HAS THE CAPABILITIES, IF THIS BODY DECIDES AND I BELIEVE WE SHOULD TO FIGHT TO PROTECT OUR HOME RULE. IF THERE WERE LEGITIMATE REASONS. FROM WHAT I HAVE HEARD FROM THE COMMUNITY ABOUT WHY THEY HAD TO GO TO THE STATE BECAUSE WE HAVE [07:05:01] AGROECIUS OR WE HAVE TAKEN OVER AND THEY HAD TO BRING PEOPLE IN FROM THE STATE TO CONTROL US. IT'S THE SAME CONVERSATION THAT HAPPENED WITH SENATE BILL 250. THEY STOOD AT THE PODIUM, SLAMMED THEIR HANDS DOWN AND SAID, DON'T MAKE US GO AND HAVE THE STATE TAKE AWAY YOUR POWERS. AND IF IT'S, YOU KNOW, AS EASY AS YOU HAVE THE POWER, BECAUSE YOU ARE HAVE BETTER STANDING WITH YOUR REPRESENTATIVE AND YOU CAN GET LEGISLATION MOVED FORWARD OPPOSED TO THE COMMUNITY. THAT'S DISAPPOINTING. AND THE CONVERSATION OF IT'S A MINORITY GROUP. I THINK WE NEED TO DO SOME REAL, HARD LOOK AT WHETHER THIS IS REALLY A MINORITY OR NOT, BECAUSE THAT CONVERSATION IS OLD. IT'S MY NOT IN MY BACKYARD. AND I KNOW SEVERAL PEOPLE THAT HAVE SAID, WE'LL JUST MOVE. WE'LL FIND ANOTHER PARADISE. I KNOW THAT'S YOU KNOW, WHAT THEY WANT TO SAY. THEY SAID SAID IT TO PEOPLE. JUST MOVE. BUT THAT'S NOT THE NAPLES WAY. SOMETIMES YOU CAN'T SOLVE ALL PROBLEMS, AND SOMETIMES IT YOU DON'T ACHIEVE 100% SUPPORT OF OF WHERE WE'RE GOING IN A COMMUNITY. BUT THE QUALITY OF LIFE IS, IS WHAT'S AT STAKE HERE, IN MY OPINION. SO I'M GOING TO BE VERY CALM, BUT I'M NOT GOING TO SIT DOWN AND LET THIS STATE RUN OVER US ANYMORE. I'M SORRY. I'M NOT TRYING TO INSULT OUR PEOPLE THAT ARE REPRESENTING US, BUT I HAVEN'T SEEN ANYTHING BUT TAKE AWAY HOME RULE YEAR AFTER YEAR AFTER YEAR AND IT'S UNACCEPTABLE. AND SO AGAIN, CRISPIN, YOU SAID IT. WE KNOW HOW TO RUN OUR OWN CITIES, AND THE STATE SHOULDN'T BE STEPPING IN. AND, KRAMER, YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. THEY CAN. BUT BELIEVE YOU ME, THERE WILL BE PEOPLE UP THERE REPLACING THEM JUST AS SOON AS WE CAN. BECAUSE IF THAT'S. WHAT IF THAT'S THE KIND OF RELATIONSHIPS WE'RE GOING TO HAVE FOR THE BETTERMENT OF OUR COMMUNITY. WE NEED TO MAKE A CHANGE. SO ARE WE JUST TALKING ABOUT THE AIRPORT RIGHT NOW, OR ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THE LEGISLATIVE AGENDA IN GENERAL? WELL, I THINK THE REASON AND MISS BERNHARDT, YOU MIGHT THE WHOLE REASON, MR. YOUNG, THIS WAS PUT ON WAS JUST TO DO AN UPDATE OF WHAT HAPPENED AT THE LEGISLATIVE HEARING AND THE FACT THAT THIS WAS A DISCUSSION VOTED 4 TO 0 TO BE MOVED TO MOVE FORWARD. I'D LIKE TO TALK THEN AT JUST TWO QUICK THINGS ABOUT SB 250, A CLARIFICATION, BECAUSE I KNOW SOME PEOPLE, I THINK THERE'S HURT FEELINGS UP HERE THAT WE ASK THEM TO. IT WAS VAGUE. IT WAS AMBIGUOUS. AND I THINK OUR CITY ATTORNEY WOULD TELL HAS TOLD ME THAT MANY TIMES WHEN THEY WRITE LAWS, THAT IS THE CASE, THAT THERE ARE VAGUE AND AMBIGUOUS TERMS. AND THEN UNTIL IT'S BEFORE A JUDGE, WE OFTEN DON'T GET THEM DEFINED. DO WE HAVE THAT CONVERSATION ONE TIME? PROBABLY. THAT'S PRETTY NORMAL, IS IT NOT THAT YOU KNOW. STATUTES ARE INTERPRETED FROM BOTH SIDES EVERY DAY. BUT I WILL SAY, IN MY OPINION, IF YOU'RE GOING TO DO SOMETHING LIKE SB 180 OR 250 AND YOU WANT IT TO WORK, THEN YOU SHOULD HAVE PUT SOME DEFINITIONS IN THERE. YEAH, I AGREE WITH THAT. I THINK WE ALL DO. BUT I JUST WANT TO JUST SO EVERYBODY UP HERE KNOWS WE WEREN'T THE ONLY GROUP THAT, AND IT WASN'T AS IF WE ASKED EVERY WEEK FOR TWO MONTHS OR WHATEVER, BUT WE ASKED THEM, HEY, TELL US WHAT MORE BURDENSOME MEANS. AND THEY WERE LIKE, NO RESPONSE. IT WASN'T. THERE'S JUST NO RESPONSE, REALLY. BUT THAT WAS FOR THE ENTIRE STATE. THEY ARE PICKING ON NAPLES. NOBODY GOT IT DEFINED. AND I THINK THAT WAS BY DESIGN BECAUSE IT GAVE THEM LEVERAGE WITHOUT DEFINITION. AND SO THEY USED THE LEVERAGE. AND THEN ON THE AS FAR AS 180, I JUST HAVE TO REVISIT. I THINK IT WAS A MISTAKE. I'M GOING TO SAY IT AGAIN, I THINK THAT WE SHOULD ONLY BECAUSE I TOLD YOU THAT I TALKED TO KATHLEEN AND I THINK SOMEBODY ELSE HAD DONE THE SAME, AND SHE WAS WILLING TO AND MATTHEW WAS ALREADY WORKING ON IT. THAT BILL NEEDED TO BE CURED. EVERYBODY KNEW IT. A WHOLE BUNCH OF PEOPLE HELD THEIR NOSE AND VOTED FOR IT. WE KNEW THAT IT WASN'T SPECIFIC ENOUGH. IT WAS WAY TOO VAGUE. AND THEY'RE WILLING TO GO GET GIVE US BULLET POINTS AND WE'LL AND LET'S WORK ON IT TOGETHER. AND I THINK THAT'S THE TACK WE SHOULD HAVE TAKEN. I'M NOT SAYING THERE'S NEVER A TIME TO FIGHT. BELIEVE THAT? I DON'T THINK THAT SHOULD. THAT WAS, LIKE RAY HAD SAID, THE STRATEGIC CHOICE. THAT WAS NOT A GOOD STRATEGIC CHOICE. AND I STILL THINK THAT IT STILL EXISTS. IT STILL HAS NOT BEEN CURED. THERE'S STILL TIME TO COMMUNICATE AND HAVE OUR ATTORNEY AND WHOEVER ELSE WANTS TO BE INVOLVED. ALL OF US GO THROUGH AND SAY, HEY, LOOK, THIS DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. [07:10:04] THIS WE DON'T UNDERSTAND. AND JUST GIVE THEM BULLET POINTS WHERE THEY HAVE SOME WHERE THEY CAN AT LEAST START THE DIALOG AND HOPEFULLY GET THAT THING REINED IN AND MAKE IT SOMETHING THAT IS PALATABLE. THAT'S MY HOPE. AND I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE WE HOW FAR HAVE WE MOVED FORWARD ON PAYING WHOEVER WE GOT TO PAY THE TEN GRAND OR WHATEVER? ARE THERE ANY CONTRACTS INVOLVED? BECAUSE I'M WONDERING IF WE CAN, IF IT'S POSSIBLE TO UNDO THAT. NO, NO, I HAVEN'T SEEN THE CONTRACT COME THROUGH. NO, NO MONEY'S BEEN ALLOCATED AS OF YET. I WOULD HAVE TO COME FROM SOMEONE WHO VOTED YES FOR IT. I CAN'T, THERE WASN'T A CONTRACT. ALL THEY DID WAS TAKE THE RESOLUTION, MOVE FORWARD. QUITE CANDIDLY, MAUREEN, THERE WAS EMAIL COMMUNICATIONS ABOUT OPENING. IT WAS JUST A $10,000 PAYMENT. DON'T KNOW IF IT'S BEEN MADE YET. I DON'T HANDLE PAYMENTS. NO, IT WASN'T BECAUSE THE THE RESOLUTION WAS SPECIFIC THAT SAID THAT IT AUTHORIZED THE CITY MANAGER TO APPROVE A CONTRACT FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE LAWSUIT. AND SO WHEN SHE CAME, I JUST KNOW THIS BECAUSE SHE ASKED ME, SHOULD WE DO A DIRECT PAY? AND I SAID, WELL, YOU CAN'T DO A DIRECT PAY. THIS IS A IT. THE RESOLUTION ITSELF SAID IT AUTHORIZES CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF THAT. SO THEREFORE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE SOMETHING. AND THEN SECOND OF ALL THEY'D HAVE TO REGISTER THROUGH MUNIS. AND AS OF THIS MORNING, THAT HADN'T TO MY KNOWLEDGE, NONE OF THAT HAS BEEN DONE. I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK FOR BUT BUT THAT'S THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING AT THE MOMENT. AND I'LL SAY THAT AS SO FAR SB WELL, WE FINALLY GOT SUED BY THE WHOEVER. I DON'T EVEN KNOW IF THEY HAVE STANDING WITH THE COURT. FRIENDS OF THE AIRPORT OR WHATEVER, BUT WE'LL GET IT. TO CLARIFY, WE HAVE NOT BEEN SUED. OH, WE HAVE NOT. WE'VE JUST BEEN THREATENED. I APOLOGIZE FOR PUT ON NOTICE. MY FAULT. SO WE'VE NOT BEEN SUED, AND I HOPE THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN, BUT IT'LL TAKE SOME. SO. SO FAR, EVEN NOW, IT'S ALL THEORETICAL. SB 250 HASN'T KEPT US FROM DOING ANYTHING. WE CAN DO WHATEVER LEGISLATION WE WANT. WE CAN DO THE COMP PLAN HOWEVER WE WANT, WE CAN DO WHATEVER WE WANT, AND THE RUBBER WILL NOT HIT THE ROAD UNTIL THERE'S A PRACTICAL APPLICATION. AND SOMEBODY WANTS TO SUE US NOW. AND I DON'T KNOW ABOUT Y'ALL, BUT IN MY JOB, I WAS THREATENED TO BE SUED. I CANNOT COUNT HOW MANY TIMES, INFINITY TIMES, AND I JUST KEEP DOING THE RIGHT THING. AND I JUST ENCOURAGE I WOULD ENCOURAGE US TO DO THE SAME. JUST DO THE RIGHT THING. LET'S DO WHAT WE NEED TO DO, WHETHER IT'S FOR RESILIENCE, FOR OUR COMP PLAN, FOR WHATEVER. AND THEN AT SOME POINT THE RUBBER MAY HIT THE ROAD AND THEN WE'LL GET REAL DEFINITIONS. IF IT DOESN'T HAPPEN IN THE CITY OF NAPLES, IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN TO SOMEBODY. I LIKE THE WAY YOU THINK. HOWEVER, IT HAS KEPT US. IT HAS. IT HAS BY OUR CHOICE. WELL, THAT WAS OUR CHOICE. IF WE CHOSE NOT TO DO SOMETHING, IT DIDN'T. IT DID NOT PREVENT US. WE SAID, WELL, IS THAT GOING TO IS THAT GOING TO CREATE A PROBLEM WITH SB 250? AND WHAT I'M SAYING IS LET'S JUST DO THE RIGHT THING. LET THE CHIPS FALL WHERE THEY MAY. THAT'S ALL I'M SAYING. WAIT. I'M SORRY. ARE YOU. YEAH. WAIT. I DON'T WANT TO KEEP GOING. I WANT TO. OH. YOU'RE FINE. SORRY. WE'RE WITH YOU. I HAVE PUBLIC SPEAKERS. AND THEN WE'LL CLARIFY ANY DIRECTION WE NEED. MADAM MAYOR. YES. AFTER THE PUBLIC SPEAKERS, I JUST HAVE A FEW COMMENTS. OH, YES, I DO. I HAVE A FEW MORE TO JUDY FREIBERG. THANK YOU. 7499 BERKSHIRE PINES DRIVE. I LIVE IN THE COUNTY. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THERE'S GOING TO BE A COUPLE OF MOTIONS OR EFFORTS TO PASS SO THAT YOU ALL HAVE THE ABILITY, WHEN YOU DO NEGOTIATE, OF HAVING A STRONGER HAND. AND SO I'M SPEAKING IN SUPPORT OF THOSE MOTIONS. I'M A COUNTY RESIDENT, AS YOU KNOW, I LIVED RIGHT NEAR THE AIRPORT OVER THE FLIGHT PATH FOR A BUNCH OF YEARS BEFORE I MOVED TO WHERE I AM NOW. SO I HAVE AN INTEREST IN CITY COUNCIL KEEPING CONTROL OF THE AIRPORT. AND I'M A COUNTY RESIDENT, SO I THINK THE REASON I WANT CITY COUNCIL TO KEEP CONTROL OVER THE RESIDENTS, BECAUSE THIS BODY IS BETTER AT REPRESENTING EVERYBODY, ALL THE INTERESTS OF ALL THE INTERESTS THAT LIVE IN THE CITY OF NAPLES, AND NOT JUST SOME OF THE INTERESTS AS OPPOSED TO THE COUNTY. THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DO NOT. AND I CAN TELL YOU THAT WHEN I COME AND SPEAK BEFORE YOU, ALL PEOPLE ARE ACTUALLY LISTENING. THEY DON'T LABEL ME SOME WAY OR ANOTHER AND BLOW ME OFF. IN THE COUNTY, I DON'T BOTHER GOING THERE BECAUSE OF MY EXPERIENCES. SO THAT IS WHY PLEASE KEEP CONTROL OF THIS AIRPORT AND THAT SHOULD BE YOUR PRIMARY GOAL. SECONDLY I'M ALSO, AS YOU KNOW, PRESIDENT OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL CAUCUS. NOW, I WAS PROMOTED TO BE PRESIDENT OF THE STATE ENVIRONMENTAL CAUCUS. [07:15:04] WE HAVE CHAPTERS IN 23 COUNTIES A YEAR OR SO AGO. MAYOR HEITMAN ASKED ME TO PLEASE GET THE PEOPLE THAT WE ELECT TO STOP DOING ALL THIS ANTI LOCAL CONTROL STUFF, AND THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT I'M DOING. I JUST GOT ELECTED AND I'M TALK TO YOU ABOUT IT OVER COFFEE. THIRDLY I AM GOING TO TALK MOSTLY ABOUT MY EXPERIENCE AS A LAWYER, HOW TO STRENGTHEN YOUR HAND WHEN YOU GO TO NEGOTIATE. BECAUSE I'M TELLING YOU, I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE SAID ALL THIS BACKBITING, ALL THIS NEGATIVITY, ALL THIS NAME CALLING IS STUFF IS A PRODUCT OF CITIZENS NOT HAVING A SAY. THAT IS WHAT'S HAPPENING. BECAUSE IF YOU GO INTO THIS NEGOTIATION AND YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND YOUR LEGAL RIGHTS AND YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO CHALLENGE THE LEGISLATION, IF IT'S PASSED, YOU WILL GO IN WITH A VERY WEAK HAND. AND I THINK WHAT COACH KRAMER SAID IS EXACTLY RIGHT. THEY'RE JUST GOING TO RUN OVER YOU. SO IT IS IT REALLY DAMPENS DOWN ALL OF THAT ANGER WHEN YOU GO IN WITH A STRONG HAND. SO I AM BEGGING YOU TO HIRE A LAWYER WHO CAN TELL YOU EXACTLY WHAT YOUR REMEDIES ARE GOING TO BE IF THEY PASS THIS LEGISLATION, BECAUSE WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN THEN IS YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A LESS CONTENTIOUS BATTLE. I'M TELLING YOU, AS A LAWYER, I'M. SO I JUST WANT TO SAY ONE OTHER THING. A YEAR AGO WHEN WE DID OUR RIVER PARK, REMEMBER, WE DID OUR RIVER PARK FORUM AND FOUR OF YOU ATTENDED THAT THAT ARE NOW SITTING UP IN THIS DAIS. THAT SAME NIGHT, THERE WAS A AIRPORT EVENT. YOU COULD HAVE GONE TO THAT AIRPORT EVENT. YOU DIDN'T. YOU WENT AND LISTENED TO THE PEOPLE FROM RIVER PARK. AND I HAVE A FEELING THAT'S WHY YOU'RE UP HERE. AND SO AND I REMEMBER COUNCILMAN BARTON TOLD ME THAT WHEN HE CAME IN THAT NIGHT. SO PLEASE DO YOUR JOB, REPRESENT ALL THE CITIZENS AND KEEP CONTROL OF THIS AIRPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS MARY YOUNG. MARY YOUNG, CITY RESIDENT, SPEAKING TODAY ON BEHALF OF THE OLD NAPLES ASSOCIATION. I WANT TO COMMENT ON THE RECENT ACTIONS BY OUR STATE REPRESENTATIVES TO ALTER THE AIRPORT ENABLING ACT AND THE COMMENTS THIS MORNING BY COUNCILWOMAN PENNIMAN CONCERNING MEETING WITH SENATOR PASSIDOMO TO DISCUSS THIS MATTER. OUR CITY RESIDENTS ARE CLEAR ON THIS HOME RULE TOPIC, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER OR NOT THEY WANT TO TRY TO REGULATE OPERATIONS AT OUR AIRPORT. THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF OUR RESIDENTS ARE UNITED ON THIS POSITION THAT THIS LARGE AIRPORT ASSET OWNED BY THE CITY SHOULD BE GOVERNED AND MANAGED BY OUR CITY ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES. THIS IS A VERY SERIOUS ISSUE THAT IS CERTAIN TO DOMINATE CITY RESIDENT CONVERSATIONS OVER THE COMING WEEKS. TO RESPOND TO COUNCILWOMAN PENMAN'S COMMENTS CONCERNING THE NAPLES WAY AND HER ATTEMPT TO REACH ACROSS THE AISLE AND MEET WITH SENATOR PASSIDOMO, AND ALSO THE OTHER CONVERSATIONS WE'VE HAD THIS MORNING ABOUT MEETING WITH, PATERNO. I CERTAINLY APPLAUD THIS AND THIS ATTEMPT TO SIT DOWN WITH OUR LEGISLATORS AND TRY TO FIND SOME COMMON GROUND. HOWEVER, THAT ATTEMPT TO FIND COMMON GROUND COULD BE A LOT MORE SUCCESSFUL FOR CITY RESIDENTS IF BOTH PARTIES WALKED INTO THAT NEGOTIATION IN A MORE BALANCED POSITION. BOTH PARTIES BELIEVING THAT THEY MIGHT HAVE SOMETHING TO LOSE. NEGOTIATIONS WORK BEST WHEN BOTH PARTIES HAVE RISK TO LOSE. MUTUAL RISK CREATES A WIN WIN INCENTIVE, ENCOURAGES COLLABORATION AND TRUST, REQUIRES RATIONAL AND INFORMED DECISION MAKING, AND MITIGATES AGGRESSIVE TACTICS. WHEN ONLY ONE PARTY HAS SIGNIFICANT RISK, THE NEGOTIATION WOULD BE UNBALANCED AND OFTEN NOT EFFECTIVE, ALL FOR THE PARTY HOLDING ALL THE RISK TO LOSE. IN ADDITION, IT'S HARD TO NEGOTIATE WHEN YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOUR RIGHTS ARE. WE FEEL STRONGLY THAT WE NEED TO RETAIN OUTSIDE COUNSEL WHO IS EXPERT IN HOME RULE DISPUTES. COUNCIL WITH THIS EXPERTISE CAN FIND ALTERNATIVES TO DEAL WITH STATE OVERREACH. SURELY OUR SENATOR AND REPRESENTATIVES WILL WORK HARDER TO FIND COMMON GROUND IF THEY THINK THE FAILURE TO DO SO WILL RESULT IN SOUND LEGAL CHALLENGES BY A VERY ORGANIZED CITY WITH STRONG RESIDENT SUPPORT. AN ATTORNEY MAY WE MAY WANT TO REACH OUT TO IS JAMIE COLE OF WEISS SIROTA IN FORT LAUDERDALE. MR. COLE IS RECOGNIZED IN THE STATE AS AN EXPERT IN REPRESENTING LOCAL MUNICIPALITIES IN STATE HOME RULE CASES, AND HE HAS A TREMENDOUS TRACK RECORD OF SUCCESS. HE'S ONLY 90 MINUTES AWAY, BUT THE VERY BEST THING ABOUT HIM IS WE'RE ALREADY HIS A CLIENT. [07:20:03] HE IS THE LEAD ATTORNEY REPRESENTING THE 13 OR SO CITIES FIGHTING SENATE BILL 180. IT WOULD SEEM TO MAKE A LOT OF SENSE FOR OUR CITY ATTORNEY TO REACH OUT TO MR. COLE AND FIND OUT IF HE IS A POSSIBLE OPTION TO HELP US AS WE NAVIGATE THIS MATTER OR KNOW SOMEONE WHO MIGHT BE. SO IN SUMMARY, I HAVE TWO ASKS OF THE CITY COUNCIL TODAY. ONE IS THAT WE CERTAINLY REACT POSITIVELY TO LINDA'S SUGGESTION THAT WE BRING IN THESE REPRESENTATIVES TO TALK TO US IN CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS. BUT TWO, AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, THAT THE CITY COUNCIL DIRECT OUR CITY ATTORNEY TO GO OUT AND RESEARCH OUR POSSIBLE OPTIONS FOR RETAINING COUNSEL AND AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, BRING THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS BACK TO COUNCIL FOR THEIR CONSIDERATION AND ACTION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. VICE MAYOR. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. THIS WAS GOOD DISCUSSION ON THIS MATTER OF OUR LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION AND WHAT HAPPENED ON SEPTEMBER 15TH. MY INITIAL STATEMENTS RELATED TO THE TIMING OF THAT STILL STAND, THAT EVERY OPPORTUNITY WAS AFFORDED TO BRING THIS TO US AND LET US HANDLE THIS PROPERLY. YET A DECISION WAS MADE THAT WENT IN OPPOSITE DIRECTION. SO I HAVE THESE. SO I DON'T JUST WANDER AROUND HERE. I'VE WRITTEN THIS OUT AND TAKEN SOME NOTES FROM WHAT OUR PUBLIC COMMENT HAS SAID. SO OUR COLLIER COUNTY LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION, INCLUDING REPRESENTATIVES BHARTHANA BENARROCH MELO AND SENATOR PASSIDOMO, HAVE MUTUALLY AGREED TO AGAIN SUPPORT LEGISLATIVE EFFORTS WHICH ARE INTENDED TO STRIP AWAY THE RIGHTS OF CITY RESIDENTS RELATED TO HOME RULE. TO BE CLEAR, LEGAL ACTION VIA LEGISLATIVE LEAVE SPECIAL ITEMS. THIS LEGISLATIVE SPECIAL ACTION, THAT'S A LEGAL. THAT'S A LEGAL MANEUVER. IT'S ALREADY STARTED IS BEING BROUGHT FORWARD. SO THAT'S GOING TO GO INTO COMMITTEE. IT'LL BE ASSIGNED TO 2 OR 3 COMMITTEES. IT'LL COME OUT OF COMMITTEE. THERE'S NO REASON. I MEAN, WITH THE FOUR LEGISLATIVE DELEGATES SUPPORTING IT, 4 TO 0 EXPECTED TO MOVE THROUGH COMMITTEE, EXPECT IT THEN TO MOVE INTO THE SENATE. AND IF SENATOR PASSIDOMO. AND THAT'LL BE MID-FEBRUARY. MID-FEBRUARY THAT THIS WILL HAPPEN. IF SENATOR PASSIDOMO DOESN'T STRIP IT OUT OF THE CONSENT ITEM, THEN IT'S GOING TO MOVE FORWARD AND IT'LL HAPPEN IN TERMS OF PLACING IT ON A BALLOT. ALL RIGHT. NOW, IF SHE STRIPS IT OUT OF THE CONSENT ITEM, THEN IT SHOULD DIE. UNLESS SHE'S TAKEN SPECIAL ACTION IN REVISIONS AND THE TIMING ON THAT. AGAIN, THIS COMES INTO THE SENATE IN FEBRUARY. IN FEBRUARY. THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION SHOULD START JANUARY 13TH, 2026 AND END MARCH 13TH, 2026. OKAY. THINK ABOUT HOW THAT SQUARES UP WITH TIMING HERE IN THE CITY OF NAPLES. ANYTHING SIGNIFICANT THAT YOU KNOW OF GOING ON AROUND FEBRUARY AS THIS IS BEING MOVED OUT OF THE HOUSE PORTION? AND BY THE WAY, IT'S THE HOUSE SIDE OF IT THAT BRINGS A LOCAL ACTION. ONLY THE HOUSE BRINGS A LOCAL ACTION, NOT THE SENATE. OKAY. THE NAPLES WAY. THAT'S A DOCUMENT YOU'VE HEARD FOR THE PUBLIC. YOU'VE HEARD US TALK ABOUT THE NAPLES WAY SEVERAL TIMES UP HERE. THIS IS A DOCUMENT THAT'S AVAILABLE TO YOU AT THE CITY. THE NAPLES WAY'S A DOCUMENT WHICH EMBODIES A UNIQUE APPROACH EMPHASIZING EXCEPTIONAL CARE, ATTENTION TO DETAIL, AND DEDICATION TO SERVING THE COMMUNITY WITH THE HIGHEST STANDARDS OF EXCELLENCE AND PROFESSIONALISM. THERE'S ABOUT TWO MORE LONG PARAGRAPHS THAT GO WITH THE NAPLES WAY. I'LL BOIL IT DOWN INTO PLAIN SPEAK. THE NAPLES WAY IS DOING THE RIGHT THINGS IN THE RIGHT WAY, [07:25:02] AT THE RIGHT TIME, AND FOR THE RIGHT REASONS. THAT'S BASICALLY WHAT IT IS. IT'S IT'S PRETTY COOL STUFF, RIGHT? I MEAN, FOR COACH KRAMER, I MEAN, THAT'S ALMOST STUFF TO LEAD TEAMS BY. AND I GUESS YOU COULD SAY WE'RE A TEAM AND OUR CITY STAFF IS A TEAM. YOU KNOW, THAT'S KIND OF HOW WE DO STUFF ANYWAY. I BELIEVE SO DOING THE RIGHT THING. I'M JUST GOING TO BREAK IT DOWN QUICKLY, DOING THE RIGHT THING. DEFENDING HOME RULE IS DOING THE RIGHT THING. I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY DISPUTE ABOUT THAT IN THE RIGHT WAY. SO THAT MEANS FOR ME, EXPRESSING OUR CONCERN ON BEHALF OF OUR RESIDENTS, TALK PLAINLY AND BE CLEAR. AND I THINK IT'S OKAY TO EXPECT THAT COME IN THE OTHER DIRECTION AT THE RIGHT TIME. NOW, YOU ALREADY KNOW WHERE I'M GOING WITH THIS ONE. ALL RIGHT? IT'S PART OF WHAT I JUST SAID. DO THE RIGHT THING IN THE RIGHT WAY AT THE RIGHT TIME. THIS LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION. THESE ARE PRETTY TOP DRAWER PEOPLE. THEY KNOW ABOUT TIMING. THEY TALKED ABOUT IT. THEY KNEW IT AS IT WAS BEING DONE. SO MAKE NO MISTAKE ABOUT WHAT THE INTENT WAS. THE RIGHT TIME IN THIS CASE, WE WERE NOT AFFORDED AN OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS THIS AS A BODY ON AN AGENDA. AND IN THE SUNSHINE, THE LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION IS NOT INTERESTED IN SUPPORTING HOME RULE. OTHERWISE, WE WOULDN'T EVEN BE IN THIS POSITION. THE ACTIONS. PROPOSED ARE NOT THE HOMIEST OF HOME RULE, AS STATED BY SENATOR PASSIDOMO, AND I BELIEVE SENATOR PASSIDOMO IS THE ONLY. ACTUAL CITY OF NAPLES RESIDENT ON THE LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION. I HAVE FAITH OUR SENATOR WILL DO THE RIGHT THING AND ADHERE TO THE NAPLES WAY. NOW, THE LAST PART OF THIS IS THE RIGHT REASONS. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE NAPLES WAY AGAIN AND DOING THINGS, THE RIGHT THINGS AT THE RIGHT TIME AND DOING IT FOR THE RIGHT REASONS. WE HAVE A CITY ORDINANCE AS TO OUR APPOINTING AUTHORITY. AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE IF YOU LOOK AT THE TIMELINE AND THE GENESIS OF THAT APPOINTING AUTHORITY, YOU KNOW, IT WAS DESIGNED BY THE STATE. THEY REQUIRED US TO ADOPT IT AS AN ORDINANCE. AND THEN OTHER ACTIONS TOOK PLACE. OKAY. NOW, THIS IS TRULY A LEGISLATIVE OVERREACH. COUNCILMAN KRISEMAN, HE USED A WORD THAT I'M NOT GOING TO FORGET FOR A LONG TIME. AND IT'S FIAT. YOU KNOW. YOU'LL SEE ONE OF THOSE DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD EVERY NOW AND THEN. BUT IT TRULY WAS A LEGISLATIVE FIAT. IF YOU BELIEVE THAT THE NAPLES AIRPORT IS ON CITY OWNED LAND, AND THAT IT IS PRIMARILY CITY RESIDENTS WHO ARE IMPACTED BY THE OPERATION OF THE AIRPORT, BOTH POSITIVELY AND OTHERWISE. AND IF YOU BELIEVE IT'S CITY RESIDENTS WHO ARE INTIMATELY AWARE OF THE MYRIAD OF ISSUES WHICH MUST BE PROPERLY MANAGED, SUCH AS NOISE AND SAFETY, THEN IT IS A GOOD IDEA TO ADHERE TO THE 57 YEARS OF PRECEDENT. PRECEDENT AND HAVING THE NAPLES CITY COUNCIL RETAIN HOME RULE ON OUR APPOINTMENT RESPONSIBILITIES. NOW, IF YOU EVER LOOK UP APPOINTMENT RESPONSIBILITIES, DO YOU DO YOU THINK THAT AT THE STATE LEVEL THEY HAVE APPOINTMENT RESPONSIBILITIES? WELL, I RESEARCHED IT. I COUNTED EVERY ONE OF THEM. THE GOVERNOR HAS APPROXIMATELY 175 APPOINTMENT RESPONSIBILITIES. THE PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE ABOUT 100 AND 27.5. OKAY. JUST MORE OR LESS A HALF THERE. THAT HALF COMES WITH AN APPOINTMENT OF AN INDIVIDUAL SHARED WITH THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE, WHO'S ROUGHLY AT ABOUT 135 APPOINTMENTS AND A HALF AND A HALF. YEAH. SO, YOU KNOW, AND I DON'T THINK ANY OF US ARE TALKING ABOUT STRIPPING THEIR APPOINTMENT AUTHORITY AWAY, ARE WE? AND WE KNOW COUNCILMAN BARTON WAS LAUGHING ABOUT ONCE YOU GET ELECTED TO CITY COUNCIL, IF YOU THINK THAT'S ALL YOU'RE GOING TO DO IS COME TO THESE MEETINGS, YOU SOON LEARN. I THINK THE FIRST DAY THAT YOU'RE APPOINTED TO CERTAIN OTHER THINGS. SO THAT'S PART OF THE JOY OF THIS JOB. NO ONE ON THIS COUNCIL DAIS IS SUPPORTING MOVING THE NAPLES AIRPORT. [07:30:05] IT WAS THE NRA BOARD MAKING THE DECISION TO PROPERLY. IT WAS A GOOD DECISION TO PROPERLY STUDY ALTERNATIVES TO THE CURRENT LOCATION. YOU HAVE TO YOU HAVE TO THINK ABOUT IT. WE'RE NOT GOING TO MANDATE IT FROM HERE. THE RIGHT PEOPLE ARE GOING TO UNDERTAKE THAT. AND I THINK THAT THEY DID. A DECISION HAS BEEN MADE. LET'S MOVE ON ON THAT ISSUE. WHAT IS OKAY IS FOR THIS COUNCIL TO CONTINUE ADVOCATING ON BEHALF OF OUR RESIDENTS ON EFFECTIVE, PROPER MANAGEMENT OF THE AIRPORT. QUALITY OF LIFE ISSUES ARE KEY TO OUR RESIDENTS. IT'S OKAY. THAT'S WHAT WE DO. AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT THE FRAMERS OF THIS APPOINTMENT AUTHORITY HAD IN MIND. NOISE AND SAFETY ARE IMPORTANT. ONCE WE LOSE OUR HOME RULE. I BELIEVE WATCH WHAT HAPPENS TO THE VOLUME OF FLIGHT OPERATIONS. WILL IT EVER DECREASE? NO. WILL WE BE IN THE SAME PLACE AS MISMANAGED AIRPORTS AROUND THE COUNTRY WITH PREVENTABLE, DEADLY INCIDENTS? I HOPE NOT. YET THE LIKELIHOOD IS APPARENT. REMEMBER, FOLKS, THAT HAS FILLED THE NEWS FOR QUITE SOME TIME. THE DEADLY INCIDENTS AROUND AIRPORTS WHERE THE VOLUME JUST NEVER WAS ADDRESSED. NOW. I BELIEVE IT WAS COUNCILWOMAN PETRANOFF OR NO, IT WAS COUNCILMAN KRISEMAN THAT ACCURATELY STATED THAT IF THIS PROPOSAL MOVES FORWARD AS IT'S SHAPED FRAMED 40% PERCENT OF THE NAPLES AIRPORT AUTHORITY BOARD WILL BE FROM OUTSIDE THE CITY OF NAPLES. 40%. SO THAT MESSAGE IS THAT THE CITY OF NAPLES, YOU HAVE ONLY THE RIGHT TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT 60% OF THE ISSUES YOU'RE FACING. THE REST OF IT NEEDS TO GO OUT TO THE COUNTY. NOW, THAT'S THAT'S THE FIRST MOVE IS TO DILUTE THE NAPLES ELECTORATE BY 40%. THAT'S THE FIRST MOVE. THAT'S NOT THE LAST MOVE. THE NEXT SUBSEQUENT MOVE WILL BE TO MAKE THE MAJORITY OF THE BOARD REPRESENTING INTERESTS OUTSIDE OF THE CITY RESIDENTS. YOU HEARD, MISS FREIBERG. IF YOU LOSE THIS VOICE, THE PEOPLE MOST INTIMATELY AWARE OF THE ISSUES, BOTH GOOD AND BAD, ASSOCIATED WITH THE AIRPORT, THAT WILL BE HEAVILY DISCOUNTED. AND I BELIEVE THAT EVEN THE MAJORITY OF THE POWER OF THAT AUTHORITY WILL BE OUTSIDE OF THE NAPLES CITY LIMITS. SO, MADAM MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION. I MOVE TO DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO IDENTIFY APPROPRIATE LEGAL COUNSEL TO REPRESENT THE CITY OF NAPLES IN ALL MATTERS, INCLUDING POSSIBLE LITIGATION RELATED TO NUMBER ONE, THE RIGHTS OF THE CITY OF NAPLES REGARDING THE PROPOSED LOCAL BILL BY THE COLLIER COUNTY DELEGATION, DESCRIBED AS A SPECIAL ACT AND RELATING TO THE NAPLES AIRPORT AUTHORITY. AND NUMBER TWO, THE POTENTIAL LITIGATION THREATENED BY THE SELF-DESCRIBED FRIENDS OF THE NAPLES MUNICIPAL AIRPORT AS TO OUR AUTHORITY IN MATTERS OF PLANNING ON THE LAND WHICH THE CITY OWNS. FURTHER, I MOVE THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY INCLUDES SOLICITING, AS WAS RECOMMENDED. THE OPINION OF WEISS, SIROTA, HELFMAN, COLE, AND BERMAN, AS WELL AS THE CITY'S AIRPORT, THE SPECIALIZED AIRPORT ATTORNEY ANDREW BARR, AND IDENTIFYING SUCH COUNSEL. THE CITY ATTORNEY SHOULD PROMPTLY PRESENT THE FINDINGS TO CITY COUNCIL, SO APPROPRIATE LEGAL REPRESENTATION MIGHT BE CONSIDERED AND POSSIBLY ENGAGED BY CITY COUNCIL. SECOND. I'D LIKE TO A LITTLE JUST A QUESTION REAL QUICK. YES. DISCUSSION. YOU TALKED ABOUT A SPECIFIC LEGAL WHOMEVER. I THINK THERE'S I THINK OUR CITY ATTORNEY SHOULD WEIGH IN ON WHOEVER THE LEGAL FOLKS ARE GOING TO BE, THAT HE'LL BE WORKING WITH THEM. WELL, HE'S GOING TO GO DO THE RESEARCH AND BRING IT BACK. YEAH, THAT'S THE MOTION. NOT NECESSARILY. IT COULD BE SOMEONE ELSE. THAT'S MY. YEAH. OKAY. IS THAT A GOOD TRACK RECORD? YEAH. [07:35:03] MAYOR. YEAH. YES. CHRISTIAN DISCUSSION. WE WE'VE BEEN TALKING IN THIS CONTEXT OF THE MOTION ABOUT TWO THINGS. IT SEEMS TO ME WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT HOW WE NEED THE RIGHT KIND OF LEGAL. HELP AND ANALYSIS TO PROTECT OURSELVES IN THE EVENT THAT THE AIRPORT LEGISLATION PASSES. AND AT OTHER TIMES IN THE LAST HOUR, WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT HOW WE CAN GET HELP, LOBBYING HELP, LEGAL HELP TO INFLUENCE THE LEGISLATURE, NOT TO PASS THE LEGISLATION OR TO MODIFY IT. AND THOSE ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. YES. YOU KNOW, NUMBER ONE, IF WHAT COMES OUT OF THIS MEETING TODAY IS THAT THE CITY OF NAPLES IS LAWYERING UP TO CONSIDER LITIGATION, TO PROTECT OURSELVES IN THE CASE THIS LEGISLATION PASSES. IT'S NOT GOING TO NECESSARILY. I'M NOT I'M NOT GOING TO OPPOSE THIS, BUT IT'S NOT GOING TO NECESSARILY ENHANCE OUR OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE CONVERSATIONS WITH OUR LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION. LET'S JUST DO THIS WITH EYES WIDE OPEN. AND THE SECOND POINT I WOULD MAKE IN RELATION TO THIS IS THAT IF WE WANT TO HIRE A LOBBYIST TO SUPPLEMENT OUR OWN RESOURCES SOURCES AND INFLUENCE. KEY PEOPLE IN TALLAHASSEE. WE NEED TO HIRE SOMEBODY THAT IS ALREADY CLOSELY. CLOSELY KNOWN AND ALLIED WITH THEM. YOU KNOW, A LOBBYIST WHO IS WHO IS SOMEONE THEY WILL LISTEN TO AND WHO WILL UNDERSTAND, WHO CAN SIT DOWN WITH THEM AND SAY, LOOK, HAVE YOU THOUGHT ABOUT IT THIS WAY? NOT SOMEBODY WHO IS ON THE OTHER SIDE, IF YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN. SO I'M NOT OPPOSED TO THIS, THIS MOTION. I THINK THIS IS THE DIRECTION THAT YOU KNOW, THE CONSENSUS IS TO MOVE IN TO TO RETAIN SOMEBODY, TO BEGIN TO DO RESEARCH ON WHAT OUR OPTIONS ARE AND SO ON. BUT I'M JUST I JUST THINK THAT WE NEED TO MAKE CLEAR THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS THAT OUR FIRST GOAL AND OUR FIRST EFFORT IS GOING TO BE TO TRY TO WORK WITH THE LEGISLATURE, COMMUNICATE, TALK, COLLABORATE, AND SEE IF WE CAN FIND AN ANSWER THAT WOULD NOT REQUIRE US REACHING AN IMPASSE. AND YOU KNOW, SO PART OF THIS IS JUST TONE. IT'S REALLY TONE. TONE IS IMPORTANT TO PUT THAT FIRST. YEAH. YEAH. SO, SO BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, FINDING OUT WHAT OUR RIGHTS ARE, IF THE WORST THING HAPPENS IS SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO DO AND, YOU KNOW, BUT BUT THAT'S WAIT AND SEE IF THE WORST THAT HAPPENS HAPPENS. AND THEN BEFORE WE DO THAT, SEE IF WE CAN MAKE SOME LEMONADE OUT OF LEMONS. YEAH. SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, AND THEN I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE THE FIRST PART OF WHAT WE'RE GOING TO START RIGHT AWAY. I JUST NEED SOME CLARITY. THAT WAS A VERY INVOLVED MOTION. I HEARD REFERENCES TO THE FRIENDS OF NAPLES BEACH OR NAPLES AIRPORT THING, WHICH IS ACTUALLY GOING TO BE ON THE TEN ONE AGENDA. SO I KIND OF WANT TO CARVE THAT OUT BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A DISCUSSION ON THAT AT THE NEXT MEETING. I HEARD WHAT WE DO WITH OUR PROPERTY, BUT THEN I'M HEARING LOBBYISTS TOO. SO I WOULD JUST JUST A LITTLE BIT OF CLARITY FOR ME SO I CAN MAKE SURE I PROVIDE YOU WHAT YOU ALL WANT IF THIS PASSES WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL. MAYOR. YEAH. YEAH. SO READ THAT AGAIN. I'M GOING TO READ IT AGAIN. WE'VE BEEN THREATENED WITH A LAWSUIT. WE HAVE BEEN THREATENED WITH A LAWSUIT, ALTHOUGH OFFICIALLY NOTHING HAS. BEEN FILED AS YET. FROM WHAT WE HAVE BEEN PROVIDED WITH A STATUTORY 14 DAY NOTICE REQUESTING US DO SOMETHING THAT WILL BE PRESENTED TO YOU ON TEN ONE. OKAY, THIS IF IT'S THE ADVICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY TO HOLD ON THAT PORTION OF THIS MOTION, [07:40:07] I'M GOING TO STRIP IT OUT IN MY SECOND READING. BUT IF IT MAKES SENSE, BECAUSE THIS IS AN AIRPORT RELATED MATTER, IF IT MAKES SENSE, THEN AT LEAST MAYBE ON YOU SAID OCTOBER 1ST OR SO, A WEEK FROM TODAY. A WEEK FROM TODAY. SO. EXCELLENT. AND NO LOBBYING WAS MENTIONED IN MY MOTION. SO I WANT TO MAKE THAT CLEAR NOW. NO LOBBYING. NO LOBBYING WAS MENTIONED IN THE MOTION, BUT IF IT'S A SEPARATE DIRECTION, THEN WE CAN CERTAINLY TAKE IT UP. SO I MOVE TO DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO IDENTIFY APPROPRIATE LEGAL COUNSEL TO REPRESENT THE CITY OF NAPLES IN ALL MATTERS, INCLUDING POSSIBLE LITIGATION RELATED TO THE RIGHTS OF THE CITY OF NAPLES. REGARDING THE PROPOSED LOCAL BILL BY THE COLLIER COUNTY LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION, DESCRIBED AS A SPECIAL ACT RELATED TO THE NAPLES AIRPORT AUTHORITY. SO WE ALL KNOW WHAT THAT IS. OKAY. AND THEN THE LAST PART IS TO FURTHER MOVE THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY INCLUDE IN THAT EFFORT, SOLICITING THE OPINION OF WEISS, SIROTA, HELFMAN, COLE, AND BERMAN, AS WELL AS THE SPECIAL OF THE AIRPORT SPECIALIST ATTORNEY, ANDREW BARR, IN IDENTIFYING SUCH COUNCIL. THE CITY ATTORNEY WILL THEN PROMPTLY PRESENT THE FINDINGS TO CITY COUNCIL, SO APPROPRIATE LEGAL REPRESENTATION MIGHT BE CONSIDERED AND POSSIBLY ENGAGED BY CITY COUNCIL. RIGHT NOW, WE'RE JUST TRYING TO ENGAGE THE RIGHT PEOPLE IN THE RIGHT JOB, LOOKING OUT FOR THE CITY'S BEST INTEREST. THAT'S IT. AND THEN COME BACK AND TELL US WHAT HE FOUND. THANK YOU. I UNDERSTAND THAT. DISCUSSION. AND THEN WE NEED TO TAKE A POLL. THE COUNCIL PETRANOFF. I WOULD LIKE TO, AT THE SAME TIME ADD A FRIENDLY ADDENDUM IN IT IN IN HIRING A LOBBYIST TO WITH SPECIALTY IN AIRPORT TO IN AIRPORT MATTERS TO LOBBY ON OUR BEHALF, BUT NOT TO SLOW THIS DOWN BECAUSE IT'S MOVING SO FAST. SO WE HAVE A TWO PRONG APPROACH. I THINK IT'S COMPLETELY UNDERSTANDABLE. IT IS IN THE BUSINESS WORLD AT LEAST, TO HAVE HAVE ATTORNEYS. EDUCATE YOU ON EXACTLY WHAT OUR RIGHTS ARE ON THIS. THE LARGEST PARCEL OF LAND THAT WE HAVE IN THE CITY OF NAPLES. AND IT'S COMPLICATED BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE AN AIRPORT THERE. AND WE NEED TO REALLY EDUCATE OURSELVES SO THAT WE GO IN AND, AND I DON'T THINK THAT IT WILL SEE BE SEEN AS A PUNCH IN THE FACE BECAUSE WE NEED TO GET UP TO SPEED ON ALL, ALL OF US. SO THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT IS TO HIRE A LOBBYIST IS TO ALSO, AT THE SAME TIME, HIRE A LOBBYIST TO START HELPING US. MADAM MAYOR, IF I MAY, IF I MAY QUESTION JUST A QUESTION, ON THE LOBBYIST. THIS MOTION INVOLVING OUR OWN CITY ATTORNEY IS PRETTY CLEAR. HE HAS A GOOD GRASP OF THE LAW. WHAT? OUR RELATION WITH THE AIRPORT IS. WHAT'S AT RISK WITH HOME RULE IF WE. IF THIS COUNCIL MOVES TO HIRE A LOBBYIST? I BELIEVE THAT WE HAVEN'T TAKEN THE TIME TO FULLY DESCRIBE EXACTLY WHAT THAT LOBBYIST WILL DO, AND THAT I THINK THAT HAS TO HAPPEN THROUGH A VOTE OR A CONSENSUS. AND IT MIGHT BE AN ENTANGLEMENT THAT WE'RE JUST NOT PREPARED, AND WE MIGHT BENEFIT FROM WHAT A SPECIALIZED ATTORNEY MIGHT ADVISE US ON AS IT RELATES TO THE LOBBYIST. BUT I WOULD LIKE, YOU KNOW, THAT THAT THAT COULD BE I MEAN, WE COULD DO IT IN, IN WE COULD DO IT IN SEQUENCE AND DO AND TAKE CARE OF THIS. SO IF I MAY FOR A MINUTE, WE'RE ALLOWED TO MAKE AS MANY MOTIONS AS WE WANT. JUST SO EVERYONE KNOWS, WE DON'T HAVE TO TIE EVERYTHING UP IN ONE. I THOUGHT WE HAD ONE. THAT WAS REALLY CLEAR. I DIDN'T HEAR A SECOND. IF WE COULD KIND OF JUST SECOND IT. THE UPDATED ONE WHEN HE REREAD IT. WELL, WE WERE IN DISCUSSION. OKAY. BECAUSE I THINK HE MODIFIED THIS ONE A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE HE TOOK OUT THE WE TAKE IT ONE AT A TIME THEN, AND WE JUST GO WITH WHAT TERRY? WHAT TERRY SAID, AND THEN WE COULD HAVE A QUICK DISCUSSION ABOUT LOBBYING. GLADLY. I JUST YEAH. SO BEFORE THAT GOES TO A VOTE, I JUST WANT TO ASK ONE CLARIFYING QUESTION FROM THE MOTION MAKER. [07:45:04] THE SECOND PART OF THAT, ARE YOU ACTUALLY DIRECTING ME TO CALL ANDREW BARR AND Y02, OR ARE YOU GIVING ME FLEXIBILITY TO ENGAGE WHOEVER I THINK I NEED TO TO BRING BACK ATTORNEYS? BECAUSE THAT SECOND PART WAS A LITTLE I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE ACTUALLY TELLING ME YOU HAVE TO CALL ANDREW BARR AND Y02. THE SECOND PART OF THE MOTION JUST INCLUDES THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY INCLUDES SOLICITING THE OPINION. IN OTHER WORDS, IF WE'RE LOOKING FOR THE PORTION IN THE FIRST PART OF THE MOTION, IT SEEMS TO MAKE GOOD SENSE TO THE MOTION MAKER THAT THOSE TWO SEPARATE ENTITIES WOULD AT LEAST BE SOLICITED IN THEIR OPINION, AS TO THE RIGHT. THEY MAY NOT EVEN TAKE IT RIGHT IN TERMS OF OF REPRESENTING OUR INTEREST OR ADVISING US AS TO LEGAL REPRESENTATION. BUT THAT IS IT. I'M NOT TRYING TO MICROMANAGE WITH THIS MOTION LETTING SO SO HE WOULD JUST FOR MY CLARIFICATION, HE WOULD HAVE THE LEEWAY TO FIND OKAY. AS LONG AS HE'S GOT THE YEAH, YOU MAY KNOW OTHER PEOPLE. YEAH. THANK YOU. AND THIS IS REALLY ONLY, AS WE DISCUSSED A SECOND AGO, TONY AND I WANT TO SAY THAT I'M GOING TO SUPPORT THIS. AND THE REASON I'M SUPPORTING THIS FROM, FROM MY STANDPOINT, IS THAT THE ONLY WAY THAT I CAN BE PREPARED TO ENGAGE IN OPEN DIALOG IS TO BE PROPERLY INFORMED AND EDUCATED. AND I AM NOT CURRENTLY INFORMED AND EDUCATED, AND I NEED THE EXPERTISE FROM AN ATTORNEY THAT SPECIALIZES IN THIS FIELD IN ORDER TO GIVE ME THE INFORMATION NECESSARY SO THAT I CAN TURN AROUND AND ENGAGE WITH THOSE THAT REPRESENT OUR COMMUNITY. SO THAT IS WHY I AM GOING TO SUPPORT THIS. I AM I AM NOT IN SUPPORT OF OH, LET'S GO JUMP IN A LAWSUIT. THAT IS NOT WHAT I'M DOING HERE. AND I AND I WANT THIS, I WANT IT STATED FOR THE RECORD AND AND HOPEFULLY OUR REPRESENTATIVES, IF THEY'RE NOT WATCHING THEY'RE GOING TO WATCH. AND THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT HERE IS AN OPEN DIALOG WITH THEM. AND I NEED TO BE PROPERLY EDUCATED, INFORMED IN ORDER TO DO THAT. SO I'M WITH YOU ON THAT. OKAY. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? IF NOT, THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND. I WILL SAY THE SAME THING FOR THE RECORD, THAT THIS IS A LAST RESORT. I DO NOT WANT TO GET INTO A LAWSUIT WITH ANYBODY. I WANT US TO WORK TOGETHER AND FIND A RESOLUTION. BUT AGAIN, I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THE. AND THE LAWYER MAY COME BACK AND SAY, WELL, MAYBE YOU CAN DO HAVE FUN WITH THAT. WHO KNOWS? AND NOT TO CLOUD THE ISSUE, BUT I ALSO AM IN FAVOR ON A SEPARATE DISCUSSION HERE IN A MINUTE IN REFERENCE TO THE LOBBYISTS. AND I THINK THAT I WOULD RATHER MAKE THAT MOTION FIRST AND HAVE THAT. SO EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT'S THE PRIORITY, THAT WE WANT DIALOG. WE WANT TO WORK TOGETHER. WE WANT TO FIND A RESOLUTION THAT IS PALATABLE TO BOTH. OKAY. THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE PULL THE COUNCIL MOTION. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. KRAMER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. CHRISTMAN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. PERRY. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BARTON. YES. VICE MAYOR. HUTCHINSON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. PENNIMAN. YES. MAYOR. HARTMAN. YES. THANK YOU. COUNCIL. GOOD DIRECTION. THE SECOND IS WHERE WE NEED TO START. AND THAT WAS WITH OUR GRASSROOTS EFFORTS AND UNDERSTANDING. ASK THE MOTION, THE LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION MAINLY THOUGH THE BILL SUPPORTER BHARTHANA TO COME AND SPEAK TO US AND ESPECIALLY WITH THE QUESTION THAT KRAMER HAD AND THAT IS, WHAT DO YOU WANT AND WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO ACHIEVE? AND YOU SAID IT IN ANOTHER WAY I DON'T THINK I WROTE. I ASKED, WHAT IS THE IMPETUS FOR THIS AND WHAT OUTCOME IS DESIRED? YES, I THINK THAT ALSO SHOULD BE IN OUR LETTER THAT GOES TO ALL OF THE REPRESENTATIVES AND A SOME TYPE OF STRATEGY AND COMMUNICATIONS ON HOW WE'LL DO THAT THROUGH BY PHONE CALLS AND THROUGH AN ADVOCACY FROM THIS BODY. I THINK IT NEEDS TO COME FROM THIS BODY. I DON'T THINK WE DUMP IT ON MONIQUE. WE DON'T DUMP IT ON ANYBODY BUT US. HONESTLY, WE NEED YOUR SUPPORT IN GETTING THIS TOGETHER. BUT WE NEED TO GO TO OUR REPRESENTATIVES. NOT THAT YOU CAN'T ALSO. BUT I THINK THAT'S OUR RESPONSIBILITY. THERE WAS ALSO MAKING SURE THAT WE STRESS THAT KEEPING LOCAL CONTROL FOR THE NOISE AND SAFETY AND PROTECTION OF. [07:50:03] AND IT'S IN THE COMP PLAN. THESE WORDS ARE IN THE COMP PLAN. WE DON'T HAVE TO MAKE THEM UP. SO WE CAN GO STRAIGHT FROM THERE. AND I THINK THEY SHOULD KNOW THAT WE I, I DO BELIEVE THIS COUNCIL IT HAS BEEN REPRESENTING ALL THE PEOPLE. I THINK WE'RE VERY RESPECTFUL ABOUT THAT. AND I THINK IT SHOULD BE MENTIONED THAT IT IS CITY LAND OWNED. I THINK KRISTEN SAID IT BEST. AND THAT THE CITY OFFICIALS SHOULD REPRESENT THE CITY. ALSO, THE PIECE ABOUT THE FACT THAT IT WILL BE 40% OF REPRESENTATION OUT OF THE COUNTY AND TO THE COUNTY AND THE COUNTY DIDN'T WANT ANY RESPONSIBILITY OR DISCUSSIONS OR ANYTHING. JUST. NO, WE DON'T WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE AIRPORT, PERIOD. I THINK THAT IF YOU COULD PREPARE THAT SO THAT WE ARE CAN REVIEW IT AND THEN MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT. AND I THINK I THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD TO DO IT IN TWO PHASES. ONE IS THE OVERALL PACKET, AND SINCE WE DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT THIS ONE INCLUDE IN THE LITANY OF THOSE THINGS, THIS SPECIFIC ONE UNDER A CERTAIN SECTION, BUT THEN ALSO TO THE MAYOR'S POINT IS HAVE A SEPARATE LETTER. SO THAT WAY THEY HAVE THE ENTIRE PACKET AND IT'S WITH THEM ALL THE TIME, BUT A SEPARATE LETTER INCLUDING AND WORKING. AND WE'LL SEND THAT OUT IN A DRAFT FORM, INCLUDING INVITING THEM TO COME HERE AND HAVE A DISCUSSION SO THAT THERE'S AN ISOLATED PIECE ON THIS TOPIC AS WELL. SO NOT TO LEAVE IT OFF THE OTHER, BUT TO MAKE SURE WE TARGET SPECIFICALLY AND THEN THAT THAT LETTER YOU KNOW, WE WOULD DISSEMINATE IN A DRAFT FORM. AND THEN ONCE WE ALL AGREED ON THAT, THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD SEND. AND THAT WOULD HAVE THE CRUX OF THE TALKING POINTS IN IT. FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE, WHEN YOU CONTACT THEM INDIVIDUALLY. SO THEY'RE IN SESSION UNTIL MID-NOVEMBER, THE LEGISLATURE I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT DATE MONEY. WELL, YEAH, BUT THEY NEED TO GET THAT CLARIFICATION ON YOU MENTIONED IT, VICE MAYOR. WHETHER IT GOES ON A CONSENT AGENDA AND IF IT DOESN'T GET TAKEN OFF, WE NEED TO KNOW THAT SO THAT WE CAN MAKE PHONE CALLS. WE'VE REALLY GOT TO BE ON TOP OF THIS. AND LISA KNOWS THAT. SO SHE I'M I'M ASSUMING SHE MADE A MEMORANDUM FOR THE COMMITTEE. WEEKS BEGINS OCTOBER 6TH. AND THERE'S THERE'S SIX WEEKS OF COMMITTEE WEEKS. IT'S IN THE AGENDA MEMORANDUM THAT I PROVIDED. BUT I AS FAR AS I KNOW THAT MR. YOUNG AND AND YOU SPEAK TO LISA HURLEY WEEKLY. SO WEEKLY WE NEED TO KNOW IF IT'S GOING TO BE ON AN AGENDA FOR THE FOLLOWING WEEK AND WHICH IT HAS HAPPENED THAT IT ALL OF A SUDDEN APPEARS ON AGENDA. AND WE NEED TO KNOW THAT ALSO. AND WE'LL NEED LISA HURLEY'S ASSISTANCE WITH THAT. OKAY. THANK YOU. ANYTHING ELSE, MR. YOUNG? NO, MA'AM. ANYTHING ELSE? COUNCIL. YEAH. DID YOU WANT TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT THE. OH, THE. YES. LOBBYIST. WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO, MAYOR, IS COME BACK TO YOU BY THE TIME WE COME BACK WITH A TERNARY DISCUSSION AND HAVE A CONVERSATION, BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO START THROWING OUT NAMES OR DO ANYTHING LIKE THAT. BUT I THINK IT WOULD BE IMPORTANT FOR US TO HUDDLE UP AND COME BACK TO YOU. BUT YOU HAVE ENOUGH CONSENSUS TO MOVE FORWARD, I THINK. SO I THINK IT WOULD JUST BE GOOD TO HAVE THAT DIALOG IN A SEPARATE MEETING, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE COME BACK TO YOU. OKAY. MISS BARNHART, ANYTHING FROM YOU THAT YOU NEED CLARITY ON? NO, I DON'T THINK SO. I'LL GET WITH CARRIE. OKAY. ALL RIGHT WITH THAT? YES. VICE MAYOR. YEAH. JUST JUST TO CALL OUT WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE SENSE OF URGENCY. SO I THINK MISS BARNHART IS GOING TO COME BACK WITH CLARIFICATION AS TO THE TIMELINE AND UPDATES. RIGHT AS TO WHAT'S GOING ON IN THESE COMMITTEES AND HOW IT'S PROGRESSING, BUT ALSO IN THIS AS WE TAKE A LOOK AND SEEK ADVICE FROM OUR ATTORNEY ON ABOUT OUR NEXT STEPS ON THIS PATH MY ASK IS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE AWARE OF SENATE BILL 7016. OH, AND THAT IS USE OF I'M GOING TO CALL IT WHERE WE REACH A THRESHOLD OF WHEN WE ARE ADVISED NOT TO USE PUBLIC FUNDS TO COMMENT OR GO AGAINST A BALLOT INITIATIVE, THAT OKAY, I THINK WE NEED TO KNOW MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THAT. THEN JUST MR. MCCONNELL, PLEASE MAKE SURE THAT THE ACTIONS THAT WE'RE TAKING, WE UNDERSTAND [07:55:08] WHEN WE CAN START AND OF COURSE START INITIATING. IT IS ONE THING, BUT WHEN WE RUN UP AGAINST A DEADLINE, MAKE SURE WE DON'T RUN UP AGAINST A DEADLINE, A THRESHOLD WHERE WE CAN'T, AS PUBLIC ELECTED PUBLIC OFFICIALS CAN'T BE COMMENTING OR ADVOCATING FOR SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN MADE A BALLOT INITIATIVE. JUST MAKE SURE WE'RE WELL ADVISED IN THAT REGARD. OKAY, THAT'S THE ASK. THANK YOU. WE'LL FIND OUT MORE ABOUT THAT. OKAY. THAT CONCLUDES THANK YOU. 12 C WE'RE GOING TO GO TO 13 A IF WE CAN. [13.A) A Resolution Approving Task Order No. 25-02-09-01-25A03 Between the City of Naples and Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., a North Carolina Corporation, Authorized to do Business in the State of Florida, for Design and Permitting Services to Add a Restroom at Baker Park, Add Office Space and Replace Pavers at the Eva Sugden-Gomez Center, in the Amount of $131,393.99; Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Task Order; Providing for Scrivener’s Errors; and Providing an Effective Date.] I'M SORRY. MR.. MCCONNELL, YOU'RE TAKING NOTES. CAN I READ IT FOR YOU? SURE. OR YOU WANT TO, MR. YOUNG? 13 I CAN, BUT 13. TRAVIS, KEEP US SMILING. RESOLUTION APPROVING TASK ORDER 25 020 9012 5803 BETWEEN THE CITY OF NAPLES AND KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC., A NORTH CAROLINA CORPORATION AUTHORIZED TO DO BUSINESS IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOR DESIGN AND PERMITTING SERVICES. TO ADD RESTROOM TO BAKER. TO ADD A RESTROOM TO BAKER PARK AT OFFICE SPACE, AND REPLACE PAVERS AT THE EVA SUGDEN GOMEZ CENTER IN THE AMOUNT OF $131,393.99, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE TASK ORDER, PROVIDING FOR SCRIVENER'S ERRORS AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR, OR GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAD MERRITT, COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR. THIS IS AN ITEM. THIS IS A CIP ITEM THAT WAS APPROVED IN THE FY 25 BUDGET. THIS IS FOR THE DESIGN COMPONENT OF THAT PROJECT. THIS PROJECT IS AT BAKER PARK AS STATED IN HERE IT IS TO ADD THE RESTROOM FACILITY. THE RESTROOM FACILITY WAS ORIGINALLY IN THE ORIGINAL DESIGNS OF BAKER PARK. THEY DID FACTOR IN ADDING A RESTROOM AT THE LOCATION THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, ADDING THE RESTROOM. SO THAT'S WHY KIMLEY-HORN WAS VERY VITAL TO US GETTING THEM, BECAUSE THEY'VE BEEN PART OF THIS PROCESS SINCE THE BEGINNING OF BAKER PARK, SO THEY'VE DONE A LOT OF WORK ALREADY. SO WE WANT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THEM AND ON THIS PROJECT TO GET THIS DESIGN TOGETHER SO THAT WE CAN TRY TO GET A SCOPE OF WORK AND EVERYTHING OUTLINED, WHICH AGAIN, WOULD THEN COME BACK TO YOU ALL FOR FINAL APPROVAL ONCE CONSTRUCTION WOULD BE AWARDED. BUT THIS ALSO DOES INCLUDE ADDING AN OFFICE SPACE. CURRENTLY WE HAVE STAFF WORKING OUT OF A CLOSET WHICH UTILIZES OUR STORAGE SPACE. AND IT'S WE NEED MORE STORAGE. SO THEN WE HAVE STAFF WORKING IN THAT STORAGE SPACE. SO WE WANT TO CONVERT THAT BACK OVER TO THE STORAGE SPACE, CREATE AN OFFICE SPACE FOR THEM SO THAT WHEN WE HAVE EVENTS THERE, THAT WE'LL HAVE SPACE FOR STAFF TO WORK OUT OF. ALSO, IT WOULD BE IMPORTANT FOR US TO, IN THE FUTURE IF WE NEEDED TO ACTUALLY PUT STAFF AT THAT LOCATION, THAT WOULD PROVIDE THAT OPTION AS WELL. IN ADDITION, THE IF YOU'VE EVER BEEN TO SUGDEN GOMEZ CENTER, THE PAVERS AROUND THAT BUILDING DOES SINK. AND SINCE I'VE BEEN HERE, WE'VE HAD TO REPLACE OR PULL THOSE UP I THINK THREE TIMES. AND I'VE BEEN HERE FOR ALMOST FOUR YEARS. SO WE NEED TO FIND A PERMANENT SOLUTION. SO THAT WAS PART OF THIS DESIGN AS WELL. AND THAT'S SO THIS IS KIND OF A TWO LAYER PROJECT. AND WE WOULD COME BACK TO YOU ALL ONCE WE GET THE DESIGN SO THAT YOU CAN SEE WHAT WE'VE DONE. OBVIOUSLY, OBVIOUSLY. BUT MY PLANS ARE TO TAKE THIS CAB ONCE WE GET A PRELIMINARY DESIGN PUT TOGETHER SO WE CAN GET FEEDBACK FROM THEM BEFORE IT COMES TO YOU ALL AS WELL. WELL, I THANK YOU, BUT $131,000 TO HAVE A DESIGN FOR A NEW BATHROOM. SO IT'S GOING TO BE THE ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR THE BATHROOM, AS WELL AS THE OFFICE SPACE AND THE ENGINEERING FOR THE PAVERS, BECAUSE IT'S NOT GOING TO BE A MATTER OF JUST PULLING THE PAVERS UP AND DECIDING WHAT YOU CAN DO. THERE MAY BE CONCRETE INVOLVED, WHICH IS GOING TO IT'S GOING TO BE PRETTY SIGNIFICANT WORK THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE DONE. WELL, WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THE STABILITY OF THE GROUND THAT IT'S ON. IT IS LAND. IT WAS A LANDFILL. EXACTLY. SO THE WHAT'S IT CALLED? GAS. THAT'S UNDERNEATH. I MEAN, THIS IS GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT WE FACE AS A CONSTANT MAINTENANCE BECAUSE OF THAT. [08:00:02] SO IS THAT IN THIS FOR THEM TO LOOK AT BECAUSE, YEAH. SO THEY'RE GOING TO MY DIRECTION FOR THEM IS TO TRY TO DETERMINE A MORE PERMANENT SOLUTION, BECAUSE TO ME, HAVING TO RESET THOSE PAVERS AT THE TUNE OF WHAT WAS THE LAST COUPLE OF TIMES WAS AROUND TEN GRAND. YEAH. ALONG THAT LINE. YEAH. SO HAVING TO DO THAT EVERY SINGLE YEAR AND THEN CLOSE THAT CENTER DOWN IS NOT IDEAL. BUT BY THE TIME IT GETS TO THAT POINT, IT BECOMES A TRIP HAZARD. WE DON'T WANT ANY KIND OF LAWSUITS AND. OH. AGREED. I JUST YEAH, IT JUST 130. IT JUST SEEMS LIKE A LOT OF MONEY, THAT'S ALL. BUT I YEAH, WE'VE WE FACTORED THAT IN ON THIS PROJECT. SO WE HAD DESIGN SERVICES AND ENGINEERING SERVICES ON THIS PROJECT. YES, PETRANOFF, I KIND OF I KIND OF FLAGGED THIS TO FOR THE AMOUNT OF MONEY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A BATHROOM, A LITTLE OFFICE SPACE, AND THEN PAVERS THAT WE'VE WE'VE FIXED AGAIN AND AGAIN. AND THIS DOESN'T INCLUDE DOING ANY OF THAT. IT JUST INCLUDES DESIGN AND PERMITTING. AND, AND $131,000 SEEMS TO BE A LOT OF MONEY FOR DESIGN AND PERMITTING ESPECIALLY ON A TASK ORDER. WE DIDN'T WE DIDN'T BID THIS OUT. CORRECT. THIS JUST. THAT'S CORRECT. SO WE WENT TO THE LIBRARY. YEAH. WHICH, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT THIS THIS IS JUST SEEMS RIDICULOUSLY HIGH. IT ALSO ON THE REPLACEMENT OF THE PAVERS, IF WE'VE DONE THEM THREE TIMES ALREADY, YOU KNOW, WHO PUT THEM IN THERE AND WHAT SORT OF WARRANTY DO WE HAVE ON THIS WORK? THIS BAKER PARK IS KIND OF IS NEWISH, YOU KNOW, AND IF WE'VE REPLACED THEM THREE TIMES, WE, YOU KNOW, CAN WE GO BACK TO WHOEVER BUILT THIS AND AND SAY, YOU KNOW, WHY DID YOU JUST WHY DID YOU PICK PAVERS AND WHY ARE THEY SINKING AGAIN AND AGAIN? DO WE HAVE ANY REMEDIES? SO I'LL SPEAK TO THE PAVERS FIRST. WE VALUE ENGINEERED THE PAVERS. THE PAVERS, YOU KNOW, TO BRING THE BUDGET DOWN AND TO BRING IT WITHIN BUDGET. WE TOOK THE SLAB OUT OF OUT OF THE PROJECT. IT WAS ORIGINALLY SUPPOSED TO BE A SLAB UNDERNEATH THOSE PAVERS, AND WE ENGINEERED THAT OUT OF THERE. SO THAT'S AN INTERESTING PHRASE. SO WE'VE WE VALUE ENGINEERED THAT OUT OF THERE. AND WHOEVER, WHOEVER YOU KNOW, WHOEVER WE WANT TO LOOK AT TO BLAME FOR THAT. BUT THAT'S THAT'S HOW THAT STARTED. AND SO ONE THING TO LOOK AT IN THIS, IN THIS DESIGN, IN THIS BUDGET TOO, IS THAT WE HAVE CONSTRUCTION PHASE SERVICES AND BIDDING. SO THIS TAKES US THROUGH BIDDING AND THROUGH CONSTRUCTION. SO, YOU KNOW, SO THE BUDGET DOES SEEM HIGH, BUT IT'S ALSO WE'RE NOT GOING TO COME BACK TO YOU LATER. THIS THE INTENT WAS TO TAKE US ALL THE WAY THROUGH CONSTRUCTION. SO A LOT OF TIMES, YOU KNOW, WE WOULD HAVE SEEN A WHOLE LOT LESS NUMBER. AND THEN WHEN WE AWARD, WE WOULD YOU WOULD HAVE SEEN US COME BACK AND ASK FOR MORE MONEY ON THIS SAME CONTRACT. RIGHT NOW WE'RE WE'RE WE PUT IT WE PUT IT ALL UP FRONT WITH WITH KIMLEY-HORN. ONE OTHER ONE OTHER THING WE DID WANT TO WE WANT TO BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION IS IN THE IN IN THE DESIGN SERVICES HERE FOR THE RESTROOMS. WE WE INTEND FOR THEM. WE WHEN WE WENT THROUGH AND BUILT BAKER PARK, THERE WAS A BATHROOM BUILDING THAT WE ALREADY HAVE PLANNED. THERE'S ALREADY INFRASTRUCTURE IN THE GROUND FOR, BUT IT'S NOW LOOKING AT IT, IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S A LITTLE FAR OFF. IS IT THE BEST SUITED PLACE? WE'RE NOT SURE THAT IT IS. SO WE KNOW THAT THAT'S A LITTLE BIT HOW WE FEEL INTERNALLY. WE THINK THAT WHEN WE PRESENT THAT TO YOU, YOU WOULD FEEL THE SAME WAY. SO WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WHEN WE BRING IT, WHEN WE BRING THIS PLAN FORWARD, WE'RE GOING TO CONCEPTUALLY SHOW YOU ANOTHER LOCATION FOR IT. BUT WE'RE ALSO GOING TO WHEN WE CONCEPTUALLY SHOW YOU THAT, WE'RE GOING TO ALSO HAVE TO SHOW YOU THAT BUDGET NUMBERS, HOW MUCH DOES IT COST TO MOVE THAT? BECAUSE WE ALREADY PUT THE INFRASTRUCTURE IN THE GROUND. HOW MUCH DOES IT COST TO MOVE? SO YOU KNOW SO CONCEPTUALLY WE THERE'S IN THE BUDGET HERE IS TO CONCEPTUALLY SHOW YOU TWO DIFFERENT DESIGNS. WE'RE NOT WE'RE NOT TAKING WE'RE NOT GOING TO BUILD THAT ALL THE WAY OUT TO CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS. SO THE CONCEPTUAL IS JUST THAT UNTIL WE PICK WHICH WAY WE'RE GOING TO MOVE WITH THAT, THEN THAT DOESN'T GET WE DON'T TAKE THAT FORWARD UNTIL WE PICK A DESIGN. YEAH. AT LEAST FOR ME. YOU KNOW, I LIKE TO TREAT THIS LIKE IT'S COMING OUT OF MY OWN POCKETBOOK. AND I GUESS IT IS AS A TAXPAYER. I, YOU KNOW, $131,000 SEEMS LIKE A LOT. I'D LIKE TO SEE THIS THING BID, AND THEN I'D LIKE TO SEE, YOU KNOW, AND MAYBE THE THOUGHTFUL DISCUSSIONS HAVE ALREADY OCCURRED THAT, YOU KNOW, ON THE NEED FOR A RESTROOM, PROBABLY IN A DIFFERENT SPOT, AN OFFICE, BECAUSE NO ONE SHOULD BE WORKING IN A CLOSET. [08:05:07] AND THEN THE FIXING OF THE PAVERS, WHICH SHOULDN'T BE MUCH DESIGN AND PERMITTING, I DON'T THINK, YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK IT'S PUTTING THIS PUTTING THE VALUE ENGINEERING BACK AND AND PUTTING A SLAB DOWN. AND THEN, YOU KNOW, HAS EVERYBODY, EVERYTHING BEEN THOUGHT THROUGH? SOME OF THE FEEDBACK I'VE GOTTEN ON BAKER PARK SPECIFICALLY IS, YOU KNOW, IT'S THE EVA GOMEZ CENTER IS FOR SPECIAL EVENTS. BUT PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, MOMS AND KIDS AND, YOU KNOW, FAMILIES AND KIDS COME IN THERE AND THERE'S SOME OF THE THINGS I'VE BEEN TOLD IS THEY WOULD LIKE TO HAVE SOME SNACKS THERE OR WATER OR, YOU KNOW, SOME THINGS THAT ARE SOLD THERE WHERE THEY CAN SPEND THE DAY AT THE PARK. AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOUR FEELINGS ARE AT THAT, BUT IT'S A SHARED SPACE FOR SPECIAL EVENTS. MADAM MAYOR, JUST AN ABUNDANCE OF TIME. I GUESS I JUST WANT TO MAKE A COUPLE STATEMENTS. ONE ENGINEERING IS VERY COSTLY. AND WHEN YOU'RE GOING TO DO TWO THINGS IN THIS REGARD, YOU'RE GOING TO GO VERTICAL AND ATTACHMENT TO ANOTHER BUILDING. YOU'RE GOING TO LAY ASPHALT UNDERNEATH. WHAT RIGHT NOW IS SAND BASED PAVERS THAT WE'RE HAVING TO REPLACE ALL THE TIME. AND IN THE END OF THE DAY, AND I'LL JUST REMIND YOU OF ITEM SEVEN F, WHICH IS A REFRESH ON A ROUNDABOUT, WAS 133,000 FROM THE ORIGINAL DESIGN THAT WAS FULLY DESIGNED. AND THIS IS THE DESIGN FROM THE FROM WHERE WE WERE. IT HAS VERTICAL CONSTRUCTION, UNDERGROUND CONSTRUCTION AND IT'S THE CEI SERVICES. SO THE ONLY REASON I INTERRUPTED A LITTLE BIT IS THERE'S TWO FACTORS IN THIS. ONE IS WE RETAIN THE BAKER FUND MONEY THAT WE DIDN'T USE FOR THE PURPOSE OF SAYING WHETHER OR NOT HOW WE WANTED TO SEE IT GROW ORGANICALLY AND THEN MAKE OTHER PREDICATED DECISIONS. SO I WOULD SAY THIS THE MONEY, I DON'T THINK IT'S A WASTEFUL ENDEAVOR IN THE ENGINEERING, NOR OUT OF THE REALM, GIVEN WHAT WE'RE ASKING TO DO. THE ONLY REASON I INTERRUPTED A LITTLE MISS PETRANOFF IS IF WE WANT TO HAVE A WORKSHOP, IS DO WE WANT TO DO THIS AT ALL? I THINK THAT'S A BETTER DISCUSSION. AND WHAT ELSE? ARE WE GOING TO UTILIZE THIS FACILITY BEFORE WE BEFORE WE MADE THAT DECISION, I JUST DIDN'T WANT TO CONFUSE THE TWO ITEMS INTO ONE AND THEN NOT GAIN TRACTION ON GETTING SOMEWHERE EVENTUALLY. THAT'S THE ONLY THING I, I SO I RESPECTFULLY JUST WANTED TO GET THAT OUT THERE SO THAT YOU HAD THOSE FACTS. YEAH. I MEAN, I WOULD HOPE THAT ON THE YOU KNOW, WE WOULD HAVE THE VALUE ENGINEERING THING OF HOW THE ENGINEERING WAS GOING TO DO A CEMENT PAD UNDER THERE. SO THAT WOULD BE FAIRLY EASY WITH MINIMAL ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS. IF IT WAS THERE AND WE VALUE ENGINEERED IT OUT, THE MATERIAL OR THE PLANS MUST STILL BE AROUND SOMEWHERE. AND THEN SECONDLY, I JUST I JUST THINK THAT WE HAVE WE HAVE THE LUXURY OF THE TIME TO GO OUT AND BUILD THIS THING AND, AND GET GET SOME COMPETITIVE PRICING. YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW WHY WE WOULD NOT GET THREE BIDS. YEAH. SO, I MEAN, IN THIS CASE, WE WE SELECTED KIMLEY-HORN BECAUSE KIMLEY-HORN WAS THE ARCHITECT ENGINEER THAT STARTED THE PROJECT FOR BAKER PARK. SO THEY'VE DONE A LOT OF THE LEGWORK ALREADY. SO IF YOU GO OUT AND YOU PUT A SCOPE TOGETHER THEY'RE GOING TO ANOTHER COMPANY IS GOING TO HAVE TO COME IN, REPLICATE THAT WORK AND GIVE US A DIFFERENT PRICE. SO WE GO TO THE LIBRARY, WHICH THE LIBRARY CONSULTANTS IS THERE. THEY HAPPEN TO BE PART OF AS WELL. AND THAT'S WHEN WE SEEK THOSE DIFFERENT REFUSE. SO WE, YOU KNOW, IF WE WANT TO DO A BID, I GUESS THAT THAT WOULD BE A NOT THE, THE PROCESS THAT WE TYPICALLY GO THROUGH. WELL, THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING WE'RE LOOKING AT BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE TO HER POINT, IT'S BEEN HER POINT ABOUT AND WE CAN DISCUSS IT IN CORRESPONDENCE THAT WE CONSTANTLY GO TO THE LIBRARY AND WE USE THE SAME PEOPLE. SO FOR NOW, WE JUST GOT DONE WITH THE ARCHITECT ON THE FIRE STATION. WHEN THERE ARE LARGER PROJECTS, WHEN YOU TAKE 120 DAYS TO DO A PROJECT THAT THE INITIAL ENGINEERING AND IN THIS CASE WHEN YOU HAVE CI SERVICES, I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT SPLIT, BUT I'M ASSUMING IT'S SOMEWHERE IN BETWEEN, BETWEEN 50 AND AND 80,000 IS THE INITIAL. IT'S JUST WHAT IS THE DURATION OF TIME AND HOW LONG ARE YOU GOING TO GO OUT FOR SOMETHING THAT IS IS THAT SMALL WHEN YOU HAVE A LIBRARY OF VENDORS AND YOU HAD SOMEBODY THAT WORKED AND HAS THE, THE, THE EXISTING FACILITY IN THEIR DOCUMENTATION. IT'S COST EFFECTIVE THAT WAY. THAT'S ALL I'M SAYING. I JUST I DIDN'T WANT IT TO COME ACROSS AS WE NEVER DO BECAUSE WE HAVE ENGINEERING THAT IS IN THIS OR THIS TODAY'S ACTIVITY WHERE WE WENT OUT AND APPROPRIATELY SO AND VETTED. IT'S JUST WHEN YOU HAVE MINOR THINGS. THERE ARE IT IS IMPORTANT TO HAVE A LIBRARY TO TRY TO GET SOMETHING DONE QUICKLY SOMETIMES. [08:10:04] SO THAT'S ALL I SAID. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? KRAMER. AND THEN? WELL, I'LL JUST SAY THAT FIRST, AS WHEN I USE VENDORS IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM, IF YOU'RE AND, YOU KNOW, WE DIDN'T BUILD A LOT, BUT WE DID BUILD THAT $18 MILLION FIELD HOUSE. BUT IF YOU'RE LOYAL AND YOU AND YOU DO REALLY GOOD WORK, AND WE'VE SEEN THIS OVER TIME, I WANT TO USE YOU AGAIN. EVEN IF YOU WERE A LITTLE MORE. I'M NOT TRYING TO GET THE CHEAPEST THING I CAN GET IF I KNOW WHAT THE PRODUCT IS GOING TO BE LIKE. THAT'S MY PERSONAL THING. AND THEN AND THAT GOES FOR EVERYTHING IN MY LIFE. BUT BUT THE OTHER THING IS, I TRUST ONE OF THE MOST FRUGAL HUMANS THAT I'VE EVER MET AND AN EXPERT IN THE FIELD TO KNOW IF THIS IS GOOD FOR US. SO I TRUST YOU GUYS WITH THAT. AND WITH THAT, IF THERE'S NO OTHER CONVERSATION, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS. OKAY. I'LL SECOND THE MOTION. MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER KRAMER FOR APPROVAL. AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTMAN. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE PULL THE COUNCIL. COUNCIL MEMBER. KRAMER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BARTON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. PENNIMAN. YES. VICE MAYOR. HUTCHINSON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. PETRANOFF. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. CHRISTMAN. YES. MAYOR. HARTMAN. YES. THAT CONCLUDES 13 A MOVING TO 13 B BE. WE FINISHED THAT ONE. OH YES WE DID. B 13 C YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU. MAYOR RESOLUTION APPROVING AN EXTENSION AND FIFTH AMENDMENT TO THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND THE CITY OF NAPLES [13.C) A Resolution Approving an Extension and Fifth Amendment to the Interlocal Agreement between Collier County and the City of Naples regarding Parks and Recreation; providing for Scrivener’s Errors; and Providing an Effective Date.] REGARDING PARKS AND RECREATION, PROVIDING FOR SCRIVENER'S ERRORS AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. I'M SORRY, MR. MCCONNELL. MR. MCCONNELL. MADAM MAYOR, THIS HERE IS THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT AS IT RELATES TO BEACH PARKING AND PARKS AND RECREATION. AS YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN I'M INTIMATELY AWARE AWARE OF THESE EVEN BEFORE MY TIME AS CITY MANAGER, BECAUSE I HELPED NEGOTIATE THAT. I'LL REMIND YOU, A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO, WE NEGOTIATED INCREASES IN TDC FROM 200 TO 500 UNDER GENERAL MAINTENANCE. WE INCREASED THE AMOUNT THAT WENT FROM ON THE PIER TO TO 400, FROM 200,000 TO 400,000, AND THEY AGGREGATED IT TO A TOTAL OF 2.2 MILLION FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE REBUILDING. AND THEN WE ADDED LOUDERMILK FOR MAINTENANCE THERE, WHICH WE NEVER HAD BEFORE, TO THE TUNE OF UP TO 200,000 YEARS. SO WHEN WE CAME TO YOU LAST TIME AND SAID, WE WANT TO KEEP THE RATES THE SAME AND WE'VE GOT A COMMITMENT FROM THEM, THEY'VE KEPT THEIR PROMISE. AND SO THAT'S AN IMPORTANT ITEM TO TO HAVE DISCUSSED HERE. ANOTHER ITEM JUST TO LET YOU KNOW IS THEY'RE CONTINUING TO KEEP THEIR PROMISE. YESTERDAY THEY VOTED UNANIMOUSLY TO SUPPORT OUR $10 MILLION IN THE OUTFALL PROJECT. SO THAT'S ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THAT. SO WHAT I'M PROPOSING IN THIS AGREEMENT IS WE'VE BEEN DOING ONE YEAR NOW FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS, AND AT THE END OF THE DAY, I THINK WE'RE IN A VERY GOOD PLACE WITH THEM. WE WILL HAVE THE PIERS STILL SHUT DOWN FOR 18 TO 24 MONTHS, WITH RESTRICTED PARKING, NOT AS MANY SPACES AS WE HAD BEFORE. SO WHAT IS BEFORE YOU IS ASKING FOR A TWO YEAR RENEWAL AT THE SAME $1.5 MILLION. IT LEAVES AN OPTION FOR BOTH PARTIES TO EXECUTE A THIRD YEAR, SHOULD THAT BE OUR DESIRE TO DO. AND IT GUARANTEES A 5% INCREASE IN IN THAT THIRD YEAR. SO IT'S KIND OF TAKING THE OPPORTUNITY TO SAY WE STILL HAVE WORK TO DO TOGETHER, BUT IT ALSO RECOGNIZES WE CAN'T STAY STATIC FOREVER. AND I THINK IT ACCOMPLISHES BOTH WITHOUT US HAVING TO BE AT THAT TABLE EVERY TEN MONTHS TRYING TO FIGURE THIS OUT. SO I THINK IT'S GREAT LEADERSHIP AND GUIDANCE. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE PUT THAT ON THE BOOKS THAT WE WHEN WE LOOK AT THE FEES AND EVERYTHING ELSE THAT THIS IS A CONVERSATION. YES, MA'AM. BUT, COUNCIL. ANY QUESTIONS? NOT A MOTION. I'LL MOVE FOR. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE EXTENSION. AND FIFTH AMENDMENT TO THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND THE CITY OF NAPLES REGARDING PARKS AND RECREATION. SECOND. COUNCIL MEMBER KRISEMAN AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER KRAMER. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE PULL THE COUNCIL. COUNCIL MEMBER. BARTON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. KRISEMAN. CHRISTMAS? YES. VICE MAYOR HUTCHINSON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. PENNIMAN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. KRAMER. YES. MAYOR HYMAN. YES. THANK YOU. PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. WE HAVE 13. I MEAN, 12 BE LEFT. AND IF YOU WANT TO TAKE OVER AND NO ONE ELSE NEEDS A BREAK. I NEED A BREAK. I'VE BEEN SITTING HERE SINCE 1:00. SO CAN WE TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK, OR DO YOU WANT VICE MAYOR TO TAKE OVER? [08:15:01] OKAY, WE'LL TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK. WE'LL BE BACK AT 615. OKAY, WE'RE BACK FROM OUR SHORT BREAK. CONTINUING WITH OUR LAST ITEM ON THE AGENDA, WHICH IS OR FOR RESOLUTIONS AND [12.B) Approval of Revised 2026 City Council and CRA Meeting Schedule.] BUSINESS IS 12 B. THANK YOU. MAYOR. WHAT'S BEFORE YOU IS THE, 2026 REVISED CITY COUNCIL AND CRA MEETING SCHEDULE. WE JUST WANTED TO GET IT BACK BEFORE YOU MADE SURE WE EVERYONE AGREED WE MADE THE APPROPRIATE CHANGES FOLLOWING OUR LAST DISCUSSION. AND SO IF WE CAN JUST HAVE A CONSENSUS VOTE OR WHATEVER YOU WOULD NORMALLY DO UNDER THE CALENDAR SCENARIO, THIS IS MY FIRST TIME ON THAT PART. SO I WOULD APPRECIATE IT. OR IF THERE'S ANY CHANGES YOU BELIEVE NEED TO BE MADE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU COUNCIL. IF THIS DESERVES A MOTION FOR APPROVAL, WELL, JUST 111 QUESTION. I NOTED THAT THERE ARE TWO DATES FOR THE CRA AND ONE IN LATE MAY, ONE IN EARLY JUNE. YOU HAVE AN ALTERNATIVE DATE THERE? YES, SIR. THAT'S. YES. SO WE SHOULD PICK ONE OF THE TWO. CORRECT. I'M SORRY. YES, SIR. YES, I WOULD ASSUME MAY. WHEN IS MEMORIAL DAY? NEXT YEAR. AND HOW DOES IT RELATE TO THE 28TH? I THINK IT IS THE 31ST. 25TH. SO. AND THAT WAS THAT WAS THE REASON I THINK YOU HAD ORIGINALLY SAID MAY, BUT WE SAW IT WAS LIKE, DO WE WANT TO HAVE IT THE WEEK OF MEMORIAL DAY, OR WOULD YOU RATHER HAVE IT GO INTO JUNE? WELL, IT'S THE THURSDAY AFTER MEMORIAL DAY. SO IS THAT THAT'S NOT A PROBLEM, IS IT? I WON'T BE HERE, BUT THAT'S FINE. YEAH. YEAH. SHOULD WE MAKE IT JUNE 4TH INSTEAD? WHAT HAPPENED? THAT'S WHY WE LEFT IT AS AN OPTION. NO, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MAY EITHER MAY 20TH 8TH OR JUNE 4TH FOR THE CRA MEETING. BECAUSE IF WE DO IT THE FOURTH, I'M SORRY. IF WE DO IT THE FOURTH, YOU'RE BACK TO BACK. BACK TO BACKS ON A CITY COUNCIL MEETING. I'D WAY RATHER NOT DO IT ON THE FOURTH. I THOUGHT WE HAD IT ON THE 11TH. NO. JUNE 11TH. THAT'S WHAT I HAVE ON MY CALENDAR. NOT ME. WE DON'T WANT TO DO THAT BECAUSE THAT'S. OKAY. I MEAN, I THINK I THINK THE 28TH, YOU'RE, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE OUT OF TOWN THEN. MAYOR. YEAH. ALREADY? YEAH. SORRY. I GOT A PLAN. YEAH. WELL. IT'S OKAY. WE COULD DO. I DON'T THINK IF WE KNOW SOMEBODY. WELL, JUNE 11TH WOULD BE. HOW ABOUT JUNE 11TH? AND THAT'S A THURSDAY. SO WE'LL HAVE ONE MEETING THE FIRST WEEK IN JUNE, ONE MEETING THE SECOND WEEK IN JUNE, AND THEN TWO MEETINGS THE THIRD WEEK IN JUNE. WHAT DO YOU THINK? I'M AT YOUR PLEASURE, SIR. I DID THE 14TH. NOT WORK OUT. WAIT. SAY THAT AGAIN. WHAT? YOU JUST SAID WE'RE GOING TO HAVE ONE MEETING. WELL, YOU GOT JUNE 3RD. YOU GOT JUNE 3RD, RIGHT? WHICH IS A WEDNESDAY. AND THEN THE FOLLOWING WEEK IT WOULD BE JUNE 11TH FOR CRA. THAT'S A THURSDAY. OH, IF WE HAD IT RIGHT AND THEN THE WEEK AFTER THAT YOU HAVE A MONDAY WORKSHOP AND IT'S A REGULAR MEETING, AND THEN WE GO TO SUMMER RECESS. SO INSTEAD OF HAVING THE OFF WEEK, YOU WOULD HAVE AN EVENT, YOU WOULD HAVE A MEETING. YOU STILL HAVE A CR, YOU'D HAVE A MEETING THAT OFF WEEK, BUT IT WOULD BE A CRA MEETING. I'D RATHER DO IT, TO TELL YOU THE TRUTH. YEAH, WELL, I JUST WAS TRYING TO PICK A DAY WHEN WE, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE'S SCHEDULES CAN CHANGE AND YOU LOSE. YOU MAY LOSE PEOPLE ANYWAY. BUT THE MAYOR INDICATED SHE WASN'T GOING TO BE HERE ON THE ON THE 28TH. THAT'S ALL. WELL, WHENEVER YOU TELL ME. ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO WITH JUNE 11TH. JUNE 11TH. YEAH. OKAY. SO MUCH FOR ME TAKING MY BIRTHDAY WEEK OFF. JUST KIDDING. I SAID THAT OUT LOUD. YEAH. YOU GET TO WEAR THE HAT EVERY TIME. WE GOOD? DO WE NEED A MOTION ON THIS? I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU'VE DONE IN THE PAST IS EVEN I BELIEVE THAT'S WHAT YOU'VE DONE TO MAKE. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS PROPOSED SCHEDULE. AND AS, AS, AS THE SCHEDULE FOR NEXT YEAR WITH THE ONE CHANGE OF MAKING THE JUNE HAVING NO CRA MEETING ON MAY 20TH 8TH OR JUNE 4TH, BUT A CRA MEETING ON JUNE 11TH. THANK YOU. MOTION. IT'S A MOTION. HAVE A SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR THE CRA MEETING APPROVALS. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE AYE. OPPOSED PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. [08:20:01] OKAY. COUNCIL. SO I KNOW THAT I'LL GO TO YOU FIRST. YEAH. I JUST WHEN WE THOUGHT WE WERE DONE I WAS COMMUNICATING WITH THE CLERK, AND BETWEEN ONE OF THE BREAKS, THERE WAS AN ITEM ON THE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. IT WAS ACTUALLY AN INCORRECT VERSION THAT WAS UPLOADED. SO WE TRACKED THE CHANGE. I JUST PASSED IT OUT DURING BREAK. I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY FOR THE RECORD THAT THIS WILL BE THE ONE THAT IS BEING SIGNED. I UNDERSTAND WE APPROVED THE CONSENT AGENDA AS ONE, BUT I WOULD LIKE A MOTION, AND WE CAN DO IT BY NOT BY ROLL CALL. MAYOR, IF YOU WOULD LIKE FOR THIS ITEM THAT I PASSED OUT, JUST SO THAT IT'S CLEAR FOR THE RECORD THAT THIS IS THE ONE THAT WILL BE EXECUTED AND IT'S ITEM SEVEN D AS IN DOG. SO DO YOU WANT TO READ THE TITLE OR JUST. SURE. YES, BECAUSE IT DID CHANGE A LITTLE BIT. THANK YOU. MAYOR. RESOLUTION APPROVING TASK ORDER NUMBER 25033040531010 BETWEEN THE CITY OF NAPLES AND BOWMAN GULF COAST LLC, DBA MONTEZ A BOWMAN COMPANY, FLORIDA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES NECESSARY FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PLAN OF INVESTIGATION FOR THE AQUIFER STORAGE AND RECOVERY SYSTEM IN QUOTATIONS. ESSER ASR OPTIMIZATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $282,797.64, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE TASK ORDER AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. A MOTION FOR APPROVAL. SO. MOVED. MOVE. APPROVAL. A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER PENMAN. SECOND. A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER BARTON. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? THANK YOU. COUNCIL. THAT TAKES US TO ITEM 14. THERE ARE NO ORDINANCES. 15. NO READINGS, 16 SECOND READINGS. THERE AREN'T ANY PUBLIC COMMENT, MADAM CLERK. NO PUBLIC COMMENT. WE'LL START WITH CORRESPONDENCE AND COMMUNICATIONS. [18) COMMUNICATIONS FROM MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL, AND STAFF] FIRST OF ALL, I JUST WANT TO SAY HAPPY BIRTHDAY, COUNCIL MEMBER MANY BLESSINGS. YES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NO HAT, NO HAT. COME ON. WE DON'T KNOW WHERE THE HAT IS. YEAH. SO WITH THAT, I WISH YOU A GREAT YEAR. THANK YOU. ME? AS LONG AS I'M SITTING IN THIS CHAIR. OH, THAT'S MY FUN FOR LIFE. ANY CORRESPONDENCE AND COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE BIRTHDAY GIRL. NOT A WORD. THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER. BARTON. JUST REAL QUICK, IN REFERENCE TO PUBLIC COMMENT FROM EARLIER TODAY FROM MR. HARTINGTON ON THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. IN MY OPINION, IS. WELL, FIRST OF ALL, WE HAVE TO GET BACK TO HIM AND GIVE HIM SOME TYPE OF ANSWER, WHETHER IT'S WE'RE INTERESTED IN LOOKING AT THIS FURTHER OR NOT. BUT MY MY TAKE ON IT IS I THINK WE GOT A UNIQUE OPPORTUNITY HERE TO EXPLORE WHAT WE ALL HAVE HAVE ESPOUSED AS BEING IMPORTANT TO US, AND IT'S UNIQUE FROM THE STANDPOINT THAT IT'S IT'S PROPERTY THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO BUY. THERE'S NOT A BIG, BIG ASK ON THAT SIDE OF THE EQUATION. SO WE DON'T HAVE TO COME UP WITH A BUNCH OF MONEY. AND IN MY OPINION, I BELIEVE THAT WE CAN HAVE PROPERTY OWNER IS GOING TO DO A LOT OF THE HEAVY LIFTING FROM A STANDPOINT OF COMING TO THE TABLE WITH CREATIVE SOLUTIONS, WHICH MEANS OUR STAFF ISN'T GOING TO HAVE TO. I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY IT'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE APPROVED BY US, AND OUR STAFF IS GOING TO HAVE TO AGREE THAT THAT THEIR APPROACH IS SOMETHING THAT'S THAT'S EFFECTIVE AND PLAUSIBLE. BUT NONETHELESS, I THINK THAT THE RESIDENT, THE IS GOING TO DO THE MOST OF THE WORK THERE, AND IT'S NOT GOING TO BE A BIG PICKUP BY OUR STAFF. SO I THINK WE'VE GOT AN OPPORTUNITY HERE TO POTENTIALLY SOLVE SOME OF THIS AFFORDABLE HOUSING ISSUE WITH LAND THAT'S NOT OURS THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO BUY, AND WE MAY NOT HAVE TO DO MOST OF THE WORK ON. SO THAT'S MY TAKE ON IT. AND I BELIEVE THAT WE, NO MATTER WHAT, WE GOT TO GIVE THEM SOME TYPE OF ANSWER, BUT. WELL, I WOULD SAY THAT. OH GO AHEAD. WELL I JUST WANTED TO REFRESH THAT WHERE WE ARE IS I'D ASKED FOR 30 DAYS TO DISCUSS WITH STAFF, AND ACTUALLY I SPOKE WITH MARK THAT MY ANTICIPATED TIME TO HAVE THAT BACK BEFORE COUNCIL AS THE LEGISLATIVE PRIORITY DISCUSSION AND THAT AS AN ITEM, HAVING HAD THE BACKGROUND FROM STAFF AND WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE ON OCTOBER 15TH. SO THAT WAS THE INTENDED TIME. PERFECT. THAT'S THAT'S GREAT. WONDERFUL. IS THAT A WORKSHOP? NO, IT'S A COUNCIL MEETING. BUT I WANT TO DO LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES IN GENERAL FROM OUR NOT A NOT THE STATE LEGISLATIVE BUT COUNCIL PRIORITIES. DISCUSSION UPDATE THAT FROM EVERYTHING FROM BECAUSE THERE WAS A NUMBER OF ITEMS ON THERE THAT WERE RESILIENCY RELATED. I THINK WE JUST HAD A SIGNIFICANT RESILIENCY CONVERSATION. SO I WANT TO UPDATE THAT. AND THAT WAS ONE OF THE ITEMS WE TALKED ABOUT HAVING AS WELL, ADDING TO THAT ITEM, [08:25:03] MAKING SURE EVERYONE AGREED WITH THAT, AND THEN WE'D BE HAVING THAT DISCUSSION. YEAH, I DEFINITELY NEED TO HAVE A DEEP CONVERSATION ABOUT IT. SO I MEAN, YEAH, AND IT WAS A WORKSHOP ON UNDERSTANDING THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OR THE BENEFITS OF THIS PROJECT IS REALLY THE CORRECT. AND IT WASN'T THAT WE WERE GOING TO HAVE THAT THAT'S BAKING OUT THE PROJECT ON THAT DAY, BUT UNDERSTANDING WHAT STAFF'S POSITION IS ON IT IN THE SENSE OF TIMING, THE AMOUNT OF RESOURCES, WHERE WE ARE WITH IT, AND THEN FROM THERE MAKE SURE IT'S A PRIORITY AND THEN SAY WHAT MEETING? WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THE WHOLE DETAILED CONVERSATION AND I WILL, YOU KNOW, I'LL JUST ADD TO THAT, I TOTALLY AGREE WITH THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES. YOU KNOW, WITHOUT AN IN-DEPTH CONVERSATION, WE CAN'T COME TO THE CONCLUSION AS TO WHETHER THERE'S A UNIQUE AND CREATIVE WAY TO TACKLE THIS WITH THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY. AND I'LL USE OUR POTENTIAL PURCHASE OVER THERE AT STILLWATER COVE. AND WE WERE TALKING ABOUT ADDING IN THE THE PARK AS A PART OF THE OVERALL LAND MASS SO THAT WE COULD INCREASE THE NUMBER OF UNITS SPECIFICALLY ON JUST THE STILLWATER COVE THING. THAT WAS A CREATIVE WAY TO POTENTIALLY SOLVE THAT DILEMMA. THERE MAY BE SOMETHING THAT'S CREATIVE HERE, TOO, THAT WE JUST DON'T SEE WITHOUT HAVING AN IN DEPTH CONVERSATION WITH WITH PEOPLE THAT ARE A LOT SMARTER THAN ME, THAN ME WHEN IT COMES TO PLANNING AND WHATNOT. AND MADAM MAYOR, I WAS JUST QUANTIFYING SO SO EVERYONE REMINDED THAT IT WASN'T DIDN'T FALL ON DEAF EARS WHEN IT WAS DISCUSSED THE FIRST TIME. AND THEN I THINK WHEN WE LEAVE THE LEGISLATIVE PRIORITY MEETING, WE'LL SAY, WHAT MEETING DO WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT'S ON? THAT WAS THE INTENT OF BY OCTOBER 15TH. THAT'S WHAT I LIKE ABOUT YOU, MR. YOUNG. YOU DON'T FORGET A THING. ME TOO. THANK YOU. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. COUNCIL MEMBER. CRISPIN. YEAH. JUST ONE THING. BRIEFLY. I WANTED JUST TO YOU KNOW, MONDAY WAS A A LONG DAY. BUT A SUBSTANTIVE DAY. AND TODAY'S BEEN A LONG DAY TO THE YOU KNOW, THE. ON MONDAY, WE SPENT HALF THE DAY TALKING ABOUT RESILIENCY AND THE NEW REALLY EVERYTHING WAS ABOUT RESILIENCY MONDAY. BUT WE TALKED ABOUT THE PROPOSED NEW RESILIENCY PLAN. AND AND THEN WE JUST KEPT GOING. AND YOU KNOW, I DON'T I DON'T THINK WE REALLY AS I THOUGHT ABOUT IT YESTERDAY THAT WAS REALLY KIND OF A REALLY A REMARKABLE EFFORT BY THE STAFF TO PUT THAT PLAN TOGETHER AND PUT AND PUT IT IN FRONT OF US. AND I DON'T THINK WE PROPERLY ACKNOWLEDGED IT. SEE, DOCTOR GEORGE IS STILL OUT THERE WITH US TODAY. AND YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, WITH THAT PLAN WE REALLY HAVE COME A LONG WAY. IT, YOU KNOW, WE STILL HAVE TO A LOT OF MEAT. WE'VE GOT TO PUT ON THE BONES, AND WE'VE GOT TO MAKE A DECISION ON WHERE THE MONEY IS GOING TO COME FROM. BUT WE NOW, FOR THE FIRST TIME, HAVE A FRAMEWORK. I'VE HAD A NUMBER OF RESIDENTS SAY TO ME OVER THE LAST YEAR OR TWO YOU KNOW? YOU KNOW, WE NEED A PLAN. WE NEED A PLAN. AND I THINK THIS DOES GIVE US A FRAMEWORK THAT PEOPLE CAN CITIZENS AND RESIDENTS CAN RELATE TO AND UNDERSTAND AND GIVES US, YOU KNOW, THE WITH THE THREE PILLARS, THE THE, THE, THE BASKETS INTO WHICH WE CAN PLACE DIFFERENT PROJECTS, MAKE INVESTMENT DECISIONS AND AND, YOU KNOW, HAVE SOME CLARITY FOR OURSELVES AND FOR THE RESIDENTS. SO I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT AND AND REALLY, IT'S KUDOS TO THE STAFF, MR. YOUNG GEORGE. EVERYBODY ELSE RESOURCE, NATURAL RESOURCES, EVERYBODY WHO WORKED ON IT, IT WAS REALLY A VERY GOOD JOB AND WE HAD A GOOD DISCUSSION. THANK YOU. YES. THANK YOU. AND WHEN WE DO WORK THROUGH THINGS LIKE THAT, I OFTEN GO HOME AND GO, OH, I DIDN'T I WASN'T GRACIOUS ENOUGH TO STAFF BECAUSE WE'RE JUST TRYING TO MOVE TO THE NEXT. SO THANK YOU BECAUSE THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT A LOT OF WORK AND IT'S JUST THE BEGINNING. SO THANK YOU FOR THAT. AND THAT'S ALL I HAVE. OKAY. COUNCIL MEMBER KRAMER. YEAH. THAT'S A YEAH. WE DON'T WANT TO TAKE THAT FOR GRANTED. THAT KIND OF EFFORT AND AND DELIVERY. THAT WAS FANTASTIC. NOTHING ELSE. THANKS. PETRANOFF. THANK YOU. ON THE RESILIENCY PLAN, SOME OF THE FEEDBACK THAT I GOT WAS, IT SEEMED LIKE A LAUNDRY LIST OF. AND I'M GLAD THAT WE PUT THAT OUT THERE. I HOPE THE NEXT EFFORT IS TO WEAN THIS DOWN AND PRIORITIZE IT MORE FINELY ON WHAT THE COST BENEFITS ARE. AND I'M SURE THAT WILL BE COMING FROM DOCTOR GEORGE. BECAUSE WE CAN IT FELT BOILING THE OCEAN A LITTLE BIT AND BUT I WANT TO COMMEND THEM ON HAVING PILLARS THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY GO TO. THE OTHER THING THAT I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT, AND IT'S THE IT'S THE UMPTEENTH TIME THAT I'VE SEEN THIS. I'LL BE ROLLING OFF COUNCIL IN A FEW MONTHS. LIKE, LESS THAN TEN MEETINGS NOW. [08:30:05] AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WANT TO WANT US TO BE MINDFUL OF, WANT TO REMIND EVERYONE OF IS THAT, LIKE ON 11 A, WE SAW A PETITION THAT WAS THE JIMMY P'S ONE WHERE WE SAW KIND OF THE CITY. THERE WERE SOME SWAP DONE AND SOME IMPROVEMENTS THAT YOU COULD ARGUE THOSE IMPROVED. THE IMPROVEMENTS IN THE BACK SHOULD HAVE BEEN HANDLED BY CODE ENFORCEMENT BECAUSE THEY BECAUSE IT WAS A MESS AND THE DUMPSTERS WERE A MESS AND SOME OF THE PARKING. AND SO WE GAVE AWAY A PUBLIC PARK IN THE FRONT GREEN SPACE AND CREATED A PERVIOUS DRIVEWAY ON THE OLD NAPLES IN THAT WE'RE ALL FAMILIAR WITH. WE GAVE AWAY THE WHOLE STRIP OF TREES AND LAND ON THE ON THE WEST SIDE, AND WE GIVE THESE THINGS AWAY, AND WE'RE DOING A LOT OF CLEANUP BECAUSE THIS STUFF WAS APPROVED LONG BEFORE ANY OF US WERE ON COUNCIL. BUT THIS PUBLIC LAND IS BECOMING, I THINK, SO PRECIOUS BECAUSE I SEE THESE BILLS AND I'VE JUST BEEN THROUGH A BUNCH OF HOUSES TO WITH OUR DESIGNER ON THE HOUSE WE'RE BUILDING, AND THEY REALLY DON'T HAVE MUCH GREEN SPACE AT ALL, AS WE SAW BACK IN 22 WHEN THEY SAID IT'S 40% LOT COVERAGE, BUT IT'S REALLY 90% BECAUSE A LOT OF STUFF DOESN'T COUNT. SO IT ALL GETS PLANTED OVER. SO OUR RIGHT OF WAYS AND THOSE GREEN SPACES THAT ARE PUBLIC BECOME SO PRECIOUS. AND YOU KNOW, WE NICKEL AND DIME GIVE THESE THINGS AWAY TO PRIVATE ENTERPRISES AND THEY DISAPPEAR FOREVER. SO YOU KNOW, MY HOPE WOULD BE THAT WE WOULD REALLY TAKE A LOOK AT THIS BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE VOICELESS. THIS IS PUBLIC LAND. NOBODY'S GOING TO SAY ANYTHING. AND AND MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE WE'RE, LIKE, STRONGER STEWARDS THAN OUR PREDECESSORS AT GIVING THESE THINGS AWAY. THE OTHER THING THAT I CAN, I JUST I WANT TO JUST PUT THIS OUT THERE. SO I SPOKE BRIEFLY TO MR. YOUNG ABOUT THIS THAT IS THAT IS THAT'S WHY THE RESOLUTION IS SO IMPORTANT. JUST BECAUSE IT'S IN YOUR STAFF REPORT. IF IT'S NOT IN THE RESOLUTION, I REALLY WE REALLY HAVE TO PAY ATTENTION TO THAT. THAT'S THE LEGAL BINDING STAFF REPORTS IF IT'S NOT IN THAT RESOLUTION. AND THOSE THINGS WERE NOT IN THE RESOLUTION, AND QUITE FRANKLY, IT WAS IT'S A DOLLAR A YEAR AND IT'S FOR FIVE YEARS. SO THERE'S NO MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT THAT POOR MR. YOUNG NOW IS. AND THE ATTORNEY IS GOING TO HAVE TO DIG THROUGH THAT AND FIGURE OUT HOW WE ARE GOING TO, BECAUSE THAT'S NOT IN PERPETUITY. AND IF IF THAT RESTAURANT GOES AWAY OR IT DOESN'T GET RENEWED, OR IF THE NEXT COUNCILS GO AWAY AND IT'S NOT RECORDED, IT'S JUST GOING TO BE GIVEN TO THAT OWNER OF THAT PROPERTY I'VE HAD THERE. THOSE ARE THE THINGS WE REALLY NEED TO BE MINDFUL FOR. WE HAVE A BIG JOB HERE. DON'T JUST, YOU KNOW, LOOK AT THE STAFF REPORT AND YOU GOT TO PAY ATTENTION TO THOSE DETAILS. SO THANK YOU. AND WE'LL ADDRESS THAT. AND THE NEXT THING THAT I WANTED TO SORT OF BRING UP IS WE BEAT THE THE AIRPORT THING TO DEATH. BUT I WANTED TO SHARE ONE OTHER THING WITH YOU ON, ON, ON MY CONVERSATION WITH BOTANA. AND THAT WAS WHAT REALLY, REALLY BOTHERED HIM WAS THE FACT OF THE NOT TAKING GRANTS. AND THAT WAS BECAUSE THAT WAS THE IMPETUS FOR THIS, ALTHOUGH THERE WERE OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES THAT WERE IT WAS BUILDING AND BUILDING AND YOU KNOW, HE HE'S TAKING FLIGHT LESSONS OR WAS TAKING FLIGHT LESSONS AND THE FLIERS THE WAY THAT THEY MARKETED THIS, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE PNL, THEY HAVE A PRETTY DARN HEALTHY BUDGET WITH BIG RESERVES. BUT THEY CHOSE TO SAY, OKAY, WE'RE GOING TO HIT YOU WITH LANDING FEES AND RAISE GAS PRICES, WHICH CREATED A LOT OF NOISE IN THE COMMUNITY THAT THAT CAME OUT AND CAME OUT TO HIM. BUT, YOU KNOW, THIS IS THIS CAN BE WRAPPED AROUND HOME RULE. I MEAN, IT IS TAKING AWAY FROM OUR RESIDENTS AND YOU KNOW THAT REALLY THE THE VOTE, WHETHER IT'S US VOTING OR RESIDENTS VOTING, DOESN'T BUG ME TOO MUCH. WHAT REALLY BOTHERS ME IS THE FACT THAT WE ARE ONLY 5% OF THE POPULATION, AND RIGHT NOW EITHER COUNCIL OR OR, YOU KNOW, THROUGH THE RESIDENTS, THROUGH COUNCIL IN THE CITY OF NAPLES, VOTE ON 100% OF NA MEMBERS AND IT'S GOING TO GO DOWN TO 5%. THERE'LL BE THERE'LL BE THREE FROM THE CITY, BUT IT'LL GO DOWN TO FIVE BECAUSE EVERYBODY'S VOTING ON THEM IN THE COUNTY. THAT'S THE BIG THING. BECAUSE I THINK THEY HAVE DIFFERENT GOALS. THEY'VE GOT DIFFERENT. YOU KNOW, THE COUNTY IS A BIG, WIDE COUNTY. IT'S ONE MIGHT BE THE LARGEST IN FLORIDA. BUT IS IT THE LARGEST? AND SO, YOU KNOW, YOU'VE GOT YOU KNOW, WE WANT TO WE ARE LITERALLY RIGHT OFF THE AIRPORT. AND I THINK WE STARTED THIS THING OF LOOKING AT OTHER AIRPORTS. YOU KNOW, IT WAS, YOU KNOW, WE WERE WE WERE FOR IT. [08:35:03] IT WAS A SUGGESTION THAT CAME FORWARD FROM THE FAA BECAUSE WE WANTED TO THOUGHTFULLY MAKE SURE THAT THERE WASN'T A PLACE TO MOVE IT, BECAUSE IN A MILLION YEARS, IF YOU WOUND THE CLOCK BACK, YOU WOULD NEVER, EVER, EVER, EVER PUT AN AIRPORT WHERE IT IS TODAY. AND YOU KNOW, BUT THERE IS NO INTEREST AND IT'S TOO EXPENSIVE. AND MAYBE WE OUGHT TO, IF THAT IS A SOURCE OF IRRITATION, COME OUT FORMALLY AND SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT? WE'RE YOU DID THE EXERCISE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. LET'S MOVE ON. IT'S OVER. WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE MOVING. THIS THE THE OTHER PIECE THAT I WANT TO SAY IS, YOU KNOW, ON THESE ALL THESE HOME RULE THINGS AND YOU CAN STATE A NUMBER OF THEM AND I FORGET SOMEBODY COUNTED THEM AND IT WAS LIKE 100, 100 LIKE LITTLE THINGS THAT THEY'VE DONE ON ASSAULTING HOME RULE. I THINK THAT IT'S GOOD WE'RE GETTING TO KNOW ALL OF OUR RIGHTS, BECAUSE I WAS READING A BOOK AND IT WAS. AND A QUOTE KIND OF STRUCK ME AND IT WAS WINSTON CHURCHILL AND HE, HE MADE A COMMENT ABOUT WHAT DID HE SAY? HE SAID RIGHT BEFORE WORLD WAR TWO, AN APPEASER IS ONE WHO FEEDS A CROCODILE HOPING, HOPING IT WILL EAT HIM LAST. AND THAT IS HOW THIS FEELS TO ME IS YOU KNOW, THERE'S THERE'S A TIME FOR APPEASING AND TRYING TO WORK. AND THEN THERE COMES A LIMIT WHERE YOU JUST SAY, YOU KNOW ENOUGH. AND SO I THINK THAT THAT WE SHOULD GO DOWN AND MEET WITH THE BEST OF INTENTIONS TO TRY TO WORK SOMETHING OUT. BUT I WOULD NOT HOLD MY BREATH. THANK YOU. I'VE BEEN HOLDING MY BREATH FOR 16 YEARS AND IT'S JUST GOTTEN WORSE. THANK YOU, VICE MAYOR. YEAH, JUST THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. JUST AS WE WRAP IT UP, A GOOD MEETING TODAY. LEARNED A LOT. AND I JUST WANTED TO TAG ON TO WHAT COUNCILWOMAN PETRANOFF HAS JUST SAID. SO I DID HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH MR. BOTANA. HE DID IN THAT CONVERSATION INDICATE THAT HE HAD HEARD FROM A FEW COUNTY RESIDENTS. THAT WAS THE WORDING THAT CAUSED HIM SOME CONCERN. AND AND COMPELLED HIM TO BRING THIS FORWARD. ALSO, THE AIRPORT GRANT ISSUE AND THE FACT THAT IT'S IT'S MONEY OUT THERE, FREE MONEY THAT COULD BE USED BY THE AIRPORT. BUT OF COURSE, WE KNOW THAT THAT MONEY COMES WITH CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS. AND THAT'S OKAY. AS LONG AS IT'S FREE MONEY, WHATEVER THE REQUIREMENTS ARE, IS OKAY. AND THEN HE EXPLICITLY REMINDED ME THAT THE CITY COUNCIL NEEDS OVERSIGHT. THIS IS WHAT WE NEED TO BE REMINDED OF. THE NAPLES CITY COUNCIL ANSWERS TO THOSE REPRESENTING COLLIER COUNTY AT THE STATE LEVEL. OKAY. SO JUST REALIZE YOUR POSITION. I'M SORRY. TELL ME. WAIT A MINUTE. YEAH. HE REMINDED. WHO DO I REPRESENT? YEAH. MR. REMINDED ME THAT THE CITY COUNCIL NEEDS OVERSIGHT. THIS IS WHAT WE NEED TO BE REMINDED OF. THE NAPLES CITY COUNCIL ANSWERS TO THOSE REPRESENTING COLLIER COUNTY AT THE STATE LEVEL. SO THAT KIND OF SHOWS YOU THE POSITION. AND THAT'S WHY YOU'RE, YOU KNOW, HOME RULE IS BEING STRIPPED AWAY ON CERTAIN THINGS. AND IT JUSTIFIES WHEN YOU'RE WEARING THAT HAT IN A DIFFERENT SEAT, YOU HAVE A DIFFERENT VIEW. YOU'RE NOT SO CLOSE TO THE RESIDENTS WHO ELECTED YOU. AND WE NEED OVERSIGHT, APPARENTLY. AND PART OF THAT IS TAKING THE ACTIONS TAKEN, SO. THANK YOU. I'M SORRY. I'M JUST GOING TO TELL YOU IT'S ALL POLITICAL AND IT'S VERY EMBARRASSING THAT OUR OUR GOVERNMENT AND THE WAY WE GOVERN IS ALL ABOUT POLITICS. AND IT'S VERY DISAPPOINTING. I HOPE THAT THIS BODY MAKES A CHANGE. BUT THE LEGISLATOR THAT FILED 250 WAS IN FORT MYERS 180 BECAME A LARGE STATE LEGISLATIVE INITIATIVE. AND NOW WE HAVE SOMEBODY FROM BONITA SPRINGS TELLING US THAT WE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE DOING. AND HE'S NEVER, NEVER ONCE CONSULTED US. THAT JUST SHOWS ME THAT THEY'RE JUST IT'S IT'S POLITICAL AND IT IT'S VERY DISHEARTENING. AND THIS IS WHY PEOPLE GET OUT OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT. BUT I THINK THAT I'M PLANTING SEEDS. THOSE THAT ARE UNDERSTAND THAT THE STATE IS TAKING AWAY AUTHORITY. PLEASE RUN. RUN FOR YOUR STATE LEGISLATURE. IT'S IT'S VERY, VERY IMPORTANT TO HOME RULE. SO. AND I'LL, I'LL WRAP UP HERE THAT. OH, SORRY. MR.. NO. MR.. BOTANA, I THINK, YOU KNOW, I GIVE EVERYONE THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT, AND I THINK MR. [08:40:05] BHUTANI, IN HIS IN WHAT HE'S DOING, THE ACTIONS HE'S TAKEN IS BELIEVING THAT HE'S REPRESENTING HIS CONSTITUENTS TO THE BEST OF HIS ABILITY. AND WHAT I JUST TOLD YOU, SOME OF THAT IS VERBATIM, SOME OF THAT IS AN ACCURATE RECAP OF THAT CONVERSATION. SO BUT I DO BELIEVE I DON'T THINK ANYBODY REPRESENTING THE COUNTY HAS ILL WILL, I'M HOPING HAS ILL WILL TOWARDS THE COMMUNITY AND OUR CONSTITUENTS AS A WHOLE, BUT SOMETIMES IT JUST DOESN'T MATCH UP WITH THE KIND OF. THINGS THAT WE WE BELIEVE THAT WE REPRESENT FOR OUR CONSTITUENTS. THANK YOU. COMPLETE. YES. SO, COUNCIL, I'M REALLY HAPPY TO SAY THAT AFTER FIVE YEARS, ALMOST SIX YEARS, WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO LOOK AT OUR BOARDS AND COMMITTEES AND THEIR DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES. AND WORKING WITH THE NEW CITY MANAGER AND ALMOST NEW CITY ATTORNEY. I HAVE HAD GREAT INSIGHTS. YOU KNOW, FIRST OF ALL, I THOUGHT IT WAS A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT NEEDED STRENGTHENING. AND WE'RE ON IT. BUT WE NOW KNOW THAT IT'S THE CODES AND THE CODES THAT CONFLICT WITH ONE ANOTHER AND THE INTERPRETATIONS THAT CAN HAPPEN. SO THAT'S SOMETHING WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO LOOK AT. BUT AS FAR AS IT COMES TO BOARDS, PLEASE DO YOUR HOMEWORK AS MUCH AS YOU POSSIBLY CAN IN CONVERSATION WITH WITH WHO EVER STAFF. MR. YOUNG, THE CITY ATTORNEY. I THINK WE MADE A GOOD DECISION THAT DRB WOULD BE THE FIRST HEARING. THAT WAS EVEN PER OUR PLANNING STAFF. BUT I WILL TELL YOU, WHEN I REALIZED THAT THIS COUNCIL ONLY SEES 10%. IF THAT OF ALL OF WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THIS CITY, THAT MOST OF IT IS ADMINISTRATIVELY AND THAT IT IS DONE BY THE DRB. THAT ANSWERED MY QUESTION ON WHEN COMMUNITY SAYS TO ME WHO APPROVED THAT BUILDING. IT'S OUR CODES THAT SAY, THAT'S OKAY TO BE REDEVELOPED AS LONG AS IT'S THIS WAY. SO WE HAVE TO LOOK AT OUR CODES IF WE'RE OKAY WITH THESE BUILDINGS THAT ARE ON ON 41 BEING LESS THAN SEVEN FEET APART THEN, YOU KNOW, SO BE IT. BUT THAT IS EXACTLY THE RESILIENCY PROBLEM WHEN WE'RE DOING LOT LINE TO LOT LINE. SO THAT SPECIAL OVERLAY DISTRICT, THE D DOWNTOWN THOSE INCENTIVES, WE DON'T WANT TO YANK THEM ALL. BUT IF WE DON'T DO SOMETHING THAT ENABLES PEOPLE TO TO CONTINUE TO REDEVELOP DOESN'T TAKE THE RIGHTS AWAY, BUT IT DOESN'T WE CAN'T KEEP BUYING. WE TODAY APPROVED A HOTEL, I MEAN, A CONDOMINIUM WITH PARKING POSSIBLY ON THE PREMISES FOR A RESTAURANT THAT HAS NO PARKING WHATSOEVER. AND WE HEARD OUR STAFF TODAY SAY WE CAME TO THE BREAKING POINT ON A PETITION TODAY WHERE WE REALIZED WHERE HOW ARE WE GOING TO PARK THESE? SO IT'S GOING TO BE SOME HARD DECISIONS. WE NEED TO DO IT FAIRLY. BUT IF WE DON'T, IF WE IGNORE IT, WE WILL HAVE RUINED THE CHARM AND BEAUTY AND WHAT REALLY IS A VERY SPECIAL PLACE. SO BOARDS AND COMMITTEES, I'M NOT TRYING TO TAKE ANYTHING ELSE ON, BUT I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE REALLY NEED TO LOOK AT AND WE NEED TO CLEAN UP THOSE CODES. SO I THANK YOU TO CITY MANAGER BECAUSE YOU REALLY THREW OUR CHARTER MEETINGS. FOR THE FIRST TIME, I CAN SAY IN MY YEARS AS MAYOR HAVE GIVEN GREAT DIRECTION AND WORKED WITH YOUR STAFF AND IN A WAY I'VE NEVER SEEN BEFORE. SO THANK YOU. MR. YOUNG, DO YOU OR MR. MCCONNELL, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING? I JUST WANTED TO SAY SOMETHING, IF I MAY. YEAH, THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING. THANK YOU. JUST A QUICK HISTORY LESSON. JUST TAKE A MINUTE, BECAUSE I HEAR A LOT AND I SEE A LOT ON HOME RULE. SO I JUST WANTED TO HOPEFULLY TEACH YOU SOMETHING IF YOU DON'T KNOW IT. BUT YOU MAY YOU KNOW, ABOUT 60 YEARS AGO, CITIES WERE OPERATING UNDER WHAT'S CALLED DILLON'S RULE, WHICH WAS DILLON D I DOUBLE L O N D. AND THAT WAS A RULE THAT ESSENTIALLY SAID THAT THEY COULD ONLY DO WHAT THE STATE AUTHORIZED THEM TO DO. SO THEN IN 68, STATE AMENDS THE CONSTITUTION AND 73 THEY DEVELOPED THE HOME RULE ACT. [08:45:01] SO HOME RULE IS ACTUALLY WHEN WE SAY HOME RULE, WE'RE REFERRING TO CHAPTER 166, WHERE WE'RE REFERRING TO THE DUTIES AND POWERS, AND CHAPTER 125 THAT THEY GAVE TO COUNTIES AND CITIES. SO I JUST THOUGHT, I HEAR HOME RULE PROBABLY 100 TIMES A DAY. HOPEFULLY YOU LEARNED SOMETHING AND WHAT I JUST SAID, BUT IT WAS ACTUALLY SOMETHING THAT WAS CHANGED IN THE CONSTITUTION AND GIVEN TO US BY THE STATE INCREMENTALLY TRYING TO TAKE IT BACK. CORRECT. SO THANK YOU. NO PROBLEM. THAT IS INTERESTING. MR. YOUNG, JUST TWO THINGS. THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING IS ONLY GOING TO BE ABOUT 13 ITEMS, SO IT'S HALF OF TODAY. SO THAT'S A GOOD NOTE. ON A SEPARATE NOTE, THOUGH, BECAUSE OF THIS MEETING GETTING PUSHED WE WOULD BE PUBLISHING TODAY. I KNOW YOU ALL WANT TO GO HOME AND READ EVERYTHING TONIGHT, BUT I'M I'M GOING TO ASK YOU THAT OR LET YOU KNOW THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO PUBLISH TILL TOMORROW, BUT THAT YOU WILL HAVE EVERYTHING OUT TOMORROW FOR THAT COUNCIL MEETING. SO WITH THAT, THAT'S ALL I HAVE, MAYOR, AND I THANK EVERYONE. THAT'S MORE THAN FAIR. THANK YOU. TOLD ME I WAS GOING TO SIT ON MY COUCH AND HIT REFRESH. YEAH. WHERE IS IT? THANK YOU. YEAH. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR THAT. AND THANK YOU, STAFF, FOR MAKING THOSE ACCOMMODATIONS. AND WITH THAT STRONG WORK COUNCIL THIS WEEK AND TO THE STAFF AND WE APPRECIATE OUR STAFF TODAY. SO WE'RE ADJOURNED. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.