Dec 08, 2025 City Council Workshop

[00:00:02]

GOOD MORNING AND WELCOME TO THIS DECEMBER 8TH, 2025 CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP.

[1) CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL]

COUNCIL MEMBER. CHRISTMAN HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER.

KRAMER HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER. PENMAN HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER PETRANOFF HERE.

VICE MAYOR HUTCHINSON HERE. MAYOR HEITMANN HERE.

THANK YOU. PLEASE STAND AND 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.

GOOD MORNING, EVERYONE. SETTING THE AGENDA. ITEM THREE.

[3) SET AGENDA (add or remove items)]

MR. MCCONNELL HAD A PRIOR COMMITMENT THIS MORNING, AND HE'LL BE BACK THIS AFTERNOON.

AND IN HOPES OF HIM BEING ABLE TO BE IN ATTENDANCE FOR THAT SPECIFICALLY, WE HAVE SOME THINGS RELATED TO TOURS AND DIFFERENT THINGS LIKE THAT, THAT HAVING THE CITY ATTORNEY PRESENT IS, YOU KNOW, MOST BENEFICIAL AND HIS REQUEST.

SO WITH THAT, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THAT REQUEST. THANK YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU. IS HE OKAY? I DIDN'T KNOW HE WAS. YEAH. OKAY. PERFECT. ANYTHING ELSE? NO, MA'AM. ALL RIGHT. COUNCIL, ANY CHANGES TO THE AGENDA? IF NOT, CAN I HAVE A MOTION? YES, MADAM MAYOR, I MOVE TO APPROVE THE AGENDA.

MOVING ITEM SIX B TO NOW BECOME SIX E AND MOVING EVERYTHING ELSE BEYOND B UP. I THINK THAT I'M SORRY.

WE CAN JUST PUT SIX B TO COME AFTER SIX E. CORRECT.

YOU WANT TO DO THAT? YES. SIX B AFTER SIX E. INSTEAD OF RENUMBERING IT SECOND HAVE A MOTION BY VICE MAYOR AND A SECOND BY PETRANOFF. ALL IN FAVOR? SIGNED BY I.

I OPPOSED. THANK YOU. COUNCIL PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.

ANNOUNCEMENTS AND PRESENTATIONS. I DO NOT HAVE ANY.

ALL RIGHT. THAT TAKES US TO ITEM FIVE. PUBLIC COMMENT.

MADAM CLERK, I HAVE NONE. OKAY, PERFECT. YOU NEED TO UNLOCK YOUR IPHONE FIRST.

AND JUST FOR THE GREATER GOOD, PLEASE MAKE SURE YOUR CELL PHONES ARE OFF.

AND THAT TAKES US TO ITEM SIX, A MR. YOUNG, THANK YOU.

[6.A) Receive Update by Johnson Engineering on the status of the Downtown Traffic Study including Policy Changes and Provide Direction. ]

SO THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING. COUNCIL.

ALLISON PICKETT, DEPUTY CITY ENGINEER FOR THE RECORD, THE AS A BRIEF OVERVIEW THE DOWNTOWN TRAFFIC STUDY WAS ORIGINALLY PROMPTED FOLLOWING CONCERNS RELATED TO TRAFFIC IMPACTS FROM NEW DEVELOPMENT IN THE NAPLES SQUARE PLAN DEVELOPMENT AREA, AS WELL AS THE PROPOSAL FOR A HIGHLY INTENSIVE DEVELOPMENT IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA.

AFTER INITIALLY CONTRACTING WITH DAVID PLUMMER AND ASSOCIATES, JOHNSON ENGINEERING WAS CONTRACTED TO TAKE OVER THE STUDY.

IN JANUARY OF THIS YEAR. JOHNSON ENGINEERING COLLECTED ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC DATA, REVIEWED EXISTING REQUIREMENTS AND POLICIES, AND BEGAN DEVELOPING POLICY STRATEGIES AND TRAFFIC MODELING TO ANALYZE IMPACTS WITHIN THE WITHIN AND OUTSIDE THE STUDY AREA, INCLUDING SPECIFIC PROJECTS LIKE THE PALM STREET HOTEL.

YOU MAY RECALL THE INITIAL PRESENTATION AND FRAMEWORK OF THE STUDY PROVIDED AT THE JUNE 16TH CITY COUNCIL MEETING EARLIER THIS YEAR.

JOHNSON ENGINEERING, REPRESENTED BY JOSH HILDEBRAND, IS REPRESENTING THEIR SECOND UPDATE BEFORE YOU TODAY.

LAURA DEJONG IS ALSO HERE FOR ANY COB RELATED QUESTIONS, AS THEY ARE INTERRELATED TO THE POLICY UPDATES.

CITY STAFF HAS WORKED CLOSELY WITH JOHNSON ENGINEERING THROUGH THE PROCESS.

WE HOPE TO RECEIVE YOUR VALUABLE FEEDBACK TODAY TO ALLOW JOHNSON ENGINEERING TO CONTINUE REVISIONS THAT WILL BE PRESENTED TO THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD AND ULTIMATELY RETURN FOR YOUR FINAL APPROVAL. THE GOAL IS TO HAVE FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS THAT CAN BE IMPLEMENTED EFFECTIVELY, AND POLICIES THAT PROVIDE INCREASED CONTROLS AND BETTER GUIDANCE.

WITH THAT, I WANT TO TURN IT OVER TO JOHN OR TO JOSH WITH JOHNSON ENGINEERING.

JOSH GOOD MORNING. ONE SECOND PLEASE. I JUST WANT TO JUST CLARIFY THAT THIS STUDY STARTED DECEMBER 13TH, 2022. THE WELL THAT WAS PRIOR TO JOHNSON ENGINEERING.

YOU ARE I BELIEVE THAT THAT IS CORRECT. THE THAT WAS PRIOR TO JOHNSON ENGINEERING TAKING OVER.

[00:05:04]

AND THERE WAS A LONG IT WAS A LONG PROCESS WHEN DAVID PLUMMER AND ASSOCIATES WAS WORKING ON IT.

WE DIDN'T MAKE A LOT OF PROGRESS AT THAT TIME.

SO YOU ARE CORRECT, MADAM MAYOR, THAT IT'S IT'S BEEN IT'S DECEMBER 13TH WAS WHEN THE INITIAL IT WAS INITIALLY BROUGHT UP BY THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD.

IN THAT DISCUSSION PROMPTED THIS ENTIRE PROCESS.

AND THEN JOHNSON ENGINEERING TOOK OVER IN 24 AND 2025, IN JANUARY OF THIS YEAR.

IS WHEN THEY WERE OKAY. WE JUST DECIDED IN NOVEMBER OF 24 TO GO OUT FOR A DIFFERENT CONSULTANT.

CORRECT. THANK YOU. JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT.

YES. THANK YOU FOR THAT MOMENT. GOOD MORNING.

IF YOU'LL STATE YOUR NAME. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.

GOOD MORNING. AND THANK YOU. JOSH HILDEBRAND TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER WITH JOHNSON ENGINEERING.

FOR THE RECORD. AND AS ALLISON MENTIONED, WE'RE HERE TODAY TO PROVIDE COUNCIL WITH AN UPDATE ON THE DOWNTOWN TRAFFIC STUDY.

I'M FIRST GOING TO GO THROUGH A COUPLE OF THE STUDY'S GOALS AND OBJECTIVES, SOME OF OUR FINDINGS, AND THEN JUMP INTO THE POLICY DISCUSSION. BUT THE GOALS OF THE STUDY INCLUDED VALIDATING PRIOR TRAFFIC DATA, WHICH WAS VALIDATED IN MARCH OF 2025 THIS YEAR PROVIDING ROADWAY AND INTERSECTION ANALYSIS TO IDENTIFY BOTH CURRENT AND TEN YEAR PROJECTED CONDITIONS AND LEVEL OF SERVICE WITHIN THE STUDY AREA TO PROVIDE POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS.

AS ALISON MENTIONED, WORKING WITH STAFF TO PROVIDE AN UPDATED STANDARDS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR PROPOSED FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS.

AND THEN ULTIMATELY WE WILL BE DEVELOPING A REPORT WITH THOSE FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.

BEFORE WE GET INTO THE ANALYSIS, I JUST WANT TO GO OVER WHAT OUR STUDY AREA IS.

THE MAP YOU SEE BEFORE YOU IT IS BOUNDED INTO TWO REGIONS, THE AREA IN RED.

WE HAVE A EAST SUBAREA AND A WEST SUBAREA. STARTING WITH THE EAST SUBAREA, IT IS CENTRAL AVENUE TO THE NORTH DOWN TO SIXTH AVENUE SOUTH TO THE SOUTH. AND THEN US 41 TO THE WEST, AND ALSO GOODLETTE FRANK TO THE EAST. THE WEST SUBAREA INCLUDES FIFTH AVENUE SOUTH TO THE NORTH, BROAD AVENUE TO THE SOUTH. IT SECOND STREET, SECOND STREET SOUTH TO THE WEST AND THEN NINTH STREET SOUTH TO EXCUSE ME, TO THE EAST, INCLUDED IN THE STUDY AREA.

WE DID LOOK AT INFLUENCES BOTH WITHIN THE CITY AND OUTSIDE OF OUTSIDE THE CITY FOR ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC GENERATORS AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS. YOU CAN SEE ON THE GRAPHIC TO THE LEFT, YOU CAN SEE THE CURRENT DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE INCLUDED IN OUR MODEL WITHIN THE INFLUENCE OF THE CITY AND THEN ALSO IMMEDIATELY OUTSIDE THE CITY.

AND AS ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENTS HAVE BEEN COMING IN, STAFF HAS BEEN PROVIDING US THAT INFORMATION AND THAT WILL BE INCORPORATED INTO OUR OUR MODEL AND REPORT. WE DID COLLECT ADDITIONAL DATA STARTING IN MARCH 2025.

WE DID FEEL IT WAS IMPORTANT TO COLLECT THE PEAK SEASON TRAFFIC DATA WE DID PROVIDE.

OUR TEAM PROVIDED VALIDATION OF PREVIOUS TRAFFIC COLLECTED BY THE CITY OF NAPLES AVAILABLE TRAFFIC THROUGH COLLIER COUNTY AND PREVIOUS CONSULTANTS. WE ALSO TOOK A LOOK AT HISTORIC CRASH DATA WITHIN THE STUDY AREA.

AND TO THE RIGHT ON THE SCREEN, YOU WILL SEE A HEAT MAP THAT INCLUDES THE THREE YEAR CRASH DATA HISTORY WITHIN OUR AREA OF STUDY.

AND YOU'LL YOU'LL NOTICE THE HIGHER CRASH OCCURRENCES DO OCCUR ON US 41 AND GOODLETTE.

AND THEN ALSO ON THE US 41 CORRIDOR. LOOKING AT THE GROWTH RATES FROM 2020 TO 25, BASED OFF AVAILABLE DATA PROVIDED BY CITY STAFF IN GENERAL.

TAKING OUT THE OUTLIERS. WE DID SEE A GENERAL YEAR OVER YEAR GROWTH OF APPROXIMATELY 1.5% OF CITY STREETS.

YOU WILL NOTICE THERE ARE A FEW OUTLIERS, WHICH MAY BE ATTRIBUTED TO THE 2020 TRAFFIC DATA DURING THE START OF THE COVID.

FROM THERE THROUGH THAT VALIDATION OF THE MARCH 2025 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC DATA WE DID FIND A FEW FINDINGS ON WHEN THAT PEAK HOUR DID OCCUR WITHIN THE CITY.

WE DID NOTICE THAT DURING THE AM PEAK HOUR WAS 11 A.M.

[00:10:03]

AND THEN THE PEAK HOUR OF 3 P.M. WAS THE AFTERNOON PEAK HOUR FOR ROADWAY CITY STREETS.

THIS THIS INFORMATION WAS USED TO ESTABLISH A BASELINE TRAFFIC.

AND WE ALSO APPLIED THAT TO MAKING ADJUSTMENTS FROM PREVIOUS TRAFFIC COLLECTED IN 2024.

FROM THERE OUR TEAM PERFORMED A TEN YEAR PEAK SEASON TRAFFIC PROJECTION UTILIZING THAT 1.5% GROWTH RATE ON CITY STREETS AND A SLIGHTLY HIGHER GROWTH RATE ON BOTH THE US 41 AND GOODLETTE FRANK CORRIDORS AT A 2%.

IN ADDITION TO THE 1.5% AND 2% GROWTH RATES THAT WERE APPLIED, WE ALSO ADDED THOSE DEVELOPMENTS THAT WERE PROVIDED BOTH WITHIN THE CITY AND IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THE CITY AS SPECIFIC TRAFFIC GENERATE GENERATORS IN ADDITION TO THE BACKGROUND GROWTH THROUGH THE 2035 HORIZON MOVING INTO LEVEL OF SERVICE. BEFORE I GET INTO SOME OF THE PRELIMINARY FINDINGS, I DO WANT TO SHARE THAT ROADWAY LEVEL OF SERVICE IS SLIGHTLY ANALYZED, SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT THAN INTERSECTION LEVEL SERVICE ROADWAYS IN TERMS OF VOLUME STARTING AT A FREE FLOW CONDITION, AT LEVEL SERVICE A ALL THE WAY TO THE FORCE FLOW THAT YOU MAY EXPERIENCE.

ON US 41 NEAR THE GOODLETTE INTERSECTION DURING THE AM AND PM PEAK HOURS.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT INTERSECTIONS, IT IS LOOKED AT SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT.

IT IS IN TERMS OF CONTROL DELAY PER VEHICLE IN TERMS OF SECONDS PER VEHICLE.

AND THIS CAN BE LOOKED AT AS EITHER EITHER A INDIVIDUAL APPROACH OR THE INTERSECTION AS A WHOLE.

SO MOVING INTO THE RESULTS OF THE ROADWAY LEVEL SERVICE, WHAT YOU HAVE HERE IS A LOOK AT BOTH THE CURRENT OR THE 2023 TRAFFIC VOLUMES PROJECTED TO 2035, BOTH FROM A BIDIRECTIONAL AND DIRECTIONAL STANDPOINT.

THE DIRECTIONAL IS CURRENTLY WHAT IS ADOPTED BY BY CITY CODE FOR ANALYSIS.

WE DID WANT TO SHOW THAT IF YOU LOOK AT FROM A DIRECTIONAL PERSPECTIVE, AND WHAT I MEAN FROM THAT IS YOU DON'T ALWAYS HAVE A 5050 SPLIT ON ON TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTIONS ON ANY GIVEN STREET OR CORRIDOR.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT FROM A DIRECTIONAL PERSPECTIVE.

YOU DO SEE, IN THOSE PROJECTED 2025 HORIZONS, YOU START TO SEE TRAFFIC SHIFTING TO WHERE WE START TO EXCEED THAT LEVEL.

SERVICE THREE C THRESHOLD WITHIN CITY STREETS.

INTERSECTION ANALYSIS. WE DID LOOK AT THE INTERSECTION ANALYSIS BASED OFF OF THAT 2035 HIGH GROWTH SCENARIO.

YOU CAN SEE ON THE MAP TO THE RIGHT IT IS COLOR CODED BASED OFF OF THE OVERALL INTERSECTION, BOTH FROM A SIGNALIZED AND UNSIGNALIZED PERSPECTIVE AND THE RESULTING LEVEL OF SERVICE.

WE DID LOOK AT AND ARE ABLE TO LOOK AT THE OVERALL INTERSECTION LEVEL, SERVICE LEVEL OF SERVICE BY APPROACH, THE OVERALL DELAY OF THE INTERSECTION, DELAYS YOU MAY EXPERIENCE ON A SPECIFIC APPROACH.

WE'RE ABLE TO ANALYZE TURN LANES WHETHER THEY ARE LONG ENOUGH OR WE WOULD OR POTENTIALLY ADDING A TURN LANE WOULD HAVE MERIT AND ALSO SIGNAL TIMING. SIGNAL TIMINGS TO PROVIDE POTENTIAL OPTIMIZATIONS OF INTERSECTIONS.

AND HERE YOU HAVE JUST A SCREENSHOT OF THE MODEL WE HAVE DEVELOPED.

YOU SEE ON THE LEFT, THIS IS A MODEL BASED OFF OF BOTH CURRENT AND PROJECTED PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC CONDITIONS.

IT'S SHOWING THE INTERSECTION OF GOODLETTE SOUTH AND US 41 TO THE LEFT, AND JUST AN OVERALL DEPICTION OF THE OF THE MODEL.

MOVING INTO THE POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS THAT ALLISON MENTIONED REGARDING POTENTIAL MODIFICATIONS TO THE CURRENT BTS REQUIREMENTS. OUR TEAM HAS WORKED WITH CITY STAFF OVER THE LAST FEW MONTHS, AND WE HAVE FOUND FIVE AREAS WHERE WE DO BELIEVE THERE IS OPPORTUNITIES TO POTENTIALLY IMPROVE AND UPDATE THE CURRENT TIS STANDARDS.

THOSE ARE UTILIZING TRIP GENERATION AS THRESHOLDS FOR TRAFFICS FOR TRAFFICS SIZES, INCLUDING A SMALL, MINOR AND MAJOR SCALE TRAFFIC STUDY HAVING CLEARLY DEFINED AREA OF STUDY CRITERIA FOR APPLICANTS.

LOOKING AT BOTH THE IMPACTED ROADWAYS AND IMPACTED INTERSECTIONS THAT WOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE TRAFFIC STUDY.

[00:15:02]

ADOPTING CRITERIA AND REQUIREMENTS FOR PHASE DEVELOPMENTS, MAKING SURE THAT THE FULL BUILD OUT AT THE TIME IS ANALYZED WITH THE INITIAL APPLICATION, AND THEN ALSO ESTABLISHING TURN LANE WARRANT CRITERIA FOR CITY ROADWAYS OR OTHER POTENTIAL MITIGATION STRATEGIES.

REGARDING THE TRIP GENERATION CURRENT. CURRENTLY A TACE IS TRIGGERED BY LAND SIZE.

OUR RECOMMENDATION IS TO BASIS CRITERIA FROM EITHER A SMALL MINOR OR MAJOR SCALE STUDY, WITH A SMALL SCALE BEING LESS THAN 50. NET NEW TWO WAY TRIPS. A MINOR SCALE STUDY BEING LESS THAN 100, GREATER THAN 52 WAY TRIPS, AND A MAJOR SCALE STUDY BEING ANYTHING MAJOR OR ANYTHING GREATER THAN 100 PEAK HOUR TRIPS, AND ALSO FOR ANY DEVELOPMENTS FOR LESS THAN 20 NET NEW TRIPS THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED DE MINIMIS.

OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE TABLE. THE TABLE DOES DEPICT BOTH THE CURRENT POLICY AND WHAT THE POLICY WOULD LOOK LIKE IN THE SMALL, MINOR, AND MAJOR SCALE, WITH THE SMALL MINOR MAJOR SCALE CRITERIA.

THE FIRST UNDER THE NEW CRITERIA, A SMALL SCALE STUDY A MEETING WITH STAFF WOULD BE OPTIONAL, BUT REQUIRED FOR BOTH A MINOR AND MAJOR SCALE STUDY.

THE AREA OF STUDY THAT IS ANALYZED BY THE APPLICANT WOULD HAVE CLEARLY DEFINED CRITERIA WHICH WOULD INCLUDE OR EQUAL TO GREATER THAN 5% OF THE PEAK HOUR SERVICE VOLUME FOR THE ADOPTED LEVEL SERVICE, AND THAT WOULD BE FROM A DIRECTIONAL STANDPOINT.

THE APPLICANT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE A ROADWAY LEVEL SERVICE BASED OFF OF DIRECTIONAL TRIPS.

ALL INTERSECTIONS WITHIN THE AREA STUDY WILL BE REQUIRED TO BE ANALYZED, AND TURN LANE WARRANT CRITERIA WILL BE ESTABLISHED AND ALSO REQUIRED AND INCLUDED IN THE TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY.

SO WHAT DOES THIS LOOK LIKE? STARTING WITH A LOCATION AND THIS LOCATION WAS PICKED AT RANDOM.

IT DOES NOT REPRESENT A CURRENT APPLICATION, BUT IT IS A SPOT WITHIN THE STUDY AREA USING THE 5% RULE.

A SMALL STUDY UNDER THAT 50 PEAK HOUR TRIP THRESHOLD WOULD WOULD ANALYZE THE ADJACENT STREET FROM THE ACCESS POINT AND THE ADJACENT INTERSECTIONS, AND LIKELY GO 1 OR 2 STREETS BEYOND. BEYOND THAT INITIAL SEGMENT, MOVING FORWARD TO THE MINOR STUDY, THIS IS BETWEEN 50 TO 99 TRIPS. THAT AREA WOULD BE EXPANDED AND LIKELY INCLUDE A GREATER AREA OF INFLUENCE AND MORE INTERSECTIONS.

AND THEN FINALLY THAT MAJOR THAT MAJOR CATEGORY, ANYTHING OVER 100 PEAK HOUR TRIPS WOULD LOOK SOMETHING SIMILAR TO THIS, WHERE IT WOULD INCLUDE A GREATER NUMBER OF INTERSECTIONS AND ROADWAY SEGMENTS BASED OFF OF THAT 5% CRITERIA RULE.

THE NEXT STEPS OF MOVING FORWARD. WE ARE HERE TODAY TO GIVE THE PROGRESS UPDATE TO COUNCIL TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS AND GAIN FEEDBACK.

AND THEN WE DO WILL BE MOVING TO THE PAB, UPDATING THE SUMMARY OF DRAFT FINDINGS AND THEN COMING BACK FOR COUNCIL FOR FUTURE MEETINGS.

WE ANTICIPATE THE FINAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO BE COMPLETED DURING THE WINTER OR SPRING OF 2026.

AND WITH THAT, I THANK YOU AND I'D BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

AND THEN KRAMER COUNCIL. I THOUGHT I READ RECENTLY THAT THERE IS GOING TO BE A HUGE DEVELOPMENT ON BAYSHORE DRIVE, AND PERHAPS I MISSED THE DATES ON THOSE BECAUSE THIS IS A 20 TO 20 5 TO 2035 STUDY.

MY SENSE WAS THAT THAT DEVELOPMENT WAS GOING TO START FAIRLY SOON, AND WOULDN'T THAT HAVE SOME IMPACT ON THIS STUDY? DOES ANYONE REMEMBER WHAT THE TIMELINE WAS ON THAT BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE HUGE.

WILL BE ON THE IF I MIGHT. AND I THINK I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT.

IT'S GOING TO START NEARLY IMMEDIATELY. RIGHT.

AND THE REASON IS BECAUSE IT'S ACTUALLY SIGNIFICANTLY LESS UNITS THAN, THAN BY RIGHT.

THEY COULD HAVE BUILT. AND SO IT'S THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE AT IT I THINK THAT'S WHAT.

YEAH. AND I DON'T, I DON'T RECALL I'M SORRY I DIDN'T READ IT THAT CAREFULLY.

IT WAS LONG ENOUGH AGO I DON'T REMEMBER THE NUMBER OF UNITS, BUT AS I REMEMBER IT WAS, I DON'T KNOW, OFF THE TOP SIX HOMES. IS THAT WHAT IT WAS? YEAH.

WAS IT SOMETHING LIKE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE BAYSHORE ONE MAYOR OR THE.

[00:20:04]

NO, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT STRAIGHT DOWN BAYSHORE.

RIGHT. THE BIGGER ONE. YEAH. THERE'S ANOTHER ONE.

MAYOR. ANOTHER ONE. THE HOTEL ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? NOT A HOTEL. NO, NO. SO ANOTHER ONE. BAYSHORE GOING TOWARD THE GARDEN.

ALL OF THERE'S GOING TO BE HUGE DEVELOPMENT IN THERE.

YES. AND I HAVE TO BELIEVE THAT THAT'S GOING TO HAVE IMPACT ON THIS STUDY IF THIS IS FROM 25 TO 35.

BUT I IS IT WORTHY OF CONSIDERATION. THAT'S UP TO COUNCIL AS STUDIES ARE PROVIDED.

WE ARE INCORPORATING THOSE INTO THE TRAFFIC MODEL AND ANALYSIS.

AND I WILL CONFIRM, CONFIRM WITH STAFF THAT WE HAVE ALL CURRENT APPLICATIONS WITHIN.

WELL, LET'S, LET'S LET'S AT LEAST FIND OUT WHAT WHAT THE WHAT THOSE PLANS ARE AND WHAT THE NUMBER OF UNITS.

BECAUSE I RECALL IT WAS GOING TO BE A GOODLY NUMBER.

OKAY. BECAUSE I HAVE TO BELIEVE I'M NOT AWARE OF IT.

I HAVE TO BELIEVE THAT WILL HAVE IMPACT ON THIS STUDY.

I'M NOT AWARE OF THAT PARTICULAR PROJECT. I KNOW THAT THERE IS ADDITIONAL PROJECTS THAT ARE BEING.

BUT THAT'S COLLIER COUNTY, SO WE WOULD HAVE TO TRY TO COORDINATE AND OBTAIN SOME OF THE DOCUMENTATION.

THERE WAS A STORY IN THE PAPER WITHIN THE LAST COUPLE OF WEEKS, I THINK.

OKAY. I'LL SEE IF I CAN INVESTIGATE. YES, SIR.

BUT THE. NO, IT WOULD BE BECAUSE IT'S COLLIER COUNTY AND IT WOULD BE INCORPORATED IF WE GET IT.

THE ONLY PART IS I DIDN'T WANT IT TO LOSE FOCUS OF WHAT WE'RE ACTUALLY DOING IN THIS STUDY AS WELL, IS TO TO TRY TO GET TO THE CRITERIA OF WHAT WE'RE GOING TO REQUIRE APPLICANTS WITHIN OUR JURISDICTION AND WHAT WE'RE GOING TO REQUIRE THEM TO DO IN TRAFFIC STUDIES. SO HIM IDENTIFYING THAT IT WOULD BE PUT INTO HIS TRAFFIC STUDY ANALYSIS PROSPECTIVELY, BUT IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE PART OF THE DISCUSSION ON THAT. I JUST WANTED TO KEEP US FOCUSED ON THAT PART OF IT AS WELL.

AND BUT WHENEVER WE GET THEM, WE'LL MAKE SURE THAT YOU HAVE THAT INFORMATION AS WELL.

THANK YOU. ANYTHING ELSE ABOUT THIS STUDY OR THE CITY? NO. COUNCIL MEMBER GRANER. YEAH. ON SLIDE FIVE.

WHEN YOU'RE SHOWING THE PEAK VOLUME SINCE 2020, WHAT'S THE MARGIN OF ERROR ON THAT OR IS THAT ABSOLUTE BECAUSE OF TECHNOLOGY, YOU KNOW EXACTLY WHAT IT IS. ARE YOU REFERRING TO THE GROWTH RATE SLIDE THAT I HAVE UP ON THE SCREEN? IT'S BASED OFF OF THE TIME FRAME WHEN THOSE WERE COLLECTED.

THEY THEY ARE COLLECTED CONSISTENT FAIRLY CONSISTENTLY THE SAME WEEK EACH YEAR.

BUT IT DOES FLUCTUATE. AND THAT'S NOT MY QUESTION.

MY QUESTION IS, WHAT'S THE MARGIN OF ERROR ON THE DATA COLLECTION. LIKE THERE'S TYPICALLY WE'D HAVE A MARGIN OF ERROR. AND NOW NOT ALWAYS IT COULD BE ABSOLUTE THAT YOU HAVE WHATEVER MECHANICAL TECHNICAL ABILITY TO COUNT EVERY EVERYTHING.

EXACTLY. WHICH IS FINE. I'M JUST WONDERING I BELIEVE THOSE ARE THIS IS THIS IS THE DATA THAT WE COLLECT FROM THE CITY.

SO OUR AND I BELIEVE THAT THE DATA AND THE SYSTEM THAT WE HAVE IS FAIRLY ACCURATE.

WE ARE LOOKING TO OBTAIN NEW TRAFFIC TRAFFIC COLLECTION EQUIPMENT, AND I HOPE THAT THAT WILL ACTUALLY BE A LITTLE BIT MORE INFLUENTIAL, AS WELL AS SOME OF THE DATA THAT WE WERE ABLE TO COLLECT.

SHOULD HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE SPECIFIC CRITERIA AS FAR AS AND JUST TO KNOW, I'M NOT PUSHING BACK ON ANYTHING.

I WAS JUST WONDERING BECAUSE IT'S, YOU KNOW, WELL, HERE'S WHAT MAYBE GOT ME THINKING THAT WAY WHEN FROM TDC, MEMBERS AND COUNCIL, YOU REMEMBER THAT IN THE SPRING I'M REPORTING THAT VISITATIONS ARE DOWN, BUT THEY'RE STAYING LONGER AND SPENDING MORE MONEY. SO THAT WAS GOOD. THAT'S WHAT OUR CITY WOULD LIKE. LESS FOLKS, YOU KNOW, SPEND MONEY AND STAY A LITTLE LONGER.

AND THIS, THIS VERIFIED THAT THAT MARCH OF 25, I'M LIKE, OH, IT DIDN'T GO UP.

IT ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW, WAS NOT A BUNCH, BUT IT DID GO DOWN A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE I'LL BE HONEST, I WAS SKEPTICAL. YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU DRIVE AROUND YOU'RE THINKING, YEAH, THEY'RE SAYING THERE'S LESS BUT THERE'S NOT LESS. BUT SO KUDOS TO TDC FOR GETTING THAT PART RIGHT OR THEIR VENDORS. ALL RIGHT. WELL, NONETHELESS, I WAS JUST WONDERING ABOUT THAT AND THEN GO AHEAD.

WELL, I WAS GOING TO SAY IF IF YOU'RE REFERRING TO BECAUSE WE DO COLLECT THE DATA, WE TRY TO KEEP IT THE SAME WEEK EVERY YEAR.

IT CAN BE INFLUENCED BASED ON THE WEEK THAT WE COLLECT IT.

SO IT IS THAT'S JUST A SAMPLE. SO I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT IS A SAMPLE FROM THE, YOU KNOW.

RIGHT. SO IN THAT TIME PERIOD. YEAH, I DON'T WANT TO PRESS THAT ISSUE. I JUST WONDERED. AND THEN ON SLIDE SEVEN, I JUST THIS IS I'M JUST WONDERING THAT THE CONTROL DELAY, I'M WONDERING HOW MUCH DO WE DO? WE HAVE A I KNOW THIS WHEN WHEN YOU GOT TO DRIVE YOUR KID TO SCHOOL AND SOMEBODY PUSHES THAT BUTTON ON AN E-BIKE OR BICYCLE OR PEDESTRIAN, I MEAN, YOU CAN SEE THE CARS IN FRONT OF YOU.

EVERYBODY PUT THEIR HEAD DOWN. SO THE QUESTION IS, IS THAT PART OF THIS OR CAN WE SEPARATE THAT FROM THE CALCULATION? LIKE HOW OFTEN ARE THOSE THINGS GETTING PUSHED AND AND HOW DO WE MAKE THOSE GO AWAY.

[00:25:01]

IN GENERAL, WHEN THERE IS A PEDESTRIAN MOVEMENT THAT TRIGGERS IT, THAT IS NOT TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE OVERALL CALCULATION.

THERE'S REQUIRED TIMING FOR THAT. THAT COULD MAKE SENSE.

THAT WOULD AFFECT IT. OBVIOUSLY THE HOURS ARE GOING COMING FROM WORK, RIGHT.

SO THAT WOULD ALSO EXACERBATE WHATEVER ISSUES WE HAVE.

CORRECT. YEAH. IT ASSUMES DURING THE STANDARD OPERATIONS WHEN PEDESTRIANS ARE NOT PRESSING THAT, THAT THAT BUTTON. OKAY. AND I DON'T WANT TO GET MAD AT THOSE FOLKS.

BUT IF WE DID SEPARATE THAT AND SEE HOW THAT EXTENDED THOSE THOSE CONTROLLED DELAYS, THAT WOULD BE AN INTERESTING DATA POINT. I THINK THAT'S ALL. THANKS. TO THAT POINT.

CAN I ASK A QUESTION? DO THE DO THEY CURRENTLY COUNT HOW MANY TIMES THEY'RE HIDDEN TODAY? DOES IT RECORD IT IN ANY WAY? AND IS IT CAPABLE OF DOING THAT IN THE OVERALL TRAFFIC MODEL USING SYNCHRO STUDIO? WE DO, WE DO IF WE HAVE THAT INFORMATION, WE DO INCLUDE THE AMOUNT OF PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS AND ON WHAT LEG OF THE INTERSECTION AS PART OF THE THE OVERALL MODELING. SO IT IS QUANTIFYING IT NOW THEN GIVING YOU DATA OR BECAUSE YOU SAID IF WE IF IT DOES.

SO IF I'M JUST ASKING IF THAT INFORMATION IS AT THOSE INTERSECTIONS, IF THE PEDESTRIANS HAVE BEEN BEEN COUNTED, THEN WE CAN INCORPORATE THAT. YEAH. THAT'S I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IF THE DATA POINT EXISTS. WELL, WE'VE COLLECTED IT IN A CASE BY CASE BASIS SO WE CAN PROVIDE IT.

YES WE HAVE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I JUST WANTED TO.

SO WHEN WE TALK LATER, I JUST WANT TO UNDERSTAND. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, VICE MAYOR.

THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. THANK YOU FOR THE REPORT.

APPRECIATE STAFF. AND AND THE CONSULTANT. THERE'S ONLY TWO POINTS.

I WANTED TO MAKE ONE. WE HAVE RECOMMENDATIONS TOWARD THE END OF THIS.

AND THIS SAYS THE STUDY AREA, THE 5% RULE. AND YOU'LL SEE REQUIREMENTS, THAT ALL HAD TO BE APPROVED BY THE STATE AT THAT TIME.

DCA OVER TIME LAST TWO DECADES, THAT HAS CHANGED.

HOWEVER 99 J-5 DCA CONCURRENCY REQUIREMENTS IS NOT BINDING ANYMORE, MEANING STATE SIMPLY INDICATED THAT WE'RE HANDS OFF.

COUNTY AND CITY GOVERNMENTS CAN HAVE THEIR OWN CONCURRENCY.

THAT GOES BACK TO HOME RULE DISCUSSION THAT YOUR DEBATING AND AND AND CAREFULLY MOVING FORWARD SO WE CAN HAVE OUR OWN CONCURRENCY REQUIREMENT FOR CITY OF NAPLES IN TERMS OF LEVEL OF SERVICE FOR TRAFFIC. LEVEL OF SERVICE FOR WATER, SEWER CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE AND DEVELOPMENT HAS TO MEET THAT LEVEL OF SERVICE. MEANING IF YOU DON'T HAVE WATER, WE CANNOT APPROVE DEVELOPMENT.

IF WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH TRAFFIC CAPACITY, WE CANNOT APPROVE ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT THAT WILL EXCEED YOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE ADOPTED BY THE CITY. SO YOUR, YOUR YOUR QUESTION IS RIGHT ON.

AND I THINK THAT IT GOES BACK TO HOME RULE THE LEVEL OF SERVICE YOU HAVE SEEN HERE IN COLORS SOMETHING THAT THE NEXT WORKSHOP IF WE CAN BRING THAT SLIDE, PLEASE. YOU SEE THAT WE DON'T WANT TO BE WE DON'T WANT TO BE IN RED ZONE CALLED F.

THAT MEANS FAILURE. TO ME, AS A POLICY MAKERS AND STAFF, WE HAVE FAILED TO GIVE YOU ENOUGH HOMEWORK AND DUE DILIGENCE SO THAT THE MORE YOU SEE RED.

THAT MEANS YOUR STAFF IS FAILING. I'M FAILING AND I'M FAILING MY CITY MANAGER.

SO THERE ARE MEANS AND METHODS. YES, THERE ARE MEANS AND METHODS ON A POLICY LEVEL WHEN IT COMES TO LAWS LEVEL OF SERVICE.

ONCE YOU ADOPT THE LEVEL OF SERVICE AND YOU CAN SAY, OKAY, OUR LEVEL OF SERVICE IS NOT GOING TO BE NO LESS THAN GREEN, NO LESS THAN ORANGE, IT WILL NOT BE RED, AND RED HAS TO BE REMEDIATED.

THAT'S WHERE THE SOLUTION SETS COMES IN. AND WE FOCUS ON THE RED TO ELIMINATE LEVEL OF SERVICE IDENTIFIED AS RED

[00:30:01]

THAT MEANS WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH PRESSURE. WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH VOLUME OF WATER.

THAT MEANS WE CANNOT SERVE. WE HAVE TO REMEDIATE FIRST.

THAT'S THE CONCURRENCY IN TERMS OF CAPACITY, OF CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE BEING ABLE TO SERVE AT THE LEVEL THIS COUNCIL DECIDES. THAT DIRECTLY RELATES TO QUALITY OF LIFE.

GREAT. AND I THINK ALL OF OUR WE DO HAVE ADOPTED SERVICE LEVELS OF C'S EVERYWHERE EXCEPT FOR GOODLETTE FRANK, GOLDEN GATE 41 AND THAT LITTLE STRIP IN FIFTH AVENUE.

AND THOSE ARE WE HAVE ADOPTED SERVICE LEVEL OF FAILURE OR E WE ADOPT WHATEVER THE JURISDICTION, IF IT'S IF IT'S STATE, THEN WE WE DEFER TO STATE OR COUNTY.

AND THEN FIFTH AVENUE IS CONSIDERED CONSTRAINED.

AND MUST WE ADOPT THAT, YOU KNOW THEIR, THEIR ROAD OR BECAUSE IT'S IN THE CITY LIMITS? YOU KNOW, MAYBE WE DON'T WANT TO PUT UP WITH AN F.

WE CHOSE TO MAKE THAT. WE CHOSE TO ADOPT THE COUNTY AND STATE REGULATIONS.

BUT I'M ASKING, DO WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO ADOPT SOMETHING DIFFERENT AND MORE STRINGENT BECAUSE IT'S IN OUR CITY, AFFECTING OUR CITIZENS? YOU CAN ADOPT WHAT YOU WANT, BUT YOU CAN'T AFFECT IT BECAUSE YOU CAN'T MAKE CHANGES TO IT.

AND SO YOU THAT YOU HAVE TO WORK THROUGH THOSE JURISDICTIONS TO DO IT.

SO YOU COULD I'M NOT SURE IF YOU CAN ADOPT IT, BUT IF YOU ADOPT IT AND YOU CAN'T TOUCH IT, YOU CAN'T IMPACT IT TO EVER GET IT AWAY FROM IT.

BUT AS FAR AS WHETHER YOU CAN ADOPT SOMETHING DIFFERENT, I'LL DEFER TO SOMEBODY ELSE.

MY QUESTION WOULD BE LIKE, CAN YOU BUILD ALONG THERE? IF IT'S AN F AND WE CAN'T AFFECT IT AND CAN'T, YOU KNOW, CAN WE SAY SORRY? WE'RE FULL UP. IT'S ALREADY. IT'S ALREADY A CONSTRAINED ROAD.

SO YOU'RE NOT TOUCHING THE ROAD. YOU'RE JUST SAYING YOU CAN'T BUILD ANYMORE. SO OSTENSIBLY JUST DE FACTO ELIMINATING DEVELOPMENT BY VIRTUE OF THE FACT THAT IT CAN NEVER ACHIEVE WHAT YOU'VE VOTED FOR IT TO BE. I'LL DEFER TO SOMEBODY WITH LEGAL BACKGROUND ON THAT.

YEAH. I MEAN, I THINK DOCTOR GEORGE IS CORRECT.

WHAT HE STATED WAS THAT THE FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE NINE J5, WAS ELIMINATED.

ESSENTIALLY WHEN THE LAW WAS THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT WAS CHANGED TO COMMUNITY PLANNING ACT THAT THEY INCORPORATED CONCURRENCY OUT OF NINE J5 AND PUT IT INTO THE STATUTE 163 3180 AND THE ONLY MANDATORY FACILITIES THAT ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE LEVELS OF SERVICES.

SANITARY SEWER. SOLID WASTE. DRAINAGE, POTABLE WATER.

SO THERE'S REQUIRED AND OPTIONAL FACILITIES. AND SO TRANSPORTATION IS ONE THAT IS OPTIONAL.

YOU CAN DO IT, BUT YOU HAVE TO THE STATUTE I WON'T BORE YOU WITH ALL THE DETAILS, BUT THERE ARE SOME STRINGENT WAYS THAT YOU HAVE TO PUT THINGS IN YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO BE ABLE TO IMPLEMENT THAT CONCURRENCY ISSUE.

AND, OF COURSE, YOU KNOW, CONCURRENCY IS THE TIMING OF DEVELOPMENT WITH INFRASTRUCTURE.

AND THAT WAS THE REMEDIATION THAT DOCTOR GEORGE WAS REFERRING TO.

IS THAT A DEVELOPMENT ORDER THAT IF YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, I'M GOING TO JUST GENERALIZE SAYS THIS IS GOING TO CAUSE A SEGMENT OR SEGMENTS OR AN INTERSECTION TO FAIL, THEN IT IS A RESPONSIBILITY TO, TO REMEDIATE THAT SO IT DOESN'T FAIL.

THAT'S A GENERALIZED WAY. BUT THE LAW HAS NOW BEEN PUT INTO THE STATUTE.

IT IS OPTIONAL. SOME CITIES HAVE NO CONCURRENCY BECAUSE THEY WANT TO DEVELOP INFILL.

SO THERE'S DIFFERENT GEOGRAPHIES THROUGHOUT FLORIDA.

AND THAT'S WHY THE POLICY WAS CHANGED. OKAY. HAPPY TO.

THANK YOU. THAT'S VERY HELPFUL BECAUSE THIS COUNCIL IS GETS HEAT ABOUT YOU KNOW, YOU APPROVE THIS.

YOU APPROVE THAT. AND YOU KNOW WE WE NEED TO KNOW LIKE WHAT? WHAT IS OUR WHAT IS OUR WHAT ARE OUR OUR POWERS? WHAT CAN WE DO AND WHAT CAN, YOU KNOW IS OFF LIMITS.

SO I'LL SAY THANK YOU. MR. YOUNG WAS CORRECT IN THAT IT'S NOT YOUR JURISDICTION, BUT IN OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UNDER INTERGOVERNMENTAL IS WHERE WE SHOULD BE WORKING AND TALKING AND COMMUNICATING AND LOBBYING FOR LESS GROWTH AND IMPACT UPON OUR CITY WITH THE COUNTY.

AND I'M PUTTING COUNCIL MEMBER CRAMER IN CHARGE OF THAT.

I JUST WANT TO ASK AND I THINK THIS IS WHAT YOU'RE ASKING.

[00:35:01]

WHAT CAN WE IMPOSE OUR WILL. CAN WE IMPOSE OUR WILL TO TO ELIMINATE RED AND ORANGE, TO MAKE IT ALL GREEN? CAN WE IMPOSE OUR LIKE WE CAN'T EVEN FIX THE POTHOLES ON 41 APPROPRIATELY BECAUSE WE DON'T OWN IT? SO IS THAT NOT TRUE? CAN WE GO AND SAY, SCREW THAT, WE'RE DOING IT.

PUT IT, YOU KNOW, SEND IN THE TROOPS. SIR YOU BEING COACH.

RIGHT ON. YOU WANT TO YOU WANT TO GO TOUCH TOUCH DOWN RIGHT AWAY.

AND I APPRECIATE THAT. THERE ARE R&R, CIP AND OPERATIONAL MEANS AND METHODS THAT YOU DO HAVE CONTROL OVER YOUR INFRASTRUCTURE.

R&R MEANS REPAIR OR REPLACEMENT. CIP MEANS WE IMPROVE THE ROADS AND ADDING MORE LANES. THAT INCLUDES PURCHASE OF MORE RIGHT OF WAYS AND WHAT HAVE YOU, WHERE WE HAVE OPPORTUNITIES NOW.

O&M IS A WHOLE DIFFERENT STORY. OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE.

IF YOU LOWER THE SPEED LIMIT TO THE POINT THAT EVERYONE IS GOING TO AVOID THE CITY OF NAPLES AND ANYTHING GOES THROUGH CITY OF NAPLES.

I'M JUST BEING HYPOTHETICAL. BUT FROM A PUBLIC SAFETY STANDPOINT MOST OF THE MOST OF THE CITY, WE HAVE THIS WONDERFUL CITY THAT WE LIVE IN, ALMOST LIKE PROMENADE.

AND YOU CAN MANAGE THE SPEED LIMIT IN STRATEGIC AREAS SO THAT IT BECOMES A BYPASS, NOT CONDUIT. JUST THE THOUGHT. HYPOTHETICAL. I'M NOT SURE HOW PRACTICAL THAT MIGHT BE.

DOCTOR G. BUT TO ANSWER. SO LET'S GET SPECIFIC BY AREA BECAUSE YOU SAID YOUR INFRASTRUCTURE.

YES. BUT US 41 IS NOT OUR INFRASTRUCTURE SO CAN YOU.

SO JUST TO ANSWER HIS SPECIFIC QUESTION, CAN YOU DO WHAT HE ASKS IS I'M NOT ALLOWED TO FIX THE POTHOLES ON 41.

JUST TO BE CLEAR, YOU'RE NOT. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT YOUR OWN INFRASTRUCTURE, NOT 41.

IS THAT A TRUE STATEMENT? YES, SIR. OKAY. YES IT WAS.

I JUST WANT IT TO BE IMPLIED. I WANTED IT TO BE DISTINCTLY BECAUSE THAT WAS YOUR DISTINCT QUESTION.

SO THANK YOU. YEAH. AND TO BE CRYSTAL CLEAR. SO THERE ARE LEVELS OF IF THEY'RE CITY ROADS, YOU HAVE MUCH MORE CONTROL. BUT IF THEY'RE STATE OR COUNTY ROADS, YOU GET INTO A MORE DIFFICULT TASK.

I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GETTING AT. RIGHT. AND THEN I'LL JUST SAY THAT THAT'S WHERE THE FDOT WILL COME IN AND EVALUATE AN F ROAD AND DETERMINE WHAT RELIEF THEY CAN GIVE.

IF THE SPEED LIMIT DOESN'T WORK, THEN THEY'RE GOING TO LOOK AT OPTIONS LIKE BYPASSES AND FLYOVERS.

SO THAT'S THAT'S WHEN IT GOES INTO THEIR HANDS.

BECAUSE WHETHER WHO IGNORED IT OR WHO IMPACTED IT, THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM, WHICH IS WHY WE SEE THE IMMOKALEE, ALL THE CONSTRUCTION AT THE 75 AND GETTING ON AND OFF THE INTERSTATE. AND WE SAW IT ON AIRPORT ROAD WITH THE BYPASS THERE.

AND IF I MIGHT MADAM MAYOR YOU DO HAVE STRONG REPRESENTATION AND VOICE IN MPO AND THAT INCLUDES CITY OF MARCO, CITY OF NAPLES, COLLIER COUNTY, AND THEN DURING MPO MEETINGS, YOU DO HAVE THE DEPUTY SECRETARY OR ADMINISTRATOR FOR THIS REGION SITTING THERE LISTENING TO YOUR CONCERNS.

SO I'M GOING TO GO BACK TO ONE WORD YOU USED, MADAM MAYOR, IS THAT INFLUENCE.

AND I THINK CITY OF NAPLES UNDER LEADERSHIP OF OUR NEW CITY MANAGER, WILL HAVE MORE AND MORE INFLUENCE BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT COMES DOWN TO PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY.

41 SOUTH, 41 GOING THROUGH CITY OF NAPLES IS NOT FOR THE ONE NORTH OF BONITA SPRINGS.

SO IT HAS TO BE TREATED DIFFERENTLY IN TERMS OF OPERATIONS MAINTENANCE.

AND I'M PLEASED TO REPORT THAT BEFORE I CAME ON BOARD, THANKS TO OUR CITY ENGINEER HERE.

WORK THROUGH FLOODING ISSUES WE HAVE ON STATE ROAD.

AND THEY COMMITTED 26 PLUS MILLION DOLLARS TO FIX IT.

AND WE'RE WORKING THROUGH THAT PROCESS SO THAT EVEN THOUGH IT'S A STATE ROAD, BUT GOING THROUGH OUR

[00:40:09]

THERE IS A FLOODING RELATED TO STATE ROAD AND THEY NEED TO FIX IT.

THANK YOU. WITH THAT, I AM GOING TO HAVE A FINAL CONCLUSION.

YEAH, I WAS KIND OF GOING TO TRY TO WRAP IT UP. WHAT I THINK WOULD BE BENEFICIAL.

IS THAT OKAY? YES, THAT'S EXACTLY WHERE I WAS HEADED. OKAY.

I THINK WOULD BE BENEFICIAL. IS, IS THAT IN ADDITION TO THE ITEMS I ALREADY ALLUDED TO, I THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD IF YOU COULD YOU KNOW, READ THROUGH THE MATERIAL WHERE THE CHANGES ARE.

I THINK WE SHOULD OFFER, AS WE'VE DONE ON SOME SUBSTANTIAL PROJECTS WHERE STAFF MEETS WITH ANY MEMBER OF COUNCIL TO GO THROUGH IT INDIVIDUALLY, GET YOUR INDIVIDUAL FEEDBACK, AND THEN THAT WAY AND I THINK IT WOULD BE AFTER THE HOLIDAYS BECAUSE THEN THAT WAY BY THEN WE CAN HAVE THE EXAMPLES OF THE VARIOUS JURISDICTIONS OR VARIOUS KIND OF DEVELOPMENTS THAT WOULD MAKE THOSE KIND OF SMALL, MINOR AND MAJOR AND THAT BE PART OF THE INDIVIDUAL CONVERSATIONS SO THAT WE CAN DO A MEANINGFUL BACK AND FORTH, AND THEN THAT THE NEXT TIME WE BRING TO THE WORKSHOP, YOU'VE ALREADY HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE THE ONE ON ONES, AND WE'RE MORE FINE TUNING WHERE THOSE, WHETHER EVEN THE, THE SMALL, MINOR AND MAJOR IS AN ACCEPTABLE FORMAT TO TRY TO GET SOME SOME REIN IN THE RULES ON THE, ON ON OUR DEVELOPMENT AND WHAT WE WANT IN RETURN.

SO IN TERMS OF TRAFFIC ANALYSIS. SO I THINK THAT WOULD BE A GOOD APPROACH.

AND THEN SHOOT FOR A MEETING AGAIN JUST BECAUSE OF IF IT'S AFTER THE HOLIDAYS, IF WE CAN MEET INDIVIDUALLY.

OBVIOUSLY WE ONLY HAVE THE ONE MEETING IN FEBRUARY, SO I WOULD THINK IN MARCH WORKSHOP OR APRIL AT THE LATEST, I'D SAY MARCH. I KNOW IT SOUNDS TOUGH. NO. IT'S FINE.

IF WE CAN HAVE IT IN APRIL AND ACTUALLY GET SOMETHING ACCOMPLISHED BEFORE THIS SESSION OF COUNCIL ENDS, THAT'S THE GOAL. AND IF WE CAN GET IT ACCOMPLISHED IN TERMS OF READY TO HAVE THE INDIVIDUAL ONE ON ONES WITH THE NEW COUNCIL IS ELECTED, THAT'LL BE PART OF THE BRINGING THEM IN. BRIEF THEM ON THAT SO THAT THEY'RE READY TO GO.

THOSE NEW MEMBERS MAY BE READY TO HIT THE GROUND RUNNING ON THOSE ITEMS. GREAT PLAN. EXCELLENT PLAN. THANK YOU. JOSH AND JOHNSON ENGINEERING.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU TO MISS PICKETT AND STAFF.

APPRECIATE IT. AND LOOK FORWARD TO THE NEXT FOLLOW UP WITH THAT.

IT'S 1015 AND WE'LL TAKE A BREAK NOW BEFORE WE GO TO ITEM 60.

THANK YOU.

OKAY, WE'RE BACK FROM OUR BREAK, AND WE'RE CONTINUING ON WITH ITEM SIX.

[6.C) Discussion of Dock Regulations Citywide.]

GOOD MORNING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL, ERIC MARTIN, PLANNING DIRECTOR. I ALSO HAVE KIM NUDY HERE FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. AND WE HAVE A DISCUSSION FOR YOU ABOUT THE DOC REGULATIONS.

AND THIS IS CITYWIDE. SO THESE ARE THE DOC REGULATIONS IN CHAPTER 56 OF YOUR CODE.

AND WE HAVE A COUPLE. THIS IS MORE YOU KNOW, COUNCIL HAD ASKED WHAT ARE THE ISSUES THAT STAFF IDENTIFIES IN THE CODE.

AND, YOU KNOW, WHERE DO YOU SEE PROBLEMS THAT COULD BE SOLVED. AND THIS IS ONE THAT IMMEDIATELY WE WOULD LIKE TO CLEAR UP.

WE DO HAVE THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT HAS BECOME THE DEPARTMENT THAT'S RESPONSIBLE FOR DOING THE REVIEW OF DOC PERMITS.

SO HISTORICALLY IT HAD BEEN DONE THROUGH THE NATURAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, NOT THE NATURAL RESOURCES STAFF THAT WE HAVE HERE TODAY, BUT PRIOR NATURAL RESOURCE DIVISION MANAGERS HAD BEEN REVIEWING THE DOC REGULATIONS.

IT HAS SINCE BEEN HANDED OVER TO PLANNING. WE'VE BEEN REVIEWING IT.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, AS WE REVIEW THESE PERMITS, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF ISSUES WITH THIS CODE THAT WE RUN INTO IN BOTH THE IN THE ENFORCEMENT SIDE. AND THEN WE DO TALK TO A LOT OF THE MARINE CONTRACTORS WHO HAVE BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION ISSUES THAT THEY RUN INTO ON THE DESIGN SIDE.

SO THESE REGULATIONS HAVE NOT BEEN UPDATED SINCE 2010.

THAT WAS THE LAST TIME THIS CODE WAS ADDRESSED.

SO SOME THINGS ARE OUT OF DATE. SOME THINGS HAVE NEVER REALLY WORKED THAT WELL.

AND THEN ANOTHER ISSUE THAT WE RUN INTO IS. PRIOR TO THE DOC REGULATIONS OR THE DOC REVIEW BEING HANDED OVER TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT THERE, THERE HADN'T BEEN CONSISTENT ENFORCEMENT OF THE RULES THAT WERE ON THE BOOKS.

SO WHAT WE RUN INTO A LOT IS SOMEONE WILL COME IN, TRY TO BUILD A DOCK WILL REJECT IT.

YOU KNOW, WE'LL REJECT THE PERMIT AND THEY'LL SAY, WELL, MY NEIGHBOR HAS THIS. YEP.

YOU KNOW, I CAN'T EXPLAIN WHY IT NEVER MET CODE TO BEGIN WITH.

AND SO WHAT WE WOULD LIKE OUR GOAL HERE IS TO AMEND THE REGULATIONS THAT WE HAVE TO MAKE THEM MORE USABLE FOR BOTH THE CONTRACTORS AND THE RESIDENTS, AND ALSO STAFF WHO HAS TO ENFORCE THESE REGULATIONS.

AND THEN ALSO TO CREATE A POINT THAT WE CAN SAY FROM THIS DAY ON, THIS IS HOW DOCK REGULATIONS WILL BE ENFORCED SO THAT WE HAVE A POINT MOVING FORWARD WHERE

[00:45:09]

WE'D LIKE TO CLARIFY THAT. WE'D LIKE TO HAVE A POINT WHERE WE CAN START FROM. SO IN PREPARING THIS DISCUSSION, WE DID MEET WE INVITED ALL OF THE MAJOR MARINE CONTRACTORS THAT WE GET PERMITS FROM.

WE WENT THROUGH AND WE LOOKED AT WHO SUBMITS THE MARINE PERMITS.

WE MET WITH THEM IN THE CONFERENCE ROOM AT OUR DEPARTMENT.

WE SAT DOWN WITH A BUNCH OF THE CONTRACTORS AND HAD A CONVERSATION.

ASKED THEM, WHAT WORKS FOR YOU? WHAT DOESN'T WORK FOR YOU? WHERE DO YOU RUN INTO ISSUES? AND ALSO WHAT HAS CHANGED AT MAYBE THE STATE LEVEL, YOU KNOW, THAT HAS SUPERSEDES AND MAKES OUR CODE NON-COMPLIANT? WE DID INVITE THOSE MARINE CONTRACTORS HERE TODAY. WE HAVE ALEX GARLAND FROM GARLAND AND GARLAND WHO SHOWED UP TO REPRESENT THE CONTRACTORS.

AND SO THIS IS JUST A DISCUSSION. WE'RE NOT PROPOSING ANY LANGUAGE FOR YOU TODAY.

WE'RE JUST BRINGING TO YOUR ATTENTION THAT WHERE WE FIND ISSUES IN THE CODE.

I DID PROVIDE A LIST IN THE AGENDA MEMO OF SOME OF THE THE AREAS WHERE WE RUN INTO TROUBLE IN THE CODE.

THE FIRST ISSUE THAT WE RUN INTO IS THAT THE, THE REGULATIONS FOR DOCKS AND PIERS ARE IN CHAPTER 56, WHICH IS THE SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS SECTION OF YOUR CODE, BUT THEY'RE IN THE PORTION OF THE SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS THAT IS APPLICABLE ONLY TO RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS. WE DO HAVE A LOT OF COMMERCIAL WATERFRONT IN THE CITY.

SO CURRENTLY WE DON'T HAVE ANY REGULATIONS FOR THAT COMMERCIAL WATERFRONT, WHICH IS TOUGH.

WE RELY ON THE STATE REGULATIONS, SO WE WOULD LIKE TO.

THE FIRST PROPOSAL WOULD BE TO MOVE THIS, THE THE DOC REGULATIONS INTO CHAPTER 52, WHICH IS THE RESOURCE PROTECTION STANDARDS.

AND THERE'S A WATER RESOURCES SECTION. THAT'S WHERE YOU HAVE YOUR SEAWALL REGULATIONS. SO IT SEEMS FITTING THAT YOU WOULD PUT YOUR DOC REGULATIONS WHERE YOU HAVE YOUR SEAWALL REGULATIONS. AND THEN IT WOULD ALSO MAKE IT APPLICABLE TO ALL PROPERTIES WITHIN THE CITY.

SO WE WOULD ALSO THEN IN THE GENERAL STANDARDS, CREATE STANDARDS APPLICABLE TO NOT ONLY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL BUT ALSO MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL WATERFRONT, WHICH WE DON'T ADDRESS TODAY.

AND THEN ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT WE RUN INTO, AND I'M GOING TO POP A MAP UP HERE ON THE SCREEN FOR YOU JUST TO KIND OF ILLUSTRATE MY WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE. SO THIS IS JUST A SNAPSHOT OF THE AERIAL OF MOORINGS BAY AND WHAT WE HAVE FOR THE MULTI MULTIFAMILY REGULATIONS.

IF YOU RECALL WE HAVE COME FORWARD TO CITY COUNCIL IN RECENT MONTHS WITH TWO VARIANCES, AND THIS IS FOR BOTH LIFTS OR BOAT SLIPS THAT DO NOT MEET WHAT WE CALL THE SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT.

SO YOU CAN SEE HERE ON A PROPERTY LIKE THIS, THIS IS A YOU KNOW, AS THE PROPERTY LINE EXTENDS INTO THE WATER, THE WAY THESE DOCKS HAD HISTORICALLY BEEN BUILT WAS THEY JUST, YOU KNOW, KIND OF ALL GO STRAIGHT UP.

AND NONE OF THEM ACTUALLY MAINTAIN THAT SIDE SETBACK.

THEY'VE BEEN THAT WAY. ALMOST ALL THE PROPERTIES ON MOORINGS BAY DO THAT.

AND SO IF WE'RE OKAY WITH THAT IN GRANTING VARIANCES FOR PEOPLE TO UTILIZE THOSE BOAT SLIPS, WE MIGHT AS WELL CODIFY IT. AND IT WOULDN'T BE CREATING A NEW CIRCUMSTANCE.

IT WOULD HONESTLY JUST BE MAINTAINING THE EXISTING CONDITIONS THAT YOU HAVE OUT THERE TODAY.

WE ALSO SEE THIS IN OYSTER BAY AREA. SORRY, I KNOW THIS IS PAINFUL TO WATCH ME SCROLL THROUGH A MAP, BUT I'LL GET THERE. IN SOME OF THE MULTIFAMILY PROPERTIES DOWN HERE IN.

IN THIS AREA YOU SEE A CONTINUOUS DOCK. SO THEY AREN'T ALLOWED TO THEY DON'T THEY AREN'T ALLOWED THE FINGER PIERS THAT YOU HAVE IN MOORINGS BAY.

BUT YOU'LL SEE ON THESE MULTIFAMILY PROPERTIES, THEY GENERALLY ALL JUST HAVE A DOCK THAT GOES FROM PROPERTY LINE TO PROPERTY LINE.

IT'S EXISTED THAT WAY. IT'S BEEN ENFORCED THAT WAY.

SO THAT WOULD BE ONE SUGGESTION WOULD BE TO ALLOW OR ELIMINATE THE REQUIREMENT FOR A SIDE SETBACK FOR MULTIFAMILY PROPERTIES.

THE CAVEAT WOULD BE THAT DOES NOT APPLY IF YOU DIRECTLY ARE ADJACENT TO A SINGLE FAMILY PROPERTY.

IF YOU'RE A MULTIFAMILY PROPERTY WITH A NEIGHBORING SINGLE FAMILY, YOU WOULD HAVE TO MAINTAIN THAT THAT SETBACK.

SO THAT WOULD BE ONE THING. AND THEN WE DON'T ADDRESS ANY LIGHTING REGULATIONS FOR DOCKS ANYWHERE IN THE CODE.

AND WE HAD LIGHTING DISCUSSION WITH YOU A FEW MONTHS AGO.

AND THAT WAS ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT CAME UP. YOU KNOW, DO WE, DO WE WANT TO DO WE NEED TO.

THERE ARE SOME SAFETY PRECAUTIONS TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THERE.

WE HAVE SOME DOCS, YOU KNOW, ON NAPLES BAY THAT STICK OUT PRETTY FAR, YOU KNOW, DO WE REQUIRE LIGHTING AND THEN DO WE ALSO REGULATE THAT LIGHTING? THE NEXT NEIGHBORHOOD. AND THIS IS ALSO AN ISSUE THAT HAS BEEN BEFORE CITY COUNCIL A NUMBER OF TIMES.

IS THE AQUILINE SHORES NEIGHBORHOOD. EVERY OTHER NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HAS WATER FRONTAGE ON NAPLES BAY HAS SPECIFIC REGULATIONS FOR THE PROPERTIES ON NAPLES BAY, MEANING ALLOWING DOCKS TO EXTEND OUT.

SO THEY HAVE SEPARATE REGULATIONS FOR THE CANALS AND FOR THE BAY.

[00:50:04]

HERE YOU HAVE THE, YOU KNOW, THE SLOPING SHORELINES. AND IF I GO ASTRAY, KATIE, MAYBE HELP ME OUT.

SHE KNOWS MORE ABOUT THIS THAN I DO, BUT YOU HAVE THE SLOPING SHORELINE, SO YOU DON'T HAVE THE DEPTH RIGHT UP AGAINST THE.

YOU DON'T HAVE SEAWALLS MOSTLY HERE. YOU HAVE RIPRAP.

YOU DON'T HAVE THE DEPTH RIGHT UP AGAINST THAT RIPRAP. AND SO WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO PREVENT HERE IS THE DREDGING.

SO AQUILINE SHORES CURRENTLY HAS NOTHING SEPARATE FOR THE BAY THAN THEY HAVE FOR THE CANALS.

SO THEY'RE ONLY ALLOWED 25FT OFF OF THE WHAT IN THIS CASE WOULD BE THE MEAN HIGH WATER LINE OF THE RIPRAP.

AND THAT'S DIFFICULT FOR THEM TO ACHIEVE. FURTHERMORE, AS YOU CAN SEE, THAT HAS NEVER REALLY BEEN ENFORCED.

YOU HAVE PLENTY OF DOCKS ON THE BAY IN AQUA LANE THAT FAR EXCEED THE 25FT.

SO THE REGULATIONS FOR NAPLES BAY THAT ARE AFFORDED TO OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS HAVE HISTORICALLY BEEN APPLIED TO AQUA LANE.

SO THAT WOULD BE A CONSIDERATION. I THINK ALEX HAD BEEN HERE MONTHS AGO ASKING IF THAT WAS SOMETHING COUNCIL WOULD BE FAVORABLE IN ADDRESSING.

AND YOU SAID YES AND DIRECTED STAFF TO PREPARE SOMETHING.

THIS IS PART OF THE CONVERSATION. WE'RE HERE FOR YOU TODAY.

THERE'S A SEPARATELY THERE'S A REGULATION IN THE AQUA LANE SHORES SECTION OF THE CODE THAT PROVIDES YOU'RE ALLOWED FOR A A STANDALONE DOC, YOU'RE ALLOWED 15FT. BUT FOR A COMBINED DOCK AND BOAT LIFT, YOU'RE ALLOWED 25FT.

AND I'M TALKING WHAT WE CALL PROTRUSIONS. SO THAT'S OUT FROM THE SEAWALL.

BUT IT KIND OF IS IT'S BEEN UNCLEAR ON THE ENFORCEMENT AND DESIGN SIDE ON IS THAT IN ANY CONFIGURATION IS THAT DOCK WITH BOAT LIFT ON THE OUTSIDE? IS THAT, YOU KNOW, THE PORT ROYAL CONFIGURATION WHERE YOU HAVE THE BOATLIFT AND THE DOCK ON THE OUTSIDE. SO MAYBE JUST SOME CLARIFYING LANGUAGE THAT THAT IS 25FT IN ANY CONFIGURATION BECAUSE YOU SEE ALL SORTS OF DIFFERENT CONFIGURATIONS THERE.

THE NEXT NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WE RUN INTO ISSUES WITH, AND IF ANYONE HAS ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS ABOUT THESE NEIGHBORHOODS, PLEASE STOP ME. I'LL WAIT TILL THE END BECAUSE I ALREADY HAVE A FEW.

OKAY. THE NEXT NEIGHBORHOOD WE RUN INTO ISSUES WITH IS THE OYSTER BAY NEIGHBORHOOD.

SO YOU HAVE WHICH WE HAVE HERE. THE WAY THAT LANGUAGE READS IS.

AND I DID INCLUDE THE JUST THE EXCERPT FROM THE CODE.

SO YOU HAVE THE LANGUAGE. IN FRONT OF YOU. DOCS ARE INTERESTING IN THAT THEY'RE UNLIKE ANY OTHER REGULATIONS THERE BY NEIGHBORHOOD.

SO IT'S NOT BY ZONING DISTRICT. IT'S BY ACTUAL NEIGHBORHOOD.

SO THE OYSTER BAY GOLDEN SHORES AND OYSTER BAY LANGUAGE READS THE FOLLOWING STANDARDS APPLY TO PIERS, VESSELS AND BOAT LIFTS. A IN CANALS 60FT OR LESS IN WIDTH APPEAR MOORED VESSEL AND VESSEL LIFT COMBINATION CANNOT EXCEED 25% OF THE WIDTH OF THE WATERWAY, AND THEN B IN CANALS GREATER THAN 60FT IN WIDTH.

A 32 FOOT WIDE CENTERLINE CHANNEL SHALL BE MAINTAINED AND APPEAR MOORED VESSEL AND VESSEL.

IF COMBINATION CANNOT EXCEED 50% OF THE REMAINING CHANNEL WIDTH ADJACENT TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.

THE FIRST ISSUE WE RUN INTO IS WHAT IS THE? HOW IS THE 60FT MEASURED? BECAUSE WATERWAY IS DEFINED IN YOUR GENERAL STANDARDS TO MEAN SHORELINE TO SHORELINE.

SO EITHER WHAT FACE OF SEAWALL OR MEAN HIGH WATER TO WET FACE OF SEAWALL OR MEAN HIGH WATER.

BUT THERE'S BEEN CONFUSION IN IS THAT PLATTED CANAL WIDTH OR IS IT ACTUAL CANAL WIDTH.

SO THAT'S ALWAYS BEEN A QUESTION THAT HAS COME UP IN IN THE DESIGN SIDE AND THE ENFORCEMENT SIDE.

AND THEN THE SECOND IS THAT THERE IS A GENERAL STANDARD, AND THIS IS A NAVIGATIONAL STANDARD IN YOUR IN SUBSECTION B, GENERAL STANDARDS THAT SAYS YOU HAVE TO MEET, YOU CAN ONLY USE UP 25% OF THE WIDTH OF A WATERWAY.

AND THAT'S FOR EVERY, EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD IN, YOU KNOW, EVERY DOCK BOAT, EVERYTHING CAN ONLY EXTEND 25% OF THE WIDTH OF THE WATERWAY.

AND THAT'S TO MAINTAIN A 50% NAVIGATIONAL CHANNEL DOWN THE MIDDLE OF EVERY WATERWAY.

SO THAT 25% OFTEN CONTRADICTS THOSE REGULATIONS.

I JUST READ YOU FOR GOLDEN SHORES. SO WE WANT TO CLEAN THAT UP TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU KNOW THAT 25% WILL ALWAYS SUPERSEDE THE NEXT ISSUE. I'M SORRY I HAVE TO INTERRUPT, BUT 25% WILL ALWAYS SUPERSEDE.

BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT YOU'RE MAINTAINING THE WIDTH OF THE CANAL.

SO 25 THE GENERAL STANDARD, WHICH APPLIES TO EVERYWHERE, INCLUDING THIS, SAYS THAT YOU SAYS THAT THE SHORE NORMAL SO YOU HAVE SHORE PARALLEL IS PARALLEL TO THE SHORE. SHORE NORMAL IS THE DIMENSION, THE PROTRUSION DIMENSION.

SO THE SHORE NORMAL DIMENSION OF A PIER SHALL BE RESTRICTED TO A SIZE SUCH THAT THE COMBINED WIDTH OF THE PIER PILINGS LIFT AND VESSEL TO BE MOORED TO THE PIER DOES NOT EXCEED 25% OF THE DISTANCE ACROSS THE WATERWAY AT THE POINT WHERE THE PIER IS LOCATED.

[00:55:05]

THAT'S OKAY. THAT'S SUBSECTION B, WHICH IS GENERAL STANDARDS RIGHT AFTER THE DEFINITIONS AND IT'S NUMBER FIVE.

OKAY, SO THAT MEANS THAT I'M JUST GOING TO PICK ON A PROPERTY HERE.

THAT MEANS THAT WE WOULD TAKE THE DIMENSION FROM RIGHT HERE, WHICH IS WHAT SIDE OF SEAWALL ACROSS TO WHAT SIDE OF SEAWALL.

AND YOU YOU KNOW, THIS PROPERTY WOULD BE ABOUT 25% OF THAT WIDTH.

AND WHAT'S THE WHAT'S THE WIDTH THAT WE HAVE IN PLACE? WELL GOLDEN SHORES. YEAH. SO THAT'S WHERE IT GETS TRICKY IS THEN GOLDEN SHORES SPECIFICALLY SAYS MAINTAINS THAT SAME PROTRUSION LIMITATION ON A CANAL THAT IS 60FT OR LESS.

BUT THEN SAYS THAT IN CANALS GREATER THAN 60FT A 30, YOU WOULD TAKE THAT NUMBER, SUBTRACT 32 FROM THAT NUMBER.

SO YOU HAVE 100, SUBTRACT 32. AND THEN THIS PROPERTY WOULD BE ALLOWED 50% OF WHAT'S REMAINING.

NOW THAT DOESN'T MATH THE SAME AS JUST A STRAIGHT 25%.

SO THAT'S WHAT'S THE WIDTH FOR NAVIGABLE CANAL? YOU'RE ALLOWED ONLY 25%. WAIT, SO THE NAVIGATION STANDARD REQUIRE 25% TO TO NAVIGATE DOWN A CANAL? NO. 50%. THAT'S 50% OPEN. YEAH. RIGHT. MEANING EACH PROPERTY OWNER, THE PROPERTY OWNER ON EACH SIDE GETS 25%, AND THEN YOU MAINTAIN 50% CLEAR. THAT IS, IF YOU HAVE IT, THAT'S.

WELL, THAT'S IN YOUR GENERAL. SO WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS WE'RE ENFORCING THE GENERAL.

BUT THE GENERAL OFTEN IS MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN WHAT THE SPECIFIC NEIGHBORHOOD REGULATION ALLOWS.

SO WE WE HAVE CONFLICTS A LOT OF TIMES WHEN PERMITS COME IN BECAUSE THEY LOOK TO THE SPECIFIC NEIGHBORHOOD REGULATION AND THEN ARE CONFUSED WHEN WE REJECT IT, SAYING THAT YOU'RE EXCEEDING THE 25% THAT YOU'RE ALLOWED.

SO WE'D LIKE TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S CONSISTENT TO AVOID THAT CONFUSION IN THE FUTURE.

THE NEXT IS ALSO OYSTER BAY AND GOLDEN SHORES.

WHILE IT'S VERY LIMITED, THEY DO HAVE SOME PROPERTIES ON NAPLES BAY, AND THERE IS NOT A SPECIFIC REGULATION FOR THE PROPERTIES ON NAPLES BAY.

SIMILAR TO AQUILON. SO WE WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THAT.

SAY THAT AGAIN. GOLDEN SHORES AND OYSTER BAY HAVE A COUPLE OF PROPERTIES THAT DO HAVE FRONTAGE ON NAPLES BAY.

AND THE REGULATIONS FOR THAT NEIGHBORHOOD DO NOT PROVIDE ANYTHING SEPARATE THAN WHAT IS ALLOWED IN THE CANALS.

WELL, THAT'S BECAUSE THERE'S NO ROOM. WELL, THESE ONES I MEAN, ESSENTIALLY YOU YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE A LOT MORE ROOM RIGHT HERE THAN YOU DO HERE. YOU KNOW, SO IT WOULD MAKE SENSE TO PROVIDE A DIFFERENT REGULATION FOR A DOCK RIGHT HERE RATHER THAN A 25%.

YEP. YEP. WE HAVEN'T BEEN TESTED THAT WAY YET, BUT IT COULD HAPPEN.

AND THEN. OH, YEAH. WAIT, HE HAD A QUICK QUESTION.

I'M SORRY. I'M BENDING MY OWN RULES. THAT'S OKAY.

THANK YOU. SO I APPRECIATE YOU GOING OVER ALL THESE AREAS IN DETAIL WITH THE AGENDA MEMORANDUM.

I'M LOOKING AT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE WE'RE ALL LEVEL SET ON WHAT WE'RE PREPARED TO DO TODAY.

THE RECOMMENDED ACTION IS DISCUSS THESE REGULATIONS AND PROVIDE DIRECTION TO STAFF ON POTENTIAL AMENDMENTS.

ARE WE TO THE POINT WHERE WE'VE WE'VE NOTIFIED THESE COMMUNITIES? THEY KNOW THAT WE'RE ABOUT TO PROVIDE DIRECTION.

THE DIRECTION THAT WE'RE SEEKING FROM YOU TODAY IS FOR YOU, YOU FOR COUNCIL TO DIRECT STAFF TO PROCEED WITH THAT EXERCISE.

OKAY. WE DON'T WANT TO GO THROUGH THAT AND AND DRAFT LANGUAGE IF YOU'RE NOT IN FAVOR.

SO REALLY IT'S NOT, IN MY OPINION, NOT NECESSARY FOR US TO GET INTO THE WEEDS IN THE DETAILS ON THIS.

IT'S MORE DIRECTIONAL AND BACKING UP FROM THAT FOR OUR CITY ATTORNEY.

ARE THESE ARE THESE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS? YES THEY ARE. AND SO SB 250 AND 180 COULD YEAH.

SAYS NO MORE RESTRICTIVE OR BURDENSOME. SO SOMETHING WILL HAPPEN.

SHALL WE GO DOWN THIS PATH. I MEAN YOU YES. I MEAN, YOU HAVE TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION, YOU KNOW, ARE YOU BEING MORE RESTRICTIVE, BUT I DON'T I'M I'M ONE THAT'S NOT GOING TO RECOMMEND THAT YOU JUST STOP THE WHEELS OF GOVERNMENT JUST BECAUSE OF A POTENTIAL LAWSUIT. BUT I'M ALSO OF THE OPINION THAT YOU TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION WHAT ARE WHAT IS THE RISK OF WHATEVER IT IS YOU ADOPT. BUT YES, IT IS A LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AND IT COULD FALL UNDER.

SO JUST EYES WIDE OPEN. YEAH. I THINK YOU JUST YOU JUST CONTINUE ON WITH OUR WORK, BUT YEAH,

[01:00:03]

THANK YOU. AND THE THE VAST MAJORITY OF WHAT WE HAVE LAID OUT HERE IS PROBABLY MORE PERMISSIVE INSTEAD OF MORE RESTRICTIVE.

THERE MAY BE A COUPLE, BUT MOST OF THIS IS TO CLARIFY AND KIND OF TRUE UP WHAT'S IN THE CODE WITH WHAT'S EXISTING IN REAL LIFE.

AND SO FINAL LAST QUESTION FOR ME. SO GIVEN ALL THESE DETAILS BY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION EXCEPTIONS AND THEN MISCELLANEOUS WITH DEAD ENDS, ETC. WHAT IS IT THAT YOU BELIEVE ARE NEXT STEPS? NEXT STEP WOULD BE IF CITY COUNCIL, YOU KNOW, AGREES THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD WORK ON.

WE WOULD DO EXACTLY WHAT YOU SAID WE WOULD WORK WITH THE NEIGHBORHOODS SPECIFICALLY, PROBABLY THROUGH PRESIDENT'S COUNCIL AND THE HOS, TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE AWARE OF THIS.

WE'VE BEEN WORKING CLOSELY WITH THE DOT CONTRACTORS TO ACTUALLY DRAFT SOME LANGUAGE.

WE DON'T HAVE ANY LANGUAGE FOR YOU TODAY IN ANY KIND OF A TIMELINE ON THAT WORK.

MEETING WITH I MEAN, PROBABLY TRIED TO DO THAT SOON DURING SEASON WHEN? WHEN EVERYONE'S HERE. BUT WORKING WITH THE HOAS IN THE NEXT FEW MONTHS.

THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. THAT'S ALL I HAD. AND I WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS THAT BECAUSE I DON'T I THINK THAT NEEDS TO BE A WORKSHOP IN COUNCIL.

NOT DEPENDING ON A PRESIDENT OF AN HOA TO GIVE OUT THAT INFORMATION.

AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN, I MEAN, I'D RATHER SAY WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A WORKSHOP.

WE'RE GOING TO DISCUSS IT. SURE. OKAY. THANK YOU.

IF ANYONE'S HAVE KRAMER FIRST, THANK YOU FOR THIS.

OH, WAIT. WERE YOU FINISHED? I KNOW I INTERRUPTED.

WERE YOU FINISHED? YOU'RE. YOU'RE GOOD. I HAVE A QUESTION.

THANK YOU. ANYWAY, THAT MAY JUST TO HELP A LITTLE BACKGROUND.

THANK YOU. I WAS I I'VE GOT FRIENDS IN THAT INDUSTRY AND WE GOT INVOLVED A LITTLE BIT.

AND I'M AMAZED AT HOW MUCH YOU KNOW ABOUT STUFF AGAIN.

SO I'M ASKED THE QUESTION IS 20, 20, 30 YEARS AGO? NO, I'M NOT THROWING ANYBODY UNDER THE BUS BECAUSE THIS GOES UNDER SMALL TOWN CHARM.

OH, 20 OR 30 YEARS AGO CONTRACTOR WALKS IN TO WHOMEVER AND SAYS, HEY, I WANT TO DO SUCH AND SUCH.

HOW RIGOROUS WAS THAT PROCESS? THE PERSON AT THAT TIME FROM CITY STAFF WOULD PROBABLY MEET YOU ON SITE, TAKE A LOOK, TALK TO YOUR NEIGHBOR, SHAKE A HAND AND WE MOVE ON DOWN THE ROAD.

SO THAT'S WHAT. THAT'S SMALL TOWN CHARM. EVERYBODY WANTS TO ALWAYS DEFINE IT. THERE'S YOUR DEFINITION. WELL, AND THE PROBLEM WITH THAT IS NOW A LOT OF THOSE ARE NOW FLIPPING HANDS.

NOW SWITCHING OVER. AND NOW YOU SEE THESE ALL THESE NONCONFORMITIES AND IRREGULARITIES AND INCONSISTENCIES. AND SO FOR THE, THE, THE GUYS WHO DO THIS FOR A LIVING, THAT HAVE DONE IT A CERTAIN WAY FOR A LONG TIME AND IT'S SLOWLY.

BECOME MORE CONSTRAINED. IS THAT A FAIR STATEMENT? YES. OKAY. CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, THEN IT IS.

AT THIS POINT, IT SEEMS TO ME DIGGING INTO IT JUST A LITTLE BIT.

I KNOW I'M A LAYMAN, DON'T KNOW MUCH, BUT I CAN KNOW IT SEEMS PRETTY UNMANAGEABLE. VERY INCONSISTENT APPLICATIONS OF THE LAW IN THE PAST, WHICH CREATES GREAT CONFUSION. AND SO I THINK THIS IS WAY OVERDUE, AND I APPLAUD EVERYTHING YOU AND YOUR STAFF ARE DOING.

AND FOR THE MOST PART, THERE'S A BUNCH OF CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG.

AREN'T THERE A NUMBER OF COMMON SENSE THINGS YOU CAN DO THAT WILL SIMPLY CLARIFY AND MAKE IT MORE CONSISTENT? THAT'S THE GOAL THAT ARE NOT MORE CUMBERSOME WHATSOEVER. CORRECT. OKAY, THANKS.

THAT'S IT. THAT'S ALL I GOT. THANK YOU. I AGREE, I WOULDN'T SAY IT WAS SMALL TOWN CHARM.

IT'S JUST A POLICY THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE THAT WAS IN PLACE AND ENFORCED.

AND I AGREE IT WAS, YOU KNOW, SMALL TOWN. YEAH.

THIS IS WHERE I MEAN I ACTUALLY HAD THAT HAPPEN IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD.

SO I GET IT AND I APPLAUD IT ALSO. SO THANK YOU.

BARTON. ERICA, YOU HAD MENTIONED A FEW MINUTES AGO THAT THERE SO ON THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE BAY FOR LIKE AN AQUA LANE. THERE'S THERE'S DIFFERENT LANGUAGE FOR THOSE PROPERTIES THAN THERE ARE.

FOR EXAMPLE, WITH PROPERTIES LOCATED ON THE BAY IN PORT ROYAL.

IS THAT SO? PORT ROYAL HAS SPECIFIC LANGUAGE FOR PROPERTIES ON NAPLES BAY.

ROYAL HARBOR ALSO HAS SPECIFIC LANGUAGE FOR PROPERTIES ON NAPLES BAY.

AQUA LANE DOES NOT. IT'S THE SAME REGULATIONS FOR THE BAY AS IN THE CANALS.

OKAY. AND IN THAT LANGUAGE FOR PORT ROYAL AND THAT LANGUAGE FOR ROYAL HARBOR, ARE THEY THE SAME OR ARE THEY ALL.

THEY'RE NOT THE SAME. SO SO OUR GOAL HERE IS TO, TO GIVE YOU DIRECTION TO FIND SO THAT YOU CAN GO OUT AND CREATE CONSISTENCY WITH THE LANGUAGE IN OUR CODE WOULD BE NICE. NOW MY QUESTION TO YOU IS, IS THERE ANY RATIONALE WHATSOEVER FOR HAVING ANY TYPE OF DIFFERENT LANGUAGE FOR ALKALINE AS OPPOSED TO, SAY, PORT ROYAL BASED ON WIDTH OF THE OF THE BAY.

YOU KNOW, THE LOCATION ON THE BAY. SO CLOSER TO, YOU KNOW, IS OR IS IT CLOSER TO THE TO THE PAST?

[01:05:08]

IT WILL BE CENTERED ON YOUR PROPERTY, CREATES THAT DISTANCE, THE SPACING BETWEEN THOSE DOCKS.

ROYAL HARBOR, ON THE OTHER HAND, DOESN'T SET A A NUMBER, A MAXIMUM, BUT IT RELIES ON THE LOCATION OF THE CHANNEL, THE SHOAL, AND THEY REFER TO THE EXISTING LINE OF CONSTRUCTION, WHICH FROM AN ENFORCEMENT STANDPOINT IS VERY DIFFICULT BECAUSE WHAT IF THE PERSON BELOW YOU HAS 40FT, THE PERSON ON THIS SIDE HAS 65FT? WHAT IS THE EXISTING LINE OF CONSTRUCTION? SO THAT'S ALWAYS BEEN VERY DIFFICULT FOR US TO ENFORCE.

I THINK THE TWO THINGS THAT PORT ROYAL ADDRESSED AS WELL IS GETTING THE DEPTH, BECAUSE WHAT WE DON'T WANT IS DREDGING ON THE NATURAL WATER BODIES.

WE DON'T WANT SOMEONE TO COME IN AND DREDGE AWAY ALL OF THAT HABITAT AND ALL THAT.

YOU KNOW, IN A NATURAL WATER BODY, IT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT ON A CANAL WHERE THOSE ARE MAN MADE CANALS ANYWAY. BUT WE DON'T WANT YOU TO BE DREDGING TO FIT YOUR BOAT. AND THEN THEY ALSO, I THINK WHAT PORT ROYAL DOES WELL IS REQUIRING YOU TO, YOU KNOW, COME IN YOUR SIDE.

SETBACK GETS GREATER THE FARTHER YOU GO OUT. SO I THINK THAT'S ONE THING THAT PORT ROYAL DOES REALLY WELL.

WHETHER THERE'S A DIFFERENCE IN AQUILINE, YOU PROBABLY HAVE MORE REAL WORLD EXPERIENCE.

GOOD MORNING. IF YOU'LL STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. I HIT THE BUTTON RIGHT ON THE BUTTON ON THE RIGHT.

THERE YOU GO. ALEX GARLAND WITH GARLAND AND GARLAND, MARINE CONSTRUCTION.

HEY, ALEX. HOW ARE YOU DOING? WELL, MY QUESTION IS, DO WE NEED TO HAVE SOME TYPE OF LIKE, FOR EXAMPLE, IF WE IF WE RIP AROUND THE, THE BAY AND WE'RE LOOKING AT THE PROPERTIES THAT FACE SOUTH IN PORT ROYAL THAT'S A NARROWER SECTION OF THE BAY, BUT IT'S ALSO CLOSER TO THE PAST, WHICH MEANS YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE HEAVIER WATER FLOW GOING THROUGH THERE, WHICH MEANS YOU'RE PROBABLY GOING TO HAVE DEEPER WATER CLOSER TO THE SHORELINE THAN YOU WOULD SAY IN THE MIDDLE OF THE BAY OVER AN ALKYLENE OR IN RURAL HARBOR.

SO AQUILINE RURAL HARBOR MAY REQUIRE LONGER PIERS GOING OUT FOR TWO REASONS.

NUMBER ONE, THE WIDTH OF THE OF THE WATERWAY, AND ALSO POTENTIALLY BECAUSE OF THE DEPTH OF THE WATERWAY.

SO DO WE NEED TO HAVE SOME TYPE OF DIFFERENT LANGUAGE BECAUSE OF THE, THE LOCATION OF THE SHORELINE? AND THE, THE THE, THE CHANGES THAT THAT SHORELINE MIGHT HAVE BASED ON THE AMOUNT OF WATER THAT'S PASSING THROUGH FROM TIDES AND THAT TYPE OF THING. WELL, THERE'S A NUMBER OF FACTORS THAT REALLY, REALLY AFFECT IT, EVEN IN PORT ROYAL ITSELF.

YOU'VE GOT LOTS DOWN AT THE END OF AT THE SOUTH END OF PORT ROYAL THAT ARE AT THE END OF ADMIRALTY PARADE, AT THE END OF GALLEON DRIVE, WHERE IT DOES BOTTLENECK IN THERE, WHERE THEY DON'T HAVE TO GO OUT VERY FAR TO GET TO THAT FIVE FEET MEAN LOW WATER WHEN YOU COME IN UP TOWARDS THE MIDDLE OF PORT ROYAL. IT'S KIND OF CONCAVE AND THE LAND IS RETRACTED AWAY FROM THE CHANNEL QUITE A BIT.

THEY HAVE TO GO OUT, IN SOME CASES 80FT TO GET TO THE FIVE FEET OF WATER.

SO THAT THAT FIVE FOOT DEPTH IS, IS A GOOD DETERMINING FACTOR OF OF THE PROTRUSION.

YOU KNOW, AS IT RELATES TO THE ELEMENTS THAT THAT DEPTH IS GOING TO DICTATE THE, THE LENGTH OF THE, OF THE PIER OF THE DOCK THAT WOULD BE COMING OFF OF THAT PROPERTY.

AND YOU'RE SAYING THAT THAT FIVE FOOT DEPTH IS PROBABLY A GOOD FACTOR TO USE.

IT'S A GOOD FACTOR. AND IT'S ALSO A NUMBER THAT'S SET OUT BY STATE AND FEDERAL.

OKAY. SO THIS IS WHERE WE GET THE KIND OF OVERLAP OF THE DIFFERENT JURISDICTIONS.

PORT ROYAL ALSO IS ALL RIPRAP. THE OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS ARE SEAWALLS.

SO THE OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS HAVE SOME WATER DEPTH RIGHT UP AT THE SEAWALL, AT THE PROPERTY LINE THAT PORT ROYAL DOESN'T HAVE THE LUXURY OF HAVING BECAUSE OF THE, THE ROCKY SHORELINE. SO PORT ROYAL IS KIND OF ITS OWN ANIMAL AWAY FROM THE OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS.

REALLY, WHEN YOU LOOK AT ROYAL HARBOR, AQUA LANE, GOLDEN SHORES THOSE ARE HAVE MORE COMMON ELEMENTS AS FAR AS THE SEAWALLS.

THE CHANNEL GOING DOWN THROUGH NAPLES KIND OF DOES, YOU KNOW, S THROUGH IT.

SO THERE'S SOME AREAS WHERE IT'S CLOSER, SOME ARE FARTHER APART.

BUT REALLY WITH I GOTTA SAY JUST REAL QUICK. ON A SIDE NOTE, IN TALKING WITH STAFF, THEY'VE REALLY, REALLY BEEN GREAT AS FAR AS THEIR ANALYSIS OF ALL THE NEIGHBORHOODS.

THE ANALYSIS OF THE RULES. AND JUST THE THE TRYING TO MAKE IT EASIER ON EVERYBODY, THE HOMEOWNERS, THE CONTRACTORS, THEM TO TRY TO GET SOME UNIFORMITY AND SOME CLARIFICATION TO THE RULES AND REGULATIONS.

[01:10:05]

YOU CAN'T GET TO ANY WATER DEPTH. NOW YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT BRINGING YOUR BOAT SHORE PARALLEL, WHICH IS NOT GOOD ON NAPLES BAY WITH THE WAVE ACTION AND EVERYTHING ELSE. SO THIS ACTUALLY GIVES THEM THE ABILITY TO BUILD A DOCK WHERE RIGHT NOW THEY REALLY DON'T.

YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT PARK SHORE. YOU HAVEN'T REALLY GOTTEN INTO PARK SHORE OR NOT, BUT, YOU KNOW IN PARK SHORE, THOUGH, THE EXISTING RULES THAT ARE THERE ALLOWED THE DOCKS TO GO OUT A LITTLE BIT FARTHER. AND IF THEY ADOPTED THE GENERAL GUIDELINES.

I SHOULDN'T SAY THE GENERAL GUIDELINES. IF YOU ADOPTED A CERTAIN GUIDELINES, THEY WOULD RESTRICT THEM MORE. AND THEY SAID, NO, WE DON'T WANT TO BECAUSE THAT'S GOING TO MAKE EXISTING DOCS NON-CONFORMING. SO THEY'VE BEEN REALLY, REALLY GOOD AT EVALUATING THE NEIGHBORHOODS AND SAYING WHATEVER CHANGES WE WE MAKE, WE DO NOT WANT TO DO WHAT'S BEEN DONE IN THE PAST.

IN THE PAST, RULES WERE MADE THAT MADE A LOT OF DOCS THAT WERE BUILT NON-CONFORMING AND PEOPLE HAD THEIR HANDS TIED TO WHERE THEY CAN'T CHANGE THE FOOTPRINT, THEY CAN'T ADD A BOATLIFT, THEY CAN'T UPDATE. ALL THEY CAN DO IS MAINTAIN OR GET RID OF IT AND START ALL OVER AND BUILD WITHIN WITHIN THE GUIDELINES. SO THEY'RE DOING A REALLY GOOD JOB TO MAKE SURE THAT WHATEVER THERE IS AFFECTING PEOPLE IN A POSITIVE WAY, NOT IN A NEGATIVE WAY. SO I APPLAUD THEM FOR THAT.

AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. AND I OBVIOUSLY THIS IS WELL OVERDUE.

WE NEEDED TO BE TACKLED AND I APPLAUD YOU FOR TAKING IT ON AND GETTING IT HERE IN FRONT OF US.

AND, YOU KNOW, WE OBVIOUSLY NEED TO HAVE CONSISTENCY IN OUR LANGUAGE AS IT PERTAINS TO TO BUILDING DOCKS ON OUR ON OUR MANY DIFFERENT WATERWAYS HERE. SO, YEAH, THIS IS, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE.

SO I'M GLAD WE'RE JUMPING ON IT. MR. GARLAND.

THERE'S NO ONE IN THIS COMMUNITY. MAYBE THERE'S A COUPLE THAT I TRUST MORE THAN YOU.

WELL THANK YOU. HOWEVER, I DON'T I MEAN, I THINK A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF HOW TO APPROVE IT IS A GREAT UPDATE, BUT YOU CAN'T DO ONE SIZE FITS ALL BECAUSE IT JUST I MEAN, NO.

AND THE DEPTH, THE DISTANCE ALL OF THAT I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU CAN MAKE THESE CHANGES TO WHERE THEY'RE ALL MORE OF THE SAME. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THEY'RE TRYING TO DO THAT.

EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD WILL STILL HAVE ITS INDIVIDUAL RULES THAT ARE THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN TAKE.

WHEN I HEAR UNIFORMITY, I THAT I, I DON'T MEAN UNIFORMITY AS MAKING ALL THE NEIGHBORHOODS THE SAME.

I MEAN UNIFORMITY AS IN GIVING US CLEAR GUIDANCE TO WHAT WE CAN AND CAN'T BUILD, GIVING CLEAR GUIDANCE TO THE ARCHITECTS TO WHAT THEY CAN DESIGN.

WE'VE GOT ARCHITECTS NOW THAT ARE DESIGNING THINGS THAT WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO BUILD, AND THEY SELL IT, THE HOMEOWNERS ON IT. THEN WE GO IN WHERE THE BAD GUY, WE'VE GOT MARINE CONTRACTORS THAT AREN'T QUITE SURE WHAT THE RULES AND REGULATIONS ARE IN AREAS THEY'RE GOING AND SELLING A DOCK IN A NEIGHBORHOOD THEY CAN'T EVEN SELL A DOCK IN, BECAUSE WE REALLY CAN'T BUILD ANYTHING THAT'S FUNCTIONAL. SO WHEN, WHEN, WHEN I'M BASICALLY SAYING IS EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD WILL STILL HAVE ITS INDIVIDUAL RULES AND REGULATIONS, BUT THERE ARE CERTAIN ASPECTS OF THE RULES THAT YOU CAN CARRY ACROSS THE BOARD.

SO THERE ARE GENERAL GUIDELINES AS FAR AS 25FT, OR 25% OF THE WIDTH OF THE WATERWAY.

THAT'S A GOOD GENERAL GUIDELINE. THE ONLY NEIGHBORHOOD THAT REALLY DOES NOT PERTAIN TO THAT RIGHT NOW IS GOLDEN SHORES, AND THAT'S WITH THAT 60 THAT GOES SO FAR BACK, I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHEN THAT ORIGINATED, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU.

THAT'S THAT'S WAY, WAY BACK. BUT, YOU KNOW, THE OTHER THING TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT TOO, IS THE DOCK RULES.

ORIGINALLY THEY WEREN'T REVIEWED BY THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT.

THEY WERE REVIEWED BY ENVIRONMENTAL. THEY REALLY YOU KNOW, BACK THEN IT WAS YEAH.

DOCTOR STEIGER AND, YOU KNOW, IT WAS THAT THAT OLD TOWN KIND OF SMALL TOWN THING.

BUT WHAT IT WAS IS HE WASN'T LOOKING AT ANYTHING BASED ON ANYTHING OTHER THAN ENVIRONMENTAL.

I MEAN, WE FOUGHT IT WHEN IT WENT TO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT FIRST WE WERE LIKE, ARE YOU CRAZY? YOU'RE LOOKING AT THIS FROM A DIFFERENT POINT OF VIEW, AND WE DON'T LIKE IT.

BUT IT WAS RIGHT. YEAH, IT'S RIGHT BEING LOOKED AT FROM THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT BECAUSE WE USED TO GET DUCKS APPROVED THAT NEIGHBORS WOULD SHARE THAT WERE HALF ON ONE PROPERTY, HALF ON ANOTHER. THEN THE NEIGHBOR SELLS AND THEY DON'T WANT TO SHARE IT WITH THE OTHER NEIGHBOR. AND THERE'S NO SIDELINE SETBACKS. AND IT WAS IT WAS THE WILD WEST.

IT WAS JUST KIND OF A IT WASN'T GOOD. SO THE RULES AND REGULATIONS YOU NEED THEM AND WHAT THEY'RE DOING ARE,

[01:15:01]

AND THEY'RE LIKE I SAID, IN A LOT OF CASES, THEY'RE GIVING THE OWNERS MORE CHOICES AND MORE ABILITY TO BUILD AND DESIGN A DOCK THAT FITS THEIR NEEDS AND FITS THEIR WHAT THE NEW CHOICES ARE, BECAUSE WE KNOW THERE'S A WHOLE NEW THINGS CHANGE.

IT'S FROM NEIGHBORHOOD TO NEIGHBORHOOD. SO IF YOU LOOK AT AQUILINE SHORES, SHE SAID, WAS THE WAY THE RULES WERE WRITTEN. ORIGINALLY IT WAS 15FT OR 10% OF THE WIDTH OF THE WATER WITH A DOCK STAND ALONE DOCK. IF YOU PUT A BOAT LIFT IN, YOU COULD GO OUT TO 25%.

AND PEOPLE WERE LIKE, WELL, WHAT CONSTITUTES A BOAT LIFT IS A LITTLE SWIVELING JET SKI LIFT.

A BOAT LIFT IS THE BOAT LIFT OVER ON THIS PROPERTY AND THE DOCK CAN STILL STICK OUT.

SO PEOPLE WOULD PUT IN A SMALL BOAT LIFT THAT THEY DIDN'T EVEN USE, JUST SO THEY COULD GET OUT TO THE 25%.

AND IT'S SO, SO WHY DO THAT? THEY'RE GOING TO STICK OUT TO 25% NO MATTER WHAT THEY DO.

SO JUST CLEAN UP THE RULES, ALLOW THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO GO OUT TO THEIR 25% OF THE WIDTH OF THE WATERWAY.

YOU'RE STILL MAINTAINING MINIMUM 50% OF YOUR CHANNEL FOR NAVIGATION.

OKAY. SO YOU KNOW MY MY WATERWAY, I'LL JUST USE THAT AS AN EXAMPLE.

SO SHOTWELL IS WANT TO BUILD A BOAT LIFT WHERE THEY HAVE THEIR RIPRAP.

THERE'S TWO PEOPLE WITHIN THAT CANAL AND THEN MYSELF WHICH WOULD BE DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM THAT.

SO THE PERSON THAT'S AT THE END OF THE CANAL AND YOU KNOW, THAT GOES ALL THE WAY THROUGH OAKLAND SHORES.

DO YOU KNOW WHERE CATHLEEN LIVES? THAT LITTLE SMALL AREA.

HOW DO YOU DETERMINE WHO GETS TO DO THE 25%? AND IT DOESN'T IMPACT THE PERSON AT THE END OF THE WATER.

SO THE RULES ARE 25% OR 25FT. SO WHICHEVER IS MOST RESTRICTIVE.

SO ON A WATERWAY THAT'S OVER 100 FOOT, YOU CAN'T BUILD OUT MORE THAN 25FT.

IF IT'S UNDER 100FT, YOU BUILD OUT TO THE 25%.

SO AN 80 FOOT WATERWAY YOU CAN GO. EVERYBODY CAN GO OUT TO 20FT ON A 100 FOOT WATERWAY.

YOU GO OUT TO 25. ONCE A WATERWAY IS MORE THAN 100FT WIDE, YOUR MAXIMUM OUT IS 25FT.

SO NOW YOUR MAIN NAVIGATIONAL AREA DOWN THE MIDDLE IS LARGER AND LARGER.

AQUILINE HAS VERY WIDE WATERWAYS, SO YOU'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE A PROTRUSION THROUGH THE MAIN CANALS, BUT NOT THROUGH THE FINGERS. NO, I DON'T, I DON'T THINK.

IS THERE A WATERWAY IN AQUILINE THAT'S UNDER 100 FOOT? YES, I THINK THERE'S A THERE'S A LITTLE POINT AT WHICH WE'RE KATHLEEN, SEE WHERE WE ARE.

THIS MIGHT NARROW A LITTLE BIT. YEAH. THAT LITTLE THAT LITTLE BOTTLENECK IN THERE.

BUT GO GO FURTHER SOUTH IF YOU WOULD. SO OVER IN KEEP GOING.

SO THEY'RE RIGHT IN THIS AREA RIGHT HERE. GO WEST.

NOT NO. GOOD. NO. YOU'RE GOING THE WRONG DIRECTION.

GO FURTHER SOUTH. GOT IT. THERE SHE IS. SOUTH.

IS THAT YOUR BAY? YEAH, YEAH, THAT'S YOUR BAY. SO.

BUT IF YOU LOOK. OH, YEAH. IT'S A LOT EASIER UP HERE.

SORRY IF IF YOU LOOK. THAT'S PRETTY DECEIVING.

I WOULD SAY IN YOUR AREA, YOU'RE PROBABLY. THAT'S PROBABLY 100 FOOT, 150 FOOT WIDE FROM YOUR PROPERTY SOUTH TO SHOT WELLS. BUT LOOK AT THE. SEE THAT LITTLE BOAT RIGHT THERE AT THE END OF THAT WATERWAY.

THIS IS THE REASON I'M ASKING THESE DETAILS, IS IF SHOTWELL'S DECIDED THEY WANTED TO BUILD A.

CAN YOU MOVE IT UP JUST A LITTLE THIS SIDE? NO, NO, THE OTHER WAY, A LITTLE MORE.

OKAY. THERE. YOU DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO MEASURE ON THAT, DO YOU? I DO. CAN YOU, CAN YOU CAN YOU MEASURE FROM THE FROM THE BOTTOM OF FOREST LANE SOUTH TO TO THE NORTH SIDE OF PORT ROYAL? OH. RIGHT HERE. YEAH. KEEP IN MIND, I CAN'T REALLY SEE THE SEAWALL.

YEAH. YOU'RE 143 FOOT ACROSS THAT. SO THE MAXIMUM PROTRUSION THERE WOULD BE 25FT, WHICH BETWEEN YOU AND THE PERSON ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE WATERWAY, YOU'D ONLY BE TAKEN UP 50FT. YOU'D HAVE A 93 FOOT CHANNEL DOWN THE MIDDLE FOR NAVIGATION.

OKAY, NOW I'M TALKING ABOUT FINGERS. SO IF YOU GO FROM MY PLACE TO SHOTWELL'S.

YOU CAN'T DO VERY GOOD, MISS MARTIN. YOU HAVE TO TURN ONE OFF IN ORDER TO DO ANOTHER.

SORRY. SO THIS RIGHT HERE? NO. RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF IT.

RIGHT HERE. SEE THAT LITTLE BOAT LIFT RIGHT THERE? NOPE.

NOPE, NOPE. TO THE DOWN TO THE LEFT. TO THE LEFT.

OH, MAYBE YOU'RE RIGHT. JIMMY, SHE'S RIGHT HERE.

SHE'S TALKING ABOUT. I THINK SHE'S TALKING ACROSS HERE. YEAH, SHE'S TALKING ABOUT THAT. WELL,

[01:20:02]

YEAH. THAT'S GOOD. YEAH. YOU'RE 207 FOOT THERE.

SO THEN GO BACK TO. I'M JUST SAYING THIS IS WHERE, YOU KNOW, ONE ON ONE BASIS.

YOU HAVE TO GET OUT THERE. YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT IT.

IF SHOTWELL WERE TO BUILD A. I SHOULDN'T USE NAMES.

ONCE AGAIN, HE WOULDN'T BE ALLOWED TO EXTEND OUT MORE THAN 25FT.

OKAY, IF HE PUT 25FT, HOW WOULD THAT GUY GET OUT? GET HIS BOAT OUT? HE'D HAVE TO GO AROUND IT. WHICH GUY? THE GUY IN THE CORNER. SO IF THERE WAS A 25FT FROM HERE.

SO YOU'D BE LOOKING AT. WE'LL SAY WE'LL START RIGHT HERE.

SHOULDN'T BE USING MYSELF BUT IF YOU'RE, IF I DID 25 THEY DID 25.

AND THE PERSON BESIDE ME DID 25. THAT'S 27. THAT'S 27.

I MEAN YOU'RE LOOKING AT A 200 FOOT WATERWAY.

YOU'RE LOOKING AT YOU'RE ONLY USING ABOUT 12.5% OF THE WATERWAY WITH THE WITH THE DOCKS ON BOTH SIDES.

THE DOCK THAT'S THERE PROBABLY EXCEEDS THE 2020 FIVE FEET.

OKAY. I, I'M JUST SAYING THAT WHEN YOU'RE GOING TO LOOK AT EACH ONE, IS IT GOING TO BE A FIRST COME, FIRST SERVE BASIS WHERE YOU. YES. RIGHT NOW YOU HAVE ENOUGH SPACE, BUT THEN YOU GO AHEAD AND BUILD YOUR DOCK AND THE PERSON LIKE THIS GUY IN THE CORNER HERE.

WELL, THE IDEA OF THE 25% IS THAT YOU WILL ALWAYS MAINTAIN 50% OF THE WATERWAY UNOBSTRUCTED, MINIMAL MINIMUM, EVEN IN THE FINGERS EVERYWHERE.

YEP. OKAY, SO THAT MEANS THAT THERE THERE WILL ALWAYS BE WHATEVER THE WIDTH OF THAT WATERWAY IS, 50% OF IT WILL BE OPEN AND UNOBSTRUCTED FOR EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.

SO EVERYONE CAN. AND THE 25, MAYBE THE CONFUSION IS THE 25% OR 25FT IS PERPENDICULAR TO YOUR SHORELINE. SO IF YOUR SHORELINE CURVES LIKE THIS, IT'S 25, 25, 25, 25, YOU KNOW, SO, SO CONFUSED.

I'M JUST CLARIFYING. OKAY, OKAY. AND ONCE AGAIN, THE RULES IN ALKALINE REALLY AREN'T CHANGING BECAUSE THE RULES RIGHT NOW IN ALKALINE STATE YOU CAN BUILD OUT TO 25% OR 25FT IF YOU HAVE A BOATLIFT.

I DIDN'T JUST MEAN AQUILINA. I'M TALKING ABOUT ALL OF THEM.

I MEAN, ALL PLACES. BUT SINCE YOU'RE ABOUT AQUALUNG, WE DON'T.

WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IT FOR YEARS IN NATURAL RESOURCES TO HAVE RIPRAP ON THE BAY FOR ALL.

PROPERTIES. SO WHERE IS THAT LEGISLATION AT? DO WE HAVE THAT IN PLACE OR NOT? THAT IS IN THE SEAWALL CODE FOR THE CITY OF NAPLES IN CHAPTER 52.

YEAH, BUT DID WE MAKE THAT POLICY? YOU'RE ALLOWED TO HAVE A SEAWALL ON NAPLES BAY, BUT YOU HAVE TO HAVE AN APRON OF RIPRAP AT THE BASE OF THAT SEAWALL.

SO IF I GO IN ON A SEAWALL RIGHT NOW, AN EXISTING SEAWALL, IT'S BEEN THERE SINCE THE 60S.

AND WE REPLACED THAT SEAWALL. I BELIEVE IT, EVEN IF I REPLACE PORTION OF THE SEAWALL, I HAVE TO ENTOMB THE ENTIRE SEAWALL IN RIPRAP UP TO MEAN HIGH WATER.

SO SO THE EVENTUAL GOAL IS, AS ALL SEAWALLS GET REPLACED ON THE BAY, EVENTUALLY THEY'LL ALL HAVE RIPRAP IN FRONT OF THEM.

BUT THAT DOES CREATE THAT. IT ALSO ADDS TO THE ISSUE OF WE'LL USE THIS AS AN EXAMPLE.

SO LIKE THIS PROPERTY HERE THEY HAVE BEEN LIMITED TO THE 25FT ON NAPLES BAY BECAUSE THIS IS WAS PUT IN NEWER.

SO YOU CAN SEE WHERE HOW DIFFICULT THAT IS WITH THE APRON OF RIPRAP TO HAVE ANY DEPTH FOR A BOAT.

HOWEVER THERE'S ALSO A SHOAL THERE. SO THAT THAT HAS TO GO INTO AND ALICE AND ANALYZING THE SITUATION. THAT WHOLE AREA THERE.

SO IT'S IT'S INTERESTING TOO, BECAUSE IF YOU THE REGULATIONS, THAT'S ONE OF THE CONFUSING THINGS IN THE ROYAL HARBOR REGULATIONS WHEN THEY THE ROYAL HARBOR REGULATIONS, YOU HAVE TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE NAVIGATIONAL, THE PRIMARY AND SECONDARY NAVIGATIONAL CHANNELS.

RIGHT NOW WE'VE RUN INTO SITUATIONS THAT'S WHERE HARBOR.

BUT IN LIKE FOR INSTANCE, WE HAD A DOCK THAT CAME IN AND WANTED TO PUT SOMETHING RIGHT HERE AND EVERYONE WAS SAYING, WELL, WHEN YOU COME OUT OF HERE, YOU COME AROUND AND YOU COME THROUGH HERE.

BUT THAT'S NOT A NAVIGATIONAL CHANNEL, THAT'S A CHANNEL THAT PEOPLE HAVE UTILIZED.

BUT IT'S NOT A MARKED OR RECOGNIZED NAVIGATIONAL CHANNEL.

SO A NAVIGATIONAL CHANNEL AS RECOGNIZED BY THE STATE IS VERY DIFFERENT.

THERE'S NOT. RIGHT. AND I UNDERSTAND. SO ROYAL HARBOR HAS THE FEDERAL LINE.

SO WHERE IS THAT. AND HOW WILL YOU I MEAN YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO TAKE THESE THINGS INTO CONSIDERATION.

YEAH. WELL THEY ARE AND THEY ADDRESS THIS IN, IN ALL OF THE, ALL OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT HAVE SEPARATE GUIDELINES FOR NAPLES BAY, ALL HAVE IT BASICALLY CAN'T GO OUT BEYOND FIVE FEET WATER DEPTH.

[01:25:06]

SO, SO LET'S, LET'S SAY FOR LET'S SAY FOR SOME REASON AND I CAN'T THINK OF A PLACE BECAUSE THE CHANNELS ARE DEEPER.

SO RIGHT THERE WITH THE FIVE FOOT, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET INTO A CHANNEL BECAUSE THE CHANNELS ARE DEEPER THAN FIVE FOOT.

SO YOUR DOC'S NOT GOING TO GO INTO A CHANNEL BASED ON THAT.

AND THEY MAKE US DO BATHYMETRIC SURVEYS ON ALL THIS. SO BEFORE WE CAN BUILD THIS, WE'VE GOT TO HAVE A SURVEY THAT GOES OUT AND PROBABLY PULLS 100 WATER DEPTHS OUT ON A PROPERTY, ALL BY A SURVEYOR, THIRD PARTY. DON'T TAKE THE MARINE CONTRACTORS WORD FOR IT.

IT'S NOT GOING TO BE ACCURATE. AND AND THEN THAT DETERMINES THEY'LL EVEN SOMETIMES DETERMINE THE POSITIONING OF THE DOCK ON THE LOT BASED ON THE WATER DEPTHS TO WHERE MAYBE ON THE LEFT SIDE, WE CAN'T EVEN GET A BOAT IN BECAUSE IT'S TOO SHALLOW. SO WE'VE GOT TO GO TO THE RIGHT BECAUSE WE HAVE A LARGER AREA OF FIVE FOOT OF WATER DEPTH.

SO ALL THAT'S IT'S BELIEVE IT OR NOT, THE NUMBERS KIND OF REGULATE WHAT YOU'RE ASKING.

I WAS LOOKING FOR. WELL, I REALIZE THAT. THAT'S WHY I'M JUST SAYING ASKING THE QUESTIONS.

BECAUSE THERE ARE FEDERAL LINES FOR ROYAL HARBOR.

THERE'S SHORELINES ALSO IN ROYAL HARBOR. THEN WE HAVE OUR NAVIGABLE CHANNEL, AND THEN WE HAVE SHOAL AND RIPRAP ISSUES ON THE SIDE. FOR INSTANCE, IN THIS AREA YOU'LL SEE THERE'S CHANNEL MARKERS.

SO THAT'S A THAT'S A CHANNEL. BUT THIS HOWEVER IS NOT RIGHT.

I RECOGNIZE THAT IT'S A CHANNEL THAT PEOPLE UTILIZE TO NAVIGATE THROUGH HERE.

BUT THAT IS NOT ACTUALLY A CHANNEL. THAT WOULD BE PROTECTED FROM ENCROACHMENT UPON.

THAT'S INTERESTING. MY BIGGEST PICTURE AND I'LL JUST STOP HERE, OKAY.

BECAUSE I'M GOING TO RELY ON YOU GUYS. HAVING THE EXPERTISE IS THE BAY IS FILLED WITH FAR MORE WELL, WE'RE DEVELOPING OUR PROPERTIES, AND EVERYBODY WANTS A DOCK.

WHETHER IT'S POSSIBLE OR NOT IS THE KEY, BECAUSE EVERYONE CAN'T HAVE A DOCK EXTENDING OUT INTO AREAS THAT ARE WATERWAYS TO GET TO PLACES OR TO GET TO YOUR CANAL.

BIG CONCERN, YOU KNOW THAT. THE OTHER IS THE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE THAT ARE ON THE WATERWAY NOW.

AND IF YOU HAVE, ESPECIALLY HERE IN THIS, WHAT WE CALL THIS SPEEDWAY.

RIGHT. IF YOU HAVE SMALL BOATS, BIG BOATS, TOURIST BOATS, YOU KNOW, THE COMMERCIAL BOATS, IT'S DANGEROUS. SO, YEAH, IT CAN BE. YEAH, YEAH.

SO ENCROACHING INTO THAT WATERWAY AND NOT HAVING ENOUGH SPACE WOULD BE MY ONLY CONCERN.

SO YOU'RE THE EXPERTS? I'M JUST PUTTING IT ON THE RECORD THAT WE JUST.

THIS IS. WE NEED TO BE SO VERY CAREFUL IN THIS.

NO, NO. AND THEY HAD THEY THEY ARE ON IT. I PROMISE YOU THAT WHEN WE'RE HAVING THESE DISCUSSIONS, THEY'RE ON IT. YOU GOT TO REMEMBER THE THE BIGGEST GROUP.

WE DON'T WANT TO ANNOY OUR NEIGHBORS. AND YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD BE LOVELY.

AND BUT, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LOT OF THESE LOTS TOO ON THE BAY WHERE, YOU KNOW, A PERSON MIGHT COME IN AND SAY, I WANT TO BRING MY 55 FOOT BOAT IN AND PUT IT ON A BOAT LIFT, AND WE'LL LOOK AROUND AND SAY, IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. YOU CAN'T GET OUT 55 FOOT ON THE NAPLES BAY, YOUR WATER DEPTH GETS DEEPER AND LARGEST BOAT YOU'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO HAVE HERE IS A 36 FOOTER. THAT'S ALL YOU'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO. RIGHT. YOU KNOW, IF YOU WANT A 55 FOOTER, THERE'S A LOT OF REALLY NICE MARINAS ALL OVER SOUTHWEST FLORIDA.

AND THAT'S THAT'S WHERE YOU KEEP YOUR BOAT. SO YOU'RE NOT YOU'RE YOU'RE NOT THE WAY THAT THEY'RE ADDRESSING THIS, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO SEE THINGS. IF ANYTHING, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE SOME DOCKS THAT WERE BUILT A LONG TIME AGO THAT PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN BUILT THAT GO WAY BEYOND THE FIVE FOOT MEAN, MEAN THE MEAN, MEAN, LOW WATER.

SO MOVING UP TO PARK SHORE, THAT'S WHAT YOU SAID.

BECAUSE THAT'S A TRICKY AREA ALSO BECAUSE IT'S SO NARROW.

WELL, I KIND OF I DO WANT TO POINT OUT JUST REALLY FAST. SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IN OAKLAND ALLOWING PEOPLE TO GO FROM. SO THIS IS NOT THIS IS PORT ROYAL, BUT RIGHT HERE YOU HAVE A 90 FOOT DOCK. AND IN AQUA THIS WOULD BE LIMITED TO 25FT.

SO I THINK IT'S THE NUMBER SOUNDS SCARY. BUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT ACTUALLY HOW MUCH THAT DOES NOT ENCROACH AND THAT'S 90FT.

YEAH I DON'T KNOW BECAUSE I CAN'T AGAIN YOU CAN'T SAY EVERYONE CAN BE 25FT.

WELL KEEP IN MIND THAT THAT, THAT, THAT TAKE A STEP BACK.

THE GENERAL GUIDELINES ARE THE 25% 25 FOOT. THAT'S FOR THE INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY.

THAT'S NOT FOR NAPLES BAY. THAT'S WHY THEY'RE WRITING SEPARATE GUIDELINES FOR NAPLES BAY, FOR THE NEIGHBORHOODS.

THAT'S WHY ROYAL HARBOR'S NAPLES BAY RULES DO NOT ARE NOT THE SAME AS PORT ROYAL.

[01:30:02]

AND NAPLES BAY, THE 25 FOOT, 25% ARE THE INLAND WATERWAY RULES, WHICH RIGHT NOW AQUILON ONLY HAS INNER WATERWAY RULES.

SO THAT'S WHY WE KEEP SAYING ABOUT THE 25% IN AQUILON ON THE BAY, BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THAT'S ALL YOU CAN DO, BECAUSE THERE ARE NO RULES FOR THE BAY. YEAH.

WERE YOU COMPLETE WITH YOUR PRESENTATION? I JUST HAD A COUPLE QUICK ONES REALLY FAST.

PARK SHORE, THE ONLY ISSUE WE REALLY RUN INTO IN PARK SHORE IS THAT THERE IS A THERE'S SOME WORDING IN THE CODE THAT SAYS THAT THERE'S A PROJECTION LIMITATION THAT YOU'RE 15FT FROM THE SEAWALL AND PROPERTY LINE, BUT THEN THERE'S THIS SENTENCE THAT SAYS MOORING PILES, CATWALKS AND OPEN BOAT LIFTS CAN BE LOCATED OFFSHORE OF PIERS AND DOES NOT PROVIDE A MAXIMUM.

NOW, REALISTICALLY, THAT WAS INTENDED TO HAVE LIKE A LITTLE CATWALK ON THE OUTSIDE OF YOUR BOAT LIFT.

UNFORTUNATELY, IN PRACTICE THIS IS WHAT WE'VE ENDED UP WITH BECAUSE A CATWALK IS JUST A THREE FOOT OR LESS DOCK.

SO THERE'S NO LIMITATION THAT. WHAT IS THAT. THAT IS CATWALKS.

SO THAT IS A THAT'S A WAY THAT HAS. YEAH. SO THAT'S BEEN INTERPRETED TO ALLOW A DOC LIKE THIS.

AND WE WOULD LIKE TO MAYBE CLEAR THAT UP BECAUSE WELL THIS IS KIND OF AND WE'VE SEEN THIS IN A COUPLE LOCATIONS.

WE HAVE ONE HERE. WE'RE STARTING TO SEE THIS.

AND THAT IS CERTAINLY NOT THE INTENT OF THAT CODE.

THAT CODE WAS INTENDED TO. SO THAT'S ONE CLARIFICATION WOULD CHANGE ABOUT THAT.

SET A LIMITATION. SET A NUMBER BECAUSE YOU CAN'T JUST HAVE MOORING PILES OUT 200FT.

SO THAT WOULD BE A IS THAT HOW BIG THAT IS. NO IT'S NOT THAT'S NOT HOW BIG THAT IS.

BUT CERTAINLY THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN RIGHT NOW, THAT'S NOT WHERE IT'S THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN RIGHT NOW.

BUT SOMEBODY COULD INTERPRET IT. TO TAKE IT 200FT OUT IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. AND WE NEED TO CHANGE THE LANGUAGE SO THAT THAT INTERPRETATION DOES. BECAUSE IF YOU'RE LIMITED ONLY TO 25% OF THE WIDTH OF THAT WATERWAY, YES, YOUR WATERWAY.

PARK SHORE PARK. SHORE RULES DON'T HAVE A MEASUREMENT FOR HOW FAR OUT YOU CAN MATCH THEM GO.

IT'S A PERCENTAGE. SO IT SAYS YOU CAN GO OUT WITH A CATWALK OR A BOAT LIFT UP TO 25% OF THE WIDTH OF THE WATERWAY.

THAT'S ALL THEY STATE. SO RIGHT NOW, IF YOU HAVE A 600 FOOT WATERWAY, YOU COULD BUILD A TWO FOOT WIDE BY 150 FOOT LONG DOCK OUT THERE.

AND IT'S PERFECTLY LEGAL. AND AND WE DON'T WANT THAT TO BE LEGAL.

SO THAT'S, THAT'S THE ONLY THING THERE. THAT'S THE ONLY REGULATION IN PARK SHORE THAT THEY'RE TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT SOMEBODY IS NOT GOING TO BUILD THAT CATWALK THAT'S GOING TO GO OUT 100 TO 150FT OUT INTO THE BAY.

GO AHEAD. AND THEN THE ONLY OTHER CHANGE WE HAD FOR IS THERE'S AN EXCEPTION SECTION IN YOUR CODE.

AND WHAT THAT SAYS IS IT SAYS IN CONSIDERATION OF THE FACT THAT NUMEROUS CANALS AND WATERWAYS HAVE UNDULATING, NON-PARALLEL SHORELINES AND DEAD END AREAS WHERE PLATTED LOTS HAVE MINIMAL WATERFRONT FOOTAGE.

EXCEPTIONS TO THE SIDE YARD SETBACK OR THE SHORE NORMAL DIMENSION MAY BE GRANTED UPON APPROVAL OF THE CITY MANAGER IN CONSULTATION WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER.

THE AFFECTED NEIGHBORS AND THE SUBDIVISION PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION, IF APPLICABLE.

NOW WHERE? THAT'S TRICKY FOR US. AS IT JUST SAYS IN CONSULTATION IT DOESN'T REQUIRE CONSENT APPROVAL.

IT JUST SAYS I TALK TO MY NEIGHBOR. THEY HATE IT.

THEY SAID NO, BUT I TALKED TO MY NEIGHBOR. THAT'S TRICKY.

AND THEN ALSO THAT HAS BEEN INTERPRETED IN THE PAST TO BE IS THERE A PROBLEM? OH, SORRY, I DIDN'T KNOW. THAT'S BEEN INTERPRETED IN THE PAST TO APPLY.

I THINK THE, THE IMPORTANT LANGUAGE THERE IS THAT IN ALL OF THESE INSTANCES, IT SHOULD BE THAT HAVE MINIMAL WATERFRONT FOOTAGE. YOU CAN HAVE A DEAD END OF A CANAL THAT HAS 200FT OF WATER FRONTAGE.

I DON'T THINK THAT THAT SHOULD BE WHERE THE EXCEPTION IS GRANTED.

SO WE WOULD JUST LIKE TO CLARIFY THAT SECTION.

AND THEN ALSO TO SAY THAT IF YOU CONSULT YOUR ADJACENT NEIGHBOR, BECAUSE THIS IS ESSENTIALLY WHAT THIS ALLOWS, IS, ALLOWS YOU TO PUT YOUR DOCK RIGHT UP AGAINST YOUR ADJACENT PROPERTY.

IF YOU CONSULT YOUR NEIGHBOR AND THEY DON'T AGREE WITH IT, THEN IT WOULD GO TO CITY COUNCIL, BECAUSE THAT'S THAT'S A TOUGH ONE FOR STAFF TO SAY.

WE CONSULTED OUR NEIGHBORS, THEY BOTH HATE IT.

AND THEN I HAVE TO DECIDE, YOU DEFINITELY NEED TO DECIDE WHETHER TO APPROVE IT OR NOT.

CLEAR? YEAH. YEAH. AND THEN APPROVAL PROCESS.

AND THEN I THINK IT'D BE NICE. WHERE IT SAYS LIMITED WATERFRONT WATERFRONT FOOTAGE.

THE MOORINGS DOES A REALLY GOOD JOB. THE MOORINGS SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFIES THOSE PROPERTIES THAT HAVE 45FT OR LESS OF WATER FRONTAGE AS PROPERTIES THAT GET THE EXCEPTION.

SO I THINK WE'VE ALREADY ESTABLISHED A STANDARD OF WHAT LIMITED WATER FRONTAGE IS.

AND IT WOULD BE NICE TO MAKE THAT CONSISTENT BECAUSE I DON'T WANT SOMEONE COMING IN AND SAYING, OH, I HAVE 100FT, BUT I CAN'T,

[01:35:04]

VICE MAYOR. YEAH. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. ERICA.

SO MY QUESTIONS IS, AND I THINK THAT NOT SPEAKING, EVERYBODY CAN SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES, OF COURSE, BUT I THINK THAT THERE IS PROBABLY A CONSENSUS TO MOVE FORWARD AND MAKE THESE KIND OF THINGS HAPPEN.

BUT AFTER LISTENING TO THE COMMUNITY. RIGHT. SO IN THAT LISTENING TO THE COMMUNITY PART, WE ALL KNOW ABOUT THE HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATIONS. THAT'S ONE PART. BUT THEN THERE'S WHEN I LOOK AT THIS, THERE'S SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, THERE'S MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, THERE'S COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, AND THERE'S WATERFRONT PROPERTIES.

RIGHT? MAYBE THERE'S NOTHING THERE. MAYBE IT'S A LOT.

DO WE. IF WE INTEND TO REACH OUT TO ALL OF THESE INDIVIDUALS, ALL THESE PROPERTY OWNERS, RIGHT, TO LET THEM KNOW ABOUT THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME AND HAVE INPUT INTO THIS PROCESS.

WHAT ARE WE GOING TO USE TO REACH THESE PEOPLE? DO WE HAVE A CONTACT LIST OF ALL PROPERTIES THAT ARE HAVING A PIER, DOCK OR BOAT LIFT, OR PROPERTIES HAVING LAND DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS, WHICH INCLUDE A PIER, A DOCK AND A BOAT LIFT? NO, IT WOULD BE AN ALL OR NOTHING. IT WOULD BE. WE WOULD JUST HAVE TO REACH OUT TO EVERYONE THAT WE SEND NORMAL COMMUNICATION WITH.

YEAH, I DON'T HAVE A SPECIFIC LIST OF WATERFRONT PROPERTIES AND AM I USING THE RIGHT TERMS? IS IT ONLY APPEAR A DOCK OR A BOAT LIFT? NO. THIS WOULD BE CHANGES TO THE THAT WHOLE SECTION, WHICH ALSO CONTROLS THE VESSEL TO BE MOORED, THEIR MOORING PILES, CATWALKS, ALL OF THOSE MOORING MOORING PILES.

YEAH. SO JUST LIKE A PILING. SO THESE ARE DOCK REGULATIONS BUT IT INVOLVES MORE THAN THAT.

YEAH IT DOES. YEAH. OKAY. WELL SO THE SECTION, THE SECTION 5693 IS PIERS AND BOATLIFT SITING AND DIMENSIONS. BUT IT PROVIDES, YOU KNOW, DEFINITIONS OF BOATLIFT CATWALKS, FLOATING VESSEL PLATFORMS, PIERS YOU KNOW, ALL THE DIFFERENT. SO OVERALL IT WOULD BE YOU'VE BRIEFED CITY COUNCIL ON THIS THEN IT'S REACHING OUT AT SOME POINT AND THEN BRINGING THIS ALL BACK TO CITY COUNCIL FOR DECISIONS ON REGULATIONS AND LANGUAGE CLARIFICATION AND ANY CHANGES TO REGULATIONS.

YES. AND I THINK THE MAYOR HAD ASKED THAT WE DO THAT IN A WORKSHOP.

FIRST TIME IN A WORKSHOP. THAT'S GOOD. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR.

THAT'S ALL. YEAH, I DON'T, SIR. YEAH, I THINK THAT'S FAIR AND EASIER FOR STAFF AND TRYING TO MAKE SENSE OF THESE CHANGES.

SO MY BIGGEST BECAUSE THIS IS LARGE, AND I AGREE, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO MAKE SOME CHANGES, BUT IS THE CHANGES THAT ARE HAPPENING ON THE WATERWAY FROM MIRACLE MILE AREA IN THE MOORINGS.

IS THAT MOORINGS? YEAH. WELL, COQUINA SANDS AND MOORING.

YEAH. YOU'RE RIGHT. SO AND THEY'RE ALL GOING.

GOING TO BE REDEVELOPED. I MEAN, WE HAVE TO LOOK AT WHAT COULD HAPPEN, WHAT MIGHT HAPPEN, AND THEN FOR THE NEW DEVELOPMENT, BUT ALSO HOW IT AFFECTS THE OLDER DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE AT THE END THERE, RIGHT AT THE BRIDGE WHERE PEOPLE CAN'T EVEN GET A LITTLE DOCK TO PUT TO STORE THEIR PADDLE BOARDS.

RIGHT? YEP. IT'S PRETTY. HAS THAT BEEN RESOLVED? WELL, THAT'S PART OF WHAT WE WANT TO ADDRESS. THERE'S, THERE'S WE HAVE SOME PRETTY CONSTRICTED AREAS OF THE WATERWAYS. YES THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS. SO THIS IS PRETTY COMPREHENSIVE. YES, THIS WOULD BE ALL NEIGHBORHOODS.

YEAH. SO WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, SOME AREAS HERE THAT GET VERY, VERY CONSTRICTED.

OKAY. AND I DID SEE THAT IT IS HIGH TIDE, RIGHT.

WE'RE LOOKING AT HIGH. I MEAN, BECAUSE IF THEY RUN AGROUND FOR LOW TIDE AND THERE'S A SHOAL OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

OH, WELL, THEY DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT IT. SO THEY DO THE NEGATIVE FIVE MEAN LOW WATER.

NEGATIVE FIVE. MEAN WATER. YEAH. WHILE YOU'RE AT IT, COULD YOU PUT SOME LANGUAGE IN THERE ABOUT DIGGING A CANAL OVER TO SUN TERRACE SO I CAN MAKE MY. SO YOU CAN GET GOLF ACCESS? SURE. NO, I SECOND THAT. THAT THAT CAN ONLY HAPPEN AT CLAM PASS. THAT'S IT. ANYTHING ELSE? NO. I JUST WANTED TO TEST THE WATERS AND SEE IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR OF MOVING FORWARD.

I HAVE A CONSENSUS. YES. I WILL SAY, THOUGH, AND I'M NOT TRYING TO CAUSE DIFFICULTY, BUT WE HAVE TO HAVE NATURAL RESOURCES AT THE

[01:40:04]

SO WE'RE TEN YEARS AGO, YOU MAY HAVE SEEN A 35 30 FOOT AVERAGE.

THEY'RE NOW EASILY 40, 45 FOOT WITH THREE OUTBOARD ENGINES.

WHEREAS FOR A BOAT THAT LARGE IT WOULD BE AN INBOARD ENGINE WHICH IS CONSTRAINED OBVIOUSLY WITH YOUR YOUR WATER FEATURES.

BUT NOW ALMOST ANYBODY CAN DRIVE A BOAT WITH THREE ENGINES ON THE BACK THAT'S 45FT LONG ALMOST.

SO IT'S THAT THIS TECHNOLOGY IS CHANGING QUITE A BIT FOR BOATS, SO IT'S GOOD TO GET IN FRONT OF THIS QUICKLY.

SO THIS IS THIS IS WHAT HAS ALWAYS CONCERNED ME BECAUSE PEOPLE DO HAVE A RIGHT TO THEIR VIEWS OF THE WATER.

AND I KNOW YOU MENTIONED IT, MISS MARTIN, BUT THAT'S HARD BECAUSE YOU CAN PUT IN A DOCK AND PUT THAT BIG BOAT ON A LIFT AND IT OBSTRUCT YOUR NEIGHBOR'S VIEW. AND THE NEIGHBOR BY THAT.

SO I WANT TO MAKE IT, YOU KNOW, NOT UNIFORM, BUT EASIER.

AND BUT WE COULD GET OURSELVES INTO A LOT OF TROUBLE AND HAVE A LOT OF HEARTACHE WITH NOW BLOCKING PEOPLE'S VIEWS, BECAUSE IT WOULD INFURIATE ME.

I MEAN, I BUILT MY HOUSE SO THAT I DIDN'T BLOCK MY NEIGHBOR'S VIEW OF THE WATER.

WELL, IT GOT KNOCKED DOWN AND A HOUSE WENT UP, AND NOW I CAN'T SEE.

REQUIRING IT TO GO FARTHER OUT THAN COMING IN.

SO YOU'RE NOT. BUT AGAIN, IF IT'S REGULATED AND THEY CAN DO IT, THEN THERE'S NO DISCRETION ON WHETHER THAT'S OKAY OR NOT.

AND THAT HAS TO BE THE I MEAN. YES, MISS PENMAN.

I MEAN, COUNCIL MEMBER PENMAN FOR THE ATTORNEY.

I MAY HAVE MADE A COMPLETE MISTAKE AT ONE POINT IN TIME, IN THAT THERE WAS AN ATTORNEY 2 OR 3 TIMES AGO BEFORE YOU THAT DECLARED THAT THE STATE LAW SAYS YOU ARE NOT ENTITLED TO A VIEW IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA.

CAN YOU CLEAR THAT UP FOR US? YEAH. YES. VIEWS ARE HARD TO REGULATE.

LIKE YOU'RE IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, LIKE, LET'S SAY YOU'RE BUILDING WELL, SKIP THE PART ABOUT BOATS, BUT BASICALLY, IF YOU'RE BUILDING A BLOCK OFF OF THE OCEAN, YOU CAN'T SAY, I ONCE HAD THIS VIEW OF THE OCEAN, AND NOW YOU'RE BUILDING IN FRONT OF IT. YOU DON'T HAVE A RIGHT TO THAT VIEW CORRIDOR.

DOCS, AS FAR AS VIEWS, YOU DO HAVE RIPARIAN RIGHTS.

AND I WON'T GET INTO THE, THE HOW THEY MEASURE THAT, BUT IT'S BASED ON YOUR SIDE YARD SETBACKS.

AND SO THAT KIND OF DICTATES WHAT YOUR VIEW IS.

IN TERMS OF LIKE, YOUR RIPARIAN RIGHTS GOING OUT INTO THE WATERWAY.

DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? CLEAR. OKAY. AND I'M HAPPY IF THE CONTRACTOR WANTS TO CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG.

BUT THE THE RIPARIAN RIGHTS ARE REALLY WHAT DICTATES YOUR YOUR VIEW CORRIDOR.

BUT YOU CAN REGULATE YOU'RE ALLOWED TO REGULATE DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF.

I'VE SEEN MUNICIPALITIES AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS DO LIKE MULTIPLE CRITERIA FOR FOR CERTAIN DOCKS AND WHETHER OR NOT IT IMPINGES ON A VIEW AREA. AND BUT YOU HAVE TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT WHAT THAT VIEW IS LIKE, YOU KNOW? IS IT STRAIGHT OUT IN A TYPICAL SQUARE LOT ON A TYPICAL CANAL WOULD BE STRAIGHTFORWARD, OR DOES IT GO OUT FROM THE CORNER OF YOUR PROPERTY? BUT IT'S IT'S BASICALLY DICTATED BY YOUR RIPARIAN RIGHTS.

AND THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION BECAUSE WAS THAT DIFFERENT THAN THE OTHER ATTORNEY?

[01:45:06]

AND THAT WAS WE DON'T ALLOW YOU TO PUT A COVER OR A BOATHOUSE OVER YOUR BOAT FOR THAT REASON.

CORRECT. RIGHT. BUT DO WE WHAT GUIDELINES DO WE HAVE IN OUR CODE NOW ABOUT RIPARIAN RIGHTS? WE DON'T. AND WE USE THE STATES OR WE DO NOT ENFORCE THE REGULATIONS.

SO OUR WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING IN OUR CODE THAT ADDRESSES YOUR VIEW, A NEIGHBOR'S VIEW OR ANYTHING WE TALK ABOUT, WE PROVIDE A SURE PARALLEL DIMENSION MEANING YOUR SIDE SETBACK, ESSENTIALLY, AND WE PROVIDE A SHORT NORMAL DIMENSION, HOW FAR YOU CAN EXTEND FROM INTO THE WATERWAY.

THOSE ARE THE TWO DIMENSIONS THAT WE PROVIDE. AND THE ONLY THING THAT WE THE ONLY OTHER TWO THINGS WE REGULATE OUTSIDE OF THAT ESSENTIAL BUILDING ENVELOPE, IS THAT YOU DO NOT IMPEDE NAVIGATION OF THE CHANNEL, AND THAT YOU DO NOT INSTALL A DOCK THAT WOULD PROHIBIT A NEIGHBOR FROM THE USE OF THEIR DOCK. SO ESSENTIALLY, IF YOUR NEIGHBOR HAS TO ACCESS HIS BOAT LIFT THIS WAY, YOU CAN'T PUT YOUR DOCK RIGHT HERE.

THAT WOULD PREVENT HIM. SO THOSE ARE THE TWO THINGS THAT WE ACCESS AND NAVIGATION.

AND THEN WE PROVIDE THE BUILDING ENVELOPE. AND THE ONLY CAVEAT I WILL SAY TO VIEWERS IS IF SOMEONE COMES IN FOR A VARIANCE, THAT'S SOMETHING TOTALLY DIFFERENT AS OPPOSED TO WHAT YOU'RE WHAT YOU'RE ENTITLED TO AS OF.

RIGHT. BUT IF SOMEONE WERE TO ASK FOR A VARIANCE, THEN YOU CAN BUILD CRITERIA THAT TALKS ABOUT VIEWS AND OTHER THINGS.

BECAUSE THEY'RE ASKING FOR SOMETHING THAT'S GREATER THAN WHAT EVERYONE ELSE IS ENTITLED TO.

AS OF. RIGHT? YES. ISN'T. I'M SORRY.

ANYONE ELSE? YES. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY. SO THE RIPARIAN RIGHTS ARE REALLY.

IS THIS CORRECT? THEY'RE REALLY EMBEDDED IN OUR REGULATIONS FROM SETBACKS AND HOW FAR YOU CAN GO OUT.

SO OUR CODE DOESN'T WE DON'T, YOU KNOW, SAY RIPARIAN RIGHTS, BUT WE DO PROVIDE.

YEAH. THE THE BUILDING ENVELOPE, WE CALL IT, WE TELL YOU ESSENTIALLY THE BOX IN WHICH YOU CAN BUILD YOUR DOCK.

AND THEN WE MAKE SURE THAT YOUR DOCK DOESN'T PREVENT YOUR NEIGHBOR FROM NEIGHBORS, FROM, YOU KNOW, UTILIZING SAFELY THEIR DOCKS OR PREVENT THE PUBLIC FROM THE NAVIGATIONAL CHANNEL.

OKAY, BUT IT'S NOT VIEW ORIENTED. IT'S IT'S ACCESSIBILITY ORIENTED.

OKAY. BECAUSE I THOUGHT THE SIDE SETBACK WOULD, WOULD TAKE CARE OF THE VIEW IN SOME CASES.

NO, IT'S IT'S A SEPARATION OF USES TO IT JUST MAKES SURE THERE'S ENOUGH SPACE FOR PEOPLE TO SAFELY UTILIZE THEIR WATER FRONTAGE FOR THEIR OWN DOCKS.

BUT I MEAN, IT DOES PREVENT IT, YOU KNOW, SEPARATES FOR VIEW.

IT'S THE SAME CONCEPT AS A SIDE YARD SETBACK FOR A HOUSE.

IF YOU HAVE GREATER SIDE YARD SETBACKS, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE GREATER VIEWS INHERENTLY.

AND WE DID DISCUSS PROBABLY IN 2010 ALLOWING, YOU KNOW, OTHER MUNICIPALITIES ALLOW PEOPLE TO PUT COVERS OR BOAT HOUSES.

AND YOU'LL NOTICE IN NAPLES, WE DON'T ALLOW THAT.

THE ONLY BOATHOUSES YOU SEE ARE OVER EXISTING RECESSED SLIPS, BUT YOU DON'T SEE ANY BOAT COVERS EXTENDING BEYOND THE SHORELINE.

WE DON'T ALLOW YOU TO PUT EVEN A CANVAS OR ANY SORT OF COVER.

SO AND REMEMBER, WE HAVE AFFORDABLE HOUSING SETBACKS IN MOST AREAS OF SEVEN FEET.

WELL, SO ALSO THE SIDE SIDE SETBACKS AS WE'RE GOING TO CALL THEM, THE SHORE.

PARALLEL REGULATIONS IN YOUR CODE FOR DOCKS MIMIC THOSE OF THE ZONING DISTRICT.

SO IF YOU ARE IN A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HAS A 7.5FT SIDE SETBACK, THAT APPLIES ALSO TO YOUR DOCK, MOST NEIGHBORHOODS HAVE, YOU KNOW, SEVEN AND A HALF, TEN, YOU KNOW, PORT ROYAL'S OR LARGER.

BUT YEAH. SO YOU'LL YOU'LL SEE THAT SIMILAR SETBACK FOR DOCKS.

THANK YOU. OKAY. BUT WE'LL COME BACK WITH MUCH MORE DETAILED LANGUAGE ONCE WE WORK WITH.

THANK YOU FOR ALL YOUR HARD WORK. THANKS, ALEX.

THANK YOU, MR. GARLAND. OKAY, THAT CONCLUDES ITEM SIX.

CONTINUING ON TO ITEM 60. MR. YOUNG. OH, THANK YOU MAYOR.

[6.D) A Presentation and Update on the Summer, Holiday and After School Camps Offered by the Community Services Department.]

AND CHAD MERRITT IS HERE TO LEAD THIS DISCUSSION.

GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING, CHAD MERRITT, COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR.

I'M ACTUALLY GOING TO LET AARON RUN THIS PRESENTATION.

I THINK IT'S UP NOW. BUT JUST TO KIND OF GIVE YOU AN UPDATE OR AN INTRO TO WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO.

[01:50:09]

WE TRY TO MAKE ENHANCEMENTS. WE TRY TO DO THINGS BASED ON WHAT THE NEEDS ARE OF THE COMMUNITY ARE.

AND WE DO EVALUATIONS AND YOU'LL HEAR THAT IN THIS PRESENTATION.

BUT THE PURPOSE OF THIS IS TO KIND OF UPDATE YOU ON WHAT'S GOING ON.

A LOT OF GOOD THINGS HAPPENING WITH OUR SUMMER CAMPS, HOLIDAY CAMPS AND SOME OF OUR PROGRAMS FOR THE KIDS.

BUT WE WANTED TO KIND OF HIGHLIGHT THAT, BUT ALSO EXPLAIN AND HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT SOME NEEDED CHANGES MOVING FORWARD.

THIS COMING UP YEAR THAT WE FEEL WILL HELP WITH OUR DELIVERY OF OUR PROGRAMS AND SO ON.

SO WITHOUT FURTHER ADO, I'LL ALLOW AARON TO INTRODUCE HIMSELF AND START THE PRESENTATION.

GOOD MORNING. THANK YOU. CHAD. MORNING. MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL, AARON HOPKINS, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT. SO I JUST WANTED TO FIRST AND FOREMOST SAY THANK YOU GUYS. AND YOU SHOULD BE VERY PROUD OF THE COMMUNITY SERVICE DEPARTMENT AND THE STAFF THAT WE HAVE THAT PUT ON THESE SUMMER CAMPS FOR BOTH THE RESIDENTS AND VISITORS OF THE CITY OF NAPLES AND COLLIER COUNTY.

SO WE'RE SUPER EXCITED TODAY TO PRESENT THIS STUFF TO YOU GUYS.

AND I'M JUST GOING TO JUST JUMP RIGHT ON INTO IT. SO THE COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT OFFERS A VARIETY OF YOUTH CAMP PROGRAMS, BOTH FOR RESIDENTS AND VISITORS. AND OUR YOUTH CAMP PROGRAMS ARE LED BY COMMUNITY SERVICES STAFF AS WELL AS CONTRACTED INSTRUCTORS, AND WE OFFER FULL DAY AND HALF DAY OPTIONS. THIS PAST SUMMER, WE HAD SEVEN IN-HOUSE SUMMER CAMPS AS WELL AS EIGHT CONTRACTED SUMMER CAMPS.

WE HAD 15 DIFFERENT OPTIONS FOR OUR RESIDENTS AND VISITORS TO CHOOSE FROM.

SO AGAIN, WE WANT TO KIND OF GIVE YOU GUYS AN EXPLANATION AND AN UNDERSTANDING OF HOW WE REALLY GO ABOUT DOING ALL THIS STUFF.

SO REGISTRATION OPENS UP EVERY SINGLE YEAR IN THE FIRST WEEK OF MARCH, AND THAT IS FOR SPECIFICALLY THE CITY OF NAPLES RESIDENTS AS WELL AS CITY STAFF. REGISTRATION IS COMPLETED IN PERSON AND IT IS DONE AT ONE OF OUR COMMUNITY CENTERS.

OBVIOUSLY, FOR US TO KNOW THAT YOU LIVE IN THE CITY, YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE US WITH SOME SORT OF DOCUMENTATION, AND THEN THE FULL PAYMENT IS DUE AT THE TIME OF REGISTRATION.

GOING INTO THE SECOND WEEK OF MARCH, WE OPEN UP ONLINE REGISTRATION FOR EVERYBODY.

THIS PAST YEAR WAS THE FIRST TIME THAT WE DID THAT, AND WE HAD A LOT OF SUCCESS FOR THAT.

I JUST REALLY WANTED TO MAKE THAT A POINT. I PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE SAID THIS AT THE BEGINNING, BUT BEFORE I STARTED WORKING HERE AT THE CITY, I WORKED OVER AT THE COUNTY AND THEY OFFERED AN ONLINE OPTION, AND WE HAD VERY MUCH SUCCESS WHEN I WAS THERE.

SO WE WANTED TO BRING THAT OVER TO THE CITY AS WELL.

AND THAT OBVIOUSLY WAS THE CASE HERE AS WELL.

WE HAD A GREAT ONLINE REGISTRATION PORTION GOING INTO WEEK THREE.

WE OPEN IT UP FOR BOTH IN-PERSON AND ONLINE REGISTRATION.

AND THAT'S OPEN TO EVERYBODY, RESIDENTS AND VISITORS.

AND I WANTED TO REALLY TOUCH ON THAT. WE DO OFFER SCHOLARSHIPS AS WELL FOR THE COMMUNITY ANYONE THAT'S GOING TO BE ATTENDING THE RIVER PARK DAY CAMP, WE OFFER THOSE SCHOLARSHIPS FOR THEM. THEY HAVE TO FILL OUT SPECIFIC CRITERIA.

AND THEN WE EVALUATE THAT AND OFFER THEM A SPECIFIC AMOUNT OF SCHOLARSHIP.

SO I ALSO WANTED TO TOUCH ON SOME OF OUR CAMP OFFERINGS.

I MENTIONED WE HAD 15 CAMPS THAT WE OFFERED LAST SUMMER.

I DON'T NECESSARILY YOU KNOW WHAT, I'LL GO THROUGH THAT REAL QUICK. WE HAD ARCHERY CAMP. WE HAD ART CAMP, ADVENTURE CAMP, BEACH VOLLEYBALL CAMP, BMX SKATE CAMP, EXTREME SPORTS FISHING FITNESS CAMP, THE VERY POPULAR OCEAN KIDS JUNIOR LIFEGUARD BEACH CAMP.

IT'S BEEN AROUND FOR A LONG TIME. WE'RE VERY PROUD OF OUR RACING ROOSTERS SWIM TEAM, OUR RIVER PARK, SUMMER DAY CAMP, SOCCER CAMP, SUPER SCIENCE SWIM AND SNORKEL, TENNIS PLUS AND THE ONES THAT ARE HIGHLIGHTED.

IF YOU COULD SEE ON THE SCREEN, THE ONES THAT ARE HIGHLIGHTED AGAIN WERE THE ONES THAT WE RAN IN-HOUSE, AND THEN THE ONES THAT WERE NOT HIGHLIGHTED WERE THE ONES THAT WERE THE CONTRACTED PROGRAMS. SO THIS KIND OF GIVES YOU THIS NEXT SLIDE HERE GIVES YOU GUYS A BREAKDOWN OF THE CAMP NAME.

AGAIN THE REGISTRATION NUMBERS AND HOW MANY WEEKS IT WAS OFFERED.

I WON'T GO THROUGH ALL THESE, BUT I WILL HIGHLIGHT, AS YOU CAN SEE OUR LARGEST CONTRACTED CAMP WITH 605 REGISTRATION REGISTERED PARTICIPANTS WAS OCEAN KIDS. AND THEN WE HAD 497 KIDS REGISTERED FOR OUR RIVER PARK SUMMER DAY CAMP, SO WE'RE SUPER HAPPY ABOUT THOSE AND OUR SUMMER CAMP LAST YEAR. IF YOU GUYS AREN'T FAMILIAR WITH THIS WE RUN OFF OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS CALENDAR.

SO AS CHAD MENTIONED BEFORE OUR OUR NO SCHOOL DAY CAMPS, OUR HOLIDAY CAMPS AND OUR SUMMER CAMPS ARE ALL BASED OFF OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOL. LAST YEAR THEY OFFERED TEN WEEKS OF CAMP.

SO AS YOU CAN SEE, TENNIS PLUS SUPER SCIENCE RIVER PARK DAY CAMP, OCEAN KIDS AND ADVENTURE CAMP WERE OFFERED EVERY SINGLE WEEK OF THE SUMMER, AND IN TOTAL, WE HAD 2156 KIDS REGISTERED FOR OUR SUMMER CAMPS LAST YEAR.

SO WE WERE VERY, VERY PROUD OF THAT NUMBER, AND WE HOPE THAT THAT WILL CONTINUE TO INCREASE AS THE YEARS GO ON.

[01:55:06]

GIVE YOU GUYS SOME OF THE HIGHLIGHTS OF THESE CAMPS AS WELL.

SO EXTREME SPORTS CAMP. SUPER EXCITED ABOUT THAT.

THAT WAS A CONTRACTED PROGRAM AT ONE POINT IN TIME.

IF YOU CAN SEE IN THE PICTURE OUR OUR STAFF MEMBER THERE, CHRISTINA.

SHE WAS ACTUALLY A CONTRACTED INSTRUCTOR, AND WE WERE ABLE TO BRING HER ON AS AN FTE.

THIS PAST YEAR, SHE'S RUNNING THE EXTREME SPORTS CAMP IN-HOUSE NOW, AS WELL AS SHE'S MANAGING A LOT OF OUR YOUTH PROGRAMS OVER AT THE FLESHMAN PARK COMMUNITY CENTER. IN THIS PARK OR EXCUSE ME, THIS CAMP SPECIFICALLY, WE CONCENTRATED ON SURFING, SKIMBOARDING AND SKATEBOARDING.

THEY WENT OVER TO LOUDERMILK BEACH PARK, HAD A GREAT TIME, AND THEY ALSO UTILIZED THE JOHNNY NOCERA EDGE SKATE PARK FOR THIS CAMP AS WELL.

MOVING ON TO OUR NEXT CAMP, WE HAD FISHING CAMP.

THIS IS THE FIRST TIME WE OFFERED FISHING CAMP IN THE CITY.

WE INITIALLY OFFERED IT FOR THREE WEEKS. IT SOLD OUT IN 15 MINUTES.

SO WE ADDED AN EXTRA WEEK DUE TO THE POPULARITY.

AND WE FISHED ALL OVER THE CITY. I ALSO WOULD LIKE TO SAY WE FISHED OVER THE COUNTY.

CHAD AND I HAVE A REALLY GOOD RELATIONSHIP WITH THE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT OVER AT THE COUNTY, AND WE TALKED TO THE DIRECTOR OVER THERE, JAMES. HE ALLOWED US TO USE SOME OF THE FISHING HOLES OVER IN THE COUNTY, AND WE UTILIZED FREEDOM PARK, EVEN THOUGH THAT IS WITHIN OUR, OUR JURISDICTION.

SO VERY HAPPY WITH THE THE FITNESS CAMP OR EXCUSE ME, FISHING CAMP.

MOVING ON. OUR FITNESS CAMP THEY CONCENTRATED ON SPEED, AGILITY, STRENGTH TRAINING, KICKBOXING.

AND THEY WANTED TO IMPROVE THE OVERALL YOUTH ATHLETE.

GREAT CAMP. I BELIEVE THIS WAS THE FIRST TIME WE OFFERED THIS CAMP AS WELL.

BUT WE DO OFFER THIS PROGRAM THROUGHOUT THE YEAR OVER AT THE FLESHMAN PARK COMMUNITY CENTER.

NEXT UP WE HAVE OUR RIVER PARK AQUATICS. SO I REALLY WANTED TO, TO TO HIGHLIGHT THESE.

I THINK SWIMMING AND WATER SAFETY IS VERY, VERY, VERY IMPORTANT, ESPECIALLY LIVING IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA.

LIVING ALONG THE COAST. SO IN THIS PROGRAM WE DO LEARN TO SWIM COURSES.

SO THERE'S A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT SWIM LESSON COURSES THAT WE OFFER.

WE AGAIN ARE SUPER PROUD OF OUR RACING ROOSTER SWIM TEAM.

A LOT OF THOSE INDIVIDUALS START OUT AS YOUTH, AND THEY END UP SWIMMING FOR THE NAPLES HIGH SWIM TEAM, AND THAT'S ALSO UTILIZED. THE RIVER PARK AQUATIC POOL IS ALSO UTILIZED BY THE NAPLES HIGH SCHOOL SWIM TEAM FOR PRACTICE.

WE HAD A SWIM AND SNORKEL CAMP THERE AND THEN WE HAD SWIM CENTRAL.

WE ALSO HAD THREE DIFFERENT GROUPS THAT WERE COMING OVER FOR SWIM CENTRAL, WHICH IS THE SWIM LESSONS THAT WE PARTNER WITH THE NCH SAFETY AND HEALTH COALITION, I BELIEVE IS CORRECTLY HOW YOU SAY IT. WE HAD FUN TIME EARLY CHILDHOOD ACADEMY THAT CAME OVER.

WE HAD LIGHTHOUSE OF COLLIER, THE CENTER FOR BLIND AND VISUALLY IMPAIRED, AND THEN WE HAD OUR CHILDREN IN OUR OWN IN-HOUSE SUMMER CAMP UTILIZE OUR SWIM LESSON PROGRAM THE RIVER PARK DAY CAMP. WE HAD FOUR.

AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, WE HAD HUNDRED AND 96 CAMPERS OVER TEN WEEKS.

THEY DID A VARIETY OF ARTS, CRAFTS, AND GAMES.

WE TOOK THEM ON FIELD TRIPS BOTH IN THE COUNTY AND OUTSIDE OF THE COUNTY.

THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I THINK IS REALLY, REALLY COOL. IT'S A GREAT PROGRAM.

THE FREE LUNCH IS OFFERED TO ANYONE UNDER THE AGE OF 18.

IF ANY OF YOU GUYS ARE FAMILIAR WITH THE SUMMER BREAK SPOT PROGRAM, IT'S UTILIZED BY THE COUNTY PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT, THE CITY, AS WELL AS THE SCHOOL DISTRICT. ANYBODY THAT'S UNDER THE AGE OF 18 ENROLLED IN A CAMP OR NOT, HAS THE ABILITY TO GO TO THE RIVER PARK COMMUNITY CENTER AND EAT LUNCH FOR FREE FOR TEN WEEKS OF THIS, OR I BELIEVE IT'S EIGHT WEEKS OF THE SUMMER. AS I MENTIONED, THE SCHOLARSHIPS ARE AVAILABLE FOR THAT SPECIFIC CAMP, AND WE OFFER THOSE SWIM CENTRAL SWIM LESSONS, SO WE'RE SUPER HAPPY ABOUT THAT.

AND LAST BUT NOT LEAST WAS OUR TENNIS PLUS CAMP.

WE HAD 306 CAMPERS REGISTERED OVER TEN WEEKS.

WE'RE VERY PLEASED WITH THAT NUMBER. A LOT OF THE PARENTS AND A LOT OF THE FAMILY MEMBERS, THEY ARE VERY CONSCIOUS OF THE FACT THAT WE WON THE OUTSTANDING TENNIS AWARD THROUGH USTA TWO YEARS AGO.

SO WE HAVE A TOP NOTCH FACILITY THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, SO WE'RE SUPER HAPPY ABOUT THAT.

WE OFFER FULL DAY AND HALF DAY OPTIONS FOR OUR TENNIS CAMPS.

WE DO A PIZZA FRIDAY FOR THE KIDS. THEY DO A LOT OF DIFFERENT DRILLS FOR ALL DIFFERENT AGES.

WE HAVE WEEKLY MATCH PLAY TOURNAMENTS FOR THE KIDS.

IT'S ALWAYS GOOD TO HAVE SOME COMPETITION BRINGS OUT THE BEST OF THE KIDS.

AND WE ALSO, AS YOU CAN SEE IN ONE OF THESE PICTURES TOO, WE HAVE A WATER SLIDE WEDNESDAY. IF YOU GUYS EVER DRIVE BY AND SEE THE BIG WATER SLIDE UP.

KIDS REALLY LIKE THAT. TRY TO LET THEM ENJOY THEMSELVES IN CAMP, NOT JUST PLAYING TENNIS AS WELL.

SO NEXT NEXT UP HERE IS OUR PROGRAM AFTER ACTION.

SO WITH ALL OF THOSE CAMPS THAT WE OFFERED, WE WANTED TO ALWAYS EVALUATE THEM.

[02:00:04]

RIGHT. SO WE DO THAT BY A VARIETY OF THINGS. WE HAVE MEETINGS WITH OUR STAFF.

WE HAVE MEETINGS WITH OUR CONTRACTED INSTRUCTORS.

WE HAVE SURVEYS THAT WE PUT OUT AND WE REVIEW ALL OF THAT STUFF.

SO AGAIN THE DATA IS COLLECTED AND HELPS WITH PROGRAM ENHANCEMENTS, MODIFICATIONS OR IN SOME CASES THE ELIMINATION OF A PROGRAM.

IT'S NOT WELL RECEIVED. IT'S NOT TRENDING AS MUCH AS IT USED TO BE.

IF YOU GUYS REMEMBER BACK IN THE 90S, THEY WERE PUTTING UP THOSE ROLLER HOCKEY RINKS ALL OVER THE PLACE. THAT WOULD BE A PROGRAM WE PROBABLY WOULDN'T DO OR A CAMP WE WOULDN'T DO.

IT'S A TRENDING IN THE IN THE NEGATIVE. THIS THIS INFORMATION ALSO HELPS US WITH OUR BUDGET DEVELOPMENT IF WE'RE GOING TO BE BRINGING IN NEW CAMPS, SO ON AND SO FORTH, WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO PUT TOGETHER OUR PROGRAM PLANS, WHICH CONSIST OF SUPPLIES, STAFFING, FIELD TRIP BUDGETS, SO ON AND SO FORTH.

SO AGAIN, WE'RE HERE TODAY IN DECEMBER TO TALK TO YOU GUYS ABOUT THE UPCOMING YEAR.

JUST SO THAT YOU GUYS KNOW, CAMP ENDS IN AUGUST.

WE'RE ALREADY IN SEPTEMBER, THE FOLLOWING MONTH, PLANNING FOR THE FOLLOWING SUMMER.

SO THIS IS A A YEARLY THING THAT WE PLAN FOR WHICH I THINK IS VERY IMPORTANT.

NEXT THING I WANTED TO REALLY TOUCH ON WAS THE MODIFICATIONS THAT WE MADE IN 2025.

AND AGAIN, THIS WAS REALLY DUE TO OUR EVALUATIONS OF THESE PROGRAMS. SO WE REMOVED SPECIALTY CAMPS WITH LOW PARTICIPATION NUMBER AND POOR LOGISTICS.

WE THEN ADDED SOME NEW CONTRACTED SPECIALTY CAMPS AND MODIFIED SOME OF OUR OTHER PROGRAMS TO INCREASE PARTICIPATION NUMBERS.

OBVIOUSLY, WE WANT TO MAXIMIZE THE ENROLLMENT.

IT HELPS OUT WITH OUR BUDGETING AS WELL. WE WANT TO BRING IN REVENUE TO THE CITY AS WELL. WE ADDED THAT WEEKLY REGISTRATION OPTION AT RIVER PARK CAMP AS OPPOSED TO JUST FULL SUMMER. I WANTED TO REALLY TOUCH ON THAT. IN THE PAST, IT WAS JUST A FULL SUMMER.

THIS PAST SUMMER, WE ALLOWED PEOPLE TO REGISTER FOR WEEK ONE, WEEK TWO.

THEN THEY COULD JUMP INTO WEEK 7 OR 8. THEY DIDN'T HAVE TO SIGN UP FOR THE ENTIRE SUMMER.

SOME PEOPLE ARE GOING ON VACATIONS, SO WE THOUGHT THAT THAT WAS A REALLY GOOD OPTION FOR THEM.

WE ATTENDED SOME SUMMER CAMP FAIRS. IF YOU GUYS ARE FAMILIAR WITH THE SUMMER CAMP FAIRS, THEY'RE JUST LIKE AFTER SCHOOL FAIRS.

SO WE PARTICIPATED IN A FEW OF THEM. IT'S REALLY THE LARGEST ONE WAS AT THE NORTH COLLIER REGIONAL PARK.

WE HAD STAFF THERE REPRESENTING THE DEPARTMENT AND OUR CONTRACTED INSTRUCTORS, AND IT REALLY GAVE PEOPLE AN IDEA OF WHAT WE HAVE TO OFFER.

WE DO WE DO BELIEVE THAT THE INCREASED ENROLLMENT NUMBERS, DEFINITELY.

THAT DEFINITELY HELPED US OUT WITH THAT. WE DID COMPLETE A FEE STUDY AS WELL THAT WASN'T SUCCESSFULLY IMPLEMENTED.

I KNOW THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH GARY ON TO BRING TO YOU GUYS IN THE FUTURE. BUT WE DO HAVE A NEW FEE FEE SCHEDULE THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO PRESENT TO YOU GUYS EVENTUALLY. IN-PERSON REGISTRATION AND THE ONLINE REGISTRATION OPTIONS WERE ADDED.

THAT WAS VERY IMPORTANT. OUR RECREATION COORDINATORS, AS I MENTIONED, DID SOME NEW IN-HOUSE PROGRAMING.

WE ADDED SOME NEW CAMPS. WE CREATED A NEW SUMMER CAMP GUIDE, AND WE LINKED IT TO OUR WEBSITE SO THAT PEOPLE COULD CAN EASILY REGISTER ONLINE.

YOU'RE A MOM. YOU'RE A DAD. YOU'RE WORKING. YOU CAN'T ALWAYS COME IN TO THE ACTUAL FACILITY.

YOU'RE ABLE TO DO THAT RIGHT FROM YOUR DESK OR RIGHT FROM YOUR PHONE. SO THAT WAS A HUGE OPPORTUNITY FOR US.

WE PARTNERED WITH THE STAR ABILITY FOUNDATION TO ASSIST WITH ONE ON ONE PERSONAL CARE.

WE REVISED OUR SCHOLARSHIP CRITERIA, AND WE ALSO WORK WITH THE NAPLES POLICE DEPARTMENT ON REVISING OUR BACKGROUND CHECK PROCESS FOR OUR CONTRACTED INSTRUCTORS AND VOLUNTEERS. AND THOSE VOLUNTEERS, A MAJORITY OF THEM ACTUALLY WERE THE THE HELPERS THAT TAKE PLACE AT OCEAN KIDS.

SO WITH THAT BEING SAID AFTER EVALUATING ALL THE CAMPS THAT WE HAD THIS PAST YEAR, WE'RE PROPOSING THE THESE MODIFICATIONS FOR 2026. WE WANT TO MOVE THE FOCUS BACK TO THE 5 TO 13 YEAR OLDS FOR OUR IN-HOUSE SUMMER CAMP, SPECIFICALLY AT THE RIVER PARK DAY CAMP, THEIR HOLIDAY CAMPS AND THEIR OUT OF SCHOOL CAMPS.

WITH NO LONGER, EXCUSE ME, DOING THE AGES OF 14 TO 22 YEARS OLD, BUT IN CONJUNCTION WITH THIS CAMP, TRANSITIONING THIS AGE GROUP THROUGH ADDITIONAL PARTNERSHIPS WITH STAR ABILITY. WE WANT TO CONTINUE OUR PARTNERSHIP WITH STAR ABILITY FOR THE ONE ON ONE PERSONAL CARE, BUT SPECIFICALLY FOR AGES FIVE THROUGH 13. WE WILL BE BASED ON THE FEEDBACK THAT WE RECEIVED.

WE WILL BE ADDING AN AFTER CAMP OR AN EXTENDED DAY OPTION FOR THE HALF DAY SPECIALTY CAMPS FOR AGES 5 TO 13, SO THAT THEY DO HAVE THE ABILITY TO STAY IN OUR CARE ALL DAY, WHICH WE HAVE PART TIME STAFF AND THAT HAS BEEN BUDGETED FOR FY 26.

SO WE DO HAVE THE FUNDS TO DO THAT. THIS WILL ALSO ALLOW US TO TO GENERATE SOME ADDITIONAL REVENUE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROGRAM.

WE PLAN TO ADD SOME SPECIALTY CAMPS IN FOR SUMMER CAMP 2026.

I KNOW WE WANTED TO ADD IN SOME SPORTS CAMPS AND SOME OTHER COOL SPECIALTY CAMPS.

WE'RE ALSO IN THE PROCESS OF REVISING AND UPDATING OUR SUMMER CAMP POLICIES AND PROCEDURES AND OUR SUMMER CAMP MANUAL,

[02:05:03]

AND WE'RE DEVELOPING. THIS WAS A GREAT I KNOW THIS WAS DISCUSSED WITH ALL OF YOU GUYS IN OUR BUDGET MEETINGS.

THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT I KNOW CHAD IS VERY PROUD OF AS WELL. WE ARE DEVELOPING A PAID INTERNSHIP PROGRAM TO ENHANCE OUR PROGRAMS AND SUPPORT OUR SUMMER CAMP OFFERINGS, AND IT'S ALSO HELPING WITH THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF RECREATION PROFESSIONALS.

CHAD AND I BOTH HAVE MULTIPLE DEGREE, MULTIPLE DEGREES IN THE RECREATION FIELD.

WE'RE VERY PROUD OF THAT, AND WE WOULD LOVE TO CONTINUE TO HAVE OUR COLLEGE STUDENTS FOLLOW IN OUR PROFESSION AS WELL.

HOPEFULLY, SITTING UP HERE ONE DAY AND SPEAKING TO CITY COUNCIL LIKE WE ARE.

SO FOR FUTURE DISCUSSIONS STAFF ARE RECOMMENDING WAITING FOR THE MASTER PLAN UPDATE TO BE COMPLETED BEFORE ADDING NEW SECTIONS OF PROGRAMING. HOWEVER, THE FUTURE DISCUSSIONS WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE ARE ENHANCING.

EXCUSE ME THE FOCUS IN THE FOLLOWING AREAS. SO OUR TEENAGERS, 14 TO 17 YEARS OLD, ADDING PROGRAMS AND OPPORTUNITIES.

STAFF FOCUS ON THIS AGE GROUP WITH VOLUNTEER OPTIONS.

OUR YOUNG ADULTS BETWEEN 18 AND 25 ADDING SOME SOME MORE PROGRAMS FOR THEM AS WELL.

OUR ADULTS FROM 26 TO 64 USING THE SAME STAFF FOR YOUNG ADULTS WITH THE SAME PHILOSOPHY.

OUR SENIORS FOR 65 AND UP, SAME THING. AND OUR INCLUSIVE RECREATION.

WHICH IS REALLY WE HAVE THERE'S MULTIPLE OPTIONS.

THERE COULD BE AND AGAIN, I'LL SPEAK ON THIS FROM MY OWN EXPERIENCE WORKING OVER AT THE COUNTY.

THE COUNTY HAS A SPECIFIC DEPARTMENT. IT'S CALLED THE AIR DEPARTMENT, WHICH STANDS FOR ADAPTIVE INCLUSIVE RECREATION, WHICH IS REALLY A SPECIALIZED DIVISION IN THE PROGRAMING FOR ALL AGES.

THAT HANDLE THE INCLUSIVE RECREATION PORTION.

AND THEN THERE'S OPTION TWO, WHICH EACH SECTION ABOVE WOULD HAVE A STAFF MEMBER HANDLING INCLUSIVE PROGRAMS FOR THAT AGE.

SO THERE'S DIFFERENT OPTIONS THAT WE COULD TAKE AND PRESENT TO YOU GUYS FOR MOVING FORWARD.

SO I JUST WANTED TO REALLY TOUCH ON THAT. AND, AND I'LL ADD SOMETHING TO THAT PART OF THIS CONVERSATION.

THE REASON THIS SLIDE IS IN HERE IS TO UNDERSTAND THAT CURRENTLY OUR DEPARTMENT, THE WAY WE HAVE IT SET UP IS WE HAVE STAFF THAT HANDLE PROGRAMS FOR ALL AGE GROUPS.

SO THEY HAVE TO TRY TO SPREAD THAT OUT SO WE DON'T HAVE SOMEBODY THAT WE CAN SAY, OKAY, I NEED YOU TO FOCUS ON THIS AGE GROUP.

I NEED YOU TO FOCUS ON THIS AGE GROUP, OR WE DON'T HAVE STAFF THAT SAY, HEY, WE NEED YOU TO FOCUS ON INCLUSIVE RECREATION.

WE TRY WE HAVE TO TIE THAT STUFF IN. SO THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT WHEN WE LOOK AT THIS MASTER PLAN, WHEN IT COMES THROUGH WHAT THE NEED IS, AND IF THERE IS A NEED TO REALLY FOCUS ON SOME OF THOSE AGE GROUPS, THEN THAT'S HOW WE NEED TO MAKE THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS MOVING FORWARD.

AND WE DON'T WANT TO JUST TAKE A SHOT IN THE DARK, SO TO SPEAK, AND START ADDING AND SAYING, OKAY, WE'RE GOING TO FOCUS THIS SECTION OF OUR DEPARTMENT ON ADULTS AGES 26 TO 64.

WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT IS A NEED WITHIN OUR COMMUNITY.

AND I THINK WE'RE MAKING THE NECESSARY STEPS.

AND WE'LL ACTUALLY, ONCE WE HAVE THAT NEW UPDATE TO THE MASTER PLAN, THAT WILL REALLY SHINE A LOT OF LIGHT ON WHERE WE NEED TO GO.

SO IN I APPRECIATE AARON FOR DOING THIS PRESENTATION.

HE'S VERY PASSIONATE ABOUT SUMMER CAMP. THAT'S WHY I COULDN'T LET HIM GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS ON ON TALKING WITH YOU ALL.

BUT YOU KNOW, SUMMER CAMPS ARE VERY IMPORTANT IN MANY DIFFERENT LEVELS AND BUILDING KIDS, AND ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY'RE TRANSITIONING FROM ONE GRADE TO ANOTHER GRADE. AND THEN YOU'VE ALSO GOT IT'S VERY IMPORTANT FOR A PARENT WHEN THE PARENTS AT WORK DURING THE SUMMER TIME, WHAT DO I DO WITH MY CHILD THAT'S CONSTRUCTIVE? AND THAT'S THAT'S WHY THIS IS ALWAYS SOMETHING THAT IS WELL RECEIVED IN THE COMMUNITY.

BUT AS YOU HEARD THAT AFTER ACTION OR AFTER CARE ADDITION THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, A LOT OF WHAT WE HAD COMING TO US WAS THE WORKING MOM AND THE WORKING DAD THAT SAID, I'D REALLY LOVE MY KID TO PARTICIPATE IN THE FISHING CAMP, BUT THE FISHING CAMPS FROM 8:00 TO 12:00. SO WHAT DO I DO WITH MY CHILD BETWEEN 12:00 AND 05:00? AND THAT'S WHAT THIS IS HELPING TO MEET THAT GAP.

AND WE EXPECT THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE WELL RECEIVED IN THAT ASPECT.

BUT IT IS GOOD TO GET IN FRONT OF YOU ALL. AND WE GET IN FRONT OF KESSAB AND WE HAVE THESE CONVERSATIONS, BUT BE ABLE TO GET IN FRONT OF YOU ALL AND SAY, THIS IS WHERE WE'RE AT, THIS IS WHAT WE'RE DOING, AND THIS IS WHY WE DO. IT IS ALWAYS GOOD. BUT WE ALSO WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR IF YOU SEE ANYTHING OF THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS OR ASK, THEN WE WOULD HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY.

[02:10:03]

DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING? I'M SORRY. WAIT. YOU'RE DONE. I YOUR ENTHUSIASM IS INCREDIBLE.

I MEAN, I SAW YOU ON FRIDAY AS A DJ AND KEEPING THE CHRISTMAS PARTY UPBEAT AND FABULOUS JOB, BUT I I'M IMPRESSED WITH THE CARING AND COMMITMENT.

I DO HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS ON THE EXPANSION AND WHY.

BUT ALL I HAVE VICE MAYOR, AND THEN I HAVE KRAMER.

BUT, MR. YOUNG, WOULD YOU LIKE TO GO? THE ONLY THING THAT I WANTED TO TOUCH ON IS THE.

IF YOU CAN GO BACK TO THE MODIFICATIONS IN 2026, I DIDN'T WANT IT TO BE A BURIED LEAD, FOR LACK OF A BETTER EXPRESSION.

AND AS THEY ARTICULATED WITH A NUMBER, YOU KNOW, NUMBERS OF STAFF AND ANALYZING AFTER THE MASTER PLAN.

THERE'S NO ADDITIONAL STAFFING THAT'S BEING ASKED FOR IN RELATION TO ANY OF THE PLANS IN 2026.

IF YOU RECALL, NET BUDGET FOR 2026 FOR THAT DEPARTMENT ACTUALLY REDUCED BY ONE.

SO I WANTED TO SAY THAT, BUT THE FIRST TWO ITEMS HERE, AS IT PERTAINS TO AN INCLUSIVE CAMP AND OFFERING AGES 5 TO 13 AND BEING DONE IN RIVER PARK AND CONTINUING TO BE MAINTAINED, IT TRANSITIONS TO A PARTNERSHIP WITH STAFF ABILITY FOR AGES 14 PLUS.

AND I DIDN'T WANT THAT TO BE BURIED IN THE SLIDE, BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT COMPONENT, AS OPPOSED TO US DOING FROM 5 TO 18 AND BEING IN THE SAME GROUP.

THIS BIFURCATES THAT A LITTLE BIT BASED ON AGES PRIOR TO THEM AGING OUT.

SO I DIDN'T I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT'S PART OF THE CONVERSATION.

SO WE HAVE CLEAR UNDERSTANDING AND OR CONSENSUS OR DIRECTION OTHERWISE WHEN WE LEAVE HERE TODAY, BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT COMPONENT.

YEAH. AND I'LL ADD, SINCE HE'S TOUCHED A LITTLE BIT ON THAT, THAT AGE GROUP JUST IN THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS WE'VE HAD ABOUT WELL, ACTUALLY THIS PAST YEAR WE HAD TEN THAT WERE IN THAT AGE GROUP THAT WENT DOWN FROM 17 THE YEAR BEFORE, BECAUSE A LOT OF THAT GROUP IS STARTING TO AGE OUT AND THEY'RE DOING THEIR THEIR OWN THING, I GUESS. BUT WE HAD TEN THIS LAST YEAR. ONE OF THEM, WHICH WAS A CITY RESIDENT AND THAT PERSON HAS AGED OUT AS WELL.

SO COMING INTO THIS COMING UP YEAR, THIS, WE FELT THIS WOULD BE A GOOD TRANSITION PERIOD TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT.

BUT AS THAT PARTICIPATION CONTINUES TO GO DOWN AND THE PEOPLE CONTINUE TO OR THE THE PARTICIPANTS CONTINUE TO AGE OUT, THIS WAS A GOOD TIME TO TRANSITION AND FOCUS ON THE ONE AGE GROUP STILL HAVING AN INCLUSIVE COMPONENT BECAUSE IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO HAVE INCLUSIVE. AND JUST FOR THE RECORD, THAT'S WHERE I STARTED.

MY CAREER WAS INCLUSIVE RECREATION. AND I THINK I'VE SAID THIS BEFORE UP HERE, BUT IT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO ME, AND I THINK THAT BEING ABLE TO OFFER THOSE OPPORTUNITIES FOR KIDS TO BE ABLE TO PARTICIPATE IN AND BEING ABLE TO OFFER A PROGRAM THAT ALLOWS THEM TO DO SO IS VERY IMPORTANT. SO WE'RE VERY BENEFICIAL OR VERY BENEFICIAL THAT WE'RE ABLE TO DO THAT AND WE'RE PLANNING TO CONTINUE THAT.

SO THAT'S IT. THANK YOU, VICE MAYOR CRAMER. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR.

GENTLEMEN, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I APPRECIATE ALL THE EFFORT THAT YOU AND YOUR TEAM PUT INTO THESE PROGRAMS. AND JUST LOOKING AT THE NUMBERS, WE CAN TELL HOW IMPORTANT IT IS TO OUR COMMUNITY AND THOSE AROUND THE COMMUNITY.

MY QUESTION IS THIS WHAT DO WE HAVE IN PLACE TO ADDRESS ANNUAL CERTIFICATION OF OUR INSTRUCTORS IN THE AREA OF SAFETY AND SECURITY. THERE'S A VARIETY OF MEASURES THAT WE TAKE.

SO OUR FIRST AND FOREMOST, I'LL SPEAK ON THE CONTRACT INSTRUCTORS.

THEY ALL HAVE TO HAVE A CONTRACT. THOSE CONTRACTED INSTRUCTORS HAVE TO FILL OUT PAPERWORK. THEY HAVE TO HAVE THEIR OWN INSURANCE, THINGS LIKE THAT. WE ALSO DO ACTUAL TRAININGS WITH THEM. WE ARE NOT MANDATED. OUR PROGRAM SPECIFICALLY IS NOT MANDATED BY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES DCF.

HOWEVER, I'M TRYING TO THINK OF HOW I CAN SAY THIS TO MAKE YOU UNDERSTAND.

SO YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH OSHA, RIGHT? IF YOU'RE NOT AN OSHA CITY, DOESN'T MEAN YOU STILL CAN'T FOLLOW OSHA STANDARDS.

WE'RE NOT A WE'RE NOT A DCF REGULATED SUMMER CAMP, BUT WE FOLLOW THOSE STANDARDS.

SO ALL OF OUR STAFF ARE TRAINED IN WITH THOSE STANDARDS THAT THEY THAT THEY FOLLOW.

NUMBER ONE. NUMBER TWO, AS I MENTIONED IN OUR PRESENTATION, WE HAVE A SUMMER CAMP MANUAL THAT WE PUT TOGETHER THAT HAS A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT THINGS.

IT COULD BE GETTING ON AND OFF THE BUS DOING COUNTS.

WE FOLLOW THE NATIONAL PARKS AND RECREATION STANDARDS. WE FOLLOW FLORIDA PARKS AND RECREATION STANDARDS.

SO WE SEND STAFF TO TRAININGS THAT FLORIDA FRPA HAS.

[02:15:01]

WE HAVE STAFF THAT ARE CERTIFIED PARKS AND RECREATION PROFESSIONALS. SO THERE'S A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT THINGS THAT WE DO TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY, NUMBER ONE, UNDERSTAND THE SAFETY AND SECURITY OF BEING A COUNSELOR.

THEY'RE IN YOUR CARE. THE WAY THAT WE KIND OF SAY IT IS, WE'RE MOM AND DAD.

ONCE YOU GET DROPPED OFF, WE'RE MOM AND DAD UNTIL MOM AND DAD OR GUARDIAN COMES BACK AND PICKS YOU UP.

SO IN A ROUNDABOUT WAY TO ANSWER THAT, WE DO A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT TRAININGS, BOTH NATIONALLY, STATEWIDE AND THEN IN-HOUSE TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL OF OUR STAFF ARE VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE SAFETY POLICIES AND PROCEDURES IN IN ADDITION TO JUST THE CITY POLICIES AND PROCEDURES IN GENERAL.

THANK YOU. AND THAT'S, YOU KNOW, WITHOUT GETTING INTO BECAUSE YOU CAN GET IN THE WEEDS ON THAT ALL DAY LONG, I COULD GO ALL DAY. BUT BUT THAT'S REALLY IT.

IT'S TWO, TWO, TWO SPECIFIC PARTS. ONE, THE SECURITY OF THESE KIDS WHO HAVE BEEN ENTRUSTED TO OUR CARE JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE TAKE A FRESH LOOK AT THAT EVERY YEAR, AND THAT WE TAKE THE TIME TO REFRESH OUR OWN PEOPLE ON, ON PROTOCOL AND THEN INCIDENT RESPONSE.

SO HEAVEN FORBID SOMETHING HAPPENS, BUT WE'RE ALL CLEAR ON WHAT TO HAPPEN.

WHAT HAPPENS WHEN SOMETHING UNFORTUNATE DOES HAPPEN? YEAH. ON UNFORTUNATELY ON A DAILY BASIS THAT THAT'S THERE'S ALWAYS THAT POTENTIAL.

WE HAVE AN INCIDENT REPORT FORM THAT WE FILL OUT.

SOMETIMES IT'S IT'S TAKEN WITH THERE'S ALWAYS A WRITTEN DESCRIPTION FILLED OUT.

THERE COULD BE PICTURES. WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO WORK WITH IT TO GET CAMERA FOOTAGE, SO ON AND SO FORTH.

SO WE, WE MAKE SURE THAT THOSE ARE FILLED OUT PROPERLY.

INCIDENTS HAPPEN ON THE PLAYGROUND. THE KIDS ARE HAVING FUN. IT'S JUST PART OF SUMMER CAMP.

IT'S JUST LIKE SPORTS. THINGS HAPPEN. ACCIDENTS HAPPEN, INJURIES HAPPEN.

SOUNDS LIKE YOU GUYS ARE ON TOP OF IT. THANK YOU.

AND I'D LIKE TO JUST ADD THIS AS WELL. WE DO WORK WITH THE NAPLES POLICE DEPARTMENT.

SO. AND THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. SO AGAIN, IT'S NOT SPECIFICALLY MANDATED TO US, BUT WE DO FIRE DRILLS.

WE DO ACTIVE SHOOTER TRAININGS, WE HAVE SAFE SPOTS.

ALL THE THINGS THAT WE THAT THEY WOULD REALLY LEARN IN SCHOOL.

IT'S JUST HEY GUYS, YOU LEARN THIS IN SCHOOL.

LET'S REMEMBER HOW WE DO THIS IN SUMMER CAMP AS WELL.

AND THEN YOU ALSO HAVE YOUR HEALTH SIDE OF IT.

SO OUR STAFF ARE TRAINED FOR MEDICATIONS FOR EPIPENS.

I'M I'M ACTUALLY THE PERSON THAT TRAINS THEM IN CPR, FIRST AID AND AED RESPONSE.

AND THEY'RE DONE EVERY TWO YEARS AS THEIR CERTIFICATION THROUGH THE AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION. SO IF THERE IS AN INCIDENT THAT'S HEALTH RELATED OR MEDICAL RELATED.

I, I FEEL THAT THEIR STAFF ARE READY TO PERFORM IF NEEDED.

I FEEL A LOT BETTER HAVING THIS DISCUSSION. THANK YOU.

SURE. THANK YOU. KRAMER. YOU JUST BROUGHT UP A LOT OF THE STUFF I WAS GOING TO BRING UP BECAUSE FOLKS THINK, OH, IT'S CAMP AND IT'S PARKS AND REC AND HAVE AT IT, AND THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT IN LOCO PARENTIS IS THE LEGAL RAMIFICATIONS OF THAT.

I HAVE NO IDEA THAT YOU BETTER KNOW WHICH IS THE CUSTODIAL PARENT AND WHICH ISN'T, BECAUSE YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THAT CONTENTION IS.

THAT'S CORRECT. SHOUT OUT TO YOU FOLKS WHO DEAL WITH THE KID THAT GOT DROPPED OFF WITHOUT HIS SHOES, WHICH WITH 2000 KIDS, THAT PROBABLY HAPPENS EVERY DAY OR WHATEVER.

THE THING IS, THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO HAVE FORGOT THEIR TOWEL. THEY FORGOT THEIR SUNSCREEN.

YEAH. PARENTS DROPPED THEM OFF KNOWING THEY WERE THROWING UP THAT MORNING OR HAD A SICK STOMACH AND WAS COMING OUT THE OTHER END.

AND YET YOU NOW YOU GET TO DEAL WITH THAT. THAT'S A LOT OF FUN.

AND IT'S ALMOST AS MUCH FUN AS THE PARENTS WHO YOU.

I KNOW THIS HAPPENS EVERY DAY. DID I DID YOU KNOW I DID CAMP WITH Y'ALL AND WITH THE COUNTY AND THERE'S INEVITABLY WHATEVER HAPPENED.

AND THERE MAY BE A GOOD REASON THAT IT'S AN HOUR AFTER THE TIME THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO PICK UP THE KID AND THEY'RE STILL NOT THERE.

SURE, THAT'S EVERY DAY. YES IT IS. I SAY ALL THAT TO SAY KUDOS TO YOU ALL AND YOUR IMPACT PLAYERS AND THANK YOU FOR THAT.

ESPECIALLY WITH THE PEOPLE IN OUR COMMUNITY THAT NEED SOMETHING CONSTRUCTIVE AND PRODUCTIVE TO DO.

YEAH. WHEN THERE ARE NO PARENTS AROUND. ABSOLUTELY.

SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND ALSO I THINK THE INTERNS THAT'S A THAT'S A FANTASTIC IDEA.

IN THE LAST VENTURE I WAS ON, WE JUST STARTED DIGGING INTO THAT A GOOD BIT. AND THERE IS THAT IS A A GREAT PLACE TO FIND TALENT AND AND HELP YOU WITH YOUR, WITH YOUR RATIOS OF. YEAH, IT'S A COMMON IT'S A COMMON PRACTICE IN OUR PROFESSION MYSELF GRADUATING FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF TOLEDO. GO ROCKETS. I HAD TO DO TWO INTERNSHIPS TO GRADUATE, SO IT REALLY PREPARED ME FOR SITTING HERE TODAY. YEAH. VERY MUCH. DO WE HAVE. DO WE NEED ONE ON ONES WITH SOME OF THOSE KIDS? DO THEY PROVIDE THAT? HOW DOES THAT WORK? THEY DO, THEY DO.

SO THEY'VE THEY'VE GOT A A PARTNERSHIP THAT WE'VE ACTUALLY MERCY AND HER TEAM AND MERCY'S OVER THERE.

SO I GIVE HER A SHOUT OUT. HAS WORKED WITH STAR ABILITY VERY WELL OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS.

THEY'VE DEVELOPED A WAY TO PROVIDE THAT ONE ON ONE FOR THOSE THAT NEED IT, AND IT'S WORKED OUT REALLY WELL.

[02:20:07]

THEY HAVE A WAY TO HAVE IT FUNDED, AND AS LONG AS IT CONTINUES TO BE FUNDED, THEN IT WILL CONTINUE TO BE AN OFFER.

SO THAT'S THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I WAS HEADING BECAUSE THAT'S YEAH, IT'S HARD TO BE SUSTAINABLE FOR THAT TYPE OF STUFF WHEN IT'S FUNDED THROUGH YOU KNOW, DIFFERENT FOUNDATIONS AND SO ON THAT, THAT HELP OUT.

WELL, THANKS FOR ALL. YOU ALL DO. IT'S GREAT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I JUST WANT TO ALSO SAY THANK YOU TO YOU TWO GUYS AND EVERYBODY ELSE IN THE ROOM AND NOT IN THE ROOM FROM THE DEPARTMENT AND THE CITY GENERALLY.

WHO'S DOING WHAT YOU'RE DOING? I'M THINKING BACK HERE TO TWO, MAYBE THREE YEARS AGO WHEN I'M NOT SAYING IT WAS THE LAST TIME WE HEARD ABOUT THIS, BUT WE HAD A PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION ON THIS.

AND SINCE THEN, THE. ARRAY OF PROGRAMS HAS INCREASED TREMENDOUSLY.

THE NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS HAS INCREASED TREMENDOUSLY.

THE INCLUSIVE COMPONENT, WHICH 2 OR 3 YEARS AGO YOU WERE SITTING HERE, CHAD.

AT LEAST YOU WERE. AND WE THOUGHT WE WERE GOING TO HAVE TO END THAT BECAUSE OF THE CHALLENGES WITH BEING ABLE TO STAFF IT PROPERLY AND WITH PROVIDING THAT LEVEL OF CARE AND ATTENTION THAT WE NEEDED TO PROVIDE.

AND OBVIOUSLY YOU WE FIGURE OUT A WAY TO ADDRESS THAT TO STAR ABILITY FOUNDATION PARTNERSHIP, I THINK WAS A KEY PART OF THAT.

AND, YOU KNOW, THAT WAS A TREMENDOUS THING TO DO TO BE ABLE TO CONTINUE TO HAVE THAT COMPONENT.

SO IN SO MANY WAYS I THINK THIS PROGRAM, WHICH WAS ALWAYS SOMETHING IMPORTANT FOR THE CITY, HAS JUST MOVED TO A WHOLE NOTHER LEVEL. AND THE LAST THING I'LL SAY IS THAT I WOULD JUST ENCOURAGE YOU TO BE VERY CONSERVATIVE AND CAUTIOUS AND CAREFUL ABOUT EXPLORING SOME OF THESE OTHER POSSIBLE EXPANSIONS IN THE FUTURE, PARTICULARLY IN OTHER AGE GROUPS. AND I KNOW YOU'RE YOU SAID YOU'RE GOING TO WAIT TILL THE MASTER PLAN IS DONE AND SO ON.

BUT TO ME, THE THE SUMMER PROGRAMS ARE ABOUT KIDS AND AND WE CAN IT TAKES A LOT OF WORK TO CONTINUE TO PROVIDE THE RIGHT KIND OF PROGRAMING FOR THE KIDS.

AND THERE'S NO REASON WHY WE CAN'T BUILD THOSE PROGRAMS EVEN FURTHER.

AND SOME OF THESE OTHER AGE GROUPS HAVE OTHER RESOURCES AND ORGANIZATIONS AND PROGRAMS THAT ARE SERVING THEM.

SO I'M NOT SAYING NEVER, NEVER, BUT I'M JUST SAYING BE MY OPINION, BE BE BE CAUTIOUS AND REMEMBER WHO THE MAIN CUSTOMER IS.

BUT IN CLOSING, JUST THANK YOU FOR WHAT YOU'RE DOING.

THANK YOU. SO COUNCILMEMBER CUSHMAN BRINGS UP A VERY GOOD POINT.

JUST BEING AT THIS AT 16 YEARS WE'VE ALWAYS TRIED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T DUPLICATE WHAT THE COUNTY HAS, BECAUSE THE COUNTY DOES SUCH A GREAT IN PROVIDING SUMMER CAMP.

BUT MAKING SURE OUR STAFF, I THINK, USES OUR SUMMER CAMP MORE THAN ANYBODY.

AND I THINK THAT'S A HUGE BENEFIT FOR OUR STAFF AND THE COMMUNITY.

AND, AND THE CITY RESIDENTS I UNDERSTAND YOUR ENTHUSIASM ABOUT EXPANDING IT, BUT WE NEED TO LOOK AT THE BUDGET AND MAKE SURE THAT'S WHERE THE PARKS AND RECREATION IS.

WE'RE GOING AND EXPANDING, AND I'D LIKE TO HEAR MORE ABOUT THOSE OFFERINGS BECAUSE YOU HAVE FULL INTENTIONS OF DOING IT.

WE SHOULD REALLY KNOW WHAT WHAT YOU'RE THINKING.

OH. GO AHEAD. YEAH. SO WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT EXPANDING, WE'RE ONLY TALKING ABOUT EXPANDING BASED ON WHAT THE MODIFICATIONS WERE IN THAT ONE SLIDE.

WHEN YOU LOOKED AT THE LAST SLIDE, WE WERE TALKING ABOUT WAITING UNTIL THE MASTER PLAN WAS COMPLETED TO BE ABLE TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT WE WERE GOING TO HAVE ANY NEEDED CHANGES.

THOSE THOSE THINGS ARE NOT BEING MOVED ON AT THIS TIME.

THE ONLY THING THAT WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW IS WHAT THE THE IMMEDIATE NEED IS AND WHAT WAS BUDGETED, WHICH WAS TO PROVIDE THAT AFTER CARE AFTER THE SPECIALTY CAMP GOT IT, THAT WAS BUDGETED FOR AND IN DOING SOME OF THESE IN HOUSE. AND IF YOU REMEMBER, ACTUALLY IT WASN'T THIS PAST YEAR, IT WAS THE YEAR BEFORE.

[02:25:01]

AND WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO DO THAT. BUT THE ONLY THING THAT WE REALLY ADDED WHEN YOU LOOKED AT IT IS YOU LOOK AT THE EXAMPLE IS THE FISHING CAMP.

THE FISHING CAMP FILLED UP REALLY QUICK. WE ADDED A COUPLE OF WEEKS ON TO THAT.

THAT FILLED UP IMMEDIATE. SO ANY OF THAT THAT WAS REVENUE COMING IN OFFSETTING THAT AND THAT WAS A NEED.

SO IT'S NOT AN ADDITION BECAUSE WE WITHOUT KNOWING THAT THERE'S A NEED, WE MAKE SURE THAT WHAT'S DONE IS JUSTIFIED AND THAT WE HAVE HAVE IT IN OUR BUDGET.

YEAH. WHO USED TO DO THE FISHING CAMP. IT WAS ONLY FOR A WEEK AND IT SOLD OUT QUICKLY.

THAT WOULD KELLY WOULD PROBABLY DON'T DON'T SPEAK.

OH, SORRY. YEAH. KELLY, IF YOU WANT TO COME UP REAL QUICK, ANSWER THAT.

SHE'S. SHE WOULD BE FAMILIAR. IT WAS BEFORE I GOT HERE.

I THINK THEY STOPPED A WAYS. IF YOU INTRODUCE YOURSELF.

KELLY LEE, RECREATION SUPERVISOR. WE DID OFFER A FISHING CAMP.

IT WAS ACTUALLY RUN BY A CONTRACTED INSTRUCTOR.

SHE ALSO RAN OUR SHE STILL RUNS OUR ARCHERY CAMP AND OUR ART CAMPS.

SHE IS A CERTIFIED INSTRUCTOR THROUGH THE FISH AND WILDLIFE, UNDER BOTH THE FISHING AND THE ARCHERY CAMP.

AND THOSE DID FILL OUT. AND WE WE WENT WE TRANSPORTED THEM IN OUR VEHICLES.

THEY FISHED AT THE PIER. THEY FISHED AT LOUDERMILK.

I BELIEVE IT WENT TO EAGLES LAKE ALSO, AND THAT THE FISHING CAMP HAS ALWAYS FILLED UP RIGHT? OKAY. YEAH. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. PENMAN, YOU ARE COMPLETE.

WELL, YOU KNOW, FOR SOME KIDS, THIS HAS TO BE THE GREATEST TEN WEEKS OUT OF THEIR LIFE.

I'M NOT KIDDING. YOU ALL ARE ABSOLUTELY AMAZING.

AND I'M RELUCTANT TO EVEN ASK THIS QUESTION, BUT HAVE YOU EVER TRIED GOLF? BECAUSE YOU ALL. I MEAN, EVERYTHING ELSE IS JUST JAMMED.

PERSONALLY, I'VE TRIED GOLF. YOU KNOW, IT WOULD BE A GREAT ADDITION IF WE HAD THOSE RESOURCES AND PERHAPS ONE DAY WE WOULD HAVE THOSE RESOURCES.

BUT AT THIS TIME WE DON'T WE DON'T. SO WE TRY TO STICK TO TO WHAT WE HAVE AND WHAT WE HAVE DIRECT ACCESS AND WHAT WE'RE GOOD AT, WHICH IS DOING THE THINGS THAT WITHIN OUR PARKS.

AND THAT'S SURE BEEN VERY BENEFICIAL SO FAR. SURE.

WELL, YOU GOT A GOLF COURSE, YOU WANT TO BUILD A. SO I WAS ABOUT TO SUGGEST WE'VE GOT A GREAT NEW COMMUNITY PARTNER IN FOUR SEASONS. YOU SHOULD PROBABLY CONTACT THEM ABOUT THE SUMMER GOLF CAMP FOR THE KIDS. THERE YOU GO. I'LL THROW YOUR NAME OUT.

GOOD IDEA. ANYWAY, THANK YOU FOR WHAT YOU DO.

THIS IS SO JUST ABSOLUTELY FABULOUS. PETRANOFF.

THANK YOU. I LOVE THE ENTHUSIASM IN THIS GROUP.

I SAW IN YOUR FUTURE DISCUSSION, YOU KNOW, IT'S YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT PERHAPS ADULTS AND SENIORS AND DOING SOME OFFERINGS FOR THEM.

AND I JUST WANT TO, YOU KNOW, WHEN I WAS READING THROUGH MY MATERIALS, I PULLED SOME ITEMS THERE.

WE IN YOUR SWEET SPOT THAT YOU'RE ATTRACTING YOUR CAMP TO? WE HAVE ABOUT A THOUSAND KIDS IN THE CITY. AND YOU KNOW, IN GENERAL YOU KNOW, OUR POPULATION IS 19,421.

OUR AVERAGE AGE IS 68 VERSUS THE NATIONAL AVERAGE OF A CITY IS 38.

WE HAVE 10,913 PEOPLE THAT ARE 65 PLUS IN THE CITY.

IT'S 56% OF THE WHOLE POPULATION OF THE CITY.

THERE ARE ABOUT 6.5 TIMES THE NUMBER OF 65 PLUS YEAR OLDS THAN THERE ARE KIDS 18 AND UNDER.

I THINK THAT WE'VE GOT TO REALLY GIVE SOME SERIOUS THOUGHT.

AND I'VE SAID THIS, YOU KNOW, LAST YEAR AS WELL TO GETTING MORE PROGRAMING FOR THESE SENIORS.

AND I JUST SAW IN WINK NEWS, IT WAS VERY SERENDIPITOUS THIS MORNING WHERE THEY DID A THEY THERE WAS A SURVEY THAT WAS DONE THAT THEY SAID ON THE NEWS WHERE THIS THE HIGHEST EVER PERCENTAGE OF LONELINESS AMONG SENIORS HIT IT.

AND THEN THE WORST AFFECTED ARE SENIOR MALES.

AND SO I THINK THAT IT'S RIPE FOR OUR COMMUNITY OF THE CITY OF NAPLES, THAT WE SHOULD LOOK AT SOME OF THESE OFFERINGS WITH AS MUCH ENTHUSIASM AS YOU HAVE FOR THE KIDS, BECAUSE IT'S SIX AND A HALF TIMES MORE OF THE POPULATION.

AND I'D LOVE FOR YOU TO CHALLENGE THAT AND MAYBE LOOK AT SOME OF THE SENIOR COMMUNITIES THAT WE HAVE ON WHAT WHAT OFFERINGS COULD WE HAVE FOR FOR THIS GROUP OF PEOPLE? THE OTHER THE OTHER PIECE IS ON THE ON THE EXPENSES.

AND I HEARD AT THE LAST MEETING THAT WE DON'T FULLY LIQUIDATE OUR EXPENSES ON OUR PARKS.

IT'S JUST THAT'S JUST NOT THE WAY IT'S DONE. DO WE HAVE.

MOST OF THESE KIDS ARE COMING FROM THE COUNTY.

I WOULD ASSUME, GIVEN THE, YOU KNOW, JUST THE NUMBER, THE JUST THE SHEER NUMBERS.

[02:30:01]

SO THEY DO THE BEST THEY CAN TO BREAK EVEN. THEY'RE NOT IN THE PROFIT MAKING BUSINESS.

SO THAT'S THAT PART. AS FAR AS THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT YOU'LL REMEMBER, ITS EVOLUTION WAS FOR ORIGINALLY FOR PARKING AT THE BEACHES.

THEN THEY AMENDED IT TO INCLUDE LANGUAGE THAT SAYS IT WAS FOR THE PARKING STICKERS ON THE BEACHES, AS WELL AS PARKS AND RECREATIONS. AND I'M TALKING ABOUT THE COUNTY NOW, AND THAT WAS WHY IT INCREASED A CERTAIN AMOUNTS.

BUT IN THAT AGREEMENT, IT ALSO SAID THAT YOU SHALL, ONCE THEY ALLOCATE A CERTAIN AMOUNT.

AND BACK THEN IT WAS $1 MILLION PLUS A PROPORTIONAL PERCENTAGE OF THE CHANGE IN THE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY TAXES AND SO ON.

IRREGARDLESS, I'LL JUST I'LL FINISH HERE. BUT WHAT THAT SAID, THOUGH, AT THAT TIME WAS, IS THAT YOU HAD TO CHARGE THE SAME FEE FOR ALL PARKS AND RECREATIONS CAMPS AND OTHER FACILITIES AS YOU DO.

CITY RESIDENTS. SO FAST FORWARD THREE AMENDMENTS FOR AMENDMENTS.

THEN IT WAS THREE YEARS AGO. TWO YEARS AGO. EXCUSE ME? WHERE WE AMENDED IT. AND IN LIEU OF A CHANGE, WE SAID THEY'RE GOING TO DOUBLE THE TDC FOR THE THE THE OVERALL BEACH MAINTENANCE AND THE PIER AND GIVE US A LOUDERMILK. IN ADDITION TO THAT, WE CHANGED THE LANGUAGE THAT SAYS THAT THE THE CITY AND COUNTY SHALL MAINTAIN THE FEE STRUCTURE TO HOW THEY SEE IT FIT.

SO THAT WOULD MEAN YOU NOW HAVE THE ABILITY TO CHARGE WHAT IS APPROPRIATE, AND THERE'S NO CONSTRICTION FROM THAT INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT.

SO I HOPE THAT GIVES YOU HISTORY. IT WAS TIED UP FOR A WHILE.

IT HASN'T BEEN FOR THE LAST TWO YEARS. AND YOU CAN MAKE WHATEVER DECISIONS YOU SO CHOOSE RELATED TO FEE STRUCTURES BETWEEN THE CITY AND COUNTY RESIDENTS FROM AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT PERSPECTIVE WHICH USED TO BIND YOU.

OKAY, SO WE COULD GO BACK IF WE TOOK A LOOK AT THIS.

AND, YOU KNOW, SAID 90% OF THE PARTICIPANTS ARE FROM THE COUNTY.

AND, YOU KNOW, WE ARE WE HAVE CITIZENS OF THE CITY OF NAPLES ARE SUBSIDIZING TO A CERTAIN PORTION OF OUR PARKS THAT WE COULD ADJUST THE FEE ACCORDINGLY OR SOME OTHER MEAN, OR MAYBE THEY COULD KICK IN SOME A LITTLE BIT MORE ON THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT TO MAKE THE CITIZENS OF THE CITY OF NAPLES WHOLE.

YEAH. AND AS AARON AND CHAD HAD INDICATED, THERE WAS ACTUALLY ALREADY A FEE ANALYSIS DONE.

THAT WASN'T INSTITUTED, BUT I THINK THAT WOULD BE THE APPROPRIATE TIME TO SAY, HERE'S EVEN TO PRESENT TO YOU THE RATIO OF EACH ACTIVITY, HOW MANY WAS IN EACH JURISDICTION, AND THEN GIVE YOU AN IDEA ON THAT.

OKAY. WELL, I REALLY APPRECIATE THE HARD WORK YOU'VE DONE. AND AS YOU GO INTO THE MASTER PLAN, I LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING AS A PRIVATE RESIDENCE SOME PROGRAMS IN HERE FOR OUR OUR ADULTS AND OUR SENIORS.

YEAH. AND JUST ON THAT, I WANT I WANT TO MAKE SURE TO CLARIFY SOMETHING.

SO THIS PRESENTATION, ONE OF THE MAIN GOALS WAS TO TALK ABOUT THE CHILDREN'S PROGRAMS AS FAR AS SUMMER CAMP.

AND WE ADDED A CAVEAT IN THERE TALKING ABOUT GOING THROUGH THE MASTER PLAN PROCESS AND HOW THAT DOES.

WE STILL PROVIDE PROGRAMS FOR ALL AGES, BUT WHAT WE IF YOU REMEMBER WHEN I SAID THAT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT IN THE FUTURE IS IF WE WANT TO REALLY EMPHASIZE THAT A CERTAIN AGE GROUP, THEN THAT'S GOING TO REQUIRE IN THE FUTURE THAT WE IDENTIFY THAT ONE WITHIN THE MASTER PLAN. BUT THEN ALSO WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION UP FRONT DURING THE BUDGET PROCESS TO BE ABLE TO ADD THAT STAFF TO HAVE THAT FOCUS.

BECAUSE OUR STAFF NOW, THEY BASICALLY SAY WE HAVE A A HANDFUL OF THEM THAT FOCUS ON PROGRAMS, AND WE HAVE TO SAY, OKAY, YOU GOT TO DO KIDS PROGRAMS, YOU GOT TO DO TEEN PROGRAMS, YOU GOT TO DO ATHLETIC LEAGUES, YOU GOT TO DO SENIOR PROGRAMING, SWIMMING, ALL AGES.

AND. THEY'RE BASICALLY SPREADING ALL OF THEIR ATTENTION, AND THEY ONLY WORK 40 HOURS A WEEK.

IF THAT'S OUR GOAL. AND THAT HAS TO BE SPREAD AMONG ALL AGE GROUPS.

SO DOWN THE ROAD, IF WE WANT TO HAVE THAT, THERE'S AN EMPHASIS THAT WE NEED TO HAVE MORE FOR CERTAIN AGE GROUP.

THEN THAT'S WHERE WE WOULD NEED TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION IN THE BUDGET PERIOD TO BE ABLE TO SAY, THIS IS WHAT WE NEED, THIS IS WHY WE NEED IT, AND SO ON.

I'D LOVE TO SEE THE, YOU KNOW, SORT OF SOME BENCHMARKING OUTSIDE OF OUR COMMUNITY ON AREAS WITH DEMOGRAPHICS SIMILAR TO OURS, ON WHAT PROGRAM OFFERINGS THEY DO HAVE. BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WHEN IF YOU JUST LOOK AT THE JUST GROSS NUMBERS, YOU KNOW, GIVEN THE FACT THAT THERE'S 6.5 TIMES THE NUMBER OF SENIORS AS THEY ARE 0 TO 18 IN THE CITY,

[02:35:01]

ABSOLUTELY. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. ANY FURTHER? PENMAN? JUST AN ADJUNCT TO YOUR REMARKS. OUR KIDS LIVE IN SILVER SPRING, MARYLAND.

THEY BUILD A DAY CAMP FOR THE KIDS AND NEEDED A SENIOR FACILITY.

SO THEY BUILT IT RIGHT NEXT DOOR. SO THE SENIORS AND THE KIDS HAVE LUNCH TOGETHER.

AND WHAT HAPPENS, OF COURSE, IS, YOU KNOW, NOW WE'VE GOT A GRANDMOTHER AND I'VE GOT A GRANDCHILD.

SO EVERY DAY THEY'D HAVE LUNCH. JUST JUST A THOUGHT.

BUT IT'S A BEAUTIFUL, BEAUTIFUL SITUATION. VERY COOL.

OKAY. ANY FURTHER INFORMATION NEEDED, OR I'M GOING TO SUB OUT AND YOU'RE GOING TO GET YOUR ATTORNEY BACK. THANK YOU FOR COMING. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE THIS MORNING.

JUST ALSO, I DID SOME RESEARCH ON VIEW CORRIDORS.

VIEW SHEDS AND JUST VIEWS IN GENERAL. AND I FEEL LIKE I NEED TO SEND YOU AN EMAIL BECAUSE THERE ARE SOME NUANCES TO IT THAT I DON'T BELIEVE.

I GAVE YOU A COMPLETE ANSWER. SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU GET GET ALL OF THAT INFORMATION.

SO I'LL SEND AN EMAIL TO YOU THIS WEEK. THANK YOU I APPRECIATE THAT.

OKAY. WE APPRECIATE THAT. JUST REAL QUICK. THANK YOU.

AND YES FUTURE DISCUSSION JUST IN THAT SECTION, IF YOU LOOK ON AGM, IT DID GIVE YOU AN UPDATE ON THE MASTER PLAN.

AND JUST REAL QUICK, WE ARE CONTINUING TO MOVE THROUGH THAT.

WE HAVE MOVED THROUGH THE PROJECT KICKOFF, THE EXISTING CONDITION INVENTORY.

WE ARE CURRENTLY AT THE NEEDS ASSESSMENT AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND YOU ALL WILL BE SEEING SOMETHING WITHIN THE NEXT, I WOULD SAY WITHIN THE NEXT WEEK ABOUT THAT PORTION OF IT AND YOUR EMAILS TO UPDATE YOU.

SO I JUST WANTED TO GIVE YOU A HEADS UP ON THAT, SINCE IT WAS AN AGM AND SINCE YOU'RE HERE CAMBIER PARK PLAYGROUND, I WANT TO GIVE AN UPDATE. NEXT ITEM. WE'VE GOT THAT.

WAIT, CAN I GO BACK TO THE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT YOU JUST MENTIONED? YEAH. IS THAT YOU KNOW WHO WHO ARE YOU DEFINING AS THE PUBLIC? SO, YEAH, DURING THE THIS PORTION OF IT, IT WILL BE THE CITY OF THE CITY RESIDENTS ONLY IN THIS PART.

AND AGAIN, I'LL SEND WHEN I SEND YOU THE EMAIL, IT'S GOT WHAT HAS BEEN DRAFTED.

SO YOU ALL CAN KIND OF LOOK THROUGH THAT, BUT IT'LL SHARE THAT INFORMATION AS WELL.

TERRIFIC. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. THANK YOU.

IN THE IN THE EMAIL IS SOLICITING YOUR FEEDBACK BEFORE THE FINAL VERSION IS DONE SO THAT YOU CAN PROVIDE IT.

THAT'S THE WHAT YOU'LL ACTUALLY BE SENT. SO CORRECT.

OKAY. THANK YOU. I WAS JUMPING, BUT DO YOU CONCLUDED ITEM SIX D IT IS CONCLUDED AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED.

THANK YOU, THANK YOU. OKAY. MOVING TO SUCCEED.

[6.E) A Discussion and Update on the Cambier Park Playground Replacement.]

SO AGAIN, CHAD MERRITT, COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR, THIS IS AN ITEM THAT I'VE GOT KIND OF A LITTLE TIMELINE OR AT LEAST A LITTLE PRESENTATION HERE. I CALL IT PRESENTATION, BUT AN ATTACHMENT.

AND THIS IS JUST A QUICK UPDATE ON THE PLAYGROUND.

FIRST YOU KIND OF SEE, AND IF YOU'VE BEEN OVER IN THAT AREA, YOU'VE SEEN THAT WE'VE REMOVED THE AREAS THAT ARE THE PORTION OF THE PLAYGROUND THAT WAS REALLY IN POOR SHAPE. AND I WILL ADD THIS AS THE PROCESS WENT, I WENT OVER TO KIND OF LOOK AT THAT.

AND NOT THAT I NEEDED ANY JUSTIFICATION, BUT IT WAS SEEING SOME OF THE CONDITION OF WHAT THEY WERE REMOVING.

IT WAS A GOOD MOVE. SO I APPRECIATE THE SUPPORT FROM YOU ALL ON THAT BECAUSE I THINK WE DID THE RIGHT THING.

CURRENTLY WE HAVE OPENED THE AREA BACK UP FOR PLAY.

IT DOES HAVE THE SHADE STRUCTURES. IT DOES HAVE THE SWINGS.

IT'S GOT A CLIMBER. IT'S GOT THE TOWERS. THAT'S GOT THE MONKEY BARS.

THOSE WERE WE WERE ABLE TO KEEP THOSE UP FOR RIGHT NOW.

THOSE WERE NOT IN POOR SHAPE. AND THEN THERE'S SOME OPEN SPACE.

THE FENCING IS STILL UP SO THAT THE KIDS CAN BE SAFELY WITHIN THAT AREA.

OBVIOUSLY THE TIKI HUTS OR TIKI SHELTERS ARE UP.

THOSE WILL NOT BE GOING ANYWHERE ANYWAYS. AND I DO WANT TO REITERATE, TREES HAVE NOT BEEN REMOVED, NOR WILL THEY BE REMOVED. SO WE WE HAVE GOT THAT THE WALKWAY STILL IN PLACE, WHICH INCLUDES THE, PICKETS, WHICH YOU'VE HAD SOME PEOPLE THAT HAVE ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT WE HAVE PUT SOMETHING ONLINE WHERE THEY CAN SUBMIT THE IF THEY'VE GOT A PICKET OR A BRICK,

[02:40:05]

SO I WANT TO SAY THAT THE OTHER THING THAT I'LL ADD ABOUT THE CURRENT STATUS OF THIS PLAYGROUND IS WE REMOVED ALL OF THE ARTWORK THAT WAS ON THE PLAYGROUND.

WE'VE HAD A LOT OF PEOPLE ASK THAT QUESTION. WE TOOK THAT ARTWORK.

OUR PLAN IS TO BE ABLE TO UTILIZE THAT WITHIN THE NEXT DESIGN TO PAY HOMAGE TO THE PREVIOUS PLAYGROUND.

SO WE HAVE THOSE IN OUR POSSESSION. WE DO NOT ALLOW THOSE GET DESTROYED.

AND WE'VE HAD PEOPLE ASK THOSE QUESTIONS, WHAT IS THAT ARTWORK? THE LITTLE THERE'S LIKE FISH AND THINGS THAT WERE ON THE SIDE OF THE OLD PLAYGROUNDS AND THE PIRATE'S HEAD AND SO ON.

SO WE DID. WE SALVAGED THAT STUFF. WE'VE HAD A LOT OF PEOPLE ASK, I SAID IT IN PUBLIC BECAUSE I WANTED YOU ALL TO KNOW AS WELL AS BE ABLE TO SAY THAT IN THE PUBLIC. SO THAT KIND OF BRINGS US TO WHERE WE'RE AT NOW AS FAR AS PROCUREMENT AND THE PROCESS TIMELINE.

WAIT. I'M SORRY. BEFORE THAT. SORRY. SO I'VE HAD QUESTIONS ON THESE PICKET FENCES.

WHERE ARE. WHAT? DID I MISS THAT? HOW ARE WE? YES. SO THE PICKETS AND THE BRICKS THAT HAVE PEOPLE'S NAMES ON THEM WHEN WE GET READY TO CONSTRUCT.

BECAUSE IT'S STILL INTACT, BECAUSE WE STILL HAVE THE FENCE UP AND WE STILL HAVE THE WALKWAY SO PEOPLE CAN UTILIZE IT.

WHEN WE GET TO THE PART WHERE WE ACTUALLY CONSTRUCT THAT AND CLOSE IT DOWN FOR THE NEW PLAYGROUND, WE WILL REMOVE THOSE, WE WILL PUT THOSE IN A PLACE AND WE WE WILL CONTINUE TO HAVE A WE'LL REACH OUT TO THOSE PEOPLE THAT ARE INTERESTED IN COLLECTING THEM. WE HAVE ONLINE, IF YOU GO TO THE PROJECT PAGE, IF YOU GO TO OUR WEBSITE, IT'S GOT ON THERE WHERE YOU CAN CLICK AND SUBMIT.

OKAY. I HAVE A BRICK AND IT HAS THIS ON IT. AND WE'RE PUTTING THOSE PEOPLE'S NAMES AND CONTACT INFORMATION SO THAT WE CAN REACH OUT TO THEM TO BE ABLE TO GET THOSE TO THEM AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME. AND THAT'S ON THE WEBSITE.

YES IT IS. OH, I GOTTA CHECK THAT OUT. OKAY. SO ALL RIGHT.

IS THAT ALL GOOD WITH THE UPDATE? IF SO, I'LL MOVE ON TO THE PROCUREMENT PROCESS TIMELINE.

AND GARY, IS THERE ANYTHING DO YOU WANT TO LEAD THIS ONE OR YOU WANT ME TO LEAD THIS ONE.

OKAY, I'LL LET GARY. ALL RIGHT. SO THERE'S THREE OPTIONS BEFORE YOU.

AND ONE OF THEM FROM THE STANDPOINT IS IS IS REALLY TRYING TO GAUGE HOW MUCH INPUT AND AT WHAT STAGES.

AND SO REAL BRIEFLY OPTION ONE SAYS IS THAT WE GO COMPLETE THE RFP PROCESS HERE IN THE COMING THREE WEEKS.

AS FAR AS WHAT DAY WE EXACTLY SEND IT OUT, BECAUSE IF WE SEND IT OUT DECEMBER 18TH, IT'S REALLY NO DIFFERENT THAN SENDING IT OUT JANUARY 5TH.

VENDORS AREN'T GOING TO BE WORKING OVER THAT TIME, AND THEN WE COULD ASK FOR AN EXTENSION.

SO THAT'S WHY WE SAY THAT WINDOW DOESN'T MEAN WE'RE SITTING ON OUR HANDS.

WE'RE ASKING THIS QUESTION NOW BECAUSE WE HAVE TO DRAFT THE RFP, AND THAT INCLUDES LETTING THEM KNOW HOW MANY TIMES THEY MAY HAVE TO MAKE A PUBLIC PRESENTATION AS IT RELATES TO GETTING TO THE AWARD OF THE CONTRACT.

SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE DOING IT NOW. SO THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN 1 AND 2 IS, IS OPTION ONE SAYS IS THAT STAFF AND MYSELF INCLUDED WE FINISHED THE RFP. WE PUT IT OUT TO BID ON JANUARY 30TH BETWEEN JANUARY 30TH AND FEBRUARY 16TH WE WOULD HAVE AN EVALUATION COMMITTEE INTERNAL. AND THEN IT'S MERELY GOES TO COUNCIL.

THAT'S ONE OPTION. THE SECOND ONE SAYS WE DO THE EXACT SAME THING.

BUT IN ADDITION TO THE EVALUATION COMMITTEE, YOU WANT CSAB TO RECEIVE THE SAME.

WHATEVER PRESENTATION OR AND THE ACTUAL PACKETS FROM THE REDUCED LIST AND GIVE YOU WHO THEY RECOMMEND AS A PRIORITIZATION SO THAT YOU DON'T JUST HAVE STAFF'S FEEDBACK ALONE. THAT'S IF THAT'S IF WHAT YOU WANT.

I'M NOT SAYING THAT'S WHAT YOU WANT, BUT IF YOU DID, I NEED TO KNOW THAT BECAUSE THEN YOU WOULD HAVE.

AND LET'S JUST SAY, FOR EXAMPLE, WE HAVE NINE BIDDERS AND WE DETERMINED THAT WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TWO THIRDS OF AND NOT LESS THAN THREE COME FORWARD TO YOU MEANING AS A COUNCIL, IF IT'S NINE, YOU'RE GETTING NO LESS THAN SIX IN WHATEVER ORDER THAT IS, SO THAT YOU CAN DECIPHER. BECAUSE IF YOU DON'T DO SOMETHING ON A SHORT LIST, THEN YOU'RE GOING TO BE SITTING HERE EVALUATING NINE I'M NOT SURE THAT'S WHAT YOU WANT, BUT IN THE SAME TOKEN, YOU MAY WANT THAT SAME LIST TO GO TO CSAB SO THEY CAN TELL YOU THE FEEDBACK THAT THEY WANT.

IT KEEPS THE INTEGRITY OF STAFF'S INTERNAL PROCUREMENT, BUT YOU HAVE A RECOMMENDATION RECOMMENDING BOARD THAT YOU'RE ASKING THEM TO OPINE, TO GIVE YOU YOUR OPINIONS AS WELL. AND IF YOU CHOSE THAT AS OPTION TWO, I WOULD SUBMIT THAT THE APPLICANTS WHEN WE PUT OUT THE RFP WOULD KNOW THAT THEY MAY

[02:45:03]

IT MAY IF YOU CHOSE OPTION ONE, IT WOULD BE THE COMMITTEE AND JUST CITY COUNCIL.

SO THOSE ARE THE REASONS WE'RE ASKING FOR THAT NOW.

AND THEN THE THIRD OPTION IS IF YOU SAID, WELL, I DON'T WANT JUST YOU AND STAFF DOING THE RFP, I WANT CSAB TO OPINE BEFORE THE RFP GOES OUT.

THAT'S AN OPTION I AND HAVE THEM STILL ON THE BACKSIDE OR NOT ON THE BACKSIDE.

THAT WOULD BE YOUR CALL. I JUST NEEDED YOU TO KNOW THAT BASED ON THE CSAB SCHEDULE, THEN THAT WOULD PUT IT GOING OUT SOMETIME IN THE VICINITY OF FEBRUARY 10TH, AS OPPOSED TO SOME TIME IN JANUARY BASED ON THEIR SCHEDULE.

SO THOSE ARE OPTIONS WILL BE OPEN TO ANY OTHER TYPE OF DISCUSSION.

BUT THOSE WERE THE THREE LOGICAL CHOICES, IN MY OPINION, AS TO MAKE SURE WE INVOLVE CSAB TO HOWEVER YOUR LIKING WAS.

YEAH. THANK YOU FOR THOSE. I PERSONALLY BELIEVE THAT WE NEED TO MOVE FORWARD.

I WANT CSAB TO REVIEW IT, BUT AND BECAUSE OF TIME AND ESSENCE THAT MAYBE IT COMES TO COUNCIL AND THEN LET CSAB IN THE COMMUNITY KNOW IT'S COMING TO COUNCIL.

BUT I PREFER THE ONE THAT KEEPS US ON TRACK. AND HOWEVER WE CAN INCLUDE THE COMMUNITY AND THE CSAB INFORMING THEM THAT WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT THIS INFORMATION. TO ME, IS A BETTER.

I GUESS THAT'S OPTION ONE THAT'S CORRECT. THE WAY YOU ARE.

YES, MA'AM. AND LET ME JUST ADD THIS JUST FOR PEACE OF MIND.

KESSAB HAS BEEN INVOLVED IN THIS CONVERSATION A WHILE AGO.

SO WE HAVE HAD THIS CONVERSATION ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT.

SO THEY HAVE SAID THINGS, AND I THINK EVERYBODY IS, IN MY OPINION, EVERYBODY'S ON THE SAME MINDSET WHEN IT COMES TO THE COMMITTEE, CITY COUNCIL, STAFF, COMMUNITY.

THANK YOU. I THINK SO I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT AND THAT WAS AN ITEM THAT I FELT WAS IT'S NOT THAT THEY HAVE NEVER SEEN THIS AND NEVER HAD THIS CONVERSATION. IT'S JUST BEEN ABOUT A YEAR AGO.

OKAY, I HAVE. THANK YOU, VICE MAYOR. YEAH. SO, MADAM MAYOR, I JUST THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS.

AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR THE WORK ON THIS. AND PROVIDING US WITH THREE OF THESE OPTIONS AND THE DETAIL THAT GOES ALONG WITH THAT.

I WANTED TO COMMENT THAT THE COMMUNITY HAS NOT HELD BACK AT ALL ON THEIR ENGAGEMENT IN THE PROCESS, AND THAT WORKS FOR US IN A LOT OF DIFFERENT WAYS.

BUT I DO BELIEVE THAT OUR OWN SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS ON THE RFP PROCESS IS THE KEY. AND I BELIEVE, AGAIN, THEY'VE INCORPORATED THESE COMMENTS FOR THIS RFP.

I DO BELIEVE THAT THE LONGER WE DELAY THE, THE THE LESS THAT WE RESPOND IN, IN TERMS OF OUR SENSE OF URGENCY FOR OUR COMMUNITY. BUT THIS OPTION ONE HAS ALL THE ELEMENTS THAT I BELIEVE THAT WE NEED TO ENSURE. IT'S A VERY THOROUGH PROCESS WITH INPUT FROM ALL OF THE STAKEHOLDERS.

THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER? CRISPIN. AND THEN BURTON. A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.

FIRST OF ALL MR. YOUNG OR MR. MERRITT, WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THIS LAST TIME, WE WE HAD DISCUSSION AND WE ALSO HAD PUBLIC INPUT ABOUT RFP, RFQ, DESIGN, BUILD HYBRIDS, AND OF ALL OF THOSE, HOW WOULD YOU DESCRIBE THE PROCESS THAT YOU'RE PROPOSING? SO MAKING SURE WE KNOW ONCE WE KNOW THIS, THIS IS THE BACK END LANGUAGE OF HOW OUR HOW IT'S GOING TO BE PRESENTED.

THE RFP ITSELF, THEY'RE STILL GOING TO BE CONTINUED DISCUSSIONS ON.

BUT I SEE IT AS TWOFOLD. ONE IS WE'RE GOING TO HAVE WE HAVE THE CONCEPTUAL SURVEY WHICH WILL BE PROVIDED WITH PICTURES AND FEEDBACK.

WE HAVE THE GRAPHICS OF THE EXISTING FACILITY AND THAT WILL BE PROVIDED IN THE BID PACKAGE AS WELL.

THE KEY TO THIS WILL BE I CALL TO BE ADDED VALUE.

AND WHAT I MEAN BY THAT IS HOW HOW IS IT AN EASY IS IT TO CUSTOMIZE YOUR DESIGNS AND ADD FEATURES? SO FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, I THINK THERE'S THE POSSIBILITY OF TWOFOLD, BECAUSE IN THE END WHAT WE WANT IS THE BEST PRODUCT.

[02:50:01]

AND THEN WE GO AND WE GET THE DESIGNS AND WE IDENTIFY AS ADDED VALUE HOW EASY IT IS FOR CUSTOMIZATION, MAINTENANCE, REPLACEMENT FEATURES, THOSE DELAYS AND TIMES.

NOW LET'S SAY THAT WE GET THROUGH AND WE CHOOSE ONE WHERE JUST CHOOSE OPTION TWO, FOR EXAMPLE.

DOESN'T MATTER TO ME WHICH ONE YOU CHOOSE, BUT CSA BE INVOLVED IN THE BEGINNING.

YOU THEN HAVE THE OPTION ONCE THE FIRM IS SELECTED TO SAY, BUT WE DON'T, DO WE WANT FURTHER INPUT? JUST ONE MORE ROUND OF HERE WAS THE INITIAL DESIGN.

LET'S HAVE A PUBLIC ITEM AND HAVE A PUBLIC DISCUSSION WITH COUNCIL.

DO WE WANT MODIFICATIONS NOW? I SUSPECT WHEN WE GET READY TO AWARD, I'M NOT GOING TO HAVE TO DRAG OUT THOSE MODIFICATIONS FROM THIS BODY.

I'M ASSUMING YOU'RE GOING TO TELL ME, WELL, WE LIKE THIS, BUT I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE THIS.

AND SO I THINK THAT WILL KNOW AT THAT TIME. DO WE NEED ANOTHER, YOU KNOW, PHASE OF LET'S MAKE SURE WE DESIGN IT AND GET THESE FINAL STAGES.

SO MY POINT TO YOU IS, IS THE FIRST ONE IS GOING THROUGH LET THEM USE THEIR IMAGINATION.

HOPEFULLY YOU GET 100% DESIGN AND NEVER HAVE A SECOND PHASE.

BUT IF YOU DON'T, THAT ADDED VALUE OF CUSTOMIZATION, YOU CAN STILL GET TO THE POINT OF SELECTING YOUR CONTRACTOR AND THEN SAY THE FINAL DESIGN.

THERE ARE FEATURES THAT WE DON'T THINK YOU PICKED UP ON, AND I THINK THAT'S THE THAT'S THE BEST WAY TO GET TO SELECTING THE CONTRACTOR, AND THEN ALSO HAVING THE KNOW THE ABILITY AND WHEREWITHAL TO CUSTOMIZE.

THEN YOU GET BECAUSE THAT SECOND PHASE OF IT IS WHEN YOU WOULD GET THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC INPUT, BUT WE'RE NOT TRYING TO EXCLUDE IT. THAT'S WHY THAT'S WHY YOU KNOW, I THINK THE BUT ON THE RFP PROCESS THAT IS ALLOWING FOR STAFF TO PUT THE REGULATORY THINGS IN PLACE AND LET AND LET THE VENDORS USE THEIR IMAGINATION WITH THE OPINIONS THAT HAVE BEEN OPINED FROM OUR RESIDENTS.

OKAY. WELL, I THANK YOU. AND I CANDIDLY SORT OF UNDERSTAND WHAT THE PROCESS SUGGESTED PROCESS IS.

I'M NOT SURE I UNDERSTAND IT FULLY, BUT MY CONCERN IS THIS BASED ON WHAT I HAVE HEARD, OUR PAST DISCUSSIONS ON THIS AND IN, IN PRIVATE COMMUNICATIONS I'VE HAD THROUGH EMAILS AND CONVERSATIONS WITH VARIOUS RESIDENTS.

THERE'S A AS THE VICE MAYOR SAID, THERE'S A SEGMENT OF OUR POPULATION, OUR RESIDENTS, THAT CARE VERY PASSIONATELY ABOUT THIS. THAT'S CLEAR. AND MY AND I DON'T HAVE A DOG IN THIS HUNT IN TERMS OF WHO GETS SELECTED AS ULTIMATELY AS THE VENDOR.

I DON'T I DON'T HAVE AN OPINION. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE IT'S WHO WE THINK IS THE BEST VENDOR, ULTIMATELY. BUT MY CONCERN IS THAT THE WHATEVER PROCESS WE GO THROUGH IT, IT IS THAT THE PROCUREMENT PROCESS DOES NOT UNINTENTIONALLY ELIMINATE CERTAIN ENTITIES FROM CONSIDERATION AND THAT IN THE END, NOBODY CAN, WITH VALIDITY, SAY THAT THE CHOICE THAT THEY PREFERRED DIDN'T HAVE A FAIR CHANCE.

YEAH. SO THAT'S THAT'S MY POINT. LET ME BE SPECIFIC.

AS FAR AS THE PUBLIC SPEAKS, AS SOON AS WE GET FINISHED WITH THIS PART OF IT, KNOWING WHAT THE BACK END PROCESS IS, THEN THE SCOPE OF WORK IN THE RFP, I'M GOING TO MEET AND MEET WITH ELLEN, JUST AS I INDICATED I WOULD, TO GO THROUGH THE RFP THAT THAT PART. BUT THAT DOESN'T CHANGE.

THAT'S THAT'S THE ONE AT LEAST ONE OF THE INDIVIDUALS WHO CAME IN, AND I HOPE I SAID HER NAME.

RIGHT. BUT BUT THEY CAME IN HAD EXPRESSED AN OPINION ON THAT.

BUT THAT'S WHY OPTION THREE EXISTS IS IF YOU DON'T BELIEVE THAT AND IT'S NOT THAT, MR. CHRISTOPHER, I'M NOT CHALLENGING THAT STATEMENT, BUT IF, IF, IF THERE'S SKEPTICISM THAT WE'RE EXCLUDING SOMEONE, THEN GOING TO CSAB AND ALLOWING A PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF THE RFP ITSELF OR COMING BACK TO THIS BODY FOR THE RFP ITSELF PROVIDES THAT PUBLIC OPPORTUNITY TO SAY THIS WAS VETTED THROUGH A PUBLIC BODY AND A PUBLIC DISCUSSION.

AND THAT'S WHY I DIDN'T WANT TO TAKE IT OFF THE TABLE. AND AND THAT BRINGS ME TO MY SECOND POINT THAT I WAS GOING TO RAISE, WHICH IS GOING BACK TO THE OPTIONS BECAUSE OF WHAT I JUST SAID, I FEEL LIKE WE SHOULD ON THE SIDE OF OF HAVING MORE OPPORTUNITIES FOR INPUT RATHER THAN FEWER.

NOW, OPTION THREE, TO ME SEEMS EXCESSIVE, YOU KNOW, GIVING CSA TWO BITES OF THE APPLE, SO TO SPEAK,

[02:55:08]

AND AND THIS IS AN IMPORTANT ISSUE THAT GOES EVEN BEYOND THE COST OF THE PROJECT, JUST IN TERMS OF ITS SYMBOLIC PLACE IN NAPLES. AND AND IT'S AND, YOU KNOW, MR. MERRITT SAID THEY, THEY KESSAB HAS BEEN ENGAGED IN THIS.

HE ALSO SAID, YOU KNOW, THAT THAT SORT OF THE LAST TIME THAT OCCURRED WAS A YEAR AGO.

SO I DON'T THINK IT WOULD BE A BAD IDEA TO HAVE CSA OPTION TWO SEEMS LIKE A GOOD OPTION TO ME, WHERE KESSAB WOULD HAVE AN INITIAL REVIEW OF THE SHORTLIST FINALISTS, AND IT WOULD ALSO CREATE AN OPPORTUNITY OUTSIDE OF THIS BODY FOR ANYBODY FROM THE COMMUNITY WHO WANTED TO COME IN AND SAY ANYTHING TO SAY, SAY WHAT THEY THOUGHT AND AND GET THAT INPUT, AND FOR US TO THEN HEAR IT, JUST LIKE WE HEAR OUR INPUT FROM THE PAB AND, AND THE CRAB AND OTHER THINGS. AND THEN, YOU KNOW, IT COMES TO US FOR OUR FINAL DECISION.

I DON'T THINK THAT WOULD BE A BAD IDEA AT ALL.

COUNCIL MEMBER AND I HAD THE SAME CONCERNS, BUT CSAB IS NOT.

THEY DON'T MEET BEFORE, AND THAT WOULD BE A DELAY.

EVEN THOUGH IT SAYS THAT IT WOULDN'T. IS THAT CORRECT? THEIR NEXT MEETING IS THIRD TUESDAY OF. ACTUALLY, I THINK IT'S CHANGED BECAUSE WE HAVE MARTIN LUTHER KING IS IN AND COUNCIL IS ON THEIR ACTUAL DATE, SO WE HAD TO MOVE IT TO, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEIR I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEIR MEETING SCHEDULE IS, BUT IF THEY COULD NOT IF THEY COULD NOT MAKE THEMSELVES AVAILABLE TO MEET IN A WAY THAT'S REASONABLE WITH OUR SCHEDULE, OBVIOUSLY IT EXTENDS OUR SCHEDULE TO SOME DEGREE.

MADAM MAYOR, JUST A POINT OF CLARITY. THAT'S MY CONCERN.

YEAH. AND THEY'LL STILL HAVE A CHANCE. I'M SORRY, MR. YOUNG. NO, NO, I'M JUST TRYING. MR. CHRISTMAS, I JUST WANT TO DELINEATE. BECAUSE MR. CUSHMAN'S STATEMENT SAID HE APPROVED, WAS OPTIONED TO CSAB. THAT DATE IS TO BE DETERMINED BASED ON WHEN THE BIDS GO OUT OR WHATEVER.

THERE'S NO DELAYING THAT HIS WAS. THAT'S A DELAYED DATE.

WE DON'T EVEN KNOW YET. SO PLANNING THAT ONE IS MORE THAN IT WAS.

ONLY IF THEY WERE GOING TO SEE IT IN THE BEGINNING.

AND THE OTHER IS, IS WHAT WOULD DELAY THE RFP GOING OUT BECAUSE THAT.

SO AND THAT WASN'T THE OPTION HE CHOSE. I JUST WANTED TO DIFFERENTIATE BECAUSE THAT WAS CONFUSION ON THAT.

YOU SAID IT CORRECTLY IN TERMS OF WHAT MY RECOMMENDATION IS, AND IT SEEMS TO ME WE CAN, YOU KNOW, WE OUGHT TO BE ABLE TO WE'RE IN THE SEASON. PEOPLE ARE HERE.

WE OUGHT TO BE ABLE TO SET A MEETING DATE THAT COULD ACCOMMODATE FOLKS.

YEAH. AND UNDER THAT SCENARIO, IF WE PUT IT OUT BY JANUARY 5TH, WE'RE NOT EVEN GOING TO BEGIN TO OPEN TILL FEBRUARY.

SO WE CAN ALREADY HAVE IT ON THEIR SCHEDULE FOR CSAB BASED ON THE TIMING OF THE OPENING, AND CAN GET IT THERE AND THE SCORING TO GET IT THERE.

THAT'S CONDUCIVE TO THAT. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE BECAUSE THAT DATE HASN'T BEEN DETERMINED YET.

SO TO DETERMINE THE OTHER WAS. MY ONLY CONCERN IS IF IT COMES DOWN TO THEIR DATES AND THEIR BEING A POTENTIAL OF SETTING BACK THE TIME FOR THE REVIEW THAT WE ASKED THEM TO COME TO A CITY COUNCIL MEETING. SO ANY INPUT THEY WANTED TO GIVE, THEY COULD GIVE IF IT COMES DOWN THAT WAY.

I'M JUST THAT'S. AND THE ONLY THING THAT I'LL SAY IS, MADAM MAYOR, WHEN WE GET BEFORE THIS RFP GOES OUT, WHICHEVER ONE YOU CHOOSE, WE'RE GOING TO TELL THEM THE EXACT DATES THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE GOING BEFORE, BECAUSE WE'LL KNOW THE CALENDAR. THAT'S WHAT HAPPENS WHEN WE DO A CONTRACT.

WE'LL KNOW THE EXACT OR AN RFP. WE'RE GOING TO KNOW THE EXACT DATES.

THE COMMITTEE IS GOING TO BE VOTING, THE DATES THAT IT COULD END UP ON A CSA CALENDAR AND EVERYTHING ELSE.

SO WE'LL MAKE SURE THAT CALENDAR IS INCLUSIVE OF THAT NO MATTER WHAT.

MA'AM, BEFORE WE EVER ISSUED THE RFP. WHAT ARE YOU ASKING ME WHAT HE JUST SAID.

DOES THAT REASSURE YOU? YES. BUT. AND AND SO THE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, THOUGH, MR. YOUNG, IS THAT THERE UNDER THAT SCENARIO, THERE WOULD BE, IF THE CALENDAR WORKED, THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE THE CSA REVIEW OF THE SHORT LIST, AND WE'LL HAVE THE CALENDAR.

YEAH. YEAH. WHEN WE WHEN WE ISSUE THE RFP SO EVERYONE KNOWS THE EXACT DATES AND AND AND IF BECAUSE OF UNAVAILABILITY OF CSA MEMBERS THAT MEETING COULD NOT BE SCHEDULED, THEN WE'LL HAVE TO DO SOMETHING ELSE.

I MEAN, WE'LL HAVE TO MOVE FORWARD. YEAH. AND I FEEL VERY COMFORTABLE WITH THAT BECAUSE WHEN WE MEET AND DO THE RFP CALENDAR WE'LL PROVIDE IT TO CSA.

THEY CAN ALWAYS FORESHADOW TO THEM THAT THIS IS COMING DOWN THE PIKE.

[03:00:03]

YOUR HELP. AND COUNCIL'S ASKED TO MAKE SURE WE GET YOUR OPINION ON HOW DO WE MAKE THAT HAPPEN CONSISTENT WITH OUR SCHEDULE.

AND SINCE IT'S FORWARD THINKING INTO FEBRUARY AND MARCH, WHEN AFTER IS THAT'S THE TIME FRAME BASED ON BEING OUT FOR 45 DAYS, I THINK IT'S MORE THAN WE'RE MORE THAN ABLE TO PLAN FOR THOSE ACCOMMODATIONS.

OKAY. I SUPPORT OPTION TWO WITH THOSE OPTIONS.

OKAY. KRAMER? YES. I HAVE TO SAY I'M 1 OR 2 WOULD BE FINE WITH ME.

THAT'S DEFINITELY TWO. SEEMS TO WORK AND NOT PUSH US BACK.

I AM COMPLETELY OPPOSED TO ANYBODY MESSING WITH THE RFP PROCESS THAT DOESN'T ALREADY DO THAT FOR A LIVING.

THAT IS A PANDORA'S BOX WE DO NOT WANT TO EVER OPEN, IN MY VIEW.

THANKS. OKAY. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? BARTON. YEAH I JUST.

GO AHEAD AND JUST REALLY DRILL DOWN AND GET THIS CRYSTAL CLEAR WAY. THE WAY I'M READING THIS IS THAT THERE IS NO DELAY TO INCLUDE CSAB ON THE PROCESS.

AND OPTION TWO VERSUS OPTION ONE, RIGHT. WE WILL MAKE IT FIT WITHIN THE FLOW OF THE I GOT THE ANSWER I WANTED, I HEARD RIGHT, IS THAT RIGHT? NO, THERE IS NO DELAY IN OPTION TWO VERSUS OPTION ONE.

ONE INCLUDING CSAB AND THE OTHER ONE NOT. YES, SIR.

WE'LL MAKE IT FIT. ALL RIGHT. GOOD. THAT'S WHAT I NEEDED TO KNOW. OPTION TWO IS IS THE WAY TO GO, AND WE SHOULD PROBABLY JUMP ON THAT AND MOVE ON.

ANYBODY ELSE? SO NUMBER TWO. OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU. OKAY. THAT CONCLUDES ITEM SIX E.

WE HAVE SIX B AND PUBLIC COMMENTS. BUT WE DO NEED TO TAKE A BREAK.

SO, COUNCIL, CAN YOU DO WE HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT? I'M SORRY FOR SEVEN. OKAY. I JUST JUST TO CONFIRM, FOR THE RECORD, WE DID NOT HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THE PAST FOR SIX A, SIX C OR SIX D OR SIX E. SO CONTINUING ON COUNCIL, WE NEED TO TAKE AT LEAST A 15 MINUTE BREAK. LUNCH IS IN THE BACK.

AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK AND DO SIX B AND COMPLETE THE AGENDA.

OKAY. WE'RE BACK FROM OUR SHORT LUNCH BREAK, AND WE'RE CONTINUING ON WITH THE AGENDA.

[6.B) A Discussion and Presentation from Staff regarding Micromobility in response to Guidance received from the City Council during the September 22, 2025 Workshop. ]

YES, MA'AM. SO WE'LL START OFF WITH HAVING A DISCUSSION ON IF YOU REMEMBER, THIS WILL BE THE SECOND TIME THAT WE WORKSHOP THIS ON GOING OVER CERTAIN THINGS RELATED TO MICROMOBILITY BIKES, EBIKES, ETC. AND SO WITH THAT, I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO TO DAN AND DOCTOR GEORGE.

SO AND WE'LL GO FROM THERE. GOOD AFTERNOON COUNCIL.

DAN LOEWENSTEIN CITY ENGINEER SPEAKING WITH YOU TODAY TO CONTINUE OUR DISCUSSION ON THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE FOR THE MICROMOBILITY ORDINANCE.

AT THE SEPTEMBER WORKSHOP, STAFF SOUGHT DIRECTION FROM THE COUNCIL ON SEVERAL PRIMARY QUESTIONS.

FIRST, SHOULD BICYCLES, ELECTRIC BICYCLES OR MICROMOBILITY DEVICES BE ALLOWED TO RIDE ON THE SIDEWALK? OUR DIRECTION WAS NO. NEXT. SHOULD MICROMOBILITY PROVIDERS BE ALLOWED TO OPERATE IN THE CITY? AND OUR DIRECTION WAS ALSO NO. THIRD, THE MATTER OF BICYCLE AND MICROMOBILITY TOUR COMPANIES WAS DISCUSSED.

THE CONSENSUS WAS THAT THESE COMPANIES SHOULD ALSO NOT BE ALLOWED TO OPERATE.

FOURTH, SHOULD COUNTY REGULATIONS GENERALLY BE FOLLOWED? OUR DIRECTION WAS YES TO THE EXTENT ABOVE. STAFF TOOK THESE DIRECTIONS AND HAD BEEN PREPARING A WORKING DRAFT TO INCLUDE THAT. ELECTRIC BICYCLES, BICYCLES AND OTHER ELECTRIC POWERED MOBILITY SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO OPERATE ON ANY PUBLIC SIDEWALK IN THE CITY. PRIVATE TOUR PROVIDERS SHOULD BE PROHIBITED WHILE FIGURING IN A GRACE PERIOD AND OR TRANSITION PERIOD. AND WE INCLUDED CHANGES TO THE CITY ORDINANCE TO REFLECT, FOR CONSISTENCY PURPOSES,

[03:05:07]

TO BE CONSISTENT WITH YOUR GUIDANCE AT THE SEPTEMBER WORKSHOP.

IN PREPARING THIS DRAFT, HOWEVER, WE NOTICED THAT THERE WOULD BE SOME UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES.

THAT THERE WOULD BE AS BIKE LANES ON OUR MAJOR ROADS ARE INFREQUENT.

SO WE HAVE ADDED A PROVISION FOR EXEMPTIONS. FIRST, MOBILITY ASSISTANCE DEVICES WOULD BE EXEMPT, CONSISTENT WITH THE ADA. SECOND, WHERE THERE IS NO DESIGNATED BICYCLE PATHS ON THE ROADWAY, BICYCLISTS ARE ALLOWED TO USE THE SIDEWALK PROVIDED THEY YIELD THE RIGHT OF WAY TO PEDESTRIANS, AND THAT SIDEWALKS ARE DESIGNATED PRIMARILY FOR PEDESTRIANS.

THIRD, SUCH BICYCLISTS WOULD BE ALLOWED ON THE SIDEWALK, PROVIDED THEY WILL BE MOVING TO A DESIGNATED BICYCLE PATH SHOULD ONE NOT EXIST ON THE ROAD THEY'RE USING. LASTLY, THE ABOVE EXEMPTIONS DO NOT APPLY TO ELECTRIC BICYCLES UNLESS OTHERWISE ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS FOR DESIGNATED ROADWAY AND WITH APPROPRIATE SIGNAGE.

AND WITH THAT WE'RE HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU. COUNSEL. I HAVE A QUESTION, KRAMER.

THANKS FOR THAT. ON UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES. THANK YOU.

THANKS, DAVID. UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES. BE. BICYCLE.

BICYCLES ARE ALLOWED WITH THE CONDITION THAT PEDESTRIANS ALWAYS YIELDED THE RIGHT OF WAY.

SO WE'RE SAYING THAT IF YOU'RE WALKING ON THE SIDEWALK.

YOU HAVE TO MOVE AND LET THE BICYCLE THROUGH.

IS THAT THE CASE? YES. THAT'S CORRECT. YOU HAVE TO YIELD THE RIGHT OF WAY TO THE BICYCLIST, HAS TO YIELD THE RIGHT OF WAY WHEN THERE'S A CONFLICT WITH THE PEDESTRIAN.

I'M NOT SURE THAT'S HOW THAT READS. YEAH, THAT'S MY POINT.

OKAY. IT'S NOT VERY CLEAR IF THAT'S HOW IT READS.

IT READS THE OPPOSITE. YEAH. INSTRUMENTS ARE ALWAYS.

OH I SEE APOLOGIES. SO THE IT'S CLEAR IN THE STATE LAW THAT.

AND THERE THERE'S A IT'S CLEAR THAT IN THE COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE THAT THE RIGHT OF WAY IS YIELDED TO THE PEDESTRIANS AND THE STATE IS ACTUALLY WORKING ON SIMILAR LANGUAGE RIGHT NOW. SO IT WILL BE CONSISTENT WITH THAT.

YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I ASSUMED. I JUST WANTED TO AND I SHOULD HAVE CALLED YOU IN ADVANCE OF THIS AND SAID THAT.

THAT'S RIGHT. FORGIVE ME FOR THAT. I'M JUST GOING TO SAY AGAIN THAT.

THE NOTION THAT AUTOMOBILES, PEDESTRIANS, AND BICYCLES ALL GET ALONG SWIMMINGLY AND LIVE IN HARMONY IS ASPIRATIONAL. IT'S NOT REALITY. ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU HAVE BUTTONS YOU CAN PUSH TO STOP CARS, AND THEN THAT ADDS AN EXTRA, HOWEVER LONG TO THE COMMUTE AND CHANGES TRAFFIC PATTERNS.

AT THAT POINT, IT'S JUST A REALITY OF MATH. ADD ELECTRIC VEHICLE ELECTRIC BICYCLES IF YOU WANT TO CALL THEM THAT.

AND I THINK IT MAKES IT EVEN MORE DIFFICULT. AND I APPRECIATE THIS.

BECAUSE WE HAVE, FIRST AND FOREMOST, PEDESTRIANS HAVE TO BE TAKEN CARE OF ON SIDEWALKS.

AND I WOULD SAY WHATEVER. HOWEVER, WE COME UP WITH CODE ORDINANCE, WHATEVER SIGNAGE, HOWEVER WE GET IT OUT TO THE PUBLIC, IT'S GOT TO BE REALLY SIMPLE, LIKE KEEP IT SIMPLE BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE TRANSLATED PROBABLY INTO HAITIAN CREOLE AND SPANISH AND FIT ON ONE SIGN.

AND SO I'M JUST THINKING, HOWEVER WE DO THIS, LET'S BEAR THAT IN MIND SO WE DON'T OVER COMPLICATE IT.

THANK YOU. I HAVE BARTON, VICE MAYOR AND KRISEMAN ALONG THE SAME SLIDE HERE WITH UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES.

A QUICK QUESTION. ACTUALLY I'M LOOKING FOR IS LIKE AN EXAMPLE.

SO AND I WILL TELL YOU THIS, SOMETHING I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT WHEN WE WERE DISCUSSING THIS LAST.

AND IT WAS OUR DISCUSSION ENDED WITH SIDEWALKS ARE FOR PEDESTRIANS AND PEDESTRIANS ONLY.

AND I AGREE THAT IN MOST CASES THAT SHOULD BE THE CASE.

BUT I FELT THAT THE NORTH SOUTH CORRIDOR WITH US, WITH THE LARGER ROADS, US 41 AND GOODLETTE THAT IT WAS GOING TO BE,

[03:10:06]

IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE THE BRIDGE.

OKAY. YES. YES. AND IT TURNS WHEN IT TURNS EAST.

THERE. THERE IS A BIKE LANE. BIKE. BIKE LANES BECOMES IS CREATED AT SOME POINT IN TIME WHEN YOU HEAD TOWARDS THE BRIDGE.

BUT GOING NORTH SOUTH, LET'S JUST THINK OF IT IN OUR HEADS NORTH SOUTH ON GOODLETTE AND US 41.

THERE ARE NO BIKE LANES IN THE ROAD, RIGHT? FOR ALMOST ALL THE CITY ON THOSE ROADS THERE ARE NO BIKES.

OKAY. SO, YOU KNOW, IT WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT FOR A FOR A BICYCLIST, AND ESPECIALLY BECAUSE SOME OF THOSE YOU THINK, OKAY, YOU JUST GO TAKE A SIDE ROAD. WELL, IF YOU GO TO GOODLETTE, THERE ARE NO SIDE ROADS THAT ARE CONTIGUOUS ALL THE WAY NORTH AND SOUTH.

YOU HAVE TO. I MEAN, YOU'RE JUMPING OVER TO 41 AND THEN JUMPING BACK OVER TO GOODLETTE. I MEAN, THEY'D BE ZIGZAGGING THEIR WAY ALL THE WAY UP, UP THE ROAD. SO I WAS HAPPY TO SEE THIS LANGUAGE IN THERE THAT SAYS IF THERE ISN'T A BIKE PATH IN THE ROAD, THEN A BICYCLIST CAN USE THE SIDEWALK WITH THE PEDESTRIANS, WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT PEDESTRIANS ARE GOING TO HAVE THE RIGHT OF WAY WHEN IT'S A PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLIST.

ABSOLUTELY. OKAY. GOOD. AGAIN, JUST SOME CLARITY ON THAT, BECAUSE I ALSO READ THAT THE SAME WAY THAT YOU GUYS DID.

I WAS, I WAS I WAS ALMOST SURE THAT THAT'S THE WAY THAT WAS OUR INTENT HERE.

BUT YOU'RE RIGHT, IT'S IT'S AWKWARDLY WORDED THERE AND IT NEEDS TO BE FIXED.

AND I THINK WE'RE, AS COACH SUGGESTED, THIS IS THERE'S NO EASY ANSWER HERE AND THERE IS NO SIMPLE ANSWER.

BUT IT'S DEFINITELY SOMETHING WE AS A COMMUNITY NEED TO NEED TO TACKLE.

AND I BELIEVE WE ARE TAKING THE STEPS. THE STEPS THAT WE ARE TAKING ARE THE RIGHT STEPS, AND THAT IS WE'RE GOING TO REMOVE MOTORIZED VEHICLES FROM THE SIDEWALKS FROM, FROM FROM THE PEDESTRIAN FOR PEDESTRIAN SAFETY.

AND I THINK THAT ABSOLUTELY HAS TO BE DONE, OBVIOUSLY WITH THE EXCEPTION, WHICH IS A HERE WHEN IT'S AN ADA REQUIREMENT.

SO I AND I ALSO APPLAUD THE LANGUAGE HERE, ALLOWING A BICYCLIST, NOT MOTORIZED BICYCLES, BUT BICYCLISTS TO BE ALLOWED ON SIDEWALKS WHEN THERE ISN'T A DESIGNATED BIKE PATH WITHIN THE ROAD ITSELF.

AND I WILL TELL YOU THIS, YOU KNOW, WE'RE ALL CONCERNED ABOUT THE SPEED OF THESE, OF THESE VEHICLES.

AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE DISCUSSING REMOVING THE, THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THESE E-BIKES TO RIDE ON THE SIDEWALKS BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE RIPPING BY, YOU KNOW, MOTHERS AND CHILDREN AND STROLLERS AND ELDERLY AT 30 MILES AN HOUR.

AND ONE MIGHT SAY, OH, YOU KNOW, THESE, THESE CYCLISTS THAT GO OUT AND DO THIS BICYCLISTS GO OUT AND DO THIS FOR EXERCISE, AND THEY'RE AND THEY'RE RIPPING DOWN CREIGHTON.

WELL, GUYS ARE NOT GOING TO BE USING GOODLETT AND 41 TO DO THAT.

BECAUSE THE SIDEWALKS ARE NOT CONDUCIVE FOR THE TYPE OF CYCLING THAT THEY WANT THAT THEY ARE DOING. THAT'S CREIGHTON IS THAT'S WHY YOU SEE THEM ON CREIGHTON.

SO THE REALITY IS, IS WHEN WE IN THOSE TWO MAIN CORRIDORS THAT I DISCUSSED JUST A FEW MINUTES AGO THE TYPE OF MY OPINION IS THE TYPE OF BICYCLES WE'RE GOING TO SEE ON THERE ARE GOING TO BE A CASUAL BIKE RIDERS THAT ARE HEADING NORTH AND SOUTH AND, YOU KNOW, NOT OUT THERE TRYING TO GET THEIR 35 MILE BIKE RIDE IN, DOING 28 MILES AN HOUR, YOU KNOW DOWN THE, DOWN THE SIDEWALK.

SO AGAIN, I THINK THAT THE AFTER READING THIS LAST NIGHT, I THINK WE DEFINITELY ARE ON THE RIGHT PATH HERE AND I THINK WE ARE MAKING THE RIGHT DECISIONS HERE. IT IT'S IN THE BEST INTEREST OF OUR COMMUNITY, AND WE NEED TO GET IN FRONT OF IT BECAUSE THESE THINGS ARE BECOMING A LOT MORE PROLIFIC BY DAY WE'RE SEEING MORE AND MORE OF THEM, AND THEY'RE GETTING FASTER AND QUIETER.

SO WE NEED WE'RE DOING THE RIGHT THING, GETTING IN FRONT OF IT.

TO THE POINT OF THE BRIDGE. AND IT MIGHT BE PRIOR TO ANY OF YOUR BOTH OF YOUR GENTLEMAN'S TIME HERE.

BUT THERE WAS WHEN COUNCIL MEMBER BLANKENSHIP WAS ON COUNCIL, WE WERE WORKING WITH THE FDOT ON THE BRIDGE AND MAKING SURE WE HAD A SAFER BIKE PATH. HAS THAT COME ABOUT? AND IF ANY CONVERSATIONS THAT YOU'RE AWARE OF, I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE STATUS OF THAT. PARDON? APOLOGIES. I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THAT STATUS OF THAT.

ALL RIGHT. WELL, PERFECT. JUST WANTED TO CHECK BECAUSE IT'S NARROW.

WHAT IS DESIGNATED AS BIKE PATH IS A NARROW BIKE PATH.

AND IT'S BUT IT IS OFF THE SIDEWALK. BUT IT I THINK IT PROBABLY AND AGAIN, I WASN'T PART OF THOSE MEETINGS, BUT MY GUESS IS THEY WERE PROBABLY CONCERNED THAT IT IS SO NARROW.

NARROW AS A DESIGNATED BIKE PATH. BECAUSE IT'S NOT A SHARED BIKE PATH.

IT'S A IT'S GOING TO ASK THE CLERK TO GIVE ME THE MINUTES FROM THAT BECAUSE.

BECAUSE IT'S SEPARATED FROM THE ROAD. YES. AND I THINK THAT MY GUESS IS BECAUSE IT'S BECAUSE IT'S DESIGNATED AS A BIKE PATH.

[03:15:05]

AND THAT'S MY GUESS IS IT PROBABLY HAS A DESIGNATED ONE.

IT PROBABLY IS TOO NARROW. THANK YOU. I HAVE VICE MAYOR AND THEN KRISTEN.

THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. SO I'M GLAD TO SEE THIS.

I STILL SUPPORT WHERE WE'RE GOING WITH THE ORDINANCE AND THE EXEMPTION SECTION. THE ONE THING I JUST WANT TO MENTION IS MAYBE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR DISCUSSION OR OR SOME CONTINUED THOUGHT.

FIRST, WE PROBABLY NEED TO ADDRESS PARKING OF THESE DEVICES IN SPACES MEANT FOR A SINGLE VEHICLE.

WHERE DO WE ADDRESS THAT, AND ARE WE OKAY WITH THEM CRAMMING AS MANY OF THESE AS THEY CAN IN A PARKING SPACE? DON'T KNOW, BUT I THINK WE WANT TO ADDRESS IT ON THE FRONT END RATHER THAN WAIT AND DEAL WITH IT AFTER THE FACT.

THE NEWEST VERSION OF THESE DEVICES ARE NOT TWO WHEELED AT ALL, SO THE TERM BICYCLE, IT DOES NOT APPLY.

THESE ARE ONE WHEEL DEVICES AND CAPABLE TO GO UP TO 50 MILES AN HOUR.

SO I KNOW THAT OUR SPEED, THE SPEED ASPECT OF WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE, ADDRESSES THE SPEED.

BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IF WE KNOW THAT THE ONE WHEEL DEVICES ARE GOING TO BE THE COOLEST LATEST THINGS ARE THEY ADDRESSED AND WHERE ARE THEY ADDRESSED? I'M SORRY. WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT TRICYCLES.

YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT SINGLE WHEEL SEGWAYS. NO.

NO ONE. NO. IT'S A IF YOU LOOK IT UP, IT'S. I DIDN'T WANT TO GET PULLING THIS UP.

I SAW A VIDEO OF IT ABOUT A WEEK AGO, AND I WAS LIKE, WHAT AM I LOOKING AT? THERE'S LIKE A IT'S IT'S A HUGE WHEEL, BUT IT'S IT'S THE LATEST AND GREATEST. JUST REALIZE IT'S HERE AND WE'RE GOING TO SEE HIM ON OUR STREETS.

LET'S JUST MAKE SURE THEY DON'T HAVE A CAVEAT RIGHT CARVED IN HERE BECAUSE WE'RE SAYING BICYCLES AND OTHER THINGS.

SCOOTERS. IT'S NOT A MOTORCYCLE. BUT SO JUST THE DEFINITION AND IT'S FOR LAWYER SPEAK.

AND THEN REALLY I THINK WE'VE IT'S MORE OF A QUESTION.

JUST AN OPPORTUNITY. I WANT TO GET IN THE WEEDS ON IT. BUT PEDESTRIANS, WE KNOW IN A CERTAIN AREA OF OUR COMMUNITY WHERE WE HAVE.

WE ALMOST PUT PEDESTRIANS IN THE ROADWAY WHEN IT COMES TO OUR BEACH ENDS.

OKAY, SO WE PUT THEM IN THE ROADWAY BECAUSE THERE'S NO SIDEWALK ON EITHER SIDE IN A LOT OF INSTANCES.

LET'S JUST MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ADDRESSING THAT AS THESE E-BIKE E MOBILITY DEVICES ARE GOING DOWN IN THOSE AREAS THAT WE RECOGNIZE THAT WE ARE PUTTING PEDESTRIANS OUT IN THAT SPACE AND MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE OKAY WITH IT. OKAY. AND WE'VE ADDRESSED IT.

THAT'S ALL. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. CHRISTIAN.

THANK YOU. JUST A COUPLE THINGS. IN TERMS GOING BACK TO UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OR FOLLOW UP ACTIONS, HOWEVER YOU WANT TO DESCRIBE IT, THE MR. LOEWENSTEIN, YOU MENTIONED THAT IN TERMS OF MICRO MOBILITY PROVIDERS AND TOUR COMPANIES THAT ARE DIRECTION WAS THAT THEY SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO OPERATE IN NAPLES, BUT WE CORRECT THAT WAS OUR DIRECTION. THAT WAS OUR THAT WAS THE COUNCIL DIRECTION.

AND, AND BUT WE KNOW THAT THERE ARE SOME OF SOME OF THOSE OPERATIONS THAT CURRENTLY OPERATE.

AND AND ALSO WE HAD A CONVERSATION AT THE LAST MEETING ABOUT TRYING TO DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN THAT AND FOR EXAMPLE, HOTELS THAT WOULD PROVIDE THESE DEVICES, ELECTRIC BIKES IN PARTICULAR, TO THEIR, TO THEIR CUSTOMERS MAYBE BIKE SHOPS TO SO I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, IS, IS THAT A FOLLOW UP CONVERSATION STAFF AND OUR CITY ATTORNEY IS GOING TO HAVE TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE WHETHER ANYBODY GETS GRANDFATHERED IN OR IS ABLE TO BE GRANDFATHERED IN OR DO WE WANT THEM TO BE.

AND ALSO ANYTHING ELSE THAT WE NEED TO DO FROM THE STANDPOINT OF THIS TRANSITION?

[03:20:04]

LISA. IS THAT CORRECT? AND SO THAT WAS ONE ITEM.

I'M NOT SURE. I THOUGHT WE HAD IT IN A SLIDE, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN DELETED.

BUT UNLESS I JUST MISSED IT. SO THAT'S THAT PART.

THEN THE SECOND PART WAS IF THEY ARE OPERATING, HOW COULD THEY LEGALLY OR WHAT DO WE NEED TO DO SO THEY TO PROHIBIT THEM FROM OPERATING.

I KIND OF HAVE TO DEFER TO THE CITY ATTORNEY ON THAT.

I JUST WANTED TO. I THINK WE EACH LEFT WITH CERTAIN PIECES OF HOMEWORK, FOR LACK OF A BETTER.

SO I'D LIKE TO AT LEAST DISCUSS IT TODAY AS TO KNOWING WHETHER THAT'S STILL THE THAT'S THE REASON I'M RAISING IT, BECAUSE IT WASN'T IN THE PRESENTATION HERE. AS TO.

YEAH, IT JUST SAYS OTHER MICROMOBILITY. AND I THOUGHT THAT WAS WHEN I HAD THIS.

THERE WAS A SLIDE IN THERE THAT CITED THE SIX AND THEN SAY, ARE WE STILL HOW ARE WE GOING TO DO THAT? SO I DON'T KNOW HOW WE CAN RESTRICT IT OR WHAT WE CAN DO.

MATTHEW, IS THERE ANYTHING YOU WANT TO OPINE ON THAT? SURE.

SO BY BY MR. YOUNG, WE DID MEET PROBABLY A COUPLE TIMES INTERNALLY TO DISCUSS THE POTENTIAL LEGAL RAMIFICATIONS OF DOING SOMETHING LIKE AN ALL OUT PROHIBITION WHERE COMPANIES AND I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG THEY'VE BEEN OPERATING FOR, BUT ARE MAKING MONEY OFF THE USE OF OUR ROAD.

RIGHT. AND HAVE BEEN FOR A WHILE. BECAUSE IF YOU'LL RECALL, AND EVERY NOW AND THEN, YOU'LL SEE IT IS ANYTIME WE CHANGE THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, WE'RE REQUIRED BEFORE SECOND READING TO DO WHAT'S CALLED A BUSINESS IMPACT ESTIMATE.

THAT BUSINESS IMPACT ESTIMATE HAS TO GO THROUGH CERTAIN CRITERIA ON HOW THIS ORDINANCE IS AFFECTING BUSINESSES LOCALLY TO GO FROM, YOU CAN DO THIS ALL THE TIME TO YOU CAN'T DO THIS AT ALL WOULD CLEARLY BE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT TO THOSE BUSINESSES.

SO BASED ON OUR DISCUSSIONS, AND IF COUNCIL WANTS ME TO REVIEW THIS EVEN FURTHER, I CAN.

BUT I THINK LIMITING HOW MANY ARE ON YOUR ROAD REQUIRING THEM TO BE IN A SINGLE FILE LINE, SIMILAR TO THE REGULATION ON NOT INVADING PEDESTRIAN SAFETY, SOMETHING SIMILAR WITH VEHICULAR SAFETY.

THOSE ARE ALL THINGS THAT I THINK IN YOUR POLICE POWER YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO.

I THINK YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO REQUIRE A PERMIT AS WELL, BECAUSE THEY'RE OPERATING THEIR BUSINESS ON THE RIGHT OF WAY. BUT IF WE WANT TO GO FROM NOT REGULATING THEM, REALLY, TO AN ALL OUT PROHIBITION.

THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME SOME POTENTIAL LEGAL CONSEQUENCES TO THAT, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU START RUNNING THE NUMBERS ON HOW MUCH THESE BUSINESSES ARE IMPACTED.

BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK ONLINE, I MEAN, THESE TOURS ARE NOT CHEAP.

AND I MEAN, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT PROBABLY ANYWHERE FROM 250 TO $500,000 A YEAR THAT SOME OF THESE COMPANIES ARE MAKING.

SO THAT WOULD BE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT TO THEIR BUSINESS. THEY WOULD ESSENTIALLY NOT OPERATE AT ALL ANYMORE.

SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION, BUT I THINK IF WE DO THIS, IF COUNCIL STILL WANTS TO DO THIS. THERE'S GOING TO BE THERE'S GOING TO NEED TO BE SOME FOLLOW UP. AND MY ANSWER MAY STILL BE I DON'T ADVISE IT, BUT ULTIMATELY IT'S UP TO COUNCIL.

YEAH, WELL I THINK. YOUR ANSWER TELLS ME THAT THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE CAN DECIDE TODAY RIGHT. AND AND I THINK THAT YOU NEED TO CONTINUE TO RESEARCH THIS. IT MAY BE THAT THE PEOPLE THAT ARE OUT THERE OPERATING, I THINK OUR DESIRE WOULD BE NOT TO HAVE ANY OF THESE OPERATIONS IN THE CITY.

BUT IF IT'S IF THERE'S ALSO THE QUESTION OF WHAT KIND OF LICENSING AND FEES THEY MUST PAY, AND I DON'T KNOW WHETHER WE HAVE A SYSTEM IN PLACE THAT'S APPROPRIATE FOR THAT.

SO WE MAY BE INSTITUTING SOMETHING NEW THERE.

IF WE CONCLUDE THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT THEY'VE BEEN OPERATING AND WE CAN'T WE DON'T HAVE THE LEGAL AUTHORITY TO SHUT THEM DOWN, WE CERTAINLY CAN, I THINK, AGREE THAT BASED ON WHAT YOU SAID, THAT THE ABILITY WE WOULD WE WOULD TAKE A POSITION THAT WE'RE NOT APPROVING ANY NEW COMPANIES OR OPERATORS TO COME IN.

SO THERE'S THERE'S A BUNCH OF QUESTIONS THERE THAT NEED TO BE ANSWERED.

AND AND REALLY, I WAS JUST TRYING TO PROBE INTO WHERE WE STOOD ON THAT, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE MR. MCCONNELL, YOU AND STAFF NEED TO DO SOME FURTHER RESEARCH AND COME BACK TO US WITH SOME RECOMMENDATIONS ON ON THAT ASPECT OF IT.

GO AHEAD, MR. YOUNG. YEAH. THE ONLY THING IS, SO WE WOULD HAVE TO DO IF.

[03:25:01]

YOU CAN'T STOP THAT PART. SO THE QUESTION BECOMES IS WHAT DIRECTION ARE WE TAKING IT IF IF WE GO TO, HOW DO WE MANAGE AS OPPOSED TO HOW DO WE ABOLISH IF WE OR KEEP FROM HAPPENING THOUGH THAT'S THE DIRECTION.

JUST SO WE KNOW, A MAJORITY OF STAFF IS SENDING US DOWN THE PATH THAT WE DO THE WORK ON THE OTHER.

AND AGAIN, VOTES CAN ALWAYS CHANGE. I JUST WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A GENERAL CONSENSUS.

AM I TRYING TO REGULATE OR TRYING TO PROHIBIT? THAT'S THE LANGUAGE I THINK WE NEED TO LEAVE HERE WITH IN THE SENSE OF AND I SAY REGULATED, WHETHER IT'S BY VIA OF A FRANCHISE OR VIA RIGHT OF WAY, PERMIT ANY OF THOSE INSTRUMENTS.

WE CAN WORK THROUGH ALL THAT TOGETHER. BUT BUT LEAVING HERE, NOT KNOWING A CONSENSUS OF COUNCIL IN THAT REGARD, I THINK, LEAVES US IN A POSITION OF NOT KNOWING WHETHER WE'RE TRYING TO PROHIBIT OR TRYING TO REGULATE TO THE EXTENT WE ARE ABLE, IF THAT'S A FAIR SUMMARY. WELL, I GUESS MY VIEW WOULD BE TO IT'S IT'S SORT OF I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS A GOOD ANALOGY OR NOT, BUT I THINK ABOUT OUTDOOR DINING ON PUBLIC PROPERTY, WHERE WE HAVE TAKEN THE POSITION THAT WE ARE NOT GOING TO APPROVE NEW OUTDOOR DINING PERMITS ON PUBLIC PROPERTY.

BUT THERE ARE A NUMBER OF RESTAURANTS THAT WERE APPROVED FOR THIS IN THE PAST, AND WE AND THEY HAVE THE RIGHTS TO CONTINUE. AND IF AT SOME POINT THERE'S A CHANGE IN OWNERSHIP OR WHATEVER, THAT PRESUMABLY IF WE WANTED TO CONTINUE, WHOEVER'S ON COUNCIL WOULD WANT TO CONTINUE THAT POLICY, THAT IT MAY NOT BE APPROVED IN THE FUTURE ON THOSE SITES, BUT UNTIL, UNLESS AND UNTIL THEN IT WOULD CONTINUE TO OPERATE SIMILARLY.

HERE WE MAY WANT TO GO DOWN THE ROAD OF CREATING THE APPROPRIATE SET OF REGULATIONS FOR THESE EXISTING OPERATORS AS WELL AS SOME KIND OF ANNUAL FEE THEY HAVE TO PAY FOR THE RIGHT TO TO USE THESE TO OPERATE THIS PROGRAM, BUT ALSO SAY THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO APPROVE ANY NEW OPERATIONS.

THAT WOULD BE, TO ME, BASED ON WHAT I'M HEARING.

A POSSIBLE WAY TO GO. SO I WANT TO GET CLARIFICATION ON THIS.

WE DO NOT HAVE A CODE FOR THESE OPERATIONS AND BUSINESSES.

THEY HAVE NOT BEEN APPROVED. AND IF THEY HAVE BEEN APPROVED THROUGH A RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT, AND WE DON'T HAVE A CODE FOR IT. WE SHOULD HAVE HAD THE CODE PUT IN PLACE.

WE HAVE A BETTER PROCESS THAT ANY BUSINESS MUST GET A BUSINESS TAX RECEIPT.

BUT IF I UNDERSTAND WHAT MR. YOUNG JUST SAID IS IF IT'S NOT, IF IT'S SILENT IN THE CODE, THEY CAN STILL GET A BUSINESS TAX RECEIPT.

THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING. SO TWO THINGS FOR ME IS I DON'T THINK WE CAN CONTINUE TO KICK THIS DOWN THE ROAD.

I THINK THAT WE NEED TO MAKE SOME DECISIONS HERE ON POLICY, TO GIVE STAFF TO COME BACK WITH THAT AND CLARIFICATION ON IF WE HAVE TO GIVE A BUSINESS TAX RECEIPT FOR ANYBODY, FOR ANY PARTICULAR BUSINESS, IF IT'S NOT IN THE CODE. AND THAT WOULD. I MEAN, AND THERE ARE PREVIOUS LEGAL OPINIONS THAT HAVE BEEN UPHELD AND EVERYTHING AS FAR AS WHAT YOU CAN RESTRICT ON BTR.

AND WE'LL MAKE SURE THAT THAT GETS DISSEMINATED AS WELL.

AND I KNOW MR. MCCONNELL HAS HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO READ IT ALREADY. OKAY.

BECAUSE IT'S A BUSINESS ACTIVITY. IT'S ON THE STREETS AND WE SHOULD HAVE REGULATIONS FOR THIS PARTICULAR APPROVAL. AND IF THAT'S A CONSENSUS, THEN WE CAN PUT THAT IN PLACE.

CORRECT. GETTING A CONSENSUS NOW. FOR THE ONES THAT ARE OPERATING, THEY DON'T HAVE A RIGHT TO OPERATE ON OUR STREETS WITHOUT PERMISSION.

AND WE HAVE TO DECIDE ON HOW WE WILL IF WE ARE GOING TO ALLOW CERTAIN BUSINESSES.

[03:30:07]

WE HAD THAT HAPPEN RECENTLY WITH A RESTAURANT THAT WE DIDN'T KNOW WAS GOING TO BE A PRIVATE CLUB.

SO WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE KNOW EXACTLY THE INTENT.

AND DID EVERYONE RECEIVE THE INFORMATION OF THE COMPANIES THAT ARE.

OPERATING ALREADY? I DON'T THINK I DID KNOW. WELL, HERE NOR THERE.

WELL, I THOUGHT WE SENT THAT OUT LIKE THE. THROUGH AN EMAIL WITHIN TEN DAYS AFTER THE LAST MEETING.

BUT THAT'S OKAY. WE'LL SEND IT OUT AGAIN TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE HAS IT. THANK YOU.

SO I DON'T WANT TO JUST MENTION NAMES. BUT THERE ARE ALSO OTHER BUSINESSES, LIKE, I JUST GOT AN ADVERTISEMENT FROM INSTAGRAM ON MY WORK.

INSTAGRAM. I DIDN'T EVEN KNOW I HAD A WORK INSTAGRAM.

BUT IT SAYS NAPLES, FLORIDA. IT HAS OUR SEAL ON IT AND IT SAYS, ARE YOU READY TO RIDE? AND IT'S CALLED RIDES. AND IT LOOKS JUST LIKE THE SLIDER.

FREE ON DEMAND ELECTRIC, 100% TRANSPORTATION.

AND IT GOES FROM TEN CITY FREE RIDE AND IT GOES TO FIFTH AVENUE, THIRD STREET AND TO VENETIAN VILLAGE. NOW, WE HAD THIS CONVERSATION IN THE CRA WITH A PARTICULAR COMPANY THAT WANTED TO OPERATE ON FIFTH AVENUE AND THEN EXPAND IT, AND WANTED TO GO ON TO 41 CROSS 41 BEYOND THE BUSY GULF SHORE BOULEVARD. AND WE DENIED IT OUT OF SAFETY REASONS.

SO WE MUST HAVE THIS CONVERSATION AFTER WE COMPLETE THIS TODAY AT LEAST ABOUT THIS MULTI TRANSIT.

CORRECT. MR. MCCONNELL MULTI MODAL MICRO TRANSIT.

OKAY. SO LET ME JUST CLARIFY IS THIS ORDINANCE HAVE MULTI TRANSIT WITHIN IT.

MADAM MAYOR, IF I MIGHT WHAT OUR CITY MANAGER WAS LOOKING FOR THAT UNFORTUNATELY IT'S NOT ON THE SLIDES. WE CREATED SECTION 36 DASH. SIX. IT STATES ALL PRIVATE ENTITIES WHO WISH TO OPERATE WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS SHALL BE SUBJECT TO OPERATING PERMIT AND AGREEMENTS, SIMILAR TO OUR FRANCHISEE AGREEMENTS.

THAT REQUIRES INSURANCE. AND IT'S NOT AN EASY PROCESS.

PERMIT AND AGREEMENTS ISSUED BY THE CITY MANAGER, AND SHALL BE SUBJECT TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL ON REGULAR AGENDA PRIOR TO ANY OPERATIONS START UP. SO THIS IS OUR THIS IS OUR STARTING POINT IN TERMS OF WHAT OUR THINKING WAS. AND AS IMPORTANT AS THE SUBJECT MATTER IS WE THOUGHT IT HAS TO GO THROUGH STAFF LEVEL DUE DILIGENCE TO THE POINT WHERE WE HAVE EAGLE EYES OF OUR CITY MANAGER LOOKING AT WHAT STAFF SAYING, OKAY OR NOT. OKAY, BUT AT THE END STILL HAS TO COME BEFORE THE COUNCIL UNDER REGULAR AGENDA FOR FINAL APPROVAL.

SO THAT WAS OUR STARTING POINT. AND THEN PRIVATE ENTITIES CURRENTLY OPERATING WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS WILL CONTINUE TO OPERATE, HOWEVER, SHALL BE SUBJECT TO SUBSECTION.

A ABOVE. WITHIN SIX MONTHS. EFFECTIVE TO DATE.

MEANING. ANYONE OPERATING WILL HAVE SIX MONTHS TO GO THROUGH WHAT I JUST LAID OUT AS A STARTING POINT. SO THEY WILL ALL HAVE TO COME BACK, OBTAIN A PERMIT, AND SIGN AN AGREEMENT AND GO THROUGH THE PROCESS.

SO. MY THINKING THERE WAS SIMILAR TO OTHER ORDINANCES THAT I WORKED THROUGH GREAT ATTORNEYS PRIVATE AND PUBLIC. YES. I THINK THAT WE CAN ACHIEVE THE INTENT OF THE COUNCIL

[03:35:05]

RULES AND REGULATIONS BEING CONSIDERED, AND THERE IS A PERMITTING PROCESS BEING PUT IN PLACE.

THEREFORE, OPERATOR WHO, WHO, WHO HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY PERMIT OR WENT THROUGH THE DUE DILIGENCE INDEED, SUBJECT TO GO THROUGH FROM EQUITY STANDPOINT LIKE ANY OTHER NEW BUSINESS WOULD GO THROUGH.

WELL JUST STARTING RESPECTFUL. BUT IF I DECIDED THAT I WANT TO HAVE I DON'T KNOW, SOME BUSINESS THAT'S UP AND COMING AND I DECIDE TO START IT.

JUST BECAUSE I DIDN'T ASK FOR PERMISSION DOESN'T MEAN I SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO CONTINUE.

THAT. JUST MY OPINION. THAT BUSINESS. AND I'M LOOKING AT IT FROM A SAFETY POINT OF VIEW. HOW MANY ARE GOING TO BE ON THE STREETS AND WHERE ARE THEY GOING? BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THAT A TOUR NEEDS TO GO DOWN CROWDED STREETS THAT HAVE TRAFFIC OR THEY HAVE PARKING ON THE STREETS, AND YOU CAN'T EVEN REALLY FIT TWO CARS OR A TRUCK ON THAT STREET, AND YOU HAVE A TRAIL OF BICYCLES, TRICYCLES, SCOOTERS, SIX DIFFERENT TYPES.

YES, YOU CAN TELL THEM TO GO IN A SINGLE FILE LINE, BUT I'M NOT SURE ANYONE'S EXPERIENCED IT.

BUT WE DID HAVE THAT CONVERSATION THAT THEY ARE ON THE ROAD AND TO MAKE THEM DO SINGLE FILE IS ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE, AND STOPPING AT STOP SIGNS AND STOPPING TRAFFIC ON THEIR OWN VOLITION IS A SAFETY PROBLEM THAT A TOUR IS ALLOWED TO STAND THERE AND STOP TRAFFIC WHILE 12 PEOPLE PROCEED THROUGH ON STREETS.

SO AGAIN, I'LL GO BACK TO MY OPINION. I DON'T BELIEVE JUST BECAUSE IT'S NOT IN A CODE AND SOMEONE STARTS A BUSINESS. I MEAN, I HAVE PEOPLE RIGHT NOW SAYING THEY'RE GOING TO START, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE GOING TO DO SOMETHING ON THE BEACH. THEY'RE GOING TO DO PICNICS.

WELL, THEY WEREN'T ALLOWED TO DO PICNICS ON THE BEACH BECAUSE WE WE DON'T IT DOESN'T SAY YOU CAN'T DO PICNICS, BUT YOU CAN'T OPERATE A BUSINESS. SO I THINK THAT'S THE FIRST THING WE HAVE TO SOLVE.

AND I'M SORRY. NO, WAIT. I WANT TO HEAR WHAT YOU HAVE TO SAY.

AND MAYOR, I HAD ONE. WHEN I HAD THE FLOOR, I HAD ANOTHER POINT I WANTED TO MAKE TOO, BUT I LET MR. COMPLETE ON YOURS. MR. YOUNG, LET MR. YOUNG RESPOND NOW.

OKAY. AND THEN. WELL, I ALREADY SAID THE OTHER TWO BUSINESS TAX AND WHETHER THEY SHOULD HAVE A FRANCHISE AGREEMENT AND HOW MANY WILL WE HAVE? AND IF WE SAY YOU CAN ONLY HAVE ONE OR YOU HAVE SIX, WHAT'S THEIR BUSINESS PLAN, MR. YOUNG? YEAH. AND I JUST WANTED TO BE BECAUSE THERE IS SPECIFIC CODE ABOUT OPERATING A BUSINESS ON OUR BEACHES.

AND SO WHEN WE DENY SOMEBODY ON THE TR, THERE'S BECAUSE THE CODE IS SPECIFIC TO, TO DENYING BUSINESS BUSINESS ACTIVITY ON OUR BEACHES. SO I JUST WANTED TO BE CLEAR ABOUT THAT.

YEAH, I WAS GOING TO USE SOMETHING ELSE THAT ISN'T IN OUR CODE, BUT.

AND I'M APPROPRIATE. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I.

I COULDN'T THINK OF ANOTHER THING OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.

IS THAT THAT WAS YOUR. YEAH. THAT WAS. OKAY. THANK YOU.

MR. MCCONNELL, BECAUSE I WANT TO LET COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISMAN COMPLETE.

YEAH. JUST ON MR. YOUNG'S POINT TWO. I THINK EVERYTHING THAT YOU JUST MENTIONED MAYOR IS ARE PHENOMENAL POINTS THAT I THINK THE WAY THE STAFF'S DRAFTED, THE REGULATIONS WILL BE HANDLED ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS AS THESE COMPANIES COME BACK BEFORE YOU, JUST LIKE TROLLEY COMPANIES AND EVERYONE ELSE WHEN IT COMES TO THEY LAY OUT A BUSINESS PLAN, THEY LAY OUT THEIR ROUTES. AND ALL OF THOSE POINTS THAT YOU MADE ARE EXACTLY WHY ADDING SOME KIND OF REGULATION IN PLACE, PROCESSING THESE APPLICATIONS IS A GOOD IDEA.

[03:40:01]

SO DON'T IF THAT'S WHERE WE'RE STILL AT THAT WE WANT TO PROHIBIT IT THEN.

THIS CONVERSATION IS KIND OF MUTE. KRISEMAN, CAN YOU COMPLETE AND THEN I'M GOING TO MOVE ON TO COUNCIL.

WELL, IF YOU WANT TO GET FIGURE OUT WHERE WE ARE ON THIS POINT.

OKAY. VERY BRIEFLY, BECAUSE THE SECOND QUESTION I WAS GOING TO RAISE ORIGINALLY WAS TOUCHED UPON IN THE RESPONSE ON MY FIRST QUESTION, BUT BUT BUT I'M STILL UNCLEAR AS TO WHERE WE STAND.

AND THIS IS WITH RESPECT TO. ENTITIES LIKE SLIDER AND THIS NEW, POTENTIALLY THIS NEW COMPANY THAT YOU REFERENCED, MAYOR THAT YOU GOT AN EMAIL OR A TEXT ON, I ASSUMED THAT THEY DID NOT FALL UNDER THE DEFINITION OF MICRO MOBILITY, BUT WE HAVE HAD CONVERSATIONS HERE IN THE PAST ABOUT THESE COMPANIES THAT WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT UBER AND LYFT, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE SLIDERS OF THIS WORLD.

AND THERE WAS ANOTHER COMPANY THAT WAS AT ONE TIME, ANYWAY, OPERATING ON FIFTH AVENUE IN PARTICULAR, AND DOING SO IN AN UNLICENSED, UNREGULATED WAY.

AND I KNOW, MR. MCCONNELL, YOU WERE LOOKING INTO THAT AT ONE POINT IN TIME, THAT WHOLE ISSUE, AND I'M ASSUMING THAT WE WOULD WANT TO DEAL WITH THAT IN A PARALLEL BUT SEPARATE WAY FROM A LICENSING AND REGULATORY STANDPOINT. BUT I WONDERED IF YOU COULD COMMENT ON WHAT THE PLAN IS FOR THAT.

YES. THANK YOU. I THINK YOU HIT IT SQUARE ON THE HEAD.

I THINK AS PART OF THIS DISCUSSION, THERE WAS SOME RESEARCH INTO THE TOUR PROVIDERS.

BUT MICROTRANSIT, I THINK HAS TO BE A POLICY DECISION THAT YOU GUYS ALL MAKE.

HOPEFULLY TODAY GET A CONSENSUS ON HOW TO ADDRESS THOSE THINGS SO THAT WHETHER IT'S EMBEDDED IN THIS ORDINANCE OR IT'S A SEPARATE ORDINANCE, BOTH POLICY DECISIONS ARE BEING ADDRESSED AT THE SAME TIME.

YEAH. OKAY. AND AND SPEAKING AGAIN FOR MYSELF, I THINK IF.

BASED ON WHAT I'VE LEARNED ABOUT MICROMOBILITY, WHAT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WITH THE SLIDERS OF THIS WORLD, DO THEY MEET THE DEFINITION OF MICROMOBILITY? I WOULD SAY THE SLIDERS OF THIS WORLD AND THE GOLF CARTS ARE MORE MICRO TRANSIT IS WHAT THEY'RE USUALLY REFERRED TO AS.

I THINK I THINK MICRO MOBILITY IS, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE A SPEED LIMIT FROM 15 TO 28.

NOT SAYING THAT. I MEAN, SOME GOLF CARTS CAN GO FASTER, BUT IT'S REALLY DEALING WITH THE DEVICES USED FOR INDIVIDUAL USE AND SLIDER AND RIDES.

I MEAN, THOSE ARE SIX FOR SIX PEOPLE, GOLF CARTS.

SO I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE HANDLE IT UNDER A DIFFERENT DEFINITION, POTENTIALLY EVEN A DIFFERENT SECTION OF THE CODE.

YEAH. AND I, I'M MERELY RAISING IT BECAUSE IT'S AN OUTSTANDING QUESTION.

I WOULD PREFER THAT WE DEAL WITH THAT CONSISTENT DEAL WITH THAT AS A MATTER OF POLICY WHILE WE'RE DEALING WITH THESE OTHER ISSUES. AND WHETHER IT'S A SEPARATE ORDINANCE OR IT CAN BE A SECTION OF THE SAME ORDINANCE AND SO ON, YOU DO YOU ALL THAT'S A THAT'S A SOMETHING MR. MCCONNELL, YOU AND MR. YOUNG CAN FIGURE OUT. BUT IT SEEMS TO ME THAT WE OUGHT TO DEAL WITH IT, BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN AN ISSUE IN THE PAST, AND IT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE FOR SURE.

SO THAT'S THAT WAS THE OTHER THING I WANTED TO SAY.

MAYOR. SO COULD I MAKE A REQUEST? WHEN WE GET CONSENSUS TO DO MICRO MOBILITY AND THE CHANGES THAT ARE TALKED UP INTO THE FIRST HALF, SO THAT WE KNOW WHETHER IT'S TRYING TO PROHIBIT OR GOVERN, AND THE SAME THING ON MICRO TRANSIT SO THAT WE HAVE TWO DIFFERENT GOING UP AND DOWN THE LINE SO THAT WE KNOW THAT CLEAR DIRECTION THAT WE'RE TAKING.

OKAY. SO IF I LOOK AT 36 SIX IN THE ORDINANCE, MR. YOUNG, A PRIVATE BICYCLE AND ELECTRIC BICYCLE.

TOUR. TOUR ENTITIES. SORRY FOR THE IF IT'S IT'S WHAT THE TITLE READS.

SORRY IF IT'S TOUR ENTITIES. YEAH. I'M NOT COMFORTABLE WITH THE LANGUAGE SAYING PRIVATE ENTITIES

[03:45:06]

WE'LL BE COMING BACK TO YOU TO GO THROUGH THAT LANGUAGE IF WE FIRST KNOW WHETHER WE'RE GOING TO REGULATE.

BECAUSE I WOULD ALSO ARGUE I WANT TO EXPLORE WITH LEGAL HOW CAN I REGULATE WHERE THEY CAN GO? BECAUSE IF I CAN GET THEM REGISTERED, THEN WE SHOULD BE. WE SHOULD HAVE A SEPARATE IN THE WORKSHOP CONVERSATION WHERE DON'T WE WANT THEM? AND IF THEY FAIL TO DO THAT OR THEY FAIL TO ADHERE TO THOSE.

SO I THINK SO. I'M NOT YOUR POINTS VERY WELL TAKEN FOLLOW BECAUSE THIS CAN GET COMPLICATED.

NO. AND I'M WHAT I'M SAYING IS, IS, IS THAT THE QUESTION I WOULD HAVE IS, IS IF, IF WE REGULATE AND WE'RE IT HAPPENS IN OUR RIGHT OF WAY.

CORRESPONDING TO THAT IS WHAT ARE THE MAPPED LOCATIONS OF WHICH THEY'RE OPERATIONAL.

AND THAT SHOULD BE IN THEIR SUBMISSION PLAN. AND NO AS LONG IF COUNCIL HAS A THESE STREETS ARE PROHIBITED, NO MATTER WHAT DISCUSSION FOR APPROVAL, THEN WE CAN HAVE THAT AS WE DO THE CODE.

THE SECONDARY PART OF IT IS IT MUST BE IN THEIR OPERATIONAL PLAN WHEN MAKING APPLICATION.

AND THEY UNDERSTAND THAT SIGNING THIS SAYS YOU CANNOT BE IN THESE AREAS, YOU CANNOT STOP TRAFFIC, YOU CANNOT DO THESE THINGS. SO THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE TO BAKE OUT.

ONCE WE KNOW WHETHER WE'RE GOING TO DO ALL THE WORK OR WE'RE GOING TO DO ALL OF OUR DEDICATED WORK TO PROHIBITING, AS OPPOSED TO TRYING TO GET IT TO BE WHERE THE ONLY PLACES YOU WANT IT TO EXIST.

THAT'S WE AGREED NO MICRO TRANSIT. DID WE COME UP WITH A CONSENSUS OF NO MICRO MOBILITY OPERATIONS AND TOURS? THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING. THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. WELL, I DON'T THINK WE HAVE A CONSENSUS YET. I ASKED SPECIFICALLY, COULD WE HAVE A CONSENSUS ON MICRO MOBILITY FIRST AND THEN COME BACK TO A CONSENSUS ON MICRO TRANSIT SO THAT I STILL KNOW WHERE I'M CARRYING THE BALL ON THAT PART? THAT'S OKAY. I'M GOING TO DO EXACTLY WHAT YOU JUST SUGGESTED.

I HAVE VICE MAYOR AND THEN PENMAN. YEAH. JUST FOR THE RECORD, AS YOU LOOK BACK ON THIS DEFINITIONS, WE NEED WORK. MAKE SURE YOU INCLUDE IN THERE NO ABANDONMENT OF THE DEVICE AND DEFINE THAT BECAUSE ABANDONMENT CAN BE A LOT OF DIFFERENT THINGS. IT COULD BE FOR PICKING UP LATER BY SOME THIRD PARTY.

IT COULD BE THAT IT'S ABANDONED FOR OUR WHATEVER IT IS.

I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO LEGALESE. PLEASE LOOK AT KEY BISCAYNE, WHO DEALT WITH A PERMANENT BAN IN SEPTEMBER OF THIS YEAR.

THAT WAS THE DEATH OF A CHILD DUE TO AN E DEVICE COLLISION OPERATED BY A 12 YEAR OLD.

ALSO LOOK AT SUMMIT TOUR. NO, THIS IS. DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE TOUR PART.

OKAY. BUT IT'S A VALID QUESTION. SUMMIT, NEW JERSEY.

ALSO, THERE'S A VARIATION ON THESE E DEVICES.

AND SO MY MAYOR, I THINK YOU'RE LOOKING FOR CONSENSUS.

AND I THINK YOU JUST MADE A COMMENT ON WHICH PART THE TOURS OR THE MICRO MOBILITY DEVICES.

WELL, IF YOU CAN RECALL, IS THAT TWO IN HERE? MR.. THAT'S TRUE. I THOUGHT WE SHOULD KNOW. I THOUGHT WE HAD A CONSENSUS ON THE SENSIBLE CHANGES AS TO WHERE THE BIKE LOCATIONS WERE GOING TO BE, AND WE HAD REACHED THAT AGREEMENT. THEN WE WENT TO THE TOUR COMPONENT OF IT.

SO LET'S JUST SAY THE TOUR COMPONENT OF MICROMOBILITY IS WHERE WE'RE AT AT THE MOMENT.

SO FOR ME, FIRST OF ALL, NO. TO AN EXPANSIVE EXPANSION OF TOURS, YES TO DEVELOPING CODE APPLICABLE TO TOURS.

AND I SAY THAT AGAIN, I'M SORRY, NO TO AN EXPANSION OF E DEVICE TOURS.

YES TO DEVELOPING CODE APPLICABLE TO TOURS. YES TO DEVELOPING CODE. YES. AND THEN INSIDE OF THAT, I THINK WE HAVE TO ADDRESS MAYBE IT IS IN THIS THE MICRO MOBILITY DEVICES THAT ARE APPLICABLE TO.

ADA APPLICATIONS. YEAH, BUT MY ASK IS TO TIGHTEN THAT DOWN, NOT AMBIGUOUS TO WHERE THE ADA EXCEPTION IS EASILY ABUSED. I THINK WE ALL KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS.

[03:50:03]

IT'S IT'S FORMALIZED SOMEWHERE. IT'S NOT. I'M GOING TO BRING MY DOG BECAUSE I'VE GOT TO HAVE MY DOG AS A AS A COMFORT.

WHATEVER. SO THAT'S AND I HOPE THAT ANSWERS THE QUESTION ON THE TABLE NOW FOR ME THAT MR. YOUNG DID THAT. YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. THAT'S ALL I HAVE ON THAT ONE.

THANK YOU. YEAH. I ALSO HAD THE ADA EXCEPTION.

AND THEN YOU KNOW, THERE ARE AN AWFUL LOT OF PEOPLE IN THE COUNTY THAT USE THEIR BICYCLES FOR WORK, AND I THINK THEY HAVE TO FALL INTO A DIFFERENT CATEGORY AS WELL, TO BE PERFECTLY HONEST WITH YOU.

WELL, THAT'S THE DISTINCTION I WAS TRYING TO FIND.

SO YES E-BIKES AND BIKES. WE ALL AGREED BEFORE THAT WAS A YES.

I THOUGHT THAT'S WHAT HE JUST SAID. BUT ARE YOU SAYING, JUST TO BE CLEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, YOU SAID BICYCLES. ARE YOU ONLY TALKING ABOUT.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU'RE NOT TALKING E-BIKES AND CHANGING THAT.

WELL, I YOU KNOW, I DO SEE THEM COMING DOWN PINE RIDGE PARTICULARLY.

AND SOME OF THEM ARE E-BIKES. WELL, THAT'S WHY I THOUGHT WE HAD REACHED CONSENSUS THAT THAT D WAS OKAY AND THAT IT WAS THE THAT A AND B DOESN'T APPLY TO ELECTRIC BICYCLES UNLESS OTHERWISE ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS FOR DESIGNATED ROADWAY WITH APPROPRIATE SIGNAGE. SO FOR EXAMPLE, IF WE DETERMINE THAT GOODLETTE FRANK WAS ONE, THAT YOU HAD IT AND YOU APPROPRIATELY SO YOUR MAIN FEEDERS, BUT NOT OTHER STREETS. SO IF YOU I THOUGHT YOU WOULD AGREE WITH THAT CONCEPT.

IF YOU DON'T, MA'AM, THEN WE WOULD JUST NEED TO MODIFY D.

YEAH. AND DAVID I'M SORRY, CAN YOU JUST PUT IT UP ON THE SCREEN SO THAT OH, I'M SORRY, I THOUGHT YOU WERE BECAUSE YOU ARE IDENTIFYING THE CORRECT AREA, MR. YOUNG. BUT IT WOULD BE GOOD IF WE. HAD SECTION 36 ONE.

OH, I SEE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. YOU WANT THAT UP ON THE SCREEN? BECAUSE SO YOU'RE SAYING D. I THINK EXEMPTIONS A AND B DO NOT APPLY.

TO BICYCLE. BUT THE WORD UNLESS IS THERE. UNLESS OTHERWISE ON A CASE BY DESIGNATED.

SO THEN YOU COULD DESIGNATE WHICH STREETS THAT YOU AGREED THAT THOSE SHOULD ONLY BE IN.

IT'S NOT JUST WHETHER THEY HAVE THE THE BIKE PATHS, BUT MAYBE IT'S THE ONES OF BIKE PATHS.

AND THERE'S SOMETHING ELSE. THAT'S THE ONLY POINT THAT I WAS TRYING TO MAKE. OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

BUT I THINK WE HAVE TO BE SENSITIVE TO BOTH OF THOSE INCIDENCES IF THEY NEED NEED IT FOR WORK.

IT'S THEIR ONLY TRANSPORTATION FOR WORK, AND IT'S ADA.

KRAMER. YEAH, I HAVE A QUESTION. SO I GUESS MISS LINDA, TO YOUR POINT, I'M TELLING ME, IF I'M CORRECT IN THIS SIMPLIFICATION, THAT WE WOULD BASICALLY HAVE A MAP OF WHERE THOSE PEOPLE WOULD HAVE TO USE THOSE E-BIKES IN ORDER TO GET TO WHEREVER THEY WORK.

IS THAT THE CASE? OKAY, SO I'M HEARING THAT ONE THING I HEAR I'M GETTING TWO SIDES HERE.

BOTH SAY THIS IS A BINARY CHOICE. I THINK I'M HEARING THE MAYOR SAY THIS IS A BINARY CHOICE.

WE EITHER PROHIBIT IT OR REGULATE IT IN HER CASE, PROHIBIT IT, WHICH WE ALL HAD AGREED TO.

AT LEAST WE HAD CONSENSUS. WE WANTED TO PROHIBIT IT. BUT I'M HEARING MY ATTORNEY SAY THAT. OUR ATTORNEYS SAY THAT PROHIBITING IT MAY BE A VERY SLIPPERY SLOPE LEGALLY TO JUST TURN THE SPIGOT OFF COMPLETELY. IS THAT FAIR FOR ME TO SAY THAT? THAT'S. YEAH, THAT'S FAIR TO SAY. OKAY. SO I'M WONDERING AND TO I THINK TO RAY'S POINT, I BELIEVE IT WAS THINK OF A RHEOSTAT OR A, WHAT DO YOU CALL IT, A DIMMER SWITCH.

IF WE CAN, WE REGULATE THEM. AND THEN OVER TIME, IF YOU'RE NOT GRANDFATHERED IN RIGHT NOW, THEN WE DON'T ISSUE NEW PERMITS. HE'S THE ONLY ONES WE'RE ISSUING.

AND AS THESE BUSINESSES, YOU CAN'T CHANGE HANDS AND STILL FUNCTION IN THE CITY SO THAT WHEN HOWEVER MANY THEY ARE.

AND MY FEAR IS THAT A WHOLE BUNCH OF PEOPLE WILL APPLY FOR PERMITS THAT DON'T DO BUSINESS RIGHT NOW, WE BETTER JUMP IN HERE WHILE WE CAN.

BUT IF THE ONES THAT ARE IF IF WE ARE OBLIGATED TO SOMEHOW HOST THE ONES THAT ARE DOING BUSINESS AND BY HOST, I MEAN CREATE THE ORDINANCES THAT WOULD REGULATE THAT BUSINESS, CAN WE OVER TIME? YEAH. ELIMINATE. TURN THE SWITCH ALL THE WAY OFF. AND YOU'RE GONNA SAY YES, YOU CAN DO ANYTHING, BUT YOU MIGHT GET SUED. NO, NO, I'M NOT GOING TO SAY THAT.

I JUST THINK THAT SHOULDN'T BE THE BASIS FOR YOUR DECISION.

WELL, FOR ME, THE BASIS IS I DON'T WANT IT AT ALL. FAIR POINT, FAIR POINT.

AND I, I'M JUST TELLING YOU THAT REGARDLESS OF WHAT'S BEEN.

I GUESS THE POINT IS IT'S BEEN HAPPENING BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE A REGULATION.

[03:55:02]

I CAN'T SPEAK TO WHY BECAUSE I WASN'T THE CITY ATTORNEY, BUT THIS COULD HAVE BEEN HANDLED SEVEN YEARS AGO.

THAT'S THE REALITY. THESE BUSINESSES HAVE NOW OPENED UP AND ARE OPERATING.

IF YOU JUST COMPLETELY HIT THE KILL SWITCH, THERE'S GOING TO BE AN ISSUE.

BUT YOU CAN REGULATE IT. IN MY OPINION, THERE'S POTENTIAL TO EVEN LIMIT THE NUMBER OF COMPANIES THAT OPERATE AT ONE TIME AT THE SAME TIME IN THE CITY SO THAT YOU'RE NOT WORRIED ABOUT, OKAY, WE LIMIT IT TO FIVE.

WELL, YOU'RE NOT WORRIED ABOUT 15 PEOPLE COMING IN BECAUSE GUESS WHAT? WE'VE ALREADY APPROVED FIVE. THEREFORE WE'RE NOT PROCESSING ANYMORE. BUT TO DO SOMETHING IN HOPES OF PROHIBITING IT IS JUST. YEAH. WELL, MY MY THOUGHT IS LIKE MANY.

THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT GET GRANDFATHERED. KIND OF LIKE THE, I BELIEVE, OUTDOOR DINING THAT IF IT CHANGES HANDS THAT THAT THAT PERMIT GOES AWAY.

IS THAT THE CASE? WE STILL OWE THAT COMING BACK TO YOU BECAUSE THAT HAS BEEN ASKED FOR US TO SUNSET SOME OF THOSE AS WELL, IF POSSIBLE, IF THERE'S A PATH TO DO SO. YEAH.

WELL, THAT WAS JUST MY MINDSET BEHIND THAT. AND IF THAT IS NOT REASONABLE, THEN I WILL ACQUIESCE AND SAY WE HAVE TO REGULATE IT AND LIMIT THE NUMBER.

IF IT IS POSSIBLE, THEN I WOULD LIKE TO, I JUST DON'T.

I'VE BEEN PLENTY OF PLACES WHERE YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO DO THAT STUFF. WHATEVER IT IS, I MEAN, GO TO VEGAS. YOU CAN'T EVEN. THERE'S NO PARKING.

YOU LITERALLY CAN'T. THERE'S NO UBER OR LYFT OR UNLESS YOU GO TO THOSE SPECIFIC PLACES.

I MEAN, THERE'S WAYS TO TO DO THIS IN PLACES THEY CAN'T EVEN TRAVEL.

THAT'S JUST ONE EXAMPLE. OR DOWNTOWN CHARLESTON, WHERE THERE'S VERY RESTRICTIVE, MASSIVE RESTRICTIONS ON TRAVEL.

SO I KNOW THAT'S DIFFERENT STATES. SO THAT'S PROBABLY NOT FAIR.

BUT AGAIN, MY IF I LIKE TO HAVE START WITH THE WITH THE GOAL IN MIND AND MY GOAL IS TO ELIMINATE IT COMPLETELY.

IF THAT'S NOT FEASIBLE, THEN LET ME KNOW AND I'LL HAVE A DIFFERENT GOAL.

BUT IF THAT IS POSSIBLE, THEN I'D LIKE TO DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO WALK DOWN THAT WAY, THAT PATH.

CAN I ASK A CLARIFYING QUESTION, MAYOR? WHEN YOU SAY ELIMINATE COMPLETELY, DOES THAT MEAN TOUR COMPANIES, HOTELS? ANYONE USING OR OFFERING A MICROMOBILITY DEVICE? FOR ME IT'S IT'S IT'S GROUPS OF TOURS. IT'S TOUR GROUPS THAT ARE PAYING WHATEVER THEY'RE PAYING OR HOWEVER THEY'RE DOING.

IT COULD BE PART OF A HOTEL PACKAGE, I DON'T CARE.

I DON'T WANT TOUR GROUPS, TOUR GROUPS DRIVING AROUND ON ANY KIND OF SCOOTER OR MOPED OR WHATEVER IT IS.

I, I, I THINK THIS IS NOT THE PLACE FOR THAT.

THANK YOU. NOW, IF THAT'S NOT DOABLE, THEN CERTAINLY YES, LET'S REGULATE IT.

LET'S LIMIT THE NUMBER OF PERMITS WE ISSUE. AND LET'S LET'S DO THAT AGAIN.

AND I DON'T I MEAN I'M PRAGMATIC. SO IF IT'S JUST ASPIRATIONAL I CAN OKAY.

IT IS WHAT IT IS. WORLD WE LIVE IN THEY'RE ALREADY FUNCTIONING I GET IT. LET'S MOVE FORWARD AND AND GET THIS DONE.

AND I KNOW I DON'T HOPE I DON'T SOUND LIKE I'M VACILLATING, BUT I JUST WANT THE PRACTICAL, PRAGMATIC WAY FORWARD. THAT'S WHAT IT IS. SORRY I TALKED WAY TOO MUCH.

MAYOR. PETRA. I THINK AS POLICY MAKERS, WE DID COME TO CONSENSUS.

WE DIDN'T WANT THESE THESE TOURS. AND I'M TALKING ABOUT TOURS.

THIS IS MY THIS. WE DIDN'T WANT THEM. THEY WERE SAFETY ISSUES.

THERE'S THEY SNARL UP TRAFFIC, ETC.. SO I GUESS FROM POLICY MAKERS, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE AS ONE, ONE OF THESE SEVEN. I WOULD LIKE THEM ELIMINATED.

BUT I DO UNDERSTAND THAT PEOPLE HAVE MADE CAPITAL INVESTMENTS IN, IN THESE COMPANIES AND KIND OF JUST STARTED DOING IT BECAUSE WE DIDN'T HAVE REGULATIONS. SO I GUESS THE THEY MADE THE ASSUMPTION THAT WE COULD DO IT.

SO I WOULD LIKE TO OFFER A A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT FOR PHASING THESE THINGS OUT, EITHER 12 OR 24 MONTHS WHERE THEY GET DUE NOTICE, BUT THEY DON'T HAVE A PERMIT. NOW, HOW CAN WE PHASE THEM OUT? WELL, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT JUST COMPLETELY UNPLUGGING THEM AND IT IS THEY'VE MADE CAPITAL INVESTMENTS AND THEY IT DOESN'T GIVE THEM TIME TO DO A PLAN B, AND I WANT TO BE I WANT TO BE KIND TO THEM.

YEAH I AGREE. SO I MADE A CAPITAL INVESTMENT AT MY HOME AND I CAN'T GET DOWN MY ROAD TO GET TO MY HOME.

THE KID NEXT DOOR CAN'T PLAY IN THE DRIVEWAY BECAUSE THERE'S A TOUR COMING AROUND.

WHAT WHAT DO THEY WANT TO SEE AT MY FRONT YARD? IT'S AN INVASION OF MY PRIVACY AND SAFETY AND SECURITY AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED.

[04:00:01]

GIVE THEM DUE NOTICE AND AND HAVE THEM PHASED OUT OVER A PERIOD OF TIME.

THAT'S JUST THAT'S JUST MY OPINION. I DON'T I HAVE TO ASK HOW THAT FROM STAFF.

WE WOULD DO THAT BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHAT PERMISSIONS THEY HAVE.

CAN I JUST ASK ONE CLARIFYING QUESTION? IF I MAY? OH, YES. I'M SORRY. NO WORRIES. SO WHEN WE SAY TOUR COMPANIES, WE'RE SPECIFICALLY TALKING ABOUT WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT NAPLES TROLLEY TOURS.

WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT OTHER TOUR COMPANIES THAT OPERATE IN THE CITY. WE'RE ONLY TALKING ABOUT TOUR COMPANIES THAT OFFER TOURS VIA INDIVIDUALLY UTILIZED MOTORIZED DEVICES. CORRECT? CORRECT. YES. OKAY.

BECAUSE A PROHIBITION TOTALLY IS A LOT DIFFERENT AND A LOT MORE LEGALLY SOUND THAN IDENTIFYING ONE FORM OF TRANSPORTATION FOR TOURS AND SAYING, YOU CAN'T DO THIS, BUT YOU CAN BECAUSE YOU USE A BUS.

WELL, HERE'S THE COUNTERARGUMENT TO THAT. THERE'S NOT AN ARGUMENT. I'M JUST I'M JUST KIND OF STATING FROM A LEGAL STANDPOINT, A BLANKET PROHIBITION CHANGES THE CONVERSATION AS JUST PUTTING IT OUT THERE.

NOT SAYING THAT WE HAVE TO DO ONE THING OR ANOTHER, BECAUSE I THINK THE CONSENSUS IS GOING TO BE CLEAR AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO OUR HOMEWORK ON THIS. BUT I THOUGHT, IS IT IMPORTANT TO JUST PUT OUT THERE AS FOOD FOR THOUGHT? WELL, WOULD WOULD A BLANKET PROHIBITION? I GUESS IT DEPENDS ON HOW YOU DEFINE YOUR DENOMINATOR.

BECAUSE IF YOU SAY IT'S MICROMOBILITY, IT WOULD INCLUDE EVERYTHING IN A TOUR.

IT WOULD NOT INCLUDE THE TROLLEYS THAT WOULD BE OUTSIDE OF IT. CORRECT.

SO THAT'S THE POINT. YEAH. SO I MEAN, IF YOU INCLUDE THEM, IT'S MUCH EASIER.

YEAH. SO I MEAN, WELL I'M SAYING THE DENOMINATOR IS, IS SIMPLY MICROMOBILITY.

EVERYTHING. YOU SEE WHAT I MEAN. YOU'RE SAYING IT'S A IT'S A SUBTLE IT'S A SUBTLE THING. BUT IT WOULD BE ALL ENCOMPASSING THAT, THAT MICROMOBILITY TOURS ARE PROHIBITED IN THE CITY OF NAPLES AND THOSE THAT MAY BE OPERATING IN THE CITY HAVE, YOU KNOW, SOME REASONABLE PERIOD OF TIME TO NOT DO THAT ANYMORE.

WE JUST PASSED A CODE. I'VE GOT A DIFFERENT TAKE.

OKAY. LET ME ARE YOU COMPLETE FOR NOW? YEAH. JUST ONE OTHER THING.

YOU KNOW, WE KEEP SAYING, WELL, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT WE APPROVED, YOU KNOW, WHAT DID YOU KNOW? DID THEY JUST. DID THEY GET SOME LICENSE? SOME? I KEEP HEARING ABOUT A RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT. WHAT PERMISSIONS DO THEY THINK THEY HAD IN THEIR HEADS? WHICH LEADS TO POTENTIAL LAWSUITS. LIKE WHAT? YOU KNOW, WHAT DID THEY GET PERMISSION TO DO? THEY HAVE A BUSINESS TAX RECEIPT FOR THEIR REGISTRATION, BUT THERE ARE NO RIGHT OF WAY PERMITS GIVEN TO THESE COMPANIES.

NO RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT. SO THAT BUSINESS LICENSE THAT THEY GOT ENTITLES THEM TO WHAT? LISA, CAN YOU COME UP AND JUST GO THROUGH THE BETA PROCESS, WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE? AND THEN WHAT YOU ASK WHEN YOU ASK THE QUESTION BEFORE YOU ISSUE A BETA.

MICROPHONE. TO THE RIGHT. THERE YOU GO. NOW, CAN YOU HEAR ME? YOU HAVE. SORRY. THANK YOU. LISA DOUGLAS, FINANCE DEPARTMENT BUSINESS TAX OFFICIAL FOR THE CITY OF NAPLES.

JUST TO SAY SOMETHING, I'LL EXPLAIN THAT, BUT I WANTED TO RESPOND TO WHAT DAN SAID, THOUGH, IS WE HAVE NINE BUSINESSES. WHEN YOU GUYS FIRST BROUGHT THIS UP LAST EARLIER THIS YEAR, THE CITY MANAGER ASKED ME TO GO THROUGH WHAT WE HAD FOR BUSINESS TAX RECEIPTS. WE DIDN'T JUST DO THAT.

WE WENT TO THE PHONE BOOK, WE WENT TO ONLINE.

WE WENT ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF TO SAY, WHO'S OPERATING IN THE CITY OF NAPLES WITH OR WITHOUT A BUSINESS TAX RECEIPT, WHO'S PROVIDING A MOBILITY, BUT WHO'S ALSO DOING THE SIGHTSEEING IN THE CITY? BECAUSE THOSE WERE THE THINGS I AT LEAST HEARD WHEN YOU GUYS WERE TALKING ABOUT THIS.

AND SO THE GROUP OF NINE, SIX OF THEM HAVE BUSINESS TAX RECEIPTS.

NOW GOING BACK TO SOMETHING ANDREW SAID A MOMENT AGO ABOUT THE BUS TRANSPORTATION.

THE BUS SIGHTSEEING IS VERY SPECIFIC IN THE CITY CODE.

IT IS SPECIFIC. IT'S OUTLINED. IT REQUIRES A FRANCHISE AGREEMENT.

WE TALKED ABOUT SLIDER A LITTLE WHILE AGO. SLIDER REQUIRED FRANCHISE AGREEMENT WAS UNDER A FRANCHISE AGREEMENT FOR A LONG TIME, AND THEN STOPPED BECAUSE THEY HAD SOME LEGAL RAMIFICATIONS, SAYING THAT THEY WERE NO DIFFERENT THAN UBER AND THAT THEY DIDN'T NEED A FRANCHISE AGREEMENT. SO ALL RIGHT, CLEAR ALL THAT UP.

NOW WHAT CARRIE ASKED ME TO DO. SORRY. SO BUSINESS TAX RECEIPT PERSON COMES IN THE BUSINESS.

THEY IF THEY HAVE STATE REQUIRED LICENSES, WE REQUIRE COPIES OF THOSE LICENSES.

IT IS A REGISTRATION PROCESS ONLY. I CAN'T HOLD THEM UP BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE ENOUGH PARKING SPOTS.

[04:05:05]

I CANNOT HOLD A BUSINESS TAX RECEIPT UP FOR FOR ANYTHING.

THIS HAS BEEN FOR THREE CITY ATTORNEYS THAT WE'VE HAD.

MATTHEW HASN'T OPINED, BUT I FIGURED THREE CITY ATTORNEYS HAVE ALL SAID THE SAME THING.

SO. AND THE STATE OF FLORIDA'S BUSINESS TAX OFFICIAL ORGANIZATION SAYS THE SAME THING.

SO WHEN WHEN A MICRO MOBILITY COMPANY COMES IN AND THEY SAY, I WANT TO DO SIGHTSEEING ALONG HERE, I EVERY SINGLE TIME HAVE SENT AN EMAIL TO OUR PARTNERS IN STREETS AND STORMWATER.

AND THEIR ANSWER IS IT'S THAT IT'S NOT REQUIRED TO HAVE A FRANCHISE AGREEMENT BECAUSE THE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT SECTION IS SPECIFIC TO BUS SIGHTSEEING ONLY. SO ONE OF THE THINGS WE TALKED ABOUT IS VERY SIMPLY, AND DAN AND I SPOKE ABOUT THIS LAST WEEK IS IF YOU CHANGE THAT TO SAY. ALL SIGHTSEEING ACTIVITIES INSTEAD OF JUST BUSSES, ALL SIGHTSEEING ACTIVITIES, YOU WOULD THEN REQUIRE EVERY ONE OF THEM TO COME BEFORE YOU FOR FRANCHISE AGREEMENT.

FRANCHISE AGREEMENT IS WHEN THE CITY, CITY, STREETS AND STORMWATER GROUP, THE ENGINEER LOOKS AT THAT.

THEY REQUIRE A BUSINESS PLAN. THEY REQUIRE. WHERE ARE YOU GOING? HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE ON EACH TOUR? HOW MUCH TRAINING DO YOU HAVE? ALL THE THINGS THAT YOU GUYS ARE SPEAKING TO ARE ALREADY REQUIRED IN A FRANCHISE AGREEMENT FOR BUS SIGHTSEEING, SO IT'S NOT REALLY A HEAVY LIFT. I UNDERSTAND YOU GUYS WANT TO PROHIBIT IT ENTIRELY.

THAT'S DIFFERENT. BUT IF YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT DOING JUST THE REGULATION COMPONENT TO IT, WE DO HAVE THOSE MECHANISMS IN PLACE NOW THAT COULD ACTUALLY EASILY CHANGE THE BUS SIGHTSEEING PORTION TO ALL SIGHTSEEING ACTIVITIES AND REQUIRE THEM TO GO THROUGH A FRANCHISE AGREEMENT.

IT'S VERY, VERY EASY. $1,000 A YEAR FOR THE CITY.

WE BILL IT OUT OF THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT. WE COLLECT IT.

IF THEY DON'T COLLECT, WE START CALLING THEM, SAYING WE TELL THEM THEY DON'T COME BACK IN FOR ANOTHER YEAR UNTIL THEY PAY THE CITY, AND THEY HAVE A PERMIT TO BE ON THE RIGHT OF WAY.

CORRECT. THE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT GIVES THEM THE AUTHORIZATION TO BE ON THE RIGHT.

THE RIGHT OF WAY CURRENTLY BROUGHT YOU UP FIRST.

CURRENTLY, THE PROBLEM IS, IS THAT IT ONLY SPEAKS TO THE BUS SIGHTSEEING ACTIVITY AND WHAT DAN AND HIS TEAM AND, AND MATTHEW HAVE DONE IS TALKED ABOUT OTHER ORDINANCES THAT AFFECT MICRO MOBILITY.

IN, IN ALL OF THE THINGS THAT YOU GUYS SPOKE BEFORE.

SO THE TRENDING IS THAT WE DON'T WANT MICRO MOBILITY TOURS.

THEN THAT'S A DIFFERENT SUBJECT THAN GIVING THEM A FRANCHISE AGREEMENT, BECAUSE IF WE OFFER IT TO ANYONE WHO WANTS TO DO A TOUR, IT OPENS IT UP TO ANY TOUR BUSINESS THEY WANT.

BUT YOU COULD ALSO DO WHAT COACH SUGGESTED, AND THAT IS NAPLES.

TRANSPORTATION HAS BEEN HERE FOR 20 YEARS. RIGHT.

THEY DO THESE SITES AND TOURS OF BUSSES, THEY DO SEGWAYS, THEY DO ALL THIS OTHER TYPES OF SMALL ANCILLARY THINGS THEY HAVE IN THEIR BUSINESS PLAN FOR THEIR SIGHTSEEING. THEY HAVE INDIVIDUAL KIND OF THINGS, WHICH THEY'VE GIVEN US A COPY OF IN, IN, IN. IF YOU HAVE SOMEBODY THAT HAS A LONG HISTORY OF THAT, SAY WE HAVE RIGHT NOW, YOU HAVE SIX PEOPLE THAT HAVE GONE THROUGH THE BUSINESS TAX RECEIPT APPROPRIATELY. YOU KNOW WHAT SAY YOUR NUMBER SIX, WE'RE GOING TO ALLOW SIX FRANCHISE AGREEMENTS A YEAR.

TRY IT FOR A YEAR. SEE IF IT WORKS. I ALWAYS LOVE GARY'S PILOT PROJECT.

I THINK HE COINED THAT TERM. BUT SEE IF THAT ACTUALLY ACCOMPLISHES WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO.

AND LIKE GARY SAID BEFORE, IF IF IT'S THE NEIGHBORHOODS MAYOR, I KNOW I'VE HEARD YOU MULTIPLE TIMES SAY IT'S AN INVASION OF YOUR PRIVACY FOR THEM TO COME DOWN YOUR STREET, SAY THEY'RE NOT ALLOWED. TOURS AREN'T ALLOWED IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS.

I MEAN, YEAH, AND I WANT TO BE CLEAR. I MEAN, IT'S KIND OF A LITTLE TRICKY BECAUSE EVERYTHING'S YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.

AND THANK YOU FOR THAT. I DID SPEAK TO RANDY.

RANDY BECAUSE I WANTED HIM TO BE AWARE OF WHAT WAS HAPPENING, AND I THINK SANDRA SENT HIM A COPY OF TODAY'S INFORMATION, SO HE WAS AWARE. BUT I CAN'T GO BASED ON SOMEONE THAT I THINK HAS RUN A BUSINESS.

WELL, BECAUSE IT'S TWO, THREE THINGS FOR ME. YOU HAVE SIX COMPANIES, AND IT DEPENDS ON WHEN THE TOUR IS SET UP. YOU COULD HAVE ONE AT NINE, YOU COULD HAVE ONE AT 11.

YOU COULD HAVE SIX DIFFERENT COMPANIES IN ONE DAY, ALL DURING SEASON.

AND THE BIGGEST AREA THAT THEY STOPPED TRAFFIC WAS THIRD STREET AT A CONGESTED AREA RIGHT THERE AT 12TH AND

[04:10:04]

AND I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THAT WAS WHAT I THINK GARY WAS TRYING TO GET TO WAS IF THE CONSENSUS OF THE GROUP IS TO SAY, YEAH, LET'S MODIFY IT TO SAY WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THEM COME IN FRONT OF US, THEN WE CAN ACTUALLY FINE TUNE WHERE YOU DON'T WANT THEM.

MAKES PERFECT SENSE. FIFTH AVENUE, THIRD STREET.

NO. IN SEASON, DON'T EVEN GO DOWN THOSE STREETS.

IF YOU DO. WE'LL HAVE THE POLICE STOP YOU. I MEAN, I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU WERE GETTING AT, WAS IT NOT? IF THE CONSENSUS WAS REACHED THAT THEY WANTED TO REGULATE THEM IN SOME WAYS, THAT.

YEAH. THEN WE GET INTO ALL OF THOSE ASPECTS OF IT.

I'M GOING TO KEEP GOING DOWN THE ROAD. THANK YOU FOR THAT INFORMATION.

BY THE WAY. THIS IS FROM YOU. WE DID RECEIVE IT MONTHS AGO ON THE NAMES, THE ADDRESSES, THE LICENSE, THE BTR, THE NOTES, AND WHAT EXACTLY WHETHER THEY'RE WHAT THEY WERE RENTALS.

RIGHT. I DON'T THINK I THINK AGAIN, WE AGREED THAT WE WERE NOT TRYING TO STOP A BICYCLE SHOP, WHICH IS ON HERE THAT DOESN'T DO TOURS FROM OPERATING AND SELLING OR RENTING BICYCLES OR E-BIKES.

OKAY HOLD ON THOUGH, THAT YOU JUST SAID E-BIKES.

SO YOU'RE YOU'RE NOT YOU'RE YOU JUST SAID THAT SOMEBODY COULD RENT AN E-BIKE TO SOMEBODY ON THE STREET, NOT AN INDIVIDUAL COMPANY COULD RENT AN E-BIKE, BUT NOT A COMPANY THAT SETS UP A FACILITY THAT YOU RENT IT AND DISPOSE OF IT.

IF I RECALL THE COURT, WE HAD THIS LONG DISCUSSION ABOUT IT.

I THINK THAT WAS ALREADY SAID. WE DON'T WANT ANYBODY WHERE THEY SET THEM UP AND LEAVE THEM ON THEIR SIDEWALK. COME PICK THEM UP. THOSE THAT'S ALREADY BEEN WE'RE NEVER GOING THAT ROUTE. THAT'S A MICRO-MOBILITY PROVIDER. YEAH, I THINK THAT WAS ALREADY DECIDED.

OKAY. BUT YES, IT WAS E-BIKES IF I UNDERSTAND THIS.

OKAY. ONE SECOND. I'M SORRY. I WANT TO GO TO THE COUNCILMAN BARTLEBAUGH.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE A DISTINCTION THAT TECHNICALLY, A BICYCLE SHOP THAT RENTS AN ELECTRIC BICYCLE COULD BE DEEMED A MICRO-MOBILITY PROVIDER. SO THEY. SO, LIKE, IF YOU WANT TO ALLOW THAT, THEN THAT'S THAT.

WE NEED TO KNOW THAT BECAUSE WE MAY HAVE TO CARVE OUT EXEMPTIONS TO THE DEFINITION, BECAUSE TECHNICALLY THE DEFINITION IS BROAD ENOUGH TO SAY IF YOU RENT AN ELECTRIC BICYCLE TO AN INDIVIDUAL, YOU ARE ESSENTIALLY A MICRO-MOBILITY PROVIDER.

YEAH. AND I WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT THE MINUTES MAYOR. BUT I THINK I THINK WHAT WAS THAT WAS DISCUSSED.

AND I THINK WHAT WE ULTIMATELY AGREED UPON WAS, YOU KNOW, A HOTEL RENTING OUT BICYCLES, LIKE SOMEBODY WANTED TO RIDE THE BIKE DOWN TO FROM FOUR SEASONS DOWN TO THIRD STREET OR FIFTH AVENUE, AND THEN THEY RIDE THE BICYCLE BACK.

BUT IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, I THINK WE DID ULTIMATELY COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT WE WERE GOING WE WERE GOING TO TO DRAW THE LINE, THOUGH, AT MANUALLY POWERED BICYCLES AND NOT ALLOW AN E-BIKE OPTION FOR RENTAL.

AND AGAIN, THAT'S WHAT I'M REMEMBERING. IT'S NOT IN FRONT OF ME.

SO I COULD BE WRONG, BUT I THINK THAT'S ULTIMATELY WHAT WE KIND OF FELL ON WITH THE WITH THE INDIVIDUAL, NOT A TOUR SCENARIO, JUST RENTING OUT A BIKE.

E-BIKE RENTALS. RIGHT. JUST A BICYCLE. OKAY. IT'S YOUR TURN.

OKAY, SO I'VE GOT A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT TAKE ON THIS, I THINK AND I KNOW THAT WE'VE SORT OF BOUNCED AROUND, AND I KNOW WE'RE MULTIPLE FOLKS UP HERE ARE SAYING, LET'S GET RID OF IT ENTIRELY.

AND, AND THEREFORE, I MAY BE THE MINORITY HERE, BUT THAT'S OKAY.

WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST WE DO IS, IS DRAW UP LEGISLATION THAT LIMITS THE NUMBER OF OPERATORS.

AND RIGHT NOW, I THINK IT'S FAIR TO SAY, LET'S USE THE SIX THAT HAVE PROVIDED THE TAX RECEIPT AND ARE CURRENTLY OPERATING, BUT AND NOT ONLY LIMIT IT TO SIX, BUT BUT ULTIMATELY, MAYBE OUR GOAL NEEDS TO BE HAVE IT AT 4 OR 5 BUT NOT STARTED AT 4 OR 5. AND THEN IF TWO OF THESE GUYS DECIDE THEY'RE NOT GOING TO OPERATE ANYMORE, DON'T ALLOW TWO TO TAKE THEIR PLACE.

AND WE ULTIMATELY END UP WITH A LESSER NUMBER THAN SIX.

AND MAYBE THAT NUMBER IS FIVE, MAYBE IT'S FOUR. BUT NONETHELESS, I THINK WE NEED TO TO PUT A, A CONSTRAINT IMMEDIATELY ON THE NUMBER OF OPERATORS.

AND THEN WHAT WE SHOULD DO IS, FROM A GOVERNING STANDPOINT ON THE EXISTING OPERATORS, THAT, THAT, THAT WE'RE ALLOWING IS REGULATE THE HECK OUT OF THEM.

I MEAN, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CLAMP DOWN ON THEM AND THIS MAY, THIS MAY PUT SOME COME UP AND SAY, HEY, WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO THIS ANYMORE BECAUSE IT'S JUST TOO MUCH.

OKAY. NOW WE'RE DOWN TO FOUR. GREAT. THAT'S FINE.

BUT WHEN I SAY REGULATE THE HECK OUT OF THEM. TELL THEM A NUMBER OF TOURS PER DAY.

THE OPERATING HOURS YOU KNOW YOU CAN'T DO IT AT 7:30 A.M.

[04:15:03]

EVERYBODY'S TRYING TO GET HOME. NUMBER OF PEOPLE PER TOUR.

YOU CAN'T HAVE A 22 PERSON TOUR. YOU KNOW, MAYBE MAYBE YOU USE THE AVERAGE FAMILY IS TWO ADULTS AND TWO CHILDREN.

SO MAYBE YOU SAY, HEY, WE'RE GOING TO LET YOU HAVE TWO.

AVERAGE FAMILY SIZE. SO A TOUR OF EIGHT THAT WILL ALSO HELP MANAGE THE THE SIZE OF THE OF THE PELOTON.

THAT, THAT IS, THAT'S CRUISING DOWN THE STREET.

LIMITED NUMBER OF STREETS THAT THEY'RE ALLOWED TO USE.

I MEAN, WE CAN HAMMER IT. I MEAN, REALLY GET STRICT THERE IF WE WANT TO.

AND AGAIN, THIS THEY MAY SAY, WELL, WHAT WHAT'S THE POINT OF OPERATING A TOUR? AND IF THEY COME TO THAT CONCLUSION, THERE'S NO POINT OF OPERATING A TOUR. MAYBE THEN WE'RE GOING TO ULTIMATELY GET WHAT WHAT THE MAYOR WANTS AND OTHERS UP HERE WANT ANYWAY, WHICH IS NO TOURS, BUT WE CAN REALLY GET STRICT AS FAR AS WHAT STREETS ARE GOING TO USE AND SAY, HEY, THIS IS IT. YOU'RE CONFINED TO THIS PARTICULAR AREA AND I SEE A SMILE ON THE ATTORNEYS FACE.

MAYBE I'M OVERSTEPPING BOUNDARIES HERE THAT'S GOING TO CAUSE AN ISSUE, I DON'T KNOW. AND THEN ULTIMATELY, THIS BECOMES PART OF THAT FRANCHISE AGREEMENT AND LICENSING LICENSING AGREEMENT.

AND I THINK THAT THE NO BRAINER HERE IS WHAT WE JUST LEARNED.

AND THAT IS TO CHANGE THE LANGUAGE ON OUR CURRENT FRANCHISE AGREEMENT FOR THE TOUR BUSSES, JUST CHANGE THAT TO TWO OR TOUR OPERATIONS RIGHT AWAY.

THAT'S GOING TO REQUIRE ALL OF THESE GUYS TO, TO, TO HAVE TO HAVE THAT FRANCHISE AGREEMENT THAT FORCES THEM TO COME UP HERE IN FRONT OF US, AND ALSO SPECIFICALLY THAT FRANCHISE AGREEMENT SHOULD BE DOING ALL OF THOSE THINGS THAT I JUST LAID OUT HERE PREVIOUSLY, WHICH IS WHICH IS REALLY PUTTING GUARDRAILS ON HERE AND REGULATING THE HECK OUT OF HOW THEY HOW THEY ARE ALLOWED TO OPERATE WITHIN THE CITY.

THAT WOULD BE MY SUGGESTION ON HOW WE HANDLE THIS ISSUE.

AS OPPOSED TO SAYING, NO, NOPE, WE CAN'T DO IT.

THIS IS A LEGAL QUESTION. IF WE SAY YOU CAN HAVE A FRANCHISE, THEN WE'RE SAYING YES TO THE NUMBER OF THAT WE ALLOW.

WELL, THAT HAS TO BE THE CORRECTION OF WHETHER WE CAN LIMIT THE NUMBER.

I THOUGHT I HEARD THAT WE COULD. I MEAN, YOUR CODE CURRENTLY ALREADY LIMITS HORSE DRAWN CARRIAGES AND PEDICABS RIGHT UP TO FIVE AND TWO. BUT THE BEAUTY OF JUST BECAUSE YOU, MAX, IT DOESN'T MEAN YOU HAVE TO GET TO THE MAX.

BECAUSE AGAIN, SOMEONE MAY COME IN AND APPLY FIRST AND YOU SAY, OKAY, THIS WORKS, THE NEXT PERSON MAY COME IN AND THEIR PLAN COMPLETELY CONTRADICTS WHAT THE FIRST PLAN IS. OR THEY WANT TO GO DIFFERENT PLACES, OR THEY DON'T PROVIDE THE INSURANCE OR THEY DON'T SIGN THE AGREEMENT.

AND THAT'S AN EASY NO, RIGHT? SO I FEEL A LOT BETTER ABOUT THAT APPROACH THAN A BLANKET PROHIBITION.

AS I SIT HERE TODAY, I WOULD TOO. FRANKLY, I THINK THAT'S THE WAY TO GO.

AND THAT GIVES US THE AUTHORITY AND CONTROL THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR.

IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY GIVE US THE THE ANSWERS THAT SOME SOME APPEAR WANT, WHICH IS NONE AT ALL.

BUT I THINK THAT THAT CREATES A PRETTY, A HAPPY MEDIUM AS FAR AS REGULATING THE HECK OUT OF IT AND, AND GIVING US A, AN END RESULT THAT THAT IS ACCEPTABLE.

BERNIE, YOU DIDN'T INCLUDE LIMIT NUMBER OF FRANCHISES LIMIT.

YEAH. THAT WAS THE FIRST EXISTING OPERATORS. SO RIGHT NOW WE HAVE SIX.

I SAID LET'S LET'S LIMIT IT TO SIX. BUT MAYBE OUR MAYBE OUR IDEAL NUMBER IS 4 OR 5.

BUT BUT RIGHT NOW I WOULD SAY LET'S USE LET'S USE SIX NOW BECAUSE THERE'S SIX THAT ARE CURRENTLY OPERATING.

AND THEN WE'RE NOT WE'RE NOT HAVING TO FIGURE OUT WHICH ONES ON THE CHOPPING BLOCK. WE CAN SAY, OKAY, THERE'S FIVE.

ARE THERE FIVE. THEY'RE OPERATING PROPERLY, I CAN I USE I USE MY TOOL PROPERLY THAT HAVE TOURS.

OKAY. SO SO GREAT. FIVE IS IS OUR STARTING NUMBER THEN AND THEN ARE YOU PROPOSING THAT WE THEN TALK ABOUT YOU KNOW, DO WE WANT TO HAVE A MAX NUMBER ON THE TOURS AND ROUTES AND ALL OF THAT SO WE CAN HAVE GUARDRAILS AROUND THIS THING 100%? I CAN LIVE WITH THAT. ABSOLUTELY. OKAY. WELL, I SINCE WE'RE GOING TO GO DOWN THIS ROAD, I WANT STAFF TO TELL ME THE ROADS THAT THEY CAN GO DOWN BEFORE WE GO MAKING THIS LEGISLATION.

BEFORE WE GO THERE, LINDA JUST ASKED A PERTINENT QUESTION, WHICH WAS WHICH WAS THEN DO YOU PUT A SUNSET CLAUSE IN THERE AND SAY SO THAT THEY ULTIMATELY THEY GO AWAY? I WAS SUGGESTING NOT A SUNSET CLAUSE THAT WE ALLOW THIS, THIS, THIS TYPE OF BUSINESS TO OPERATE, BUT WITHIN THE GUIDELINES THAT WE, THAT WE CREATE.

WELL, AND IF I MAY, YES, THANK YOU FOR ASKING.

THE SUNSET PROVISION, TECHNICALLY, THE WAY IT'S DRAFTED RIGHT NOW IS LIKE YOU GUYS GOT THE NEXT SIX MONTHS.

BUT JUST SO YOU KNOW, THE MOMENT THIS PASSES FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE, YOU HAVE SIX MONTHS TO GO THROUGH THE NEW PROCESS THAT WE'RE ADOPTING. SO RATHER QUICKLY, IF THESE ORDINANCES GET PASSED, THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO COME BEFORE YOU ANYWAYS. YES, THERE'S A SUNSET BECAUSE THE CURRENT OPERATING FRANCHISE OR THE CURRENT OPERATING GROUPS WOULD NEED TO ADHERE TO THE NEW RULES AND REGS, BUT THEY WILL HAVE A SIX MONTH GRACE PERIOD.

YES, THAT I'M TOTALLY FINE WITH. I WAS REFERRING TO ARE WE GOING TO ALSO ARE WE IS OUR INTENT LIKE COACH HAD SUGGESTED, WHICH WAS HEY, LET'S ALLOW THIS, BUT LET'S TRY TO PUT AN END TO IT.

[04:20:03]

HOWEVER, WITH THE VERY STRICT RULES AND REGULATIONS THAT WE AS A, AS A GOVERNING BODY DETERMINE IS ACCEPTABLE.

I'LL JUST TELL YOU AND I'M GOING TO GET VOTES FROM THESE PEOPLE.

PORT ROYAL DOESN'T WANT IT. THIRD STREET DOESN'T WANT IT.

FIFTH STREET DOESN'T WANT IT. FIFTH AVENUE DOESN'T WANT IT.

THEY GO TO THE PIER AND THERE'S 12 OF THEM SITTING THERE.

THERE'S NO PLACE WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO BUY BIKE RACKS FOR THESE, OR DESIGNATED PARKING AREA FOR THEM UP AT THE PIER, BECAUSE THAT'S ONE OF THEIR STOPS. SO THESE ARE THE THINGS THAT NEED TO COME BACK TO COUNSEL ON WHAT SAFE STREETS THAT THEY CAN ACTUALLY RIDE ON. IF THIS IS WHAT WE FLIP AND DECIDE THAT WE WANT TO ALLOW THIS TO HAPPEN.

YOUR TURN. I CONTINUE TO FAVOR MOVING IN THE DIRECTION OF ELIMINATING THEM WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT FROM A LEGAL STANDPOINT, THERE MAY HAVE TO BE A TRANSITION PERIOD OR PERHAPS THE CITY ATTORNEY TO COME BACK AND TELL US WE CAN. ALL WE CAN DO IS REGULATE THEM ALONG THE LINES.

MR. BARTON. COUNCILMAN BARTON JUST SAID, BUT MY STARTING POINT WOULD BE TO SEEK TO ELIMINATE THE TOUR COMPANIES. THE MICRO-MOBILITY TOUR COMPANIES FROM OPERATING IN NAPLES.

I'M OKAY. SO I HAVE ONE, TWO THREE, FOUR THAT FIVE THAT DON'T WANT IT PERIOD.

SO WE'RE BACK TO WHERE WE WERE BEFORE AND THAT WE DON'T WANT IT TO HAPPEN.

I THINK I MIGHT HAVE BEEN THE ONLY THE ONLY ONE THAT HAD SUGGESTED THAT LAST TIME TOO.

SO I WAS IN THE MINORITY LAST TIME TOO. I WILL SLEEP OKAY, BUT RAY IS AM I AM I HEARING YOU RIGHT, RAY, THAT YOU ARE ALLOWING FOR A PHASING OUT PROCESS? I DON'T FEEL LIKE WE'VE GOTTEN. AND I'M NOT BEING CRITICAL OF MR. MCCONNELL BECAUSE HE NEEDS TO DO MORE RESEARCH ON THIS.

I DON'T THINK WE HAVE BEEN PROVIDED WITH THE IN WITH AN ANSWER AS TO WHETHER WE CAN PHASE OUT NOW THESE OPERATORS, OR WHETHER WE WOULD NEED TO ALLOW THEM TO CONTINUE TO OPERATE UNDER A NEW REGULATORY REGIME WITH PERHAPS LANGUAGE THAT WOULD.

WHEN THEY WHEN THEY WOULD AT SOME POINT END THEIR OPERATIONS, THEY WOULD NOT BE SUCCEEDED BY ANOTHER COMPANY, SO THAT PERHAPS OVER TIME YOU GET TO ZERO. I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU KNOW, WHAT THE, THE THE RIGHT PROCESS FROM A LEGAL STANDPOINT AND A STANDPOINT OF THEIR RIGHTS ARE.

BUT I, I WOULD, I WOULD SEEK TO GET TO A POINT SOMEDAY WHERE THESE OPERATIONS WOULD CEASE TO OPERATE IN THE CITY. OKAY. THAT'S I AGREE WITH THAT. AND BUT THAT'S I THINK THAT'S DIFFERENT THAN SAYING, OKAY, WE DON'T WANT THEM. WELL, OF COURSE WE WANT THEM.

WE ALSO BUT WE NEED TO BE PRUDENT AND NOT PUT OURSELVES IN AT RISK OF OF GETTING HAMMERED IN COURT.

YEAH. AND YOU KNOW, I THINK THE ANSWER HAS TO DO.

I'M SURE PUBLIC SAFETY IS PART OF IT, BUT I DON'T.

I DON'T THINK, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT A CITY LIKE CHARLESTON, SOUTH CAROLINA.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT OUR GRID SYSTEM, OUR STREET SYSTEM, THE THE OUR BUSINESS, WE WE HAVE THREE BUSINESS FOR, IF YOU WANT TO CALL INCLUDE VENETIAN VILLAGE FOR BUSINESS CORRIDORS.

AND ALL OF THEM ARE RELATIVELY SHORT IN LENGTH AND NARROW IN TERMS OF THE WIDTH OF THE STREETS.

I MEAN, IT'S JUST NOT A IN MY OPINION, IT'S NOT A CITY THAT IS CONDUCIVE TO THESE KINDS OF OPERATIONS.

AND THAT'S THAT'S MY ARGUMENT. SO VICE MAYOR, I'M GOING TO WRAP IT UP IN THAT.

YES. OKAY. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. I JUST THERE'S SEVERAL VARIATIONS OF WHAT WE'VE DISCUSSED, AND I THINK IT'S GETTING NARROWED DOWN SUFFICIENTLY.

BUT WE SHOULD JUST ASK OURSELVES, WHO IN OUR COMMUNITY ARE RESIDENTS WANT THESE TOURS? BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT GOING TO FIND ANYONE. YOU'RE NOT GOING TO FIND ANYONE THAT WANTS THESE E DEVICE TOURS COMING PAST A THEIR BUSINESSES OR THEIR RESIDENCES, AND WHO APPEAR WANTS TO BURDEN OUR CITY CODE ENFORCEMENT WITH THIS IN ADDITION TO THEIR NORMAL WORKLOAD.

[04:25:05]

AND WE'VE GOT A LOT OF GOOD EXAMPLES WHERE IT'S SIMPLY NOT HAPPENING.

SO I'D JUST CAUTION EVERYBODY MY TAKE AGAIN IS GET US OUT OF THE E DEVICE TOURS BUSINESS.

THE IDEAL NUMBER IS ZERO. SO HELP GET US THERE.

TWO. NO EXPANSION OF THE FEW WHICH ARE OPERATING.

CLOSE THE BTR, THE BUSINESS TAX RECEIPT LOOPHOLE AND DEVELOP ROBUST RESTRICTIVE CODE IF IT'S STILL NEEDED.

I MEAN, IF WE DON'T HAVE THE CODE, WE MOVE PAST ALL THIS.

WE STILL HAVE A NEED TO HAVE THAT CODE AND PREVENT THIS FROM HAPPENING.

AND ON THE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT MODIFICATION, I THINK WE ALL LEARNED THAT HAS TO BE ADDRESSED.

NO TRANSFER. I THINK IT'S ALREADY BEEN MENTIONED, NO TRANSFER OF THAT FRANCHISE AGREEMENT UPON A CHANGE IN BUSINESS OWNERSHIP AND WHATEVER ELSE IS APPLICABLE. AND THEN WE'RE USING THE TERM ALL OR SIGHTSEEING BUSINESSES.

BE CAREFUL ABOUT MARRYING OURSELVES TO A TERM.

ALL SIGHTSEEING BUSINESSES, AUDIO TOURS, STUFF, VARIATIONS ON THAT.

WHEN WE DEVELOP THAT FRANCHISE AGREEMENT. BUT I'M I'M STILL WHERE I WAS.

THIS JUST DOESN'T BELONG IN OUR COMMUNITY. LET'S DEAL WITH THE MISTAKES THAT WE'VE MADE, PHASE IT OUT AND MOVE ON.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. YOUNG. THE DIRECTION THAT YOU NEED AT THIS POINT.

YEAH. I MEAN, I THINK IT'S FIRST WE EVERYTHING NEEDS TO BE EXPLORED ABOUT PROHIBITING IT.

AND THEN IN THE MEANTIME WE'LL DO OUR DUE DILIGENCE FROM A RULES PERSPECTIVE IN CASE IT HAS TO BE PHASED OUT.

BUT BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, UNTIL I KNOW WHETHER WE CAN PROHIBIT IT DIRECTLY, IT'LL BE A HYPOTHETICAL, YOU KNOW, WORKSHEET. AND SO THE SOONER WE KNOW THAT, THE MORE ATTENTION WE CAN PAY TO THE REST OF THE SECTIONS.

IS IS THAT A FAIR STATEMENT? I'M NOT TRYING TO PUT IT IN YOUR LAP, BUT BUT IN SOME REGARDS IT IS.

THAT'S FINE. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. NOW YES. MR. MCCONNELL, ARE WE GOING TO.

IT'S ALREADY 3:00. ARE YOU PREPARED TO TALK ABOUT MICRO TRANSIT? I WAS ACTUALLY HOPING THAT WE WOULD BRING THAT UP TO GET A CONSENSUS ON THAT AS WELL.

I THINK I HEARD A CONSENSUS. I KNOW WE'VE KIND OF FOCUSED ON TOURS, BUT IF COUNCIL JUST WANTS TO PROVIDE A CONSENSUS ON MICRO TRANSIT, THOSE ARE REALLY THE THINGS THAT WE'VE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT TODAY. SOME OF YOU HAVE IDENTIFIED THE RIDERS, THE SLIDES JUST SO YOU ALL KNOW IT CAME ACROSS MY DESK PROBABLY EARLY THIS YEAR. I SENT A CEASE AND DESIST TO BOTH COMPANIES, TELLING THEM THAT THEY CANNOT OPERATE WITHOUT A RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT.

ALTHOUGH I WAS TOLD THAT THE MY LETTERS WORKED FOR A LITTLE BIT, BUT THEN I'VE GOTTEN PICTURES AND VIDEOS THROUGHOUT THE YEAR OF THEM CONTINUING TO OPERATE. SO AGAIN, ANOTHER POLICY DECISION FOR YOU ALL ON WHETHER OR NOT YOU WANT THESE MICRO TRANSIT.

I DON'T WANT TO SAY THEY'RE GOLF CARTS BECAUSE GOLF CARTS ARE REGULATED BY A DIFFERENT FLORIDA STATUTE. BUT THEY ARE REALLY A PICKUP DROP OFF.

MOST OF THEM OPERATE FOR TIPS ONLY, BUT IT'S NOT A CAR.

IT'S NOT A MICRO MOBILITY DEVICE. IT'S SOMETHING THAT SEATS 4 TO 6 PEOPLE.

LOOKS LIKE A GOLF CART, BUT I GUESS ONE COULD SAY IT IS.

SO YEAH, IF WE COULD HAVE THAT DISCUSSION MAYOR, THAT'D BE VERY HELPFUL.

OKAY, WHO WOULD LIKE TO START? I PERSONALLY HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THEM.

I PERSONALLY HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THEM. PARDON? GOSH, YOU KNOW, I, I GUESS SIMILARLY I, I'VE, I'VE NOT HAD ANY CONSTITUENTS OR RESIDENTS BARK AT ME ABOUT THEM AND TELL THEM, TELL ME THEY GOTTA GET OFF THE ROAD. I CAN HONESTLY SAY I'VE NEVER USED ONE, SO I'VE NEVER PARTICIPATED IN THE PROCESS.

BUT THEY THEY I HAVEN'T PERSONALLY WITNESSED THEM HOLDING UP TRAFFIC OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, SO I GUESS I DON'T HAVE ANY I DON'T HAVE ANY REAL STRONG FEELING ONE WAY OR ANOTHER. SO I DON'T WANT TO BE WISHY WASHY AND SAY, WILL THE COUNCIL HERE? BUT, YOU KNOW, IF SOME OF YOU GUYS HAVE REAL STRONG FEELINGS ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, I'M I'M OPEN EARS AND HAPPY TO LISTEN TO YOU.

I HAVE HAD PEOPLE COME TO ME AND EMAIL ME AND AND TALK ABOUT THEM AND, AND AS A PROBLEM AND PROBLEMS THEY CALL THEY CAUSE IN PARTICULARLY IN OUR COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS.

AND I THINK WE SHOULD MOVE TO ELIMINATE THEM IN THE CITY.

VICE MAYOR. WELL, THIS IS LIKE ANYTHING ELSE.

THE DETAILS MATTER. SO I'M USED TO HAVING A VEHICLE PICK ME UP AT THE AIRPORT AND TRANSPORT ME TO A HOTEL.

[04:30:08]

AN EXPANDED GOLF CART LIKE TRANSPORTATION. AND THEN WHEN THEY DO THAT, THERE'S ADVERTISING ALL OVER IT.

THERE'S RADIOS GOING ON. SOME OF THEM HAVE ELECTRONIC BOARDS ON THE INSIDE WITH ADVERTISING, BECAUSE THESE THINGS ARE GOING TO GET PAID FOR ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.

AND TO THE EXTENT THEY CAN GET IT OFF OF THE PNL OF THE HOTEL, ETC., THEN THAT'S THOSE ARE ALL INCOME STREAMS THAT A BUSINESS LOOKS FOR.

SO SIMILAR TO COUNCILMAN CHRISTMAN, WHEN YOU OPEN UP THAT DOOR, IT JUST KEEPS ON GOING AND IT BECOMES A PROBLEM. WE'RE BETTER OFF JUST STICKING TO THE BASICS AND NOT GIVING OUR CITY STAFF OUR CODE ENFORCEMENT, OUR POLICE, ALL OF THEM, THIS EXTRA NONSENSE TO DEAL WITH.

SO THAT'S RIGHT. BUT IF I COULD. VICE MAYOR, JUST TO ADD I POINT DETAILS MATTER. TO ME, A HOTEL SHUTTLE WHICH EXISTS EVERYWHERE NOT JUST IN NAPLES AND VICINITY, IS DIFFERENT THAN THESE PRIVATE OPERATORS WHO ARE FOR WHETHER IT'S FOR TIPS OR FOR IT'S A PAYMENT. AND THEY, THEY, THEY, THEY BASICALLY, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, REALLY OPERATE ONLINE.

I MEAN, THERE'S NOT A PHONE NUMBER YOU CALL OR ANYTHING AND I MEAN, THAT'S THOSE ARE TWO.

SO YOU'RE DRAWING A DISTINCTION, TWO DIFFERENT ANIMALS. I MEAN, WHAT I'M REALLY TALKING ABOUT IS SOMEBODY WHO'S OPERATING A BUSINESS FOR A POINT TO POINT PICK UP AND DELIVERY OF PASSENGERS. I THINK IF YOU HAVE COMMERCIAL, IF YOU HAVE WELL, CERTAINLY HOTEL SHUTTLES.

TAKING PEOPLE TO WHATEVER FORM THEY TAKE, TAKING PEOPLE TO THE BEACH OR WHATEVER.

THAT'S COMMONPLACE, AND I THINK IT WOULD BE PROBLEMATIC TO THINK ABOUT INCLUDING THAT IN A PROHIBITION.

SO IF WE CAN EFFECTIVELY MANAGE THAT. SEE, THERE'S A THERE'S A ONE OFF THAT WE'RE SAYING HOTELS AND BOUTIQUE HOTELS, ETC. THAT WOULD BE PERMISSIBLE. I CAN SEE THE ARGUMENT FOR THAT, BUT I JUST DON'T KNOW FROM A LEGAL STANDPOINT HOW HE'S GOING TO MANAGE IT.

BUT IF HE CAN, IF WE CAN EFFECTIVELY MANAGE IT AND NOT HAVE IT GO OFF THE TRACKS, THEN THAT'S AN ISSUE BECOMES ENFORCEMENT TOO, BECAUSE POLICE, THEY SEE THEM GOING DOWN THE ROAD, THEY DON'T KNOW IF THEY'RE TAKING A BUNCH OF HOTEL GUESTS TO THE PIER OR IF THEY'VE JUST BEEN TOOLING AROUND FIFTH AVENUE AND THIRD STREET AND PICKING PEOPLE UP. OUR, OUR THE HOTELS THAT ARE INVESTED IN OUR COMMUNITY WOULD PROBABLY WORK WITH US IN IDENTIFYING THEMSELVES APPROPRIATELY AND BEHAVING APPROPRIATELY.

THEY'RE IDENTIFIED ALREADY. I THINK THIS ORIGINALLY CAME UP IN HOPES THAT WE WOULD ELIMINATE A LOT MORE TRAFFIC, THAT HOPEFULLY, RATHER THAN HOPPING IN YOUR SIX PEOPLE COMING DOWN IN SIX CARS, THAT THEY MIGHT TOUR WITH AN OPERATOR.

SO WE SAW THAT AS AN ANTIDOTE FOR THAT. IF WE FIND IT UNATTRACTIVE, THEN WE NUKE IT.

I JUST SO WE'RE GETTING THIS CONSISTENT CONSENSUS.

KRAMER WELL, HERE'S WHERE I AM ON IT. I, I WANT TO HAVE THEM, BUT NOT I WANT US TO PUT THEM ALL OUT OF BUSINESS, OR THEY WORK FOR US BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE DEDICATED PARKING FOR OUR RESIDENTS ON THIRD AND FIFTH, AND PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE DIRECTED TO GO TO THE PARKING GARAGES IN THE COUNTY GARAGE, AND THEY'RE GOING TO NEED A SHUTTLE SERVICE TO GET TO OUR BEACHHEADS AND TO GET TO OUR BUSINESS DISTRICTS. I WANT THAT TO HAPPEN BEFORE I DIE.

NOW YOU AND I ARE GOING TO GO HEAD TO HEAD ON THAT ONE.

THAT'S OKAY. SO THE OTHER THING IS WITH THE TRANSPORTATION STUFF, IT'S.

I'M JUST WITH MISS LINDA, LIKE THE IDEA THAT WE'D HAVE MAYBE TWO LESS CARS ON THE ROAD BECAUSE SIX PEOPLE ARE OR EIGHT PEOPLE ARE IN SOMETHING LIKE THAT, OR PEOPLE NOT DRINKING AND DRIVING. I THINK THAT'S THOSE ARE VALID REASONS TO HAVE THESE SORTS OF THINGS.

TO REGULATE THEM, YOU KNOW, LIKE IN CHICAGO OR NEW YORK CITY, WHERE YOU HAVE THE BADGE ON THE ON THE TAXI CAB.

IT'S WORTH CRAZY MONEY BECAUSE THEY'RE SO LIMITED.

THAT'S NOT HARD. YOU GET THEM A DECAL, IT LOOKS LIKE WHATEVER THAT WE ISSUE AND THAT WE VERIFY EACH YEAR OR HOWEVER OFTEN WE WANT TO,

[04:35:03]

SO I'M WITH YOU. ARE YOU FINISHED? YEAH. BUT I DO WANT TO FORWARD I'M GOING TO SAY IT AGAIN.

I THINK IT'D BE GREAT IF WE CONTROLLED ALL OF IT.

SEE, I MADE MONEY OFF IT. OFF THE ADVERTISING.

WANT TAXPAYERS TO HAVE TO FUND TOURISM FOR PEOPLE TO GO FROM HOTELS TO THE BEACH? I DON'T EITHER. THAT'S WHY WE'RE GOING TO CHARGE FOR THE PARKING IN THE GARAGES. THAT'S WHY WE'RE GOING TO CHARGE FOR PARKING ALL OVER. AND THEN THAT REVENUE IS NOT ONLY GOING TO PAY FOR THAT PROGRAM, BUT IT'S GOING TO PAY FOR THE SHUTTLE SERVICE TO KEEP PEOPLE OFF THE ROADS.

THE CRA MEETING, AND THEY'RE OPERATING IN OTHER PLACES.

AND IT WORKED OUT SO WELL THAT IT NOW BECAME PART OF THE CITY BUDGET OF 90,000 AND UP TO RUN THIS TRANSIT.

I PREFER TO GO WITH WHAT WAS SAYING HERE, AND THAT THE HOTELS THAT ARE TRYING TO PROVIDE A SERVICE SHUTTLE, WHICH THEY'RE DOING ALREADY ARE IDENTIFIED. THEY HAVE PICKUP AND DROP OFF PLACES NOT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE ROAD, AND THEY'RE ADDRESSING THE NEEDS. NO DOUBT. DEDICATED PICKUP AND DROP OFFS.

AND I ALSO I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING YOU'RE SAYING. AND WHATEVER SIERRA YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, I'M TELLING YOU, PAY FOR IT, I GUESS. OF COURSE THEY DO.

I'M SAYING THERE'S A REVENUE STREAM THERE THAT WE CAN TAP INTO, AND THERE'S A WAY TO MANAGE PEOPLE.

GO TO BRECK. GO. I'M TALKING PALM BEACH WHEREVER AND WHERE.

IT'S RESIDENT PARKING ONLY. GO TO LONDON AND YOU'RE YOU'RE GOING TO BE ON PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION THAT YOU ARE GOING TO PAY FOR.

THAT'S JUST HOW IT IS. IT'S A REVENUE STREAM.

IT DOESN'T COST ANYTHING. SO THERE'S A WAY TO GO ABOUT AND MAKE THAT HAPPEN.

NOW, THAT'S A BIGGER VISION, ANOTHER CONVERSATION.

SO BUT IN THE INTERIM, ON THE WAY TO GET THERE I AM NOT OPPOSED TO THEM.

AND IF WE, IF WE WANT TO REGULATE THE ADVERTISING OR WHATEVER IS OFFENSIVE TO WHOMEVER THEN I THINK THAT'S DOABLE TO TWO SEPARATE THINGS.

HOTELS HAVING THEIR OWN WAY OF GETTING PEOPLE THERE VERSUS A COMPANY COMING IN.

AND AGAIN. IT'S THE RIGHT OF WAY. IT'S LIKE A TAXI GOING TO WHATEVER DISTRICTS ARE ALLOWED.

TWO SEPARATE THINGS. IF I AM. IF I'M CORRECT, IT IS.

BUT I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT NO HOTEL USES A MICRO TRANSIT GOLF CART TO PICK UP PEOPLE FROM THE AIRPORT.

NO. SO? SO WE ARE ALLOWING HOTELS TO USE THE MICRO TRANSIT DEVICE, RIGHT? NOT JUST PICKING UP AND DROPPING OFF, BUT THE ACTUAL GOLF CART WITH A DECAL.

AND I CAN WORK WITH THE CITY MANAGER ON IT. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE MICRO TRANSIT DEVICES IN BOTH SCENARIOS.

AND THEN YOU ARE CORRECT, MAYOR. WELL, SO THEN THE COMMUNITY THAT DRIVES AROUND IN THEIR GOLF CART IS MICRO TRANSIT.

NO, NO. GOLF CARTS ARE REGULATED BY A DIFFERENT STATUTE.

THEY ARE ALLOWED ON CERTAIN ROADS, NOT ON ALL ROADS. AND I KNOW MISS BECHET'S HERE, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF SHE NEEDS TO SPEAK TO THAT. THIS IS AND WE'LL HAVE TO MASSAGE THE DEFINITION OF WHAT MICRO TRANSIT IS SO THAT IT DOESN'T INCLUDE SOMEONE ON A GOLF CART, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD INCLUDE SOMEONE ON A GOLF CART.

I THINK THIS IS GOLF CARTS. THEY ARE. BUT THEY ARE FOR HIRE OR FOR TIPS, OR FROM POINT TO POINT DROP OFF.

THEY'RE NOT FOR RECREATIONAL USE. OKAY. ALL I CAN SAY IS, IS WE HAVE BEEN MASSAGING DISCUSSING THIS FOR OVER TWO YEARS.

WE NEED TO GET SOME TO POLICY. WE NEED TO BRING IT BACK TO COUNCIL.

AND WE CAN'T KEEP KICKING THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD.

AND MORE AND MORE PEOPLE ARE COMING IN. I HEAR THAT WE'RE SO FAR.

EXCEPT FOR YOU, COACH. COUNCIL MEMBER. KRAMER.

OKAY. FOR HOTELS. I WOULD ALSO JUST SAY THAT WE JUST DID THIS, AND IT'S STREET LEGAL.

THE LSVS, THE LOW SPEED VEHICLES. IS THAT RIGHT, ALLISON? YEAH, THOSE ARE THE GOLF CARTS. THEY HAVE A HOLE THERE ALREADY.

THERE'S STATE LAW THAT ACCOMMODATES ALL OF THAT THAT WE DON'T REALLY NEED TO MESS WITH.

THAT'S ALREADY KIND OF A DONE DEAL. THEY'RE LIMITED ON HOW FAST THEY CAN GO AND WHERE THEY CAN GO.

AND YOU KNOW THAT WHEN YOU PURCHASE ONE AND YOU HAVE TO THEY HAVE TO COACH YOU UP ON ALL THAT. THAT'S DIFFERENT THAN HAVING AN UBER BASICALLY WITHOUT WINDOWS.

THAT'S AN ELECTRIC VEHICLE, WHICH IS WHAT YOU'RE REALLY TALKING ABOUT. OUR CODE, WE CAN USE THE DEFINITION BETWEEN COMMERCIAL AND PERSONAL USE, I WOULD THINK, AND THE DEFINITION IN OUR CODE TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE BOTH GOLF CARTS, ONE PERSON OWNS ONE PERSONALLY AND THEY'RE USING IT FOR PERSONAL USE, THE OTHER ONE THE HOTEL OR WHOMEVER IS USING IT FOR COMMERCIAL USE.

I WOULD THINK THAT THAT THAT DISTINCTION BETWEEN COMMERCIAL USE AND PERSONAL USE WOULD, WOULD THAT LANGUAGE WOULD BE ABLE TO DISTINGUISH.

WELL, I'M ALSO SAYING THAT THOSE MIGHT NOT BE LSVS.

THEY MIGHT GO TOO FAST. YOU CAN'T GO MORE THAN 20 MILES AN HOUR.

[04:40:01]

BUT MY POINT IS IF WE'RE IF WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT HOW WE WRITE THE CODE SO THAT WE'RE DISTINGUISHING BETWEEN THE THE ONES THAT THE THAT THE HOTELS ARE USING WITH EIGHT PEOPLE IN IT VERSUS AN INDIVIDUAL WHO OWNS ONE AND USES IT FOR PERSONAL USE.

I WOULD THINK THAT THE, THE TWO, THE, THE WORD COMMERCIAL AND THE WORD PERSONAL USE IS EASY TO PUT IN THE CODE.

YES, I WOULD I WOULD THINK THAT THAT WOULD BE A REAL EASY WAY TO DISTINGUISH, BUT LIMITED TO HOTEL SHUTTLING.

AGAIN, I'M FROM A LEGAL. I'M NOT CONCERNED ON ON HOW TO DRAFT THIS.

I JUST WANT THE POLICY TO BE CLEAR. AND WE'RE ALMOST THERE.

I THINK SO. I MEAN, I THINK THERE THERE'S A WAY TO WRITE ANYTHING I UNDERSTAND.

I'M NOT GOING TO REGULATE GOLF CARTS BECAUSE THEY'RE PURSUANT TO STATUTE. I THINK RIGHT NOW, WHAT I'M HEARING, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, IS YOU DON'T WANT THEM. MAJORITY OF YOU DON'T WANT THEM, BUT YOU'RE OKAY FOR HOTELS TO USE THEM AS AN ADDITIONAL SERVICE FOR THEIR GUESTS.

THAT WORKS FOR ME BECAUSE THEY'RE DROPPING THEM OFF AT THE BEACH OR FIFTH AVENUE OR THIRD STREET, AND THAT'S SAVING ON PARKING BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT TAKING THEIR CAR OUT OF THE PARKING LOT OF THE HOTEL.

PETRANOFF I JUST COUNCILWOMAN I JUST WANTED TO ASK, YOU KNOW, TO ME, THIS JUST SEEMS LIKE A DIFFERENT KIND OF VEHICLE AS AN UBER. AND IT'S AND IT'S JUST A TIP. SO I'M NOT YOU KNOW, WE HAVE UBER'S HERE ALL THE TIME AND LIFTS AND IT'S YOU KNOW SO I'M NOT SURE WHY THIS IS SO EGREGIOUS COMPARED TO YOUR AVERAGE LYFT RIDE OR UBER RIDE.

AND MAYBE SOMEBODY YOU KNOW WHAT WHAT WHAT ARE THE NATURE OF THE COMPLAINTS.

BECAUSE I HAVEN'T REALLY HEARD ANYTHING ON THIS ON THESE YOU KNOW, VEHICLES.

BUT TO ME IT JUST SEEMS LIKE A, YOU KNOW, JUST ANOTHER FORM OF AN UBER.

AND WHERE WHERE IS THE DIFFERENCE AND WHAT IS THE NATURE OF THE COMPLAINT VERSUS AN UBER? WHICH ARE HUNDREDS OF THEM ARE ARE DISPATCHED DAILY.

SO AS SO AN UBER. THE QUESTION IS AN UBER VERSUS THESE FOUR HIGHER UP RIDES RIGHT.

THAT ARE TIP BASED ETC.. UBER'S TYPICALLY GO HOME WITH THE OWNER RIGHT THEIR PERSONAL VEHICLE AND THEY LEAVE THE OTHER DEVICES. I SEE THEM PARKED AROUND TOWN IN GROUPS.

SO THEY'RE THEY'RE GARAGED NOT EVEN GARAGED. BUT BUT THEY'RE THEY'RE PARKED AROUND TOWN.

THEY THEY USUALLY INVOLVE ADVERTISING SOUND. THERE'S DIFFERENT ASPECTS AS YOU GET INTO THESE INDIVIDUAL FOR HIRE MODELS AND WHETHER OR NOT YOU WANT TO SEE THAT ALL OVER YOUR COMMUNITY, AS OPPOSED TO AN UBER, WHICH IN MY OPINION IS MORE DISCREET, DROP OFF AND DROP, AND THEN THEY MOVE ON.

THANK YOU, MR. BECKETT. THANK YOU FOR COMING UP.

SURE. ALLISON, FOR THE RECORD DEPUTY CITY ENGINEER, I JUST WANTED TO RELAY SOME OF THE ISSUES BECAUSE WE DID AS MISS DOUGLAS MENTIONED, THE SLIDER AT ONE POINT WAS A PILOT PROGRAM THAT WAS APPROVED THROUGH CITY COUNCIL SEVERAL YEARS BACK. WHEN WE DID LOOK AT THAT PROGRAM, WE DID THEY WERE UNDER A FRANCHISE AGREEMENT.

SO THEY HAD RESTRICTIONS. WE DID LOOK AT WHERE THEY PARKED.

WE DID LOOK AT THEIR ROUTES, WHERE THEY COULD GO. WE HAD THAT LIMITED AS WELL UNDER THE FRANCHISE.

OURS WERE RESTRICTED. SO THERE WAS A LOT OF CONTROLS THAT WE DID HAVE.

SO THERE WAS, THERE WAS THAT PLUS WE DID HAVE SOME PROS BECAUSE WE DID LOOK AT AT THE TIME WHEN WE TOOK INTO ACCOUNT WAS THE ABILITY OF REDUCING THOSE PARKING SPACES. I KNOW THAT THERE ARE SOME OF THE RESIDENTS THAT DO USE US, OR HAVE BENEFITED FROM SOME OF THESE MICROTRANSIT VEHICLES.

THESE SLIDERS WE HAD NICOLE RIDE AT ONE POINT AS WELL.

BUT TAKING THEM IF THEY NEEDED TO GET TO AN APPOINTMENT, NEEDED TO GET TO PUBLIX.

THEY DID THEY DID UTILIZE THOSE TO TAKE THEM TO TO MAYBE FIFTH AVENUE IF THERE WAS AN EVENT.

IT WAS BUSY. SO THERE WAS SOME POSITIVE FEEDBACK THAT I HAVE RECEIVED, SOME OF THE DOWNSIDES.

I DID HEAR THIRD STREET. I THINK THERE WERE SOME ISSUES FROM WHERE THEY WERE PARKING AND STALLING.

BUT THAT WAS PART OF THE CONTROLS WHERE WE DID HAVE THEM CITED FOR VIOLATIONS.

IF THEY WERE SITTING AND PARKING IN THE WRONG AREA FOR A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME.

SO THOSE ARE SOME OF THE THINGS, PROS AND CONS, THAT I JUST WANTED TO, TO RELAY TO YOU.

IS IS WHAT WE'VE SEEN WITH THE MICROTRANSIT OPERATIONS.

CAN I ASK, MADAM MAYOR, MAY I ASK A QUESTION? NO, PLEASE. MR. TO LISA'S POINT EARLIER THEN AND THE FRANCHISE.

THEY JUST STOPPED PAYING IT. THEY YES, THEY STOPPED PAYMENT AND THEY HAD VIOLATIONS.

[04:45:03]

WE HAD INITIALLY SENT THEM SEVERAL VIOLATION LETTERS I DID PERSONALLY, AND THEN THE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE HAS MORE RECENTLY REACHED OUT TO THEM RIDES.

THEY DID REACH OUT AND HAD INQUIRED ABOUT THE THE PROCESS.

MADAM MAYOR, I DID HEAR YOU MENTION THAT NAME AND WE DID LET THEM KNOW AS FAR AS THE CRITERIA GOING THROUGH THE STEPS THAT WOULD BE APPROVAL THROUGH YOU, THROUGH CITY COUNCIL FOR THE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT, THE PAYMENT.

AND I DIDN'T HEAR THEM ELECT TO MOVE FORWARD.

SO I BELIEVE THAT MR. MCCONNELL HAD ALSO HAS ALSO SENT THEM A LETTER AS WELL TO CEASE AND DESIST.

AND, MADAM MAYOR, MAY I JUST MAKE ONE OTHER POINT? SLIDER WAS ORIGINATED AND CAME THROUGH AS PART OF THE CRA, BUT TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE, NO SLIDER OR ANY OTHER COSTS HAVE EVER ENDED UP IN ANY STREET FUND OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, BECAUSE I DON'T BELIEVE THERE'S ANY COST THAT WE ARE NOW BEARING RELATED TO ANYTHING WITH SLIDER, BECAUSE IN FACT, WE DON'T HAVE THEM AUTHORIZED IN ANY CAPACITY.

THE ONLY ONE THAT CAME THROUGH THE CRA AND ENDED UP IN THE BUDGET IS RELATED SPECIFICALLY TO THE THE YEAH, THE CHRISTMAS DECORATIONS WITHIN THE FIFTH AVENUE.

I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE OF THAT SLIDER ACTUALLY CAME IN INDEPENDENTLY.

I THINK THAT THEY DID APPROACH THE CRA AS WELL, BUT THEY INITIALLY CAME IN INDEPENDENTLY.

THEY OPERATED. THERE WAS NO EXPENSE TO THE CITY.

SO THEY OPERATED AND THEY THEY WORKED OFF OF ADVERTISEMENTS WHICH WERE RESTRICTED, AS WELL AS THE TIPS THAT WERE BROUGHT UP BEFORE.

BUT THERE WAS YES, YOU'RE CORRECT. SO I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT IT WASN'T CRA BASED, BUT THAT WAS INDEPENDENT THAT THEY APPROACHED THE, THE, THE CITY AND OUR DEPARTMENT TO MOVE FORWARD AND TAKE IT THROUGH THE PROCESS FOR THE FRANCHISE.

OKAY. THANK YOU. SO THE ISSUE IS THE ISSUE IS IS THAT IT? THEY THE SLIDERS HAVE ADVERTISING WHICH MAY LOOK TACKY AND THEY MAY HAVE SPEAKERS AND OTHER THINGS THAT MIGHT BE NOISY.

AND THEY MAY PARK IN AREAS WE DON'T WANT THEM TO PARK IN AROUND THIRD, FIFTH AND WHEREVER THEY'RE ALLOWED TO GO.

OKAY. I JUST WANT TO UNDERSTAND THE SORT OF THE WHAT PEOPLE ARE PERCEIVING AS THE DOWNSIDE.

IF I COULD JUST I THINK THAT'S ALL TRUE. MISS PETRANOFF AND I WOULD JUST ADD TO IT THAT THE EXPERIENCE WE'VE HAD WITH SLIDER AND 1 OR 2 OTHER VENDORS OR POTENTIAL VENDORS HAS BEEN HAS HAS LACKED CERTAIN NORMAL STANDARDS OF BUSINESS BEHAVIOR. YOU KNOW, I MEAN, THEY HAVEN'T, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, I THINK ALISON JUST REFERRED TO SOME OF THE HISTORY WITH WITH SLIDER.

I MEAN, IT'S, YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN DEALING WITH MAYBE A NICER WAY TO SAY IT IS THESE ARE CLEARLY ENTREPRENEURIAL OPERATIONS THAT ARE PERHAPS RUN ON A, ON A, ON A LEAN OPERATIONAL BUDGET.

YEAH. AND AND, MADAM MAYOR, IF I MAY. EVEN WITH THAT, I MEAN, NOT OVERLY REGULATED, RIGHT? AND I'M NOT HEARING THAT THEY'RE A RESOUNDING SUCCESS, THAT THERE IS SO MUCH DEMAND.

I'M HEARING THAT THEY'RE STRUGGLING. SO THERE'S THERE'S SOME WARNING SIGNS.

YEAH. YEAH. MY MY BIGGEST WARNING SIGN. AND NO OFFENSE, COUNCILMAN KRAMER.

IT'S. I'M NOT. I'M NOT IN THE BUSINESS OF HAVING THIS CITY IN PARTICULAR RUN A TOURIST TRANSPORTATION WITHIN OUR CITY. THAT CONCERNS ME.

SO THANK YOU. EVERYONE HAS SPOKEN ON THIS. MR. MCCONNELL, DO YOU NEED ANY FURTHER DIRECTION ON MICRO TRANSIT? SO JUST TO CONFIRM, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG COUNCIL'S CONSENSUS IS TO A MAJORITY OF YOU IS TO PROHIBIT THEM, BUT ALLOW THEM FOR HOTELS. RIGHT. YES. YES.

YES, YES. KRAMER. WITH APPROPRIATE SIGNAGE, DESIGNATED THEIR HOTEL.

YEAH. THOSE ME AND THE MR. YOUNG HAVE ALREADY KIND OF BEEN TALKING THROUGH HOW.

BUT WE'LL BRING OBVIOUSLY, WHATEVER WE PROPOSE, WE'LL HAVE TO COME BACK FOR TWO READINGS AND AND THAT THEY ALSO ARE HAVE SOME TYPE OF A PLAN BECAUSE WHO KNOWS. THEN THEY'RE GOING TO START, YOU KNOW, WILL THEY BE RUNNING TO THE NAPLES BEACH HOTEL.

[04:50:02]

WHATEVER THOSE RULES ARE NEED TO BE IDENTIFIED AND WHATEVER POLICY WE MAKE.

YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I WAS GOING TO RECOMMEND. SO AS MR. YOUNG IDENTIFIED IN THE BEGINNING OF THIS WE WERE GOING TO KIND OF HANDLE THIS IN A THREE PART APPROACH WHERE NUMBER ONE WAS THE CONSENSUS ON THE UPDATES FOR THE BICYCLES AND ELECTRIC ELECTRIC BICYCLES, WHICH COUNCIL AGREED TO.

NUMBER TWO WAS THE MICRO-MOBILITY AND NUMBER THREE WAS THE MICROTRANSIT NOW.

SO IN AN EFFORT TO NOT STONEWALL ALL OF THESE REGULATIONS FROM COMING FORWARD ONCE THINGS ARE DONE, IS IS IT OKAY THAT IF, FOR EXAMPLE, IF LEGAL MAKES A DETERMINATION AFTER TALKING WITH MR. YOUNG THAT COUNCIL'S CONSENSUS ON MICRO MOBILITY ON THE TOUR COMPANIES IS OKAY, OR CAN WE AT LEAST BRING BACK THE MICRO MOBILITY ON THE SIDEWALKS? LIKE, IS THERE A WAY TO KIND OF JUST GET SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN AGREED TO PAST WITHOUT WAITING OR YOU? WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS WITH IN CHARTER FOR TWO YEARS, MR. MCCONNELL. WE NEED TO GET POLICY AND WE NEED TO GET THESE CODES COMPLETED.

UNLESS YOU FIND THAT YOU'VE GOT I MEAN, YOU CAN'T MAKE THAT DETERMINATION.

I THINK IT SHOULD ALL COME BACK NICE AND NEAT PACKAGE AND LET'S GET THIS COMPLETE.

SO SO IS THE CONSENSUS TO WAIT TO BRING EVERYTHING TOGETHER? WELL, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? WAIT TO BRING EVERYTHING TOGETHER? THERE WERE SOME LEGAL QUESTIONS THAT WERE RAISED THAT I NEED TO RESEARCH AND PROVIDE ANSWERS TO.

OKAY. WELL, SO THE ONLY THING I WAS OFFERED, IT'S GOING TO TAKE YOU MONTHS OR ANOTHER TWO YEARS BECAUSE WE'VE ALREADY BEEN.

NO OFFENSE, I'M NOT. BUT WE HAVE A LITTLE RESPECTFULLY, I THINK THAT'S A LITTLE UNFAIR TO SAY THAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR TWO YEARS, AT LEAST FROM MY STANDPOINT. BUT AGAIN, WE HAVE THE AIRPORT ORDINANCE COMING IN JANUARY.

WE HAVE THINGS HAPPENING, AND OUR LAST MEETING IS WEDNESDAY.

SO THE EARLIEST THIS COULD EVEN BE PRESENTED TO YOU IS I MEAN, YEAH, IT WOULD BE IT WOULD BE MARCH OR APRIL AT THE EARLIEST.

YEAH. SO I WOULD SUGGEST IF YOU GET SOMETHING READY AND THE OTHER TWO SECTIONS ARE NOT READY OR THE OTHER TWO ORDINANCES ARE NOT BRING THE ONES READY, GET IT IN FRONT OF US SO WE CAN MAKE A DECISION. AND THAT WAS THE REASON.

AND RESPECTFULLY, MATTHEW WAS SPEAKING WITH ME.

INFORM ME AT THAT. AS MUCH AS THAT'S WHAT WE WERE CONFERRING.

IF WHEN I LEANED OVER, IT WAS AS MUCH BECAUSE I WANTED TO KNOW.

THE SOONER YOU CAN GET E-BIKES OFF THE STREETS OR OFF THE SIDEWALKS, I ASSUMED YOU WANTED IT IN FRONT OF YOU, AND THAT WAS WHY I WANT TO KEEP PROGRESSING ON THOSE AREAS THAT WE CAN GET ACCOMPLISHED.

AND WHILE NOT TAKING OUR FOOT OFF THE GAS ON ANYTHING BUT WHATEVER'S DONE, IF WE CAN GET IT BACK TO YOU AND IT MAKES SENSE, LET'S BRING IT BACK. THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT I WAS HEARING FROM YOU AND I JUST WANTED. AND I WAS CONCERNED THAT THE MAYOR WASN'T GETTING THAT SAME MESSAGING. AND THE MESSAGING I HEARD WAS, IF A PORTION CAN BE BROUGHT TO YOU QUICKLY, AND ANOTHER PORTION WAS GOING TO TAKE JUST A LITTLE BIT LONGER, DO YOU WANT US TO DELAY ON THE ON THE ONE THAT CAN BE BROUGHT TO YOU QUICKLY? AND I'M JUST SPEAKING FOR MYSELF, OBVIOUSLY, BUT I WOULD SAY BRING US AS SOON AS SOMETHING'S READY, BRING IT TO US SO WE CAN MAKE SOME DECISIONS AND GET IT DONE.

AND AGAIN, THAT'S JUST MY OPINION, BUT I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD WAIT SO THAT IT'S ALL IN ONE BIG, BEAUTIFUL PACKAGE, AND THEN WE CAN VOTE ON ALL THREE ASPECTS OF IT AT THE SAME TIME.

I WOULD AGREE WITH MR. BARTON. OKAY. YEAH. WE'RE IN A WE'RE IN A PERIOD OF PREEMPTION, AND WAITING IS USUALLY NOT IN OUR BEST INTEREST.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. IF CITY MANAGER, YOU HAVE EVERYTHING YOU NEED, MR. MCCONNELL. THEN WE'LL CONCLUDE. SIX BE. AND THAT TAKES US DOWN TO PUBLIC COMMENT.

OH. THANK YOU. STAFF I'M SORRY. I WAS MOVING WAY TOO QUIET.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR STAFF AND ALL YOUR EFFORTS.

MISS DOUGLAS, PLEASE LET HER KNOW I SAID THANK YOU.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OKAY. THAT TAKES US TO PUBLIC COMMENT.

[7) PUBLIC COMMENTS]

COUNCIL. THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK.

JANET FERRY, 34 102. I WATCHED THE SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING ON HB 4005.

I FOUND IT VERY CONCERNING. MAYBE SOME OF YOU WATCHED IT.

WHAT WAS MOST CONCERNING WAS THAT OUR TAX DOLLARS ARE BEING SPENT ON A LOBBYIST WHO SPENT MORE TIME GIGGLING WITH THE SPONSOR THAN GIVING THE SUBCOMMITTEE A STRONG STATEMENT ABOUT YOUR CATEGORICAL, CATEGORICAL, EXCUSE ME, CATEGORICAL OBJECTION TO THE BILL AND WHY REPRESENTATIVE TOLD THE SUBCOMMITTEE THAT THE BILL WAS GOOD FOR THE PEOPLE. IT GIVES THEM THE RIGHT TO VOTE.

THAT'S IT. THAT'S ALL, HE SAID. THE TRUTH IS THAT IT DIMINISHES THE VOICE OF THE PEOPLE OF THIS CITY BY 15 TO 1.

[04:55:07]

THE LOBBYIST WAS ALSO A MAN OF FEW WORDS. HE SIMPLY WANTED TO GO ON RECORD THAT THE CITY OPPOSES THE BILL.

THAT'S IT. THAT'S ALL, HE SAID. THEIR CAREFREE DEMEANOR WAS PROBABLY MOST SHOCKING.

ASIDE FROM STEALING THE VOICE OF THE PEOPLE, THE BILL CHANGES THE AGREEMENT THAT WAS IN PLACE WHEN THE CITY SIGNED THE AIRPORT LEASE.

SO PERHAPS THE LOBBYISTS COULD HAVE MENTIONED THAT THE SUBCOMMITTEE COULD CONSIDER THAT THERE MAY BE A WHOLE NEW SET OF UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OF THE BILL PASSED. THERE'S A LONG LIST OF REASONS THAT YOU AND THE MAJORITY OF YOUR CONSTITUENTS ARE OPPOSED TO THE BILL.

BUT THE SUBCOMMITTEE HEARD NONE. I'M NOT SURE WHAT HAPPENED TO THE IDEA THAT THE HIRED ATTORNEY PLANNED TO ADVISE THE LOBBYIST ON HOW BEST TO LOBBY.

THERE COULD NOT POSSIBLY HAVE BEEN A STRATEGY SESSION BETWEEN THEM.

IT WAS MORE BELIEVABLE THAT THERE WAS A STRATEGY SESSION BETWEEN THE LOBBYIST AND THE SPONSOR.

I'M NOT SURE WHO'S MANAGING THIS EXERCISE AT THE CITY LEVEL.

YOU KNOW ALSO THAT THE PUBLIC HAS BEEN CONFUSED BY YOUR POSITION AS A BOARD HEARING INFERENCES ABOUT NEGOTIATIONS FROM THE DAIS OVER THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS.

YOU ARE OPPOSED TO THE BILL, AND YOUR DIRECTION IS TO SEE THAT THE BILL IS WHOLLY DEFEATED.

WE KNOW THAT NOW BECAUSE OF THE CONSENSUS YOU CAME TO LAST WEEK.

COUNCILMAN CRISPIN ADDED THAT IF THE BILL WASN'T DEFEATED, THERE MAY BE SOME NEGOTIATION AND THAT THE COUNCIL IS SPLIT, THAT THERE ARE MIXED VIEWS ON COUNCIL. AND THAT IS TROUBLING, IN MY OPINION, THAT THE SPONSOR AND THE LOBBYIST ARE NOT GETTING CLEAR DIRECTION, THAT THEY THINK THAT IF THIS BILL MOVES FORWARD, THEY MAY STILL WIN BECAUSE THERE'LL BE SOME NEGOTIATION.

YOU NEGOTIATE ISSUES 99% OF THE TIME. WE JUST SAW YOU DO IT FOR 2.5 HOURS.

IT'S AN UNBELIEVABLE CIVIC CONTRIBUTION THAT YOU GIVE AND IT'S MUCH APPRECIATED.

YOU CONSIDER YOUR CODES, YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHEN ANY ISSUE COMES BEFORE YOU, THE CITY AT LARGE, EVERY INDIVIDUAL NEIGHBORHOOD AND YOU HEAR FROM US AND YOU GIVE US TIME, AND THAT IS EVERYTHING IN LOCAL GOVERNANCE.

I THINK WHEN IT COMES TO HOME RULE, THAT'S WHERE YOU DRAW THE LINE.

THIS SHOULD BE NO NEGOTIATION. IT TAKES AWAY EVERYTHING THAT YOU'RE HERE TO DO FOR YOUR LOCAL COMMUNITY, AND IT SHOULDN'T BE TOLERATED OR NEGOTIATED. AND THE LAST THING THAT I'D LIKE TO SAY IS, I THINK IT'S REALLY A SAD DAY WHEN HOME RULE IS WEAPONIZED BY OUR CITIZENS. YOU SHOULD NEVER RECEIVE A THREATENING LETTER THAT UNLESS YOU APPOINT TO ANY BOARD PEOPLE THAT AN INDIVIDUAL OR A COALITION DEEMS APPROPRIATE, AND THAT YOU SHOULD NOT CONSIDER CANDIDATES FROM ANOTHER NEIGHBORHOOD SPECIFIC NEIGHBORHOOD, OR ELSE THAT INDIVIDUAL OR THAT COALITION WILL TAKE ACTION AGAINST OUR HOME RULE AND OUR LOCAL GOVERNANCE.

YOU SHOULD NEVER BE THREATENED THAT WAY. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE. THAT CONCLUDES OUR PUBLIC COMMENT.

I ACTUALLY, WHEN I HEARD IT LAST WEEK I WENT TO MR.

[8) COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL, AND STAFF]

I'M GLAD I TOOK A BREATH. AND I KNOW THAT THIS VIDEO WENT OUT TO EACH ONE OF YOU, AND THIS WAS GOING TO BE MY CORRESPONDENCE AND COMMUNICATIONS, BUT AND THANK YOU MISS FERRY, FOR BRINGING IT UP.

COUNCIL. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO WATCH THIS, BUT IT WAS SENT TO YOU.

COULD YOU PLAY THAT? DAVID? I DID NOT RECEIVE IT.

005 CITY OF NAPLES AIRPORT AUTHORITY. CALL YOUR COUNTY, SIR.

THE FLOOR IS YOURS. THANK YOU. CHAIR C 30S. THIS IS A GREAT BILL FOR NAPLES CITY AIRPORT.

WHAT IT DOES IS IT TAKES THE POWER OF APPOINTING FROM THE CITY COUNCIL, GIVES IT TO THE PEOPLE, PUTS OUT THERE FOR A VOTE. THREE PEOPLE FROM INSIDE BONITA, INSIDE NAPLES AND THEN TWO PEOPLE FROM THE COUNTY.

THAT IS THE BILL. THANK YOU SIR. ANY QUESTIONS OF THE SPONSOR? ANY QUESTIONS OF THE SPONSOR? ALL RIGHT. SEEING NONE.

ANY PUBLIC TESTIMONY? JOSEPH SALSBERG, CITY OF NAPLES WISHES TO APPEAR IN PERSON.

YES, SIR. I DO WISH TO APPEAR. THE CHAIRMAN. THE FLOOR IS YOURS.

[05:00:04]

THE FLOOR IS YOURS NOW. SORRY, SORRY. THANK YOU.

CHAIRMAN. MEMBERS. JOSEPH SALSBERG, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF NAPLES, I HOPE EVERYBODY HAD A GREAT THANKSGIVING.

THE CITY AT THIS TIME IS RESPECTFULLY, RESPECTFULLY OPPOSED TO THE LEGISLATION.

WE'RE STILL REVIEWING IT TO SEE WHAT, IF ANY, UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES MAY ARISE FROM IT.

THAT BEING SAID, WE UNDERSTAND THE CONCERNS OF THE SPONSOR.

WE HAVE SPOKEN A LOT, AS YOU CAN TELL FROM OUR EXCHANGE WHEN I CAME UP HERE.

THAT WILL CONTINUE. WE'RE TRYING TO ADEQUATELY SATISFY HIS CONCERNS AND WORKING THROUGH THE PROCESS.

BUT THE CLIENT DID WANT US TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR OPPOSITION WAS ON THE RECORD.

BUT I APPRECIATE THE COMMITTEE. APPRECIATE YOU, VICE CHAIRMAN. APPRECIATE THE SPONSOR. THANK YOU, SIR. APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS. ANY MORE PUBLIC TESTIMONY? THAT'S IT. ALL RIGHT. WE'RE GOING IN TO DEBATE ON THE BILL.

THANK YOU. DAVID. I, I'M NOT GOING TO GET INTO THE DETAILS OF, OF I THINK IT WAS INAPPROPRIATE AND FOR EVEN THE CHAIRMAN TO SAY, WELL, THAT WAS WEIRD.

WAS WEIRD. I AM ONLY GOING TO MAKE ONE REQUEST, AND THAT IS THAT WE HAVE.

CLEAR. I ASKED THE CITY ATTORNEY, AND OF COURSE, YOU KNOW, HE ASSURED ME THAT THEY WERE GOING TO BE OPPOSING THIS AMENDMENT WITH SUBSTANCE OF WHY WE OPPOSED IT, NOT TO STAND UP THERE.

AND HE'S NOT IN CONTROL OF OUR LOBBYISTS. I THANK OUR LOBBYIST FOR REPRESENTING US, BUT I WOULD LIKE FOR US TO HAVE SPECIFIC REASONS. THERE ARE NINE, 12 THINGS IN THERE THAT HE COULD HAVE STOOD UP AND SAID, EACH ONE OF THEM IS WHAT THIS CITY IS, IS OPPOSED TO.

AND THAT'S THE DIRECTION I WANT THE LOBBYISTS TO HAVE, IS, IF WE'RE OPPOSED TO IT, MAKE A CASE FOR IT AND FIGHT FOR US, NOT JUST STAND THERE AND SAY THEY'RE OPPOSED TO IT.

ON THE RECORD, IT WAS VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE GET THAT.

SO THAT'S MY DIRECTION. AND IF I HAVE ANYONE OPPOSED TO THAT OR LET COUNCIL MEMBER PETRANOFF LIKE NOT VERY EXPERIENCED IN THE LOBBYING SIDE.

I HAVE TO ASSUME THAT THEY DID SOME INFORMAL DISCUSSIONS WITH EACH ONE OF THESE MEMBERS.

IS THIS GRAY ROBINSON? THIS IS THE GUY FROM GRAY ROBINSON.

THERE IS YES, HE IS FROM GRAY ROBINSON, BUT IT'S A TEAM OF THREE, MAYBE FOUR.

I KNOW MR. YOUNG HAD TO APPROVE THEM, BUT IT'S JASON UNGER, JOSEPH SALTZMAN, AND THEN THERE'S TWO OTHER PEOPLE IN DIFFERENT AREAS OF THE STATE BECAUSE DEPENDING ON WHERE THEY'RE CENTRALLY LOCATED, THEY ALL HAVE DIFFERENT RELATIONSHIPS WITH DIFFERENT LEGISLATORS.

SO ARE WE SEEING A LOT? ARE WE ONLY SEEING, YOU KNOW, A TINY BIT? AND THERE'S ALL THESE UNDERGROUND CONVERSATIONS GOING, YOU KNOW, THAT IS THAT IS ACCURATE.

THIS WAS THE FIRST COMMITTEE IT WAS PRESENTED AT.

SO THIS COMMITTEE MEMBER, THESE COMMITTEE MEMBERS, WE HAVE TO ASSUME, WERE TALKED TO INFORMALLY OFF OF MIKE, OFF OF, YOU KNOW, ON ALL OF THOSE REASONS WHY THIS LEGISLATION DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.

I CANNOT ANSWER THAT. WHO IS WAS GIVING THEM.

I CAN I CAN ASK SPECIFIC QUESTIONS IF YOU'D LIKE AND FOLLOW UP WITH YOU ALL, BUT I, I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'VE SPOKEN TO THE INDIVIDUAL COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRIOR TO.

AGAIN, I'M NOT GOING TO PRETEND TO BE A LOBBYIST BECAUSE I'M NOT. SO.

WHAT I WOULD HAVE ALONG THE SAME THOUGHT PROCESS HERE, WHAT I WOULD HAVE LIKED TO HAVE SEEN AND WOULD HAVE APPRECIATED, WOULD HAVE BEEN SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD GET FROM US WHEN WE ARE MAKING A STATEMENT THAT THAT WE MIGHT WE MIGHT HAVE HAD DISCUSSIONS WITH A WHOLE BUNCH OF PEOPLE ABOUT. BUT NOW THERE'S A CAMERA ON US AND WE OFTEN WILL SAY, I WOULD LIKE TO STATE THIS FOR THE RECORD, OUT IN THE SUNSHINE FOR EVERYBODY TO SEE.

SO YOU CAN GO BACK ON, ON LINE AND REWIND IT AND PLAY IT AS MANY TIMES AS YOU WANT TO.

BUT HERE ARE THE REASONS THAT THAT THAT THE THE CITY COUNCIL OF NAPLES OPPOSES THIS BILL, AND WHY THE RESIDENTS OF NAPLES OPPOSE THIS BILL AND AND STATE IT FOR THE RECORD, FOR ALL PARTIES AND ANYBODY, ANY PART OF THE PUBLIC WANTED TO SEE IT.

INSTEAD, WE JUST GET YOU KNOW, OKAY. THEY DON'T THEY DON'T LIKE IT.

SO JUST THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING TO TELL YOU. THEY DON'T LIKE IT.

I MEAN, HE COULD HAVE EASILY GONE INTO. YOU KNOW, I'M NOT EVEN TALKING ABOUT A DISSERTATION THAT TAKES 30 MINUTES.

I'M TALKING ABOUT THREE MINUTES. YOU KNOW, JUST LET'S HAMMER THE POINTS.

THIS IS THIS IS THIS IS WHERE THE PEOPLE THAT I'M REPRESENTING AS A LOBBYIST, THIS IS THIS IS HOW THEY FEEL.

AND WE DIDN'T WE DIDN'T GET ANY OF THAT. SO I AM I AM ALSO FRUSTRATED BY THE THE MINIMAL EXCHANGE.

THEY'RE ON CAMERA. THAT COULD HAVE EASILY GONE IN JUST SOME MORE DETAIL AS TO AS TO WHAT'S GOING ON AND WHY WE'RE DOING IT.

AND EVEN IF THOSE DISCUSSIONS ARE BECAUSE I ALSO DON'T KNOW HOW THE PROCESS WORKS WHEN IT COMES TO LOBBYISTS.

BUT EVEN IF THOSE DISCUSSIONS ARE BEING HAD OFF CAMERA BEHIND THE SCENES, GREAT.

[05:05:05]

AND EVEN A SUMMARY TO US PAYING THE PAYING A FAT BILL THAT, YOU KNOW, ON WHAT WHAT ARE THE WHAT ARE THE POINTS THAT HE'S BRINGING TO WHOM? I MEAN, IF WE HAVE THREE LAWYERS WORKING ON THIS.

OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT. DID ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY COMMENTS? I RECENTLY MADE THE ACQUAINTANCE OF A YOUNG WOMAN THAT LIVES IN PARK SHORE WHO WAS A LOBBYIST FOR THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA.

LET ME RUN THIS BY HER AND SEE IF SHE THINKS IT'S AS REPREHENSIBLE AS WE ALL DO.

WELL, THAT'S WELL AND GOOD. BUT BUT WE HIRED THE PERSONS, AND WE'RE NOT SATISFIED, SO THAT'S ENOUGH.

YEAH. THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE. AND WE NEED DEFINITELY REASONS FOR WHY.

AFTER YOU SAID, HOW MANY WERE THERE? COUNCIL MEMBER.

CHRISMAN. YEAH. I HAVE A QUESTION WHILE WE'RE ON THIS TOPIC.

MR. MCCONNELL MAY KNOW THE ANSWER TO. I WE ALSO RECEIVED HER.

I SAW SOMEWHERE A REPORT THAT THE BILL HAD NOT BEEN REFERRED OUT OF COMMITTEE.

AND WOULD NOT BE NOW UNTIL AFTER THE SESSION BEGINS IN JANUARY.

AND MR. MCCONNELL, DO YOU HAVE ANY INFORMATION FROM OUR LOBBYIST AS TO WHAT, IF ANY, IS THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THAT? NO, ACTUALLY, THAT THAT INFORMATION, I BELIEVE, CAME FROM MISS BARNHART.

I CAN CONFIRM THAT AND GET BACK TO YOU, BUT I WAS NOT.

I WAS NOT THE FIRST. LIKE, OUR LOBBYIST DID NOT TELL ME THAT INFORMATION.

SO AGAIN, YOU HAVE IT'S INTERESTING BECAUSE WE'VE HIRED A LOBBYIST FOR THIS SPECIFIC PURPOSE, BUT THEN YOU HAVE THE CITY'S LOBBYIST WHO IS COMMUNICATING WITH MR. YOUNG AND HIS TEAM AND. YEAH. WELL, I DON'T THINK IT'S COMPLICATED.

JUST MY OPINION. YES. NO, NO. WHEN YOU'RE DONE, MA'AM.

I DIDN'T SAY COMPLICATED. I JUST SAID OKAY. BECAUSE, I MEAN, I THINK IT'S WE HAVE A LOBBYIST, LISA HURLEY, WHO'S WORKING REPORTING. I DON'T KNOW, REGULARLY TO MR. YOUNG AND TO MISS BARNHART. AND THAT'S HOW WE SOME PEOPLE FOUND OUT ABOUT IT GOING TO THAT COMMITTEE.

AND THEN WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, THIS SEPARATE PIECE THAT THAT FALLS UNDERNEATH THE CITY ATTORNEY.

THAT'S WHY I THINK IT'S ALWAYS BEST THAT WE'RE COVERING EACH OTHER, BUT THAT IT FUNNELS THROUGH BOTH THE CITY MANAGER AND THE CITY ATTORNEY, SO THAT I MEAN, THAT'S WHAT WAS MY BIGGEST CONCERN, IF THAT MAKES SENSE TO ANYONE, THAT JUST SO THAT WE'RE ALL AWARE.

YES, WE HAVE A MAIN ATTORNEY, I MEAN, A LOBBYIST, AND WE ALSO HIRED ONE SPECIFICALLY FOR THIS ENABLING ACT.

MR. YOUNG, I'M SORRY. NO. THAT'S OKAY. SO TO JUST TO BE CLEAR, AND ONLY BECAUSE MR. MCCONNELL HAD SAID AS FAR AS HOW MANY THERE WERE.

SO WHEN COUNSEL ACTED, COUNSEL ACTED TO DO AN ATTORNEY AND A LOBBYIST AND AND THAT WAS FUNNELED THROUGH.

BUT PART OF YOUR ACTION SAID THAT THE CITY MANAGER SHALL BE DIRECTED TO ENTER INTO AGREEMENT.

SO THAT IS A DIRECTION THAT YOU GAVE ME. LIKEWISE, REGISTERING LOBBYISTS IS ALSO A TASK OF THE CITY MANAGER IN CONNECTION WITH THAT CONTRACT. SO SPECIFICALLY TO MR. MCCONNELL'S POINT IS THERE'S FOUR PRESENTLY UNDER THERE.

I WOULD GET AN EMAIL THAT FROM FROM MR. MCCONNELL AND SAYING THAT GREG ROBINSON IS SUBMITTING THESE APPLICATIONS FOR LOBBYISTS TO BE REGISTERED UNDER OUR NAME. IT COMES IN A SECURE EMAIL AND THAT IS MY FUNCTION WITH THEM.

SO THERE'S FOUR THAT ARE REGISTERED UNDER THERE.

AT AT THE AT THAT REQUEST. THE SECOND PART OF IT IS YOU.

SO TO DELINEATE AND THAT'S MY ROLE. THAT'S BEEN MY ROLE SO FAR.

BUT WE ALSO WE HAD THE SAME CONVERSATION AT THE LAST MEETING.

AND THERE WAS CONVERSATION THAT TALKED ABOUT OUR LOBBYIST IS STILL THERE ON EVERY OTHER MATTER.

AND WHEN AN ISSUE IS IMPORTANT THAT IS COMING UP ON THERE, SHE'S KEEPING ME ABREAST OF OF OF ANYTHING THAT'S COMING UP.

ON THE OVERALL HAVING ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE CITY OF NAPLES.

SO IN THAT COMMUNICATION, IF IT COMES, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S, IT'S PROVIDED THE LAST TIME IT HAPPENED THAT WAY I PROVIDED TO THE MAYOR.

BUT DURING THE LAST PUBLIC SESSION, THE MAYOR SAYS, WELL, I WANT TO I WANT TO KNOW, IS THERE ANY WAY WE CAN PUT IT ON OUR WEBSITE?

[05:10:05]

AND SO THEREFORE, THAT IS WAS MY REQUEST TO HER TO BE ABLE AND AN APPRECIATION OF THE MAYOR'S REQUEST TO MAKE SURE THAT INFORMATION MAYBE EVEN MAKES ITS WAY TO THE WEBSITE. WE'RE STILL WORKING ON POINTING IT, POINTING IT TO A SPOT, RESEARCHING. ARE WE ALLOWED TO HAVE A LINK ON OUR WEBSITE? THERE'S THINGS I'M TRYING TO WORK OUT, BUT THAT COMMUNICATION WITH OUR PERMANENT, FULL TIME LOBBYIST ON ALL MATTERS.

I WOULDN'T WANT TO SHUT THAT DOWN, NO MATTER WHAT AS IT PERTAINED TO ONE ISOLATED ITEM.

SO IF COUNCIL, ON THE OTHER HAND, AND I'M MISTAKEN, AND COUNCIL DOESN'T WANT ME TO INFORM WHEN IF IT PERTAINS TO THE AIRPORT OR OTHERWISE, WE ARE JUST LETTING YOU KNOW THAT THIS WHAT LISA CONVEYED.

BUT THAT JUST TO BE CLEAR ON THAT PART OF THE COMMUNICATION.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU KNEW THAT THOSE ARE THE ROLES AND HOW THEY'RE DELINEATED FROM MY FROM MY PERSPECTIVE.

YES. THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. AND I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT YOU HAD TO REGISTER THE LOBBYIST.

I MEAN, I DID WHEN WE HAD THAT CONVERSATION LAST WEEK, BUT THAT CLARIFIES A LOT.

SO THANK YOU. SO, MR. MCCONNELL I I THINK MAYBE DO I HAVE A CONSENSUS THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO OUR LOBBYISTS TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAILED IN, IN CONVEYING OUR REASONING FOR NOT WANTING THE ENABLING ACT TO GO THROUGH BECAUSE LOBBYING IS DONE, OBVIOUSLY, AT THE GOVERNOR'S CLUB, IT'S DONE AT THE LUNCH AREA.

IT'S DONE. IT'S DONE EVERYWHERE. BUT AS COUNCIL MEMBER BARTON STATED, FOR US, FOR THE PUBLIC, WE DIDN'T SEE THAT REPRESENTATION. AND I THINK FOR THE RECORD, IT'S MOST IMPORTANT FOR ME, AND I HEARD FROM TWO OTHERS THAT THREE, FOUR OF US NOW BELIEVE THAT A, YOU KNOW, A REASONING THAT WE DO NOT WANT THE ENABLING ACT IS MOST OF IMPORTANCE. I'D LIKE A WRITTEN MEMO ON WHAT POINTS HE IS NEGOTIATING ON, JUST LIKE YOU WOULD DO IN A REGULAR NEGOTIATION.

YOU WOULD. YOU KNOW WHAT? WHAT ARE THE POINTS THAT HE HAS? YOU KNOW THAT. WHAT ARE THE TROUBLESOME POINTS THAT HE'S USING TO LOBBY? I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU KNOW, WHAT THOSE CONVERSATIONS ARE.

I KNOW BITS AND PIECES, BUT WHAT WHAT IS HE USING? I KNOW ONE WAS THE FEAR OF THE ACROSS FLORIDA THAT THIS.

YOU KNOW, THEY COULD DO THIS WITH EVERY MUNICIPAL AIRPORT ACROSS FLORIDA.

AND HOW WOULD THOSE FOLKS LIKE THAT? SO, MAYOR, MAY I MENTION SOMETHING? YES, PLEASE. SO WHEN THIS INITIALLY WAS TALKED ABOUT, COUNCIL WAS VERY CLEAR WITH THEIR DIRECTION THAT THEY WANTED ME TO FIND SPECIFICALLY TALK TO JAMIE COLE AND ANDREW BARR TO FIND AN ATTORNEY WHO COULD LOOK TO SEE WHAT OUR POTENTIAL DEFENSES OR RAMIFICATIONS WOULD BE IF THIS AIRPORT AUTHORITY ACT WENT THROUGH, AND TO FIND A LOBBYIST BASED ON SOME RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE RECEIVED SPECIFICALLY FOR THE AIRPORT AUTHORITY ACT.

IN MY OPINION, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I DID. I REACHED OUT TO ANDREW BARR, WHO CONNECTED ME WITH MULTIPLE LOBBYISTS.

SOME HAD CONFLICTS, BUT I ENDED UP WITH WHO I PRESENTED TO YOU ALL AT THAT MEETING.

AND THEN THE MOTION INCLUDED JAMIE COLE, WHO WAS THEN PRESENTED TO YOU, WHO WAS THEN BEING ENGAGED FOR THE SECOND PART OF THIS.

WHAT'S TRANSPIRED AFTER THAT IS A SERIES, AND I MEAN A SERIES OF PUBLIC RECORDS REQUESTS TO THE NAA TO PROVIDE A PLETHORA OF DOCUMENTATION, THOUSANDS OF PAGES THAT THE LOBBYIST AND JAMIE COLE HAVE REQUESTED IN ORDER TO SATISFY WHAT CITY COUNCIL ASKED FOR.

ALONG WITH THAT, THERE HAVE BEEN MEETINGS WATCHED AND THERE HAVE BEEN CONVERSATIONS WITH ME INCLUDED, AND ANDREW INCLUDED, RELAYING THE DECISIONS AND THE DISCUSSIONS THAT HAVE OCCURRED AT THIS DAIS AND INDIVIDUALLY.

THEREFORE, IF YOU WANT THEM TO JUST REITERATE WHAT COUNSEL HAS SAID PRETTY MUCH IN EVERY CITY CITY COUNCIL MEETING FOR THE LAST SIX MEETINGS, WHEN THE REPORTS COME UP, THEY CAN. BUT I JUST CAUTION YOU THAT MICROMANAGING SOMEONE THAT YOU ALL HAVE HIRED.

AGAIN, IF YOU WANT ME TO CALL HIM TODAY AND SAY, WE NEED YOU TO SHOW UP ON THE 10TH SO COUNCIL CAN TALK TO YOU VIRTUALLY,

[05:15:01]

I'M STARTING TO FEEL A LITTLE UNCOMFORTABLE, IF I'M BEING QUITE HONEST WITH YOU, ABOUT THE POSITION THAT I FEEL LIKE I'M BEING PUT IN RIGHT NOW FROM EMAILS I'M GETTING FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC.

YOU KNOW, YOU, YOU ALL AND I AND I'M HAPPY TO DO IT HAVE PUT ME IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS SITUATION THAT IS HIGHLY, HIGHLY CONTENTIOUS, HIGHLY CONTENTIOUS. WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THE AIRPORT.

AND I AM NOW RESPONSIBLE TO FACILITATING INFORMATION AND PROCESS, AND I DON'T MIND DOING THAT, BUT IT'S LIKE AT THE SAME TIME, YOU ALL HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO CALL THE LOBBYIST AND SPEAK TO HIM YOURSELF, OR I CAN HAVE HIM COME TO A HEARING AND THE PUBLIC CAN HEAR HIM ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS.

I JUST I JUST WANT TO BE HONEST WITH YOU BECAUSE I THINK THE PERCEPTION OUT THERE FROM THE PUBLIC IS THAT I'M DOING SOMETHING NEFARIOUS, AND I AM THE MOST STRAIGHT LINE PERSON OUT THERE, AND I AND I CARE ABOUT ETHICS, AND I CARE ABOUT MY BAR LICENSE, AND I CARE ABOUT WHAT YOU ALL ASK ME TO DO. BUT WE GOT TO FIGURE SOMETHING OUT, BECAUSE THE POSITION THAT I FEEL LIKE I'M BEING PUT IN RIGHT NOW IS SOMETHING THAT I DON'T WANT TO CONTINUE. SO LET'S HAVE THE GUY COME HERE.

I'VE GOT A QUESTION IN REFERENCE TO THAT, MATTHEW. SO IS IT.

I'M SORRY, MAY I KNOW? SO SHOULD WE. YOU JUST MENTIONED THAT IF WE HAVE IF WE HAVE A MESSAGE FOR THE LOBBYISTS, WE CAN CALL HIM DIRECT. IS SHOULD WE SHOULD THAT SHOULD THAT BE THE STEPS THAT WE SHOULD THAT WE TAKE.

LIKE FOR EXAMPLE, NOT SURE I'M GOING TO CALL HIM ANYWAY, BUT NONETHELESS, I'M WASN'T OVERLY THRILLED WITH WITH WHAT I JUST WITNESSED ON CAMERA THERE. I FEEL LIKE THAT SOMETHING MORE COULD HAVE BEEN SAID.

OKAY, SO OBVIOUSLY I'M A LITTLE DISAPPOINTED WITH WITH THE MESSAGE THAT WAS DELIVERED.

AGAIN, I'M NOT. I'LL REITERATE, I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH LOBBYING PROCESS, AND I AND I AM ALSO ASSUMING THAT HE PROBABLY HAD ONE ON ONE CONVERSATIONS WITH ALL THE PEOPLE THAT HE NEEDED TO HAVE CONVERSATIONS WITH TO GET THE MESSAGING ACROSS. I STILL WOULD HAVE LOVED TO HAVE SEEN MORE ON CAMERA, IS WHAT I'M SAYING. SO IF I IF I WISH TO GIVE THAT MESSAGE TO HIM, SHOULD I BE GIVING THAT TO HIM PERSONALLY AND NOT SAYING TO TO YOU? AND AGAIN, I THIS I WILL REITERATE AGAIN, BECAUSE I DON'T UNDERSTAND THIS PROCESS AS I AS I SHOULD, AND I CERTAINLY DON'T WANT TO PUT YOU IN AN UNCOMFORTABLE POSITION. IS THAT SOMETHING I SHOULD BE GIVING THAT MESSAGE DIRECTLY TO THE LOBBYISTS AS AS A CITY COUNCILMAN, SHOULD I BE GIVING HIM A CALL OR THROWING AN EMAIL OUT AND SAY, HEY, THAT SEEMED, YOU KNOW, THAT SEEMED WEAK? WHAT WHAT'S THE POINT HERE? YOU KNOW, YOU REALLY DIDN'T SAY. SAY WHAT I FELT LIKE YOU SHOULD BE SAYING ON CAMERA.

SHOULD I BE DELIVERING THAT MESSAGE AS OPPOSED TO YOU? I MEAN, AND AGAIN, I WANT TO WAIT.

I WANT TO SAY SOMETHING BECAUSE THIS IS WHERE I'VE WITNESSED AND SAW I'VE SEEN THE LEGAL BILLS.

IF WE ALL START CALLING AND WE DON'T STAND WITH ONE VOICE, YOU KNOW, SOMEONE MAY HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH THEM THAT'S NOT THE SAME. AND THEN HE'S CONFLICTED.

I'D LIKE TO JUST I'M SORRY YOU FEEL YOU'RE IN THAT POSITION.

WE PROBABLY SHOULD. SHOULD THAT COME FROM YOU, THEN MAYBE THE MAYOR.

IF WE HAVE A CONSENSUS OF WE. WE WEREN'T THRILLED WITH THAT WITH THAT MESSAGING.

DOES THAT COME FROM YOU? AND AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW.

I'M ASKING I'M ASKING MATTHEW HERE. WOULD THAT BE BETTER FROM COMING FROM ONE OF US, REPRESENTING ALL OF US AS OPPOSED TO YOU? BECAUSE AGAIN, THE LAST THING I WANT TO DO IS PUT YOU IN A POSITION WHERE YOU FEEL LIKE YOU'RE BEING COMPROMISED, BECAUSE THAT CERTAINLY IS NOT MY POINT. I CAN PROMISE YOU, IT'S NONE OF NONE OF THE NONE OF US UP HERE WANT TO DO THAT.

SO PLEASE GIVE US DIRECTION ON, ON, ON A BETTER WAY TO DO THIS AS OPPOSED TO SAYING TO YOU, HEY, GO TELL THAT GUY THAT THAT WAS WE WANTED SOMETHING DIFFERENT.

SO. AND DO YOU WANT TO ANSWER THAT? I WOULD, IF YOU DON'T MIND.

SO NUMBER ONE, IT'S A FLAT RATE FOR THIS 5000 A MONTH FOR THE LOBBYISTS, FOR THE FOUR THAT WE HAVE FOR GREG ROBINSON.

SO I JUST WANT TO PUT THAT OUT THERE. HOWEVER, I DO AGREE, AS YOU KNOW, I'VE REPRESENTED GROUPS OF PEOPLE IN FRONT OF YOU ALL BEFORE.

I ALWAYS THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO HAVE A POINT PERSON FOR COMMUNICATIONS.

IT'S JUST MORE EFFICIENT THAT WAY. MAKE SURE MESSAGES GET ACROSS.

HOWEVER, WHEN THIS COMES UP. SOMETIMES THE MESSAGE IS NOT CONSISTENT FROM COUNCIL AND THEN IT PUTS ME IN A POSITION TO HAVE TO SAY, WELL, 4 OR 5 OF THEM SAID THIS, SIX OF THEM SAID THIS, AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE.

AND RIGHT NOW THIS IS THE MESSAGING, RIGHT. SO THAT EVERYONE WHO'S WATCHING UNDERSTANDS THIS.

DO EVERYTHING IN YOUR POWER TO MAKE SURE THIS ENTIRE BILL DOES NOT PASS.

PERIOD. PERIOD. CORRECT. I WISH YOU ALL COULD HAVE BEEN ON THE CONVERSATION THAT I HAD AFTER I WATCHED THIS VIDEO LAST WEEK, BECAUSE I KNOW YOU. I MEAN, TRUST ME, I HAVE NO PROBLEM TELLING SOMEONE THAT THIS WAS BEYOND A PROBLEM.

IT WASN'T PROFESSIONAL. IT WAS OUR FIRST IMPRESSION OF HIM.

YOU HAVE A THOUSAND PEOPLE FROM THE CITY WATCHING.

I DON'T CARE WHAT YOU DO OFF CAMERA. THIS IS A BAD LOOK.

PERIOD. THAT MESSAGE WAS ARTICULATED. YOU GUYS WANT TO EMAIL ME AND HAVE ME FORWARD IT? THAT'S FINE, BUT I HAVE NO PROBLEM BECAUSE I SAW IT AND I FELT THE SAME WAY THAT YOU ALL FELT BECAUSE THIS IS MY FIRST INTERACTION WITH THESE INDIVIDUALS.

[05:20:01]

AND SEE, I CAN'T SPEAK ON WHETHER THIS IS NORMAL OR NOT.

NORMAL. I WILL SAY THAT HE TOLD ME THIS WAS A FIRST FOR HIM.

HE IMMEDIATELY KIND OF LOOKED LIKE A DOG WITH HIS HAIR, WITH HIS EARS BACK.

HE WAS EMBARRASSED BY IT BECAUSE HE SAID, THAT'S THE FIRST TIME I'VE EVER BEEN PUT IN THAT SITUATION.

AND IT WAS AWKWARD AND HE DIDN'T KNOW WHAT TO DO. THAT'S WHAT HE TOLD ME.

BUT IF YOU GUYS WANT TO HEAR THAT FROM HIM, PLEASE REACH OUT TO HIM. I WAS THE FIRST TIME HE'S LOBBIED, KNOW THE FIRST TIME THAT HE HAD AN INTERACTION LIKE THAT OFF CAMERA. I'M JUST RELAYING WHAT HE TOLD ME BECAUSE, AGAIN, I OWED IT TO YOU ALL TO ADDRESS THIS BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND THE SEVERITY OF WHAT WE'RE ASKING HIM TO DO AND THE IMPORTANCE OF IT.

WELL, I'M HAPPY TO HEAR THAT, THAT THAT YOU GAVE THEM A MESSAGE THAT'S SIMILAR TO WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT UP HERE.

SO I'M I'M HAPPY TO HEAR THAT. SO THANK YOU. BUT JUST TO SUM IT UP BEFORE WE GO DOWN THE LINE, MAYOR, I JUST WANT TO MAKE IT VERY CLEAR AND REITERATE WHAT I SAID THE FIRST TIME THIS WAS BROUGHT UP.

EVERYONE I TALKED TO SAID THIS WILL PASS BECAUSE IT'S AN IT'S A LOCALLY SPONSORED BILL.

AND YOU ALL STILL WANTED TO GO THROUGH THIS EXERCISE. AND I WAS HAPPY TO FACILITATE THE PEOPLE.

BUT I STARTED OFF WITH THAT BECAUSE EVERYONE I TALKED TO SAID LOCALLY SPONSORED BILLS THAT GET UNANIMOUS DECISION ARE PRACTICALLY SHOO INS.

SO THE LAST TIME I BROUGHT THIS UP, I SAID, IS THERE ANY CONCESSIONS? THE THE ANSWER WAS NO. I RELAYED THAT TO THE LOBBYIST.

AND NOW, I MEAN, THEY'RE DOING WHAT YOU ASKED THEM TO DO.

SO I JUST WANT TO LEAVE IT AT THAT. MAYOR. OKAY.

I DON'T. YES. GO AHEAD, COUNCILMAN CUSHMAN. I WANT TO WRAP THIS UP.

I DON'T WANT TO KEEP LINGERING OVER THIS. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE ONE SUGGESTION THAT MIGHT HELP US ALL IN TERMS OF THE CONTINUING EFFORTS WITH THIS LOBBYING EFFORT AND IN THE STATE.

AND THIS BUILDS ON A COMMENT COUNCILWOMAN PETRANOFF MADE A FEW MINUTES AGO.

I CAN TELL YOU THAT IN MY CONVERSATIONS HERE IN NAPLES WITH RESIDENTS ABOUT THE AIRPORT AND WHY I THINK THAT THIS BILL IS A BAD IDEA AND SHOULD NOT PASS.

I HAVE THREE REASONS THAT I GIVE THEM. AND I DO IT EVERY TIME.

ONE, TWO, THREE. AND THEY'RE THE BEST REASONS I'VE BEEN ABLE TO COME UP WITH.

THESE ARE MY THESE ARE MY REASONS. AND IT REALLY HAS TO DO.

WHY? I MEAN, THIS BILL IS BASICALLY ABOUT IT'S A GOVERNANCE BILL.

BOTTOM LINE AND WHY THIS IS THIS BILL DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.

BUT WE DON'T HAVE AS A, AS A COUNCIL AGREEMENT ON THREE REASONS OR FOUR REASONS OR WHATEVER THEY ARE, NOR COMMUNICATION WITH OUR LOBBYISTS AS WELL.

WE THINK THE BEST ARGUMENT IS BE INTERESTING TO KNOW WHAT OUR LOBBYIST THINKS AS WELL.

SO I THINK HAVING THAT YOU KNOW, THAT THAT YOU KNOW, ESSENTIALLY BACK OF THE ENVELOPE AGREEMENT ON WHAT WE THINK ARE THE MOST IMPORTANT REASONS WHY THIS BILL DOESN'T MAKE SENSE WOULD BE A GOOD THING TO HAVE.

DOESN'T MEAN THAT YOU THAT OUR LOBBYIST HAS TO WHATEVER THEY ARE, SAY THAT AND NOTHING ELSE.

YOU HAVE TO BE ABLE TO IMPROVISE AND BE FLEXIBLE AND SO ON.

BUT IT WOULD, IT WOULD BE A USEFUL A USEFUL EXERCISE TO TO TRY TO GO THROUGH AND A USEFUL THING TO COME UP WITH. THAT WAS THE LOBBYISTS JOB TO LOOK AT THE BILL AND. SEE WHAT DIDN'T BENEFIT THE CITY.

AND IT'S VERY CLEAR IT WAS ON I MEAN, BILL WAS ON THERE.

IT STATES CLEARLY ON THE WEBSITE WHAT THE BILL'S INTENTION IS WHAT IT'S GOING TO CHANGE AND SIMPLY COULD HAVE BEEN STATED, PERIOD. WE DON'T NEED I MEAN, A, I DON'T THINK THAT WE SHOULD BE GOING TO HIM AND TELLING HIM HOW TO DO HIS JOB. I THINK IT'S CLEAR THAT WE WOULD HAVE LIKED MORE SUBSTANCE IN HOW AND WHY THE CITY IS OPPOSED TO IT. AND IT'S I MEAN, I KNOW THAT MISS FRASCINO SENT THESE OUT TO EVERYBODY A WEEK AGO. IT WAS ON THE WEBSITE OF THE LEGISLATION ABOUT THIS.

IT'S PRETTY EASY FOR ANYBODY TO HAVE LOOKED UP WHAT THIS BILL COVERS.

[05:25:07]

BUT I, I DON'T THINK THAT YOU SHOULD FEEL UNCOMFORTABLE BECAUSE WE GAVE YOU DIRECTION.

YOU CHOSE THE LOBBYIST AND I ASKED YOU I BEFORE THE HEARING, I SAID, I AM SURE THAT HE IS GOING TO GIVE REASONS TO WHY WE ARE OPPOSING IT. AND YOU SAID ABSOLUTELY.

I MEAN, I THINK THAT'S JUST COMMON SENSE. SO IT DIDN'T HAPPEN.

I WOULD JUST COMMUNICATION SOMEHOW TO HIM HAS ALREADY HAPPENED.

BUT IF THIS COUNCIL FEELS LIKE WE NEED TO GIVE FURTHER DIRECTION, I THINK IT WOULD BE THAT YOU LOOK AT WHAT HAS BEEN SENT OUT AGAIN TO YOU.

AND IF YOU DISAGREE WITH THE POINTS THAT ARE ON THERE.

I MEAN, IT CLEARLY STATES WHAT THIS BILL IS TAKING AWAY.

AND, YOU KNOW ALL OF IT. I MEAN, WE SAID THAT ITS ENTIRETY AND WE HAD A UNANIMOUS VOTE.

AND WHETHER YOU LIKE ONE PIECE OR NOT, ONE PIECE, THAT MAY HAVE BEEN WHAT PUT MR. MCCONNELL INTO A UNCOMFORTABLE SITUATION BECAUSE THAT'S AND WE SHOULDN'T DO THAT TO HIM.

WE SHOULDN'T GO AND TELL HIM, WELL, I'M OKAY WITH THIS, BUT NOT THAT YOU SHOULD HAVE LEFT IT AS THAT.

WHO TOLD HIM THAT? I'M JUST SAYING. YEAH. I MEAN, AGAIN, WE HAD A CONVERSATION.

I MEAN, THAT'S THAT'S THAT'S LET'S PUT THIS STUFF IN CONTEXT, INCLUDING THE COMMENTS THAT WE HEARD TODAY FROM OUR ONE PUBLIC SPEAKER.

MR. MCCONNELL, LAST WEEK ASKED US A HYPOTHETICAL QUESTION.

WOULD WE DO WE CONTINUE TO OPPOSE THIS BILL? IT'S AN ENTIRETY OR ARE WE OPEN TO NEGOTIATING? HAVING THE BILL BE ACCEPTABLE WITH CERTAIN CHANGES TO IT? AND THIS IS ALL IN THE CONTEXT OF WHAT WE HAD ALREADY AGREED TO, WHICH IS WHY WE OPPOSE THE BILL.

AM I CORRECT? WE ARE SEVEN. NOTHING. WE OPPOSE THE BILL.

AND I SAID AT THE TIME THAT I DIDN'T THINK THIS WAS A PRODUCTIVE CONVERSATION TO HAVE.

THE RECORD SHOWS THAT I USED THAT WORD. THIS WAS NOT A PRODUCTIVE CONVERSATION TO HAVE WHERE WE WOULD BE SITTING HERE IN PUBLIC DOING A HYPOTHETICAL CONVERSATION ABOUT, WELL, IF WE CHANGE THIS OR WE CHANGE THAT.

AND WE. TALKED AROUND THAT SUBJECT FOR QUITE A WHILE.

WE NEVER TALKED ABOUT SPECIFIC ITEMS THAT MIGHT BE CHANGED OR NOT CHANGED.

BUT SEVERAL PEOPLE ON THIS DAIS YOU KNOW, SAID, WELL, YOU KNOW, IF IT COMES DOWN TO IF YOU HAVE A BILL THAT PASSES IN ITS CURRENT FORM VERSUS A BILL THAT'S GOING TO PASS THAT'S LESS BAD.

WHERE DO YOU COME DOWN ON THAT? IF YOU HAVE IF YOU HAVE A CHOICE ON IT? IT WAS THAT KIND OF A CONVERSATION. SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK THIS COUNCIL HAS BEEN CONSISTENT AND UNIFIED REGARDING OUR POSITION ON THIS BILL, WHICH IS TO OPPOSE IT.

SOME PEOPLE CAN TRY TO DIVIDE US ON THAT, BUT I THINK THAT'S BEEN OUR POSITION.

IT'S STILL OUR POSITION TODAY. AND WHAT I WAS SUGGESTING MERELY A MOMENT AGO WAS THAT IF THERE'S ONE THING THAT PERHAPS WE HAVEN'T DONE, AND PERHAPS IT'S A LOBBYIST JOB TO DO THIS AND GIVE IT BACK TO US FOR OUR COMMENT IS WHAT ARE THE 3 OR 4 MAJOR REASONS WHY WE THINK THIS BILL IS A BAD IDEA FOR NAPLES? WHAT ARE THE 3 OR 4 REASONS THAT? AND AS I TOLD YOU, I HAVE MY SET OF REASONS. EACH OF YOU PROBABLY DOES TOO.

YOU'RE PROBABLY VERY SIMILAR. AND HAVING THAT, AS THEY USED TO SAY, YOU KNOW, ELEVATOR, YOU KNOW, POINTS TO MAKE IN AN ELEVATOR CONVERSATION WITH SOMEBODY MIGHT BE A USEFUL THING TO HAVE.

OKAY. WELL, IT IS AGAIN. IT IS ALREADY ON THE LEGISLATIVE WEBSITE SHOWS EXACTLY WHAT THESE ARE. IF YOU KNOW.

[05:30:03]

I'M SAYING WHAT PERHAPS WE COULD DO. A MORE SUCCINCT JOB OF IS SAYING, WHY IS THIS BILL NOT A GOOD IDEA? OKAY. WELL MAYBE WE'LL TAKE A VOTE ON THAT ON FRIDAY.

ON WEDNESDAY THEN IF YOU REVIEW SOME OF THE THINGS THAT ARE IN IT, BECAUSE I THINK THAT THAT CLARITY NEEDS TO HAPPEN.

AND I WANT TO WRAP THIS UP, I HAVE MR. VICE MAYOR AND THEN MR. YOUNG, AND THEN GO INTO FURTHER CORRESPONDENCE AND COMMUNICATIONS.

OKAY. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. FIRST THE I WANTED TO ADDRESS THE STATEMENT BY OUR CITY ATTORNEY.

WE THIS CITY COUNCIL HAS FAITH IN YOU. WE HIRED YOU.

YOU HAVE A DIFFICULT JOB. WE UNDERSTAND THAT.

MY ASK IS JUST SUCK IT UP AND GO GET IT. JUST GIVE EVERYTHING YOU CAN TO THAT EFFORT.

I BELIEVE THAT YOU HAVE, BUT CONTINUE TO DO SO.

NOW, I WANT TO MAKE A STATEMENT TO THAT REPRESENTATIVE FROM GRAY ROBINSON.

WHAT'S HIS NAME? JOSEPH SALZBERG, I BELIEVE JOSEPH SALZBERG.

SOMETHING SLOW, SOMETHING CLOSE TO THAT. SO A SPECIALIZED LOBBYIST, THAT'S WHAT WE HIRED.

SPECIALIZED LOBBYIST HIRED BY A MUNICIPALITY IS GENERALLY EXPECTED TO DELIVER STRATEGIC PROACTIVE AND MEASURABLE ADVOCACY EFFORTS. THEY'RE ALSO EXPECTED TO COORDINATE AND PREPARE TESTIMONY FOR HEARINGS.

YOU MR. SALZBURG HAVE REMAINING OPPORTUNITIES WITH THE HOUSE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS SUBCOMMITTEE.

THEIR WORK IS NOT DONE, AND YOU MAY HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO BETTER THAN WHAT YOU JUST DID.

WHAT WE WITNESSED IN VIDEO. BUT YOU HAVE THE HOUSE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS SUBCOMMITTEE HAS WORK TO DO.

THE HOUSE GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS SUBCOMMITTEE AND THE HOUSE STATE AFFAIRS COMMITTEE, AT THIS POINT IN TIME, HAVE HEARING OPPORTUNITIES. YOU LIKELY HAVE NOT HEARD DIRECTLY FROM NAPLES RESIDENTS RELATED TO YOUR REPRESENTATION AT THE HEARING IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS SUBCOMMITTEE.

MANY HAVE BEEN LEFT WONDERING IF THE TESTIMONY YOU PROVIDED IN THE HEARING IS THE BEST THAT GRAYROBINSON CAN DELIVER.

PERHAPS THAT IS THE BEST THAT YOU HAVE. I AND MANY OTHERS BELIEVE YOU HAVE NOT GIVEN YOUR CLIENTS THE CITY OF NAPLES, YOUR BEST EFFORT. WE WERE SERIOUS WHEN WE HIRED YOU.

WE EXPECT YOU TO BE SERIOUS IN YOUR REPRESENTATION OF OUR COMMUNITY.

TO BE CLEAR, YOU HAVE A COMMUNITY DEPENDING ON YOU TO REPRESENT OUR CASE TO THE BEST OF YOUR ABILITY.

STEP UP, MADAM MAYOR. THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY.

THANK YOU, MR. YOUNG. YEAH. MINE ARE GOING TO BE SIMPLE.

MATTHEW AND I WORKED TOGETHER ON EVERY ISSUE THAT COMES BEFORE YOU AS IT PERTAINS TO CERTAIN THINGS IN THIS REALM. THERE WERE CERTAIN DIRECTIVES THAT WERE GIVEN THAT PUT IT IN HIS BAILIWICK AS IT PERTAINS TO BOTH LEGAL AND LOBBYIST, AS IT PERTAINS TO CHANGING THE CODE AND THINGS IN THE NA.

WHEN THOSE DIRECTIVES ARE GIVEN FROM THIS BODY, WE RESPECT THOSE AREAS.

AND YOU CAN'T HAVE TWO VOICES. IF HE NEEDS ME TO ATTEND A FUNCTION OR A PHONE CALL WHEN IT'S AN AREA THAT WAS PUT IN HIS.

HE INFORMS ME AND I WILL GO. IN THE SAME TOKEN, I RESPECT THOSE BOUNDARIES.

ONCE THIS BODY HAS TAKEN CERTAIN ACTIONS AND WILL ALWAYS DO SO.

SO THE POINT BEING IS WHEN. SO I DON'T WANT THERE TO BE ANY MISGIVINGS ABOUT WHERE WE STAND ON THAT.

PART OF IT IS WE'RE WORKING TOWARD THE END RESULT THAT YOU PUT IN FRONT OF US, DIRECTING WHO'S POINT BASED ON YOUR DIRECTION AND WORK ACCORDINGLY, AND THAT IS PERFECTLY FINE WITH ME. THERE ARE TIMES WHEN WE BLUR THAT.

AND CASE IN POINT WAS THE LAST MEETING WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT MAKING SURE WE COMMUNICATE ON THE WEBSITE AND DIFFERENT THINGS LIKE THAT, SO IT TAKES DIFFERENT ENGAGEMENT, BUT I JUST DON'T WANT THERE TO BE ANY MISGIVINGS ABOUT WHEN WE WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO GET ACCOMPLISHED AND WORKING TOGETHER ON THESE THINGS AND WHEN WHOEVER'S IN POINT WE RESPECT THOSE AREAS AND TRY TO KEEP THAT MOVING FORWARD IN A POSITIVE DIRECTION, BECAUSE TOGETHER WE'RE GOING TO GET MORE DONE THAN WE EVER WOULD APART.

AND SO I DON'T WANT THERE TO BE ANY MISGIVINGS ABOUT THAT INTENT IN ANYTHING THAT WE'RE TRYING TO GET ACCOMPLISHED.

SO I JUST WANTED TO GO ON THE RECORD ON THAT, JUST BECAUSE I DON'T WANT THERE TO BE ANY CONFUSION. THANK YOU. MR.

[05:35:02]

IF WE LOOK AT WHAT'S BEEN SENT TO US AGAIN THEN IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS THAT YOU WANT SPECIFICS TO COUNCIL GIVE TO OUR LOBBYISTS. I'M SURE WE CAN DO SO.

BUT I BELIEVE, AS THE VICE MAYOR SAID, THAT THEY ARE LOBBYISTS.

THEY CAN MAKE THEIR STATEMENTS. AND REPRESENT US TO A GOOD CASE.

TO WHY THIS IS NOT GOOD FOR THE CITY OF NAPLES.

SO WITH THAT. THANK YOU. I IT WAS NOT AN EASY SITUATION TO BRING UP, BUT I CANNOT LET OUR TAX DOLLARS AND NOT BE REPRESENTED WELL, AND WE'RE GOING TO MAKE THAT CHANGE.

I KNOW BECAUSE THIS IS AN IMPORTANT PIECE OF LEGISLATION AFFECTING OUR ENABLING ACT AND WHETHER IT'S THEY SAY THAT IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN OR NOT, NOT ONE MEMBER OF THAT COMMITTEE ASKED A QUESTION.

SO IF THAT'S THE WAY TALLAHASSEE OPERATES, THAT IT DOESN'T MATTER.

YOU'RE MY FRIEND. YOU BRING IT FORWARD. I GET PRESSURE TO APPROVE IT.

THEN THAT'S SAD. THAT'S A SAD PROCESS FOR THE WAY THEY THEY GOVERN AND TAKE AWAY HOME RULE.

SO I'M GOING TO END THAT AND GO INTO CORRESPONDENCE AND COMMUNICATIONS.

COUNCIL MEMBER KRAMER.

I WANT TO WAIT A MINUTE. NO. I'M GOOD. WE JUST WENT FROM WHEN I FIRST SAW THAT TO YES, IT'S IT'LL FIRE YOU UP.

BUT WE WE THAT WAS SO BIPOLAR JUST NOW. LET'S ALL LOOK AT THIS THING AND GET TOTALLY FIRED UP.

AND THEN LET'S SAY LEAVE HIM ALONE AND LET HIM DO HIS JOB. I'M OKAY WITH THAT.

WE PROCESS THAT. BUT THAT'S WHAT JUST HAPPENED.

WELL, SO LET ME FINISH. THE FACT IS THIS OUR COUNCIL, I DID THIS ON MY OWN.

HE DID THIS ON HIS OWN. WHEN THIS WHOLE THING FIRST WENT DOWN, THE CONVERSATION WAS IF.

THE COALITION OF REPRESENTATIVES FOR SOUTHWEST FLORIDA AT THE STATE LEVEL UNANIMOUSLY PUSH A BILL FORWARD.

IS IT GOING TO GET THROUGH? AND THE ANSWER IS, YEAH, ABOUT 99.999% OF THE TIME.

AND IF THAT IS IT'S SAD. IT'S SAD. THAT'S THE REALITY OF IT.

IT'S AN EASY TRADE OFF. IF THEY WEREN'T IF IT WASN'T UNANIMOUS THEN IT COULD HAVE BEEN A DIFFERENT STORY.

BUT THE FACT THAT IT IS UNANIMOUS AND THE FACT THAT I TOLD YOU, YOU DON'T NEED A LOBBYIST. WE HAVE PEOPLE THAT TALK TO. AND HE AND HE THE LAST WORDS HE SAYS IS, HEY, YEAH, WE'LL WORK WITH YOU. WHATEVER.

HE AGREES. IT'S OVERREACH. HE AGREES. A LOT OF THE POINTS WE MAKE, THE RATIONALE IS THAT A WHOLE BUNCH OF HIS CONSTITUENTS THINK THAT THIS BODY HAS MADE SUCH BAD CHOICES IN THE PAST.

THEY CAN'T BE GIVEN THAT RESPONSIBILITY MORE.

I MEAN, AND I'VE SAID THIS AND THAT'S THAT'S THE REALITY OF IT.

NOW, IT CAN BE RIGHT OR WRONG OR WHATEVER, BUT WHAT'S THE WHAT'S THE WHAT'S OUR PLAYING FIELD AND WHAT ARE THE RULES WITHIN THAT.

AND YEAH, IS IT SAD THAT THAT'S HOW MAYBE IT'S SAD, BUT IT IS HOW THINGS WORK AND THAT'S HOW THIS IS WORKING.

NOW THERE IS A THERE IS A CHANCE AND EVERY LAWYER WOULD TELL YOU, YEAH, MAYBE IT WON'T GET PASSED AND MAYBE IT WON'T.

AND IT COULD BE THAT THERE'S ENOUGH PEOPLE THAT ARE IN HIS PARTY THAT JUST THINK, I'M NOT SAYING HIM, ANY PARTICULAR REPRESENTATIVE WHO IS PUTTING FORWARD SOMETHING.

THERE'S ENOUGH PEOPLE THAT JUST DON'T LIKE THEM THAT THEY'LL VOTE AGAINST IT.

THAT HAPPENS TOO. SO THAT IS THERE'S AND I DON'T KNOW ANY OF THAT.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S THE CASE OR NOT ON MY PART.

I ASKED THIS FROM THE BEGINNING, AND IT'S ONE OF THE REASONS I THAT WAS UNANIMOUS FOR US. LET'S FIND OUT WHAT OUR OPTIONS ARE IN THE EVENT THAT IT PASSES.

AND THAT'S MR. BARR, CORRECT? MR. COLE. MR. COLE, SORRY, WE STILL HAVE NOT HEARD FROM MR. COLE. IT'S BEEN SOME TIME. IF MR. COLE IS GOING TO COME BACK AND SAY, LOOK, IF THIS THING PASSES, THEY CREATED THE CHARTER, THEY CAN FIX THE CHARTER.

EVERYBODY HAS A BOSS, AND YOU DON'T HAVE TO LIKE IT. IT'S HOW IT'S GOING TO BE. I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW THAT IF HE COMES BACK AND SAYS, YEAH, THIS IS EGREGIOUS AND YOU ALL NEED TO JUST LET IT LET THE PROCESS PLAY OUT SOON AND YOU'RE GOING TO WIN IN COURT.

I'D LIKE TO KNOW THAT TOO. AND THAT'S THAT'S WHAT THE ORIGINAL QUESTION WAS.

I THOUGHT WHEN WE WHAT IS OUR RECOURSE AND WHAT ARE THE ODDS OF DO WE HAVE A RECOURSE AND WHAT ARE THE ODDS OF US BEING SUCCESSFUL IN IT.

AND WE HAVEN'T HEARD THAT YET. CORRECT. AND WITHOUT.

WITHOUT DIVULGING POTENTIAL LEGAL STRATEGY, I THINK TO ANSWER THE QUESTION BASED ON OTHER CASES THAT MR.

[05:40:05]

NOTHING IN PARTICULAR. IT'S HARD TO KNOW RIGHT NOW IF THERE'S BEEN A PROCEDURAL ISSUE TO ATTACK, BECAUSE IT HASN'T GONE THROUGH THE PROCESS. SO IF YOU ALL WANT TO KNOW RIGHT NOW.

HOW TO FIGHT THIS. THE ANSWER WILL MOST LIKELY BE DON'T TALK ABOUT IT.

WAIT IT OUT AND HOPE THEY DO SOMETHING WRONG.

WITHOUT PUTTING TOO MUCH MORE CONTEXT TO IT. NO, I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT BUT I CAN, I CAN.

AGAIN, IT'S IT'S THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT WATCH THIS AND IT'S JUST IT'S HARD TO TALK ABOUT IT IN PUBLIC.

I UNDERSTAND I HATE BRINGING IT UP. AND LAST TIME WE WERE KIND OF PRESSED, YOU KNOW, HOW WOULD YOU KIND OF SOME STRATEGY STUFF AND AND I THINK THAT'S I HATE DOING THAT. SO ANYWAY THAT'S GOOD ENOUGH INFORMATION FOR ME RIGHT THERE.

HISTORICALLY SPEAKING, WHEN YOUR COALITION UNANIMOUSLY SUPPORTS A BILL, IT'S AN EASY ACCOMMODATION FOR EVERYBODY AROUND THEM BECAUSE THEN THEY CAN ASK THEM FOR THE SAME.

IF THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS GOING TO SPREAD IF THERE WAS A FEAR THAT THIS WAS GOING TO BE A WILDFIRE THROUGH THE STATE AND AFFECT ALL SORTS OF MUNICIPALITIES, WE WOULD HAVE WAY MORE JUICE. BUT THAT'S NOT THE CASE.

WELL, HOW MANY? YEAH, IT'S CERTAINLY NOT THE CASE CURRENTLY.

HYPOTHETICALLY. SO THANK YOU FOR ANSWERING THAT QUESTION.

THAT'S REALLY ALL I HAD IN COMMUNICATIONS. I JUST WANTED TO KNOW IF WE WERE ANY FURTHER DOWN THE ROAD ON FINDING OUT IF, IN FACT, THIS THING DOES GO FORWARD, IF WE HAVE ANY RECOURSE. AND I THINK WE JUST IT'S PROCEDURAL IS WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR AT THIS POINT.

THANKS. AND COUNCIL MEMBER KRAMER, I APPRECIATE YOUR.

COMMENT ON WELL, WE JUST WENT FROM THAT AND SAID WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT.

WE COULD DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. IF YOU HAVE A SUGGESTION OR ANYBODY ELSE HAS A SUGGESTION THAT WE DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT, THEN WE CAN. WELL, MY THOUGHT I DIDN'T SAY ANYTHING AT THE TIME.

WE HAVE NO IDEA WHAT HE'S DONE IN THE BACKGROUND, AND I DON'T WANT TO UNDERMINE SOMETHING THAT MAY BE SUCCESSFUL.

THE FACT THAT IT'S ALREADY NOT MOVED FORWARD IS GIVES SOME DISHEARTENING SOMEWHAT.

AND I DON'T I DON'T WANT TO JUDGE ANYBODY BY WHAT APPEARS TO BE THEIR WORST MOMENT PROFESSIONALLY OR PERSONALLY.

WE'VE BEEN WE'VE BEEN CAUTIONED ABOUT MICROMANAGING THIS PROCESS TO AGAIN.

AND THAT'S, THAT'S THAT'S WHY I I'M I'M WITH YOU ON THAT.

I DON'T I'M NOT SUGGESTING WE NEED TO ALL JUMP IN THE RING WITH HIM AND START SWINGING AT PEOPLE.

SO I HAVE DONE LOBBYING. YEAH. OKAY. SO AND IT COMES DOWN TO RELATIONSHIPS.

THERE YOU GO. SO DO THEY TRUST YOU? AND NOT JUST RELATIONSHIPS, BUT IS YOUR CASE.

IS THERE A FIRST? DO YOU HAVE A VALID CASE TO BE MADE.

AND THEN BECAUSE. WELL, I GUESS MAYBE THAT'S NOT ALWAYS THE CASE EITHER, BUT IT'S SUPER HELPFUL.

BUT THEN WHAT ARE THE RELATIONSHIPS LIKE AND AND AND DO YOU HAVE SWAY WITH THOSE FOLKS.

AND SO I DON'T KNOW HE MAY KNOW EVERYBODY HE WAS TALKING TO ON THAT DAIS AND THIS GUY MAY BE THEY MAY HAVE A GREAT RELATIONSHIP.

AND EVEN THOUGH IT LOOKED LIKE MATTHEW AND I TALKED ABOUT IT, I'M LIKE, ARE YOU KIDDING ME? YEAH. EVEN THOUGH I HAD A LOT TO SAY ABOUT THAT CLIP, THE OPTICS WERE OBVIOUSLY NOT GOOD.

I'M NOT SUGGESTING THAT OPTICS. YEAH. SO I'M NOT SUGGESTING THAT WE SHOULD DO ANYTHING BUT LET THOSE GUYS DO THEIR JOB.

THANK YOU. PETRANOFF. I GUESS ON THAT TOPIC, I THINK IT MIGHT BE HELPFUL IF WE HAVEN'T ALREADY DONE SO TO GIVE TO MATTHEW AND GARY BY PHONE. IDEAS ON HOW THIS HURTS US, HOW THIS LEGISLATION SPECIFICALLY HURTS US, IF THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.

JUST IF THEY HAVE IF TO ARM THE LOBBYISTS WITH EVERY POSSIBLE THING.

YOU PROBABLY HAVE 99% OF THEM, BUT IN THE EVENT THERE'S SOME OUT OF THE BOX IDEA.

I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, I'D LIKE TO GIVE THEM AS MANY TOOLS AS POSSIBLE.

AND COUNCILWOMAN, I THINK MAYBE THE MAYOR SUGGESTED ON WEDNESDAY THAT WE MAYBE DISCUSS THAT. BUT I'LL TAKE IT ONE STEP FURTHER AND SAY, MAYBE ALL OF US SHOULD COME TO COME TO THE TABLE WITH ONE, TWO AND THREE, AND WE CAN ALL SAY WHAT OUR ONE, TWO AND THREE IS. AND THEN AS A BODY, WE CAN SAY, HEY, WE LIKE ONE, TWO AND THREE. OR HOW ABOUT WHAT? WE'RE NOT GOING. I MEAN, BECAUSE IF YOU READ IT, I DON'T THINK THERE'S GOING TO BE ONE, TWO AND THREE.

WELL, YEAH, I TRY, BUT I GET IT. I SUGGEST WE DON'T COME TO THE TABLE WITH TEN REASONS WE DON'T LIKE IT, AND IT'S BAD FOR THE CITY, BUT MAYBE IF WE CAN CONDENSE THEM INTO OUR TOP THREE AND OUR AS A AS A, I MEAN, WE ALL HAVE OUR TOP THREE. MAYBE WE CAN ACTUALLY COME TO A, A TOP THREE OR TOP FIVE AS A, AS A UNIFIED BODY UP HERE. AND I THINK THAT EXERCISE IS PROBABLY WORTH EXPLORING.

[05:45:02]

YEAH. AND AND, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT SUGGESTING THAT HE OPINED ON EVERYTHING.

I'M JUST SUGGESTING THAT SOMEBODY GIVES THE LOBBYIST THE BEST IDEAS THAT WE HAVE.

ON HOW THAT WOULD HURT THE CITY. YOU KNOW, AND I DON'T WANT TO MICROMANAGE THIS PROCESS EITHER, BUT I ALSO WANT TO HAVE OVERSIGHT OVER THIS PROCESS AND THAT THESE, YOU KNOW, THESE ARE REAL COSTS.

AND WHAT WE SAW MAY BE DISTURBING OR IT MAY NOT.

I DON'T YOU KNOW, I DON'T HAVE THE LOBBYING EXPERIENCE.

I DON'T WANT TO I REALLY DON'T WANT TO DEBATE THIS.

OKAY, THEN LET ME GET TO MY OTHER. MCCONNELL WANTS TO ANSWER.

I JUST WANT TO SAY ONE THING. I APPRECIATE HOW MUCH YOU ALL CARE ABOUT MY COMFORTABILITY.

RIGHT? BASED ON WHAT I SAID. BUT JUST TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF CONTEXT, I THINK THIS EXERCISE NEXT MEETING WOULD GIVE ME A LOT OF CLARITY.

IF YOU ALL WOULD DO THAT, I THINK THAT WOULD BE A GREAT STEP, BECAUSE THE THING THAT SOMETIMES MAKES ME UNCOMFORTABLE IS I HEAR YOU ALL, BUT I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK FOR YOU. ALL RIGHT? SO THAT'S WHAT I MEANT. LIKE, SOMETIMES, SINCE I'M THE CONDUIT FROM YOU ALL TO THE LOBBYIST, SOMETIMES I FEEL LIKE IT'S PUTTING ME IN SITUATIONS WHERE I HAVE TO SPEAK FOR A MAJORITY OF YOU.

THEREFORE, IF I HAD A MAJORITY CONSENSUS ON A FEW THINGS THAT I COULD RELAY, THEN AT LEAST I WOULD KNOW I WOULD BE ACTING AT THE PLEASURE OF COUNCIL AS OPPOSED TO TRYING TO FILTER INFORMATION IN MY, YOU KNOW, I JUST WANTED TO PROVIDE THAT.

I THINK THAT'S A GOOD IDEA. OTHER IDEAS, OTHER THINGS ON CORRESPONDENCE AND COMMUNICATIONS.

JUST WANTED TO CHECK ON THE I NOTICED THAT THE PARCEL ON THE MIRACLE MILE THAT IS ACROSS THE STREET FROM LOUDERMILK, 1500 GULF SHORE BOULEVARD NORTH. THE PRICE TAG WENT DOWN $1 MILLION.

IT'S IT'S STILL FOR SALE. I HAD HEARD THAT SOMEONE LOBBED IN A $5 MILLION OFFER.

A DEVELOPER HAD DONE THAT FROM A FRIEND OF MINE WHO'S A REALTOR, BUT JUST I BELIEVE THAT THE REALTOR, THE CRA PERSON WAS GOING TO BE LOOKING AT THIS PARCEL.

WELL, OOPS, SORRY. YES, MA'AM. BUT WHAT I WOULD ALSO SAY IS, IS THAT WE THERE WAS DISCUSSIONS TO KEEP AN EYE ON THE PARCEL. HOWEVER, EVEN AT THE LAST MEETING, WE HAD TALKED ABOUT COMING BACK TO YOU WITH A PLAN THAT WOULD TAKE ALL CRA DOLLARS AND AND DIFFERENT THINGS LIKE THAT.

AND THAT'S I DON'T BELIEVE IN THE CRA. SO IT WOULD BE IT'S NOT IT WAS JUST IT WAS JUST GETTING SOMEBODY TO LOOK AT IT IN THE CITY THAT HAS MAYBE REAL ESTATE EXPERIENCE TO SEE IF THIS IS SOMETHING WE MIGHT BE INTERESTED IN.

OKAY. I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT IT WAS ON IS JUST SO I'M CLEAR.

IS IT FOR TO BE ANALYZED FOR STORMWATER? IS IT TO BE A PARKS AND RECREATION? BECAUSE WHEN I'M LOOKING AT IT, I'M THINKING OF POTS OF MONEY AND OUR OBSTACLES AHEAD OF US, THE STEPS WE JUST MOST RECENTLY TOOK. AND SO I'M TRYING TO JUST.

OR DO YOU WANT IT LOOKED AT FOR ANY REASON WHATSOEVER IF, IF IT CAN BE PURCHASED, YOU WANT ME TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THAT PURCHASE PRICE WOULD BE? WHAT I DON'T WANT TO DO IS GO DOWN THE ROAD WHERE WE LANDED ON THIS, THE ONE FOR CRA WHERE WE PURCHASED A PROPERTY BECAUSE IT WAS AVAILABLE.

AND NOW WE'RE TRYING TO EXTRAPOLATE WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO WITH IT.

NOW WE CAN IDENTIFY SPECIFIC PURPOSES, BUT I'D LIKE TO HAVE A GENERAL IDEA BEFORE, BECAUSE I KNOW THERE WERE SOME THAT SAID, WELL, IF IT'S FOR THIS REASON OR THAT REASON, WE COULD, YOU KNOW, RAISE THE FUNDS OR WHATEVER.

BUT I ALSO I HAVE TO HAVE A SPECIFIC PURPOSE OF WHICH WE WOULD BE RAISING THE FUNDS.

AND SO THAT'S THE ONLY THING, I GUESS I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD.

OR DO YOU WANT TO ANALYZE FOR ANY PURPOSES? WELL, WHAT I WAS THINKING AND I THOUGHT WHAT WE HAD CONSENSUS OF IS WE'VE GOT A PARCEL ACROSS THE STREET FROM LOUDERMILK PARK, WHICH IS A HEAVILY USED BEACH PARK, AND IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO EXPAND THE PARK ACROSS THE STREET.

THERE'S A LITTLE YOU CAN PARK SOME BOATS THERE AS WELL.

WE IF IT IF IT GETS SOLD, IT'S GOING TO GO CONDO AND IT WILL BE GONE FOREVER.

SO, YOU KNOW, I WAS THINKING AND I THOUGHT THAT MAYBE ALL OF YOU WERE THINKING, TOO, THAT IT WOULD BE AN ADDENDUM UNTO THE PARK AND, YOU KNOW, ALLOWING FOR SOME GREEN SPACE FOR DRAINAGE, ALLOWING FOR POSSIBLE.

YOU CAN DO MORE. OKAY. I'LL, I'LL, I'LL PURSUE IT FROM A GETTING A BETTER PRICE BACK TO YOU PERSPECTIVE AND SEE WHAT I CAN GET.

AND THE ONLY REASON WHY I MENTIONED SYRIA IS THAT ONE REALTOR GUY THAT WAS LOOKING AT, I FORGET THE GENTLEMAN'S NAME THAT WAS LOOKING AT YEAH, BUT WE DIDN'T. I DIDN'T GIVE HIM ANY KIND OF TASK ORDER TO DO ANYTHING.

LIKE, MAYBE HE'S NOT THE PERSON. MAYBE WE JUST GO TO A REALTOR AND ASK I, YOU KNOW, OKAY.

[05:50:03]

AS THE COUNTY GROWS, THEY THEY USE LOUDERMILK, THEY GO OVER TO AND SO DO OUR CITIZENS.

AND IT GETS REALLY PACKED. AND IT WOULD BE NICE TO HAVE A LITTLE MORE ELBOW ROOM, PERHAPS.

OKAY. THE NEXT ITEM IS THE THERE WAS SOMETHING BROUGHT UP TO ME THAT A BILLIONAIRE, STEPHEN ROSS.

AND AND IT WAS A WALL STREET JOURNAL ARTICLE.

IT HAS $200 FIX FOR MIAMI'S COMMUTING HELL. AND IT'S BY ARCHER AVIATION.

IT'S SORT OF AN ELECTRONIC HELICOPTER. IT'S CALLED A VERTIPORT AIR TAXI.

AND I BELIEVE WE HAVE AN ORDINANCE IN PLACE THAT WE ALL PASSED THAT PROHIBITS THEM FROM LANDING IN PEOPLE'S YARDS.

AND I BELIEVE THAT'S CORRECT, IS THAT I WANTED TO VERIFY THAT.

YEAH, I'LL BRING IT BACK UNDER COMMENTS. ACTUALLY, I RECEIVED THE SAME ARTICLE AND HAD SOME RESEARCH DONE ON IT, AND I BELIEVE THAT WAS YOU. I THOUGHT YOU PASSED SOMETHING TWO YEARS AGO.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE I HAVE THE EXACT ARTICLE WITH ME AND THEN.

BUT I'LL EITHER DISSEMINATE IT BY MAIL OR WE'LL BRING IT UP UNDER COMMENTS, OKAY.

IN THE NEXT MEETING. AND SO THAT, YOU KNOW, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE OF THAT.

AND THEN THERE WAS ANOTHER COMMENT THAT WAS MADE BACK PAST AS OR DO WE HAVE ANY PROTECTION AGAINST THESE VERTICAL HELICOPTERS, ELECTRONIC HELICOPTERS DOING FLIGHT TOURS OVER OUR CITY? KIND OF LIKE WHAT, YOU KNOW, IN MAUI WHERE YOU'VE GOT THE HELICOPTER RIDES, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE NOISY AFFAIRS AS THERE.

DO WE HAVE ANY OR CAN WE EVEN ENTERTAIN ANY PROTECTION FOR HAVING THOSE KINDS OF TOURS? WELL, THERE ALREADY IS SOMEONE AT THE AIRPORT DOING TOURS.

THE REGULAR HELICOPTER. RIGHT. OKAY. I MEAN, CONFIRM THAT.

BUT YEAH, I WAS NOT. YEAH. I WAS NOT AWARE OF THAT.

AND THEN I THINK THAT'LL BE ALL FOR TODAY. THANK YOU.

I'LL BRING UP THE OTHER ON WEDNESDAY. KRISTEN, YOU LOOKED AT ME.

I JUST WANTED TO RAISE ONE POINT, ASK ONE QUESTION.

MR. YOUNG, YOU MAY KNOW THE ANSWER TO THIS. OR IF YOU COULD FIND OUT, I'D APPRECIATE IT.

I ALSO SENT AN EMAIL TODAY TO ERICA WITH THE SAME QUESTION.

DO YOU KNOW WE JUST HAD TWO COMMUNITY MEETINGS BEFORE THANKSGIVING? PUBLIC INPUT SESSIONS RELATING TO THE COMP PLAN.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE. I'D LIKE TO KNOW WHAT THE FINAL COUNT WAS IN TERMS OF PARTICIPATION AT THOSE TWO MEETINGS.

I'M SURE YOU DON'T KNOW THAT OFF THE TOP OF YOUR HEAD. BUT MORE TO THE POINT, DO YOU? DO YOU KNOW WHAT WE HAVE SCHEDULED FOR ADDITIONAL PUBLIC INPUT MEETINGS AT THIS POINT FOR JANUARY, FEBRUARY OR BEYOND? WHAT'S WHAT'S ACTUALLY ON THE CALENDAR? I KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT DIFFERENT OPTIONS AND I, I WASN'T SURE WHAT WE HAD BECAUSE DEPENDING ON THE PARTICIPATION IN NOVEMBER THAT WE HAD AND DEPENDING ON WHAT'S SCHEDULED IN THE NEW YEAR WE MAY WANT TO MAKE AN ADJUSTMENT.

AND TOMORROW OR WEDNESDAY WOULD BE THE LAST CHANCE FOR US TO TO REALLY ACT ON THAT IF WE WISH TO FOR EXAMPLE, ADD SOME MEETINGS. SO THAT THAT'S MY MY QUESTION TO YOU.

YEAH. SO TWO THINGS. I ATTENDED BOTH OF THE MEETINGS.

I DIDN'T STAY FOR THE ENTIRE THING, FOR BOTH OF THEM. BUT MY MY MY ROUGH COUNT COUNT IS ABOUT 110 TO 120 COMBINED.

THAT BEING SAID YEAH, THE NEXT TIME YOU'RE GOING TO SEE IT WAS I DON'T BELIEVE THERE WAS ANYTHING SCHEDULED IN JANUARY.

IT WAS TO BE SOMETIME IN FEBRUARY. YOU WAS ALSO GOING TO BE HAVING THE JOINT PAB AND CITY COUNCIL MEETING IN JANUARY, BUT PUTTING TOGETHER MORE MEETING, YOU KNOW. SO THAT'S WHY I THINK THERE WAS ALREADY A FEBRUARY.

AND. YEAH. AND I THINK THAT'S WHEN YOU WOULD HAVE BEEN DISCUSSING THE REST OF THE CALENDAR.

I'LL CONFIRM THAT. AND SO YOU'RE AND ACTUALLY I'LL HAVE HAVE ERICA.

THAT WAS MY THAT WAS MY WHAT I THOUGHT WAS THE CASE.

THERE WOULD BE NO MEETINGS IN JANUARY THERE, I BELIEVE ARE TWO MEETINGS SCHEDULED IN FEBRUARY.

AND I, I THINK WE THEN SAID THAT WE ALWAYS HAD THE OPTION TO ADD MORE IN MARCH IF WE THOUGHT THEY WERE NEEDED.

THAT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING AS WELL. BUT I'LL CONFIRM THAT WITH ERICA AND THEN, AND I THINK THAT JOINT SESSION CAN IRON OUT IF THERE'S MORE AS WELL.

SO BUT I'LL MAKE SURE YOU HAVE THAT FOR WEDNESDAY.

[05:55:02]

SHOULD THAT BE TO THE DESIRE. SO YEAH. JOINT MEETING IN JANUARY WITH PAB ABOUT THE COMP PLAN.

WELL I KNOW THAT. OKAY. I THOUGHT YEAH BUT OKAY.

BUT BUT BASICALLY WHAT. GIVEN THE COUNCIL SCHEDULE WITH WEDNESDAY BEING OUR LAST MEETING AND THEN BEFORE HOLIDAY BREAK AND THEN WE'RE NOT BACK UNTIL JANUARY 20TH, I THINK IT IS THE THAT THE OTHER THAN WEDNESDAY, IT WOULD BE UNTIL JANUARY THAT WE WOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE ANY FURTHER ADJUSTMENTS TO THE SCHEDULE.

YEAH. AND WE CAN. I DON'T REALLY WANT TO PUBLISH ANYTHING ELSE BETWEEN NOW AND WEDNESDAY, BUT WE CAN HAVE IT SO THAT ERIC IS HERE ON OUR CORRESPONDENCE.

YEAH. I DON'T I'M NOT SAYING WE CAN DO IT IN CORRESPONDENCE.

YEAH. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. BARTON. ONLY THAT A LITTLE OUT OF THE LOOP. SO I HAD NOT HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE BEEN EXPOSED TO THAT VIDEO AND DIGESTING IT ON CAMERA AND FOR THE PUBLIC. MAYBE YOU GUYS MIGHT HAVE GOTTEN A LITTLE MORE REACTION OUT OF ME THAN YOU'RE TYPICALLY USED TO.

SO THAT'S THE CASE. I APOLOGIZE, BUT IT IS WHAT IT IS.

BUT OTHER THAN THAT, ALL'S GOOD. THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER PENMAN.

YEAH, A COUPLE OF THINGS. COACH, AT ONE POINT IN TIME, YOU'RE MIKE.

WE WERE DISCUSSING SOME OUTDOOR DINING. AND AT THAT PARTICULAR POINT IN TIME, YOU SUGGESTED THAT PERHAPS SOMETHING LIKE THAT SHOULD BE ADMINISTRATIVE AS OPPOSED TO COMING BEFORE US.

I THOUGHT THAT WAS A VERY GOOD IDEA, TO BE PERFECTLY HONEST WITH YOU.

AND IF WE COULD FIND A TIME TO TALK ABOUT IT A LITTLE BIT FURTHER, THAT'S AN EASY THING AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED.

LET LET THE STAFF DECIDE AND LET'S MOVE ON RATHER THAN BRING IT BEFORE US.

COACH. MISS LINDA, IF I MAY, THE THE EASIER THAN THAT, I THINK, IS THE MUSIC THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN APPROVED.

AND THEN IT COMES BACK TO US BECAUSE. BUT THERE'S NEVER BEEN ANY COMPLAINTS.

THAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO ME. IT SEEMS LIKE SIMPLE CHECK THE BOXES TO ME.

AND IF SOMEBODY COMPLAINS, IT'D BE DIFFERENT, RIGHT? ANYWAY, BUT THANKS FOR SUPPORTING THAT.

THOSE THINGS THAT MIGHT BE EASIER ELSEWHERE. I WILL, IN ADDITION TO THAT, I WILL TELL YOU THAT I THINK THE SPECIFIC ONE YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT WAS IT WAS ACTUALLY A REDUCTION IN SQUARE FOOTAGE, REDUCTION IN TABLES AND A REDUCTION IN CHAIRS FOR THE OUTDOOR DINING, BUT IT HAD TO BE REAPPROVED. THAT'S THAT SEEMED LIKE A REAL NO BRAINER THAT WE DIDN'T NEED TO MAKE THAT DECISION UP HERE.

BUT YES. SO THERE CERTAINLY ARE CASES AND I'M SURE WE COULD WE COULD FIND WAYS TO TO INCREASE EFFICIENCY AND EFFECTIVENESS WITH THAT, WITH WITH DETERMINING CERTAIN WAYS TO GET THAT DONE.

AND I'M NOT ARGUING BECAUSE IT TAKES TIME FROM US.

I'M, I'M TRYING TO FIND A LITTLE BIT MORE ELASTICITY FOR STAFF.

THAT'S WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR WITH THAT. AND PETITIONERS.

RIGHT. AND PETITIONERS THE PROPERTY NEAR THE GULF.

I WOULD REALLY ADVISE AGAINST THAT BECAUSE OF ITS LOCATION.

LIKE IT OR NOT, THAT BODY OF WATER IS GOING TO GET A LITTLE HIGHER.

MAYBE NOT IN OUR LIFETIME, BUT SOMEBODY'S GOING TO LOOK BACK AT SOME POINT IN TIME AND SAY, MY GOD, WHY DID THEY WHY DID THEY THROW MONEY AT THAT WHEN IT WAS UNDER WELL, IT'S NOW UNDER UNDERWATER.

THAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN. I'M SORRY. COME HELL OR HIGH WATER AND PROBABLY IN OUR LIFETIME, BUT NOT MAYBE IN THE NEXT TEN YEARS.

SO I'D BE A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT IT. INTERESTING TO ME THAT HE'S REDUCED HIS PRICE.

MAYBE SOMEBODY SAID, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO NOBODY WANTS TO BUY THAT CLOSE TO THE GULF.

BUT JUST A THOUGHT. ALSO ON THE OH, ON ON THE DISCUSSION THAT WE JUST HAD ABOUT THE LOBBYIST.

THAT'S SORT OF A SENSITIVE TOPIC. DOES ANYBODY ELSE FEEL LIKE WE SHOULD BE DOING THAT? WE DON'T HAVE TO DO THAT IN THE SUNSHINE, THAT PERHAPS WE SHOULD HAVE A CLOSED SESSION ON THAT AND THEN COME BACK WITH OUR DECISION, OR SHOULD IT BE IN THE SUNSHINE? IT HAS TO BE IN THE SUNSHINE.

YEAH, WE'LL FIND ON THAT. INSTEAD, WE CAN'T DO THAT.

OKAY. I'M SORRY I DIDN'T I DIDN'T PICK UP ON THAT.

NO WORRIES. WE CAN WE CAN ONLY HAVE AN EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR ONE OF TWO REASONS.

EITHER FOR LABOR NEGOTIATIONS PURSUANT TO A SEPARATE STATUTE OR BASED ON AN ANNOUNCEMENT THAT YOUR CITY ATTORNEY MAKES.

[06:00:04]

THANK YOU. I HAVE TO ADMIT, I DIDN'T PICK UP ON THAT.

THAT'S ALL I'VE GOT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. VICE MAYOR.

THANK YOU. THE COMMUNITY HAS FAITH THAT THROUGH OUR ACTIONS, WE DO OUR BEST TO PLACE THE RIGHT PEOPLE IN THE RIGHT JOBS.

THIS EXTENDS TO OUR STAFF AS WELL AS INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS WE HIRE.

WE HAVE A VERY IMPORTANT MATTER. HOUSE BILL 4005 CURRENTLY BEING WORKED ON AT THE STATE LEGISLATURE.

WE ALL WITNESSED JOB PERFORMANCE, WHICH HAS CAUSED ALARMING CONCERN.

DO WE HAVE THE RIGHT PEOPLE LOBBYING ON OUR BEHALF? THERE IS MORE WORK REMAINING ON HB 4005. IF WE ARE MADE AWARE OF ADDITIONAL PERFORMANCE ISSUES FROM THIS INDIVIDUAL.

I SUGGEST WE MOVE QUICKLY, FIRE THIS GUY AND GO WITH THE NEXT CHOICE.

TIME IS NOT A LUXURY WE HAVE IN THIS REGARD. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR.

THANK YOU. ANY FURTHER? MR. MCCONNELL? NOTHING TODAY.

THANK YOU, MR. YOUNG. MARTY CAME IN, SO SHE WANTED TO ADD SOMETHING ON THE COMP PLAN.

I WOULD LIKE TO DEFER TO HER FOR A MOMENT. GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL.

THANK YOU. GARY, I JUST WANTED TO ADDRESS COUNCILMAN KRISTEN'S QUESTION.

THE PAB AGENDA FOR THURSDAY'S MEETING HAS AN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY THAT CONTAINS ALL OF THE METRICS, INCLUDING THE ATTENDANCE AT THE COMP PLAN SESSIONS.

SO THAT'S ALREADY BEEN PUBLISHED AND IT'S INCLUDED IN THE PACKAGE.

AND ALSO, THE SECOND ROUND OF MEETINGS IS SCHEDULED FOR FEBRUARY 12TH.

AND WE'RE GOING TO DO TWO MEETINGS LIKE WE DID LAST TIME. AND THOSE ARE THE REMAINING GENERAL PUBLIC GENERAL PUBLIC SESSIONS.

CORRECT. SCHEDULE. THANK YOU. BUT I WOULD ASK YOU IF YOU HAVE TIME TO LOOK AT THE AGENDA.

THERE'S A LOT OF GOOD INFORMATION IN THERE. SO THANKS.

THANK YOU. ANYTHING ELSE, MR. YOUNG? NO, MA'AM.

I HAVE NOTHING FURTHER. OKAY. I JUST I SPOKE WITH MR. YOUNG BRIEFLY ABOUT OUR CONVERSATION IN THE CAR ABOUT THE PRIORITIES IN STORMWATER.

AND RESPECTFULLY, YES, HE NEEDED THE TIME TO GO AND SEE FROM WHAT FUNDS WE WERE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT THAT.

AND THE QUESTION CAME UP, DO WE NEED TO HAVE A SPECIAL MEETING? SO WE DON'T NEED TO ANSWER THAT NOW. I JUST WANT YOU TO KNOW, I'VE SPOKEN TO MR. YOUNG ABOUT IT. AND AT THIS POINT THE PRIORITIES WILL NOT CHANGE FROM WHAT WE DISCUSSED. AND HE'LL COME BACK TO US. OR MAYBE WEDNESDAY, WE CAN DECIDE WHETHER WE NEED TO CALL FOR A SPECIAL MEETING OR NOT, OR, YOU KNOW, NOW, NO, I ACTUALLY I'M THINKING ABOUT TIMING OF THAT, AND THERE'S JUST NO WAY I'M GOING TO BE PREPARED TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION UNTIL BY WEDNESDAY I HAVE TO HAVE MY MEETINGS. I STILL HAVE A LOT OF, YOU KNOW, AND THEN WE I JUST DOUBT VERY SERIOUSLY THAT WE'RE GOING TO GET TO THE POSITION OF HAVING IT BY JANUARY 21ST. BUT I GIVE ME A LITTLE BIT OF TIME TO TO ASCERTAIN THAT HERE IN THE NEXT WEEK OR SO, AND THEN WE'LL GO FROM THERE. AND MAYBE YOU AND I COULD, LOOK, IF WE NEEDED TO PRESENT IT TO COUNCIL, THEN WE WOULD HAVE A DATE BEFORE THIS COUNCIL LEAVES.

WELL, YEAH, THAT WE CAN, WE CAN, WE CAN CERTAINLY.

OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO GET THAT ON THE RECORD WITH THAT.

YES. CHRISTMAS PARADE TOMORROW. PARDON. OH THANK YOU.

YES. THE CHRISTMAS PARADE TOMORROW, 630. CORRECT.

30 5:00. 630. AND IT'S GOING TO BE ANOTHER FUN YEAR.

SO WHAT'S THE THEME? ANYBODY KNOW THE THEME? SANTA CLAUS? WITH THAT, WE'LL FIND OUT ON WEDNESDAY THAT IT WAS ANOTHER GREAT PARADE IN THE CITY.

SO WE'RE ADJOURNED.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.