[1) CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL] [00:00:05] GOOD MORNING AND WELCOME TO THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL THAT WE ARE NOW BACK IN SESSION ON THIS BEAUTIFUL AUGUST 19TH, 2026. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. COUNCIL MEMBER. BARTON HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER. KRAMER HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER. KROL HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER. PENMAN. HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER. SCHULTZ PRESENT. VICE MAYOR BLANKENSHIP HERE. MAYOR HARTMAN HERE. TODAY, WE ARE HAPPY TO HAVE PASTOR JAMES HENDERSON FROM CELEBRATION BEACH CHURCH, [2) INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE] IF HE'LL COME FORWARD FOR THE INVOCATION AND FOR THE PLEDGE. GOOD MORNING, MADAM MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL. THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME THIS MORNING. GOOD MORNING. LET'S PRAY. GRACIOUS AND LOVING GOD, WE COME BEFORE YOU TODAY WITH GRATITUDE FOR THE BEAUTIFUL CITY OF NAPLES THAT WE LIVE IN, AND FOR THE PRIVILEGE OF CALLING THIS COMMUNITY HOME. WE THANK YOU FOR THE MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL WHO WILLINGLY GIVE THEIR TIME, THEIR ENERGY AND THEIR LEADERSHIP IN SERVICE TO THIS CITY. WE'RE EQUALLY GRATEFUL FOR EVERY CITY EMPLOYEE WHOSE DEDICATION KEEPS US SAFE, BEAUTIFUL, AND STRONG. BLESS EACH ONE OF THEM AND THEIR FAMILIES, AND REMIND THEM THAT THEIR FAITHFUL SERVICE MAKES A MEANINGFUL DIFFERENCE IN THE LIVES OF EVERY PERSON WHO LIVES HERE IN NAPLES. AND LORD, WE ESPECIALLY LIFT UP THOSE WHO RUN TOWARD THE MOMENTS THAT MOST OF US NATURALLY SEEK TO AVOID. OUR POLICE OFFICERS, FIREFIGHTERS, EMTS, PARAMEDICS, EMERGENCY PERSONNEL, AND HOSPITAL STAFF PROTECT THEM AS THEY PROTECT US. GIVE THEM CLEAR MINDS AND MOMENTS OF CRISIS. STEADY HANDS WHEN SECONDS MATTER AND COMPASSIONATE HEARTS FOR EVERY PERSON THAT'S PLACED IN THEIR CARE. LORD, WE PRAY FOR EVERY ELECTED OFFICIAL TODAY THAT YOU'VE ENTRUSTED WITH LEADERSHIP AT THE CITY, COUNTY, STATE, AND FEDERAL LEVELS. WE ASK THAT YOU GRANT THEM WISDOM, THAT YOU GRAB THEM STRENGTH, AND YOU GRANT THEM COURAGE FOR ALL THE CHALLENGES THAT THEY FACE. AND FINALLY, LORD BLESS THE WORK THAT'S GOING TO TAKE PLACE IN THIS ROOM TODAY. MAY EVERY DISCUSSION BE MARKED BY RESPECT, EVERY DECISION BY WISDOM, AND EVERY ACTION BY A GENUINE DESIRE TO SERVE THE PEOPLE OF NAPLES ESPECIALLY WELL. CONTINUE TO BLESS THIS CITY, THOSE WHO LEAD IT, THOSE WHO SERVE IT, AND THE WONDERFULLY DIVERSE COMMUNITY OF PEOPLE WHO CALL IT HOME. WITH GRATEFUL HEARTS AND HOPEFUL SPIRITS, WE ASK FOR YOUR GUIDANCE, YOUR WISDOM, AND YOUR PEACE. AMEN. THANK YOU, PASTOR HENDERSON. PLEASE JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS. ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. [3) SET AGENDA (add or remove items)] GOOD MORNING, MR. YOUNG. GOOD MORNING, MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL. SETTING THE AGENDA. NO CHANGES TO THE AGENDA. BUT I DID WANT TO ANNOUNCE THAT WE HAVE 11 A.M. TIME CERTAIN RELATED TO ITEM 13 A, AND THAT PRESUPPOSES THAT THE LAND USE ITEMS ARE COMPLETE EITHER OTHER. EITHER WAY. OTHERWISE WE WOULD WAIT UNTIL THEY ARE COMPLETE. BUT WE DO HAVE AN ATTORNEY ON THE LINE RELATED TO THAT, THAT ITEM AT THAT TIME. SO THANK YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU. COUNCIL. ANY QUESTIONS? MOTION TO APPROVE THE AGENDA. I MOVED AND SECONDED. I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER PENMAN AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER KRAMER. ALL IN FAVOR? SIGN BY I, I. OPPOSED? THANK YOU. PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. THAT TAKES US TO ANNOUNCEMENTS AND PRESENTATIONS AND WE DO NOT HAVE ANY TODAY. [5) PUBLIC COMMENTS] WHICH TAKES US TO ITEM FIVE, WHICH IS PUBLIC COMMENT. AND IF YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK IN PUBLIC COMMENT, THERE ARE REGISTRATION FORMS IN THE BACK OF THE ROOM THAT CAN BE GIVEN TO THE CLERK. OUR FIRST PUBLIC SPEAKER IS LISA ARNOLD WITH SISTERS IN ARMS. IF YOU'LL JUST COME FORWARD TO THE. YES. JUST STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE. YES, MA'AM. GOOD MORNING, MAYOR COUNCIL MEMBERS. MY NAME IS LISA ARNOLD. I'M A 28 YEAR COMBAT VETERAN OF THE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE AND THE PRESIDENT OF SISTERS IN ARMS OF CAPE CORAL INCORPORATED, WHICH IS A 501 C THREE ORGANIZATION FOUNDED BY WOMEN VETERANS FROM THE AMERICAN LEGION POST 90 IN CAPE CORAL. WE SERVE AS THE VOICE OF FEMALE VETERANS ADVOCATING FOR VA HEALTH CARE NEEDS WHILE EDUCATING AND SERVING THE COMMUNITY TO ENSURE SUPPORT AND RECOGNITION FOR ALL WOMEN WHO HAVE SERVED. WE ARE ALSO DEDICATED TO HONORING THE SERVICE AND SACRIFICE OF WOMEN WHO HAVE SERVED IN THE UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES. ALTHOUGH WOMEN HAVE SERVED AND ANSWERED OUR NATION'S CALL FOR MORE THAN 250 YEARS, THEIR CONTRIBUTIONS HAVE TOO OFTEN BEEN REDUCED TO A FOOTNOTE. [00:05:03] INSTEAD OF CELEBRATED AS AN ESSENTIAL PART OF AMERICA'S MILITARY STORY. AND SISTERS AND SISTERS IN ARMS OF CAPE CORAL IS ON A MISSION TO CHANGE CITIES AND THE CULTURE. I'M HERE TODAY BECAUSE SISTERS IN ARMS OF CAPE CORAL IS LEADING AN EFFORT TO BUILD SOUTHWEST FLORIDA'S FIRST EVER MONUMENT DEDICATED SOLELY TO THE WOMEN WHO HAVE SERVED IN ALL BRANCHES OF THE UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES. AFTER RETIRING FROM MY AIR FORCE CAREER, I NOW CALL BEAUTIFUL CAPE CORAL, FLORIDA HOME. HOWEVER, AFTER A COUPLE OF YEARS OF RESEARCH, I NOTICED THAT IN A CITY THAT LABELS ITSELF A PURPLE HEART CITY, THERE ISN'T A SINGLE OUNCE OF RECOGNITION FOR WOMEN VETERANS. EVEN MORE SURPRISING, I FOUND OUT THAT THERE ISN'T ANY IN ALL OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA. QUITE FRANKLY, IN ALL OF SOUTH FLORIDA. WITH THAT KNOWLEDGE, I, ALONG WITH THE BOARD OF STRONG MILITARY WOMEN, CREATED SIA FCC TO ADDRESS THAT. THE MONUMENT WILL BE LOCATED AT FOUR MILE ECOLOGICAL PRESERVE IN CAPE CORAL. THIS BEAUTIFUL STATUE WILL RECOGNIZE THE COURAGE, SACRIFICE AND SERVICE OF WOMEN VETERANS FROM ALL BRANCHES OF THE UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES, WHILE SERVING AS AN EDUCATIONAL AND INSPIRATIONAL LANDMARK FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS. EACH OF YOU HAVE A PHOTO OF EXACTLY THE MONUMENT THAT WILL BE BUILT. IT WILL LOOK JUST LIKE THAT. THE WHY BEHIND IT ALL. THE MISSION IS NOT JUST DEEPLY PERSONAL TO SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WOMEN VETERANS. APPROXIMATELY 25,000 FEMALE VETERANS WHO LIVE IN SOUTHWEST FLORIDA. BUT TO THE MILLIONS OF WOMEN WHO HAVE SERVED BEFORE AND WILL SERVE IN THE FUTURE. WE ALL HAVE OFTEN IMAGINED A YOUNG GIRL LOOKING AT THE PRESERVE FROM YEARS FROM NOW. SHE SEES A BRONZE WOMAN STANDING THERE. SHE'S ASKING HER PARENTS, WHO IS SHE? HER PARENTS TELL HER THAT SHE'S A STRONG MEMBER WHO SERVED HER COUNTRY AND DEFENDED NATION'S FREEDOM. AND IN THAT MOMENT, THAT LITTLE GIRL SEES HERSELF AS STRONG AND A LEADER IN OUR COUNTRY. TO PUT IT ALL IN PERSPECTIVE, HOW MANY OF YOU HEARD OF PAT TILLMAN, CHRIS KYLE? BUT HOW MANY OF YOU HAVE HEARD OF SHANNON KENT OR LORI PISTOLA OR ISABELLA GONZALEZ, WHO JUST LOST HER LIFE IN IRAN FOR SUPPORTING IRAN? THAT IS THE WHY. SO WHY AM I HERE? I'M HERE TO ASK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT IN THIS ADVENTURE, THIS MISSION, AND I'M HERE TO ASK YOU TO PUT THIS OUT TO YOUR COMMUNITIES. LET THEM KNOW THAT THIS IS FOR THEM. ALTHOUGH IT'S IN CAPE CORAL, IT'S FOR SOUTHWEST FLORIDA. SO I'M JUST HERE TODAY TO SHARE THAT INFORMATION WITH YOU. AND I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME, MISS ARNOLD. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND AND THAT'S SHOCKING. AND THANK YOU FOR TAKING ON THAT TASK TO HONOR WOMEN WHO HAVE SERVED. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I LEFT MY CARDS. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS PENNY TAYLOR. GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS PENNY TAYLOR. I LIVE IN LAKE PARK. WELCOME BACK. AFTER YOUR SUMMER RECESS. MADAM MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL. I HOPE IT WAS A GOOD ONE. TODAY I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE FOUNDATION UPON WHICH WE ARE BUILDING THE 20 YEAR NAPLES 2045 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THAT FOUNDATION IS THE CITY'S VISION PLAN, DEVELOPED THROUGH A BROAD COMMUNITY PROCESS THAT BEGAN IN 2019 AND WAS COMPLETED IN 2020. IT REPRESENTED WHAT THE PEOPLE OF NAPLES WANTED FOR THEIR FUTURE OF OUR COMMUNITY, AND THE CITY COUNCIL MADE IT PART OF THE FRAMEWORK ON WHICH TO BUILD THE NAPLES 2045 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. BUT IN SEPTEMBER 2022. THE UNTHINKABLE HAPPENED. HURRICANE IAN STRUCK NAPLES. IAN WAS SIMPLY NOT ANOTHER STORM. IT PROFOUNDLY CHANGED OUR COMMUNITY. THE HURRICANE FLOODED HOMES AND BUSINESSES. IT DAMAGED INFRASTRUCTURE. IT CHANGED THE WAY MANY RESIDENTS UNDERSTAND THEIR VULNERABILITY AND BEGAN A REBUILDING PROCESS THAT CONTINUES TODAY. AND IAN DID SOMETHING ELSE. IT CHANGED THE CIRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH WE PLAN NAPLES FUTURE. TODAY, FEMA FLOOD RISK INFORMATION AND REQUIREMENTS AFFECT HOW HOMES ARE REBUILT OR EVEN IF THEY CAN BE REBUILT, HOW HIGH THEY MUST BE CONSTRUCTED, AND HOW WE THINK ABOUT FLOODING, STORM SURGE, INFRASTRUCTURE AND RESILIENCE. SO MY QUESTION IS VERY SIMPLE. CAN A COMMUNITY VISION PLAN DEVELOPED IN IN 2019 2020, BEFORE HURRICANE IAN EFFECTIVELY SERVE AS THE FRAMEWORK FOR A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT WILL GUIDE NAPLES UNTIL 2045. OR SHOULD WE THOROUGHLY REEVALUATE THAT VISION PLAN BEFORE RELYING UPON IT AS THE FRAMEWORK FOR OUR 2045 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN? [00:10:03] AND I'M NOT SUGGESTING THAT THAT VISION SHOULD BE DISCARDED. MUCH OF IT MAY REMAIN EXACTLY WHAT THIS COMMUNITY WANTS, BUT HAVE WE ADEQUATELY TESTED ITS ASSUMPTIONS AGAINST NAPLES THAT EXIST TODAY? FLORIDA LAW PROVIDES SOME GUIDEPOSTS. SECTION ONE, 63.3177 OF THE FLORIDA STATUTES REQUIRES THAT MANDATORY AND OPTIONAL ELEMENTS OF A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BE BASED UPON, AND. THIS IS A DIRECT QUOTATION RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE DATA. THE STATUTE CERTAINLY RECOGNIZES THE IMPORTANCE OF COMMUNITY GOALS AND ENVISIONS EXCUSE ME. BUT IT ALSO REQUIRES THE CITY TO REACT APPROPRIATELY TO THE EXTENT NECESSARY TO THE DATA AVAILABLE ON A PARTICULAR SUBJECT AT THE TIME THE PLAN IS ADOPTED, AND SECTION 163.3191 SAYS THAT GOVERNMENTS AND I'M QUOTING, SHALL COMPREHENSIVELY EVALUATE AND AS NECESSARY, UPDATE COMPREHENSIVE PLANS TO REFLECT CHANGES IN LOCAL CONDITIONS. THIS RAISES SEVERAL QUESTIONS. WHAT COULD CONSTITUTE A GREATER CHANGE IN NAPLES LOCAL CONDITIONS THAN HURRICANE IAN? WHAT DID HURRICANE IAN TEACH US ABOUT FLOODING AND STORM SURGE AND INFRASTRUCTURE AND EVACUATION AND REBUILDING AND RESILIENCE LESSONS THAT MAY NEVER HAVE BEEN CONTEMPLATED IN 2019 AND AND 2020. WHAT DOES FEMA INFORMATION AND OTHER POST DATA TELL US TODAY THAT THEY COULDN'T TELL US THEN? AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, IF THESE SAME VISION QUESTIONS OF 2020 WERE ASKED OF NAPLES RESIDENTS TODAY, WHAT WOULD THEIR ANSWERS BE? THIS IS NOT SOMETHING WE SHOULD SPECULATE ABOUT. THE CITY'S OWN DRAFT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SAYS THAT ITS STUDIES AND SURVEYS AND DATA PROVIDE THE TECHNICAL FOUNDATION FOR THE GOALS, OBJECTIVES, POLICIES AND ACTIONS CONTAINED IN THE PLAN. SO BEFORE WE USE A SIX YEAR OLD PRE IAN VISION PLAN AS PART OF THE FRAMEWORK FOR DECISIONS EXTENDING TO 2045, I BELIEVE THERE ARE REASONABLE QUESTIONS FOR COUNCIL TO ASK. HAVE WE TESTED THE ASSUMPTIONS OF THE 2020 VISION PLAN AGAINST NAPLES OF TODAY? HAVE WE FULFILLED OUR LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES IN THIS IN THIS PROCESS? THE ANSWERS TO THESE QUESTIONS NEED TO BE OBTAINED BEFORE THE PLAN MOVES TO ADOPTION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I'D SAY THAT WHAT YOU. I WOULD HOPE THAT YOU WOULD ALSO SHARE WITH US IN WRITING OR ONE ON ONES ON WHERE YOU THINK OR WE COULD STRENGTHEN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BECAUSE NOBODY KNOWS IT. LIKE YOU MIGHT KNOW IT. AND THEN I'LL JUST SAY THAT I DON'T THINK THE VISION HAS CHANGED AT ALL, BUT I DO THINK THAT THE POLICIES WITHIN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UNDER EACH SECTION HAS CHANGED. SO YEAH, I DON'T THINK ANYBODY THAT THE WHOLE POINT IS, IS NOT BEING MIAMI AND STAYING THE WAY THAT WE ARE. BUT WHILE WE ARE RENOVATING AND COMING UP TO DATE. SO I DO PLAN TO DELIVER MY COMMENTS AND, AND WHAT I'VE SPOKEN TO YOU TODAY TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND NOT TO BE ARGUMENTATIVE, BUT WE DON'T KNOW, MA'AM, WE DON'T KNOW. WE WON'T KNOW UNTIL WE ASK. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANY FURTHER PUBLIC COMMENT? AND BY THE WAY, I SPOKE FOR MYSELF ON THAT ONE. DONNA. ADAM. GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS DONNA AND I'M IN ZIP CODE 34102. THIS IS IN REGARDS TO THE SPECIAL EVENTS. WELL, AT FIRST GLANCE, WHEN WE SEE AN EVENT FEATURING A LOCAL BOOKSTORE AND A NONPROFIT ENCOURAGING CHILDREN TO READ, MOST OF US AUTOMATICALLY APPLAUD, DONATE, AND VOTE YES. BUT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO ENCOURAGE THE CITY AND CITIZENS TO DO THEIR DUE DILIGENCE. INITIALLY, I WAS EXCITED TO SEE THE OPENING OF BOOKS ON THIRD. UNFORTUNATELY, AFTER VISITING THE STORE AND SEEING A SELECTION AT THE ENTRANCE FOR YOUNG READERS ON WHAT LOOKED LIKE A OCCULTISM AND WITCHCRAFT, [00:15:06] MY EXCITEMENT TURNED TO CONFUSION. MY CONFUSION LED ME TO GO TO BOOKS ON THIRD'S WEBSITE TO SEE WHAT OTHER BOOKS THEY WERE PROMOTING. WHAT I FOUND WAS A BIT SHOCKING FOR BABIES AND TODDLERS FROM 0 TO 3. THEY RECOMMEND BOOKS LIKE ANTI-RACIST, BABY AND A IS FOR ACTIVISTS. THESE BOOKS FEATURE A PERSON RAISING UP A COMMUNIST FIST AND BLM, SELF-PROCLAIMED MARXIST ORGANIZATION THAT PROMISES THE BREAKDOWN OF TRADITIONAL FAMILIES IN WESTERN CIVILIZATION AND THE YOUNG ADULT SECTION. THEY PROMOTE BOOKS LIKE BEYOND THE GENDER BINARY. THIS BOOK IS ANTI-RACIST. THE BLACK FRIEND ON BEING A BETTER WHITE PERSON, TRANS HISTORY AND A NUMBER OF WITCHCRAFT BOOKS FOR PARENTS. THEY RECOMMEND RAISING TRANS KIDS, HOW TO RAISE AN ANTI-RACIST, HOW TO RAISE A FEMINIST SON, AND A NUMBER OF ANTI-CHRISTIAN AND WITCHCRAFT BOOKS. IRONICALLY, THEY ALSO FEATURE BOOKS LIKE DUMBING DOWN OF AMERICA, RAISING CRITICAL THINKERS AND ANXIOUS KIDS, ANXIOUS PARENTS. SO WHY AM I BRINGING THIS TO THE ATTENTION OF CITY COUNCIL AND THE COMMUNITY? BECAUSE JUST LIKE PEOPLE TEACHING CLASSICAL EDUCATION HAVE AN AGENDA, PEOPLE PROMOTING CRITICAL THEORY HAVE AN AGENDA. THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO IS CULTIVATION VERSUS DESTRUCTION. CLASSICAL EDUCATION IS BUILT ON THE PREMISE THAT THERE IS AN OBJECTIVE REALITY, A STANDARD OF TRUTH, GOODNESS AND BEAUTY, AND A HERITAGE OF WISDOM THAT HAS BEEN PASSED DOWN THROUGH GENERATIONS OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION. MARXIST IDEOLOGY, OFTEN LABELED AS ANTI-RACIST OR SOCIAL JUSTICE. EDUCATION IS ROOTED IN CRITICAL THEORY. IT DOES NOT SEEK TO TRANSMIT A HERITAGE. IT SEEKS TO DISMANTLE ONE. CLASSICAL EDUCATION TREATS THE STUDENT AS AN APPRENTICE TO THE TRUTH. IT ASSUMES THAT THERE ARE TIMELESS REALITIES, VIRTUES, LOGIC, AND LAWS OF NATURE THAT EXIST INDEPENDENT OF OUR POLITICAL TIMES. IT ASKS THE STUDENT TO GROW IN WISDOM. CRITICAL RACE THEORY TREATS THE STUDENT AS A POLITICAL SUBJECT. IT ASSUMES THERE IS NO OBJECTIVE TRUTH, WHICH IS WHY THEY BELIEVE MEN CAN BE WOMEN. IT DOES NOT SEEK TO FORM A VIRTUOUS CITIZEN, BUT A RADICALIZED ACTIVIST. WHEN PEOPLE PROMOTE CRITICAL RACE THEORY, THEY SEEK TO DIVIDE CITIZENS ALONG RACIAL LINES AND UNDERMINE THE TRADITIONAL FAMILY VALUES OF OUR COMMUNITY. IF YOU WANT AN EXAMPLE, LOOK AT THE CHAOS AND DIVISION IN CITIES LIKE NEW YORK, SAN FRANCISCO, AND PORTLAND, WHERE THIS MARXIST IDEOLOGY HAS TAKEN HOLD TO SEE THE END RESULT. I ENCOURAGE BOOKS ON THIRD TO REFLECT ON WHAT THEY ARE PROMOTING AND UPHOLD THE VALUES STATED ON THEIR WEBSITE, SUCH AS BEING A WELCOMING AND INCLUSIVE PLACE FOR BOOK LOVERS INSTEAD OF DIVIDING PEOPLE BASED ON RACE, RELIGION AND SEXUAL ORIENTATION. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO REMIND THEM THAT UNDER THE US FEDERAL CIVIL RIGHTS LAW, DISCRIMINATION PROTECTIONS APPLY TO ALL PEOPLE REGARDLESS OF RACE, SEX, RELIGION AND THAT INCLUDES WHITE, CHRISTIAN, HETEROSEXUAL WOMEN AND MEN. I ASKED CITY COUNCIL STAFF TO REVIEW EVENT APPLICATIONS CAREFULLY AND AVOID BUSINESSES AND ORGANIZATIONS PROMOTING IDEOLOGIES THAT DIVIDE THE COMMUNITY. I'LL ALSO HAND THESE IN TO THE CLERK AS EVIDENCE OF WHAT THEY'RE PROMOTING. OKAY. THANK YOU. NO FURTHER PUBLIC COMMENT. MADAM CLERK. OKAY. SIR, DO YOU HAVE A PUBLIC COMMENT? I DO, AND I JUST READ THAT ON NUMBER EIGHT ON THE DOCKET. AND I DIDN'T PUT ANYTHING IN THERE. SO I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE GOING TO SKIP ME OR NOT. OH, SO IT WOULD BE FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA. SO YES, WE'LL PUT YOU ON PUBLIC COMMENT. YOU CAN FILL IT IN AFTERWARDS IF YOU'LL JUST COME, IF YOU'LL COME FORWARD. SORRY. YES, SIR. HELLO. SO IF YOU'LL JUST STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD AND YOU HAVE THREE. MY NAME IS JOHN COX. I'VE LIVED IN NAPLES FOR 68 YEARS. I'VE BEEN THROWING A HALLOWEEN PARTY FOR 37 YEARS IN LAKE PARK. THERE'S BEEN A LITTLE BIT OF CONFUSION ABOUT HOW LATE I CAN HAVE MY PARTY TILL I'VE ASKED TO HAVE IT TILL 10:00. AND THE REASON BEING IS BECAUSE THE KIDS COME BY AND TRICK OR TREAT FROM LIKE IT GETS SUNSETS AT 7:00 AND THE KIDS COME BY TRICK OR TREAT, THEIR PARENTS COME. THEN THE KIDS GO HOME AND THE PARENTS COME BACK AND WE PLAY MUSIC BY REQUEST TILL 12:00. WHEN I'M LOOKING AT YOUR BYLAWS AND SUCH, WHEN I READ THE INFORMATION ON THE. ON THE SPECIAL PERMIT FOR FOR NOISE ORDINANCES AND STUFF LIKE THAT, IT SAYS ON THAT THAT I NEED TO QUIT MY MUSIC BY 10:00 DUE TO SECTIONS 2237. WHEN I GO BACK AND I LOOK THROUGH ALL YOUR ORDINANCES AND STUFF I SEE [00:20:03] HERE. MOST OF THIS STUFF'S ABOUT LEAF BLOWERS AND BUSINESSES MAKING NOISE. THERE'S VERY LITTLE ABOUT A PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL. A LOT OF IT IS ABOUT BUSINESSES THAT HAVE LIVE ENTERTAINMENT AND LIKE RESTAURANTS, LOUNGES. I'M A PRIVATE ENTITY. IT SAYS HERE. IT SAYS HERE ORDINANCE ON 2022. AND THEN I DON'T KNOW WHAT ALL THIS MEANS. 14, SEVEN, SEVEN, NINE, IT SAYS. FOR INDOOR ENTERTAINMENT, WHICH DOESN'T PERTAIN TO ME, IT SAYS HOURS OF OUTDOOR LIVE ENTERTAINMENT WILL BE DETERMINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND SHALL NOT EXTEND 10 P.M. SUNDAY THROUGH WEDNESDAY AND 12 P.M. NIGHT, MIDNIGHT ON THURSDAY THROUGH SATURDAY. THIS YEAR, HALLOWEEN FALLS ON A SATURDAY AND IT'S A RELIGIOUS HOLIDAY. I HAD THIS GIRL NEXT DOOR THAT USED TO SIGN MY PETITION. I'D. I'D HAVE EVERYBODY IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD SIGN SOMETHING THAT SAID THAT THEY KNOW I'M HAVING A PARTY. THEY'RE WELCOME TO COME TO IT. THE CITY COUNCIL WANTS ME TO INFORM YOU SO THAT YOU'RE NOT SURPRISED WHEN YOU HEAR THE MUSIC. AND THERE WAS A GIRL ACROSS THE STREET THAT SIGNED MY MY LETTER OF ACCEPTANCE EVERY YEAR. AND THEN I ASKED HER, I SAID, JOANIE, I SAID, ARE YOU THE ONE THAT KEEPS CALLING THE POLICE ON ME AROUND 10:00 EVERY TIME I HAVE A PARTY? AND SHE SAYS, YES, JOHN, I AM. AND I SAID, WELL, WHY, JOANIE, WE'VE BEEN NEIGHBORS FOREVER. SHE SAID, WELL, JOHN, I'M A CHRISTIAN AND I DON'T LIKE PAGAN HOLIDAYS. I SAID, JOANIE, THIS IS HALLOWEEN. IT'S BEEN AROUND FOR 22,000 YEARS, AS LONG AS CHRISTIANITY. NOVEMBER 1ST IS ALL SAINTS DAY. THIS IS ALL. DOES THAT MEAN I'M OVER? YOU HAVE ONE MINUTE? YES. I DIDN'T KNOW I WAS TIMED. ANYWAY, IT CLEARLY SAYS IN THIS DOCUMENT HERE THAT I CAN HAVE ENTERTAINMENT TILL 12:00, AND I CERTAINLY HOPE THAT I CAN HAVE ENTERTAINMENT TILL 12:00. I'VE BEEN HAVING THIS PARTY FOREVER. I'VE GOT 50 SIGNATURES FROM EVERYBODY IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD ALL AROUND MY HOUSE. NOT ONE PERSON THAT I KNOCKED ON THEIR DOOR SAID, NO, I OBJECT TO YOU HAVING MUSIC TILL 12:00. NOT ONE KNEE LAKE PARKING. EVERYBODY COMES TO MY PARTY. EVERYONE'S THERE. EVERYONE LOVES IT. IT'S NOT FOR PROFIT. IT'S FOR CHILDREN AND MY FRIENDS AND NEIGHBORS. PLEASE LET ME HAVE MY PARTY AS I PLANNED AND HAVE THE MUSIC UNTIL 12:00. AND SO YOU'RE ASKING THE COUNCIL TO CONSIDER THAT? YES, MA'AM. I'M HOPING THAT YOU WILL. AND IT STATES RIGHT HERE THAT THAT'S NOT BEYOND THE REALM OF YOUR RULES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. SO COUNCIL THAT IF TO HONOR THAT REQUEST WOULD BE THAT THAT ITEM WOULD HAVE TO BE PULLED FOR DISCUSSION AFTER BECAUSE IT'S IN THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WE CAN DISCUSS IF ANYONE CHOOSES TO PULL ITEM EIGHT B EIGHT. OKAY. NO, WE'RE GOING TO GO TO THE CONSENT AGENDA. AND IF ANYONE CHOOSES. OKAY. MADAM MAYOR CAN I MAKE A SUGGESTION. YES. IF WE ARE GOING TO DO THAT WHEN WE ASK FOR IT TO BE PULLED, COULD COULD WE ALSO BE SPECIFIC ABOUT WHICH ONES WE'RE GOING TO DISCUSS? SO THERE'S 17 ITEMS ON THERE. AND WHILE I SUPPORT HAVING THE DISCUSSION AND BECAUSE I DID RECEIVE A MESSAGE FROM MR. COX WHILE I WAS IN THE BUDGET HEARING, HE PROVIDED THE SIGNATURES. AND YOU, AS YOU AND I DISCUSSED YESTERDAY, THERE ARE VERY DIFFERENT SECTIONS OF THE CODE, BUT I RESPECT THE REQUEST AND HAVING IT. I JUST DIDN'T KNOW IF WE WANTED TO REVISIT ALL 17 OF THEM, BECAUSE THAT THAT ITEM WERE COMBINED WITH MULTIPLE EVENTS. THAT'S ALL. THANK YOU MA'AM. AND WE COULD IF ANYONE CHOOSES TO PULL. AND BY THE WAY, THANK YOU, MR. YOUNG FOR SHARING THAT INFORMATION BECAUSE I WAS MORE INFORMED ON YOU COMING TO COUNCIL THAT THE DIRECTION WOULD BE THAT WE BE SPECIFIC ON ANY ITEM WITHIN THE CONSENT AGENDA THAT WOULD BE PULLED. AND THEN WE CAN DISCUSS THOSE ITEMS IF IT'S MORE THAN ONE INAPPROPRIATE TIME. OKAY. YES, MA'AM. OKAY. WITH THAT THAT CONCLUDES PUBLIC COMMENT ITEM FIVE. [00:25:01] MOVING TO THE APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. [APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA] YES. VICE MAYOR? YES, I'D LIKE TO PULL ITEM EIGHT A NUMBER ONE. THE BOOKS ON THIRD EVENT. OKAY. ANY OTHER ITEMS WISH TO BE PULLED OR. ITEMS ON. A DAY. OKAY, OKAY. I'M SORRY. YEAH. EIGHT A ONE. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO PULL EIGHT B EIGHT FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION. OKAY. EIGHT B EIGHT AND 8B18A1. THANK YOU. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION COMMENTS. IF NOTHING ELSE, MADAM MAYOR, I MOVE. WE APPROVE THE REMAINDER. REMAINDER OF THE CONSENT AGENDA EXCEPT ITEMS A, A ONE AND EIGHT B EIGHT, WHICH WILL HAVE FURTHER DISCUSSION ON SECOND. OKAY. I HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. PULLING EIGHT A ONE AND EIGHT, B EIGHT BY VICE MAYOR AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER KRAMER. ALL IN FAVOR SIGNED BY I, I OPPOSED OKAY. THANK YOU COUNCIL THAT TAKES US TO. ITEM NINE AND A FEW MINUTES ONLY TWO ITEMS. MAYOR. WE CAN PROCEED WITH THEM HERE IF YOU'D LIKE. SO WE'RE GOING TO GO TO ITEM TEN, WHICH WOULD BE THE ITEMS PULLED FROM CONSENT AGENDA. [10) ITEMS PULLED FROM CONSENT AGENDA (If Needed)] GOOD MORNING, MR. MERRITT. GOOD MORNING. TRYING TO GET TO THE ITEM HERE. OKAY. SO, LOOK, WE WERE DOING ITEM EIGHT ONE, CORRECT? THE NAPLES ITINERARY FESTIVAL BOOKS ON THIRD. YES, SIR. YOU WANT TO GOOD MORNING. DANIELLE. SPECIAL EVENTS AND MARKETING SUPERVISOR. THE FIRST EVENT IS THE NAPLES LITERARY FESTIVAL. IT IS. THE APPLICANT IS BOOKS ON THIRD. THEY ARE NOT A NONPROFIT. THE EVENT DATE IS FEBRUARY 7TH, 2027. THE EVENT LOCATION IS ON SITE. THE EVENT HOURS ARE. THE SET UP TIME IS ON FEBRUARY 6TH FROM 4 P.M. TO 12 A.M. THE EVENT TIME WILL BE FROM 6 A.M. TO 9:30 A.M. FOR THE FIRST PART OF IT, AND THEN FROM 9:30 A.M. TO 9:00 P M. THE TAKE DOWN TIME WILL BE FROM 9 P.M. TO 12 P.M. ON FEBRUARY 7TH, AND THEN AGAIN ON FEBRUARY 8TH FROM 6 A.M. TO 9 A.M. ESTIMATED ATTENDANCE IS 500 PEOPLE. THERE WILL BE AMPLIFIED SOUND, THERE WILL BE ALCOHOL, THERE WILL BE TENTS, AND THERE WILL BE SANITARY FACILITIES. APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED 120 DAYS PRIOR TO THE EVENT DATE, AND THERE IS NO OUTSTANDING BALANCE. COUNCIL APPROVAL IS REQUIRED DUE TO AMPLIFIED SOUND. THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR US? AND WE'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER. BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THE IS THE PETITIONER. THE PETITIONER IS IN THE AUDIENCE PRESENT. NO, I DON'T THINK SO. VICE MAYOR? YEAH. JUST BECAME AWARE OF THESE CONCERNS THIS MORNING DURING PUBLIC COMMENT AND WOULD LIKE TIME TO CONSIDER THOSE AND MAYBE TALK TO THE EVENT ORGANIZER. SO MY SUGGESTION IS WE JUST CONTINUE THIS TILL THE, I THINK OUR NEXT MEETING SEPTEMBER 3RD. AND WE HAVE, IF WE HAVE SPECIAL EVENTS ON THE AGENDA, THEN. SO WE'LL HAVE IT ON THE SORRY, SEPTEMBER 2ND. BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW ENOUGH NOW, I JUST HEARD COMMENTS I WOULD WANT TO FOLLOW UP ON AND TALK TO THE ORGANIZER ABOUT BEFORE WE MADE AN INFORMED DECISION. YEAH. THE, SO THE SPECIAL EVENTS WILL HAVE ON THE SECOND MEETING IN SEPTEMBER. [00:30:01] THAT'S TWO WEEKS FROM TODAY, ROUGHLY. IT WILL BE SEPTEMBER 16TH, OVER TWO WEEKS FROM. IF YOU SAID SEPTEMBER 2ND OR 16TH WAS THE NEXT SCHEDULED FOR SPECIAL EVENTS. THE EVENT IS SCHEDULED FOR FEBRUARY OF 2027, SO I BELIEVE. SO THERE'S TIME. OKAY. TIME PERSPECTIVE. YOU HAVE IT. ALL RIGHT. SO THAT WOULD BE MY SUGGESTION AND REQUEST IS JUST TO CONTINUE IT TO THE NEXT SPECIAL EVENTS DISCUSSION. SO WE HAVE A CHANCE TO FOLLOW UP ON THOSE CONCERNS EXPRESSED BY A RESIDENT. DO I HAVE A MOTION TO CONTINUE OR. I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY HAS AN OBJECTION TO THAT. THEN I WOULD MOVE THAT WE CONTINUE CONSIDERATION OF ITEM EIGHT A ONE TILL IT SAYS SEPTEMBER 16TH MEETING. I'LL SECOND THAT. OUT OF RESPECT FOR THE VICE MAYOR. OKAY. I HAVE A MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE OF EIGHT, A ONE TO SEPTEMBER 16TH. AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER KRAMER. ALL IN FAVOR? SIGNED BY I OPPOSED. OKAY. COUNCIL. THANK YOU. PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. OUR NEXT ITEM, MR. MAYOR, IS EIGHT B EIGHT. THE NEXT EVENT IS THE HALLOWEEN COSTUME PARTY. THE APPLICANT IS JOHN COX. IT IS A NOT A NONPROFIT. THE EVENT DATE IS OCTOBER 31ST, 2026. THE EVENT LOCATION IS 1040 13TH STREET NORTH. THE SETUP TIME IS FROM 3 P.M. TO 5 P.M. THE EVENT TIME IS FROM 5 P.M. TO 12 A.M. THE TAKE DOWN TIME IS FROM 12 A.M. TO 12:30 A.M.. ESTIMATED ATTENDANCE. ATTENDANCE IS 100 PEOPLE. THIS IS A PRIVATE EVENT. PARKING WILL BE IN THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD AREA. THERE ARE NO STREET CLOSURE REQUESTS. THERE WILL BE AMPLIFIED SOUND. THERE WILL BE ALCOHOL. THERE WILL NOT BE ANY TENTS. AND THE APPLICANT DID SUBMIT THE APPLICATION. 120 DAYS PRIOR TO THE EVENT DATE. AND THERE IS NO OUTSTANDING BALANCE AND I'M SORRY, COUNCIL APPROVAL. COUNCIL APPROVAL IS REQUIRED DUE TO AMPLIFIED SOUND. THANK YOU. DISCUSSIONS. I GUESS MAYBE CLARITY WHAT THE AMPLIFIED SOUND IS. I MEAN YEAH. OH, WAIT. I'M SORRY SIR. YOU CAN COME FORWARD TO THE PODIUM IF. YOU ARE. IF YOU'LL COME FORWARD AND NOT HAVE TO BE ON THE MICROPHONE. YES, IT'S A BAND. AMPLIFIED SOUND, A BAND. IT'S WITHOUT YOUR QUESTION. I DON'T HEAR VERY WELL. I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THE AMPLIFIED A BAND. YEAH, I'VE HAD THE SAME BAND FOR 20 YEARS. A BAND. YEAH. AND WE. AND WE'LL WE'LL QUIET IT DOWN. YOU KNOW, IF ANYBODY ASKS, IT'S EVERYBODY IN LAKE PARK IS THERE. I DON'T KNOW WHO IN THE WORLD WOULD EVEN CALL, EXCEPT THERE'S ALWAYS SOMEBODY. SOME QUIET LIFE LIVING A QUIET LIFE OF DESPERATION THAT DOESN'T LIKE ANYONE ELSE HAVING FUN. THERE'S ALWAYS ONE. THERE'S ALWAYS ONE. YES. THANK YOU SIR. NOW WE'RE GOING TO GO INTO CONVERSATIONS. IF YOU'LL JUST STAY RIGHT THERE IN CASE THERE'S A QUESTION FOR YOU, SIR. COUNCIL MEMBER KRAMER, THIS IS FOR STAFF. HOW LONG HAS THIS BEEN GOING? I DON'T THINK I HAVE THE EXACT ONE. THIS IS. IT'S ON REPEAT. SPECIAL EVENTS. SO ITS 38TH ANNUAL. I'M SORRY. IF YOU'LL COME TO THE MICROPHONE. OH, YEAH. 38TH ANNUAL. I COULDN'T HEAR A QUESTION. I REALLY DON'T HEAR WELL. 38TH ANNUAL HALLOWEEN PARTY. WHAT WERE THE PARAMETERS FOR THE FIRST 36 YEARS? WE WON'T COUNT LAST YEAR. YEAH. I MEAN, I WOULD HAVE TO PULL IT UP. OBVIOUSLY ANY OF THE EVENTS THAT ARE SUBMITTED, THE THEY'RE EXPECTED TO FOLLOW ANY CITY ORDINANCES. SO IF IT'S IF THERE'S A NOISE ORDINANCE THAT'S IN EFFECT, THEN IT WOULD THEY WOULD HAVE TO FOLLOW THE NOISE ORDINANCE. BUT THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE A BETTER QUESTION FOR MAYBE POLICE DEPARTMENT OR CODE. I'M NOT SURE WHICH ONE WAS. WELL, THAT'S MY QUESTION THEN. WHAT ORDINANCES SHOULD WE BE FOLLOWING? WELL, OKAY, WAIT, LET ME THANK YOU. AT LEAST IN MY OPINION, WHAT IS TRANSPIRED IN THE PAST. I THINK MR. COX INDICATED IT BY HIS OWN STATEMENTS IN THE OPENING, IS, IS THAT EVERY NOW AND THEN THERE IS SOMEBODY THAT COMPLAINS WHEN THE MUSIC'S BEEN PASSED AND THE CODE HAS BEEN IN PLACE FOREVER. SO WHAT HAS HAPPENED VERSUS WHAT IS IN THE CODE ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. AND SO, YOU KNOW, AND WHEN YOU HAVE A SPECIAL EVENT, AND AGAIN, I'LL REFER YOU TO THE PAGE IN ITEM FOUR, [00:35:06] I BELIEVE IT IS ON PAGE TWO WHERE THEY CHECK A BOX AND SAY THEY UNDERSTAND THAT AMPLIFIED SOUND IS TO BE TURNED OFF. IF I WOULD BE REMISS IF I DIDN'T SIT HERE AND SAY THAT GETS PUSHED IN LOCATIONS THROUGHOUT THE CITY ALL THE TIME. SO THE POINT THAT I'M MAKING IS, IS FOR ANYONE CAN SIT HERE AND SAY, HAVE THEY DONE IT PAST 10:00? YES. HAVE WE RECEIVED THE COMPLAINTS? YES. IN THIS CASE, THE COMPLAINT CAME IN EARLY AND SAID, WELL, THEY ALWAYS DO IT. AND DANIELLE WROTE TO MR. COX AND SAID, JUST AS A REMINDER, HERE'S WHAT THE CODE SAYS. AND MR. COX THEN IN MY UNDERSTANDING, SAYS, WELL, IS THERE A WAY FOR ME TO GET RELIEF FROM THAT, EITHER THROUGH THE CITY MANAGER OR COUNCIL? AND THAT'S WHAT HE'S APPEALING TO DO TODAY. SO AND SO, COACH OR MR. KRAMER, I APPRECIATE THE QUESTION, BUT IT WOULD BE REMISS TO BURY MY HEAD IN THE SAND AND SAY HE'S NEVER GONE PAST TEN, BECAUSE BY HIS OWN ADMISSION, THAT'S OCCURRED AND AND SO ON. SO I HOPE I ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION APPROPRIATELY, BUT THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I THOUGHT. I JUST WANTED IT TO BE THAT CLEAR. AND, AND I'VE ALWAYS PUT ON MY APPLICATION THAT THAT WAS MY REQUEST TO PLAY TILL 12. THE, THE VEIL BETWEEN THE LIVING AND THE DEAD IS THE THINNEST AT 12 A.M. ON HALLOWEEN NIGHT, THE MORNING BEFORE SIR ALL SAINTS DAY. I DIDN'T ASK YOU A QUESTION WITH RESPECT. SO LET ME JUST TELL YOU THIS I DON'T CARE. I WANT EVERYBODY TO FOLLOW OUR CODE. IT'S WHY WE HAVE ONE. NOPE. I DIDN'T ASK YOU A QUESTION. THANK YOU SIR. CLARIFICATION. WHAT'S THE CODE? IS IT? IT'S TILL TEN. I HAVE. WAIT WAIT WAIT WAIT. OH, I THOUGHT YOU ASKED ME. NO, I'M ASKING STAFF. YEAH. SO THE IT SAYS IN ORDINANCE SECTION 22-37. IT'S 10:00 PM. SO THE WEEKENDS VERSUS WEEKDAYS. NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE, BUT AGAIN, I'M NOT I DON'T SPECIALIZE IN ENFORCEMENT OF THE CODES OR ANYTHING, BUT I CAN TELL YOU THAT IT'S REALLY JUST THE SOUND. THE EVENT CAN CONTINUE ON ALL THE WAY TILL 12. I THINK THE CODE ENFORCES THE SOUND. SO NOBODY I DON'T THINK ANYBODY'S TRYING TO END THIS EVENT AT TEN MR. BARTON AND THE SECTION IS REFERRING TO. HE IS CORRECT WHEN HE MADE HIS STATEMENT. THAT SEEMS TO ALL BE GEARED TOWARDS BUSINESS. THE SECTION HE IS SPEAKING SPECIFICALLY TO IS IN YOUR BUSINESS DISTRICTS, WHERE YOU HAVE INDOOR AND OUTDOOR ENTERTAINMENT, AND YOU SET A SCHEDULE AS TO WHEN THEY'RE GOING TO BE. AND THAT'S IN IN AS A CONDITION AND A TERM WITHIN THE APPLICATION FOR THE AMPLIFIED SOUND TO BE CONSISTENT. WHEN IT COMES TO SPECIAL EVENTS, IT'S DEFINED BY A SEPARATE SECTION, AND THEREFORE IT IS STEADFAST IN THE SPECIAL EVENTS, WHAT THAT IS, AND IT DOESN'T DEVIATE. BUT IT WOULD ALSO BE REMISS IF SAID YOU DON'T HAVE AMPLIFIED SOUND AND BUSINESS COMMUNITIES AND OTHER AREAS THAT EXIST UP TILL MIDNIGHT AND SO ON, AS YOU KNOW. SO I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THE SECTIONS OF THE CODE THAT ARE GOVERNING IT. THANK YOU. TO CLARIFY ONE STEP FURTHER COUNCIL CAN MAKE A CHANGE IF WE CHOOSE TO ALLOW IT TO GO TILL 12. I BELIEVE YOU CAN AS LONG AS I MEAN, I, I AGREE, I'M JUST I GOT A QUESTION. SO WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE WITH THIS GIVEN A RESTAURANT THE MIDNIGHT TO HAVE THEIR PARTY. AND HERE WE HAVE A PRIVATE CITIZEN WHO'S BEEN DOING THIS FOR 38 YEARS, VOLUNTEERING TO DO A NICE EVENT FOR HIS COMMUNITY. YOU KNOW, WHAT'S THE PROBLEM HERE? I MEAN, WE ALLOW IF WE IF WE DO IT FOR RESTAURANTS, WHY WOULD WE DO IT FOR HIM? MR. COUNCIL MEMBER, IT'S BECAUSE OF THE CODE. AND THE CODE STATES DIFFERENTLY FOR COMMERCIAL VERSUS RESIDENTS. BUT AS AS I WAS TRYING TO EXPLAIN, WE CAN MAKE THAT CHANGE IF WE CHOOSE. BUT HE'S FOLLOWING THE CODE, AND THAT'S WHY THE GENTLEMAN, MR. COX, IS HERE TO ASK US FOR THAT WAIVER. I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT BUT. AND IF WE WANT TO DISCUSS IT AT ANOTHER TIME, WE CAN MAYBE THERE'S SOME CONDITIONS WE COULD PUT ON AS FAR AS. CAN YOU TURN THE AMPLIFIERS OFF AT 10:00 AND STILL PLAY. IS THAT WHAT WOULD THAT BE CONSIDERED? THAT'S NOT AMPLIFIED THEN. RIGHT. IS THAT A POSSIBILITY? I DON'T BELIEVE SO. I BELIEVE THAT THE BAND NEEDS THE AMPLIFIERS AND STUFF TO PLAY THEIR MUSIC, THAT WE COULD TURN IT DOWN. WE COULD. THE BAND PARKS ALL THE WAY IN THE BACK OF MY PROPERTY WITH. WHEN THE BAND STOPS, EVERYBODY'S GOT TO MOVE ALL THEIR CHAIRS, THEY PULL IN, THE PARTY STOPS. I WAS SHUT DOWN LAST YEAR AT 1015 IN THE PARTY WAS OVER, PERIOD. IT SAYS RIGHT HERE, THANK YOU. WEDNESDAY, 12 MIDNIGHT, THURSDAY THROUGH SATURDAY. THIS IS YOUR. YEAH, WE'RE THAT'S FOR COMMERCIAL. [00:40:05] BUT BUT WE'RE TRYING TO I'M I'M RAISING A QUESTION LIKE, YOU KNOW, WE CAN GIVE HIM. DOES THIS MAKE SENSE? I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW. I MEAN, I KNOW IF I COULD TALK TO YOUR I CAN BE COACHED UP. OKAY. SO I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. MY QUESTION IS, IS THERE A WAY TO KEEP THE AMPLIFIED SOUND THAT DOESN'T DISTURB THE. CAN YOU DO BOTH? CAN IT NOT BE LOUD ENOUGH SO THAT IT DOESN'T TRAVEL ACROSS THE STREET OR DOWN OR DOWN, WHEREVER IT'S TRAVELING TO BOTHER WHOEVER IT'S BOTHERING, LIKE. AND THEN AND THEN I GUESS WHAT WE NEED, THEN THEY'RE GOING TO MAKE A PHONE CALL AND SAY, THE PARTY'S STILL GOING AND IT'S TEN, TEN, OH ONE, AND THEN THE POLICE HAVE TO SHOW UP. AND THEN AND THEN WE'LL KNOW WHAT'S WHAT. THAT'S MY GUESS. AM I CORRECT IN THAT? I WOULD SAY THAT STAFF CAN ADMINISTER ANYTHING THAT YOU DECIDE, BUT IF YOU'RE IF THERE IS A POLICY THAT YOU WISH TO MERGE THE TWO SECTIONS TOGETHER, WE MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO BRING IT BACK TO A FUTURE AGENDA AND DEAL WITH THAT ON ITS OWN. BUT WHAT I WOULD SAY IS, IS IT FROM AN ENFORCEMENT PERSPECTIVE, THE MORE IF YOU DELINEATE ALL OVER THE PLACE, THEN THE CODE DOESN'T HAVE ANY LEGS. SO YOU CAN DO I SUPPORT WHATEVER YOUR DECISION IS. I ALSO SAY THAT IF YOU BELIEVE THAT SATURDAYS SHOULD HAVE A DIFFERENT TIME, THEN LET'S TALK ABOUT WHAT THE CODE CHANGE WOULD BE SO THAT WE ARE WE AT LEAST BUILD CONSENSUS THAT WE CAN ENFORCE AND MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO YOU ON SPECIAL EVENTS, AND I'LL LEAVE IT AT THAT AT ANOTHER TIME. CORRECT. BUT RIGHT NOW WE'RE GOING TO DISCUSS WHAT'S BEFORE US. CAN I SAY ONE THING, MA'AM? PLEASE? JUST MR. MAYOR, YOU REFERENCED DO YOU HAVE A SUBSECTION OF WHERE THE 10 P.M. REQUIREMENT COMES FROM? NOT NOT TO PUT YOU ON THE SPOT BECAUSE PERSONALLY, I DON'T SEE A 10 P.M. REQUIREMENT. WHAT I SEE IS TWO DIFFERENT VARIATIONS OF NOISE LEVELS FROM 7 TO 10 AND THEN FROM 10 TO 7. SO COUNCIL CANNOT ALLOW SOMEONE TO VIOLATE THE NOISE ORDINANCE. SO WHETHER MUSIC GOES TILL TEN OR FROM 10 TO 12, THEY STILL HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THE DECIBEL LEVELS IN THE CODE. AND IF THEY DON'T, WE WILL CITE THEM AND ISSUE NOISE COMPLAINTS. SO DON'T KNOW IF THAT HELPS THE CONVERSATION. BUT YES, IT DOES. THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I'M GETTING AT IS THAT YOU COULD HAVE WHEN YOU'RE NOT. AS LONG AS YOU'RE NOT VIOLATING THE CODE, THERE'S NO ISSUE. SO I DON'T SEE A PROHIBITION RIGHT NOW. THAT'S I SEE IT THE SAME WAY AS YOU. YEAH. THANKS. SO IF IT'S NOT AMPLIFIED AFTER TEN HE'S, YOU CONTINUE TO PLAY. I MEAN, EVEN IF IT IS, EVEN IF IT IS AMPLIFIED, BUT IT DOESN'T VIOLATE THE CODE. THERE'S NO HARM, NO FOUL AS FAR AS I CAN READ IT. SO ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? I'VE GOT A REAL QUICK QUESTION FOR MR. COX. I KNOW THAT YOU SAID YOU GOT YOU TALKED TO YOUR NEIGHBORS AND YOU AND YOU GET THEIR FEEDBACK OR THEIR SIGNATURES ON A FORM THAT SAYS, HEY, I'M HAVING THIS PARTY AGAIN. SIGNATURES FOR EVERYBODY WITHIN EARSHOT OF MY RESIDENTS. AND I COULD HAVE GOTTEN EVERYONE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAD I KEPT GOING. I APPRECIATE YOU. ONE PERSON SAID, NO. THAT'S WHERE I WAS GOING WITH THAT. I APPRECIATE YOU MAKING THAT EFFORT, FIRST AND FOREMOST, TO BE CONSIDERATE OF YOUR NEIGHBORS. THAT'S IMPORTANT. AND MY QUESTION WAS, DID YOU GET ANY NEGATIVE FEEDBACK FROM THEM? NOT ONE, NOT ONE PERSON. AND I KNOCKED ON DOORS RELENTLESSLY. NOT ONE NEGATIVE FEEDBACK. NOT NOT ONE OBJECTION. IT'S FOR MY NEIGHBORS. THEY'RE ALL THERE. MADAM MAYOR, I'M READY TO MAKE A MOTION UNLESS SOMEBODY HAS SOME ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION. GO FOR IT. I'D LIKE TO GRANT THIS PETITION TO PLAY AMPLIFIED SOUND TILL 12 A.M.. MR. COX, YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND, THOUGH, THAT OUR NOISE ORDINANCES WILL STILL BE IN PLAY. SO EVEN WE'RE ASSUMING THAT WE PASS THIS AND ALLOW YOU TO PLAY AMPLIFIED MUSIC UNTIL MIDNIGHT. YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND THE POLICE STILL CAN'T SHOW UP AND SAY, HEY, YOU'RE PLAYING IT TOO LOUD SO YOUR NEIGHBORS CAN STILL COMPLAIN ABOUT IT. BUT MY, MY, MY MOTION WOULD BE TO ALLOW HIM TO PLAY THE AMPLIFIED MUSIC UNTIL 12 FOR THIS EVENT. I'LL SECOND THAT. I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER BARTON AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER CRAMER. ANY DISCUSSION BRIEFLY ABOUT HOW MANY OF YOUR COMMUNITY ARE GOING TO BE ATTENDING THIS EVENT? CHILDREN, I HAVE A THOUSAND CHILDREN. I GIVE AWAY LIKE $600 WORTH OF CANDY. WELL, I'M TRYING TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION AS FAR AS GUESTS, ADULTS, MAYBE 30, 40. OKAY. THANK YOU. AND IF I'LL GIVE YOU A LITTLE INSIGHT BECAUSE IT'S RIGHT. WE'VE BEEN THERE. IT IS LIKE LAKE PARK FOR THOSE THAT DON'T KNOW LIVE ELSEWHERE IN THE CITY. IT'S THE CITY FOR 30 YEARS OF WHERE TO GO GET CANNED. I MEAN, IT REALLY IS. AND IT'S CENTERED AROUND THIS EVENT. IT'S UNBELIEVABLE. FAMILIES, FAMILIES TRAVEL TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD FROM OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS FOR KIDS. CAN CAN CAN. YES. TRICK OR TREAT IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. THAT IS A REALLY, IT'S REALLY FUN. IT'S, IT'S A GREAT EVENT FOR HALLOWEEN. THEY COME FROM OUT OF TOWN. THEY PARK IS LIKE VICTORIA PARK. I WOULD STOP THERE, MISTER COX. OKAY, I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. [00:45:01] MADAM CLERK, PLEASE PULL THE COUNCIL. VICE MAYOR BLANKENSHIP YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. MARTIN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. KRAMER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. SCHULTZ A YES. THANK YOU. AND IT'S APPROVED. AND THANK YOU, I THINK. THANK YOU. MEMBER BARTON EXPLAINED IT PERFECTLY. OKAY. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. OKAY. THAT CONCLUDES THE ITEMS PULLED FROM OUR CONSENT AGENDA. NOW THAT'S MOVING TO ITEM 11 LAND USE MATTERS. [11.A) A Resolution Determining Conditional Use Petition 26-CU3 Pursuant to Sections 46-34, 58-833, and 58-838 of the Code of Ordinances, City of Naples, to Allow for Construction of a New Modernized Clubhouse and Amenity Center Buildings to Exceed the Maximum Height of 30 Feet for Principal Buildings in the Public Service Zoning District; and to Allow for Consideration of a Parking Needs Analysis to Reduce the Required Minimum Number of Parking Spaces Pursuant to Section 50-107 of the Code of Ordinances, City of Naples, for Property Owned by Royal Poinciana Golf Club, Inc., and Located at 1600 Solana Road, More Fully Described Herein; Providing for Scrivener's Errors; Providing Findings and Conditions; and Providing an Effective Date.] MR. MCCONNELL. THANK YOU. MAYOR. A RESOLUTION DETERMINING CONDITIONAL USE PETITION 26-CU3 PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 46, 34, 58, A 33 AND 58, 838 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, CITY OF NAPLES TO ALLOW FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW MODERNIZED CLUBHOUSE AND AMENITY CENTER BUILDINGS TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 30FT FOR PRINCIPAL BUILDINGS AND THE PUBLIC SERVICE ZONING DISTRICT, AND TO ALLOW FOR CONSIDERATION OF A PARKING NEEDS ANALYSIS TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED MINIMUM NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES. PURSUANT TO SECTION 5107 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES. CITY OF NAPLES FOR PROPERTY OWNED BY ROYAL POINCIANA GOLF CLUB, INC. AND LOCATED AT 1600 SOLANO ROAD. MORE FULLY DESCRIBED HEREIN, PROVIDING FOR SCRIVENER'S ERRORS, PROVIDING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS, AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THANK YOU, MADAM CLERK. PLEASE SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU'RE ABOUT TO GIVE. BE THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH. YES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. WE HAVE COUNCIL DISCLOSURES. STARTING WITH COUNCIL MEMBER. CARL. TALK TO STAFF AND OUR LAST MEETING INTERACTION ABOUT IT. COUNCIL MEMBER BARTON. IT'S THE SAME AS LAST TIME. NOTHING ADDITIONAL, BUT WHAT I, WHAT I DID WAS SPEAK WITH STAFF AND TO GET SOME CLARITY ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM. AND I ALSO MET WITH PETITIONER'S AGENTS ON SITE. AND JUST FOR THE RECORD. COUNCIL MEMBERS, THE RECORD DOES NOT REFLECT THE PAST. UNDERSTOOD. IT'S. I GUESS MY POINT WAS I DIDN'T HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL. BUT BUT WHAT I DID HAVE WAS THE SAME AS LAST, WHICH WAS WHAT I JUST SAID. THANK YOU. SO, MAYOR, WHAT WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW IS SUPPLEMENTING THE PRIOR DISCLOSURE. SO ANYTHING FROM THE DATE THIS WAS LAST HEARD TILL NOW? OKAY. NOTHING ADDITIONAL THEN. OKAY. BECAUSE THE RECORD WAS ALREADY. YEP. OKAY. SO NOTHING. ADDITIONAL CONTRADICTION. KRAMER, I HAVE SPOKEN WITH PETITIONER'S AGENT. AND STAFF SINCE THE LAST MEETING. BRIEFLY, JUST FOR CLARIFICATION. THANK YOU. SCHULTZ. I HAVE MORE OF A HOUSEKEEPING ITEM HERE AS FAR AS YOUR PARTICIPATION IN THIS ISSUE. WE HAD A SPLIT COUNCIL THREE THREE YOUR VOTE. YOU SAID YOU'D BE ABLE TO BE OBJECTIVE ON SOMETHING. AND PERSONALLY, I FIND IT INCONCEIVABLE THAT YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO WALK INTO THAT CLUB, THE COUNTRY CLUB, AND NOT HAVE EVERYBODY LOOK AT YOU IF YOU VOTED NO. I THINK THAT'S YOU. VOTING NO IS AN IMPOSSIBILITY IN MY JUDGMENT. SO I'M JUST ASKING YOU RESPECTFULLY, PLEASE RECUSE YOURSELF FOR THIS ITEM. OKAY. AND DISCLOSURES. THANK YOU FOR THAT. REQUEST DISCLOSURES. THE PETITIONERS REACHED OUT TO ME. I COULDN'T MAKE THE SCHEDULE WORK BECAUSE PART OF THE STATE. SO THEY DID MAKE AN EFFORT TO TO VISIT. THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER NO ADDITIONAL CONTACT. SO BUT YOU WEREN'T HERE THE FIRST TIME I MET WITH THE PETITIONER'S AGENT AT THE CLUB ORIGINALLY, AND I THINK I DISCLOSED THAT EARLIER. YOU'RE LOOKING FOR CONTEMPORARY DISCLOSURES. I THINK YOUR DISCLOSURE WAS SATISFACTORY BECAUSE I BELIEVE YOU WERE ABSENT FOR THE FIRST MEETING. YES. SO YOU WERE ACTUALLY DISCLOSING ALL OF YOUR CONTACTS YOU'VE HAD. FAIR ENOUGH. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER. I MEAN, VICE MAYOR, SINCE THE LAST HEARING, I DID MEET WITH THE PETITIONER AND THEIR AGENTS ON SITE WHERE THEY ANSWER SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT MY CONCERNS ABOUT HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING. AND THEY SHOWED ME ADDITIONAL ARCHITECTURAL DESIGNS AND DIAGRAMS THAT WE DIDN'T THAT WERE MORE MAGNIFIED THAN WHAT WE HAD IN THE MATERIAL. SO IT WAS EASIER FOR ME PERSONALLY TO SEE. AND THEY SHARED SOME STATISTICS ON SIZE AND HEIGHT, WHICH I'VE ASKED THEM TO SHARE IN THE MEETING TODAY SO THAT EVERYBODY HAS THE SAME INFORMATION. ADDITIONALLY, I DID HAVE SOME CONVERSATIONS WITH STAFF SINCE THE LAST MEETING ON THIS. OKAY. I HAVE NOT HAD FURTHER CONTACT WITH THE PETITIONER OR THE PETITIONER'S AGENT. AND AS FAR AS I DID GO TO THE ETHICS DIRECTOR AND ASKED FOR AN OPINION ON WHETHER [00:50:03] I HAD A CONFLICT. I AM NOT A VOTING MEMBER OF THIS CLUB, SO I DID NOT VOTE FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT. AND IF YOU DON'T KNOW ME AND DON'T THINK THAT I CAN STAND UP AND GO INTO A ROOM WHERE I. MAYBE THERE'S SOME ADVERSE SITUATIONS AND MAKE A GOOD AND FAIR JUDGMENT AND DECISION. THEN YOU DON'T KNOW ME WELL, BUT WITH THAT, I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE MIGHT BE AN APPEARANCE OF A CONFLICT OF INTEREST. AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO. COUNCILMEMBER SCHULTZ AND I ASKED THE CITY ATTORNEY BECAUSE WE DID. AND I'LL ASK IT PUBLICLY IN MORE DETAIL. DID WE HAVE A VOTE LAST TIME THAT WAS ON THE RECORD, OR WAS THE ITEM PULLED THREE THREE DIED. THERE WAS A MOTION TO CONTINUE THE ITEM. WE ACTUALLY HAD TWO VOTES. WE HAD A VOTE TO APPROVE IT, WHICH DIED THREE THREE. AND THEN SUBSEQUENTLY WE HAD A MOTION TO CONTINUE, WHICH PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. THANK YOU. SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, I DO NOT THINK THAT THERE IS A CONFLICT FOR MY VOTING. HOW COULD YOU VOTE NO? WELL, I COULD VOTE NO EASILY. OF COURSE YOU COULD. BUT I'M NOT GOING TO ARGUE WITH THAT BECAUSE THIS IS A HEARING. TO HEAR WHAT THE PETITIONER AND THE PETITIONERS AGENTS ARE REQUESTING. SO I COULD VOTE NO. THANK YOU SIR. WITH THAT WITH THAT MAYOR. AND I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY FOR THE RECORD. SO NONE OF YOU SHOULD COME IN HERE WITH A PRECONCEIVED VOTE. RIGHT. EVERY VOTE YOU MAKE IS BASED ON THE CRITERIA THAT YOU'RE EVALUATING AND THE EVIDENCE PROVIDED, WHICH IS TESTIMONY, SUBMITTALS, COMPETENT, SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE FROM YOUR EXPERTS, COMPETENT, SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE FROM THEIR EXPERTS WANT TO MAKE THAT CLEAR. I DO THINK WE SHOULD INCLUDE THE EMAIL FROM MR. MORRIS MORAWSKI INTO THE RECORD, BECAUSE IT IS CLEAR THAT YOU DO NOT HAVE A CONFLICT. HOWEVER, DUE TO THE FACT THAT THIS IS A QUASI JUDICIAL PROCEEDING, YOU MAY ABSTAIN IF YOU BELIEVE THAT THERE IS AN APPEARANCE OF A CONFLICT. IF THERE WERE A CONFLICT, YOU WOULD BE REQUIRED TO ABSTAIN. SO I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT FOR THE RECORD AS WELL. BUT THAT'S ALL I WANTED TO ADD. THANK YOU MAYOR. WELL, I'VE HAD SEVERAL, NOT JUST COUNCIL MEMBER SCHULTZ, BUT I HAVE HAD MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC ASK IF THE APPEARANCE OF A CONFLICT FOR MY VOTE. CAN YOU. YEAH. SO OPINE ON THAT. YES. SO AS A COUNCIL MEMBER, YOU ARE REQUIRED TO VOTE. PERIOD. THERE ARE ONLY TWO SITUATIONS IN WHICH YOU DON'T VOTE. ONE OF THEM IS YOU HAVE A CONFLICT. SO YOU'RE REQUIRED TO ABSTAIN. THE OTHER ONE IS YOU MAY ABSTAIN. SO IT'S A CHOICE DUE TO THE FACT THAT THIS IS QUASI JUDICIAL IN NATURE BASED ON THE APPEARANCE OF A CONFLICT. BUT THE RULE IS YOU'RE REQUIRED TO VOTE UNLESS ONE OF THOSE THINGS APPLY. SO TO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, THE APPEARANCE OF A CONFLICT DOESN'T REQUIRE YOU TO ABSTAIN. IT GIVES YOU THE OPTION TO. HOPEFULLY THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION. IF THERE WAS A VIOLATION OF CHAPTER 112, MY ADVICE TO YOU WOULD BE PLEASE REMOVE YOURSELF FROM THE DAIS. YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO VOTE, BUT THAT IS NOT WHAT'S OCCURRING HERE. BASED ON THE EMAIL THAT WE RECEIVED FROM MR. MORAWSKI. OKAY. WITH THAT, WE ARE MOVING FORWARD WITH THE PETITIONER'S AGENT. CAN I ASK A QUESTION ABOUT PROCESS? SO DO WE HAVE TO REPEAT EVERYTHING THAT HAPPENED BEFORE? OR WE CAN ASSUME WE HEARD IT. IT WAS ON THE RECORD. HOPEFULLY MRS. PENNIMAN HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW IT. AND SO TODAY IS JUST ANYTHING NEW OR DO WE HAVE TO HEAR EVERYTHING ALL OVER AGAIN? GREAT QUESTION. SO FOR THE RECORD, MR. PENNIMAN, YOU DID HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THE PRIOR HEARING. OKAY. AND YOU FEEL LIKE YOU CAN YOU'RE CONFIDENT THAT YOU UNDERSTOOD WHAT WAS PRESENTED AND YOU CAN MAKE A DECISION ON THE MERITS? YES, SIR. OKAY. THAT BEING SAID, WE ACTUALLY DID CLOSE THE RECORD. LAST TIME WE WERE ACTUALLY IN DELIBERATION. I DO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO MAYBE JUST GIVE A BRIEF SYNOPSIS OF WHERE WE LEFT OFF, BECAUSE THERE WAS SOME ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS THAT WE WERE ADDED TO. BUT YES, I UNLESS YOU ALL WANT, THERE'S NO NEED TO START FROM THE BEGINNING BECAUSE ESSENTIALLY THAT RECORD IS BEING CONTINUED TO TODAY. SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE RECORD OF THE MEETING, IT INCLUDES ALL OF THE FIRST MEETING AND ALL OF WHAT HAPPENS TODAY. [00:55:04] I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION ON THAT. IN REFERENCE TO VICE MAYOR'S DISCLOSURES. I KNOW THAT HE GOT SOME INFORMATION FROM THE PETITIONER THAT WE CAN WE CAN HAVE THAT PRESENTED TO US. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. OKAY. YOU CAN ASK QUESTIONS. YOU CAN HAVE SUPPLEMENTS. BUT I MEAN, YOU CAN EVEN TAKE PUBLIC COMMENT AGAIN IF YOU WANT. OKAY. BUT ULTIMATELY, TO ANSWER HIS QUESTION, WE SPENT TWO HOURS ON THIS ALREADY. THERE'S IT'S UP TO YOU. BUT YOU'RE ALLOWED TO NOT SPEND TWO HOURS FROM THE BEGINNING. AGAIN, I'M NOT ARGUING FOR KEEPING THE TWO HOURS ON THE DOCKET TODAY. BY BY THAT COMMENT, MR. MCCONNELL, IF THERE ARE PUBLIC SPEAKERS, YOU CAN FILL OUT THE FORMS IN THE BACK OF THE ROOM AND GIVE THEM TO THE CLERK. AND WITH THAT, GOOD MORNING, MR. YOVANOVITCH. QUESTION. YES, MR.. SCHULZ. COUNCIL MEMBER. SCHULTZ. THAT'S FINE. ERICA. EXCUSE ME. DID THEY SUBMIT A NEW PLAN. THEY DID NOT. SO YOU'RE BACK WITH THE SAME THING. OKAY. THANK YOU. SAME REQUEST. THANK YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING. FOR THE RECORD BEHALF OF. IS THIS ON? OKAY. IT'S RED. I ALWAYS GET CONFUSED. ON BEHALF OF ROYAL POINCIANA JUST BRIEFLY, WE HAVE TWO REQUESTS IN FRONT OF YOU. ONE IS A CONDITIONAL USE TO GO TALLER THAN 30FT. AND THE SECOND IS FOR THE PARKING NEEDS ANALYSIS. WE DID HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO MEET WITH VICE MAYOR BLANKENSHIP, AND HE REQUESTED THAT WE PROVIDE SOME ADDITIONAL DETAILS BASED UPON THE INFORMATION WE PREVIOUSLY SHOWED AT THE PRIOR HEARING. I DON'T WANT THERE TO WE'RE NOT INTRODUCING NEW INFORMATION. WE JUST SHOWED HIM ON A LARGER SCALE EXACTLY WHAT WE SHOWED YOU ALL IN THE PAST. SO OUR INTENTION IS TO. BASICALLY HAVE DENNIS AND ALI, WHO'S THE PRESIDENT OF THE CLUB, BASICALLY PROVIDE THE INFORMATION THAT WE SUBMITTED OR DISCUSSED WITH MR. VICE MAYOR BLANKENSHIP. I WILL THEN BRIEFLY GO OVER AGAIN HOW WE SATISFIED EACH OF THE CONDITIONAL USE CRITERIA, WHICH IS WHAT WE'RE HERE TO DISCUSS, WHETHER OR NOT WE MEET THE ADDITIONAL THE INDIVIDUAL CRITERIA. AND THEN THAT'S IT PROBABLY TEN MINUTES INSTEAD OF TWO HOURS TO GO OVER THE INFORMATION AGAIN IN SUMMARY FORM. AND WITH THAT, WE'LL BE AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. BUT WITH THAT, I'LL INTRODUCE DENNIS, AND I'M GOING TO JUST PUT UP JUST FOR PUTTING IN CONTEXT KIND OF THAT EXHIBIT. SO YOU ALL REMEMBER EXACTLY WHERE THIS IS IN CONTEXT OF THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY. THANKS, RICHARD. GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING, MADAM MAYOR, VICE MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS. THANKS FOR BEING HERE. I WANT TO START BY JUST SAYING THANK YOU TO THOSE COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO TOOK THE TIME TO MEET WITH US AT OUR P. AND BETTER UNDERSTAND OUR PROJECT. I THINK IT WAS HELPFUL FOR ALL OF US. THERE'S FOUR POINTS I'D LIKE TO TO MAKE THIS MORNING. THE FIRST IS OUR PROPOSAL IS VERY CONSISTENT WITH THE CHARACTER, THE QUALITY, AND THE LONG TERM VISION OF THE CITY OF NAPLES. WE START WITH THAT. SECOND, OUR PROPOSAL HAS BEEN THOUGHTFULLY DESIGNED TO RESPECT THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS AND MINIMIZE ANY POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO THOSE COMMUNITIES. THIRD, OUR PROPOSAL WILL ENHANCE THE OVERALL PROPERTY WHILE PRESERVING THE TIMELESS ELEGANCE AND DISTINCTIVE CHARMS OF THE NAPLES COMMUNITY. AND FINALLY, WE BELIEVE THE PETITION COMPLETELY SATISFIES THE CITY'S REQUIREMENTS FOR CONDITIONAL USE AND REPRESENTS A RESPONSIBLE AND WELL PLANNED ENHANCEMENT. I THINK YOU ALL KNOW ABOUT OUR PROPERTY. ARP WAS FOUNDED IN 1969. IT ENCOMPASSES 360 ACRES IN NORTH NAPLES, INCLUDING 218 HOLE GOLF COURSES. THE PROPERTY DURING THIS TIME PERIOD HAS BEEN EXTENSIVELY LANDSCAPED OVER THE PAST 57 YEARS TO PROVIDE FOR SUBSTANTIAL VISUAL SCREENING FROM ALL SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS. INTERESTINGLY, THE AVERAGE AGE OF OUR GOLF MEMBERS IS 77, AND THE AVERAGE AGE OF OUR SOCIAL MEMBERS IS 81. AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, ARP IS MUCH MORE THAN JUST A GOLF CLUB. OUR MEMBERS PARTICIPATE IN TENNIS, PICKLEBALL CARDS AND A WIDE RANGE OF OTHER SOCIAL ACTIVITIES. AND TO THIS POINT, WE HAVE OVER 400 BRIDGE PLAYERS. PRETTY REMARKABLE. WE HAVE OVER 160 FULL AND PART TIME EMPLOYEES WITH EMPLOYEE TURNOVER OF LESS THAN 7%, WHICH IS BEST IN CLASS IN THE HOSPITALITY INDUSTRY. [01:00:03] NOW, FINALLY, AT THE JUNE 17TH MEETING, THERE WAS A QUESTION REGARDING THE NUMBER OF MEMBERS THAT WE HAVE AT THE CLUB. SO LET ME CLARIFY. OUR BYLAWS ACTUALLY GOVERN THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF MEMBERS WE CAN HAVE, WHICH IS 1045. AND THIS IS NOT CHANGED FOR OVER 20 YEARS. A MEMBER VOTE WOULD REQUIRE WOULD BE REQUIRED TO ACTUALLY CHANGE OUR EXISTING BYLAWS. SO WE WANT TO BE CLEAR ON THAT. TODAY WE HAVE 1042 MEMBERS. SO JUST BELOW THE MAXIMUM LIMIT OF OUR BYLAWS. LET ME TURN TO THE HIGHLIGHTS OF OUR CURRENT DESIGN AND RESPOND TO A COUPLE QUESTIONS THAT WERE RAISED AT OUR LAST MEETING. THE OVERALL DESIGN OBJECTIVE WAS TO CREATE A CLUBHOUSE OF ENDURING QUALITY AND UNDERSTATED ELEGANCE, WHILE PRESERVING THE DISTINCTIVE CHARACTER THAT MAKES NAPLES SO SPECIAL. IMPORTANTLY, I THINK WE SHARED AT OUR LAST MEETING. THE DESIGN REDUCES THE CLUBHOUSE FOOTPRINT BY ABOUT 20%. THE SMALLER FOOTPRINT CLEARLY ALLOWS US TO FURTHER ENHANCE THE SURROUNDING NATURAL ENVIRONMENT THAT WE CURRENTLY OCCUPY. AND AS I JUST MENTIONED ABOUT OUR DEMOGRAPHICS, OUR DESIGN BETTER ACCOMMODATES THE DEMOGRAPHICS AND THE NEEDS OF OUR MEMBERSHIP. AT OUR MEETING ON JUNE 17TH, I BELIEVE THERE WAS SOME UNDERSTANDABLE CONFUSION ABOUT THE OVERALL HEIGHT OF THE PROPOSED DESIGN. SO LET ME CLARIFY OUR DESIGN. 100% OF THE OCCUPIED SPACE WILL BE BELOW 44FT. LET ME REPEAT THAT 100% OF THE OCCUPIED SPACE WILL BE BELOW 44FT. TO BE CLEAR, THE PORTIONS OF THE BUILDING ABOVE 44FT ARE NON OCCUPIED SPACES. THIS WOULD ONLY INCLUDE ATTIC AS WELL AS ROOF WALLS. IN FACT, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE PROPOSED DESIGN OF THE CLUBHOUSE, AS WELL AS THE CART BARN AND VICE MAYOR. THESE ARE THE PERCENTAGES WE SHARED WITH YOU THAT DAY. 25% OF THE BUILDING IS BELOW 42FT. 52% IS AT 50FT, 10% IS ABOVE 50FT AND BELOW 60FT, AND 12% IS AT 60FT. SO CLEARLY, WE HAVE MULTIPLE ROOF DESIGNS THAT THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE. I WOULD LEAVE YOU WITH THE THOUGHT THAT THESE VARYING ROOF HEIGHTS ARE ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS OF THE DESIGN RATHER THAN THE ADDITION OF ADDITIONAL OCCUPIED SPACE. THE LARGER ROOF FORMS ALSO SERVE A PRACTICAL PURPOSE. THE MANSARD ROOF FORMS ALLOW ROOFTOP MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT TO BE SCREENED FROM THE GROUND LEVEL, WHICH WE THINK IS VERY IMPORTANT. THE PROJECT, AS WE MENTIONED, INCORPORATES MODERN STORMWATER IMPROVEMENTS AND SUBSTANTIALLY MORE ENERGY EFFICIENT SYSTEMS, FOR EXAMPLE, WILL REPLACE 75 INDIVIDUAL AIR HANDLERS WITH CHILLERS ON THE ROOF, WHILE ALSO PRESERVING ALL THE MATURE LANDSCAPING SURROUNDING THE CLUB. AND WE WILL CERTAINLY CONTINUE OUR AUDUBON STEWARDSHIP. TAKEN TOGETHER, THE DESIGN IS ATTRACTIVE. WE BELIEVE IT'S APPROPRIATELY SCALED AND LANDSCAPED, COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY AND CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY'S ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS AND LONG TERM VISION. SO BEFORE I CONCLUDE, LET ME ASK RICH TO COME BACK UP AND TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT HOW WE SATISFY THE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS FOR CONDITIONAL USE. RICH. IN YOUR INFORMATION PACKET, YOU HAVE THE ORIGINAL STAFF REPORT TO THE PAB WHERE YOUR STAFF. WHAT'S THAT? THERE'S. I THINK WE NEED TO CLEAR UP A LITTLE DISCREPANCY. SO BOTH IN THE PARKING NEEDS ANALYSIS THAT IS ON RECORD. AND THEN ALSO THE TESTIMONY FROM THE LAST MEETING POINTS TO A MAXIMUM MEMBERSHIP OF 1022 MEMBERS, AND THEN YOUR PREVIOUS SPEAKER JUST SAID 1042 MEMBERS. RIGHT. AND WE'RE CORRECTING THAT. AND I CAN HAVE JIM BANKS COME UP. IF YOU HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT LET ME LET ME ADDRESS ALL THAT, ERICA. AND THEN, OKAY, WE'LL GO FROM THERE. ARE WE CORRECTING THE PARKING NEEDS ANALYSIS? WE ARE, WE ARE. YES WE ARE, WE ARE CORRECT. THE PARKING NEEDS ANALYSIS SAID 1022. RIGHT. WE HAVE 1042 TODAY WITH A MAXIMUM OF 1045. SO WE'RE GOING TO ASK YOU, WHEN WE GET TO THAT PART OF THE RESOLUTION, TO CHANGE THE CAP THAT YOU GUYS PUT IN AT 1022 TO 1045, REMEMBER WE HAD THIS DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT DO OUR BYLAWS SAY? OUR BYLAWS SAY 1045 MEMBERS. BUT YOUR PARKING NEEDS ANALYSIS IS ALL DEVELOPED AROUND 1022. AND I HAVE JIM BANKS HERE TO BE ABLE TO SAY THAT THE 98 ADDITIONAL SPACES WE HAVE UNDER OUR PARKING NEEDS ANALYSIS WILL MORE THAN SATISFY THE INCREASE FROM 1022 TO A MAXIMUM OF 1045. MAYOR. [01:05:01] THIS IS WAY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT I ANTICIPATED. THEY'RE GOING TO MODIFY THEIR PARKING NEEDS ANALYSIS ON THE RECORD RESPECTFULLY. YOU KNOW, WE'LL LEAVE IT 1022 I DON'T KNOW, IT'S NOT EVEN THAT. I JUST DON'T KNOW IF STAFF'S HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO EVEN REVIEW THE ANALYSIS THAT WE'RE ABOUT TO HEAR. WE'RE NOT. WE'RE GOING TO LEAVE IT AT 1022. OKAY. LEAVE YOUR RESOLUTION AT 1022. I DON'T WANT TO COME BACK. I DON'T WANT ANOTHER CONTINUANCE. IF WE ULTIMATELY NEED TO GO TO 1045, WE'LL GO THROUGH THIS PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS AGAIN IF IT'S THAT BIG OF A DEAL. BUT LET ME LET ME LET ME GO THROUGH THE INDIVIDUAL CRITERIA. REMEMBER, IF I CAN, ON THAT POINT, YOU ALL ASK US WOULD BE WILLING TO CAP THE NUMBER. IT WAS NEVER AN ISSUE AT ALL THROUGH THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS AND WE HAD DISCUSSION, WHAT DOES WHAT DO OUR BYLAWS SAY? CANDIDLY, I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THE BYLAWS SAID. WE WENT BACK AND REVIEWED THE BYLAWS. THERE ARE 1045. BUT IN RESPECT TO THE CITY ATTORNEY AND TO YOUR STAFF, THERE WAS NEVER A CAP IN ANY OF THE DOCUMENTS IN THE PAST. WE WERE ASKED TO AGREE TO IT. WE SAID, SURE, WE DON'T WANT ANOTHER CONTINUANCE. SO IF WE HAVE TO LIVE WITH 1022, WE'LL LIVE WITH 1022. IN THE RESOLUTION IT WAS NOT IN THE INITIAL RESOLUTION. IT WAS ADDED SINCE THAT TIME PERIOD. BUT LET'S GO THROUGH THE CRITERIA. THERE ARE TEN CRITERIA THAT APPLY TO THE CONDITIONAL USE. AS I BEGAN TO SAY, YOUR STAFF ANALYZED THE TEN CRITERIA IN THEIR REPORT, WHICH IS PART OF YOUR RECORD. SO I'M JUST GOING TO SUMMARIZE THOSE TEN CRITERIA AND HOW WE MEET THEM. THE FIRST CRITERIA IS THE INGRESS AND EGRESS TO THE SITE. THE INGRESS AND EGRESS IS STAYING EXACTLY LIKE IT IS. THERE'S NO CHANGES TO THE INGRESS AND EGRESS AND THE THE CLUBHOUSE AND GOLF COURSE HAVE OPERATED FINE FOR ALL OF THESE YEARS. WE DID A PARKING ANALYSIS FOR A REDUCTION OF 20% OF THE PARKING UNDER THAT ANALYSIS. IT CLEARLY SHOWED THAT WE HAD 98 MORE SPACES THAN ARE REQUIRED. SO WE HAVE AN ADDITIONAL 90 SPACES ABOVE WHAT THE PARKING NEEDS ANALYSIS SHOWED WE WOULD NEED FOR PURPOSES OF THIS CLUB. REFUSE AND SERVICE AREAS ARE ALL SCREENED AND ARE ADDRESSED IN YOUR SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN, WHICH HAS RECEIVED ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL. WE HAVE ADEQUATE UTILITIES TO SERVE THE SITE AND AGAIN HAVE BEEN VERIFIED THROUGH THE SITE PLAN REVIEW, SCREENING AND BUFFERING FOR THE SITE. AS YOU CAN SEE ON THIS SCREEN HOW FAR AWAY WE ARE FROM ANY OF OUR NEIGHBORS, THERE IS MORE THAN SUFFICIENT ADEQUATE SCREENING AND BUFFERING FROM THE CLUBHOUSE TO ANYBODY WHO COULD SEE IT. AND THOSE OF YOU WHO HAVE COME ON SITE, YOU SEE HOW FAR YOU HAVE TO DRIVE IN TO THAT SITE BEFORE YOU EVEN GET A GLIMPSE OF THE CLUBHOUSE. SIGNAGE AND LIGHTING HAVE ALL BEEN ADDRESSED IN THERE AROUND THE CLUBHOUSE. NOBODY FROM OFF PREMISES WILL SEE IT. NEARBY DEVELOPMENT YOU CAN SEE ON THIS SCREEN IS RESIDENTIAL. YOU WE ARE THE CLOSEST HOME IS 836, ALMOST 837FT AWAY. AND WE HAVE NO ISSUES WITH OUR NEARBY DEVELOPMENT SITE ADEQUACY. WE ARE 356 ACRE CAMPUS, WHICH IS MORE THAN SUFFICIENT SIZE TO PROVIDE FOR THE GOLF COURSE AND FOR THE PROPOSED CLUBHOUSE COMPATIBILITY WITH OUR NEIGHBORS. AGAIN, THIS VISUAL SHOWS YOU HOW OUR NEIGHBORS ARE PRETTY FAR AWAY AND WE ARE COMPATIBLE WITH OUR NEIGHBORS. AND THEN THE COLLECTIVE IMPACT WHAT I THINK IS VERY IMPORTANT IS THIS DOES NOT SET A PRECEDENT. THIS IS YOU. YOU LOOK AT EACH CONDITIONAL USE WHETHER OR NOT THEY MEET THE INDIVIDUAL CRITERIA. BECAUSE YOU SAY YES TO THIS ONE. IF YOU DO SAY YES, DOES IT MEAN YOU HAVE TO SAY YES TO THE NEXT ONE? THAT PETITION HAS TO COME THROUGH AND SHOW YOU HOW IT MEETS THE CRITERIA. SO THERE'S NO PRECEDENT SET BY APPROVING THIS ONE. YOU'RE NOT LOCKING YOURSELF IN TO APPROVING ANY OTHER PETITION JUST BECAUSE THIS ONE WAS APPROVED. AND WITH THAT, YOUR STAFF DID ANALYZE THE CRITERIA. YOUR STAFF DID AGREE THAT WE SATISFIED THE CRITERIA. WE HAD OUR PROFESSIONAL TESTIMONY AT THE LAST HEARING THAT SHOWED HOW WE MET THE CRITERIA. ALL THE COMPETENT, SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE SHOWS THAT WE'VE MET THE CRITERIA. AND BECAUSE THIS IS QUASI JUDICIAL, YOU LOOK AT THE COMPETENT, SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE IN MAKING YOUR DETERMINATION. WITH THAT, I'LL TURN IT BACK OVER TO DENNIS FOR A FEW MORE COMMENTS, AND THEN WE'LL ASK YOU TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF BOTH PETITIONS. THANKS, RICH. SO AS YOU EVALUATE OUR CONDITIONAL USE PETITION, I RESPECTFULLY ASK THAT YOU TAKE A COUPLE ADDITIONAL [01:10:01] FACTORS INTO CONSIDERATION. AS YOU'VE HEARD, RP HAS CAREFULLY EVALUATED THE CITY'S CRITERIA FOR CONDITIONAL USE THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS. IN FACT, WE BEGAN DISCUSSING THIS PROJECT WITH COUNCIL OVER TWO YEARS AGO TO GET YOUR INPUT AND SUGGESTIONS BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH OUR DESIGN. WE'VE WORKED COLLABORATIVELY WITH THE CITY STAFF OVER THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS. TO NOTE, WE'VE ACTUALLY INVESTED OVER $2 MILLION IN THE PLANNING, THE ENGINEERING, THE ARCHITECTURAL, AND THE PERMITTING PROCESSES THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH YOUR REVIEW PROCESSES THAT ARE IN PLACE. AND AS YOU KNOW, THE PAB APPROVED OUR PLANS BY A MAJORITY VOTE. AND AS RICH JUST EXPLAINED, WE BELIEVE THE PETITION FULLY SATISFIES THE CITY'S APPROVAL CRITERIA FOR CONDITIONAL USE. AS RICH JUST INDICATED, I DO UNDERSTAND THE CONCERN THAT THIS PETITION COULD ESTABLISH SOME TYPE OF PRECEDENT GOING FORWARD. HOWEVER, AS A CITY COUNCIL HAS ADVISED AT OUR LAST MEETING, EACH FUTURE PETITION WOULD BE EVALUATED INDEPENDENTLY AND ON ITS OWN MERITS. AND FINALLY, I WANT TO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO CONSIDER THE PRACTICAL IMPACT THAT WE ARE REQUESTING. OUR CLUB, AS I MENTIONED, OCCUPIES 360 ACRES. THIS IS NOT A BUILDING PROPOSED ALONG A PROPERTY LINE OR IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. THE PROPOSED CLUBHOUSE IS LOCATED WELL WITHIN OUR PROPERTY WITH SUBSTANTIAL EXISTING LANDSCAPING AND SEPARATION FROM SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS. GIVEN OUR LOCATION, THE PROPOSED DESIGN WILL HAVE NO MEANINGFUL ADVERSE IMPACT ON SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS, AND AT THE SAME TIME, WE BELIEVE THE PROJECT WILL PROVIDE A HIGH QUALITY CLUBHOUSE DESIGNED TO SERVE NOT ONLY OUR MEMBERSHIP, BUT ALSO COMPLEMENT THE CHARACTER OF NAPLES FOR DECADES TO COME. SO LET ME CLOSE WITH THIS. ROYAL POINCIANA FULLY SUPPORTS THE CITY'S BUILDING HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS. WE ALSO SUPPORT YOUR CONDITIONAL USE PROCESS AND THE STANDARDS. THE COUNCIL IS APPLYING THIS PROCESS AS WE SEE IT EXISTS, SO THE COUNCIL CAN EVALUATE INDIVIDUAL PETITIONS AND ON THEIR SPECIFIC FACTS AND DETERMINE WHETHER THE ESTABLISHED CRITERIA HAVE BEEN MET. WE'RE CONFIDENT THAT OUR PETITION SATISFIES THOSE CRITERIA. WE SPENT YEARS LISTENING TO OUR MEMBERS WORKING WITH CITY STAFF, REFINING THE PROJECT, AND HAVE FOLLOWED THE CITY'S ESTABLISHED REVIEW PROCESS. WE'RE EXTREMELY PROUD OF THE DESIGN THAT IS IN FRONT OF YOU. WE BELIEVE IT REPRESENTS THE CHARACTER OF NAPLES, PROTECTS OUR SURROUNDING ENVIRONMENT, ADDRESSES THE LONG TERM NEEDS OF OUR MEMBERSHIP, AND WILL HAVE NO MEANINGFUL ADVERSE IMPACT ON OUR NEIGHBORS. FOR THESE REASONS, ON BEHALF OF THE ROYAL POINCIANA CLUB, I RESPECTFULLY ASK THAT YOU APPROVE OUR CONDITIONAL USE PETITION. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME THIS MORNING. HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS. COUNCIL PETITIONERS OR THE PETITIONERS AGENT. OKAY. THANK YOU. WE'LL MOVE TO THE STAFF REPORT. GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING. JEFF BRAMER, PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THE OF COURSE THE STAFF REPORT THAT WE GAVE A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO WILL STAND IN FULL, BUT I'LL MAKE SOME COMMENTS AT WHAT HAS HAPPENED SINCE THEN. THE DEPARTMENT HAS RECEIVED NO NEW PUBLIC CORRESPONDENCE CONCERNING THE REQUEST. SECOND, AND WE'VE HEARD SOME TESTIMONY ABOUT THIS, AND PERHAPS THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS. THE RESOLUTION FROM THE FIRST MEETING HAS BEEN UPDATED WITH SOME ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS PREDOMINANTLY NUMBER TWO, WHICH WAS CAPPING THE MEMBERSHIP LEVEL IN THE RESOLUTION IN YOUR PACKETS. IT'S 1022. THAT WAS THE DISCUSSION THAT WAS HAD A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO. THAT IS THE NUMBER THAT'S QUOTED IN THE PARKING NEEDS ANALYSIS. THAT IS PART OF THE AGENDA. OTHERWISE, THE STAFF REPORT REMAINS THE SAME. WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY NEW PLANS. THE BUILDINGS HAVEN'T CHANGED THE LOT. COVERAGE HASN'T CHANGED. THE USES HAVEN'T CHANGED. SO I GUESS FOR EXPEDIENCY, I WE CAN LEAVE IT THERE AND WE CAN SEE WHAT KIND OF QUESTIONS MAY COME UP. SO THANK YOU. VICE MAYOR. SO I KNOW YOU [01:15:03] HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO REREVIEW THE PARKING NEEDS ANALYSIS IN CONNECTION TO 1022 CHANGING TO 1045. BUT DID YOU AGREE WITH THE PRIOR ANALYSIS THAT SAID THERE WERE 98 SURPLUS SPACES? YES. YES. STAFF DID AGREE WITH THE ORIGINAL PARKING NEEDS ANALYSIS. OKAY. SO IF WE IT SEEMS LIKE IF WE CHANGE IT FROM 1022 TO 1045, THAT'S AN INCREASE OF 23. THE ISSUE I HAVE WITH THAT, DOING THAT ON THE FLY TODAY IS THAT THE PARKING NEEDS ANALYSIS IS REFERENCED IN YOUR RESOLUTION, AND THE PARKING NEEDS ANALYSIS THAT WE HAVE ON FILE THAT IS REFERENCED IN THAT RESOLUTION SPECIFICALLY MENTIONS 1022. AND IT'S KIND OF ALL THROUGHOUT HERE. THERE'S ANOTHER SECTION ON PAGE EIGHT OF THE PARKING NEEDS ANALYSIS THAT SAYS, AS PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED, THIS CLUB'S MEMBERSHIP WILL REMAIN THE SAME. SO THIS IS ALL I HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THIS WITH RESPECT TO 101,045, BECAUSE THEY HAVEN'T PROVIDED AN ANALYSIS OF 1045. OKAY. AND AS I RECALL FROM REREADING YOUR PRIOR MEMO, STAFF FELT LIKE THE CRITERIA AND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE CONDITIONAL USE CRITERIA WERE MET. YES. THE ONLY MENTIONED THAT STAFF MADE IN THERE. IS THAT THE MEMBER AT THE TIME THAT THIS ORIGINALLY WAS HEARD THAT THE CONDITIONAL USE CRITERIA CRITERIA HAD NOT BEEN APPLIED, NOT THE CONDITIONAL USE, I'M SORRY, THE PUBLIC SERVICE HEIGHT REGULATIONS HAD NOT BEEN APPLIED PREVIOUSLY IN THIS MANNER TO ALLOW THE ENTIRE BUILDING TO EXCEED THE 30 FOOT HEIGHT REQUIREMENT. RIGHT, RIGHT. WHICH IS NOW CERTAINLY SOMETHING I WAS STRUGGLING WITH AS WELL. AND UNFORTUNATELY OUR CODE ISN'T CRYSTAL CLEAR. BECAUSE I'M TRYING TO FIND. THE CAUSE OF THE WIDE DIVERSITY OF USES ALLOWED IN THE PUBLIC SERVICE DISTRICT STRUCTURES IN EXCESS OF 30FT, CHURCH SPIRES, WATER TOWERS, ETC. MAY BE APPROVED AS PART OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PROCESS PROVIDED THAT THEY DO NOT AFFECT PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY OR WELFARE. THAT'S KIND OF. WHAT SECTION ARE YOU? IT SAYS IT'S IN SECTION 58-838. IT'S THE VOTING SECTION FOR PUBLIC SERVICE DISTRICT. YEAH. SO ON THE ONE HAND THERE'S TWO SENTENCES. SO IF YOU READ THEM TOGETHER, THE FIRST SENTENCE IS MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF STRUCTURES IN THE PUBLIC SERVICE DISTRICT IS 30FT FROM PRINCIPAL BUILDINGS. THEN THE NEXT SENTENCE SAYS BECAUSE OF THE WIDE DIVERSITY STRUCTURES MAY EXCEED. YEAH. SO TO ME, IT WAS CONFUSING BECAUSE THE PARENTHETICAL CHURCH SPIRES, WATER TOWERS, ETC. INDICATES IT'S ONLY LIKE ELEMENTS ELEMENTS. BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT THE. BUT THAT'S AND THAT'S HOW IT WAS APPLIED, APPARENTLY IN THE PAST. BUT THAT'S REALLY NOT WHAT THE SENTENCE SAYS. THE SENTENCE IS MORE OPEN. IT DOESN'T SAY LIMITED TO. RIGHT, RIGHT, RIGHT. SO THAT'S WHAT I'VE STRUGGLED WITH ON INTERPRETING THIS ZONING ISSUE. IF YOU RECALL, AT THE PRIOR AT THE ITEM BEFORE THIS THAT WAS HEARD, WHICH WAS THE CHURCH, TRINITY CHURCH, IT ALSO APPLIED TO 30FT ABOVE FOR THE PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE. AND YOU ALL MADE THE DETERMINATION THAT, YES, YOU CAN REQUEST IT SUBJECT TO MEETING THE CONDITION OF CONDITIONAL USE CRITERIA. AND THAT'S WHY WE ARE ALLOWED TO ASK FOR ABOVE 30FT FOR THE PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE. AND THAT'S IF YOUR YOUR CITY ATTORNEY POINTED THAT OUT DURING THAT HEARING PROCESS. YEAH. THANKS. I THINK THOSE ARE MY QUESTIONS FOR YOU GUYS RIGHT NOW. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OH YES. BARTON. FURTHER FOLLOW UP ON THAT. ON THE PARKING. SO IF WE LEAVE IT RIGHT NOW IT'S BASED ON 1022 MEMBERS. RIGHT. IF THAT WERE TO BE CHANGED TO 1045, THAT WOULD THAT WOULD REQUIRE MORE SPACES, RIGHT. BECAUSE IT'S A LARGER NUMBER OF PEOPLE. SO THE 1022 MEMBERS IS A MORE RESTRICTIVE NUMBER THAN THE 1045. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THEY THE PETITIONER, AS THEY MENTIONED A FEW MINUTES AGO, THEY ARE OKAY. I UNDERSTAND IT'S THE RIGHT NUMBER IS NOT 1022, BUT THEY'RE UNDER THERE. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THEIR STATEMENT A FEW MINUTES AGO SAID THAT THEY WOULD BE WILLING TO ACCEPT THE MORE RESTRICTIVE NUMBER BASED ON THE 1022 MEMBERS. [01:20:10] IF IF THE COUNCIL AND STAFF CAN'T SEE THEIR WAY THROUGH ANALYZING THAT, WE HAD THAT ANALYSIS BASED UPON 1022 SHOWED WE HAD 98 ADDITIONAL SPACES IF STAFF AND. THE COUNCIL SAYS WE CAN'T ACCEPT THAT 23 ADDITIONAL MEMBERS WILL NOT USE UP ALL 98 SPACES. WE WILL LIVE WITH THE 1022. WHAT WE PREFER TO DO IS HAVE YOU AGREE TO THE 1045. AND IF WE NEED TO CHANGE IN THE NEEDS ANALYSIS, A COUPLE OF REFERENCES TO 1022 TO 1045 TO SHOW THAT WE NOW HAVE. I CAN'T DO THAT IN MY 98 -23 IS 75 ADDITIONAL SPACES, ASSUMING EVERYBODY CAME. IF THAT'S A PROBLEM, WE'LL LIVE WITH THE 1022. I WOULD HAVE JUST PREFERRED TO HAVE RECEIVED THIS. THIS WAS CONTINUED FOR A NUMBER OF WEEKS. I WOULD HAVE PREFERRED TO RECEIVE AN AMENDED PARKING NEEDS ANALYSIS. HAD A MINUTE TO ABSORB THIS INFORMATION INSTEAD OF HEARING ABOUT IT AT THE MEETING, I'M BEING ASKED ON THE SPOT TO DO THAT ANALYSIS, AND I WOULD HAVE PREFERRED TO HAVE A RESOLUTION SENT TO ME WELL IN ADVANCE THAT ADDED THE 2022. IT WAS ON THE RECORD. IT WAS IT WAS OFFERED BY YOUR TEAM AND IT WAS IN THE MINUTES. MAYOR CAN I MAKE A I'M NOT ARGUING. I'M JUST SAYING I SAW THE RESOLUTION FOR THE FIRST TIME. THAT'S CORRECT, MR. YOVANOVITCH. YOU KNOW HOW I AM WITH RESOLUTIONS. I MEAN, I'M VERY I'M A STICKLER AT PAYING ATTENTION TO THAT RESOLUTION. AND IF YOUR BYLAWS SAY ONE THING AND THE RESOLUTION SAYS ANOTHER, WE HAVE AN ISSUE. SO LET ME GO BACK TO THE CITY ATTORNEY. JUST ONE THING. THE 2022 RESPECTFULLY CAME DIRECTLY FROM THEIR PARKING NEEDS ANALYSIS. IT WAS NOT A NUMBER I CAME UP WITH. THIS IS THEIR DOCUMENT THAT THEY CLEARLY MADE AN ERROR ON. RIGHT. THAT 2022, IF IT WOULD HAVE SAID 1045, WE WOULDN'T EVEN BE HAVING THIS CONVERSATION RESPECTFULLY. THE QUESTION IS, WHEN DID YOU FIND OUT ABOUT IT? BECAUSE IT WOULD HAVE BEEN NICE TO REVIEW. HOWEVER, IF COUNCIL WANTS TO MAKE THAT CHANGE RIGHT NOW BECAUSE THEY FEEL LIKE THEY'VE HEARD ENOUGH COMPETENT, SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE, THE ONLY SUGGESTION I WOULD MAKE IS HEARING FROM THEIR EXPERT, THEIR TRAFFIC EXPERT. FOR THE RECORD, YOU HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO DO THAT. BUT FOR THE COUNCIL FOR THEM TO SAY, I WOULD HAVE LIKED TO KNOW ABOUT THE RESOLUTION. THE NUMBERS WERE IN THE DOCUMENTS THEY PROVIDED. THAT'S WHERE THE 1022 CAME FROM. THEY MADE THE MISTAKE, NOT US. AND I'M NOT DISAGREEING THAT IT WAS A MISTAKE. IT WAS OUR MISTAKE. MADAM MAYOR, AND I UNDERSTAND THE FRUSTRATION ON THE STAFF'S BEHALF, I UNDERSTAND. I CAN HEAR THE FRUSTRATION IN OUR ATTORNEY'S VOICE. I UNDERSTAND, CAN WE HEAR FROM THEIR TRAFFIC EXPERTS SO I CAN HEAR HIS OPINION? AND BASED ON THIS. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING. I NEED TO BE SWORN IN. YES. CAN YOU RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND? YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU'RE ABOUT TO GIVE BE THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING I DO. FOR THE RECORD, MY NAME IS JIM BANKS. I'M PRESIDENT OF JNB TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING, AND MY FIRM DID PREPARE THE PARKING STUDY. WE HAD A 25% BUFFER BUILT INTO OUR PARKING CALCULATIONS. SO WITH THE ADDITIONAL 23 MEMBERS, WE WOULD BE REQUIRED TO HAVE 12 ADDITIONAL PARKING SPACES, WHICH WOULD STILL LEAVE A SURPLUS OF 88 PARKING SPACES. SO WE STILL HAVE MORE THAN ADEQUATE PARKING TO ACCOMMODATE THE 101,045 MEMBERS. THANK YOU, I APPRECIATE THAT. DO YOU HAVE IT FOR HIM CONCERNING THIS? OKAY. I'LL HAVE SCHULTZ FIRST. OKAY. COUNCILMEMBER SCHULTZ, THANK YOU. I DON'T KNOW WHO WOULD BE ABLE TO ANSWER THIS. WHAT NUMBER OF RESIDENTS? EXCUSE ME. OF MEMBERS RESIDE IN 3410 2 OR 3 4103 OVER 45% OF OUR MEMBERS ARE RESIDENT OF THE CITY OF NAPLES, AND THE ZIP CODES (341) 023-4103. YES. 001. OKAY. I'M SORRY. OKAY. THANK YOU. SECONDLY, THE WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF GOING TO A COUNTRY CLUB WHERE YOU'RE A MEMBER AND THERE'S A GOLF COURSE THERE, THERE'S TENNIS COURTS THERE, THERE'S ALL THIS STUFF. AS I RECALL, AND IT'S NOT TOTALLY CRYSTAL CLEAR, BUT ONE OF THE BIGGEST ARGUMENTS PUT FORTH BY YOUR TEAM WAS ESSENTIALLY, THESE ARE ELDERLY PEOPLE AND AND THEY SHOULD NOT HAVE TO WALK SO FAR TO GET FROM ONE SIDE OF THE BUILDING TO THE OTHER. THAT'S UNDERSTANDABLE TO A POINT. BUT IN THE END, WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF GOING TO A COUNTRY CLUB? IF IF YOU'RE PLAYING GOLF OR TENNIS AND THEY'RE SOCIAL MEMBERS, OF COURSE YOU'RE GOING THERE TO EXERCISE, [01:25:07] MAKING A FEW EXTRA STEPS SHOULD NOT, THAT'S I AS I LOOK AT IT, IT'S A WHOLE DIFFERENT ANIMAL. AND YES, WE HAD TWO HOURS OR SO OF DISCUSSION AND THE PRIOR GO AROUND AND YOU SEEM TO HAVE PARSED THE EDGES AND POLITICALLY WITH A SMALL P WORKED IT IN PARSING THE RULES. THE CODE IS THE CODE. WE CAN TRY TO PARSE IT AND WE CAN TRY TO WORK WITH IT CONSTRUCTIVELY. YOUR PLAN, AS I SEE IT, HASN'T GOTTEN ANY INFORMATION TO ANYBODY HERE UNTIL NOW IN SOME RESPECTS, OR WITHIN THE LAST DAY OR TWO. WHY COULDN'T YOU HAVE COME BACK AND ADDRESS IT WITHIN A WEEK OF WHEN WE VOTED IT DOWN THE LAST TIME? WELL, THE REASON WE COULDN'T COME BACK IN A WEEK IS YOU DIDN'T HAVE A MEETING. THAT'S NOT MY THAT'S NOT MY COMMENT. COME BACK TO THE STAFF AND MAKE YOUR PROPOSAL BASED ON WHAT WE SHARED WITH YOU AS OUR VIEWS THE LAST TIME WHERE IT WAS THREE THREE DEAD AND YOU DID NOTHING TO AMELIORATE THAT EXCEPT TRY TO WORK THE SMALL P POLITICS OF IT TO MAKE IT MORE ACCEPTABLE AND TRY TO EXPLAIN THIS, THAT AND THE OTHER AGAINST PARSING. I DON'T BELIEVE SO. WHAT WE DID IS WE DON'T EXPECT YOU TO BELIEVE SO. BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO THINK WHATEVER YOU WANT. I JUST WHY DID IT TAKE THIS LONG? AND YOU DIDN'T EVEN TRY TO WORK WITH US AS TO WHAT OUR OBJECTIVES WERE FROM THIS DAIS? WELL, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, PLEASE. WE DID TRY TO WORK WITH YOU. WE HAD A MEETING WITH ONE OF YOUR MEMBERS TO GO OVER HIS COMMENTS AND CONCERNS ABOUT HEIGHT. WE ALSO HAD A THREE THREE TIE, WHICH MEANS THERE WAS A FOURTH PERSON WHO HAD NOT EXPRESSED HER OPINION. SO TO SAY TO US WE NEEDED TO MAKE CHANGES BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T LIKE THE PROJECT WAS NOT IS NOT FACTUALLY CORRECT. WE HAD THE RIGHT TO HAVE SEVEN MEMBERS HERE, AND THIS WAS THE FIRST MEETING. WE CAN HAVE SEVEN MEMBERS HERE FOR OUR PETITION TO BE CONSIDERED. WE'RE NOT PARSING ANYTHING. WE ARE EXPLAINING WHAT OUR PETITION IS TO A FULL SEVEN MEMBER COUNCIL. WE REALIZED THAT OUR BYLAWS HAD 1045. THAT WAS A MISTAKE ON OUR PART. I'M NOT SAYING THAT IT BECAME CODIFIED WHEN WE SAW IT IN THE RESOLUTION. I SHOULD HAVE CALLED ERICA. I SHOULD HAVE CALLED MATTHEW AND SAID, YOU KNOW WHAT? YOUR RESOLUTION SAYS 1022. IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN 1045 MY MISTAKE. I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT. BUT THERE'S MORE THAN EXCESS PARKING IN THE ANALYSIS. THAT'S THE ONLY THING WE'RE HERE TO TALK ABOUT. WE'RE TALKING TO A FULL MEMBERSHIP OF YOUR OF YOUR COUNCIL, WHICH WE HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO DO. THERE IS NOTHING THAT SAYS WE NEEDED TO MAKE ANY CHANGES, BECAUSE WE DIDN'T KNOW IF WE HAD TO MAKE ANY CHANGES TO GET FOUR OUT OF SEVEN TO SAY YES. DO YOU UNDERSTAND? ONE THING IS THAT I'M NOT ALLOWED TO TALK TO ANYBODY UP HERE EXCEPT HERE. SO YOU CAN SPEAK WITH ONE. OKAY. THERE'S SIX MORE OF US. SO TO EXPECT THE MAYOR OR TED OR ANY ANYBODY HERE KNOW, THEY. THAT CAN'T WORK. SURE, SURE. THIS IS HOW IT WORKS. THE PROCESS IS. YOU'RE TELLING ME HOW THIS WORKS, SIR? YOU'RE TELLING ME HOW THIS WORKS? YOU'RE TELLING US OUR RULES. NOW, I DON'T WANT TO BE COMBATIVE AT THE END OF THE DAY. YEAH. I'M TELLING YOU HOW IT WORKS, SIR. YOU ARE BEING COMPETITIVE. COUNCIL MEMBER SCHULTZ. SO YOUR QUESTION. CAN WE GET BACK TO THE QUESTIONS OF THAT YOU HAD? YEAH. WHAT WAS DONE TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT THE TRANSPORT WITHIN YOUR BUILDING, WHICH YOU WANTED THE LONGER HALLWAYS? I BELIEVE THAT WAS PART OF IT. AND I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THAT LOGIC, GIVEN THE INTENT OF THE CLUB, IS FOR SOCIAL AND PHYSICAL ACTIVITY. SO SO IT'S AN INTERESTING QUESTION. IF YOU GO BACK TO OUR SESSION IN JUNE, WE INDICATED THAT THE LENGTH OF THE CLUBHOUSE TODAY IS OVER 1000FT. I INTRODUCED THE DEMOGRAPHICS OF THE AGE OF OUR MEMBERSHIP, SO YOU'D HAVE BETTER CONTEXT AS TO WHY WE WANTED TO HAVE TWO STORIES WHY WE WANTED TO GO UP WITH THE BUILDING, THE NEW DESIGN VERSUS AN ELONGATED BUILDING BECAUSE IT WAS MORE RESPONSIVE TO THE DEMOGRAPHICS, THE EXISTING DEMOGRAPHICS OF THE MEMBERSHIP. I WOULD ALSO TELL YOU, BECAUSE YOU ASKED THIS QUESTION IN JUNE, YOU KNOW WHAT, WHAT GOES ON AT THESE CLUBS AND WHAT WHAT I TRIED TO EXPRESS THEN, AND I'LL SAY TODAY, THE DYNAMICS OF THE CLUB INDUSTRY HAVE CHANGED DRAMATICALLY IN IN THE LAST TEN YEARS. CLUBS AND MEMBERSHIPS ARE LOOKING FOR MORE ACTIVITIES, MORE THINGS TO DO, MORE SOCIAL ACTIVITIES. I INDICATED WE HAVE OVER 400 BRIDGE MEMBERS AT PP. THEY PLAY NOTHING BUT CARDS. SO THEY'RE NOT THEY'RE NOT GOING THERE TO WALK THE HALLS OR, YOU KNOW, [01:30:03] ETC.. THEY'RE NOT GOING THERE TO PLAY GOLF. THEY'RE THERE TO ENJOY FELLOW YOU KNOW, MEMBERS YOU KNOW, IN THOSE TYPE OF ACTIVITIES. WE HAVE SIGNIFICANT SOCIAL EVENTS THAT TAKE PLACE ALMOST EVERY SINGLE NIGHT AT THE CLUB. SO THE MEMBERS ARE LOOKING FOR MUCH MORE THAN WHAT MEMBERS LOOK FOR TEN YEARS AGO. AND CANDIDLY, IF WE WANT TO REMAIN COMPETITIVE AS A CLUB IN THIS MARKETPLACE, THOSE ARE THE REASONS WHY THE MEMBERSHIP VOTED SIGNIFICANTLY TO DO SOMETHING. I MENTIONED THAT, YOU KNOW, WE SPENT OVER FOUR YEARS WORKING WITH THE MEMBERSHIP TO REALLY UNDERSTAND THEIR NEEDS AND THEIR WANTS. OVER 90% OF OUR MEMBERS VOTED TO DO SOMETHING SIGNIFICANT, EITHER A MAJOR RENOVATION TO YOUR QUESTION OR A REPLACEMENT OF THE BUILDING. 64% OF THE MEMBERS VOTED TO GO FORWARD WITH A NEW CLUBHOUSE. THAT'S HOW MUCH SUPPORT THERE IS FROM OUR EXISTING MEMBERS RECOGNIZING THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE A THREE YEAR PROJECT, THERE'S GOING TO BE SIGNIFICANT CONSTRUCTION DURING THAT TIME PERIOD. AND THEY VOTED NOTWITHSTANDING THAT, THAT THIS WAS THE RIGHT THING TO DO FOR ROYAL POINCIANA AS WELL AS OUR COMMUNITY. SO I HOPE THAT HELPS, I HOPE. I'M TRYING TO BE RESPONSIVE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR QUESTION, ERICA. THE HEIGHT ISSUES WERE BROUGHT UP. IT'S A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THE DEBATE OR DISCUSSION. EXCUSE ME, THE DISCUSSION BACK IN JUNE, HOW THEY DIDN'T SHORTEN IT OR LOWER IT. RIGHT. IT'S STILL ABOVE WHAT THEY'RE SEEKING. VARIATION. SAME DESIGN AS WAS BEFORE YOU IN JUNE. AND SO AGAIN WE'RE REVISITING SOMETHING. SO BUT THAT'S MY QUESTION. SO TO THAT POINT, COUNCILMAN, WHAT WE DID TRY TO DO IS EXPLAIN, BECAUSE I DID THINK THERE WAS A LOT OF CONFUSION IN THAT MEETING ABOUT 60FT. EVERYONE HAD A VIEW THAT THE WHOLE BUILDING ACROSS WAS 60FT. WHAT WE TRIED TO SAY IS THAT THE ACTUAL OCCUPIED SPACE OF THE BUILDING IS 4% OR 44FT, 100% IS 44FT AND EVERYTHING ELSE IS ROOFLINES, DESIGN, ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS, ETC. AND IMPORTANTLY, IT ALLOWS US TO PUT ALL OF THE MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT ON THIS ROOF AND TOTALLY SCREEN IT FROM THE GROUND, WHICH I THINK IS ONE OF THE OBJECTIVES HERE IN THE CITY IN TERMS OF NEW CONSTRUCTION. SO SO WE'VE TRIED TO BE RESPONSIVE TO THE QUESTIONS THAT WERE RAISED BACK IN JUNE ABOUT THE HEIGHT. JUST TO CLARIFY, AND MY COMMENTS ARE PART OF THE RECORD TODAY, RIGHT? SO YOU, YOU WERE AWARE AND ARE AWARE THAT THE CODE SAYS WHAT IT SAYS ON HEIGHT, SO YOU'RE DELIBERATELY GOING ABOVE IT AND SEEKING PERMISSION, AS IT WERE, IN A VARIANCE FROM US TO ALLOW THIS, EVEN THOUGH IT'S THE SAME. THIS IS NOT A VARIANCE, BY THE WAY. IT'S NOT A VARIANCE. THIS IS A CONDITIONAL USE PETITION THAT AND WE DO UNDERSTAND THE RULES. AND WE UNDERSTOOD THEM SEVERAL YEARS AGO WHEN WE MET WITH A NUMBER OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS TO REALLY GET YOUR INPUT AND YOUR FEEDBACK ABOUT THE DESIGN. AND WE WERE INFORMED, QUITE FRANKLY, BACK THEN, THAT AS LONG AS WE MET THE CRITERIA. THIS WOULD BE GOOD TO GO. SO AND WE'VE OPERATED UNDER THAT ASSUMPTION OVER THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS. THANK YOU. OKAY. THAT'S IT. I GOT A QUESTION FOR ERICA. OKAY. ONE SECOND. I'M SORRY. YEAH. ALONG THIS LINE, JUST A COUPLE THOUGHTS. AND I THOUGHT WHEN YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT YOUR MEMBERSHIP IN THEIR YOUTH. I'LL VOUCH FOR THE FACT THAT I'VE BEEN. I THERE'S THERE'S MORE THAN A COUPLE WEEKLY BIBLE STUDIES, AND MANY OF THOSE FOLKS AT RP DO NOT PLAY GOLF OR TENNIS AND ARE NEVER GOING TO AGAIN. I DID IT. I'VE DONE A TALK THERE FOR GRANDPARENTS 101 OF THE, THE REALITIES OF SOCIAL MEDIA USE FOR YOUR GRANDKIDS. I MEAN, THIS STUFF IS ONGOING AND THIS IS THEIR COMMUNITY. AND IT'S WAY BEYOND THE GOLF COURSE ALSO FOR THOSE THAT COULDN'T DRIVE OUT THERE AND TAKE A LOOK AT IT, I ENCOURAGE YOU TO DO THAT AT SOME POINT. HOWEVER, THIS GOES JUST SO YOU CAN SEE, THEIR PRACTICE FACILITY IS LIKE THREE TIMES BIGGER THAN ANYBODY AROUND. LIKE THEY COULD PARK AYE THEY HAVE SO MUCH EXTRA SPACE OUT THERE, IT'S RIDICULOUS. AND THE FACT THAT THEY HAVE, YOU KNOW, 98 ADDITIONAL SPACES BASED ON THE. 1022 ORIGINAL. THEN WE HAD 98 EXTRA AND I. BUT I WILL SAY THIS, THIS IS THIS IS REALLY FOR ANY PETITIONERS WATCHING, WHAT HAPPENS IS IF YOU COME INTO A MEETING AND IT'S. AND I HATE THIS FROM BOTH SIDES, I NEVER WANT A GOTCHA. I NEVER WANT A SURPRISE. THAT'S WHY I ALWAYS TRY TO GO LOOK AT THE SITE, TALK TO THE PETITIONER, TALK TO STAFF ABOUT EVERY ITEM BECAUSE I DON'T WANT THINGS LIKE THIS. THINGS LIKE THIS IS WHAT ALLOWS THE 200 PEOPLE AT HOME WATCHING THAT ARE OPPOSED TO ANY. CONSTRUCTION ANYWHERE IN THE CITY. THEY'RE LIKE, OH, SEE, GIVE THEM AN INCH. THEY TAKE A MILE. SEE? THEY DID IT AGAIN. THEY'RE TRYING TO DO IT ON THE FLY. AND IT JUST ADDS FUEL TO THAT FIRE. SO THAT'S DISAPPOINTING. AS COMMON SENSICAL AS IT IS, IT'S ALSO COMMON SENSE TO SAY WE COULD HAVE GIVEN EVERYBODY A HEADS UP. [01:35:04] AND I APPRECIATE RICH, YOUR MEA CULPA. YOU'RE OWNING IT. SO THAT'S COOL. BUT THE COMMON SENSE THAT THAT SHOULD BE LIKE THE VICE MAYOR SAID, THAT'S KIND OF EASY MATH. I'M NO GURU AS A MATH MINOR, NOT A MAJOR, BUT I CAN DO THAT MATH. SO. I THINK THIS BECAME ACRIMONIOUS AND I THE TEMPERATURE NEEDS TO GO DOWN. THEY MEET THE CRITERION, AS OUR STAFF HAS TOLD US. IT'S NOT A VARIANCE. AND I'D LIKE TO MOVE THIS FORWARD. I'M READY TO MAKE A MOTION, BUT I KNOW WE HAVE WE HAVE TO FINISH THE STAFF REPORT. OH, I THOUGHT I APOLOGIZED. I THOUGHT THEY WERE DONE. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. OKAY. ERICA. YEAH. AS OUR HEAD PLANNER. ARE YOU COMFORTABLE WITH THIS WHOLE PARKING STUDY? HOW IT'S EVOLVING HERE TO EVEN MAKE THIS A VIABLE PIECE HERE? AM I COMFORTABLE WITH THE ADDITION OF THE PARKING? I AM UNCOMFORTABLE REFERENCING A PARKING NEEDS ANALYSIS THAT IS NOT ACCURATELY PROVIDING THAT INFORMATION. IF THEY COULD PROVIDE TO ME OR ADVISE PARKING NEEDS ANALYSIS. THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF A PARKING NEEDS ANALYSIS IS TO SHOW WHAT THEY'RE WHAT THEY'RE DOING. SO I DON'T THINK THAT WE SHOULD REFERENCE THIS DOCUMENT THAT SAYS WE HAVE 1022 MEMBERS, AND WE WILL NOT CHANGE THAT IN THE FUTURE. AND THEN IF WE ALL UNDERSTAND THAT THEY ARE TELLING US RIGHT NOW, THEY'RE GOING TO CHANGE THAT. I YEAH, I MEAN, YOU HAVE 1045 AND WE'RE GOING ON A 1022. YOU KNOW, I MEAN, I'M THAT JUST SEEMS TO ME BIZARRE. I MEAN, I'M JUST DOING THE MATH. I JUST OKAY, THIS IS THE RECORD MOVING FORWARD. OKAY. AND THE FACT THAT THEY HAVE ALL THIS LAND, I MEAN, THEY CAN COMPLY WITH THE CODE. I MEAN, THERE'S NO HARDSHIP OR THIS IS JUST, YOU KNOW, ARCHITECTURAL TASTE, BASICALLY. WE'RE DEALING WITH. SO HOW DO WE ALLOW THIS? AND THE RATIONALE BY ALLOWING IS WHAT. YOU CAN'T SEE IT FROM THE ROAD AND ALL THAT. WELL YOU KNOW, THAT'S NOT GOOD CRITERIA. YOU CAN'T SAY, OKAY, YOU COULD DO THIS. YOU KNOW, THAT'S OKAY TO DO IT BECAUSE NO ONE CAN SEE IT. BUT YOU CAN'T DO IT BECAUSE SOMEONE CAN SEE IT. SO IT JUST IT'S ILLOGICAL TO ME. I JUST, I JUST AM HAVING A LOT OF PROBLEMS GETTING MY HEAD AROUND THIS, THIS WHOLE THING AND YOUR DISCOMFORT. IT BOTHERS ME EVEN MORE. SO I JUST, I JUST CAN'T SEE HOW THIS COULD BE SUPPORTED PERSONALLY. SO I ALSO HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THAT. SO ERICA, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS PROPERTY, IS THIS GOING TO ALLOW THE LEGISLATION FOR ANY THOUSAND FEET TO BE ABLE TO USE THIS HEIGHT FOR THE. NEW LEGISLATION ON. AND I KNOW YOU KNOW THIS. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT IT WILL. I HAVEN'T DONE A FULL ANALYSIS OF THIS. THERE IS LANGUAGE IN LIVE LOCAL THAT SAYS THAT YOU CANNOT RELY ON A PROPERTY THAT RECEIVED A SPECIAL BONUS IN HEIGHT. IF THIS CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL FOR THE HEIGHT WOULD CONSTITUTE A SPECIAL. I WANT TO SAY A SPECIAL BONUS SPECIAL EXCEPTION. I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE WORDING IS. THEN I THINK THAT WOULD PRECLUDE THIS FROM BEING AN EXAMPLE THAT SOMEONE COULD USE. BUT WE HAVEN'T DONE A FULL ANALYSIS OF THE 1000FT LIVE LOCAL MAYOR. PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG GUYS IN YOUR, IN OUR PRESENTATION, WHATEVER IT WAS TWO MONTHS AGO, I, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, YOU DID AN ANALYSIS ON THE LIVE LOCAL AND THERE WAS NOT ANY. THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. THAT THIS PARTICULAR THIS PROPERTY DOES NOT IN ANY WAY, IF LIVE LOCAL APPLIES, THIS PROPERTY DOESN'T GIVE ANYBODY ANY ADDITIONAL HEIGHT THAT DOESN'T ALREADY EXIST BASED UPON EXISTING STRUCTURES THAT EXIST IN THE CITY, AND WE DID PROVIDE THAT AS PART OF THE RECORD. THANK YOU. YEAH. WAIT ONE SECOND. YOU WERE COMPLETE COUNCIL MEMBER CARL AT NOW. OKAY. AND SO MY QUESTION ABOUT LIVE LOCAL HAS BEEN ANSWERED. AND AT ANY TIME DID THE DRB OR P A, B OR ANYONE ASK FOR THE HEIGHT TO BE LOWERED AT ALL? NO THEY DIDN'T ASK THEM TO LOWER THE HEIGHT. IT WAS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL BY THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD. OKAY, SCHULTZ, OUT OF FAIRNESS, THERE SEEMS TO BE MORE AMBIGUITY WITH YOU'RE NOT COMFORTABLE BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T HAVE TIME TO DO THE ANALYSIS. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO MOVE IT TO NEXT MONTH. SO ALL, ALL THE QUESTIONS AND I'VE NEVER HAD A CHANCE TO GO TO THE SITE MYSELF BECAUSE I WAS, WE WERE ON BREAK EVEN THOUGH WE WERE BACK FIVE MEETINGS. SO I WOULD JUST LIKE TO, IF WE COULD PUT IT TO THE NEXT MEETING AND GIVE ME A CHANCE, BECAUSE AGAIN, I CAN'T SPEAK WITH ANY OF YOU FOLKS. SO YOU'RE FAMILIAR FAR MORE FAMILIAR WITH THE INS AND OUTS. SO IF THAT WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE, THEN ALL THE HOMEWORK. ERICA SHOULD BE ABLE TO HAVE A CHANCE TO GET HER STAFF DONE WITH THE ANALYSIS PROVIDED TO HER, AND THEN SHE WOULD BE MORE COMFORTABLE WITH IT, AND MAYBE THAT WE CAN SPLIT THE BABY. [01:40:07] JUST A THOUGHT. KRAMER, I'M PREPARED TO MAKE A MOTION, AND THEN WE CAN WELL, FIGURE OUT AFTER THAT. BUT I WANT TO FINISH QUESTIONS FOR THE STAFF. AND THEN WE ALSO HAVE A QUESTION FROM COUNCIL MEMBER SCHULTZ. YES, VICE MAYOR, SO ERICA AND MATTHEW, THAT THE STATEMENT THAT WAS ADDED TO THE DRAFT RESOLUTION, IF IT WERE TO MOVE FORWARD. IT'S NUMBER TWO. THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF CLUB MEMBERSHIPS SHALL NOT EXCEED 1022. THAT STATEMENT DOESN'T REFERENCE THE PARKING NEEDS ANALYSIS. SO CAN THAT STATEMENT BE CHANGED IF WE WANTED TO TO 1045 AND IT DOESN'T AFFECT THAT STATEMENT DOESN'T. BUT THE RESOLUTION ITSELF. SECTION TWO. SECTION TWO SAYS APPROVAL OF THIS APPROVAL OF THIS CONDITIONAL USE PURSUANT TO SECTION 4634 RELIES UPON THE CONSISTENCY WITH AND ACCURACY OF THE. AND IT LISTS THE DOCUMENTS AND ONE OF WHICH IS THE PARKING NEEDS ANALYSIS. IF THEY COULD AMEND THE PARKING, GIVE US AMENDED PARKING NEEDS ANALYSIS. I JUST DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE REFERENCING THIS DOCUMENT WHEN WE KNOW IT'S INCORRECT. CAN THAT BE. IF THIS WERE VOTED ON NOW, COULD THAT BE ADDED AS A CONDITION THAT YOU RECEIVE AN UPDATED PARKING NEEDS ANALYSIS THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE TESTIMONY TODAY? AND I JUST TO BE CLEAR, I'M LOOKING AT THE TRANSCRIPT FROM THE JUNE 17TH MEETING. THE INCLUSION OF THAT AS A CONDITION TO THE RESOLUTION WAS EXPRESSLY DISCUSSED BY THIS BOARD AND AGREED TO BY THE PETITIONER, SO THE INCLUSION OF THAT CONDITION WAS CLEAR. SO THIS IS NOT THE FIRST TIME THEY WERE AWARE THAT THAT WOULD BE ADDRESSED. THAT IS CHANGE NUMBER 2 TO 1045 AND ADD A CONDITION THAT THE PARKING NEEDS ANALYSIS BE UPDATED TO REFLECT THE TESTIMONY TODAY PRIOR TO EXECUTION OF THE RESOLUTION. RIGHT. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANKS, MAYOR. COUNCIL. ARE THERE OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? IT'S A WELL, IT CAN BE A QUESTION FOR STAFF. BUT IT'S IT'S IN RESPONSE TO COUNCILMAN PAUL'S STATEMENT ABOUT THE CRITERIA BEING WILLY NILLY. AND IT'S A MATTER OF NOT BEING ABLE TO BE BE ABLE TO SEE THE STRUCTURE. THAT'S NOT WHAT IT IS. ERICA, PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT THE A HEIGHT EXTENSION CAN BE APPROVED FOR CONDITIONAL USES, PROVIDED IT DOES NOT AFFECT PUBLIC HEALTH OR WELFARE. IS THAT AN ACCURATE STATEMENT? THAT IS YES, THAT IS THE QUALIFIER FOR APPROVAL. SO SO IT'S NOT WILLY NILLY. THERE'S THERE'S THERE'S LANGUAGE IN THERE SPECIFIC TO ALLOWING THE REQUEST FOR A HEIGHT EXCEPTION. ASSUMING THAT IT DOESN'T AFFECT THE HEALTH AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. THE CLOSEST HOUSE IS 800, 837FT AWAY. THIS IS NOT GOING TO BE AFFECTING THE HEALTH AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. WELL, I WOULD JUST SAY THE ISSUE IS, ARE WE STICKING TO OUR CODES? ARE WE MAKING EXCEPTIONS? THAT IS THE CODE. I MEAN, IT'S THE LANGUAGE OF THE CODE. I KNOW, BUT BUT BUT BUT WHAT? YEAH. YOU COULD, WE COULD GRANT THAT. BUT BUT WE'RE ALLOWED TO DO THAT. YES YOU'RE CORRECT. THERE'S 20,000 CODE SAYS THAT WE CAN. OUR CODE SAYS THAT WE ARE ALLOWED TO DO THAT. WE'RE ALLOWED TO GRANT AN EXCEPTION. WE ARE FOLLOWING OUR CODE BY GRANTING. WE PREPARED TO DO THAT FOR OTHER PEOPLE. EVERYTHING IS GOING TO BE ON ITS OWN MERIT. EVERY SINGLE PETITIONER IS GOING TO HAVE TO FOLLOW OUR CODE AND MEET ALL TEN CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL. THIS ONE, THIS DOES MEET TEN CRITERIA OF THE CODE. AND WE CAN. AND OUR CODE ALLOWS A HEIGHT EXCEPTION TO BE APPROVED, AS LONG AS IT DOESN'T AFFECT THE PUBLIC HEALTH OR WELFARE THAT THAT IS IN OUR CODE. SO WE ARE FOLLOWING OUR CODE BY BY CONSIDERING THIS THIS HEIGHT EXCEPTION. SO WE ABSOLUTELY ARE FOLLOWING OUR CODE AND WE ARE FOLLOWING IT TO THE TO THE T THERE. THEY'VE THEY'VE GOT TEN CRITERIA AND THE HEIGHT EXCEPTION CAN BE CONSIDERED. SO AGAIN WE ARE FOLLOWING THE CODE AND THE NEXT PETITIONER IS GOING TO HAVE TO FOLLOW THE EXACT SAME CODE THAT WE'RE SITTING HERE DISCUSSING TODAY. AND THE ONE AFTER THAT IS GOING TO HAVE TO FOLLOW THE EXACT SAME CODE THAT WE'RE SITTING HERE DISCUSSION TODAY. AND WE'RE ALL GOING TO ANALYZE THAT. AND HOPEFULLY WE HAVE THE TIME TO GO OUT AND MEET WITH PETITIONER, LOOK AT THE LOCATION AND SEE THE SPACE THAT THEY'RE USING. AND WE CAN ACTUALLY MAKE AN EDUCATED AND INFORMED DECISION AS TO WHAT'S IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE COMMUNITY. WHAT'S IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE COMMUNITY HERE IS THAT THEIR HEALTH AND WELFARE IS NOT AFFECTED BY THE HEIGHT OF THIS BUILDING, WHICH IT IS NOT. THANK YOU. MR. BREMER, THE EXISTING BUILDING IS. THAT'S GOING TO BE DEMOLISHED. IS IT 42? 44FT. NO. IT'S NOT. MADAM MAYOR, THE EXISTING BUILDING IS NOT 44FT. OKAY. I WAS HELPING MR. GREEN. YEAH. IT'S NOT IT'S NOT 44FT TODAY. [01:45:06] THAT EXISTING BUILDING IS A SINGLE STORY BUILDING. OKAY. COUNCIL MEMBER CARL, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION OR YOUR. WELL, I REALIZE THERE'S WAYS TO WORK AROUND THIS, YOU KNOW, BUT I MEAN, BUT BUT TO MY POINT, YOU KNOW, I, I THINK WE HAVE TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE. AND, YOU KNOW, WE'RE MAKING EXCEPTIONS FOR, YOU KNOW, 1045 PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, AND I JUST, I, I'M, I'M NOT COMFORTABLE WITH THAT. I'M NOT COMFORTABLE WITH THE APPLICATION, THE WAY IT WAS PUT IN. AND WE'RE MAKING EXCEPTIONS ON, ON THEIR TRAFFIC PLAN. I MEAN, THIS SEEMS TO BE A LOT OF GREASING GOING ON IN MY OPINION, BUT I JUST MY, MY, MY THOUGHT ON IT. OKAY. THANK YOU. COUNCILMAN MAYOR ONE WAIT ONE SECOND. I HAVE COUNCIL MEMBER PENMAN I'M SORRY, I HAVE TO ADMIT I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED HERE. I'M LOOKING AT THE PARKING NEEDS THE IMPACT STATEMENT, AND ON PAGE 995, OFF SITE TRAFFIC IMPACTS. AT THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE, THERE IS A PARAGRAPH THAT SPECIFICALLY STATES. IT'S CONCLUDED. THIS STUDY ADDRESSES AND FULLY SATISFIES THE CITY'S REQUIRED ASSESSMENT OF THE PROJECT'S OFF SITE TRAFFIC IMPACTS BASED UPON THE DETERMINATION THAT ITS IMPACTS WILL BE NEGLIGIBLE AND DE MINIMIS, AS DEFINED BY THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. MORE SPECIFICALLY, THE NEXT NEW GENERATED STRETCH GENERATED TRIPS WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY LESS THAN 1% OF THE ADJACENT ROAD SYSTEM'S ADOPTED LOSS CAPACITY, AND THEREFORE, BY DEFINITION, WILL BE DE MINIMIS. I'M NOT SURE WHAT WE'RE SPENDING TIME ON HERE, FOLKS. BASED ON THAT STATEMENT FROM THIS TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT LESS THAN 1% OF AN IMPACT. NOW, I LIVE IN THAT AREA, AND I CAN TELL YOU THAT SOLANA ROAD IS RARELY, IF EVER, THE IMPACT ON SOLANA ROAD IS DE MINIMIS. I LEAVE MY AREA GOING SOUTH. I STOP AT A STOP SIGN. I RARELY RUN INTO A CAR THERE. SO I YOU KNOW, FRANKLY, I THINK THIS IS RIDICULOUS. WE ARE. WE ARE PARSING AND MINIMIZING WHAT OUR JOB IS. WAY TO MAKE WAY TOO FAR. SO FAR WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HYTHE AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT APPLICATION, NOT THE PARK. THIS PARK, WE'RE NOT. THAT'S NOT THE ISSUE. I JUST WAS TALKING ABOUT. I UNDERSTAND, SIR, BUT WE'VE SPENT A LOT OF TIME ON PARKING AS WELL. OKAY. SCHULTZ. AND HOW FAR DIFFERENT ARE WE THAN UNDER NANCY PELOSI? YOU GOT TO PASS IT BEFORE YOU CAN READ IT. SO WE'RE WE'RE EXPECTED. DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF? THAT WAS JUST A ORDINARY COMMENT. NO, NOT NOT AT ALL. OKAY. SO IF NO FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. DO I HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT? NONE. OKAY. CLOSING. YOU KNOW, IF YOU DON'T WANT TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO ASK FOR A CONDITIONAL USE, YOU SHOULD REMOVE IT FROM THE CODE. BUT WE ARE PROPERTY OWNERS AND WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO ASK FOR THIS. WE MEET THE CRITERIA. WE HAVE A RIGHT TO BE APPROVED. THAT'S MY ONLY REBUTTAL. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME, AND WE HOPE YOU'LL BRING A MOTION TO APPROVE. THERE ARE ALSO TWO THINGS THAT STAFF HAS, AND WE WILL WE WILL UPDATE THE STUDY TO REFLECT 1045. IT'S ALREADY BEEN SUPPLEMENTED THROUGH THE PROFESSIONAL TESTIMONY THAT IT DOESN'T NEGATIVELY IMPACT THE PARKING. WE WILL CHANGE THE STUDY TO REFLECT 1045 MEMBERS SUBMIT THAT TO STAFF PRIOR TO THE RESOLUTION BEING EXECUTED. I THINK THAT WAS ONE OF THE CONCERNS AND ONE OF THE QUESTIONS, AND WE'RE HAPPY TO DO THAT. STAFF. ANY OTHER FURTHER COMMENTS? QUESTIONS. OKAY. THIS IS TIME FOR DELIBERATION. AND IF THERE ARE NO DELIBERATIONS, MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THIS RESOLUTION PETITION 26-Q3. PROVIDED THAT. NUMBER TWO IN THE RESOLUTION WILL BE AMENDED PRIOR TO EXECUTION OF THE RESOLUTION. DID I SAY THAT RIGHT, MATTHEW? SAY THAT THE PETITIONER WILL PROVIDE AN AMENDED PARKING NEEDS ANALYSIS TO STAFF, PROVIDED THAT THE PETITIONER WILL PROVIDE AN AMENDED PARKING NEEDS ASSESSMENT TO STAFF PRIOR TO THE EXECUTION OF THE RESOLUTION. I GET THAT PART RIGHT? YES. OKAY. SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER KRAMER AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER BARTON. CAN YOU CLARIFY THAT NUMBER TWO IS CHANGED TO 1045 INSTEAD OF 1022. [01:50:02] WELL, YEAH, JUST TO BE SPECIFIC, THAT THAT YES, THAT WOULD BE CHANGED TO 1045 VERSUS 1022. THANK YOU, VICE MAYOR. MAN, I MESSED THAT UP BAD. DID I? SECOND STANDS OKAY. FURTHER DISCUSSION. OKAY. CAN I JUST ASK THE CLERK IF SHE GOT THAT MOTION. I DID EARLIER IN THE CONVERSATION, I HEARD AND REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY STAFF. DO YOU WANT THAT IN THERE AS WELL? YEAH. OKAY. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE FOR THE RECORD, WE HAVE IT. YES. THANK YOU. IS THAT PART OF YOUR MOTION? YES, MA'AM. OKAY. YES, MA'AM. AND FOR THE THIRD TIME, I. SECOND STANCE. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. NO FURTHER DISCUSSION. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE PULL THE COUNCIL MEMBER. SCHULTZ, FOR THE REASONS CITED IN DISCUSSION. I CAN'T I CAN'T VOTE FOR SOMETHING THAT BOTH STAFF ARE TURNING. I CAN'T, I CAN'T SUPPORT IT, SO NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. YES. VICE MAYOR BLANKENSHIP. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BARTON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. KRAMER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. KROLL. NO. HEITMAN. YES. IT PASSES 5 TO 2. THANK YOU. WITH THAT COUNCIL, WE NEED TO TAKE A TEN MINUTE BREAK. 162. OKAY, WE'RE BACK FROM OUR BREAK AND WE'RE CONTINUING ON WITH ITEM 11 B, MR. [11.B) A Resolution for the Purpose of Determining Outdoor Dining Petition 26-OD4 Pursuant to Section 56-126 of the Code of Ordinances Approving Only the Change of Business Operator for a Restaurant Owned and Operated By ONB, LLC, a Florida Limited Liability Company, Located at 1148 3rd Street South, More Fully Described Herein; Providing Findings and Conditions; and Providing an Effective Date.] MCCONNELL. THAT IS ME. THANK YOU MAYOR. A RESOLUTION FOR THE PURPOSE OF DETERMINING OUTDOOR DINING PETITION 26-0D4. PURSUANT TO SECTION 56-126 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, APPROVING ONLY THE CHANGE OF BUSINESS OPERATOR FOR A RESTAURANT OWNED AND OPERATED BY OMB, LLC, A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY LOCATED AT 1148 THIRD STREET SOUTH. MORE FULLY DESCRIBED HEREIN, PROVIDING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. MADAM CLERK, FOR ALL THOSE INTENDING TO OFFER TESTIMONY, YOU WERE NOT PREVIOUSLY SWORN IN, RAISE RIGHT HERE. DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU'RE ABOUT TO GIVE. BE THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. COUNSEL. DISCLOSURES. COUNCIL MEMBER. FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE. VISITED MANY TIMES. AND DID NOT. AND STAFF TALKED TO STAFF, BASICALLY. THANK YOU. BARTON. NO COMMUNICATIONS. DIDN'T WE ALREADY DISCUSS THIS? THIS WAS ON. WASN'T THIS SOMETHING WE DID A WHILE BACK? WE APPROVED IT IN 2025. AND THIS IS A CHANGE OF BUSINESS TO THIS. YES. I HAVE NO ADDITIONAL DISCUSSIONS FROM THE LAST TIME THAT WE'VE DISCUSSED THIS, SO. NO, I'VE GOT NO DISCLOSURES. SO UNLIKE THE FIRST TIME, THIS IS NOT ADDING TO THIS IS A BRAND NEW. SO NO DISCLOSURES THEN. THANK YOU. I SPOKE WITH STAFF. I READ ALL THE CORRESPONDENCE THAT WAS SENT AND I WALKED AROUND THERE WITH THE NEW HOTEL. YOU CAN KIND OF WALK UP IN THERE TO THE LEFT OF IT. I JUST KIND OF LOOKED AROUND, WANTED TO SEE WHAT WAS WHAT. A COUPLE TIMES LAST WEEK, THAT'S ALL. COUNCIL MEMBER SCHULTZ FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE. NO DISCLOSURES. AT PENMON FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE. NO DISCLOSURES OTHER THAN SOME EMAILS. FAMILIAR WITH THIS? I DISCUSSED IT WITH STAFF AND READ THE EMAILS THAT WE RECEIVED. FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE, NO COMMUNICATION WITH THE PETITIONER OR THE PETITIONER'S AGENT. AND HAD READ THE CORRESPONDENCE WITH THAT PETITIONER'S AGENT. GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING MAYOR, VICE MAYOR. MY NAME IS CLAY BROOKER WITH THE LAW FIRM OF CHAFFEE PASSIDOMO AT 821 FIFTH AVENUE SOUTH. FIRST OF ALL, WELCOME BACK FROM YOUR PSEUDO SUMMER RECESS. THERE'S A LITTLE BIT BUSIER THAN A NORMAL SUMMER FROM THE PAST EXPERIENCE, BUT OUR FIRM REPRESENTS, ALONG WITH RENEE ZAPATA OF THE ARCHITECTURAL FIRM OMB LLC AS PETITIONER AND RESTAURANT OPERATOR, AND THE CAMALIER FAMILY AND OLDE NAPLES BUILDING, LLC AS PROPERTY OWNER IN THIS OUTDOOR DINING APPLICATION FOR THE OLDE NAPLES BUILDING. AS YOU MAY BE AWARE, THE PROPERTY SHOWN HERE AS IT APPEARED CIRCA 1921, IS LOCATED AT THE ENTRANCE TO THE THIRD STREET SOUTH HISTORIC DISTRICT AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF BROAD AVENUE AND THIRD STREET SOUTH. THE OUTDOOR DINING APPLICATION BEFORE YOU THIS THIS MORNING HAS ONE AND ONLY ONE SIMPLE PURPOSE TO UPDATE THE RESTAURANT OPERATOR. [01:55:08] OUTDOOR DINING AT THIS LOCATION WAS ALREADY APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL BACK IN DECEMBER 2025, AND NO CHANGES TO THAT APPROVAL OTHER THAN TO UPDATE THE RESTAURANT OPERATOR ARE PROPOSED TODAY PURSUANT TO THE CITY'S CODE SHOWN HERE. A NEW OUTDOOR DINING PERMIT APPLICATION MUST BE SUBMITTED FOR CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL WHEN THERE IS A CHANGE IN THE BUSINESS. OPERATOR. WE UNDERSTAND THAT THE PURPOSE OF THIS REQUIREMENT IS TO ENSURE THAT THE NEW RESTAURANT OPERATOR IS FAMILIAR WITH THE APPROVED LIFE SAFETY PLAN FOR THE OUTDOOR DINING, AND ANY OTHER CONDITIONS IMPOSED ON THE OUTDOOR DINING APPROVAL. ACCORDINGLY, THE SOLE PURPOSE OF THE APPLICATION BEFORE YOU TODAY IS SIMPLY TO REPLACE THE PREVIOUSLY IDENTIFIED RESTAURANT OPERATOR UNDER RESOLUTION 2025 15, 789, SHOWN HERE WITH THE CURRENT PROPOSED OPERATOR, OMB LLC. THE PRINCIPLES BEHIND THE NEW RESTAURANT OPERATOR WILL BE STEFANO FRATILA AND MARINA NOVIKOVA. MISS NOVIKOVA IS HERE TODAY AND CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. YOU MAY BE FAMILIAR WITH MR. FRATILA BECAUSE HE BRINGS A WEALTH OF PROVEN, SUCCESSFUL EXPERIENCE OPERATING HIGH QUALITY RESTAURANTS IN THE NAPLES AREA, INCLUDING LA SALLIER, WHICH IS CURRENTLY AT 360 12TH AVENUE SOUTH, ABOUT A BLOCK AND A HALF AWAY FROM THE SUBJECT LOCATION. IF THIS APPLICATION IS APPROVED, MR. FRATILA INTENDS TO RELOCATE THAT RESTAURANT TO THE OLD NAPLES BUILDING. THIS RESTAURANT FEATURES AUTHENTIC ITALIAN CUISINE ROOTED IN THE RESTAURANT'S MONTE CARLO HERITAGE SINCE 1982, OFFERING HANDMADE PASTAS, FAMILY STYLE SHARING PLATES, FRESH SEAFOOD AND CLASSIC ENTREES. SOME OTHER OF MR. VITELLO'S NAPLES RESTAURANTS INCLUDE BEACH RESTAURANT AT 305TH AVENUE SOUTH, CAFE MILANO AT 805TH AVENUE SOUTH, VERGINA AT 705TH AVENUE SOUTH AND BAKERY AT 824 FIFTH AVENUE SOUTH. IT SHOULD ALSO BE MENTIONED THAT MR. PATELLA POSSESSES EXTENSIVE EXPERIENCE WITH HISTORIC BUILDINGS THROUGHOUT HIS PROFESSIONAL CAREER. HIS FAMILY OWNS THE OLDEST RESTAURANT IN ITALY, LA SIBILLA, WHICH FEATURES TWO ANCIENT TEMPLES DATING BACK TO THE BC ERA. ADDITIONALLY, HE OWNS A RESTAURANT IN THE ART DECO MIAMI BUILDING, THE CARLYLE, WHERE THE MOVIES THE BIRDCAGE AND SCARFACE WERE FILMED. ALL OF MR. PATELLA'S EXPERIENCE WILL BE SHOWCASED AT THE OLDE NAPLES BUILDING IF THIS APPLICATION IS APPROVED TODAY. AS PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED, WE ARE PROPOSING NO SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES TO THE OUTDOOR DINING PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. THE APPLICATION INCLUDES THE SAME PREVIOUSLY APPROVED LIFE SAFETY PLAN SHOWN HERE. THE OUTDOOR DINING AREA, THE SEATING LAYOUT, HOURS OF OPERATION REMAIN EXACTLY AS APPROVED UNDER RESOLUTION 2025 15, 789, AND A NEW OPERATOR WILL COMPLY WITH ALL OF THE CONDITIONS OF THAT APPROVAL WITHOUT MODIFICATION. AS A CONDITION TO THE OUTDOOR DINING APPROVAL, THE CITY REQUIRED THAT WE PROVIDE SEVEN PARKING SPACES FOR THE OUTDOOR DINING AREA. SO WHEN THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED THE OUTDOOR DINING BACK IN DECEMBER OF 2025, IT ALSO APPROVED SEVEN DESIGNATED OFF SITE PARKING SPACES AT THIS LOCATION 300 375 BROAD AVENUE SOUTH, ABOUT 350FT AWAY FROM THE OLD NAPLES BUILDING PROPERTY. SHOWN HERE ARE THE COPIES OF RESOLUTION 2025 15788 AND THE RELATED OFF SITE PARKING AGREEMENT, WHICH HAS BEEN RECORDED IN THE PUBLIC RECORDS AS REQUIRED BY CODE. AGAIN, NO CHANGES TO ANY OF THESE APPROVALS ARE PROPOSED TODAY. TO CONCLUDE, THE SIMPLE, THE SIMPLE AND ONLY REQUEST BEFORE YOU TODAY IS TO APPROVE ONB, LLC AS THE NEW RESTAURANT OPERATOR FOR THE OUTDOOR DINING AT THE OLD NAPLES BUILDING. ALL OTHER ASPECTS OF THE OUTDOOR DINING APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL BACK IN DECEMBER 2025 REMAIN UNCHANGED. WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST COUNCIL'S APPROVAL OF ONB LLC, AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE WITH THE CAVEAT THAT I'VE BEEN DISCUSSING WITH ERIKA. THE DRAFT RESOLUTION THAT'S IN THE AGENDA CONTAINS TWO CONDITIONS THAT STATE, BASICALLY, THAT THE APPROVALS ARE DEPENDENT UPON THE OFF SITE PARKING BEING APPROVED. WELL, THAT HAS ALREADY OCCURRED. SO I HAVE A I HAVE SUGGESTED MODIFIED LANGUAGE TO REFLECT THAT THOSE APPROVALS EXIST AND THAT THIS APPROVAL, [02:00:05] IF GRANTED TODAY, IS RELIANT UPON THAT OFF SITE PARKING APPROVAL BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY OCCURRED IN THE PAST. I CAN GIVE YOU SPECIFIC LANGUAGE, BUT MAYBE PULLING UP THE RESOLUTION MIGHT BE AN EASIER WAY TO INTRODUCE THAT. BUT WITH THAT, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. THANK YOU. COUNCIL QUESTIONS FOR THE PETITIONERS AGENT. SO IT WAS THERE A AS BUILT SURVEY ON THE HOTEL TO SEE AN UPDATED LIFE SAFETY PLAN THAT ACTUALLY FITS WITHIN THAT SPACE THAT WAS APPROVED BACK IN 25. YOU MENTIONED HOTEL. DID YOU MEAN RESTAURANT? WELL, THE THERE, THE RESTAURANT WHICH HAS A HOTEL AND RETAIL SPACE NEXT TO IT HAS BEEN BUILT. AND MY QUESTION IS, WAS THERE A CONFIRMED AMOUNT OF SQUARE FOOTAGE? ONCE THAT HOTEL AND RETAIL SPACE WAS CONFIRMED THAT THE AMOUNT OF SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR OUTDOOR DINING IS STILL REMAINS. THE AMOUNT OF OUTDOOR DINING SPACE IS 2315FT², AND THAT HAS THAT IS UNCHANGED PER THE PRIOR DECEMBER 2025 APPROVAL. IF I UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION CORRECTLY, YOU ARE REFERRING TO A NEXT DOOR PROPERTY WHICH IS NOT THE SUBJECT. PROPERTY HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH US. SO WHETHER THAT SPACE, THOSE COMMERCIAL, THOSE RETAIL SPACES THAT WERE BUILT IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE OLD NAPLES HOTEL, WHICH IS NOW UP AND RUNNING, WHETHER THAT HAS BEEN CONFIRMED OR THAT SPACE HAS BEEN CONFIRMED, HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS. I ANSWERED MY OWN QUESTION. I'M GOING TO GO BACK TO. I'M GOING TO GO TO START ASKING. YES, WE HAVE RECEIVED AS BUILT SURVEYS FOR THE OLD NAPLES HOTEL THAT HAS BEEN CONFIRMED AND WE. AND THROUGH THAT I CAN CONFIRM THAT THAT CONSTRUCTION DID NOT ENCROACH UPON THE AREA THAT THE OLD NAPLES BUILDING HAS REQUESTED FOR OUTDOOR DINING. NO. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THAT WAS A BETTER ANSWER. OKAY. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE PETITIONERS AGENT. THANK YOU. WE'LL MOVE TO THE STAFF REPORT. GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING. MAYOR, VICE MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL, CITY MANAGER. CITY ATTORNEY. CITY CLERK. TASHIMA LEWIS WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT BEFORE USE. OUTDOOR DINING PETITION 2604. THE PETITIONERS O AND B, LLC. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS 1148 THIRD STREET SOUTH. THE OUTDOOR DINING PETITION REQUEST IS DUE TO A CHANGE IN BUSINESS OPERATOR THE PETITIONER AFFIRMS THAT THE OUTDOOR DINING AREA CONFIGURATION, HOURS OF OPERATION AND CONDITIONS OF THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED OUTDOOR DINING PETITION, 25 DE 18 WILL REMAIN WITHOUT MODIFICATION. SIMILAR TO THE ORIGINAL SUBMITTAL, THE NO INFORMATION RELATED TO THE PROPOSED RESTAURANT, SUCH AS THE NAME, CUISINE TYPE, DINING FORMAT OR RESTAURANT WERE INCLUDED WITH THE APPLICATION. A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND THE OLD NAPLES BUILDING IS A LEGAL, NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE. BUILT IN 1921, THE BUILDING WAS CONSTRUCTED CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO THE INCORPORATION OF THE CITY AND PRIOR TO THE ADOPTION OF REGULATIONS REQUIRING PROPERTY OWNERS PROPERTY OWNERS TO PROVIDE OFF STREET PARKING. CONSEQUENTLY, THERE ARE NO PHYSICAL PARKING SPACES ON THIS SITE. AN ADMINISTRATIVE DETERMINATION ISSUED BY FORMER PLANNING DIRECTOR ROBIN SINGER IN 2011 PROVIDED THAT THE LAST PERMITTED USE OF THE PROPERTY OPERATED WITH A PARKING DEFICIT OF 76 SPACES, AND THE BUILDING WAS ESTABLISHED AS A LAWFUL NONCONFORMITY. ON JUNE 26TH, 2018, JUDGE LAUREN L BRODIE ISSUED A FINAL JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF THE DEFENDANTS IN THE CITY OF NAPLES, OLD NAPLES BUILDING LLC AND BROAD AVENUE LLC, ORDERING THAT THE DEFENDANTS SHALL BE ENTITLED TO RELY UPON THE SEPTEMBER 2ND, 2011 ADMINISTRATIVE DETERMINATION UPON APPEAL BEFORE SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS, THE FINAL JUDGMENT WAS UPHELD. PUBLIC NOTICE FOR THIS PETITION WAS ACHIEVED ON JULY 28TH, 2026. A TOTAL OF 481 LETTERS WERE MAILED TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 1000FT OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AS OF THE DATE OF THE STAFF REPORT. STAFF RECEIVED ONE EMAIL IN SUPPORT OF THIS PETITION AND IT IS INCLUDED IN YOUR BACKUP MATERIAL. I DID RECEIVE ONE EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE IN OPPOSITION WHICH WAS PLACED ON YOUR DESK THIS MORNING. THE PETITION WAS REVIEWED BY APPLICABLE CITY DEPARTMENTS. THERE ARE NO OPEN CODE VIOLATIONS, AND THE LIFE SAFETY PLAN WAS APPROVED BY THE DEPUTY FIRE CHIEF. PURSUANT TO SECTION 56. ONE. 26. TWO OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE STAFF HAVE REVIEWED THE PETITION FOR OUTDOOR DINING ON THE PROPERTY, LOCATED AT 1148 THIRD STREET SOUTH, AND FIND THAT THE STANDARDS HAVE BEEN MET SHOULD THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE OUTDOOR DINING PETITION 260 D FOR [02:05:06] STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND THE SIX CONDITIONS INCLUDED IN THE RESOLUTION. THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. I'M AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. AND I WOULD JUST ADD TO THAT THE CONDITIONS THAT WERE INCLUDED IN YOUR RESOLUTION WERE CARRIED OVER FROM THE PREVIOUS OUTDOOR DINING REQUEST, THAT THE REASON FOR THAT IS THAT RESOLUTION WAS WORKED THROUGH WITH OUR LEGAL TEAM, THEIR LEGAL TEAM, PRIOR TO THAT. MR. BROOKER HAS PROPOSED A BIT OF A AMENDMENT TO THAT REFLECTING THAT THE PARKING AGREEMENT HAS BEEN RECORDED. IT'S BEEN EXECUTED AND RECORDED. THIS IS THE CONDITIONAL USE THAT ALLOWED FOR OFF SITE PARKING WITHIN 600FT WHICH ALLOWED THEM TO HAVE THE OUTDOOR DINING TO BEGIN WITH THE INTENT OF THOSE TWO CONDITIONS THAT HE'S REFERRING TO ON THE INTENT OF THOSE TWO CONDITIONS WAS TO ENSURE THAT THE OUTDOOR DINING AT THIS LOCATION WILL ALWAYS BE TIED TO, AND RELIANT UPON, THE CONDITIONAL USE FOR OFF SITE PARKING AND THE PARKING AGREEMENT THAT WAS EXECUTED BETWEEN THESE TWO BUILDINGS THAT ENCUMBERS BOTH BUILDINGS NOW IN PERPETUITY. AND THAT PARKING AGREEMENT CAN'T BE AMENDED BY ONE PARTY. ESSENTIALLY WITHOUT THE CITY'S APPROVAL AND APPROVAL OF BOTH PARTIES. SO I CAN READ CLAY'S PROPOSED LANGUAGE. IT'S ESSENTIALLY JUST CHANGING, DEPENDENT UPON. COULD YOU PUT IT ON THE SCREEN? I ONLY HAVE IT IN AN EMAIL, SO I CAN'T PUT THAT ON THE SCREEN, BUT I CAN I CAN READ IT INTO THE RECORD IF YOU'D LIKE. ESSENTIALLY SAYS APPROVAL OF THIS OUTDOOR DINING REQUEST IS RELIANT UPON RESOLUTION 2025 15788 WHICH MEMORIALIZES CITY COUNCIL'S APPROVAL OF OFF SITE PARKING AND THE ASSOCIATED OFFSITE PARKING AGREEMENT RECORDED ON MARCH 26TH, 2026. AS AT OFFICIAL RECORDS RECORDS 6568. PAGE FOUR OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. COMBINES THE TWO, SHORTENS IT, AND REFERS TO THAT PARKING AGREEMENT. AND IF I COULD CLARIFY THAT, THAT LANGUAGE WOULD REPLACE CONDITIONS TWO AND FIVE AND A DRAFT RESOLUTION, SO TWO AND FIVE WOULD DISAPPEAR. THE LANGUAGE THAT MISS MARTIN JUST READ WOULD COME IN ITS PLACE, AND BASICALLY SERVES THE PURPOSE OF TYING THE TWO APPROVALS TOGETHER IN PERPETUITY. AND REFLECTING THAT THAT OFFSITE PARKING HAS ALREADY BEEN APPROVED. AND THE OFF SITE PARKING AGREEMENT HAS ALREADY BEEN RECORDED WITH RECORDING INFORMATION SO PEOPLE CAN SEE IT AND GO FIND IT AND READ IT. AND IF THAT OFF SITE PARKING AGREEMENT WERE EVER TO BE AMENDED, IT WOULD AFFECT THIS OUTDOOR DINING. THE TWO WILL FOREVER BE ENTWINED. ARE YOU SAYING SO IF THE BUILDING IS SOLD, IT'S NOT OWNERSHIP PER SE. IT'S THE, THE ENCUMBRANCE ON THE OFF SITE PARKING ON BROAD AVENUE IS THAT THERE WILL EVER FOREVER BE A CERTAIN NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES AVAILABLE FOR THE USE OF THIS OLD NAPLES BUILDING AND ALL OF THE CONDITIONS THAT WERE PLACED UPON THAT, SO THAT THAT PROPERTY WILL BE ENCUMBERED IN THAT WAY IN PERPETUITY. SOMEBODY COULD BUY IT, BUT THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO ADHERE TO THOSE ENCUMBRANCES. AND ALSO. YES. AND ALSO THE USES THAT COULD BE APPROVED IN THAT BUILDING THAT IS CURRENTLY AN ART GALLERY. AND THIS IS ALL DEPENDENT UPON THE FACT THAT THAT ART GALLERY CLOSES AT A CERTAIN TIME, REQUIRES A CERTAIN, YOU KNOW, OR REQUIRES A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF PARKING DEMAND. SO IF YOU KNOW, IN THE FUTURE, WE GOT A BUSINESS TAX APPLICATION BECAUSE SOMEONE WANTED TO PUT A RESTAURANT IN THAT BUILDING, WE WOULD SAY, NO, THAT IS ENCUMBERED IN THAT WAY, UNLESS IT'S A VERY, VERY SMALL RESTAURANT THAT CLOSES AT FIVE, RIGHT? WE'RE ONLY OPEN FOR BREAKFAST. SO GREAT. QUESTIONS? YES, BARTON. FIRST OF ALL, IF OUR PLANNING DIRECTOR AND OUR ATTORNEY ARE OKAY WITH THAT LANGUAGE. I'M OKAY WITH THAT LANGUAGE. I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE GOT TO DO TO. THERE'S GOT TO BE A CONDITION TO THIS APPROVAL OR OR WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING YOU GUYS HAD A DEAL ON? IT WOULD JUST IF A MOTION WAS MADE, YOU COULD JUST MAKE THAT MOTION AND THEN THE RESOLUTION WOULD BE AMENDED PRIOR TO EXECUTION, WHICH AGAIN, IF YOU GUYS ARE OKAY WITH IT, I'M OKAY WITH IT. BUT OBVIOUSLY IF YOU'VE GOT OPINIONS CONTRARY TO THAT LANGUAGE, I'M FOLLOWING YOUR LEAD. I DON'T. AND THEN THE OTHER ONLY OTHER THING WAS JUST A REAL QUICK COMMENT. THIS IS ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT I WOULD LOVE TO SEE APPROVED ADMINISTRATIVELY. WE'VE GOT A SITUATION WHERE THERE ARE ABSOLUTELY NO CHANGES TO THE OPERATING PLAN. THE ONLY REASON IT'S BACK IN FRONT OF US IS BECAUSE THERE'S A CHANGE IN THE BUSINESS. OPERATOR. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THE RATIONALE FOR THAT IS THAT WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE NEW BUSINESS OPERATOR IS FAMILIAR WITH THE LIFE SAFETY PLAN. I WOULD LOVE TO THINK THAT MAYBE A SIGNED AFFIDAVIT FROM THE NEW BUSINESS OPERATOR SAYING HE'S FAMILIAR WITH THE LIFE, THE LIFE AND SAFETY PLAN THAT'S BEEN APPROVED GOING TO STAFF AND STAFF, SEEING THAT SIGNED AFFIDAVIT. [02:10:04] AND WE CAN ALL MOVE ON WITH OUR LIVES. THAT WOULD BE AWESOME. AND WE WOULDN'T BE UP HERE DISCUSSING SOMETHING THAT'S ALREADY BEEN APPROVED AND THERE HAVE BEEN NO CHANGES. SO JUST A FOOD FOR THOUGHT AND ONE COUNCILMAN'S OPINION. THANK YOU. I DO HAVE A QUESTION, THOUGH, ON THE LIFE SAFETY PLAN. CAN YOU PUT THAT ON THE SCREEN? TRY. IS IT IN YOUR IS IT IN YOUR PRESENTATION? IT WAS IN THE PRESENTATION. EXCELLENT. WELL ON MY PRESENTATION IT'S KIND OF A PICTURE. SO IT IS PART, I BELIEVE, OF THE AGENDA. I GOT IT. OH, NO, THAT'S THAT'S THE LANDSCAPE. I KNOW. KEEP GOING. THERE YOU GO. THAT IS THE APPROVED LIFE SAFETY. CHIEF. I JUST WANT TO CONFIRM THAT SOMEONE, SINCE THE PROPERTY SURROUNDING IT, THAT THIS ACTUAL LIFE SAFETY PLAN AND NUMBER OF TABLES AND CHAIRS IS STILL ABLE TO FIT WITHIN THAT AREA. OKAY. PHIL PENNINGTON, FIRE CHIEF. THIS PLAN WAS REVIEWED BY THE ACTING FIRE FIRE MARSHAL AND WAS APPROVED. SO. BASED ON THAT, IT SHOULD BE IT'S APPROVED. IT WAS REVIEWED AND THERE'S NO ISSUES. ESSENTIALLY, THEY DID SUBMIT THIS. SO I THINK I KNOW WHERE YOU'RE GOING WITH THIS. THEY WERE NOT APPROVAL FOR THIS PETITION. THE ACTING FIRE MARSHAL DID NOT RELY ON HIS REVIEW FROM 2025. THIS LIFE SAFETY PLAN WAS SUBMITTED FOR SPECIFIC TO THIS APPLICATION AND WAS REVIEWED WITHIN THE PAST MONTH FOR THIS APPLICATION. CORRECT. WHICH OBVIOUSLY TAKES INTO CONSIDERATION THE NEW HOTEL CONTEXT. YEP. OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. CAN YOU JUST GO OVER THE CONDITIONS ALSO, THAT WAS IN WITHIN THAT, THE RESTAURANT OWNER IS AWARE THAT THERE WILL BE NO CHANGES TO THE INTERIOR. SEPARATE DISCUSSION. BUT YES, I HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED. I DID HAVE A MEETING YESTERDAY. YESTERDAY WITH THE NEW ARCHITECT OF RECORD BUSINESS OWNER AND THEIR CONTRACTOR TO GO OVER, YOU KNOW, THE EXTREME LIMITATIONS ON THIS BUILDING. AND THEN ALSO WE AGREED TO HAVE A MEETING AGAIN IN THE FUTURE AND WORK WITH THEM VERY CLOSELY AS THEY MOVE FORWARD SO THAT THEY'RE AWARE THAT NOT ONLY DO YOU HAVE HISTORIC DESIGNATION LIMITATIONS, BUT ALSO THE NONCONFORMING ASPECT OF THIS BUILDING, NOT ONE THING CAN BE CHANGED. IT IS VERY SPECIFIC. YES. AND I, AND IT'S IN THE RESOLUTION UNDER THE RESOLUTION. IT'S IN THE STAFF REPORT. IT'S IN THE RESOLUTION. SO THE RESOLUTION NUMBER FOUR IN THE EVENT OF ANY BUILDING PERMIT, DEMOLITION PERMIT OR ANY FUTURE RENOVATION OR CONSTRUCTION TO THE BUILDING THAT REQUIRES DEMOLITION OR REMOVAL OF ANY EXISTING SQUARE FOOTAGE THAT CONTRIBUTES TO THE CALCULATION OF 76 PARKING CREDITS AS STATED IN THE FINAL JUDGMENT DATED JUNE 26TH, 2018. THE OWNER SHALL FORFEIT THE PARKING CREDITS ASSOCIATED WITH THE DEMOLISHED SPACE, WITH THE REMAINDER OF THE PARKING CREDIT ASSOCIATED WITH THE NON DEMOLISHED AREA REMAINING INTACT. AND THEN IT WENT INTO THE PURPOSES OF CALCULATING THE FORFEITURE OF PARKING CREDITS. AND THIS WAS ALL DISCUSSED IN THE ORIGINAL APPROVAL. THIS CONDITION WAS ACTUALLY DRAFTED WITH OUR LEGAL TEAM AGREED TO BY THE PETITIONER AND WAS PART OF THE 2025 APPROVAL. WE'VE INCLUDED IT IN THIS RESOLUTION SO THAT IT WILL ALSO BE A CONDITION OF THIS APPROVAL SHOULD COUNCIL VOTE TO APPROVE. SO THE PETITIONER CAN MAKE A STATEMENT THAT THEY ARE AWARE OF THIS AND KNOW THAT ANYTHING THAT WOULD CHANGE. OH, I'M SORRY YOU CAN'T ANSWER THE QUESTION FROM THERE. HELLO. MY NAME IS MARINA. WE ARE AWARE ABOUT THE CONDITIONS. OKAY. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE BECAUSE THAT'S MOST IMPORTANT THAT THAT REMAIN. OKAY. THANK YOU. WE ALSO INCLUDED NUMBER SIX. SHOULD ANY OF THESE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL BE VIOLATED. CITY COUNCIL MAY REVIEW, MODIFY OR REVOKE THIS APPROVAL. RIGHT. SO THANK YOU FOR THAT BEING ON THE RECORD. THAT'S WHY I WANTED TO MAKE SURE YOU KNEW THAT. AND THEN HOW DOES THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT KNOW ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR REQUIREMENTS FOR THIS POSITION? [02:15:04] THE CONDITION THAT I JUST READ MR. BECKMAN HAS BEEN INVOLVED FROM THE BEGINNING. HE WAS INCLUDED IN THE MEETING WE HAD YESTERDAY, AND WE WILL INCLUDE HIM IN ALL MEETINGS WITH THE CONTRACTORS, ARCHITECTS AND BUSINESS OWNER MOVING FORWARD. AND SO LEGALLY AND ADMINISTRATIVELY, THAT IS SUFFICIENT IN MAKING SURE THAT THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT IS AWARE. LEGALLY, I FEEL A LOT BETTER THAT IT'S IN THE RESOLUTION. ADMINISTRATIVELY, I'LL DEFAULT TO PLANNING AND AND MR. YOUNG, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THIS HAS BEEN AN ISSUE THAT'S GONE ON FOR A LONG TIME. BUT I DON'T KNOW HOW ELSE WE COULD NOTIFY SINCE STAFF CHANGES AND STUFF. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S A WAY TO NOTIFY IT. SO THE NONCONFORMING ASPECT OF THE BUILDING. THIS IS THE OUTDOOR DINING APPROVAL. AND WHILE I UNDERSTAND THAT THE OUTDOOR DINING APPROVAL IS CONTINGENT UPON OR IS RELIANT UPON THE MAINTENANCE OF THE NONCONFORMING ASPECT OF THE BUILDING, SHOULD THE. SHOULD THE PETITIONER OWNER ANYONE DO ANYTHING CONSTRUCTION WISE THAT WOULD FORFEIT THAT NONCONFORMITY THAT HAS IMPLICATIONS ON THIS BUILDING BEYOND JUST OUTDOOR DINING, THE OUTDOOR DINING. THEY'VE SHOWN THEY'VE PROVIDED PARKING SEPARATELY SO THEY'RE NOT RELYING ON THE 76 PARKING SPACES TO ACHIEVE THE OUTDOOR DINING THAT WAS APPROVED. THAT'S WHAT THEY DID. THE CONDITIONAL USE FOR THE OFF SITE PARKING. THE 76 PARKING SPACES THAT ARE THEY ARE AFFORDED THROUGH THE NON-CONFORMING STATUS OF THIS BUILDING IS FOR THE OPERATION OF THE INTERIOR AND THE RESTAURANT ITSELF. SO I DON'T KNOW THAT TYING IT TO THE OUTDOOR DINING RESOLUTION. BUT I MEAN, TO BE CLEAR, WE'VE HAD MR. BECKMAN IS VERY AWARE OF NON-CONFORMING BUILDINGS AND HOW IT'S A REPAIR AND MAINTAIN SITUATION, NOT A REMOVE AND REPLACE. AND EACH ONE OF THESE. AND WHEN THE BUILDING PERMITS COME IN, YOU KNOW, THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT, NOT ONLY DO THEY ADMINISTER THE BUILDING PERMIT, BUT THEY, YOU KNOW, THE SUBMITTAL AND ISSUANCE OF THE BUILDING PERMIT. THEY'RE STRUCTURAL REVIEWERS. THEY'RE ALL OF THEIR REVIEWERS. AND MR. BECKMAN HIMSELF WILL LOOK AT THAT AND MAKE SURE THAT THEY ARE SHOWING IN THEIR CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS HOW THEY ARE MAINTAINING THIS NON-CONFORMING BUILDING. AND SO, YOU KNOW, I FEEL LIKE THAT THROUGH THE REVIEW OF THE PLANS. AND THEN ALSO KEEP AN EYE ON IT AND MAKE SURE AND WORK WITH THE CONTRACTOR AND MAKE SURE THAT AS THEY MOVE FORWARD, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE STICKING TO THOSE PLANS. IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT WHEN A BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION IS FILED AND PROCESSED, IT GETS ROUTED THROUGH PLANNING DEPARTMENT. IT DOES COME THROUGH PLANNING. WE DID PLANNING, GOING TO SEE IT. WE DID SO PLANNING REVIEWS. WE DO A ZONING REVIEW. AND THAT ZONING REVIEW IS NOT JUST, YOU KNOW, TO MAKE SURE IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE CODE, BUT ALSO TO MAKE SURE IT'S CONSISTENT WITH ANY OTHER APPROVALS OR ENTITLEMENTS. IN THIS CASE, ALSO WITH THE FINAL JUDGMENT THAT WAS ISSUED. WE DID REVIEW THE ORIGINAL ADDITION ALTERATION PERMIT THAT. THAT, THAT THEY, THEY HAD ISSUED A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO. AND THERE WAS A LIFE SAFETY PLAN INCLUDED IN THAT FIRE WOULD REVIEW THAT LIFE SAFETY PLAN PLANNING REVIEWS IT FOR CONSISTENCY WITH THE ZONING REGULATIONS. BUT THEN AGAIN, THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT, STRUCTURAL REVIEWERS, THEY REVIEW IT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE METHOD OF CONSTRUCTION THAT THEY ARE USING IS CONSISTENT WITH MAINTAINING THE NONCONFORMITY AND NOT, YOU KNOW, REMOVING THE BUILDING AND REPLACING IT. NO, I UNDERSTAND. I'M JUST CHECKING TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE ARE PROCESSES AND PROCEDURES. IF THERE WERE EVER TO BE CHANGE OF STAFF OR HISTORIC KNOWLEDGE THAT IT IS WITHIN YOUR DEPARTMENT, BUT ALSO WITHIN THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT. SO WE DON'T HAVE AN. OOPS. YES. THANK YOU. AND THAT'S WHY SOMETIMES YOU HAVE TO CONFIRM THAT. I THINK THE PETITIONER WILL TESTIFY IN OUR MEETING. YESTERDAY I DOUBLED, TRIPLED, QUADRUPLED DOWN TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY UNDERSTOOD HOW SENSITIVE THIS IS ON THIS BUILDING AND HOW LIMITED THE CONSTRUCTION WILL BE. THANK YOU. A SIGNED AFFIDAVIT FROM THE PETITIONER MIGHT BE VALUABLE THEN. I DON'T KNOW WITH RESPECT TO THE OUTDOOR DINING, BUT NO, BUT JUST IN GENERAL CONSTRUCTION SITE. IF SIGNED AFFIDAVIT WOULD WOULD TELL ALL OF US IF PART OF THE FILE THAT THEY UNDERSTAND EVERYTHING THAT GOES ALONG WITH RUNNING AND OPERATING A BUSINESS IN THIS PARTICULAR LOCATION. SURE. WHERE THAT'S APPROPRIATE, WHERE WHAT WOULD WE TIE THAT? WELL, AGAIN, I WOULD I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE THAT AS A PART OF A CONDITIONAL, I MEAN, ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL PROCESS. AND THEN WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO SPEND AN HOUR UP HERE TALKING ABOUT SORRY, I SEE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. THANK YOU. YEAH. OKAY. FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. PUBLIC COMMENT. NO, NO PUBLIC COMMENT. CLOSING REMARKS. RESPECTFULLY REQUEST APPROVAL. THANK YOU. OKAY. ANY DELIBERATION? I'LL MAKE A MOTION. [02:20:06] MAKE MAKE MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION FOR THE PURPOSE OF DETERMINING OUTDOOR DINING. PETITION 26-0D FOR PURSUANT TO SECTION 56-126 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES PROVING THE ONLY. THE CHANGE OF. THE BUSINESS OPERATOR FOR A RESTAURANT OWNED AND OPERATED BY OMB, LLC. DO YOU WANT ME TO MENTION ABOUT SIX CONDITIONS? FIRST OF ALL, PERFECT MOTION. OKAY. THAT WAS BEAUTIFUL. JUST CHECKING. OH, THAT WAS BEAUTIFUL. YES. WITH WITH THE MODIFICATIONS TO CONDITION TWO AND FIVE, AS REFERENCED BY STAFF, AS NOTED. AND THE. AND THE AFFIDAVIT. DO YOU WANT TO DO THAT? OKAY. NOT GOING TO BE A PART OF THE PROCESS. HE LOVES AFFIDAVITS. THIS GUY DOES. THAT'S WHY I'M HOVERING OVER MY BUTTON HERE. OKAY. ARE WE GOOD WITH THAT MOTION? SECOND. OKAY. I GOSH, I WAS I REALLY THOUGHT YOU WERE TRYING TO HELP ME OUT AND MAKING SURE I HAD CONFIDENCE IN THE PROCESS THERE. I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER CARL AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER BARTON. NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, MADAM CLERK. VICE MAYOR BLANKENSHIP. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. CRULL. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BARTON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. CRAMER. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. SCHULTZ. AYE. COUNCIL MEMBER. PENNYMAN. YES. MAYOR. YES. PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. GOOD LUCK. THANK YOU. TAKES US. TAKES US TO ITEM. MAYOR. IF WE COULD DO ITEM 13 A 13, A GS ONE SECOND. ALL RIGHT. YOU'RE ON YOUR GAME THERE, BARTON. ARE YOU? DO YOU WANT TO READ THE TITLE? YES, PLEASE, SIR. 13AA SUPPLEMENTAL RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF NAPLES, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF NOT TO EXCEED 29 MILLION PUBLIC UTILITIES REVENUE [13.A) A Supplemental Resolution of the City Of Naples, Florida Authorizing the Issuance of Not To Exceed $29,000,000 Public Utilities Revenue Bonds, Series 2026 To Finance and/or Reimburse the Costs of the Acquisition, Construction and Erection of Additions, Improvements, and Extensions to the City’s Public Utility System and to Pay Costs Related Thereto; Providing for the Payment of Such Bonds from Pledged Revenues on Parity With Certain Bonds Heretofore Issued by the City; Making Other Covenants and Agreements in Connection Therewith; Authorizing Competitive Bids and Approving the Forms of the Official Notice Of Sale and Summary Notice Of Sale Pertaining to Such Bonds; Making Certain Provisions and Delegating Certain Responsibilities with Respect to the Official Notice Of Sale, Bidding and Sale of Such Bonds; Approving the Forms of the Preliminary Official Statement, Continuing Disclosure Certificate, and Paying Agent and Registrar Agreement; Authorizing the Execution and Delivery of the Final Official Statement, Continuing Disclosure Certificate, and Paying Agent and Registrar Agreement; Providing Certain Other Matters in Connection Therewith; And Providing For An Effective Date (11:00am Time Certain).] BONDS SERIES 2026 TO FINANCE AND OR REIMBURSE THE COST OF THE ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION AND ERECTION OF ADDITIONS, IMPROVEMENTS AND EXTENSIONS TO THE CITY'S PUBLIC UTILITY SYSTEM, AND TO PAY COSTS RELATED THERETO, PROVIDING FOR THE PAYMENT OF SUCH BONDS FROM PLEDGE REVENUES ON PARITY WITH CERTAIN BONDS HERETOFORE ISSUED BY THE CITY, MAKING OTHER COVENANTS AND AGREEMENTS IN CONNECTION, THEREWITH AUTHORIZING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND APPROVING THE FORMS OF THE OFFICIAL NOTICE OF SALE AND SUMMARY NOTICE OF SALE PERTAINING TO SUCH BONDS, MAKING CERTAIN PROVISIONS AND DELEGATING CERTAIN RESPONSIBILITIES WITH RESPECT TO THE OFFICIAL NOTICE OF SALE, BIDDING AND SALE OF SUCH BONDS. APPROVING THE FORMS OF THE PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL STATEMENT, CONTINUING DISCLOSURE CERTIFICATE AND PAYING AGENT AND REGISTRAR AGREEMENT AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY OF THE FINAL OFFICIAL STATEMENT, CONTINUING DISCLOSURE CERTIFICATE AND PAYING AGENT AND REGISTRAR AGREEMENT, PROVIDING CERTAIN OTHER MATTERS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. STEFAN MASSELL, FINANCE DIRECTOR. I'M JOINED TO MY RIGHT BY MR. JOEL TYNDALL. HE IS WITH HILLTOP SECURITIES. HE'S THE CITY'S FINANCIAL ADVISOR ASSISTING WITH THIS ISSUANCE. IN ADDITION, PARTICIPATING VIA ZOOM, WE SHOULD HAVE MR. CHRISTOPHER ROWE, WHO'S THE BOND COUNSEL, WHO HAS BEEN RETAINED FOR THIS PURPOSE. AND JUST HIGH LEVEL WANTED TO PROVIDE, YOU KNOW, AN OVERVIEW OF KIND OF WHERE WE ARE, HOW WE GOT HERE. SO WE'RE HERE TO REQUEST CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZATION TO COMPLETE THE SALE OF BONDS. THESE ARE BONDS THAT WERE CONTEMPLATED AS PART OF THE STORMWATER BEACH OUTFALL PROJECT. THIS IS THE $27 MILLION BOND ISSUANCE THAT WE'VE DISCUSSED IN PREVIOUS MEETINGS. YOU KNOW, JUST GOING BACK IN JUNE OF 2024, CITY COUNCIL HAD AWARDED A CONTRACT TO KIEWIT FOR A GUARANTEED MAXIMUM PRICE OF $86 MILLION FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROJECT. AT THAT TIME, THERE WAS A FINANCING STACK THAT WAS RECOGNIZED AND IT WAS A COMBINATION OF GRANT FUNDS. THERE WAS EVEN ARPA MONEY THAT WAS EXPENDED FOR THIS PURPOSE, AS WELL AS SOME $0.01 SALES TAX FUNDS. IN ADDITION, THERE WAS THE DEBT ISSUANCE OF $27 MILLION. ALL OF THAT, INCLUDING THIS ISSUANCE, WAS ACTUALLY CONTEMPLATED AS PART OF RESOLUTION 2024-15407, WHICH A COPY OF WHICH IS INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET FOR THIS ITEM. IN SEPTEMBER OF 2024, CITY COUNCIL APPROVED AN INTERFUND LOAN BETWEEN THE STORMWATER FUND AND THE CITY'S POOLED CASH WITH AN INTEREST RATE OF 2.67%. [02:25:03] AND THOSE CASH RESOURCES ARE CURRENTLY OWED TO GENERAL FUND AND WATER FUND. THE INTENT WOULD BE TO REFUND THOSE SHORT TERM INTERFUND LOANS ONCE THESE THIS DEBT ISSUANCE HAS BEEN COMPLETED. ADDITIONALLY, ON JUNE 18TH 2025, THE CITY CITY COUNCIL APPROVED A TOURIST DEVELOPMENT TAX GRANT AGREEMENT FOR AN ADDITIONAL $10 MILLION FOR, YOU KNOW, FUNDING OF THIS PROJECT. SO THIS IS KIND OF THE LAST PIECE OF THE PUZZLE TO MAINTAIN THE PLAN FOR LIQUIDITY WITHIN OUR STORMWATER FUND FOR OUR SHORT TERM NEEDS. AND KIND OF THE BEGINNING OF FUTURE DEBT ISSUANCES THAT HAVE BEEN CONTEMPLATED AS PART OF OUR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN. THE RESOLUTION BEFORE YOU TODAY DOES INCLUDE ALL NECESSARY AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THE SALE OF THE BONDS ON A COMPETITIVE BASIS TO ACHIEVE THE PROJECT FUNDING OF $27 MILLION AND DECLARES INTENT TO UTILIZE AND COMPENSATE LEGAL AND OTHER PROFESSIONAL PROVIDERS FOR THIS PURPOSE. THE AMOUNT OF THE AUTHORIZATION IS SET AT 29 MILLION TO ALLOW SOME FLEXIBILITY PERTAINING TO THE STRUCTURE OF OFFERS RECEIVED FROM INTERESTED PARTIES. HOWEVER, THE INTENT REMAINS FOR THE CITY TO ISSUE A SUFFICIENT AMOUNT OF BONDS TO FUND THE $27 MILLION IN PROJECT COSTS FOR THE STORMWATER FUND, PLUS CLOSING COSTS AT THE LOWEST TRUE INTEREST COST POSSIBLE. AND LOOKING AHEAD, THE BONDS ARE TENTATIVELY SLATED TO GO ON SALE ON SEPTEMBER 2ND WITH CLOSING TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED FOR SEPTEMBER 23RD. DID JUST WANT TO MAKE MENTION THERE'S A PRELIMINARY FINANCING SUMMARY INCLUDED WITHIN THE AGENDA MEMORANDUM. THESE INTEREST RATES DO FLUCTUATE. AND I THINK THE LATEST UPDATE THAT I'VE SEEN SO FAR WAS FROM AUGUST 18TH AND THEY WERE UP, IT WAS UP TO A TRUE INTEREST COST OF 4.21%. SO WE'LL JUST HAVE TO SEE WHERE THE MARKET LANDS AT THE END THAT THAT'S JUST GOING TO CONTINUE TO BE A MOVING TARGET UNTIL THOSE BONDS ACTUALLY DO GO ON SALE. AND WITH THAT, I WOULD OPEN IT UP FOR ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. COUNCIL VICE MAYOR. THANK YOU. HOW CONFIDENT ARE YOU ALL IN THE 27 MILLION THAT YOU THAT'S PROJECTED NEEDED IS THE RIGHT NUMBER OR SHOULD WE WITH WHERE THE PROJECT STANDS? YOU THINK THAT'S ENOUGH MONEY OR TOO MUCH, YOU KNOW, TO COMPLETE THE PROJECT? I'LL LET YOU GO. OKAY. I MEAN, I'LL START AND THEN I'LL JUST. I'LL JUST SAY THAT IN ALL THE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY STUDY THAT WAS ALSO PERFORMED FOR THIS ISSUANCE, IN ADDITION, FOR OUR CIP, THIS $27 MILLION NUMBER HAS BEEN A STEADY FIXTURE IN THOSE THERE WILL BE A NECESSITY TO ISSUE ADDITIONAL DEBT IN THE NEXT FIVE YEARS, AS WE KNOW WE FEEL CONFIDENT THAT WE'LL HAVE ADEQUATE LIQUIDITY IN THE FUND FOR THE, FOR THE NEXT YEAR OR TWO. THE CHALLENGE THAT WE HAVE IN MAINTAINING ARBITRAGE COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ISSUING DEBT WITHIN A TWO YEAR TIME HORIZON OF THOSE OUTFLOWS ACTUALLY OCCURRING IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN THE TAX FAVORABLE STATUS OF THE DEBT. AND SO THIS AMOUNT IS RIGHT FOR US IN THE SHORT TERM. AND THERE WILL BE ADDITIONAL AMOUNTS, YOU KNOW, CONTEMPLATED AS WE GET CLOSER TO COMPLETION FOR OTHER PROJECTS. SO I'M GOING TO TAKE YOU BACK INTO THE ORIGINAL FINANCING STACK. AND IT WAS 27 MILLION AT THE TIME. AND EVEN IN THAT DISCUSSION, WE SAID THAT WE WERE STILL GOING TO BE APPLYING FOR TDC FUNDS TO TRY TO GET THE EXTRA 10 MILLION. NOW, REMEMBER, WHAT WE'VE ALSO EMBARKED UPON IS SIGNIFICANT STORMWATER IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS. AND THAT'S WHAT STEFAN'S ALLUDING TO FOR FUTURE DEBT ISSUANCES. BUT WHEN WE RECEIVED THE TDC FUNDS, WE ALREADY BEGAN. WE'RE BEGINNING DESIGN ON MAJOR PROJECTS. AND SO WE HAD PASSED A LONG TIME AGO RESOLUTION THAT SAYS WE ARE GOING TO HAVE OUR OWN FUNDS IN THIS. AND WHEN THE IT'S TIME TO ISSUE THE DEBT THAT WE WOULD REPAY OURSELVES WITH A PORTION OF THE DEBT. THAT'S WHAT PART OF THIS IS DOING. SO THE. 27. I SAY ALL THAT TO GIVE YOU TWO THINGS THAT ARE FACTUAL AND COMFORTING. WE DON'T NEED TO ISSUE ANY MORE DEBT BECAUSE WE DID RECEIVE THE 10 MILLION. WE'RE ALSO NOT GOING TO REDUCE THE DEBT BECAUSE WE HAVE ENOUGH INITIATIVES IN STORMWATER THAT WE'RE KICKING OFF, AND THAT IS SUPPORTED BY YOUR 25% INCREASE THAT BEGINS ON TEN ONE. SO IN SHORT, THE PROJECT IS ON. IT IS MOVING ALONG ON TIME AND WITHIN THE BUDGET, INCLUDING CONTINGENCIES, AND THAT WE DON'T EXPECT ANY ADDITIONAL NEEDS RELATED TO THIS PROJECT FROM ANY PART OF THIS ISSUANCE. THAT'S THE FIRST THING. SECOND THING IS BECAUSE WE WILL HAVE REIMBURSED OURSELVES AND RECEIVED THE TDC. IT PROVIDES US THE LIQUIDITY TO HAVE THE JUMPING OFF POINT FOR THOSE FUTURE PROJECTS THAT WE'RE DESIGNING. THAT, AS STEFAN ALLUDED TO, WE'VE ALREADY BAKED OUT IN THAT THE POTENTIAL OF THE DEBT ISSUANCE TWO YEARS FROM NOW. AND THAT'S IN A PERFECT WORLD, IF THEY GET DESIGNED AND PERMITTED IN 24 MONTHS. SO THIS CONTEMPLATES BOTH. AND WE FEEL PRETTY GOOD ABOUT THIS ISSUANCE IN TOTALITY, NOT ONLY FROM WHERE IT WAS TWO YEARS AGO WHEN WE PUT IT IN THE [02:30:10] FINANCING STACK, BUT ACTUALLY EXECUTING IT TODAY. OKAY, GREAT. SO IF WE DID GET THAT EXTRA 2 MILLION, LIKE IF THERE ARE ENOUGH PEOPLE WHO WANT TO BUY THE BONDS AND YOU GOT IT TO 29, WE WOULD GO AHEAD AND TAKE THAT 2 MILLION AND ACCEPT IT AND USE IT FOR OTHER PROJECTS. IT WOULD ONLY GO INTO EITHER FINANCING OF COST AND OR THE EXECUTION OF IT IF THEY WERE. I THINK IT'S A DISCOUNT OR PREMIUM THAT REQUIRES YOU TO HAVE ADDITIONAL LEEWAY, BECAUSE WHAT WE WANT TO WALK AWAY WITH IS 27. WE WON'T BE TRYING TO WALK AWAY WITH ANY MORE. IT'S HOW THE BOND IS STRUCTURED THAT REQUIRES THAT LEEWAY. I HOPE I SUMMARIZE THAT CORRECTLY TO PERHAPS I DID, RACHEL. THAT'S THAT'S CORRECT. SO WE'RE STRUCTURING AGAIN, JOEL TINDLE WITH HILLTOP SECURITIES RESTRUCTURING THE BONDS TO PROVIDE $27 MILLION OF PROJECT FUNDS. HOW BONDS ARE SOLD. AS GARY MENTIONED THEY CAN COME WITH A PREMIUM OR A DISCOUNT. AND IT REALLY WILL DEPEND ON THE WINNING BID THAT COMES IN HOW THE BONDS ARE STRUCTURED. THAT WILL ULTIMATELY DRIVE THE PAR AMOUNT, WHICH IS BEING AUTHORIZED HERE. BUT THE INTENT IS TO SIZE THE BONDS TO PROVIDE 27 MILLION OF PROJECT FUNDS. AND DO YOU ALL MARKET THE BONDS, OR IS THERE A SEPARATE UNDERWRITER? THE UNDERWRITERS WILL BE BIDDING ON THIS. SO WE ARE ASSISTING WITH SETTING UP THE BID FOR UNDERWRITERS TO COME IN AND PLACE THEIR BID ON. AND DO THEY TYPICALLY, WHOEVER THE UNDERWRITER IS, DO THEY TYPICALLY SELL THE BONDS TO THE PUBLIC OR TO INSTITUTIONS OR. YEAH. A LARGE PART OF NEW ISSUE MUNICIPAL BONDS DO GO TO INSTITUTIONS, AT LEAST INITIALLY. THERE CAN BE OCCASIONALLY SOME QUOTE UNQUOTE RETAIL PARTICIPATION WHICH ARE INDIVIDUALS. BUT A LOT OF TIMES NEW ISSUE MARKET. AND THE BOND ON THE MUNICIPAL BOND SIDE IS PRETTY HEAVILY DOMINATED BY INSTITUTIONS. BONDS DO TRADE. SO THERE IS THE POSSIBILITY IN THE SECONDARY MARKET THE BONDS COULD BE AVAILABLE. PEOPLE ARE OFTEN INTERESTED IN HIGH QUALITY ISSUERS LIKE THE CITY OF NAPLES. RIGHT. THAT'S RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. GOOD QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. YES. COUNCILMEMBER SCHULTZ, WHO DO YOU ANTICIPATE USING FOR THE UNDERWRITING SYNDICATE? IT WILL BE BASED ON THE BID. SO HOW THE BID IS BASICALLY STRUCTURED IS THAT THE BONDS ARE PUT UP FOR SALE IN THE MARKET UNDERWRITERS IN THE MARKET CAN CREATE THEIR OWN SYNDICATES OR BID BY THEMSELVES. AND WHOEVER BASICALLY SHOWS UP WITH THE BEST DEAL THAT INCORPORATES BOTH THE FEES THEY'RE CHARGING AS WELL AS THE INTEREST RATES WILL WIN THE BID. WHAT, IS WHAT HAS BEEN THE APPETITE FOR SECURITIES BOND ISSUANCES LIKE THIS? THERE'S BEEN PRETTY REALLY GOOD INTEREST. I MEAN, THIS WE ANTICIPATE HIGH QUALITY CREDIT RATING. OBVIOUSLY, THE CITY'S GENERAL CREDIT RATING IS VERY STRONG. WE ANTICIPATE A STRONG RATING HERE AS WELL. ON THE UTILITY SIDE, BUT THE INTEREST HAS BEEN BEEN GOOD DESPITE SOME OF THE VOLATILITY WE'VE BEEN SEEING MORE RECENTLY. THIS WOULD PROBABLY BE MORE TOWARD INSURANCE COMPANIES AND BANKS MAYBE. YEAH. I MEAN THERE'S THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF INTEREST FROM MUTUAL FUNDS, INSURANCE COMPANIES, SEPARATELY MANAGED ACCOUNTS OR SMAS HAVE PLAYED A BIG PART IN THE MARKET. BUT THERE'S STILL, THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF INFLOWS INTO BOND FUNDS STILL IN THE MUNICIPAL BOND FUNDS STILL, DESPITE KIND OF WHAT'S BEEN OCCURRING, OBVIOUSLY, RATES ARE HIGHER THAN THEY'VE BEEN IN THE LAST SINCE POST COVID LOWS. BUT THE MARKET'S STILL FUNCTIONING. YEAH. I WAS AFFILIATED WITH HILLTOP FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS IN MY PRIOR LIFE. SM AYE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. FURTHER QUESTIONS? DO YOU HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? NO. OKAY. ANY FURTHER? ANYTHING ELSE, MR. YOUNG? ON THIS ITEM? NO, MA'AM. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. COUNCIL. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS. MOTION I MOVE. WE APPROVE THE RESOLUTION IN 13. AYE TO ISSUE UP TO $29 MILLION OF BONDS. SECOND, WE HAVE A MOTION BY VICE MAYOR AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER. CRAMER. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE PULL THE COUNCIL. A COUNCIL MEMBER? YES. VICE MAYOR BLANKENSHIP. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BARTON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. KRAMER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER KROLL. YES. AND, MAYOR HARTMAN, YES. THANK YOU. COUNCIL PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. THANK YOU BOTH FOR BEING HERE, MR. ROWE. NEXT TIME, PLEASE DON'T SPEAK SO MUCH. MADAM MAYOR, I DO WANT TO SAY THERE WILL BE A DOCUMENT THAT WILL BE CIRCULATED AT OUR NEXT BREAK THAT [02:35:08] WILL REQUIRE THE SIGNATURE OF EVERY MEMBER OF COUNCIL. THAT IS JUST PART OF THIS, THAT GOES ALONG WITH THE RESOLUTION AFFIRMING THAT IT WAS YOUR VOTE THAT YOU TOOK TODAY. SO IT'S JUST A LEGAL DOCUMENT, AND I WANTED TO POINT THAT OUT. SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MR.. I WAS ACTUALLY SAYING THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR ASSISTANCE. AND WITH THAT, THAT CONCLUDES OUR ITEM. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. OKAY. COUNCIL, IF THERE ARE ANY ANYONE OPPOSED, I'D LIKE TO DO 13 G. IF MR. MERRITT AND IS AVAILABLE TO COME FORWARD. MR. YOUNG. OKAY. WE'RE GONNA BE HERE TILL, LIKE. YOU AND HIM. YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND YOU CAN STAY SEATED, I. YEAH. THANK YOU. COUNCIL. MR. MAYOR, ARE YOU OKAY TO MOVE FORWARD EARLY? ABSOLUTELY. LET ME GET A SECOND SO I CAN GET MY STUFF PULLED UP HERE. THANK YOU FOR DOING THAT. SO, COUNCIL, WE'RE GOING [13.G) Consideration of the Repeat Special Event Applications Enumerated Below:1.    Swamp Buggy Parade – US Highway 412.    Community Celebration and Charity Event – Supreme Auto Collision] TO ITEM 13 G. YES, THE REPEAT SPECIAL EVENTS AND MR. MERRITT'S HERE TO HANDLE ANY OF THOSE ITEMS. SO, CHAD MERRITT, SPECIAL EXCUSE ME, NOT SPECIAL EVENTS. I ALMOST TOOK DANIELLE'S PLACE. COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR. THIS IS THE A COMMUNITY CELEBRATION AND CHARITY EVENT. THE APPLICANT IS J.R. NOCERA AS A NONPROFIT SAYS NO EVENT DATE IS NOVEMBER 14TH, 2026. THIS. THE EVENT LOCATION IS SUPREME AUTO COLLISION. THE EVENT TIME IS 5 TO 10 P.M.. ESTIMATED ATTENDANCE 750 EVENT TYPES. PRIVATE EVENT. STREET CLOSURE REQUESTED. NO. THE AMPLIFIED SOUND. YES. ALCOHOL. YES. TENTS. NO. SANITARY FACILITIES. YES. DID THE APPLICATION COME IN 120 DAYS PRIOR? YES. OUTSTANDING BALANCE. NO. THIS EVENT IS. THIS WAS AN EVENT THAT WAS. THE ORGANIZER TRIED TO HAVE EARLIER THIS YEAR. IT WAS NOT PERMITTED. SO IT WAS STOPPED BY THE CITY. AND THEY HAVE PUT IN FOR THE APPLICATION AGAIN. A COUPLE OF THINGS ON HERE THAT WE WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT THE PARKING, WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT 750 PEOPLE, THE PARKING IS, IS NOT SUFFICIENT FOR THAT AREA. WE DON'T HAVE A PARKING PLAN. THE PARKING PLAN DOES STATE RIDE SHARE, WHICH WE HAVE ACKNOWLEDGED IS NOT A, A VALID PARKING PLAN WITHIN THE THE MANUAL. AND THEN THE, THAT'S ACCORDING TO SOME POSTS AND ALL THAT WE'VE BEEN POINTED OUT. IT DOES STATE THAT THE ORGANIZERS SAID THAT IT WOULD BE OVER A THOUSAND PEOPLE. SO WE DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S IN CONFLICT WITH THE. 750. SO WE DON'T KNOW IF IT'S 750, IF IT'S 1000, IF IT'S 1500. WE'VE SEEN DIFFERENT THINGS REPORTED AND THE LOCATION VENUE IS AN AUTO SHOP. IF THIS IS APPROVED, WE WOULD RECOMMEND SHUTTING FOURTH AVENUE NORTH DOWN BETWEEN 10TH STREET NORTH AND HIGHWAY 41, JUST TO ENSURE THAT THERE'S NO CONFLICT WITH VEHICLES AND THE PEOPLE THAT ARE GOING TO BE IN THIS PARKING LOT AREA. IF YOU LOOK AT THE EVENT SET UP, IT'S GOT ALL OF THIS CROWD IN THE PARKING LOT, WHICH KIND OF IS ALMOST SEMI-CONNECTED TO THE ROAD. SO FOR SAFETY REASONS, WE WOULD RECOMMEND IF THIS IS APPROVED, THAT THAT BE DONE. AND THAT'S ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE FOR US OR IF YOU GOT THE PETITIONERS HERE, SO YOU CAN ANSWER QUESTIONS. AS IT RELATES TO THE EVENT ITSELF. THANK YOU, THANK YOU FOR AND COUNCIL THAT WAS ITEM 13 G NUMBER TWO COMMUNITY CELEBRATION. AND MR. MAYOR, YOU SAID THAT YOU WOULD RECOMMEND THAT YOU CLOSE DOWN FOURTH. SO ON THE. EVENT SITE PLAN. [02:40:01] I HAVE PARKING ADDITIONAL PARKING HIGHLIGHTED FOR VENDORS. I'M. I'M SORRY. YEAH. I MEAN, IF YOU WANT TO ASK ABOUT THE SITE PLAN, I WOULD ADVISE TO ASK QUESTIONS ON WHERE PEOPLE ARE PARKING. WE JUST HAVE WHAT YOU SEE IN FRONT OF YOU. YOU CAN SEE FOURTH STREET NORTH RIGHT HERE. YOU SEE THAT THE STAGE IS SET UP, WHICH APPEARS TO BE IN ONE OF THE GARAGES FACING BACK TOWARDS THE STREET. SO THE CROWD'S GOING TO BE IN THAT AREA. IT LOOKS LIKE HE'S GOT LINES OF CHAIRS. I'M ASSUMING THAT MAY BE VIP. IT MAY BE TABLES. I'M NOT SURE WITH THE LINES THERE. THERE'S AN ENTRANCE THAT YOU SEE THAT'S RIGHT ON THE EDGE OF THE STREET WHERE THE IT'S DRAWN AS A DRIVEWAY. SO IF YOU'VE GOT QUESTIONS ON THE SPECIFICS OF THAT LAYOUT, I WOULD ENCOURAGE TO MAYBE BRING UP THE PETITIONER AND LET HIM ANSWER THOSE. OKAY. DO YOU MIND JUST PUTTING THAT UP ON THE SCREEN? OR MAYBE DAVID COULD HELP US? PLEASE. SO WE KNOW WHAT WE'RE REFERRING TO. HE'S NAVIGATING RIGHT NOW. THANK YOU SIR. DAVID. IT'S IN THE APPLICATION. SO IT'LL SAY COMMUNITY CELEBRATION AND CHARITY EVENT 11. YEAH. YOU DRIVE UP THERE. PERFECT. THANK YOU. OKAY, SO I'VE GOT IT PULLED UP. MINUS THIS POP UP. OKAY. AND THEN THE NEXT PAGE, WHICH IS THE HIGHLIGHTED PINK AREAS. DANIELLE, I KNOW THIS IS PROBABLY CAN YOU IDENTIFY WHAT THOSE PINK HIGHLIGHTED AREAS ARE? THOSE ARE FOR PARKING. SO THOSE WOULD BE FOR THE VENDORS. AND THEN IF THERE'S ANYTHING ADDITIONAL LEFT OVER AFTER ALL OF THE VENDORS HAVE PARKED, THAT WOULD BE FOR THE ATTENDEES. OKAY. AND THEN THE STAGE AND UNDER ROOF IS APPROXIMATELY WHERE IT'S IT APPEARS TO BE IN THE BUILDING. SO I'M ASSUMING AGAIN, THIS IS AN ASSUMPTION I WOULD MAYBE IT WOULD BE A QUESTION FOR THE PETITIONER, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S GOING TO BE IN THE GARAGE AREA OF THE BODY SHOP. THANK YOU. YEAH. OKAY. IF THE PETITIONER WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD, STATE YOUR NAME FOR ANY QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. JOE NOCERA, OWNER OF SUPREME COLLISION. NAPLES RESIDENT SINCE 1973 AND SON OF FORMER COUNCILMAN JOHNNY NOCERA. YES. YOU'RE CORRECT. THE BAND WOULD BE IN DOWN AT THE SHOP. THERE'S THREE BIG PAINT BOOTHS AND IT WOULD BE TUCKED IN IN FRONT OF ONE OF THOSE PAINT BOOTHS. WE'VE HAD MANY PARTIES DOWN THERE BEFORE. NORMALLY WE DO IT IN CHRISTMAS. BUT THIS WAS SUCH A CHARITY EVENT FOR THE ABUSED WOMEN'S SHELTER. AND THIS WAS THE TIME FOR US TO GET WITH THE ABUSED WOMEN'S SHELTER AND RAISE THE MONEY FOR THEM. THE LAST PARTY WE DID HAVE WHICH WAS TWO YEARS AGO, I BELIEVE WE PROBABLY REACHED ABOUT A THOUSAND PEOPLE AT THROUGHOUT THE NIGHT. I FLEW IN TWO DIFFERENT BANDS. WE HAD ZERO ZERO PROBLEMS DOWN THERE. WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY PROBLEMS WITH PARKING. WAIT ONE SECOND, MR. MAYOR. YES. THANK YOU FOR GETTING HIS PHONE. SORRY TO INTERRUPT. NO. THAT'S OKAY. I'M NERVOUS. I PUT A LOT OF EFFORT INTO THIS. I'VE. I'M. I'M GOT A LOT OF MONEY DISHED OUT RIGHT NOW, AND I DIDN'T KNOW, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, THAT I NEEDED A PERMIT FOR THE BAND OR ANY OF THIS, OR I WOULDN'T HAVE TRIED TO DO IT MAY 1ST. IT WAS A IT WAS NEWS TO ME. AND THEN WHEN THEY CAME OVER ON THURSDAY, THE NIGHT BEFORE THE PARTY AND SHUT ME DOWN, I WAS JUST IN SHOCK. AND BECAUSE I DID SO MUCH PLANNING ON GETTING EVERYTHING READY. SO I, WE DID, WE DID EXACTLY WHAT YOU ASKED. WE WENT THROUGH PUTTING EVERYTHING THROUGH THE PERMIT AND [02:45:08] AND THE MAIN THING IS, YOU KNOW, IT'S IT'S NOT SO MUCH ON OBVIOUSLY ABOUT SUPREME COLLISION, IT'S REALLY ABOUT THE ABUSED WOMEN'S SHELTER AND RAISING MONEY FOR THEM. WE, WE ARE EXPECTING TO RAISE I'M GOING TO GUESS $50,000. SO FOR THERE AND I KNOW PATTY YEARWOOD HERE. SHE'S ONE OF THE DIRECTORS OF THAT. AND PATTY AND I GO WAY BACK. WE'RE GOOD FRIENDS. AND SHE BRINGS HER CAR TO ME WHEN SHE WRECKS IT. BUT YEAH, WE COORDINATED IT TOGETHER, AND WE DID EVERYTHING WHEN WE CAN. WE ARE DEFINITELY PROMOTING RIDE SHARE AND WE ALSO WHITNEY FIFE, MY MANAGER AND I HAVE WENT TO EVERY SINGLE BUSINESS AROUND OUR FOURTH AVENUE. WELL, WE OWN THE BUILDINGS, MAINLY ALL OF THEM ON FOURTH AVENUE, INCLUDING THE DUNKIN DONUTS. AND WE GOT SIGNATURES HERE ON THE ONES THAT WE DON'T OWN TO USE THEIR PARKING FOR THAT EVENING. AND ALL AROUND THE CORNER AND DOWN TO THE CHURCH AREA AS WELL. SO PARKING IS ALWAYS TOUGH. IT'S, IT'S TOUGH IN AUGUST, WHATEVER. TODAY IS THE 19TH. IT'S JUST THE CITY OF NAPLES, AND I HAVE AN APPRECIATION OF WHAT I JUST SAT HERE AND LISTENED TO FOR THE LAST TWO HOURS OF WHAT YOU GUYS GO THROUGH EVERY DAY. IT'S QUITE SHOCKING, ACTUALLY. IT'S A REAL WAKE UP CALL, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU. I'M BORN AND I HAVE TALKED MANY TIMES, POSSIBLY ABOUT ME RUNNING AS WELL, AND I DON'T KNOW IF I COULD GO THROUGH WHAT YOU GUYS JUST WENT THROUGH THESE LAST TWO HOURS, BUT WE'RE WILLING TO. I MEAN, IF YOU SEE ANYTHING IN THERE THAT YOU DON'T LIKE AND WE CAN ADJUST TO IT, WE'LL BE HAPPY TO WORK WITH YOU. BUT I DO WANT YOU TO REALLY REMEMBER THE CAUSE THAT IT'S GOING THROUGH AND HOW HARD PATTY AND I HAVE WORKED TOGETHER ON THIS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. JUST ADD. SO FROM AN EMPLOYEE STANDPOINT, THEY DON'T HAVE ANY CONCERNS WITH THE WAY THAT IT'S LAID OUT EXCEPT FOR THE POTENTIAL. AGAIN, THE RECOMMENDATION FOR SHUTTING FOURTH DOWN IN THAT AREA WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD STATE. SO I JUST WANTED TO PUT THAT ON THE RECORD. AND THE PURPOSE OF SHUTTING DOWN FOURTH WOULD BE TO, TO KEEP CARS, BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT AN OPEN STREET THAT'S GOING TO BE PEOPLE COULD POTENTIALLY BE GOING BACK AND FORTH. AND IF YOU'VE GOT A CROWD OF A THOUSAND PEOPLE, IF THEY MOVE BACK, IF IT GETS TOO CROWDED AND PEOPLE SAY, I DON'T LIKE STANDING IN THE CROWD, AND ALL OF A SUDDEN YOU'VE GOT PEOPLE IN THE STREET BECAUSE THE VENDORS ARE ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF FOURTH. YEAH. IF YOU LOOK AT THE LAYOUT, WHEN YOU LOOK AT EVERYTHING IN PINK IT WOULD JUST, IT'S MORE OF A PRECAUTION THING. AND WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE TIMING OF THIS EVENT I THINK THAT WOULD BE, I DON'T THINK IT WOULD HAVE ANY IMPACT. IT'S NOT GOING TO HAVE IMPACT ON TRAFFIC. IT'S THAT STREET. IF YOU'VE BEEN DOWN IT AT THAT TIME, IT'S NOT GOING TO REALLY. LET ME CLARIFY REAL QUICK. THE VENDORS ARE NOT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF FOURTH. I BELIEVE THAT'S JUST THAT'S JUST DEPICTING PARKING THAT'S AVAILABLE OVER THERE. THAT'S RIGHT, THAT'S CORRECT. I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. FROM A SAFETY PERSPECTIVE FOR NOW FOR STILL MIGHT BE THE WAY TO GO. BUT THANK YOU FOR THE VENDORS AREN'T OVER THERE WHERE PEOPLE HAVE TO KEEP GOING BACK AND FORTH TECHNICALLY, BUT MAYBE IT NEEDS TO BE SHUT DOWN. I UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM, BUT JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT THE VENDORS AREN'T ON THE OTHER SIDE. WELL, THAT'S I KNOW IT SAYS PARKING, BUT YEAH, IF THE PARTY IS CONTAINED TO THE FACILITY, I BELIEVE IT IS. J.R. IS THAT OKAY? CAN YOU PLEASE COME FORWARD? THE VENDORS THAT WE HAVE THERE, WHICH IS TULLY'S AND MY DAUGHTER'S EVENTS WITH PAIGE THEY'RE INSIDE OF THE PROPERTY. THEY'RE THEY'RE INSIDE ON MY PROPERTY. THEY'RE NOT OUT ON THE STREET. OKAY, PERFECT. MY FACILITY IS 60,000FT², SO WE'VE GOT QUITE A QUITE A SPACE DOWN THERE. OKAY. IF YOU'LL JUST STATE FOR A SECOND, I HAVE VICE MAYOR AND THEN SCHULTZ AND THEN KRAMER. THANK YOU FOR WANTING TO DO THIS FOR THE COMMUNITY AND FOR THE WOMEN'S SHELTER. THAT'S A LOT OF WORK. A LOT OF EFFORT. IT'S VERY COMMENDABLE FOR A GOOD CAUSE. THANK YOU. HOPEFULLY WE CAN WORK IT OUT SO YOU CAN HAVE A VERY SUCCESSFUL EVENT. ONE OF THE CHALLENGES SEEMS TO BE PARKING, AS YOU MENTIONED, IN THE AREA. AND IT'S GOING TO BE AT NIGHT RIGHT AFTER FIVE STARTS AT FIVE. YES. SO DID YOU HAPPEN TO TALK TO NCH ABOUT USING THEIR PARKING GARAGE? BECAUSE MOST OF THEIR APPOINTMENTS ARE, I THINK OVER AT 5 OR 530? YEAH. NO, THE ONLY ONE THAT HAS QUITE A PARKING LOT THAT I'VE TALKED TO IS THE, THE CHURCH, WHICH IS ONE BLOCK DOWN FROM US RIGHT THERE ON THE CORNER OF THIRD. [02:50:03] AND IS IT. YEAH, IT'S THIRD AND RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM THIRD NORTH. YEAH. PLUS YOU HAVE ALL THE STREET PARKING TO, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE ALL THAT AND YOU HAVE ALL IN FRONT OF MY BUILDINGS TOO. ARE WINDS. WHAT DID YOU TALK TO? WINDS. I DIDN'T GET TO WINDS. NO, NO. GO AHEAD. THAT WOULD BE A SUGGESTION. I TALKED TO NCH AND WANTS TO SEE, YOU KNOW, IF YOU COULD USE SOME OF THEIR PARKING, BECAUSE THEY'RE VERY CLOSE ALSO TO TRY TO ALLEVIATE THE PARKING ISSUE. YEAH. MAYBE THIS IS STAFF. THE RIVER PARK COMMUNITY CENTER PARKING. IS THAT. CERTAINLY. I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY. I FORGET HOW MANY SPACES OVER THERE. THERE'S SOME NEW PARKING THAT JUST GOT ADDED. JUST DOWN THE STREET THERE. BUT, I MEAN, THERE'S NOT A TON OF PARKING THERE, BUT WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THIS EVENT AND DATE AND TIME YOU KNOW, IT'S PUBLIC PARKING, SO IT'S NOT GOING TO IMPACT. YEAH, THAT WE HAVE THAT CROSSING 41 RIGHT? TRAFFIC LIGHT THERE. CROSSWALK. I DO IT. YEAH, I DO. I DO HAVE THE NEW PARKING GARAGE TWO. THAT'S DOWN. THAT WAS MY NEXT QUESTION IS IF THOSE DON'T WORK OUT. WE'VE GOT THE NEW PARKING GARAGE ON FIRST AVENUE SOUTH, AND YOU CAN HAVE GOLF CART SHUTTLES OR SLIDE OR SOMEBODY TAKING PEOPLE BACK AND FORTH. JUST HOPEFULLY IT'S VERY SUCCESSFUL AND YOU HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE LOOKING FOR A PLACE TO PARK. YEAH. YEAH. THAT'S WHY WE ARE REALLY PROMOTING THE RIDE SHARE AND UBERING. AND THE ONE WE HAD A FEW YEARS AGO, WE JUST, WE HAD CLOSE TO A THOUSAND PEOPLE THERE AND IT WAS VERY SUCCESSFUL. AND IT WAS WE DIDN'T HAVE NOT ONE PROBLEM WITH PARKING AT ALL FOR THAT ONE. WE'RE GUESSING 500 TO 750. BUT AFTER THIS ONE GOT SHUT DOWN, I JUST KIND OF REALIZED, WOW, IT'S, IT WAS A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT WERE COMING. OF COURSE, THERE ARE TWO OF THE MOST POPULAR BANDS THAT NAPLES HAS TO OFFER. SO THEY HAVE AN ATTRACTION THEMSELVES. AND THAT ONE, THAT ONE BAND, ROCK REPUBLIC IS EXTREMELY POPULAR WITH EVERYONE IN THE CITY IN NAPLES AND COLLIER COUNTY AS WELL. SO. I MEAN, I JUST I'M HOPING YOU GUYS COULD PASS IT. I MEAN, IT IS A GOOD EVENT. IT'S I ALSO HIRED SECURITY. I HAVE SECURITY THERE. AND I'VE TALKED TO SOME OF THE PD ABOUT HAVING THEM STAY AROUND AND KEEP AN EYE ON THINGS. IT'S, IT'S A CONTROLLED ATMOSPHERE. I MEAN, THIS ISN'T MY FIRST, MY FIRST TIME DOING THIS. IT'S PROBABLY MY 20TH, BUT NEW LAWS REQUIRE NEW THINGS AND, AND MEETING IN FRONT OF YOU GUYS AND SEEING WHAT WE HAVE TO DO. YEAH. IT'S JUST AS YOU KNOW, THERE ARE A LOT OF RESTAURANTS IN THAT AREA AND IT'S JUST PARKING IS AN ISSUE THAT WE. WELL, THAT'S MY OTHER POINT IS I MET I MET WITH LA TROVA WHO'S. THEY'RE THE ONLY RESTAURANT IN OUR FOURTH AVENUE AREA. AND THEY ARE REALLY WANTING THIS BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO GET A LOT OF OVERFLOW BUSINESS. IF YOU DON'T LIKE WHAT TULLIUS HAS TO OFFER IN THE CATERING, THIS GUY IS COMING OUT AND HE'S OFFERING SPECIALS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. AND SO HE WAS REAL EXCITED FOR TODAY, AND HE'S ANXIOUS TO HEAR WHAT I HAVE TO SAY WHEN I GET BACK. SO YEAH, WE'RE WE'RE, YOU KNOW, YOU GUYS KNOW, WE'VE BEEN AROUND A LONG TIME AND WE OWN THOSE BUILDINGS. WE BASICALLY OWN FOURTH AVENUE NORTH, YOU KNOW, WE OWN ALL OF FOURTH, INCLUDING THE DUNKIN DONUTS, WHICH ALLOWS US, YOU KNOW, EVEN MORE PARKING THERE TOO. SO IT'S, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THAT WHOLE BLOCK. I'M NOT SURE IF I AGREE WITH CLOSING FOURTH AVENUE DOWN BECAUSE THERE'S SO MANY PARKING SPOTS ACROSS THE STREET. BUT I DO SEE HIS POINT HERE ABOUT. BUT THERE WILL BE THE WAY I. THE WAY I SET IT UP IS YOU CAN'T GET ON MY PARKING LOT. THERE WILL BE NICE, FANCY CARS ALL LINED UP TOUCHING EACH OTHER, AND THERE'S ONLY GOING TO BE ONE ENTRANCE IN THE FRONT AND ANOTHER ENTRANCE IN THE BACK ALLEY. AND WE WANT AS THEY COME IN THROUGH THAT ENTRANCE, THAT'S WHERE WE WANT THEM TO DONATE TO THE WOMEN'S ABUSE SHELTER. THAT'S HOW WE'RE GOING TO GET THEM. AND JUST FOR THE RECORD, ON FOURTH, THEY CAN STILL MAINTAIN IT AS PARKING. SO YOU WOULD JUST HAVE IT SHUT DOWN TO THROUGH TRAFFIC. SO THEY WOULD HAVE TO HAVE SOMEBODY THERE TO MANAGE THE THE PEOPLE PARKING. SO IT WOULD JUST BE IN A PARKING LOT AREA. YEAH. [02:55:02] I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THE NEED, BUT YEAH, THAT'S IT. JUST PARKING IS MY BIG QUESTION. OKAY. COUNCILMEMBER SCHULTZ, YOU HAD MENTIONED SOMETHING ABOUT THE FLOW OF TRAFFIC, AND THE CHIEF IS HERE. IS THAT SOMETHING HE CAN SPEAK TO NOW? THAT WAS UP TO HIM. SO, YEAH, I THINK HE'S COMING UP. SORRY FOR WAKING YOU UP, CHIEF. ALWAYS. SARA DOMINGUEZ, CHIEF OF POLICE. AND I WANT TO MAKE A POINT ON SOMETHING. I AM ON THE BOARD OF THE SHELTER. SO I AM IN FAVOR OF THE EVENT AND ALL THAT. IT'S JUST ABOUT HOW WE MAKE IT SAFE AND WITHOUT DISRUPTION TO ANYONE ELSE. SO EITHER OPTION IS GOOD. YOU CAN CLOSE THE ROAD, OR PEOPLE WILL FIGURE IT OUT. YOU KNOW, I'VE SEEN THAT THEY DO IT FOR THE FIREWORKS, RIGHT? AND THEY PARK EVERYWHERE. AND I THINK IF WE AND I THINK IF MR. NOCERA ALSO ADVERTISES LIKE OPTIONS PARKING GARAGE PEOPLE PARK AT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT ALL THE TIME. EVERYTHING NEARBY. WE CAN CROSS THAT BRIDGE WHEN WE GET THERE, BUT THERE ARE PARKING SPACES AND PLACES THAT PEOPLE JUST HAVE TO WALK, OR WE CAN CLOSE THE STREET EITHER WAY. EITHER OPTION IS GOOD. THAT'S. OR PERHAPS IF THERE'S A MAP THAT GOES OUT HIGHLIGHTING ALL THE PARKING AREAS THAT WE'VE ALL SUGGESTED AND CONFIRMED, AND THAT GOES OUT WITH HIS EVENT, THEN MAYBE THAT WILL BE THAT WILL SATISFY THE PARKING CONCERNS. AT THAT POINT, WHEN YOU HAVE THE THE PROMOTIONS FOR THIS STARTING TO COME UP. ARE YOU GOING TO HAVE A LITTLE A LITTLE MAP AND SAY, PARKING IS HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE? YEAH, WE WE COULD DO THAT. THAT WOULD BE AN OPTION. AGAIN, IT'LL DEPEND ON WHETHER. OH, MISTER, MISTER, COULD YOU PLEASE COME TO THE PODIUM? I'M SORRY. IT WOULD. IT WOULD DEPEND WHETHER WE HAVE THAT OPTION OF PARKING ACROSS THE STREET ON FOURTH AVENUE BECAUSE THERE IS, THERE'S IF WE START AROUND THE CORNER THERE AND IT GOES ALL THE WAY UP TO THE TACO TACO ON THAT CORNER. AND WE'VE GOTTEN APPROVAL FROM EVERY OWNER THERE THAT WE CAN USE A LOT OF THAT PARKING. AND THERE'S PROBABLY ANOTHER 20 TO 24 SPACES OVER AT THE DUNKIN DONUTS. AND THEN WE HAVE MY BROTHER'S BUILDING, WHICH IS SUPREME AUTO CENTER. THERE'S QUITE A QUITE A LOT OF PARKING THERE. I KNOW WE CAN GET CLOSE TO 30 TO 40 CARS IN THERE. AND THEN OF COURSE, AROUND THE FRONT OF MY BUILDING, IT'S ANOTHER 16 TO 18 SPACES. THEN YOU HAVE EXACTLY WHAT HE SAID. IT'S, IT'S PUBLIC PARKING OUT THERE. AND I THINK WOULD BE OKAY WITH THE PARKING, BUT I JUST, I THINK A GOOD IDEA TOO IS WHEN I DO START ANNOUNCING, YOU KNOW, IF THIS GETS APPROVED, YOU KNOW, HEY, THIS IS WHERE WE RECOMMEND FOR YOU GUYS TO PARK. BUT THE NUMBER ONE THING WE'RE RECOMMENDING IS UBERING AND AND RIDESHARE. VERY GOOD. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. KRAMER AND THEN PENMAN. THANKS FOR DOING THIS. GO AND STAY. A COUPLE QUESTIONS FOR YOU. YOU DON'T GET TO SIT DOWN, BRO. NO, IT'S ALL RIGHT. I'VE SAT BACK THERE FOR TWO HOURS. AREN'T RESPONSIBLE. ARE VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE AREA. THEY GOT. THEY ALREADY HAVE. THAT'S OBVIOUS. I MEAN, DUNKIN DONUTS IS HERE. AND THEN IT'S ALL THE REST OF THE BLOCK. THAT ENTIRE BLOCK IS THEIR OPERATION ON THE SOUTH SIDE. THAT'S JUST HOW IT IS. CORRECT. AND IT'S WILD BECAUSE THEY HAVE LIKE PAVERS FOR ALL THEIR STUFF. AND THEY PARK A BUNCH OF VEHICLES THERE ALREADY BECAUSE THEY DO FOR A LIVING. AND THEN YOU GOT SIDEWALK AND THEN YOU'VE GOT MORE SPACES. SO THERE IS ALREADY THAT IN PLACE THEN THE OTHER SIDE. SO HERE'S I'M JUST A QUICK QUESTION. THE IT WAS BODEGA ACROSS FROM YOU. IS THAT THE RESTAURANT? IS IT A NEW RESTAURANT? IT'S CALLED LA TROVA. YEAH. SO THAT'S THE ONE THAT'S THERE FIRED UP BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO GET MORE BUSINESS. YES. AND I KNOW FROM ROGER ACROSS, YOU KNOW, THE THE GREGORY'S I KNOW THEM FOREVER. AND THEN DOWN. I'M ASSUMING TURCO'S GOING TO STAY OPEN, BUT THEY HAVE THEIR OWN PARKING. THAT WOULDN'T AFFECT THIS. RIGHT. HE'S MORE ON 41. YEAH. YEAH. SO IN MY VIEW IT'S AWESOME. WE CAN MAKE IT HAPPEN. I THINK WE HAVE TO HAVE THE MAPS AND EMPHASIZE THE RIDE SHARE. BUT. I WILL SAY I AM FUNDAMENTALLY OPPOSED TO CLOSING, SHUTTING OFF ANY CITY STREET AND THEN CHARGING ANYONE TO GO, ANY CITIZEN TO GO ON IT LIKE THAT. FOR ME, THAT'S A DEAL BREAKER. SO LEAVING THE STREET OPEN IS I'M ALL FOR. AND THEN ILLUMINATING THE OTHER PARKING OPTIONS AS WELL. LIKE I SAID, WE'VE NEVER CLOSED FOURTH BEFORE ON ANY OF THE OTHER PARTIES WE'VE HAD DOWN THERE. YEAH. AND I JUST DON'T THINK IT'S NECESSARY. I DON'T, I DON'T EITHER, BUT I'M GOING TO GO WITH WHATEVER YOU GUYS WANT TO DO. [03:00:03] OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY. I HAVE YEAH. STAFF, THIS IS THIS IS KIND OF AN UNUSUAL REQUEST HERE IN THAT NORMALLY IF THERE'S A CHARITY INVOLVED, I KNOW THAT YOU PUT THE CHARITIES THROUGH SOME RATHER RIGOROUS INFORMATION THAT YOU REQUEST FROM THEM. IF, IF THE EVENT IS ACTUALLY FOR CHARITY IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE IS, IS THE SAME THING APPLYING, GIVEN THE FACT THAT THE PROCEEDS GO TO CHARITY, ARE WE ALSO ASKING FOR SOME SORT OF A RECONCILIATION AS TO HOW MUCH WENT TO THE CHARITY AND THE SAME RECONCILIATION THAT YOU REQUIRE FOR ALL CHARITABLE EVENTS? YES. THE ONLY THING THAT WE REQUIRE WHEN A CHARITY APPLIES IS IT'S BASED ON THE THE RATE. SO IF THEY'RE RENTING THE PARK AND IT'S A CHARITY PUTTING ON THE EVENT AND THEY QUALIFY FOR A NON PROFIT RATE. SO WHEN IT COMES TO A PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL ON A PRIVATE PROPERTY AND THEY'RE GETTING MONEY, WHETHER THEY GET $10,000 AND GIVE 5000 TO A CHARITY, WE DON'T DO ANYTHING IN THAT REGARDS. AND TO MY KNOWLEDGE, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE HAVE ANY REQUIREMENTS TO SHOW THAT. THAT'S JUST PART OF THERE. AND THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HAS BEEN DISCUSSED PREVIOUSLY. AND THE TIME FOR US TO DO THAT IS WHEN WE BRING BACK THE SPECIAL EVENT MANUAL. AND I THINK HERE TO SOME EXTENT CHAD, I'M NOT SAYING TO SOME EXTENT CHAD'S RIGHT. I DON'T WANT TO SAY IT THAT WAY, BUT BUT THE POINT BEING IS, IS IF YOU'RE GOING TO COME UP WITH CRITERIA BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE ANY AT THE MOMENT OF WHICH YOU WANT TO HAVE, IT WOULD MORE IT WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE IF YOU HAD IT AS IT PERTAINS TO PUBLIC SPACE AND RENTAL FEES THAT YOU'RE AFFORDING THEM AT A DISCOUNT WHEN THEY'RE AFFILIATED. BUT FOR SOMEBODY TO HAVE A PRIVATE EVENT AND DOING SOMETHING FOR CHARITY, AND THAT'S A SIDE NOTE TO THE OVERALL ITEM. AND EVEN IF YOU DID IMPOSE THAT, YOU YOU'RE GIVING FEE STRUCTURE CHANGES BECAUSE OF A CHARITY AND REQUIRING A REQUIREMENT. I'M NOT SO SURE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY, BUT I WOULD WELCOME THE DISCUSSION AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME AT THE WORKSHOP, WHEN WE DISCUSS MANY CHANGES TO THE MANUAL IN THE SPECIAL EVENT MANUAL. THAT MAKES SENSE, MA'AM. THAT'S. THANK YOU. FAIR ENOUGH. J.R., IF YOU DON'T MIND, JOIN US AT THE PODIUM AGAIN. FIRST OF ALL I APPLAUD YOU FOR PUTTING THIS ON. YOU'RE SPENDING YOUR OWN MONEY AND YOUR OWN TIME AND YOUR OWN ENERGY, AND THIS IS A GREAT CAUSE FOR THE WOMEN'S SHELTER, SO KUDOS. JOB WELL DONE. THE SHUTTING DOWN FOURTH. I'M LESS MILITANT THAN COACHES ABOUT SHUTTING DOWN STREETS, BUT. BUT I UNDERSTAND WHERE HE'S COMING FROM. I'VE BEEN TO SEVERAL EVENTS AT THIS LOCATION. THEY ARE ALWAYS VERY WELL ORGANIZED. THEY'RE PUT TOGETHER PROFESSIONALLY. AND THE MANY THAT I'VE BEEN TO, NONE OF THEM HAVE THE STREET SHUT DOWN. AND I CAN PROMISE YOU, THERE WAS AT LEAST A THOUSAND PEOPLE THERE. SO THEY'VE GOT IT SET UP WHERE PEOPLE ARE NOT STAGGERING INTO THE STREET OR TRIPPING INTO THE ROAD. THEY DO A REALLY GOOD JOB AND HAVING THOSE CARS ACROSS THE FRONT WILL KEEP PEOPLE OFF THE STREET. SO I DON'T THINK IT'S, I DON'T THINK IT'S NECESSARY, ALTHOUGH I DO CERTAINLY DO APPRECIATE MY, MY PERSONAL OPINION OVER HERE ONLY BECAUSE I'VE BEEN TO EVENTS THERE THAT, THAT HAVE THIS NUMBER OF PEOPLE. I DON'T THINK IT'S NECESSARY TO SHUT DOWN THE STREET. I WILL I WILL, I WILL AGREE WITH THE WILL OF COUNCIL IF COUNCIL DECIDES TO, TO FOLLOW MR. MERRITT'S SUGGESTION, SHUTTING IT DOWN AND IT'S APPROVING THIS. IT'S GOING TO BE. SHUTTING IT DOWN. IT'S GOING TO BE A PART OF APPROVING IT. I'M OKAY WITH THAT. SO I'LL GO EITHER WAY ON THAT. BUT HOWEVER, WITH THAT SAID, I DON'T THINK IT'S NECESSARY. AND J.R., YOU JUST TOLD US A FEW MINUTES AGO YOU DIDN'T THINK IT WAS EITHER. YOU'RE NOT YOU'RE NOT REQUESTING THAT. NO, I'M NOT REQUESTING THAT AT ALL. NO. AS FAR AS THE BUSINESSES OVER THERE MOST OF THEM CLOSE AT FIVE, RIGHT? YEAH. ON THAT STREET. THE ONLY ONE THAT'LL BE OPEN IS LATROBE. YEAH, I GUESS PROBABLY TACO. TACO? OH, YEAH. BUT AGAIN, THEY'VE GOT THEIR, THEIR, THEIR ENTRANCE TO THEIR PARKING IS, IS OFF OF 41 IF I'M, IF I'M REMEMBERING THAT CORRECTLY AND I'M SURE THAT THEY'RE THERE. HAVE YOU HEARD ANYTHING FROM ANY OF THOSE PATRONS OR I'M SORRY, NOT PATRONS, BUT BUSINESS OWNERS OVER THERE. AS FAR AS NEGATIVE FEEDBACK FROM ANYBODY NOT WANTING YOU TO DO THIS. NO. AS A MATTER OF FACT, IT'S BEEN VERY, VERY POSITIVE. AND LIKE THERE'S LIKE SOME CLOTHING STORES OVER THERE CALLED LARK. YEAH. YOU KNOW, SHE WANTS, SHE WANTS THE EXPOSURE AS WELL. SHE'S GOING TO STAY OPEN TILL 10:00 THAT NIGHT. SHE'S BROUGHT THAT TO MY ATTENTION. IF IT PASSES, OBVIOUSLY. SO SHE'S OBVIOUSLY LOOKING FORWARD TO IT. SHE'S GOING TO EXTEND HER HOURS BECAUSE SHE KNOWS THERE'S GOING TO BE A BUNCH OF PEOPLE. THERE'S GOING TO BE PEOPLE THERE AND PEOPLE [03:05:05] WALKING OVER THERE AND TAKING A LOOK AT STUFF. SHE'S GOT SOME HIGH END CLOTHES AND STUFF LIKE THAT OVER THERE. SO OKAY, IT'S MORE EXPOSURE TO HER AND AND ALL THE OTHER GUYS AROUND, BUT MOST EVERYONE'S CLOSED. YEAH. AND I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERN AND IT'S A SATURDAY TOO, SO. RIGHT. YOU KNOW, A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE JUST NOT EVEN OPEN ON SATURDAYS. I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERN OF COUNCIL FROM A PARKING STANDPOINT. THERE'S, THERE'S, IT'S LIMITED, THERE'S NO DOUBT ABOUT THAT. BUT WITH ALL THAT SAID, NOT TO REITERATE EVERYTHING THAT'S BEEN SAID UP HERE IN REFERENCE TO PARKING, BUT WE DO HAVE A BRAND SPANKING NEW PARKING GARAGE THAT JUST GOT CHRISTENED NOT A FEW MONTHS AGO THAT THAT PEOPLE ARE MORE THAN WELCOME TO USE. I WOULD BE COMPLETELY FINE WITH THIS WITH THE CONDITION OF AN EXPANDED PARKING MAP BEING PUBLISHED WITH WHATEVER. YEAH. WITH WHATEVER ADVERTISING OR MARKETING YOU'RE PUTTING OUT FOR THE EVENT, MAKE THAT A PART OF IT. EMPHASIZE AS YOU ARE, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THE BRIDE SHARE IS NOT A PARKING PLAN, AND I GET THAT. BUT EMPHASIZE THE HECK OUT OF THAT ON ALL YOUR MATERIAL AS WELL, ALONG WITH AN EXPANDED PARKING MAP SHOWING OTHER AREAS THAT CAN BE UTILIZED. I THINK WE'RE WE SHOULD BE IN PRETTY GOOD SHAPE ON THIS. AGAIN, I APPLAUD YOU FOR DOING IT. I'M READY TO MAKE A MOTION. I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE COMMUNITY CELEBRATION AND CHARITY EVENT AT THE SUPREME AUTO COLLISION. KEEPING THE ROAD OPEN, BUT MAPPING OUT NECESSARY SECURITY PARKING ISSUES WITH WITH EVENTS OR EVENTS MANAGER. I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION FOR APPROVAL FROM COUNCIL MEMBER AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER. BARTON. FURTHER DISCUSSION. AND I DID NOT HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE PULL THE COUNCIL. COUNCIL MEMBER PENNIMAN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. KRAMER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. SCHULTZ. I. AND THANK YOU FOR DOING THIS FOR THE COMMUNITY. EXCELLENT. THANK YOU. YES. WAS THAT A YES? YES. THANK YOU. VICE MAYOR BLANKENSHIP. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BARTON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. KROLL. YES, MAYOR. YES. THANK YOU. IT'S APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. THANK YOU FOR DOING THAT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. JUST WANTED TO SAY SOMETHING, TOO. YES. OH, JUST COME FORWARD AND JUST MAKE. JUST STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE. HI, I'M PATTI ERWOOD, AND I'M THE CURRENT PRESIDENT OF THE SHELTER GUILD. ONLY BECAUSE THEY ASK ABOUT 170 PEOPLE BEFORE ME. AND I WAS THE ONLY ONE THAT SAID YES. BUT I ALSO WANT TO SAY TO Y'ALL I AM SO GRATEFUL THAT GOD CALLED EACH OF YOU TO BE COUNCILMAN AND THAT HE DID NOT CALL ME. I COULD NEVER DO THIS. IT IS. IT'S UNBELIEVABLE WHAT Y'ALL DO AND FOR SO LITTLE MONEY. BUT I'M GRATEFUL. SO GRATEFUL FOR IT THAT Y'ALL ARE TAKING CARE OF THE CITY OF NAPLES. BUT I JUST I REALLY JUST WANTED TO TELL YOU ONE OF THE REASONS THAT AN EVENT LIKE THIS IS SO IMPORTANT TO US, IT REALLY THE MONEY'S GREAT. YOU KNOW, I LOVE TAKING EVERYBODY'S MONEY. IT'S WONDERFUL. BUT IT'S THE EDUCATION BECAUSE SO FEW PEOPLE KNOW THAT FLORIDA IS THE THIRD STATE IN THE COUNTRY FOR HUMAN TRAFFICKING, AND THAT NAPLES AND FORT MYERS ARE KNOWN AS A HOT SPOT THAT LAST YEAR WE HAD 1800 CALLS TO OUR DOMESTIC VIOLENCE HOTLINE. AND WE'RE HAVING LESS AND LESS PEOPLE STAY AT THE SHELTER. SO THEY'RE STAYING WITH THEIR ABUSERS MORE AND MORE. AND THESE ABUSERS AREN'T TYPICAL, AREN'T AREN'T THE PEOPLE THAT YOU JUST THINK THEY ARE, YOU KNOW, THEY LOOK, YOU KNOW, JUST LIKE YOU, BILL. THEY LOOK JUST LIKE YOU, TED. I MEAN, THEY LOOK, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE. I'M SORRY. I'M JUST SAYING THEY DO. THEY ARE. YOU KNOW, THEY WEAR A PROFESSIONAL FOOTBALL UNIFORMS AND THEIR VICTIMS ARE SILENCED, YOU KNOW, BY, YOU KNOW, THE HUMILITY OF IT ALL. AND THEY LIVE IN THEIR COMMUNITIES. AND IF YOU SEE OUR MAPS OF WHERE THESE CALLS ARE COMING FROM, THEY'RE COMING FROM PORT ROYAL AND PELICAN BAY AND GRAY OAKS AND WINDERMERE. IT'S NOT JUST THE PLACES YOU THINK IN EAST NAPLES AND UP IN IMMOKALEE WHILE IT'S HAPPENING THERE, IT IS HAPPENING IN OUR COMMUNITY. SO WHEN WE GET AN OPPORTUNITY TO, TO SPEAK TO, TO A DIFFERENT GROUP, A DIVERSE GROUP LIKE THIS, IF THERE'S 800 PEOPLE OUT THERE, THERE'S 200 OF THEM THAT ARE LIKELY IN ABUSIVE SITUATIONS OR HAVE BEEN AND THAT DON'T EVEN KNOW ABOUT THE SHELTER. AND EVERYTHING WE DO IS FREE. THERE'S NOT ONE THING LEGAL AID. WE HAVE SOMEONE AT THE COURTHOUSE TO REPRESENT THEM TRANSPORTATION, TRAINING, DAYCARE, NOT JUST A ROOF OVER THEIR HEAD, BUT A HOPE THAT THEIR LIVES CAN BE CHANGED AND THEIR KIDS CAN. SO I AM JUST SO GRATEFUL THAT Y'ALL HAVE APPROVED THIS AND WE JUST APPRECIATE IT. BUT I'D LOVE TO INVITE Y'ALL. OUR CEO WANTED ME TO INVITE THE CITY COUNCIL TO COME FOR A PRIVATE TOUR. [03:10:02] WE'D BE HAPPY TO DO A LUNCHEON FOR YOU, BUT WE'VE NEVER DONE THAT IN AN ORGANIZED MANNER, AND WE'D REALLY LOVE FOR YOU TO COME SEE OUR FACILITY AT STATE OF THE ART. AND WE HAVE PEOPLE FROM ALL OVER THE COUNTRY COME TO SEE OUR FACILITY TO MODEL THEIRS LIKE OURS. WELL, THANK YOU FOR WHAT YOU DO. AND THANK YOU, MR. MASSARO, FOR HOSTING THAT EVENT. YES. THANK YOU FOR YOUR EFFORTS. APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. MERRITT. ALL RIGHT. GOING TO OUR NEXT ONE. THIS IS THE SWAMP BUGGY PARADE. I'LL LET DANIELLE GO THROUGH THE DETAILS. ALL RIGHT. THE NEXT EVENT IS THE SWAMP BUGGY PARADE. THE APPLICANT IS SWAMP BUGGY INCORPORATED. THEY ARE NOT A NONPROFIT. THE EVENT DATE IS JANUARY 23RD, 2027. THE EVENT LOCATION IS. THE PROPOSED EVENT LOCATION IS US HIGHWAY 41, GOLDEN GATE TO THIRD AVE SOUTH. THE SET UP TIME IS FROM 8 A.M. TO 10 A.M.. THE EVENT TIME IS FROM 10 A.M. TO 12 P.M., AND THE TAKE DOWN TIME IS FROM 12 TO 12:30 P.M. THE EVENT TYPE IS A COMMUNITY EVENT. THE PARKING WILL BE IN THE SURROUNDING LOTS. THERE IS A STREET CLOSURE REQUEST. THE AMPLIFIED SOUND. THERE IS NO AMPLIFIED SOUND. THERE IS NO ALCOHOL, NO TENTS AND THE APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED 120 DAYS PRIOR AND THERE IS NO OUTSTANDING BALANCE. THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL IS REQUIRED DUE TO THE STREET CLOSURES. YES. AND JUST KIND OF GOING THROUGH THIS, YOU KNOW, LAST YEAR. AND I MADE SURE THAT WE WE PUT THIS BACK IN HERE, BUT WE HAD, I KNOW SOME OF YOU MAY HAVE GOTTEN THE CALLS, BUT WE GOT BOMBARDED WITH CALLS ABOUT THE CLOSURE ON 41 AND THE TIMING OF IT. AND SO WE WANT, WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE BROUGHT IT BACK TO YOUR ATTENTION TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE WAY THIS IS SUBMITTED, IT'S GOING TO CLOSE 41 DOWN IT. IS THERE OTHER OPTIONS? DO WE WANT TO LOOK AT THOSE OTHER OPTIONS? WE PROVIDED A COUPLE OF IDEAS THERE. WE'RE OPEN TO WHATEVER. IF YOU WANT TO CLOSE 41 AGAIN AND CONTINUE, THEN WE THAT'S AT THE WILL OF COUNCIL AND MOVE ON. BUT WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE SHARED THAT INFORMATION THAT IT IS GOING TO IMPACT. 41. IT IS GOING TO CLOSE. 41 I HAVE OKAY, I HAVE KRAMER AND THEN VICE MAYOR OR ME AND THEN LOVE THE SWAMP BUGGY PARADE. LOVE IT. WE HAVE RIDDEN OUR BICYCLES DOWN WITH NO CARS ON 41 MANY TIMES. THAT IS FUN. HAVING SAID THAT, MY QUESTION IS WHAT OTHER EVENT? LAST YEAR WE HAD A CAMP THE SAME DAY WE HAD SOMETHING IN CAMBIER BOWLS MAYBE. WHAT WAS IT? YES. SO YOU HAVE TWO EMPTY BOWLS. BUT KEEP IN MIND TOO, THAT YOU GOT CONSTRUCTION ON GULF SHORE BOULEVARD. THAT'S STILL PROBABLY GOING TO BE IN PLACE AT THIS TIME AS WELL. YEAH. SO CONSTRUCTION AND BOWLS ALSO THAT WEEKEND IS THAT. NO. DO WE HAVE ANYTHING IN CAMP. DO WE HAVE ANYTHING IN CAMBIER THAT WEEKEND. THERE'S THERE'S NOT. OKAY. SO THAT'S A BIG DEAL BECAUSE THAT COMPLICATED THINGS LAST YEAR. AND THEN WHAT ABOUT AT BAKER? I THINK WE HAD A WE HAD A RUNNER OR SOMETHING SIMULTANEOUSLY AT BAKER LAST YEAR. RIGHT. WE HAD THREE THINGS GOING. YES. LAST YEAR THE EVENT WAS SCHEDULED FOR ONE OF OUR BUSIEST WEEKENDS IN JANUARY THIS YEAR. THE EVENT IS SCHEDULED FOR THE FOLLOWING WEEK. SO WE DO HAVE THOSE SAME EVENTS SCHEDULED FOR THE PREVIOUS WEEKEND, BUT THEY ARE NOT. THEY'RE NO LONGER ON THE SAME WEEKEND THIS YEAR. SO FOR TWO ONE. I'LL TELL YOU THE TRAFFIC MY DAUGHTER WAS COMING. UP FROM EAST TRAIL, COMING WEST ON 41. AND THERE WAS FOLKS DIDN'T KNOW FOR WHATEVER EVENT THEY WERE GOING TO, WHICH LANE THEY SHOULD BE GETTING IN. AND IT GOT REALLY IT WAS JACKED UP. AND ONCE YOU GOT GOING NORTHBOUND ON GOODLETTE, YOU WERE YOU'RE PRETTY, YOU'RE GOOD TO GO. YOU JUST. BUT PEOPLE DIDN'T KNOW. AND SO IT WAS NUTS. AND WE'RE ON THE PHONE WITH HER. AND ANYWAY, SHE WAS DESCRIBING TO ME AS IT WAS GOING ON. YOU AND I TALKED TO MYSELF, WHICH BRINGS ME TO THIS. AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S NECESSARY NOW WITH THAT OTHER EVENTS, BUT YOU AND I TALKED ABOUT MOVING IT TO GOODLETTE, KEEPING IT ON ONE SIDE WHERE YOU KEEP THE OTHER SIDE GOING, MAYBE I DON'T REMEMBER. YEAH. I MEAN, I WOULD DEFER TO PD ON THAT, BUT ONE OF THE OPTIONS WAS, IS TO EITHER UTILIZE THE CURRENT PARADE ROUTES THAT WE USE FOR THE CITY. AND THEN THE SECOND. IF THAT WAS NOT AN OPTION OR WANTED TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT TO KEEP IT ON THE SAME PATH OF WHERE IT WAS GOING, IT WAS GOOD GOING FROM THE MALL, BASICALLY THE MALL DOWN TO BAKER PARK, RIGHT? AND THEN THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO CONTINUE THROUGH THE SECTION, AND IT WOULDN'T HAVE AS MUCH OF AN IMPACT ON THE TRAFFIC. YOU'D STILL HAVE 41 OPEN. YOU COULD GET TO THE HOSPITAL. THE FUNNY THING ABOUT THE OTHER EVENTS IS PEOPLE COULDN'T GET TO THE OTHER EVENTS BECAUSE OF SWAMP BUGGY PARADE. SO IT ACTUALLY IT KIND OF HINDERED A LITTLE BIT OF EVERYTHING GOING DOWN 41, BUT IT'S MORE OF WE DON'T, [03:15:08] WE'RE NOT INTERESTED IN IT GOING AWAY. IT'S MORE, CAN WE GET SOMEWHERE WHERE IT'S, IT'S NOT GOING TO HAVE AS MUCH IMPACT ON THE TRAFFIC. AND THAT WOULD BE THE CONVERSATION THAT WE WERE TRYING TO HAVE. OKAY. WELL, IT'S JUST GOOD TO KNOW. AND I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER HERE FOR EVERYBODY, BUT I DO WITHOUT THOSE OTHER TWO STRESSORS, IT IS A DIFFERENT SITUATION BECAUSE THAT THOSE OTHER TWO THINGS, THEY WERE ALL GOING SIMULTANEOUSLY. MAN. IT WAS ABSOLUTELY. IT WAS PRETTY UNTENABLE. ALL RIGHT. THAT'S ALL. THANKS. I AGREE. AND I WOULD SAY A TRADITION SHOULD TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER ANY OTHER. EVENTS HAPPENING IN ANY OTHER AREA. SO WE SHOULD ALWAYS, AS A STAFF BE MINDFUL OF THAT. ALSO, WE HAVE THE TRAFFIC SIGNS THAT SHOULD BE UTILIZED AND WE DON'T HAVE 41. I MEAN, GULF SHORE BOULEVARD CLOSED IN FRONT OF THE HOTEL, WHICH WAS A BIG PROBLEM BECAUSE WE HAD NO SIDE STREETS TO BE ABLE TO GET PEOPLE SOUTH. IF THEY HAD NOT. YEAH. SO EVEN THOUGH I KNOW THAT COMMUNICATIONS WILL DO A GREAT JOB IN PRIOR INFORMING THEM THAT WE STILL HAVE CONSTRUCTION ON GULF SHORE BOULEVARD, BUT IT WILL BE, IT HAS BEEN RELIEVED SOMEWHAT. SO, VICE MAYOR? THANK YOU. I WAS GOING TO MAKE THAT POINT TOO, THAT NOW YOU HAVE THAT ALTERNATIVE FROM THE NORTHERN PART OF THE CITY TO COME DOWN BY THE NAPLES BEACH HOTEL, GULF SHORE BOULEVARD. GET OVER TO THIRD STREET AND GO SOUTH IF THEY WANT TO. AND THIS IS SUCH A TRADITION 77 YEARS IN A ROW AND SUCH A BIG PART OF OUR HISTORY AND THE CULTURE OF OUR OUR AREA AND OUR STATE. SO I'D LIKE TO SEE IT CONTINUE. IT FELT LIKE TO ME LAST YEAR, THE SIGNAGE AND THE COMMUNICATIONS WEREN'T AS MUCH AS THEY WERE IN PREVIOUS YEARS. SO IF WE COULD DO A BETTER JOB OF PUTTING OUT THOSE SIGNS A WEEK AHEAD, WARNING PEOPLE ABOUT THE EVENT THAT IT'S COMING AND SEEKING ALTERNATIVES. ALSO, MONIQUE AND HER GROUP NOW DO A REALLY GOOD JOB WITH STREET CLOSINGS AND THINGS THAT, YOU KNOW, TO PUT OUT HER EMAILS ALERTING PEOPLE THAT IT'S COMING AND THAT THEY SHOULD PLAN FOR IT. I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF COMMUNICATION IMPROVEMENTS THAT COULD HELP WARN PEOPLE OF THE EVENTS, SO THEY CAN PLAN THEIR DAY ACCORDINGLY AND NOT BE AS IMPACTED. SO YEAH, AND JUST AS FAR AS THE. LAST TWO YEARS, WE'VE GOT BOMBARDED WITH CALLS. SO IT WASN'T JUST LAST YEAR WITH 41 CLOSURE. SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT STATEMENT. BUT SHE ALSO JUST LET ME KNOW THAT NASH TO NAPLES ALSO HAS AN APPLICATION THAT THEY SUBMITTED THAT IS PLANNING FOR THAT NIGHT ON THE SAME DAY. IT'S THAT NIGHT. IT WILL NOT TAKE PLACE AT THE SAME TIME, BUT IT WILL MEAN THAT WE WILL HAVE TO CLOSE THE STREETS AROUND CAMBIER PARK. DO I THINK THAT'S GOING TO HAVE ANY IMPACT? MY PERSONAL. NO, BUT I JUST WHEN I TOLD YOU THAT THERE WAS NO EVENTS THAT THAT WERE ON THAT SAME DAY, I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT WAS OUT WHEN SHE JUST TOLD ME THAT. WELL, WHEN DO YOU CLOSE THE STREETS FOR NAPLES? I BELIEVE THAT'S SCHEDULED FOR 6 A.M.. AND WHAT STREET? IT WOULD BE AROUND THE PARK. SO PARK STREET CAMBIER PARKWAY AND EIGHTH STREET SOUTH. IT'S THE REQUIRED MPD CLOSURE. IT'S NOT A REQUEST BY THE ORGANIZATION. IT'S ONE OF OUR SECURITY MEASURES. WASN'T CLOSED OR THE ALLEY. THEY SHOULD ALL BE CLOSED AROUND THE CAMBIER PARK, EIGHTH STREET, NOT EIGHTH AVE. FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, EIGHTH AVE IS OPEN. EIGHTH STREET GETS CLOSED AT 6 A.M.. YES, WELL, THAT ONE HASN'T COME TO CITY COUNCIL YET. NOT YET. THAT ONE IS IS FOR THE SEPTEMBER 2ND MEETING. YEAH. SO FROM THE STANDPOINT OF WHAT I WOULD SAY IS THIS IF THIS TRADITIONAL EVENT IS AUTHORIZED IN TERMS OF GETTING WITH THE CHIEF AND WHAT IS THE EARLIEST POSSIBLE TIME OR LATEST POSSIBLE TIME WE CAN CLOSE IT. WHAT I'M NOT TRYING TO DO IS DEBATE AN EVENT THAT'S NOT BEFORE YOU. THAT'S COMING LATER. WE WOULD GIVE YOU THOSE VARIABLES GOING INTO THE TIME OF THE CLOSURE. THE ONLY THING I'M SAYING IS I JUST DON'T WANT THAT TO BE ABSOLUTE WHEN IT'S NOT IN FRONT OF YOU. AND SO I THINK WE WOULD MEET IF THIS ONE IS AUTHORIZED, WE WOULD MEET WITH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND EVALUATE THE APPLICATION FOR THE LATEST POSSIBLE TIME. WE COULD CLOSE THE STREET TO TRY TO ACCOMMODATE LETTING THINGS CLEAR OUT IF POSSIBLE. [03:20:04] BUT I DON'T WANT I'M TRYING NOT TO OVERSTEP, BUT I DO THINK IT WARRANTS A CONVERSATION. SHOULD YOU TO SEE WHAT THE FLEX IS ON THAT BEFORE WHEN WE BRING IT TO YOU, I BELIEVE IT'S COMING EITHER SEPTEMBER 2ND OR SEPTEMBER 16TH. AND THEN WE WOULD HAVE THAT FLUSHED OUT FOR YOU. SO. YOURSELF. OKAY. PERFECT. THANK YOU. NO FURTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS. I'VE GOT A COUPLE. BARTON. SO, YEAH, I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERN OF SOME WITH THE 41 CLOSURE, BUT I'M ALSO SAYING THE SAME BREATH THAT SOMETIMES SACRIFICE IS NECESSARY TO CONTINUE WITH, WITH TRADITIONS OF OUR COMMUNITY. I AM NOT GOING TO BE A COUNCILMAN THAT VOTES DOWN THIS PARADE THAT'S BEEN GOING ON HERE FOR 77 YEARS. I CAN TELL YOU THAT RIGHT NOW. WITH THAT SAID, THERE'S VERY FEW THINGS, VERY FEW RELICS OF OUR COMMUNITY THAT HAVE BEEN HERE LONGER THAN I HAVE. THAT HAPPENS TO BE ONE OF THEM. I COULD 41 CLOSURE. YEAH, THIRD STREET IS OPEN. SO THERE'S A NORTH SOUTH CORRIDOR OF THE GULF SHORE BOULEVARD IS IS NOW OPEN IN FRONT OF THE HOTEL. YOU CAN GET THERE. THERE'S A LOT LESS AND I WOULD SAY AS A CONDITION, MAYBE WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS IS THE ONLY EVENT ON THAT. AND I'M USING THE WORD DAY ON PURPOSE DURING THE DAY. THAT SHOULD BE THE ONLY EVENT THAT WE THAT WE AS A, AS A COUNCIL OR AS A STAFF WOULD, WOULD CONSIDER BECAUSE IT IS A BIG DEAL TO SHUT DOWN. 41 SO I THOSE ARE MY THOUGHTS. AND WITH THAT MOTION, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION, MAYOR, IF I MAY. YES. I'D LIKE TO APPROVE THE SWAMP BUGGY PARADE. AND CAN I PUT THAT CONDITION IN THERE ABOUT HAVING THE ONLY THAT EVENT FOR THE DAY. IS THAT NECESSARY OR IS THAT. SURE. OKAY. WELL, I THINK MR. YOUNG. WELL, WHAT I WOULD ACTUALLY LIKE I WOULD LIKE THAT BECAUSE I WAS GOING TO ASK FOR IT BEFORE THE DISCUSSION ON THE OTHER. SO IF WE COULD SAY THAT, THAT THAT, THAT IT PROVIDES THAT STAFF NOT ACCEPT ANY APPLICATIONS THAT WOULD INTERSECT WITH THOSE HOURS AND SOMETHING SIMILAR TO THAT, THAT ALLOWS US TO, IF WE GET IT, ONE, WE JUST REJECT IT. DON'T BRING IN FRONT OF YOU AND HAVE YOU HAVE TO DEBATE THE OTHER. THE NASH. THE NASH. NASH TO NAPLES WILL HAVE A. IT'S A IT'S A PENDING APPLICATION AND WILL EVALUATE THE LATEST TIME. WE CAN SET IT UP SO THEY DON'T CONFLICT. OKAY. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE THE CLOSURE OF 41 FOR THE SWAMP BUGGY PARADE WITH THE CONDITION THAT IT'S NOT GOING TO HAVE ANY CONFLICTING EVENTS ON THAT PARTICULAR DAY. OKAY. CAN I SAY THAT AGAIN? REQUEST THAT STAFF NOT PROCESS ANY CONFLICTING EVENT, ANY EVENTS ON THAT DAY THAT CONFLICTS WITH THAT SCHEDULE? YES. AND I WOULD LIKE TO ADD A CONDITION THAT SAYS THAT STAFF WILL NOT PROCESS ANY CONFLICTING EVENTS FOR THAT PARTICULAR DAY. THANK YOU. I'LL SECOND THAT. OKAY. THANK YOU. I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER BARTON AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER KROLL. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE COUNCIL. COUNCIL MEMBER. KROLL. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. KRAMER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. SCHULTZ. AYE. COUNCIL MEMBER. PENNYMAN. YES. VICE MAYOR BLANKENSHIP. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BARTON. YES. AND MAYOR HARTMAN. YES. THANK YOU. PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. OKAY. WITH THAT IT IS. MADAM MAYOR. CAN WE DO ONE MORE? OH, YES. 12 AYE. [12.A) Report to City Council, Pursuant to Section 56-125 of the Code of Ordinances, on the Six Month Status of Live Entertainment Petition 25-LE7 Approved by City Council Resolution 2026-15816 on February 18, 2026, for Amplified Indoor (with Doors and Windows Closed) Live Entertainment for the restaurant known as Prime Social Reserve on the property owned by 5th Ave South Investments, LLC, a Florida limited liability company, and located at 837 5th Avenue South.] WE SKIPPED IT TO GO TO OUR TIME. CERTAIN. AND MISS MARTIN IS HERE. THIS IS RELATED TO THE SIX MONTH REVIEW. THANK YOU. SO IF WE CAN COMPLETE THAT ONE AND THEN WE'LL BE ON TO THE. YES. THANK YOU. MR. MCCONNELL. THERE'S NO RESOLUTION TITLE. OH, OKAY. THIS IS THE MOMENT OF SILENCE. SILENCE WHEN WE RETURN. I'M SORRY. MAYOR. NO. AN INSIDE JOKE. THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I'LL SUMMARIZE FOR A MOMENT, BUT THIS IS THE FIRST TIME WE'VE COME TO YOU WITH ONE THAT WAS A SIX MONTH REVIEW. DIDN'T REQUIRE ACTION. AND SO THAT'S WHY IT WAS JUST TO LET EVERYONE KNOW THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THIS HAS APPEARED. AND, MISS MARTIN, I'LL LET YOU GO FROM THERE. SO THIS IS JUST REPORTING TO CITY COUNCIL. THIS IS THE SIX MONTH STATUS UPDATE FOR YOU ON A LIVE ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT THAT WAS ISSUED FOR PRIME SOCIAL RESERVE. WE ARE HERE TO REPORT THAT THERE HAVE BEEN NO ISSUES. WE DID ASK WE REACHED OUT TO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, CODE ENFORCEMENT AND THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. NO VIOLATIONS. NO VIOLATIONS OF THE PERMIT ITSELF, THE CONDITIONS OF THE PERMIT, NO LIFE SAFETY VIOLATIONS. [03:25:06] CLEAN, CLEAN BILL SINCE THE RESOLUTION WAS APPROVED. SO WE'RE JUST HERE TO REPORT THAT TO YOU. THANK YOU. NO ACTION REQUIRED. AND DID THEY HAVE ANY ENTERTAINMENT INSIDE? I HAVE I DON'T KNOW. THEY WERE. I CAN SPEAK TO THAT. THEY DID. I'M SURE THEY DID. YES. THEY WERE APPROVED ON FEBRUARY 16TH, 2026. OKAY. SO SIX MONTHS FOLLOWING THAT THEY'VE HAD NO ISSUES. JUST A QUICK COMMENT. YOU MIGHT ALREADY BE WORKING ON THIS. I THINK YOU ARE. THIS IS ANOTHER ONE OF THOSE ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVALS. THAT WOULD BE AWESOME. I TRIED. I THOUGHT, I THOUGHT HONESTLY, WE AMENDED THE CODE TO PUT THIS. I THOUGHT THIS WOULD GET IT ON CONSENT, BUT APPARENTLY NOT. SO COMMENT FROM COUNCIL MEMBER. YEP. I WOULD LOVE THIS TO NOT BE AN ACTUAL ITEM. I WILL PURSUE FURTHER AMENDING THE CODE. SO I SECOND THAT. WHATEVER IT WAS. THANK YOU. SO IF YOU'LL RECALL, WE CHANGED THE CODE WHICH MADE THIS A REQUIREMENT, BUT IT'S UP TO YOU GUYS TO EITHER INCLUDE IT OR NOT AS A CONDITION. YEAH. HOW DO WE DO THAT IF IT'S TO MAKE IT AN ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL IF THERE HAVE BEEN NO COMPLAINTS. TYPE OF THE NEXT TIME A LIVE ENTERTAINMENT COMES UP, WE'LL REMEMBER THIS MOMENT AND WE'LL CRAFT A CONDITION THAT WE CAN JUST USE AS PART OF THE TEMPLATE MOVING FORWARD. OKAY. WE ONLY WANT TO HEAR THE THE BAD GUYS. THAT'S RIGHT. YEAH. WHEN THERE'S COMPLAINTS AND PEOPLE ARE MAD. AND SO WITH THAT, THANK YOU FOR YOUR REPORT. OKAY, THAT CONCLUDES ITEM 12 A AND IT IS STILL 819. I'M SORRY I KEEP LOOKING UP ALL DAY. IT IS WE'LL SAY 12, 15. I KNOW. AND WE WILL TAKE A LUNCH BREAK FOR 15 MINUTES. OKAY. WE'LL BE BACK AT 1230. OKAY. WE'RE BACK FROM LUNCH AND WE ARE CONTINUING ON WITH ITEM 13. BE CORRECT, MR. [13.B) A Resolution Approving the Fiscal Year 2026-27 Non-Ad Valorem Assessment Roll for the Bembury Assessment Area Located Within the City's Utility Service Area; Directing Certification of the Assessment Roll to the Collier County Tax Collector; And Providing An Effective Date.] YOUNG. YES, MA'AM. OKAY. SO MR. MCCONNELL. YES. THANK YOU. MAYOR. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FISCAL YEAR 2020 627 NON AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR THE BANBURY ASSESSMENT AREA LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY'S UTILITY SERVICE AREA, DIRECTING CERTIFICATION OF THE ASSESSMENT ROLL TO THE COLLIER COUNTY TAX COLLECTOR AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. I'LL GO AHEAD AND HAND. THESE ARE, AS YOU KNOW, THE ANNUAL ASSESSMENTS RELATED TO THE CONSTRUCTION ASSESSMENTS FOR THE SEPTIC TO SEWER. AND THIS WAS THE FIRST ONE THAT WAS COMPLETED BY THE CITY. AND THIS IS JUST THE ANNUAL ASSESSMENT AWARD. THANK YOU. YES, MA'AM. WE JUST ASK FOR APPROVAL. WE DO NOT HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT. AND IF THERE'S NO COUNCIL DISCUSSION, THEN COUNCIL MEMBER PENMAN. IS FINE. SECOND, I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER PENMAN AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER KRAMER. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE PULL THE COUNCIL. VICE MAYOR BLANKENSHIP. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BARTON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. KRAMER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. KROLL. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. PENMAN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. SCHULTZ. AYE. MAYOR HARTMAN. YES. THANK YOU. COUNCIL PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. [13.C) A Resolution approving the Fiscal Year 2026-27 Non-Ad Valorem Assessment Roll for the Gulf Acres/Rosemary Heights Assessment Area located within the City's Utility Service Area; directing Certification of the Assessment Roll to the Collier County Tax Collector; And Providing An Effective Date.] MOVING TO ITEM 13 C, MR. MCCONNELL. YES. THANK YOU. MAYOR. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FISCAL YEAR 2020 627. NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR THE GOLF ACRES ROSEMARY HEIGHTS ASSESSMENT AREA LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY'S UTILITY SERVICE AREA. DIRECTING CERTIFICATION OF THE ASSESSMENT ROLLS TO THE COLLIER COUNTY TAX COLLECTOR AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. ANY QUESTIONS? COUNCIL. OKAY, I MOVE TO APPROVE THE NON VALOREM ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR THE GULF ACRES ROSEMARY HEIGHTS ASSESSMENT. SECOND. THANK YOU. HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER BARTON AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER KRAMER. AND THE RECORD SHOW THERE WAS NO PUBLIC COMMENT. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE PULL THE COUNCIL. COUNCIL MEMBER SCHULTZ A COUNCIL MEMBER. PENNYMAN. YES. VICE MAYOR BLANKENSHIP. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BARTON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. KRAMER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. CROWELL. YES. MAYOR. HARTMAN. YES. THANK YOU. COUNCIL PASSES UNANIMOUSLY GOING TO ITEM 13 D, MR. [13.D) A Resolution Approving the Fiscal Year 2026-27 Non-Ad Valorem Assessment Roll for the Seagate Undergrounding Assessment Area; Directing Certification of the Assessment Roll to the Collier County Tax Collector; and Providing an Effective Date.] MCCONNELL. YES. THANK YOU. MAYOR. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FISCAL YEAR 2020 627 NON AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR THE SEAGATE UNDERGROUNDING ASSESSMENT AREA, [03:30:02] DIRECTING CERTIFICATION OF THE ASSESSMENT ROLL TO THE COUNTY TAX COLLECTOR AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. TO HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT. COUNCIL DISCUSSION. NO MOTION. MOVE TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION FOR THE NON-AD VALOREM TAX ASSESSMENT. ROLL FOR THE SEAGATE UNDERGROUNDING ASSESSMENT AREA. SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER BARTON AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER KROL. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE PULL THE COUNCIL. VICE MAYOR BLANKENSHIP. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. KROL. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BARTON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. CRAMER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. SCHULTZ. AYE. COUNCIL MEMBER. PENNYMAN. YES. MAYOR. HARTMAN. YES. THANK YOU. COUNCIL PASSES UNANIMOUSLY MOVING TO 13 E, MR. [13.E) A Resolution Approving the Fiscal Year 2026-27 Non-Ad Valorem Assessment Roll for the Curlew Canal Assessment Area; Directing Certification of the Assessment Roll to the Collier County Tax Collector; And Providing An Effective Date.] MCCONNELL. YES. A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FISCAL YEAR 2020 627. NOT OUT NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR THE CURLEW CANAL ASSESSMENT AREA. DIRECTING CERTIFICATION OF THE ASSESSMENT ROLL TO THE COLLIER COUNTY TAX COLLECTOR AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THANK YOU. NO PUBLIC COMMENT. COUNCIL DISCUSSION. SEEING NONE A MOTION. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE FISCAL YEAR 2627 NON AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR THE CURLEW CANAL ASSESSMENT AREA. SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER CARROLL AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER BARTON. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE COUNCIL. COUNCIL MEMBER. PENMAN. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. SCHULTZ. AYE. COUNCIL MEMBER. KROL. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BARTON. YES. VICE MAYOR. BLANKENSHIP. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. CRAMER. YES. MAYOR. HARTMAN. YES. THANK YOU. COUNCIL PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. AND THAT IS ALL WE HAVE FOR YOU, MR. MISSAL. SO ONE MORE FFO13F. THANK YOU. FIFTH AVENUE. NO PROBLEM. A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN ANNUAL SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR THE FIFTH AVENUE SOUTH BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FOR FISCAL YEAR [13.F) A Resolution Adopting an Annual Special Assessment Roll for the Fifth Avenue South Business Improvement District for Fiscal Year 2026-27; Providing That Assessments Constitute a Lien on Assessed Property Upon Adoption of the Assessment Roll; Directing the City Clerk to Record the Assessment Roll; And Providing An Effective Date.] 2020 627, PROVIDING THAT ASSESSMENTS CONSTITUTE A LIEN ON ASSESSED PROPERTY UPON ADOPTION OF THE ASSESSMENT ROLL. DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO RECORD THE ASSESSMENT ROLE IN PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THANK YOU. DO YOU HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? COUNCIL DISCUSSION. THE ONE THING I WOULD LIKE TO ADD. I'M SORRY. IT WAS JUST TO MENTION THAT THIS WAS PREVIOUSLY EXTENDED FOR AN ADDITIONAL TEN YEAR TIME FRAME FOR FIFTH AVENUE SOUTH. OKAY. SO IT IS NOW SET TO EXPIRE IN DECEMBER 2030. SO THERE'S FOUR MORE YEARS AFTER THIS YEAR. BUT IN ORDER TO EXTEND FURTHER, THERE WOULD NEED TO BE A WHOLE, A WHOLE NOTHER ASSESSMENT PROCESS BECAUSE THE INITIAL ASSESSMENT ONLY ALLOWED FOR ONE ADDITIONAL TEN YEAR PERIOD, WHICH IS ALREADY COME TO FRUITION, AND THAT ADDITIONAL PERIOD IS 29 ENDS. WHAT WINDOWS US? YEAH, YEAH. SO YEAH, SO THIS ONE RIGHT HERE FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2627. AND, AND IT BASICALLY WOULD GO UNTIL 2930 AND THEN 30. RIGHT. 2930 OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT INFORMATION. IF I MAY, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 13 F AS PRESENTED THE MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER KRAMER SECOND, A SECOND BY VICE MAYOR. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE COUNCIL. COUNCIL MEMBER. KROLL. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. SCHULTZ. AYE. VICE MAYOR. BLANKENSHIP. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BARTON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. KRAMER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. PENMAN. YES. MAYOR. HARTMAN. YES. NOW. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. RUSSELL. SO WE COMPLETED 13 G. NOW MOVING TO 13 [13.H) Consideration and Approval of the 2027 Workshop and Meeting Schedule for the City Council and Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA).] H. MR.. YOUNG. YES. SO IN YOUR PACKET WE UPLOADED A PROPOSED AND TENTATIVE 2027 COUNCIL AND CRA MEETING SCHEDULE. I DID GET SOME FEEDBACK FROM MEMBERS OF COUNCIL IN TERMS OF YOU KNOW, IT'S ALWAYS A, A TOUGH THING WHEN IT'S A MONDAY HOLIDAY. SO I WANT TO BROACH THAT PART OF THE SUBJECT. AND YOU CAN SEE, YOU KNOW, RIGHT NOW WE'RE SCHEDULED DEPENDING ON OUR, OUR, ON OUR COMMUNICATIONS, I'M GOING TO HAVE SOME DISCUSSION AS, AS TO JOINT SESSION WITH THE COUNTY, BUT WE'RE SCHEDULED TO BE DONE ON DECEMBER 9TH. AND WE RESUME IF WE'RE GOING TO ACCOMPLISH A WORKSHOP AND A REGULAR MEETING IN JANUARY. AND THAT'S THE FIRST EXAMPLE OF THIS SITUATION WHERE WE WOULD HAVE MONDAY OFF BECAUSE OF MARTIN LUTHER KING DAY. SO THE QUESTION IS, DO WE WANT TO HAVE THE WORKSHOP IN JANUARY AFTER THE MONTH BACK? AND WE CAN EITHER DO IT ON THE 19TH AND THEN HAVE A MEETING ON THE 19TH AND 20TH, OR WHAT YOU'VE DONE IN THE PAST ALSO IS YOU'VE SAID, [03:35:04] WELL, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE IT ON TUESDAY AND THURSDAY AS OPPOSED. SO I OPEN THAT UP FOR THE DIALOG. I'VE CONSISTENTLY SAID JUST MOVE IT TO TUESDAY FOR THE DISCUSSION POINT. BUT WE CERTAINLY, I CERTAINLY HAVE NO PREFERENCE. WHATEVER, YOU KNOW, COUNCIL WISHES TO DO IN THOSE GIVEN WEEKS. SO WITH THAT, I JUST THINK JUST OPEN DIALOG AND DISCUSSION. AND THEN ONCE WE GET THROUGH THIS MEETING IN TERMS OF WHAT YOU'D LIKE TO SEE CHANGE, THEN WE'LL BRING IT BACK. AND I THINK WE JUST THROW IT ON CONSENT IS WHAT WE DID LAST YEAR. SO THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF THIS DISCUSSION. THANK YOU, VICE MAYOR. I PREFER NOT TO HAVE BACK TO BACK. IS THIS PARTICULAR ONE THE SAME. YEAH, THE JANUARY AND FEBRUARY, THE MARTIN LUTHER KING DAY AND THE PRESIDENTS DAY. I LIKE THE TUESDAY THURSDAY SCHEDULE. I THINK IT'S HELPFUL FOR STAFF TO HAVE A BREAK IN THE PUBLIC TO HAVE A BREAK IN THE MIDDLE AND NOT HAVE TWO BACK TO BACK MEETINGS. BUT ALSO FOR US, I THINK IN PAST EXPERIENCE, WHEN WE HAD LOTS OF LONG MEETINGS, I FELT LIKE OUR DISCUSSION OR DECISION QUALITY SOMETIMES SUFFERED. SO TO ME, IT WAS BETTER TO HAVE A LITTLE TIME BETWEEN THE MEETINGS. BUT BUT IF PEOPLE FEEL DIFFERENTLY, IF THEY FEEL LIKE IT DOESN'T BOTHER THEM, I COULD LIVE WITH TUESDAY. WEDNESDAY. I JUST PREFER TUESDAY. THURSDAY. I WOULD AGREE WITH YOU. AND THANK GOODNESS WE HAVE GOTTEN A HANDLE ON LONG MEETINGS FOR THE MOST PART. YES. NO MORE. I MEAN, I'M NOT SAYING IT HASN'T OR CAN'T HAPPEN, BUT I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU ON THE ORDINANCE THAT SAYS WE'LL HAVE THEM ON WEDNESDAYS. I DON'T BELIEVE IT PRESCRIBES THE DAY. HOWEVER, THE CODE DOES SAY THAT YOU HAVE TO HAVE TWO REGULAR MEETINGS A MONTH, AND THAT IS A MINOR CHANGE WE'RE BRINGING FORWARD, I BELIEVE. SEPTEMBER. SEPTEMBER 2ND. SEPTEMBER 2ND. WHICH WILL ALLOW YOU THE FLEXIBILITY OF HAVING. TUESDAY. THURSDAY. CORRECT. OR ONE MEETING A MONTH OR NO MEETINGS IN A MONTH LIKE WE JUST DID RECENTLY. WELL, WE HAD MEETINGS IN JULY, BUT THEY WEREN'T REGULAR MEETINGS. YES. OKAY. SO AGAIN, WE REALLY I THINK THERE'S ONLY TWO MONDAYS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. AND IT WOULD BE THE JANUARY AND FEBRUARY. AND IF WE WANT, YOU KNOW IF YOU WANT ME TO PREPARE IT TO SAY TUESDAY AND THURSDAY. SO IT WOULD CHANGE IT FROM HAVING IT TO THE 19TH AND 20TH. IT WOULD END UP BEING THE 19TH AND 21ST, AND THEN SUBSEQUENTLY IN FEBRUARY, IT WOULD BE THE MOVE IT TO THE 16TH, AND THEN WE'D HAVE TO MOVE TO THE 18TH. NOW, I DON'T KNOW ANY CONFLICTS. I'LL EXPLORE THAT AND LET YOU KNOW WHEN I COME BACK. BUT CERTAINLY THAT WOULD BE IF THAT'S THE WILL OF COUNCIL, WHICHEVER ONE IS FINE WITH ME, JUST LET ME KNOW. THE CONFLICT IS THE AIRPORT BECAUSE THEY'RE THE WELL, THE AIRPORT IS NO LONGER UTILIZING THIS FACILITY, SO WE DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THAT. YES. CORRECT. OKAY. ANY COMMENTS, ANY ISSUES? I WILL SAY, JUST LOOKING AT MY COUNTY, THE ONLY ISSUE I HAVE IS WHEN WE GO TO TUESDAY'S TUESDAY FOR THE 19TH, FOR EXAMPLE. THAT'S TDC WHICH I SERVE ON. THEY'RE ALWAYS ON TUESDAYS. SO I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY THIS TAKES PRIORITY, BUT I'M JUST THROWING IT OUT THERE THAT I WOULD MISS THAT I WOULD MISS THAT. AND I DON'T KNOW AT THIS POINT WHAT WOULD IF THERE'S SOMETHING I WOULD NEED TO ADVOCATE FOR IN THAT MEETING OR NOT? WELL, I THINK YOU MISSING A MEETING PERIOD IN TDC WITH ALL THAT'S GOING ON I'VE NEVER MISSED. OH, I'M NOT SAYING THAT YOU WOULD. I'M JUST SAYING THAT WITH. WELL, SO JUST SO YOU KNOW. SO BOTH DAYS BOTH OF THOSE TUESDAYS ARE TDC MEETINGS AND THE ONLY OTHER, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, I SHIED AWAY FROM SCHEDULING IS WEDNESDAY AND FRIDAY. BUT THAT WOULD BE YOUR PREROGATIVE AS WELL. THESE ARE YOUR MEETINGS. I JUST AM HELPING. I THINK I'M TRYING TO FACILITATE DISCUSSION. SO YEAH EITHER WAY. WELL YOU COULD YEAH. MY FEAR IS CANCELING IS THAT IS A SCHEDULE. I THINK WE NEED TO KEEP THEM ON THERE BECAUSE WE HAVE ENOUGH WORK TO DO. YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? THAT'S THE THAT'S THE FEAR SIDE OF IT FOR WHATEVER IT'S WORTH. I MEAN, I KNOW YOU DON'T LIKE THE BACK TO BACK STUFF. AND I RESPECT THAT 100%. BUT SO IF WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO THE MONDAY HOLIDAY AND I'M GOING TO ATTEND TDC, THEN I'D RATHER GO WEDNESDAY, THURSDAY THAN WEDNESDAY, FRIDAY. I DON'T WANT TO. THAT'S WHAT I, THAT'S WHAT I DON'T WANT TO DO A FRIDAY MEETING IF I CAN HELP IT JUST BECAUSE WELL, LIKE YOU, WE. I MEAN, I'VE GOT A CHILD IN SPORTS AND FRIDAYS USUALLY OR SOMETHING. [03:40:05] WE'RE AT. THAT WAS WHY I PROPOSED WHAT I DID, SIR. YES, SIR. SO YOU'LL HAVE TUESDAY. WEDNESDAY, THURSDAY. NO, I MEAN, I ALREADY IT'S COMMON FOR ME TO HAVE MONDAY, TUESDAY, WEDNESDAY. I DID THIS WEEK. AND YESTERDAY WAS LONG AT TDC BECAUSE OF BUDGETING AND STUFF. ON A PERSONAL NOTE, I DON'T KNOW IF IT MATTERS, BUT I'M GOING TO BE IN TUSCANY ON SEPTEMBER 15TH. CAN WE ALL GO? 2020 THE MEETING THERE IN 2027, 2027, SEPTEMBER OF 2027. IS THAT AN INVITATION? SO SO WE'LL WE MAY HAVE TO PLAN ON YOU. THAT ACTUALLY WILL PROBABLY BE YOUR 505. LIKE IT IS THIS IN ONE OF THE MEETINGS FOR YOUR ACTUAL HEARING DATES, JUST SEPTEMBER IS THAT WE HAVE VERY LIMITED TIME THERE, BUT WE CAN WE CAN FOLLOW. THE PROBLEM WITH THAT WAS WE DON'T EVEN KNOW UNTIL TRIM COMES OUT. AND THAT'S NOT UNTIL MAY. SO I CAN'T EVEN TELL YOU WITH CERTAINTY. I'LL DISCUSS IT IN MORE DETAIL WITH YOU. SO DO WE. I'M SORRY, I PAUSED. I WAS LOOKING AT THE VICE MAYOR BECAUSE WE WANT TO SUGGEST A COMPROMISE. I'M JUST GOING TO PROPOSE THAT WE GO WEDNESDAY THURSDAY SO I CAN MAKE TDC. AND THAT'S FOR THOSE TWO WEEKS. YEAH, I KNOW IT DOESN'T. IT'S NOT PERFECT, BUT. YEAH. IS THAT OKAY? WE HAVE CONSENSUS. YEAH, I'M FINE WITH WHATEVER THE WILL OF THE COUNCIL IS. I WILL I PREFER HAVING A TWO DAY BREAK BETWEEN IT, YOU KNOW, BUT IF IT CAN'T BE DONE. WELL, WE WOULD HAVE. WE WOULD HAVE TO GO TO A FRIDAY. MONDAY. WELL THOSE ARE THE REASONS THAT THEY'RE MONDAY HOLIDAYS. THAT'S WHY THERE'S THE THERE'S THE WORKSHOP HAVE TO BE THAT WEEK OR COULD IT BE THE FOLLOWING WEEK. I BEG YOUR PARDON. THE THE WORKSHOP. WELL YOU CAN DO THAT. THAT'S WHAT I SAID. OR YOU COULD DO THE WORKSHOP. IT SAYS OR RESCHEDULE. SO IF YOU WANT TO DO CRA AND THE A WORKSHOP IN THAT SAME WEEK, YOU COULD DO IT THAT WAY. OH WAIT. LET'S SEE. WHERE'S THE CRA IS THE 28TH, CORRECT? APRIL AND THEN JUNE? NO. IN JANUARY. RIGHT. AND THERE'S NOT A CRA. YES. AND IF YOU DID IT THAT WAY. LIKE IF THE WORKSHOP WAS MONDAY OR TUESDAY, 20TH OR 20, BUT THAT'S A THURSDAY. SO YOU'RE WANTING TO DO IT THAT ARE YOU WANTING TO DO IT THE 25TH. BECAUSE OTHERWISE THE 26TH IS STILL GOING TO BE A TUESDAY, AND THE 27TH WOULD PUT IT STILL BACK TO BACK SO THAT THERE'S NO TDC. I'M SORRY, THERE IS NO TDC THAT DAY. NO. OKAY. SO I'M GOOD WITH ANY DAY THAT WEEK, 26 OR 20 FIFTH, ANY OF THOSE DAYS, IT DOESN'T MATTER TO ME. WELL, YOU AND I HAVE A MEETING ON THE 26TH. THAT'S IT FOR. OH, I HAVE. 230. BUT OKAY, I'LL DEFER TO. THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING THE WILL. I'M NOT GOING TO. FIRST OF ALL, MAYOR, I DON'T LOOK AT MY SCHEDULE IN ANY IN ANY WAY AS TO. I WOULD SWITCH ANYTHING ON MY SCHEDULE. I GOT ON WHEN YOU CAME. I JUST KNOW THAT THEY HAD ASKED US AND SO. BUT IT DOESN'T MATTER. I'M SURE THEY COULD. I'M. I'M FINE EITHER WAY, MA'AM. SO IN THAT INSTANCE, THE REGULAR MEETING WOULD STAY ON WEDNESDAY THE 20TH. BUT THE WORKSHOP WOULD MOVE ONE WEEK LATER INSTEAD OF THE 18TH WOULD BE THE 25TH. CORRECT. BECAUSE I WOULDN'T MOVE THE. THAT'S FINE. THE REGULAR MEETING BECAUSE WE HAVE ORDINANCES. AND THEN YOU HAVE THAT, YOU KNOW, ADVERTISING AND ALL THAT OTHER STUFF. SO THAT'S. SO JANUARY 20TH AND JANUARY 25TH FOR A WORKSHOP AND. THE 28TH FOR CRA. OKAY. OKAY. 25TH. 28TH. OKAY. NOW. FEBRUARY. AND I'M SORRY. YEAH. SO DO WE WANT. JUST MOVE IT A WEEK AGAIN TO THE SAME THING. NO, I CAN'T. I CAN'T BE THERE THAT NEXT WEEK. THEN THURSDAY THE 18TH. 17TH. 18TH OR IS THAT RIGHT WITH YOU, VICE MAYOR FOR THAT WEEK FOR THE. YEAH, YEAH, YEAH. YOU SAID IT'S OKAY. YOU CAN'T DO ANYTHING. [03:45:03] THE WEEK OF THE 22ND YOU'RE GONE. RIGHT? BILL, YOU GOT IT EVERY YEAR. WE DON'T NEED TO ANNOUNCE IT. SO FEBRUARY 18TH. YEAH, FROM 15TH TO 18TH FOR IT FOR THE WORKSHOP. WELL WE COULD DO IT THE 16TH ALSO. I MEAN, IT'S STILL BACK. OH YOU HAVE TUESDAY. THANK YOU. SORRY. GOT IT. 17TH. 18TH? YES. OKAY, SO THE 18TH IS A WORKSHOP AND THERE'S NO CRA. THAT CORRECT? OKAY. IS THERE ANY OTHER ORDERS? EVERYTHING ELSE LOOKS SATISFACTORY. I HAD A QUESTION ABOUT THE CRA MEETING IN JUNE. JUNE 24TH. YOU KNOW, IT'S EIGHT DAYS AFTER OUR LAST REGULAR MEETING WHEN WE TYPICALLY GO INTO RECESS FOR THE SUMMER. YEAH. SO COULD THAT CRA MEETING BE HELD BEFORE SOMETIME BEFORE JUNE 16TH. SO THAT. YEAH, SURE. SO HOPEFULLY WE'LL HAVE A LOOK AT THAT WHOLE SUMMER. I WOULD ACTUALLY I WOULD ACTUALLY PREVENT THAT FROM HAPPENING. WHATEVER YOU GUYS WANT TO DO. I PREFER THAT THERE'S NO ONE. OPPOSING OPINIONS THERE. WHEN DO YOU WANT THAT CRA MEETING, WHICH IS THAT ONE IS TYPICALLY THE ONLY REASON WE HAVE THAT ONE STILL THERE IS TO DISCUSS THE CIP AND EVERYTHING SO THAT IT'S DONE BY THE SEASON. BUT WE CAN. CAN WE? WE'RE EARLY ENOUGH THAT IF, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, THINK ABOUT IT, WHEN WE'VE DONE CIP AND BUDGETS, WE FINISH EARLY ENOUGH. I ACTUALLY THINK IT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL IF WE DO THE BUDGET WORKSHOP AND DO A WORKSHOP ON THE SAME DAY AND SCHEDULE THEM, AND THEN THAT WOULD TAKE CARE OF THAT PART OF US TO GIVE US THE DIRECTION THAT WE NEED. OKAY, SO DO IT. AND THAT WAY WE STILL KEEP THE OTHER REGULAR MEETING FOR ALL NORMAL BUSINESS, BUT DO THE CIP. SO WE'RE WE'RE GOOD TO BE LEADING INTO THE SUMMER MONTHS. THAT MIGHT WORK. SO IT'D BE THE SAME DATE, THE 14TH. YEAH. LET'S DO CIP AND MOVE IT TO THE ACTUAL CIP WORKSHOP HANDLE CRA AT THE SAME TIME. BUT IT'D BE A SEPARATE MEETING AND A SEPARATE MEETING. AND WE WOULD JUST PLAN ON THAT, LIKE AT THREE, YOU KNOW, IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING, BUT ESTIMATED TIME. AND I THINK THAT WOULD BE LIKE 3 OR 330 BECAUSE WE'VE MADE PRETTY GOOD TIME WITH OUR ADVANCE MEETINGS AND STUFF, AND THEN WE COVER THEM AT THE SAME TIME. I THINK THAT WOULD BE EFFICIENT. SO JUNE 14TH WORKSHOP PLUS CIP, CORRECT? NO, IT WOULD BE I'M SORRY. IT WOULD ACTUALLY TAKE THE MAY 17TH WORKSHOP AND WILL ADD THE CRA CIP TO THE BACK END OF THE NORMAL CIP WORKSHOP. OH, OKAY. I HAD YEAH, I THOUGHT IT WAS JUNE. IF THERE'S CONSENSUS FOR THAT, I THINK THAT'S AN EFFICIENT USE OF TIME. DOES THAT THEN ELIMINATE THE JUNE 24TH CRA MEETING COMPLETELY? OKAY. I'M ALL FOR THAT. YEAH YEAH YEAH. BECAUSE WE BECAUSE WE WILL HAVE ALREADY SATISFIED OUR QUARTERLY MEETINGS. WE WILL HAVE ALREADY SATISFIED OUR QUARTERLY MEETINGS BY THE JANUARY, APRIL AND SO ON MEETINGS. SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THAT WORKS FOR ME. OKAY. OKAY. YEAH. GOOD CALL Y'ALL. ALL RIGHT. I THINK THAT'S EVERYTHING THAT I NEED. I'LL BRING THAT BACK. WE'LL REMEMBER THIS WHEN WE GET TO OUR OTHER CONVERSATION ABOUT ADDING A JOINT MEETING, BECAUSE SOME OF THE DATES WILL BE ELIMINATED BY IT CREATES ALMOST THREE MEETINGS IN A ROW BY THE TIME WE'RE DONE. SO WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT WHEN WE GET TO COMMUNICATION. SO THANK YOU. OKAY. ANY OTHER CONCERNS COMMENTS. GOING ONCE TWICE. ALL RIGHT. THREE TIMES. DID YOU NEED A MOTION ON THIS TODAY OR NO. OKAY. WE'LL BRING THAT BACK. OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU MR. YOUNG. THAT TAKES US TO ITEM 13 I. [13.I) A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Increase the Budget Amount for Specialized Aviation Legal Services in the Amount of $35,000 for a Total of $105,000 with Greenberg Traurig, LLP; Providing for Scrivener’s Errors; and Providing an Effective Date.] YES. THANK YOU MAYOR. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO INCREASE THE BUDGET AMOUNT FOR SPECIALIZED AVIATION LEGAL SERVICES AND THE AMOUNT OF $35,000 FOR A TOTAL OF $105,000, WITH GREENBERG TRAURIG LLP PROVIDING FOR SCRIVENER'S ERRORS AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE FOR THIS RESOLUTION. THERE WAS A SUPPLEMENT PROVIDED TO YOU ALL DURING THE BREAK. THE ONLY THING THAT CHANGED, REALLY IS THE FIRST TWO RECITALS. WE WANTED TO ENSURE THAT WE IDENTIFIED THE PROPER RESOLUTION THAT INITIALLY ENGAGED THIS FIRM. BESIDES THAT, I JUST WANT TO MAKE CLEAR THIS ONCE I GET THROUGH TWO OF THESE ORDINANCES, I DO WANT TO HAVE A CONVERSATION. THE CODE ONLY ALLOWS THE CITY MANAGER TO SPEND UP TO $35,000 A YEAR ON ATTORNEY SERVICES. [03:50:03] THE WAY THE CITY HAS BEEN OPERATING SINCE I STARTED IS EVERY TIME THAT 35 IS HIT, WE COME BACK TO COUNCIL FOR ANOTHER 35. SO THIS IS NOW THE THE SECOND RESOLUTION THAT WE'VE COME BEFORE YOU, BECAUSE THE INITIAL ONE RAISED IT TO 75 AND NOW WE'RE ASKING FOR ANOTHER 35. THIS IS NOT MODIFYING THE BUDGET AT ALL. THIS IS JUST SIMPLY AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO PAY INVOICES UP TO THAT AMOUNT. I'M OPEN TO DISCUSSION ON THIS. ONCE WE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER, BUT I THINK GENERALLY SPEAKING I WANT TO KNOW COUNCIL'S POSITION ON IF I COME TO YOU ONCE BECAUSE WE'VE HIRED AN ATTORNEY FOR A SPECIFIC THING, IF WE CAN JUST AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO SPEND UP TO, WE COULD PICK A GREATER NUMBER. SO I'M NOT COMING BACK TO YOU IN $35,000 INCREMENTS. IF I ANTICIPATE THE LEGAL COST BEING MORE THAN 35,000. SO NOT TO DO YOU HAVE A NUMBER? GENERALLY SPEAKING, I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE DEPENDENT ON THE LEGAL WORK THAT WE'RE DOING. I'M NOT ASKING FOR THAT NOW. I JUST KIND OF WANT YOU GUYS TO START THINKING ABOUT IT. OPEN TO HEARING YOUR THOUGHTS. IT IS SEPARATE AND APART FROM WHAT I'M ASKING FOR TODAY, BUT I JUST FIGURED I'D MENTION IT BECAUSE THERE ARE SOME FIRMS THAT WE ENGAGE THAT I KNOW FOR A FACT ARE GOING TO GO OVER 35 OR 70,000, AND IT'D BE A LOT MORE EFFICIENT FOR ME TO JUST COME AT YOU ONCE THAN THREE TIMES. YEAH, IT SEEMS TO ME IF YOU COME AND SAY WE HAVE MATTER, A, B, C IS GOING TO COST, WE ESTIMATE 100,000, THEN YOU COULD HAVE A BUDGET AND APPROVE FEES UP TO 100,000, OR THAT THE CITY, THE CITY MANAGER CAN APPROVE INVOICES UP TO 100,000. INSTEAD OF DOING IT 35, 3535. OKAY. THAT'S MY NUMBER TO 100,000. DO YOU HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH THAT? NO. AND I THINK THAT WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH WHEN WE BRING THE BLANKET ONES AT THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR, WE ESTIMATE WHAT IT WILL BE FOR THE WHOLE YEAR. AND THEN IF IT EXCEEDS IT, I HAVE TO COME BACK. AND THEN LIKEWISE TO WHEN WE REACH A CHANGE ORDER ON SOMETHING. CITY MANAGER HAS 25% OF THE ORIGINAL CONTRACT, BUT ONCE WE'VE DONE THAT, WE ALWAYS HAVE TO COME BACK. AND I THINK THAT MAKES IT CONSISTENT. BUT IT HAS TO BE A PROJECTED AMOUNT BEYOND THE 35. AND THEN ONCE THAT PROJECTION, IF IT ISN'T SUFFICIENT, IT SHOULD HAVE TO COME BACK TO YOU NO MATTER WHAT. SO CORRECT. SO THAT PUTS THE ONUS ON THE TIME WHEN WE COME TO YOU TO DO AN ESTIMATE, YOU GET ONE GOOD ESTIMATE AND THEN YOU AUTHORIZE UP TO THAT. BUT THEN EVERY OTHER TIME AFTER THAT IT COMES BACK TO YOU AND YOU HAVE A NEW ESTIMATE BASED ON TIME OF YEAR, ETC.. SO I THINK THAT'S A CONSISTENT JUST NOT AT BE THAT I DON'T WITHOUT ANY NUMBER ON THE BACK END. I WOULDN'T FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH THAT EITHER. I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR ABOUT THAT. IF IT DOES HAPPEN, THEN YOU'RE GOING TO REPORT IT I'M SURE IN COMMUNICATIONS. YEAH. AND IT'S NOT ABOUT THE RECORDING. IT'S JUST ONE MAKING SURE I DIDN'T WANT TO HAVE WHERE I WAS INTERCEDING AND MAKING A DETERMINATION ABOUT WHAT THAT THRESHOLD. AT A CERTAIN POINT, IT SHOULDN'T BE IN MIND BECAUSE EVEN MY OWN CONTRACTS, I DON'T HAVE THAT AUTHORITY. WELL, AND FOR INFORMATION FOR US IS REALLY WHAT I WAS REFERRING TO. YES, BECAUSE I'M ACTUALLY BRINGING ANOTHER ONE TO YOU ON THE SECOND BECAUSE OF THIS $35,000 INCREMENT. SO MAYBE FOR BUDGET YEAR 27, WE CAN TRY THIS NEW PROCESS AND I CAN TRY TO GUESSTIMATE, HOPEFULLY WE DON'T NEED A LOT OF ATTORNEYS, BUT IF WE DO, I'LL DO MY BEST TO GUESSTIMATE AND WORK WITH MR. YOUNG SO THAT WE CAN TREAT IT SIMILAR TO WHAT WE DO WITH SOME OF THE OTHER CONTRACTS THAT YOU GUYS APPROVED. THAT WAS THE GOAL IN HIRING YOU. DONE MY BEST. OKAY. SO UNLESS THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS, AS YOU KNOW, GREENBERG TRAURIG IS ANDREW BARR'S FIRM. MOTION. YES. I MOVE TO APPROVE ITEM 13 A AS PRESENTED. MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER KRAMER SECOND. SECOND BY VICE MAYOR. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE COUNCIL. COUNCIL MEMBER. KRAMER. YES. VICE MAYOR. BLANKENSHIP. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. KROLL. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BARTON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. SCHULTZ. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. PENNYMAN. YES. MAYOR. HARTMAN. YES. THANK YOU. COUNCIL PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. OKAY 13 J. THERE WAS ALSO A SUPPLEMENT ISSUED. [13.J) A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Increase the Spending Authority for Labor Legal Services in the Amount Of $35,000 with Allen, Norton & Blue, P.A.; Providing for Scrivener’s Errors; and Providing an Effective Date.] I ACTUALLY CHANGED THE TITLE ON THIS ONE TO AVOID EXACTLY WHAT WE JUST TALKED ABOUT. I'M INCREASING THE AMOUNT IN THIS REQUEST SO THAT IT CAN GET US THROUGH THE END OF THE BUDGET YEAR. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO INCREASE THE SPENDING AUTHORITY FOR LABOR, LEGAL, LEGAL SERVICES IN THE AMOUNT OF 65,000, WITH ALLEN NORTON BLUE AND PA PROVIDING FOR SCRIVENER'S ERRORS AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THIS FIRM ASSIST US WITH EMPLOYMENT AND HUMAN RESOURCE ISSUES. THERE'S CURRENTLY A CASE PENDING THAT WOULD HAVE TAKEN WHAT I ANTICIPATE THEIR NEXT INVOICE PAST THE 35,000 THAT I WAS GOING TO INITIALLY ASK FOR. [03:55:08] THEREFORE, TO GET US THROUGH THE END OF THE YEAR AND IN ANTICIPATION OF SOME THINGS THAT ARE OCCURRING. WE, WE PROVIDED AN AMENDMENT ASKING FOR 65,000 TO GET US THROUGH THAT. ADDITIONALLY, AS PART OF THE HANDOUT, AGAIN, THERE WAS A REFERENCE AND A DATE THAT WAS CORRECTED IN THE FIRST RECITAL. WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THE RECORD IS CLEAR. SO UNLESS THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS I JUST WOULD PREFER OR REQUEST A MOTION APPROVING THIS. ANY QUESTIONS COMMENTS. MOTION. MOTION TO APPROVE $65,000 FOR LEGAL SERVICES RELATIVE TO LABOR SERVICES WITH 35. NO IT IS 65 IS 65 WITH ALLEN NORTON AND ZBA FOR SCRIVENER'S ERRORS. THANK YOU. AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THANK YOU. I HAVE A MOTION BY SECOND MEMBER AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER KRAMER. QUESTION. DID YOU SAY THIS IS FOR ONE PARTICULAR CASE THEY'RE HANDLING? NO, NO, THIS IS FOR ANYTHING THAT THEY DO FOR US. BUT THERE IS ONE CASE IN PARTICULAR THAT I'M THINKING OF THAT WE CAN TALK ABOUT OFFLINE THAT I BELIEVE WILL TAKE THEM PAST WHAT I WAS ABOUT TO REQUEST. SO INSTEAD OF ME COMING BACK TO YOU ON THE SECOND FOR ANOTHER 35, THAT WAS WHAT THE AMENDMENT WAS RELATED TO. I INCREASED THE AMOUNT TO 65. BUT THEY'RE NOT SPENDING 135,000 ON ONE CASE. NO, SIR. NO. OKAY. WELL, AND THEY'VE ALSO BEEN PAID THROUGHOUT THE FISCAL YEAR. YES. AND WE IN HR AND CITY MANAGER USUALLY UTILIZES THEM FOR ALL ISSUES RELATED TO PERSONNEL. THAT'S NOT TO SAY THAT WE DON'T HAVE ADDITIONAL CONVERSATIONS HERE, BUT BUT WE DO RELY HR ESPECIALLY ON FOR THIS FIRM. IF WE GET, YOU KNOW, EMPLOYEE COMPLAINTS OR QUESTIONS ON EVERY MATTER. WE REFER TO THEM AS OUR AS OUR LABOR RELATIONS. OKAY, SO I HAD A MOTION AND A SECOND BY CRAMER. MADAM CLERK. COUNCIL MEMBER. CRAMER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BARTON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. PENMAN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. SCHULTZ. NO. VICE. MAYOR. BLANKENSHIP. YES. MAYOR. HARTMAN. YES. THANK YOU. PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. OH, I DIDN'T HEAR THAT. OKAY. 6 TO 1. YEAH. AND JUST BEFORE WE MOVE ON, I JUST WANT TO MAKE CLEAR THIS IS NOT CHANGING THE BUDGET. THIS IS SIMPLY JUST CHANGING THE CITY MANAGER'S AUTHORITY TO ISSUE PAYMENTS UP TO THE BUDGET THAT YOU GUYS HAVE ALREADY APPROVED. OKAY. 13 K IS AN ANNOUNCEMENT, IF I MAY, MAYOR. [13.K) Announcement of Executive Session regarding City of Naples v. City of Naples Airport Authority, et al; Case No. 2026-CA-001094, 20th Judicial Circuit, in and for Collier County, Florida ] YES, PLEASE. THANK YOU. PURSUANT TO 286.011, SUBPARAGRAPH EIGHT, YOUR CITY ATTORNEY IS ANNOUNCING HIS REQUEST FOR AN EXECUTIVE SESSION CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC FOR THE PURPOSE OF SEEKING ADVICE CONCERNING SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATIONS OR STRATEGY RELATED TO LITIGATION EXPENDITURES ASSOCIATED WITH LITIGATION. STYLED CITY OF NAPLES VERSUS CITY OF NAPLES, AIRPORT AUTHORITY ET AL. CASE NUMBER 2026-C AYE DASH 1094. AND IN FORT COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA ON SEPTEMBER 2ND, 2026, AT APPROXIMATELY 1230 IN THE CITY'S CONFERENCE ROOM ON THE SECOND FLOOR OF CITY HALL, THE EXECUTIVE SESSION IS EXPECTED TO LAST APPROXIMATELY 90 MINUTES BUT MAY END EARLIER. THE ENTIRE SESSION SHALL BE RECORDED. NOTHING SHALL BE OFF THE RECORD. NO ACTION WILL BE TAKEN. ANY ACTION REQUESTED BY COUNCIL WILL EITHER TAKE PLACE WHEN WE RECONVENE OR AT A FUTURE PUBLIC HEARING. FOLLOWING INDIVIDUALS WILL BE PRESENT DURING THE EXECUTIVE SESSION. MAYOR TERESA HEITMANN, COUNCIL MEMBERS BILL KRAMER, LINDA PENNIMAN, BERNARD BARTON, TED BLANKENSHIP, JOHN KROLL, SCOTT SCHULTZ, CITY MANAGER. GARY YOUNG, CITY ATTORNEY MATTHEW MCCONNELL, AND A REPRESENTATIVE FROM DION'S COURT REPORTING. THANK YOU. THAT ONE MORE IF I IF I MAY, MAYOR. YES. THANK YOU. JUST WAITING FOR THE ORDINANCE TO LOAD 14 AYE. YEAH. MY APOLOGIES. MY IPAD JUST. WENT OUT. I'LL PULL UP THE AGENDA. I JUST PULLED UP. ALL RIGHT. AN ORDINANCE OF THIS WAS THAT YOU'RE GOING TO READ THIS. IS THAT WHAT I HEARD? AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF NAPLES, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE NAPLES CODE OF ORDINANCES TO CREATE A NEW SECTION 1-17 OF CHAPTER [14.A) First Reading of an Ordinance Amending Public Noticing Requirements.   An Ordinance of the City of Naples, Florida Amending the Naples Code of Ordinances To Create a New Section 1-17 of Chapter 1, General Provisions, to be Titled “Public Notice Requirements”, Providing for Electronic Publication of Required Notices and Advertisements on a Publicly Accessible County Website, Providing for Annual Notification to Residents and Property Owners to Receive Notices by Mail or E-Mail, and Establishing a Registry for This Purpose in Accordance with Section 50.0311, Florida Statutes; Amending Subsection (a)(1) of Section 2-53, Notice of Business to be Transacted; Subsection (4) of Section 2-83, Appeal Procedure; Extension of Time for Compliance; Section 2-764, Notice by Publication; Subsection (b)(2) of Section 12-5, Limitation Upon Grant; Subsection (e) of Section 30-163, Violations; Subsection (b) of Section 30-170, Pretreatment; Section 38-67, Public Notice; Section 44-8, Definitions of the Land Development Code; Subsection (e)(2) of Section 46-34, Approval of Conditional Uses; Subsection (b) of Section 46-36, Variances to Coastal Construction Control Line; Subsection (b)(4) of Section 46-38, Vacation of Street, Alley, Easement or subdivision Plat; Subsection (i) of Section 46-41, Claims for Vested Rights; Subsection (4)(a)1 of Section 52-93, Dredging, Filling and Other Marine Construction in Inland Waters; Subsection (c) of Section 54-31, Approval Procedure; Subsection (m)(2)a. of Section 56-48, Satellite Antennas, Towers and Masts; Section 58-804, Procedure for Approval of PD Zoning; and Subsection (i)(1) of Section 58-1078, Airport Noise Impact Zone Land Use Regulations of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Naples to Reference the New Section 1-17; Providing Administrative Procedures, Definitions, and Rules of Construction; Providing for Codification, Conflicts, Severability, Scrivener’s Errors, and Providing an Effective Date.] ONE, GENERAL PROVISIONS TO BE TITLED PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS PROVIDING FOR ELECTRONIC PUBLICATION OF REQUIRED NOTICES AND ADVERTISEMENTS ON A PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE COUNTY [04:00:06] WEBSITE, PROVIDING FOR ANNUAL NOTIFICATION TO RESIDENTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS TO RECEIVE NOTICES BY MAIL OR EMAIL, AND ESTABLISHING A REGISTRY FOR THE PURPOSE. FOR THIS PURPOSE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 50.0311 FLORIDA STATUTES AMENDING SUBSECTION A ONE OF SECTION 2-53 NOTICE OF BUSINESS TO BE TRANSACTED. SUBSECTION FOUR OF SECTION TWO. DASH 83. APPEAL PROCEDURE EXTENSION OF TIME FOR COMPLIANCE. SECTION 2-76 FOR NOTICE BY PUBLICATION. SUBSECTION TWO OF SECTION 125. LIMITATION UPON GRANT. SUBSECTION E OF SECTION 30-163 VIOLATIONS. SUBSECTION B OF SECTION 30-170. PRE TREATMENT SECTION 3867 PUBLIC NOTICE SECTION 448. DEFINITIONS OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. SUBSECTIONS E TWO OF SECTIONS 4634. APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USES SUBSECTION B OF SECTION 46. 36 VARIANCES TO COASTAL CONSTRUCTION CONTROL LINE SUBSECTION B4 OF SECTION 4638 VACATION OF STREET, ALLEY EASEMENT OR SUBDIVISION PLAT. SUBSECTION I OF SECTION 4641 CLAIMS FOR VESTED RIGHTS, SUBSECTION FOR AYE ONE OF SECTION 5293 DREDGING, FILLING AND OTHER MARINE CONSTRUCTION AND INLAND WATERS. SUBSECTION C OF SECTION 5431 APPROVAL PROCEDURE, SUBSECTION M2A OF SECTION 5648, SATELLITE ANTENNA TOWERS AND MASTS. SECTION 58 804 PROCEDURE FOR APPROVAL OF PD ZONING AND SUBSECTION ONE OF SECTION 581078 AIRPORT NOISE IMPACT ZONE LAND USE REGULATIONS OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF NAPLES TO REFERENCE THE NEW SECTION 1-17, PROVIDING ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES, DEFINITIONS AND RULES OF CONSTRUCTION, PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION, CONFLICT, SEVERABILITY, SCRIVENER'S ERRORS AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THANK YOU. YEAH. ERICA OR MRS. RAMOS? BOTH. OKAY. GOOD AFTERNOON. ERIC MARTIN, PLANNING DIRECTOR. WELL, THAT IS AN INCREDIBLY LONG TITLE. THE INTENT OF THIS IS ACTUALLY VERY SHORT. SO THE INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE IS TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY'S ALTERNATE USE OF THE COUNTY'S WEBSITE IN LIEU OF A NEWSPAPER PUBLICATION FOR LEGAL NOTICES. IF YOU RECALL, THIS WAS BEFORE YOU IN JUNE BEFORE RECESS. THE CITY CLERK BROUGHT TO YOU A PRESENTATION. IT WAS IDENTIFIED AT THAT MEETING THAT A PORTION OF THIS ORDINANCE IS APPLICABLE TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH REQUIRES PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD REVIEW. SO WE DID IT WAS CONTINUED FROM THIS MEETING, REMANDED BACK TO THE PAB FOR REVIEW OF THE ORDINANCE. WE DID TAKE THIS TO THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RIGHT BEFORE THEY BROKE FOR SUMMER RECESS. AND THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD DID RECOMMEND APPROVAL 7 TO 0 OF THE ORDINANCE THAT'S BEFORE YOU TODAY. SO WE ARE BACK FOR FIRST READING AGAIN. BUT THE FIRST OFFICIAL FIRST READING OF THE ORDINANCE, NO CHANGES SINCE THE LAST TIME. IT WAS BEFORE YOU AND PAT. AND THERE WERE A FEW CONCERNS THE LAST TIME WE PRESENTED AT FIRST HEARING AND THE PAB ALSO WITH REGARD TO HOW WE'RE GOING TO ENGAGE THE COMMUNITY TO SUBSCRIBE TO THE LEGAL NOTICES. AND SINCE THAT TIME IN MAY, WE HAVE DONE SOME COMMUNICATIONS THROUGH OUR COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE IN OUR MONTHLY NEWSLETTER THAT GO OUT TO. I'M NOT SURE WHO'S ON THE LIST, BUT I'M SURE THERE'S THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE ON THAT DISTRIBUTION LIST AND IT GOES TO ALL THE HOA PRESIDENTS. WE ARE PUTTING A DIRECT LINK IN THE NEWSLETTER TO SUBSCRIBE TO THE LEGAL NOTICES AND PROVIDING THAT INFORMATION RIGHT UP FRONT SO THAT THEY LINK DIRECTLY TO THE COUNTY. THEY CAN SUBSCRIBE AND IT'S AN EASY PROCESS. SO WE TRIED TO GET OUT THAT COMMUNICATION, AND WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO PUT SOMETHING IN THE MONTHLY NEWSLETTER EVERY MONTH TO CONTINUE THIS PROCESS. WE UNDERSTAND IT IS A LEARNING CURVE. WE HAVE BEEN PUTTING THAT NOTICE IN OUR CITY NEWSLETTERS SINCE JUNE OF 2024. I BELIEVE IT'S BEEN A GOOD WHILE. SO THE OTHER QUESTION THAT COUNCIL HAD WAS, CAN WE DETERMINE HOW MANY HITS OR HOW MANY SUBSCRIBERS THAT WE DO GET FOR THOSE NOTICES? AND I DID CALL THE COUNTY AND THEY HAD STARTED NOW TRACKING THOSE. SO WHEN WE GO INTO THE LEGAL NOTICES AND, AND PULL UP THE ACTUAL NOTICE THAT'S BEING POSTED, THEY'RE GOING TO START PUTTING THE NUMBER OF HITS ON THE BOTTOM OF EVERY NOTICE. SO THEY ARE GOING TO KEEP TRACK OF THAT. BUT WE NEED TO ALSO KEEP IN MIND THAT, THAT THOSE HITS ARE NOT GOING TO INCLUDE THE NUMBER OF SUBSCRIBERS THAT SUBSCRIBE TO THIS PROCESS. AND SO I THINK THAT WHAT I WOULD DO TO KEEP THE COUNCIL INFORMED IS EITHER IN MY ANNUAL REPORT OR GIVE THE COUNCIL AN UPDATE PERIODICALLY ON HOW MANY SUBSCRIBERS WE HAVE TO THAT SITE FROM THE COUNTY. [04:05:06] SO I CAN KEEP A TAB AND KIND OF LET YOU KNOW AND GIVE YOU AN UPDATE. I FEEL LIKE IT'S SIMILAR TO WHEN THE CITY WENT TO PUTTING ITS PUBLIC RECORDS ONLINE DIGITALLY, AND THERE WAS A LITTLE LEARNING CURVE FROM THE PUBLIC BECAUSE OUR PHONE USED TO RING ALL THE TIME FOR COPIES OF LEGISLATION THAT WAS APPROVED BY COUNCIL, AND THE PETITIONERS WANTED A COPY AND THE ATTORNEYS WOULD BE CALLING. SO EVENTUALLY, WHEN WE TOLD THEM THAT IT WAS AVAILABLE RIGHT ONLINE, YOU KNOW, ALMOST TWO DAYS AFTER THE MEETING, THEY KNEW WHERE TO GET THAT. AND OUR PHONE DOES NOT RING ANYMORE FOR ANY PETITION RELATED LEGISLATION BECAUSE THEY KNOW WHERE TO FIND IT, AND IT'S EASIER FOR THEM TO ACCESS IT. SO I'M HAPPY TO CONTINUE TO ADVISE THE COUNCIL ON THAT. AND THEN IN THE MEANTIME, THE MAYOR JUST GAVE ME I GUESS A MEMO THAT SHE SENT TO THE COUNCIL. I JUST GAVE IT TO THEM ALSO. OH, OKAY. I DIDN'T SEND IT PRIOR TO YOU OR TO THEM. I, THE ONLY REASON I DID IS BECAUSE IT WAS FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR THIS INITIATIVE. AND I WAS HESITANT BEFORE. AND THE REASON I'M REALLY HESITANT IS WHEN I LOOK AT THE ITEMS, CRUCIAL ITEMS THAT I THINK THE PUBLIC SHOULD BE AWARE OF, EVEN THOUGH WE MAY NOT HAVE AS MANY PEOPLE READING A NEWSPAPER, IT IS A TRADITIONAL WAY. I KNOW THERE'S STILL PEOPLE IN THE IN THE COMMUNITY THAT READ THREE NEWSPAPERS EVERY DAY, INCLUDING THE NAPLES DAILY NEWS, WHICH IS ALSO DIGITAL. SO IT IS. THAT'S WHY I FELT REALLY STRONGLY TO WRITE YOU A LETTER POINTING OUT MY CONCERNS IF IT WERE. AND I APPRECIATE THE INITIATIVE, BUT IF IT, IF IT WEREN'T ABOUT CERTAIN DEFINITIONS AND LIKE NOTICING ON VACATIONS OF A VACATION OF STREETS, ALLEYS, EASEMENTS, DREDGE AND FILL MARINE CONSTRUCTION SATELLITE ANTENNAS, WHICH ARE VERY BIG CONCERN OF OUR COMMUNITY NOTICING OF AIRPORT NOISE IMPACT ZONE. I JUST THINK THESE ARE VERY, VERY I DON'T WANT SENSITIVE OR THEY ARE ISSUES THAT WE FIND OUR COMMUNITY IS CONCERNED ABOUT. SO THAT I WAS GOING TO GOING TO ASK YOU ABOUT THE NUMBER OF SUBSCRIBERS THAT WE ACTUALLY HAVE TO LEGAL NOTICES, BUT WE DO NOT HAVE A SECTION ON REGISTERING FOR LEGAL NOTICES ON OUR WEBSITE. AND WE HAVE IT FOR OUR NEWSLETTER AND OTHER THINGS, OUR COMMUNICATIONS CHANNEL, BUT WE DON'T HAVE IT FOR LEGAL NOTICES. RIGHT. AND THAT'S BECAUSE WE DO NOT, AND WE, WE'RE NOT, WE DON'T RUN THAT DATABASE. THE COUNTY CLERK OF COURTS RUNS THAT DATABASE. SO WE CAN'T HAVE IT ON OUR WEBSITE, BUT THE BEST WE CAN DO IS PROVIDE THE LINK DIRECTLY TO SUBSCRIBE HERE. SO THAT'S WHY IN THE MONTHLY NEWSLETTER, WE HAVE THE LINK TO. PLEASE SIGN UP TO RECEIVE LEGAL NOTICES HERE. CLICK. IT GOES RIGHT TO SUBSCRIBE AND THERE ON THE SUBSCRIPTION PAGE. I MEAN, I WE CAN'T MAKE IT ANY EASIER THAN THAT, BUT IT'S THE BEST WE CAN DO. IT IS. WELL, WE COULD DO BOTH AND I, AND THAT'S WHAT I'M RECOMMENDING IS THAT WE STILL DO BOTH. I THINK THAT THIS WAS A RECOMMENDATION OR A BILL THAT CAME OUT OF THE STATE WHO ALSO TOOK AWAY A LOT OF OF OUR LAND. I KNOW THIS IS NOT ABOUT LAND USE NOTICES. CORRECT. YEAH. I'M SORRY, I WAS GOING TO ADD THAT TO THE RECORD AS WELL. JUST TO CLARIFY, THIS IS ONLY AN ALTERNATIVE ALTERNATE METHOD FOR THAT WOULD TAKE THE PLACE OF THE NEWSPAPER PUBLICATION. THIS DOES NOT AFFECT THE LEGAL NOTICES THAT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT PROVIDES FOR PETITIONS, MEANING THAT THE MAILED NOTICE THAT IS SENT WITHIN 1000FT, AND ALSO THE SIGNAGE THAT IS POSTED ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. SO THOSE TWO THINGS WILL STILL CONTINUE TO HAPPEN. THIS IS JUST THIS WOULD REPLACE THE REQUIREMENT TO PUT THE ADVERTISEMENT OF THE MEETING IN THE NEWSPAPER. SO WE DON'T PUT THE ADVERTISEMENT OF INDIVIDUAL ITEMS IN THE NEWS. IT'S THE THE THE THE NEWSPAPER ADVERTISEMENT OR. [04:10:03] YEAH. I GUESS WE CALL IT AN ADVERTISEMENT IS JUST THE MEETING ITSELF, THE MEETING DATE, THE MEETING LOCATION. SO THAT WOULD BE WHAT WOULD BE REPLACED HERE. BUT WE WOULD STILL CONTINUE TO SEND OUT THE MAILED NOTICES WITHIN 1000FT. QUESTION. MISS MARTIN, IF IT'S A ZONING APPLICATION, THOSE COSTS ARE PAID FOR BY THE APPLICANT. THE NOTICES THAT ARE SENT OUT. YES, WE CHARGE THOSE, BUT WE PAY FOR THE LEGAL AD. WE PAY THE LEGAL ADVERTISEMENT. YES. OKAY. I THOUGHT WE WERE. MAYBE I NEED CLARIFICATION. I THOUGHT WE WERE CHARGING THAT. THERE'S IT'S A TWO STEP PROCESS. MAYOR. THERE'S A PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENT BEFORE IT GOES TO THE A, B, AND THEN THE PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENT WHEN IT GOES TO CITY COUNCIL. SO IN THE CITY COUNCIL PART OF IT, WE GET REIMBURSEMENT FOR THOSE CHARGES BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THAT COME FROM OUR BUDGET. AND THAT IS NEWSPAPER. YES. SOLELY FOR LAND USE. SO IF A PETITIONER COMES AND WANTS TO FILL IN FOUR LAKES ON A LARGE PIECE OF PROPERTY, WE WE GET REIMBURSEMENT FOR LAKE AND FILL. YEAH. BUT IS IT IN THE PAPER? YES. NO. NO. LAKE AND FILL IS IN THE PAPER. NOT IT DOESN'T GO TO PLANNING. THAT'S A DIFFERENT. RIGHT. SO THAT'S WHY THE ONES THAT HE LISTED ARE VERY CRITICAL ISSUES. I THINK THAT THAT ARE NOT LAND USE ITEMS, CORRECT? CORRECT. SO THEY DON'T HAVE THE BENEFIT OF THE 1000 FOOT PERIMETER PUBLIC NOTICE, MAILED NOTICE. AND WHEN WE'RE TALKING COASTAL CONSTRUCTION AND I MEAN I JUST A VARIANCE TO THE COASTAL CONSTRUCTION LINE NOT BEING IN THE NEWSPAPER IS VERY CONCERNING TO ME. I CAN'T EVEN RECALL THE LAST TIME WE HAD A VARIANCE TO A COASTAL CONSTRUCTION SETBACK. NOT SINCE EVEN MATTHEW'S BEEN HERE. YEAH. THOSE ARE APPROVED ADMINISTRATIVELY. I THINK THERE'S PROVISIONS IN THE CODE THAT ONLY UNDER VERY CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES WOULD THE NATURAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT REMAND THAT TO COUNSEL FOR A HEARING. BUT THOSE VARIANCES TO COASTAL CONSTRUCTION CONTROL LINE ARE AN ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW. AND THIS IS AN ALTERNATIVE METHOD. AND IF COUNSEL AT ANY TIME WOULD THINK THAT WE SHOULD ADVERTISE FOR SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE MORE OF AN IMPORTANT MATTER FOR THE COUNCIL AT ANY TIME. YOU COULD ALWAYS DIRECT THAT WE PUT IT IN THE NEWSPAPER, BUT WE WOULDN'T KNOW THAT UNTIL IT'S PUBLISHED. WELL, WE DON'T KNOW THINGS LIKE THAT. THERE ARE STILL CERTAIN THINGS THAT THE STATUTE WILL REQUIRE. WE WILL STILL BE SUBJECT TO THE STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS FOR NOTICING OF ORDINANCES, YOU KNOW. SO REZONING OF PROPERTIES, MAP AMENDMENTS, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS. THERE ARE CERTAIN CERTAIN ITEMS THAT WOULD HAVE TO STILL BE ADVERTISED IN THE NEWSPAPER. I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT THE ONES THAT ARE MENTIONED IN THIS AMENDING THE PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FROM THE NEWSPAPER, I JUST DON'T SEE ANY REASON THAT THIS IS SUCH A BIG SAVINGS TO US THAT WE WOULDN'T WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CONTINUE A PRACTICE. I'M THANKFUL OR NOT REALLY THAT THE STATE ALLOWS US TO DO THIS. BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S A BENEFIT TO THE PUBLIC AT ALL TO ONLY HAVE ONE FORM. BUT THAT'S JUST MY OPINION OF AND CONCERNS, QUITE FRANKLY. SO AND I, AND I APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING IT FORWARD, MRS. RAMBO, AND I'M HAPPY TO ADDRESS THESE POINTS ON HERE, IF YOU'D LIKE ME TO, BECAUSE I KNOW YOU HAD 3 OR 4 AND I I'M HAPPY TO, YOU KNOW, ANSWER THOSE FOR YOU IF YOU COULD. MISS. MAY I MAKE JUST A QUICK COMMENT? MAYOR. SURE. YEAH. WHAT? I KNOW THAT I JUST READ THIS MAYOR THAT YOU GAVE AND I JUST WANT TO CONFIRM. SO CHANGING TO THE DIGITAL FORMAT VERSUS THE NEWSPAPER IS THE SAVINGS WOULD BE ROUGHLY 56000 ANNUALLY. IS THAT, IS THAT AN ACCURATE NUMBER OR IS THAT. I DON'T I DON'T I THINK IT'S MUCH, MUCH MORE. AND AS A MATTER OF FACT, I DID. I NOTICED THE OTHER DAY, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAUGHT THIS ON MONDAY, BUT WHEN ERICA WAS PRESENTING HER BUDGET, I SAW LIKE IT WAS A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO, THAT SHE SPENT $72,000 ON LEGAL ADS ON JUST THAT DEPARTMENT. AND I REALIZE THAT SOME OF THOSE MAY STILL, BASED ON WHAT I'M HEARING RIGHT NOW, SOME OF THOSE OF THAT 72ND MAY STILL HAVE TO HAPPEN IN IN THE PAPER, RIGHT? A VERY SMALL PERCENTAGE, BUT YES, SOME. BUT SO NONETHELESS, IT'S, IT'S A LOT OF SAVINGS, WHETHER IT'S 50 OR 70 ANNUALLY. MY, AND IT'S HER, I GUESS HER POINT IS HER 50 DID NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THAT WAS WHAT HER DEPARTMENT SPENDS ON LEGAL NOTICE. [04:15:01] SO IN THAT YEAR IT WOULD HAVE BEEN A COMBINATION OF THE TWO. OKAY. AND STOP TIME. YEAH. SO SO THIS POINT IS THERE'S, THERE'S SIGNIFICANT SAVINGS HERE THAT WE ABSOLUTELY SHOULD NOT IGNORE. AND IN MY OPINION, IT WOULD BE ABSURD FOR US TO CONTINUE WITH THE PAPER IN LIEU OF DIGITAL. IF WE'RE LOOKING AT 50, 60, 70, 80, 90 WHAT, 70 PLUS 170 PLUS 50, $120,000 ANNUALLY. AND IN THIS PARTICULAR YEAR. NOW, WITH THAT SAID, I UNDERSTAND THE MAYOR'S POINT AND THAT IS HAVING ONE DIGITAL ONLY CONCERNS HER AND SHE WANTS TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE OTHERS. MY QUESTION TO WHOMEVER AND IT COULD BE YOU GUYS OR IT COULD BE THE MAYOR. IS THERE ANOTHER FORMAT OTHER THAN THE PAPER WHERE WE'RE SPENDING 50 TO $120,000 A YEAR, IS THERE ANOTHER FORMAT THAT WE WOULD COUPLE WITH THE DIGITAL THAT WOULD THAT WOULD EASE YOUR CONCERNS IN REFERENCE TO HAVING MORE THAN ONE FORMAT OF OF SUPPLYING NOTICES? WELL, AND I KNOW YOU'VE GOT A LIST HERE. I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S ALL OF THOSE THAT YOU WOULD WANT OR, OR 1 OR 2 OF THOSE OR SO A TRADITIONALLY THIS HAS BEEN DONE. SO THE COMMUNITY IS ACCUSTOMED TO IT. IF THEY'RE LOOKING FOR IT, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO GO ONLINE TO OUR WEBSITE TO LEARN MAYOR. I MEAN, EVERYBODY MAY OR MAY NOT. OKAY. WE GOT WE GOT SMART CONSTITUENTS. THEY WILL LEARN HOW TO USE THEIR COMPUTER AND THEY WILL LEARN WHERE TO LOOK TO FIND THESE NOTICES. IF THEY'RE NOT IN THE PAPER, THEY'RE GOING TO REALIZE THEY'RE BEING NOTICED SOMEWHERE. IN ADDITION TO THAT, WE WILL MAKE SURE THAT OUR STAFF IS PUTTING OUT NOTICES ON OUR WEBSITES SO THAT THEY CAN THEY CAN SIGN UP WITH THE WITH THE COUNTY BECAUSE I REALIZE IT'S A COUNTY SYSTEM, BUT THEY ALSO WILL HAVE NOTICES ALL OVER OUR WEBSITES AND OUR IN OUR MATERIAL. TELLING PEOPLE THESE NOTICES ARE NOT IN THE PAPER. FOLKS GET ON. YOU HAVE TO GET ONLINE AND YOU HAVE TO LOOK. WE ARE CAPABLE OF LEARNING THAT. WE'RE ALL CAPABLE OF LEARNING THAT. SO DO WE HAVE DATA? MR. YOUNG, THAT SHOWS HOW MANY PEOPLE IN THE CITY HAVE SIGNED UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER. THIS IS AN INITIATIVE WITH MISS RANDOLPH, AND SHE HAD ALREADY INDICATED THAT THAT GOES TO THE COUNTY WEBSITE AND IT'S NOT HOSTED THERE. ALL WE DO ON OUR WEBSITE IS POINT THEM TO THAT WEBSITE BY VIRTUE OF A CLICK, I BELIEVE. BUT I'D RATHER HAVE MISS RANDOLPH ASKED DIRECTLY. BUT WE'RE NOT QUANTIFYING IT TO, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, ANYTHING ON FROM THE ADMINISTRATIVE PERSPECTIVE ONTO THAT LINK. AND MISS RANDOLPH, I'LL DEFER TO YOU ON THAT. SO I'M SORRY, I THOUGHT I HEARD HER. THANK YOU FOR THAT. THE REASON WHY WE REALLY WERE THINKING AHEAD. BECAUSE, REMEMBER, THE COUNCIL HASN'T ADOPTED A AYE PROGRAM YET. WE'RE STRICTLY IN A PILOT PROGRAM PROCESS. WE HAVEN'T REALLY HAD A CUT OFF DATE AND WENT TO THE COUNTIES FOR THE ALL THE ADVERTISING. SO WE HAVEN'T NOTICED THAT FINAL THING IN THE NEWSPAPER SAYING WE'RE NOW, YOU KNOW, GOING TO THE USE THE COUNTIES FOR ALL FOR OUR LEGAL ADS. SO THAT HASN'T BEEN DONE UNTIL WE GET TO THE SECOND READING. AND THEN WHAT I WAS TRYING TO SAY TO COUNCIL IS I CAN MONITOR THAT PROCESS FOR SUBSCRIPTIONS TO ENSURE THAT WE ARE GETTING MORE OF THE PUBLIC SIGN UP, THAT THE NUMBERS ARE INCREASING AND, AND GIVE YOU A REPORT ON THAT AS WE GO ALONG. BUT WE'RE KIND OF JUST STARTING OUT THE PROCESS PER SE. I MEAN, WE'VE BEEN DOING A LOT OF TRIAL. WE HAVE ALL FOR THE LAST YEAR AND A HALF, WE'VE BEEN PUTTING A NOTICE IN OUR MONTHLY NEWSLETTER TO ALL THAT. IT GOES TO LETTING THEM KNOW THAT WE HAVE THIS ON OUR HOME PAGE, ON OUR WEBSITE TO SUBSCRIBE TO LEGAL NOTICES. I CAN TELL YOU THAT THE MOST LEGAL NOTICES LATELY THAT ARE GETTING A LOT OF HITS ARE THE PURCHASING DEPARTMENT NOTICES FOR BIDS, BECAUSE I WENT OUT AND I CHECKED THOSE, AND I WAS KIND OF SURPRISED THAT THEY'RE GETTING A LOT OF ATTENTION. SO I KNOW IT'S I KNOW PEOPLE ARE GOING THERE AND THEY'RE GOING TO FIND, THEY'RE GOING TO GO AND LOOK AT FOR WHAT THEY, THEY, THEY'RE LOOKING FOR. SO I'LL BE QUIET AFTER THIS BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT I, THE QUESTION I WAS GOING TO ASK MR. YOUNG, AND THAT IS, DO WE KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE ACTUALLY RECEIVE OUR NEWSLETTERS THAT OUR CITY AND RESIDENTS. AND CAN YOU GIVE US ANY YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW IF GARY WOULD KNOW THAT INFORMATION. THE NUMBER OF SUBSCRIBERS TO YOUR NEWSLETTER. I DON'T KNOW THAT NUMBER OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, BUT I CAN CERTAINLY REPORT BACK TO COUNCIL IF YOU'D LIKE ME TO. I CAN TELL YOU THAT REALLY, OUR GOAL IS NOT TO UNINTENTIONALLY REDUCE PUBLIC AWARENESS. IT IS TO INTENTIONALLY PROMOTE PUBLIC AWARENESS. THAT IS OUR PHILOSOPHY. WE WE WANT THE PUBLIC TO BE ABLE TO ACCESS THESE NOTICES EASILY. THAT'S KIND OF THE WHOLE PART WHY WE GOT ENGAGED IN THIS, BECAUSE THEN I AGAIN, I'LL JUST LET OTHERS TALK. [04:20:07] THEN IT SHOULD JUST STAY ON OUR WEBSITE BECAUSE IT. IF IT'S THERE, IT'S IN THE NEWSPAPER. THEN WE HAVE DONE OUR DUE DILIGENCE IN INFORMING THE COMMUNITY. AND I THINK THAT PROTECTS US IN MANY, MANY WAYS. SO DO I HAVE ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? YES. CRAMER. JUST A QUICK THOUGHT. IT'S ANECDOTAL. SO TAKE IT FOR WHATEVER IT'S WORTH. BUT JAY KYLE FOSTER WAS HERE. I DON'T KNOW FOR ONE OF THE AIRPORT MEETINGS. MAYBE SHE'S RIGHT FOR THE PAPERS. I'M SURE YOU GUYS KNOW SHE DOES STUFF THAT WE DO AND WE BUMPED INTO HER AT A BREAK OR SOMETHING, AND I, I TOLD HER I STILL GET THE PAPER NEWSPAPER. LIKE I'VE JUST BEEN. THE REASON IS BECAUSE I HAD SO MANY PEOPLE THAT I KNEW THAT WORKED AT THE NEWSPAPER. I FEEL AN OBLIGATION. AND, AND I MEAN, AND STAFFS HAVE BEEN DECIMATED. SO MANY FRIENDS THAT HAVE, YOU KNOW, AND SHE KIND OF LAUGHED AND SAID, YOU KNOW, WHENEVER I SEE SOMEONE READING A PAPER OR NEWSPAPER, I TAKE, I'VE GOT A FRIEND THAT I TAKE A PICTURE AND I SEND IT TO HIM BECAUSE CAN YOU BELIEVE THIS? I'M A DINOSAUR. LIKE THAT'S THE WORLD WE LIVE IN. I WILL ALSO SAY THIS. I'VE. SINCE 98, I'VE BEEN GETTING IT. I HAVEN'T READ THE NOTICES IN IT ONE TIME. NOT ONE TIME. AND IF I REALLY PEOPLE THAT ARE INTERESTED IN THE PROCESS, IT IS REALLY HARD FOR ME TO BELIEVE. AND IT MAY BE TRUE. THERE MAY BE A HANDFUL OR HOWEVER MANY, BUT IF YOU'RE THAT INTERESTED IN THE PROCESS THAT YOU'RE READING NOTICES, IT'S HARD FOR ME TO IMAGINE THEY'RE NOT SOPHISTICATED ENOUGH TO USE THEIR PHONE OR THEIR COMPUTER TO READ THE NOTICES, BECAUSE EVEN IF YOU READ THE NOTICE AND YOU WANTED TO DIG FURTHER, THEN WHAT WOULD YOU DO? OR SOMETHING YOU SAID, OH, THIS IS SHOCKING. LET ME. WHAT'S YOUR NEXT STEP? IF IT'S WHAT YOU'RE HOLDING IN YOUR HAND, OBVIOUSLY YOU'RE GOING TO GET ONLINE AND YOU'RE GOING TO GO DIG INTO IT AND SAY, WELL, WHO WAS THAT CORPORATION AND WHO IS WHO AND HOW LONG HAS THAT BEEN THERE? LET ME SEE THE OTHER MAP OR WHATEVER. SO AS A TRADITIONALIST, I'M WITH THE MAYOR PRAGMATICALLY, I AM WITH NO NEED TO PRINT IT. NOW I WILL ASK THIS. MAYBE THERE'S A HAPPY MEDIUM. IF YOU HAVE A SUBSCRIPTION TO THE PAPER, YOU AUTOMATICALLY GET THE DIGITAL VERSION. THE DIGITAL VERSION, I THINK, IS MUCH CHEAPER TO ADVERTISE IN BECAUSE IT'S NOT PRINTED. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S STILL THE CASE, BUT THAT WAS MY CASE WHEN I WAS DOING A DIFFERENT JOB A FEW YEARS AGO. SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WOULD BE OR IF WE'D EVEN ENTERTAIN IT IF WE'RE JUST BASED ON THE PRINCIPLE OF THE THING. BUT I'LL GO WITH THE WILL OF COUNCIL ON THIS, BUT I REALLY DO SEE BOTH SIDES. I JUST, I THINK IF WE ARE IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT BANG FOR YOUR BUCK, WE'RE THERE'S NOT MANY. I MEAN, WE'RE SPENDING THAT MUCH MONEY ON A HANDFUL OF PEOPLE. THERE AREN'T MANY PEOPLE THAT COULD NOT ACCESS IT. I JUST CAN'T BELIEVE THAT IF THEY IF THEY WERE REALLY INTERESTED. BUT MAY I ASK, DID YOU CONFIRM THAT WE ARE NOT ALLOWED TO CHARGE BACK THE PETITIONER FOR THAT ADVERTISEMENT? DID WHO CONFIRM I ARE YOU CONFIRM. CAN YOU CONFIRM THAT? IF, OH, CAN I THAT WE CAN CHARGE BACK ANY COST TO ADVERTISE TO THE PETITIONER AS ANY OTHER PETITION DIGITALLY? NO. FOR A NEWSPAPER. OH, CURRENTLY, CAN WE CHARGE WHOEVER FILES FOR A PETITION OF EASEMENT OR LAKE FILL OR COASTAL CONSTRUCTION? VACATING AN ALLEYWAY SUBDIVISION PLAT. I CAN TELL YOU MAYBE MATTHEW CAN LET US KNOW, BUT I, I CAN TELL YOU THAT I HAVE BEEN GETTING REIMBURSED FOR PETITIONER RELATED ADVERTISING COSTS WHEN IT COMES TO THE LEVEL OF CITY COUNCIL. GOOD, GOOD. WHICH IS WHOLLY LEGAL AND ALLOWED. BUT PETITIONERS WOULD NEVER PAY FOR THE COST OF OUR OWN ADVERTISEMENTS, SUCH AS THIS ORDINANCE BEING ADVERTISED BETWEEN NOW AND SECOND READING. SO THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT WE AS A CITY ADVERTISE IN THE NEWSPAPER AS WELL THAT WE WOULD NOT GET REIMBURSED FOR. SO A VERY, IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY, A VARIANCE TO THE COASTAL CONSTRUCTION LINE IS DONE ADMINISTRATIVELY. SO WE COULDN'T CHARGE ANYTHING BECAUSE WE DON'T ADVERTISE IT. THERE WOULD BE NO ADVERTISEMENT. YOU CAN'T CHARGE FOR SOMETHING THAT YOU DON'T PAY FOR, RIGHT? CORRECT. BUT A DREDGE AND FILL AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S ADVERTISED IN THE NEWSPAPER. YES IT IS. YES. PAT KNOWS BETTER THAN I DO. THAT, TO ME, IS OVERKILL. [04:25:03] PERSONALLY, IT'S IN OUR CODE. BUT WE DO. WE DO COLLECT FOR WE WE DO GET REIMBURSED. THE PROBLEM IS, IS THERE'S A WHOLE LOT OF STAFF TIME THAT GOES INTO PUTTING THE AD IN THE PAPER, MAKING SURE WE GOT THE NOTICE OF PUBLICATION, FOLLOWING UP ON THAT, FOLLOWING UP TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GOT THE INVOICE, PAY THE INVOICE. THE OTHER DAY, WE WENT TO PUT AN AD IN THE PAPER AND THE NEWSPAPER SAID, WE'RE SORRY, BUT WE CLOSED YOUR ACCOUNT FOR NONPAYMENT. WE SPENT ONE PERSON FIVE HOURS ONE DAY, TWO WEEKS AGO, JUST TO GET THE AD IN THE PAPER FOR A COUNCIL MEETING, BECAUSE OUR ACCOUNT WAS CLOSED AND WE COULDN'T FIGURE OUT WHO DIDN'T PAY THE BILL. SO I ALSO HAVE THE ABILITY TO CHANGE THEIR DEADLINES. NAPLES DAILY NEWS. WE'VE RUN INTO THIS ON MULTIPLE TIMES WHERE, YOU KNOW, FOR A HOLIDAY, WE, YOU KNOW, OUR MY DAY IN MY OFFICE HAS A SCHEDULE. IF A MEETING IS ON THIS DATE, SHE KNOWS SHE HAS TO GET THE AD IN SO MANY DAYS AHEAD OF TIME. BUT IF THERE'S A HOLIDAY, YOU HAVE TO SPECIFICALLY CHECK AND SEE AND MAKE SURE IT IT COMES WITH ITS OWN HOST OF CHALLENGES. THAT'S WHY SHE HAS SEVEN PEOPLE IN HER DEPARTMENT. BECAUSE WE. IT'S TEDIOUS WORK, BUT NEXT. ANYBODY ELSE? VICE MAYOR? OH MY COMMENT. YEAH. SO SAINT MONIQUE IS HERE. DO YOU HAVE THE NUMBER OF SUBSCRIBERS TO YOUR GENERAL EMAILS THAT YOU SEND OUT? HI. GOOD AFTERNOON. MONIQUE BARNHART TIBERIUS COMMUNICATIONS MANAGER. I APOLOGIZE, I DIDN'T KNOW WE WERE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THIS TODAY. SO CURRENTLY WE HAVE 24,904 SUBSCRIBERS TO OUR CUMULATIVE LIST. SO IF YOU WANT A BREAKDOWN OF EACH LIST THAT WE HAVE. SO WE HAVE LIKE AN ALL COMMUNICATIONS WHERE THEY GET EVERYTHING THAT WE SEND. AND WE HAVE THE WEEKLY TRAFFIC BULLETIN. WE HAVE OTHER VARIOUS EMAILS SO OR EMAIL LISTS. I SO IF YOU WANT THAT BROKEN DOWN, I'D HAVE TO, I NEED A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME, BUT THAT'S OKAY. I THINK IT GIVES US A GENERAL IDEA THAT YOU HAVE A BROAD REACH INTO THE. WHO WAS THE PRESIDENT'S COUNCIL AND THE GENERAL PUBLIC THERE THAT CAN BE USED AS A CHANNEL TO NOTIFY PEOPLE, TO THE EXTENT WE HAVEN'T ALREADY, OF THIS CHANGE IN PROCESS THAT IF YOU WANT TO SEE THE LEGAL NOTICES, HERE'S WHERE YOU SIGN UP FOR A SUBSCRIPTION. FOR THE LEGAL NOTICES, THOUGH WE DON'T HAVE A SUBSCRIBER LIST FOR THAT BECAUSE THAT'S ON THE COUNTIES. YEAH. I MEAN, YOU COULD, YOU COULD INCLUDE A LINK IF YOU WANT TO RECEIVE CITY LEGAL NOTICES, CLICK HERE AND IT TAKES YOU TO THE COUNTY WEBSITE. AND THAT'S WHERE MISS RAMOS COULD MONITOR HOW MANY PEOPLE ACTUALLY DO. AND THAT'S AND THAT'S ACTUALLY WHAT WE HAVE TODAY. AND IT'S THE FIRST TAB ON THE CITY WEBSITE. CAN YOU TELL HOW MANY PEOPLE HAVE SIGNED UP? I CHECKED BEFORE FIRST READING AND THERE WAS 40. THAT WAS. THAT WAS BACK IN MAY. OKAY. BUT REMEMBER, WE THAT WAS KIND OF EVEN BEFORE WE PUT OUT ANYTHING IN THE NEWSLETTER ABOUT SUBSCRIBING. SO, SO WE COULD DO A COMMUNICATION BLITZ. I MEAN, I THINK ONCE IF WE, IF IT GOES THROUGH SECOND READING, IT WILL, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO DO A WRITE UP. WE NEED TO GET COMMUNICATION OUT AND IT WILL BE A LEARNING CURVE TO FIND THAT. IN ADDITION, ALSO BECAUSE YOU WERE TALKING VICE MAYOR ABOUT HAVING ANOTHER PLACE OR SOMEONE ASKED WHERE ANOTHER PLACE COULD BE THAT WE COULD PUT THE LEGAL NOTICES. AND WE DO HAVE ALL THE LEGAL NOTICES ACCESSIBLE ON OUR CITY WEBSITE. YEAH, THAT WAS MY NEXT QUESTION. SO NOT ONLY CAN THEY SIGN UP FOR THE OFFICIAL LEGAL VERSION ON THE COUNTY CLERK OF COURT SITE, BUT THEY CAN ALSO GET IT FROM OUR OWN WEBSITE. WE POST ALL THE LEGAL NOTICES ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE, SO I MIGHT HAVE MISSED EVEN TELLING YOU ALL THAT. SO. SO THAT'S ANOTHER ANOTHER CHANNEL THAT PEOPLE COULD GO, RIGHT. BUT NOT THIS. THIS WILL BE REMOVED. NO, WE'RE NOT REMOVING ANYTHING ON OUR WEBSITE. WE'RE KEEPING EVERYTHING. THEY WOULD HAVE BOTH. WE'D HAVE THE CITY WEBSITE AND THE COUNTY WEBSITE. YES. OKAY. OH YEAH. IT'S JUST NOT THE NEWSPAPER, JUST NOT THE NEWSPAPER. GOT IT. OKAY. YEAH, I HAVE ONE MORE STATISTIC THAT MIGHT HELP YOU. SO IN OUR AUGUST NEWSLETTER FOR THIS PUBLIC NOTICE SYSTEM, WE HAD 75 PEOPLE CLICK ON THE SUBSCRIBER LINK FOR THESE PUBLIC NOTICES. NOW, I DON'T KNOW IF THEY DID ON THE COUNTY'S WEBSITE, BUT WE HAD 75 INDIVIDUAL CLICKS FOR SUBSCRIBE TO THE ONLINE PUBLIC NOTICE SYSTEM IN OUR NEWSLETTER. THAT WAS JUST IN AUGUST. JUST IN AUGUST. AND THAT'S OFF SEASON. [04:30:04] A LOT OF PEOPLE AREN'T HERE AND AREN'T FOCUSED ON THE CITY AS MUCH RIGHT NOW. I SUPPORT THIS INITIATIVE. I THINK NOT ONLY IS IT A COST SAVINGS, BUT I THINK WE MAY ACTUALLY HAVE BETTER AWARENESS OF WHAT'S GOING ON IF PEOPLE CLICK ON THE SUBSCRIPTION, WHETHER IT'S THE CITY NEWSLETTER OR THE COUNTY SITE AND THEY'RE GETTING IT IN THEIR EMAIL, I THINK THEY'RE MORE LIKELY TO READ IT THAN IN THE BACK OF THE NEWSPAPER. I'VE NEVER READ THE LEGAL NOTICES EITHER. I READ THE NEWSPAPER, BUT I DON'T READ THAT PART. SO I THINK WE CAN END UP WITH A BETTER, BETTER PROCESS AND BETTER COMMUNICATION. BETTER AWARENESS. OH, I AGREE, I JUST DIDN'T WANT TO ELIMINATE THE NEWSPAPER, BUT THANK YOU. I AGREE. ANYBODY ELSE? CARL. YEAH, I'M TOTALLY FOR MIGRATING TO ELECTRONIC PLATFORM. IT'S AVAILABLE FOR FREE 24 OVER SEVEN PAPER. YOU KNOW, IF YOU'RE NOT A SUBSCRIBER YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET THAT INFORMATION. AND I DON'T LOOK AT THE CLASSIFIED TAB. I DO HAVE THE PAPER ELECTRONICALLY, BUT I DID CHECK IT OUT AFTER WE TALKED ABOUT THIS LAST TIME. AND IT'S LIKE A, IT'S LIKE ENTERING A MUSEUM ALMOST. I MEAN, THERE'S NOTHING THERE. I MEAN, IT'S JUST NOT, IT'S NOT YOU KNOW, SORRY. I MEAN, I'M FOR MAYBE GIVING PEOPLE NOTICE. YOU WANT TO GIVE NOTICE A FEW MONTHS BEFORE YOU GO 100% ELECTRONIC. THAT'S A GREAT IDEA. BUT IN THIS DAY AND AGE, WE'RE LIKE THE LAST OF THE MOHICANS HERE WITH, YOU KNOW, WITH THE WITH THE WITH THE CLASSIFIED ADS. NO ONE'S DOING THAT ANYMORE. JUST IT'S JUST AT SOME POINT, YOU GOTTA SAY, ENOUGH. WE'RE GOING TO GET IN THE 20TH CENTURY, YOU KNOW, SO THAT I DEFINITELY WOULD MIGRATE ELECTRONICALLY. OKAY. ANYBODY ELSE? I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION. THEN I CAN SEE THE CONSENSUS BUILDING HERE. YOU SAID THERE IS NOT AN EFFECTIVE DATE IN THE RESOLUTION IN THE ORDINANCE. BE EFFECTIVE UPON SECOND READING. AND WE'RE AT FIRST READING, RIGHT? SO THERE IS A DEFINITE DATE, RIGHT? YES THERE IS, BUT WE WOULDN'T ADVERTISE IN THE NEWSPAPER THAT WE'RE USING THAT UNTIL AFTER IT WERE APPROVED AT SECOND READING. SO THIS IS ANOTHER ADVERTISING I NEED TO DO TO NOTIFY THE PUBLIC. BUT THAT WOULD BE WHEN THE ORDINANCE BECOMES EFFECTIVE. AND THEN THAT'S WHEN WE WOULD BEGIN THE PRESS RELEASES AND COMMUNICATION. BUT THIS WAS ADVERTISED IN THE NEWSPAPER. NO SECOND READING. IT'S ADVERTISED. OKAY. IF IT'S IF IT WILL BE ON FIRST READING TODAY. WHEN WOULD SECOND READING BE? AT THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING. NEXT COUNCIL MEETING IS THE SECOND. SECOND. WOULD IT BE THAT SOON? TWO WEEKS. I THINK IT'S TEN DAYS. YEAH. HAS TO BE ADVERTISED. YES. WE WILL MEET THE ADVERTISING REQUIREMENT. YEAH. OKAY. THERE'S NO PUBLIC COMMENT. ANY FURTHER COMMENTS? OKAY THEN, MADAM MAYOR, I MOVE APPROVAL OF THIS ORDINANCE LISTED IN 14 A ON FIRST READING AND SCHEDULE SECOND READING FOR SEPTEMBER 2ND. SECOND. OKAY. I HAVE A MOTION BY VICE MAYOR AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER. KRAMER. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE COUNCIL. COUNCIL MEMBER. KROLL. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. SCHULTZ. AYE. VICE MAYOR. BLANKENSHIP. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BARTON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. KRAMER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. PENMAN. YES. MAYOR. HEITMAN. NO. IT PASSES 6 TO 1. THANK YOU, COUNCIL, FOR YOUR INDULGENCE ON THAT. THANK YOU, MRS. HRABOSKY. OH, YES. THANK YOU FOR COMING IN. OKAY, THAT TAKES US TO ITEM 15. PUBLIC COMMENT. AND THEN TAKES US TO ITEM 16, WHICH IS CORRESPONDENCE AND COMMUNICATIONS. [16) COMMUNICATIONS FROM MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL, AND STAFF] SHALL I START THIS WAY? COUNCIL MEMBER SCHULTZ. SORRY. WE'RE AT COMMUNICATIONS. NOTHING TODAY. OKAY. NOTHING TODAY. OKAY. I'LL SKIP TO KRAMER. SORRY. THAT WAS FUNNY. I'LL PASS. OKAY. YEAH, YEAH. TDC MET YESTERDAY AND A COUPLE THINGS. ONE I RAN INTO CHAD COMING OUT OF THE GOING INTO THE MEETING. THEY TDC APPROVED $750,000 FOR THE BREAKDOWN IS, 5000 FOR LOUDERMILK, I THINK. AND THEN THE BALANCE FOR BEACH RENOURISHMENT, WHICH THAT'S A LOT OF MONEY. WE ARE GRATEFUL FOR. SHOULDN'T TAKE IT FOR GRANTED. ALSO, THE YEAR TO DATE ECONOMIC IMPACT FOR COLLIER COUNTY OF VIA [04:35:10] TOURISM. IT WAS GIVEN TO US YESTERDAY UP 8.8% AND IT WAS $2.9 BILLION. SO THIS IS WHEN YOU BUILD IT, THIS BEAUTIFUL PEOPLE WANT TO WANT TO SEE WHAT IT'S LIKE. AND FINALLY, I. I TRY NOT TO TALK MUCH IN THAT MEETING, BUT I DID LET EVERYONE KNOW PRETTY EMPHATICALLY THAT WE HAD JUST THE PREVIOUS DAY IN A WORKSHOP, FOUND CONSENSUS TO RAISE OUR MILLAGE RATE AND TALKED ABOUT THE HEADWINDS AND REALLY ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO, TO VOTE NO FOR THE REFERENDUM THAT'S GOING TO END OR DIMINISHED GREATLY PROPERTY TAXES AND TO DIG INTO IT. AND I WANT TO TALK TO ANYBODY AND WE CAN HAVE A CONVERSATION. YOU CAN COACH ME UP, TELL ME WHERE HOW THAT'S GOING TO WORK. I ALSO, I REALLY EMPHASIZED THE COMMITMENT WE'VE MADE TO HAVE POLICE AND FIRE THAT'S GOING TO MEET THE NEEDS. AND I'M PROBABLY TICKED OFF SOMEBODY WHEN I SAID, YOU KNOW, I MENTIONED OUR PEERS COMING ONLINE AND HOW THAT'S THE MOST VISITED PLACE IN SOUTHWEST FLORIDA FOR DECADES AND HOW THE MARRIOTT'S COMING ONLINE AND THE THREE MONSTROSITIES, I CALLED THEM ON DAVIS, THE GIANT KLEENEX BOXES. AND WE HAVE TO PROVIDE SERVICE FOR ALL THAT BECAUSE THEY'RE ALL COMING THIS DIRECTION. AND PEOPLE DON'T REALIZE WHEN YOU'RE DOING IT THAT WE HAVE TO, WE'RE PAVING THE ROADS WHEN WE HAVE THE POLICE AND EVERY WE HAVE TO PREVENT THE CRIME AND ATTEND TO WHATEVER THE FIRST RESPONDERS HAVE TO ATTEND TO, WHETHER IT'S HEALTH OR PUBLIC SAFETY AND, AND PROVIDE ALL THE INFRASTRUCTURE. AND SO KUDOS TO US FOR DOING THAT. BUT I JUST WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT I'M TRYING TO AMPLIFY IT. MAKE THEM AWARE THAT WE ARE THE MINUTE AND I DON'T WANT TO DIMINISH MARCO ISLAND. WHO'S THERE SITTING NEXT TO ME? OR EVERGLADES CITY OR FOLKS OUT IN IMMOKALEE. THE REALITY IS THIS IS WE'RE THE VANGUARD. SO THANK YOU TDC. AND ALSO, I HOPE WE CAN CONTINUE TO WORK TOGETHER. AND WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT SOME JOINT MEETINGS WITH THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. AND I HOPE THOSE ARE PRODUCTIVE MOVING FORWARD TO HELP US WITH PROVIDING THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND RESOURCES FOR ALL THE FOLKS THAT ARE USING OUR AMENITIES. THAT'S ALL. THANK YOU FOR THAT REPORT, I APPRECIATE IT. I KNOW WE DO. THE COMMUNITY DOES. AND FOR YOU ATTENDING THOSE MEETINGS, DO THEY EVER BREAK DOWN THE PERCENTAGE? BECAUSE I KNOW FIFTH AVENUE CAN DO IT OF HOW MUCH IS ACTUALLY COMING TO THE CITY VERSUS THE COUNTY WITH TOURISM OR FIFTH AVE CAN DO IT THROUGH THE BID BASED ON RECEIPTS THAT THEY GET. I JUST MEAN IN GENERAL BECAUSE IT'S FOR THE HOTELS. ALSO VISITED SPOTS IS ABOUT THE BEST WE GET. IT'S SO WHEN THEY, THEY DON'T DELINEATE BETWEEN THE TWO. I WAS TOLD CAN THEY IS OH NUMBER SEVEN. YEAH. WE'RE NOT WELL I DID NOT KNOW THAT BUT YEAH, I MAY BE ABLE TO GET THAT SORTED OUT. IT WOULD BE INTERESTING TO KNOW HOW THE TD C DOLLARS ARE SPENT. BUT ALSO WHO'S BENEFITING THE MOST. THE CITY, THE COUNTY OR. WELL, WHEN YOU LOOK AT WHAT TDC IS FOR, TDC IS VERY SPECIFICALLY TO PROMOTE TOURISM AND BEACH RENOURISHMENT. THAT'S IT. I MEAN, THAT'S IT. BEACH RENOURISHMENT. WELL, THE REALITY IS, I MEAN THAT IS ONGOING. THE, THE BULK OF AFTER STORMS IS WHEN THE BULK OF IT HAPPENS. THANK YOU LORD SO FAR. DON'T BELIEVE IN KNOCKING ON WOOD, BUT I WILL SAY THAT WE'VE BEEN VERY FORTUNATE SO FAR THIS YEAR IN THIS SUMMER SEASON, THIS THIS RAINY SEASON, THAT THERE HASN'T BEEN A MAJOR EVENT WHERE WE REALLY HAVE TO DIG INTO A LOT OF A LOT OF DOLLARS THERE BECAUSE IT'S SUCH A NARROW SCOPE. THE TDC IS VERY WELL FUNDED. ULTIMATELY, WHATEVER DOLLARS ARE SPENT ARE DETERMINED TO BE SPENT BY THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. WE'RE JUST AN ADVISORY GROUP, BUT THEY RARELY OPPOSE WHATEVER THE WILL OF THE TDC IS. WAS THERE A DISCUSSION ON THE PRIVATIZATION OF THE TDC? YES. THAT'S AN ONGOING THERE'S A LOT OF WORK TO BE DONE. IT'S JUST BEEN STARTED. THEY'VE MET WITH EACH OF US INDIVIDUALLY AND PITCHED THE PLAN, BUT IT IS REALLY HONESTLY IN INFANCY. I ASKED VERY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS ABOUT STRUCTURES. SO FOR EXAMPLE, THE DIRECTOR WAS THERE AND I SAID, WHO GETS TO FIRE YOU? I GUESS MY YOU KNOW, IN ANY, IT'S ONE OF THE FIRST QUESTIONS I ASKED IN AN INTERVIEW WHEN I'VE INTERVIEWED, LIKE, WHO GETS TO FIRE ME? BECAUSE THAT'S WHO I REALLY WANT TO TALK TO. I DON'T WANT TO TALK TO THE BAND DIRECTOR OR THE HEAD OF THE PARENTS COUNCIL OR WHATEVER. I WANT TO TALK TO YOU WHO CAN FIRE ME? SO WHO'S GOING TO FIRE YOU? AND THEY HAVEN'T EVEN COME UP WITH THAT YET. SO THAT'S HOW FAR DOWN THE ROAD THIS IS. THANK YOU. [04:40:08] SURE. THE ONLY THING I WANT TO ADD ON TDC, JUST AS JUST TO REMIND EVERYONE, WE USED TO GET 200 000 FOR BEACH RENOURISHMENT AND WENT UP TO 500 0002 YEARS AGO, AND THAT'S PART OF WHAT MR. KRAMER WAS ALLUDING TO. WE USED TO HAVE NO LOUDERMILK, AND NOW WE CAN GET UP TO $250,000 A YEAR. AND THE PIER USED TO BE 200, AND THEY'VE INCREASED THAT TO 400. THAT'S HOW WE ENDED UP WITH A 2.2 FOR THE FOR THE PIER. AND THEN THE OTHER ONE IS THE 10 MILLION, MOST RECENTLY ON THE OUTFALL PROJECT. AND THE KEY ABOUT THE TDC IS, IS YOU HAVE TO GO TO THEM WITH A PROJECT. BECAUSE OF THEIR NARROW SCOPE, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO SAY, HERE'S A BLANK CHECK, GO DO IT AS YOU WANT. YOU HAVE TO GO TO THEM WITH A SPECIFIC PROJECT AND PURPOSE AND THEN DEFEND WHY IT QUALIFIES FOR THE TDC FUNDS. SO I THINK AS WE CONTINUE TO DO OUR INFRASTRUCTURE REPAIRS, WHICH IS WHAT THE OUTFALL PROJECT WAS, BUT IT WAS REMOVING THOSE OUTFALL PUMPS FROM THE BEACH AND IMPROVING THE BEACH AREA. THAT'S HOW THE CASE COULD BE MADE. SO WE NEED TO DO OUR DUE DILIGENCE AND BE PREPARED TO AT LEAST ASK FOR THOSE PROJECTS, ESPECIALLY THE ONES ALONG THE COASTLINE, AS WE CONTINUE TO TO IMPROVE OUR INFRASTRUCTURE. SO I JUST WANTED TO, TO SAY THAT IN ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF WHAT WE HAVE TO DO TO MAKE SURE WE GET THOSE DOLLARS TO. ABSOLUTELY. AND TO GARY'S POINT, THOSE THOSE REQUIREMENTS ARE STATUTE. IT'S NOT THERE'S NOTHING ARBITRARY ABOUT IT. YOU MUST MEET THE QUALIFICATIONS BY STATUTE IN ORDER TO EVEN ASK FOR IT. YES, SIR. THANK YOU. BARTON. JUST A REAL QUICK FOLLOW UP OR COMMENTS IN REFERENCE TO MISS TAYLOR'S PUBLIC COMMENTS EARLIER TODAY. THIS MORNING ON OUR 2045, 2045 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. I APPLAUD HER CONCERN AND INTEREST IN THE REVISIONS THAT WE'RE WORKING ON. AND SHE BROUGHT UP A GREAT POINT. AND WE NEED TO CONTINUE TO REMIND PEOPLE THAT WE, SPECIFICALLY, WE, WE, WE EXTENDED THE DEADLINE ON THAT TO OCTOBER 23RD SPECIFICALLY SO THAT WE GAVE THE PUBLIC AMPLE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW AND PROVIDE FEEDBACK. SOLE PURPOSE OF THE EXTENSION WAS TO ALLOW OUR, OUR RESIDENTS TO LOOK AT THIS AND PROVIDE US WITH FEEDBACK THAT THAT THEY THINK IS IMPORTANT. SO WHEN SHE COMMENTS THAT WE NEED TO DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S BEING DONE PROPERLY AND WE'RE GETTING THE APPROPRIATE FEEDBACK FROM OUR COMMUNITY, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE DOING, AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE'VE DONE. BUT I FELT IT WAS A REAL GOOD TIME FOR A REMINDER TO THE PUBLIC THAT THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE'VE DONE. THERE WAS AN EMAIL TO THE CITY OF NAPLES EMAIL THAT WENT OUT TO EVERYBODY THAT SUBSCRIBES ON AUGUST 12TH, THAT HAS THE DRAFT LINK TO THE DRAFT THAT'S THERE FOR REVIEW AND FOLKS AND THAT, THAT EMAIL ALSO SPECIFICALLY STATES THAT YOU HAVE UNTIL OCTOBER 23RD TO GET ANY COMMENTS OR FEEDBACK BACK TO ERIC AND MARTIN. SO CLOCK IS TICKING. IF IT'S OF CONCERN TO YOU, THEN PLEASE PROVIDE FEEDBACK. WE WILL, WE WILL THE APPROPRIATE PARTIES WILL, WILL REVIEW IT AND IT'LL BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION. AND I WILL ADD THAT MISS TAYLOR SPECIFICALLY SAID THAT SHE HAD THE INTENT OF PROVIDING HER FEEDBACK TO ERIC AND MARTIN, THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. SO, AGAIN, I APPLAUD HER FOR DOING THAT. AND THE PUBLIC NEEDS TO KNOW THAT THEY HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO THE SAME. THANK YOU. THAT'S A GOOD PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT THERE. SO WE DON'T GET YELLED AT IN THREE MONTHS FOR NOT EXTENDING IT AND NOT GIVING THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PUBLIC TO GIVE US FEEDBACK. WE'VE DONE THAT. I THINK MAYBE TWICE EVEN OKAY, TWICE. WE'VE DONE THAT TWICE NOW. THANK YOU. YOU'RE COMPLETE COUNCIL MEMBER. YEAH, WE JUST HAD OUR PRIMARIES AND, AND MAYBE THINKING ABOUT BECAUSE THE WOMAN LEAGUE OF VOTERS CAME TO US, SAID, WELL, YOU COULD SAVE 50,000 BY MOVING THE ELECTION AT THE SAME TIME IN NOVEMBER. AND, YOU KNOW, AND LOOKING AT THE VOTER TURNOUT, WHICH WAS PRETTY DISMAL, ESPECIALLY FROM THE CITY, I MEAN, THE CITY'S TURNOUT STANDPOINT WAS PRETTY DISMAL. THAT MADE ME THINK ABOUT HAVING, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE ALWAYS HAD WE HAD THE ELECTIONS OF FEBRUARY AND ALL THAT. IT MAY MAKE SENSE TO KEEP IT THAT WAY BECAUSE HAVING IT IN NOVEMBER OR, YOU KNOW, MAY NOT BE AS BENEFICIAL BECAUSE THERE'S TOO MANY PEOPLE WE'RE LOSING FOCUS OF THE CITY RESIDENTS IS WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY. SO IT'S KIND OF KIND OF GOT ME THINKING IN THAT DIRECTION NOW THAT THE SAVINGS PROBABLY WOULDN'T BE WORTH IT. IT'S A GOOD OBSERVATION. YEAH, I COMMENT ON THAT. YES, PLEASE. IS THAT RIGHT? I THINK THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH WHAT YOU'RE SUGGESTING HERE. BUT YOU WILL ALL RECALL, I'M SURE THAT THERE IS ONE PARTICULAR ORGANIZATION, THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS, [04:45:03] THAT IS, YOU KNOW, SORT OF APPEALED TO US AND SAID, WHY ARE YOU SPENDING GOOD TAX DOLLARS TO BE TO HAVE YOUR OWN SEPARATE ELECTION? WHY WOULDN'T YOU DOVETAIL WITH COUNTY ELECTIONS? SO THAT. RIGHT. SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WOULD NECESSARILY SOLVE OUR PROBLEM RELATIVE TO WHAT YOU'RE SPEAKING ABOUT, BUT IT'S MAYBE SOMETHING WE OUGHT TO DISCUSS AT SOME POINT IN TIME. SAVE US MONEY AND MAYBE GET A BETTER TURNOUT. I DON'T KNOW. WELL, HAVING IN HIGH SEASON YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE MORE CITY PARTICIPATION, I THINK, AND YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE MORE OF A FOCUS ON IT. I'VE ALWAYS BEEN THE ADVOCATE THAT THE SMALLER ELECTIONS MATTER MOST IN YOUR LIFE. AND PEOPLE ARE KIND OF FIXATED ON THE BIGGER ELECTIONS AND TO KEEP IT SEPARATE WILL GIVE MORE FOCUS TO THE SMALLER ELECTIONS. AND THAT'S, THAT'S WHERE I'M THINKING WHERE I'M GOING. THAT'S IT. OKAY. MR. YOUNG. OH, SORRY. I'LL LET YOU GO. I'LL LET VICE MAYOR GO. THANK YOU. FIRST OF ALL, THOSE NUMBERS THAT MONIQUE MENTIONED. THAT'S AWESOME. SHE HAS OVER 2000 PEOPLE SUBSCRIBING TO THE NEWSLETTERS. I THINK THE COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGY OVER THE LAST YEAR OR TWO HAS REALLY RAMPED UP AND IMPROVED, KEEPING PEOPLE AWARE OF WHAT'S GOING ON, WHETHER IT'S EVENTS OR ROAD CLOSINGS OR OTHER MAJOR PROJECTS. IT'S BEEN REALLY HELPFUL, I THINK. AND I CERTAINLY APPRECIATE THE WORK OF STAFF OVER THE SUMMER BREAK WHILE WE WERE GONE. ALTHOUGH IT MAY NOT SEEM LIKE MUCH OF A BREAK SINCE WE HAD SPECIAL MEETINGS THINKING BACK, WE HAD THE PARADE AND FIREWORKS DURING THAT TIME FRAME. AND BOTH WERE GREAT EVENTS THAT I THINK WE GOT LOTS OF POSITIVE FEEDBACK ON. SO WE APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT STAFF DID OVER THE SUMMER ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. I HAD A CALL WITH DAVE FIGHT LAST WEEK. I WANTED TO GET AN UPDATE ON WHERE THE COALITION WAS WITH THEIR REVIEW. AND IT WAS ENCOURAGING. THEY'RE HAVING REGULAR WEEKLY MEETINGS. WORKING THROUGH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND COMING UP WITH, I THINK. SOUNDS LIKE HELLO? OH, YES. AN URGENT PAYMENT. OF COURSE I'M ON IT. DOESN'T SEEM RIGHT. LET ME INVESTIGATE. YOU SEE, I JUST TRUST MY HERO. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. SO. YEAH, DAVE EXPECTS THAT THEY'LL MEET THE OCTOBER 23RD DEADLINE AND PROVIDE GOOD FEEDBACK TO THE PLANNING STAFF AND THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD AND ULTIMATELY US ON THINGS THAT THEY'D LIKE TO SEE IMPROVED IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. ALSO A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO GARY AND DOCTOR GEORGE AND I MET WITH CHARLOTTE ROMAN, THE CHAIR OF THE BIG CYPRESS BASIN BOARD, AND LISA KOHLER, WHO'S THE ADMINISTRATOR. AND WE HAD A GOOD UPDATE MEETING WITH THEM, TOO. SO DOCTOR GEORGE AND GARY COULD GIVE THEM UPDATES ON THE VARIOUS PROJECTS WE HAVE GOING ON FOR WATER MANAGEMENT, FLOOD PREVENTION, WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT. WE HAD SOME UPDATES FROM THEM ON THINGS THEY'RE WORKING ON, AND THEY'VE BEEN BIG SUPPORTERS OF PROJECTS IN NAPLES IN THE PAST AND HAVE HELPED US WITH GETTING GRANTS FROM DEP AND TDC AND OTHERS WITH HELPING SUPPORT THE CASE FOR THE PROJECTS, AND THEY EXPRESSED THEIR ENTHUSIASM TO CONTINUE TO DO SO. SO IT WAS IT WAS GOOD, I THINK, FOR THEM TO MEET. THEY CERTAINLY KNEW GARY AND DOCTOR GEORGE, BUT NOT NECESSARILY IN THE CURRENT ROLES AND THEIR CURRENT RESPONSIBILITIES. SO THAT WAS A GOOD DISCUSSION, GOOD THING TO HAVE WITH THEM. WE ALSO TALKED ABOUT THE OPPORTUNITY FOR PERHAPS A JOINT PROJECT WITH THE COLLIER COUNTY STAFF AND COMMISSIONERS, AND HOPEFULLY WE CAN PUT THAT ON THE AGENDA WHEN WE HAVE OUR JOINT WORKSHOP WITH THE COMMISSIONERS. SO SOME PROJECTS THAT COULD PARTICULARLY IMPROVE WATER QUALITY IN NAPLES BAY THAT INVOLVE WHAT'S GOING ON OUT IN THE UNINCORPORATED PART OF THE COUNTY. AND THAT COMES INTO NAPLES BAY AND HOW WE CAN WORK TOGETHER ON IMPROVING WATER QUALITY. SO THEY WERE VERY OPTIMISTIC ABOUT HELPING US WITH THOSE. I ALSO GOT TO PARTICIPATE IN A NCH LEADERSHIP PANEL FOR SOME OF THEIR UP AND COMING STARS IN THEIR, [04:50:10] IN THEIR PROGRAM IN THE, IN THE HOSPITALS ACROSS ALL THEIR CAMPUSES. REPRESENTATIVE BEN ROACH AND COMMISSIONER HALL WERE THERE AS WELL. AND IT WAS JUST REALLY ENCOURAGING TO SEE THE PEOPLE WORKING IN THE HOSPITAL WHO WANT TO ENGAGE IN THE COMMUNITY AND MAKE IT A BETTER COMMUNITY, NOT JUST FOCUSED ON THEIR JOBS AND ON THE HOSPITAL, BUT BEING PART OF THE COUNTY, THE CITY AND THINGS THAT WE HAVE HAVE GOING ON. SO HOPEFULLY WE CAN HAVE MORE, MORE PROGRAMS LIKE THAT. THE PRIORITIZATION PROCESS. CAN WE GET AN UPDATE? I KNOW YOU GUYS WERE BUSY OVER THE SUMMER. WE HAD TALKED ABOUT IN THE SPRING, HAVING SOME KIND OF RANKING PROCESS TO KIND OF HELP PRIORITIZE THE NEXT SET OF INITIATIVES OR PROJECTS THAT WE WANTED TO SPONSOR. THE INTENT WAS TO PUT IT ON FOR THE SEPTEMBER 2ND MEETING JUST BECAUSE OF WHEN WE CAME BACK ON BREAK, WE HAD THE WORKSHOP AND THEN THIS ONE WHAT I'LL, YOU'LL RECEIVE IT. I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH MONIQUE AND STAFF AND, YOU'LL RECEIVE IT EITHER FRIDAY OR MONDAY, HOPEFULLY AT THE LATEST, TO GET OUT TO WHERE IT'S JUST GOING TO BE A CLICK AND DRAG, PRIORITIZING WHAT YOU WANT. AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK AND HAVE THAT AS A DISCUSSION ITEM. SO THAT'S ME AGAIN AT THE, AT THE SAME TIME. YOU'LL ALSO RECEIVE THE LOOK AHEAD THAT HAS THE CERTAIN DATES THAT ARE FOR LIKE SEPTEMBER, OCTOBER, WHAT WE'RE ALREADY PLANNING. NOW THEY'RE NOT SET IN STONE, BUT CERTAINLY SEPTEMBER SET IN STONE BECAUSE WE WILL BE PUBLISHING FIVE DAYS AFTER THE OTHER. BUT ANYTHING IS STILL SUBJECT TO BE MOVEMENT. BUT WE WANTED YOU TO KNOW BY PUTTING IT ON THE LOOK AHEAD AS WELL, WHAT WE'VE ALREADY GOT SLOTTED IN WHERE IN CASE YOU WANT TO CHANGE THOSE AS WELL. SO THAT IS THE INTENT AND TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION ON SEPTEMBER 2ND, BELIEVE THAT MEETING HAS ENOUGH TIME IN IT. AND AS A MATTER OF FACT, I, I THINK WE HAVE ENOUGH TIME LEADING INTO THAT TO HAVE A COUPLE ITEMS THAT I SEE AS LOOK AHEAD ITEMS OR, YOU KNOW, PRIORITIES THAT WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO HAVE THOSE DISCUSSIONS RATHER THAN WAIT ON A WORKSHOP BECAUSE I THINK WE HAVE THE TIME ON THE AGENDA. AND THAT'S KIND OF HOW I TRY TO BEEN DOING IT. BUT BUT CERTAINLY YOU'LL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO VOTE NO LATER THAN NEXT, NO LATER THAN NEXT TUESDAY, AND THEN WE WOULD PUBLISH IT AND BE READY TO HAVE THE DISCUSSION ON SEPTEMBER 2ND. OKAY. THAT WOULD BE GREAT. THANK YOU. THEN ON A COUPLE OF THE FOLLOW UPS FROM OUR JOINT MEETING WITH THE NA BOARD JUST HAS THE JOINT MEETING WITH THE F A AYE OR THE JOINT MEETING WITH THE MEDIATOR HAPPENS YET? NO, NEITHER ONE HAS. NO. I ACTUALLY JUST FINALIZED WE'RE SENDING A JOINT CORRESPONDENCE TO THE FAA TO KIND OF IDENTIFY THE ISSUE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. I JUST FINALIZED THAT WHILE I WAS SITTING HERE. SO THAT'S GOING TO BE SHIPPED OFF THIS WEEK. AND THEN IT LOOKS LIKE THAT MEETING PROBABLY BASED ON EVERYONE'S SCHEDULE WON'T HAPPEN UNTIL MAYBE FIRST OR SECOND WEEK IN SEPTEMBER, DEPENDING ON FAA AVAILABILITY. AS FOR THE MEDIATION, IT WASN'T NECESSARILY A REQUIREMENT OF COUNCIL. WE DID EXTEND IT TO THE 18TH. IT WAS MORE OF A OF A SUGGESTION I MADE TOWARDS THE END OF THE MEETING. I HAVE BEEN PUSHING IT. WE DID GET THE JOINT MEETING SET FOR SEPTEMBER 17TH AT THE AIRPORT. BUT HOPEFULLY THAT ANSWERS BOTH THOSE QUESTIONS. ALL RIGHT. SORRY. MY RECOLLECTION WAS WE THOUGHT THE MEDIATOR WOULD HELP PREPARE FOR THAT NEXT MEETING. TO THE EXTENT THE MEDIATOR COULD WORK WITH THE STAFFS TO WORK OUT SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT IT WOULD MAKE OUR JOINT MEETING GO BETTER. BUT MY MEMORY COULD BE WRONG. NO, I THINK THAT WAS THE THAT WAS THE BASIS FOR MY REQUEST. WE ACTUALLY DO HAVE A HALF DAY BLOCKED OFF ON THE 26TH. OUR SIDE HAS PUT TOGETHER A PRETTY COMPREHENSIVE LEASE, IF YOU WILL ACTUALLY TRYING TO TRANSLATE IT INTO TERMS. SO WE'VE BLOCKED BOTH SIDES. THAT BLOCKED OFF I THINK FIVE HOURS ON THE 26 TO WORK THROUGH THAT TO SEE IF WE CAN COME TO A RESOLUTION. AND IF NOT, THEN THE NEXT STEP WOULD BE MEDIATION TO TRY TO USE THE MEDIATOR. BUT WE HAVEN'T REALLY HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO KIND OF MEET AS A GROUP AND DECIDE, IS THERE ACCOMMODATIONS FROM BOTH SIDES WITH STEPHEN TABOR AND AND KIRSCH AND ALL PARTIES INVOLVED? SO THAT'S ACTUALLY SET ON THE 26TH NEXT WEEK, AUGUST 26TH. CORRECT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. GREAT. HOPEFULLY YOU ALL WILL MAKE SOME PROGRESS SO THAT WHEN WE GET TOGETHER IN OUR JOINT MEETING, FINGERS CROSSED, WE'LL, WE'LL MAKE PROGRESS AND, AND NOT JUST KEEP THE DEBATING, DISCUSSING AND DEFERRING, [04:55:06] I AGREE. CAN I ASK A QUESTION ON THAT? YEAH, PLEASE. SO DID YOU. DID I HEAR YOU JUST SAY THAT MEDIATION IS NOT A REQUIREMENT OF 164? NO, IT'S THE EXACT OPPOSITE. MEDIATION IS DEFINITELY A REQUIREMENT OF 164. IN ORDER TO GO BACK AND REINITIATE OR WITHDRAW THE ABATEMENT. IF YOU'LL RECALL A FEW MOTIONS AT THE LAST JOINT MEETING, ONE OF THEM WAS EXTENDING THE MEDIATION DATE TO SEPTEMBER 18TH. SO THAT'S WHERE WE ARE. I THINK THE MAYOR'S TO CLARIFY WHAT WHAT YOU HAD SAID A SECOND AGO, YOU WERE WANTING TO USE A MEDIATOR IN THIS PROCESS PRIOR TO US HAVING ANOTHER JOINT MEETING, IN THE HOPES THAT A MEDIATOR WOULD HELP FIND THAT COMMON GROUND. BUT THAT IS SEPARATE APART FROM THE REQUIRED MEDIATION OF THE 164. NO. SO THAT WOULD BE THE THAT WOULD ABSOLUTELY COUNT THAT TOWARDS MEDIATION OF THE 164. I WOULD NOT PAY A MEDIATOR. SO IT'S REQUIRED NONETHELESS, TO ANSWER THE MAYOR'S QUESTION, IT IS REQUIRED THAT YOU WERE YOU WERE SUGGESTING THAT THAT MEDIATION AT THAT POINT IN TIME WOULD HAVE BEEN THE REQUIRED MEDIATION FOR THE 164 PRIOR TO US HAVING A JOINT MEETING. I SUGGESTED THE MEDIATOR BECAUSE I THINK ULTIMATELY, IF THE LAST THING WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. YEAH, I THE LAST TWO THINGS, I MEAN, THEY COULD ACTUALLY BE HELPFUL. THEN IT WAS THEN IT WAS IT WAS ME THAT NEEDED THE CLARIFICATION BECAUSE I WAS THINKING THAT WAS GOING TO BE IN ADDITION TO THE MEDIATION OF THE 164, WHICH DOESN'T MAKE A FLIP A DIFFERENCE TO ME, WHETHER IT'S THE NO, A SEPARATE MEDIATION OR THAT MEDIATION, THAT MEDIATION QUALIFIES AS THE REQUIRED MEDIATION OF 164. I WOULD 100% MAKE THE ARGUMENT THAT IT WAS ME THAT NEEDED A CLARIFICATION FOR THE OTHER SIDE, BUT THAT WOULD ABSOLUTELY BE MY POSITION. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. SO THAT'S WHAT I WAS HOPING FOR, THAT IT WOULD ALSO HELP US MAKE REAL PROGRESS, BUT AT THE SAME TIME NOT HAVE TO HAVE A SEPARATE PROCESS LATER. AMEN. SO DOES YOU SAID THAT YOU HAVE A LEASE TO PRESENT TO THE NA. NO. OH. COULD YOU CLARIFY WHAT I. YEAH. IF YOU RECALL, WE LEFT OFF ON A COMPREHENSIVE TERM SHEET, WHICH I THINK WE GOT THROUGH FIVE OF EIGHT PAGES ON AT OUR LAST JOINT MEETING. STEVEN TABOR AND I, ALONG WITH THE HELP OF ANDREW BARR'S FIRM, THOUGHT IT WAS APPROPRIATE TO START TRANSLATING THOSE HIGH LEVEL, COMPREHENSIVE IDEAS INTO ACTUAL LANGUAGE THAT CAN BE REVIEWED AND EDITED. BECAUSE AGAIN, TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE ONE WAY OR ANOTHER. EITHER WAY, WE NEED A DECISION BEFORE THE ELECTION HAPPENS IN NOVEMBER. SO INSTEAD OF WASTING TIME, THE LAST THREE WEEKS HAVE REALLY BEEN, I'VE SPENT A LOT OF TIME WITH STEVEN TABOR SPECIFICALLY PUTTING TOGETHER A VERY, VERY COMPREHENSIVE DOCUMENT AS A VERY, VERY ROUGH DRAFT WITH THE VERY CLEAR UNDERSTANDING THAT NOTHING'S BEEN PRESENTED, PRESENTED OR APPROVED BY COUNCIL. BUT JUST TO ESSENTIALLY. ALLOW THE CONVERSATIONS TO JUST UNFOLD IN A MORE SPECIFIC MANNER. SO WHAT'S THE PLAN THEN FOR. YOU'RE GOING TO MEET THE 26 FOR. WELL, I I JUST ANNOUNCED MY INTENT TO HAVE AN EXECUTIVE SESSION, BUT WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE THAT IF WE WANT TO JUST TALK ABOUT THIS NOW. NO, I'M JUST ASKING. NO, NO WHERE YOU'RE AT BECAUSE I DON'T THAT'S NOT. YOU JUST SAID YOU WERE MEETING THE 26. YEAH. NO, NO, WE CAN TALK. I MEAN, IT'S A PUBLIC PROCESS IN GENERAL. I'M MEETING WITH THEM ON THE 26TH TO GO OVER. LEASE TERMS TO SEE IF WE CAN COME TO AN AGREEMENT. IF WE CAN'T OR WE CAN'T EVEN GET CLOSE, THEN I'M GOING TO CONTINUE TO PUSH, WHICH I'VE BEEN DOING SINCE OUR LAST JOINT MEETING, GETTING A MEDIATOR INVOLVED. CONCURRENTLY, WE WERE ASKED TO MEET WITH THE FAA AS A PREMISE TO THAT MEETING. WE WANTED TO SEND A JOINT VERY BASIC CORRESPONDENCE TO THE FAA OUTLINING THE PURPOSE OF THE MEETING, SINCE I HAD ALREADY MET WITH THEM PRIOR ON A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ISSUE, WHICH WAS CHANGE OF SPONSORSHIP. THAT LETTER HAS TAKEN A FEW WEEKS TO PUT TOGETHER. HOWEVER, I'M PLEASED TO REPORT THAT THAT LETTER HAS OFFICIALLY BEEN FINALIZED AS OF TODAY AND WILL BE SENT TO THE FAA ASKING FOR A MEETING. OBVIOUSLY, I WILL MAKE MYSELF AVAILABLE BASED ON THEIR AVAILABILITY, BUT I'M THINKING, BASED ON THE FACT THAT WE HAVE MEETINGS NEXT WEEK AND WE'RE ALREADY TEN DAYS AWAY FROM SEPTEMBER, IT'LL PROBABLY BE IN SEPTEMBER PRIOR TO THAT HAS TO BE PRIOR TO THE JOINT MEETING OR ELSE THERE'S NO POINT OF HAVING ONE. SO THAT'S THE MOST UP TO DATE INFORMATION THAT I HAVE. IF YOU MAKE PROGRESS ON THE 26 GREAT AND WONDERFUL. IF NOT TO THE EXTENT YOU CAN TRY TO PUSH AND THE TIME YOU HAVE TO GET A MEDIATOR INVOLVED BEFORE OUR JOINT MEETING TO SEE IF THAT CAN SPUR THE PROCESS ON. THAT WOULD BE GREAT. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU NEED ANYTHING FROM US TO HELP YOU WITH THAT. AT. THE JOINT MEETING TO BE PRODUCTIVE, USEFUL AND PRODUCTIVE. [05:00:05] I APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING IT UP, AND UNLESS I SEE ANY OBJECTION, I'M JUST GOING TO TAKE WHAT HE SAID. IF THERE'S NO OBJECTION AS A CONSENSUS FROM YOU ALL THAT I CAN REPORT BACK AND SAY, IF WE DON'T HAVE ANY PROGRESS ON THE 26. FEEL FREE TO WATCH THE MEETING. MY COUNSEL TALKED ABOUT IT ON THE 19TH, AND WE REALLY WANT TO USE THE MEDIATOR TO MAKE THE 17TH AS PRODUCTIVE AS POSSIBLE. SO THAT ACTUALLY HELPS ME IN ITSELF. SEEING NO OBJECTION. NO OBJECTION. OKAY. BY UNANIMOUS VOTE OF COUNSEL. THANK YOU. THAT DOES HELP. WELL, THANKS. I KNOW YOU'RE SPENDING A LOT OF TIME ON THIS, AND I REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR TIME TO SPUR THIS THROUGH AND NAVIGATE THIS. NO WORRIES. NO WORRIES. I'M HAPPY TO DO IT. THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTIONS THOUGH. THAT ACTUALLY IS VERY HELPFUL. ALL RIGHT. SORRY, I'M JUMPING AROUND BACK TO SPECIAL EVENTS. I APPRECIATE THAT YOU ALL HAVE REOPEN THE PROCESS FOR EVENTS COMING UP IN THE SEASON TO GET THOSE PROCESSED. ARE WE WE'VE COMMUNICATED THAT TO AT LEAST THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE ASKED AND TYPICALLY HAVE REPEAT EVENTS EVERY YEAR. YEAH. IMMEDIATELY UPON SENDING THE EMAIL, I MET WITH CHAD AND DANIELLE AND SAID INITIATED A NOTIFICATION TO THEM IMMEDIATELY SO THEY KNEW THEY WOULD APPEAR ON EITHER THIS DATE OR THIS DATE AND THAT WE'D BE GETTING ALL THOSE FORWARD. AWESOME. AND I THINK I'VE HEARD THAT WE'RE BEING FLEXIBLE ON THE 120 DAYS TO GIVE PEOPLE SOME FLEXIBILITY TO GET THESE THINGS BACK TO COUNCIL IN THE NEXT MONTH OR SO. THE ONES THAT. YEAH. SO FOR CLARITY, THEY HAVE ALREADY THEY'VE ALREADY SUBMITTED AND THEY'VE ALREADY BEEN. SO THOSE ONES HAVE ALREADY BEEN SITTING THERE. WE'VE BEEN SITTING ON THEM, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO SEE IF WE COULD GET A CONSENSUS. SO, YOU KNOW, AND THAT WAS, YOU KNOW, THAT WAS THAT RESTS SOLELY SOLELY ON ME. AND BECAUSE THAT WAS MY DIRECTOR OF TRYING TO GET CONSENSUS AND NOT HAVE WHERE WE APPROVE SOME AND NOT OTHERS, BUT REVERTING TO JUST WHATEVER THE MANUAL SAYS. NOW, WE'LL COME BACK TO THAT IN OCTOBER. BUT, BUT YEAH, AND WE WE'RE PROCESSING EVERYTHING BECAUSE WE NEVER STOPPED ACCEPTING THEM IN ITS PUREST SENSE. WE JUST CAUTIONED THAT WE WEREN'T PROCESSING THEM. SO THERE MAY HAVE BEEN SOME DELAYED. IF SOMEBODY BRINGS THAT UP, THEN I WOULD CERTAINLY WORK WITH THEM ON THAT. SO OKAY. BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO ON THE SIDE OF MAKING SURE EVERYONE GETS PROCESSED AND, AND IF WE IF AND WHEN WE MAKE A DECISION ON THE MANUAL, WE'LL ADJUST EVERYTHING PROSPECTIVELY AND NOT DO ANYTHING BACKWARDS. THAT'S THE WAY, THAT'S THE APPROPRIATE WAY TO GET THESE DONE AND GET THEM MOVING FOR THIS NEXT SEASON. SO YEAH, THANK YOU. THANK YOU. BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY ORGANIZERS ARE GETTING VERY NERVOUS ABOUT THE THINGS THEY NEED TO DO TO MAKE THEIR EVENTS HAPPEN. YEAH. OKAY. AND I WILL SAY, I WILL SAY THIS, YOU KNOW, A COUPLE WE DID HAVE SOME EMAILS TO IT SAID, WELL, BECAUSE OF THE DELAY, THAT THE DATES WEREN'T AVAILABLE BECAUSE OF OTHER ITEMS, EXCEPT FOR SOME OF THE ITEMS. SOME OF THOSE, THEY ARE NOT AVAILABLE ANYWAY BECAUSE THEY'RE ALREADY TAKEN BY BIGGER EVENTS THAT HAVE THE SAME DATE. SO THAT COMPETITION OF THAT NEVER CHANGED. IT WAS JUST A MATTER OF THEM AS THEY CAME IN. THEY WERE JUST BASICALLY SITTING THERE UNTIL WE HAD THIS DIALOG. SO AGAIN, WE'LL CLEAR THOSE OUT IN A MATTER OF TWO WEEKS, TWO MORE WEEKS, AND THEN, YOU KNOW, BE ON EVEN KEEL. WE'RE NOT STOPPING ACCEPTING ANYTHING. AND WE'LL BE PROCESSING EVERY, PROCESSING EVERYTHING AS SOON AS IT COMES ACROSS. ON THE SAME TOKEN, I WILL MAKE ONE OTHER NOTE ON THAT SUBJECT. AS FAR AS THE MERIDIANS AND EVERYTHING. RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE QUANTIFIED SOME SHARED COSTS OF PUTTING THEM OUT AND THINGS, BUT RIGHT NOW, FOR THE NEXT MONTH AND A HALF, UNTIL WE GET IN A ROOM AND HAVE THIS CONVERSATION, YOU KNOW, WE'VE PAID FOR THESE THINGS. WE'RE GOING TO ON THE SIDE OF JUST PUTTING THEM OUT. THAT'S ERRORS ON THE SIDE OF OUR OF OUR CITIZENRY AND THOSE WHO COME IN. BUT BUT ULTIMATELY, WE'LL HAVE TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION IN OCTOBER WHEN WE TALK ABOUT ALL FEES AND EVERYTHING AND SET THAT. BUT I DID WANT TO KIND OF JUST LET YOU KNOW THAT WAS MY IT WAS JUST BASICALLY MY DECISION AT THAT POINT TO SAY, ARE WE GOING TO TRY TO DO SOMETHING TO GET THAT SHARED COST? AND IT'S JUST THE JUICE ISN'T WORTH THE SQUEEZE UNTIL WE HAVE A COMPREHENSIVE LOOK AT THE MANUAL. AND I WANTED YOU TO KNOW THAT WAS MY DECISION. WE HAVE ALL THE BARRICADES HERE NOW. EVERYTHING IS HERE. AND THEY WERE DEPLOYED FOR THE PARADE. AND YEAH, THEY'VE BEEN DEPLOYED A COUPLE DIFFERENT TIMES NOW, BUT YES. OKAY, GREAT. CAN YOU ASK, JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, WHEN'S OUR IN A JOINT MEETING? CAN YOU REPEAT AGAIN WHEN THE A JOINT MEETING IS CURRENTLY THERE IS A CALENDAR HOLD FOR SEPTEMBER 17TH AT 1 P.M. IT IS ALSO THE SAME DAY AS THE ANY AYE MEETING. THEREFORE, WE WILL BE MEETING AT THE AIRPORT. THANK YOU. OKAY. WHAT. AND CAN YOU CLARIFY WHERE WHEN YOU'LL KNOW THIS OR WHAT'S THE HOLDUP? THERE IS NO HOLDUP. IT'S CONFIRMED. I'M JUST WORKING WITH MR. YOUNG AND DAVID FOR THE ITIT RELATED ISSUES TO ENSURE THAT IT'S LIVE STREAMED AT THE CONFERENCE ROOM THAT WE'RE ALL GOING TO BE IN. YEAH, I HAVEN'T BEEN IN THAT ROOM BEFORE. I DON'T THINK SO. [05:05:03] IT'S AVAILABLE. IT'S ABLE TO DO ALL THE TV AND PUBLIC SPEAKERS AND EVERYTHING LIKE WE HAVE HERE. YES, THAT'S PRECISELY WHAT I ASKED. YEAH. YES, THEY HAVE THIS TO ACCOMMODATE THAT. AND DAVID HAS PREVIOUSLY BEEN ABLE TO LINK THEIR STREAM TO OUR WEBSITE SO THEY CAN STILL GO THERE. AND DAVID ASSURED ME THIS MORNING, AFTER OUR DISCUSSIONS YESTERDAY THAT HE WOULD BE ABLE TO ACCOMMODATE THAT. GREAT. THANKS, GARY. GREAT, THANKS. SEPTEMBER 17TH, 1 P.M.. COUNTY BUILDING. AIRPORT BUILDING. AIRPORT. YES. EXCUSE ME. NO WORRIES. THANK YOU. I THINK THAT'S MY SHORT LIST. SHORT LIST? OKAY. AND THAT DOES ACTUALLY ELIMINATE A LOT OF THINGS FOR US TO. WE HAVE A MEETING ON THE 16TH AND ONE ON THE 18TH TO CONVERT AND EVERYTHING ELSE. IT ACTUALLY IS. IT'S A GOOD SITUATION AS FAR AS US BEING ABLE TO, TO UTILIZE THIS ROOM EFFICIENTLY AS WELL. MR. YOUNG? YEAH, JUST A COUPLE THINGS. SO OVER THE SUMMER, AND YOU MAY HAVE SEEN A COUPLE DIFFERENT POSTS THE PEER, YOU KNOW, CONTINUES TO MOVE ALONG. WE'RE POURED WE HAVE THE PILINGS OUT AND THE BENTS ARE BEING POURED. WE'RE CLOSE TO WELL, WE'RE AT THE MIDPOINT NOW. AND THEN WE HAVE PILINGS IN EVEN BEYOND THAT. SO THE EPP WOOD IS EXPECTED TO BE AGAIN BEING INSTALLED AS EARLY AS LATE OCTOBER. AND SO THE PROGRESS IS, IS MOVING ALONG AND, YOU KNOW, WE JUST KEEP PRAYING FOR ANOTHER, YOU KNOW, SUCCESSFUL HURRICANE SEASON AND, BUT WE'RE WE'RE MAKING GREAT PROGRESS THERE. THE OUTFALL PROJECT, AS YOU KNOW, IS IS WAS SLATED FOR JULY AND WE'RE DOING VERY WELL ON THAT. SO THOSE ARE ALL GOOD THINGS. THE PARADE WAS UTILIZED. WE HAD A LOT OF PLANNING SESSIONS TO PUT OUT THE MERIDIANS AND THE BARRICADES AND, YOU KNOW, BUT WE ASSEMBLED THE GROUP OF STAFF TO, TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT, KEPT VERY CLOSE TABS ON THEIR TIME SO WE COULD HAVE A COST ALLOCATION AND KNOWING THAT, YOU KNOW, HOW WE WANT TO DO THIS BECAUSE AGAIN, THIS IS A BENEFIT TO EVERYBODY, BUT YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT LOOKING TO RECOVER EVERYTHING ALL AT ONCE, BUT AT LEAST TO HAVE A SHARED COST FOR, FOR THE PEOPLE WHO ARE HAVING EVENTS. SO THAT'S A BIG THING. AND THEN AS YOU KNOW, WE HAD TALKED ABOUT THE JOINT WORKSHOP, WE SENT OUT THE MEMO THE OTHER DAY, MISS PATTERSON HAD HAD GIVEN ME SOME DATES LAST MONDAY. CHRISTINA SENT IT OUT. AND SO I WANT TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT SO WE CAN KIND OF FLEX OUT THE YEAR. THE DATES THAT WERE GIVEN TO US BY MISS PATTERSON AND SHE INDICATED TO. IF YOU WANT SOMETHING ELSE, TELL ME, WAS OCTOBER 6TH. OCTOBER 20TH, NOVEMBER 17TH, DECEMBER 1ST AND DECEMBER 15TH. AND WE SENT OUT THE EMAIL AND RECEIVED EVERYONE'S RESPONSE. SO I WANT TO THANK EVERYONE FOR THAT. YOU KNOW, PART OF THE DIFFICULTY IS, IS WHEN I LOOK AT THIS, I TRY TO NARROW IT DOWN. I'LL GIVE YOU MY THOUGHTS. AND SOME PEOPLE HAD VARIOUS DATES THEY COULD OR COULDN'T MEET. AND FOR ME, BECAUSE THERE'S SO MUCH THAT HINGES ON NOVEMBER AND THE ELECTION, IF WE MET IN OCTOBER, WE'D SPEND HALF OUR TIME TALKING ABOUT WHAT IF AND NOT TALKING ABOUT WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO. AND SO FROM MY STANDPOINT, THAT'S THE REASON I WOULD SAY FOR ME, OCTOBER DOESN'T SEEM PALATABLE. I THINK WE'D GET MORE ACCOMPLISHED THE OTHER WAY. SO THEN YOU HAVE THE DATE OF OCTOBER OR EXCUSE ME, NOVEMBER 17TH. AND WE JUST TALKED ABOUT HAVING BACK TO BACK MEETINGS. AND WE HAVE THE 16TH AS A WORKSHOP, 18TH AS A COUNCIL MEETING. SO THE NOVEMBER 17TH DATE IT SEEMS, AND IT'S ONLY TWO WEEKS OFF OF ELECTION. SO I THINK FOR ME, WHEN I LAND ON THE DATE, I LAND ON DECEMBER 1ST. THAT BEING SAID, THAT IS A TDC MEETING IN BOTH. OKAY. IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT. INTERESTINGLY, ALL THE DATES THAT WERE GIVEN, ALL BUT TWO WERE TDC MEETINGS AND A COMMISSIONER CHAIRS IT. OKAY. RIGHT. AND THAT'S WHY I THOUGHT THAT ONE WAS EITHER THEY CAN'T HAVE THAT OR CAN'T. ONE OF THE OTHER HAS TO NOT HAPPEN. THANKFULLY, THE FIRST IS A TUESDAY. THAT IS NOT A TDC MEETING. OKAY, SO AND IN FAIRNESS, AND THEN THE MAYOR SAID WHEN WE TALKED, SHE SAID, WELL, MAYBE JANUARY EVEN SO. SO THE CONSENSUS IS FROM FROM EVERYONE WAS DECEMBER IS OPEN DECEMBER 1ST OR GO INTO JANUARY BECAUSE THERE'S 15TH. THAT'S AN ISSUE FOR A COUPLE. SO I GUESS I WANTED TO PUT THAT OUT. AND IF I DON'T KNOW IF YOU EITHER AGREE WITH ME, DISAGREE. BUT BUT TO ME IT JUST SEEMS PALATABLE THAT. BECAUSE ONCE YOU GET TO THE 15TH, REMEMBER WE'RE DONE DECEMBER 9TH. SO TO GET TO THE 15TH, THAT CHANGES. PEOPLE HAVE ALREADY MADE ARRANGEMENTS AND CAN'T BE HERE DECEMBER 15TH BECAUSE THEY'VE ALREADY HAD PLANS. AND WE'LL BE ON BREAK STARTING DECEMBER 9TH. SO THAT'S THE REASON THE 15TH. I WANT TO JUST GIVE THAT SUMMARY. SO REALLY TO ME, IT'S I THINK IT'S DECEMBER 1ST OR, YOU KNOW, [05:10:02] ONCE WE RETURN IN JANUARY. BUT I OPEN THAT UP FOR DISCUSSION OR RECOMMENDATIONS IN CASE YOU WANTED A DIFFERENT DATE THAT I COULD REACH OUT TO, TO MISS PATTERSON AND TRY TO GET THAT FINALIZED. YEAH. IF I MAY. THE ONLY REASON I SAID JANUARY, I WISH IT WERE TOMORROW, BUT WE NEED TO BE PREPARED ON THE INFORMATION AND HAVE A WORKSHOP ON WHAT WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT AND MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE PREPARED FROM A STAFF POINT OF VIEW. ALSO THAT WE HAVE NUMBERS AND FACTS AND ANYTHING THAT WE WANT TO DISCUSS AND HAVE THAT BACKUP MATERIAL. I DON'T KNOW, IN LOOKING AT THE LOOK AHEAD, HOW YOU FIT IN THAT PARTICULAR CONVERSATION, BUT WE COULD LOOK AT IT AND SEE IF WE CAN FIT THAT IN ON A SURE AS A CONVERSATION. YEAH. NO, AND I THINK THAT'S, THAT'S FAIR. MAYOR. AND THAT'S WHY I THINK THAT WE STILL HAVE OCTOBER AND THE TWO FIRST TWO MEETINGS IN IN NOVEMBER THAT WE COULD HAVE THAT PLANNING SESSION. SHOULD, SHOULD THAT BE THE NEED? I ALSO THINK THAT WE SHOULD DO THE SAME THING THERE IS GET, SEND OUT AN EMAIL AND HAVE EVERYONE WRITE US BACK THE THINGS THEY'D LIKE IN THERE AND THEN CONSOLIDATE IT TO A WORKING PLAN. I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF REDUNDANT ONES WE ALL KNOW ABOUT. AND THEN AFTER NOVEMBER, AND THAT'S WHY I THINK THAT AFTER, YOU KNOW, COME, COME AFTER THE NOVEMBER ELECTION, WE'LL FIND TO THAT. BUT I THINK IF WE CAN HAVE THE NOT ONLY HAVE IT DISCUSSED IT INTERNALLY, BUT HAVING DISCUSSED IT WITH MISS PATTERSON AS WELL, LEADING INTO WHETHER IT'S THE DECEMBER MEETING OR JANUARY. SO I'M OPEN TO BOTH. I THINK THAT GIVES US PLENTY OF TIME AND KNOW THE RAMIFICATIONS OF ANYTHING ELSE THAT MAY BE COMING OUR WAY, IF THAT'S A FAIR STATEMENT. SO DECEMBER 1ST, I MEAN, WE WENT A LONG WAY AROUND RIGHT THERE. IT'S DECEMBER 1ST. YEAH. BUT I WANTED YOU TO KNOW CONTEXT. THAT WAS THE REASON. DECEMBER, DECEMBER 1ST OR IN JANUARY WHEN YOU RETURN. THOSE ARE THE TWO THOSE ARE THE TWO THINGS FOR DECEMBER 1ST FOR A PLAYER TO BE NAMED. YES. OKAY. AT A LATER DATE? YES. IS DECEMBER 1ST OKAY? UNLESS WE GET. I'M IFFY ON DECEMBER 1ST, BUT IF WE ALL ARE PREPARED, I'LL MAKE IT WORK. YEAH, WE'LL JUST WORK TOWARDS THAT DATE. AND ONCE WE GET CONFIRMATION FROM THEM AND WE'LL SCHEDULE IT, IT'LL EITHER BE THE OCTOBER WORKSHOP OR IT WOULD BE THE FIRST MEETING. EXCUSE ME, THE FIRST MEETING IN THE LAST MEETING IN IN OCTOBER. BUT REALISTICALLY, I THINK THAT WILL BE THE OCTOBER WORKSHOP BECAUSE FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, PAB HAS 12 OR 13 ITEMS ON THEIR AGENDA THAT IT'S GOING TO BE THE SECOND MEETING IN OCTOBER WILL BE VERY EXTENSIVE FROM A LAND USE PERSPECTIVE. SO I'M YEAH. SO WHEN I LOOK AT TIMING, I WOULD RATHER I WOULD RATHER SCHEDULE FOR THE FIRST MEETING IN OCTOBER OR THE OCTOBER WORKSHOP TO HANDLE OUR DISCUSSION AND PROPER PREPARATION FOR THE NOVEMBER MEETING. OKAY. BUT WE CAN MAKE THAT WORK. I WILL REACH OUT TO MISS PATTERSON AND SEE IF WE CAN CONFIRM THAT DATE. OKAY. THANK YOU. AND OTHER THAN THAT, I'M SURE THERE'S SOMETHING ELSE, BUT I'M GOOD FOR TODAY. THANK YOU, MA'AM. THANK YOU, MR. MCCONNELL. YES. THANK YOU. JUST ONE THING. BECAUSE WE GOT AN EMAIL WHILE WE WERE SITTING HERE. I DON'T KNOW IF ANY OF YOU HAVE SEEN IT, BUT IT WAS ON SERVICE OF PROCESS TO THE CITY. I JUST WANT TO, I GUESS GET CONSENSUS, BUT ALSO INFORM YOU OF WHAT I BELIEVE THE BEST PROCESS IS TO RECEIVE SERVICE OF COURT DOCUMENTS MOVING FORWARD, AND SOMETHING THAT I'VE DONE IN OTHER CITIES BEFORE. SO FOR 8.111 ACTUALLY LAYS OUT A LIST OF WHO CAN BE SERVED AT THE CITY. OBVIOUSLY EACH ONE OF YOU CAN BE SERVED. IT GOES DOWN A LINE WHERE IT'S YOU ALL, YOU KNOW, MAYOR, VICE MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBERS, CITY CLERK, CITY MANAGER, IN-HOUSE ATTORNEY, OR ESSENTIALLY ANY EMPLOYEE UNLESS YOU HAVE A REGISTERED AGENT, WHICH WE DON'T HAVE A REGISTERED AGENT AS A CITY. SO ESSENTIALLY, PURSUANT TO STATUTE, YOU COULD PROCESS, YOU COULD EFFECTUATE SERVICE OF PROCESS BY SERVING REALLY ANYONE AT THE CITY. TO ME, THAT'S NOT A GOOD IDEA, RIGHT? WHAT WE'VE TRIED TO REALLY DO IS EVEN WHEN FIRE OR POLICE OR SOME OF THESE OTHER DEPARTMENTS GET SUBPOENAS OR REQUESTS FOR DOCUMENTS, THEY ALL FILTER IT THROUGH OUR OFFICE SO THAT WE'RE THE ONLY ONES REALLY EITHER COMMUNICATING WITH THE ATTORNEY, ASKING FOR EXTENSIONS, ETCETERA. SO WHAT I HAVE DONE UP UNTIL THIS POINT IS I HAVE JUST. MOST PROCESS SERVERS HAVE ACCOMMODATED ME EITHER BEING HERE OR NOT HERE AND ALLOWING ME TO SIGN FOR SERVICE OF PROCESS JUST BECAUSE I'M THE FIRST PERSON THAT GETS IT. I SHIP IT OFF TO EITHER RISK MANAGEMENT OR MY OFFICE, ETC. AND AT LEAST WE'RE NOTIFIED OF DEADLINES THAT STEM FROM THE MOMENT YOU RECEIVE IT, RIGHT? BECAUSE MOST COMPLAINTS, YOU HAVE 20 TO 30 DAYS TO RESPOND FROM THE RECEIPT. HOWEVER, WHAT I THINK WE SHOULD DO IS WHAT I'M GOING TO DO IS I'M JUST GOING TO START, SINCE THERE'S SOMEONE IN THE CLERK'S OFFICE ALL THE TIME, [05:15:04] AND IT'S A PUBLIC RECORD ANYWAYS, WHEN IT'S FILED AND THEY HAVE A STAMP OF TIME, I'M JUST GOING TO DIRECT EVERYONE TO THE CLERK'S OFFICE, ANY PROCESS SERVER TO THE CLERK'S OFFICE. I'VE ALREADY COORDINATE THAT WITH MISS RAMBO. THERE'S ALWAYS SOMEONE THERE THAT WILL STAMP IT. THEY WILL SEND IT TO US. I WILL SHIP IT OFF. BUT SINCE YOU GUYS GOT AN EMAIL TODAY, I JUST WANTED TO GO AHEAD AND IDENTIFY THAT. BUT THAT'S MY SUGGESTION MOVING FORWARD. IF I'M HERE AND THEY WANT TO SERVE ME, I'LL TAKE IT. IF NOT, I THINK JUST A GENERAL PRACTICE FOR COMPLAINTS SHOULD BE FILTERED THROUGH THE CLERK'S OFFICE. THEY USED TO COME TO MY OFFICE ALSO AND I HAD TO SIGN FORM. WHAT HAPPENED WITH THAT? DID YOU REMOVE ME? I CAN'T REMOVE YOU BECAUSE THE STATUTE ALLOWS IT. BUT. BUT MOST PROCESS SERVERS WHO I GUESS KNOW ME NOW BECAUSE WE GET A LOT OF SERVICE OF DOCUMENTS, HAVE ACCOMMODATED MY REQUEST TO SERVE ME FIRST INSTEAD OF BOTHERING YOU. COUNCIL MEMBERS OR SERVING US IN THE MIDDLE, COME TO OUR OFFICE. THE DOCUMENT WILL GO TO WHOEVER'S OFFICE IT'S SERVED AT. SO IF IT'S SERVED TO ME, I'M NOT GOING TO COME GIVE YOU A COPY. I'M GOING TO SEND IT TO RISK MANAGEMENT OR PROCESS IT BECAUSE IT'S A LEGAL DOCUMENT. IF YOU'RE SERVED WITH IT, THEN I WOULD ANTICIPATE YOU OR SANDRA WOULD SEND IT TO ME. PLEASE, ALWAYS, ALWAYS. AND I DO SEE THAT I HAVEN'T BEEN RECEIVING THEM, SO I DIDN'T KNOW. YES. SO TECHNICALLY EACH ONE OF YOU COULD STILL BE SERVED. BUT MOST PROCESS SERVERS ARE PRETTY ACCOMMODATING TO THIS REQUEST. SO I JUST WANTED TO KIND OF LET YOU GUYS KNOW THAT I'VE ALREADY COORDINATED THAT WITH MR. BOSQUE. WHY WOULDN'T IT GO TO RISK MANAGEMENT? NOT EVERY CASE IS RISK. YEAH. NOT EVERY CASE IS RISK MANAGEMENT. GENERALLY SPEAKING, AND I MEAN THIS RESPECTFULLY, I'M BRINGING THIS UP NOW BECAUSE WE WERE ALL COPIED ON AN EMAIL. BUT I'VE HANDLED SERVICE A PROCESS WITH NO, WITH NO HICCUPS. I THINK IT'S OPERATED FINE. AND MY SUGGESTION IS TO JUST DO WHAT I'M SUGGESTING RESPECTFULLY TO ENSURE PROPER PROCESSING. OKAY. AS FAR AS YEAH, THE NEXT STEP OF THAT. SO MAYBE NOT. IS THERE A LIST THAT GOES OUT TO COUNCIL OF THESE SERVED ITEM COURT CASES OR. TO BECAUSE DO WE GET A LIST WHEN WE ARE SERVED OF WHO WHO SERVED US AND KNOW WHAT IT'S ABOUT, YOU DON'T. WELL, IF YOU'D LIKE ONE, WE CAN TALK OFFLINE. I CAN PROVIDE ANY INFORMATION THAT ANY OF YOU WOULD LIKE. BUT, I MEAN, I THINK COUNCIL SHOULD KNOW WHAT WHAT WE'RE FACED WITH. AND THEY CAN GET IT INDIVIDUALLY. I SEND YOU GUYS A LOT OF EMAILS ON UPDATES, BUT I WOULD ABSOLUTELY HAVE NO PROBLEM. THANK YOU. SENDING YOU WHATEVER INFORMATION YOU'D LIKE. OKAY. YEAH. THAT IS NOT AN ISSUE AT ALL. THANK YOU. OKAY. SO I JUST HAVE SPECIAL EVENTS. THE ONE THING THAT. I'LL WAIT FOR MR. YOUNG BECAUSE THIS REALLY IS TOWARDS HIM THAT WE LEARNED DURING BUDGETING THAT WE HAVE CITY SPONSORED VERSUS I'M NOT SURE HOW OR IF THE TITLE HAS BEEN USED FOR CITY LIKE PROGRAMED EVENTS. AND I JUST THINK COUNCIL NEEDS TO UNDERSTAND WHAT A CITY SPONSORED EVENT IS, WHAT'S COVERED UNDER THAT. AND THEN WHAT IS AN INITIATED CITY PROGRAMED SPECIAL EVENT AND HOW THAT IS HANDLED FROM A COST POINT OF VIEW AND, AND SO ON. AND I THINK THAT IS IT. SO OUR NEXT CITY COUNCIL MEETING IS SEPTEMBER 2ND. AND THERE YOU HAVE IT. WE ARE ADJOURNED. THANK YOU. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.