We will move to item 2.1 on the agenda, and that's presentation of our December service awards.

This time I'd like to call forward for our service awards.

There are two to present today.

I'd like to call for Sherry Watkins from Planning and Development and ask the city manager to read the letter of rec of uh award for this uh emission for this 25-year employee.

Everyone who has been to the planning and development department, whether as a customer or an employee, knows Sherry Watkins.

For 25 years, her positive energy and the laugh you can hear from across the room have been a part of the soundtrack of the department.

She is everywhere at once, never sits still.

And if you are not sure where to start, the rule is simple.

Ask Sherry.

She knows more about the city of Clearwater and how to find the right person, record, or place than just about anyone.

And she has done it all in Allie McBeale's skirts and Halle Berry and Jane Fonda worthy hairstyles that people still remember.

Sherry joined the city in 2000 and has grown from a development review technician to administrative assistant to her current role as the department's document and records specialist.

If a record exists, she either knows where it is or will exhaust every avenue to find it.

Her motivation is always to do what's best for the customer, who she reminds colleagues is the reason the department exists.

A former department director used to say that if you looked up the definition of customer service, you would see a picture of Sherry.

One attorney who has worked with her for more than 20 years has called out her servant heart.

That customer focused lens guides everything that Sherry does, including leaving the department to be one of the first in the city to proactively scan and digitize records.

She has taken on the daunting task of transforming decades of paper files into and microfilm into searchable records, scanning historic plans, and now leading a major project to convert microfiche so information is preserved and easy to find.

Her customer service is rooted in patience and epathy.

Sherry understands that most people who contact the department are not experts in planning, permitting, or records.

She translates technical language into plain terms and helps customers figure out what they really need, no matter how many times or how much time it takes.

Inside planning and development, Sherry is the person people go to when they have no idea where to start.

For many years as administrative assistant, she managed the development review committee and community development board calendars and deadlines, keeping everyone on track and helping applicants navigate the process.

She also mentors new, often very young staff members, quietly teaching them how things really work.

Many planners will admit that at some point in their careers, they showed up at her desk in a panic over making a mistake or missing a deadline.

She is the calm in the storm, listening, pulling out calendars, talking through options, and sending them to their managers with a plan instead of just a problem.

Her colleagues describe her as generous and kind with a side of SASS.

Sherry is known for frequently saying, not a problem, it's what I'm here for.

She's a proud mom and grandmother and brings that same care into the workplace.

The planning development department may joke that she secretly runs the place, but there's a lot of truth in that.

The city of Clearwater is better because of Sherry Watkins and the positive impact she has had on residents, developers, attorneys, and businesses, helping Clearwater truly thrive from Beta Beach.

Thank you.

Well deserved.

Thank you.

Thank you, Sherry.

Thank you.

Thank you.

That's my granddaughter.

Thank you.

Thanks so much.

We all wish we had a fan club like Sherry's.

Thank you so much, Sherry.

Twenty-five years of your commitment, not just to your job, but to the city of Clearwater and our citizens, and we thank you so much for your service and the way you have served our city.

Next we'll call forward for the employee of the month award for November.

Raymond Dresh from Public Works.

Ray is truly someone who can do it all.

He manages his responsibilities in the transportation division with exceptional efficiency and still finds the time to wear multiple hats supporting development review for other divisions and public works and even other city departments.

He does all of this while maintaining a friendly, approachable attitude and never hesitates to assist co-workers with questions or challenges, including frequently helping troubleshoot troubleshoot IT issues.

And he's accomplished all of this in just over a year in his role.

The City of Clearwater is undoubtedly better because of Bree's contributions, and within transportation, we feel very fortunate to work with alongside him.

Ray's dedication is also a standout example of high performing government and superior public service in action.

He consistently goes above and beyond to ensure that projects move efficiently, departments safe supported, and employees receive the help they need to succeed.

His ability to deliver high quality results while strengthening collaboration across the organization is exactly the kind of service that elevates our workplace and the community that we serve.

Please join us in congratulating Ray, our December employee of the month for his outstanding contributions and well-earned recognition.

Congratulations.

Thank you.

Opt out of providing the 80% to 120 AMI missing middle property tax exemption to development that would otherwise qualify pursuant to the Live Local Act.

Good afternoon, Mayor, Council, Dylan Mayu, I'm the housing manager.

I'm here to present an item regarding the city's decision to offer the missing middle property tax exemption under Live Local Act.

Section 196.1978 of Florida statutes allows res rental developments with 71 or more units and an ad valorum tax exemption, property tax exemption if they provide housing for households earning between 80 and 120% area median income.

Beginning with the 2025 tax role, local governments were given the option to opt out of this exemption if certain conditions were met.

To qualify for the opt-out, the most recent annual report from the Schimberg Center for Housing Studies must show the area has a surplus in this style of affordable housing.

In this case, the most recent Schimberg report identifies the Tampa St.

Pete Clearwater Metropolitan Statistical Area.

Uh does indeed have a surplus of affordable and available units for households earning between 80 and 120 percent of area median income.

This implies that there's not a need to incentivize this the development of this style of uh property of uh restricted housing.

By adopting the resolution, the city will choose not to grant the missing middle tax exemption for the 2026 tax year and will notify the Pinellas County property appraiser accordingly.

This resolution applies to tax year 2026 only.

It'll automatically expire January 1st, 2027, unless renewed by council in accordance with Florida statutes.

With that, staff recommends adoption of the resolution opting out of the missing middle property tax exemption for calendar year 2026.

I'd be happy to address any questions.

Any questions from the council?

Just questions.

Councilmember Manino.

Thank you, Mayor.

Quick question.

Uh, does this opt-out have any effect negatively on current projects like Indigo or anything like that?

No.

Oh, well, as far as well, they're all under 80 percent, but um does this have any let me let me look into that and I'll get you an answer for on Thursday.

No, I want to make sure I answer that accurately.

That was my only question.

Thank you.

Okay, any other questions?

Thank you.

Accept the 2025 local housing incentive strategies report.

Oh, sorry.

Uh item 3.2 on today's agenda uh is the request for city council to approve the 2025 local housing incentive strategy, or uh better known as the LHIS, as developed and recommended by the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee.

As background, floor statute 420.9076 requires that any city or county receiving state housing initiative partnership or ship funding to appoint an affordable housing advisory committee.

The committee must include representatives from from specific groups and professional fields uh that work in or alongside the housing industry.

For Clearwater, we met this requirement primarily through our neighborhood and advice uh affordable housing advisory board, and then council also approved four additional members to ensure full compliance with state statute.

The duties of AHAC include reviewing the city's housing related policies, procedures, land development regulations, and the comprehensive plan.

Then they recommend strategies to encourage or remove barriers to affordable housing development.

State law requires the committee to evaluate at least 11 incentive areas.

That includes expedited permitting for affordable projects, reducing or modifying impact fees, allowing flexible densities, reserving infrastructure capacity for affordable units, allowing accessory dwelling units, reducing parking or setback standards, allowing flexible lot configurations, modifying street requirements, evaluating policies that increase that increase the cost of housing, maintaining an inventory of land suitable for housing, and encouraging development near transit and major employment centers.

So, in addition to these statutory categories, Clearwater continues to evaluate five additional focus areas.

That's adaptive reuse, improvements to the land development code, communication and marketing of affordable housing, financing strategies, and partnerships.

Throughout the fall of 2025, staff from the Economic Development and Housing Department and Planning and Development, along with consultant Wade Trim, facilitated four AHAC meetings.

The meetings reviewed the previous year's incentives and evaluated whether modifications or strategies were warranted.

The community re community spent time reaffirmed the committee, sorry, uh spent time reaffirming the value of affordable housing and clearwater, clarifying guiding principles, and refining recommendations in the LHIS.

Some of the most notable, some of the notable recommendations include updating the expedited permitting review process and shifting points of contact to the housing manager and development services manager, adding pre-approved accessory dwelling unit plans to uh sets to facilitate ADU development, considering access accessibility features within the city's affordable housing design standards, and directing developers and residents to the updated and centralized information on the city's website.

The LHIS report is due annually and is required to be submitted to the Florida Housing Finance Corporation no later than December 31st, 2025.

If approved Thursday, staff will transmit the report and continue working to incorporate council approved incentives into the local housing assistance plan.

Staff recommends the approval of the 2025 local housing incentive strategy as recommended by the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee.

This action supports strategic priority 2.4, supporting equitable housing programs that promote stability and reducing homelessness within Clearwater.

That I'm happy to address any questions.

Any questions?

Yes.

Thank you, Mayor.

No uh no question, just want to make a comment.

I had the privilege this board uh had the faith in me to serve on the AHIC board, so thank you for that.

Um you and staff did an amazing job uh navigating the entire process with Wade Trim.

I think the board did a great job at some very in-depth conversations on topics very important uh to affordable housing and clearwater in the community.

Uh and I think the report uh definitely sums up the process that this board went through.

So thank you and staffs for your time.

Thank you.

Any other questions?

Do we have consent?

Yep, yes.

We have consent on 3.2.

Thank you.

Agenda item 3.3.

Approved the city of Clearwater's fiscal year 2024-25 consolidated and annual performance and evaluation report.

Dylan Dilmayu Housing Manager.

So today I'll walk you through the results of the consolidated annual performance and evaluation report, uh, better known as the CAPER.

This report provides a comprehensive overview of how we've used federal funds through fiscal year 2024-2025.

Thursday's meeting will be the second of two public hearings.

There is a 15-day comment period that will end on Wednesday this week.

Um, and as of current, we've received no comments.

Um the report on Thursday, housing staff will work to submit the report by the due date, December 29th, 2025.

Uh so what is the CAPER?

The CAPER primarily pulls data from HUD's integrated disbursement and information system, it's known as IDIS, which tracks all of our financial and accomplishment uh information for federal funds.

The report's table, this is important to note the reports tables reflect federal data and match funds exclusively.

State and local funds aren't included in these tables.

However, the narrative sections, we include uh state and local data to give more complete picture of our work.

With that, I'll bring it through the 2024 accomplishments.

For housing combined with ship home CDBG, we assisted 253 individuals with housing related services.

We constructed one rental unit.

We rehabbed one existing rental unit.

We constructed two homeowner units.

However, it's important to note that we also closed indigo apartments, which added 208 affordable units to the city's inventory, of which three were restricted under the city's land use restriction agreement and will be counted next year's CAPER due to the fact that the project funding was not closed out this fiscal year.

We rehabbed 13 homeowner units, two with federal funds, 11 with ship, 18 down payment assistance loans, that's eight with home, ten with ship.

We assisted 42 households with tenant-based rental assistance, and finally, the city provided funding for homeownership and counseling service to 176 households.

With regard to our public facility and services work, we expended 1,043,672 in total for public facilities and public services.

For facilities, we completed five projects in total, two utilizing CDBG CV, all of which rolled over from the 2023-2024 fiscal year.

These projects included St.

Vincent DePaul facility improvements to St.

Vincent DePaul's campus, the ARC, CNHS's head start facility, directions for living, and our club child care.

Total expenditure for projects completed in fiscal year 24-25 include 226,737 dollars in C D BG and 44,274 in C D BG C via as COVID relief funds.

We also started four facility projects last year, but they were delayed and therefore will be rolled over into the next year's CAPER.

Through the support of sub-recipients, the the city assisted 3,485 special needs persons through public facilities activities.

For public services, we funded two with $94,048 in CDBG and two with 44,335 in CDBG C V.

One of those is still open.

This includes funding for Metropolitan Ministry's homelessness program, West Points, West Care's Turning Point Program, Direction for Livings Homelessness Program, and St.

Vincent DePaul's homelessness program.

It's also important to note we had one additional service that we were going to fund.

They had the dropout, one of another funding source that they were expecting fell through.

So they withdrew their application.

For economic development, we provided $80,000 for technical assistance, technical assistance services to Hispanic Business Initiative Funds.

They do business as Prospera, and we care doing business as Upwards to assist 42 microenterprise businesses.

Staff is still working on completing the commercial facade program agreements and therefore no projects were completed.

However, there is a pipeline of applications.

With regard to our resources and investments, with C VG, we started the year with $2,617,994.

We expended $1,043,672.

Again, bear in mind some of the funding from Indigo is not counted in this number.

For home, we started the year with $4,897,672.

We expended $377,610.

Multiple projects are currently underway and not accounted for in this in this expenditure total.

To give you just an idea, we have approximately $4.162 million conceptually budgeted for projects in pre-development.

With our SHIP funds, we started the year with $1,898,317.

We expended $1,169,975.

With regard to our homelessness work, you know, we do a lot of our work with our homeless work with C DBG funds.

An additional 739 under a separate national objective, not uh reported.

The city also budgets $300,000 for homelessness initiative, $300,000 in general fund.

This year the city funded nine organizations for homelessness services using that program.

The the report also goes into other actions and other activities.

So to kind of go over a quick synopsis, our biggest funds that we that we uh utilize for activities is our ship fund outside of our federal funds.

Um the city received state housing initiative partnership, again, that's the SHIP program, and utilized the funds for first-time home buyer assistance, home home rehabilitation for low to moderate income homeowners, construction of affordable housing units, and we also utilized SHIP to fund our disaster recovery program.

We assisted eight households with disaster recovery after the storms last year.

Finally, monitoring.

The city ensures compliance with federal rules and regulations for agreements administered under its CDBG and home program.

This includes advising sub-recipients on performance and conducting regular monitoring to assess compliance and addressing and address any issues.

Monitoring visits are conducted annually.

More frequently if the subrecipient is deemed a higher risk.

Most notably, no findings were found in 2024.

That's the summary of the 2024 paper.

I have Dania Perez, she was the point person on this year's report.

I'd be happy to address any questions.

I don't have a question, but I can tell you I am real happy with your department.

You've done a great job this year.

Wow, that's a lot of programs and a lot of people you've helped.

So I'm really happy with the report.

Thank you.

Thank you.

It's it's staff really.

They they're fantastic.

Okay.

Any other questions?

So this isn't marked consent.

Is this uh uh it's a public hearing?

Okay, all right.

Well, thank you for the report.

Yeah, gen item 3.4.

Approve the reimagined clearwater library call for development concepts process and authorized staff to implement targeted marketing and outreach strategy.

You can bring the presentation up, please.

Good afternoon again.

Hey, Susanino, CR executive director for the record.

This item is the opportunity to present our updated marketing and communications refinement of the reimagined clear water library initiative.

So today I'm bringing forward the request for approval of the reimagined clear water library call for development concepts and authorization for staff to implement a targeted marketing and outreach strategy to support the reissuance of the call for development concepts in January of 2026.

So this refined approach incorporates your direction from earlier this year, the results of the 2025 solicitation period, and extensive feedback from other staff members, including city manager's office and stakeholders.

So this presentation will cover project overview, lessons learned, industry insights, messaging framework, timeline, projected budget, and next steps and questions.

So the updated reimagined clearwater main library strategy builds on insights from the 2024-2025 and reflects the direction provided by the trustees.

So the slide highlights three key areas of improvement.

First, it's lessons learned.

This reflects the feedback from the initial call for development concepts, including the need for clearer messaging, more consistent outreach, and stronger engagement with prospective partners.

Then two, more strategic focus.

Uh, to strengthen lead tracking and follow-up.

Then three, transparency.

We are placing greater emphasis on clarity and openness throughout the process to attract high quality culture partners and build public trust.

Uh to repurpose a part of the main library into culture and arts hub.

Following trustee direction, staff updated solicitation to advertise that up to the full square footage of the building may be available for redevelopment.

During the first solicitation, during the first solicitation window, 25, 245 contacts were reached.

Six applications were received, but none were advanced by the city council.

So some of the gaps that were identified included, marketing clarity, follow-up consistency, CRM, that's customer relationship management tracking, and prospect engagement.

So these findings informed.

These findings informed a more refined strategy that we're presenting to you today.

So as far as some of the lessons learned from the first solicitation period and our digital market analytics, several lessons emerged.

One is clarify the vision and scope.

So strengthening the message on available space in the library, potential incentives available, the cultural uses, and charter compliment compliant considerations.

Then two, a more targeted engagement.

So increasing direct outreach to museums, developers, and institutional partners, including the American Alliance of Museums, which is the AAM, and the American Library Association or ALA.

Then three, improve follow-up and tracking.

First iteration, we were basically tracking things on a spreadsheet and didn't have all the email information.

For instance, we might have had an info at ABC.com type of email addresses.

So we'll use a more consistent touch point and centralized customer relationship management system, which we already have Blue Dot in place.

That's a great tool to start tracking the next round.

Four, allow more adequate time.

So culture partners typically require six to nine months of communication before they can meaningfully prepare and submit a proposal to be considered by the council or the trustees.

So five, leverage professional support if needed, utilizing marketing, public relations, and consultant expertise to elevate project positioning and improve positional quality, proposal quality.

So these lessons form the backbone of the updated strategy.

So as far as industry insights, to better align with industry standards, staff did engage consultants and reviewed best practices from the culture sector.

So Mr.

Battle and other staff members did engage some of those consultants.

I think it was Joel from public communications.

So consultant feedback included that, and these were also other research by staff as well.

A 5,000 square foot footprint is considered significant for culture and exhibit programming.

Museums and culture institutions typically require six to nine months of advanced communication and relationship building.

Then depending on the scope, planning through opening can take anywhere from six to two point five years.

Then culture partners prioritize early, clear feasibility information.

Then some of the recommended adjustments include engaging additional consultants to strengthen project feasibility and positioning, building a six to nine month lead time into marketing outreach efforts, expanding recruitment through national cultural networks, such as again as the American Alliance of Museums and the American Library Association, including incorporating earlier and clearer messaging to support partner planning and decision making.

So these insights reinforced reinforce the need for a long-range strategic outreach approach.

So marketing and communication goals and targeted audiences.

Our refined strategy includes four primary goals.

One is clarified library uses and available space, including charter compliant allocations, full ranges of uses and redevelopment flexibility, if any.

So provide an accessible material, clear process flow, and monthly updates to the trustees to ensure that they have that you, the trustees, have all the information needed to adapt as prospects start to be engaged by us.

So primary target audiences are museums, cultural institutions, arts organizations, developers, experienced in culture, adaptive reuse.

Then the secondary audiences are universities, foundations, tourism and economic development partners, downtown stakeholders, residents, and media, and the like.

So as far as our messaging framework, so a stronger messaging framework is essential.

Key selling points include a walkable connection to Cushman Park and the Sound, a prime location and rapidly transforming downtown district and located by the waterfront, economic and cultural benefits for partners in the broader community, and more clear summaries of available space, potential lease terms, and any incentives.

And more clear summaries of available space, potential lease terms, and any incentives.

All these materials are not reached mentioned and will reinforce these value points.

As far as a timeline, our proposed timeline right now is to reissue the call for development concepts in January of 2026 for your direction, unless you say otherwise today.

Monthly provide the trustees with updates with feedback from the prospective partners, and you also give us feedback and we adjust accordingly.

Then late in 2026, unless things change, start to accept and review proposals.

So this schedule alliance with the industry expectations for institutional planning and concept development.

So the next particular slide is to execute to execute a competitive marketing and requirement campaign.

This is just here for your information.

Staff may pursue, if needed, or even to a lesser extent, uh support in the following areas.

One is marketing consultants, two brokerage partners to market space to qualified cultural tenants, then public relations firms number three for storytelling and earned media.

The number four is engagement specialists for community outreach and tracking and support.

In total, this can range anywhere from 100,000 to 140,000, or even less if we value engineer it as much as possible.

In closing, this refined strategy, we hoped we'll address a lot of your identified issues from the past, and that we can put together a more robust outreach strategy for the next iteration.

I'm open for questions, so with staff to see available if I can't answer the questions, and we're also here to hear your favorite listen to your feedback.

Questions, Vice Mayor.

So I have monthly meetings with Jesus, so he's been keeping me uh very well informed, and um, so I really appreciate the presentation.

And there was no suffice to me what the content was that was there.

The only thing I want to highlight once again is that targeting includes not only identifying the institutions, but the actual appropriate person with the best way to communicate with them rather than the general um avenue, right?

So that is included in the targeting, identifying the correct person for that institution and the best way to communicate with them.

That's it.

Otherwise, I think you did a great job, and uh we've communicated often, and I realize and I acknowledge and I thank you for your hard work.

What else?

Councilmember Mariah.

Uh thank you, Mayor.

Uh very retrospective, I would say would say.

Um, I think the vice mayor gave us a pretty hefty report last time after round one.

Uh, and I think you touched on and staff touched on just about every concern and challenge that was on there.

Uh I'm supportive of this 100% and moving forward with it.

Um, I think the council's idea of dream big, go big with this.

This is a great opportunity.

Um, I still stick with that.

My own, if I had a hesitation, and I don't let me scare you yet, Vice Mayor.

If I had a hesitation, my only hesitation would be the timing of this.

Um important, and we're diving back in so quick.

I'm I'm just have a little hesitation that if this was just paused briefly, that pretty soon there's multiple cranes downtown, and there's a different buzz and vibe.

There's three to five new businesses, the doors are open, and we might just you might just have an easier time trying to sell it versus being the first one to the party kind of thing.

Um, but no, I am I I think it's a great report.

Staff did an amazing job of dissecting where our pitfalls were, what some of our challenges and hurdles were, and how we're better at the second at bat, and I greatly appreciate that.

Uh and if the dias is supportive of moving forward with this uh as of January in 2026, I'll support it as well.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Thank you, Jesus.

I appreciate the report.

Um, I have to give you your team credit.

I think that you guys do great with uh really all of our staff do on hearing what this dais wants and being able to pivot and then provide those, especially with your meetings that you're having with the vice mayor uh monthly, just to make sure that you guys are kind of staying on point with where that's going.

Um I too would agree that I think that if you have more foot traffic, more hotels, um, maybe you get a different uh sense of a sell, if you will.

Um, so a pause if this is what people want to do.

I'm not opposed to it.

On the other foot, you know, I think that developers have a great mind of the future, and they can see things and see the horizon.

So, you know, seeing that permits are pulled, construction's happening, um, you know, you don't necessarily have to always pause.

So uh I would be interested to see what the rest of uh my colleagues up here have to say and moving forward, but just uh I sincerely appreciate you and the team's work on this and being able to be so flexible with the needs that we we hit you with uh when you come up and give a director's report like this.

So thank you very much.

Yeah, I had concerns with uh the last uh go around.

I think we've uh we hit a lot of uh taken care of a lot of questions and made it better this time.

I'm for moving forward now.

I think it's uh there's enough gonna be happening after the first of the year.

Um I mean, we've got a lot of things that look like it's happening now.

Yeah, my only concern was giving them enough time to put something together to come to us instead of rushing it.

And I think I think the timeline is good this time.

So I'm looking forward to uh supporting this moving forward now.

Uh well um to echo the remarks already made when we considered the proposals that you brought to us.

I just really want this the community to think big and think bigger than what uh was you know what we yielded from the last RFP response.

So I'm uh I appreciate the the ideas and what we might do differently the next time around.

I do share some concern that the vice mayor has that um uh that um well I guess it was I guess it was Cusmor Menino that the timing uh I think we felt like the last time we didn't get the proposals we we thought we would get because of the timing, we didn't have any construction going on next door that should start here soon.

Definitely the Gotham property will be started by January one.

Um so I feel like a little time to get get going on that would help us.

And then uh I think it was the vice mayor told us last time that some and it's in in your report that some of the uh people who might have responded said they didn't have enough time to do it.

So my only concern is that um maybe in this case we need to kind of till the ground before we put it out again.

Um I I don't think there's anything to re to prevent us from marketing, bouncing the idea.

You said the museum association trying to cultivate some interest in it before we put the RFP out again.

Uh I think that would buy us a little time to maybe have have uh to get more activity going.

So whoever might be interested, hopefully some big organizations from around the country around the world, uh, might be interested to bring something.

And my point would be, and and the my point was last time.

What I really want to us to see us get is something here that you can't find anywhere else in Tampa Bay already.

Or or going forward.

Something so unique that we we are the draw for whatever it is here, that throughout throughout the region, this is the only place you can find it.

If we find something where Clearwater is the only place in the state of Florida that has whatever we we were able to put in here, that's even better.

But definitely something that uh and you know that and we've already got other cities within the region that are known for certain things.

St.

Petersburg has a glass art collection, uh several museums in that.

They have the Dali, you know, they have things that um I don't want to be a separate location for something that's already established here.

I feel like we owe it to our citizens to think really big and to find something unique.

And I I don't know if we find that just by putting out an RP too quickly before we have like as you said, network with this museum association to try to try to get some pre-RFP distribution interest in it.

Just make folks aware that this is coming.

And um, and then I think the other thing is every time I'm at a concert sound and I see it full of people, I look at the back side of the library and I say, Wow, you know, some way to connect it to because it it sits there visually from everyone in attendance at a concert at sound, um for them to see the back side of it, or maybe experience a concert from the back side of it in a way that would enhance the concert experience for for folks at the Baycare Sound, but also bring attention to whatever goes in there too.

So I don't know if that's part of the conversation we were doing that.

But but that's my only concern is last time.

Last time, I think Vice Mayor, you're the one that said some folks you had spoken with said that somebody who's going to bring something really dynamic.

They need more than six to nine bots.

That if we haven't already engaged potential ones like that in conversation, putting it out right now might be too early to allow them to respond.

Can I so in terms of timing, the only concern that I have is the actual duration of each institution to um respond to the proposal?

So I would be open to extending it even longer.

In terms of timing of when to start, I don't share those concerns.

I in a couple of weeks we're gonna have the hotel being built.

Beginning of next year, we're we're gonna have the Gotham and then the um the garage.

Next year, our city hall is going to be finished.

So there's no lack of activity.

In terms of being effective in marketing, I actually think that the reaching out and and um to these institutions should be part of that proposal um process because there's gonna be a lot of noise if they if they understand that there's plenty of time, there's gonna be more interest.

And the marketing should actually be part of the conversation.

If you want to delight delay it by one month or two, that's I mean, okay.

But um there is a lot going on.

It's gonna be very evident if you ever visit there'll be there are gonna be cranes.

Um we need to like keep on this momentum.

That's my thing.

That's my two cents.

Councilman Robert.

And I could be a little clearer, maybe what I said.

I think it's okay to start this process now.

My concern before was not having enough time for them to respond with a really good plan.

And I would be okay with extending that time frame a little longer.

Uh because that's to me that's kind of part of marketing it, uh, putting it out there.

And I want to, if we're looking to get some really big plans here, let's give them a chance to really come back with some really great plans and not be rushed.

So stick to this schedule and and and have the proposal nine months, or you want are you talking about more than that?

No, I'm I'm no, I just think a little longer, maybe.

Uh what is it, July?

Is that when you're towards the end of the year?

We will just start the process of contacting individuals in January.

The window to actually accept proposals wouldn't be towards the end of the year, but those monthly meetings where we discuss what's going on with our engagement, we can adjust and move it out more if we needed to that window to actually start to accept proposals.

I'm for that.

I don't think that would hurt the any ideas, and it would give them people that are gonna consider this, maybe are listening to what we're saying, and and maybe give it a little bit extra when they come back to us.

So just for clarity, when would the RP go out?

So it would be advertised similar to last time, and Mr.

Margot can help out if he needs to.

He helped this team was very instrumental in putting that together.

We advertise a call for development concepts that there would be a window that would open up at a certain time.

But during that time, we were giving tours, we were just talking to these prospects, doing that contact as much as possible.

Of course, it's a refined strategy now, but that similar process as far as advertised or we're gonna have a window open.

Yeah, but I'm still confused.

When would the RFP prompt that's a good call for developing the code?

When is the RPC called out?

And then that window is nine months.

Is that is that what I'm understanding that we're talking about?

It's not an RFP, it's more of a we caught it a call for development concepts very similar.

Okay.

And this is where I need the help as far as how we structured it.

It was called a call for development concepts, and then but we also were advertising a window that we're gonna have a 30-day window at that time, which if we would have had a little bit more engagement, we could have said, hey, we need more time in 30 days.

Well, what Jesus is saying, he's responding to what you're asking him to do, and that is start the marketing now.

He's using the term call for concepts as the marketing initiation point.

Okay.

You're giving us feedback and you're okay with us doing that now.

We will officially start that, announcing that through quote unquote.

We want to reopen the call for concepts.

We will not accept proposals until 30 days before the September deadline that you're asking them about, or sometime after that.

The hope is is that if we start the marketing, the call for concept conversation as early as possible, that those monthly check-ins with you, or however frequently need to do, you we may need to pivot in terms of extending the time frame or do something a little bit different.

So we're trying to build in enough time to cultivate the types of folks who you think we want to target, who we want to target, who will respond, who have expressed interest, but may also give us feedback that makes us tweak what we're doing a little bit as we're going forward.

So the schedule that he gave you is feedback directly is in response to the feedback from the last conversation in which it was expressly stated from several of you that there probably wasn't enough time, right?

So from we want to build it out so there's enough time to do tilling of the field.

I think as you said, you know, cultivating the marketplace and doing it in a way that meets the expectations of the council, and at the same time, we're gonna announce on a certain date that you've got certain amount of days in terms of giving us a proposal.

At this point, we think it'll be nine months out at the latter end.

It could be longer, could be shorter, or it could be something different.

But we're giving you this is where we think we want to be.

Once we check in with you, you may say let's do it differently, or better yet, we hear you.

Let's pivot in a slightly different direction.

That's that's what we're sharing with you today.

Thank you, Mr.

Matt.

That's helpful.

That's helpful.

Yeah, yeah.

Okay.

Any further discussion?

If not, do we have consent?

Yes.

Yes.

We have consent on 3.4.

Gender item 4.1.

Thank you.

Approve a firm transportation service agreement with Florida Gas Transmission.

Good afternoon, Council.

My name is Alex Gill.

I'm the assistant director for CDS Energy.

Uh, this uh item is looking for your approval for an agreement between CGS Energy and uh Florida Gas Transmissions uh to allow us to nominate our gas or reserve our annual gas uh capacity uh with um FGT for the next 10 years.

I'll take any questions.

Okay, any questions.

If not, do we have consent on firm point?

Yep, we have consent.

Thank you, sir.

Yes, agenda item 5.1.

Approve supplemental work order to order 2 at Atkins Realis, USA for a lower spring branch stormwater improvements.

Oh, good afternoon, Mayor, members of council.

Um my name is Kelly Petrich.

I'm the engineering division manager here at the City of Clearwater in the public works department.

Um today I'd like to present a supplemental work order two.

This is for the lower spring branch project.

Um it's in the amount of 177,052 dollars.

It's for Atkins Engineering.

Uh, we'll be delivering the final design elements required to advance the project to construction.

Uh this includes an updated survey verification after the 2024 impacts, the hurricane.

This will also mitigate the risk during construction.

Update uh design based on the survey and refine the northeast embankment slopes of springtime avenue.

This is a city acquired property.

Uh, also we will be including a decorative uh traffic rated design bridge railing design for Overbrook and Springtime Bridge.

This was uh previously designed as a uh pedestrian-rated bridge.

Uh, this will be for the improved safety and also neighborhood character uh with the removal of the old bridges.

Um tree mitigation is also part of this.

Um tree medication plans outside the right-of-way to meet permitting and aesthetic requirements, and also we will work on final specifications for the project.

Uh we plan on maintaining compliance with the regulatory partners.

This supplement includes continuity of both the Swift MUD and U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers permits, services not included in the original um scope, but it's um essential for the construction of this project.

The ERP permit will also expire next year, and this will facilitate the turnover to operations.

Uh we also plan on adding a construction support in this phase of the project.

Uh limited construction phase services provide necessary support, shop drawing review, RFIs, coordination with utilities and agencies, site visits, and project closeout are not included in the original work order.

Um we anticipate a construction timeline of uh 18 to 24 months.

Um it's also noted that we do have an additional 23,360,000 that's allocated as an allowance for additional RFIs, only if needed, of course.

Um we're also very happy to say that during proposal negotiation, the engineering department was able to save the city of Clearwater 31,230.

This is uh 15% savings back to the city.

Um right now we estimate that construction will start in the spring of summer of 2026, and the the completion of this project should be in the spring summer of 2028.

Um we're very excited because this will advance a major flood initiative uh that will remove approximately 11 homes from the hundred-year floodplain.

Um questions at this time.

Okay, any questions?

Do we have consent?

I believe we have consent from Council Member Manino too.

They'll confirm that when he comes back.

So thank you.

Okay, all right, thank you.

Okay.

Agenda item 5.2.

Approve a purchase order of park mobile for reimbursement of transaction fees for mobile parking.

Good afternoon.

Excuse me, good afternoon, Mayor Council members.

I'm Mike Chalet.

I am the parking manager for uh in public works.

Uh, agenda item before you today is a request to approve a purchase order with Park Mobile LLC so that we can continue offering citizens and visitors the ability to pay for parking using the park mobile app.

The service continues to grow in popularity and currently account for approximately 48 percent of all paid parking sessions in city owned parking facilities.

This purchase order is being issued as a piggyback on the omni cooperative purchasing contract consistent with section two five six three one C that the city clear water code of ordinances.

I'd be happy to answer any questions.

Okay, any questions on 5.3?

Do we have consent?

We have consent on 5.2.

Councilmember Manito we have consent on 5.1.

Absolutely.

Thank you.

General item 5.3.

Approval the request to convey perpetual easement over city owned land to the Florida Department of Transportation.

Thank you, Mr.

Florida.

Good afternoon, Mayor, Council members, Robert Kasmer, Public Works Real Estate Coordinator.

In brief, the item before you today is to convey a perpetual easement over city owned property to the Florida Department of Transportation in support of the pedestrian overpass on State Road 55 U.S.

19 to include a portion of North Side Drive.

City staff have reviewed and approved this request.

This is just a rendering of what we're asking.

Any questions, please?

Any questions on this agenda?

No questions?

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mayor.

Gen item 6.1.

Authorized an increase of communications international Avero Beach for a citywide two-way radio maintenance.

Good afternoon, Mayor, City Council, and City Leadership.

Brandy Calendria, General Services Director.

General Services Radio Communications Division is requesting to increase a previously approved contract by City Council on April 3rd of 2025 in the amount not to exceed of 426 941 and also extended the term through September 30th of 2026.

The increase is for the fiscal year 26 annual maintenance agreement, in addition to the fiscal year 26 net new and replacement purchases, and also parts and accessories such as shoulder mics and batteries.

We have no questions.

Do we have consent?

Yes.

We have consent on agenda item 6.1.

Thank you.

Thank you for good afternoon.

Agenda item 7.1.

Authorized a purchase order to municipal emergency services of Finales Park for the purchase of self-contained breathing apparatus.

Chad Pim and Fire Chief.

Clearwater Fire and Rescue request approval to purchase the Scott AirPack X3 Pro self-contained breathing apparatus to replace our aging 2015 units and meet the latest NFTA standards.

The purchase includes 110 air packs, required cylinders, hoses, face pieces, adapters, two compressors for filling the cylinders, and a new respiratory fit testing system.

The manufacturer provides a comprehensive lifetime warranty covering all major components, and I am available for questions.

Okay.

Any questions on this agenda?

You have no questions.

Do we have consent?

Yes.

We have consent on 7.1.

Thank you, Chief.

Agenda item 8.1.

Authorized purchase orders to JPI Barrel Project Engineering, Wolden Engineering, and CAP Government Inc.

for emergency services related inspection plan and review services.

Good afternoon, everybody.

I'm Kevin Garrett with the Planning and Development Department.

And uh we are everything okay.

Uh we are in the first of December, so we have made it through a hurricane season.

Uneventful this year.

Yay.

Congratulations to us.

So what happened last year was we had to do a lot of extra inspections, and we had a lot of extra permits.

To date, right now we have done about 2500 storm-related permits only, in addition to all the other ones.

So we were lucky last year we tagged on to another contract that the city had for extra inspectors because we have not only our normal construction going on and have an inspections go on and plan review go on, but we have all of the storm damage that we have to go, and we basically went almost house to house in the in the damaged areas.

And we had them on contract, I think for about a year.

This is not our normal day-to-day inspections.

Back in July, we um we put out for bids, we asked for bids, and we got these eight companies here.

Can you see them?

And so we analyzed what they provided us, and we asked for plans review, and we asked for uh inspections.

And so uh after looking at the companies, we come up with um the best three in each.

And so we're asking for purchase orders for JPI on inspections.

Uh, we'll go one, two, three.

And what happens is sometimes we'll call JPI and we'll ask for help.

Maybe they don't have enough or they don't have anybody, and so then we go to the next one and we go to the next one.

So we have those three companies for inspection, JPI, barrel, and will then, and the same thing for plan review services, JPI, CAP government, and uh will then for that.

So that's what we're asking for for approval for purchase orders for these emergency inspection and plan review services.

Any questions?

Any questions on this agenda?

No questions.

Do we have consent?

Yes, yep.

Jenna Jen item 8.2.

Provide updated information related to roof repairs and property appraisal at North Ward Elementary School, including a proposed pre-marketing and disposition strategy.

All right.

Good afternoon, Lauren Matske, Planning of Development.

So back in September, staff brought forward um the summaries of the different efforts and studies that have been taking place for um on behalf of the city for the North Ward School since we purchased the property.

Well, we purchased the property in 2019.

So today's today's update will focus on everything that we've done since receiving your direction at that meeting, and we have members from CRA from Economic Development and Housing and Public Communications that have been part of everything that we're putting together.

So I'll start with just a quick review of this site.

Um, this is also from the past slides that we've used.

Um, the North Ward portions of the North Ward building are registered on the National Register of Historic Places and Locally Designated.

The campus has numerous buildings, which shows how its needs evolved over time.

So the national register listing identifies three of the structures as contributing or as and are designated as historic, and that's the 1915 original building, the 1926 two-story edition, and then the portion that's outlined in red with 1945 on it, includes cafeteria edition as well as um later renovation to that, which included the library and kitchen.

So those are all the pieces that are designated historic.

Additionally, on the site, there are several non-contributing structures, which include the former auto dealership, which was used as a classroom annex.

It was constructed in about 1926, and then the pavilion, which was actually from 1996, where which was used for mechanical buildings.

So in September, we should we talked through and had row architects talk through their assessment, which documented the existing conditions, identified potential grant funding, outlined recommended pre-development improvements and and some cost estimates at that planning level.

Um, at that time, council affirmed the importance of maintaining this as historic and provided direction for um looking into addition redevelopment partners.

This was the conceptual example that was that was the one that everyone there seemed to be consensus on moving forward with, which is to say that we would look for partners for a mixed use development or someone that can help with the preservation but also reuse of the historic school buildings.

So in this one, you'll see the contributing structures are retained and adapted for new uses, while the non-contributing buildings that are on the north end of the property are demolished and and residential development is in that place.

So locating that new development on the north end has a few different benefits also because it keeps the front lawn open, which is also kind of part of the history of the site.

It honors how the campus functioned while also providing just some additional open space along Fort Harrison.

But of course, it's not a final design.

This was for ill illustrating what could be.

So at City Council's direction, we sought some well, the the importance was to make sure that the building is watertight and no additional damage was being done to the structure, which we want to make sure we're preserving.

So General Services came to our rescue or my rescue.

I don't look for quotes for anything like that.

And they went out in October and visited the site.

They, of course, also noticed noted the evidence of prior leaks, but also gave me the gave us the history that repairs had been completed in 2021 and 2022.

So on the day they visited the ceilings were dry, thermal scans were showing us dry, but um they they also reiterated that these roofs are near the end of their lifespan.

So they developed or worked with quality roofing to get us some cost estimates for different scenarios.

One being to replace the roof with asphalt shingles, which was council's direction from work session, and those costs are shown there, um, both to just do new roofs for the three historically significant buildings or on all the buildings, and then also to provide a what what could be a shrink wrap, so to speak, temporarily covering the structures as it is a short-term stabilization option.

And then we have the we had some some funding set aside up to 200,000 for initial stabilization efforts that could be used for this.

Um to help frame the future decisions.

We also requested two independent property appraised appraisals from for the North Ward building.

So two firms submitted written reports.

James Millsaw and Associates concluded with a value of approximately 1.6 million, and the second firm was urban realty solutions, and theirs was approximately 2.7 million.

So the Millspaw report was attached as supplemental information to your agenda item.

The urban realty solutions report was received after the agendas were published.

So if that hasn't been sent to you, it will be sent to you separately.

And given the variance between the two numbers, um staff will probably be re reviewing both reports and um in more detail to understand and reconcile any differences.

But this is also not my area of expertise.

Fortunately, I have economic development here to answer any detailed questions you may have on that component of our work.

So, you know, before before we move into the marketing and disposal strategy, I want to pause and connect this back to City Council strategic priorities.

Because by stabilizing and preserving North Ward's historic school complex, we're directly supporting council's goal of maintaining key public assets and historic features rather than allowing them to further deteriorate.

Um, by preparing the site for possible sale to qualified private partners who will reinvest, add new uses, and bring residents and activity back.

We're advancing your focus on strong public-private initiatives and targeted revitalization.

And then last and most importantly, in my opinion, the value isn't just for the eventual sale price, it's preserving and repurposing this land market that provides the long-term cultural and neighborhood value.

I also want to know that this effort has been embedded in the city council, the city's policy direction for several years.

So the downtown redevelopment plan, which was updated in 2018, just before the city purchased the school, um, specifically calls for pursuing the historic designation, which we've achieved, and coordinating with the school district to repurpose it.

So our goal has always been to use this building for some function or use.

So today's discussion is a direct continuation of that.

And then more recently, the North Greenwood CRA, which this building is within, emphasizes preserving and expanding the community's historic and cultural resources, and it advice it identifies this area and the surrounding vacant properties is providing opportunity for a potential catalytic project.

So again, this moves us towards that vision.

And with that, I can hand off to Assistant City Manager Battle to discuss the marketing.

Thank you, Lauren, for uh framing the issues or at a minimum, you know, providing a little bit of context of why we're here this afternoon.

So after our last conversation back in September, you asked us to do a number of things.

I think we've done that in terms of bringing you additional information to help guide what happens next.

So, what do we do?

How do we get there and what's the process, right?

So I'm here to propose to you kind of a multifaceted approach to it.

Some of them run in tandem, some of them can be independent, but all to at the end of the day get interest in development, redevelop the site, get into productive use, and most importantly, get it out of our hands into private development hands.

So, what are some of the reuse parameters and goals?

I think it is to identify developers or help identify and also make available to the development community that we seek partners that have historic preservation as a part of their mission in terms of the reutilization of this property.

So we need to curate what that audience looks like, similar to the conversation about the library.

We need to initially market.

We need to make people aware that this property is available.

And we want to use a similar approach in terms of a long lead time before we actually announce that we're ready to accept proposals.

So we assume a pre-marketing approach of the next uh five to six months.

So that would put us uh starting beginning of 2026, around May or June of 2026 to put together, use the feedback that we get to put together a development package, you know, development brochure, whatever the case may be in terms of making our putting our best foot forward from a marketing standpoint, but also utilize that opportunity to identify all of the benefits that the site provides from a redevelopment standpoint.

What are the rules of engagement from a land use zoning and capacity standpoint, and as it exists as Lauren said, this kind of sits in the boundary of two different areas, downtown and North Greenwood, and what are the benefits of being in both of those areas from a redevelopment standpoint.

Also providing some market information data.

So moving into May of 2026, there'll be a lot of construction activity happening in Clearwater and just around the area in general.

That'll be helpful, I think, in terms of building the case that this is an area of prime for redevelopment, and also as the North Ward redevelopment plan mentioned that this could be the part of a catalytic development opportunity.

This site sits in the middle of a lot of different um uh vacant properties around its immediate vicinity.

So we want to play into the opportunities that that provides just from a global standpoint and helping to sell the opportunity.

Talking about incentives, whatever they may be, use that as a platform and use those marketing brochures as a platform to say that we're a willing participant.

Not only do we own the property, but we realize that these types of projects are hard to do, and sometimes that is the way to get from A to B in terms of a redevelopment opportunity.

Um, and similar to other projects that you've seen us do, site tours, the marketing collateral, of course, websites, social media, any type of advertising opportunities.

We want to take advantage over the next five to six months to just put as much top of mind content out there about this being a great opportunity to participate in another part of the urban renaissance that's occurring in the city of Clearwater.

So, how do we try to prescribe that in a much more detailed or direct fashion?

Um, we can take the approach of issuing an RFQ to try to pre-qualify developers from the feedback that we get.

That may not be necessary, but we want to put that at top of mind that we may use that process to at least set the bar high in terms of the folks who can officially provide and participate in any type of redevelopment submitting redevelopment proposals that we would then vet and bring to you for consideration.

Also talk about what the minimal content that would be utilized in terms of solicitation process.

So as we build that package, we would bring it back to you to share it with you, get your feedback, get your comments, but definitely make sure that what we're seeing and what we're putting out there is something that uh you get an opportunity to see and give us feedback about and make sure it includes all of the points that we've talked about.

There's been a lot of great discussion about downtown today, and I think we want to make sure we capture that in everything that we put, start to put out about development and redevelopment, and this site sets up well to make this a great test case of how to do it and do it right.

Um, and lastly, proposals will be evaluated and reviewed before presenting them to you.

The hope is to drum up all of that interest, get a great response in terms of development projects.

We have been getting interest in this site.

So it's not to say that uh, unlike any other site that we have and that we own and are willing to offer for development.

This has been a unique one because there's been interest from particularly folks who participate in the art space and the art development of artists' loss.

There's a lot of um adaptive reuse projects around the country, and many of those developers are in this area in the state of Florida, and there's several projects around the state of Florida that they find the site to be attractive about.

There are also affordable housing development or developers who've expressed interest in the project as a mixed-use development, just in general, folks who've just expressed interest to learn more.

Some of them don't have a development project per se, but they want to know more about Clearwater and want to use this project and this property as an opportunity to come to to bring them further in and to talk more about what Clearwater has to offer.

So uh in earnest, we would start the process after whatever your conversation is today about uh in response to what we presented and look forward to coming back in about the May to June time frame to specifically kick off an actual uh solicitation um uh period for the recep receipt of development proposals at that time.

So that's what we're here to give you that response to our September meeting.

You asked for some information, hopefully provided some great feedback for you to think about, but in earnest to tell you what how we would pursue a redevelopment opportunity going forward.

So I'm here to answer any questions as well as staff from economic development planning and um and others who may participate in the conversation.

Okay, Councilmember Albretton.

So I guess my concern is we talked about the roof repairs before and then we decided maybe we could just repair the roof instead of putting a whole new roof on it, and then you're bringing this thing about shrink wrap.

I don't really know what that is.

What it is what exactly does that mean?

I would call it uh yeah, I would call it a temporary cover, similar to what you probably see on residential properties when they've identified like a blue tarp, like a blue tarp type of approach, yes, sir.

The shrink wrap thing just kind of grew me there a little bit.

There's some there's some companies that do it in a lot more uh how can I say a better way than the blue tarp approach in the state they actually cover it.

So my question would be how long would a roof tarp last would it last through all this we're gonna do, or do you think that it's not gonna last?

I don't I don't know.

We didn't we didn't get into the longevity of it, but um we can provide some feedback on that as well if if that's an approach you want to take.

But I don't I don't have a response to that particular question off the top of my head.

Because I know that uh polypropylene or whatever they use doesn't last a long time in the hot sun, right?

So if we're thinking it's gonna last like through next summer, it probably will have to be reapplied or something, right?

But I I don't really don't want to spend 300 something thousand on a new roof if we're gonna be putting this out for sale or for development, but I do want something that'll last through that period.

Okay, we'll get more information and we can we can definitely report that.

Okay.

Um the roof shrink wrap would have their feelings heard if you called it a blue tarp.

It is a thicker mill and it is a much better project.

Um it's composed better, it lasts longer, it looks better.

Uh it would be offended if you called it a blue tarp.

So it is not a blue tarp, but uh, I do think that is an important question.

I mean, spending 83,000 for how long of a time frame does that give us in protection versus 372,000.

Um about a third of a difference, but I think that time frame is important.

Quick question regarding the appraisal process, the 1.6 and the 2.7.

Do they appraise that for highest and best use, or do they appraise that in protecting the historic value of those three buildings and then put a value to it?

It's my understanding they did both or attempted to do both.

I think a lot of I think the very you see such a I'm gonna call it a wide variation, but a variation of value.

There isn't a building to compare this to be able to provide, I think, uh an appraisal that you can say it's this or that.

Um, so we had several conversations with both appraisers about the types of opportunities that they could see to help them determine a proper evaluation from property.

So uh as Lauren mentioned, and even as our staff is noted, you know, the discrepancy isn't something that um we thought we would we would see, but at the same time, both appraisers identified that this is going to be a difficult building to provide values that may sink that may be very similar just because of the unique nature of the property.

Yeah, I can see that.

So just for clear sorry, no, no, uh, just for clarity, the different direction you're looking for from us today is a decision on how we're protecting that roof to move forward.

Two two things.

Well, maybe three.

Um I don't know if it's a decision on how to move forward with the roof until we get an answer to the question about the longevity of the quote unquote shrink wrap.

That that may be a table discussion for for another meeting.

But definitely if you uh agree with the process of a disposing of the property, and then second of which is the process that we would employ to market, then make it available for development.

Those are kind of the the things that we're asking for your feedback and an approval for uh today.

Thank you.

Yes, thank you.

Um, gonna throw out the unpopular opinion again.

Um I think that we should obviously open this up for the historic adaptive reuse experience, um, but also open it up for development in general.

So just throwing that out there for anybody to ponder as we continue this discussion going forward for however long it lasts.

But uh I think it'd be worth just exploring what comes back and seeing do both instead of just one and be fixed on just that um when I saw the first appraisal, I was a bit taken aback 1.6 when we acquired it for 1.8.

But then there's a big discrepancy between that one and the next one into a point seven.

I think we've invested a lot already on this property, so I have reservations about investing more unless there's a real um likelihood of more leak, you know, an active leak, which would um damage the property.

So I do want to know what that product would do and and what that uh timeline would like.

Can it be can it can it be a safe alternative for two, three years or six months, you know what I mean?

And that way I can evaluate if 83,000 is something that I can be comfortable with.

Um, in terms of direction, I I approve the direction, and I think we also include it in the uh county buildings, right?

Yeah, so um let's see what happens.

Okay, if uh just a reminder, if you may remember Lauren said that at this point after when they did the roof evaluation, they did not see any active leaks.

So at this point, you know, it there may be depending on how uh substantially strong the the shrink wrap is it may help you determine when you want us to deploy that if we start to notice something versus just spending the dollars now, um do something while it's in our ownership if we're asking you so or if we notice that there is damage to the property.

But at this point, we're not recommending to do anything at the moment, but we do recognize that we have some dollars that we can spend if we need to spend if the roof uh becomes gets gets in a poor condition.

When when they made the report last though, I think we asked the gentleman whether there was currently any damage, and I think he said no.

That's correct.

Yeah, so it's not immediate.

It's not immediate.

His recommendation was that and and Lauren said this as well as just a roof, it's getting to the end of life, so patching it, repairing it.

You can only do so much before you really need to explore either total relate replacement or some type of temporary structure covering if you I would say it's time to do something.

I mean, we've been letting that's the city, we've been letting it sit there for arguably too long.

So I I think it is important that we do something, and so hopefully, temporary fixes, and I wouldn't want to spend more money than we need to just to preserve it for somebody else who's gonna do something else with it.

Um and I did want to comment uh council member cotton.

I understand what your argument is, and uh I I certainly don't want to see whatever is done with this property be a burden to taxpayers.

I I don't want to I I wouldn't want to see us operate in a way that uh we have to subsidize whatever goes on there.

Um so I I do want to see what public-private partnerships we can get on it.

I I would say though, I would be cautious to just put it on the market and just sell it for whatever it's worth without some kind of control because the reality is we just don't have enough property in downtown Clearwater that we have control over to uh really drive economic development and incentivize folks to activate those properties.

So I I would like to find some type of public private partnership where it's not a burden of the taxpayers, but yet we we maintain enough control that we can really prescribe these.

Yeah, we we can we can motivate somebody to to develop it in a way that activates the public and brings people in.

So that would be all my thoughts, but I don't have anything else to share.

So okay.

We'll come back with um some more information about the roof and also we can give some more feedback about a process that we think can work to meet what your objectives are.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Consultant.

Good afternoon, Mayor Council.

My planning public utilities interim director.

I'm here today to request approval for the WRF credits repair program with our Dura incorporated.

And an amount not to exceed 11.1 million dollars across the five year term.

We're really looking to bridge the gap to uh our consolidation.

So we need them to be able to uh help us maintain the facilities uh so we can get to consolidation.

Uh it's tied to high performing government and environmental stewardship, and I'm open to answering any questions that you may have.

Okay.

Any questions on this agenda item?

Mr.

Mayor, but uh want to just emphasize what was just uh reiterated.

You know, it's to help us get towards consolidation, it's not to exceed.

I mean, that's a giant number, right?

For facilities that we're essentially trying to get away from.

However, I do understand and I hope the public understands that these facilities have to be up and online and running efficiently uh for us to get to that consolidation goal where everything's nice and seamless.

So not to exceed 11.1 million dollars, and this is also to uh maintain our way of life.

So thank you very much.

Absolutely, and I just want to add to uh to what you said there.

So this is really for condition assessments uh for the point repair contract and development and design and construction oversight.

So this is more of the engineering piece of it.

We'll have to bring on a construction company, or we'll have to be able to utilize uh our staff to do some of the work that will need to be done to make sure that we bridge that gap.

Okay, anything else on 9.1.

If not, uh do we have consent?

Yes, we have consent on 9.1.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And then Clearwater Code of War's section 2.063, 2.411, 2.412, 2.413, and 2.425 relating to the Clearwater employees pension plan.

Council members as part of staff's review of the advisory boards.

Last year's process change involving the PAC where they no longer hear the uh disability hearings, has now basically become a very ministerial in nature.

And so one of the things after reviewing the process and hopefully to reduce that redundancy of them recommending that change.

Yes, to the pension trustees.

Um it legal reviewed it that there is no impact in terms of the um the plan's soundness, um, the ability uh for contributions.

It there's really nothing just eliminates that ministerial duty that now they're only approving minutes and making recommendations to the pension trustees to approve anyway.

Okay.

Any discussion?

If not, thank you.

We'll move to agenda item 11.1.

Mayor 11.1 and 11.2 are my items.

Um they do involve active litigation.

Uh, these are two slip and fall cases just for brief context.

Um, you know, we have historically insourced about 90 percent of our litigation.

However, with Mr.

Fueno's departure, we are outsourcing our cases during this interim period uh until we are able to fill his position on 11.1 and 11.2 are to that effect.

Uh Banker Lopez is the firm that has handled all of our workers' comp.

Uh they have been handling that for many many years preceding my time as city attorney, but they also have a very strong practice in relation to tort defense.

Um so that's why they've been recommended for this case.

Okay.

Or both.

Do we have consent on our questions for questions?

If not, do we have consent on 11.1 and 11.2?

Yes.

Yep.

We have consent.

11.3.

Here, 11.3 um is a renewal with law firm of a widener PA.

So um Matt Widener is the attorney who handles our lean foreclosure cases.

Uh, this also predated my time as city attorney, but I'm okay with it.

Uh he is outside council.

This agreement is a master agreement, meaning that he does not get paid anything.

He only gets paid when we actually do a foreclosure case.

He takes them on contingency fees.

It is important to emphasize that number one, there is no cost to this except when the city authorizes a foreclosure.

Number two, Mr.

Widener does not get to choose the cases or even recommend the cases that come before the council as it relates to foreclosure.

If there is a recommendation for that, because it is a sensitive topic, it gets vetted through staff and then comes to council on a case-by-case basis or at a very minimum on a batch basis.

But Mr.

Widen, for you know, important I think ethics reasons as well as public perception reasons, does not participate in that process at all because we don't want to incentivize him to be trying to bring more foreclosure cases than what is than what we as a city you know deem are appropriate.

Um final point I'll make on this is that uh just as a reminder, um I know that some of the code enforcement cases that tend to be most problematic, uh meaning the properties that tend to be in some of the worst shape are sometimes residential properties.

But just as a reminder to the public, we cannot foreclose homestead.

Uh and so that is going to be true regardless of the state of the property.

We do put liens on those properties.

Sometimes those properties can be moved into stronger hands because a prospective buyer will come in, and then we could potentially negotiate something like a lien reduction, but this is only for non-homesteaded properties as a concept.

That's that happy to answer any questions.

Any questions on 11.3.

If not, do we have consent?

We have consent on 11.3.

11.4.

Mayor 11.4.

Um I have a bunch of items today.

So if I had a greater sequence than I've had in my recent memory.

So 11.4 uh relates to Gotham.

So as a uh kind of brief recap for the public, I know council is aware of this.

Part of our development agreement with Gotham says that the city will contribute 17 million out of the parking fund to the project.

That money's already been committed, that was already decided years ago back in 2022.

All of that is done.

The development agreement and purchase and sale agreement with Gotham as it relates to the old city hall parcel, say that the 17 million from the city will be contributed at closing.

We're still working out a little bit of the detail as to whether that's a closing credit and how you manage that, but the gist of it is 17 million was already set aside and it's to be handled at closing as far as the timing.

Gotham has approached us and asked to convert that into a loan.

They would like to do that for tax reasons.

Um I don't see any harm to the city in this.

It is crucial to emphasize that there is no additional funding request, so the amount of the funding is not changing.

It is also important to emphasize that the timing of the funding is not changing.

So it will be a loan that is issued at closing.

We are, if this gets approved, essentially doing Gotham a favor to help their project be on stronger footing financially.

But I do think that's beneficial to the city, especially because they have agreed that we will get a promissory note.

So if the council converts the parking fund grant into a loan, we will be holding a promissory note.

No payments will be due on that loan, but that promissory note will secure the funding so that until the project is finished, there will be a security interest that we will hold.

So if anything, it is more protective for the city than what we currently have.

So for those reasons, uh I'm supportive of it.

Um I don't know if the manager has any additional comments, but that's essentially what this is.

So questions?

Okay.

Do we have consent?

Okay.

We have consent 11.4, 11.5.

Uh 11.5 relates to a private public partnerships.

Uh so Florida law creates what I think is a pretty good framework for how we can, although we are not required to uh lease public property for revenue generating projects.

That is not the exact statutory language, but the gist of it is that the legislature wanted to create a framework by which um local governments could put out solicitations for things like leases of government-owned real estate, particularly when there is a lot of private sector interest.

This typically will come up in the context of revenue generating projects, because if you're a private developer, you probably don't have much interest in funding a new city hall or a new police station because they make no money.

And so if you're a developer, though, you might be interested in anything from a golf course to a marina, an air park, parking garages, uh concert venues.

These are things that may be publicly owned at the airpark.

Um, like all of these things are publicly owned, but the private sector is able to monetize them.

So the legislature has created a mechanism that is optional for local governments uh to essentially solicit and procure um private sector partners.

Clearwater has an ordinance in place that essentially duplicates or mirrors state law.

There's nothing wrong with that.

I've had have no objection to that.

The problem, however, with duplicating state law in our own ordinance, is that our ordinance could become obsolete.

So when state law changes, now our old ordinance is on the books that is misaligned with state law, and that is what has happened here.

The legislature has recently modified the P3 process, but our ordinance has not been updated to match it.

So we really have two options.

Either we change the ordinance to start matching up with state law, which could be something we might have to do every year or every couple years, or we just repeal it all together.

My recommendation is just repeal it altogether because the statute still exists, we can still use the P3 framework, and we won't have a potential mismatch between our local ordinance and state law.

So essentially my recommendation is to um repeal the ordinance again, not because I'm opposed to P3s, but because state law has already set up the framework for that, and that's that framework could change and has changed.

So happy to answer any questions.

I know ACM has also been part of that conversation.

So any questions.

Okay, no questions.

Thank you.

Move to the agenda item 11.6.

Mayor 11.6 and 11.7 are second readings.

Uh but happy to answer any questions.

Okay.

Any questions of 116 and 117?

Not uh do we have consent um on those two items.

So we'll move to agenda item 12 city management reports.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, I just wanted to thank our teams.

It was a really busy Thanksgiving weekend with multiple events, the big one being the turkey trot, of which I think our teams did an outstanding job.

I know that was a Herculean effort from a lot of different departments and organizations, and so certainly wanted to extend the gratitude to them.

Um, and also the Christmas tree lighting, the holiday tree lighting last night um was also a really fantastic event, and just want to thank our teams for that.

That's it.

Thank you.

Nothing at this time, Mayor.

10 item 14.1.

Councilmember Cotton.

Yes, Mayor, thank you.

Um, this is to bring up your body's um thoughts on reinstituting public comment for items not on the agenda for our uh Thursday meetings.

Um, in the summary, you could see that I was um keeping the three minutes for citizens to be heard, not allowing for one-minute additions, and uh max allotted time frame for that portion of the meeting to be 30 minutes.

So essentially allowing 10 citizens to be heard if they want to be heard.

It would be first come, first serve.

The not sharing of the one minute would only pertain to this portion of the agenda, it wouldn't pertain to any other portions of our agenda.

Um but just seeing what the temperature is.

I think that you know we're starting to see people come to DDD meeting, DDB meetings and CRA meetings and use their citizens to be heard comment in an area where it doesn't belong.

Um we've also had people request that uh citizens to be heard be put back on and or town halls be made available.

Um I just think now would probably be a good time to get that reinstated.

I think that uh bringing up this discussion with the parameters in which I've put forward it may be palatable to each of you, but uh just seeing where everybody stands on that so that we can see where this ball goes.

Any other council members have thoughts?

Well, I'll chime in on it.

I I think uh I think it may be time to bring it back.

Um we have it seem to have the disruptions uh that's been nice not to do that.

But um, I do think there are people that really would like to come and speak their mind to council.

And um I think uh you know having the three minutes is is good.

Um not being able to piggyback on top of that for people that want to create a scene or a commotion is good, and the 30-minute limit.

Uh didn't we have that before?

Did we have a 30-minute limit?

No, it was uh 60 minutes.

I don't know how often that really came up in practice, but the rule did say 60.

Yeah.

So anyway, I I'm for if uh you know everybody else's uh before bringing it back.

Okay.

Anybody else, Councilmember Manino?

Mayor, I thank you.

Mayor, I think you just I can ask um the council member just for clarity.

When you say 10 citizens and kind of a first come first basis, I'm just wondering what it looks like when there's more than 10 that may not be directly from our community, but want to speak to an issue, but they're here, say before residents are.

How do we have a plan on how we may handle that?

The unfortunate thing is I don't think we can handle that, right?

And it's not, I think that would be too much work on the clerk's office to try and vet who's a citizen and who isn't.

It would just be a first come first served basis.

Uh and yeah, I mean, there's no way to really combat that.

So and I'm not trying to put more work on their office to you know look through every person.

Um my hope is that our citizens would would get preference, you know, but it's not a perfect world, unfortunately.

So um I appreciate you bringing the discussion back.

I know everybody on this dice, the last thing we ever want to do is not hear from our citizens.

It means a lot to all of us, whether it's an email, whether it's a phone call, whether it's in here.

Um it was not an easy decision when we went down that path, and it was a prescription.

We kind of felt that when safety was at question, uh you know, not just the dais, but residents were discussing it, uh, even staff had some questions on it.

That was a prescription at the time, that not the best path.

It was what we felt was the only path, and we went that way.

Um many would probably say that it's helped and it's been a bit of a deterrent.

Uh I'm I'm okay and supportive if that's the direction this dias wants to go back.

I think we just have to be aware.

Um the enforce the burden of enforcement um becomes a heavy lift back to the gavel on our decorum rules, and I think that's vitally important um that we understand that, and then that's also uh putting our PD in that role of enforcement as well from from the gavel to him.

Uh I'm I'm supportive of it if the council wants to go back in that that direction.

Um it is it is unfortunate there's not a way, and I totally agree with you on making sure that the you know citizens and the community voices can be heard first and foremost, but not um not possible, and I recognize that.

Uh, but I'm interested to to see what the rest of the council thinks on it.

Um I'm conflicted.

I uh when I've realized that this was gonna be on the um consent agenda item.

I purposely engaged in the community.

I know that was easy because we had so many events.

Um and I heard both sides.

Um and I dug in deeper a little bit with those who feel that email when I present the argument, you can communicate with me.

You can email, call, text, we can meet for coffee, you can come to the city hall.

They actually clarified for me what was different, and they put value in being seen, recorded in a public setting.

That's important to them.

And so now I'm left with the decision.

Okay, how important is that versus those citizens who've told me that they now feel safer coming to the meetings because it's uh less disruptive.

Um that business is being conducted versus having a circus atmosphere, that those who are disruptive are not even from Clearwater.

So um I'm conflicted.

I am going to keep hearing what citizens are gonna say, but this is not an easy decision for me because I also want to hear I I also want to put value on the first responders and how difficult this will be if we reinstate it.

Number two, if we go back, how hard is it gonna be if we recognize it's a mistake, so maybe uh have a uh uh expiry time?

I'm not quite sure, but it's it's not clear-cut for me because I'm hearing many different opinions.

So I I'm looking forward to hearing more before I make my stance.

Okay.

Um so my thoughts are I'm not opposed to it.

Uh I think we have to ask ourselves, and when we last debated it, I asked this, is uh I don't know how long how long is this had that been on the agenda?

30 years.

We we've had it forever, right?

Yeah.

I mean, Mary, do you mean the portion of the meeting for yeah, I mean I defer to the clerk, but a long time, right?

Before I started working with the city, so that's been a while.

So my my point then was, and my point is now it is having it on the agenda the same way today.

Um serving the same purpose it was intended to serve years ago when it first started being on the agenda.

Uh when we didn't have social media, when we didn't have you two, we didn't have all this stuff that invites people who come in, like the comedian Alex Stein.

Uh when we didn't have social media, when we didn't have YouTube, we didn't have all this stuff that invites people who come in, like the comedian Alex Stein got I don't know how many clicks when he came to the community development board and put on a comedy routine.

I don't think that was the purpose of having on our agenda years ago.

And it's and that's that's what I've seen it being distorted to.

It's um there are people from our community, we've seen them, they come in and they genuinely are residents here, and they have a uh something they want to communicate to the five of us collectively.

Um which but that's been a very small portion of it.

Many of the folks that come in, and many of the folks that drive from long distances to get here, they're they're not coming in to help you know give us an idea of it's going to better the community, they're coming in to use as uh a media platform to generate, I guess, if you have our YouTube channel, I guess, subscribers and and turn it into something that it was never intended to be.

So and and we had the experience in the last year where um because we had that part of our agenda, we had citizens coming in on legitimate agenda items, business directly before the city, who were made to feel uncomfortable in coming out to speak on an agenda item because of the atmosphere that these folks created.

I I know that you know, and certainly I I've invited folks to run for mayor and to if you want to sit up here and hold the gavel and try to make a judgment call and whether or not somebody's out of order or not with the the advice I've gotten from the city attorney, it's not that easy, folks.

And I'm telling you, I I've certainly have not done a perfect job in doing that, but it it is very difficult to sit there and make judgment calls on all kinds of folks.

So I would I I'm not against having it back on.

I would ask us to think about how can we do it in a way that protects the right of folks to come out and talk on agenda items, that they don't have to sit through, they don't feel like they're in an atmosphere where they're uncomfortable coming out to to pres to present or speak on an agenda item.

And then if there's some way to narrow it to at least discourage these folks like Alex Stein to come in from making a mockery of it, really, to use it to promote your own business or whatever enterprise you have, but to do something that's really not to put on a performance that's not furthering our citizens' best interest, not helping our city.

Uh folks have a right to speak for sure, but but they don't have a right to speak on our platform, on our media platform.

They've they've got all kinds of opportunities to do that through social media and YouTube and all other.

If you want to speak out to the public, there are a gazillion better ways to speak to the public rather than coming to a meeting here and doing it.

If you're speaking to us, that's a different story.

We encourage that.

Um I know other cities have approached them different ways.

We had a separate town hall and a separate location.

That did not work very well.

I think we all recognize that.

I think people were even more uncomfortable that came out to speak on a legitimate city uh item.

So if there's a way to separate it from the meetings somewhat, it could be the same night, same day.

Uh if there's a way to, you know, I heard somebody say, you know, we had Zoom meetings at one time that allowed people to speak to the council that uh but it took out the security concerns that people would have.

Um there are other communities doing it different ways too, to just recognize the reality that the purpose of the meeting that that item agenda, agenda item, is to let people come out and speak to five of us about their concerns on something concerning the city.

And if there's a way to make sure it stays to that and not just this open mic night at the improvisation comedy club, that's what I I think is in the best interest of our citizens to do.

So again, I'm not opposed to it.

I would just ask us to think about a way forward that kind of limits the theatrics that we witnessed.

So I have a question for the city attorney.

Um, I what I've seen over the years is the thing that makes it a circus atmosphere, is that these people come in with cameras on their chest, on their head, they acquire poll cameras, they're they they put cameras up on the I mean, why do they need cameras?

You know, I what I've seen over the years is the thing that makes it a circus atmosphere is that these people come in with cameras on their chest, on their head, they require poll cameras, or they they put cameras up on the I mean, why do they need cameras?

Why does anybody coming here need a camera?

Because this is all video taped and is for the public.

When they come in with their cameras, it's easier to edit certain things and snippets and the way they want to do it, just to put it on YouTube for their you know, their um specific uh thing that they want to get across.

If we can we eliminate uh recording devices in here?

I mean, it is being recorded as being made to the public.

Personal recording devices, if we took that away.

So certainly understand the question.

Um, this is a topic that has been litigated fairly extensively.

A lot of communities have gone through uh that question as well.

Uh generally speaking, uh, the courts have held that there is an individual personal constitutional right to record public meetings.

Um, however, that does not mean it is unlimited.

So, for example, if someone is using it in a manner that is particularly disruptive, if something uh could be confused with a weapon, if it's causing extreme distraction that is preventing the business from being conducted, I do believe that we could look at potential um decorum-related rules for how, when, where they're used within the room.

Um, I have seen cities defend lawsuits successfully on those grounds.

I do not, however, believe we could pass a blanket ban that would tell citizens that they are prohibited from filming their government uh when we are conducting a public meeting like this.

Yes, thank you, sir.

Uh, I appreciate each one of your all's inputs and um back and forth with this.

Uh you know, I think that it's important because it's the one time where you get everyone in the same room.

You have all five of us.

You have the assistant city managers, the city manager, the clerk, the city attorney.

They can say their piece for three minutes right from that podium uh to say exactly what they need to all of us, right?

Um I've even seen us at times go back down into the audience after a meeting and meet with that person because we wanted further information to get with them.

Uh I think everybody here knows they have a tiny supercomputer in their pocket or purse that they can find our email or whatever information they want about us and reach out to us.

You know, I I had the ability to come here and do that.

I chose to do something different, and now I'm sitting here.

So when it comes back to allowing people to redress us, all of us that sit up here, I just think it's important to give them time to do that.

And it's three minutes.

If we can't just sit through three minutes of a theatric, if we can't sit through three minutes of something that's important to one of these people out here or to a Clearwater business owner.

I don't know.

Maybe we need to instill more discipline in ourselves.

Um that's why I eliminated the additional minutes that give people up to 15 minutes.

That's why I've limited it to 30 minutes.

Citizens are just gonna have to understand if if they had something they wanted to say and they didn't get it in as one of those 10 people, and we had some uh circus attend that that's not on us.

We we empathize with them, right?

But uh going forward, there's two weeks from now you can maybe be earlier or try and get your name back in and let us hear what you have to say.

So I I'm still gonna stick with you know what I've put here.

I would like to see if there's any further.

I mean, we back when we were trying to fix the rules when we actually had it, we thought about trying to limit it to just clear water, clear water businesses, clear water stakeholders, clear water residents.

There was no true legal way to try and get that done.

And then, well, what about regionally?

We started trying all these different options, it just wouldn't work.

Um so that's why I I think that as we've noted, sentiment has come down.

I do think that there are residents that want to be able to come up here and speak to us about things that are important to them.

I think that that is important to me to hear them aside from an email and or a phone call because it gets everybody in on it, right?

Um it's not just me then getting one thing because of sunshine.

I can't bring it to Mike if it's closer to him or you know, to Lena if it's closer to her downtown or to you, mayor, or or you, council member all written on the beach.

I I have to go to either the city manager or one of the assistant city managers or the city attorney and try and figure this out and and help the one person when they could just come here, tell us their issue, and we know what it is.

Nine times out of ten, the city attorney's already taken notes, the clerk's taking notes, and one of the the city manager ACM has taken notes.

I've seen ACM slaughter get up after meetings or during a meeting to help those citizens and get further information.

So I think that is the importance, you know.

And I think Lena saying that she's had citizens give her that more in-depth information, kind of hits that nail on the head of what I'm trying to convey.

And I understand there's other people that don't feel that way.

I'm not trying to negate them or what's going on there.

I just I think it's an important part, especially a local government.

And it comes back to just give the people their three minutes and move on, right?

Max of 30 minutes, we got max of 10 people every meeting.

Some important things will come out of it, and there's going to be some clowns that show up to the circus.

And I think that we just have to be ready for it and move on.

So thank you for the time.

If we have any more discussion, I welcome it, absolutely.

Yeah, I just want to say it's not this isn't about thick skin, or it isn't about it, it's about it's about people coming in and being so over the top that they are dissuading citizens from coming in and speak.

Um and you know, I I get it, you know, we that's why we have police officers here.

But I I had to testify at a criminal trial with a police officer.

I mean, it takes time out when uh we we ejected some uh we uh asked someone because they violated the rules to to leave, and then they they came back in, so they trespassed.

So our officers tried to control the situation, and um I I see that time that our police officers are spending trying trying to deal with all that that I think is unnecessary if we just put in some guardrails.

I agree with you that and I said earlier, we have gotten good feedback from time to time from some folks who didn't know how to reach us if they show up.

I I don't think I haven't heard anybody say they're against that.

Uh I just I just wonder if you have some ideas on how we can do it a little differently, or try doing it a little differently than what we did it before, to see if we can minimize the dampening effect that that some folks would have on other folks coming in to speak.

Not against it, not about tough skin, it's about are there some ways that we can maybe put it different places on the agenda, have it a different time, in addition to limiting to it.

My only concern about the the 10 people is now we get now we get into who got in line first and we get into this, you know, the 11th person feels like they haven't been treated fairly if we cut it off in that.

You know, uh some communities have a sign up.

You don't speak on public comment unless you sign in and register ahead of the meeting.

And then I guess you could do that, but you would need some mechanism, I think, to limit it before the meeting to no more than 10.

City attorney, do you have something?

Yeah, um which part to take first.

So I guess to take the easiest part first.

Uh, yes, the council can decide uh what portion of the agenda you'd like to have this on if you decide to bring it back.

So whether you'd like to have that at the end, the beginning, the middle, uh, is completely up to the council's prerogative.

So I think that's that's the easy part of this.

Uh, as far as uh the sign up, um, I think that probably would be a good way to track, you know, who was here first, and because people would sign up and it would just be numbered one through ten, and uh you know, you wouldn't have the fighting in the sense that uh once someone's signature is on there, then they're on there.

Could you have a fight as people are trying to sign?

Maybe.

Uh, but at least once it's on there, you would have number one through ten.

So I think that would uh at least solve the administrative problem for the clerk.

Uh to council member Manino's point, uh, I strongly suspect uh what will happen is that uh it probably will be a lot of um folks who are from outside of our area, probably a lot of folks who come out repeatedly, you know.

Um, so you're probably gonna get a lot of that, but that's okay.

That's not really good or bad, that's just just an observation.

To the mayor's point uh about how we might kind of um I'll say guide that process so it's a little bit more orderly.

I do not believe under Florida law that we could necessarily regulate or limit um in terms of residency relating to people who comment on agenda items.

So, in other words, for agenda items, I do think that anyone in the public has a right to comment on them regardless of where they live, whether they're a stakeholder in our community or not.

However, when it relates to non-agenda items, in other words, if we are reinstituting a portion of the meeting that citizens to be heard for items not on the agenda, at least when I last look at this, it was my opinion that the city has the right, if the city chooses to limit that to people who are local stakeholders.

That could be defined within reason, may not just be Clearwater residents, perhaps it's Pinellas County residents.

How do we account for things like their water gas customers and things of that nature?

But to the mayor's point, we may have options to ensure that the people who are commenting, number one, actually have some kind of connection in some kind of stake uh in the local community, and number two, um, you know, that way it doesn't drown out if there's the 10 same 10 people who are just monetizing their YouTube channel every week, it doesn't drown out those actual residents who want to be heard.

So at least when I last researched this, which has been a while, I I did believe at the time that we could put a residency requirement for non-agenda items only.

Uh so if that is something the council wants me to uh update and look back at, I can certainly look at that.

How would you feel about that?

Um, I would actually really appreciate it.

So maybe is what I was gonna say is uh we picked this discussion back up in the new year at our January 15th meeting or that Monday council session.

Um I still agree to the three minutes not allowing extra time in that 30-minute time frame.

And and one of the reasons I I say that is because I think that if you want to talk to us, you should be able to get up and talk to us, you know, say what you need to say to us and and don't be scared.

I understand it's something interesting.

I mean, it's another thing sitting up here and talking to everybody too.

Um but we want to hear you.

I mean, I think that everybody genuinely does.

So I would totally be for that.

And um one of my concerns though would be for our our elderly.

You know, we've got some people that just do not know how to use technology, so signing up beforehand might be a problem.

Maybe a workaround to that is good old-fashioned clipboard and 10 slots with a signature verified by the security guard that goes through the medical metal detector with signage.

If you'd like public comment, please let security know.

Shows your ID that you're a Clearwater resident if we get that okayed, and then they sign their name to one through ten, whoever the first ten were, and then anybody else who asks, sorry, it's it's it's been full.

Um, so maybe that's a a workaround to ensure that it is a Clearwater resident stakeholder or something like that.

Okay, any comments.

So you want to oh, Councilmember Manino.

Yeah.

I appreciate the discussion.

I I think we already did all this homework kind of on that.

What we found was somebody rented a room to somebody for a dollar for a month and now they're a tenant.

Somebody registered for a one credit online course at St.

Pete College for 79 dollars and now they're a student.

Like we're we're opening doors to I don't know if the juice is worth the squeeze and going down those those routes, but um I'm I'm open to whatever the dais decides.

I I see the balance, it is we all value the importance uh with respect to the public in hearing hearing their thoughts, but I I there is a balance there too of capitalizing on a meeting and ruining a business meeting uh just for personal gain and and things like that.

So trying to strike that balance has been the challenge in this discussion.

Uh we're going on a year and a half now, and I don't know if we found that answer yet.

I I I can see Pinellas County residents.

I mean, we've got so much that's unincorporated or incorporated Clearwater that it's you know we can extend it to residents, and and by residence, you just you have to show a driver's license or something that shows your um be pretty easy to show.

Yeah, okay.

So we want to put it on the first meeting, council meeting in January.

Yeah, move it to work session, give uh staff time to kind of research it.

Get into more into the weeds and make sure that we've you know crossed our T's dotted our ice.

Yeah, thank you all.

I appreciate it.

Yeah, yeah.

Uh so what I'm taking is my own work is to kind of go back uh to that topic of residency requirements, um, you know, things of that nature, and see uh what we can do.

Again, when I last looked at this, I felt pretty confident in the answer, but it's been a while since we've looked at this.

So I'd like to you know look at that again, see if that's changed.

Thank you.

Okay.

Um to council member Alberton.

I I have the deepest respect for you.

You've served this council, this city is a council member for seven years going on, completing your second term.

Uh beyond that, you've been um a lifelong uh resident of Clearwater and a um uh community contributor to making this community and this city great.

Uh and I have the deepest respect for you, not just as a colleague, but as a person.

And I just want to also narrow that my concern over this, and I've I've had feedback from the citizens talk about whether you know the decision to vacate the street.

There's no application pending right now by anybody to vacate Garden Avenue.

We don't have a we're not talking about vacating the street.

The only question right now is the question that you asked the attorney general.

And I understand we got you got a letter back today, which I haven't had a chance to read that came in while we're meeting here, at least I've got it while we're meeting here.

But the the issue is simply about the letter, and for me it was understanding how the process came to be that we requested the letter from the attorney general, when we clearly have a legal dispute over the ownership of the real property, and the dispute is between one property owner, the city of Clearwater, which is not the five of us, it's the citizens, it's the taxpayers.

And another property owner, which is uh I looked it up today just to make sure I knew exactly who owned the property that's in dispute that claims that they own the street, and that is the Church of Scientology, Flag Organization Inc., which is a Florida nonprofit corporation, uh tax exempt, and it's simply a question of and you're and the question in your letter was does the city own the street, the citizens, or does the nonprofit organization own the street.

Uh it's a property dispute, and it's in the best interest, obviously, of the citizens of Clearwater, who we represent, that uh it be determined that the city owns the property, and it's in the best interest of the nonprofit that it owns the property.

So and it's and it it's not it's not a question that hasn't already been asked and uh answered by our city attorney and their attorney, you know, in this legal dispute we have.

The citizens of the city are represented by our city attorney and our legal department.

Uh we've got a couple of those folks who are board certified in real estate.

They they they know what they're talking about, putting together the opinion of the day.

The flag organization is represented by a very competent real estate attorney here in Clearwater.

Um, and he's making a great argument that they own the property.

But it's clear that it's in the best interest of the citizens that it be determined that the city owns the street, because it's a big it's a big number.

It's the appraisals came back over a million dollars.

So it's important to our taxpayers and to our citizens that we argue for them that they own the street.

And if you have two sides that don't agree on a legal interpretation of something, we don't ask the attorney general, who doesn't to my knowledge have any title lawyers or ever.

I I haven't read this letter to see if he gave a title opinion, but I I'm not aware of them ever doing that before.

I don't think they have any real estate lawyers on staff.

I don't think they have anybody on the attorney general staff that's bird board certified in real estate.

So it was just a strange request, and that's what I just wanted to get to the bottom of how that evolved, full transparency.

We know this community, this whole street's been a very controversial thing.

I think the public wants to know just full transparency.

How does the letter of the request transpire?

Um, so I was really wanting to have this on the council agenda Thursday night, but the clerk pointed out to me that we agreed that we would put on the work session agenda.

So I would like for it to be on the agenda Thursday night.

Uh anticipating because uh the nonprofit organization wanted him to write it.

Um that it's it's favorable to them, but I haven't read it, so I haven't seen what it says.

But also, you know, gives give us a chance if there's anything you want to share about how involved, that you'll have the opportunity to do that.

But I think it's important that um that we better understand why the request was made, how it came about, um and then we'll see what the result was from the letter, but that's the reason I want to talk about it Thursday.

Okay, well, if if you insist on bringing it up Thursday night, that's your prerogative mayor.

Um but I my question is simple.

I know this is gonna come up again.

The door hasn't closed, and as Lena says on the whole subject, they're gonna they're gonna come at it again.

I want to know why our attorney says that we own that street by fee fee simple.

This is my question because our attorney says Clearwater owns the title to that property, fee simple.

Their attorney says, no, you don't, it's a vacation of right-away, and I want to know why other vacations that we've done, for instance, 1086 El Dorado, we didn't own that fee simple, but we gave it a vacational right-of-way.

Grace Way, which is called Pine Street in the early 2000, we gave that to the Episcopal Church of Ascension.

That wasn't fee simple owned by Clearwater.

The parcel owned by Calvary Church was owned by the city, not fee simple.

We gave that as to Calvary Church.

That was that was a couple of years ago.

I was on the council for that.

Um I think Pierce Street was given to IMR, which was now Frank Crum, because they built the big building there, and they that wasn't owned fee simple.

I I just see all these other vacations that we do that all of a sudden we own this one fee simple.

I want to know, I want to have somebody tell me why, or give me an opinion that we don't or we do, because I've got two opinions, one that we do and one that we don't, and that is the that is the crux of my whole is try to understand why this is different than every other street we've ever done in Clearwater.

Okay, the I don't agree with our attorney that we own it fee simple.

I've heard from other attorneys, and I'm not advocating one way or another.

I'm advocating for the best interest of Clearwater here, and I'm not saying how I'm gonna vote on this, but I need to know to be for myself, not for anybody else.

I kind of know what everybody else's opinion is, but I'm having a hard time with this.

I need to know some kind of more information to know whether, or we just should go to court and have a judge decide it.

I mean, maybe that's how we go.

But anyway, that's where I stand, and it I mean, I hope that answers your question.

If you still want to bring it up Thursday night and have me repeat this again, I'll do that.

But that for me, and I didn't even know we had a letter from the attorney general, so I want to see if I'd like to read that and see what it says.

But that's where I stand.

I haven't made any decision on this.

I'm not doing it for one side or the other, I'm doing for the betterment of Clearwater, and I need to know that before I make a decision.

Now, the decision isn't being asked of me right now, but I've got enough brains to know that I'm gonna be asked that in the next two or three months when another application gets here because they're gonna go at it at this again.

They want to build this um auditorium, and as far as I understand, they own both sides of the road.

It's a platted right-away.

I've seen the plat.

I don't know why we own it fee simple, but if they can answer me that, it'll make my decision making a lot easier.

And that's all I have to say about it right now.

Okay.

Anyone else?

Vice Mayor.

Um first of all, I want to clarify when I meant the door has closed.

I wasn't referring to the application or any of that.

I meant the conversation regarding the correspondence we had received from the attorney general.

That's what I meant.

The conversation was closed.

We had moved on, yet we had made a decision.

Um that's what I was referring to.

I do understand how this raised concern.

Um, especially when it's a topic that generates great public interest.

Media's involved, there's citizens doing a petition.

That we're careful.

And what I mean by careful is I'm not saying that that something was wrong or right, but we are a team.

And so I would have preferred that if anything is communicated with a city letter, especially when it's a topic so important like this.

So that we can be transparent and be a one body and sort of be aware of what's going on.

This is an important topic.

Your concerns, your your discomfort with this.

But because of the sunshine law, I didn't know.

So if we had discussed it, um, I would have known.

And so if we're going to be a team that's going to be effective, I would like to have a discussion on how how can we proceed.

Should we, you know, talk about the process?

If you're going to communicate with the letterhead, and you're, and it's, and it's something that is very um important.

It's a big issue, and the response is gonna affect all of us.

I would have appreciated a discussion.

I would have loved to hear what you what you were thinking.

Well, you just heard it, so yes, but after the five and that then that letter didn't have your name on it, Lena.

I know it had my name on it.

I know that.

And we talked about this before everybody else, you and I were on council.

And I have, you know, as of last February, we talked about stationary.

And how we were gonna proceed on that.

And it was explosive, it was just as explosive last time, wasn't it?

Well, but we agreed, the council agreed that we could use stationary with our name and the city logo if it was a city business not involving anybody else.

So I I didn't like that I was accused of doing something illegal when it was a legal thing that I did.

And you know, this has been hard for me because I've lost a lot of friends that I had close friends that accused me of taking money from Scientology.

I would never ever I mean I would never ever think about doing that.

And I know what the public thinks about this, I know what the Save the Garden Avenue people think about it.

Um I just if I'm gonna be asked to decide, I need to know, I need to know the facts.

Or if the facts don't come through this letter that evidently came today, um I may throw it, you know, up to a judge and say you decide.

Well, um I want to say nobody uh I mean I got brought up.

I didn't hear anybody accuse anybody of doing it illegal or last meeting.

Nobody, nobody said, and I even said that that's meeting.

Um I I would just share with you that there's some question about why are we why are we weighing in or why are any one of the five of us trying to make a decision on whether or not we have a legal guy?

You know, one of the best advice I got when I first started practice in law was um the old saying that um a lawyer who represents himself as a fool for a client.

Uh I I'm not trying to form my own legal opinion here.

I'm relying on our our collective and our citizens attorney to make that decision for us, to advocate for the citizens, and it is in the best interest of the citizens of Clearwater that it be determined that the city owns the street.

It's been a price at over a million dollars, and so he's laid out at least a legal question.

Uh and we've said all along, I think our last direction of the city attorney collectively was to tell um the the opposing party here to put it before a judge, ask you know, file a quiet title action, let the judge decide.

Somebody who's going to not be influenced by outside influences, just look at the facts, look at the law, and make a decision.

I mean, we've we've been the city attorney wrote to them, Mr.

Potter, and invited them to do that.

But that's the judge's rule.

That's not our five role beside that.

Our job is to represent the citizens and to advocate for what's in the best their best interest.

So um that's all but but but to go back.

I I never accused anybody doing that illegal.

I just had questions about it.

I was surprised, like the vice mayor was by it.

And so that's why I and part of the reason I raised it the other night was the reason why we uh evidently just got a letter today.

I didn't think we could wait to uh at least bring to the attorney general's attention that it wasn't a collective decision to send that letter, it was something you did on your own.

So with that, um, you know, we'll put it on the agenda for Thursday night, and unless somebody else has got something.

Council Member Manino.

Mayor, thank you.

Um first of all, I appreciate you opening the discussion um sincerely uh and letting the gentleman know how fond you are of him and his service, because I know we aren't the only ones in this community that feel that way.

Um David's loved in our community, and Mary Helen uh as well, and deservably so.

They've their family and generations before them have done a lot uh for this Clearwater community.

There's been a lot of discussion about in the best interest of Clearwater, and I've heard it kind of thrown out multiple times.

And in my opinion, and I'm not gonna be long-winded with this tonight in the best interest of Clearwater, and I think our best interest um is to not continue this discussion.

I don't know what where this is gonna go, what we're gonna get out of it.

This is the second bite of the apple that we've had this discussion.

There's been no new revealing information, no mind-blowing answers.

We we know the gentleman's thoughts, we know his heart, we know what he wanted and how he was conflicted.

Um, the letter's been sent, the an answer and a response has been given.

Again, in the best insurance interest of Clearwater.

It's it's my thought that the best interest is to put this to bed to move forward in the next time that we have this on an agenda to make a decision uh regarding whether it's an application or not, or the discussion of of another letter or opinion that needs to be addressed, then we address it.

Uh, but for me, in the best interest of Clearwater, I don't feel that having the same discussion on Thursday is gonna bring anything fruitful that this discussion obviously didn't do already, and that's that's just my thoughts with this.

Councilmember Cotton.

Yes, thank you.

Um I agree with that.

You know, I I think that this is the time and place to have had this discussion.

I think that this allows you to ask your questions.

Um I think that you did a very good job about conveying what you were trying to do instead of putting one of us in the court of public opinion.

Um, and I want you to know that I would have stood up for any one of you had that have happened, even you, Mayor.

Um so I wasn't gonna say anything until uh Councilmember Manino went because I agree with that.

I don't know what taking this the Thursday night does for the betterment of Clearwater.

Um I think that you've said your piece.

We clearly have another letter we've got to go through and see what that says.

And and look, like you say in the very beginning of this, there's no petition right now.

So why are we trying to bring it up?

Um I think it just takes the team, as Lena pointed out, and I think we all refer to ourselves as that, and starts to put a black eye on us, and then it starts trickling down into our community and and and so forth.

Um so I would just be curious as to why you wanted to convey again to Thursday night, just to repeat what you have said.

I mean, I can see that we have an audience of citizens, we have a reporter in the back, Colby, thank you for being here.

I mean, I I just don't know what we're trying to get at that people can't go to this meeting that's recorded and and understand for themselves to see why it is uh you wanted to bring it back up and and see there.

So that's my only curiosity.

Um I appreciate this discussion.

I think it's healthy.

I really do.

So I'll end with that.

Well, that's what I hope is we keep the level we're keeping it now, as a professional again.

Um Council Member Robert, you've uh uh you have done more probably for this community than four of us, but probably during your lifetime.

You left this community, we didn't even love for you.

Um I I I hearken back to what Council Member Manino said Manino said when when the Garden Avenue issue first came up.

Um, that because of because of the nature of the and how controversial this entire topic is.

You said, which I agree with, we can't afford to not be completely transparent with everything regarding history.

And on this thing, I would just encourage us to I'll review the letter, I'll see what it says, and um maybe I'll have a different look at it than what I do here today.

I have not read the letter.

I just saw that it came in, and I don't have time in the middle of a meeting to read it.

Um but I I would encourage us to be completely transparent about how the letter got requested and why we did it completely.

That that uh to the extent we are I I think that that helps keep people from drawing your own conclusions about it.

So uh uh particularly after we just got the letter from the attorney general, I want it on for Thursday night, we'll have it on, and hopefully we can keep any further discussion like we have today, keep it at a high level, and and we'll uh after that we'll move on.

Yes, well, thank you for getting for the acknowledgement, and I can't agree more with you.

I think that that's one of the main things that I ran on is making sure that the people know what's happening.

And here, if we go back to the very beginning of certain things, I reached out for an attorney general's or we just reached out to the office to tea speak to the chief of staff because it was reported in the media that the letter to you, sir, was a nothing burger and things like that, and that it wasn't big.

Uh I like to follow up and get data and facts.

So I made a call to the seven-digit Google number you can find with the Department of Justice and the AG's office.

Um and here it turned out to be something.

And so further with that, I took my findings to allow people to hear.

Hey, listen, I've done a little bit of due diligence.

I reached out, this is what I found.

And then I followed the same procedure you went.

I I put it on an agenda.

This is what I found, just want to discuss it, right?

Just like we did here, Attorney General knows.

I think yours was something 29th.

I don't know why 29th sticks in my mind, but the main month doesn't.

Discussion of AG letter.

And I think two meetings later, I was lamb-basted by being cryptic and not putting enough information and blindsiding people.

Well, I felt blindsided on Thursday, and that's probably why people got a reaction they did, because it was frustrating to see you treat another council member the way you were doing, and I would hope nobody would treat you that way, and nobody else would treat one of another with that, with the kind of just disrespect that happened.

With that, this has gone tremendously, right?

I think that this is how we would like to see all these meetings go.

But here with this, you know, with during my lamb-based thing, we we agreed that because it was cryptic and there was no summary, we would at least put in the discussion what is going to be discussed.

Well, there wasn't anything in the summary that you wanted to discuss.

So that was cryptic.

I I just don't think that we should on one foot say, oh, well, now's the time to be transparent.

It's either we're gonna be transparent the whole time, like I try to be, or we're not.

So to sit there, I just I'm gonna call a spade a spade, and and that's just how I see it.

And I'm sure there's a future YouTube video coming through about how I'm terrible person bought and paid for and hate you, which I don't, I want you to know that.

Um, I think that we get along pretty well actually, but can't wait to see what they have to say this time.

Okay, well, I don't hate you either.

So um uh we'll we'll talk about it Thursday.

Uh it'll be on the agenda.

Give me time to read the letter.

I don't know what the lady who letter says, um, but it'll give me time to look at that and we'll put it on the agenda for Thursday.

Okay, with that, we'll move to item 15.

Uh is there any business?

There's no new business council comments.

Item 17, closing comments by Mayor.

I don't have any today, so with that, we will adjourn the work session of the Clearwater City Council for December 1, 2025.