This time we'll call to order the July sixteenth, twenty twenty-six meeting of the Clearwater City Council.

If you wish to address the council tonight, please complete a comment card.

Comment cards are located by the clerk, seated the Ryan Adais.

When called to speak, please hand your card to the clerk.

This time we'll move to item two on the agenda.

That's our invocation.

Please stand for the invitation to be uh invocation tonight to be given by myself.

I'll remain seated so that you can hear me on the microphone.

And then ask you doll to remain standing afterwards so that we can uh have the Pledge of Allegiance.

So if anyone would please bow their heads and respect.

We are uh we pray for our gratitude for the opportunity that we have as elected officials to serve this great community and these great citizens.

We ask for your wisdom tonight and your discernment as we consider uh difficult questions and difficult issues.

We ask for humility and grace to be shown by all as they hear opinions and perspectives that may differ from their own.

We pray that you give us the uh the ability to respect others' decisions and their opinions and the words that they may say, and that we engage this meeting and we conduct this meeting with uh respect for others.

We also that you ask that you continue to bless our city.

This city has been so blessed in so many ways, and we ask that you continue to bless our city.

And then finally, we ask that uh we pray for the safety of all of our first responders here in this city.

Those that are in the room tonight and those that are out in the community serving as we speak.

We pray for their safety and the safety of the families as they serve not just us, but they serve all the citizens of Clearwater.

And all this we ask in your name.

Amen.

My pledge is the flag of the United States of America.

One nation's law with literacy and justice.

Before we go further in tonight's meeting, I'd like to introduce our day.

To my far left is our deputy city clerk, Nicole Sprague.

Good evening.

To her right is our city clerk, Rose Marie Call.

Good evening.

To her right is our interim city attorney, Owen Coleman.

Good evening.

To his right is Councilmember Lena Tosheda.

Hello.

To her right is Vice Mayor Ryan Cotton.

Good evening.

To my right is Councilmember Mike Manino.

Good evening.

To his right, Councilmember David Albert.

Good evening.

To his right, our city manager, Jennifer.

Good evening.

To her right, our assistant city manager, Dan Slaughter.

And to his right, Assistant City Manager Al Battle.

With that, we'll move to item four on the agenda, and that is the approval of the minutes.

Approve the minutes of the June 18, 2026 City Council meeting.

Is there a motion to approve the minutes?

Move approval of minutes.

Second.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed?

Unanimous.

We now move to item five on the agenda, and that's our consent agenda.

Are there any items to be removed from that consent?

Hearing that, is there a motion to approve the consent agenda as presented?

So moved.

Second.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed, unanimous.

This time we'll move to item 6.1 on the agenda.

So council item of 6.1.

The item for council is to approve a 30-year franchise agreement with Duke Energy Florida LLC for the purpose of providing electric and power services in the city of Clearwater.

Passed ordinance 9929-26 on the first reading.

In December of 1995, the center, the city entered into a 30-year franchise agreement with Florida Power.

And in years that follow, Duke acquired Florida Power.

Duke has been providing local electric electricity service since then.

Now, as the 30-year franchise agreement reaches the conclusion, the city evaluated its financial and operational feasibility of the city distributing electricity directly to customers, which is similar to how the city's asset for water and its water and sewer utility and the clearwater gas system.

In 2024, the city hired New Gen to prepare a feasibility study.

In September of 2025, New Gin presented that feasibility study to council, and council approved the voted to move forward with an appraisal.

And the city has received an appraisal and they received it in June of this year.

Now, since the expiration of the franchise agreement, Duke and the City of Clearwater have been operating on a month-to-month basis.

At the same time, the the city staff and Duke have engaged in negotiations for a new franchise agreement.

So under the proposed franchise agreement, Duke will continue to construct, operate, and maintain its electric utility franchise facilities to the city and its residents.

The new franchise period is for a new 30-year term.

The city will continue to receive the 6% franchise fee.

Now, chapter 32 of our code of ordinances requires that a franchise agreement be approved via ordinance.

Now, in addition to the franchise agreement, the city and Duke will enter into a memorandum of agreement.

Now the memorandum of agreement is not before council today.

It's just to be discussed.

The first reading of the franchise agreement is.

Now, as it relates to the memorandum of agreement, it's for a same 30-year term.

And I'm going to read a list of call them investments by Duke and benefits to the city of Clearwater and its residents.

So as part of the memorandum, the parties will agree to create a vision community action plan, which will be paid at Duke's expense.

And Duke will provide ongoing economic development support in furtherance of the plan.

It amounts of $20,000 annually for the first five years of the memorandum.

There will also be a creation of a downtown retail development strategy.

There will be funding for that strategy through five installments of $30,000, followed by site readiness review.

There will be assistance with the city's increased infrastructure resiliency goals, and in further support of that, there will be donations of 100,000 for six consecutive years.

There will be site readiness evaluations of city designated downtown areas and the Hercules Industrial Park.

The agreement will also provide for five annual installments of $20,000 in economic development funding for the North Greenwood CRA.

There will be the completion of construction of a loop electrical feed for the city police headquarters.

The Duke and City will draft and execute a 20-year naming rights sponsorship agreement for Coachman Park improvements to include shade structures, with Duke contributing 30,000 annually.

Duke will provide annual GIS updates.

Also, the city will be allowed the continued use of property adjacent to the Clearwater Beach Restoration Center and the library at 2191 Seoul Road.

It also allow parking on the Duke's Rideaway at the Carpenter Complex and an ballpark.

There will be a vegetation management plan, and then the Duke agrees to appear annually at regularly scheduled council meetings to provide information on resiliency plans within the city.

And I believe that concludes at least my portion of the presentation.

Shall we go ahead and do a reading now?

Just go ahead and set that.

Ordinance number 9929-26.

An ordinance granting to Duke Energy Florida, LLC, doing business, Duke Energy, non-exclusive energy or excuse me, electric utility franchise to occupy in municipal streets and rights of ways in the city of Clearwater, Florida, for the purpose of providing electric and power services, prescribing the terms and conditions, accompanying the grant of franchise, providing for severability of provisions, and providing an effective date.

Okay, at this time, uh, is there anyone here from the public that would like to speak to this agenda?

I yeah, so I have some cards.

Oh, yeah, thank you.

First one, I have Brian Ox Jr.

Good evening, uh, Mr.

Mayor, Council members, Brian Unks, 625 Court Street here on behalf of Duke Energy Florida.

So the second part of the dynamic duo of coal and unks, and you heard from Katie at the work session along with Melissa Satius, Duke Energy Florida president, uh, who was honored to give you a presentation on what we hope is an outstanding improvement to a relationship that's based on your leadership, based on your due diligence, on your investigation, on your time, on your energy, on the staff's energy, on your outside experts energy and diligence on what is the city's options now that we're renewing or at a point where you have the opportunity to renew a franchise agreement.

This isn't about renewing a franchise agreement, it's about renewing and reaffirming a relationship.

A relationship with Duke Energy, which is simply getting better for the citizens of Clearwater, who are our customers and who are your uh your citizens and your constituents.

And you had them at the forefront of this entire process, and I think that's why you see amongst Clearwater residents broad support for the renewal of this improved agreement with all of the benefits that you've already heard from the city attorney and that you've all discussed, and you've all brought different things to the table from downtown revitalization, utilization of Coachman Park, improvements of critical city infrastructure, on top of the hundreds of millions of dollars of investment that Duke Energy has already done and will continue to do, to be at the very, very, very top level of customer service and of citizen service and levels of service, as they have been that competes with anyone across the nation.

So here really tonight, we're here to say thank you for your consideration.

We hope that you will agree with your outside experts that renewing this agreement is something that is a good option for you to do tonight, and it's only gotten better and improved with your with your leadership and all of the effort and time that you put into this two-year process and the city manager and her outstanding team who've been there every step of the way, evaluating all of these critical choices.

Um, Miss Satius is here again tonight.

We do have that PowerPoint.

If you want us to go back through it at any point in the evening, we're here to answer any questions that you have.

But we're here really mostly on behalf of the Duke Energy team, our citizens of Clearwater who happen to work for Duke Energy and live in the city of Clearwater.

Uh, we're just grateful for your consideration and for all of your leadership.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next speaker.

Henry Daly.

All right.

My name is Henry Daly.

I'm a Clear resident and a Duke Energy customer.

I'd like to thank the city council for their time and effort and considering options for the city's energy good and allowing public comment on this important issue.

First off, I have no problem with the public utilities.

There's plenty of cities that do that.

I have no problem with Duke Energy making a profit as a regulated monopoly monopoly, even though I think they should seriously consider a rate reduction.

Other than getting a feasibility study, it appears a city of Clearwater to me is not ready to uh for such a massive and expensive project could take years to complete and cost taxpayers billions of dollars.

You know, my biggest concern is really just getting energy back after hurricane.

I'd like to think that's pretty what most people think after a hurricane can have to get their energy back.

So without recapping everything that's already occurred to date on balance, I just think this makes better sense to renew the franchise agreement with Duke.

I hope both sides work to develop a clear understanding of how Duke and the city can fairly efficiently continue even so the residents of Clearwater.

And thank you very much.

Next speaker.

Mark Bunker.

Hi, I'm Mark Bunker.

And I um I wanted to say that I appreciate all the investments that Duke Energy is going to be putting into all the city projects.

I got a call yesterday or the day before from a woman who's got a hundred-year-old telephone pole in her backyard that's damaged her home, and she has been calling Duke over and over and over.

No one's responded.

I would like to see in the memorandum of understanding, not just these financial things, but some commitment to actually respond in a certain uh amount of time to customers' concerns.

And I think that would you know be the best thing for our city.

If Duke doesn't want to put up uh a page on their website, perhaps the city should put one on there as well.

That would get all those comments for Duke into our hands so we can uh forward them to Duke and make sure some action is taken.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next speaker.

Adam Shiloh.

Adam Shiloh.

Good evening, Council.

Thank you very much for giving me the opportunity to speak.

I'm a supporter of Dump Duke coming from St.

Petersburg, and thank you for letting a visitor speak speak in your beautiful city.

There are three reasons why I believe that going with a municipal utility would be the best move.

Reason one is it's the most democratic way to let the people themselves decide what the utility should do, how it should be organized, and you the competent representatives be the ones to administer it.

It's the closest to direct rule of the people.

Number two, this proposal has no animus, no hostility whatsoever to the wonderful uh workers who work for Duke Energy.

In fact, a municipal utility would continue their wage rates, would continue the wages, hours, and conditions they have.

And for those who are unionized, maintain their union contract.

Thirdly, dig through as you do your diligence and study, and you'll see that after Duke Energy has paid for the costs of the maintenance of equipment, the buying of raw materials, the paying the wages of its hard-earned workers.

It's guaranteed a profit of slightly more than 10%.

Think if that 10% was taken off the table and stayed here in Clearwater to be used for the benefit of the people of Clearwater, rather than that 10% going to the um shareholders of Duke Energy.

That would be 10% less to costs, 10% for maintaining uh the uh equipment here in Clearwater and uh for the wages of the Duke workers.

So for that uh of the municipal utility workers.

So for that reason, I strongly urge the council to think that of a municipal utility.

Thank you very much for your time.

Next speaker, please.

Jorge Vasquez.

Uh hello, and uh thank you so much for having me today.

I want to start off by thanking you, honorable councilmen and women for your time.

You're doing something that is incredibly selfless every day fighting for a just and equitable reality for your constituents and for your neighbors, and I'd like to contrast that with a corporation, one that is publicly traded, like Duke Energy, which their sole purpose is to raise and maximize shareholder value, and that's not necessarily a moral, but that's how corporations work.

The customer will come second.

And this is not uh some type of of uh warning, it's a promise that we're going to see rates go up.

In North Carolina, they're currently fighting to get prices rates up by 18%.

That is showing us what is going to happen here.

We've already done a study and have seen a reduction of 10% according to the Nugent study within the first year of municipal energy, along with the appraisal, that looks to be about 15% in the first year.

That's incredible.

That's 35 million dollars.

That's way more than the 2 million dollars that Duke is expected to spend in the city on all of the programs that were mentioned here today.

And so when we do that over 30 years, assuming that rate stays the same, that's over one billion dollars in savings.

That will do so much more than the investments that we could see from Duke.

And uh, and so what I would like to mention here is that there are already other counties that are saving money.

In fact, Winter Park did dump Duke before the potentially the potential of that happening here, and they are saving rates 30%, sometimes 20% less than we do.

So we already know the consequence of leading Duke, and we could see constituents save so much money.

We have the opportunity today to do something that is incredible for the locals here and make uh profound change in their lifestyles.

A 30% reduction in cost, 20%, 15%, that's money that could go to restaurants, bars in the area, and other local businesses that could see success, especially in trying times where gas prices are up, inflation is absolutely crazy at no fault of this council, but we can try to do something to give relief to some of the locals here in this town.

And uh I also would like to mention as well that it's the fiscally responsible thing to look at other options.

I think we all know that before we make a large financial decision that we take the time to weigh every single option.

The as far as I know, people in Clearwater have not heard about the appraisal or some of the results or information I think we owe to them to discuss this into further detail so we could see what opportunities lie ahead of us.

So I'm pleading with you to reconsider the deal, look at the options and see the opportunities that lie for local people here in Clearwater and Sink People more broadly.

And uh again, I appreciate your time.

Thank you for being so selfless in coming here today.

Thank you, sir.

Next speaker, Jeff Munn.

Hello, I want to thank the council for being here.

I've lived in Clearwater now pretty much my entire life.

Um I've seen my rates with Duke Energy go up year after year.

I've been getting squeezed financially in the midst of an affordability crisis, you all have the opportunity to help the citizens of Clearwater.

You can be their champion.

You can do, you can literally give power back to the people and help them save in one aspect of their lives.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you, sir.

Speaker.

Aidan Kretschler.

Hello, council.

I'm here because I'm a strong supporter of the Dump Duke campaign.

And I just wanted to say that I'm I'm a little confused, so maybe my confusion can be can be squared away.

To my understanding, the feasibility study said that it would be cheaper for consumers to move forward with a public utility.

So I'm I'm just confused why we're not moving forward in that direction.

You hear a lot of concerned citizens here tonight who want cheaper utility bills, and I think that'd be a real benefit for people dealing with the affordability crisis.

And I want to say there are a lot of concerned citizens here who are not paid to be here by Duke Energy.

I can't say that for everyone, but um I just hope you strongly reconsider this item.

Thank you.

Thank you, sir.

Next speaker.

Karen Lemming.

Thank you for uh pulling this all together.

This is my first time speaking at something like this.

Um but uh I've been a Duke customer in multiple states now.

Uh I moved from North Carolina in 2024, and now I live here.

Um my time with Duke has not been great.

Um I think that in North Carolina, there's issues with turning off power in like my apartment, things like that.

Ended up having to eat like three or four months of that rate after I moved, things like that.

Never got any help doing that.

Um here, even recently, we lost power for uh thankfully only a couple of hours, but knowing that the profit will come first for Duke.

It's like a scary thing as a consumer.

Um because I know they're gonna cut as much safety as they can to increase profit as much as they can.

Um, and at some point that's gonna come down to uh you know me at home with my dog in the summer of Florida, and it's gonna be a hundred degrees outside, and hopefully not a hundred degrees in my house.

Um I think uh I support um the dump duke program.

Um I would like to see a public utility brought here.

Thank you.

Thank you, sir.

Next speaker.

Shane Meager.

Hello.

Um, so first I wanted to thank you all for starting the feasibility study, doing the appraisal.

It's been really refreshing and kind of empowering as a citizen to feel like those who represent me are doing work that would benefit me and exploring information that you did a feasibility study that showed as was submitted mentioned 15% savings in the first year, 20% after 10 years, after that, up to a quarter of people's bills, that the appraisal came back at half the cost of what we thought it would, but from the feasibility study.

So to me, the logical next step would be to continue with that process, not to sign a 30-year contract with a company that's gonna charge us all the opposite of that.

Um, so that's for me what is the guiding thing here is the steps of logic.

Um and public power, the argument for public power operates off of logic and fact, as we see in the feasibility study and the appraisal.

Unfortunately, Duke's argument operates off of fear, it operates off of negative ads against our city council people.

It operates off of pressure campaigns, it operates off of manipulating residents of Clearwater in St.

Petersburg through dark money groups, which has been proven and shown, and that's really important that you consider that and the people you're assigning a three-decade deal with.

A deal where almost two generations of children could turn into adults, where you could save in their lives over 10,000 for that one child from their family with these savings.

This isn't a small thing.

This is locking in people who won't have a choice after this.

They're in a deal with the devil.

Signing this would be an implicit statement that Duke can exploit us for three more decades, take advantage of our crises, and bully public officials.

All it will take is one disaster to raise our rates back to getting their profits where they want them and where they've been.

That agreement that they have for us is meaningless.

It's meaningless.

They know that they will get what they need, they know their profits will be protected and perfect.

They know everything will come back at some point because they have strategies.

The city's strategy will be to help residents.

Their strategy will be to get back to where they are now to continue that and to get more every single quarter.

Bigger bonuses, continuing to take from people for themselves.

So please, please do not sign this essentially.

It just would not follow logic.

And mainly it's a big decision to make that seems rushed.

Um that would lock us in for such a long time.

And that would be really hard for me to like wrap my head around essentially.

Um let's not sign this agreement.

Let's operate on facts and let's get those facts to the citizens uh Clearwater.

Thank you.

Thanks, sir.

Marley Price.

Hello.

Um, I really appreciate all of you taking the lead on something this bold.

I know it really probably wasn't easy.

Um I was a little disappointed to see the agenda come out with the having the 30-year agreement.

That's a really long time.

Even Newport Richie just signed a 15-year agreement.

Um mostly because there's a really big difference between what the feasibility study found you guys could save in the first year versus what Duke is offering.

Um, 35 or over 30 million dollars in the first year alone, I'm pretty sure, versus like two million dollars spread out over 30 years.

That that's crumbs that they're offering.

And I'd be like, if you're really set on signing with Duke again for some reason, you should use the study to get a better deal for the community versus signing something like this.

Um, and if not, I think you have a really good chance to do something really brave and make history similar to how Winter Park did.

Um, the council that did that, they are like the city loves them there, they are known in history books, the city's always talking about how great they are, their rates are lower.

They have like 85% of their lines underground, they have beautiful trees all over.

They're having a great time over there, and I would I would love to see that here.

And I would love for all the other cities and the county to follow, so everyone can work together.

I just think it would be really awesome.

And um, yeah, thank you all again for the work that you've done, and I hope you keep an open mind on this.

Thank you.

Thank you, next speaker.

Alex Schechter.

Hello, uh, thanks for having me.

Sorry, bear with me.

I'm a bit tired.

I'm not being paid to be here.

Um, I just want to say I was born and raised in Largo, Florida.

I um at 18 I joined the military and I um was staging in Goldsboro, North Carolina, and now I live in St.

Petersburg, Florida.

I've never seen, I've never not paid a Duke energy bill.

And this body unanimously are the ones who introduced me to just how much savings there are with public power.

Uh, you know, 10% in the first year, potentially.

Um I just think you know you guys uh have really just introduced us to just how much savings there could be with this, and I've been really proud of the city, and I've been speaking to my council members in city council in St.

Petersburg about just how incredible it's been.

I do find it strange that you guys have um you know, I hope you guys continue this path.

I find it this pivot a little strange over with your previous city attorney, you've uh unanimously voted for both the feasibility study and the appraisal.

So I just really hope that under this new city attorney as well, you continue um this path forward in looking into our options.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next week, Jason Scott.

Good afternoon, council.

I want to first thank you all for being us to this point and investing into our uh our options, you know, funding this feasibility study and then the appraisal.

Um I just want to say right now, I'm a little bit disappointed the way it's looking with us looking at a 30-year franchise agreement.

I think the next step after getting the appraisal would have been maybe public education and discussion around those results and why there would be um any conflicts and why we would look into going back to a 30-year agreement.

I haven't seen anything public from the council or from the mayor or the city as a whole on why we would want to flip back to a 30-year agreement with Duke Energy after we had what seems to be amazing uh results from the appraisal.

Uh and just to break it down, from what I've saw, it was 235 million dollars for the buyout of the assets from Duke Energy compared to what Duke was saying was what 1 billion dollars.

And that's over 10 percent savings for every resident here in the city, as well as potentially those enclaves outside of the city as well.

And I just I'm right now just perplexed why we want to have those public discussions having uh public input or education.

So right now I'm asking you to take a step back from this first reading and uh set out a plan for that public education, not to move forward with this reading until we have that public uh uh input and education.

Um and you know, I I know there's also um potentially um some conflict on the advice being given from various consult uh consultants or legal advice that might be holding this up based on um public reports, but I would like to see what's holding us back.

Uh overall, I'm in support of public power uh when it comes to reliability and affordability.

Even K West has better reliability than Duke Energy across the state of Florida, which seems ridiculous, and then for uh for the affordability, you can look at the appraisal results.

I so I really just are asking the city council to take a step back.

We don't need a rush into this.

The franchise agreement has only been expired for over six months now.

Um, and really look into how can we publicly um have public education and discussion on this topic before looking at a 30-year agreement, and also please take it back.

We cannot have 30 years, and we need to have the legal team.

We move the um the item called injunctive relief.

We cannot have that in the agreement.

Thank you.

Thank you, sir.

Yeah.

Next speaker, please.

William Johnson.

This is us.

This is the term.

Yeah.

Sorry, I didn't have a joint maybe.

Good evening, council.

Um, and thank you.

And uh my comments are if you choose to uh adopt a Duke Energy extension.

I think there's some concerns that should be addressed that I haven't seen in the agenda item or the description that the uh the attorney uh proposed.

Some of you know that I have been volunteering with the Parks and Rec department out on Clearwater Beach to remove graffiti and stickers.

As a result, I've become aware of the Duke maintenance of beach transformers.

As a result of requests from uh assistant city manager uh Dan Slaughter, Duke has been embarking on repainting many other transferred farmers out on the beach, and I uh thank them for doing that.

Uh it's positive, but there's still more work to go in that regard.

Um, but still the the biggest issue for me is the above ground power lines, particularly in our downtown clear water.

It's very unusual for downtown to have so many above ground power lines so close to our buildings.

Um this is on Myrtle along Myrtle, these power lines were just recently built, rebuilt uh without considering undergrounding them, as most cities have done.

Um I see this as a lack of consistency with vision and disconnect with our economic development partnership.

We used to have a great economic development partnership with Duke.

Uh I think that's deteriorated present time.

Um this Myrtle line goes right by our new Cleveland Street Entertainment District and our city hall, as well as uh residential development there.

I can't see how somebody would enjoy looking out their their bedroom or their living room onto power lines.

Disney is Disney has a saying that everything speaks, that whatever you see communicates the the concerns or the thoughts of those in the community, and this photo shows that collectively we aren't interested in being a first class downtown.

Thank you for your consideration.

Thank you, sir.

Next speaker, please.

Steve Wishard.

Good evening, council.

Appreciate the opportunity to let me speak.

Um, I'm relatively new to the town.

I moved down two and a half years ago just in time for the hurricanes.

That was great.

Um I come from Colorado, and I live through the boulder municipalization effort.

It was 10 years and millions and millions of dollars, and nothing ever came of it.

Um I believe they had the best intentions, um, but this is not a short or easy process to go through, and I'd hate to see City of Clearwater go down the same path.

And my other point is I heard several people mention the feasibility study, and there's going to be 10% savings, 15%, 20% savings.

My understanding reading the feasibility study is that the city would only be buying the distribution system, and that's one quarter of the bill.

I don't understand how you can get 10-15% savings off of one quarter.

That's making the distribution system suddenly cost half as much.

So reading the feasibility study, I didn't quite understand the committed savings that I promised.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, sir.

Thanks, Speaker.

Douglas James.

Good evening, Mayor and Council members.

My name is Douglas James.

I reside in uh Clearwater, Florida.

I've been here a couple years.

Thank you for allowing me to speak.

I appreciate the time and effort that has gone into the study, uh studying this issue over the past two years.

The city invested significant time and taxpayer dollars to determine whether uh there was a better path forward for Clearwater residents.

My concern tonight is not whether Duke Energy has provided uh a service, my concern is whether committing Clearwater to another 30-year green is the best long-term interest for the people that actually pay the bills.

The city's own feasibility study indicated that a municipal utility could potentially reduce rates over time, even if there are challenges and significant cost to creating a city-owned utility.

Uh, those findings deserve careful consideration before making a decision that could shape our community for the next three decades.

Um 30 years is very long commitment.

Technology, energy markets, and our community needs will change dramatically during that time.

Once this agreement is signed, future generations of Clearwater residents may have a very limited flexibility.

I respectfully ask you to consider whether this is the right time to make a 30-year commitment or whether preserving future options would be better served to the citizens you represent.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you, sir.

Next speaker.

Laurie Green.

Hi, Council.

Thank you for hearing me.

Uh I've been a resident here since 88.

I bought my house in '93, and I've been a Duke customer.

And 10 years ago, the pole in my backyard is almost 100 years old, and it's listing worse than the Titanic.

So it ripped a hole in my roof.

And I contacted Duke, and through much negotiation, they finally agreed to fix it, pay for it.

Well, come forward 2025.

That same poll ripped another hole in my roof, and I submitted a claim to Sedgwick, and they gave me a form letter denial.

It's not our fault, it's rotten.

So I submitted more paperwork to them on June 2nd.

I sent it to Sedgwick and I sent it to Duke in St.

Pete.

Didn't hear a word.

Not one word.

So I contacted the Public Utility Commission.

They got in charge in touch with them.

They didn't call me right away.

So I had to call them again.

Well, then they call me, leave a message.

They didn't get me.

I called them back several times before I got them.

All I got was voicemail, called back the utility commission again.

Finally they got on top of them.

And they called me.

And they got some guy to come out and loosen up the cable, but nothing about the damage, which I documented to them.

I gave pictures, I gave them everything that they needed.

Not a word about what they're going to do about the damage.

In this time that has passed, it now has ripped out the that black line there, which comes from uh I think Verizon, Verizon, wow.

And there's still no answer.

They're not doing anything as far as what damage how they're going to remunerate me for the damage that they've done.

And it's like, really?

I mean, who holds these people accountable when their polls are damaging people's homes?

Now, a guy came out, he said he's gonna put it in uh a new work order to replace it.

I think we're looking at a few months, still nothing about how they're gonna repair the damage.

So who holds this group accountable?

We're looking at 30 years.

If this is how they're dealing with their customers now, I'm a customer, pay my bill every month.

What can we look forward to?

There's other polls in my neighborhood that are also bad.

So what's the answer?

What is Duke going to do to answer this?

Bunch of Duke people in this room, but I'm not I'm not hearing from the people in St.

Pete, nor am I hearing from Sedwick.

So that's that's my that's my story.

Thank you.

Thank you, Ms.

Green.

Next speaker.

Gloria Campbell.

Gloria Campbell.

Uh first of all, I want to commend this council.

I have been in and out of this council for the last six years, and I think you guys drew the short straw.

Uh when you first uh sworn in, I think some of you that withdrew street and it's been going downhill since then.

So tonight I want to say that uh number one, I give you credit.

I was excited about the study because I thought maybe the municipal option was the best option.

But then I thought about as I see how things are happening today.

When we see what's happening in the Middle East with oil and gas, uh, do we really want the city of Clearwater having to be responsible for our utilities?

Uh a feasibility study is just that.

It says what may happen.

It's a guess, it's the best guess, but there's no guarantees.

Uh but what I really came up here to talk about was uh one of the initiatives that Duke has done in the North Greenwood area, which is uh weatherized weatherizing our tenants uh or some of the citizens.

Uh they have spent, and we have seen several people who've called and said they have seen their bills reduced by the weatherization that's been done.

They've gone in, uh they blanketed, uh hot water heaters, they put in new thermostats, uh, they put weather strips in around windows and doors, and that has led to, in some cases, a 10% drop in bills.

And for people who are living on fixed income, 20, 30, 40 dollars a month is a lot.

And so uh, so I just really wanted to thank them for what they've done to the community, thank them for the opportunity to be good citizens.

And I know that uh there are a lot of people here who are uh not happy who've had really bad experiences with Duke.

I haven't been one of those.

I've had I've lived in uh the area for 40 years and I've had Duke the whole time.

So uh so I think that I hope that and I believe that the people who are sitting here in this room are subject matter experts, or they have hired people who are, and when they make this recommendation, they're making it in good faith in the best interest for the public.

So thank you for your service.

I hope your loading gets lighter.

Uh I hope the rest of you the the things that will become for council would be less at some day.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Ms.

Campbell.

Next speaker.

Kevin R.

T.

Laughlin.

We were one and two on the list.

My name is Kevin R.

T.

Lachlin.

Hello, I know most of you.

Um I have experience with this.

I lived in Bel Air when Florida Power agreement expired, and the councilman and mayor there had the courage to put it before a public referendum.

And then I saw the commercials, and then I saw the wine and dines at the country club.

I spoke at that country club, and as I told this story in one of my responses, the heads in the crowd of the You Could Tell who lived in Bel Air back then, because they saw that.

They saw, I don't want to say bribery, but the commercials were horror stories.

And that's a rich community.

Unlike us, they have defined borders, they have a better advantage than we do in putting our own MEU in.

But a few things I want you to consider.

The MEDEU does uh the proposal does account for a the a third option of where you can delay this, study it further, maybe put out an education program because this is the second time I've been through it, and these things are hard to understand.

But a few things I don't think have been considered.

Okay, one to hire the staff that you're going to need, the people that work for TICO that work for Duke, that work for Florida Power and Light, they have non-compete contracts.

You're going to be digging all around the country to find staff.

Our recent uh compliance with Tallahassee, which cost us our communication union because they fell below 60%, and you're gonna have to reason with union line workers to come here and work knowing that you won't stand behind their union.

Those are difficulties we're gonna face.

I'm not against this.

I am fully for this.

I think this is something you can do.

Mr.

Mayor, I heard your piece where you think we can do this.

And number one, how are we gonna do it?

The lead man is behind it.

And with your leadership, I think we can get together.

I think we can hire the right people.

I think we can make this a realization, but please realize the MEUs that they cite around the state are for the most part homegrown.

When they incorporate it, Jacksonville use that as an example.

Jacksonville is Jacksonville, it is Duvall County.

That's a huge population and fine and refined space to utilize an MEU.

Um, Lakeland or any of those, they they're homegrown.

They said we're going to incorporate it as a city and we're going to have our own utility.

No one has ever stood up to one of these monopolies and got an MEU out of them.

I watched it fail in Bel Air, we just saw it fail the entire state of Maine.

Um, this is going to be a tough road if you decide to do it, but I think we can do it, and I think we have the courage to do it.

We can break away from that.

When people talk about all the benefits, those benefits that are coming back to us are our dollars that they took in profit, a small percentage that they took in profit.

So I hope you consider those factors when you look at this too.

Look at the little bit of a delay.

Thank you.

Thank you, sir.

Next speaker.

Joe Lugo.

Good evening.

Uh Mayor, City Council.

My name is Joe Lugo, and I serve as the director of the Foundation and Entrepreneurial Services for Amplified Clearwater.

On behalf of our organization, I wanted to thank the City Council, the city staff, and Duke Energy for the time, professionalism, collaboration that they have gone into in this process.

We recognize that these discussions involve important decisions for our community, and we appreciate the thoughtful approach that has been taken.

Amplified Clearwater's mission is to strengthen our local economy by supporting businesses of every size.

Developing future entrepreneurs and creating opportunities for residents to succeed.

We do not take position on every policy issue before the council, but we do value partnerships that help move our community forward.

Over the years, Duke Energy has been a meaningful partner in many of those efforts.

Through the support of the Amplify Clearwater Chamber Foundation, the Duke Duke has invested initiatives that expand opportunities for minority-owned businesses, provide entrepreneurial education, and mentoring through our Ignite Entrepreneur Center, and inspire the next generation of business leaders through our young entrepreneurs academy.

These investments have made a real difference in the lives of local entrepreneurs and students.

We are equally appreciative of the city's commitment to fostering a strong business climate and creating an environment where organizations like ours can partner with both the public and private sectors to serve our community.

As Clearwater continues to plan for its future, our hope is that the spirit of collaboration demonstrated through this process continues when local government, community organizations, and private partnerships work together, our businesses have greater confidence to invest, our entrepreneurs have greater opportunities to grow, and our residents benefit from a stronger local economy.

Thank you very much for your leadership.

It is appreciated.

Thank you for your willingness to engage in thoughtful dialogue and your continued commitment to the success of Clearwater.

We look forward to continuing to work alongside all of our community partners to build a stronger future for our city.

Thanks.

The facts are Duke was the most expensive utility in the state of Florida in 2025.

The average municipal utility customer in Florida pays 20 to 30% less.

And Duke does not have better reliability than the average municipal utility.

So this is a very straightforward case of signing this agreement is agreeing to pay more for the same product.

And that's just basic common sense not to do that.

You could ask a child and they would understand you know, pay more for the same product.

And so I just, you know, the the feasibility study was clear.

The assessment came back even cheaper than expected.

And so then to just rush into a 30-year agreement, it just boggles my mind.

Um at least don't make it a 30-year agreement.

You can do a shorter agreement, you can just go on an ongoing basis.

There are other options here.

Um to do so, when again the facts are so clear in this case, it really brings into question the decision making and the motives of the leadership in this city.

And then one other point I wanted to say uh a man just previously said that there has not been a municipal takeover in the state of Florida, but that's not true, there has been one.

It was uh within the 21st century, it was taking over uh the utility from Duke, and it was in Winter Park, and they pay significantly lower rates than we as Duke Energy customers do.

So thank you for your time.

Please make make logical decisions, don't make us question at the decision making of this council.

Thank you.

Thank you, sir.

Thanks, Speaker.

Andrew Hernandez.

Good evening, everyone.

Thank you for being here.

Thank you for letting us speak.

Mr.

Mayor, um, I'm a resident of Penells County, and I'm a fully for uh public utility.

Uh Lakeland, Winter Garden, Tallahassee, uh, all of them pay significantly less, and it's been shown.

The study came back, pretty straightforward.

People pay less.

Um, it's not easily done, but it's something worth doing.

Uh, the middle class worth are worth it.

And so thank you so much.

Thank you.

Thank you, sir.

Next speaker.

Lacey Linglebach.

Thank you, Mayor, and council members.

Um, I'm a resident of Pinellas County, and I have been for the last four years, but my family's lived here for about since the 60s.

Um, and I I want to thank you guys for you know taking a step that's that's pretty unique in doing the feasibility study and actually trying to find the information to make sure you're making data informed decisions.

Um but I I'll be honest, I'm a little bit disappointed because I feel like this vote kind of came out of nowhere.

Um I think of what 30 years from now is, I think, okay, that's 2056.

What are we going to be seeing by then?

Well, we should be expecting about a half foot at least of sea level rise, more frequent flooding, um, more extreme heat days, everything that threatens our infrastructure, but also everything related to electricity right now is the way we can prevent all of that from happening and make our communities more resilient to climate change.

You know, it's important that we make these decisions thinking through not just what does it cost right now, but what will it cost us in the long term?

And I think while weatherization is great and having programs like that is great, the other aspect to this is investing in renewables, and you'll never truly be able to control that when you are under operating under a uh private corporation like Duke Energy.

On top of that, I think it's a little irresponsible to be jumping into a decision like this when we have a referendum coming up in November about property taxes that will honestly probably increase the costs for many citizens, especially renters in the area.

And so when they're gonna have those increased costs on top of the increased cost of just what we should expect with Duke uh phrasing their their rates all the time, you know, I I just think there's there's no reason to rush into this, and that's just why I really um advocate to either delay the vote or truly consider you know, is 30 years the right term in this language?

And honestly, I I would love to see Clearwater be a leader um in the the realm of sustainability and resilience and also just helping people actually be afforded uh or afford to live here in the future, people like me or even our senior population that is uh experiencing hardships right now.

Thank you guys.

Thank you, ma'am.

Are there any other speakers?

Yeah, okay.

If not, then we'll turn to council discussion.

So at this time, see council members have questions or comments they would like to make Duke is here.

If if somebody has questions, then there are no questions, then we're just going to discussion.

So council member Albright.

Okay.

All right.

Well, first of all, I want to say thank you all that came out tonight, whether you were for or against and uh thanks for all the emails on both sides of the issue.

Yeah, there you go.

Didn't have my mic on, sorry about that.

All right, so we've studied this issue for over a year now, and uh I still have concerns.

How many employees would be required?

What is the specialized training, engineering expertise, union costs?

What's what all what's the cost of all that to be involved?

What would happen if a major hurricane struck before adequate financial reserves are established?

What capital investments would be needed for vehicles, equipment, infrastructure beyond the taking of Duke's property by imminent domain?

There are also significant legal and financial uncertainties.

What would be the ultimate cost of acquiring Duke's system through eminent domain?

Although current estimates have declined, the courts, not the city, will be the ones to determine the final price.

If litigation delayed operations for five or six years, what effect would that inflation and rising operational costs have on electric rates?

You know, I saw a um a newspaper article stating that you know that uh if we decide to dump Duke or taking on electric as you as uh MEU that we could save citizens $18 a month.

Um so I looked at that and I said that what they're saying is we could save $18 a month.

Or we could sign a 30-year franchise agreement.

Um other questions I have is why are Duke's future rates increases projected differently from the cities.

How would the storm restoration resources be secured and prioritized?

I mean, I don't want to do this, and then all of a sudden, you know, the city takes it over, and we have a storm like we had a couple of years ago, and we can't get any of the power lines put back up before Duke people could.

What would be the proposed service boundaries?

Um would that create additional litigation involving enclaves?

Because we don't have straight boundaries in Clearwater.

We have a lot of of this, and I think it would create litigation we're not even counting on.

Finally, with property tax referendum.

That could reduce Clearwater's annual revenues by approximately 20 million.

Is this the right time to assume an obligation of nearly a billion dollars?

With all these concerns still lingering, and franchise agreements looks pretty good.

Duke is putting in about two million dollars to sweeten the deal, and that's four times what we spent on the study.

Now, commissioning the study was the right decision.

Before considering a municipal utility, we needed a clear understanding of both opportunities and the risks.

A feasibility study.

It offered analysis, not solutions, and it was careful to acknowledge that many of its assumptions and projections weren't guaranteed.

The City of Clearwater and Duke Energy have worked together for many decades.

Like any long-standing relationship, there have been occasional disagreements and challenges, but those moments have been far outweighed by years of dependable service.

I look forward to continuing that relationship over the next 30 years under this new agreement, and we'll vote in favor of the ordinance which approves the new franchise agreement.

Okay.

Councilmember Manino.

Sure.

Thank you, Mayor.

I have a couple questions.

Can I questions before I make a statement?

Is that okay?

Questions of Duke or City of the Channel.

No, I'll ask staff if that's that's okay with you.

Appreciate all the speakers that got up.

It's definitely not uh not easy to get up and speak at a hot mic to an issue, especially when the room split and there's views on both sides.

So I appreciate everybody that came out, whether you're a Clearwater resident or you came over from St.

Pete, you are uh you're appreciated.

Um just just a couple questions, staff, if you don't mind, then you can city manager direct who it might be best asked.

I a couple things in the MOU I think are worth uh talking a little more in depth about.

Um, and the the first one is there's a lot of talk in the MOU and several items regarding economic development um funding and strategies associated with that.

I hope maybe somebody on staff can talk a little bit in depth about that.

And then my second one uh was this process, and we've heard the word rushed a couple times.

I I believe we started these conversations in 2024.

Um, so I I don't necessarily feel it was rushed, but in the beginning of that process, we did have some deep discussions and obviously emotions uh in the room about the protections of our tree canopy when possible, um, as well as questions regarding vegetation uh management and mitigation for storms.

So I'm I'm wondering if we could have somebody from staff just touch on the MOU regarding those two items.

Yeah, absolutely.

ACM Battle, if you will please go through some of the economic development strategies.

Sure, sure.

Thank you for the opportunity.

So uh as I got engaged in this discussion, some of the things that we were asked to provide in terms of negotiating points was a list of what would we like to have Duke help us participate in advance as far as the city of Clearwater being successful, and I offered a few items with respect to economic development, specific targeted redevelopment efforts, as well as retail development, and how can we enhance our partnership and collaboration with them in several areas across the city?

So I'll go through these as summarily as possible, you know, not take as much time, but I did want to explain them in a little bit of detail because I think that's what you're asking for to help with your discussion.

So I'll do my best in this space.

So the franchise agreement provides an opportunity for us to reboot and support efforts from the last time that the city completed an economic development strategic plan, which was back in 2011.

So since we have not invested specifically in that type of arrangement in terms of looking at the city from a framework of how we want to recruit for things such as how do we want to develop future land use across the city?

Also, how do we want to encourage and incentivize investment across the city?

Um what type of business retention and the expansion climate we want to create?

How do we want to pursue business development on a large scale, small scale, and you know, mud mom and pop level type of scale, if you will, and also what do we want to put in place with respect to talent and um recruitment and keeping the talent in the city of Clearwater in Pinellas County and having them work in the city of Clearwater?

So some of the things that we asked for them to consider, and they and they provided some back and forth with respect to what that would look like.

We're in four areas.

One of them is specifically recognizing our lack of investment in a strategic plan from a citywide standpoint, and that's why you see a five-year commitment, $20,000, $100,000 in total, for us to put some framework around some of those things that I just mentioned and try to target those.

And over the five-year period, we can, if you look at it at a high level, come up with a mothership approach to how we want to look at economic development and what's the overall strategic plan, but then layer underneath that specific tactics and strategies that we can take advantage of based on a changing market and a changing clearwater.

And I think you all would agree that we're heading in a direction that's different than where we were in 2011.

In addition to that, we also asked them for some help in really enlivening the retail experience in downtown Clearwater.

We've got a lot of initiatives focused on downtown.

We also have a ton of investment focused on the area.

That's why you also see a commitment, multi-year commitment to help us develop a retail strategy.

There's a significant amount of retail investment, not just by us but by others in the space, Cleveland Street Alliance, private development, county properties that are coming on the market in terms of their overall redevelopment efforts, and also city properties that we want to see change hands from us to private development interests in order to continue to build a tax base and provide jobs and opportunities to our local uh residents.

So we see this as an opportunity for us to help frame the discussion around what type of retail, restaurant, and entertainment experience we want to be versus leaving it to the marketplace.

We want to be proactive in that effort, tell people what we want versus them giving us what they think we are the best for, but try to help them and meet them in the middle in terms of those resources when people are looking and making those initial inquiries about what's the best fit, where is the market, and where can we fit in in terms of what's happening in Clearwater.

Also, the site readiness part that you see mentioned there, this is really talking about collaborating with them on the front end.

In many cases, as my experience is that utility providers are brought in in the process in terms of large development projects and identifying where capacity is kind of late into the process, they have agreed to be very proactive with us, be up front in terms of the conversations with those developers, and also be at the table, advocacy, marketing, talking about how we can help them identify where infrastructure can, is or needs to be upgraded, and also target where those investments can be, whether it be downtown, whether it be the 19th US 19 corridor or the Hercules Industrial Area, where we have a lot of job growth opportunity based on a huge manufacturing presence, which doesn't exist in all parts of our city, but that's a place where we want to see that advance.

And the last one, the North Greenwood CRA, excuse me.

You heard a little bit of that mentioned this earlier about Ms.

Campbell in terms of what they've been able to do with small things such as weatherizations of homes, but we also have have been given a commitment to do something that helps our North Greenwood CRA, which is a very uh early in its development life CRA doesn't have a lot of resources, those five-year commitments of 20,000 will be huge.

It'll allow us to leverage those funds, collaborate with Duke, collaborate with the community, and use dollars that aren't city avalarm tax dollars, CRA dollars, but another resource, another tool in our toolbox to really advance economic development and that effort too.

So we think that those investments combined are huge benefits to us.

The ratepayers may not necessarily see those in terms of uh reduction or a savings, but if we're able to advance and bring more economic development here, it will be a boom in terms of what we receive back in terms of the investment capital from the private industry in terms of these types of uh tactics and strategies.

Thank you.

Also, as um Ms.

Campbell mentioned, so we did have our our experts sit in and participate in these um negotiations and reviewing both the feasibility report, the appraisal, and then um participate in the negotiations.

And so for our next um expert, I would like to ask ACM Slaughter to talk about the uh the tree canopy.

Sure.

So uh it's gonna be no surprise to the council or even some of the people in the room that uh there was a lot of consternation at one point about the vegetation management that was occurring in the city and and uh in surrounding areas uh for some you know required activities that Duke had to manage and had to do.

Um what came out of that was uh many, many meetings uh of uh city staff along with Duke staff to try to identify the best way to do that moving forward, and what you see in the agreement under Exhibit A is essentially reflecting what we came to as an agreement and how to manage it, and it's been working very effective for us.

Um essentially, the agreement or the exhibit acknowledges both uh that Duke has to do manage vegetation management, but also that the city has a responsibility to protect our urban canopy and consistent with our strategic plan.

It um it provides for um you know minimum uh notification requirements uh to both the city uh so that we can uh evaluate where those activities are gonna occur and make sure that the proper public outreach, but it also requires us to collaborate on the public outreach so that not only is Duke using their outreach efforts, but we're leveraging the city outreach efforts with our neighborhoods teams with our our reach, and then people are receiving it from multiple different directions, and of course, we hope they receive it the message from one particular potential.

Um the um the other thing I think it's important to mention though is that um you know we have an obligation on in this agreement to promote right tree, right place, which is what we we believe in and we support, uh, both in our public outreach campaigns or public outreach outreach efforts, but also through like the planning activities, so that we can avoid these kind of conflicts between the canopy and the the uh power lines in the future.

Um from a practical standpoint, just to explain what happens currently now, which we are uh very appreciative of the collaboration with Duke and uh and seems to be working very efficient for our community and for our staff, is uh they have when they have management vegetation management activities.

Uh their staff that are responsible for those activities reaches out to our arborists, they share maps and collaborate and discuss where those activities are going to occur.

Um, certainly there's uh an assessment that's done where they identify what activities need to be, whether it's pruning or removals.

Our arborist and their staff travel in the exact same truck together, they drive the route, they look at all of the um the uh the vegetation that's going to be addressed and make sure that there's essentially um consensus that this is the appropriate activity that needs to move forward.

So and then there's uh a reference in the agreement that we're gonna work collaboratively with both of them to resolve any differences or issues or concerns that come up when inside those activities.

And we um we've been fortunate to kind of have this particular language in place for the last about what year and a half now at this point, if not two, and uh I can tell you it's working very effectively for the team.

Thank you.

I I greatly um greatly appreciate that.

It's one thing to go through the process and for us to roll our sleeves up and be engaged in it for two years with so much information.

It's um another thing for the public to see a punch list with a bullet next to it and not really understand uh the two the true depth to it.

So I appreciate a little um deeper discussion on it.

Uh I did go to the Ross Norton uh community neighborhood uh event that that Duke put on.

Um it was uh it was an awesome experience.

I appreciate Duke for hosting that.

I think uh the room is full.

Um I think everyone in there was very skeptical at first.

What do you want from me?

What kind of information are you gonna take and how much is this gonna cost?

They thought there was uh a trick or a bait and switch.

Um, and they're a hundred percent what was not.

Um I think Miss Marilyn uh got up and gave her personal testimony on the amount of money she saved right away, um, which was more than the $18 we discussed and everything from weatherizing hot water heaters to the changing of water faucets and shower heads to giving away digital thermo thermostats for people's walls.

They were uh amazed by some of that, but the savings uh was far greater than some of the savings we're discussed here, and I don't believe Duke had to do that, um, and you continued to serve the community.

I appreciate that.

I appreciate the collaborativeness that's gone through the last two years in the process.

Um any meeting that I was able to be you know updated on or communications uh that I had it was uh open dialogue, uh and I truly, and I believe staff truly felt that uh Duke representatives were not just listening, you heard you heard our concerns, you you heard uh some of the things that we were hoping we could help our taxpayers with and help our community with, and that shows up uh directly in the MOU, and I I appreciate that.

I want to say I appreciate the city manager being a lead negotiator in this.

Um, I know that was a a lot a lot of meetings, a lot of lifts.

Um, you and your team uh did did a great job.

I appreciate the constant communication and updates uh that you and your team uh gave to us as council members.

Uh I also want to say that the public was not ignored in that two-year process.

We spoke many times uh about making sure we shared uh that that's feasibility study online uh and with our residents, making sure we created uh a fact sheet on there so people can understand fact and fiction, um which was important uh, especially with so much mis uh information out there to help guide our citizens to to find truth.

Uh I thought that was important, uh, so I I appreciate the collaborative efforts and all the work you and your team put into it.

For me, uh tonight's decision is not simply about re-signing uh franchise agreement.

It's about our responsibility as a dais as stewards of the public's trust.

Uh, throughout this process, uh all of us uh commend all of all of my my colleagues have approached this decision from the very opening conversations uh with an open mind.

Um I thought that was extremely important as we we traveled this process.

We listened carefully to many different presentations.

Can't tell you how many flow charts and charts and lists we went through, revealed reviewed all available information and truly you know weighed both the opportunities associated with this as well as as the risks, and that that's um that's important in this process is opportunity is great, but it also comes with risk and making sure we understand uh both sides.

Uh to me, the the idea of municipalization of our electric system, it it definitely deserved extremely thoughtful considerations.

Uh we understand as a DIAS and as a as a leadership team the affordability challenges, not just in our community, but throughout the country and any opportunities we get, whether it's a millage rate or taxes or just being responsible with every tax dollar, um we give that the consideration it deserves.

But I think our obligation is not to pursue the most ambitious option in this process, but to pursue the option that gives the best long-term interest to the people we serve, uh the citizens of Clearwater, the taxpayers of Clearwater, the businesses uh of Clearwater, and that's what we have to keep in mind.

As elected officials, we have a fiduciary responsibility to protect all of those constituents, and that means making decisions based not on optimistic assumptions, uh, but on evidence, on prudent financial stewardship, and on careful understanding of true risk management that this process truly deserves.

The potential benefits of municipalization remains largely dependent on assumptions, not facts like we've heard, not concrete logic, uh, but based on assumptions, and that's those assumptions are regarding acquisition cost, financing, litigation, operational performance, long-term market conditions, um, and and those are true risks.

Um conversely, the risks associated with eminent domain, protracted legal challenges.

You know, I think our feasibility set study identified they believed uh eminent domain legal process may last three years.

Um we just heard Boulder Colorado tell us it lasted over 10.

Um that drastically changes financial assumption short term and long term uh without a without a doubt.

Uh the uncertain financial valuations and significant financial exposures are real.

Uh and ultimately it'd be borne by the taxpayers.

That's who would pay for that risk.

Um, and that that doesn't uh hit us lightly, that's for sure.

None of us up here.

Uh but for me personally, this decision comes down to one fundamental question.

Have we reached a level of certainty, facts, logic that justifies placing hundreds of millions of dollars of public resources at risk?

That's the decision that's before us and the question.

Uh to me, uh I come to the conclusion that I I do not believe we have.

Um I believe that risk to the taxpayer far outweighs the ambition.

Approving a new 30-year franchise agreement with Duke Energy.

It's not a decision we're making up here that's against innovation.

It's anti-future opportunities, uh, but it's uh it's a decision based on stability, based on reliability, and fiscal responsibility.

It provides certainty for our residents while allowing our city to continue to advocate, as we just heard, uh, for improved services, stronger accountability and investments that benefit the community at large from beach to bay.

Our responsibility is not to make again the boldest decision in this process.

Our responsibility is to make the wisest one.

I truly believe that for those reasons.

So thank you.

Thank you.

Councilmember Tosheda.

I want to thank everyone.

I think it was over 21 people that came and share their thoughts with us.

I thought you did it in such an effective and compelling way and in a respectful way, so therefore you were heard better.

So thank you so much.

It wasn't anything that I did not hear before in the chances that I got out to go in in the neighborhoods and various organizations where we had these discussions.

I heard the same thing, the same arguments, all very compelling.

Everybody makes sense, everybody has a valid point.

So thank you so much for coming out and to effectively and in such a great way share your thoughts with us.

With that being said, I think it's important that I take this moment to thank everyone involved in this initiative.

I acknowledge the extensive work that has gone into evaluating this opportunity.

And it was a long process.

But as I've been reviewing it, I found myself looking beyond the appraisal, beyond the feasibility study.

An appraisal can tell us what something may be worth.

A feasibility study can tell us whether it's achievable.

But my decision has to take into account a much broader picture.

There's so many moving parts.

For example, I've been weighing the financial exposure, the costs that I've yet to be quantified, the potential for challenging extended litigation, the impact on our other capital priorities, our aging infrastructure, and the uncertainty surrounding future revenue sources.

And I'm also mindful of what I see as an increasingly uncertain environment for local governments.

Over the past several years, we've seen more decisions traditionally made at the local level become subject to increasing state preemption.

Whether we agree with that or not, I think it's another factor that adds uncertainty, especially when we're considering considering a significant, challenging, and long-term financial commitment like this.

I don't want anyone to think or to mistake my comments as a lack of confidence with our ability to potentially operate a municipal electric utility company.

For me, the question is not simply whether it's feasible.

The question is whether it's prudent.

It's not whether we can do it, it's whether we should.

So for those reasons, I will be uh in support of renewing our new agreement.

Thank you.

Vice Mayor.

Thank you, sir.

First, I want to thank Duke, our staff, New Gen, and our outside council for the tremendous amount of work that went into negotiating this franchise agreement.

These negotiations were not simple, and I appreciate the professionalism, diligence, and persistence demonstrated throughout this process.

I believe they have negotiated an agreement that positions the city well for future while protecting the interests of our residents.

No agreement is ever perfect.

Ever negotiate every negotiation involves compromise.

The question before us is not whether we could imagine different terms.

The question before us is whether this agreement serves the long-term interest of the city of Clearwater.

After reviewing the agreement and hearing the recommendations of our staff and outside council, I believe this agreement is in the best interest of Clearwater.

I want to be clear that my support for this franchise agreement should not be interpreted as opposition to municipal.

Oh my goodness, municipalization.

I removed that word.

Right.

Goodness.

Tongue twister.

I continue to believe local ownership deserves serious consideration, and I remain interested in exploring whether municipalization could one day provide lower rates, greater reliability, and greater local control for our residents.

However, I have a responsibility to govern based on circumstances before us today.

There is a very real possibility that municipalities across Florida could face significant budget challenges in coming years, depending on the outcome of a statewide property tax referendum.

Clearwater could potentially face a reduction of approximately 21 million dollars in annual revenue by 2028.

With that uncertainty on the horizon, I do not believe it is prudent to commit the city to what could become years of costly litigation in pursuit of municipal municipalization, particularly when we have a negotiated franchise agreement before us that I believe serves the interests of our residents.

Good government requires us to carefully weigh both today's opportunities and tomorrow's risks.

I believe accepting this agreement is more fiscally responsible course of action under the circumstances we're facing today.

Good government is not about chasing perfection, it is about making prudent decisions with the information we have while protecting the taxpayers we serve.

For those reasons, I'll be supporting this franchise.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

I'll go, I always go, not always, but uh most often go last and risk of repeating what others have already said.

Uh but I'll try not to do that.

But uh I do agree with several of the comments that have been made by my colleagues up here.

And I just want to make sure that our citizens, our taxpayers know, and and maybe answer some questions of those who came in here tonight to uh speak against our adopting uh our or accepting this motion uh or this agenda item uh that our our focus has been from the beginning uh the welfare and the best interest of our citizens and taxpayers.

We we engaged in this, uh, all five of us unanimously to with a concern for affordability, and our franchise use agreement with our franchise agreement was was terminating soon, and so it was the appropriate time for us to consider this question, and I think that the entire council all along was uh interested, as vice mayor just said, can we as a city operate the electric service and provide electric electricity service to our citizens cheaper than what we could by having any outside uh entity do it, and including Duke.

Uh and I think that remains our concern.

We've been very interested in that and what we could if we could provide it at uh at less cost to our citizens.

And the study came back and said that we could, and then we had appraisal done, and the appraisal to the point was made by someone here tonight, uh came back showing even more favorable number than what our advisors had said.

So uh that was interesting, I think, to all of us, and I made the point on Monday, I'll make the point again.

Uh, regardless of what we do tonight, um, the information we gathered from this study is so helpful to our city going forward.

We heard the staff talk about some things that are coming out of the MOU that are going to be addressed.

Uh, we understand the electric service to our citizens better now than we did far better than we did before.

And we also, I think, at least for me, I understand that we could, and uh we we could run it ourselves at some point if if it was appropriate and circumstances changed and maybe years from now, but uh as I made the point earlier, we've operated a gas company for 100 years that's been so successful, sells into multiple countries uh count counties.

Um and gas is different from electric, and I understand that, and this is a big undertaking.

But for me, that information, the confidence that we would have was important, and then with all that the city is getting back to taxpayers and the MOU that uh Duke has agreed to do some really great things for our city that will save our taxpayers' money to help us more than recover the cost that we put into doing the study.

Uh this is really important to me too.

It came down to me to what the vice mayor just said is that um you know our advisors were very clear that uh this is not a you know flip the switch, decide to do it tomorrow, and you just start.

Uh, there was going to be a lot of legal involved and a legal involved for a long time.

And although we could absorb those costs and pass them on, according to the advisors, over time to ratepayers, uh, we could not do that immediately.

The immediate cost over the next several years in trying to transition to a municipally owned electric service, um, all those attorney's fees, and they were going to be significant.

Uh it was going to cost our taxpayers a lot of money.

And in this environment, with the pressure we have trying to make our taxes affordable for our citizens as well.

I just don't feel the timing is right to put that pressure additionally on our budget to go ahead and uh to try to do that at this time.

That in light of all the benefits that Duke is offering the MOU continuing the relationship makes sense for me.

So uh with for those reasons uh tonight I'm going to also vote in favor of this agenda item and to move it to the second reading.

So with that, uh is there any further discussion?

If not, then um all those in favor.

Do we need a motion?

We need a motion for agenda item 6.1.

Second.

Okay, motion second.

So all those in favor, opposed, unanimous.

Thank you for all who attended tonight on this agenda.

And thank you for those who spoke.

And then move to agenda item 6.2.

Approve a tentative millage rate of 5.8850 mills for the fiscal year 2026-27 and set public hearing dates on the budget for September 15, 2026, and September 21, 2026 to be held at 6 p.m.

Good evening, Mayor and Council members.

Um, as we discussed on Monday, this is the first reading of the millage and Kaelin Castell, our budget director, will go through the budget presentation now.

Sorry, I was having a problem with my mic here.

Um, so this presentation um for the budget, the city manager's budget that's being proposed, um, does have a balanced budget once again for the 26-27 year.

Um, and what is being proposed is at the same rate as the current year, meaning this millage will stay the same.

That is based on the direction that was provided from the council at our strategic plan workshop.

We do have an increase of FTEs proposed in this budget of nine, and that is as a result from collective bargaining agreements previously that were approved by the council that go into effect this year.

What this budget is focusing on is that we're focusing, we're maintaining what we discussed at the strategic plan with a continued alignment of our work plan that we go through annually, a focus on maintaining our current facilities, services, and pay structures.

Council, um, as a reminder, we we went through a significant comprehensive pay study where it was recommended that we go to the 75th percentile, um, and this budget includes keeping us at that 75th percentile.

Um, looking into the future, so what we've got coming up in this next budget year, it's quite a bit, um, but we're gonna have the grand opening of our city hall.

We are going to continue um focusing our attention and the excitement and the momentum around our urban renaissance that's occurring not just in downtown but across the city.

Um we've got the county property redevelopment option that we've discussed many times uh that RFN is out previously, or I'm sorry, is out now with an expected return for a master developer to return their submissions at the end of September.

So we'll be working on that project significantly next year.

Um we've got major street renovations, Aceola being one of those.

I think we've got the bluff development, and then obviously what's on everybody's mind in terms of preparing for any potential um changes in our revenues, such as the property tax referendum.

So with that, I will now turn it over to Kayleen.

Thank you.

Good evening, Mayor and Council Kayleen Castle, budget director.

Um, this is the fiscal year 26-27 proposed budget for all city funds.

Um, that total is $800,214,596.

Our operating funds and special revenue funds are $609,673,696 of this total, and capital improvement funds are budgeted at 190 million five hundred forty thousand nine hundred dollars.

And in total, this represents a five percent increase from the fiscal year 26 amended budget.

This slide further breaks out the operating portion of that last slide showing um totals by fund type.

So the general fund for fiscal year 27 um reflects a three percent increase from the current year's amended budget, and I have a few slides that further detail the general fund a little late in this presentation a little later in this presentation.

Our utility funds total, which include the budget for water and sewer, stormwater, gas, solid waste, and recycling operations reflects a 4% decrease from the current year's budget.

This includes 476.8 FTEs that support these utility operations at a cost of 44.4 million dollars across these departments.

Transfers of 73.8 million is budgeted to fund capital maintenance projects and one and 10.9 million is budgeted for the payment in lieu of taxes, and these transfers total 36 percent of that total.

Uh the budget for operating costs include expenses like commodity purchases, utilities, dump fees, supplies, and chemicals are estimated at 71.3 million, and debt and internal service charges are budgeted at 35.9 million.

The enterprise funds total, which includes the budget for the operations of the beach marina, the Clearwater Harbor Marina, the airport, and our parking operations is a 13% increase over the amended current year's budget.

To support these departments, 75.1 FTEs are budgeted at $5.5 million.

Transfers of $1.2 million will fund capital projects and $1.2 for the payment in lieu of taxes from these departments.

The budget for all operating costs, this includes expenses for fuel for resale at the marinas, are all of the utilities for these departments, parking meter contracts, merchant fees is estimated at 10.2 million.

This is 53% of that total.

And debt and internal charges for these departments is budgeted at $930,000.

The internal service funds include the budget for information technology, utility customer service, building and maintenance, and fleet and radio communications, and also the central insurance fund, which supports the operations of risk management and employee benefit programs, and also the health the employee health clinic.

The budget for internal service funds reflects an increase of 6% from the current year.

This total includes funding of $15 million for $159.3 FTEs, transfers of $1.4 million for capital maintenance projects, a total of $41.2 million is budgeted for all of our insurance costs and claims citywide.

And also the budget for all other operating costs of these departments includes the cost of technology software support and agreements, citywide fuel costs, maintenance and vehicle for the city's fleet, and the building and maintenance contracts, and that is estimated at 24.9 million.

Special revenue funds reflect a 23% increase from the current year.

This represents changes in funding of penny for Pinellus projects that are planned next year versus the current year.

These funds include the special development fund.

This accounts for restricted revenue sources that are allocated to capital projects such as penny for penellis, road millage, and fuel tax, and these totals are budgeted at 26.8 million next year.

And special funds also includes the special program fund.

This is used to account for both revenues and expenditures related to grants.

This is budgeted at 1.8 million, and also includes our other housing assistant funds budgeted at 1.2 million.

And finally, capital improvement funds are reflect a 16% increase from the current fiscal year, amended budget, and I have a slide that further details that also later in this pro in this presentation.

This chart represents the change in taxable values over the last 11 years.

Our 2026 preliminary values received from the Pinellas County property appraiser reflect an increase in property values of approximately 2.5% from 19.2 billion in 2025 to 19.7 billion.

The proposed millage rate of 5.8850 mills is recommended for fiscal year 27.

This is the same rate as was levied in the current year.

Due to the value growth, this rate is proposed at 0.13% greater than the rolled back rate.

The rollback rate is the millage rate that would provide the city with the same property tax revenue as was received in the current year.

And this is adjusted for the value of new construction.

Using the proposed millage rate, property tax revenues are projected to be 110.9 million in fiscal year 27.

This represents an increase of approximately 1.76 million or 1.6% over the current year's budget.

Of the $110.9 million projected, approximately $105.6 million will support general fund operations, and $5.3 million represents the road millage set aside for the maintenance of city streets.

Revenues that support general fund operations reflect a net increase of 3% in comparison to the current year.

As discussed on the previous slide, property tax, our advalorum revenues are budgeted at $105.6 million.

This is a 2% increase over the current year.

And that source of revenue represents approximately 40% 46% of total general fund revenues.

Utility taxes and franchise fees, they're always a little bit volatile based on the consumption of electricity and gas.

These revenues, which combined account for approximately 15% of total general fund revenues, they're anticipated to increase for next year's collections.

The category of other taxes includes business tax receipts and communications services tax.

Communications taxes is budgeted at a decrease based on current revenues.

Communications taxes is budgeted at a decrease based on current revenues, current year's revenues.

The category of intergovernmental revenues include sales tax, state revenue sharing, fire and EMS tax, and other local funding and reimbursements.

The budget for these are estimated at a 2% increase over the current year, and this category accounts for 15% of general fund revenues.

Charges for service revenues represent approximately 9% of the total.

This includes fees at our rec centers, revenue collected at the pier, as well as service charges between our operating funds.

And we're anticipating a 4% increase in those revenues next year.

Transfer in revenues include the payment in lieu of taxes from all of our proprietary funds, and also transfers for admin and staff costs from the CRA as well as our special program funds.

These revenues are approximately 6% of total and are budgeted at a 1% decrease in comparison to the current year.

Other revenues account for 7% of total.

This includes building permit fees, fines, interest earnings, and other smaller miscellaneous revenues, which also include our ticket revenues and naming rights for the sound.

This category is expected to increase by 10% next year.

General fund expenditures in total reflect a 3% increase across all operations.

This proposed budget for next year includes all personnel costs and adjustments in line with approved labor contracts.

It also includes the anticipated cost of insurance increases, operating expenses necessary to support all of our existing service levels, debt service costs for the imagined clearwater bonds, and capital funding for road maintenance and facility improvement projects.

The police department budget is increased by 6%.

This represents increases for personnel costs related to wage and pension contributions.

The increase by 11% in the fire department is related to personnel costs, which include the addition of nine new fire medics as approved in the collective bargaining agreement, and also the increase related to personnel costs for their that agreement and pension contributions.

The parks and recreation budget is decreased by 9%, and this is related to transfers to the capital in the current year versus what's budgeted next year.

And the non-department budget includes the costs for minor general expenses, it includes general fund-wide property and liability insurance costs, the transfer for the CR CRA for the city share of Advilorum taxes, and it also includes transfers to the capital fund for ongoing maintenance projects at all of our general government facilities.

So this total is at a 12% increase, is primarily due to the increases in capital funding as well as liability insurance increases compared and compared to the current year.

This pie chart also represents general fund expenditures by department.

The budget for public safety is approximately 46.5% of the total general fund with the police department representing 28% and fire and EMS at 18.5% of that total.

The next largest cost is the is our parks and recreation department at 22% of the total.

This distribution is very similar to the current year with public safety increasing by 2.5%, and that increases offset by a decrease in the parks and recreation budget.

Same total general fund, but this chart shows it by category.

Personnel costs continue to be our largest expense at 62% of total.

This represents funding for 1,172.4 full-time equivalent positions that support all the general fund operating departments.

Operating expenditures represent the next largest category at 15%, and in internal services 10, and you can see the rest of the distribution.

I want to point out that interfund transfers are 11% of the total, and this represents 17.3 million transferred to fund capital repair and replacement projects, and 2.1 million for one-time major facility renovation or road construction projects.

And also of that transfer total, 4.4 million is transferred to the CRA representing the TIFF contribution for this year.

And debt and capital expenditures combined are 1.5% of the total.8 full-time equivalent positions are proposed across all funds for fiscal year 27, and this is a net increase of nine positions from the current year's budget.

In this graph, the sand colored portion represents the general fund.

And the total this is a total budget of 1,172.4 positions, and it's a total increase of actually 11.

In comparison, the green portion represents all other funds.

It is 732.4%, a decrease of two in compared to the current year.

In the general fund, FTE changes include the nine new fire medics that we mentioned, and this is added to the fire department to provide for staffing to cover a reduction in the work week that was approved in that collective bargaining agreement.

And in public works, a business systems analyst has been added to support the implementation and maintenance of the new asset management software system and an additional position to support the city's growing geographic information system needs has been transferred from the information technology department into public works.

And then that decrease and all other funds represents changes in information technology.

The position that I just mentioned was transferred to support GIS, and also a vacant network analyst was eliminated.

The total budget for the capital improvement funds is 190 million, 190.5 million for fiscal year 27, and this represents the funding for capital improvement projects by category.

All of our utilities, this is the planned capital maintenance projects for stormwater, water, sewer, solid waste and recycling, and gas are budgeted at 103.1 million.

This is about 54% of total capital funding.

General government projects are budgeted at 48.6 million, 26% of total.

This includes projects for fire, police, sidewalks, parks and recreation facilities, libraries, and maintenance of all city buildings and facilities that operate general government functions.

Projects in support of internal service operations are budgeted at 19.4 million, 10% of total.

And these are projects that support fleet radio communications, general services, information technology, and utility customer service.

And the capital budget for small enterprise funds, which is the air park, both marinas and our parking facilities, is proposed at 19.4 million, also 10% of that total.

New projects in the capital plan this year include fire the fire department radio replacement project.

This is an estimated cost of total estimated cost of 1.4 million.

And in the current year, we moved existing funding of 413,000 in our last amendment.

Actually, the the remaining funding of 828,000 will come from the general fund, and it's going to be transferred across fiscal years 27 through 29, so a phase of that project.

And then we anticipate fire reimbursements from the county to uh to come in fiscal year 29 at the completion of that project.

The Stevenson's Creek Park Project is added to complete the property renovation after hurricane damage in 2024.

This project has a total estimated cost of 1.5 million, funded by general fund revenues faced over fiscal years 27 through 29.

And also the East Clearwater Resiliency Project is added to provide for infrastructure improvements in the Bay Shore Corridor.

Total project costs are estimated at 1,090,000, and this is funded by revenues from the general fund and stormwater fund over fiscal years 27 and 28.

For the water and sewer system, we have several new projects that are in the capital plan with fiscal year 27 funding.

This includes the automated meter reading project, estimated at 7.6 million funded over fiscal years 27 through 32.

The water reclamation facility consolidation project, this is estimated at 900 million funded over fiscal years 27 through 32.

Well field improvement project is estimated at 37 million, also funded over all six years, fiscal years 27 through 32.

Our lift station and point repairs and improvements are estimated at 110 million funded 27 through 32.

Sewer point repairs and improvements are estimated at 201 million funded over all six years 27 through 32.

The water reclamation facility maintenance and repair project is estimated at 23 million funded over 20 the years uh 27 through 32.

And our water reclaimed water well repair and improvement project is new at an estimated 169 million dollars funded over fiscal years 27 through 32.

And some of these projects that he just mentioned replaced other projects that were in there that were kind of combined in one big umbrella, and we're really just breaking these out for kind of transparency so you can see the movement of those projects.

So, council, the action requested of you today is to set the tentative millage rate, which the city manager has proposed at the current rate 5.8850 mills, and to formally set the two public hearing dates for September, and all of this information will be provided to the county, and it will be included in the trim notices that are mailed to our residents in August.

Just to note, if you set the tentative millage rate at this proposed rate, 5.885, it can be reduced before final adoption in September, but can't go higher without a first class mailing to each of each taxpayer at our expense.

We schedule a special work session as an opportunity for you to further discuss the proposed budget with all departments present, which will be held here on August 11th at 1 p.m.

And both of our public hearings are scheduled as special meetings this year.

The first one planned on Tuesday, September 15th, and the second hearing to adopt formally adopt that budget is planned for Monday, September 21st.

Both of them will begin at 6 p.m.

The full uh proposed budget is available on our website.

It was posted on June 30th.

We posted our digital book again this year as well as a full PDF document.

I'd be happy to answer any questions.

Well, first, thank you for all that's really important information, but it's not the easiest to present.

So I appreciate how you do it every time.

You get through it quickly and you present it in a way that's uh easy for us to hear.

So see the majority.

Thank you.

Um, I just wanted to point out a couple of things with us.

One, the importance of our strategic planning and what we, as in our team, does with that information.

And so what you see before you in this budget is a result of those decisions, collective decisions that were made at the strategic plan.

So it was our goals were to provide a millage rate that was at the same rate, but while also looking, going through and looking at where we had opportunities to make improvements and efficiencies and/or reduce costs.

And I think it's extraordinary that our team was able to present a budget today that holds the military at the same rate, um, despite all of the increasing expenditures that we have, um, including keeping a competitive workforce at the 75% percentile, adding in those nine new firefighters, um, and doing so at an increase of only three percent to the general fund expenditures.

So our team really did a phenomenal job.

So, to the department heads and to the assistant city managers, I thank you for taking that exercise so seriously and making those reductions so that we would be able to present that benefit to you today.

Uh thank you for pointing that out, uh, which is public when it talks about an increase in employees over the previous year as firefighters that we're adding, it's not uh adding folks.

Uh you know, important community cares a lot about first responders and those are the uh the personal ads that we're adding in this budget.

So thank you for sharing that.

I do have uh, and apologize if I missed it.

Uh I may have been focused on a prior slide, but the the two public hearing meetings, the one on September 5th and 15th.

Do we vote at that meeting?

We don't vote at that meeting, it's just a public comment.

It's the first meeting.

So we so we would vote at a first reading.

That's a special meeting instead of one that's on our regular.

Correct.

Okay.

Okay.

Uh well, with that, let's first uh take public comment.

Is there anyone here from the public that would like to speak to this agenda item?

Good evening, Mr.

Mayor, Council members, and staff.

My name is Patrick Raffrey.

I'm a resident of the countryside area of Clearwater.

This item I have no issues with with respect to its proposal and the maintenance of the current millage rate that I believe will result in about 110 million dollars of addition additional funds to be managed by the city.

Each year there is excess funds available to the city, even though the millage rate is kept the same because our property values have gone up.

Most of us, I believe, can absorb that increase without too much difficulty, and we do see the city prudently using those increases very focused on maintaining good budgeting.

The concern that I have is the November Amendment three that will be on the ballot.

That could be a disaster with respect to the financial planning of not only Clearwater but many cities in the state of Florida.

We do not know the exact results of it, but we do know in 2027 there will be an immediate credit toward our property taxes that would result in reduced revenues.

Therefore, what I'm suggesting to the council, to the city's public information office and the lobbyists that will be working on on behalf of the city in Tallahassee is that there'll be a focus on what that would really mean to the city of Clearwater, so that we may educate the residents and citizens of Clearwater that if they see this as nothing more than a reduction of their property taxes, what would be the significant impact financially to the city of Clearwater and this budget that was just presented to us now.

I think it's very important that they understand that because, as in many things, when you mention cost reduction, everybody's on board quickly.

But they often do not think of the implications of that cost reduction and a reduction to our property taxes, we would all like to see.

But we need to balance that with what the impact will be on the budget for our city.

So therefore, what I'm saying is that there needs to be a focus on the possibility of that amendment passing in November and the dramatic impact it's gonna have on our budget process.

And we need to educate everyone with respect to what that would mean to us, and hopefully you'll undertake that focus and educate and inform us so that when we do vote in November, we know exactly what we're voting for and what the impact of that will be.

Thank you very much for your time.

Thank you.

Anyone else here from the public desire to speak to this agenda?

Okay, hearing scene none.

Oh uh council discussion.

Okay.

Vice Mayor.

Thank you, sir.

Kayleen, thank you for the report.

Um over the last decade, Clearwater's advilorum tax revenue has seen a growth of 46.6 million dollars to the proposed 110.9 million dollars.

That is an increase of approximately 138%.

During that same time period, commute cumulative inflation in the United States has been approximately 39%.

I recognize that inflation has increased the cost of providing city services, and a portion of this revenue growth reflects those higher costs.

But even after accounting for inflation, the city is collecting substantially more property tax revenue than it did just 10 years ago.

My question is not whether we have more revenue, because we do.

The question is whether we are exercising the discipline and stewardship of our taxpayers expect before asking our residents to pay more.

We owe them the best possible use of the resources they have already entrusted to us.

I do appreciate the work that staff is doing, but I am going to ask them to continue making hard decisions and continue looking to make their budgets more efficient.

No matter how small the reduction, uh, I would like to see us hit a rollback rate for this budget year, and depending on what the people decide in November, look to do a millage rate decrease the next year.

Thank you.

Further council discussion?

If if not, uh I'd I'd just like to add to what Visemere just said.

I I you know, I said on Monday, I I support uh giving taxpayers relief.

Um and um, you know, if if this ballot measure doesn't pass, I'd I'd like to see us look at uh reducing the millage.

But I personally uh I just don't think the timing is right for us.

Uh, we're already navigating the what ifs we had Mr.

Raffrey come to the podium and speak a minute ago about uh the pressure it's going to put on our city and some difficult decisions we'll have to make uh if if if the referendum passes.

So I I just think um, although I support reducing the millage, I'd love to see us try to do that.

I'm so thankful for the many years that our real property owners in this city have, by their contributions, have made this city what it is.

If they haven't been paying the real property taxes over the years that they had, we would not have one of the most beautiful cities in the United States.

And I respect their commitment in the past to doing that and what they're doing in this to support this current budget.

I'm just personally concerned that um reducing the millage at this time without knowing what the impact may be of uh of a vote that's gonna happen in November, that um that's not in the best interest.

But I did want to say that I do support this idea, and much of what you said I think we'd need to consider.

Um it's been a while since we did reduce the millage.

And I think um, you know, depending upon what happens in November, we need to look in the future to see what we can do to reduce the millage here.

So, with that, is there any further discussion?

Councilmember Manino?

Appreciate you.

I think uh Councilmember Alburn wants to speak as well, but I'll touch on it.

Appreciate you.

Um thank you.

So fun, right?

Exciting.

You do it with such a smile, and uh I appreciate all the work that uh the team uh puts into the process and really keeps us informed and educate us along the way.

Um it's interesting as a budget process goes through, it's based so often on projections and assumptions and when the actual numbers come in and financial numbers really hit the board.

Sometimes decisions can shift and pivot.

Um that's uh that can't be easy on staff when we give you direction to go one way for months and months of you're smiling because you know what I'm going for months and months, um, and then to kind of throw a curveball at you.

But you and your team are always uh flexible, you adapt, you're professional, and I appreciate I appreciate that.

So thank you.

Um like all of our families, not just Clearwater, affordability uh is an absolute challenge, and we've all been hit uh with higher cost and inflation, and we see it at grocery stores, gas pumps, uh, energy bills everywhere we go, and there's no way uh to insulate ourselves away from it.

I believe that's government and as a dais, we have uh an obligation to live with our means, and I know our city believes that, and this leadership team and and your staff have shown that the last couple years.

I think last year we reduced our our spending over 10 percent, um, which was uh which was great to our taxpayers, kept the millage rate the same.

Uh and this year, as we approached the process, we got hit with uh about a 12 million dollar shortfall in gap and deficit that uh we had fears that that would change maybe the quality of life or the level of service that our Redis residents have come to expect uh and deserve.

Uh you produced uh a budget that uh made our community safer without a doubt by adding first responders personnel, uh, but also didn't change those level of services and the quality of life, and that's that's important.

Uh I did not speak to this item on Monday as others did because I I still had uh several questions and I wanted to know what really I saw that percentage of 0.13% and it seemed so minimal.

So my questions were kind of based on what does that 0.13 percent look like in a in a dollar sense, and does that 0.13% change that level of service or quality of life, and can we manage it and not put us in financial instability or or risk and can we continue uh that level of service that our residents you know deserve.

Property tax uh referendum has come up several times, um, and that's uh that's a drastic measure.

Um that that's gonna be a radical change if passed to our citizens on that level of service and quality of life, and I agree a thousand percent with Mr.

Aftery, and I know staff does as well.

Um we should be talking about it more often, and I know city manager and our team does have opportunities and workshops scheduled going forward to truly educate our residents, but at the end of the day, they'll be making that decision on what they want their community to look like, what level of services uh and their quality of life.

I think after discussing with you know the finance team and the city manager, I believe we do have the ability, and I'm confident we have the ability to absorb that 0.13% that would put us at a at a rollback and continue that level of service.

I do understand that this is tentative, uh, that anything approved today still has an opportunity going forward uh to lower but not raise.

Um but I I do believe that we have an opportunity now to make that statement to our our residents and our citizens that we hear you.

We understand the struggles, they are real, we understand the realities of the environments that we all live in.

Um we've done that on this day for the last two years.

I think we have another opportunity to do that going forward, and that 12 million dollar gap is covered.

You team did an amazing job.

I think, like the council member said, that that little extra, that point one three percent.

I think we have the ability to overcome that and continue to do some work uh going for that going forward.

Uh but for that for those reasons.

I sorry I threw a curveball at the finance team or at the city manager in this, but I I do proudly support a rollback.

I do have confidence in in your team and in our leadership team that we have the ability to not only absorb that but to exceed expectations and performances that our community and residents deserve on the quality of life side and the level of services.

Uh so with that, am I correct in understanding that this doesn't have to be a super majority vote to push this budget through?

No, because this is just the information that's being submitted to the county for trim notices.

So your trim notice, which I'm sure is probably your favorite piece of mail all year, um, because it's very it's very easy to understand.

Uh so the term notice actually shows the rollback rate every single year in one column, and then the the last column is what all of these proposed rates are.

So all of the agencies on your tax bill, what they're making the decisions like this right now, it shows what that rate is.

So this isn't the final decision, that's the notice to residents, it's not what their final bill is.

Um so it's it's literally the no it's you're approving the notification to the county of what we want to um put in the trim notices for our residents.

Appreciate you.

Um I'll support a rollback rate.

I believe it reflects both sound financial management and our commitment to the taxpayers of of Clearwater, but thank you.

Kaylee, I got a question.

So it's such a small uh difference on the rollback rate.

I was told somewhere around what the actual citizens would probably find out of it is like a two dollar difference in their tax bill.

It I have you figured that out where I something like that.

Yes.

It's it would be 77 cents per 100,000 dollars of taxable value.

So usually in September I share a slide that shows like a uh 250,000 dollar taxable value, and that's 192.

$1.92 would be on like that $250, but you just multiply out $77 per $100,000, but maybe if $250 is average, it'd be a dollar and ninety.

Right.

So I mean, the way I look at it, it's a great thing to say we're gonna go back to the rollback rate.

This is this year it's so small.

I mean, it's such a small thing we're giving back to.

I I think we could do more as this raverty said educating the people as to what's coming with this referendum, and you know, the possibility of things that we're gonna have to cut back if it passes, because we've got to, you know, we've got a maintain budget, and you know, we don't want to do it on um fire and police, but a lot of things that people really take for granted in the city of Clearwater, like the parks, the libraries.

I mean, you're gonna see a decline on some of those things that people use every day, could be soccer fields, it could be a lot of things because we have a very big parks and rec budget, and I can see the impact taken mostly on that.

Um so to be honest, I think that you know, just by saying it sounds good to say, hey, we're gonna accept the rollback rate, you know, really only means a couple of dollars for most people.

I think keep it as the way it is, and um and then tighten our belts.

And I want to tell you, and I'm the city manager and all the uh um department has again seems like we say this for every year for the last three years, you guys do an amazing job on tightening the belt.

I mean, we were way ahead of this whole um you know cutting back and tightening the belt thing that Florida went through a couple of years ago.

We were already doing it, and every year we do it.

So, you know, we don't really spend a lot of money just everything we spend or what really makes Clearwater great and people use.

So I I think that because it's such a small amount that I would I would go just for where we are right now, not the rollback rate, and uh because we are gonna have to really tigh I have a feeling we're gonna be tightening our belt a lot here coming up after November.

So that's what we're just showing you.

Um well initially, you know, I've said it before, it keeps me up keeps me up with like all the all the responsibilities we have.

And so my knee-ject reaction was like no.

Um, but then I was you know having conversations with staff, and then I see how it's doable and it's um and it it can be done, and I acknowledge that it might be perceived as a small amount, but perhaps perhaps it may be I was thinking because the staff has reassured me that it has um a nominal um effect, I guess, and it can be done.

I'm I'm open to it.

I understand the argument that's only let's say two dollars per person or per household, but I'm thinking, you know, is this gonna be perceived as a as an all of branch to the staff to this to the citizens?

So I can see both sides.

Um can um can I what what's it mean in a dollar amount to us in our budget?

Uh if if we went to the rollback rate, what's the total amount?

The total that we would receive, not not for each property owner, but what what's the total amount?

At the rollback?

The difference in yeah, that we would be receiving.

It's um can I tell you this short story long?

Um it just helps it helps me kind of paint the picture.

So we base the preliminary budget on early estimates from the property appraiser.

They come you know in late May, and then we get our final numbers, which is what I reported to you today.

That's the that's what we we use through this whole process.

Our numbers changed a little between the two of those, they increased a little, and that almost absorbed the rollback rate, that increase.

So what we presented um in the document, what we released, and then our that tweak of numbers almost absorbed the the rate, so we would not have to make a huge change.

It would be um a hundred and forty-five, a little over 145,000 reduction in the revenue.

Yeah, well, I I see it differently.

Like I said earlier, I support the idea of rolling back.

I and I would agree, even though it's not a big amount, and it's not um it's not you know, for each property owner, it's not a lot.

It I think it does send a message, which we've been trying to share with our citizens already.

I mean, we have uh quick staff for doing this.

The staff has worked very hard over the last two years to find savings and to find ways to do things more efficiently to keep our cost down, and we continue to do that.

We're mandated by the state now to do that every year.

Um but um I I didn't realize that the you know the rollback rate would result in that that much of a difference.

And hearing what the others are saying now that they're open to it, uh but I if I do understand it.

We uh whatever we put in there, we can't go back to current rate tonight.

We're setting the ceiling, right?

We can roll it back to the city.

You could, but you wouldn't want to go through that process, right?

But we can't yeah.

So I would I would vice mayor a little shocked uh to be honest.

I mean, I understand I noted that this year's rollback was going to be uh a small reduction, um, but going from what I thought Monday was a lone island to hearing a little bit of support.

I appreciate it.

I think that this is um the good governance that I talk about, right?

Is to be able to have these open discussions and see where we can help people and make an a meaningful impact.

You know, I mean two dollars to some is more than others, right?

And that's only on the first hundred thousand dollars, so four dollars might get somebody something.

I don't know what that's gonna be.

Um, but the Wendy's meal.

Anyways, um it starts us looking and trending in the right direction of trying to hit a future rollback rate.

I think that's kind of the overall arching message.

No matter what does happen in November, I think we're setting a tone going forward.

That yes, we acknowledge through the city manager through her diligence staff and through all of our directors on tightening the belt, as has been said, um, that we are maintaining this is the people's money, we want to be good stewards of it and try and put the best foot forward for those people while still producing the best services and best product that is their hometown uh to give to them.

So I'm very grateful for the conversation we're having tonight.

Um I don't know if anybody else wants to continue this.

Yes, Mr.

Alberton does, so I'll be quiet.

That's thank you.

Well, I can count.

So I don't want to be the lone guy that says I'm gonna raise taxes.

No, it's such a small amount.

All I wanted to get uh across to everybody is belt tightening is coming.

And Clearwater's better off than most, especially rural municipalities are gonna really they're gonna really be devastated.

But we do have, I know we're gonna have to cut back and we're gonna have to tighten our belt, and some services are gonna be cut back.

And and we need to put, I think it's a great idea to put that out to the public so they understand what they're voting for.

So I'll go along.

Looks like we have a 5-0 thing here about the rollback, right?

Maybe council members.

Yes, yes, okay.

I I know it's symbolic, but I think it's uh it sends a message, and I and I'm I'm for it.

What would that rate be though?

To make the motion?

Can I oh sorry?

Thank you.

Thank you, thank you, Mayor.

I I do want to thank you.

Um I did not again speak on Monday because I wanted to know what that figure was.

Um, and I know you did make calls uh to all of us to make sure we understand what that figure was.

Now whether we had that dialogue or you had that dialogue is a is a different story and on each of us in the in that relationship to manage, but um that that figure was not a surprise to me, and I appreciate that.

Uh, and that's why I made that decision because I felt that 144,000, regardless of the two dollars, um, it is doable, uh and I have the confidence in our staff to tackle it, but I thank you uh and the team for for getting us all uh that figure and those answers before tonight's meeting.

And if you would just allow me, and I know that you hear because you you meet um you know every week with Jennifer, but to your point of recognizing belt tightening and changes coming, you know.

You know, I'm um I'm on the front lines with my peers, uh, and what they present, and it's been made clear from their bosses, like regardless.

We know and we've heard, and we're working toward it.

And they've been challenged to rethink.

And and so we are we, you know, we know that this is what you want.

It's what you wanted this year, and it turned out to be not a very huge large change, but but it is absolutely the direction that that you know, my peers are hearing, and you know, when they're looking at their budget this year, and when they're planning for next year, they're they're really that they've been challenged to think hard, you know, regardless, because it is it is what your direction has been since you've been uh sitting at the dais.

So I just want to reiterate um from uh me on the front lines with my peers, uh that it's not easy, and and and they are looking for you know for improvements and and opportunities to bring you back, you know, an even lower um budget for the the next year.

Thank you.

Yeah, any further discussion.

A motion uh to approve the new millet rate at five point eight seven seven three.

All those in favor?

Opposed email.

Thank you.

This time we'll call back to order the meeting of the city council and we'll move to item six point three on the agenda.

Council members, um, item six point three appoint ten members to the twenty twenty-six affordable housing advisory committee to include the appointment of a locally elected official and adopt resolution twenty-six dash one twelve.

Uh staff is asking that the item be continued to the next meeting.

The reason being um since the work session, I received a call from Miss Byers, who is no longer um able to serve on the Nayab board, which Nayab representative, the board members of Nahab must serve as a hack, which means we're short one member.

So at the next meeting, I do have applicants available for council consideration, but I'll present it at the next meeting.

Thank you.

Declare a surplus or in real property located at one zero three, Northeast Avenue, Clearwater, Florida, three three seven five five.

Approve the transfer of said property to the city of Clearwater Committee Redevelopment Agency and authorize the appropriate officials to effectuate the transaction.

Good evening, Mayor, City Council, City Manager, City Managers, other respective members of the dais.

Chris Edwards, Economic Development Housing Director, from our presentation on Monday, tonight's action as an administrative step.

That declares the current city-owned property located at 103 Northeast Avenue as surplus and transfers of property to the city of Clearwater CRA.

This transfer allows CRA to strategically manage and market the property for future redevelopment that supports downtown revitalization.

Expands the tax and economic base as well as advances the goals of the downtown community redevelopment area.

Stand ready if you have any questions or comments.

Okay.

If not, we may uh may we have a reading here.

Thank you.

No, this is just clear.

Uh is there any council discussion on this item?

If not, is there a motion?

Move to approve agenda item 6.4.

Second.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed, unanimous.

Agenda item 6.5.

Provide direction on the proposed development agreement between MHG Palm Pavilion Hotel LP 6 Flag.

Planted LLC and the City of Clearwater for property located at 10 Bay Esplanade and 18 Bay Esplanade, providing for the allocation of 91 units from the Hotel Density Reserve under beach by design.

And confirm a second public hearing in City Council Chambers before City Council on August 20, 2026 at 6 p.m.

or soon thereafter, as may be heard.

Thank you.

Good evening, Mayor Council, Ted Cozai Planning Development.

So over the next two hours, I'm going to go over this.

So we have a very short summary here.

West side of the properties to remain, the existing restaurant, east side of the property, a demolition to offer a path for improvements for what is proposed.

The district is in the tourist district resort facilities high for future land use.

Old Florida district of beach by design.

The development proposal is a permitted density of 50 units per acre, allowing for 53 units on its own.

An additional 91 units from the hotel density reserve is requested.

There's a total of 144 units at 136 units per acre.

The height is proposed at 75 feet.

The proposal as proposed is consistent with the community development code pertaining to SEP's height parking and landscaping.

Um is noted that in the future, the future the required fee the FLD site plan.

If so, this reserve is uh move forward and other plans will be reviewed by the community development board, and that will need to be substantially consistent with what you're reviewing now.

Um the proposal also is consistent with beach by design pertaining to design guidelines and the provision of a tropical modern architecture, which complements the tropical vernacular envisioned by beach by design.

Also envisioned in the beach by design and and to be eligible for what is requested is the out the allocation of units.

They need to demonstrate compliance with transportation requirements, including the provision of a review of a traffic impact study that has been reviewed that concluded that traffic operations would continue at a at an acceptable level of service, mandatory hurricane evacuation and hotel closure provisions, transient hotel operations, internal hotel access and reservation system, and acknowledging the return of any unused allocated rooms to the reserve.

So therefore, the proposals in compliance with the standards for development agreements consistent with the comprehensive plan and you know furthers the vision of beach redevelopment set forth by beach by design.

Thank you, and I'll take any questions.

I believe there's a presentation by the applicant.

Good evening.

Um mayor, council members, Katie Cole with the law firm of Hill Ward Henderson, 600 Cleveland Street, suite 800, Clearwater.

No, I know.

I was getting through the here tonight to speak about the redevelopment of the Palm Pavilion Inn and the allocation of hotel units from the hotel density reserve.

I have it printed out if I need to.

I'll turn the screen there.

Wait, no, that's that's fine.

No, no.

That's the neighbor.

Fifth one up top says Pomp Avenue.

I know that's the staff presentation.

It's okay.

I can I can flip through on the Elm.

I can't see it in front of you.

Barely read my own notes.

Let me grab it and I'll just put it on the one.

Low tech.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Um I think this is staff's presentation.

I'm guessing that's gonna be the staff presentation now.

That's okay.

You want to pull up the conceptual sentence?

I'll put it on there.

There's not rocket science.

That'll work.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay.

Um, I'd like to introduce Mr.

JB McKibben of McKibben Hospitality, who's the owner of the hotel portion of this property.

As you know, um, the beach side group is owner of the historic Palm Pavilion Restaurant, which is now Krabby's Beachside, and they began operating that after the two took title um in January.

So, JB.

Sure.

Katie, thanks for the introduction.

Uh evening, Mayor, Council members.

Just wanted to introduce myself to everyone, so you know who I was.

Um, but JB McKibben, uh, President McKibben Equities, and McKibben is a hundred-year-old uh this year, uh family-owned business, I'm fourth generation, and we're headquartered uh in Tampa, just across the bridge.

Um we've operated in Clearwater for a long time.

We run the Hampton and the uh the uh Dolphin Sands Hotel for the Page family, and just really excited now to uh to be a deeper part of this community with the Palm and looking at the future vision for that project is gonna be more resilient, add more jobs, more income, um, and and more features uh for the community.

Just generally, McKibben, um, everything we like to do to reinvest from from the art top to bottom, um keep it local and in the community.

That's a big initiative for us, and uh really excited for the opportunity to put our special touches here uh right next to home at Clearwater Beach.

So thanks.

Thank you.

Um, as you know, we're here tonight uh to request uh your allocation of units from the hotel density reserve, and we understand I'm not not gonna go through.

I know we did this um in May, so I'm not gonna go through in detail, and you've also seen it and you've been here before.

But we recognize you've received a significant pressure to stop the implementation of one of the most successful redevelopment plans enacted throughout the state.

Um beach by design.

I have my very tattered copy that sits on my desk.

Um, it was implemented by the city uh 20 years ago uh specifically to encourage the tourist and hospitality industry.

The council members at the time uh did an amendment to the growth management plan to the comprehensive plan, hired consultants to look at traffic infrastructure, uh employment and job opportunities in Clearwater and what would best generate uh income and revenues for the city.

It was determined then and has continued uh as the result of the very successful implementation of the plan to make and turn Clearwater into uh the world's most one uh best beach, which it receives on a regular basis.

After the allocation of units, the owners then do need to go back to the community development board for an approval of the actual site plan.

At that point, the traffic study will be analyzed with the engineers, not on a conceptual level, but on an implementation level.

Where are the access points?

What conflicts exist, etc.

Libby Rodriguez, the project's traffic engineer, is here with us tonight and happy to answer any questions that you may have as it relates to that.

It's important to note these are the existing conditions.

Much of the correspondence you've received today is from the Pura Vita Hotel or Pura Vita condominiums, which are here.

The Pura Vita condominians is 75 feet from high from base flood elevation.

The request before you tonight is for a hotel 75 feet tall from base flood elevation.

Here is the hotel.

You can see the existing restaurant that will remain, and the parking lot and the existing hotel will be redeveloped into a new hotel.

It's very specifically considered to face the hotel rooms toward Kindle instead of the public uh noise generating uses like the hot uh like the pool and uh the restaurant areas to provide that buffer.

Uh this is just an example of the elevation and the floor plan on the third floor, which shows uh the pool deck area in the amenity space.

Uh Mr.

Kovac went through the beach by design requirements for the allocation of hotel density reserve.

You'll hear a lot tonight about why there was 1,300 units that were allocated by Beach by Design and how many are left.

Um, the 19 that are remaining to be allocated after this allocation, presuming you do that, um, does not consider the undeveloped units that are still out there.

There is a tally that the city staff has that I'm sure each of you have seen as it relates to the development of those projects.

The old Florida district is specifically contemplated to serve a mix of uses.

And uh it specifically says in the project that the Old Florida district is an area of transition between resort uses in the central beach to the low-intensity residential neighborhoods to the north of Acacia Street.

To that end, Beach by Design supports the development of new overnight accommodations in attached dwellings throughout the district with limited retail commercial and mixed-use development fronting mandalais.

Additionally, waterfront restaurants are encouraged to remain and/or locate on property fronting the Gulf of Mexico.

This project does exactly that and introduces additional overnight accommodations in the old Florida district while retaining the historic Palm Pavilion restaurant on the Gulf of Mexico.

With that, we're happy to answer any questions and appreciate your support.

Okay.

Jonathan Wheat.

Good evening, Mayor and the City Council.

Um, since this is the first time I've addressed the council, I'd just like to first thank you all for your service to the city of Clearwater and Clearwater Beach.

That being said, um, and due to the short time that we have, I get straight to the point.

Uh my wife and I live at Pura Vida, uh 22-unit residential condominium community, immediately adjacent to the Palm Pavilion property.

At its closest point, our homes are only about 35 feet from the proposed development.

I have submitted a letter in opposition, and our condominium board has also submitted a formal letter on behalf of our community.

One concern I have is that the residents who will be most likely directly affected by this proposal have received remarkably little attention through the whole process.

Pura Vida, for example, is barely mentioned in the staff reports, and previous notices concerning this project have never been received by us.

It's almost as if our neighborhood doesn't exist.

However, my primary concern, however, is that the sheer scale and intensity of what is being proposed, the city's own planning history recognizes this site as appropriate for 14 hotel units.

In 2024, the existing 30-room inn was allowed to continue because of its long-standing non-conforming status.

Now, less than two years later, the applicant is asking for you to approve a hundred and forty-four-room hotel on the same property.

This proposal is not simply redevelopment.

It is a fundamental change in the intensity of the development on this site, more than 10 times what the zoning originally contemplated.

I also reviewed the mints from the May uh council meeting.

I was surprised by how many direct questions received answers, such as generally consistent or appears to be consistent.

With respect, generally consistent should not be enough when considering one of the largest density increases on North Beach.

The council deserves clear answers.

Either this proposal complies with beach by design and the hotel density reserve criteria, or it doesn't.

Finally, I'd like to ask you to consider the broader question.

What kind of North Beach do we want in the future?

10, 20, 30 years from now.

Many of us chose North Beach because it is a different, is because it is different.

It offers a unique balance between residents, visitors, small independent hotels.

Appreciate your timed up, though.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Thank you.

You're time limited on speakers.

So thank you for coming tonight.

So I just respectfully ask you to vote no.

Do we have our next speaker?

Thank you.

Patrick Raftery.

Good evening once again.

The night grows late, but I'm still full of excitement, no problem.

I've spoken on this matter before, and my concern, even though I reside in the countryside area, is for the traffic density and problems that it may present to the Clearwater Beach area.

There's an allocation request for 91 units, which will result in a 10-story 144-unit hotel to be put on this property.

As the mayor pointed out, I believe at the work session on Monday, the traffic problem is essentially south of the roundabout.

And that is because all of the development thus far, pretty much has been south of the roundabout.

This development starts the development north of the roundabout, and maybe the start of that development continuing up there, and we already know there's a significant traffic problem for those residing on Clearwater Beach.

This will simply add to it.

At the work session on Monday, Councilmember Cotton also pointed out and requested some information about a traffic study that was being done.

And if I'm not mistaken, we learned at that work session that that traffic study will not be complete until November of this year.

And it is a detailed traffic study of the situation on Clearwater Beach right now, which we know is a problem.

I believe Councilmember Cotton's suggestion was that he would like to propose the 91 units be allocated, but the balance that remained of 19 units, we hold up doing anything with that until this traffic study is released, and the implications for Clearwater Beach are known.

I would suggest you may want to consider that pause now, because we know there's a problem, and we know that it's not yet been resolved, and we know there's a traffic study that's due in November of this year.

Also, as Council Member Cotton pointed out, with 19 units remaining, there could be additional units returned to that pool.

And the problem might be faced once again with somebody wanting to develop north of the roundabout.

Because of the traffic problems.

Those that reside on Clearwater Beach, I think must really consider running to the CVS for an errand with the traffic that they see.

So I think what I'm asking to say to yourselves is that at some point enough is enough, and you need to pause this and say, what will we do to address the problems with traffic and the density of things that are there already, and say beach by design may have outlived its usefulness.

Thank you very much for your time.

Thank you.

Next speaker?

Okay.

We have one more.

Good evening, Mayor Rector, Council members, city staff management.

In relation to this project, I would like to share some supply side economics about the need or lack thereof for additional hotel rooms on the beach, especially those added through increased density.

Through discussions with Councilman Cotton, we received occupancy and capacity data plus other information for Clearwater Beach.

What I'm handing out, and I point to it right there, is on the attached documents, page one.

You will note that the occupancy for 12 months ending April 2026 is 71.2%.

The highest months for occupancy are March, which is spring break, and April at 88.7 and 86.2, respectively.

On page two here, the current fiscal year, meaning October through April, the year-to-date occupancy is only 70.6%.

The demand year over year comparison follows the same relative trending curve, which is right here over the last three years.

Through this past year and ongoing, we will be seeing the addition of 91 units at the new Marriott on East Shore Drive.

The future additions already in the system include 200 units at the Marriott at Sand Key, project of 135 units at 405 Coronado Drive, and 158 units for the Hilton on the bluffs.

Though the Hilton is not really on the beach, its proximity, including transportation to the beach, will add to the beach hotel capacity.

It's that close.

These four projects total an additional 584 hotel rooms.

These increases coupled with the fact that a 60-unit hotel was converted to a condominium, the downsizing of 405 Coronado, and the return of these hundred units that make this available of Captain Blight project, would seem to suggest the industry is already reconsidering how many units are necessary.

So the question is is there really a need for an increase of another 91 hotel units on the beach, especially via density reserve pool.

And with an annual average occupancy of 71.2%, there is no need to just keep building more and bigger.

It is time for a pause on any more distribution or redistribution from the hotel density pool.

Can we hear a motion, please?

Thank you.

Nothing I'm aware.

Okay.

None.

That we will move to council discussion.

Anyone have any thoughts they want to share?

Council Member Albri.

All right, so I've got a lot of, I know probably most all of us have emails regarding different things about this project.

Here's the way I see it.

The project abides by beach by design.

When beach by design was adopted, the density pool was established based on the load that the sewer water, electric gas, and traffic could support.

Beach by design has been a proven plan that has worked on Clearwater Beach for over 20 years.

The formula for placing density units for this project is legal.

The traffic study has been done and approved by staff.

Neighbors who complain about a mixture of commercial and residential property too close together must know that this occurs in the old Florida district where this is placed.

Neighbors who complain about losing their view must know that Florida law does not give a property owner a legal right to preserve a view across a neighbor's property.

So I don't find any reason to deny this property owner the right to 91 density units.

Now it's gonna go to the CDB and all the plans will be scrutinized and the traffic, as they said, the traffic study will be looked at again.

But you know, that's why beach by design was made.

And you know, we're the only thing I would say to staff now is okay.

We've got after this allocation of 91 units, they got 19 units left.

I'd like to see that the staff uh consider allocating the 19 units to a strategic positions on the beach, not just random because I know that we can build in some areas, and other areas probably are too densely populated already.

So I'd like to not pause anything about it, but I'd like to just start thinking about strategically using the last of the 19 units.

But I will support the uh the uh 91 density units.

Councilman Menino.

Thank you, sir.

Read my notes over here.

I can't see that far.

What are you doing?

Um yeah, I'm supportive of the project.

Um beach by design was uh as said earlier, was an absolute amazing, well thought out, comprehensive plan.

It was not rushed, it was not built around assumptions or guesses.

It was built around years of professionals, the best in their industries doing a complete comprehensive plan and an evaluation of where clear water was at the time, identifying a need to shift away from residential units taking over the whole beach to tourism being able to support our tax revenues and to build out so tourism can continue.

Yes, it has been a long time, um, and that's credit to an amazing plan, uh, not to anything else.

I did get a little nervous on Monday when I heard the dreaded M word for development as well as the pause word, um, so I'm not gonna use that again.

But I I do think I do think we've come uh to a place where as we find an exit ramp, similar to what the council member says, I I think we need to have a deeper discussion, almost a strategic visioning session on identifying what our original plan was for, where some of those gaps like uh intercoastal boardwalk was supposed to be built and be an amazing amenity to to tourists and to to our residents.

There are a couple gaps in that, so maybe we identify where those opportunities and gaps are, and then strategically start to allocate opportunities for allocation in a strategic spot manner and not just a stick hands in a cookie jar and pull density out.

I think that's where we've come.

Uh, I am supportive uh of this plan of this project.

I think it will will add to to North Beach.

I appreciate in the beach by design plan that it's not just you know, grab density, you have to qualify for it, and you qualify for it uh on high standards of meeting development agreements and challenges that city staff puts in there to make sure the capacities met to make sure that traffic can handle it, and all of that is has already been said this evening, and traffic studies um do show that.

So I I am supportive of this project moving forward, and I do hope.

I believe uh the council member has already put on the next agenda session that discussion about it, and I I hope that can shift away from the M and P word and more into a strategic visioning of an allocation side.

Thank you.

I don't know that the M word was uh said, but I did definitely say pause.

Um to any developers watching.

I'm not saying that that we're closed by any means.

Um but to the locals again.

I'll just reiterate that we know that we have a traffic study that we now know is coming near the end of the year, um, and it comes down to all of us that live here, right?

Um, and to the tourists that do come and visit uh trying to move people onto our beach and off our beach is gonna be a priority.

So uh we'll get into that uh pause discussion next next work session.

Uh I look forward to it.

I look forward to some of the data points that are coming from it.

Um, but I do also support this project and all the future projects that are coming.

I do agree with your sentiment that beach by design being 20 years in did take into account uh future impact studies and that it is a good plan because we've been able to implement it with minimal changes going forward.

So uh thank you very much for the time and the clarification.

Um we'll talk again next session.

Council.

I'm in full support of a discussion.

There's a lot of confusion, there's a lot of uh opinions out there, and I think that would be healthy to kind of just get all the information out there and and and have that discussion.

However, I will not deny the right of this property owner to get um the rooms that they are requesting, it is well within their right, and it's part of the plan.

And before we do anything to derail that, I think we need to be very careful, intentional.

Um support the allocation of these ninety-one rooms, and I am looking forward to a discussion.

Leaves me.

Um so I just want to start by saying I think uniquely for me, uh going to and from up and down all around Clearwater Beach has been part of my daily life for uh almost 10 years.

I've lived out there for almost 10 years, it's my choice.

When I first moved out there, folks, my friends thought I was crazy.

Why would you go out there?

And uh, and I can tell you why.

I not only have been there for almost 10 years, but I stay there, it is one of the best places in the world to live.

Despite all the development, it is a phenomenal place to live.

And um, so I but I understand you know why my neighbors out there are concerned about additional growth because there are times where it is uncomfortable, but uh we all choose to live out there, those of us that do, because despite the inconveniences, despite all these tourists, it is still the best place in the world to live.

And I am thankful that uh we have become ranked in the top 24 beaches in the world, uh, one of only three U.S.

beaches to be ranked in that uh in that category because we have kept and we have uh developed the beach over time in I think the right way.

Twenty years ago, long before I became mayor, any of us were sitting up here, uh, we made a decision.

We were going to raise our density, we're gonna attract these flag hotels, and uh that been many headaches.

I can tell you I've been stuck in that traffic, like some of the folks I see out here in the office uh audience uh at times, and it's frustrating, but it has been a phenomenal success.

We have uh reaped so much benefit as a city, not just those of us who live on the beach, the entire city from the success of Clearwater Beach.

Um we generated, I just went to the tourist development council meeting yesterday in the month of May, Clearwater alone generated 2.6 million dollars of bed tax in one month.

Uh and and that's about anywhere between 35 to 40 percent of the county's entire bed tax.

Um and what that means is um you know, some of those monies from bed tax come back to allow us to do many nice things and improvements, the marina is getting some money right now, barricade ballpark from that bed tax.

We're able to do many nice things throughout the city because we made that decision years ago to grow our beach in this way.

Uh and it's not just the bed tax, it's all the folks who work out there, the families that rely on the income that work in these hotels.

Um it has been a phenomenal success, and although if you pulled together the folks who approved all this originally 20 years ago, maybe they wouldn't have put as many rooms in the pool uh as they did, but they did, and despite any second guessing, Monday morning quarterback, uh it has been a phenomenal success.

So uh I want everybody to remember that.

I also want folks to remember that we recovered so much faster than all of the other barrier islands for a couple reasons.

One reason is that our staff did a phenomenal job in putting Humpty Dumpty back together again, but because we are part of a larger city uh that has a phenomenal growing uh economic driver out there on the beach with the hotels we've added that were built more resiliently, we came back so much faster.

So I I yeah, I know uh again I feel it.

I know what folks out there who have been concerned about having additional units out there are uh I I get it.

You know, it's it at times it's tough, but we choose to live out there, and we choose to live out there knowing uh all the growth and all the additional growth, and there's not a whole lot of growth left.

The units are all almost except for 19 already allocated, so there's just not much more they can do.

So that's part of my decision.

The second part of my decision is this property, property owners do have rights.

You know, I and we all have rights, but those folks who have relied on this plan to uh to McGibbins here today.

Uh investing, uh there was some comment made about well, you know, maybe maybe you know that we've already added too many rooms, we're not filling them.

I can tell you that uh from the TDC yesterday, four of the six months of tourism and hotel occupancy and bed tax have been for the six months ever in Pinellas County.

We are filling them, all of them, and I'm sure that's driving the desire of McKibben to uh add these rooms out there.

Um so I I understand all the concerns, I feel it personally, but um I I just feel like as council member to shade has said, uh you know, we also need to understand the property owners who have relied on this plan to develop and to help us create the great success that we've all been created.

So you know, we we're gonna consider it again on August 20th.

So uh if folks uh want to come out that aren't here tonight that uh want to voice their concerns or try to change our minds, they're certainly uh have another opportunity to do that.

But for me, uh I think that uh I I'm going to be voting to move it forward to uh the August voting meeting.

So with that, um is there any other discussion?

Now is there a motion?

Move to approve agenda item 6.5.

Before the vote is taken, I just want to remind everybody you're only approving the public hearing date.

Yeah.

Okay.

Okay.

Did we get a motion in the second?

All right.

There was a motion in the second.

Okay.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed, unanimous.

With that, we'll move to our next agenda item, which is not out of line here.

6.6.

6.6.

Appoint an individual to the sister cities advisory board as a business community representative with an unexpired term through March 31, 2028.

Council members as directed at the work session.

I did invite the prospective applicants of the prospective applicants.

Um Ms.

Acton is here.

Mr.

Johnson did um withdraw his application as he no longer qualifies to be in that category, to serve in that category.

Um, and then I did share the application for Christine Michaelack, who lives at eight 55 Bay Way Boulevard, um, and is a retired AARP consultant, and she is also here today to answer any questions.

Okay.

Um so at this time, is there anyone here from the public that desires to speak regarding this agenda item?

If not, then uh we'll have council discussion.

Vice Mayor.

Uh thank you, sir.

Um, to the applicants who came and stood through this riveting meeting.

I appreciate you all.

Thank you for for coming.

Um Ms.

Mike Lick, thank you for uh applying as well.

And um Cheryl, thank you for being here as well.

Uh also I'm going to stick with my original recommendation uh for Cheryl to get this appointment due to her travel experience again with Delta Airlines and being a part of that uh business that uh community that that just deals with travel and overall knowledge that she would have, and I believe uh international travel as well.

So um again I will nominate uh Miss Action.

Okay.

Um is that a motion or are we having discussion?

I figured there would be discussion.

Okay.

I can make a motion.

Councilman.

Make a motion.

I um I agree.

I I had the same discussion on Monday and and thought Cheryl um was was a good fit for the same reasons, uh travel experience, tourism, uh as well as serving on multiple community associations and board roles uh in addition um to being part of the citizens academy.

Uh so I I think that's probably fair to continue my support for Cheryl.

Thank you.

Any further discussion?

Councilman?

Okay.

Okay.

Okay.

Is there a motion?

I'll make a motion to appoint Ms.

Cheryl Action to the Sister City's advisory report.

As agenda item 6.6.

Second.

Is there a second?

Second.

Okay.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed, unanimous.

Thank you for serving.

Move the agenda item 7.1.

So council 7.1 is a second reading.

Do you want me to go ahead and read the title?

So ordinance number 9909-26.

Ordinance of the City of Clearwater, Florida, amending code of ordinances, Chapter 30, traffic and motor vehicles, allowing payment through mobile platforms, allowing digital parking permits, clarifying continuous parking period requirements, allowing phone and email response to parking tickets, requiring an original affidavit or plea to contest parking tickets, increasing the penalties for parking fines, creating mobile payment parking zones, and eliminating the requirement to display parking receipts, amending appendix A, schedule fees, rates and charges, Article 14 streets, 19 streets, sidewalks, and other places or other places, sections 5-4-5, increasing administrative fees and increasing fees for removal and reinstallation of pay stations, providing for several ability and providing an effective date.

Okay.

Hearing none, is there a motion?

Motion to approve agenda item 7.1.

Second.

All those in favor, aye.

Opposed to this agenda item 7.2.

That's opt ordinance 9888-26 on third reading, vacated city right of way, alley drainage, utility easements as more particularly described, and record a Bayview City Subdivision, Plat Book 9, page 43, and the abutting Babe Bayview Terrace Subdivision as recorded in Plat Book 12, page 63 of the public workers of Pinellas County.

Evening, uh Mayor, Council members, Marcus Wilmington Public Works, uh, director.

You've seen this one a couple of times on Monday.

We did highlight there was going to be a slight change.

So what's in front of your uh packets uh as of today incorporates that slight change.

That's the removal of that little section up there on Tennessee.

So this is uh the current one is in your packets.

So standing by if there's any specific questions.

Okay.

Uh is there anyone here from the public tonight desire to speak for this gender item?

We say none, but we have a reading.

I read the title of the ordinance.

All right.

So ordinance number nine eight eight eight two six.

An ordinance of the city of Clearwater, Florida, vacating city right of way, alley and drainage and utility easement as more particularly described herein and recorded in the Bayview City Subdivision, Platbook 9, page 43, and the abutting Baybut Terrace Subdivision recording in plat book 12, page 63 of the public records of Pinellas County, Florida, providing an effective date.

Okay.

Any council discussion?

Now is there a motion?

Move to approve agenda item 7.2.

Second.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed, unanimous.

Agenda item 7.3.

Adopt ordinance 9884-26 on third reading, annexing certain real property whose post office address is 1903 Douglas Avenue, Clearwater, Florida, 3375, together with certain rights of way of Douglas Avenue and Sunset Point Road into the corporate limits of the city and redefine the boundary lines of the city to include set edition.

Okay.

Anyone here from the public tonight decide to speak to this agenda item?

Hearing saying none.

Any council discussion?

If not, can we have a reading?

Yes, sir.

Ordinance number nine eight eight four-two six.

An ordinance of the city of Clearwater, Florida, annexing certain real property located at the northeast corner of Douglas Avenue and Sunset Point Road, whose post office address is 1903 Douglas Avenue, Clearwater, Florida, 3375, together with certain rights of the way of Douglas Avenue and Sunset Point into the corporate limits of the city.

And redefining the boundary lines of the city to include set edition, providing an effective date.

Now is there any approved council discussion?

If not, is there a motion?

Move to approve agenda item 7.3 seconds.

All those in favor?

Opposed unanimous.

Agenda item 7.3.

Ordinance number 9885-26 and ordinance of the city of Clearwater, Florida, amending the future land use element of the comprehensive plan of this city to designate the land use for certain real property located at the northeast corner of Douglas Avenue and Zenset Point Road, whose post office addresses 1903 Douglas Avenue, Clearwater, Florida, 3375 upon annexation to the City of Clearwater's Commercial General CG providing an effective date.

Hearing saying none.

That was the meeting.

Okay.

Uh with that, then is there any council discussion?

If not, is there a motion?

Motion approved agenda item 7.4.

Second.

All those in favor?

I opposed you now.

This agenda item 7.5.

7.5 is the third reading.

Ordinance number 988-26.

And ordinance of the city of Clearwater, Florida, amending the zoning atlas of the city by zoning certain real property located at the northeast corner of Douglas Avenue and Sunset Point Road, whose post office address is 1903 Douglas Avenue, Clearwater, Florida, 3375 upon annexation to the City of Clearwater as commercial C providing an effective date.

There are left of you here tonight.

Desire to speak to this agenda item.

Hearing seeing none, is there any council discussion?

If not, is there a motion?

Motion to approve agenda item 7.5.

Second.

All those in favor?

Opposed, unanimous.

We'll now move to agenda item eight.

Citizens to be heard on topics pertaining to city business, not on tonight's chair.

Are there any citizens to be heard?

Patrick Raftery.

I believe I have outlasted anyone that wanted to speak on an item not on the agenda.

Does that mean I'm entitled to 30 minutes?

No.

No, not tonight.

The lights will go up.

Absolutely.

I'm glad there's enough of a crowd here to hear me.

I would like to speak to you on a proposal that's going to be presented to you at the August 3rd work session, then that is in regard to the landings.

At the present time, you have letters sent to each of you from the Stevenson Creek Advisory Group, the Sierra Club, and Melissa Stanmoth with Mary Mont relative to being in opposition to this.

Melissa was here tonight, but she could not last until this late hour.

Her letter is definitively detailed as to the objections that that neighborhood has to this development.

Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition will discuss and approve this opposition as well at our August 3rd meeting, and you'll get a letter from us.

Not too long ago, there was a referendum to put light industrial businesses in that area, and it was overwhelmingly defeated.

I think the sentiment of the neighborhood is quite the same with respect to this most recent proposal.

You'll have a chance to hear that proposal in its detail on August 3rd and ask questions of it.

And you may decide to proceed with it.

You may decide not to.

I would like to add another option that I'd like you to consider.

This was an unsolicited proposal on a rather significant piece of property in central Clearwater, the landings.

I don't think it's appropriate for one proposal to be decided in the absence of any other bids that could be made.

I personally would suggest to the council that you request additional bids from other developers who have looked at this property and may have ideas that are more conducive to the neighborhood than the one that's presently before us.

I spoke to the developer at his first presentation, and he told me the two biggest benefits to the neighborhood be one proximity to this new business, i.e.

they could walk to it.

That didn't strike me as a very interesting benefit.

Secondly, they could also have their property used for parking for those that needed to get onto that development.

Again, I did not think that was very good as well.

However, there's a great deal of issues with respect to the proposed development of that entire area.

So I would ask you to carefully consider what's going to be proposed on August the 3rd.

Make your decision accordingly, but keep the option open of saying we want to hear if anybody else has an idea for the development of that property and to solicit their bids before any decisions are made.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Any other folks I believe, oh, okay.

Chelsea.

I'm really quick.

I know we all want to go home.

Um I don't know if I need to do my name and address.

Chelsea Gersh's name.

Um I live and I'm the president of the Plaza Park Neighborhood Association, which you all know, and I'm actually the closest neighborhood to downtown Clearwater.

So I just wanted to basically um say how excited I am for the development happening down there.

Um it obviously affects my myself as well as all my neighbors and my neighborhood.

And one of the things they do is they preserve their history and the historicness of their buildings.

So I appreciate the developers in downtown for doing that.

And then I also just wanted to say I also wanted to mention that the new mural that is going up on the Parks and Rec building has started.

That's in my neighborhood, and I really appreciate that.

So I'm really happy to see this new one going up on the parks and rec building.

So thanks for all that.

Thank you.

Anyone else?

I believe he has left Zachariah Wade.

That is it.

Okay.

Don't see him here.

All right, we'll move to item nine on the agenda, city manager reports.

Thank you, sir.

Um, I just wanted to mention I know that we've had a lot of um community requests for additional information and educational opportunities as it relates to the property tax referendum.

And so just wanted to remind everybody, we are working closely, um, collaborating with the legal department um and with the Foota League of Cities as to what the city is allowed to do as it relates to educating on this topic.

And so um it's not as easy um or straightforward as one would seem, and so it's not a uh any by any times of a means to not educate.

We're just trying to follow those rules, but we are having a community engagement specific to the budget so that we can hear from the community as to what they would like us to prioritize, and that meeting is scheduled for August 1st um at 10 a.m.

at morningside, and so if you will please just help us get that word out.

We really are hoping for a large crowd um to be able to engage the community specific to the budget.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Nothing bad.

It's time we'll move to item 11.1.

Discuss city attorney candidates and next steps.

Uh council, uh, can we take a five-minute recess so we can we can do that?

Have Mr.

Clay the building we'll recess for just a few few moments.

Call the meeting back to order and again move to 11.1 on the agenda.

Which is discuss the city attorney candidates and next steps.

So we had um we we've had a round of one-on-one interviews with um discussions with the candidates, and then we had this morning uh we had a uh work session where they presented to us, and so I feel like uh I again want to thank the staff, Tiffany, for helping the consultant pull together with us, and um we we had some really good candidates, I thought so.

We had a work session where they presented to us, and so I feel like uh I again want to thank the staff, Tiffany, for helping the consultant pull together with us, and um we we had some really good candidates, I thought.

So I thought all four were very capable, and all four would make good city attorneys for our city.

So appreciate your efforts and having us do that.

Um with that um, is anyone like to start on discussion with candidates and who they may prefer to uh to fill the vote?

Councilmember Albert.

I think we'll start first since I've done it all night.

Yeah, okay.

The city attorney position requires an individual with good moral character and professional integrity, capable of making well reasons, difficult and thoughtful decisions quickly and independently.

SGR has brought together a very professional group of applicants interested in becoming Clearwater's next city attorney.

As I mentioned early today in our special session, applying for the position, knowing that a longtime attorney with the city, um attorney's office is also applying.

It took a lot of moxic from all the rest of the uh applicants.

In my opinion, each applicant had strengths and personalities that would work very well as our city attorney.

I remember Andrew Mai as an applicant in our first search back in 2021.

He's worked with both county attorney's offices and cities, and he has a real attraction for Clearwater.

Camilo Soto worked as an assistant city attorney for Clearwater for over a decade and would be very familiar with our city attorney's office and our city's culture.

John Anastasio is a Florida-based municipal attorney with more than four decades of experience in local government law, land use, labor, and employment matters, public records litigation, governance, and governance council.

He seems to have the experience, but in my opinion, he wouldn't fit comfortably in Clearwater's culture.

That leaves Owen Kohler.

Owen has been Clearwater's interim city attorney twice since 2018.

He knows Clearwater's culture, and I found that he is a very detailed oriented attorney and a team player in City Hall.

He's always been a phone call away with any questions I've had, and he explains strategies and legal concerns in our weekly meetings in an easy to understand term.

I was happy to see that he wanted to step up to be city attorney, and I support him in that role.

Anyone else?

Thanks, sir.

Um, so before I share my thoughts, I want to thank each of the candidates for their time, preparation, uh, and professionalism they have shown throughout this process.

Um also want to thank Tiffany and staff as well for going through this with us.

It's been fantastic, and and I'm very appreciative of it.

Um it is evident that each of them care deeply about public service, all of the applicants, and I appreciate their willingness to place their names in consideration for one of the most important positions in our city.

This has not been an easy decision.

Um throughout this process, I've looked beyond resumes and credentials.

Every finalist is a capable attorney.

My focus has been on identifying the person who I believe is best prepared to serve the city of Clearwater on day one, provide steady legal counsel, protect the interests of our city and residents, and continue the tradition of professionalism that this office has established.

I'm looking for someone who demonstrates sound judgment, communicates clearly, remains composed under pressure, understands municipal government, and can earn the confidence of those they advise.

Those qualities become especially important, and the city is complex as Clearwater.

We regularly navigate significant development projects, major public contracts, constitutional issues, sunshine law obligations, and the matters that receive considerable public attention.

Throughout the process, one thing became increasingly important to me while interviews and applicant material tell us a great deal about a candidate.

There's no substitute for seeing someone perform the job.

Over the past several months, Owen has had the opportunity as our interim city attorney.

He has advised this council through complex, high-profile matters, including a citizen-led petition process, the Duke Energy franchise agreement, the Phillies Agreement, and each instance I have seen him remain prepared, composed, and focused on providing clear legal advice so this council can make informed decisions.

I was also encouraged by his understanding of the role itself.

When asked what he viewed as the city attorney's most important responsibility just this morning, he spoke about providing legal advice to the city as a whole, ensuring the council understands both the law and the risks before making the decision.

That answer reflected the philosophy I believe this office should embody.

I also believe there is value and continuity.

Owen has built productive work relationships with the council and staff, understands this organization and has demonstrated that he can effectively perform the responsibilities of this office.

That does not diminish the qualifications of the other three finalists at all.

All of whom brought meaningful strengths to the process, as council member uh Albrighton noted on a little bit, and I'm sure others will through this.

All of them should be proud of the way they represented themselves.

Rather, it reflects my belief that at this moment in Clearwater's history, Owen is the candidate that best positioned that is best positioned to continue serving the city with integrity, professionalism, and sound legal judgment.

So again, I sincerely thank each of the candidates and their willingness to serve our community.

Based on my evaluation of the entire process, I will be supporting Owen as Clearwater's next city attorney.

Councilmember Teshay.

Yes, I also would like to thank all the candidates for their time, professionalism, and uh willingness to uh put themselves out there.

We were very fortunate to have an uh exceptionally strong pool of applicants, and I sincerely appreciate the effort each of them invested throughout the process.

For me, the decision was about more, it was not about so much the credentials and legal experience.

They were all talented, they all had something to bring.

The more difficult question for me was determining who is the best fit for this organization and for Clearwater, and this was based on my experience in the corporate world when I uh entered a sales um uh position, and my manager who still uh I I revere much, she when she hired her whole team, no one really understood where she was coming from.

There was no pattern until she completed her team, and then we realized she made sure that every strength was represented and every weakness was covered.

And so we became the number number one uh team in the nation consistently because she hired for a whole rather than each individual for their strengths.

Um, so to me, this was just uh this was not just about filling a position, it was about strengthening a leadership leadership team.

I wasn't simply looking for the most qualified individual.

I was looking for the person who would make an already talented leadership team even stronger.

An effective leadership team is more than the sum of its individual talents.

Its strengths come from how well those talents complement one another.

That's especially true in this position, where the city attorney works closely with council, the city manager, our executive leadership team, staff, and ultimately the residents we serve.

So while leak while so while legal ability and experience were certainly important, I also considered integrity, judgment, communication, temperament, collaboration, institutional knowledge, and the ability to build trusted relationships across the organization.

Sometimes the most qualified candidate on paper is not necessarily a best fit for a particular organization.

For me, this decision was not about finding this decision, was about finding the right fit for Clearwater today and in the future.

After considering all those factors, I believe the candidate I'm supporting is best overall for our city and for our organization, and that would be Mr.

Collin.

Councilmember Manina.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um staff.

I know early uh in this process of serving.

I was quickly reminded by the city manager that um, sir, you're here for policy and not personnel.

And um, you had to tell me that a couple times up front, and I eventually got the hint, but I appreciate it.

But this is one of the instances uh where this dais uh like yourself does have that that ability uh to participate in it, and I think it's important uh that staff did facilitate that process uh for us to be truly included from the very first uh meeting, and I appreciate that.

I appreciate uh the organization you put into it.

Um I appreciate our consultant, uh, very thought-out, well-organized, very communicative, collaborative process.

Uh, I think that was everybody has said the candidates they put before us were all extremely qualified.

There was no no questions about that.

Uh each and every qualified candidate uh has a passion to serve.

Um we all felt that in our one-on-ones uh and in their presentations today.

There was no question about their experience, all knowledgeable uh and professional.

So they all check those boxes.

Uh they should all be proud of who they are and their their ability to serve whatever city or county or organization um they continue to serve in.

Uh they all had individual qualities and characteristics that I I truly did enjoy.

Um Mr.

Anastasio was extremely mission focused and a problem solver.

I I I enjoyed that and realized that real quick.

Mr.

Mai was extremely even keel.

His leadership style was calming, uh refreshing.

Um, and and that that was um definitely a positive for him.

Uh Mr.

Soto had an extreme positive energy and vibe to him.

He was upbeat, had a good smile, um, and and that energy um was contagious.

Uh but for me at the end of the day, a lot of very important characteristics and what we need uh to lead our city attorney's office as the chief legal advisor.

Um was somebody that would bring us continued stability.

Uh somebody that brings that stability not only in their leadership style, uh, but stability in our culture and culture in that office.

Uh the they bring that stability and and comfort.

Uh Clearwater is unique in so many of its opportunities as well as its challenges.

Uh and for me, uh Mr.

Kohler definitely checks that box.

I'm 100% not only comfortable uh but confident in saying that Mr.

Kohler should uh and look forward to him continuing to be uh the city attorney for the city of Clearwater.

Thank you.

So I uh as I uh said earlier, and I appreciate what the others have said about all four candidates, that uh we would be uh we would be in good hands with any of the four that we chose.

Uh it does take a lot to put your name out there when there's an internal candidate for any position, let alone this position.

And uh I want to assure uh all the candidates, and this was not uh a done deal by any means in the beginning.

We were very open to considering anyone who applied, and that's the reason we engaged a firm to look for our next city attorney.

And um, and they had really good candidates, and we are appreciative of that.

And I could go on and on, and some have mentioned the individual qualities of each, and as an attorney myself, uh had great respect for all of them, enjoyed my conversations with them, and I think the thing that I noticed was that each one of the four of them would have brought something different to our city.

They had something about their background.

I had something unique, and all four uh would be a great fit.

Uh, but I uh agree with the others here that uh for me uh you know there's um you know certainly Mr.

Kohler can't um he he's not naive in anything that's uh happened here over the years or happening now.

He he he's seen it all, so he's going into with eyes wide open as far as the challenge we face and the difficulties and challenges and uh and he's helped navigate us through many of those and and um and he uh has been for me since he's been interim, he's been very easy to work with, and I think we've all acknowledged that.

So I agree with the others that um and we'll make it unanimous that uh we select or we offer the position of city attorney to Owen Kohler.

And then uh with that, I think we have consensus.

Uh so our next step, I think, is for Tiffany for HR to work with Mr.

Kohler on an agreement to uh become the next city attorney.

Yep, we can certainly do that.

As far as the drafting the agreement, um looking for some direction from counsel, would you recommend that we go to uh an outside council?

I I think that that's appropriate that we get outside council to draft it.

I think that's typical of his issue.

That's my understanding is that uh Mr.

Kohler would prefer as well, and we have um agreements that we can uh go ahead and get uh settled on.

Okay.

So yes.

Excellent.

Thank you very much.

We'll take it from here and be in touch.

All right, thank you all.

Good.

Thank you.

Okay, with that, we'll move to item 12 on the agenda, closing comments by council members.

Who would like to go first?

Council members to share.

Okay.

You almost had a straight flush, but no.

Um okay, so to me, the I need to talk about our 250 um anniversary.

I was really, really pleased with it.

So I want to recognize our city manager and the many staff members who made Clearwater celebration of America's 250th birthday such a tremendous success.

What impressed me the most was that it there wasn't just one thing going on.

There was so many things.

Whether it was Patriarch Patriotic Crafts, um ping pong tournaments, many community events.

Um there was truly something for everyone.

It was a wonderful example of city departments working together alongside our local businesses and community organizations to create a celebration that reflected the spirit of Clearwater.

I also want to recognize our parks and rec department and public communications team for creating Clearwater celebrates 250th brand and bringing the entire uh initiative together.

It gave the celebration its own identity and made it easy for residents to discover all the activities taking place throughout the week.

Special shout out to Chris Cook and the special events team.

They were challenged to make this year's celebration at Culture Park memorable and different, and they absolutely delivered from the kids' zone to the outstanding musical performances to the inspired addition to Clear Waters Clock Talent.

They created the kind of fun um that we that Clearwater really um enjoyed.

And also, Mr.

Dan Slaughter.

Um thank you so much for championing the edition of the laser show.

There was a moment there where I I thought I was like in Eastern Europe.

Yeah, laser.

Uh so thank you so much.

Honestly, the laser show added something different.

Um, and I got a lot of positive feedback from it.

And of course, fireworks was a great perfect way to end it.

But a lot of people worked very hard and the results showed.

Thank you.

Uh Vice Mayor, do you have anything?

I do not.

Thank you, sir.

Councilman Renato.

Good.

Um, yeah, Mayor, thank you.

Uh definitely follow up on that.

I won't go into too much of it.

Uh, but the 250th celebration, not just the the weekend, but leading up to it, staff did uh an amazing job.

Um we now know who the man is for the for the laser light shows, so you've uh you've got that, and that's good to know.

But it it it was awesome.

I hear it was much better when you're down under it than on top of it.

Um we definitely learned that.

But what a great celebration that our our city and our country deserve 250 years uh was definitely magical.

Um I I was questioning at times during the fireworks show if it was ever gonna end.

Uh it was it was extremely long.

Um and uh it it was it was uh absolutely beautiful.

I also today had the privilege of touring our recently renovated long center pool.

Um absolutely beautiful.

Um it it's this is truly a generational type project, um, and is part of what separates us uh as a city from other surrounding communities throughout the state uh in the region.

As I walked around there, it was just easy to visualize the children from summer camps and how many hundreds and thousands of kids have learned to swim in that pool for the first time all the way through the ages to the elderly uh in the therapy pool, um individuals that can't be out in the sun, and that's the only exercise they get.

Um that pool checks so many boxes outside of college swim tournaments and stuff.

Um I I could see them in there, it felt beautiful in there.

The air was crisp and great, the pool water was in HD.

It's uh absolutely clean as can be, and I I just wanted to commend the the great collaboration that went into it between our leadership team, parks and recreation, public works, wanna maker Jensen architects, uh, and creative contractors.

Um and then to top it off, I think we're still waiting to find out what that final number is.

Uh but it sounds like that beautiful project went off, and we could have be saving over half a million dollars uh when the numbers come back.

I've seen preliminary close to 700.

Um, that's uh that's awesome.

We almost got a sun deck built.

Um and I know that was uh that was some pushback on that, but uh kudos to the entire team, the collaboration project.

Uh I I did say tell the team that I was gonna talk about it, but they said make sure you say it's not open yet.

So it officially is not open.

They are uh running around on final touches before they get the CO.

Uh they said it should be days, not weeks, hopefully.

Uh, but but it is an absolute beautiful project.

So thank you to all the time and energy that our staff put into that.

Uh our community's gonna enjoy that for many years to come.

Thank you, Mayor.

This member Albright.

Uh nothing, Mayor.

I think I've said enough tonight.

Okay.

Well, I hate to um hate to have good news close on um sad note.

But uh there were two individuals that have passed away in our community here in uh in recent weeks that I just wanted to um remember them and remember uh their families.

Um first one is Paul McMullen.

Um he passed away, and his funeral was last Saturday uh here in Clearwater.

Uh Paul played for the Clearwater Bombers.

Uh he's probably more well known through uh the community for uh his family business, the McMullen Oil Company, which he took over from his father, Guy McMullen, who lived to be over a hundred years old.

And uh and Paul's grandfather was Captain Jim McMullen, was original homesteader here in Pinellas County.

And uh you don't have you you hardly go anywhere in Clearwater.

We don't see a McMullen Road or McMullen tennis something, McMullen.

And uh Paul was a member of that family and uh really was very involved in the community and used the success, the McMullen Oil Company, which his father had founded to carry that on and contribute in many ways to our community.

So uh to that family, we want to uh send our uh deepest sympathies to them for all that the McMullen family and certainly Paul contributed to his lifetime here in Clearwater.

And the second uh death is uh we'll uh attend the funeral tomorrow, Jack Latvala.

Uh Jack uh was served in many capacities in elected office, and then Jack also helped many, many candidates from not just Clearwater, but across the state be successful.

So in addition to his own legacy he left through his leadership and elected office, he uh helped many others uh in this city and other cities uh succeed and reach to the point where they could have an impact.

So if you count all the people that he advised from their campaigns and helped get elected, uh he may have impacted our community, our entire state uh by not only his own leadership but helping others more than any other political leader here in the state of Florida.

Uh anyone that knows Jack, he could have his moments where he he could be a little tough.

But um I don't think anyone can doubt the impact he had through the breadth of the influence that he had over many.

So uh tomorrow we will uh attend his funeral and uh our thoughts and uh go out to the uh Latvala family on the passing of Jack Lethal.

So with that, we will uh if there's nothing else to come before the council, we will adjourn the meeting of the Clearwater City Council for July 16th, 2026.