Thank you guys.

Thanks for coming to our um, let's see, today's October twenty-first meeting of the Gulfport City Council.

If there's any chance that your phone is on, check it now, please and turn it off.

Appreciate it.

If in fact during the meeting, if you are unclear and you need to have a side conversation with somebody, that's fine.

Just if you would go out into the hallway, we'd appreciate it.

As always, we have an action pack long meeting tonight, so we will start on time.

So the meeting's called to order, and the invocation will be given by Councilman uh Nancy Nancy early tonight, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.

So please stand if you will.

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America.

Present.

City Clerk Carico is present.

Thank you.

And welcome.

Um, especially in uh storms and uh uh to provide more benefits for us for uh things like uh cleaner air as well as uh uh helping us with our utility bills to keep them lower in the summer months.

So I I'm referring here to our urban forest and the the trees that make up the urban forest.

And um tonight I'm like to present an idea as a proposal um uh it's uh related to the resident tree board.

So uh last year or maybe two years ago now I I presented uh a canopy analysis study that I had done off of the 2023 aerial data.

We found that there was a 23.1% canopy cover, which is very low uh for the our uh county.

And um the if I remember correctly, uh City Council at that time adopted a 30% tree canopy cover goal uh without there being an end date on it.

We all know that 2024 was a very challenging year for our community, not just for uh because of the storms, but because of the excessive amount of uh trees that we lost uh before and after the storms uh with people that were concerned about the trees uh during storm season causing damage or uh creating a hazard for the community.

We know we we don't have uh data uh in order for us to track exactly how many trees were lost due to the two hurricanes that we had.

Um the communities around us uh have estimated that there in their communities as many as 10 to 20,000 uh trees in city right of way were lost, um, and that uh information was published through the Tampa Bay Times.

Um and so looking forward, we want to make sure that we are uh not only caring for the existing uh urban canopy cover that we have, but we also want to make sure that any investments that we make to the tree canopy cover are going to be a future storm resilient.

Um and there's a lot of ways to do that.

So one of the my specialties is community forestry.

Community forestry is a departure from municipal forestry in that it involves the community uh to work with city leadership in order to help make wise decisions, bring more uh money through grants to the table, and to do volunteer efforts in order to support the direction that the city leadership wants to go.

It originally started in the early 2000s.

I'm originally from Detroit and uh worked at a nonprofit that had started community forestry back in the 1990s, and they uh when I was with them, they were planting between six and eight thousand trees per year, all with volunteers, which is pretty remarkable.

Um and the the city was at that point was the leader in saying what direction they wanted to go, what the priorities were, and uh if there were specialty neighborhoods that were requesting additional assistance, then we would come in, do the community engagement and figure out what the the uh project was going to be and deliver that project to uh to the community.

Um this this model uh encourages a lot more integration and interactivity uh with uh community leaders in order for there to be kind of uh uh a push or an incentive in order to maximize the amount of uh buy-in that the community has.

And a lot of times uh uh in community forestry, the tree board can help to uh to bring resources to the table when the budgets for the city are uh restrained or constrained in any way.

So um the resident groups, like I mentioned, they they bring the volunteer energy and the labor, but uh they can also bring a lot of uh other um like marketing tools and things like that.

Um they can write, as I mentioned, they can write um with in coordination with the city leaders, they can write grants in order to bring more money in.

Um they also have the ability to do education and advocacy um through the volunteer network that that could be established as part of it.

So resident tree boards is uh is something that's been around for you know more than a hundred years.

And uh these are very very common in uh larger municipalities, medium municipalities, toward in the north where the forests are more extensive.

But it's a it's a tool that is very uh successful.

So resident tree boards is uh is something that's been around for you know more than a hundred years and uh these are very very common in uh larger municipalities medium municipalities toward in the north where the forests are more extensive but it's a it's a tool that is very uh successful um and it help like I mentioned it's uh it's a way for the residents to step forward uh take on some responsibility work with the city leadership and um determine what the what the most uh productive way to uh to approach forestry might be and so you can see that there's uh more than 3400 uh resident tree boards yeah they could also be called tree commissions so but they're all lumped into tree boards uh in the United States um this year um and this is all information that's on the Arbor Day Foundation website so tree boards are one of the uh minimum requirements for uh the tree city USA requirement there's three requirements uh one is the uh having a tree board or a committee spending at least two dollars per capita on on trees or forestry in a whole and that can be any range that could be salaries that could be maintenance any range of uh uh uh budget items and tree boards um have uh varying uh responsibilities depending on what the charter or what the the council and and leadership uh ask of that tree board and sometimes it can shrink sometimes it can expand depending on what the needs are so um one of the th the things that is most productive that I've seen is uh that uh tree tree boards or tree uh commissions can actually be the driving force for tree planting as far as implementation goes uh planning and and execution would all fall in in partnership with city officials or tree giveaway events which we've had uh a few of them in the in the this past year um and so what that does is it allows a single staff member to work with the tree board the tree board then uh advertises through its social network in order to bring additional volunteers to staff the event and then you can have a very efficiently run um uh tree distribution either through plantings or giveaways so that you can uh make those investments in a timely manner uh consistently over many years uh I I did mention that uh engagement in education are uh another common uh uh role uh for the the tree boards and so uh like I did uh two years ago with the urban forestry uh or the tree canopy cover um the the board itself can uh can take that on as a uh responsibility typically it's done every five years and they can take that on as a responsibility and then make a present presentation to this uh to this council here um and then of course uh like I mentioned several times it's all in coordination with uh with uh providing uh professional services volunteer services marketing and all of those things in uh direct collaboration with the the city staff so um we have a you know uh we've met a couple times and we I mean as many residents who have gotten together twice now in order to talk about what's possible and what direction we think would be uh best and this presentation is a result of those two meetings discussing how we as a community can come together in order to support the the tree goals or the tree canopy goal um in the city of uh of goldport okay so uh we mentioned every every five years um the the uh we call them UTCs or urban tree canopy analysis are done uh one of the other things that we could do is compare the uh 2024 to 2025 uh change analysis and what that means is we'll do a 2024 uh analysis do a 2025 and then compare by whatever however we want to break up the scale it could be down to the neighborhood it could be down to the block how many trees we actually lost because of the storms and that's something that you wouldn't have to pay a consultant to do that a tree board could help you with that and then there's of course uh uh operational things like um rec making recommendations for which trees uh uh should be either planted or uh given away in a tree giveaway and uh additionally um they can um the tree board can work with local nonprofits and volunteer groups in order to do uh tree inventories uh so that we know what stock we have out there what the health of that is uh how much benefit accumulative annual benefits that those trees provide so then we can begin to plan a more resilient um uh forest that has fewer pest or storm issues in the future um and so it this is a proposal but if it's adopted uh these are things that I've already mentioned that uh a tree board could do and um these are things that going into the into the new calendar year um we could uh meet with city staff the the tree board if it's approved could meet with city staff in order to figure out what to learn what the goals are as well as to try to figure out what the best way for us as a as a uh a volunteer resident group to interface and to take uh in order to you know to to meet what the the the direction is from from this body

uh tree inventories uh so that we know what stock we have out there what the health of that is uh how much benefit accumulative annual benefits that those trees provide so then we can begin to plan a more resilient um uh uh uh forest that has fewer pest or storm issues in the future um and so i this is a proposal but if it's adopted uh these are things that i've already mentioned that uh a tree board could do and um these are things that going into the into the new calendar year um we could uh meet with city staff the the tree board if it's approved could meet with city staff in order to figure out what to learn what the goals are as well as to try to figure out what the best way for us as a as a uh a volunteer resident group to interface and to take uh in order to you know to to meet what the the the direction is from from this body so um next steps um i i i would i welcome any discussion on this uh this is something that's near and dear to my heart and I think that it's a a very vital uh role um but uh if if this is something that the city and residents are interested in then we could begin to develop the the processes who's on the on the board and what the the roles might be in the future uh this is just another slide uh pretty much the same thing I've already said and that's the end thank you thank you um if you want to stay up here for just a minute dean in case there's any questions we usually go in speaking order to see if anybody has any questions of you so council member early thank you for that presentation that was great what is the optimal um membership volume for a city depending on the responsibilities oh the responsibilities not the city size per se it it it can it's not typically by the city size um it it typically is by the role and the the roles could be as simple as just meeting once a year in order to talk about what the issues are all the way to Massachusetts is the most uh progressive model where tree boards actually uh um they reside over the tree uh like protection ordinance and tree removal permits which is kind of on the the extreme so they need more yeah okay thank you thank you very much mayor totally in favor of this and um with our new volunteer portal it would be easy to make you know it come together and have a place you know to coordinate through um and I think it would be ideal for doing an inventory again handling tree giveaways and helping with that and um and even you know it could be that people come and get a tree and if we have enough volunteers there they could go home with that person and plant it for them if they they're not not able to that themselves and make sure that they plant it in the right place so that it thrives you know because sometimes I know I just got a tree and so I had somebody help me decide where I was going to plant it right in the middle of my new front yard and instead she said no no no you got to move it over here because it it won't get enough sun because there's an oak tree over there.

So you know knowing that kind of stuff is is what those volunteers could do and also again right tree right place and um and help find public places that are appropriate and I know that if we plant them on um the right-aways that we also want to make sure that the people who live there want them and will help take care of them and they also could maybe even help with um whether things need pruning or not and um to make sure that they're not I just learned about thinning trees so that they're not so heavy during a storm and again people could you know if people had a place where they could call and say okay this tree company came out and told me this tree is disease and needs to be cut down is it and because the arborists work for a tree cutting company and if they say it's disease they can just take it down without a permit and people don't know and so they could be spending thousands of dollars to have a tree taken down that's perfectly healthy maybe just needed a trim or something and and and if we had a place where they could call to get a second opinion that has no money at stake that that would be a really ideal thing and we could maybe even write articles in in the in the GABR or Gulfport living or wherever and and put them online and um you know for things that are seasonal and people need to know so I think it's a great idea I'm all in.

Councilmember Shaw likewise I'm very much in favor as well um certainly the tree canopy many of the things that have already been mentioned as far as the maintenance of them that's critical I have two 300 year old live oak trees I have them on arborist inspect them and and thin them and deadwood them et cetera every year and that's so critical and you know I can see where a lot of the trees that were damaged that I was aware of had fallen because they hadn't been properly maintained and then of course the the the right right tree in the right place is extremely important as well so I I think that so much has already been said that just to say that I certainly support it.

So I I think that so much has already been said that just to say that I certainly support it.

Yes.

I definitely support it also, and as Vice Mayor Thano said about the volunteer portal, that's a great idea.

Um I'm all for food foresting, so yeah.

Throwing that in there too, since we're having the residents do it.

That'd be awesome.

I have plenty of plants I could donate.

Well, very good.

Sounds like we've um uh pretty much in agreement that we think this is a good idea that we'd like to see go forward.

Um we do have a new arborist.

I don't know if you've had an opportunity to meet um, excuse me, I I did say that wrong, a new horticulturist.

Okay.

And um he was at the tree giveaway recently when I went and uh just beaming with excitement about his role and um explaining the trees that were available and how they needed to be cared for and such stuff.

So it was quite impressive.

So in terms of, you know, I don't know how to make that happen, but if he could be the staff person, I think that that would be um a good start.

And I also feel like with our new software, uh we have, and I'm always everybody knows I'm always in favor of any initiatives being driven by volunteers.

Um I'm all in favor of that.

I think my only question would be that you might want to address is when um Vice Mayor said um placed in the right location.

Uh I pondered the location because sometimes when our trees are being placed in the right of way, um, they might be very close to our sidewalks, which then creates a lot of maintenance down the road for us in terms of sidewalks rising, and also secondarily, it creates a lot of dropping leaves that end up on top of our storm drains, and we have a flooding issue.

So, you know, I think um where to put them is one question, uh, and I agree with let's not put them in somebody's right away that doesn't even want them and it's not going to take care of them.

But also, you know, if there's certain trees that we know are less likely to cause problems with our sidewalks in the near future and are less likely to drop, God forbid, pine needles, uh, or leaves into our streets.

Um I was recently in Alaska and um I was in Anchorage, and I kept looking at how clean the the curbs were and how clean the um storm drains were.

And then I had an aha moment.

It's because they had trees, but all the trees were backed way off the street.

So they weren't dealing with uh that kind of debris and issue on a regular basis like we are.

So guidance along those lines would be real helpful.

Yes.

Okay.

Thank you.

Then we need to talk next steps.

So maybe we could have because we've already, you know, met and dealt that maybe we could set up a meeting with um Benji and Tom or Kendrick and or or Tim, whoever would be the appropriate person to to start fleshing out what we would see as being appropriate.

Can we set that up, Jim?

Mayor.

Um I mean let me talk to Tom and then you can reach out to Dean.

I think we just got a consensus here and then we will decide how to move forward.

But we're not talking years from now.

There's a there's definitely was a consensus that we'd like to see this move forward.

So let us regroup and uh figure some things out and then we'll have a conversation for all to hear, and we can start the movement forward.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Please contact me if you have follow-up questions as well.

Alrighty, thank you.

Okay.

Appreciate it.

Okay, so that brings us to our discussion item, and that's where I said things were gonna go in a little different order.

So um, as many of you know, we've had a committee that's been meeting for several months now called the Charter Review Committee.

Uh each one of us selected the sections of the review that we thought needed to be looked at, and it wasn't too hard for us to come up with a consensus of about five that we felt the most strong about when it was all looked at.

And since then they've actually looked at some additional ones.

So as they take and they present their ideas to us tonight, okay, there will be discussion among us.

There will be public comment.

But just so you know there's no final decisions.

We may vote that yes, we'd like to see this move forward to the become a referendum on the March ballot.

But whether it passes or not is totally up to y'all, okay.

So I don't want to hear, oh, the council decided to do this or council decided to do that.

That's not what we're about, okay?

It's the residents who will make the final decision.

So that being said, I think that uh Mr.

Joe Gunther is going to actually give us a presentation on this tonight.

Or I guess lead this discussion, I should say.

Thank you.

Our board has worked uh diligently uh to revise the current charter, dedicating considerable time and effort to these proposed changes.

We got a feedback from council on this, and um we really put a lot of time and effort into to listening to your feedback and trying to make those changes to make everybody happy with that.

Um we are recommending um modifications to a total of nine sections.

Um while some of these changes are minor, um, other couple other sections are quite detailed.

I'm gonna go um through those section by section.

I know you have that in front of you.

Um starting off with section 103, uh extraterritorial powers.

Uh, we have three changes in that section.

Um, provoke uh a proposed revision, uh change the maximum lease term from 30 years to five years.

Um we we decided to make that change.

That's going to increase flexibility for the city.

Uh it's going to reduce underpricing, number one, um, which in the in the past history of Gallport, we have underpriced um some commercial uh real estate.

Um it's going to give us better alignment and um with planning cycles for that.

Um, um proposed addition.

The monetary amount of any lease for real property shall be at fair market value to be termed determined through a licensed appraiser, paid for and chosen by the leasee.

The city reserves the right to obtain a second appraisal, paid for and chosen by the lease or should there be a discrepancy in value.

Um with that, uh number one on that, there again that's going to prevent underpricing because a a licensed appraiser will be giving you the value of what that lease should look like.

Um that's going to ensure tax the taxpayer gets a fair value for their taxes on that property as well.

Um it provides predictable income.

Um, and our goal is a transparency and transparency of how the council makes decisions.

And that's transparent.

Here's what the value says it is, and that's what it is.

Uh number three in section 103 was uh a proposed addition, new language.

Upon uh upon approval of the referendum by the city's electorate, the the grantee is responsible for recording the updated deed with Pinellas County clerk of the clerk within 30 days.

Otherwise, said property would revert back to the city.

Um reasoning behind that is is protecting the city from liability.

Um it ensures accurate public record and um it ensures that the taxes are being paid by the grantee and not the city still paying the taxes on that property.

Moving on to Section 302.

Um the proposed addition is new language.

Uh both the mayor and council members shall be elected for three terms and shall be limited to two terms consecutively.

Any member of council who has reached a maximum term for their seat must be held out of office for a minimum of two years at the time of qualifying.

An exception would only be permitted in the event there are no qualified candidates for a specific ward or for mayor.

Um that was one that we talked a lot about at the last meeting.

Uh we took what you your advice was, we went with that.

Um we looked at other municipalities and what they do that are about our size.

Um we're trying to encourage innovation.

Uh we're trying to prevent stagnant stagnation and um balance power by promoting a healthy democratic process.

Uh term limits would also improve accountability.

That was our reasoning on that one.

On section 304, uh mayor, presiding officer, proposed revisions.

The mayor shall uh preside at meetings of the council.

The mayor shall be recognized as the head of the city government for all ceremonial purposes and by the governor for purposes of military law, but shall have no regular administrative duties.

The council shall elect a vice mayor annually from among the current council members chronologically by ward at the meeting following the general election or as soon as thereafter as practical, who shall act as mayor during the absence or disability of the mayor, and if a vacancy shall occur, shall become the mayor of the for the completion of the mayor's unexpired term until the next general election as provided in section 306 D of this article.

The title of Vice Mayor shall only be assigned to a member of council who has served a minimum of one year on the City Council.

Upon the vice mayor becoming mayor, or should be the vice mayor resign, a new vice mayor shall be assigned to the next chronological ward as long as that council member has served a minimum of one year.

And that is that one's just basically a verbiage cleanup, and that one's pretty self-explanatory.

Moving on to Section 305.

Um 305 and 306 are probably the two that we spent the most time on.

Um it's very lengthy, um, especially 306.

So I'm not gonna read all that, and I'm I'm gonna do both of them um together to try to give you an idea of what our board um felt was uh necessary.

Like I said, we did spend a lot of time on that one.

Um we're trying to maintain the integrity and the accountability and public trust.

Uh we are allowing for the council to be able to act swiftly to protect the credibility of the governing body.

So this what we're trying to do in this is we're trying to give the council a swift action where you could if you had a problem you could take care of it right away.

Um we are strengthening the city's ethical framework while maintaining public trust and confidence.

And then moving on to section 309.

Um in section 309, there were three changes.

Um section C we are striking in a book kept for that purpose.

Um and we're changing that to per uh per Florida state law.

Um and that's the same with section E and what we're doing there.

That's just a cleanup.

Uh the city clerk doesn't use books anymore.

And so we tried to go with per Florida state law to make that verbiage cleanup.

And then in subsection six, uh not consistent with, and we're changing that to in the limitations of the Constitution.

Moving on to 314, uh proposed revision, change the charter review time frame from once every 10 years uh to every five years, and the charter must be renewed in its entirety.

So right now we're changing it every 10 years, and we're proposing that's done every five years.

Um we believe that it's gonna enhance strategic planning and adaptability, uh stay legally compliant and transparent and responsive uh to what Gulfport needs.

And with the way things change with uh technology, we do need to look at it every every five years, not every ten.

Um section 402, uh proposed removal of qualifications.

At the time of appointment, the city manager need not to be a resident of the city uh or state, but during the tenure of office, the city manager shall reside within the city unless otherwise suspended uh and affirmed by four votes of council.

Um allowing the city manager to be outside broadens our talent pool.

Um Jim O'Reilly is a perfect example of of talent outside of our municipality.

Um and then section 501.

Uh we are removing as determined by council, that's just a verbiage cleanup, and that's the final one, and that one's self-explanatory.

And so we do have the whole board here tonight and be happy to answer any of your questions.

Okay, city clerk, can you give me a a little guidance on how we should do this?

Um do we take it one at a time?

We have discussion, then call for public comment.

Uh, you know, I need a little guidance on how this should best be done.

You can take each section by section if you'd like and then do the roll call vote after that.

Okay, if you'd like.

All righty.

So I think what we'll do then is um we're gonna go in speaking order, all right, and we will take one section at a time.

And Joe, you did an excellent job of summarizing, and fortunately we had this in advance, so we've had a chance to look at it as as well as this is our secondary conversation on this.

So I think that we can go in speaking order.

Um, and I think as each one of you do this, you know, are you okay with the way they've written it?

Would you like it tweaked a little bit?

Do you not like it at all?

Would you prefer um I don't know at this point, Teresa?

Do we say if we would like to see this move forward if we don't, or do we wait and take a vote after public comment?

This is just your discussion on the items.

Okay, can openly discuss about what your feelings are on it.

Okay.

Um and then it's up to you if you want to take public comment after that.

You could.

I think that would keep it cleaner that each we're always talking about one subject matter.

So I think that's what we'll do.

We'll say our comments, we'll listen to public comment, and then um then I would think um city clerk that you would then ask us if we'd like to see this move forward or not.

Yes, okay.

We have a plan then.

Okay.

And we'll start with you, please, on section 103.

I don't have any questions on that.

I only have a question on a different section, so I'll wait until I get to that section.

Perfect.

Thank you.

Good job, though, everybody.

Really good job.

Yeah, I appreciate all the time that you've all put in on this because it takes a lot and it's detailed and could be boring.

So thank you.

Um, I don't have any problem about the five years or the other thing.

Um in the last section, um it says an updated deed, but if they're just leasing, they're not actually getting a deed.

So uh how does that work?

What what's the legal thing then?

What would they actually be updating with the county clerk?

Right.

If the if it's just a lease, then they wouldn't need to do that.

We would just probably just have the lease agreement with the with the clerk, and and that would be fine.

Yeah, because we're talking doesn't apply like that.

Yeah, it we're talking five-year terms, so nothing would need so we really don't need that section, right?

Um I don't think it hurts having that section in um if there is a the because it'll address if there's a sale of property, which you do by referendum, but that would also be recorded.

So I'm only thinking if we are going to put some of these out for referendums, if you have too many items, people just lose track of what's going on.

I understand.

But if you look at the paragraph above it, it talks about the property being sold.

Okay.

So that's what that means.

Okay.

All right.

Okay.

All right, then that makes sense because we were talking about just leasing.

Okay.

And um so again, I don't have a problem with it.

I'm wondering if if it can't be something that just by policy we put into any sale agreement rather than put on the charter.

So people I I and I don't have a problem with it being in the charter, but whether that would if it if we have to cut down the number of things.

May Mayor, if I may.

Yes, please.

If you determine um however many of these that you want to go forward, we will put in an ordinance form for you.

And at the time you which will require two readings.

You also will have the time at that point that if you see them all, you decide we don't want this one because there are too many, or so you can so you're gonna have more than one opportunity.

Um tonight is really telling us which ones you want us to present in ordinance form.

Once you read those, I mean you may there could be yeah, we don't really need this one, Vice Mayor.

Like you said, this could just be a policy we're gonna adopt.

And so when we put them in in um ordinance form, that's how they appear on the referendum.

That's how they will appear uh with the question.

Wait, they'll appear in a I have to write a question that has to be 75 words or less.

So uh little art.

I I'm sure, especially on the ordinance spells out more in depth what you're trying to do, but the actual question is will be shorter, probably.

Okay.

All right, okay.

That's my only thing.

All right, council member Shaw.

I too appreciate the the time and the thoughtfulness that the uh advisory board put uh into this.

So thank you so much.

And I do not have questions about these, and I think they're all important language.

Okay.

I'm totally okay with the uh changes being suggested in section 103.

Did you do coasting?

Um I have nothing to add.

Okay.

And I have nothing to add on that.

So before we move on to the next section, is there any public comment?

Anybody want to speak uh specifically to section 103?

Seeing none, we're gonna move along then to section um 302, which has to do with terms, just to refresh your memory, okay?

And we'll let you go first.

I I think I asked this before.

I just wanted to double check, Joe and team.

So this would be um implemented at the next election, which would be in March, correct?

So the three years.

And well, it has to be approved at the next election, so it wouldn't take effect until the following election.

Okay.

Yes.

That's what I was wondering.

So if I ran again, it would be for three years.

Because I couldn't do it until after.

Right.

Okay.

Okay.

I just want a clarification.

Thank you.

No more questions.

Yeah.

You're when your term was up would be the first election that we would it would go to the the additional time period.

Great.

Thank you.

Thank you.

No more questions.

That was my only question, is about the effective date, too.

Um term limits was something that I felt were extremely important, and I have thought that for a number of years as well.

I did a a research project of all the cities within Pinellas County and some beyond, and also asked a number of uh city managers and city officials from other locations, and and two years has um basically been considered to be rather archaic, and the majority of them by far are three years and four years.

So I think the three years is is is a good way to go.

And um term limits.

Um I you know, I'm I've always been in favor of that.

Thank you.

Councilmember Jackson.

Um I'm okay with the verbiage that's here.

So no changes for me.

Okay.

I am definitely in in in favor of term limits, so I'm really glad to see this.

Um I like the fact that we're increasing the um council members from two years to three years.

I think the term of two years is reasonable for a total of six years.

Um I said this before and I'll say it again, but I'm okay if I'm in the minority.

I do think that based on the fact that our last mayor was in office as mayor, I think for 16 years.

So could go to nine years from what we've had in the past 16 and 20 years, nine is a substantial difference.

So that being said, public comment, please.

Mr.

Freed?

And then I see you, Lenny, and I see you, Mary.

Hi.

Hello.

Um I'm not a fan of term limits.

Um I do like the fact that we're extending the time of the limit.

Um, but I think it should be staggered.

So odd and even numbers.

Um and I don't think nine years is enough.

Like two fives, maybe that would give you a tenure, and then uh maybe four for the council.

So I don't think six years enough to accomplish what you want to do, nor do I think uh.

I think ten is a good number.

Thank you.

Um Mary, you're next, and then Lenny.

So my comment is really about the interaction between different sections of the charter.

If you change this section 302 so that you have longer terms, then you also need to change 501 because it talks about elections every two years and odd years and even years and odd numbers and even numbers of council.

And when you change one thing, you've got to change every ripple effect of that in the document and take care of it.

And it doesn't this doesn't address that, and it doesn't address where the mayor's election is in relation to the other um city elections.

So I'd like to see that cleaned up.

I don't okay.

And here it gets implemented.

Lenny.

That's the problem.

Lenny Gukenheimer and on the Avenue.

So I do agree with that term limits.

Would you use the mic, Lenny?

I I I do agree with the term limits.

Um I'm wondering if the length of time that we're uh showing here, if that's going to be adequate for the experience that you need to have to actually uh be on council or the mayor.

I know you're have a better view of that than I do.

But um, there's going to what Mary was saying.

So if the districts that and uh the odd districts, like one and three have their elections and even years, then uh that's a three-year term.

So next year is going to be the election for 20 uh for one and three in 2026.

And they'll have a three-year term that will end in 2029.

But they're only going to be elected in the even years.

Yeah, she already brought up that.

Yeah, I know.

Okay, but see that's the example.

Right.

And the same thing happens for the uh the even districts.

Yes.

So that definitely needs to be looked at.

Okay, anybody else for public comment on this section?

Did I see a hand?

Yes.

John.

Hi, uh Jonathan McCoachy.

Quick question.

I didn't hear it, and I'm sorry, I haven't read it.

Um just wondered, can the mayor run for counsel when they're done?

Or is it a mayor considered counsel and therefore?

Or is it a mayor considered counsel and therefore they have to sit out.

Regardless.

Yeah.

Okay.

Just didn't get that.

Yeah.

They have to sit out.

If you've been in office, your term is up, then you have to sit out before you could come back.

Anybody else before I close public comment?

Okay, with that in mind, um, I didn't know if I want to go to the city attorney or to um we wouldn't change 501 until 302 passes.

302 has to pass before we would change 501.

If 302 fails, then we're not gonna have a referendum.

302 fails and 501 changed and passes, then we have a bigger problem.

So then if I understand right, you're suggesting that if we put it on the ref referendum and it passed, then we would probably come back at the next election and have to clean up section 501 to accommodate the odd year even year kind of thing.

Yes.

That makes sense.

I was wondering how you're gonna handle that.

All right.

Any any further conversation?

We've had public comment.

Are we ready to vote on this?

If we want to see this move forward.

The only other thing I'd say is is if people felt like three terms was better than two, I I would be okay with that.

Well, again, you will have the opportunity to once we bring the ordinance forward.

Obviously, it requires two readings and public comment, and you can amend it at that time if you so choose.

So um I very clearly am in favor of term limits, and I've said that here tonight, and now you've heard why I think that the mayor's terms should be not their terms should be longer, but that they should be able to do three terms.

Okay.

So we'll let it we'll take a vote as it reads now, and then I just ask you to think about it before we would pass the first reading.

I am also in favor of how it's written.

Okay.

So we didn't do a roll call vote on the first one, did you want you had kind of gone in, so I just let you go.

I didn't know.

I mean, I don't think again, because it's just having us draft the ordinance.

I mean, it depends on how council wants to deal with it.

The first one, everybody was in consensus, so I I wrote that down as we won't draft that.

Okay.

So that's okay with you.

We do consensus.

Okay.

All right.

So do we have a consensus to um have our city attorney um draft this in a question and move forward for the first reading?

Yes.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Yes.

Okay, we have a consensus.

Very good.

All right.

That takes us to section 304, and that has to do with how a vice mayor is um is, and I I don't know what to say because this proposal talks about being assigned as well as elected.

But that's what it has to do with, just so you know what our conversation is on this one here.

So if you want to uh start off, please.

Sure.

This one's worded a little tricky, but I I think it might be me.

Um served a minimum of one year on city council, or should the vice mayor resign, assigned to the next chronological ward.

I think I get it.

Um I thought it was going to be tricky up here, and I just couldn't make it work, right?

With regard, but it is the next election, and that that's how this would work.

Um I'm good after working that out in front of the whole entire world.

Thank you.

Sorry.

It would have been had I been just elected, like you guys had.

Then I we would have had a problem this time because nobody would have been appropriate for the three of us started the same month, basically.

I couldn't get that.

The only thing I uh would change, because I understand the purpose of that, but like this year it could have been a problem because we have so many new people all at once.

Um but in the first time where you say shall elect a city a vice mayor annually from among the current council members chronologically by ward, you're not really electing, you're just selecting, not electing.

So I would just change that one word to select or or assign, whatever.

But um, but it isn't an election because you're just doing it in chronological order.

Okay.

I I would agree with that that change as well.

Because it it is it is like you mentioned, somewhat contradictory or confusing, so I think it gives it more clarity.

Okay.

I understand.

Councilmember Jackson.

I'm okay with it.

Yep.

You're okay with what?

I'm okay with it written out as um I think elect is fine, like we all agree.

We go in chronological order.

Okay.

So that's sort of an election, I think.

Okay, so here's my thoughts on this one.

I feel like if um any of those suggested changes that were made, the this is the one that I would disagree with the most.

Um I don't think that there needs to be any change.

It already spells out that um that the that they will be um elected, and I would like to see that term elected.

I don't like this uh the chronological order, and I'm gonna tell you why.

Because for us to just go in chronological order is to assume that all council people are created equal, and I don't know that that's the case.

If I look at some of the past councils, we've had council people be way more involved than other council people, okay.

And if the vice mayor is to step into the position of mayor, and they don't have anywhere near the time available, this could be a problem.

So I don't think just the fact of, well, you're next, we have one, so now let's do two, let's do three, let's do four, in order, I don't think that that is really what we need to do.

I think that the council people should elect their vice mayor.

It's a one-year term, they should elect them.

And uh I'm making some assumptions here that they've already worked together or they know each other or they've listened during their campaigns.

Um, because I don't think that um I mean, we've had some people on council that I would have not been happy to see step into the position of mayor, okay.

And we have had people on the council that have had full-time jobs, and we've been people that have had people that are fully retired, and there's a different time commitment needed.

So I would like for the um the vice mayor to actually be elected from their peers, and if that's the case, then there's no need for um 304 to be changed at all because that's what it says now.

I know that the habit has been fallen into to do it by chronological order, but that's not what the charter says.

So that's my opinion on that one.

Public comment?

Yes.

Jennifer.

Hi, Jennifer Donch Premier Drive.

Um, just based on that last comment, to say that someone who has a full-time job that might be elected to council would not be appropriate to step into the mayor's position if they need it to be, is um it's like offensive almost because how could you say that someone just because they have a full-time job does not have the amount of effort available?

That's like saying a mom can't love all her kids the same.

Like you can have two full-time jobs and do them both perfectly acceptably.

And I and I agree with what you just said, but I think that um if we're electing, we can take that into consideration.

There are some people that could not do that.

But some can.

Yeah.

And you said that that's why you don't think that.

So I'm just saying I think that that's not appropriate.

I I'm sorry if I said that, then I'd like to take that back and say that uh that is one of my considerations is the amount of time, and not everybody on the council can give the same amount of time as everybody else.

Or they may not um necessarily when they're brought there, but could step up to the plate when they need to.

Right.

And so that's a really good point in that probably when it's time to elect, we should see who wants that role.

Yeah.

Or they might be offered that in this step up, and then you'd be so blown away that you'll have somebody available that you never knew, you know, like a dark horse might come out of nowhere and hit a home run.

Okay.

Let's see.

I think I saw another hand too.

Yes, Lauren.

Lauren Stern word for I agree with the mayor, this should be entirely elected, not rotated, not doled out like a deck of cards.

It's got to be about capacity, history, willingness, all that.

Okay.

Anyone else?

Yes, Laura.

What you just proposed, Karen, I don't know.

I'm still going back and forth in in my mind whether or not I like it, how I feel about it, but it does make me wonder if the a vice mayor did step into the mayor role because the mayor wasn't able to complete the position.

How then how long is the term for that vice mayor that stops?

The way it reads, it's uh till the end of what would have been the mayor's term.

Okay.

So let's just say that the mayor has a three-year term.

Then the vice mayor would could potentially step in for two and a half years is the way I read it.

If if the mayor had to leave after six months.

So it could be a long period of time.

And is what we do now just kind of designating, you know, kind of shifting from ward to ward for the vice mayor position.

That has been the practice.

That's not what the It's not what it says.

But how does it work in other cities with a council like this?

Do the council members elect their vice mayor?

I don't know.

I I think a lot of them do.

Okay.

Some do.

Some the mayor appoints the vice mayor.

Everybody does it, you know, differently.

So it's not like what we do.

Well, there are some that automatically.

Take turnship.

Yeah.

Okay.

And I think from attending a couple other meetings now, um, city attorney, tell me if I'm wrong.

I think there's actually councils of five that are appointed, and then that council of five elects the mayor.

Yes.

Okay.

All right.

Thank you.

Okay.

Um, and then I'll get to you, do you?

Tommy Bixler, Town Shores.

I like what you said about the board elects.

But the next last thing, I wasn't going to say anything.

But the last thing he said was they take over the whole term.

Shouldn't that be until the they take it over until there's a next general election?

I do not believe that's what our charter says.

Well, I'm well, you're talking about changing the charter.

I'm thinking that should be something in.

It shouldn't be, oh, three more years.

They weren't really elected by the people.

The next time an election comes up, for instance, like when somebody's removed from the board or somebody dies off the board, you appoint somebody, but the next general election, you have a vote to replace that person.

So just my opinion.

Up at some meeting.

That's the current that's the current language we have.

Oh, it is?

I'm sorry, but they said that the finish term is the current language we have in the that's not proposed to be changed.

Oh, okay.

That's good then.

So the remaining term uh the remaining term until it expires.

So I was saying if the mayor had just been elected for a three-year term, and something happened and they had to leave after six months, then they would the vice mayor would be mayor for two and a half years.

Yep.

Well, although although maybe not, because it's maybe it's unexpired term until the next year.

Yes, that's what I'm getting at.

That's key, right there.

Six months until the next election, and then the next person would they be elected for two years?

Well, we need to clarify that.

Yeah, because it also goes into the next section on vacancies.

So we need to once we once you decide on this one, we'll be able to next one, then we'll be able to write it accordingly.

Okay, thank you.

Dean.

Thank you.

And I I apologize, I don't I may not know the charter that well, but in my past I've seen catastrophic events that have wiped out more than one uh person.

And so is there a provision in the charter currently, or could there be that if the vice mayor is not able to perform the duties of the mayor, then there might be a tertiary person that would be selected, elected, whatever the term might be.

Yeah, but that's an interesting question.

We actually saw something pretty traumatic happen in St.

Pete Beach, where they were down to, I believe, one commissioner, uh and they had to select four, you know, they selected one and then those two selected one.

It was challenged, I think that was upheld.

But I understand what you're saying.

Uh if that was to occur for the vice mayor position, I would believe the council would appoint somebody to become vice mayor and fill that empty seat as we've done before, uh, fill a position.

But again, some of that goes to what you're gonna do in the later section.

Is that already codified?

Um the selection is of a remember vice mayor position is just solely a um ceremonial type situation, other than they would fill in for mayor, um, and we we have filled positions by the remaining council members.

That's how we've done it in the past.

So I would think like if if the mayor had to leave, and the vice mayor either couldn't or didn't want to take it on, then maybe the remaining three council people could choose another.

That's probably what would happen, or depending on our timing, you might let now you're talking about two vacancies.

We might fill the but not necessarily vacancy.

Like maybe I just didn't want to.

Right.

Ooh.

That's what I'm saying.

Of course, if they shouldn't have appointed me if I really did want to take it over.

So maybe in capacity.

Yeah.

There's there could be a situation, and forgive me, that could be a situation where the mayor could no longer serve or had passed, and that the vice mayor uh when they became vice mayor were capable of doing the mayor position, but then something happened that they could no longer be.

How would the mayor then be selected?

I think it would be just selected by the remaining members, which would include the vice mayor if they were still gonna sit up there.

Okay.

And let's just assume the vice mayor wasn't gonna sit up there, then we would probably go ahead and fill the empty seat and have those four people select someone to be to serve as mayor from that group.

And then you fill the remaining seat, right?

Thank you.

Yeah.

Did I see another hand?

Interesting question.

Mr.

Freed?

Yeah.

And then Mr.

Gunther, I'm gonna give you a chance if you want to address, because I kind of am in a disagreement, and I don't mind at all if you want to kind of rebuttal that.

Yeah.

Um, you know, in my personal life, my public life, and my business life, I've seen people rise to the occasion, and I've seen people who uh have not risen to the occasion with duty say that's been charged.

I have risen to an occasion.

I tend to be in a crisis, so I tend to rise to an occasion.

Um so you know, I kind of like the rolling part, um, because you you have to give people an opportunity uh to uh rise to the top or not.

And if there was a uh a severe enough problem, you can make that decision then and there, like, oh you know, you're not working out as vice mayor, you know, we're not gonna allow you, or perhaps it's not a position for you to be attaining.

Um and and I'm gonna preface this with a point.

Uh or not, I don't know if preface is the right word, but I have a question to each of you who are not mayor.

Could you step into being mayor?

Think about it.

Thank you.

Anyone else for public comment on this issue?

Okay.

Mr.

Gunther, did you want to say anything more?

No.

Okay.

All righty.

So let's see.

Oh.

Yes, Mr.

Rubin does.

When we're talking uh when we're talking about the vice mayor position, I think it was originally created to go from ward to ward because each ward was representing their people to the in the council.

Now I think that being elected might be the right way of doing it to get the right person in, and then whether it's the mayor elects and everybody agrees to it, or that would probably work to to make the vice mayorship work better.

Oh, yeah, I would want the entire council to elect.

And and what I'm hearing is to know who uh on the council would like to be vice mayor, because if somebody would prefer not to be considered, then that would be very helpful too.

And then that goes back to my tie-in if somebody had such a commitment at another that they could didn't feel that they could do it.

So I worded it very poorly, as Jennifer pointed out, but that is what I was thinking.

Okay.

Anyone have any other questions that you'd want of us to ask about that?

Not yet.

Maybe we should go again in in speaking order.

Okay.

In speaking order.

I must have a thank you.

No, um, is there anything else that you want to say?

I think at this point we're just trying to decide now if we would like to see this move forward to a question from the city attorney for a referendum.

Yes, I would.

Okay.

Okay.

So I've I've been um vice mayor twice now in in rotation.

And again, because we haven't had it, have that person have to move into the mayor's position.

You know, it was a really good thought about um whether that person should be elected as opposed to just rotated.

So I actually think that might be better.

And um, so then I wouldn't want to move this forward.

Okay.

Ms.

Sean.

I'd I'd rather leave it the way it is, where you elect somebody from the council.

Okay.

So I've been listening to everything everybody, and um, and now I am actually thinking uh in terms of the council electing the vice mayor, and that um that the person has the option to say I I'm not quite up to that at this point, and that it would be until the next general election.

Okay, so then there's no change needed, because that's what it says now.

Okay.

Councilmember Jackson.

I like the idea of going chronologically by ward and representing all of them.

Okay.

And and I would like to see it be an elected of um position from among the board, not um in chronological order necessarily.

So, mayor, under based on the three to two, um, we would leave it the same unless we have to make a change based on what you do in the next two sections.

Uh good point, yes.

Okay.

So now we're gonna address um section 305, uh, which deals with appointments and removals.

And the the changes now I had to change screens, I don't have it up with me exactly, but this has to do with the ability for the council after uh to remove somebody from council following due process by a three four vote.

All righty.

I just have a clarification question, Joe team.

So as it it was written, any council member violating the provisions of the section shall be guilty of a second degree misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof.

What you're asking to change it to is we can vote someone off without the piece about being convicted.

The idea now the way the language is written before is that you have to be convicted of a misdemeanor.

Right.

And uh in talking with the attorney to be convicted of a misdemeanor is going to take a year, year and a half, two years.

So by the time you're there, that person's already gone.

So we're trying to give you the ability to act more swiftly with that.

Okay, thank you for the clarification.

And and remember what is being recommended is um some suggested problems, violations of law, ethical uh misconduct, dereliction of duty with the due process provision that's in your next section.

So it is the card before the what we didn't have before the other one, you couldn't do anything.

We talked about it several times over the years, and it was just but they're just six suggestions, right?

Those are just talking about including but not limited to violations.

So that's one of the considerations.

Remember, the way this would occur again is city council, if by three three-fourths of the vote of its members uh remove the council member, but that council member in the next section can ask for a hearing which gives them due process and which also allows for, depending on how you decide it, um allows for a subsequent vote by council after all the evidence has been presented as to whether or not there really is a violation.

So the same group of people would be the same ones voting again.

Well, that's a question that comes Oh no, it's not a question, it's right here.

Well this group you would vote, so this would happen.

Let's just say you decide to pick council member A.

Councilmember A, three court three-fourths of you say council member A has done something bad, we want Councilmember A off.

That's the first vote you take.

That's what this section talks about.

And then you go into the next section as to what happens because you could vote council member A off, and Councilmember A goes, yeah, okay.

I'm not challenging it.

But the next section provides for council member A to have some due process rights to say, hey, that's not fair, you all are ganging up on me, I don't believe I did anything wrong.

Let me see the evidence you have against me, and that's what that section has.

Once that the follow-up question with that is let's assume again, council member A, you vote to have that, they have the hearing.

The hearing shows something, you ultimately have to vote again to say based on the findings of that hearing councilmember A should be removed.

So you're giving a significant amount of due process.

But before this provision had no teeth because as Joe said, by the time the state attorney's office would look at this to because you have to be convicted, it's not being charged.

And so conviction could take a while.

Not only that, but honestly, if you've never had a prior um offense, and you go to the state attorney's office and you have uh they charge you with something, they may give you a withhold of adjudication, which is not technically a conviction.

So the language that was in here has to be changed, no matter what, because it doesn't it doesn't mean anything right, it's meaningless as written.

Right, it's meaningless as written.

Okay.

I have no more questions.

All righty.

I'm I'm okay with this as it is.

Well, as I said before, I'm I'm okay with this as long as the due process includes a written warning that the accused signs and has a chance to rectify.

So if you're saying that goes in the next section, well, under your scenario, that's council member, that would be up to the majority of the council.

I mean, there are things that occur that somebody did something wrong, a mistake, or they didn't, you know, they they didn't know they were doing something wrong, and you can quote unquote sanction them and and and say don't do that again and agree that you're not gonna do that again.

That's always an option that you have.

Um I'm just saying I want to see that in our charter.

Okay, that will be in the next section.

But but wouldn't it be before you vote on them?

It wouldn't because it the next section.

I can I understand what you're saying, Vice Mayor.

So you want to add to this section that then option could be Yeah, after being warned or something, yeah.

And I since I'm the one that raised the point before multiple times, and again, um that's how I would feel about it.

We can add that language and and put it if you approve, we'll put it on uh for your ordinance.

I don't think it's necessary for me to outline the specifics of what has transpired in the past as to why, but I believe that that's a necessary component to make it fair.

Understood.

Okay.

Councilmember Jackson, I think it's okay as is.

Okay.

I'm comfortable with this um section, and so I will open it up to this is section um 305 for public comment.

Yes, Lauren.

All right, stern one four.

I acknowledge this is a tangential comment.

Has Mr.

O'Hara been charged yet, Mr.

Salzman.

I'm not the one who charges them that you have to talk to the police department.

Well, it's the state attorney's office, right?

Has Mr.

Well the police department is the one that we've got to do.

That's not for right now.

That's not to be done around.

As of the last time I asked Mr.

Salzman, he had not been charged.

There were various complications.

My concern is that the we are talking about the charter review right now, so that is not appropriate at this time.

So I heard you.

But the my concern is that if we leave it as charged, that's still been six months now.

So that's why I bring that up.

Okay, thank you.

Uh Dean In light of many of the things that are happening in in our uh in our country, I am a little bit concerned about the the court of public opinion.

And it's this uh section very specifically could wound a potential public servant who may have done something wrong, may not have done something wrong, and this board would then uh choose a punishment or some kind of remedy that then could prohibit that person that that public servant from being re-elected, even if they hold their their seat through the end of their term.

Thank you.

All righty, Mr.

Bixler.

I'm not real sure what you when you talked about a hearing bill being held, who would oversee that?

Is that that's in the next section?

This section is solely.

This this section is solely allowing counsel to um remove a council member if they so choose.

We never had that provision, as you're aware of prior incidents that happened, council couldn't really do anything because other than contact the governor and ask the governor to remove correct.

But then in the event in the hearing, that's that's not in the section that's spelled out in the next one.

Yes, sir.

Who who does the hearing?

Well, that's the question.

We're gonna get to section 306 next.

Okay, all right, sorry.

All righty 305, Lenny.

Did I see another hand over here?

No.

Okay.

Lenny.

Good evening again.

Um I have a question about except for the purpose of inquiry, the council and its members shall deal with employees of city solely through the city manager, and neither the council nor any member thereof shall give orders to any employee.

So in the past, there was questions about what constitutes a proper inquiry.

Um could a city council talk directly or ask a question directly to a uh an employee or a staff member, or does it have to go through a certain protocol?

I I think that that should be spelled out because that caused a lot of contention in the past.

And it seems really vague to me.

And if we somebody gets into trouble because they sent an email that uh maybe should have gone a different route, and then all of a sudden we come into where we have a hearing, and I I think people need to know what's going on within the city government, and asking questions should be appropriate, but it was a big issue before, and I think there needs to have some better clarification on that.

But it what constitutes a proper inquiry.

Thank you.

And and my Ms.

Shaw, I think that's what you're saying is that a proper inquiry, you want the notification that it's something different.

No, this is different.

This is not suggested for a change.

No, that's okay.

That's not what I was addressing.

I'm sorry.

Did I see another hand for public comment on this?

No.

Okay.

All righty.

Then we're only dealing with 305, and we'll come back to 306 in a minute, okay.

Uh so on 305 in speaking order.

Would you like to see this move by the city attorney to come back in the form of a question for a referendum?

No.

Okay.

Oh, I I agree with Councilmember Shaw that there should be a warning in there and and written into this, you know, at like you know, before it says a city council may by three fourths vote remove a council vote like after a written warning, then they can do that potentially.

Okay.

So would you like to see this come back as a referendum with question change?

Okay.

All righty, council member Shaw.

Um it was my understanding that Attorney Salzman said that this was a necessary modification.

Well, we at least need to strike the section that that we're recommending to strike because it doesn't make any sense.

Um what this section does, it gives you some teeth on dealing with someone that you feel has done something wrong that you've never had before.

So the question always came up well, what can you do with somebody?

As as you've mentioned, Councilmember Shaw, maybe we should have somebody sanctioned or you know, a written agreement that you've never had that ability to do that.

This has been the only provision that you've had, and it's one that we couldn't enforce.

So the this one is giving you the ability to do something in some circumstance subject to obviously the due process provision.

So if you don't do anything here, obviously the next section dealing with any of the hearings would be null and void, and we wouldn't have to do that.

But I would recommend that you give yourself some ability, even if it is to do a sanction, something in this section, if you ever want to do something to one of your fellow council members.

Okay.

Well, I I think I'm gonna have to be a little more succinct.

We had a previous council member that was repeated repeatedly warned not to continue a certain behavior.

Yes, and and then still felt that they weren't doing anything wrong, continued it.

Yes, and then we found ourselves in those circumstances.

Conversely.

There's no teeth, nothing to do, right?

Right.

And that's why the teeth are needed.

Conversely, the reason I feel so strongly about the other aspect of well, also in regards to that, there was some question did that person know better?

I mean, I've just watched the ethics of training and uh the four hours mandated, and and and I know it was said there whether they could find the paper that council member signed or not, that person knew better.

Right, and or should have known better.

Um and and then after being told so many times um, you know, by our our our charter staff that should have ended it, and then we found our our hands tied.

Right.

Um and so back to my conversely.

Now we had a situation where uh a certain practice was happening, and it went on for a very long time, nobody mentioned anything, but then there was a move to take action on that or perhaps even remove them from their position.

Yes.

So that's why I feel so strongly that having that you're calling it a sanction, um you know that that it's outlined, they s they're there this it's discussed with them, they sign it, and then if they continue, we have something to do if if this goes forward.

Well, council member, I'm just thinking out loud that maybe perhaps we put if if the majority of you are uncomfortable with the language that's in there, that we put uh some general language of what council could do, and then we draft an ordinance being more specific.

And the reason why I'm telling you that is you know, once you put something in the charter, it's hard to change.

In fact, the language we have in there, which is doesn't help, is poor language.

So my recommendation to you would if you if the majority of the council wants to do what you want to do, would be that we uh keep the stricken area in, we come up with some general language that allows council to um sanction and or uh remove subject to a ordinance because the ordinance would be a lot more detailed.

We could do it that way.

That doesn't make sense to me exactly.

But I'm I'm saying don't lay out the process that council member Shaw is asking for in the charter.

You would lay it out in an ordinance.

Yeah, this would give you the ability to do something, the ordinance would spell out how you do it.

But would that be an ordinance it would have to be voted on by a referendum?

Be voted on by you.

By us.

You're the ones that remember you're the ones that are ultimately doing this, making this taking this position.

So then you're saying that we wouldn't put all the part we we'd take out the the stricken part, yes, and take out the part that they put in red.

Only if a majority of you want to do that.

I'm saying that that's a way of doing what council member Shaw is talking about doing.

Yeah, because I know we all know what we're talking about here.

Uh I was never warned that my emails were inappropriate, and I was writing them for years, and nobody said anything to me.

So then to have it come up like all of a sudden I did something wrong and was never told, and then they wanted to do something.

So that's that's why.

Right.

So that's why she wanted to put the warning.

Right, but let's give it another example.

Let's take it the other way and say somebody is uh stealing from the city.

Right.

Okay.

Is that the same action you want to take of a warning versus removal?

The the so I'm trying to give you the option to uh to do what you'd feel is necessary based on the circumstances, which would be a more detailed ordinary.

You don't have to do any of that.

You can do whatever language you want, but I'm just saying if council member Shaw wants to get a little more into um it's almost like a progressive discipline, we would have to be a little more detailed.

I would want to put all those details in the charter.

So then we should take out the part that's in red as well.

I would just put in something that says council shall determine uh shall adopt a policy on how to X, Y, and Z, and then just leave that, and then you would have to adopt that policy.

Okay.

I I would that's just a suggestion.

I like that suggestion.

Now, charter review may tell me that that's terrible.

Deb, you had something you wanted to say.

As you said, we all know what we're discussing here, and we spent a lot of time discussing this.

And it was not our intent that the minute someone does something wrong, you guys are voting them off.

Because there are actions that are truly you didn't know, and egregious actions where you wouldn't want a warning.

Boom, you need to go.

You wrote a $50,000 check to yourself out of the city coffers or whatever.

So I think if you force a warning, you've shot yourself in the foot a little bit, and it gives you more tolerance.

And it was our expectation that the city would have addressed something that needed a warning before it ever got to you to vote them off before it ever became part of a hearing where residents would be here in public comment.

So that was just kind of I wanted to share that.

That was our thought process.

We don't want to see anybody get voted off for doing a minor thing that they didn't know about.

But I understand with the prior council person, he'd been counseled several times and continue.

That's that's a different story.

Your situation with the emails was something totally different and took on a life of its own.

But that was that was our thought.

And I agree with you that people do need a warning for certain things, but I don't think it needs to be memorialized in the charter because you would have to do that for every action, no matter how bad.

Well, I'm in a bit of a conundrum because at this point, um, I understand what the intent of the advisory board is, and I and I and I respect that and appreciate that, but I also realize that certain boards or councils can politicize something.

So I'm trying to protect us from a council that politicizes something.

Well, and that was part of the the three three forced vote, you know.

You can't you've got to have a consensus, a majority to be able to do that.

But I think this is such an improvement over what you had before where you couldn't do anything, no matter what action the councilperson had taken.

So, you know, amend and revise, but don't leave it as is.

Right.

I don't think we should leave it as it is either.

Uh I mean we we may city manager made a suggestion to me, which would be we could put something in here that says um you know, start at uh sanctions up to removal, but again, you need a process on which one are you gonna do the sanctions on and which one aren't you, right?

And and and that's that's what I'm suggesting is a good idea.

I mean, you have the second part of this, the the next section, which talks about the hearing and the ability to uh require the due process and all those things is a protection for that individual, but it wouldn't stop the way it's currently read to take the person and uh assume that we'll just talk to you know the vice mayor is being accused of doing something.

We don't think it's a removal, but uh the mess everybody else thinks it's removal, and then you have to have a hearing, and then you have to do the so I don't know how you can distinguish between if a council says this is what they think is removable versus that who's you're the only ones who could judge each other at the end of the day.

So unless you choose to change this completely the next section and say we will have an independent special magistrate who will hear this and make a determination, and their determination is final for the purposes of this issue, and council will adopt their position, that could be a way that you choose to do it.

Okay, all right, too.

Then we'll so that would so this section we could write how you want it, which is the council in essence has the ability to sanction or recog or recommend removal subject to this other section, which will have a hearing by a special magistrate.

Okay, okay.

Thank you for your counsel.

I think that's good.

I mean um comments out on the floor too.

Well, we haven't I haven't even council member Jackson, you haven't had a sp a chance to say anything yet.

Yeah.

Um I'm okay with how this section is written, and then we can discuss 305.

You mean 306?

306, sorry, sorry, yeah.

Okay.

So somebody said, you know, uh made reference to um uh what we could do to another council member, and I I'm not reading it that way.

I I'm reading it in terms of what we the council can do to protect the residents of Gulfport.

So I'm reading it very different.

This to me is not gee, I can't wait to you know give somebody some punitive POWs or something, but rather we all know.

I mean, I've been coming to council meetings for 13 years, and when we had the what we had last year to see this go on and go on, and and everybody know about it, and for the for everybody to be so angry at the council, and I was talking and listening, and I was hearing the council can't really fire somebody off the council, and people were mad at the attorney because why didn't the attorney come after him?

And I'm like, Because the attorney works for him, he doesn't work for the attorney.

So I'm I am actually in favor of the way the um charter review has written this, and then if we need to make a tweak into 306, I'm uh I'm comfortable because I do think, and I understand exactly what's being said up here was not all things are created equal in what we had going on with one council member and what another council member was being accused of.

One had a w many warnings, one had no warnings, is what I understand.

Okay, I'll never know for sure, but that's my understanding.

So if that's the case, I'm okay with the idea that there has to be some kind of a written notice, and maybe we can handle that in 306.

So I'm in favor of the way 305 is written that we do have the ability to um have some teeth and to call for a hearing, and that's how I read it.

So with that in mind, I saw a couple hands up.

Jennifer.

Thank you.

This is first I want to just like congratulate the board on the charter review board on this because it's hard.

You're a legislative body, you're not a judicial body.

So making sure that you keep in your lane of you know of legislating creating ordinances and keeping it that clean is super important.

I really appreciated the suggestions by the city attorney about a special magistrate, and also cleaning this up by like moving a lot of this into code.

I have three minutes, correct?

Yeah, I was gonna ask you to use your mic because I get a lot of complaints.

I thought you were pointing to the time I was like, I don't think I've spoken over three minutes.

No, I was um thank you.

Yeah, and I think moving a lot of this stuff into ordinance will give you the flexibility to evolve as you need.

And so I really appreciated that suggestion by the city attorney too.

And I am really enjoying watching how the sausage is made, but I think from the foundational perspective, really situating yourself as a legislative body and moving away from uh judicial body is gonna be very important as we move forward, and I think our voters will be looking to make sure that you make that distinction if this does come before them.

Thanks.

Okay.

Uh Jonathan didn't know I'd say anything about this, but a quick thought.

Um sounds like that the charter is the constitution, if I have that right, essentially, and and the ordinance is the other.

You guys make the ordinances.

I I am constantly reminded by reality that uh contracts, and in this case I think the the charter have to be written assuming malintent.

Okay.

They have to be written not with this happy, oh, but we'll all do the right thing.

They have to be written assuming three members of you are going to do the wrong thing or gonna have malintent towards one of your members who are gonna want to potentially even reverse an election for their own political reasons.

Okay.

So if you say, well, we'll just write it so there's a bunch of power that that then can be exercised by a vote, a majority vote on the council, you're giving an awful lot, you know, potential opportunity for uh three members of council to remove a member of council for whatever other reason.

I'm just being reminded of that.

So if if your constitution can include language that makes that harder without being toothless, we don't want to be toothless.

You want to be able to do what you're setting out to do.

Um but I'm just kind of reminding of that.

Don't don't assume we're writing this for a sunny day when everybody's in a good mood and smiling.

Okay, that's all.

Okay.

Yes.

Um I from my limited understanding of how this all works, it does sound like the corrective disciplinary process would be helpful in addition to the ability to vote um someone off the council.

Um for I'm I work in HR, and I any of us who have jobs have um potentially experienced a corrective disciplinary process and a performance improvement plan, and it's always the idea that someone, if you are looking to terminate, it should not be a surprise.

They should know that they what they're doing wrong, what those expectations were, and that should all happen.

And then if it goes to a special magistrate, all that evidence and that documentation is there for whoever's on that magistrate to evaluate so they have some information, what conversations were had with this person, what were the reactions, what steps were taken, so that it is it doesn't seem like a reactionary process.

It seems like these are the expectations and the rules that we apply to everyone, and it sounds like that's more appropriate for an ordinance type of situation, but up to and including a vote to remove someone from a board.

So that's my input.

Thank you.

Did I see another hand?

Yes.

I think we should elect Jonathan.

Um in my political life, I have been a grassroots organizer and been in people's faces, and um I'm kind of an attack dog.

And I'm kind of an attack dog.

And I've done grassroots organizing.

I've done other types of organizing.

And I've also been a victim of a political hit job.

And I didn't appreciate it then.

I still don't appreciate it.

So and I'm speaking to this, I think this is board of an issue of 306, but this board is not a judicial board, right?

You're not lawyers.

And I don't believe you could pass judgment in that way.

And you have qualified immunity here.

So you want to pass judgment?

Surrender your qualified immunity.

Okay.

And I mean what if somebody is elected to uh this council who's uh leans more fascist or more socialist, and you don't like it.

That's what elections are for.

Okay.

Um 305 does not seem democratic to me.

It's anti-democratic.

Delete it.

All righty.

Do I have anybody else for public comment?

Thank you.

All right, hearing none.

I think we have a massive confusion.

I have no clear direction here.

No.

I mean, the way I'm reading this, and maybe I'm not reading it correctly, and you want to correct me, and I'm good with that.

The way I'm reading this is that this is saying that following due process.

So following a hearing, if that person was found guilty during that hearing, then we, the council, by a vote of three to four, could say, you're out of here, rather than letting it drag on for a long period of time.

And so I think that 306, it's hard to look at 305 without 306.

I imagine you found that the to be true too.

So I think maybe we should without um having a consensus or not consensus out on 305, maybe we should go to 306, because I know I had a lot of questions on 306.

So I'm going to suggest that we move to 306 and we can come back to 305.

Are we okay with that?

My reading of this is that we would vote them off, and then they would get the hearing.

Well, that was you you would have to day in court, so to speak.

First, before you vote them off.

Okay.

But you'd have to raise so the truth should be that a majority of you say councilmember A is you know out of control, and we need to um remove them.

There is, in my opinion, you would then have a majority of you would have to say we want to remove you.

You have the opportunity to agree with us or have your due process hearing.

Those are your two choices.

That's the way this is written.

Would you say that again?

So the majority of you say council member A is stealing.

Um so councilmember A, you could we're either going to vote to remove you or you can have your due process hearing.

What do you want?

Because you have to take the action in order to institute the right for the due process hearing.

Okay, so that was similar to what did happen here when Mayor Um Henderson asked somebody if they would resign because da-da-da-da-da.

Okay.

And that person said no.

And they were asked a couple of times and they said no, and finally it was we're going to turn this over to the attorney's office, the governor.

And they will do a full investigation, or you can resign.

Right.

And then at that point, that person chose to resign.

Right.

So what what we're saying is if we as a counsel, and uh I know that was led by the mayor.

I mean, he's the one that had to say it.

So if the mayor said, Councilmember A, uh, we're gonna ask for your resignation tonight.

And of course, if you think we're wrong, you can have due process, but this is what we, and then they would have an opportunity to resign or to say no, I want my due process.

So if they said they wanted their due process, we don't do anything at that point except to arrange for the hearing to happen rather to have relatively quickly as opposed to waiting months if not years for it to happen through the State Attorney's Office.

Because as you said, Mayor, the problem is the way it's currently written, you have you may say to Councilmember A, as was done, we'd like you to resign.

No.

Now what are you going to do to me?

Nothing quickly, right?

Um so this is trying to at least put some teeth into it, whether it's ultimately how you want to do it or whether you want to have the ability to do something less than that, because you don't even have the provision that allows for sanctions.

Um that's why we would have to have a we would have to request first to voice our complaint.

We're not happy, we would like for you to resign for this reason.

And if and if you're not willing to do that, then we're going to um have request right now that the rest of the board votes in terms of whether they want a hearing.

Right.

And they would I get to see the way it's written is I'm A, you I need a majority of you to say you want me off, then I make my request for a hearing.

Before I'm leaving, you're we're gonna have a hearing because you want me off so that somebody can make an opinion as to whether or not I really did anything wrong.

Exactly.

So we're we're um not really voting them off at that point then.

We're saying that you're not because if you don't take a position, a majority of you to say that you want me off, then why would I do anything?

I won't demand anything, because you go, yeah, you're doing uh a crummy job and we think you stole something, and I go, Yeah, no, I didn't.

You have to to institute the due process, you have to vote to say we're gonna remove you.

Your option is to resign or have a hearing.

Because that's by due process right.

And actually you'd be saying we'd like to remove you.

Right.

Because we have to see if we have a three-fourths vote, because then that's what tells that we do want to remove you, but it's up to you to decide.

Do you want due process or do you want to resign?

Exactly, because if you're if I can't, if if I can turn enough people that I don't get a majority, a three-quarters majority of you to want me out, then I don't have to do anything.

I'm like, okay, well, you guys are wrong.

Okay.

So with that in mind, then I'd kind of like to just put 305 aside for a moment, and let's move to 306, because I I think that um I I think that it's hard to vote on 305 until we know what 306 is suggesting.

And and remember, Mayor, 306 has two sections.

One is the forfeiture of office for other what includes this, but there's other reasons that you would automatically lose your office, right?

So under 306, A is the violation of the provisions of the Charter, but um you lose a qualification, excuse me, B1.

Two lacks at any time during the term of office any qualifications as prescribed by the Charter by law.

Um three, you're convicted of a crime, which we don't have any teeth on that one right now either.

Um, or four fails to attend three consecutive regular meetings or a total of six regular meetings within a 12-month period that are unless excused, right?

So this there's not just what we're we're talking about, but there's other provisions that the Charter Review Commission has a committee has recommended that would result in uh some automatic removals.

So I think that those should be maybe looked at separately than the other one because you don't have teeth in these situations.

They're adding some teeth for you in some general circumstances.

Okay, so you're saying that you think Section B and Section C should be looked at separately, is that I would accept B1 really talks about C because that's the one that says violates a provision of the city charter regarding conduct of the office in order for this provision to be effective, the city commission must determine that such violation uh by the affected city council member was intentional, willful flagrant or continuous, because I think that would trigger C and so how would you suggest we attack this?

Well, I would say I would ask council first, does it if you have any if you're okay with two, three, and four?

B two, three, and four.

Okay, so it's been a while since Mr.

Gunther presented this, so let me just read for everybody.

Uh we're gonna uh look at B2, B three, and B four, B2.

Um City Council member shall forfeit the office if such council member lacks it at any time during the term of of office, any qualification for the office prescribed by the charter or by law.

Three is convicted of a crime following involving moral turpitude for the purposes of this section, convicted means a determination of guilt that is the result of a plea or trial, and four fails to attend three consecutive regular meetings or a total of six regular meetings within a 12-month period or other work sessions of the city council unless such absence is excused by the city council.

So Nancy or Ms.

Early, if you would go first on B two, three, and four.

I'm fine with the way that those are written.

All righty, and that would go to Okay.

My first comment is because we've struck all of A, wouldn't B become A?

But that's just Well, A says vacancies, so we didn't strike the the title.

A, it's titled as A vacancies, then it goes that paragraph.

Oh, then the volume is.

Okay, okay, that's fine.

Um the one thing that I would want to look at is the three consecutive regular meetings or a total of six.

I don't think even with excuses, I I don't think you should stay on if you miss that many meetings.

That's just my opinion.

I mean, that's that's missing a big chunk of what you're elected to do.

And there are a lot of I'm sorry, Vice President.

However, if you write it the other way, then council doesn't have the ability in the circumstance where something happens that you that you want to allow that person, this would be automatic.

So that's the problem of what you're looking for.

And I do get that.

I thought about that.

What if somebody has to go have an extreme operation or something like that?

And they don't want to give it up.

But what tends to happen is if somebody is absent just because they're on vacation or something or or whatever, that you know, the the city clerk usually brings it up and yes, they're excused and asks for your excuse and and we don't even vote on it.

You know, so that I I think that just going on vacation should not be an excused absence.

I think it should only be something that's more serious.

So uh again, um not to interrupt you, but you could come up with specific criteria adopting what's excused and what isn't.

I mean, that's always you're right.

That's probably the hardest thing I've seen in every board that I've dealt with is A, people don't like to vote somebody that that's unexcused.

Right.

So that's always happens.

It's I'd say almost a hundred percent of the time it's given as an excused absence.

So then you don't really have any teeth here.

Right.

If you're not gonna do that.

You have to be willing, council has to be willing to actually vote and say no, that's not an excused absence or yes, that circumstance, you know, God forbid you lose somebody in your family, you've got to leave that.

There could be reasons that you don't want to, but like you said, I've decided to go on a two-month cruise, and uh I'd like you to excuse me for that.

You know, that that may not be the the one that you would excuse.

But it it is hard to get a hey, we like council member A, we're not gonna say that right.

But you know, but but you're elected to to be here and to be making decisions.

So I'm I mean, and I I guess what's happened regularly is usually the clerk will say, you know, Mary asked to be excused for tonight.

Right.

And and then we all just go, mm-hmm.

No, we don't really take a vote on it or ask why they asked to be excused.

Well, this would require you to take a vote because you're gonna have to determine whether it's excused or unexcused.

Because if it's not excused, it it's automatically becomes one of those strikes, right?

Well, it it was that way before, though.

Before it said, you know, majority of other councilmen vote to excuse subjections.

But we haven't been doing it.

Right.

But this is an honor.

If you don't do this one way or the other, then it's then it's gonna affect the person because they're gonna automatically be gone if you're not gonna vote to excuse me.

If you don't vote to excuse me, formally vote to excuse me, and I hit six, I'm out.

But we already had that in.

I'm just saying it was already in that way, and we weren't doing it.

Well, this is actually gives it a little more teeth the way they wrote it.

Okay.

Okay.

All right.

Councilmember Shaw.

I'm fine, thank you.

I'm also fine, thank you.

Okay, so when we're looking at those three points that we're just looking at, I also agree.

I think that six meetings of absence is too much.

When you consider that really in a year's time, there's 24 scheduled meetings, and it seems like there are many times I've seen where one and sometimes even two get canceled because of holidays or something.

Um I think um six is too much.

Um it's not a matter of, you know, that I'm gonna fight real hard for this, but I think that um missing six meetings is definitely too too many too much leniency.

Um I would probably suggest that it be pushed to four.

But on the other things on this one, I was I believe I was okay with that.

Two th two and three, yes.

Yeah, two and three.

I was okay with that.

So that would be on my thoughts on four.

Um I don't think I'm sorry, Mayor.

Then I would ask counsel, I know you're gonna take public comment, but I I assumed you're gonna take public comment on the whole thing.

Yes, I am.

And so then I would ask council to consider two things with the remainder.

One if you want to allow this provision for due process in because that's what we're talking about, having a due process hearing, and then number two, how you wanna do that, because the way this is written and and the board can tell me differently, but the idea here was to try to get some independence in making a determination as to whether or not there's a violation.

But the ultimate final decision would come back to you, because again, you are the council and you're these are your peers, right?

That you're talking about.

My suggestion that I threw out to you may be something you want to consider also, which would be totally take it independent with the option of coming back to you as a formality or coming back to you as an ultimate decision.

So there's several different ways you can do this.

I hope I didn't muddy the waters too much.

We have to go back to number one, too.

Well, no, I was making my comments on B.

I I know, but we haven't even talked about B one.

We were just doing two, three, four.

Well, B1 is uh violation of city.

I mean, uh the way I look at B1, and again, the board may consider it differently, violates a provision of city charter regarding the conduct of the office.

Are you guys talking about this one being the one where um if there's an automatic provision in there?

This would not this is not the one that would trigger C or would I think it would trigger C.

Yeah, that's what I that's what I thought.

So I would look at this as the same as what you're gonna determine at C, because you're making it you're you're gonna say that oh what you did was intentional, you intentionally stole, right?

So okay, you said that majority of you say I should go because I intentionally stole that should then that triggers C.

So it would read forfeiture of office, a city council member shall forfeit the office if such council member violates a provision of the city charger charter regarding the conduct of the office.

In order for this provision to be effective, the city commission must determine that a violation by the affected council uh city council member was intentional, willful, flagrant, and continuous.

So that is determined by the hearing.

That is determined.

No, you all make that determination, and that triggers my right for a hearing.

And and should these all say or rather than they're certainly or issues rather than not and issues.

Right.

Well we'll correct that.

Okay.

Because again, you're you're accusing you made a finding, and this is actually so you made a finding that I willfully did this as opposed to what councilmember Shaw was saying that maybe I did something I didn't know I was doing something wrong versus I willfully knew this, right?

So I willfully did something, and you guys go, Well, you're off.

You know, we've had enough of that.

You willfully did that.

Then I get to have my hearing if I want to.

Or I just agree with you and I walk away.

But I'm reading it as it says that they will forfeit the office if they did da-da-da-da-da intentionally or willfully, and I think sometimes you'd have to have the hearing to make that decision if it was intentional and willful.

No, I mean that's what I'm reading.

You might say it was, and I'm saying, but I didn't know that.

Well, but that's you're right.

That's why they have the hearing.

But initially, to trigger the hearing, you have to make a at least uh three quarters of you have to sit there and say, Well, yeah, I think that was wrong.

Come on, you knew that.

That you had to know that.

But using the example that we had.

Yeah, you know that's wrong.

Come on.

You were told, you were told that was wrong.

So there's no way, you know, so we think it's willful, and I go, okay, fine, but I want my hearing.

All right.

So we're we're now looking at B one.

Right.

We just we went across and we said B2, three, and four, and now we're looking at B one.

Any additional comments on that?

The only comment I have is can we really ever know what someone thinks is willful, intentional.

You can say to me, come on, you knew that.

You don't know I knew that.

Well, I council member, I only say this to you this way.

We ask juries to make that determination.

True.

So we do ask people to make those determinations as to whether something is willful.

Um so that is, I mean ultimately again, this just triggers my ability to have the hearing in which somebody is gonna actually look at evidence.

You are generally saying, okay, look, you misused the credit card.

You did it three times.

The first time we got you, right?

You did you maybe you didn't know, but you were told, and then you're told again.

So yeah, at that point, we think it's at least willful enough to trigger the opportunity for you to ask for the hearing.

Okay.

Okay, I'm good.

That's how it's kind of that's the intent.

I'm good.

I'm okay.

Okay.

Um, did you have anything to say on B one?

No, I think it goes with okay whatever else.

Councilmember Shaw.

We're talking about B one.

Uh-huh.

Okay.

Um it's fine.

Okay.

I'm okay with it.

I'm okay with it.

So that takes us to C.

Yes.

And um, I don't know if if the city attorney wants to give us an overview again on this because it's been a couple of hours, or if Joel Gunther would like to give us a overview on uh C again, please.

So what C does and and thinking about this, I I I really don't know what you're ultimately going to decide, because this is a provision in the charter which allows a process for me as a council member to have due process rights.

Okay.

Whether it's it's hard.

It's hard to put this into specific language in the charter, because again, if something changes, we can't really, it takes a while to change it.

But the essence here is that as a council uh member, this is and you all correct me if I'm wrong.

The way this reads, and we probably need to clarify it, because the mayor brought up this issue, at least to me, um, for clarification.

Are you having an independent board make a determination first that I've had a violation and then allowing me to have a hearing and ultimately having counsel make that final decision, or we having an independent board hear everything and make a determination whether or not the violation exists, and then it just goes back before counsel.

And I I frankly, after we were talking about it, if council is comfortable with it, I'd rather have you appoint an independent uh magistrate to have a hearing and make a determination which you will adopt.

And the reason for that is it takes away all the politics, because if you're gonna if there's gonna be an ethics group, you're gonna be appointing them, and it's gonna be accusations.

Here we have uh special, I mean you have a special magistrate right now, but if you chose him, you have a special magistrate, hear it, go through the trial as it is, it's a non-jury type trial, and then have them make a finding, and then that finding is brought back to you for you have hit on exactly what I was struggling with because as I'm reading this, it was so unclear to me if we're the jury and we're going to make that decision, which I don't think any of us should be doing it.

To me, it should be an independent counsel who's hearing this, and then they bring forth their findings to us, and it's not political, and we stay out of the fray.

We've already said, hey, we think we have a problem, we'd like you to resign.

You say I don't want to resign, I want to have a hearing.

Great, then let's uh arrange quickly to have a hearing, and we keep our opinions to ourself, and then we listen to the findings.

I think that's a cleanest word.

Did you need to clarify?

It's an independent group.

Okay, it's like uh the planning and zoning board.

But but the problem with it being an independent group, is it gonna be one that each council person appoints a person to?

So then the person you appoint could already be biased.

I'd prefer just to go to a magistrate.

I think that thinking it through it would be better just to have somebody who acts as a judge.

Yeah.

I agree a panel only because it becomes political.

Yes, yes.

Right.

Because how do we select it?

You all select well, we always selected the people that we know we're gonna vote for.

Right.

You know, so our magistrate would be the right answer, I think, wouldn't it?

You have to do that.

Independent and have it and have it be final by him and not even come back to us.

Well, it has to come back for a formal adoption.

Oh, okay, right, okay.

Yeah.

You know what the bottom line is?

Everybody here was elected.

You all had an oath, which is part of your ethics that you did.

That's what we want you to live by ethics.

Okay.

Not going after somebody backdooring or any of that.

Live by the ethics, you're representing the people of golf court.

That's what you are.

Yeah.

One of the first lines in our charter is everything is in the best benefit of golf court.

And that's what you all think to do.

Yes.

That's why we've worked a lot of hours on this.

Yeah, yeah.

They did a great job with this because they took there was nothing there and they created this.

It's easy, I know.

So, counsel, do we kind of have a consensus then that we're okay with that if it if this whole hearing is handled by an independent magistrate?

Yeah, yes, it's out of our hands totally.

Yes.

So we are interested in bringing forth a referendum here.

Um seeing how he words the question.

We're we're interested in we know what we want to do.

We're not exactly sure how to get there exactly.

And I'll take public comment in a minute.

You I I have a better, at least as we're sitting here now, I have a better understanding of how you want this.

Right.

And I think that that that was the intent of our review committee as well.

Um of the verbiage in here I struggled with.

I had to read it many times, and I still had to ask the attorney.

You know, I I'm seeing a conflict here.

So before we uh move on, public comment, yes.

Wow, that's a lot of work what you guys are doing.

But I only have one comment would be in that process when somebody gets to the point where you're talking about them going through that hearing and that shouldn't at that point there be some sort of language in there where they're suspended until the outcome of the hearing, either with your counsel pay or without pay.

They do that a lot in a lot of cases, you know.

So are they can continue on the board and maybe doing what you know, not being specific what's happening in the past, doing what they've been doing already until that hearing comes about?

Shouldn't there be some sort of maybe suspension in order?

I'm I'm a little uncomfortable with somebody being suspended before they've had a hearing.

Well, no, you're you're making the accusation.

Okay, and they're requesting the hearing.

Oh, okay.

Pending the outcome of the hearing, you're suspended.

Otherwise, if they were found innocent, then they could get um their back pay.

You don't have to take their pay away, depending you won't you won't perform on the council until outcome.

Otherwise, it could continue on.

We'd probably do that in 305.

Okay.

All righty.

Okay.

All right.

Let's see.

I had saw a couple more hands.

Yes.

Amy.

Amy Costa, uh 20th Avenue South, Midtown Business Collective.

Okay.

So now that we're kind of back to we looked at 306 to look at 305.

Wouldn't 305, like the red in 305 that says what could happen?

Because it sounds like 305 is just saying that nobody on council can direct orders to city employees, right?

Like that could be a good idea.

But right now would just do in public comment on 306.

No, no, no, I know.

But you had said let's look at 306 to because it but what I'm saying is this would fall under B1 under 306.

So where it says the city council may by three-fourths vote of its member remove a council member from office for cause, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

It's it doesn't make sense that that would be under the appointments and removals because that's just saying that it's like in you guys dealing with emplo city employees, so wouldn't this whole red part just fall under B1?

Because it's the same thing.

If you violate a charter, which is Section 305, this would happen.

It just kind of seems like it's double.

I see what you're saying.

Do you know what I mean?

Like that would be this is the rule.

Like no city council member should be directing other city employees.

That's like that's the prohibition or yeah.

But then the follow-up, if that happens, it falls under B1.

And frankly, I think you have a very good point because I really think based on the way 306 reads that 306 should be separate for the uh under vacancies, as the vice mayor said stopping it maybe uh either doing two, three, and four under those and then doing a separate section, which has one and then the public hearing.

So we probably make sense to create a new section, because it really doesn't fall under vacancies, filling of vacancies, other than we had it there, right?

So we probably need to do a whole new section under removal of office, you know, call it something like that, which would be easier on a question too.

Right.

It would because it makes it very simple.

Because the question would be do you uh, you know, in essence, um do you want to uh add a section which provides for the the removal of a council member after a due process hearing, blah blah blah.

So that would make more sense to do it that way.

So it would if council is okay with that ultimately I'll ask you, then I'll just create a new section.

My work is done.

Um Mr.

Freed.

That's actually a good idea.

So if we come out of here, and Mr.

Fried's coming up, but if we come out of here and you're clear on what we're saying, clear as mud, then you're going to maybe tweak it a little bit more when you come back to us with questions of the way you would like to see it presented on the referendum, and then you have to have an ordinance.

Right, because the ordinance will so the ordinance title will say things like um amend section 306 vacancies.

And then it'll have a whereas provision talking about really what it says and what you want to do, and then it has a section that actually has the question of what we're going to do.

So that would make it easier for me because these are these are difficult because they're really talking about different issues.

I agree.

Yes, Mr.

Freed.

Yes.

Uh reference to B3.

I need an anthropological and a legal definition of moral turpitude.

Actually, moral turpitude has a legal definition, uh, which is basically acts of uh I'd have to look at the exact definition.

I don't want to tell you that, but it's it's really like depraved and violates the duties owed to one's fellow man or society.

Excellent.

And does that law change over time?

Definition's been pretty solid over the years.

I mean, there are there are legal cases that give you a definition of moral turprity.

Such as sodomy.

Yeah, that could be against the law.

It's against the law.

If it's not against the law, then no.

Abortion.

If it's against the law, it could be considered see where I'm going.

Absolutely.

Okay.

100%.

Anyone else?

Julie.

This is why you kind of like the ordinance.

That's why like the ordinance.

I just have a couple clarifications.

Um it says in red, the office of a member of City Council shall become vacant upon death resignation or removal from office in any manner authorized by law.

Is that your charter law, or is that the state of Florida law?

The state of Florida law.

Okay.

So are we dealing with two different laws here?

Charter Law and State of Florida.

Well, the Charter Provision has the removal in it.

Okay.

I just I was just double checking.

That's an addition to the charter.

Okay, so should both be in there?

I know sometimes you have to put borders with both.

Let me think about that one.

Okay.

And then the other question is where was it?

Sorry, I lost it.

Was this it was the same thing about the public hearing?

Yes.

It says that the magistrate would be one of the five members.

So we're talking about doing that differently now.

Okay.

So all of that is out, and we have an actual magistrate.

Yes.

Because before the magistrate needed to know law.

Right.

That was why it the intention of the board uh recommendation was exactly what was said, but I think we can clean it up by just going with the right, because most people that would be appointed would not know law.

Well, we would have to appoint a lawyer.

Correct.

Okay.

Very good.

Which is no guarantee that they know law.

Or that they know this kind of law.

Okay, thank you.

Okay.

Yes, Lenny.

Hello again.

Um back to uh I guess 306 in the public hearing.

Um please keep in mind that we have to whatever you come up here with, it has to go to the people for a vote.

And it would the simplest uh language that you can have when you actually have the referendum, the better.

And uh I think that maybe the consensus was to not have uh an advisory committee, but go straight for it with a magistrate.

Well that would really clean up things because if you have to look at this ten times to understand, and you're still not sure, trying to explain that to people, and you're trying to ask for their vote to accept this.

It it's gonna be very, very difficult.

So please keep in mind when you actually drafting these things that you have to sell it to people who have no idea what even a charter is.

So thank you.

Thank you.

All righty.

Um I think before I can move on to another section, we just still have to address um D.

Which is the one uh that addresses resumes uh shall be required by any applicant within 10 days of any vacancy.

The submitted resume shall be made available to the public for review by placement on the city clerk's page on the city website.

If no resumes are submitted, the council may proceed with appointing a person to fill the seat, and that uh that section is labeled um filling of vacancies.

Right.

All right, so that is uh what I just read to you is the changes that the review committee is suggesting.

So, in speaking order, thoughts?

I'm good with this language.

I'm good with it.

I am as well.

Me too.

Okay, I have a problem with it.

The problem that I see with it is when it says resume shall be required of any applicant within 10 days of any vacancy.

What if the vacancy happens two nights after a council meeting?

The whole council might not even know about it.

I I we had, I mean, I think we had somebody move, and um the public knew that he had moved before the uh council was officially told that he had moved when he decided to say he had moved.

So I I just think we get a um I'm just questioning a little bit about the 10 days.

That might be better.

That might be better because I'm just saying how does we may not be told that there's a vacancy and the timing might just really be off for that to be impossible to do.

So we can do it to 20 if that's I I have one question on that.

Um if I recall correctly, we had 30 days to fill that vacancy.

Right.

So does that 20 days fit within that filling it within 30 days okay?

That's a good point.

Well, it doesn't be 15 days.

Well, 15 days would give us um, you know, there would be a two-week period.

You know, let's say some a vacancy happened the day after a council meeting.

Typically council meetings are every two weeks, but there's exceptions to that rule too.

Well, you know, also honestly, we could call a special council meeting.

Okay, okay.

So that's if we if we fall within that time period.

But I think maybe 15 is a good time period.

Okay, because then we still have the 30 days it has to be filled within the 30 days.

And yeah, I don't have a problem if if the way the calendar worked, you know it was going to be really cumbersome and we called the special meeting.

I that would be okay with me on that.

So on that particular point of 1 days to 20 days and 30 days, anybody public comment need to speak?

Okay, seeing none, then let's move to um 309.

309.

309 is the one that says uh it's labeled ordinances and resolutions in general.

It's section C effective date and recording, all ordinances and resolutions passed by the council shall become effective upon passage or as otherwise provided therein.

Every ordinance or resolution shall upon its passage be, and it used to say uh be recorded in a book kept for that purpose.

Our our committee has asked that it now say be recorded per full Florida state law and shall be signed by the May Mayor and the city clerk.

Right.

Obviously, we're not using uh handwritten recorded books anymore.

Yeah, right.

Um so that that was archaic, and this is just updating it.

And is that one that would have to go to referendum as opposed to just kind of updating it?

This could be one today's language.

Um for charter change.

There are provisions that allow for things that don't need to go by referendum, but since at this point I would just tell you uh to get council's approval, and then we can make that determination.

Because I'd rather move forward with everything and and take it out if we need to versus so for for what we're trying to do right now, are we all comfortable with this moving forward, knowing that if down the at the next meeting, if we want to remove that we can.

Yes, yes.

And Mayor, there's a second section.

Same thing under E.

Yes, I agree.

Same thing under E.

Okay.

All righty.

Charter Amendment Section 314.

So what we what it says today is at least once every 10 years, the council shall cause this charter to be reviewed in its entirety for possible amendments.

Right now, no, excuse me.

Shall cause this charter to be reviewed for possible amendments.

The suggestion uh from our review committee is at least once every five years, the council shall change shall cause this charter to be reviewed in its entirety for possible amendments.

So it's those two issues, changing it from 10 years to five years, and from the way we did it, where we just said, hey, these are our biggest issues that we'd like you to look at.

It's saying that we want the entire thing, uh the entire charter to be reviewed.

I agree.

I thought Joe made a good argument.

So I agree.

I agree, but I would add that it should be by a citizen committee, because I know at times the council is just wanted to do it themselves, and I think it should be by a citizen committee.

Councilmember Shaw?

Uh I definitely agree with the language in its entirety because I've observed cursory looks, and we can tell even from the amount of things that are being addressed now by our wonderful advisory committee that there's a lot of things that needed to be updated.

So I I agree with five years and in its entirety.

You know, beyond that, if if uh others are in agreement with additional things, uh I I'm not sure I would have any objections.

Okay.

Um I'm in agreement with it as well.

Thanks.

With what council member Shaw said, or with what's written.

Okay.

Um I I like what's written, but I think if we could add the by uh uh appointed committee because I do think that uh it doesn't need to happen by the council.

Right, I agree that was a good point.

Yes.

Okay.

Public comment on that.

Seeing none, we'll move along.

Um section 402.

402 um is appointment, qualifications, removal compensation is the title for administrative, and uh B is there was a change in B.

Qualifications.

The city manager shall be chosen by the council solely on the basis of executive and administrative qualifications, which with special reference to actual experience in or knowledge of accepted practice with respects to the duties of the office as herein set forth.

It looks to me then, and committee tell me, then it looks to me like you added in red and then you took it out.

Oh, you just removed.

Okay, so what they're wanting to do to do then is to remove this next part of the statement.

At the time of appointment, the city manager need not be a resident of the city or state, but during the tenure of office, the city manager shall reside uh, yeah, shall reside within the city unless otherwise suspensed by an affirmative vote of four or more council members.

So they want to the committee is suggesting that we remove that.

First thoughts.

Oh, I I agree it should be the best person for the job, not the best person in 2.8 square miles.

So I agree.

Okay.

I would want to keep it.

I would want the city manager to move to our city.

Um they can certainly start.

They could move in, they could live in Wyoming for all I cared when when we hire them, but I would want them to move into the city.

I would keep this because we still could make an affirmative vote if they wanted to live in Pasadena instead of here, but I think they should live in the city.

Councilmember Shaw.

From what I've heard from residents, um at the very least, they would want the city manager to move to Pinellas County if they weren't here already.

So what we do with that as a council is is I defer to the majority, but um to say that they can just live anywhere.

I mean, if they had a two-hour commute, that would not be advantageous to us, right?

As viewed by our residents.

So, in order for us to know if you have a majority vote or not, I just need to know.

I hear I heard here a yes and a no, and now you're next.

Okay.

Um, I mean can I make a suggestion to that city?

Please.

So you go to hire a new city manager, and the city manager lives in Wyoming.

And you say, okay, we're gonna hire you, but you need to look, by the way, in the contract, you you have to live within 10 miles of the city.

You can still have that as negotiation.

You could still say you must reside in Pinellas County.

You could still do that.

This is just the charter requiring that particular action.

So I don't want you to think by if you remove this as suggested that you're precluded from having any say where the person is.

You still have that in your ability to contract with them.

When they council were to come together and decide what qualifications they were looking for, they could put that as one of their qualifications.

Absolutely.

Even if that's not what was specifically stated in the charter.

That is correct.

As long as it's not confident, thank you for making that clear.

And we can we can do it.

Okay.

Um then with that in mind, I think removing that would be fine.

Removing that would be fine.

Councilmember Jackson.

I'm for removing it.

Okay.

So I think that that's three in favor.

And uh for me, it really helped on that because I'm um I'm very happy with the situation we have going now.

So this is you know, not not about anything active, but I do think that if somebody didn't have all the history of golf port, um which we have now, even though he may not live here, I think that it would be a disadvantage.

So I think living very, if not in golf port, living very close to golf port would be important, but I could fight that battle if I had to down the road when if and when what there was a um a process.

Okay.

So um I'm comfortable then with what our review committee has suggested.

Any uh public comment on this, Mr.

Freed.

Yeah, I'm just uh two things.

One is I'm a little confused about um whether you want the person to live in Gulfport or not, and the second thing is I'm curious to know what Jim and Dave thinks about this.

Okay.

Well, I don't think that we need to do that during the review.

This this that's not really what we're talking about.

Also, I'm confused about uh is this are you requiring someone to live you're not requiring that this removal?

We are removing that statement.

We might decide that in our qualifications that we want it, but it's not part of the charter.

Anybody else need to speak on that?

Yes.

Since you're talking about the contract of the city manager, do you do residents have any say in what those requirements might be if you were to say in the contract they do need to live in golf court, they don't need to live in golf court.

Is that at all part like that gets public comment or discussion, or is that all decided by the council or contract usually done one in forever?

Um but the contract usually is uh directed council gives the terms that they want.

We it's usually my position negotiates it bring it brings it back to council at a public meeting for approval.

So all those conditions are our terms are reviewed and at a public meeting and determined for approval.

Okay, so there would be opportunity for public comment during the discussion of a contract.

Well, as in all things, I mean I get tons and tons of emails, you know, every week.

People are giving me their opinions.

Yeah.

So I'm listening to opinions because I'm here to relay the majority opinions in most cases of what the residents are saying, not what Karen Love wants.

So I think that um, you know, I think that our I think we're pretty respondent to what our residents have to say.

But ultimately, when the decision has to be made, we're the ones that get egged, and so we will make the decision.

Yeah, and since this hasn't come up in a long time, I just wasn't sure how that process would go.

And um something to consider is would a person be qualified to work remotely in this role.

If you're saying they do not have to live in golfport, do they even have to live in the state of Florida?

So in our modern day it's something to consider.

Right.

Fortunately, we don't have to address that in the charter.

I wanted to thank the um charter review board for noticing that this is something that doesn't belong in the charter.

I like guiding documents that can fit in my pocket, not ones that I have to carry around like this.

And so I think that's very smart.

Also, I serve as the lobbyist for the Sun Coast League of Cities, and so I know that at any given time there are lots of openings for city managers, and this is a highly competitive market.

We are very fortunate that we have not had to go to market for a city manager, and it would be catastrophic if our guiding documents limited us to only people who lived within our city limits.

I mean, I think that this is um that that more will be revealed when we have to go through the process again.

But I appreciate taking this out of out of um the charter, and thank you to the Charter Review Board.

Um and I appreciate you saying that because certainly since the storms, there has been much much uh upheaval among elected profici uh um politicians as well as um city managers, and we are so fortunate in my opinion that we have not had that upheaval here in this city, and we've really had a continuity with our staff members, and I think it's made for a little bit easier recovery if there's any such thing as an easier recovery.

And the last thing is um Article 5, qualifications and elections, um, and it's called Section 501 election special election definition of qualified elector.

And they have they have struck four words from here, so I will read this.

The genuine general election of council members shall be held on Tuesday in March for uh in each year, and what they struck out as determined by the council.

five qualifications and elections um and it's called section 501 election special election definition of qualified elector and they have they have struck four words from here so I will read this the general election of council members shall be held on Tuesday in March for uh in each year and what they struck out as determined by the council in even numbered years the council members from the odd numbered wards uh the city will be elected that whole bit so the only thing that that's being changed is that it says as determined by the council and we've already said that if um one of the earlier sections tonight if that passes then we're gonna have to change 501 down the road to coincide in any case so my very first thought is I I don't know that it's that important to come to referendum to remove four words on something that we suspect will come on referendum again next year and I think you guys don't choose the Tuesday in March anyway the supervisor of election exactly so I don't think we really need to address that is everybody okay it could also be one that we could do by uh ordinance so let me look at that too okay all righty so city attorney well I I have one other thing I'd like to bring up that that they didn't bring up if that's okay so the only thing that I read through this all this afternoon and the only thing that came up to me that wasn't brought up and and this is something that we may not even want to touch I'm fine with that but um in 502 there's the um the way the wards are broken up and I don't know how it was when they originally made the wards and they make sense geographically but ward one is almost twice as big as the other wards and would we want to look at that in terms of changing it by population or is it fine the way it is by you know by geography it's just something that to consider we we looked at that okay so we we thought that uh geography was the better way to do it the the guidelines everybody knows where they are at no changing no gerrymandering no whatever is going on right everybody is where they're at we all vote yeah it's true it's just where you have to live yeah yeah so it's not you know it's not that case okay yeah and and I just want to bring that up in case yeah I had heard uh somebody else bring that up as well so I I did think about it and I'm I myself am comfortable with the way the words are divided right now yeah okay that's fine all righty so the question before I release this committee that's you know done such a great job and I hope that even though we had to have discussion and ask questions and get through it ourselves I hope that that didn't mean that we didn't you know trust and appreciate the time you sent there are a couple things that were a little difficult and the bigger question is city attorney do you feel like you're clear on our position up here I feel I am and if not Teresa and Jim can uh what I usually do is when I draft the ordinance I send it to them to look at first in case I missed something okay so that we can all be on the same page to bring it to you.

Okay.

All righty yes Mr Gunther one question for the council members that if you feel comfortable sunsetting us uh and that we're done yeah I do and I say thank you job well done okay so I know this is really unusual that it's 8 31 and some of you came for public comment and we haven't had public comment yet but we're gonna have to take about a seven minute break to get in line for the restroom and then we we will resume thank you for your patience.

Yeah yeah to have a say in the matter it's far from being settled but I think we made advancements so and that was the goal so now let me open it up to public comment anybody have anything they'd like to say any matter limit three minutes Ms.

Armstrong so I'm here about some good news um a couple of months ago the um golf court cribbage group asked for permission to put a beach box down at the beach excuse me just a minute oh ladies we have a public speaker go ahead I'm sorry so we asked for permission to put a beach box down at the beach to collect toys anything that was left over on the beach that we could could be used on the beach and I'd like to report that that was installed today and yesterday and that it is available for toys or any beach items and that it was completely created out of recycled materials and um we're just happy about it thank you very much thank you yes Amy Amy Costa

And I'd like to report that that was installed today and yesterday, and that it is available for toys or any beach items.

And that it was completely created out of recycled materials.

And um we're just happy about it.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Yes, Amy.

Amy Costa, um preaching of the choir.

But Saturday, the 25th is our um Senior Center Foundation night in Italy.

Um it starts at doors at five, dinners at six.

I know it is also the witches walk, so we encourage witches to come and have some Italian food and some wine before you go out on your uh brooms.

Um and then also, and it benefits the senior center, obviously, all the programming and hopefully one day a new building.

Um also on Halloween, um, we are putting together a Gulfport citywide creepy crawl, and we're inviting all of the local businesses to participate by um having a trick-or-treat for the kids and decorating an area of their business, and then um registering with uh Wonderworks and the MBC, and you can also do specials for the parents, an activity, a photo up or whatever, and we'll put it on a map, and there'll be a scavenger hunt.

So every location where the kids go, they get a sticker and they can turn that in to us for a raffle, and a lot of businesses are donating the raffle prizes.

So just an attempt to um support local businesses, send the families to businesses where they might have never visited, and then get to know some of our small businesses.

I think everyone needs the love.

Um so if you're watching or you hear this, please register and and participate.

It should be a lot of fun.

Thank you.

Sounds like fun.

So running up in the interest of time.

Um, Courtney Prokopis, 15th Avenue South.

I have four points to bring to the council today.

Um, the first regards door-to-door sales.

Uh, my understanding is that solicitors have to have a permit.

My question is is that permit issued by the city or the county?

What does it look like?

And are the solicitors required to display it like a badge?

Um, if so, it seems like a really easy and really effective public service announcement opportunity.

So residents know what to look for.

Um, in advance of this public comment, I checked in with our new city website mascot, the little gecko guy.

Um that gecko needs a name, so maybe a community naming contest.

I feel like that could be fun.

Um point number two.

Oh, I'm out of breath from that tiny run.

Um, uh citizens asking for updates.

I will always ask for updates.

I continue to um to support transparency.

I have a simple request.

When residents ask for updates, please include a timeline.

Specifically, I'm asking right now for a timeline on the Living Shoreline Project.

I understand some progress, but just a rough timeline.

We don't need by this date this will happen, but this typically takes this many months, and then it moves into this stage.

That stage takes so many months, so on and so forth.

Um should we include government shutdowns?

Sure.

Yeah, again, interest of transparency.

I know that was kind of like a little bit of a poke, but yes, absolutely.

What's happening at the national level affects us.

So the more we talk about it, that can get people inspired to then speak up to the national level.

Um remote public comment.

I know it's in process, but when, when is it being implemented?

What is the timeline for that?

Um the cooking issue.

I was deeply troubled by how last meeting's unanimous vote on the ordinance banning cooking in public spaces went.

Referring to it only as the cooking issue minimizes its impact.

This kind of ordinance allows for selective enforcement against people living alternative and vulnerable lifestyles, and it becomes profiling.

A fair law should not depend on individual judgment during enforcement.

It's nothing short of codified dog whistle, and it makes me supremely uncomfortable.

Number four.

Regarding the investigation into former Vice Mayor O'Hara Allegations of misuse public funds.

Reports indicate that he's been living in the home of a Gulfport police department sergeant for several months now.

Does this create a conflict of interest or the appearance of one?

As a citizen, I believe the public deserves to know what safeguards are in place to ensure this investigation remains unbiased and trustworthy tonight.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Public comment.

Anyone else?

Lauren.

Lauren Sternward 4.

I have a couple of things.

We had a meeting this week, this past week organized by Gulfport parents that I attended.

I would like to formally request now that we I don't know if it's a proposal or uh ordinance or whatever it is to create uh child care offered from 6 to 8 p.m.

at the rec center, staffed by our background tracked wonderful staff that already work in the rec center.

Um that would obviously not cover the entirety of the meetings, but I think it would provide a chunk of time where people could mostly attend public comment, and it would be really really great.

Lots of other cities have that, and I think the cost would be minimal given that we already have the facilities and the staff.

Um okay, so I got on a little bit of an investigation on the water charge, the water issue, water bills.

Um what I learned today is that uh I believe that we actually don't pass along the cost of um like a uh snowbird, like a snowbird who is not here who shuts their water off.

My previous understanding on this issue was St.

Pete charges us, and we just pass that along.

What I learned today, actually, I think is that we made that we have that charge, and it was explained to me that that covers our infrastructure.

Um, so I would like to know if is that true or not.

Um and then I've also seen Margaret Tober have many posts on Facebook, and I believe she's also submitted this to the city about open accounts that have hundreds or thousands of dollars of balances, and then um I saw a thread of a lot of comments that were like, Oh, I'd love to sign up for that.

You know, I'm a fixed income or single parent or it'd be great to not have to pay my water bill and not get it shut off.

So I don't I the previous counsel I heard her before people up here were elected, come up here and talk about that, and she has not done that.

So I'm bringing it up because I would love for that to be looked at to be fair.

Um yeah, and and if there's anything needed as far as the child care thing, would you guys like to see how other cities did it or any other things like that, then I would have be happy to do research or work with the city to make that happen because it would make a big difference for a lot of um voters, taxpayers, families here in Gulfport to be able to come have their voice heard on the issues and to feel like the city is behind them in participating.

April's town hall was at the library.

Um a police officer and two librarians all were happy to take care of my kids.

They were like, we have paint for them to do, we have this, they can come over here.

It was so welcoming, and I didn't have to think about it.

And I wasn't expecting, I brought my own craft.

So that was amazing as a parent to go to a public event that had that, and I think it would be really great to have at City Council.

Thank you.

Scott.

Good evening or tomorrow morning.

Forgive me if I'm a brain warp on that first session, so I'm using notes here.

First quick shout out, uh, gratitude towards the uh recreation center for reaching out for some assistance with uh paying for the kid uh candy for the kids, costumes and stuff like that.

Uh I'm by the way, representing uh Gulfport Merchants Chamber this evening, and so we were very happy to donate some funds to them uh today, and I encourage everyone else to participate in that because it's a good cause.

Primary reason for my uh being here tonight is to tell everybody that we've kicked off the 2026 uh Pink Flamingo Home Tour, home and garden tour uh committee and efforts, and uh the the event is March 7th, as it's always the first Saturday in March, so it'll be the March 7th this year.

Uh I want to thank uh the uh Jim and his entire staff, particularly Justin and Kristen for their ongoing support on this and everything that we do.

Uh and also there's a lot of people up here uh tonight who have been helpful in this event in the past, Karen.

April have both taken lead on it.

Marlene, I know has been a uh participant as uh as her home being on tour.

And uh I reached out, having served on the board of directors with Nancy uh prior to her taking this position, uh trying to give me some feedback on a decision on where the the um the tour should be this year, and she had a very enthusiastic response about ward four being the place, so announcing that that will be our location or for the garden district or the northeast of the city as you choose to call it.

Um, and and Nancy, in fact, has uh signed up to lead our uh one of our committees uh for for that effort, and we've started that.

Thank you, thank you.

Um just last week.

Uh but it did do and uh also encourage if there are any homeowners who think they've got something that's worth showing, and I'll bet you if you think you do, you probably do, and or maybe friends or neighbors in uh ward four uh that you can suggest.

And uh also encourage if there are any homeowners who think they've got something that's worth showing, and I'll bet you if you think you do, you probably do, and or maybe friends or neighbors in uh ward four uh that you can suggest.

Please reach out to me to Nancy, or just call the chamber office uh at the standard number and and leave us a message and and we'll absolutely get back to you.

Uh it's a lot of fun.

Uh I've done it twice.

My um our home has been on twice.

Uh it's a great experience.

We have testimonials from uh from last year's participants of how many wonderful new people you meet, friends you you make for life and you see on the street and they go, Oh, I was at your house, and it goes from there.

So thank you all for everything, and I'm out.

Anyone else for public comment?

All righty, I'm gonna close public comment then, and we will move on to the city manager's report.

Just one report this evening, Mayor, in regards to um I know Vice Mayor Thanos had asked for our weekly report or bi-weekly report on permitting.

Uh one positive I was advised before the meeting, just before the meeting this evening that the number of violations issue uh have been sent that we've heard from instead of 70, 84 parties have contacted and are working through the issue with us.

Out of the hundred letters, out of the 158 letters that have been sent, we have about 30 more to send, 30 to 40 more, and that will close out the the balance of them.

They're working Saturdays in the morning to to get the balance of the letters out.

Mark and Zanette.

Mark?

About 40 more, I believe.

And of the uh so the 84 have responded.

Right.

And when you say they've responded, that means they've kind of told us their plans, or they've actually applied for a permit.

Started the permitting process.

Which is what the goal has always been.

Which has always been the goal.

Uh started the permitting process or starting the process to disprove that they had no damage.

It's not automatic, get a permit.

It may be that you can document that you had no damage, or those type of issues.

And that's but we're these viol.

So that's 84 people that have responded like within less than the last 30 days.

And then it's a notice of violation letter that's no longer a courtesy letter.

Right.

That you could face you know, consequences.

Okay.

That's all I have, Mayor.

Thank you.

Um, do we have a city attorney report?

No, Mayor.

Are you tired out already?

No, Mayor.

I'm okay.

All righty.

And that takes us to City Clerk Report.

No report, Mayor.

All righty.

So that will lead us to council comments and reports, and we will go in speaking order on that.

Okay.

I just wanted to share, and I think I have before that the Florida League of Cities had an open call for hey, listen, who wants to join one of our committees, and I desperately wanted to.

Um I sent my resume, and I am now a part of the municipal operations policy committee.

So I'll tell you a little bit about that.

I won't take up much of our time, but we meet every single month, and we have five bills that we want to pass in front of the Senate.

All five will be supported by the Florida League of Cities, but one will be really supported by the Florida League of Cities, making it their main.

And what we do every month is that we meet, there's um guest speakers, there's experts, and we're encouraged to come back and talk to our constituents, and then we vote to get to that one that they're going to back.

So a few of the items are sovereign immunity.

Oh, Mayor Love.

Wow.

What time is it?

And what day is it?

Okay.

Okay.

Ummunity, which is um a request to instead of having uh 100,000 for a personal injury or uh 200,000 for an incident, they want to go all the way up to 1 million and 3 million, which could cripple a city of our size.

Okay.

That's one of them.

There is I know that it's quite bad.

There's a clerk there.

So I just want to look at Teresa for one second.

So the clerks have come forth, and this is the third year in a row that they've come forth with legislation that would provide public record exemption, just as the chiefs um are excluded from having to um post their addresses online and whatnot.

And it never makes it.

Um I'm happy to say that that in our voting process.

So again, we it's a very methodical.

Um I'm happy to say that that in our voting process, so again, we it's a very methodical, started out five, and then we're down to three, and then in November we'll go down to two, and then in December we'll all talk about the last one.

And the clerks actually made it into the top three.

Seven clerks were there, ten percent of the population were clerks, and they um how many of them um have had their life threatened, and all seven have raised their hand.

One person raised it twice.

It was devastating.

Now, I'm not gonna put Teresa excuse me, the city clerk on the spot, but I have been privy to emails that I'm gas that I wouldn't talk to people the way that she's spoken to, and she's just doing her job.

I mean, and I'm not I was born in New York City and raised there.

I work for a corporation, and I'm a mother of a daughter who has a daughter.

If you know, you know, I am not weak at all, but I read those emails, and I just don't understand it.

So I'm very happy that that made the voting this time to at least get close, right?

Um, the open carry is also on there, a little bit of changes wanted to be made there.

Um the emergency communications, which is um 911.

I was spoken to the city manager today, and we are a part of next gen 911, which and please if I'm miss if I misspeak, but within three feet of where you are, if you call 911, your hand device, your device, your phone, can bring them within three feet of where you are.

You no longer it's no longer um however it used to be the PIN or how however that used to work, right?

So, anyways, um part of this in uh emergency communication is um there's a legislative office that is trying to get um a call center and then transfer.

So the transfers could be take time, and I know for a fact that we don't want we don't want that.

So that was one competitive bid threshold, meaning um if it's over a certain amount of if we wanted to redo this this room here, and it went over our and we wanted our own folks to do it, we pay this the city, right?

The staff, why not have them do it?

But if it's a certain threshold, we have to go out for our FPs, and why would we want to do that when we pay our staff?

That's another one.

And then let the last one is uh chapter 419, which is community residences recovery community and congregate living facilities, which is essentially group homes, and uh there are three counties really impacted Dade, Palm Beach, and Broward County.

So um there's not a lot of rules there, there's not a lot of certifications that are asked for, and it's creating a problem at neighborhoods.

So it's very exciting.

I really enjoy it, and um I look forward to maybe the clerks um Bill getting all the way to number one, Teresa.

But if not, there's a lot of others.

I'll be requesting support because I did last year.

Good.

Thank you.

So thank you, everybody.

Thank you.

Okay, I have a lot of things.

Uh first, I I would like to hear where we are with the public comment thing, because I don't think it's on the website or anything.

Then I thought it was gonna start with October, so we had we had to wait till October to pay for it.

So we're still waiting.

Dave followed up with them this week, and we have not heard back.

Okay.

Um, and then I went to a Tampa Bay Regional Planning Meeting, and also they had a coastal master plan meeting, which both the mayor and I watched on Zoom, and this is a three-year plan for coastal management.

So I'm on the Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council, and this is sort of a subgroup of that.

And I would suggest because it's a three-year thing, and I'm only gonna be here for six more months, that somebody else take that on, because that way you can be part of the whole process.

They're gonna have trainings for how to present to the public so that they know what we're doing and all that.

So I would just think that somebody else might want to um look at that.

And I also was at the Florida League, and I think was there anything else here when we can't be um there was a a lot of talk about the um local emergency planning committee, and they have a brochure, and um they prepare for chemical emergencies planning training, public education.

They have a TASMAT training center, and um there's somebody on the Tampa Bay Regional Planning staff that's their LEPC, whichever that stands for, local planning emergency, local emergency planning committee, and um so we could always go to them for any training for the fire department or public works or anywhere, and hopefully Kendrick is looking at that, and um, and apparently I learned that EV fires have to be put out very differently from other fires.

So that's that was also interesting.

Anyway, and then another thing that came up there was about oh no, that was at the Florida League.

Anyway, at the Florida League, our top things ended up being enterprise fund transfers where they want to limit how much money we can take from our enterprise funds.

So that would be like utilities and the marina and things like that where the funds are kind of separate from our general funds and limit it to I think 5%.

That's not final yet because there's haven't been in session yet.

Um we want to encourage them to let the cities decide for themselves how much of the enterprise fund we want to move to the general fund.

It could be that you don't need any extra repairs or any extra things done in some enterprise fund, but you do need it for something else in the general fund.

So we want to let them make let the cities make that decision.

And the other one was for extra territorial surcharges.

And again, this doesn't really affect us.

This is more like somebody like St.

Pete who provides services for other cities, like we get our water from them.

And and it and we're a little different because they don't pay for our infrastructure, but sometimes they pay for the infrastructure as well, and how much can they charge those other cities for that service?

And then there were several other things that we decided that we did not want to put forward because we want to keep them as city decisions rather than state mandates so that we keep local choices.

So that was the main thing there.

I had my town hall, which was excellent, and it's recorded and will be going on the website and um so anybody can watch it again.

And the point was it turned out to go a little longer than we thought, so the library was closing.

But the point was so that people could record their experiences, and we could have a um an archive for the history museum.

So that doesn't mean that we can't do that.

So people could either record it themselves, like on their phone, and then either send it to me or to Justin, or they could get together with somebody and have the other person record it, or they can call me and I'll either do it or arrange for them to have somebody do it so that we can get that experience you know put into an archive, and then if we get enough response, um, those of you who know Zion, he's volunteered to put together some kind of a mutual presentation that we could do in January or February.

Um another thing that came up was we have all these um elevated houses being built, and in our design guidelines, we have guidelines for basically single-story houses, but we don't have anything for elevated houses or for commercial buildings.

Do we want to consider that maybe we should because we're gonna have a lot of them built right now, and they can either all look very boring, or we could be like Anna Maria and have all kinds of really clever, cute, attractive, and keep the character of Gulfport that we like in place.

It it would be something that we should have done probably years ago because now to do it when everybody's trying to build is gonna be a little complicated.

But I just want to bring that up so people know about that.

Um it's community planning month, and some people are putting together a letter for that, but this is going so long.

Anyway, the other thing was I've been asking for a presentation on flood insurance.

So the city does a whole bunch of different things to get us our 20% discount on flood insurance.

Um I was hoping that we could have a presentation on that.

If you guys want it, I know that information, I have it all, but you guys probably don't.

So if you would like a presentation on that, then I think we should ask the city manager to arrange that because I've been asking for six months and it hasn't happened.

So it's only if you guys want it.

So you can decide that.

And also to find out where we are on our comp plan.

Um I was hoping we should have had it back from the county by now.

Well, it went back to the state had comments, and we plan on bringing that to you November 18th, Michael.

November 4th, November 4th.

Oh, because otherwise we'd have a lot on the 18th, yeah.

Uh November 4th is the uh you'll be seeing the comp plan amendments for the second reading.

But it doesn't it go to the planning and zoning board too?

No, this is second reading.

The initial went to the planning and zoning board.

They recommended the as the advisory committee to you.

You passed it on first reading.

It was then transmitted to the state of Florida.

It then comes back to you after they've they've made their comments and changes, comes back to you for second reading.

At the second reading, then it is then transferred back to state as 45 days to review it once again.

Because I thought okay, that's different than my understanding.

My understanding was that we sent it to the the county for updates to the up to the Florida current codes, and then it was going to the state and coming back and forth, but that the planning and zoning hadn't made any changes that they wanted outside of getting it up to code.

No, that's the only thing that's the state made some comments and comments on it that we made those changes that you'll see on second reading.

Yeah, but what about the planning and zoning making changes totally separate from anything that's required?

We haven't got there yet.

Okay.

We you have to get this part done.

Okay.

That you're going to approve on the fourth.

Okay.

And then you're going to talk about it.

Then you're starting the ADU process.

Okay.

In December, I believe it is December, your first meeting in December, Forward Pinellas will come to your meeting and present the fundamentals of the ADU discussion.

Okay.

Because then we have to change our comp plan and also adopt ordinances.

Excuse me, to support that land changes to the land development code.

But first, you'll have to change your comp plan to permit AD.

But there might be other things we want to change too.

Well, I mean, let's your AD.

Do one at a time.

I thought your ADUs were the primary focus.

Well, they are they are, but you know, I don't know.

There could be other things.

Um I'll leave it at that.

And then I just maybe let me know if you're interested in that flood thing or not.

If you're asking for consensus, let's just use those words so we always know what we're trying to accomplish.

Yes, whether whether whether you would like to have a presentation about the things that we do to get the discount for the flood insurance.

Okay.

I don't feel the need to do that at this time because number one, I feel I'm now aware that we're on one of six cities in the entire county that is getting discounts.

And number two, in order to get higher discounts, we need to um be more restrictive, and we're not allowed to do that until October of 27 because of Bill 180.

So I don't see any point in doing that now.

The information could be old by then.

That's what I thought too.

I okay.

Okay, we can just wait.

Okay, that's it.

Thank you.

Okay.

Thank you.

Okay.

Well, since the last council meeting, I attended the Sun Coast League of Cities.

Um that the primary focus again was uh legislative matters, and Jennifer Webb mentioned tonight that uh she's representing that with the Sun Coast League of Cities, so that was very informative.

Um we broke into groups uh and um discussed what focuses would be important and then shared from each each table, shared what came out of each discussion.

Uh then I also attended the Florida League of Cities, and um uh council member Early and Vice Mayor Thanos already explained the process, and I did cover quite a bit of that um in my my report, which is also online on the city website.

Um but again we're going through um the ongoing legislative discussions and prioritizing issues, and the committee that I'm on is development, uh code enforcement and redevelopment.

And uh all all of although all the issues as council member early mentioned will be addressed during the legislative session.

Um they will narrow it down to certain ones to prioritize, and yet they won't leave anything out.

And the and for those that didn't hear the conversation or the report before, um the main ones that they're identifying right now are CRAs, impact fees, short-term rentals, ADUs, and those types of things.

Um I also attended the midtown business collective meeting.

Uh I attended the GMC board meeting, and by the way, there's two amazing pages, two full pages about Gulfport in this publication.

And so for anybody would like to see that, and I think we have some mentions elsewhere in it too.

There's quite a few, and you can everybody can pick up their copy at our welcome center, which is also six days a week now.

Yeah, it'd be be proud.

Look at it.

And then um on Sunday, I was able to uh join the young Gulfport Parents Group, which I was really um excited to be there and and hear about their their thoughts and and their vision for Gulfport and and how their um coalitioning.

The sense of community and the many ways folks were helped was a beautiful common thread.

And I mentioned these three things in particular because that's that because they're evident that the Town Hall Wonderworks event and the DRV galleries events all contributed are contributing to connection and healing in our community.

So in my commitment to accessibility, I'm still available every Monday at City Hall.

I am I've done the three ongoing scheduled locations along with individually scheduled and unscheduled times.

And I also completed four hours of mandated ethics class.

One of the people isn't here that I was hoping to hear this, but there is a misunderstanding out amongst our residents about fines if permit fees were not applied for.

Yes.

I believe Mr.

Nichols had briefed me the other day, and also Councilmember Thanos, excuse me, Vice Mayor Thanos.

We achieved about 25%, about 20,000 feet linear feet of pipe have been televised and minimal repairs done, cutting roots, things like that.

And that's he'll be able to give you a bigger, excuse me, bigger update as we get through more of the stormwater discussion.

Okay, so that's in one of the regions or 25%.

Throughout the city primarily he's moving back down by the beach, but he was up in this area.

Good.

And I had a quick question about this the permitting update.

Um earlier in the year you had said that we had 37 solar panel uh how homes with th solar panels.

Okay.

And and this list 48.

Is this 48 in addition to that 37?

No, that's a cumulative.

Completed and/or permitted.

Right.

Okay.

And then I was wondering uh if you would mind uh mentioning the hurricane recovery program through Pinellas County, the people first recovery program.

I believe the mayor was going to speak to that.

Okay, I'll leave that to her then.

And that's all I have for right now.

Thank you.

Yeah, my only um report is what we've already talked about about the public comment.

Um I spoke with Dave Mather today, and we are in contact with the Grancus and moving forward.

It's gonna take a minute to set it up.

That's all.

Thanks.

Okay, so I normally like to try really hard to address um several of the things, especially if um said during public comment, especially if repeated, but tonight I'm not gonna do that.

Tonight I really want to spend my precious 10 10 minutes to address code enforcement permitting and um protecting our participation in the national flood insurance program because that is my priority, and that's how I ran for office, and that's how I still feel.

It's real easy because so many things are up and running.

It's it's real easy to think we're back to normal, but we're still not back to normal.

All you have to do is drive through the marina area and you see how many homes are sitting there not occupied at this time.

So I usually speak strictly from the heart, but when it gets late and I get tired and I get up at forest, um I'm I wrote something that I'm going to read tonight, which is not the way I typically like to communicate.

Um so my letter goes like this.

It says, I've received an earful of um, I've received an earful uh in the last two weeks about perception of the lack of caring by the city and the city council over the last set of letters that went out as early as October 1.

I can understand why it has been an overwhelming process for all of the residents in the special flood hazard area.

I can't say I know how you feel, but I can see the look on your faces.

I see the fear and I see the anger.

No one has gone through this before, and when I say no one has gone through this before, I want to say the residents haven't gone through it, but neither has the city gone through it.

Nobody was prepared for what happened to us last year.

So it's a new process with a learning curve, to say the least.

Right now I feel like our city is walking a tight rope of trying to show compassion to our residents and adhering to the FEMA requirements.

They're not compassionate, okay?

And we're trying to mix the two.

Contractors are going directly to the portal and following the same FEMA guidelines as other cities and counties, so that if they find the process hard, you might want to find another contractor.

And that sounds like I'm being a smart aleck.

But we're not two months into this.

We're 12 to 13 months.

There was a whole set of new rules.

But if your contractor hasn't learned that and doesn't understand that and doesn't know how to use a portal at this point, that's a problem, and you might want to get suggestions from somebody who's had a contractor and good success.

If the um if residents are not getting the help and the answers that they need, I mean it when I say I want to know about it.

I mean this.

I want to know about it.

That's what I'm here for.

I'm here to listen.

I have found that sometimes what our uh technical people are saying and what our compassionate people are saying, that sometimes I can blend the two and we can work through it pretty darn quickly.

Um I would also like to suggest that for me to receive secondhand information is not helpful to getting to the bottom of the issue.

So if I'm out having lunch and somebody wants to tell me about what happened to their, you know, their neighbor's sister, and that's not going to be real helpful for me to get into it, especially if the neighbor's sister won't pick up the phone and call me.

Um we, the city, the city council, the city, the building department, nobody is looking to find people.

That is not what our goal is.

We are wanting to fulfill the requirements of FEMA along with bring our own people into compliance.

I've heard a lot of misinformation regarding the letters.

I've read them, I've reread them, I've reread them again, and a lot of what people are telling me is not what the letters say.

So I would like to just clarify.

If you are under 50% damage, but you live in the floodplain hazard area, you have to get a permit to bring your home back to pre-storm condition.

So when you're reading, I only had 15% damage, I don't have to get a permit.

That's not what FEMA has told us, okay, and we are going to follow those rules.

Um, on the other hand, I lost my place, give me just a minute.

Um, I've heard that when they got this last letter, and I say last letter because this is the third letter that people have gotten, okay.

It is not saying that they have to have their work completed and pass final inspection in the 30 days they're being given.

They're being told that you need to start the application process for a permit.

For some people, that means walk in and apply for the permit.

For some people, that means they need to come in and say, hey, I'm behind because this is what happened, but I'm working on it, and I'll have this to you in I'm gonna miss your deadline by five days.

Okay, we're not trying to find people, we're trying to bring them into compliance.

Um the goal is compliance, the goal is compliance.

I really feel like with our compassionate staff that anybody who walks in and needs to talk to us who's legitimate and has much to say other than I don't care what you say, I'm not doing anything, it's my house.

We're gonna work with them.

That is what we're trying to do.

Okay, then I also have to say now, if you're over 50%, okay, you have much much tougher decisions.

The letter was real clear on that.

If you're over the 50%, you need to bring um whoop my eyes went the wrong way.

You need to uh bring your uh home, you need to elevate your structure, okay.

That's one option you have.

You could move your pick up and move your home to a higher ground, okay.

You can choose to demolish and rebuild, or you can choose to just demolish and have a lot for future use or for sale, whatever you want to do.

Those are tough decisions, and a lot of people have made those decisions, but there's some people that I think were really counting on Elevate Florida, and maybe they didn't hear till August or September that they didn't get Elevate Florida and they didn't think through their plan B.

So they've now been told we have to hear from you, we have to know what's going on because we need this documentation for FEMA.

So, you know, I would say that if there's somebody out there that falls into that category, I'm over 50 percent, I didn't get elevate Florida, and uh I can't get all this done in 30 days because I didn't think I had to make the decision that quick.

Come in and talk to us, okay?

And just because maybe you have talked to the building department and they're talking to you and giving you ideas, and then code enforcement sent you a letter.

Don't get all riled up.

Let's just call me, tell me.

That's what's going on.

I'll say, yeah, it's always possible that this part of the department and this part haven't coincided and they don't know.

Again, we're not trying to do anybody dirty, we're trying to save the the national flood insurance.

And why do we want to do that?

So Fort Myers Beach went strictly with compassion, they didn't care what FEMA had to say.

Okay, they were on probation for ever since uh Ian hit until recently.

They are now off of probation.

But just so you know, just because they're uh off of probation does not mean that their residents who had a 25% discount got it back yet.

The earliest that they could get back this discount is in April of 2026.

Okay.

And in order to get um this back, FEMA is continuing to go through their records, check and see what they're doing, and you can imagine if getting permits today is a hassle and a problem in terms of gee, I already did the work and now I have to get a permit.

Imagine if it was three years ago, and that's what's happening, and you have to have inspections.

Imagine if they now say, Oh, I know we gave you the permit, but now in order to make FEMA happy, we have to come in and we have to keep cut some sheetrock out to look at some of your electrical work.

Okay, so again, all I'm trying to do is say, I do think we're compassionate.

I I feel it among everybody on the staff of Gulfport, but these letters and the council had nothing to do with the wording of the letters, but what we what did we just hear?

84 people that say less than 30 days ago, we could not document for FEMA what's going on, we can now.

So it means it is working, even if it came across as harsh.

I apologize.

We're trying to get results, and those results are to bring our residents into compliance.

Okay, so I know there's so few of you uh in the it's okay.

I needed to say this for the folks who'll go back and watch the video down the road.

And again, if you know anybody that's struggling with this, nothing is more important to me than trying to help be a mediator if need be, make sure communications are clear to get this done.

Thanks.

Okay, so we're ready to go to consent, please.

All right.

Consent item 7A, consider approval of meeting minutes from workshop meeting held October 2nd, 2025, and regular C city council meeting held October 7th, 2025.

Item 7B, resolution number 2025-85, a resolution authorizing the city manager to accept a donation from the Gulf Port Multipurpose Senior Center Foundation Incorporated of a Hojazaki ice maker to be used by the Gulf Port Multipurpose Senior Center.

And item 7C, resolution number 2025-86, a resolution authorizing the city manager to enter into an agreement, amending the current emergency medical services ALS first responder agreement with the Pinellas County Board of Commissioners, Pinellas County Emergency Services Authority, authorizing the city of Gulfport Fire Department to provide advanced life support first responder services.

Motion to approve.

Second, all in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

All right.

So tonight we have no ordinances, so we will move on to our resolutions.

Item 9A, resolution number 2025-87, a resolution amending chapter 25-4, leisure services of the code of ordinances to include the use of city-owned electric vehicle charging stations, establishing charges charging rates and idle fees, and providing authorization for implementation.

Motion to approve, second.

Mayor, as council had previously discussed the moving to charging for the charging stations.

This includes the one at the casino and city hall, and we've levied a fee of 30 cents per kilowatt hour with a um idle fee of five dollars an hour.

All righty.

Any discussion, council?

No.

No.

Any public comment?

Seeing none, call the vote.

Councilmember Early.

Yes.

Vice Mayor Thanos?

Yes.

Councilmember Shaw?

Yes.

Councilmember Jackson?

Yes.

Mayor Love?

Yes.

Carries to passage.

Item 9B, resolution number 2025-88.

A resolution approving a special event application from the Gulfport Food Forest Incorporated, providing for the temporary waiver of provisions of the code of ordinances, city policies during said special event, and providing for responsibilities.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Mayor, if I may.

Yes, please.

The um Gulfport Food Forest Monthly runs a Sunday market up on 49th Street, and this is to document that they are now reached special event status, and it's necessary for them to complete the application process and provide the city insurance as in co-insured.

Okay.

Any uh council comments, discussion?

No questions.

No, I think it's great.

No.

All righty.

Any public comment on this matter?

Yes.

Here you go.

Well, thank you.

That's it.

All righty.

Councilmember Early.

100%, yes.

Vice Mayor Thanos?

Yes.

Councilmember Shaw?

Yes.

Councilmember Jackson?

Yes.

Mayor Love?

Yes.

Carries to passage.

Item 9C, resolution number 2025-89.

A resolution authorizing the city manager to enter into a scope of services agreement with Harvard Jolly, PBK for the renovation expansion feasibility study for the multipurpose senior center project.

Motion to approve.

Second.

City manager.

Yes, Mayor.

This is the uh next step in the re-evaluation and propo the drafting of proposal regarding the senior center to contract with Harvard Jolly to go back and look at it, give us a new scope and plans for or not full blown pan, but to evaluate the status and phase that we would be using.

Um we are being able to, we've got approval from HUD from House Housing Urban Development to utilize part of our 1.5 million dollar grant to do this also.

Super.

Any questions, comments, concerns?

Um when they do this report, will they come back with an estimate of how much the different phases will cost?

That's what we're starting with.

We'll have some rendering.

They're looking, they're in the process, they're reviewing the plans that we have now, and that they we invested quite a bit at the start the drawings, and they'll be bringing that an estimate.

How what's more feasible, what's feasible, and what the cost associated with those phases would be.

Great.

We'll ask them for that.

They'll give you an estimate.

But it's also going to take council input.

Do you want to move in this direction?

Would you like to do this?

So it'll be a discussion, but if you remember what we asked them to do was to um break it down in what would in the long run be the most efficient and economical way to do it.

Right.

It will it to renovate what they're gonna look at is how to renovate and the existing into feasibility of combination of horizontal and vertical, because we talked about possibly if the if certain aspects of the building will support a second story things to that effect also, and some renderings and potential things you can do.

And we hope to have that in about three to four months.

Okay.

Oh, and that was gonna be my question.

When can I when could we expect in three to four months?

Okay.

All righty.

Any public comment on this?

Did you ask Marlene?

And I think I thought I asked if there were any questions, concerns.

No, I I read through all of it and I asked whatever questions I had already.

All right.

I thought I had asked that.

Public comment?

Yes, Mr.

Freedom.

I I know I've mentioned this before, but I've taken uh uh non-empirical uh talking with folks in uh different uh uh ages and different economic abilities, et cetera, et cetera, and um discussed once again the uh Gulfport Casino and how wonderful it would be to have the Gulfport Casino uh moved, take it down, rebuilt, and be part of the senior center because as we all know, um maybe in my lifetime that that will flood again.

Uh and uh it is historical building, historic building.

I don't know what's involved in in moving it, taking it down, rebuilding it, making it part of the uh senior center.

Um I think it makes sense economically.

Um it's a good steward of my tax dollars rather than spending seven, eight, nine million dollars over time on a building that will flood again.

We can spend that money and keep the essence of the Gulfport Casino.

Um you won't be freeing up space for the waterfront, which is not necessarily a bad thing.

Uh also I'd like to know what the cost of this uh reimagining is.

Um I didn't look at the documentation, so I don't know how much it is.

$38,000, Mayor.

How much?

$38,000.

$38,000 of my tax dollars.

Okay.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Um let's see.

Anyone else for public comment?

All righty, seeing none.

Oh, excuse me, Amy.

Amy Costa, Gulfport Senior Center Foundation Board Member.

Um, I guess one of the points I I know, right?

Like coming up with a different hat.

Um I'm just curious about the the monies that were promised from the original fundraising.

We've not gotten a report back.

We don't have any of that.

Okay.

All right, thank you.

I'm sorry I cut her off.

She was asking if the folks who had offered and had donated funds for the new building, we had to go back to those people now and say we may not have a new building.

We probably are going to refurbish and reuse the space that we have and then add to.

Are you willing for us to keep those contributions?

And so I sorry I interrupted and said we don't have that information yet.

Okay.

I expect that we will get that because I know that um Rachel was asked to do that.

Okay.

So with that in mind, please.

Councilmember Early?

Yes.

Vice Mayor Thanos?

Yes.

Councilmember Shaw?

Yes.

Councilmember Jackson?

Yes.

Mayor Love?

Yes.

Carries to passage.

And item 90, resolution number 2025-90, a resolution authorizing the city manager to enter into an interlocal agreement with Pinellas County for post-storm recovery services and providing for Lemoyne disaster recovery LLC as the perverse vendor.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Mayor, this is to maintain compliance with Senate Bill 180 as part of Pinellas County.

He had a request for proposals.

Subsequently, Lemoyne, we had used them in the past.

And they uh once you under the interlocal agreement, Manoas County, there's also awarding these contracts today.

At their two o'clock meeting, am I correct, Justin?

Yes, sir.

Yes.

So to clarify, in the past, when we went 112 years without being hit, um we didn't have anybody on contract to come to our rescue if we got into trouble.

Exactly.

Okay.

So now the state came down and said to the county, um, we want everybody to have a contract in place with a company, and that is what we're doing.

We're fulfilling that.

Exactly.

And as you've explained it to me, this is quite a large company that can bring trained people from other parts of the country, not hire people off the streets.

Right.

They had to meet certain requirements as part of the interlocal agreement and then submitting their proposal.

The best way to look at it is a term that's used in our memos, that it's scalable.

How much do you need?

And we'll have a plan, and Justin and Clark have worked on Mark and Mike have worked out a plan of what we need, and we would ask specifically for that.

A big part of title base, and they didn't have supervision or management capabilities.

They just put people out there, as you said, Mayor, they just put people out there.

This company, we would ask them from the beginning.

And it's as you said, no one in Pinellas County did this before.

In the state is you heard uh Director Guthrie talk about this is what you're required to do under Senate Bill 180.

Got it.

Okay.

No questions.

So are we going to have a separate contract with somebody for debris removal?

Yes, that's a good question.

Because we always have that.

Yeah, that's a separate contract that Tom.

So this is for substantial damage letters help with permitting and inspections and that kind of stuff.

Permitting in that is would be we would expand our use of our contract that we signed already.

But this would be substantial damage estimates and such like that.

Just the same rules that Title Basin had paid.

Okay.

Anyone else?

Any questions, thoughts, concerns?

Well, I was just going to say that I think any kind of additional backup plan, if if you know what we've already implemented in place and staff is implemented, that that's that's valuable for us to have to fall back on should the need arise.

And that's what this is, and as I understand it, it's a menu, only as we need it.

Yep.

And we have we have 24 hours once the declaration of emergency is declared for to them to and for me to issue a notice to proceed.

Where are they headquartered?

Um they're a national firm.

Let me check with that.

Do they have a local office though?

No, I don't believe so.

The Justin, you have that detail.

That's okay.

I just wanted to know if they had a local presence.

So this company, Lemoyne is headquartered out of Louisiana.

We will be essentially uh the attempt is to establish a contract with this vendor uh to be on standby for these emergency situations.

Having this pre-arranged contract in place would ensure that the vendor mobilizes quickly, and like what city manager Riley talked about, our next move after we send this interlocal up to the county with Lemoyne selected as the vendor of choice, and this was the vendor that moved in March 24th that was uh uh completing the detailed damage inspections.

Um but once we send that interlocal up, uh the notice to proceed would be next.

Um God forbid we ever need to go through the disaster recovery that we experienced last season.

Justin, what was the name of the other?

What was their previous name?

Uh Workforce.

Workforce.

Yep.

Um so um Pinellas County's um RFP was to secure vendors that are available and qualified to provide post-storm recovery services, the detailed damage inspections, uh substantial damage inspections, people that are that essentially go around the nation to do this at major disaster events.

Um reviewing the proposals, and I think the floodplain manager can speak more in depth to this, but the um qualifications were that each vendor had to submit their resumes, work experiences, and we saw a lot of similar um features involved with workforce, and that's how we selected Lemoine was that the um the inspectors that we had in the conference room that we were managing that um essentially built a relationship with as well.

Um that was very important to have that oversight on rather than trying to be reactive to what we found that was submitted on the first pass.

Um the level of detail required was uh having them in the room to you know be in between the the the data going from the the portal to the resident, I think was one of the biggest lessons learned.

Um there's any additional questions uh be happy to help.

Thank you.

Thank you, Justin.

All righty.

Um let's see.

Did I ask for public comment?

Sorry.

All righty.

Jennifer Donch, uh, Premier Drive.

So I'm not actually super satisfied with the way that Lemoine or previously workforce um handled all of these situations.

So I did research um what the county had, and I had some questions about why we chose Lemoyne, they weren't necessarily the highest ranked out of the ones that did submit their um bids to the county, and they don't have the most um available staffing.

So I I have this chart from the county that they had.

Um and Lemoyne has um one certified building official available from from their contract that they offered, and um AECOM had 35.

So to me, if I'm saying like I'm gonna need these things in 24 hours, maybe somebody else is also gonna need a building official, or maybe some other municipality or somebody else, there's gonna be maybe need way more than what we think.

And this one um didn't have what I thought uh would be an appropriate amount of resources, and the cost was relatively similar, so it didn't really seem like um a good pick to me.

Um if anybody doesn't have this, it's uh really kind of cool to look at this chart to see like what everybody else had.

Um so I I'm not um I'm huge in favor of having this interlocal agreement.

I just don't think that Lemoine is the one to do it, and if they are, I would maybe say to include other ones also, like okay, Lemoine is gonna be the one that we rely on the most, but let's also have AECOM or Tetra Tech or somebody else also ready to go, so we also have more resources available.

That's all I got.

Thank you.

Anyone else for public comment?

Anyone else for public comment on this city manager?

Did you want to address that?

Okay, thank you.

All righty, council member early?

Yes, Vice Mayor Thanos?

Well, I'm I'm gonna say no after hearing that.

Councilmember Shaw.

I'd like to hear if we can look at having a second one.

Should this company fall short then too, if we're going to approve this one?

I'm asking you to need a yes or no.

Okay.

Umries to passage.

All righty.

Then that takes us to new business, and we will go uh take care of new business in speaking order, please.

Um Scott shared my new business.

Okay.

All right.

So thank you.

This is only kind of new business, but I had a water bill for my new rental unit, the house, and it was like $50 more than I expected.

And I called Sonia, and with our new system, we were able, she was able to give me a whole list hour by hour, what happened, and we talked about it, and and clearly I didn't have a leak because it would go even even and so we determined that the amount of water that it was probably a hose left on, and I was having them water a new tree for me.

So chances are they left the hose on and forgot to turn it off, and that's what happened.

But it was marvelous that they could find that so quickly, and so I've asked her to put that out for the public to know, and and soon when everybody is electronic, there's only a few more to change out, and we have our towers.

People will be able to go to a portal and see all this for themselves.

So it was a wonderful service.

She gathered information for me for a resident in ward four.

And I got that too, and it was amazing how she somebody different because mine was ward three, but amazing how she was able to report exactly, and then could even say, so this sounds to me like the teenagers are sneaking back into the house.

Yes, it was good though.

Anyway, I just want to remember to mention that.

Anything else?

Um, I I mainly had a couple of questions.

Um in relationship to the shutdown.

Um, have we been impacted by that in any way so far?

Not to this point.

Okay.

And then one other quick little one.

Um at one time it was brought up about uh paddle board rentals at the beach.

Are we still thinking about that?

We were planning on it once we have a beach again, and we'll talk about that on your first meeting in the winter.

I thought that might be the case, but I just wanted to double check.

All right, that's all for now.

Thanks.

No new business.

All right.

I do have a couple of things.

Um, one is, you know, I I'm the representative on the uh Ford Pinellas board, and they put out a memo, they're looking for a project for February, where the actual people that sit on the Ford Panellus board could go into a community and do a project.

And they reached out to me, and I didn't want to miss an opportunity for free labor and volunteer work.

So I responded back to them, and this is not to say that they're going to do this, but the project I wanted to, you didn't be aware of of what was thrown out there and make sure that you guys are okay with it, because I can always renege on this uh since they haven't made any decisions yet.

But um Priscilla Kidder took me out to Clambaiu and educated me on the invasive um species that are trying to strangle some of our mangroves there and showed me some of the work that her and and our um uh horticulturist prior horticulturists had done to work together, and um she showed me what could be done in a work day, you know, if we went out there and we identified these trees, and in some cases you just kind of cut them down low and put a dab of poison, which you have to have a licensed person to do that.

In some cases, you can just pull out the saplings.

So that is the project that I submitted to see if they wanted to help us, okay?

So I wanted you to be aware of that.

The second thing I wanted to bring up is and this is a third meeting in a row now that there each time there's a minor change in the Lincoln Cemetery, so I always bring it up just so everybody knows exactly what's going on.

So um since the last meeting, as a matter of fact, I think it was dated October 14th, Mayor Welch actually sent a letter to his council.

Okay, but he copied me.

And in his letter to his counsel, he pretty much provided a timeline uh starting with 2018 of what his efforts had been and what had been going on behind the scenes uh concerning the Lincoln Cemetery.

In it, um, Gulfport was mentioned in the memo to St.

Petersburg Council, Golfport was mentioned twice.

Once they were mentioned for July 25th when Mayor Welch and I had a meeting, which I immediately told you all about what happened there, which was just me saying, is there any do you have any evidence?

Can you show me that the cemetery once belonged in St.

Petersburg?

And he said, I've heard it also, but I don't have the evidence.

I said, Can you get it to me?

He did.

So the second time we're mentioned is on September 25th, when he provided us that information.

And so, and I immediately gave you all a copy of that.

And then when I got this memo from him, which again was not I was just copied on it, I provided you with a copy of that.

So there's nothing else besides that, but I did want to say just so he gave a timeline to his counsel.

Okay, so this was between him and his counsel.

He did um CC me and Pastor Williams, um, and this was the basically the conclusion at the end of the memo.

It said that the uh owner of the property, the city of St.

Petersburg, the city of Gulfport have some decision-making responsibilities in determining the path forward of my administration, meaning his um uh oh oh excuse me, and my administration, meaning his looks forward to collaboration on this important endeavor.

Um, and I provided each of you a copy of that.

There was no suggestion of a meeting, there was no we're going to call a meeting.

So that's where we are.

So again, when we're asked for any kind of a story about the Lincoln Cemetery, at this point, the owner has not asked us to do anything.

So we do nothing, you know, until we hear something, and then we can because it it would be premature for us to even have any kind of discussion when we don't even know what it is that the owner of the property might want.

So enough about the Lincoln Cemetery.

Um, then it was mentioned the the $813 million that we hear about, a lot right now.

So they just opened up the applications on the 20th.

I guess that was just yesterday.

Um the book that came along with it.

So just to be clear, this is federal money administered by the county.

Nothing was run down by the cities, they didn't ask for our approval or thoughts on anything, so we know nothing more than what you've that what you've read and and heard in the media as well.

I was in communication today back and forth several times with one of the liaisons who was most helpful to me because immediately the in one point of the 291 page book that tells them how to administer it.

But at one point they actually spell out the that it doesn't, they're not qualified if the structure is more than five units.

So I got the liaison on the phone.

And he did, so he did exactly what he said.

And this is what I got from them.

Anybody in Gulfport who flooded should go ahead and apply.

Okay.

Everybody should apply.

Rehabilitation.

Whatever.

That one has the biggest pot of money.

Okay.

And if you just read the synopsis of it, it would lead you to believe that they're only there, this is only going to help people who really haven't started down the road of recovery at all yet.

But they told me not to interpret it that way, even though that's what it said.

So they said that everybody should, if only if you only apply to one of their programs, apply to that program because that will get you a case worker.

And once you have a case worker, you might get a phone call that says, Well, this program wouldn't work good for you, but this one here would, so we're gonna shift you this way, okay?

And the other reason I really wanted to speak about this is because when the city was you know quick to just publicize that this was happening, um, there were some people that were very quick to say that this would not help the condo owners.

And I was told clearly today, do not jump to that conclusion by any means.

There's a series of qualifiers, okay.

Um that's why the book's 291 pages.

There's a series of qualifiers, but condos, homeowners associations would not qualify, but individual homeowners who have been damaged, they can qualify.

So they're very definitely encouraging people to the to apply.

And if you think you might fit into two or three categories, apply for two or three categories.

There's there's besides it takes your time, there's nothing wrong with doing that.

Okay.

So if you hear anybody that's discouraged, I mean, income can be a factor, but I've been told they're not necessarily depending on how many people apply, they might might not apply to that just exactly either.

So there's so many variables.

So everybody in Gulfport, in my opinion, should be applying for this program and see if you can't get a piece of the the money to help make you whole after what you've been through.

Did they say anything about how much insurance you would have got back or anything if it covered it?

Um, I asked no questions about insurance, so uh I can't uh say.

And um the last thing that I uh just two more things real quick.

When we talked months ago about Duke Energy and the solar project, okay.

I don't feel like we ever finished that conversation or I had a definitive um consensus on what people wanted to do because um you know, we had a presentation, it was somewhat confusing, then we talked about it some more.

Now there's more people down on Duke Energy, and at that time I said, you know, basically for years the first three years we'd pay in 7,300.

We have, so we know that for 10 years after that, we pay in $7,600.

So we have an investment of $14,900, okay, so that we could potentially receive some funds back, years 14 through through 30.

So I put that at 16 years.

They've told us that how much could we expect to back to get back?

Well, it could be between one and three thousand dollars a year, is what they told us.

So I took and just said, okay, let's just average that to $2,000 for 13 for 16 years.

That would mean an investment of $14,9 over a 30-year period of time would pay back $32,000.

And I'm questioning, and if you think this is all a good investment and you're okay, it's all right, but it's kind of been left hanging.

There really was never a consensus whether we wanted to continue with this or not.

So I'm just asking for that tonight because I don't think that's happened.

Investing $14,900 over 13 years to get back, potentially, we don't know.

It could be as high as $36,000, but it could be as as low as $12,000.

And you know, I'm I said this before, so I'm going to say it again.

Technology is changing, politics are changing.

Will we ever see a penny back?

Okay, so that is what I'm asking you for consensus to yep, keep going, or no, let's not move forward.

Okay.

Wasn't it a credit?

Was it a credit or was it it's a credit owner bills?

Yeah, it's a credit in that form.

So to me, I wanted to keep going because I felt like that we had better chance of getting a credit on our bill, right, than for them to mouse a check every and I might be simplifying it needlessly, but that's why I was okay with keep keeping um going.

Okay.

I think a credit's easier for them to give us is what I was saying.

And I know when they presented this originally, it it seemed to really play out and work out.

And because I'm very in favor of solar, you know, I I want to encourage them to keep doing it.

You're quite right that who knows exactly what we'll get back and what's gonna happen with Duke.

But even if some other cities change to a different um provider or provide for themselves, you know, unless we piggy back on to say St.

Pete or somebody else, we're not big enough to do that ourselves.

So at least for the moment, I think I would keep doing it.

I agree with my two fellows okay.

Then we have a consensus, and that's done.

I can put that to bed then.

We're gonna continue with this program.

All right.

And the last thing I'll say is I asked everybody to reach out to me, you know, with any kind of permitting.

Um, you know, not that I'm a permitter, I'm not trying to do that, but if you need some assistance, just in you know, figuring out some things.

I will be in uh what's called emo training.

Uh I'm leaving Thursday afternoon, I'll be gone Thursday, Friday, Saturday, Sunday, I'll be back on Monday.

So if I'm a little slower than normal to respond to emails, that's why, because I'm gonna be schmoozing with other um elected officials and learning a whole lot.

Okay.

Likewise.

All righty.

Meetings adjourned.

Thank you for hanging, guys.