Good morning.

I'd like to call the figure if I call it to order.

Good morning.

I'd like to call this May Fourth Regular City Commission meeting to order.

And remind you all to silence your cell phones, and I'm going to silence mine right now.

Next, we'll have the invocation by city auditor and Greg Griggs.

In that name we pray, Amen.

One nation.

Individual with liberty and justice.

Ms.

Griggs, are there any changes to the order of the day?

Yes, Mayor, there are.

Changes to the order of the day.

Please add under Commission presentations agenda item number one point one proclamation rate.

Recognizing May 13th, 2026 as Salvation Army Day, further request of Mayor Trice, and that is all the changes to the other day.

Okay.

Thank you.

May I have a motion to approve the proposed agenda schedule?

So moved.

Second.

Moved by Commissioner Batti, seconded by the Vice Mayor.

May we have your votes, please.

And it passes unanimously.

Thank you very much.

Okay, next up is the presentation.

So if you will, commissioners will join me up front.

And where is it?

I had it right here.

Thank you, and I believe there are representatives from Salvation Army here today.

Mayor Red Mike.

Oops, I didn't know.

It might already be known.

Okay.

Is it working?

Okay.

I just wasn't using it.

And would you introduce yourself?

Captain Jim Curry for the Salvation Army here in Sarasota, so it's been a pleasure here.

Thank you.

So thank you, Captain Curry.

And as soon as I can open this, not doing well today.

Okay.

This is a proclamation from the city of Sarasota.

Whereas the Salvation Army has been serving the people of Sarasota for nearly a century, meeting physical, emotional, and spiritual needs with compassion and dignity.

And whereas the Salvation Army remains present wherever the need is greatest, walking alongside individuals and families facing homelessness, food insecurity, addiction, and crisis, offering not only immediate relief, but a path towards stability and renewed hope.

And whereas through its center of hope shelter, the Salvation Army provides a safe and supportive environment where individuals and families are not only cared for, but encouraged, empowered, and celebrated as they work to rebuild their lives.

And whereas National Salvation Army Week provides an opportunity to recognize the impact of service generosity and community partnership, and to encourage all citizens to care for their neighbors in meaningful ways.

Now, therefore, the City Commission of the City of Sarasota, Florida, and on behalf of the citizens of our community, takes great pride in recognizing May 13th, 2026 as Salvation Army Day, a day of special importance and worthy of the recognition of the residents of the City of Sarasota.

Thank you, Captain Curry, and uh let you say a few words while I put this together.

Well, I appreciate the city uh proclaiming this day that National Salvation Army Week is some of you may not know was given by Harry Truman for the work we did in World War II.

And uh we continue that service today.

Just a brief little bit about me.

People always ask me all the time does the Salvation Army really do what they say they do.

I was homeless in the streets of Los Angeles 30 years ago.

Salvation Army picked me up, gave me dignity, gave me a savior, and I've worked hard and diligently to give back because of those that gave to me.

So Salvation Army does what it says it does.

I'm living proof of that, because I should be dead, be honest.

But uh I think the city, I think for all the citizens that help us along in our mission, because we can't do it without you.

And so we thank you for everything that you guys do for us.

Thank you.

Thank you again.

And I'll see you on the 13th.

Yes.

Okay.

And next up, uh, first, this is a little bit off the agenda.

We are fortunate to have Carrie Fryling with us this morning at the tail end of her uh I think she may have oh.

There she is.

So she will become a familiar face on this dais in, you know, on uh July 6th.

Well, the first day this is our first meeting.

But she will be in City Hall throughout the month of June.

So maybe say here she is.

Oh, for those of you who who don't know, Carrie Fryling is our new city manager who uh begins her term as city manager on uh May 29th.

So I was just thinking we should have her come up so the camera can see her because she's a lion nobody watching from home or online.

Well it if she wants to, I know she was not dressed to be introduced to the city of Sarasota.

But if you'd like to come up.

What do you want me?

Oh no, not this.

We promised her she'd never have to set out that side of the house.

I apologize I didn't think I'd be on camera.

But I have been in town um uh since Friday, had the opportunity to attend the neighborhood meeting on Saturday and meet everyone.

So I just wanted to say again how honored I am to be working with all of you in the community and uh wrapping things up back home and we'll be here soon.

So again, a pleasure, and it's really nice to be back in the building and meet everyone.

So thank you.

We hope this this will be your home for many years.

Absolutely.

I can't wait to become a neighbor and and make this my community.

So again, see you soon.

Thank you.

So uh next up we have uh we will be having the citizens input concerning city topics, and I will ask Ms.

Griggs to read the Pledge of Public Conduct.

Thank you, Mayor.

We may disagree, but we will be respectful to one another.

We will direct all comments to issues, we will not engage in personal events.

Thank you.

And we have and I was just counting, uh probably close to ten people who have submitted requests to speak cards, and I will uh call up the first five.

Gerald Komensky, Joel Wirth, Nancy Finley, Dale Horwitz, and Ron Cashton.

And if you please, when you take the mic, introduce yourself, indicate whether or not you are city resident and whether or not you're representing someone other than yourself.

Thank you very much.

So Mr.

Kaminsky, have a seat, everybody, and I don't want to say make yourselves comfortable.

And you each have three minutes.

I I don't know.

You gave me a whole lot here, so I'm trying to figure out what you gave me.

Well, there we go.

There we go.

And then back here.

I want to put that on what I'm told is the OMO of the.

Yes.

I've never heard of an elmo before.

Yep.

Thank you.

I had uh previously prepared this, but now I know there's a no.

Shall I begin?

Yes, please, Mr.

Kamensky.

My name is Gerald Kamansky.

I live at 3854 Bay Shore Road in Sarasota in the Indian Beach Sapphire Shore area.

I'm here to speak to the matter of the manner in which jungle gardens has now presented itself to our community.

The photo, I don't know if it's available depicts the way Jungle Gardens has imposed its view on the entire community.

Anyone who lives in Bayshore Gardens drives up and down Bayshore Road.

Not only that, but it has become a regular thoroughfare for commuters and for people from the airport.

They see this as a presentation of our neighborhood.

It has been described by people.

A visitor described it to someone as why do you have a prison camp here?

Laughable, but really kind of tragic for the neighborhood.

Well, tragic is an overstatement.

I live across the street from this.

Surrounding jungle gardens on two sides are homes that probably have a combined value of well over 50 or 60 million dollars.

Mine's not one of those.

Mine's one of the homes, but it's not.

There's some of those homes that are on the water and are very, very expensive.

I've been told by a local realtor who knows this neighborhood better than anyone that that is impacting on those immediately adjacent up to 10% of the value of their homes.

I've distributed for you to see the original granting resolution in 1972.

That resolution required that they provide a 10-foot deep and two to six feet high, opaque landscape, so that they would present themselves consistent with the nature of the community they are.

That was a result that they are a part of.

That was a result of the special exception granted to them in 1972.

Now, if there's a concern that this is too late to enforce that for some reason, the fence is brand new.

It's about three or four months old.

Before that, there was a uh the site, the chain link fence was in the front of it, and they kept that in spite of putting up this eight-foot yellow polyvinal fence.

The resolution incorporates my reference, ordinance 1618.

Ordinance 1618 not only was made a part of the resolution, but when the petition was filed by Jungle Gardens, the same owners who are there now, they said they would comply with that.

Ever since the day of the ordinance being granted, they have tried repeatedly to dodge it.

Beginning with the date that the public uh hearing was held, the commissioners discussed it, and the jungle gardens asked that they not include that in the resolution.

It was included.

Jungle Gardens.

Thank you very much, Mr.

Kaminsky.

And Joel Worth, I think we'll probably continue your remarks.

In better words.

Good morning.

My name is Joel Wirth with an E.

Good fences make good neighbors.

I am a full-time homeowner and resident of the Sapphire Shores community, just next door to Jungle Gardens and our companion Indian Beach Community.

I grew up in Chicago and a former urban planner and formerly trained urban planner.

There I learned of Daniel Burnham and the 1909 Burnham Plan and the City Beautiful movement.

And here we are on the perimeter of Jungle Gardens.

I live just a few blocks from Jungle Gardens.

Like other neighbors, I drive by and also walk our doggy countless times at as many as a month along Bay Shore Road.

There's a glaring contradiction here in our community.

Jungle Gardens markets itself as one of Sarasota's foremost treasures to tourists, especially families with young children.

What major tourist attraction shrouds itself in barbed wire and a plastic fence, turning its back on its own neighbors.

These aren't the signs of good neighbor, as our state would say.

The name Jungle Gardens is a misnomer.

Gardeners respect their perimeter.

See the Selby Garden right here in Sarasota as an example.

As my neighbor said, I invite you to take a ride along Bayshore Road here, along the perimeter of Jungle Gardens.

As my um sorry, come see for yourselves.

As we drive along the otherwise beautiful Bay Shore Road, the exterior of Jungle Gardens looks more like a prison camp than a garden.

Yes, we're a tourist town, and Jungle Gardens has promoted itself for decades as one of the city's primary tourist destinations.

Barbed wire and plastic fencing, these aren't the elements of a city beautiful.

Quote unquote.

Those are the words of Daniel Burnham.

We asked the city to be a steward here in helping to improve this border.

We want to see compliance with the resolution, ordinance 1618, resolution 07R 1969.

Beautiful landscaping as required, what they promised to do, and what they were ordered to do.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Nancy Sutton Finley.

That's I'm not sure.

Good morning, thank you all.

My name is Nancy Sutton Finley.

I live at 3926 Bay Shore Road.

I built a home there four years ago.

It's a multimillion dollar home, and as my my neighbors have suggested, I walk out my door, and that is what I see.

It is my son who recently visited this weekend.

He hadn't been here in six months.

We walked out the door to walk our dog, and he said, Since when, mom, do you live across the street from a prison?

I said, well, it's not really very funny, but yeah, it's begun to look like a prison.

Okay.

The prior to this, it was well landscaped.

It was covered in vines, there were you know all kinds of plantings and trees.

You hardly noticed that it was a chain-link fence.

Now it is glaringly obvious that it is a chain-link fence with barbed wire on top of it.

Okay, as you see in the picture.

And could not be uglier.

It does not deserve, or we don't deserve as a neighborhood to have this in the middle of our neighborhood.

They are violating the agreements that they signed with the city in 1972.

They should be expected to uphold those as a good neighbor, as a major historic site, as an ongoing business, as a tourist destination.

All of those are reasons why they should be expected to uphold what they signed with the city in 1972 to properly landscape their fence.

I would say that I am a very pragmatic and practical person.

All we want is a simple solution.

All we are asking them to do is to landscape their fence so that it's not an eyesore and ugly.

They have been enormously resistant to they have been unresponsive, resistant, and unwilling to meet in any way, shape, or form with the neighborhood association, who has tried on several occasions to discuss this with them.

They do not want to meet.

So we are asking the city to take notice to this, to become involved, and to hopefully apply some pressure upon them to say you have an obligation to be a good neighbor in this community where there are homes that are multi-million, regardless of the price.

It's really not about the price.

Okay?

But we are all tax-paying members of this community, and they have an obligation to fulfill what they agreed to.

Thank you for listening.

Thank you very much.

Dale Horowitz.

My name is Dale Horowitz.

I live at 711 South Palm Avenue, number 304.

We are concerned about the recent loss of uh electricity for our elevators for over two days due to the fact that water seeped into electrical wires under 711 South Palm after having two new condos built on the street.

Three new condos are being proposed for the same South Palm block.

We are concerned about the infrastructure, whether it is up to handling it.

We already have trouble with water pressure, but we do not know if the infrastructure has been addressed, if the traffic studies have been looked at.

And luckily, we had just updated our generator prior to this happening.

So our locks and our doors were covered, only our elevator wasn't.

For two and a half days, I walked the dog up and down and up and down and up and down and up and down, maybe 45 times, and now have a problem with a leg.

That's all I have to say.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Uh Ron Cashton.

Can you pick us on the newly discovered Elmo?

Thank you.

Ron Cashton, city resident.

So, as you all know, I've been leading the efforts against uh U.S.

recycling and that facility, and as also all of you know, that facility has been operating illegally without a permit since February 26th.

And as part of this effort, one of the things that I found out is there's a gap in our legal framework for the city.

Because right now, the city doesn't have any way to enforce regulations that the businesses already need to have.

So what I'm asking for the commission to do is create that legal framework that you can enforce the regulations that other agencies already provide.

This is something that the city could do.

We're not asking for any additional regulatory authorities.

Oh, and if you can show you, I was gonna say that.

Miles showed a Elma, thank you.

I do.

Oh, and if you can zoom out a little bit, Miles.

Thanks.

So I know it's shocking to everybody that you could have an industrial operator operating without the required permits.

Um, but that's the case right now because the city has no ordinance that requires a business to have their proper license.

And we should.

We should be able to safeguard the population.

And yes, this is something the state could do, but we can also add the belts and suspenders to make sure if someone is operating without the permits, if they're operating beyond the legal framework that they should be.

And we're only talking industrial operators.

So these are businesses that would harm the health and welfare of the residents.

Um the city, through its code compliance framework, should have this tool, this catch-all that says if you're an industrial operator and you don't have the required permits, and you're operating illegally, we can fine you a substantial amount, which the city can do.

We're 50,000 people, so we can even go up to a thousand dollars a day.

And we can through uh if someone is a repeat offender, call for a special magistrate and actually issue a cease and desist.

And that's all within our purview, but we don't have the ordinance.

So I'm asking the Commission to do that and to direct the city's attorneys to do it expeditiously.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Cashton.

Thank you all for coming up, and I will call up the next four people.

Tammy Hauser, Renee Zimmerman, Tony Peters, and Kelly Brown.

And just remind you, give state your name, whether or not you're a city resident, and whether or not you can sit anywhere.

I'm telling you, because I'm going to withdraw and coming up at time.

Okay.

Thank you.

Um whether or not you're representing someone else.

Thank you.

So uh Tammy Hauser.

Okay.

Good morning, everybody.

I'm Tammy Hauser.

I'm the founder and CEO of Discover Sarasota Tours, which is a local business that is located in the 1899 Fruitville uh development project in historic Gillespie Park.

I'm here representing myself and also four of the other businesses that are impacted by the potential sale and redevelopment of our space.

Breakfast house, cookie cottage, uh Siegfried's German restaurant and uh artful um giraffe.

Space enough.

Good morning.

I need some more coffee.

Um we are here to say that we do not oppose this development.

We understand it is the right of the Lancasters to sell their property.

We understand that uh this project meets zoning requirements.

We are not here to say anything about it.

What we are here is to give you an update and ask for your support.

We have a potential relocation space.

One of our businesses, the Breakfast House may be purchasing a plot of land that's basically at the corner of Fruitville and Tuttle.

It's about an acre and a half.

Our joy, our dream would be to move any of the cottages that are able to be moved to that new location to create replicate the destination that we have, make it even better, make it more uh usable for the residents of Sarasota.

We have over 200,000 people who come to um frequent R 17 businesses in our current location.

Uh if we're all on Fruitville and the cottages are brightly colored and bringing back a whole sense of old Florida, uh I think it could really be a wonderful destination.

The five uh businesses uh want to work together in a sort of co-op arrangement to make this happen.

Of course, it's going to require financial resources, planning resources, historical preservation resources, none of which we are none of which we have.

We're business owners.

So we are here to say if you have any resources that you could bring to our attention that you could help with this project, we would be eternally grateful, and we're ready to work on it.

Our timing is quick.

They want to raise all of our cottages next February, middle of season, horrible time for us to be uh shuttered.

Um so we are working on it right now.

I offer my email address.

I'm trying to coordinate with my businesses.

I'm Tammy at Discover Sarasota Tours dot com and happy to funnel whatever you can provide for us.

Uh Commissioner Jen has been so helpful uh already, but we ask for everybody's support.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

And um while um Renee Zimmerman gets ready to speak.

I'm gonna ask Celine O'Connor to come down.

She came in late and she asked to be included.

So, Mr.

Zimmerman.

Yes, good morning, everybody.

And thank uh first of all, thank you so much for giving us the opportunity to speak in front of you.

Um my name is Renee Zimmerman.

Um I'm the owner of Siegfried's restaurant and beer garden here in downtown Sarasota.

And um I'm not just speaking for my business, for myself, like Tammy and me are speaking for all the businesses that are affected by the 1899 Foodville project, which means they are looking to demolish all the 1920 to 1930 bungalows which are home to our businesses, and to make room for 423 more apartments here in downtown Sarasota.

And um, yeah, like I said, I came here um to speak for all of us and to give you a little insight about myself, about my family, my wife and me.

Sorry, it's a little emotional for us.

Um we moved to from Germany in 2018.

We gave up everything.

I come here since I'm a little kid, and I just always saw the potential in Sarasota.

I'm in that hospitality and restaurant business since almost 20 years now.

And I always said to myself, one day when I open my own restaurant, it's gonna be here in Sarasota because I saw the potential.

I love the town, I love the community, I love the support.

And not just me, most of the other businesses over there made it through COVID, through a pandemic, through so many storms.

We are all here.

I'm in business in seven years now.

The breakfast hall is even longer.

Tell me about the with the discovery tour is about the same.

The outfit you are off, all the businesses.

And we are really proud of that, and we are proud of all our regulars and our guests.

And at the moment, we are in a situation where we are in the dark.

So we don't get any answers.

We don't get answers from our landlords.

We don't get answers from our develop from the developer or the company that works for the developer.

So all our guests come to our businesses every single day, ask us, what are you gonna do?

Where are you gonna go?

Are you gonna close soon?

I had just had guests last week.

They said, Oh, we wanted to come tonight because we were we're leaving for a few months and we are scared that you're not gonna be there anymore.

But we don't have answers for them to tell them this is when they're gonna start.

This is how long we have.

The property hasn't even been sold yet, so we don't know when they finally sell it or not.

So this is all like a situation where we wish we could give more answers to our guests and customers.

So I'm also just here to bring that to your attention and ask you for your help in the future and your support, and we appreciate Commissioner A.

Kotch a lot for being um there for us so far.

And um, yeah, just want to bring to your attention that this is all family, small successful businesses that the community like and love here in Sarasota.

And um, yeah, we ask you for your help and um don't forget about us.

Thank you very much for coming in.

Um Kelly Brown.

Good morning, Commissioners, Mayor, Vice Mayor.

My name is Kelly Brown.

I am a resident of Gillespie Park, so all of this is very near and dear to me.

I am also the president of the Coalition of City Neighborhood Associations, representing over 22,000 households in the neighborhood.

In the city, excuse me.

I'm here to speak to you this morning on parks and park zoning.

In January of 25, our membership voted unanimously to start a committee to look at how do we protect our parks, how do we make sure our green spaces stay green as our city continues to grow.

How do we make sure our green spaces stay green as our city continues to grow?

We need to make sure that that space is dedicated to parks and our quality of life.

So we started working with city staff collaboratively over the last year and a half to understand what we needed to do, what was different.

One of the things we discovered that was really amazing.

I know you can't read that, it's really small, but I'll email it to you later.

We have over 60 parks in the city.

Those parks are zoned in over 10 different zone areas.

There's no one consistent zone that protects our green space.

So we looked at it and said, okay, how do we fix that?

What do we do?

So we've worked collaborating collaboratively with legal, with development services, and the parks department, Jerry Fogel, the director of parks and rec.

And we came up with what we think is a really great solution, working with them to create a new zone that's just for parks and that will protect our parks when all of us have all gone somewhere else.

Everyone that lives in Sarasota will always be protected, our visitors, because let's face it, our industry is people, and we want the people that come here to also experience beautiful parks.

So I'm sitting here today to ask you, Commissioners, to please give direction to staff to start the process of completing a new zone and moving all of our parks into it.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Selena O'Connor.

Thank you.

First of all, I support the businesses.

I hope things work out for you.

And my name is Celine O'Connor.

I'm a full-time resident of Lido Key.

The City of Sarasota Engineering Department, particularly acting assistant city engineer Alex Davis Shaw, deserve and have our sincere thanks for their dedication and hard work in completing the Leader Beach Dredge Project.

The city's efforts to strengthen the shoreline brings much needed relief to many Lido Key properties, devastated by Hurricanes Helene and Milton, helping restore protection, stability, and confidence for residents as a community continue as the community continues to recover and rebuild.

Thank you, Commissioners, for approving this fighter project.

The project did, however, fall short of its original plan by not fully replenishing sand between the two southern rock roins, leaving that stretch significantly underfilled and nearby residential buildings more vulnerable than anticipated.

The U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers maintains that sand will migrate south over time.

However, the southern end of Lido Key Beach lost most of its sand from 2021 renourishment with a little evidence of meaningful southward migration.

I encourage the city to reevaluate options given the new Dune project as currently planned will not sufficiently compensate for the shortfall or provide the level of protection originally intended.

On a separate topic, creating a special parks district for the city of Sarasota offers range a range of long-term advantages that can strengthen both the community and provide financial stability.

By establishing a dedicated funding mechanism, the city can ensure consistent investment in park maintenance improvements and new green spaces without relying solely on fluctuating general budget allocations.

Its financial independence allows for a better long-term planning and even lower overall expenses by addressing issues proactively rather than reactively.

Lastly, as a reminder, to please take advantage of the opportunity before City of Sarasota to acquire Ted Sperling Park from the county.

It would ensure stronger local stewardship and alignment with the city's long-term parks management goals.

The long-term impact of not taking over Ted Spurney Park is the continuation of the jurisdictional merry-go-round the city and residents currently experienced with the county.

Thank you to the Sarasota Police Department for their continued investment and vigilance regarding matters at Ted Sperning Park and for your excellent response times when called upon.

Your presence and professionalism are greatly appreciated by the community.

Thank you, Commissioners, for your continued hard work on behalf of the amazing Sarasota City and the residents.

How blessed we are.

Thank you all.

Thank you, Ms.

O'Connor.

Thank you all for coming and giving us your input.

Okay.

Next up, Commissioners, is approval of the minutes of the April 6th regular commission meeting.

I had no uh corrections or edits to the minutes.

Thank you.

And unless anyone else did, I would move approval.

Second.

Second.

Okay.

Move by Commissioner Aher and Kotch, seconded by Commissioner Bad T to approve.

Okay, but seconded by the Vice Mayor to approve the uh April 6th minutes.

Sorry.

Here Benz again.

Sorry.

One more time, sorry.

That was my fault.

Passed unanimously, thank you very much.

Next up is I believe we have a report.

We have a report regarding the downtown improvement district, the board report uh initiatives and requests for fee waivers and I'll call upon downtown improvement district chair Ruben and Business District Manager Ryan to make the presentation.

Good morning, Mayor, Vice Mayor, and Commissioners.

Appreciate your time this morning.

My name is Wayne Rubin.

I'm chair of the downtown improvement district.

And just for information of the public, we're a self-tastic tax taxing district that works with an annual budget under the purview of the Commissioners, and uh you approve our budget each year as well.

Uh this report provides an overview of recent board discussions related to the upcoming fiscal year budget and board initiatives, as well as a request for city partnership support for the America 250 celebration.

First, as part of our it's it's ongoing review of programs and budget priorities.

The DID board is recommending the discontinued of the downtown in-bloom hanging basket program, originally implemented in 2016 to enhance downtown aesthetics.

The program currently includes approximately 234 hanging baskets throughout the district.

Over time, however, it has become increasingly costly and labor-intensive due to the hand water, daily hand watering, seasonal plant replacement, and ongoing maintenance is outlined in the agenda backup materials that you have.

Filing two public board meetings and a budget review workshop, the DID Board of Directors unanimously recommended ending the program and relocating those funds to a higher impact improvements.

The proposed reinvent reinvestment of approximately 180,000 annually includes enhanced ground level landscaping along Main Street corridor, which is not currently maintained by the city, as well as the upgrades to the downtown tree lighting program.

The tree lighting project will be implemented in phases, beginning at Selby Five Points Park later this month, and is intended to improve safety, visibility, and overall downtown activity.

I think we all appreciate the tree lights and how much they enhance our downtown.

Additionally, the board is requesting the city partnership to support for the America 250 celebration.

The DID is planning to host a July 3rd event, Spirit of 76.

Envision is American-themed family-focused celebration in Selby Five Points Park.

To support this community event, the board respectfully requests consideration of fee waivers and in-kind service city services with a total estimated value of $4,000, with the DID board picking up the balance.

So our reinvestment, what do we want to do with our 180,000 dollars?

That's just about 20% of our budget on an annual basis of our self-tasking taxing district.

Reallocate approximately 80,000 to 180,000 in fiscal 2027.

Ground level landscaping enhancements, focused investments in Main Street quarters, not currently maintained by the city, as I mentioned.

The light pole refurbishment.

I think we've all seen the light poles and they're deteriorating over many years now.

So Julie spoke with Public Works and got some estimates.

Repaying approximately 250 to 300 light poles is estimated to cost 150 per pole base or 780 hours per full pole, roughly 31,500 to 225,000, depending on the scope that we all come up with.

The downtown tree lighting program, phased implementation, totaling approximately 315,000 over three years.

Phase two Main Street Core, 76,000 hours to enhance the landscaping all through Main Street that we maintain.

The intended benefits include safety, nighttime visibility, and activation of public spaces.

The broader beautification incentive programs, development of potential, the property owners and businesses beautiful incentives, public partnerships enhancements, reduce long-term maintenance burden on the district.

So we like for long-term improvements that that make an impact and give us long life than the uh basket program at the present time.

So I'm here for any questions or thoughts.

Thank you.

Is there any requests to speak, Ms.

Griggs?

No.

Okay.

Commissioner questions them.

Um Commissioner A.

Heron Koch is up first.

Good morning.

Thank you.

Good morning.

Thank you for your report.

I appreciate it.

I appreciate the backup material as well.

Um talk to me a little bit about the landscape beds and where those are and what the plan is for those.

You said $70,000 for that?

I think the first initial let me describe my budget real quick.

I think it was $76,000.

$76,000.

That's the low beds all the way along Main Street that the district presently maintains.

They need plant material, they need mulch material, they need they need general refreshing all the way up Main Street.

Okay.

Okay, and those will be paid for and maintained by the DID.

They currently are maintained by the DID, and we would pay for the improvements to those to re-hogate.

Yes.

So they'll be enhanced, is what you're saying.

Yes, yes, that's the same.

The money will go from the baskets to the landscape.

Above ground to the ground, yes.

Okay, all right.

And um have you already received some ideas of what that would look like?

And no, I want to make sure we had a consensus before we go and do those efforts next to get some estimates and to uh you know engage the landscape architect to help us engage that I'd ask baby Phil Smith to come in and guide us a little bit and help us figure out what will be long-term enhancements to Main Street.

Okay.

And um I imagine there was some or maybe there wasn't any sort of input about the doing away with the flower baskets and what that discussion was was like.

Um make sure the understanding is going from the hanging baskets to the landscaping.

Yes, so we had lengthy discussions about that actually, and we're hoping that you know there are enhancements, the baskets are pretty downtown, and people do enjoy them.

We're hoping the city finds it in their purview to keep to keep up the program.

We've had the program for over uh 10 years now, and it's spent over a million dollars in that.

So it's a lot of our money tied up in one item.

I think we could spread the items uh around with the with those proceeds.

Okay.

And um for the um lighting.

Yes.

Are there other solutions besides physical little lights that get cut and break and bulbs go bad and things like that?

Are there other solutions out there?

We've explored um we have a good vendor, and we've explored upgrading those lights, which is part of this program actually, getting a much better quality light that has longer looms, lasts a longer time, and is uh is a higher quality, so it's made for that type of installation.

Okay.

Because it is it is very pricey and it does seem a little bit um it's well, I mean, we have long storm seasons, we have lots of wind.

We have lots of activity downtown.

Um there can be you know destruction to those.

I mean, uh you know, I myself see as you walk down Main Street, some of them have been cut, some of them are, you know, it's corroded.

Um when one piece of it breaks, usually the whole thing breaks.

So it seems like a lot of money into lighting, which which is nice and and creates a great environment, safety, all of those things.

I'm just curious if there aren't other solutions to physical lights on poles and trees.

Good morning, Julie Ryan, for the record.

Um Main Street is currently undergoing um vision in a design uh to redo Main Street.

So part of those discussions are part of the longer-term um infrastructure and program, um which obviously is at least five to ten years out.

So this is an in-term solution.

We have looked at some uplighting, um, but it has been the consensus that you know the lights really do create a more valuable impact.

Um, but it is being discussed as part of the overall design to um the enhancements that will be done along Main Street.

Okay.

Okay.

So that's that's good to know because I think uh there may be better ways to create the same effect that without that sort of very costly physical light.

Although it's it is lovely.

This is beautiful, yes, absolutely.

Um and the $4,000 fee waiver, what does that include, just so that we know?

That's the um the police, the uh barricades.

Um what were the other items, Julia?

Police barricades.

Yeah, it's the it's the regular in-kind services is to have the public safety aspect that's there.

The DID is um contributing $15,000 to actually put on the event, but these are the um it would be a typical expense that's covered by the Fresh Fridays.

Um so it's broken down to that, and it's primarily for public safety.

Okay.

All right.

And was somebody, anybody from the city staff weigh in on that $4,000 and where that comes out of our budget?

Is it planned for?

Is it allocated earmarked?

It wouldn't be I mean it's not planned for yet, so I would talk to uh Ms.

Strickland to see where that potentially could come out of and get back to the city commission on that.

Okay.

Right.

It was the same thing with the city manager asked us to please do something for 2050.

Right.

So we did it, didn't have the money either, so we looked around and figured out where to do it and we accomplished that.

Good, good.

Well, I know we've had discussions about uh 250 and and celebrations, and so I think that's um my opinion is that it's in order with with the direction of the of what we should be doing as a city.

Um hanging baskets.

Okay, I think those are my questions.

Thank you very much for your work and your discussion.

Thank you.

Like we personally thank you for your support of DID because you come to all our meetings.

That means a lot to us, so we appreciate that.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Vice Mayor.

Thank you.

Um regarding the Bloom program.

I think it probably served its purpose.

And that it's a good idea to move on and bring plantings, drought tolerant plantings to ground level.

I think that's a good idea.

Um could you explain the grant program that's mentioned in your report?

It seems like a pretty good idea too, but talk to us a little bit about that.

The grant program has been around, I think, for many, many years.

Uh we uh embellished it and enhanced it during the pandemic with storefront grants trying to help the merchants, which included uh outdoor seating lighting umbrellas to try and help their businesses during the pandemic.

And then since then we've also had grants um for drug court, different things come to us during the year for money.

So we have a little set aside to take your grants, which we analyze their financial statement, their need, and the quality of the outcome of the of the request for grant.

And that's a good idea.

I think it also incentivizes their participation in a defined beautification.

Were you thinking of keeping it to the beautification program?

Yeah, um part of the discussions, the actual program has not been fully for this particular for the beautification has not fully been um developed yet until we had the plan going forward.

But the ultimate goal would try to get the adjoining pop property owners intermerchants once the um plantings were there to try to help us to keep it maintained so that the total financial burden wasn't always on the um district, even though they do have you know the landscape contract that would do that, but we would get a little bit more incentives from the property owners to beautify their space as well so that it would tie in.

So I think that's a good idea to be consistent in your efforts and focused on the beautification instead of having uh diverse interests and efforts, so that's a good idea.

Uh on page 13 of 33 of your report, you mentioned light up the night, the light up the night event um that's the lighting of the tree at points.

Yes.

Could you work with the city and St.

Armand's so that those two events are not on the same night?

I know Commissioner Betty is superman and can get to everything.

But having the events on the same night makes it very difficult, if not impossible, for most commissioners to get around.

It is been a long discussion for the past three years with the board and um as many times that we have discussed it.

Um they have always concluded that it is a fresh Friday night, and that is the night that they've had it on.

I will once again bring it up this year when we go to plan that and try to see whether or not the board is um conducive of altering that.

Well, and not necessarily the did altering their date, but working with St.

Armand's so the two events are not on the same night.

Yes.

So it's been a goal for three years.

Makes sense.

Yeah.

Perfect sense.

Yeah.

Um my last question is regarding the fee waiver request.

Um event at five points on July 3rd would not conflict with any other event that's being held on the same night in the downtown area, would it?

Yeah, we did verify with um the um events team to make sure that um because there are so many other things going on during that week that that Friday was an appropriate time and there would be um availability to have the event on that day, and that's how we determine that July 3rd.

And um if it's on a Friday, could we make it a fresh Friday so that the money is already in the budget for it?

Fresh Friday um goes from September, our last event is June.

So typically um Fresh Fridays wouldn't go through July.

Um so we couldn't, so we had to actually add another date because the contracts usually for Fresh Friday is only nine events, and it goes from September to June is the last event.

Thank you.

And thank you and everybody on the DID board for your service to the downtown and our community.

It's our pleasure.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Um, Commissioner Albert, did you still want to speak?

No, that my questions were already answered by the previous question.

So thank you very much for your presentation and everything that you're doing.

And in addition to the board, thank the members of the DID.

Thank you.

Yes, that's thank you.

Appreciate your time, Ms.

Morgan.

Thank you.

May I have a motion?

I would move to, I guess, accept their report.

And that would include the $4,000 for the 250 celebration.

Okay.

Motion by Commissioner Ahern Kutch.

Seconded by the Vice Mayor to accept the DIDS report and authorize $4,000 in kind for city support for the July 3rd event.

Okay.

Any discussion?

I guess not.

Okay, that passed unanimously.

Thank you very much.

We're up to uh parks and recreation uh board report, and I will call upon uh General Manager Mark Hamilton and prep board chair Carl Schaftall to make the presentation.

Good morning, everyone.

Uh morning.

Let's just say that I'm Mark Hamilton, GM Parks and Recreation.

Uh lucky to be the liaison with these fine gentlemen of the Parks Recreation Environmental Protection Board.

Uh this is Leo Fitzgerald.

Um he was the chair during this year, and then uh just some more right as Carl Schoffstall, who is now the current chair I'll pass it on to them.

Thank you, Madam Mayor, Madam Vice Mayor, Commissioners.

Uh as the report that we've submitted indicates, I've been honored to be part of the preparatory advisory board since 2018, occupying the seat for the Bobby Jones Golf Complex.

During those years I've been vice chairman, and for the past two years, it has been my honor to act as chairman.

During this year, we have successfully stabilized our board.

We have supported General Manager DePazio and Director Fogle and their efforts to aid the city in its recovery from the storms of 2024.

We've responded to requests from this commission for recommendations of, among other things, the continued development of the Bobby Jones Golf Complex.

Finally, I am proud to point out that this board has continually supported the methodical pursuit of the parks master plan.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Well, good ever good morning, everyone.

It's nice seeing everybody again.

Um starting to get back in.

I'm honored to been asked to uh be the chair of the uh the prep board and again you know me a long time.

Um I went a couple rounds many years ago and was away from it for a little bit, but I am back.

And uh couple things that I've uh wrote jotted down here.

Uh for the update on the monthly park projects, input activities.

The master plan that we had done a few a few years ago is is moving forward.

Uh there was a little bit of hiccups with the storms and everything, and uh it's taking a little bit longer to get it accomplished, but it is on track to get done.

Um money is always an issue with everything.

And um present plans with the board that we have now is um I had it, everyone out here on this board that was on it at the time, voted for the parks district, and then it was rescinded.

Um we would have been a little bit farther along if it would have stayed, but again, uh we've had discussion at our board uh meetings that uh we've been talking to the city attorney a little bit, and um I'm gonna I made a motion at this last board meeting, and I'm gonna make that at the end of uh my comments here.

But um uh everybody voted for that, so I don't understand why we wouldn't do it again, and it's uh it's very important that we fund the parks because we all want a world-class city and world-class cities have world-class parks.

Um the uh the current the our just a comment about the current board um as member Fitzgerald said, uh when uh we have a very, very good board that I've I've seen since I've been back on it.

Um each one of the members brings a unique uh skill set to the to the board.

And um one of the things that I was really impressed about is that uh along with City uh parks department staff, we've all taken on to go out and look at a certain amount of parks, and we go out and look at them and with the help of again with staff, put a PowerPoint presentation together that shows how well they are starting to be improved and maintained.

We all know when the county gave them over to us many years ago, it was a disaster.

And um, again, with the staff uh put helping us putting together, we're we're looking at everything.

And we are actually uh starting to get feedback from the community, and that's in my opinion, a very important thing that um people are noticing it and people are looking at it and people are commenting on it.

Not all of them are the best, but uh we're working through it.

And uh just that the to finish up, uh the motion that I made uh is about the park district.

And um I made a motion on the prep advisory board formally requesting the city commission to direct staff and the city attorney to examine options for developing funding for parks district effective immediately.

The motion was seconded by member watts, and it passed unanimously 6 to 0.

So I feel that that is very important that the ask from you uh as commissioners to get uh the attorney to start looking at it, that when not only for the parks district uh but for the funding of the parks district.

And uh I think it's important that by the time the new city manager steps in and gets situated, she's gonna have her hands very full as she starts to get in and get started.

But at least we will be on the ground running and with with the help of the attorney, we can start to lay things out for her.

And uh I was at the CCNA meeting on Saturday, and I had a very brief discussion with her.

I know she's and I've been polled in many ways, but she's very in favor of it, the way it sounds, and she's she's done this a lot.

So, like I say, and along with that, uh what Ms.

Brown set up here as the uh the chair of CCNA is uh get this zoning straightened out where we have the parks in its special loan category that uh they can't be touched over in perpetuity.

So again, I look forward to working and meeting with everybody here again, and uh I'm back.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Commissioner Ahern Kotch.

Yes, thank you.

Um there are several items that I wanted to ask and and bring up not only here at the table for for us, but also for the community to to understand.

But first and foremost, I would like to talk about um this parks district um topic.

Um for some who don't know, uh this commission did vote twice to we did create a parks district, um, and then we voted twice to create a millage for that parks district.

We were advised at the time that it needed a five-zero vote, a unanimous vote of the commission.

Um two years in a row, consecutive years in a row, we had four commissioners vote for this.

Um Commissioner Betty, I believe you were on the commission one of those years, and Commissioner Alfred was for both years, as was I.

Um twice it received four votes, um, and three of the people are sitting here at this table.

Um I would like this to be one of our main uh items that comes back as fast as possible this budget year that we have on our agenda the creation of a parks district, number one, and we pull out of our current millage, not create a new one, what the parks district needs.

Um that's an important discussion.

It uh I think it's been made um new information to us, and Mr.

Polzak, you can expand on that, that in fact we only needed a majority.

Is that correct to create a parks district and not uh five zero?

It it's there seems to be some mixed information.

I'll come back to you on that.

Okay.

Um do you have a question?

My yes, and my question is uh Mr.

Polzak, is that something and Ms.

Jorgensen, is that something we can put on the agenda as soon as we can Yeah, I mean creating the parks district itself would pretty simple.

Like I said, we have done that before, so we can bring back an ordinance creating it, and then that would need to be followed by the the funding mechanism with the with the millage, which we could also do.

And we can do that during before this budget season.

Correct, we could.

Okay.

Um I would like to to do that if we're that's my official request if we can do that for this.

Uh along with discussions about the zoning and Ted Sperling as well, if we can.

Okay.

So you really suggesting that we put that on an agenda.

Correct.

I was just making sure that that's something that we can do.

The discussion on the agenda.

Correct.

Correct.

All right.

Um next is this uh board is um parks recreation and environmental protection advisory board, something that we talk about, but it usually gets left off of the end.

And I love your minutes and the backup material that you have.

I wish all boards had this kind of comprehensive notes about it.

I'm not really sure how to make that happen, but these are incredible.

You can see exactly what you all talked about, what your efforts were, what you presented on over an entire year.

Um along those lines, I see that you had discussions about composting and about undergrounding, and those being some of the environmental uh items that you had.

Um I noticed that there was a question about um Arlington Park and the Ponds, and I didn't see a response to that about um the stormwater being managed there, the state of and the health of those ponds in Arlington Park.

Was there a response given from the county about that?

To my recollection, no, not really.

Um of the members, and I'm not again I I don't have his name here correctly, but uh with the water drying up, it's it's been it's not been good, and they were trying to cut the weeds down and stuff, but again, I don't recollect that the uh the county has gotten back to us with any kind of a specific fix question or whatever.

But we can look at the dispute between the people, the county actually doing some treatments and the residents, and this has escalated and it's not a very good situation right now.

Okay.

Um I would love to see some information on that when you get a chance.

Um and then the Army Corps of Engineers and the beach renourishment question.

Um I saw that that was also brought up in here as well, and I'm not sure what that discussion was at your board's level.

Yeah, we we're going to get with the city engineer and and ask what there was an article that was out why they did not continue on it.

They say that the sand is going to drift.

And again, uh you all know my situation, and um that was kind of when that was going on, so I I'm definitely going to look into that.

Um, but again, they did not go all the way down to the point on the end down here, and uh, I'd like to know why.

I mean, I read what they their answer was, but I don't know.

I mean, we were there.

I'm all about saving as much money as you can, but uh I think that the that should have been done.

Okay.

Again, I don't want to speak for anybody until I find out exactly what what the answer was.

Okay.

All right.

Well maybe we can have a talk about that at the end of the this meeting.

And then the last question is about um at the very end, it talks about research unique ways to raise funding for the department and projects.

What does that mean?

How we're going to fund it and where we're going to get it from.

And what are the ideas of funding and we're just now starting to talk with amongst us ourselves and again we wanted to uh approach you people to turn around and get this get the ball rolling with the devil's the D in the details.

And what we need to do is we want to make sure that we get this right.

As Jerry was down at the last meeting in uh with the city attorney, and I'm in total agreement with him.

Uh we had the presentation from the Boca Ratone.

They've they've gone now that their budget is 45 million dollars.

I mean, they're doing a lot of development downtown.

They're looking to uh trade property.

So yes, we want a parks district, but we need to make sure that we get the funding right, and that's where the details are are really going to be that we're gonna have to start to drill down into this.

So to answer your question in a roundabout way, we're looking into it.

Okay.

Um I did want to just throw there out there that, and I believe I've mentioned this before, is that Venice has a really robust volunteer group to help with parks and also help with landscaping.

Um so I don't know if there was some sort of coordination with you all.

Maybe they did, the conversation we had before, a bigger picture of a group of folks who volunteer their time for gardening and and and so forth.

And you can look to Venice to find out how they organize it, how they do it, what it takes, how many people?

It's a lot.

But um those are my questions.

But love your minutes.

I'm glad the board is now meeting regularly and that you're not having uh the situation where you didn't have a quorum anymore.

So thank you all for your service and thank you for your help.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner.

Uh Vice Mayor.

Thank you.

Uh I too thank you for the service you provide.

Um page three of your report, you talk about funds that are currently being held by the county and returning those funds to the city.

Would you speak to that, please?

Well, on all new developments that are going in, there's a park impact fee that uh has been done for years, but it's always gone back to the county that they manage it, and then we have to turn around and go back and ask them to use our money.

That's basically what is in a nutshell.

And I've been a proponent uh for years.

That that should be we should control that as a city because that is our money.

And I I again I don't want to speak for the city attorney, but that is something that um I think that it was one of the projects or topics that we would be looking at as we go forward over the next year or so.

But I I totally agree with you with that.

So it sounds like it's it was a missing piece to when the county turned the parks back to the city, the money should have come with it.

Well, there's there's and the way that I understood that over the years with the interlocal agreement, there was two different things.

Uh the as I understand the park impact fees, the PIF, that can only be used as for it can't for enhancement, not any kind of maintenance or you know, work in the parks.

It's if you expand the capability or increase the usage of the parks, that that's what that would go toward.

And again, uh maintenance is uh, you know, just like on the founds and with the penny sales tax, they can't turn around and they can't use money out of that to turn around and for repair and maintenance.

That has to go to improve or you know, new.

So uh again, we will we will definitely look into that and get back to the honor.

Thank you.

Um lawn bowling.

It used to be sort of hidden over there in what is now the Bay Park.

Now I drive past lawn bowling every day multiple times, and I wonder why is lawn bowling that section of Bobby Jones not part of our park system.

I'm gonna let yes.

That's right, yeah.

That was a it was influenced by the bay uh encouraging the lawn bowling club to vacate where they were along 41.

And uh they were given some funds to uh essentially develop that section of what was at one time Bobby Jones golf course.

Uh it was annexed, if you will, or taken away.

It was still a public park uh and and turned into a lawn bowling facility.

Um the problem is that once they burned through the initial funding that they got from the bay, uh they had nothing.

And uh the result, you know, they have approached uh Bobby Jones Trune management about possibly using some of our resources or their the golf courses resources to help them.

Uh that's a non-starter.

Trune has no interest in that.

It's not part of our contract with Trune management.

Uh and so then it was on to, you know, they came to to the prep board and asked uh, you know, what what could we do?

And uh, you know, I'll be honest, I said, you know, you you folks have an ability to assess your membership, do that.

Uh you know, they have they were given a facility that was working.

They went out, we the folks at Trun did recommend somebody that could give them some advice on how to run a lawn bowling facility.

And apparently that advice was deemed uh unacceptable.

And as a result, they have they have not followed any recommendations, and they've done it themselves, and now they have a lawn bowling that I would respectfully say is dead.

If there's no grass there, it's dead.

And they can water all they want.

I go by there almost every day also.

And the found those sprayers who are going, it's just creating mud.

Um, you know, it's it's something that uh they're gonna have to someone's gonna have to come up with a solution because it's not working.

And do you know if they have any interest in being a part of our park system, or if their interest is remaining independent.

Well, I I can't speak for them.

I would assume that they would love to be part of the city's parks, but uh and uh uh it sounds like it's sort of a contentious thing.

It is.

But let me say, in in all honesty, yes, it's I'm you know, I have been an ardent supporter of the Bobby Jones golf complex, and you know, there was a time when we had a lot of property and then it was whittled away and whittled away, and you know, it was like the lawn bowling was kind of the last I'll call it an insult, you know, to to the to the restoration of Bobby Jones that you know this area was carved out for them.

And you know, the question has always been okay, is this for the city for the residents of Sarasota?

Well, you know, you look at they they have a membership and the full-time Sarasota residents, they're not a lot of them that use that facility on a regular basis.

Uh you know uh but I uh I am a biased observer.

Um so just from my point of view, it seems like uh we ought to have some discussion with them.

And um the art of compromise could go far here in making that facility the best it can be, whether or not it's part of our park system.

So I don't know who I'm addressing that to.

Uh you guys, Mr.

Fobil up there, hi.

I can add a little to that.

It is a lease agreement, and we have met with lawn bowling.

The city has provided lighting and uh a really nice restroom trailer, and they are working to repair the green, and they do want to make it better and open up in the fall.

So uh they have changed uh president to a new gentleman, Eric Martin, and uh it's currently their goal to work towards to have that beautifies and open up in the fall.

So um parks and recreation is working with them, we're discussing it with them, we're aware.

Um so our goal is for them to succeed as well, but as I said, there it's an agreement, so uh, you know, it's up to them to make it succeed, but we're here for them.

Okay, thank you for that.

Um I wanted to say that I really appreciate was that me.

No, that's not good.

Thank you.

Uh I really appreciate uh your monthly report or however frequently you meet uh by a prep board member who's gone out to some parks and presents a PowerPoint and a video, I think.

I think that's a great idea.

Um I also wanted to say for the record that I'm strongly supportive of establishing a parks district and funding it.

Uh the new zone district for parks.

Uh that became the disparity and dis in zones became very clear to me when I was on the planning board and we were talking about many different park issues.

Um I think that's oh also um north and south Leto and Leto pavilion.

Uh maybe we could include that in the discussion when we talk about a parks district.

I know those properties are not the cities now, but we could talk about that when we talk about a parks district.

Well, I think the the city beach is ours.

Uh the South Park Ted Sperling is owned by the but from my communications, and I don't know if I'm talking out of school here or not, but I'm going to, that they would like to give it back to us, and not for a dollar for a hundred years or a dollar a year for a hundred years.

I think they're in uh they have there's an appetite that they would like to give it back to us.

And again, I was a proponent of that a hundred years ago.

I mean, we're our own city.

Well, 70 years.

He was me was but it's uh it's ours.

It's a city's.

You know, we own it, we need to take care of it.

And uh I wasn't very happy when you know you're talking about interlocal agreements when they gave back our parks and it kind of dissed us.

They didn't kind of they did this us and what they're doing with about giving money back, but you know, regional parks.

Robert Taylor is a regional park.

Yeah.

The majority of the was the majority of the uh was the uh membership is outside the city of Sarasota.

My time is up again.

I want to thank you for all you do.

Um Commissioner Batti.

Uh thank you, Mayor.

And uh thank you, Carl.

Welcome back.

And uh thank you all for the work that you do.

Um we know how important you know our over 60 parks in the city are to our residents and visitors alike.

Uh I just have one question and that is about our interlocal agreement um when it as it comes to the city and the and the county and the maintaining of our beaches or what have you.

Um I mean you live out there, you know, in Leto.

Um I throw a volleyball tournament out there every year um that is uh well attended and um uh a great deal of participation.

One thing that I saw out there this this past year with the with the volleyball players were coming to me bringing me huge shards of grass uh glass, you know, that would remains uh uh from the storm and almost like boulder size right rocks.

That could have been a huge, huge liability to to us.

And I'm just wondering, you know, how how this is gonna work with uh going forward with our interlocal agreement with the the county in terms of maintaining particular I know you know Ted Sperlin is is their thing, but um when it comes to North Leto, um taking care of that and making sure that uh that our beaches, you know, I see Mr.

Fogel coming down as well, making sure that's that sand is is sifted, you know, and tilled um and turned over to to uh take care of those types of things.

Jerry Fogel Parks and Recreation, uh thank you, Commissioner.

So I can definitely reach out to the county pertaining to those items um to ensure that um you know those are safety items are being addressed.

Uh I can also get their schedules for the maintenance uh to be able to share that.

When there are volleyball tournaments, maybe they can do an extra maintenance if you will to prep for that tournament.

So I'll I'll have those conversations, Commissioner.

Okay.

Uh excellent.

And again, uh thank you, Mr.

Fogel.

Uh thank you all for the work that you do and you know your your volunteering.

Um, you know, that's uh you know you can't be quantified, just actually giving up your time and efforts uh to maintain our parks and so on.

So thank you all.

Thank you, Mayor.

Okay.

Uh Commissioner Ahern Codge, second round.

Just one more question about uh the celebration of Bobby Jones hundred year um in your materials that talks about it opened in 26, but it was named in 27.

What's the settlement of when that's going to be and what does that look like?

Well, I've been talking with uh the manager over there and uh and Trune uh management and uh my solution is that we have two.

Um and you know that we have two different logos, so we sell lots of shirts and lots of beer mugs and those sorts of junk that'll help.

Uh but uh no, I I uh uh we have not come to that uh to a conclusion when it's it's certainly coming.

Yes, I will pursue that.

Okay.

Thank you.

That was my question.

Did you want to add something, Mr.

Fogel?

Just just uh, you know, obviously whether you know we determine 2026-2027.

I think um, you know, we'll do one celebration, obviously to celebrate that.

Um my guess is we're probably looking more towards 2027, since that makes more sense at this point.

Uh so I'll I'll make sure Ms.

Jurgensen uh gets the information to share with the commissioners.

But 2027 it looks like right now.

It could be uh December 31st, 26 through to January 1st, 27, and there you go, you do both of them in one event.

Right.

And wouldn't the residents in that area love a celebration that goes from the next day.

No.

Okay.

And and Mr.

Batti has buzzed back in.

Uh yeah.

You know, now um just before you know you all you know depart.

I just wanted to uh publicly give um uh thanks to Mr.

Fogel um for the work that you did with Mary Dean and that you continue to the efforts that you continue to make, you know, with with that that part because that's an ongoing issue um that that you know we're trying to uh you know find some sort of resolution to of whatever and uh um it's contentious at times.

And uh I just want to thank you again and thank you, you know, Parks Rec for that as well, but but you in particular, Mr.

Pogba, for what you're doing to try and you know and you as well, Mr.

Green.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Well, okay.

I want to thank you all.

We've got spectacular parks throughout the city.

Some of them are more renowned than others, maybe because they're bigger, but if you go through the city, you will find little gems all over.

So thank you all for making that happen.

And thank you for your report.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And may I have a motion?

A move to receive the annual report from the parks, recreation, and environmental protection advisory board.

Move by the vice mayor and seconded by Commissioner Bad T to accept the report.

And I'm assuming no discussion, and shall we vote?

And it passed unanimously.

Thank you very much.

Mayor, before we move on, are we good to go with pursuing the parks district?

What happened on the agenda?

Well, I think we should have a motion to direct staff to look into it.

Uh I would move that to to have staff move expeditiously to um add that to our agenda discussion about a parks district.

Second.

Just for the record, you just please note it it won't be in May.

It won't be until July.

So I just want to make sure that everybody's aware of that.

Okay.

Um if we if we do it.

I mean, it we're getting close to budget season, and the idea to do the parks district is to do it in this.

No, I get it.

I'm just telling you, because we put out May's meeting Thursday.

But we can just put the agenda item on there.

Discussion of parks district.

We can add some of this backup material.

I'll be responsible for putting that together if you want.

I'm gonna have I'm gonna make let you make that call again.

Okay.

Yeah.

So Commissioner, if you're worried about budget, uh we've already been working with Ms.

Fogle on running the numbers and and understanding what that does to the budget, even if this comes on July.

I do feel like we have the opportunity to still put that on um the July budget workshops.

Now I'll double check with Ms.

Strickland because I don't want to put her into a difficult situation.

So if we could make the motion to just put it on an agenda, then I'll work with staff on if the May 18th works or if we have to move it to July.

Okay.

And if you need my help gathering stuff, I've got ideas for that too.

Okay.

The other thing though that you mentioned earlier was also considering uh zone district for parks.

Are you interested in adding that to the agenda discussion to the agenda item?

I I think that we should move first with the district.

And you know, I think if if we clutter it with too many items, um it's going to become a very big difficult discussion.

Uh that's a whole creation of new zones and what they mean and definitions and things like that.

The parks district creation is a park district and a millage that goes with it, and that's a simple vote that starts the ball rolling for everything else.

I agree with that.

Okay, so there's a motion by Commissioner A.

Hearn Koch and seconded by the Vice Mayor to add to uh agenda very soon uh that we uh discuss establishing a parks district.

Um mayor, I believe the CD.

Do you is there consensus to have me go ahead and draft the ordinance and do all the legal documents, or do you want to talk about that at the next agenda item?

Draft it.

Draft it.

Some of us I will be voting against it, by the way.

Yeah.

Because of the budget issues.

Where are we going to unless if you are requiring that it not be an additional tax?

Mayor.

Yeah.

Don't go down the road.

Okay, yeah.

This is both.

So is it important to answer uh the city attorney's question if there's not going to be a unanimous vote?

Should you be drafting it?

Um I'll research whether unanimity is required, and then if it's not, I'll bring forward a product.

Okay.

Okay.

So let's have we have a motion and ask vote on that.

Okay.

Okay.

Okay.

So passed unanimously, thank you.

It is 1030.

I guess the question is, are there items pulled from consent one?

I don't have any items pulled, so I think you can knock that out with the first one.

I didn't want I did, I pulled two.

From consenting one.

Okay, so then I'm going to suggest we take a break now.

I was there was nothing pulled up.

So okay, it is uh 1027.

Shall we return at 1040?

Sure.

Okay.

Okay, we're about to resume the March May.

Excuse me.

May the fourth be with you.

Okay, when we broke, we had just started about to start consent agenda number one, and I had asked which items are being pulled.

Um, yes, Mayor, item numbers six point two and six point three are being pulled by Commissioner Aaron Crutch.

And that is all that I'm going to do.

Okay.

No, six point two and six point three.

Oh, sorry.

Okay.

So Commissioner Ahern Kotch moved approval of six point one, and the Vice Mayor seconded.

May we have a vote, please.

Yes.

Okay.

Thank you very much.

So uh Commissioner Ahern Kotch, you pulled item uh six point two.

Yes, please.

I um pulled this item just because I would like a very very short description of the project and where the how it's funded, please.

Okay.

Good morning, Alvi Marie Kralis, Capital Projects Manager.

Um so the circus trail extension um is currently being funded up to 30 percent with city dollars.

So out of our um extending the multimodal network and line item the CIP, that's where you're gonna find that.

The continuation of the project from um taking it from 30s to 100 percent is being funded through FDOT using Sun Trail funds.

And then once we complete that phase, uh construction is also funded through FDOT and City dollars as well.

Okay, it says here in our backup the funding sources FDOT urban areas 555,000 and MPO transportation 555,000 and a total project cost of 1.1 million.

Correct.

So where does our CIP come into play here?

Uh getting the project to 30 percent.

So we're currently doing that project right now.

What do you see in um before you is the design of the project continuing from 30 to 100 percent, and that is um the 1.1 million from the FDOT and MPO.

Okay, so we funded it up to 30 percent, and then from 30 percent forward it's funded by those two MPO and FDOT.

Correct.

Okay, and would you just mind showing where it is and what it is you have the visual there in front of you?

I can pull it up.

I'm sorry.

Uh, don't you have it right there?

No, this is for the next one that got pulled.

Okay, I was can pull it out of here.

I didn't know it was gonna just so that we can let the public know where it is, and then um also that it was it's one of the top um priorities uh for uh the city of Sarasota um to make this connection.

All right.

Easy enough would be Google Maps here.

There you go.

Okay, so right now this is Fruit Bill and Beneva Road.

This is where Circus Trail currently is.

Do you see my closer?

Yes.

The project would extend circus trail from where it turns to the west side of Circus Boulevard.

It will keep it on the east side of Circus Boulevard, extending it to um where it continues, crossing over here through a pedestrian and bicycle bridge, and then moving on from here all the way to this segment right here.

So this is an old trail.

It's um it's cracked, there's a lot of things going on.

Um it would end, it has a term I right there before the 17th Street Park, because the idea is that once it's built, we can partner up with uh Sarasota County, and then Sarasota County um can help us determine where they want the crossing and we can get into an agreement with them to move the project forward to the next stage.

Okay, and what's the timeline?

So right now um 30 percent for I'm gonna talk about the the segment that we're responsible for for now.

Um 30 percent is slated to be completed by fall of this year, and then design would soon start right after.

Uh with design, we're looking at uh about one year to uh one and a half year to get that completed, and then construction is actually available in 2028-2029 fiscal year.

Okay.

FDOT fiscal year, very different than ours.

Okay, but the funding is in place.

Yes, the funding is in place.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um would you like to kick care to make a motion?

Sure, I would move approval of consent uh six point two.

So move second.

Okay, uh moved by Commissioner Ahern Koch, seconded by Commissioner Batti to approve item number six point two.

And your votes, please.

And it passes unanimously.

Thank you very much.

And Commissioner Ahern Koch, you also had pulled 6.3.

Yes.

Um also I have some questions about this one here.

I think I might have misunderstood some of the backup material.

Um and then I had some questions about uh tree removals and and things like that that are part of the backup material.

But first of all, in our description here, it talks about the lowest responsive bid being $6,000 17,588.84 cents.

And then it also talks about the total project cost being $5,569,000 and three cents.

And I'm curious about where the funding comes from the two main sources of funding a grant, two grants.

I'm curious where the rest of the funding is coming from, and if I've completely misunderstood this backup material.

That's okay.

Good morning.

Halving Murray Crow, this Capital Projects Manager.

Robert Hagen, City Surveyor.

Okay.

So the funding right now, we have the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, so that's FDEP.

And then the WCIND, which is the West Inland West Coast Inland Navigational District.

Thank you.

That works.

And a portion of the dollars are also coming from city funds.

It is within our seawall program line item in the CIP, as well as the additional funds would be coming out of the hurricane program as well, which is that line item number one in the CIP.

So the seawall program is in the CIP.

Correct.

And the hurricane is also in the CIB.

Both of them.

Most of the dollars are coming out of the those two grants, and we are expecting to look into additional FDEP dollars to leverage some of our own funds as well.

Okay.

Okay.

And so we we think that this is also going to be funded as well.

Yes.

Okay, the funding is secured.

All right.

And then I had some questions about the backup material.

Talks about in here tree removals.

And it's on page.

The 19 of 28.

It says removal tree removal item number 10.

30,000.

And then we have more tree removal, root pruning.

And then tree replacements.

Just curious about why we need to be removing trees in this project.

Well, I can answer that question.

We had met extensively with the Arborist.

There are some trees along the waterfront there that are in distress nature.

And what we're looking to do is put new vegetation in there, healthier vegetation.

Plus the other thing is by raising the seawall, we're going to have to bring additional fill in behind the seawall, which would cause us to cover the roots, would which would also impact the uh the trees as well.

Yeah, I mean it seems like there are a lot of trees, like over 30.

Yes.

Huh.

Um and are all of those trees in poor condition or diseased or they are in poor condition.

The one tree that we are making, uh we made extreme efforts to save us.

There is a large oak tree over by La Barge that uh we are we are putting in some significant uh improvements to make sure we're able to preserve that tree.

And that is healthy.

Okay.

Um if I could um get a just a tree survey so I can see which trees are being removed, because I'm sure I'm gonna have outreach from the public when this starts happening and I would love to be made aware of that.

Okay.

We can do that.

They're all they are all illustrated as well on the uh on the design drawings for the project.

Okay, would I would love to see that and um a timeline on this on the project?

Is for the whole project.

Uh we're looking at beginning as quickly as possible.

And we're looking to complete phase one by the end of December and then move into phase two.

We could possibly move into phase two earlier, but we're we're trying to the reason for the phasing is twofold because we're trying to maintain marine operations at the same time.

So having the entire 1500 feet of the A dock under construction at one time would be a little difficult for Suntext to maintain uh marine operations.

Okay.

And have you all been in touch with the Sarasota Bay Estuary Program?

Um, because we have been talking about um coastline restoration uh in that area as well as a project for the Sarasota Bay Estuary.

Have you been in touch with them?

We have been in conversation with them.

Matter of fact, we we had been in discussions with them on the southern portion along uh where adjacent to the Leary is wrapping around to uh Bayfront Drive.

Um there are two major outfalls they are looking to uh clean up that area and and those outfalls as well.

Okay.

Um I would just say, you know, where where it's not necessary for the trees.

I mean, shade is key to our community, and if it's not absolutely necessary, you know, maybe not do it.

We we understand.

And and one of the other one of the other things, if I may.

Um there's also safety concern out there because of the salt water infiltration in that area, the roots tend to uh remain on the surface.

And that creates a numerous amount of trip hazards and and actually you cannot lie or really enjoy that part of the park where those tree roots are right on the surface.

But this is also contributing to their poor health.

Uh Don Olam and the uh Paran Arborists, we had worked very closely with them uh throughout this project.

Yeah, we we wanted to try to see if there was a way of saving them and if it was worth saving them rather than bringing new uh new younger trees in to grow.

And we will be bringing actually relatively mature trees.

So the the cost is in there to bring in larger trees rather than waiting for smaller trees to grow in place.

Yeah, I saw that.

Um which also spoke to me as well.

I mean, the removing trees and replacing trees, and the cost of all of that is not small.

So and believe me, I if if it if it were up to me, I'd rather not remove the trees.

Uh unfortunately, what I what we feel is that later on we will be removing them and and incurring this cost anyway.

Thank you.

Okay.

Is that it?

That's it.

Okay.

Anyone else?

Uh may I have a motion?

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Move approval of item 6.3.

Um the uh park seawall.

Second.

Okay, moved by uh Commissioner Albert, seconded by Commissioner Batti to uh approve the uh item 6.3.

Okay.

And any discussion?

Nope.

Okay, let us vote.

And it is unanimous.

Thank you all very much.

Uh so moving on to consent agenda number two.

Now I believe Randy Mora is joining us online.

He is mayor, he's available by teams if you have any questions.

Otherwise, I can give a brief explanation of this item.

Okay.

Yeah.

I would I pulled this item, so I would like a brief explanation of it, um, please.

So this is the only item, and it was pulled.

So if you don't mind me, I'll just go ahead and read the title and you can just get into it.

Great.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Resolution number 26R 3393, a resolution of the city commission of the city of Sarasota, Florida, amending the city's formal rules of procedure for city commission meetings, providing for the replacement of any previous versions, providing for servability, providing for the correction of scribbler's errors, providing for reading by title only, and providing for an effective date.

And again, just for record, we do have Randy Morrow on Zoom for any questions.

And he's there.

If you look in the corners there, he's up there.

And just to preface it, and then I'll ask Randy to uh expand.

But that this has been discussed before.

This is uh as I told you, it would be coming before you for approval.

We've done a rules revision via workshop format before.

Um if you want to workshop this, you can you direct us to do that, but I don't think it's necessary.

This is uh just essentially a housekeeping update.

It's updating our operating system from 8.0 to 8.1 or something, I don't know.

Um and making some key changes which are important.

Um I asked Randy to work on the development of this, which he did, and he did a great job.

He reached out to other jurisdictions throughout the state of Florida.

Um as you know, he does a lot of work throughout the state of Florida.

Including some important jurisdictions that have had case law on this matter recently.

So I believe we're getting the best practices that are out there.

I'll let him uh expand on that real quick.

Thank you, Randy.

Uh thank you, uh Attorney Polzak, and thank you, Commissioners, for the indulgence superior Zoom.

Um and happy to address any questions.

Um while this is um being presented to you as as housekeeping, there are s there are substantive revisions being made to your rules of procedure to both um modernize them and align them best with current practices uh and recent developments in case law.

There's been case law of the 11th circuit concerning rules of procedure and guidelines harmonizing with the First Amendment and restrictions on uh most especially the public comment uh elements of the uh rules of procedure and so the this resolution and the corresponding exhibit uh seek to align those, those are set forth in strike through and underline format to show you the edits.

It's also just memorializing things that are common in rules of procedure.

Uh when we take the approach of revising an ordinance or resolution or or other policy, we take the opportunity while we're under the hood to address as many issues uh as we can identify, so you're not doing things in a piecemeal fashion.

And so there's some other uh edits that were made or revisions that were made based on best practices.

So I'm happy to answer any any questions, uh comments or concerns you may have, but that is the function and operation of these rules procedure.

Okay.

Yeah, um so I do have a number of um of uh um edits so to speak to this.

Uh I don't know if you want those now because it I mean you do have strike through and underline, but I mean I have a number of them.

I can talk about them later with you if you'd like, but uh I so I do have a number of those.

But my questions for for uh content um on page 11 of 16, it says no speaker may transfer their time to any other person or group of persons.

Where is that coming from?

Because we we've allowed for that in the past.

I I understand that.

And so this is um I was asked to present you with a resolution that reflects uh best practices and also reflects um different options.

This is ultimately these are your rules of procedure.

If you wish to change that, uh that is a discussion for this body to have.

Uh the challenge that was presented or the issue that was identified is the tracking of yielding of time and the and the um in terms of the procedural elements that that especially in more contentious hearings, not necessarily just in the city of Sarasota, but as a function of public meetings, uh trying to be consistent in the manner in which uh you im implement your time, place and manner restrictions on public speech.

And so that's why that was done.

Well, um I would say that uh it's been our practice that um you know we don't want to cut off your notes to spite your face.

And so often what happens when you have a big impactful presentation and you'll have a neighborhood association, instead of getting 50 people to come up and speak to the same topic, you have one person representing, and sometimes they ask for a little more time.

Uh so instead of having, and I did this myself when I was my neighborhood's president, right?

And I represented my neighborhood.

We had 40 people signed up to speak.

I asked for a 10-minute presentation.

So that my time to speak was 10 minutes instead of 40 times three minutes.

And I had to ask it at the table, and I was allowed to do that.

Um, or you can have 40 times three minutes.

And so often that's become a uh a practice that we do where we let one person who represents the neighborhood association have a little more time so that we don't have 40, 50, 60, 80, 100 people speaking for three minutes.

Um Commissioner, I would I would say on those that I I would just wish to clarify on those rules of procedure, it does provide that should a situation arise where the commission determines modifications to the public comment times are necessary and appropriate, the commission may modify the times with the approval of a majority.

So if you're in a if you're in a one-off hearing that lends itself to that, the commission has the ability still to do that.

It was it was regulating what people have as a matter of right in terms of uh presentation.

So um thank you for that clarification.

Um however, I would caution us on those on that leading in with that no speaker may transfer.

I mean, if I were a citizen reading that, I'd say, okay, well, it's not a possibility.

And you know, it says further down there, we may make exceptions, but leading off, I would say as a neighborhood, all right everybody, three minutes, here we go.

Um I don't know if that that text there is necessary at all, uh honestly.

Um so I question that one.

I also question we've it's it's it's here not to be changed, and we've done it before that we cannot, we don't have.

Um it's on page 10 of 16 item B, uh half three-quarters of the way down.

Unless required by state law, no public input shall be permitted on second reading of ordinances as well.

For me, that one I'm you know, sometimes it's necessary to hear from people on a second reading.

Sometimes something has happened between first reading and second reading that you know uh changes the situation.

Sometimes something has happened between first reading and second reading that you know uh changes the situation, and when we cut out the public's ability to speak to these items, you know, we we really lessen the value of our hearings.

So I I I'm not supporting that that piece either.

Any comment or discussion or anything about that one?

Well, um I mean you're asking questions at this point.

Yeah, and those are those are my I'm asking the the attorney a question, like any comment why that's why we why we shouldn't change that.

So I sorry I can't tell from the video if you're asking uh attorney Polzak or myself.

Go ahead.

In as much as in as much as I I assisted with the drafting, I acknowledged that language existed within your your rules of procedure presently.

Uh and and I wasn't sure, you know, philosophically or operationally what the um you know what the what the history was there, so I I tried to preserve it, but adding the language subject to the applicable requirements of Florida Statute 286-0114, that is a statute that governs public comment, and it says the public shall have an opportunity to be heard in reasonable proximity before which official acts are taken.

And so if something substantive were to come up, that language was added as you sort of describe between let's say first reading, it says that the skate park hours will be seven to ten, and then on second reading it suddenly says three to ten.

Um it's a totally you know a a different kind of regulation and that may be an opportunity or an inroad inroad there where it that kind of substantive amendment uh that it may be appropriate on second reading, and so it it it creates sort of a rebuttable presumption towards public comment uh based just with acknowledging the statutory text, so it's not an absolute restriction.

Uh so this language was was done to um ameliorate that concern.

Um I I don't read it that way.

And please explain.

That is how it operates though.

Um because if I were again a regular old citizen and I read that, unless required by state law, required by state law, no public input shall shall be permitted on second reading.

I would say oky doke.

No we're not allowed to comment.

Um I don't know where in any of that it says it could be allowed.

Well, Commissioner, it's it's again it's your rules of procedure and it's not my intention to debate.

I I uh that's not my role uh mine is to advise if if it's the will of the commission to make clear that there shall be public comment at first and second reading or only first reading or only second reading, which are all permutations I've seen uh in different legislative bodies.

Okay.

So it is a possibility that we could um allow it uh as well.

Okay.

Um and then my question about the um non-substantive underlining and things like that.

Shall we do that later?

Or if it's not substantive, I think we should it's not substantive.

Commissioner, if you're saying there uh would qualify as Griven's errors under section four of the resolution, I can correct those.

Okay.

Scrivener's errors are the rest of uh um I think my comments here are questions.

Um that's it, just those two uh items.

Um Vice Mayor.

Thank you.

Um I do agree with Commissioner Ahern Kotch regarding the transfer of time and public com allowing public comment even on second reading.

Um I think perhaps we could just tweak the wording a little bit on the transfer of time thing to make sure that it's clear to the public.

Um and then I ask a question.

Once we get these approved, I think it might be worth our while to take a little bit of time, either in a workshop or during a meeting, to clarify any pragmatic changes that would influence and affect the operation of the meeting.

Of course they all will, but the big ones, I think.

Sure.

Kind of like a training workshop, if you will.

We could do that.

I'd have Randy come down if you choose to adopt these today, we could schedule that at a later date and um have kind of a workshop training.

Okay.

Um Commissioner Alford, Commissioner Bette.

Any questions?

Okay, I I did have one about consent agenda, citizens' comments on consent agenda.

But Paige?

Well, no, I I'm in general.

Oh, okay.

Um we have been my belief is we have not been doing citizens' comments on consent agenda unless the item was pulled.

No, um no, you there have been times I'll I have to say Mr.

Hyde has had items he wanted to speak to the QL didn't pull, we just have him come up and speak.

So it's just a matter of who shows up, but we still take we don't take all public comments.

So yeah, because I I noticed in you know Mr.

Mora the the proposal included citizen comments on consent items.

So whether they are pulled or not.

Okay.

So I don't know if that's something that we have we have never denied anyone public comment.

Okay.

Okay.

Yeah, I I was just wondering because to some extent, unless we pull it, we are not we don't discuss unless we pull it.

So that doesn't mean that the public can't come and speak to it.

So that has happened.

Okay.

Okay.

And and so the other thing I was it's I guess this is a follow-up on uh Commissioner Ahern Koch's question and also the vice mayor in terms of like with item B and item D, maybe well in item D, move up the Commission may, a majority of the Commission may uh allow uh for a particular situation uh the passing over of the time, move that statement further up so it's right after saying no uh no transfer of time and then however, and but then in the same vein, add something to B that would indicate that um the Commission may decide, you know, in a particular situation to allow comment on second reading.

Something to make it clear that the Commission may allow it.

And just I don't know if this satisfies your concern, but in section or rule one on page four.

There's underlining language added in there consistent with Rule 13.

Time lines and procedures set forth here and may be modified by a majority vote.

And that's so you have that ability that's prominent in the rules, obviously in rule one itself that you can adjust these and modify them as you see fit.

So yeah, I mean other than that, I think.

Oh sorry, Mayor, continue.

No, go okay.

I was just gonna say other than that was that was the only questions I had, but please, Mr.

Mora, go ahead.

Uh I would just want to make sure I I I'm prepared and willing to provide you um you know suggested language for a motion should there be a consensus in in any in any single direction so far.

I've I've really only heard um two members uh suggest out of the majority of your body suggest that um any language should be amended.

Um and mayor, yours was to to rework the existing language as it relates to the transfer of time and and groups, and and just so you can understand so it doesn't sound too vague.

Um Commissioner Aaron Coch is as an example, I was in a community that allowed for the transfer of time, and so then people would get up and it was a question of is there a cap on it?

You know, okay, you can transfer time, you get my three minutes, my three minutes, and then somebody shows up and gets 27 minutes.

Um do you get, you know, how do you authenticate who those people are and make sure that um that time is is limited or or regulated some fashion, they don't come up again.

And those when in discussing with staff and team, I said, you know, there's a few ways we can harmonize this.

This is offered as one solution.

Again, these are your rules.

You are the legislators.

I am not.

I'm providing you a uh a template to work from.

Um the language there, I I do think, Mayor, to your point, uh if you wish to move it, you could, but it does say, however, should a situation arise, the commission can can modify it.

So I think that existing language is there.

If there's a if there's a desire to change the language as it relates to either the transfer of time or public comment at first and second reading or any other aspect, uh we we can certainly accommodate that.

And and if if your aim is to pass this today with sufficient consensus direction, I can certainly um provide you some language.

The last thing that I think came up was the discussion about the uh public comment and consent agenda, which I think the um clerk and parliamentarian adequately addressed, but uh ordinarily it most communities don't open specifically public comment for consent agenda, but should a member of the public make their desire known, usually that's done ahead of time because somebody will come up and say, I know you take public comment at this time and that time.

My concern is on the consent agenda, and I don't see where that time is.

And usually that's how staff works to accommodate it either by moving it down on the agenda or making that note and allowing for it in the course of the proceedings.

So I think that addresses the concerns that have been raised to this point.

And again, if if an amendment is to be made to this resolution in its current form, I just wish to make sure there's sufficient clarity on the majority of the body giving that direction.

Thank you.

I'm gonna call on Commissioner Alpert in a second but regarding the transfer of time, I think really what Commissioner Aher and Kotch was referring to where there might have been several people who wanted to talk about the same item had maybe filled out a speaker card and requested that one individual use the combined time and and that would be different from transferring time on the fly.

So maybe if this makes sense to the others the idea being you know that several speaker requests can be combined to enable a single speaker to represent all of them and use their combined time.

Yes.

I agree with that because I I'm sorry I'm sorry.

I agree with that because I don't want us to get confused.

I I want everybody to be able to speak don't get me wrong but I don't want it to get confusing up here on the fly and then I'm trying to figure out how much time to give these people.

That's not fair also to people here, those who didn't get a chance to speak or whatever, or even myself trying to figure out because I want to make sure I'm giving everybody the adequate amount of correct time.

So if we're gonna do that we just need to make sure that we're clear on what we're doing because I don't want to be put in a position where somebody said that I'm not giving them the right amount of time because we decide you all decided as a body that you wanted to people transfer transfer and transfer your time.

I don't know.

Am I giving 10 minutes three minutes, four minutes, five minutes you know so we seem to make sort of clear right and and I I think what we've seen in the past is is generally an neighborhood is organized and they have several points they want to address.

And there's one who represents the neighborhood who wants to make a presentation to say this point, this point, this point, as opposed to 10 people coming up each taking three minutes, saying the same thing overlapping not coordinated.

I mean that's the situation that I want to make crystal clear for our neighborhood associations, for our groups, for not just our neighborhood associations for folks that you know if you if that's what you desire to do is to make a unified presentation that option is available to you and instead of 10 people taking three minutes you have one person taking 10 minutes or 12 or whatever we need.

And you can have your people sitting next to you to say I represent five people each that would be 15 minutes.

I'm gonna only need 10 or seven or whatever.

That's the situation.

Mr.

Mora does that sort of clarify and differentiate from what might have come across earlier.

Yes and with sufficient agreement of the council um you know a motion could be made to amend to include language along the lines that you know nothing in this rule shall be construed to prevent a single speaker on behalf of an identifiable group of persons from presenting to the commission for a identified limit limited number of minutes or you know identified specified period of time.

I think that would make it clear and and ameliorate um Commissioner's concerns about the um the perceived ambiguity of the language saying nothing in this prevents somebody from speaking on behalf of an identified group you know with appropriate limitation as established by the commission.

Okay.

Thank you.

Uh Commissioner Alpert I've got a question on uh item G page 12 and when we're talking about um the irrelevant um comments are we just talking about only if they're coming you know signed a um speaker card and they're coming up to speak or are we talking about if they're sitting in the audience holding signs that are irrelevant to the city's business.

That's a good question.

I would say that the answer is yes in terms of the either or you know you can think of the situation in either context I'd be a little if someone's holding a sign in a manner that's not um you know disruptive or otherwise obviously that's something your parliamentarian and city attorney would work through to determine if that satisfies the definitions as set forth in your in these rules should they be adopted uh the the course of these or or the scope of these of this language is targeted towards public comment irrespective of what time it is in the meeting.

Um the classic example I give um is whether they're at the microphone or in the back of the room, if somebody just keeps yelling play free bird into the microphone, you know, it's it's that's not what we're doing, and that might and that could be disruptive and and therefore irrelevant because it is not pertaining to any agenda item.

And um, you know, and obviously uh I I don't know if you guys command a playlist in your other meetings, but it's otherwise not within your ordinary jurisdiction power.

So um that's the sort of language or sort of situation that language is designed to address.

And that this these categories of language are derived from uh Supreme Court and First Amendment jurisprudence uh to harmonize with recent guidance from the uh appellate courts about these issues.

Thank you.

Okay.

Yeah, that I did want to add what I said housekeeping earlier, I appreciate Randy expanding on that.

These are really important changes.

I do hope that um would encourage you to adopt them today with modification if needed so we can move forward with these new rules.

Um more questions?

Well, thank you.

There's no if if there's no questions, Madam Mayor, I would suggest um based on the course of the of the discourse a suggested motion to amend um the section uh two D to add language saying nothing in this in these rules shall prevent a single speaker on behalf of an identifiable group of persons from addressing the commission on behalf of that group for a specified amount of time as established by the commission.

Okay.

I think that sounds good.

Okay, I'm looking for a motion.

Um I was gonna ask so really quickly, what about B and the second reading?

Do you have suggested language for that?

I I didn't see uh there wasn't consensus direction on that.

If there is, uh please let me know and we can um if the the discourse so far yourself and um the vice mayor voice some concerns about that, but reflecting as it is the the majority will of the body, if there's a desire to continue with that, we can certainly do that as well.

I believe the mayor had suggested something like the commission may allow public comment on second reading.

Or did I misunderstand?

Well, no, you didn't misunderstand, but then Mr.

Polzak pointed out, I guess it was somewhere in rule one, uh I guess that the but I don't see it, that the commission could Yeah.

It it is on page one, or excuse me, page four.

Rule one, Randy, you can correct me if I'm well so that is designed.

That language I think is is is best understood as targeting the the timelines set forth in Rule 1 itself.

Um, you know, that and and but Rule 13, which it which it cross-references, which is on page um the language is on page 15 of 16.

It says the rules of procedure shall be adopted, amended or rescinded by a majority vote of the entire commission.

A majority vote of the commission members present is required to suspend or waive any of the rules.

And so you can always at any time amend any of these rules.

And for those of you who may remember when I came before your body to teach about parliamentary procedure, um, and as it otherwise states uh above, these are guidelines, right?

These are this is just a set of rules, so there's shared expectations in addition to due process, but there's shared expectations through the process, but it's you are the board that manages the corporate entity that is the city of Sarasota.

And so if the board determines that it's in its best interest to uniformly increase the amount of time to eight minutes for every person today, because hey, there's two there's three people here and they're the most knowledgeable people in the state of Florida on an issue, then you have the ability to do that.

The same is true of taking um public comment on an item on an off on an let's say uh a one-off item doing it twice, whether by because of the rules or you just simply think it's required.

If you wish to create it as a matter of right, uh I would suggest you change the rules.

If you're trying to ensure that it's clear there's an exception, I think the rules are clear on that, even if they're not necessarily clear to every person who would read them on first blush without reading them in context.

May I come in?

Um Commissioner Aaron Coch.

Yeah, I would err on the side of um being crystal clear.

If I were to read this as a layperson, I would go straight to persons addressing the commission if I were trying to figure out how to address the commission.

Um I may not necessarily understand the underlying implications of all of the others.

And I I for me here it says absolutely, unless it's required by state law, you can't address it.

So I don't think it harms us to err on the side of allowing and in and and having uh discussion uh the language the commission may allow public comment on second reading, if blah, blah, whatever.

Um so I I would prefer that we we make that express statement.

Um the layperson may not go all the way over here somewhere else that doesn't have anything to do with the thing that they're trying to look at, which is persons addressing the commission.

So what is the sense of the commission with Commissioner Ahern Koch's suggestion that the Commission may allow public comment on second reading, not is required to, but may I I don't know.

I think just you know, again, when we change things on the fly, we aren't thinking of all the ramifications.

That always concerns me.

Um so then it's not it's not clear to the public whether it'll be allowed or not allowed, you know.

So I think that that money is set up, but um you know there may be some language that can be tweaked in there that you know allows us to do it, but we can do it.

You know, they said we can do it anyway.

So I I don't know.

I don't know.

I given that the given that the rules of procedure already provide for this, um if you were to make an edit, I would just simply suggest within item uh B on page 10 of 16 where it says absent an amendment after first reading or um which was one of the concerns um Commissioner Aaron Kotch that you raised, or unless required by state law, I would say absent an amendment after first reading, comma.

Um sorry, I'm just thinking through on the fly, absent an amendment after first reading, or um unless required by state law or specifically permitted by the city commission, no public input.

And so just adding the or specifically permitted by the city commission is is while while redundant, I don't think does any harm to the integrity of the rules.

My only advice to you, of course, as a commission is be mindful of the consistency of those kinds of concerns for equal protection reasons.

Um but otherwise I would say uh we can have that language uh added.

So after the or uh or after the unless writing specifically um permitted by the city commission or required by state law, and it would continue as it otherwise reads.

Okay, Ms.

Griggs has a comment.

Um I don't have a state either way, I just want to make sure it's clear because from our standpoint, and I look at it from Lori's standpoint in the back, she doesn't know.

If somebody comes to say, hey, I'm gonna speak on this as a second reading, she doesn't know if the commission is going to say yes or no.

So we don't we have to be able to tell these people something.

So I don't I that's not only cassarias.

She says, Oh, we I don't know.

Are we going to have public comment on this item or not?

I don't know.

And then let's say they we you all say yes, you're going to, and they didn't sign up.

So now we've got 50 million people rushing back to try to do that.

I want to talk, I want to talk.

It can be confusing if we have a hot topic item.

Commissioner Albert?

Yeah, my suggestion is that we only allow for it, you know, that we allow for it if there has been a change between first and second reading.

Maybe that way, and then if there has not been a change, then it's not allowed.

So then it'll be clear to everybody whether comments will be taken or not.

I would I would appreciate that, but it's up to the commission how you want to do it.

I agree with that.

Yes.

Only if there have been changes since first reading.

Right.

Mr.

Mora, does that require an amendment?

No, the language as it presently reads with the strike through and underline says uh absent an amendment after first reading, or unless required by state law, no public input shall be permitted on the second reading of ordinances or quasi-judicial matters not subject to a public hearing.

So that is um that would be how that sentence reads without any further action.

Um that said, just for keeping track of the proceedings, madam mayor, uh the I if you're inclined to proceed with the resolution today, there would still need to be a motion on the other uh suggested amendment concerning nothing in the rules preventing a single speaker representing a group.

Okay.

Um anybody other questions?

Are anybody ready to make a motion?

I can make a motion.

Um move approval uh uh to but uh I'm sorry, move approval um to adopt resolution 26R-3393 with exhibit a amended rules of procedure for the city commission meetings, also including an amendment to 2D with the language suggested by the attorney.

I'll second.

Okay.

Moved by Commissioner A.

Hearn Kodch, seconded by the Vice Mayor, and question for the clerk and Mr.

Mora.

Is that clear?

I think I'm clear on Mr.

Moore.

Is that clear?

It is clear to me, and I will uh work to provide language for purposes of uh finalizing the resolution as it'll be enacted and circulated, and otherwise, if there are in fact scribner's errors that that require um addressing those can be otherwise addressed as detailed by the resolution itself.

Okay.

Thank you very much.

Is there any discussion?

I guess we're voting.

So this will be a roll call vote as well.

Adrenal Kalpert, yes, Betty.

Yes.

All right, yes.

Yes, yes.

And passes unanimously.

Thank you, Commissioners.

Thank you, Mr.

Mora.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And it is 1130, and can we get through unfinished business in the half hour?

Yes.

Yes.

I hope.

I would hope so.

Okay.

Okay.

Thank you very much.

So we are moving on to item 9.1.

Uh let me turn my page here.

And this um this is a motion to authorize us to execute a lease agreement between the City of Sarasota and the Humane Society of Sarasota County, and district manager, business district manager Ryan and executive director of the Humane Society borrows will make a presentation.

Thank you.

There we go.

It's still morning.

Good morning, Julie Ryan.

Um putting on the economic development and real estate hat now.

Um so here we are to present a proposal for a lease agreement with the Humane Society of Sarasota County.

Um this item I'm gonna review some of the history as it has been before the commission uh several times before.

Um stop, this uh proposal came to the commission back in August of 20 uh 24 when uh we received an unsolicited offer to um purchase some property owned by the city at 2385 15th Street.

Um it was at that meeting, City Commission considered that and requested staff to work with the Humane Society to develop a purchase and sale agreement that came back before the City Commission in March of 2025.

An appraisal was done on the property for its land value at about 130,000.

During those uh discussions, um this particular um parcel did have some um terms that we did need to re-look at, which included the stormwater protection, perhaps some deed and easements, and were instructed to come back at a later time.

Since that time we have completed some boundary surveys, not only of the entire property um, but of different portions of the property, one including the stormwater and one the usable space.

Um we also have done um not only a fail market value for the land um but also for a land use agreement.

Um we've had many, many discussions um with the city attorney and with the proposed tenant.

And um we've come to the conclusion the best option to move forward with this is to enter into a lease agreement.

Um so that is what we're here to discuss today.

There will be um some considerations that are um uh decisions for the commission to make regarding this lease agreement.

Just a review of the property.

Um again, the property is at 2385 15th Street.

It happens to be adjacent to the existing Humane Society's um property that they own.

The lot itself is about 69,000 square feet.

The proposed lease agreement is for about 22,000 square feet of that property.

It's the one highlighted in in yellow to the north.

Um the other remaining portion is unusable portion, which is primarily used as um stormwater retention.

So as far as the lease considerations for the commission to decide, um, the first would be the um how long you would like this lease agreement to be.

And that would be something that we could monitor and look at, and or the tenant is desiring a longer lease, but that is a policy decision for the commission.

The second would be the consideration of the lease payment.

We do have a fair market value for the land.

It would equate to about $550 a month or an annual payment of about $650.

The commission could choose that.

Commission could choose a rate of their choosing, knowing the market value.

Or we do have what has been commonly used before in the past, a public benefit rate of $100 a year, recognizing the use unique benefit.

The property, and I will have Connie can go over in further detail, but they would be looking to utilize the space for putting in a track, uh dog walking track along with some benches, some waste station.

It would also be fenced.

Thank you.

Good morning.

Good morning.

Thank you for your time.

So my name's Connie Boros.

I'm the executive director of the Humane Society, and I really appreciate your time.

Can you hear me?

Thank you.

So I'll give you just a little bit of additional information.

So we have been providing services in Sarasota since 1952.

So next year is our 75th anniversary, and we were the first nonprofit animal welfare organization in Sarasota.

So we're very grateful for the partnership with this community that we've had for quite some time.

Today, we are more than just a shelter, we're a safe haven for animals, hope for this community, and we also provide joy through adoptions.

The one other service that we have is providing the healing power of animals through our pet therapy program, which takes uh a human and and dog team into schools, hospitals, and senior facilities.

So we're doing important life-saving work.

When we began, we were serving we have the capacity for 48 dogs and six cats.

We now can serve over 200 animals on site.

So through plan full uh expansion and renovation over the years, we've really expanded our capacity.

Right now, we sit on 2.7 acres.

We're on 15th in line.

Uh we have about a 37,000 square foot facility.

So this extra piece would equate to about an extra half an acre of walking paths, which is really one of our biggest limitations of space.

So by expanding the dog walking area, we're going to reduce the stress and improve the behavioral health of the animals in our care and enhance the overall quality of life.

I will also say it's an added benefit for our staff and our hundreds of volunteers that are with us every single week, making sure the dogs get out.

Our plan calls for every dog to get walked a minimum of two times a day.

And in addition to that, we have an every dog every day participating in a playgroup so long as they socially are able to do that.

So we have a lot of good stuff going on.

So we are respectfully requesting a 15-year term, and of course, that favorable $100 a year rate, so that we can make sure all of the fundraising that we do is really going towards the medical and care that the animals need.

This land also requires some pretty significant remediation.

Currently it's a landlocked parcel, so this is not something that could be used independently per se, and some of the neighboring businesses have taken to using it for car storage and other things that are going to need to be removed.

And then also some trees and leveling the land to make sure people are safe and walking.

Plus, we would be paying for the fencing.

So that is why we're requesting the longer term leases, knowing that we're going to have to make an initial investment into the property.

But it is much more about land, about much more than just land, it's really about this impact.

So from a numbers perspective, in 25, we saved over 3,600 animals.

Our goal this year is 4,400.

So again, we're increasing our capacity and impact.

The other thing I'll mention is that we are a no-kill shelter, meaning that we do not euthanize any animal adoptable animal to make space for another.

So our save rate over the last year was over 97.5%, which is very favorable.

On average, it costs us about $1,490 to save a life.

So when you factor in the facility infrastructure, and of course the important daily medical care.

So things just to keep in mind.

So we are completely independent nonprofit.

So this partnership with the city would be incredibly appreciated.

Again, we're just deeply grateful to this Sarasota community and its leadership for supporting us for the past 74 years.

And we look forward to continuing that partnership for many years to come.

So thank you for your time and consideration.

Thank you.

Commissioners, questions?

Vice Mayor.

Thank you.

On page 17 of 20 of the lease.

Item 33.

Says the tenants to notify the city manager of nonprofit status annually.

Typically, how is that done?

In writing.

Correct.

Yes, we we look up on the nonprofit with the state, and we can verify it that way.

And we usually typically always ask for an annual report that confirms their nonprofit stat status every year.

It's tracked.

We have record of that every year.

Yes.

Okay.

And Ms.

Boros, when you talk about trees, you mean adding trees, not removing trees?

There are down trees.

So it's more removing debris, not looking, we would not be looking to remove healthy well trees that are standing upright.

And might you consider adding some trees for shade purposes?

It would certainly be a consideration.

Because of the way the land is currently being used, I've not had access to walk all of it right now, so it really needs an assessment, but we are all about the shade.

So for the well-being of the animals and the people.

So yes.

So animals and the people.

Right.

And you talked about leveling land.

Is there a downslope or just uneven terrain?

It's currently very overgrown.

And so we're going to make some assumptions that what's under there is going to need to be made a little safer.

Thank you.

And this would be the first lease.

Correct.

Okay.

Those are my questions.

Okay.

Thank you.

Commissioner Ahern Koch.

Thank you.

Thank you for your presentation.

Let me ask, I just wanted clarity because it's mentioned differently in the lease agreement.

You are a nonprofit, not a not for profit.

So those two terms are most often used interchangeably.

But they're not the same thing.

They're different, there's a difference between a not for profit and a nonprofit.

And that has to do with IRS status.

It has to do with accepting donations that are tax exempt.

So I just want I'm I think we should be clear on whether you're a nonprofit or a not for profit.

Do you do really want to ask more like are you a 501c3?

We we are a state recognized 501c3 organization.

Okay.

Okay.

In good standing.

Okay.

But I think we should get clarity on whether you're a not for-profit or a nonprofit.

I believe you are a nonprofit.

But I did want to make sure that we were clear on that.

This dog walking area, will that be open to the public?

No.

Okay.

I believe it's only accessible through would only be accessible through the back of their personal property as it is landlocked.

Okay.

And it would create greater liability.

Okay.

That is the reason why we would not be able to have it just be open to the public, is because we have very specific uh operating procedures for the safety of the volunteer staff and the animals.

Okay.

And when you said it's a no-kill shelter.

Um for adoptable animals.

What happens to the animals that are not adoptable?

So we have a team of people that meets on a weekly basis to review all of the animals that have either been with us longer or might have some additional challenges.

The additional challenges most often that we would be talking about is behavioral or medical.

And so we have a very specific enrichment plan that we put in place.

We put in behavioral medications to assist with anxiety and things like that, as well as what we call enrichment activities.

And we spend quite a bit of time working with those animals trying to prepare them to be successful in a home.

However, our veterinary team uh part of the oath that they take, and we believe is first priority is safety for the community.

And there are very rare exceptions where we will make those decisions as a team after a long period of intervention.

Does that answer your question?

Kind of vaguely.

So there are occasions where a decision has to be made for euthanasia for the safety of the community.

Okay, and you said that's about three percent of the time.

Less than three percent.

Less than three percent.

That three per that 2.5 that I referenced also includes maybe kittens that come in very small and are not able to sustain life is in that percentage.

So this is not all just those sorts of really difficult decisions.

Okay.

And then I wanted to ask you a question about the it's page 2D.

Uh to be constructed or erected.

Building structure, buildings, structures, walls, fences, sidewalks.

You don't intend on doing any buildings or structures.

Should we strike that language?

This the the um paragraph that you're referencing is common language that's used universal on all leases so that the definition is clear.

It's just part of the normal template language in all leases so that it's covered when you get to the other sections.

So that's why it is it's listed the way it is.

Okay.

But we're really just talking about fences, not building structures or walls, right?

Correct.

For our purposes, yes.

It also says later in the lease, you know, dependent on the dollar amount of the investment, those would have to come before city commission.

So let's say $50,000, right?

They did decide they wanted to put a structure, that would be a decision that this board would have to make.

If it's $50,000 or more.

Correct.

Or more than less than more than more than.

Yeah.

Um I think those are all of my questions of your requesting a 15-year lease, staff is recommending a five-year lease.

Does staff have a recommendation about the amount to be the cost of the lease amount, whether it's uh $500 a month or the $100 a year, $550 a month?

Yeah.

$550 a month.

$550 a month or somewhere in between or $100.

Those are strictly policy decisions for for the commission.

We did provide, like I said, the um fair market value, um, and that is where we you know landed on the $550.

Um, I think the total annual um appraisal came was $65 or $66,000 a year.

That's how we got the annual, but it is um a commission policy decision.

Okay, so I guess the cost, I'm I'm trying to figure out the amount over a 15-year period, I believe it's $81,000.

The city would forego if it was for $100 a year for 15 years.

Um and it's $24,000 if it were five years.

Right?

Correct.

If you if you do it in terms in dollars, so that we understand what that number is.

Okay.

Is it finished?

I am finished with questions.

Commissioner Batti.

Oh no, no, uh, thank you.

Thank you very much.

And I really appreciate the work that you all do.

Um I'm not sure if that question was answered as to uh why staff is recommended five five years instead of 15.

Typically um the with the with new leases, um, we don't typically have an extended period of time just for the sole fact that it is the first time, you know, um entering into an agreement.

Um it does have a another you know, an additional five-year renewal, you know, so the thought process is to you know see how the tenants and in that act, however, it is solely a policy decision as far as time.

Okay.

Yeah.

I have no problem with fitting at least for the Humane Society and the $100 nonprofit fee or whatever.

So thank you.

But thank you.

Okay.

Commissioner Alpert, anything?

Okay.

Um actually I my first question was sort of answered already, but I'm gonna ask it anyway.

Um was there any discussion beyond the $100 a year request from the Humane Society?

Did you consider asking or potentially agreeing to another figure higher than $100 a year, but less than the fair market value of $550 a month.

Opposed to me, correct?

Yes.

So uh for us, really the base level 100 a year is incredibly favorable.

So in 2021, we went through an expansion, which drastically increased the number of animals that we're able to care for.

But along with that, it also significantly increased our staffing required to care for those animals.

And so we're very much in a position right now of partnering with the community, building our donor base, which has been incredible for all these years.

And so we would not look favorably upon taking on a higher level at this point in time.

Okay.

Because quite frankly, we have been trying to move away from the $100 a year.

I mean, if you stop and think about it, maybe you can get a happy meal for your kid once a month for $100 the year.

So I mean, this is not the era that we're in.

And I was at some point going to suggest to the commission that we come up with a new policy, maybe it would be 10% of the fair market value for agencies like yourself that are contributing to the benefit of our city, but $100 a year really is obsolete.

And I would think that if we went to the higher amount, since you are an organization that has been in our community, as you said for almost a hundred years, that okay, we don't we could trust you for more than a five-year lease that maybe the 10 or the 15 might make sense, but not at 100 a year.

I mean, that's unconscionable.

Um I'm hoping that you would consider a higher amount than a hundred dollars a year.

We would love for you to be able to lease that and get the benefit of the space, but I can't see us going for $100 a year.

And then for Ms.

Ryan, um I don't know that the rest of us know the difference between not-for-profit and nonprofit, and I think the crucial thing for us might be $501.

So maybe that could be something that would be specified that this is applied to 501c3 organizations.

But yeah.

I I can answer that quick.

A nonprofit is a 501c3, they're able to take tax deductions of not-for-profit is more like a chamber.

They're usually a 501c6 or a 501c7, um, which doesn't typically take donations.

So this if they're a 51c3, it would be a non-for-profit.

So nonprofit.

So that's why I'm saying maybe you go we completely clarify that language.

No, sure.

So use the right word plus in parentheses 501c3.

Um, Commissioner Batti.

Uh yes, uh thank you, Mayor.

You know, and you know, to that point, you know, trust me, being on this commission, I would I uh advocated for moving away from those types of leases, you know, a dollar a year or whatever.

Um so on.

But when it comes to the case of the uh Humane Society, in particular, I mean this property in particular.

This nothing there.

Nobody uses it.

I mean, you know, this if we're talking about like say the orchestra where they whatever that lease is over there on valuable property, I can understand.

But this property we're not doing anything with that.

We have no intention on doing it.

Nobody even thought about that property until they brought it to our attention.

Nobody even thinks about it or whatever.

Um so I have no issue with you know what the um and if we want to go for a higher amount than $100, I'll say $101.

So I came in here today thinking probably five years was a good time frame.

And $100 was a good amount.

I'm now thinking that maybe we could increase the number of years to ten, but also increase the amount to five hundred dollars a year rather than one hundred dollars a year.

Commissioner That wasn't a motion though.

Okay, Commissioner Albert, we haven't gotten to that, obviously.

Commissioner Alfred.

Um I'm I'm in agreement with Commissioner Batty that I mean this is a property that is not usable for any other purpose.

You know, like it's landlocked, it's not you know, nobody else is gonna really be able to use it.

So I don't have a problem with keeping it at $100 a year for you know the five years or 10 years or even 15 years, I'm okay with moving that up.

I mean if we want a little more than that, you know, then make it, you know, 250 a year or 200 a year or something for a property that's not going to be used for any other purpose anyway.

Well, I'm I'm listening to us do an appraisal of the property as being worthless and you know contradicting what the professional appraiser came up with, which is also why I would have said, you know, start with a policy that's say ten percent of the appraisal, which would be fifty-five dollars a month, which would be six hundred and sixty dollars a year.

Um but uh I mean I I'm I I don't object to that.

I think that is a reasonable uh way to look at it.

But we you know we don't have that policy yet.

So we need to so um Commissioner Ahern Koch.

Well, as long as we're speaking to our ideas and not to questions.

Um I had the idea to start off conservative and go with a smaller lease time and a higher rate and work towards a longer lease, like if the first five years everything is good, it's uh it's a nice track and they pay whatever the the highest amount is that it works its way back to rewarding them for that to say the the the rate goes down over time.

Um that was one of the thoughts that I had for for something like this.

May I comment?

Yeah, please.

So um unfortunately we can't take a quick road trip over this piece of property, but it is currently landlocked, it is an absolute eyesore.

Um and I appreciate the fact that the appraisal was done.

Um I also really appreciate the comments of your your job is to advocate on behalf of the city, and I hear that.

Um I would just point out again that we do not seek city or county dollars.

In fact, we do take animals and place them from Sarasota County Animal Services that does receive that funding.

Um so I really do see it as a win-win for us to clean up this piece of property, take responsibility for it, um, and serve the community.

So open to your conversation, but that this is a win-win in my from my perspective.

Yeah.

Um you're still on the board.

Sorry.

Okay.

Uh just I don't control that thing.

I know, I know.

Yeah, yeah.

And I agree with uh is it Miss Connie, Connie Boros.

Yes, I apologize.

Um because like I said, you know, to the commissioner's point, there's nothing that can be done with this property.

I mean, they're making improvements to it or have you buy it out in the sidewalk in the walkway and in a pet-friendly, you know, animal-friendly, you know, environment, you know, like Sarasota.

I would think that we would do everything in in our power, you know, to try and see that uh that you know they make use of a land that's not even useful, and we're not, you know, particularly like to us, you know, we're not doing anything with it.

It's not so let's you know, do everything we can to benefit the humane society and what or whatever.

We can't sit here talking about like, you know, we love this and we love that, and then we're you know making it a bit arduous for for these people to uh do what it is they want to do for the benefit of our community and uh the health and well-being of our animals and and and so on, you know.

So I think it's a complete benefit, you know, to to in a win-win situation at as Ms.

Boris is just uh and I believe there's language in the lease that speaks to if for some reason we were not holding up to our end of the bargain, um the city has an exit option with a 90-day notification or something like that, just so you know.

Anybody else?

All right, so we need a motion, I guess, to um discuss.

Start, yeah.

So thank you very much for your presentation.

Thank you.

All right.

Um I'm gonna move approval of the lease for the uh humane society at the rate of 100 per year for a five-year lease with two um five-year extensions.

Second.

Okay.

Motion by Commissioner Alpert, seconded by Commissioner Batti for to approve the lease for $100 a year for five-year term with options to read for two five-year renewals.

Yeah.

Okay.

Yes.

Speak to the motion.

Um it just, you know, if there's a concern about what's going to happen there or what we're doing, that allows us then in five years to you know take a look at at the lease if necessary and and and renegotiate it.

Okay.

Commissioner Batch.

Five years.

Oh, sorry.

Commissioner Batte.

It's a humane society, is all I got to say.

Commissioner Ahern Koch.

Um I I think that that um sounds like a reasonable option.

You know, five years is $24,000.

It's you know the city is in a position to be giving money away, but I understand and I agree that this is a valid municipal purpose because these some of the animals are all of the animals are taken off streets, they're from bad situations, and they could otherwise be um either put in a in a different situation or be uh helped and uh given loving homes.

Um so I do see the connection for the valid municipal purpose.

Um if we do change our mind, then we have five years.

I'd like the shorter lease idea until we actually do develop um a policy, which we don't have in place, and I understand the mayor wants to get somewhere with that, and I agree with that too.

Um the hundred dollars a year or a dollar a year leases are are something that we've talked about revising, but absent that at this point in time.

Um I just want to speak to the motion.

Okay, uh, I would like to speak to it too.

Uh I just could reiterate what Commissioner Betty said.

It is the humane society.

I think the shorter term for a first lease is good with the two extensions.

That's also good.

And the 100 dollars is just fine uh for use of this landlocked property.

Okay.

I actually am going as I'm opposing this.

Um the main reason is at this point, expectations are among the nonprofits, not is it's gonna be a hundred dollar a year lease, the city's always going to give us a hundred dollar a year lease.

We actually went made the effort to get uh an appraisal.

I would even request amending the motion um to make it two percent of the appraised value, which would be $132 a year, but at least relate it to something the appraised value rather than say, oh yeah, anybody just a hundred dollars a year, no matter how valuable the property is, we're gonna only charge you a hundred dollars a year.

Um I understand your reasoning, but if then we at the you know, because this has been our policy.

So I think that the better way to do it is then subsequently figure out what our policy is, because if we say now two percent, ten percent, whatever it is, that suddenly becomes our policy when we haven't thought through that.

So in addition to this motion, are you going to recommend to the city manager that we add to the agenda a display of the establishing policy?

Yeah, I think that would make sense.

See if we want to change our policy.

So it would be a second motion.

Yes, a great motion.

Okay.

So uh so no more discussion on this one.

Okay.

Okay, and we should vote.

Whoops.

Okay, motion passes four to one.

Okay.

And then I will make a a second motion that, or do we really need a motion to put it on the agenda?

Okay, I'll make a second motion to put it on the agenda for discussion of a policy on um lease amounts for nonprofits in the city.

Second.

Okay, motion by Commissioner Alpert, seconded by Commissioner Batti.

Is there any discussion?

No.

Okay.

No, I need to go ahead and get it.

Thank you.

And that passes unanimously.

Thank you very much.

Uh and it happens to be 1202.

Perfect time for lunch break.

Yeah.

Uh shall we say 115?

Sounds good.

Okay, so we are recessed until one fifteen.

Good afternoon.

Welcome back.

We are back in session, the May Fourth Commission meeting.

And we are at legislative public hearing uh ten dash one, and I will call upon the city auditor and clerk to administer the oath.

Okay.

Crowd now.

Um anybody who plans to speak at any public hearing today, whether it's the legislative or the quasi.

You plan on speaking, please stand and take the oath.

Anyone who plans on speaking today at any public hearing, please stand and take a note.

Who is able to stand?

Thank you, sir.

No, I'm just I you're right.

Anybody, all right.

All right.

Do you swear or affirm that the evidence or factual representation which you're about to get or present to this commission during any public hearing held this fourth day of May twenty twenty-six are truthful.

So the next item is a public hearing on proposed ordinance number twenty-six-five five nine zero.

I'm sorry, amending the code of the city of Sarasota, chapter thirty-three.

Traffic and Motor Vehicles, Article 4, stopping, standing, or parking to increase the number of hours during which paid parking is in fact for on-street parking spaces, for surface parking lots, and for city parking garages, all as more fully set forth herein, and to further increase fines for violation of city parking regulations as more fully set forth herein, providing for the severability of the parts hereof, repealing ordinances in conflict, providing for reading by title only, and providing for an effective date.

Okay.

Thank you.

And I will call upon General Manager of Parking Harvey and City Attorney Pulse Act to make a presentation.

And Mayor, if I may, I did ask Mr.

Harvey to print the presentation.

There is no changes to it, but in Granicus, it wasn't showing up correctly with all the pages.

So he did print copies, so everybody can reference the printed copy.

Thank you.

Hi, good afternoon.

My name is Broxen Harvey.

I'm the general manager of parking for the City of Sarasota.

Thank you.

So today I will be going over the changes to proposed ordinance number 26-5590.

It is an ordinance to extend paid parking hours and to further increase parking fines for violations.

So on March 23rd, I came before Commission and I actually gave a presentation on the rate analysis that would actually be able to, the changes would be able to actually put the parking division back into the black and also to stay in the black.

Commission actually approved two of those recommendations.

And those two recommendations were to increase the citation fines and also to extend the paid parking hours.

The other option that was approved, the recommendation, sorry, that was approved was the increase of hours and keeping the existing rates.

Currently, right now, our hours of operation of that which we charge for parking is going to be from 8.8, sorry, 10 a.m.

until 8 p.m.

currently.

And this recommendation was to increase the hours from 8 a.m.

until 12 a.m.

Um, which would be an increase to 16 hours, and also that would be for on street and also to increase the hours of operation 24 hours inside of the public lots and the garages.

On this chart, it actually shows the revenues where we currently are, projected to be in our current year of 2026.

We're expected to bring in $6.2 million with expenses of $6.5, we will be at a negative loss of $270,000.

However, in 2027, with the increased transit fees of $2.7 and $280,000 for the citation fees, we then move up to $8.

I'm sorry, $9.477 million with expenses of $8.8 million, and that has a net operating income of $674,000, $797.

And if you look as we go throughout the rest of the years to fiscal year 31, we actually will continue to be in the black and actually not lose revenues.

And just to confirm that these expenditures do they do cover um capital expenses such as the replacement of elevators, the replacement of meters on the street, and also a contingency as well for the parking department and parking division.

So the proposed changes to the ordinance ordinances read as follows.

First, for section 33-1, there's a change to the definition of holidays.

Holidays right now would mean we actually struck through on Sundays.

That is 10 holidays.

What is omitted here is going to be the day after Thanksgiving and the day before or the day after Christmas.

So the actual holidays will still remain free, but the either the day before or the day after Thanksgiving or Christmas will not be.

This is basically if a person is parked on a time street, you cannot just move to another parking space.

You have to move to a whole nother city block.

And that is actually our current um process right now.

We just had a small change to the to the verbiage.

So Section 33-11.

Um this is basically remains unchanged, but I left it in here so that this does dictate and show that a fine can be imposed for racing or obstructing any chalk marks on a vehicle.

That fine will be 250 dollars, which it is as now.

So continued Section 33118.

Um these are again are the changes to the hours, um, the hours in which you can park on the street, um, standing or parking upon such streets or lots between the hours of 8 a.m.

and 12 a.m.

midnight, seven days a week.

Um we removed Sundays, and we kept holidays as defined in section 33-1 of this chapter.

So moving to the fine schedule, this is the second um part of this ordinance in which the the um the fees for the citations has been increased.

So if we can see that overtime will go from 25 to 30, overtime parking in excess of one hour, 25 to 30, overtime parking in excess of two hours, 30, parking in restricted areas from 35 to 50, that is considered a safety um violation, um double parking um is gonna go from 30 to 35 parking in the wrong direction will be fifty dollars.

Illegal parking in the alley 40, illegal parking and designated fire emergency lane would go from 35 to 50.

Um also any other offense regulated or controlled by this chapter, the provisions of this code or ordinances of the city in regard to parking of motor vehicles on the street of the city and on the parking lots within the city will go from 35 to 50 dollars.

Um again, um number 10 of this section 33 of 167.

We are looking at habitual um parking violators.

These are individuals that receive three or more parking tickets uh for parking violations described in this article within a 60-day period uh for each citation above three issued to the same violator within a 60-day period.

Um that habitual violator fee will now go from $35 to $40.

Delinquent fees, so these are fines that are not paid within 14 days of the date of the time noted of the citation shall be assessed and initial is going from $15 to $20.

Um, then two delinquent fees of $15 is now going to $20.

Each shall be assessed for every additional 30 days.

Such parking fines and delinquencies, delinquent fees remains unpaid, a maximum of it's going from 45 to $60.

Illegal parking and spaces provided by government or non-government governmental entities for disabled persons, whether marked by the internationally accepted wheelchair symbol, which was um changed there to caption parking for disabled permit only or by both such symbol and cap and caption that will remain to be 250 dollars.

Um that is the end of my presentation.

Now open up for any questions or comments.

Well, before we do that, we do have uh three people who have requested to speak.

And also Mayor one on one on three.

Oh, and and and one online.

So we'll take care of the three that are here and then go online.

Uh Martin Hyde, David Lowe, and Rita Pogani.

And mayor, by the way, I was just told the the one Zoom is not there anymore.

So if they show up, yeah.

Okay.

So thank you.

Martin Hyde.

Indeed.

So uh obviously my name is Martin Hyde.

I I still don't live in the city.

Um it seems like there's uh an appetite to uh increase taxes today for the uh mooting earlier of a uh parks district.

Um the impact though of increasing parking hours to essentially 24-7 is impossible to calculate.

So this is risking the livelihoods of local businesses.

We know people will pay during peakows, and we know that they're used to it.

What we don't know is if they'll pay on Sundays or later evenings at the same rate.

Downtown evenings are about entertainment, not retail.

Nobody coming down here to buy a pack of batteries at uh nine o'clock on a Saturday night.

Not only does it put downtown at a disadvantage to other areas which are free, but the specter of fines create a permanent deterrent, and uh they shouldn't be ignored either.

Excuse me.

There's a good example here of why staff shouldn't get out of their lanes as they keep their incomes regardless of impacts to business.

Increasing the number of hours increases the overhead by 2.2 million dollars, which is 80% of the increased revenue.

Quite apart from the uh regressive nature uh of parking costs and the guesswork which has gone into projecting revenue, we do know the costs will increase because they said so, and because you'll need more staff to manage more hours.

If the guesstimates on income are wrong, you could end up actually worse off.

If you must increase something, must increase your income, increasing the meter rate by 25 to 30 percent, keeping the same hours would increase revenue by over a million dollars, and here's the important bit without increasing your cost at all.

That'd be much more certain and keeps the cost risk of adding staff to zero.

I get empire building, which is exactly what this is.

This parking department already has 38 staff.

This would take it north of 50, yeah.

Breathe in.

Fifty people to run a parking in a city that's less than 20 square miles, of which a third is underwater.

Fifty people.

It defies the basics of math and the supposed purpose of keeping expenses under income.

Unless you're in a gambling mood with the future of local businesses, I'd strongly urge you to review the math and the logic before you move forward, lest the damage and the obligation to staff overhead are irreparable.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Mr.

Lowe.

Yes, David Lowe speaking as a resident today, and um let me embroider on some things that Martin talked about, and maybe from a slightly different angle.

My question is, is anybody looking at all of this in a holistic way?

We're removing flower baskets.

We the county has eliminated two bus routes that's to some degree service downtown.

There is a hesitancy, and I don't know why, to pass the sound ordinance, and even on an interim basis that gives the police more to work with on engine revving, right?

And we know that last year, anecdotally, and I think it's probably more than that, the merchants had a rough summer season.

I don't know what to predict this year, but you know, business may not be getting any better.

I don't know about tourism and all that kind of stuff.

Our economic development manager position, I believe, is now open, and I don't know who's charged at the city for it, shall we say the big picture of economic sustainability and vitality.

We talk about special events and that kind of vitality.

I'm talking more broadly.

And the other thing is curating of retail.

I know we talked about that, and I trying to pursue that, but you know, curating retail so we have more destinations, more amenities that make downtown interesting.

But to Martin's point, this idea of tinkering with this, and my hat's off to Broxton for trying to you know be tequila and please everybody, right?

You know, it is not gonna happen.

But I would urge us not to treat all of this too casually and not look at that bigger picture, and then sit around here nine months from now and say, what the heck were we thinking?

We eliminated this, we eliminated this, it gets in the press, and before that, and we're not showing respect to our small business owners.

So I don't know exactly all the answers.

I do know philosophically I agree that parking should be largely self-liquidating, right?

You know, that it shouldn't be a general assessment for everybody.

So I start with that kind of premise.

I'll sign on to that.

Some people don't, right?

But it's how do we get there and how do we phase these kinds of things in?

The final comment, I would hope, Mr.

Harvey, we have some kind of prenup on the elevators, right?

I believe in looking at the capital plan, one of the elevators isn't planned to be, or elevators aren't planned to be replaced for two years, right?

And these things are out all you know very, very often.

Again, I don't know where you, you know, the tooth ferry comes with the money, but you know, if if we're going to keep the elevators, uh, are they repairable and what time frame, right?

Because again, we're looking at removing irritants, removing reasons for people not to come downtown, parking, elevators, you know, flower baskets, you know, you know, you name it.

Uh, you know, drip drip drip.

Before you know it, we've made some really bad decisions.

One specific Sunday.

And I'm this has nothing to do with religion, but you know, is there an opportunity to give a break on a on a slow day for the restaurants or something to give a reprieve, you know, to on that?

And I again I we we need to look at this in totality, but to me, is there some logic on in the hours to Mr.

Hyde's point where you're making some outstanding point.

And the final point is part of our problem here that Broxton has talked about before is we're behind.

We're not charging enough, and we're in the hole, and when we increase, you know, we're we're we're not increasing, we're at half of what other municipalities are.

So how do we dig ourselves out of maybe a bad situation?

It may not be enough.

I'm I I hate to say this, but you know, um it's a it's a complex project, and I would hope that the Commission is treating it as such, and again, somebody is responsible for the big picture here.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And um Rita Pagani.

What is it?

Pogony.

Pogan?

Pogney.

Thank you.

All right.

My name is Rita Pogany, and Sarasota has been my home for 20 years.

Could you speak into the mic?

I'm sorry, thank you, Mm.

Sarasota has been my home for 20 years.

And I want to begin by addressing my concern with the proposed increases in parking rates and the extension of paid parking hours.

This change alone too is enough to discourage people from coming downtown, especially in the evening when restaurant, bars, and nightlife depend on steady traffic.

Charging more and for longer hours sends the wrong message.

It makes downtown less inviting and less accessible at the very time you are trying to attract people.

I'd also like to touch on a somewhat related issue.

I do appreciate the intent behind the beautification efforts, improving the look in Phillip Main Street is a positive step in creating a more attractive environment is something we would all support.

However, widening widening the streets at the expense of removing parking spaces is not the right approach.

Convenient street-level parking is critical to the success of any towntown area and the retail stores here.

People want to be able to pull up near a storefront or a restaurant, expecting them to park several blocks away in a garage is simply not realistic for many visitors.

Taking together these proposals, higher parking costs, extended paid hours, and fewer parking spaces do not support revitalization.

They create barriers.

And spending taxpayer money on changes that make it harder for people to visit downtown, risk doing real harm to our local businesses and the long-term vitality of Main Street.

If the goal is truly to bring more people downtown, the focus should be on enhancing accessibility, supporting businesses, and making it easier, not more difficult for people to come stay and spend time here.

I strongly urge you to reconsider this plan.

Thank you very much.

Okay.

So we commissioner questions, and I see the vice mayor is up first.

I am thank you.

Well, this is a complex problem.

However, an enterprise fund is supposed to pay for itself.

If it doesn't, where do we get the money?

Yeah, that that is correct.

We are supposed to be able to pay for ourselves, so we have to look at alternatives like what I brought forth to the Commission.

Right.

And if the enterprise fund does not generate enough money to be self-sufficient, where do we get money to cover things like elevators?

Sure.

The increase of fees or the extension of hours?

Or the or the general fund.

Oh, oh, yeah.

Well, we don't want that, but yes, that's correct.

We don't want that.

Okay.

So I have a question about fines and fines in relation to wrong direction.

Parking.

Okay.

What does that mean, wrong direction?

So a parsons maybe going down a one-way street and they are parking in the wrong direction, or they actually crossed over into another lane and they are parking just basically what it says going in the wrong direction.

Does it also refer to back end parking when you are supposed to front end and front-end parking when you are supposed to back in?

Yes, because we have no back end signage throughout the um throughout the city as well, correct?

Right.

That seems to me to be the reason I get a lot of complaints from people I know.

Sure.

Nobody in this room, I'm sure.

Do we have adequate signage?

We do.

To inform people that they're supposed to back in or front end when they park?

We do, yes.

So our um what we try to do is actually have enough signage so that it is visible and that it is clear.

And also whenever we write a citation, we want to make sure that we are able to get the vehicle and the sign so that a person knows exactly what the violation was.

So I would I would say yes, we do have adequate signs because we actually try to get a picture of the sign in every frame.

Okay, thank you.

Um I had quite a few additional questions, but they were all answered because of your PowerPoint that you printed for us.

Okay, all right.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, Commissioner Alpert.

Um I think just one question.

Um I think um Mr.

Hyde brought this up, and so it's a shame he's not in the room because he'll be surprised that I agree with him.

So um speaking from the audience.

My my question is, um wouldn't we, you know, as Mr.

Hyde said, wouldn't we be better off to keep the same hours and increase the fees so that we don't have to hire extra staff demand the evening?

Sure.

So I know that was your original recommendation.

Sure.

So I I never requested for additional staff.

So the staff that we have right now will be the same staff that will enforce the the late hours.

So I'm not sure where that that information came from, but I never requested new staff.

Um if anything, um I think I came forth and I said no additional staff will be needed for any of my changes.

So how will you do that without getting additional staff?

Because that's a lot a lot more enforcement time.

How would they do that under the So for the garages, the garages actually have photo enforcement already?

We have LPR cameras that a commission voted um to go gateless uh maybe about two years ago.

So now we have cameras inside of garage.

So the garages can take care of themselves, right?

When a person comes in, the same type of technology, that's when you are on the SunPass, when you go and you're riding, it takes a picture of the license plate and then it sends you an invoice uh in the mail.

Except these would be only for citations.

This will only be for people that did not pay for parking.

Um they would receive a invoice in the mail.

So that would eliminate the staff from having to go into the garages, and we're already extending, we are already at 8 o'clock.

So we just need one additional staff member to be able to go into midnight, and then Sundays, we are already which Commission voted maybe about a year and a half ago as well to enforce on Sundays uh for safety only.

So we've been doing that for the last past year and a half or two years.

So now we already have a person that is working on Sunday.

We will just need one or one and a half more individuals, which we have.

Um so instead of having we're just it's just a scheduling item.

Just have to make sure that we have the accurate scheduling for the um seven and a half individuals that we have on parking enforcement.

All right.

So um that's good to know.

So in your opinion, which way is better to go to increase the fees for shorter hours or extend the hours?

So I would say my recommendation would be to extend the hours.

And the reason is because it's to me it would be less impactful because everyone would be impacted by the actual rates.

Should we increase the hours to midnight or increase the hours to Sunday?

So for me, the less impact would be, even though it's more revenue to go by extending the hours, that's not the reason.

The reason is that again it will be less impactful because every single person, if we go from $1.50 to $225, which was the recommendation, every person would be impacted that pay for parking in the City of Sarasota versus a smaller percentage.

Okay.

And if in the future, obviously, if we see that this was not a good idea, if it does have an impact as far as you know, nighttime in downtown, we have the option of changing it.

Sure, sure.

We can always go back and make the change.

But just to just let you know, I actually did some research.

Um, so just our surrounding, and I was asked to get this information to see what the surrounding um cities were doing, and our surrounding cities are actually charging longer hours than we are, and um they are charging on Sundays as well.

If anyone wants to know what those cities are, I can tell them.

But yeah.

Well, one advantage I see is every day is the same hours.

And so there is not a question of well, today what are the hours, you know, tomorrow what are the hours, so that you are you're unclear.

So I think that's one good thing about it.

Yes.

Commissioner Aheron Kotch?

Yes, thank you.

I just wanted to clarify um for uh one of the speakers, Ms.

Bagoni, we are not suggesting to raise the rates at all, correct?

No, no.

Okay.

It was one or the other.

Correct.

And we are not hiring any more staff?

No.

Okay.

So I just wanted to make sure that those items were clear.

And um also in this new proposal, the trolley, which is currently paid for out of the economic development fund to the tune of about $970,000.

This proposal proposes to take over those costs so that we can have some money finally in the economic development fund to help our small businesses as was suggested.

That is correct.

This is a step towards that effort, correct?

That is correct.

Okay, I wanted to clarify all of that.

Um I do have uh at least 10 non-substantive scriveners errors.

So I don't know if you want to hear that now or later.

It's up to you.

I think you can uh just submit them later.

Okay.

Um Commissioner Batti, did you have anything you wanted to say?

Okay.

Um I have a couple of things, and and one of them is uh the Vice Mayor alluded to, and you didn't really pick up on it.

Okay.

In the current year before these changes and the last year, uh parking operated at a loss.

If I understand correctly, that loss was reimbursed or paid for out of the general fund.

Is that correct?

That is correct.

The general fund means the taxpayers of the City of Sarasota.

So in effect, the taxpayers in general were subsidizing the people who were parking.

Yes, that is correct.

So by making yourself the parking either break even or profitable means that the cost of parking is imposed on the people who are parking as opposed to the taxpayers in general.

100% correct.

Yes.

Okay.

Now on the other side of the coin, um, so going forward, if we pass this, you will be making a profit of sorts.

So I am wondering Commissioner Ahern Koch mentioned some of the uses of that profit.

Um I'm also wondering, would that mean that you would have the funds for some service improvements, maybe getting the garage elevators fixed faster or so um part of this includes replacing the elevators.

So they will be under warranties and and there will be newer and there will be better models, so hopefully they won't go down.

But if they did, we would definitely have the funds um available for them to be repaired.

Okay.

Yes.

And and I guess this is more of a finance question, which you may and may not have the answer to.

So if say you're you have got a profit, um, would that money be able to be going back into the general fund if you you operated your enterprise fund as at a profit?

So we could pay off our debts that we owe to the general fund at a faster pace.

Oh, okay.

So you are actually borrowed from the general fund.

Yes, yes.

We actually have money that we're paying back annually to the general fund.

That's that's interesting to hear because we all know that the general fund from the last meeting, the general fund is in trouble.

So it would be nice to have some money coming in, have you pay off the your debt.

Um I had a couple of questions on page eight of your presentation in terms of the definition of parking.

Parking means the standing of a vehicle upon a public street.

I learned how to park, I mean how to drive in a different state, and standing had a particular definition where uh you were in your vehicle, the motor was running, but you were sitting in a parking space.

Sure.

Is that similar in Florida?

Well, yeah.

So no standing and no parking is pretty much the same thing.

So you can't have your your vehicle idle, basically.

It can't park or stand be standing.

Okay.

You can't sit in that parking space in your car without paying.

You so maybe the alternative would be driving around the block repeatedly and just thinking pros and guns.

So time you have you have time limits, so you could park in time for two hours.

If you parked in meter parking, you have 10 minutes free.

Or you could park in the garage, we have one hour for free.

So if you are waiting on someone, I would choose those alternatives.

Okay.

So yeah, only wait for 10 minutes.

Correct.

And and just a clarification, for those 10 minutes, do you have to register your car immediately?

And then if you don't leave at the end of 10 minutes, then you start getting charged.

Sure.

I I let everyone know you have to do something to receive the free time, right?

So in order to get the free 10 minutes on street order free hour, you have to actually start a parking session, whether that's with a kiosk at the pay station or with an app.

Oh, okay.

Because I was going to say again with the signage question recommending that uh are are you in a position to uh do some more education and enhanced information?

I've got to tell you, I checked into a hotel for a conference last week, and entering the hotel, I was parked in the hotel parking lot, entering the door of the hotel.

There was this huge sign pretty much blocking the door, which said XYZ company handles the parking in this hotel parking lot.

I shrugged it off saying, oh, well, I'm a hotel guest.

It's going to be on my Sure.

At the end of two days, I went to my car and there was notices on my dashboard, and I said, I didn't know that.

And then I looked up and I saw all those signs in in the parking lot.

So got to do more than just signs.

More to do some education.

Um then that then brought me to on page 12.

Um I don't know if this is a uh secret on the thing about having to move your car and not park in the three spaces over after your time has you know expired.

How does the enforcement know that you've only moved it a couple of spaces?

So we have a route sheet, and we have um two ways of uh basically timing when we actually come and we actually do the route sheet and we actually know what vehicles were there on that block, and then we return two hours later or whatever time frame is later, if those vehicles are still there now, then they're in violation.

Okay, so you really do know.

Yes, definitely.

Yeah, yeah.

I won't pull that trick then.

But um, yes, so those were my things I I wanted to understand, and I want everybody else to understand that this is not a money grab as some of the emails we received have suggested.

It's you know the parkers pay for parking as opposed to the citizens subsidizing them.

That's correct.

Yes.

Um, so Commissioner Batite has some questions.

Uh thank you, Mayor.

No, thank you, Mr.

Brooks.

Um, what is the I mean, your proposal of uh Sunday on the um paying on Sunday.

What's the difference in in paying on Sunday and not paying on Sunday?

I mean it would be one million dollars difference.

All right.

And Commissioner Alfred.

Uh, just want to clarification when you're talking about um people moving their cars after the time limit um to a different location.

That just applies to the areas where there is not a parking meter, correct?

If there, if you're parked at a parking meter, if you wanted to stay longer, you just pay more for more time.

Yes, don't go.

Okay.

What I'm talking I'm talking about is a streets where it has like two hour or three hour time to put a screen.

Yeah.

Okay.

I I I was pretty sure that was the case, but I thought we also should just make sure that people understood that.

All right, that's all I have.

Anyone else?

Okay, then I will close this public hearing.

Thank you very much, Mr.

Harvey.

And uh sorry.

And I will ask for a motion.

Mayor I have a motion.

Okay.

Um, move approval of proposed ordinance twenty-six-fifty-five ninety on first reading.

I'll second it.

Okay.

Motion by the Vice Mayor, seconded by Commissioner Albert to uh approve uh proposed ordinance number twenty-six dash five five nine zero on first reading.

Is there any discussion?

Seeing none.

It will also be roll call.

Albert.

Yes.

That's he?

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Aaron Cotch.

Yes.

Uh motion passes unanimously.

Thank you very much.

Um I'm gonna guess that the next item is going to take a while, so do we we want to take a ten minute break before we get started?

Sure.

I need a one.

Okay.

Okay, so it is uh two o'clock exactly, so let's get back at Chushan.

Yes.

Okay, everybody, we're gonna get back started.

You can take your seats, please.

Thank you.

So uh we are reaching our quasi judicial public hearing, and I suspect that Ms.

Griggs should uh leave the uh oath for anybody who wasn't here.

Oh, please stand.

All right.

Do you swear affirmative evidence of factual representation which you're about to be able to present during this commission public hearing held this fourth day of May twenty twenty-six are truthful?

Thank you.

And also, Mayor, can I make a statement?

If you all could please, please, please, everybody who is gonna be in front of a mic, please speak in the mic.

We have been getting issues with not being to hear you all so please speak in the mic.

Oh, and loudly.

Thank you.

Um the next item is a public hearing on appeal application number 25-APP-03, an appeal regarding the approved site plan 24-ASP-07, 1260 North Palm residence, and which was heard by the City Commission at the May 13th, 2025 meeting.

So I'm opening the public hearing on the appeal application, and I'm going to call upon the attorney to give us a little brief brief introduction.

Okay.

Thank you, Madam Mayor, and thank you for having me again today to the Commission.

So this item comes back to you in a little bit of an unusual posture.

It returns to the Commission from the process described in the Florida Land Use and Environmental Dispute Resolution Act, which you've heard called Fluedra Fluidra.

I don't know the appropriate pronunciation, but I'm going to use Floradra today.

But it's under 70.51 of the Florida statutes.

As you all know, the Commission reviewed and granted Bay Plaza's appeal application on May 13 of 25.

That had the effect of denying the site plan application filed by 1260 Palm Properties, which had been approved administratively and by the planning board.

An executed resolution to that effect was filed on July 16 of 25, and the applicant timely submitted a request for relief under Fluadja.

That process resulted in the submission of revisions to the proposed development that are in your agenda materials.

And before we move into the quasi judicial process, the presentation of evidence and the like today, the special magistrate that was mutually agreed upon by the parties to handle the Florida process, Mr.

Mark Bentley of the Johnson Pope firm in Tampa, is here and is going to speak for a few moments about the Floydra process used in this case and the recommendation before you, and then we'll move into the quasi judicial hearing portion of our festivities this afternoon.

So I'd invite Mr.

Bentley to come forward and uh speak to the Commission, please.

You guys want to hang around?

Good afternoon.

Good afternoon.

Welcome.

Commissioners, my name is Mark Bentley.

I didn't realize you had a dress code, otherwise I'm feel free to receive it if you like.

I am.

Well, first I'd like to uh express my appreciation for having the opportunity to address the commission.

Uh it's been a pretty long process, and uh I've really enjoyed it.

Being a special magistrate or master, that's not uh what I do full time.

I do a lot of it.

And I've written numerous articles and and things on it.

So um I won't characterize it as a public service, but it's something I like to do, you know.

And in any event, it's been a real pleasure working with Lucia, Allison, Jay, and Joe on this matter.

They're extremely experienced and very professional.

Uh likewise Robert and his team, Matt, Joel, and George.

So there are a lot of talented people coming to uh together to reach this hopefully conclusion of the case.

Um they took the process very seriously, which the legislature uh finds great import.

Um I'm based in Tampa.

Um I'm a lawyer for about 40 years.

Um I really didn't know anybody involved in this case except for Jay went to law school with my wife.

And uh everybody knows Robert, you know, if you're in the legal field, so I don't have any vested interest in this case, a dog in the fight, as they say.

Um in any event.

Oh they call me the special magistrate.

And I I think the reason that I was hired, and here again it's not a unilateral thing.

Um both the the lawyers have to agree on the the magistrate, and typically it's based on qualifications and track record and things like that.

I never asked them, but I guess if you ask them, I surmise that's why they did it.

So um the special magistrate requirements are you don't necessarily have to be a lawyer, you have to have mediation experience and experience in certain disciplines like environmental science or land use planning, things like that.

Um I'm I'm a planner by trade American.

I've been a member of the American Institute of Certified Planner since 1989.

I was a former planning director for the City of Oldsmar, a long-range planner for Hillsborough County.

So in my pre-lawyer life, it was all governmental work.

So in any event, I I fit the bill apparently.

So let's talk about the law, okay, and the process, the way it's supposed to work, and I'll tell you what happened at Sarasota.

Okay.

And then if you have any questions, certainly I'll try and field them.

The laws found at, as Jay indicated, 70.51 Florida statutes, which is the Florida Land Use Environmental Dispute Resolution Act.

It was created in 1995 by the legislature, and there was this strong property rights movement at that point in time, and I think it was a result of some egregious condemnation by some CRAs in South Florida where they were acquiring properties under the guise of a Can you come closer to the microphone?

Sure, under the guise of being a public purpose when it would really was for economic development.

So the legislature kind of zeroed in during that session.

And so not only did they enact this Fluidra process, but in the same legislation, and actually it ended up in the same chapter in the statutes, was the Burt Harris Private Property Act, which allows for compensation for it's like inverse condemnation.

So they're two totally different statutes, but they just happen to be in the same provision, Florida statutes.

So what's I find what's really uh a benefit to invoking the Fluidra process is a lot of times with some time constraints, you'll have a public hearing and you'll have maybe a major project and some technical issues like this one, where you have 10 or 15 minutes and you're trying to get your point across and get your experts up there.

With all the chaos, you know, and the other constraints, uh, it's difficult sometimes.

So what Fluidra does is give the parties an opportunity to kind of get back, sit back, identify the issues like they did in this case, see how we can compromise and address those, okay, and then go back to the legislative body.

So that's what occurred here.

Um the laws invoked by a petitioner whose development order is denied or approved not in a manner that is satisfactory to the petitioner.

Uh for example, I had a case in Venice, and the petitioner got his project approved, his zoning approved, but he didn't like one of the zoning conditions that required some transportation mitigation.

So he filed for flu direct to get rid of that condition.

So it doesn't necessarily have to be a denial.

It can also be used in enforcement actions like code enforcement and things like that.

So in this case, the only development order at issue is city council resolution number 25R 331, which quashed four administrative approvals.

Um the obviously the site plan approval and the three administrative adjustments.

The statute says it shall be liberally construed to affect its obvious purpose and intent in resolving disputes, and governmental entities shall direct all available resources and authorities to effect fully the obvious purposes and intent of this section in resolving disputes.

The process continues until the owner decides to stop it or the commission rejects my recommendation after conducting a de novo hearing on the merits of the petitioner's request, if the petitioner wants a hearing.

So the way this process works, it's kind of there are two components to it.

My initial responsibility is at mediation, and then if we can come up with a compromise, present that to the legislative body.

If that's not successful, then the petitioner at his discretion is entitled to a hearing where the burden is on him to demonstrate to me based on substantial competent evidence that the decision, in this case, the resolution quashing the approvals was unreasonable and are imposed an unfair burden on the use of their property.

So for example, if the settlement's not accepted today, we would go back to that step and then kind of replicate what we're doing today.

Let's say hypothetically that I found that your decision was unreasonable, I would issue a recommendation back to you, let's say to adopt the or approve the site plan.

You could either ignore that, you can approve it, or you can seek to modify it, but any or impose conditions that's only subject to the petitioner's approval.

If he doesn't like a condition that you're seeking to impose, then he doesn't have to accept that.

So say hypothetically, and typically on a zoning denial, the relief you would seek is a petition for writer Surtiori, which has to be filed within 30 days.

So once the process is completed, the tolling would disappear and the petitioner would have 30 days to file suit if he didn't elected to go that route.

I like to explain the notice and participation requirements that were followed in this particular case.

The parties to the proceeding under the statute are the local government, the city, and the petitioner, which is 1260 palm properties.

Also, anybody who perfected standing to participate is considered a participant and does not have party standing.

And let me explain.

Under the statute, if you are an owner of contiguous property and you receive notice of the Fluger proceeding, if you request to participate within 21 days, you can request, you can participate as what they call participant.

You're not a party.

Okay.

And also, if you participated in the hearing below and provided either written or verbal testimony, you have the right to participate if you requested further participation in fluja proceedings.

No one really knows too much about this statute, so no one really goes that route.

The I guess it's is it Bay Palm or Palm Bay?

I'm sorry.

Yes, Bay Plaza.

They perfected their opportunity to participate in the process by virtue of the fact that they were a contiguous property owner, and within 30 days, or excuse me, 21 days, they elected to participate in the process.

And I was looking at the file today, and I think 1260 filed their petition on September 11th, and then the city sent three notices to the opponents and the registered agent.

I think on the 19th, and likewise Robert Lincoln emailed a copy of the petition and the notice to uh counsel for the opposition on the 19th as well.

So all the notice has been covered.

So the opposition status is a participant, and under the statute, a participant's participation is limited.

This is under 70.5112 if anybody's interested, is limited to addressing issues raised regarding alternatives, variances, or other types of adjustment to the development order, which may impact their substantial interest.

It is not a rehash of the zoning case.

The way it's supposed to work, and it worked in this case, is if there's a proposed settlement, that's presented to the participants to receive their input or perspective on the adjustments to the project that that are described in my recommended settlement.

So in this case, no one requested to participate except Bay Plaza Property Owners Association through their legal counsel, as I mentioned as contiguous property owner.

So on January 7, 2026, mediation session was commenced.

Mr.

Bentley was there representing the property owners association.

And there were many people along with Mr.

Bentley.

And they were wearing red shirts, so I surmise that those were his clients.

So the mediation went on for about three or four hours more or less, and the parties were making a lot of progress, and there's some technical issues involved here.

We're just kind of shifting things four feet, whether it's parking, part of the building, you know, you have to be very precise.

And so some of these require some of these issues required input from other disciplines like solid waste and things like that, and needed a lot of thought and input.

So it's not something we could just accomplish in four hours.

We then returned to the Media Center and announced the settlement, which was subject to council approval, obviously.

Counsel for the opposition was there.

I went through the agreed upon terms and Miss Karina Koser, I hope I'm saying that right, attorney was given the opportunity to participate per 70.5112.

And what I just told you the participation is limited to commenting on their perspective on any variances, adjustments to the project additions and things like that.

So without any time constraint, we allowed Ms.

Koser to make a presentation, and after that mediation was convened uh concluded, and the petitioner in the city agreed to have further discussions to kind of tweak some of the language and make a couple of adjustments.

But the general terms were announced to Ms.

Koser and her clients.

Eventually I was provided with the agreed upon language and incorporated that into my recommendation to the commission, that's your considering today.

So the options available today from a dispute resolution standpoint are accept the recommended compromise, reject the compromise, modify the compromise, which should only be allowed if the petitioner agrees with the proposed modification.

If there is either a rejection or the petitioner does not agree to any modifications that may be proposed by the commission, then the petitioner is entitled to a hearing on the merits of its request, where the petitioner here again has a burden of demonstrating to me with substantial competent evidence that the quashing of the administrative approvals by the commission in that resolution was unreasonable and are imposed an unfair burden on the use of the petitioner's property.

And like I said, if we went back to the hearing on the unreasonableness, we would go through the same process.

There'd be hypothetically, let's say I issued a recommendation that based on the presentation that I thought your decision was reasonable, that concludes the process, and Mr.

Lincoln and his client have reserved all their rights to administrative proceedings or legal proceedings.

So just a couple things, as you may recall, and I think this is important.

Your professional planning staff supported the proposed site plan and adjustments.

And one thing I noted is in your resolution too, the language is in Sarasota is kind of unique relative to a lot of local governments.

The way you have the process and the series of appeals, you know, I I haven't seen that before, but in any event, um is explained in the resolution.

That was a de novo hearing.

It did not take all the evidence from all the prior hearings, okay.

Um so anything that was going to be part of the record at that point in time had to be submitted on that day, or I think under your code a couple days in advance for your consideration.

So the petitioners' modifications were the result of a compromise and reflect a good faith effort to address concerns raised by the commission.

The evidence presented at the de novo hearing by the commission.

And under Florida law, staff reports are considered substantial competent evidence and expert opinions.

Versus what I noticed in the record, and I verified this on a couple occasions based on what was provided to the parties is I saw a letter to the clerk's office by Mr.

Bentley where he had refuted the staff's findings with respect to the seven criteria that apply to site plan review and approval.

And then he presented a PowerPoint to the commission on the day that you enacted your or passed your resolution.

So I never saw any expert testimony or reports from the appellant.

Attorneys are advocates.

Okay.

Their argument is not considered substantial competent evidence.

So when I said in my recommendation is that there was a strong likelihood of prevailing on the merits, that's what I meant.

Not about a legal proceeding, but the fluger proceeding where I have to make it make a determination whether your decision was on reasonable or imposed an unfair burden.

So the attorney's argument is not considered substantial competent evidence, and that's all I was alluding to.

Now, if we end up having the hearing, they won't have an opportunity because they're not a party to that proceeding to present any evidence.

So we haven't gone that far down the path.

But I'll tell you one thing is that if the uh petitioner, Mr.

Lincoln and his group has erred on the side of caution if there's any they don't want any due process complaints or you know uh anything of that sort.

So if it's a close call about someone participating, they're all like forgiving them due process and equal protection.

And it only benefits them instead of them complaining to their commissioners, hey, I w I didn't have a shot at it, or you know, I didn't know about the hearing and all that kind of stuff.

So that's pretty much it.

You know, I know it's a complicated, cumbersome process, but that's kind of the way it worked out, at least from our perspective.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh go back to our attorney.

Thank you, Mr.

Bentley.

So it so to be clear for today's purposes, what you're being asked to do is to act upon and implement the special magistrate's recommendation.

Uh to do that, the city commission must make a decision upon the site plan application, which is done quasi judicially.

So the city commission acts upon their recommendation by acting upon the site plan application.

I hope that part is clear.

I know the process can be a little bit muddled under the statute.

As you know, in quasar judicial proceedings, it is not the city commission's function to make law, but rather to apply law that has already been established.

The commission may only consider evidence in such proceedings that the law considers competent substantial and relevant to the issues.

If the evidence induced at the hearing demonstrates that the applicant has met the criteria, then the commission should find in favor of the applicant subject to any conditions of approval.

Conversely, if the evidence demonstrates that the applicant has failed to meet the criteria, then the commission is required by law to find against the applicant.

Specific to today's hearing, and because uh the city commission heard a full, and I mean full presentation of the proposed development at its meeting on May 13 of 25.

We're going to hear and incorporate uh by reference the evidence and testimony then presented.

Uh the minutes were included uh in your backup to refresh your memories of those events.

Uh so today we'll focus principally on the revisions to the development that resulted from the Floredro mediation process.

All witnesses must give their testimony under oath and must give their name and address for the record.

All testimony and questioning must address matters that are relevant and material to the issues.

There is an established procedure which will be followed at this hearing as set forth in resolution 02R-1505.

And with that, I will turn it over to Mayor Trice to lead us through that process.

Mayor, I have a couple of process questions that I think would be better asked now before the hearing is open.

And I I we were also going to do some more process stuff.

So yeah, go ahead with your questions.

Um, first of all, are the decision-making criteria the same as they were for the first hearing?

Yes.

And that includes standards for review for site plans, right?

It does, 4506, yes, ma'am.

Um and approval criteria for adjustments.

Yeah, you have approval for criteria for adjustments, and I'm sure that uh attorney Lincoln and City Staff will talk about that, but to a degree, and we can discuss it as we move along, but they're sort of subsumed and incorporated into the site plan application.

Okay.

And what about the advisory committee design guidelines?

The advisory committee design guidelines.

Um believe we're at issue today.

You have established criteria that did that do not do not incorporate those?

No.

They were brought up during the May 5th 13th, 2025 hearing.

And the advisor advisory guidelines when you look at it are that.

They are not uh standards for determining compatibility or anything else.

We also had extensive testimony at that hearing about how the site plan uh followed actually the requirements of the those advisory guidelines in terms of conceptually in terms of how that approached.

So there was evidence regarding that to the extent that it's relevant towards the design philosophy of of a project, but they are not standards that you can apply to deny a project.

Thank you.

And then one additional question.

So since staff recommended approval of the site plan, both administratively and during the city commission hearing where the appeal was granted.

How can we be assured that the City Commission's desire to deny the site plan was adequately represented during the Fluedra process?

Because uh we as attorneys have we have a little bit of a dual role there.

First of all, we have uh ethical duty to represent you folks, um, but we also have a duty to follow the statute as promulgated by the Florida legislature, which says you got to try this process.

We can't go into that process and say um City Commission denied it, so we're not going to participate meaningfully.

The decision ultimately remains in this body's hands, not the not the attorney, uh not your city staff, um, not the magistrate.

So it is it was well understood through the process what what had happened and how this body had acted upon the appeal application.

Thank you.

And to note on that, the entire record from the proceeding below was presented to the magistrate.

Arguments made evidence presented, that entire record wouldn't be.

Yeah, he watched it.

I mean, he had he saw everything that we did.

He didn't have the pleasure of being here in person to experience it, but I said I suggest that you know he mentioned a chaotic process, which we're not going to have today.

I don't think we had then.

You know, there's a lot of things to get through, and you all got through them really well the last time.

Uh but at the end of the day, um we had an obligation to um uh undertake on the city's behalf uh and in good faith the the process set out by the statute.

Thank you.

So at this point, I believe we still need to go through uh the explanation of the quasi-judicial process and and including time limitations for applicants and um etc.

Right.

You have you have affected person, let's start with affected person status and then we'll go to time limits.

And I and I have a process question too.

Okay, you want to do that before we do the other.

No, just I just wanted to.

Oh, there are uh Okay.

Commissioner Albert has a question for you at the leave.

Yes, of course.

Um I just wanted to make sure I heard correctly because I was a a little confused that if the Commission denies this today, then it goes to a hearing in front of Mr.

Bennett again, the mediator, or it goes to the circuit court, or it goes to a parent in front of the mediator, and then if that outcome isn't what people want, then it goes to the circuit court.

Yeah, and uh people will be defined here by our applicant, but yes, it will go back to Mr.

Bennett or Mr.

Bentley, excuse me, for a for a full hearing, and then it would return to you again.

So uh you have a possibility of coming back to you in the uh in the Florida process.

Okay, so then there doesn't go to circuit court at any point.

The hearing is before the the uh Yeah, the FLEDA process would would need to go through that step until a petition for CERT could be filed.

Okay, start all over.

Okay, it goes back to the mediator for a hearing.

Correct.

Then it comes back to us, and then if there's still an outcome that one side or one party or the other doesn't agree with, then it goes to circuit court.

Yeah, it it may come back to you.

If the uh if the mediator decides that what action you took on the application, uh what's the term under the statute I think reasonable or does not unfairly burden the property, then we would be done.

And then it would be then it would be right for circuit court review by petition for cert.

If he says that you did, um then you may see it again.

Okay.

Thank you.

Okay.

So affected party status first.

Yes, ma'am.

I only have uh the single um sign up for Gina Brulato.

Is that consistent with your information, Member?

Okay.

Um I've just been handed some time.

Sorry.

Don't come down yet.

Yes.

Okay, go ahead.

Not that we received any.

No, she just thought she was being called.

Okay, gotcha.

All right.

Okay.

Uh you have some time limits.

I've been handed a uh an agenda with no notations that says we have time limits of 20, 20, 5, etc.

Um time limits are within y'all's purview.

I make uh uh whatever you all do is up to you.

Given the fact that we we went through the full quasi hearing on the the entirety of the uh project before, I would suggest to you that uh a lesser time limit for presentations is appropriate in this case, but of course that's your your decision.

It is my experience that the more time that is allotted for presentation, I don't wish to suggest that the time is not well used, but sometimes you get a bit more um irrelevant information and fluff and things that are not directly directed specifically to um the criteria that you are being asked to review.

You'll get stuff like, well, but we're wonderful, and so you should do this for us, whatever the case may be, which is not which is not directed to the evidence.

Again, time limits at your purview.

I don't want to intrude on the buttons.

Then let me interrupt here.

We have 20 minutes for the applicant.

Is that how much you would like, or do you want less?

20 well it would make 20 minutes.

Less, but I think having the 20 minutes reserved, I do believe we will be much less than 20 minutes, but just in case.

We would like to have that.

And let me say that um I just want to reiterate an understanding um uh with Mr.

Diego that the record that was made prior to the city uh before the city commission at the prior hearing is therefore still part of the record.

And I'm I'm I'm reiterating this partially to go to Commissioner Ulrich's question because obviously at that hearing we extensively went through all of the reasons why the um application met all of the various criteria, and rather than spend a lot of time today going through those painstakingly again, our plan is to focus on how the uh the settlement proposals improve the application and address issues that were raised to us.

And that's where we think we can do that in 20 minutes or less.

Okay, so what if this is acceptable to the commissioners?

I have here applicant not to exceed 20 minutes, staff not to exceed 20 minutes, the one affected person has up to five minutes, and the individuals who signed up for public comment have up to three minutes, and the rebuttal would be five minutes each.

Is that acceptable to the commissioners?

Yes.

Okay.

Okay.

Back back to the meet party in that.

Um I don't believe you're on the list.

I mean it.

Yeah, we don't have we don't make specific um part for this, Robert, you good with after staff, uh 10 minutes after staff?

I I think normally it's five, but I'm okay with ten if she needs that.

Not me.

I I understand.

Oh, for the Yes, I'm sorry, I I missed the presentation.

I was just kind of thinking yes, automatically that he would have that.

Mr.

Morgan, just acnounce yourself for the record so we can know just announce yourself so we can know who you are asking for the record, please.

Morgan Bentley, brother of my long-lost father.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I just need to make sure that the question is.

So following following staff?

And how long, please?

10.

10.

Okay.

And and w what are they they aggrieved party?

Or what are they?

They are they are they.

Aggrieved, affected, impacted, substantially impacted.

There's lots of ways to characterize them, but there is no doubt they were.

Okay, but and they would go before the affected person.

I'll go before after staff and before affected persons.

Okay.

And then how much time?

You said ten minutes for them.

Um and then um ex parte communication.

Yes.

Do we have ex parte communications that any commissioner wishes to disclose?

I do.

I had brief conversation with attorney Brenda Patton.

Not about content, but about timing of a letter she sent the commission.

And does watching the May 13th, 2025 City Commission special meeting?

All seven or so hours of it count as ex parte?

Considering your communication with Attorney Patton, are you able to render a fair and impartial decision on the application?

I am.

I thought I saw Commissioner Batiz.

And I think you and myself spoke about this earlier.

And I did have brief conversation with uh, you know, just by happening stance walking through the parking lot with uh one of the tenants of the uh uh what what address is that?

Yeah, no, not Bay Plaza, the the um 1260.

Commercial commercial attendance of uh 1260 or what have you.

So we had a conversation.

And considering that communication, are you able to render a fair and impartial decision today?

Uh I would hope so.

Yes, and that's the same.

How about yes?

Or no, that's okay.

Yeah, yes, yes.

Everybody else.

Um, I uh had a meeting as well with uh with staff, uh yourself and our city staff.

Um I've had many uh community meetings um where I have participated and um I received input that made it crystal clear that I was not allowed to speak about this topic.

It is quite the topic of the day, along with Fruitville Road.

So um I made it clear that I was not to express an opinion, but I could hear comments uh that were or questions, but I would not answer.

Okay.

And considering all that, are you able to render a fair and impartial decision today?

Yes.

Um I also had a brief conversation with Brenda Patton where she uh reiterated what she put in a letter to us, and I met with staff.

Okay.

And same question, Commissioner.

Yes.

Thank you.

And and I met with staff and I read the emails that came in.

Okay.