Welcome to the City of St.

Petersburg City Council meeting.

Your elected officials are Mayor Ken Welch.

District 1 and Council Chair Copley Gurtis.

District 2, Brandy Gabbert.

District 3, Mike Harding.

District 4.

And Council Vice Chair, Leseth Hanowitz.

District 5, Deborah Fake Sanders.

District 6, Gina Driscoll.

District 7, Corey Givens Jr.

And District 8, Richie Floyd.

Good afternoon.

Welcome to the September 25th, 2025 City Council meeting.

If we could do a roll call, please.

Curtis.

Here, Abbott.

Anowitz.

Fix Anders.

Driscoll.

Here.

Gibbons.

Here.

Lloyd.

Here.

Okay, this morning we will have our invocation given today by our own Councilmember Corey Givens Jr.

And then please remain standing for the Pledge of Allegiance.

If you join me in standing, please.

Thank you, Chair.

Let us pray.

God of our weary years, God of our silent tears, thou who has by thy might let us into the light, keep us forever in thy path.

We pray.

We come this afternoon, God, to say thank you.

If we had 10,000 tongues that said thank you 10,000 times, it still wouldn't be enough for all that you do and continue to do.

We have so many blessings, so many blessings that we do not have room enough to receive them.

We live in one of the greatest cities on earth, and for that we are grateful.

We are grateful for our leadership, Lord.

We ask that you cover and protect each and every one of them, each and every one of us, from local elected officials all the way to the White House.

Let us lead, Lord, not by our will, but by your will and by your way, so that the greater good of humanity may be accomplished.

We ask that in all we do that you be glorified.

Lord, we ask that you hide us and that you continue, Father, to get the glory out of all that we do and all that we say.

Let it be about you and not about us.

We ask that you touch each and every person in this city from the least fortunate, Father, to the biggest corporation.

Look over us as we endeavor to do good, to walk humbly, and to love mercifully.

In Jesus' name we pray.

Amen.

Amen.

Pledge allegiance to the God of the United States of America and Cesar Republic for which it stands.

One nation, under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you.

Please be seated.

Councilmember Givens, thank you so much for the invitation.

Council members, real quick before we get to the uh agenda.

Obviously, um, I have a neck brace on, and so if I'm not looking at you, I apologize in advance.

Um, I'll probably get it be getting up and down just to stretch.

Um, but uh I'm here with you for the evening, so no, I'm not going anywhere, but just uh I know I've asked for this a lot over the last few weeks.

Just give me a little grace and uh just appreciate appreciate it so much.

So just wanted to give you a heads up.

This will be on and off, and I'll probably be standing up and stretching.

Okay, council members.

We have an agenda in front of us.

I'll entertain a motion for approval.

We have a motion and a second, seeing as no other council members wishing to speak.

Clerk, could you please open the machine for voting?

Council members, please enter your votes.

Seeing as all present council members have voted, clerk, please tally and announce the vote.

Mr.

Chair, motion to approve the agenda, passes unanimously.

Okay, council members.

We have a consent agenda.

Clerk, we have any cards on the consent agenda.

Okay, council members, we have a consent agenda.

I'll entertain a motion for approval.

Second.

We have a motion and a second on the consent agenda, seeing as no other council members wishing to speak.

Clerk, could you please open the machine for voting?

Council members, please enter your votes.

Seeing as all present, council members have voted.

Clerk, please tally and announce the vote.

Mr.

Chair, motion to approve the consent agenda, passes unanimously.

Okay, we're gonna move right into open forum.

Clerk, if you could please read the rules.

Only the individual wishing to speak may sign the open forum sheet.

Only city residents, owners of property, business owners in the city, or their employees may speak.

All issues discussed under open forum must be limited to issues related to the city of St.

Petersburg government.

If you are speaking to an item on the agenda, you may only speak once during the open form when the item comes up on the agenda.

In order to provide an opportunity for all citizens to address council, each individual will be given three minutes to speak, and after which the microphone will be muted.

If you wish to address city council through the Zoom meeting, you must use a raise hand feature button in the Zoom app or enter star nine on your phone at the time the agenda item is addressed.

When it is your turn to speak, you'll be unmuted and access to state your name and address.

At the conclusion of your comments or when you reach the three minute limit, three minute time limit, you will be muted.

All raised hands will be lowered after each agenda item.

Regardless of the method of participation used, normal rules apply, including the three minute time limit on comments, the requirement that any presentation materials must be submitted in advance of the meeting and the rules of decorum.

If live public comment is disrupted by violations of the rules of decorum, the chair is authorized to accept public comment by alternate means, including by email only, and we do have some speakers, Mr.

Chair.

Okay.

Let's call two at a time, please.

First two speakers, Jamie Hoke and John Hoke.

Please go to either podium, state your name and address for the record, and you have three minutes to address City Council.

I'm sorry, there was okay.

Jamie, you can lower that if you want to.

Thank you.

There's a switch on your left hand side by your hip.

Oh, right hand side.

Right.

We're get it.

Sorry about that.

I'm a new one here.

In short, um, okay, I'm ready.

Okay.

Hello, my um city council members.

My name is Jamie Hoke.

Um, born and raised St.

Petersburg native, 6801, 10th Avenue North, St.

Petersburg, Florida, 33710.

I'm here to urge you to save the St.

Petersburg Science Center.

A cornerstone of our Westside community, a legacy for my first grandchild Harrison arriving 2026.

No further city funding is needed to make this happen.

For four years, St.

Pete for STEM, my son John, and many others have worked to overturn over time to revive the Science Center, securing millions in state, federal, and private funds.

They've offered 1.6 million above market value to buy the land and transform the blight bleed into a self-sufficient hub with venues for community events like baby showers or my daughter Rosellen's future wedding.

Yet the city decision to cancel the sale in favor of stormwater tanks, opting to keep a relocatable brush site, threatens this gift.

As Joe Hamilton said, you don't kill a 20 million dollar project because you don't want to move a pile of palm fronds.

My two children, John and Rosellen, are St.

Pete natives, like much of my family.

As a parent, every time I've dropped them off, I trusted that we're learning skills that would shape their problem solving abilities and worldview.

The results speak for themselves.

John, now president of the Jungle Terrace neighborhood, Army officer and a businessman who has stayed in St.

Pete and continues to give back to his community.

Rose Ellen, inspired by the same, graduated from Emory Riddle, a STEM university, was commissioned as a Navy officer, and is finalizing her helicopter pilot training in Pensacola.

I want my grandson Harrison to build and dream here, just like his daddy John and his Aunt Rosellen.

The Science Center is a launch pad for STEM dreams and building the leaders of tomorrow St.

Pete.

It's robotics, artificial intelligence, astronomy, and sustainability exhibits inspire thousands, equipping kids for tomorrow's challenges.

John Hooke, president of Jungle Terror Civic Association calls it integral to creating great humans.

Yet closure leaves a depressing eye sore.

Today, as you discuss its future, I urge you to approve the land sale and relocate the brush site if needed.

A simple solution for a fully funded, self-sufficient project.

Let's ensure Baby Harrison and every child can build, learn, and soar here.

Save the Science Center.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Council members.

My name is John Hoke, 8318 40th Avenue North.

I am here today representing the Council of Neighborhood Associations.

I stand before you today, not just as a neighborhood leader, but as someone whose own childhood was shaped by the St.

Petersburg Science Center.

The foundations formed at this historic site have led me to become a successful business owner, an army officer, and a community leader.

The Science Center is an integral asset to creating good and great humans in St.

Pete.

As a young student, I spent my summers building rockets, replica engines, and tapping out Morris code, while also learning about the native Tokobaga people who once lived on this land.

Those experiences didn't just entertain me.

They ignited a lifelong curiosity and a love of learning.

And I know I'm not alone.

Generations of children from across St.

Petersburg grew up with memories just like these.

Memories that bind us together.

As a new father, I want St.

Pete's future generations to have the same experiences we did.

The Science Center is more than a building.

It is a part of our city's history, culture, and neighborhood identity.

The Mosaic Trail, Tampa Bay's largest public artwork, remains a vibrant reminder of what this site means to our community.

We face a choice.

Especially when the water treatment capacity at the Northwest plant has already been expanded.

The recent physic feasibility study compared the Science Center site to a brush site, but it's not a fair comparison.

Comparison.

The analysis was based on an inflated replacement property value of 2.9 million, which overstated the costs associated with replacing the brush site.

The science center is being purchased for above full market value, and those funds could help us replace the brush site if ever needed.

The truth is this doesn't have to be an either or decision.

We can preserve our historic science center while still meeting the city's long-term utility needs in a more thoughtful and cost-effective manner.

If we walk away now, we lose more than a piece of property.

We lose a funded STEM hub at a time when schools are struggling with budget cuts.

We lose an artificial intelligence center of excellence that would boost jobs, innovation, and economic competitiveness for St.

Pete's future leaders.

We lose an event space and office space for West St.

Pete, and perhaps most importantly, we lose trust.

Trust that our city will keep its promises to its people.

On behalf of the 45 member neighborhoods of Kona, I ask you to choose preservation, progress, and community.

Let us bring the Science Center back to life, not just for today, but for generations yet to come.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next two speakers.

You have three minutes to address City Council.

My name is Dr.

Perry D.

Washington.

Look it up on the internet.

Perry G.

Washington owner.

You find a retired real estate brother.

Dr.

Washington, we need your address, please.

Perry Boot Bayview.

And I'm Perry.

Perry Babu.

Now.

Mr.

Washington.

Excuse me, Dr.

Washington.

I need your address, please.

Sir, I will not give you my address because I will not be assassinated.

Give us your cross streets, please.

They view in 34th Street.

Thank you.

I've done this many times before.

Now, I received a letter on the 11th.

They did the 28th of August.

It stated that I was going to waive my right in the city saying I'll call it co-violated.

First of all, I don't like the way it was done.

You have a copy.

I left it left yesterday.

I would not go on it.

Second of all, the city does not have the right to wave my right.

You cannot, it's against the law.

And every time you do it to me, you do it to someone else.

I've heard the word we.

And people were standing here asking my money for a woman's assistance program.

Bottom line.

I went there and I gave them what I had to say in writing.

I gave it to you.

Violate my right, yeah.

I'm going to sue you.

What happened the other year?

I have my gut, and I have not one to court.

It took all these years, all these months, seven months, eight months.

We might go to court.

Why?

They want me to say I'm guilty.

You out there read my first of all.

32 and a half years.

Do you or me have the more knowledge?

Thank you, Dr.

Washington.

Go ahead, Dr.

Carlson.

I'm Dr.

Ed Carlson, 7691 30th Avenue North for Jungle Terror Civic Association.

I'm here to advocate for our grand magnificent, glorious supercalifragilistic expialladocious science center.

Yes.

So 85 years in St.

Petersburg.

Grew up in Midtown over 55 years in West St.

Petersburg.

19 years president of Jungle Terror Civic Association.

Five decades and generations of children, teens, and adults have learned, enjoyed, and grown from our science center.

The reality of the Northwest treatment plant, which is in our neighborhood since the 2015 overflow, two deep well injection sites have been rehabilitated.

Two new deep well injection sites are drilled.

Thus we've doubled the capacity.

The storage tanks from went from 10 million gallons, expanded two and a half times to 25 million gallons.

The Northwest plant is good forever into the future.

Just in case multiple creative alternatives to move the brush site.

The city owns properties 635 feet long by 111 feet wide across from Azalea Middle School, Caddy Corner to the Science Center.

The Azalea Church has a large vacant space across the street.

Number seven on the feasibility map, 2401 72nd Street North is available.

There's vacant land at 2449 Anvil Street in the industrial park.

The Greek church on four and a half acres has a large parcel south of their church, which could be utilized.

The new science center is like our initial one.

It's inclusive, includes everybody.

It's collaboration of citizens, bipartisan state and federal grants, local officials, nonprofit organizations, architects, engineers who love our city.

To kill this beautiful center of education, economic development, and community gathering for a brush site would be dastardly.

Healthy gathering place for children, teens, and adults continues the historic garden walk of blending of states and the self-sustaining, enhancing, unique gift to our city and region.

Be yes to our science center.

And I look forward to having my 90th birthday on the event center on the roof.

And you all are invited.

One Zoom speaker, Mr.

Chair.

Marley Price, once you enter to the meetings, please, please unmute yourself, state your name and address.

You'll have three minutes to address City Council.

Good afternoon.

Can you hear me?

Yes.

Awesome.

Marley 5034 32nd of North.

I was super excited to dial in today, as I'm sure you all saw the news about the Clearwater Feasibility Study for public power being released this week.

And it looks really convincing.

Would make a real difference for families in our city right now.

So I hope you'll all take it as seriously as you are before the study came out.

Um as our franchise agreement end date really is sneaking up around the corner.

And I also find it really interesting that this impartial study and how it compares to the one Duke commissioned, which obviously it's really clear now that that was a tactic to scare residents out of cutting them off.

But it's inspiring that Clearwater officials are willing to go up against this huge corporation on behalf of their community.

And of course, this isn't like a concrete measure, but I will also point out that it was a Clearwater Council member that won the best of the Bay Award for Best Politician last night.

So I think that really just speaks to what people are asking their city council members to do right now.

Um and the Clearwater Mayor summed it up really nicely.

I think that if there's a way to offer residents lower rates, how can we not consider it?

So I really hope you'll all like really put some thoughts to that and uh do the right thing.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next two speakers, please.

Dr.

Lynn Sinat and Steve Elfman.

Please go to either podium, state your name and address for the record, and you have three minutes to address City Council.

I'm Dr.

Lynn Sennett, 107 Fair and Place North, St.

Pete 33701.

Dear City Council members, thank you for your service.

I speak today to implore you to support the revitalization of the Science Center on the West Side of St.

Pete.

I realize this is an administrative decision.

However, council and engaged citizens can play a big part in making this a reality.

Why the Science Center?

As a retired research mathematician, I know both the importance of mathematical literacy as well as what fun math can be.

Today's New York Times, ironically enough, is an article, what declines in reading and math we mean for the U.S.

workforce.

It's not just for college.

Everybody is concerned.

Welding, heating, and manufacturing and air conditioning manufacturing for pipe fitting students need to understand fractions.

The U.S.

is falling behind.

Employers are concerned.

Math scores are the lowest since 2005.

One executive likens it to a frog in a pot of water.

The pot is heating up.

Think about the potential opportunities to assist our students, bringing buses bringing youth from all over the city to have fun and learn at the center.

A great opportunity to enhance the STEM abilities of our young citizens and increase their later job prospects.

So I'm ready to volunteer.

So I'll ask you guys how would you choose a how would you teach a youth why three times five equals five times three?

Well, little show and tell.

I have these little bags of colored blocks, and you can just set up a little thing, and it's obvious to everybody.

So a lot of fun.

We need the science center, fully funded, a gift to our city, requiring no taxpayer dollars.

Please stand with our community, help make this transformational asset a reality.

Your support honors our history, invests in our future, and keeps St.

Petersburg a city that values education, innovation, and cultural enrichment.

Thank you for your leadership and your consideration.

And I'll leave this with Chan so everybody can take a look at it.

Thank you.

Go ahead, Steve.

Do I have a uh graphic image to display?

Uh my name is Steve Elftman, president of the Azalea Neighborhood Association.

I live at 1401 Farragut Drive.

And I want to say a few words about why the Science Center was important when it opened in 1966, and why now, more than ever, science matters.

I want to tell you about my neighborhood's first generation, the pioneers who built the science center.

In the mid-1950s, a golf course in West St.

Pete was transformed into a thousand new homes.

The new neighborhood was called Azaleaville.

Meanwhile, on our eastern edge, at what is now known as the Raytheon site, Electronic Communications Inc.

or ECI began operations and started hiring.

Scientists and technicians from across the country moved to West St.

Pete for these jobs.

They started families and wanted better educational opportunities for their kids.

In 1959, they organized a science club, and by 1966, there was a science center built by donations and funding efforts.

That's because 1966 was a huge year for science.

There was the first soft landing on the moon, and the Apollo program was preparing to put men on the moon in three years.

The year that the Science Center opened was the year Star Trek premiered.

Public excitement about science was everywhere.

The Science Center's opening in March was a big event with special buses ran from Williams Park to the ceremonies.

Among the speakers at the opening was the voice of NASA Mission Control, the man heard on television for every manned space flight.

So the Science Center is more than a building.

It represents what our first generation valued 70 years ago, and what I hope we still value.

Picture the near future, a student riding a bus to Azalea Middle School.

What will she see every day?

A science center that makes her think that science is important, or will she see wastewater storage tanks?

With today's challenges to science and education, we need a place like the Science Center to inspire the next generation even more than we did in 1966.

Thank you for supporting our Science Center.

Next two speakers, please.

Amy Poisidente and Dr.

Julie Mastery.

Please go to hide the podium, state your name and address for the record, and you have three minutes to address City Council.

Amy Posadente, 2860 63rd Street North.

Mayor Welsh and City Council members, my name is Amy Posadente, and I live in the Holiday Park area of St.

Petersburg.

I am here today to express my strong support for rebuilding the Science Center at its historic home in Jungle Terrace.

As a St.

Pete native, I remember taking field trips to the Science Center in grade school.

As the mother of a six-year-old, I have been looking forward to my son having the chance to likewise visit and learn at the Science Center.

My son and his first grade class are being introduced to science more heavily as part of their first grade curriculum than they did in kindergarten.

Excuse me.

Topics covered so far include all about the sun and what is gravity.

They would benefit so much from complementing their in-class STEM learning with field trips to the Science Center, allowing them to build rockets, explore the Mosaic Trail, study local history, and more.

As president of the Holiday Park Neighborhood Association, I can confidently report that Holiday Park residents, as well as our fellow West St.

Pete neighbors, are united in a desire to have the Science Center reopen.

Less than two weeks ago in my role as HPA president, I attended the mayor's annual neighborhood summit, where one of the main themes was quote, celebrating our uniqueness.

During this summit, the mayor and various speakers encouraged us to identify, celebrate, and honor the unique and special parts of our neighborhoods and communities.

Well, the Science Center is certainly one of the most special opportunities here in West St.

Petersburg that will serve as an important destination for all city residents.

City Council, and especially our Westside Councilman, I implore you to work with administration and the mayor to figure out a way to make this project work.

The brush site can be moved, and my son and his classmates are ready to schedule a field trip to the Science Center.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Council members.

My name is Julie Mastery, and I come before you.

A piece of it, and robotics, coding projects that brought learning to life.

It offered school programs during the day, after school enrichment, and summer camps, and inspired thousands of young people.

When the city acquired the property, it was with the promise that it would remain dedicated to science education.

Now we must honor that pro that promise.

The urgency is clear.

National studies, and you've heard this from other speakers, show that American students continue to lag behind their international peers in math and science achievement.

But when children engage in science outside the classroom in places like our science center, their performance and confidence grows dramatically.

These programs create the pipeline for future engineers, doctors, scientists, innovators right here in St.

Pete.

There is a plan to not only restore, update, and improve the facility, the plan is to provide cutting edge programs and partners to this community.

This effort has strong support from the state, the city, educators, parents, and the community.

Families are asking for it, and teachers are asking for it, and our children need it.

I urge you, Council members, to look not at the property value, but at the human value.

The spark in a child's eye when eyes when they light up a circuit for the first time, or the pride they feel when they realize that they can do science and math.

Preserving this property as a science center is not only honoring its history, it's an investment in the future for our city and our children.

Please keep the science center property dedicated to inspiring generations to come.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next two speakers, please.

One speaker in Zoom, Mr.

Chair Jason S once to the meetings, please.

Please unmute yourself, state your name and address.

You'll have three minutes to address City Council.

Good afternoon.

Can you hear me?

Yep.

Perfect.

Jason Scott, 4636 Redfish Lane, Southeast.

I'm sure you all heard, as Marley said earlier, of the Clearwater Feasibility Study being completed and released.

I hope all of you sit down and read it thoroughly while keeping in mind that it does not exactly represent rate payers or assets in the St.

Pete area.

And that a St.

Pete study is still required for us to understand what is possible for our city.

In the Clearwater study, it laid out how the city can effectively lower rates for its residents while taking on improvements as well.

And over a period of time can lower rates.

That is similarly significant in savings as other cities in Florida enjoy.

I also want to point out that we're currently seeing Duke advertising that are suggesting that we're going to see rate rates lowering in March 2026.

But in reality, this is due to their storm recovery charges expiring.

While year-over-year rates are actually increasing, which was improved by the PSC up to 2027.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next two speakers, Mr.

Chair, Mary Ann Hapala and Jenna Byrne.

Please go to High the Podium, state your name and address for the record.

You have three minutes to address City Council.

You can also raise the podium.

Yep.

Thank you.

Didn't want to stay.

You're good.

Good afternoon.

My name is Brianne Hopla, 1214 10th Street North 33705.

I'm one of the co-directors of Pathfinder Outdoor Education, and I'm here to advocate for the Science Center.

When Pathfinder volunteered and was selected to be the fiscal agent of the Science Center, our sole goal was to provide hands-on educational opportunities with a focus in science and technology to future generations in Pennells County.

It saw over 20,000 kids annually.

So just imagine how many more children, families, and Pennells County students we could provide future educational field trips to that would not have the access to these opportunities without a science center learning hub in our city.

Knowing there is a science achievement gap in our state and city.

This is a worthy investment in our future.

With your help in keeping the science center revitalization project alive as envisioned and planned, this space would fuel inquisitive minds, enthusiasm, and through diverse educational collaborations on all things science and tech.

Your support in the Science Center will help provide students from all ages and stages, backgrounds, and income levels with the opportunity to be more capable and competent leaders, develop life and technical skills that are available to respond to any future challenges our city may face.

Please consider how the science center would be an invaluable asset to Pennell's County area and provide a myriad of family-friendly classroom supportive environments for generations to come.

Thank you for your time.

Good afternoon, council.

I am you know privileged to be able to be here and speak with you today.

My name is Jenna Byrne.

I am a very proud resident of St.

Petersburg.

My address is 435 3rd Av North 33701.

I'm also here representing Water Warrior Alliance.

We are one of the first tenants of the St.

Petersburg Science Center, and we are very proud to help lead the environmental education within the facility.

And while I operate all over the state of Florida, St.

Pete is my home and where all of my core programs were always be.

It is beautiful.

We have community, arts, culture, and local businesses.

We've done so well with not bringing in a whole bunch of different chains.

And that it inspires not only adult residents, but our children see it.

They know it's different here and it is special here.

So resiliency is something that has come up a lot, and a lot of the content that's come out recently.

Resiliency is not abstract, it is a lived experience.

So last year I was personally and professionally devastated by the hurricanes.

And if I didn't have community support, it would have been even harder.

I'm still recovering.

I'm moving out of a storage unit and converting my garage and my new residence around the corner into my office because we lost so much.

So resiliency isn't just a few different decisions we're going to make now.

It's us investing and inspiring this next generation to understand how to be innovative and learn.

And they're not going to be able to do that with the means that our public education has to offer.

And so, you know, nowadays I have two girls and I do youth programs all year round, and it is my favorite thing to do, as Julie Mastery had said.

Being able to experience a child to witness and accomplish something for the first time is so absolutely beautiful.

And you know, our kids nowadays they love technology, they need something hands-on.

So a worksheet in school is not going to engage them enough to have that interest to see if this is a passion of theirs that they want to follow through and commit to because it's a test they're given the day after they're given the assignment, and they're expected to understand and absorb that knowledge.

But there are many different styles of learning, and hands-on experience is one of the main things that they'll be able to experience in the St.

Pete Science Center.

Um, I actually grew up in Pascoe County, which is north of here, but I grew up underprivileged and underserved.

And so I've been involved with Joe Hamilton and amazing community members here for I think three, four years now at least on this project.

And I've spoken with several council members here before, and years ago, um Deborah Fixanders had mentioned transportation as an issue for members in her district, and I know being an extra speakers, Mr.

Chair, Alain Carey and Joel and I think it's Schleich.

I can't read the last name.

Can you repeat that second name, please?

Clerk.

Joel and Schleich, I think that's what it is.

Can I read the writing?

Uh, please go to uh I have the podium, state your name and address for the record, and you have three minutes to address to the council.

Hello, good afternoon.

My name is Eileen Carey.

I'm at 532010 Street North.

And I'm here because we really need help with the permitting process for our home.

Um, I understand that the city has been working really hard for recovery over the past almost year, and really want to say thank you to the team members for the city and for you all for everything that you have done to help us, you know, get back to normal, rebuild our community, rebuild our city.

I do see that work has been done.

But our personal story is that a tree fell in our house during Hurricane Milton, um, and we're trying to do everything right, and uh we submitted our permit 21 weeks ago, and we've been really patiently waiting.

Um, and about a month ago, I kind of started getting frustrated, and so I started to reach out saying, hey, what's going on?

Why is this being held up?

I don't want to skip in line, but like where am I in line?

I need kind of an update.

And they were like, oh, you're so you're so soon.

You should have it, you know, by the end of this week or next.

Well, that was two weeks ago.

So we've been waiting.

Um, and uh I do want to say thank you to Trisha Terry specifically, who's been very responsive with her communication, always getting back to me, letting me know where things are in the process.

Um I've also been in contact with our contractor about daily to be like what's going on, what do you need to submit, where's going?

And every time they're like we submitted it, we're waiting.

And then it's like another week waiting on the city to get back to them, and then they're like, oh, we need something else.

And it's this horrible back and forth.

Um, and most recently, uh, we were told on Friday, all you need to do is pay, and then you got your permit.

So we caught our contractors, hey, we were told all we need to do is pay.

And then they paid.

And then the city's like, oh, wait, you need something else.

So they immediately submitted it.

And that was Monday, and now we're on Thursday.

Um, and so I'm just really frustrated.

I want my house to get back to normal.

We've been waiting patiently.

Um that to say I wanna reiterate that I really appreciate everything the city's been doing, and I understand that everyone's overwhelmed by workload taking care of all of our residents.

Um, but it just really feels like we have gone through the ringer with this process.

Um, and I'm really kind of at my wit's end.

I know people who have been in my same situation, who applied for permits after us, who have gotten permits.

Um, and so I'm like, I don't really know what's going on with ours in particular.

I'm trying to be patient, but I'm really getting frustrated.

So if you all can help us get to the finish line and get this permit, it would mean the world to us.

So thank you very much.

Ma'am, if you could just hang out for a minute, Callie's gonna come in and get your contact information from me and I'll look into it personally.

Last speaker.

Let's just repeat the name one more time.

Joel and Schleck, she may have had to leave.

I think that may have been heard I had to leave.

Okay.

Um, Senator Dale Roussan.

Senator.

Welcome.

Thank you.

Good afternoon.

Darryl Rousan, 535 Central Avenue, St.

Petersburg, 33701.

I really don't have a lot to say.

Except save the Science Center.

My little brother, whose dissertation was entitled The Direct Numerical Simulation of Particle Laden Channel Flow.

Fluid Thermodynamics that he learned at the Science Center when he was young.

Carried him through engineering at Howard and at Stanford.

He donated the textbook that he wrote to the Science Center and thanked them for sparking a hunger for knowledge in him that he's been able to spread throughout the United States and the world.

I have worked with a great team of people so far.

And over the last five years, I've brought back nearly seven million dollars in state funding to support this operation.

As you know, it is not easy getting appropriations out of Tallahassee.

And if this project does not go through, it very likely will revert and have to be reappropriated, which is no guarantee.

I stand with Mr.

Hamilton, the neighborhood association presidents, the residents of that area, and saying, please save the science center.

Thank you.

Thank you, Senator.

No more speakers, Mr.

Chair.

Okay.

Thank you.

We're gonna go ahead and close open forum.

And council members, before we go into our reports, I'm gonna turn it over to legal for an introduction that I accidentally skipped.

Thank you, Chief.

Thank you, Council.

I just wanted to introduce you to Anastasia Underwood.

Uh, thank you for approving confirming her appointment on your consent agenda.

Uh, we're very excited to have her, as we always are to add a new attorney who already has a long list uh to the office.

Um Anastasia's gonna be working on some grant programs, land use, environmental.

Uh, she's eager to learn, extremely smart, and we're fortunate to have her.

Awesome.

Thank you and welcome, Anastasia.

Thanks for putting the jersey on.

Would you like to say anything?

Put you on the spot, you know.

Um legal doesn't have to push the button.

No, we jump in soon enough.

Uh, thanks for this opportunity, and I'm so excited to be part of um the city attorney's office or for city of St.

Pete.

Thanks for the opportunity.

Thank you.

Welcome.

Okay, Council members, we're gonna go into reports and we're gonna go to F2.

Uh and we're this is uh we've got lots of good news.

I think everybody knew it was budget, so we pulled a bunch of good news this afternoon.

And so uh we're gonna welcome Brajesh on an item for good news pulled by Councilmember Harding.

Councilmember Harding, did you want to intro the item?

Yeah, thank you very much, Chair.

I appreciate the opportunity.

Brigh, thank you for uh for coming forward.

I I wanted this to uh to be pulled and for us to talk about it because um the the understanding that the team that we have working here at the city is absolutely incredible.

This project that Brajesh is going to talk about is I don't know how you would term it, it's a regional project.

Um the project in itself uh upon completion will affect the area from Venetian Isles and Shoreacres all the way up to and probably past 16th, and north to south from 22nd to at least 62nd.

This is one project that will affect and it's it's bigger than it involves let's see, there are eight districts that involves more than district three, it's gotta be damn near a quarter of the entire city.

Um and the uh and the idea that um that Mother Nature decided she was going to do different things and we're able to uh and we're able to accommodate that on such a mass scale.

This will bring relief uh to just a phenomenal amount of people.

And Brezhnev, I could not be any more uh impressed with your team.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you.

Uh welcome.

Thank you, Council, Bragesh Prime Insurance Capital Improvements Department.

First of all, I would like to apologize.

Um time-wise, I did not I I really wanted to put together something to give context of the scale of the magnitude of the possible benefits, but unfortunately, I hit SENT and I didn't.

I thought I hit Santa was still in draft.

So um we've all made that mistake before, Braz, don't worry about it.

Yeah, so I if it's possible, I may ask Chan to bring up the council location map just so the residents and we can give general perspective.

Absolutely.

Um thank you.

I appreciate that.

And while that is being done, um, I wanted to really talk um big, and again, this is this is where we really start to take a look into the innovation and thinking outside the box that we do have projects that we have on the books, um, stormwater master plan projects, other type of um resiliency and sustainability projects, but how all of these strategically come together towards a big picture, and we had a really good conversation at the Hood's committee um last week, I believe, about the BC and how those laid out strategically.

And this is the beginning of that thinking process within these northeast quadrants of the city.

So there will be more to come.

Um, but this is the start of it.

And you know, the the key element I want to bring apart, and the council member touched on it, is that the tidal gates that we're planning is to be installed within the vicinity of the show acres.

It does not, and I want as much as possible, and we will have to do a really good job when we do the public engagement part of this.

That is not to benefit one community, but this is a benefit to all the communities in that region.

Um so we will have to do a lot of public engagement when we see start this project.

Um so the gates will be located within that area.

And why we're moving forward with this project now.

Um district maps, okay.

I think I could work with that.

Um why that's important is because right now we're in the process of um beginning the design of the overlook bridge.

There are two channels that currently flow out of that water body.

That water body um receives water from the western section of the city.

Stormwater basins L and M.

Unfortunately, I know these alphabet by head in my head now.

Um essentially stormwater systems are designed so that they have major basins and then micro basins.

All those micro basins flew towards and generally flew towards a mean corridor out.

Kind of like our roads are your residential and then your collectors and the arterials.

So if you think about it, 54th Avenue Channel, as well as the 45th Avenue Channel are the inner state for the stormwater system, getting out of those communities that go as far west as 16th Street.

Now those areas are tidally impacted, and you we've all spoke all spoken about the hydraulic grade line within our stormwater system and sea level rise and how that impacts the efficiency of our stormwater system.

So taking that into context, um, you know these improvements, taking that into context, what we looked at on the area of that water body.

And to give you an idea of the communities that flow towards that water body out of basins LM, we're talking about Edgemore, Placido Bayou, Arcadia, Euclid Heights, Greater Grove Mont, Harris Park, Alendale, Alendal Oaks, Alendale Terrace, Patrician Point, Eden Isles, and also parts of Northeast Park, Magnolia Heights, Five Point, Snala, and Oakwood.

So that gives a context of why how what we're looking at on the possible benefits of this.

Now, many of these communities were tightly impacted during Helene, as well as the rain-induced flooding from Milton.

Obviously, with Milton, we had extreme rain events during cycles of our tide event.

So that didn't have enough time to relieve itself in the hydraulic gray line within the that water body.

So we're looking at installing tidal gates primarily at two locations, and as I mentioned, it's within Chuekas.

But that's because that's the water body that provides the ultimate discharge of all these communities towards Tampa B.

Now, if we do the calculation, just the high-level calculation, and Councilmember scratched my head on this, and this is why I did this another way.

He had a question on volume.

So just on the volume of the calculation of just that water body, not taken into account the volume of water storage that we could pick up in our stormwater system for each six inches of that water body, we're talking about 52 million gallons of storage capacity.

So if during a rain, a major rain event, a storm, we see an impact of surge, we can close that gate.

But we don't have that surge impact on our stormwater that puts our residents at risk of flooding as far west as these locations.

So you see, we've done one on the south, basin sea, this is its location, and we will continue to look for opportunities for these major regional benefits across the our community as a whole.

So the objective of this project, as I mentioned, we're getting started to start to get moving on that bridge design.

But we don't want to start a bridge design that ends up with the structural supports of our bridge that are too narrow.

So we want to define how wide we need to be so we can fit if it's a feasible design, so we can fit our um valves, our gates, so we don't have scour, or we also have efficient drawdown of that bio, and we don't affect water quality.

And also we can look at the extent of the benefit.

So that's primarily why we're looking towards this project.

This at this point, we need to do that modeling.

We need to understand the design criteria so that we we can move forward with outlining that in the design of the bridge.

Um I'm sorry for the lengthy explanation, but I am open to questions.

Thank you, Brezhnev and uh Councilmember Harding, thanks for pulling the item so we can talk about the east side of town and the entire conversation is about District One today.

I appreciate that.

So we'll go to Councilmember Gabriel.

Thank you, Chair, and uh thank you, Brajesh for the uh item.

Thank you, Councilmember Harding for pulling it for conversation.

Um I don't know if it was, you know, just that it was on consent or that you pulled it or what, but obviously there was an article in the Tampa Bay Times uh that talked about this project, and you can only imagine as a representative for District 2 uh lying 95% within the coastal high hazard area, every single neighborhood being dramatically infected by Helene and other uh events that happened prior to that.

My phone began to ring off the hook immediately after this article came out.

Uh St.

Petersburg considers floodgates to protect shore acres.

So what does that say to our community?

It says that we are prioritizing one neighborhood over another.

So I'm very glad that we're having this conversation today because um a lot of the confusion that was created.

Um I don't know that we're gonna be able to necessarily clear up today, but as the representative for the district, it is my job to elevate the concerns of the residents that I serve to the city.

And so I wanted to have a conversation today.

And some of this is going to come from the actual analysis and the feasibility and some of these alternatives that might come from the study.

I support the study today.

You know, we talk about being able to hold back water.

Well, water finds a way.

A lot of it, what do we say to District 2, who has had issues for a very long time with flooding, dating all the way back to ETA in 2020.

They are a repetitive loss neighborhood, Riviera Bay specifically.

What do we say to them when they say to us, where is that water going to go?

And are you going to make us the next short acres?

What do we say to that?

So one of the key elements in the modeling that we will have to do is to ensure the impacts on a wave action.

So we don't spread or we cause adverse impacts on adjoining communities.

So that's key and critical to it.

But the other element is within this area, primarily, we get more of that bathtub sewage as well.

And that will really go into the analysis of how we do the modeling.

But the in retrospect, and you know, I don't want to say yes, there's nothing to we are worried about because at the end of the day, ideas start with a concept.

Sometimes a concept work, but we have to vet it.

This may not be the final solution.

It may not be the complete solution, but I would say that there are other solutions within the other communities that we're working on.

You know, the coordination we've had with the regional planning council is leading to some really good projects regionally in that community as well.

And I look forward to the conversations with the district tool master plan because that's also going to facilitate, you know, the land development codes as well as how we address additional improvements within that community.

So I would say definitely in the first element of what are the impacts, we want to make sure we don't adversely impact any other community.

That's we don't want to push the problem from one spot to another.

That's key.

Right.

Um, the other element is so that will be taken care of in the model modeling analysis.

Um the other element of it as far as what's next step for these communities, you know, we will continue working with the Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council, understand their projects, but there are also some projects that we are proposing to them that could probably look at that regional benefit along the same scenario as well.

So I would say that will probably come out of the regional planning recommendations or probably be partnerships of those.

Okay.

Todd, could you please um so we're talking about the regional planning council, the collaboration, the cooperation, trying to come up with more regionalized projects?

Um let's talk about the resilient St.

Pete Action Plan.

Um, the residents, we have asked them over the course of the last year plus to cooperate and participate in this planning.

Um we were supposed to have had a deliverable by now.

Unfortunately, there was some staffing changes at it at Jacobs, which I think might have slowed things down a little bit.

Residents are saying, well, we participated in this.

We thought you would all produce this plan that our say would be involved in these large regional projects, and now you're moving forward with all of these things without actually taking our can our thoughts into consideration.

So can you give the residents who are listening today a timeline estimated, um, recognizing things happen?

Um, but when can they expect for the regional action plan to actually be delivered to them?

So the product from the regional action plan, we're gonna be delivering it in a little bit of an unusual way than we normally do.

Normally, you know, we we create a like a report.

Story map.

Yeah, and so what we're gonna be doing for this is a story map that can be on our website that can that that'll show um aerial photographs of of the different neighborhoods that are affected.

It'll it'll it'll it'll list some of the things that were brought to us by the neighborhoods, it'll list some of the general conceptual ideas of how to handle the flooding in those different areas, and it'll be an interactive type of of uh uh product.

And so I know the staff is working on that.

I've seen communications between Jacobs and our team on making sure that we get that that that story map up and running, and I know that that they've made good progress on it.

I believe we're gonna have something that we can review in October, but I I I can't I did I didn't come prepared to to really nail down that date.

But based off of the conversations I've seen from the the um the team, I think they're making good progress.

Okay, so when we had a meeting in August with the team that I set in on, we were hoping to have a deliverable by September.

Unfortunately, again, staffing changes at Jacobs, I think had some effect on that.

Um now we're saying that potentially maybe October.

Um, you know, I I really I just want to press on the administration that we find a way to move this forward.

We need to move this plan to a place where the residents can actually then give us more feedback after it gets released.

We can incorporate more neighborhoods.

Um, you know, this really is a citywide issue.

And um it's really moved to a place now where residents want to make sure that their voices are included.

They felt like it was through this process, but now that we're kind of, you know, at the end and we can't just quite get it in for a landing.

I'm really just asking that administration honor the request of the residents and get this project done so that uh residents do feel included in these decisions as we move forward.

We're spending their utility dollars, and they should feel as though they have a say in what we're doing.

Um, the last thing that I want to ask about, and this might go back a little bit to um, you know, the concerns about where the water is going to go.

You know, Riviera Bay, um, the canals within Riviera Bay took on a lot of siltation from the hurricanes, and we've been talking about this behind the scenes a lot.

Um they're they're quite frankly pretty fed up with the fact that we are kind of hand, you know, handicapped by the Army Corps of Engineers.

Um, we need to move some of that stuff forward.

One of the questions I had about the floodgates was well, you're telling us that you can't dredge our canals because of the Army Corps of Engineers process, and that you don't have the funding to do it either, but you're gonna do these floodgates, and you're also doing that on navigable bot navigable bodies.

So, does that not take the Army Corps of Engineers?

So, can we talk a little bit about the Army Corps and and kind of the misnomers around that?

So such a good question.

So, just to put into perspective, I think for the communities have to understand this is not a project to say we're doing it.

This is a project for evaluation.

So it's the modeling plus reaching out to the Army Corps, the regulatory agencies, Florida Fish and Wildlife, doing the NEPA evaluation to see can we do it?

Not just a modeling.

So you will include the Army Corps in the studies.

So this is not to see we're moving forward with the design criteria to develop a design criteria and we're moving and we're building.

This is not that.

This is for and just question so perfect.

Um, this is really for us to investigate.

Can it be done?

What are the permitting implications?

What are we looking at at permitting timelines, regulation, do we have to do mitigation for this?

All that will be defined.

So it's so I want the residents to understand it's not that we're doing it, we investigate it.

What the benefits are and what the implications on what the constraints are for us to even move forward with the project if it is feasible.

And I think too, that kind of takes me back to my original question about the article and some of the miscommunication around that.

Um, I think it's really important for residents to understand that just because we vote to even study it today does not mean that it will happen, does not mean that it will happen in the way that people believe it might happen.

And also, once again, because you have the Army Corps involved, um, the process for dredging these canals um in Riviera Bay, we've looked at that, and with the Army Corps permitting alone, and then all of the work that we would have to do on the back end, that could be an 800-day project.

Correct.

So let's think about that in the context of floodgates, right?

Like you can only imagine.

So this is not going to be an overnight when all of a sudden we're gonna be, you know, protected in this particular area.

And this is a long game.

Yeah, and you bring up another good point, the word protected.

So even if this, let's say in the future, this fans out a perfectly viable project, it provides the benefits we're looking for, we have a path forward.

At the end of the day, what residents have to understand is protection, you have to understand your evacuation zone.

Right.

If you anyva, I mean, those are things that still exist.

And we still need to have a concerted effort and a plan for how we're gonna help these communities lift themselves up out of that harm's way because we are a coastal community.

We are never going to keep all the water out of our city.

It's just not going to happen.

We all have to learn to adapt and get get really prepared for the future, which is living with this water.

And so I I just I want this to be crystal clear because people read these headlines.

I mean, I called you and I read you the article, and I was like, what would you think if you lived in Shore Acres?

And you're reading this article, right?

It feels like a false promise that we're protecting.

And so this is our opportunity to be really clear with residents what it is, what it isn't.

And I'm just asking again that we really get focused on um a resident participation piece to everything that we do in this space.

One of the main drivers of community resilience is education and collaboration with our communities.

And if we are not educating them, they're not gonna know what we're doing and what the actual output is gonna be.

So um thank you again for polling the item, and thank you, Chair, for the time.

Okay, council members.

Move approval.

Second.

We have a motion and a second on F two.

Seeing there's no other council members wishing to speak.

Clerk, could you please open the machine for voting?

Council members, please enter your votes.

Seeing as all present council members have voted, clerk, please tally and announce the vote.

Mr.

Chair, motion to approve a genanum F two pass this unanimously.

Okay, thank you.

All right, we're gonna move into F three.

Another good news item.

This one's pulled by Councilmember Givens.

We're gonna talk about a child care food program grant.

We've got Mike Jeffries joining us, but I'll turn it over to Councilmember Givens.

Councilmember Givens.

Thank you, Chair.

Um I asked that this one be pulled mainly because Mike knows for years.

Um I've been a huge proponent for fighting and combating food insecurity, uh, specifically in South St.

Pete, which has been designated uh a food insecure area, food desert.

Um wanted to make sure that the community knew that we have this opportunity to receive 262,000 dollars from the Florida Department of Health, which will help us feed hundreds of students in food insecure areas in our after school care program.

So I will turn it over to you, Mike.

Thank you.

Fantastic.

Thank you so much for polling, and I appreciate the opportunity to uh discuss.

I'm Mike Jeffries, I'm the community enrichment administrator.

While this is very different than floodgates, we're talking about carrots and ranch.

It's uh just as important.

So I'm happy to take the time.

Um this is a continuation grant that we've received um now for many, many years.

And as Councilmember Givens said, uh, this is a grant that provides after school snacks for the participants that are in all of our recreation centers.

And while I joke about carrots and ranch, um, I do think that it's important to share that these are nutritionally uh approved snacks.

So we're not talking Doritos, we're not talking, you know, chocolates, we're talking about uh cheese sticks, we're talking about items that have fruit, uh vegetables, and grains.

And um the kids really are responding very, very well.

Um we are excited about this program.

We find that um all of our snacks that we order for each uh rec center uh are being utilized and they're being utilized appropriately.

Uh so we're really excited to have this partnership.

This uh this is a partnership with the Florida Department of Health.

Um we follow the dietary guidelines uh for Americans, and um we work with the Pinellas County schools as our vendor, which um is really a great partnership.

Again, we partner with them in many ways.

Uh this is one more way that they support us.

Uh most of you know on council we have had a real struggle trying to find vendors that will uh provide us uh decent uh lunches and breakfasts uh for another program that we have.

Um, and we equally have the same issue finding uh vendors that will provide the snacks, the the healthy snacks.

So we've partnered with Pine House County Schools.

Um while we're talking about it, uh just wanted to kind of say that we um have been doing this since 1999.

Um we are in what's called permanent funding status, so we don't have to go back each year um to renew it with the state um because of our performance because of the past audits that we've had, we've been able to move into that uh different category of funding, which has been a real blessing.

Um the other thing that I will share um while this is only available to our program participants, uh we do have breakfast and lunch that's available during the summer for um our entire community.

So anyone who is um 17 and under can participate in that.

And um, I know how much you guys like uh statistics and data.

Um I just wanted to report out that uh last year we served over a hundred and eighty-one thousand uh snacks um in this program.

So I know that you all um are real proud of that.

Each and every one of you have been just an amazing advocate for um health and wellness and our community at large, but especially when it comes to the children that are in our rec centers.

So thank you so much for your support.

Thank you.

And Apple Bay keeps the doctor away, and with that, move to approval.

Second.

We have a motion and a second on F three.

Seeing as no other council members wishing to speak, Clerk, could you please open the machine for voting?

Council members, please enter your votes.

Seeing as all present council members have voted, clerk, please tally and announce the vote.

Mr.

Chair, motion to approve the genanum F four passes you know F three passes unanimously.

Okay, we're gonna move into F4.

This was pulled by Councilmember Harding, where we're gonna talk about the license agreement for the St.

Pete Lawn Bowling Club.

Councilmember Harding, I'll turn it over to you.

Thank you, Chair.

Mike, thanks very much for staying up here with us.

I I had some questions.

Uh you and I talked earlier.

Um I I appreciate the the answer the time you're gonna spend with us.

I I have some concerns with uh the lease.

I have some concerns with the the time that the uh the the venue is open and available to the public, and I appreciate you uh you going through some details with us.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you.

Absolutely.

Uh so I will jump right in.

Um we appreciate this opportunity as well.

I know there have been a lot of emails that have been going back and forth, and um we thought that it would be important to go over um some of the history as to um how we got here, go over our current practice, and then um finally come up with our recommendation as we move forward.

I know that I've spoken to um almost all of you and have gone over some details, so I appreciate the time on that.

Um today we're here to um to go into uh an additional lease renewal with the St.

Petersburg Lawn Bowling Club.

And I think it's important to note that um this historic facility and historic club have uh been working together and working with the city since 1933.

Um it's been a fantastic relationship.

Um we have a great relationship with the club.

Um we uh know that this is an extremely unique facility.

Uh we know that this is not your typical parks and rec facility.

This is not a pickleball court or a basketball court or a soccer field that is uh built just by the city uh to be open to the public.

This is something that um again, while the club was in um in place in 1933, uh, even before that, uh the city and uh lawn bowling um uh experts worked together uh to uh create a partnership where the club and the city built the facility that we have here today.

I think most of you know that the facility has components that are historically significant.

There are buildings that are on the registry.

Um there are uh lots of um lots of excitement that goes on out at the lawn bowling and lots of things to be to be proud of.

This is not while I said this is a unique uh scenario.

This is not the only scenario where we have a historical facility, um, a relationship with a historical club that's been running it for many, many years.

We've got other examples of of that.

Um, as we bring renewals uh forward, um, I think that it should be noted that we're not required to do an RFP to go out.

Uh this is not part of the procurement process.

This is a license agreement, and we've had a long-standing practice of working with the current historical club.

And some of those examples would include Shuffle Board, the chess club, uh Tennis Center, uh, the police athletic league, uh, the garden club, and even USF out at Clan Bayou.

Um, we feel like that continuity of relationship and management of the property is really beneficial to the community.

Um, and it's something that um you know we would uh like to continue.

We think that's a strong precedent and a good long-standing practice as we move forward with these renewals.

Um we do uh we do frequently get um concerns from the community when it comes to youth sports, when it comes to shuffle board, you name it.

We get folks that think that they have a better idea of how a facility should be run.

They don't like how a club um you know has decided to manage a facility.

Um we have a long-standing practice of um having the individuals that have those concerns work with the elected board that is running the facility.

So what we like to do is we will say, hey, if you have a problem with a youth sports, go meet with the board, chat with them, see if there's some way to come up with a consensus, some way to uh work through those issues.

Again, we think that that's very important.

Uh these boards are elected by the members, and uh those boards are really running those facilities on our behalf.

We have had scenarios um out at the tennis center, and I think it's important to note where we've had clubs that have not uh decided to renew their their management, if you will, and that facility has come back to the city.

Um we ran the tennis center for years after the club um decided not to renew their lease.

Um, we had to hire staff.

We had to hire um all sorts of uh supervisory teams to go out and and kind of run that facility.

So I don't want to lose sight that the clubs that are managing these facilities are doing the city a great service by running those facilities and by providing the services that are detailed out in their agreement.

Um and I think as we move forward, I think another one of um our current practices has been to um recognize the direction that the club is wanting to go and to work with the club to kind of find that consensus and and move forward um on a common path.

Uh as we look at recommendations here today, um our recommendation is that we would renew with the existing uh club uh that has been running it since 1933.

Um again, they've been very open to our suggestions over the last uh couple of decades, and we've had just a great relationship working with them.

Um the other thing that we'll do is parks and rec.

Um we've heard from some of the council members and some of the community that uh there should be an increase in um availability of the facility.

We have chatted with the club, the club is on board with that.

So parks and rec will work with the club to figure out what exactly that looks like so that it can be more available.

Councilmember Harding, I heard you loud and clear that it's such a great facility that we'd like to see it more available.

So again, we will work with the club and we will figure out what that looks like as we as we move forward after um after this renewal.

Uh Councilmember Gertis, same conversation we had that you know it is a unique piece of property uh with a unique history, and again, we're happy to um liaison between any uh council member, any community members that um are looking to increase the availability of the property.

And I can tell you that even as we've uh met with the lawn bowling club here recently, uh there's even a willingness to um allow their members to have keys to a lockbox to have even more access than they have right now.

So I think we can get to that, and I think that's something that we can that we can work through.

The other thing that we'll continue to do, and I think this is important, we'll continue to work with the engineering department.

Um there are a couple of CIP uh projects that are um on the on the books, have been on the books for a while now.

Out at the out at the club.

One that um has been on the books since February is a um a rewiring electrical uh project that's going on in the clubhouse.

I have to tell you that we went through the entire process, started in February, working with the engineering department and CIP, and we got all the way to uh you know the part where the contractor was going to start to do the project, and the contractor said, Hey, this is a bigger job than we had originally uh first thought.

So we we met with engineers, uh, looked at that, and they said we think the building should be de-energized.

Um we don't think that it's safe to leave the power on in this facility.

So, of course, if the experts are telling us to de-energize the facility, that's exactly what we've done.

So I know in some of the emails you've heard that uh the club is not operating at capacity.

Um, one of the things is they've got a clubhouse that they don't have access to.

So, yes, that is a very real world scenario.

We continue to work with uh engineering and happy to report that we have permanent permitting that is polled and ready to go to start that um that rewiring and that electrical work at the facility.

Um the other things that um you know we'll continue to do is we'll continue to work with uh the community and navigate um the issues that that might come up.

But I have to tell you, you have a bunch of volunteers that um have been running this club.

Uh the club has been in place since 1933, and um they have been a fantastic partner, and I think that it's important that we uh continue that relationship as we see um you know the facility move into the next uh couple of decades.

So that's all that I have as far as my report.

Happy to answer any questions that you might have.

Okay, thanks, Mike.

Let's go into public comment, please.

First two speakers, Mr.

Chair, Beth Eschenfelder and Robert Hashiah.

Please go to eye the podium, state your name and address for the record.

And you have three minutes to address city council.

Thank you.

My name is Beth Eschenfelder, and for the past 25 years, I've resided at 532 6th Avenue North, which is two blocks directly north of the lawn bowling courts.

And even though I live so close, I know you share a common experience with me, which is coming down that I sep I-375 off ramp, getting stopped at that fifth street light, right?

And you look to the right, and you see deserted, minimally maintain lawn bowling courts and facilities.

And you think you might think this is the gateway to our city.

It should be a shining example of the vibrancy we have here to share with the community, and it should, and more access is one way that we can do that.

And that's what I want to talk about.

Specifically, that the city really needs to guarantee that we have adequate access to this public parks facility for city residents and our visiting guests.

By access, I mean two things game time and then other access for dues paying members.

The current licensee is only structuring game time 7.5% of the time currently allowed in their license agreement.

That includes a limited number of days that really are not convenient for a lot of working residents, no weekend hours, one night a week, and all of that is reduced drastically in the summer when the club is off season.

Regarding other access for dues paying members, there is none.

They operate like other lawn bowling clubs around Central Florida, where members are given an access code and they're simply asked to return the equipment, maintain the courts, have a great time, which is really important for a lawn bowler who might be representing the city at an upcoming regional, national, or international competition.

They need that time to practice on the courts that they can't get during game time.

The current licensee has demonstrated their unwillingness to grow and change and add more access.

One to vote no on this particular license agreement, and second, to demand that something more progressive come back that will guarantee more access to city residents.

Um and will restore the majesty of this great facility in its efficiency, its use, and its appearance for years to come.

So when you stop at that fifth street light in the future, you'll be glad you made a difference because we have the ability to see something different, and you can make that happen.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good afternoon.

My name is Robert Cosha, homeowner at 532 6th Avenue North.

I've been a real estate broker for almost two decades, and I work with contracts, leases, management, and association rules on almost a daily basis.

In my opinion, this 93% inaccessible multimillion dollar public recreational property located at the gateway to the city is not even close to being in its highest and best use.

Not for the community, its club members, the handicap, or visiting tourists.

Immediate intervention is required.

After over a year of study, I think this facility should be temporarily closed and restructured to bring it into compliance with city, state, and federal ADA laws and remedy local code violations before reopening.

It should be internally restructured as well.

Like the now successful Shovel Board Club organization has 2600 members.

This organization has fewer than 40 members.

The community wants and deserves one more public court time, member access to the facility, a member lockbox, and two, an ADA compliant facility as required in the license agreement.

An external ADA expert advises the facility is not even close to being compliant.

At the 2025 annual meeting, 90% of membership voted for more access and a lockbox.

This vote was overridden at the pleasure of the board, keeping the public facility closed to the public and members for 93% of the time.

The city has no object objection to a lockbox at the city uh St.

Pete Lawn Bowling Club.

Some club members drive 40 plus minutes to use the Clearwater Lawn Bowling Club because the St.

Pete Club is closed 93% of the time.

When the facility is open Monday, Wednesday, Friday mornings, it is not accessible to many working and school-going people.

The facility is managed by a board composed of 50% snowbirds who do not have physical presence here to run the facility properly.

Please do not allow the license agreement to be renewed that will continue to keep this facility 93% inaccessible to city residents.

These shortcomings can be rectified by a third party taking over the property to fix the deficiencies and create a club that is safe, successful, and acceptable to all the public, including the disabled.

The mismanagement of this facility has fallen through the cracks for years due to lack of effective monitoring by the city, but now is the time to make that stop.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next two speakers, please.

Please go to either podium.

State your name and address for the record.

We have three minutes to do a city council.

Thank you.

My name is Sheila Lake.

I am the attorney for St.

Pete Lawn Bowling Club.

My address is 475 Central Avenue, right over there.

My office address.

I'm also a resident of St.

Pete, and I've been a resident of St.

Pete for almost 25 years, but my family is from St.

Pete.

I I I tell you this, my grandmother and my mother and her siblings performed a variety show on the pier in the 60s.

We are entrenched in St.

Pete.

The Lawn Bowling Club owned the property until then.

So they have been there for almost a hundred and ten years.

The board would love to open up the bowling club for any time you want to come in.

That would be wonderful.

The problem here is funding.

They are a small association.

They are funded by their membership dues.

They don't get any federal or government funding, any state funding.

So they are, as I'm sorry, I can't remember your name.

As Mike said, they they have been speaking with Mike and they are interested in expanding.

Um it's from my point of view, when I get off that interstate exit and I look to my right and I see St.

Pete Lawn Bowling Club, I know I'm home because it's been there my whole life.

Even I grew up in Virginia because my father was in the military, but when I came here, I would see it.

It's always been there.

It's home.

Every day we see more and more of St.

Pete's history being taken away to put up new development.

And I'll tell you, I'm a real estate attorney, so I'm not against development, but I think it's very important for St.

Pete and for its citizens that we keep some of our history.

The lawn bowling club is the first lawn bowling club in Florida.

It's the largest lawn bowling club in Florida, and it's the tenth largest in the country.

So it's very important to St.

Pete in this area.

And uh I I wanna say this so it doesn't sound like I am attacking her on the offensive.

But the two prior members that you just heard speak are prior members.

They're disgruntled.

They've had a serious issue for several months because the board would not let them do what they wanted to do.

So I'm urging you to look at the history of St.

Pete to look at the history of this club, to know that lawn bowling is actually on the rise again, and it's amazing.

I just attended a wedding, my daughter's wedding in England, and half the people there are lawn bowling club members.

And so I think that working with Mike and the city and the board.

I think St.

Pete Lawn Bowling can come back.

Thank you.

Any other speakers?

More speakers, Mr.

Chair.

Okay, we're gonna go to council member discussion.

Councilmember Driscoll.

Thank you, and thank you, Councilmember Harding, for pulling this item.

Um, I had been in in uh discussions as well after hearing from um folks about concerns that they had on this particular agreement.

I think that the lawn bowling club actually has that same potential that the shuffleboard club has.

It can follow in this footsteps to become um the to have a revitalization that the Shuffleboard Club sees that no one probably ever thought would be as big as it is.

Imagine if the lawn bowling club had over 2,000 members.

That took work, not from the city, but from a board that was dedicated from volunteers who showed up every Friday night to open the doors to to open the gates to everyone for free.

Um to introduce them to the game, to welcome them.

It was like having an open house every Friday night, and the members started signing up, and the leagues started growing.

And success came back to the shuffle board club.

It's a great example of what you can do when you put a plan together and execute it for something like this.

I would like nothing more to see than to see something.

Uh these improvements, I think they would be very welcome.

I think we can all agree we'd love to see it open more.

I'd love to see it open to more to explore and discover this.

Um I think it would I think it would behoove the the board and the the membership of the lawn bowling club to talk with the shuffle board club, especially those longtime board members and members who were there and find out how did you get that going?

And and I think they would be more than happy.

They're a great bunch.

They would be more than happy to um help share their share their secrets and um there and perhaps offer an opportunity for collaboration because they're right there.

So there is some real magic that can happen there.

If you have the the people to put it together, um the funding was mentioned, that will come too.

But you've got to open the doors.

So I hope that we see that move forward.

Now, when you have conflicts between um boards and and members and all of that, um we hear that quite a bit, whether it's with um, you know, a club, whether it's with an HOA, whether it's with a neighborhood association.

I mean, we get a lot of that.

The important part is that the city is here as a resource, but not as a mediator.

This stuff really needs to be worked out.

That's how we grow is by learning how to resolve conflicts within organizations.

That is why, although I would love to see improvements, I would love to see better relations, I would love to see better public relations.

It is not for us to get involved and decide.

The lease that we have in place, could it be stronger?

Could it be could it have more requirements?

Yes.

But that might actually hinder the lawn bowling club from being successful and growing.

I need this to happen organically, I need it to happen or collaboratively, and I need it to happen without government getting in the way.

So I am willing to off off the dais.

I am willing to meet with the stakeholders with the lawn bowling club and give my opinion, or make some introductions so that real conversations can take place.

Um and that's where I'm at with it today.

I like I like the way the agreement is because it gives the flexibility the flexibility for growth that I think is needed, especially at this juncture for the lawn bowling club.

And so I will um be happy to support it and happy to be available for ongoing conversations that make it work for everyone.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Councilmember Harding.

Thank you, Chair.

Mike again, thanks for your time.

Um and to be clear, uh, I intend to to move this along when I'm done talking.

I I had the opportunity to read through the lease.

Um, and really here's the basis of of my concern.

Um the the it well, let me back up a step.

The the historical significance it is is uh is evident.

The fact that that not only is it there, but the same the same club um is also still in existence and running it.

Um takes a take takes a uh a lion's share of effort to get it there.

But where we are today, and and what I read in the lease is that the onus is on the city for everything.

The club is responsible for the first two thousand dollars worth of RM.

And aside from that, the city does everything else.

We pay the power, we pay the water, we pay the RNM, we pay the CIP, we pay everything.

And that's okay as long as it is a there is a benefit to the city.

And so I look at the I looked at the website, um, and um, and that and that's the basis of of this discussion is that that if the city is gonna pick that up, if the if we're going to pay all that, then it just has to be available and it does it to the citizens as a whole.

Now it doesn't have to be available tomorrow, but there needs to be a plan in the I don't I apologize, I don't have any other comparison, but the the shuffle board um property went through this cycle as well, um, where there is no one there, and that and the group put in the effort.

The city is definitely putting in the effort.

You're talking about spending money on on uh on CIP, which I agree with.

Um, but we but I but we need to see it from the other side.

We need to see that that this is something that's not gonna benefit whoever is a member, but it's available to all.

Um and um and and I mean this this is yours.

I I just wanted us to talk about it.

No, I appreciate it.

I appreciate the opportunity, and we completely agree.

Um we do think that lawn bowling is on the uptick, and we do think that this is a fork in the road.

We think that you know the the trajectory can be different, and our conversations with the board members um indicate that they feel the exact same way.

And I I'm not sure that that was always the case over the last 10, five years.

I you know that I'm not sure that it was as popular, and and we did watch it with shuffleboard.

I totally agree with Councilmember Driscoll.

Uh, you know that I bring many agreements forward to you all, and I I like to have teeth in my agreements.

I don't know how to structure this one that doesn't stymie the growth because I put in the wrong the wrong teeth, the wrong deliverables.

I think we can get there, and based on my relationship and Rick's relationship with the board, we have a group of people who really love the sport and really want to see it move forward.

And I think that's to me that's uh a commitment enough that we're gonna take it to the next level.

We do uh again, you know.

I heard from several of you about the availability, and the board is is on board with a lockbox for their members, you know, as a first as a first start, you know, to get those to get that process started.

And I think if we could connect them with shuffle board, that would be fantastic.

We can help do that as well.

But I think that um I I guess I look at it kind of the other way.

I'm really glad that when the shuffle board club was not thriving that we didn't give the operation to someone else.

And and I think that we were able to keep that continuity and we were able to keep that longevity moving forward and give them a chance.

And I think lawn bowling can do the exact same.

Thank you, Mike.

And to your point, um leases are are hindering.

And sometimes the the spoken word, gentlemen's agreements, and just making your point heard is enough.

So with that, I move approval, Chair.

Second.

Okay, just quickly.

Uh, first, Mike, thanks for the one-on-one on this.

Appreciate uh you hearing kind of my feedback on all this.

Um quickly, just um Councilmember Driscoll, thanks for uh your willingness to mediate uh in the middle of this.

I do I really do think it's important.

Um I Mike, I know you you and I talked about this, but I is the best thing maybe for like if I put in an MBI for an update for PSNI just to see how this is going a year from now.

There's no rush.

I just want to make sure it doesn't get forgotten.

Yeah, I I I think did I hear you say uh uh an update a year from now?

Yeah, I think I think that would be perfect.

Let's do an update and that would be great.

Because I just think um, listen, you guys do an amazing job.

We have a bunch of assets that you have to follow and track.

I just think um as we want to see this one grow and it maybe we just spend a little bit more time on this one as we want to see it, gives council member Driscoll some time and and staff some time to spend some time with the board and see what couldn't collaboration can happen.

There's my voice going.

And uh and and so I just I wanted to throw that out there real quickly.

But I like that idea.

It also gives us a chance to get power into their clubhouse again.

Yeah, it gives time, right?

You're in permitting.

I don't want it three months from now.

I want it a year from now.

Let's see how it goes.

And then and then I think if now that I'm saying it out loud, everybody knows that we're paying attention, and a year from now we'll we'll um redirect the conversation and make sure some changes have happened.

So I appreciate your willingness and staff's willingness to continue to work on it.

Councilmember Driscoll, thanks for being will being willing to mediate in that.

And then Councilmember Harding, thanks for pulling the item.

I do think it was important that we have the discussion.

All right, council members.

We've got a motion in a second.

Seeing as no other council members wishing to speak.

Clerk, could you please open the machine for voting?

Council members, please enter your votes.

Seeing as all present council members have voted, clerk, please tally and announce the vote.

Mr.

Chair, motion to approve a genome F four, passes unanimously.

Okay, thank you, everybody.

All right, we're gonna move into F five.

This was also polled by Councilmember Givens.

Uh, and we've got Burges joining us again, but I'll turn it over to Councilmember Givens.

Thank you very much.

I'll be very brief, Chair.

Um Brajesh, I just had a couple of questions.

Um, you know, obviously I get the complaints that I'm sure a lot of people get when it comes to pavement and depressions that are opening up.

So I know that there was a change in the contractual amount, so I just wanted to know what was included in that, and hopefully just get an update and see where we stand with pavement restoration.

Sure, thank you.

Um sorry, and um wanna just take a little step back.

You know, we did do that PSI presentation related to the difference between operational and capital.

Um, so this is primary capital.

So um what this is focused on and the reason why um and kind of this kind of brings me back a little bit of time back and the comment that Councilmember Driscoll mentioned when we were dealing with all the little contractors and trying to package bids in such a way that we can attract contractors um because it's not a small to us, it's not a small amount that we're putting out on resurfacing, but to these contractors that are doing 18, 20 million dollar contracts, you know, a straight rule on FDOT right away.

It's very easy for them to bid those things.

So this was a mechanism of um getting the contractors to commit to staying here and hitting these projects hard, um, to getting more fall roads paved as quickly as possible so they don't start and demobilized to go to another location and wait for the next batch of work.

So this was really focused on making sure that we get the best bound for the bug um dollar, but also um leveraging and accelerating as much roadway projects as we can to also get some fiscal benefit in the magnitude of work that we're gonna give them at the at the time as well.

So this is what's really driven on the capital side of this.

But on the operational side, I will gladly follow up um with you as well on that.

Smart and efficient as always, Burgess.

So thank you very much.

And with that, I move to approval.

Second.

We've got a motion and a second on F5.

Seeing there's no other council members wishing to speak, Clerk, could you please open the machine for voting?

Council members, please enter your votes.

Seeing as all present council members have voted, Councilmember Floyd maybe turn there.

Clerk, could you please tally and announce the vote?

Mr.

Chair, motion to approve a gentleman.

Five passes unanimously, Councilmember Floyd being absent.

Thank you.

I asked my chair to be my right, my left.

She failed on that one.

All right, we're gonna move into F1 where we've got a Science Center update.

Councilmember Driscoll, I believe this was an update you asked for, so I'll turn it over to you before we go to Aaron Fish and Claude Tankersley.

Thank you.

And um thanks to city staff for preparing for this.

This is a um, you know, the the plans for the the science center.

It's something that um as a city council member.

I have um heard about and been involved with since 2020, 2021.

Um it was it was an incredibly exciting opportunity for us to revitalize the science center.

I I do see that former council member Robert Blackman is here.

This was his um uh original idea to revitalize this as the the council member for the West Side and District One at the time, and I do want to extend my gratitude for um envisioning a new day for the science center.

At the time, um there were three out of the eight city council members that you see here who were serving then who voted on um the the initial plans for the science center, and so today we've got several members who were not involved then.

I have um watched and kept in touch with this project as it's moved forward, and um, you know, at the time it had a ton of public support we see through the emails and through the folks who um spoke today that that support is still there.

And so um when I got a phone call a few weeks ago um letting me know that um the administration had decided not to move forward with the science center, I was understandably disappointed.

This is something I had been looking forward to for a long time.

Um I walked through it back then and and saw what it could become.

And it was really hard to take.

Um I understand that as you know, especially now with the things we've learned, even in the last year, um, that we have to um really focus on balancing our infrastructure needs and planning for the future with um the other projects that we want to see happen.

That's why I just kept having this nagging feeling that there was a way for us to do both, that we can strengthen our infrastructure, that we can plan for the future while planning for the two the future of our students, our children in our community and their exposure and experience with science.

Um this is a fantastic community asset, it's a citywide asset.

If you're not going here, where's the closest place?

Mosy, you're putting every you got it to go all the way there.

So I thought we need to talk about this because it has been so popular, because it had so much support, not just from residents, but we heard from former students, teachers.

Um, we had incredible um support.

Um the group had incredible support for um funding.

I wish Senator Roussan was still here from uh Senator Roussean and others in state leadership.

And um also our former Congressman Charlie Chris was able to.

Oh, he's back.

Senator Russan, I just recognized you and um expressing my gratitude for the support um that you have given to the science center over the years and for the incredible amount of funding that you have been able to bring home uh for your hometown and for the science center, um, as well as um millions um that were um achieved by our former congressman Charlie Christ, and yes, city council early on had much had gave much support for this.

So, with all of that, I felt like we really owed it to the public to explain why there was this turn of events that um led to the announcement that the science center project would be canceled, and also because of Florida Sunshine Law, I wanted to hear from my colleagues and hear what everyone else thought.

Um, so I asked for this to be discussed in a public meeting.

I do appreciate all of the emails that were received, the comments that were made today, and the presence by people here who care.

And I hope that no matter how we move forward, we're going to do it with the children in mind, and knowing that we really need to do we really need to look at all of the different ways that we could possibly get a win-win and do this and that going forward.

That's my hope.

With that, sorry it took so long, but um this became a much bigger deal than I thought it was going to be when I first asked for it to be reported on.

And Aaron, I know you've created a presentation for us that I would love to hear and then hear from my colleagues.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember, for the introduction.

Uh good afternoon, uh, council chair, vice chair, members of council, Aaron Fish, Real Estate and Property Manager Management Director.

Uh here to discuss uh more or less a timeline of events related to the Science Center since the city's acquisition of the property.

This is a property that's at 7701 22nd Avenue North, immediately abutting uh to the south of the Northwest Water Reclamation Facility.

Um, as you see in this image here, this is the current layout of the treatment facility with the remainder of the Science Center property outlined in red.

On November of 20, uh November 20 of 2019, the city did uh complete the acquisition of uh the property from work net panellus.

This was a strategic acquisition that was to serve two purposes.

Uh, one was for the expansion of the Northwest Water Reclamation Facility, and the other was to ensure that the city's brush site could remain on the property.

Uh the property originally totaled 6.78 acres, included 27,000 square feet of improvements, along with those improvements are the main two-story science center building.

And the the approximate purchase price was 3.2 million.

The expansion of the Northwest facility on the north half of the site progressed.

Uh real estate did order an appraisal, and that appraisal for the remaining 3.89 acres of the southern portion of the site was determined to be 1,860,000 in the as is value.

It was at this time that uh staff and public works decided to discuss the the possibility of selling the site due to the appraisal.

On September 30th of 2021, council passed a resolution to approve WikiWachi funds.

Those funds were to cover mold remediation, a feasibility study, and operational costs associated with the site.

Uh 175,000 of those approved funds was expensed for those items.

In May of 2022, the city commissioned a renovation and feasibility study to assess the viability of reusing the two-story building.

Uh the study estimated costs ranging from approximately $3.5 million up to approximately $9 million to bring the building up to either basic code compliance or uh a complete shell renovation.

The property was formally replatted in June of 2022.

This resulted in a console uh consolidation of the treatment facility uh parcels and it split off the brush site parcel and then the remainder of the science center property to the south.

Conversations about the site's future uh began circulating in around 2021 and 2022.

This was initiated in part by then Councilmember Robert Blackman.

Ideas including reactivating the site as a city operated event center or developing a new science education facility.

Around this time, the St.

Petersburg group became involved in exploring possibilities for the site's reuse.

In January of 2023, the St.

Petersburg group submitted a formal proposal to purchase the property for a new science center dedicated to STEM and STEAM education.

St.

Petersburg group followed up with a revised proposal in February of 2023, and in response to the proposal submitted, the city did issue a non-binding letter of intent in February 17th outlining proposed sales outlining the proposed sales terms uh contingent upon updated appraisals.

A public notice of the city's intent to dispose of the property was published in February of 2023, and writing alternative proposals of which none were received.

Two appraisals were obtained in March and April of 2023.

This resulted in as is market value to be between 1.5 million and approximately 1.64 million, with the highest and best use value to be approximately 2.66 million.

On August 9th of 2023, the city transmitted a draft agreement for the sale and purchase to the St.

Petersburg Group, with the sale terms including a purchase price of 1.6 million, 60 days of due diligence, 180 days to secure financing, and a closing window window of 30 days thereafter.

In September of 23, the St.

Petersburg Group opted to pursue a HUD grant to fund the Science Center project, which took over a year to complete.

The HUD grant process required an environmental review and a storic review, and the historic review initiate was initiated by the state of Florida.

Historic review determined the rotunda planetarium and the tile mosaic walkway were to remain as part of the Science Center project as a condition of the HUD grant, which were memorialized in a memorandum of agreement executed on August 26, 2024.

The conditions placed on the property were directly related to the HUD grant and the use of federal funding proposed for the Science Center project.

The conditions resulting from the historic review did not result in the property being registered as a historic site.

On October 15, 2024, HUD issued a letter confirming completion of the environmental review and released the conditions associated with the grant, with former authorization to use grant funds received through the HUD Environmental Review Online System on October 23 of 24.

Following the HUD grant approval in October of 24, the city resent the previously negotiated agreement for execution.

St.

Petersburg Group requested modifications to the agreement, including a request for the city to hold a purchase money mortgage.

As part of the renegotiation, the city requested a right of first refusal to repurchase the property under specific conditions.

And at this point, I'll have administrator tankersly cover the next point.

Thank you, Aaron.

Claude Tankersley Public Works Administrator.

I asked Aaron if I could step in and clarify this next point because it can be misleading, and we wanted to make sure that we got it right.

And so the for the second bullet really what we were advised by bond counsel was that a qualified independent consultant needed to certify that the sale of the property, which is a water resources asset, would not materially adversely affect the net revenues of the sewer system.

And I apologize for any miscommunication or misunderstanding, particularly to my colleagues.

And as a result, public works contracted with Wade Trim to prepare a feasibility report evaluating multiple sites, including the Science Center for potential future wastewater expansion.

The need for this evaluation was underscored by events in 2024 when Hurricanes Helene and Milton inflicted significant damage across the region, which included impacts from a seven-foot storm surge and over 20 inches of rain, which severely stressed the Northwest plant.

Although no sewage spills occurred at the plant, the extreme flows overwhelmed many treatment processes, with the situation being exacerbated by the fact that the Northwest plant is the sole wastewater treatment facility serving the Barrier Island communities of St.

Pete Beach and Treasure Island, both of which experienced major infrastructure failures due to the storms.

These vulnerabilities highlighted the need for increased treatment capacity and storm resilience.

In response, the city initiated the Northwest Water Reclamation Equalization Storage Feasibility Report.

The study's goals were to assess the feasibility of adding equalization and short-term wet weather storage at or near near the Northwest plant and to evaluate potential sites for maximum storage capacity.

Thank you, Aaron.

I'll go through the results of the feasibility study now.

So as I mentioned before, bond council advised that a qualified independent consultant needed to certify that the sale of the property, which is a water resources asset, would not materially adversely affect net revenues of the system.

In order to do this, the bond covenants also state that the asset can be disposed of if it's no longer necessary or useful to the operation.

Because of this, public works and water resources department made the decision to pursue the feasibility study to evaluate whether or not these facilit that this asset was useful or necessary for the system.

We had a stress test on our system last year with the storms in 2024, like nothing we'd seen before, and we learned a lot about our system.

After last year's stress tests on our sewer system, we felt it was prudent to do a third-party feasibility study on the property, which is a sewer utility currently owns, whether that property is necessary or useful before we sell it to do our due diligence.

It was my decision as a steward of the utility to pursue this feasibility study, and it is my responsibility to advise the mayor on what's best for the facility.

So in June and July, Wade Trim worked on the study.

In August of 25, a draft of the report was submitted to the city, and in September of 25, a final report was submitted to the city.

The scope of the project entailed conducting a conceptual level evaluation that considered the feasibility, complexity, and relative cost of constructing equalization wet weather storage tanks, either on the existing site or adjacent sites or nearby sites.

And this was done in alignment with the city's long-term resiliency planning framework to consider the importance of preserving key locations for future plant expansions by identifying sites that were best suited for the EQ tank placement while preserving the some other sites for process related infrastructure.

This drawing here shows you the nine sites that we evaluated.

Many of them are close to, if not on the site, or immediately adjacent to the site.

The science center property is located in site number one.

The brush site property is located at site number five.

Site number four is part of the overall Northwest plant facility.

It's a centralized area that currently does not have much infrastructure on it.

So the feasibility study looked at these nine properties to determine what size tanks and how much storage could be placed on each of the properties.

And you can see on this figure here, how each of those properties could be utilized.

The study did look at accommodating a minimum of a five million gallons of EQ storage.

This minimum five million gallons came from the St.

Pete Water Plan, which was completed in 2019, which had recommended that at some point we we move forward with an equalization tank at the Northwest site.

These sites were evaluated on multiple evaluation criteria that included ease of construction, the hydraulics of being able to connect the tanks to the other facilities, any ancillary infrastructure such as odor control systems, fencing, force mains, etc.

How much storage volume could be achieved at each site, what a conceptual cost would be for each site, including any property acquisition costs if applicable.

And these cost comparisons were normalized on a cost per gallon of storage basis.

And then also we looked at the operating strategies.

How would these tanks be operated?

These tanks in the right situation could be operated as both what we call an EQ tank and well as well as a wet weather storage tank, or they might be, depending on the location, better served as a wet weather storage tank, not so much as an EQ tank.

So the feasibility report evaluation criteria that we laid out, each of these had a weighted score.

We did feel that, and in consultation with our consultants, we did feel that the most important to the facility and most important to the utility was the amount of storage available to be had and the cost to achieve that storage.

On the criteria scoring, if a score of one would suggest that in that criteria, it was a least favorable.

So based off of these scorings, we came up with a weighted score for each of the facilities, each of the locations, and as you can see highlighted here, the number one location identified was what we call the south part of the plant, the part of the plant that's in the central that that that's that that's between all of the different processes on the south side of the plant.

It's number four, site number four.

The second site was the science center, the third was the former Raytheon property, and the fourth rank site was the brush site.

And again, highlighting here what those four sites where they are located.

Again, the brush site and then the science center site and the site number four are all currently owned by the by the asset by the utility.

I want to take a closer look at the two sites in question, the science center site and the brush site, and how they compared to each other and their scoring.

You'll see that they compared relatively similarly in many different areas.

And I'm going to go back to the previous slide because as you can see, site number one and site number five, they're they're kind of they're both on the west side of the plant, on what we call the tail end of the plant.

And so they they have a lot of similarities.

They're both easily accessible by by roadways.

And so they they got a lot of wage scores the same.

Where they differed was on ease of construction and cost.

So for the science center, the cost for the science center was determined to be less than the cost of the brush site, primarily because the brush site, if we were to move the brush site, we would have to find another location for it, as it is an important asset to the city.

And so the there was estimated at a $2.9 million dollar property acquisition cost for the brush site.

Both sites had some level of demolition, but obviously the science center site had the most level of demolition and therefore a higher cost for that.

One of the questions that we've had is why is the property acquisition so expensive for a brush site?

And actually, Aaron, if you don't mind taking that and talking about what you found.

Sure, the reason for the higher cost is scarcity of land.

There's not a lot of raw land left in this vicinity.

To buy a replacement location to continue serving the area residents would most likely require buying an improved site.

An improved site comes at a much higher cost because you're paying for the value of a building that you would then have to demolish to make it raw land for the brush site.

One of the I would say one of the sites that was evaluated, it was site number six, recently sold.

It's an improved site, sold this month for seven million dollars.

So that illustrates that the challenge of finding a site within close proximity that is raw land at a reasonable fair price to relocate the brush site.

Thank you, Aaron.

There were some additional considerations for the consultants in their final recommendation.

And so I'd mention that as part of our long-term planning, we we we do anticipate uh that there will be some expansions to the plant at some point in the future for a variety of different reasons, one of them being regulatory.

And I do have uh uh John Pallanchar and Dr.

Dreckler here from our water resources department to answer any questions that may come up about this.

But we do know that from a regulatory standpoint, we we do expect at some point in the future that the state will require us to do more nutrient removal from our reclaimed water.

We don't know when that's gonna happen.

Could be five years, could be ten years, we just don't know.

But it was anticipated as part of our St.

Pete Water Plan.

And as part of the St.

Pete Water Plan, they did a conceptual layout of what that would look like if we had to add additional unit processes for that additional removal of nutrients.

And those processes were proposed to be placed in the site number four, that that area on the on the actually on the site to accommodate that that function.

The other thing we're looking at is as I mentioned, the 2024 storms were a stress test for our system.

And one of the things that we have been considering for a while and trying to figure out how to do is when one plant is being stressed more than other plants, uh, that we can try to find a way to transfer flows from one plant to another.

So, for instance, if the northeast plant is being inundated and is being stressed to avoid sanitary sewer overflows for that plant, if we had a way to transfer some of those flows over to the northwest plant, then that would allow us to control the system better for those sanitary sewer overflows.

The Northwest plant is is it is an advantage in the fact that it is higher in elevation than the other two plants.

The Northeast plant is about five, six feet above sea level.

Southwest plant is about six to eight feet above sea level.

The northwest plant is about 24 feet above sea level, and it was the only plant during the storms that we did not have to shut down.

So that's what we're that's what we mean when we talk about future plant expansions that we are anticipating, but they are not yet developed.

Um and also I mentioned to the the fact that um you know some of these uh sites are closer to the other processes than others, and so therefore we may be able to use the the tanks uh either for EQ and wet weather or maybe just only for wet weather.

And so we took specific comments from the report, put them in this table here.

I won't read it to everyone.

I know everybody can read it on their own, but one of the things that the consultant did share was that some apot some of the sites do appear suitable for tank placement, but they may be more valuable for housing process equipment essential to future wet weather expansion.

So the final recommendation from the feasibility report from our consultant uh reranked the the four sites with the science center being ranked number one, the brush site number two, again the on-site area, the south area number three, and the former Aetheon site number four for the reasons that I mentioned earlier.

Um the they they had recommended that the brush site is better suited as a contingency site given that it's closer to two of the uh processes the sludge processes and reclaimed water storage, um, and then the the former Raytheon property and the on-site south property were better and more critical footprints for long-term treatment expansion and should be preserved accordingly.

So I'll I'll close with our presentation by noting the irony that I am a professional engineer.

My staff are engineers and scientists.

Um, and the feasibility study was developed by engineers and scientists, and all of us chose to build our careers around science.

We'd love science.

We did this because we we love science, and we're aware of the irony that we are here to to talk about the fact that our love of science also runs up against our requirement to provide resiliency for our sewer system as best we can and to strive to be good stewards of the utility.

So that is the conclusion of my presentation, and I thank you for the opportunity.

Thank you, Claude.

Okay, go to we have any speakers?

Yeah, we have any cards.

Okay.

Uh we'll go to by Cher Hanowitz.

Thank you.

Um, first of all, I want to thank everyone that's here today.

You've been very patient.

I know that some of you had looks on your faces when you're like, hold on, this is F1 and is other items are happening, and you're you're wondering when this item was happening, and what happens is uh we have an agenda and they sometimes reorder things.

So it came up at the end, because I guess the other one should have gone a little quicker, but in any event, I I I think you I I just think I know look, I haven't spoken really.

I thank you for waiting patiently for this item.

I was one of the council members that was not involved when this first came up, as was first mentioned, there were three council members here.

So when this was brought to my attention um by um, and I was contacted by Joe Hamilton, and I heard from the community, I really did not have a lot of information.

Um, and especially because the last time that I got an information, the sale was happening.

And I did not know, and my big question was how did we end up here?

So I asked the administration to provide records back on September 8th.

So I can do a review of everything and be able to ask intelligent questions to figure this out.

And that's what I've been trying to do.

I started getting records, I think it was around September 16th, and a lot of them came right before this meeting.

And I have spent a lot of time on this.

I also want to mention there was a clarification made about the PowerPoint presentation today, and that's based on a conversation I had yesterday with administration.

And I want to I want to point this out because I think it's important because it goes back to why we're here today.

When I looked at the records that were produced, and when I looked at the PowerPoint, the timeline was important.

And the thing that struck out to me was the legal counsel had advised for this formal study.

So I'm thinking, okay, I'm gonna talk to the attorneys, figure out what's happening.

Well, yesterday I had a meeting with the attorneys, both in house and outside council.

And to my surprise, I was told that that legal advice had not been given at all.

Now that was a problem for me.

So when you hear a clarification that's made here, I speak with attorneys to figure out did they advise that a formal study was necessary to determine whether the property remained essential to the utility system?

That did not happen.

And with that being said, I want Jackie because this happened yesterday, and just so they hear from someone else, not just from me, what happened yesterday in terms of the conversations that we had with outside counsel, and you were there, and I'm obviously allowing you to disclose this as an attorney.

You typically you would not you know I keep those things on lockdown, right?

Um yeah, so we had in general, there was a discussion about what is required pursuant to the bond covenant, which Claude clarified.

Um, and does the language in the bond covenant that all of you received that was highlighted in green require a feasibility study, or is it something different from that?

We advised it was something different from that, uh, which was confirmed by Dwayne Draper from Byron Miller, all of our bond council.

And we also pointed to the fact that there is some precedent for this that corresponds with the highlighted language, which was done for Albert Witt, which was a you know a one-page um qualified independent consultant determination, as uh Claude explained uh for Albert Wooded at that time with the corresponding resolution approved by city council.

Okay, and so yesterday I because I don't like to surprise anyone.

I I contacted Claude and I contacted Rob to let them know that I was gonna bring up this issue, and he you know, uh an explanation was provided today, uh, and Claude has taken responsibility for that he ordered this.

One of the problems that I have, and I'm gonna say it out here, is that this timeline was done back in July.

There were three different people that reviewed this timeline.

There were edits made to this timeline, and one of the timeline edits were made by Mr.

Tankersley, and specifically on this item, the edit that was made was as a result, and this was added by Mr.

Tankersley of the recommendation from legal counsel public works added to Science Center property to the scope of services for the Northwest EQ storage.

And I appreciate everything I was said.

I have a hard time when something like this is provided, it's edited by professionals.

Your engineers, you guys are really detail-oriented, and that is put in there, specifically added.

Counsel advised me, no conversations happen with them with the public works department.

Dwayne, the outside counsel, and I had a conversation with them.

And Jackie, is that true?

Yeah, but that's that is what Mr.

So forgive me for bringing this up because I have to rely on experts, and I don't like doing this, and I had that conversation yesterday.

I don't like doing this because I can't make up these facts, but when I'm presenting with with facts by experts, I usually take them for face value, and it really upset me when I'm looking at documents and it contradicts, and and trust me, I could go through more documents, contradict what has been presented to us.

That's the first part.

The second part is that we're looking at a study, and I understand that you're looking at the science center and other properties.

When you look at the feasibility study that was done, we weren't advised there was gonna be a change of course.

The last conversation we had, a sale was happening.

And there was correspondence because Council Member Gabbard asked for information, and in the documents that were provided, this was back in July, there was an email that said, Am I crazy or wasn't this going to be done by Stantec provided by Janie?

Because all of a sudden Way Tram is here.

And your response was that was a common misperception.

I have emails all the way from January through March, including from Erica Langham's from many people talking about Stantec.

There's the reason why outside council was hired and they were going forward with it.

So it wasn't a misperception, it was actually happening, and at some point the brakes were put on.

Because all the emails show that.

So Stan Tech was actually contacted, and there is an email in there regarding the conversation with bond counsel, and we'll need to Stantic to complete the one-page consultant certificate.

That was provided to Aaron.

All that happened.

So it wasn't a misperception, and it just shifted.

Now something caused a shift, and maybe y'all decided, okay, we want to make sure that we want to use this property, like you said, um, because whether we need it, and we have to make that determination.

That wasn't based on conversations with the attorneys, because my understanding is that this study, this feasibility study, doesn't change the fact that you could still sell the property.

So it and I covered that yesterday with outside counsel.

As a matter of fact, it's the opposite, because when you're doing the one-page document that you're gonna do, it's because you're getting rid of property.

This is to basically have documentation to say, guess what?

We're not gonna get rid of the property because these are a reason.

So it's completely the opposite thing that just happened.

When we talk about land that's important and the scarcity of land, and I see emails that talk about Raytheon offering the property, and it's declined.

In this process, there's a feasibility study happening.

You want to receive unbiased information about what's the best course, and while that is happening, which nobody else knows while that's happening, you actually say no to the sale of a property and not say, well, we're just gonna wait to see what a feasibility study does, and then the same group that does the feasibility report in their report, say basically that you should definitely given the strategic location and size, the property of Raytheon should be pursued for purchase by the city.

I'm sorry, I just right now, and I could go on from some other stuff that I found in the short period of time.

I'm having a hard time with this.

I'm having a hard time with how this came about.

I'm having a hard time trusting some of the information based on what I've seen.

I'm also having a hard time when I see notes when they started this process, like please do not include the brush fight.

When you're trying to consider everything, so forgive me, and I hate to be part of this.

I cannot believe that this is presented to council the way it has and how it's come before us.

I just can't.

So thank you, council member and Claude.

If you don't mind, let me say a few words and then uh you can clean it up for me, I'm sure.

Um, you know, the first thing I want to do is I also just want to thank everyone who came out today.

Uh growing up in West St.

Petersburg myself, I could relate to a lot of the experiences uh that you had so um really want to thank you for being here.

Also want to say that the administration really has deep empathy for Mr.

Hamilton.

Um, we know that he's worked hard on this, um, and it's difficult when a project changes course.

We've all experienced that.

So I just wanted to say that publicly, Joe, that I'm sorry, I know you probably feel tough and it's disappointing, so I understand that.

We might have to go one at a time.

And you know, the one thing I'll say is that I I think there was miscommunication at the staff level.

Um, I think in looking at it, that's accurate.

I certainly think that I could have done a better job uh of asking some more difficult questions to staff members and and what was going on and where it was at.

But but my understanding is that essentially outside council work through Ms.

Dyer who worked through the CFO who worked through Aaron.

And I I haven't seen anything that shows that Claude was aware of those conversations or that he was a part of it.

He was doing his best to try and see what was best for the utility.

You mentioned Albert Witted, and it's true that there's a one-page analysis, a financial analysis on the net revenues.

That's true.

There's also an alternative study that goes with that.

I don't know if you have that, but it was part of that.

And that's kind of the work that Claude was doing in the feasibility study was similar to the alternatives analysis that was done at Albert Witted.

So look, if have we made mistakes, sure we've made mistakes, but we're operating in good faith, and we're trying to protect the utility as best as we can.

Everybody knows that wastewater is a significant issue in the city of St.

Petersburg, and we're doing our best to protect the residents' interests in that area.

So, Claude, I don't know if you want to add anything to that.

So, some of the um some of the correspondence uh that you mentioned, I don't believe that I was a part of it, and so I I so for instance the the do not include the brush site.

I I don't recall being a part of that.

Um it's possible that I was, I just don't recall it.

Um, but I you know, I I do want to give our our team an opportunity to to talk about anything that they you know remember from our conversations.

I do also remember talking to Aaron about the the Raytheon site when the Raytheon site first became available a while ago, like a year or two ago, they had some um restrictive covenants to the the site that we felt made it difficult, if not impossible for us to use it for the wastewater system expansion.

They they had restrictive covenants on it related to putting underground piping.

And while we could put above ground piping at a wastewater treatment plant, it does make it difficult to do that.

And so at the time we decided not to pursue it because we weren't able to get them to change on that.

They ended up selling the property, is my understanding, and the new property owner uh has indicated to us that they were willing to turn it over to to sell us the northern part of it.

Again, Aaron reached out to find out if those restrictive covenants were still available or are still on the property, and was determined that they were.

And I appreciate that, except for the fact that you have a contract that is pending right now for 1.6 million for that site, and you're not taking into consideration anything that we've heard here.

I get what you're saying, but the Delta's 500,000, what you're talking about.

Negotiations weren't even entered into.

As a matter of fact, you can negotiate these restrictions and they require mutual agreement.

Have the attorneys been engaged to negotiate these restrictions?

I mean, council member, I can't it to the extent that we were, that would have been Mr.

Dima.

So I can't really confirm whether we were or weren't.

But my point is you can negotiate the restrictions.

Yes.

Okay.

So what I'm saying is, I understand where you're coming from, but if you're trying to get a feasibility study based on all the factors without without influencing, letting these experts look at everything and come back.

Why would you not say just let's wait?

This as a matter of fact, it was a rush.

Let's just wait till the feasibility study happens, and you don't have to turn anything down at that point in time because you can look at whatever the report says because they were actually analyzing the report, and the report does say that it talks about the covenants, it talks about the fact what you mentioned that you don't, you know, you have to you can still do it above ground, and there can be cost to that, but that these restrictions will require Musho agreement, and it can happen, and it says that although these restrictions limit some uses, the site remains feasible for tank placement, provided that piping and pumping equipment are installed above grade.

So it's not like it's out of the ball game.

I'm just the fact that in the process, it was completely declined.

You're doing a feasibility study to get a result.

At the beginning, there are notes from in it's from the departments, it was within with water resources, and I it the employee escapes my mind because they were reviewing it, says, do not look at the brush site.

To me, that's indicating trying to actually move something to a certain point.

And I just I have a hard time with that when I see that.

And I I respect you, Claude.

I understand what administration is at, but I hope you understand where I'm coming at and where I'm looking at it from an outsider and seeing all this, and the it's just the math isn't mathing, like the new young the young people say.

So if I could just say for the record, I mean we did not absolutely try and dictate a result uh to the consultant.

We don't we don't want to have a meeting like this with a black cloud over it.

We'd like to be here saying, Look, we're gonna build a science center and we're gonna be able to take care of the utility too.

We've been sitting around looking for a both and answer.

I I agree with you.

Can I think it's my turn?

The quorum.

So I just want to put that on the record.

And that's fair, but from what my reading of everything, when you're having a feasibility study done, to me, those are factors as taking the totality of the circumstances that causes me concern.

And I would love to hear from other council members.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Councilmember Gabber.

Thank you, Chair, and uh thank you all for coming out.

Thank you to everyone who may be listening that has emailed in and shared information.

I know that there have been a lot of community meetings on the west side, the neighborhoods that have been talking about this, and um certainly understand as one of the three council members who was here when uh former council member blackman brought this forward uh the passion that exists.

Um, it's no secret, I'm not originally from St.

Petersburg.

I did not grow up here, so I don't have a memory of the Science Center.

Um, but people very close to me do, and I know that there is a great love.

Um, I'm also married to an engineer, so I am science adjacent, and um definitely understand uh you know the complications and and Claude, what you said at the end about the irony of this all, right?

Um I guess I'm just gonna kind of fill in some blanks if we can.

Um, because you mentioned that in July I did send an email asking for um the status or the scope of work on this study.

So I'm gonna fill in some blanks for everyone, and Claude, I'm gonna start by saying that um I support you in the work that you have done to get us to this place because I do believe you were doing the due diligence that is your role to do, and behind the scenes in my one-on-one conversations, that is what I pushed for because I believe that it was important to make sure that as we were going through this process that we were dotting our i's, crossing our T's, and making sure that we were looking through the lens of resiliency on this project.

So I say all of that to say that um luckily I take really good notes in all of my one-on-one meetings.

So I'm gonna go back to April 1st.

I had a meeting with Aaron to discuss the project.

At that point in time, the project was moving forward.

Um, it was the first that I had really heard about it, I think, other than an article that might have been in the catalyst about some uh site plans, um, since probably 21 or 22.

It had been quite a while since we had really talked about the project.

Um, so had this meeting with Aaron, was told at that time, and I just want to say um from the notes that legal was working with outside bond council to do a stand tech consultant study occurring to see if it makes sense for the city to dispose of property, the analysis will occur, and then a resolution will be brought to city council for approval if recommended to dispose.

So I started to ask Aaron some questions, um, just a little more probing, and it it kind of got a little bit outside of the scope of you know what I think is probably appropriate for city council because I was asking a lot of questions that I really felt were more fair for administration than for Aaron.

Um, so you know, we ended the meeting, and then two weeks later, I had a meeting with Rob and with James.

Um, so when it came up in that meeting, um, I was also told that it was going to be a stand text study.

Um Bryant Miller Olive uh Miller Olive was involved, and that um I had asked when that was going to be completed, and they did not have that information.

Some time passed, had not heard any more about it.

Um I had a call with the mayor at sometime in April after this meeting, and the Science Center came up.

He told me that they were continuing to move forward with the Science Center, and the entire conversation really around that, it was quite brief.

I said that I just wanted us to make sure we were looking through the lens of resiliency as we moved forward.

That was the extent of my conversations about the study until I asked in July through the email that you saw what's going on.

Can we see the study?

Can we see the scope of work?

Like I just more curiosity.

Because it was never my intention in us doing this study to kill the science center deal.

It was always my intention for us to make sure that we were looking at that and making sure that we were doing everything that we could to try to get the best of both worlds.

Expansion for the facility to make sure that we understand what can be done there, but at the same time honoring what the community obviously wants.

Now, did I go out on a limb and advocate that yes, we got to do the science center at all costs?

No, absolutely not.

Every it is no surprise to anybody that resiliency is my number one concern for this city.

So I wanted to kind of fill in some of the blanks for city council here because we have these conversations with administration behind the scenes, and we don't ever really we don't get to share that unless a situation like this comes along.

And so I thought that the history lesson from my perspective over the course of the last several months was important to the public records request that you pulled because I really want to thank you for doing that.

I spent quite a bit of time uh this week as well going through all of that, comparing that with the timeline that um the St.

Petersburg group has been taking around to the neighborhood associations, and I too have had some concerns about kind of where the miscommunication has lied.

Um, that that piece of it is still very concerning to me.

So when we talk about the actual study, um, can we bring back up the presentation and can we look at I believe, and of course I closed it.

It's slide 23.

Yes, that's the one.

Okay.

So Claude, can you talk to us a little bit because you know there's this ranking at the end, and there is the site number four, and that was ranked as number one.

And this is specifically for the additional EQ tanks, correct?

Yes.

Okay, so um it talks about cost and ease of construction.

I want to hone in on those two specifically.

Cost is the same, it weighted the same.

Ease of construction was the one that really kind of differentiates the science center from site number four.

So can you talk about how when we look at this, it somehow becomes in a later part of the presentation that it's the science center against the brush site.

How do we go there?

Like, I don't really understand that part.

And and we did have a meeting about this, and we went through it.

Um, but that piece of it still, I just don't really understand how we go from there to the brush site.

Certainly.

I'd like to change the the scale.

Yes, please.

So I'll point out here, and and and again, I I might need some help from my colleagues here.

But if you see the the plant up in the northeast, the the the top right corner, you see some tanks there, and there's some tanks that and and facilities that go across the top of the site all the way over to where the brush site is on the far west.

We have some tanks there on the far west, and then this then the science center just below it.

That number four site is part of is part of the facility uh property, and it and it's right there adjacent to all the other processes, and it's a it's a spot that doesn't have a lot of current infrastructure on it.

It's it's kind of hidden by those two blue you know tanks, but there's not a lot of current infrastructure on it.

So it's open, relatively open land, uh which makes it easy to construct, but also it's close to all the processes in the plant.

When wastewater flows through a plant, it starts at one end and it flows all the way through the other end, and and it receives different types of treatment through the process.

As I mentioned earlier, as the regular as the regulatory um agencies have suggested, we're likely to see at some point some changes in how much nutrients we got to remove.

That nutrient removal occurs relatively in the middle of the process, towards the beginning of the process, not at the end.

And so having the land available in the middle of the plant makes it more usable for future.

And then also if if we are able to figure out a way to transfer flows during wet weather from the other plants to this plant, then we are likely going to need to look at perhaps expanding the aeration tanks and the clarifiers that are also located right there next to number four, but they're not located next to number one or number five.

So it is my understanding that's why the consultants rated that as a as a hire for um you know future use and why that was important.

If we put these tanks in the in a location where the tanks could go somewhere else, but if we put those tanks in a location that has the possibility of expansion for future use, that's probably not the highest and best location for those tanks.

But it's not impossible.

It's not impossible.

It's just a little more difficult.

It's a little bit more difficult.

And and and it and it will limit us in the future so that it's possible at some point in the future when it when we have to expand the plant, we might not have the appropriate room for it in the future.

And if I could just touch on that, I mean that's one of our concerns, and that's why we haven't been able to come up with a both and solution that we would like to come up with.

Because you know, when when we look at the brush site, it's not just the importance of the brush site now, which it is if you look at it, it's the second most used brush site in the city, it's very important.

But if the brush site were to go away, we would want it for future use of the utility.

Um so it's we don't see it as a swap one for one.

We can move things here because we could do something else there.

My understanding of the study is that the long-term future of the wastewater facility encompasses the entire site, basically.

That's that's our concern.

Okay.

And and and council member, if if I didn't fully answer your question, if there's anything that my colleagues can add to maybe clarify it, just let me know.

Okay.

No, I mean, yes, we're talking about this feasibility report, right?

But ultimately, your role, Claude, as you said, is to do this study, evaluate, and I still support that you did this, and then advise.

This was not your decision.

And so I think it's really unfair for us to kind of hammer a little bit too much on all of you.

Um, I think it's important the facts to the future expansion of the plant, but I don't I don't want to get into like kind of throwing you guys down the as the scapegoat on all of this.

I don't think that's fair, and I don't want our community to look at it that way either.

Um, so I I'm good with your team, and I I thank you for everything that you all do.

Um I guess for administration, is there an answer to the question of why we continued to negotiate for so long with the St.

Petersburg group, and we continued to give the green light at every single turn.

I think I even saw, and I didn't pull, I mean, I probably have it here somewhere, but I think it was 2023.

There was an email that was like, All right, Aaron, we're good to go.

Like, let's let's get it to happen.

Um, it's 2025.

Yes, we had a hurricane, we know.

Um, but I mean, why did this continue for so long with no resolution?

I I don't understand.

I mean, if I'm looking at it from the community standpoint, if the city is still negotiating with us, then there's still hope.

There's still okay, we're still moving forward.

We're still investing, we're still asking our senator.

Well, we didn't ask our senator, but the community did to go and get money for this project.

Why did we do all of this for so long to end up here?

I don't understand that.

Yeah, I that's a good question, and I'll do my best to address it.

And as you know, uh, because you know we were here together, um, I I was the lead in 2019 on acquiring the property.

Yeah.

Um, and you'll remember that water resources said we need the northern half to add the two tanks, and the southern half was kind of up for grabs.

We had a lot of discussions, we wanted yeah, affordable housing, we want to do this, we want to do that.

So we had the blessing of water resources at that time that they did not need that property.

That continued into 2023.

We were negotiating this, you know, um uh out of everyone's control, I guess, but the HUD setback um, you know, was pretty significant.

Um, and then you know, as we get into the storms and we see the impact of Helene and Milton, uh, I think the the concern of the utility team heightened when they saw the impacts of the hurricanes and how that could impact the future need of the facilities, other facilities that we may need there.

Um, and I I think the feasibility study showed that they were right in that and that we had to prioritize the utility and that things had changed.

So back to the conversation about that Raytheon site.

Um, can you tell us why and and maybe I don't know.

I I know these emails were not you were not on these emails that I saw.

Um, so you maybe not be able to answer this.

But why did we not, as part of this greater conversation, if we felt as though this this new reality of needing to expand that plant, which frankly we don't have a full-blown plan for and we don't have funding for.

So let's just be clear about that.

Um, why did we not pursue at least initial negotiations on that Raytheon site to see if there was even a potential?

I mean, what else are they gonna sell it?

What who else are they gonna sell it to?

I mean, come on.

Like it who else wants that property.

So I I just don't I don't understand, and I'm in the real estate world, like I mean, especially commercial properties, like, unless they have a really desirable use for them, which I wouldn't see this property having, it people are negotiating.

Like, it's just a fact.

So, why didn't we at least try to do some initial like an LOI or something like that to see?

Or did we?

And we just didn't see the results.

Council member, good question.

And yes, the city did uh submit an LOI when we found out that the property was officially on the market for sale.

Uh, we looked at this again as a very strategic land purchase.

Um we were negotiating with Raytheon.

Uh they were not wavering on their restrictions.

Uh ultimately it was this the decision to break off those negotiations because the restrictions were pretty significant.

Um, and then later on uh the property did sell earlier this year.

Uh 5.1 million.

The wait a minute.

The Raytheon uh site, hold on.

I just want to make sure we're doing the same one.

The former Raytheon property number nine.

There was the rectangular portion that's in the that is the northern portion of what was sold that we went back to Raytheon, or excuse me, back to the developer who bought the property from Raytheon to see if they would be interested in selling and to see what those restrictions looked like and the restrictions that the developer agreed to uh were essentially the same as what was proposed to the city from Raytheon, and they're very restrictive.

And at the time it was considered that they were too restrictive to actually use the property for its intended purpose.

Okay.

Well, I'll remain confused on that because we just had a conversation about a $500,000 delta between what they were asking and what we were willing to pay, so or what we're making for this property.

So uh I'll remain confused on that.

Um, I think that's one that we'll just have to move on from.

I don't know, we're gonna clear that up today.

But I did not see an LOI in our pro in the public records request, and maybe that's because going back to uh sometime in 2024 is when an L was submitted.

All right, and just and in this illustration, the three um yellow circles that are on that north half of the Raytheon site, the the part that was purchased by the developer includes that piece of it, and then going south all the way to 22nd Avenue.

So that part that is just blank there.

Yes, that that was included as the entire sale.

Um, but we did go back.

So we've essentially we made two attempts to buy property there.

Yes.

Okay.

Um, well, I mean, talked earlier about irony.

Um, I think it's kind of ironic that today a lot of our conversation has been around a lot of running themes, history, community, science-based policy decisions such as resilience and health and nutrition.

Yet here we sit saying that we don't want to have a science center.

I heard like the echoes when it came up, you know, can we not we can't have it all?

Well, I I I have to wonder why can't we?

Like, we really need a win as a city.

Like it's a long time coming.

Our city's been through a lot over the course of the last year.

We've had a lot of projects that we've tried to bring in for a landing that out of reasons that you know none of us could help, they did not happen.

We need a win.

And I, when I look at this, see that I feel like there could have been a different decision made.

And so I'm I'm disappointed.

And I just I feel like there was another option that we should have explored, and I I wish we would have done better with a faster timeline and a faster response.

The whole HUD piece of it, I think is another thing we're gonna have to all like just agree to be confused on because I've seen HUD letters and LLIs and like approval letters with the conditions from 2022, yet we're saying 2024.

I'm not quite sure there either.

Um, so we'll leave that where it is, but um I think we could have done better.

And quite frankly, it makes me very sad to think that we're not going to continue this conversation.

So I look forward to hearing what the rest of City Council has to say.

Um, and that maybe there is still a piece of light for the science to have help.

So thank you, Chair.

Thank you.

Councilmember Harding.

Thank you, Chair.

Um my first concern, uh, and I'll I'll echo or piggyback on uh councilmember Gabbard is at the end of the day we we rely on contract in this country, and that's when the smart people at that end of the dais get involved.

But leading up to that, um we rely on good faith.

And this process has been going on for literally years, um, enough so that uh that we got other parts of government involved all the way up to uh a state senator, and and um and money was spent on both sides, and life force was spent on both sides, and plans were made on both sides.

And it feels like it seems like this came out of nowhere and should have been uh at the beginning of the process if it needed to be.

And I don't like the way that this feels um, but irrelevant to where we are today.

Um my issue um with uh with the the study and how we've treated it, and Claude, I find your team as always with all of my interactions with you to be um always incredibly enlightening, three rule and above all honorable.

And so thank you for the work that you've done.

My um my issue is not with the study, it is what is it is with what we did with the study.

And um what I understand is that of the four or five or six or seven sites that we looked at for possible expansion, um, all of them are possible.

All of them are um are from an engineering perspective possible.

We closed down the the uh the pre the plant down at Albert Woodard Airport, but we still use those tanks.

Um and so what we're talking about is money.

I would imagine, Claude, if we tasked you with putting those tanks in Pascoe County, you could do it.

It's just a matter of uh of money.

And um and the difference that we're talking about here is the half a million dollars or a million dollars or whatever it is.

What we haven't talked about yet uh up here on the diocese is what it is that that we're talking about.

We're talking about a science center for children.

We're talking about a place that that half the people in this room uh have memory of.

We're we're talking about uh uh some we're talking about a a a brick and mortar structure that addresses um that addresses something that has fallen short in education today and is being debated, and and that is that is STEM and sciences.

Um we have a uh group of uh people who went out, formed a plan, and raised money.

They didn't raise so many, they raised 16 million dollars on the way to 25, right?

And it's a it's a not-for-profit entity that again um is pointed towards our kids.

I I struggle with if that group had come to us and said, hey, listen, um, we're gonna build this in your community.

Will the city get involved for a half million dollars, or the city get involved for a million dollars?

You would find consensus all across the board in this entire building, right?

That that's the the most precious commodity that we have.

And so and so at the end of the day, um my struggle is that this is a good cause, there's a good group behind it, and the city um the city absolutely can be involved in it and should be involved in it.

Um it is never too late.

Uh, and that's why we're talking about this today.

The the sorry, lost track of my point.

Uh I but well, I'll just finish with that.

But that is my struggle is that um it is that the most prudent thing to do is to not build this and uh and save that that land for uh future tanks.

But that's not what we're in the business of doing.

We're not a for-profit entity.

We're an entity that builds things with the resources that we have for our citizens.

And so prudent is not necessarily a consideration.

The consideration is what can we do that best uh that that best benefits the 300,000 people who live here.

And the truth of the matter is that we can accomplish the the um the the points in the study of setting land aside, possibly building extra tanks, um, having a place for more throughput or other processes as this gets more complicated, and we can build the science center right there at the same time.

And so that that ultimately is my struggle is um is that all of this is doable.

Um that's what uh that and that's what I'll stand behind.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Councilmember Floyd.

Thank you.

Uh so I'll start I guess by talking about science.

Like I am an engineer, I have a bachelor's and master's degree in electrical engineering, and I taught science and engineering right next door to Zalea Middle School for a year, and uh now I'm not gonna talk about any of that because I don't think it's relevant to the conversation anymore.

Instead, I'm gonna talk about economic development and how this is a private sector economic development project that we uh had that you know we're selling for basically market rate uh this property and this public use and basically public use facility is gonna be created there, and we let them get a long way down the line before we pulled the rug a long way, and uh when it comes to economic development, like providing certainty to our private and public sector partners in this case as well, uh is very important to me.

I think it's very important to developing the local economy of the city, and so uh based off of that alone, as well as the fact that I understand where y'all are coming from on the study, um, and I see why you got to the conclusions you got to, but I also did not hear that anything outside of we would be inconvenienced if we did not have the science center prop property, and so because of that, I'm willing to be in convenience to allow uh uh a project like this go on.

Um and that's that's really where I'm at today, and so I I'd be willing to continue figuring out how we can make this happen.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Councilmember Givens.

Thank you so much, Chair.

I appreciate it.

It was brought up earlier that I think the best inspiration for a young person when it comes to this site is seeing a science center and not seeing some sort of waste storage facility.

Um I am one of the few probably on this diets who actually benefited from the science center.

Um, some of my best field trips growing up as a child were to that science center and my dad as well after five decades, you know, and so I think it's important to recognize the fact that there's so many benefits, and if we were to lose sight of this project, we risk losing five years of Senator Roussan and Representative Jacques and so many others' hard work, um, seven million dollars in funding, uh appropriations that may not necessarily follow this project because they are tied to this site.

Um, and I think it's a tough loss.

You know, the statement was made to Mr.

Hamilton, well, you may not have five votes to get this thing saved.

Well, sounds like he has those five votes.

So um I just want to say that I certainly think this is a uh project that's worth us saving.

Um it's gone too far, and I think it's you know uh a worthy cause.

When I think of this site, I think about the planetarium.

Um I think about one of the largest mosaic art pieces in the United States, and all of that would be at a loss for the purpose of saving a water capacity facility that we may not necessarily need.

Um so with that, Chair, I'm done.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Councilmember Fix Sanders.

Thank you.

I I I wanted first of all thank everyone for coming in and sharing your opinion.

And I am very appreciative to everyone's um comment.

So I will start in full transparency.

I was not the 100% supporter of the science center initially.

Because I wanted housing.

You know, I kept thinking about housing.

What else can we do?

Can we do housing?

We need a uh a large space to provide housing.

So I'm I'm all about housing.

Um, and as the time went, um, and we saw what was developing, um, as I share with Senator Roussan, I see where we are.

Um, as I share with Senator Roussan, I see where we are.

The mayor had already gotten to a point.

I won't speak against it, but I'm still in the same place of wanting housing.

So when I heard that all of a sudden it was stopped, halted.

Um part of me said, Well, okay, now let's.

But then another part of me said, if I were in those shoes, and I had gone this far, I I'd invested this far.

How would I feel?

What would that do?

Am I still wanting to have somewhere for our wasteboard?

I do.

That I mean that's a must.

We are we are responsible to ensure that our water supply that that we're there.

But then I think about how can we do both?

So I don't know if we can vote yes and no, but I think we we need to figure out how we can do both.

Do I still feel the same way about the science center?

Absolutely.

Did I see the the renderings of it that I absolutely loved?

Yes, I did.

Um, I still have the same concerns about the science center.

I still have the same concerns that not all students will have access to it.

Um I was told that that would not be an issue, that would not be a concern, and I'm gonna hold you to that.

Um, so I'm letting you know up front, my concerns are still there.

I'm not gonna let that go, but I'm still struggling with how long this went to all of a sudden say now we have to stop.

But then the other part says we need to have that facility.

So um I am in this position of listening and trusting um our administration, but also looking at what was invested in getting it to the next place because I got into a comfortable place.

I thought that the deal was done, we were moving on, you know, it was only to hear this.

So I'm gonna leave it there.

Um that if it moves forward, which at this point, you know, I don't I don't you know have a uh discrepancy against it, but as a city, we were responsible.

Um we we people keep saying Helene, we had Debbie Helene and Milton.

We were not prepared for all three of those.

Things had changed since we had this conversation.

I think the conversation would have stopped with the science center early on.

I just wish it would have dis it would have discontinued um early on.

So again, I am at the position, I want to can we do both?

Um, and I don't know what that may look like.

I don't know if we're required to act on this right now, but I would love to see us um entertain what that looks like.

That's it.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Councilmember Driscoll.

Thank you, Chair.

I understand that you have not had an opportunity to speak yet, and I kicked us off, so I wanted to yield to you if you would like to say a few words before I start too.

Thank you.

Um, first uh thanks for the countless one-on-ones, Claude and team and Rob and the mayor.

Um I I don't normally uh say things like this, but I'll I'll toot my horn a little bit.

Um, yes, there were three of us on the dais that voted in September of 2001, but I had started going to meetings in July when I announced and was at the meeting when this started in September of 2001, and I can promise you, maybe other than Joe Hamilton, and I and I would put up against Joe, there is nobody that has had more meetings and spent more time on the Science Center since 2001 than me.

And so um I just I I wanted a level set real quick.

Um council member givens, I agree.

I've got lots of memories at the science center, probably a few I shouldn't have.

Um, and so my brothers went there, I went there, my nieces, my nephews.

Uh I live less than a mile from there.

And so this has been something that I think it's the first phone call I got in November of 2021 from count then council member blackman.

Uh, and I think the second one was a text from you, Councilmember Gabbard.

And so um this has been something where I have talked about it in every single neighborhood meeting in almost if not every one-on-one I've had with the mayor, probably 50% of the one-on-ones I've had um with with Rob and administration.

So I again I just wanted a level set because uh and I'll start with this and then finish somewhere else.

And I know that that kind of fractured.

We've talked about it at nauseum already, so I'm not gonna go into that.

But I just want to make it very clear from both my perspective and speaking on behalf of my of my meetings with administration and the mayor, uh, everybody was rowing in the right dire uh in the same direction.

This study obviously throws some different things, and and again, it's been talked about, and we have public hearings, so I'm gonna I'm gonna make sure I'm cutting myself short.

But here's the deal.

Obviously, uh I think cab, I think council member gabbard said it best.

Um, you know, we need a win, and selfishly, I'd love for that win to be on the west side of St.

Petersburg in a place that I think we saw lots of wins go from 1966 until 20 teens when the science center closed.

And so, you know, I would love to try to find uh a reasonable path forward.

I've continued to try to do that with the mayor and administration, and so the all of the feedback has been very good because we were not able to talk about this.

Most of the talk we've had has been about funding, frankly, of this project.

Well, putting wiki watching money out, then putting it back in.

Uh, you know, that that's those are the conversations that we've had at the this point.

So I just I just wanted to relay my sentiment and my uh my passion for this project.

I also I listen, I I get the data.

This is kind of where I stood when we were talking about projects in the past, but I do think you know, if there's a way to get an and rather than an or, I'd certainly love to get there.

And so um for the sake of time, I'm gonna yield and we'll go to council member Driscoll.

Thank you.

And it has been um really important to me, and I'm very happy to finally hear from my colleagues on how what we think of all of this.

And I think um the message seems pretty clear that and is the option that we would like to move forward with.

Um I gotta back up for a minute because Claude Um we have had a a great working relationship over many years now, and um I have the greatest respect for you.

I know that you prioritize your your um your mission in our city, your team, and our residents, not necessarily in that order, it all works together, it's all prioritized for you.

And um that's why it's really difficult for me to hear um that there's this discrepancy on on what happened, and it kind of colors this whole thing.

Um I want to believe that there was not an intention of deception here, but when I see that when I hear this, and then see the study, I can't help but think that this was the study was presented to us as being objective, but it's actually biased, and that certain elements of it were um steered in a certain direction to create a certain result.

I need I need to know why you why you did this.

I'm looking, I'm looking for an explanation that I can be peace peaceful about.

So I I did not steer it towards a specific result.

Matter of fact, I was very clear with the staff that this needed to be objective.

Um and that we needed to look at all the sites as with an objective lens as much as we could.

Um, and so all I can say is that I did not steer this towards a specific result.

Okay.

If the study had been done after the sale of the science center was completed, and it was determined that was not part of this, it all the other options were there.

Would you be able to move forward with planning for the future at that site?

We will continue to move forward with planning.

But if if the science center was already sold, right, no longer an option, right?

Would you still be able to make it work?

We as the plan should, as the feasibility study showed you, there are many options available to us.

Yes.

So the and is possible.

And that's where I think that we should be headed towards now.

Okay.

This gives me a lot of encouragement.

I didn't know where we were going to be with this today.

But being able to plan for the future for our infrastructure and be able to move forward with letting this group reimagine, re-envision, and revitalize the science center is really the best of both worlds, especially these days.

We all know science is under attack right now.

It is up to cities, it is up to the private sector, it is up to people like us in all in this room to make sure that our children have that access to science.

Because why are you making these plans?

Because we have problem we have challenges that we know will lie ahead one day.

How are we going to know what those are?

Science.

How are we going to know how to fix it?

Science.

Down the road, the children who will be attending the science center will be the scientists of tomorrow who are solving those problems for us.

And so this all the synergy here is absolutely fabulous.

One of the reasons that I love the Maritime and Defense Technology Hub out on the port is because students at USF St.

Pete can go outside if they're studying marine science, they can look out, they can look out at the port, they can look all around them and see jobs.

So I think there is a path forward, and I'm hoping that we can figure out what that might look like.

But first, um if you don't mind and uh I need to ask the chair for permission.

I I think that since Joe Hamilton is here with us, would you oblige and allow him to step up?

I just want to ask him a question and give him the opportunity to speak just for a moment.

Uh sure.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Mr.

Hamilton, hope I didn't catch you off guard.

Uh you're you're the kind of guy who's always ready.

Yes, thank you.

If you could introduce yourself to everyone, sure.

Joe Hamilton, um, with St.

Peeper Steam, St.

Pete Foundation, St.

Petersburg Group, uh been uh working very hard on this project for a few years.

Um I a couple quick points I'll make just for the record.

Uh number one, first and foremost, Copley's been an absolutely great partner in this process, and he is true to his word.

He has busted his rear working on this, and we were all rowing in the same direction.

So I concur and appreciate his partnership in this endeavor.

Um the HUD grant was awarded, and it was uh first it was uh Robert Blackman and Charlie Christine, a beautiful act of bipartisan uh uh goodness for the city.

They they brought the three million dollars into uh here, it was approved in 2022, it was initiated in 2021.

Um at that point, the election just ended, and there was sort of a period of hibernation as the mayor got uh used to his new role, and uh we didn't have a lot of communication, so it wasn't until uh 2023 that we were able to pick back up the conversation for this where this HUD money was involved from the previous year, and then once we actually had a path forward, we started the HUD process, so that's why it began in 2023, it was actually initiated long before that.

Um, and with regard to the reports, I mean, just stepping stepping back, it's you know, the top four results in this objective report, three were dismissed out of hand.

One was just the very first one was dismissed because these tanks weren't important enough to put there.

The number one site, this is the number one place we should put it.

Nah, there's higher and better users.

These tanks aren't important enough to put there, and so let's take it off the list.

Can you stick to the science to the science center specifically?

Because you're gonna make comments on the study.

We should have done it during open forum or the three minutes.

I just want to be fair to everybody.

Yep.

And actually, the point I really need to have a question, yeah.

I did.

Sorry.

That's okay.

Let's go with the question.

I just want to make sure we're being fair.

Yep.

Yeah.

Um, but thank you.

Thank you for all of that.

That that part of the timeline is great, and um we've all reviewed reviewed this study, it's been out there.

Um, and you know, there could be other conversations that happen with that.

It isn't it is not for us to decide today what the alternative will be.

I'm hoping that we can send a message today that there is to be an alternative.

Let's get to that later.

What I wanted you to share with us, what I wanted to ask you was to tell us your experience and what you have put into this project over the last five or so years.

Um because this isn't done.

This doesn't just magically fall out of the sky.

This guy's blood, sweat and tears and his um time and his treasure are wrapped into this for the community.

It's not to enrich himself.

Nobody gets rich off these kinds of projects, okay?

Joe, what has this meant for you?

What have you put into it?

And um brevity is golden.

Yeah, well, first it's it's definitely not just me.

Pathfinder's been a great partner, Water Warrior Alliance, it's been a real village.

All of our elected officials, you know, we've had bipartisan support.

So, you know, I'm I'm simply just sort of the water carrier that that carries other people's water on this.

Uh and you know, this to me was a great opportunity.

It is a great opportunity because obviously there's still a path forward, I believe.

Um, you know, when I look at all the things uh, you know, and I have uh an interesting role at sort of the the middle of a lot of stuff in the city.

Um, you know, I'm looking at economic development, I'm looking at preparing our region for the future with emerging technology.

I'm looking at preserving historic elements of our past.

I'm looking at educating our our kids.

I'm looking at being financially sustainable, which was very important for me because so many of these science centers go out of business and struggle financially.

So it was a beautiful, beautiful puzzle uh to be able to put together something that checks so many boxes that has art that has history, that has education, that has economic development, that it has event space and office space and things that can make us sustainable.

And we packed every square inch of that 50,000 square foot, you know, star destroyer looking building with goodness and value for the community.

Um, and that's why it is frustrating to hear these conversations about you know moving a dumpster and some palm fronds to a place would be inconvenient when so much, you know.

I I think this is what real resiliency leadership is about is understanding it's a multifaceted issue.

And you know, you don't say I want to fix education, I'm gonna buy 10,000 desks.

You say it's a multifaceted issue, and we solved a lot of mouth or at least worked on solving a lot of different multifaceted elements of need in our city, and that was what was really exhilarating around the project and being able to bring so many people together, each each aligning with their own self-interest to contribute to this and make part of it their own and and become almost like a uh you know just a platform for everybody else to really thrive under.

So that's that that was that was the vision.

That was the goal.

That's where the the effort went.

All right, thank you.

Thanks for all you've done up to this point on this on this project, and I um hope that we do find a path where we can move forward.

You know, we received a lot of emails, um, and thank you, those of you who are here and emailed and those of you uh those who could not be here tonight.

Um, I really appreciate all of the emails.

There's one that stood out to me.

And this is what made me believe that I was doing the right thing by bringing this conversation forward in the public um today, and it's from um a teacher named Tamika Morris, um, who used to live in the jungle terrace neighborhood.

She lives in a different neighborhood now, um, in District Five.

And she um still passes by her middle school azalee when she's while she's waiting for the Science Center to be back on her field trip list.

She says, I am in my 31st year teaching, and this trip was one that touched the lives of so many.

They constantly worked with our Pinellas County Schools Department to develop hands-on activities using standards that students were current currently using.

This can't be replicated, and it was free for students like my Title One students that otherwise wouldn't have some of these experiences.

It goes on, but you get the idea.

This is for Tamika and for all who teach at the Science Center, who learn at the Science Center, and who want to see the Science Center thrive.

Jackie, help me out here.

I know I know.

Um please this isn't some this was just a report item.

It wasn't something for us to vote on.

But again, one of the reasons I brought it forward was to find out what my colleagues thought about it.

It seems that we have um several council members who would like to see this move forward.

Um what can we do?

I I mean you you certainly have the option today to make uh motion requesting anything that you would like of administration related to the project.

Okay.

Do we have to do a do you have to quickly write a resolution for us?

No, you we don't uh I mean we you you have that option, but a resolution isn't necessary.

A motion would suffice.

Okay.

Um well then I will um make a um a motion for city council to request that the administration reconsider the plans for the science center site and um move forward with the agreement with the St.

Petersburg group um for the science center and work on alternatives for the um public works uses in other locations.

I just made that up.

It doesn't sound very graceful, but will that do?

Yes, second.

Okay.

Okay.

Councilmember Fix Sanders.

Thank you.

I have a question.

Now listening to administration and listening to the majority of an and instead of an or.

I thought I did hear that there's an option for them to be in the same location.

No, no, okay, I missed it.

Just wanted to make sure.

All right, thank you.

I hear your motion.

Okay.

Um just one thing.

I don't know if um so I don't want this to hang out there.

We've everyone's waited for far too long already.

And so um if if this should pass, I would like to have administration tell us um a date certain by which this transaction will be completed.

And um then um after that I will look at um a new business item to schedule um a meeting in PS and I to discuss the alternatives for public works and get an update from them that way.

So that's kind of what I'm what's noodling in my head right now.

I would like to know if if we can get a timeline, if we can get some we'll we'll talk to the mayor about whatever the vote is tonight and we'll get back to city council.

Okay, great.

So um could you please give us an update at the October 2nd City Council meeting?

Because if you're gonna ask like I said, we'll talk to the mayor and we'll get back to you.

All right, thank you.

I look forward to hearing an update on that on October 2nd.

Thank you, Chair.

Okay, we have a motion and a second on an F1 motion.

Seeing as no other council members wishing to speak, clerk, could you please open the machine for voting?

Council members, please enter your votes.

Seeing as all present council members have voted, clerk, please tally and announce the vote.

Mr.

Chair, the motion for agenda item F1 passes unanimously.

Okay.

Thank you.

All right, we're gonna keep moving on because we've got public hearings to get to.

We're gonna move into new business and we're gonna go to G1.

This is my item.

If you could please try to be uh quiet as you're entering or exiting, because we do have to continue to move on.

Please and thank you, and thank you for being here.

This is respectfully requesting referral to the budget finance and taxation committee to discuss public revenue bonds series 25 2025 C and I'd entertain a motion for approval.

Move approval.

Second.

We have a motion to second on G1.

Seeing as no other council members wishing to speak.

Clerk, please open the machine for voting.

Council members, please enter your votes.

Seeing as all present council members have voted, clerk please tell and announce the vote.

Mr.

Chair, the motion to approve a genetic one passes unanimously.

Will Council Member Harding make absent.

Okay, we're gonna move into G2.

A ref uh referral from Councilmember Givens.

Thank you, Chair.

And I'll be very brief.

Um I brought this forward simply after being approached by Pastor Williams, uh, the owner and chair of Cross and Amble, the nonprofit that's currently operating Lincoln Cemetery.

Uh they're in a bit of a bond, and so in order to keep them from going into a state of disarray, I've asked that the council consider having a joint discussion uh with the golf port city council regarding the cemetery's historical significance in the future.

Uh again, this conversation is strictly about educating uh both council bodies about the history and also the future uh for options and opportunities.

So with that respectfully requesting a referral to the housing land use and transportation committee or other relevant committee to discuss a potential joint meeting between the St.

Petersburg City Council and the Gulfport City Council to discuss the Lincoln Cemetery, and with that I move for approval okay.

Um as there's some some discussion on this item, and we haven't gotten a second yet.

I'm gonna defer G2 till after the public hearing.

We can bring this back up after J1 because what I want to do is I want to give council five minutes to go to the bathroom before we go into public hearing.

And so we're gonna we'll just defer G2 till after J1, Jackie.

That's okay.

Yeah, I would say just procedurally if if it's okay with Councilmember Givenchy in light of the start time.

Right, if if you wouldn't mind withdrawing your motion just for the record, so we can just bring it up fresh at that point.

So we'll bring it back up clean, council member givens after J1.

So just will you just put that you withdraw the motion on the record?

I would draw the motion for the record.

Thank you.

Okay, we're gonna recess for five minutes.

We're gonna come back at 625 for uh for public hearings.

We're in recess.

Okay, we are going to call back to order the September twenty-fifth, twenty twenty-five City Council meeting.

We're going to move right into public hearing, and uh, I'm sure most of you uh heard Vice Chair Hanowitz go over this last or two weeks ago and and just by sure Hanowitz, thank you for handling first reading during all of this.

But a lot of this is scripted, and so uh please bear with us.

I I will probably just like my sheer handowitz a couple of weeks ago, I will also probably screw this up.

So um, okay.

This is the start of the public hearing.

The public hearing is on the final budget, the final millage rate, and the budget appropriations ordinance for fiscal year twenty twenty-six, which has been amended for second reading to include the intent of the request made by city council at the first public hearing, administration's proposed changes since the first reading as outline and attachment B recap of changes.

This is also the public hearing on the excuse me, public hearing on the proposed multi-year CIP program for the city of St.

Petersburg.

Prior to public comment, the first substantive issue discussed shall be the percentage increase in millage over the rolledback rate necessary to fund the budget, if any, and the specific purposes for which ad valorum taxes are being increased.

That issue will be discussed by Liz McCoskey, our budget director and staff.

Uh after the title to the budget appropriations ordinance is read.

Clerk, if you could please read the ordinance.

Adopting this appropriations ordinance as the budget for the city of St.

Petersburg, Florida for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2026 and providing for related matters and providing an effective date.

And we do have cards, Mr.

Chair.

Okay.

We are going to go to uh our budget director, Liz McCoffsby for our presentation.

Okay.

And before I begin the presentation, if anyone here has specific questions or concerns regarding the assessed value of their property, exemptions or classification related to your property or information on your trim notices.

Tonight we have here with us Kevin McKeon, the deputy of assessment administration, and Jeffrey Haynes, the director of residential appraiser appraisal from the Pinellas County Property Appraisers Office.

If any would like to speak with them, please follow them at this time, and they will answer any questions you may have.

For those attending virtually, please contact the Pinellas County Property Appraisers Office at 727 464 3207.

Um they're um available Monday through Friday, 8 to 5, or you can email Mike at PCPAO.org.

Thank you for being here.

All right, good good evening and thank you, um, Chair, Vice Chair, and members of City Council.

This evening is the second of two public hearings on the fiscal year 2026 budget for the city of St.

Petersburg.

Florida statutes 200.065, the Truth and Millage Act, which is also referred to as the TRIM Act, requires a specific process for our discussion tonight.

The order of this process is laid out in attachment A of the backup materials.

The clerk has just provided the second reading of the FY26 budget ordinance, and in just a moment, I will review with council and the public the proposed changes to the tentative FY26 budget that City Council approved two weeks ago.

Upon conclusion of the budget presentation, we'll then hear from the public.

And after public comment period and discussion and deliberation by city council, um, city council will be asked to take action on three items, and each of these actions will need to be done as a standalone motion.

The first one is to adopt by resolution the final millage rate of 6.4525 for FY26.

The second is to adopt the FY26 budget appropriation ordinance as the final budget.

And the third item is to um adopt by resolution um the FY26 through FY30 capital improvement program.

So under the Florida statutes 200.065, also known as the TRIM process, the first item of substance to be discussed is the percent increase, if any, in millage over the rolledback rate.

For purposes of the FY26 budget, the rolledback rate is 6.2083 mills, and is the millage rate that would generate roughly the same amount of ad valorem revenues in FY26 as the city received in FY25.

Under the TRIM statutes, we're allowed to recognize ad valorem revenue associated with new taxable value added to the tax base.

So the rollback rate generates slightly higher revenues in FY26 than the city is scheduled to receive in 25.

The proposed FY26 millage rate is 6.4525 and represents a 3.93% increase over the rollback rate.

The year-over-year increase in advalorum revenue from FY25 to FY26 is 10.452 million.

The second step in the state required trim process is to discuss the reasons ad valorum revenue taxes are being increased.

A major reason for the increase in the ad valorum revenue is to provide the resources needed for wage increases for all city employees, including police and fire rescue.

There's some key areas of investments plan for the FY26 budget, and they're aligned with the mayor's five pillars for progress.

Under the education and youth opportunities pillar, there's funding to continue programs such as the mayor's Future Ready Academy, year-round youth employment program, youth development grants, literacy and steam programs, and under the equitable development arts and business opportunity pillars.

We look to fund the continuation of many of our economic and workforce development programs and our art programs, while adding funding for some new programs, including individual artist grants and the poetry festival.

Under neighborhood health and safety pillar, we're continuing to fund neighborhood and public safety programs like the Call Program, Community Impact Grants and Programs, the Safe Summer Program, and the Healthy Neighborhood Store Program and our Healthy Food Action Program.

For the housing opportunity for all pillar, there will be funding to continue our progress on the 10-year housing opportunities for all agendas and provide resources for various social service programs.

And finally, in the environment infrastructure and resilience pillar, the preliminary budget will have funding for projects that protect our environment, increase our resilience, and improve our city's infrastructure, including the St.

Pete Agile Resilience Program.

The increase in advalorm tax is based on a 4.93% increase in 2025 property values over 2024.

This next chart shows a 10-year history of property tax avalarum revenue uses.

Per our city fiscal policies, Avalorum revenues must be allocated to cover the cost of providing public safety to the city.

First, these revenues will be used to fund the police department and any excess applied to the fire rescue department.

And after we transfer out the required contributions to the city's three tax increment districts, which is about 26.5 million.

The net FY26 advalorm revenue of just about 202 million will cover 91.6% of the city's public safety costs.

This slide illustrates the calculation of the millage rate for FY26.

The first step in this calculation is to determine the value of one mil.

To do this, we take the gross property value and then multiply it by 96%, which results in $35.471 billion in value for budgeting purposes.

And this gives us the value of $1 mil, which is $35.471 million.

The second step is to look at our FY26 general fund requirements of $411.9 million and net out the other sources of revenue other than ad valorem, which total $183 million.

To arrive at the amount of required ad valorem taxes or $228.87 million.

The third vital step is to divide the required ad valorem tax amount, which is shown as B on this slide, by the value of $1 mil, which is A on this slide, to arrive at the 6.4525 mills required.

This next slide illustrates a typical tax bill for the resident of the city of St.

Petersburg.

The City of St.

Peter Petersburg makes up about 30% of the homeowners tax bill or 30 cents of every ad valorem tax dollar paid by property owners.

Pinellas County makes up 22% of the total taxes.

The balance of 12% is made up of various other taxing authorities such as the EMS, Southwest Florida Water Management District, and the Health Department and various other agencies.

So we'll now move into a discussion of the changes to the FY26 budget since the city since City Council approved the tentative budget two weeks ago at the first public hearing.

This information is included in more detail in attachment B of the backup, which is called the recap of changes.

And we had no change in the general fund revenue since the last public hearing.

We do have a change on the general fund side.

Oh sorry, there is a change on the revenue.

There is a change to the general fund and the revenue side, and this is related to the parks and recreation department.

The amounts for both of the FY26 JWB agreement and the annual agreement with the Florida Department of Health for the summer food program were greater than the amount that we had in the FY26 budget, so this is the additional revenue that we'll receive for those two grants.

Moving on to the requirement changes in the general fund.

They're found on page one of attachment B.

And the requirement changes listed total an increase of $157,000 and mirror the revenue increase on the previous slide of those two parks and recreation grants.

We also had a net zero change in the general fund budget related to the police and fire rescue departments as a result of the new collective bargaining agreements.

And again, these have a net zero effect on the general fund when combined with the contingency change.

The change in contingency shown is again is that net amount needed to fund the requirements for the new police and fire collective bargaining agreements.

Requirement or expense changes for other funds are broken down on the recap of changes attachment B of the backup.

And as a result of the new collective bargain agreement and a little bit of a rounding when we added that amount into the fund.

Um per the amended amendment number one to the 2024 emergency medical services advanced life support first responder agreement, where we had a proposed a new full-time lieutenant position, which was not included in the agreement, so we did remove it from the emergency medical services fund, and we removed the corresponding funding amount to the overtime line item.

So again, that was a net zero change in the fund.

Okay.

In this next section, we'll give a quick overview using tables, charts, and graphs to illustrate the city's FY26 budget.

And these tables are included in the FY26 budget and brief, which has been posted on the city's website.

The total operating revenue budget for the city is 974.464 million.

Charges for services make up the largest category of revenue at 422.2 million or 43.3%, followed by taxes at 302 million or 31%.

The FY26 operating budget on the requirement or expense side is 976.229 million and is 8.2% higher than the FY25 operating budget.

The water resources operating fund increased by 12.3% year over year from 222.9 million to 249.2 million, and the general fund and reserves budget increased by 4.55% from 394.5 million to 412.4 million.921 million.

The general fund revenue comes from various sources as illustrated on this chart.

The largest single source of revenue are taxes, which include ad valorum or property taxes, and is a total of 73.33% of the budget or 302.048 million.

Intergovernmental revenue is our next highest category, which includes our half cent sales taxes, and that's the second largest source at 10.48% or 43.2 million.

The total general fund expenditure budget for FY26 is 411.921 million.

The city's general fund is categorized into six administrations, and the single largest general fund investment made by the cities in the public safety administration, which includes police and fire rescue departments and is about 54.2% of the budget.

And services and commodities make up the second largest at 19.9% or 81.9 million.

The FY26 CIP budget includes a total of 202.022 million in projects.

Water resources projects account for the largest portion at 126.1 million or 62.4%, while a penny for Pinellas projects account for 37.3 million or 18.45%.

The total amount budgeted for the five-year CIP plan is $1.049 billion.

And then this next slide shows the fund balance commitment categories that council will need to reaffirm these categories or other categories when the budget is adopted.

And in closing I'd like to mention that the information on the city's FY26 budget is available on the city's website.

And I'd also like to take a quick moment to thank the budget team for all their hard work and all the department personnel throughout the city that provide assistance throughout the budget process.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay.

This is the beginning of the public comment portion of the hearing the general public should be allowed to speak and ask questions prior to the adoption of the final millage rate and final budget by city council normal rules apply and you'll have three minutes to speak.

We'll uh call the first two speakers please Stephen Bearfield and John Tyler please please go to eye of the podium state your name and address for the record you have three minutes to address city council.

Good evening Stephen Bearfield 5036 Casillaway South.

As president of the St.

Petersburg International Folk Fair Society I'm appearing before you for the third time this budgetary season regarding support for SPIFs SPIFS has received financial and other support from the city for the past 49 years.

Cultural arts grant eligibility changed abruptly this year making SPIFs St.

Pete's longest running public annual event the only organization in the city that was not allowed to apply for a cultural arts grant this year.

I have made phone calls I have sent emails to all of you to the municipal staff to the mayor's office I've appeared here three times and the follow-up has been resounding silence.

It's been shocking we have found that in the 2025 budget ending in a few days there was a $10,000 amount and I quote for SPIF's 50th anniversary not in the cultural arts budget of which we didn't ask and for which we were never informed and we have never received I would like to get on the record that you approved a $10,000 amount for our 50th anniversary this coming year during last year's 2025 budget and that money has not been issued to SPIFs.

I hope that council can help ensure that that happens since we were ineligible to apply for the cultural arts grant we have requested support both from the municipal budget and the council budget as we continue our work suppl celebrating the diverse cultures that make up the fabric of St.

Pete.

I respectfully ask that the council address this matter in tonight's meeting before finalizing the 2076 budget the day and time when celebrating cultural differences is under attack is the very day and time when affirming events such as this international folk fair are imperative for the safety and well being of our citizens while I've been listening to the meeting this afternoon I've been reviewing the budget information there are four cultural annual events that have received an average of 22 to 23 thousand dollars from the city for this fiscal year under nondepartmental among those you cannot find spiffs listed it's unthinkable that the city is walking away from spiffs we have not been offered a date now for three years in a St.

Petersburg Park no response from the Parks Department no offer of dates.

We have been pushed out to Pinellas Park and now you are closing the purse on us as well.

It's a tough day for St.

Petersburg it's a tough year for St.

Petersburg and it doesn't feel much like a 50 year celebration.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

I am John Tyler I live at uh 13th Avenue North in St.

Pete um just call I'm just uh uh speaking today about uh I was looking over the budget and looking at the uh the complete streets aspects and uh uh bike infrastructure aspects of the budget I just like to see more you know going forward on the uh on the uh bike infrastructure particularly uh I know the 28th uh street uh project has been uh approved and is at least phase one is going to start I'd like to see make sure that you know we follow through with phase two and three um I'd also like to see uh more bike infrastructure on the roadways that lead to the uh sunrunner stops uh common area that a lot of people use use the bikes because they get they can use the bikes and get you know get on the sunrise with their bikes so I'd like to see uh more complete streets funding uh targeted at like you know 40th 49th 58th where people uh use those areas to get to on their bikes to the sunrunner stops and then speaking of the sunrunner stops uh was it the uh uh chamber of commerce uh right along on the Sunrunner and the uh lady at um at uh the resort in St.

And then speaking of the sunrunner stops, uh was at the uh uh chamber of commerce uh right along on the Sunrunner, and the uh lady at um at uh the resort in St.

Pete Beach was telling us about uh employees, like one employee in particular that she works with who uh takes three different buses every time she goes gets to and from uh work.

And you know, I couldn't help but think about that lady thinking how nice it would be if there was housing for her right on the sunrunner route.

So instead of having to spend three hours of her day trying to navigate all the buses, she could live right above a sunrunner stop and have more time with her spouse, with her family, all that.

So anything that the city council can do to get more housing.

I know some of these sunrunner stops, there'll just be you know, one story, two story, single use, whether they be commercial, uh residential type of buildings rather than the kind of higher density development you would expect to find at high frequency bus stops.

So there's a couple of things I had in mind looking at the budget.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next two speakers, please.

Wendy Wendy Wesley and Courtney Burt.

Please go to I the Podium, state your name and address for the record.

And you have three minutes to address to the council.

Good evening, council members.

Thank you so much for having me.

My name is Courtney Burt.

I am the vice president for community health and community impact and health strategies for the American Heart Association, uh 11207 Blue Heron Boulevard 33716.

Um I'm here this evening to ask the council members to please consider making a motion to add 82,863 to the budget this year for the fiscal year 26.

Uh, this is for a mobile grocery store site or excuse me, a mobile grocery store that would visit the Jordan Park families twice per month.

Um we all know that that is an area that has low income, low access based on USDA data and and other community health needs assessment data that we have here locally.

Um we also know that heart disease is the number one killer across all ages, genders, categories, and nutrition is one of the biggest factors for that in access to healthy foods.

Uh, this mobile grocery store will break down barriers that these families face in Jordan Park, which is lack of transportation.

Um this evening, we were gonna have a family that would come share why this would be important and they have child care issues.

Being able to bring a mobile grocery store right to their doorsteps would not only bridge a lot of those barriers for them, but just make it easy.

Um, it would also make it uh the diversity of food being brought to these families versus the convenience stores and the other options that they have right now within close proximity to the Jordan Park area.

Um, you know, we have this amazing solution for only 82,863.

Uh data suggests that returns on investment for these type of initiatives related to nutrient nutrition security could return of investment of greater uh upwards to almost 2,000 percent, uh depending on the engagement with the initiatives.

Um, I don't know how many of you I know Councilmember Givens was at one of the events I was at.

I personally have been out to numerous events at the Jordan Park community during their holiday Christmas events, uh during their after school events.

I've taught the children there how to do hands-only CPR.

If you guys can get this push through the budget, I give you my personal commitment that not only will you get this mobile grocery store, which will be provided by Feeding Tampa Bay, but you will also get my commitment that we will come alongside them and we we will provide a plethora of resources, giving out clinically validated blood pressure devices, teaching the children how to do hands-only CPR, teaching them physical activity.

Um, if I didn't feel passionately about this, I wouldn't go and spend a lot of my own personal time, and I have been at at least five events this calendar year, jump roping with the children myself.

And if you can go out to these events and see the families come out and engage, we are not only building community, and we're not only improving health, but we are building connectedness.

We're building trust in our health care systems, and we are really making generational changes that we can't even gauge what the financial return will be on that investment.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Hi, my name is Wendy Wesley.

I live at 357 Fourth Avenue South.

I'm a registered and licensed dietitian nutritionist here in St.

Petersburg, and I work um weekly with populations all over St.

Petersburg.

I'm here to uh ask for your support of the Jordan Park um mobile grocery store.

I spent many years working at St.

Anthony's as a clinical dietitian, and I'm first could see firsthand the um effects of nutrition insecurity.

Um it seems that in St.

Petersburg, we instead of adding access to food, we are losing access to food.

Uh most recently with the closing of the Save a Lot grocery store at 22nd Avenue and 49th Street South, the closing of the Save a lot at Kokinaky Plaza, and we're going on um eight years without a grocery store at Tangerine Plaza.

So I would um ask council to fund this mobile grocery store at Jordan Park.

Um, as the uh previous gentleman who stood at this podium said um transportation is uh a major barrier to access to uh work and also to groceries.

And um uh we do live in areas of low-income low access.

Um, also I don't like to use the term, but called and commonly known as food deserts, and these areas are often linked to transportation.

So if this mobile grocery store could bring the groceries to where people live, it would have an incredible impact on this uh part of St.

Petersburg.

Thank you.

Next to speakers, Tara Hubbard and Jay James, please go to the podium, say it your name and address for the record.

You have three minutes to address city council.

Go ahead, Jared.

All right, I'll go first.

Can you hear me?

Uh Tara Hubbard, I live at 4751 6th Avenue South.

Hello, council.

Great to be here.

Uh so wanted to chat about the budget.

Um I'm a big multimodal transportation fan, as many of you may know.

And seeing the the budget for next year, uh, it's it's a little disappointing.

I would love to see more funding in this region uh for these types of projects.

Closer to home, uh realizing the lack of funding, seeing firsthand what that causes.

Um, there's been a lot of studies and planning for uh infrastructure improvements along the Sunrunner Corridor, along the Pinellish Trail, in those uh intersections that actually go to those really world-class uh transportation services that we have here, um, but the lack of connectivity is uh quite tragic to see.

Uh, for example, the 49th Street Corridor, which is where I live off of, uh, and my family also we have our office off of 49th Street.

Um, in that corridor coming from Sunrunner and coming from Pinellas Trail is extremely dangerous to uh traverse as a pedestrian or a bicyclist.

Um just recently I arrived home from out of the country on Sunday evening and went to my office on Monday morning, and I saw the a film crew right next to my office.

So I rolled down my window, hey, what's going on?

And they shared with me that that uh location was where a woman was just um tragically hit by a drunk driver.

Uh and learning about that, she was riding in a curb lane.

So realizing that the studies that we have uh actually promoting the bike lanes on that corridor, actually, this council last year uh voted on those in infrastructure improvements and just to see that nothing has been done is and seeing the actual results right in my backyard was uh really tragic.

So I would implore uh the council and the city to possibly make these types of infrastructure improvements possible uh faster and better funded.

Uh, that is something that I would love to see.

Thank you all for your time.

Thank you.

Hello, my name is Jay James.

My pronouns are the Demandares to 2042 27th Street South.

Um April 26th, 2024.

11-year-old Amir Williams was fatally shot by his 14-year-old brother Kimoni Williams.

Students had the day off from school on that Friday, and the mirror was home with his older brother and 13-year-old sister, said the police.

Comoni Williams told the authorities he found a gun in a nearby alley, and the shooting was accidental.

St.

Pete Police Assistant Chief Michael Kovashev.

I hope I said his name right, said a firearm should not have been there.

This is where we are today.

A teenager should not have had a firearm.

He was playing around with the firearm and it discharged.

Marcus Rivers, April 20th, 2025.

21-year-old Marcus Rivers was killed in his car in Riviera Bay.

A 17-year-old was also shot in the same shootout and was in critical conditions afterwards but survived.

Marcus is alleged killed us all two 16-year-old boys and the 70-year-old who was injured.

These are just two of the young folk who've been killed since we launched our Save Our Streets campaign and have been coming here and talking to y'all under Mayor.

We want to stop violence in our community, and our budget should reflect that.

The residents of St.

Pete are looking for our test dollars to prioritize the people's needs.

And based on our outreach, it is uh more accessible youth programming.

Save our streets is a public safety measure.

So this funding should come from as part of the city's public safety budget.

And we demand that there is no increase in the police budget.

And instead, increase the public safety budget to support this initiative.

Across this country and here in St.

Pete, one of the best indicators of increased violence is a lack of investment in a local community.

We need to address violence at the root, which means supporting communities that are most impacted.

When neighborhoods don't have access to stable vote, stable housing, stable um health care, stable child care programs, then how do we expect them to have any form of stability?

This is a story that we see in city after city.

The presence and violence in a community is a reflection of a city's uh um officials willingness to support that community.

That's y'all.

What are y'all gonna do?

Thank you.

Next two speakers.

Next two speakers, Lena Vu and Misty Batroff, I believe that's it.

Please go to either podium, state your name and address for the record.

And you have three minutes to address city council.

Okay, I'll go first.

Good evening, council member members.

My name is Misty Battorf.

I'm the executive director of the Skyway Marina District.

I live at 6175 56th Place North in St.

Pete.

Um, first I want to thank you for your continued support you've shown to all of our main streets.

I've proudly served in this role for seven years.

And in that time, we've made a real impact through community events that bring people together and strengthen our local businesses.

However, during those seven years, the funding we receive has not increased, while the cost of holding events has risen significantly.

Road closures, police presence, and overall expenses of putting on an event that is safe, welcoming for community events continue to grow.

We are grateful for an arts grant that allowed us to host six arts events this year, but that grant is no longer available, which limits what we can provide this upcoming year.

So to continue offering the events that enrich our community, draw visitors, and support small businesses.

I respectfully ask that you consider an increase in the city fundings to our main street program.

Your investment helps us sustain and grow these opportunities for our residents and businesses alike.

Thank you again for your partnership and support.

Thank you.

Hello.

Uh Lena Vu, 772578th Street North.

Um, I'm here in support of the Dream Defender Save Our Streets campaign as well as increased funding for other social programs.

Um, I think we can all agree that children are the future, and the mayor said so himself in the budget brief.

Uh and he also said that their current experiences will shape their tomorrow.

So will their experience continue to be seeing people living on the streets or people living paycheck to paycheck, unable to afford basic necessities like housing and food, which is really the root cause of violence and crime.

Will they continue to see the city council allocate over a hundred and seventy million dollars to the police while people are struggling to pay rent and provide for their families?

We don't need over 400,000 for police take-home vehicles.

We need more resources that will actually benefit the community and especially the children.

The the mayor seemed really proud of the safe summer uh program that was implemented last year for the youth.

Um, but I want to know what you're doing year-round to make sure that they have access to the resources they need, whether whether it's financial or transportation, um, to make sure that they don't have to continue experiencing violence, whether direct like Jay was talking about, or indirect by means of poverty and lack of resources when the city could be doing more.

Um, so whatever is making you feel the need to spend so much money and resources on the police.

I want you to put that energy towards addressing the root cause of the issues plaguing the city and incarceration is never the answer.

So, as long as you continue to prioritize policing and um instead of investing in the city, then you will never be doing enough to keep our community safe, and I hope you that room that you remember that.

Thank you.

Next two speakers, please.

Christian Arnold and Rafael Tabera, please go to eye the podium, state your name and address for the record.

And you have three minutes to address City Council.

My name is Christian Arnold, 2306 First Avenue North.

I am the executive director of the Grand Central District.

Very large district, so much I have uh 30% of the city council uh representing us.

Um I wanted to reiterate what Misty had said about the main street program.

Uh I don't think there's anybody who's interfaced with one of our associations who doesn't think that that money is well spent.

Um we work closely with city administration, we advocate for the businesses, uh, we work in economic vitality, and uh it makes sense to a little more money down for our associations makes sense.

The reason I'm here today is uh we don't have a line item in the budget for for one of the ways that we make money is events, and the biggest one we have is Halloween.

Halloween uh was started by downtown partnership five years ago.

Um, and as part of that, the expenses there's a deduction in the city bill to to cover those costs.

When it started, it was about 25,000 to run Halloween, those costs have tripled almost quadrupled.

I just got my city bill today.

For this year, it's $60,000 for police and traffic.

The deduction is still the same, it's still $30,000.

Um, the reason why you've never seen me here asking for money before is because I pride myself in this I'm a good fundraiser, and uh I like to get the the private sector involved.

Uh it's it's tough out there right now.

We know with the economic and political climate right now, fundraising is extremely difficult.

Uh so I'm coming here to ask for money from the city.

Um obviously I would like to see a lot of money from the city, but if we can just cover the city bill, I we can do the rest.

You know, Roger Curlin, who was the my colleague at the edge district, he and I have working tirelessly uh to find sponsors.

We lost our title sponsor this year, but you know, we've been out there nickel and diamond, and we're we're getting close.

But the the city bill being double that what it's been, it's very difficult as to even break even.

Uh we were hoping to make a little bit of money this year, but it's not it's not looking that way.

Um, you know, Halloween is two miles of Central Avenue.

Uh talk about a benefit to the city uh and economic vitality.

We're we're activating the entire Central Avenue corridor, everyone's involved in it.

We have uh this year we have an autism area, a sensory area, we have we have a kids' zone.

There's there's a million things going on, and the whole city is coming out to we had over a hundred thousand people last year.

And it'll be a shame if the city lost this wonderful event that we know we're trying to do on.

So again, I don't want to ask for a lot of money, but it would be great if the city could just cover city costs for us this year.

Thanks.

That's all I got.

Thank you.

Hi everyone, my name is Rafael Tabera, and I'm a resident at 851 18th Avenue North.

Now, I believe that too many of our youth has been impacted by gun violence.

And when we do service at communities that are most impacted by set gun violence, communities like Child's Park, what they tell us is that they need more youth programs.

For example, like after school programs and things of that nature.

And another thing is the police department has the same exact sentiments, but there's a problem here.

Our budget doesn't reflect that.

And so the thing is our youth is our future, and we need to invest in them.

They're much they're more, they're more than worth the investment.

They're everything.

They're a reflection of us and what we leave with them.

And so it's on us to do the work and to leave a better world for them.

And nevertheless, these kids shouldn't even be subjected to this gun violence.

Like that should just not even be happening.

So please take note of what's occurring in these communities and in this city, and please just consider it when we're talking about the budget, because I mean, it's everything.

So that's all.

Thank y'all for y'all time.

Thank you.

Next two speakers, please.

Next two speakers, Max McCann, Ulysses Burden, please approach our podium, state your name and address.

You'll have three minutes to address City Council.

All right.

Good evening, Max McCann, 2648 Third Avenue South.

Here to ask this council to increase funding to increase its investment, uh, as the previous speaker said, in complete streets and safe streets projects.

The last time I was here, I mentioned a crash where driver hit a cyclist on 28th Street.

Earlier today, I sent you a photo of that by email.

I'm sure your inboxes are disasters, but if you find that, please look at it and please appreciate the the violence that is required for a human body to cause that much damage to a vehicle.

And what's also remarkable about that is we've been planning safe streets improvements on 28th Street for, as far as I know, about five years, and we haven't broken ground on those yet.

Um, as Tara mentioned on Friday, there was another tragic crash where Kirsten Strang was hit and killed by a suspected drunk driver on 49th Street.

Witnesses reported that her body was carried on top of the vehicle for eight blocks before falling off of it.

Now her six-year-old son has to grow up without a mother.

We've also been planning improvements on 49th Street for over a year.

This council adopted a resolution specifically for the for those improvements over a year ago.

On Tuesday, a 56-year-old woman was hit and killed by a driver while walking across 34th Street North.

Yesterday, an 89-year-old woman, Angela Sha Shehat was killed by a suspected junk driver on 38th Avenue North in a head-on collision.

Yesterday, a cyclist was struck by a driver at 22nd Street South and 15th Avenue South.

Some of you may know that's on our bike to school route.

Uh, so that one hits close to home.

I saw a cyclist hit on 38th Avenue North on my way home from work today.

The the mayor's uh budget in brief doesn't mention complete streets funding.

It's not even an item.

So that um it sends a message that this isn't uh priority.

But I want to be constructive here.

Here's my idea.

In the future, let's use a portion of these public safety funds for safe streets.

That's a form of public safety.

And what police and fire do is incredibly important, but let's be real.

What they do is reactive, and a lot of what they're reacting to is car crashes.

I want to use some of that money to prevent the crashes in the first place.

Let's make our streets safer.

Um one last thing I'm gonna note these projects don't have to be expensive.

Also, in the email I sent you today was a project that Atlanta did where they installed a bike lane for 10,000 in less than a year.

We can do these kind of quick build projects here, and so uh don't let perfect be the enemy of the good.

Uh let's make our streets safer.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Hello, my name is Ulysses J.

Burden or Jess Dureau, and I am a resident of 50239 Springwood Boulevard, North Pinous Park, Florida.

I grew up here in St.

Petersburg, Florida.

I am here to support the demands of Save Our Street campaign.

It is a phrase, don't quote me on it.

Ask not what you can do for your country, but what I mean, ask what not your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country, or President Roosevelt.

Moving on, according to AI Google research context for phrase and expression, bullets don't discriminate.

It's often used in public commentary and advocates and politicians to emphasize that gun violence is a widespread problem that can impact anyone.

However, the literal interpretation of the phrase is undermined by statistical data that shows the impact of gun violence is not equally distributed.

Disparities are driven by complex socioeconomic factors, including uh systematic inequalities, privates, and access to resources.

I admire Senator Del Rousseau.

Why you may ask for going into his personal resources for the greater good of the community.

I recall the morning of April twelve uh April 25th, 2003.

I was 12 years old many moons ago, which marked the sunset of my mother's life.

She was an innocent bystander.

That caused a ripple effects for myself and my family.

Uh started, the Leo started working for the sheriff's office of Pinoz County and lost his job after a dog got shot.

I believe that humans and animals matter.

According to AI research with my Google to my uh Google research, uh general gender men and far are far more uh far more likely to be victims of gun violence than women across all intents, homicide, suicides, and unintentional.

Do you know that males account for the vast majority of firearms deaths included about 90% of fatalities from 1990 to 2021?

I am a survivor of gun violence myself back in 2014.

I was shot.

I am grateful to say I beat the statistics, and I'm happy to be here today.

And intersectional race and gender.

Certain groups are face heightened risks when both race and agendas are considered while race for gun homicides increased faster for the black Americans than any other group from like 2019 to 2021.

The rate among black women specifically rose by 79%, the sharpest increase of race or gender.

Young black men age 15 to 34 who lives in large city face the highest risk of gun violence.

I call to action, let's be accountable, you know, the ripple effect of gun violence within the community by stopping the violence in our communities and budget should reflect that across the country and here in St.

Petersburg.

There are already good programs in the area that can make a difference, but they are under advertised and underused, such as the Science Center and Tesco team program.

Thank you.

Next two speakers, please.

Next two speakers, Vanessa Miller, Sierra Clark.

Please approach our podium.

State your name and address.

You'll have three minutes to address city council.

Hello.

My name is Vanessa Miller, 1726, 43rd Street South.

We just like you want to stop the violence in our communities.

The city's budget should reflect that.

Thanks to a surveying done by the Save Our Streets campaign brought to you by the Bay Area Dream Defenders.

We know that our communities want more accessible youth programming.

We know youth and young adults need a place to be.

We need safe, free third spaces.

We need mentorship.

We need that village that everyone is told that we need so badly.

And we look around and we're wondering where is it at?

Or how much do I have to pay to get it?

By investing money into youth programming, the city makes a clear and a very bold statement.

Modeling for our region that we care for the future of our youth.

Investing more money in policing clearly shows where we think our youth are destined to end up.

Investing in their education, our housing, our parks, our after-school programs, and other physical and mental health efforts is a radical act of hope that our community so desperately needs right now.

Investing in youth programming specifically leads to better outcomes for youth, including safer neighborhoods.

I would like to acknowledge the community programs that we do currently have in our city and our county.

They're doing an excellent job.

We love them.

I've worked for them.

I volunteer with them.

And I know personally that they could use more funding.

More funding means more outreach.

Money allocated towards these programs can help bridge that gap between barriers that we may see, such as transportation issues, lack of awareness of these programs, and fees that may go into participation.

These are some of the goals of the Save Our Streets campaign.

As a public safety issue, we expect that this would be reflected in the city's public safety budget rather than doing an increase in millions of dollars for our police force.

We deserve to see our local officials prioritize the safety of our people with comprehensive solutions.

And we demand that the city's budget supports our call to save our streets.

Thank you so much for your time.

Thank you.

Joyful day, my name is Sierra Clark, 4544 22nd Avenue South.

The scariest things in our youth lives today aren't monsters in scary movies.

It's not having safe places to dream to grow and to be obviously remarkable.

This summer I had the opportunity again to be a part of story 727 impact summer camp.

And the title of their anthology that speaks of their truths when they found out that funding was lost and summer camp almost did not happen.

They titled it nightmare on camp street.

We have a crisis inside our city, but not just our city.

But since this is our city and we say that we are St.

Pete, it's our problem and our priority.

So this year they created an anthology that did two things and told two truths.

What makes them obviously remarkable and their fear that they felt that they um when they found out can't was not happen.

We didn't, we do not fund programs like these.

We don't invest in our neighborhoods.

We are we are compelled, um, when we take on positions to do something different.

It isn't just our civic duty, it's our God-given obligation to do something greater.

When Christ died, he said, greater shall we do.

Yes, we can't keep patting ourselves on the back when it comes to overcoming hard things while continuing to um underfund the very solutions that prevent them.

The Save Our Street campaign is asking that you listen to the people to fund prevention and not punishment, and to invest in the future of our children.

Maya, so we know some of the things that makes our youth obviously remarkable before they're before the judge, and these things are not considered or before they're taken and they're not able to come home.

Maya loves helping people, sharing her voice and learning who she is.

Serenity loves her family painting and discovering the beauty of the world around us.

It is our opportunity, and not just our right, but it's our opportunity to show that we care and not just in a surface way.

I think your children will be proud of you because they see that you're building something.

But I think your grandchildren and your children's children will realize that it lacked of flavor.

We get an opportunity to change the way our history tastes, the way our history vibrates through our community.

There is a corridor that the interstate ran through that used to be considered the heart of St.

Pete.

We can bring paintbrushes back again.

Thank you.

Next two speakers, please.

Next two speakers, Jerry Fund.

Excuse me.

And Neil Camondella.

Please approach our podium, state your name and address.

You'll have three minutes to address City Council.

Hello, my name is Jerry Funt, 3803, Haynes Road North.

I know there are a couple campaigns here with similar names, but I'm here once again, the Bayer Air Dream Defenders for the Save Our Streets campaign proposal.

We started this campaign a few years ago after spending substantial time talking to the community.

We asked, what is it that you need to feel safe and how can we best resolve gun violence?

They didn't say we need more police on the streets or more kids in cages.

They told us that we needed funding for accessible, effective, and utilized youth programs and someone from the city to come into the community to help families identify and access support that the city already has.

Some of you were serving on city council when we started the pro the campaign, and some of you have joined us since then.

When we first arrived, we were told that we needed to start earlier, engage the city sooner so we can make it happen.

So next year we came back earlier.

We were here consistently during last year's budget process.

Once we got to the end, after appearing over and over with often the largest group in the room, we were told this is great.

You all deserve to have this happen.

We want to make it happen.

We just need more details.

Meet with all of us a bit earlier.

Let's get earlier next year, and we should be able to make something happen.

So we listen.

We've met with most, if not all of you, over the last year.

We've met with the mayor's office.

We have uh revised our proposals and we have kept showing up.

And now we are once again at the end of the budget process.

And I expect we're gonna hear maybe next year.

But we cannot keep kicking this can down the road.

Last August, 11-year-old DeAndre Hargrove was shot and killed in Child's Park.

His alleged killer was 14 years old.

Ashley Lamardo from the St.

Pete PD said, we understand that usually a lot of criminal activities are typically associated with boredom or having too much time on their hands.

In April, Jaden Hill, a 13-year-old, was shot and killed in a driveway near Lake Magory.

His alleged killer is 14 years old.

A few weeks ago, 21-year-old Tyrone Howard was shot and killed just outside of Child's Park while his daughter was in the car with him.

He crashed and she was fortunately physically okay, but will grow up without a father.

His alleged killer was 20 years old.

All of these stories you're hearing from people with our campaign have occurred in the last two years since we started talking here.

Lives lost while we've been kicking this can down the road.

My friend Jay comes here and says, Show me your budget, I'll show you your priorities.

So what are our priorities?

That we need to fund as well.

Understood.

But this is a worthwhile investment if it's a priority.

I know that we will likely leave here, kick the can down the road, and continue that way.

These are tragic stories.

Vionre Hargrove, Tyrone Howard, Reginald Booth, Jaden Hill, Tamon Newkirk.

974 million dollars.

That's a big number.

What can we do to show that these lives are worth something in that budget?

Thank you.

Thank you.

Greeting, Council members and staff.

My name is Neil Camardello, and my address is 6142 Fourth Avenue South.

I'm here to urge you to fulfill the funding obligations of the Complete Streets Program, which was adopted nearly 10 years ago, and is intended to create a connected and comprehensive network for all users of the road, including pedestrians and bicyclists.

Since that program was adopted nearly 10 years ago, over 130 pedestrians and bicyclists have been killed in St.

Pete, and hundreds more have been seriously injured, including last week on 49th Street, where a single mother was killed by a drunk driver.

We could have prevented her death.

49th Street is a thoroughly studied part of the high injury network, which is precisely the kind of place that should have been fixed by the Complete Streets program, which was adopted nearly 10 years ago.

More preventable deaths will occur unless we take bold and courageous action now.

I'd like to share this article with the council.

Describing how a city much larger than St.

Pete achieved zero traffic deaths for an entire year.

The leaders implemented common sense safety measures like reduced speed limits and improved street design.

Recognize that lives can be saved with minimal or low cost solutions, and that the funding to complete streets has a positive return on investment by creating spaces that are economically and culturally vibrant.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Last speaker, Beatrice Farrell.

Please approach either podium, state your name and address.

You'll have three minutes to address City Council.

Hello.

My name is Beatrice Farrell.

I'm a business owner at 136 Fourth Street South.

Today I'm here.

Two years ago, the council agreed to fund $75,000 for two years.

And we were for the Digital Inclusion Network.

We were encouraged to find other funding, and we were successful, kinda.

The city of St.

Petersburg was recommended for a 6.94 million four-year grant from the National Telecommunications and Information Administration.

Based upon the activities of the project that this council and the city funded.

For context, there were over 700 applications received, totaling 6.9 billion dollars.

There was $880 million available to fund these applications.

And at the time, the only grantee in Florida.

So congratulate ourselves.

And now I work for the um Digital Education Foundation, and 80% 85% of the network members are active in what we're doing now.

We have continued to do this work.

Thank you.

Thank you.

No more speakers, Mr.

Chair.

Okay.

The public portion of the hearing is now closed.

We're going to go into council comments and discussion.

And we'll go to Councilmember Driscoll first.

Thank you.

And thanks to all who made time to be here this evening and speak and really make yourselves heard in regards to the budget that we have before us and what our what the priorities are, what your prior priorities are, and what ours should be.

Um I will start with our last speaker and say hello Beatrice.

It is great to see you.

Thank you for being here this evening.

Thank you for all of the work that you've done.

Um you have had um support from the administration and city council uh for years.

I have been um tried to be your biggest champion as you work tirelessly to bridge the digital divide in our area.

That work continues even if the organizations um evolve, and I hope that as we move forward, we'll be able to find more ways to support you.

Given that we have in the past allocated money from our budget as well as partnering to secure that grant um that was so exciting while it lasted before it was dissolved.

Um there's it doesn't mean that there's not more work to do.

And um I look forward to having conversations with you about where you guys are at now and how the city can be helpful so that we can make sure that St.

Petersburg is a place where we can say everyone is connected and has that access.