Jul 28, 2025 Regular City Commission Meeting

[ROLL CALL]

[00:00:08]

OKAY. I'M CALLING THIS REGULAR MEETING OF THE SEWARD CITY COMMISSION TO ORDER FOR THE 28TH OF JULY, 2025. FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO GOT HERE AT 130. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE. SOMETIMES THE WHEELS OF GOVERNMENT GRIND SLOWLY. ROLL CALL PLEASE. MAYOR RICH HERE, VICE MAYOR COLLINS HERE. COMMISSIONER CLARK HERE. COMMISSIONER. JOB HERE, COMMISSIONER REID. OKAY. AND OUR INVOCATION WILL BE PROVIDED THIS EVENING BY CHAPLAIN HANK BRIGHTON, CAMP OF THE HUMANISTS OF THE TREASURE COAST. AND AFTER, WILL YOU PLEASE LEAD US IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE? SURE. PLEASE STAND. FRIENDS. WHAT A WONDERFUL OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL OF US IN THIS CHAMBER AND IN THE CITY AS A WHOLE TO LIVE, WORK, MAKE FRIENDS, LEARN, RECREATE WORSHIP AS WE CHOOSE OR NOT, ENJOY FINE DINING, RAISE A FAMILY, OR JUST HAVE FUN IN THE TRUE SHINING DIAMOND OF THE TREASURE COAST, THE CITY OF STUART. FOR THIS WE ARE MOST THANKFUL. EVERY DAY IT'S BEEN.

IT'S BEEN SAID THAT EVERYTHING IN LIFE COST. WE PAY FOR EVERYTHING AND MENTAL, PHYSICAL OR SPIRITUAL COIN.N. THE MECHANS OF RUNNING A CITY LIKE STUART TAKES THE VERY REAL EXPENDITURE OF WORK AND THE ACTIVE PARTICIPATION OF ALL STAKEHOLDERS CITIZENS, ELECTED OFFICIALS, CITY STAFF AND COORDINATION VIA EXCELLENT COMMUNICATIONS WITH OTHER AGENCIES OF GOVERNMENT AND THE BUSINESS SECTOR. AS WE SEE ALL AROUND US IN THE CITY TODAY, THIS WORK IS GETTING DONE VERY WELL. FOR THIS. WE ARE MOST THANKFUL EVERY DAY. EACH ONE OF US HAS THE ABILITY AND THE RESPONSIBILITY TO MAKE GOOD THINGS HAPPEN IN OUR LIVES, OUR COMMUNITY AND THE WORLD. THE WAYS WE DO THIS ARE MANY AND VARIED, BUT MOST OF ALL, KINDNESS AND RESPECT TOP THE LIST FOR THIS. WE ARE THANKFUL EVERY DAY. SO AS WE BEGIN THE PROCLAMATIONS, DELIBERATIONS AND RESOLUTIONS OF THIS MEETING, WE ASK THE CITIZENS TO SEEK THE HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION BEFORE US, THAT THEY BE INSPIRED BY WISDOM AND JUSTICE, TO DO ALL THE RIGHT THINGS FOR ALL THE RIGHT REASONS, NAMELY, THE ENHANCEMENT OF OUR NATURAL ENVIRONMENT, OUR STRONG NEIGHBORHOODS, OUR HIGHWAYS AND BYWAYS, OUR BUSINESS COMMUNITY, OUR RECREATIONAL FACILITIES, AND OUR POLICE AND LIFE SAFETY DEPARTMENTS, TO NAME A FEW. FOR THIS, WE ARE MOST THANKFUL EVERY DAY. FINALLY, WE REMEMBER THE NEEDY AMONG US IN BODY OR SPIRIT. MAY WE BE TRUE INSTRUMENTS OF PEACE IN PROVIDING THEM THE ASSISTANCE THEY NEED WITH A HAND UP OF ENCOURAGEMENT OR PHYSICAL RESOURCES. FRIENDS, WE SAY ALL THESE THINGS IN THE NAME OF EVERYTHING THAT IS HOLY, GOOD, HONORABLE, AND TRUE. AMEN, AMEN. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS. ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. THANK YOU SIR. I WOULD LIKE TO THANK MR. JOBE FOR MAKING THE EFFORT TO BE

[COMMENTS BY CITY COMMISSIONERS]

[00:05:04]

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER CLARK. THANK YOU. THIS WEEKEND, I PARTICIPATED IN THE TREASURE COAST WATERWAYS CLEANUP AT THE. SHEPHERDS PARK. WE'VE DONE SOME IMPROVEMENT AT SHEPHERDS PARK IN THE PAST FEW YEARS, AND THOSE ARE ALL COMING INTO LITERALLY COMING INTO BLOOM. AND THE PARK IS LOOKING VERY GOOD, I MUST SAY. THANKS TO. I'M GOING TO CALL HER AN ELLIE ANN HAWKINS. I KNOW SHE COORDINATED THE CITY, BUT THERE ARE OTHER PLACES AND OTHER PEOPLE WHO DID THINGS, I THINK, AROUND OTHER WATERWAYS IN MARTIN COUNTY, BUT JUST TO SHARE WORK THAT HER THAT SHE DID AND ALL THE STAFF MEMBERS THAT CAME OUT FROM CITY STAFF, AS WELL AS THOSE FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC. AND I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT WE JUST DID A LEASE WITH THE HELL GATE DRAGONS FOR THE ROWAN. COMPANY, WHATEVER. I GUESS GROUP THAT'S THERE, THAT'S LEASING A PORTION AND HAS ACCESS TO THE TO THE WATERWAYS OF THE PARK. AND I THINK THAT'S A GOOD, POSITIVE THING FOR THE CITY OF STUART. AND I WAS GLAD TO SEE THEM PARTICIPATE IN THAT PARTICULAR EVENT. AND I DON'T I THINK ANNE WILL BE COMING TO US WITH SOME NUMBERS, BUT I'M HOPING THAT AS TIME GOES ON, WE'LL BE SEEING LESS AND LESS DEBRIS AND OTHER THINGS COMING OUT OF OUR PICKUPS. AND WE DO THESE CLEANUPS BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE BEING MORE RESPONSIBLE AND NOT THROWING SO MUCH ALONG THE WATERWAYS. BUT WE DID HAVE QUITE A BIT, AND I DON'T HAVE THE NUMBERS AS TO WHAT, HOW MANY POUNDS OR WHAT TYPES OF THINGS WERE FOUND AT OUR PARTICULAR LOCATION. BUT I THINK ANNE IS GOING TO GET SOME IDEAS OF WHAT HAPPENED IN THE ENTIRE CLEANUP AND COME BACK TO US ANOTHER DAY.

BUT IT WAS A GOOD EVENT, AND WE HAD, I THINK A LOT OF OUR COMMISSIONERS WERE THERE AND OUR CITY MANAGER, AND IT REALLY SHOWED OUR UTILITIES DIRECTOR AND PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR AND STAFF. I EVEN MET A STAFF MEMBER WHO I DIDN'T KNOW WAS IN OUR PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT. SO IT WAS A IT WAS A GOOD EVENT. AND I I'M REALLY PROUD OF WHAT THE CITY DID TO SPEARHEAD AND WORK ON OUR PORTION FOR THAT. I WON'T BE HERE FOR THE NEXT FEW DAYS, BUT I KNOW THAT THERE'S SOMETHING COMING UP ON JULY 31ST FOR JOINT CITY COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD MEETING. SO IS THAT THIS FRIDAY OR SOMETHING? OR THIS THURSDAY MORNING AT 9:00 AT THE MORGAN LIBRARY? AND SO THOSE IN THE PUBLIC OR OTHERS WHO CAN ATTEND PLEASE ATTEND. I KNOW TODAY WE HAD A MEETING AT 4 P.M.

AND WE HAD THE HONORABLE CRYSTAL ROBERTS FROM THE MARTIN COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD, WHO STAYED WITH US FOR ABOUT AN HOUR AND A HALF TO TWO HOURS, AND SHE HAD BROUGHT IN A PAPER OR SHE BROUGHT IN A PAPER FROM THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION RELEASING THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, GRADES AND ACHIEVEMENT FOR 2425. AND IT SAYS THAT MARTIN COUNTY HAS ACHIEVED AN A RATING AS ONE OF 28 A RATED SCHOOL DISTRICTS IN IN FLORIDA. AND IT GIVES TWO OF OUR SCHOOLS JENSEN BEACH HIGH SCHOOL, MARTIN COUNTY HIGH SCHOOL, AS WELL AS STUART MIDDLE SCHOOL. AND THEN WE HAVE IN THE ELEMENTARY AREA, FELIX WILLIAMS AND J.D. PARKER AS SCHOOLS. SOME SCHOOLS HAVE SHOWN IMPROVEMENT OR NEED CHANGES, BUT ALL THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS THAT ARE LISTED AND THAT WERE PART OF THAT LISTING IS HERE. AND I'M SURE THAT PEOPLE CAN GO TO THE MARTIN COUNTY SCHOOLS.ORG AND SEE HOW THE IMPROVEMENTS ARE. MISS ROBERTS DIDN'T LEAVE ANY PARTICULAR WORDS OF WHAT SHE WANTED TO SAY, BUT I KNOW SHE DEFINITELY WANTED TO HAVE OUR COMMISSION AS WELL AS THE PUBLIC KNOW MORE ABOUT HOW THIS A RATING SCHOOL HAPPENS AND HOW IT HOW IT HELPS TO FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE IN OUR OUR COMMUNITY WHEN WE RUN FOR OUR OFFICES, ONE OF THE THINGS WE TEND TO PROMISE TO PEOPLE IS THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE LIVING IN A GREAT AREA. THEY CAN LIVE, WORK AND PLAY AND

[00:10:03]

GANDHI SAVED US AND TO ALL OF OUR STAFF. I MEAN, OUR STAFF REALLY WORKS HARD, HAS TO LISTEN, HAS TO FOLLOW THROUGH. THEY ARE THE TOOLS. WHEN THE COMMISSION MAKES POLICIES THAT WORK THROUGH THINGS. AND I JUST WANT TO TELL OUR STAFF AT THE CITY OF STUART, YOU KNOW, THAT WE'RE JUST SO PROUD OF THEM. WE'RE PROUD OF EVERYBODY. POLICE, FIRE, RECREATION, UTILITIES, ALL OF OUR DEPARTMENTS, PUBLIC WORKS. AND IT'S JUST, YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST SO IMPORTANT WE'RE GOING TO BE SEEING MORE OF JOLIE BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THREE MORE BUDGET MEETINGS. MIKE. WELL, WE IN THE PAST HAVE HAD TWO, BUT WE CAN HAVE THREE IF NECESSARY RIGHT NOW. CURRENTLY, WE HAVE A BUDGET MEETING SCHEDULED FOR AUGUST 11TH. WE YOU'LL RECEIVE A FULL PRESENTATION OF THE BUDGET, AT WHICH TIME WE'LL SCHEDULE ANOTHER ONE. IF WE AT THE SECOND BUDGET MEETING, COME TO A CONSENSUS, THE COMMISSION ADOPTS A BUDGET. WE WON'T NEED A THIRD BUDGET MEETING. BUT IF THERE'S A NEED FOR IT, WE'LL ADDRESS IT THEN. THANK YOU. BUT YES. SO WE ALWAYS THINK OF, YOU KNOW, THE BUDGET AND HOW IMPORTANT THAT TYPE OF PRESENTATION IS AT THIS TIME. BUT I JUST REALLY EVERYBODY WORKING TOGETHER JUST MAKES IT SO IMPORTANT. AND WHEN WE SEE THINGS, WE SAW THAT OUR NEIGHBOR CITY HAD SOME ISSUES. AND JUST TO THE NORTH OF US, AND WE JUST NEED TO BE. I'M SO PROUD OF CAN I HAVE THE NAME OF OUR MINISTER WHO SPOKE TODAY? WHAT'S HIS NAME? MR. BRIGHTON. BRIGHTON, BRIGHTON. CAM, MR. BRIGHTON CAM AND BE THANKFUL. BE THANKFUL. THAT IS SO IMPORTANT. AND WE JUST NEED TO WATCH OUR WAYS, WATCH OURSELVES AND KNOW THAT WE JUST THERE BUT FOR THE GRACE OF GOD. SO WE JUST NEED TO BE THANKFUL AND IT'S SO IMPORTANT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU FOR YOUR WORDS TODAY. THANK YOU, MR. VICE MAYOR. YES.

SO I APPRECIATE THE WORDS FROM COMMISSIONER JOB AND I ACTUALLY WE DON'T GET TO TALK YOU KNOW, SO I HAD SIMILAR THOUGHTS WITH REGARD TO THE RESOLUTION THAT CAME THROUGH JULY 22ND FROM WEISS AND SIROTA REGARDING JOINING THE LAWSUIT TO FIGHT SB 180. I'D LIKE TO PUBLICLY RECOGNIZE ALSO, DORI HARRINGTON FROM CITY OF DELTONA, WHO HAS HAD A LOT OF COURAGE TO STEP UP AND STAND UP AGAINST THE STATE. AND THEN ORANGE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CHRISTINE MOORE, MYRA URIBE, NICOLE WILSON, KELLY SIMRAD THEIR MAJORITY IN RECENT CLIPS. JUST TO ECHO SOME OF THEIR SENTIMENTS, THEY SAID THINGS LIKE, WE'VE GOT TO GET ALLIES IN OTHER MUNICIPALITIES.

IF WE AGREE TO REPEAL ANYTHING, THEY'RE JUST GOING TO KNOW THAT THEY BULLIED US AND NEXT YEAR IT WILL BE EVEN WORSE. WE SHOULD NOT TAKE A SINGLE HALF STEP BACK. THIS IS WHEN WE STAND UP AND WE FIGHT AND WE CHALLENGE THE STATE. I REALLY APPRECIATED HEARING THAT FROM ANOTHER MUNICIPALITY. AND GOD WILLING, THIS COMMISSION WILL JOIN IN AND BE AN ALLY WITH THEIR MUNICIPALITY IN DELTONA. THEY HAD THE COURAGE TO STAND UP AGAINST STATE OVERREACH THAT THREATENS THE QUALITY OF LIFE, CONSERVATION AND HOME RULE, AND MOST ALMOST EVERY COUNTY IN THE CITY OF FLORIDA. VOTERS WITHIN THE CITY OF STUART AND MARTIN COUNTY OVER THE LAST TWO ELECTION CYCLES. WE'RE CLEAR IN THE CITY, THEY SAID, STOP THE LAND, USE CHANGES, STOP APPROVING THESE MAXIMUM HEIGHT, HIGH DENSITY APARTMENT BOXES, AND STOP OVER DEVELOPING AND CREATING MORE TRAFFIC. FOUR OUT OF THESE FIVE SEATS AND THEN TWO MORE IN THE COUNTY HAVE TURNED OVER TO CANDIDATES WHO CAMPAIGNED ON SLOWER GROWTH. RESIDENTS DID THEIR PART. THEY WERE GOOD AMERICANS, RIGHT? THEY DID THEIR RESEARCH AND THEY CIRCLED THE BUBBLES THAT BEST REFLECTED THEIR VALUES. IT IS CLEAR WHAT VOTERS WANTED. IT IS CLEAR WHAT THE WILL OF THE

[00:15:02]

[COMMENTS BY CITY MANAGER]

[00:20:01]

AND I ALSO I WASN'T SURE WHEN COMMISSIONER REED WAS COMING BACK, BUT I THOUGHT IT WASN'T UNTIL AFTER AUGUST 4TH, BUT HE MAY BE BEFORE AUGUST 4TH. BUT I KNOW THAT HE'S NOT GOING TO BE AT THE JOINT MEETING AT THE END OF THE WEEK. SO THE OVER TIME OVERHAUL WAS THERE. SO WHATEVER THE DISCRETION OF THE BOARD IS, I'D BE LOOKING FOR A MOTION ON THAT. AND NORMALLY IT'S NOT A RESOLUTION. IT WOULD JUST BE YOUR GUYS'S WOULD BE GIVING ME A MOTION ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. IF THERE IS NO MOTION, THEN WHAT HAPPENS IS THE LAST ADOPTED RATE WOULD BE THE NOT TO EXCEED RATE, WHICH IS FIVE. SO SILENCE WOULD LEAD TO IT BEING FIVE. UNLESS SOMEBODY MOTIONS FOR SOMETHING LESS. I THINK WE'RE PRETTY. I MEAN THE DIRECTION OF WHAT RIGHT WAS MY NUMBER? I DON'T KNOW THAT YOU WANT TO HAVE A DISCUSSION. WE'LL HAVE IT IN THE CONTEXT OF A MOTION. SO NOT JUST A SPECIFIC ACTION ON OUR PART. SO AND I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON IT OR NOT. SO I WOULD MOVE THAT WE SET THAT RATE OF 4.757 NOT TO EXCEED NUMBER. I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION. WE HAVE A MOTION BY THE VICE MAYOR AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER JOB. IS THERE ANY PUBLIC DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM? MISS MCBRIDE, WOULD YOU LIKE TO? REPHRASE THE MOTION? WE SET THE MILLAGE NOT TO EXCEED NUMBER TWO. NO, IT'S. WHAT IS IT? IT'S NOT SETTING THE MILLAGE, BUT IT'S A MOTION TO NOT TO PROVIDE TO FILE AN SR FOR 20 OR FOR 20 OF THAT, WE WILL NOT EXCEED 4.75 ON OUR BUDGET OR MILLAGE. SO THAT MEANS DURING THE BUDGET PROCESS, WE IF WE WERE TO GO BACK TO LAST YEAR'S BUDGET OR GO TO 4.76, WE'D HAVE TO START THE ADVERTISING OVER AND DO THE WHOLE THING OVER. IT JUST CAPS IT AT 4.75 AND WE'RE NOT SETTING IT. BUT THAT'S RIGHT, IT DOESN'T SET IT. THEY COULD BUDGET HAVING THEM PREPARE. IT'S A FORM THAT THE CITY IS REQUIRED TO FILE WITH MARTIN COUNTY. CORRECT. ON THE STATE. RIGHT. ADVERTISE. YES. RIGHT. YOU. I HAVE ATTENDED MORE BUDGET MEETINGS THAN ANYONE IN THIS BUILDING. THE FIRST ONE WAS WE WENT LINE BY LINE. HOW MANY PAINTBRUSHES? HOW MUCH

[00:25:04]

EVERYTHING'S MOWED. WE HAVE A WHEN I RAISED MY TWO CHILDREN, THERE WERE FIVE AND SEVEN. WHEN I, BOB AND I MOVED HERE, THE ONLY THING THEY HAD WAS IN THE SUMMERTIME, A FLAGLER PARK.

THERE WAS A SUMMER PROGRAM. OTHERWISE WE LIVED AT THE BEACH. WE'VE COME A LONG LOOK AT OUR RECREATION DEPARTMENT. THOSE OF YOU WHO HAVE COME AND SEEN EVERY DAY, THERE IS SOMETHING GOING ON FOR THE SENIORS, THE, THE, THE WORKING PEOPLE. YOU GO DOWN TO THE BANDSTAND. THERE'S ALWAYS ACTIVITIES. I JUST I'VE BEEN GOING OVER TO SHEPHERDS PARK AND SEEING THE KIDS PLAY IN THE PLAYGROUNDS. WE HAVE MEMORIAL PARK. EVERY TIME YOU GO AROUND, THERE'S SOMETHING GOING ON.

THANKS TO THE RECREATION DEPARTMENT. LIKE I WAS TELLING YOU ABOUT THE SOCCER FIELD. THE FOOTBALL FIELD, I. AND I'M GOING OVER AND WATCHING THESE GAMES. THE LITTLE LEAGUES, THE LITTLE LITTLE TOTS PLAYING BASEBALL AND THE BASKETBALL. THERE'S ALWAYS KIDS PLAYING BASKETBALL. AND I KNOW TWO OF YOU ARE NEW TO THIS, BUT BELIEVE ME, IF YOU BRING IT DOWN TO WHERE COMMISSIONER COLLINS WANTS IT, THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO CUT SOMETHING BECAUSE THEY'RE REALLY WORKING AT BARE BOTTOM AND THEY DON'T. THEY'RE SQUEEZING THEIR PENNIES. LEAVE IT AT FIVE. AND LAURA AND SEAN, MAYBE THIS YEAR YOU COULD TALK TO EACH DEPARTMENT HEAD AND GO OVER TO THE DEPARTMENTS AND SEE HOW THEY WORK, SEE HOW DEDICATED THEY ARE. I DO KNOW YOU COME TO THE REC CENTER A LOT, SO I BUT JUST MEMORIAL PARK, THERE'S ALWAYS THE REC CENTERS ALWAYS GOT SOMETHING GOING ON. AND A LOT OF THE TIMES THE EMPLOYEES ARE, ARE DONATING THEIR, THEIR, THEIR TIME. BUT PLEASE, I KNOW IF YOU'RE RUNNING FOR ELECTION, YOU WANT TO SAY, OH YEAH, I LOWERED YOUR TAXES, I DID THIS, I, I, I BUT ON THE BACKS OF THE LITTLE PEOPLE. I MEAN, IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'RE BEING PENNY WISE AND POUND FOOLISH. LEAVE IT AT 5%. AND THAT WAY THE GARBAGE, THE TRASH PICKUP, YOU DON'T SEE MANY PEOPLE HERE UNLESS THEY HAVE A PROBLEM OR THEY WANT TO SAY SOMETHING. BUT BELIEVE ME, I'VE BEEN HERE. YOU CUT SERVICES AND YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE STANDING UP HERE. AND I'LL JUST SIT THERE AND SAY, OH, I TOLD YOU SO, BUT PLEASE. AND I KNOW YOU'RE YOU FIGURED THAT AS A GROUP, YOU'RE ELECTED AND YOU'RE GOING TO CHANGE. BUT YEAH, THE TRAFFIC'S SLOW GROWTH.

NO MORE BOX SIZE APARTMENT BUILDINGS. WE ALL AGREE ON THAT. BUT YOU TAKE AWAY THE THINGS THAT WE THE PEOPLE ENJOY, THAT WE PAY OUR TAXES FOR IS WRONG BY JUST LEAVE IT AT FIVE. DO YOUR HOMEWORK THIS YEAR. REALLY, REALLY DO YOUR HOMEWORK. GO AROUND AND SEE AND TALK. AND THANK YOU. MISS YOU. OH I GET ON MY SOAPBOX. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. I HAVE NO FURTHER PUBLIC COMMENT. ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS? YES. OKAY.

ACTUALLY, IT WAS JUST A NOTE TO WHAT VICE MAYOR COLLINS HAD SAID ABOUT THE LAWSUIT. IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING AND THE RESEARCH THAT I'VE DONE, IF YOU'RE NOT PART OF THE INJUNCTION IN THE LAWSUIT, EVEN IF THEIR SUCCESS, IF THEY ARE SUCCESSFUL, YOU WOULD NOT BENEFIT IF YOU WERE NOT PART OF IT. SO YOU'D HAVE TO. THAT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING. THAT'S NOT IF THE LAWSUIT IS TO DECLARE, WAIT A MINUTE. WE'RE NOT HAVING WE'RE HAVING A MOTION. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE MOTION. OKAY. I'M SORRY. OKAY. SO. DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS REGARDING. NO, I SECOND THE MOTION. OKAY. YEAH. SO JUST JUST TO THE POINT OF THE MILLAGE, LIKE, WAS BROUGHT UP IN THE LAST PRESENTATION. AND IT'S THE IMPETUS FOR WHY I'M SAYING 4.75. WE ARE GOING FROM PROPERTY VALUES THAT ARE DOUBLE DIGIT INCREASES EACH YEAR. THAT HAS BEEN THE CASE TO NOW STARTING TO TURN THE CORNER TO WHERE WE ARE SEEING SINGLE DIGIT INCREASES IN PROPERTY VALUES. THE SMART THING TO DO IN YOUR BUSINESS WHEN YOU'RE SEEING YOUR INCOME DECREASING IS TO START TO DECREASE SPENDING. THE ONLY LEVER THAT THIS COMMISSION HAS TO START THAT NEW TRAJECTORY IS

[00:30:05]

AND THE LEVER THAT WE CAN SAY TO TELL OUR CITY MANAGER, HEY, START LOOKING AT WHAT WE'RE SPENDING, IS THAT MILLAGE SO THAT HE HAS TO COME IN WITH A TIGHTER BUDGET FOR, FOR THIS ROUND. AND THEN WE SEE WHERE THE NEXT CYCLE LEAVES US. IF THERE IS DOUBLE DIGIT INCREASES IN PROPERTY VALUES, IF THINGS ARE IF WE'RE SWIMMING IN MONEY, LET'S MAKE EVERYBODY CAPTAINS.

LET'S HIRE MORE PEOPLE. LET'S EXPAND LIKE, BUT IF YOU'RE NOT AND YOU'RE ACTUALLY SEEING MORE OF A TRAJECTORY LIKE THAT, YOU HAVE SET YOURSELF UP BY STARTING TO DECREASE AND CUT DOWN FROM HAVING TO DO SOMETHING REACTIONARY, WHERE YOU DO HAVE TO CUT SERVICES. SO THOSE ARE MY THOUGHTS. YEAH. I HAVE NO INTEREST IN REDUCING AT THIS TIME. THE STATE IS GOING TO COME AFTER US. WE DON'T HAVE THE NUMBERS ON. THEY'VE INCREASED THE HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION AND WE DON'T HAVE THOSE NUMBERS IN HAND. THE ECONOMY IS WEAKENING AND WHAT THE WHAT THE STATE HAS PROPOSED NEXT YEAR FOR REDUCING FOR RESTRICTING THE ABILITY OF CITIES TO, YOU KNOW, EARN MONEY THROUGH AD VALOREM TAX IS VERY SCARY. SO WE ARE GOING TO BE SEEING REDUCTIONS NO MATTER WHAT WE DO. WE CERTAINLY SHOULD NOT IMPOSE A PENALTY ON OURSELVES. IN ADDITION, WE'VE WE'VE WE'VE SUGGESTED A GREAT DEAL OF NEW SPENDING. WE HAVE THE CONSIDERABLE BURDEN OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ATTORNEY. IF YOU THINK SHE'S GOING TO BE ALL IN AT JUST HER SALARY, I, I THINK YOU'RE ILL INFORMED AT THIS POINT. WE HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO MAKE SURE SHE HAS THE TOOLS, RESOURCES AND FINANCING THAT SHE NEEDS TO BE SUCCESSFUL. AND WE TOOK ON THAT RESPONSIBILITY. WE NEED TO AND WE NEED TO FOLLOW TO BE ABLE TO FOLLOW THROUGH ON THAT. SO I CERTAINLY DON'T WANT TO REDUCE OUR REVENUE PRIOR TO HER TAKING HER JOB AND UNDERSTANDING WHAT OPPORTUNITIES MAY EXIST FOR HER AND WHAT THAT MAY COST. SO SEEING NO OTHER COMMENTS, ROLL CALL PLEASE.

MADAM CLERK. COMMISSIONER, CAN I JUST ASK TO HAVE THE CERTAINLY READ AGAIN PLEASE. IT IS TO MOVE TO SELECT THE NOT TO EXCEED MILLAGE RATE AT 4.75. OKAY. YES, YES. COMMISSIONER. CLERK. NO.

VICE. MAYOR. COLLINS. YES. COMMISSIONER. MAYOR. RICH. NO. SO THE MOTION FAILS. SO, DID YOU

[APPROVAL OF AGENDA]

CAN I GET A MOTION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA, PLEASE? SO WE HAVE A MOTION BY THE VICE MAYOR AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CLERK. IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM

[COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC (Non-Agenda Related) (3 Minutes Max.)]

[00:35:08]

BUT I MEAN, IT'S JUST, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT ASKING FOR THE WORLD. I KNOW WE ALL HAVE BUDGET PROBLEMS RIGHT NOW. I DEAL WITH IT ALL THE TIME. SO I'M NOT ASKING FOR THE WORLD. AND LIKE I SAID, I WOULD LIKE TO THANK AGAIN, MR. MARTEL FOR HIS RESPONSES TO MY EMAILS AND SOME SUGGESTIONS ON WHAT WE COULD DO. BUT NO THANK YOU. I'M GLAD YOU BROUGHT THAT TO OUR ATTENTION. YES, COMMISSIONER, BECAUSE WE ALL I HEAR ABOUT IS FRAZIER CREEK. FRAZIER CREEK IS PART OF THE DOWNTOWN PROJECT AND THIS AND THAT AND EVERY OTHER THING. BUT POPLAR CREEK IS IT'S A PRETTY LARGE CREEK. DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION? NO, I DON'T WE DON'T WE DON'T ENGAGE TOO MUCH. BUT JUST AS A PROCEDURAL THING FOR MR. MARTEL, DO WE HAVE. THANK YOU, SIR, DO WE HAVE SOMEBODY WHO DOES REGULAR INSPECTIONS ALONG PLACES LIKE THAT TO SEE IF PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN THE RESIDENCE, THAT PUPPET CREEK OR OTHER AREAS ALONG THE ANY TYPE OF A CREEK OR WATERWAY THAT MAY BE CREATING POLLUTION. DOES OUR CODE ENFORCEMENT CHECK OUT THOSE TYPE OF WATERWAY POLLUTION TYPE THINGS? WE DON'T HAVE ANY MANUFACTURERS IN IN THE STEWART AREA THAT ARE GENERATING POLLUTION INTO POPLAR CREEK. AND SPEAKING WITH DAVE, I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE SOURCE IS. IT WAS A SHEEN ON TOP OF THE WATER. IT'S LIKELY COMING FROM CANTOR HIGHWAY OR OTHER STORMWATER RUNOFF INTO THE CREEK. IN 2011, THE CITY OF STEWART ENTERED INTO A MULTI MILLION DOLLAR PROJECT WITH THE DEP AND LITERALLY DREDGED AND CREATED AN ISLAND IN POPOLOPEN CREEK, RIGHT ACROSS FROM THE POPLAR CREEK APARTMENTS, AND TRIMMED BACK ALL THE MANGROVES AND BUILT A BRIDGE SYSTEM WITH THREE PATCHED ISLANDS TO FOR A WALKING PATH TO IT TO HELP. THE FLOW. WE ALSO BOUGHT 25 ACRES OF LAND FROM KIPLINGER'S ON CENTRAL PARKWAY, AND THEN TURNED THAT INTO A BIG LAKE AND DUG THAT OUT TO RECHARGE THE SURFICIAL AQUIFER AND TO STOP THE. STORMWATER FROM RUNNING STRAIGHT INTO POPLAR CREEK, AND CREATED A WEIR SYSTEM SO THAT THE WATER FLOWS OVER.

IT'S WHERE THE WATER OR DOG PARK IS ON POPLAR CREEK. AND AS IT RELATES TO THE HALF CENT SURTAX, I HAVE BEEN IN COMMUNICATION WITH STAFF MEMBERS ABOUT PROJECTS FOR FRAZIER CREEK ONLY.

NO, I'M JUST KIDDING. ABOUT PROJECTS AS IT RELATES TO BOTH FRAZIER AND POPLAR CREEK, BECAUSE THEY BOTH HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM. AND THE PROBLEM IS THAT OVER TIME, THE SILT FROM RUNOFF FROM LAKE OKEECHOBEE, BUT ALSO FROM THE JUST TOPSOIL AND EROSION AND THINGS FROM THE RUNOFF FROM THE STREETS, FILLS IN THOSE CREEKS. AND THE MANGROVES ALSO GROW VERY BIG.

AND SO IT'S EXPENSIVE TO TRIM THEM ALL AND TO STAY ON TOP OF IT. SO IN ORDER TO MAKE THO CREEKS MORE NAVIGABLE FOR BOTH BOATERS AND KAYAKERS AND PADDLE BOARDERS, WE ARE GOING TO BE BRINGING YOU BACK SOME PROPOSED PROJECTS THAT WOULD GO FOR MATCHING GRANTS WITH THE DEP TO TRY AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT WILL BE DREDGING. I DON'T KNOW IF IT'LL BE OTHER TYPES OF PROJECTS, INCLUDING TRIMMING MANGROVES, BUT A WHOLE SERIES OF THINGS. AND I AND I WILL BE BRINGING THAT BACK TO YOU. WE'RE JUST TRYING TO ORGANIZE WHAT GRANTS ARE OUT THERE AND WHAT WHAT WE CAN DO. BUT I HAVE BEEN SPEAKING WITH DAVE, A LARGE DRAINAGE AREA INTO THAT CREEK.

YEAH, RIGHT. AND SO TOUGH ONE WHEN HE WAS WHEN HE'S TALKING ABOUT POLLUTION, HE'S NOT TALKING ABOUT LIKE 55 GALLON BARRELS FLOATING THAT ARE IT'S LITERALLY IT'S A SHEEN THAT WAS

[00:40:04]

GOOD EVENING AGAIN, MISS BRINKLEY. YES. GOOD EVENING AGAIN. AND ALL THE GLORY. GO TO GOD. THANK GOD FOR JESUS BECAUSE SOME OF YOU OUT THERE, YOU ARE NOT NICE PEOPLE. IN MY OPINION.

YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH HIS. HE STOOD. AND MY THING IS YOU TALK ABOUT YOU WANT TO PUT A I'M THINKING A SKATE RINK ON A ROLLER SKATE. YOU WANT TO PUT A SKATEBOARD OUT THERE. HOW MANY BLACK PEOPLE HAVE YOU EVER SEEN ON A SKATEBOARD? SO I'M SAYING, YOU DOING THIS FOR THE WHITE COMMUNITY? YOU'RE NOT DOING IT FOR US. BLACK PEOPLE DO NOT OWN NO SKATEBOARD. AND THEY'RE VERY FRUIT. BACK IN THE DAY, THEY DID ON ON A SKATEBOARD. THEY DO NOT DO THAT TO HOPE SOUND. THEY DO NOT DO THAT. SO THIS WHITE PEOPLE THAT YOU'RE DOING THIS FOR, NOT FOR US. AND IT'S IN THE HEART IN THE HEART OF THE OF STUART EAST STUART. SO YOU DON'T DO NOTHING FOR US. AND GOD IS A GOOD GOD. AND HE SITS HIGH AND LOOK LOW. I STILL TRUST IN GOD. I'M STILL GOING TO LOVE YOU, BUT WHAT YOU'RE DOING IS WRONG. AND WE PAY ME AND ALL OF US GOING TO PAY THE PRICE FOR THE WRONG WE DO TO PEOPLE, BECAUSE FOR WHATEVER REASON, WE GOING TO PAY THE PRICE JUDGMENT DAY. AND I'M I'M STILL LOVING YOU. I'M STILL LOVING YOU. AND ANOTHER THING I GOTTA NO DISRESPECT. I LOVE YOU, MARY, I DO. I GOT A LETTER. I JUST LOST MY SON AND NOT THAT LONG. AND RIGHT NOW I'M CRYING.

STILL, IT'S BEEN A YEAR AND A HALF AND I HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO SAY, LET GO OF MY CHILD. I HAVEN'T, AND I CAN'T, AND I WANT TO LET GO, BUT I CAN'T GO OUT THERE AND PUT A HEADSTONE ON MY CHILD OUT THERE AND MOURN. AND I'M GETTING THESE HARASSING LETTERS SAYING, I DON'T HAVE A SAY. SO I KNOW PEOPLE HAVE OFFERED TO OFFER TO GET ONE PUT ON THERE, BUT I WASN'T READY.

AND I'M STILL NOT READY TO SAY WHEN I GET THERE, I'M GOING TO PUT HER HEADSTONE ON MY CHILD.

IMMA PUT HER HEADSTONE ON HIM. BUT YOU KEEP SENDING ME THAT. I'M NOT GOING TO PUT THEM ON THERE RIGHT NOW. I'M JUST GETTING MYSELF BACK OR HELP ABOUT LOSING MY MIND BECAUSE I LOST MY CHILD. HE'S 1 IN 1,000,000. I'M JUST GETTING BY THE GRACE OF GOD. HE BRINGING ME BACK TO REALITY. AND NOW YOU'RE HARASSING ME ABOUT A HEADSTONE? IF I WOULD'VE KNOWN THAT I READ IT, I WOULD HAVE NEVER WENT OUT THERE. IT'S A BLACK CEMETERY. I WANT TO NEVER PUT MY CHILD OUT THERE. I WOULDN'T HAVE. AND THAT AT THIS FIRM HERE, PEOPLE BEEN DEAD 20 SOMETHING YEARS AND THEY STILL DON'T HAVE A HEADSTONE ON THEM. I'M HERE NOT HARASSING THE PEOPLE. THE ONE IN SAVANNAH, THE BLACK. THEY NOT HARASSING PEOPLE ABOUT NO HEADSTONE. AND HE ALWAYS BE. CAN WE PROVIDE? THANK YOU, MISS BRINKLEY. NO DEADLINE. IT'S JUST A REMINDER. STOP SENDING THE REMINDERS. WELL, WE.

YOU CAN CHANGE THE CODE. I MEAN, THE VARIOUS INSTRUCTION THAT'S NOT AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC. SO WE CAN BRING IT BACK AND CHANGE THE CODE IF YOU'D LIKE. BUT THE CODE DIRECTS THE CLERK TO WHEN THEY SELL THE PLOTS. WE NEED TO HAVE THEM MARKED SO THAT THEY DON'T GET LOST OR UNTRACKED, OR THAT PEOPLE DON'T WALK ON THEM AND STUFF LIKE THAT. SHE'S GRIEVING RIGHT NOW. YOU GUYS CAN DO WHATEVER YOU I MEAN, THAT'S NOT IN THE CODE. YOU HAVE TO YOU HAVE TO TELL US, IS IT GOING TO BE A CASE BY CASE OR. I DON'T KNOW WHAT I MEAN. I DON'T CARE TO BRING A DISCUSSION BACK. CAN I MOTION THAT WE. AND YOU COULD BUY HER A HEADSTONE, THAT'S ALL. YEAH. DOESN'T WANT A HEADSTONE BECAUSE SHE DOESN'T. SHE'S NOT READY FOR HEADSTONE IS WHAT SHE'S SAYING. I, I KNOW THAT WITH SO THE AUTHORITY THE AUTHORITY WOULD BE TO WHAT WE DO IS ACCORDING TO THE ORDINANCE, IT ALLOWS SOMEBODY TO PURCHASE A HEADSTONE WITHIN SIX MONTHS OF THE BURIAL. AND THEN A AFTER SIX MONTHS. AND IT'S BEEN A YEAR AND A HALF. WE SENT A FIRST REMINDER. AND IT'S A VERY KIND

[00:45:04]

THAT IS RIDICULOUS. THE NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION IS NOW AT FOUR ON A SUPPRESSION TRUCK AND THREE ON A RESCUE TRUCK. WE OPERATE ON TWO FOR EVERY VEHICLE IN OUR DEPARTMENT, AND WE DO THE BEST WE CAN WITH WHAT WE HAVE. AND WE DO VERY WELL. WE DO. WE ACTUALLY HAVE A VERY HIGH ROS RATE, WHICH FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO DON'T KNOW, FIRE RESCUE DOES EMS. AND TO BE HONEST, THAT IS A FAIR MAJORITY OF THE JOB. IT'S ABOUT A LITTLE OVER 90% OF OUR CALL VOLUME. SO OUR ROS GRANT MEANS THAT WHEN WE HAVE SOMEONE WHO DIES AND WE PERFORM CPR, WE ALSO DO ALS SKILLS, ADVANCED LIFE SUPPORT. WE PUT THEM ON A MONITOR. WE CAN SHOCK THEM. WE CAN GIVE THEM MEDICATIONS. WE HAVE ONE OF THE HIGHER ROS RATES IN THIS STATE. ONE OF THE DEPARTMENTS THAT BEATS US IS PALM BEACH COUNTY. THEIR STAFFING IS FOUR ON AN ENGINE, THREE ON A RESCUE. NOW TAKE OUR NUMBERS. IF YOU WERE TO GIVE US MORE STAFFING, WE COULD DO MUCH BETTER THAN THEY CAN. SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT LOWERING THE MILLAGE AND WE SAY BRING IT TO 4.75 WHEN WE'RE ALREADY AT BARE BONES, AND I SPEAK ON BEHALF OF MAJORITY OF DEPARTMENTS IN THE CITY, I CAN'T IMAGINE WHEN WE REDUCE OUR BUDGET, WHEN WE'RE ALREADY OVER ON CERTAIN THINGS, WHAT THAT WILL DO TO STAFFING IN TERMS OF NOT JUST NOT HIRING NEW POSITIONS, BUT ALSO IN TERMS OF POSITIONS WE ALREADY HAVE WHEN CERTAIN PLACES ARE ALREADY LOSING EMPLOYEES BASED OFF OF CONTRACTS THAT HAVE COME UP IN THE PAST. SO THAT'S REALLY ALL I CAME TO SPEAK ON. I'M I'M THANKFUL THAT WE'RE KEEPING IT AT FIVE IN TERMS OF THE NOT TO EXCEED, SO THAT WE CAN HAVE FURTHER DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS.

SO THAT'S REALLY ALL I HAVE ON THAT. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. I HAVE NO FURTHER COMMENT. MAYOR.

[CONSENT CALENDAR]

I'M SURE. OKAY. AND SECOND, BY COMMISSIONER CLARK, IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEMS? OH, NO. I'M SORRY, I NEEDED TO ANNOUNCE TOO. I MENTIONED THIS AT THE CRA MEETING. YOU'RE PULLING TWO. ITEM NUMBER TWO IS BEING WITHDRAWN AND WILL BE BROUGHT BACK ON AUGUST 11TH.

BECAUSE WE DIDN'T GET WE NEED THE CONTRACT FROM THE CONTRACT TO BE ABLE TO SEE IT FOR YOU TO APPROVE IT. AND THAT'S FOR THE PROJECT LIFT. I MENTIONED IT DURING THE CRA, BUT I FORGOT. SO IT'S JUST ITEMS ONE AND THREE. SO WE ARE APPROVING THE CONSENT CALENDAR, INCLUDING THE MINUTES EXCLUDING ITEM TWO AND INCLUDING ITEM THREE. NO PUBLIC COMMENT ROLL CALL PLEASE. MAY I CLARIFY? IT WAS THE MOTION WAS BY COMMISSIONER COLLINS, THE VICE MAYOR. VICE MAYOR COLLINS. YES.

AND MR. CLARK, YES. THANK YOU. VICE MAYOR COLLINS. YES, COMMISSIONER. CLARK. YES,

[4. AUTHORIZATION TO EXECUTE AMENDMENTS TO LEASES WITH TENANTS AT 301 SE OCEAN BLVD (RC): RESOLUTION No. 63-2025; A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF STUART, FLORIDA AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AMENDMENTS TO LEASES WITH TENANTS AT 301 SE OCEAN BLVD. BETWEEN THE CITY OF STUART AND VARIOUS TENANTS TO ALLOW FOR THE TERMINATION OF LEASES IN THE YEAR 2028; TO ALLOW STAFF TO RELOCATE IN ACCORDANCE WITH PRIOR COMMISSION ACTION; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.]

[00:50:02]

THE OTHER LEASE IS THE CANCER SPECIALIST. THE CANCER SPECIALIST HAD AN OPTION AND THEN ANOTHER OPTION. SO THEY HAD ABOUT NINE MORE YEARS THAT THEY COULD STAY. BUT THE ONLY CHANGE IN THAT LEASE IS THAT WE WOULD THE END DATE IS FEBRUARY 28TH OF 28. SO EFFECTIVELY MARCH 1ST WOULD BE WE WOULD TAKE POSSESSION OF THE PROPERTY WITHOUT ANY MORE EXTENSIONS WITHIN THEIR GIVING UP THE EXTENSIONS AND ALL GOOD. AND WE GO OUR SEPARATE WAYS. AND THE PURPOSE FOR THAT IS OBVIOUSLY ORGANIZING IT. SO THE INTENTION WAS TRYING TO GET BOWMAN TO GO TO THAT. AND THE FEBRUARY 28TH OF 28 IS WHEN THIS CURRENT EXTENSION THAT THEY'RE IN RIGHT NOW RUNS OUT. THEN THEY COULD EXERCISE ANOTHER FIVE YEARS AFTER THAT, BUT THEY'RE WILLING TO GIVE THAT UP AND THEY'LL MOVE OUT AT THE END. AND PART OF THAT IS THERE'S A LITANY OF CIRCUMSTANCES, BUT PART OF IT IS THAT THEY'RE ACTUALLY OUTGROWING THE PLACE, AND THERE'S A LOT OF PARKING CONSTRAINTS. AND SO IF WE STARTED PAINTING PARKING NUMBERS AND GETTING STRICT ON IT, IT COULD WE COULD MAKE IT DIFFICULT FOR EACH OTHER. WE OBVIOUSLY HAVEN'T DONE THAT. WE DON'T WANT TO DO THAT. AND SO THE PURPOSE FOR THIS IS TO GET AUTHORIZATION FROM THE CITY COMMISSION TO EXTEND THE BOWMAN LEASE, ALL TERMS THE SAME, JUST UNTIL JANUARY OF 27. AND THEN WITH THIS OPTION TO GO TO THE TO ALL THE WAY THROUGH 28, IF THEY DON'T FIND SPACE. BUT THEY WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY COULD LEAVE IN JANUARY OF 27. SO I SAID, OKAY, JUST MAKE THE LEASE TILL JANUARY OF 27. AND THEN AGREEING TO REDUCE THE CANCER SPECIALIST LEASE TO REMOVE ALL OPTIONS. AND THEIR LEASE ENDS FEBRUARY 28TH, 2028. AND THERE'S NO OTHER TERMS TO CHANGE THE QUESTIONS. IS THAT CLEAR? THIS HAS BEEN ADOPTED. OKAY. SO I, I APPRECIATE YOU LINING ALL THESE UP FOR 28. I KNOW WE'VE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT THIS, BUT IS THERE IS THERE NO BENEFIT TO SORT OF MOVING IN PIECES AND MOVING INTO BOWMAN'S LOCATION WITH SOME AMOUNT OF CITY STAFF? WELL, SO THE WAY THAT IT WAS, NO, WE WANT THE RENT. WELL, THE WAY IT WAS DESIGNED WAS THAT THE BOWMAN SPACE WAS THE CITY MANAGER, CITY ATTORNEY AND CITY CLERK WOULD GO THERE. AND THE CONCERN WOULD BE THAT IF WE HAD BOWMAN LEAVE THIS NOVEMBER AND CITY MANAGER, CITY ATTORNEY AND CITY CLERK LEFT THIS BUILDING, ALL THAT WOULD REALLY BE LEFT IN THE BUILDING IS THE DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. WE'D STILL HAVE TO COME HERE FOR MEETINGS, BUT EVERYBODY WOULD BE GONE, AND THE PUBLIC WOULD COME TO THE BUILDING AND WOULD BE CONFUSED BY IT. SO RATHER THAN AND I DIDN'T WANT TO LEAVE ONE DEPARTMENT KIND OF BEHIND. AND THEN YOU ALSO HAVE ENGINEERING IN THE ANNEX BUILDING. SO BY MOVING IT TO THIS 28TH DATE, THAT GIVES US THE ABILITY TO BUILD OUT THE MEETING ROOM IN THE CANCER CENTER. IT ALSO HAPPENS TO COINCIDE WITH THE SAME TIME THAT THE STATE OF FLORIDA'S LEASE IS EXPIRING. AND THE WILLIAMS LEININGER LEASE EXPIRES WITHIN A COUPLE OF MONTHS OF THAT AS WELL. SO THE REST OF THE BUILDING ESSENTIALLY BECOME AVAILABLE AS WELL. THE MINUS WELLS. BUT THE CANCER SPECIALISTS WERE GOING TO BE THERE. SO WHAT WE'RE DOING IS FLIPPING ORIGINALLY THE DYESS AND THE MEETING ROOM WAS GOING TO BE WHERE WELLS IS. BUT BECAUSE THE CANCER SPECIALISTS ARE LEAVING, WE CAN MOVE IN AND LET WELLS STAY AND GO AND HAVE THE WHOLE SEPARATE BUILDING BE THE CANCER, BE THE DIOCESE AND STUFF, BE THE CANCER BUILDING. PLUS, BY LEAVING BOWMAN THERE, YOU END UP RECEIVING ABOUT 165 TO $170,000 A YEAR IN RENT, PLUS THE TAXES, PLUS THE MAINTENANCE AND THE BENEFIT TO IT, WITH US BEING SPLIT BETWEEN US WOULD BE PROBABLY CONFUSING TO THE PUBLIC. SO IT'S JUST BETTER TO DO IT ALL AT ONE TIME. BUT YES, WE COULD. IN FACT, IF THE COMMISSION DIRECTED US TO NOT EXTEND TO BOWMAN AND END IN NOVEMBER AND MOVE STAFF TO THE BOWMAN PLACE IN NOVEMBER, DO THESE NEED TO BE SIGNED? AND. WELL, I WAS HOPING TO HAVE THEM BACK FOR THEM TO BE SIGNED THIS

[00:55:01]

AND SO IF YOU WANT, I CAN ROLL THIS TO THE 11TH AND BRING IT BACK AS IT RELATES TO IT IS REASONABLE. THAT WOULD JUST BE I'D LIKE TO LOOK AT IT. SURE. PUT EYES ON IT BEFORE I APPROVE IT. RIGHT. AND LIKE I SAID, IT'S NOT. I CAN GIVE YOU THE WHOLE LEASES TOO. BUT THE ONLY THING THAT'S CHANGING IS THE DATE. BUT IT'S FINE WITH ME. WE CAN ROLL IT TO THE 11TH. I WOULD PREFER I'D LIKE TO PUT EYES ON IT. EVERYTHING YOU'RE SAYING SOUNDS GOOD. NOTHING'S GOING TO HAPPEN WITHOUT EMOTION. SO. OKAY. SO DO YOU NEED A MOTION TO BRING IT BACK NEXT TIME? NO, IT JUST ROLLS. JUST ROLLS. AND THAT WAS. DOES ANYBODY WISH TO MAKE A MOTION? I DON'T THINK SO, COMMISSIONER CLARK. COMMISSIONER JOB? NO. SO IF WE DON'T MAKE A MOTION, IT JUST ROLLS TO THE NEXT AGENDA. IN AUGUST 11TH. RIGHT. HERE'S THIS, BY THE WAY, THIS IS THE UNSIGNED LEASE. IT'S LITERALLY THREE PARAGRAPHS. OKAY. NO ACTION IS TAKEN REGARDING THIS ITEM. RIGHT. MR.

[5. RESCISSION OF CITY OF STUART'S ORDINANCE NO. 2539-2025 (RC): ORDINANCE No. 2543-2025; AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF STUART, FLORIDA, RESCINDING CITY OF STUART ORDINANCE NUMBER 2539-2025 PURSUANT TO SECTION 28 OF FLORIDA SENATE BILL 180 WHICH WAS ADOPTED AND EFFECTIVE AS OF JULY 1, 2025; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.]

SENATE BILL 180, WHICH IMPACTS MORATORIUMS AND ADOPTIONS OF MORE RESTRICTIVE AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY'S LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS. AS YOU RECALL, THE CITY COMMISSION DIRECTED STAFF TO INITIATE THE ZONING OF PROGRESS LAST SUMMER. FOR SIX MONTHS, THE CITY HAD A MORATORIUM ON DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS. WHILE THE COMMISSION CONSIDERED AMENDMENTS TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS. AND ON MARCH 20TH AND APRIL 16TH, RESPECTIVELY, THE CITY COMMISSION ADOPTED THOSE AMENDMENTS THAT THEY CHOSE TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS. I WANT TO SPECIFICALLY REVIEW SECTION 28 WITH WITH YOU GUYS. AND THIS THE SECTION 28 WILL APPLY TO EACH COUNTY LISTED IN THE FEDERAL DISASTER DECLARATION. FOR CERTAIN HURRICANES, MOST IMPORTANT WOULD BE HURRICANE MILTON, THE LAST ONE AND EACH MUNICIPALITY WITHIN ONE OF THOSE COUNTIES. AND WE WERE LISTED AT OUR MARTIN COUNTY WAS LISTED IN THAT DECLARATION FOR HURRICANE MILTON. SO THIS THIS LAW DOES APPLY TO THE CITY OF STUART. AND AS A RESULT, SECTION 28 SAYS THAT THE CITY MAY NOT ADOPT MORE RESTRICTIVE OR BURDENSOME AMENDMENTS TO ITS COMP PLAN OR LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, OR PROPOSE OR ADOPT MORE RESTRICTIVE OR BURDENSOME PROCEDURES CONCERNING REVIEW, APPROVAL OR ISSUANCE OF A SITE PLAN, DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, OR DEVELOPMENT ORDER AND ANY SUCH MORATORIUM OR RESTRICTION, RESTRICTIVE OR BURDENSOME COMP PLAN AMENDMENTS OR LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS OR PROCEDURES SHALL BE NULL AND VOID AB INITIO, AND THAT IN LATIN TERMS MEAN AS, AS, AS IF IT NEVER TOOK PLACE. AND OF COURSE, THEY HAVE THE NEXT LINE. IT SAYS THIS SUBSECTION APPLIES RETROACTIVELY BACK TO AUGUST 1ST, 2024, WHICH IS A FEW WEEKS BEFORE WE STARTED OUR ZONING AND PROGRESS. AND THIS IS WHAT CONCERNS ME. THIS IS MY REASON FOR BRINGING THIS ORDINANCE BACK TO YOU GUYS, TO HAVE IT RESCINDED. AND I USED THE WORDS RESCISSION OR RESCINDING BECAUSE WE KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS, BECAUSE WE DEALT WITH THAT WITH BRIGHTLINE. SO I WANTED

[01:00:01]

SO THAT'S WHY IT'S THAT'S WHY I BROUGHT THIS FORTH SO THAT WE CAN GO AHEAD AND CUT THIS OFF AND NOT AND PREVENT ANYBODY FROM SENDING US A LETTER AND EXPOSING THE CITY TO UNNECESSARY FEES. AS COMMISSIONER JOBY AND THE VICE MAYOR BROUGHT UP AN INTEREST IN JOINING THIS LAWSUIT WITH A LAW FIRM. IT'S MY OPINION THAT US TAKING THIS ACTION ON THIS ORDINANCE WOULD NOT IMPACT OUR OUR ABILITY TO JOIN THE LAWSUIT. IT WOULD NOT IMPACT THE RESULTS OF THE LAWSUIT. IF ANYTHING, IT WOULD MAKE OUR POSITION IN THE LAWSUIT STRONGER BECAUSE THIS LAW IS HAVING A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THE CITY VERSUS A POTENTIAL IMPACT OF THE CITY, BECAUSE WE ARE HAVING TO RESCIND OUR LAW THAT WE SPENT SEVERAL MONTHS AMENDING. WOULD YOU CONSIDER BEING SUED AN IMPACT BY OTHER? YEAH. I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY THAT I'M NOT SAYING I'M NOT SAYING THAT WE HAVE TO RESCIND IT OR NOT RESCIND IT TO HAVE STANDING IN LITIGATION. I'M LETTING YOU KNOW THAT IF WE RESCIND IT, IT'S NOT GOING TO AFFECT OUR ABILITY TO JOIN THE LAWSUIT. IF ANYTHING, I THINK IT MAKES US LOOK BETTER COMPARED TO CITIES THAT HAVEN'T DONE ANY CODE REVISIONS THAT ARE AFFECTED BY IT, THAT THEY POTENTIALLY, OVER THE NEXT TWO YEARS COULDN'T CHANGE THEIR, THEIR, THEIR LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, WHEREAS WE HAVE ALREADY DONE IT. WHAT I WILL SAY IS RESCINDING THE ORDINANCE AT THIS POINT WILL STOP ANYBODY FROM FILING A LAWSUIT AGAINST US OR, YOU KNOW, SENDING US A LETTER AND THEN THREATENING TO SUE US, BECAUSE IF SOMEONE SENDS US A LETTER THE NEXT VERY NEXT MEETING, I'M GOING TO HAVE ASKING YOU GUYS TO RESCIND THIS ORDINANCE. SO WE'LL BE IN THE SAME BOAT WE ARE NOW. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU SOME OF YOU I WANTED TO EXPLAIN TO YOU, IT'S MY OPINION THAT DOING THIS WOULD NOT IMPACT ANY OF US JOINING THAT POTENTIAL LAWSUIT. I DID, I DID SPEAK TO. NOT JAMIE COLE, WHO I GUESS SOME OF YOU SPOKE TO, BUT I SPOKE TO SUSAN TREVATHAN, WHO I'VE MET IN THE PAST, AND I SPOKE TO HER ON THE PHONE. AND THEN I ALSO SAW HER AT A CONFERENCE LAST WEEK DOWN IN BOCA FOR CITY LAWYERS, AND I SPOKE TO HER A SECOND TIME ABOUT IT. SO I AM FAMILIAR WITH IT. AND SHE SENT ME. I DO HAVE ATTACHED. THEY SENT ME AN EMAIL AND ATTACHED THE PROPOSED RESOLUTION, AND THAT'S WHAT IT WAS. EITHER COMMISSIONER OR VICE MAYOR MENTIONED OR BOTH OF YOU MENTIONED. AND WHAT IT WAS IS IT'S JUST A DRAFT OF A RESOLUTION THAT WE COULD BRING FORWARD. WE WOULD OBVIOUSLY HAVE TO TAILOR IT TOWARDS THE CITY AND ADD A RESOLUTION NUMBER AND PROBABLY TWEAK IT SOMEWHAT TO MAKE IT RELEVANT TO OUR FACTS HERE. BUT THAT'S WHAT THAT RESOLUTION WAS. BUT WE WOULD HAVE TO OBVIOUSLY PUT THAT ON A

[01:05:04]

TOTAL BAN ON ANY MORE INTRUSIVE OR BURDENSOME LAND USE AND ZONING REGULATIONS. SECTION 18 PROHIBITION ON MORATORIA AND CONSTRUCTION. RECONSTRUCTION AND REDEVELOPMENT OF PROPERTY. EVEN IF THE PROPERTY IS INTACT AND WAS NOT DAMAGED BY A HURRICANE OR OTHER EMERGENCY EVENT.

WHEREAS SECTION 28 OF SB 180 SIMILARLY PROHIBITS MUNICIPALITIES FROM ENACTING ZONING AND LAND USE REGULATIONS FOR THE ENTIRE STATE OF FLORIDA RETROACTIVELY FROM AUGUST 1ST, 2024 THROUGH OCTOBER 1ST, 2027, WITHOUT ANY RATIONAL JUSTIFICATION. WHEREAS SB 180 IS VAGUE, PROHIBITIONS ON MORATORIA ON CONSTRUCTION, RECONSTRUCTION AND REDEVELOPMENT OF PROPERTIES, AND LAND USE AND ZONING REGULATIONS THAT ARE MORE RESTRICTIVE AND OR BURDENSOME, AND OTHER AMBIGUOUS PROVISIONS RENDER SB 180 INCOMPREHENSIBLE, CREATE UNCERTAINTY, CHILL LOCAL GOVERNANCE, AND ENCOURAGE PREEMPTIVE, POTENTIALLY FRIVOLOUS LITIGATION TO FORCE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS INTO REPEALING LEGISLATION, EVEN IF IT MIGHT OTHERWISE BE A VALID EXERCISE OF HOME RULE AUTHORITY. SO I KNOW YOU DON'T NEED COMMENT FROM US TONIGHT. WE'RE NOT VOTING, BUT AS OF RIGHT NOW, WHERE IT STANDS, I WOULD NOT BE COMFORTABLE, I WOULD NOT I DO NOT THINK IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO RESCIND THESE CODES, THIS ZONING AND PROGRESS THAT WE ARE IN FOR SIX MONTHS DOING OUR BEST TO TRY TO DELIVER WHAT PEOPLE VOTED FOR. AND I THINK IT'S INCREDIBLE THAT YOU WOULD CHUCKLE AT THAT. SOMEBODY WHO RENTED THE SIGN ON MONTEREY THAT SAID, ARE YOU TIRED OF TRAFFIC? I'M NOT DONE, I'M NOT DONE. I'M NOT DONE. OTHER COMMISSIONERS, I'M GOING TO I'M GOING TO QUOTE WHAT YOU PUT ON THAT SIGN. ARE YOU TIRED OF TRAFFIC, MR. VICE

[01:10:02]

WHERE ARE WE ON THE ON THIS? WELL, IT'S ONLY THE FIRST READING. WE'RE NOT REQUIRED TO TAKE A VOTE. IT WILL AUTOMATICALLY BE TRANSMITTED. CORRECT. MR. BHAGAT'S POINT IS THOUGH, SOMEONE COULD COME IN TOMORROW AND FILE A LAWSUIT. CORRECT? WELL, THEY COULD SEND THE LETTER. THEY COULD SEND IT NOW. I'D RATHER NOT TALK MORE ABOUT IT ON THE DIET. HE DOESN'T WANT TO TEACH HIM HOW TO DO IT. YEAH, YEAH. DO IT. PREMIER TED TALK. IT'S NOT A SECRET. YEAH.

SO WE'RE AT ITEM NUMBER FIVE, RESOLUTION 2543 2025. YES. OKAY. SO. NORMALLY I WOULD. I WOULD PROBABLY HAVE THE SAME FEELINGS THAT I THINK THAT COMMISSIONER JOE AND COMMISSIONER COLLINS HAVE WHEN IT COMES TO HOME RULE AND WHAT OTHER COMMUNITIES ARE DOING. HOWEVER, IN REGARD TO THIS PARTICULAR SENATE BILL AND THE SPECIFIC THINGS THAT IT MENTIONED UNDER THE EMERGENCY ACT AND THE WAY THAT IT REACHES BACK. AND FOR WHAT WE DID, I THINK THAT IT STANDS. WE HAVE A CONFLICT. AT LEAST I HAVE A CONFLICT BECAUSE I SAID IT PROBABLY SIX DIFFERENT TIMES OR MORE WHEN WE HAD THOSE MEETINGS THAT I DON'T THINK WE FOLLOWED THE PROPER PROCEDURE IN THE ZIP, IN GETTING THIS INPUT FROM OUR COMMUNITY THAT WE SAY THAT WE WANT AND HAVING THIS TOP DOWN APPROACH ON THE ZIP. AND I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE THIS BOOMERANG EFFECT NOW, AND IT'S COMING FROM THE STATE. AND YES, I AGREE THAT I DON'T WANT ANYBODY TO TRAMPLE ON HOME RULE.

BUT WHEN BECAUSE THIS ONE PARTICULAR THING THAT WE DID AT THIS TIME, I JUST THINK THAT WE DIDN'T DO IT, WE DIDN'T FOLLOW THE RIGHT PROCEDURES. AND I KEPT SAYING THAT ALL THIS TIME THAT WE VOTED THROUGH THAT PROCESS. AND EVEN WHEN I HAD TO VOTE, BECAUSE I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE EASTPORT AREA WAS ABSOLUTELY CONSIDERED, AND BECAUSE THAT WAS KIND OF PARCELED OUT AND LEFT UNTIL THE LAST MINUTE, AND IT ENDED UP LOOKING LIKE IT WAS A VOTE FOR WHATEVER SITUATION WE WERE GOING THROUGH WITH THE PAST SIX MONTHS AND THEN SOME. I JUST THINK THAT. I, YOU KNOW, HOME RULE NEEDS TO BE PROTECTED. BUT AT THE SAME TIME, BECAUSE I, I KNOW IN MY HEART WE DIDN'T DO THE STUDY, WE DIDN'T DO THE KIND OF THINGS THAT TRULY CREATED THE CHANGE THAT WE WANT INTO IN THIS. IF WE WANTED ZONING AND REZONING IN OUR ENTIRE COMMUNITY OR INTO A SPECIFIC AREA OF OUR COMMUNITY, WE DROPPED THE MULTI-FAMILY, WE DROPPED THE COMMERCIAL, WE DROPPED THIS, WE DROPPED THAT, AND THEN WE ONLY HAD THESE THINGS RELATED TO JUST EASTWARD ALONE. YES. FOR THIS TIME, I AGREE WITH THE STATE. I HOPE THAT WE CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS THING. OKAY. YES. THAT WAS A YOU YOU STATED THAT REPEATEDLY AND CORRECTLY THAT WE DID NOT FOLLOW PROPER PROCEDURE. SO I AM NOT WILLING TO EXPOSE THE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY OF STUART TO LAWSUITS. THIS IS NOT A SENATE BILL. THIS IS A LAW. THIS IS A STATE LAW. AND WE SWORE AN OATH AND SIGNED AN OATH TO UPHOLD THE STATE LAW. AND WE DON'T GET TO CHOOSE WHICH LAWS THEY ARE. WE CAN BE UNHAPPY, WE CAN COMPLAIN, WE CAN TALK TO OUR LEGISLATORS, BUT WE ARE REQUIRED TO FOLLOW THE LAW. IT PASSED BOTH THE HOUSE AND THE SENATE UNANIMOUSLY, AND. ON. YOU KNOW, THEY ARE ABSOLUTELY COMING AFTER HOME RULE. THIS IS ONE WAY THEY DO IT AND THEY WILL CONTINUE TO DO IT. AND OUR MISBEHAVIOR, MISBEHAVIOR, REGARDING THE CHANGES WE PROPOSED DOES NOT HELP IN THIS EFFORT AT ALL. IF THESE PEOPLE ARE EFFECTIVE IN FIGHTING THIS, AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S HARD TO PREDICT THAT THAT STATE LAW WILL BE UNDONE AND WILL APPLY TO EVERYONE BECAUSE

[01:15:07]

WHETHER YOU THINK YOU PROCESS ANYTHING CORRECTLY OR NOT. NUMBER ONE, THE BILL WAS INTENDED TO BE SPECIFIC TO PROPERTIES IMPACTED BY HURRICANES, BUT THE ENTIRE STATE OF FLORIDA WAS UNDER AN EMERGENCY FROM HURRICANE MILTON. AND THEREFORE EVERY CITY, COUNTY, VILLAGE, TOWN AND MUNICIPALITY IS OPEN RIGHT NOW TO ANY APPLICANT SAYING THAT THEY CAN FILE UNDER SENATE BILL 180. NUMBER TWO, IT'S A ONE SIZE FITS ALL MENTALITY. EVERY MUNICIPALITY IS BEING TREATED THE SAME. MARTIN COUNTY IS BEING TREATED NO DIFFERENTLY THAN MIAMI. IT DOESN'T MATTER THAT OUR COMP PLANS ARE DIFFERENT IN THIS BILL IS BEING UNILATERALLY APPLIED AND EFFECTIVELY LIMITS AND AS WE HAVE ALL HEARD, REMOVES HOME RULE AS DEVELOPMENT RULES ARE BEING CENTRALIZED AND MANAGED BY THE STATE, NUMBER THREE STANDARDS WOULD BE ROLLED BACK RETROACTIVELY TO JULY 2024 TO ALL OF THE ORDINANCE BEING APPROVED BY ANY MUNICIPALITY WHICH COULD BE DEEMED, QUOTE UNQUOTE, BURDENSOME. HOWEVER, THERE IS NO DEFINITION OF WHAT BURDENSOME MEANS IN THIS BILL. SO LET'S SAY YOU LIVE IN A COASTAL COMMUNITY LIKE STUART, AND AN ORDINANCE WAS CREATED THAT DWELLINGS MUST NOW BE STILTED IN YOUR HOUSE, BUILT AT SEA LEVEL, FLOODED BECAUSE OF A HURRICANE. AND LET'S SAY YOU DIDN'T GET ENOUGH MONEY FROM THE INSURANCE COMPANY. SO YOU CAN SAY THAT IT IS BURDENSOME FOR YOU TO BUILD YOUR HOUSE ON STILTS, AND YOU APPEAL UNDER THE SENATE BILL, AND THEORETICALLY, YOU CANNOT BE DENIED. SO YOU REBUILD YOUR HOUSE AT SEA LEVEL. WHICH LEADS US TO THE FOURTH ISSUE. WHAT WILL INSURANCE NOW COVER? INSURANCE RATES WERE NOT ADDRESSED AS PART OF THIS BILL. SO IF YOU REBUILD YOUR HOUSE TO A STANDARD THAT IS NO LONGER A BEST PRACTICE, CAN INSURANCE COMPANY NOW DENY YOU BECAUSE YOU AREN'T BUILDING TO CURRENT CODE? AND CAN YOU SUE THE MUNICIPALITY FOR BEING UNINSURABLE? AND IF YOUR HOUSE FLOODS AGAIN, IS THIS MUNICIPALITY NOW RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR REPAIRS? NONE OF THIS IS ADDRESSED IN THE SENATE BILL. THIS BILL IS AN UNFUNDED MANDATE, MEANING THAT IN THIS BILL, IT IS REQUIRED THAT CITIES AND COUNTIES ARE TO OFFER SAFETY MEASURES LIKE SHELTERS. YET NO MONEY WAS PROVIDED AS PART OF THIS BILL TO FUND THESE REQUIREMENTS. THIS CREATES A FINANCIAL BURDEN FOR EVERY MUNICIPALITY. AND THE BIGGEST ISSUE WITH THIS BILL IS THAT IT MAY NEVER SUNSET. SENATE BILL 180 IS IN PLACE BY STATUTE UNTIL OCTOBER 2027. HOWEVER, THE BILL STATES VERY CLEARLY THE PROPOSED DATE THAT THE BILL ENDS IS CONTINGENT UPON EMERGENCY BEING DECLARED IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA, SO THE END DATE RESETS AFTER EVERY ONE, EVERY EMERGENCY THAT THE GOVERNOR DECLARES. AND AS WE HAVE HURRICANES EVERY YEAR, THERE'S A STATE OF EMERGENCY DECLARED EVERY YEAR. AND THERE IS A CHANCE THAT THIS BILL WILL NEVER SUNSET. EVERY MUNICIPALITY SHOULD CONSIDER JOINING THIS LAWSUIT. IT IS NOT A CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT. THERE IS NO GUARANTEE THAT ANY INJUNCTION OR POTENTIAL RULING WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF MUNICIPALITIES WOULD BE APPLICABLE TO EVERY MUNICIPALITY IN THE STATE. THAT WOULD BE UP TO THE JUDGE, AND THAT IS A RESULT OF THE SUPREME COURT RULING THAT HAPPENED LAST YEAR. MAYBE THE LEGISLATURE WILL REVIEW IT LATER. WE CAN'T DETERMINE THAT. BUT THIS LAWSUIT AT LEAST PROTECTS MUNICIPALITIES IN THE MEANTIME. AND IF SENATE BILL 180 DOESN'T AFFECT US TODAY, IT WILL THEORETICALLY EXIST IN PERPETUITY. AND THERE IS NO DOUBT THAT THE CITY OF STUART, THE VILLAGE OF INDIANTOWN, MARTIN COUNTY, ETC. WILL AT SOME POINT BE SUED. THERE ARE MANY FAILURES WE FACE WITH THIS BILL, BUT THE BIGGEST FAILURE WE DO IS TO NOT PUSH BACK TO TALLAHASSEE. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. I HAVE WALTER LLOYD. GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. WALTER LLOYD, 150 CABANA POINT CIRCLE. THANK YOU, MISS CARTWRIGHT. THAT WAS WONDERFUL. I MINE'S MUCH MORE SIMPLE. I JUST WOULD SAY DO NOT RESEND THE ZIP. DO NOT RESEND ALL OF THAT ACTION THAT WAS PUT FORTH.

[01:20:04]

OKAY. MOVING ON TO ITEM SIX, I BELIEVE. MR. YOU HAVE A MOTION A SECOND NOW. OH YOU'RE RIGHT. I'M SORRY. ALL IN FAVOR. ALL IN FAVOR IS FINE. YEAH. ROLL CALL. OKAY. MAYOR RICH, WHERE IT IS SIMPLY TO TRANSMIT TO THIS TO SECOND READING. YEAH. THE SECOND READING. YES, COMMISSIONER CLARK. WHAT DID YOU WHAT WOULD WHAT WOULD YOU SIMPLY MOVE IT TO THE SECOND READING? OH, THEY'RE VOTING YES TO MOVE IT TO THE VOTE, COMMISSIONER. YES, VICE MAYOR COLLINS. YES. OKAY. SORRY.

[6. DISCUSSION REGARDING THE MARTIN COUNTY COURTHOUSE PARKING REQUIREMENTS AND PROPOSED BRIGHTLINE FUTURE PARKING (Part 1 of 2)]

[01:25:10]

[01:30:05]

THEY CAN DO ZERO. AND WE COULDN'T REGULATE IT. WE COULD REGULATE SUCH NONSENSE. WE COULD REGULATE THE COUNTY. BUT BUT THERE'S ALSO THEN THE LAST PIECE OF THE PUZZLE IS THERE'S CEMENT DIRECTLY BEHIND OUR WATER TREATMENT PLANT, AND PEOPLE PARK THERE NOW EVERY DAY AND EVERY WEEKEND AND PLAY BASEBALL, OR PEOPLE PARK THERE TO GO TO WORK AT THE WATER TREATMENT PLANT, OR PEOPLE PROBABLY PARK THERE TO GO TO THE COURTHOUSE. I MEAN, I HONESTLY DON'T KNOW WHAT THE DIFFERENT USES ARE OR WHO'S PARKING THERE. MY PROPOSAL WAS TO PAINT DIAGONAL STRIPES ON ALL OF THAT CEMENT SO THAT THE PARKING SPACES, BECAUSE RIGHT NOW IT'S YOU CAN PARK ANYWHERE.

IT'S NOT REALLY DELINEATED, BUT TO DELINEATE THEM AS VERY SPECIFIC PARKING SPACES AND THEN PUT UP THREE HOUR PARKING SIGNS THAT MADE IT SO THAT YOU COULDN'T PARK IN THOSE SPACES FOR LONGER THAN THREE HOURS. WE COULD OBVIOUSLY GIVE AN EXCEPTION TO OUR EMPLOYEES THAT WORK IN THAT BUILDING, BUT THAT WAY, IF SOMEBODY WERE AND AGAIN, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 2030 OR 2031, BUT IF SOMEBODY WERE TO COME TO TAKE BRIGHTLINE AND WANT TO PARK THEIR CAR AND THEY WERE GOING TO GO OUT OF TOWN FOR A WEEK, IF THEY HAD TO PAY $20 A DAY TO PARK IN THE TWO ACRE PARKING LOT, OR THEY COULD PARK ON THE CEMENT PARKING SPACES AND JUST LEAVE THEIR CAR FOR FREE.

MY FEAR WAS THAT THEY WOULD PARK ON THESE CEMENT SPACES AND LEAVE THEIR CAR FOR FREE. SO ORIGINALLY WHAT I HAD SAID IS I WAS GOING TO DO, I WAS GOING TO STRIPE THOSE AND MAKE THEM THREE HOUR. THE ONE LAST CLAUSE THAT WAS IN THE ORIGINAL INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WAS THAT THE CITY WOULD PROVIDE 54 SPACES THAT WERE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC WITHIN 2500FT OF THE COURTHOUSE. WELL, THE DENVER, GEORGIA, DETROIT, ALL ARE WITHIN 2500FT. SO IS SEMINOLE BEHIND THE LIKE, WHERE THE SUNTRUST BANK USED TO BE. ON TOP OF THAT, EAST OCEAN, FLAGLER AND MLK ARE ALL AND DIXIE ARE

[01:35:02]

THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BUILD 200. THAT'S WHAT AGAIN, THIS IS ALL HYPOTHETICAL. BRIGHTLOT COME AT ALL. BRIGHTLINE ASKED FOR 200 SPACES. RIGHT, RIGHT, RIGHT. ASKED FOR 200 SPACES.

THERE'S 160 SPACES THERE, RIGHT? WE'RE 40 DEFICIENT ALREADY? NO, IT WOULD AT THE END. IF BRIGHTLINE BUILDS BRIGHTLINE AND BUILDS THE 200 SPACES, INSTEAD OF THERE BEING 160 THERE, THERE'LL BE 200 THERE. AND WE'RE ADDING A SECOND LEVEL PART OF IT. SO THERE'LL BE THERE WON'T BE 160 THERE, THERE'LL BE 200 PARKING GARAGE. THEY IT'S A LEVEL AGAIN. WE'RE, WE'RE GUESSING SPECULATING BECAUSE WE'RE NOT PART OF THAT ANYMORE. SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY'RE

[01:40:03]

THAT'S WHAT JODY DID. THE DID THE MATH ON IT. BASED UPON THE SQUARE FOOTAGE. THEY DO NOT HAVE 403 SPACES. THEY HAVE 160. AND THEN THEY ALSO HAVE 125 IN THE TRIANGLE SPACE. AND THEN THEY ALSO HAVE, I THINK, 50 IN THAT OTHER SPACE. SO THEY HAVE 175 PLUS 160 ALREADY GROSSLY PARKING DEFICIENT, OR AT LEAST WE'LL SAY PARKING DEFICIENT. AND NOW THEY WANT TO PUT A STATION ON TOP OF THEIR PARKING LOT. THEY'RE ABOUT 65 SPACES A PROBLEM. THIS IS A PROBLEM BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO PUT ALL OF YOUR REQUIRED PARKING OUT ONTO THE ON STREET PARKING AND SURROUNDING AREA. THIS IS A PROBLEM. IT'S NOT JUST MEETING BRIGHTLINE'S REQUIREMENT, WHICH THEY DON'T HAVE ENOUGH SPACES FOR. IT'S HOW DO YOU MEET YOUR OWN PARKING REQUIREMENT, AND WHAT DOES THE CITY DO TO RECTIFY THIS SO THAT THEY DON'T MAKE A MESS IN THE CITY FOR YOUR RESIDENTS, FOR THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE HERE AND THEIR ABILITY TO THEY WOULD THEY COULD PAVE GAZEBO PARK. THIS IS TURNING INTO A GREEN SPACE. WE ALREADY HAVE AN AGREEMENT ON THAT. NO, THE AGREEMENT ON THAT WAS THAT THEY WERE FORGIVEN 65 PARKING SPACES TO PARK TO BE ABLE TO PARK THEIR PROJECT. NOW THEY WANT TO DO SOMETHING NEW. THEY'RE BREACHING THAT DEAL. THAT'S A NEW PROJECT. THEY'RE BREACHING THAT DEAL THEN. BUT THE NEW PROJECT, THEY'RE NOT THEY'RE NOT MEETING THEIR PARKING REQUIREMENTS. WHY IS PARKING REQUIREMENT IS NOT 200? THE NEW PROJECT'S PARKING REQUIREMENT UNDER OUR CODE IS EITHER 33 RIGHT LINES. RFP REQUIRES 200 SPOTS THERE. THAT'S A CONTRACT FOR AN OFFER OF A OF A PURCHASE. THAT'S LIKE SAYING I'LL PAY YOU $1 MILLION FOR A PIECE OF PROPERTY OR 500,000. OUR CODE DOESN'T REQUIRE IT. THAT WAS JUST WHAT THEY WERE

[01:45:03]

I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT BRIGHTLINE. I'M TALKING ABOUT THE COURTHOUSE. THE COURTHOUSE ALREADY HAS 160 SPACES. THEY'RE ALREADY DEFICIENT. AND SO. RIGHT. SO LET'S ASSUME ALREADY DEFICIENT IN THEIR PARKING. RIGHT? BUT LET'S SAY THEY DIDN'T BUILD IT ON THAT SPOT. SO NOW WE'RE AT 100 AND DOWN THE STREET, THE 160 MIKE. LET'S SAY THEY BUILT THE PARKING BRIGHTLINE AND EVERYTHING DOWN THE STREET. AND THEY BUILT 40 SPACES FOR BRIGHTLINE THAT WOULD MEET OUR CODE. THAT'S FINE. THAT'S NOT WHAT THEY'RE DOING. NOTHING TO DO WITH THE TWO ACRES. NOT WHAT'S HAPPENING. THEY'RE BUILDING 40 EXTRA SPACES AS PART OF THE. AND A LOT THAT'S ALREADY DEFICIENT OF PARKING. YES. YOU CAN'T ROLL YOUR EYES. IT'S THE TRUTH. I DON'T DISAGREE THAT IT'S LESS PARKING THAN OUR CODE REQUIRES. AND WE HAVE A PROBLEM, BUT IT'S NOT HAVE A PROBLEM. THEN WE REQUIRED THEM TO DO. WE REQUIRED THEM TO DO THAT. I NEED TO BE ABLE TO VERIFY WITH DOCUMENTS. I HAVE NO IDEA. I'LL GET YOU. IT'S RESOLUTION 33, 33, 88. I WANT WHAT I WANT WHAT THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS WERE IN 86. I WANT WHAT THEY ARE NOW. I WANT EVERYTHING RELATED TO THAT. AND IT'S NOT ABOUT BRIGHTLINE, IT'S ABOUT THE COURTHOUSE. WELL, AND SO OUR REMEDY HAS TO PARK. SO AGAIN RECOGNIZE THAT BRIGHTLINE AND COURTHOUSE ARE SEPARATE.

THEY'RE DIFFERENT ENTITIES. IF THE COURTHOUSE DOESN'T MEET ITS PARKING, OUR REMEDY IS TO TELL THE COUNTY YOUR COURTHOUSE IS IN VIOLATION OF OUR CODE. YOU CAN'T FEEL ANYTHING THAT'S PARKING.

YOU AT LEAST CANNOT BUILD MORE ON IT. THEY'RE NOT BUILDING MORE ON IT. THEY'RE PUTTING THE PARKING TO BUILD A PARKING FOR ANOTHER PROJECT. THEY'RE NOT BUILDING A GARAGE. THEY'RE PUTTING THE PARKING FOR ANOTHER PROJECT ON TOP OF THEIR EXISTING PARKING, SO THEY WILL BE NO LONGER ABLE TO PARK THEIR PROJECT ON THEIR SITE. BUT BUT USING TAKING THE COURTHOUSE OUT OF IT AND USING SUNTRUST BANK. IF SUNTRUST BANK NEEDED 100 PARKING SPACES AND THEY WANTED TO BUILD A LITTLE OUT PARCEL OFFICE OF 10,000FT■!S, WE'D SAY, OKAY, BUT UNDER OUR CODE TO BUILD THAT 10,000 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE, YOU NEED TO HAVE AT LEAST 34 MORE SPACES. SO IF INSTEAD OF THEIR HUNDRED SPACES, THEY THEN BUILT 140 SPACES. SUNTRUST BANK COULD THEN BUILD THAT 10,000 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE, CORRECT? OUR DEAL WITH THE COUNTY WAS THEY NEEDED 160 IN THAT TWO ACRE PARCEL, AND NOW THEY'RE GOING TO COME BACK AND SAY, WE'RE GOING TO BUILD 200 IN THIS PARCEL FOR AN 8000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING, AN 8300 SQUARE FOOT IS ACTUALLY ONLY 24 SPACES.

I DON'T WANT TO KEEP ARGUING WITH YOU BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO GO BACK AND FORTH BECAUSE IT'S

[01:50:03]

THEY DIDN'T SUBMIT A PLAN. THEY DIDN'T USURP ANY PARKING. THEY HAVEN'T TAKEN AWAY THAT. THEY ALREADY HAVE SIGNALED THAT THEY PLAN ON DOING THIS. SO I THINK THAT'S SUFFICIENT ENOUGH TO START LOOKING AT THIS AND POTENTIALLY SENDING THEM A LETTER. AND I'M I'LL SEND THEM ANY LETTER YOU WANT, REGARDLESS OF WHAT THIS IS. WE CAN SEND THEM ANYTHING YOU GUYS WANT. I WANT TO LOOK AT IT. I THINK IT'S I THINK IT'S WARRANTED IF YOU'RE GOING TO CREATE A HUGE TRAFFIC AND PARKING ISSUE BY LETTING THEM PARK THE 200 REQUIRED SPACES FOR BRIGHTLINE ON THAT SITE. BUT THE 200 SPACES IS NOT REQUIRED. BRIGHTLINE WILL NOT USE 200 SPACES. DOESN'T MATTER FOR THE RFP. THEY WANT THOSE. THEY ASKED FOR IT. THEY WANTED IT BECAUSE THEY WANTED IT TO BE BUILT FOR THEM. THAT'S NOT CORRECT CODE. THAT'S THEIR REQUEST. BUT THAT MEANS THAT AGAIN, I'M BEATING THIS TO DEATH ON THAT SITE. YOU'RE NOT ABLE TO PARK YOUR 160 BECAUSE IT IS NOW BRIGHTLINE PARKING. IS THIS IS THIS DIFFICULT? LIKE, IS THIS CONFUSING? WELL, WHAT YOU'RE WHAT YOU WANT TO SAY IS THAT NO MATTER. IT'S WHAT IT IS. SPACES GET BUILT THERE. LET'S SAY A THOUSAND SPACES GET BUILT THERE. YOU'RE SAYING ALL THOUSAND NOW APPLY TO BRIGHTLINE? NO. IF YOU CAN BUILD ON THAT SITE, THE ONE, THE WHATEVER, YOU'RE REQUIRED. I DON'T WANT TO SAY IT'S 160 BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW YET. BUT IF YOU CAN PUT YOUR REQUIRED PARKING ON THAT SITE, WHAT WHATEVER WAS THERE IS A FINITE NUMBER THAT'S ALREADY THERE, RIGHT? PLUS BRIGHTLINE'S PARKING FOR THEIR RFP. THEN WE'RE GOOD, RIGHT? BUT OTHERWISE YOU'RE PUSHING OUT ONTO THE ON IF THEY DON'T AND IMPACTING THE REST OF THE RESIDENTS. AND IF THEY DON'T BUILD BRIGHTLINE AND IT DOESN'T GO FORWARD, THERE'S 65 SPACES SHORT. CORRECT. AND THEY'RE PUSHING THAT OUT ONTO THE STREET RIGHT NOW THAT WE ALREADY HAVE AN AGREEMENT AND A DEAL RIGHT NOW, IF YOU GO TO COMPOUND THAT, THAT THAT DEAL AND MAKE A NEW DEAL, YOU'VE MADE YOURSELF EFFICIENT. ANY EXPANSION THEY NEED TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE PARKING FOR WHATEVER THAT MIGHT BE ON THAT SITE, RIGHT? ANYWHERE. IT DOESN'T MATTER WHERE. WHATEVER YOU BUILD, YOU HAVE TO BUILD A PARKING GARAGE OR WHATEVER. IF YOU WANT TO BUILD A 10,000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING, YOU HAVE TO BUILD 33 PARKING SPACES. OH, YOU'RE DOING IT AGAIN. YOU'RE GOING RIGHT BACK TO THAT FOLLOWING THE CODE. NO, CODE IS NO. THE RFP THAT REQUIRES THE 200 SPACES. I'M GOING TO LET COMMISSIONER CLARK ASK SOME QUESTIONS. OKAY. THANK YOU. I KNOW THAT I SPEAK FRENCH OR GERMAN OR SOMETHING, BUT I'M GOING BACK TO THE. YOU WERE ITALIAN? YEAH. EARLIER. YEAH, I'M GOING BACK TO THE ZIP THING, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN. AND MAYBE MR. BAGGETT CAN HELP ME. BUT WHEN WE DISCUSSED THE ENTIRE ZIP PROCESS AND WE TALKED AND TALKED ABOUT PARKING, I THOUGHT THAT THERE WAS SOME TALK. IT MIGHT NOT JUST BE ZIP, IT COULD HAVE BEEN ANOTHER PROJECT. WE'RE NOT GOING TO FOLLOW THE ITE STANDARDS. WE DON'T NEED THE ITE STANDARDS. WHAT STANDARDS ARE WE USING? AND WHEN WE ASK PEOPLE TO CALCULATE PARKING AND TO GIVE US NUMBERS, WHAT ARE WE USING? AND DID WE EVER ABOLISH THE ENTIRE ITE STANDARDS FOR THE CITY OF STUART BASED ON WHAT'S IN OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN? OR WAS IT JUST FOR THAT TIME PERIOD WHEN WE WERE LOOKING AT EITHER SOMETHING WITH THE ZIP OR WHATEVER THAT PROJECT WAS? BUT I DISTINCTLY REMEMBER I THINK IT WAS OUR COMMISSIONER, VICE MAYOR, WHO SAID, WE'RE NOT GOING TO FOLLOW THE IT AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO USE THAT AS A CALCULATION. SO WHAT ARE WE DOING AND WHAT ARE WE FOLLOWING AND WHAT ARE OUR STANDARDS? AND THESE ARE PROPER RHETORICAL QUESTIONS. YOU DON'T HAVE TO ANSWER THEM, BUT I'M PUTTING THEM OUT THERE. THE OTHER THING WITH THIS ENTIRE PARKING IS WHY IS IT THAT IF BRIGHTLINE, I KNOW THAT WE'RE SUPPOSEDLY NOT WORKING WITH THE COUNTY? I'M NOT SURE WHY, BUT IF BRIGHTLINE IS COMING IN OR THE COUNTY'S COMING IN, WHY IS IT THAT WE CAN'T WORK WITH THEM TO DO IF THEY HAVE TO GO UP AND STILL DO THAT PARKING GARAGE? I KNOW THAT THIS IS TRYING TO FIND EVERY WAY NOT TO DO IT, BUT THERE'S AN ENTITLEMENT. I BELIEVE THAT PEOPLE CAN GO UP IF WE WORK WITH THEM AND AGREE WITH THEM. THERE'S RIDE SHARING THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN TO OFFSET SOME SOME PARKING NEEDS. THERE'S OTHER THINGS THAT CAN HAPPEN. PEOPLE CAN. WE'VE SEEN THE BENEFIT OF RESTRIPING STREETS AND DOING ALL KINDS OF STUFF DOING. THERE'S A LOT LOTS OF SPACES IN STATEMENT STREET AND OTHER THINGS IN THAT AREA THAT CAN CREATE AN ADDITIONAL 30 OR 40 OR WHATEVER SPACES, IF WE EVER HAVE TO REDO THAT. I'M NOT SURE WHY WE'RE DIGGING INTO THIS THING AND TRYING TO FIND EVERY SINGLE WAY POSSIBLE NOT TO HAVE THESE NUMBERS WORK OUT, TO CREATE SOMETHING ON THAT SITE. AND MAYBE IT'S BECAUSE BECAUSE IF THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN, THEN

[01:55:01]

AND WE'RE SAYING, WELL, WAIT A MINUTE, YOU'RE PUSHING NOW PARKING FOR THE PEOPLE IN THE COURTHOUSE, THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN THE AREA, THE PEOPLE WHO COME TO SHOP GO UP. YOU'RE PUSHING.

YOU'RE PUSHING THOSE PEOPLE OUT OF THEIR PARKING SPACES. THAT'S BECAUSE WE'RE BELIEVING IN THIS GROUND PARKING AND NOT ALLOWING A REAL PARKING GARAGE TO GO UP. IF THE COUNTY EVER COMES UP WITH THE MONEY THERE, WE NEED TO FIND DECENT RESOLUTIONS THAT WE HAVE. WE CAN PROVIDE CONTROLS FOR, AND IT'S IF IT'S A PARKING GARAGE, IT CAN HAPPEN. I'M NOT SURE WHY. WE'RE NOT SAYING THAT WE CAN'T HAVE THAT IN OUR DOWNTOWN AREA AND BY OUR COURTHOUSE IF IT NEEDS TO HAPPEN AND WORK WITH I JUST THE IDEA OF EVERYTHING MUST BE IN FLAT PARKING AND NOTHING CAN HAPPEN ELSEWHERE. I, I JUST, I REALLY THAT'S NOT A, THAT'S NOT A SUFFICIENT WAY TO LOOK AT IT THERE, THERE NEEDS TO BE OTHER THINGS TO, TO LOOK AT AND WORK WITH AND I DON'T I HOPE THAT WE HAVEN'T BURNED ALL OUR BRIDGES WITH THE COUNTY ON, ON WORKING TOGETHER ON THIS THING. BUT OBVIOUSLY, IF THE GOAL IS TO NOT HAVE NOT SUPPORT THE IDEA OF HAVING THE TRANSIT SYSTEM THERE, THEN, YOU KNOW, MAYBE THIS KIND OF CONTINUATION WILL GO ON, BUT JUST PARK YOUR PROJECT, BE ABLE TO PARK IT. SO THEN I DON'T BELIEVE THAT WE'RE THE ONES WHO PULLED THE PARKING GARAGE. IF THE COUNTY WANTS TO BUILD A GARAGE, THEY CAN BUILD A GARAGE. AND OKAY, SO THEN. SO LET'S LET THEM PROPOSE. THAT WAS NEVER THE ISSUE. IT WAS 200 PARKING SPACES. THAT WAS WHAT BRIGHTLINE WANTED. AND SO WHEN THE CITY AND THE COUNTY RESPONDED TO THE RFP, WHEN WE ENTERED INTO THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT OUT OF HESITATION, WE WERE CONCERNED THAT THEY WERE GOING TO START WANTING TO DO THE TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT. AND SO WE PUT IN THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT THAT WE WOULD ONLY PROVIDE SUFFICIENT PARKING TO MEET THE NEEDS OF THE RFP, BECAUSE IF THEY ADD IT ON LATER THAT THEY WANTED THIS FOUR STORY BUILDING, WE DIDN'T WANT THEM TO WANT A FOUR STORY PARKING GARAGE, BUILDING 600 PARKING SPACES IN ORDER TO PARK OTHER APARTMENTS. BUT AS WE WERE GOING THROUGH IT, WE DETERMINED THAT YOU COULD PUT 200 PARKING SPACES ON THE SURFACE WITHOUT BUILDING A STRUCTURE, AND WE COULD SAVE SOME OF THE OAK TREES. SO WHEN IT WHEN THE WHOLE DISCUSSION AND BRIGHTLINE STARTED PULLING THE GARAGE OUT OF THE THING, THE CITY WHEN I WAS NEGOTIATING WITH DONNA, I WASN'T PLANNING TO JUST GIVE THEM THE EXTRA MONEY FROM THE PARKING GARAGE. WE HAD IT SET UP THAT A CONSULTANT WAS GOING TO BE REVIEWING THE CONTRACT WORK, AND ONLY PROVIDING THEM THE MONEY NECESSARY TO BUILD THE STATION AND THE CONNECTING TRACKS, AND IT WAS GOING TO COST LESS TO NOT BUILD THE PARKING GARAGE AND TO HAVE SURFACE PARKING WITH OAK TREES INSTEAD. YES, IT WAS GOING TO BE 200 PARKING SPACES, NOT BECAUSE OF A CODE REQUIREMENT,

[02:00:06]

BUT THE PROBLEM IS THE ENTIRE THE BUT THE ENTIRE PARCEL IS GOING TO BE BRIGHTLINE PARKING.

NONE OF IT IS GOING TO BE PARK EXCEPT FOR NO. ALL OF THE PARKING IS GOING TO BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. IT'S OPEN TO THE PUBLIC NOW. YEAH, IT'S THE ENTIRE PARCEL IS GOING TO BE PAID. BRIGHTLINE SHARED PARKING. IT'S GOING TO BE PAID PARKING FOR ANYBODY WILLING TO PAY FOR PARKING, THERE WILL REMAIN PUBLIC PARKING. RIGHT. IT BECOMES BRIGHTLINE'S PARKING LOT FOR BRIGHTLINE. OH, WELL, IT WOULD BE COLLECTING THE FEES FOR THAT PARKING. IT IS AGAIN. IT IS NO LONGER THE. THAT PART DOESN'T MATTER. IT'S NO LONGER BECAUSE OUR CODE DOESN'T JUDGE PAY OR NOT PAY. RIGHT. SO IF YOU'RE GOING TO THE COURTHOUSE AND YOU YOU WANT TO PAY 20 BUCKS TO PARK, YOU'RE FREE TO PAY IN THAT PARKING LOT AND PAY THAT 20 BUCKS AND PARK AT THE COURTHOUSE. OBVIOUSLY, THAT'S NOT REALISTIC, BUT IT'S STILL NOT. I MEAN, THAT DOESN'T THAT IS WHAT IT IS. AND THAT OUR CODE DOESN'T SAY PAID PARKING DOESN'T COUNT. THERE'S PAID PARKING NOW RIGHT HERE IN DOWNTOWN. YEAH, YEAH. YOU'RE ALREADY DEFICIENT ON THAT SITE. AGREED. WE SHOULD ALL BE ON THE SAME PAGE OF MAKING SURE THAT PEOPLE, RESIDENTS ARE ABLE TO PARK. THIS SHOULDN'T BE A PRO OR ANTI BRIGHTLINE THING IF WE ARE SETTING IF WE ARE ALLOWING THIS TO TAKE PLACE WHERE ALL OF THE COURTHOUSE PARKING WILL BE PUSHED OUT ONTO ON STREET, WHEN EVERYBODY GETS THERE EARLY IN THE MORNING, THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE ANYWHERE FOR PEOPLE TO PARK. THIS IS A HUGE PROBLEM, WHICH IS WHAT WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE? WHICH IS WHY I WANTED TO MAKE IT ALL THREE HOUR PARKING SO THAT THAT COULDN'T HAPPEN. THAT WAS WHY I WAS OBJECTING TO STRIPING IT AND DISCUSSION ABOUT GIVING THE COURTHOUSE PEOPLE SPECIAL STICKERS. AND THEY'RE STILL GOING TO BE IN THOSE SPOTS. WELL, NOT IF YOU DON'T GIVE THEM TO THEM. RIGHT. BUT THAT WAS THAT WAS THE NEXT STEP FOR THE DISCUSSION. SO THAT THE THIS IS THIS IS A PROBLEM. I WANT TO LOOK AT WHAT IS REQUIRED OF THE COURTHOUSE. AND THEN 403 OKAY. AND SO WE NEED TO BE COMMUNICATING WITH THE COUNTY. MAYBE TODAY IS NOT THE DAY BECAUSE WE'RE NOT ALL HERE. BUT WE NEED TO BE TALKING ABOUT CORRESPONDING WITH THE COUNTY SO THAT THEY UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS NOT OKAY. YOU CAN'T DO THIS. TO YOUR POINT, IT'S ILLEGAL TO PUSH YOUR PARKING OUT ONTO THE REST OF THE CITIZENS ON THE ON STREET PARKING. I UNDERSTAND WHAT LOGIC YOU'RE COMING UP WITH. YOU'RE YOU'RE EXTRAPOLATING THAT THE 200 REQUESTED BY BRIGHTLINE SOMEHOW BECAME CODE. NO, I DIDN'T SAY CODE. BUT WHAT IF BRIGHTLINE ONLY REQUESTED FOR THEN? THAT'S A TOTALLY DIFFERENT SITUATION. BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT THE CASE. WELL, SO BRIGHTLINE CHANGES THEIR MIND AND ONLY REQUESTS 31. A TOTALLY DIFFERENT SITUATION, DON'T YOU THINK? THAT'S WHAT

[02:05:02]

I CAN'T PULL RESOLUTION 33 DASH 88. OKAY. YOU'RE PRINTING OUT. IT'S TOO OLD. CAN I GET IT? YEAH. OKAY. YEAH. THE CLERK'S PRINTED 3388. SO WE MOVE ON. YEP. I'M GOOD. SO HOW WOULD WE

[7. DISCUSSION WITH CITY COMMISSION REGARDING PUBLIC WORKSHOPS FOR 121 SW FLAGLER AVENUE]

[6. DISCUSSION REGARDING THE MARTIN COUNTY COURTHOUSE PARKING REQUIREMENTS AND PROPOSED BRIGHTLINE FUTURE PARKING (Part 2 of 2)]

BUT IF THEY WANTED TO ADD ANOTHER 10,000FT■!S TO THE COURTHOUSE, TO THE STATE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, IN THE COURTHOUSE, THEY'D HAVE TO BUILD 33 MORE SPACES. AND IF THEY BUILT THE 33 MORE SPACES, THEY'D BE ALLOWED TO BUILD THE 10,000 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION TO THE STATE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. NO, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEIR NUMBERS ARE. AND IF THEY DID THAT, THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME IN. I'M USING OUR CODE FOR THAT. THEY'D HAVE TO COME IN AT 400 -65 AND THEN ADD ON 33, 160 SPOTS ISN'T GOING TO DO IT. THEY'D HAVE TO RESTRIPE THAT WHOLE THING. IF YOU GUYS IF THE CITY ALREADY SAID THE BUILDING THAT'S THERE IS ENTITLED TO EXACTLY THE NUMBER OF SPACES THAT IT HAS, NOBODY SAID THAT. WHO SAID THAT WE DID THAT RESOLUTION? THAT'S NOT WHAT I HEARD. I HEARD WE'RE GOING TO RELIEVE THEM OF 65 SPOT, WHICH WAS WHAT IT WAS, WHICH IS RELATED TO THE PARCEL. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE REQUIRED PARKING ON THAT SITE. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A SEPARATE ISSUE. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WE'RE GOING TO NOT LET THAT GAZEBO BE A PARKING LOT, AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THAT BE EQUIVALENT TO 65 SPOTS. SO DON'T WORRY ABOUT THOSE 65. WE'RE NOT GOING TO HOLD IT AGAINST YOU. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT'S REQUIRED FOR THE BUILDING THERE. OTHERWISE, THAT'S A TOTALLY SEPARATE AGREEMENT ABOUT THE GAZEBO PART. THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH PARKING. BUT I WANT TO KNOW WHAT COURTHOUSE WANTED TO ADD A 10,000 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION TO THE STATE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AS PART OF THE COURTHOUSE. NOTHING TO DO WITH TRAINS, NOTHING ELSE. ARE YOU SAYING WE WOULD REQUIRE THEM TO MEET CODE FOR THE 10,000FT■!S? D WE WOULD SAY, NOPE. YOU ALSO HAVE TO BUILD THE 65 PARKING SPACES THAT WERE SUPPOSED TO BE IN GAZEBO PARK. NOBODY'S TALKING ABOUT GAZEBO PARK. I JUST SAID YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT GAZEBO SO THAT 65 WOULDN'T BE IN IT. NOT TALKING ABOUT GAZEBO PARK, TALKING ABOUT THE OTHER ONE. ALL YOU'D BE TALKING ABOUT IS THE TEN ZERO ZERO ZERO SQUARE FOOT BUILDING THAT THEY WERE ADDING ON TO THE COURTHOUSE FOR THE STATE ATTORNEY. NO, IF THEY PIGEON ME INTO THAT ONE, WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT IS WHAT IS THE REQUIRED PARKING FOR THAT? THAT'S THAT'S FOR THAT COURTHOUSE. AND THEN WE RELIEVED

[02:10:02]

I'M GUESSING IT'S LOWER THAN THAT, BUT THERE'S GOING TO BE 403 SITES BECAUSE THERE WAS NO ON STREET PARKING ON EAST OCEAN. THERE WAS NO ON STREET PARKING ON FLAGLER. THERE WAS NO ON STREET PARKING ON PITTMAN BACK THEN. AND WE'VE SINCE ADDED TO THE CODE AND SAID THAT THE PEOPLE WHO'S EVER BUSINESSES IS GETS CREDIT FOR THE ON STREET PARKING SPACES THAT ARE IN FRONT OF THEIR PROPERTY. SO THEY'RE GOING TO END UP WITH ABOUT ANOTHER PROBABLY 50 OR 60 ADDITIONAL SPACES BECAUSE OF FLAGLER AND FIGURE ALL THAT OUT AND EAST OCEAN, WHICH MEANS THEY'RE GOING TO BE OVER PARKED AGAIN. AND NOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 400 THEN, BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO GO BY THESE NEW CHANGES AND UPDATE. WELL, YOU'RE SAYING THEY NEED 400. SURE. I MEAN IF ARE WE I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE GOING TO RENEGE ON THE GOING TO RENEGE ON THE GAZEBO DEAL.

THEY'RE GOING TO NEED 400 DIVING INTO HYPER TECHNICAL. THE ISSUE IS IF YOU DISPLACE ALL OF YOUR COURTHOUSE PARKING BY LETTING IT BE BRIGHT LINE PARKING, WE HAVE A PROBLEM. BUT IF IT'S. THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. BUT TAKING BRIGHT LINE OUT OF IT, IF IT'S STATE ATTORNEY OFFICE OR PUBLIC DEFENDER OFFICE, IT'S NOT THIS YOU CAN'T THAT'S NOT APPLES AND APPLES, BECAUSE THE ENTIRE LOT IS BEING USED FOR PARKING NEEDS. IT'S CODE. THE ENTIRE LOT IS BEING USED TO PARK BRIGHT LINES.

RFP. IT'S NOT THE SAME THING AS ADDING 10,000FT■!S, AND YOU NEED 30 SPOTS. THE ENTIRE LOT. IT WOULD BE LIKE IF THE OUTBACK BUILT A BURGER KING ON ITS PARKING LOT, RIGHT? THAT'S WHAT IT IS. IT IS TO BE. IT'S JUST KIND OF CONFUSING. BUT THEN WE CALCULATE THE PARKING FOR THE BURGER KING, AND WE CALCULATE THE PARKING FOR THE I GOTTA BE ABLE TO PARK IT. RIGHT. AND THEY HAVE 160 NOW. AND THE PARKING FOR THE BURGER KING IS 33. OH AND THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE PARKING IS 200. YOU NEED THE ENTIRE PARK PARCEL FOR PARKING FOR BRIGHT LINE PARKING. NO, THERE WAS NO LAW THAT SAYS PARKING, THAT WE DON'T HAVE A RULE THAT SAYS BRIGHT LINE REQUIRES 200 SPACES, RIGHT. THAT I DON'T HAVE THAT DOESN'T EXIST WAS THE RFP. THAT'S WHAT BRIGHTLINE WANTED, RIGHT? BUT IT'S NOT A CODE THAT'S NOT A PARKING. WE SHOULD BE PREPARED FOR WHAT'S GOING TO WHEN THAT COMES THROUGH. THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. RIGHT. AND WE AND WE ALL KNOW EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE. I'M JUST SAYING THAT WE DON'T HAVE A CODE THAT DISTINGUISHES BETWEEN PAID AND UNPAID, OR THAT REQUIRES SOMEONE TO BUILD PARKING LOTS OR PARKING SPACES BECAUSE OF A PRIVATE LEASE. SO IF IN MY OFFICE I MAKE MY PARKING LOT PAID RIGHT, OKAY.

RIGHT. THERE'S NOTHING I CAN DO. AND NOW I'M GOING TO CHARGE PEOPLE TO PARK IN MY PARKING LOT AND PUSH MY PARKING TO ON STREET INSTEAD OF PARKING MY PROJECT, I, I KNOW, AND THEN I'M GOING TO PUT RICKY'S HOT DOG STAND THERE. I DON'T WELL NO NO, NO, YOU CAN'T BE A HOT DOG STAND. YOU HAVE TO BUILD NEW SPACES TO MEET WHATEVER. RICKY'S HOT DOG STAND REQUIREMENT IS CORRECT. WHICH IS NOW, IF MY ENTIRE IF MY ENTIRE PARKING LOT IS FILLED UP WITH RICKY'S HOT DOG STAND. WELL, THAT PAID PARKING. IF YOUR PARKING LOT IS TEN SPACES IN IT AND YOUR BUILDING NEEDS TEN SPACES, YES, THEN TEN ARE DEDICATED TO YOU, WHETHER THEY'RE PAID OR NOT. CORRECT.

NOW, IF RICKY'S COMES IN. YES. AND HE NEEDS TEN SPACES. YES. YOU'RE GOING TO NEED 20 SPACES IN YOUR PARKING LOT FOR RICKY'S IN YOU. AND IF YOU BUILD IT, YOU'RE GOOD TO GO. BUT THEY CAN'T BUILD IT, RIGHT? THAT'S WHAT HE'S SAYING. BUT THEY CAN'T. THEY NEED 200, BUT THEY CAN'T BUILD IT. THEY NEED 200. NOT UNDER THE CODE. THEY DON'T. THEY DON'T 200. THAT'S THE PART THAT DOESN'T EXIST. THERE IS NOTHING ANYWHERE THAT SAYS A 10,000. SO IT'S JUST A GIANT SHARED PARKING ARRANGEMENT. THAT'S THE POINT. IT'S NOT SHARED. IF THEY'RE TELLING YOU THEY NEED 200 AND THERE'S 160 THERE, THEY'RE NOT. YOU'RE MAKING ME EXTRAPOLATE THE 200.

THE ENTIRE PARCEL YOU'RE SAYING IS A BRIGHT LINE PROJECT. NO. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. LET'S CONTINUE DISCUSSION ANOTHER TIME. WE NEED TO MOVE ON. RIGHT. CAN WE OKAY TO AT LEAST BE PREPARED? COULD YOU COULD I ASK YOU BECAUSE YOU'VE SAID TWO TIMES BEFORE MR. MARTEL HAS NOT PROVIDED YOU WITH THE DOCUMENTS. COULD YOU PLEASE MEET WITH MR. MARTEL PRIOR TO THE MEETING AND MAKE SURE IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN IN OUR PACKET IF WE'RE GOING TO DISCUSS. OKAY. BUT YOU KNOW SPECIFICALLY WHAT YOU WANT. COULD YOU JUST MAKE SURE THAT HE PROVIDES IT? I VERBALIZED THAT AT THE MEETING.

OKAY. WELL, THEN YOU NEED TO SAY TO HIM AGAIN CALCULATION OF HOW MANY SPACES WERE NEEDED. THE COURTHOUSE I HAD, I HAD 100, BUT THAT WASN'T IN MY POCKET. I GOT NOTHING IN MY PACKET TO LOOK AT AND REFERENCE, AND HE KEEPS SAYING THE SAME THING AND YOU KEEP SAYING THE SAME. WE DON'T HAVE AN ORDER. WE'RE NOT 403. WE DON'T HAVE THAT. THAT DOCUMENT DOESN'T EXIST. WE LITERALLY WENT OUT AND PULLED UP THE PROPERTY APPRAISER'S OFFICE AND SAID, HOW MANY SQUARE FEET IS THIS

[02:15:01]

RIGHT? ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. YOU'RE RIGHT. OKAY. AND THAT'S, THAT'S THERE'S UNEQUIVOCAL OR DON'T PUT A BRIGHT LINE STATION ON TOP OF YOUR PARKING LOT OR 400. OKAY. WE GOT THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS.

THAT'S THE THAT'S THAT THEY WILL BE REQUIRED TO MEET ALL THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS. THEY WILL.

THAT'S WHAT I ASKED FOR. OKAY. WELL, THEN I DON'T UNDERSTAND. THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS ARE EITHER 33 OR 8. RIGHT. SO LET'S MOVE ON. THIS IS THIS IS LET'S MOVE ON. NEXT ITEM THE PUBLIC WORKSHOPS. SO WE START WITH MAYBE A MINIMUM NUMBER. WELL THREE WELL PROBABLY WANT TO START WITH ONE ONE OKAY. AND THE QUESTION IS THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT A MODERATOR.

THERE WAS A DISCUSSION ABOUT HAVING. SO YOU DIDN'T SPEND MONEY ON THAT. SO IN THE PAST THE CITY WHEN THE ISSUE CAME UP, ACTUALLY HIRED A PLANNER TO DO A DESIGN BASED UPON WHAT THE COMMISSION ENVISIONED, AND THAT IS WHAT STARTED IT. AND THEN PEOPLE CAME IN AND STARTED TALKING ABOUT, OKAY, WELL, I'D LIKE TO SEE BIGGER TREES THERE. I'D LIKE IT TO BE FURTHER BACK WITH MORE GREEN SPACE, OR I'D LIKE TO SEE A MARINA OUT BACK, OR I'D LIKE TO SEE THE STREET GO THROUGH. IF WE'RE HAVING A BLANK SLATE AND IT'S JUST WIDE OPEN, NO, THEN BECAUSE THE CITY DID THAT TOO. AND WHAT THE CITY DID IN THAT CASE IS WHEN MAX STUCKEY SENT THAT EMAIL TO THE DAVE COLLIER, THE CITY COMMISSION JUST SAID, OKAY, CAN WE PRESENT THE EXISTING IDEAS AND PLANS AND SORT OF HAVE IF ANYBODY'S AVAILABLE TO, TO REVIEW THEM OR DISCUSS THEM INSTEAD OF STARTING? I'D LIKE TO HAVE A MODERATOR. I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A MODERATOR. I MEAN, LOOK, WHAT HAPPENED IN EAST STUART WAS PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, COMMISSIONERS ENDED UP YELLING AT THE PEOPLE THERE, AND THERE SHOULD BE A MEETING WHERE THE COMMISSIONERS AREN'T EVEN THERE BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE YOU KNOW, WE AFFECT THE DYNAMIC. IF YOU REALLY WANT TO HEAR FROM THE PUBLIC, HEAR FROM THE PUBLIC. YEAH. IT'S GOING TO TAKE A LITTLE BIT OF MONEY. I MEAN, YOU KNOW, BUT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PROBABLY ONE OF THE MOST SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENTS THAT THE CITY IS GOING TO MAKE HERE. AND BOY, WE NEED TO GET THIS RIGHT BECAUSE IT CAN BE IT CAN BE A MARVELOUS RESOURCE. YEAH. SO I MAYBE WE SHOULD TALK TO PEOPLE WHO DO PROVIDE MODERATION FOR THESE THINGS. IF YOU TALK TO MOSER, CAN WE HAVE STAFF FROM SOMEBODY FROM STAFF? NO. NO STAFF. I MEAN, STAFF NEEDS DIRECTION FROM THE COMMISSION AS TO WHAT THEY WANT. DO YOU WANT STAFF TO DESIGN A HOTEL WITH A CONFERENCE CENTER OR DO YOU WANT THERE'S EXISTING DESIGNS THAT ARE THERE FOR NOBODY'S ADOPTED THEM. WELL FOR A STARTING POINT TO EVEN GIVE REFERENCE. AND THEN PEOPLE CAN SAY, BUT LIKE FOR EXAMPLE, ABSOLUTELY NOT. THAT'S INTERESTING. NO, NO OFFENSE TO THE EXISTING DESIGNS, BUT THE ONE THAT THE THAT HAD THE AMPHITHEATER IN IT THAT WAS IN THE MANGROVES THAT VIOLATED THE SHORELINE PROTECTION ACT. YEAH. I MEAN, IT HAD LIKE SOME SERIOUS. PROBLEMS, BUT WASN'T AS A MODERATOR THAT WE PAID FOR TO CREATE THAT. NO, I THINK HE DID THAT ON HIS OWN. NO, THAT WAS THAT WAS THROUGH STUART MAIN STREET. THAT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH US. SO MAYBE MAIN STREET WOULD BE OPEN TO HOSTING. I'D BE HAPPY TO MAIN STREET, THE BDB, SOME OF THESE COMMUNITY GROUPS. RIGHT. THAT'S OKAY. THERE ARE PEOPLE TOO, AND IT HAS A VESTED INTEREST IN IT BECAUSE IT'S DOWNTOWN. AND MAIN STREET'S MISSION IS MAIN STREET. SO IT MAY BE NOW THEY'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE ANY MONEY TO HIRE OR DO A PERSON THAT I DON'T KNOW WHO THEIR BOARD MEMBERS ARE, IF THERE'S ANYBODY I KNOW IS I KNOWS I DON'T WANT TO VOLUNTEER.

RIGHT. BUT I'M, I'M HAPPY TO REACH OUT TO I THINK IT MIGHT BE WORTH EXPLORING SO I DON'T HAVE TO SPEND MONEY. I, I AGREE WITH THAT. I PREFER, OKAY, YOU'RE HEADING IN THE WRONG DIRECTION IF YOU DON'T WANT. I REMEMBER WHEN THEY DID INDIAN RIVERSIDE PARK, WHICH IS A HUGE SUCCESS AND AS ACCOMPLISHED SO MUCH IN SUCH A RESOURCE. I MEAN, THERE WERE A NUMBER OF CHARRETTES FOR THAT, AND IT WAS NOT DOUG SMITH WAS NOT COMMISSIONER SMITH, IT WAS NOT THE COMMISSIONERS. IT WAS PEOPLE WHO DO THIS PROFESSIONALLY AND KNOW HOW TO GET. THE PROBLEM WE HAVE IS WE ALL HAVE OUR POINT OF VIEW AND WE END UP IMPOSING THAT, AND THAT DOESN'T WORK. THAT'S NOT LIKE CANDACE HOSTED, AT LEAST FOR THE FIRST ONE. CANDACE, I DON'T THINK CANDACE HAS THE ABILITY TO DO THAT. MAYBE THAT'S NOT A STRIKE ON HER. MAYBE SHE'S NOT INTERESTED, BUT MAYBE THEY WOULD BE LOOKING FORWARD TO DOING SOMETHING LIKE THAT AS A FIRST ONE. AND THEN IF WE'RE LIKE, THIS IS NOT WORTH IT. THIS GUY WENT NOWHERE. AND BY THE WAY, I'M HAPPY BETWEEN NOW AND AUGUST, WHY DON'T WE REACH OUT TO THEM? WHY DON'T WE REACH OUT TO THE CRB? YEAH. THERE'S TIM,

[02:20:04]

LET'S REACH OUT TO MAIN STREET AND SET UP TEN HUDSON. I DON'T KNOW, LET'S LET'S HAVE THE CRB HAVE A DISCUSSION ON THE CRB. ONE PROFESSIONAL ON THERE, IF NOT MORE, RIGHT. THIS IS A STARTING POINT. START MOVING AND GROOVING A LITTLE BIT, BUT IT'S GOING TO COST A LITTLE BIT OF MONEY AND THAT AND THAT'S YOU'RE HOPEFUL OKAY. THANK YOU. IS THAT IT FOR NOW. CAN WE GO TO NUMBERS EIGHT TILL AUGUST 11TH AND THANK YOU BY THE WAY. THAT'S OKAY. I'D RATHER DO IT THIS WAY AND SLOWLY AND PIECEMEAL. YEAH. AND GET IT RIGHT RATHER THAN BY THE WAY THEN PEOPLE HEAR US TALKING AND PEOPLE HAVE COME UP TO ME AND SAID, I HOPE YOU DO THIS. I HOPE YOU DO THAT. AND TO YOUR POINT, I HOPE IF MAIN STREET DID THAT, WE WOULD HAVE VERY LITTLE INPUT. YES, I WOULD LIKE TO JUST BE BECAUSE WE HAVE THE ULTIMATE INPUT, RIGHT? WE DON'T NEED TO LISTEN TO EACH OTHER UNTIL WE GET TO THE FINAL MEETING, ESPECIALLY THE LAST TWO MEETINGS. IT'LL BE OKAY. ITEM

[8. DISCUSSION AND DELIBERATION ON THE FUTURE OF THE 1.97 ACRE COMMERCIAL LOT FRONTING NORTH US-1 OPPOSITE NORTH RIVER SHORES BOULEVARD]

I'VE ATTACHED TWO LEGAL DOCUMENTS TO THE AGENDA ITEM. I'D LIKE TO GO OVER A COUPLE OF THEM WITH YOU. THE FIRST WOULD BE THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY AS A BACKGROUND FOR FOLKS HERE, WE ENTERED IT. WE, WE JOINED WITH THE COUNTY AND PURCHASED THE LAND FOR WHAT IS NOW HANEY CREEK. AND WE ENTERED INTO AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT. IN PART, WE AGREED WITH THE COUNTY THAT WE WOULD CARVE OUT A 1.97 ACRE, I.E. THE TWO ACRE PARCEL WE'RE DISCUSSING, WHICH IS ON US ONE. AND IF YOU'LL SEE ON THE FUND, IT'S CALLED A FUNDING AGREEMENT, NOT AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT, BUT IT IS AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT. AND THE FOURTH WHEREAS CLAUSE SAYS. AND JUST TO EVEN GO FURTHER, BEFORE I GO INTO THE WHEREAS CLAUSE, THIS WAS DATED JUNE 14TH, 2011.

SO 14 YEARS AGO IS WHEN THIS INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WAS ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE COUNTY. AND REGARDING TO THE JOINT EFFORTS TO PURCHASE WHAT IS NOW HANEY CREEK AND TO MAINTAIN IT. SO OUR FOURTH WHEREAS CLAUSE SAYS THE CITY HAS DETERMINED SUBJECT TO REFERENDUM, THAT IT WILL USE TWO ACRES MORE OR LESS LOCATED ADJACENT TO US, ONE TO CARVE OUT PARCEL OF THE 51.4 ACRES FOR A COMMERCIAL PURPOSES IN ORDER TO GENERATE REVENUE FOR THE IMPROVEMENT, MAINTENANCE AND MANAGEMENT OF THE REMAINDER OF HANEY CREEK PARCEL AND ADJOINING CONSERVATION LANDS. AND THERE'S A LOT OF OTHER STUFF IN THIS AGREEMENT. I'M JUST NOT GOING THROUGH ALL OF IT. I'M JUST ADDRESSING THE PARTS THAT ARE RELEVANT TO THIS TWO ACRE PARCEL IN SECTION 8.3. THE CITY AGREES THAT ANY AND ALL REVENUE OTHER THAN TAXES RECEIVED BY THE CITY FROM SALE, LEASE OR OTHERWISE FROM THE CARVE OUT PARCEL SHALL BE PERPETUALLY AND EXCLUSIVELY USED FOR THE IMPROVEMENT, USE, MANAGEMENT AND OPERATION OF THE SITE AND ADJOINING CONSERVATION PARCELS. ALL SUCH IMPROVEMENT, MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION SHALL COMPLY WITH MARTIN COUNTY ORDINANCE 711. IN THE EVENT THE REVENUE EXCEEDS THE EXPENSES FOR THE IMPROVEMENT, USE, MANAGEMENT AND OPERATION OF THE SITE, THEN THE EXPENDITURE OF ANY SUCH SURPLUS REVENUE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO THE PRIOR AGREEMENT OF THE CITY AND COUNTY, WHICH AGREEMENT SHALL NOT BE UNREASONABLY WITHHELD OR DENIED. I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT THIS CLAUSE, THIS SECTION, TALKS ABOUT REVENUE THAT IS GENERATED FROM THAT COMMERCIAL PARCEL, BUT IT DOESN'T MANDATE THAT WE HAVE REVENUE FROM THE PARCEL. AND I ASSUME FOR THE LAST 14 YEARS WE HAVEN'T HAD ANY REVENUE. THE COUNTY HASN'T CALLED US ON IT. AND WE'VE PAID, WE'VE PAID, WE'VE PAID FOR IT WITH OTHER FUNDS, BASICALLY. AND IT'S ALSO MY UNDERSTANDING OVER THE LAST 11 YEARS, 14 YEARS, THAT WE HAVE MADE MULTIPLE EFFORTS TO TRY AND DEVELOP THE WITH DIFFERENT COMMERCIAL PROJECTS, WHICH TO NO AVAIL. AND THEN SECTION 8.4, THIS DOES DISCUSS THAT THE CITY SHALL ANNUALLY PROVIDE THE COUNTY WITH AN ACCOUNTING OF ALL REVENUES RECEIVED FROM THE CARVE OUT PARCEL AND THE USE OF

[02:25:04]

YOU. OKAY. ANY OTHER? YEAH. MY. I HAD A COUPLE. OKAY. SO I WAS REALLY HAPPY TO SEE THIS. I FELT LIKE THIS KIND OF ALL CAME TOGETHER IN THIS AGENDA ITEM WHEN I TALKED TO MERRITT ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHAT TO DO WITH THE HALF-CENT SALES TAX. ONE OF HIS MAJOR POINTS WAS, IF ANYTHING, WITH THAT TWO ACRES, DON'T PUT A PARK ON IT, PUT IT IN CONSERVATION. RIGHT. AND THEN WHICH WOULD NEED THE REFERENDUM. BUT YOU COULD DO THAT AT ANY TIME WHEN YOU. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GUYS REALLY DUG INTO THIS, BUT WHEN YOU LOOK ON. IF YOU LOOK IN THE THESE ITEMS IN THE BACK, IF YOU LOOK AT THE DIGITAL PICTURES OF IT, THOSE LINES ARE IN COLOR AND THEY ACTUALLY SHOW PROJECTED PATHS. SO THESE THESE PROPOSED I KNOW WE DON'T HAVE IT UP THERE, BUT IN YOUR PACKET.

YEAH. THIS PROPOSED EXACTLY WHAT I'M DESCRIBING. BUT OFF OF BAKER ON THE NORTH SIDE OF IT. YEAH THERE'S ANOTHER ENTRANCE UP THERE BUT IT'S NOT DEVELOPED YET. IT WOULD BE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STREET. SO NOT THIS WAY. THIS WAY. GOING INTO THIS. YEAH. THERE'S ALREADY TWO ENTRANCES TO THE PARK. NO. IF YOU LOOK NEXT TO THE BUTTONWOOD, THIS WAS PROPOSED. NEVER. IT NEVER HAPPENED. THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I'M DESCRIBING. WITHOUT HAVING TO TOUCH THE TWO ACRES.

IF YOU PUT THAT TWO ACRES IN CONSERVATION OFF OF BAKER, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO PULL UP A MAP. IT'S NOT. IT'S NOT THIS ENTRANCE HERE, SO. NO, NO, I KNOW IT'S NOT. THIS ENTRANCE PROPOSAL IS WHAT WAS RIGHT NEXT TO AARON'S, RIGHT SLEW NURSERY THERE ON BAKER IN 2022 AS A KIND OF A PROJECT TO EVALUATE. THE IDEA OF WITH THE ARPA MONEY. RIGHT. YOU HAVE TO GO TO REFERENDUM WHAT IT WAS GOING TO BE. NOT FOR THAT. WE'RE NOT FOR THAT. NO. RIGHT. WELL, ACTUALLY, I DON'T I'VE NEVER BEEN OPPOSED TO THAT. I DIDN'T KNOW THAT THIS EXISTED. THAT'S WHY I'M SO I'M

[02:30:03]

I MEAN, IT GOES WAY UP NORTH. IT'S EXPENSIVE. YOU CAN'T CUT REVENUE AND KEEP ADDING EXPENSES. AND CLEARLY THE THERE'S A WORST THERE IS A AN ISSUE WITH DEVELOPING THAT PROPERTY. RIGHT. YOU NEED THIS DECEL LANE THAT'S EXPENSIVE. YOU NEED A TON OF FILL. OBVIOUSLY IT'S COST PROHIBITIVE TO EVEN DO THIS. OTHERWISE IT WOULD HAVE ALREADY HAPPENED. IT'S REASONABLE TO JUST GO AHEAD AND PUT THAT IN CONTEXT AND JUST VOTE IT INTO CONSERVATION.

TRAILHEAD THE TOP. OH WE HAVE TO GO REFERENDUM OKAY. REFERENDUM I MEAN WE COULD TALK MORE ABOUT IT, BUT WHEN WOULD THAT KIND OF LANGUAGE NEED TO EVEN BE ON A REFERENDUM. THAT'S THE NEXT.

NEXT AUGUST, SPENDING 25 OR $30,000 FOR OUR OWN REFERENDUM THIS NOVEMBER WOULD DO IT RIGHT.

WE DON'T. WE NO LONGER. WE USE GENERAL ELECTION FOR 26, ONLY HAVE THEM EVERY OTHER YEAR. SO WE YOU GUYS COULD CALL FOR A SPECIAL ELECTION. WE COULD NO, NO, FOR A 26, THE GENERAL ELECTION, THE GENERAL GENERAL GENERAL ELECTION. I'LL GIVE YOU THE EXACT. BUT IT MIGHT BE MARCH 30TH. BUT IT'S LIKE IT'S RIGHT IN THAT TIME FRAME. THERE'S A SO LET'S SAY LIKE A BLACKOUT THING.

LET'S SAY HYPOTHETICALLY, THIS WAS A NOT EVERYBODY'S HERE, BUT LET'S SAY HYPOTHETICALLY, THIS WAS SOMETHING WE WANTED TO DO. WHEN SHOULD WE GET THE BALL ROLLING ON CONSERVATION FOR THIS, YOU DON'T NEED ANYTHING TO DO CORRECT THE TOP PART OTHER THAN A COMMISSION TO VOTE TO DO IT. CORRECT. OR THIS PART, THE IT'S THE TWO ACRE PARCEL. JUST THE TWO ACRES TO PUT THE TWO ACRES INTO CONSERVATION, YOU WOULD NEED TO ADOPT LAND USE FOR REFERENDUM, PROBABLY IN JANUARY OR FEBRUARY. BUT BEFORE THAT, AND I DON'T THINK THE COUNTY IS GOING TO GIVE US MUCH ISSUE WITH IT. YOU'D NEED TO GO BACK AND AMEND THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY, BECAUSE THE COUNTY AND I AND THE CITY ARE JOINT OWNERS OF IT. WE'RE NOT. IT'S WE CHIPPED IN MONEY TOGETHER AND BOUGHT THE LAST 50, WHICH WITH THE LETTER FROM MARTIN COUNTY FOREVER SHOULD BE ZERO ISSUE RIGHT. I DON'T I DON'T LIKE I SAID TO YOU, I DON'T EXPECT THAT IT'S UP TO THE COMMISSION, BUT IT WOULD BE THE COUNTY COMMISSION WOULD HAVE TO VOTE ON IT. THE CITY COMMISSION WOULD HAVE TO VOTE ON IT, WHICH THAT WOULD BE. WHAT KIND OF TIME FRAME YOU WANT ME TO PUT IT ON

[02:35:06]