City Council - Regular Meeting

I'd like to call to order the City of Apopka Commission meeting for August 5th, 2026. And I'd like to recognize Vice Mayor Velazquez for the invocation.

Okay, thank you. Pastor George. Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you for coming to the meeting today. I'd like to introduce our local pastor, Pastor George Sarolongo. He's been a personal friend of mine for almost 10 years. And if you all can remember Mosquito Creek, that's where the church has been, Remnick Christian Church. And he has been an actual... contributor and supportive of our community. And even yesterday, he had a big backpack event for our community. So welcome, Pastor George Sotolongo.

Please, everyone stand.

Thank you so much. Mayor Nick Nesta, Vice Mayor Diane Velazquez, and all the city commissioners, for all you do for Apopka and our leadership, and for welcoming the power of prayer. So let's bow our heads. Father, we just thank you for the wisdom of God today. Lord, in this meeting, we call upon your wisdom. Lord, when you appeared to King Solomon, you asked him whatever he wanted to ask, and he asked you for wisdom. to be able to lead your people well. So we ask for your wisdom in this meeting today. Lord, I pray, Lord God, for all who are involved in this meeting, that they will lead with integrity, with unity. Lord God, with purpose. and with unity. I pray that every decision will be anchored by your will for the city of Apopka. Lord, I pray blessings over all the leaders in this room. And I pray lastly, the blessing that Moses gave for God, for the people of God. In the book of Numbers. And he said may the Lord bless you. May the Lord keep you. May the Lord make his face shine upon you. May the Lord raise his countenance upon you. Give you peace. And give you strength. I pray that for every person here. Every leader here. In Jesus name.

Amen. Thank you pastor.

Please remain standing. We're going to do the pledge. 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.

Thank you, Vice Mayor. That was special. We will now open up public comment period. Mrs. Bone.

All right. Dr. Jim Moyer.

Good afternoon, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Commissioners. My name is Dr. Jim Moyer. I'm the elected Orange-Souland Water Conservation District to supervisor serving of Popkin Northwest Orange County. This presentation is mine and mine alone, as always. The purpose, again, which I try to say every time of Orange Soil and Water Conservation District, the purpose of the district is to work in conjunction with other governmental entities in implementing land and water resource protection practices by assisting, guiding, and educating the public. The city of Apaco generously has allowed me to have office hours here the third Thursday of the month from 11 to one. Please join me. As a Florida special purpose district, we have limited amount of authority over things like global warming. There are many things beyond our control. For example, CO2 emissions from fossil fuels, and it's by far beyond what's mandated by the Florida Soil and Water Conservation Districts. Bill Gates, who I'm around the same age, I grew up with him. I have a lot of respect for Bill Gates. I personally believe planting trees is important, but Bill Gates says I don't use some of the less proven approaches. I don't plant trees. Gates does mention that he puts his money in direct air capture, heat pumps, and installing solar panels. This is a summary of some of the next few slides. There's many impacts on soil and water. which we'll get to real quickly, but I don't have a lot of time here. So lack of regulations and enforcement led to over-fertilization, unregulated business, uncontrolled development. Other animals and plants, feral hogs, invasive plants. Other human activities, over-grazing, over-agriculture. Deforestation contributes to global warming, reduces the aquifer replenishment, disrupts water cycle, leading to droughts, what I call bipolar weather conditions, and erodes soil. Again, the UN report earlier this year mentioned the three, four conditions here. please change habits, conserve water use, clean water bodies. Thank you for your time and God bless you all.

Thank you, Dr. Moore.

Thank you, Nikki McGuire.

Great afternoon, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Commissioners, and everyone in the rightful place. I am super excited to do this presentation because on Saturday, last Saturday, I got to watch every child smile as I say seasonal goodbyes to them for them to go back to school. I know I only have three minutes, so what I would recommend is that this presentation, please go to YouTube, and then you can hit pause on each slide and enjoy each slide as you go. But on behalf of Naomi Kids, I want to thank everyone for their support. It doesn't matter. There is value in as much as giving $1 as much as even if you gave $1,000. We appreciate it all. I want to share with you guys, this summer, our mission statement is protecting the minds of today's youth to become tomorrow's leader with an academic focus with our mentoring program. And this summer, we were proud to watch a four-year-old who came into our program just turned four and left in two months, nine weeks. reading at a first grade level. We do not take it lightly. And what we do with the kids, it's not overwhelming them, it's not forcing them, but having fun with them and showing them that learning can be fun. Oops, sorry, wrong button. All right. Our team making a difference. So we can only do it through partnership. So with Caresos, we had four interns this summer. We had five core staff members and nine volunteers earned community service. Most of them were from the Pup Girl. high school beta club two of the volunteers through partnership again and i'm gonna keep saying because partnership is a big deal to us we were able to get one a full-time job with domino's pizza and another one got a full-time job with home depot so we're proud of our partners and our partnership Our back to school shopping experience. Thank you again, Vice Mayor. Vice Mayor has not, Naomi Kids is going on 13 years. Vice Mayor has not missed one of our events. And so I appreciate Vice Mayor for showing up on Saturday to watch the kids smile while they do their shopping. We are gonna be, Nelson is also in the picture. That's the owner of Domino's. He has pushed after the event for us to expand the program to the shopping program to make it much bigger. We, as Naomi kids, we're going away from the backpacks because everybody's doing that. We're doing the school shopping. Now it takes a village. So thank you to all our sponsors. And remember, you can go on our website and assist us with donations. Every dollar counts. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. McGuire.

Rod Olson.

Thank you, Mayor and Commissioners, for your service. Before I begin today, I want to correct something from the last meeting. I questioned the last three Planning Commission appointees without having all the facts. That was inappropriate, and I apologize. Thank you to Planning Commissioner Dume for calling this to my attention. In an email shared with all on the dais, but directed at Commissioner Dume, Anderson. It became or wound up becoming an op-ed. Commissioner Anderson, please accept my apology. I want to thank you, Dr. Thomas and Mr. Bell, for calling this to my attention. And Mr. Bell, it's an honor to serve with you on the mayor's transition team. You're bringing a lot to the table. As you can see, Apopka continues to have the lowest millage rates in our region. Apopka, 4.15. Winter Garden, 4.49. Ocoee, 5.21. Mount Dora, 6.25. Sanford, 7.25. These communities, the last 11 years, have averaged 1.65 more mills than we do. These are the communities that us and Apopka go to dine, shop, attend events, and enjoy vibrant downtowns. Like Apopka, they face growth and infrastructure challenges. They just have invested more in what needs to be done. Kind of what you get what you pay for. And we have met the enemy and the enemy is us. Apopka is the first city my family chose to live in. Every other move I had was for college or for work. We chose Apopka, that's why it's near and dear to me and why I care. Apopka's approach has typically been reactive, postponing difficult decisions until they become major emergencies. During the time, one thing after another, while expecting different results. If you do keep doing it over, we're going to have the same results. That's what we're doing. We're stuck in that. We need an independent forensic audit, not to point fingers, but to understand what happened, strengthen internal controls, and make sure we do not repeat the same mistakes. For the second time in three years, the city has changed financial software in the middle of a budget year and in the middle of budgeting. You can't put together a good budget without good numbers. And when people are worried about reloading the new system, it's ludicrous. Since October 24, the city has averaged 2,400 hours of overtime a week. a week, and while we have 50 plus vacancies, we need to focus, that's 50 to $75,000 a week down the toilet. This is a financial employee burnout issue. Many of the challenges facing APAPCA developed over many years, it's not gonna be fixed with one budget process along the way. The roadmap is straightforward, build realistic budgets, improve financial accountability, prioritize and fill critical vacancies before adding additional layers of management. Review overtime every week, conduct monthly department financial reviews, invest productivity instead of reactive crisis. Beginning today, you have the opportunity to establish a new standard of budgeting, planning, accountability, and transparency. Please seize this opportunity. As Mother Teresa said, let no one ever come to you without leaving better or happier. It's my hope that we can all work together and bring this forward and make Popco what we can, the best possible city to live in. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Olson. If we can, moving forward, just make sure we stick to the time as much as possible. I appreciate it.

Super professor, Dr. O.

Good afternoon.

Good afternoon.

The first thing I'd like to do is again thank the city for sponsoring the Orange Soil and Water Conservation District for a meeting and kind presentation of the chamber hall, August 14th, 3 p.m. The board will be meeting here and it will be streaming or recorded. stream. And that's wonderful. Normally we're on air with Orange TV, but we don't get on YouTube. So that's wonderful. And we certainly do appreciate the relationship. And the relationship goes back 80 years because some of the most powerful board members back in the day were from APOPCA because of the agriculture here. I did want to say that we've confirmed that plastic to-go cups, which are normally thrown in the trash, can now be recycled. And I just reconfirmed it with Josh and verified it because I had sent that memo that Orange County was doing it. And he looked into it and sure enough... plastic to-go cups, which some people amass, a lot of them go in recycling. And then vape pens without the cartridge in it. Vape pens can be dealt with straight with TerraCycle. Either organizations or businesses or groups or individuals can make arrangements with TerraCycle to gather them and dispose of them. And it would be nice if maybe we had A regulation where vaping company, vaping, vape selling companies, smoke shops would gather the leftover cartridges and send them into TerraCycle. What they do is they make like things like nuts and bolts out of them. And then I do have some books here available to help support the district. And I even have some of the Perrine Slim books with me of Northwest Orange County, which is a lot about a pop gun. And it goes clear back to... the Native American days to the beginning. So again, thank you. And I think that once the budget gets worked on, that we're going to see a big improvement in it. And especially if we, the line items get marked that are essentials because people are saying, we don't know what those lines mean. And so we need to see the assets and we need to see the expenses, and then what is essential and the expense, the non-essential and essential in the expenses. Thank you. Thank you, Dr. Olmsted.

Sylvester Hall.

Sylvester Hall, Rock Springs Ridge. As I look around and we started meeting, we started off with the prayer. I just asked myself, when are we going to take God at his word with so much hate and so much that's going on in the world today? And we always pray. We always give the pledge. Those things are just becoming more just routine words to speak. And so when you keep hearing me coming up here and saying, since I've been doing this for about two years, get to go and check the cameras because it won't show up in the minutes. In the city of Apopka, in the state of Florida, and in our country, we're in a national crisis because too many good people are standing by saying nothing, doing absolutely nothing. And when I say good people, Good people that can make a difference, but they remain silent. When we normalize the abnormal, we desensitize the truth to the point the truth doesn't matter. And look at where we're at now. When we know the truth, it still don't touch our heart. It still don't move us to make a difference. We just sit there and, oh, it is what it is. And so when the disaster come knocking at your door, then we will see. When I say things like the truth matters, integrity matters, honesty matters, accountability matters, responsibility matters, character matters, leadership matters, wisdom matters, justice matters, laws matter, rules matter, morals matter, ethics matter, facts matter, and all God's people matter. Mayor, I responded to a social media post. They were saying, do you think the mayor is running this, moving the city in the right direction? And I said, no. And the reason I gave was lack of decision-making, priorities, and lack of wisdom. And those, by me being, I would say, a supporter of yours, I'm strong enough and man enough to tell you when you're wrong. And so when you surround yourself with people who don't give you good advice, that don't tell you when you're wrong, that's a wrong road to go down. And so I know you've been here for six years. If it was a new mayor just coming in and not familiar with Apopka, then I can see. But you've been here for the six years I've been coming to these meetings. You've been here. Everything that Mr. Olson and the other ones had said before I got here, you already know that. So your refusal to do that questions how you're leading the city of Apopka. When I look at things like the city administrator, other than the police chief and the fire department, that was, for me, that was priority one. And we still haven't addressed that. Those things cause me to have concern. The people that you surround yourself with, those things have me concerned. And Commissioner Anderson, mom used to say, you make your bed, you're lying. But I'm going to say this for you. Out of all the things I see posted on social media, I don't see anything posted about our President Donald Trump from that social media that makes you look like an angel. So you keep that in perspective. And I hope as you move forward, you find your way to the right path. Thank you.

Thank you for your feedback, Mr. Hall. I just said thank you for your feedback. Sorry.

Leroy Bell, Apopka. Rod Olson, I appreciate you saying that you appreciate serving with me on the transition team. And I like to say I appreciated the opportunity, but now I need to back away from that. And I do thank for the opportunity. One thing I'm not going to be, I'm not going to be disrespected and I'm not going to be bullied. I just did an interview with 13 and the gentleman that Jim, he was the one that flipped me off in the meat, a rock and a test to it. And I pushed back and I told you about it. But yet and still, I'm the one getting the brunt of this crap from social media. Only because I said it. that I didn't think the man was doing what he said he ran on. And for that, I said, we needed an audit. We never heard anything about an audit. If we find out what an audit, audit and find out where we at, we can see much better. Even then, I didn't agree with all of these heavy position that with all these salaries. When you just heard Rod Olson said that we got all these positions with all this overtime not filled. If we We'll fill these positions with all these high salaries, especially when it's earmarked that we already sent one person from the transition team over to the county. And now it's earmarked that this position is going to some of the people on the transition team. I'm not for that. As the guy Jim said, he was on, he'd been on Apopka 35 years. I've been here ever since 1968. And if I do the math right, I think that's somewhere around 58 to 57 years. The preacher just left here and he started with wisdom. That's what Solomon asked for. But what Solomon also asked for discernment. And that's an adjective for having and showing good judgment. keen eyesight and the ability to ride, the ability to notice subtle changes and subtle details. And my thing is this. I don't think in my heart, in my heart, in the 58 years that I'm here, I voted for you and I supported you. I was in Walmart the other day. Guy walked up. Hey, man, what's wrong with your mayor? I said, yeah, that's my mayor. He was talking about the 10%, 6%. I said, no, he didn't vote for that. But here's the thing. I don't think that taking advice and the people that support you and you turning your back on for a disgraced candidate from Pueblo, Colorado.

Thank you, Mr. Bell. I hear you, sir. I hear you.

Valerie Sparkman.

I get nervous every time I get up here. I have something to read. I hope I can read it within three minutes, but I want to start off with this beginning of a scripture, and it says, no weapon that is fashioned against you shall succeed. I'm Valerie Sparkman, the owner of Just Like Mamas. Soul Food and Wings, LLC. In 2024, a city code enforcement officer stopped work at my restaurant and required me to obtain a permit for cosmetic work. I'm going to stop for a minute because I remember when I said this in 2024, Nick Nesta, which was Commissioner Nesta at that time, actually got the ball rolling, so I don't even know if you remember that. or not because I didn't even know that the stop work order was invalid. At the time, code enforcement officers were prohibited from performing building related enforcement of this nature. The officer did not have the authority to issue a stop work order and a permit required was never needed. This was not an inexperienced employee who simply misunderstood his role. He had worked for the city for more than 20 years. And during his entire career, he had never issued an order like this until he issued one against my business. this is not merely an allegation. The city's own administrator investigation internal affairs for the city of Apopka confirmed that the non-stop order was never issued and that no permit was ever required. And he was acting out of the scope of his authority. His actions delayed the opening of my restaurant, cost my business thousands of dollars in expenses, lost profits, and caused significant emotional reputation or harm. Yet instead of seeing meaningful accountability, I later learned that the same employee was recognized as the civilian of the year. There is now a new administration, and I'm asking directly, what is going to be done about this? Why should a small business like mine spend years going through legal channels when the city's own administration, Internal Affairs, already established what happened right in black and white? Why is there no meaningful acknowledgement of the harm? No visible accountability, no public explanation. What has been done to ensure that this cannot happen to another business owner? This is not simply about a disagreement over permit. A long time city employee exercises authority that he did not possess. And he'd been with the city more than 20 years. And this direct action was towards my business. A new administration represents an opportunity to handle this differently. I'm asking the commission and the new administration to not ignore what's happened. Why must I continue to fight through the legal system for the city to address facts that its own investigation has already confirmed? I'm asking that administration to demonstrate that the city causes document harm to a citizen and her business, which is me. It will do more than place the findings in the report. I'm asking you to act. Thank you. I'm Valerie Sparkman.

Thank you, Ms. Sparkman. I'm going to dig in on this, and then I'll get you a response by the end of the week, and we'll meet by the end of the week if you have time. Thank you.

And also, Mayor, is it possible that, because I know this is an ongoing legal thing, can we talk about it on the dais sometime? I mean, because I have a lot of questions about it, but I was afraid to talk about it because I know it's a pending legal issue because I do kind of know some of the facts of it as well.

I need to find out what kind of pending legal issue to give you good advice on that. So I'd say until I have that information, I wouldn't.

Okay, so you're not the attorney handling the lawsuit? No. Oh, the city hired a separate attorney to handle it? Okay.

Mr. Williams, are you able to speak on that?

Okay.

I believe that's through our HR risk attorney's office.

Okay.

I'll look into that, though, and get with you, please. Okay. Thank you.

Okay.

Good afternoon, Mayor.

Good afternoon.

Vice Mayor and Commissioners. Just wanted, again, thank you for... Christmas in July that we had at Just Like Mamas the last Sunday of the month, last year in July. It was a very successful event. If you go out to look at the pictures that are on Compassionate in Apopka on Facebook, you'll see we had a packed house, and I think I stopped counting. It's 78th. So we had enough food, enough clothing, enough hygiene items. Things really got moving. Some people had never celebrated Christmas in July. And they were very excited about it. And I was very excited about it. Thank you for the... food donations. Thank you for the clothing donations. Thank you for the extra water, the extra, the community supports us so much with things that overflow to where I've had to move from one unit to another because of the overflowing of donations that I receive. for the organization. So again, I never want to miss an opportunity to say thank you and just how grateful I am. Our next event will be August the 23rd. It will be at Just Like Mamas. And we will be having the month of August is National Waffle Month. So we are going to have breakfast for dinner. and one of the things we're gonna have is chicken and waffles. So if you would continue to keep doing what you're doing to support the unhoused and the needy in the area, if you would go out there and look at the Compassionate Anapapka and follow me, you will see that I'm picking up family units. you know, kids are going back to school and with the cost of things, I'm starting to see whole families coming and needing support. And I'm sending them to places where I know they can get more support, but I am starting to see an influx of that. So continue to do what you're doing. The things that you give me stewardship over, do not go in vain. And I always emphasize to the unhoused, that the community supports them and especially our mayor and the commissioners of the city. So I thank you and continue to do so.

Thank you, Mr. Street. All right. Anybody else? Anybody from the public wish to additionally speak that maybe didn't put in a card? All right. Well, I appreciate everyone coming today to speak during public comment. We will now close public comment, move to the approval of minutes. There's two sets of minutes for July 15th and July 27th. Any changes or adjustments that need to be made on those? If not, I will look for a motion to approve the two sets of meeting minutes as presented.

So moved.

Motion by Commissioner Barron. Second by Commissioner Ruth. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed? Motion carries unanimously. Mr. Williams, any changes to the agenda?

Yes, Mayor. Do you have one change? The applicant for business item number five, Floridian Town Center Hotel major development plan has requested to move the business item to the August 19th commission meeting. Other than that, no other changes.

The major development plan. Okay. For Floridian Town Center. Got it. Thank you. We don't have any proclamations, presentations, or awards today. Moving on to consent items. Are there any items that need to have further discussion either from the diets or anybody from the public wish to discuss these in any additional detail? If not, I will look for a motion to approve these seven items on the consent agenda. Moved by Commissioner Ruth. So moved. Second by Vice Mayor.

Yes, second.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed? Motion carries unanimously. Business item number one, the City Commission Rules and Order of Business. This one was one that we discussed early on, and I wanted to make sure I'd asked for kind of feedback preliminarily, and everyone just said somewhat of a... Do it, and we'll edit it as needed from there. So this is a, I call it a Frankenstein of multiple municipalities of the same ones that Attorney Shepard sent to me, and then we made sure that you guys had as well to review. So we can go in any type of manner to go through this. I do have Mr. Williams ready to take notes of any edits that we're going to make. I'll make some notes as well of any adjustments. So are there any specific questions or adjustments or clarifications on any part of it?

I do, Mayor. So on the first section where it says regular and special meetings, number two, where it says notice of a special meeting must be given to each member within 24 hours. I have a bit of a concern. The only reason is because with my job, I have a full time, so it may require some adjustment for me. So I do ask that at least maybe three or four days in advance would be a little bit more helpful for me. So that way I can coordinate schedules and kind of change things around. But that's one. Again, the same for on the agenda, the 24 hours in terms of special meeting, I guess it's like maybe almost to the bottom. last two sentence agendas for any special meetings called will be provided with a much advanced notice as possible, but at minimum 24 hours prior to special meetings. So that was my, um, which one was that? On agenda page one, it's the last, it's almost like to last two sentences, uh, agendas for any special, what would you like that adjusted to? Um, just at least gives us a few days in advance.

Okay. Um, and I'm fine with that. The only, these are kind of more one-offs and less used, but I absolutely hear that. So, um, I just want to make sure that we are able to meet that just in case there is something more short term. Um, like one that's coming up may be specifically the fire union contract.

Okay.

That may be coming up to where we have to do a special meeting, but, uh, To approve it, make sure that we're meeting timelines. I don't want to rush it, but at the same time, I want to make sure we're getting it right. So happy to adjust that however we need to. Just want to make sure that it gives us a little flexibility to make sure it's being pumped out.

Okay. Yeah, and that was my recommendation. And so my other one would be the manner of addressing commission time limit. So it says address to three minutes. I have requested it previously during our commission meetings to move this up to four minutes. So I'd like to see that.

And this matches the policy that was previously approved. That's the only reason I did that. What I want to do, I guess my ask is that previous that we've done in the past is that we've kind of made a request like that. My ask, I guess, moving forward is during your commission reports or anything like that, make an official motion so that everybody just gets on the same page and it's not, oh, well, I only heard it or whatever it may be. There's no ambiguity there. That's my only ask there on that. But I'm happy to. And that's the only reason I copied it there. is it matches that policy. So we just, if I may ask that you, if you feel that you would like to make a motion, then make that motion and we'll absolutely receive that.

So do I make that motion now or do I need to do that during my commission report?

If possible, do it during commission report. And then two, we'll make sure this is adjusted as well. Or we can put it in here to match In the verbiage in here, we can say limit their address to match the policy in place for public comment. So this doesn't have to be readjusted after this. It'll automatically match whatever may be adjusted from there. Is that okay?

Yeah, no, that's fine. I'll make that motion during my commission report to change the minutes to four minutes instead of three.

Do you want to go over that policy in more depth or you only want to change that part of the policy?

In the public comment section? Not of this. The public comment section of our policy? Correct. No, I mean, I've got to review the policy completely just to make sure, but I would like to see at least this part of the policy change to four minutes, from three minutes to four minutes. Okay.

Okay, understood. I just want to make sure I'm on the same page here. Okay, understood. So if we can, what we'll do is adjust that to say to match city policy. Policy.

Something along those lines. Okay. There is one more. I thought I highlighted it. It'll come to me.

No problem. We can move forward. All right, we'll come back.

Thank you.

Anybody else have comments, questions, qualifications?

So in the also there is one second. So the agenda language contains two potentially conflicting instructions. So one hand it says staff were arranged submitted items for approval by mayor, but it later says that any member of the city commission may cause an item to be placed on the agenda by submitting it on time. The key question is kind of what the approval of the mayor means.

So it's effectively that final approval will come through my office. You can request that within these timelines, obviously put in there. And the timelines are created. It's similar to what I've already instituted and updated since I became mayor of getting the agenda out at least a week early. That's been a big one to make sure that the residents in the commission have as much information as long as possible. And then with that, that nine day period as well. I know it's a random one, but the Monday before. the agenda comes out, I make sure that's the deadline that everything's put in. So that's why that timeline is there, but that the final approval will come through my office. So it can be requested to be put on the agenda. And that is what I request to be on nine days in advance. And then final approval will come through my office. And then the agenda itself will obviously be posted seven days in advance.

So I think the only issue with that is it kind of gives the give you authority to the mayor, I should say, the authority to withhold a timely commissioner's sponsor item. So there's nothing that will, there's really no framework to say, okay, if both commissioners submit something, you kind of can determine. And I think that's been an issue before in the previous administration in that certain commissioners will request the mayor ask them to the agenda in a timely fashion and And the mayor would never add it to the agenda. So I want to make sure that if someone submits something in a timely fashion, that is added to the agenda and not at the mayor's discretion.

And there has to be some discretion built in just for the charter itself. So I hear what you're saying. Absolutely. Obviously, being on the receiving end of that multiple times. So what I want to make sure here and what this allows is that we don't want an agenda like today where there's twenty eight hundred pages. And no offense to our developers, but it's because of our developers. So what I don't want to do is have if multiple agenda items from the commissioners are coming up, I want to be able to space it out properly that we can place them where they need to. Or if they need a little more discussion of which direction one thing is going versus another, it allows that time as well, because we want to make sure that that's why we do those workshops. And we're going to be starting that again this following week. meeting is to make sure that everyone's on the same page there at the same time so that it's not just one specialty item that needs more discussion to be fleshed out and really have more staff input to really refine it to what it should be or could be as an action item then.

So I want to see some language saying that within two commissioner meetings that the item will be placed in the agenda. Cause once again, it still does not give the commissioner, the commission, um, a role or the authority to say, we want this on the agenda because you set your discretion. So it could be kicked down the road for two years.

Well, that's correct. And I don't, at the same time that it, that kind of is the, the office and what the charter has dictated. So I hear you. And that's something that it can absolutely be a motion item and things of that nature. Uh, But just because it's requested, it doesn't mean it absolutely has to get on there.

Well, I think that's an issue. Because I think if we're going to develop a rules and order of decorum, that the commissioner has a right to have something on the agenda. And there needs to be a time frame. Because you were on the other receiving end of that where you had other commissioners ask the previous mayor or whatever mayor to put something on the agenda. And according to you, in your own words, it was never added to the agenda. So it needs to be something in here, which I don't know why this is a debate. But it needs to be something in here where it says within two meetings, at least, there will be an effort to be put on there. Because if not, it's kind of still left up in the air. And it could be something that's timely, something that's important that the commissioner wants to be heard as an item on the agenda. So I think every commissioner should have a right to have something placed in a timely manner on the agenda.

And I don't disagree with you on that. It's what we can't get into is that I see the agenda two to three meetings from now still. So I'm already planning that out. So if stuff is being added late, it creates difficulty to plan properly. So I'm okay to add definitely a timeline or a provision in there that allows and creates that vehicle to get on the agenda in the proper time. The concern is just that I, my office sees again, three to four meetings around two to three meetings from now of what that looks like. So I don't want to box us into where I've got to be moving to a right now today, 2,800 pages, because we, we pushed some of the things around, which was fine, but it caused a 2,800 page agenda. And so that's where there's gotta be some flexibility to be able to move items around at the times needed. So I'm okay. I'm absolutely okay to put a something in there. that, like you had said, to best efforts to get it in within two to three meetings, I'm absolutely okay with that. It's just there needs to be some flexibility that that may not happen due to if we're dealing with budgets or anything that may be going on at that time or a lot of developments going on. It pushes things out. So I'm absolutely okay with that to add some language in there to the discussion. to best efforts be put on the agenda within three meetings something along those lines okay thank you for that where would you do you have a specific two two at least just anywhere in there could i give a month so two at least a month within a month so within two weeks let's do it within a month i like um okay

Okay. In addition to that, the minority commissioners cannot call a special meeting. So a special meeting may be called by the mayor, the vice mayor, when the mayor is absent or a majority of the commission. So what that means is, is that the minority commissioner cannot call a special meeting. And I think every commissioner should be able to call a special meeting.

Oh, I don't think, I think I was following the charter on that one.

I don't see, we're in the charter. I looked at the charter. I didn't see that in the charter, in the charter.

It's the provisions within that the charter is there. And so the problem with, again, a lot of this was based on the charter itself. So it's the powers that are prescribed there. So we can't take away powers there, but.

Which item on the, I'm sorry, attorney, which part of the charter that states that? Okay, thank you. All right.

The city commission, this is 2.8 of the chart. Excuse me. The city commission shall meet regularly at such times and places a city commission may prescribe by rule. Special meetings may be held at the call of the mayor or the mayor in mayor's absence at the call of the vice mayor or at the request of a majority of the city commission. And whenever practicable, the city commission shall provide for not less than 12 hours notice to the public. That's 2.088.

So that's where I'm copying that from.

Okay. So that's something that would have to be changed because that's a, so we're, and I'm just trying to understand this. So the charter already did state, so we have a, this here, every language in here was drafted by the charter.

Not at all. No. When you say everything in the rules that you're talking about? No, absolutely not.

Okay. Okay. So this language here, if we change this language here, how do we change this language here to be fair too? Because it seems like to me, like a lot of this language is the majority in the mayor. So if you have a council that's the majority, then they're kind of controlling the whole entire council. And this kind of like, to me, it's kind of set up this way. It was kind of go through all the language. I mean, I have a whole different things that I'm kind of pouring out of this, but it's actually is, we'll do that. I mean, the majority commissioner won't have any say, so absolutely anything. It really won't have a voice.

So you can be clear. The baseline of what is required is what the charter says and must be followed. If you adopt rules that you apply to yourselves, for example, speaker rules, they're not in the charter, but you can have them. And if you adopted a rule, which you could also rescind and you could change just like you're doing now because you have rules already. You could make a rule that allowed for a special call of the meeting by some other device. For example, I mean, it doesn't say this, but if you wanted to empower the clerk to call a special meeting for whatever reason, you could make that. But you could also change that rule because it's not in the charter. But if someone... doesn't qualify under whatever rule you make, but qualifies under the charter, they get to do it regardless of the other rule. Do you follow what I'm saying? The charter trumps if there's a conflict, but not, it's not, it's not to stop you from having additional rules. It's to be a baseline of the minimum you can expect.

And when can we update the charter?

We literally just did.

That's just a question. Can we update it again?

Sure. You can do it as many times as you want, whenever you want. But understand, you can do it on a specific issue like this one, or you can do the complete review, which we did, which took a long time.

So if I wanted to update that language in the charter, how do I do it? Do I make a motion to revisit the charter to update that language?

It should be on an agenda. But yes, then you would discuss the item. And if you get agreement, then I can just like I did the other stuff. I draft a question, the language, the so forth. And then if it gets voted to go forward, it goes on the ballot.

So not on an election.

Yeah. Of some sort.

Yeah.

OK. And we just do. OK. And the second question is in regards to, I guess, with any rule. Well, you know, I can answer that for myself. OK.

I'm not finished. One second. Let me go back up.

Do you want to come back to you?

No.

Okay.

I do not. I just want to make sure that based off what he said that some things don't apply. Okay. So no individual notice or regular scheduled meetings. The rule states that the no notice of a regular meeting must be given to individual commission members. Um, and I think the issue with that is, is that, um. If it's moved to another day, moved to another hour, counseled by the majority or unilateral, that we, once again, it's just, it's kind of the same thing. And maybe that, was that part in the charter as well? The charter, was that in the charter as well? Do you know which part of this was in the charter? Was all of this drafted? Mayor, do you?

Give us some background. So the mayor had asked me, as he mentioned, to gather rules of procedure from various jurisdictions. Some we represent, some we got from other places. So y'all would have some things to look at and consider. And then I think, as he said, he looked through the documents to try to put together what he thought would work for y'all and then come to you for comment. But rules of procedure for a council can be changed, candid, like people change underwears. Because they're your rules. So, for example, if you said we love the idea of Robert's Rules, which, by the way, is a terrible idea, you could adopt something that said we're going to follow Robert's Rules right now. You could do that in the very next meeting. You could change it because it's a rule that you get to create. And so as long as it doesn't conflict with what's in the charter, you're good to go. If you want a charter amendment, then that becomes much more formal, as you already understand. And that requires charter language, an election and a vote.

OK. All right. Number seven. So the no express appeal for the presiding officer's ruling. The mayors decide all questions of order, but the rules do not provide an express procedure allowing commissioners to appeal the mayor's ruling to an entire commission.

There is a provision in the I did read this. There's a provision in the rules that says something about if there's some sort of a conflict. you can choose to follow or look at Robert Shules. I think I remember seeing that in there towards the bottom. So there is a mechanism which you can choose to follow. But the reason why Robert Shules is generally not a good idea is because if you've actually read them, as many people claim to, it's super complicated because it's not just what's a motion, what's a priority motion, what seconds can, what can be reconsidered versus what can be reheard and so forth and so on. There's a lot more to it, and I would suggest kindly that General Roberts complicated things more than he simplified them.

Okay. So that's part of the – you read that in the charter, correct?

No. The part I just read was in the rules. At the bottom of the rules that were drafted – you know the provision I'm talking about. Somewhere at the bottom of the rules it says something about if there's an issue, we can revert to Roberts' rules if we need to, something like that.

Yes.

Okay.

But that's without my issue is with that is without an appeal procedure, the mayor's procedure ruling appears final unless some other parliamentary authority is incorporated elsewhere. And that's where you stand up the Roberts rule in order.

That's where you could invoke the rules if that's the group you chose to. Yes.

But you're recommending that we take that out, that we shouldn't. You recommend that we take that out and we shouldn't use Robert's rule of order as a as a firm.

We're going to follow this every time, because if you do, you'll really need a parliamentarian and you'll have to really study up on them. Because, again, it's you know, there's a lot of informality that goes on that passes as Robert's rules. It's really not like what is a primary motion? What is a secondary motion? What is a privileged motion? And on and on and on. And the reason that's important to understand is people use the rules to tie people up in knots. I have subscribed to the theory, and most of my, in fact, all of my jurisdictions do the same, that if we can all understand what we're voting on and what we're trying to accomplish, that really should be the role of government, not to try to get more complicated so that the folks don't understand it and so y'all don't understand it. So it because I've seen it used as a weapon and it can be weaponized. It's weaponized in Congress every day. Just watch C-SPAN. But if you want to just try to get stuff done, the best way to do it is make what we all know, make a motion, get a second. If it doesn't get a second, it dies for like a second and you move on. If there's a procedural issue, somebody's talking out of turn or so forth. That's really what rules like this are generally for is to try to keep order, which the charter doesn't do a great job of doing. No charter does. do a great job of that. And to make sure that, for example, we allow people to speak, but we have some decorum. We allow you all to have debate with some decorum and that sort of stuff. That's kind of stuff that rules like these are supposed to be for.

So on the last pager, it says questions of procedure not covered by these rules, the city charter, the city code, or general law are governed by Robert's Rules of Order. Right. That's what I was referring to. That's what you was referring to. Latest edition, used as a guideline, but not binding authority.

Right. That's my recommendation. I didn't put it in there, but I agree with it.

Okay.

Anything else?

Yeah, I'll just make motions in the back. Yes, I'm fine for now. I don't have to make motions to change them, so.

Any other adjustments, changes that we can make? Any feedback? No? Then I will open up to public comment. Anybody from public comment, we should speak on this matter.

I agree that all members should be always able to add something to the agenda, and whether it's being pulled up during their report time, a motion, a resolution, if that's agreed upon to to bring it up during that time. Getting it nine days ahead allows for the evidences to be brought forward and presented to the citizens so that you get citizen feedback. And this is in the Sunshine Manual too, that it's preferred to have it on the agenda, but that it doesn't have to be on the agenda. Something can be brought up. And therefore, if let's say Commissioner Anderson wants to put forward a resolution or a motion or bring something to the table, period, whether there's a motion involved or not, just an issue, she's able to do that. And in nine days early, therefore, she can put the evidence in front of the citizens and the rest of the commission as a report. But if you bring it up at the meeting, unless you bring in a stack of 1,000 copies or have a slideshow, then your evidences aren't going to be able to be brought forward. But issues can be brought forward easily. So I see both sides. I see the right to be able to do it and the privilege to be able to do it. But the preference would lie with bringing it in nine days earlier with all the evidences, just like with a consent agenda. Everything has to be presented for everyone on the board to read and understand. if it goes on the consent agenda. Otherwise, they don't know what they're voting on. They need that seven days in advance. And we saw in the past that didn't always happen. So look forward to that. As far as special meetings, yes, as many days in advance as you can. But I do believe that one person, which is a minority of the board, shouldn't be able to create a special meeting unless it's one of those emergencies that someone knows we've got a hurricane coming and they asked for it prior to everyone else. So having one person being able to freely call meetings on a regular basis is, I think, pushing the envelope.

Thank you, Dr. Olmstead.

First off, disclaimer, I'm speaking. I know I'm in uniform, but I'm speaking right now as a citizen, and I hope it does not affect the brand in any way. As part of the changes, I would like for the wording to be specific as to the time of how long public comments or speakers can be up here. I know Commissioner Barron was told to, during her speech, her presentation that she could make a motion. But to say it's going to be according to the city policy, I think that's unfair to the citizens because at that moment, you guys could then say, oh, the policy is two minutes. But if we have it and we know it's specifically three minutes or specifically four minutes, we need to have stuff You guys are pushing for transparency. We need to know what we're up against and what we're facing. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Warren.

I'm glad that Commissioner Byrne brought this up. I have a problem with the agenda, putting something on the agenda with the final approval of the mayor. I won't use Commissioner Anderson because I get pushed back because what in the world he supporting her for? Some of you, this commissioner down here. I'm a citizen and I go to my commissioner and I start speaking to her about a situation in the community. And she said, yes. I agree with that. What we need to do, we need to put this, this is an agenda item. And she said, I'm going to see, can I get this on the agenda? She bring it, she present it. It goes to your office for nine, whatever days it take to get on the agenda. But it seems to be, you decide, you're a little Caesar. Well, I'll change that. You're a little Brian Nelson. You decide that you don't want it on the agenda. and they give you the power to say, no, it don't go on the agenda. So now here it is that I'm getting taxation without representation. So I think that right there, somebody needs to call that back. Any concern that a citizen have and either commissioner feel that there's something needed to be discussed, I think it shouldn't be nobody with any power Remember, Mayor, not king. Thank you, Mr. Bell.

Mayor, during your campaign, we had many conversations. And one of the conversations we had And I said this not to be vicious, but I said, our residents sometimes act like dumbasses. And I said that because if you look at what's happening, we let anybody tell us anything and we don't hold no accountability. That's why we get lied to time and time by politicians because they know they can serenade us and they'll smooth it over and then we come back and we raise hell. But once the damage is done, the damage is done. Now, you brought up that you've been the victim of tactics like this by Mel Nelson. So for me to see you come up and do the same thing, it bothers me. The last meeting when I was here, I said, Mayor, you're doing the same thing Nelson was doing, but you're just being polite about it. No changes are being made. I constantly see you writing, but I don't see any changes being made. With Golden Gym, I think Mr. McKinney brings a lot of knowledge. Nobody has yet to sit down with him and say, hey, let's have a deep dive in what you know. He already proved he embarrassed Mayor Nelson a few times on situations that he spoke about. What do we do? We suppress it. So now you're doing the same thing Nelson was doing by wanting to control absolute power. And what you ran on, I want to have the citizens involved. I wanted them to have a decision. That's what you ran on. That's what you told them. And the citizen voted for you overwhelmingly because they wanted a change. Not necessarily you was the right man for the job. They wanted a change. They was tired of being victimized by Mayor Nelson. And so when somebody is, it's just like a relationship, you're going through a divorce, anybody who come to you and serenade you, you jump on board. So please don't take the people for granted. And remember, I always come up and say, everybody up here was chosen to serve not to dictate, but to serve. And if we do that freely and our hearts are freely, these things can happen. But I want y'all to know that people see you. I see you. Others see exactly what's going on. And there will come a time when that get turned on his head, what everybody will see. And I'm trying to save you from embarrassment because it don't make any sense. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Holmes.

Rod Olson, just a couple of comments. One with the aspect of speaking the agendas. When I pulled it open multiple times, I got a black half page. I couldn't read half of it. And on a couple of occasions I got in, I realized that's one of the things you say, user error, and I'm the user. But I don't know if anyone else has that problem. When you pull it up, half the page is blacked off for the user. the documents within the agenda and it was so difficult to read kind of read one half move it around for another i'm not sure if it's a technical issue or it's a rod olson issue uh with regard to agendas i think all of you should have the ability to and with within reasonable time frames to get something on the agenda it's one of the complaints that everyone that was on the commission before pretty much had and i think we need to carry The aspect of, and I apologize for going over three minutes, it should be four, but neither here nor there. I timed myself about 20 times at 20 minutes and 30 seconds to two minutes and 45 seconds. And I guess I paused once or twice or I got a hiccup or I got a little nervous for a moment and it ran a little bit longer. We all should have four minutes. There's also some of the language in the past indicated, well, and if there's 15 people wanna speak, they only get one minute each or two minutes each. That's a pile of buffalo chips. We put you in those seats. We deserve our four minutes of fame. If someone comes up, if I agree with Mr. Hall or with Mr. Bell, I can just come say I agree with what he said with the exception of whatever. We can try to refine things maybe, but everyone should have a right to come up and speak. We're 100 days in. Everything, everyone is looking for change. I want to ask everyone just a moment now to take a deep breath with me. Nice deep breath in. Nice deep breath out. Let's do another one. Deep breath in. Deep breath out. Change is gonna happen. Changes and wheels, progress are happening, but we have to give time for it too. We're looking for some immediate results. What we have today, I've lived here for 12 years. It's been history for 12 years. And for what everyone tells me, it goes back further than that. It is not gonna change in one meeting. It's not gonna change in one week. It's not gonna change in 100 days. Take a deep breath. Make sure your voice is heard. You've got these wonderful people up here serving us. Let them know. Don't call Rod Olson and say, hey, Rod, why don't you bring this up? I get 15 of those calls every week. If I agree with it, I do. The problem is, is that the people that come up and represent every time, it's like a time I brought my shoelaces up. It's like shoelaces are like Charlie Brown, blah, blah, blah, blah. It's Rod Olson again. It's Sylvester Hall again. It's Leroy Bell. It's Dr. O. It's Jim Moyer. We take the time to come up here. Please hear us. Give us our four minutes. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Olson. Anyone else would like to speak on this? I will close public comment then. Any final thoughts, adjustments, anything of that nature?

I just want to say that I appreciate that you put this on the agenda and it has allowed not just the public, but the commission to kind of give their input. And when we bring this back, it should have... Language that I believe that the public would be happy with and also the Commission, whatever the suggestions are, is really so that we can work cohesively up here and also give that voice to the residents that they have been asking for.

Understood. Any other final comments?

We'll revisit these. We're going to revisit this again. This is going to come back as a final draft.

We'll bring it back. As a final comment, I'll go through and make sure that I hit all the...

Otherwise, this will come to you as a part of your ordinance.

I don't know how to stop this.

Okay.

Okay. I'm sorry. Yeah.

It's okay.

Go.

Okay. That's that was my question. We're going to revisit this.

So correct. So what I'll do is I'll, I'll have it redrafted. It'll be on the next agenda with the, the edits and things of that nature. So any other final comments? then I do wanna go over and make sure Mr. Williams has these adjustments here. So on the first page under special meetings, well, excuse me, regular special meetings, but specific special meetings number two, the comment of getting out the notice in advance, I was going to say, try to like aim for three days. Is that the special meeting should have as much notice as possible. That's the goal. Those are going to be far less. It's just that an emergency take things of that nature. They may not be able to get there. So just to make sure, but at least, at least three days. Yeah, we can. Exactly.

That will.

Okay. And then that same thing being updated on the second page where it says 24 hours changed to at least at minimum three days. And then we're going to add in a verbiage that says with best efforts of a commissioner, bring something on the agenda. It will be put on within a month of that being submitted.

The best efforts part, what is that? Within a month, that's not definite. So the best effort part.

I was following your language there.

No, I said best effort. I said will be put on it, will or shall be put on the agenda.

Okay, that's not what I heard. Okay. Yeah, no, you had said with best efforts. We actually just closed public comment. Let us discuss it, and it'll be brought back at next meeting.

And...

All right, we'll adjust that one. I didn't see any more on that. On page four goes into public comment and the verbiage will be to match city policy. And the only reason, I personally feel that we should look at that policy completely. I think there's some other things in there that could be adjusted. So to some points that were made that it limited and provided times, as you'll see on our agendas, that it could be unilaterally reduced to two minutes if we want to. So there is some language that probably could be cleaned up or should be cleaned up that I was concerned about when that policy first came up. So however and whatever, but just something that I definitely want, I think we should review completely. And then that was it. Those are the adjustments. Mr. Williams, do you have all those? Yes, Mayor. Perfect. All right. Then we will table this until the next commission meeting and have it brought back, cleaned up, and for final comments and get it approved from there. Do we need to make a motion on that?

The next meeting is August 19th.

Correct. I'll make a motion. I'm going to move to table this item, the City Commission rules and order of business to the August 19th, 2026 meeting to reflect the edits made today.

So moved.

Motion by Mayor Nesta, seconded by Vice Mayor. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed? Motion carries unanimously. All right, but moving on to the... designation of an official voting delegate for the Florida League of Cities annual conference. Each year, the Florida League of Cities requests that member cities designate one member of their city commission to be a voting delegate at the annual conference. This designation is done by nomination of the city commission. The selected person will vote on the new Florida League of Cities leadership and resolutions as presented at the conference. We have a conference coming up next week. The actual meeting for the delegate will be Saturday, August 15th at 9 a.m., In the packet, we did put the last four voting delegate members, usually commissioners. In 2022, it was vice mayor. In 2023, it was myself. In 2024, it was Commissioner Anderson. And in 2025, it was former Commissioner Smith. So I'm open to any discussion on who would like to be nominated or to nominate somebody for that.

Obviously, I think we've already...

I have to agree with you.

It's either Commissioner Ruth or Commissioner Barron. Have you done it before, Commissioner Ruth, when you were on council before?

No, but if I was reliable to make a motion, I'd hope that we'd go down there with a united front and nominate our mayor.

He is new.

So it's not usually for us, a mayor, to go to that. It's usually the commissioners show up in some capacity. Yeah. It's all kind of rotating. Yeah.

It's usually the commissioners at that Florida League.

And we usually rotate, and that's why we put it in here, to show kind of how it rotates around. For the commissioners, it's additional, because on my side, I do have different separate meetings that I will be part of.

I just didn't want it to interfere with Thursday morning's ethics training. No, this is Saturday. This is the Saturday, the 15th. We have to nominate Commissioner Barron. Then make the motion.

I'll make that motion.

Wait, I was going to nominate you.

Let me take public comment before we do any of that. Anybody in the public wish to speak right now? If not, I'll close public comment and I'm open to a motion.

I make a motion to nominate Commissioner Sam Ruth to be our representative at the Florida League of Cities on Saturday, August the 15th.

All right. I have a motion for the designation to go to Commissioner Ruth. Do I have a second?

Second.

Second by Commissioner Anderson. Motion by Commissioner Barron. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed. Motion carries unanimously. Congratulations. What an honor. Thank you. That's good. Wow. I'm sure you'll represent us great.

Have fun with it. It really goes by real quick. I'm just glad that it's you. All it is is they give you one of those little plaques and they'll do some things and you just...

Well, I was just hoping that he got to go in there and tout the fact that he was a commissioner and now a mayor. No, I appreciate that. It's totally appropriate for a commissioner to do that.

You'll see what it is. It goes by real quick. It does. It's easy.

I've been there before. All right. We'll move on to the next item on the agenda, business item number three, which is quasi-judicial, the Ridge Phase 3 Major Development Plan. Before we do that, Attorney Shepard, please remind us of what quasi-judicial means in this framework.

Yes, sir. And we have several quasi-judicial matters on the agenda today. Just some of them are under business and some of them are under public hearings. And essentially, these are land use matters that require the governing body to act as essentially judges. and apply evidentiary standards to whether the decision should be pro or against whatever the application is. That means the applicant has the initial burden to prove that they meet the standards set out in your code or your comp plan, depending on the issue, but usually it's some combination of both, mostly code, that it meets that by competent substantial evidence. So what is that? That means that An ordinary routine person would be able to take that and say, that's evidence. What it is not is opinion. So you may hear opinions. They may come from the podium from citizens are concerned about. I don't like it because I think it'll bring traffic or I don't think like it because I think it's too dense or whatever. Those are opinions, but they are not evidence. It doesn't mean you can't listen to them. It just means that when you apply the standards that are applicable under your own code. If they're not evidence because they aren't experts, then they're not to be considered if you're going to do this right. The important standards are spelled out for each of these things in the staff report. And the staff also makes a finding that constitutes evidence because your staff are considered by the courts to be experts. Whether you agree or disagree is not my point. It is that that's what the law provides. You have a planner, you have senior planners, you have engineers and so forth. And they all get together. And at the end of the reports for each of these matters, they will say whether they make a recommendation of approval or not. And the standards that your code sets out that you're supposed to apply. The reason this is important to point out is that what you're hearing from them is literally considered testimony, just as if you were in the case. And when the developer speaks or if it's somebody member of the audience who speaks but is qualified, planner an appraiser for whatever a traffic engineer or something that can also be evidence but it's important that you understand that distinction between i don't like it and evidence once the The applicant has made a prima facie case that it meets all the requirements frequently done by the staff. It's the staff that said, we recommend approval. That's telling you they've met the standards. The burden shifts to the governmental body to come up with evidence that it doesn't meet if it's going to deny. And that's where you would listen to public, other experts that might come and testify or whatever. At the end of the day, once the public comment is over and the testimony is over, then it's up to you to deliberate and make a decision. The last thing I'll add that is if you make a decision to deny a land use quasi judicial decision, your planning department is required to issue a letter that says the reasons why. So it's important for the record that you say the evidence that you relied on to deny whatever it is that's being applied for. That's it. Thank you, Attorney Shepard. Ms. Sanchez.

Yes sir, good afternoon. Jean Sanchez with the Community Development Department. This item is a quasi-judicial request for the Ridge Phase III Major Development Plan. The request before City Commission is to approve the Major Development Plan for multifamily development within parcel three of the Ridge Plan development. This item was previously heard by City Commission on July 1, 2026, and was tabled to August 5, 2026 for additional discussion regarding transportation access and roadway improvement considerations. There have been no changes to the proposed MGP since that meeting, and given the time that's passed, staff is elected to present the item again in full for the benefit of the Commission, the applicant, as well as the public. So the subject property is located within, like I said, the Ridge PD, generally on the southeast corner of Boy Scout, or sorry, southwest corner of Boy Scout Road and Ocoee Apopka Road. The proposed multifamily development is located on the western portion of Parcel 3 with the remainder of Parcel 3 planned for future commercial and office development under a separate development plan. THE PROPERTY HAS MIXED USE FUTURE LAND USE AND PD PLAN DEVELOPMENT ZONING DESIGNATIONS. THE RIDGE PD WAS ESTABLISHED BY ORDINANCE NUMBER 2858 ON JULY 21, 2021 AND THE PD WAS LATER AMENDED BY ORDINANCE NUMBER 2938 ON JULY 27, 2022, WHICH MODIFIED THE APPROVED PD AND EXPANDED THE OVERALL DEVELOPMENT AREA. The proposed multifamily use is within the approved development program for the Ridge PD and the request for commissions regarding the MDP application for parcel three under the already approved PD entitlements and applicable development standards. The Ridge PD was approved as a mixed-use planned development with residential, commercial, office, industrial, open space, recreation, stormwater, and supporting infrastructure. Parcel 3 encompasses approximately 30.49 acres, and just about 14 acres are allocated for the proposed apartment development, and the remainder is identified for, like I said, commercial and office use. The proposed MDP does not change the approved land uses or development capacity established for parcel three. Instead, it actually implements a portion of the previously approved Ridge PD master plan through our major development plan process. The proposed MDP includes 363 multifamily dwelling units within 11 apartment buildings, along with a clubhouse, pool, access drives, parking areas, sidewalks, landscaping utilities, and other related site improvements. As part of the project, Bonson Lake Drive will be extended from its current terminus to Okoye Papua Road. This extension was contemplated as a parallel facility to Boy Scout Road. and it helps to distribute site traffic through the roadway network. The plan also includes cross access and pedestrian connections to the future commercial office area and parcel eight, which is identified as a community park and central amenity area for the PDE. The plans identify proposed turn lane improvements along Covey-Popka Road as well. Turn lane requirements were specifically discussed during the DRC meeting with final turn lane details to be further evaluated during the construction site plan review based on final roadway design, access configuration, and applicable engineering reviews. Approval of the major development plan would confirm the project's consistency with approved PD and as well as development standards that are applicable, but it would not authorize construction. Final engineering construction details will be addressed through the construction site plan review. The landscape plan provides a coordinated landscape treatment, including canopy and understory trees, hedges around apartment buildings, clubhouse, pool area, as well as pedestrian connections. It also provides perimeter buffers, parking lot landscaping, foundation landscaping, and planting areas intended to soften building frontages screen parking areas and enhance the pedestrian environment. On June 3rd, 2023, I'm sorry, on June 3rd, 2026, the Development Review Committee recommended approval. At its meeting on June 9th, 2026, the Planning Commission voted 42 to recommend approval as well. Discussion prior to that vote included transportation, access, roadway improvement considerations. And at its July 1st, 2026 meeting, the City Commission tabled the item to August 5th for additional discussion regarding transportation improvement items. The proposed MDP does not increase the approved development capacity for parcel three. It does not change the approved land uses. That's not authorized construction. Final technical compliance will be addressed for construction site plan review and permitting. And based on the plans, staff report, and supporting exhibits, staff finds that the applicant has demonstrated competent substantial evidence that the proposed MDP is consistent with the comprehensive plan that approved

Ridge PD master plan the land development code as well as applicable development standards staff and applicant are available for questions Thank You miss Sanchez any questions from dice Most of my concerns are this this the corridor study I have a great interest in the corridor study apparently it's it's going on its own This would be, what, its fifth or sixth year?

It was published, as I recall, in 2022 or 23. 2021.

It's already had a first and second read. OK. And approved. And there was a fantastic study that was put forth. the the contractual obligations that i was most concerned about it you know at our previous council meeting uh pertaining the deadline of the october 19th of this year with nothing transpiring on that which you know led me to you know push back on more so on the staff than the developer, because I appreciate everything the developer is doing. They've been forthcoming. Even with some of the comments that staff, staff's been in a hurry to start that corridor study, which ultimately they successfully paid for and we've received. They set forth timelines of, we're not working in a vacuum. that I'm having is I'm asking for questions from staff that nobody's aware of. And that's what bothered me at the time. If we're gonna sit up here and be quasi judicial and I'm acting as a judge and I'm asking for the study that nobody knows about, I'm asking for contracts that I have that nobody knows about. It's kind of hard for me to be impartial, which is what I was trying to do. I think you can even go back to the comments that were made. My attention was more into detail on our end than their end. And I still have major concerns when we... We put on the facades that, you know, we're not going to entertain the traffic portion of this until 2028 or further. We've been working on this for going on six years and we've done nothing. And I want everything that's occurred up to this point to reflect the sins of the past are still hotness today. And that's my only concern that I have pertaining the project because the Bradshaw Harmon connection is not going to get started until we first get take a more robust and creative manner about kicking the tire and getting this thing started. And what I'm looking for more on our end is a more cooperative effort with the dais to backfill four years of nobody knew what was going on. So I'm trying to respectfully Just because we didn't know where it landed four years ago, we need to catch up and accelerate that time frame.

I will address the corridor study. The corridor study, people knew about it. So I'm one of the people who knew about it.

You were not here, though, right?

I'm sorry?

You were not here.

I did not touch transportation. I was here, sir.

I've been here since 2017. The night of the council, the night that we had the council meeting.

I was out of the office, correct. Yes, sir.

The planning manager covered. At the time I asked, prior to that, me asking for the study, nobody on this end was giving me the information of material that I had in my hand.

I think they were confused. There are a lot of things going on in Ocoee and Papua Road. which is what I wanted to address about your comment on robust improvements. So let's start with the corridor study. We do know about it. We know about it because we used it to actually apply for the build grant. Back then, we applied for the race grant. We did not get it the first time. We applied again, and then we got it the second time, which is something the city should be proud of. It's over $17 million. It's for Coahuila-Papua Road Complete Streets. That is your robust improvement. The unfortunate thing with infrastructure is it's long range planning and those kinds of projects. Frankly, the shortest I've seen is about 10 years to come into reality. We're always trying to play catch up with these things. So is there a specific question that is not related perhaps to executed agreements? Because those I'm not really that privy with and I would have to defer that to the city attorney.

Well, the information I was asking at the time was the information that I had in my possession. We were getting comments that was coming from the public because of the lack of transparency that we're discussing right now wasn't afforded to us back when I was having the discussion at the last sit down that we brought this thing forward.

Unfortunately, we've had staff turnovers and significant ones. We've had a change in transportation coordination, a change in city engineering, public works.

Change in mayor.

That too. Yes, sir. So we don't want to, we try really, frankly, I'll speak on behalf of planning. Planning tries to be really comprehensive with our stuff. We're trying to coordinate. Public works is always coordinated. We have standing meetings. So these things just take time to get familiar with. But yes, the last 10 years, and I can only speak for the last 10 years since I've been here, there have been a lot of turnovers. Unfortunately, that knowledge has gone away with some of the people. There are little things happening that we have to, it takes time to go back and realize what's going on.

Well, if we were going to be transparent, moving forward, because I want to make sure the developers afforded all the necessary tools he needs from us to really keep moving forward on this project, because I think it's important. You know, in the outside world, they have time. Time is money. And I want to make sure that they're afforded all the time that they can get to make sure that the product that they give us is successful. But we need to be very transparent with the transportation obligations that we're moving forward in the future because the last transportation study that was done in 2021, It's kind of died on the vine, and I want to make sure that we revisit that.

Are you referring to the corridor study? Because I would disagree with that.

Well, there was a first, second read, and there was a transportation study that was actually contractually obligated us to at least start by October 19th of this year.

So when that study and really that agreement that you're talking about, which... FOR LEGAL QUESTIONS, I'LL DEFER THAT TO THE CITY ATTORNEY. WHEN THAT WAS DONE, WE DID NOT GET THE BUILD GRANT. THERE IS NO PLAN AT THE TIME, NO ROBUST IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR KOE PAPKA ROAD. WE SAW THE WRITING ON THE WALL, A LOT OF THINGS WERE HAPPENING DOWN THERE. OBVIOUSLY YOU KNOW ABOUT THAT INTERSECTION, KOE PAPKA ROAD AND BOY SCOUT. Semis were getting stuck and things like that. So that was contemplated because we didn't have anything. We got turned down for the race grant. And then when that was executed, and this is what I'm telling you is what I understand just based on my research through these projects, not necessarily because it has everything to do with this quasi-judicial item. but because of my projects with the BUILD grant and really a lot of things in that area. When we got turned down for the BUILD grant, that agreement was entered into by the city. I wasn't privy to a lot of the terms in there. As I understand it, it was reviewed by the staff for appropriately you know, reviewing those studies or whatever the case may be. I wasn't in the room. However, I know the reason why. So when we did get the BUILD grant, this agreement and its amended agreement, okay, has always been executed. So I guess there's a kind of a double solution to Ocoee and Papka Road, which is good and bad. I'm not sure what the city exposure is on that.

But we are actively receiving impact fees for the implementation of some of this, but yet we still don't have an idea where the funding is on the grant or when we're going to receive it.

Again, if we're talking about transportation impact fee credits, I'll defer that to the city attorney and perhaps the finance director. I can't comment on those.

And let me ask this if I can jump in here. Moving forward, especially with these type of business items and specifically quasi-judicial, but the background information you're asking about, what can we do better to make sure that you have it, that you don't feel that there's question marks out there still?

The transparency we're having right now, it's when you ask for it and nobody knows what you're talking about. The lack of departmental transparency was more offending than... not getting the answer because nobody knew what I was talking about.

And I think that there's sometimes it goes back to staffing overall, that there's many people wearing multiple hats and sometimes it's not the person you think sometimes. And one person may be running one specific project and that's that one person. So a lot of institutional knowledge is being kept by one or two people. And so to your point, it does create delays in getting information out, things of that nature. So I definitely hear that.

And I just want to just add that because the, from my understanding of this development, the development agreement, actually the developer was responsible for the quarter study and they used that, the city of Apopka used that to get the grant. So there had to be some collaboration because you use that information. So staff had, you know, I just think maybe sometimes, because I know with me being a new commissioner now, I guess I'm not really new anymore, but I was confused at first on who to ask information for. You know, because I wasn't sure who to ask. Now I kind of know kind of, you know, who to ask. So I think that has a lot to do with it. But just based off of just meeting with the developers, going over everything, that grant that was secured was a result of the developers assisting the city. It kind of worked together with that. And that grant was for the widening of the Akoya-Poplar Road to four lanes from Harman Road to South Parthorne Avenue. Is that correct? Okay. And that's at $17 million. Yes. correct that's five million dollars it's just five million dollars that was a match that was set aside in the right a little bit over four it's a 20 percent 20 percent match okay and we already have funding for that it's already was set aside in the budget that's what i understand okay i just want to so i because there was some because i know yes yes i i understand i think stopovers always create a vacuum um when our transportation coordinator left and um

City engineer changed. There were a lot of things.

So with the transportation coordinator position, but we don't have that position anymore because we completely reclassified that position.

So we don't need a transportation engineer is what we've been trying to hire for. But the problem is our salary right now is not where it needs to be.

I was asking about the transportation coordinator position that we reclassified. That's the position that was reclassified.

I have no idea what the positions are. I mean, that's beyond my figure. I'm not sure.

Once again, that was a vacant position that we wouldn't have all these issues and these questions if we would have hired a transportation coordinator. I mean, we declassified the position now, so we don't have those options.

To be fair, planning is trying to fill that gap. And I know, but you have part-time transportation planners up there. So, but yes, when they left, there were a lot of projects that we kind of had to play catch up.

Okay. I got one final question. Sure. So what I'm hearing you is, can our existing transportation support this additional traffic that we're going to be bringing to the area?

At the time, considering that the TIA was produced based on the entitled visa, it's what the TIA.

Phase one and phase two is complete. We're moving into phase three. So I'm trying to distinguish phase one, phase two is completion, which wasn't. part of the additional you know that was that was a projected traffic pattern that was going to be four years out so we've rolled the clock four years we're we're in phase three there's four five and six coming um our water wastewater going to be able to support i'll defer that to public works sir um our stormwater plan is you know what what i'm trying to do is i'm trying to create a transparent discussion that if anybody's paying attention, they can go back and hear this because when it doesn't work, I'm not sitting on the, you know, I'm not the Christmas ornament. Everybody gets the kick.

And I actually asked the developers that question. We kind of talked about the different, the force main oversizing, like they actually oversized the piping from the eight inch to the 24 inch. The main, the water main oversizing for the force main, they went from eight inch to 24 inch. The regional lift station, the code requires that we put a duplex in two pumps. They put in three pumps for the capacity, future capacity. So I did ask those questions, but I understand the developers actually exceeded what the code was.

Yes, all these commitments that were imposed back in 2021-22, they have been completed on the utility side. So the Forceman has been constructed as a 24-inch and extended all the way along McCoy Apopka, Modern Road, all the way to the new apartments there.

I think the question was specific to capacity, though.

I'm worried about the hospital and the surroundings. That's been accounted for from the very beginning. When the master development plan, the original master development plan for the entire development was approved, which is going almost five years back. The stormwater is already accounted for. There's an existing pond that will accommodate for all the stormwater for this particular parcel tree. So that has also been addressed.

And to add secondary to that study, one of the pushbacks that we got was about the environmental study. And I would like to let everybody know that there is a completed environmental study and everything out there has been checked nine ways to Sunday and it's secure. So I appreciate the efforts on everybody's part to get some of my other questions answered. I just wanted to make sure that everybody was on record with... you know the surrounding areas we're not going to you know this this additional impact is this being brought in that area it's not going to have a a um it's not going to affect the other areas around it so i want to make sure that yes that we know that and are we still moving on the traffic signal at boy scout so

The traffic signal at Boy Scout was already identified in the original traffic impact analysis, which was done in 2021, April, I believe, of 2021. Now we're five years after that. Once we get into the construction site plan, the request will be to update the traffic impact analysis and include all the new traffic flows that we have, including the one on Binion, and the one on Okoye-Apapka Road, and basically within the, I believe it was a two-mile radius from the very beginning.

But that Apapka-Okoye side is, correct me, I think it's 45 and Benyon's 35 speed limit, correct?

They changed it from 45 to 35?

Yeah, changes. Binion, I believe it's also 45 in some areas. Correct.

I saw somewhere that they were recommending a change to 35.

That is for Boy Scout Road. Okay. Yes, Boy Scout Road is going from 45 to 35. Okay. Yeah, so Gene already explained some of the issues with the federal grant, with the build grant. It's a process of... could be five to six years, right? We are at the point right now that we have submitted, we have been notified by the federal government and through DOT, of course, that the grant will be awarded. And we submitted the final documentation for that. So we expect probably by the end of the year, possibly by beginning of January, that we're going to have the agreement signed before we get to that point. We cannot spend any money on that project. because otherwise we can get reimbursed. So at that point, we'll engage into the design process. Technically looking, we're probably about two, two and a half years from starting construction on the project. And that will include the complete street widening of Okoia Papka from Harmon Road all the way to South Houghton Road.

Thank you.

Yes.

Any additional questions? Well, I just, I don't know. Everyone said they met with him, but I did meet with him on the 28th. I met with Mr. Craig Perry and Pedro. And yeah, I was kind of brought up to date from their half. And my understanding is that he was not allowed to do any work until we started the work. And the grant we have, but we haven't started on the widening because we haven't signed the agreement yet. Yes. And so basically this, what we're hearing today for the apartments, really kind of includes this whole widening and what they're committed to. But it's just the apartments is something that he has been doing in phases to develop this area.

Correct. And that developer's agreement is only talking about improving the section of Okoyapapka from Harman. to, I believe, 13th Street. So we're going further past Bradshaw all the way to South Horton, which will include, and at the time, of course, there was still a county road. In the meantime, most of it has been transferred with excluding the section between 13th, I believe, and South Horton, which the county is now improving some of the drainage system. Once that's been completed, that will be transferred to the city. So at that point, we'll have a full control. over that entire section of the road.

Thank you. And my understanding is that with these apartments, it's anywhere between, if I'm not mistaken, they told me three to five years before it actually, or is it two to three years? Just because the timing of having the apartments ready for people to move in, it's important to have this road widened, to have some of the transportation in place. for the impact of the additional units that you're building.

Absolutely. So thank you for that advice, Mayor Pedro-Yosan of Apopka Center Line Development. The short answer to that is that it's a process. We have to go through the permitting even after, if we're blessed enough to receive the approval today. It's about two and a half years from that process in order to move forward with respect to everything that we have to do in order to meet with the permitting and actual construction documents, et cetera. So that's typically the time frame.

So, about 2 and a half to 3 years, so. With that said, because the impact is 300, 343, 363, right? So the impact of those residents coming in there, it really concerns this role. So when. That's what I'm looking for for our staff is the timeframe for the road.

I understand you were given kind of a printout separate from the staff report about the planned transportation projects on there. And I kind of outlined, like Vlad said, the grant agreement for the BUILD grant is right now being reviewed. I think it's under legal review that our grant administration just sent out. And so we're trying to get that executed. We're hoping before the end of the year, like Vlad is thinking, I think he's being very liberal, but before the end of the year, we're hoping to get that started. We have dates and milestones that we are required to meet for that grant award. And so I think I gave you something, the preliminary engineering environmentals, we're hoping to start in January next year. THIS IS ASSUMING, OF COURSE, THAT THE GRANT AGREEMENT IS EXECUTED BY BOTH THE CITY AND FHWA. SO REALLY, DESIGN STARTS NEXT, LET'S SEE, JULY 2028. RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION THAT WE'LL FIGURE OUT WILL START AROUND JULY AS WELL. WE'RE GOING TO START CONSTRUCTION, WE'RE HOPING, BY APRIL 2030. but those are kind of the milestones for the agreement too.

Just one more question, because you said the second grant was approved. What was the date of that grant?

Which grant? Oh, the build grant?

The second submittal that was...

I have to check. Okay.

Don't recall.

Sure.

Because I know the first grant. Sometime last year. But when was the second grant submitted? I mean, not submitted. Approved.

We did. You were there in our community meeting outreach. One was in Van Carlton. One was at the VFW. We submitted around that time. We. received information that we were a recipient about six to eight months later. So it was sometime last year that we were awarded. But I'll have to double check and I'll send that information to Radley. Yes, ma'am.

Okay. I just want to say that I... also met with Mr. Pedro, Mr. Perry as well. So I'm expert on that. But I do want to share that they gave me a presentation, if you will, on the fees that they've paid to date and the remaining fees. impact fees that are still pending. So thus far, they have paid to date $5,787,372 in impact fees, and there's still another $6,061,607 pending. So once the build-out for the ridge is completed, there should be almost $12 million, $11,848,000 $1,979 of impact fees that should be coming our way. So I just want to make sure that that's true and we're good. I can't really attest to all the numbers because I'm a planner. I know, but I know Ms. Blanche is in here, so I know she can kind of come up with those numbers at the top of her head.

Good afternoon, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Commissioners. We are tracking those impact fee credits. I would have to go back and look at those numbers. I don't have them with me, but they are, you know, coming in and I think they are getting some types of credit as well. So, but I would have to go back and look at that. I didn't bring that information with me. Okay. Okay.

Should have asked. Thank you.

No problem.

Any additional questions?

You know, I do. One more question. So in regards to the impact credit, and I'm glad you actually brought that up, and this is just for the residents that actually had some concerns and didn't kind of understand the process with the impact credit that we give. So from my understanding, statutorily, if the developer goes beyond the scope of what's required in code, is that what triggers the credit for the impact fees? Yes. Okay. Perfect. All right. So that was one of the things that I got questions on. They thought there was just something that we decided to give them back a credit. But statutorily, we have to do that. I just want to just say that.

Yeah. The utilities were addressed through an upsizing agreement. So basically the difference of what was required for the development, what the city requested, considering, of course, future improvements there and additional need for capacity.

I just want to clear that up for some calls that I received on that. Thank you. Okay.

Any other questions? I, too, met with the developer as well previously just to get a better understanding. I met with him at previous iterations and phases of this project. I will open up to public comment now. Anybody from the public wish to speak?

We will have a pop-up. It was something that was just said. You know, I believe in whatever you guys are going to do. But I think when it comes to these things, when it leads from the Development Review Committee that we once said, that any comprehensive studies and everything, all I need to be dotted, all T needs to be crossed. It don't need to be I get back with you with that. I don't know about this. I'm not privileged to this, but I know about this. Everything needs to be black and white in front of you guys. Everything. Especially with infrastructure and everything going. So, please, before you make a decision, don't wait for something to come back. It needs to be up front right now before you guys. Thank you, Mr. Bellman.

And Sylvester Hall, one of the things I would ask is that once we have these meetings, if you got agenda items, the department that's responsible for these items should be prepared to speak on any questions that the citizens may have or you may have. They get the agenda. They know what's on the agenda. They should prepare for it. And when they come here, be prepared. The other thing I want to ask Ms. Sanchez is, When the last time your department hired an employee? Because you keep saying that, hey, we're short, we got turnovers, we got this. When the last time an employee was hired in your department? And so when we say we don't have people to pour the concrete, Mayor, this is one of the things that I say when I talk about priorities, you know. These are quote unquote low-level jobs, but we are focusing on executive jobs with three positions that require us to pay over $600,000 a year. It don't make sense to me. And that's why I say, as a supporter of yours, I can come here and I can tell you that. It's not to be ugly with you, but we all say, hey, look, give us time. Well, if you start not in the wrong direction, you ain't gonna never get there. So that's why it's important for us to start in the right direction to get where we want to. And the only way we do that is knowing exactly where we are, material readiness and financial for the city, period. Anything else, you're misleading the people. That's why I speak that way. And so if we can concentrate on getting some of these low-level jobs where the people who are actually coming in and doing the work, sweat, labor, and everything else, they deserve the same respect and the same pay that the executives are getting because they are the ones that are actually going out, keeping us safe and doing the work to give us this quote unquote image that we're trying to portray to everybody that come to Apaka. Well, I truly believe if your staff, the police department, the fire department, public works are doing their job, the city will glow like a beacon. You don't need a public image to come in and sell the city. It will go like a beacon. So let's keep that in mind when we say priority. And this department is not an isolated situation. This is every department. And those issues are not being addressed. Those are the things that concern me when we say we're moving in the right direction. Give us time. If I see you going the wrong direction and I know you're not going to get to where you want to be, Am I one of those good people just sitting by watching bad things happening when I know better? So that's why I'm saying that. It's not to be ugly, not to be against you. It's that I see us going in the wrong direction, and we need to do a U-turn and come back and get on track. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Hall. I will say, I just want to correct, I don't see these as low-level jobs.

Goodness, I only have about a half a dozen things. First, right out of the box, as you drive around the community, one of my concerns with multi-story units is the fact that we are in danger area. You see everyday devastation go everywhere. When you see apartment complexes go up that are three stories high, All block. Great. Next one is one-story block. The rest is lumber. And you've got others, and all three stories are lumber. That's an issue for our police, for our fire, and for the safety of the residents that are going to live there, in my opinion. Secondly, schools. That's how I got involved with coming to these meetings to begin with. That's 108 new students that'll be coming in. Where are they going to go? Is there clear roads and sidewalks to get to the schools they need to get to? Going way back, how I got involved with this is Melissa Bird with brand new school board comes up, has a meeting. Everyone's concerned because there was 46 trailers. on the Wolf Lake campus that my granddaughters were going to. That's how I got involved in this whole thing. Melissa said, we have a mandate from the state not to be the cork in the bottle that we have to prove all new development. So, you know me, I'm like the dog without the bone. I went to Teresa Jacobs, and I can't remember the superintendent at the time. She's no longer there. And I said, could you show me a copy of the memo from the state? She says, well, no, Mr. Olson, that doesn't exist. I said, well, then tell me in the last 15 years, six years ago this was, How many times you said no to a development in Apopka? Zero. Zero. And now the 46 trailers are gone. Isn't that wonderful? And they're closing schools in Orange County. But we have to look up. We're a growth area. Where are these kids going to go? The trailers cost more to operate. They're not as safe. And any time there's any kind of a weather event, guess where they go? Into the main building disturbing another class. Enough said on that. The other aspect, the aspect roads and sidewalks, I guess I kind of hit on that. Four, I had the aspect of frames. I already hit that. My numbers are rolling around here, just moving. But the aspect of looking at staffing positions. You know, I've been riding on that. Everyone's wearing multiple hats. We've lost CRA monies because we have one person managing three different things, including CRA. We didn't spend it, so we lost it. We have got to do better. I think Mr. Hall and Mr. Bell both hit the nail on the head. We in the past have approved things and we don't have all, well, we're going to get that to you. They got to have every I dotted, every T crossed before it moves, even present, come up here. They have to pass all those I's and T's at the development department. Goes to the planning commission, should have every I dotted and every T crossed. And when it comes to you, it should just be a cakewalk. Another thing we need to look at addressing is other cities have implemented timeframes. So if Rod Olson comes in, says, I'm going to put this development in, you sign off. And now we're three years, we're four years, we're five years later. He hasn't done anything. We need to put time limits, as many cities do. You've got 72 months to deliver, and if you don't, it goes back into the center. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Olson. Anyone else from the public wish to speak? All right, we will close public comment period. Any final comments from the commission? All right, I will look for a motion to approve the major development plan for the Ridge Phase 3. so moved by commissioner ruth second second by vice mayor all is in favor say aye aye all opposed motion carries unanimously

Can I just get a two-minute break? It's so cold in here.

You guys complain that it's hot, you complain that it's cold. Sure, five-minute break.

I just wanted to get a five-minute break.

I do want to thank Mr. Perry and Mr. Carter for your meeting and your time. You know, I sincerely appreciate everything you did for me and get my answers. I wish we could have done better as a team and helped kick-start this four years ago.

I'd like to call back to order our meeting and resume on to, uh, cause that judicial cold link, a pop, a revised major development plan. Who do I have running this? Mr. How are we doing?

Doing good. How about yourself? Doing very well.

Appreciate you being here today.

Yeah. So, good afternoon everyone. My name is Amir. I'm a planner at the community development department. So the applicant has submitted a major development plan for a property located at 2560 West orange blossom trail, which is just east of Stuart Avenue and west of Lakeview drive. The major development plan is called Coal Link Apopka, and it consists of a proposed new warehouse building to the existing site. The new building has a total area of 168,600 square feet. And this MDP was previously approved, actually, at the March 3rd, 2026 city council meeting. But it is being brought back to city commission as the applicant has done a Scribner error. by putting the incorrect total building area on the previous MDP. The previously approved MDP had a significant lower building area of 147,624 square feet. Hence, this item is being brought back to City Commission because this is an increase of almost of around 20,000 square feet instead of increase instead of decrease. These are the vicinity and aerial maps of the 2560 West Orange Blossom Trail site. The total site area consists of 27.63 acres. The future land use for this property is industrial and the zoning for this property is light industrial. This is the Coal Link Apopka Major Development Plan sign. It's pretty much the same, just the increase of the 20,000 square feet and an addition of one or two parking spaces to comply with the code. The Development Review Committee has recommended approval on July 14, 2026. Planning Commission has recommended approval. And the recommended motion for City Commission is to approve the Kolinka-Popka Major Development Plan. Stop and applicant are available for further comments or questions.

Thank you, sir. Commissioners, any questions?

The only question I had was reference to the exit that is on Lakeshore Drive.

I think it's Mayflower. Yeah, it's from Mayflower, as you can see. Yeah, Mayflower.

And I know that is a very short stretch because it leads up to 441. There's a lot of traffic there, too. And I know that there are semis that are coming in and out of that area. Is there a contingency plan in place in terms of supporting... the traffic along with the residents that are there and making sure that the semis that are leaving this area are not causing any additional setbacks.

So the developer has agreed to redo Mayflower Avenue to code standards, and it will hit up Lakeview. The entrance doesn't touch 441, so Mayflower will end at Lakeview Drive. But for more information, I'll defer that to the applicant as well.

Thank you.

And I had one question that echoes Commissioner Behrens. Wouldn't a common sense approach to this, if we could actually create a signaling pattern, meaning give a, you know, Mayflower gets a left-hand turn only, a sign just for the turn, not the turn in green. You could also do the other side on the north side. It could be a turn left to where you got two lanes of traffic merging at one another, but actually making total opposite turns. And then, you know, for a timing mechanism, then go to an all green to where you get the through traffic. or maybe step back coming out of the site with the semis, right approach, meaning come to Mayflower, right to the stop sign, right down to a traffic signal that allows you to get the 414. Basically what I'm trying to do is take a much higher level approach at it and maybe interject some very inexpensive discussions or comments to the discussions that could be had at a future date. I'd like to see us kind of entertain that as a discussion item, as a group, to see if even the signaling can be done that way.

Yeah, I can defer that to the applicant and see what they have to say in terms of improving.

But they wouldn't have access to that light. That would be on iron, correct?

Yeah, it's a city, but I'll have to refer that to Vlad since he deals with transportation. He's coming, yeah.

Hey, these guys are professionals at what they're doing. I value their input.

Yeah, Mayflower is the only road that is actually operated and maintained by the city. So the applicant has... accepted to do complete reconstruction of the road all the way to Lakeview. Lakeview, the entire section of Lakeview is Orange County Road. And, of course, 441 is a DOT road, which the applicant is proposing parallel traffic impact analysis, extension of the left-turn lane in the northbound direction. Correct. So those are the improvements that are going to happen on the – On the traffic side, we know that the span is just so short there between 441 and Orange Boulevard. And most of the traffic, I believe the traffic impact analysis show like 85% of the traffic to be heading towards 441 or to be coming from 441. So only, I believe, 15% will go to the south and they will be dispersed between West Orange Boulevard and, of course, Binion Road.

But you and I both know on the south side on Mayflower, three semis lined up. That's the length of the entire road.

I believe there was a widening proposed there on the Mayflower, right? Correct. Yes. Joshua will explain a little bit more to you.

Yes. So on Mayflower Avenue, that's currently is 24 feet and we're widening it to 36 feet. So much wider breadth to account for that extra staging that can happen. Correct. Any additional questions?

No. All right. Well, I will open up to public comment. Anybody from the public wish to speak? We'll close public comments. Any final comments, questions, concerns from the dais?

From the dais to staff, I mean, this is the kind of, especially for me, this is a win-win for the city, and I hope that we enter into a lot more of these kind of, we have an imbalance in the city of Apopka. We're heavy residential, so I'm eagerly waiting patiently for creative ideals like this to come to the city, because I think it's a win-win for both the applicant and the city.

in our city now, this is just an expansion for Coal Link, am I correct? And Mayflower Avenue has been a contention for a few years. So the fact that they are going to bring it up to city standards and I can see what Commissioner Ruth was saying about the exiting and entering into that Mayflower, it's not a long road, It's a matter of controlling how many semis you get coming in. I mean, how does that work when they're coming into business? Is it a certain time that they're coming into the business or leaving the business? When is your, like, I guess your most busy hours of the day?

So I can't speak to the exact time, exact details, because each, I guess, there'll be like tenants within this as well that are seasonal and that sort of thing. So I can't exactly say what it is. But typically this... The distribution will be during hours that are not peak hours for traffic exiting or leaving the a.m. or p.m. peaks.

Yeah. I think a lot will have to do with the business hours of calling. And then, you know, 441 does get busy. They have some peak hours in the morning and peak hours at night. And so I can understand wanting some kind of traffic control there.

And I will say we've been working with, and it's been for a while now, working with FDOT on 441 traffic signal timing just to get cars in and out of there because it'll back up all the way to Binion some days. So we're working on that as well. That's definitely high on the prior, and I think it'll help that flow as well.

Yeah, there's one light right on 441 that you died.

Correct. That's the light. Oh, is that the light? That's the one I'm trying to get. Yes.

Okay.

Any final comments?

No.

All right. I will look for a motion to approve the revised major development plan for Coldlink Apopka. So moved. Moved by Vice Mayor. Second by Commissioner Ruth. All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed? Motion carries unanimously. Thank you. The next one. Thank you. Moving on. Quasi-traditional Floridian Town Center Hotel major development plan. This one is being continued. I do want to just open it up just in case anybody's here to speak publicly about it. If not, I will look for a... Are they continuing it to the next meeting? Okay. For a motion to continue this item to the August 19th agenda. So moved by Commissioner Ruth.

Second.

Second by Commissioner Anderson. All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed? Motion carries unanimously. Next up, Ordinance Number 3169, Second Reading for the General Employees Pension Trust Opt-Out Clause.

Ordinance number 3169, an ordinance of the City Commission of the City of Apopka, Florida, amending Chapter 54, Retirement Systems, Article 2, General Employees Retirement System, by amending Section 54-19, Definitions, by amending Section 54-20, Membership, and by amending Section 54-21, Board of Trustees, providing for codification, providing for severability, providing for conflicts, and setting an effective date.

Thank you. Dr. Patton, any changes? No changes. Thank you, sir. Any questions from the dais on this one? No questions. Open to the public. Any public comment on this? No public comment. We'll close it. I look for a motion to approve ordinance number 3169. So moved. Moved by Commissioner Ruth.

I'll second.

Second by Commissioner Barron. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed. Motion carries unanimously. Thank you all. Thank you. Ordinance number 3158.

Ordinance number 3158, an ordinance of the City of Apopka, Florida, amending the future land use element of the Apopka Comprehensive Plan of the City of Apopka, changing the future land use designation from residential very low suburban to office for properties located at 4410 Chandler Road and 4420 Chandler Road, owned by Richard Chandler, comprising of 5.12 acres more or less, providing for severability, conflicts, and an effective date.

Good afternoon. This is Dr. Junseong Planner at the Community Development Department. The applicant has requested a future land use amendment for properties at 4410 and 4420 Chandler Road for a development of a child care facility. The size of the property is 5.1 acres. The current use of the property is residential. The current future land use is residential, very low suburban, and the requested future land use is office for child care facility use. The subject properties are located approximately 300 feet away from Kelly Park School. And Kelly Park School currently has a future land use of office and zoning of office, zoning which are consistent with the requested future land use and zoning of the subject property. Based on the proximity to the existing school, staff believe that proposed office future land use for child care facility would be compatible with the surrounding area. In 2025, Planning Commission approved special exception use for childcare facility under the current land use and zoning. Following that approval, the applicant submitted a site plan proposing a maximum student capacity of 275 students. And during the site plan review process, staff found that proposed student capacity exceed the permitted number of the student per our code that limits the number of students in residential zoning district based on the projected number of person per household and the density. Based on the calculation with a maximum density of two dwelling units per acre on 5.1 acre property, the maximum student capacity would be limited to 29 students. The calculation is provided in this step report. According to the site plan provided by the applicant, the size of the building is about 15,000 square feet with about 30 parking spaces. Under the current use and zoning designations, the student capacity will be limited to 29 students in proposed 15,000 square feet building. Therefore, staff recommended the applicant to pursue a future land use amendment and rezoning to address the student capacity limitation issue. For clarification, approval of proposed future land use amendment and rezoning would not authorize approval of the site plan or special exception. If this future land use amendment and rezoning are approved, applicant will still need to be required to obtain special exception and site plan approval. On April 1st, 2026, the DRC recommended approval and on June 9th, 2026, Planning Commission unanimously recommended denial due to concern that office use may not be compatible with the surrounding area if the proposed childcare facility is not constructed on the property. Recommend the motion from the staff is to accept the first reading of ordinance number 315 and hold it over for second reading and adoption. Staff and the applicant are available for any questions or comments, and the applicant has prepared a presentation.

Thank you, Dr. Sun. Applicant, if you'd like to do a presentation now, and then we'll jump into questions and comments from there.

Good afternoon. For the record, McGregor Love, 215 North Eola Drive. While I'm getting this set up, if I could ask staff to go back to the slide that had the concept plan and the elevations, which will be helpful for our discussion.

Oh, I have that control.

Well, Commissioner Ruth, I'm happy to report that you don't have to wait long for creative non-residential solutions of residential land. This is the proposal we have for you today. And I think a little brief history is necessary for this application. I was not involved back in July of 2025. when my client received approval from the Planning Commission as part of a special exception. And the intent was to keep the zoning the same to allow exactly what we're proposing today. And as a condition of that approval, the Planning Commission said, well, we really want this to be a major development plan, which would mean it would go before you for approval. During that process, it was when we discovered that this zoning provision, which may or may not ever have been at issue before, would limit this facility to 29 students. Obviously, that was not the intent and that was not understood at the time. And so that's when I was involved. I worked with staff and they told us, well, office future land use and zoning is probably appropriate here. We still have to go back before the planning commission and have our special exception modified based on the current design and the current zoning. So we have that coming up, but this will allow us to develop what was originally intended to be developed on this property. Now, the Planning Commission did unanimously recommend denial. And when I got up to speak to the Planning Commission about that, based on the conversation I heard, I wanted to clarify what the source of their concern was because they brought up the concern, well, what if you don't develop this property? We like the use. We think that it's supportive of the neighborhood. But what happens in the future if an office is not compatible with the area? And I entirely recognize that concern. At the time, we proposed modifying the ordinance to include an assurance that it couldn't be developed. The reason staff didn't vote in favor is because we did not have that language settled. We do today. And I'd like to read this language into the record for you. It's not part of the draft ordinance you have before you. I believe that it will be at the next hearing if you move this to a second reading. But we propose adding a new Section 3 to the agreement, which I'll read now. Notwithstanding the office future land use designation approved by this ordinance and notwithstanding any use that may otherwise be permitted under the city's comprehensive plan, land development code, or any implementing zoning district, development and use of the real property described and depicted in Exhibit A shall be limited to childcare, daycare, and other substantially similar child care or child-oriented uses and or accessory or ancillary uses customarily incidental thereto. This limitation is site-specific to the property described in Exhibit A, is an express part of the future land use map amendment adopted by this ordinance, and shall govern all subsequent zoning site plan permitting occupancy and development approvals. for the property unless amended by subsequent ordinance adopted in accordance with applicable law. We've cleared that language both staff and the city attorney's office. So now I know that there will likely be some questions about the site plan, which you have up on the screen here. So I'll go over some of the kind of the most likely questions here. You can see two access points. The access point at the north is a 20-foot wide stabilized surface for emergency purposes only. The design of the site is mostly based on the topography, but you see at the north there, there are several heritage trees that will be saved by this design that pushes most of the development to the south. So at the bottom at the south end, there is a right in, right out. There are 46 parking spaces under code 28 are required. Typically, because the applicant does operate a daycare of the same size in Apopka, at peak time during pickup and drop off, they usually have around 10 or 11 cars. So this parking lot is expected to be more than adequate to contain any queuing and parking without any spillover going on to Jason Dwelley Parkway. And I'm happy to answer more detailed questions about the site plan if you have them after this presentation. Finally, we have been working with Mr. and Mrs. Sanders who live to the west. I can see them on this concept plan. Their property is just there to the west. The Sanders have lived on their property since 1997, almost three decades. The city and the area has developed around them at the time in 1993. There was a cross-access easement that stretched east to west and then stretched north to south. The city's changed in the time. It's grown around them. They have an access issue, and we are committed to helping them solve that issue. On this concept plan, at the very northwest corner, you see a 60-foot-wide sort of I don't know what geometry calls that, a rhombus maybe. That was what the public works director had suggested we incorporate into the plan to assist with their access. As an additional point of background that I that I forgot to mention. In 2017, when the Orchid Estates Platte was recorded, there was a 30-foot easement recorded in favor of the Sanders. But that easement really isn't sufficient for what their access needs are. And we need to be able to improve that for them. We're committed to doing that. What we've done now is we've requested a meeting with the public works director so that we can sit down with him and their consultant and the Sanders if they want to attend. And make sure that if we're going to dedicate 60 feet over here, that something can be designed that will actually be usable for them. And any option is on the table, and we're committed to working with them on their access issue. That is really all that I have for you on this presentation. I'm available to answer any questions that you have. Thank you.

Go ahead, please. Well, thank you for that presentation. So I know in regards to me, because I'm just receiving that additional language for the ordinance, I have not had time to talk with staff or the attorney in regards to what their language looks like. So for me, I just not ready to make a, if I have to make a recommendation, it will be to deny it because it's new information has been presented that I haven't received until just now. In addition to that, in regards to the standards family, has there been type of, there's no written agreement right now where you guarantee to give them access or vacate. There's nothing in writing right now. It's just your insurance and your guarantee. Or is there something written where you...

There's no agreement in place right now, but just an understanding that we'll work together. And the Sanders and their consultant are here today. And certainly, if you'd like to speak to them, I'm sure they're willing to discuss it. Okay.

Just for me, I just received this language, so I know I can't make a – I don't feel comfortable moving forward without it.

And I apologize. I did think that it would be part of the agenda packet. It has been approved by the city attorney's office a couple weeks ago.

You guys are receiving it. Commissioner, this is new even for me.

This is new even for me.

Okay, so our mayor hasn't even received it.

I'm trying to find the email. This is something I was sent probably about a month ago when this was first, like one of the first times it was continued. This language was brought up. I'm trying to find the email and I'll re-forward it.

Was it shown as approved? Like it was tentative language, but was there anything that went out from us in any capacity?

No, the discussion was that this was an item they might bring forward at that meeting and then it was continued from that meeting.

And there was an email from the city attorney that it was Andrew Hand who confirmed that he had no substantive issues with the language.

You sent us an email?

Yeah, I'm trying to find it. It was around that first time of the continuance. Ah. But at that time, it wasn't approved.

It wasn't.

Okay.

Or reviewed by staff or the attorney. No, it was reviewed by staff. At that point. Mm-hmm. Well, I do have to echo a similar sentiment. Until we see it in the actual ordinance properly provided, then we should table that until that comes in front of us.

Yes. And I would also like to hear from the standards as well, if that's okay, and the engineer, because I want to kind of hear what they're... Do you have a thank you to have on them?

Yes. I was going to ask the same.

So if we can, before, if we can just let a final kind of, not final, but any additional comments from the dais and then we'll open it to public comment from there.

Right. So I just want to say I did meet with Bobby, Mr. Bobby Sanders and his wife, Jessica, on Wednesday, July 8th. where they kind of outlined what their concerns were. And certainly one of the biggest concern was being landlocked. And that was something that when I did meet with Mr. McGregor and the applicant on Wednesday, July 29th, you had assured me that that would not occur and that you have been in talks with the applicant with the homeowners. So everything that you're presenting today kind of gives me that there is some agreeance between the Sanders and the applicant, except what you just read, I can't find. And I certainly believe that the attorney read it and agreed with it and the Sanders family agrees with it. But I think before we can actually vote on it, that we would need to have it in writing. The final language.

Right, the final language in writing.

Because when it's approved here, then it goes straight to the mayor's office and he's actually signing off on an ordinance that doesn't have that language. That's correct.

Mr. Mayor, I did locate that email was back on July 13th. July 13th? Correct.

Okay, let me look for that.

And the title's Forward Follow-Up on City Process.

Okay. Okay. Let me search. July 13th. Oh, here it is. Regarding. Okay, there's the clause. I don't know. Did we respond? Anybody respond as acknowledging it? Because usually I always respond acknowledging it. I think it was probably the way it was kind of.

Well, even if that's the case, it's still, we should have had this in here.

We should have had it in here. Yeah. And you are correct. You sent it. It looks like it was, yeah, okay.

It was right before that first attempt, that first reading, or the first reading originally was scheduled, and then it got continued.

But the public doesn't have it either. It's not in the, it's not in the packet. It's just not in the packet. It's just not in the packet. Okay. Yeah.

any additional comments from the diets well because i was mentioned um i and i do got i do echo your sentiment i'm looking for this kind of um future investment in the city but i do want to make sure that that we inject common sense to it you can't build around a resident and actually create an enclave that they that they lose all access to their property so um let's let's be mindful of that and on on moving this thing forward so i'm going to be paying attention to that you can't I don't know how we got here this far without having a lot more of this conversation a long time ago.

I agree with you. And we've committed to the Sanders to make sure we improve their existing access.

Make sure we protect the value of their property. Absolutely.

Yeah. Any additional questions?

No, the only, just more of a comment. I agree in terms of I want to make sure that Mr. and Mrs. Sanders' property is not locked in, that you all come to an agreement in terms of what these plans are going to look like, that you meet with Mr. Vlad and are able to set that up. in terms of how they are able, not just them, but if they're in case of an emergency, our fire department, our police are able to access their property, that we are protecting them as well. So I right now am going to decline in approving it until we know for sure we have everything in place and that everybody across the board is set and ready. And then that way we can move forward with it.

Thank you. All right, we'll open it up to public comment. Anybody from the public comment wish to speak?

Yes, sir. I'm Bobby Sanders, and I'd like to say that the road that we had was for the nursery and for the Chandler family. That was my aunt and uncle's house, and I bought it from my aunt and her children. And the road, when the nursery went out of business, The road went to pieces and a helicopter couldn't get down this road. And Jessica had to go to work every day. And there was no way for her to go down that road without the probability of getting stuck. And it caused a lot of rift with this family, which was unbelievable to me. I would never, ever believe that that could ever happen. I know when I was in the Army, I thought of all of my family with nothing but love and respect and was proud of every one of them. It's caused a lot of problem. And if Apopka would have watched after this before they put in White Delight, this neighborhood and this other neighborhood, if they would have watched out for this, then this would have never happened. And I appreciate y'all even addressing it and watching after our well-being. And I appreciate each and every one of you, including Valerie, every one of y'all that has addressed it with me. And that's all that we want you to know. We appreciate it. Thank you, sir.

Anyone else from the public wish to speak? If not, I will close public comment. I think the sentiment here is two things. One is to have this language updated in the ordinance when it's brought back to us. And then two, I would like to see some type of agreement with the Sanders family showing we are in agreement to this. We support this project and this is what we're getting. It doesn't need to be anything superficial, but in writing that we can see that both parties are in agreement that this is where we need to be.

And for the record, the 60 feet that you see at that top northwest corner, We'd like to confirm that it can actually be designed for what it needs to be designed for. It looks pretty wide, but part of the due diligence we'd like to do to make sure that this isn't some dedication that they really can't use is to have it somewhat engineered to show, okay, it meets the city's standards. This is a better access. Right now they have 30 feet. And it doesn't work very well for any of the needs that they have for even their single family home and certainly not for emergency access. This would make it better, but we want to make sure that it's really sufficient for what they need long term, which does take some design work. We're working on that. We're having our engineer look into it. independently and we'll meet with the public works director. So for the next time we speak, I hope to have more information for you.

Excellent. Any final comments from there? Thank you. Thank you. Yeah. Thank you for working with those.

Of course.

So we will move to, so there is two, two different items here. So there's going to be one, this first ordinance, which then the next one. So we'll probably table both of those. We'll do it in separate readings though. So I will look for a motion to table ordinance number 3158. Do we feel we're going to have enough time August 19th?

I feel we can have enough time. Yes, yes, let's do August 19th.

So looking for a motion to table ordinance number 3158 to the August 19th meeting.

So moved.

Moved by Commissioner Barron, seconded by Commissioner Anderson. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed? Motion carries unanimously. Next up, ordinance number 3159. Okay.

Ordinance 3159. An ordinance of the City of Apopka, Florida, changing the zoning from RSF 1A residential single-family estate, 2-0 office for certain real properties generally located at 4410 Chandler Road and 4420 Caroline Road. Owned by Richard Chandler, comprising of 5.12 acres, more or less, providing for severability, conflicts, and an effective date.

I don't want to make you read this whole thing. We most likely are going to be tabling this one. I do want to open it up to public comment, though. Any public comment? Sitting down, we'll close it. Unless you have any final comments, Commission, I'll look for a motion to table ordinance number 3159 to the August 19th meeting.

So moved.

Moved by Commissioner Anderson, seconded by Commissioner Ruth. All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed? Motion carries unanimously. All right. Ordinance number 3160.

Ordinance number 3160. An ordinance of the City of Apopka, Florida. AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE APOPCA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF THE CITY OF APOPCA. CHANGING THE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM COMMERCIAL TO INDUSTRIAL FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT EAST KEENE ROAD OWNED BY HCH DEVELOPMENT LLC COMPRISING OF 5.23 ANCHORS MORE OR LESS PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY CONFLICTS AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

For the record, this is June's Zone Planner. The applicant has requested a future land use amendment of property located at the intersection of East King Road and Clark Canal Road to develop a car storage warehouse. The size of the property is 5.2 acre, and it is currently vacant. Looking at the surrounding area, there's a retention point to the east, highway 414 to the north, and vacant land to the south, and gas station with additional vacant land to the west. The current future land use of the property is commercial, and the requested future land use is industrial. Per the applicant, the proposed use is enclosed luxury car storage, and a storage warehouse is permitted in light industrial zoning. The properties along the corridor of East King Road and Kulakuna Road have industrial and agricultural future land use. Therefore, staff find that the proposed industrial future land use is comparable with the surrounding area. The image you see is the conceptual site plan, and these are the conceptual landscape plan. On April 8th, the DRC has recommended approval, and on July 14th, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval. The recommended motion is to accept the first reading of Ordinance No. 3160 and hold it over for the second reading and adoption. Staff and applicant are available for any comments and questions.

Thank you, Dr. Sohn. Any questions for staff or the applicant?

I did meet with the engineer. Luke, is that your title, engineer? I met with Luke Lassen on July 13th, and he presented the project. And also, I have to say this, at the legislative wrap-up, when I was sitting, the gentleman that I was sitting next to actually is the person that's building this. And he introduced himself. So I don't know if we just happened to sit together, but he mentioned this. I said, oh, I did speak with Mr. Luke Classen. So I actually spoke to the developer and initially this was brought to my attention by Mr. Luke Classen.

And I too met with Mr. Luke as well on this property. You know, when I first moved to Apopka, you know, there was one thing I was determined was to understand the historical side of our city, right? And this area has been underserved for decades. And I think at this point, this... garage or if you will storage unit although the concept is great but just not for this area and so it's a no for me in terms of changing the future land use amendment for this area from commercial to industrial because i think we could potentially put something there that would provide a resource to this area especially for those residents that live just on the north side of the 414, I think it's important that we provide a resource to this underserved area. So it's a no for me in terms of approving this future land use.

Any additional comments from the commissioners?

I just want to kind of add to that, and I understand that, but this property has been sitting there for decades. And so when they brought this product to me, Mr. Lou Classen, the product itself is condominium. And it's luxury cars. It's self-contained. They will have it gated. And the way this product is, it's going to bring a very large revenue to our city that will not require the services that we give to rooftops. And, you know, we talked about, you know, what do you do with a piece of property that has been sitting for decades? And obviously, where it sits between two highways, I don't know, what would you put there that can serve a community between two highways?

I mean, there's...

Besides warehouses, we have plenty of warehouses that are lined up on the 429 and they're aligned with residential areas. And I'll tell you the truth, you take the road up, it doesn't give anything to the residents, the residential homeowners. It doesn't offer them anything other than if they are employed in the warehouse, but it does not give them anything. And so this particular property was doing the same thing. And I'm looking for... commercial properties to come into our city that's going to generate rent-a-view, that's going to lift the clientele that would bring here. I mean, these are luxury cars. And I shared a story about when I was in New York and I knew a good friend that was in the business of luxury cars. And it really just is making over a million, two million dollars. But this is condominiums. It's not like people are going to come in and rent and put their car there temporarily. They are actually investing like buying a house. They're buying a condominium. And this is going to be very expensive. And I just feel it's a good product for our city because These luxury car owners are now coming into Apopka. So you know what? They want to be near their cars. I mean, tell me someone who doesn't own a luxury car loves it more than their family. So they may want to buy a home in Apopka just to be close to their car and their boats and their buses. So I think this is a very good product only because one of the issues that our residents constantly express is that when we put up rooftops, it's the services we have to provide. water, police, fire. This is pretty much a self-contained condominium. So I support it because I do understand the product.

I completely agree with you 100%. The concept is phenomenal. Absolutely. I just don't think it's great for that section. I think it belongs close to maybe our airport area, like our small signature airport, or somewhere where it will... support those that are going to have their luxury cars in these warehouses. I just don't think it would provide a source for our residents that live in this area right now. But I agree with you in terms of the concept. The concept is great. I just don't know if it would, again, provide a resource for our residents in this area. So I mean, that's just my stance on it.

So just to clarify, can you clarify with us the existing zoning commercial, the community commercial? Can you give us an example of something that supports right now in this current zoning?

Community commercial is basically for more like retails. Like restaurants, storefronts.

I just want context. Okay. So I am in this was I was, you know, thinking, you know, just different because I kind of share both of their, you know, I'm kind of split because I do feel that in this area, this will be a be an access to it will be. It will be something, and I'm really trying to just put it into words. I do like the concept, and I do think it will help increase the quality of that area. And if not, it's going to continue to sit. And right now... I actually think this is probably the best option for, in my opinion, just based off of, because if they're going to be investing and putting their million dollar cars in there, they're going to care a lot about the area. And I think right now, when it goes to the tax roll, we need, you know, it will help increase the tax roll. It'll bring in more revenue. I think it'd be a good, good, good idea for the area. I haven't seen the desire for anyone to come in that area and put retail in that area. So I think this would be a great idea. So I actually do support the concept as well, because I think it will actually add value in the, It'll bring more charm to the area. And the goal is, is to make sure that we're actually adding value to the area. So I think it will actually be a great concept for the area as well.

Any additional comments at all? The only thing I can add to it is, you know, I would be the one here with the most years in the area. That was a nursery area that on both sides of the road, my entire life, it was a nursery. On the west side of the road was a horse farm. And right beside that was a salvage yard. So I've lived here 65 years. I've never really seen anything outside of those entities there. It being a commercial base, as far as a revenue source, I like the tax base that's going to be generated and come from it. I look forward to what it could bring. I'm just giving you my historical analysis of the area, which was, it's always been a nursery based. So outside of that, that's all I can add to the comment.

Thank you. Anybody from public, we should speak on this. All right. I will close public comment. Any final comments from the Diocese at all? All right, I'll say one final comment on my end too. I do think that, well, let me confirm, it's gated to the internal streets, sidewalks, streetlights, those are all gonna be maintained by the owners, correct?

I'll defer that question to the applicant.

Okay, thank you. Please state your name for the record.

For the record, Mike Rankin, Land Planning Group. Mayor, commissioners, staff, and residents, thank you for the opportunity. You guys have a tough job. I've served in cities and counties for some 30 years, so I get what you go through. Don't always appreciate the outcome, but I respect the outcome, so thank you. And I also want to say you guys have an incredible planning staff. We really appreciate working with them. Again, with me tonight is Luke Klassen, the engineer for the project. Commissioner Ruth made a comment earlier that he wanted to see creative ideas come to the community. Well, I think we've got one for you. This is very similar to developments that have occurred in other areas, Tampa, outside of the state of Florida, where you've got this type of concept dropping in affluent areas. You know, and you think of the draw that Apopka would have in this area well beyond its city limits for folks that would want to bring their vehicles here, show them off, run up the street. on Main Street, get something neat, come back, leave a couple hundred dollars at one of the gas stations while they're here. So I see the economic impact that that has. We, June, can you bring up the, or do I have control of it? Just the concept. Thank you. No, let's go to that. And you can see we really wanted to dial in on the detail of the facade and the landscaping. The one to the left up there, that is not one of the... staff's cars driving by there that core 38 cord there it's just a concept car and we really wanted to dial in on how this thing's going to look from the road knowing this location would be a real challenge uh with its infrastructure and um as close to the ingress and egress into this property to have a traditional retail center there. It would just be a tough fit. So this is more of a passive setting. And if you look at as the crow flies to the east northeast, we're 683 feet away from the nearest residence. To the south, we are about 500 feet. And then to the south, southwest, we're about 430 feet as the crow flies from the closest point of this property to the closest point of those residential properties. So you can see we're well away from a residential community, but we're tied well with the infrastructure that's currently there. So a little over 80,000 square feet, 48 units. You know, these folks will be able to, as I mentioned in planning and zoning, I've got this problem. I've got five Lamborghinis. I don't know where to put them. So this is be a great location. I don't have five Lamborghinis, by the way. But the gentleman that's building this has quite the car collection.

He showed me photos.

Yeah, he's very proud of that. So we ask your consideration to take staff's recommendations. We're anxious to move forward. I want to assure you that we'll meet all the policies and procedures of the city as far as landscaping, setbacks, buffers, ingress, egress, et cetera. And I'll yield my time and answer any questions you may have. But thank you for your time.

Thank you for that. Just to confirm, your internal streets will be the community's responsibility. So the streets, the sidewalks, the streetlights are all going to be the community's responsibility, not the city's, correct?

That is correct. And it will be dark skies as well.

Okay. Excellent. We appreciate it. Any additional questions at all from the commission?

I just think it's going to be just a great look for that area. And I really think I appreciate you guys for actually putting a lot of time into the design. I think it's going to be really cool for that area.

Well, give a lot of that credit to Luke and the architect on the project, but more to the owner. Crazy idea to build this.

It's going to look nice. All right.

Well, I will look for a motion to approve Ordinance No. 3160 at first reading and hold over for a second reading and adoption.

So moved.

Moved by Vice Mayor. Second. Second by Commissioner Anderson. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed?

Me.

Vote passes 4-1 with Commissioner Barron in opposition. Next up, Ordinance No. 3161.

Ordinance number 3161, an ordinance of the City of Apopka, Florida, changing the zoning from CC, community commercial, to IL, light industrial, for certain real property generally located at East Keene Road, owned by HCH Development LLC, comprising 5.23 acres more or less, providing for severability conflicts and an effective date.

Dr. Son?

The applicant has requested a rezoning of the same property. The size of the property is 5.2 acre. The current zoning of the property is CC Community Commercial and the requested zoning is IL Light Industrial. Properties along the corridor of East King Road and Kalakona Road has a light industrial and agricultural zoning. On April 8th, DRC has recommended approval, and on July 14th, Planning Commission, you need mostly recommended approval. The recommended motion is accept the first reading of ordinance number 3161 and wholly over for second reading and adoption. Staff and applicant are available.

Thank you, sir. Any additional questions, comments? I'll open up to the public. Anybody wish to speak on this one? If not, I will close public comment. I do want to disclose, because it's quasi-judicial, I did have, was forced to meet with Mr. Klassen, so let me just close that.

Any other final comments then? I met with Mr. Lou Klassen, but I actually met informally with the person who was actually developing this. What's his name? Yes, he gave me his card. Yes, yes.

All right. Well, I will look for a motion to approve ordinance number 3161 at first reading and hold over for a second reading and adoption. Moved by Vice Mayor. Seconded by Commissioner Anderson. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed? Nay. That passes 4-1 with Commissioner Barron in opposition. Thank you. See you in a couple weeks. Thank you, sir. Next up, resolution number 2026-31.

Resolution 2026-31, a resolution of the City Commission of the City of Apopka, Florida, adopting administrative fine settlement guidelines for code enforcement liens, establishing minimum settlement amounts for residential and commercial properties, providing eligibility requirements, authorizing the process of lien settlement requests, providing for satisfaction or release of liens, providing for conflicts, severability, and ineffective date.

Mr. Hanson, I just want to apologize because I should have put this at the top. So I apologize for that. I made you wait through development. So it's OK. I'll fix that moving forward.

So it's OK. Mayor, vice mayor, commissioners. Yeah, this is the new settlement amounts that I've worked up. Five percent for residential or the value of the property, whichever is less and 10 percent on commercial property. value of the property or which is ever a lesser value. I'm going to do $500 per day and they will have 90 days to pay the settlement once you guys approve it.

Understood. Thank you for that. Thank you for taking the time to clarify this too. And it was concerning. So I appreciate that. Anybody from the dice have any additional questions?

So, so when we, Once they go through court enforcement and they're given the fine, is there a timeline for them to either come to compliance or pay? Because in the consent agenda, the first one, I mean, it's before this. I mean, they were 1,032 days.

Oh, there's some probably even more than that. Yeah, there's some that are really old.

Yeah. Yeah, and I mean, I had a lot of questions with that one. And I mean, they purchased the property from HUD for $90,000, but it took them four years to come into compliance and their fines were $531,000 for 1,062 days of not, I mean, is there any way to tighten that up?

I don't know because, I mean, there's some that, I'm telling you, there's some that are probably 10, 15 years old. I don't think we can force them into.

If I may jump in and correct me here, but there's some that are, for homesteading properties, we can't do anything. Basically, it just runs.

Well, what was interesting about this one was that they became homestead this year. So before this, they were not homesteaded. So if they're not homestead, maybe that's the question.

If I remember correctly, it can go up to 20 years before anything. Jason and I had that talk about this, and this is for non-homesteaded properties. It could just go, there's just, I don't know if Cliff, is there anything we could?

Let me say, so we can create a policy as a city to state after X amount of time, and it's whatever we decide, we can start foreclosure proceedings.

Oh, that's absolutely the case.

Okay. So I think that answers your question is that we can create that timeline of if it's a non-homesteaded property at X date, we can kind of add some teeth to what we're doing.

That would make sense because, I mean, when I asked all the questions and at the end I said, when was it homesteaded? They just did it. But they did it after they came into compliance. And I believe they agreed to pay a $10,000 or a fine of up to $10,150. Right. But for almost four years, they just did not come into compliance. But they were not homestead.

Right.

And we allowed it to go for so long.

We'll have to come up with, like what the mayor said, have to come up with something and

Would you come up with something about a timeline instead on the property? Because that would also include commercial.

Sure. Absolutely. It would include both.

I would like to see a policy like that. Only because when you have these blighted... properties and commercial buildings, they're an eyesore to the homeowners surrounding it, other businesses. It's a deterrent.

Correct.

And so I'd like to see that.

I'll come up with something. I'll get something together.

Put something together at a future...

commission meeting. And in addition to that, I just want to make sure too, because some, you know, financial reasons could be, could be the reason why they're not able to bring it up to code. So I also want to make sure that there's a process where we're able to give them time where it's not accumulated because if they have a financial hardship and we're finding $500 a day, we'll still create a, you know, a more of a financial hardship. So is there a meeting where we'd be like, okay, you come in, you explain that, you know, I need this amount of time in order to

Not in the past, but we could look at that moving forward, too. Because it adds up quickly.

That's part of the special magistrate process.

So we've gone to many, if not a large amount of them. What they do is somebody will come up, the magistrate sits right here, and basically it's a very delicate negotiation, not an aggressive one by any means. The magistrate can't say, can't Hey, I'm going to offer you this, but they can say, do you want 120 more days? Do you want six months? Depending on the complexity of it and kind of has that conversation with the homeowner or landowner from there. From my experience, not saying it's every single time, but that's usually how that goes is that that's where that time is built in where fines will not start until after. 20 days, 50 days, 160 days, whatever the number is that the magistrate and the resident decide on, that's what they move forward with and gives them that time without any fines. And then that fine starts after that timeline that was agreed to.

You must be getting hardship. Yeah, I'm familiar with it. I'm definitely familiar with it. But still, you can come up with something and life can happen to anybody and get sick. I just want to make sure that we're still... you know, these are people's homes that they invested in. So we'll make sure that we're not creating a, you know, a strict, I mean, there's a reason why the statute gives you all these years before, you know, something happens. So I just want to make sure that we are still, you know, that we're not... We'll work with them.

Compliance is the goal.

Compliance is the goal, yeah. Compliance is the goal. Not the money, not the property. Compliance. I just want to make sure we're trying to get that.

We'll work with them. Okay.

Any additional comments, questions? I have a comment. And basically it was... to our city administrator radley yesterday we had a pretty lengthy discussion about this um and one of the things that i wanted to make sure that we were cognizant of is before the five and ten i want to know what our cost is and you know obviously to track something that long there's a cost to that And I want to make sure that we're at least starting with the baseline of knowing what our exposure is, and then we can have a better discussion of the 5 and 10. But I want to make sure we capture our additional costs. And I know it's not in here, and I know it was kind of sudden yesterday, but I just want to, for the record, I just want to make sure everybody understands that at a higher level, there's discussions going on, and I just want to make sure that Those thoughts are being shared with the diets. Yeah.

If you could look at section two, number four. I think this is what you're talking about.

Section two.

Number four.

Oh, all city and current art costs, including recording costs, title search costs, abatement costs, administrative costs. Okay.

So, Commissioner, Mayor, to ensure that we're meeting that, that's something we can provide with the settlement agreement as it comes forward to verify, so you all can verify that the city's costs are incorporated in that. That just requires some additional tracking on staff point.

Yeah, I just wanted to make sure that staff was being transparent with the diets. So as we know what our exposure is, you know, before we start moving any further and assessing percentages, make sure we're capturing our calls. Right. Covering, yeah. Great point.

Sure.

Any additional comments? Thank you. That was an oversight on my part.

I'll open up to the public for any comments here.

Rod Olson, and I had trouble pulling this up to be able to look at the whole thing, so the first thing is a question that we can kill it from there. This is the settlement guidelines. This is how much we're going to fine and steps to do it. Does it also include how it's resolved? What I'm getting at is, you know, I was Rock Springs Ridge. We had $2,250,000 in fines. It did not come before the dice. It was settled by someone. Who knows? within the code enforcement department without review. And it was my understanding from one of our former commissioners, that's the first time that the commission didn't sign off or approve that element. There ought to be thresholds. Staff should have the responsibility of up to certain levels, resolving it, reducing a fine based upon X, Y, Z criteria, but there should be a threshold that says it comes before you. Settling 1,320 homes worth of crap for a dozen years for $250,000 on a $2.5 million. The city could use that money, am I wrong? If that doesn't have those parameters, I'll be happy to work with anyone trying to establish them. I've never done it before, but I know when working with my systems and we had various fines and so forth when operations I'm responsible for, we had thresholds. Staff member A has up to X. Then it goes to the supervisor. Then it goes eventually where it goes. So you don't want to tie the system up in the one hand, the other hand. $2 million pitched. Not good.

Thank you, Mr. Olson. There is a clause in here that says, unless otherwise approved by the city commission, eligible code enforcement liens may be settled according to the following minimum guidelines, which references that 5% and 10% for residential properties versus commercial, mixed-use, industrial, non-residential.

Basically, you guys, even if it comes to say it was $10,000, if you guys wanted to say, no, we want $20,000, It's whatever you guys decide.

So you're going to continue to come. To your point, that was the only one, from my understanding, in the history of the city that hasn't come to us. Right. From what I found out about that.

And there's no timeline with that one either.

That's a wild agreement. Yeah. That one has no timeline. Yes, so we're doing these to make sure that doesn't happen again. So any additional public comment here? I will close public comment then. Any final comments from the dais? All right, so I will look for a motion to approve resolution number 26-31. Moved by Commissioner Ruth.

Second.

Second by Commissioner Barron. All those in favor, say aye.

Aye.

All opposed? Motion carries unanimously. Mr. Williams, anything for us?

Just a quick update on the estimated billing for the month end of July. We've dropped another percentage point down to 4%, which leaves a remaining 1,244 accounts on estimated REITs. So we're continuing to make progress. Again, big shout out to our utility operations team and utility billing team to continue knocking away at that. excuse me, that number, because as we get further down this list, they are the more challenging meters that need to be addressed.

So, so what was that number again?

1,244 accounts.

They really have done an incredible job and it's really impressive to see the efforts they've put in. It's a lot. And I know that was kind of, as they've had to move around on some different tasks, they've really done well and really aggressively gotten those estimated reads down. So really proud of them and really impressed by them and their efforts and Definitely not the easiest job ever. And to your point, the next ones up are some, I told them, I'm like, I hope my meter never goes out because I know where it's at and I know there's roots around it. And I'm like, I hope that this one just works forever. So thank you for that. Anything else? That's it. Awesome. Attorney Shepard.

Just briefly, I'm sure you all are now aware that at least for now, the referendum that we were all worried about in November is off the ballot. It can be put back on supposedly if the attorney general or the legislature rewrites the rule, the law. And it gets past the judge. But we're up against the time deadline for the balloting. So that's why it may not make it. It just depends on what they want to do. And I've heard various things. I don't know what to believe. But for now, it's off the ballot. Keep watching for the next 10 days and see what happens.

Thank you, sir. Commissioner reports. Vice Mayor.

Well, two things. And I know that. We have been talking about either an in-house attorney will continue the services with the office, the city attorney's office. He did provide an opportunity to sit down with each one of us to kind of show us the difference. So that's still, I know, open. I guess today you don't have time. It's almost five o'clock. Can we make an appointment?

Yeah, that's fine. And I did. I've already had an opportunity to speak to Mr. Ruth, and I appreciate that opportunity. I'm happy to speak to any of you. As I said, it is uncharged time because obviously, notwithstanding that I'm retiring, I'm not an uninterested party. So I wanted to make sure. But yeah, I would like to at least give you the benefit of my thinking. You all know you've had two. Well, some of you know that you've had two prior episodes with in-house attorneys. And the issue is simply trying to make sure you set yourself up for success and not failure. And so if you're going in-house, if you do it on one person, it's not going to work. I'm just saying. You're going to need more because it's a big job. You're the second largest county in Orange County. One lawyer. If it was me, I couldn't do it. I'm just telling you.

Okay. Then the other, I just kind of want to extend, again, our condolences on behalf of the city, but also personally for the former chief administrator that was here for 25 years, Jack Douglas, his wife. And my good friend Cher passed away. on Monday, so I didn't think I would cry. Okay, I'm sorry. It's okay. You're really dragging down the meeting. I know, I am, I am. Just want to share the condolences and I want you to know that Jack and Cher have been a very much part of our community for decades and he served our city with professionalism integrity. He was not just the city administrator, he was the finance person and she worked decades for Apaka High School and just wanted to extend my condolences. I mean, Jack is listening, let him know that We love Cher and we loved him. And if he needs anything from the city for us to help support him during this time that we are available to him. And I'm so sorry.

That's it. Thank you. Should have put you last. I know. I'm like, oh, this is heavy.

At least you made me laugh. It's my defense mechanism.

I have to use humor for things. Commissioner Anderson.

Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. All right. That was heavy to come behind. Okay. I also would like to extend my condolences to the Douglas family as well. I will definitely be praying for the family, for all their strength and everybody in the APAPA community that this, this, the effectiveness of having a community. So, and also to you, I know that was a, you know, close friend, friend of yours. So definitely, definitely be praying for you as well. So moving on to a, okay. All right, from that. So two things. I know I mentioned earlier in the beginning of the budgeting process about the $150,000 that currently is earmarked. Can you kind of go, where is that now? Do we have to re-put it back in the budget? Because I want to make sure that we're able to use that $150,000 for the homeless shelter. There's a lot of money. There's like, yeah, I just want to, because I want to ask. I'm just. That's Duke money. Duke money. Yes, ma'am.

It is Duke money. Duke money has been. Okay. Yeah.

It's been in mark for a while. That is not in the budget, but it is in the reserves. Mm-hmm.

So I will ask that it be put into the budget so that we can actually utilize it. Because I know with the CRA, even though we're pushing the meeting back, that there are some talks of, you know, about purchasing that property. I just want to make sure that we have everything kind of lined up and kind of ready to go. So I'm asking that that be put into, do I have the motion board? Is it going to be in the budget?

As we go through the budget process, all the edits, you can throw everything in there.

Okay.

And then we can discuss it from there and have feedback.

Because it is earmarked for the homeless. That's what it's used for? Yes. Okay.

Yes. It's exclusively only able to be used for that.

Used for that. Well, that's how it was earmarked by a previous council commission. Okay. Because we do have other funds that were earmarked, like the birding park and some work at the amphitheater, that is still in the budget. But they were earmarked for those projects. If you don't want to proceed with those projects, you have to come back.

We definitely need to review all of them. Anything that's earmarked, let's review, make sure we're happy with it and still want to continue with it, but also tie it to a plan. If we're going to do it, here's the timeline, here's the project, which is why I started to initiate the project trackers for each department. If we're going to do it, let's put a timeline to it and get some threshold and metrics in place for success. Yeah.

And can we get a list of that, the different projects that are currently, well, the money that's currently earmarked? Because I know I could be in conversations that, oh, we have something earmarked, so we kind of know. And I think that'll kind of assist us as well with the budgeting process as well. I will. Perfect. Thank you.

I appreciate that.

Okay. The second thing is, and maybe this is a question to the attorney, not really sure, but I know that we spoke just like mamas. Is there any type of insurance that is in place if... Any of the city employees or any type of negligence where we're able to, so they don't have to seek, you know, to go through the legal process where we can say, okay, we messed up. We can go through our insurance company and kind of.

Well.

I know that's a loaded question.

These are actually more complicated than you might have recognized. First of all, I don't know what insurance you have. That's not a question. That I can answer, that would be risk management that might be able to answer it. But in terms of how the insurance company deals with things, even when they're your fault, that's something that we learned from the firefighter episode that we don't control. Because I'm certain, although without pointing out whom, there were people on the die that would have supported payments to his family members. but our insurance carrier defended us and won and there was no payments because there was no legal liability. So the real question is, when we think we have liability, is that enough for the insurance company that we may have to pay? And the answer is no. We have to have legal liability and we have protections as a government called sovereign immunity that kick in for many things. And most planning functions that we're engaged in, like the ones you're talking about, we would cover it. For example, Let's suppose this was a case where you had someone, if I understand the facts, put a stop work order on something that they didn't have a right to put a stop work order on. I'm just assuming that those are the facts for the sake of discussion. But let's suppose the case had been where a building inspector had gone out and said, this thing passes and then the building collapses. Or it turns out that I literally had this case, no joke, where it was a plan that said it was supposed to block construction. And it was built with frame construction. The building people know what I'm talking about. And even though the plan said block and it was built frame, the inspector passed it and then got sued. But we have no liability. So as weird as it seems, that's what sovereignty means for the stuff that government does most of the time. We don't have immunity for making mistakes. I mean, we have immunity for making mistakes. So we have insurance that will pay for the cost of our defense and so forth. But to the extent we're covered by sovereign immunity, what they're going to do, as they did in the other case, is assert that defense and probably win.

One small correction. I'm fairly sure that Duran Finley dropped their lawsuit.

That was after it was dismissed. Trust me, I know that one well. It was dismissed and they just decided not to refile.

Okay. So I guess my remaining question is, is it possible that because you haven't been, I guess, brought up to speed with the attorney to get with the risk management to see if the insurance company. Because from my understanding, just hearing things, obviously, there's been a financial hardship on, you know. From my understanding, she blew her life savings to open up this business. And there was a months and months where the business could not open up. And I just think we need to do all we can as a city to make sure that we explore every possible possible.

It's a you have a different situation about whether or not. And of course, there's there's some some complications here, too. But if you as a city decide this is something that we think. needs to be done and we can argue that it serves a public purpose or something like that, we might be able to do what would otherwise be called a volunteer payment. Anytime you spend government money, it has to accomplish a governmental purpose or a public purpose. And so that's the difficulty, but we probably could work our way through that. But that's a different question than saying to the insurance company, hey, we think that this was a bad thing and you ought to pay. They're not gonna, because if we have a defense, there's no reason for them to. And so the difference here is, and this is the part because I'm not brought up to speed, there is a different cause of action. I don't know what's been asserted, but if you are asserting that you have color of law to do something and you don't, so you act as if you do, like you act like you're a cop and you're not a cop. or you act like you have the power to put on, maybe in this case, a stop work order that you didn't have. There may be a liability that goes outside of sovereign immunity for that. But I don't know that and I don't want to tell you that's certain because that's why you have the insurance defense firm. So you're not immune from all activity where government workers make a mistake. But for most, you are.

So this is loaded. Maybe I need to get with, I guess I'm trying to figure out what is a way where we can actually, because from my understanding, it's possible that it's still costing this business owner a lot of money to the point where they're almost about to go out of business. And I think that time is not on her side. So I think that if we could come up with something where we're able to kind of meet with her and figure out what that looks like and then come into the council and see if there's something that we can kind of, you know, agree on.

I'm in agreement with your decision-making on that. But again, it's about being a large thing because I always have to say the bad part. But the bad part is you also have to remember that as soon as you start saying, you know, this just doesn't seem right, you're going to have a lot of people more standing up telling you what's not right and why you ought to be helping them also. And I can think of a few things that have come through these chambers in the last year that without mentioning – people who would be lining up and say, wait a minute, when I came here and said, this is what y'all did to me, you didn't do anything.

But our investigation actually – maybe we actually did do it.

Yeah.

So that's a little – I think that's a little different. It's a lot different than that. Okay. So I guess the next course of action is I guess the pleasure of the counsel.

What do you guys – do you guys – What I would recommend because I haven't been updated on this either. What may be beneficial is to contact our attorney that's running with that, have individual conversations, and then kind of see what we need to do if there's a shade meeting of sorts that maybe needs to happen or can't happen.

If it's pending litigation, you can have a shade meeting. Yes, but it has to be pending. And if that's there, if she's already sued, then you have an opportunity.

So maybe that's the opportunity. Have individual conversations, ask the questions, get a comfort level, and then we can schedule a shade meeting to figure that out from there. I think that's the most appropriate way to do it without getting us into any trouble either.

Okay, I like that. Okay, perfect. Thanks for that. All right, so we'll do a shade meeting. Okay. The next thing, talk about homeless shelter. Okay. And then the next thing is the resolution, I think it was 2025 dash 19 in regards to the public, the public comment. So there's several things in the resolution that I think that 1 that I do think we need to bring back 2 things in particular that I would want to make a motion for just 1, just 1 motion, or maybe 2 motions for it is about the 30 minute. In that resolution, it talks about 30 minutes that is dedicated for public comment. I want to remove that 30 minute because depending on what the topic is, depending on the community and what's going on at the time, I don't want to limit that. In addition to that, what we talked about is the three minutes to four minutes change in that. I want to go ahead and make a motion now to remove the 30 minute, the 30 minute public comment cap thank you for that and to no limit and also to change from three minute to four minute um time for public comment uh motion to uh

Remove the cap. Well, adjust policy 2025-19 to remove the language about the cap and to increase public comment from three minutes to four minutes per person.

Okay. Moved. Thank you. Three minutes to four minutes and removing the cap, I guess. But to limit... the person who comes up for four minutes that one time because what happens is when I public when I was at planning and zoning they when I thank you when I was at planning and zoning they only gave them two minutes and that was Orange County but you can't have the same person keep coming we have someone that he came up the He had his time. Then he went back to the back of the line to come back up to get two more minutes. Oh, that's different.

So this is just my motion. But then you could do it almost to limit. But my motion, I just want a motion for that. But you can do your motion for that to limit the time.

Well, it's just that, you know, that adjusting the oneness that he has.

Well, I just want to just do you can do your motion separately if you want. So we do have a motion.

I'm absolutely acknowledging the motion. Thank you. I just need a second for it.

Technically, that was my first idea, but thank you, Commissioner Anderson. I appreciate it, but I'll second it as well. All right.

Seconded by Commissioner Anderson. Excuse me, Ruth. This is why we need two hour meetings. Thank you. Is there any final discussion on that? I do want to open it up to public comment too for here to give any kind of preliminary feedback for this. All right, so motion, second. All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed?

I think we should, we've been trying to massage this, so I don't know if I want to approve that right now. I want it to come back with everything. You can say no.

That's my goal as well, to bring it back. So I'm going to be a no vote as well to bring it back to really dissect this.

Yeah, I don't want to piecemeal it.

Because this was something I advocated strongly for when I was a commissioner. Right. I advocated against the no limits, advocated against... reduce them to three minutes and so i want to bring this back and do it properly now well i don't think everybody's willing to look at it well i just wanted to say this and i know we have a motion on tape but we're discussing a bit of a motion but that's another story but we already took the vote commissioner where did you stand on that i think we need to work on all right so the motion did not pass it was three to two with commissioner uh Got it. Ruth, Mayor Nesta, and Vice Mayor in opposition.