City Council - workshop

This time we'll call to order the 05/04/2026 work session of the Clearwater City Council. This time we move to item 2.1 on the agenda.

Authorize the purchase order in agreement with Olimeter DPG LLC for natural gas main and service line locating services.

Good afternoon, council, mayor. I'm here on behalf of CGS Energy. I am the gas manager. And we currently have a damage prevention agreement with Olimeter. Right now, we're required by six fourteen of the federal code and also Florida statute five fifty six to locate lines. We offer that service free to our public and excavators and we're wanting to continue with Ola Meter. We had a committee that had we took bids from five vendors. They were selected as the most responsible bidder. They've done a good job for us. Our ticket volume is up.

We're seeing a lot of growth in Clearwater. That's a good thing. We're getting a great service with good quality. So we recommend that we go with Olemeter and continue with Olemeter. So with that, I mean, we're asking counsel to authorize or sign an agreement with Olemeter. It's a one year contract in the amount of $670,000 There's three one year one ups after that, which would be based on the CPI increase. But that's about it. We're very comfortable with this team. The selection panel all agreed that Olometer was the vendor of choice. So that's what we're here to do today, and I've got a damage prevention guide here, so if you guys want one, y'all can have one.

And also a little damage prevention card, so we are very big into public safety and utility interruptions and minimizing that, so we're very proud of our group and what this team has done. Olimiter has done a great job. So with that, that's our recommendation.

Any council discussion?

Any questions? If

none, do we have consent? Yes. Have consent. Thank you, sir.

Thank you, sir.

Appreciate it.

Have a wonderful day.

Move to agenda item 3.1.

Authorized the purchase order of Rick Croft Enterprises doing business as Texas Trailers Sales Services for the purchase of seven enclosed trailers.

Good afternoon, mayor council. Matthew Anderson, assistant director of Parks and Recreation. The item for you is to purchase seven enclosed trailers and one forklift. These items are needed to, help with our storage needs and also material handling. The seven trailers will increase our current storage capacity to 1,600 feet.

Plus, it will allow us to transport our stored items back and forth from storage to events, also out to maintenance jobs and things like that. So it actually makes us more efficient than what we currently are at with having a load to take places. In the forklift, we'll also increase our capability to handle all the supplies, paper products and things that we stock the sound with, all the different facilities throughout the city. I'd be glad to answer any questions at this time.

Okay. Any questions? Not do we have consent? Yes. Have consent on 3.1. Thank you.

Thank you.

Item 3.2.

Ratify and confirm a reimbursement payment to the Philadelphia Phillies in the amount of $2,600,000 for, repairs to damage caused by hurricane Melton.

Thank you. Good afternoon, mayor, council members. Art Cater, Parks and Recreation director. The item for you today is reimburse the Philadelphia Phillies cost that they incurred due to repairing the storm damage caused by the hurricane, Milton to the BayCare, ballpark. The damage occurred between October, ninth and tenth twenty four, and to have the stadium ready for spring training by February, very short time frame, several things had to take place.

First, the council approved the initial mitigation work to dry out the stadium. Second, the council approved some of the initial restoration work to pay Servpro. Third, the Phillies were authorized to make the remainder of the repairs needed, and they utilized their contractor that they had on board then, creative contractors. The partnership of the Phillies Management Parks and Recreation Risk Manager, Creative Contractors, and the insurance adjuster for the city ensured that the stadium was operational before opening day 2025. Staff has reviewed and approved all the expenses to ensure that the funds were that we are reimbursing the Phillies now were in fact done because of the damage due to the storm, and that nothing in that reimbursement is for enhancements that the Phillies did, and or improvements that they did over and above the storm damage.

That was important because it they got mixed. That's why it's taken so long to come back to you because you may ask, well, why has it taken so long if we finish the work? And one of the things was to go through and make sure that that that was accurate. The total amount of reimbursement due to the Phillies is $2,635,500.96. I'm available to answer any questions. Yes, sir.

Okay. Councilman Robert.

Did we get any FEMA reimbursement or We how did the insurance work on

received insurance, and we have applied for FEMA reimbursement for we actually received Todd Marrone can answer that better, but we actually received a $500,000 decrease in our deductible. That's what we're seeking from FEMA.

Okay. Yes.

So we received a $5,000 deduction from the National Flood Insurance Program, and we have FEMA reimbursement pending, and then we receive insurance for the other dollars. So at this point, we're actually pretty close to hold except for the remainder of our deductible, which is about 1,600,000.

Okay. Thank you.

It's actually a follow-up question for Dan. So what are the most recent updated numbers? How much was what how much is totally due to us? And how much has it been already dispersed?

So we tried to write this into the text a little bit. And it is a little bit confusing because when you're going through the insurance assessment, they provide you a certain value, you do the work, sometimes those numbers don't exactly pair up. But the total loss total for the gross loss was $5,324,000 Now our deductible was somewhere in the neighborhood of $2,100,000 but that was reduced by $500,000 So we had the deductible of 1,600,000. We have received the insurance proceeds in the amount of 3,100,000. So the remainder that Mr.

Cater's talking about for FEMA is we are trying to seek the remainder of our deductible amount of 1.6 from FEMA, which would theoretically in the end hopefully make us whole completely, which is optimistic.

What about total, not specifically to the Phillies? Overall,

how much I would have is to get that for you. I don't think Todd's here, he'd probably be the one because it is an algorithm of a chart to figure it out. Because we have multiple different carriers, multiple different policies, and multiple different ways he seeks reimbursement. So I don't have the total loss numbers off top of

The last time I asked, I was like, we only received 10%. I was like, oh my gosh, let's speed this up, you know. We spent a lot.

I can ask Mr. Avis to have Todd give a summary of where we are currently to get you some updated information.

Thank you.

Vice Mayor?

Yes, sir. I'll speak to that a little bit too. We're moving at the speed of FEMA. So that can take years. You know, certain disbursements they're able to throw out really quick, like emergency protective measures and those types of things. But once you get into having your own insurance going through that, providing the documentation back to the federal government through the state that the insurance has been paid, it's a whole rigmarole. So I look forward to hearing what those exact numbers are, and what the roundabout numbers are too. But, yeah, unfortunately, we still got to buckle

up and we're in line. Nino?

Thank you, Mayor. I know you've commented on this previous, but Art, I just want to thank you and staff and the partnership you just described on the task your your group did to make Clearwater Baseball ready was nothing short of miraculous. There were fish swimming in Bryce Harper's locker. Yeah. Seriously, And it was unbelievable, but that that short type time frame to turn it back around and be ready for the pitchers and baseball, the region was barely able to traverse on some of the roads throughout Pinellas County, but your your team had had the stadium ready. It was it was amazing. So thank you.

Thank you. Yeah. Two things. One, consistent with what the vice mayor shared, it takes forever. I know communities I've worked with through in my private sector who communities waited ten years or more.

I'm told told by a city leader in the New Orleans area that they're still out some money from Katrina, from FEMA. So as the vice mayor shared, to get it, you know, priority monies get but we're still out quite a bit and probably will be for quite a long time just the way it works unless we can get FEMA reform, which seems to be taking forever to do it in Washington. But and then the second thing is having walked through with you and Matt that day day after Milton, mean, just seeing the how inundated the locker room, everything under stands was with the water. It was a heavy turn and a quick turn to try to get that, stadium ready for spring training. And your efforts were, you know, monumental.

The Phillies, we we all dug in to get it done. And, you know, we can look back at different things that made us more successful than other communities, but starting spring training one time, getting those Phillies fans back that that early February, that sparked the recovery economically for the entire city. And it was tight, and we were making calls to get it done and get it done before that day. I think they were painting in the locker rooms the day before the players arrived. So hats off to you all for all that, but folks, this is, you know, hopefully we'll get it back eventually.

But regardless, it was money well spent because it came back in droves and what we've been able to recover by getting back so quickly. So thank you for all your efforts again.

Well, thank you. And again, it was a team effort. I mean, the city as a whole and those people that I did mention, today couldn't be done without us working together

and partnering.

Yeah. Thank you. Okay. Do we have consent? Yes. Okay. Thank you. Agenda item 4.1.

Authorize a purchase order to Lake Brothers LLC for the maintenance of city owned lakes, ponds, wetlands, and mitigation sites.

Good afternoon. I'm Sarah Kessler, environmental specialist at the Public Works Department. This is for the approval of our lake maintenance contract. The cost of the first year is a little bit higher than subsequent years, and that's because there's an initial treatment at some of the sites. 15 contingency is added to the contract, and that's something that we've done for many years because of unforeseen costs.

So those costs are not for additional treatment of the sites. Like we have a standard that those sites need to be treated to, and so that's part of the contract. Those unforeseen costs would be if we have a super cold winter and some of the herbaceous vegetation dies for replanting. As we have other projects come online, a lot of times we have storm water ponds that need to be added to the contract. So that's what that 15% contingency is for. It's not just it's not for things that are within the contract. And those funds are not used without approval. So if you have any questions, happy to answer those.

Okay. Any questions on this agenda? We have consent? Yes, sir. We have consent on 4.1. Thank you. Agenda item 4.2.

Award a construction contract to concrete protection and restoration for the Garden Avenue Garage Restoration Project.

Good

afternoon, mayor and council members. I'm Michael Schillet. I'm the parking manager of this Public Works Department. Item before you today is a request to award construction contract to Concrete Protection and Restoration LLC in the amount of $186,318 for the Garden Avenue Garage Restoration Project. This project addresses preventative maintenance repairs identified through a recent condition assessment of the garage, which is a two fifty space parking facility that serves downtown Clearwater.

Repairs are necessary to preserve the structural's use structure's useful life, maintain safety and help avoid more significant costly repairs in the future. The work will be completed in phases to make sure you keep as much parking available during the construction as possible. I'm happy to answer

any questions.

Any questions on this agenda? If none, do we have consent? Yes. Do we have consent on this agenda item? Thank you. Genital item 5.1.

Approve the annexation initial future land use map designation of residential urban and initial zoning atlas designation of medium density residential for the property at 2448 Nursery Road.

Good afternoon, council. My name is Adrian Young, planning development. Voluntary annexation request for 0.3 six three acres located on Northside Nursery Road, approximately one twenty six feet east of 1st Street Court. The parcel is occupied by detached dwelling unit at the moment. The applicant is requesting annexation in order to receive sanitary sewer and solid waste from the city. Plan development staff analysis includes that the annexation petition is consistent with the community development code and comprehensive plan. I recommend approval if there any questions.

Okay. Any questions on this agenda? None? Thank you. Item six point excuse me, 5.2.

Approve the annexation initial future land use map designation residential urban and initial zoning atlas designation low medium density residential for unaddressed Sunset Point Road property.

Again, Adrian Young, planning development. Thank you. This voluntary annexation request is for 0.14 acres located on the North side of Sunset Point Road, approximately 252 feet west of Northumberland Booth Road. The applicant has requested annexation on to receive city city services and combined parcels. Plan development staff concludes that the annexation petition is consistent with comprehensive plan development code and recommends approval. Any questions?

Okay. Any questions on this agenda? Okay. Seeing none, move to the next agenda item, agenda item 5.3.

Approve future land use map amendments from the residential urban category to the residential medium category for the property at 2446 Nursery Road.

Hello again. Adrian Young, plan development. This voluntary future land use map amendment request is for 0.44 acres located on the North side of Nursery Road approximately 186 feet east of Rose Street Court. The parcels are occupied by the tax dwelling unit. The applicant's requesting the future land use map amendment from residential urban to residential medium. Plan development staff includes that the petition is consistent in the comprehensive plan, community development code, and also recommends approval. Here for any questions.

Any questions on this agenda? I'm seeing none. Thank you.

Okay. Agenda item 5.4.

Provide direction regarding the city's tree preservation ordinance.

Good afternoon Lauren Matzky planning and development so earlier this year- council had requested staff provide a summary of some changes that Pinellas County had recently completed in their to their tree code amendments earlier in '26. So today I'll provide an overview of the county's code structure and highlight certain difference between the counties and the city's tree preservation ordinances. Just for for those watching from home, I've not provided or presented or prepared any code amendments but following council's discussion today, we're we're ready to to make any changes as as requested. So, recent council actions including the recognition of Arbor Day and the Tree Canopy research studies support the and of course the support of the annual tree giveaway reflect the city's understanding and importance of preserving the tree canopy. So these efforts obviously reflect the importance of that and all the other environmental benefits that they have.

So I won't go into all of that. The community development code then is what tells staff how to implement or to achieve these policy directions. This is where I don't know how to do this from. Sorry. So I'll begin with areas that staff identified as possible refinement to our existing code.

I'll summarize the city's process, review several side by side comparisons, and conclude with permit activity and the city's policy context. So in as a difference that from some of my other presentations, I promise I'm not going to go line by line through code today. And I'll eventually catch on to this part. So before getting into the side by side comparison, we did take a step back or up and look and identify some areas where there are opportunities within the city's code to to improve the clarity, usability, overall administration in line with some of the original correspondence on the topic. So some of these are more organizational in nature, like restructuring sections of code or certainly incorporating better graphics.

A lot's changed these days. People are definitely visual and I find them very helpful myself. Some of the other recommendations that we would want to include are more technical. So there could be rating system changing in how we handle residential tree counts and then there's administrative items including exemptions, how we address hazardous trees here in the city of Clearwater and our current fee structure. These are all things that came out of our internal review as well as our comparison.

So briefly, removal or the permitting process here in the city of Clearwater. Free removal permits are typically handled administratively by staff. That includes the review of the application, conducting site visits, making a determination, and usually with input or always with input from the land development arborist. The land development arborist are part of our team and they review both the trees in the field as well as when there are site plans or development applications in front of us that also include potential tree removal and also tree preservation. So, the process is more detailed for multifamily and non residential properties but it's more streamlined for single family and duplex properties.

So two family and single family. When there's more complex situations because sometimes these arise in the field, staff may bring

in

additional their peers basically, additional land development arborists may come out and do an independent assessment of the situation so that way we have multiple perspectives on the question or a tree in question or the situation in the field. So and that's all done before making a final decision. And if a denial is being considered, they would also seek an additional arborist input and conduct further management review before finalizing that. So, there have been times where the city has hired outside arborists to come and make an assessment of a tree also before moving forward with a denial as an example. I'm going to confuse things a little bit and switch to the ELMO real quick.

Because like anything, you know, the more you look at your own slides, the more you're like, oh, I would do that slightly differently if I had another minute. So I spent some time reviewing the county's presentations. We spoke with their staff and really tried to get a better understanding of, you know, what they had before and kind of where they were starting from and why they were making their changes. And someone on my team actually made this slide. The the left side is straight from one of the county slides, and then they created the the right side for the city of Clearwater just as a comparison.

So and and I just wanted to use this because this this helps illustrate that the county and and Clearwater were starting at different places. So under the county's former code, which again is on the left side, even a relatively small residential project, which is what we see more often here in Clearwater, like an extension of a driveway would trigger a pretty major mitigation requirement. You'll see on there that under their former code for this small typical residential lot in Clearwater, it would have required 27 shade trees or over $10,000 to be paid into their tree bank fund. Their landscaping requirement required two shade trees. And in the example, it's the removal of two trees totaling about 40 inches in diameter at breast height DBH.

So under Clearwater's code, like where we would be starting from now, that mitigation is obviously or is clearly substantially less. So our mitigation would be two shade trees and about $1,900 payment into the tree bank fund. And our overall landscaping requirement is four trees. So I'm just sharing this as context because it was it was difficult to do an apples to apples comparison across the board, and I think it was really interesting to me when I saw this, you know, how different are what was their code prior to January and where our code is now in comparison. They also have a wider variety, I would say, of situations out there.

In their presentations, they also had illustrate, you know, a two acre lot that had 40 something trees on it in addition to already being developed. And I don't think we have very many situations like that here. So it just kind of they were covering a wider gamut of situations than we have as a built out community. So then I can switch back to my slides. Thank you.

So now I'll jump into some of the comparisons. So this this slide shows where each code begins in terms of regulating trees. And for shade trees, both the city and county started four inches. It's called inches DBH, which is diameter at breast height. That's their standardized measurement.

Where they differ is with palms, accent trees, and which we we the city regulate or consider and then homesteaded residential properties are treated differently in Pinellas County. Palms count towards the tree requirements in both of the codes but you'll see different measurements used the city uses 10 feet in height and the county is at six feet. The city also has the separate category for accent trees at two inches DVH where the county does not distinguish between accent trees and shade trees in that regard. The county generally does not regulate trees on homesteaded single family properties. This was a new addition to their code and unless they exceed 24 inches DBH.

So if it's on a homes, it's very specific. So homesteaded residential property, if it's under 24 inches DBH, it could be removed without a permit. One of the next changes that the county made was simplifying their tree rating system. Previously, they had seven different ratings. They found it was in talking with their staff, they found it was difficult to apply consistently.

They said some categories were rarely used and in some cases, different ratings led to different outcomes. So their revised system is a rating system of four zero to three. They also combined specimen and historic trees into the highest rating rather than treating them as separate categories. As you would have seen, I provided a handout that our team put together to compare both codes side by side without doing it all on the slides. And you'll see that we have a zero to six scale, which speaking with staff, they still believe it works well but this is definitely an opportunity to create better alignment across the two municipalities if desired.

Next is the replacement tree. So, this is one of the bigger structural changes in the county's code. It was pretty complex to understand. You know, I think we probably read it numerous times and I don't I would not be able to administer it myself right now. But in talking with them, I started to get the hang of what they were trying to accomplish.

So instead of using an inch for inch replacement, the county ties mitigation to both the size and the rating of the tree. So the grade one, two, and three are the ratings, the size goes down the left column. But in essence, smaller, lower rated trees require less mitigation while larger, higher rated trees require more. Their stated goal was to create a more practical approach that better reflects the value of the tree being removed, which I followed. And they allow for mitigation through on-site replanting payment in lieu for a combination of both.

What I learned was they did not necessarily allow that prior to these changes where we already have all of that. And so the difference between ours would be we're still an inch for inch approach. And then you'll see also on this, they give a credit specifically for the nuisance and invasive removals, and that's an opportunity for our code to be more clear.

And I'll touch

on that a little bit more in a minute. So, the county also made adjustments to how minimum tree requirements are set for residential lots. In Clearwater, you'll see on the left hand side, we have broader ranges for our lot ranges where the county breaks those ranges down into smaller, more detailed blocks. I think for the typical lot sizes that we share in common, the end result is pretty similar. But again, the county is a little bit more granular.

So this is another area where staff thoughts and potential evaluation and bringing in this difference or simplifying our approach for aligning it more more closely. So it just kind of depends. You can see at a certain point, you know, we're we are more trees for the larger lots compared to but I added along the bottom. Low medium density residential zoning district is our most prevalent zoning district and that has a minimum lot size of less than of 5,000 square feet or less. So I'm sorry.

I'm going do this again. Where's my other sheet? I just wanted to go back then to we can do that, sorry. This is then a snippet from the county's presentation that they gave. And so you'll recognize now their former pre January 2026 code on the left, the same graphic that I used in the other one.

And then on the right side, you'll see what they've revised it to. And so in this scenario, again, was the removal of two Laurel Oaks 40 inches. They dropped it down to eight trees. So the tree bank contribution dropped from 10,200 to approximately 1,800, which is a pretty significant change through their their amendments. And then the trees was from 27 trees to eight trees.

So I can understand why some of the headlines were what they were when I really took the time to deep dive into this. So I thought this really illustrated the success of their changes because it it really did reduce the burden of their regulations on their property owners. So kudos to them. I mentioned that the county's code clearly identifies certain exemptions from their replanting requirements. For example, trees that are located within a proposed building footprint or trees rated as poor would be exempt from needing to be replaced.

In Clearwater, this is an area where our current practices are not always fully reflected in the code. So this is, again, another opportunity for clarity. For example, we we in practice and through policy would not prevent the removal of a tree if it impacted the economic use of of a property, but that's not explicitly written in the code. Also then how we handle the hazardous trees, we're relying on the state law or we do utilize or our residents primarily utilize the state law which allows for them to have a letter from an arbor certified arbor stating that it's hazardous and then the removal without a permit. In speaking with county staff, they were finding that everyone was using that instead of going through the process of their code because of the costs and the replacements.

So they were finding they indicated that many times, you know, they might receive a phone call asking and then they'd never hear back from anyone but then the trees would be gone. So they had a you know, they did not want that. They wanted to maintain and really incentivize the maintenance of the larger, more prestigious trees within their community. So, again, this is where clearer guidance within our code would be beneficial, I think, for everyone, and we could bring forward some of those things that we've done by policy and actually codify them so it's continuous across teams. So this slide looks at the fees, how mitigation is calculated, and enforcement of fines.

Clearwater is Treebank because we use the inch for inch for our mitigation. That's what ours is based on. So it's $48 per inch DBH. It's been that number for a very long time. We've not changed our fee structure structure in a very long time. So, that's why this year, we're actually working on a a fee study. The county uses a flat amount per tree and you pay for what's not replanted. So, lower rates for some residential properties and higher rates for the non residential properties. So that's where you'll see for a single family or a duplex triplex, they have a flat rate of $300 per tree regardless of size. But for those reminder for those that are homesteaded, it's exempt from all of this.

And then it's $500 for the multifamily and commercial. So I had included this slide more as an example, like a visual reference for what a DVH actually looks like. In all fairness, when I started digging into this, really had no idea what 24 inches DBH would look like. Right? I mean, seems big, but I really wasn't sure.

So the visual person in me, I was lucky. I have arborists that were willing to go out and measure trees. Now these are on the municipal surface of building property, so I thought at least that was someplace regularly accessible. We also we had a department event at Crest Lake Park, and we measured some of those trees for fun because that's what we do. So but, you know, these are I mean, you know, y'all can come anytime.

But, I mean, these are slightly smaller than what the the county would allow from a residential property, but I I was hoping that y'all would find it, helpful as well as I did, because 24 inches is even bigger than this. But, you know, county staff, they have their reasons for this information. And again, code is different. Our staff is different. We have different things that we try to achieve here in the city.

So following this slide, so the DBH is where it splits into branches. Is that

No. It's it's I would say it's probably right around here because it's supposed to be around test height, which I think is about four and a half feet up. I have certified arborists in the crowd that could correct me if I'm going But right. That would just happen to It's a standard height. Yes. It standardizes. So that way, you can

Got it.

Okay. Which was fun. I didn't put in all the pictures with people in them, but I took a lot.

Okay. I get it.

So this then just like gives us the general sense of our current permitting activity because, again, you know, I know that our teams stay busy, but I really don't know what that means until you pull out the numbers. Right? So these are specifically for the stand alone permits. So I'm not doing anything to my house or either and I just have concerns about a tree and I come through or you know, maybe it's fencing but not a brand new development that everything's coming in as part of a whole package. So, the city processed you know, just under 300 permits in 2023 fewer in '24, '25 likely reflects some of our waivers for tree permits post storm.

And then as of the first quarter of this year, we're at 44. And then you'll see denial rates have generally been consistent around 11%, a small increase to 13% there. We were kind of surprised at how consistent that is. But I think the, you know, the majority of our requests are approved. You know, each one is each one is reviewed on on a case by case scenario. So, you know, there were asked and we go out and look at, you know, because there's a lot of questions or concerns about, you know, damage being a main one. I understand that. Like, is there a potential for damage? Is it currently damaging? Is it uplifting, you know, sidewalk or or driveway?

And so, that's where you you just have to get out on the field and really look at it. So, our our team goes out and does that and you know, based on their expertise and certifications, this is where we happen to have landed. So this was just for some context there. And then just, because this is all policy based or our code comes from, you know, what is in our comprehensive plan. I understand, like, this this is a lot on one slide.

But, I did go ahead and do a review of Clearwater 2045 just to see, you know, or refresh my memory on on the different ways that we talk about. This is bigger policy level. Changes to our community development code are not necessarily inconsistent with this. You know, when we're looking at trying to make things clearer for our community and bring consistency across those things can still be consistent with the importance of maintaining our tree canopy. Again, as shown, like you're just two weeks ago, actions taken that were supported by all of this.

So it's just to kind of pull it all together on one place. And so that's what I have for my slides and a comparison. I have a lot of support. I also have my team here who can answer if there's detailed questions. But what I might do is and you all can look at it if you want to or not is just pull up these again back to some of the recommendations because I think this was a very helpful exercise for us.

You know, we do try to review our code periodically in different times. Sometimes it's because a question is asked and that is just that's what the impetus is for opening it up like a case like Vesky to talk about the tree code and what's been changed. It's a great chance for us to go through and evaluate and see what would we do differently, what are we doing that's not in the code, how can we make things easier for our customers because when it's easier for our customers, it's just a better relationship for all of us. So with that, I'll now stop talking for real.

Discussion. Vice Mayor.

Yes, thank you. Lauren, thank you and your staff for starting to look into this. And I appreciate the areas that you just went up to, of kind of where you're focused, and welcome the upcoming debate of what we're getting ready to go through here. One of the main reasons, and I'm glad that you brought one of the slides from the county, is to ensure pretty much what you did there, is show what they're doing, how it's helped residents in our area to be more simplified in an area that we can get. So I'd like to be somewhere along that line.

You also referenced when you were talking on page nine about the state statute, and the reason people probably aren't reaching out is because of Florida Statute 163.045, which puts a hard limit on local governments. When it comes to residential properties, I'm just gonna read portions of it right here. Local governments cannot require a permit fee or mitigation for removing trees on residential properties. It's not just the homesteaded properties, it is those residential properties. If the tree is dangerous and then you did hit who is able to deem a tree dangerous, they do have to, we go out and ask about it, produce that letter,

Yes, if you it comes

from And that is a certified arborist or licensed landscape architect. So I think that maybe we should try to reference that within wherever we go with this, whatever we decide, and how we incorporate that into our new coder, where we go from here. I also wanna say that this isn't just trying to clean up what we have, looking out for our residents and protecting those trees that matter most. You know, we've got some beautiful oak trees, we've got some beautiful palm trees. And I think that everybody here, you know, took a hard stance too, when we were dealing with residents having issues issues with utility company that's going through.

So we all preserve, love our canopy and wanna preserve it. But I wanna say, it comes back to making sure that when you see somebody else neighboring jurisdiction, maybe doing it a little bit better, that we look at how we can either mirror that or do something even better. So my goal is to improve predictability, reducing unnecessary burdens on the residents, and maintaining meaningful canopy protection. I think that that also ease the burden on your staff too, right? Not getting in, I know the last year you showed it was only 47 permits, so that's not too much.

But the following years, you're up to 300 permits, that still takes time up on one of your staff members after review, maybe go out, look at the location and see if that's something. So if we can get to an area where that's, you know, hey, you fit the diameter to where you don't need to do anything, have a great day, thank you for contacting us. One of those types of situations. Maintaining protections for specimen or high value trees, I already hit that. So ensuring that those remain in place is gonna be a priority.

Identify the opportunities to shift routine low impact tree removals an administrative approval process, just, hey, I'm looking to take out this tree, this is where it's at, this is what the tree is, boom. And then review, as you've already alluded in your slideshow, the tree bank fee structure and the cost deliverable to our community benefit. So with that, I appreciate the time, I appreciate the work that you guys have already put into this. This is a great starting point, and hopefully this makes sense. If not, I can definitely come back later off line and try and articulate better what's the thoughts of my brain are.

Thanks, Mayor.

So I started reading this yesterday and I'm like, have to put it aside, finish the rest of the agenda and come back. It's a lot to read and I had to and I still don't understand a lot of things. It's a lot to even comparing itself was arduous for me. But one of the things right away that popped into my mind was what is our goal? Is it to be more aligned with the county and therefore, you know, decreasing the confusion between the residents of Clearwater Proper and Clearwater, you know, or is this an opportunity to revamp everything and take a second look?

So that kind of that question came early on. So if you don't mind, I'm going to just go down the list. Regarding the protected trees, I want to know what is that sweet spot according to the city between protecting trees that are established enough to truly contribute to our canopy versus overextending the definition of protected and making it an enforcement challenge. Right? So the county has it at six feet and we have it at 10 feet for palm trees.

Okay. So I'm thinking, how is palm trees considered in in terms of canopy? And that's a big discrepancy between ten and six. Just want to see what the city's perspective was that in that regards to the permit threshold.

I'm gonna ask Ted Kozak to come up because he he's our manager for development review. So they review all the landscape plans and everything like that, but then he's also certified arborist. But what I will do also is just for everyone else, that is from our code and this is our zero to six kind of rate just in general for trees. So to one of the earlier points it's like, you know, we have the five and the six are the outstanding and specimen and those are shall be preserved. That being said, you know, there might be instances where it is blocking the reasonable use of our property and economic use.

And we have always tried to work with our community to build around or preserve, but sometimes they do come out. But burning palms, that's totally Ted.

Thank you, Ted Kosek, and planning and development. I'll get a little nerdy on this first, so

I welcome it.

Palms are not trees, but there's my editorial. It's a very tall grass. So in the ranking of importance, palm is great, but it's not a canopy per Exactly. You need to be a frog to get a little bit shade under one of those. They're fantastic and they have their part because sable palms are Florida's tree, that's a conflict among itself.

But it is Florida's tree is a sable palm. So saying that, clear trunk is measured to the height. So it's not the top of the fronds of a palm, it's where the fronds start branching out, if that's a better description. So in the aspect of number of trees on a property, the rule of thumb is onefour on it, not taking the beach into account. So it's the typical property that requires four shade trees. One of those shade trees could be a palm or a cluster of palm. So in the importance, it's worth one quarter, if you will. So what were other questions you had on that?

The discrepancy between the county's height versus ours, like six versus 10. I was just wondering like what's the sweet spot.

For the palm? Yeah.

I mean, palms do not have a diameter per se, they don't grow like a tree with those concentric rings. They're a bunch of little straws, so it wouldn't make sense to measure them by diameter breast height, which is four point five feet. So the county's six feet would just essentially make it a very smaller palm, in terms of establishment, the importance is it could die faster, you know, even my backyard. I lost two very new mango trees last winter because of how cold it is. So if they're smaller, they don't survive, they don't establish.

So the sweet spot, I mean between six and ten maybe, but typically 10 feet clear trunk is across the state threshold. South Florida, the jurisdictions I worked in, it was 12 feet. So, you know, the range, the sweet spot, the typical spot is 10 feet.

Okay. And then for tree ratings, I kind of like the county because it's easier. A lot of the county's changes I think are simplified and easier to administer or at least to understand from the from that perspective, especially like when it comes to smaller defined tiers versus, you know, zero to 5,000 is this. And the county does it like by 2,500 feet, which means the resident can benefit from that, right?

Having it clear and consistent would be fantastic.

Yes.

I'm sure everybody I mean, now you're creating a new language for tree writing from just jurisdiction to jurisdiction. So that's that's a great

point. Okay.

That would be that was the protected trees. This is the tree rating system that the county had. So this is what I think you were talking about was, you know, compared to

Yeah, have zero to six. The one

from zero to six. Have zero to three.

It's still showing

Oh, it's still showing on that. Sorry. No, I jumped ahead. I apologize. It's, again, it was those things that I'm like, I should have added that. Right. So from a zero to a theory, think that, you know, we I don't think we had any concerns as for what that's worth. It's obviously your decision and direction. But we find that where it's important and it still achieves our local community standards, that alignment is beneficial for all. And then this was the lot size piece that was referenced.

And so it's just a little bit finer grain. Right. On the county side and I can see where that would be beneficial for because we have a wide variety of lot sizes even though the one zoning district is is the primary zoning district. Within that, you can go down to 3,000. You can go down to 2,500. And in downtown, we don't have any But lot

I think their system, Pinellas County system, think is more advantageous for the residents. And then the last but not least is the their tree permit application fee. I do like the fact that they do have a promotional impact for the nuisance and invasive. That's just one thing that stood out to me. And again, tree bank fees are also less complicated. So whatever the county is doing that I think simplifies and gives more flexibility to the but simplifies the process, I would be in support of.

May I ask a question on As the fees I mentioned or as you all recall, we're doing a fee study right now. Would you be comfortable with that? Would you like us to bring forward a recommendation on the fees based on the county's work or would you like us to continue to have our consultant look at our our fees specifically for trees. I think we've always acknowledged ours are low in comparison. The county was high.

I think in comparison and so they found the challenge of that. I think we've both seen those challenges of our various fees as they were in our because ours at 48 per inch is not much of a deterrent to take it down either. But at the same time the county found the opposite being true. Their fees were so high that people were using the it was easier to find an arborist that would write a letter.

So the money we collect goes to the free bank and stays in the free bank, right?

Yes. And so that's what gets used for Arbor Day and some of and trees on city But

how much money do we have sitting in the tree bank now?

I did not look that up. Public works administers it.

I think I think the director may know.

Mayor Council members, it's just under $1,000,000

So that would be my you know, if we're able to and that's after spending whatever we just spent on the annual Arbor Day giveaway, We shouldn't be sitting on that amount of money. So if we need it to we either need to give it away, you know, more frequently or keep it the same, what we're collecting on these fees, because it appears to me if we've got a tree bank that that's much and the purpose is to, you know, force the city, we've got enough reflecting enough of the things we already have. And

I should say, Mary, we will be drawing that downtown. We did get the one forestry grant and we've got some urban forestry projects coming. It won't draw it all the way down, but it'll

just That'd a little be my only concern. We're collecting enough to adequately meet the city's needs.

Understand. That's it for me.

Mr. Manino? Thank you, mayor. I'll let you finish. I'll just throw in on this. That is a good point, and if we're collecting it now, what exactly are we able to use the tree fund on? Is it just tree canopies in certain places? Are we allowed to landscape and beautify Coachman Park? Are we where are we limited to where this gets spent?

Oh, good. I have I do have it.

So we've been trying to prioritize it in some of our key areas along our right of ways that we're doing. And then we work with Parks and Recs if there's areas that they need to come in and deal with. But we do talk about with like some of the upcoming Osceola, Fort Harrison, we're doing some streetscape, those may be opportunities for us to contribute from the tree bank back into those.

Okay. Maybe we have discussion sometime later on identifying certain gateways or areas in the community that the council sees fit or need and be able to use some of that money. To answer your question, I think a feasibility study, Lauren, on finding out what our surrounding communities are charging isn't a bad idea. We get a baseline. We understand where we are compared to some of our other communities, but then you still have the ability to then come back and compare it to where the county is. And we can make a decision versus just running in one direction. Think we can kind of kill two birds with one stone on that.

I think that something like this is possible that we could, you know, I'd like she has to think about it and then talk internally a little bit, but it might be that it's something that we could do more at a staff level and pull it out of the actual study, hearing the kind of other pieces that have come through today as long as we leave it more localized. And I think that's generally what we try to do when we're looking at our comparator cities. You know, we're looking at kind of a view in the very immediate area and then kind of those that we strive to be, you know, are kind of our aspirational goals also. So we usually try to find the cities that are similar in size, similar in character, or, you know, also redevelopment communities, things like that. So we could take a look at you know just the fee piece.

But you can see where a broader comparison across numerous cities if we were trying to compare tree code to tree code would have been a lengthy exercise. Narrow it down to just county versus city was much more helpful. Thank you.

When she's done on I didn't know if you were done. Was just touching on her question.

Okay. I Go

on, go ahead.

Thank you, Mayor. Okay. Obviously this is important because we're trying to find balance and it's important to balance environmental protection and community well-being, which we know what our tree canopy does for so many of our neighborhoods. But balancing that with homeowners autonomy as well as trying to make sure we're not imposing restrictive, barriers, to those homeowners. Finding that balance in that sweet spot is important what we're trying to do.

I think it does help to try to find some sort of alignment as we're doing with the county. I do this Clearwater property abuts to county properties and I've had neighbors all the time say, well, why can they remove that neighbor and I can't? And I'm touching their fence. That does make it tough. Just, some feedback for me that six foot versus 10 foot, the flexibility of the homeowner, I'm comfortable with six or 10 on the Palms.

Don't, I I whether we go 10 or six, I'm good. The tree rating system, I'm comfortable in aligning that with the county, kind of simplifying that. I don't necessarily know if we need poor and a below average as well as above average and outstanding. I think we can kind of simplify that language. Help me better understand on the replacement trees and credits when you say we're currently inch for inch and the county is currently a grade versus size of a DBH.

Let me find that.

There

we go.

Ted, I'm going to ask for Ted's assistance too because well, I might be able to talk through it because I tried to when I spoke with their their planning staff who had written the amendments. We use their their 5,000 foot parcel as an example. So, in that one, you'll remember it was a 5,500 square foot lot and it was a removal of 40 inches. When they spoke through it, they assumed a grade level of two. So in that instance, if they were removing, you know, that would be eight replants required.

So if any of those were nuisance, it would be reduced by the number of nuisance trees. So if if one of those trees had been a nuisance tree, it would have been removed from that. They would get credit for up to four nuisance trees. Like I said, it took us a little while to read through it and I'm still not abundantly clear. I knew what they were trying to get at but you know, again, it was to require more replants for higher quality trees as opposed to ours where if you were removing 40 inches, you have to replant 40 inches or pay the deficit into the tree fund.

So, here you would have to know to be able to calculate what your replant was to be. You would not just be able to rely on the number of inches if you have that

number. You

would have to the grades. You would have to do this kind of calculation.

Do the math.

Yeah. Okay. I I think once you get used to any system, you get used to it. But inch for inch is you have to know one number to kind of know that mitigation or do the math of your dollars to replace. And again, they didn't have that ability to do some of that that we already do. So I could see where this was a great leap forward for them.

Tree count, I'm comfortable aligning with the county in that category. And then the exemptions, you said there's some opportunities for clarity, guidance and codified for continuity. Supportive of that, I think anytime we can kind of go through some of these codes and clean them up and make them a little bit easier and bring clarity to them. I'm all for it. So I talked about the feasibility. And then enforcements and fines. We had a we're a little bit off on that one with the county.

I'm just going to keep pulling

it up. No,

you're You're okay.

Is

you see would probably deserve some sort of feasibility and see where we are compared to surrounding municipalities or has that been done recently?

I think that that would be something when you're pulling up someone's fee schedule or fines, it would all be part of that. So I think we would look at the insurance versus the grade kind of setting that. Think I appreciate it. I don't know if my team would agree with me, but I thought there was some value to setting a cap per tree like they have the $300 per tree. It just kind of gave us a flat rate.

So in that regard, was more predictable. So but I didn't do a lot of math to kind of compare. You know, I thought their exercises were really valuable in, you know, I chose just the one that was the residential lot because their other one was was a scenario like I said that we don't necessarily have here but that's something that I would expect our us to pull together for you so you would have a couple more illustrations with final recommendations as an ordinance, if that would be helpful to you, of course.

Absolutely. Well, I appreciate you and all staff's time that went into this. It definitely wasn't a snipping tool, cut and paste, and let's throw it on the website and move forward. So there's a lot of time and I appreciate the vice mayor bringing this discussion forward. Thank you. Thank you, mayor.

Just wanted to go into something and correct me if I'm wrong, Lauren. To get to the fee, you know, the county is doing something that's flat structured. I like that. I think that that's just a nice way of doing it. You know, you get through your rubric of whatever we end up going to, and here it is, this is what you're gonna charge the resident, right?

With that, and even the mayor alluding to that, you know, or you, that the county might have been higher, we're obviously really low, there's a sweet spot in the middle. We're already taking your time, right, to try and make your staff's time to try and get into this more beneficial streamlined structure, so then you're less burdened. I think it would just be worth a phone call to call the local people that deal with this, and see what the fee structure is, and find a happy medium instead of spending money, me if I'm wrong, in a feasibility study to see what we should be at. So if we're able to just Well,

that's what I said internally. All right.

I just wanted to clarify that.

Thank you very much. That's my favorite thing to do is call my peers. Perfect. Send any of to

say hi

to lunch. Perfect. Because that's where, you know, I think it's just that easy, right? Or an email and then they can just fire one back when you're ready.

Usually, yes. When focused on something like one topic, that is a great way to do it. And that's why I think that it's simple enough for us to pull out of our broader fee schedule. I feel like I've got good direction from the city council regarding fees and stuff that we can bring forward a recommendation with some data behind it as to how we got there.

Fantastic. And I appreciate everybody else's comments. I know the mayor's gonna end up with what he's going on. I thank the staff again, for everybody going through this, seeing where we can get to. Hopefully you guys have direction from us. It seems like we're kind of all on the same page of what we're looking for going forward. So I'm excited to see where we end at down the road. But thank you for putting the due diligence into this and getting us all this information.

So what's the next step? I guess at the step level, you're all going get all the local comparators, right? And then you're going to come back with all that information for us or is there something else you're doing before you bring it back to us?

I mean, if there is a desire for another work session item with just recommendations before putting it in an ordinance form, that's a possibility. Or we could work just towards a full ordinance and bring that bring that forward when it's ready. I I can't speak off the clock like how fast that could be done because there's other things to to potentially move around. From a process standpoint, it's an amendment to the community development code. So, fully local.

So, because nothing came from here that would require changes to our our bigger policy. So, that would ultimately result in a presentation to the community development board for their review and recommendation and then something to city council. We do try to engage the public where appropriate. So as we dig in, that would be something that we would discuss internally to determine if some sort of what we've done in the past is varied. Sometimes we've just done a quick open house. We've been available to answer questions. Sometimes we've done an online session for people who want to hear what about an ordinance prior to it being brought forward. So we don't have a one size fits all approach for that.

I would like that. I think this is an important topic and it's complicated. And so before you present an ordinance, I would like to have a conversation before that happens, at least an agenda item.

So, I mean, what I would do is work with this is a city manager battle and the rest of the city administration for pull together for a possible proposed project timeline, and then we would be able to communicate

that to you.

That's more Albert. Do you have any

No. No. I'm just I'm listening to everything, and I think that we've made some good points that it's it's important to have a balance, and you know, I've seen some of these discretions on the CDB, on people coming in wanting to remove trees, also when I was on the CDB that we had some people coming in that I thought we could be probably a little more I don't know. I think we can meet a different level there, which I'm glad you were talking about doing that now.

I mean, of course, I'm biased. I think my team does a phenomenal job trying to get all of the tree protection in place and really work to find how to replace trees and helping our customers whether it be the single family homeowner or even the larger sites, you know, picking the right trees. It does not always feel that way to the people, you know, five years later. It's difficult to say what's going to happen in fifteen or twenty years. Deal with it at the city also, right? Will the tree damage something, you know, in a long time from now? But, you know, I think our team is very skilled at that. There's a reason why we invest in them as staff as certified arborists. So and they always appreciate that you all do that too.

Okay. I'll weigh in last. On the timing, I was impressed with the county. They just did it, knocked it out very quickly. And so I would like to work as quickly as possible to getting something done on it. Vice mayor beat me to putting it on the agenda, but it's something that I wanted to get on as well because I noticed how quickly the county addressed the rules, got and enacted something differently. So I'd like to see us, you

know, wherever the timeline is, I'd like to

see us work quickly towards it because we brought this up. You put it on the agenda two months ago or so?

It was supposed to be on the last one. Our meeting was going pretty long, so I asked to have him move to here to save us some time, because I figured it'd be lengthy discussion as well.

So I'd just like to see this work as quickly as possible. I understand the time demands, you got other things going on. We got a lot been thrown at your department here recently. So sensitive to that, but I would like to see us work with some sense of urgency on it because I think it is important to the citizens because we have and and that's what that's what my hope is here is that we can and you pointed out some areas where we are more citizen friendly than the county. I'd like to keep those, but also maybe incorporate into our codes some things that they adopted that would make ours more citizen friendly.

And I appreciate those folks who are expert in trees, arborists, who are the tree nerds as we referred to. I'm not. And I know we have residents who are in addition to our staff, but the average person is not. And council member Albritton referred to a gentleman, you know, who I think represents a lot of the community, that they're often elderly. They're often don't have a lot of resources.

They can't hire the highest priced tree removal company to come in or landscaper to do their work. They're just trying to make their property look better, take care of their property. In some cases, they've had the property for years. And they get frustrated because they're just trying to make the property look nice. To the extent we can simplify some of these, explain better, I think that helps quite a bit too.

But I think just making it more citizen friendly. And, you know, there's a fine line between we're trying to protect our tree canopy to benefit all the citizens of the entire It's good for our community to have a strong, vibrant, healthy tree canopy. It's good for everybody. So there's a community need in doing that. At the same time, we need to respect that folks have property rights, and we're not micromanaging someone's private real property to the extent where, aside from trees, I'd show you examples of statutes and all kinds of other things where we have some of the most atrocious looking properties where folks do all kinds of weird stuff aside from trees, you know, and we, you know, we can't get in.

I'd love to go in and redecorate some some yards, which are pretty obnoxious and not just, you know, all over the city, but we can't because that's their property and they're allowed to do what they want to do with it to a certain extent. So I do want to make sure we're balancing that and make sure we're respecting the rights of the homeowner to, you know, do do with their property what they want within reason and balance that against the community's interest in having a strong tree canopy. So thank you for this report. It's very informative where you showed the the differences between the county. I learned some things, and as I learned what DBH was, and I can tell you, got you 95 to 98% of our community doesn't know what DBH is and all that.

So learned a lot from it. And it looks like we're already better as far as being more citizen friendly than the county. And that's good to say. I'd like to see if there's some ways we can make our code with regard to trees even more citizen friendly to sometimes, in some cases, mirror what the county has done.

There are some great 24 inches and above in Crest Lake Park.

Yeah.

Thank you. Very good.

Thank Yeah. You for your

Mayor, can I summarize just to make sure that we're clear? So my understanding is staff's going to work on a timeline that we'll share with you on how we could potentially develop some revisions. From the feedback today, we'll take a look at the existing ordinance in the county and figure some suggestions on how ours could improve taking the County language, but retaining the ones that are in the best interest of our citizens. And then we'll present that to you through one on ones and maybe just ask in the meantime, you continue to think about that and anything else you want to see in it. We can incorporate it when you see it on one on ones, and then by then we'll bring it back. Does that sound good?

Yes.

Thank you for your report. Thank

you.

Okay. Move to item 6.1 on this year.

Except for our Department of Transportation grant agreement for the parking lot expansion rehabilitation project.

Good afternoon, mayor, council, Mike McDonald, marine and aviation director. This item accepts amendment number two to the FDOT grant for the airport parking lot project, providing an additional 693,992 in state funding. This brings the total project cost to approximately 2,700,000 with FDOT funding 80%. The amendment aligns the grant with the current construction costs associated with the terminal and parking improvements. FlyUSA will be reimbursing the city for the local match portion. I'll be happy to answer any questions.

Any questions on this agenda item? No. Seeing none, do we have consent? Yep. We have consent on 6.1. Thank you. Agenda item 6.2.

Except the order of Department Transportation grant agreement in the amount of $790,000, $369 for the construction and terminal building at the Clearwater Executive Airport.

Good afternoon, everybody. Again, Mike McDonald, marine and aviation director. This item accepts amendment number two to the FDOT grant for the airport terminal construction, providing additional $790,369 in state funding. This brings the total project cost to approximately 9,380,000. The FDOT funding 50%. The amendment aligns the grant with the awarded construction cost and ensures the project is fully funded consistent with the bid award. Consistent with the operation operating agreement, FLY USA will reimburse the city for the applicable local match portion of the grant. I'll be happy to answer any questions.

Okay. Any questions on this agenda item? Not, do we have consent? Yes. We have consent on 6.2. Thank you. General item 6.3.

Except Florida Department of Transportation grant agreements

We have grants. Yes.

We do. For the re mill and overlay project at the Clearwater Executive Airport. This

item accepts amendment number two to the FDOT grant for the taxiway mill and overlay project providing additional $37,074,785 dollars in funding. This brings the total project cost to approximately $2,850,000 with FDOT funding 80%. The amendment aligns the grant with current construction cost and ensures the project is fully funded consistent with the bid award. Consistent with the operating agreement, FlyUSL will reimburse the city for a portion of the local match not to exceed $94,447 with the remaining local match funded through Air Park reserves. I'll be happy to answer any questions.

Any questions on this agenda? If not, do we have consent?

Yes.

Consent on 6.3. Thank you. Thank you. General item 7.1.

Appoint Jasmine Cruz to the Municipal Code Enforcement Board to fill an unexpired term through 10/01/2026. Council members, mister Brown was serving in this capacity for some time, and unfortunately, because of work, he needs to step away. And so the applicant we have on file, she actually filed for another board CDB, but I thought she'd be a really good fit for this board and she is willing to serve. She is a paycheck supervisor and I think based on her human resources background, I think would be a good fit for the board.

Any discussion? Do we have consent? Yes. Do we have consent on 7.1? Agenda item 8.1.

Approval legal services agreement with Days Law Firm.

Counsel, this is, my item. It's a legal services agreement from, I would say, mid October until beginning of April. We didn't have a litigation attorney. We hired one on April 6. She's been here for about four weeks. Since then, we have taken back, I think three cases from outside counsel. We've also been served with three additional ones. And when she came on board, she had some also active cases that she's managing. Just to be able to manage the caseload, we're requesting this particular matter go to outside counsel, today's law firm. We've used him for several years.

He specializes in nineteen eighty three actions in federal court. He also represents the city of Tampa. So I'm open for questions. I ask that this be placed on consent. Okay.

Thank you. Councilman Robert, did you have a question on 7.1?

Yeah. It was regarding, I saw a lady yesterday that came up and asked me, she said she applied for one of the boards, and we picked somebody else for it, and she was just wondering why we didn't send like a notice to her saying thank you for applying, you know, just something nice saying, you know, stay, maybe next time we will, it could even be in a text form or something.

It should have been, I'm sorry, and I'll double check with system. So the system does when Granicus, it's everything is automated. So when it is categorized as being appointed, you receive a letter without the information for that board and those who are not should have received. So I'll go in and if not, then I'll go back and send it manually.

Yeah, I think just would be nice,

you know. It should have been, but it's the same letter except now it's just automated.

Okay.

Agenda Okay. Item 8.2.

8.2 through 8.6 are second meetings, and there's no additional information.

Okay. Fine. To agenda item nine, senior manager, do you have any or either one of you have any reports? I do not, mister Battle.

I do not. No, sir.

Okay. Agenda item 10, senior attorney verbal reports.

No, sir.

And item 11.1.

Schedule special work session to discuss a proposed entertainment complex.

Councilman Manino.

Mayor, this is me. First of I apologize for this agenda item strictly saying proposed entertainment complex. I think our original discussion several weeks ago was in the hopes that we could have a special session, a work session that went a little deeper than just the EVO Dolby discussion, but I know the agenda item just says that. I appreciate council's support and willingness in having this discussion and the opportunity to schedule a special session workshop. As we've discussed multiple times, Clearwater were undoubtedly in an exciting period and a hopeful period for that matter of redevelopment.

Our marina and our beautiful pier to our entire 9 US 19 Corridor and our downtown district that we're in. I was going through a downtown reboot or has been famously coined by our assistant city manager as the urban renaissance and he's still waiting for his check for that. That should be in the mail. But recently, as we all have been aware, there's been a vast amount of coverage and press releases, social media threads regarding the coordinated efforts of the Church of Scientology, Cleveland Street Alliance, and their development partners as they've released their Cleveland Street redevelopment plans. The COS has been requested over the years by citizens as well as this dais to develop and activate their properties for the benefit of the entire community.

And I think we've all had those discussions before. I think it would only be fair to acknowledge that at this moment today, it is the first time in over fifty years that an entire commercial block of our downtown is advancing in redevelopment. And I do appreciate that all of their plans that have been pub publicly made are accessible to the public. I think that that's important and we have asked for that and I appreciate that. Why we as a city and as a leadership team welcome and celebrate the development and redevelopment that's going on before us, downtown and the activation.

We also think it's vitally important for us as a city and for a leadership team to have discussions here in the sunshine or a special work session workshop on what is transpiring downtown and do that from a position of neutrality and not necessarily from a position of advocacy or opposition. Our community deserves this level of transparency. I think we've all recognized that it reduces confusion, prevents misinformation and overcomes misinformation that's so often out there. And it helps build trust in our community, not just with our citizens but our community partners, which is vitally important to all of us. My goal in this discussion today is kind of threefold.

First, if we allow the city clerk to kind of help us coordinate and identify and find a date that works in our hectic schedules. I know we're all extremely busy, including travel. Some travel quite a bit coming and going. So staff has worked hard in looking at our calendars and I'll let the clerk help us manage that. Second goal for a body is decide how this special session workshop is facilitated.

Whether as this is my discussion item, whether, you know, I kind of facilitate that again from a position of neutrality and facilitate it or if the dais prefers staff to lead that discussion, mayor, or any other option that the dais sees fit. So that's number two. And then the third, I think it's important. It's great that we pick a date and schedule it, but to identify what the heck we want to talk about and identify are those certain projects that we want to have on. And I know the agenda item, and again, I apologize, just said the Family Fund Center, but that was not my intent.

I believe there's a handful of things out there that we should discuss in that. The welcome showroom downtown, all of the Cleveland Street projects, the EVO and Dolby entertainment center, as well as the RH LRH Hall that as we're hearing there have been applications submitted. So I think that's important to be a part of the discussion. So I think those are my three goals for this. I thank you for the opportunity. I think first and foremost I'd give anybody an opportunity if you had a question or discussion and before I move in to the three items of the date.

First of

all, I appreciate you bringing this forward. There has been a lot of confusion. I thought today we were just I thought your focus was going to be on the family center, but you did mention a lot of other things that you're right. There's a lot of confusion and misinformation. And so the way these projects have been presented across all the media outlets has created such confusion.

But regardless of the intent, the volume and persistent messaging suggests a level of certainty that just isn't there, especially with the theater. None of the required reviews, land acquisitions, vacations and approvals, they haven't been done. So despite all that robust conversations out there and all the public messaging, it should not, and I hope it won't influence our process or responsibility to review it. So I am in support of having a work session to reset and not just the theater, but there's a lot of confusion between Cleveland Street Alliance. Who is that?

Is that a partnership? And if it is, what kind of partnership? And we need transparency. You're right. We need to talk about it because when the information is being conveyed in such a robust in some ways invasive way, like I cannot watch a YouTube video without having a commercial and hearing it and knowing that it is not the complete picture, I know that.

But when I speak to others who are not as informed, there's a lot of confusion and then there's and that's how that's how fear gets in. That's how conflict gets in. It's from that confusion. So I really would appreciate an opportunity for us to discuss in the sunshine all the topics that would clarify everything and reset and reset us. Yeah.

Yeah. I'm not I'm not against having a special work session. I I don't I don't know why we need a special work session. Don't know why we just couldn't add it as an agenda item to upcoming work session. I share the by council member Teixeira's sense of, I wouldn't say confusion, but I certainly don't want to dampen any enthusiasm for an exciting project that when it hit the media, everybody's I hear a lot of people, wow, that's impressive, and it was impressive.

But we I think the five of us learned about it from staff after the first Dolby press release came out. So I don't think any of us had any heads up that they were going to announce that and then the EVO Entertainment. So with that, I just want to make sure I understand what's being proposed and what's going on, and I've had to unfortunately tell the media that I don't know. I know that the Cleveland Street Alliance LLC is a for profit limited liability company registered with State Florida. I I know that the the flag organization is is Scientology is a tax exempt nonprofit organization and separate from Cleveland Street Alliance.

And I know EVO Entertainment, which I tried to reach out to their CEO. He called me back originally and haven't had a chance to connect with him since. But they're a Texas organization that does movie theaters, these family entertainment centers, but for profit. So how all, you know, what the and I think the property that's being proposed for this center is owned by a different LLC. And I don't know who the owners are of that, but that's a for profit Florida liability company.

So I would very much like to get to the bottom of who's playing what role here. I don't know what, you know, the nonprofit's role would be with for profit LCs and developers and movie business. I don't know. But I would like to get to the bottom of who who's involved in this? What are the roles?

And I'm really up to talk to the EVO Entertainment because CEO because it sounds like he's had success. He's very well connected in the movie and family entertainment business, and look forward to hopefully having a with him. But I agree with you. There's it's put the five of us in a difficult spot because we're certainly because of all the publicity, getting a lot of questions from the community about it. And we just don't know.

And I've no one's explained to me how all these entities are involved together, who's primarily responsible, getting mixed signals on who's leading this, who's not leading this. And I would like to know because the community wants to know. And certainly, we want to support businesses activities and public accessible activities in Downtown Clearwater, and hopefully this is what this will be. But I need to know more about it. But I don't know that we need a special work session because at this point, I don't know who's playing what role in this.

I don't know what the proposal is and how they're going to move forward. I would like to see us just add it as an agenda item to an upcoming council meeting workshop and then invite maybe all these institutes to come in and share with us what their plans are.

Ken, do you mind if I address those couple of questions before I?

Oh, go for it.

Vice mayor, thank you. First of all, thank you for feedback from both of you. Again, I think it's important that we try, especially in a fact finding and discovery discussion, that we try to remain from a neutral standpoint. And then we fact find and discover and we can create a better understanding and clarity. Good question.

Why a special work session? I thought about that before I threw that discussion up, but I think today was a perfect example. We just talked about a tree ordinance for fifty four minutes almost, and that was just trees in our community. That's not talking about over $350,000,000 of proposed downtown development that cover entire street blocks and corners. So I think being as though it is a downtown, being as though the lack of clarity that's been discussed from from my two friends here earlier and understandably so, as well as the the dollar amount.

I think it is deserving, especially being as a sensitive topic of downtown and the church of Scientology it is. I think it's important that we have that discussion and do it solely focused on it because it's not something that will be done in thirty minutes especially when we're trying to know why now, what changed, who's behind certain organizations or nonprofits, what are the entity relationships, what are the projects, what are the permits, what are the timeframes, what are the cost. These are a lot of questions that that we will have hopefully answered and and whether some of our downtown partners join us or not. That's a different question. And hopefully we can get to the bottom of that.

However we facilitate that discussion whether it's myself, staff, or you Mr. Mayor, I think those are all very valid questions that a special work session would allow us to cover. Thank you Vice Mayor for letting me jump in real quick.

Vice Mayor?

Yeah, thank you. I'm all for this. If we do need to be in a special work session, you know, talking about what's happening and I invite it, you know. I will say this, this is brought to our attention in an infancy stage. We don't know a whole lot about the project and everything like that.

But when you have a large theater group and Dolby Digital Atmos, I think everybody knows Dolby Digital, championing something that's going to be put into downtown Clearwater, you have to champion it. And I think the answer is we don't know, but we're going to find out more facts. I mean, that's why it's following the process that it is. And we'll get more facts when staff is done going through and finding the details and hammering it out and getting to us. But we need to remember that as elected officials, our words matter, they carry weight.

And if we're going to be hawkish towards a product project that seems fantastic for families to enjoy and bring to our downtown, what type of tone as elected officials has that said we should be? And we constantly talk about the ghost town that is downtown Clearwater. Mike, how long have we grown up here, and nobody We don't even come down here, right? Things are starting to change. Urban Renaissance, we have a hotel, we have another new building coming up with commercial in the Bottom Floor.

BayCare Sound is doing great. Now we have a potential for EVO Entertainment and Dolby Digital to build an amazing family center, I don't know why we would try and deter that or be negative towards it in any way, even if we don't have all of the information. You simply say that. We're doing our due diligence. Staff is working through it, and we'll get there in the end.

Be transparent as we can along the way. That's our job, right? That's why I'm all for this work session as well. I think that, you know, maybe when this does get scheduled, who knows, maybe more data from staff will be available, and we'll be able to present even more, and welcome the Cleveland Street Alliance to come and present their things. I think that I know that Scientology somehow does partake in the Cleveland Street Alliance.

I'm not exactly sure how, but I've heard that multiple times up here. So I would assume it's probably true. I mean, we had Sarah come, what, almost a year ago to present how Cleveland Street was going and things have been happening, right? We see the People's Bank that is nearing completion. We see just across the hall from where City Hall meets, that entire south section of Cleveland Street is now under construction.

So it's a very different landscape than it was twenty years ago. It's a very different landscape than 05/12/2025, agenda item 4.1 when Sarah stood here and showed us her plan to have this Clearwater robust. Like, I mean, things are happening. And I think that we have to give credit where credit's due. I always welcome the communication and transparency. So I'm all for this. I think that it'll be great. And I think that as we continue down this, staff will even have more information for us as we continue. You know, I see the heads shaking yes. So I welcome this no hold bar. I think it'll be great.

Well, that's nobody's been a hawking shit just by asking questions. I mean, this there's no there there's no need for secrecy here on what what their plans are. And to the fact we weren't communicating with, that's that that I I would just like to know more. I mean, I would have loved to have known more before this was announced in the media, you know, who's involved, whatever. Most most of our folks developing things in downtown do that.

They let us know ahead of time what their plans are. So but I I don't I don't think there's any anything any questions have been asked here being hawkish. We just want to make sure we have the information to before we get all excited about it. You know, we all know, and I mean, the public knows, that there has been plans and talk about a family entertainment center for a decade now in Downtown Goodwill. This isn't anything new, so this isn't something that came out of nowhere, but it hasn't happened for a long period of time.

So for the community to naturally have questions about it, I think it's just, you know, it's natural. And but I don't think it's being negative just for us to want to know more information and to have that shared.

Would say that even that comment there is hawkish because of this is a private property following the rules, coming to us with a potential program. Staff is reviewing it, and it's just to what I said. Hey, Dolby Digital and EVO Entertainment released an awesome expert saying that they're going to build something here in Clearwater, and it's fantastic news. Obviously, we don't have that information. So when the news is coming to you, when the news is coming to any of us, we say what I say.

I'm excited about it. We'll see what happens when it comes here. Staff's working through the details, and the more we know, the second we know it, you'll know it. You know, when it comes to the projects that are happening downtown, the only reason we had more insight is because we control the properties. I mean, this is a personal property rights issue with the development on their thing, and they're coming to us for different zoning, for different vacancies, for those types of things.

So I mean, when that information does come through, I don't even know what all that entails. That's when we'll know more information, and that's when you disseminate it. But to say that they're doing something in secret, it's a private entity, whoever the LLC is that owns that exact property, to do what they want, and then present us with the information that staff goes through and then lets us know. I mean,

that is the process.

It's the process

for the Internet. The only reason we had more insight to anything else is because we own the property. Were able to hold those contingencies. So I think that you do get a little hawkish in those types of things. We just need

to

understand that this is great for Clearwater.

I hope the CEO of EVO Entertainment will call me back today. I've made repeated attempts to. If you did call me back to his to acknowledge first, I would like to hear

I was telling you that busy person then too. He's the head of an entertainment corporation.

I know. Called me back, and all of sudden he didn't. So hopefully, he'll

call me. Hawkish.

So so

you described it in a word that none of the media outlets ever used, which is potential or proposed. It is presented as fact. So my neighbors who it will be impacting their accessibility, maneuverability, come to me and to add to the many questions that Mr. Manino, Council Member Manino has asked, which have been asked of of me too, was the question, when did this happen, Lina? Did you guys do it in back like, was this a backdoor deal?

Because they're saying, like, it's happening. So did you give away that road that I use every day? What about that other road? What about the parcel? Perception is it is a done deal, which then affects the community's perception of when did this happen?

How did this happen? And that perception of backdoor deals which did not occur at all. So I wish that they were a little bit more responsible when they're promoting and marketing a project that is proposed, that is potentially because it is not a done deal. They own some of the property, not all. And so all I'm asking is for clarity and responsible verbiage because it is not a done deal.

It is a potential or proposed. Just the man the manner in which it was released causes conflict and it was unnecessary. It could have just been presented as we are proposing to come. There is a potential project. We're working on coming. But stating it as a done deal just adds fuel to the fire.

Mayor, if I may, real quick, but I wanna make sure that we hear from council member Alburden. First of all, thank you for having courage all of us to have these discussions because for a long, long time these discussions were not happening on the diet. So whether we're agreeing on things or there's layers of emotions, that's all natural. But the courage and the willingness to have these discussions is what's going to make Clearwater better. So whether we're agreeing on things or not, thank you.

It's appreciated. Secondly, we're going to have plenty of opportunities to continue these discussions. This isn't a one and done. So I hope we can limit our back and forth and our banter because I promise as we move forward, whether it's in a special work session or we move forward individually with these with what projects may or may not come before us, we will have those opportunities to have those discussions. So I just hope that today we can kind of keep this agenda item a little more simplified.

Let's let the council member Albrecht and throw his two words in and let's get back. If there's three of us that are in support of scheduling a special work session, let's get the clerk involved. Let's find a date. Let's find how we want to facilitate it and then move forward with what exactly projects and questions we have that we want answered. I am taking notes from each of us as we have discussions and what your questions are. We'll make sure those are included, but I do greatly, greatly appreciate us having this discussion that is not easy and it's challenging. At the end of the day, it's better for Clearwater, so thank you.

And I would support the speciality.

Thank you.

That's my role, right? Yeah.

So I'm gonna talk about the elephant in the room again because here, you know, the question is not whether people are skeptical. Most are, as am I. And, you know, because Scientology's decades of secrecy, their history of acquiring property without any clear public intent, You know, it goes on and on. It's insular culture, all earned that skepticism. But the question is whether we allow progress to be tested.

So what we're seeing now is after years, and you've all touched on it, of talk. We're doing this. We're coming out with this. It's finally coming. We're seeing it. It's actually being constructed right now. And I you know, a year ago, we all heard that they were gonna do this. Over a year ago, it was January of last year. And my comment to them was, I am blown away by this plan. This is great.

They have all the property. It's not like they're taking over. They got a 100 acres of it downtown already. If they will develop it, that is a plus. So my only comment was, why don't you bring it all out to the public so the public understands what you're doing? It's taken them over a year to do that. They they told us it was gonna take thirty to forty days from last December from last year. Finally, it's coming out. Now they've got this thing over here on Osceola that lays out everything they're doing. They say it's open to the public.

Come see it. Well, a lot of public ain't coming downtown. But I like your idea, councilman Menino. Bring it out on the dais here. Show talk about it so everybody can see what's going on, and we get a little more idea of what they're doing. I mean, I've got same thing as all of us. You got people asking us, what's going on down there? Well, about all we can tell you is the same thing in the paper. We read the paper too. You can read it, you know?

That's my point.

But let's go ahead and have them on we gotta understand a little more about it. I am excited that finally things are happening. Let's have them come in and tell us what's happening and be more public facing about it because it needs to be or, you know, we're our necks are all on the chopping block for this. I'm really excited that it's happening. Let's have a I don't care if it's a special meeting or we take a work session and spend two hours talking about it. But I think it's something we owe the public to do, so that's all I'm gonna say.

Well, it sounds like we got consensus to be a special position.

Clerk. Yes.

Steph has identified the following three dates. The first one, there is a conflict. May 28. Council member Albritton is traveling. So he's yes, sir.

Okay. May 28, I come back in like 02:30. Okay. Give me the, like, 03:30. If we can do it like a 05:00 or six, I'm in.

Okay. So that's one day. The other two dates are Tuesday, June 2, one or three p. M. Or Wednesday, June 3, three p. M.

June 2, one or three p. M. And June 3,

one or three p. M?

Just three p.

M.

On June 3.

On the June 3? The

way you guys look at your calendar, I've looked at mine. I'm supportive of the twenty eighth given Council Member Alburton time, whether it's 04:30 or 05:00 to give them time to get from the airport. The other dates are flexible for me as well. My preference is that the twenty eighth, we get this on the books and we move forward, but we have to respect everyone's schedule. So whatever works for everyone else.

It looks like I can do the twenty eighth or the third, the second doctor's appointment.

I like twenty eighth.

Twenty eighth is good, like I told you. And the third, I have I have a PSE legislative meeting in the morning, but the afternoon is free for me.

Would 05:00 work for everyone?

Okay. Twenty eighth?

Twenty eighth?

Mhmm. Oh, okay.

Good. 05:00? Mayor.

Twenty eighth, what time?

05:00. 5PM.

Can't do it during the day or what's the

We can, but I have to give council member Albert in time.

He doesn't get back till 02:30.

No. 03:30. Well, you know, hoping that it's gonna be on time, but I could probably be back here for 04:30. That's the thing. Like, I don't know my schedule.

The thing with June 1 is that we already have a DDB and city council session, so it might be a

long day.

Second and third. And third.

Isn't that Joe?

And third. Second and

I can I can Third?

Third is good in the afternoon.

I think I can move something that evening. So I can do it at 5AM.

Twenty eighth, 5PM.

On the

twenty eighth, five? Okay. Okay.

Are you good, madam clerk?

Yes.

Perfect. Okay, Mary, if you don't mind second. Lena, are you good?

Sorry, I apologize. We're talking about calendars.

Are you good? Okay. You guys are good with the twenty eighth, 5PM? Okay, the second thing I discussed earlier, I think it's important that we decide how we're going to facilitate this. Again, I'm willing to sit in a position of neutrality and kind of facilitate our discussion with staff and all questions that we have, or we can have staff direct it and facilitate it for us, or mayor any other option yourself or that this board feels fit.

I'm gonna just run like a regular workshop, I think. You know, share the meeting like I normally do. Whatever

the

Do you have any thoughts, mister Sarra, about do you think there's a way that that would be more productive?

I think the mayor staying true to the process we know is fine, but I think once we set an agenda, you know, as far as the actual items that would be on the agenda, there's certainly no problem with maybe some staff being able to gather some data and present some brief overview very short and be able to discuss that to facilitate the conversation much like our special budget workshop type process. Very simple. So it probably depends on the actual agenda items and how you

structure Speakers? I don't know.

I mean, my thought was we invite everybody. Why not? It's an open work session. We're trying to do a fact finding and bring clarity to ourselves and to the entire community to invite I don't know who Cleveland Street Alliance is as far as a person, so invite anybody from the organization. There's we've heard Scott's name all over development downtown or Randy or

He's listed as the manager Yeah. For the L's.

Love to have them all. The invite's there. I'm hopeful and optimistic that this can happen for the city, and the more they wanna come in in the sunshine and have discussions with us to bring clarity to the community, I'm I'm all for it. So I think we invite them all as well as staff, our economic and development team will have the answers hopefully to our questions as we get closer.

Well, we'll just leave

it like a

normal work session for now See how it comes together to your point.

Comfortable with that?

As we get closer to it, somebody else is together.

I'm seeing it as like a kind of like our strategic financial meetings. Yeah. Mayor opens it up, staff presents like the rubric or the agenda. We just follow that. We have that open discussion. Yeah. Think we're good.

I think the manager could follow-up the one on ones to really kind of clarify. I mean, you mentioned earlier though, if having one item with regard to the Cleveland Street properties, one with the Elmer And Edward Hall

and then one with the evening. Next on the list. Yeah. Perfect. I'll jump right in there. The third thing, and again, thank you for your time and for helping us with the discussion was It's important for us to identify what we want to cover in this workshop. And I know my agenda item was my fault again. I'm sorry it only said EVO Family Center, but by no means did I show up here hoping that that was the limit of what we discussed. I think if we're truly having an open workshop and we're discussing clarity and transparency, everything needs to be involved. I think we have to talk about the showroom, talk about the Cleveland Street projects, 600 Block and beyond, talk about the EVO and Dolby Family Entertainment Center.

Staff will have a better update on where we are because these aren't even discussions we've had really in our one on ones to know where we are at in that process, as well as the LRH Hall and where we are in that development application as well as the vacation request. I don't see why we don't touch on all of them.

The only thing I would say on that is that's a separate agenda item that will be coming before us because they've got an application of AK Garden Avenue coming up again.

Right? Correct.

Yep. They've submitted an application of AK Garden Avenue. That's It hasn't been set for a council date.

But I think that's the fact finding and clarity we're looking for. That's all staff would have to say is, here we are in the process. These are the meetings that have taken place. This is what is taking place in the future. Here is where we are in the process as a community and here's what's next. I don't think we need to have if it's not able to have a robust conversation, then then we don't. But if we are, at least we we do our fact finding side of it in the process and let's let everyone know where we are in that process. Have discussions where we can and don't discuss where we can't.

If I may, if you can correct me, Owen, I mean, we'll be in the sunshine so we can still have an open discussion with whatever facts or data are presented?

You could have a discussion, yes.

Okay. Even though that it's on a future agenda item whenever you all are done going through it, correct?

I mean, I think you could discuss where it is in the process. Perfect.

Thank So

is it that what we want to cover all those that I just discussed as far as Sure.

Can I have a couple of days to ponder and organize my thoughts and then share that information with staff if I have to? I mean, it looks like you have everything but let me just give me a couple of, you know, days to figure out if there's anything else I would like to add. Or at least a day. Give me something.

I don't have a problem with that. Okay. I mean, as long as we're not adding things and then all of a sudden Dais doesn't know what's being added and they have an objection to, well, why is that being brought into this discussion? That's not part of it. We need to make sure we have an opportunity for that.

I could probably go well, we could I can inform the city manager and then she can inform you guys if want to. Or share the request on email as I usually do when I want to add an agenda item. That

would be my preference. Yes. That we have just a general

framework today and that

through one on ones we can refine the agenda.

All I want

say on that is, I mean, we had we addressed Garden Avenue before and thought the direction from the Attorney General was to was to keep our consideration of that issue to Garden Avenue and not to, you know, expand, you know, talk about Cleveland Street and other things that the Attorney General's guidance was to focus on Garden evidence. So that that's why I'm wondering, is it better for us to separate the discussion of what happens there from in light of what the guidance we already had on that I felt like part of the guidance was we shouldn't be considering how these other properties relate to their request to close Garden Avenue.

So I think according to the Attorney General's opinion, I think what he said was you can't place conditions, let's say, the parameters of the Garden Avenue vacation involving Garden Avenue is what he said. And I think in terms of Garden, you just talk about where it is in the process, knowing that you would have to come back and have another discussion on it. Yeah. But they would have to be viewed separately as well.

Yeah. Okay. One update.

Yeah. I would agree with that. I think just strictly an update. Here's where we are. But you're you're a 100% correct, mayor. We cannot say, tell me what you're doing on Cleveland and and this family entertainment center, and that'll weigh into my decision making process. Agree a 100%.

I was trying

to just Yeah. No. Totally agree and appreciate the protection. That that's all I had. If anyone else wanted to add to it again, these are great discussions for us to continue to have. They're challenging. Yes. They're sensitive topics. Yes. I I think it's better for the citizens at Clearwater, better for our entire community, and makes us stronger as a group. So we're gonna disagree on things. We're gonna agree on things. I think one of the things that we all respect and enjoy the most about working together is we accept that, and we we're okay with not agreeing on everything. We know nothing's personal, but we are just handling the business of the people, and we're gonna continue to. So I thank all of you for your robust conversation.

And and I think we all agree transparency. Let's get it all out. Let the public see any conversations we're having, you know, collectively, associates, Scientology. Thank you for putting this on, and hopefully we'll get this scheduled now, and we'll move forward with that. So with that, we'll move to item 12, new business.

I've got something, Yes, we have public comment that's set to expire with the way that we've been doing it. I think that it's been going well so far. I'd like to just maybe do another extension for another few months, maybe three months, see how it continues to go. If it continues well, with the way that we've set it and established it, then put it back as another voting opportunity in the future to set it back into just the normal agendas without having to keep setting another extension and another extension and another extension.

Okay.

So it wasn't so this item wasn't added to the agenda, but I think if there's consensus, you can talk about it now. I'm super Oh, was doing it for

new business. The next for the

next because it expires after this Thursday, So

my question is, do you want to discuss it for the next work session?

Correct. That's was

making it

up because then we can

Sounds good.

We will the window. Will make the window, though, because if it expires, we have to make this decision before it expires?

Well, believe

that Well, was can make it on the Monday and then have the motion on the following Thursday.

And when does it

expire? Expires this Friday.

This Friday, yeah.

So that's what I'm saying.

Can take, you can take, counsel can take it out of order to institute it that same meeting so that

All right.

That's one way of handling Okay.

Thank you. Thank you.

Anything else? Okay. Now we'll move to item 13, council comments. Anybody got anything you want to add?

I learned a palm tree is not a tree.

Item 14 closing comments by mayor. I don't have anything to add in particular today. So with that, we will adjourn the work session of the Clearwater City Council for 05/04/2026.