City Council - Regular Meeting

Good. We're going to go ahead and call the January 20 20th, 2026 city council meeting to order. Ask Counciloman.

Gracious God, we are grateful for the opportunity to serve our community. Guide us with wisdom and strength and clarity in our decisions. Bless this meeting and our city and our shared commitment to the common good. and start off with a roll call. Ward one, two, four, five, and six are present. Looking at the agenda, are there any amendments needed? None are needed. I also want to make sure everyone saw I did add some discussion on there about today. Is everyone good for that?

Okay, moving on to announcements. February 3rd, 2026 is our next city council meeting. February 16th through 17th, uh, city offices are closed due to President's Day and Marty Gro holiday. February 18th city council meeting uh is going to be on Wednesday because of the hot day. U we do have a presentation today regarding our FY23 financial audit. So we will start with that. I would like to come forward.

Good evening. My name is Maria Sailor. I'm the audit director from AL. This is Kim Maralich, our audit partner. Here to present the fiscal year 23 audit. We'll start with slide three before you. You have uh three deliverables. These are our physical copies of what we present is a report charge to governance. This is a standard letter letter letter of communication that we're required to provide and it outlines our responsibility as your auditor and your responsibility as the audit. And then uh it also will acknowledge any corrective statements adjustments and any delays conducting the audit. As you're aware there were significant delays conducting this audit and they are in the greenbound report you will have the UAL financial report and then you also have a letter of recommendation to management. And these are um opportunities for improvement of processes and controls and uh ways to improve the financial health and maintenance of go on to slide four. The annual financial report is in the green bound report you have in front of you. This is financial position as of 9:3023 and it's historical in nature. It does not represent uh the city's current financial position. The city was given an modified opinion which is the highest level of assurance that we can offer. The opinion that the financial statements are materially correct as they are presented. The audit report is on pages two to five and then the report on compliance with government auditing standards is on pages 64.

Um on pages 6 and 11 6 through 11 is your management discussion analysis. This is prepared by city management and it condenses the report and all of the issues and the financials um into just a few pages uh easier to read and condenses things into you know highlights uh some rest of the slide go an overview of the financial statements uh governmental standing government accounting standards board requires annual financial report to contain two full sets of financial statements. The governmentwide is u full approval financial statements and it presents a longer term focus and includes all assets and liabilities of the city. And then fund level uh they're on pages 14 through 21. They're presented on an economic resources model and only the spendable resources that are available at the end of the year are reported at the end of the year through 60 days after year end and also not required by the government standard for you to maintain budgetary basis. So the city really maintains three sets of books on an ongoing basis. Slide eight. U the governmentwide statement and position we have here is a summarized version. Um I don't need to go through and read the numbers to you there. Um this section is going to maintain all of your um financials and the rules. Um you have assets and deferred outflows of 71 million and your total position for government activities is 39.8 million. Um business activities net position is 49.7.

If we move on to slide nine, we have the governmentwide statement of activities summary. You'll note that there were uh $5.1 million on government activities, prior period adjustments, and in business activities, there was 1.6 million in prior period adjustments. Slide 11, governmental funds balance sheet. The governmental funds are on modified approval. Uh only report current financials, no fixed asset or long-term debt, and general fund largest and accounts for most of the city's activities. Um we're looking overall for governmental funds, cash 5 million, restricted cash of 1.3. These are restricted for uh grant specific or uh bond proceeds that were for specific purpose. Uh significant amounts are due from other governments. These are related to grant receivables that haven't been received yet. Slide 12, we have the governmental fund balance sheet. The continued uh we're on to deferred inflows. Uh you have 4.9 in property taxes, 4.9 million, and 1.8 million in grant revenues. These are amounts that are receivable but not received within the first 60 days after year end. So they're reported as deferred inputs and they'll be reported as revenue in the subsequent financial statement. Um you'll note uh the general capital projects fund has a deficit fund balance. Um this is due to expenses for capital projects that have been paid before the related grant revenues have been received. So once the grant revenues have been received, the deficit would be slide 13. General fund uh balance sheet

comparative. We're looking just at the general fund here compared to 22. Um there's a couple significant changes um in dollar value, but the cash fluctuation is normal. This fluctuates based on timing of expenses and receipts. Uh due from other funs is normal fluctuation. Um the deferred inflows the second to last section deferred inflows unavailable revenues they were not reported in the prior year and that is one of the prior period adjustments that were reported in the current uh you'll notice at the bottom the unassigned fund balance it increased 871,000 the GFOA which is the government finance officer association recommends a minimum of two months operating uh revenues or expenses to maintain and unassigned. Um a lot of cities aim for 15 to 30% for greater financial stability. Um based on what we'll see on the next slide, the city um currently two months would be 1.8 million and the city has you know well over that. So there's a good reserve in place uh to meet you know obligations of 550 uh governmental funds statement of revenues expenditures and changes in fund balance. Uh your most significant revenues are property tax, sales tax, gaming revenues and grants. Slide 16 continued uh we're looking at 16.4 million in operating expenses and uh we have an excess 2 million of expenses over revenues operating. Slide 17.

Net change in fund balance is a $3.2 million decrease and there's a $5.6 million prime period adjustment. The ending fund balance for all governmental funds is 7 million compared to 15 million. that is a result of the two the change in fund balance and the power adjustment. So we have general fund comparative property taxes decreased 692,000. This was really a result in change in reporting of funds not necessarily a change in the chain of property taxes. Some of them that were prior reported in the general fund are in another fund are now being reported fund. Slide 19. So we have general and governmental uh or general government and public safety increases um were mostly related to personnel costs transfers in and out uh they vary for year to year and the ending fund balance of 4.4 million is overall decrease 2.3 from 222. Looking at the proprietary statement of net position, this is a summarized version. Uh your utility fund has a total net position 30 million and harbor fund total net position of 19.6. Slide 22. Utility fund comparative with saw a 776,000 increase in due from other governments as related to uh grants and change in fund reporting. Some uh there was a significant number of accounts and fund changes in the current year based on

recommendations of the prior auditor. The accounting changed a lot. uh restricted cash increased 3.1 million and this is related to the ARPA funds that were previously reported in governmental funds in 2 and the depreciable assets change is related 5.3 the 3.4 million increase in unearned revenue. This is related to the ARPA funds. They were uh inappropriately recognized as revenue in the prior year. So this change was reported as per adjustment and there's a change of 675,000 in liability. This is based on the city's proportionate fair overall. We have unrestricted net assets of 311,000. Uh based on the GFOA's recommendation of two months operating cost. Um the two months operating cost for the utility fund would be 1.4 million. So the unrestricted net assets for utility fund is a little less than what's looking at the harbor fund comparative 2 uh the D from other funds decrease that fluctuates from year to year. uh restricted cash decrease. It's related to restricted notes uh proceeds in the prior year were spent in the prior year and the change in depreciable assets related to uh unrestricted net assets for harbor fund is 383,000. Two months of operating costs for harbor fund is approximately 370,000. So the

harbor fund appears to have the recommended unrestricted assets. This is a summarized version of the changes in the revenues expenditures and changes in net position. Um couple highlights are just the operating revenues of five million for utility fund operating the harbor fund operating revenues of 1.2 and operating expense of the change in net position of 1.9. So we're I guess so. The water sales increased uh 605,000. Uh there was an increase in rates and users and operating expenses increased 1.1 million. These are mostly related to personal cost. Uh capital gains there was 822,000 reported in capital gains. This is related to grant received. for capital projects and this was also a change in fund reporting from 223. Uh contractual services decreased and other services and charges increased uh 472,000 457,000. These are related to uh reporting changes being reported in different accounts or grouped in different accounts. uh capital gains decrease 321,000 and this varies from year to year based on

grant receipts for capital project change in net position 1.9 million increase and ending net position of 19.6 We have the proprietary cash flows utility fund um provided by operating increased by 3.3 million. This is related most significantly to the ARPA funds that were not previously reported in the utility fund and harbor fund changes used in operating uh was an increase of 1.6 million mostly related to a change in due to due from other city funds uh transfers and back and forth between the different funds. Non- capital financing increased 3.2 million and related to transfers between city funds and capital and related financing used 4.0 million and for capital budgets most significant note disclosures um you know there's quite a few in there but some of the highlights are uh note number two on pages 30 to 31 are they detail your cash and restricted cap note seven on pages 36 to 39 details long-term obligations debt and pension liability compensated absences pages 41 45 is note 9 employee benefit plan. The city's portion of the PUR's pension liability is 17.4 million. On pages 49 to 50, note 15 details a Gazsby 101 implementation. That is a change in accounting standard in the current year required by government auditing standards to um update the reporting of compensated absences that was implemented in

pages 51 to 53 note 16 details the prior period adjustments and 54 to 55 is the uh was subject to a federal single audit. Any time the city spends more than $750,000 in a given year, we're required to have a single audit. The city spent 1.5 million in fiscal year 23. They had two major programs and ages 73 to 76 summarizes the findings of the federal single. There was a stated financial state financial statement material weakness for overall accounting issues. two major program findings uh duplicate reimbursement of expenditures from two different federal programs and suspension and dearment failure to provide acquire suspension compliance. There was also a finding related to delayed reporting to the federal audit period. On pages 7778, there was management's response in the corrective action plan, management's plan to address findings, current status, and the resolution on supplemental information. The last report in the find report is report on compliance with state law and regulations. This summarizes our testing procedures and there was one finding related to retent retention of documentation to support comp. Do you have any questions? A material weakness is uh more broad and overaching. It reaches all levels of

financial reporting whereas a significant deficiency is more condensed and specific to a certain topic or specific to page 93. I think that references reconciliation if I'm not mistaken some of those issues are the same as fiscal year 22 correct I know you probably can't speak to that on the actual audit that's

I'm So Mike, maybe just refresh my memory because I know that was an item that came up with issues of reconciliation ledger accounts and that was if I'm not mistaken. So what was done or not done they were talking about bank reconciliations not being done in a timely manner and then the financial statement being put on the financial statement basically every month being current even though those bank reconcilations not fully complete. That's what 22 auditor was referencing. These are going back to your reconciling general ledger balances. You want to talk a little bit more on that. It's basically court court liabilities.

There were state liabilities your balance sheet

and the management was unable to provide us with support. that made the balances that support the balances. They weren't reconciled. Rental deposits were not reconciled on a regular basis in the realm of each at the end of each period or month. They were checking to see who deposited. And so when we were trying to support just another question just in regards to the double grants I know that was something looks like I know it's been a recommendation action plan but essentially that was incorrect. guidance through that process. I know it's looks like it's being They had additional costs.

What happened was uh with the ARPA funds there was three sets of federal funds that were awarded to the city. Money directly given to the city, money coming from the state and then Hancock County. So funds that were submitted for Hancock County were fully reimbured by Hancock County, but then the state required them to upload the same expenses to their portal and the state reimbured of that as well. So the same receipts were reimbured two times. Uh through testing and looking at further invoices, there was substantial uh additional expenses subsequent to the year end that will cover the difference. And so there's no question related to the finding and there's no expectation of those

they weren't as

again that was instruction by horn on how to upload to get reimburse from the state that we were following. just another follow. So I know I know there was some with 23 information. So I know we're still with this year 24 position time. We're still still be on the time frame right

yeah 24 will be will be late again in federal but I don't expect any because so many of our significant related to you guys have a time frame in mind

we will be prepared to present the engagement letter within the next week to 10 days and then it'll be based on Once we begin the audit, if everything is provided timely, we can complete the city and I know our staff has already started and that'll put us in line forward. That would be something that you would pick up. I mean,

the city's running on a cash basis and when they get it, they move it back to an acral basis.

And that was one of the things I mentioned at the beginning. There's three sets of books that the city is required to maintain. They're required to maintain the information in order to make it full governmentwide. They're required to maintain information level and also a lot numbers should be a lot more.

Uh there will be a finding for the delayed uh reporting. I don't expect another finding for the two that we have at the moment. The other two anticipated Thank you. Can I get a motion to accept the FY23 financial ait? Do I have a second?

Second one. Any discussion? The motion.

I motion carries. Okay, moving on to our public forum. We do have some somebody signed up about an agenda item. One other person has signed up not regarding the agenda item. Just want to clarify uh we are not voting on a zoning ordinance tonight. Um however, we we are implementing some things going forward that I'll address because I know probably a good bit of you are here regarding that before our second public forum. But nonetheless, I wanted to state that and bring up Miss Katie Hood regarding 107 Washington Street 104.

That's right. Good evening. Uh my name is Katie Hood. I represent uh Miss Miriam Jones and Mr. Brad Jones who are here today in the audience. They are residents of 107 Washington Street. Um and I'm here today to speak on um agenda item 7A which is um a a zoning variance request for 104 Washington Street which is across the street from the Jones residence. Um, we were here just last week in front of the planning and zoning commission and I know that their recommendation is to deny the application for um the variance uh that would result in a about a 12 a 12oot setback to the front yard of 104 Washington Street. Um it's my understanding that y'all have the packet of all the information that was provided to planning and zoning and I'm assuming that that's correct. There was a letter from December um from my clients Brad and Miriam Jones along with the actual variance package that was submitted by the Missellis. I just want to make sure that you all have all that information. Okay. So, the reason why I asked that is because in in the um let me back up. It's my client's position that there is no hardship here. And if you look at the um application for variance to the zoning ordinance, the actual um article 13 with regard to variances require certain things to prove that there is in fact a hardship that exists that would give rise to um the necessity or basis for granting the variance, which as we lay out in our letter from December, um we do not believe that there is a hardship here at all, much less um that any of the following conditions enumerated out in article A through H specifically are not present. But more importantly and something that I wanted to clarify in

the record is that the zoning or the variance application um by the Melis um requests or states that there is a neighboring property that has an 18 foot front yard setback and the property that I believe that is being referenced in the application their front yard is not on Washington Street. neighbor we're talking about that has a supposed 18 foot front yard set back. That property in question or an issue is actually facing south uh Beach Boulevard. It's 600 Beach Boulevard and the front yard setback of that home is 50T. The minimum setback here um is according to the the zoning ordinances and laws is 25 ft for an average of neighbors. This neighbor front yard is not on Washington Street. It's on South Beach and so they've got a 50 foot setback. Their sideyard is on Washington Street, but the sideyard setbacks, as I'm sure y'all are all intimately aware of, is is a completely different analysis and is not a 25 foot setback or an an average. That language is not um really even in consideration here. We're talking about a front yard setback requirement of 25 ft for an average of the neighboring And there has been no evidence placed before um the planning and zoning commission or the city council here today by the applicant um as to what other neighbors front yard setbacks may be. Um so anyway to summarize all of that the 25 foot requirement is what is actually applicable. I'm sorry.

Anyway, that was that was my main point that I wanted to clarify. Everything else is in the record but that thing that was one um measurement that was not in the record and I have some renderings of 600 South Beach if I have extra copies if this is something that's of interest to you.

Thank you. Thank we'll put you on the second public comment period. Oh, about the invoice. Absolutely. I'm sorry. I thought you were talking about the PNZ.

No. Uh, Anita Warner and it's agenda item 6M. Motion to approve payment to Orion planning and zoning the amount of 8,206.86 for the zoning code rewrite. Okay. Is that the complete amount that we paying them or is that for only part? How much have we paid Orion for the zoning code rewrite? Can anybody that's invoiced through December 31 number? Okay. So that's all we've paid them for the zoning code rewrite is 82. No bill through December 31 for whatever period of time that was on that. Okay.

It's not the complete. There's still more to go. We're not finished yet. Okay. My question is how much I understand we paid him for the comprehensive that's if you can either do a public records request or either call Mr. He's not going to have that information in front of him but Orion had a engagement letter that was approved by the city that's probably most likely on the city's um minutes if you look and it'll also be on the dockets that he can he can easily pull for you via public records request. I'm just wondering if we have a ballpark. We have any idea what we pay? Yeah, there there is an engagement. There's a agreement out there with them, but I just I don't know what it is off the top of my head, but it's readily available. We're only about 71%.

If you look at the agenda package, the invoice, it says issue date 1231, due date January 30 for 8,200. um and breaks it down in budget amounts and how much has been was the total was 101500. They're 71% invoiced. Okay. And so on the agenda, okay, and they're still working the packet. Okay. So then breaks it down even further. Code assessment was 100% code update 82%. Code adoption is

Thank you. So that is our second public form that'll be after

yeah he's on my name is Joe Melli I'm a 10ear resident of Bay St. Initially, we had a uh a meeting set for the zoning and planning about the variance in in the property that own 104 Washington, but it was cancelled by uh the people on your board due to illness and so they reset it. But I had I had a uh I went out of the country and I couldn't change my plans to come back in for this last meeting over here. And I just need to make a statement about about the zoning the uh relative to the setbacks on that street. The two houses across directly across the street I have an 8 foot setback 103 and 107 Washington Street. the house directly next on the uh facing the u the lot 108 he's got a 20 foot set back and the one down the street was a re uh a renovation to an existing residence over there he has a 12ft set back from the same street and if you go anywhere down Washington Street there's multiple houses just about on the sidewalk over So, what I was trying to do is uh rather than a 25 foot setback, go to like a 15 foot setback off of the uh sidewalk, which would allow me to put a garage in the back of the house. And it would also keep me out of a flood zone on that map uh for insurance purposes. So, that's the

biggest reason. It was a hardship setback in a way because of the flood zone. The traffic on Washington Street is uh pretty heavy traffic. It's a main thoroughare. A lot of boat traffic coming through streets and and speeders. So if it allowed me to take to put a uh a garage to the rear of the property, it would eliminate us or anyone a guest in that parking along Washington Street if we have any car. So that's why I wanted to try and get the set back. which would allow me to have a garage at back residence. The uh the only other option I have would be to take and build a raised house with parking underneath the plot. And I think the the one I have would be a lot prettier than having a raised house across the street. So I don't know if you can do anything. I know you had your meeting. Unfortunately, I was out of the country. I couldn't get back to town.

I'll ask council here. Is this is there going to be any I guess this would be the new evidence you would present at the B&Z meeting. I believe they actually addressed that in the planning meeting. I know they mentioned even even where the house being moved to it would still be in that flood plane because of percentage.

Yeah, it's the flood plane is in the back and so if I bring it up it would get me out to vote tonight. No, for going to the minutes approval. I'll call for a motion to approve the minutes of January 6, 2026. Have a motion. I have a second.

Second by council. Any discussion? Vote the motion. I motion carries 6. Okay, moving on to the consent agenda. Is there anything anybody would like to pull off of?

Yeah, I mean I would like to kind of just go back and touch upon what was mentioning and have some discussion on the council. Maybe you can help me out too. So breaking this down as you mentioned Mike So clarification though there's also the travel expense I think as response travel was not for the travel in January it was not for the

as of 12312 in January travel was in January 2026

and so I guess kind of what I want to better understand and I think Jordan kind of alluded to and we as we received email about I don't I don't want to proceed to you. I won't let you talk about that. But it looks like we're going to have an engagement process which is needed from the citizens, but my concern it looks like just based on the feedback we've got to kind of digest this thing. It looks like it's going to have a lot of work being done to it. So what parameters kind of guarantees do we have and I guess pursuant to the contract that we entered with Orion. What I don't want to get in the situation is we're already at several% of the budget and then based on I think the feedback that we're going to be getting from the citizens and what we're going to be asking we're going to be engaging around a whole lot in this process. So I don't want to exceed that budget. So I I certainly you know I want to really think about how we handle I'd like to kind of pull this invoice and kind of better hear from you invoice because what we paid for thus far. So can you ask can based on their involvement level

they can exceed the budget right because there's going to be a lot more I would imagine their contract that we've signed is 101500 not to exceed so that will be available for any public workshop that we have questions comments city council citizens and all that will be contained within I think right now we're still in a public comment period which we had scheduled for about eight weeks which is going to go longer there is rush that was said up front. So whenever y'all again right now it's just like we did the comprehensive plan that send in comments so they can make adjustments and if that needs to be some other type of public workshop meeting or something that he needs to be here then we can make that request

and that but that's not going to be in addition to that'll be within the confines of what we do. I would have to find that out. we were asking him to fly into town. But I think that's that's the most important aspect is that well right now though we're in a public comment period. I would say play the public comment period out right which which I think is very important to have that level involvement from Iran because again up to this point and I'm just speaking for myself and I've asked for updates throughout this process. December that asked if there's an update. You mentioned that you guys are working with Ryan specifically and you had some concerns and they pulled I think it was sections one through eight. I mean did they make those adjustments? Is this the final product that

this is the product that went public that said all right y'all now it's the eight week plus whatever it's going to be to get community input just like we did comprehensive plan and we'll get the data points of how arrived at the current zoning district the first data point was your comprehensive plan

yeah I'm thumbing through and there's not I mean toggle between the compens the new zoning and it really doesn't specify in the plan just references the different zoning district. So I mean what are the data points where we arrived at the decision that we did for different districts and setbacks was that because I don't see that data from the plan I just see I see some some constructs here but not data so did come up with that I would recommend that you again you've got his phone number your email say you have access to it individual every council member comments I haven't gotten response back and again I know we're going to go through this process

no I mean I know you've had phone calls continue but okay just for clarity though the Orion consulted with administration on this final draft yes we've administration me and so based on Mike has read through this okay so based on what they proposed you guys saw this and said this is going to be this This is what we should present and wait again the feedback that says all right we want an 8 foot set back or a 10 foot setback change want 8 foot fence or a sixoot fence those things get changed through this process just like we did the comprehensive plan

we want to better understand how we submit those requests I mean I don't want to go ahead December 31st arriving at the draft hoping that there is a budgeted amount to carry us through public comment because that was something that was planned. I'm sure they plan revisions. So I think we continue going on and gathering and if there gets to a point I mean you'll have another $22,000

separate vote on it separately that way if it's vote I don't want that we will pull the consent agenda item number item so we're pulling No, just I will ask for a motion to approve the consent agenda removing item six. Do I have a motion? Motion by Councilman Salvo. Do I have a second?

Second by Holmes. Any discussion? Motion. discuss it. I'll call for a motion to approve the payment to Orion Planning and Design in the amount of $8,26.86 for the zoning code rewrite. Have a motion. Motion motion by council. Do I have a second? Have any discussion?

I just don't feel comfortable without understanding. what obviously what the future holds in terms of up to this point

and from my understanding we are currently under contractual agreement. Yes. And that's what if you if you look at this agreement there's you know so the first what 10,000 roughly $11,000 of it that you've already paid was nothing but code assessment. So that was for them to sit there and read your code. That's what you're and look at it. Could we get the original agreement sent to the Yeah, of course.

Yeah. And so now, you know, the bulk of what they're 82% of is code update where they've gone in there and actually updated it, change, edit it. So now we are at the beginning of the public process, including council input. So there has to be a starting point where you get this to you guys and you get this to the public. And that's where we're at. We're at the starting point of the public and council input. Is there a way to put that

correct. So this is something that you all would be voting on. So in order to be interactive, you had to get a starting point. You had to get a document presented to you that then you can start openly discussing and and talking about because we couldn't we couldn't I couldn't they couldn't call you all in a meeting and say okay let's start you know reddrafting a zoning ordinance. So that part was done by your team on your administration to get you all to a starting point. So yeah, there are going to be changes. Of course, there are going to be changes, but what Jeremy and Michael Riso did was go through this and try to figure out what needed to be changed before, what needed to be edited. I can't even explain to y'all the hours these two guys have spent doing this. So I guess you could say comically, imagine what that draft might have looked like before. But again, these are these are ers that come in and look at an overall um aspect of the city and then it's up to us as leaders to look and say that's not going to work for us. What's another option? And then they can make other re other recommendations. So there's been a lot of back and forth. So some of these two are ideas for you to consider. You might not like them and that's okay. Citizens might not like it. That's okay too. That's that's why we're at this starting point. That's what today or not today, but two weeks moving forward. That's what this is all about. Let's go through.

We spent a lot of time

and it's going to continue as everybody looks looks at it. They're going to have, you know, see things that need to be changed as well. We're not on a timeline. It just takes three months. It takes three months. It takes six months. We're going to do it. We're gonna do it right and get it out there. But you had to have somewhere at the start to like we'll listen to input council plenty of citizens as you can see very interested in this and everything and we'll go from there. Same thing with the um comprehensive plan, you know. So,

well, no, and it's good that we've established those guidelines. I think as I left the meeting, the last council meeting we have about addresses, we had a four-we comment period to go on February 11th to this planning zone which will be the public hearing and it comes to us February 18th council meeting for vote. Well, that was that's the game plan. Yeah. So, that doesn't mean it's in stone or anything like that. I mean, if we get if we're there on those dates, we are. But if we're not, you know, we'll we'll continue.

What what is our mechanism? So, I know the process is You can put online comments that's in the document. You can now email Burke. Um, and there is a inquiry section in the city website, but what's the justification? Because I've already seen areas that have been changed. Um, is that based on one citizen calling said, "Hey, I need I don't like the way this is zone. I need this back." What is that process? Because this document is living, breathing. I've already seen dynamic, but I've seen that some areas have already been changed. What necessitates that? Is it one person calling one comment? How do we arrive at that decision? you know some of the changes that that you know we I say myself you know with a lot of feedback that we disagree and feedback but that's we're putting our input in other

and one thing at that meeting we did ask is for them to compile all So I I think that's I think that's happening from this first draft. So where we come we'll see what changes I think we need to keep it go back to the other way but continue.

So Jordan I also think that's what you're paying these planners for is to go through and read these comments and not have to have you guys read every single comment. If there's thousands of comments, the planners can look at this and say, you know what, you're right. That doesn't meet the needs of Bay St. Louis. Or wait, maybe there's, you know, put this one on the side for a question. Let's talk to the council about this. So, I think that's part of this interactive process is looking at what should be incorporated, what shouldn't be. If it's something that's black and white, like, oh yeah, that was a typo or I understand what they're saying, they are absolutely right. I think they're going to go ahead and incorporate incorporate those changes as they move on because there's no reason to have a dep in-depth conversation about something that everybody agrees needs to be changed. So, I would imagine that that's not to speak for Bob, but I would imagine that's what's happening with May I interpret, but I just feel like this should be during council business and allow us to get through the agenda. and then we can have this long drawn out conversation on the council because there are people here still agenda.

I think Kyle's question was more on the

Yeah, we definitely got sidetracked there to feedback already. after this after this invoice there's still 20 22 22% left and I'd like the original work that they already done to get us to where we are now second if there's no other discussion I'll call for a vote

I Moving on to planning and zoning applications. Moving on to planning and zoning applications. I will call for a motion to follow planning and zoning's recommendation and deny the application for a variance of a 13 foot resulting in a 12oot setback to the front yard submitted by Joseph and Lillian Melli located at 104 Washington Street parcel 149P-30-18.001 001 it was approved 50 to deny. Do I have a motion to follow the recommendation?

Follow. I have a second. Second by Councilman Lewis. Any discussion? The motion? I

I motion carries 6. Moving on to B. A motion to follow planning and zoning's recommendation and deny the application for a special exception to allow an accessory dwelling on a lot under 15,000 square feet which is a variance of 3,361 square ft from the required minimum submitted by John Robin located at 312 dele parcel 149F-29-262 it was approved 6 that was approved do I have a Motion motions. Do I have a second? Second by Councilwoman Davis. Any discussion? The motion.

I I I motion carries 6. Moving on to 7C. A motion to follow planning and zoning recommendation and approve the application for a special exception to construct an accessory dwelling on a parallel exceeding 15,000 square feet submitted by Eco Instruction Construction LLC located at 928 Old Spanish Trail parcel 137Q-36-98. It was approved 51. Do I have a second? Any discussion? The motion.

I motion fails. Motion fails. Oh, 33. Motion to deny. I'll call for a motion to deny planning and zoning recommendation and a motion to deny uh the application submitted by Construction LLC located second motion by Council Lewis. Second by Counciloman Holmes. Any discussion? table.

I mean, if it doesn't, it didn't get a a vote to pass. So, that means it fails. So, it's not I mean, you're you're asking to ultimately they're asking for approval of this and you guys are not approving it with a three-3 vote. We make a motion to table. That is that is what we have. They could request that, right? Well, they would have to they would start the

Yes, correct. on the moving to project updates. Good evening. Um, we submitted our report for multiple projects throughout the city. We don't have any action items tonight, but we can um address any questions that council may have on any of the project. You guys obviously with our past discussion Mike I know what you guys did is you know wanted to first assess and see and scope it and see if this is part of the issue of the main sewer line the sewer line nonetheless especially the area right right near St. Charles St. And I think maybe cost again 500,000 but Jason in terms of just kind of that's continuing to I mean really at this point that area is probably you don't know it's there you can see people have you know it's there so you avoid it people that don't know they um you know what uh what are our options in terms of not at the moment of the scope of trying to know again

your best estimate maybe what can be done address I think you could go in and um I don't want to say patch some of those areas but we could identify what what are the worst areas the ones that have the the greatest amount of settlement and then cut those areas out, repave them, do some base repair. What we presented was to mill the whole section from Valentine to Bayo the complete rem that you wanted to identify certain areas and go in and make those repairs. I think that that's doable.

Well, I know we're I know a couple city based on the necessity started kind of thinking $500,000 upgrades um through the road and bridge fund. Um have you identified I mean I think that area probably wor down the stretch remedies. Mike is there anything we might need to do just what we did on Dunar few years back when we did that we just went in and pulled and had just those are bad. instead of doing the whole thing. It's just I mean it's just settlement. I think it goes back to when the sewer line was installed after hurricane Katrina and all those improvements were made. It's just a back fill issue. So compacting from the from the trench up. Um there's nothing wrong. There's no settlement or there's no infiltration in the sewer line that we can tell once we went through and videoed and inspected it. One thing I would throw out is we're currently advertising for concrete flat work unit price repairs and asphalt unit price repair. So a lot of this work could be incorporated into that contract once we receive those bids. You know, that could be something to consider. We get those bids. We know what the unit prices are.

We can look at certain areas if we need to go saw cut, you know, 20 foot by 10 foot patch or whatever. You're not getting that. That's just citywide. Yeah. Those are just quotes that we'll have. You know, Ronnie needs somebody as they make a sewer tap or a water tap. So, we don't have to go up. Where are we at on that process? Those are advertising right now. I think I don't know. It should be in our report whenever the bids are due. I don't know, but we can get that to you. It's within the next couple weeks. I know that.

And so price. Yeah, those have been advertised. I think the unit price contract for asphalt and concrete we had those scheduled so that hopefully we can make the recommendation after first meeting in February. So we should be receiving those award those contract follow

I would say since we're so close to receiving those unit price let's get the bids in and then we can go from That could be the first

um I've spoken with several business owners downtown. Do you have a schematic or something? We do uh we've been working with the administration on um location of crosswalks and 88 parking and um loading and loading unloading zones, things like that. So I think they're currently reviewing the latest plan. Um and then that would be something that we could definitely coordinate with once we kind of have a finalized plan. U some of that I think we could um again once we get the unit price contracts in the 88 parking the parallel parking spaces we'll need to modify the sidewalks to have that way and that transition to 88 spaces. So we might be able to do some of that with these unitric contracts. The asphalt roadway unit contract has striping included in it. So that's kind of the the first step is once we receive those contracts and bids we'll know what that cost is going to be. We can proceed at that point. have somewhat of a schematic that we're finalized any from what I saw uh months and months ago.

I don't think it's changed much at all. We submitted that for a G Coast Restoration Fund grant. I don't think it made the the recommendation list. Um so we really haven't gone in and tweaked anything since we last presented it. So we'll look at there's room for tweaking. I think there is. And last but not least, it says here that we need to schedule a public hearing on

we do. So, do we do that tonight? that we pushed that. We had some some questions come in from contractors about how to transition between the street that we're paving and the street that at the intersections because we're doing about a 3 inch overlay. So, we have to tie that in. So they've asked for some additional details on that which we're working on. We did push the bids till next Tuesday just to give time for the contractor to review all those. So we'll have a recommendation for that award.

Turning lanes to give you an update on that. So, we do have we added an intersection towards I 10. I think it was uh Rain Street and so we're going to restructure the bid proposal and have a couple as alternate and put rain back in the main the base. We were worried about permitting in that section, but we've already got that cleared. It's all within the rightway of MDOT. So, the next phase on that is we have to submit our CDNI contract as part of MD has a PSN package plan inspecting estimate for the CNI contract go attachment with that once they approve everything then we can actually go out for we can we can add some time

okay just touching on the park master plan you said it didn't make the list for the grant that's something we'll hold on to resubmitted next year other grants we can go after that

we'll we'll keep resubmitting I think we did submit that as a restore, you know, potential restore project. We were trying to look at uh Piku did a I think it's called Friendship Park through GCRF and they were successful getting some funds for that. To me, I think GCRF is probably the best the best use for those funds. But we can seek out other funds. We can resubmit next year and we can kind of go either way with that. Moving on to ordinances. I'll call for a motion to approve ordinance 678-01- 2026 of the mayor and count city mayor and city council of the city of St. adopting salary schedule establishing salary compensation for the officers employees and open positions of the city of B motion council second

any discussion guys come Chief discussion I carowed to change my vote. I just read something and I'm sitting here reading over I just realized

the I think you have to ask the to bring it back up.

So being it didn't just call a motion for it again. I would just make a motion to add it back to the Okay, I'll make a motion to add uh the motion to follow planning and zoning's recommendation and approve the application for a special exception to construct an accessory dwelling on a parcel exceeding 15,000 square feet submitted by Eco Construction LLC located at 928 Old Spanish Trail partial 137Q-36 98.

Council. Any discussion?

I motion pass. 5 to one. I will now call for a motion to follow planning and zoning's recommendation and approve the application for a special exception to construct an accessory dwelling on a parcel exceeding 15,000 square ft submitted by Eco Construction LLC located at 928 Old Spanish Trail Partial 137Q-36-98. Do I have a motion? Motion by Councilman Salvo. Do I have a second? Any discussion?

The motion. Motion carries. Moving on to the city clerk's report. I will call for a motion to approve the docket of claims 26-005 dated January 20th, 2026 in the amount of $760,7154. I have a motion. Have a second. Second by council Holmes. Any discussion? The motion

motion carries home44. I'll call for a motion to approve the docket claims 26-008 special dated January 20th, 2026 in the amount of $360. Do I have a motion? Motion. Do I have a second? Second by Councilman Lewis. Any discussion? The motion.

I motion carries. 5 to the 6. I'll call for a motion to approve to approve the engagement letter with Butler Snow for legal services and to reappoint Butler Snow as the city attorney for Bay St. Louis. A motion motion council second.

Any discussion? Any motion?

I motion 6. Moving on to council business. Old and new business. We do have Salvo has some items on here. Starting off with the Mississippi Power. We talked about it budget time presenting. Is it ever show contract before the next turned over to go do it sooner. But when we looked at it, it was just

at the time couldn't happen as quick.

We're still looking at it trying to move forward. Yeah, looking at some unloading zones there. Trying to get those in the sidewalk for the ADA accessibility. We may get away with just one cut in downtown. that creating that kind. Not sure the time. Maybe 4 to 8 morning time street cleaned up. Need be Also create back east side It's just not adequate. We have more trucks.

It does, but it's just for for right in the shoot. I see a lot of people and go, you know, pick up me, you know, not just big trucks and everything. We're going to be looking at maybe possibly get the big delivery trucks off the street.

Yeah. I did want to bring up uh I know here going out for RFP and I didn't want it to fall off the ball, but I wanted to bring it up and discuss the future plans for the Bay St. depot. I know it's it's uh it's going to be becoming vacant really soon. So, I'd like to see where we're at on the thought process, what we'd like to see, what direction we'd like to go into. I'm okay with just I'd like to hear everyone's opinions. But if we just go out for a RFP and see what comes in with some restrictions people don't waste their time and submit just any application, but wanted to get everyone's thoughts on what they feel about it. If everyone's okay with that, they have any other suggestions. needs to be. We need a place that preserves our history and I think it's position very well with the grounds with the occasions that the city

So I I just think it's a it's a jewel city and the and have any communication and we're pretty much on the same page. Um, we talked about having like little spaces that could be possibly rented or like local artist. Um, things that actually reflect St. Louis there also focusing on track. We do have the volunteers there now. I would be interested in possibly as a position so that someone is actually there and the lighting is there and it's appropriate. It's, you know, welcoming for people getting on and off the train and so they're just volunteers and no one's there with the little ladies to me that doesn't feel 100% safe the way it is now. But I do like the vision that we're both talking about. Maybe send out some bids for the upstairs and the little is functional.

Yeah, I think you know I think from day one we went into the process of trying to re-evaluate the best use of this um you know a lot of discussion workshops on it. I mean in terms of you know we've established is the fact is I don't mind you got somebody there not so expens we know we're probably not going to recoup the totality of what that expense is building when it comes to insurance and utilities but you know I kind of took it from our recent meeting because we had we had obviously there's events that have transpired um where we had a we had a visitor center county tourism went to a veins we know the issue where we had a we had an art center we had a art museum there no long no longer there and then I kind of felt like landed on. Okay, you know, let's put that out and see what opportunities we have and how can we mitigate cutting some of those expense on the city. Um, you know, my one thing is going to be how do we differentiate delineate if we have, you know, obviously we've gone through the route of doing a decrease fair market value based on a nonprofit status. So, how do we delineate if someone puts in uh, you know, it's a nonprofit that can't compete with a forprofit, you know, so how do we make that determination on what the best use is, you know, based on prior discussion just now of maybe having a visitors center, a welcome center. You know, I if we go that route, I'd love to try to kind of entertain and maybe invite coastal tourism coast Mississippi to come and explain how, you know, of course it's Hancock, but we're sending them $450,000 of the 2% lodging fee or lodging tax to the coast Mississippi. So maybe there can be an opportunity that they can help with the visitor center based on what we're sending them on that. So I mean there's options to where it doesn't just fall on Bay St. Louis. want to truly be like a visitor center. Um but uh you know look forward to maybe that discussion with them as well and see see how we can cross that bridge with them. But ultimately I mean I think again the goal is to try to offset some of our expenses there. Um and I kind

United States related poss You know something many others too know We went visit place over there where they do on the wall. But also in that talking to the city just something to look at. They had a great So just something to think about like

a lot of revenue. You know I think about the obviously how do we offset the cost there has to be a employee to maint kind of first. So, it's kind of how do we, you know, but I also agree with Louis, you know, we set out to try to cover some of the costs of the building at the very beginning, which is I'm okay with a blank How do we get hopefully someone will submit because the question becomes how do we get to what they have in who's going to facilitate it or would that be city facilitating that that's the challenge who would step into

I'll send you that's kind of the catch up with What would that be? Well, we'll look that. I mean, is that something?

I think I think you know tourism needs to be that building in that prominent space needs to be run by the city. It's a city, you know, it's not a county tourism. I don't think we need to farm it off to some someone else. I think the city needs to take responsibility for it.

Are we good at the second floor? I mean, we don't have to that comes in. Are we going to set parameters for that? Like you said, you know, you don't want people coming in and you know, I think as far as use of the building, what we'd like to see. So with an RFP, we don't have to accept anything,

but we don't want people to waste their time. I mean just obviously I don't want to see that stuff like that. That's more so what I was thinking with with setting the parameters. I didn't want someone to come. That was really my main thing. I mean I kind of look at we've discussed this before having two floors two stores having different entities in there and they work together you know so a little bit how to get the chamber building. Um but still we've discussed that even with both buildings put something top how does that work together for the entire building?

Well that was just a thought is if you know that's going to be you know it's a city responsibility to staff let's say visitor center um You know, again, there's there is already a mechanism for tourism that that we're giving coastal Mississippi to help with that. So, should that be a burden or expense solely on the city when we are providing 2% of our lodging fee that goes to coast Mississippi? So, maybe open that dollar. So, that's not a added expense on top of the expenses already on that building. I'd like

how do we do that since you guys have been here but she has come to the council meeting before No. Well, I just wanted to better understand I did reach out to Judy. I wanted to better understand their operations and how we fit in with that. Um, there was a meeting scheduled, but I think it'd be more prudent for Judy to come address. So, that's up to the council. I think better understand, enlighten us on their operations and how we fit into that, what our needs are. our needs are. Hey, we want a visitor center. We're also paying the expense on this building. We're paying good city St. Louis, you know, taxes towards the city. So, I don't want to, you know, lose sight of the fact that how can we work together with that bill? So I guess obvious as far as first and second floor I think that's a lot of square footage one person, but I do want to keep something together That way we can go ahead.

All right, moving on to any other discussion. Are we good with that plan? Moving on to our public forum. While Caitlyn is getting that getting the sheet, I know a lot of people are here to talk about the 2045 zoning ordinance. Um, since it was released, you know, we've seen a lot of feedback, gotten a lot of comments. Um, I did want to address a couple of things that, you know, sent today about what we're doing to better the process to allow more public input to extend the timeline. Uh, so the first thing we did, we rem removed the February 11th public hearing date. you know whenever we thought you know whenever this it was a it was more so if perfect case scenario no public comment came back it would have went February 11th and then at the March meeting come to us obviously we know we receiving a lot of public comment right now so that's not a realistic date so that was the first thing so we're still going to have a public comment we're probably we're going to extend that um until we feel until the council feels ready um then know possibly I think a workshop would be beneficial and then have a public hearing. Uh so that'll be the first thing. We'll let the public comment run and then we'll get something scheduled as far as for workshop and then uh we also included three new ways to or there's three ways now to submit public comment through Dropbox directly on the web page. You can email Jeremy Burke directly. I know there was some questions about you had to sign up for Dropbox. So we this morning a a form on the actual web page. So you can go directly to that form, submit your comment, and when you submit it, it goes to Jeremy B and

on the city's web page.

On the city's web page. So it's actually where all the links are. It's on the city web page. So we wanted everyone to we didn't want any hassle. We wanted everyone to feel like they could comment and uh and if we wanted to be uh accessible as well. We also added a link to the uh file on the web that same web page so you can click it instead of a Dropbox link. There was also the 2045 comprehensive plan now linked on that same web page. Uh we also have requested Orion to send us separate maps with each new district separated so there's not a bunch of colors overlaying each other. And those maps will be printed u and we will post those in council chambers as well as the city hall conference room and it will also be added to the website. Uh the next thing is u we're creating the document right now or is comparing the current zoning districts to the new ones regarding lot size minimum yard front with setbacks and that way it'll be a lot easier to see the differences. Um if you're like me you've been looking plan on one screen, the old looking at the new. So, it's it's uh that'll make it a little bit easier for everyone to get through.

Yeah, if you don't want, so I'll move my spot. It'll be uh and that will also be added to the website. In addition to that, uh there are printed copies available at city hall. just in case someone does not have computer access, you can go there and pick up a copy. Um, and then uh we will uh there's also going to be a weekly advertisement in the paper, weekly Facebook post about the zoning ordinance. Woo uh was at the P&Z meeting and actually interviewed Bob with Orion when it was drafted. And then also he's available obviously for all of council members to reach out to. So, uh, feel free to give our input, but please right now submit public comment. That's the part of this process that we're in and we want to want to continue on that track. So,

and Jordan, if somebody wants the oldfashioned pen and paper route, that that's fine, too. Just drop it at Jeremy B's office. Perfect. So, just want to want everyone to know the kind of updates on where we are with that. Thank you everybody for your feedback thus far to this point as well. Moving on to the public forum for Yeah. Yeah. So, just kind of clarify. So, when comments are made, are there going to be as dynamic changes or because if we're going to be printing these maps and make a change? So, how how interactive and live and how dynamic are we getting changes? Because I've already seen a couple. So, is that

I would assume that these making any changes that would be like corrections or something like wait that wasn't supposed to be that somebody said somethingack of anything substantial I think. So if there's an oversight or that's correct, but it's not as hey I'm not happy with this. I want this back. No, I don't think you're not gonna take one person. That's what I wanted. There's a lot of opinions out there. There's consensus on opinions. People are saying, "Hey, we don't like thousand people saying that. That might be a recommendation going. Hey, look, we're getting a lot of this.

Yeah. And I appreciate the clarification. Either misheard or misread. I think that was part of it early on was you have this issue. We have the ability live time. You put the comment in the drop box. We can make that change specific to that. No, I mean like they did with the comprehensive plan. I mean they were emailing back to the constituent res whatever on the drop seen a lot of comments. So I put some on there because that was the advice. I've talked with Bob and then with you said put in the comment section. I haven't seen I haven't got response. I haven't seen response. I've personally received a few emails and I've just received one today but it's live. And that should pull up right when you just go to the

website. If you go to it live, you can see comments on the column. Whoever emails multiple visitors probably and we'll have side by side. We'll have a synopsis of what the changes were so you don't have to go from 175 to the current ordinance. I've asked We're keeping that of our old ordinance compared to our new ordinance. What changes like red line type of thing? Where is that now? I've asked for it. So I can upload that too.

Okay. But I mean our current ordinance if you remember it got shifted just to organize. we did maybe this is a complete rewrite of your zoning ordinance. So I don't think it's possible to get a thing you can do is the sidebyside comparison the red line but I think it's unrealistic. I think it's practical to ask them to go in and say after this became that

well I just I want to look at it from it just just mention the redines follow again I appreciate the steps going toward making this as easy as possible but it's hard to follow I think that's

as I said it's hard to follow if you're not familiar somebody like you will probably realize it because there might be a whole section that looks completely struck out it might not actually be gone it may not made sense where it was in our previous zoning ordinance. So, it is now moved to section four instead of section one. So, that's what I say when I'm saying it's hard to follow. I mean, it's very easy to see what has been deleted. But there also when you look at a redline document, you also have to think a little bit and say, okay, is this actually removed or is there another place in this document that it may be?

So, I'm sure once we get that, we'll be helping some of our calls about that. I think public comments keep flowing in the middle. I mean we have public at the end of that period I'll be okay with We talked about February 3rd and February 18th. March

3. March.

I have another meeting that day, but may not need me, but I want to tell you I will not be able to do that. Yeah. Should we do it on March 4th? Yes. So, currently we're just those are the dates we were just throwing around are regularly scheduled council meetings. The March 4th we're going to have a public workshop. So, that'll give ample time for public comment throughout that period and then you can look at them when you come to a council meeting and then we'll also have them at city hall. So, I think that'll give ample amount of time uh to kind of get a good first one to go into that workshop and then see what comes from that. Well, that's always

I will also tell y'all that we've had multiple meetings with Bob via Zoom, too. So, that that is always option that they can't be to zoom in and they have screen sharing capabilities and they do this all the time. So very organized and it's really not much different. All right. So March 4th 5:30 we'll have a workshop.

Okay. So moving on to the public forum. Want to get all that out the way. We do have some people signed up. Tad Black regarding the zoning ordinance. Thank you, councel. Um, real quick, I'm going to make this statement and it's true. Go find it out. Go to any consultant in zoning. Zoning controls the quality of life in your community. That's a fact from over and I've been involved with person the 2010 and of course for the 20ou the one y'all talking about now 2045. I'd like to know how many other cities because I've checked with other cities. How many cities use this catchall low medium high density zoning right? I don't think that's going to protect the quality of life in Bay St. Louis. I want to know how that came about instead of getting rid of our R1, R2, R3, R1A, R1B because that's what was adopted back in 1964, right? So, I want to know what other cities are using this and how well is it working out for because I've never I've heard of it after Katrina. Now, remember after Katrina, they did give some leeway to people. They took instead of having a 25 foot frontage, you could have a 20 I mean a 25 instead of a 30. They reduced it from 10 on the side to eight. So they did some changing to help rebuild Bay St. Louis. We added 50 foot in the downtown area height on the advisory board for the second comprehensive plan. Right. But first of all, I want to know what other cities use this because Waveland

doesn't. Pastor Shan doesn't, Long Beach does it. Long Beach's majority R1, right? Talk to the city planning person. Most of their land is R1 single to wealth because that's what sets your quality of life in your community. All right. Second, how how did the when the majority of the people that participated in the comprehensive plan a couple years ago in their statements in their comments they said we want less density. How did this map come about that sh is nothing but more density in my neighborhood the neighborhood you grew up in right 100 foot lots by 144. That's the average. There's some smaller ones out there because of key lots, because of the streets running diagonal to the highway. But anyway, so I I I really think that we need to give a hard thought about this catch all medium, high, and low density. That's that's going to cause more problems for special exception setback requirements. And when I looked at some of the requirements for the high density, that's a joke. That's a joke. And I I'm I'm scared. This is going to be, I believe, will be one of the biggest decisions this council makes in the next four years. And where do we want our city? Do we want to protect the quality of life that's been here since I've been here? And that's been 64 years, right? I love this town. And that's why I fight for the right zoning, right? And I and I want each one of you council to do a thor a thorough thorough job. I told Miss Holmes and I talked to her before the election. And I picked up that zoning book and I said, "That is your Bible for quality of life that they say St. Louis." Did I not? All right. It

is. And the way it's zoned right now is going to cause a lot of concern. Don't know. It's not really spelled out what is high, what's low. You got your lot sizees 5,000 to 10,000, whatever. I do not think this way of zoning is the correct way to zone our our city because we did a future land use map as a city councilman back in the 90s and we all the land that's in in question right now should have been reszoned but the council and Katrina happened so it fell through the cracks. It was a beautiful future land use map for the first comprehensive plan. It put residential where residential should be. It put commercial where commercial should be, but it didn't get I still have it. It's in my attic. Matter of fact, I told Councilman Lewis I'm going to dig it out and give it to him. I do not understand how I was on the advisory committee with all the Zoom meetings and all that. And most of the people that participated do not want this type of density in our community. Now, I don't know what's going to happen. There may be some other people did participate that do want it. I know there's a lot of developers out there and I know the map has changed in the last week because I started looking at it and two or three days later land that I was worried about being high density all of a sudden went from high density to medium density. I don't know how that happens. I didn't tell anybody to do it. I called my councilman about it and he started checking on it and a couple days later the map changed just like that. comments.

Well, so there you go. So, one person can make a comment and change it. I mean, I think I think that's the job of all seven of y'all. I mean, all seven of us will approve it,

right? That's what I'm saying. I want y'all to really do your homework. This is very, very important. You know, me, where I live right now on Seventh Street, been there most of my life, it's not going to affect me because everybody around me is already built, right? But when you start, there's a lot of vacant property on Yugo Street, 10th Street, there's still vacant property and those lots are 100 by 144. And your new zoning says we can make it 90 foot lots, right? I don't even like that. Mine will become where I can make it a 90 foot lot. That's what it has according to the scale that the best I could determine. But there was so many shades of yellow with medium density and high density. But I know there was a piece of property on the corner of old Spanish tra uh Washington Street and Subie Street that was the same density as Spanish acres because you got to remember Spanish acres was being processed before the zoning was actually put into play. So there was some things that happened and then some sub some developers got con park. Let me go back to Spanish a because it was done wrong. There was too many houses. It cost the taxpayers of Bay St. us $4 million to fix that drainage problem. $4 million to fix the drainage where people in Spanish acres don't have to park on the old Spanish trail for a day when it rains three in density causes more runoff. You you you clear a lot, you build an average size house, you got 45% more runoff. You start putting more density on that property, you're going to have more than 45 and there's already flooding problems again in the area where I live. Matter of fact, we need to ditches dug out.

Thank you. Just a quick point of clarification. Tad, I know you're actually my appointee from the conference of plan 2045 advisory council. Appreciate appreciate based on your knowledge and experience. Appreciate you attending those meetings. I hope in future you do come to our workshop. Oh, I will I'm not going away on this is serious to me. But in terms of conference planning, you were at this meeting, but advisory council was not necessarily involved in Zoom.

No, I I asked that specific question to Bob in a Zoom meeting. You know, when are we going to take a look at the future land use map? That's what we're supposed to have, right? And he said, well, that's a secret a separate phase. That was his comment. And the second phase, none of I don't I think Anita was she was on the board and I don't know if anybody else just us, but there's more than that. But I was never contacted about the zoning issue from the advisory board. Okay? That that didn't happen. And to be honest with you, like I said, three comprehensive plans that I've participated in, one as a councilman, two as a a citizen, and I wasn't really impressed with the group session because I kept asking for meetings for us to sit down as a group like we did in 2008 for the 2010 comprehensive plan. And Bob kept promising me that we were going to meet as a group. We only met on Zoom and the only thing we got out of the Zoom was data. Data that says maybe we can make people in downtown put a parking garage on their roof or we take the frugal shopping center and turn that into a condo resort. Those were artist concepts that we looked at when Bob presented some stuff. The zoning never was brought up to my knowledge. Thank you for

Jordan. May I address two things real quick? I just want just for clarification because there's so many people listening to this. So, one thing that everybody needs to keep in mind is that pre-existing subdivisions, those lots are all those lots have already been subdivided. So, if you live in a subdivision, so let's take Pan Park, that is a platted subdivision. In order to go and alter the size of those lots or change those lots, you would have to get chanc approval. So, we just need to keep that in mind that when you're when you're talking about those lots and if they're in subdivision, those those have already been set. Those are there and it would have to come Yes, it would come here, but it would have to go to Chancery Court. Um, the other thing that I wanted to point out just when you're talking like R1, R2, R3, cities, cities use all different terms and a lot of people do use R1, but as Mr. Black pointed out, the city of Long Beach does. Well, yeah, they do, but in the city of Long Beach, an R1 single family um residence, the requirement of a lot width is 75 ft and the lot area minimum is 7,500 square feet. So, for educational purposes, I just want to make sure everybody listening to this and to you guys know that an R1 in Bay St. Louis and an R1 in Long Beach or an R1 in Gulport or high density, whatchal it side of Lemon here, like could be total different. So, you have to go to if you go to compare your zoning ordinance Bay St. Louis's to anyone else's, make sure you look at the chart of uses and then make sure you actually go look at what the definitions and what the requirements of each of those zones are because they're different anywhere you go.

Thank you for the clarification. Moving on to the next public forum, we have Miss Kathleen Monty. Yeah, we'll bring up Mr. So my comments are based on that Mr. But that that part was a perfect scenario before we received

but that's what was being advertised to these people. Matter of fact, why don't you ask how many people are here because of this and then I'm going to ask why wasn't it on the agenda and the first thing for people to talk about instead of them sitting here for three hours because we have a public forum and a procedure

because you didn't want to hear from the citizens of the base St. Louis. All right, start my time. I'm going to read it because and I'm here to express a concern shared by a number of citizens of Bay St. Louis. Impression is that this new PNZ ordinance is trying to be slipped in, voted on, and enacted while no one is watching. That the city council really doesn't want to have to deal with taking input from citizens that elected them. You were elected by citizens. you don't want to deal with the mere fact that I asked to be a guest speaker and to have sufficient time to present this but was taken off the schedule and asked to speak at the end of this on the non-aggenda forum with a threeminut limit reinforces that impression that y'all don't want to hear from the citizens. It also bears a question. Why is something this important not on the agenda in conversations with you, some of you city council members, I believe there's a good bit of interest in reviewing this document in detail and correcting or killing this albatross before voting on it. And those of you who relayed that to me, please don't be offended by my comments. We've been told to make comments directly on the website to Orion. I've emailed mine via Jeremy Burke and Mike Rizzo because it's difficult or impossible to put comments on a website. Many of the folks I've spoken to tell me the same thing. You can't make comments online. I understand y'all fix that. Thank God more of but that's what our impression y'all don't want to hear from us. That's what we're seeing. I've heard the words regarding the ordinance. We need to trust the process. I want you to keep in mind that the same folks telling that the city administration or the folks who are in charge of ensuring development goes on as supposed to be as in Shieldsboro to be done correctly. Yet go look at Shieldsburg. It was bulldozed flat. That's the administration was supposed to trust. I don't think I'm alone in my comments that a few years back when I heard some feelings here and I said I had no faith that the administration would do the right thing.

Trust and credibility once lost is hard to regain. The ordinance draft written by Orion and paid for by the citizens of Bay St. Louis supposedly was developed with input from the citizens. The last three big development pushes in this city were all met with public push back. SWK development between Third and Beach that the part between Central and Ballentine and Shieldsbury. All three were opposed to higher density developments and all three had a lot of opposition not being developed not to being developed but to being developed as higher density areas. Yet this draft ordinance moves the entire city in the opposite direction. We didn't have input from from people. Unless I'm mistaken, there are no public workshops regardless or y'all scheduled some now. Now y'all had the only the only input was on the plan which is not a fast hard ordinance. It was a living document. Recent recent meeting where Bob Barker uh was was present. The question was asked, will there be a public comment period? The answer was given was consistent with similar questions. Public comments will be taken at the PNZ meeting. City council won't be taking comments. That's what was spoken at the January 5th meeting. I refer to my initial remark. Council does not want to hear from its citizens. That's the impression that you guys have given the citizens. And um tonight, Mike Bo has told me when I walked in that has changed, but it changed tonight. Contractors Orion in his case will listen to the people that write the check. They'll be polite and listen to the other people, but they're going to respond to the people that write the check. You guys write the check to Orion. I got two more pages. I don't have all 12 pages of documents, but I got more say my time's up. But then I would ask that there I'm watching the time. Maybe you weren't, but I am.

Well, thank you. Your time is up. So now I have to I'd like to ask for a show of hands. Who's here for the P&Z? And then ask me why was it not on the agenda and why was it not first? Mr. Cliff, at the January 5th meeting, I want to point out that was the first time. Every single council member, why did y'all not getting that from the administration earlier? It was the first time. You need to ask them people why are they not giving you the information a little bit on timely basis. I'm not trying to argue with you or anything. I'm just here to tell you from a councilman's perspective, I was given that day we received it or actually came in at the PNC meeting. I don't know about you, it's 150 pages long. It's a lot of pages long. Yeah, I've read it

and I understand I've seen your comments back and I do appreciate them, but to take the fact that we received it that day, the timeline that was presented on January 5th was a perfect world if no comments were to be coming in. That wasn't clarified and wasn't wasn't put out there. to apologize for the people. You understand? But I want to make this very clear to you and everybody in this room. There's not a person up here that's trying to push this under anybody in this room or in this city. So to come up here and accuse that, I do not appreciate that. So thank you very much, Mr. Cliff. Your time is up. Didn't figure you'd like my comment. Thank you.

Moving on to Miss Kathleen Monty. Good evening, Kathleen Monty 105 Sycamore. And I don't know if it's appropriate to discuss this tonight or not. It does refer to the zoning map. U but I'm afraid it's going to get lost and so that's why I want to bring it up now. Um, and it's the when I looked at the maps, which the colors are difficult, and I've got a suggestion about that later, I'll add, but the entire beachfront area on the water side of the seaw wall from Beach Boulevard of the city's northern boundary line at Cedar Point to the south city line at Wavelin is zone ba front. This includes the Washington Street Pier and Pavilion area owned by the county. There does not appear to be any separate zoning any longer to protect sand beach and land located to the south of the seaw wall from development. If so, this really truly cannot and should not be allowed. According to the table 41 in the um proposed ordinance, um the following is allowed by right in bayfront zoning. Our house is Bayfront Zoning. Across the street is Bayfront Zoning. Okay, got a picture. All right. Across the street, uh, accessory structures, all these are allowed by right according to what I read. Accessory structures, fences, home occupation, swimming pools, government buildings, accessory dwellings, single family dwellings, and then additionally the following is allowed by special exception. Did I say by special exception the first time? I meant by right if I did this. Okay. Uh this is what's allowed by special exception

according to that same table for the bayfront bed and breakfast assembly hollow lodge gazeos. Um, please create a zone to protect the sand beach and lands area land and areas south of the seaw wall similar to what the current R5 and R5A zones protect. If not, someone please explain why because I don't understand. I mean, that's one of our greatest assets as a city. And if you go back and look um at the R5 that we had before, fences, gazeos, peers, and non-habitable structures were allowed by uh special exception use uh if passed for an affected area only that began at Beach Boulevard, 618 North Beach Boulevard South to 612 South Beach Boulevard. So, please, I hope that the new one will and I'm thrilled to know that we are going to be having more input, more workshops, and I'll do my best to put this in the computer, but it would be awfully long.

I'll I'll personally get with you. Miss Kathleen, are you talking about everything? Yes, it's land. It's land in the Bay Are you talking about the Bayront? That the district that you're looking Call it Bayr. Land in the Bayfront District between Beach Boulevard and the Seaw wall shall be limited to fences, gazeos, peers, and nonhabitable structures by special exception only. Is that only in the new one or the old? Yes, ma'am. Where are you finding it? Because I didn't see that. Why don't you just come here and I'll show you. I don't Thank you.

No, it's right on the page. Hey, Heather and Are you okay if I go ahead and call up the next miss?

I need a war. Thank you for changing the schedule. What I don't understand is when what your comment time is. I understand we're going to have a workshop on March the 4th. When are the comments going to be due? By March 4th or up sometime before that. I think we'll we can probably set deadline. I mean you want before that way there's some

I'm just some because I am a lite and I have tried to use that website and I'm so glad you made up some other things. It just it was very frustrating to go on and try and comment and then Dropbox comes in and then they want you to subscribe and then they start sending me emails. Don't want to do that. I'm glad you've given us some other alternatives. I am very much I was a member of the environment committee so I was very concerned about as you all know trees and landscaping and all those things and and I agree with Tad they heard it and then we never had another another meeting. So, but everything that we have said for the last however many years we fought Shieldsboro because remember they wanted 50 they wanted what 175 lots originally and now they're down to I think 120 some odd thereabouts in the second phase and then and they swore they would save the trees and what did they do? They went in and bulldozed practically everything in sight. That's not what we want. I don't care who the developers are. They don't live here. They come here. They take money out of this community and they leave. You need to make sure this zoning ordinance is works for all of us who are here. We don't want to be Pensacola Beach. We don't want to be Beluxy. We don't want highrises. We want to keep the charm of our town. And they say that in the comprehensive plan. So, thanks. You'll be hearing more from me. Thank you very much.

Okay, nobody else has signed up for the public forum, so we will move on to our next order of business being our attorney's report. Is there anything to cover with the attorney? No, you've heard enough from me. No need for executive session. I will call for a motion to adjourn the meeting of January 20th, 2026. Motion. Do I have a second? Second by councilwoman Holmes. Any discussion? The motion. I motion carry 6 meeting.