City Commission Meetings - Special Meeting

I am calling to order the special special call  city commission meeting for December 1st at 4:30.   Opening prayer by Dr. John Haley, senior pastor  of New Covenant Church of God of in Christ,   followed by the pledge of allegiance,  led by Commissioner Granger. Please rise. Let us pray. Lord, thank you. Thank you for  everything you've done for us individually.   Thank you for what you've done for us  collectively. And God, we recognize   your awesome power and your goodness that you  have extended to each one of us. You filled our   days with gladness of heart. You've made us  jubilant and joyful in spirit. Thank you for   doing so by way of the spirit of your precious  precious son, our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.   Now God, we will be remiss were we not to ask you  for your wisdom, ask you for your grace and your   guidance in times like these. Nehemiah in chapter  1 asked for your favor and your blessings to   ultimately rebuild 2.5 miles of walls and  gates that were destroyed in Jerusalem. God,   not only did you grant him his desire, but you  gave him the wisdom to do in 52 days what others   were unable to do in 74 years. You blessed him to  rebuild the walls of Jerusalem. Your word tells us  

to acknowledge you in all our ways and you will  direct our paths. Nehemiah did that and God you   responded mightily to his requests. So here we  are knowing that you're no respected of persons,   asking that you grant these commissioners and  our mayor who are your servants. Grant them   the wisdom they need to facilitate the rebuilding  of what is necessary to effectuate growth in this   community now and in the days to come. Help  them to come to a concrete resolve of what is   in the best interests of the community and the  constituents they serve. Bless them to be united   and wholeheartedly committed to this work. Bless  them to stand on the shoulders of righteousness.   And we recognize for their goodness and their  propensity to rule with wisdom, transparency,   and sincerity all the days of their lives. It  is in the precious and immaculate name of Jesus   Christ we ask and pray these things. Amen.  Amen. Amen. If you'll join me in the pledge   of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of  the United States of America and to the republic   for which it stands, one nation under God,  indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. [Applause] Please call the role. Mayor  Branch, present. Commissioner Street,   here. Commissioner Hughes, here. Commissioner  Lucas, present. Commissioner Granger present.  

Mary have quorum. Thank you. You've received  the meeting minutes from November 10th. Do I   have a motion to accept? Motion to approve.  Second. Any discussion? Please call the RO.   Commissioner Street? Yes. Commissioner Hughes?  Yes. Commissioner Lucas? Yes. Commissioner   Granger? Yes. Mayor Branch? Yes. Motion passes  5-0. Thank you. You're welcome. You know, Jonathan   and I actually this afternoon were talking  about how to make this meeting flow the best   uh keeping us moving forward, giving the public  as much opportunity to speak uh with information   in front of them. And one of the ideas was to  move audience participation to after discussion   of the term sheet or have multiple segments  of audience audience participation. Do we   have any strong feelings either way of how  to how to create more dialogue? I know one   other the comments were uh to even have a  roaming mic during public comment so people   feel the most comfortable. That was another  another bit the feedback I heard as well. One of the things that I heard was from a  being nervous mean yeah if if they can stand   up and talk so maybe we can go back there or the  idea of maybe moving that back to the middle so   they're not right up here. Just want to be able to  give them the most opportunity to talk. But yes,   sir. U I like the idea of them listening and then  having comments afterwards or both. U because they   did have the opportunity to look at it online  and read the agenda. I'm fine with both. I would   suggest we do both. Uh what I mean by that is um  keep podium. Um allow audience participation right   now for those who need to make comments and maybe  they have to be somewhere else. Um that's what's   on the agenda. but then also allow for um other  times where so so we have different kind of like   we did the last time where we had 5A talk about  it comments 5B comments just open up for comments  

each time. Okay, that's what I would suggest.  Yeah. How do we feel about taking that to them   or I mean I'm not really against it. I could just  see how it could kind of fall apart pretty quick.   Yeah. or help speak to you instead of intimidating  being it kind of goes down to I'm not a big fan of   trying out something new especially when we have  some a topic that is that is as hot as it is right   so all let's just we keep the podium and just  let's open up a couple times in in in section five   so people have opportunity to speak multiple times  especially as more information is coming out um we   want to keep things you know factual and truthful  and straightforward and keep things moving so   let's just go and open up audience participation,  please come forward. Um, your name and address   for the for the record. You have three minutes to  talk. Don't be nervous. We're all just people. So,   please come forward. Yes, sir. Good evening.  Good evening, everybody. Thanks for letting me   speak. Uh, Frankie Pinto, 801 West 13th Street,  Panama City. And I have uh three questions.   When will the marina sharet uh workshops be held  for the uplands? Um I don't think that is really   uh important for the slips wet slips. Uh when  how many workshops will there be and then   um from that the time frame for upland's  funding and construction? It seems like we   have two separate the slips and the uplands  and my big concern is the uplands uh grassy   parkway as I have spoken to. So um if you can  address those three questions I'd appreciate it. Are you will you is that all the  comments you have? Yeah. Okay. Jonathan,  

do you want to answer those questions?  Yeah, sure. I do know um we did have a   conversation today with uh with Dober Cole uh  after basically the holiday week last week.   But one of the things we got kind of two  options. Uh option one would be workshop   um in two parts basically. Uh December 17th which  is a Wednesday uh 4 to 7:00 p.m. 4 I'm sorry 4 times on 4 to 7 p.m. Okay. Yeah. Not two different  time adopted. We haven't talked to these and we   have this would kind of be like a an kind of a a  listening session specifically about the Marina   Uplands kickoff and then they would return January  21st to the 22nd. It would be an open house   uh stakeholder uh meetings that would be  a two-day period again January 21st 22nd.   Um and then you know kind of from January 23rd  through February 28th they would work on detailed   plans and recommendations and then sometime in  early March have community workshop number two.   uh the second workshop would could occur later uh  if the additional financial an analysis was needed   by PFM because they need to be done before they  can move forward. Option two would be to basically   do it all uh over a 3-day period. That would be  January 21st through the 23rd. Same kind of thing,   but you'd have a kickoff for the Uplands kind of  a listening session. Uh and then followed by two   days of the of the community workshop. Uh and then  again over the same time, January 23rd through   kind of the end of February, detailed plans  and recommendations put down. Uh and then have   community workshop number two, kind of that first  half of March, uh following the uh the financial   analysis that would be needed by PFM in order for  Dover Cole to really make the recommendations to   this board. So we've got two options. Yep. And  then the other question was funding and timelapse   the wet slips. I think that's what we're here to  talk about today. Yeah. I I don't know. So yeah.  

Okay. So, uh, you let us know during December,  I guess, when those are going to be happening.   I'll send you an email personally. Okay, great. I  appreciate that. Thank you. Yes, sir. Anyone else? Don't have to be shy. Yes, sir. Good afternoon. Good afternoon or  almost evening. My name is Norvin Tippido,   206 North MacArthur Avenue, Panama City, Florida.  Uh, is there money to build the 50 wet slips   available through grants or whatever they may  be? Can I ask you, mayor? Yeah. I mean, do you   want to have more questions or is that was that  the only question? I'm sorry. Was that the only   question or No, no. I get I I want to know if they  give them all to us at one time. You don't Well,   if if there is money available, why does doesn't  the city go ahead and build the 50 wet slips?   Let's see what's going to happen with the 50 wet  slips. Uh leave the wetlands alone for the uplands   alone for right now because we don't need no uh  hotel or motel on the on the uplands like being   proposed. 250 units going to take up the whole the  whole entire marina out there. We need to save the   marina for the kids, for the people of this city  to use. Uh down that center strip between the two   basins. Yeah, maybe a couple stores right through  there. Singlestory buildings would be fine,   but you could also get the people who are running  the St. Andrews Marina. Also check out the city   marina as the slips are being built and it could  be paid. They could pay their money for the rent   fees to those people. so they could come down and  and take care of it that way instead of having a,   you know, a big a big financial burden on  the taxpayers. So, how about it, mayor? Yes,   sir. Is that it? Yeah. I was just there's more  I'd like to say, but I'm going to keep it. I look   like I'm outgunned. Sure. No worries. There  is I should have made this announcement. At  

the very front of the door, there's a couple  different printouts that I suggest everyone   grabbing. It'll make a lot of clarity. One  is a memo from Jan Smith, our city clerk,   about different possibilities of ways we can  borrow money and different avenues of borrowing   money. Uh it looks like this. Make sure you grab  this handout at the front door. And then the other   print out is the term sheet six from CMP, which  is the current path that they propose as well. So,   uh these are your these are the possibilities of  us using money. Uh and I don't want to read this.   This will be like four minutes of me reading.  So, make sure you grab this sheet. We're going   to be going through those. Yeah, it's kind of, you  know, it's kind of confusing to me the way things   have been going on around here. You know, uh I'm  just kind of like I say, just just at all about,   you know, what to believe and what not to  believe. I hear all kind of rumors through   the grape vine and all. I heard we have the money  to build uh the 50 slips if we wanted to. and uh   that if we give it to the CMP that they go they  want a stipulation that they get the uplands and   uh like I say I I don't think we should uh group  the two of them together. I think it ought to be   two separate things. The 50 slips first. Let's  build it, see what we got. If it works out,   then let's go ahead with the other 250 and and let  the city make the money and uh keep the uplands   for us. Yes, sir. Thank you. All right. Have a  good day. Thank you. Anyone else? Yes, sir. Forgot   the timing. Mhm. Not used to doing this. I know.  And if you have questions, just answer ask all   the questions at once and we'll answer them all at  one time, too. Yes, sir. Derek Thomas, 1100 West   10th Street. Um, notice that the area right there  around Indigo Hotel is being torn up for plumbing,   sewage lines being put in, and uh water manes.  And if you were going to do a development of   the upland, would you be doing that now? And or  how much more is that going to cost to put in  

all the plumbing for all of that stuff? And just  to remind you guys, that's field dirt suck sand   sucked up along Beach Drive that was dumped on top  of the frame for the for the upland area. And so   that's just sand piled on top of mud. So any kind  of building that's more than one story is going to   have a lot of problems there and so would putting  in the plumbing would create a lot of problems.   Did you find out I brought this up a couple times  about the uh slips getting permits for them at the   original meeting St. Joe had offered to do the  whole the the north side or the west side for   two for 450 and the city offered 600 to do the  whole thing and St. Joe said, "No, we're just   going to do the west side." So, did who's paying  for the permits on the on the east side. So, if   you got the the stuff for the uh west side now and  getting to 50 slips, I'd like to see that. Also,   have you considered how much more it's going to  cost to take those two C brakes and turn it into   one solid seaw wall? I think that's going to be a  very expensive proposition. Thank you. Thank you,   Jonathan. Did you want to answer the question  of the when did the construction project around   destination Panama City start? Uh that's area 011.  That's a state uh that's a CDBG grant that we have   uh for that. And I mean it does involve uh you  know upgrade of water lines. And so you know   whatever type of development we need to do out  on the T do you know we'll add additional water.   There's actually already water line out to the  base of the T do. You've got that old riser pipe   right there. you've got plenty of water already  out on the marina for both uh you know hotel and   to go and and Harrison's. It's just a matter of  what we'd want to run out there. But you know   probably would involve running an 8 inch water  line out to the T do and that would supply water   for a number of of you know developments or  whatever might have out there and that's city  

standard now. Yep. So yep. Thank you. Anyone  else? Public comments. Don't be shy. Yes sir. Good evening. Hello, I'm Bernie Thompson. Um, I  would like to Can I get an address, please? Yeah,   I live in Panama City Beach. So, I was thinking  about repurposing money, specifically about   $6 million. And the money I'm talking about is the  grant that was initially like $8 million for Beach   Drive. And we know now that the city is not going  to be getting Beach Drive. DOT is not transferring   it. Um I mean the whole multi-use path idea has  fallen apart. Everybody knows that. But you've   already burnt through maybe $2 million, but you  got at least $6 million of sidewalk grant money   if it's still good because I think it expired.  But you've still got $6 million that could be   repurposed. We know it can be repurposed. And when  I leave here, I hope that you'll acknowledge yes,   it can be repurposed or no, we're still saying it  can be repurposed. But if you were to take that   $6 million, imagine what you could  do. I mean, we could have sidewalks,   things related to sidewalks that the grant  allows you to do, benches, restrooms,   all kinds of cool stuff. Rather than sticking  with uh we're going to take the $6 million and   now it's only a 4ft sidewalk or why don't we just  repurpose that to what the people want? I think   that and that's all I have. I just would really  love to know what you think about that. Thank   you. Thank you. Have any previous communications  related to grant allocations been sent out before  

my time? Uh yeah, I mean we have a letter from  the former District 3 DOT secretary that says   it can't be repurposed and the appropriation  specifically says sidewalk in between Frankfurt   Avenue and Sixth Street. Okay. So, thank  you. Anyone else? Yes, sir. Come on down. Good afternoon. Hi, I'm Corey Ash, a  property owner at 544 East 6 Street.   And I just wondered from reading the notes  um how much uh you guys have reached out   for like public private partnerships um outside  of just St. Joe Company. I think they're great,   but they did have a point on collateralization.  And I think that, you know, there's probably a way   that the city could outsource this whole problem  to a private industry. Um, if that's what you guys   cho choose to do. I just didn't know if you've  already tried that or there's been some some   uh other solutions considered. Yes, sir. That's  my only question. Thank you. Yes, sir. This is   the whole conversation today is a P3. CM CMP uh  City Marina Partners is a P private organization.   We're talking about doing a P3 with them. Okay.  Yeah. The term sheet six is the presented P3   option. So they're the financing mechanism or  there's a there's a bunch of them. I definitely   definitely suggest grabbing this term sheet for  more information. So this is the one that outlines   all the funding mechanisms we have in house  and this is alternatives with a with a private   public partnership. Oh, I see. I see. Okay. So,  when I was thinking public private partnership,   I meant thinking thinking like um I mean, I'm not  saying I I would do it, but let's just say if you   were redeveloping a Brownsville area, maybe a  casino would want to purchase that. Maybe they  

would then obviously pay and the amenities would  come. I'm not saying a casino would, but I'm just   simply saying for like what I meant by public  private partnership. So, if there's um an open,   you know, if your objectives are kind of known  to other partners outside of St. Joe Company,   I think that there would be probably a way to  finance the 50 slips and include maybe some   other stuff as long as it, you know, agrees with  the city's objectives. Yes, sir. Thank you. So,   that's kind of what I Is that in here? Is that We  put an RFP out uh year and a half, two years ago.   I it's it's been pretty close to two years if not  and it actually followed what we did at this you   know this all started in St. Andrews with the  St. Andrews Marina and the prior commission   might have even been two commissions ago, voted  to go out for request for proposal from AP3,   a public private partnership to build out and  operate the Sanders Marina. After we got that one   um locked in, we then did the same thing with  the downtown marina. We went out for RFP and   uh and that's that's our relationship and  and ongoing negotiations with city marina   partners. Okay. Okay. So, so that's already  then kind of locked in. All right. Great. So,   the options that we're looking at to finance it is  what they've presented then. So, we're kind of far   in the process already. Well, if I just to be St.  Andrews is locked in. Downtown is not. We're we're   in negotiations with CMP. Would you have to go  through with whatever with CMP or is there another   That's a question for the commission. That's what  we're going to find out tonight. All right. Sorry.   So, I guess that's my question then. Do you do  you have to go with them and would you consider   maybe recompeting the opportunity for other uh  developers? That's what we're going to find out   tonight. Yes, sir. Thanks. Yeah. Anyone else? Open  public comments. Anything related to the marinas?

Yes, sir. Good evening. Good evening. Bob the second 1906  Tindle Drive. Um, looking through this paperwork,   I see a lot of sources of funding  from Florida. I may have missed it,   but I don't see any kind of information in here  about possible federal funding sources here. Uh,   I'm sure y'all are aware in April, the president  issued executive order 14276 to restore American   seafood competitiveness in this country.  that gave direction to every agency in the   federal government to do what they can do to  restore the commercial seafood industry in this   country. This marina is a classic example of  funding that could be possible for that. So,   I would suggest that you have your staff  research this because I suspect there's   plenty of money out there, not just for fishing,  working waterfronts, infrastructure, everything   that goes along with what this marina is. And  I've you've heard me. I've sent y'all emails,   communicated, you don't need to reinvent this  wheel. All you need to do is restore the city   marina to what it once was. Panama City has a  strong heritage, a lot of history. Mayor, your   family has been involved. Miss Lucas was born into  it. She's fully aware of everything that's here.   We don't need housing. We don't need all this  stuff there. Your Facebook post the other day,   it's classic. You got people sitting on the ground  looking at sunsets. How you going to look at over   a townhouse to see that? You don't need that. You  need a marina. You need the infrastructure to go   along and support the vessels that come in there,  provide the opportunity for people to see what's   going on where the civic center once was. Put you  an amphitheater there. The warf in Orange Beach,  

Alabama. If none of you have seen it, is perfect.  It's got a amphitheater there. They bring concerts   in. Name people. Look at Pier Park what they do.  Would you rather sit on the grass at Pier Park   surrounded by buildings or would you rather sit at  the marina on the grass on benches looking at the   bay looking at the sunset looking at everything  that's there? That's what it's all about. That's   what it's always been about. That's all you need  to do. You don't need to work and provide a gift   to investors to build infrastructure to profit  from. Support the people. Support the people   who you're supposed to be loyal to, the citizens  of this city. I'm one of them. That marina, part   of it belongs to me. I pay taxes for it. Leave  it. Restore it. Put it like it was. Don't worry   about making it some grandiose atmosphere that's  not necessary. Yes, sir. Thank you. [Applause] Public comments are still  open. Yes, ma'am. Come on down. Good evening, Commission Mayor. I'm  Sandy Marisa. I live in Lin Haven.   I've been reviewing the city's own public  financial analysis for the current CMP deal.   The PFM report dated June 6, 2025. This is  the document the city relies on to determine   the financial viability of the CMP deal. And  for the public who doesn't know what a PFM is,   the Public Financial Management is one of the  largest municipal financial advisory firms in   the United States. and they advise governments,  counties, cities, and school districts nationwide   and are known for conservative datadriven  analysis. And there is one sentence in this   report that every citizen needs to hear very  clearly. The upward financial potential for the  

downtown marina beyond the current projections in  the proforma may be limited if the downtown marina   uplands are not further developed. The report  continues and again I quote, "It is expected   that CMP will request that the city evaluate  development proposals for landside development   to create additional value for the downtown marina  wet sill operations." And these two sentences   establish something essential. This is not just  a marina project for CMP. Its financial success   depends on Upland's commercial development. And  we all know across Florida when marinas require   upland development to be financially viable,  the pattern is the same. Higher rent pressure   for business owners and regular people, curated  tenants, parking restrictions, and reduced access   for fishermen and residents. Local businesses  pushed into a competitive ecosystem they never   asked for. Business owners who rebuilt this town  after Hurricane Michael. And you do not have to   take my word for it. in Dustin, 38, Tampa,  Fort Walton, West Palm, the cause and effect   is consistent every time. And I am concerned  as a citizen of Bay County that the PFM points   to a future designed for hypothetical future  residents, investors, and tourists. Hypothetical,   while the people who actually live here now are  treated as expendable. And before anyone argues   that the PFM is simply a suggestion, we cannot  claim this report is just a suggestion and also   use it to justify public private partnership. The  PFM report is the only financial justification on   record for this particular partnership. And  if we de dismiss the parts we don't like,   then the whole recommendation becomes  unreliable. And if we are dismissing one part,   then the entire financial justification must be  re-examined. If this report is just a suggestion,   it cannot be used to justify the CMP partnership.  But if it is the basis for the partnership,  

then every single part of that PFM, including the  Upland's dependency, must be taken seriously. We   cannot pick and choose what we like and don't  like. I hope our public servants today will   consider the implications this report asserts for  the future of everyone in Bay County. Financial   reports may deal in numbers and projections, but  without the context of real living community,   there are simply numbers on a page. Thank  you very much. Thank you. [Music] [Applause] Anyone else? All right, closing public  comments. Moving on to item five. Mr. Harrison, would you come  up and give us about 10 minutes   and we're going to open up public  comments again, more than likely. Good afternoon. William Harrison, 101  Harrison Avenue. Uh for context purposes,   um I guess first let me say I I'm I'm glad that  we have a lot of uh citizen involvement and and   people attending today. I hope they're a  lot online as well. And and we encourage   uh constant and continual uh public involvement  through this this project. Um for context,   uh there were five term sheets that we proposed  to the commission uh last month that led to this   meeting. Uh the commission did not take any action  on the five term sheets which were kind of a um a   summary uh of different options in looking at um  a variety of ways that the city could move forward  

uh on building the wet slips and funding the  wet slips. Uh the concerns uh there there were   a number of concerns that you raised. Um but some  of the greatest concerns had to do with uh funding   uh the wet slips, the financial feasibility  of the project as a whole and then looking at   the input from the public through public chares  uh for what the uses would be for the uplands.   The advertisement that the commission sent  out uh I guess beginning of last year for   this project included a look at the marina as a  whole. Uh and this followed the process that uh   we went through uh on the St. Andrews Marina and  looking at the wet slips and the uplands at the   St. Andrews Marina. So the the process follows a  St. Andrews Marina. Uh there's a lot of modeling,   financial modeling and and analysis done uh  by our team and by the city's uh consultants   uh and the city staff uh to make St. Andrews a  financially feasible project. And for those in   the audience who may not know, um it is the same  group at the St. Andrews uh Marina U that's known   as St. Andrews Marina Partners. uh as are here  before you tonight with city of Marina partners. So for tonight's purposes uh I guess there's  a lot of of um consideration of what we term   uh uh term sheet number six uh that we've put  in front of you uh over the last week or so.   We feel like this addresses the concerns that the  commission raised and that the public raised at  

the last meeting. Some of that is the um interest  of some commissioners uh to have this project   move forward. uh concern of the commission as  a whole that the all public input be taken into   consideration before anything if anything is to be  put on the uplands. Um as we discussed at the last   meeting, CMP proposed in our initial uh submittal  to the city uh beginning of last year uh that   sharets be held immediately uh upon our submitt  uh being uh uh provided to the city so that the   public would have the opportunity to come in  and say what if anything would be done uh on the   uplands. the city at that time for whatever reason  did not want to do that. Um and so now here we are   with a kind of a time crunch uh being seven years  past the hurricane and not having any operational   slips. So we encourage and support uh cheretses um  as we proposed uh we any and everything that can   be done to bring the public in for the public's  input for uh what if any uses to be put on the   uplands uh we think is is vitally important to  the the future of this this project. And so what   we've proposed in term sheet six kind of marries  together all of those different um uh priorities   uh of the commission as we have heard it. Uh one  is that we could go ahead and begin construction   in uh this month assuming that the commission  approves a term sheet uh which is non-binding uh  

on either party. And what we would propose is that  this would come back with a long-term agreement   for the next commission meeting that I think is  in mid December. Uh that long-term agreement is   uh similar to uh many long-term uh agreement  drafts that have been sit sent to the commission.   uh before we kind of shoved that and went to term  sheets. And so we believe we can turn that around   uh pretty quickly, working with your staff to  incorporate any action that you may take tonight   if you are interested in doing that. Uh what term  sheet six does is it puts pressure on the city   and on CMP uh equally I think fairly in moving  forward. One is that that CMP will move forward   with construction of the 50 slips. We were able  to obtain the 50 slip exemption uh from permitting   uh which allows us to begin construction uh at  any time following the issuance of a development   order by the city uh planning department.  the city would fund um the construction   of the the wet slips. Um and similar to what  we're doing uh with the city at St. Andrews,   uh the major items in construction would be  procured by the city, the way that it is being   handled at St. Andrews is that we're required to  get multiple quotes. We bring those to the city.   the city approves uh whoever it is that is u you  know the best um respondent to whatever the bid  

is and then we proceed we proceed on. Uh the  advantages of of doing it that way is the city   procures uh the the major items for construction.  They're probably four or five different areas of   major procurement. Um and as the city as  the procuring um uh arm of the project,   there is no sales tax on that and we would  proceed on with construction of the 50 slips.   What would also occur uh as part of this process  is that there's about $10 million worth of Upland   uh infrastructure that needs to be constructed. um  that uh the city uh commission at the last meeting   um uh intimated that that that you wanted to use  $5 million approximately in FEMA funds uh that   could be used for uh construction cost of part of  that $10 million. We at CMP would be responsible   for the remaining $5 million. Those $10 million  worth of investment in construction are nonrevenue   producing uh improvements out there. It would be  to uh to u replace the pavement on the T dock to   put in utilities, storm water if we're required  to do that, railings, lighting, prominade. Um,   and I I'm probably missing something in all  the the uh the breakwater that is missing in   the West Basin. Um, and and so with that, uh,  we would we would move forward in constructing   those improvements. Uh and and as you reported  at the last meeting, uh you have $150 million  

uh that were was borrowed for FEMA projects uh on  reimbursement projects where you have to spend the   money first and then you're reimbursed. And so  you need a fund to work from to accomplish those   projects all over the city, not related  necessarily to the to the marina, but   uh that's what that fund is there for. And so what  we would do is is to marry up our schedule with   your requirement in your financing um with Truis  Bank, I believe it is, that that $150 million   either has to be repaid by September or October of  2027, uh or it has to be refinanced. And so our uh   construction project and the money that we would  use for construction, one of two things would   happen in September of 2027. If as a result of the  Cherrettes, there is adequate upland development   that can be constructed where there's going to be  revenue generated from that that would cover the   losses of the wet slip operations. then we would  move forward and as a result the the money that   we have used that you put into the project for  the construction of the 50 slips would become   our responsibility. So it's the construction  of the 50 slips and construction of $5 million   worth of upland infrastructure that's nonrevenue  producing. that would become our responsibility.   Or if the decision of the commission following the  Cherrettes is to not have anything on on the the   marina or there's not sufficient uh square footage  for us to be able to recoup some revenue for the  

losses and the wet slips, then we would turn the  slips back over to the city. Uh and then the city,   similar to what we're doing on St. Andrews would  cover our uh cost that we've proposed as 20% as as   known and I have talked about which is exactly the  agreement over at St. Andrews. And then the city   would move forward at that point not only with  the operation of those 50 slips but then with   construction of the remaining 150 slips uh for  a total of 200 slips that have been approved uh   by the city for construction at the the downtown  marina. So I want to be clear that in the analysis   that has been done by the city's consultant by  our consultant and this is true throughout the   state of Florida wet slips cannot stand on their  own. they're going to be a loss and it is a loss   uh whether it's in an operations or it is the  risk of the operation and maintenance um uh   damage to the infrastructure of the wet slips  and the the bulkhead or it is the catastrophic   loss as we experienced with the hurricane.  It is a risk that is that just continues on   uh which is the nature of of marinas. And so what  we've tried to do at St. Andrews and we're trying   to do with the downtown marina is to figure out  a way to balance the risk for what you're trying   to accomplish and providing a community amenity uh  and having something that is not a drain uh on the   the uh the tax uh revenue that you get uh from  the different sources that you get um revenue.   And so what we're trying to do is is to take that  risk, measure that risk through financial modeling  

as best we can. Uh and then um uh and then project  into the future the way that this can be uh a way   for shared revenue uh to the city so that you make  revenue off of those operations. Um, so that is   uh probably the best way that I can simply explain  how term sheet six uh differs from the other five   that you looked at uh last month. Uh be happy  to answer any questions that any of you have.   Questions related to term sheet six? Anyone?  Not yet up here? Nothing. Um, I think you've   done such a a collaborative job listening and and  adjusting and it's to me a lot of the onus of the   confusion right now is on our side and and because  we didn't do the shruts early on and you're even   hearing from the public u Mr. Zales and and Mr.  to it and said, "Hey, here's some they mention   ideas of buildings that they wouldn't mind seeing  built." Uh, and that shows there is a willingness   of the public to have certain buildings on  there and you and our partners are willing to   build something and we haven't told them what  we want them to build and so they're going,   "Do you want us to do this? Do you want us to do  this?" And they're trying to find common ground   with us. Um, and so if we had the shreds done a  year ago or six months ago, we had these plans,   we would be it'd be so much easier because the  public would say, "Yeah, I I like that thing."   And you could then take that even as a developer,  they're guessing on what their return could be on   imaginary square footage. That's really hard. So  it's what you're seeing from the public or what   what you're seeing from the developer is the  hardest form of risk, which is no details. And   that's really not fair on for them either. And so  for me, it's really hard in this in this moment to   to to go forward with the deal. Like I want 50 wet  slips, boat slips as soon as we can. And I wish we  

were having conversation this collaborative when  we had an idea from the do call shrutz of what the   citizens want to see. It would be a whole lot less  combative and the citizens wouldn't have fear. We   would we would know you would know you'd be able  to have a tighter deal and you'd be able to comp   out what you're what you could make off of small  commercial spaces in the middle of the on the   tea. If that's what the citizens want, you then  could say, "Well, that's what this would deliver   in return." And it would be a lot easier for them  as a developer. Uh who has to make a return? who   could go broke doing this deal. Uh, and so I would  like to see us move forward with construction of   the slips and having these sort of conversations  much later March when April whenever Dober Cole's   having the plans presented of the public input.  That's what I would prefer um in this moment.   Yeah. Um, we've already heard tonight put the  marina back to what it was. What was the square   footage on the upland when all the buildings were  there? Uh just from looking at aerials, it appears   to be uh about 190,000 square ft. Uh that's not  taking into account the top floor uh for the the   curtain rise on the back of the the civic center.  So, we round that up to about 200,000 square ft,   you know, with the four winds, everything down  the the center, the the ice house, you know,   that over there. Um, city hall, the library, and  the civic center u was about 190,000 square ft. So, there were buildings on the marina before  and a lot of square footage. Oh, a lot of square   footage. And and mayor, if I can, be feasible to  build back what was there before and it make money   meaning a civic center, a library, non-incomering  buildings? There's I think there's a there's a a  

disconnect in what was there and what we we think  we want or don't want and what makes it work. Um,   and I think that's the concern I I'm hearing from  the citizens is we don't know what's going to be   there. That's great. But what was there didn't  produce quality of life in terms of you go hang   out, you go to a show, you can do that, but  just go hang out and you sit in a green space   or something like that. So if you were to produce  something that made money, we get to share in that   revenue. Correct. That's correct. So talk about  the slips, money that comes off the slips versus   money that comes off the where that where that  money can go. Let's help how it can be shared   if at all. Before I answer that, let let me say  this, and I I hate to to go over this again with   the commission, but for people who may have not  have heard this before, in 1957, when there was a   bond issue to construct both marinas, there were  commercial activities on both marinas that were   required as part of the bond issue because there  was not sufficient revenue to pay to pay the bonds   uh where the city borrowed the money to build  both marinas. uh and and that is still the   case. That is just the nature of of marinas. Um  now to your question about you know what would   be the the uses and and how do we how do we move  forward with the funding uh uh revenue sharing uh   is the term that we use. Uh currently we have  a sovereign merge land lease on each marina.   uh any revenue derived by and it's a it's a fee  waved. Um so the state does not participate in   the revenue share of the money that is generated  from the wet slips. Uh and and it is a a long-term  

lease which the the cabinet approved in 2013 2014  because of the economic um disrepair of downtown   and St. Andrews. the statute allowed them to have  a long-term lease rather than it just be 5 years.   And so in those typically in the sovereigns  emerge land lease there's a percentage of the   revenue that the city takes off of that that goes  to the state of Florida because it's their land   the where the wet slips are. the remaining money  that the city makes that's not paid to the state,   the city has to keep that on the marina because of  the inherent problems with wet slips and bulkhead   repair and replacement. And so all of that money  stays there in a fund that similar to you have an   enterprise fund fund for water and sewer that can  only be used for water and sewer. This can only   be used on the marina for the wet slips. Now if  there is upland development, upland development,   whatever revenue is generated from that from  sales tax, ablum tax, um gross receipts tax,   um assessments, whatever, all the different things  that the city does, all of that money goes into   general revenue. So that is a significant and  and you have your own consultants who can do that   analysis. Um and and contrary what a gentleman  said earlier about you know us building a hotel,   we haven't proposed a hotel and and we um you  know we have talked with St. Joe about it. They   have their hotel out there and they have the  right of first use and and we're not proposing   to do anything that is competitive to them. We are  trying to find things that are complimentary. But  

the challenge of that is we are exposing ourselves  to to the do coal chet process here at the very   end of of almost two years of all of this for the  public to come in and say this is what we think   ought to be on this property. And you know we we  said last time you know a dog park or an aquarium   or you know whatever all these different things  that are things that we may enjoy but if they   are not financially feasible then we're we're in a  deeper hole if we go out there and spend money on   something that doesn't work. And you know, I drove  up and down. I mean, I drive up and down Harrison   Avenue every day, but but today, you know, with  all of Harrison Avenue being open, you know, it   it takes my breath away when I look at the 4 and  500 block of Harrison Avenue that is essentially   vacant. Uh there's a lot of square footage there  that has been up for lease and for sale for a   long time. And just because we go put something  out there on the marina does not mean that it's   going to be successful. And so what I envision  in this process is that the public comes in and   hopefully hundreds and thousands of people will  come in and and give all of their ideas because   we need the public to support whatever it is. And  they may want tacos or they may want, you know,   a ferris wheel or whatever the thing is. I I don't  know what it is, but they come in and say all that   and and we need Yeah. They may say grocery store.  We had a group, you know, last week that came in   or week before last that made a big presentation  to us and said we want a Publix on the marina and   we want all these different things on the marina.  Um, but it has to be feasible for us to be able   to do that because, you know, the difficulty is  you go build tens of millions of dollars worth  

of of what you think is going to work, it doesn't  work. And now what do you do? It's a huge problem.   Really bad for you, embarrassing for us. Yes. Um,  and so certainly want the public to hear that. I   think after the sharets or during the sharets  we're going to have to have real conversations   of hey you guys want a splash pad or a dog park  or a ferris wheel thing those don't make money   that they can be compensated these or subsidized  these ways using upland developments and that's   why I think those are the real because we all we  all want dog parks and walking paths and we don't   want to pay for them right and we want to avoid  the situation to me I want avoid the situation   I'm only one person up here that the state marina  has which is the bulkhead repair and the deferred   maintenance of it. So for me, a lot of a lot of  my desire is to have reoccurring revenue in that   area, whether it's boat slips or up in development  that doesn't pass along. I want to have in that   fund to where when the railing gets bent, we've  all been out there before the railings bent,   they put orange tape on it for a year and a half  and there's you go to St. Andrews and all the   sidewalks are collapsing in. We want to avoid  that and that has to happen through planning to   repair those things. You know, the the benches get  rusty, right? the all those kind of things. And so   I don't want to pass down to our children a $25  million bulkhead repair that they're not saving   up for. Uh and so those are the real conversations  that I think we're going to be having when we see   what public amenities the public wants and we say  here's how we get to there. They don't happen the   general fund can't subsidize everything. We we  this is a money in money out organization like   anything else and we can't just have things  that go out all the time. So um I'm looking   forward to those conversations. Does anyone else  want to ask any questions or have any comments? It's very quiet up here tonight. Well, I don't  have any other questions for Mr. Harrison. Do we   want to open up public comments? You can comment  again if you've heard something. We ask questions.  

Mr. Harrison might come up again, but we want  to hear your input. Come on, Judy Stapleton.   I know you want to talk. Come on, J looking  around all shy. Come on up, Miss Stapleton. Yes, ma'am. Judy Stapleton, 542 South  Bonita, Panama City. Can you pull the   mic a little bit closer? Sure. Is that  better? Better. I listen and I listen.   And what I hear is we can't make any money  on our city except if we use the marina.   We have to have the money from developing the  marina to make our city solvent. Pretty much   what I hear because I say and other people say,  "Look downtown. Look at the empty buildings. Look   at the empty lots. You're doing a wonderful job  creating incentives for CMPs or other people.   Why not create incentives for people to develop  those things for housing and for retail downtown?   I know that there are cities, I read about them,  that develop a downtown and on their waterfront   develop waterfront properties, marina parks  where people can go and enjoy it for leisure. Um,   I don't know that we could do that. I I keep  hearing we can't. Um, if you're going to do it,   remove the identity marker Panama City Marina  because it will not be a marina. Just put a sign  

up saying South Harrison because that's what it's  going to be. Um, the citizens will then still be   able to walk and stroll around the prominade. We  can look out at the water and enjoy the view. We   can look at the buildings, the 225 possibly  residents on the marina and see what their   view is. We can also enjoy, I suppose, shopping  at some of the other shops. What 300,000 square   ft of shops and residents. We can enjoy looking at  those. We can probably enjoy eating at Harrison's.   Some people can enjoy boating as long as there's  still parking for their their trucks and their   trailers until you find out that you need that  parking for the residents and for the shops. You have a choice. And I I recognize that it's  so difficult. You're either going to have to use   what I hear referred to all the time as the our  treasure to develop it to make money or you're   going to have to figure out ways to use the land  and the buildings inside the city for your money.   Yes. Thanks. The the respond a little bit of  that. We do have that's a CRA district which   is community redevelopment. Um and we have some  of the strongest tax incentives in the state   um for rebating of construction on on non city  property. Um but adding we do have a lot of vacant   buildings, a lot of vacant land. That indicates  the lack of interest of other people wanting to  

invest in our town. It shows that people would  rather invest other places. And so it's it that   means it's harder for them, not easier for them.  Even showing the the vacant building on Harrison   Avenue, that doesn't make a bank look at a  project infavorable. It makes it look the bank go,   is your project not going to get built up? And so  um there is a counterbalance to that and that is   is and Mr. Harrison touched on it is is projects  can get built and you go bankrupt because they   don't hit the numbers that you're guessing at.  So I did want to say that. Anyone else? Yes,   sir. Sure. Uh, do I need my address? Yes, please.  544 East 6th Street, Cory Ash. Thank you. Um,   so I your point was spot on and I've just been  listening and I looked over the CMP was a little   bit confused now. I have some clarity. But uh  what what seems to me we come to this thing   where we want to get some things but we don't  want to pass on that responsibility to you know   the older the people that live here us right. So  the opportunity is it's either on one hand you   raise the taxes on the people who live here or on  the other hand you bring in more people to split   that tax load with. So if I'm here I just want to  make sure that I'm understanding. So the deal that   CMP put forth right now gets it gets you 50 slips  for $10 million at $200,000 a slip. And that's a   I mean, I'm using the round numbers. I think the  gentleman said it was 10 million in total with   the city doing some reimbursement and then them  doing some addition. I'm a simple kind of guy. So,   I take the whole number divided by 50. I  don't know if $200,000 per per slip is a  

good number because I've never bought  a boat slip. But I would ask like um does that what I've heard think I've heard him  say just for a little piece of clarity once you   spend that money there's not an estimation of  getting that money back so so we would need to   make it economically viable and so just  to the point I'm what you would consider   an outside investor I guess I'm from here my  family's been here for a very very long time,   but when you approach to make an investment, Dove  Do Mule, I think they did a report and they said,   "Hey, you guys, we want a lot of great stuff  that the community's given us feedback on,   but our actual zoning policies don't  permit that." Now, if if I could,   I just want to say when you get ready to  build a grocery store and you go to the bank,   they look at the people around that grocery  store. They look at how many houses are there,   what their income is. Have you considered ways  of enriching the current people who live here   by adjusting the zoning to make their properties  more valuable without increasing the tax base, but   then new people who come in would be purchasing  the right to build something maybe a little bit   bigger on their lot. not overwhelming, but just  something another way to generate some revenue if   no one's thought about it. So, sorry. Thank you.  Thank you. Anyone else? Comments? And we have   adjusted our land development code a few times.  We've uh adopted the Dover Cole uh recommendations   of the neighborhood plans and even downtown had  a re uh reszoning rewriting of the code in 2008  

uh which has higher density, no parking, zero  setbacks and no storm water ponds. So So with   that and I've done a little bit of studying and  I'm sorry I don't want to take Will you give him   my card so we can email me that article? Sure.  And uh I've done a little bit of Sir I'm sorry   you need to go to the mic. Just people online  are listening. Oh sorry. Okay. Um, so with that,   with the adjustments, we're a small city. All  right? So with the adjustments, there's still   like about yay thick. The only people that are  going to make it through that yay thick policy   to make us solid investment is St. Joe company  who's going to pay their attorneys, lawyers,   and all the others. And every investor isn't  necessarily that way. But, you know, I'm all about   homegrown. So I would is there any way that I'd  be happy to meet with you and the city planner and   go over the land development code with you and and  that gentleman as well with the CMP Michael Fuller   and I can meet with you about the lane development  code if you want to give him a card. I know. Yeah.   Happy to go over. Thank you. He's got my contact.  Yes sir. Yes sir. Absolutely. Hey Alan. Hello. Hey   Robbie. Frank Castle 1011 East Second Plaza. Um,  thank you for the handouts earlier. A lot of good   stuff. I like that there's a culinary um option  there. I'm assuming that's going to be FSU doing   some sort of cooking place there. Um, as a citizen  that's lived here, my concern is the financial   um maintainability of it, which you all seem  to be doing, and to please just move forward.   just please let's move forward because it the  storm was seven years ago. Thank you. Thank you. Yes, ma'am. My name is Christian Moser, 311  Maselina Drive. Uh I agree with that gentleman.   Keep the faith. Keep moving forward. Um I just  want to make sure if I misunderstood and I I  

knew I had to come up here. Um, did I hear the LTA  is going to be brought back to the commission for   reconsideration or was it just a portion of it in  December? LTA. The LTA. The LTAM that's referenced   in the plan. The LTA. I I understand. We don't  have a long-term agreement. Well, if it's going   to be brought back for a long-term agreement  and it's based on the sharetses, the sheretses   are just being completed. So, I'm not certain  of that timeline if I've misunderstood that or   if that's an incorrect timeline. And secondly,  if the I know it was 300,000 square ft and now   it's 200. Is that because the 200 doesn't include  the hotel and Harrison's? Correct. So the 190,000   square ft that were on the Marina previously. Oh,  that total would need to say but just not on the   on the ending side. I see what you're saying.  You're saying the previous square footage of   what it used to be might already be met with the  current buildings that are I was just wondering if   you'd done a consideration of what the um overall  coverage will be because the indigo is where you   know the library was Robbie and the ice house  and all that and just curious if there's a what   the percentage is if we know that before versus  after with indigo Harrison's plus 200 but my big   question was can the LTA be approved without the  shits being completed? Thank you. the the answer   to your question on the on the square footage is  the indigo and Harrison is not included in the   200s. Okay. And the loan ter the loan long-term  agreement William's going to answer that question   for you. Yeah. Hey, Chris. No, you were right.  You were right. So, what you know what we proposed   in in the u the term sheet and and this would be  carried over into the long-term agreement is that   we're going to proceed on with construction  and however long it takes Dra Cole to do the  

Cherrettes uh and issue a report and the the city  accept that. Uh all that will be done before we're   finished with construction of the 50 slips. And  if the decision of the commission based on the   public input is to leave the marina just like it  is, then we would have an exit ramp to say, "Okay,   we can't get enough upland revenue support from  the vertical construction." And so we're going to   to exit stage right and and hand the 50 slips back  to the city and then you pay us uh a reasonable   profit and overhead and then we'll be out of it at  that point and then you can proceed on how you'd   like. But if there is an there is adequate uh  vertical upland construction that can be done that   would generate some revenue and reduce the risk  for the kind of thing mayor that you're talking   about and the bulkhead and upkeep the slips and  generate revenue to the city. Then we'll proceed   on with that and we will at that point we'll  have the long-term agreement in place u that   will continue on. Yeah. The long-term agreement is  really two parts. It gives us an agreement to move   forward with the slips, I think. Correct. And then  the other part is subject to all public sharetses,   all do coal stuff. Once that comes back, that's  where the the long-term agreement if we all stay   together, that's where it comes into play, right?  That's correct. That's where that agreement but   also part of that is, you know, there is 55 years  left in the agreement between the city and and St.   Joe. uh where the city needs to send, you know,  whatever it is that we're doing to St. Joe and   they have the ability to to make a decision. They  may like, you know, what comes out of the Cherret  

and decide that they want to build it all or they  may take a a pass on it and say, "Looks good. We   have no objection, but we're not going to build  it. You go build it." And then we would proceed   on with that. And so we may all agree on what it  is that we want to do, but your agreement with St.   Joe allows them to come in and take over the whole  thing. And if if that happens, uh, then, you know,   that'll send us down a different route. But that's  a possibility. But that's a first right of use,   not a first right. That's not a a a veto.  It's not a veto, right, for the public. Yes, ma'am. Could you clarify that? What  would St. Joe have to first? Actually, Nevin,   can you clarify that? Ne, could you speak to what  St. Joe's rights are? Ne. Yes. Can you repeat the   questions? The the question, what is St. Joe's  written right of first right of use? Yes. Under   we the city executed a long-term lease agreement  with St. Joe um I believe in 20 here it is 20 2020   August of 2020 in that to encourage St. Joe to  uh invest the money that it did which was 35 to   $40 million it asked for a right of first use  on the remainder of the marina. The marina site   is approximately 22 or three acres. Uh the site  that is directly leased to St. Joe is Lshaped.   It includes the Harrison restaurant, the green  space in between Harrison's restaurant and Hotel   Indigo. Um and they they said that they would  like to have the right of first use. So if the  

city proposed to build um something that St. Joe  um had a different idea, the first of all there   would be a third party could come in and propose  something or the city could propose something.   The city would then show it to uh St. Joe and it  would be very specific. It says we want to build   I'm trying not to give an example. I will not talk  about aquariums tonight. So, we're going to build   something and and and these are the terms. St.  Joe, are you interested in doing that? Under the   lease, St. Joe has 60 days some time period to  say yes I'm interested in doing that and I'll do   it for the same terms or very comparable terms  and this is what I'll do or St. Joe could say,   "I'm not interested, but have you thought about  this?" and propose an alternative. The city is   under an obligation to consider in good faith  the alternative. It is not under an obligation   to do the alternative and St. Joe doesn't have  a veto right. And so uh one check and balance   in this process is that if a third party came in  and the deal was very advantageous to the vendor,   uh St. Joe could look at that and say, "hm, I  like that idea. I'll do it." So it it is kind of   a check and balance to make sure everyone is is uh  you know coming up with something that's fair to   all parties. So, it's not a veto. It's a right of  first use. Yes. Public comments are still up. Yes,  

sir. Mayor, can I I'm sorry, Chris, I didn't  answer your question about the 300,000 and the   200,000. the the 300,000 is an estimate that  we took from three different conceptual plans   uh that the city had had um commissioned uh  from Wooden Partners uh Do Cole in in 2019.   I think the Wooden Partners has has been within  the last year. Um Dover Cole was in 2019 and then   John Anderson's drawing in in 2024. And so we took  those conceptual drawings and just estimated what   the square footage was of those drawings for the  upland uses. We were not involved in any of those   drawings. The city didn't ask us. The the people  who drew those pictures didn't ask us. Um but we   we took from that the estimate of about 300,000  square feet. Thank you. And just to give more   background, Sandy, you're welcome to come on up.  uh the the drawings that Mr. Harrison mentioned,   John Anderson were in the initial early  conversations, we were talking about square   footage, and I don't even I can't visualize  what that much square footage looks like. So,   we had hired uh by an hourly draftsman, architect  said, just draw it what you think would be on   the marina cuz I just can't. We need something.  So, all this has been an attempt of me as well,   just trying to get the visualization is what do  these buildings look like? And that's what I think   the shreds are going to do hopefully. Yes, ma'am.  Okay. So, thanks for having me up again. It's   Sandy Marissa. I've already stated my address. So,  when CMP talks about the square footage and um he   stated very rightly that there was 190,000 square  ft already on the marina. Um yeah, that is true   in terms of square footage, but the functionality  of those buildings are very different than what is   being proposed now. The the functionality  of those buildings were public buildings.  

uh library, a place to go see the sunset, a place  to go fish, the civic center, uh the civic center   is a public building. I performed on that as a  school child all the way from like four all the   way up until my adulthood. This was a public place  for our people. And I think what is really being   lost here is that while we can argue this in terms  of square footage and say it's the same. There's a   difference between even like what's being proposed  with the private versus public uh partnership here   and whether or not you know who owns the deed to  what's being proposed here versus who owns the   functionality of what is being proposed here which  is in I think every extent of the word in reality   who owns it which is the functional use of this  space. And so when we talk about these buildings   um we need to make sure that they are for the  public. And right now we are talking about a   private organization as well meaning and as  well-intentioned as as wonderful as they are   determining who can use the facilities that  are on this public space and making it into a   profitable place for a private company. But that  is not at all what we had before. We had public   use buildings. And we talk about marinas losing  money. Well, they only lose money if a private   investor is investing in it and putting millions  of dollars up. Uh and if the city rebuilds it with   funding that other optional funding, which I can't  wait to get to that is listed in this packet,   then they'll break even. We can look at  things like the Appalachiccola um marina   or the um somebody mentioned the St. Augustine  Marina. Marinas don't need upland development to  

function. They just don't. Thank you. Thank you.  [Applause] Anyone else? Yes, sir. May I everything   that's built ma'am? Everything that gets built  on the marina, you asked about who owns it. We as   Panama City citizens own everything that is built  in the water and on the upland. The investor does   not. The minute that they build it vertically,  they put a slab on the ground. It belong it   doesn't belong to you. It belongs to us cuz she  lives in the neighborhood. We live in Panama City.   It belongs to us. Okay? So, I want I want to be  clear about that. And that's not a jab at that's   the difference is okay. We own it on their nine.  I I just want to be clear that when you ask who   owns it. Yes. But to add, I think what you mean  is if there's a huge shortfall in the marina,   the Panama City citizens pay for the No, no, no.  Well, that but who owns the the dirt and who owns   the buildings? We do. Whether we pay for them or  not, we own. Can I can I add um uh I think I think   there's uh two groups of folks I think um kind of  in two different uh the folks that have been here   a very long time probably remember the commercial  on the marina. Yeah. And the folks um kind of in   my age group and younger and anybody who's um  new new to the area do not because it was all   it was all demoed. Um, so that was something that  was kind of a surprise to me when when, you know,   first started trying to tackle this issue was that  um that there was actual commercial like people   restaurants and and whatnot on the on the marina  um prior and that was how it was designed and it   was built in the ' 50s. So I I do want to say that  cuz there there are a lot of people out there who   um just don't know they don't know that that  that existed and there's a lot of people out   there who do remember it. Um, and so it's kind  of like two different two different conflicting   experiences with the citizenry that we have. So,  I just kind of wanted to bring that up because,  

um, I was also one of those people that was  like, well, there's never been any commercial   in Arena. And then I found out, oh, yeah, there  has. So, I'm I'm done. Um, to come up, Eric, Derek Thomas, 1100 West 10th Street. uh I came out  here from uh Louisiana and after Hurricane Katrina   they built up uh Baton Rouge. They were going to  move all of the government buildings, offices from   New Orleans to Baton Rouge. And so they built  these beautiful towers and it was spectacular.   They borrowed a bunch of money and then when it  was time to open them up, they had no parking. So   they had to buy a a piece of land the closest they  get with about seven blocks away and they built a   parking garage. But by the time the parking garage  was finished, the people that had been in New   Orleans decided to just rebuild their offices and  stay there. So this big giant tower sitting there   still about 20% unused and all the people park in  the surrounding area because why walk seven blocks   when you could just park in the neighborhood. So  when you're building this, if you don't have a   parking space for every marina slip, if you don't  have a parking space for all of the tables at all   of the restaurants and for every apartment there  and have that already blocked off on your parking   at the marina, then you don't have any place for  the public to park because after you've done that,   after you've taken the public parking lot that  you've already built and you put a building there,   then there's no public parking anymore. And  if you're out on the T do you've already spent   $150,000 for trees that might be in in five  years big enough that that would be a shaded   area the public could hang out on and enjoy it.  But where's the public going to park? If you take   away all of the parking and build the upland, then  there's not going to be any place for the public   to park unless they park in a parking garage and  walk to the marina. And what if it rains? I mean,  

by the time this built by the time this lets out  tonight, it's going to be pouring down rain today,   tonight. Imagine that if you're trying to use the  marina and forget just going there and watching   the sunset and using that marina if you wanted to  for the next 55 years. I think that's too long to   wait. So, consider that. And uh how much is that  sea break going to cost? So, I can come out of   here with uh it's not permitted yet or designed,  but it it'll probably several million dollars.   Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Um Jonathan, I've  heard the number $150,000 for trees on the marina.   Can you clarify that? I'm What now? I've heard  multiple times. $150,000 for trees and please   let us know what those trees cost. I've heard  it multiple times. Okay. I talk about the the   oak trees that we put around. I I don't have that  number with me, but um Can you find that number?   I will find that out, sir, because I've heard it  multiple times. So, thank you. Yes. Anyone else?   I suspect it's a little bit less than  that, but I want to know for sure. W the second 1906 Dundle Drive. Um I didn't  know you could come up here multiple times,   so I appreciate being able to cuz y'all  hit on a couple of things. Number one,   when you talk about new residents versus those  of us that have lived here for a long time. My   family came to Panama City in ' 65. I was 12 years  old. Got in the fishing business. And when I talk   about the heritage and the history of that marina,  that marina is where fishing started and bowling   started in Panama City years and years ago. My  family was involved in recent history since ' 65.   In the business that I've been in the for hire  and commercial business for 58 years since ' 65.  

I was fortunate to have met and known and worked  with old-timers that were here when that marina   started. Put the boats there, the Queen Fleet, the  Davises, all those people. That's where all that   started. When you look at Bay County, Panama  City, and you look at the tourism business,   that all came from fishing. Currently, I'm the  executive director of Southeastern Fisheries   Association, the Otis Commercial Association in  the state of Florida, formed in 1952. Commercial   fishing, there's two food producers in this  country. You've got aquaculture, farmers,   and ranchers. You've got seafood. seafood were  the first food producers in this country. The   people that came and founded this country, they  produced seafood. This industry and the heritage   and the history that goes along with it is  important. The citizens that live here and   have been part of this forever understand that.  And that's why I've stressed that that marina,   you don't need to reinvent it. pre October of  18 that marina was doing fine. City I think was   making money. You weren't throwing money at it and  whatever. Hurricane destroyed it. You had to start   over. You don't need to reinvent the thing. Put it  back like it was. Put the marina store, the fuel,   the ice. You can get out and research. You got two  prime tackle shops in Bay County. how Tackle and   Half inch. They may be interested in putting  a tackle shop at that marina. I don't know.   I suspect they would because you look at what's  happened with downtown. Y'all done a pretty good   job. I'm not real happy about the width of the  roads and whatnot that's there, but you've done  

a pretty good job of bringing people back down to  Panama City. Okay. So, it's kind of like you build   it, they'll come. You put that marina back. You  put the boats in there for people to look at and   to enjoy and to use. You have the infrastructure  there for people to sit on the grass, on the   benches, watch the sunset. Create an amphitheater.  Bring people in here. You got Fourth of July. You   used to have hundreds of boats in the bay watching  fireworks. Lately, that doesn't happen because   they don't have a place to do it from. You get  the marina rolling again. You bring all that back.   There's your money. There's your infrastructure.  The city will prosper from that. Just do the   basic stuff and then let it grow from there.  Thank you. Yes, sir. Anyone else? Don't be shy. Yes, sir. You You're good at it, though. Don't  be nervous. Take a deep breath. Mary Andrew,   um St. Andrews. Um I just have a question on the  phase 2. If the uplands were developed, um would   you um would condos be an option to be put in  there? Um and if so, would they h have the slips   developed specifically for those condos? Um that's  my question. It's a good question. Thank you. What   was the question of could they build condos and  could those slips have uh could those condos have   slips? William Harrison, 101 Harrison Avenue. Um,  we we have not proposed any particular use. Uh,   and I know a lot of of uh potential uses have  been uh assigned to us. Um, we have not proposed   anything. Uh, and we're waiting on the sheretses.  We'll see what the sheretses show. Um, and you  

know, my personal preference, uh, is to not put  condominiums out there. Um, and you know, there's   a I I think that for for financial feasibility  purposes. Uh, I think residential is a good use   out there because we need daily activities uh to  support downtown. Um, and so what what would that   be? you know is that here again trying to not be  and we won't be competitive with with uh Indigo   but being complimentary to them uh there's a lot  of of revenue that can be derived to the city that   goes into general revenue uh of the city if there  are short-term rentals that are less than 6 months   uh because you generate bed tax and and all that  u but all this is subject to what the public   sheretses are and what comes out of all that. Um  but um we have not proposed condominiums and and   specifically uh certainly not assigning uh or or  transferring a boat slip to uh a condominium. Um   we have never said that or proposed it or  thought about it. Uh so all that will be   on a first come first- serve basis which is the  requirement of the sovereign submerged land lease. Yes, ma'am. Hello. Yes, ma'am. Jennifer Vigil, 101 West  Beach Drive, president and CEO of Destination   Panama City. Just want to say that so that  it's very transparent. I was asked to come   up and speak tonight to directly talk about the  impact of not having the marina and what it has  

had on the local economy. Um, I don't think that  a lot of people realize, and Commissioner Granger,   I greatly appreciate you saying that you didn't  realize that there were restaurants and private   industry on the marina years ago. One of my  favorite things to say at local speeches,   uh, I speak at the Rotary, at the Lion's Club,  all of them, the ladies auxiliary, everywhere,   and everybody always has questions about what's  going on with the city. Um, and you know, when I   used to give this speech 10 years ago, destination  Panama City is 10 years old. When I used to give   this speech 10 years ago, I used to have to say,  "Welcome to Panama City. It's the only city in   Northwest Florida that has a negative population  growth. We were the only city in Northwest Florida   not growing. Uh we knew that the Marina Civic  Center was in disrepair. Um we actually went   ahead and did the pre-application for the Triumph  Grant well before the hurricane for rehabilitation   of that structure. Um Stan Jones was a wonderful  marina director, but even when Stan Jones was   here before the hurricane, there were plans to  redevelop the marina and make improvements on it   because it was not conducive to the citizenship.  Uh one of the great parts about government after   30 years is that citizens don't really change, but  what I realize is their perception is uh directly   related to when they enter the conversation. Um  before destination Panama City got started in our   effort, they actually went and did what I think  today you guys call a charet, but it was when   they went to the citizens and asked the citizens  of Panama City how they wanted us to represent   them as a tourist destination because they didn't  want the culture changed. They wanted Panama City   to represent what Panama City meant to locals.  In doing that, there's about a 135page document  

called the 2015 tourism development and economic  impact report. In that report, citizens, they went   out and interviewed citizens. They did cherettes.  They did all of those things. They spent $134,000   on that report back in 2014 to make sure we had  a visioning visioning document going forward in   2015. The hurricane happened in 2018. So the city  did a series of cherettes to find out whether or   not the citizens still wanted the things that they  wanted before the hurricane. It is eyeopening to   see that what they wanted in the 2015 report is  the exact same thing that they wanted in 2018   after the hurricanes and in 2019. Um it's still  some of the same things that they look at today.   So, I really encourage you to not have  us wait another seven years before we get   some of the amenities back because you make my  job really hard. When the hurricane happened,   I had five amenities. Now, I only have  one and that's St. Andrews Bay. So,   we really need to start putting back the four  amenities. Yes, sir. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. One one last thought, Frank Pinto,  801 West 13 Street. Um, I would in the planning   process, I' i'd make it uh mandatory when looking  at the downtown and looking at the marina that a   full analysis is done. whatever is done to  the marina, how that will that affect good   or bad downtown area. So you have a competition  there. More if you have more restaurants down,   you want to put restaurants in the marina,  but you have businesses up downtown that are  

going broke and and stores closing. How is that  going to affect them? You need a balance and an   analysis for whatever is done at the marina.  How will that affect downtown? Panama City is   at a disadvantage. It's not on a thorough  failure to Panama City Beach, 15th Street,   23rd. Those are all thorough fails. You have  a lot of traffic, you have a lot of people,   you have a lot of advertisement for  buildings along 15th and 23rd. Panama City,   you got to go out of your way. And so  that handicaps Panama City. So you got   to think about how you're going to overcome those  handicaps. And that's another critical planning   uh thought that needs to be taken into concern.  Thank you. Thank you. Yes sir. Anyone else? Welcome. Hello. I don't really need to be the  microphone. Funer Dilmore 309 East 23rd Street. Um   just want to come and say I support this project.  Seems like a great idea. Look forward to seeing   a new marina. Thank you. Thank you. [Applause]  Anyone else? All right, closing public comments.   Moving on to memo on financing options. Does  anyone want to take the lead on that conversation?   I do have a couple questions. Yes. So, Jan, I got  to review what you sent. A couple things. Are you   you were just saying that the the um the district  doesn't extend beyond the T docks and the uplands,   but not that we couldn't expend funds on a dock  or something. Um I believe the CRA and DIIB funds  

have to be spent in the area. I don't think  you you can expand the area. I'm assuming you   can expand the area. What I'm asking is is from  and this is just my understanding and we just   adopted a plan for the CRA which included this um  but the CRA funds could be used to go and build   a dock. There's no inside the area inside the  lot. So Jonathan Hayes and I had a conversation   with Buoyant Boon Beach. Correct. Boon Beach.  So there there's a couple different models of   CRA owned marinas in South Florida. They actually  do extend their boundaries into the water so that   they can spend the money in the water. We haven't  done that. We could um if we wanted to have the   long-term debt on on the CRA. Um so you any any  sort of upland development then pays for the the   financing of the boat slips. You could do that  if you expand it. Now we could use CRA to build   prominons and parking spaces and infrastructure  and all those kind of things, but we can't use   it past the boundary. The boundary is at the  edge. That's new information to me. That's what   I wanted to ask. But but if I may, Commissioner,  Mr. Mayor, but very similar to expanding any   of the other CRA, you have to go out and do the  final necessity and and you're looking at a 12 to   18month process and probably 50 to 70K. So So then  my next question is um it sounds like there are   potential for certain grants, there's potential  for certain things, but obviously those have   extended timelines too. So based upon your your  report, what I'm not in favor of and I'll go ahead   and communicate this. I'm not in favor of using  infrastructure sir tax and the reason why is our   citizens expect their roads to be repaired and so  that's really where that money needs to stay. Also   not in favor of general fund. Um, but if we could  flip the use of the FEMA grant to use on slips,  

I think that's kind of what I'm reading into your  your thing of what you were thinking and what you   were saying. Um, and then look at on the upland  side, a potentially back filling with CRAAS, DIIB   and things like that that's already eligible. So  I that's I I think that's a pretty option. So are   you in favor of creating debt to to move forward  for the citizens? I I think from what I've and   this is this is just my opinion. I think that um  I think there is a large concern not just with us.   Uh just 5 days ago there was a uh P3 partnership  on a South Florida marina that pulled back over   concerns of overdevelopment on public spaces.  And so I think that there's a concern not just   locally but abroad of being too aggressive with  development specifically as we've gone through   one of the highest growth percentages we've ever  seen in the state of Florida. And so I think it's   we need to do the diligence through the time to  go through public chares and we need to do all   that before we start making commitments or even  the even the thought of making a commitment. So,   I'm in favor of utilizing the funding options  that we have at our disposal currently to get   started on the 50 and then that gives us enough  time to go through a public process and see what   the citizens really want to see on the marina and  then we can give them good options to that. So,   just moving forward blindly, I'm I'm not in favor  of that. But we do have the the um the FEMA grant   that's available. We also have um you know the  variety of funding sources that are here and I   think that's where that's kind of where I'm at.  So that's why I've been pretty quiet this whole   time. I've kind of already But that doesn't answer  my question. Are you in favor of creating debt   because funding sources is debt and we're going to  get a loan for us to go and and and build this and   no matter who's on the other side. Are we okay  with creating more debt to create this? Well,  

if we use the FEMA funding, we're not creating  new debt. We're using the existing debt that   we already have. Okay. It's got to be paid back  well by the 20 by 2027. We can't even answer that   question if we went with terms each6 because if  we can't we can't but but I'm asking a a direct   question. Are we okay with creating debt? That's  all I want to know. I can't that's all I want   to know. Isn't but but with the term sheet six  if they walk away from any we're like we can't   get you any uplands and they walk away we still  have to create long-term debt to then pay for the   slips. We've already created it by the by the time  we get to that because we funded the we funded   the build either. We've already paid for the for  the the slips up front and they're we don't have   ability to pay for the slips up front $150 million  loan which is which is debt. Right. So we're all   saying we're okay with using debt to the extent I  didn't I just want to No, no, no, I'm not. That's   what I'm asking. Yeah, I'm not. So, but we use  that money and there's a and what term sheet term   sheet six does for us is gives us an opportunity  to have that repaid back assuming that everything   with the the citizen stuff went okay and we have  a partner if not we also have slips but we could   still have that same piece at the end of this  there's no difference will pay it back FEMA will   pay it back if we use FEMA funding they're paying  it back then we have the opportunity to look at   and say hey do we want if we want to use somebody  for a management contract. Do we want them to pay   us back? What our investment? So, we're talking  about going through the EHP process then is what   you're is that what you're saying to to get the  money paid back, the reimbursement? Can I just   Yes, ma'am. Please. Okay. There there are sac  there are sacrifices to be made no matter which   funding mechanism you choose. If you choose one of  these funding mechanisms, like you mentioned, the   infrastructure s tax, you're going to give up the  roads, right? You're going to not be able to fund   the roads that you want to. If you choose the FEMA  grant, it's either got to be you got to cut back  

the footprint or you have to go through the EHP  process. Um, if you if you use the environmental   services fund, then that chances are they might  have uh not be able to buy the equipment that   they need in a timely manner. What was the plan?  Like we have money in the environmental services   fund to fund this ourselves. What are we giving  up to fund that if we use that? A street sweeper. nothing but love. I I just think we have we  have an ability here's what I heard and this   is what I got from from Jan's from Jan's memo.  There is no reason to put ourselves into a spot   where we have to do something when we don't have  to do something. we can actually walk a process   with our citizens to build more trust rather than  eroding it by trying to take two steps in advance   and potentially backing ourselves into a corner  that we may not want to do because what did you   just say cuz that may I don't understand what  you I think though the building the 50 slips   would probably go to building trust you're right  that's too so we all agree and giving and giving   a process in which people can communicate what  they want to see back on the marina that they   own. I think that is a a great process. Yeah.  I don't I don't think anybody's arguing I don't   think anybody argues that way. No. Okay. I just  my question is debt. Yeah. That's my big concern.   That's where I'm at. Is is is I think your process  is sounds good, but all it does is create Well, by   their ter by their numbers, we'll have $9 million  in debt. only process that does not create debt in   this scenario, long-term debt, is using the FEMA  funds to go and build the first 50. And I want   to give you and and you and Commissioner Granger  props really what y'all suggested on financing. We  

can actually make money on the proposal that  was given to us by us running the money and   building it the slips and we can make a quarter%  interest on the money. So between maybe $250 and   $300,000 because they would pay us that if we did  business with them. Okay. So right now who's going   to build that for us is what I want to know if  and and we're going to create debt cuz their   proposal means they build they're working for  Panama City. We're we're in charge of the money.   We're in charge of all the ordering. There's no up  there's no upcharge to it. So from there, whatever   the the number is, that total in their proposal,  they've agreed to pay us one quarter of a percent   on the total balance in a lump sum. Okay. To me,  that's a congratulations. Thank y'all for coming   up with a way to make us money cuz every other  thing so far is costing us money on the front   side. That's I just want to point that out that  that's pretty cool idea and I want to give you all   props for that. I don't know that you you realize  what you're walking into when but Josh you looked   confused. Is that is terms that are supposed to  give you progressive prog as deals progress there   should be more and more clarity. This doesn't  give clarity to us or to citizens. It's exactly   what y'all asked for. No, what I'm asking for is  to put out I want to put out for bid the designs   and I want to know how much that costs and I want  to fund that ourselves. I don't really care about   long-term debt. I want to be able to control the  uplands and the process for that because we could   always extend it. There are lots of we have four  or five options here including expanding the CRA   district, the environmental services fund. So,  I'm not desperately trying to uh I'm trying to   give clarity to the deal, not less clarity. And  the first of these slips might just be us building   them ourselves and we're talking about all this  again when we have the designs and the sharets,   when we have clarity and and citizens might be  excited about the square footage. I don't know  

because no one knows what they're building yet.  So, long-term debt is probably the biggest pole   in the tent for me. Yep. And the reason why  is because uh a I don't want to raise taxes   on any of the citizens in Panama City, and B, we  have a state legislature that is currently trying   to figure out a way to get rid of property taxes  on at least homesteaded people, which I support,   but that's going to cause us to have to rethink  our budget with less money. So adding debt at a   time when we know that we could be potentially  looking at even tightening down, you know,   three belt loops instead of one um is is not  a not a good idea to me. I think that's a deep   hypothetical to lose control in the uplands. Well,  I'm not saying we shouldn't. I'm just saying is   is that uh going into debt shouldn't shouldn't be  the the direction that we move forward with that.   the the concept of making the decision to take  the 5 million go do the first 50 slips in turn   does everything that we're talking about right  now except that doesn't include the MEP that   doesn't include the utilities from Harrison's now  that's all up so CRA DIIB those are all available   funding sources for those particular things okay  um that's there it it that can be used. It seems   to be bond that money, right? It seems to me to be  the most reasonable path to ensuring that we have   the best way to navigate conversations with our  citizens as well as control the actual end of the   outcome. Otherwise, we're kind of just saying,  well, this could happen, this might happen,   this might happen. And you get into all these  other variables. The only one that I see that is   clearly defined is the one that I just said to me.  Miss Olivia, can you give us a breakdown of what  

it would take to build the slips back with FEMA  money? Yes. Thank you. That was I have a question   though before I give a timeline. Name and title  for the public. Thank you. Um Olivia Schmidt,   the integrity group um consultant uh FEMA  consultant, not other consultant. Um I do have   a question um about the permitting, the wavered  permitting. Um the four I'm assuming it's the   404 waiver. Um yeah, it's a the USA. Okay. So  um is that through you or does that go to the   city? The city has it. Okay. So you guys have the  waiver. Um and you have the ER permit already too. So there's the there's a there's a 404 permit  and then there's the ER permit. A waiver on one   is not a waiver on the other. And I'm only asking  this because it does change timelines if you don't   have both. a full waiver. It's the same thing that  we're constructing St. Andrews with for for the   for the 50 though. You mean the ERP? The first um  it's just a Yeah, it's a ERP. It's a environmental   resource permit. Yeah. ER ERP. Same thing.  But it's for We're good for the 50. Okay. So,   50 is good. Correct. Okay. Okay. So, um yeah,  the only if you used your 5 million for that.   I don't I haven't seen the new footprint and I  don't know what the original footprint was and   whether or not the current proposed plan expands  over the original footprint. Um, but as we've said   on multiple occasions, if you expand more than  20% of the original footprint, FEMA will require   a full environmental assessment through NEPA. And  a waiver, um, an a 404 waiver and a even the ERP   waiver is not going to get you out of any a NEPA  assessment. So, what's that time, frame? Yeah,   that's really difficult to um 18 months. 12 to  18 months would probably be for 50 slips. No. Uh   yeah, for 50 slips, but I mean we would go ahead  and submit the whole the whole project if you had  

it. So you wouldn't be held up again. Now you will  be held up on the 51 plus because of your need for   the 404 and the ERP, but the NEPA waiver would  be covered. The the NEPA assessment would do the   entire marina, not just the 50 slips. I would not  suggest you do that. I would do the entire marina   approval for for environmental assessment. Would  that hold up the 50 slips? Not any more than the   50 slips being held up by that same assessment.  Like it's going to be you're going to do 50 slips   is going to take you the same amount of time to  do all 200. But we don't have design on the other   basin yet. Nor do we have the per we have the  permit for the 50 and the engineering will be done   on that this month. Yeah. The other has got to be  permitted and designed and engineered, right? So,   yeah, you're going to be held up on the other  anyway. Um, but we don't have FEMA money from   that anymore. But you don't have FEMA money for  that anyway. So, I mean, yeah. So, you're still   looking at the same time lane for EHP reviews 12  to 24 months whether you did I mean, I'm sorry,   12 to 18 months whether you did 50 slips or 200  slips. But you said if we build exact without   going over. I mean, we would still have to go  through the EHP review if you did exactly what was   there. It would just be you could potentially get  an exemption for not expanding. Um, like I said,   I don't I haven't seen enough of those plans to  be able to in good faith tell you that they're   not going to require um because it is water and  Florida's really particular about their water.   Um, and so from that perspective, typical NEPA  requirements say that anything in excess of 20%   footprint change requires NEPA assessment. If  it's less than 20%, you can potentially get an   exemption. I can't tell you in good faith that  you will or will not apply for that. I mean,   uh, qualify for that exemption based on just  what we're talking about. Are we able to use  

that money from FEMA not on the first 50  but the next sequential 50? Yeah. Yeah.   But you would also if that's the case I would go  ahead and submit as much as you can and get that   because USACE is 6 to 18 months and then you have  your ERP. I mean just all the permitting plus the   um plus the environmental assessment. So if you  can do it all at the same time then not one's   not holding up the other. And you don't have  to have permits to go into your EHP review,   but you do have to be applied for them. So, the  fastest money, and James can correct me, is the   environmental services fund because that's our own  money sitting in our account currently that we can   lend ourselves and even charge ourselves interest  if we wanted to. We could build the first 50 slips   and then start the discussion of FEMA and slips  51 through 125 and those mechanism along with   partnerships after the schelets. So, one of the  concerns that I've got with that specific fund is   um we have to go through what's required on rate  studies. And if we start taking money out of that   fund, what going to happen is ultimately the rate  studies are going to show the need for massive   increases in trash and garbage around the city.  And so, we need to have some in that. Now, I'm not   saying that in this like maybe this does take too  long and we've got to go to a different option.   But I think our option utilizing the $150 million  line regardless whether it's on this 50, the next   50, the the next hundred. I I mean I think that  is to me what makes the most sense. Maybe FEMA   is fast with their response, maybe they're not.  And you know, chances are they won't be. I mean,   if you have a plan for the original footprint, the  one that I think that you have right now currently   done expands the footprint. Correct. Yeah. What  percentage? I don't know. Okay. So, I mean,   we could send those plans through with the the  exemption paperwork and see what comes back. Now,  

it's December 1 and it's state government  and then federal government. So, I mean,   at best, we're looking at mid J mid January, 1st  of February before we probably get anyone to focus   on it. Um, but a um exemption is pretty easy. It's  easy paperwork. You have to fill it out regardless   of whether you have to do the full NEPA assessment  or not. So that's something we can do to see what   the percentage looks like. Can I ask one more  question that's not FEMA related? So we've gone   through this process before where we haven't had  money to construct what we needed to construct   on the marina. So we did this with prominade.  Prominade got built and from what I understand   the city didn't outlay money for it. We paid it  back through the revenues that we'd gotten from   the hotel and the restaurant or some other funding  mechanism. Why are we not looking at that option?   May I you're you're asking if St. Joe should  finance it. Yeah. Because that's who built the   prominade, right? Yes. And we used their revenues  to pay it back. All right. So, since we're talking   about time and and and money in St. Joe Neban,  could you help us out on time with where we are   in our agreement with St. Joe and building  the marina and what happens if if they call   call the call in on us and in terms of time if  we wait until next June what can happen if we   say that's what we're going to vote on what does  the st Joe have the ability to uh jump in and say   hey guys we're going to go ahead and do this and  whatever they spend we pay we we write a check for   because Josh I think that's what you're talking  about is we wrote a check for them to them on on   I think it was I thought it was the prominade that  we we had to write a check. Yeah, I know. We had   to we had we had to finish the prominade and I  know the city didn't have the money to finish the   prominade and it was used either revenues from the  hotel or somehow there was payback but it didn't  

ultimately hit the general fund. Okay. So whether  that was CRA or however that was I'm trying to   understand like what I what I'm getting the sense  of and this is what I would like to do really from   this standpoint. I'm just trying to get us to the  next step and the next step is 50 and then give   give a process to go through upland stuff without  having some type of gun to my head on on having to   do anything in that process. I think that's the  piece that I'm trying to say. So, and we don't   technically have to decide right today how we fund  it. To me, all we have to do is go we want to put   this when the designs come in, we put it out  for bid and over the next cuz once you get the   designs, there's 45 days of procurement waiting.  We still can go through all the exercise of how   long will it take to expand the CRA? Do we want  to do that? How much will it cost? Environmental   services fund. What's what's the repercussion  of that? FEMA money. What are our options there?   We still haven't closed those doors yet in my  opinion. And to me, it's too early to be inking   deal with the people. Can a answer the question  about what Panama City is on the hook for if   we don't get going on these slips? I don't think  any of us are advocating not getting going. Well,   but getting going and your plan on how to get  there is next June and today we are in default.   Go ahead, Nevin, if you will. My plan is not next  June. I'm I'm I'm committed to starting now. If   FEMA's ultimately ends up taking too long, we've  got to find another way to do it. And so like uh section 2.2 of the um lease with St. Joe,  it says that the redevelopment of the marina   is obviously a high priority for both for the  city as well as uh the St. Joe and that the   city agrees to use quote all commercially and  governmentally reasonable efforts to redevelop   the marina including construction of a wet slip  marina with slips prior to the completion date or  

within a reasonable period of time thereafter.  The completion date is the completion date for   Hotel Indigo. Obviously, that's been done uh  in the past. So, that's within a reasonable   time thereafter. I don't know that 3 years is  reasonable. But uh and if we have not met that,   well, we you know the if if we don't then St. Joe  would need to um come up with a suggestion as far   as they could exercise self-help maybe. I how  does how does how does the lease read? Let Oh,   the lease doesn't say what happens. But if we're  what they can do, the way I read it was they get   to come in and build it. We don't get a say so  in it and they're building the whole thing. We   write a check. Is that correct? We don't we don't  get any say so then. I that's the way I ran the   way. The trade-off is deciding now on the on like  going into shreds with sort of a bias of finding   square footage or the deal falls apart and we  end up going with a single source bid and so   and having long-term debt ending up right in the  back of the same place of going how do we fund   this thing and so for me I I am unwilling to vote  yes on a P3 today. I will make that very clear.   I want to find a way to to put this out for a  bit bid so we know what it costs and as soon   as we can and then we'll start talking about  we can decide today. I'd love to see the CRA   district expand it and the CRA handle all the  bonding for this thing. So I like your I like   your comment from the standpoint of what we need  to decide today is whether we're going to fund   the first 50. Dr. Hi said find what's necessary in  its he said help this board find what's necessary   clearly communicate that the city needs to be  the responsible party for finding the funding   for the first now how that is done I think is  still open discussion before we just get off   this subject I want to close my comments with this  concerning uh the obligation to rebuild the marina  

uh the city does have one and the city needs to be  concerned about it and I believe that you all are   all five of you. That's not the issue. Um I do  not believe the city is in breach today of this   agreement because it says that within a reasonable  period of time thereafter we've had co we've had   uh all kinds of different things that have made  it unreasonable I believe to actually get it done   prior. Now, if there is further delay, I think  we are becoming perilously close to being in   default. So, I I do encourage, as all of you have  already indicated, you're moving forward, but it   is there. It's something we need to be aware of.  I just didn't want it to sound like that uh there   was any admission of of anything. That's not at  all from my perspective. Mayor, if I may, uh, my better half said that I need to write  things down because I get off task. So,   um, I did. You wrote a lot. I wrote a lot. I was  up late last night. Uh, tonight we're we're here   to talk about the marina and it is we got to be  responsible. We got to be transparent. We got   to be we got to be able to achieve something.  So, I think we all agree that 50 slips, that's   where we start. It restores public access, access  access to the water, and improves our waterfront.   According to Jan's memo, we can afford to fund the  50 slips. But let me be clear, affording that is   creating debt for you as the citizen versus an  opportunity to partner with somebody, whoever it   is. Maybe they carry that cost. But affording  the 50 slips, we do not have the money in the  

bank. We have to borrow it from somewhere in order  to do that. And either and I think Brian said it,   uh we don't we don't want to raise your taxes.  We want to do this deal so that it it works for   everybody. We don't need outside financing. uh  as we've been discussing because of that the   way that I read term sheet six was thanks to our  commissioners down here we can offer a loan we can   make money off of we can the city can fund the  first 50 slips CMP works and this is under this   inance the sheet six here the city the CMP works  for the city at no profit labor and materials   So to answer the question about what's it going to  cost, we're give you the exact number. Here's how   many poles we're going to need. Here's how many  we're going to know and we're going to buy it.   Okay? So it's not going to be marked up, but we  procure it through how it's going in St. Andrews.   They give us three bids. We make a decision on  that. Okay? So that's that's happening there.   What it also does, and more importantly, it does  not tie the Uplands to anything. Nothing. Nobody   has it. There's no there's no discussion about  what's going to happen with it. What's going   to happen is the Dober Cole it's gonna share  we're going to get the public involved while   we're building slips. Nobody's in charge of the  uplets. There's no use. There's no nothing there.   We don't have an idea when the public is creating  that. But here's where it gets good. We give CMP   a sheet that says, "All right, we're going  to build a dog park with a building on it."   They say we're out. We don't want to do that.  We still have 50 slips that we paid for. They're   ours. But we still have to pay them the 20% on the  profit for them to walk away because they worked  

for free. There was no profit that they worked  for. This is under this is in the sheet that y'all   have. Okay? Or we can partner with them because  we bring a they bring a document that says, "Hey,   we're going to build something that y'all that  we all put together." remember they're citizens   too that we all put together and and we go get  a cost to do it. But at no time has anybody said   this is what's going to happen before we have  all the shreds. So I want to be clear about   something. Everything that we're talking about  up here we can accomplish by starting the slips.   We fund them. They build them or that's under  this proposal. It can be us building them. No,   that's not true. and we all agreed on upfront on  this that we didn't want to manage it, operate it,   run it, nothing to do with the marina. Okay?  So, we get into business with them and then   guess what has to happen? Just like if you're  going to go build a house, everything that's   going to get built has to go through the  planning process. It has to be designed,   come to Panama City, go through the development  process, get and get voted on by the commission.   Nothing is going to go on the upland unless Judy  has an opportunity to go to a sharet and say,   "This is what I like." Because that is way down  the road, folks. We're trying to make a decision   today on an upland that isn't going to happen for  at least 2 years. But the part we've been missing   is this. you're going to ask somebody to go build  something. We're where We're our economists. We've   hired two economists that have both said the slips  will not work without the upland being part of it.   Their economists said the same thing. So, we have  three that say that what they left all of what   all of them agreed to was that what the density  is going to be, what's it going to look like,   all of that. Leave it to us. So the cool part  is mayor you said trust our and listen to our  

consultants. We got three of them that say do  it this way and I completely disagree with that   and okay but but on one end you say when you agree  with the consultant agree with the assumption when   you don't by the campaign mayor their job is to  take numbers and put them out there and make and   put and put together um you know models whether  you disagree with how they do it or not that's   how they do it. They don't take personal numbers.  They don't go get cost and put plug those in. No,   but we should. But we should. But that's what  you believe. That's what you believe. That's   what I'm asking for. So, what this does is it  allows for us to get started. It allows for us   to pay for something and maybe but not guaranteed.  We have a partner and we don't. We might we might   end up with 50 slips and nothing on the marina.  Boy, that makes some of y'all real happy. Okay.   We're just going to be able to pay for it all.  So, we have to do something later on with that.   But my point is what what the mayor and Josh are  talking about is let's just vote on this one thing   and get started when this entire sheet and does  exactly what everybody's talking about and puts   nothing on the upland other than we're once we  get all of the all the densities all the heights   all the things that we choose then we go to CMP  or somebody else and say all right do you like   this idea we are in charge 100% for the entire  part of this process they get no say, "Sir, tell   me where that's a bad idea." We tell them what we  want to do, but we get slips in the process that   we pay for. Now, that's where we are today. Term  sheet one, they paid for everything. Everything today. We don't have that. Today, we're  going to go into debt to do this. Okay? So,   and that's the truth, folks. And don't let it be  spun. We They were going to pay for everything.   And today we're going to go into debt. And I'm  okay with going into debt if we can pay it back.  

But I don't want to go into debt. Agreed. I want  it paid back. If it will pay it back. And I think   the mayor I'm not done yet. Oh, I thought you  were. Keep going. So with that with that in mind,   I'd like to make a motion that we accept term  sheet six subject to the sharetses being completed   the and the long-term agreement mean working  with this long-term agreement and the sharets   being completed because we don't know what any  of that's going to look like. Subject two, folks,   means that that has to happen in order for the  long-term agreement to go forward. But what it   gets us is slips being started right now and  we're making money on the interest the way   that it's being presented. Thank you to the  commissioners at the other end. All right,   we have a motion on the floor. We have a second.  So we have a motion. I want to support that. The   problem that I have with it is is that I'm not  sure where we're going to get the 9 million from   the FEMA $150 million loan. So that's long-term  debt. Yep. Yeah. Well, it's not but with the   ability to get paid back. That's the only reason  that I'm I'm okay. Either way, or we can go to   term sheet one question. Okay. Is the ability to  get paid back at the same rate of interest that we   will get that the loan will cost us. We're going  to make a quarter% on the on the money that we're   giving out. Yeah. But if we use portion of the  150 million, what's the interest we have to pay   on that? 4.7 plus plus a quarter a quart% back  over top of that. Yes, we making we're making   positive. We're already discussing the motion  though. We have a second but Oh, yeah. Do we have   a second to discuss? I'll second to discuss. Okay,  let's keep discussing. So, my my problem is this.   After the sharet, we might find that citizens  are excited about this presented deal and that   they're building things that they know are good  and they're happy and they have more clarity  

and we might just pause this this this might to  build it just at the price of materials is the   best construction bill we'll get in singularity.  Exactly right. In singularity and so we might be   back to this conversation after the citizens have  had time to talk about different options. What do   they want to see? We might be right back here. But  I but I I can't go into the shreds with a biased   opinion of you got to find that square footage or  we're back to square one with a single source bid,   a non-competitive bid that we haven't put out  and got gotten competitive. With all due respect,   they met what we asked them to do and that and and  remember we inherited Mayor, you and I inherited   them. Okay. We didn't ask them to come in single  source. We asked them people to respond to an RF.   They're the only people that did. Can I can I say  one thing? I I have not talked to the bank about   $9 million. So I'm not sure that the bank  would be willing to fund $9 million. How   much you talked to the bank about? Between four  and five. So okay, going back to the I guess the   environmental services, how do we know when we're  when we're in need of a study and are we forced   to raise rates based on the study because that's a  process I've never been through. So, I don't know   when the next study is up, Jared. Uh, so we're  in year three of our five-year study. Typically,   those are done five years every 5 years to adjust  uh those rates. Um, things that you've mentioned,   sir, um, or you know, what's that do to us if  we decrease our reserves? Um, our our fleet,   those uh, our capital replacement schedule really  drives a lot of that. Um, and it's due to not   just customer growth, uh, but, you know, age and  wear and tear of those those vehicles that drive   our city streets, uh, three times weekly.  Um, so those are your knuckle boom trucks,   your front loaders for commercial garbage and your  side loaders for, uh, residential. Um, we've been   experiencing higher than normal customer growth.  Um, so that's why the the fund is in really good  

shape. Um, but yeah, that's that's the big um  the big issue is capital replacement. A new side   loader garbage truck I believe is in the realm  of four to $500,000 and there's about a 18month   manufacturing period for those. That's why it's  so important. How much is in there? 6 million,   sir. Okay. And and if I can just add to Mr.  Jones. So, you know, a lot of folks don't realize,   but after we have any type of storm, whether it be  a severe thunderstorm or tornado or a hurricane,   environmental services takes takes the lead  on clearing our roads in addition to just,   you know, we think that empty dumpsters and blue  trash cans. They also want to have, you know,   so that immediate expense for that after a storm  and then be able to fund that operation for up to   90 days. It's what keeps us from using temporary  debt when we have debris removal and those kind   of things. Street sweepers. So I we got a motion  on the floor. If we want to go on to other things,   I would suggest we like like make a decision  on this motion. We got a motion in a second for   discussion. So the the commentary I hear from  the public is don't rush. Find a good deal. We   waited long enough. All right. I don't hear this.  We got a house slips today and I with a deal that   we can't I can't really It takes me 10 minutes  to explain this term sheet and what I do hear is   do it right. This is our only option. And uh and  so I would wonder if the citizens would rather us   not even make a decision if they would they like  to see the trade-off of us not making a decision   on the wet slips currently and wait till after  the shreds completely and have this conversation   delay the decision or I didn't get elected to  wait anymore 7 years I got elected to make good   decision a good decision getting the slips is a  good decision what you're trying to do is stop the   upland part and it's already stopped it there's  no in this tell me where in this presentation   that says we're we're doing uplands there's  There's nothing there. It gives us an avenue   to get started. We have avenues with a potential  bill to pay at the end. Yeah. Right back. We're  

going to pay the bill anyway. How are we not going  to pay the bill if we paying it ourselves? We do,   but through this by going out to bid, you at least  know what your numbers are. You You have more   predictable pieces. And how are you paying for  it? I I would love to get to that point if we if   we finish up the discussion on this one. I like I  have a followup that I would support. So, Mr. Mr.   Mayor, if I might add, I did have a conversation  today with uh Mr. Murphy with St. Joe just to kind   of get an update. Um he actually reached out to  me and I asked some additional questions. So,   it is important to note that in about two weeks,  we do expect the first 50 slips uh to be designed.   Um however, uh by mid to late January, it's not  just the West Basin, but we gave direction back in   July for St. Joe to develop both basins. So within  4 to 6 weeks, we should have both basins uh fully   designed uh and ready. And the estimate for the  first 50 slips uh is about 4.3 million. That's the   latest estimate from St. Joe. Uh it's important to  note that does not include the break wall on the   very west side that does need uh to be returned.  So just those are the latest numbers as of early   this afternoon. Does that include MEP over the  water? It it it does, but then the city would need   to get any necessary electrical and uh water up to  the edge. They'll basically bring it over the over   the bulkhead basically into our ride ofway for  lack of a better description. Mr. Mayor, I think   the voices of the people here tonight and that  we've heard consistently have been consistent.   The Marina needs to remain a public accessible  jewel in our city. We are the ones who protect   that trust. We are the ones who make the decision.  Um, our staff has given us avenues where we can   pay for the first 50 slips. Let's go ahead. Let's  get that done. I appreciate uh CMP and the work  

that has been done. And I would not want us to tie  the hands um at this point. Let's go unfettered   into the sharetses. Uh, and it may very well be  just as Jennifer Vigil said earlier, you know,   we have the 2015, we have the Cherrettes after.  Um, it's like what I say about uh, Glennwood. We   know three things people in Glennwood have asked  for for the last 20 years. And we know that the   people in the city of Panama City has asked that  our public marina on downtown Panama City remain   accessible and public. And with that, I call  the question. All right. Please call the role.   Commissioner Street, no. Commissioner Hughes,  yes. Commissioner Lucas, no. Commissioner Granger,   yes. Mayor Branch, no. Motion fails, two to three.  I'd like to follow up this motion with another   motion to proceed with the city bid documents  for the first 50 slips utilizing the temporary   debt loan um from Hurricane Michael recovery.  Second. Any discussion? How about we go back? you're suggesting that we use the 150 million  um cash flow fund to pay for the marina. Um,   initially when when that was set up, I supported  it because every time that we would go to use   spend the spend the credit card, we had a a  funding source, FEMA or um state state funds   or infrastructure sir tax, something of that  nature that would back the payment that we would   then get in the future to pay for the project. And  the idea was is that the 150 million would speed   projects on. Now, obviously, it would speed this  project on, of course, but there's nothing backing   the funding of it. So, therefore, it will roll to  long-term debt, and I don't support that. It could  

be the revenue from the slips. It could be um it  could be the revenue from other improvements that   come. That could be all sorts of other things that  comes from. I thought revenue from the slips had   still FEMA grant because that's still something  for us to go and and go through that process.   So the fumigrant's five um which is more  than enough to do what we need to do. No sir,   it's going to for the first 50. Yes. But Josh,  you can't use the 50 slips if you don't have   the MEP from Harrison's dam. You don't have the  ability to operate the slips without spending   $10 million. No matter what, you have to spend  the utility money. And we've got five of them.   You guys are watching what what it takes to  actually get something from construction to   finish with what's happening in St. Andrews. And  so by the time that we actually start this, we   will be a year down the road before we need that  MEP that you're talking about, which means we have   gone through public chares, which means we will  have gotten more certainties on what we can do,   whether it's looking at the environmental services  fund, whether it's utilizing FEMA funds. There are   a lot of other options at that point. But the  point is, we've got documents that are going to   be ready for bid in two weeks. We have a funding  source that is already allocated for our recovery   projects and we've got $5 million that can be  spent on the marina from FEMA. So my my feeling is   let's move forward and go to the next step. Okay.  Well, there's a motion and a second. All right.   Let me make sure I understand. You're not okay  with moving forward with no no commitment, but you   and and possibly we don't have any debt, but you  are okay with borrowing money with no way to pay   it back today. We're going to you want us to vote  on that with not knowing where it's going to come   from to pay back the long-term debt. I tell me how  we've already borrowed that money. We've already   budgeted in this year's budget all of the interest  expense. That's great. And so there is no cost.   This affects nothing having to do with the budget.  Can we budget to take out $9 million? We are  

already we are already paying the interest in our  general fund budget for this year with our current   budget. There would be a delta though between  the monies earned versus the monies that we would   right. So because the money is not staying in the  current we earn interest off of the money we don't   spend, right? There's a potential investment loss  but there is no change to our general fund budget   by this action at all. Okay. But when there's  still your request, as far as what you ask when   we do our financial report, this one would be no  effect to the general fund budget. That's correct.   This year, this year, where do we get the money  to pay it back in by 2027? Committed to working   on other alternative options, but you want to  vote on that today with no not knowing where   it's going to come from. Same thing, not knowing  about the lot of unknowns. Jen, you Jen wanted to   chime in here. Yeah, there there's one there's  one caveat from the um from bond council that   the marina slips must be rented to individuals and  not to someone's trade or business during the loan   period to keep it tax exempt. So I just wanted to  that's interesting. I wanted to um let you guys   know in corporate names. Well, we're talking about  a temporary place to get to the next step. Again,   you can't even rent these slips until you actually  get them constructed. So, like these are all   these are all steps to a step and this is the  clearest step that allows us to move forward with   certainty on getting 50 slips and all these other  conversations can either continue or they can get   more defined, which is what I hope happens. They  get more defined. Yeah. So, go ahead. I just I'm   not comfortable putting, you know, four, nine,  whatever how many millions of dollars on the   credit card if we do not currently have a plan to  pay it off because that that was the that was the   plan using the 150 million. That was every single  thing we put on that. We had an idea of how much  

that was going to going to go back on that. So  cash flowing rather than um putting it on a credit   card and letting it sit for long-term debt. This  has to come up with money, too. No, this would   roll into long-term debt and then we would either  have to eat that out of our expenses, which we're   already next year looking at going into a lowered  expense uh status for the city, which means we're   going to have to eat even more, or we're going  to raise taxes, and something's going to have to   give. And my fear is is that we're going to wind  up raising taxes. Well, this puts us in either   we finance it short term for them and they pay  us back. So, we're still using the credit card   here or the upland deal doesn't work out and  we're still using the long term that did say I   didn't like this. Yeah, I don't like any options.  This was the problem they don't like. Remember,   we're getting that debt because y'all came up with  the idea of financing it. We can go to term sheet   one and they'll pay for everything. Environmental  services get started tomorrow. But my point but   my point, Janice, is that there we're talking  about the debt that's been created. There's   a there is a path for no debt. There's a path  for possible. So, let me ask the question. And   the only way that yours is is only debt. Let me  ask this question. Are we going to go pay off $5   million of the $150 million line of credit within  2 weeks? No, we're not. We've already budgeted for   the interest expense. It's already debt that the  city has incurred. Let's utilize it to help our   city recover, which was the full purpose of doing  it 100%. and then we can work on other long-term   obligations on the other side of this. It creates  a four or five or $9 million ticking time bomb for   us to deal with. We will find out more once we go  out, which is let's pass it and then read the bill   to not uh support the legislative process to get  rid of property taxes. Yes. Any other discussion?   We have a motion and a second. Call the role.  Commissioner Street can repeat the motion. What's  

the motion? The motion is to for the city to issue  bid documents with the source of funding being the   $150 million debt. Sounds good. Please call the  RO. Commissioner Street, yes. Commissioner Hughes,   no. Commissioner Lucas, yes. Commissioner Granger,  no. Mayor Branch, yes. Motion passes 3 to two. [Applause] We have a motion to adjourn. Yes. Just  little little housekeeping here. Um there's you do   have a meeting on December 16th and I believe  it'd be appropriate at that time to give you   a report give the commission a report as far as  timetable for bidding this out. Uh if I believe as   uh the city manager indicated we should have  the full drawings and bid specs by the middle   of this month. um you know when does it hit the  street, how long is it there, when do we expect   to get bids? Also, at the same time, it would be  appropriate to give you um a report concerning   how this action may impact CMP as far as the the  we don't have an agreement per se, but they were   selected and they had an interim agreement and I  just want to be able to give you a report on that.   There was some uh talk earlier about just formally  terminating which would uh give them the ability   to to bid on actual construction. I don't know  but I need to talk talk to CMP about I need to   review what we already have done but you need  to have that as a report back. Also under our   agreement with St. Joe, I think it'd be important  to have a formal uh response that we vote on that  

says this is the path forward on December 16th.  I also sent an email to Jonathan today about just   infrastructure, water, sewer, get it out there.  What's required? Is a dock snorkel thing required?   I want to know all the costs, railing, timelines,  FEMA money, all those sort of things. Okay, that   can we have too many hypotheticals? We're talking  about by by December 16th, I think is reasonable.   And I'll just state this. I mean, assuming  we do get that week, the week of the 15th,   we get those plans back from St. Joe. Uh, with the  exception of the Christmas and New Year holidays,   that will be the primary focus of our purchasing  division and public works team to get those bid   docks ready to go out just as soon as possible  in January. Uh, and if that works out, then the   the hope would be at the first meeting in March to  bring back some type of bid recommendation. Thank   you. Any other additions for recommendations?  No. Anything else? I didn't hear you. Any more   recommendations for staff for December 16th?  No. No. All right. Motion to adjurnn. Motion   to adjourn. Second. Second. Please call the  wall. Commissioner Street. Yes. Commissioner   Hughes. Yes. Commissioner Lucas. Yes. Commissioner  Granger. Yes. Mayor Branch. Yes. Motion passes 5.