City Commission - Regular Meeting

hearing is that there's no more funding or that if you didn't get noticed, you're not going to get a notice. And they just wanted us to be sure to communicate to the community that that isn't the case. Um, as they're running through this phase right now, they do anticipate that even with the increase that they have some that have decided to go a different direction. And so, it's really just going to be a matter of um encouraging individuals to reach out directly to them to see if there are any funding available or if they can get on the wait list. Panelis recovers. This is the 813 million that was allocated for storm recovery. Um they've been having a series of popup uh offices around the county. So I know that they were in Treasure Island yesterday and they're going to be in Lillman Thursday. So and then they also have these two um permanent locations in Clearwater and St. Petersburg. Um on the bottom of the screen you'll see kind of these different buckets. I thought it was very interesting because even from the time that they had the public meeting where they talked about some of the programming that they were maybe going to be um implementing, it's kind of evolved quite a bit. So there are like quite a bit of different pockets. Again, those funding limitations and restrictions are still in place because some of the funding is coming from CDBG, but they have kind of expanded the types of programming. And so if anyone is interested or they have um as they've as they've communicated to us, if there's a gap in their project, then please come talk to them because there may be a way again that they can kind of look at some of a way to assist to getting you to that finish line. Now, as we go into hurricane preparedness, talking about training, we've been continuing to do our NIMS and ICS training for all city employees. And then for FEMA grants management training, we um conducted that. We had it for city staff and that was very very helpful. We continue to look for grant opportunities and work with public services Camden um and his team as as

the gentleman just said. So again, we're kind of we we realize that we've got um we need to look at any opportunities that that we can to be able to address the needs um for Penllis County damage assessment training. That was training that Penllis County conducted. They came into our office and did it with our team. They also are moving forward with 4Runner. So, we anticipate that as they're implementing 4ERunner and we now have 4Erunner that we'll be continuing that training together. As well as we've been conducting um in-house 4Runner training for our team. For personnel, we hired seven permit techs through the limited term duration employee status. That was back in April or yes, no, April. And that'll go through potentially April of 26. We also issued a RFP for community development temporary personnel. Um, this was for emergency and non-emergency periods. This was the JPI and CAP contract that we currently have in place. And then we also have a potentially an interlocal agreement with Penllis County that's going to be going before you this evening. And this is was a county-led RFP. Again, there were a lot of communities that weren't really where we were at, hadn't done the RFP, and so they needed to tap into these services. Um, the county took the lead on that. And so, this evening, you know, we have the ILA ILA request before you, and then we'll be subsequently be coming back to you. So, that's a really a long-term bigger picture look at some of the numbers at a glance. So the total valuation of permits um when we looked at that time period is over 375 million. I just want to call attention this is the total valuation for scope of work. So you know you may have like the dawn take for example that in itself was a 100 million plus project but just giving you an idea of the valuation of the project scopes. For

permit fees we've waved um just over 3.7 million and we've collected just over four mill four million. Um, I just want to note that I think it's important that whereas we did, you know, um, we were able to cover our expenses of what was waved. Um, I just want to call attention to just the amount of added personnel and contract workers that were needed during that time. So, I think that's important when you look at the what was waved and then what our bottom line was. And then the average cost of fees permit was at 1864. Um, that's, you know, taking not considering fee waiverss or anything. That's just taking it all all projects across the board of what the average fees per per project were. And, uh, you've seen this number before. Um, we received notification that for the FEMA claims for repairs in St. Pete Beach, it was at approximately 200 million. This is a lot, but I'm going to go through it very quickly. And this is just really a snapshot of some of the key kind of um items or or steps along the way that you all have undertaken. Um it's definitely not a comprehensive list and there's probably a lot missing, but um we know the hurricanes happened in uh September 26 was Hela. Immediately after the city started doing that initial damage assessment and then Milton hit and then in December is when the actual individual substantial damage estimates began. And then that is also when the city removed the look back period because that was a big deal. The look back period for substantial improvements damages in December. The volunteer program was also initiated that was talked about earlier and that was instrumental to getting us through this that phase of the recovery and permit fees were waved at that time in December. In January is when we began to allow substantial interior repairs for locally designated historic resources without a variance. again key key

component to all of this. Hence the the amount of sub um of local designations that we saw as a step in the recovery process. In March is when we waved the sod bond that was you know we had a sod bond requirement for a long time and then it just kind of didn't make sense. So again just another kind of pivot there. In March is when we signed on with Forerunner for the damage assessment software which will really help us streamline um not only um damage assessment but really flood plane management in the future. And [clears throat] then in April is when we had the permit fees reduced to 50% through June 1st. And then that is also when we signed on with the limited term duration employees, those seven permit techs and hired them on. And then that is also when we sent the first kind of we'll call it the blanket letter, the letter that kind of went out to everyone if we didn't if you didn't have a permit on file and we thought that you had damage. And so that was when that first mailing went out. And then in July is when we issued the RFP for the community development personnel. And in August we did that local amendment to the Florida building code. Again, that was the one um the requirement for the raising of the mechanical equipment to allow some flexibility there. In October, we did we had you all accept and review the substantial damage administrative procedures plan, which was the city's first plan for an SDAP plan. And in November is when we finally have compiled all of the data points, if you will, up until this point um to get us ready for this next phase of what I'll call the phase prior to enforcement. That's basically um giving us all of the data from from LAR, from what we have from permitting, from what we have from FEMA, everything across the board, just being able to cross reference. And again, it's not going to be perfect, but it's going to be that initial phase of the enforcement of okay, we do not have any record of you having a permit for this property. And then in December also is when again the potential for the

interlocal with Penllis County for that additional um personnel during emergency and non-emergency times. So again not include this is not capturing at all but I think it it does um do a good job of just showing just all the steps that you guys have had to take along the way and how you've had to pivot and how legal has had to look and see what we can and can't do. And then SP 180 comes into play and that changes things up. So again, it's it's definitely um I've only been here for about half of this, but um I can tell you that it's it's been kind of uh quite an experience to see all the work that's been done in such a short amount of time working for in government for a long time. And you know, I always uh have heard the joke of we're built for endurance, not speed. And we've been really speedy is what I'll say lately. Um, now I'm going to hand it over to Camden and he's going to talk about the CIPs and again kind of that longer term recovery and what we have planned for the city to address preparedness.

Laura, before you leave, I have one quick question regarding the uh 41 elevating structure permit applications. How many of those uh successfully received anything from Elevate Florida program?

So the last number that we had was that there were four recipients in St. Pete Beach that had moved to that next phase in the recovery. But I have personally only spoken to one resident that has actually um that's moving forward with the process that that they've actually been, you know, um have had the the inspections already conducted and now they're lining them up with the contractors. So, I'm only aware of the one that's actually at that point in the process. I would I would recommend that we do some kind of hot wash with the recipients to see what kind of lessons we can learn and somehow uh share that if possible with the other applicants to help them succeed.

Thank you. I've got a quick question for you also, Laura, on the um on the slide where it talked about the the number of or the average number of days to permit issuance.

Um I feel like there's some folks who are waiting from for permits who are going to think those numbers are are uh um ambitious. And so on where it says that like on demolitions the average time to issuing a permit is nine days. it is does that mean it's nine days after the 30-day period that the city has to review the application? So, the way that the average time is is arrived at is um Joanne takes it, she actually exports it from Excel. So she takes all of the demo/or elevation permits and then in that Excel file it has the date that it was applied for and then the date that it was issued and then it's taking the average time based on those those of course there's a couple outliers which um so if something has been in there for 300 and you know close to 300 then then we're not including that but that's so it's a manual process and not perfect but that's where we're getting the average number of days is from her spreadsheet that's looking at all of them and and using the issuance date, excuse me, the application date when it's submitted and then when it's actually issued

and taking the average of all of them. Yes. Somehow. Okay. Removing the outliers first. I don't think because you have 153 demolition permit applications only 118 have been issued. Right. So there's still So the ones are the outliers of 300 plus the ones that have not been issued. No. So that that would be the nine days would be using the 118 that have been issued because it's averaging the time to issuance. So those people would say like what you're saying, it's not nine days. I'm still waiting.

Yeah. Well, and when you when you look in the permit portal, you know, there's I think if you pull up the permit portal and search by type of work and you search demos, the you know, there's 15 on a page from the from the the say the consumerf facing end of the permit portal and and uh and I don't think that there's any on the first page that have been issued and the permit application dates go back to about August. So, so I think that there's um I I I I believe what you're saying is is accurate. But I'm just I just want people to know that there's maybe some differences in in in how you may look at the permit portal and what you might assume versus how you guys are figuring out the average because there's you know I I don't I don't I mean I I would I would love it if it was true. I haven't talked to anybody who's gotten a permit in less than 45 days. So, I'm that that's why I was curious about the if if you weren't counting that first 30 days that the that the city has to review the permit before it gets issued or you know what what's happening there. So,

no, but I will get further clarification because what I what I have asked is can I look in I work and see the average like is it viewable and it wasn't until she explained that it's manual. So, I will get clarification once she explained that she's pulling it in from her spreadsheet and then averaging it. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Commissioner Robinson, I had a question. It kind of follows suit with with uh Commissioner Marriott. Um but not necessarily in the demolition side of thing, just in the permit proc processing side of things. Um we still have our seven temporary employees. Correct. Yes. And we have them as I see in this through uh April of 26. Is that what we're looking at? Or or potentially

potentially through that. Um I I just have to question whether um because I'm getting calls as well from permits not not the uh demolition but permits in general um taking just to get a response is taking the 30 days just for a response to find out that they needed something else and it just it's a long pro is there a way to shorten this process? I'm also finding that there's inconsistencies between uh permit tax between what one requires and another one requires. So if you're somebody who has multiple permits out there a you know a contractor let's say um working on different jobs and they get different permit taxs they've had to they've been required to proide something on one job but they do another job and they're not required by this other permit tech to provide it. So, I'm seeing inconsistencies and I'm hoping that there's a way that we can address that to again speed up this process [snorts] um whether you know that be um you know getting back in contact you know getting if they need more info or just being consistent across the board. Um it's it's it's an issue for a lot of residents. I get a lot of phone calls. Well, I um please if you you can give them my information because I would I'd like to look into it personally because I know that it definitely um consistency is key in how we're applying the rules, but I'd love to say that each permit tech applies the rules the same way, but you know, it it just may be the way that something was interpreted or that they thought that this wasn't needed. And so I I would like to know, you know, get more details so that I can really address it.

I can provide you that list. Thank you. Thank you.

And another question on on them because I do get also the same, you know, email or call from someone saying that, you know, I'm still waiting for my demolition permit and and I know it's more than nine days, you know, um because they're already at point of frustration. Um and then um you know, I hear people um say how difficult it is to get a permit in the city. That's a general comment, right? And it comes from contractors, too. But with that, what are we doing to help streamline elevation permits or demolition permits? You know, like we had one, and I don't want to say I can guarantee you, but I I I could tell you who that one that's closed because it's someone who asked for a permit before the hurricane. So, this is the one elevation that happened prior. So, it makes it seem like one was done, but I know that started way before. So, how are we improving so that when someone is coming whichever contractor to pull an elevation um permit that we have a list of stuff that this is what you need so that there's no question um you know some say this city requires that but our city requires something else you know and and and that's the comments you know I've heard from some two elevation companies that I've spoken to or even with the demolitions you know when I get a resident call and say I don't know why it's not approved yet. You know, something's missing and then they don't know what's missing. You know, like is there a checklist that's given to them? Like these are the things that you need to get um is it a survey, you know, is it, you know, whatever it is that you need to get these demolition permits or elevations or whatever it may be to help reduce the the time or the frustration if there is out there. So, and I actually should have included in there because there was quite a bit of time spent on it, but we did recently finalize the elevation and the demo checklist which are on the website now, which again are a pretty good resource for sure. Still not perfect. And why I say that is that, you know, still things

came up. I think the recent example that I can use was um uh you know historically you know a portaotty would normally be required if you're building a new home and you're demoing first and so they want to see the portaotty at the pre-site but because of where we're at and the amount of demos that we have going on and because there's properties that are maybe going to have the property be demoed and then maybe it's a couple weeks maybe it's a month maybe it's two months do we really need that portaotty but if you look at how it's written in the codes and all of that it's so so then it comes time well when you're updating the checklist. Do you update it with what is the rule and what the code says or what we're enforcing you? So, so that's a that's just one example, but we did update that checklist and we just got it up in the last couple weeks and it's on the website and I think um what I can do is make sure that the team if they hear elevation or demo again whether it's a contractor because you hope that the contractors are more familiar but they we've heard the same complaints with maybe from a contractor. I think they're the most the ones that are even more well-versed in the rules, usually that'll be the one to call you out on something if it's not being enforced consistently. So, what we can do is if they say demo or elevation, we can just make sure that we're getting them that checklist ahead of time, you know, and then if they have question whether they need it or not,

right? Are there things too that um and I'm sure you communicate this with Francis our city manager um that as a commission that we need to help change like as far like you're saying in Portaotti is that something a land development code that needs to be modified like are like how we did the sad you know like is there are there things out there that are just frustrating not only the resident but the staff as well like why is this there like do we need this is this something that needs to come back to change you know to kind of in the situation that we are, you know, like you've seen so many. I absolutely think there are and and to be quite honest I think that we've been in such a reactionary mode kind of to just have to change it come back to you quickly that we haven't had the opportunity to like take that more kind of holistic look at everything from what we're looking at from how we determine the valuation of the scope of what you know all of these things that if it does require a code change I think our goal was to get through the the thick of this and then be able to kind of have a more comprehensive look because what happens s is you change this over here and then you don't even realize the the subsequent effect that it has on on everything else. So, I think that um yes, the short that's the short answer. Absolutely. And I know that we've been taking those and working with the city manager as those have came up like the raising of the mechanical equipment, the stairwells, you know, um changing the code. So, um we'll continue to do those oneoffs, you know, because we time is of the essence to get people back into their homes, but there we're definitely going to need to do a more comprehensive bigger picture kind of evaluation and probably changes Is that something we could see at one of our priority workshops as far as what they've, you know, with within a couple months? Something that they've seen that we should be taking a look at

like the fill. I know we brought up the fill, you know, like when is is that coming to us at priority? [snorts] I mean my suggestion would be everybody take notes of course in the proning department stage for the budget year because there's a cost associated with this comprehensive review of the land development code. It's not um and then Brandon's plate is very very very full. So I do want to prioritize for him on what what we are trying to um accomplish in this budget cycle. I know that's not fast, but I will promise you if they see something that's creating a pattern, you're seeing us try to bring them back despite not being able to do that comprehensive review yet.

Thank you. Sorry, two things. Uh, one, uh, are we tracking the demolitions of historic homes? Yes, we are. Perfect. Great. And then, uh, secondly, thank you, uh, to you and the city manager for a lot of things that were discussed this evening. you know, as as I sit down on our one-on- ones, you take that input and you're responsive. The checklist is critical because it eliminates the perception that we're moving the goal. So, now it's transparent. People see that, they know what's required, and they can come in better prepared. So, thank you. Thank you.

Good evening. Uh, for the record, Camden Mills, public services director. Um, so as Lauren mentioned, um, we're going to be moving away from our our regular updates on hurricane, uh, preparedness and recovery and transitioning into a capital improvement plan update. Um, so this evening, I want to give a a highle summary on our adopted um, five-year capital improvement plan. Um so as you can see here um through through 20 fiscal years 26 through 2030 we've identified about $213 million um worth of projects and and needs. Uh majority of these projects come out of our our capital improvement fund uh which is includes our our seaw walls, our shorelines and our roadways as well as our our wastewater fund and then our resiliency fund um which which tackles a lot of our water threats um from um high tides and and storm water and whatnot. Um so as as I mentioned, you know, the 26 budget at at $58 million is is budgeted and approved. Um those outer years for 27 through 30 are are just planned um but but currently unfunded. Um as you can see these these few first few years in 26 27 and 28 um the the overall annual total is higher um because we're we're really focused on recovery um from the storm and and getting us into a place that we need to be. And then in these outer years um that that fun annual funding amount um should decrease as as we're getting um back into a better place. Um moving forward um our team plans to give a more granular update on the fiscal year 26 status of our projects and our schedule moving forward. And that'll be our our regular kind of cadence moving forward is we'll give you guys those those regular updates on our active um CIP program. Um, and with that, I'll answer any questions.

Thank you,

Commissioner Robinson. Subrius, is that within the 2027 budget? Where am I looking? Where am I finding? Is it crossing over between two? It is crossing over between two. So, that that force main one is is crossing over. The um portion of the design is in 26. Um but the construction funding is is split between um 27 and 28 28 and uh end of life is 29 on that project. I mean on that that particular line correct

the the end of useful life um I believe extends a little bit beyond that but we want we don't want to wait till the end of that useful life. I thought the last time we last discussion was 2029 20 2029 2030 I believe and we can verify that um we did recently receive um completion of the preliminary engineering report for that forest main one. Um that report will be used to um solicit the um design build for for the next phase of that project and we'll be coming back with you um through the review and results of that report once our team finishes reviewing it. Okay, great. Thank you. Yep. Thank you, Camman. Thank you.

Do we have any general audience comments? Deb Sheckchner.

Good evening. Deborah Shakner, Bokea Isle Drive in St. Pete Beach, Florida. Um, I want to thank everybody for the lights because finally they don't look shopworn and awful. They have a shape. They never really had a shape before. So, kudos. Um, when I came home, I saw all these um toll signs out there. I started calling it a toll frenzy as I was seeing things on Next Door and Facebook. Unfortunately, people don't have the facts and that always bothers me that somebody doesn't go back and look at what was done. Uh people who are running for office should know what a discussion item is. I'm surprised they didn't. Then I started thinking it's almost like a Saturday night life skit. Oh honey, let's go over to St. Pete Beach. They'll spend $30 probably on dinner, some drinks. Oh, but that dawn dollar pole toll. Do we really want to spend that? The stores the same things. Do you think people are not going to come here because of a $1 toll? I happen to think they'll be happy to pay that toll. You're going to go to the beach. You want to go to Chick-fil-A first and bring the food over. Oh gosh, that's going to cost us another dollar per car. It's like a joke. It benefits the residents. Residents don't have to pay for that. The facts matter. This frenzy is manufactured by a group of people that I'm going to guess some of them with the music and late night music frenzy as well. We're not a city that works on frenzies and I've been here for a very very long time. It's not always been calm, cool, and collected, but it's

never like frenzies, missing the facts. And I do ask everybody out there, research on your own. Watch a commission meeting. Come see a commission meeting. Find out what's really happening. Because if you don't and you just listen to what the masses say, you're going to be misled and you're going to find yourself in a situation where you're going to say, "I wish I did look at that. I wish I didn't just join the crowd or join the group or follow." Um, it's almost nonsensical in a sense. And when you look at the costs we have not only for infrastructure and sewers, we have costs that we pay for more than 50% for tourists meaning trash pickup, beach cleanup, EMT, EMS, fire, police. We fund all of that as our small city. We don't get bed tax, very little sales tax. So yeah, we're in bad shape and yes, to keep up our standards, we need to do something. Thank you. [clears throat]

There are no more general audience comments. Thank you. Next, we move on to the consent agenda.

Commissioner Malinada, you had an item you wish to pull. Yes. So, uh, item G, the approval of the city sponsored annual City of St. Peach bonfire event h toasted at the 16th Avenue walk over in Pasigril on December 10th. Um, the Pacril community uh has decided that they would like to keep that as the tradition that they've been hosting for 30 years. Uh, and they have been working behind the scenes with Mandy Edwards. So thank you Mandy for helping that to uh to continue to be a tradition that they take great pride and honor in hosting. So at this time they do not want to put that burden on the city and uh other than the co-sponsorship that you've so graciously provided in the past. So nothing more to add on that. So

So just pull you're just pulling it out. Yeah, we're pulling out completely. So yeah, just wanted to make it clear that it will still continue to be uh held. It's just uh that they they do want to host that as they have done in the past. So, Commissioner, can I ask you a question because just to know, is it approved though already? Like cuz were they not pending insurance? They will provide the insurance. Uh they've been already on the co-sponsor because I know it's like next I feel like it's next week, but it's like a week and a half away, right? Okay. It's on to 10. So, [clears throat] thank you.

Happy to announce it. Commissioner Robinson, do you have an item? Yeah, I just wanted to have a discussion about the um insight global contract for is it I works and just had questions in regards to that because of um just concern is is I works really the program that we need at this point or my understanding is we've got this amount of the 69,000 for a total contractual obligation of 138 but the whole system needs to be um updated for a tune at a tune of I just want to know what we see coming in the future on this as well as is this the right product. Should we actually be looking at another product instead of you know uh this one

very good questions. Um and to to answer the answer your [snorts] initial question about you know is this uh the right product for us and are we spending money in the right places? Um, fundamentally we need to spend um some money now. We've been working on this over the summer. So, uh, community development director Laura just stood here and gave you all a lot of stats and data on, you know, the processes within her department and functions and and things that, um, you have high expectations of. Uh, there was questions about the integrity of some of that data and and how that's flowing through the system and complaints and calls that you're getting. Um, those are all things that we're actively working on. uh to improve the efficiencies within the current software because we um it's it's one of those things that it's not an easy one to rip and replace, right? We we can't um unravel it from our business model uh overnight. Uh so our intent and the strategy would be get it optimized as best we can focus on the major pain points um that are really critical to the residents and the community um and affect change there uh while we look at other solutions potentially uh on a go forward basis because I would anticipate based on what I've learned and in my knowledge of spending time in this software a lot this summer is it is probably likely not the platform long term. Um there's a lot of limitations that we're running up against no matter what, you know, direction we try, but we are making some inroads, but I suspect it will eventually get replaced. Um we're just in the middle of a few big ones right now. So hopefully after that, we'll be getting uh you know, stronger priority on looking at that.

So we're looking at this as more of a band-aid. Uh it's somewhat of a band-aid. Um you know, I think the the issues that you all are experiencing need to [snorts] be addressed and they need to be addressed now. And there are ways we can do that and way there are ways we are looking to do that and working on and that this will do that.

Uh yes, much of what we're working on right now should help optimize the software. We're looking to gain some operational efficiencies from automation. Um we're looking to gain a better intake process. There's a lot of concern and things falling through the cracks in terms of intake coming into the permitting department. there's a lot of channels that people can, you know, inroads for getting access to uh to help and support to get their permit over the the goal line. Um the the website is, you know, needs to continue to be refined and information shared appropriately, standardizing how we're all treating certain permits, right? So we have a standardized process, standardized workflow and systems that support that throughout the entire end to end uh solution. So, what are we looking at down the road, do you think, as far from monetary standpoint?

Um, as a replacement or as a a total rehab on it,

I unfortunately I don't know if I want to say right now. I don't think I have a good number to go on for you from an estimate. Um, I can tell you that what we spend right now for the software isn't really um, in comparison to our other core what I would consider our core platforms, which obviously this is one of our very core platforms. Um, it it's not terribly expensive in relation to others. Um, but you know, the reality is if we can find a similar product for similar dollars to get out of it what we need, then we're going to go that route because again, this one I think is regardless of how much we optimize, we're going to still run up against some limitation that we're not going to probably be able to overcome. What do you think the life expectancy is on this right now?

On what we're doing right now, um, probably another, you know, 24 months. um we're going to need, you know, a period of time to go through RFP and and all of that, right? The necessary uh procurement process to look at contenders, valid contenders for uh replacing this. Thank you. Yes, ma'am.

Okay. Is there a motion? I move to approve the consent agenda as amended. Second. City clerk, if you'll please do a roll call. Commissioner Robinson, yes. Commissioner Rzniki, yes. Commissioner Maldonado, yes. Vice Mayor Marriott, yes. Mayor Petilla, yes. Motion carries. Thank you.

Next, we have ordinances 5A. First reading of ordinance 2025-23,

an ordinance of the city of St. P Beach, Florida, providing amendment of article 3, division 4, sections 2-281 through sections 2-295 of the city of St. PP code of ordinances, providing purpose and intent, updating and clarifying the definitions, establishing the authority and duties of the procurement manager, clarifying the authority to award, updating the procurement methodology and emergency procurements, changing contract administration, prescribing procurement protests, establishing a vendor suspension and debarment process, providing for codification, conflicts, severability, correction, of Scrier's error construction publication and an effective date.

Good evening, city commission mayor. Um Devin Schmidt, finance director for the city of St. Pete Beach. Um I just wanted to take the opportunity to um provide some highlevel changes um to the procurement procurement ordinance um that is before you this evening for first reading. So, the initial um changes that are included in here was um a recommendation as we were looking at what the Florida Division of Emergency Management has um for their policies. So, we looked at several of their policies that were model um policies for our procurement. Um, we also were looking at how um, our policy could better align with our state laws a as well as keep us in compliance during an emergency situation with any of the federal dollars that we would receive after the fact. Um, so those are some opportunities that we um included as as in part of this um, update for our policy. In addition, um the intent here that you'll see is that there were some changes to the thresholds and how um our micro purchase threshold, our simplified acquisition threshold, and our formal bid threshold are all obtained and procured. Um, first and foremost, moving from the 2500 up to the 5,000 um will give the opportunity for departments to um still review um purchases under through that dollar threshold, but not have to be in a position where we're um looking to uh do the simplified acquisition where it's looking for three quotes for each one of those purchases. This will also give the opportunity um for us to continue to um provide public value and delivery while maintaining our competitive solicitations. Um and we'll continue that procurement oversight. Um the other change with that is the formal bid threshold will increase from 25,000 to 50,000. Really allowing our procurement team, our department directors, especially after you just saw

Camden's um full 5-year capital list to focus on more of those larger um project initiatives for the city. So I just wanted to take an opportunity to explain some of the higher level changes um and we're uh looking forward to rolling this out um should commission approve it. questions, comments. Thank you, Devin.

Any discussion? I I have just one question, but to to the city attorney, is there a reason why we're just adding um Senate Bill 180? Is is there any and because hearing Devin say, you know, like to make sure we stay with uh state regulations, is that the only one that's being um mentioned? Senate Bill 180. Yeah. What page are you on? I can't find it right now. I know I had made a note about it. I can I can look into it for second reading. Yeah. Okay. Just to make sure there's not another one that we should be Yep. We'll look at addressing. Okay.

Is there a motion? I'm I motion to approve um the first reading of ordinance 2025-23. Second. City clerk, if you please do a roll call. Commissioner Risniki. Yes. Commissioner Maldonado, yes. Vice Mayor Marriott, yes. Commissioner Robinson, yes. And Mayor Patulla, yes. The motion carries. Thank you. Next, we have item 5A, sorry, 5B, first reading of ordinance 2025-22,

an ordinance of the city of St. Pete Beach, Florida, creating land development code section 6.26, 26 certified recovery residences establishing procedures for the review and approval of certified recovery residences and a process for requesting reasonable accommodations from local land use regulations as mandated by new Florida statutes providing for severability codification conflicts and an effective date.

Right. Good evening Brennanberry planner. So, this is the last of the year or the last legislative sessions uh preemptive local ordinances as they pertain to zoning. Uh this is a requirement that the city must adopt by January 1st and that applies to every municipality statewide. Um what this does is effectively create a onus to create a reasonable accommodation standard for certified recovery residencies. These are similar to community residential homes. That law has been in the statute for a couple of decades at this point. We have a number here in our city. We also have at least one residence that exceeds the standards for a community residential home. It's certified by the joint uh joint commission. I don't know if they would fall under this forthcoming ordinance, but this would apply to any expanded or newly established certified recovery residents moving forward. As you can see in the definitions in the ordinance, there are four different levels of certified recovery residents. They go from effectively independent living uh democratically run down to facilities that um require extensive treatment. Um they usually fall under the sober living type of of residence. There are no clinical services offered in these residences just like you have with community residential homes. They are for habitation. There might be treatment services but there are no clinical services in the residence. Um this is meeting the state statute as we understand it. I did want to clarify that this is more pertaining to dimensional waiverss um what would normally go forward for a variance or for a zoning impact uh waiver instead of an actual use waiver or an intensity or density waiver. So, examples we thought of talking with the city attorney would be allowing for an administrative waiver for stairs or a ramp in a setback um for one of these facilities to be

established. Allowing for a reduction in parking when it's out of character with what the needs of the use will be. This is not any kind of administrative waiver to allow these uses where they would not otherwise be authorized. The city has a use called a residential equivalent use. They're allowed by conditional use permits in certain zoning districts. They're allowed by right in certain multifamily zoning districts. These would be facilities that would still go through the normal process, but once they're established that they can be legally established without a conditional use permit. They may be able to ask for an impact or a dimensional variance instead of a use or an intensity variance from staff. That is something that we would need the ability to accommodate. It's not a direct approval. we can still consider the the merit of the request that's being made, but we need to have a process in place to be able to process them. So, along with this ordinance, we will also be coming up with an application process that'll be available on our website. It'll meet the statutory deadlines and um that's effectively a summary of the ordinance. Happy to take questions. As I said, this does need to be adopted by January 1st to meet the statutory deadlines. So, if there are items in this ordinance you would like to see clarified, anything added in uh that we have the legal ability to do so, we can certainly consider them between now and next uh reading, which will be next Tuesday.

Any questions? Commissioner Miki. Oh, I'm sorry. It was still green from before. Questions, comments?

I do have one audience comment. Deb Shner. Uh, good evening Isle Drive, St. P Beach. I wanted to be clear that this is only for residential, but I do have a concern that we're going to do some spot zoning when he mentioned zoning changes. So I don't know where you feel on that but you know spot zoning is pretty much illegal. So I am hoping that that does not include spot zoning and it will not be given to commercial properties as well. Thank you.

And again Brandon um this meets the minimum of the statutory requirements correct? Yes, it was drafted to be at the minimum. Okay. So, it doesn't exceed there's no nothing in here that exceeds any of the requirements. Not to my knowledge, city attorney. No, they pretty much tell you what you have to do and this one choice. Okay. Just wanted to make sure. Thank you. It's then it doesn't change zoning and uh you it still has to meet all zoning requirements as they currently exist in our zoning code. Thank you. Is there a motion?

I move to approve the first reading of ordinance 2025-22.

Second. City clerk, if you'll please roll call. Commissioner Maldonado. Yes. Vice Mayor Marriott? Yes. Commissioner Robinson? Yes. Commissioner Rzniki? Yes. Mayor Patulla? Yes. The motion carries.

Thank you. Next, we have item 5C, first reading of ordinance 2025-21, an ordinance of the city of St. Pete Beach amending the St. Beat Beach Land Development Code sections 310, 613, 614, and 622 to increase front yard stair encroachments for specified residences, allowing retention of nonconforming balcony footprints and specified non-conforming residential accessory structures following substantial improvement to the primary residence. clarifying restrictions on non-conforming uses and amend restrictions on elevated and substantially improved non-conforming structures. Modify residential storage building standards. Modify residential equipment setback standards and provide a front setback line alternative for residential culac and curve street lots. Provide for severability cotification and scriveners errors and providing for an effective date. Thank you. So that this is the second first reading of this ordinance. Uh we made some title changes, so we did decide to readvertised to keep it um in line with our legal requirements. I did uh make an attempt at changing the portions of the ordinance that I received feedback from at the preceding meeting. I'll just go through them briefly. In section 3.10, 10. There was an amendment made that was hopefully uh provided a little more clarity to the limitations on structural rebuilds and elevations when they are in a required setback. Um I just wanted to clarify that the habitable floor of the structure that's being reconstructed or elevated is allowed to remain in that setback. There is no limit to increases in floor height. If they decide to keep increase the ceiling height a couple of feet when they perform the elevation or

the reconstruction, they are eligible to do that. any additional stories other than those that are elevated or reconstructed need to meet the current setback. So if they have a single family residence, one story they elevate, they can elevate in place. If they decide to add another level, they would meet the setbacks on that additional level. Uh moving on to sub item F. Uh that's just clarity for the the balconies. We received some feedback at the preceding meeting about that. That is when a balcony exists. If it is elevated with the home, they can add a balcony beneath it on the new walkout level. It would be in the same footprint as the balcony that is being elevated, even if that isn't a required setback. We just provided that language to clarify that as well. There was some confusion and just a lack of clarity in the ordinance over what a non-conforming use structure improvement standard would be. That is a very broad term that's been in our ordinance for several years. I added the term substantially in front of that. They could still make improvements to the structure. They can upgrade the fixtures inside the residence. That would be an improvement, but it wouldn't necessarily fall under substantial improvement. It's a substantial improvement of the residents that were concerned relative to the extinguishing of of non-conforming uses. So, I added substantial to address that. Uh we were talking about elevating structures in place. Those that are eligible to be elevated with a non-conforming number of units or when one rebuilds and they decide to rebuild the structure. Um they're limited in square footage, but they're also to able to maintain the number of units that they had on the property. That's common in in Pass Grill and a few other areas in our our jurisdiction. Uh we updated that to meet current flood plane requirements. looking at the distance between existing established grade and the required base flood elevation plus freeboard. Currently, it limits them to the height of base flood elevation. That was the standard in time in in place at

the time and they would lose a foot off the the ceiling height of their home. Um we amended the rebuilding standards to adhere to the current state tolling provisions for development. Um any development approval that is in place within one year of a state of emergency declaration is told for the length of the state of emergency plus 2 years and they're allowed to add up to two years for an additional state of emergency that's declared within that extended period of time. So some of the large developments that have been approved by the commission over the last few years have been extended for several years because of subsequent states of emergency. This just brings that in line with what larger developments are capable of undertaking. Currently, the standard limits them to make a decision within one year. This tolls this out to one year or 60 days following the um uh

expiration of a state of emergency. So that just brings it more in line with the larger developments for the single family and and multifamily re redevelopment. We provided some clarifying language for accessory structure rebuilds and we also clarified the language regarding the ability to finish out the garage when a home is elevated. That not counting against the 10% limitation on rebuild of living space. Um they are able to both finish the garage and add on 10% living space before it kicks in the requirement to comply with the accessory structure ordinance. So, with that being said, um we have advertised for this item to be brought back next week for final rating. The state had a few comments on proceeding ordinance language that they've asked us to update um because we've made updates to language that they asked us to update. I am hoping to just uh make sure that this aligns with their requirements by next week. If not, we might push the second reading off until January. Hoping to not do that, but we're we're in correspondence with them. So happy to take feedback. Um if not, we ask for approval on first reading.

Thank you. Questions, comments. Are there any audience comments? Yes, Deb Sheer. Okay. Is there a motion? I'll move to approve first reading of ordinance 2025-21. I'll second. City clerk, please do a roll call. Vice Mayor Marriott? Yes. Commissioner Robinson? Yes. Commissioner Rzniki? Yes. Commissioner Maldonado? Yes. Mayor Pata? Yes. The motion carries.

Next we have item 5D. First reading, ordinance 2025-25. An ordinance of the city of St. Pete Beach, Florida, providing for amendments to land development code 3.14 appeals providing for codification, conflict, severability, correction of scriveners errors, construction, publication, and an effective date. And this is the Oh, go ahead, Brandon. Sorry. Uh this is just the amendment that was discussed at I believe the last city commission meeting to have the city commission as the de facto um hearing entity for appeals. We did add in an option for delegation to a special magistrate. That's the current standard that we have in our code. I think I believe it's more general. Um a licensed attorney this would be to the special magistrate. That would not be automatic. Uh that would come to the city commission. If you choose to delegate to the special magistrate, you would have that option. So that's the only change we've made from the discussion that occurred at the preceding meeting.

Thank you. Commissioner is Nikki. Just a quick question. Brandon, so in that in that um adjustment that you just talked about, so it'll it'll come to commission and then we decide whether to send it to

Yeah. that you would normally hear it. Um, sometimes there might be certain kind of case where you say, "Well, we don't really want to get into it. That's beyond our level of expertise. Let's have a person go do it." Maybe something that would require you to go examine a building that was constructed to see if it was um done in correct um in compliance with the land development code. Um it might be impractical for all of you to go out there and look at it. the special magistrate can do a site visit under sunshine law and go see things. So there certain circumstances could arise where we at staff level thought, well maybe we should keep it there. Then we won't have to change the code in the future. It'll be there as an option should you decide to use it.

Okay. We did have a case that was a little bit different um in another city where it involved a building code issue and an appeal and foyer was set up. The whole city council would have to go out and review the building official determination on a building and it was highly impractical. So we w up changing their code to to allow a different process. Okay. Thank you. [clears throat] Any audience comments? There are no audience comments on this item. Thank you. Is there a motion? Make the motion to approve first reading of ordinance 2025-25. Second.

City clerk, if you please do a roll call. Commissioner Robinson, yes. Commissioner Rizniki, yes. Commissioner Maldonado, yes. Vice Mayor Marriott, yes. Mayor Patula, yes. Motion carries. Thank you. Next, we have item 5e. First reading of ordinance 2025-24,

an ordinance of the city of St. Pete Beach, Florida, providing for amendments to the code of ordinances, chapter 131, wireless communication towers and antennas, and chapter 132, communication facilities in the public or city rights of way. Renaming chapter 132 to communication facilities in the city rights of way providing for codification conflict severability correction of scriveners errors construction publication and an effective date and this is an ordinance Brandon's here for some technical questions but something that the city attorney's office prepared in conjunction with staff and community input um and this addresses in chapter 131 what I would call uh commonly the big towers, the big cell phone towers, and then in chapter 132, the city rightway, the what I would call the 5G towers, but they're small wireless facilities um in two separate places. And um this updates both chapters of the code, uh puts in some criteria. We've been very careful not to uh stray into areas that are preempted by federal or state law and we have consulted with the attorneys that actually brought the case uh with Children's Health Network versus FCC um and they were very helpful and had some expertise uh that they were willing to share with us to help us prepare this ordinance.

Thank you. I also for the record since I'm manager money um there are some administrative impacts for this ordinance is we will not have staff expertise on um board to review these permits. They're too expansive and technical. So um my plan would be and and the way these the way that it has occurred in the past here is they come in batches. It's it's not like we get one a month. So um in the last 5 years we've for example we've received one batch of about 20 applications another batch for 30. So it's average 10 but there's not a steady stream of work. So when we get these batches um we would send them off to a contractor. We are trying to get quotes on how much that I'm Did were you able to secure that?

Um they haven't responded back. we'd have to go for a request for uh qualifications or request for proposals to get someone lined up. But I think it's a wise move to have someone um selected and then on call should we get um large tower or a batch of small towers that can help Brandon review some of the technical aspects of the u applications and we would set those contracts up if this were approved. We would set those up similar to the way we're proactively setting up for emergencies and then the contract would be ready to execute and and um

these wouldn't be planners per se. They would be technical wireless communication experts so they really know the technology. [clears throat] They'd work with our planning team. Yeah. Um thank you for bringing that up. I know we discussed that previously. Um there might also be the possibility that the county has subject matter experts that we can tap into possibly uh write their contract or seek their expertise to reduce the cost of if any. Thank you Commissioner Robinson. Is there a fee for the application for such Brandon? And can that fee cost be covered? I mean can it cover the cost of outside?

We have we have two things to keep in mind. One is the large towers and one is the small wireless facilities.

So with the small facilities, I believe we don't we don't charge a fee. We have a few options through state law and I believe we currently have a slightly higher communications tax. It's not a lot of money. It's it's a fairly small amount of money that we receive each year. I believe that's the mechanism that we went with. The small wireless facilities, um there's a lot less to review in chapter 132, which is the chapter that applies to them. So I would expect those reviews to be much less expensive. Chapter 131 is the one that pertains to guide towers, monopoles, the very large facilities you see elsewhere in the county. Um those I believe we can currently charge pass through. There's a rule making session underway that would limit those fees, but that's not currently um in place. We would be able to charge some pass through for those.

Okay. Thank you. Commissioner is Nikki.

Um just a couple of questions on the ordinance. Um on page 597 which is the title basically of chapter 132 communication facilities and then the striketh through of of public and then addition of city. My question is um when for and this is illegal are if it's a state road is it considered a city rightaway or a state rightaway? um that like the FDOT, Gulf Boulevard, FDOT reviews applications in Gulf Boulevard. We we don't review those. We review other city rightways. Brandon, you can address how that's been handled.

That's correct. Occasionally the FDOT will ask for input on color of poles or equipment, but those reviews do not go to us. And that applies to any kind of road work on Gulf Boulevard. they will give us advanced notice for significant work but uh they they in house review all those permits I guess but you know because we've had it for some time as public right so it used to say public rightway so why to me that's a public rightway whether it's a state or a city it's public so I I felt like we kind who decided that the state is this something that is a um a statute statewide that if it's a state road the municipalities have no say.

Um, it's similar to that. It's kind of like the flip side of the coin. The state statute they adopted for the small wireless, the 5G preeemption act, um, says that we're preempted on our city right away. We have to give them our city right away for free and they have a number of preeemptions on there and that applies on our city right away. So, this is written for for that. Um, FDOT has their own set of rules and their own preeemptions. their own process that they go through. But we can't control the rightway that FDOT owns. We can only and we're only required to give the free right away in our own state of right away.

Okay, I get that. It's just that I don't understand the writing of it. Like why for so many years did we have public right away? Um and who's monitoring what what FDOT is doing? Because I'm going to give you an example of you know like a small mini tower, right? That was in the Donsesar neighborhood. We got it moved, but Yeah. Well, they moved it to Gulf Boulevard and it's a and it's a small cell tower and it's like 10 ft away from a house. Mhm. And so there's, you know, is there rules in in the state level when it's close to a residential house that close, you know, and are we missing it? Like how do we know?

Let me um address the first question first. How did it get to be public? Um the history of the ordinance is was from 2018 ordinance 18-03 and that was adopted in June 27th 2018 and then there was an ordinance 2021-09 that was adopted on October 8th 2021 and at that time we put in public um I think as a matter of practice once applications were coming in uh we found oh there's some of these that are in the FDOT and they have to go to FDOT um So I think it makes more sense and it's is less misleading to say city of rights of way here in conjunction with the state statute that says we have to use we have to let them use our city right of way.

Um so FDOT has their own set of rules. They can adopt rules like this if they would like to. Um do we know if they have those rules for like close to residential homes at a state level? I mean that close. I think they're preempted as well. So there's no setback, nothing. They can be as close as they want.

Correct. And I don't know how hard FDOT negotiates. You know, we want to be tough negotiators. That's why we're beefing up our ordinance, but you'd have to talk to FDOT to see about how strong they want to get with their cell phone or cell cell tower regulations. FDOT goes through state agency rule making. It's a different type of process. It's similar to adopting an ordinance. Um but they go through their own rule making. One of one of the issues is that the telecommunications industry lobbyists are very powerful in Tallahassee, not only in the legislature but at the agency levels. And unfortunately we can't reach into the FDOT right away under chapter 132.

Okay. And then on page um uh 608 section 132-5 it mentions October 1st 2022 is that needed anymore? I mean that's that's passed again that's kind of a remnant from uh ordinance 20219 that was adopted in October of 2021

and that gave the um providers one year to register. So, if they already had facilities that were in place but had hadn't registered with the new registration requirements, it gave them one year to register. So, I think it may be good to leave it in there just in case we find a facility that never registered. We can say, "Hey, you had a deadline. It's passed. You've missed it." Um, you know, it's been four years. So, I would I would And how do we know if they registered in there? How do we know? Do they register with the city? Yes. Yes. So, we just don't have a list to know whether We have a list. Okay. But it's if you go out there and you find one, oh, we never saw this one or something. I can't imagine that happening, but Okay.

As far as we know, everyone out there is now registered. I won't we adopted it on October 8th, 2021. There may not have been anyone registered. So, we gave them one year to come in and get registered. Okay. Seemed like a reasonable amount of time. And and one more question. Um on page 610, what does 125% of a facility height by definition? What is the facility and what is 125%.

So that would be the in the case of a small wireless facility. You've seen them on, you know, on our state and local roads. They're the poll with the equipment box on the side and the antenna on the top. It would be the height of that facility. 125% of whatever that height is in inclusive of all its features needs to be the set back from an existing building or a permitted building. That's a it's just a fall radius standard. If it's 100 ft tall, it would need to be set 125 ft away from a from an existing building. Again, that's a fall fall zone or fall rate. So, if the tower falls over, you have an extra 25% of cushion before it hits something.

Okay. I was just looking because of the in that page or so or that section mentioned the coastal construction line like how close it is to to that. Right. There were some additional standards added in for reasonable setbacks from protected areas before an environmental impact assessment or statement would need to be made. And that's the standard we'd selected in line with a a building setback. So Okay. So it's just the fall of that facility. Correct. Yes. Okay. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. Uh going back to the uh city manager's comments, I just wanted uh to highlight and also be more transparent in this that under section 131-14 review fees and cost on page 597 of the packet. It says to the extent allowable by state and federal law that the applicant shall pay for any development review costs. This includes both in-house as well as the consultant cost. So, we capture that pretty clearly in there and um I think that we just have to work within what's permissible as you were saying earlier to make sure that that's upfront and recognized by staff. Thank you.

And that's why we have that to the extent allowed by federal or state law. If those laws change, yeah, this would automatically change. It wouldn't need an amendment. Of course, we always have to comply with federal and state laws. Commissioner Marriott.

Uh, thank you. I just have a question for the city attorney on this ordinance. Um, are are we putting ourselves at any risk if any of the telecom companies challenge this ordinance or or claim that it violates some of those state statutes that we think that we're in compliance with? Um, what is what is our exposure? I imagine we would first get a notice um from whoever is complaining and we would be able to work with them on addressing if there's a concern. Um there's a possibility we could get litigation which we would have to decide whether to defend or repeal. Um there's also a possibility of inviting a legislative response where um the telecommunications lobbyists could run to the legislature and ask for even stronger preeemptions. Um we kind of have to cross those bridges when we come to them, but those are real possibilities.

And do we lose any part of our existing ordinance if this one gets challenged? In other words, if we pass this ordinance and it gets challenged, then do we have no ordinance at all? Now, that's why we didn't repeal and replace. Okay? Uh we did the underline and strike through. Um so if um this ordinance gets stricken or we repeal just this amendment that we're doing this year, we go back to the language that's here that's not underlined. Okay. Thank you. Are there any audience comments?

Yes, Deb Shner. Deborah Shaknaboka Drive in St. Pete Beach. So if it's a city rightaway or a rightaway FDOT, there was a woman here when this all started who had those huge poles put in front of her house blocking her view. And clearly some people think these um towers are health hazards. But beyond that, who wants to have a bet in front of their house? I cannot even imagine how much her house is worth less now. And she was very, very upset. How can we stop them from putting these things in front of somebody's house? It just seems so wrong. And does that mean this woman cannot have this taken down and she has to just suck it up and lose 50, 60, $100,000? Because even with those huge um lines that the lighting companies put up, those houses in those areas are worth so much less than surrounding areas. And nobody seems to be thinking about that. And I feel for that woman who has this in front of her house and she lost her view and she has to deal with that. Thank you. [clears throat] Kelly Lee McFreder. [snorts] Hi there. Good evening. Kelly Lee McFreder, 3612 East Maritana Drive, St. Pete Beach. And you might have been talking about me. I did have the big cell phone tower. Huge 5G in front of my house. Um, worked with Linda Cheney and

uh, Florida Realtors to get that removed. Big deal. Thank you all for addressing this today. I know we have asked so much to have this on the agenda for today. Thank you for the support for that. That's what we do want to say. Uh, Lauren, I all of our families, we certainly appreciate all of my neighbors. Um, all the petitions, all the things that we have signed, that we've been speaking, and that we have been doing. There's so much support. As this wonderful woman was saying, no one wants this in front of their house. And the one on 36 in golf is probably one of the most scariest I've ever seen. And I do hope we can continue to wrap our arms around this. Take this in. I'm going to use the word be brave. Be the hero for Florida. Be the hero for the beaches. And say, you know what, Telecom, we want to own our beaches. We want to own our city. We want to own our homes because we're going to lose our our insurance because of the aggregate. They did not want to separate how they were going to separate between if the tower did fall because it was obviously 100 feet tall, 24 feet, who was going to pay. Was it going to be Duke? Was it going to be um AT&T? Home homeowners was out. They were they said we we are done with you. We're out. So, there was a whole lot. And of course, we know the seaw wall, the docks, everything else. We are in a historic neighborhood in my neighborhood. Historic Dons is our neighborhood. So, we do have some protection rights from the state. And I do feel like we have a lot of legs to stand on and I very much encourage you to keep what you're doing. Thank you. I appreciate this. Has been a battle for the beaches and I'm in it. I'm in it. Thank you.

Thank you. There are no further audience comments.

Any further discussion? [clears throat] Is there a motion? Yes. I motion to approve the first reading of ordinance 2025-24. I second. City clerk, if you'll please call a role. Commissioner Rzniki, yes. Commissioner Maldonado, yes. Vice Mayor Marriott, yes. Commissioner Robinson, yes. Mayor Petrilla, yes. The motion carries. Next, we have items for discussion. Commissioner Resniki, you're up first.

Thank you, Mayor. Um, I wanted to bring up I think it might have been like a year and a half ago. I don't even remember when when I first asked to have this item on resiliency uh for discussion. Um, but with with so much that has happened since then, including the hurricanes, um, I still would like to discuss having um, and I don't know what to call it, and this this could be a a legal that maybe, you know, our city attorney could help with. Um, for residents, it's it's an opportunity for residents in our city to participate in the future of our city. um to have a group of people um who live within their neighborhoods um speak about what's going on in their neighborhoods, whether it's flooding, infrastructure issues, um seaw walls that need repair, changes in land development codes, um economic development, whether um you know uh help with the finance, you know, um I know I spoke to uh Devon and and I know that the staff are working on finding resource other resources uh for for revenue um whether a sales tax or or whatever it may be. Um but we have a lot of residents who have um a lot of pretty good ideas. Okay. And and they actually live in these neighborhoods. Um I'll give them an example of of the Donsar subdivision who you know after that we of course decided to have our own resiliency uh group. Um and they've been working pretty hard um with the city um I know uh our city manager and and all the staff who are part participating Camden and and everyone else I mean we meet monthly sometimes twice a week just to talk about resiliency for the neighborhood improving storm water flooding um underground utilities

looking for money um you know we've we've got grants that we've written too you know that are in the works um and even discussions about um obtaining bonds uh to get repairs done in the neighborhood. And and I don't see why none of the other neighborhoods could or why as a city we couldn't give our residents that opportunity um to talk about what's happening in their neighborhoods. You know, I don't know, you know, what happens in the fronts of any of your homes. I don't live in your fronts of your home, but I know I can speak for what happens on my street, right? Because I see it every day. and and um you know staff even though I know they're working hard they don't live in our streets right they don't know what happens in in um 24 hours of rain right and and we see it you know whether we can get out of our house or not like today it was raining I remember I don't know a year ago or two that I coming to a a commission meeting I had to make sure I parked my car on the bridge the bayway so that I could make a meeting you know and I debated it today because it rained you know, and I did have water in the street. Luckily, the tides were in my favor to get out of my house. Um, but I only know that, right? None of you know what I have to plan to get out. And and I feel the same for a lot of other neighborhoods. Um, representing, you know, for the district, Bel Vista is very different from the Dawn. Leo is very different from the Dawn. You know, all all our different residential areas are very different. Even within the Dawn, El Centro is very different from Maritana. I mean, I'm sure you all, I would think, see the similar things that need repair that that I would like for us to have, and I don't know if you want to call it an advisory um I don't want to say board, you know, it's not like we need a board, but a group that would have a beginning and an end. You know, we've had strategic groups come together before when we did strategic planning for the city, and it

had a beginning and an end. you know, we could have a resiliency group for the city that has a beginning and the end where where the residents themselves are coming up with good ideas. I mean, there's so many that call me and tell me, hey, you know, why not try this or do that, you know, and they know they're the ones living there, you know. So, um, you know, maybe have it like a uh we develop a resilient St. Pete Beach plan, you know, for the whole city that's composed of the whole city versus, you know, um not talking about it and somehow working with, you know, um city staff, you know, and I hate to create more meetings. I know it's a lot of work for for the city to be meeting just with the Dawn. Um but it's almost like it can be combined somehow. Um because they have some pretty good ideas and they're working really hard, but I think everyone deserves the same thing. So, I just wanted to put that out again because we we talked about it and we kind of punted it away and said no, put it to the planning board, but I don't see them the same. You know, I think this is very specific of what's happening in in in our city with all the hurricanes with shortage of of money um that maybe we could have a a good solid group of people, which we know there's volunteers out there. we just gave, you know, a proclamation for volunteers and kind of closed the door on that, but I know they want to be doing other things. There's so much to do for the city and and I'm sure there's a lot of people who are willing to do that. Thank you,

Commissioner Rniki. I think that I think you that you have a a a good idea there and I and particularly on bringing the rest of the city into these conversations about resiliency instead of just, you know, specific neighborhoods. I I um you know I I think my district is is uh is famous for feeling like they're the redheaded stepchild of the beach, right? And so um so I commonly hear people going, "Oh, you know, why is the dawn getting all the money?" I'm like, "Well, because their houses are flooding more than ours." So, [laughter] you know, um but but I I I wonder if um you know, to to to begin with um because I see our city manager sitting over there going, "Oh my gosh, please don't give me another project to do right now. [laughter] And and so if if a if a starting point to something like this could even be um you know something that's not explicitly city sponsored to begin with, but you know maybe the maybe the library could start to host a series of resiliency forums where we can get a group of people together from the different neighborhoods and start the conversation and then from that group maybe coales into a into you know the most productive fashion to be able to move forward to to then have you know a group that bring their recommendations to the city or or then have some meetings with city staff down the road to talk about what's practical and and you know have some you know potentially I mean I think there's great potential in having some volunteers being involved in uh you know locating and and trying to help the city get grant money for for those kinds of projects and and that's certainly something that we need. So, um, you know, I I think I I think it would be a great uh a great endeavor to to embark on. Um but but may maybe maybe from the get-go, you know, maybe all of us can help it become a a kind of a grassroots community effort to begin with that that then can then link up and be a more

official part of, you know, city city planning a little bit down the road when the city staff has a little bit of capacity and and and we have more of a idea about what exactly that group can do. just make a quick comment and there are quite a few projects going on right now that intertwine with each other. We have fee studies. We have a CRA I'm a community redevelopment area being studied right now. We have um a revenue team internally that's working on how those come together. And we also have a finance committee that at your direction we engaged heavily with this last year and we were planning to track with them through the revenue discussion. And so I I guess I would ask maybe if I could go back with staff and we could map out all of these activities that are going to be going on and what's the community outreach strategy and then come back here and say ask you did we miss something because if you just create a resiliency team we are and I might use the wrong term here and Camden's I think gone but we're about to go into a watershed mass plan study again that's required every 5 years and that's where they look at the entire city and the resiliency of storm water drainage how are we managing all the water runoff sewer flows that could be a space where they go through that but that doesn't solve the problems

so I'm trying to connect the dots for you all to see how do we progress and start to connect you know resiliency with the the the amount of money we need to which neighborhood and we are a little challenged here because we have very neighborhood specific challenges. So I just am trying to figure out how to still I think that's why even you we you know the body hasn't figured out how to do this yet because it's very unique here with the exception of our wastewater. Yeah. So, if you could just give me a minute to think a little bit about it because we do need to map how we're we're going to be doing quite a bit of community outreach and I want to figure out how it starts to

and you and you brought a good a good example when you said the the water um the master water plan. Okay. Um when I first moved, you know, to the Donsesar, our neighborhood was even written in that plan. Okay. because we don't have a basin. There was no water basin. So, it was not in the plan. And not until we were trying to look for money to help with the neighborhood did we realize that we couldn't even tap into the money that and I hate to say Pastor Grill, but that's that's how I found out Pastor Grill Way got addressed with millions of dollars for flooding because they had a basin and and we didn't. So, we were excluded from from that funding and and that repair, you know, that that they had done through Pasigrow Way just because of that little detail and and only because the community happened to read it, you know, and in our neighborhood because we got really active in looking into how we're going to get more money did we find out. I could guarantee it's happening somewhere else. Not Not every neighborhood in our city has a water basin. You just run off water through the street. So, you you won't even have one. So again, because the residents brought it up, you know, it it was just missed and and so I do appreciate that you're saying, you know, that the staff will be working on how to get that community outreach. Um because we know, right, we know, we live there. We see what's happening, what's missing. And um anyways,

so I would just say that um the commissioners are the bellyb. you talk about the different parts of the body and try and figure this out that I get an abundance of input and I can guarantee you that the city manager knows my needs [clears throat] because we have that open uh and routine conversation and there certainly is a lot of uniqueness as you've all said you know whether you're down in district one and feeling neglected it could be a good thing because she knew the first night that we were having flooding on Vina Delmare right and was able to turn and react to that and that led to a series of other things that we discovered and uh we were able to work with staff and address but we have to have that input and and I'm talking to the public basically to talk to your commissioners keep them informed because we can't be everywhere every time despite our best efforts and we're missing things right so and and we do have cross flow and overflow and a lot of things so I do hear sometimes about some of the other districts and I feed that to the city manager and have complete faith that you know she as she's mapping these things out is tasking it to the staff but in terms of trying to establish another separate working group I think that it probably uh would not be as smooth and as easy as you envision that we're going to run into a lack of uh people wanting to volunteer. Everybody's great at giving you ideas, but when it comes time to putting boots on the ground and getting out there and committing to it, you're you're going to find that it's hard to feel that. So, I I just say that to uh to be open since we can't talk individually about these things that I think that you will find um that you're not going to be able to feel that as easily as you think. [clears throat] Thank you.

I would also say that if you feel passionate about it, maybe it's something you take on. I know you feel passionate. Maybe that's something that you can take on. And I know uh Commissioner Mayor, you felt passionate about the business economic development. Maybe that's some small business. Maybe that's something you can take on and head up and and that way you know it it starts the ball rolling. Um just an idea on that. Um

I appreciate that. Um because I and I did like um Commissioner [snorts] Marriott's idea to like maybe be a library and of course I'll wait for the input from our city manager but you know again we can't talk outside of this. I don't want to overstep you know like someone from your neighborhood or something saying hey we have the same things going on you know like you know if if I did that then I'd be coming obviously to let you all know because it's hard right because we can't you know talk outside of here. Okay, Commissioner Robinson, you had a couple of items.

I had a few items. one is for discussion was the um the uh FEMA 2025 letter um and um getting a little bit more info on that. Um, I was hoping to get and see how everybody felt about this was, um, getting Mike Twitty in here to talk to everybody about that 2025 letter because my understanding is if you haven't done any work yet, and I could be wrong, but this is my understanding on it. I'd prefer to hear it out of Mike's mouth is that if you haven't done any work on your home from the 2024 storm and there is a storm in 2026 that you will be subject to the 2025 letter which is half of what you had before. So, I'd like that to be very clearly stated to our community that because I know that there's a lot of homes things haven't been done on and for various reasons. People waiting on determining what they're going to do, how they want to do it financially, whatever. Um, or if they're going to sell. But it's a huge issue for anybody who hasn't done any work. And I just think it it it needs to be out there and and uh stated clearly um and concisely to the general public and to our residents. So, how does everybody feel if I was to try to get work with the city manager to invite him to speak?

Yeah, I think that'd be a great idea. Of course.

Okay. Um the other thing is I wanted to bring to the attention that I had brought this up before and I've talked to um uh Francis about this as well. while I was talked to Ralph about this in in regards to our substantial improvement and substantial damage determinations section 98-122.4 for um within that there's a couple things a little bit more of a of um uh um when you get to paragraph B which isn't paragraph B in this needs to be uh re uh number numbered um so under paragraph B there's a couple items underneath it there's three of them that talk specifically about uh the cost to perform the improvements Item two is a bit misleading. It talks about um well, it isn't misleading. It actually goes against what we've been doing. It talks about the first item talks about a submission of a detailed cost estimate by a licensed contractor provided such estimate includes all work required to complete the work described in the permit application. So that specifically goes into a licensed contractor. Number two says submission of a currently says submission of a summation of the prevailing market costs for all materials and labor including all expenses normally charged or incurred if the work were performed by a contractor. Then it says IG construction supervision and management. Says insurance and it says overhead and profit demolition etc. Well, we got rid of insurance and we got rid of overhead and profit and that was under the homeowners. That was something I fought for and we got that taken out. So, that needs to be clarified in that. And I believe that can be just

an administrative item. So, I just wanted everybody to be aware of that. The other item I wanted to discuss was um um showing up in some of district one, I think in district 2 a lot is a bit of Airbnbs. Some of the homes are being turned into Airbnbs and there's big concerns with the residents. I think you might agree. Um and us to seriously think of how we're going to handle that. Other communities across the United States are doing things. I I don't know. Do we currently do a um a business [clears throat] license for all all rentals in the city?

Assistant city manager or are you coming up? Okay. Laura Canary, community development director. So, as of now for single family residential and single units condos, we do not multiple units or multiple units in a in one building. We do. So, it's that unit um that's factored in the unit count. It might be something that we would look into or possibly look into what other cities are doing because the at least it's trackable. We know where they are. We we know what's going on um and that they're aware of what the rent what the rental stipulations are in the city.

Yes. And um that is something that we brought up during the fee study. one of the items that we've brought up with the consultants that we're working with and I am aware of other jurisdictions that even if it's say for um rental purposes that you're still required to get a BTR and pay that fee. Okay. Thank you. I just wanted to bring that up for discussion. It's something that um I think we should consider doing. I'd hate to see our whole city turn into an Airbnb and and I mean I don't know much control over that other than regulating some of making sure they're doing what our comp plan is as far as Yeah. Well, we en enforce enforce the ordinances we have, right? That's that's what we can do about it. And

and I have no problems with with having, you know, rentals have to have some sort of business tax license and register. Um, al although I think that, you know, the people who are coming into our city and and think that they can vacation rent also probably wouldn't have looked into anything enough to know that they have to have a a BTR either. So, you know, so like I'm not I'm not sure you [snorts] you know, other other than the people who are already following the rules, I don't know that we capture anybody any differently and we're still [clears throat] stuck with just having to track them down and enforce, you know, enforce the ordinances that we have. Um, which I think I think our code enforcement team is is doing. I do know that um some number of years ago, I think when uh the the short-term rentals first started to become an issue in St. Pete Beach, and Commissioner Robinson, I'm sure you remember this because you've been here for a long time as well. Um that that at at that time our code enforcement team was very small. Um, and I think at that time we even had volunteers who would come into the city who would just their job was to come in for a few hours every week and go through all the VBO and Airbnb and you know listings to find the ones that were being advertised in our city and then give that information to the code enforcement team. So um you know other other than just making sure that our residents who see it happening notify the city. I believe there's an article in St. Petersburg that talked about a woman that actually did that because she did it for fun.

Yeah. [laughter] Did it for fun. And um actually with the amount of fines you could do, you could support a full-time job on it. Yeah. I mean, so um you know, there's there's that aspect, too. But um no, I don't pull I I don't know of anybody other than our own code enforcement looking at um the Airbnb stuff here. I know that it happened outside in St. Petersburg that yeah people were doing that. There was an article in the paper on that. That's that's interesting you you say that Commissioner Robinson. Um does our current code enforcement actively look now? As far as I know, I don't think they do. Pretty busy. They do.

They actively look. Okay. Because I always heard that it was a cclick fix. You know, like I know it happens a lot in a couple of the neighborhoods. It it's not just a district one, district two. There's a lot of short-term rentals going on. But what the residents that at least I talked to always feel that it it's their responsibility to have to report it if they figure it out, you know, and then it's not enforcable if we can't find the ad because it's based off of this ad. Um, but I I kind of like that volunteer idea if it's legally possible, right? That person would have to be the one that's reporting it, right? Because you have to have the designated reporter. this volunteer will have a lot of um reporting in their name, but would it help? Because it is a frustration for a lot of residents in in my district um because they they feel like they've got a rat, you know, like they've got to tell on their neighbor and and basically they're tired of having to tell because it keeps coming back, you know, and and if you've all watched Special Magistrate, you can see how many um short-term rentals go through there. Um, and some of them, um, and I'm sure you know our city attorney knows are repetitive.

Well, there might there might be a way if if we do require the business um license on that to then require some reporting on it as well, right? And at least if we have that, then we we have a way to track people as as well. So, um, I just think there's a lot of ideas to be had on it. Um, and it's something that unfortunately because of the state of our economy and the and the homes out here that we're probably going to see a lot more of it. So before it gets out of control um for residents, I think it's something we need to look into.

Yeah. So I'll um work with staff to see if the volunteer idea could feasibly work. I do know we don't have a full-time person looking at this every day. So I just want to for the record be clear. We typically load up on the seasonal times and that's how they do the cadence of their work is what's the most likely problem we're going to have in January and then February and so amaze turtles and so we don't have a full-time person looking at it year round. So that could possibly be an option for them to get assistance.

We have a lot of people working in code enforcement compared to what this city had just a few years ago. And uh I [clears throat] have heard a handful of residents say, "Gosh, I wish those guys were tracking down the short-term rentals instead of standing in my front yard with a tape measure citing me for have my gra grass be a half inch too long." So [laughter] we might be able to redirect some resource resources.

I'll get you some info too on other programs I've seen.

Thank you. And I think I had the last one too. So last one, sorry. Um I just I wanted to bring up um if it was possible well to talk about for resiliency. We have big eye and eye issues here. Inflow and infiltration issues within our sewer system. They're not just in the mains. It's also in lateral lines from um people's homes. Um the city of St. Petersburg uh did a program where they actually again um blue skies they were able to provide 100% rebate on residents who replaced their lateral lines from their homes out to the city. Unfortunately, we are uh as I would consider where where we are financially that we are um still in storm or gray skies and it's going to be a long time before we're in blue skies that we could see enough money to probably be able to offer that to residents. Um, in lie of that, um, I was thinking that what we could do, um, which we currently don't have in place, is for new builds to require new builds to replace their lateral lines, um, and wave the permit fee to do that as an incentive. Um, it makes sense if you're doing a new bill to get rid of your old sewer. It helps the city out. And if we get to a point where we have, you know, enough in uh reserves that we could offer it to the rest of the city and do even a 50% a 25% any% of a rebate for to incentivize people to do this just to help the city out because it's spending money up front. It's going to save everybody in the long run. It'll reduce sewage costs. It will help all in all. Um, so I wanted

to put that out and see what everybody thought about adding that in. Um, you know, there's there's other things that we could talk about for resiliency, too, such as um, everybody will hate me on this one, but um, possibly for new builds as well for if they have issues with their seaw walls. Um, any requirement to do seaw wall replacements. But right now, I'm I'm I'm pretty set on on us doing something on the lateral line replacement for new builds. I think it makes sense for everybody, and I think it makes sense for the homeowner, too, who's spending millions to build this home to be able to spend $3,000, $4,000 to do their lines.

Any thoughts on that? Did um where did you find because I wrote this there was about five homes on Casablanca that are having issues with their laterals. So um you said St. Petersburg was offering a a refund. Are you is it St. Petersburg or the Penllis County? Is it definitely St. Petersburg? I will tell you right now because they they were kind of mentioning to me that program St. Pete I got to look for it just in case. It's a private lateral rehabilitation rebate program. [snorts]

Um, I mean I I like the idea, but and for some reason, and I would have to look again to see if there was the Penllis County water, you know, had something for laterals, too. Um, but from what I remember, at least two residents who've had to replace their lateral um recently, but they they had to pay for it. So, um,

yeah, this was done in in the city of St. Petersburg. Okay. And um you know I it's a great program and I I had mentioned it to Camden and he actually when he was meeting with everybody asked to see if we could get involved with their program. Um but that you know that was that was a that was an ask and uh didn't come back with a yes on that one unfortunately. An ask to St. Petersburg. Yes. And they just didn't answer. Okay.

But um well worth an ask. Always worth that. Um, but I wanted to bring that up because I I believe that might be somewhat of a a fix and it's not a 180 issue or anything like that. Um, the other, you know, idea was somebody else brought up the idea of these bad flow devices and, um, I had a resident bring that up too, asked, you know, if about getting, um, you know, a group together to see about getting a reduced rate. The problem is I would be really afraid, hate to say this, but on our sewer to do backflow devices on every house here with the state of our sewer. That would not be that could not be pretty. So I think that's an excellent idea with the U lateral line rebates if if any. Uh, I would also ask that maybe this be added to the laundry list of TDT repurpose, reuse since it does kind of tie into infrastructure where tourism could be impacted by secondary effect. So, you know, our our representative said that there's a lot uh a lot of maneuvering that's going on. So, yeah, possibly TDT. I think that uh um I don't I've talked to a number of new house builders in the last year and uh um I don't I haven't talked to anybody who's building new houses posttorm who isn't automatically replacing the sewer laterals. [clears throat] So I don't think anybody would have a problem with it being required because they're doing it anyway. Um, I know in uh in district one um there are a lot of sewer laterals being replaced as houses change hands because when inspections are done and they put a camera through the sewer line in a home inspection and find out that they've basically completely failed um most of those are getting replaced um you know at the time of sale or

[clears throat] when the houses change change hands. So I think that there's uh um you know a significant percentage of them that are being replaced and are going to continue to be replaced in the next 6 to 8 months um even if we don't do anything. Um so I think that's good news and uh um [clears throat] and I think this would apply to not just residential but to all properties, all builds, all new builds. Yeah. Next we have staff reports. City clerk. Nothing to report. City manager.

Just want to remind everyone we have our Christmas tree lighting this Friday, December 5th at 6 p.m. at Haram Park. So please join us. City attorney. Nothing this time. Thank you. District 4. Just want to announce that all the uh board positions and committee uh positions have been filled for district 4. Thank you to everyone who applied. I have a great representation from various districts uh excluding district one. So uh I just wanted to say that uh in the sake of transparency that I did have several applicants uh from everyone except district one. So thank you. District three. Nothing.

District two. I'm happy to report as well that uh up and beach um reourishment has been done and I was talking with Francis uh yesterday and when we were talking about that I mentioned well maybe we should get volunteers to plant seed oats and so that I hear and I see Mandy smiling in the back. Thank you. She's heading that up. So um thank you. So happy to report that.

Thank you. District one. Um, so the Sunday market has been quite lively now that the weather has been absolutely lovely. So if you haven't made it to the Sunday market, it's a great time to come on out. They have a lot of new vendors and uh music and lots of great things going on. There's also a handful of new stores that have opened in the last few months on Corey Avenue. So um if you haven't been down there to check that out, you should check it out. And uh I've heard rumors that the little shopping center where Veto and Michaels was always located um will be getting refurbished soon hopefully. Um so hopefully we'll bring a little life back to that block there um on Blind Pass. And that's all I got.

Thank you. And with that we are adjourned. Thank you.