##VIDEO ID:EE7bR9J9z54## e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e if ever oh boy our are hey Tyler slow all right good evening everyone this is the August 20th 2024 city of Treasure Island City commission meeting thank you everyone for being here we will call our meeting to order um and if we can get started with the Pledge of Allegiance please stand with me Al to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liy and justice for all thank you start with roll call please commissioner Toth here vice mayor doctor here commissioner Min here commissioner Dicky here mayor pay here thank you thank you all right next is approval of our regular and workshop agendas do we have any changes um to our agenda that need to be made this evening no no I just have one comment and my sympathies go out to you and the audience um because getting through the Workshop agenda uh if you read all 600 Pages raise your hand congratulations that was a load so many thanks all all right thank you all right hearing no changes to the agenda we'll proceed um as it was published next we have proclamations recognitions and certificates of appreciation first step or only thing on that section is exemplary EMS performance award and I'll turn that over to Chief bars thank you mayor Commissioners it gives me great pleasure to be here again uh to brag on my folks a little bit quite proud of what they do every day for our citizens and come on up Ash Ash Hub and Juan Martinez she's been with us for eight months now firefigher EMT started paramedic school last week yes sir so long one year schooling road ahead of her everybody pray for me she gonna need it we've been there um ju Martinez firefighter paramedic with us uh came to us with some experience in EMS and how long you been with this one uh four years four years so um relatively you know in the greater scheme of things inexperienced crew but what they did in our EMS medical director our physician medical director for the county recognized this and uh sent accomodations for both of them on and I'll read on this one on June 30th 2024 this team contributed to the exceptional effort and professionalism demonstrated during a witness Cardiac Arrest what that means is um their 40 early 40s year old female patient was talking to them and then her heart stopped and uh what turn into a routine call becomes a very serious EMS call at that point the team managed this recitation with exemplary skill and coordination through their dedication and steadfast approach the crew successfully achieved return of spontaneous circulation and facilitated a favorable neurological outcome for this patient your commitment to delivering top-notch care reflects great credit upon both of you and your agency and the penas County EMS system you are committ for your expertise professionalism and caring approach and that's from Dr Angus Jameson our EMS medical I would also like to present our EMS exemplary performance award which is a citation bar that they can wear on their dress uniform to be recognized for this heroic achievement you like to pleas congratulations well I'll say uh we wasn't alone uh we also had our engine come out and those guys um deserve it just as much cuz they helped out too and I was just learning and I'm glad to be here thank y'all and I wanted to thank the training that this department and penel County uh helped me with uh without that I wouldn't have be here right now getting this award so thank you all right we'll take a picture with the commission you know such one more one more there's one more got you well thank you very much for protecting our Community we're always so proud of our fire department and thankful for all the services that they provide for our community so thank you and congratulations again yep all right next we'll move into public comments for non-agenda items so at this time if there's anything that we don't already have on our agenda um for the meeting or our Workshop this would be the time to um come up and speak each person will have five minutes um and please state your name and address for the record when you approach the podium so first I have Greg Smith uh thanks mayor and Commissioners uh I want to share some thoughts with you after the last Elevate TI Workshop this is the first chance we've had to get back together I'd just like to say we want to concur that uh we're going to concur on the sea level rise Mr Smith can I interrupt you we do have Elevate TI on our agenda later this evening so if you plan on commenting on Elevate TI that would be the appropriate time to provide those public comments I thought this was an agend this is a this is for non-agenda items so we have the agenda this was the meeting agenda not on the meeting agenda we have it on our Workshop agenda this evening on there's a separate com on agenda hang on one second let me and concur with our City attorney this agenda allow but if he's speaking on item that's on another agenda he should hold it that agenda okay so if it we do have this on the agenda this evening so in the interest of time we need to make sure that all of our comments are pertinent to the agenda item that we have before us so if you have comments for non-agenda we can hear those at this time it's on the agenda for the workshop this evening this is not up for debate folks if you have a comment on Elevate TI it is on our agenda later this evening for the workshop do you have comments do you have comments on a non-agenda item two separ separate meeting it's still you sent out a meeting agenda without on okay you have something for non agenda exactly it's not elev on that this is this meeting is going to be over and the agenda will be ended so it's a non-agenda sir you're out of order you need to anyone who's not at the podium please refrain from speaking we have a period of time for public comment later at our Workshop meeting for Elevate TI and we can start the meeting with our public comments we will take public comments on Elevate TI at that on that agenda item we'll start the meeting with comments the workshop will start with our comments we will have the presentation on Elevate TI just like we always do and then we'll have time for public comment meeting I it's on the same evening and we have it on an agenda later this evening yeah but they do it on they take it for please I've consulted with our City attorney she says that I have that within my authority so please if you have other comments you can proceed if you have something on elevator TI it will be later in the meeting but she site where it says we can't do that I need to see a law it's within our it's in within our rules of procedure for the city commission during this whole meeting you know it's on the agenda no why we're here this is a non agenda do you have anything else to add that's not about Elevate TI that's my that's my ruling at this point please that's your ruling that's my position at this point I've consulted our City attorney and that is it's on an agenda later this evening non agenda whatever this non-agenda item is let let them run don't make a mountain out of a mole hill but he wants he wants to keep us here for about two hours or three and no excuse me please it will be it will be at the workshop on the agenda item this is a non agenda item I mean I'm this is not this isn't a debate at this point aenda it's aenda we have it on the agenda later this evening I'm not going to allow the okay I'm calling on the next card Andrew vassie do you have comments on a worksh a workshop is not a meeting where this is the agenda that's the worksh agenda and I'm calling our next I'm calling our next speaker at this point Andrew vassie do you have comments on a non-agenda item say say I have comments on elev okay we'll be considering that at the workshop meeting Ray tuning do you have comments on not on Elevate TI my name is Ray tuning I live at 11205 thir Street East I'd like to talk about Elevate TI sir Jennifer I don't understand why you're sitting over there in silence we site the the rule that says we can't do something that's not on the agenda it's not on the agenda this is comments on pleas us what we say yeah why why you're looking at him look at us look at us no she's my she's our attorney she's looking at me she's giving me an answer she our attorney yes she's our attorney she is the city's attorney yes not your attorney what about the Commissioners what do they think what does the commissioner speak about the commission excuse me excuse me there are rules of procedure that identify when people can speak and when they can have public comment and how long that public comment can be and it's so that there is an orderly meeting so that the the items of the meeting can be handled in an orderly fashion and done in a timely manner so that they can get through the agenda items while having allowing for public comment in the rules of procedure it identifies what the agenda is how it's laid out and it also identifies public comment that being limited to five minutes and that if there are items um that are not listed on the agenda they may do so during public comment on non-agenda if it's on an agenda then it's handled during that agenda time frame that is what a non agenda item is agenda what the commission are we in the work I don't this I different meetings thank you Jennifer I appreciate that and that is our that's my answer I excuse me it is on the agenda later this evening on our Workshop okay this is okay I so we have Ray you spoke next was Mark Hoy do you have comments for that are not pertaining to elevate TI Kim Matthew I will move your I'm moving your cards to the Elevate TI section you'll still get called on everyone's going to have their time to speak on Elevate TI that's not what I'm doing here I'm like the city Comm or the City attorney said in the interest of time and to keep comments topical to the item that we're discussing before us we're going to have those comments during that agenda item Cara Sim do you have comments not relating to elevate Tienda kism 780 Capri Boulevard um I have a question actually for the entire city commission I am looking at a meeting notice and agenda for this evening for 6: p.m. that looks like this that's two pages stapled and I am looking at a meet meeting notice and agenda that says for 700 p.m. that is one page like this nowhere on this two-page document does it mention Elevate TI at all but it does on Section e say public comments for non-agenda items it does not say public comments for non-agenda items including the Board of Commissioners regular meeting and workshop so on a technicality I do think the residents have a right to speak only time and in factuality also I would press the City attorney to cite what ordinances in your mun code say otherwise because there are technically two meetings tonight I have come to many of these the city commission meeting starts now the workshop that you're doing after is for the foll following commission meeting that will come to again which then will vote in those minutes from the previous Workshop which is the one that follows this meeting so I truly think for five minutes all of these residents that showed up tonight do have and can have the right to speak on whatever topic they choose that is not on this original two-page agenda at 6m so thank you I'm going to use the last 3 minutes of my time um to speak um so my family and I purchased a home here in Treasure Island in 2020 and we renovated um we actually raised our seaw wall and we chose to raise it 12 inches we were in need of a new seaw wall um and FEMA standards you can raise your seaw wall actually up to 18 inch um we chose to raise it 12 because if you go another six you have to bring in the Army Core engine which can completely triple your timeline if needed um it can cause you a lot of time a lot of headache um but I do foresee in the future um them raising that even more which is amazing you know if you know we are trying to raise everything um does elevate TI you know is it is it a right thing to do I'm not sure um do the residents need the choice yes it's private property at the end of the day um I actually think the 400 pay document should be for the most part dismissed um and once again just like the 100,000 that we spent on the road diet study we can probably forgive the hundreds of thousands that y'all have spent on this um study again um you know from Treasure Island staff that mostly probably don't live in the city um and that didn't personally pay for it out of their own tax dollars for this overstimulated idea perhaps the city staff can instead focus on initiatives the residents want and advocate for not against private property owners should have the right to choose what they want to do with their own home or business it's already been brought to light that by passing this and implementing it that it wouldn't even get us to the next discount threshold for flood insurance as a city and again at what cost to the residents it's probably not even in that savings um as what we would end up paying in taxes Here's a thought to all of you and to everybody behind me let's work together and work with our residents like you did with my family we had to work with our own engineer we provided drainage plans a topographical survey before and after we reduced our hard surface ratio and the city made sure that we weren't draining onto our neighbor's yards with all of the previous Storm surges thus far water hasn't protruded onto our yard not g wood why don't we create a rebate program hopefully going back the last 5 years to include me um for those that are raising our seaw walls and for those that do want to elevate their houses why don't we create a survey with more than just yes and no questions why don't we create focus groups made up of residents from each district perhaps include other options instead of those yes or no answers I employ you to concentrate instead on more local more repetitive issues and not global warming and SE rise which will be on an international level let's keep things within our small town and focus on practical Community Driven issues such as Waste Management assisting developers Treasure Bay for example and that's potential encouraging new investment to the area and making this the ideal destination for folks to work play and want to stay assist your residents instead of causing them stress and to use their hard-earned money to fight you and what I've endeavored myself and from what I've witnessed beat you thank you thank you Gary pateno do you have comments for non-agenda items oh yeah good evening commissioner Gary penano 15 treasur Lane Paradise Island uh my concern is uh with all this activity with all this activity going on I hope we haven't lost sight of our pumping station um I'm really getting concerned with the fact that we're not even starting this thing we don't have a start date we don't have a finish date um are we going to be another Community is going to be a statistic that has sewage that leaks into their area because of problems we're not addressing I also noticed that uh apparently it's it's a critical high priority infrastructure project but also I've noticed too on the backup station over by the paradise on Towers there was a rental unit over there are we having trouble with that backup unit as well you know we can't afford to have seage J I hope you guys will take a strong look on this and get some information out when we're going to start this thing I'm really getting concerned it's going to be a major problem if we don't get behind this thing and push it you know we've been talking and talking and talking thank you thank you all right Diane Hawkins she might not she in the lobby Diane Hawkins I have you down for Elevate TI and non-agenda item so this is for non-agenda and I'll move your card back for elev TI as well hello all I'm Diane Hawkins at 13858 Street East and I would just like to encourage for workshops I I'm become aware that workshops are for presentations to the commission to the to the mayor and of course of course there are public comments but I've not really seen a forum where we have a nice flow an exchange a dialogue between the city commission and the residents and I'd like to see that kind of thing now it's too late for that for the coming Workshop I mean we're dealing with Leva we have things to do but I know that there might be some latitude at the workshop and I would encourage the mayor to allow us to perhaps ask questions that we might expect to have answered tonight and then we could walk away we could feel heard and we could get some more information that will enable us to get our thoughts together for the next step so that is all I want to say for now would love to see more of an exchange a forum where we can talk back and forth with each other thank you okay thank you ahead do we have any other public comments for non-agenda items have all the people you that will be later at our Workshop okay we're going to move on to our commissioner reports for the record just for the record Jennifer that a person was able to get up here and stop and talk about Elevate TI but you shut everybody else down and you Contin to shut us down that is not proper that is not right it's not fair at all for the residents we should have an opportunity to talk we've prepared some things we would like to speak thank you for your comments we do have an opportunity for everyone to speak later in the agenda okay we're going to be moving into commissioner reports now you got a do you have a do you have a comment not on Elevate TI excuse me okay what was your name sorry okay you can come to the podium it's not on Elevate TI that's what your card said was Elevate TI uh well it's not it's part of eleva but not TI structure okay that okay so we bought our house about 17 years ago and lived in it fulltime for about seven years we want to leave and retire in this home and in on Treasure Island um wondering if this is even possible at this point uh we've been floated about three times the last past four years after a costly remodeling in 2020 can the city and fima under the current code and ordinances let us Elevate our house with a 4ot lift regardless of fima Base flood elevation with the understanding that this project needs to meet the 50% F Ro same for Phi will you allow us to bring 24 Ines of clean field um on this project if we were to do it um um under the proposed cumulative substantial Improvement CSI what would happen if in the year we Elevate our house using most or all of the 50 fima allowance towards elevation our roof gets blown away that very same year by a storm hence pushing us above the 50% threshold rule to repair what would happen then with the repair of the roof it would put the city and us in a critical situation to say the least um we believe in not implementing CSI and let the permit to permit code stay in place which makes sense for most of the Treasure Island residents there is an urgency for us to leave our house as a for floating would not be welcome time is of the essence here we need the help of the city to stay in our B house thank you thank you are there any other comments all right hearing none we'll go into commissioner reports commissioner Toth all righty thank you um thank you all for coming out really really appreciate that you're coming out and sharing with us during the workshop so we please continue commissioner to so we can all share in our concerns for the future of our community in our Island um I would like to congratulate and Echo the congratulations of our fire department our EMS firefighter paramedic Juan Martinez and firefighter EMT Ashley hubs it's amazing as a nurse I know how difficult it is to resuscitate a patient and actually have them come through Kudos it's amazing thank you proud to have you with us in our city there will be um a rotating surprise closure of the John  dog park while there are pouring some cement to fix um some of the benches that sit on a cement slab for the people that use the dog park and um that's basically all I have for this evening thank you thank you vice mayor doctor I look out here tonight and I see several folks from uh District Two and I've had several discussions with folks from District Two and I encourage you to continue to hear your voices um and um and that that's all I have for this evening thank you commissioner minning uh I would just add a ditto to commissioner doctor uh over this past couple weeks I've received numerous emails uh and I just want to say thank you for those of you who have taken the time to write those uh and I hope that I've addressed every one of you maybe not with a direct answer but at least an acknowledgement that I have received your emails so I would encourage you to continue that as we move forward with this elevati and and the train modification manual thank you thank you commissioner Indi I just wanted to give a quick update on the uh pay for parking uh program out on Sunset Beach which was launched on July 30th uh we're three weeks into it now we've had collected 244 payments a little bit uh more than $10 per payment so we've generated $2,600 in Revenue just through the first three weeks uh side street parking is now being enforced so if somebody's not paying uh for those uh for parking they are getting issued tickets uh we're on a pace right now to generate about $47,000 but this was the first three weeks of the program and it is uh and during some of that we had tropical storm Debbie that uh on a Sunday and Monday so we didn't have a lot of parking activity going on there but anyway it's starting out well we've dealt with uh the individual complaints we've gotten regarding the subject I've gotten 20 about 20 emails from people and I've responded to all but one uh that was rather nasty so I chose not to respond to that one uh but I have responded to that and we've gotten a a uh a few comments uh from from people but most of the comments came from uh people who are not sun or Treasure Island residents uh anyway it's it's going well like congratulations or thanks to the uh public works department and the police department and uh for for getting this launched and and for it going as smoothly as it did thank you all right thank you I have no report this evening so we'll move into our approval of minutes we have one um item on that part of the agenda which is approval of the commission regular meeting and workshop minutes for April 16th and the special meeting minutes for April 19th do we have a motion to approve those minutes I move to approve the minutes of the commission regular meeting and workshop for April 16th 2024 and the special meeting for April 18th 2024 as written second okay do we have any um comments or corre question from the commission no any public comments on our minutes hearing none roll call please vice mayor doctor I commissioner Min I commissioner dicki I commissioner Toth I mayor Payne I all right um next is our consent agenda we have one item on consent this evening which is a hold harmless agreement from the city of Largo um do we have a motion to approve the consent agenda I move to approve the consent agenda second okay do we have any comments or discussion from the commission do you have any public comment on the consent agenda hearing none roll call please vice mayor doctor I commissioner Manning I commissioner Dicky I commissioner Toth hi mayor pay hi thank you all right moving on to our items of business first item is i1 first reading and public hearing on ordinance number public am budget amendment to recognize the American Rescue plan act funding ordinance 202 24-19 an ordinance of the city of Treasure Island Florida amending the fiscal year 2024 budget to recognize $3 million in federal funds in the general fund and transfer an equal amount to the Wastewater preserve access to um to preserve access to fund the master lift station reconstruction providing for severability conflict and effective date good evening mayor and commission um as you know that we uh a few years ago we received the uh 3.4 million roughly in arpa funding um and we have used about 400,000 of that money for this building uh and the city had pledged the balance of the three million would be used for the master lift station we don't intend on changing that um whatsoever however to um because the uh arpa has a December 31st deadline of um spending or obligating the money um just to be on the safe side and make sure that we preserve access to that money we've worked with our audit firm um who has given us some uh advice and some guidance as a way of uh receiving that money now and still keeping it uh preserved and pledged for the master lift station so this is largely just a an administrative change to recognize an equal amount of allowable costs in the general funding this year um recognize that $3 million in arpa funds to offset that and then booking an equal transfer of that arpa money to the Wastewater fund which is where the project the master lift station is budgeted um so basically it's a a way of receiving the money now and making sure that we have it the $3 million on hand ready to go uh as soon as that project is ready to uh put some shovels in the ground um with that it's a you're pretty straightforward item but if there are any questions I'd be happy to address those great thank you do we have any questions for Mike oh just a reminder this is the first reading so um need to come back and that's why I wanted to make sure it was on this meeting's agenda because it affects the FY 24 budget and I didn't want you guys to have to be voting on a budget amendment while you're adopting the budget at the same time it was a chicken in the egg thing and my brain couldn't reconcile it so that's why I wanted to put it the first reading on this meeting the second reading it'll be done so by the time the budget is adopted September at the second September meeting um this will already be decided all right thank you do we have any public comment sure come to the podium state your name and address please uh Ray tuning 11253 Street East I've been in front of you guys before on this particular item with respect to the the uh lift station this lift station was uh deemed a critical piece of infrastructure back in 2021 and um or thereabouts I'll have to get the exact um dates but the fact uh is is that it was um there was money appropriated to move forward with the lift station with the engineering side of it that it then got spent about $350,000 and then it was sidelined because there was a dispute with the engineering firm that was working on this I understand it and so in the meantime nothing has happened so through the years and if you went by the lift station today it's spelling particularly nice today okay so this is a critical piece of infrastructure it continues to be delay I I blame the public works department and the people that are managing this project you can look at her if you'd like I saw you do that that is uh that is critical to us this thing needs to get going and it also needs to be decoupled from the Public Works building and you need to go back and review and determine whether or not it's even in the right spot so uh I want you all to think about that especially when we come to the budget and uh piece of uh the presentation later this afternoon in the workshop but somebody should be accountable for how long it's taken it's been ridiculous so I know you're new here and I know you've got some Report with your staff but I also hope that you'll look at things from our perspective and I guess you're living here now I don't know but when you do you'll be a resident and you should be just as concerned as we are that these projects sometimes just don't make any sense I don't even know what what we did this year other than this city this city uh uh hall building right here thank you for your time thank you do we have any other public comments all right hearing none I'll entertain a motion I move to approve ordinance number 202 24-19 at the first public hearing and to schedule a for a second and final reading at on September 3rd 2024 regular commission meeting second okay it's been moved in second end do we have any commission discussion or comments the only thing I I would like to ask is uh at our next meeting if we could have some kind of idea what the timeline is to get this uh project started thank you any other comments yeah I think Chuck we're going to be covering uh the carryovers later on in the uh this meeting or actually in the second meeting tonight um and that's where we will probably begin to uh prioritize what we have on that carryover list but that is correct what we're going to do is make sure that the commission understands what had been approved previously the dollar amounts and the funding sources and that'll be provided to the commission to give them some visibility into that piece and also it's going to be brought back after the budget for a prioritization okay great thank you yes it is all right that was the only my comment was going to be I just want to make sure that this isn't going to cause a delay it's truly just a a safety mechanism to really make sure that we don't have any possibility of losing this funding but I do want to I I agree with the residents this needs to move forward I've always agreed with that I think that we need to we need to carry forward with this as as quickly as possible um it is a very very high priority um all right any other discussion all right roll call please vice mayor doctor I commissioner Min hi commissioner dicki I commissioner Toth hi mayor Payne I thank you thank you thank you Mike all right next is item I2 first reading and public hearing on ordinance 2024 -09 and I'll have the City attorney read the ordinance title Please ordinance 20 24-9 and ordinance of the city of Treasure Island Florida amending the city of Treasure Island's code of ordinances by amending section 50-17 General Provisions Article 5 micromobility of chapter 50 traffic and vehicles by removing the exception for the micr mobility devices on West Golf Boulevard providing for severability providing for conflict providing for codification and providing for an effective date good evening mayor and Commissioners um the micromobility ordinance was originally presented to the commission back in January of 2023 and I get that at that time uh the proposed ordinance prohibited micr Mobility devices on all sidewalks um my understanding is there was a commission discussion about that and there was it was determined to put an exception in for West Golf um the former city manager um had requested that I guess based on a conversation with the Commissioners that we remove that exception so we're just bringing that forward to remove it on all sidewalks within the city okay um do we have any questions for the staff I I just have a comment is can I add if it's not a question we'll do the comments after we have the motion any questions for Mary Ellen no all right um do we have any public comment I have a card from Steve Edwards my name is Steve Edwards I live on 92nd Avenue Sunset Beach I've been a resident of Treasure Island for over 31 years if I could take just a moment before I start as a former paramedic I would like to congratulate and thank two of chiefs Bar's finest well done uh I'm a lifelong Runner and cyclist I run in cycle over 7,000 miles a year um almost all of my running miles are on the streets and roads of Sunset Beach many of my cycling miles are on the roads of Sunset Beach I blogged thousands of miles and thousands of hours on the roads and streets of Sunset Beach I've been running and cycling here for 40 years I was running and cycling here before I moved here I learned in college and graduate school and in the business world the importance of empirical data and empirical evidence by definition empirical evidence is information that is obtained through observation or experience it is fact-based and not opinion-based I have over 40 years of empirical evidence and observations and experience running and cycling the streets and roads of Sunset Beach I watch all the commission meetings I have not missed a meeting in years I recall the meeting where this ordinance was enacted I recall the intention and it was safety uh for the operators of micr Mobility devices to use the sidewalk to avoid vehicles on West Gulf while the goal of the ordinance was safety it has also created some unsafe conditions there are three issues the first is practicality and safety how many micr Mobility devices are equipped with mirrors if so are they being used by The Operators of those devices if they have to turn around and look as opposed to using a mirror they're taking their eyes off the road and the sidewalk ahead they're diverting their attention and they're losing their focus is the operator continuously checking their mirrors and turning around to look and deviating and weaving on and off the sidewalk based on traffic if they move on to the sidewalk then they have to turn around or check their here again to make certain that no vehicles are coming before they move back into the roadway that can be a lot of weaving and a lot of deviating on and off the roadway it can be very erratic I spent nearly 25 years in professional Motorsports I was the director of safety for indie car racing I still have a safety oriented mindset and perspective from my perspective and observation that is not a safe situation I know from my racing background and experience professional race drivers tell each other and especially tell new rookie drivers two things hold your line and be predictable I know that West golf is not a racetrack but the same principles apply hold your line be predictable if I'm a driver and I see the operator of a micr Mobility device varying their line weaving and deviating on and off the roadway they're unpredictable being in the roadway with the Sherl markings holding their line makes them predictable issue number two some operators of micr Mobility devices are operating on the sidewalk full time it's their PR primary route unrelated to whether there's traffic they stay on the sidewalk fulltime regardless of the traffic issue number three some not all operators of micro Mobility devices confront and challenge pedestrians they can be aggressive and they disrespect pedestrians I've seen it I've experienced it I've been a recipient and a victim of it if a micr Mobility device is coming at me are they going to give me the rideway or possibly hit me it becomes a game of chicken it can be a last second to decision and it's not a decision I want to have to make it's not a decision anyone should have to make I'm especially concerned for the elderly who use the sidewalk praise God I am still agile some people are not I can attempt to make a last second avoidance and I have some people cannot and if they can they shouldn't have to from my empirical evidence if pedestrians are forced off the sidewalk they only Escape Route is into the roadway so we now have micromobility devices moving off the roadway into the sidewalk and pedestrians moving off the sidewalk into the roadway that's not a good tradeoff and it's not a safe situation I don't believe that was the goal or the intention of the ordinance if the intention of the ordinance was safety that's a good thing but in a case can be made from empirical evidence that allowing micr Mobility devices on the sidewalk has made it less safe for The Operators of those devices and for pedestrians if the goal of the ordinance was safety it's created unsafe conditions for these reasons and for safety reasons I support this proposed change I thank the good lord for keeping me safe for 40 years I thank and commend commissioner Dicky for his dedication and Devotion to commit to Public Safety and I also thank him for his care and concern for the residents of Sunset Beach thank you thank you very much do we have any other public comments on this agenda item all right I'll entertain a motion I move to approve and schedule ordinance 2024-25 forward and I appreciate uh Mr Edward's comments and uh his contributions thank you thank sure you have some and yeah I I was adamant back when this took place that micromobility did not belong on sidewalks so commissioner Dicky I appreciate you uh making this good and we move forward good any other comments yes I've actually had some requests too to remove the micromobility devices on off of the beach Trail because of pedestrians feeling swerved it's on page to um subsection one subsection one where it talks about the beach sidewalk M um I've had comments and concerns brought to my attention that they don't feel safe with the microb bability um devices on our beach Trail they feel that that should be just a walk Trail yes okay any comments on that I would I would agree with you that I don't know where the city is on having an ordinance like this for our beach Trail um certainly that gets a lot more traffic than it does on West go bouevard um so um I'll just make that statement and see what staff might think of that in the future something that we discussed with the beach Trail was um that within the city manager capability um during like busy events or busy holiday weekends we have the ability to dictate to the micr mobility vendors like the scooter companies that operate those rentals that they can shut that down for specific days so that may if it's a if it's an issue of the scooters on the weekends or just busy weekends during spring break things like that then it might be a first step that we just pay more careful attention to that timing um but that just I I haven't witnessed any issues out there I'm walk my dog out there quite a bit um but just a option for the beach Trail because if we recall the conversation was a a desire to create ultimately a path from a safe path both for Walkers bikers and and micr Mobility because like these electric scooters are not very safe on the street or Gulf Boulevard was to create a safe path for them all the way from John's Pass down to Sunset Beach so the um Beach Trail during non- busy times was the the safest place for all those people to be um but if we want to treat the scooters differently that's I'm okay with that but just wanted to kind of put that put that out there I have part two um when the mic Mobility rental devices are left they're left in the sidewalks and that impairs people who have mobility issues with going down the sidewalks so that's part two problem of the micromobility issues is that specifically on the beach Trail or just Citywide on city sidewalks more or less um I've seen them on the turn to Capri I've seen them pulling out I've also seen him going in the wrong direction on the sidewalks so people are pulling out of a business and they look right look left and all of a sudden you've got this micromobility device come winging up at you on the sidewalk in the wrong direction yeah well they're not supposed to be on the sidewalk at all so that's an enforcement exactly issue but I think the as far as compliance with parking that was was that not in the ordinance to begin with there's designated places so if we ever see something like that that needs to be reported to the city manager so that we can report it to the to the company and they should be I believe it's in their license agreement that they need to promptly dispatch someone to relocate that scooter yeah I've gotten up and gotten out of my car and pushed them into the grass next to the sidewalk because people do need to use the sidewalks safely so do we want to add do we want to add a revision about the beach Trail here to the ordinance or do we want to just move forward as is and I think monit this piece of it is much less controversial than the beach Trail I think the beach Trail was going to require some uh uh hearing from a much wider audience uh so I I'd like to propose that we move forward with this amendment and and uh re-evaluate the beach Trail issue separately it's on here though but it wasn't a published change that we were okay in the so we can explore that I think it would be incumbent on all of us to maybe do a little bit of research and talk to our constituents about what their thoughts and feelings are are on that I've gotten a couple calls that's why I brought it up all right um I just wanted to add I think that this is a a great example of how things aren't necessarily set in stone we adopt a lot of policies as a commission we review a lot of initiatives and things that we um want to try and I I'm I'm certain that I said this on the Das when we adopted this ordinance was if it doesn't work out we can come back and we can reconsider and decide if we need to make an adjustment just like everything that we do just because we pass an ordinance doesn't mean that it's um that we're locked into that a future commission can always bring something to the city manager and um put it on AG on an agenda to to edit what we're doing so I think that's just something really important to keep in mind um as we talk about things later in our our Workshop we can always um if kind of using a a Tech slogan we can beta test things and that's what we did with this is we beta tested the West GF Boulevard micromobility and it didn't work so we are making a change and we're coming back and we're we're making it right so thank you commissioner dicki um for for bringing this forward any other comments or discussion all right roll call please vice mayor doctor I commissioner Min I commissioner dicki I commissioner Toth I mayor Payne hi all right thank you good all right item three is second and final reading of ordinance 2024 d10 ordinance 202 24-10 an ordinance of the city of Treasure Island Florida vacating approximately 1,22 Square ft or 0.235 Acres of Sunshine Lane a public RightWay located between 127th in John's Pass for and for a utility easement to be retained over the same area providing for severability and providing for an effective date right thank you turn it over to Jesse good evening mayor Commission all right uh so nothing's changed on this it's the exact same the only thing we did actually my bad we did change one thing out so we swapped out exhibit B and we have provided the executed easement agreement that has the unrecorded executed agreement so been swapped that not yet this will be for the next case and that's all H staff has uh the applicant is available as well too okay do we have any questions for the staff all right thank you um at this time we'll open the public hearing do we have any public comment including comments from the applicant all right hearing none we'll close the public hearing and I'll entertain a motion I move to approve and adopt ordinance 202 24-10 on the second and final reading second all right it's been moved in second and do we have any commission discussion only thing I'd like to see is out of all of this that we can have accessibility to the end of the point from that property the sidewalk and we make sure it's level for um handicap patrons to use that's something that I um have relayed to the um that I I thought about that too and relay it to the applicant um identifying that strip of land and I believe it previously had some sort of connection there um I was probably too young to to remember that but we have a public Jetty out um to the east of their this property and then we have the John's Pass Bridge to the West um and there's sidewalks on both sides of that so it would be wonderful to have those connected um in order to provide Public Access out to the to the jetty um I'm not suggesting I think it's it's not necessarily linked to this um agenda item or this vacation but just kind of putting it out there to the applicant that I think that would um make the commission a lot or at least for me it would make me a lot more comfortable with this if we were able to have them um look into that as a as an opportunity to improve our um access out to that Jetty because right now you have to kind of walk out on the beach access a block up and then walk down the beach to get to the jetty which is paved and has seats and things on it so it would be really nice to have that out there and then secondly since it is contiguous to the property the former Gator property um the sidewalk is blocked underneath the draw underneath the drawbridge and that would be a safety issue to have that reopened for people to cross freely underneath it instead of going into Golf Boulevard that's blocked off under the off area yeah oh interesting okay any other comments all right um roll call please vice mayor doctor I commissioner Manny hi commissioner dicki I commissioner Toth I mayor Payne I all right that's approved thank you all right um item four is variance 00438 2024 for 7675 Bayshore Drive and I'll turn it over to the City attorney to give an explanation of this quasi judicial proceeding okay so um the applicant is going to be given 10 minutes to present after they've completed their presentation staff will be given 10 minutes then the public will be given an opportunity to come forth and speak um then the applicant will be given a 5 minute rebuttal during any time during the applicant's presentation or staff's presentation the commission may have comments and they'll direct them towards staff or the applicant additionally if the applicant has any questions of um the city if they could direct those to the commission or if City staff has any questions for the applicant if they could direct those to the commission at this time um oh and once the presentation is concluded the public hearing will close and then the commission will take action at this time anyone wishing to speak on this item should um please stand if they're able and raise their right hand be sworn in by the city clerk this includes any members of the public who think they might have something to say during public comments on this variance um so anyone who plans to speak needs to be sworn in okay all right go ahead do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony that you're about to give will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you God thank you all right right thank you Seline thank you um next does the commission have any exp parte Communications on this variance that need to be disclosed no all right hearing none um we'll open the public hearing and we'll start with the applicant's presentation oh good evening everybody hello Jesse feel like I have an unfair advantage today we've done the six weeks ago before the uh Planning and Zoning Board already so uh yeah I have an idea of what's to come the Planning and Zoning Board by the way did support my request just FYI uh well I want to start with a question or just uh something hypothetical yeah if I were here tonight offering a 50% density reduction on a new construction project I think it is fair to assume that every body in this room would support that well I am here today offering you that yeah uh however due to uh yeah paradoxical density requirements in the current zoning code I've been compelled to ask for an increase in density in order to achieve a 50% reduction going from four units to only two okay let me explain the the specifics and the property that we're talking about is uh 7675 Bayshore Drive which is the uh property closest to the dark Beach on the water I'm sure everybody has been there uh it is currently an unplatted lot yeah currently large enough to allow for a total of four units I'm not a fan of multif family development in this City and there's plenty of examples proving that uh take the three new single family homes by the shell shop on the beach for example I supported single family development there over higher density multif family options at 7675 Bayshore Drive it is Our intention to split this lot in half resulting in two single family homes instead of a four unit situation this means fewer cars less sewage better impervious surface ratios and an overall more favorable outcome so what's standing in the way there's a requirement that applies when New Lots are created each lot must be 70 ft wide this requirement only applies when a lot is newly created which is uncommon but certainly the case case at 7675 bore drive we fall short of this requirement by 11 ft per each future lot however if you're not creating a new lot the minimum lot with for a single family home is only 40 ft and the two new Lots will be 19 ft wider than that so to make it clear these requirements directly do come contradict each other now City staff will in their presentation argue that there is no hardship and that the future Lots with 59 ft in width are not in Conformity with the neighborhood so first let's address the issue of hardship this is not about hardship it's about common sense there's no hardship here just practicality as for neighborhood Conformity let's look at the facts there are nine single family homes to the north of this lot between the dark Beach and the Roth Hotel one of them is 70 ft wide another one is 50 ft wide and on average they're all 60 feet wide so for this city to argue the two 59t wide Lots with single family homes on them are not in Conformity with the neighborhood is yeah puzzling to be honest so there's really only one question to ask yourselves how am I going to explain to a fellow resident that when I had the opportunity to reduce density on this slot by 50% I chose to vote against it it's that simple and quite frankly I think that no one ever should have to spend six months arguing over something so clearly beneficial to the city and its residents again all right thank you we'll turn it over to the staff for their presentation all right so um so just reminder this say case number v- 00438 d202 4 uh so the variance request is for a proposed subdivision of an on platted track to land uh the first variance request is to section 74102 subsection 3 to reduce the required lot width from 70 ft to 58.7 Ft for the proposed lot a the second variance request is also to section 74-10 two subsection 3 to reduce the required lot width from 70 ft to 59.75 Ft for the proposed Lot B and as you already saw this is an image of the property located at 7675 Bayshore Drive L use the L use is a residential medium it is zoned residential medium rm15 and it's just a survey of the proposed lots I'm sorry I tried to do as good as I could with that visual uh so just a little background uh the request is to create two platted Lots from an unplatted parcel of Land Based On A Lot width lot depth and lot area the existing unplatted land meets the minimum requirements for a multif family lot in the rm15 zoning District based on the density and the chart under Section 68- 431 the parcel as currently configured would allow four units based on 302 Acres times 15 units per acre equals 4.5 units which rounds down to four units so section 68- 431 of the zoning regulations has minimum lot requirements for a single family lot section 74- 42 has minimum lot requirements for a new subdivision lot which are greater than that required by the zoning District so this just a little breakdown of how the applicant is proposing these Lots so as you can see in section 68- 431 the required lot withth is 40 and the applicant is proposing 58.7 for both so he meets that requirement however in section 74102 this is whenever the subdivision comes into play the lot with requirement is 70 which the proposed Lots A and B are less than that uh everything else is met lot lot depth and lot area they do meet their as and then this just gives you a rough idea for the survey proposal lot a for the lot width then this is Lot B also for the second variance request lot with um so the staff recommendation uh staff recommends denial of a variance request to section 74 -102 subsection 3 to reduce the required lot width from 70 ft to 5875 ft4 proposed lot a based on the analysis of the Criterion section 70221 finding that they have not been substantially satisfied and that unary hardship does not exist if the city commission deems a hardship does exist staff recommends the following conditions condition one prior to final replat review by the Planning and Zoning Board the existing duplex on proposed lot a shall apply for complete the work and close out a permit to convert the duplex to a single family dwelling in order to meet density requirements or demo the structure condition two the existing doc uh boat lift on proposed lot a is not in conformance with the setback requirements of section 69-71 the doc slbo left must either be relocated or have an AB budding property owner sign off which is like an exemption or a variance approved two setbacks then staff's recommendation for the second variance request uh staff recommends denial of a variance request to section 74-10 two subsection 3 to reduce the required lot width from 70 ft to 5875 ft for proposed Lot B based on the analysis of the criteria in section 70- 221 finding that the they have not been substantially satisfied and that an unnecessary hardship does not exist uh so once again if the city commission deems a hardship does exist staff recommends the following conditions condition one prior to final replant review by the planning zoning board the existing duplex on a shall apply for complete the work and close out a permit to convert the duplex to a single family dwelling in order to meet denser requirements or demo the structure and condition two the existing dockboat lift on proposed lot a is not in conformance with the setback requirements of section 69-71 the dock Boat Lift must either be relocated or have an AB budding property owner sign off an exemption or a variance approval to setbacks and then moving on to the second so on June 27th 2024 the Planning and Zoning Board recommended approval with the following conditions which are those yes what yeah so variance one and variance request to the planning zery board recommended approval with the conditions stated by staff and that is all I have we are available for question all right do we have any questions for the staff any questions for the applicant and I don't know if this is Staff or applicant probably more applicant than staff um so if it was to be two lots um I would assume that uh whatever is built would be raised correct there's an existing structure currently which is a duplex it is going to be modified to be a single family home and elevated and on the uh currently vacant half that'll be new construction per zoning code now ultimately would there be two docks at the site ultimately yes and with the with regards to the condition to uh the dock it it has to be removed so it can be written into the approval with condition that it uh has it can be removed it's it's old it needs to go regardless and it it I just by it it is good Common Sense uh you know I think that uh it it have you had an opportunity to talk to any of the neighbors and hear from any of the neighbors I'm glad you ask because I've now had to mail uh a letter advising that we're having hearings twice uh six weeks ago before the Planning and Zoning Board two neighbors were here uh ready to speak and uh criticize expecting you know something that was not going to be in their favor they ended up speaking and clearly uh uh supporting this project because it's just I mean nobody wants to see multif family when single family is an option yeah absolutely and the uh the density makes a lot of sense as well it's logical if you're going to build four condos that probably each condo is going to have two cars everything will be twice yeah twice yeah the amount of people cars sewage I mean all the things uh that would make you want to turn down a project and I mean if we're going down from four units to two it doesn't sound like so much but if I were standing here proposing something like we're going down from 200 to 100 units I'm sure the answer would even more easily be uh let's do it right do you know uh these two lots or this one lot that you're asking to make two uh does does that lot flood uh the seaw wall is not uh high enough to stop water from coming over so yes the property has flooded uh the intersection there flooded today just a sunny day flood event thank you all right any other questions go ahead a question for staff in your um denial you state that based on the analysis of the criteria in section 7221 above finding that they have not been substantially satisfied what hasn't been substantially satisfied and that an unnecessary hardship does not exist sorry commissioner give me one minute there's actually just so you know there is of course I'm sure you probably are familiar there's like eight criteria that has to be met for a variance Crest to be approved and usually the one that gets everybody is whenever it comes down to the existing conditions is not the result of the actions of the applicant yeah that's usually the one that unfortunately kills a lot of things and that's the basis for this one is that a hardship does not exist oh yeah so if you want to we I can go through these one by one these I just want the one that you used on he used to deny so we're waiting on it do you have a comment while we're waiting on I have comments but not questions so should I hold my comments now um yeah we'll yeah just questions at this time it's all right so sorry about that okay so the ones that the applicant did not meet would be criteria three which states the strict application of the provisions of the Land Development regulations would not permit the applicant reasonable use of the building structure or land uh criteria four The Peculiar conditions and circumstances existing are not the result of the actions of the applicant the applicant's agents or the applicant's predecessors and title criteria five the variance proposed to be granted is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the building structure land criteria six which is actually broken down in a couple individual ones so the Redevelopment substandard and then the neighborhood character then the last criteria that was not met would be number seven which is the granting of the variants were be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this chapter would be what on the last one um would when the granting of the variants will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this chapter okay and uh one last question for for me if you would how is it that pnz came to a conclusion of recommendation and staff came to a conclusion of denial how does that happen I think we have some comment cards from the chairman of the Planning and Zoning commission so he might address that question I hope so okay yeah I'd like I would be interesting what staff thinks I can address it too sta let me ask staff please okay okay so you want to know how pnz came to the conclusion of approval and we yeah we're sitting up here we've got pnz saying to us go ahead and approve and we've got staff saying to us deny I cannot speak for how they made on that final decision but I know we base our decision off the criteria stated in section 70-22 so the implication is that pnz doesn't I that's my that's what I'm inferring for what you said I don't mean to get AR but I just we're sitting up here with let's save some more we'll I have comments on that so we'll talk about that once we discuss um but question can you go back to the slide that has the part that shows the different lot widths and this required by the two sections yeah so that's it's really the second row there section 74102 that they're not in compliance with so we're D putting two different requirements on this correct so and that comes down to the determination that this is a subdivision so is there a definition of subdivision that you're using to make this circumstance fall under that code it just doesn't really make sense to me so the minimum lot width for that sort of a lot is 40 under 68431 I know that we have a lot of Provisions in our code that are in conflict and that seems to be the issue here but um I don't understand why the determination wasn't made that it meets the requirements of that one so it's allowed to proceed so um you are quite correct that these are in conflict this has been on our list to fix when we do the ldrs this year for a long time we've been waiting for the comp plan for a very long time uh but how this is a subdivision is because these lots have to be platted and they're coming to you as a plat they would come back for approval under the platting guidelines and that is the provisions in um 74102 so basically our code says it says three actually conflicting things it says that you can build a single family home on any platted lot of record that means the lot was platted this is unplatted land so it falls into a different category our code also says as you see up here that under um 68431 that you need a lot that's 40 ft wide 90 ft deep and 4500 square ft of lot area um under the subdivision code my only explanation of that is I'm assuming that when they were writing that they were contemplating a new subdivision you know not a single leftover piece of land in Sunset Beach so they were looking to the future of the city and that's more applicable to be honest to the lots that are on the larger islands on the more recent Islands so uh that's why in the report we also provided you with a a table showing the typical lot widths in the blocks next to that because that seems to be another criteria that um you would want to look at to see if this was consistent great thank you I'll reserve my comments on that for our discussion afterwards um any other questions okay um we'll move into public comment now um so do we I have a one card from Richard Harris good evening uh mayor and Commissioners Richard Harris 374 Bay Plaza also chairman of the Planning and Zoning Board as uh you have been told we did consider this one and it boil down to a couple of issues first off we thought the uh uh reduction from 4 to two was a no-brainer common sense you know as far as hardships were concerned it's hard to determine one in this area but like for instance today that area flooded today I mean I had pictures taken and I have pictures of the water coming up out of the inlets which we're trying to address as we speak so our comment was put your thinking caps on Planning and Zoning Board let's come up with a solution wouldn't it not be better to have two single family raised homes on pilings rather than a four unit Condo building I know it's a small reduction but it's still a reduction and then we started looking at of course there was the conflict which none of us really understood much but I live up on Bay Plaza and uh we have a nice little subdivision there kind of isolated every lot up there is 50 ft wide everyone and uh except for the irregular ones so you know it was a uh situation where 58.7 five is obviously exceeding the lot width in Sunset Beach by great amount I mean we have lots in Sunset Beach as small as 30 ft by 60 ft or no rather 50 feet by 60 feet that's what it is 3,000 square fet so we said this is just a common sense solution we just approved that same day a a separate project which uh also had a uh reduction in density but it didn't have this added wrinkle of uh subdivision of land so provided this is one of the situations where it was a little cloudy with the discrepancy in the code uh the existing lot situation the fact that that area does flood as a hardship and uh we just thought that the reduction and density would be a great idea so we voted uh to approve it and uh I think quite frankly our recommendation should should stand thank you very much thank you is there any other public comment for this item we yeah no um does the applicant have any rebuttal no applicant waves rebuttal all right um we'll close the public hearing at this time I'll entertain a motion all right or we can discuss if we're not confident in the motion that needs to be made we can discuss first yeah let's do that okay um do we have any commission discussion first yeah i' I'd like to comment on I happen to attend that uh that same uh planning and zoning board meeting that uh that hendrik had mentioned when he got up there and several things that I noticed in that one was that we do have conflicting codes here uh and and you heard directly from the staff that the the code uh the the section 74102 is was meant for a for a subdivision and this really is just a a a oversized lot that they're intending to take to two lots and put two single family hes but anyway so you have the conflict of codes there but even with that if you look at the far right columns uh the lot area uh the lot areas on both lot A and B uh significantly exceed both both uh uh both the uh section 74102 and 68431 by a significant amount so uh it's a it's a pretty decent sized lot uh it's 47% larger than required by a single family lot the 40 by 90 so it's a good siiz lot uh and and it's by the way it's uh 20% larger than than the lot that I have about a half mile up the road so so I don't see that as uh as as an issue and to uh add a little bit to what you heard from Hendrick earlier uh there were a couple of at beach residents that came there to to uh uh to to oppose uh this variance and but once they heard what the plan was they actually got up and said uh they support it so it does fit in with the community uh the local residents seem to want it great any other comments no um to me I think I I agree with what commissioner dicki just mentioned and um I think honestly the this we're here because of a a the hardship in my opinion is the conflict in our code I mean that's something that the city has imposed on on this lot but through our own development of of codes that aren't aren't clear and we're working on changing that um so I think it is in consistent with or it is is consistent with the neighborhood character um and and just going through sometimes we go through this checklist and just mark off all of them just to make sure we're in compliance but I feel as though this this checks the boxes for me I think strict applications of application of the provisions of the Land Development regulations um wouldn't permit them to use it how the how the code intended um and that's what we're resolving here is bringing an alignment um the intention of the code with what's actually being allowed in reality so um I'll support it I agree it also reduces the intensity of the property and all right um then I'll entertain a motion all right let's make sure I get this right the city commission has determined that unnecessary hardship does exist pursuant to section 70- 221 of the the Treasure Island code of ordinances and has moved to approve a variance request to Section 74- 102 to reduce the required width from 70 feet to 58.7 for proposed lot a and excuse me commissioner are you um approving with the conditions that were outlined by staff or correct okay now would I be would I read through that in here or no you can just say um um with conditions as identified in the staff report okay with conditions that we're identified with the staff report okay is for the first variance would we take a vote on the first and then second yes second okay that's been moved and seconded um we've already had our discussion and um public comment so we'll do roll call vice mayor doctor I commissioner Minn I commissioner dicki I commissioner Toof I mayor Payne I thank you thank you next motion okay the second variance request the city commission has determined that an unnecessary hardship does exist pursuant to section 70- 221 of the Treasure Island code of ordinance and has moved to approve with conditions with conditions uh set forth second okay um roll call please vice mayor doctor I commissioner Minn I commissioner dicki I commissioner Toth hi mayor pay hi thank you thank you all right is there any further business that needs to be before the commission right hearing none we will adjourn our regular meeting and we will reconvene in about five minutes for our Workshop meeting thank you all for being here e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e start the meeting did you get that nail what did you get that nail yeah I me all right welcome back um this is the city of Treasure Island Workshop meeting for August 20th 2024 um thank you for being here we'll go ahead and get started with our city manager and City attorney report I have nothing to report this evening thank you our city manager in the interest of time I have nothing to report all right thank you very much all right we'll move into our discussion items on on the workshop first up is B1 which are the remaining items for the fiscal year 2025 budget I'll turn it over even mayor and Commissioners um we uh left a couple of items that were kind of up in the air after the uh budget Workshop um and so we just have a couple of little uh loose end items that we just need uh input from the commission before we can have the uh the final uh City commission proposed budget U scheduled for September 3rd so uh I've got two weeks to make any changes that the commission may have so that I can get a a budget document prepped and ready for you guys to uh to vote on um so the uh the two uh really kind of remaining items is just kind of an overview of the fee schedule and uh an evaluation of the proposed uh purchase order roles uh a purchase order roll and uh carry forward items uh this is basically any projects that have been started uh meaning they've got a purchase order outstanding for them or any project that's been allocated but yet not commenced um as to whether or not um what the commissions um Mike if you can pause do we I'm happy have an issue mayor everyone has to be in a seat so we can maintain the wi of the okay our fire chief is recommending we have to have everyone in a seat so if everyone if anyone doesn't have a seat we do have overflow seating in the in the foyer if anyone has any difficulty hearing us in the foyer please let us know and we will Rectify that got two more three more chairs there okay thank you I don't stink too bad so there's an extra chair up here if there's if anybody needs one um so basically I'd like to go through the uh the sort of the basically the changes in the fee schedule um the various uh directors are here to answer any specific questions that you might have um as to the the wise and the uh um what fors for any of those changes um and then we'll move into um an updated view of the purchase outstanding purchase orders and the carry forward list um I have just during the meeting break provided all of you with a revised uh version of that PO rooll and carry forward that was updated earlier today and posted on the website but just uh just to make sure that you guys have the latest and greatest I went ahead and printed off that version so that you guys uh uh have that one to peruse um in that document you'll see the uh the carry forward list um is pretty straightforward has the uh project name the department that's uh involved the account code where it's uh currently budgeted and the current uh amount and each fund uh that would be available for those projects um the other list is the uh outstanding po form um and that has that is active as of yesterday I ran that one yesterday morning um and the highlighted items on that report are purchase orders that we believe uh will not be carried forward into FY 25 for any number of reasons so the highlighted ones on there you can largely ignore uh there's just no way of not running those on the report so I just wanted to uh make sure that that was highlighted uh so that we can kind of focus on the the issues that need to be addressed um for as far as the fee schedule go I'm just going to go through the uh different sections in the book and just kind of highlight can I interrupt you real quick do you have anything to put on the screen or um I I do not but I can pull up the uh I could pull up the fee schedule that would be great okay just so that the audience can see follow along oh thank you Stacy I didn't think the file was quite that large all right so starting on page four um Community Development um the uh yes CDD uh building permit fees are increased to reflect changes in the uh Building Department Services contracts that the commission approved I believe at the last meeting uh those contracts went up 3% so we've adjusted uh the rates um as best we can it's not a we can't just necessarily add 3% onto them the way that they're structured uh so we've made uh the best adjustment uh to those rates to make sure that we're capturing um our cost in addition to uh any fees uh that are included in that uh the zoning flood plane and civil review uh fees are also increased toct higher engineering costs uh Planning and Zoning Board fees are increased to uh reflect additional staff time and cost required to cover the review and the npds um inspections on page 11 um it's being increased from $25 to $35 just to cover that uh additional cost that's uh involved in those fees um does the commission want me to handle like each section by itself or do we just go kind of go through each of the different uh programs and if you guys have any questions we can stop there sure and just in the interest of time if anyone has any questions as Mike's going along feel free I just TR please I I please interrupt me I don't like hearing the sound of my voice either um for the fire section here on page 13 uh with the increase for the iaff uh collective bargaining agreement uh the uh special detail rates for our firefighters have gone up accordingly this is basically if um somebody needs to rent firefighters for an event or something like that this is the uh stated hourly rate uh in Parks and Recreation this is probably where we're going to have some of the largest changes and where we will need um some commission input uh the summer camp fees are being increased to just reflect those increased costs to put on the program that's on page 14 there um this is the one where we think that we will need some input from the commission the golf fees uh are increased and the rates are change somewhat um in anticipation for the increased costs for the golf course um if if the commission this kind of dovetails to the second conversation for this item um what the commission is Desiring to do with the golf course kind of uh affects what staff would recommend uh for this Revenue um at this point since the the initial base bids uh were cancelled and we've gone out to to rebid um staff is recommending that we actually revert this and go back to our current rates for fy2 not knowing exactly when and how and what we might do with the golf course um it just feels like we should probably keep the rates again the same way they are for another year so the rates that are in here reflected the new ones um if the commission uh would like for us to keep the current rates this will be reverted back to what they currently are you me pause there for any conversation and me keep on uh going through the golf stuff I figured that would be sense okay through yeah I agree play through as it as it is that was uh we had that conversation yesterday and it was uh it was anticipating that we'd be bidding like the golf course would be awarded and we'd be making these changes but if we're not we can hold that off and till we make another decision on the golf course uh the facility rental fees are updated to reflect the new spaces in this building that's on page 16 and the uh Park Improvement fund Mike I do have a question here on on the uh Beach pavil in particular uh the uh I'm glad to see that you guys added a 25% discount for uh residents for uh rentals of all the public parks and Facilities so I'm glad to see that in there but it's still at $150 an hour I know we've had a couple of residents that have rented the Pavilion recently and there's a 4-Hour minimum so for a a woman a resident that wanted to give a seventh uh a birthday party for seven year old she had to pay $600 uh just to get uh just to rent the uh Pavilion for 4 hours anyway so I said I'm glad to see the 25% discount in there but I really would like to uh encourage uh the commission to consider a 50% discount for residents uh renting the the Pavilion in particular any thoughts on that yeah I think our resident should get a break excuse me I think our resident should get a break I 50% discount on the Pavilion as opposed to 25% for residents for residents what is the thinking on that cost is it especially like the 4our deal is that because when we put somebody on overtime we're not going to call them in for one hour of overtime and so you so what how does that build that's precisely I I I don't want to speak necessarily for Kathy in her department but for the way I understand it um is that because those are on the weekend if we're going to have somebody that's staffed is going to be here on the weekend it's kind of like making it worth their while uh so that's why the the minimum was Set uh for the weekend there's Mike you can give us answer that is correct Mike you explain it correct Mike yes yeah the Pavilion used uh and I agree with the rates uh in the minimums especially like for wedding parties and stuff like that which uh which I think the Pavilion gets a lot of that type of activity but for a local resident that just wants to throw a birthday party for for seven-year-old yeah uh the 50% discount I I would encourage that to reduce the required minimum hours so you know you're not going to run a 4-Hour birthday party we do versus you know a wedding that's going to be four hours all right that's good because then we run into that too no no minimum required for residence is what you're suggesting well I was saying like two hours would cut be 50% okay all right I would agree with that yeah if I could mayor I'd just like to know Mike if we do something like that by reducing the number of minimum hours do you cover costs yeah we'll cover costs but we will uh we'll cover all cost of Staff electricity and stuff like that but uh any like for future updates of a facility or something that won't be covering extra costs for stuff like that though okay what percentage would you say the usage of the Pavilion is right residents versus non-residents I looked that up yesterday actually so uh I would at the Pavilion and Community Center both I did it's 18% residents to non-residents so 18% resident rate or not rate 18% is of the rentals is residents yeah so I'm okay with either either approach what do we have a preference I like commissioner to's recomendation minum hours yeah to do the apply the 50% both to the minimum hours into to the rate so resident okay so what you're saying is a Treasure Island resident or a business owner can get a 50% discount on the rate and the minimum hours half of the minimum hours yes the minimum hours going down to two versus four correct yeah it is important to not here too the the minimum for the uh for the Beach Pavilion is week days it is a 2hour minimum weekends it's 4our minimum so would be too I thought four hours all the way straight through week days are two hours yeah how about we just we change the discount to 20 50% but and change the minimum hour for the weekends to two two or only or do you only want that to be for residents only for two minimum for residents 4our minimum for non-residents okay does that make sense yes everyone good with that thank you all right so we're going to go to the next uh topic which would be the uh parking no the next one is the the last item on the parks and wre is the park Improvement fund change uh that was a couple of years ago we created that fund um and basically net profits for any non for any profit oriented R um previously had to contribute 3% to the park Improvement fund now we're bumping that up to five just uh because we've got uh some downtown uh Treasure Island and park improvements that we've got scheduled and uh just some other um projects that we have and the three to 3% to 5% is still a nominal um uh fee tacked onto those for-profit events that are booked so it's 5% of net profits of net profits and so what does that consist of how how do you build that I mean and and we're just taking money away from ourselves right and moving from one pocket to the other no it's this would be um this is the net profits from any um so the uh uh Sports Fest the volleyball got it okay so this is this is those type of events those those events that make so they make $20,000 when they're out there on the beach the city would get 5% the volleyball and the okay got it thank you yeah that's what I thought it was I wasn't quite sure thanks okay uh and then we move on to the uh finance and parking uh sections uh changing the uh parking meter rates uh to 375 uh per hour all times and eliminating the uh discount for uh the community center the downtown Community Center Parking uh this one was a largely request from Parks and wreck uh mainly because of the weekend bookings of the community center uh they often times were not having enough parking at the community center because people who were going to the beach realized they could park for cheaper at the community center and walk over so it was displacing people who were booking at the community center from being able to park at the community center and they were having to find other parking uh so just a a way of reconciling that and making the rates kind of a little more streamlined uh throughout the city okay so as this reads everything is going to be 375 yes whatever parking that we have yes except except for this except for the Sunset Beach which has its uh the5 yeah okay um I'd like to see us take this up to $4 yeah I agree what is yeah let's yeah especially so if you take a look just below what we're doing is we're taking a look at all the residents where today we sell the residents a pass for 45 bucks this takes it down to $5 per account and an account basically is the license plate of your car yes so that basically now instead of buying two two of the the uh permits for $990 you're going to get two permits for $10 so it's a $5 for each of your car you know if you got one it's $5 you got two cars you got $10 uh and that's uh that's basically a a big improvement from the cost of going from $90 to $10 for two cars that now are registered so then the increase if we increase parking meter rates to $4 that's really born by visitor not that that's yeah that's by visors you'd think that all residents would put the $5 in if if it's they want to park uh in the cars my concern about rolling the price uh back from $45 to $5 were losing about uh about 60,000 50,000 a year in revenue is according to your budget that's a drop in the bucket considering the whole general fund I realize it's a drop in the bucket but we we historically have had about 1,500 people will pay for that $45 pass and now we're roughly and now we're dropping it to five but what the other part of that the physical pass now you're you're talking about uh charging $100 for that and I did have some residents that reached out to me that weren't uh very techsavvy and asked uh if they could get the physical pass rather than that and initially they've been told they can't do that out on Sunset Beach so uh not after this year after this year they can still get the physical pass this year but next year would cost them $100 instead of $45 no I'm looking at item number uh if they wanted the physical hang tag correct yeah that's what I'm saying so hang on if someone come we'll have time for public comment after we're done discussing um if someone comes into the front desk and asks to buy a permit we have a public computer here right and our staff is more than willing to help assist a resident to purchase that through the online portal our staff has admin rights and can basically manage any resident's account so if we have a resident that's never ever ever used a computer they can still come in and get the License Plate Reader the E pass and it will be as exactly as seamless as it was previously right for $5 is that correct for $5 as opposed to 45 why would we do the physical pass um in the past the physical pass was was largely done um to move between Vehicles because we didn't have a way of registering vehicles that was the way of sharing that privilege now that we've got the ability uh to change license plates and on in a instant have a different license plate registered to that user's account it's the effectively the same as transferring the physical pass right why have the physical pass the the question that I'm asking because we knew that there would be people that would well but the thing is is that uh you know if you go down to like St Pete and that they they don't have it I mean everybody's operating off an application that you know an app that's taking care of everything and it seems like it would make more sense and you know that we're not going to be uh having to move you know they well I guess you wouldn't be able to move but you you C can go on let me you can go on the computer and you can change if you got a visitor you could put them under a pass correct yes okay so what you're getting is that yeah the residents are getting the benefit of for their car to be able to park but even a guest if they you know go on the computer and go in or can they call in and if they they're not Savvy and somebody's going to change it for them if they can call in and we can confirm their identity we'd be happy to so like an elderly person that has a caregiver that drives them to and from and uses a different car the Hang tag is very useful for them for that purpose because they have somebody that's different driving them and they don't necessarily come during City Staffing hours so I think some a little reduction for some of our residents from $100 for situations that really do require a hang tag like for example my parents have caregivers they drive them different places when I can't and if they can take my parent they take the Hang tag and use it from my car to theirs to take my parents to the beach or different places so that makes it transferable that way without them calling the city staff because we don't necessarily know that they're going to go during City business hours so the $100 I think is a very high charge for that so I'd like to lobby for to keep the physical pass uh but to keep it at $45 instead of 100 thank you oh I don't have I just am wondering why we're gonna have pass yeah commission that scenario makes sense and I think the intention in making it $100 was probably to disincentivize people from getting that pass to reduce the um staff time to issue them um but I agree I think a $5 compared to $45 is plenty of an enough of an incentive to encourage people to go online and do that instead of coming in and getting the hang tag and if they want to come and get the hang tag they can I would uh my only question for that one is is just as far as administering this program uh what is what's the split so can somebody come in and get a hang tag in two passes can they come in and get a hang tag in one pass can they get two passes like we where now U creating another Pandora's box of situations that my staff is going to have to deal with well we've always had two passes per that that was only three years ago that we added the second pass yeah okay so we were do one hang pass and the other one today is the the sticker right yes and now it's going to be the license plate and possibly so I think we'd stay with the one hang per per per address per address okay yeah because I don't see that somebody that's going to need a hang tag is going to really worry about Electronics so is it is it no more than two passes per address regardless of what format correct okay I'm sorry I was I'm what what are people thinking about the $4 from 375 to $4 we're we're going to be losing $60,000 uh by reducing everybody from $45 down to five uh that's a way to pick up you know three or 4% of the revenue you know by going up the extra quarter I will say in the years past whenever we've thought about raising the parking rate I always uh anticipate some discouragement so I take whatever our current parking volume has been I add whatever the new rate would be and then I reduce it by about 15% because there's probably going going to be some people who are discouraged from paying you know a slightly higher rate so that's that's always something that I factor in it's a just a way of hedging against making sure that it's not a it's not going to be a straight one: one so I we we do make some adjustments like that so the the revenue would likely go up I don't think it would be necessarily 375 it wouldn't be a linear uh increase I don't know go ahead just because of I'm sorry go ahead Mr just because it's at 375 doesn't means 6 months from now it can't go to four correct the the commission can can change the fee schedule any point in time during the fiscal year what is do you know off the top of your head what St P Beach and Mader Beach are at I think they're at the three the 375 I'll have to I I need to double check and uh verify they might actually have some different rates now in St Pete Beach I'm fine with the the four I think this is a big win for our residents to be able to get a passord $5 a year and if we can offset that loss in Revenue with increased um a quarter more an hour for visitors I think that that's fine I think that's a big win for our residents okay if that's I'm not in agreement no you're not in agreement on the four no not at this point in time I mean as I just asked Mike you know tomorrow we could change it right um but I well I'm not going to say what I was going to say but I think there's got to be some fairness all the way around and if we're a quar or less than madira good for us okay I agree with the $4 doll sounds like they're for visitors and it's an impact on our staffing what we have the passes are reduced on cost to our residents the electronic pass at $5 okay I can support yeah I can support the $4 as well uh with the argument being that we're lowering the electronic pass to $5 from 45 okay sounds good okay and then the only other one in the parking was uh upping the city special event parking from 20 to $25 a day uh that's basically the range it says that currently we can charge between 15 and 20 and we just wanted to change that to uh 20 to 25 uh and then last one or moving on to police U same thing with the fire department uh the special detail fees uh have been increased to reflect the personal services cost um we've also deleted the bike decal fee um uh Chief Barkley has told me that he's not even sure what this is and when we when we would have done this and what any of the rules are so if this is not a thing that our Police Department can even do or isn't even aware of we might as well to take it out of the fee schedule um oh and then we also have in here um and this will be an item that'll be coming back um hopefully here in the next couple of months um a change to the parking ordinance and this is one of the things that's holding up uh going to LPR Citywide is that we need to make a couple of little changes to our parking ordinance um just to make some to make enforcement possible uh so whenever we do that we'll also be bringing uh back this other change to move the actual fees the parking fees and fines from um its own Standalone section in the code of ordinances to the fee schedule so that it's easier to change on an annual basis whenever we do um the budget not we're not advocating that any of these should be changed but this is just an easier and more transparent way of uh having those fees uh and knowing exactly what all the fines are for uh those individual fees and then the uh the final change and this is one that uh I believe the the commission mentioned last year um and we were unsure if uh what the process would be but we've uh increased the business tax uh rates by 5% for all of the different categories and this would be effective for the next business tax renewal because the uh renewals for this year have already gone out so this would be for Effective August of next year um gives us a lot of time and and JY can uh help with uh some of the extra requirements that are involved on the legal side to make changes to the uh the business tax uh rates uh and with that that is um the only thing we have for the uh the fee schedule so if there are any questions about that we can pause now before we go into the the CIP stuff all right any questions from the commission on the Fe schedule all right thank you all right so I think probably the easiest way thank you Mike uh the easiest way probably to go through this is to um just look at the carry forward list first those are the uh um those are more of the projects that haven't uh that don't have a PO outstanding so these are um budgeted amounts that are currently available um in the budget are you able to pull this up wait a minute what about the uh I thought we were going going to get into fees for like Solid Waste pickup and that kind of stuff did we skip right over that or we that was discussed during the budget Workshop okay that is in the feast schedule you have any what I was gonna say was the uh I know in the original uh uh budget review that we had you had talked about raising Solid Waste uh 10% uh and recycling 3% and you explain the difference being that that 7 percent that we needed to acrew uh some money for to replace trucks uh garbage trucks down there a portion so of that increase would be U largely it's to build up the fund balance to replace uh the garbage trucks but the other reason is the hauling The Tipping fees at the pelis County Dump have didn't change for 30 years and in the past couple of years they've been drastically increasing their tipping fees so that's what's driving um our percentage difference compared to the recycling and yeah so that's the 7% is large is just due to the hauling 3% is is the The Tipping uh and the 3% is um is what's what we're building up for the fund balance okay thank you for that clarification Mike if I could tipping is land fill Fe is correct correct yes good thank you okay all right can you pull up the carry forward let me ask a question now that you've pulled this up okay so when we went through the budget we did the capital approvement program and it was for fiscal year 25 through fiscal year 29 correct but when we take a look at the carryovers none of those carryovers re are reflected being in uh the 25 expenditure that's although I'm going to guess that what you're going to tell me is that because you got the carryover sheet they automatically go into the year 25 carryover no the okay so how do we how do we work that how does this money get uh portioned off from the fiscal year 25 to 29 I I guess I'm not understanding the question so during during the year there's some fancy government accounting that has to be done and with all of these projects um at the staff level we assume that the projects will be completed so on paper we have to pretend like all of those projects will be fully spent at the end of Any Given fiscal year so that money has already been budgeted appropriated and revenues have come in to support them so that's that's money that is our uh uh been ACR been where are you going to put that expenditure in the capital program it would it it would carry forward to fy2 okay so basically things that we don't even know what our expenditures are going to be or even that we want to continue to do those expenditures automatically get a free pass into next year's capital budget not necessarily a free pass the this has always been a list that the commission has had every year as part of the budget adoption process um of the the list of projects that um are recommended to be continued into the next fiscal year okay but I call that a free pass because we don't know that we want to do all these things at the staff level we we have to assume if the commission has put a project in the budget that you are wish to continue to do that project okay so at any point in time during the year if the commission says we don't want to do that project and anymore staff is happy to draw a line through it and forecast it is not being spinned and commissioner and a if I could what we're doing here is we're trying to give some visibility into previously approved projects and their funding sources and amounts so that there's visibility to what was previously committed to by the commission and what is being proposed for the future out years for the CIP you know so you can see both sides and and and this is the opportunity for the commission to take a look at this and say okay hypothetically if there was something in there for you know the city manager's new car and we wanted to replace and give them a new car every year and you want to remove that this year then this is your opportunity to take away my car which you don't have for the record yes if he does he's got don't have the most current version okay but you're correct so these are all items that have been approved in previous budgets yes that we've already discussed through our budget work shops that hasn't necessarily those projects haven't been completed yet yeah these These are projects that haven't even been and some of these are multiple year carryovers um for a few of them they might be and that's it's a little bit of a misnumber to say it's a multiple year because some of these projects like the uh the Curbing and storm water um $100,000 is not um you know is is not a ton of money on an annual basis but if we don't spend it for three years $300,000 will get a better economy of scale uh and a contractor will give us much more favorable rates if we have $300,000 worth of work versus $100,000 worth of work I get that but then we're putting money aside that we really don't plan to spend next year so that money sits in an account someplace and maybe makes interest someplace but but we're still setting it aside yes if you want to think about it like that it's not like each of these have their own bank account uh this you know the budget is just a uh a a a way of overlaying onto your current cash flows how you plan on allocating and spending so if I want to if I want to take a look at saying I'm going to do some pavement and it's going to be 500,000 we would be setting aside 100,000 next year then the next year then the next year and then when it builds to 500,000 then we're going to use it because now it's you know the volume or or or we it when it's 200,000 and there's a massive need a a road has washed out or something along those lines at any point in time we you know have the ability to use that funding um it's just more advantageous in some instances if we can U amass it and spend it you know in chunks rather than a little bit every single year so we could you know philosophically if we say that we're spending half a million dollars over five years we could budget half a million dollars in one year in the fifth year and just wait until that fifth year comes around to do all those projects but what you end up doing is eliminating the ability to do any of those projects in the four years before that so if you if you cut out all of your Paving money and you needed to do a Paving project and you didn't have any currently budgeted funds to do a Paving project it's going to take six weeks because we're going to have to do a budget amendment which is an ordinance and an ad in the p just to add money to do Paving in that example so how much is our carryover budget uh it depends on year to year this how about this year this one the total would be uh 15 million yeah 15, 836 th000 right so almost 16 million uh yes so I think what yeah if I can interrupt what this tells me is that and I'm glad that we're looking at this because it I I we have not had a sheet like this in past in reviewing the budget so what this tells me is that we are budgeting for part I understand the the pavement sort of situation where we're building up something to take advantage of economies a scale but this tells me that we've budgeted for things in the past that we didn't have the bandwidth to accomplish so I think that being it's it's nice to have high goals and things but if we and maybe that's a that's a knock on us as a commission in reviewing the budget is taking a closer look and really having a better dialogue with our staff about what is feasible what are you going what can you actually accomplish this year is this are we setting too high of goals for ourselves so I think that creating this document and reviewing that even on a quarterly basis would be a really great idea so that we can monitor this and work that number down right now we have all these projects that we have already approved in the past um and I think an exercise that would be valuable since this isn't necessarily something that we're approving right now would be and I'm not suggesting we do this tonight but maybe at a future Workshop that we go through each one of these line item by line item get an update of where we're at why it has carried over and then do a sort of ranking system like we did with the city manager selection process where each one of us provides a priority to that Pro project and we take an aggregate score to rank these and really give the city staff some guidance on what's important and what's not to the commission because we're the ones that are determining that that would provide them some better Clarity um and maybe there's some things on here that we've previously committed to that we don't really care about anymore and it's something that we all vote a zero on and then it can just be it can be eliminated and we can put that money back to the fund balance I think that's an excellent idea and I'm glad uh participate in that process I agree and then also we give the staff and everybody priority to what items where they rank on getting things done and accomplished versus running around trying to get a whole slew of projects done that we might not be able to does that address your concerns so do we want to keep on going through this list or do or do we want to kind of just pause and let you guys look at the this list and the PO list and we'll we'll come back uh at the on the third and yeah I I as long as we do this again and and get into greater detail and prioritize I think that's a good suggestion I just had one question about the one and a half million for a Gulf Boulevard undergrounding I thought in our last meeting Mike you had mentioned uh that uh that if we didn't use that money this year that we were going to lose it uh for the Golf Boulevard undergrounding of the utilities Golf Boulevard undergrounding is um is a County uh funded project and it's for undergrounding the power lines and the cables and putting in new lights on Golf Boulevard they they gave us uh 5.3 million to finish up the the rest of it we're going to finish it up about 2.4 to 2.5 million and and after that we cannot use that money for anything else so it's not that we're not using it we just got it done I did put in a proposal to the county which was turned down um a couple months ago to underground uh 108th Avenue and they at this point put didn't say no you can't ever do it they said you can't do it now until All the Monies have been used up by the other um um communities on the in the U big sea so it's not that we're losing the money we just have no way of getting to it right no I understand that so that's why I guess I was asking why we were carrying it Forward at what point in time would we know that we were going to be able to use this money or not the one one and a half million let me see what you're looking at right we we probably have 400 to $500,000 left to do so that that carry forward is yeah we got a million extra in there but it's it's because each year we get 1.5 million from them to do the undergrounding so that's why that number is in there okay Mike if I could or mayor I think in this project what had happened was staff had done a lot of the work here where other municipalities had outsourced and used private contractors to do their engineering and construction site management their costs were larger and they expended all of their money they were allocated the city here did not expend everything so pelis county has to make a decision whether we can keep the money we were allocated to further underground or if we need to use that money to pay for other municipalities who overexpanded their money that is correct that's right very good I got that right y well that's a very that's a very good argument though that was that was good so we're paying for their inefficiency Chuck that's a very good argument and I'm sure we're using that with the county of us keeping that money because had we done what other municipalities are doing that money wouldn't be there to be reallocated to other municipalities correct and and that's the Fidelity that we would like to give the commission you know to understand each particular project some have more than one funding source some might be linked into a grant project and maybe there's a deadline for a grant a deadline that is passed but that's the Fidelity that we need to give to the commission and the visibility with the other older Emy previous approved projects and the upcoming ones and that's what we're going to do on a quarterly basis yeah it' be nice to know where the funding was coming from on this besides the amount Chuck did we ever figure out the uh Treasure Bay ponds Improvement you know I I got with finance and we could not find that dollar amount so I was going to circle back with you and ask for your book and and I don't know if it's a maybe a draft version from a previous CIP but I'd like to get that from you if we could okay yeah sure thank you all right anything else it seems like we'll be coming back to you on the third with a better list and uh we'll have a we'll have an auction and again this I mean I I don't want to necessarily commit ourselves to the third depending on what the agenda looks like this isn't necessarily something that needs to be done before we adopt the budget okay I if if the the only if we don't adopt this with the budget we would have to do a budget amendment to carry these this money forward if we do it as part of the budget we don't have to go through that whole process but a budget amendment is an option though for a budget amendment is is absolutely an option it just it's an ordinance and requires two meetings and an ad in the newspaper it's just an extra little burden but you know we ordinance would be removing one of these things from no in order for in order for this to get carried forward over into fy2 it needs to be one of the items that's with your budget adoption memo right I'm saying that we could we could carry this all forward and then afterwards take a look at some of these if there are any of these projects that need to be eliminated yes the the commission is going to have uh everything that's on this page will have the ability to not approve it when staff comes up to approve it we would have a a conversation if there's something on this list that you don't want we just won't do it and then next year you can scratch it off and not bring it forward this is just these are what has been approved in the budget but not been requested by staff to be used in the budget these will all have to come back up here again to be approved for you all to for us to even spend the money but we're holding the money for it that is correct that's the problem yeah so it's not that it's been hasn't and we know that it'll need to be approved again but the I think the thing that the residents are concerned about is that we've budgeted for that we're holding that money and we haven't accomplished these projects so I do want I think either way we do it we have the opportunity to take them out um whether we do that before the before after I just want to reserve some discretion on timing if we have a really busy meeting on the third um not sure unless unless there's a feeling that that's an urgent thing that needs to be done at the next meeting I no I I agree with you it doesn't have on the third but it should be you know soon soon yeah okay we can I'd be happy to schedule that one for early October and this will be my final plug for the Strategic plan I think if we had a new strategic plan we would know which money needs to get SP first so uh that's my last little plug for the evening all right thank you all right we have a few speaker cards for public comment on the budget agenda item right tuning R tuning 11205 Third Street East uh didn't have anything prepared I was waiting to see exactly what was going to be discussed tonight there's a couple things that uh that stuck out for me one is this carryover we've had that sheet for I don't know three or four days and we've gone through it um I'm surprised you guys just got it tonight I don't understand had a few days ago was well but we had every I'm glad that that's not the case um the 23 to 24 carryover was 8 million and now it's whatever 15 17 I don't know what exactly what it is but I think what that shows and I'm sure some other speakers will will be talking about this is that we're paying taxes it's going into accounts and it's not being spent and I think what I had said earlier about the lift station U is is the bottom of the problem is really the the Crux of the problem which is that these projects are approved we we are we're gathered around them we really want them to happen and they're not getting done they're just not getting done right and so it's the city manager's responsibility to find out why they're not getting done and I think uh what you had said earlier is true is we're biting off more than we can Cho so if we don't have the capabilities and the people and the and wherewithal to get them done then we should be collecting perhaps maybe a little less taxes or find resources outside that can get it done if they're critical but uh this has got to to stop the other thing is I saw that there was a summary sent out about the capital Improvement projects and um there were a lot of things the last uh Workshop I was here there was a lot of things that I saw a lot of heads going up and down with respect to some of the projects that needed to be pulled out of there such as the $876,000 for the for the West Causeway and stuff like that and so we have a new one that comes out and there's no changes no changes so um I don't know if maybe those changes are going to be done before you guys vote on them but I hope that all of you will be saying here today after I'm through speaking those changes need to be made and when they're brought forth to you guys that you're not going to vote on you're going to say no I'm not going to vote on this this budget because I asked you to take them out and you didn't take them out so I hope that you guys will do that so I saw a not ahead I hope you do that thank you thank you all right Cara Sim hi Caris Sim again 780 Capri um I was unable to attend the last one but I've been very familiar with numbers and reading everything um for the last couple months um so I do appreciate all the work you guys have put in um I um I've lost I've lost a lot of faith um in the uh the staff um of the city um not necessarily um the Commissioners but um I've just noticed there's a lot of discrepancies um and there's a lot of focus on things that I don't necessarily believe the residents are for um in terms of you know for example um all these EV vehicles um I'm not really sure what the direction is we're trying to go with electric um obviously we're all about saving the environment but when we're dealing with storm surge and water and Golf Boulevard um lithium batteries and water don't go um so that may be something to consider um also I noticed in the budget um you know obviously all the police now have their own Vehicles I'm not quite sure why we need an extra one um at 68,000 so maybe y'all can let me know what that is um also another code vehicle both of these are electric by the way for 30,000 um also uh $6 million Public Works building um you know I was under the impression and I've spoken to a couple of y'all up there that we are looking at hopefully um Outsourcing garbage um like most cities um and um you know when it comes to that $60,000 loss for changing resident parking from $45 to5 I don't have any confidence that we're going to recoup that in any way um so I'm actually for just keeping the way it is I don't see why I don't see whose idea it was I've never heard a neighbor complain about a $45 for the year to park um ever um in all the years I've been here um so I I really don't understand why we have to even bother changing it um have we thought about a bridge tax um obviously that's I don't even think been brought up at all um and I saw there's a non-department pool car another electric vehicle um for 45,000 not sure what that would be for um Transformer that needs relocated for 650,000 where is that um and why isn't Duke taking care of that um there's another one in the middle of a parking lot behind Ricky te's maybe they can take care of that one you guys can get like a two for one deal or something um and then relocating I saw the police why don't we put them in this big beautiful building instead of building them their own building um and then roselli Park obviously I'm on Capri I play tennis um I do love pickle ball but I would hate to see that whole facility turned into pickle ball courts um so I really hope before you guys make any final decisions on that and just nixing tennis altogether that you consider the residents that live in that District um and even around in all of TI who play over there and talk to them and see actually what they want that to be spent um because it looks like you guys want to spend 183,000 um to change that over all together um or I saw you can just reline the Treasure Bay courts that you have already for 35 um to heck of a savings but um I really just hope at the end of the day that we're smart with our money um and that's all thank you thank you Andrew vasy Andrew VY uh 6th Street East aisle of Palms want to hit on three things parking first um commissioner doctor I think you have the right idea on looking at uh variable fees I think the idea about making an event change is a good one in that you would Target something like Sandy ovations I think what you're missing though and I've raised this before um in front of the commission and I spoke to the new city manager when he was a candidate is um consider doing a business plan for the parking there is the the technology that's out there now that we use at airports for example provide Dynamic pricing so that you can set your pricing for an event but it doesn't have to be that price all the time for that event you have them where when cars leave they reset the meter back to zero so when you get that first drop again that it zeros out the meter so people aren't using the other meters there's all different Revenue ways that work for this so I think that that rather than saying well mad's doing this what I do be a little more scientific about it and do a business plan for it and um I think you'll you'd be surprised by the results on the revenue side the reason I think this is important is it makes up 10% of the um of the city general fund and so doing well in parking is going to help us on the tax side because you're going to increase revenues as long as you don't keep growing the budget 50% like we've talked about second thing is on the rollover you're doing the right thing to look at it because the rollover is pretty much based on the projects and the history of those and we've looked at those over the last three years now they're rolling over because projects aren't getting done um I don't think you should kick the can down the road though because by taking discretion like you just said you would all you're doing is pushing it over to the budget and then it's going to roll to October to January Ary to March and then next August we're going to be back here talking about a rollover that's up again you have and the last thing on the on the capital project that ties to the rollover right now you have an $18 million capital budget for this budget six of million of that is the bond issue for the Public Works building um many of us have said you got to get the lift station done you got a $5 million Grant three years ago whenever it was construction inflation is running 10% a year I'm in that business that's what it's running that means your $5 million Grant from two years ago has $4 million worth of buying power but your project still costs $5 million so that million dollars that you just lost through inflation for two years is going to come back somewhere so get the lift station project going decouple it from public works and then do the work on 108 Street to look at the value of the land you left behind by buying this building at least create some value for what you did by coming in here by rethinking 108 Street which is a waterfront property which is City controlled and that you can generate some revenue for us and offset our our um our tax burden for what you want to do so those are my three high level comments oh I want to say one more thing when as part of this year's budget for the 18 million we've identified items that should be deferred which would only run up your rollover so of the 18 million there's 10 million of deferral what makes that number look so large is that you you have a $6.1 million bond issue scheduled in this budget for the Public Works building so if you defer the public works you look at 108 what it could be then you don't do the bond issue this year that's six million of it right there you have another two million for the Public Works building the Public Works building is not a $6 million project it's an $8 million project because it has the transformer in it it has a $610,000 contingency that you added into it which is essentially a makeup for not getting it done and having the cost run up not that all projects shouldn't have contingency because they do but this is a contingency that got added to the budget this hasn't been carried and grow growing as a percentage of the actual budget this is new for this year into into this cost you also have another $200,000 for connectivity so you had 400,000 the last time and now you're adding another $200,000 to it this year in from the rollover and you haven't spent any of it and I'm not up here to spend it I'm saying what Ry said which is look at giving some of that back because you're not using it and it's there year after year you have two side loader garbage trucks are 830,000 but we should be looking at how we're going to deliver Services we're a city of 6,000 the only city that does her own garbage as clear water they're a city of 120,000 that's 20 times bigger than our population and we and we're doing this I'm not saying it's the right answer but it needs to be evaluated professionally looked at thank you very much thank you all right Greg Smith Greg Smith 53 104th Avenue I'm going to I'm going to try to help you prioritize a little bit on that rollover I just do it I would do a millage rate reduction absolute millage rate reduction that that we got 15 million 16 million guys that's ridiculous that that's poor that's poor planning it's poor budgeting it's even poorer execution I I I mean it's almost like we should be asking for a bank Charter we're just collecting deposits and then then this is why I think I can say it now because it's up there this is why we're concerned about Elevate TI it's a it's a huge project and we can't get anything done you manage a $250 million road project and we can't manage a lift station come on guys all right do we have any other public comment on the budget mark p it's probably I had it marked on two things on one I apologize probably under the pile there apologize for that someone stapled five of yours together so I assume were all on non agenda I only had one card for two topics here they didn't throw in the shredder no you're right um Mark hoey 225 104th Avenue so I first off want to say I appreciate how our uh budget workshop on August 2nd was run uh I had prepared a considerable number of questions prior to it in reviewing that original proposed budget and the fact that we were able to interact in between as those various buckets came up for discussion answered virtually all my questions but I had a few that I needed to carry over and I was hoping they might be covered or answered before tonight or certainly if not then I'll ask them now so let me just throw these out um you were quick to comment about uh the golf fees and with the push off of Treasure Bay renovation a bit I'm understand leaving it where it is but if you noticed in the budget it was flat all the way through 2029 even taking into consideration that at some point something was going to be done with Treasure Bay so I would just ask that that's a flag that maybe uh yes once that money if it comes and is invested in that facility that we should be charging accordingly for that facility um there was also an anomaly in the uh Public Works budget and there was a approximately $4 million increase between the fiscal year 24 budget and what was actual and there wasn't any explanation as to why that big bump in one year from what was planned to what was actually spent in 24 now I know that's the past but I think that's a worthy question to say what happened because obviously we just added to that for the 20 25 forecast and then speaking back to Treasure Bay not the project but just operating we have seen that go up it was had a budget of $ 63,5 se6 in fiscal year 23 and it has steadily uh Rose and it's ballooned to a projected now or forecast 1,2,1,2 for 2025 so again this is the facilities we've all been talking about in disrepair and all the things we talked about but why is where's that money going it's not going towards the project of rebuilding it it's just operating cost and then the final one and commissioner minning I I see your Expressions at times when we talk about oh it's only $660,000 yeah you and I I think think the same way small dollars add up to Big dollars over time so this is a small one but we have a $9,000 uh tag in the budget for vending machines for vending machine n okay big deal but the earnings from our vending machine shown on income SES only $6,800 so what are we subsidizing for $2,200 with the vending machines that the city owns and operates don't understand that but thank you for your time thank you all right do we have any other public comments on the budget all right hearing none um is there anything else the commission wants to add before we push this forward to the actual budget hearing ask M do you have anything else I no comment I'll see you guys on the third okay um just to kind of we'll I in the interest of time I did write down some of the questions that folks had at public comment we'll be sure to kind of touch base on those um in between now and the budget hearing I just want to I know a lot of you are here for Elevate ti so Mark I do have your emails still in uh are your questions in an email so I'll follow up with you and make sure that you get answers to those questions um and as far as the budget not being updated like I think there was Mr tuning that commented on that this the the agenda item for tonight was not an adjustment or a review to the things that we suggested during our budget hearing it was a carryover for the remainder of things that we didn't get to discussing at the original budget Workshop yes um so a revised budget will be provided at the actual budget hearing when we when we discuss that so all of the things that we discussed at the budget hearing and gave direction to the staff to be adjusted will be adjusted in the in the proposed budget when we have it at the hearing correct correct yes I I provided the the draft CIP list and that was you can tell it was the old version because it has my notes in it um that I made during the meeting so it is very much the outdated one um it it will be updated and will reflect what is um in the adopted budget book great thank you thank you all right we'll move on to our next um item which is B2 which everyone's been waiting for presentation of the treasur island Trin modification program we'll have our staff presentation and we'll have our time for public comment and our our commission discussion good evening since we went through quite a lot on the technicalities of this program back on July 30th um we wanted to focus on the ordinance revisions that accompany those tonight so it's a much shorter presentation I promise than than what we had before I know it's late um before we get going I just wanted to um put it out there again that the basic purpose of this program is to allow us to continue to drain storm water from our streets so while we'll talk a lot about you know eight different ordinances that we've modified to allow us to develop a train modification program that is the goal that was identified um in our watershed management plan that was adopted back in 2021 um one of the other things to keep in mind as we go through the presentation through the eight ordinances we've identified the changes to the ordinances on each section each chapter but we've highlighted in blue those changes that that directly support the program so as we've discussed in other items tonight our codes are old and they are outdated and as we were going through these they needed a good deal of cleanup um so we'll talk about those too but so while this looks like a lot of changes you'll see that those changes directly supporting this program are not as big as they may otherwise seem um another thing that was mentioned tonight that um that was a good point that I would like to re iterate is this project is behind schedule we've worked on it a very long time um and while we feel that we have spent countless hours reviewing every scenario that we possibly could to make this program as good as it possibly can be we completely recognize that there's going to be tweaks along the way these these will come back before you we will ask for revisions once we get to that you know 15th 20th 30th permit oh no we need to we need to kind of take another look at this again and um as was said earlier these things are not set in stone if something is not working for us that is a chance for us to go back and revisit that but we do feel that we have a very good start to where we are today all right y I have one other thing to say um we interrupting no no no we are interrupting tonight and I really appreciate you doing that um this program the eight ordinances are a package deal so this is a program where um we can't pick and choose because there have been and we will go through it in detail changes to each of these ordinances that allow us to use Phill in a sustainable manner so it's not you know well let's pass these and not those if there are certain things that need to be changed about the program that will require us to revisit the ordinances collectively and look at how one impacts another so okay um Justin Keller with Advanced engineering again I appreciate y yall having us um so I do want to point out in section N9 and 10 of the manual um that was originally posted back in December and and reposted with with some updates now uh we have a section on program maintenance and and how to implement the program essentially and you'll see in there we actually have a um recommended audit of the program to make sure that number one are we being as streamlined as possible are there ways that we can you know I know you hate the term skin the cat but skin The Cat In A Better Way um and then also are there opportunities for us to you know let's say to us to take new data that may change our our pretty much our long-term goals and incorporate that and so I think that's one thing to you know I I just want everybody to to take a look at that to where we understand that essentially when we are planning for these long out years I think we have to recognize that data is going to change okay now when the data changes do we make knee-jerk reactions or do we pretty much recognize what our goals is what the long-term plan is and then say okay well if that bar changes then we'll reassess um the one thing we want to make sure that we do is that you know one of the lines I'm actually going to steal it from a resident about uh holding the line and being predictable you know and and I think one thing that we've talked about with this program is because Treasure Island is so unique within the neighborhoods that doesn't mean that how we apply the requirements of the program is unique we apply it in a very standard methodical and repeatable way throughout the various properties so as as we as we kind of take that sentiment moving forward we want to make sure that if we if if there's a let's say if if there's a slight change in what some of the projections may be for our year-end goal you know which is 2100 that the outside Community uh the development Community the real estate Community recognizes that Treasure Island is not going to make these knee-jerk reactions of you know adjust your adjust your goal by a couple inches here and oh uh we got a seal of a rise change let's make this minor adjustment here again we want to make sure that we that that we recognize there's going to be new data over the timeline of this program if it does you know come come to fruition and that we have pretty much built in ways to ensure that we're maintaining it in the right way and that we can implement it effectively and that is all documented within the manual and I certainly welcome any any feedback on that from the commission can you take this time to introduce yourself again as well yeah so um I've been up here a lot and certainly you know uh we definitely noticed that there's a resident contingent here so I'm Justin Keller with Advanced engineering um I am a I'm a product of penel County Schools I was born in Bayfront I I lived in Shore Acres my whole life all right Shore Acres is known for flooding so before it was cool to talk about flooding in roadways I was living that my whole life in Shore Acres my family still lives there I bought a home in shoreacres I run into a home on Shore Acres I am very aware of how title impacts can affect your day-to-day life I still call my parents and look the Noah gauge data and tell them you're not GNA be able to come back so just keep my kids for another three hours okay I promise I'll come and get them um and and so essentially um and I went to Lakewood High School and then I came back here and and I've and I've practiced engineering for this about my 21st year in the business um I'm not a Treasure Island resident but I'm a penel County resident I was born in pelis County I I serve pelis County governments um I do uh public infrastructure from Wastewater from from Wastewater systems portable water systems reclaimed water systems Transportation um this program is so all-encompassing of all of that and you can't just say oh well I have this little expertise in this so I'm going to go ahead and write this manual you know you have to know how all the pieces fit together and I certainly think that I I I bring that skill set and Al that local knowledge again not a treasure is resident I did have uh prom pictures taken over in Treasure Bay so that kind of counts for something I think um but you know we we I I I certainly have worked with the city for a while and where where are the challenges that Cal communities are facing I've lived it I see it from a professional standpoint I'm a business owner in this area and so I understand that penel County as a whole has a lot of crappy decisions that are going to come up really soon soon and a you know I will probably be accused of fear mongering whatever but I'm born here I raised here I know that the highest gauge data that we've hit in this area is from Hurricane Elena from 1985 which was elevation what like five in change so if we're basing all of our decisions based upon hurricane Elan in 1985 that skirted off the coast and and not what the real threat is then I feel like we are we are short changing the reality of situ ation and so I I certainly did want to provide that feedback again I know it's not going to move move the needle much but I did want to kind of share my personal background as it pertains to not only um my involvement in the engineering community but also my personal experiences with not being able to access my house because I'm stuck so thank you okay so um the topics we'd like to go over tonight are again a brief background of the program and then really get into the nitty-gritty of the ordinance Provisions there are eight in total one is just um to adopt the technical manual that um that outlines this program and one is a new uh chapter 76 which just addresses storm water and that was one of the ones when I talked about you know we needed a lot of cleanup up in our code anyway storm water is brand new and it kind of brought us into the present with best management practices and that was something we had on our list to do outside of the elevati proog program we want to revisit the one-year CSI that the commission modified um during our last cons uh discussion and talk about the 49% threshold that goes along with it and then talk about um next steps in an adoption timeline and whether or not that timeline meets your expectations and then um get any um if you do want to stick with the 101 timeline prior to for adoption that we discussed at our last Workshop um we would request that if you had any recommendations or changes that we talk about those this evening and whether or not they're feasible to be made within that time frame so again we um have several adopted policies here in the city that have led to the development of this program we had our 2021 strategic plan which directly references this program our comprehensive plan which we discussed last time policies throughout that um that directly relate to this program as well as the watershed management plan um which we adopted back in uh 2021 so um I I've heard some people say that this is fast but in in my experience here in the city we haven't talked about these ordinance changes more for any other ordinance that I can think of um so in addition to discussing the watershed management plan back in 2021 we've also held nine public meetings to review this program um which are listed here those have largely been with our local plan in agency but have also been with um real estate professionals they've been with engineers and contractors um to talk about various parts of the program and this is a quote um from Noah I believe this is from their um their senior adviser for Coastal inundation and resilience and this comes out of their 2022 technical report on sea level rise where that newer data did come from and basically what it's saying is that it's this is not just an issue that will be dealt with at the federal government level it's a local responsibility to tackle these issues and if you look you'll find similar quotes from Governor Dan santis and other Representatives at the state level as well this is not something where we can push it off and count on somebody else to come save us it's not going to happen they do have programs to help us um get grant funding to work towards it but we have to lay the foundation for these projects that are worthy to get that gram funding okay so the first uh chapter we'd like to discuss is utilities oddly enough there were two chapters in the city's code that was called utilities one that resided outside of the ldrs which is this one chapter 54 and the other which is uh chapter 75 within the ldrs um we felt that that was confusing and it needed to be streamlined um and really the only change here that has any pertinence to the program was that um there was references here to storm water management that were moved into their own chapter into chapter 76 so what remains in 54 is pretty much everything that has to deal with utility be billing and fees and Water Conservation um not necessarily you know items that should be within our Land Development regulations so again we have chapter 75 which was called utilities we're proposing to rename to make it very clear what it actually is which is pable water sanitary sewer and reclaimed water um again all references to storm water were moved to chapter 76 and anything that was duplicative here for billing and fees was moved to 54 um again there is an article in here pertaining to drainage that um that got deleted because we started over in 76 with updated storm water management code all right so um we we um hit on it last meeting um but the reason one of the main reasons why the storm water code is changing is because there's also a change coming at the Statewide level um the new storm water rule or the you know the Statewide storm water rule which pretty much um changed how civil engineers look at storm water um we've been using what's called what's been called presumptive criteria back since like the 80s when the water when the water management districts came into Force within the state and um pretty much that criteria said that okay if you know you have to pretty much do X and you will get y it pretty much assumed or presumed um that essentially if if you provide or if you perform a specific task related to storm water you will get this much nutrient reduction um now the new state water rule um which again I believe it was just actually signed back in June um essentially they're looking for performance and they pretty much say I don't care how you do it but you have to meet this nutrient removal criteria so essentially um the code as it stands now was based you know had had some um um suggestions based upon more of the presumptive criteria so we certainly had to make sure that we change the water uh quality element of the code in order to make sure that number one we're aligning with um this the new Statewide storm water Rule and then we're also ensuring that we we protect the resource es um because again Bo bog sea Bay is an impaired water body and it is an outstand of Florida um outstanding Florida water um so certainly you know recognizing the importance and the responsibility that we have to to discharge as clean storm water as we can um so we had and yes we had a couple terms that I can certainly you know go through if anybody wants to nerd out with me on that one um so really from a storm water standpoint uh the major change that that we had as as it relates to the train modification program um is really the design uh design requirements because we are recognizing that as as we um look forward um you know to some of these environmental changes that are being predicted by multiple agencies um we need to make sure that not only can our community handle it for the reasons that we're proposing within um the the program but also we got to make sure the storm water systems are designed to recognize those it doesn't really make a lot of sense if we have you know if we're um you know pretty much having these long or let's say these long-term goals about what we're trying to accomplish and then we leave kind of storm water out of the equation so um and also we wanted to recognize that um you know if if the uh train modification program was adopted um that that's going to change how sites are graded it's going to require the use of walls and so we wanted to make sure that well we're we're let's say a bit more um you know we we provide designers more flexibility during the design process to use walls for more Retention Ponds if needed and then we also give them specific ways that they can discharge and you know if if a if a storm water system is close for connection we we want to make sure that they make that pipe connection but if it's beyond a certain threshold we want to give them the opportunity to discharge via sheet flow like like certain ponds do so um you know really from our standpoint it was about taking all of the storm water codes that were or or the storm water requirements that are pretty much hidden throughout the old code and taking them out consolidating them and standardizing them to kind of meet today's best best practices and then also the storm water rule um another element of chapter 76 is your um npds program just a quick summary the the npds program is essentially um you know uh the government uh uh the city owns a storm water system and you get a permit from the EPA that's passed through to the D in order to operate it and in order to pretty much have that permit each year um you know you have to abide by the conditions of the permit so um part of that is the uh responsibility making sure that there are no illicit discharges into your system again none of this is pertinent to the uh train modification program but in in the name of you know kind of streamlining and consolidating information it made sense to Route this in or to put this information within the new storm water code hi Katherine yonan with the city of Treasure Island uh so on the flood plane management side the first change we made was to update the address for the new city hall which is just required by um the state regulations the second change we made is to go into the details on what are the requirements to get a permit um and to reference the terrain modification manual a lot of this um chapter that you're going to see with the exception of the things that we brought over from the building code uh is a lot of cleanup and clarification and trying to make our code more consistent with the FEMA regulations so that when we're audited by FEMA that we have every single thing that we're required to have uh so it talks a lot about forms and it talks about which kind of forms you have to use and when you have to use them so that's um it's identified to go with the manual but it's really required elsewhere as well um yes so one of the things you will see is that the definitions were revised um the probably most relevant thing that we were are going to talk about tonight is substantial Improvement and substantial damage those are terms that are already in our code those are terms that are required by FEMA and they are terms that are in the Florida building C so what we're proposing in the ordinance that you have in front of you is a change to have a cumulative substantial Improvement which is a one-year uh total for permits within the year like looking back if whenever you look back a year you see what permits have been pulled the other is um right yes Stacy's point is we're not looking backwards from here we're looking backwards from when the program starts like if you pull a permit on October 1st of 2024 on October 1st of 2025 that permit's not going to count any anymore when we look at your permit history for substantial improvements the other change that's proposed and within there is a change to 49% which we'll go into in more detail but I wanted you to know that that's part of these changes in the flood plane regulations um we once again in the next section that you see in 66 31.5 once again that's uh paperwork and housekeeping um we uh also then started going into amendments to the Florida building code so we have local regulations that overlay the building code um that we have had in the building code for a long time and under the new state guidance they asked that these they they recommend that we no longer keep them in the building code because there's a much higher level of review to get them they have to be reviewed by the state after adoption we want to make sure that these can uh be just handled like all Land Development regulations uh the most significant change that people have been asking for is a change for placement of Phill and right now we are in no Phil City this would be revision would allow for the use of Phill and tell you how to use it through the whole manual process um the other two are also housekeeping things to uh be consistent with FEMA regulations and state law on uh once again 60 the above ground tanks is the same uh 663 of 7.2 uh we outlined that um concrete slabs used for parking enclosures cannot have a turn down or thickened edges and Justin can you say why well that's required by FEMA essentially what they want what you know so um the different flood zones in the city you have a velocity Zone which is referred to as a vzone essentially that means that during a during the design storm that FEMA utilizes which is a 100-year storm event uh that the wave action would be greater than 3 feet that's where you start looking at these deep piles you deep Foundation Systems there's a coastal a Zone um which is identified by your lioa um which is a um which is an acronym for essentially a line that delineates a certain type of wave action so everything that is waterw of the limo is essentially one to three feet in wave action during a storm and then everything else um is essentially just an azone which is for for a simplified way to put it is just like a static Rising water to where there's no wave action that would um require a a structure or a building to be designed to accommod at the impacts of wave action um so when we talk about the turn down slabs essentially what what FEMA the federal government dictates to to the cities is that um you cannot have any slabs greater than 4 Ines uh within those velocity zones and essentially that is so that when a storm hits um that essentially that slab can break up in small pieces and not cause damage to ajacent structures uh I think two more one more there we go uh decks and patios in coastal High Hazard areas once again that's the Zone B and the coastal a zones which are the high wave action areas um and the last section here is 66 37.5 talks about non-structural fill and Coastal High Hazard um was removed um to allow uh the use of Phill in those zones and then also too the current code does require a wave a way runup analysis which is a second engineering assessment um when you use Phill um our proposed approach to using Phil is pretty much if you follow the man is is that we do not need any more wave runup analysis because the manual essentially provides a framework that negates the need for that and there so we talked about chapter 8 which are the building regulations um we made uh significant updates to bring this code up to date it had a lot of old references to Old years and old things that don't exist anymore so a lot of that was purely housekeeping and in the fire prevention code we referen the correct codes as well as in the building code uh we the things that we uh looked at in reference to uh chapter8 this is where everything we talked about moved to chapter 66 which are the flood plane regulations uh for ease of of keeping the code updated um we allow once again the things that move to 66 allow Drive flood proofing for non-residential which would be areas like our downtown um clarifying that that is allowed and uh we also are now allowing other types of found foundations in AE Zone not necessarily always requiring piles and columns and just just for reference the the dry flood proofing essentially what that allows is um FEMA does not allow for a residential structure to be dry flood proofed which is why all these residential structures have to have the finished floor so high that's a federal guideline um however for commercial buildings they do allow for dry flood proofing which is why some of the you know like you may have a newer development uh that that's a commercial development that essentially can be built slab on grade if you will as long as they drive fet proof that's permitted and so that's something I know that it was important to continue to allow for the downtown area to have atg grade construction if if the owners want it sorry it's late and we're sharing one microphone so chapter zoning chapter 68 which is our zoning ref regulations what we uh focused on was a lot of definitions in here uh and you'll see a lot of the definitions have to do with um the first set is like building building height development fence grade perious area and structure those were we tried to unify the definitions throughout our code because we had different definitions in chapter 68 chapter 66 and chapter 8 and we weren't uh functioning that well with having a different definition depending on what you were doing so we modified them to be consistent with Florida building code uh and then we had to dive deep into the fence and wall and hedge regulations when we talk about we have an elevated property next to a non-elevated property so that took a lot of time to figure out what we were going to do so you'll see new definitions for fences guards open fences and those kind of things in there as well and as in the other sections of the code we incorporated uh references to the Terin modification manual which it tells you to go there to uh figure certain things out the other thing that is very relevant to zoning is what we call a height adjustment factor and a setback adjustment factor and what those are is when you have a structure that's able to elevate their uh base floor or their garage floor for instance above grade and say it ends up 2 feet above natural grade then uh the way we measure Heights in in the zoning code is from base flood plus two so that's a static level that would stay straight and then your floor would be coming up so what we're G doing is having a factor built in that you get that same two feet back in your height of the building same idea with the setback adjustment factor is that you have more stairs when you're two feet higher so we did a mathematical calculation and gave you you could your stairs could project into the setback so that you're not losing any of your buildable um rights under this code and that that really that really allows for kind of the current homes that can be built today that can be can now be built in this in this proposed new environment to where essentially we're not you know we're not squ squishing people's garages and we're not resulting in Footprints needed to be smaller because of Stairway impacts yeah other things we put in here in regards to the terrain module are um referencing these factors that we just talked about um we referenced the watershed management plan we revised the application of zoning District regulations to ensure that you always have a permit uh that was just another broken thing in our code so that we had to use other codes to enforce codes cases sometimes because everything's in a flood plane we also have the uh flood plane code so we we had that op option but this is a lot cleaner and more straightforward uh we took anything related to storm water back to chapter 76 like we talked about was also scattered throughout the zoning code um and then when we went into setbacks all of this the sections the third bullet bullet from the bottom were just revised to talk about our new grades that we've defined which is natural or finished so natural being where the grade is naturally now and finished is where it would be using the terrain modification protocols um we also revised uh the next two sections to talk about that um setback adjustment factor and the height adjustment factor and then a lot of big changes actually to the to the fence wall and hedge uh some of them related to terrain and some not so in regards to the ones related to terrain we had to look at where we have properties that are on two different levels and so we our goal was to make sure that everybody could have as much fence as they have now so that's that was our goal in doing this without creating a cavern for the person who's not raised uh the other thing that we did in the fence regulations is we've had a lot of conversations with a lot of applicants about wanting to have higher fences in their front yards as well as um different types of fences as we all know all fences used to have um upright pickets and now a lot of people are going with horizontal fences so it's just some updates to the code to allow what's what what has been asked and moving on to chapter 69 Justin uh chapter 69 um is Marine structures um and and Commercial Fishing we did not change any commercial fishing regulations knowledge um so so essentially what we did is that you know the the train modification program is really uh at as for different what we're calling development classifications we have pretty much the structures that are governed by the Residential Building Code we have all other buildings that are governed by the Florida building code commercial multif family um we have public infrastructure and then we also have Coastal erosion structures which seaw wall is the predominant means of providing Coastal erosion protection um and I mentioned that because you know I I I do want to reate itate that you know as as you know every Waterfront community in this count in this County um you know starts to to fight this battle um you know essentially seaw walls are certainly a part of it um but seaw walls only play a certain part you know to where if if we pretty much kept our storm water system the way it is and we jacked up all our seaw walls 10 feet we would still get the same sunny day flooding that we do now because we have connectivity to the storm water system so the only way that we can really jack up our seaw walls and leave everything as it is right now is if we commit to to storm water pupping stations and that's that's something that we did discuss with the storm in the water shed management plan um and um you know so so you can certainly go uh take a look at that as well if you'd like to um so as far as uh chapter 69 um again we we took the opportunity to be consistent within how we're using terminology throughout the code um you know a central theme that that Katherine pointed to um and and so we also um one of the things with with seaw walls um like the trade modification program in its entirety is that it's it's predictable it's repeatable it uses the same evaluation approach for all properties but it still recognizes that everybody's not going to be able to accomplish the same goals because the train of the land is very different in southern parts of the city um when compared to even North you know to uh Central and Northern parts of the city so we also want to make sure that if if you know for seaw walls if somebody is not able to achieve the the minimum capit elevation of five that essentially the uh sheet cross-section and then also the tieback system is designed to where at a later date if it needs to be elevated that essentially the city has the information on record to say to either that current resident or the next Resident yes we know that you can raise your cap by x amount of feet and we have the sign and seal calculations to more or less support that um so that's why when we talk about the application requirements is that it's so important we get that information on the front end to make sure that we can more or less document not only that these requirements are being met for future adaptability but also so we can kind of keep that paper trail because a lot of times when you buy a house you're probably not going to get the seawall calculations as part of the package um so if so if we can keep that on record and more or less confirm that if we provide you know that that if a seawall needs to be elevated we essentially know that we have the ability to do so um and and then also we took an opportunity to stand uh to pretty much update the city's codes and utilize um I don't want to say um let's say more industry standard material I think right now your code more or less focuses on concrete sea wall panels and um um steel sheets it doesn't recognize vinyl which a lot of Seawall contractors are using vinyl even composite um so you know it's kind of obvious let's go ahead and if we're doing this code let's go ahead and standardize to use a lot of the material that people in the wild so to speak are actually using for seaw wall construction um we also added um um supplemental criteria as far as um design clarifications as far as exactly what we're looking for as far as for those sign and seal calculations um again if you came in and got a permit tomorrow you'd have to submit signing signning seal calculations anyways so this is not a new requirement we're just making sure that we are more clear with the applicant on what essentially those what what we want to see within that calculation package and then also to uh we we clarified um ma what a major seaw wall repair is um and and essentially what we are proposing is that if if an applicant has to repair more than 50 feet or 50% of their lot with full sheet pile install that they need to go ahead and need to do the full the the full length regardless um I think from a just a practicality economy of scale standpoint you know like a lot of your costs are borne by getting the contractor out there to do the work um and so you know um so certainly while while it it is more money to do the entire lot um you know it's if if you have a seaw wall That's failed so bad that 50% um needs to be addressed not via a a belly beam or a whaler but by an actual new sheet then we are uh requiring that the entire seaall be replaced and as far as updates to the train modification manual um you know again the the initial draft was uh well we've um just to give you some background as far as some of the um uh some some of the other reviews this has been through I want to say back in March of 23 we had a peer review um with um penel County Regional planning Council some adjacent Beach communities um and then also uh engineering firms that perform plan review Services um currently for the city of Treasure Island um which which is not not not my company AED other companies um and um and so we um we that that was essentially a older form of the manual we've we updated in December and these are the updates um that were um let's say the updates that are proposed um we added some additional definitions um you know certainly the city team has been very adamant and making sure that I I I I stay on subject as far as definitions and it is important because when it comes to the application um you know a lot of the challenges I think staff has in in using the code that none of us created just you know the code is a code it's here um so essentially we're trying to make sure that we can be very standardized so when somebody goes to chapter 68 chapter 6 9 or the manual when we say a word it means the same thing in every um in every section um and then two we also uh clarified uh regulated activities um again I think you'll you'll you'll see that really um there's a lot of work that the city processes from a permit standpoint that would not be subject to the requirements of the train modification manual um essentially we are laser focused on new construction and substantially um substantially improve buildings um we also um clarified that section five is for uh one and two family dwellings and those that are governed by the uh Residential Building Code um which is more or less a spin-off if you will the Florida building code um uh in uh you know Stacy mentioned um you know us uh looking at different options you know um the the the manual not only has to uh let's say accommodate the you know the obvious projects um but it also has to recognize that especially for commercial properties that there's different ways that a property owner can become compliant so we clarified how the manual would be applicable um if if one of those different Avenues whether um you know whatever way that that the property owner wants to take then the manual can can support that um and then also too um we did U make some modifications to Section 8 specifically the requirement for elevation uh relationship ships and then also um in order to make it less bulky um we removed some of the appendices that had a lot of um uh let's say um numerical data in there so um that is still something that will be a part of the program implementation it will just live outside um it will live outside to where if there's a map that can help an applicant doesn't really need to be part of the code uh which means that we can you know that that if it needs to be you know if we need to change something like a minor change it wouldn't have to go through a Cod revision process we can say okay well you know instead of using this term use this term post it on the website and again this is all supporting documents that would essentially support an applicant's uh um let's say um application process when when using the manual yeah it contain these appendices contain your uh Heights that you're um yeah yeah the flood plane elevations flood plane elevations and also had a lot of forms so those forms get updated all the time so we didn't want to adopt them into code okay so this this is a bit repetitive this section it's only a couple of slides I apologize but this seems to be um a key misunderstanding of what's being proposed in the program so I just wanted to take a couple of minutes to um to Reed discuss it um substantial damage and the FEMA 50% rule as we often call it or substantial improvements are requirements by the federal government that we have to adhere to today um we actually look at every permit that comes in under these requirements and to make sure that there's no applicant that's splitting projects or phasing projects to to circumvent this rule um they have to sign an affidavit if they're anywhere close to 50% saying if something unknown happens during this construction you discover mold or something else that increases your scope of work something else in that project has to fall off so that you you know are not subject to completely reconstructing or elevating um your building and this is these are requirements today as they stand here in the city SOA bema so substantial damage is damage of any origin to a structure whereby the cost of restoring that structure to its before damaged condition would equal or exceed 50% of the market value of that structure any Improvement to a substantially damaged structure is considered to be a substantial Improvement regardless of the ACT ual repair work performed so if damage is more than 50% of that structure value that structure now regardless of what repairs are are planned to be made to it has to be either elevated um to be compliant with the FEMA elevations plus 2 feet or it has to be torn down and reconstructed to meet that lowest living floor requirement by FEMA so the change here in the program is if you were going through this process either through substantial damage or substantial improvements you would now be adding some fill a few feet of fill below that garage floor like for a residential structure that's the change um so we're not recommending any change to FEMA substantial damage regulations there are neighboring cities that do have higher thresholds here than what stea FEMA stipulates mad beach being one of those but we are not recommending um any change there substantial improvements today says that any Improvement that's made to a structure that exceeds equals or exceeds 50 % of the Market's structures market value is considered to be a substantial Improvement and again that's where you have to come in to that FEMA compliance by reconstructing or elevating um a misconception here is that it applies to every kind of permit that you would pull and that's that's not accurate um so it's only to your building it doesn't apply to any work that you would do in your yard to your pool your dock your fences your driveways or anything like that um currently it's not calculated over any time period but FEMA encourages a cumulative approach and that's why we talked um in in former discussions about if we were to adopt a 5ye or a 10year we would get um significant CRS credits that um could potentially help us to get to one of those um higher levels that allow for a greater um Insurance discount but that's that's not what we're proposing today the 49% reduction which we'll talk about in the next slide does give us a few points but it's not nearly as significant as had we been looking at a adopting still the five or the 10-e that was proposed initially um again similar work cannot be broken out into multiple permits and that's something that our building department reviews now when these permits come in and um one good point to make is one of the reasons why we have to adhere to these FEMA regulations and they audit us um is because we would no longer qualify for FEMA Disaster Assistance or for participation in the National flood plane insurance program and that's why we have to be so careful that we're administering these requirements correctly so the proposed um changes are a one-year cumulative um analysis of those permits and 49% thresholds so 49% we talked about last time that is just basically a cheap way to get a few extra points it really has no impact um it's just something we recommend because we can get a few points for it um and again we've once we decided the commission directed staff to go back and reduce that time frame from five as was recommended by the LPA down to one we went back and looked at a lot of different properties around the city to see are people tripping this is this happening is this would this really have any substantial impact on the city and we can't find where that answer is yes you know there's a lot of a lot of properties floating around well they did it they did it they did it they didn't do it um not that we found I'd be happy to look at any others that that that you may know of or think that may have done that but I mean this is not an easy search that we can perform so I'm not going to say that we've looked at every permit in history but we did look at the ones that are rumored to would have had a problem with this and that was not found to be the case um so one of the reasons why we're proposing this is because these thresholds and adhering to these policies it's sound flood plane management and it's really protecting the Investments that are made to structures and it also is helping to meet the objectives of elevate TI to elevate roadways so you know this program is is adopted by other municipalities other counties throughout flood plone areas um and they don't have a train modification program it's just the right thing to do and it's recommended by FEMA and so people do it as well as our neighboring cities um it but it does the reason why we're bringing it Forward at this time is because it does directly support the objectives of our program um another thing that we like to point out is that market value is dynamic and changes with each permit we've gone back and and looked at these big permitting projects that are done and checked those updated evaluations on the property appraisers website and they're giving one to one or more value for that work that is done which was kind of surprising to us to find because you know you'll recall when we went through the calculation we were only assuming 80% to be conservative but we're actually seeing that it's it's more than that um and that's not even to to Discount what you could get with doing a private appraisal after your work is completed that would allow you to continue to do work back to back so a one-year threshold does not mean a one-year waiting period and we showed that even when we were looking at a fiveyear CSI you could do 49% get an appraisal another 49% do more work so it really does keep building on itself and a oneyear time frame is not going to have any significant impact um so again um CSI as it's defined in the Florida building code does not pertain to Corrections needed to address Health sanitary or Safety Code deficiencies as cited by the building official the caveat to that statement is that's not the case after uh substantial damage occurs so if we have a big storm all bets are out so this is something that would have had to have been identified by the building official prior to that type of an event um what else haven't we talked about just yeah um I think the commission last time asked us can you call around some of these other municipalities who've adopted these programs are they having people complain are they having issues track it um our flood Point manager did that and they had no concerns or no issues that have been brought to their attention and what we're recommending here because this is probably the most controversial part of the program is recommending what we talked about earlier we could do a one-year trial period or honestly if it needs to be relooked at prior to then we can relook at it prior to then but we really think that this is the right thing to do for a Coastal Community that's already experiencing these flooding impacts one last thing I want to say about that is there have been a lot of examples flying around where people are using lower than average Treasure Island structure values and saying what if what if I did this and within that same year time frame substantial damage comes and now I only have $50,000 to repair my home I really want to spend $100,000 to repair my home or $150,000 to repair my home so what they're saying is instead of spending 250 or whatever the amount is to actually Elevate their home to come into compliance where they wouldn't have to worry about any of these improvements or these thresholds they just want to you know keep worrying about this what if scenario if this major storm happens within that same oneyear time frame you know that that's really what we're looking at here it's it's it's big what if scenario and there's better ways to to protect your investment within the city yeah um and and then to also when it when it comes to like the you know the when when a storm hits um so flood insurance only pays out 250 Grand and and essentially the you know um the the nfip is a federally subsidized program to where I I have flood insurance where I live in in North St Pete and I am you know my policy subsidized by the federal government to where I don't pay my true risk and that's something to where like the bigot Waters act and all that they've been trying to correct that but they find that in order for all of us who have flood insurance to pay your true risk it pretty much makes communities unlivable because who can afford $2,000 you know $20,000 a year to pay flood insurance it's crazy um but and so what what FEMA does the whole reason that FEMA has this 50% threshold and then they say they want you to elevate is because their job is to get people off the books they want to have it to where if you are an at risk structure to where if you're below the flood plane you're on the books and you're an at risis structure they want to minimize that investment and essentially that the you know the CSI continues that approach to where you know knowing that if somebody can syn of th000 dollars into their home and they're only going to get a 250 Grand payout from FEMA if they're residential structure you know that that's why we found a lot of other communities have have adopted the CSI you know because of the reality is that um you know when when it happens and it hasn't happened in this area what since 1921 like we're you know we will at some point in time get hit by a hurricane that can can we provide an opportunity for people to to become compliant to pretty much um not being at risk structure in an environment to we're not trying to rebuild the whole Tampa Bay area and you know that that's you know again it's it's it it it has some benefits to the train modification program to where you know as as we get homes elevated it provides a greater opportunity for elevating roads but also too this is something that could be absolutely be pursued independent of that as Stacy alluded to um to where there are many communities that have that and are you know don't don't have any kind of program um like the TMP um I hear a lot of who's doing this at the background we showed a full chart of pelis County municipalities that are already doing this now but just to name a few of the beach communities Clear Water belir beach madira beach St Pete Beach and rington Shores already have this program um the same or more stringent than than what we're recommending tonight if you help has a life yeah there's a whole bunch of other ones um so I the other thing that we've heard is why now what you know we've we've heard we're rushing this through you know again we have had more public meetings talking about these forthcoming ordinance changes than for any other ordinance changes that we've talked about and a lot of the ordinance changes that we've made have just otherwise been needed and it's kind of hard to be touching an ordinance and ignore all the bad other things that are in there without trying to address some of them at the same time that said again we will be coming back to as we go through the big ldr updates our code as a spiderweb um so we'll be coming back and we'll have the opportunity to make changes if something isn't working out but why now so the program is already behind schedule for adoption we've talked about this for a long time the commission asked that you know when we moved into this building actually prior to that um so we moved in March prior to that it was requested that the building department start handing out this information hey we want to let permanent applicants know this program is coming down the pike you need to be aware do you want to hurry up and get your permit in now so you're not subject to or would you like to wait so that you have the opportunity to use Phill so this is out there there's a lot of people waiting on it and you may not hear from them tonight because I think that there's a good sentiment that this is a foregone conclusion and they're waiting for this to happen um so when we talk about private projects additionally um the lands in Boardwalk is one of those which is a public asset which is waiting on the adoption of this program and then we have public projects like City seaw walls that need to be reconstructed um either to a higher height or for adaptability for future height um and the Public Works Master Pump Station knowing that this was coming you know it doesn't really make a whole lot of sense if we have the opportunity to build our wet Wells you know down at grade if we have the opportunity to elevate those up um it also lessens the financial burden over time when we can start taking advantage of normal reconstruction cycles of SE of sheet of streets but also when people are planning to reconstruct their homes anyway like the time to grab is now so that we don't miss those opportunities we're already behind the curve with sea level rise I I know the commission knows as well as staff knows just like the blue moon that we have yesterday we're the ones receiving those calls it it's happening now and it's going to just continue to get worse um so here's when we talk a little bit about the schedule uh we talked about earlier if we do want to keep this on the um on the time frame to adopt before 101 we'd like to discuss any recommended changes tonight to discuss even if it's feasible to make those changes prior to and then if updates are needed thereafter they can come back for modifications once the program is adopted and at that time the business impact statements that would be required to be performed by staff would be on those modifications and not of the entire program so um we already have two business impact statements that we're working on which are for those sections that are outside of the ldrs the chapter 8 revisions and chapter 54 revisions but this would require um more time for staff to go back and complete all of the other ones um and again the development Community has been anticipating the opportunity to to use this program so if we did keep it on the 101 schedule this would be our proposed um next steps to get to adoption and that's all we have all right thank you very much it was definitely a shorter um shorter presentation comprensive thank you for the details um we'll start with does if the commission has any comments um or questions for the staff before we go into any sort of public comment go ahead I had a a couple of questions uh Katherine you mentioned you would you talked about uh the one one-year application of the uh substantial damage or substantial Improvement you said if you opened a work permit up October 1st of 24 by October 1st of 25 that would not be considered it's it's actually I misspoke it's when the permit closes so you start your permit closed to permit to opening the next permit okay I was hoping it was going to be the open one but that's but I uh no thanks for catching that okay that was fine thank uh and % applies to to still open permits right if you're 50% and the perm open you have to wait to close out the permit what Justin is saying is today if you have multiple permits open at the same time we're having to evaluate substantial improvements based on those 50% for those multiple permits at the same time so even today you would close out your permit before starting a new one if you were circumventing this requirement I I understand that but I just closed in or locked in on the open uh comment uh and Justin this question is for you uh and I did hear you say that others have looked at this you mentioned pelis county has looked at uh this plan as well as a Tampa Bay Regional planning Council and I thought I heard you say uh although may I may have misinterpreted that other another engineering firm has reviewed the plan did you mention yeah so we we um actually uh one of one of the appendices that we took out was the peer review and the peer review comments um so that and and that's something to where again not not really something that we would put in a peer review comment database as part of codes but yeah that that was part of the manual we can certainly repost that because yeah what what we did is early on in the process we we went through a a self-imposed peer review and it was U penel County their their the um flood plane administrator and and the Public Works director um was involved in that we also had um uh some people from St Pete Beach were involved in that we had the regional planning Council that confirmed that the plan is is in alignment with the resiliency action plan which is the the regional planning council's uh let's say a guiding document for how communities need a plan for some of these strats moving forward and then also because you know one of the end users is going to be the applicant end and it's also going to be the engineers Who currently perform plan reviews and so it was important to make sure that they were aware of the changes coming down the pike okay all right thank you I had and and another engineering firm that is not necessarily a plan reviewing firm but they they were willing to provide commentary and being involved in in the process you said they were willing to or they did yeah no they well they they did it it was pretty much they they did it for us it was a freebie and and they pretty much did it reviewed it and provided commentary um in order to make sure that you know okay thank you and the last question I have if I can uh Stacy uh you talked about the one-year uh rule already and you mentioned that it doesn't really impact that many people as far as Home Improvements are concerned that they'll open one up and get it done and then come back maybe a year later or whenever and fix that up my only my my biggest concern is is the one the homeowner who is used up there 49% uh with Home Improvements and then a month later a storm comes and they have substantial damage I don't think I fully uh understood your answer to that so substantial damage is all bets are off substantial damage is regardless of any permitting activity that has happened substantial damage is 50% or more of that structure's value if that occurs there's there's no repairs being made to that structure until it becomes compliant no no and I understand that but let's say there's 45% right of of damag mhm uh but they've already used up their right their 49% in Home Improvements so a couple of things there that I um was trying to articulate it's it's a it's going to be a rare scenario I hope that Excuse excuse me please please be respectful it's within one year of that permit closure that that that that major storm hits and now we're talking about a a monetary value within not to exceed the substantial damage threshold but still more than what they would have had available um so part of what we talked about during the last discussion is um we would want to make it a standard practice and it's something that's discussed now but maybe more formalized is that after you pull a major permit in addition to getting that affidavit would be a recommendation to go out you're you're completing $100,000 of substantial improvements go out and spend that couple of hundred extra bucks and get your appraisal your private appraisal to to increase your value so the example that we show please let her please let her answer the question you're speaking out yes yes she is please and the example that we showed using a a lower than average um conservative structure value when we were doing the 5-year calculation last time um they were pulling 49% of the value doing the work closing it out and then pulling another 49% of the work closing it out and still had money left um so again if you're if you're looking at an average home value around $350,000 in the city and doing those backed back um improvements then you're spending hundreds of thousands of dollars into your non-compliance structure when you could have spent a similar amount of money getting it out of your flood insurance requirements and out of your your threshold requirements alt together you're done with it and so it's a it's just a common flood plane best management practice for flood plone areas that's not unique to this program or to this city but also and can I so follow up I this is something that I think I mean obviously people this is a an issue that is causing heartburn and maybe not understanding or maybe not feeling like she's answering the question but maybe I can help further because this is something that I'm concerned about as well that scenario that commissioner dicki just referenced that's largely concerning significantly concerning to all of us that is not a situation that we would ever want to set people up for so if anyone I created a a a calculator of my own in an Excel spreadsheet today happy to share it with anybody to go through how how like a scenario where you can plug in your your original appraisal value of what your the value of your structure is and then it walks through how many like what your budget is on each successive permit so for example like Stacy just mentioned 350,000 if your structure is worth 350,000 you have 50 we'll say 50% rather than 49% for the ease of um calculation so on your first permit you can do7 $75,000 renovation on your house at that point once you finish that permit say it your project takes you six months to do she's saying that the property appraisers web data that they are collecting in his public record is showing that a onetoone return on that inv investment in your home is going back to the appraisal value of your structure so if you go out and get a new appraisal after you're done with your six-month renovation of your house that $350,000 value of your property becomes $490,000 then you get to use 50% of that minus whatever you spent on the first renovation that you still have to improve your property so in this situation that commissioner dicki is referencing say you finish your your renovate your $175,000 renovation and a storm hits the next day you have $770,000 in addition because you've increased the value of your structure so you have more room in that 50% within that first year before the your first permit falls off so you're not down to zero if you're investing money into your into your home right you're investing money into that that situation so I'm not saying that 70,000 is necessarily going to be enough to cover that that sort of a situation but that's a that's also a risk that people need to be and I think this is other thing that Stacy is trying to get at is if you investing the full 50% of the value of your structure into an onr onr structure that's not something that FEMA is suggesting you do it's not something that Noah is suggesting you do it's not in the best practices that Stacy's recommending because it is risky you're investing a lot of money into a structure that could easily flood and be damaged by a storm so that's a that's a risk that a a homeowner needs to evaluate whether they're whether they're comfortable with that okay thank you I would and happy to share that calculator it goes through even further scenarios it's kind of a up until that onee Mark where your first permit falls off you have a little bit less and less but you can continue to do backtack permitting you just can't do full 50% back toback permit until a year so um my comments you know there also is a situation today that could play out similarly to where if you have if you're you get the 50% tomorrow and you're in work you know doing the work and then a storm hits this season the same situation would really happen to where even in today's rules you would be leveraged your 50% and you couldn't repair your home or or you'd have to do something different with your scope of work so yeah yeah yeah because it's until your permit closes even today so I mean I think anytime whether this passes or it doesn't pass any time anybody gets that 50% your your your margins are pretty thin you know you know if a storm hits because you still would be subject to that because your permit is not closed and so therefore anything on top of it is above and beyond the 50% which is why FEMA by you know giving us crappy insurance rates and minimal return on investment only 250 grand for residential structure that's why they're trying to get everybody up or out can I so I have this answer that question sounds like that's what everybody's concerned about I this it's on just get close yeah okay so what we have we adopted this ordinance I believe is 2021 where we permit say exactly the scenario that you stated you did your 50,000 whatever in improvements storm went through you didn't have the time to obtain an appraisal one of our ordinances adopted in 2021 I believe is what it was we permit retrospective appraisals so you would come into the building apartment be like hey this is the damage that I've taken um but I'm going to reach out to obviously a certified appraiser and they're going to backtrack the value of your structure so that Sol so obviously the improvements that you did would be added on to the value then thank you Jesse okay further commissioner comments M um I'm going to bring up one that I've done in the past um and here's a situation uh I'm a commissioner okay I have one of my uh residents in District 3 come up to me and say hey Bob uh so you want me to spend x amount of dollars substantial dollars to elevate my house I'm going to tear it down it's slab on grade right now I'm going to tear it down and I'm going to build it up and I'm going to spend let's say a million and a half something like that maybe just a million maybe 7 million like people over on Paradise did anyhow and then you're saying you're going to want to elevate the streets okay let's do that um and that's going to cost the taxpayers X amount of dollars I don't know whatever that is but folks you can't get here because Gul Boulevard is not going to be raised and the West the East Causeway how long that's a 70-year project how long is it going to be till that gets raised and so the entry points and the Ingress and egress out of the city um you can't justify it and and my point is until the state comes along and says we're going to improve Gulf Boulevard and raise it to meet let's go terrain modification raise it to meet that and they're going to do it all the way up and down Gulf Boulevard do you think that's realistic hell no it's not going to happen come on and the federal government the federal government's not going to how how deep is their pocket 43 cents of every dollar we spend with the feds is borrowed that's not going down you think they're going to jump in and say oh yeah we're the good get we got Deep Pockets we're just going to keep borrowing and throw money at you if you've learned one thing look at what's happened with Beach re nourishment just take a look at the hassles that we are getting to get Federal funding for a federal project to renourish our beaches really it's not happening folks the last one we did here was funded by penis County for the most part federal government I I truly believe that they have set the stage to get us out of here and if you think to the contrary just stay tuned because we can we can do terrain modification the program is fine if we had infinite amount of money but again this program is designed to go to 2,100 if sea level is rising at the projected rates sea level's not going to stop at 2100 um and and for all the folks in this room and I'm looking around and I'm saying there's probably nobody here who's going to be living in 2100 maybe if you're lucky I don't know oh Mike is um but what we're doing and what the program here is designed for is for your kids your grandkids and their kids I mean it's way down the road we're talking this is 26 so you're talking 74 years or 20 76 years is 24 so uh I agree and I like the intent of the program I think it's it's thought out for what it is um but until Golf Boulevard our Ingress egress to the city is guaranteed that it's that the funding is going to be there to raise it I'm not for it no I I I saying I'll wait for your applause um I um I so so regarding them trying to kick you out or they want to kick us out I mean kind of you're right yeah and essentially manage Retreat manage Retreat is a real strategy that is being discussed Y and there are people that believe hey these were Barrier Islands let's return them to barrier islands and this program says hell no and this program essentially fights and this program is a fighting chance to say we're not going to just let the waters take over and this program will allow for you to raise the roads us okay us and then to regarding regarding uh the dot and Golf Boulevard because that was a question that that you had and we spoke with the uh uh the state Statewide resilience officer and they do not have a plan for Golf Boulevard now because they're waiting for local communities to adopt plans now that that's not me that's the State of Florida and when you look at the State of Florida this I mean this so the State of Florida their whole program with resilient Florida is they're trying to put money to the communities to do their own resiliency planning so very much it is pretty much a trickle down to where they're putting this onus on on the localities and Noah's saying that um you know when um you know um some of some of the resilient Florida framework they in in the in the program launch quotes Governor Dan santis is talking about giving communities the opportunity to give money to them to plan for these to plan for these events and the dot because they are one road it is a disconnected drainage system but it is one road they could do pump stations for their small roadway and they they're they're they're sing a roadway to where they just because we're doing train modification what we're saying is that we don't want to be below sea level so that's not saying that we're not going to have to use storm water pump stations in a strategic Manner and you're right Dot may choose to pretty much do storm water pump stations and if we're incorporating terrain modifications and they're doing storm water pump stations we still have a passable opportunity to where the roads can still be traversable during during the rain events that they're designed for um I don't agree what you're suggesting is that we're going to rely upon a pump station an artificial means of controlling water to keep sea level rise at a batement no I I was I was saying that Golf Boulevard essentially if if we come to a scenario to where you know to your point to where Golf Boulevard doesn't have any plans so what are they going to do they they theoretically could also use storm water pump stations or train mod or a combination of them both and you know I mean and and and that's just the reality of what the state would have at at their disposal and from our standpoint I don't see a future where city the city of Treasure Island doesn't incorporate the use of Phil and relies on storm water pump stations um okay we're we're going in a do Loop here yeah we can um my question was or my statement was until the state commits to raising Gulf Boulevard then how can I ask one of my residents to Fork over 250 500 a million dollars but we're not asking them to that that's incumbent upon them and their decision to it it's really saying what we're hearing what staff is hearing from residents and what we talked about when we adopted the watershed management plan back in 2021 is our community expects us to come up with storm water drainage Solutions we of city and in my and years being here I have seen a that is becoming worse I mean it is something that is visible and you can see it especially down in the Sunset Beach area to tell them that our solution is manage to treat Retreat and hell with your neighborhood I don't I don't know how we do that that is not something that we can sit up here and professionally recommend all right I'm going to go down commissioner doctor commissioner to do you have any questions I don't have any questions right at the moment comments okayy because all right we'll go ahead and go into some public comment wait and will the Commissioners will have another chance to comment yes okay thank you um all right Richard Harris and as a reminder um I know it's late and I understand everyone's frustration with waiting until now but I appreciate you waiting because we did have other people other items on the agenda we had other people that were here for those items that that was the order of sequence that we publish this agenda in so now is the time to provide these comments I'm very grateful that you've all stuck with it and if you know anyone that had to leave early we welcome comments via email phone call um you're welcome to tell people that they can they can do that so um Mr Harris thank you Richard Harris uh 374 Bay Plaza also chairman of the planning and zoning and local planning agency uh start things out to tell everybody our schedule we are going to have a another Workshop that makes about seven plus a few uh conversations during other meetings uh we're going to have it at 1:00 on Thursday everybody is welcome to come uh after that at 6:00 on the same day we're going to think about uh making a recommendation to the city Commission as of right now we have never made any recommendation to the city commission we've had a lot of discussions the one thing that uh is Paramount in regard to elevate TI is getting rid of the prohibition of Bill I mean let's put this way I'm one of the lucky ones I tore my house down in 1996 but at that time the law saying prohibition of Phill was in place I could not raise my house any higher than what I raised it uh if I could have gone from what it is which is 5.78 in the garage 27.6 I would have been happy to do it when uh I was at home uh August 4th when hurricane Debbie was off the coast 75 miles and by the time it got here it was category 1 it was blowing uh about 4ot waves up blind pass hitting my seaw wall and sending water up into the air about 10 ft so was kind of interesting to watch good thing was we didn't get a whole lot of Street Flooding at that point but my point is if you're going to tear down your house uh if you're one of these lucky people that has bought a house decided to tear it down build another one you should be able to haul fill in and raise that house if you want to um that's what I consider the most important part of this ordinance the second thing is and we will talk about it a lot on Thursday is the back-to-back permits um you know it bothers me when people say oh you know we're the ordinance is designed to drive you out well quite frally the 50% rule that is in place and has been in place for 20 years is designed to drive you out uh if your house is damaged more than 50% you either got to raise it Jack it up or tear it down build another one I mean this what we're doing here doesn't change that at all we all know that you know the uh one thing that I really want to talk to talk about on um Thursday is the street con uh reconstruction schedule you know we said uh these streets have a 30-year life I've lived here for 38 years I haven't seen much of any uh rebuilding of Roads especially on on Sunset Beach during that 38-year period my street on Bay Plaza has never been repaved uh so we want to talk about that you know we got to remember that the average age in the city right now is 57 years old uh you know 76 years is how long this program is going to last that's 133 years old sorry we're not going to make it like Bob was saying is for our kids and grandkids so you know we do want want to talk about the backtack permits I know to me one year is not too too much I kind of prefer just leaving it the way it is but we'll work out a solution we've got seven board members that and we're going to have a discussion on Thursday and we'll come up with a recommendation at that time the other item uh that we've talked a lot about is where do you uh uh these elevations I mean what we want to have a 7.6 in the garage as a finish floor if you can get it that high the seaw walls 5.0 I wish my seaw wall was 5.0 it's 4.0 uh and the roads they want to be about 5.1 you know do we mandate those uh really wanted to make it all voluntary there's a lot of discussion on Thursday that's going to go in on that I'm not going to say which way I'm going to lean at this point but uh s situation is we got to figure out you know how do we get these houses elevated it is not a program to drive anybody out if you want to live the rest of your life in your one-story ranch house go for it I want you to be able to uh you know get a permit keep your house renovated keep it in great shape and enjoy your life and we'll see everybody on Thursday and that's at 1 pm for the workshop thanks thank you just so everyone knows we do have about 15 cards at five minutes each that's about an hour so just in not encouraging anyone to take less time but just stating that matter of the fact if we all do five minutes we're going to be here till 11 um Greg Smith all right I made it back let me uh let me just thank everybody for uh for for listening um couple things we don't seem to ever want to talk about what this is going to cost I mean I've heard this presentation I've set through three hours and nobody talks about the reality of this thing it only works is if you raise the roads right there's there's two Givens here if if all the roads aren't elevated and GF Boulevard is not elevated there's no project I mean Elevate if you don't Elevate the roads there's no project that's that's where the cost comes in $250 million to elevate 24 miles a road but yeah we don't talk about that now we can we can change the rule we can we can mess around with that the improvements and we can reduce people's ability to stay in their house a little bit maybe it's three $400,000 we can do that but what do we accomplish I mean in a perfect world they want everything elevated we can rip off every single story house today we don't have $250 million to go raise the roads what what are we accomplishing I think I mean I think Bob makes a good point I mean there's there's a there's a certain point where this becomes a really good idea we need to continue to watch the storms we need to watch the data but we we I don't know I mean we're trying to uh even there's there's like 50 houses that were built by FEMA regulation there on grade they're all over town you can't Elevate the roads if you follow what these guys have said so if we don't Elevate the roads what have we really done I mean I'd love to have a nice tall house but if I have to go everywhere by boat I mean I'm just not sure that's what we're looking for and I I mean the fact that we've sat and listened to this and this group doesn't talk about what's going to what it's going to cost and what it's going to take to get anything done just shows how experienced inexperienced we are and we're not ready for a project like this I mean I'm the risk management for a 20,000 person engineering firm a project like this comes to us we look at it we give them 30 minutes to talk about it I'm the chairman I cut them off just like mayor Payne Cuts people off I'll cut people off too at 30 minutes and I ask him to tell me and there's one question how you funding it simple question how you funding it if they can't tell me how they're funding it no funding no project I mean that it's it's pretty simple you know we're about the math we're not about anything else I mean all the taxpayers out here are going to get burdened and it's almost like pick your poison you're going to get burdened with a billion doll Road elevation project when you fix when you try to factor in the interest or you're going to or you're going to drown and I I I just think we're not quite where we need to be yet on this thing there's just there's some good ideas there there's clearly some things that we need to do but it's simple there's one thing we need to do and this is what everybody wants they want some fi dirt like all the other communities have and you can do that with a simple ordinance you don't you don't have to re you don't have to redo everything to get people fill dir and and and you know screwing around with the 50% Ru I understand why why 10 years May made a difference but now why are we even talking about it it's irrelevant everybody keeps saying it's irrelevant one way or the other why are we wasting time on the 50% rule you know let's focus on what needs to be done for the long term and let's focus on the weak points that are out there today and we've got weak spots somebody said Sunset Beach was a weak spot earlier let's focus on Sunset Beach but let's be realistic about what this going to cost and let's don't set up here and hide about all you know talking about ordinance this ordinance that there's one ordinance that needs to be added that's filer that's it I mean how hard is that I mean everybody else has everybody else has filer regulations all up and down the beach and and they give you a hyp for your house and it's optional you you're you're asking people to put $250,000 in a new house to elevate TI most people that have you know maybe can do it maybe they can't but you're the example you use Bob if you're at a million three million four you're you know you're right on that threshold you're going to do it you want to stay in town but you have to go $250,000 it just it just doesn't make any sense so I I would say here's what we ought to do we ought to just we ought to scrap everything put in a uh put in a filter ordinance we ought to take the knowledge that we've learned continue studying this build a coalition on the Golf Coast get some cities involved get some money get some real money not not you know hey yeah we're behind you all the way just get some real money and go figure this thing out we've got a few years go down to Naples where there's a lot of money go up to Pensacola build a coalition and see what happens all right thank you for your comments Mr Smith Andrew VY Andrew VY is Palms um first um want to thank everybody for hanging for four hours um to get to this um you all as a as a board work under the Sunshine Law I want to address what happened four hours ago very briefly so we're permitted public comment and second as residents and more importantly as constituents we're voters so we're allowed free speech and you created tonight A Time place and manner issue so that's where we are now you're supposed to be neutral so no favoritism for people who who for example might favor elev TI you're supposed to allow us to speak where our intended audience is not push us deep into the night not make us experts on uh Coastal fishing code that we've all sat through tonight so that we can get to this point so that everybody can be here so you're a lawyer you know where it goes from there I just want to bring that up because I've been in a hundred Florida Sunshine Law meetings sitting in one of these tables Brower County for LA airport Hillsboro County Tamp International Airport fuia County Daytona Beach Charlotte County pagor I've never seen what happened I've been through commission meetings I've been in workshops I've presented to boards never seen that that happen what happened today and don't like it now I want to talk about cumulative substantial Improvement which is a topic that we are being misled on there's a lot of misleading information it's not coming from us the residents it is coming from the staff okay so cumulative substantial improvements the um the the I'm going to read the quote right from the memo April 12th memo you can all go look it up on the website if the city does not Implement a cumulative substantial Improvement program multiple rounds of improvements will continue to be allow for a single structure meaning your house such a major Improvement may make the structure desirable for occupancy for another years now let me reread that such major improvements may make the structure desirable for occupancy for another 30 years or more that's you living in your house Mr VY can you please speak into the microphone so that everyone at home can hear you sure so that's residents living in their house for 30 years it may make it desirable to do that well we certainly wouldn't want that so what we do is we Implement a cumulative substantial Improvement program so here it is but it's presented as oh pay no attention to this we all agree if your house is damaged by more than 50% FEMA takes your house out you either Elevate you sell or you build a new house everybody agrees to that so FEMA is the bad guy on that why on Earth would you as our elected officials push on us as residents something above what FEMA is already doing who is benefiting from it home what homeowner is going to come up here and say please take if you go back to the go back to the April 12th memo it was 10 years at that point then you all stepped it so four months ago it was 10 years then you all stepped it down to five years now to one why this is like negotiating to buy a car oh we'll split the middle no the answer is zero years permit backto back allow us to enjoy our house so you took the 10 years down this is what staff recommended 10 years so that you could and and the exact quote is allowing multiple large improvements to occur prolongs the time that existing structures will exist a low elevation prolongs the time that's the time you get to live in your house so it's this is not a secret this is right here in the memo it's right out there and you as Commissioners are going to vote on this and we as constituents are going to watch what you do because we don't want to have somebody telling us they don't want to prolong the time in our house we don't want them to say we can enjoy our house for another 30 years and you're not going to elevate the roads so I I think that the last thing is this feema insurance thing if you read again right in the memo additional points they talk about points oh we go to 49% versus 50 we get a couple of points okay additional points would move the city closer to the next classification which once achieved meaning it doesn't achieve it you might get there okay would result in increased premium discount so we do all this ask yourself why are you imposing this on the resident I don't get a premium discount I it makes it harder for me to stay in my house you admit it's harder staff admits it's harder to stay in the house and you're going to vote to do this I don't think that's going to go over very well with the residents and the homeowners in the constituents of treasure H thank you thank you Ray tuning I had a lot more uh Ray tuning 115 Third Street East I had a lot more prepared to to read through and I'm going to try to rush through it as as best I can but there were some comments made up here I hope I have the time to uh to address because I couldn't believe what I heard um first thing I'd like to say I believe uh Elevate TI lowers not raises our property values on single story homes Elevate TI is loudly proclaiming buyers beware if you buy a single store home in TI and run the risk of exceeding the city of TI's application of the FEA 50% rule under the new proposed code and the uh and the train modification program uh you exceed 50% by a combination a combination of cumulative improvements and storm damage not substantial storm damage which they keep saying it's not it's damaged so if I do a bunch of work and then I turn around and have a storm event and that whole cumulative number is above a certain pound uh amount I'm going to have to move on I also I'll take this moment right here to talk about um you don't get if you had a $200,000 house you got 100,000 50% and then you do that work and you get it back well I hate to tell you it doesn't work that way it works the wayc uh way it works is you get a new uh appraisal but some of that appraisal does not apply because some of it's repair they're doing on a square footage you don't get all of those monies back it doesn't work that way my my my perspective of elevate TI by the way I've I've repaired my house many times or done improvements and pulled a whole bunch of permits from from these people and turns out that I don't see that number showing up on my on my pis County my perspective is the Elevate TI will make it more difficult to sell a sing ster home as only buyers that that can afford to buy these homes with the intention of knocking it down and building a much more expensive elevated home that pool of buyers is much smaller than the pricing for the single single story homes will eventually start dropping and already have to some extent today the sellers of these single story homes will end up lowering their price as they compete and for those buyers and the buyers will have to contend with the added cost to meet Elevate TI requirements such as seaw wall storm water management and so on and so forth the State of Florida has laws that protect homeowners from local government laws that damage or diminish the value of one's property one such law the bur Harris act this law law has been successfully used by residents against local government overreach at a m massive cost to local governments and the taxpayers I don't think anybody here would be interested to see that happen as a taxpayer I wouldn't want to be on the hook to pay a settlement nor uh would one want to basically Sue themselves so the question is has the scenario been fully considered and vetted with respect to lawsuits and I'm directing that to Miss Jennifer um Elevate TI and the hypocrisy of what's going on I don't remember when it was brought up earlier but the whole thing about seaw walls so it's like we're talking about seaw walls and all these rules and what regulations and what have you but you guys are getting ready to spend a whole bunch of money I know some of it's Grant but a whole bunch of money for uh living Shoreline and I support the living Shoreline but you're good there you're going to cut the seaw wall you're going to lay the slope back I've heard this gentleman right here talk about this back and forth with the with the uh the the the tides well he just said that we're going to take away having those types of systems being double checked by another engineering firm is that prudent I don't think so so um and then you're telling us that we have to have these kind of measures and you're going to build this living Shoreline and it's going to it's going to be built less and you're going to create a bowl on the inside and you've already also stated that because we're connected to the to the boaa Bay that that elevation inside that bowl is going to be coming up and down and Destroy whatever that's inside there uh in closing I want to say that what's needed here is common sense and National Solutions not grand grand plans that were never real that will never be realized I do believe Elevate uh TI has some aspirational qualities but it should be done in a smaller non-mandated pieces and thly vetted by the residents I've met with several of of you Commissioners one of you had mentioned that you first thought was that the concern your concern was that there would be winners and losers I don't believe that there that has to be the case if we pause and allow enough time for the city and residents we could work together and find the right Solutions and we could all be winners I'm using this time as uh um I'm sorry that's that's all I have so thank you very much for the time and thank you right Mark Hoy good evening Mark Hoy 225 104th Avenue and for the record I'm in a uh slab on grade twostory 20 unit condominium building here on 104th we're screwed there's nothing going to save us till it's washed away and something else will get built there okay anyway um just a couple of things that you know came out I'm going to shorten this because the benefit of everybody here A lot's been said I'm not going to rehash it but you know I I want to speak again because it's been brought up repeatedly about the uh effect and the impact and flooding and all that and I get all that I've I've got a few more years on me than some of the folks and I've seen this before take sea level rise in 1989 the Associated Press published an article quoting a senior un environmental official and I'll read it un predicts disaster if global warming not checked now we've heard that for a long time a senior un environmental official says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by year 2000 the article went on to say for example the Maldives Islands one sixth of Bangladesh a fifth of Egypt's arable land could be flooded furthermore this un environmental expert forecast it could take a hundred billion for the US to protect its East Coast well we're still here as are the Polar Polar Bears and the arctic ice cap my point is this data continues to change and I appreciate your comment to say you've got to stay relevant with current data that that's important and even that's changing because as I pointed out at our last meeting we were using data for our forecasting that was 7 to 11 years old Noah updated that data in 2022 and it showed that the rate of sea level rise had slowed their most recent intermediate sea level rise forecast for 2050 25 years from now is N9 in lower that's a reduction of 37% from where they thought it was going to be still going to go up but it's slowing will that rate of Rise continue to slow I don't know none nobody knows but it's something we're going to fix to jump into a huge project based on efforts and thoughts and using old data and our desire to have some sort of mediation process the city's response at the time was to say well the two graphs data lines that were shown from 2017 and 2022 well they're going to come together by 2100 anyway so what does it matter well really that's 75 years from now just how accurate are those data points today the city is proposing to make extensive changes to the city's building codes and ordinances while committing millions of taxpayers dollars and residents dollars to a proposed terrain modification program you know the other thing and you heard about it this is primarily a road building Road raising program in fact the word roadway is used 58 times in a appendix B the terrain modification manual and yet there are zero details in that about how those roads and when those roads would be elevated and at what cost finally I agree much of this could be considered aspirational goals targets things that we should be working together to try to accomplish as both technology and knowledge increases in fact the word goal is mentioned more than a 100 times in that same 147 page appendix B 100 times yet in the end and there were questions about it this is a mandate for the example on page after page is and I'll I'll quit all proposed new developments shall be reviewed to determine that and you have one two and three which are the standard been there forever the number four is the new one the requirements of the city's terrain modification manual located in appendix B have been met that's a mandate that's not aspirational that's not goals thank you for your comments Kim Kim Matthew Matthew 22500 4th Avenue I'm in the same building as Mark so I am also screwed um I'm going to try to keep this short because I know everybody is tired it's been a long day I just want to focus on the fact that this is a huge undertaking which I know everybody recognizes we currently have nine projects on our City website as current projects as I go down through those I don't see any of those have been completed um so I'm wondering rather than putting so much time and effort into Elevate TI I don't disagree with a lot of it I don't I don't agree with the mandates however let's focus on the things that haven't gotten done in our city that have been sitting on that website for quite some time Public Works and pumps station facility Treasure Bay living Shoreline Treasure Bay future planning Dune management and Beach renourishment traffic and Mobility plans Gul Boulevard Wastewater maintenance roadway Paving Street Landscaping projects and the public safety complex for police and fire not on that list which we need to really talk about is our downtown area we need some economic development in our city that's nowhere list and I know a lot of that depends on private development but I'd like to see the city reaching out to some developers working with them to make our Downtown City Center something other than a desolate Forest that it is right now so it's not even a forest we don't have trees um so rather than put so much time and effort in and expense into something that we can't accomplish in any of our life lifetimes I'm not saying it's not worth looking at but let's look at what we can do and what we can accomplish and it's not raising the entire Island um I'm not against a plan to support our Island from rising sea sea levels but I'm not a sea level denier that's a term used by mayor um to refer to those of us who are questioning the urgency of this program I love this town and I love living here but I think the priorities of the city and the staff are misplaced and may not reflect the priorities of its residents and I would ask you to reach out to your residents in forums other than this um I know many of you have talked to Residents and I and we appreciate that but the concern is we feel maybe like we're not being heard thank you thank you Cory Evans Cory Evans else first sure yeah uh hendrik bizon I'll keep it pretty short now to just as a reminder to state your name and address or your district for on 7701 Bay Drive uh rather than maybe focusing on all the details that were addressed I mean this is a highly complex uh project obviously I'm uh I'm in favor of it generally speaking uh I don't know all of the details when it comes to the financing of elevating roadways Etc I do believe that Federal money will come along once the project begins I do understand that FEMA requires municipalities to put a plan into motion that is uh uh considered U Grant worthy and uh so I'd like to see this move forward uh but while I have the opportunity to speak I uh I do know that very few people understand that uh if uh because of FEMA regulations you are forced to either elevate your home uh or build new there's $30,000 in um of money available through FEMA that's whether as long as you have an ni uh what's it called nfip flood insurance policy uh it doesn't matter if it's an income property or second home or your primary home uh you come to the city with a plan that's going to cost you way more than what you're uh 50% structural value is uh and the city will issue a letter that you are going to have to make your home FEMA compliant you take that to your insurance agent and uh they will process a $330,000 uh refund or refund not you know they'll will'll process that amount of money to come to you towards the project hardly anyone insurance agent knows this uh and I think that uh May motivate people to actually go ahead and become compliant I do know one thing uh I don't agree at all with the fact that if we uh that elevate TI will devalue property values they've already been devalued uh try to sell a house that's not elevated currently in the city it's hard we have no beach insurance is unpredictable we don't know how high it's going to get uh uh nobody wants to buy in an area that floods all the time that's a reality so we have Sellers and I can guarantee you they don't tell the agents during the time of selling but their main motivation is they want to get out of here and we have no buyers wanting to buy into this community anymore that's the problem of the low Barrier Islands so you know at some point we all have to either then decide to sell while we can get some uh some money for our properties still uh that's if we don't act thank you very much thank you all right Corey I'll make it real real quick um so my wife and I came here in ' 08 so we've been here 16 years and so my opinion that raising the streets is a terrible idea is based upon what I've seen over the last 16 years um we live on is of Palms Fourth Street and in the 16 years we've been here I've seen the street flood four or five times but the houses have never flooded because they're about a foot and a half or two feet higher than the street if you raise the streets the houses are going to start flooding and we don't have the money to raise our homes we really don't most of the residents on isop Pals can't afford to raise their homes so I think raising the streets is a bad idea instead put the money into waste disposal into you know pumps that pump the money um pump the water out when the when the streets are flooding so that the houses don't flood that's my opinion thank you just just to be clear Mr Evans streets wouldn't be elevated until every home on that street is also elevated so that's what the the city will eventually but that's another thing that is not being considered this is a very very very long-term plan we're not looking at taking a big a $250 million loan out as soon as this passes to try to elevate every street in Treasure Island this is a plan that goes very far into the future home the residents all right Tammy Vasquez Tammy Vasquez uh 12020 Fifth Street cap um Isa Capri um I kind of had a whole thing planned out but those two gentlemen pretty much stole my thunder on a lot of it very eloquently but I'm just going to speak common sense um like many of you I know you for sure Tyler um I grew up here on Treasure Island I grew up on Palms I now live on Capri I didn't stray far um I've been I was here during Elena um that I know you weren't but U my family's house did flood we lived on um Fourth Street um in is of Palms but we were able to rebuild it and everything was great we continued living here I've lived here like I said my whole life um Common Sense has to come into play I'm not an engineer nor will I ever claim to be one I think there are very good things in everything that that you know there not everything but there are some good good points the minute you slap mandate on it sorry you lose 90% of your residents anytime you have something that you want to mandate that is immediately and the only people who don't think it's going to devalue the property values are people that are the investors waiting for the people that have to sell those are the only people you know not going to say any names that just spoke but Cas in point oh they're not worth it now people don't want to buy here now I'm sorry I'm a realtor as well as a business owner and hes sale every day as a matter of fact I believe we're down to only maybe three for sale on Isa Capri in the single family homes and single story homes sell every day so that is untrue so you know I think we can take bits and pieces out of it you either make it a referendum or you make it an an option but the minute you slap mandate on it I'm sorry there's only one name for it and nobody likes it and nobody likes it used but it is socialism plain and simple and that is not okay and we don't have to agree but it is what it is um the minute you tell us we have to do something or we're going to devalue your home that I'm sorry that's what it is it is what it is I'm not going to take up a bunch of time because like I said they pretty much said everything I wanted to which um I'm glad you know thank you guys for having this um you know I think it's it's worth staying um for and but I think it's important one thing I will say about elev TI I think the best thing it's done is it's got people into meetings that have never come to meetings and that I think is good because I think it's important as a small community especially that people pay attention to local government it's very very important and thank you guys I appreciate it Chris Hawkins he's no longer okay Diane Hawkins I'm awake okay Diane Hawkins from Isle of Palms 8th Street all right so most of what I wanted to say has been said but I will say this so FEMA they are a bugger we work with FEMA for the better part of three years and the city to do substantial improvements and it's hard enough to comply with a FEMA 50% rule FEMA is also a bad actor as far as I'm concerned because they hold insurance rates hostage they approve or deny insurance rates and in that way they blackmail cities and residents into complying with their guidelines which quickly become mandates so I don't care for FEMA Elevate di adds more layers of ordinances and rules and mandates so basically we're getting in bed with the devil we don't need to do that there are some good parts of levati and we can certainly use those but just just because an idea is good doesn't mean it should be codified into law it means that it's something that people should be able to consider property owners who are bearing the costs should be able to consider it we can incentivize it we can encourage it but to insist and enforce is not the right way to go we don't have the money for it none of our neighboring Coastal communities are doing it and the City of TI and its residents should not be the guinea pigs thank you thank you Byron Magby hello Byron Magby I live on Tarpon drive and uh on Paradise Island um what has been proposed is an unsolvable puzzle and um the reasons for being an unsolvable puzzle we've heard a lot of that today let me get into a couple of specifics but before I do this is a puzzle that if this were passed would make the residents of this island responsible and the monetary burden is on us to do everything except the roadway part we're Walling off the city at the expense of me and these people trying to wall it off but it's not going to work this Street out here is a major source of water if if it's not raised and you can't raise it I don't know how you can but it's going to cost too much money raising the rest of the um roads 24 miles of Roads it can't be done realistically and financially but getting back to the puzzle uh there's a proposal that little by little homes be raised seaw walls be raised or water just just going to come right around those right just come come right around those seaw walls the uh run off from one house is going to go to another that has not been raised yet we're talking about a puzzle that's unsolvable because there's uncountable misery and financial loss and problems caused by the fact that this is peace meal it can't be done peace Meal which means it can't be done at all you can't have everybody do this at one time it's impossible and did anybody check the video out online that shows you what the city's proposing uh and it shows run run off from these raised houses onto the uh streets but not onto the houses next door not realistic that's not being that's not being uh honest um another part of the puzzle um the streets are still going to flood until they're raised I don't see how any of this stops any Street flooding um and the street flooding is not that bad in some areas some it's worse but it's going to be exactly the same everybody the the uh tides are going to rise it it'll back up through the drainage system water's going to fall and regardless of whether there's a seaw wall here and there and three or four houses on one street it's still going to be the same all of this expense that we're paying for for nothing the um oh field dirt thing this cracks me up in a way unfortunately field dirt comes in people put field dirt in these uh new Ray structures well the first rains that come along the first floods guess where all that field dirt's going right back into the bay because this proposal strips all lawn all of our irrigation all of our palm trees there's nothing to hold that field dirt in once these people put it in first good rain that comes along some of us leaves more of it leaves it goes down into my lot your lot the streets it's it's a muddy mess the field dirt thing is just ridiculous at this point having it built up that much one lot at a time the um raising the roads as I mentioned that's not going to Happ happen I I just I don't see it uh we've already heard many projects that the city just cannot undertake can't afford um heard talk about a bond issue to raise $6 million for sewage that can't even be done much less $250 million it's just not going to happen uh instead what we need to do is submit this first of all to a referendum of all citizens not just have you guys decide it let's submit this to the people to their homeowners see what they agree to I'm I'm sort of surprised that that hasn't been done something of this magnitude you don't do it yourselves come on that's not your that's not your job this is our city these are our houses submit it to us for a vote um so what I'm telling you is my take on this and my presentation is look defeat all of these new uh regulations defeat the uh everything that has to do with Elevate TI don't do it right now if you want to do it later if something else comes up fine but this is not the time to do it we don't have the information nor do we have the funding for it thank you sir thank you very much Robert baso that is our last card so if anyone else is interested in speaking if you could take a moment to fill out a card that would be great last one oh maybe maybe not it's cold here um I feel like a rush because October 1st is coming and we're behind the eightball and I really feel like you know the sky is falling I want to make it clear that those of us that rise in objection to this elevati we're not deniers we're not deniers about climate climate change it it's cyclical things will change change so we're not we are not deniers I I think it's not a rush I think we need to step back uh on this and take a look at the whole the whole thing now speaking of 17th century English poets John Dunn in his devotion upon emergent occasions wrote no man is an island entire of itself every man is a piece of the continent we're we're one team every bar island island is a team we're all together we just can't wait rise up and not have other people do the same thing we need to take our time we need to study it I've heard that there were other communities that were talked about I like to see that data the engineer talked about peer review i' like to see an another engineering company saying this is a great idea I want to I want to see that the main thing I read the Fai the Fai clearly states that upon full implementation 70 years from now it still will not mitigate storm surge that's what that's what I care about right now tropical storm Debbie did some you know Capri Boulevard normally didn't flood it flooded this time where is the medication to for hurricanes and for storm right now there's a lot of Technology out there we said one to uh uh Miss to over there but what other areas are doing like barriers and some pumps and some valves let's do that right now those are the things that are impacting us and worry me me right now yes I'm concerned about my children and grandchildren not really but uh so I I see your point I want to be here for a long time my house on Capri I'm almost at 10 feet but I'm still in the flood Hazard Zone and I will be in 70 years from now now talking about Community rating system we all I read where we're proud about having a level six here I got my renewal notice today for my fee of flood insurance I'm moment at 10 ft which is the base flood elevation by the way which has been reduced this year by FEMA which is a good thing which is anti- uh sea level rise by the way I've been here eight years I went from $1,700 a year with private last year I went Federal $5,600 today I'm told is $6,300 for and so I called up my broker I said hey I live on Treasure Island and we have a CRS level six and I want my 15% or 20% bonus I want some money back they laughed do you know in real terms as of today my premium reduction was how much how much $15 $15 so gr by ratings you know we're level six now my because I live on the water like most of us do here I'll be paying in this year $6,300 that includes the $15 back okay and I'm almost my one my level is high almost at 10 feet and that's how much I'm paying that's a lot of what are we doing about that so I think it's bold what we're doing it's great idea let's let's work on it let's pause it take our time let's work with the other barer Islands let's get more more peer reviews let's see the peer reviews and but it's a bold move and I respect everybody here for taking the initiative but we're we are Community we are one conent thank you very much thank you carim hi again kisim 780 Capri um my questions are actually just for the staff um and they're more comment questions um but I heard a lot of things tonight and I've seen obviously I follow along on Facebook I see the um social media posts from the city um and I find them very interesting um which I feel like you guys have kind of gone on the offense now um and and you're now on defense um with a lot of uh a lot of the posts um I Heard madira Beach tonight got mentioned I heard Clear Water got mentioned I heard a lot of cities surrounding us are and have this in place something like this um a couple meetings ago I heard from y'all that we were the first no one had this in place and that they were looking to us as an example um my questions are what do they have in place can we see it can it be posted you know you guys are all about your social media nowadays so can we get that information posted so we can repost it to the residents um because if this is something that you guys want us to know about and learn about um then I want to see the facts and the numbers and the figures from other cities doing it I'd love to see what madira did I'd love to see what clear water has done I would love to see how much it's cost them I would love to see who was involved in the project um I would love to see what engineering firms that they used um you know they're right here they're right down the street so I don't see why we haven't seen that information yet um and you know I'm all about you know updating our building code that's great um getting you know on track with Florida building code wonderful um what I don't understand is why Stacy got up here and said all eight ordinances or nothing when I read all of them and you could easily adopt some and scratch some others I don't know if that's because it causes them more work or if it is just not possible I don't understand why it's all or nothing and that's a huge red flag for me um as to why things can't be picked and chosen one or the other or made to look um more presentable for the residents um so I guess I as I've you know shown before I like facts I like things to be backed up um I don't just like assumptions um I don't I heard the word assume a lot from the staff um that word I don't I don't like verb you know verb words that are used like that um and I don't think the residents do either especially at the end of the day when we have all voice that this is going to be our dollars at the end of the day so um if the staff can start posting some information that they clearly have unless they are making it up then um we'd love to see it so that's all thank you have a good night thank you do we what if there's no other public comment I had a couple of clarifications that I think might be helpful do we have any other public comment all right hearing you already spoke Mr tuning I didn't use all my time if nobody else just mention one more you did use all your time you went past the buzzer yeah um thank you okay um with no more public comment um do we have any other commission discussion or Stacy did you want to address anything very quickly um when we talk about roadway reconstruction we did talk about the cost for these things at our last meeting and we talked about looking a differential when we were going to reconstruct a road anyway at an additional 15 to 40% depending on the project on top of that cost and that differential is what we would foresee being funded through grants and that's how we presented the CIP this year when we talked about West Causeway it was even more than that being able to be Grant eligible under some of these programs which we have a greater capacity to get being that regionally we are you know one of the first to look at having a program that you know that performs some of the same goals that they're looking at doing down in South Florida so that's one thing another thing I think that may be getting missed is that while it is true that ultimately getting all of the roadways elevated by the year 2100 is a super lofty goal um most of our roads can be elevated to some degree today they might not be able to get to the full you know low road collection point at 5.0 like some of our roads can um they may only be able to go up 6 in 8 in you know but this this is not something we're talking about waiting 30 40 years to start elevating roads you know we want to start going after that grant money to cover those differentials on roads that need to be reconstructed anyways as soon as we can um and we think that will make a difference and when it comes to that funding you know how will it be funded well that's something that we talk about during our CIP planning process and we have projects that we don't move forward unless we have grant funding for and that's a decision that of course you all would make when that time came um when it comes to the package deal that I discussed that is how it's written today that doesn't mean that we can't go back and revisit these things if that's the commission's will that is you can't pick apart one piece today and say we're only moving forward with these four it just won't work like that it's not saying that we can't go back and look at those things it's just not how it's written today thank you I want to talk to she brought up something we did not get to talk about that's let me talk about it for one minute you've already used your full five minutes you let her go and say she's never said before now we don't have a chance to talk about it sir you've used your full five minutes I'm sorry please sit down thank you sir commissioner minning uh question for staff can the Phil ordinance be separated and passed as itself do do you want to address that there's not a fill ordinance okay but the one that we keep hearing thises fill ordinance so we have one ordinance that's the manual go ahead Jen yeah I was going to say so actually the fill is throughout it's not in one section so you have fill when you're dealing with it from the flood plane you have fill when you're dealing with it even from like the fence restrictions and how you're going to deal with that you have fill in how it's going to be handled within the manual so it's it's in several places certainly if the direction was that you wanted to provide for Phil but you know not for something else we'd go back and amend but it it wouldn't be just one okay so an ordinance could be developed and written and brought forward that just deals with the film material and whatever fringes you want to put on that multiple ordinances multiple because we'd be amending several sections to address it so that's what I understood it to be is that it's a cross reference through multiple ordinances for Phill to be put into different places as needed and barriers to prevent runoff to a neighboring house that's on slab if you're going to fill and also Provisions for um basically protecting people that are still on grade because you want to protect everybody's ability to live out here and that was the sa the security of this ordinance altogether was to clean up the language and make it so that people could follow and that's why it's cross referenced if I understand that correctly okay thank you and that's what I thought we were conveying but I don't and then the roadway or down the road pardon the pun but um it seems like what we're really trying to do is protect people's ability to stay here and stay in their houses with the ability to how you can do it safely and stay in the guidelines of the 50% rule thank you great thank you commissioner doctor you have anything no commissioner dicki I'm uh I'm leaning towards where uh commissioner Min has uh has addressed already I think the the from the very beginning the most important element of elevate TI to me was was allowing Phill uh this city is one of the only cities that I know about in the state that does I may be incorrect about that Stacy shaken orhe but but we everybody we have 100% agreement on the commission on the residents everybody agrees that that allowing Phil is a smart thing to do uh so I would like to see this effort move forward with Phil regarding the other initiatives uh we heard all along that you can't Elevate the roads until the houses are elevated so that is way down the road and I don't mean by six intimate elevation right I don't mean by 6 Ines or whatever uh so I don't H I don't have a problem with that especially if if you're if we're not asking the taxpayers to pay for elevating those roads 6 Ines 8 Ines whatever if we can get grants then sure especially if it doesn't result in a negative impact to to the water draining on the residents which I know you guys wouldn't even recommend that if that were the case so where I would personally like to see this whole effort go is go forward with Phil and go forward with it quickly uh for those of you who said say pause this uh I can tell you you probably don't live on Sunset Beach uh you heard two people speak tonight that lived on Sunset Beach and both of them were for the general concept of elevate TI they weren't for every element of it but they were for the concept of it Sunset Beach is a different if it's a different animal it's a different situation out there and and the quickest way to help the residents of Lev TI as Dela Phil so I would like to see this go forward with that uh roads will take care of themselves in the long run it's not going to I'm not worried about it costing taxpayers money because we're not going to do it if we don't have the money and we not going to do it if we don't have the grant so so I'm not too worried about uh about elevating TI as I had imagined be allowing the fill don't change the 50% rule FEMA's uh requirement is strict enough and I and and I don't think we need to I think we can make this work in the long run I I think we can if we allow Phil and let let all this happen organically that we can eventually get to where we want maybe not as quickly as as if we've uh forced forced some of these other issues all right where did do stand I have one one last comment okay um the term will fund this with grants has been thrown out tonight and many many nights many days many months years um I think we're kidding ourselves take a look at the United States and take a look at the shoreline that's involved in the United States and they're probably I'm going to say 10 2050 meetings may be going on tonight much the same topic that we're discussing here how to elevate our area how to protect it and we're going to fund it with grants no s sorry I don't I don't think that's a practical solution there's going to be so many people applying for grants that are going to be impacted by sea level rise um just look at a map and to think that the federal government is uh going to be sufficiently benevolent that they're going to meet everybody's demands or everybody's requests for a grant don't forget a Grant's a competition doesn't mean when you apply for a grant that you're going to get it so put yourself in the vicinity of just Florida um and think of uh all the coastal communities just think of our big SE Barrier Island communities all applying for Grants okay I said my peace thank you okay I clarify where I I stated on there and I think I was saying the same thing and that we don't uh that if we don't get the grants then we don't do it we don't there's no way the taxpayers of this city can afford you know 250 300 million everybody knows that so if you don't get the grants then you don't get then you don't do it so we're I think we're saying the same thing but just differently now your turn well I'm trying to determine what the consensus is of the commission because at this point we need to there's an LPA workshop on the August the 22nd and then if we're trying to do this by October 1st to avoid those business impact statements which would delay this even longer and cost us even more um we need to decide how to move forward if you're looking for consensus I agree with both Bob and hard all right so my question for staff hearing that that's a consensus what and hearing the public I mean I'm I'm listening to you guys I I sense that the yes I am I don't know who said that but yes I am listening to you I've been up here for just as long as you've been sitting in the audience listening to you um I sense that the the the reservation is the Mandate and personally I think that the entire Florida building code is a mandate so I don't really get the analogy of this is something that we're we would be requiring residents to do the state and our building code require residents to do all kinds of stuff that are mandates on how properties are developed and built so that us adding this to the building code does not make us socialists this is a something that's being presented it's not any different than any other part of our building code so I I take issue with that personally but I I hear the concern and I'm identifying that I hear that that is everyone's frustration so if we were to remove that mandate from this equation and leave it voluntary When someone knocks down their house and builds a new house that they can bu bring in the Filer and all of our terrain modification all our manual that we've spent a lot of time and effort on developing those policies and these changes to our ordinances would still guide a builder on how to do that properly correct it would it just doesn't get us to our objective of why we developed the program through the watershed management plan to elevate roadways so we're going to have people who elect to elevate their homes but yet can't access their homes right but that's something but eventually I mean this is this is a long-term plan we're talking this isn't going to be accomplished even by 2100 so if everyone's hesitancy is having this be forced upon everyone I'm I'm saying now let's look out at 2200 like this will eventually be something that if it if it's a policy now that it's allowed we could eventually see that day where the entire Community is elevated I don't have the faith that the community will do that on their own own because it is a significant financial um burden and expense so I I don't know when that would happen but it the day will come and I think what we're hearing from the commission is that we want to allow it but they don't feel comfortable requiring it and I I know that that's that's hard because we' put a lot of time into this but my question is can we make that change to the Mandate but still keep the majority of what is in this plan because it is addressing what to do when you do bring in Phil and elevate a property so we're still going to have all those issues that are revolving around elevating a property like some of the people have mentioned flooding neighbors this technical manual is how we prevent that from happening so implementing all of this without the Mandate I know it's not what we envisioned a year and or in 2021 but it seems as though that's the will of the commission at this point in time so um does staff need what I'm sorry I was good may I ask a question sure so you're saying we go ahead and adopt the program that's not what he's saying no that's not what I'm saying I'm saying what are the things in the program that are the parts that we're not comfortable with as a commission from what I've heard it's the Mandate it's the back-to-back permitting but we still have if we allow Phill this is a pro this is something that's scattered throughout our code that has to be adjusted and that's what all of the that's what the program is addressing is how to how to guide a resident through that process and what needs to be required if some is bringing in Phil so if we remove the piece of requiring it this still this the the plan still outlines how to do that and a best practice to not impact your neighbors and not to and to do it correctly to engineer it correctly um so I think that just removing the Mandate portion of it is really what everyone's uncomfortable with right in the 50% if I'm wrong and the 50% uh back toback permit yeah remove that and and this would I think everybody would support what we what we're left with here am I question sure um the staff don't we already have rules and regulations on the book that say you cannot increase your runoff onto a neighbor's property yeah so what is so what are we saying you didn't actually give them a chance answer the audience answered but I didn't hear Stacy's answer Stacy okay we had a little eye contact so yeah but what's the difference so that's just that's I what's the difference between this and that right now we have a rule that says you can't impact this this plan demonstrates and show we've had me you know there's there's OB you know we talked about the four program tenants and as far as like well why why do you even need to regulate Phill you know which we've talked about in Prior workshops with the LPA and prior workshop with the commission so allowing Phil certainly um doesn't negate those concerns um so you know it's almost like our is is the thought process that pretty much you know residents have a path to go Phill or no fill and then if they go fill they follow the guidelines of the manual if they go no fill they follow no fill requirements MH but why do you need to follow the the terrain modification when it already says if I am a property owner and I bring in Phil okay and whatever quantity and wherever I put it no matter what I do with it on my property I can't increase runoff to my neighbors well because Phil Phil is also going to have adverse impacts as far as what you're doing within the plal or like the rain based flood plane it's also going to have impacts as far as like based upon the FEMA flood zone you're in you can only fill certain amounts um based upon how some of the um you know how the city's Watershed responds to larger storm events you're still going to have places that need to be protected where like Overland flow transfers happen so there still are things that need to be looked at when you when you use Phill which is why we identified those you know we talked about these four tenants to where like why do we even need to regulate Phil and you know so pretty much those don't go away it's just a matter of if you bring in Phil do we make it like pretty much give people the option you can go no fill or G fill I'm I'm I'm confused because I've got I've got a lot and let's say it's 100 by 100 okay okay and I can go to U calculations depending on what kind of surface I've got as so what kind of runoff I can expect from that I can do a runoff model for that yeah but whatever amount of rainfall falls on my lot that's 100 by 100 is going to fall on 100 by 100 I don't care if it's 10 ft high or or it's at grade level okay no and certainly you know from a storm water management standpoint that is an accurate statement yeah I agree so but but the there's other aspects to where what like let's say you're on a v let's say you're in a vzone okay let's say you're in a vzone and you know there's the the assumption that you can just add whatever fill you want to well that's pretty much where we get into cha challenges with nfip you know to to you know to where essentially when you know the federal government if we start adding too much fill and velocity and Coast a zones now we run the risk of not being able to write flood insurance in the community which is why that first tenant of the program is preserve the nfip and so you know the second thing we also have our flood planes that we deal with here predominantly when we talk about the flood plane it's tidal right because everyone's really talking about storm surge but you also have a plal or like a rainfall based flood plane and as um you know and the way we have the program set up is that you know conventionally in in flood plane management when you have flood plane impacts you have like cup for cup compensation and so we are requiring the cup for cup compensation for commercial properties but for Residential Properties we are not requiring the cup for cup because that becomes a bit burdensome so what we're doing is that we're giving them prescriptive measures to deal with those flood plane those rainfall-based flood plane impacts based upon how the how the flood plane hits their property we also have certain situations to do you want to that I'm sorry I just no you're you're fine we just lose our our FEA compliance and Disaster Assistance and our ability to manage storm water throughout the city okay it's we're we're talking between the commission and staff right now what did you have something the risk are we lose our ability to control storm water throughout the city we lose FEMA disaster assistance and our flood insurance program those are the R of not doing itly don't do it but we already have those conditions right now please let allow us to have a conversation with the staff thank you you know you know FEMA you know the the reason why the noof Phil ordinances are in place is because Phil has impacts Phil Phil has impacts when you know because it takes away storage from the flood plane so pretty much FEMA in you know FEMA says we recommend you go no fill which is why the city went down that road in the first place because it because it got you a lot of you know because there were some CRS points that was kind of the the carrot to dangle and now and so you can't just arbitrarily add Phil that that's just not how the world works that and that's not say that that's not true when you look at we we we work with other communities we design storm water infrastructure throughout penis County I understand how flood planes and Phil work I mean no when you talk about flood plane M are you talking about a residential lot yeah so I I'm I'm talking about the the entire city being in the flood plane well there's there's the special flood Hazard area which is the 100-year flood plane and then there's also what we've you know there there's a rainfall based flood plane to where when it rains that there's a certain amount of storage associated with each Basin within the city mhm and and then as you go filling and you take up that storage the reason no fill ordinances are there to begin with is because as you displace that water you start having adverse impacts okay but you can't you know you have an impervious surface ratio that you have to fulfill so you just can't go that's that's a material I mean you know it's almost like filling up a bathtub if you you know pretty much if you have a bathtub and you fill it up with let's say 100 gallons of water it's going to be elevation X yep and then you go and you put you know four four inches of concrete in there and you put that same amount of water in there it's going to be higher because you've essentially displaced the area that the water can take and now you're forcing it to Stage higher it's going to run off so yeah I mean all right okay okay Sor I'm through terrible all right so at this point I don't have clear excuse me can you please allow me to to speak um at this point I don't feel as though we have obviously don't have consensus amongst the commission I don't feel like we have clear guidance for the staff um to proceed with this schedule so I think at this point what I would suggest is city manager stay um that you meet with each one of us to determine at what how we go forward from here we've had a lot of um I think some transparency from the the commission tonight that might be enlightening for you guys on how we move forward we're going to need to have the planning and zoning board discuss this on Thursday and um hear what they have to say um and hopefully a report can be given to them on what was discussed tonight but um I think some work needs to be done and it's not going to be solved this evening so um yeah I got that direction mayor I just wanted to clarify or just uh to solidify I think I heard a lot of talk about the Mandate so the required could be something if if I'm correct here of a recommended versus a required I think I've heard a lot of information about Phil dir being in all of the ordinances but with the desire to make sure that the fil dirt ability for that to be brought into the city is something that is there um so those two items also having to talk um further discussion on the 50% in the one year if I could captured in those three items yeah um on 50% I didn't think there was further discussion I think we I to three to two agreed that that we' abandon not to change not to not to implement a stronger restriction on the 50% rule other than what FEMA has okay that's your opinion that's your opinion that's your opinion concur okay we'll do thank you all right so we'll and that's we'll we'll work the staff will work with one of us and kind of come back with a a suggestion can staff work on developing an ordinance that relates directly to Phil and I it's not one ordinance we can work at revamping the program which will take a significant amount of time for us to go back and do but we will do it at your direction okay and we also would like to announce that um we're going to recommend cancellation of the LPA Reg meeting at 6:00 because the full purpose of of having that done was to provide a recommendation to you all and now that we're holding back there's we'll hold the workshop but we're going to go ahead and cancel that meeting okay all right all right thank you um how long we have one more item on the agenda B3 local mitigation strategy um is that just I know that's you and we're doing this cuz you're out of town the next meet next meeting that'll be up to you um it's basically just an update of what we did last year as part of the uh LMS can you just wait till the noise yeah let if everyone who's not staying for this can please exit the room so we can hear our staff that's interesting it's flood mitigation yeah I don't know how much late you later you would like to stay uh it's pretty much set up that Catherine and Mary Ellen could go over it at the next meeting if you would like to get the update up to you is that okay yeah I'm all for it all for what no 15 to 30 minutes he said do we want to postpone or do we want to do it for 15 to 30 minutes I'm fine with going another 15 minutes yeah I'm good I'm always up late so it's fine usually miss my nap all right let's hear it this is our flood mitigation strategy for FEMA right M that's nothing to do with what we just talked about I know oh did Jason cut me off what yeah not shooting up there wasn't is it because Phill is intertwined with so many other this tentacles and so many all right thank you Stacy didn't two okay all right I might speed through this a little bit so okay so this is basically just an update of last year's 2023 uh some of the things as what was done in the local Med local mitigation strategy then also the program for public information and then the flood insurance Improvement plan as well as well all right so we're going to start with the LMS update first um so pretty sure a lot of us are quite familiar with the LMS so it's basically countywide Hazard mitigation plan that the city of Treasure Island is a part of along with I believe it's another 16 or 17 other municipalities as well uh the biggest benefit out us being part of this part of the LMS is that it provides the city with their flood plane management plan which is required as part of the nfip CRS program and just another update um so next coming in the springtime we are going through the next 5year LMS Plan update so we're changing out some goals and objectives and stuff like that so the city will most likely be adopting a new fiveyear update and I'm guessing like spring of 2025 right uh so basically the biggest thing we had staff-wise is just myself took over as the primary member and then the assistant director Mary Ellen she is the alternate member and then I was Katherine as well uh so some of the initiatives uh so these are some of the things that we have on the list right now um so we have the reconstruct Public Works garage and yard reconstruct public safety building the Citywide seaw wall repair the public workk seaw wall replacement and reconstruction of the fire and police facilities and then also the king fish Park seaw wall Rehabilitation uh so the latest things that we actually did accomplish and have been removed off this list uh was the East Causeway drainage roadway improvements and then the generator for the EOC uh so some of the Outreach programs that we do so we have 41 listed and pretty much these are all things like Jason helps us with like social media all these types of public Outreach that we do to inform the public about flood and Grant programs and mitigation strategies and then there any questions about LMS or I kind of skip through that really quick but good good all right and so now this is the the next one the program for public information update um so basically this is also another part of our Outreach as being part of the LMS as well um same thing County and another 18 municipalities as well too uh we have some stakeholders basically we comprise the penis County flood risk and mitigation public information working group and not only does this committee meet the basic CRS system PPI requirements but they also evaluate flood insurance coverage flood plane management flood warning response and provide provide input into the LMS uh same thing so just an update on some members uh I moved up and basically my main stakeholder is uh Clyde Smith which is the billmore resort general manager and then the additional support we have is Mary Ellen Edwards the assistant director and then Brian Ford the insurance resources uh so we hold meetings obviously throughout last year of 2023 um so what most of these meetings did is we the committee we evaluated update modified the identifi target audiences for like our Outreach messages and then some of the projects were have been adjusted and added to this Outreach as well too um out of the 36 that are implemented through this program the city ourselves we do 25 with the assistance of penis County and that was all for the PPI one and any questions on that do you inter interact with Emergency Management we do uh as you know like trip so there is times where they would have they could have input if they would like to any of these things especially with like LMS I know the county has their own comprehensive emergency plan and it's kind of intertwined with what we have in place so a lot of them put their input into this and then everybody looks at it as well to okay thank you and next one is the flood insurance Improvement Plan update um so the pelis county flood insurance coverage Improvement plan is developed and coordinated by the previous mention that I kind of just mentioned and same thing County and 18 municipalities and so this is just actually this actually surprised me so this is some of the latest flood insurance policy data that we received from FEMA in October 2023 the city of Treasure Island has 1,887 policies in force as compared to 4,898 policies in force in 2021 uh so a significant decrease in the number of flood insurance policies as you can see and why why is that yeah that yeah that one's kind of hard to as did you want me to answer that question now please yeah so that we there's not really quite sure we think it could be because of the risk rating 2.0 that put into place or because there could cheaper private flood insurances that are being offered there's a strong private flood Market okay out there yeah there's a there's one right here in in St Pete Neptune flood that was started so there's a lot of people that are going with private flood insurance MH Y and as you can see this pretty much shows you all the other municipalities involved and as you can see everybody has had a huge uh drop in flat insurance policies and then actually pretty much just kind of always answered that question as well too so risk rating 2.0 is implemented in 2021 there's been a decrease the nfip policy counts it is unclear if those policies were dropped to purchase flood private flood insurance or people oh that was another option too yeah people might have chose not to renew their policies at all as well so as part of this group um like you said their goal is to basically identify improve and implement Outreach to educate the public about the benefits of having flood insurance coverage and that was all for the flood insurance Improvement plan questions on that one NOP all right and that's all I had there there's a benefit to being the last on the agenda did anybody say all right y that's all I had so the next thing that we're planning on doing is basically just bring forward the uh like hopefully there repetitive loss area analysis because originally I was trying to put that in this presentation but there's a lot more involved in those reports and I wasn't be able to get that done thank all right any questions good job is that just the that's everything you have all three of those plans and updates yes all right sounds good we appreciate it um do we have any public comment seeing no public in the room anymore um I'll take that as a no do you have anything else that any of the Commissioners would like to say all right um with that being said we'll adjourn thank you