The meeting’s most issue revolved around the Destin Code Enforcement Department’s staffing shortages and operational efficiency. Currently, the department is operating with only four or five employees, leading to delays in managing cases and responding to resident complaints. The Director of the Code Department acknowledged the staffing challenges, noting that several employees had left due to better opportunities and personal reasons.

One council member emphasized the frustration expressed by residents over the lack of follow-up on complaints. The Director suggested shifting operational hours to ensure more staff are available simultaneously, proposing a straight day shift, such as 7 AM to 4 PM or 8 AM to 5 PM, to better handle the workload. This suggestion received some support, recognizing the impracticality of maintaining night and weekend shifts with the current staff levels.

The council members discussed the hiring process and expectations for new employees, noting that potential hires might not fully understand the challenges of the job until they start. The Director shared an example of intense scrutiny faced by staff, with a resident emailing the department over 470 times in just 90 days.

A broader concern was raised about the support provided to Code Department employees by the council. One council member highlighted the lack of support, suggesting that unless this issue is addressed, retaining staff will remain problematic. The conversation also touched on the nature of proactive versus reactive cases, with the Director explaining that proactive cases are initiated by officers who identify violations independently, whereas reactive cases are prompted by citizen complaints.

The council members debated the department’s responsibilities, particularly regarding registration tasks that could be managed by administrative staff instead of enforcement officers. There was a consensus that the department is stretched thin, and a reevaluation of task distribution is necessary to improve efficiency.

The council also discussed the need for clear communication and accountability in reporting. Questions were raised about the accuracy of reports presented, particularly regarding staffing and schedules. The dialogue revealed a desire among council members to find solutions that would enable the department to function more effectively while addressing employee retention challenges.

In addition to the code enforcement issues, the council delved into financial strategies for borrowing funds, with a proposal regarding a $25 million borrowing initiative. Jerry Ford, the financial advisor, presented two main options: a bank loan with different amortization schedules and a tax-exempt bond issuance through public markets. The bank loan options included a 15-year amortization with a 10-year balloon payment or a 20-year amortization with a similar balloon feature. Ford explained the difference in proposals and the necessity of considering the implications of each option carefully.

The council discussed the complexities of the financial proposals, emphasizing the need for clarity to ensure effective bidding from banks. The council’s previous request for a fixed rate for five years was modified to a 10-year interest rate reset to attract more banks to participate in the bidding.

Another topic was the Barrett School tri-party agreement involving the city, the county, and the school itself. The agreement’s purpose is to facilitate the school’s opening, with concerns raised about traffic management and pickup/drop-off procedures. The county emphasized the need for designated parking spaces to prevent congestion. Council members expressed excitement about the school’s opening and acknowledged the collaborative efforts involved.

Discussions also focused on the Parks and Recreation budget for fiscal year 2024. Council members raised concerns about unspent budget allocations and the lack of progress on projects that had been earmarked for funding. A motion was made to further discuss the budget at a special council meeting, emphasizing the need for a clear plan for spending the budgeted funds.

The meeting also addressed the appointment of an interim city manager due to the extended absence of the current city manager. Discussions emphasized the importance of a temporary appointment lasting less than three months, with a local candidate, Mr. Larry Jones, identified as a suitable option. The council expressed support for Mr. Jones, and a motion was passed to proceed with negotiating his interim contract.

Additionally, the council considered ordinances related to changing the future land use and zoning designations for parcels of real property located north of Calhoun Avenue. The proposed ordinances aimed to achieve a unified development, with council members engaging in discussions about the implications of the zoning change.

Finally, the meeting concluded with public comments, focusing on safety concerns and proposed improvements for a particular property and its surrounding area. Discussions included the need for a fence and signage to prevent public access to dangerous areas while preserving the view.