One notable topics was the proposed charter amendment requiring public approval for any actions involving properties acquired through a referendum. Peter Lack, a community member, voiced concerns about a property purchased by referendum. Lack suggested that any future actions concerning this property should also be subject to public approval, emphasizing the importance of maintaining the will of the populace. He pointed out that if the city engaged in property swaps, the value of the properties should align with the original intent of the referendum.

Following Lack’s comments, the committee shifted its focus to the draft charter ordinance. The chair announced the distribution of a new ordinance package, which included updated language based on feedback from previous meetings. A discussion ensued about property swapping, with Mr. Trapani highlighting the need for a mechanism requiring public approval for any potential liquidation or trade of properties acquired via referendum. He emphasized that if the board of commissioners wanted to engage in land speculation, it should be done independently and not at the taxpayers’ expense.

The committee members debated the implications of property value in the context of liquidating city-owned land. It was noted that some properties hold significant value and should be subject to similar referendum requirements. A motion was raised to amend the charter to reflect these principles, stressing that properties acquired through referendum should not be traded or sold without further public approval. Concerns were raised about the potential overreach of including every possible scenario in the charter, leading to discussions on ensuring clarity and necessity in the proposed amendments. Despite reservations, there was a consensus on the importance of holding the city accountable for property disposals that were initially acquired through public votes.

The meeting also delved into the complexities of the lease agreement concerning city-owned property operated as a hospital. There was contention regarding whether the city retains ownership of the land and the building at the end of the lease. A motion was proposed to defer the discussion until the lease could be reviewed to ensure that any changes align with the lease agreement. Participants emphasized the importance of clarity in the charter, specifically regarding the ownership of the hospital building and the underlying land. The committee agreed that the current charter language does not adequately reflect the city’s ownership and suggested that the language should explicitly state that “the hospital building and dirt belong to the city of Tarpon Springs.”

Further confusion arose regarding the definition of the hospital’s ownership and the roles of various entities involved. The committee debated whether to include the name of the hospital in the lease documentation, ultimately deciding that referencing only the Tarpon Springs Hospital Foundation, Inc. would provide a cleaner representation. The conversation underscored the importance of the lease’s language matching the city charter, with a consensus emerging that identifying the foundation as the lessee would provide clarity.

The committee also revisited the implications of any future changes to the hospital foundation’s structure. It was articulated that the lease solely exists with the foundation, and any future changes would necessitate an amendment to the lease. A participant highlighted the significance of ensuring that the foundation does not sell the property without community input, reiterating that the city retains ownership.

In addition to property and lease discussions, the committee addressed grammar and procedural clarifications within the charter. This included a review of the procedures for filling vacant positions on the board, grammatical changes regarding meeting attendance, and zoning powers. The committee debated the use of the word “shall” and its grammatical implications, emphasizing the need for precise language in legal documents. There was also a discussion about the powers of the board concerning zoning matters, with revisions aiming to avoid limiting the board’s authority.

Another topic of interest was the sidewalk improvement plan. The committee clarified that the city would need to budget a minimum of $100,000 for sidewalk projects, with the option to withdraw up to $300,000 from a specific fund for that purpose, and that a sidewalk improvement plan should be established by 2029. This was agreed upon as a necessary addition.