The commission’s meeting centered on the downtown undergrounding and streetscape improvements project. This initiative is designed to enhance utility reliability by transitioning from overhead to underground systems, thereby minimizing risks like those seen during Hurricane Milton, when downed wires caused prolonged power outages. The project also aims to boost property values and pedestrian safety by improving streetscapes, with an anticipated 89% increase in property values within the project area, generating significant tax revenue.

The project is set to begin in March 2025, utilizing directional drilling to minimize disruptions. It will be conducted in phases, starting with undergrounding utilities along specified streets, followed by streetscape work. A construction manager at risk contract was awarded to Burkart Construction, with a guaranteed maximum price of $8.7 million. The plan includes a comprehensive public outreach strategy to maintain communication with local businesses and residents, emphasizing minimal disruptions during peak tourist seasons.

Public feedback underscored a mix of support and concerns. Community members, including business owners and residents, largely welcomed the project, citing long-term benefits such as improved accessibility and aesthetics. However, some expressed worries about the impact on local businesses during construction. The commission assured that efforts would be made to maintain access and reduce disruptions, with some operations occurring at night to avoid peak business hours.

In parallel, the commission faced pushback from East Stuart residents regarding a proposed skate park. Residents argued that the skate park does not align with community needs and urged the commission to prioritize historical preservation and broader community enhancements. Critics accused the commission of neglecting East Stuart’s interests, pointing to high water bills and the perceived imposition of development codes unsuitable for their neighborhood. Calls for greater accountability and sensitivity to community voices were echoed by multiple residents, who emphasized the need for genuine engagement and transparency in decision-making.

Additionally, the meeting addressed governance and procedural issues, including discussions about the commission’s code of conduct. Some members advocated for updating the code to ensure it remains relevant and effective, while others questioned its necessity, arguing that existing state ethics laws already provide sufficient guidance.

The commission also considered proposals to streamline the city’s zoning processes, particularly concerning Planned Unit Developments (PUDs). There was a consensus on the need for transparent public involvement in zoning changes, with an acknowledgment of past criticisms regarding insufficient engagement. The discussions emphasized balancing expediency with thorough community consultation to address both residential and commercial development needs.