A primary focus of the meeting was the council’s exploration of jurisdictional boundaries, specifically the thousand-foot perimeter around Big Carlos Pass. Curtis Lewig, the harbor master, was invited to clarify these boundaries. He explained that while the town’s jurisdiction extends one thousand feet into the surrounding waters from the shoreline, dredging responsibilities for the Big Carlos Pass inlet fall under Lee County, not the town of Fort Myers Beach. This distinction prompted inquiries regarding specific locations such as Laguna Shores and Fair View, leading to a broader discussion about the town’s responsibilities for dredging within its jurisdiction. Members sought legal clarity on these boundaries to prevent liability issues, with suggestions made to include explicit language in the charter to avoid future confusion.

In another discussion, the council examined the role of the mayor, particularly concerning the authority of elected officials versus administrative staff. The council considered past instances where changes were allegedly requested by individuals outside the council or Local Planning Agency, raising concerns about interference in policy decisions. There was a consensus that policy decisions should remain the purview of elected officials, emphasizing the need for a clear delineation of authority between the council and administrative staff. The council also debated the timing and method of the mayor’s election, with suggestions to elect the mayor after every election cycle rather than annually to maintain continuity and stability in leadership.

The meeting also addressed the compensation structure for council members, which had not seen adjustments since 2016. A proposal was introduced to establish a committee to recommend compensation levels based on market metrics and community standards, which the council would then debate and vote on. This proposal aimed to create a more dynamic and transparent approach to compensation. There was also discussion about the nature of council compensation, with differing opinions on whether cost-of-living adjustments should apply to council members, given their role as public servants rather than employees.

Further, the council explored the processes for filling vacancies and removing council members from office. The implications of residency requirements for council members were debated, with concerns about how temporary living arrangements might affect eligibility. The council emphasized the importance of due process in any removal proceedings, advocating for public hearings to ensure transparency and accountability.

Finally, the council examined public meeting protocols, particularly the conditions under which executive sessions may be held and the procedures for public comments. There was a consensus to revise the charter to allow flexibility for non-public meetings in specific legal or personnel matters. The council also reviewed the rules governing public comments, emphasizing the need for flexibility in managing speaking times to encourage public engagement.