The discussion of RV regulations emerged as a topic, with over 300 violations identified for RVs parked in residential areas. The current ordinance requires these vehicles to be parked behind residences, but a commissioner expressed concern about enforcing this rule strictly, noting the potential backlash from residents. “If I were to go out and cite the 300 right now, this chamber couldn’t hold the people that would show up,” the commissioner remarked. To address these issues, the commission considered adopting strategies from Panama City, which has successfully managed similar challenges. The discussion concluded with a request for city staff to review Panama City’s ordinances or resolutions for potential adaptation in Lynn Haven.

Equally significant was the debate over the city manager’s holiday pay. A proposal to include overtime pay for Martin Luther King Jr. Day in the city manager’s contract arose, as the initial agreement was made informally via email and not officially recorded during a meeting. This prompted discussions about the appropriateness of retroactively ratifying decisions and potential future contract amendments to specify holiday compensation. Some commissioners argued for formal approval and transparency, while others believed the city manager’s leadership role justified holiday work and compensation. The dialogue underscored the importance of establishing clear contractual provisions for holiday work to avoid similar issues in the future.

The commission also grappled with the city’s comprehensive plan, which requires updates to comply with state requirements. Staff emphasized the importance of submitting statutory changes first, with a public hearing requested due to the necessity of state submission. Updates included replacing outdated terms like “handicap” with “special needs” and incorporating elements related to climate change. Questions arose about the commission’s role in reviewing the comprehensive plan once returned from the state, with staff confirming the flexibility to either present objections to the commission or handle them directly. The commission expressed interest in delving into the comprehensive plan and various zoning matters in future meetings, particularly focusing on accessory structures and their definitions.

The conversation then shifted to civic engagement strategies, with proposals to include non-binding questions on the ballot for the upcoming election. This initiative aimed to gather public opinion on issues while minimizing costs. However, concerns about ballot fatigue and the influence of question wording were raised, leading to discussions about limiting the number of questions to avoid overwhelming voters. The commission recognized the need to decide on which questions to include and the importance of passing a resolution to set ballot language before the qualifying deadline for candidates.

Additionally, the meeting addressed operational issues concerning the water treatment plant, with inquiries about a feasibility study and the implications if legislative appropriations for planned expansions were not received. Ongoing meetings with Bay County and the completion of a vulnerability study were noted as crucial components of these discussions. The study’s data on progressive flood plains would play a vital role in future projects and collaborations with Bay County.

The commission also planned to revisit the city manager’s contract in the upcoming February meeting, allowing time for evaluations to be completed and discussed. The assistant city manager was tasked with facilitating meetings to ensure all commissioners could contribute to discussions regarding the city manager’s performance and contract considerations.

Lastly, the commission examined pension matters, focusing on the multipliers for various roles, including police, fire personnel, and the city manager. Concerns arose about the implications of having a higher multiplier for the city manager compared to those in more hazardous roles. A cost projection from actuarial accountants was suggested to understand the financial impact of these multipliers. The meeting also addressed the construction of a new building and its temporary occupancy certificate status, emphasizing the need for transparency in financial figures and the complexities introduced by FEMA and insurance claims.