##VIDEO ID:OiAD7petdfE## e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e [Music] keep it okay he just wants to go home I'm calling to order the regular meeting of the steward City commission 25 November 2024 roll call please Madam clerk mayor Rich here commissioner Clark here commissioner Collins here commissioner goob here commissioner Reed here this evening the invocation will be be provided by Pastor James Hart from steuart Alliance Church will you then lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance afterwards thank you would you join me in prayer father we uh come before you this evening and uh this is the week that we in this country celebrate a day called Thanksgiving and uh God I thank you that um you've told us throughout your word that we are to be thankful all at all times and so Lord our hearts tonight Lord should be uh filled with Thanksgiving for all that uh all that we've experienced Lord even in the difficult times we thank you that you're with us uh Lord we uh come before you tonight and and I thank you personally I thank you God for uh this group of elected folks before us that uh have given their lives to serve uh this community this city and uh Lord as I usually pray I ask your blessing to be upon them Lord I Thank you for them I thank you for their families I thank you for Lord their their spouses and children and and God just ask you to surround them with your love and your grace your mercy Lord and your goodness and uh God we thank you for this beautiful place that you've given us here to live and God we pray for your very best uh for our city and as they make decisions uh to determine that Lord we ask you give them wisdom and discernment and Direction and uh Lord you've told us in your in your word in Philippians chapter 4 I not to be anxious about anything not to continue in anxiety or worry or care but in everything uh by prayer and supplication with Thanksgiving let our requests be made known to you so I'm just trying to do that tonight Lord and so we give you praise and give you thanks in Jesus name amen amen I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all thank you Pastor thank you commissioner Reed do you have any comments this evening I do I was goingon to mention this to Mike or Mike can maybe give a brief overview or if we can pull agenda item one that's on the consent calendar just so the public knows on why we're merging the two boards okay um also I have bumper stickers out there if anyone's looking for one it says Stewart where Peace Quiet and natural beauty are more important than money from Ernest lions and I also wanted to talk about the one agenda item zoning in progress I know everything that we've discussed as a board has mainly targeted multifam parking requirements I know they're going to discuss about extending it or not extending it um I know on the December 9th meeting that's when we're going to be voting on each individual resolution I believe for the changes and maybe at that time if there's nothing that address because we haven't really addressed the commercial side and commercials being wrapped up into the zip when in adherently it shouldn't um because most of the things that myself and fellow board members have discussed has mainly pertain to multifam and the parking requirements for that even for R1 residential but there really hasn't been anything for commercial so that's all I have to say for right now thanks thank you commissioner goob do you have any comments this evening yes briefly I just want to thank everyone who's here tonight everyone who's online um in this week of Thanksgiving it's thankful for people like you who want to be part of the community and I appreciate it thank you and Happy Thanksgiving to everyone thank you commissioner Collins do you have any comments this evening um it's kind of an off-the-wall one but the the plastic straw Extravaganza from a few years ago I brought this up before the last you know this election cycle and I wanted to ask if we could to agenda to bring back the plastic straw ban in light of and I had brought this up at that last um when I when I brought up before is the research now that there's posos in these plant-based straws so even though we were trying to do a good thing by limiting plastic we we're actually contributing to posos contamination so I wanted to ask if if possible that we could bring back I know it' make a lot of business owners happy to but what I considered kind of a ridiculous ban on plastic straws now especially in light of them contaminating the environment worse there was any consensus from fellow board members I I I don't think there would be any reluctance by the commission to reconsider that I don't I don't think it's been enforced and it's been it's not enforced it also wouldn't be a motion for reconsideration it would simply be directing us to bring back a new ordinance ordinance uh resending it right I I don't have any position to reconsidering that I would like to see it also from the point of the phospherous but also from the point of someone have you ever had a drink with those paper straws I mean it's terrible they're horrible they serve purpose and they give you Pas and they give you P to V I think there's pasas in the plastic too but we'll talk about all that uh Mr mortality I didn't get to say anything Sor Happy Thanksgiving to everyone well just is that it that's that's it for now well I'm sad to make this comment especially this time of year because the city talks a little bit about affordable housing about accommodating accommodating a diverse groups of group of people in our city which is essential to vitality and unfortunately not not only are we not moving forward but we're going backwards and perhaps some of you have read in the ocean about Ocean Point which is hard to believe but that was 30 years ago that that was built and I remember the incredible fear that generated and the you know the concerns that were not based in reality and it is just a terrific place for people to live it's a very well cupt it's very nice um the tax credits are up people are literally in tears rents are going up at least 150% these are people who live in our community who walk to their jobs it's very very sad and I I don't know if there's anything we can do about it with this particular project and that's not the worst of it unfortunately the the other only affordable housing in the city um called The Crossings over on Indian Street that's going to clo that's going to lose their uh subsidy which allows for very reasonable rents in I believe 2028 so we're going backwards here and I think we need to find a way you know when we talk about Workforce housing affordable housing the same baseless concerns that were said 30 years ago about Ocean Point are said again and there's a city as I say a city is diversity and not just ethnically and racially but economically and by age and if we lose that we lose an essential part of what it means to be a city um and so I hope we can find a way forward and to keep these people in our community because I believe there was a woman there she's paying a th000 her rent's going to 2500 she's not going to find anything in Martin County so she's going to have to find move a long way from where she's been for a long time so I feel very sorry for these people um okay comments [Music] by the city manager um I had two issues to address tonight briefly first I was contacted by the county and asked if the city would do a letter of support for the um bright line Grant that's being requested by the county in uh late December so if the consensus was the commission I would bring it back on December 9th as well um or uh the com if the commission instructs us that we can uh support the grant we can prepare the letter and attach it so that it can be mailed out directly after the December 9th meeting um and then the other issue I had for tonight is uh on uh Thursday or Friday of last week Florida's Surgeon General issued a report as it relates to fluoride and the report from the sergeon general has a concern about um adding fluoride to the water the city of Stewart had a referendum in the early 2000s in which the public voted to add fluoride to the water the referendum said something to the effect of uh that the city would follow the would not put fluoride in the water in an amount higher than the recommendation of the CDC which uh is the Center for Disease Control out of Atlanta the um my recommendation after speaking with uh the director is that the city because of the surgeon general's current position that the city put on hold um any further addition to of fluoride to the water until such time as we can get a formal opinion from the attorney general Andor the surgeon general's office as it pertains to um this issue my concern is that in April of 2016 the federal D just like the CDC did not have any regulation regarding pooa or posos in its water and in fact its guidelines were that you maintain the levels of pasos or pooa below 600 parts per trillion but we received a letter or a phone call on in the middle of April from our Congressman that said yesterday the state adopted a guideline that it's 70 parts per trillion and as a result we ran into that whole litigation I do not want to get a call from the state of Florida saying that we cannot add floride to the water and have been adding fluoride to the water without taking steps necessary to make sure that it's um not going to happen that way so I'd request that the commission authorize us um to temporarily refan from adding it until we can get this issue resolved and then you're free to have a more formal Al uh agenda item to address it and I recognize upfront that the city commission can't normally vote to simply not follow a referendum because obviously it's a referendum so three votes don't overcome it but in this instance because it relates to the health and safety of the water and because of our past experience with the water I'm not suggesting that we terminate the practice I'm just suggesting that we reach out to the um Attorney General's office as well as the surgeon general's office and explain the situation to them and get a more formal um recommendation on it before moving forward and then in the meantime we would cease using it we won't use it until we get it I would I would motion along those lines second we have a motion by commissioner Collins and a second by commissioner Clark and I I forgot one part too um Peter G and our uh director uh that um suggested that the city provide if there are any families that have concerns that they cannot provide fluoride to their child because it's not in the water that the city would be willing to give them fluoridated toothpaste and I recommend we do that it would be significantly less expensive than putting fluoride in the water and I don't actually think we're going to have a line at the water treatment plan of people that are on our water bill that are going to take the time to come all the way down to get a travel size of crust or whatever it is in order to accommodate but I also want to make sure that nobody can say we didn't provide for or accommodate somebody that was from a lower socioeconomic uh neighborhood that could not afford to get fluoride my only concern with that is if could we get public comment first commissioner Collins on this issue is there any public comment on this issue I would surprised since no one knew it was coming about removing you could raise your hand yeah about okay ma'am come forward please please state your name and address hi Missy Harris Alam manday I have been reading the same articles you've been reading and for the head of the medical Department to say that we should stop using it sounds to me like that's an alarm that something's wrong with it so I would like to see what you're talking about but I would really like to have it removed from the water in the city I think it's detrimental to the health of our children dentists will supply it if they need it right and I so I'm I'm all in favor of removing it thank you thank you any other Mary you have no right okay mayor um see no other public comment are there any questions or comments by the Commissioners commissioner goobi I have a question in providing fluoride toothpaste isn't that a contradiction to what we're saying that it's harmful in the water but we'll provide you with um well what actually happened was all of the dentists in Martin County came to the city commission meetings and asked us to put FL in the water and the commission had a few meetings in which it didn't vote to do so but the public pressure became so much that the the commission voted to let it be on a referendum and it went to referendum and 66% of the population voted in favor of putting fluoride in the water and therefore we don't have the discretion as a board to vote to remove it because a referendum mandates it as a result the reason that we ran into it when we were voting no what we would hear from the public was you're discriminating against the lower socioeconomic neighborhoods because they can't afford to go to a dentist and get the fluoride treatment that you may be able to get and that's why the dentists were suggesting that we put it in the water to help and believe it or not they came back five years later and actually did show that there had been a reduction in uh too decay in the lower soci economic things but the balance is the question there so what we're suggesting is look before someone comes out and says that the city is discriminating against them or taking something away from them rather than putting fluoride in the water for everybody we'll also have toothpaste so if somebody comes forward and they show that they have received water and they live in the city of Stewart and they have no other source to get the fluoride for their children fine we'll incur that expense during this temporary period to make sure that we're not not putting ourselves in the crosshairs of that no and I understand that my question was basically are we kind of saying this two different things out of each side of our mouth now a small tube of toothpaste with fluoride might be less than what something is someone is drinking or ingesting via two or three glasses of water from the city water that I don't know the distinction is that they a person who if you put it in the water they don't have the choice right so in this instance it would give them a 100% their discretion if they don't want that at fluoride toothpaste they don't have to use it but right now the fluoride in the water there isn't a second water option no I'm I'm all in favor of removing the fluorid or no longer putting it into the city system I'm I'm willing to update my motion to include during this temporary window that if someone from the city did want to have um us order floridated toothpaste for them we would be willing to do that okay second okay commissioner Reed question I have no comment I think it's great if we offer an alternative I'm not for fluoride in the water myself personally but I think as the city offering it as an alternative then people have that choice still until we find out I I also just wanted to say I appreciate you doing this mic and um keeping us out of having larger issues later by following the Surgeon General in Florida and helping navigate this as it is difficult with the referendum thank you no I was going to say that Dr Julie Boron boron has been here like for I don't know as many years that I've been here asking for it to come out and of course we've had scientific evidence both ways so um like you said as long as new things are coming out and we're trying to follow what need to be followed we'll just do that so the precedent of going against a referendum really concerns me so Mr Martell is there language in there that said if new scientific evidence is presented we can there there is ignore the will of there isn't and I don't it's not my intention because I feel the same way as you I don't think we have the discretion to ignore the will of the people but I also saw a report and received a report from the Florida Surgeon General that said you shouldn't put fluoride in your water and I know that there's multiple cities that are now putting it on their agenda to have their commission withdraw the fluoride from the water because I can't put it on the agenda because it was a reev a um done by referendum I'm saying publicly look I want to make sure that it's full disclosure that the this short period of time however long it takes us to get in touch with the state and reconcile this we want to stop putting Floyd in the water but we also want to make it available and I'll add it to the water bills and the statements of the water bills and tell everybody what we're doing and then at the end of the day if the re if the Surgeon General doesn't form or put out a mandate that there's no florid in the water we will continue to do it until there's a referendum otherwise I just have a concern that we're to find ourselves in the same situation we found ourselves in under the POA thing where they change a regulation and then if it if the regulation changes tomorrow and I don't get to be back in front of the city commission for 14 more days and they say no more floid in the water I'm not going to have authority to not put floid in the water until I get back in front of the commission and I don't want to be caught up where we're actually doing it in violation like we would have done I guess if we hadn't in the pooa thing we didn't have it above 70 parts per trillion what's the CDC stance on pooa currently right we waiting for CDC well the federal government still hasn't done a federal a federal standard standard so we would still be but the State of Florida has lowered parts per trilon so were you did they reach out you to specifically as the city of Stewart as they're aware that we put fluoride in our water and they directed you they sent no they sent an email to everybody I have the email um the it's just the it's the attorney the Florida surgeon general's opinion and it came out on Friday but um I can he said fluide in any amount it says State Surgeon General Dr Joseph A leado issues Community water found fluoridation guidance today State Surgeon General Dr Joseph leado announced guidance recommending against commun Community water fluoridation due to the neuros psychiatric risk associated with fluoride exposure fluoride is a naturally occurring chemical compound present in groundwater fresh and saltwater rain water soil plants and Foods Community water fluoridation is the process of adjusting the amount of fluoride and drinking water to a level recommended to prevent tooth decay historically Community water fluoridation was considered to be a method to systematically through ingestion deliver fluoride to all community members however currently many municipalities across the US and several European countries including Austria Belgium France Germany Italy Norway and Sweden have eliminated water fluoridation today fluid fluoride is widely available from multiple sources including topical fluorides such as toothpaste mouthwashes and fluoride applications by dental providers evidence shows fluoride strengths strengthens strengthens teeth making them more Decay resistant however additional research is being conducted to review the impacts of overall fluoride exposure in the population Floridians should be aware of safety concerns related to systematic fluoride exposure including adverse effects in children reducing IQ cogntive impairment and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder increased neurobehavioral problems in children whose mothers ingested fluoride during pregnancy accumulation of fluoride in the pineal gland causing sleep cycle disturbance skeletal fosis which could increase the risk of bone fracture potential risk of premature minarch in adolescent girls potential suppression of the thyroid gland by inhibiting iodine absorption due with the neuros pych psychiatric risk associated with fluoride exposure particularly in pregnant women and children and wide availability of alternative sources of fluoride for dental health the state jur Surgeon General recommends against Community fluoridation the Florida Department of Health strongly supports oral and overall health through operation and expansion of school-based preventative Services County Health Department dental clinics which provide Dental Services screening and treatment referral in preschool and school settings provider education including training on oral Health Service delivery for those with special Health needs promotion of healthy habits with emphasis on a reduction in Sugar consumption through oral health education communities providing oral health care supplies to Community Partners providing tobacco and VAP vaping cessation resources and services then it says quote it is clear more research is necessary to address safety and efficacy concerns regarding Community water fluoridation said State Surgeon General Dr Joseph ladapo the previously considered benefit of community water fluoridation does not outweigh the current known risks especially for special populations like pregnant women and children based on self-reported data from 2023 it's estimated that more than 70% of Floridians on community Water Systems receive floridated water to see if your community health system is included please visit the Florida Department of Health's public water system actively uh fluoridating web page and they provide a link and then did they indicate they're going to convene a panel to study to final guidance final guidelines they didn't indicate anything they came out Friday November 22nd and my concern is that under the pooa thing they didn't tell us anything until the day we found out and so what I'm suggesting is not to put an absolute bar on or prohibition about future fluoridation in the water but rather to suspend that fluoridation until we get some type of uh formal response from the attorney general Andor the um Surgeon General that staff would start following up on uh tomorrow to determine you know what's going to happen or what they're doing with it and then I'll report it back to you guys at the next meeting and you can take whatever action you'd like so the basis for our decision to overturn the world of two-thirds of the people is what imminent risk to Public Health I've never received um the so the city adopted it I think in like 2006 or seven and so almost uh 18 years have gone by and we've and and fluide is always a discussion and people have always had feelings one way or the other but the state Surgeon General has never provided um a a guidance guidance or statement to this effect before and then the word guidance actually has a link on it and I can click on that and it's a three or four page document that I'm not going to read right now from and it says guidance for Community water floration November 22nd 2024 and it cites um 16 references and uh essentially says that um based upon that federal case that came out in September yeah and he cites a Litany of several studies one in Mexico a Canadian study um another Canadian study another study in Jama Network in May of 24 August 22nd 2024 the US Department of Health and Human Services National tacology program published a report evaluating total fluoride exposure from all sources and then it goes through several suggestions and um ultimately uh takes the opinion that we should not be putting the floride in the water so I just I it puts me in a real predicament actually I'm not sure would you rather get sued for violating a referendum or for poisoning your community uh specifically pregnant women and children that's your position well and I don't I'm hoping not to get sued by anybody actually I'm I'm more just concerned with just the safety of the community if I if we're making the decision on the safety I don't know that the failure to put Floyd in the water for six weeks weeks or two months is going to make any difference in the overall uh fluoridation of the water because we've been doing it for so long but at the same time it seems like it's a pretty reasonable step to just be preventative and make sure that the the Surgeon General is is making this recommendation but I I understand your concerned completely because we do have a referendum and that is my dilemma Mr Mayor so Mr Morel that if the if the governor says no then that would preempt the referendum and everything isn't that correct that would preempt everything we wouldn't have to actually go back if the state made it illegal yeah we wouldn't do it so just like if we had a a referendum to have plastic straws and then the state said we're going to preempt it the state's going to regulate straws we couldn't regulate straws so if they do enter that position it will become straightforward well I hope we get back at answerers soon because this interim thing is going to be you know well and that's why I wanted to make sure that we had a a response to that side of it too by saying look if there's anybody that doesn't feel like they're they have the ability to get fluoride we're going to pick up the tab for that on the other side of it just to make sure that we're not short chaining Ching anybody okay Mr Mayor okay um commissioner job okay so I I don't think we're overriding the um referendum we're doing a temporary suspension in the name of health and safety for our children and our community so and it's temporary so we're not saying we're never going to do it we're waiting on guidelines from the Surgeon General so I am personally in favor of doing that how exactly does it read well and quite frankly I could have played games with it but I don't think that that's appropriate either it says the city shall put fluoride in the water in an amount not to exceed the guidelines recommended by the CDC so they recommend 7 parts per liter well I could have said to Peter behind closed doors administratively let's put .001 parts per liter in until we get this matter resolved still been in compliance with the ref with the referendum language but really it would have been intellectually dishonest because it would have been misdirecting it and and hiding it and I just wanted to come straight out and say look this is the plan here's what we're going to do until we have an answer so that we don't get ourselves in a situation where people are claiming that they're having an illness because we are putting fluoride in the water after the Surgeon General told us not to we've never had the Surgeon General tell us not to before so you said we'll put it in the utility bill and we we do any other advisories or anything on our website I can see the steuart news writing as I speak so and we'll definitely write accurately I I don't think it's sufficient I don't think it's sufficient to rely on his coverage no and obviously it's Our intention to have Misty notify the people that we have email addresses for and we're going to have uh the U water plants going to include the statement in the series of water bills it'll continue running until this issue is resolved and obviously we're going to reach out to the state and try to get a straight answer so that we can resolve it you know whatever it is it is okay any other questions from the commission thank you see none roll call please Mary Madam clerk commissioner Reed yes commissioner goobi yes commissioner Collins yes commissioner Clark yes mayor Rich yes okay that was comments may get a motion for the approval of the agend approval of the agenda pull in item number one we have a motion by commissioner Clark and a second by commissioner Collins pulling item number one from the consent calendar any public comment on this see none all in favor okay comments from the public on non-agenda related items Madam clerk do you have any green cards I do Mr Robert Hamilton story just left yeah and hopefully he'll do it accurate he's yes to appreciate we got that out of the way good evening good evening Mr Hamilton first of all thank you and Happy Thanksgiving to everybody there and everybody else in the room um I'd like to direct your attention to please read what the state of Florida said in December of 2023 when they advised the city on exactly how to handle the roof windows and doors they made reference to it in a letter again which was received this past Friday and that letter it states we told you this before five months before the job got started I felt it was very disingenuous of the comments from Mr Mortel B that their hearsay coming from other people and he never met with us we've been asking for meetings for a long time I know by the last one we're going to finally get to have this taken care of it is imperative you read the date because everything after December of Janu uh December of 2023 everything he said false the State of Florida said you will do it this way was not done that way had nothing to do with all the gaslighting that went on he's extremely intelligent man I will not take that away from him but he should use his intelligence to do something right for our community we care about everybody there and everybody here I don't know we all have different ships that come in here with our issues and we look to you to resolve these issues this never should have been an issue the State of Florida again they said in December of 2023 they outlined it in three sections on what to do and it was just deliberately not done and to twist things around on me and my wife was terrible and we will wait for the rest but again on a good note I want to thank all of you guys I know that job's not easy I appreciate commissioner Rich coming out he saw it was trashed I appreciate the rest of you Commissioners what you're doing behind the scenes I appreciate commissioner Reed but now we need to get a resolution done and move forward and fix the 1995 Church of Stewart with that said thank you very much and Happy Thanksgiving everyone Happy Thanksgiving I have Richard Olen do real do good evening my name is Richard Olen I live in Stuart Florida hiring a city environmental attorney is a waste of money at a minimum it would cost $300,000 a year and up to $15 million in 20 years the attorney would have zero influence concerning concerning discharge from the Kobi for 20 years the State of Florida representatives in Washington DC have pushed billions of dollars of funding to the Corp of Engineers to fix Lake Kobe I've known personally that this Dyke was unsafe all my professional life I was the lead Geotech engineer for the core of engineers for seven years in the headquarters in Washington DC but be because of the work on this D for the last 10 years the reservoir maximum water levels are now several feet higher than just 5 years ago that means we have less discharge now let's look at the actual discharges into a river into the river next to Stuart release of fresh water requires a delicate Balancing Act with consideration to all the EOS systems in Florida and the potential this is important and the potential for blowout failure of the Dyke toward Steward all water releases are based on regulated operational system manual that has been prescribed the prescribed manual was crafted with careful coordination the Corp of Engineers State of Florida Florida water districts environmental experts and Martin County with consideration to Federal Regulations state regulations judicial mandates court ordered requirements and computer modeling a city environmental attorney would have zero influence talking to the core of engineer or state agencies even in 25 years the idea of a city of Stewart environmental attorney is a delusionally dumb idea it would be a colossal waste of money and finally the lobi problem is 100% internal to the State of Florida and not a federal problem I believe the Trump Administration should transfer all control of Lake oobe to the State of Florida and get out of this game thank you thank you thank you perfect timing Deb Frasier thank you good evening Deb Frasier executive officer of the Treasure Coast Builders Association Fraser allow me to interrup yes are you commenting on a non-agenda item I would like to comment on agenda item number four that was going to be my question could I wait to speak then yes you should wait okay thank you thank you Madam clerk I have no more I'm sorry no more public okay thank you so um a motion for approval of the consent calendar removing item one I had a motion I thought I'd made that motion did too okay yeah we just probably went so then we'll Mr bagett will you please read item number one for our consideration we didn't vote on two and three though but we approve the consent the agenda we agenda we should probably vote on the consent calendar first and then do item I thought I was asking you told right okay all right okay so vote on two be a motion with regard to resolution number 121 2024 move approval regarding Veterans Memorial Park phase four we just we doing the consent calendar all at once commissioner Clark you want andent calar l oh you just you don't want individual roll call hence the consent calendar okay uh the consent calendar items number two and three okay a motion for the motion for approval I'll second the motion second by commissioner [Music] goob let's do a roll call on that okay now we do the roll public comment public do we have public comment see none okay commissioner Reed yes commissioner Collins yes commissioner goobi yes mayor Rich yes commissioner Clark yes now Mr bagot will you read item one for our consideration please resolution number 119 d224 a resolution of the city Commission of the city of Stewart Florida authorizing the merger of the city's Board of adjustment with the city's local planning agency authorizing the transfer of the duties and responsibilities of the city's board of adjustment to the city's land planning agency providing for conflict providing for severability providing for an effective date and for other purposes um Mr Mortel would you like to the reason we brought this forward is because I was working with the clerk to put together the agenda for December 9th and on December 9th the board is going to be asked to reappoint um volunteers to all the boards and uh I mentioned this I think at the last meeting that unfortunately or I guess it's fortunately um we do not have the need for the board of adjustment like we did in the past and as a result the board of adjustment members that get appointed to the board have expressed frustration that they volunteer they say they want to cooperate and be involved in the city they get appointed to a board and then they don't hear from us for seven months and I I think it may have met once or twice last year but there's no real end in sight as far as even meeting again anytime so rather than reappointing all these people and having them not know if they're going to have any meetings um staff was suggesting that we merge the language in the code for the board of adjustment into a responsibility of the LPA board and what we what we would do if you if the board grants this merger of the boa to the LPA Advisory Board what will effectively happen is we will continue the boa until such time that we have you adopt the new language in the code making it that the LPA does those duties but it's not likely that we'll even have a board of adjustment meeting anyway um that way we will not put on the agenda for December 9th an appointment for you to reappoint members to a board of adjustment for the following year because there will be no reason to appoint anybody perhaps you could clarify why there used to be a need for this and why so it no longer I don't think I've ever been to a boa meeting so for what it's worth there's a couple of things have happened number one we're essentially built out so there are no Lots there's less than 20 acres of available single family home lots vacant in the city of Stewart but when I show those aerial maps of Stewart like in the the 70s and 80s all of the neighborhoods had you know 30 40% vacancies throughout those neighborhoods so there was a constant new single family homes coming in and getting developed and when the gis was invented it turned out that the surveyors that would put a stick in the ground and somebody moved the metal rod and things like that they'd be off by a foot and people would go to buy or sell a house and the front porch was actually 9 ft into the setback instead of 10 ft into the setback so the board of adjustment was going through and fixing a lot of these setback problems so they had constant meetings every month where they'd have two and three maybe four meeting agenda items per meeting but now if you look at all the neighborhoods all of the lots are built on and because of Technology you're not running into situations where surveyors overlap the surveys are actually digitally done and they're right to the to the penny and so we just don't run into the situation that we used to now there are still situations where the board of adjustment convenes because someone's applying to do a lot split or somebody's seeking a variance for one reason or another their porch needs something that um might encroach in the setback or something like that but literally it's so few times that I think I know there was one meeting last year and I I don't know if there were two I think there were two and one got SC cancelled but as a result I just I feel bad because what what happens is you you you know we tell the board of adjustment people well you're going to meet the third Tuesday of the month and they start clearing that on their calendar and then after about the fourth or fifth month that's goes by they start saying you know what I'm available on that night to go do other stuff because they've been sitting around waiting and then we call them up and say hey we're having a meeting next Tuesday they're like well listen I'm already obligated I you hadn't called me in five months I didn't know we were having any meetings so then we scramble on Quorum problems my thought was and again it's totally the discretion of the board I just know that you guys are the ones having to appoint people and the feedback we get I don't want you to be in a position where you're insulting Somebody by appointing them to a board that doesn't meet so do we have a motion and what does it cost in terms of the emails what's the overhead to even have these well I mean we have to we have to advertise the board meetings which is you know $700 or so just to run the advertisement and then you have to have staff present at the meetings and you have to contact them and run them down to make sure they're confirmed for it you have to do the separate agenda and you have to publish that agenda and you have to do stuff so it it's thousands of dollars to have a meeting that part though is I mean listen if there's a a need for the meeting we'll have the meeting the solution to it now is to simply just have it be part of an LPA meeting that's already going to occur that LPA board is going to be more versed in the issues with the city because the other thing the board of adjustment happens is because they don't meet at all they but when they do have a meeting they don't have as much familiarity with it now there's members of the board that have been around a long time or that have experienced that might have some familiarity but overall they just don't meet while we're talking about boards do you mind no you can continue while we're talking about boards what and this will be a lot more contentious what was the purpose of the East Stewart historical Advisory board when we we're more formally going through the uh guy Davis Park and moving forward on it the city commission voted to have a committee appointed to provide historical information and data so that it could be commemorated throughout the park or identified in the park the original um resolution bylaws adopted by that board or by the city commission for that board had them having three meetings and then doing a final report they had the three meetings did the final report and then not the summer of 24 but the summer of 23 in August September when we were having the budget meetings the chairman of the board came to one of the budget meetings thanked the city commission for putting the committee together and then recommended that it should be a permanent board and at that meeting the commission voted to make it a permanent board however the intention remains that the purpose for that board is to address new projects um Coming forward in the East Stewart neighborhood and next year we're going to run into the same thing I know and I don't know where uh panel Gandhi sdz is was that the scope though was to review projects any steart or historic add the historical information for projects in East Stewart and that's why I'm asking because it seems like there's been confusion on what the purpose of that board is when we were talking about the skate park I got some feedback from one board member who who felt like that should have been run through that board and so it it seems like and the skate park being in the guy Davis Park right guy Davis Park was run through that board and that board had done all the historical data for the guide Davis Park Renovations so that issue had been resolved okay I'm going to ask that we we are now on the fourth issue I mean we're talking about gu Davis Park we're uh that's a different board what I was going to what I was going to uh can we confine our discussion to item number number one I'm still on one what I wanted to to recommend was that we also include the that historical board in there as well for the same reasons of staff is there we have multiple PE how many people are at one of those meetings well there's there's seven members of the board that we have to track but then you have the City attorney two members of the clerk two people from the CRA so you normally have a minimum of five staff got a lot of money that's plus a a member of the police department plus you have somebody running the computer system let's get a motion with the elements you I no I'm just I'm just I'm making kind of a a point for it first so it doesn't seem like it's it's um when you make a motion and get a second then you make the points regarding the value of the motion so can we do that please to keep them moving sure sure sure so I I would like to make a motion that uh we merge the boa into the LPA but also amending this or if it needs to be a separate item to you can just add it to the motion the East Stewart uh want to eliminate or use it as needed maybe reconvene it when there is an appropriate issue instead of just trying to find reasons to have them meet while we're burning um money on the clock you know okay if you could be so right now specific now direction is to have four meetings a year no matter what right so if you were to direct us to just schedule meetings as needed as needed that's fine and keep the committee yeah okay okay is are you comfortable with that language yes sir okay we have a motion by commissioner Clark do we have a second I'll second that motion and we have a second by commissioner goob do we have any public comment on this item Nick are you gonna comment on this is this on the East Stewart one this is specifically on no this is on the merging of the boards yes we're doing yes okay so I didn't show up here for this item but no that's fine you're you know the zoning in progress is about to make thousands of properties non-conforming and may result in a very dire need for a board of adjustments because there will be non-conformities existing across the board in several properties so just a just a thought that's true too thank you Nick okay um any other public comments Madam clerk I do not questions or questions or comments by the board thank you may I so I have a um I have a comment on that kind of similar to Nick also and then something that my sorry the City attorney city manager said specifically that when we sometimes when we have the board of adjustment meetings people aren't familiar um with what they're looking at and I know that just coming into this with new members on the board people don't know who to select for what boards because they're not familiar with some of the things or or the people or people in the community and it makes it very difficult I was thinking that if we could at least um have these members or have people as at least have up to three or four alternates to the LPA so that they're second there a second fiddle they can always have a um have a a quorum and um they'll always be learning they don't have to necessarily come to the meetings but at least we'll know that there's some people that we can look to if we need to to refer and have somebody step in if we could actually change it the makeup of the LPA to have at least maybe two to three um alternate members but if we can't even get our regular members I know I know but we have seven members in the PA and if you have alternate members and people do come do the alternate members participate no no they'll just be there as as as people who are interested but they're not going to be voting but there the regular members will always vote it's only if they're needed they would be called in Mr but know I know it's just a suggestion are you asking commissioner CS to amend his motion no I'm just putting out there I'm just asking commissioner goob um would the these additional floaters or whatever we want to describe them as would they be required to have City email addresses right correct and financial disclos and financial disclosures and sunshine yeah they'd have they'd be just like regular um right so then it kind of defeats the purpose of closing a board that's not useful any longer because we never meet and then extending a board that does meet and can do the job of that board needed anyway it's just a way we all we need to have a way to get people um trained to be able to when the time comes and if if a commissioner asks them that there's somebody who have been interested or have been trained or something or maybe that's what we need to do is to offer training once or twice a year for people who are interested in being a member of a board so that they kind of have an idea what it takes to be on any type of board at the city is steward commissioner just are you done commissioner you yeah just a reply to commissioner Clark um I think that training is is very important but you should be training the people as they're on the Committees new people who come on to those I was on LPA myself for a year people being appointed to those boards could benefit from that training rather than doing it for alternates or they do get the training when they're on the board no they don't oh okay I thought that they were okay mayor Rich may I commissioner Reed so I sat on the board of adjustment and okay I did I sat on the board of adjustment for two years I think we saw three or four agenda items in two years um I do know when it comes to the board of adjustment when you do vote on an agenda item it does hold some weight though um I agree with the motion to merge the two boards I think it would you know more board members would be active so you're not on standby like I was like uh Mike had stated sometimes I would hang around on the third Thursday and it would get cancelled and I couldn't make plans etc etc um what I'm not in support of though with the motion commissioner Collins is doing it as needed for the East Stewart without having their input um I recognize where you come from um but I'm very familiar with sunshine and the Attorney General did state that there should be public notice for controversial items um so I don't support the motion in the way that it's stated unless we hear from East Stewart maybe that should be an agenda item so there's plenty of notice so it's not like a sudden gotcha um I do think they should be able to come in and provide comment thank you thank you may Mr Mayor and I thought CLK I thought that there were going to be two separate things now I read this agenda item regarding the board of adjustment and I spoke again with the city manager I didn't speak with the city attorney but let me be clear I hope or it was clear we're only merging the role we're not going to you merge these additional people it's just a role so everything is going to be handled by the LPA correct that's it Mr Mortel correct well I me Point these to the boa we'll be gone they on December 9th at the reorganization meeting we will not ask you to to appoint anybody to the board of adjustment correct and the lp will not be extended all of their terms expired December 9th so you could potentially take someone that if you had someone on the LPA and the boa you get to decide in my particular case I don't have anyone on the LPA I just have someone on the boa so you push them over yeah so basically I'm just moving my appointe over and out of respect to Warner I gave him first right of refusal um that's just where my position was though okay all right so your recommendation with regard to the historical Advisory Board is leave it alone what should be an agenda item I think at a future meeting whether it's I don't think we should stack up December maybe the first quarter meeting second week of January that's just my opinion out of respect to them because those board members would be upset you're saying not necessarily upset like just to hear from them I mean if you're sitting on an Advisory Board and it's just to meet when there's actually a need versus just like every I fully support where you're coming from as far as a need versus just doing it every quarter because it might not be necessary to even do it every quarter but I think out of respect to those board members they should be notified ahead of time what's going to potentially happen to their board kind of like what we did with the boa and the LPA if any board members wanted to provide comment they could come provide comment or reach out to us and there was plenty of notice that's my only thought on it I don't think there's enough notice the reality of it is this we're none of the Motions intend for you to remove anybody from the East Steward Advisory board so from a staff perspective for December 9th we will be having those appointments placed if you'd like I can I can put that issue on December 9th's agenda okay as a separate item for notice so that we can address it accordingly I'm in support of that if you want to amend your motion motion along those lines that's fine okay mayor he's he's going to amend his motion so I'd like him to do that before we continue discussion right so I would pull out we would pull out an E Stewart specific Advisory Board item for the ninth and then the motion is simply what we have in front of us exactly yes thank you commissioner Collins I'll second that it's already Okay no Okay commissioner we have a motion by commissioner Collins and then second by commissioner Reed commissioner goobi I just wanted to clarify that we were not disbanding this the East stward committee we were just changing their calendar meet you know we're not taking any action now with regard to them thank you any other comments questions from the board I would just like U Mr morto how many times this year did the LPA meet because I know twice no they met regularly obviously the zoning in progress but there'd be a lot of cancellations but that was the applicants where they were on the meeting and it was scheduled to go forward and we actually had a couple of special LPA meetings plus LPA is designed or in the code to meet any time we have a um a ldr change so right the text Amendments have to be reviewed by the LPA as well so they definitely meet more than busy but you know everybody thinks the city is has this building frenzy but actually there have been so few applications that I know the LPA has not met that often so I think it makes sense to merge those responsibilities um with with the LPA so that they can uh play a more active role as far as training goes I the responsibility of training I think is the commissioner who appoints that individual to the board I know when I was on the I would meet with my commissioner before every single meeting and as needed and my appointees now I meet with them before every meeting or as needed so I think we you know we possess that responsibility and whether we choose to do it or not is obviously up to us so seeing no other comments roll call please commissioner Collins yes commissioner Clark yes mayor Rich yes commissioner goob yes commissioner Reed yes motion is approved uh Mr bagot could you read item four for our consideration please sure and before I do uh mayor I just wanted to point out that I had a new version of the um resolution 120202 placed in front of you uh I mistakenly left out um one of the exceptions of government building so I wanted to put that in the title and also in the uh resolution yeah so it's uh resolution number 120202 a resolution of the city Commission of the city of Stewart Florida extending the zoning and progress under Section 1.4.4 Stewart Land Development code AS authorized in resolution 95202 as it relates to new development with the exception for single family dwellings governmental buildings requests that do not increase the density or intensity of an existing use Source structure or any commercial project that does not include a residential component and that does not increase the square footage of any structure providing for conflict providing for severability providing for an effective date and for other purposes um and just to uh this is my agenda item so I'll uh give a little bit of a background back on August 26 2024 the commission directed the city staff to initiate a zoning in progress under our land of development code section 1.4.4 and um the purpose of the zoning progress is to allow the City commissioners to evaluate and Mi make text amendments and map changes to the city of Stuart Land Development code and comprehensive plan if applicable um under our code it allows us to do it for three months which we did initially and it started uh once we did the advertisement on September 4th so it started in essence on September 5th um and so it put a freeze on all development applications with the initially was with the only the governmental buildings and the single family uh exceptions uh obviously throughout the first three months we added two more exceptions um and under our code we after three months um and um for good cause and upon making a finding that it's in the public interest to do so the commission uh is free to extend up to another three months uh and that's what this uh motion is for or this resolution proposed resolution is four uh we've had three workshops we've gone through an exhaustive review of of several chapters of the Land Development code um and we are coming back next meeting which would be after the three months uh to finalize a resolution identifying areas that you want code to be revised subsequent to that we'll have to come back with ordinance changes first and second reading uh identifying all the specific sections of the code that you want changed um and so for today we're asking uh the resolution you were asked to bring back um uh so that we can extend it for another three months mayor I'd like to move resolution number 120 2024 we have a motion by commissioner Clark Collins no Collins sorry I'll second the motion and a second by commissioner goobi is there any public comment on this item Madam clerk yes I have Frasier welcome back thank you and I appreciate that I was going to ask that question so I'm Deb Frasier I'm the executive officer of the Treasure Coast Builders Association I appreciate all the work you all have put into all of this but I would like to really Express that we would as the Builders Association and I have over 6,000 members that we ask that you vote this um motion down because again there's been no study on what the tax implication are if you go another 3 months there have been no studies really whatsoever on how this is going to affect your city and when you have to raise taxes to your current residents I think they're going to say what happened um I have people again in the audience with me this evening that this affects their pocketbook and if you do pass this motion I would like to ask that all of you as well for the next 90 days um refuse your salaries or whever you make money because that's what you're doing to my membership and so if you're willing to do that to your own uh constituency the people that did vote for you and if you're willing to do that to the builders and and all of the subs and everybody who works I mean Ronnie was here last uh week and could not be here this evening and he named off you all know Ronnie and his people and so the problem becomes you're it's basically Restraint of trade you're not allowing these people to do business in your city and so I'd like to respectfully ask if you're not going to allow our members to make money in the city that maybe you should not also and understand how that feels so I would also like to thank commissioner Clark for her motion at the last meeting because I feel very strongly that you would have a lot of people agree that this motion should not go forward thank you thank you I have Nick shro nick shro uh resident of the city also have an office and couple businesses in the city um again the zip kind of erroneously in my mind and and without reason includes commercial development um you can talk about how you know we're discussing parking uh and that's why commercial is part of it but you're also discussing single family lot sizes and you've excluded single family lots so kind of a contradiction there um it's becoming more and more apparent that this is really just to shut down construction activity um the the collateral damage here you know you've heard it in this in several meetings um you know Commissioners have have expressed that as coll collateral damage um and it's the couple car that have been put out there are particularly confusing you know what's the square footage of a building how are you expand you know what's an expansion of it what's an intensification of it it's real simple it should just not include commercial development that does not include a residential unit if it's commercial and it doesn't include a residential unit it moves forward that's that's the motion if you want to stop four-story 30 unit per acre half units whatever you know have at it none of that's happening for the next 5 years Years cuz all of it that needed to happen happened in the last 5 years and that happened for the previous 15 years where there was none of it so you know what what's being stopped right now is the day-to-day working activity of people in the city of Trades of contractors you know the Hot Shot developer from Palm Beach county is just going elsewhere he's just going to a different town it's it's the the folks in my office the folks in Ronnie's office the folks that are all 6,000 members of the T ccba um and you know there's just a high level of confusion with you know Johnny's Pizza Parlor gets approved but floring de cour is not you know it it should be simple if it's commercial it doesn't need to be wrapped up in the zip eat the elephant one bite at a time you you've you've taken on too much there's no way that three chapters 7,000 Pages or whatever it is of code gets Rewritten and there isn't a tremendous disaster that comes out of that you can you can do this one piece at a time thank you duet price all right duet price and Stewart 257 salti bewinds bewinds there you go thank you all right so I appreciate what Nick and everybody else has saying here so I want to do something that I pulled offline where before I'll come in here and I've made things personal so I'm going to make it based on the hat I wear when I go to different communities and I present and study concept of zoning traced back centuries right contemporary zoning and planning routes emerg as Lo a tool of racial then socioeconomic exclusion that's in the White House document okay they also made a statement it says growing Suburban communities were not the only places immune from fiscal zoning which is what I'm hearing that the majority of the commission is fiscal zoning protecting they're holding the city hostage word from the commission often misuse by down Zing was Paramount often mixed use and smaller lot homes that were already exist exting in those neighborhoods were no longer allowed to be built see the pattern under evolved view of fiscal zoning a large lot single family community is considered to have less of an impact larger lot homes provide similar tax Bas as those with greater density we heard that too these residents are likelier to be more affluent as those homes will be more expensive so as we're watching this you guys think it's happening just because of the shutdown they're targeting areas so exclusionary resoning laws is what I see happening here and it's was even more evident I was at home and I'm watching it and someone brought up East Stewart board and the fact that they mentioned something about a skate park so they're going to eliminate that part of it I will tell you as I sit here and watch this majority commission under the guys off this m mandate I will say there's been a mandate against minorities since 1917 and this majority commission is aggressively pushing this on this community right now unfettered and unchecked by staff through fear I don't know maybe through fear and if it continues to move forward by this community it makes one wonder you know you have that nice little sticker what does it really mean for the city steuarts thank you thank you I have no further public comment mayor that's all that's all okay we have a motion in a second um questions or comments by the board I by the commission I have comments you want to go first sure I'll go first commission Reed um I'd much rather this come on December 9th a motion and the only reason I say that is that's when all these agend items it's going to be on the uh board meeting on December 9th where we're going to vote on it one by one but I do know the consensus from the board anything we talked about in the zoning in progress like I had mentioned in my public comment it was all multif family it had nothing to do with commercial there was no commercial parking requirements um I do support the motion I'd rather see it on December 9th though and I actually did speak to Ronnie by the way Ronnie has uh no no current projects in the city of Stewart that are affected commissioner Reed commiss you get clarification from Mr the zoning in progress expires on December 4th correct so it it so if we wait till December 9th it will be expired got okay so extending it I support extending it until December 9th and then when we do vote on it one by sorry weon we're voting for the extension today correct and then on December 9th you're voting for the items items come back so on December 9th I thought it would have been more appropriate but it would have been expired gotcha okay and if you vote on it today you're voting for 90 days yeah but we can always get rid of it on December 9th if the board just so happen to do that basically there's a small Gap it seems like we're trying to fill because of the the expiration because of the expiration because whatever we come up with has to go in front of the LPA and CRA and then come back to us for final approval I was going to ask Mr mortell to actually describe the process we'll have to go through to adopt any changes well so obviously we're going to come back on December 9th with a resolution for the commission to go through the items that they want changed we will then take the resolution and development will start to revise those at the last Workshop the board said that it wanted to hold some public hearings in at 10 Street for any changes related to the east Stewart portion of the code I don't know if they want to hold public hearings for any of the other portions but if we come back December the last meeting in December if we come back and can get the changes done before Christmas so that they can be advertised and be on the crb and the LPA meetings in January then they would be on those meetings in January if we didn't have any public meetings and we returned them to the city commission for the first meeting in February you could have the first reading at the first meeting in February and the second reading at the second meeting in February which would have it so that the ordinance would be adopted before March 4th which is when the zoning in progress if you grant the extended extension would expire because it can't go any longer and can't be extended past March 4th if we have any other public hearings or provide any other additional extensions we will not have any ordinances adopted by March 4th and we'll have um some difficulty meeting the time frame yeah but in in response to your comment about the December 9th the only thing on tonight's agenda is was instructed to bring the extension because it expires December 4th there's that Gap if it gets ex if it gets extended then the commission number one doesn't have to extend it for 90 days you can do it for two days if you want it it's whatever the commission's pleasure up 90 days up to 90 days correct it's actually three months but well right we say 90 days but code says three months it's three months it says three months in the code but what we've done is always put specific dates in the resolution uh because again the commission has the right to pick the DAT short months um February and you also have the ability to terminate it so at any time a vote of the board could could cancel it I think the commission is aware that we can terminate it I also wanted to point out that we had previously uh you voted for the fourth exception which was any commercial project that does not include a residential component and that does not increase the square footage of any structure yeah this will be the first time it's Incorporated in a resolution this resolution that's not been you guys voted on that but it wasn't by resolution I hear effective but it was effective I'm just pointing it out that that Mr shro made a comment I hear that on that particular exception thank you for clarifying I'm not I'm not finished yet but I mean it it does makes sense I guess to extend it until December 9th to where we're voting on each thing and if there's no commercial components but on December 9th when you say you're voting on each thing for example if on December 9th you vote and instruct staff to remove half units you're not adopting an ordinance on December 9th we still have to come back to the LPA and we still have to come back so well I think that's where where you if you amend it but if you lifted the zoning in progress on the nth and made it end then somebody could come in on the 10th and apply for half units even though you voted to imp yeah and that's when I say ended if if uh like what Nick had said you know I know as a board we're targeting multif family I don't recall anything really being discussed for commercial besides storage units so if that's the case the commission has also the right to not extend it related to commercial tonight which is what's onay that's include like to hear from fellow board members but as far as I know there's never been any commercial discussion besides storage units there could potentially be Parcels that are broken up into phases that are currently commercial only you sub so but but the next phase would include uh potentially multif family so making sure that we then it wouldn't be involved it won't matter anyway but the parking the parking that we would um so just don't allow people to subdivide Lots then if that's what you're saying it it already ex it's the it is though but um so just going through with this completing just doesn't make sense we just can I just ask if you're I mean I'm curious unless are you finished with your REM I'm not finished yet we're going back and forth right now but there still hasn't been anything brought to the board besides what I'm saying it makes sense and I really haven't heard any other argument on why commercial would be included because commercial when we haven't targeted commercial the residential component hang tight and we are talking about far ratio and how it relates to multif family so right now if you were to exclude commercial from the zoning and progress going forward the new updates that we're making to commercial far and how it relates to multif family would not be included for all the applications that come in so the what you except if you guys are if you're not allowing them to come forward with anything related to multif family then the balance of far would not come into effect until they came forward with the balance of multif family at which time whatever new laws you adopt would be in place but there are projects that are broken up into phases potentially that like for example SE Coast Bank they have sure they have an 8 acre parcel and it's zoned downtown as it's zoning and land use they have an application for a commercial building and a parking garage if that comes in and it doesn't have any residential component to it and they build 100% of whatever far they're allowed to have you know far of three of the whole site which would be 8 * 3 * 43,000 be a hum humongous building um then when they came in for the residential if the code said would meet all the couldn't meet it they couldn't meet it but right now if they applied and it include residential that wouldn't be accepted because they weren't they because we're not accepting residential IAL but if the board's intention is not to address commercial at all then even though seast might have the desire to add residential in phase two or phase three or they would meet all the requirements because they had a parking to be whatever the law is that but the changes but that's but the changes that we make in this ZIP would not apply to that first phase would the applications come in as it as it related to residential it would it would just not apply as it related to their commercial application so you could just add a parking garage in there I mean if that's what you're at I mean so when they go to have an entire PUD so right now if they applied for a PUD and their PUD came in today and it said we just want a commercial building and a parking garage or no parking garage whether it matters doesn't matter the city could process that if they then went to amend the Pud to add residential we could say sorry we're in a zoning in progress you can't amend it you can withdraw it if went through the Pud and got approved whatever they got approved for they get approved and then if three years later they came back and said same land we want to amend this PUD when they apply for the amended PUD whatever the code is on that day they would have to meet what they have to meet but how does that work when you have far that is old well at n one one portion of that parcel how does that not affect the second the only the only thing we discussed so far as a board as it related to far was to say that if you had a 100% far that whatever that is that you're entitled to as a commercial that if you're adding residential that it has to be balanced so it has to for every foot of far you have to lose a foot of residential or whatever that might be well right now under the downtown zoning I believe it's a far of three so if um using a an example of an 8 acre parcel an 8 acre parcel would have 8 * 43560 * 3 equals a, 145,000 square feet of office space that would be a lot I like when you think about the Walmart's 166,000 square feet so it would be 10 Walmarts um or actually nine Walmarts but then if they came back in but let's say they build a 60,000 ft² office space well they're not even reaching a far of one on that 8 Acres so they're never going to be to where they overuse the far the ones that become more complicated is the two ACR site that builds the 880,000 foot building and then wants to build 300 apartments or whatever it might be and you run into those even so using another example of one if somebody had right now what our position is or the direction of staff is is that they want the commercial projects for every square foot of commercial that they use it has an impact on the amount of density that they can add to that property later whatever you guys adopt you adopt so if you adopt that it's a 200% reduction in density and they build a 60,000 ft building if they come back in 5 years to apply for the residential whatever that far adoption is you bought or approved they could be too late they may have already overbuilt their commercial even though they have a PUD that's the Pud only vest they only vest the rights listed in the P so they're not asking for any residential rights if they're only applying for commercial yes if they apply for residential rights in the Pud the residential rights would vest whichever you granted but if they don't apply for residential rights a PUD is basically its own law form of zoning so how does that work so like C downtown when you have a parcel that's split up into phases it's two puds or it's an overall PUD it's one PUD that might be amended four times so that but that that a as soon as you do that then you have vested rights under our previous under that entire but under aan Leah we granted the city granted 300 and some residential units and EXC commercial and it was all done in 97 and it was all vested then so when it comes back for the Amendments it's still playing with those vested rights that were vested in the original PUD yep if in fact the application does not include any residential right now then they don't vest any res residential the only way it vests is if they come back to amend the Pud and say Well we'd like to add residential the city commission can say okay well the current ldr says for every th000 sare fet of commercial you lose a residential unit and you had entitled to 80 residential units but you have 70,000 square feet of commercial so you lose 70 of those 80 units you can only do a maximum of 10 or even worse situation would be if they had built an 880,000 foot me building and they were only entitled to 60 units and you said well you're you're you've got 880,000 units you you that subtracts 80 units from it and you only had 60 to begin with under our new code you don't get any residential units there are no units to award the calculation is over the question is how you guys are going to do those units but either way that won't affect if it's a Pure commercial unless you guys are affecting Pure commercial so then the reasonable thing to do would be extend this for now and then on the 9th when we go through that if there's nothing that's touching commercial then we would relieve correct that that's my thought process and I did speak to Ronnie about that parking wise or it's touch and Commercial that's that's accurate that's just how I felt you have comments I have comment you you have comments okay all right so let me see if I can read what I have yeah okay so let's start with the commercial um as far as I know in the three or four meetings that we've had let me say first that I voted we had new members on the board I voted to let's look at the code check out everything but this idea of affecting the pocketbooks and and having a effectively a moratorium I've asked twice to reconsider that and try to do another way which is to still get community input but at some point in the future maybe set a time where we can work on we've changed Z in code at times in different ways and not necessarily with a a zoning in progress so I just want to say that with regard to the commercial um uh I think uh after the second time when somebody came in with commercial and also the um City ATT a City attorney just brought up today that there's a new resolution on page two that says um we are doing the um exemption with regard to Commercial and then let me see um what it actually says Mr baggot you can you can see it in the title commissioner Clark okay and I'll see it in the in the title too the except in the middle part of the title as it relates to new development with the exception for single family dwellings government buildings requests that do not increase the density or intensity of of an existing use or structure or any commercial project that does not include a residential component and that does not increase the square footage and I know that we've had comment as to what but I think it's clear no residential component no square footage however um in all the discussion that we've been having there has been some parking talk with regard to um some commercial or par in general but um so far we have not had that um input as to a lot of things with regard to to Commercial and so I I agree with this and I think that we should keep it a as that um the other thing is that in the three or four meetings that we've had for the zoning in progress we haven't had that much input from our five Commissioners here here as to certain specific things that we think are needed and are needed darly for our community to function and to be vibrant and to redevelop or develop and I I just haven't seen it which is why twice I've asked to let's pull back and go to another method of trying to figure out what each neighborhood needs and what needs to happen in certain categories so that we can try to um to really make changes that people in the neighborhood um understand and are and agree with okay let me do number three that I have here um uh I see this um as a place to um replace houses if somebody wants to to replace their small lot house if there's a hurricane if there's something and they can't do it within 90 days or whatever happen if they if we make everything large Lots 6,000 square ft then those people they just can't go buy their next door neighbor's lot and say hey go buy your lot so that I can have a bigger lot to to to develop so um I think that we have to be very careful when we're talking about making everything one size fits all and having small Lots I mean small Lots not be able to to come back and redevelop and they now they're going to have to sell their lot to somebody who's going to buy two lots together to do something they're out of their home that they've lived in for 30 40 years if they have a fire something is happening or whatever is going on and the property hasn't um whatever the rules are that they're following especially if it hasn't been active for 90 days and they're going to have to come in so I think that we're losing that opportunity for people who have affordable housing sure residential now when we change some of these lot sizes we have to be very careful and um that's why I'm saying that uh I don't think that we need to um I don't think that we need to go forward we have enough rules in our in our laws and and and you know we were just talking about teaching boards and and how boards need to learn the rules and and the regulation and I thank you Mr Mortel for taking the time out to talk about this and about the puds but meeting with staff meeting with with the with the um actually meeting with some of the developers in the community who have to come in with their problems um it's very very important but I think we have enough guidelines in our laws as it is in our Land Development code that we can deal with things instead of wrecking the livelihood we've seen the change we've seen the change in the political climate we see the change that's eminent in the economy these people need to have something in order to actually just go forward with something that they would have gone forward with anyway and if we do uh adopt this today it seems as if what they're asking for commercial they're going to go forward with anyhow as long as it meets these these requirements if we agree with it but I'm saying that I think honestly that we need to have another way to look at our neighborhoods to look at our communities we always keep harping towards the downtown or maybe towards the CR area but we have some communities and neighborhoods when we have our hazardous um pickup weekends or cleanups and those neighborhoods are really nicely set out and I think for zoning purposes just to look at some of these neighborhoods to look at what's going on with Homebase um home Homebase uh cottage industry type things and other things that people may need changes in certain things in the code and I know that we're looking at that also but I think that doing that kind of study is more important and it doesn't have to be with a zip in there the planners we can look at that and we can do that without having to to to Really stop everything and shut everything down so I just I really I hear you um commissioner Reed I really think that we have adequate laws to deal with what we need to deal with and if we do come in with new codes whenever those codes come in they're just going to have to live with it at that time and work with it and we will deal with it I think that's stopping everything now just because we're going to change one thing we are built out I think I heard Mr mortell say that we're literally practically built out for all intents and purposes we don't have a lot of multifam ready to be built in the city of Stewart I don't think we have any multifam um undeveloped zoning and it would only come if something got changed a commercial or and those are what we deal with every day changes in land uses change and that's when we use our judgment and we use the codes that we have I I really I hear you commissioner Reed I am asking don't do it today you're asking maybe next week look at it I'm just saying that I know who I'm going to vote if we have to do it but I think you were trying to put forward taable in today but I hear Mr Mortel saying that because we have this December 4th deadline we still have to make some recommendation today um I just to appease the um members of the public and we're concerned we do have a new resolution which is not really new we've we've we've talked about this before but Mr um bagot just um gave us something new that does describe the commercial um Project without any residential and without any addition increase in square footage so that is actually taken care of but I think that we do have laws on the books now that deal with any quirks that can come in and if we need to make changes let us make sure that we're involving our public in a ER manner instead of the top down approach where we make the suggestions and we send it back to the LPA I just think I I don't know that's my comment thank you commissioner Clark yeah commissioner Collins Mike do you mind for commissioner Clark touching on Cottage Lots I know that was one of the concerns is that somebody with a smaller than 6,000 foot lot would somehow be boxed out of rebuilding their burndown or hurricane damage house well the city in 200 10 or it was either 2007 or 2010 but they adopted the cottage lot ordinance that said any lots that were 5,000 square fet and that were in existence on December 10th 2007 would be considered legal lots of record and that means that if if their house burned down they're not considered a non-conforming lot they are considered a legal lot of record it would just prevent anybody from splitting a 10,000 square foot lot into two 5,000 foot Lots because you can't create a new legal lot of record right what year was this Mike it's in the code under Cottage Lots but it said December of 2007 so I'm assuming it was December of 2007 in any event currently your proposal to make the Lots 6,000 square F feet it doesn't have the language but you could say that any lots of record would be considered valid lots of record and would not be um uh non-conforming or whatever and would would remain as buildable lot however we have several hundred lots that are less than 6,000 square fet and so it might be easier and again this is a subject for the ninth right it might be easier for you to give direction to staff to say all of the current pul pul Parcels of record are Parcels of record as of today and moving forward the city will will not allow any lot splits that create Parcels less than 6,000 square ft or whatever square footage number you guys want to sense and it would but again those are discussions for how we want to do it in the past when the city adopted the cottage lot subject it was because it recognized that there were several lots that didn't meet the single family standard because they were below the the the thing and so on the 9th no matter what discussions we have because for example Le when you guys are talking about the multifam um parking I'm not wishing this on any particular development but in the event and we'll have the examples of all of them we'll run the math but in the event harborage got wiped out in a hurricane it deviated well the only project I'm familiar with that didn't deviate from parking was Costco so every project deviated from parking in some way or another if you adopted the 2.5 parking for harborage and you reduced the density down to 20 units an acre harborage is 28 units an acre and it's 130 129 units I believe as a result if it got knocked down by a hurricane it would only be able to build back 102 units or something like that so 40 or 30 of its units would not be allowed to be built back in addition to that it had already deviated from parking so it would also have to build if you have 129 units that's 130 units times 2.5 it's 300 parking spaces but because it did below that it would probably have to build another 100 parking spaces but because it can't it would also have another 50 units that it couldn't build back so out of 129 units it wouldn't be able to build back 25 to 30 because of the density change and it wouldn't be able to build back another 50 because of the parking change and the same goes for all of the multif family units in the city unless the commission says that it's not going to apply retroactively and we're going to deem these units as um conforming not non-conforming but valid Lots based upon the calculation as long as they don't expand and add more units so so the discretion of the board as it relates to the Nuance to that is what's going to take time to talk about but that's also available to rectify some of the extreme um examples that you hear uh because obviously it's not our intention to make every condo in steart not be able to get title insurance and not be able to be sold and not get a morg enough get loans on their property yep lots of consequences which is why we need to make sure we're we're moving forward with this tonight so that we can have that robust discussion and then we can see if potentially there you know nothing comes up commercial if we're going to relieve the commercial aspect of it um but my hope would be I know commissioner Clark you'd like this to end tonight to me it would make more sense on the ninth it's an entire agenda specifically for that and here we're just extending it it's coming back on the n and if on the nth if there's nothing commercial to me it would make sense then to not have that to not have what the the commercial side of it right if if we don't touch anything commercial correct between now and the 9th it wouldn't make any sense to continue it until March then for the commercial to me it would just be more appropriate then because we just so happen to have a little Gap at this point that's my opinion because it's going to expire on the 4th right so we have to extend it not if this motion passes no it will not expire on the 4th correct yeah I think he was referencing if he were a and then at such time if we want to make an exception for to me it makes sense to have it at least until the 9th obviously I know it's for 90 days three months however they want to word it but I think on the 9th it'd be more appropriate for it to be brought up if there's nothing that falls into this for commercial between now and the 9th it wouldn't make sense to even okay have it that's my very clear commissioner go yes I I have something to say um there's a lot of talk at the dis here as to we didn't need zip it didn't need to go forward we had rules and regulations and coding um to cover all of that but here we are today in Stuart with overdevelopment and the reason there is overdevelopment because those codes weren't followed okay they were um they were granted exceptions they were granted all sorts of items that would now put them in non-compliance if we went back and made a conservative effort to contain what happens here in Stewart so I understand what you're saying there are codes there but they weren't followed so maybe what we're trying to do here is make sure in the future that they are and I'm not adverse to making exceptions where they need to be made in this this process and but I think that we should certainly move forward with it and make those exceptions as needed thank you I was going to say something else I was going to say something else but I I um I forgot right now go on go on commissioner [Music] um think she talking my views on this are clear I've never been for it I think it's it's excessive and overreach and oh yeah mayor Rich may I I think the public speaks more clearly and the unnecessary difficulty we've created for the businesses that are so important to the city and the jobs that are so important to our residents I remember what I let commissioner May Rich may I first um I know you say you've never been for this but when you campaigned two years ago you did have a billboard on caner and Monteray that said are you tired of sitting in traffic let's put a pause on development so you campaigned on that um we're here now specifically multif family it was just on multif family not this broad brard didn't specify that okay thank that's all I have to say Reed yeah done you done commissioner yeah so again I was going to you you I it's like about the greater public good and I know we have to balance this thing and I hear about um traffic and I there's lots of traffic in Martin County that's coming in and out of steuart and um it's not necessarily from steart development and so we have to look at the greater public goods for those who are creating our tax base for those who are uh investing in our city and uh we can't it's not that you're against development we have to make sure that we have um the right kind of development so that we can keep a vibrant City and keep things going it is very important um no development is is is not good uh we just need to make sure that it it's done appropriately and I I think that for for the greater public good and for the times that we're in and for what we're going to achieve with waiting another 3 months or even six months I think that we would be better off um with our public um stopping the zip right now and then working on some specific things that we need to do if we need to work on just multif family uh if like I said as far as I know there's not any um multi family uh land use that needs to that that's vacant as far as I know or very little so um again that you know what is it is it's neighborhoods it's it's it's working with the CRA it's working with neighborhoods for parking areas or making things better within that part of the community I think that those are the things that we need to work on and um I I'm not even going to stress it anymore did we have a motion we do and we have a second just to clarify commissioner Clark there's there has been no motion to end it tonight it is simply I'm saying the motion is only to not extend it right I couldn't make another motion December 5th is that correct it would start December 5th no the motion is to to approve this resolution correct right it's not to end it tonight read the yeah that's very confusing what you're doing right now I have approv approved resolution 12 24 to extend for now but if choose to remove commercial component on December 9th no no no no no the commercial component is is that can't be included Mr bag that's not included it's simply the motion as it read approve the resol it's simply the motion as it reads there have been no amendments to it right as the resolution reads as the resolution thank you it's got the zip will be extended for another three months that's what we're voting on with the four exceptions yes correct there's no amendments to that resolution correct and then on the December 9th meeting if nothing in between it would make more sense not discussing what de okay roll call please can I ask a question public comment public comment is over I have a question so we said on Haven voted yet in the current motion it says on public comment is heard in order okay when we have a motion in a second then we have public comment then we discuss then we vote that's how we have always done it and how we will do it this evening okay on November 7th 2024 we voted today's no November we voted unanimously to add another exception to the zoning in progress which allows the city's Development Department to accept and process applications for any commercial project that does not include a residential component and that does not increase in the square footage of any structure that's already embedded in this in this motion and in this um and in this resolution correct but I've heard from people the last time they came with a commercial project and maybe because there was some splitting or some other things that they didn't understand that relates to development itself they said that um they weren't able to move forward with their commercial project and so I wanted to be be sure that people who are here tonight if there's a vote for this resolution 120- 2024 that it says that commercial projects that do not increase um square footage and that do not are not tied to residential can move forward is that correct Miss cougler is that how you will implement this yes and I think those properties that to to which this would apply are probably well aware of that exception I think it's a fairly small number just to clarify Madam clerk after the motion was made in second we did have public comment did we not we did thank you can you allow them again just to be no happy no I don't see any need to we don't want to start opening that door okay um roll call please commissioner Clark no commissioner goobi yes yes commissioner Reed yes mayor Rich no commissioner Collins yes motion passes 3 to2 Mr Baga will you please read item five for our consideration resolution number 12222 a resolution of the city Commission of the city of Stewart Florida authorizing budget amendment number three to fiscal year 2025 budget appropriating and authorizing the expenditure of funds from the opioid settlement to purchase automated external defibrillators and other first aid supplies and creating a public service announcement providing an effective date in for other purposes do we have a presentation from staff we do not um it's basically tomell you wish to I'm just here to answer question so the short answer is there's eight defibrillators being purchased with the opioid money that are going to be in the cars and rotate in and out four at a time because they have to be charged and we have the opiod funds that can be used for this exact purpose but it requires a budget amendment because it's the opioid money the opioid opioid money has restrictions on what it could be used for came from the state of Florida or the national so it's there was a class action opioid case that we had an attorney represented the city on but the Attorney General declared it a case of great public importance and took over all of the opioid cases on behalf of all of the counties and cities in the state and settled it in Tallahassee and then dispersed the funding or funds from the settlement based upon a formula and we it's like a seven or eighty year payment and we have or 30-year payment and we have years of payments coming right but it was all done by the Attorney General so it'll allow like faster response time if we have Road Patrol with AED so we're not waiting on fire rescue basically that makes we have ads on the road but they're being Antiquated and we're going to get the same ones that the fire department has I'd like to move for approval for resolution 122 D 2024 then second jeez second enthusiastic seconds motion by commissioner Reed and a second who who the tie goes to commissioner Collins commission Collins is there any public comment on this issue see none are there questions or comments by the commission I think it's a great thing to have Road Patrol aeds that can happen very suddenly and I will say for the road Patrol we have on the road when you call 911 depending on that severity level you guys are there fast so thank you Happy Thanksgiving commission I mean chief t next job Chief tanell and for your staff we appreciate all the service that they do as First Responders Chief how many instances have there been that the police have had to use these devices without running a report I can say that oh just yeah um I want to say with since we've had aeds when they first started becoming public use uh I want to say dozen two dozen perhaps so we've had them for a while over how many years well this is I was a sergeant so we're talking well over 10 years now so just over one a year we'll say yeah give a give or take but it's a really good tool especially we're the first ones there just wondering and it tells you what to do if somebody's out no they're very simple devices now AR so you're saying the county doesn't have this yet um I'm sure they do if they don't I'm I'm champing it soate it any other questions or comments regarding this roll call please mayor Rich yes commissioner Collins yes commissioner Clark yes commissioner Reed yes commissioner giobi yes it is unanimous Mr baggot please read item six for our consideration please resolution I guess you should stay there Chief yes sir resolution number one 123-124 a resolution of the city Commission of the city of Stewart Florida authorizing budget amendment number four to the fiscal year budget uh fiscal year 2025 budget appropriating and authorizing the expenditure of funds for Shop with a cop providing an effective date and for other purposes Mr Mayor um are you going to ask for can I make a motion you certainly may I'd like to make a motion with a stipulation that may or may not go into the motion with regard to resolution number 12324 I move that we approve it but that the police department picks a day when Walmart is not busy and that the cupcakes are ready when we first get there when Walmart is not busy just prior to Christmas I'm there every day do you really wish to add that to okay I'd like to attend no move approval yeah I attended that's why I was saying that we have a motion by commissioner Clark will you with your enthusiasm commissioner Reed will you second it second it second is there any public comment on this item seeing none are there questions or comments by the commission can you tell us a little bit about the shop with the cop and how many students I mean how many children you serve so it started probably I want to say about 5 years ago warmart gave us donations um us and the fire department so every year Our Youth Intervention officer Kathleen Lannon picks out along with some School staff picks out some needy children that would probably need help during the holiday so we average about anywhere between 12 and 15 kids and the the monies that we get we get we allocate anywhere between $200 and $300 for them to go shopping with an officer with a school teacher with a commissioner perhaps total or per child per child okay yes a lot so um they get they come up with some goodies so and and some of the kids are really really uh good they'll be shopping for their mother instead of themselves so it's actually a very good event so the fire department is also involved um but it's it's a very good success and very good I guess you could say Feelgood story because we're giving back to the community Through Walmart and yes I'll make sure the cupcakes are ready for you when you get there did you have a preference on cupcakes but so I I have attended this I would urge you to do it it it's really fun I think the cops enjoy it as much as the kids the children absolutely but uh yeah it's it's so important that they have a good interaction with the police and I let you know ter specific dat is yeah and I think didn't you dress up in a ulous costume no sir sometimes they have who did or was that Troy commissioner McDonald no that was one of the uh employee staff so if you can find the time I would I would urge you to go so see no other comments or questions public no we did public comment oh yeah roll call please commissioner Reed yes commissioner go OB yes commissioner Clark yes commissioner Collins yes mayor R yes thank you thank you Chief Mr bagot item number seven for our consideration please resolution number 116-24 a resolution of the city Commission of the city of Stewart Florida authorizing the adoption of legislative priorities for the 2025 legislative session providing for an effective date and for other purposes I take it Mr hogard will be presenting for the staff uh yes sir um unfortunately I don't have a 30-minute presentation for the commission that's so you're all very disappointed um video from tah yeah exactly uh actually uh to make things real simple just a quick brief update especially for the new Commissioners um last year during the legislative session for 2024 City commission had uh made three requests to the state um for Appropriations two of those were appropriated um by the state one as you know guy Davis Park and then two was uh storm waterer uh connection assistance unfortunately um the the storm water uh was vetoed by the governor uh understandably so they're trying to push all the local governments to these Grant programs that they've created and so I'm bringing that up for this reason is that what you see in front of you is only one request this year um and part of that was we were also unsure where we were going to land with the train station um where we could Target as far as getting money from the state because the state's kind of box local governments in uh on on what we can actually request through Appropriations uh they they're trying to push everybody to these Grant programs so the only thing that we identified for this coming year for the request would be additional funding for the guy Davis project it would be essentially what we call a a second um phase for construction planning and we know the Project's going to take up to two years to construct uh so as a result of that by the time this money would be appropriated uh if we're successful July 1st of next year would be the state's budget by then we could potentially be in construction or starting construction the reason I'm bringing that up is I'm sure on everyone's mind is the skate park and anything else that's been added to the scope of the project so uh if the skat Park were to increase in cost or anything that's unknown what we're doing this year is we're ensuring that the skate park is included in the scope of what this money would be requested so that is something that's going to be an element in what we're requesting but also everything else that was kind of in there from the first year so I just wanted to put that caveat in there because I know that's been up a lot so um but that's that's all I have tonight that's it yeah so thank you thank you thank you I know it's early Mr Hogarth but and but you've been doing this a long time do you do you want to characterize the mood of the legislature this year versus prior years for the city I think this is going to be my 10th session um coming up uh I've you know been following Florida legislature for about 20 years I know I've look young but I've been doing it a while and I could safely say that one of the reasons why we're not as uh involved as a city as we used to be and I mean in in policy decisions all that is the state has just become more kind of enclosed into itself and I'm not trying to make a political statement by saying that it's just it's more difficult for us as individual cities to kind of advocate for specific issues so what we're finding now is the league of cities the association of counties if you're a County government um and I've been involved with both in my career uh that's really the arm branch of the cities and the counties um to get in the doors of of uh you know the representatives and of course really you all on phones is what they want to hear from staff have have tried to reach out to to staff in in the years past and there's been some success with that that's become less and less common so um not to not to discourage you from reaching out by phone in fact you guys are the voices they do still want to hear from uh but but I I think it is important to still state that the Florida Le of cities is our primary um arm to of advocacy so as as as busy and and productive as we want to be we we really need to work with them um to make sure our message is kind of uniform uh so that's on the policy side but but especially with uh asking for these Appropriations to make sure the state legislators know the our legislators I should say know that what's what's important for us and this year we only have one item so um you know last year we got 500,000 we had a million-- dollar request the request in front of you is a million dollars um if they only approp and a lot of times they'll cut it in half if they cut that in half we would end up essentially with our $1 million at the end of the day that we were asking for to begin with so uh that's the thought process but um I'm happy to answer any other questions thank you yes commissioner J uh if they historically just cut it in half why aren't we asking for 1.5 million I mean it's a good question and and we we try to so so what happens is when you're when you're a state representative or Senator and you get up there seniority also matters what you're told is this is how much you're you kind of are allocated this year based on the projections and all that and a city of our size and our and our historic requests were kind of I don't want to say completely boxed in it depends on the project um over the course of four years we got two and a quarter million for the uh alternative water supply project um I I could say that before then I wasn't aware of any specific appropriation request that the city had ever gotten before that um and Mike or might someone else might be more familiar in years past I wasn't here so this is something that we really have been targeting we've been very successful with uh the last you know eight nine years and um we're just trying to continue that just if you ask too much you know they might just completely TI off that's what happens yeah right yeah thank you thank you thank you thank you all thank you Mr Mayor may I have a I have a question you certainly may commissioner Clerk city manager you had brought up about uh us sending a letter to the county with regard to Bright line what what is it what what what action do you need from us are you bringing up next meeting or is it today or hearing we just unanimous hearing no objection from the commission I was going to put it on the agenda for December 9th and have a draft of the letter I I have objection so to me if we're going to talk about this now they went unilaterally um we at least I asked them to wait for the new commission to be seated um in my opinion they subverted you know week out that Tuesday the new commission was going to be seated they completely subverted the ability of the new commission to be able to renot renegotiate a deal where bright line pays anything by gutting the uh settlement agreement so absolutely not I would not be in support of a letter going to Bright line and thank you for bringing that up it's not a letter to Bright line it would be a letter to the federal uh rail Administration supporting the county for their Grant application absolutely I would I would not be in favor of doing that okay well that's one voice I think it's so that all the Commissioners could be heard on this issue i' if you can put it on the agenda that would provide a fairer means of ADD addressing this issue does it need to be agenda do we have to wait next week or you can do it whichever you guys want I think it's going to be for the greater good of the community if the county applies for it and if they need the the letter for the city and they're moving forward I don't think it will hurt for us to um to to uh send a letter to say so that they can add it to their Grant application would it oblige the city in any manner Mr Morel the city would not be obligated to pay any funds it would just make it that the county would be more likely to get the 80% of the grant because it would show the support so it would not impose a financial obligation on the city yes no or any kind of performance obligation correct it's just okay just a letter of support yes do you want to make a motion to we can are weing motion cuz I'd like to say something if we're going to do that we're discussing oh we're just discussing I we might as well put it in a discussion in the context of a motion in a second commissioner com wait because why talk about it if there's no support for it okay cool we'll listen to see if they're support well then let's do it in the context of a motion okay but I thought we were discussing why can they not make can we just I was just inquiring of Staff mayor can we just okay okay you're there well you're asking or someone's asking for this letter of support uh if I remember correctly both bright line and the county decided they did not need the city right they went forward without us and now they're asking for a letter of support I I just feel it's it's kind of hypocritical of them so I would not be in favor of a supportive letter okay Mr Mr Mortel is is it too late to do it next week or should we do it now it would be at the next meeting be the nth of second week of December would be the second week I am happy to do either I mean I really don't think it will hurt I'm want to make a motion that we if you want to do it now and then do it again we can always vote and revote or change our minds if we do when you say do it now and do it again be more specific I don't understand what you're you're saying okay let's see what happens today then I'm going to make a motion that we um uh authorize a city manager to prepare a letter of support so that they can add it to their Grant application to get the Chrissy fun is it Chrissy funds Mr no it's the federal state F yeah Grant F something uh to get the funds to to um move forward with the um bright Line station it is a I'm reading it a request for support letter F grant for right Line Station in Martin County okay that is there a motion there's a motion number for agenda item seven yet or we haven't we didn't vote on it we didn't the clerk no you're right I'm sorry is there anything that we need to do Ben we can do that technically commissioner Reed as long as we're not in the middle of of a motion I understand it just makes more sense order it's so confusing for the public and myself no we didn't vote on we don't do get a motion in a I don't even think we got a motion in a second for you no I just thought Ben was making a presentation we sorry sorry guys yeah the the timing is a little bit weird because the election just happened and we don't know when the the local delegation's going to meet but because of the holiday it could be in the next couple of weeks like a lot of times they meet right in December January and so as a result of that if there was something that you all wanted to add in like a project for an Ask we could do that after the fact we just didn't have that conversation and the only thing that I've been kind of guided to so far is just guy Davis right now so the the simplest uh would be just an Ask of approval to just for that wine item for this we might as well vote on it is a resolution motion for resolution number 116 2024 approval second I okay we have a motion by commissioner Clark and a second by commissioner Collins do we have any and I'm not seconding anything tonight is there any public comment on this issue no no it's okay see none questions or comments by the commission I do mayor Rich commissioner Reed um so this seems to happen at almost every meeting it's very confusing when we're talking about an agenda item and then a new motion all of a sudden gets brought up things get lost in the shuffle with all due respect I understand where you're coming from commissioner Clark but if I'm getting finish I was told you was finished if if I'm getting confused how do you think the public feels or even staff it's just for Quorum purposes if we're discussing an agenda item about a legislation update with staff what does this letter of support it just has nothing to do with the agenda item that's all I'm asking it's very confusing and I think out of respect to everybody I'm not only trying to learn but I expect my fellow board members to learn the process and just just do things appropriately it's just so much easier um that's all I ask thank you thank you I asked the May here and I thought that we were done I I it's a it's honestly I thought that we were done we all thought that we were no you you are correct commissioner Reed I apologize that it was my thank you it just makes more sense okay thank you commissioner Reed okay so any additional comments or questions from the commission on this item item seven seeing none roll call please commissioner Reed yes commissioner Clark yes commissioner Collins yes commissioner goob yes yes so now commissioner Clark you would need to make your motion again Mr Mayor it seems like we're at the end of the agenda and at the beginning of the meeting um the city manager had mentioned that um he'd received a request for uh support for a grant application by Martin County for the um bright Line Station which the count is applying for if I could get some uh information from the city manager and figure out if we need to consider that today or if we can agenda it for another time I would appreciate that I do not want it to be agenda and have all the yellow shirts back and go through this whole ordeal again so I would like us to just decide to do this or not good Mr Mortel could you answer commissioner Clark's question please my question is the I brought it up at the beginning of this meeting to find the pleasure of the board I work for you guys and as a result I have to follow the policy of the board and I what I was doing is asking what do you want me to do so it's whatever you want me to do okay so commissioner Reed you would be the the last to speak on it I honestly wouldn't be in favor not only with the way I was treated from a exiting board member at the county I think it's been talked about enough on where we stand and where the county stands and where bright line themselves stands the county decided to go ahead they basically obliterated the original settlement agreement so I would imagine that's where they stand on it I'm not sure why they're looking for a letter from us then there you go mayor goob I just I have one question because uh commissioner Clark mentioned that we would vote on it then and then come back again on the 9th if we vote on it and it's not approved why would we bring it back I wasn't sure I wasn't this point there's nothing to vote on CU she's not made the motion again so there's no motion to vote on we're just discussing yeah and Mike has consensus I understand the will of the board you want to make a motion and see if or are you reading the room here Comm okay no no no no if Mr Mortel thinks that it's if there's something that's going to be violated if it needs to be put on an agenda tell us to put it on an agenda if we just need to have a either a consensus or if we need to make a motion I'm willing to make a motion that we out of um respect for everyone in Martin County and in the city of Stewart with regard to the fact that the county is moving ahead even if we didn't have the uh support from our commissioners that we're moving ahead the count is moving ahead and they need the support of the city as a government body within the county to support the Grant application just a letter of support for the Grant application um I don't think it will hurt anybody I hear I hear what we're saying and I hear you commissioner Reed commissioner job I hear you commissioner Collins but I think for the the the the public and for the the longterm of Martin County obtaining this at a 80% grant that we this sometimes we have to compromise or put our eggs in another basket and make sure they don't break and um just try to do something to move forward how about a letter of disappointment in how the county handled this situation that's to an apology to the city and the residents for subverting their vote uh by the Tuesday before that those new Commissioners came in they decided to unilaterally on the way out gut the settlement agreement how about a letter like that it because they completely disenfranchise the voters here so you like to propose that okay so I didn't make up I did okay so so so nothing has happening so I made the motion so if it doesn't get a second that's fine I made the motion that we do send something for the because of the way that we stand as a county seat within the city of Stewart as a county seat and this is a longterm effect with longlasting um results uh that we it it's not going to impact the city we don't have to pay any money or do anything but it will help the county to receive uh this letter uh uh from on after making a motion like this okay so I've made the motion is there a second see none the motion fails thank you sir so Mike could you articulate your consensus from this discuss I'm not bringing it back okay thank you thank you Mr Mor thank you Mr Mr Mayor thank you ladies and gentlemen May other items for Mr Mayor one sec I have one point of clarification Mr mortell was again correct it's not 30 years on the opioid settlement it goes out another 10 years to 2034 so that's where I got the 30 so Mr Mortel for cl so just FYI thank you thank you meeting is adjourned thank you thank you good input boys for