I called to order the regular session of the board of Commissioners of the City of Tarpon Springs on Tuesday, June 18th, 2024 at 6:30 p.m. Roll call, please. Mayor Vatikiotis here. Vice mayor here. Mr. Eisner here. Commissioner Collins here. Commissioner DiDonato here. Okay, this evening's invocation will be given by Reverend Major Ted Morris of the Salvation Army. If we can all stand and then remain standing to pledge allegiance to the flag. Spout for prayer. Our father, we thank you for those gathered this evening for this Board of Commissioners meeting. We thank you for our mayor, for the members of this commission, the city manager, the city attorney, our first responders, fire and rescue, medical personnel who keep us safe and healthy. Father, may this meeting be productive tonight, as we learned the business of the city and hear many of the things that are happening in our community. Father, we thank you for each person involved this evening. We thank you for the safety. We thank you for our beautiful city in which we live, for it's in your holy name we pray. 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. Before we get started, I have two announcements, one. At the very end of the day, on the right, you'll see major Jeff Crawford. He's one of our new, majors in the police department. He'll be sitting in for Chief Young, who's out of town at the moment. Also, we have one addendum, to the consent agenda that was not on the agenda for the website, although the agenda that you see out there printed for your, convenience is actually already includes that. That's a, a an extension to the DPI Vulnerability and Action plan grant, which is a minor thing, we have two important proclamations this evening, and I'm going to move to the front and, get started the second the first is the Juneteenth, and then the second one is the, Hope day. And I'm going to need the entire commission on the, Hope day. Event. So let me move forward. Miss Miles, you will come forward. This is Miss Maggie Miles. She'll be accepting the proclamation this evening. Whereas Juneteenth is one of a number of Freedom Day celebrations commemorating the signing of the Emancipation Proclamation of 1863. And whereas it celebrates the freeing of the last slaves in Galveston, Texas, by General Gordon Granger in June 19th, 1865, almost two and a half years after the President Abraham Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation and whereas Juneteenth has been formally informally celebrated ever since, until 1979, when Texas became the first state to proclaim it and as an official holiday. And whereas on June 17th, 2021, Juneteenth became a federal holiday and is now reorganized or actually recognized by all 50 states. And whereas throughout our nation, Juneteenth is a time of prayer, reflection, and a memorable tribute to our country's African American heritage. And Whereas the city of Tarpon Springs is proud to join our nation in honoring Juneteenth, to promote and enhance the unity and spiritual strength that brought African Americans out of slavery and sustained their dignity and prosperity to present day. And whereas the celebration of Juneteenth should remind each and every one of us of the precious promises of freedom, equality and opportunity for all people which are the foundation of the American Dream. Now, therefore, I, Kostas Vatikiotis, by virtue of the authority vested in me as mayor of the city of Tarpon Springs, Florida, do hereby proclaim June 19th, 2024, as Juneteenth Day. Thank you, miss Miles. Thank you. Thank you. Miss Miles, I'm hoping you can kind of fill us in on the celebration on Saturday and a few other things that you have planned. Thank you. Go ahead, I just want to thank the mayor. The city of Tarpon Springs, this fine commission and our city manager, Lucas and his staff this Saturday, June 22nd at 11 a.m. at Dorsett Park, the city of Tarpon Springs will be celebrating their very first commemorative Juneteenth Day and I am so ecstatic about excuse me, the collaboration with Mark and his staff to make this day, just a great one. So if you're not doing anything on Saturday, we would love to see you at Dorsett Park at 11 a.m. We have some free food and some entertainment, so hope to see you. Then again, thank you. All right. Thank you, miss Miles. Yeah Jenny, the commissioners would want any of you like to make any comments on Juneteenth. I'm going to be busy that day. I'm going to be at Juneteenth with you. So I'll see you there. Miss Tunstall, if you can come forward, you can bring your family forward with you too, if you'd like. Come on up. Come on. Julie. Hi, Julie. Let's go. All right, so. How are y'all? I'm going to need the commission's help in a minute, so I'll give y'all a call up, okay? Okay. Hi this is a kind of. This is very special to me. It's hope day, event. It's actually celebrated today, June 18th. And it, it's the day that the first, sponge boat with helmeted, divers left Tarpon Springs, for the first very first voyage, June 18th, 1905. And, that's part of it. But then this day also is somewhat of a Founder's Day for Tarpon Springs. And we want to recognize a variety of groups of people. We can't recognize everybody in one event. So, I think many of you know, Jacqueline and Julie, they own and operate, Rusty Bellies restaurant. They're at the west end of the sponge Docks. Also, Pelican Point Seafood and, until recently, your marine ways. And, tonight, I called, I asked Jacqueline if she could come up, and, and I'm glad her mom's here with her, but the celebration is not for Jacqueline and the restaurant. Although they do a fabulous job and they're contributing to keeping Tarpon Springs on the map, it's actually for Jacqueline's grandfather, Julie is dad, Joe Reese, and, you know, today we had 100th anniversary recognition for Saint Nicholas boat line. And the exhibition boat was sitting right there and I wanted to make sure everybody knew that it had been in operation for 100 years. But those boats can't just operate without maintenance. And we've had a number of, marine rail's, people in town that have maintained those boats. They've built boats. And, Joe Reese, your your dad, your grandfather was one of those. My Uncle Steve was another. In fact, we're recognizing them tonight, and I paid my dues down there. Anybody that has ever, scraped barnacles off the bottom of the boat knows how hard of a job it is. And dealing with, welding torches and just about every any other gizmo that you have to use in order to do the necessary repair on the bottom of these boats. I want to name a few people, that were part of this effort. Joe Reese was 1st July. Louis Mellis and Gulf Marine was Steve George, Unclocked, Marine Ways junior. Duckworth Duckworth boatbuilding who was just recently closed. He's retired. Finally Dickie Sirmans I don't know if you remember Dickie and his son, Joe, Wally Erickson, who I'm hoping is still here. Yeah Joe Kramer, do you remember Joe? Okay Joe moved from the east end of the sponge docks out to Anclote and was still continued in boat maintenance. But he operated the boatyard that George Ceruchus took over. And I think we all know George, Philip Sarris. That's a name you don't hear very often. And James Brady, who built a number of fishing boats, and he was an excellent and had an outstanding reputation as a boat builder. Of course, Peter and Nick Stamos, who started out with, wooden boats and commercial boats. I think the commander, right, was one of yours. Yeah the commander, I think, went to the Belarus's for a while. Then it went to the George Hughes for a while, Corinthian catamarans, which is on the north side of the river boat. Right, Glenn Boatwright's dad. And then really, really an oldie, Goldie, who I picked off, a Sanborn insurance map from 1919. There were 2 or 3 boat builders then, but the only one that gave a name, the actual name of a person was Mariners. And, he's one of the original ones. A whole bunch of fishing boats and sponge boats were built. And a lot of those boats were built out of cypress trees, which was the easiest thing to get your hands on. So without these individuals, all this notoriety that we have for sponging and, and, and, fishing and shrimping, would not have happened. And then the last thing I want to say, which people don't draw a parallel, but it's very similar. The sponge industry, died in 19, the late 1940s when the blight, the red tide hit and the toxins from the dying bacteria basically killed our sponge beds. Well there was another transition of technology. We, as well, in the late 1960s, 1970s, when resin boats came out, fiberglass boats. And unlike wood boats, they could seven, ten years without being hauled out. The wood boats couldn't go for more than two without having to go in and get barnacles off, any wood worms, wood boring worms had to be killed and so forth. So when that happened, a lot of our boatyards lost business. A lot of them couldn't maintain their business. And obviously there were no boats because many of them didn't build resin boats. The only one that, built any resin boat was George Lucas at the east end. But here's a perfect example that when that industry died, we had a family transition into something that they also knew, which was, basically a fish market. And then I know you expanded that and then, of course, I know personally the big risk that you took with a restaurant, which is a huge success today. And I want to congratulate you all. So, let me read this proclamation. By the way, this is my last hope day. There will be another mayor up here next year, so that's why. Another reason why it's very important to me. Whereas the city of Tarpon Springs is blessed with a natural beauty of its many parks, bayous, waterways, and the Anclote River . And whereas the area surrounding the city of Tarpon Springs has always been inhabited with people of many cultures exhibiting a pioneering spirit and a strong resolve to preserve its way of life and hope for the future. And whereas this area was known in its early years for its farming, timber, citrus, cattle fishing and sponging industries, and whereas it also served early as a winter destination for many wealthy northern families who appreciated the beauty of the area and saw hope and the warm climate and spring waters. And whereas the city of Tarpon Springs was incorporated on February 12th, 1887, and whereas the US government recognized the town's strategic importance when during the Spanish American War, it established a deep water channel in 1899 within the Anclote River to center to the center of its working waterfront . And whereas the purpose of the deep water channel was to encourage maritime industries such as the sponging industry of the Key West, Cork and Bahamian of African descent, to move northward away from hostilities and Whereas in 1905 the first helmeted divers of Greek origin arrived in Tarpon Springs to work in the sponge industry on the hope it would be better that their lives and that the that of their families, more so than from their from where they came. And whereas those first sponge divers set sail June 18th, 1905, from the sponge docks aboard the Elpis, or the Hope, which is the name of the first sponge boat. And whereas the sponge industry quickly became the center of commerce in tarpon Springs until its demise in the late 1940s, and whereas many other such industries rose and declined, while the city of Tarpon Springs and its residents continued to hope and persevere, whereas the commercial fishing industry and other industries eventually prospered. And whereas the sponge industry endured and its remaining boats and operators is a testimonial to the resolve of its residents and businesses to carry on the traditions of the past and maintain hope for the future. And whereas the city of Tarpon Springs has preserved over the past 137 years to sustain its values and identity as established by its earliest inhabitants, now therefore, I. Costa Vatikiotis, by virtue of the authority vested in me as mayor of the City of Tarpon Springs, do hereby proclaim June 18th, 2024, as Hope day. Thank you for that's all I'd like to say a few words. Just, you know, your dad was a great guy. Well, I'm. I'm very privileged, being three generations now, hopefully four generations being in the industry, we have seen, numerous changes in the industry in my 40 something years in the business. But Tarpon Springs has always kept us as a family and has accepted all of our changes. And I believe, as I've seen the changes through the years, these changes will continue and continue to make us great, you know? And so all that has been lost, whether it be by, offshore deaths of fishermen because of weather or what have you, they are still close to our heart and you'll see that a lot in our menu. Thank you. Thank you both. Thank you. If I can have the commission come up, if you would like to stay up here, can I have the commission come up, please, we also, as part of this event, normally it takes place at the sponge docks, but today is a commission day, so we decided to incorporate this event into this evening. And then we had the 100th anniversary ceremony separately at 230 in the afternoon at the Sponge Docks, part of this, event, we have one commemorative poem that we read which is crossing the bar, which which is universal in its message, and it's accepted by all seamen. And I've asked there's four stanzas. I've asked each of the commissioners to read one stanza, starting with, vice Mayor Cullen. So go ahead and let's each before we start that. Pardon me, can I say something about Julie? Oh, yes. Go ahead. Thank you. So I love you. No matter how you dress. Don't worry about it. So I know Julie from rotary for about eight, nine years now. And I just want you to know it's not just the restaurant. She has a heart of gold. She's always there to give. She's always there to do. We've worked together on many events, and all I can tell you is I want to thank you from my heart. Because I know just how big your heart is and your whole family. And not for nothing. She does have the best gumbo soup in town, so thank you. Yes Thank you, thank you and thank you to you all. And I always appreciated working with you. Any other commissioner . Okay, yes. Crossing the bar by Alfred, Lord Tennyson. Sunset and Evening Star. And one clear call for me. And may there be no moaning of the bar when I put out to sea. These are tongue twisters, so just bear with me. But such a tide is moving. Seems asleep too full for sound and foam. When that which drew from out the boundless deep turns again home. Twilight and evening bell and after that the dark. And may there be no sadness of farewell. When I embark. For though from out our Bourne of time and place. The flood may bear far. Bear me far. I hope to see my pilot face to face. As when I crossed the bar. Thank you gentlemen. Now we're going to have Major Jeff Crawford ring our ceremonial bell, in in observance of the individuals that died, at sea and also that died, natural deaths or whatever . But we're a part of our, hope day, and basically as part of the theme that we've got as far as contributing to the city of Tarpon Springs and making it for what it is, major Crawford. All I'm going to say is God bless us all. I hope we have a great year. I hope we're protected by any hurricanes. And I hope they just say hello as they're passing us by. So thank you very much, everybody, I'm going to ask any resident that has comments, public comments that they'd like to make on either of the two proclamations to come forward and make those now. Thank you. Mr. Dallas? Yes. Good evening. Peter Lucas, 514 Ashland Avenue, two onorable groups to honor tonight, with regards to our history, I will again mention the ability to use the property the city foreclosed on. I think it's on levees and Oak Street, to work with the black community to create a museum, that's what I promised Annie Dabbs. I'll continue to work on. And, let's see if we can make that happen. Now, as far as the waterfront, you've heard me before, and I'm going to say it again. It's nice to honor the past, but let's see if we can't recreate some of the past in the present. And in the future. And what I will mention as I mentioned before, reorganize the Maritime Committee, find ways to find money to attract boat repair people. People to help do the maintenance for these boats, to attract new fishing boats, to have subsidies to. Have new sponge boats. So instead of I mean, it's nice to recognize these people that past but most of them are gone. And are we going to just put it on the wall and say, that was us, or are we going to do anything to rebuild some of that, that is a port. We are a port of safety. We are a port of safety. So just to couple things that I want to remind the board about. Thank you. Okay Let's move on to, I want to thank everybody here that was here for the proclamations. And again, I wish you well in the future. So thank you for being here. I want to move on to, regular public comments on anything that's not on the agenda. This evening. So is there any public comment from anybody? I guess it's me again. All right. Let me get set up real quick here. Today's reading . John 319 to 21. This is the verdict. Light has come into the world, but men have loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. Everyone who does evil hates the light and will not come into the light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what he has done has been done through God. So that was the theme kind of truth. I looked it up and that's kind of how I get these things. So I want to mention a couple of quick things, I finally got a chance to watch the Public Arts Committee debate from the May 28th meeting. I don't know, you beat, you beat these hardworking people up back and forth. And then Commissioner Panagioti asked for two members of the board to support him in tabling a motion. And then when they finally, about a half hour later, come to the motion, he denies it. I don't know, but I have a more important thing I want to get back to being that the mayor said at the last meeting. I could discuss some things of basically what he calls political, but I'm going to again reiterate it's facts. Facts facts, facts. So I think you all misunderstood what I spoke about last time. You tended to think it's an election thing because I know, Chris, we've worked on the has nothing to do with it. It's personal. It's between me and Frank. No matter who he'd be running against. Now, we wouldn't be here if back on February 6th, when all this was going on about who to appoint. I think it was Commissioner Koulianos. Anybody would be wanting to run afterwards. And there's two of the candidates said, yes, but Mister or Commissioner DiDonato inferred, no, I'm here to help. That was basically at one 2248 of that meeting. Why I love this town. Don't need the job, I can help. But now he's running so again, we have to get back to my issue now. You also misunderstood, thinking that it was not frank like in parks. I agree he's done a lot for parks. And when I said at the end that when he ran against Chris Alahouzos at that forum, he said he would support the park, but here's the point I want to go back to about him basically making a decision for the city without authorization. I'm going to go back to this article from, the this was the one residents worry about project. And Mark Kerr said the city manager noted , ultimately, all the policy decisions will have to be approved by commissioners. Now, I have a couple things I want to refute. First off, as one of his defenses, Commissioner DiDonato said, well, the land uses commercial general is still commercial general. However in the letter, if you remember, the county came to the city, which means they would have been ready to change the land use as we change land uses. So that's not a problem. The problem to me was to learn which I didn't know about, and I was accused by Mayor Protus and Commissioner Dinato that I knew about Ellen writing the letter. Well, that's the city administration setting up policy. You wouldn't allow that. And he said, yeah, I cc the commissioners. That's all after the fact. So when he got that letter to sign from Ellen and, and Judy, he unilaterally decided that he didn't say, hey, Judy, hey, Ellen, I need to put this before the board. Let's talk about it to decide the policy. He decided the policy when he signed that letter. Case closed. Mister Delacruz. What what date was that of which? The letter. What year are you talking about? You can get that from the clerk. And I'll be glad to quote that since my time is allowed. You've asked me a question. This was the letter dated February 26th, 2001, to Mister Calvin Harris, Board of County Commissioners, Rehab Plaza. DRA. Dear Chairman Harris and commissioners, it recently brought to our attention that Pinellas County has made an offer to purchase the above, captioned 70 acre parcel parcel of real property for park and recreational purposes, blah blah blah blah blah. Mister, the city is. I asked for the opposed to any public sector acquisition of this property. We're never consulted concerning the move, nor are we able to understand the logic behind this offer to purchase when there are several other parcels of greater environmental recreational value. Using Frank privilege. Thank you. And I'm just going to mention that this letter that you mentioned is 23 years old. And that's why we're still here, because of the decision that was made then. Thank you. Thank you. And I'm also pointing out that it was a decision you unilaterally made by one person who spoke very much authority and power. I appreciate the politics. This evening. Good evening. Board members and Mayor Anita Produce, 901 Bay Shore Drive. You are right, mayor. The letter is old. Everybody knew about it. He knew about it. I'm tired of hearing it. That property is not conducive for a park. The way things are today between drug dealers, rapists, homeless. Who's going to be taking care of that out there? It's over with. Let's keep going on the second thing, and maybe the attorney can give some light to this. To me. I had lunch with three attorneys, sat day, and I did not know. And I don't think the public knows that form six is in court right now to be wiped out, that you don't have to fill out what you owe, how much money you have, what your, job is and, in the community or the where you want to run and it's in court, and it may take a year to get a decision on it. And I think people in the community need to know that, because a lot of people would like to run and aren't running because they don't want to fill out that financial report. And they told me it can take up to a year to two years for the state to decide what to do. And right now, if you decide you want to run, you don't have to fill it out. And I think the board should elaborate on that for the citizens. Thank you. Good evening, Giuliana De, for 13 years of Oakwood Street. How is everybody doing? I miss seeing you all, guys. I'm reading the Florida Sunshine Law provides right to access to the government proceeding of the public Board of commissioners. That means meeting, etc. The Florida Public Record Acts extends the right of access to include all documents and all other materials made, made, made or received in connection with the official universal business. That's all records. The law has, pertaining to how we do business here in the city. And I feel as I've been reading the Sunshine Law that a lot of things come through that, are set in procedures, but it's the way they're set in procedures, and that's how I want to say so. I appreciate your time. Thank you. Thank you, Miss Day. Is there anybody else from the public that's got comments on anything? Not on the on the agenda? Mr. Jump? Anybody, remote access comments. And we do not have any raised hands at this time. Okay. Miss, Miss Jacobs, nothing, on. Okay, Commissioner DiDonato, did you want to say anything? Well just to add to what was said about 20 some odd year old letter that I did sign, I'm not denying that I signed it. But again, Mr. Delacruz has forgotten to remind the audience that that was copied to every commissioner at the time. They were well aware of what the purpose of that property was from the city and the county. I'll check the archives from the county and from the city. And there is no official offer. There's not even a letter stating from the county to the city that they wanted to purchase that property. What it was my research. It was a luncheon, a city manager's luncheon that our city manager attended, and she was approached in a verbal conversation of which there doesn't seem to be a record of. She brought it back to the commission, it was discussed, and she wrote the letter and I signed it and Peter, you were up here from 2004 to 2010. You never bothered to change the zoning either. You knew what it was. So I think it's kind of ill of you to even keep bringing this up. All right. Thank you. Let's move on to the consent agenda. If, does any commissioner want to pull any item from 3 to 9? Not pull. But I do want to speak about one. So, do it a comments or whatever at the end. Okay. Yes. All right. Let's well, let me read the agenda. The consent agenda, number three is satisfaction and release of liens. Number four is attorney's fees. A Eunice salesman. Jensen. Invoices 820118201282013. Item B Johnson Jackson. Invoice 13051. Item five. Award file number. Maintenance. File number 240123. Maintenance, repair and operations equipment and supplies utilizing Sourcewell contract. Item six Award file number 240138. Single source purchase of elements, original equipment, parts and service. Item six. Item seven Award file number 240137. Single source purchase of original equipment manufacturer parts and service for vector. Item eight renew file number 210090. Manhole structure rehabilitation action and, item nine, which is the one that was added is approved FDP standard Grant agreement amendment no cost time extension for vulnerability assessment and action plan. Let me go to public comments. Are there any public comments on any one of these items on the consent agenda? Mr. Jump any remote access comments and we do not have any raised hands at this time. Okay. Thank you. Commissioner Eisner, go ahead. Did you want to go for a motion first? We can do that. Is there a motion to approve in a second? So moved second. Second. Okay. Go ahead. So, one thing I wanted to explain to the residents that there was a, pretty decent increase on the number six. The Cummings and I spoke with Mike Vecchio, and I wanted people to know and I wanted the staff to know. As I spoken to the city manager a number of times, it went from 40,000 to 75. And whenever we have something like this, I always delve in to find out what the reasons are. So I was pleased with the response I got, it was it's a specialty item. It's items that are the for the fire chief and other items that we don't want to do in house because of time constraints. So, the only thing that I would like to request is that we put in a better backup so that the residents can see, because the residents can't get the questions answered as I can. So I've asked and answered that question for why it went up that much. Thank you. Okay. Thank you sir. Any other commissioner comments? Roll call. Commissioner DiDonato. Yes, Commissioner. Collins. Yes Commissioner. Eisner. Yes. Vice mayor. Coleus. Yes. Vatikiotis Yes, move on to the special consent agenda. Item ten. Approve contract for attorney services. City manager. Of course. Our attorney, Lewis. Whoever wants to go ahead and. Okay. And do that, it's my pleasure to bring forward tonight the contract for new new attorney services. As you know, it's Mr. Lewis last night. So we're timing this real well. We're right down to the wire. As you know, you all had a chance to meet the Mr. Dickman, who's in the audience right now, Andrew Dickman, we've talked to him. We're. I'm very comfortable with them. You talk to them. I hope you're comfortable with them. Basically, he's assuming the contract with one change that I'll let. I'll let Commissioner Eisner address, but essentially it's assuming the contract. We look forward to have him there. His reputation, as you know, since I have some background with, attorneys and other cities and stuff, you know , his background, and the background of other people in his firm that's going to be assistance to the staff is, is great. And we're really looking forward to we've got a lot of things that's on hold and on stall, we're going to slowly work him into it. He's agreed to come meet staff tomorrow at our staff meeting, so we will slowly get them up to date and get those issues. That's kind of been on hold, back going again. And, so I'm just real happy to present this to you. And, again, I know, Commissioner Eisner is going to talk about one change in talking with Mr. Dickman, and Mr. Dickman has agreed to, but essentially it's, authorizing the signature of the contract and bringing them on starting tomorrow. Okay let me go to public comments. Are there any public comments on this item? Here. Lucas, 514 Ashland Avenue. I understand the bind you're in, but from my understanding, there was no RFP done for this selection. I remember a couple of months ago when this first came up, there was a lady from the Pope firm in Clearwater who volunteered. And then I guess, some conflict or something. She's out. Mr. Lewis, brave to cross the skyway. I believe it's from Bradenton. Sarasota area. And now we're asking someone to come from Naples even further. Further lag. If you. I don't know. I don't understand somewhat of the sense of this, not that they can't represent you, but not having done an RFP and then to select this firm basically, you know, plucked out of the air. I'm not sure how. And again, it's not against the firm. It's the process. And I'll also bring back something I've mentioned over the years. Maybe it's time to set up our own city attorney department, just like we finally got to getting an internal auditor. You hire an attorney, a paralegal. They handle everything. You can still have Mr. Saltzman do the litigation or something. And then kind of wondered, are there no other people at Mr. Sampson's that could fill in for all this other stuff? They're closer than Naples, so I don't know the process. The distance somewhat lack of transparency on the process and, that's what I have to say. Thank you. Okay. Anita, protest, 91 Bayshore Drive. I did not read the contract or anything, but I remember, Mr. Trask. There was an issue about mileage from, Commissioner Eisner that he brought up. Is this gentleman getting, mileage money? That's a long ways from Naples. I know I've traveled it many times to go see my daughter when she was down. There are we giving him gas mileage? Let's be fair. I'd just like to know, because if I were him, I would demand it. Because that's a lot of money. Gas is expensive, and I don't know what you've got in the contract. Can anybody answer that? Well, address things at the end of comments. Thank you. Are there any other public comments? Okay, Mr. Jumper, any remote access comments? We do not have any raised hands at this time. Okay. Mr. Dickman, Andrew Dickman is the managing partner of the law firm that is coming on board. If I asked him to come to the podium. So for one, we can all see what he looks like. And, I'm hoping to get a camera on him up there, Mark and Mike and, Mr. Dickman, a couple of questions were asked. Yes. Yes, sir. First of all, thank you for having me here, joined by Tabitha McConnell. She's our, our communications director. She happen to be in the area. So I asked her to come over here with me to see the city and be here. It's a beautiful place, those questions are valid questions, and I'm glad they're being asked, I'm. I am the founder and managing partner of the Dickman law firm, I'm born and raised in Tampa, our firm represents local governments in Pinellas County and also in Collier County. I spend probably, most of every week, Monday through Wednesday in Pinellas County because I represent, as you know, I'm the city attorney at Saint Pete Beach. Their meetings are on opposite Tuesdays as yours, which is really the key reason why, this was attractive to me. Besides the fact that this is a beautiful city, I'd love to help. Help out any way I can. So there won't be. There is in the contract. There is no charge for mileage whatsoever. I have a residence downtown in Saint Pete , we spend a lot of time there. So there's no there's no mileage, again, my family is also in Tampa, so that's one of the reasons why, I set up our firm so that, you know, we can work out of Naples, and then I can spend some time here in Tampa and also see my own brothers and sisters who live in Tampa, I'm very fond of this area. I remember coming to Tarpon Springs as a kid, and I'm very fond of Saint Pete and Pinellas County, so I am assuming the contract, basically on the terms that were set by your, the prior attorney that you all lost, the same hourly rate, there is a provision in there for $1,200 a month, and I wasn't clear what that was for, but I'm willing definitely willing to, eliminate that for sure, I just only will charge you for the hours that I and my team work for you, and any expenses that we have, which will just be things like, you know, copies and facsimiles, things that you would expect, so I hope that answers the questions to that. So I, I have a presence here. It's not like we're driving here from Naples, just for this meeting. And we are here. I've been here for ten years representing cities. And happy to do it. So, if it's your pleasure to have me join your team, I have spoken with your manager, and Mr. Saltzman about, you know, the role and I'm fine with it. And, so I'm happy to answer any questions, one other thing. My background. I'd like to give you that, too. Just so the public hears this, I think it's important, as I said, I'm a native of Tampa. Went to went to college at University of Florida graduate school there as well in urban and regional planning. I was an urban planner for ten years, went to law school at night, because I was still wanted to pursue, comprehensive planning and zoning, land use, environmental law, things like that. But as a lawyer, then became a member of the bar in 2000, opened my own firm in 2002, and now it has grown to, we have four attorneys, a number of different, non attorney legal assistants. It's the perfect size, and I really enjoy working in Florida government. Thank you, Mr. Dickman, let me ask Commissioner any questions from the commission for Mr. Dickman? No vice mayor, no questions. I just, I'm happy to support this tonight, as had a very good interview with Mr. Dickman and, one of his staff members, Mr. McConnell, I think they have a good understanding on, what this commission has. And in a direction and taking and preserving our small town charm. And, I'm happy to support them taking over the attorney services contract that's in place. Okay. Any anybody. You know, I have talked with you and very much enjoyed the conversation. And I appreciate and respect your area knowledge. And, I'm excited to get started and go to work. Yep. Okay Commissioner Eisner. Yes, please. Thank you. Mayor, I need to first clarify a comment that was made earlier. There was a comment made that, I questioned our last attorney, and that was not true. What I asked was why we were being billed and it wasn't in the contract. Is the question I asked, and I got not a good answer. The answer was, that's how we always have done it. So that was the more clarifying, answer. Not with Mr. Dickman. No no, that was the comment. Previous attorney, previous attorney. Yes. My conversation that I had with Mr. Dickman this morning, first of all, we had a great conversation. I was very impressed with what you had to say, I, enjoyed the conversation. I look forward to working with you. But in addition, Mr. Dickman was very gracious because I couldn't understand why we had this $1,200 administration fee, and I asked him kindly if he would consider, removing it and just charging us for what he needs. And he just said, sure, I'd love to do that. That was fine and dandy. So I do want to thank you because it was it was a it was a good gesture. It was kind. And, anything that your contract states is what we're happy to pay you is what I said. So So it's just that particular thing is a bit of a sore note because it wasn't in the contract. And that's what happened. So it wasn't that I was zeroing in on anybody like was portrayed, but I'm looking forward to working with you. I had a great time speaking with you and Matt, and I look forward to working with you in the future. So thank you. Great. Anybody else? Oh, Commissioner Collins. Yes Mr. Dickman, it was, it was a pleasure with having our zoom together. And I look forward to working with you, just. I think you passed over it quickly. I just want the to reiterate that you have a home in Saint Pete, right? Yes, we have an apartment down downtown, Saint Pete. Yes, sir. Okay, so just you're not always coming from Naples? No, no, not at all, as I said, you know, I do a lot of work with. I am the city attorney for Saint Pete Beach, which requires me to be there. But your meetings are on different days, I've been doing that for ten years, so it made a lot of sense for us to just go ahead and get an apartment, downtown, and on a personal note, as I said, you know, my family's in Tampa, so that made it even better to do that, to repeat that, because I think another point I wanted to make, and I'm sorry to interrupt, is I want everyone to also understand that we have no conflicts whatsoever, we don't represent, developers here in this area, I don't represent any abutting jurisdictions that would have any issues with you. So there there won't be any, any conflicts whatsoever. Okay. Anyways. Thank you. I look forward to working with you. Thank you, sir. And we have better food here than in Saint Pete. All right, Mr. Dickman, thank you, we're looking forward to having you on board, just to be, just a circle around the answers. I want to be clear and answer them in the way that they were presented, Mr. Dickman is not driving from Naples. He's going to drive from Saint Petersburg on a regular basis. Number two, if that is an issue with RFPs and everything else. And there's also some technicalities with the RFP process that prohibited us from going out and number two, he's not charging for mileage. I want to be clear on that too. So and also, as part of this contract, you're being appointed as general counsel. I just checked with the city manager. We don't need them to include that in the motion. It's in. The contract was, also, there will be no $1,200 administration fee, right? Is that already taken care of? We can just make that in the motion that we. Okay, we've got to sign contract. He'll. I'm sure he'll bring me or send to me tomorrow the new signed contract. With that out of there, I'll bring it tomorrow morning. I'll cross that out, because I'm just adopting the prior contract. That you had with that, I wasn't aware of what that was for, so. But I'm happy to cross it out. I'll initial it, bring it to your office, Mr. Manager. And you'll have my signed copy and I. Can I say something, mayor? I want to say something to everybody out there. This was a thorough process, and this city is very, very lucky. We were able to bring Mr. Dickman in to take over that contract for two years and get. Yeah we could have done an RFP services and I can tell you where we'd be sitting right now. We'd be sitting two months later with that group of what happened when we did the RSP last time. If you remember, they all come in and got eliminated, so we'd be two more months with projects behind, and I guarantee you we would not find a firm as experienced as Mr. Dickman with his qualifications, with the work he's done, and very thorough thought of the travel and everything was put into it ahead of time. And this is the best for the citizens. It works out great. And believe me, if we gone the other process, you may have a new city manager before you have a new city attorney. So. So I just want the residents to know that this was thoroughly done in process. And if anybody would have called me, I'd have read that process instead of come up to the meeting. And the backup was covered also. So this city is real lucky to get this firm and you'll see I'm right in the upcoming months when you see him in action and his firm in action and his partners that can contribute in things, you'll see that a job was thoroughly done by us, and a good job was done by us to bring him on, to serve our city. Now, the other part of that story is the fact that what RFP did go out and we hired, Miss Kardash and Mr. Salzman, it was part of the same RFP. And so if we went out to a new RFP, I'm not so sure that we would have been able to keep mr. Salzman without having to include an entire new RFP and maybe Mr. Salzman partnering with Mr. Dickman if he was interested in that time. I don't know. But the bottom line is we are where we are. I'm very grateful for that, the one other, discussion I had with Mr. Dickman and also went back and talked to City manager about it, there's a whole lot of catching up to do that we need to do with, city clerk's office and a number of other things that's going to require, you and your associates to come up to speed with the city charter or land development code and a number of other things. And these are not things that we would be direct. We would be billing you. They're not action items. They're familiarization items. And I've asked the city manager if, if, if it would be worth giving you some time, for familiarization. And so I gave a specific number of hours. But the city manager would like to have this rolled into the comment, into the into the, recommendation, the motion to approve the contract, to allow the city manager to authorize any additional time that's needed for orientation to the city in terms of our rules, regulations and charter and other things that you're going to be involved in. So, are there any other commission comments? So let me see if I can get this right. One, I would like to have a motion for approving the contract with Mr. Dickman's law firm, with, change to eliminating the $1,200 administrative fee, also, authorizing the city manager to, provide a time for orientation of Mr. Dickman and his attorneys , with regard to the land development code and other, things that are specific to Tarpon Springs. Is there a third item I recall? There's a third item. There is no third item. Okay. May I have a motion and a second to that effect. So moved second. Okay If there's no further commission comments roll call. Mr. DiDonato. Yes, Commissioner. Collins. Yes Commissioner. Eisner. Yes. Vice mayor. Coleus. Yes Mayor. Vatikiotis. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Dickman, Mr. Mayor, I'd also like to offer something, because I do think it's important that the community knows who I am and trusts that, you know, one of the things I like to do is I would offer at a convenient time for the community, no charge, an hour meeting with the community, sometime, maybe a coffee get together, if that's something you would like. I think it's important that the community knows me. Doesn't think I'm. I would like it. But in our form of government, it depends on three of the five. Yeah, but I'd like to turn that over to the city manager. My, my feeling is there's no objection to it, but please coordinate that with the city manager. That's no problem. Unless a commissioner has. I want to put it on the table. It would be no charge, but I do like to get to know the citizens a little bit. That'd be great. We'll work on that. All right, all right. Thank you. Mr. Have a good evening. Thank you. Okay Item 11 is approved. The contract to purchase the stamps property, proceed to referendum development, in other words, develop the referendum question. City manager. Of course. Yes. I'm sorry. We were scrambling a little bit to put this together, but I tried to give you an update at 11:00 today of where we were. We've got some more developments, basically, we're asking tonight to approve, the finalization of approval to sign a contract for the stamps property, at and there are some things in there that we want the city to discuss and get direction on. Essentially, we have a timeline issue. As you know, we need to do the ballot language for the referendum, and we need to do it in the two readings of July, so whereas in, in and that is to get the early August, the first week of August is when we have to have it to the elections office. So whereas normally we just deferred this meeting for a couple of weeks and done it to get all these items put together, we don't have the luxury because of that. That timeline. But I think we're we're just down to a very few things, to resolve. And let me just go over some of them. There's only really two big items. One, that the commission needs to make and another one that that, attorney Salzman I didn't want to commit to until, you know. So let me go over real fast. One of the main issues is a clause about a second deposit, and it asks for a second deposit if the referendum passes, and the amount of that is, is $525,000, this is if something happens between the time of the approval of this of the citizens and, and that for some foreseen reason, we don't close that extra money is put in there and forfeited, if we don't close that contract now, myself, seeing the chances of that happening, if the voters approve it, are very low. But our attorney is especially concerned about circumstances that might happen and didn't believe it was my place or his place to put in there a half million dollar forfeiture, of the dot before we ran it by you. Another item when you have item five on the list, not in five. Item four about the default by buyer. That's that's that's in the same line of the second deposit. So those two are easy, the purchase price with this whole package we're talking about was reduced by Mr. Stamps to 5,250,000. That price, if you see in the, in the rough draft, I just crossed out, that's something pending all these things we're talking about, there's a very minor issue on the closing cost that's so minor. I think we can resolve that. That's that's not an issue for tonight about either paying half or the seller paying the. But that's just a minor item. The issue that we're really worried about getting complete tonight is not an issue that we're at contention with. It's whether we could do. And this is about a provision in there about allowing them to remove dirt from the property for up to two years. Now, where it helps us is that we save the restoring of the site and the hauling of dump truck after dump truck of the site out, and the money that it goes to do that, how it helps, Mr. Stamm is, is obviously provides them over two years the chance to do dirt. The problem with that in which we didn't know if we could put together so fast, is that there's a permit involved, but I think at 4:00 or 430, sometime late this afternoon, Depee has tentatively approved the ability to leave the site and leave the dirt as is, and so our ability to do a brief amendment are crew that we have doing the restoration as agreed to no problem to stall there at a good place to commit all the other items that are required for the permit, but then to go on hold because we would have the responsibility of the citizens, turn down the referendum. We would have to then go back and remove that dirt for the contract. And, the only thing it would cost us is mobilization fees for them to mobilize again, but again, if it passes, we've saved another chunk of money of all that hauling away and stuff. So again, we got word late this afternoon. That's not a big issue now because we've been told by DEP we can they gave us the language, the minor revision. We're able to do that. So that comes off the table and can resolve. And I think we've already got tentative language that Mr. Robertson and Mr. Stam has talked about today that that's agreeable. So there's no problem with language or that. So that's not an issue. The other issue, which is one Mr. Saltzman, and I thought that you had to realize and I understand it and understand it from Mr. Stam's side, he's got the clause in their release of claim to take condemnation or eminent domain of the property. So the clause reads that, that if we go in this contract that we're not that, and it fails, that we will not go and try to take the property by eminent domain. Now, if the voters, if the voters voted down, you know, I don't think we'd go in there and do it. But five years from now, another commission and stuff, he's already got whatever he's built on there. He's worried about being subject no matter what he puts on it. It just means the city's going to pay a lot more money because he's developed it. So. So he doesn't want to come back and, some later commission again. I don't think we would do it if the voters turned it down, but I can understand his concern. But that's the kind of unique item. And I know there was some questions about even the legality of doing it. They were looking into, but, that's something that we need to see at the comfort of the commission on putting that language. And again, I can understand it. He's putting it up. If it doesn't pass, he's going to immediately start his project on it and stuff. And at a later time he doesn't want to come back. Well, voters didn't approve it. We're going to eminent domain and take it so very well. Understand that. And those are the only real issues that that we need to address. And we can address the issues. And you're comfortable with those issues tonight. Then an approval of the finalize. Get the lawyers to do the language of the contract, and we can get it signed and then work to bring you back the second the referendum on the language from the from the referendum. So those items just need to be discussed, and the direction on those, texted you the contract. But I feel a lot better than I did than 11 when a lot of these issues were out there and not finalized. So before I go to public comments, let me just one point of clarification. The returning the site to the way we found it is in the lease as well, right? That requirement. So we're going to modify Mr. Stamos has agreed to modifying the lease and somehow that'll be memorialized. And all of this as well. Yes. When we do the probably the extension of the lease and stuff and we just asked for in there with 60 days, if the referendum fails that we pick up and do it, we need 90 because again, we got to remobilize the team. We had out there. So we're just asking for 90 instead of 60. And then the this business of the restoring the site to its natural to its to the condition that we found it in is going to be eliminated from the lease. You follow what I'm saying. We've got the DEP permit that requires restoring the site, but I thought that was contained in the lease with that property as well. Yes. And again, if it fails then then if the referendum fails, then we would we would meet Remobilize, the crew that's out there now and fulfill that part of the contract and remove the dirt. Okay Within we're asking for 90 days discussion you had. Yeah, yeah. All right. Okay. Thank you, let me go to public comments. Are there any public comments on this item? Mr. Good evening. Greg Lunt 743 Chesapeake Drive, I didn't really come here to talk about the specifics of the contract. I figure you're going to work them out. I'm not quite sure about the legality of the eminent domain clause. I'm not quite sure if you can remove the city's powers like that, anyway, what I did want to talk to you about is approval for the overall contract in itself. I think it's a good deal for the city. If we did take it by eminent domain without the contract, we typically go for appraised value plus 35 or 25. That's almost $4.6 million anyway, coupled that with the charge of decommissioning, looking for another site having to recommission another site. ET cetera. ET cetera. This is value based for us. We should be doing this, the site's been used as a spoil site. It's elevation is known. The engineering is done. It's got a great floodplain to filter this water as it goes back to the river, the alternate site that we looked at doesn't have any of those attributes. We're not sure the elevation. It's right across the road. It doesn't seem. Where's it going to drain to? We might have to treat the water in order to get rid of it. It's just an expensive, proposition from one end to the other. It doesn't have any ancillary uses, the closest or proximate to the R.O. plant right now means that we can expand our solar panels. We can expand facilities for the R.O. plant if we need to drill another well, if we need to store water on site, that sort of thing. So rather than buying into an unknown and saying, no, we don't want to do this, we should definitely go ahead and get this done, as long as they can work out all the contractual details. It sounds on the overall part pretty good to me. And I sort of my position, but thank you for listening. Thank you. Are there any other public comments on this item? Appeared lack is 514 Ashland Avenue. First off, you need to take what former Vice Mayor Lunt said and put it in an information panel to put out to the customers your water customers or, however, to show the advantages of purchasing this property. Now, I did read some of the contract, so, I think it's fair for Mr. Stamos to ask for that second deposit if it passes, 5.25 million, 10% is $525,000. In a normal transaction, you'd have to be putting cash up front. You're only putting up 25. That's a good deal. So if it passes, he gets his deposit. Now I saw there was something in there later. Also about 50% and things like that. But the default buy via clause, which is kind of what you're concerned about if you have to put out that. 525 and the 25. But if you really read the full language, it basically absolves you of any other tortuous claims that you would be involved with. If it wasn't to go through. And you could ask your legal attorneys that if it passed and y'all didn't do it, that would be something to do. Section 919, which is allowing Mr. Or let's say Anclote Properties pioneer development to be able to have to take dirt off that land for up to a blank number of years. If we're buying the land, why are we giving it back? And basically it looks like there's no fee for that. We know it would be helpful in building homes to level out stuff, but I don't think we should be once we purchase this property for 5.25 million that were in turn going to be giving away the dirt that we not only put on, but that was there before. And lastly, former Mayor Lunt mentioned about giving up future powers. That's 9.20, which basically waives you being able to do any condemnation, eminent domain or any other type of actions in the future. So you are in a way, by contract tying a future board. So So I would recommend agreeing to the 525 deposit. The default by buyer supports that. But if you do that you have to take out 920 at a minimum. And then 919. I just don't understand the logic or the need for having them take land off the land were purchasing, which is part of the land we're buying, that we put some of the dredge on. That's our land. So kind of curiousthas there any other public comments? Mr. jump, any remote access comments? If anyone online would like to speak on this item, please raise your hand and you'll be allowed into talk. And we do not have any raised hands at this time. Okay. Commissioner DiDonato, you have your light on. Yes this is an item that really goes back, even as far as I know, into the 90s. And even it was discussed in the 80s. It looks like there should be for better cooperation in the future, hopefully from the Army Corps, so that we can do this on a more consistent basis. The dredging, I do feel the city needs its own site, I, I, I wonder about the price. I think it's a little on the high side. Personally, I, I love the location. I think the location works out for the city. Well I wonder, like, I'd like to ask, city manager. Did we ever look at the Stauffer site as a possibility of doing this? And is that possible? No, it's tied up. It's tied up in the contract. It's not available to even make an approach on yet, so. And who knows when it'll be. So I. I like everything and nothing. Yes. Mr. Stamos says respect you. You've been a longtime businessman here. I just am very uncomfortable with the price. I think is more than we should be paying, but I like everything else about it. So Yeah, vice mayor, Yeah. And then I mean, I'm mayor. I've. I have mixed feelings about it. I understand it's a lot of money, but when it comes when it ties into our responsibilities as a commission, it's under our charter and our responsibilities to help. It's under section eight, item Q to improve and maintain the navigation of the Anclote River and city bayous in accordance with this section. So we're in a spot where our, a decision made today won't necessarily be. I mean, we'll have an impact in the future, for our community, too. So, I believe we just have to let the residents decide and hopefully could be a good enough description to let them understand what's going on, how it ties into the long range planning of the city. And, we can go from there. So thank you. Thank you, I'm sorry, Commissioner Eisner. Thank you. Mayor, first of all, I disagree. It's been in the charter for, a while, and, it was not, purchased then, it was rented for $700,000, which I felt was a waste. So, I'm not saying that it's wrong to just not go ahead with this, but it's just because it's in the charter doesn't mean we have to go ahead with it, it hasn't been in the past. We've never owned a piece of property that was for the spill site for the, dredging. So, as far as I agree with Commissioner DiDonato about. I'm not comfortable with the price. I do want to thank Mr. Stamos. I had a conversation and I hopefully, hopefully that is why maybe you changed it from 550 to 5 250. It's just it's a very tough thing, comments were made and I ran the math as well, they were appraised at, 3.6 average, I'm not an eminent domain person, but is just factually it is 4.6, as an eminent domain. So there's a difference of about $650,000. The $650,000 we would save, just in, in not having to remove the sand, so I was tossed back and forth. I would have wanted you possibly to sweeten the pot where I have my biggest drawback is in some of the requests that we got, just, today. And those requests, about the 525. I don't have a problem with it as a if the referendum passes, On number two, I'm dragging my feet with the price. It's almost like I might have to vote on it by holding my nose, because we do need it, and we don't have many choices, the closing costs, I believe, should be done by both of us. The second deposit, on default, I have issues with that. Removing the excess dirt. And this is a question for the council, would they have to get special insurance to be working on what would be our property at the time? Ensure the stem is has to indemnify the, the city for that. Maybe that would be an issue to address when we put that in the contract. Well, it's not addressed now. So that's why I'm bringing this up because okay, and then on number, you know, six where it says page 13, item 9.2 release of claim to take condemnation or eminent domain of the property. That's tying up the hands of a future board. So So I really never would do that. So these are my. You know, I'd love to hear for some flexibility coming back, and I'll wait to hear what the rest of the board, I just I would like to see a different deal if you want me to throw a number out there. And I don't really usually do this. I would have like to see you come in at five, but you didn't, so. But I appreciate you making some consideration by lowering it. So it's a half compliment. Thank you, Commissioner Koulianos. Yeah. So let's, let's discuss the price, you know, in, in in Mr. Sam's defense, the, you know, we appraise the property as, as vacant land. And that comes out to the three, 3,675,000. Mr. Sam's has a piece of property that he can develop and make revenue from, and it has a certain value to him because he would be losing his opportunity, money that he could be making on that property if he were to develop that property. So I don't want in any way for anyone to disparage him, for asking for more, I don't think he's doing it for that to be greedy. I think he's doing it because that's what his property is worth to him. Okay, so with that said, you know my concern. Well, one, when we talk about our responsibility, whether, that's in the charter, to keep the waterways open, it doesn't speak that we have to buy a piece of property for dredge, I don't think we've done I have seen I don't, like, say, I can't say what we've done because, I've only been on this board now for, a little over a year and a half, I have not seen a critical analysis of what all the options are for dredging. We've used this property twice in 25 years, so that tells us that dredging will come up as a need. 12 to, you know, maybe 15 years from now. So we're addressing a problem, today that we may not have to address financially for some time. And and, and have we done a critical analysis of all the dredging options like, you know, putting the refuge on the refuse on a barge and taking it out to water, that's an option, partnering up with, you know, Pasco County to find some common place for, disposal again, a $5 million piece of property that here in the backup, we're financing over, and the recommendation here from from our finance director is to, is to, finance this over five years. So it's going to cost us about $1.2 million a year for the next five years, if any, of you that attended or watched the, budget meeting we had just last week, we talked about how thin the amounts of money that we really have that are discretionary for the use of other projects and other things in our community, so, for example, we have and I had the, the city finance director give me a list of all the unfunded projects that we have. So we have the Beckett Bridge project, even though it's being done by the county, we have to pay for the hookup, once that bridge is fixed, and that's going to cost us about $4 million. That's not funded. We have the Craig Park, and we. And I'm going to go back to what we talked about when, one of our residents used a kind of a peculiar term of prioritizing our priorities. And, I think, you know, before I go through this list, we have to ask ourselves if again, we don't have we can't write. We can't write, print money. We have to use what money? We have. Okay? So we have to be able to budget this, we have to. And now, again, as is proposed to us, pay for a $5 million piece of property in five years that the primary use of that property is something that could possibly be 4 or 5 boards down the road, that, again, this necessity that this board needs to solve this problem at this time, so and we discussed, those things that are of high priority, again, the Beckett Bridge, $4 million, the Craig Park seawall phase two. Again, we've only funded the half of Craig Park. We still got the all the other half. It's only going to go to about, where the. They throw the cross right now. We got to go all the way around the other side. We don't even have a price on that yet, the cops and kids, the construction of the new project, $3.3 million. We don't have that funded the cops and kids renovation of the old building that it is estimated at 1.6 million. We don't have that, orange Street has been pushed to 2026. But if we have to pay $1.2 million in debt service for this , piece of property, we may not be able to do that, the sponge docks pumping again. We're talking about priorities. I can't think of anything that takes higher priority than the flooding on our bayou and saving our sponge docks. And again, we're addressing this instead of that. And these are always going to be choices when we're spending $5 million we and it's and it's going to be about 6 million when we have when we talk about the interest we have to pay on the money. So we've got the sponge docks pumping. That was, $3 million, the Discovery Park renovation to renovate the Discovery Park, which our, our children use 600,000, if we do this, reverse. This reverse eminent domain on the Kocoras Park. We don't even have a price on that yet, we bought the Roosevelt property for 1.8 million, but we have no money. We have not, funded or decided what we're going to do with that property. So if we do any kind of, development or parking lot or whatever it is, we're going to do with that property that's not funded, our golf course, we talked about getting a new golf course, clubhouse that's not funded, we talked about a splash park that's not funded. So, in a perfect world, I would love to have this property. It'd be great. It'd be great to have this property. So we have a dredge site and there are some ancillary uses, putting some solar panels out there, maybe putting the tank, even though we could put the tank there. But there is a spot for the tank on the existing property, but again, we'd have this elbow room. It's always nice to buy property, but again, property costs not only costs us money if Mr. Samus develops that property and puts a commercial, development on there, we're going to get the impact fees, we're going to get taxes on that property, in into perpetuity. We're going to get, he's going to pay water and use and we're going to get money from that. So we are losing opportunity money every time that we take something, off of the tax rolls, it costs us money. In a in addition to buying the property. So with all the things we have now, if and let me ask the city manager, what is the latest we could make this decision and still get it on that referendum in November? We don't have again, we have to do the referendum language. So we really don't have what's that date? What's the date? You have to have the referendum language to the county 9th August ninth. Okay. So you know, if we were going to do if this was being bundled with some Long-Term with a long term debt, see, one of the problems we have is that if we can't finance it for more than ten years without going to the public has to approve any, any financing in in excess of ten years. So no matter what this is going to, this is going to take about six. Even if we went ten years, it would take over 600,000 out of our general coffers every year. If we do the what has been, proposed to us here, it's 1.2 million, for the next five years. And I, I'm afraid that this is I really don't want to see this, handcuff the future board that's coming in behind us. That is not going to have it's going to have to cover that debt service. Now So if, if we could, if we could take these priorities that we have and sit down, be together, do a, you know, we could do a workshop, we could do a special session where we can then talk about long term financing, where we can go, you know, if we were to issue a 30 year bond note, that that could incorporate a great deal of these immediate needs. We have that and also take care of that, that situation. I I, I could see doing that right now. I can't I could not I can't vote yes on this very short truncated, funding of this long term need, I just I, we have too many other things that are that would have a higher priority, to me now, I'm just one guy, but that would be my vote. There's too many immediate needs we have as a community that I would take $1.2 million every single year to pay for something that we may not use for 12 to 15 years from now, again, we have to make decisions with we can't make decisions in a vacuum. We have to make decisions in, within reality. To me, this would be like at your home. Your house needs repair and you. But instead you go buy a vacation home. Well, it's nice to have a vacation home, but I got to fix the house and I think we got stuff we got to take care of in the house. So thank you. All right, let me, before I go back to you, to let me just have my comments. I've written a whole litany of stuff down, but I want to make it short and then go to you, too, and then I'll. I'll figure out what I want to say, you know, the one thing that, you know, city manager, I learned and, and, and, it's extremely important for commissioners to understand, and you. Know, y'all, you know, you make up your own minds on this, but I never want to second guess residents, we're not buying. We're not deciding to buy the property. You're deciding on whether you should pose this to the residents. And you're you're you're you're kind of second guessing that maybe the residents aren't as smart as you. And all this list of projects that we have to do you think that'll ever end? It'll never end. Last year we went through $40 million worth of projects and the sky was falling . Then, you know, long term, funding all this other stuff. I can't do this in good conscience and stuff like that. Well, you know what? Every year it's going to be the same thing. And. And maybe after a huge storm, it'll get worse. But the one thing I do know is that the river channel is a key to the city's future and its waterfront and I'm not willing to gamble with that. I think we got to the point, I was very critical of the future boards of being penny wise, pound foolish, of not buying the property when they had an opportunity. And we went through the negotiation and, with Mr. Stamos and he came up with a price and then we basically said, okay, that's unaffordable. But then all of a sudden we finished our our river dredging, and then all of a sudden, well, well, what about the future? You know what we know we've got to do the, the recreational channels. We've got to do all this stuff. So it's not just the main channel, it's the recreation channels and all these alternative approaches of this of, of removing the soil and disposing of it have gone through before we actually went and leased this property, taking it out to the Gulf and dumping it out there and things of that nature, that was just not feasible for the channel, the Inland Channel. So I'm not going to I from myself. I'm not going to tell the residents I know better than them, if a person wants to buy a house because he he because he just likes it, fine. If he wants to stay. Well, I love it. It's perfect, but I don't like the fact that it's got a porcelain sink instead of a, you know, a stainless steel sink. Therefore, I'm not going to buy it. Despite everything else, I think that we listed a whole number of, of, it wasn't just the, the tank, but there was another, issues with the solar panels, the fact that it was adjacent, to the row plant. We've got the trail passing through there. There's a whole litany of things that could be utilized on this project. And just like the 1.8 acres, this is I see this as the same way. The city has no property at the sponge docks. None. We start losing parking lots down at the sponge docks. We're dead. The city loses the channel because we don't have a place. And we're in effective. And for whatever reason, there isn't any property available. And. And the other approach of, putting it on, on barges and taking it out to the Gulf and dumping it is, is somebody's going to pay for that. And it isn't going to be the Army Corps. The responsibility of disposing spoil material is the city of Tarpon Springs. The local sponsor? Not not the Army Corps. So somewhere along, they'll be happy to take the money to pay them, and they'll contract to have it done. But we're the ones that are going to have to come up with the money and so for me, I'm going to let I'm going to support letting residents decide. I think that's the fair thing. I think if the commission feels if individual commissioners feel strongly about these issues, then I think they need to share their views with the voter. And, whenever they're asked and, and let them, make their own decision. But I'm not going to gamble, in terms of the city's future, I'm not, you know, one thing. I'm an old guy. I may not be here when the dredging comes up again. At least the federal channel, but I may, and I'm not going to be sitting there, watching the, the, you know, the, the, gymnastics that people are going to have to go through to make that work again, because we had an opportunity to, to buy this property, even if it's $5.5 million, the property doesn't scare the price, doesn't scare me. It's the future of the city that scares me. We've worked hard to put in place plans, strategic plans, comp plan updates to make sure the city stays the way it is. And we do have challenges with the flooding and things like that. But an equal channel challenge is to maintain that river, which it's been, what, seven years now, eight years before we since we started on that effort that we just are finishing it up. So I want to me personally, I'm going to let this, I'm going to support letting the residents decide. And I'll have that discussion when they they ask me what I think about it, and I'll tell them the same thing I just said. But this business of worrying about projects and, long list of projects, that's never going to end for the city of Tarpon Springs. We always have to provide for our residents, Commissioner Eisner, thank you. Thank you for letting me go. So, there were a couple of things said, I know the projects will never die off, but some of the projects that, Commissioner Kuleana said, we've all been aware of. So I'm just glad he took the spear by having to announce it all, because these are all things that sit on our plate and keep us up at night, where we're getting the money from. So, I'm glad you brought that up. I do agree with you on that, the only correction , I think, and Bob Robertson will tell me that, it's not 3 million at the vault. I think it's 4.5 million at this point. So it's up another million and a half. But, I just don't feel comfortable making a decision without knowing what the stofers area is. I know they don't want to sell it, but we don't know if they won't sell it in two years. In five years and seven years. So we don't know that, we also don't know what the mavrommatis property is as well, because I asked that question and I didn't get we have nothing to compare it to, and I hate making decisions where it's this or nothing. So for me, I need to be able to have and make an educated decision making choices of knowing. Now, I'm not saying I don't want to support this. I'd like it to be cheaper so that it could be easier for me to say yes, but without, knowing what the other, you know, prices would be. I know it sounds far fetched to take barges and bring them out into the Gulf and dump them somewhere, but we're going to do that with the outer crossing, correct? I mean, that's that's what we're going to do with it. Well, I know it's just the flip side. You're not going to bring the dirt into the end of the channel to dump it. I know, so I know it's but I don't I don't know how much that costs as well. So unless I have, you know, ten on paper and I'll give the city manager the headache to try to get me these prices, I'd like to know how much it is. How many barges did we bring in? What would be the cost of bringing the product somewhere? What is the price of bringing it to Pasco County, as was mentioned or elsewhere? You know, I know the, the pluses and minuses of this. You know, the stamps property. I just don't know the pluses and minuses of the other. So it's this is to me, I hate being in a do or die. I need to have more information. And if we can hold off on making this decision, I'm not saying yes to it. And I'm not saying no to it, you know, if we get three people that say yes, I don't need to even vote, I just like to make my decisions getting all or as most of the facts as I could possibly have. Okay. I'd like to ask staff if we know, because I do not want a dump truck. Load of dirt would be how much you'd have to pay for that. You have any idea? Are you talking? What are you talking about? Hauling If he's going to be hauling, fill out of there. I'm wondering what that what? How much would be a retail value of that? I mean, I don't know, George. I, I'm just trying to find out because it does strike me as strange to pay more than the appraised value. And then lose some of the dirt as well. I, I totally agree with the mayor in that this is a needed project, but to me there's not enough I's and T's dotted and crossed, it bothers me, I think Commissioner Koulianos has brought up a point which tells me that as soon as we can, I know we're going through the budget process, but as soon as we can, we need to have a workshop and prioritize our priorities. Because it's obvious we've got a lot on the table. I believe that the funding can be made available, but can be and will be are two different things to me. We need to we need to map those things out. I, I feel like we're rushing, but then I don't because I know this has been going on since the 90s that I know of. They've talked about buying property. So I it's a tough decision. It's a very, very tough decision for me. And but I'd like to know what, what a truckload of dirt is. I don't know that. But I can tell you, while this is a win for the state and the dirt, it's a win for us. And I'm talking about us not having to possibly clear that dirt off per our requirement of contract. You're not talking about it. You're talking maybe a couple hundred. I'm looking at Bob to shake his head. You're in the neighborhood of a couple hundred thousand or more. It's going to be saving us if the referendum goes through as opposed to that. We have to do by the September deadline of the contract to haul off. That's an expenditure to us that that that won't. If you're talking about the money and stuff, that's a saving. While it gives him dirt for his property, it's a savings to us. I want to play it now. If it doesn't pass the referendum, we're gonna have to go back in and haul the dirt and then pay that money. But it has a potential to save us, you know, a couple hundred thousand, at least of what we'd have to haul off from now to the end of September to meet our contract. So can you offer a little more information, originally, the plan was we were going to move all the dirt off. Yeah. Bob, you want to come up and explain that real Bob can come? The commission doesn't mind. Yeah, I think this needs a little. Just a little more explanation. Sure. Bob Robertson project administration department director. So the question is, you're trying to get a handle on on the cost of moving the material and whether it needs to be moved at all. Well, if we're going to give up two years worth of dirt, I want to know what what a retail value of that is. Well, and how or it's undefined. I don't know, George. How much is it? Well, for us, it's a bit tricky because we've we've removed sovereign submerged lands that's owned by the state of Florida. So it's not it doesn't have monetary value to us. We can't sell it. We can only reuse it for municipal purpose. So there's a trade off in the value as far as hauling costs I think, Tom, correct me, it's about 120 bucks a load for a 175 to move a load of 20yd■!T, 20yd■!T of in a dump truck, 18y. There's 60,000yd■!T of material out there. So it's a big expense to move that material, even if we were going to salvage it for ourselves. So to be able to leave it there without having to move it, without having to regrade it, it is a big advantage and savings to the city. We, we we've done this 3 or 4, 4 or 5 times that. I can remember in my lifetime here. So we've done basically a couple of hundred thousand or so every, every time we've done that. No. Remember the last dredging? Yeah. The land was given to the Kokolakis. We left it there because of the cost. That's correct. Yeah. Right. But I know we've done it in the past and we've paid money. I don't I think it's not as much as we're paying now, but then nothing as much as. Yeah. You know was and now is a big difference. But those are my, my things I, we do need to we should have done this a long time ago that quite frankly, kind of give me an idea. And that's what I wanted to know. All right. Commissioner Koulianos. Okay. Let's I this isn't about me, so I don't have to go into defense mode, I didn't say we shouldn't get the property. I didn't say that. We don't have a need for the property. What I said was that we have of if we're covering this with short term funds, we have other, other, higher priority items that that would require our short term funds. Now I think we need again, I, I just threw out there barges. I don't know what all the options. I'm not a, you know, I, I stayed in Holiday Inn Express. Maybe that makes me smart, but, I don't know anything about dredging and barge fees and how any of this works. It's not my bailiwick, but. But I want to be educated on those things, and I think we should have some conversation about what the options are. I have not seen a critical analysis of what all the options are with, the leftovers from from the dredging, to make a decision. And as far as, you know, going, there's a reason that things come here first before they go to referendum. It's not that we're we don't trust the residents, but the residents trust us that we know how we're paying for things. Before we put it on the on the referendum, most things on the referendum pass because they assume we've done our homework. Okay. So they trust it's they trust us. So again, I think if we have till August to make this call all that I think we should have a workshop. No, no no no, you don't have the August. What do we have. You do not have time. You again you have to do two referendum, two readings readings for the language of it, then the clerk's got it. We got to translate them into Spanish. There's a lot of work to do. You're asking for information that would take a month or two to get back, so you're not going to do it and be able to make Mr. Stamps as you know, November election. You could you could probably do it if it was going to be a march referendum, election. But you're not going to be able to we wouldn't be able to get that information back to you. Of all the information you're asking to make that decision, in time to have those two readings that we have to have statutory timing between and advertising, again, to make November, you know, we don't have a, we don't have a window. So again, I would be in favor of this if, if this was bundled with a long term, debt, instrument, not a five or even ten year debt instrument, I think it needs to be a long term debt instrument, that should actually be on the referendum along with this. If we were going to do that, let me ask Mr. Stamos if a question. Is under no. Is there any circumstance under which you would wait till the march? Election to have this on the referendum, well, I'd have to go back. You know, you guys asked last time you guys asked me to buy the property. I didn't come to you to sell it. I just. So last meeting that we had, you kind of approved moving forward with this to a degree. At least get the appraisals and get all the financing information together, etc. So I went to my family. We discussed it with the, you know, and the terms that we were going to, to, to ask that were important to us. And the in the contract. And of course, at that point we said November was what we wanted. We wanted, you know, to get it to November. That was made clear at the last meeting. I'd have to go back and ask if they were willing to, to do that. May I? Because we stopped our development plans basically to be able to accomplish getting in November on the property. I mean, we're halfway through development plans for the property. And, you know, when we were approached by the city to purchase it, possibly if we if we were to make a decision to purchase your property and we voted on the purchase of your property to go to referendum, but we waited till March, that would give us time to put to get our financing, available, all so that we could have both because they both need to be on the referendum. It needs to be buying the property and then how we're paying for the property. Can I offer something that may be a way out of this? It's a positive thing. Yes. We could do the short term financing for the purpose of purchasing the property. Then between now and March, we could do a long term financing package that would go to the residents at a march referendum, and may include some additional money that we might need for some of these other things that are going to flush out in terms of this budget process. That's a solution on. I mean, that would solve a problem, not a problem that would solve a question that you have that if you had a long range funding package, my issue is cash flow, right? My issue is cash flow. That would be something that, between yourself and Mr. Herring and the city manager can work out something for that would make you comfortable that we could hear. I don't know that. To me, it seems my, my concern is that we've got a. That's all I want to say. I don't want to cheat anymore. No, no, at the time, I just wanted. Let me ask. Let me ask Mr. Lewis in. Could could the language for the referendum include the, that the city intends to float a long term debt instrument? I think. I think that it's important whenever I think when there should be always two, there should be, two questions answered anytime something's on the referendum. And that is what do we intend to do with this property that we're buying? And then the other is, how are we going to pay for it? That's that's to me is critical to the residents, and if we don't put that language in, they assume we know how to pay for it. And in this case, we don't because we're the, the I what has been what is in our backup as the recommended, method of paying for this property. I can't go along with that. It's going to I think it's going to cripple us from being able to do any, any projects in the next couple years to have to have to cover $1.2 million in debt service. Is it possible to put language in the referendum that refers to that? Why doesn't the Commission make a motion to do that now, tonight and no, I'm asking about the language on on the referendum on 6 million. I don't I truthfully don't even know at this moment if we if essentially put it some sort of contingent that we're going to go long term public financing on that. So I, I would have to even research that. We're just saying that the city is going to pursue long term a long term financing. Again, talking to the same question. Yeah, I don't think so. No, I mean, I would have to like yeah, I don't know that, but I don't think so. But I have to I would have to even research that issue. But the thing but the so one of the problems in voting on it tonight, that's why I keep asking this question. Can this even be tabled till the next commission meeting or are we are we put that tight? Because if we can even push to the next commission meeting, we have time to go sit with Mr. Herring, do our research on on bonding and find out what's available and if and we can talk to because we have we have financial advisors that help us with putting together our long term bond, instruments. Now we have a we have a decent rating. So we probably have an ability. But I'd like to know that we could do that before we vote on buying something. That and turns out we can't do that. And we're stuck paying $1.2 million a year to that's going to I think is going to put us in a cash flow problem. So can we can this be tabled until the next commission meeting. Maybe. But let me let me the thing I don't understand that you're saying and that's what I'm trying to get my mind for everybody, actually, you're saying that it's not a viable approach to. To, first of all, we're not buying it, but the residents are going to have to approve that purchase, that we would move ahead with a short term. First of all, we know how we're paying for it. So it's not how we're there isn't any question how it's the proposal is, paying for it over five years, but you don't think it's a viable option, and you wouldn't want the flexibility of moving ahead with the purchase and then putting a long term financing package together, not just for this, but maybe something else that comes up. I mean, if we if we approve to do a long term financing for five point, whatever, $2.5 million to pay this thing off, I think that's cutting our nose off to spite our face, given everything else that we're talking about that may need some funding. And if you remember, last year's commission meeting, the budget meeting, we had that $40 million and we were talking in those terms as well. At that time, we haven't even gotten to that point this time. But I really envision if the hiccup on this thing is short term, five year financing and there's an opportunity to get that ten year plus through the residents in March, I would suspect that that would be the flexibility that we would go to, the other part of it is, can we defer this? Yeah, we could probably schedule not even involving Mr. Stamos schedule next commission meetings. Agenda so that we would we would, consider the, the, long term financing of this little research that you're wanting to do first. And if that's positive, then we could move to approve the contract. Is that sound along with I'm sorry, along with the first reading of the ordinance. Can we do it that way? Miss Jacobs, do you do you follow what I'm saying? I just don't let me try to be simple, because the thing I don't understand, we're going to have to pay for the property of Mr. Stamos in November. So, so the long term, I'm understanding how the long term is voted on the people in March affects how we pay Mr. Stamos in November. That that's what I'm having trouble understanding. No, I do, I'm just trying to get some some some solution or a, you know, an option to give. Mr. kuleana, I'm sorry, Commissioner Kuleana. A little bit of a comfort. I I'm fine with what we've got. I feel that there's always flexibility that we can do, once this moves ahead, the property is not purchased until the residents decide that it's going to be purchased. And then we're going to have to have the money within 90 days after the referendum. Is that correct? There was a 60 days. It's going to be December 30th, December 30th, which is almost two months to just a little less than 60 days. So between now and then and the budget will be over and you budget will be approved. And if there's any additional money, then we would do a long range, financing option. Anyway, I wanted to go. I'm sorry, I didn't mean one more point of information. Okay. Miss Jacobs, what is, a separate referendum cost on a on an item, it's not so much the cost. It's what the county can support. Okay. And being the November, the currently the only support the August, which is the primary, the November general election and our march, the March election, we cannot purchase a we cannot hold a referendum on an on a different date with that they won't allow won't support it. No Okay, Commissioner Coleus, you got anything else? No, I, I can't support unless we have I mean, we we're we're doing this thing. Okay. We haven't we haven't prioritized all of our spending needs. We haven't had that meeting where we're. I understand that, Mister Sammy's in getting this done by March, getting this done by November. It's putting us, you know, we're we're, like, in a, some crazy fire drill here to get this to buy this. It's not a I appreciate the, you know, keeping the water. We're we're not going to ever abdicate our responsibility to keep the water , ways free. It's not the only option. Like Commissioner, Eisner said, there's options. We haven't explored those options. I've seen. No, I've seen no study of how any of those options were explored. You know, we keep hearing we hear talk about the Mavrommatis property. That's that's a couple of million dollars cheaper. Cheaper. I don't know. And here we are making this decision. And the only thing we have in front of us is the short term financing, option, which I think, puts us. It puts the future boards in a bind in a cash flow bind, so, you know, if you know that for a fact, it gets us in a short cash flow, blind cash flow bind. You're going to take 1.2 million out of the. I'm just every time we. Yeah I don't know. I mean, I think Mr. Herring would say that we're getting into a cash flow bind if, if that was before you. I've had many talks with Mr. Herring. Pardon me. I've had many talks with him. He can tell you he and I have been, okay. Buddies on the phone for days over this. I'm. I'm stressed over it just as much as anybody else, but, you know, every time Mr. Herring, talks about buying something, he says, I'm going to get it out of the penny fund. Penny fund? The penny fund is. Gets us about $3 million a year. Okay And we use it for it's been the bailout for everything. Now, this 1.2 million is coming out of the penny fund. That's money we use. That's money we would use for all these things that I, that I, that I listed here. Not all the things. Okay, for the majority of them. So so it's just a cash flow thing right now . I'm having a hard time with it. So Commissioner Eisner, I don't come back to you, so, where did I have my figures here? They disappeared, I did want to do the math. On what Commissioner DiDonato had asked, and I think my calculator went blank, but it was close to $500,000 with the numbers that Tom function gave and the amount of, sand there. And so I did the calculations. It could be 5 or $600,000, 500, 600,000, the removal of the sand that's presently there. That's what it would cost the city. Correct Okay. So I know that's the question he asked. And we just moved on. So but in addition, I mean, I'm I'm also in somewhat of an agreement to what, Commissioner Koulianos is saying because, you know, I and I know what you're saying as well. So it makes in certain aspects, it makes sense to do this, even though it's being a squeeze, but, you know, I think there's a give and take to find out other venues before we make it. This is a big, big plunge. And I just hope that Mr. Stamos has and his family can can, you know, go ahead. I've got some other things to say, Commissioner. I'm sorry. Vice Mayor coleus. Yeah, just. I'm sure the residents can see right now. This is one of the harder decisions for us because, you know, we want to be able to use funds to take care of capital improvement projects that we have currently in our pipeline, but we also see an opportunity for long range planning that really has come up recently. And so, it's a tough decision and we have to decide, you know, if we do let the voters come to that decision, it is up to the voters. But we all up here did advise the city manager to reach out to the Stamos family and come up with numbers, and we have them in front of us. And yes, I'd like to do more projects that, as Commissioner Callahan has stated , but I also understand the long term planning aspect of it, too. And that's our job to try to balance it all and, you know, this is a decision that goes to referendum, it does solve a long, a long range planning issue. And we've seen that it took potentially 7 to 8 years to as Commissioner Koulianos and the mayor said, two prior boards that helped get this, dredging started again. And so, so, this is a, you know, as a term that's, that's stated. This is a tree planted that will provide shade for future generations. And so, so, if there is a need to have a special session or come back with more information to help ease their minds, I'm for it. As far as the new city attorney that's going to start working tomorrow, is will they be handling this acquisition or is that Mr. Saltzman? I would say Mr. Saltzman, since he's the one working on the contract and. Okay, okay. And so, if there's any more information that they're requesting to help make their decision then to be brought forward, let's try to do it. But this is a balance of what's needed to get done now. And long range planning and I do think about future generations, and I'm sure prior boards have too. And so that that emblem right there, that emblem, that city seal, where you see right there, it's the river. It's, you know, that's our lifeline, that's our community. So we have to decide what how the voters are going to go for it. And so that's where I'd like to leave it. Two things, I want to ask, Mr. Robertson, if you can come up. Commissioner Iser, you got your light on again and, Commissioner, vice mayor, you don't need your light on anymore, okay? How much money have we spent on leasing this property? So we've spent about 130,000, the other remaining up to 700,000 that, Commissioner Eisner said earlier was reimbursed to us by state grant. Had we not had that, we would have had to spend about if we didn't have a state grant, what would it cost? About 700,000. We would have spent about 700,000 total in leasing the property. Okay. And okay. So thank you. Yes, sir, let me let me just say again, it's the residents that are going to be deciding this between now and, no November. And there's ample opportunity to come up with some solutions. What I know the residents put us here to solve problems, to make policy and solve problems. This is a problem. And to me, it's critical as anything else. Now, voting to purchase the property with short term financing, which is the solution. That's that's the real solution. That's what we have. That's an option. That's what we're doing tonight. But that doesn't mean that's what we have to do. By the time, you know, not necessarily. We don't have the time because of another, referendum that we would have to do for beyond ten years, which can be done in March. So between now and March, if this short term funding, which would be the cash flows, you're concerned about, was an issue and along with some other things that we have needs for, I'm sure that would be something that there would be ample time for, the finance director along with the city manager, to come up with a recommendation to say, okay, this is something that's going to cost us, $6.4 million money out of pocket over the five years, if we do long range finance thing, it would cost us a little bit, but I know what you're saying. It wouldn't be that we would be paying $1.2 million a year. It would be something less over ten years per year, that sort of thing. I know what you're getting at, so. But that's an option as well for me. It's a bird in the hand. We worked hard with the stamps family to get it to where it is. It is what he feels it's worth, and he's told me a number of times it's worth to him a lot more than the five and $5.25 million. And quite frankly, if the residents decide that it's too much for whatever reason, then that's the end of the story. But I just don't want to say, we're making this decision. And then in ten years from now, we don't have a solution for dredging the river or it's going to cost us, you know, 3 or $4 million or whatever. It's going to cost us. And then the residents are going to be saying the same thing I did this last time. What are you guys doing? You've had another chance to buy the property and you didn't want to, you know, you don't get didn't give anybody a chance to do it. It's the same old story. We just, you know, somebody once said Miss Durham said the food truck that the city keeps getting in the way of itself sometimes. And this is one of these examples that I think we're wringing our I don't think it's being irresponsible at all. We found a funding solution, I haven't not heard one peep from the city manager saying that this is going to stretch us thin for what the plans are, there is another approach that if this is uncomfortable for some commissions, once this thing gets approved to go to for referendum, we can start as part of the budget process, a long term funding. Solution, not just for this, but any other money that we're going to need. So I don't understand, you know, we're always going to have problems. We're always going to have projects, and we're always going to have the river to dredge. We're always going to have the recreational rivers, the channels to dredge and add. This is a bird in hand, and we've got we're talking about two birds in the bush. Well, maybe this and maybe that. I've heard that so many times in the past that I've heard that so many times in the past that, you know, I'm actually really tired of it. So anyway, Commissioner Eisner, you put your light on again. Yes. I just have one last thing to say, you know, I'm listening to what everybody's saying, and everybody's making good points. The problem that comes into play when we pass a referendum, we usually pass a referendum with a very positive, spin on what we're referendum, you know, and there's been, you know, it's not that the public doesn't understand band or they're not as in tuned to what we do, the bigger problem, I think I'm hearing on this board is that it's up to us to try to be the momentum and the motivation to explain to the residents why this is good, and yet I have a good group of people here that haven't, other than yourself, that I'm not a good person. I know that's not what I said. I know I'm teasing you. I'm. That's okay, I don't have a clear cut way to explain to a resident why they should vote for this referendum, when I'm sitting here saying, I don't know if I could vote for this referendum, that's the big issue. There's the unknowns we spoke about. There's the rush of this. You know, I mean, I have no crystal ball and nobody's brought this up. But I'm going to bring it up. We're watching the housing market was going up, up, up, up, up. Now the housing market is frozen and going down, down, down, and that's just across the whole United States. So we don't know if this property will go up in price. It will go down in price. We don't know if it's built upon. Will all of those houses that are being done? I mean, it's a lot. I'm just saying, man, hit by a Cat five storm. I mean, it's like I can give you a thousand reasons of this and that. Yeah, but I can't give one reason to the public other than the fact of. We need this. Okay. So that's what I say. We need this for dredging. But what happens, you know, if they say, well, is it worth five? Whatever And that's where I draw the line and go, well, you know, that's what the price is. You know, I know when I go to the store, there are certain things. I walk down the aisles and go like that, but I'm not buying it. It's just too much money. Water you need, I followed this is water. It's not food that maybe you need or you don't. This is water. This is the lifeline of the city that we're. I understand all that, okay? I just don't have. I don't have the answers. Right now to give to the public of why. Why other than what we've discussed that this is something that they should agree to. That's my. Let me let me ask. Miss Jennings was on the marine Commerce Committee. She's been waving at me. I don't want to be rude, does the commission support a waiver of the rules to go back to public comments? I'm okay with that. Mr. Jennings, please come forward. But we want you to stand for at least another 45 minutes. If you don't. Okay. I mean that with love. I made an appointment with my pain doctor Joan Jennings, 2204 Pine Drive, as the mayor indicated, I was on the Marine Commerce Commission in 2016. And I think if you go back and look at the minutes in the records of the, findings of that committee, you will find answers to a lot of your questions, the chair of the committee was Pandalai. Klonaris. And I know at the time, he and the city manager just schlepped all over Tarpon Springs looking for appropriate, spoil sites, a recommendation was found for the same as property and was suggested to the board at that time to purchase it, and they chose not to. They chose to lease it. So now you guys might be falling into the same pitfall. The other thing that committee did was to prepare an economic impact statement that showed the value of the river, a navigable river, to the community, and it was impressive to say the least. We just honored Therese family. They're a water dependent, you know, family business. Duckworth who I learned just recently retired, was another one. So much of Tarpon Springs depends on that river and the navigable ability for commerce and recreation to go in and out of the river. One of the things I learned in the Coast Guard Auxiliary is also that tarpon is a safe harbor. It's the only safe harbor between Tampa Bay and Apalachicola. So when you're talking cat, whatever hurricanes , if there's any shipping out in the Gulf that needs a safe harbor, they can come to Tarpon Springs. If the river's shuttled over, they're out of luck. All right. There's so many reasons why this should be done. And as indicated to, it's in the charter and according to the studies or what was done in the past. And if you know me, you know I don't like to linger on the past. I like to look forward . But the last dredge was done in 1998. And one of the reasons this current dredge was so complicated and cost so much money, it's like cleaning your house. If you let it go, it's going to be harder to do, and it's going to be a lot more expensive. So we have to start thinking about doing a dredge on a more regular basis and to keep that river open. And, you know, if you want to tell the residents that, you know, as a reason for all of this, you know, and that committee exhausted things like, you know, you know, taking things out and dump trucks. This was done eight years ago. And it just fell by the wayside. So maybe one of the ideas that you may have is before you have a special section or a work study is go back and look at what that committee found. You know, you know, Julie, was just up here. She was on the committee there were people who had water based businesses that were on that committee. And you know, they knew what they were looking at. They knew the value of a navigable river to their businesses and their families. Maybe if you go back and see what they found, you may too. Thank you. Okay. Is there anyone else that, has a public comment that did not get up beforehand that would like to say something? Now. Katie Taylor, 1991 Douglas Lane, Tarpon Springs. I wasn't going to speak tonight, but after hearing all of this about the stammers property. Kudos, Mr. Stammers, you're a very astute, smart businessman. I congratulate him because for the last 20 years, sounds like y'all been leasing this property back and forth. You've had many chances to buy it because Joan just said that you had a chance to purchase it earlier, but now Commissioner Koulianos just ran through a whole list of things that you don't have budgeted for. Thank you for putting the splash park down there. Although it's on the bottom of the list. Thank you. Because those are children we're talking about in our community that you just told me you don't have money to even do the splash park. Thank you, Commissioner Eisner, for trying to give you options to do to check other means that you might be able to accomplish this goal without having to pay above market price. Sound like you, the property you're paying 500, five, $5 million. The property is valued at less than that, and I kudos to him again for charging you more for the property because he what he would have lost if he sold it. He's losing money by selling it to you. So he's charging you in advance for something that he hasn't even gotten. I don't know if he'd have made for it yet, but he's getting paid for it, so. But what I'm what I'm trying to say is I'm all for. Because y'all are very smart men. Y'all know what you're talking about. I take it because I'm putting my trust in you. But my concern is community, community, community. We got children with playing in a park that's 100 degree weather. All we asking for is a couple of water to pop out the ground and pour it over their head to cool them off, but you're telling me you don't have the money, but now you got $5 million that you want to spend on property that you might use once or twice in the next 15 years. But the bayou, when I go around the bayou, the bayou is flooding you can see the water all over the sidewalk. You don't even see the sidewalk. You just said the sponge docks is backing up. So and I go down there and eat at Johnny's. I like I like going to the sponge dock. That's my favorite place to go to get my tourists on, but it's really think about community. I might be talking about the splash park because the splash park is my passion. So if you find the money to buy Mr. Simmons property, I hope you can find the money to address the list that Commissioner Koulianos just presented to you. Thank you. But what people need to also understand. Thank you, Miss Taylor. What people need to understand is that river represents a certain, like a $260 million worth of revenue each year in terms of this area for businesses and things and, a lot of that revenue, the taxes from that is used to pay for things like splash parks and things. Penny for Pinellas. So if that revenue goes away, we can talk about all these nice things which are always going to have to be they're always going to have to be done. They're never going to go away. They're always will be a need to do something here in the city. Last year we came up with $40 million for everything that we needed. We talked about the same type of financing that we're talking now. I this is just one of those projects. So, Commissioner Koulianos. Again no one is, under, considering the importance of the waterways. Okay. Nobody's doing that. So I appreciate Miss Jennings getting up and talking about the importance of the waterways. None of us are arguing that the waterways aren't important, we and we don't have to go through our lineage to express that. So I think we can quit arguing that point. The point is the this piece of property and the funding of this piece of property and the operational, cash flow of the city. So like I said at the beginning of my little diatribe, I'd love to have this piece of property. I think it has it. It's obviously useful for what we've been doing with the dredging. It's right next to our other property that it's adjacent. That's B great to have that expansion. It would be great to have the, the, the solar farm, which is a near and dear to my heart and, and so forth and so on, I just want to find, we need to address and again, we're doing all this, and I and I'm not it's his property has every right to do what he wants. We're doing this because we're under an artificial deadline of meeting this, November referendum. Because the owner won't wait till March. Where? Maybe we could have a financing idea that also we sit down together and have our workshop, our special session where we sit down with all these items, prioritize them, because, again, we could go, it's not about going $5 million in debt. I'd be willing to go $30 million in debt if we were addressing these big issues in a long term, bond issue, because if we went 30 years on a $30 million project that addressed the Craig Park seawall, that addressed, the Beckett Bridge issue, that really took care of the sponge docks where we really could, could put our efforts into that, it's not about it's not about that, but it but that cash flow, that 1.2 million that is in this proposal takes from the spending we have now. So if we could have a and again, I ask the question of Mr. Seamus, if he could wait, he said he could talk to his family. He can this wait one week until we could see what financing arrangements we can make. And we also need to sit down and talk about what are what are the items. I'm not I don't want to go do research on a, $20 million, 30 year bond if we don't even know what we're spending the money on. Okay? I mean, so again, let me let me let me finish, please, so can we at least compromise? I think it's important that we go forward, in a unified fashion. If we're going to put this on the referendum, I think it's important that we as a board, like Commissioner Eisner says, aren't confusing. If we can't get it together here, it's going to be difficult for the for the residents. Let me please, let me finish. Please let me finish. You're frustrating, but just just relax. How many conversations have you had with me during your life? We're friends. You know how they go. Go ahead. Okay, so. So let's. So if we could at least have an agreement on a, on a, some workshop, some special session where we sit down, put our priorities together, which would include this property, even if we go ahead and vote to put it on the referendum tonight, we still can. I'd like to, before we got to November so that we can answer the questions that, Commissioner Eisner was saying. When the citizens ask us, how are we going to pay for it, we can at least say, okay, we've addressed it. And like, Miss Taylor said, we've also addressed your a lot of your immediate needs as, say what you said, just a little bit of approve the to purchase the property on the condition that we pursue long term funding. Know that we have that we agree to a, a special session workshop where we're going to sit down and incorporate this into our priority list and then pursue how we will fund it. So we can answer that question before November on that referendum. We need to be able to answer that question to the citizens, to the residents that we know how we're paying for this, because right now, paying for it over five years, it's coming out of our immediate need of money to fund all the projects that I mentioned here. But listen to what you're saying. I mean, I agree, you're saying we're going to fund it for 5.2, but then you're wanting to do long range planning, which was what I'm saying. Okay. Agree to the 5.2. Let's do the five. The long range funding. We may have to do a 5.2, you know, five year note just until we get to March, you can't go. You can't go get a bond issue for $5 million. No, no, no, it's a misunderstanding. What I'm saying. So we have to we have to have a bigger if we're going to go for long term, it has to have a bigger unless. Unless we agree. Unless we unless we agree to a long term. Let me ask, the, our finance director. Not yet. Let me ask some more questions. Not yet. Okay. Because it's a real simple listen, let me put it in simple terms, because I don't know if I'm putting in simple terms because y'all got my head spinning too much. We have to address this and address the November election. And it puts 1.2 million out of our penny for five years. So you do that and then you work for March. If you're looking for you work for March and the March election because whatever you do, the bond for 5 million, 10 million, 15 million, 20 million, that makes up for the shortfall that the 1.2 million is going to do. And you could do that in March, and you could do this in November. If you want to, if you want this project because but you can't. We're in the middle of budget time and we have got so much going on, we can't bring this together in 2 or 3 weeks. All the stuff you it's impossible to put put it on there stuff. But if it's a shortfall then you make up that shortfall with the money to finance all those projects. You talk about a shortfall in a march, you know, you identify your projects. Those projects are 20 million, whatever a million is. These are our priorities, ten projects. And then the meantime, Ron has plenty of time to work with the finance, the bonds, what type of bonds you can do, what you're going to do. And then it would go to the March referendum, and then we solve the shortfall before we even go into it. We've got the one loan out there, but we solve that. So I don't know what that would be. The approach. That's basically what I'm saying. Okay. I mean, so, do you have anything else? Okay. Commissioner, Eisner had his light on. Then I'll come back to you. Vice mayor. Go ahead. Mike. So my question is, Bob. This $525,000 to remove the sand is that what was taken out of the river? This dredge. Okay, let's get this straight. But we got these numbers going around. It's not 500. It's not. It's not 500,000. Right $500,000. And we're talking about what's your question about my question was we said it was going to be 60,000 cubic feet. And you had, 175 per so I figured that up to be $525,000 to move this sand. Is that sand? Was that the sand that we took out of the dredge? Yes Okay. So I am following my own thinking. Well I just I love the price is different than Bob. Well, that number isn't where it's just for excavating and moving sand. That's exactly what I was looking for. That's that small part. Okay so, when you take that number and put that into. And I know there's other we have to purchase some other property, we may have to desalinate it. I know about that, but you're talking about having ten dredges out of that price of just moving the sand. So I'm just running math. My way. And it works. It works. At least it works for me. Just all play along for a few minutes, so when you have that kind of, you know, funding, then you have to say, well, you could be making an offer for the stuff of project. You could be making an offer for the mavrommatis. And I'm not so sure Mr. Stamos wouldn't come back to, you know, sell it down the road. You know, I understand, I know I saw your plans halfway done for building it. I understand, I understand, you know, all I'm saying is it's a lot of money, and, I would just love to know another offer, something to compare it to. That's all. I'm going to go to Vice Mayor Kolody. Then we need to call the question. Get on with the rest of the meeting, vice mayor. Yeah, sure. I think it's important for if the finance director or administration, project administration with the purchase of this property, have a negative influence on the capital improvement projects that we have currently listed for this year and next year. And you know, that just potentially mean that we would have to rearrange some of the priorities within those capital improvement projects for the next year or two. Ron. Good evening. Ron Herring, finance Director, yes. I mean, we got to reallocate the projects and see which ones we're doing and pending, you know, with the financing for this, you know, as a commissioner, Koulianos had the list of projects that are out there that, you know, what's going on with cops, you know, the cops and kids building, renovating the old one, Orange Street construction, river and bayou dredging. So, yes, I mean, it all fits together within the penny fund, trying to, you know, balance it out and fund those projects. Okay And so, yeah, I remember the Orange Street design was something that was done prior to this original board. So, these capital improvements projects do take time, I just wanted to ask those questions and, have the residents a better understanding from staff's perspective when given this information to move forward. So thank you. Okay I'm going to ask for a city attorney, Lewis. Go ahead. Yeah. Just just quickly just, depending. I know your your honor. Mr. Mayor, you're going to call the question, but ultimately, depending on how the vote goes, you will still need to give guidance to Mr. Saltzman and the city manager, if you vote to approve it in regards to the different issues. I mean, that's that is also because right now, listening to the conversations, I don't think there's a clear answer whether or not it'll be approved. But if it is, if it does, at least go that way. If it comes to a comes to the vote, there's the staff is still getting staff would still need guidance as to those separate issues that Mr. Licorice actually brought up. I just wanted to just wanted to restate that point. Thank you. Okay. So, thank you. May I have a motion again? You know, if you don't want to vote. No, but it's got to be an affirmative motion. May I have a motion to approve purchasing the property and allow the city manager to sign the purchase agreement, pending referendum approval by the residents, with, allowing the, the purchase price of $5,250,000, the, minor items that the city manager will take care of. But then the two items that were of significance were the $525,000, deposit, to be paid if the referendum is approved, as a hedge that the city does not close on the property. And, and then, I the other item would be to allow the, current owner of the property be to remove excess dirt from the property after closing, for a period not to exceed two years. And then with that, the lease will be modified to remove the requirement on the city's part, I believe, to, what if the referendum is approved to, to, to establish the property in the condition that it was before we started the driven charging project? May I have a motion to that effect? And the release of the claim about compensation and then the release of claim of, taking, condemnation, eminent domain of the property. That would be, page 13, item 9.2, may I have a motion to, approve in a second based on those conditions? So moved. Is there a second? Second? Okay, roll call, please. Hold on. I like, some discussion. If there's. And we have a motion, we can have a discussion. Go ahead. So let me ask, let me ask Mr, herring a question. Can can he come forward? So, Ron, when you when you looked at the five year deal, is did you talk to the bank about that? No, I just talked to our financial advisor for the city. So what about did we can go up to ten years? Correct Correct. We can go up to ten years without going out for referendum, which would reduce that debt service from the 1.2 million a year to about 625,000 a year. So we can cut the cash flow, burden on the city in half if we. And without going to referendum. Correct. But you need to explain, Ron, what the consequences of the penny and the use of the penny after five years. Why we're we're going to the five years. Because that's all we're guaranteed for the penny when you go off the five years and the other time, you may not have a funding if the next penny don't pass has to be renewed. Yes, but that's a risk we would take. That is that is correct. And plus we did the five years to lower the total interest cost on the financing. Yeah I understand the interest, but we've never but the penny funds never been denied. Correct It's in its fourth ten year term right now. It's always passed overwhelmingly. But there's no guarantee right. You could do it where it's also backed by the other governmental fund revenues, not just the penny fund. You can do that. It's called a covenant to budget and appropriate but not property tax money. But every all the other general fund revenues would be backing it along with the penny fund. But if we found no other, if we didn't pursue anything long term, we didn't go to any kind of bond issue. We could go to a ten year, with the only risk is that the penny fund doesn't get, re-approved, which it's always been approved. And then at that, at least we be cutting the debt service in about half, which would free up about $600,000 a year that could be used for other, other purposes. Right? Correct. Okay So can we have an understanding that we pursue that as a as as Ted Lee's free up cash flow for the next, you know, yes. Years. Can we at least get can we have that compromise. And we have time for that. Because really we just have to be able to pay him in November, in November, December. So. So yeah, can I know it's not part of the motion, but can I get an understanding from the board that they would be okay with pursuing it over ten to include that in the motion, that we would love it in the motion we would pursue. So amended. Okay. And then that would free up at least free up 600,000 a year from our, yes, our obligation, and give us some cash flow, a little bit of, you know, loosening the tie. I'm very proud of you. Okay. The only thing is, I wish you would have thought of that an hour ago. Oh, that's all right. So things don't always come to my mind that. That's good, hey, hey, that's all right. All. All that ends well. I mean, all that, well, this is a really important thing we're doing. And if it takes an exhaustive amount of time to go through it, i.e. the next item on the agenda. No, no, number 13, but, the this this is this warrants, the time and the effort. And for us to go through this kabuki dance is important. Okay. So if can we incorporate that into the motion we have. Okay. Thank you. Mr. I'm sorry, Commissioner, I'll second that motion. This motion and I'll, I'll re second. And, Vice Mayor. Amended his motion. Okay. That's clear to you. Is that correct? He can put it in, start putting it together tomorrow. That can. All right. The finance is just the finance. He can do that tomorrow. And is there any other commissioner comment before we go to roll call? Roll call please. Commissioner DiDonato. Yes, Commissioner Collins. Yes, Commissioner. Eisner. Yes. Vice mayor. Kolody Yes, mayor. Vatikiotis. Yes. I was half tempted to vote no just to be all right. Argumentative. But I wish to, thank the commission. I know it, you know, I I'm, I'm exact. You know, honestly, I'm really, really, just feel good about this. And because this is something that 25 years ago, the first river dredging, we should have had the foresight to do something like this. And the last commission, when I first became actually before I came on the commission in 2019, we were talking about this and it was like deaf ears. And we had the same sort of argument back then. But the property was worth 1 to $2 million. I mean, we could have bought it for 1 or $2 million back then. Point of order. We spoke enough about this. Could we move on? Yeah. And Miss, Miss Jennings, I don't know if you're still there. Thank you very much, and, Commissioner Koulianos, I apologize for interrupting you, but, you are frustrating sometimes. Love has never having to say you're sorry. All right. Thank you. Thanks, John. All right, we need a break. It's 905. Thank you, we, we're going to recess at 905 and reconvene at 915. Thank you all. I dated myself. Is that everything is clear themselves because, you know. Yeah, because you all voted to go ahead and it's okay for the. Sleep. I don't want to. Lead you to sleep like all of us . Yeah, I think it's much of an issue. Commissioner. That's going to be coming in here pretty soon, we're reconvening at 917, what? I'd like to ask the commission is to, move that. We waive our rules of procedure so I can kind of cherry pick some of these items and get most of the people that are here done so we can let them go home, and then we'll pick it up in order from there. So we have a motion to waive the rules of procedure for that reason. So moved sir. Second I'll second a roll call please. Commissioner Commissioner DiDonato. Yes Commissioner. Cooley. Yes, Commissioner. Eisner. Yes, vice mayor. Cool. Yes. Yes. Mayor. Vatikiotis. Yes. We're going to start with Miss Vincent on the on the resolution 2024 dash 15. Mr. Lewis, if I can ask you to read the resolution by title, please. Yes Resolution number 20 2415, a resolution of the city of Tarpon Springs, Florida, relating to community redevelopment pursuant to chapter 163, part three, Florida Statutes. The community Redevelopment Act, making a legislative finding that conditions of blight as defined in the Community Development Redevelopment Act exists in the Central Tarpon Springs Study Area, requesting that the Pinellas County Board of County, Pinellas County Board of Commissioners, delegate delegate. The redevelopment powers enumerated in the Community Redevelopment Act to the City of Tarpon Springs for the establishment of the Central Tarpon Springs Community Redevelopment Area, requesting authority from the Pinellas County Board of County Commissioners to establish a tax increment Financing District and a redevelopment trust fund within the central Tarpon Springs community Redevelopment Area, declaring a need for a community Redevelopment Area Agency providing authorization to proceed with preparations of the Central Tarpon Springs Community Redevelopment Plan and providing for an effective date. Okay Miss Vincent, thank you, Rene Vincent, planning director. I'm going to go through this, presentation, everybody but Commissioner DiDonato seen this already, so I'm going to go fairly quickly, so what we're asking you to do tonight is to approve resolution 2024, Dash 15, adopting or finding that there is a, adopting the finding of necessity for the central Tarpon Springs CRA, the boundary is generally, the study area contains about 787 acres, generally bounded by Live Oak and the Pinellas Trail to the north, US highway 19 to the east, the city landfill property and the Stonehedge mobile home park to the south, and the existing CRA boundary to the west, importantly, this is a the, we want to, have a tiff district, the tax increment financing district that does not raise taxes. It keeps the existing taxes in the area and collect and brings the Pinellas County tax revenue into the, funding mechanism, this is just the state criteria. I won't dwell on that, this is enabled by state legislation, we have to have a positive finding of at least two of now, 15, findings, 15 blighting factors. We right now are, demonstrate at least nine of those, again, blight is a statutory definition. It's not to take anything away from the area. We do recognize, the value of this area to the city, and this is why we want to have the CRA to preserve that, there's also Pinellas County criteria that will have to be, part of the evaluation. This is the county, what the county uses to determine their funding level, and their contribution to the Tiff and the length of the tiff. So this is just a highlight, a high level slide on the process. Tonight we if we adopt the finding of necessity, it has to go to the Pinellas County. They must approve it. They will delegate authority certain of those powers to, to, plan for the area. We have to develop a plan and then and only then can we get the trust fund established, some of the things that we can do with the CRA, we can do grants for various types of, programs, code compliance, facade improvements, home improvements, and then we can fund a whole host of capital projects, street improvements, sidewalks, water, sewer, parks and recreation facilities. We will be required to have a CRA advisory committee as part of the, Pinellas County's requirements, and that will be a board that will directly provide directed, advisory and advisory capacity to the Board of commissioners as the redevelopment agency, I've already discussed we have at least nine of the 15 blight factors. We do think, by our estimation, that we would qualify for the maximum funding from Pinellas County, the maximum TIF contribution of 95% and the full 20 year funding and just, our preliminary estimates for the first five years would generate approximately $1.2 million of revenue. That's based on an annual property tax increase of 3% on average, we did, publish this, notice in the as per state statutes in the Tampa Bay times. And we provided, notice via registered mail to all the required taxing authorities. So our recommendation is to adopt resolution 2014, Dash 15, approving the finding of necessity, and then we will continue the public engagement process to develop, the redevelopment plan. And we will essentially, there will be a bit of a holding pattern waiting for Pinellas County to, review and adopt the finding of necessity and delegate those additional authorities for us to plan for the area. We don't realistically expect that until fourth quarter of, of 2024, so in the meantime, we can begin the, you know, the plan process internally, working with me, perhaps, you know, seeking out people to be on the advisory committee, and, and work on those things in the interim. So with that, I'll stop and answer any questions that you might have. Okay Let me go to, public comments. Are there any public comments concerning this? This is the finding of necessity for the establishing the central tarpon CRA central, which is predominantly the, north I'm sorry, South, South central, Tarpon Springs, abutting us 19. Is there any public questions, public comments concerning this? Mr. Jump, any remote access comments ? I would like to make a public comment. Please raise your hand and you'll be allowed in to talk . And we do not have any raised hands at this time. Okay. Commissioners. Anybody comment on this? This is all straightforward. Go ahead, vice mayor. Just happy to support this. And if this does come to fruition, be great. Funding opportunity and for facades and for all those houses in those neighborhoods. So happy to support it. Thank you. Miss Vincent, we're talking about still about a year from now or a year or so plus. Okay. So it'll be somewhat of a new commission. I'll be dealing with us, but at least we're getting the ball moving in that direction. Yes we are. Finally, if there's no more , if there's no further comments from Commissioner roll call, please. You have to have a motion. Oh. I'm sorry. Yes. Go ahead. Motion to approve resolution. Resolution 2024, Dash 15, is that correct? Second. Yeah. I'll second it second. Roll call, please. Commissioner DiDonato. Yes, Commissioner. Collins. Yes, Commissioner. Eisner. Yes, vice mayor. Coleus. Yes. Mayor. Vatikiotis. Yes Okay. Let's go. People in the audience or 12 and 13, that's what we go back to. 12 and 13. Let's go to number 12. The new cops and kids center. City manager, of course. Yes. Bob Robertson will come up here. What we're asking for is the final approval to go to the design, we've got the design, budgeted, the location, the confirmed location. That was the majority. The large majority of the citizens of the community wanted. So we're at the step now to move forward. It's got Arpa money involved. So we want to get it started within the timeline. This is for the design. Hopefully we're going to use that design to have a better opportunity to gain grant funding, that we're going to try to achieve the design is going to be very helpful when they see what we're doing. So Bob, just pick up the pieces shortly and, explain the item. We'll do. So I'm Bob Robertson, project administration department director for the city. I'll give a brief staff report and presentation as as city manager asked also here tonight for questions. Robin Read, executive director of Tarpon Springs Housing Authority. I have the architects, Ram Venkat and John Bryant with me and Tom Burke from Stantec for questions as well. We're here tonight to follow up on the board's request back in February to bring this, the final site selection for the new proposed cops and kids building for approval since the February meeting, we've worked with architect and stakeholder team to complete additional due diligence on the two site finalists, site one and two, which I'll point out in a second. Here, we're recommending proceeding with full design on site one. I'll briefly highlight the differences here. In summary, site one here is the one that's closest to the existing facility, it can be built under existing zoning, whereas site two, which is this one here, closer to, Mount Moriah Church. That one would require a zoning change, back to site one. It's in close proximity and direct line of sight to existing cops and kids facilities. Site two is further away. And just to point out again, the existing facilities are here. This is Harrison Street and distance. Sorry I didn't give you some perspective there. Site one would require relocation of the existing tennis court. You can see it's basically being built on the site where the tennis court is, site two would not existing tennis court remain where it is, site one is close to existing utilities. No lift station or force. Main would be required, whereas site two, excuse me, site two is further away and would require a lift station and a force main. And finally site one received strong support from the community and stakeholders and by a margin of 10 to 1 over over site two. So as a result, we're recommending approval of site one from the board to let us move forward with the design. Our architects are prepared to proceed, with that design and that's, is concludes my summary, Mr. Mayor. Okay Let's go to public comments. Are there any public comments on the proposed location for the Cops and Kids Center? Zeb Atkinson 621 East Orange. Where is the tennis court going to move to in option I guess. Option one you said you'd like me to. Is that the tennis court right there? Yeah So if we did site one, the tennis court will be relocated here in the area behind the outfield. Oh, okay. I couldn't tell what it was from back there. I play tennis, so I've been over there before playing tennis. All right. Thanks Are any other public comments? Miss de? Juliana de 413 East Oakwood. How would you get to the tennis courts, sir? Okay, if the tennis courts, you could either park at the existing parking on the over by where the, recycling is now, or potentially along the street on Harrison as people typically do now to use the tennis courts. So they have to walk through the baseball field to get to the tennis court. That's what you're saying. You have to walk around the outside of the trail. Going to be around will be a walkway. Yeah, okay. There's a trail there. There'll be a sidewalk that there will be you will put a trail there. Yes There'll be a sidewalk that runs the entire length of the outfield so you can access it from either direction. Okay. So from the parking lot, how would they access the. You would put a sidewalk going there, yes. Okay. What are you going to do to make the dumpster area more, attracted? Yeah, because it's very if you ever go by that dumpster area back there. Oh, I think you're talking messy, nasty and everything else. Yeah, I think you're talking about the existing recycling area down here, right? Correct. Yeah. So that's something that have to be addressed separately. And I think Public Works has a plan to move some of that around. But that's not going to be part of this project. But it can be addressed okay, I'm in favor of site two, putting the center to the back end and not take away from the park. Thank you. That would be option two, Mr. Roberts. Is that okay? That's what she's saying. Yes, she she preferred site two here. Are there any other public comments? Katie Taylor, 1991 Douglas Lane I did attend that meeting at, cops and kids, but my question is going to be, when you put the building on site one, will it impede from children in the public access in that park anytime cops and kids are using the park? Park? No, it shouldn't, because you've got the parking. You still got the parking at cops and kids on on both sides, on the grass side and the one side of the building. It shouldn't have affect any more than the parking is for the present building. I mean, as far as the children. So if you have cops and kids, children out there on a break, during the course of the day and the children from the community want to be out there, will it hamper the children in the community from accessing the park? No. It make no difference to how it's going now. There'll be no change to how it is now. Okay. Thank you. Are there any other public comments? Okay. I also want to recognize, Miss Robin red is here tonight. Our executive director from the Housing authority. You can't see her. She's. She's not past the cameras. But anyway, thank you for being here this evening. Mr. jump, any remote access? Comments We do have a raised hand. I'll allow the first person in. Okay If you can state your name and address for the record. Good evening, Peter Lacus, 514 Ashland Avenue. I would highly recommend the board. Go look at the chart. Mr. Robertson put together. As far as the pros and cons, it site one definitely outweighs. But another thing I'd like to bring up as the children are mentioned , if you put the cops and kids in the back, you're splitting up the staff to have to. Man two basically separate areas. Whereas if you put the building where the front is, all of the cops and kids and the other activity is more able to be viewed and monitored by the staff of all those that would participate. As far as the tennis courts, as it mentioned, there would be a trail. The only thing I would recommend that in regards to that aspect that not only is there some landscaping as far as to create shade on that trail, but also some nice lighting. So that area is lit in the evening time around dusk or so. But as far as your obligation of the board, I think your best option is, option one. Thank you for your time. Okay. Anyone else? Mr. jump? And we do not have any other raised hands. Okay Commissioner. Comments, Commissioner DiDonato, you had your light on. I just have a concern, having played on those fields, the lighting on the tennis court, if we had a night game on softball, that could be a the lighting on the tennis court. Yeah. That would have to be constructed to not have a light that would obstruct the lights on the outfield. So you. I just want to bring that point out that you need to look at that because when the ball is coming down, all you see is the light and not a softball. Yes. Okay. So, Commissioner Eisner, how old are the courts, the tennis courts that are there now? I don't know, been there a long time. You know, I have no, I'm asking the other time, about eight years ago, eight years, he says. Well, I'm just asking that because, I mean, we'd be destroying it to move them to another location. Correct? Okay And I have to ask the next one, are we making one of these courts of pickleball? Not even broaching that right now? You wrote that later. I couldn't resist. Okay Any other, vice mayor? Yes Yeah. I think site one is the most important, including just keeping, all the children close together. I think the staff's done a great job in, addressing in many different factors. And if the community wants a pickleball court there, they'll be the ones to decide. We're not going to just put anything there without the their approval. So just wanted to state that and site one, and it's been a long time coming. And this is, just looking forward to it for those future generations. Thank you. Okay, if there's no further commission Commissioner Sequoia, did you getting ready to make a motion? Yeah Thank you. May I have a motion? And a second. So, moved second. That's to approve. What site? Site one to amend site one if you can include the to amend site one. Yeah. Okay No further comments. Roll call please. Mr. De Donato. Yes, Commissioner. Kent. Yes. Commissioner Eisner. Yes Vice mayor. Yes. Yes. Mayor. Vatikiotis Yes. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Robertson, let's go next to 13 one, which is the, revisit the decision on Riverside Tennis Court one, court 12. We did 12. That's not what I have here, but pardon me, it's not what I have here, but I think the numbers moves because that addendum. I'm sorry. That's okay, item 13 is to revisit the decision on Riverside tennis Court. One court striping for pickleball, city manager. Of course it was. It was brought up at the last meeting. If we had time to revisit the decision, Riverside Courts now has one court that is both pickleball and tennis that was decided on, since that time, you've approved the building of the four court, the four pickleball courts at the splash park, the ask was the to bring it back. If they hadn't already, manufactured it wasn't too late to bring back the revisit. If you still wanted to keep a combination pickle tennis ball, tennis court at Riverside Park or all tennis since the, since the pickleball courts have been approved. So I was asked to be revisited. So simple decision is do we keep it the way it was approved with the one one pickleball tennis court combination? Or do we do we change it as a result of the other vote? Okay, let's go to, public comment. Good evening. Mark Eisner. 1218 Castle Terrace, Tarpon Springs. I'd like first of all, to thank the commission for approving for beautiful new pickleball courts and also for your decision to redo the Riverside courts with versa Court, which from a tennis point of view, is a very acceptable service. I am a tennis player and I am a pickleball player. I'm going to point out to you some things why you do not want to put a pickleball court on versa. Court. First, let's look at the tennis playing point of view. Any tennis players here who's ever played on a court that's lined with pickleball lines, you're totally confused. The pickleball lines are just behind the service box, the end lines, the sidelines as you don't know what line you're hitting. You talk to some of the players at Riverside tomorrow at 730 in the morning. If you'd like to come out. They're seniors. They're not going to be able to deal with all the different lines. Some of the chalk is easy, but when you lay those pickleball lines down on that surface, totally distracting. Number two, I don't know how many of you realize that that the tennis net is set at 36in in the center, a pickleball net is set at 34in in the center. So who's going to be moving and adjusting the net up and down? You're going to leave it to the players. Look at the holes in the net on Riverside. Now you're not going to leave it to the players and somebody's going to be there to change the netting for paddle, for pickleball and tennis? I don't think so. It's just not the right design for that. And from the pickleball point of view, what are people going to start playing pickleball and use the wrong height of the net? They're not going to learn how to play the right way. Good pickleball players. They're not going to want to use that court. It's basically not usable for pickleball as well. Now one of the things I've heard is that those courts aren't always in use. Why do we have to have four? Well, when comes November and December, those courts are going to be in use and they're in use. You can go by every morning and you'll see four tennis courts being used. It's as simple as that. I also had a discussion with a club that I play pickleball with, and for their recommendation, and basically they would never consider that type of surface for pickleball. And let me give you some of the comments that I've gathered from pickleball players who played on that service. Pretty much any surface is better than that type of surface. Just striping bare concrete would be far superior to one of these modular tile surfaces. There's a right time to play on modular courts and that time is never. These are pickleball players. If we have done a survey or did a focus group among some of our tennis and pickleball players, we might have learned this terrible and annoying to play on. But the snap together service has randomness that makes the adjustment difficult or impossible. In a mentally limited experience. Okay, we got stuck with one of these courts for our past league season. Four of eight players had injuries. Yes, injuries we never have playing 3 or 4 these days a week on a regular court. The games were difficult or impossible to enjoy. And while I just say don't do it, Mr. Eisner, your time is up for the four minutes. Okay well, let's just say the rest of the comments are going to show the same thing. I'd recommend maybe since my career has been in doing consumer research, focus groups and the things like that, maybe before you make the final decision, you should talk to some more tennis players and to pickleball players. The people who I turned the petition in with many of them play both and they all agree it's pretty much unanimous that even among the pickleball players, they would not play on that surface. So I thank you for your time. And again. I thank you for the great courts that you're putting in for our enjoyment for both sports. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Eisner. Are there any other comments? Good evening. Dave Cutler, 616 Seaside Drive. Thanks for allowing us here for this, I was kind of. I found out about all this just by reading the article in the beacon last week and finding out there were some, some, some dissension over, after after Parks and Rec chose to vote. Five. Nothing to line one of them with, combination lines and the other three just tennis lines. I'd like to see them all with combination lines, but that's another story. On a daily basis, I drive by there daily basis, and rarely is there more than 1 or 2 courts in use. So I disagree that there's going to be 4 or 5 courts in use, because I, I've been driving by that for nine years. I can't think of more than once or twice I've seen more than 3 or 4 three courts use ever. So it's just not to be so, pickleball is the largest, growing sport in the country, you know that. That's why you're you're you're building for, pickleball courts down off Safford, this is a neighborhood park. It's the neighbors that are using it right now, older people use it younger people I've seen using it down there, there's quite a few I would say it's currently about 60 over 40. Tennis to pickleball. I play both tennis, I play pickleball, I play tennis my whole life. I play pickleball the last six, seven years, I think it's what you're basically telling the. The pickleball folks is we don't want you here. We're we're building a court on the other end of town outside your neighborhood. Go play there, I think that's I'm insulted, actually, and I think and I think the other pickleball players would, too. I think we're, we're courteous. We're courteous to the tennis players, we try hard to, know our know. Know our place. And, I just disagree that, we shouldn't have. I I would suggest all four courts, but at least one court available to us to come and play. If we wish to. Up there. It's my neighborhood. That's what I'd like to see. Thank you, thank you. Is there any other comments? Good evening. Rich Smith, 1288 Hillside Drive, please keep the decision to strike one court for pickleball and tennis at the Riverside Park . I've been at this residential and this community in this community for 12 years. And I'm a physical education teacher in Tarpon Springs for 20 years. And I can speak firsthand about the growing popularity of the sport of pickleball and its appeal to all age groups. My family and I have been playing pickleball at this at this park for over a year now. Every weekend. And in that time, I've seen an increased number of young people, families, friends playing pickleball at this park. The first court striking for pickleball is a wonderful way of ensuring that pickleball is played in this community and is a growing, this inclusive neighborhood park. Thanks and Yu need to come to the microphone and please take no more than 20s for 30s. All right, the only other thing I want to take exception to is, I called versa, all over the country, we they are getting orders to convert tennis courts into combination courts, and they they claim and I talked to their, their customer support group that, they're all all all the other municipalities and HOAs are opting for combination pickleball and tennis courts. So this is the largest company in the country doing this. I think it's a great idea to do business with them. But listen to what they're telling you. Thank you. Bye. You have every right, Mr. Eisner. But 30s, I'd like to go back to the first meeting where you approved Versacorp. Tom, on 2 or 3 occasions. Oh, there you are. When asked. And you can go back and look in the meeting specifically said Versacorp is not appropriate for pickleball. We can go back to the meeting. He was asked and he said it's not the best surface. I have nothing against pickleball players. You're talking about a dangerous surface. Thank you. Yeah All right. Thank you. $700 million in government Covid health care costs for pickleball injuries. Let's reduce those. Is that back consent? 631 East fourth Street. Again I played my dad got me playing tennis when I was a little kid. I played in high school. I played at San Diego State University. I played recreationally. Now for fun, let a pickleball court be a pickleball court. Let a tennis court be a tennis court. And like you said before, never the two shall meet the lines and everything. Like he was saying, it's ridiculous. You know, just let the tennis player, if you have to make all four of them pickleball courts, that's fine. And the tennis players can go someplace else and play tennis, play tennis. They can come to Dorset Park. There's going to be a new, tennis court right there at Dorset Park with lights. I'll go to this way, please. You talk this way, but. All right. But I mean, or you can put three pickleball courts in one tennis court and let them, you know, do that kind of thing. Or two pickleball courts and two tennis courts. But I just think crossing them is like racquetball and tennis. When they used to try and do that, it's ridiculous. My $0.02. Okay. Thank you. Are there any other, comments, Mr. Jump, any remote access comments? If anyone online would like to speak on this item, please raise your hand and you'll be allowed into talk. And we do not have any raised hands at this time. Thank you, Miss Jacobs, the two comments we had, the gentleman got up, gentlemen. Okay, so we're done with that. Okay, Commissioner Eisner. Yes. Thank you. Mayor. So one thing that wasn't mentioned, though, that we did get a letter of a, I believe somebody sent it in with 21 signatures on it, wanting to keep it as a tennis court. That wasn't said. So I did actually speak with this gentleman, about it. And and I also spoke with my cousin, and I did ask a few people. So here's what I have to say. You have 21 people, and now 22, the whole purpose for this project was to, decide whether we were going to vote for new tennis courts, one way or another, whether it was going to be rip it out and redo it for 500,000 250,000 for this versus court. And, 125 was the price to do the, just the, pick me up a little bit to the band, aid it so that it would work for a while, you know, I'm not looking to chase anybody away, but I'm not looking also to change it, to a pickleball court, because we could have somebody come in here and saying they want to change it to a shuffleboard court. I mean, it's a tennis court. That's what it was. That's what it's been, the fact that we have people playing pickleball on it is great, I know that I checked, and I'm sure Mr. Function would say the same thing. There is a pickleball material, which we're not putting in. We're not putting in a material that's for pickleball. I know there was, comment made that we were going to leave. One court, not not with a verse of court on it. And it was just going to be concrete . The whole purpose of doing the verse court was to elevate it over the water for flooding, and also because it was long lasting and it was a good material to redo the court. Why we're changing it is beyond me, the tennis height being two inches different, you know, it is a different game. But if you look at, I don't know, can we put that up there to show what the fourth court would look like by some chance? Because that's the telltale sign right there. And by the way, I don't play pickleball or tennis, so I have no iron in this fire. Oh, I'm sorry, I'm just trying to make common sense out of this. That's it. Okay. I don't know if you can see that. It's in the bottom left. The short lines are like, I don't know, it looks like they're about three, four inches apart. Maybe even less. There's no way you can tell, I believe the line that's closer to the player would be the pickleball line and the other would, you know, the one that goes straight across. There is no way you could tell if a ball is going to be in or out. Okay. So you can see what I'm talking about. This is confusing. So if we're going to do this, I know that'll be the only court that nobody's going to want to play on as far as tennis goes, because it's, I know my, Mr. Eisner knows I was a tournament class Paddleball player, and lines are real serious when you're playing a quality game, and I just can't see that, I would want to have this there. And it's not something you could change once you order it. So that's where I am at. All right, Commissioner Koulianos. Point counterpoint, so, first of all, we previously approved this. So this went through a whole, you know, bantering of this, at a prior meeting, and we and we voted on it knowing we were going to be putting some pickleball courts on, Safford Avenue. So we already knew that, this was voted on this, leaving this the one court strike for pickleball was voted on June 10th by the, Park and Recreation Committee, and they voted unanimous to have the one court have the optional pickleball, let's go down to this. The striping, first of all, all tennis courts, it have alternative, lines for, for, singles and doubles. So people who play tennis know. Now, this isn't, this isn't, you know, the , the US open court, where I'm sure it's set at just singles. This is a recreational court. This isn't a high, a tournament level court. This is a recreational court, I, I run by there, five times a week. I see pickleball players there almost as much as I see, tennis players there, more tennis players early in the morning later, I see the, pickleball guys showing up, that's where I met Dave and his family, and, and it's wonderful. You know, he lives in the in the neighborhood. He shows up to play with, pickleball with the, with his family, his kids and I even said, you know, it's wonderful your kids still want to hang out with you, so. So it's it serves a purpose that people want to go play, pickleball there. He's not a professional. He doesn't care if the court, you know, if it doesn't bounce as well or this that he's there to enjoy it and spend time with his family, Dunedin, Saint Petersburg has have, multiple courts with the, with the various lines on them, people figure it out. You go there, you know, I grew up playing, sports in, in, our, gymnasium at my high school. They had, volleyball courts that went this way. They had the basketball courts that went this way. They had lines all over the place. You knew which line it was. And then you and you, you you figured out and you and you did it. First of all, they'll probably be, you know, lighter or whatever. And so people will figure that out. I think that's, there is no there will be no pickleball, available again, because you can't use chalk on this, like, now, all the people that go there to play pickleball take their chalk and they make a line so they can play there. They don't care about the net height. They're using the net at the height it is. They're not professionals. They just want to have some fun with their families. Okay. So you will be taking that away from them by not having this because they'll have no option to be able to play there. So so and this is this, this is one, you know, I, I don't know this as a fact, but I think it's probably got the most population of our town is on that side, over there. And they'll have absolutely nowhere to play pickleball. It's the fastest growing participation sport in America, we have it's going to overtake, long term. I bet you it overtakes tennis and, because more people can play it. It's it doesn't it's not as taxing. And even young people are getting into it like, you know, Andre Agassi says he wishes he had played that he's, he's now becoming, a high level, professional player at this. And he says he wishes he had played this his whole life. He loves it. So it's a great sport. Our our, Parks and Recreation department thinks we should have it, we voted on it. We thought we should have it, let's just leave it alone, okay? Thank you. Vice Mayor Coolio's. Vice mayor coleus. Yes. I'd like to keep the pickleball court there, it is a growing sport, I hear of, you know, younger generation and older generation playing there as well and playing often. And we want people to be outdoors, my only concern was, and I don't know, and it might be too late, but I'd like to see those lines on that southwest quadrant court only because I think it's, you know, somewhat furthest away from all the residential houses. It's, and it could if ends up being that popularity sport that we think it's going to be. There could be another, art piece to add on the back end of the concession stand. That's pretty much just has the murals going along too. So that's why I was hoping we could have it in that southwest quadrant. I don't know how far we are in the development process. If we're too far out, so be it. And, but, the residents want pickleball and see the park and rec board vote in favor five zero. I think that's a good support. And, I know we may inconvenience some residents who play tennis there only and might get a little bit tighter there, too. But it's good to see everyone outdoors and really having some activities. So I'd like to keep the courts as is. Thank you. Commissioner DiDonato, you got anything? Yeah, yeah. The only thing that I want to mention is, honestly, this item shouldn't have come to the commission to begin with. As far as striping the pickleball tennis, you should have been left with a recreational advisory and the staff to make that decision. But we did make that decision. So, what I was going to suggest, if we got into a big tangle over this thing to go back to the recreation advisory board and get their recommendation, but evidently that that's already been done and they want to leave it as it is or not leave it as it is. Their recommendation was to, to stripe it, already, so I don't have an issue with leaving it as it is, or else, if we get into a, you know, a huge debate over this, I just send it back to them and leave it with city manager, make a decision with the, staff and the recreation advisor. It's not a policy issue. It's really just an implementation. And our recreation department does a fabulous job of, making decisions on behalf of the residents without us ever getting involved. Easter egg hunts, picnics and things like that. They don't ask us our advice. They just go ahead and do it. So, Commissioner Eisner so I wanted to clarify what you just said because it's, I did not want us to be deciding this either. The problem that came into play was, when this was discussed, it was the players that brought that up to me. As I said earlier, I don't play the game. I don't have an eye on it, but I do think that, the material is not conducive to play and that will be a problem down the road, but I'm not going to support it just because I'm not supporting it, and if you guys want to support it, so be it. I just don't I did, and when we did vote it last time, as I'd like Commissioner Koulianos to know I didn't support it last time either. Okay. Is there any other comments? Are there would there be any? Would it be too late to consider moving it to that southwest corner? I thought that was the corner we were putting it in. No, it's actually the way it's looking at. It's the northwest corner. Well I don't know what corner. It's, city manager, of course. Can you help us out a little bit? Yeah. I don't want to keep jumping on all these different things, but the reason there's a reason it's actually in the southwest corner . Southwest corner. It's actually the closest, court to actually Wide View. That's where we have some water that's southwest in relation to the concession stand. Yeah If you want me to move the sessions. Oh, you want to move the South? I can move anything right now. It's not built right now. So whatever you want me to do, I have no problem moving to the other. Other side to. I'd like to see it moved to the southwest corner. As I said, it's right behind that concession stand, and I think it's furthest away from all those other houses. And it's plotted right middle of the park. Would that be an issue, sir? No, not to me. No, sir. Okay, so we're still going to have the three tennis courts with the one hybrid court with the pickleball and tennis court. Okay We. No, no, no, I'll make the motion right now. Do we need a motion. No. Because no, we don't need a motion unless there's someone that wants to, go beyond what they're saying. The vote is, and make a motion to remove them. That would be the only thing. But I don't know that that's going to happen. I don't think I have support to remove it, so. Okay. All right. That's the end of the issue then. All right. Thank you. Let's Right. The other item is, let me see what? We're back to the resolution. Yeah Let's go ahead and do the resolutions, sorry, Tom, resolution department. Oh, the departmental reorganization. Right. 17. Yeah. Okay. Resolution 2024 dash 18, Department reorganization, Mr. Lewis, can you read the resolution by title, please? Yes. Resolution number 20 2418, a resolution of the Board of Commissioners of the City of Tarpon Springs, Florida, authorizing changes in the public works organization, including the division name in sanitation to solid waste division, title change and position upgrade for facilities supervisor to include assistant public works director, regrade streets and stormwater supervisor position from 19 to 21. Read grade Sanitation Supervisor from 17 to 19. Regrade sanitation tech one to tech two. Reclassify sanitation Tech two to crew leader. Eliminate parks assistant supervisor position create parks maintenance records technician pay grade 12 effective one one 2025. Regrade parks supervisor pay grade from 17 to 18, in Parks Department. Reclassified two tech twos to crew leaders. Classified fleet assistant position to Fleet Operations Coordinator and regrade from 12 to 14. Okay, City Manager, of course. I'll go ahead and start, this was something we didn't have. We didn't have time or we didn't have the positional money to bring to you last October in the budget, we had talked about bringing to you in January, the money. And it opened up from a position that changed and left, because, you know, to bring it forward now, it needed to be a no impact to the budget. There's two main reasons for doing it. The one you'll hear from Mr. Function is, is, is a reorganization and positions to hopefully increase the accountability of his different divisions, his different areas. And, a good plan of leadership and, moving forward. The reason from a city manager aspect is that these positions, especially second and third command positions, there is bounty out from other cities for other cities positions. They're even sending postcards to our people at home with licenses from other cities to try to recruit them for their. When you're talking about this area and somebody there now, some of these are are people who've earned their way up at, at at the lower grades but are be moving higher because the responsibilities stay on. But when you're talking about the people that you see on here moving up these these are the most vulnerable people that if we lose and the replacement, the replacement field out there is the other cities will tell you is so bad. That's why it's poaching on other cities and there's no rules, no rules barred, which I've told the other city managers, I can play that game too and stuff. But again, the importance of now into waiting is these are going to be some prime positions and we have people there and we kind of need to put them up to the level where they belong, they have been taken on increased responsibilities. It's a good plan of leadership under the director to have more accountability in his mind. For getting things done, getting projects done in a clear line, but in my aspect of bringing it now, it's the it's the what's going to go on, what's going on with the cities and their personnel. Tom will explain to you from an organizational aspect. Why he wants it. It is a budget neutral at this time, a budget neutral, proposition, or else I wouldn't have brought it forward to you. So, Tom, if you go through and, from your aspect of, of leading the department and what it does to the responsibility of these people were moving up. What you think it adds and add and what it adds to the efficiency of getting the job done in the many different areas of storm water, sanitation, in public works. You know, how's that? They're all a little better. Sorry. Tom. Function, public works director, there's a number of different reasons. As Mark eloquently, eloquently said, about, moving the positions. The other one is, I'm not going to be here forever either. So I had to put some type of organizational plan in, and I didn't need, an assistant on, on the director side of it here, because there's a lot of stuff happens in the office, and there's a lot of changes going on in the department, too. And a lot, a lot of this work here is tied into regulatory requirements between storm water, fleet and even the Parks department. They're all kind of tied in together, again. Yeah, we hear a lot about other cities and counties starting to search for our people. And one of the things I'm very proud of is how qualified my people are, my stormwater, my stormwater. Tony Menello is top of the line when it comes to stormwater. He's been getting a lot of hits about leaving. I don't want to leave any lose any of those people because their cost is a lot more money to fill them in, we reorganized the Parks Department to, changing some things, eliminating the assistant parks, supervisor and adding in that technician, because on that side again, too, was a regulatory requirements there, there's a lot of administrative help that's required, and we need that there a long time over there, too. Same thing with sanitation that's changing, too. As we all know, prices are going up. I've got to reorganize that department, be making a little more efficient, so I'm moving some people up here that help me with that organization to actually run things a little more efficiently. They're certified people, too. Believe it or not, even the sanitation. So a lot of these positions here are not only keeping good people in place. It should make all my departments much more efficient and, get ready for the next, next ten years. I won't be here for ten years. So, I have questions. Okay, public comments . Are there any public comments on this matter, Mr. Jumper? There any remote access comments ? If anyone online would like to speak, please raise your hand and you'll be allowed in. And we do have a raised hand. Allow the first person in. And if you can state your name and address for the record. Peter Tilak, 514 Ashland Avenue, this is an important thing you need to do. Sometimes it may seem like in a reorganization, it's just an integrative breathwork, but this is preparing you for the future. As you've heard, the city manager and as you well know, was looking out mandatory. So all these other positions are in high demand. And this rewards those that have shown loyalty to the city. All beach here. And you're recognizing their loyalty, putting them in a structure of pay makes it not only competitive, but it also makes it a reward for their loyalty and dedication to the city. So we'd like to thank Mark, not only, Tom, but also Paul Smith, that they've set up organizational structures here, the city for the future, as some of our senior leadership with so much, inherent knowledge boots on. So I would highly recommend the passage of the organization for your time. And we do not have any other raised hands at this time. Okay, I've got a light on, but let me let me make my comments, first, I wish I would have had a chance to talk to the city manager a little bit. I, I see what you're you're you're wanting to do, Mr. Function, but, as I've said before, you know, I'd like for there to be some, details. For example, I know what the city manager is saying, that, we need to be competitive, but there's nothing there that that shows us what the salaries are of these individuals and somewhere else. And normally, all this regrading is done as part of the budget process. And we're doing this outside the budget process, which, I'm not too happy about, just because we do have a process that we should be following. The other part of it is, is, I know it's a net, you know, there's a little bit of a, not a savings, but basically it doesn't really cost anything, but it it does cost something for, you know, it's taking money out of your, parks and putting it into, your, your, your, your vehicle maintenance. And then also the other stormwater, I believe, was the other one. So I'm not sure I understand how, you know, we it keeps it within public works, but we're moving it out of the work centers and putting it into some other things. I don't have an issue with, hiring people, but I also would. And that's something I've said. I've always wanted to do a better job in certain areas than public works. Let's see a plan and then, you know, in the city manager said, we don't have enough people. I said, well, let me see a plan and I'll support to get more people. That's not an issue. The other part of it is parks Umming for the work center, the parks part that were were changing is that we're eliminating the one assistant, if I remember correctly, the position and then hiring an administrative person. So we're reducing actually the field the amount of field activity the, the one thing that that I could see if these, supervisors were exempt, in other words, they were salaried individual, but they're all hourly, right? Yes. So basically it's purely, giving them money to be competitive with what? With what it is elsewhere. And we're saying that we're going to increase their responsibility a little bit. But for me, 40 hours is 40 hours. I mean, unless it's a person, if he's got a full, job description already that he's putting in his 40 hours, then giving him more responsibilities to be able to give him more money doesn't mean he's going to be able to do that without, really, getting overtime involved. And so that that's the way I see it. I've been in this band to the left, his shoes as well, and I would really, I understand what you're doing, but. And I would like to see the data, as far as the salary adjustment. So that's always something that we've always seen. We don't see it here. And that would be part of the budget process. And then also, the other part would was the fact that, I wouldn't mind seeing it. And I know the city manager, there's competition by adding more billets to I know you're you're working through that right now. That would be part of the budget process, too. And I don't have any objection to giving you who you need in order to get the work done. I know that you you're kind of, you move things around a little bit in terms of going where the, the folk the emphasis is. Yes. And then when that kind of dies down, you move it to another part. I understand all of that, but, we just need to do, a little better, not not better, but we need to actually look at this in a little more sober way and provide you the resources we need. And I would like to do that rather than just trying to prove this, because once it's approved, you're not going to take money back from people and stuff, and you're really giving them more responsibility, than I think that they can actually handle within a 40 hour week. I mean, that's my sense on it. So I can answer some of those questions for you. Go ahead. Some of my tattoos have actually been filling in as pretty much doing the work of, of, crew leaders already. They've already been doing that work, the other issue is about taking somebody out of the field. Now, unfortunately, my park supervisor spends more time in the office worrying about paying bills and answering phones than he really should be out in the field. He should be out in the field. That's why I'm asking for that assistant in the technician in the office to handle those phone calls in the billing and the payroll and stuff like that. So actually that puts it puts actually my supervisor more out in the field managing his people, than he is. Right now. But you're less one person. No, I'm not less one person. I'm actually replacing the, the actually the assistant supervisor and asking for a, a technician administrative help inside the office and getting the supervisor more out on the street, because right now he's handling those duties. I'm not sure I saw that. I saw where you're not hiring the person that you're taking the money from. And you're using that to hire an office administrator. But not until January of 2025. That's where the numbers are financially work out to. Yes. Okay. I'm trying to do this responsible too. On that side too. Sorry Well, yeah, I want to hear what everybody says. If you if I don't support this, it's not because I've got an issue with with, any of not wanting to do a better job. I want to do a better job. I just don't see us being very effective in this approach, in wanting to get to that goal. So let me let me go to some of the commissioners, Commissioner Eisner, you got your light on, thank you, mayor. I didn't know where when you said that you didn't see the increases, because there there, here. You didn't see that. Okay. I went through the whole thing. Yeah, I know I did as well, but, you know, we're living in a very , very strange time. And the economy, just with inflation, just really got out of hand and that's where I see it. And if this restructure helps keep us, without losing people, the most value that you can have in an organization is to have somebody who's experienced at what they're doing. The time to retrain is so costly that if he could manage the way this is, I think that's a great thing. If he's just eliminated a position that he's going to have to bring back at another point. And I see your point, but I do know that it's not just in his field, but it's the police. It's the fire. It's all of they're all being solicited. You're right. And we have to, you know, we're kind of in the trenches in a way, because I don't want to lose people. And, you know, I've also listened to the charter committee where they want to get more volunteer people and more this and more that. And I'm like, I sit there, watch that sometimes and go, are you going to pull it out of a rabbit, out of your hat? It just doesn't work like that, when you're doing management of a lot of people, which we have over 300 some odd people, you have to entice them to want to stay in the position working. You can have the greatest boss if you can't make your ends meet. What, what do you do? You. And you know, I know that we try to do that with budget, but this is an auxiliary type of way, which I know you know, all this, but, I'm I'm in agreement because I could sometimes I've had to do reorganization, to make people, just stay on and, you know, not so much to do better work because they're doing fine work. It's just you know, you just don't want to lose. You know, I look at this and I see experienced people. I see, you know, they have downtime. People get sick, people get hurt, you know, they're on disability. I mean, you know, there's so many reasons and, you know, when you lose 1 or 2 persons, the first, you know, thing that you'll hear and you yourself say this, you know, where you find that this isn't clean enough or the grass was left somewhere here you know. And I'd like to see that we keep the town as as nice as we possibly can. And you know, look, if they're not going to work out, regardless of whatever price, then it's up to them to, you know, change them or, you know, but I looked it's not really it's a five, 7. There's only one in here that is a 10% and one is a 15% increase, which is substantial. But but you know, if that person there, he would be the one. Tom would be the one to know if the value on return on assets again is I'll go to return on assets on every single thing. If we if, if that's worth keeping that person on and I know who he's referring to. I mean, I guess my point is this isn't the only department that has those issues. And to piecemeal this outside the budget process to me is not fair to everybody else until we hear the whole package together. That's what I'm getting at and that we've always done it that way. I don't recall picking one out to do this, and then we'll do everybody else later. Inflation is vicious out there right now. Okay, let me go to, Vice mayor, Julia. Yes, yes. Mr. I'm seeing these wage increases for, about the nine positions, and they're supposed to start on January 1st. Well will there also be a cost of living increase that will be adding during the budget process to these individuals? The only position that actually starts in January is the, recorders technician. The other positions come in immediately after the. Yes. So if approved, this increase would start effective immediately. Yes, sir. Okay. Then potentially during the budget process there will be a cost of living increase. On top of this increase we have right here I hope so there will be there will be, but no, the reason why I ask this is I understand you're going to reorganize ation. There's going to be some of the upper management that gets shifted around, and there will be some way of pay increases. But, how do you think some of the lower level individuals within these departments are going to feel when, when they see those type of increases and potentially they'll get another cost of living increase? Do you think it affects morale at all by looking at the reorganization this way? I believe it helps it, as these people move up over here, it's opportunities for the for lower level to move up to, okay. Do you think this could have waited maybe one more month as we start the budget process? Because we're not too far off from from that. And that's, that's one of the reasons too, that I'm, I'm looking at and I just have my concerns with it. Well, another month you're saying I believe it should have been done months ago . I got hung up a little bit on trying to. There's a lot of work goes in the back of this over here trying to look at salaries, making sure you're not compressing other departments, if anything, I'm guilty of being a little late on this instead of, earlier, as I should have been, now, I believe the time is now, to be honest with you. Okay I mean, I'll just. I'll wait to hear back from the other some of the other commissioners. I'm just reserve knowing there's some good pay increases that they're going to start effective immediately. They're valuable people. We never want to lose them. You know how I feel about that. I just want morale to. I don't want the other individuals on the lower level to see these type of increases and say, hey, we're out in the field busting our butts, too, you know? And we want to be looked at a certain way as well. And so, I really like to get all that discussed during the budget season and make sure that we can have everybody in competitive, salaries and compensation and making sure we don't lose any of these people because I don't want to lose them at all either. So but I also want to make sure that some of those lower level people, do have some cost of living increases that are somewhat respectable without compression towards these other individuals mentioned. So thank you. You're welcome, Commissioner. No other comment. You didn't did you have your light on? Yeah So, Tom, let me let me ask you, Tom, the, on this, this reorganization cost, report you have here, the is the assistant supervisor. Is that is that position, filled right now? No. Okay how about the. So now you're going to add the. So we have a say it. So this savings is a budgetary savings not an actual savings because we don't have that job funded. The 88,000 that's thrown in here to offset these, these raises their savings from are not it's not like you're eliminating this position. You're eliminating a position on paper, but it's you're actually not writing a check for 88,000 bucks to anybody right now. That's correct. Okay. So, I love how how government works. I so it's not real money, so we are increasing our spending by 88,000 because that job is not even filled. Okay, Tom, you know, I get the retention, argument, and I'm not saying it's that it's not real, what I want to hear is how doing this this improves the services provided, to the residents. That's what I want to. That's what I want to hear. And, you know, I want to know that by doing this and creating these supervisory positions, that somehow that is going to, improve mobilization of staff to, to get to certain things of maintenance that maybe are lacking now or, or lagging behind. And we're getting on things quicker, the this should be more than just, you know, let's pay these guys more so we can keep them. Let's pay these guys more so we get better services in our town. That's the that's the message I want to hear, so, so I kind of agree with the, the mayor that we're doing this outside the budgetary process, which we have a process to do that and all this could be brought up. Then I, and vice mayor makes an excellent point, we're giving somebody here a 15, 10% raise, and then if we do a three, 4% increase, all of a sudden now they're getting 13, or 18% or 19% raise. Which is more than what I would think, we probably would be warranted. But, again, I just want to know that by doing this structure, it it not only just retains people, but it improves the services to our community. And that's, that's what matters to me. So, Commissioner Eisner, you got your light on again. I do, because I want an answer. What was just said, you know, when you're in a position of not wondering where your next meal is coming from and you could pay all your bills and your house is paid for, you don't have any issues. You can just go and go to work and be carefree. But I would bet you if I asked Mr. Funchion about some of these people here, are they juggling those bills to pay their cell phone bill? Are they juggling the bills for their food? Like a lot of people are in town. If they're juggling their bills for the rent because they maybe can't afford a house, I don't know, I'm just throwing things out there, these are things that they're facing every single day. And if you don't think that that plays on somebodys, work, getting calls from the wife saying, what are we going to do with this? How are we going to do that? I mean, these are things that, you know, I know I don't face that. I know you don't face that, but I'm sure a lot of these people do face that, you know, if you follow the Social Security, there's we're headed into the biggest cola, you know, cost of living increase, you know, and we're only doing that because of the inflation. So, you know, I don't know. Is that do you get what is your feedback that you get from the people? Is it that you're doing this for retaining or are you doing this because it's, you know, they're having trouble making ends meet? I'm doing this for a couple of reasons. One is, you know, these are the lower end salary. A lot of these guys is front line. Guys are among the lowest our people we have in the city here, and they work very hard, as we all know. I know that. But they're improving. And these now my people are certified. We have certified spray techs, as we go along, the equipment we're using is becoming much more, sophisticated. I have younger people here coming on that are computer people. I have to keep them in that department, you know, if we keep on pushing back, pushing back, I will have positions open. I guarantee that I'm lucky enough right now. Knock on wood, that all my positions are filled at the moment. Except for this one, the assistant supervisor, to, Commissioner's point about being 18% raise. Well and theoretically, if you give anybody a 3% raise next year, it's not an 8% raise, you're going to move up 15% more in competitive line with everybody else. And we talked to cities. All the cities have the same thing. I mean, you know, I'm lucky enough to have personnel in my in my parks department. I've been here for years for years, you know, ten, 12, 14, 15 years, 17 years, 20 years, 31 guys, 33 years, not making a lot of money. Those opportunities are starting to come out in other places, I want to move now because you make wait till September. October? That's fine and dandy. Right? But then if I got to fill 3 or 4 positions, it's going to cost you a lot more money, I'm not going to bring people in. You're going to be pressing people up, and you're going to be in a much tougher position to fill positions, and I'm not going to be here much longer either. So it's important that I have somebody else that I know can, you know, learn what's what I've gotten over the last 20 something years. You know, I know the inner workings of the city and the departments and helping them move along. But, not to approve it. I think it would actually, at this point here, would also send a negative effects to the department, even the guys that weren't getting raises. So you before you put this into paper, you kind of compared this to other cities. Oh, yes. I thought the other cities all the time. See, that's where, you know, I'm, I trust you and you know, and I, I know it's a large increase, but I just keep seeing there's large increases across the board in everything that is happening. You know, everything, wise man once said, pay me now or pay me later. Yeah I know, you know. But do you see, once you lose the person, then you can't go back and say, hey, maybe we should have given them that 5% increase. You know, it matters if you want to retain people and you want to make them, feel like they're not facing the day to day, you know, where they're going to spend that money or how they're going to pay those bills. You kind of have to make up for it unless we have things started going down in price, which we're not. So that I am going to support it. Thank you. Commissioner DiDonato, do you have anything, I don't disagree with anything that you're saying. I'm just simply saying there's a proper venue for that, which is the budget process. And I don't I don't don't doubt what you're saying. Goes across all 325 employees. So why are we doing this now in in ignoring all the other work centers, I understand what, Mr. Funchion is saying, but that equally applies to the others as well, I agree. Okay, so, let me just offer something if, if, if, if, if there's a sense that this may get turned down, I'd rather that not happen. I would prefer it be deferred to the budget process. I'm just throwing that out right now for, for some thought before we get to that point. Vice Mayor Kolody, I'd like to defer to the budget process. I think it's you know, I like Commissioner Eisner. He brought up a very portion of what workers that, you know, it's tough to live, but there's a lot of workers here that it's tough to live. You know, it's tough for me to live budgeting stuff. So I get it. But I just think it would. We're a month out from really starting to work on this budget, and, you know, I, I all these guys are great individuals up here. I just, I, I don't know what type of message it sends to those other people that may only get a 3% cost of living increase next year. And, you know, and I want morale to always be the best. And I I'm sure some of these people in the positions that are changing there are, you know, they're moving around. They should be here for a lot longer than what's, you know, more than sooner than to retire. I think they'll be here a lot longer. So I'm not sure how much you know, promotions there could be within these organizations. And that's why I just want to make sure we get everybody straightened out with this, this cost of increase. So I'd like to defer to the budget process. So those are my thoughts. Okay, Commissioner Coleus, I'm sorry. Colonies Yeah I agree I'd like to defer this and again, I just, I'm all in favor of people making more money. I appreciate it, and I have no issue with any of these recommendations, because I know you know who these people are. I just want when we have this conversation next, that we sit down and have if we do this, this is how it translates to better services for the community. Here's how we will be able to improve mobilization. We will be able to improve follow up on projects. Those are the things that I want to see. That's all. Thank you. And I and again, if there's more manpower you need, you need to compete with getting that with the city manager compared to what other people want to get. As well. I mean, other positions. So it's not manpower, it's not manpower. It's the people with the technical ability to do the job. You know exactly what it is. And we're going to have to move on to the next generation. We're going to have computerized mowers and stuff. Tom, I understand, I'm sorry. You're not. I'm I'll be honest with you. I'm extremely disappointed. Unbelievably disappointed. All right. Well, may I have a motion and a second? A motion to defer the item, if you, Mr. Mayor, a resolution? No, if it's you're going to defer it, just have it on whatever you're on your budget date. If you're going to defer, defer it to a date certain if you're going to defer to budget, do you have any dates you want to defer it to, I just I just bring it back during the budget because we got a lot of different dates, so if it's going to be during the budget process, then I don't know how to narrow those dates down to how do we handle that? You should defer to a specific date, but I don't. Is there if you if you want to. I guess if you're just going to specific, the specific, would be our personnel budget hearing. Is that correct? Which is in September, usually in August or September. If you want to defer to personnel, budget, personnel discussions, that's not acceptable. I mean, I know that's the one. Yeah, there's remember I bring you that special one that's kind of outside because you have to approve it in a resolution form. So it comes from commission. So be to that meeting, if I'm not mistaken. Help me out, Mr. Lewis. The, the item is to, defer resolution 222024 dash 19 budget. Not that one, resolution 2024 dash 18 departmental reorganization, public works to the budget hearing in either August or September. Is that correct? Okay. So, yes. Is there a motion and a second to that? There's two more comments here I think. I'm sorry, Commissioner, did I don't want to say something and I want to say something. No. Go ahead. I think we're up here to be budget minded. Absolutely. Do to some of the first words that were said, I believe it was, our city manager said that it was budget neutral, meaning it's not costing a dime. However, it may be saving us some employees. And you have a department head up here telling you that, and we're saying, oh, let's wait four or 5 or 6 more months. Well, you know what? Three, four months? Some of these people live day to day. And what I was going to say earlier on and turn it off because I answered my own question, what's happening today is we're paying new workers way more than some of the people we've had for 15 years when they started. We're not we're not catching up. We used to do a salary based plan, and I hate to say this word, we went out and had it subcontracted, so we paid for it. But we did it so that we could keep up and not lose talent. I hate being a training center. I don't want to be that. You have a department head saying, and Tom, you haven't come up here that often as I remember asking for money. No. And I just if it's budget neutral to me, it should have been an automatic approval. It you know, I frankly, I don't get it. So if I'm voting for a delay, I'm going to vote no. I'm sorry, but it's not budget neutral. We're picking up higher recurring costs. Those words not should not have been used. It may be budget neutral for 2024, but we're picking up higher recurring costs beginning fiscal year 25 2025. And it's compounded with a cost of living allowance. And I think in that way, what we've done in the past, which I'm not sure I understand, why we're doing it now, it's always been rolled up in the citywide budget, where we look at the entire recurring cost. And that goes to the, did this go to the Budget Advisory Committee? This particular item? No, sir. Okay. So there's a there's a little whoop, you know, few hoops that we need to go through, but I understand what you're saying. I'm just saying that there's a process. We go through, and I just. Our employees need to understand that as well. And we're not. I'm not turning it down. I don't think the commission is turning it down. I think they're just saying, let's do it in a way that we look at everybody at the same time, that's all. So Commissioner Eisner, so, I agree with what I just heard from Commissioner DiDonato and at the same time, we're doing, again, micromanage being a department head, that's what I see. I know you're not turning it down, but you are, in a way, because because the structure that he's describing, he didn't just come up with this because he wants to just give people a raise, he's doing this for retaining retain ability and for, allowing them to be able to concentrate and to answer what Commissioner Kuleana said, if you have less stress on your head, you're going to perform better than if you're worried where your next meal is coming from. And I just I'm looking at the costs on here. They're not a lot of money. You know, one of them, 39, $55,000. You know, I don't see that being a whole lot of money. And I know, I know where you're going to go with this. I know you're going to say let's do it in the budget. I'm saying that we should be micromanaging. It's not micromanaging. It's following an approved process. And the fact that you look at all the employees in a fair way, not just single one group out and give them raises and then when it comes to budget time, we wind up with some harder decisions and we don't give them as much. And then all of a sudden there's just wondering, well, why did these guys get this much? We're not being considered for any more ourselves. And all I'm saying is it's much better from an entire workforce based on my experience, as you look at everybody that's together, rather than selectively looking at some people and then making excuses later why we're, you know, why we can't do what we can. But we've already made a decision with another handful of people for the same reason that the other people are telling us is why they want raises. We're giving it to somebody else, but we're making harder decisions because as Mr. Herring comes up with something and says, well, look, this is the most that we can do this year, that's all. It's all the same money. That is all the same money. It's not. It's not different money. The raises that you give is the same money that is used for making adjustments and salary ranges, regrading individuals to higher grades. It's all the same money and it's all recurring cost. And whatever you do it, it's inherited by future commissions and the current commission and also future commissions going forward. That's why you do everybody together, that's all. If the fire, if the, fire chief came up and had to do a reorganization to maintain people and it came out to a net zero, I would agree with that as well. Okay. I would I would always as long as you're not asking for more money, it's not a net zero. Well, you're giving certain people more money and you're going to be paying that same person more money. And you may be filling another supervisor later, and you're going to be paying that person $88,000 plus and plus the others 10 to 15% more. I don't have an issue with that. As long as everybody is looked at together, I don't want to argue about it, that's all I have to say. So So, I'm going to call the question if there is a motion, I'd like to have a motion and a second. And this is concerning resolution, 2024 Dash 18 Department reorganization, public works motion to defer resolution 2024 dash 18 to the August budget session. Is there a second second roll call, please. Donato. No. Commissioner Collins. Yes. Commissioner. Eisner. No Vice mayor. Coleus. Yes. Mayor. Vatikiotis. Yes. Skipped item 15. No. We're coming back to it. We're coming back to it. We're in the resolutions that we're supposed to do at 730. Okay. Over on 18, budget resolution, resolution 2024 dash 19. Mr. Lewis, could you read that resolution by title? Yes Resolution 2024, Dash 19, a resolution of the Board of Commissioners of the City of Tarpon Springs, Florida, amending the budget for fiscal year 2023 through 24. Be it resolved that the board of Commissioners of the City of Tarpon Springs, Florida, that the following amendments are made to the fiscal budget year of 2023. Dash 24. Okay. Mr. Heron, good evening. Usual several times during the year resolution. So thank you. Good evening. Mayor, commissioners, budget resolution 2024 dash 19 is being brought before you to budget for items that were have not been previously budgeted for in fiscal year 2024. Our last amendment was done in this last January. I tried to list all the other items and summarize them in the cover letter. A good portion of the larger items is due to capital projects, that the board approved. That requires some additional funding. And if you have any questions, I'd be more than happy to answer. Okay, public comments are there any public comments on this item? Mr. Jump, any remote access comments? And we do have a raised hand at this time and I will let them in. And you can unmute and begin speaking. Please Thank you. This is Georgiana Francis from 15 Athens Street, I don't have any comments on this. Are we going to get to the public art appointment or did I miss that? Because you've been jumping around tonight and I think there's people waiting in the audience. So I mean, I know we're having trouble finding volunteers. I think this might be one of the reasons it's almost 11:00. Shut up. Are we going to be going through the candidate forum and all these other things as well, or. I'm sorry, can you explain that? She's talking about the order to the public art committee appointment already happened, or was it okay, okay, well, this is going to take just a few minutes at most. I know, but this is I mean, you have people waiting in every single meeting. People are saying we don't have volunteers. You're making people sit in the audience all night while you go through and refuse to give your employees raises, I'm just wondering, you've moved around the entire agenda tonight, so we have. No, you keep waiving the rules. I don't know when this is happening, and I think we're out there, but what what is it that you're waiting to hear? I don't know if the public art committee appointment has been done already. If I missed it or not. Okay, well, we'll hear that next . We'll hear that next. Miss Francis. We'll hear that next. Okay. Thank you. Okay any other comments, Mr. John? And we have no other raised hands at this time, Commissioner. Comments. The only thing I want to throw in here, this is Commissioner Cooley on this is your discretionary funds right here on this page. Go ahead, Commissioner Collins, you got anything? Okay, so, Ron, are just so for clarification on these items have already been there. They're already funded, they were they were not in the. What you're saying is they weren't not in the 2024 budget, but they were already approved. And funded. Yeah, the board approved, most of them. And we just need to provide the balance of the funding. Yes. So this is just housekeeping. Correct. Okay. Thank you. Okay, if there are any other comments from the commission on this item, may I have a motion to approve resolution. N2024-9 team so moved. Sir Second. Second. Second. Roll call, please. Dinato. Yes, Commissioner. Collins. Yes, Commissioner. Eisner. Yes. Vice mayor. Coleus Yes. Mayor. Vatikiotis. Yes. Okay, let's go to. Mayor. Sorry to interrupt, but you may want to. We probably should do a motion to vote to extend it past 11. I was hoping we'd finish the meeting by then, but that's all right. May I have a motion to extend the commission meeting on a second? I'll do a motion to do 1130 just to keep it. Fine. Second. Second. All right. Roll call, please. Thanks. Mr. Lewis. Yes Dinato reluctantly. I'm sorry you said yes, Commissioner Collins. Yes, Commissioner. Eisner. Yes, vice mayor coleus. Yes, mayor. Vatikiotis. Yes Okay, let's, Ordinance, we're on the special consent, right? You said you do the art. No, no, that's what I'm trying to figure out. Which one it is. Oh, there it is. Number 15, item 15. Appointment to public art committee. Miss Jacobs, I'm sorry. Appointment to the public art committee. If you could just give us a quick rundown on that. That's correct, so you have it was, due to the resignation of, miss McGrath, you have two options, I know it shows. See there. But you'll see that they also placed, email that miss, Susan Soto has moved out of the city limits now. So the only options you have are a to move the current alternate number one, which is Miss Taylor, who is appointed, on November 7th of 20, 23 to fill this vacancy. As a regular member. Or you could appoint, to be, that would appoint alternate number two, Don R Botelho, who is appointed by the BoCC on November 8th of 2022 to fill this permanent vacancy. Okay. Public comments. Are there any remote access comments? And we do have raised hands at this time. I'll let the first person in. And please unmute and you can begin speaking. Thank you, Georgiana Francis, 15, Athens Street, I, saw the two alternates and, I've been watching the public art meetings and, I wanted to, speak on Katie Taylor's behalf. I know that the other alternate has been there a little bit longer, but, you know, Joan put in her email that one of the eligibility requirements is, you know, private citizens knowledgeable in the field of public art education or community affairs. And I think, recently with the, Black Heritage Project and all of the, you know, drama that has ensued since then, and David Archie's letter, which I'm sure you all read, I think that, it's really imperative that we do have people that are involved in our community on that board, could have avoided this fiasco, Katie is more involved than just the art committee, she comes to all of almost all the BoCC meetings. She came to the TNC meeting last night. She stays for the whole meeting, and she gets involved, and more importantly, she actually listens. She doesn't just come to speak her her portion and leave. Like a lot of the people in this town, she actually listens. And she listens more, not only to other people at the meetings and other committee members, but she listens to her community. And that's what we need. Not just people that are puppets and placed on these committees as favors. It's getting really old, really fast, she's someone who's a genuine representation of her community, and her appointment would, would help fulfill that board, and, and we need more people like her on all of our boards in Tarpon Springs. And tonight was a great representation of that. She when she makes a decision, I'll tell you, one of the things I respect about her is that she knows what she wants and she knows how to say it, and she's not going to go around talking for about ten minutes around the issue, so I think that she would be a great addition to that, we have enough people that have all these art backgrounds, and I don't think it's really been displayed in the projects, especially recently. So, I mean, I know there's not probably one art project, public art project that I'm like that I like. So I think you got, everybody should also listen to Frank DiDonato up there, that was really embarrassing. I've never heard an employee, a department head, say that he was disappointed, and that was really shameful. And I'm embarrassed for our city tonight. Thank you. Okay. Thank you, are there any other comments, Mr. Trump? And we do have another raised hand and I'll let them in. Please unmute and you can begin to speak. How's that? Mike Peter Lack is 514 Ashland Avenue. I would like to follow up on what Miss Francis has mentioned about the dedication. Miss Taylor offers to the city. Over the years. You've watched all the casserilla and calamity about whether we're mixing history and art, and art is art in their own view, but we also have an obligation to use art to teach history. And I think it's important at this time that as we speak about signing pledges of diversity and equality, that that Miss Katie Taylor gets an opportunity to be able to represent her community at the art committee. And again, as Commissioner Eisner mentioned earlier, again, it's kind of micromanaging. In a way, what y'all did before, Put it off is not going to change anything. Thank you. Okay, anyone else? Mr. races. And there are no other raised hands at this time. Okay let's go to the commission. Any commission comments? I just want to make it clear that whoever does get selected, there's obviously been a lot going on, including the public art committee, and it's not any one individual to just jump up and give their own ideas to the committees. You're supposed to work together for the future of the community, for the well-being of the committees. You're on, not for your own agenda, but for the agenda of the community together as a whole. And so I want to make that very clear. Okay, thank you. Thank you, vice Mayor, is there any other commission comment? And I'd like to also follow up with Miss Francis. You know, it's great she stays involved, but she has to also look at how she takes care of herself on the committees, especially the planning and Zoning Board, as well. So, you know, we shouldn't be throwing stuff inside glass houses. So I appreciate criticism. But at the same time, you know, I wanted to look out for all the employees, not just a certain group of individuals. When we have lower level employees or asking why other people are getting the raises and we're not getting looked at. So I stand firm in that and we'll take care of all the budget issues when the employees, when that time comes. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Are there any other comments from commission? Is there a motion to fulfill the, position for the on the public Art Committee motion to appoint Donna Bertello to the, permanent position? Is there, is there a second, second? Okay, if there's no further commission comments, roll call. Commissioner DiDonato . Yes, yes. Commissioner Cooley. Yes. Commissioner. Eisner. Yes. Vice mayor. Yes. Yes, mayor. Vatikiotis. Yes Okay. So we just left with number 14 and number. And then two, and then number 19, is that correct? That is correct. 14 and 19, 14 and 19. Yes. Okay. Let's go ahead and do the referendum. The question actually, item 14, consideration of a referendum on US highway 19, public safety and capacity improvements, we got the presentation from, Mr. Blanton on, Ford Pinellas as far as the viaduct concept. And I think we kind of, it was a teaser was supposed to be just preliminary to further discussions. With us and also the residents. And I think we kind of, gave him or at least the viewers, some of the viewers, not necessarily our residents, but others that were watching from down South County, the impression that perhaps we're just kind of, blowing it off as we've done in the past. And, he actually had wanted to, he asked for a meeting, to come up here, and I thought it was actually for some thoughts on community, involvement, participation. But it has actually the share. Give us an update on fDOT. I asked, city manager, of course, to sit in. Of course, we had, Ali Keen and, Miss Vincent sat in as well. And and he gave us an update on the fdlp. And I guess the reaction at best from the South County was somewhat mixed as far as how we felt about things. And then fDOT, was having some funding issues where there consultant at least that's what was, told to us and that, this matter would be extended further out, which, based on my experience in dealing with fDOT, is just simply a polite way of saying that there's other places that, that may, that that would, that would be more interested in working with us is finding solutions. So I, I wrote this, memorandum up in kind of a way and it is what it is. And you've read it, but basically it's, you know, we're we're our responsibility as well as the policy. I mentioned that earlier tonight is solving is problem solving. And, and, and sometimes, when somebody comes to us and, and it would certainly solve, the viaduct, concept would certainly solve a lot of the, the problems on, on US 19. And in fact, it would go from six lanes that we have right now up to 11 lanes. And, and then, you know, but there's the downside to with regard to access locally. And I asked, Mr. Blanton, I seem to be the biggest issue. And he says, well, all those things could be worked out, but you're not going to get to do that until you at least you start working with fDOT. And that's my words, not his. And so, I think people are, from my perspective, as it's always been on US 19. It's a safety issue. And and, we had a very lengthy debate over that with the one, apartment project that was approved for the property next to the bridge on the Anclote River on US 19 and, and, and certainly that hasn't gone away. As a matter of fact, it's gotten worse. And one of the reasons why the, the viaduct, the teaser showed that the traffic would continue to increase. So I think that there's a number of things, as Mr. Blanton said in the meeting, that, there's a lot more of, data now documenting on on what the effects both good and bad, are of the elevated highways and the one of the reasons why they're proposing the viaduct is that would cure a lot of the things that they faced earlier with some of the earlier, raised highways that they did further south. So I, I talked to the city manager a little bit, and I put this, memorandum together, at least for the commission to consider perhaps going to, referendum on this thing. And let's hear what the residents have to say as far as, an elevated highway, the viaduct concept and let them decide and send a clear message to fDOT if once between now and March, the residents, are educated based on the information that both forward Pinellas and our staff would put together on the pros and cons, then obviously we, there will be a clear message to fDOT that the public, the residents here in Tarpon Springs, which includes the businesses and property owners as well, that would certainly be all part of the workshops that would take place, would do not want it. On the other hand, they may say that they're completely fed up with the people dying on us, 19 and they want something done. And the viaduct, concept would, hopefully solve that problem. But also would create other concerns with local access . And that would be the challenge for future commissions and, focus groups to resolve those. And, and fDOT is always open to suggestions as far as making their concepts work within the local community. We've got to get to the point where we can work with them. That's the basis of this memorandum this evening. So let me go to public comment. So are there any public comments? Just one person here. Anita. Pros 901 Bayshore I don't know what's in your memorandum, but look what's going to happen on Klosterman Road when all those houses go in there and look what's going to happen with what land is left. And they're going to build because they're going to take commissions to court. They're going to win because communities want that money to keep their communities going and keep businesses going. It was in the 80s, I believe, maybe, Commissioner DiDonato can correct me that they were going to come through and do an overpass here in Tarpon, and it depends on where the egress is and where you get off and on. It was going to kill our community. It was going to kill all the businesses along the highway. You know, they're not going to be able to control traffic. It's here you see what's happening in Pasco County. It's here. People are going to get killed. I may get killed tomorrow. My family doesn't want me to drive on the highway anymore, but it's going to happen. We can't control the traffic and these overpasses unless you work with the state and you get it right. You can save your community. You can save the sponge docks and let it keep on going down, because you can see now what it's happened to some of the, shops, shopping centers as you go through, countryside, Clearwater and Saint Pete. And it's sad we're not going to be able to control traffic. People are coming down, people coming here. Unless the hurricane comes in and wipes it all out. We don't know. But traffic is here and you just have to learn to live with it, drive safely, and, take care of yourself. You're not going to be able to control it. Board members. We're not going to be here that long. I want to come back as an eagle in 20 years after I'm gone to see what's happened here and how it looks. But it's here. We're going to have to live with it. Take care of Tarpon Springs only, and the people you're going to ask the referendum or the people that moved down the last five, ten, 15 years? Oh, they came here, but they don't want anybody else here. It ain't going to work out. Okay. Mr. Reese, is any remote access comments? And there are no raised hands at this time. Okay, Commissioner Eisner, you've got your light on . We all get the report from the police chief about the accidents. One of the reasons I was against the, well, the main. And only reason I was against the Anclote Harbor project was because they were going to be picking up and dropping off school kids on 19 and, I'm just hoping and praying that we don't have where two cars tap each other and take out 8 or 10 kids that are waiting for the school bus in the morning. We get enough accidents there. This will correct the, it's not going to correct all the accidents, but it will correct a lot of them because we won't have lights. There's no lights up there. When you have those overpasses, when you're talking about the 80s, we didn't have GPS and Waze. Most people know exactly where the sponge docks are, if that's their goal to find it, if they want, we can put a sign there, you know it. I'm not saying that it's not going to hinder business, but. But do we sacrifice the amount of deaths that are on that road to not go and improve the roadway, the way we have it right now, it's a death trap. Nobody wants to pull onto it, we had that with Anderson. Is it Anderson Park or Anderson Woods? They didn't want distant open because they can't pull on the seniors could not pull on to 19. They were scared. So they wanted to pull on on Destin. That was one of the claims. Anybody you speak to they speak about 19 as they're terrified to go on it, so if you have a service road with an overpass, at least you have an acceleration lane to get on and off. I do agree with what, Miss Protas said about making sure that you have the on off ramp, the egress and, in the right spots and that I would not approve without seeing how they are because we should have it. Where if you're coming from the South, that you can get off here and utilize, you know, where we are, you know that's but that's coming. So ten year process. Exactly. But we still need to kind of look into this and go ahead and try to accept that the multimodal, you know, improvements that we're going to need here. That's it. Miss Vincent, I see you over there in the corner, you're here for this item right? Just do you have anything that you'd like to contribute for the commission? I didn't ask you either, so before we go any further that I think I'll probably speak for her also, you've seen the presentation. It's something that needs to be considered. I know I've been around. I was around when the overpass was going to destroy Tarpon. But it really needs to be looked at. The figures and the deaths need to be looked at, you know, safety trumps all. So if there's a way to do it to increase the safety, with elevated roads or however it's done to something that needs to be thought of and us to have forums and get all the information to the people. And then them ultimately decide the non-binding vote would give you an idea, and hopefully leading up to the non-binding vote is the education to you need to look at that. Anybody who's traveled the places on 19 to have the off ramp. Yeah. When it first did it hurt businesses. But you can get around you can do U-turns under the overpass. You're not pulling out. So I understand the old feelings of what it's done. But I think there are ways to do it now that have to be thought about, for safety, because these roads in 5 or 10 years, you know, we need a way for somebody to get around, in Tarpon to someplace in tarpon on 19 and maybe go on a side road and not have to jump on 19. So I think the important thing is not only getting the citizens feel, but really to get the education out there, the looks and the knowledge. So you know, we don't go just on the old ways and decisions that we look at everything, then make a decision. It's not what the people want. Then good. Tell us. And it's not what the people want, but it I don't think it can be dismissed from the pure safety and traffic and highway death and foreseeable future. What's going on? So I just think we no matter what the feeling, are you if you're against it, we need to look at it and look at all ways to do it, to maybe alleviate the fears of ruining the downtown or the 19 business corridor. Okay, Commissioner Koulianos, thank you. I don't I don't know if this was all fueled by my comment that I didn't want an overpass, but, no names mentioned. Yeah, that's right. I can always read between lines, but, you know, I, but if we're going to bring up Anclote Harbor, I was the first guy to cast. I was the first guy to cast a no vote on Anclote Harbor, and it was 100% about safety, and traffic. So, it concerns me as well. I think it's a great idea. I think it's a great idea for the citizens to see this and let's hear what they have to say. So it it makes me happy. No. Okay. Yeah, I'm fine with it. The more ways we can keep the residents involved, the better. So All right, so, I you have your light on again. Yeah, I have one more quick thing I wanted to say. We've all ridden on 19, okay? And we've all seen that person sitting on the left hand lane going, oh my God, I got to get out of here and just shoots across 4 or 5 lanes. I mean, that won't happen with this. And that's you know, it would avoid all of those type of accidents. The same thing when they're coming to a red light and they're they're they're on their phones, they're texting their everything. There's just so many reasons for it. And like I said, when I, when I go, I go to BJ's, you know, to the, discount store. I know what's exit to get off, you know, and if I pass it, I could get off the next exit and turn around. It's so easy. You know, I don't think people are going to forget that tarpon Springs exists. No. You know, so the thing I watch somebody, you know, make a right hand turn, hit somebody in the side and send them sideways. And when I got out of the car, I asked him, why did you do that? He said, well, my GPS told me to make a right hand turn here, you know, and I mean, it was just, you know, you get crazy people up there. So you know, if you want to say something, pick like the call the order. You know, it's getting late. We're hearing stories. So thank you. Just, he wanted a motion to move ahead with the. Wanted to go ahead and finish up. Okay I had no idea what he was just, you know, he was just, I got you. I make a motion that, we, We approve. Item special consent, item 14. Consideration of a referendum on U.S. highway 19. Public safety and capacity improvements. I. Okay, would you amend that to direct the city manager and the city clerk to begin developing a referendum question for approval? We would have to do that through ordinance as well. Is that correct, miss, Jacobs, a referendum question, usually a referendum question is through a resolution, I'm not sure if it would take an ordinance. We'd have to look more into it. So moved. It'd be a resolution. Pardon me? It would have been resolution, not ordinance A resolution. Okay. Yes And so we direct the city clerk, the city manager, to prepare a resolution to pose the question, non-binding question to the residents. So moved. Okay. Is there a second? Second? Okay. No further comments. Roll call. Commissioner DiDonato. Yes, Commissioner kuleana. Yes. Commissioner. Eisner. Yes. Vice mayor. Coleus. Yes Mayor. Vatikiotis. Yes. Okay. Thank you , that ends the agenda, I hope. 19. No, 19. Sorry about that. Resolution 2024-20 candidate forum Rules and regulations. Mr. Lewis, can you read the resolution by title, please? Yes. Resolution 2024 Dash 20, a resolution of the Board of Commissioners of the City of Tarpon Springs to co-sponsor a candidate forum for candidates for city office to be held on Tuesday, June 25th, 2024, and providing for rules and procedures for the conduct of the Candidate Forum. Providing for an effective date. Okay, thank you, Miss Jacobs, is this your item? Yes This is just our standard, resolution. We do adopting the rules for co-sponsoring the, candidate forum with the Women League of Voters of North Pinellas and, that will be held Tuesday. As he said, June 25th, I invite all the residents to attend, it will also be filmed for future viewing, from 6 to 630. It'll be here, held here in this auditorium from 6 to 630 would be the meet and greet portion. And from 630 to 7 would be the candidate forum, where, residents would be allowed to pose their questions. Okay, public comments this June 25th, next Tuesday, okay. Mr. Races, are there any public comments? And we don't have any raised hands at this time. Okay. Thank you, Commissioner comments. Anything I have a motion to approve resolution. 2024 dash 20 candidate forum rules and regulations. So moved, sir. Second. Second. Okay. Roll call please. Commissioner DiNardo. Yes, Commissioner. Collins. Yes, Commissioner. Eisner. Yes. Vice mayor. Cool. Yes Yes, mayor. Vatikiotis. Yes. Okay. That ends the agenda, let's go to board and staff comments. Major Crawford, you got anything for us? No, sir. Okay, Mr. Lewis, I want to thank you for the all the work that you've done for us to service. And I'm sure you probably are going to save a little money on gas now. And so thanks very much for your time and helping us out. I know it was a difficult time for a lot of people, and, so thank you for that, did you have anything besides real quickly, number one, I know it was brought up earlier about the form six versus form one. Form six, latest stance on that one is that there was a temporary injunction put in place by the South district, south of Florida , the Commission on Ethics at this point has adjusted their online reporting. So then now, now instead of form six, it's, form ones, right? That's that's temporary, though. Still. Right. Until as right now, until someone makes a decision, until a judge makes a decision. Okay, but, the only other thing I would like to say is. Thank you. I appreciate it's been an honor and privilege to work here, and I will say so thank you for having me. Thank you for, working with me through this process, I really do appreciate the city. And I would like to say that, you know, I appreciate and respect the city staff, especially, like they have my utmost respect. And it was been a pleasure to work with the entire city staff. Thank you. Mr. Lewis. City manager. Of course. Anything. And I just want to add that on behalf of city staff, I want to thank Mr. Lewis and your firm, not only coming to the meetings and helping out so we had somebody at the meetings, but, what he's done with staff in this interim. Time to get us ready to move on to the next attorney, it's just been great. And anytime you need a reference for your firm or yourself, be sure and put my name down, because you've done a lot for us and staff and your firm, and we truly appreciate. And we're in a good place to continue with Mr. Dickman tomorrow when he, takes over for you. So we appreciate that. And it was great working with you. Thank you. Okay, miss Jacobs, I just too, would like to thank, Mr. Lewis for his assistance in my department. Thank you. Okay I'm going to say my comment first this time. So So, because it's an important one, we have an annual review of our rules of procedure that are coming up. It's probably going to be the first meeting in July. Is that correct? Yeah. We were hoping to, wait and get the attorney, the new attorney on board as well to look at those. So maybe sometime in July. That's correct. So the idea is to look over the rules and come up with some ideas that you might want to change. I've got a couple of them that have already discussed with, with Miss Jacobs and, and we'll, we'll work through that. If there's some other things that, that you want, there may be just, just whatever they I don't want to qualify those. So anyway, that's, that's what I wanted to bring up. That was important. So the other thing is, I wanted to wish every father a belated, Happy Father's Day. It was especially a good week for me. Good weekend for me. I got my blue tie with the names of all of my father, my five grandchildren on it, and that was given to me. My my, my younger son's father in law, John. Alex, I want to thank him for that. Let's go to, city commission comments, vice mayor, Mr. Lewis, I just want to thank you for serving the city. I appreciate everything you did, this Saturday, we have our first commemorative Juneteenth. I look forward to being there. And I want to thank miss Miles for all of her efforts and helping coordinate to get this, first annual, commemoration. So I will be there and, other than that, there's nothing else. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Eisner, you got anything? No, I just make a big mess. I want to thank Mr. Lewis. I appreciate all your hard work. I know it was a big task for you to come here and to help us out, but thank you, you know, we'll miss you. But as I said, you know, it's, it was a long ride for you, so I can appreciate, you know, and I'll stop talking because I know you got that ride home, but thank you. Okay, Commissioner Collins, anything, I want to echo those same thoughts, Mr. Lewis. You made everything, seamless for us, I really appreciate it. And, you know, I always think about, the city attorney's, like, I think about referees in a in a sports game, if the, if at the end of the game, you are talking about the refs, that's not good. So they need to they keep the game flowing along. And I think he's done that. He does that in a, in a very professional manner. And, I appreciate whoever gets you next, will be well served, the, on in regards to Juneteenth, something interesting. My, my daughter Joanna and my son in law Nick are, are in Spain, doing research, for the university of South Florida on, the slave trade, they, when, when they were bringing slaves from Africa to America, they were actually they were also grabbing, Native Americans and taking them to Spain. And, they're researching, through chattel, through records, right now they're in records in the, in the 14th century of, or the 15th century, excuse me, of, slave trading and, trying to locate some of those Native Americans, the records were different, but anyways, it it's kind of apropos to what's going on, also, I think I'm definitely going to work with, our, our city finance director on, drafting up a bond issue idea. At some point, we'll have to have, when we have our meeting of priorities of, projects, I'd like to be able to have at that time, the possibility of a of a bond issue and where we can actually fill that bond issue up. With these high priority items, which could also include the what we passed tonight. So or what's going to the referendum tonight. That's it. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner, I just would echo. Thank you, Mr. Lewis. I didn't get to work with you very long, but I certainly appreciate what you've done for our city and wish you well. Thank you. Okay we had some tough issues tonight, and I appreciate everybody's patience. I know, I want to say it was a little strained, but I think we, we made it, and I think we could walk away without having to worry about looking behind us. So thank you very much. All of you. Thank you. Meeting adjourned at 1125. Is that right? Forgot about the fireworks.