The charter revision Commission for Monday, June 17th, 2024 is called to order at 2:05 p.m. We have a quorum. Roll call please, doctor? Ruth, I'm here, Mr. Collins. Oops. Miss Jennings here, doctor Boucouvalas is absent and excused. Mr. Koskotas here, Mr. Simon here. Mr. chair, Panay is absent and excused. Well, thank you very much for coming, I just, we can continue on with public comments. Is there anyone here who would like to make a statement? No. Okay. Moving on, let's talk about approval of the minutes for the May 29th, 20, 24 minutes. I did notice that there's one section in the minute that is not, complete. Do we want to vote on it with the assumption that it will be filled in, or do we want to just pass and go on to what would be the amendment? What would be what would change? So basically, he said that the people basically the only thing he had said about residency was that the people spoke and the titles needed to be corrected, but I didn't. Apparently it must not have saved that, but I can bring it back so I'll do this. I'll I'll make a motion to accept the minutes of May 29th, 2024, as amended, to correct the names. Is it not the one? That's the section 20 Dash s under Mayor Dave. I'll second that. I apologize. Any further discussion on that, Michelle, would you call the vote Miss Jennings? Yes. Mr. Coskewness. Yes, Mr. Seaman. Yes. Vice chair Collins. Yes Chair. Root. Yes. Then I'd like to make a motion with regard to approval of the June 3rd, 2020 four minutes. Second. Any discussion on these minutes? These are your minutes. Do you. Are you good with them? I'm writing them. Okay Michelle, would you, call the call the vote, miss Jennings? Yes, Mr. Coskewness? Yes, Mr. Seaman? Yes Vice chair. Collins. Yes, chair. Root Yes. Do we have an update on on, whether, Ryan Quattlebaum is joining us today? They're here. They're outside. They are outside. Please. It's. Yeah, it's this time. Okay go to that section. What section is that? Let's see. Go anywhere. Yeah. All right. Perfect Mr. Quattlebaum, we, of the charter revision Commission, welcome you to talk to us about your charter section or any other parts of the charter you feel you would like to speak about. And this is an opportunity for interactive dialog, so. Great. Awesome. Well, the floor is yours. First off, thank you for taking the time to do this important work for the city. I know that, the charter review is an important part of what not only the city, but the commission and the citizens, look to as far as keeping, our city whole and doing the work that, has been called for within the charter. The part that I wanted to reference specifically is part 33 that calls out the specifics of the city or of the, this the hospital. So, as you know, Advent Health has been here in the community now for 14 years and has done a lot to address the needs of the community by expanding services, bringing new physicians, attracting team members, etc. and we believe that this section of the charter , while great, is duplicative to the work that we do at the hospital and the lease that we already have in place with the city. So as of now, the hospital and Advent Health has a lease with the city, that was a 70 year lease that was negotiated some time ago, that went for 70 years and that, we have in place between Advent Health and the city of Tarpon Springs, that is, is with running the day to day operations of the hospital. That's that's our work and our job from my perspective. I love the fact that the city of Tarpon Springs takes the health care of the community so seriously that we put the city hospital into the charter. I think that's that's great, what I would say is that it's duplicative in the sense that if we have a lease already in place between the hospital and the city, that that would function as a, as a mechanism to hold, us accountable to the day to day operations. And while I would think that part of that is putting the onus on the city commissioners to hold city commission accountable, if I were city commissioners, I'd say they want to hold me accountable to running the day to day of the city. And the mechanism to do that would be the lease that we have in place today, that's what, that's how I see this current section, and that's what I would submit to this group today. And before I, before I pass, I just wanted to take a moment to introduce the folks who have been gracious enough to join me from Advent Health, Melanie Brown, who oversees, government relations and who I think many of you know as well, as well as Jessica Schumann, who is chief legal officer for West Florida Division, just here to support more than anything. But again, I thank you guys for taking the time to meet with me, first of all, I need to disclose and I want to know if I could ask a questions, but the fact that I'm vice Chairman of the board of the hospital, I know that precludes me from any vote. That's correct. But does it preclude me from getting information or asking questions? It doesn't preclude you from getting information or asking questions. It precludes you from being involved in the discussion , of any vote and the vote. Okay, so I do have a question. And this is probably for legal, you've seen the charter provision. Does the current lease have language that mirrors the charter provision means, it does. So section 4.3, restrictions of further amendments. States no further amendment of the articles of incorporation of the Foundation shall be allowed or approved, except with the consent and approval of the City Commission and upon further referendum, upon approval of the voters of the city. So that's currently in the in the lease. Does that because of the you know, when it says the foundation? Yes. Okay. Now you know, if things have morphed with with the hospital with regard to the foundation and the different boards, how is there a foundation hospital foundation now and how is that what does that consist of? There is still a hospital foundation that is in place today, the hospital foundation has been in place and continues to operate, there was talk and discussion that one of the city commissioners was in that would of dissolved that foundation and that has put been put on hold and on pause to maintain the integrity of the foundation as well as the citizens input and opportunity to be a part of that foundation and support the work that goes on at the hospital. So this is a question for legal okay to the extent the city elected to base likely not require or let's say, the foundation went away and it was a direct lease without the foundation itself. How does that land age in the lease that makes reference to the foundation become enforceable when the entity no longer exists? And I don't mean to put you on the spot, but but that's I'm sure somebody was going to ask that question. So I figured I might as well. No, thanks for the question. Thanks for having us here today. The actual hospital entity is still called the Foundation, so we have two separate entities for everyone's purposes. We have a hospital foundation for the can you just you can pull the microphone down closer to you. Sure thing. How's that? Thank you. That's better. Thanks. We have a hospital foundation that has the purpose of charitable functions for the hospital. And then the hospital itself is called the Tarpon Springs Foundation, Inc. So we do have two. So I want to make sure I'm answering your question. Are you talking about the actual hospital entity, the corp or the foundation? I'm talking about the entity that the lease makes reference to as a as part of that. So that would never go away. We're not making any changes to that. Okay. If that's your question. Well I thought that's not you making changes. It has nothing to do with the hospital making changes. Well in order for it would be the city have if the city made, you know, decided that a foundation no longer needed to exist. I think that was the discussion that the city decided thought about doing away with the foundation. So if my concern is how does that how does that, you know, how does that become a in the lease? How is that in order for us to make any changes per the lease, we still have to bring it back to this, to the to the corp. Sorry, to the city. We can't make any changes with the lease or with this charter language. But the point that we're trying to make is it says the same thing in two places as. And so really, what is the purpose of that, I have a question. So who is the lease with a foundation or AdventHealth North Pinellas and is the foundation that the I'm hearing it's the hospital foundation that has the lease. Is that an assign of AdventHealth North Pinellas? We have two separate entities. I know this is confusing. So we have Tarpon Springs Hospital Foundation, Inc. that is who the lease is with. That is different than the charitable foundation. Well, I don't the charitable foundation. Is it referenced in the lease. Correct. So any references with regard to the foundation have nothing to do with the charity aspect of AdventHealth. It's specifically the, the operations of, of AdventHealth, so I hope that answers no. Well it answers the question, but it leads to a few more. All right, okay, so if the if the help me understand, the owner if, if the Tarpon Springs Hospital Foundation, Inc. Yes, ma'am, is a C Corp, is it? No, no, it's not. Okay, so it is. What's the structure? It's a not for profit 51C3. Okay so it's run by its membership. Correct. Right So who. Yeah Who is in charge is that a city entity? Is it a hospital? City is just a city is just the landlord. The members are. So AdventHealth itself is the members of the of the corporation that has the lease. Just just to be clear for. Yeah. Please clarify. Okay. All all of the city is, is a landlord, right. And the hospital is in fact the tenant. And there's restrictions on what the lease obligates the tenant to do, and any and that's pretty much it seems like it's in its simplest form. That's what it is. Right, and so that particular provision and if you have to look at the history, why that provision was put in place, was there was a concern with regard to, you know, with the lease, first of all, I think and I'll just be blunt, you know, there was a question is whether or not, you know, the elected officials can be. You know, you know, change that would impact their the, the lease with the city without it with, you know, I don't want to I don't want to be too blunt, I'll just I'll just I'll just leave it. Leave it at that. I'll just leave it at that, that they. Well, they wanted to make sure that any, any aspect that happened on campus, with regard to the with regard to the hospital, the, this the city had to be included as far as a reference to any activity or change in the in the hospital structure that affected the lease and the and put those coming in or any other party on notice that that this is a city owned asset, that any change required city approval. And that's pretty much in the short. And that's your short answer as to why this provision was put in the charter. Can I ask you, how does this section 33 harm you running the hospital, sir? Great question, doesn't harm anything. It's duplicative. That's that's my point. So having it in here really is, it's not going to change anything. What happens from day to day with what we do, what I would just say is that it's duplicative. So if we have something in place that's already a lease that I understand that that's that's my that's my point. It won't hurt anything if it stays in there is what you're saying correct? Okay. And let me tell you that five years ago when this went in . There was no reference except in your lease maybe. Okay. There is no reference to the city still owning the property. Whatever yadda yadda yadda. This put that in there. It doesn't hurt anything. It doesn't stop you from doing your business. You guys have expanded. You've made everybody in the city happy . But that's like an open checking account. And I appreciate you guys showing today too. I, I just necessarily don't think that it's necessary. I'm sorry. It's not necessary to change what's been working these past seven years or 14 or whatever it is. Totally understand I did make a comment last week with regard to this provision. As far as clarifying, that section B, if you recall, where it says, the section shall be required to be referenced in any lease or agreement between AdventHealth North Pinellas and all its successors and assigns of that part of that property. And any third party, I think we I threw some language out there, but, and I can't remember what it was. I think we changed that. The word that in that last sentence to of city owned property. City owned property. Yeah. And I think that that if in fact, this board elects to keep this language in there, I think that that change, would help clarify, the some of that, ambiguity in the lease, also, you mentioned that there was some discussion about dissolving the foundation. How would that impact the lease if that indeed happened, I wouldn't have any impact. Okay. Who would? So So it would still remain with the Tarpon Springs hospital Foundation, correct? Okay So the sort of, you know, separate but equal is that, yes. So there are two separate boards. Two separate boards. Yep. Okay Is there any overlap on the boards? There is actually no overlap on the board currently. One is an operating board. The other one is tasked with raising funds for the purposes of supporting the hospital. Thank you. Yeah It no longer is called Tarpon Springs Hospital, but but that board is called that. Correct Okay. That's why we like this. Should totally understand that. Nothing personal against the hospital. I think you guys have done a great job. We could not tell you how grateful we are that you came and you and you have a hospital. We have a hospital in Tarpon Springs. And that's very important. Absolutely. And I think the change that happened five years ago was we changed from Advent Health to Advent Health North Pinellas. I think that was the, or or Florida hospital, maybe two, I think, I think I believe it was Florida Hospital beforehand. And then we changed it to advent. I remember we it was the name change that we addressed in our I will tell you this, this is nothing to do with with the charter had had it not been for Advent Health, Tarpon Springs would not have a hospital. Right Yeah. No, we applaud you being here and we grateful that you came to talk to us today and brought staff. Absolutely. Yeah. And I'd be remiss if I didn't also at least tell you guys that, and to Mike's credit, we've, recruited many physicians, even within the last couple of years since I got here, with three more coming this year. So. Right here grew up in Tarpon Springs. It's very exciting to have those people that grow up here, live here, leave and then come back to care for their friends and neighbors. So excited about that. Yeah. On a personal nature as a frequent flier at the hospital, I really appreciate you guys, especially the emergency room. It's fabulous. It is great. Greatly improves that have been made are just wonderful in terms of changing it from a sterile environment to a welcoming, community environment. Thank you for all you all have done one just simple kind of stupid question probably, but under under a should we not perhaps reference the actual name of the group that is the correct name in the lease and everything rather than. Well, that was going to be. My next question is what is the relationship between Advent Health North Pinellas, the entity and the Tarpon Springs Hospital Foundation, Inc? The entity to doing it's a DBA. So Advent Health North Pinellas would be the doing business as and then the entity the legal structure to your point underneath that would be Tarpon Springs. Hospital Foundation Inc. Yeah, okay. Great question. Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions? Okay. Anything else? Well, I thank you very much. Thank you board. Thanks. Your participation and we'll take your comments under advisement okay. Thank you. Made it out alive. Bye Thank you very much. Have a good day. Bye bye. Okay Are there is there anyone here who would like to. Let's see. I guess we'll go into the review, but I will since. Anita, since you are here, do you have anything you'd like to say after that comment with the hospital here? No, that's the big windows. We used to ride our bikes up and talk to the patient . All right, well, we have some time today to work through, to work through our remaining sections and then start our decision making. Okay. Excuse me, can we just go ahead and finish this? I think we know the two changes we want. Yes. Okay. We have a request to go ahead and do section 33. Yes. The first change, let's put this. I'd like a motion to adopt the language of suggestion, changing the word that in of that property of city owned property. So moved second. Okay. Any further discussion on that? All right. And you're going to set up that's fine, Michelle, would you call the vote? Sure. Miss Jennings? Yes. Mr. Yes. Vice chair Collins. Yes yes. All right. So now the next one is, do we need to change the, the title in terms of Advent health North Pinellas to Advent Health North Pinellas, dba Tarpon Springs Hospital Foundation, Inc, I don't think you need to. From a legal perspective, it's if you want to. But no, it's just it would be help future people understand who they're working with. I, I think this is complete. I mean, if they're DBA, they could be DBA. Five other names. I'd rather have the, the core entity name there, but I'd like to hear what Merle has to say about that I would. You're okay. I'm okay. Either way. Really. It's not that critical as I see it, but it it does clarify and simplify and make it a little more understandable to add it I think. But but the DBA. Yeah Yeah, I was confused, I have to admit. And we, I don't remember talking about the Tarpon Springs Hospital Foundation, Inc. five years ago. I've ever heard of it. Well, you have today. I've got today. Okay. So I'm fine. You're fine with adding that, adding that language. Likewise And I think it's de minimis, but I wanted the correct spelling of AdventHealth. Right. Well, that was that's a scrivener's error. Well, we we're going to take that all right. We think it may be the other way around though. The term Tarpon Springs Hospital Foundation Foundation Foundation, Inc. DBA right. That's what she she said, right. Oh, I thought he said it was the other way around. Me too. That's what my notes indicate. Yeah. Around Tarpon Springs Hospital Foundation, Inc. dba AdventHealth. Well, then we should have it. And it should be noted here. Okay. May I ask for a motion to change, AdventHealth North Pinellas in 1 to 2, three locations to for the Tarpon Springs Hospital Foundation, Inc, dba AdventHealth North Pinellas. So moved second, any further comment or discussion on the matter? I think just specifying, you know, it's the placement would be the introductory sentence and subsections A and B okay. Okay. Who made the motion? I did, you did. So you're amending your motion to include the location of the changes to the introductory sentence. And in subsections section 33 A and B, can I make a suggestion? Yes that you make reference to it in the first section. And then you put in AdventHealth. And that way it's reflected throughout throughout the paragraph. Instead of having so the word the terminology would be Tarpon Springs Hospital Foundation, Inc. parentheses dba AdventHealth hospital. And then we can use AdventHealth hospital in the other two. That's how you know it. Yeah. Okay Okay. Would you amend the motion, please? I will amend my motion to, to, you know, in the introductory sentence to put city proper city owned property now known as, well, it's not now known as city city property, doing business with Tarpon Springs Hospital Foundation, Inc. dba AdventHealth North Pinellas. Yeah. So we're we're inserting Tarpon Springs Hospital Foundation, Inc. prior to AdventHealth North Pinellas and then includes enclosing AdventHealth North Pinellas in parentheses with the DBA right in front of it, is that it? Okay. Change your site. Accept the amendment. Oh good. Yeah. Okay. Michelle, would you call the vote on that miss Jennings? Yes. Mr. Stevens. Yes. Vice chair Foley. Yes, yes. Michelle, could you just read back the change, okay. So in the first paragraph, I call it as it's known, it's going to say Board of Commissioners shall require all leases of the city owned property now known know doing business as city owned property, doing business with Tarpon Springs Foundation, Inc, dba AdventHealth North Pinellas. The DBA is in parentheses now DBA and AdventHealth North Pinellas. The whole thing I'm writing here DBA and it's just Divi AdventHealth right, right. And why don't we let our attorney we understand what you want. We'll put the final language to make sure we use the correct terms. Okay. It's like that. Okay Yeah. Right. Because you had there was an end in there. Sorry I misheard. That's okay. Okay. We're okay over here. Okay. You okay? You know what we're doing? Yes, Mr. Attorney. Okay, good. All right, and then we'll note the Scrivener error, with, no space between advent and health. Right And, the chair has learned that it's not Scrivener error. It's Scrivener error. Yes yes. Do we need to vote on that. No. On the Scrivener error. Scrivener. Yeah Or the term Scrivener. No. No no. Okay All right. Are there any other changes for the section. Oh nope. Done. Okay. Do I have excellent suggestion. Do we have to make a motion vice chair. We have to make a motion to accept the section 33 as amended, no. Yes. Well, I don't I think we've accepted the amendments. Yes. Okay, great. Just checking. I think we're good to go on that one. Right. When And. All right. You'll vote on the final version when we present it to you. Okay, great. Thanks Okay, so we have sections one and two that we've accepted without change. Actually I'm not going to do that. I'm going to go to the ones we've missed. So far. So which have we missed any. Yeah I think there's just a couple. Let's see. We did emergency purchases. That's reserved sidewalk improvement fund. Yeah. Because I thought we I jumped to the last one. There's 30, 31 we've not talked about 31, and actually we, we let's see, we did talk about initiative and referendum, and we approved two changes there. Okay. So go to 31 prior obligations. Right rights and ordinances not impaired. We have not done that one. And we have not done amendments. So those are the two sections we've not discussed. So let's talk about, 31, the adoption of the 18 1983 charter of the city shall not affect or impair any rights or obligations of the city which existed under prior law. All ordinances in effect upon adoption of this charter, to the extent not inconsistent herewith, shall remain in full force and effect until amended or repealed. All special act powers heretofore granted to the city by the state of Florida shall remain in full force and effect until amended or repealed. It has not been changed since it was put into this charter. I don't I the way I read it, I don't see any need for a change. No, I don't either . I don't either. So we're going to accept it without change, I would make a motion to accept the, provision as is second. And that's been seconded. All right. Any further discussion? No, Mr. Could you call the vote Miss Jennings? Yes Mr. Excuse. Yes. Mr. Seaman? Yes. Vice Chair Collins. Yes. Chair. Root. Yes Okay. That was easy. All right. 32 the amendments section, which basically talks about what we do. This charter may be amended, is provided by section one 66.31 Florida Statutes. The Board of Commissioners shall appoint a charter revision commission at least every five years to review the provisions hereto hereof and to recommend any changes in this charter upon request of the Board of Commissioners. The most recent charter revision Commission shall be reconvened in order to render an advisory opinion regarding any interpretation of the charter. Such Commission shall be composed of seven members, and the affirmative vote of four such members shall be required to propose any changes to this charter. Such commission shall receive comment from the Board of Commissioners, charter officials, and the public, and shall then transmit proposed charter amendments in accordance for form. I'm sorry, an ordinance form to the board of Commissioners for further comment. The Board of Commissioners shall, within 30 days, return the proposed amendments to the charter Revision Commission, with its recommended proposals after review thereof. The Charter Revision Commission shall make its own final report to the Board of Commissioners in an ordinance form which shall be adopted verbatim by the Board of Commissioners. The Board of Commissioners shall, within 120 days of such final report, hold an election on the recommended proposals. In the same election, the board of Commissioners may sponsor its own proposals and also including public initiative proposals. The referendum summary shall advise the public as to whether the proposed bill is sponsored by the Charter Revision Commission, by the Board of Commissioners or by public initiative in the event of any conflict. Among proposals that proposal receiving the greatest number of affirmative votes shall prevail to the extent of such conflicts. All right, I have, two comments and actually three comments here. Can I summarize what we've heard? All right, so, actually I have two. The vice mayor suggested, and that, adding the process on how the commission is selected and, but the process is not in here, and I don't think it should be in here, nor should I agree with you. It should not be in here. Okay. So that, do we have anybody who has a contrary feeling to that? No. Okay okay. The second one was on, the last the last line of the last sentence. There was a suggestion that that. Of the electorate be added between affirmative votes and shall prevail. So that last sentence would read, in the event of any conflict among proposals, that proposal will receiving the greatest number of affirmative votes of the electorate shall prevail to the extent of such conflict. That's a good that's a good addition. That's a good addition. Okay. Are we good with that? Yep All right. So can I have a motion to make that change? I do have one question though. Yes. This goes to council. Is it still under section 166 .031. Statute numbers change. I'll double check. Right now I just want to make sure that we're we're by referencing statute. We want to make sure statutes have the statute. Numbers have not changed. Good, good. Catch They've changed on you sometimes and all right. Yeah. And Mike to your point, maybe after we determine it after Florida Statutes, we might put the year that the statute was enacted. Because, as you said, they change at the drop of a hat. It's still the same. Okay That was just my only question. All right. We have, a motion. Do we have a motion and a second right now. You gave us two of your changes. Yeah and I corrected from 3 to 2. Well, okay, what was not one was not a change. One was just not an addition. Well, he had asked that the mayor that we should include the mayor and the vice mayor having two picks for the charter revision commission, but that's a process thing. Yeah. And so it doesn't belong here. So that's not something we would vote on because we're not amending we're not amending it to include that. So the only vote we would have is what you recommended in the language. Right. Well, I feel that since our charter commission, our charter personnel came and made the suggestion we should make a motion not to accept it. Well, no, we should discuss it. And if there's a motion that comes out of it, it comes out of it. But if there's not, then I just I had recorded that as a part of one of the conversations. Well, I'll make a motion to incorporate the language that you've, you've, you've modified the, as to that particular, revision. And so, okay, so we have, we have a motion to add of the electric electorate after greatest number of affirmative votes. If there's other potential wording changes, should we address those all at once or just as a separate vote after this? I don't think there is any other wording. I have one. Oh, you have one. Okay. Well let me. Well we've been doing these individually as opposed to one great big pot. So let's go. Let's go ahead and all right I'll second Mike's vote and then we can okay. But we can also defer it in case. Is it of the same in the same sentence. No, no. Is it related to what we just voted on. No. Or we're going to vote on okay. So let's keep it separate. Okay, we have a motion and we have a second. Do we have any further discussion on that now can we call the vote Miss Jennings? Yes. Mr. Cuscuta? Yes, Mr. Seaman? Yes Vice chair. Collins. Yes, chair. Yes. All right. Okay. Mr. seaman, where do you have to share with us? Maybe I'm not reading this right, but there's something here that just doesn't quite make sense to me. It's. Let's see. One, two, three. It's the fourth line up from the bottom. It or fifth that says in the same election, the Board of commissioners may sponsor its own proposal and also including public initiative proposals. It yeah it that wording seems awkward to me, it may be like and may also include public initiative proposals or something. It Or maybe I'm just reading it wrong. What would it sound better if it said the Board of commissioners may sponsor its own charter amendments or charter revisions. It also including public and, you know, saying, proposals. You want to get away from the word proposals and add charter charter revisions, the word charter revision had its own charter revision. That's I mean, that's that's clear, but I mean, to me, the word including just looks wrong in that usage. It looks to me like it should just be include, but so no, you're right. It is. It's a little awkward the way it is phrased. So, so by clarifying it, would you say that in the same election, the Board of Commissioners may sponsor its own charter revisions? Okay Period. Right. No no no no. Along with and also include and also include any public initiative as to any charter revisions. Because proposal is a is a doesn't sound it sounds like you're asking for something other than a charter. Well, as long as as long as we're here. I'm thinking that that there's a separate process for public initiative proposals, correct? Yes. Does that need to be in this section? I mean, are those initiatives for amending this charter? No no, that's a statutory provision anyway. So why include it? Yeah, I, I don't understand why that language has that. Okay Can't the public make. They can. Yeah. But through the initiative and referendum process they can they can just mentioning that the public I mean that's how I understood it to be. I thought we had that in an earlier section. There it is. Initiative reference right. Section But I don't think it speaks to well this talks about specifically what this board does. The Board of Commissioners shall, within 120 days from the final report, hold an election on the recommended proposals in the same election, the Board of Commissioners may sponsor its own proposal. I mean, honestly, that language doesn't need to be in there because it really has nothing. Yes, they can they don't. This doesn't need to tell them. They can, they can. And people can include public initiatives. Yes, they can. That's what it's trying to say. It's just saying that if you guys do it, they can also and so can the public. But we know that anyway. So it's a question of whether you want to put it in there. It's somewhere else in the charter saying those two things. No, what's in the charter is that the procedures for an initiative, I mean, we can put anything during the election. You, you, you can elect people during an election. We can do anything by property. You could do your referendum changes and we could have public initiative changes on there. And we could have the commission's changes on there, I mean, it's just acknowledging you can do that if that makes it clearer, it makes this makes it think that that public initiatives have to come to us or you couldn't have one other than during this time, but because. Because what it's saying, I think what this is saying is if this if the commissioners have a charter revision that they want to see, they have to they have to, present it to us. No. Right. They don't. No, they don't. But that's contradicting to yours, right? In fact, that's what could easily happen. You could propose x, Y and z, and they and they could say, well, that's great. We don't agree with that. And you said, yeah, we're doing it anyway. This doesn't need to be in this provision of the charter then. That's right. Because it seems like it seems like this, that that section kind of says that. Right? It shouldn't be in your section because your this is your procedures. Yeah. Right They can do it any time. I mean, we could get an initiative for, proposal tomorrow. Good. That's a good point. I think it was just memorialized. So the process right? No. Because you remember at the first meeting, I, I explained you presented to the board and then the board has 30 days to come back with their suggestions and you all as a board could accept those or not. If you don't accept them at that point, they can do their own contract. So if they chose to write, the public could. So when we have the ballot language, the ballot language always has to say this is driven by charter revision driven, right. This is who sponsored it or this is sort of commissioner driven. Okay. But that that's a requirement anyways. Right. So if you put a period where it says the Board of Commissioners shall, with its 120 days from such final report, hold an election on the recommended proposals period, and the rest of that section should not even be there. I agree, I think it's what would happen if the Board of Commissioner, if we took that out and the Board of Commissioners decided they wanted to do something, they could do it at any time, at any time. They could do it at 120 days. They could do it in 500 days. And this kind of forces them to do it all in one thing. So the public no, it doesn't even do that. What this says is basically. Yeah. By the way, we the commission could put one on there. At the same time. It's just acknowledging what they can do anyway. It's you know, it is it's confusing. It's a confusing it's a confusing sentence. Yeah. And I agree with that. It's not was not well written there. However we've taken it like two steps further now to boot. Bump You know kick it out now the I think the 120 days is important because that forces that's in there. Yeah that's in there. Change any of that where it says where it says the period would be the Board of Commissioners shall within 120 days from such final report, hold an election on the recommended proposals period, period. And then everything comes out after that. And we don't have to discuss with the tiebreaker. I mean, no, because that's, that's, that's law. Anyways. Let me just be the bad guy here. I got to I got to bring this up because I was a commissioner in the old days when these types of things I talk about used to happen, what happens is if the Board of commissioners. Don't want it, they don't want to have a thing they're not going to do anything. They're not going to recognize what we've done here. They don't have a choice. It comes back. Yeah, they have to do it within 120 days. They can say, hey, we don't want this one and it comes back to you and go, yeah, well, we do, we do. And it goes. And at that point you're saying they have no control. No control. It shows up on the ballot. So they could wait five years and put this same thing on there. Well, they could do that at any time. Yeah. In fact, what Irene was referencing is that easily let's just say that you want to do the residency and you want to make it change that every employee in the city has to live in the city, right? They could come up with their own at the same time, at the same election going, we only want the city manager, assistant city manager, police chief and fire chief. You can both have competing resolutions. Referendum questions. Yes. Excuse me. One wins prevails. Right. And I understand that part when they're done at the same time. But I don't understand if they're going to come 60 days later. Well they can't change the charter. Well they can by referendum. Yeah. But yeah but but it's still but it's still a referendum by the, by the electorate. Yes Okay. Not the commissioners can't change it on their own. They can they can put their language on a referendum right, on a referendum. But they could do that at any time, no matter what we put. And if it is this, this whole it is this whole book, this whole book could be changed by referendum. If they want you, you are you are 100% correct at any time. Either the public or the Commission could, if they meet the requirements, put on another referendum question. And it's exactly it could change everything you do. But they'd have to call this board in to discuss it and go over it and see if we wanted to change it. No, no, no, that's only for from this time. Yeah, yeah. This. That's only questions on what's. Well, you're two things. You are correct. You're the ones that you suggest. Go to them and they come back and say yes sir. Sir why are you doing this. Or we don't want this. And you go, okay, that's great, but we're doing it anyway. Or after this is done as you know, they can come back to you and ask you to reconvene and explain why you did the residency one, or explain why you did. You know, whichever one you did, the if we pass a height one or you know, anything like that. So this from from where I would put the period from the dawn from there down is actually meaningless, right? There's no meaning to it. It doesn't hold any. You're right. It doesn't hold any real, there's anything because it can be done anyway. Okay? All it does is all it does is provide to me more confusion than than than than explanation. Okay, so. Well, the other thing too, is we've been talking about changing proposals to charter revisions. Shall we do that? The last word of the sentence or leaving. I would change proposals to charter revisions. Okay. Well we they use the term term proposed amendments. I would duplicate the term. Where do they say proposed charter amendments. Yeah that's fine, but I would use the same language throughout as opposed to taking something different and putting it in there. So where does it say proposals at the beginning. Because you can't you can't. In other words, how you define in line six, a second section. So on the first paragraph, there's on the third line it says and to recommend any changes in this charter okay. So it talks about changes there. And then you go down to the second paragraph. It's the second sentence talks about shall be required to propose any change to this charter. And then you go down to one, two, three, four, five. The fifth sentence, I mean, the fifth line in that period says, commissioners shall within 30 days return the proposed amendments. And then the next line says recommended proposals. It says amendments to the charter. Yes. Okay. So I just think we should adopt language that's consistent with the rest of the paragraph. Agree with you. Yeah. I think proposed charter revision is clearer for sure. Or charter amendment. So changing own proposals to. Propose charter revisions, proposed charter revisions. Yes I like that. You want to do it in the form of a motion. Since you brought it so moved second. Well, let her call the motion. Let her call the. Yeah. Okay. So let's. I'd like a I'd like a oops. Wrong. Mrs. B is here. Take it out of there, I'd like proposal to, change, recommended proposals to proposed charter revision and to delete the rest of this section after that statement. I had a motion, I believe. Yeah. So moved second. Okay. So moved second. All right. Is there any other discussion here? Because that will also remove the first one because we're now deleting that. Okay, any other discussion. All right. Can we call a vote Miss Jennings? Yes, miss. Yes. Mr. Seaman. Yes, vice chair. Colonies. Yes, chair. Ruth Yes. Can I have five minutes? Yes. Let's take five minutes. We'll be back at five after three. Okay. Did we also get rid of the rest of that paragraph or not? We took out this. Yes, we did both in the same election system . Including the Charter Revision Commission at 304. Okay. We're okay. I don't have to be back to voice my, you know, my thoughts on this, because it probably it's not something that I think will be voted on next week or that. But one of the things is I, as Merrill does as well, we sit on the planning and zoning and we did a pretty comprehensive land use plan for the city. And in our plan, I believe we have, height recall requirements. Are we put in for the, the, I guess the US highway or the business district along along highway 19? I think we did . Right. Well, Renee mentioned that too. Yeah. She said there's a. Yeah. And there should be an overlay. I don't think they got it. And the thing is this I don't know if a height restriction should be done by charter. I don't think it should be. I think it's something that if you wanted to make it more difficult with regard to height restrictions, I think that should be done by ordinance. And that ordinance would be requiring a supermajority to go beyond what the land use with the comprehensive Land Use Plan provides, because, you know, we there are a lot of time was spent and taking, height restrictions into consideration when that whole year or year and a half project was done, to now, you know, try to put it in the form of a charter. That's not I don't look at that stuff as part of our Constitution in some regards. Those are things that should be done by ordinance. And this the ordinance could be as restrictive as you want or require, you know, more than just a majority vote if the city is, concerned about height restrictions, they could put it on themselves to require a super majority. But that's got to be done by ordinance. And I don't think by charter, because it's because there's a crossroads a lot on charter revisions and ordinances. There's things that we've discussed, you know, on this board that that have been brought up as a possible charter revision, when in fact it should be more of an ordinance and not a charter, you know, and that's that's just my thought. And regardless of what the height limitations would be, I think that should be done by charter, by by ordinance. And because we don't get a chance to look at the, you know, and maybe we should look at the land use plan, but but nevertheless, that's just those are just my thoughts. So the majority of the ones I've seen are done by ordinance. Yeah. Because even when we were looking, and I think Irene looked and we found the ones that Renee talked about , but but there's not a lot of them because they're not done by charter. Yeah. They're not done by charter. They're done by ordinance. Right And I don't I don't I don't want to, how did they interrupt you? How did they get put on a charter group? Because they're not on there now . I mean, did somebody require it? Not. Nothing's in the somebody. Somebody recommended it. Yeah. When, Commissioner Collins came, he gave a rather impassioned plea to, keep tarpon with the same feel it has today. I agree recommended doing it through building height restrictions. I agree with him, but I don't want to dilute, you know, I don't want to dilute the charter and I, we never we really we hadn't delved into what we wanted to do with that suggestion. Yeah, I just captured it in here. I know that he's coming next week. I won't be here. I hope I won't be here because hopefully I'll catch my plane. But but. But I just wanted to, you know, express my, my reservation about about making that a charter. A charter amendment, that's all. Yeah. I'll have to agree with you on that, Mike. I think it's yeah, it's places in an ordinance. I think that, you know, and I agree the city of Tarpon Springs right now is going through a fairly significant task of looking at what's sustainable means for the city. And I think that there is some thought, whether it's good or maybe not. It's not that it's bad, but, you know, I thought, well, if, if, if we're, if we're trying to make a change like this and it's something that hasn't been done and it's going to be painful, should we make it put it in the charter to force the city to address it. And then once it's on rails, it can come back out? Or do we suggest a charter, an amendment process instead and, and let it go forward. Now personally, if it doesn't belong in a charter, I am in favor of not having it in a charter because I think it's cluttered. But I didn't want to lose the intent and the conversation that we should have regarding it. I agree, I think it's more it's much more difficult. It's where you have a change of a of a charter or whatever. It takes. A majority of that board to vote. If you have an ordinance that that that you're concerned about certain things, whether it's height limitations or whatever the case may be, if you require a supermajority, I think that's more difficult to overcome than a change of the charter or a change of the ordinance, unless you want to change the vote and that's more difficult to do. And so by if you really want to restrict and preserve and I do you know, our, our what we have in Tarpon Springs that it's one of the ways you can you could do it by ordinance and not by charter. Because I think I think changing that provision in the charter would be easier to change than having a supermajority on an ordinance that's just my thought, and it's a good thought. And part of it was the thing that rang through my brain was the sidewalk thing. Yeah. It didn't belong in the charter. It didn't belong there. But the only way we could get them to fix the sidewalks. And we're thinking about the invasive trees now, and it shouldn't have to be put in there. No but how do you do that with the Board of commissioners? The only reason that's going in there, because it's been ignored, it really well, it's you know, and the thought is, well, it's the same thing for building heights. There are ways to get around it. They're too easy or today too, I mean, too easy. Yeah. But that's building heights are requiring the city to do certain maintenance is, you know, certain maintenance is more where you could force the city to do it, not by ordinance. It just has to be done. But when you're looking at, you know, to go through a year and a half of, of, of a comprehensive land use plan and have that stuff looked at incorporated, vetted, I mean, I don't know how much time we spent on, on, on on vetting these or coming up with the comprehensive land use, I think it's important that that, that and everybody had an input in the comprehensive land use. The commissioner, the citizens that showed up, staff, the board. And so I think we worked out a really good comprehensive plan, but to just to just by charter to, to basically you can void part of that plan by by putting it in a charter. So and I see I see your your comment. So where I was coming at this is that we don't really address sustainability in the charter, but it is a big focus today and it's something that we need to address, and I mean, there's the plans getting put in place, etc. and that's why I was thinking, well, maybe we'll take one of our blank charter sections and we'll address it as a sustainability piece and include the ecological, well, part of it that would bring in the we could include the historic nature of the town. We can we can include those sections on a broader basis piece that our charter appropriate. I don't know if you were here when we were talking before the meeting started, we were talking a little bit about sustainability and part of the comment actually was my comment is, by the way, we couldn't talk at that because the sunshine, well, I know that, but we were having just a general conversation that had nothing to do with the charter, it really had nothing to do with the charter. But it was we're talking I was talking in general about because we have a sustainability committee, and it seems that and I'll just, you know, this is my opinion is at this point they have no teeth. Right. Well, that's one of the reasons to left. And so they have no teeth. And I put some of that I want to call a fault. And if those are I apologize if you're on a sustainability committee and you're watching, but I think that the onus was on them for not being more forceful in in holding the city or staff accountable for their discussions or suggestions or whatever they they have come up with. I've not sat through any of their committee meetings, but you know, there are certain things that I you know, we actually bring it up at our planning and zoning, you know, and when they're when they're, applications that are coming through, you would hope that somebody from that committee would be present to voice or have a, you know, part of this, their concern over sustained sustainability, yeah. And actually, I'm sorry to divert you, but I think that in the past things have been very stovepiped, and we're seeing the importance now of having plans that are are meshed together and they're consistent with each other from, you know, sustainability. And I can't remember the other one and, and the budgeting process and etc. these things all need to be mapped and tied together. And you know, when you, when, when you make the comment about, gee, you know, we should have board representation from this perspective on PNC, that goes across, I think, a lot of the different boards. You probably need recollection. Representation from other organizations. It should be looked at. Well, I mean, obviously, if it's a if it's a, not planning. So what's the other committee? The board of adjustment. If it's a board of adjustment, they have their own. You have, you know, the you know , that has nothing to do with the with the planning and zoning that has to do with whatever building, you know, or setback requirements, etc. That and so that's one thing. But when we look at site plans or approved site plans that require green space or require certain certain things, as far as, that what you would hope that that and when I look at sustainability, I look at air, water. You know, you know, things like that. And, you know, avoiding hot spots, so I, you would hope sometimes that somebody would be there to say, look, these are the things that we would like to see as far as recommending options, you know, because we don't know when you have a sustainability committee, they have probably more knowledge as to what they would think would be environmentally, better on a site plan than I may have. Okay. And you would hope that they would recommend somebody building this. This is their site plan. These are their proposed vegetation. You know, but we're concerned about a hot spot. We like to see, you know, guidelines, certain certain requires certain recommendations that we would be able, as PNC put a recommendation for or for a conditional approval. And that's where I think they whether they say, I don't know if they missed the boat or they I don't know if they present those concerns to staff or staff could include those recommendations. And I could be wrong, but I just don't I just don't see it. And, and I would like to see if we're looking at a charter review, that, that, that sustainability has a place at the table and I, and I agree with you. And that's why I'm thinking that we should really discuss. Yeah. How you do that in an appropriate charter level to, you know, make sure the appropriate attention is being put on that. So it has have you seen in other communities that I don't know, do other communities have us? I would imagine they have a sustainability committee that has some teeth or some, seat at the table that, that to, to incorporate it in a possible charter. I don't know if I've seen it in the charter. I've seen it in by ordinance, you know, the creation. But I, I don't know if I've. We'll have to look, I don't think I've seen one. What department in the city is holding the meetings with the sustainability committee? I don't know, I don't know. And I'm wondering. The public services Minister Kiger is a oversee the sustainability committee, public service, public services director. Yes. He's the only one he oversees. He's the he oversees the committee. But there also is a. There is. I'm just curious on somebody has to be there that knows about sustainability. I believe he sits on TRC, so I was just trying to ask. I'm not sure if there at what if site plans go to TRC. But there is a sustainability coordinator under and I and I could be all wet. I could be all wet, I could be all wet with my thoughts, but I just , you know, from from I know our PNC meetings. I just don't see much of it of any. I mean, I'll nobody's nobody's come to comment and it would be nice if they did. That's why I asked who's in charge of that. They should have. They could be. I just don't know that they are. Well they should have come to the committee chair. So and done it that way. And I basically just ask them since then if site plans go to TRC and if there's someone who sustainability that has input from TRC level, she put. Yes, but I don't know exactly. But but is it somebody from staff or. Because if you have a committee, if there's a committee, a sustainability committee, do they review site plans or should they review site plans. Well TR the TRC review is all staff. Yeah but but but the city has, residents who sit on a committee. Right. Okay The sustainability committee. And I don't know what they look at. Do they look at plans and say, hey, we could we I recommend that the city, you know, staff adopt these changes to the site, plan to make it more environmentally, you know, friendly or we want to more trees or we want to see this or we want to see that. I don't know if the only opportunity for them to do that would be at our meeting. Probably. Yeah. And so. Right. Their mission statement is to review and make recommendations regarding city sustainability and resiliency. What does that mean? Your guess? Well, I can tell you what Pinellas County, to make more sustainable and resilient to current vulnerabilities and future conditions, promote the wise use of resources and reduce the overall carbon footprint. What does that mean through internal government governmental practices and external community services? And how do they go through a review process? I'm looking and I'm and I'm sorry to try to try to I don't want to hijack this, but no, I mean that's okay. And we talked as well about adding a sustainability plan into chapter, section eight. We have the comprehensive plan and the strategic plan there. And we've talked about adding it's a sustainability plan. Yeah. Subjects include increasing energy efficiency, conserving water, reducing waste, protecting sensitive natural areas, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, utilizing environmentally responsible practices products and technologies. Potential for new green businesses and jobs. Participating in the development of a city wide sustainability action plan as proposed as, prepared by and implemented by the City Manager and staff. Reviewing and providing input on information for sustainable practices to be distributed to the public and businesses by the city. Compiling and updating city sustainability activities to date so as to maintain a current status of city progress in this area. Perform such other duties and assignments as requested by the Board of Commissioners of the City Manager. So sustainability. I don't see any teeth in any of that. Well that's where if we add it I know that's I'm bringing this stuff up to, to for that purpose. So do we want to start and work through eight or do we want to start and go sequentially. I'll put I would I would you I'll leave that up to you. I prefer well you wanted to talk about I want to talk about stuff because I'm not going to be here. Yeah. That's right, so is there anything else you want to that's on your hot list now? No, that's you've you've I've pushed my you've pushed my buttons on things that I push your buttons. I thought it was good. Yeah, we have, an hour and a half, I think an hour and a half would be a really good time to jump in to section eight, where we have a number of things to address, and let's get some decisions made, because I think I think that and the 350 K number I don't think is, is hot an issue as it was five years ago. Everybody wants it to go up. It's a matter of picking a number. But I do recognize that Mr. Trapani is very, impassioned about the direct mail option. So before we jump into that, I'd like to have, him here for that conversation. So, jumping from that, let's go into eight because that's the next section with major teeth and the sustainability thing. So let me just summarize what I have in terms of, outstanding issues, capital improvement plan and sustainable city plan have been recommended to be added to this charter. The capital improvement plan was to have a prioritized list of capital improvements made available annually. Sustainability plan as as we just discussed, there was a recommendation by Mr. Lucas to add citizens to the CRA board. I had a suggestion on considering behavior. I had taken it out after your comments that I listened to on July, June 3rd. But, I think that, another that may be get opened up. Not by me, though, then there were dates. I have to go back and figure out what I meant by that. It says dates open years. Oh, that was they had to do with the renewal of every five years, etc, and getting things lined up, appointed boards. We talked about prioritizing the applications of special talents, knowledge and skill sets, and the suggestion to bring in advisors of candidates with appropriate skill sets not available. Board participation. Current limit of one board per volunteer unless board is for less than a year. And the question the discussion there should it be raised CLG requires requires city to maintain CLG status and follow the national Historic guidelines. Commercial fishing at paragraph to address commercial fish fishing and boat builder access to go max because it was it's not in the charter historic assessment require periodic property assessments according to the National Historic Guidelines. The Marine Commerce Board, put it in here and establish a marine commerce board with importance beyond navigation, from 19 to go max for the Anclote River. We talked about adding a review of the charter as a part of the budget process, and having a prioritized sidewalk list, maintaining that for repair of existing city public sidewalks. That is what this set of changes I have, going back, going back to the, appointed boards, you know, prioritize application of special talents. But also, I think we discussed allowing, somebody to sit on more than one board, provided that was not, in conflict. Yeah, I have that as a separate on the board participation. If not in conflict. All right. So Mr. Saltzman, you're the one who's going to ultimately have to write the language for improvement. Yes. Or update or recommendation, whatever you want to call it. Is it sufficient for us to tell you what we'd like to see, or do we need to give you, verbatim, the change language we want to have? No, it's I think it's sufficient for you to say what you would like to see, because when I present it back to you, I want you to be able to look at it and say, okay, this this meets the antenna. It doesn't. Right? Okay. All right. You missed the point or this isn't clear. Or here's how we make it clear, which is really generous on your part, because that leads us open to how we would like to see it addressed. And then you figure out how to best do that. Okay. So, I would like to, okay. So if I look at these topics we've got, we need to talk about board composition. All right. That's one that covers the, the special talents and the number of boards you can participate on. That's one topic. The second topic would be planning. What additional plans do we need to reference here, etc. Just like this, the, strategic plan and the comprehensive plan, because we have it's been recommended to have a cap well capital improvement plan. The prioritized sidewalk list, a strategic plan. I think those are the those are the things and then there's, two areas that focus on us being a waterfront community, specifically addressing commercial fishing and the, the Marine Commerce Board. And then there's basic requirements, which I believe the language that Renee provided to us on how to align the dates. Did everybody look at that? I think that was probably sufficient, all right. I don't know that we need to do anything more other than adopt that. And then, we, talking about the makeup of the, cra board. Let's see, is there anything else on here and then the CLG? So it's really it's the boards and the plans and the maritime focus of the city. Those are really the three areas. And then as an aside, reviewing the charter as a part of the budget process, which is kind of its own focus that we need to take, have I characterized that sufficiently? And so, yeah. Can we summarize what specifically we want Mr. Saltzman to try to adopt into charter revision language for us? Carrie, if I can make a point about the Marine Commerce Board. Yes, it was established in 2016 because I was on it. It was never closed out. It still exists. It's just been in hiatus. So I don't know how you want to deal with that, it was a closed out because you couldn't find people to sit on the committee. No, it just it's, it was decided that, the committee fulfilled its obligation as outlined in its original mission, which was to, you know, organize all of the different, agencies and entities for the dredge. And we got to the point where that was done. And then the only thing that was left was, lobbying and fundraising, which we were not allowed to do by law. So it just kind of went into hiatus. So the question is, so let's let's talk about that. But let's talk about these things in sections. Okay? That's why I was trying to organize this. Okay. So I'd like to start off and, can we go ahead and make a recommendation that we adopt reviews the charter as a part of, the budget process, in other words, as a part of the annual budgeting process, review charter and make sure items required by the charter are addressed in the budget period that would be the motion. I'll second that motion. Why can't I make the motion second? All right. So I think that that that is language we would like to see show up in section eight. Correct Yes. Is there any further discussion on this matter? You have a puzzle just thinking about the intent is to use the charter to give guidelines on how to do the budget right. Well, to not to ignore. Right. Some of the you should be doing your budget with example here. The cuts have been ignored. No no no no maybe not ignored but they haven't been trying to think of the language. Well, because review the charter . It's almost as if do the budget with not. But that you're requiring the city manager in the board of commissioners to approve create funds where needed to action the requirements of the charter or you're almost to you need to consider the requirements of the charter in your budget preparation. The funding requirements. Right? Right I mean, it needs to be a consideration. Yes. Technically they already have to do that. But a reminder certainly wouldn't. Right. That's what it is. It's reminding you that when you do the budget preparation, you use that as you consider the charter requirements, especially if you're adding more requirements. As far as funding, you know, because we talked about the invasive species, that would require more of a of a yeah, right. A budget allocation. I think you're fine with the motion you make. You've made. And if there is any tweaking, I'll just propose that in addition. How's that? Okay Would you like to restate that briefly? No, I think it's fine the way the motion has been made . Okay. What my intent is when you have specific is I may also give you just an additional, version of it for you to look at when you're going through it. Okay. Do we have any further discussion on that or clarification? All right, I'm going to go ahead and ask Michelle to call the vote Miss Jennings. Yes Mr. Yes. Mr. Seaman? Yes. Vice Chair Collins. Yes. Chair. Root. Yes. Thank you. Accepted. All right. That's that was low hanging fruit. We do have a special guest that may may be here, too. I I, I saw I saw you talking to Irene. I didn't know you were here to talk to us so. Well, only if you have a question for me. I think there was. Yeah. No, the process. Yeah. About sustainability Committee and P and Z. So. Okay. Well we can we can migrate into the next discussion which is about the plans okay. Okay. And we can talk about sustainability plan and how do we incorporate that into section eight of the charter. I don't know. We looked at before incorporating this section eight, you know, we talked about having a separate section with regard to ecological sustainability. And I think to give the importance of a sustainability be more, teeth, for lack of a better word, that it would be all in a separate section because it could get lost in all the in section eight. And, and I guess and I don't know if this is, Rene we were talking about about, you know, we have a committee, a sustainability committee, and I don't know, you know, I know on P and Z, we've never had input from that committee. When we look at site plans or any of that stuff to get what their recommendations are, I know recommendations come from staff, but but I don't I've never seen anybody from the sustainability committee. I've never known what if they've made any recommendations from their committee, not from staff, but from their committee with regard to, you know, special conditional use, site plan. So I don't so they currently do not have a site plan review type of. And I'm not saying they should, I'm just saying that they should be able to put and I don't know how they they put the recommendation plans to staff. So when staff makes a presentation motion to us with a site plan, you know, review or whatever, that sustainability committee recommends XYZ. I mean, yeah, that that just it does not happen. Now, the committee doesn't have that responsibility. It's not they don't there's no you know, when you review something with planning and zoning Board, we have a land development code that says these things have to be done, you know, considered. So the and the sustainability action plan really more speaks to, you know, how do we get those things into the code so that they are then reviewed as part of any, any site plan or whatever the development proposal may be. So the committee right now does not have that. They don't have that authority. They don't they you know, it's a committee. Yeah, they don't have any teeth. Teeth. There's no rules and regulations to review something against. It's, you know, so you know that I think in my mind, you know, you know, from reviewing the, the comprehensive plan that we integrated a lot of the sustainability action plan items directly into the comprehensive plan. As soon as we get that approved, then we'll start reviewing all the land development codes and the regulatory things. And then that's where those things hopefully will get integrated into our land development codes. And then they have to be done, you know, you know, have to be followed. So, so that's kind of where things are today, if you know, for things like site plans for permitted uses by right, you know, it needs to be some somewhat, I'll say black and white in the code for us to apply things to them, things that are legislative are a little more malleable, but, so without criteria for them to review, I'm not sure what the role would be, does that muddy it up even more for you? Well, yeah, I mean, I just how do how do we in your recommendation to give some I think it's appropriate focus for what you're looking. Yeah, yeah. How do we ensure that appropriate focus is given to make sure that the good efforts that have been done to date are rippled through how we do business in the city? How do we make sure that those guidance plans are developed for all of the boards that operate? How are we, how we make sure that the sustainability action plan needs and requirements are reflected in budgeting? How do we make sure that, you know, etc. So that's why I appropriate focus, we were considering adding a section in here that talks about, not just that sort of thing, but also, you know, invasive species and desired species and, you know, I mean, the world is sustainability is very, very large today. And how do we make sure that appropriate focus is given as we've got comprehensive plan, we've got, a strategic plan that's been adopted. We can put a well and all those things are, are pretty well integrated. Now, you know, as we've developed the strategic plan, we were doing the update of the comprehensive plan. There's the comp and the comp plan is very much, organized now around the strategic plan. We and we crosswalk the sustainability plan into the comp plan. So, you know, when you're talking about things that you want to be regulatory in, you know, my. Recommendation is to have those things exact that they're in regulatory documents. We're going to do a major overhaul of the land development code, the smart code. And so that's the time to put those that's where the teeth needs to be. I, you know, I, I think if you building something into the charter that provides for that, I, you know, I think that's would be my, my recommendation. But I think trying to capture, I don't know what level of detail you're trying to capture in the, in the, in the charter at this point. That's what concerns me. So appropriate appropriate, appropriate, that's what we're struggling with. All right. How do we get to appropriate here? The other thing, just as a comment, I would like to get a copy of the strategic plan or not, the strategic plan, the sustainability action plan today is that is that on the website? Because, I mean, Madam Chair, it could be as simple as us adding language with regard to the to the adoption or language in the charter that says, you know, the adoption of this, the, you call it the Sustainability Action Plan, you know, where we can require the adoption in the charter and that get into that, get into the obviously getting into the detail. I think that's beyond what we have the ability to do. But but to make sure that that sustainability has teeth along the way. And I don't know how to do and I, I think that's what we look like, chair said. We're struggling with, I suppose you get I mean, you know, I suppose you could recommend something to the effect of just like you have a section for, you know, where we call out specifically you, you shall have a planning and zoning board. They do X you have a board of adjustments. They do X, you know, the city shall, you know, maintain a, you know, sustainability committee, and you know, some you know, I'm just trying to think, you know, at least memorialize it in the charter. And, you know, we'll maintain a sustainability action plan that must be, you know, considered, you know, along with the strategic plan and the comprehensive plan for budgeting purposes, something kind of broad like that is that. Does the city have a sustainability action plan? We do. Yes. We do. Yeah. Under the public Services department, they'll say they have their own section, sustainability. So maybe if we got a copy of that we could understand what we're what we're trying to put in here. Because I'd like to see the action plan too. Yeah. That's that's the whole thing. I'm sitting here saying, God, I'm I the only one that don't know what's in a planner. So it's been I think it's been completed for about a year. And so we're in process of getting a new sustainability coordinator, and so, you know, it's like, you know, it's moving into the implementation phase. So, you know, basically what's in it right now. Oh, I know broadly what's in it, I don't know details because it's not my document. So, it's public services owns it. So 91 pages long by the way, if it's a if it's a you know, permitted I mean, if, if it's a, not a conditional use but a permitted use, does it, does that part of the permitted use process require the as part of the permitted use? Compliance with the, sustainability? Is that something that that I don't know that wouldn't be done by charter, but that would be done by I would imagine, ordinance. I think that again, I think those are the types of things that you would so the action plan is, is broad. It's it doesn't it's not, it's not, it's, it's like a policy direction type of document. And so you've got to bring that down to something that's actually implementable at this point. And that's so I think, I think without seeing what's in it, that's fine. I don't think I would an action to provide the action plan and the sustainability plan to this board. We will take take it up again when we discuss what we should do for that section going forward. Yes. Suggestion. I'm honestly not quite sure whether they did it for us at P and Z, or whether I saw it at a BoCC meeting that I was at, but I've seen a 30 minute or so presentation on it that the that the staff did. Why don't we ask to have that, that presentation given to us? Okay. Was that done by staff or was on the sustainability action plan? Yeah. Was that Denise Menino? I'm not sure who who gave that I think I think it was, the committee's annual report that was given by Denise Menino. I think that may be that may be that presentation. And for those of us who have time and or interest to delve further, the actual plans to that would be right. She's here. Could I ask her about about the, comprehensive land use with regard to height to make sure that it was discussed? The. Oh, yes. Is the building height addressed in the sustainability? The comprehensive land use plan? Yes. We talked last time when you were here about, putting the height in some way into the charter. Yeah. You said that there are requirements. You said that you didn't have an overlay for that yet. No, I we discussed because one of the discussions, one of the commissioners was here about asking the height, height restrictions be in the charter. Right. And I mean, we I have reservations about putting it in the charter, my because I if I recall, we had a pretty comprehensive of review of that when we did the comprehensive land use as far as height restrictions and areas where height restrictions would be a little bit more lax, I think like in the US 19 corridor, etc. and so one of the discussions we had internally was whether or not we would even, you know, that that should be more of an ordinance, and if they want to be more restrictive than that, that making it more of an ordinance would be requiring a supermajority to change that. And I think that becomes more difficult than trying to amend, the charter or whatever to allow height, height increases. And so I wanted to make sure that we had, in our comprehensive land use, that we actually had, height restrictions, ones that were, you know, included in that comprehensive land use that we discussed the, the, the land use . The land development Code has we have height established throughout the land development code based on zoning district. Then you have the special area plan and the smart code, and it has its height limits as well. So it varies from district to district. But it is regulatory and it is in effect. Yes. Okay. So that answered the question I had. Yeah By the way just an FYI going back to sustainability, it was established in resolution 2023 dash 22. Resolution by the Board of Commissioners of the City of Tarpon Springs, authorizing the adoption of the City of Tarpon Springs Sustainability plan. I'm laughing with you. It's adopted. Yeah, it's in the implementation phase, so and like I said, we did it's not even a year old not even know. And we lost, you know, we had a new sustainability coordinator in that did not work out, so now we're in process of hiring another sustainability coordinator. So I'm sure this person will pick it up and run with it. And do great things. Your department is currently utilizing the city's sustainability. We utilizing might be overstating it. We have incorporated the appropriate actions that should be incorporated into our documents and to the land into the comprehensive plan, and then we'll continue to that when we start tackling the land development code. So that's what I, I don't know anything about it, and I don't mind reading 91 pages. I don't want to, but a lot of it is pictures. The film will do me fine. So if you want, I'll dig it up and I'll send it to Irene. She can forward it to you. We have a crosswalk that we developed that shows where certain actions of the sustainability plan are found in the update to the comp plan. So you can kind of see how those things are working together. That'd be a great. We'll get that sent to sent to you. Great. Wonderful. All right. I think I'm out. And oh, I have one more if it's appropriate to ask at this time. One of the things we've we've got in the section we're talking about right now is, is, board and commission qualifications. And we've talked around this several times, but, but we're getting to the point we're going to have to make some come to some conclusion on. Some people have suggested that it's already so hard to get people on boards and commissions that it doesn't make sense to do it. And others would like to, to see it happen, we, we sort of have an unusual situation on, on P and Z right now where we, we sort of have people from the, from the specialty fields that that I would suggest if we were going to put those limits on people. But I just wanted to get your your feeling on, and, obviously it just addresses the boards and commissions that you're, involved with. But, on what you think about qualifications to not for all the positions either, because obviously there needs to be at large positions, I would think. But I think some people with particular qualifications would be helpful if it's possible to get those people. I mean, you know, across the board, you know, obviously we want people that are, you know, qualified to sit on on our boards and committees. The only board where we really need to be mindful of it from a, maintaining our certified local government status is Historic Preservation Board. And so and that one is particularly, you know, it's hard to get people, that, you know, to, to meet that, that need. And the state does recognize that we're a small local government. And so it is can be hard to find those specific skill sets at times for that board, and my tendency is to, to agree that it's great to have them on the other boards, but requiring it, I just think it makes it, you know, right now, you're right. We have we're in a really good place where their or their membership, and so I, you know, I but, you know, I think anybody that's interested in being on a board should be given the opportunity if they can. And, you know, because they're showing interest and you can learn, you know, there's it's nothing you know, magical about a lot of the stuff that we're doing. It can be learned if there's interest. So I you know my tendency would be not to make it. It is hard sometimes, though, to get, you know, to get people to even be interested in being on board. So I would see it as, you know, potentially another roadblock. You know, one of the things that did get brought up is training for board members that absolutely that I think is something that, you know, we definitely you know, planning and zoning board, you know, there's planning and zoning commission training that, you know, we can set up through, you know, the Florida Planning Association and, you know, APA. And so there's opportunities for that type of thing, CLG as well, sort of a local government as well. Correct Can I send my pack members to the museum? Can you send your pack members to the museum? I don't know, do you have an opinion on if, let's say, a board member serves? Because right now there's they're restricted on on serving on one board, but there are certain boards that that say a citizen who might be interested in having the ability to sit on more than one board, provided that the boards are not in conflict with each other, and that would maybe help alleviate some of the. Yeah, we just we do have a lot of boards. I think, you know, I, I think I would be hesitant about having any overlap between planning and zoning. Board of adjustments and HPB because at any given time, I could have an application that might have to hit all three of those boards. It doesn't happen often, but it, it it's frequently they'll have to hit two boards. So code enforcement or. Yeah, but I think, you know, outside of that, I think, you know, if, if you know, if you as you know, wanted to cross deck over to another board where you just don't have a lot of overlap . Yeah. I mean, I think that would, would help us in filling, filling seats. Yeah. Somebody from PNC could serve on the public art committee. I don't see any overlap right now. Somebody can't serve on a public art committee or marine or marine, commerce Committee or something like that. That really has nothing to do with, right? With the board they're sitting on. And you might if it's a new board, you're standing up, you might want to have somebody with existing board experience to come on and help that get started. All right. I, I'm just the conversation and how we're going I think we're still we're I can say I think we're focusing in on what we want and we're getting a better idea. We'll get the sustainability documents. I think that will help a lot, but for section eight, I think that, I'm inclined to move that to two weeks from now. And take a cut at better organizing by sector, by topic, area specific changes to go in. And I will take that on to do okay. Is that. Yeah. So, so, Madam Chair, we we've sort of gone through obviously we're going back and, and re, you know, going to a deeper dive in some of these sections, but in your opinion, you know, with the exception of a handful of sections, we've, we've pretty much at least from what I think is we've pretty much hammered out a lot of. Yeah, we're down to details at this point, we've got the I think section eight is our big section. I think residency is a big section for us to address, I think that, we've had a lot of discussion on civil Service board, but I think it's a matter of decision. Do we eliminate it? Do we slim it down? We leave it intact. It's pretty straightforward. I don't think we're going to. We shouldn't need to go off on too many other tangents with that, I think we are going to have to discuss really what the powers of board section on the difference in powers between PNC and Board of Adjustments. We got three ways to go right. We can leave it as is. We can have, the Board of Adjustments, you know, have the same powers that PNC has today or vice versa. But I think, what Attorney Salzman educated us about is that the PNC, the commissioners have to make the decision on land use. So it's really we're not going to be taking PNC to that level. And the ability to put, decisions on the agenda. Yeah. The consent agenda. That's procedural. So I am keeping a list of recommendations that I will make as a part of the report for this. That's on there already. And we'll continue to grow that as we have, like for example, doing an ordinance to provide building height restrictions. That makes sense. That's a that's a really good item. That's recommendation that require supermajority to. Yeah. For supermajority. Yeah I have that written down. But those are the big ones. So I really would like to, start just knocking out the, you know, the handful of things that we can just close out today, I'm really glad we just had this section eight. So since you're not going to be here next week, and I don't know that I'll get a chance to put it all together in the next seven days. I think I'm going to take two weeks to really organize this. Well, and if I come back and I've lost, I've missed something. Don't shoot the messenger here, okay? I'm doing the best I can here, but let's maybe let's just go back and go through a couple of these things. I think we can knock them out, if that's okay. I think that, under section three, let's go to that. We have two, three things there. One is the 350 K. What number do we want to put in at this point, Commissioner Dino Dino recommended a half million to million. Commissioner Coolio's recommended 400 and 425 K. City manager said up to 750 K Mr. Delacruz suggest, 500 K and tied to an index. Mr. Trapani suggested removing it personally. I think 507 50 is what I now. That's my recommendation, but I'd love to know where you all stand on that, we know where Mr. Trapani stands. So if you. I guess the only other one is, doctor, we don't know what where she is on that, but if we could pick a number and go forward, I'd come in at the 750. I had 500, but I don't, you know, I would agree with 750. Okay. Yeah. The big thing is what number can we get voted approval with? You know, 752 big a bite. Will we likely get it for 506? I mean, what is the number that our electorate will be willing to give to the commissioners? I think 500 would fly. Yeah. In a referendum vote. Yeah. I don't disagree with you. I like 750. But if we're trying to make this where the electric electorate would pass it, you're probably right. 500 this this increase. I keep forgetting that they have to still vote on it. Yeah, yeah. This increase helps the city manager. And if we have an emergency, it's taken care of already. So yeah. Should fly pretty good. Yeah. I mean, I think I kind of agree with a lot of you that 750 makes sense. But but 500 may well be what would pass. Do you want this in the form of a motion. So we could put this to bed, yes. So I make a motion that we, we put that at 502nd. Any further discussion? Well, just to specify that it's section three H. Yes. We're talking about section three, item H. Approval by the board for, purchase, sale, conveyance or leasing of real property, for some less than it's currently in there, 350,000 changing it to 500,000. That's the only change is the numbers 350, 350,000 to 500,000 for the limit. So we have a motion and a second for that. Correct. Any further discussion? No call. Call the vote please, Miss Jennings. Yes. Mr. Yes. Mr. Seaman? Yes Vice chair. Collins. Yes, yes, yes. Then okay. So 500 check. Okay. Let's see, Mr. Chair Panay has suggested a direct mailing. I'm going to push that because I think since it's his suggestion, he should be able to speak for it, the other thing here is adding dredge and spoil sites under section B for eminent domain. What section of that section? Section three. We're in same section item. You know, there's item B acquisition by the City of Rural Property under the powers of eminent domain exclusively for water and sewer utility easements, public rights of way, public parking and storm drainage improvements. So they want to add an addition to water and sewer, public rights of way, public parking and storm drainage to have, include spoil sites. There Okay, I'll move to make, I'll just hold it. This is on tomorrow night's agenda for the board of commissioners. They're looking to buy a piece of property. Yeah, but that doesn't affect what we believe should be in here for eminent domain. We won't need eminent domain if they purchase it. Well, they may need the other. Other. Okay, I'm with you. That's for today. That might not be for ten years from now. That's good, okay. Could you continue with your motion? I'm right, under I move that under section three, item B, the words , for, dredge and spoil sites be included. As being under eminent domain, I'll second that motion any further discussion? Can we call the vote? Miss Jennings? Yes. Mr. Yes, Mr. Seaman. Yes. Vice Chair Collins. Yes, chair. Yes. Thank you. I just keeping my own set of notes. All right, check that. Next one, I'm going to skip eight. We're going to go to. So there was, there's been talk about as well under section 11, election cycle, qualifying time and public notification. Do we is, is that something, we the first on election cycle is change election cycle to be consistent with the November cycle and eliminate the March independence. That was one comment, qualifying time extending the one week qualifying time to 30 days. Yeah We received an email from Craig lint on that one, and this is the item I was going to bring back. I didn't know you were going to finalize it today after all the speakers or either next week just to show doesn't matter. I would defer it just to show other municipalities and give you a background on some of those. Okay, yeah, we can, we can, we can jump into that now, do we want to do that? Let's see if we got an hour. Let me just see if there's any other really small. How difficult would it be if we were consistent with the November election? I know we talked. There was a discussion why? It was changed at the before, but, yeah, there's a there's a there's a sentiment for the people who really like the March elections. It's because we have our own during that period of time. It's we're not drawing people out for, how can I say this? We're not just getting people who would vote in a national election, etc, people who are very focused on Tarpon Springs, that that's the reason I'm hearing from it. Yeah. I don't have a dog in that fight. I know, but the participation has been pretty. It's been low, low, and I think you would get very low. And one of the themes that we've heard from this board , especially from Mr. Trapani, is that increase public participation is important, you're not going to change apathy, but by changing, by changing it to a date where there's more issues on a ballot other than the city may draw out more residents to vote, in my opinion. I agree with Mike on that. Yes Yeah. So you want me to respond to that? Yes, certainly. And that's why I was going to bring you back all the information. Like I said, I don't have it all put together yet, but the and like I said, it doesn't matter to me any of the changes. But just to give you the some of the pros and the cons, if you were to do a November election, they would either have the commission would have to change to 2 or 4 year terms, that's one thing. Number two, just from the numbers. And I could bring those to you, just because something is on a November ballot with another election, such as the primary. Yes, it does bring out a higher turnout. But if you look at the actual numbers for the city's election versus the total residents that came out, it's about the same percentage, a vote, because sometimes what will happen is the resident will vote for the primary or and they won't even get to the city. They'll they just won't vote it, the, the and the only thing about the placement, when you're on one of those type of piggyback elections is the city would be more to the bottom of the list. And then the referendums are even lower. So those are the only, you know, the pros and the cons, the differences in signage, you know, these are just come up at other charters. That's why I'm mentioning it, signage when it's our March election, we have just our stand alone election signs when it's, a primary or or other elections that have school board, judges and other things. Then there's a lot of signs. So you know, you'll get the thing both ways saying, well, we don't like our signs mixed in because no one sees our signs. But that's just some of the things. How does it how does it how how would that going to a November election make go from a two year to four year? So because their elections, county elections or primaries or federal elections are every 2 to 4 years. So we would be able to piggyback every two years. Right now we have three year terms. So they're on the they have that off cycle. So it wouldn't meet it wouldn't always meet that 2 or 4 year. So someone would either. We would have to get that cycle and the attorney correct me if I'm wrong, but to get to that cycle, someone on you would either have to decrease term's to two years or increase term's to four years. And I think the fight has been before. No one's wanted to do either or. I'm sorry. I thought there was an election. There's some election. What form or another that happens every November, whether it's other municipalities or whatever. Well, it could be in another municipality, but if it doesn't. Yeah, it's all I know. All the city, the local cities are either 2 or 4 year terms. We're the only ones that are three year terms. Right I do whatever Irene says. No, no, no, I would like to bring you or at least send it to you this week, just like I said, it hasn't. So you provide us with that information this week and we can have that. And I just pick local, just, you know, a few of the local municipalities. So we will we will defer that conversation. Okay. There was another thing that was brought up, and that is that, was a comment that appointees should not be allowed to run for office because the thought in this, this is coming out of what some other municipal cities, do, if you have an appointee you bring in that's filling the end of the term, then that gives them an advantage to running for the next election cycle. So the thought is to limit the appointee to only the term that they're elected to serve in, to finish. And then they, they can they can run in the future. But it's like term limits. They're going to have to give it a year. Yes So we have like I'll take commissions. Our commissioners for example, we have it's not an at large commission vote. There's you you could vote for this seat or that seat. So somebody appointed on this seat will would preclude them from running for another seat. Well, it would be like the term limits. They couldn't run for any seat. It is at large. It is at large. It is at large. Yeah. But you're running for a seat just to keep the rotation. Yeah. So they. But you're running for a seat. It's not an open. In other words, if you've got three seats open, the top three vote getters don't get all three seats. You have to pick which two to designate your seat for you. When you announce what seat you're running for. That's correct. So if I'm running for seat one out of just if I'm appointed for seat one and my and I'm only going to serve out seat one, you know, let's say I wanted to run for seat two of the next, you know, on that election cycle. You're saying you you could not do that. I'm you that would it would you would be you would have to have a cooling off period, so to speak. And then you'd be free to run for a future election. But, well, they could run if, if they didn't finish their term, but because they have term limits, it states currently that they, they only get two three year terms. So it doesn't really matter what's I mean, they could literally run in for commission seat one. And let's say the second time comes around and they don't want one or or they sign up for their that seat to run again. And then someone else jumps in the ring and they don't want to be in that seat. They could run for a different seat. It's just that their term limit is two three year terms, and then they have to sit out a year . And the thought is, is that if you have someone appointed in to fulfill the, you know, the empty seat, you know, the empty seat, if they are allowed to then run for any you know, right. It's considered an appointment election that, you know, you know, once their term is done, that that gives them an unfair advantage over someone else who, you know, who's who's coming in because they were not they were not elected into that seat. They were appointed to that. Yeah. They have the popularity of incumbents I think is the thing too, is if somebody is appointed , okay, and they choose to run, this is why I like the fact that if you're appointed, you could also run is a you see their job performance. So you know what to expect if they decide to run. Because now you've seen how they perform as opposed to not knowing who is, you know who you're voting for because you don't know what their performance is going to be or how they how they act. Two I think it would preclude we have some, you know, the commission and I think they've done a good job when they when they look for an appointment, they look for very qualified person to fill that role and not just somebody off the street. So I think you would be they would be hesitant if I was potentially going to run. And I was offered an appointment and I was very well qualified. I would be reluctant to be appointed because because my thought would be I would run an ad. And so I think you, you, narrow the field as to very qualified people who may want to , you know, hey, if they're that very well thought of by the commission to fill that void. Well, my role here is to make sure that we that all opinions. I know, I know, but I'm just voicing mine. No, no, I'm just voicing mine. No. And those are really good points. Does anybody else have anything to add to the discussion? Well, the other it was brought to my attention over the weekend that the City of Madeira Beach's mayor resigned and because of the kerfuffle over form six, everybody that remained on their council were all appointed. So the mayor defaulted to an appointed. They would all be precluded from running. Yeah So that was Saint Pete. Yeah. They would all be precluded from running. No, no, not unless he resigned. And like over the weekend he did. Yeah. Sunday Yeah that's a good point because they would be precluded from running, you know here you got a whole you've lost a whole set of commissioners, then you'd lose them all over again. Them all over again because none of them could run. Right. And there goes your experience. Let's see. So thank you. Form six. So if somebody came up. Yeah Madeira Beach mayor resigns of a three year term. And then decided to run. They're only going to get one three year term after that. That's correct. Because they're if you didn't serve the unexpired term yeah. Then it would mess up the, the staggering of the terms. So they're really not getting anything if they run. They're not. It's just that if they're if they get three months a week versus three years, it's all considered, a filter. Okay So we've discussed this. Is there any, does anyone have, did you find that Andy? Yeah I found it. Anybody have any strong feelings about whether we need to discuss it further or make a change to the charter for this one? Okay, well, we'll move on the move suspended that for now. They did . That's what. That's what surprised me. Okay. Until we hear otherwise, form one is accepted for qualifying. Right? Five, three. What's that? Four and five. Look simple. Well, we, we were depending on how many changes overall we were making. I've got a reserve to go back, and I think the name needs to be changed. But if we have a lot of changes, I'm going to push that. So I'm leaving that one open, all right. Let's see here. Mr. Saltzman, did you have an opportunity to find, wording for, assistant city manager? I've looked at a few of them, but, and I will have wording for you. Okay In that case, let's take, 20 minutes and see if we can't put Civil Service Board to bed. I think from our discussion that there was a plan there was a, section 19. Yeah, there was there was, opportunity of employee to go through. They have a law. The city has a whole, grievance grievance process. And I thought what we were going to look at is changing. Instead of having a civil service board just make reference that, that that they have the opportunity to go through that process and just do away with the Civil Service Board as a as, as a category. But put in there, and I don't know how we would title it, but that, that the, the, the leave it out chair. We have the HR director coming next Monday. Did you want to. Oh, okay. We'll put it on the agenda. Okay, in that case, no no, no, let's talk about residency and see if we can't get to very specific actions or closure on this stuff. Okay so we've heard a lot about why there's residency requirements. And that really comes down to the two areas. And that is emergency support and fabric of the community, I was not here for that discussion, although I really enjoyed listening the conversation. But my thought was, well, I was been involved with the Navy for almost my entire career, and that's an organization that requires residency in the United States, the United States Navy. That's right. You gotta live in the United States. But. Well, no, it's more than that. I'm just kidding. No Yeah. It's getting late in our meeting right? Well, we can stay focused for 20 more minutes, but they recognize the fact that, I mean, the US Navy has ports and what's become very expensive real estate areas, right? Because it's waterfront and, you know, sometimes recreation areas, etc, from Southern California to, you know, the Pacific Northwest to, you know, East Virginia Beach. Yeah. We got Virginia Beach. We got actually all over Norfolk. We've got, you know, Jacksonville and Charleston and just places all over the place. So where they require residency, they also provide opportunity for housing for those individuals. And I didn't hear any conversation about that. But I think that in light of the individuals we are going, we may require to have residency here. That's something that should be considered. As opposed to just, you know, saying, you know, you've got to live close enough, to get here in 30 minutes or you've got to whatever. If we're going to require somebody to live in, in our neighborhoods, but we're not necessarily willing to pay them so that they can have, you know, that they can afford to live here, then we need to look at how do we provide affordable housing. That's appropriate for their status for whatever. And another thing is, consider of a concession on their, real estate taxes or something of that sort. Well, you can do that. I mean, the city could provide buy downs on mortgage rates. They could provide all kinds of things. Well, then the question is, what's fair and what would you know? Residents allow and etc. you know, so I will say, as you know, we're not the federal government that has the ability to print money. No, we're not, but I think when we heard the discussion from the fire fire chief, we haven't heard from the police chief, were they identified necessity? I think he had a list. Yeah, yeah, he had a list. And I and I think through our conversations, we narrowed down what the residency requirement, would be, and if they were current, like you said, he's got a, you know, his assistant fire chief lives on the other side of 99, not in an unincorporated Tarpon Springs or, you know, and that would preclude him. But but I think the discussion from from what I've heard from staff is absent the fire chief, police chief, city manager, or people that are grandfathered in if they're promoted within, if they're promoted internally, they would be deemed grandfathered in, there's only a handful of people that we would require residency and the rest would be, I don't know if we called it a 10 or 15 mile radius, live with it a 10 or 15 mile radius. He called it an area of mobilization. Yeah, yeah, that was basically and my 10 to 15 miles or 20 to 30 minutes. And he gave his wife's job as an example of so, so, you know, I, I could see us adopting something like that, for the emergency response, I agree. Yeah. I think that makes a lot of sense. Then the question is then how about the, the other part of that which is the fabric of the community, the need, you know, for planning actions, you know, the I guess that falls on the development services director, do, do we need to require that they have a presence in the city, that they're having so much influence over? I you know, I, you know, I used to think pretty strongly that they had to be living within Tarpon, but the influence that your commissioners and board members have with regard to driving what they feel is the their the fabric of the community be, I think, outweighs , what somebody with, you know, lived outside of the area would try to push in Tarpon Springs. And I also look at the fact that so much of what the city does now is started with conversations with the citizens. The citizens are on the committees. This citizens, you know, it gets active by citizen run boards, etc. And I agree with you. Yeah. It's hard. It's hard for somebody else to come in and paint what they want tarpon to be when the, when the commissioners that are that you vote for and the people that sit on these boards have a lot more pushback than I think they've had before, we I think by the very nature of their professions, they're contributing to the fabric of the community. The fact that, you know, they work here, you know, I mean, you see them on patrols, you see them at city events, you know, just the fact that, you know, they don't live here. I don't think that affects their their impact on the fabric of the community. Okay So, let me add something. Yes Please do. During that meeting, I think we after speaking and listening to the fire chief, he recommended a 10 to 12 mile radius radius. But the city manager, the police chief, fire chief and assistant city manager for sure should live in the city. And there was a lot of talk on the public services director and the public works director. If they're not one in the same, it all boils down to if you work for General Electric and you got a promotion, they say we have a promotion for you. I know you live in New Port Richey, but your promotion is going to be in Clearwater and you have to live there. Do you want to take the promotion? GT did the same thing. I passed up a great job not to move, did the same thing and it's the individual has to make a decision in his life where not only where he wants to live and raise his family and his kids, but we all work for money. For my union days, I remembered that very well. And to get more money, sometimes you have to move. And does it cost you more? Of course it costs you more. It costs money to move. But The 10 to 12 mile radius, I mean, does do any parts of the unincorporated part of Tarpon Springs exceed the 10 to 12 mile radius? Like if you go down East Lake? Is that farther out. It does. Yeah. So I would suggest we include unincorporated Tarpon Springs and include well we can't we have to be specific. We can't say 10 or 12 mile. We have to pick a number like 12 miles as measured from, you know, the city hall, city hall or the police. Well, actually, he was suggesting from the center of operations operation center, our new center, yeah, that's either way. It's not an easy decision to make, but it's the easiest one we're going to make. Yeah. Okay. So. Right we are we planning to put in a requirement for assistant city manager? I think we are going to do that. Yes. Yes, I think so. I think we all agree we're three. And the reason I ask is so that. So we should include assistant city manager. The only caveat the only caveat would be if somebody is promoted internally and they are not a resident of Tarpon Springs currently, that they be grandfathered in. Okay, I don't know how to put that in there, but but all right. So well, we're going to do this for Mr. Saltzman. He can always go back and refer to the videotape because we're there for posterity's sake for at least, what, three years, right? All right. So let's let's start with who. So it's the city manager, the assistant city manager, the fire chief and the police chief are the minimums. Who in addition to that, they had they gave us a list of their EOC central staff list, right. But then he said, well then we went into the area of mobilization and we went into, well, he's got plans for this and he's got two shifts and 12 hour shifts, and the people that are needed are going to be there, blah, blah, blah. So That said, yeah, because they do they there's a mobilization in any event, right . So now. Aside from City manager assisting city manager, fire chief and police chief, I think the public services director, public service director, are we in agreement with that? Yeah, I think they said in case of flooding and stuff like that, that's fine. Yeah And that's really important. Then was there a second one? Was there a public works director or whatever? They changed the name. I'm not sure. There's two of them. One is the public services director and that is, the water and the public works director is the streets and roads. Okay. Okay. Then public works director. The other one public works is Tom Friday. Okay So let me ask you a practical question. Yes If it's a flooding issue that you need somebody here, they're not going to come and stop the flooding. They're going to, they're going to have to make, you know, the flooding had, would have had already have occurred for them to exercise their job function. So why would we require them, I mean, to be a resident, if they're available, their ability to be here, you know, if it's a 10 or 12 mile radius or 15 mile radius, you know, I don't think the onus of them having to be here would, would defer any flooding issue. They would just have to have an action plan after the flood or as the flooding, you know. So you know what what causes a flood. Well you know, it's getting the it's getting somebody who's going to lead the repair, who's going to make sure that there's enough employees. He's called to come in. Come in. I need your hand. I got a flood. But I don't think you need to live here to do that. Right Listen, guys, I, I, I'm all for you. I said I had a list of four and a list of six. I like the four I like. Yeah. I think if we go beyond the four, there's no place to stop. Logically Right. Okay, well, the others are. The others are on the list of the essential staff or EOC. Yeah. So but he said they mobilized them. All right. Let's let's hear from Joan. Who's your fifth, well, I have city manager, assistant city manager, fire chief, police chief, and the public services director. Okay, where are we on public services director? I make my same comment. I, you know, I don't know. You know, them not living in tarpon. Would you know if it's an emergency, they're going to be here anyways, if you know a storm is coming, you're mobilized. If it's something that's an emergency, you could be on vacation and have and have something happen, doesn't make you get here any quicker, I just, I just, you know, when you got a good public service director, I don't think they had anything to do with the fabric of the community. I just I just think it's just whatever their job function is, and I just don't think they're, you know, them. Living in the city would would be any benefit or negative of not residing here. That's just okay. Is this residency or emergency? Oh I'm sorry. Okay. No. Then I take them off. Okay. Yeah. We're not establishing emergency personnel. Okay. I'm sorry, I misunderstood. Okay, so we have our top four for residency, right? Okay We're all in agreement with that list. All right, I have a I have a thought. If an existing staff person who's not a resident moves into one of those four positions, opens and we give them an exemption, should we at least include that? If they do move, they need to move in to the city. Okay, so let's go to the next the next section and talk about the exemption part okay. Right now we have an exemption for employees employed prior to March 14th ninth, the, Mike had suggested that if someone gets promoted in the exemption applies. And now morale is suggesting that if they move and they're in one of those positions, the, the exemption does not apply. Yeah. And a lot of cases when you're grandfathered for something that's that's the case. If you choose to change the situation. Okay. Well yeah. The any opinions on that. Any commentary actually it's going to be easy because the four that we're talking about all all are here now. Yeah. So we have to consider what's going on down the road. Except for an assistant city manager won't be a problem. We won't be picking them. No. Listen, if assistant city manager says I'm only 12 miles away. What? I gave him my vote. No no, no, no, I mean, come on. There may be an assistant city manager that that the city brings on. That's a current employee. Okay, so if an internal city personnel is promoted in into one of the four positions. They they are grandfathered into the exemption . Should we call them essential positions? Well, I just say one of the four positions, you know, the critical four positions and our our, illustrious city attorney is going to make this sound really good. Are they're grandfathered into the residency exception. To the extent they. All right. Hold on X exemption. All right. However, if. One of the exempted. Parties elects to move. The exemption residences or change residences. The exemption. Is forfeit. Does that describe it? It describes it. Do we have do we have, concurrence with that language? Well, I would word it differently, but I concur with the with the with the concept. Right. Well, Mr. Saltzman is going to do magic on the language. Do that capture. All right, so then the next thing is what are the limits? Residency to meet the residency requirements. That's. These individuals need to live. I would take out the time, I would say within 12 miles. Of now what should we call it. So that if the name changes, it doesn't drive a change to the charter? It's an operation center. Well, that name could change. Located the new operation center. It's on you, isn't it? I'm concerned that that name might change charter. What? What if it moves? You're putting it in the charter. What if it changes its name? Well, like if it's the police station or the primary firehouse or something that can move, but the name is not going to change. So the location, I mean, emergency operation center, it could. Yeah. Emergency operations center, emergency operations center. All right. Well, everybody know what emergency operations center means. Okay, well, that does bring up an interesting point. You know what? If it's moved out by the, row plant, then your then your radius changes, right? I was almost going to say, why don't you just put it from city Hall? Yeah. Okay. We'll do that because City Hall is always going to exist and it's pretty central and it's going to be central because we wouldn't put it out some remote part of the city. Okay. So city Hall within 12 miles of Tarpon Springs city Hall or within the unincorporated in incorporated and unincorporated Tarpon Springs limits? Yeah, I think that's key. The unincorporated because then you that's what some of the complaints have been, right. Yeah Well we're going to allow them to be in the unincorporated if it's outside that ten mile or 12. What are we within with 12 mile limit. Okay. And we're talking about public works and all. Then we're not there yet. So are we all in agreement with the limitation with the definition of residence and residency in Tarpon Springs is 12 miles. The requirement is 12 miles of city hall or unincorporated Tarpon Springs. The limits of unincorporated. Okay. Yeah, we agree with that. Yeah. Okay. What group are we talking about? The four essentials. We're talking about the four essential people, the residency within. They got to move into town. You can't let them stay 12 miles out and require the assistant to live in town or the police chief. What happens if the police chief lives in New Port Richey? Well the police chief said the last emergency he was on vacation in Colorado. Well that was a fire chief. I mean, the fire chief. Yeah, I, I don't think. How are you giving exception to the four people who have to be here? I that's my problem. Yeah, I thought the exception was for all the others. For all the others? Yeah. The directors and stuff. Yeah. That, that that's what I understood. I understood the four had to live within. Within Tarpon Springs. Right. All right. And that's fine. I was I couldn't hear the entire conversation. I would recommend is that the four live in within Tarpon Springs or the unincorporated part of Tarpon Springs, because that's really part of Tarpon Springs. Yeah Where is that? What radius is that? Well, are you going the other side of 19? You're, you're you're you're not. There's parts of the other side of 19. I mean, we, we've annexed down on Keystone. Right? I understand that, but is that in the 12 mile thing now that we're. Well, no, I think that's a separate issue is what do you include the limits of Tarpon Springs to include the unincorporated area of. That's part of Tarpon Springs. That's the question. Do you want to include that as part of Tarpon Springs? Now? It goes a long way down. Well, it's I used to live off of I used to live in Riverside and that they were annexing up to there. I don't know where that is. That's off of Keystone, between, Cypress Run and I'm trying to think of the name of the church that's right there that I tell you from that location, depending on how you hit lights, you can be at City Hall faster than I can be. Out in point, Alexis. Yep. No, I guarantee you, I guarantee you that's not even a question. I know, and because you're only hitting really the 19 light of any substance. Yeah. I mean, and there's enclaves within the city limits of tarpon right off of Curlew Road, that our county is county total fitness is considered county, off of curlew behind the hospital. Okay, Harbor Oaks is in the city limits. Palomino drive in that area is not. Yeah. And you get down off of. Yeah. There's right. Right. There's. Yeah. That's why that's why the unincorporated I mean some people can't vote in the city that basically live in the. Oh the end of Florida Avenue. Right. It's unincorporated South Florida. Yeah. You know, if you go past that, people are so we're I think that, okay, so we have the four key employees. They have to live within the incorporated Tarpon Springs or unincorporated Tarpon Springs was just a suggestion. I was making it up because you can Baywood village and you're not you're considered not in tarpon. Well, and those people don't have an allegiance to another community because. No, they consider themselves part of Tarpon Springs. So okay, so we're talking about for the for key employees and where are what are their limits. Yeah. Listen, my problem is, is the unincorporated areas are long. They're fingered everywhere. Right. And for the four most important people, if we're going to require one to move in, then you might as well require them all to move in or none to move in. But you can't. You can't put a distance on the fingers of the unincorporated areas. I mean, the city limits is the finger. That's where it stops. Okay Anybody coming for the city manager's job is probably going to move in the city, because if they didn't, I mean, it's and I know how expensive it is for anybody to buy a house these days, but we can't leave that open. Okay, guys, I'm telling you, we're looking at a nightmare. If we don't say you four have to live here and I think they understand that. That those four have to live here. If they can live in I. I tend to I tend to disagree. I think I, you know, I like the idea of the city and its unincorporated sections to be acceptable, because you could be one block over from, from the city and you can't be a police chief or a fire chief. You know, because you're one block too far and require them to, to have to sell their home to move. Can I ask a simple question? It would be possible to get maps. I'd like to see what we're talking about here. Well, I think we, you know, we see this all the time on planning and zoning, we actually have we actually have, and through the county, correct me if I'm wrong and you would, you would know this is, is we actually have a kind of a map of what unincorporated Tarpon consists of, I think so, because when we did our comprehensive land use plan, one of the issues we had was where a developer or a builder would get a permit from the county knowing that they had to annex in. And, and so we they developed a, an area plan of, of potential annexation. So there is a dimension. It's just not way, way out there. Like, you know, you would think anybody you could live way out there. That's part of the finger. There's actually a, a map that consists of what they consider unincorporated tarpon Springs. So it kind of gives you a county. The county considers that. Well, we consider Tarpon Springs, considers it, because we, we, we look at when we developed our land use plan, we knew that eventually any of this development would have to come in number one. So we sort of, you know, you can only go so far north before you hit the Pasco County. Okay you could only go so far south. Okay. Well, you hit Palm Harbor if you hit Palm Harbor. So we knew that the all the unincorporated pockets of Tarpon Springs and that's easily definable, that is easily definable. And then the question is how far east do you go, and do you go as far as Brooker Creek? That's the question. No, that's, that's way, way beyond, yeah. I think the areas that are marked for annexation in the immediate future at least have to be adjacent. Yeah. At this point, you the city. Yeah Yeah. It's got a but city property to be but and then you city resources is the reason to bring it. Correct. Okay so like Forest Ridge community, even though it has a Tarpon Springs address, is an unincorporated area. So that's just at the north end of. Yeah. And that's why that's why I would be reluctant to require them to move in when they live in unincorporated Tarpon. I call it unincorporated Tarpon Springs because from, from the, from the, the map that we look at, you know, even though they're deemed county it seems like they're tarpon and, and you could see it it's pretty like it's pretty much defined, the, the most recent that we had for our elections, that will show you not only the precincts, but I'll show you by color code what is in the city limits and the unincorporated in Tarpon Springs as well, within those pockets, yeah. It has to be something very definitive. It is definitive? No, it's your thing is not definitive because it's. Can you bring up those areas that currently are next to tarpon and then put it in? No, no, actually the boundaries are definitive. The unincorporated part of Tarpon Springs, I would love to see them. Okay. Help me understand what you're saying. I would love to see him because we're going to have some control on this or there's no way. I think if you saw it, you would. Yeah I think it would help to make sure that it is well understood by all of us. Yeah Irene's trying to see if she can bring it up and then. Okay, so that was so we're looking for those four individuals defining what that is. We've got the two different the two qualifications. In other words, if you get an internal city personnel that is promoted into one of these four positions, they get grandfathered in. The residency exception. And if one of the exempted parties elects to change residency as the exemption is forfeit now and now we're just it's whether or not we're including unincorporated Tarpon Springs for those four individuals. Okay Now. So, Irene's looking at what she can bring up for that. Are there other residency restrictions? We want to see? No. Here we go. Do you want me to try to enlarge? Let me just show you a, In here. You're looking behind you now. Is this the same map you work from? And. Yeah. See if I can enlarge it and zoom to an area. For example. So right here, let me see if I can enlarge a little bigger okay. So that's customer. Let me make it smaller I could probably define it. Yeah. Let's make it a avenue that you were speaking of is right here okay. And see that's that's the unincorporated. But this is Florida Avenue. Yeah. Go back. Can you make it a little bit smaller to show the what's section. Yeah. Zoom back out okay. Okay That's this is clustered right I clustered. This cluster. Yeah okay. That's Klosterman okay. So Klosterman or you could see the like, this is not this is unincorporated. That's Unincorporate that's unincorporated, and here the yellow is incorporated, the yellow is incorporated. So our boundaries are is the blue boundaries are because we have properties out here to this beyond 19. Mariner village is unincorporated. That was county. Yeah. In the city limits. The village that's incorporated that is incorporated. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Over there by, what's across from the college? That subdivision rolling. Oats. Rolling. That's a lot of those streets. Veronica or Verona or something like that. Those are all right here. Can you move it this way? Yeah. Hold on. Sorry. It's Okay. Okay. The yellow is all in incorporated. See the white up in there on the other side of 19? That's all unincorporated. And up here is. This is Tarpon Avenue, area Avenue and these areas are not. Yeah. And let's see that. Go, go more to the right. All right. And the yellow is incorporated. And that's the white around there is not. Yeah. All the annexations have to touch to be annexed in or what do you what do you call that. There's a name for that. So in the white here on the edge that's on the other side. That's, that's, that's like obviously that's Eastlake. Yeah. That's way that's like Tarpon. Yeah It's like it's all Eastlake. Sail Harbor is up in the corner. It's not in the city but C yeah, Cell Harbor yeah is unincorporated. Yeah. Yeah. So where is, Cypress run on us? Cyprus. Cyprus. Run. Okay. That's unincorporated. Incorporated. Is that unincorporated or is that. That's not it's not incorporated. That won't be. It won't be. Yeah. It's not not included. It won't be. What about the housing development across the street from it. From. That won't be. It's unincorporated right. That's pretty well define. Oops. How about going north? Pasco County, this is the division. Yeah yeah. Well, there's the north on the on the, from 19 east west. I mean, 19 West Pasco County is the line, 19 East. Is she right here? Of course not. This is I can't be my guess. It might be 19. Yeah. 19 East. You've got all the way to the county. Except for obviously, no, that's off Oscar Hill Road. Yeah. Right there. So So there is a defined area. So in this in the charter we're going to identify those defined areas. Because at any time if somebody who's in the white now extends, they're going to keep going. Right. Extends where if they keep though they're becoming annexed I think that's but the thing is if they're annexed are part of the city. So somebody lived here. Somebody if somebody lived five miles down Keystone. Not that they could if they were annexed, they would be part of the city. So wouldn't it be if they. Right. So they would be in a right white area and that white area expands right somewhat to what they'd have to be annexed. We're thinking unincorporated Tarpon Springs. If somebody lived, somebody lived right here. Yeah. Okay. The language we were the city, unincorporated Tarpon Springs. They have a Tarpon Springs address that could never change. Change? That part would be constant. You have to have a Tarpon Springs address. Yeah. Let's let's we'll define it now there's two. There's two, there's two zip codes. There's 346, eight eight and eight nine. Right, right. So we'll define it like that okay. Let them talk I'm going to, to close out this part. Let's talk about, if we have what our definition, our definition is going to be zip codes (346) 883-4689. It's, it's going to say tarpon Springs in your address. Right. It's unincorporated Tarpon Springs that that's the only way you could identify it. Otherwise we run into the problem that you you discuss. If you put three, four, six, eight eight and three, four, six, eight, nine, we've got it covered. Okay. So at this point, our next meeting is next Monday. We have the HR director coming in. Anyone else? And. Mr. That's right. Commissioner Collins is coming back. I'm sorry. That makes it easier. And the election stuff. Okay. That's fine. Is anybody have a board comment or staff comment they'd like to make before we wrap? I just want to thank you again for the stuff that you've put together. It's really helpful. Well, it helps me keep it organized. And I think it helps me understand where we need to continue finding closure, so thank you. I appreciate that, but that's my job as chair. Any comments? No comments. Okay we will continue residency next week to understand, we've we've discussed the key four and then if there's a requirements on anyone else and then I think we're ready to go. Yes Request that would probably help us with that list of the other people would be an org chart. Oh Can we get an org chart? Yeah, I can provide that. Okay. And actually it would be good to have a city org chart. I mean, not just, you know, I think if you, I think if you go to eight eight and eight nine that would be great. It does that covers it. All right. And the last thing to do today is adjourned. Adjourned.