e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e order the charter revision Commission of Monday July 22nd 2024 at 2:00 roll call please Dr root here Vice chair colus yes Dr Bales here M Jennings here Mr ccas here Mr Seaman here Mr chair pany here we will start with public comments today they're limited to four minutes and please introduce yourself and your address Hi how are you I'm fine my name is Jack spurk I live at 400 Grand Boulevard I'm part of a small group of people called preserve Tarpon uh we're a small group that always looks for uh preservation um we sent you guys an email and I was just here to reinforcing it that uh we were certainly support uh a five-story limit um we would probably like to see even more we would probably like to see two to three stories in the downtown along the docks and in some of the historic neighborhoods um there's so many examples of why we need it uh one p one place is Safety Harbor um a friend of mine lives in a huge condo that's built right off of Main Street that's way out of scale um they recently put just a three story high building on Main Street which is totally out of scale with all the other buildings so I think you know maybe we're not dealing with that problem now but one day it'll come to this town and um we really think we'd like to see preserve the the character of our neighborhoods thank you thank you thank you very much is there someone else who'd like to make a public comment made it just in time thank you pet black is 514 Ashlin Avenue um couple of things uh first want to follow up on what Mr cuscus brought up a while back with the hospital when Mr uh quas bomb I believe it is quad bomb was here and Mr quad bomb was trying to basically say you didn't need the piece in the charter about the hospital because it's in the lease we need to continue to protect the city and leave it in the charter because if for some reason 50 years is a long time they go and try to flip the hospital and there's changes we need to continue to have that protection uh also I wanted to follow up a little bit and maybe now that Miss Vincent's here y'all can get a little more discussion about it about commissioner kol an's recommendation about limiting Heights and how to do that um I think that's a wise idea I think something the citizens of Tarpon would appreciate um he gave you plenty of exemptions as far as on US 19 and maybe certain corridors but I think for the predominance of of the city some type of height limit would be uh appropriate um also in the I mentioned when I was here last uh with regards to the comprehensive plan and the Strategic plan but I also mentioned I believe the sustainability plan needs to be incorporated into the charter and not only the sustainability plan but also the sustainability committee as you know in the powers the board can dissolve or disband committees uh at their pleasure and I think uh with the situation that we Face here in Tarpon with so many rivers bayus and creeks uh we need to amend uh solidify the sustainability plan and the uh sustainability committee into the charter uh just coming in today some of you who live back around bies are already flooded they got the signs at uh hope and Canal and and uh Roosevelt already so we know it's an issue I just would like to protect the city to make sure we lock those things into place um one other thing and I'm not sure if this could be done through the maritime committee but as I mentioned you've got the comprehensive plan the Strategic plan I'd like to have the sustain stainability plan in there also in your Charter you have two boards that are mentioned Planning and Zoning Board and the boarding of adjustments I've mentioned the sustainability plan to be uh committee to possibly be added and that could be done maybe when you put it in with the plan but I think it's time we need to revise and Revitalize the maritime committee and if necessary put that into the charter we all know the river is our lifeblood not only for Commerce but for our tourism but I I've I've pushed for this I honestly believe that we can Revitalize our Port we can Revitalize our Waterway um there are many things that could be done as far as getting grants I've mentioned to the city commission about they do facade grants they do grants here and there a maritime Grant to offer to boats or companies that would bring in people or boats to redo sponge fishing other types of marine activities Marine Max bought that big property across the street and I sent it to the city commission they have an intern program to train people to work on boats and stuff we've got that potential and it's industrial and it's it's beyond just the base of Tourism my time's run out thank you yeah you're on time but thank you very much for your insights is there anyone else who wishes to speak I'd like to make comments on his comments um yes go ahead I I would just like to point out that most of the things that Mr deac has brought up or regurgitations of things that the committee is already taken action on to put into the recommendations and Charter changes the sustainability committee we said we were going to put on with with the plan and um we're discussing the Heights today it was already on the agenda so most of those most if not everything was has already been discussed and taken action on yes uh in case you missed it we are keeping the the hospital in the plan we have uh going forward with the Marine Commerce Committee as a recommendation on the Board of Commissioners as opposed to putting it in the charter um uh the uh building Heights we're talking about today um see where else is we're talking about putting the sustainability plan in the charter as well so that's where we are okay did you have something to add go ahead well we got uh an email from uh Denise monino asking that it not be added to the Charter yes we did but we'll be discussing that as well okay any other comments on the comments no thank you very much for your uh your engagement in this important issue and we're going to move on um I'd like to uh uh invite Renee Vincent planning director to come and talk to us about changes we had two actions for you one is uh we in discussions on the CRA board um it was a suggestion that we add citizens to it and and later discussions there was a comment that uh we're that there's a plan to add an Advisory board that would have citizen input um and we wanted to close that up with your thoughts and what your plans are and insights are on that which are we tackling first well that's the CRA board and adding an Advisory Board to it okay so um by by pelis County um requirements they dictate that when we have a CRA that the Board of Commissioners has to sit as The Advisory Board um I'll I honestly I didn't actually this didn't get related to me that you were going to be talking about this so I haven't done any homework but um I'm sorry did you say that the that the Board of Commissioners is The Advisory board or the board they are the they are the agency so you have an agency board so that has to be the Board of Commissioners right um whether or not you can add advisory members to that that I'm not sure with if we establish you know we've adopted the finding of necessity for the central Tarpon Springs CRA and we've transmitted that to the county panel's county now anytime a new CRA is being formed they require an ad in addition to the Board of Commissioners sitting as the agency they will require an advisory committee be established there's just no getting around that um that will be part of their uh delegation of authority they will require us to if they follow suit with what they've done for the last several years they'll require it for any new CRA and I would expect that if we try to extend the timeline of the existing downtown CRA that they will require it to be an advisory committee for that CRA as well as probably as a condition of extending the time on the existing CRA um okay so your comment here is that this is is already covered by pelis County R I believe it is yes ma'am okay any questions for Renee go ahead well not on this not on this subject maybe some of the others that she's going to talk okay well we're on the subject now till we close it out I understood how it worked so I'm good I'm sorry I said I understood how it worked I'm good okay all right no more questions on this okay um then the second area um we were asking you to come and talk about about is you you had shared with us your thoughts on um building Heights uh you've been doing a lot of work with your comprehensive plan your comment was well you have Building height restrictions throughout the city you just don't have a map of that at this point or an over overlay so to speak um and can you explain the restrictions in the regions where they are well okay before we like take a deep dive on this I want to defer to the City attorney um I just handed him a bit ago the uh chapter 163 3167 which had some specific changes that just went into effect in 2023 and it specifically and this is what was added in 2023 an initiative or referendum process in regard to any Land Development regulation is prohibited and there's other things talks about that as well I'm going to defer to um Mr salsman as to whether or not we can even go down this path at this point go ahead but I have I have questions for Renee though before you answer the question one of the things that we you that uh we were going to look at was a overlay of the city as to the height the current height uh restrictions on the uh um comprehensive land use cuz I think in when we were doing the comprehensive land use we looked at H you know certain areas of of the city that would be more favorable to a height variance or higher floors than other parts of the city and and I think you're going to you had an overlay are you going to give us an overlay as to what the what the uh uh height requirements are in those various sections obviously we know 19 had would have a higher um so okay but let are you still talking about in reference to a charter a charter question here or referend initiative here's the thing we're going to be coming back and doing Land Development regulations after the comp plan is adopted but here's the thing for example my recommendation is that not be in the charter my recommendation is that that should be done by ordinance that it requires a super majority of the of the commission to to vote to increase height limitations and I think we were we were I think I think you thought that was not a bad idea um as opposed to just putting it into Charter and and where the that is you know so I I don't think you can put I'm I'm again I'm going to defer to the to the attorney I don't think you can have a charter question around establishing anything like if you want to if you want to do that super majority that's an ordinance that's an or but are you a I don't think that you can make that a charter referendum question that it should be a super majority no we have right now Renee we we're just asking you questions we have already um discussed whether or not it should be a section in the charter versus an ordinance um we are we are putting together a list of recommendations for the outside the charter outside the charter so let's not get tied up in that but our question outside of the charter you know I mean we have we we have owning Heights established for every square inch of the city uh we have the special area plan and the smart code that is is broken further broken down by area if you're on Tarpon Avenue if you're on North pelis if you're on the docks all of those things and and that was established through a pretty extensive planning process back in 2011 2013 it's been further amended since then I mean you know we you know if you're G to start you know further reducing Heights you know I mean that that it's calibrated now based on where they are there's not one universal height limit across the city it just doesn't exist so you know anything that we're going to do is going to have to be in a public process and a public forum um I you know I I'm not exactly sure what else I can say about it at this point I mean at this point would you consider commenting on our thoughts with regards to requiring heart uh height variances approved by the board adjustment also require super majority approval for the Board of Commissioners is that that I mean that's a you I I where you have site plans that go to the Board of Commissioners that could also potentially have a variance process for height or anything for that matter um I know under pelis County regulations they basically they grant that power to the board of commission ERS to review those to those they can grant a variance as part of a site plan processes so that to get so that you get away from that conflict between two boards I think that's something that's probably worthy of considering what the vote needs to be so in other words take the approval of the height variant from the in certain in certain specific instances and what would those be and if a site plan has to be also be approved by the bo if a site plan has to be approved by the board of adjustments if it's a plan that's going through that process then and I think to remove the conflict between what the board of adjustments might do and what the Board of Commissioners might want you you you we need to you can specify that it goes to the Board of Commissioners and they can grant that variance I think the Board of Commissioners may also have the ability to say we're going to defer that to the board of adjustments I mean I don't know there just a clean you know a clean break here we have in the plan development regulations the Board of Commissioners can can wave certain design criteria you know so it's that you know that's a that's a you know that's another process so I mean I'm I'm not there's there's not a clean way to you know I mean we'll we can look at this as we go through all the Land Development regulations which is going to be starting very soon that's the next thing after the land after the comp plan um the special area plan is its own unique process and and smart code I think that's been well calibrated and it's actually been further reduced in 2022 you know they they took that down and basically said you know you have absolutes and then in a certain couple of districts you can get one additional Story by conditional use which is the Board of Commissioners so they you the Board of Commissioners has control over height that see you know for the most part in in the smart code although you know I think I think Board of adjustments could also weigh in if in in certain instances but I don't know you know if you've seen it sliced and diced any other way I mean I said pellis County they they don't they don't take the power away from the board of adjustments they just give it also to the plan to the Board of Commissioners when they're reviewing a site plan um to to be able to if it's something that's going to the Board of Commissioners I want to say with the county that's a very small small bit of stuff most of that is handled by their develop Review Committee so um I don't know if that answered anything or just muddied up the water for you so anybody have uh comments or questions for Renee go ahead well Renee I'm I think part of the problem is a lot of people microphone a lot of people didn't understand that there is existing every piece of property in town has a height a limitation on it or or guidelines you know depending on whether it's commercial or residential and and the other thing is is we're talking about height this is to everybody we're talking about height and a vacuum and the height has to be tied into FS isrs density things like that because under certain circumstances you could give somebody a little extra height for them to create a bunch more green space and and so I think did we decide we're not going to put in the the charter the height thing we're going to do an ordinance right now we were discussing we have not made that decision made a decision I've been working on recommendations for the Board of Commissioners in terms of an ordinance for that so but but we haven't made a def firm decision on putting in a chart Mike you thought it was going to be an ordinance is that what you're saying I I I I thought it didn't belong in a charter I thought if you put restrictions significant restrictions on the ability to deviate from the height requirements it it could be done by ordinance and not by Charter okay so and that's what that's what I'm feeling is that the it's too complex to an issue the height is tied to too many things to just have this thing and it's like Renee said when she first started and everybody in here is most everybody in here has been involved in it one way or another these comprehensive plans and these public hearings and the special area plan and um and all kinds of things so it's what I'm I I hesitate to just totally take out any flexibility for future Generations future Commissioners to to work to work with so I'm I'm more leaning towards one the documents of the comprehensive plan and the zoning and let's hear from Mike first okay sorry I I think you know obviously it's you know things that we discuss as recommendations for the city commission to adopt his ordinance okay whether they adopt it or not you know that that's on them but from public comment and everything I've you know the information I've gathered people in this community want to see some height restrictions okay and I don't you don't want to take it away from your Board of Commissioners because I think it's under their purview I think it may be simpler that instead of a a board of adjustment like you said if it's a site plan that those things probably need to be approved by the Board of Commissioners and not necessarily the board of adjustment so I I think this this the process may be able to be simplified I don't know that's your job to figure that out but by have there may be compelling reasons as John may have indicated that you may want to deviate from what the height requirements are provided Green Space so you let somebody go a little bit higher whatever the case may be but that compelling reason if it's that compelling you know the recommendation that we've discussed is that it be by super majority of the commission okay and that that's your check and balance that S I think satisfies the community uh with regard to uh their their wish to have limitations on on height requirements and I'd even go as far as say that that ordinance to change that ordinance would require a super majority of the Commissioners to change the ordinance because otherwise you can if you have a super majority for an ordinance and then they decide to change ordinance just by a majority you're going back to square one so I would even take it as far as requiring a super majority to change that particular ordinance and that kind of locks in this this the uh restrictions on anybody just uh being able to having a a majority and or whatever and I think that that what's I think that would satisfy the the residents of this community it puts the onus back to the Commissioners where it probably should be and avoids having to make that a charter Amendment did that did I say that clear that's correct that's how I understand it okay but I added having a super majority change ordance it's uh it's here super majority four out of five I know what a super majority is what's the super majority to act on what actions would you require a super majority to increase height Vari height Varian over one story two stories whatever whatever whatever the comprehensive plan says that they are I think what he's saying is that anything that would normally have required a variance to go to the board of adjustments to increase height go to do it and if it's a site plan that would also have to go to the Board of Commissioners that one the Board of Commissioners would have that Authority but they would have to it would have to be a super majority vote to you know and and you and candidly once you open that up you you you might end up having that apply to a lot of things but you know hopefully we can kind of put our arms around it and limit it to to height um and does that does that get around the state law that you're St you're completely outside of the um the charter at that point so yes I think that that that's purely a local policy decision of you know of the of the Board of Commissioners um I could go with that but that's just a recommendation we'd be making that's all yeah it works yeah my concern the whole time was just just to provide a a little higher level to to have to get by to to make really sure that they're really are compelling reasons sure uh for for doing one and I I think this does it and I would agree it's not really a charter well and I yeah and you you do have hardship criteria in the board in under the board of adjustments so you have to have a compelling reason whether you're going to the board of adjustments but we need to carry that over to if we're going to make that switch with the Board of Commissioners for a site plan um we want to have that hardship criteria in place that there's some compelling reason so I want to recognize Tina um you know uh I agree with John that things are complicated but I don't agree that people don't know that there are necessarily height restrictions I think they do and but they want to but I have but everyone I've talked to or have heard from one way or the other wants to make sure that we do not overdevelop um the city and wants to have some kind of really major restrictions in place now if this can work now from what I've seen it can be in the charter but it doesn't have to be in the charter you know so if we can make this as as stringent as Mike has suggested with the super majority um you know maybe that is the way to go but I have a couple I do have a couple questions and I I'm relying on the fact that I know you know so much but can you tell us just for instance for the downtown historic district what is the current restriction on height what and what is the current restriction for the sponged docks what is the current restriction for that historic area that's it it varies by where it it doesn't follow the Historic District Lines no no it I mean so when when we calibrated the smart code we were looking at more fine fine grained areas so you know so you've got you know like Tarpon Avenue for instance um is is two two to three because that's what's comp you know when you get outside some areas are only two um you know along North penel you've got one area in South pelis where the manatee Village shopping center is that whole thing actually allows five so it it it's very it's calibrated to where you know based on compatibility and in the surrounding area that was all put into place when that was originally adopted at the Docks um again that's part of the smart code area um generally speaking most of the docks is three story maximum um and and a fourth floor by conditional use I think but I think that that we just remended that code year and a half or so ago and and and brought that down to to remove any confusion so um you the vast majority of the docks is three story although right along the Waterfront it's actually twostory and and what about the residential area of Greek toown and the residential area um that's the salad the fruit bowl area that is um neither one of those areas are in the smart code area there are they're generally r60 you know they're they're generally a one and two family residential at 30 30 fet I think okay I think I think r60 is 30 feet off the top of my head so it's definitely less but we but when we amend you know these these upcoming uh land codes and so on WE to look at that I mean you know that we can we can absolutely okay yeah when we're when we're looking doing if we're going to expand the smart code we're going if we take those areas in you know we will look at you know what is the compatible height in any area it might only be two story I mean that's generally what you have around there so right you know all that has you know needs to be taken into consideration do we have any further questions yes John Renee isn't the downtown the Tarpon Avenue regulated more by the far than it is the height it's both it's both it's it's by story it's got compatibility issues too it has compatibility you have F you have in ISR um yeah so you've got a lot of things to have to to deal with it's not just just Heights any other questions for Renee she's here no I think you did a great job thank you very much for coming hope I didn't buddy up I I wish we would have kind of tuned into the whole restriction in the state statute a little sooner I apologize for that but you know we're no apologies you came you gave us our information we're grateful of that that that the the piece on about Land Development regulation was just put in in 2023 so thank you thank you okay I'm going to ask for an amendment to the agenda so that we can um go ahead and discuss our remaining uh Charter revision items um since that's not on our agenda today um so may have a motion for that so move second is your second yep second okay uh all in favor I I I any against all right so let's move on and talk about um the remaining uh Charter sections so for section8 on the CRA board uh we've received our input from Renee I think that uh we are going to my recommendation is to uh no action the suggestion to add citizens we don't have an ability to do so and if an additional CR is put into place then the county um requires an advisory board so I don't think we have a charter action for this I agree you do I agree you I agree with you okay I'd like a motion for non-action on so moved second okay any further discussion roll call please actually it's yeah right roll call Dr gal yes action Miss Jennings no action can you make a negative motion to accept and no action on it yeah okay yes Mr ccus yes as to the to not putting not putting it in okay Mr Sean yes Mr chair Penny yes Vice chair Janis yes chair Ro yes okay moving on um I am uh going to jump to the section 22 on possible Building height sections um um we have uh I've added a summary to the recommendations of the Board of Commissioners to adopt an ordinance for Building height restrictions require height variances approved by board adjustment to also require a super majority approval for Board of Commissioners is that language correct and is that where we want to go the the only caveat I would add to that is because because the commission you know the Comm the Board of Commissioners can change an ordinance by majority they can vote to do away with the super majority so I would add that any the recommendation would be if this ordinance is adopted that any change of this ordinance would also require super majority of the Commissioners that make sense yeah that makes sense Mike you still do we need this overlay mat because it's all no that's what that's one of the things that yeah that's what your Rene had that one time she was going to give us the overlay so we could see the the height but but at the end of the day it is what it is and and and so there's height recall her promising us that overlay well I think she said she' give us a she was working on it but I don't I don't think that's I I don't think it's necessary but but you the rest of it's okay Mike take that part out and then we do the thing with the super majority and takes a super majority to change the ordinance yes I've added those words and that way the board the the Commissioners are sort of maybe handcuffed being able to do anything outside of a compelling reason do we have any other changes we want to see to that are we going to um are we excuse me are we putting this in the CH no this is for recommendation of the Board of Commissioners I apiz where we were so any Board of Commissioners that are watching that's for you that's coming at you okay um so we had discussed uh taking section 22 which is a a reserved section um can I have a motion to accept no changes to section 22 move second second any further discussion Michelle would you call the V on that here Dr baval yes M Jennings yes Mr yes Mr Sean yes Mr chair panny yes Vice chair colis yes yes okay our favorite topic ecological sustainability so um I had comments on two sections so I apologize that under my notes Here it only talks about um uh oh no I'm sorry I did include it um to apport uh appoint a sustainability and we called it a commission last time as AOS a committee and adopt a plan include control of non-invasive species and tie the have the um plan tied to the budget with direct accountability Vice it being distributed across departments and the City attorney was going to provide us words for uh for us to consider and here they are so have you seen your paragraph have you had a chance to read it yes but I didn't include the committee and I didn't include the language on the uh budget so we have to add I I I actually wrote some stuff down you want to share yeah I you know that you know what you put in there was fine but at the the last sentence I would put that the city shall allocate allocate adequate resources to implement the plan okay um so but this doesn't mention a commit a committee so Madam chair I I would love to be able to do five things at once I'm challenged at one at a time to is beyond it the at one time we talked about just putting that we would have a sustainability committee and we would have a sustainability plan and not get too mucked up with and too detailed and what the plan should say and I'm still of that opinion myself that we we we need the sustainability committee we need the sustainability plan but Mike you want to take out um um Brazilian peppers I want to plant oak trees what do you want to plant palm trees I mean we can't put I want to go to no La in native Florida week we can't put everything we can't put everything in so what I'm saying is is the plan is developed by the committee adopted by the board and they um and and and actually you know you we have members of the public who were in charge of the committee saying don't put anything in the charter but you know I think there's enough ground swell of public opinion that thinks that sustainability is important um I I would I would like to believe that anybody who's elected as a as a public official has that built in but it maybe maybe not so I think we should say that we have a sustainability committee and we have a sustainability plan and that's in the and that's in the charter and then what the boc and the and the committee do with it as far as flushing it out is and the public at LGE at the public at large attending meetings and saying this is this is what's important to us this is what we want I I I'd like to to okay hold on wait minute resp hold on hold on so if I understand you correctly you would like to keep the first sentence of the attorney's statement and add in the committee part yeah add in that do we have a committee that has the pl you add the committee um and take out the rest of I'm going to PLL everyone okay so you get a chance um Mor would you like to weigh in uh from the perspective of the the charter the the broader brush Strokes may may be good but I I do feel the the uh non-native uh invas of vuc vegetation and stuff is is has become a really important issue so if I mean if we don't find a way to address that in the charter itself I I think it needs to be uh strongly worded uh part of our recommendations at least to the boc it's it's in the adopted plan already and that was written to us by the people in charge of the plan they told us that's already in the plan no well wait a minute we are surveying so I'm going to ask you to be patient and let people have their say without jumping on them okay so so you have a plan right but a plan is just a plan and there's implementation of a plan and you could have a plan all day long john but if you don't implement it there's no plan so so I you know obviously you know this is this is one I've been pretty adamant about and and so it so by adding the fact that the city has a plan by providing and I'm and this is pretty broad stroke I'm not saying you have to allocate because if you go back there's a reason Reon why you put the sidewalk uh criteria in in the in in the charter because they they had a plan for sidewalk repair but they weren't doing anything no they didn't have a plan well but they could have had a plan they could have but they they could but even if they had a plan y'all they they nothing was being done and and you forced them to have to do something okay so and and and by painting this with AO broad Stroke by saying that the city will allocate adequate resources to implement the plan and that puts the onus on them to determine what adequate resources are okay I'm not telling them how much they have to allocate for a plan is just providing uh um the resources necessary as they have the resources to to address uh their sustainability plan um and you other than that I think the language besides having a committee I think the the language is fine but as y'all mandated that the city budget money for sidewalks I'm saying the city needs to look at budgeting whatever they decide whatever they think is adequate and that's uh subjective uh to do something because currently there's almost like a tug of- war no department wants to allocate their their dollars to doing something out of their budget with regard with regard to and specifically uh removing evasive species nobody wants to allocate it out of their budget so so this kind of forces the Commissioners and the city manager because now he's got to look at this as okay what are we going to put aside to to look at this that's why I think it's important because I think if you just don't put something in there that requires them to do something this could be overlooked and it's in the charter but no one pays attention to it that's just my opinion Mike your language stop oh you'll have a chance we're pulling everyone okay not just every other time back to John all right I am GNA come to you next to last okay because you're Vice chair um Tina would you like to weigh in um well I think I think I think it's good to put this in um can you speak into your microphone yes is I I do I do think we should have a sentence about allocating adequate resources um again having read the memos that were given to us by berer and manino you know saying pointing out that they already have uh about the invasive species as part of their plan I I could leave in this sentence about that or take it out I I could go either way I I don't think it's necessary but if everyone wants to leave it in this one but definitely the stuff about allocating resources John well I think I'm going to defer to Denise Menino's memo and uh to read it it says Mr Kyer director of Public Services explained there is no need to include the sustainability advisory committee in the city Charter Charter in order to quote give it more teeth most elements of the sustainability plan have been integrated nicely into the comprehensive plan and will be included in the Land Development Co code the action steps requiring removal of invasive species were also clearly explained by Mr Kyer to consider well anyway uh you know if if they're being ignored now by the comprehensive plan you know and the ordinance would make putting it in the charter affect that at all you know to you know allocate sufficient funds you know should that be an ordinance issue rather than a charter issue when I say I didn't say funds I said resources okay but again could that be incorporated into the ordinance rather than into the charter that's that's the only thing I'm asking okay that's a good question we're polling now so we'll have discussion in a minute Vice chair I I also read that letter from two different people there my problem is is I don't think we should put everything that's a problem in the city in the charter okay and I know you talked to Public Works people and they said you know nobody wants to take money out of their share of the budget that's a city manager problem if he understands and you just can't say I got all these roads to fix I can't take money out of there cut weeds down yeah you can and that's that's what a government does that's how you spend your money get everything you want at home no you get what you can afford I I just don't like all of this in the charter we found out me especially because I love the idea that we're going to make them put sidewalks down ha this isn't going to make them cut W Woods down I don't care if you if you give them every name of every invasive species es it doesn't mean they're going to cut it down it has to come from the top guys I I'll support anything you all design uh decide I don't have a problem with what I've heard I just don't think it belongs in the chart I really don't I am going to share my opinion I tend to keep my opinions on the quiet side but I think this is a really important issue um I think sustainability has become an important issue and I think it's going to become an even more important issue and I think that by including it in the charter we show a vision of the future that needs to be addressed and sustainability incorporates a whole lot more than just invasive species and I think that you know I know we've had a hot spot with with invasive species but there's so much more to it you know we've got Rising water we've got all kinds of things that are going to be impacting our city going forward and it I really think it's time to address it and make it one of the make it the third plan that's in the charter we are not we are following precedents by giving this plan weight by including it in the charter that's what we are doing we are saying it is important okay the second thing is um we don't have really committees addressed um in in the other Charter aside from pnz and um the uh the board of adjustments but those are really those are those are boards not committees um and we've decided to make the uh Marine Commerce Committee of a recommendation to the Board of Commissioners as opposing to calling it out as a charter section so I'm on the fence with that part of it I am very hard over for giving whatever we put in there a statement with regards to um allocating resources to the plan to implementing the plan and making sure there's a mechanism for direct accountability because that is that's a problem that has already been identified um if the you know we have a precedent for solving the city's problem so where we're consider concerned that it hasn't been done adequately now you can point to the sidewalk as a as as that we're not going to make it a section on its own we're going to add it to the duties of the Board of Commissioners to maintain the city of Tarpon Springs and look forward to to some of the hard decisions that are going to have to be made um the other thing is I think that what we want the sustainability plan and the city's actions to do is more than just looking at um eliminating non-invasive species for landscaping development and Redevelopment we need to we need to go today and clean up what we got and you know like to see some focus on that as well that's my opinion so I know Mr T pany's been waiting patiently to make comments so CL is yours well I um you know it it's a relatively new um concept so some of the things Joan that they I don't think we should say the city staff hasn't taken out anything or taking any action to remove invasive species I mean I've seen them do a little bit but you know the whole concept of the ordinance the committee you know in the history of the town it's I would say it's very new relatively new so I I mean I heard everybody and I appreciate it I heard Mike's comments but um but Carrie I I agree with you that the sustainability has cream floats to the top and sustainability has come to the top and people minds and and what they want to see addressed in a community as much as sidewalks and and streets and Police and Fire and Building height so I'm going to stick with my original position which is we should say that it the city shall have a a sustainability committee and the city shall adopt a sustainability plan but not micromanage the plan contents in the charter and what they're supposed to do thank you okay thank you any other I comments back M of course uh force uh when it gets when it talks about allocating resources it doesn't mean spending money there's Personnel within the city they could allocate Personnel that's money no if you're already paying somebody to do something it does you have them you know they already you are paying them you're not not costing you more money you're just allocating them differently one two I I think as as Carrie said this is important and at the end of the day at the end of the day it's for the voters to decide whether or not this is something that they want to adopt okay and and and so by by requiring you know putting this language in asking that that the city adequate uh allocate adequate resources I think the voters will decide whether or not how important this is to them and and not necessarily us and and so you know I I I don't want to uh foreclose the residents or the citizens voting on this to say okay we want this but we just don't want it in language we want to see it implemented and what better way to implement it is to require the city like y'all did the sidewalks to to be able to to provide the resources to accomplish it and at the end of the day you know I I think the citizens and and I've heard believe it or not I've heard from uh people in the city when I when I brushed this up and they said look this is what you know I thought of you know that we thought of and one of the things we were discussing and they thought it was a great idea they really did you know and that's coming from that's not coming from the director but that's coming from uh boots on the ground within the city um and and so you know that that tells me it was going the right direction you know we can come to a maybe a compromise on this and ask for the sustainability plan and the committee to go into the charter and then follow up with recommendations of the Board of Commissioners for allocating resources to implement plan and accountability that's fine that's fine I just I just think it needs to be addressed and I think if if if they ignore that recommendation then that tells you that wasn't important on on on their part I just wanted to see that it got the same attention that that the previous uh uh this previous uh chart review did with the sidewalks I I have to tell you though um for the sustainability of my eyesight I need you to keep your feet under the [Laughter] desk okay those of you at home okay um what I'm going to recommend is a motion to uh adopt the first sentence of the attorney's language uh uh modified to add the sustainability committee can we yes can we ask a question for clarification so on 624 it says sustainability ability committee and it says Bo to appoint sustainability commit committee to develop and maintain a sustainability plan and recommend recommend changes and updates to the boc that was voted on on June 24th we we found out they already have a plan Michelle okay so that's they they already adop we didn't know at the time that they had actually gone through with the adoption they plan right yeah that's why that's is there can can I finish my request for motion and then we'll go into discussion okay so I'd like uh the motion as I stated adopt the first sentence of what the attorney wrote with the addition of the sustain establishing a sustainability committee and you know Mr salsman will give the appropriate words that we'll have a chance to approve when it comes back um in in companion with that adding uh any further recommendations we want to need me we want to add to our recommendations the Board of Commissioners can I get a motion for that so move second second okay any discussion yes yes I think your idea of the uh the compromise is is good I think we could actually capture it all in the charter if we if we just said that the the city would maintain or appoint and maintain a a sustainability committee and um adopt um main adopt Implement and provide uh the provide the resources to what your language mik provide the resources resources provide adequate resources period to implement the plan period allocate that allocate okay resources and then that keeps us from having to recommend to the boc we just get it all in and U and it I think it cuts down on the rub with the existing sustainability committee are you say not have that in the charter no I'm saying to put what I just said in the charter okay yes he's he's all right all right okay so um let's let's close out the current motion um and go on with a different motion because it's I think it's too complicated to amend right can I read the language and see if this works okay the city of Tarpon Springs shall maintain a a sustainability plan and committee which shall provide for the Improvement and maintenance of the environmental social and economic Vitality of the city of Tarpon Springs and allocate allocate adequate resources to implement the plan yep that sounds great I can live with that period can who who who uh just one question vice vice chair do you agree with uh the change amend your motion yes the second who seconded it this Jen me do you agree with that my ification and then we'll have a further discussion yeah just a quick semantic question adequate funds or sufficient funds or does it matter what's that funds resources resources resources allocate resources I mean we can the city commission shall allocate adequate resources to implement the plan do you do you accept the change to the motion yes okay further discussion I'm in um Michelle would you call a vote Dr Val yes M Jennings yes Mr cuscus I would have liked to add a Bas of species but i' say [Laughter] yes peny yes Vice chair colan yes chair Ro yes and that will go in Section 8 with the other plans okay I thought it was going in 21 good work no that um last time we were talking about it was going to go as a paragraph in Section 8 let's let's open that up my recommendation is that this this be added to the appropriate section in chap Section 8 as opposed to SEC um a new section of 21 are you all right with that or does this need to be its own section section section yeah I I agree any agree with that I'm just looking at my notes here that's where the other yeah it's r r R8 R well we're already Reed remembering those right that's that would be the reum or the Rel lettering no because we're already doing it up here because we added something here so I think we should make it can it be added to follow the paragraph on the Strategic plan so it goes compreh you want I think that's where we need to add it and and it's all that whole section is being re renumbered anyway way mhm do we need a vote on where we put it no okay I that's just uh that's just something that we'll do as housekeeping we present it to you well you know I'm hard over on having it be in the right place with the right title so well no we'll put it there but if if for some reason you don't like where we put it you can just move it okay that's I I want to I'd like it following the um the other the other two plans okay so um oh I'm sorry I promised John we'd start early I want to open a discussion on eminent domain um we have already voted on this but John said there is new data so I will ask him to explain to us where why we need to be considering what what he found has found out okay so this this the new data is that the city has entered into a contract to buy a piece of product property but let me just digress for a minute the city has the right of imminent domain on any legal use they could they could imminent domain spoil sites without any change to the Charter okay so but the fact that the city now has a a contract on a piece of property to buy and it's going to a public referendum for the CI citizens to um bless to me if you make this Charter change you're you're setting up the potential for the Board of Commissioners to circumvent the will of the people and that is if if if the charter failed and then they used imminent domain I don't care if they use imminent domain as long as it goes back to the people the the change that you're making in the charter is is that the city commission can use imminent domain for a spoil site without a referendum but now that it's a there's a contract a piece of property and if that fails and the commission comes back and uses imminent domain that's a circum vision of the will of the people and you'll be complicit in that allowing them to do that uh okay I'm going to I'm going to say I disagree with you there I I can't find the section on M domain right now as I'm flaing through my sticky notes if anybody knows where it is which one b as in beta yes three oh that's I'm looking on the wrong one that's what okay um so I read this paragraph not that it circumvents going for a referendum for purchase I read this as the city can use eminent domain to acquire Pro property for the you know water sewer utility easement public rights away public parking and Stor drainage improvements and we're adding dredge and spoil sites to that those are without referendum let me finish but if the cost of those goes over currently $350,000 then they would still have to go out for referendum I don't think reading it correctly I I don't think legally from and the attorney would would would say this to the extent that the city has to go off for emminent domain that follows under the purview of the commission period regardless of what the dollar amount is that's the that's the the purview of the commission so you can't restrict the cost of eminent domain you can't restrict the cost for eminent domain because it's a separate court that determines the value of the property cor I was not aware of that all right well that's fine so um so a jury so that's the objection CH that that they're they're being able to I don't care if they use imminent domain to buy a spoil site if the city needs a spoil site but the the fact that we have a contract on the property and the voters turn it down and then if this is in there and they circumvent the will of the voters I got a real problem with that well from a legal perspective from a legal perspective Council even if they want it to circumvent the will of the people that's still within their constitutional right so you can't John it is no well look I'm not saying it's not but I'm just saying I don't want to set it up to to to make that possible what I'm saying is it currently is possible it's p possible no matter what you no matter what you do in the charter it's possible then why if they have that right then why add it if they have that right right now why add it you don't have to because I checked with Mr solsman he I said can they condemn a oil site he goes yeah well it looks to me like in this Charter we're are limiting their rights to use them in a domain to only those areas but but you can't you can't limit it you can't limit emminent then we should look at removing that paragraph if it's not effective purpose I think you leave the paragraph in place yeah but uh yeah Mr Soulman's wording for any legal purpose so we have voted to add dredge and spoil sites to the list under 3B and you've add it didn't we add also uh the reasons for the eminent domain well that's kind of 3D no we didn't add the reasons for I thought we had that oh no you you made it so they can use imminent domain for a spoil site right but I thought we added and provide reasons for emminent domain we did not put that in there did we not I I think what we did is if you if you if you look at the Four Corners of that sentence right okay they could only use it for water sewer utility in public RightWay we wanted to add uh spoil sites so that so they have that Authority in am domain for spoil sites and that way it goes beyond the four corners of that paragraph okay I just want to make sure because I had this additional language in there that that makes sense what I said yeah and that's the way historically that's the way it's been and that's why this is small in the number of things they put in there you have to have these all the time and he gives the city the goahead take them I understand the water the sewer the streets the right away I understand all of that we added I just we we added spoil site so they're not limited to just I understand that's what you added M what I'm saying is just me personally I just don't think it's appropriate to have a reference referendum and then set it up for the commission to be able to circumvent the referendum and circumvent the will of the people that's just me I wouldn't add it myself they they they could have done it by imminent domain yes they could have without without but they you know I guess they they are choosing to go to referendum on this but they could have done it by em domain regardless the only time they're really going to go for emminent domain is if there's a real need and we cannot negotiate something to get it I mean eminent domain like you know is is there's got to be a city reason for that a need for that a specific need because you're actually taking away the ability to determine the value of the property that's determined by a third party and actually can be a a jury question with 12 jurors so you wouldn't do that unless you absolutely had to because you're losing out on the ability to control the cost those would be almost when we it's an emergency situation where you need you need this property otherwise you can't you don't have drainage or whatever so how does it sit right now we've added imminent domain we've added a spoil site to that sence yeah dredge and spoil we we had an we have an imminent domain in the charter already added spoil sites and reasons for imminent domain well I you know again I think the charter is a direction that they're trying to say there are certain things in Charters that may not be able to be enforced on changes of situations that you're not anticipating and that's always true of uh in any Charter as it as it sits right now without mentioning dredge and spoil spoil sites though under state law the city actually really has the right to em domain for spoil sites anyways don't they yes so it doesn't need to be in here but you're again you're trying to put together language that is giving direction to the commission these are the only reasons we want you to do it right so I think a strong argument can be made by Commissioners if somebody says hey let's do x y and z no the charter limits what we can do this is not a situation where it's an absolute emergency that we have to do this right so I there's nothing wrong with if you want to add that language and you did vote to say that part of that will also be explaining the reasons for that eminent domain action right and and I look at it from a different perspective we can go out to the citizens they can approve the uh the referendum for the spoil site and the property owners can say uh you know what we've changed our mind we want more or we're decided not to sell we have a contract with them yeah it's a breach of contract they can still do it well it's specific specific performance it's just a personal thing with me that that we're expanding it when we've got a referendum and we it's just what you're doing is you're just allowing the commission to say we can use imminent domain for spoil when before they weren't allowed to to do it I'm all for spoil sites I think we should have one I don't know that enough critical analytical analysis was done on this but I'm for a spoil site but I'm just not for circumventing the will of the public okay and and just as a question what was the new data you brought forward that the prop it was not under contract when you voted to do this so the new data is that the property the city now has a piece of property with a consensual uh contract between a buyer and a seller to to to put this property on a referendum to acquire by the by the city but on you didn't have that you didn't have a contract when this first came up yeah but on the same token you're talking about I mean from a practical standpoint you're talking about the purchase of a piece of property that if the city was going to go after emminent domain for this amount of money would not occur unless it was something that was absolutely needed for the city yes uh question for Mr solsman uh given what you've been discussing about the fact that there are really no limitations on eminent domain does that word exclusively belong in there I don't think there's anything wrong with the language that's in there okay I think it's giving direction to the commission I I think that there are times when there could be an emergency situation that something has to be done that they can look at this and say okay this is beyond yes it's beyond the scope of the charter and frankly honestly somebody could challenge it based on the fact that you're going beyond the charter and we could have a court have to make a decision as to what you can do in that situation but I think this gives direction to the commission right I guess the the word exclusively is what's bothering well again eminent domain is a really it's the city's not going to be go getting in the evident domain business unless it absolutely needs to it's just not something they're going to do right that was the purpose of it Joan the exclus exclusively was to say you guys can use them in a domain but this is all you're using it for right you're not going to use it for Parks you're not going to use it for spoil sites or whatever or anything but other than what's said okay so Mr Suman when you say you think it it it it's it's good as it is is that including the change we voted for okay um uh I'm going to take a poll of the commission to see if we need any further discussion question on this item um um no I don't don't think so okay I'm good with everything you're good with it Mr terapen we know it was a good Hill what's that but you're not d uh I'm okay okay Mr C okay good all right so no Action Moving On okay we have completed our recommended set of changes I believe at this point to the Charter yes you GNA you're going to take that statement away from me one one question and and and uh it's it's okay if y'all tell me no it it won't hurt my feelings or anything but it's and I don't know if it's exactly new information but it didn't pop into my head until Saturday and uh when a situation came up it has to do with perhaps enlarging the potential pool for uh members to participate in boards and commissions it would be in Section 8 but if it's not if it's too late to discuss it tell me so well you said we've allowed discussion if there's new information do you have new information so it's an idea that in it's something that just came up I will get you okay with it you you approve it discussion approval yep that's I see enough nods to go ahead okay well it's it's very simple and some of y'all may have a reason that you that you don't like it but there you know our Section 8 under what is currently J says Commissioners May appoint any City residents to serve on one permanent border committee uh what it doesn't address is all the people out there that have a real stake in Tarpon Springs have businesses here but don't necessarily live in town own property in town is there a way and should we consider allowing not just residents but Property Owners or business owners or or whatever to increase that pool it it came up from a very specific situation where someone that I felt would be a really good position to take my spot on on P andz and I asked him about it being proactive the other day and he said well I live like one block out of Tarpon Springs tell them to move move the line yeah yeah anyway so that's the thought I I think that anybody that has quote unquote skin in the game should be considered if somebody owns property or a business sometimes they have more of a stake than just a resident so well by Resident we still exclude part-time residents because they're not citizens of the community um from my perspective well I'm going to go ahead let's see where are you on this oh that that's tough because because again you know it goes back to the issue of people with and I assume this this person had um skills are very applicable to the Committees and sometimes we have people on committees who who aren't as skilled you know so um I guess I could go either way because I think there is a need for I think there is the for skills oh Carrie I'm gonna okay go ahead okay quickly the organization I used to work for was a business improvement district and they waited uh the power of the board to uh property and business owners and I think that you know they've made sometimes a larger investment in the community than residents so you know I'm with Merl on this one strongly okay I'm a little bit mixed I I could see property owner cuz they have to get in the game businesses could be like a revolve Ving door um but at the end of the day you know one of the things we have to look at is improving the skill set of those who sit on on boards to so um and so there there are people a lot of people that are qualified that that actually participate in the city who don't you know own property to city but that also you look at it there are people that live in the city okay who are residents of the city that could serve on a boards but they have no skin in the game because they they you know they may be renting down over there at the apartments by wind Dixie okay so they could serve on the board and that's they're transitory okay um so I I could see I could see you know I don't know if it you know I don't if a change of the charter or the that that's that's what the charter require there's there's one specific line here that we have so so I I don't know if that's State mandated that they have to be but I I could see uh broadening broadening this the the pool of of potential candidates um you know because because just because you're a citizen or resident of Tarpon doesn't mean you're you bought into the City and there are there are people like you said that that live outside the city who who do more in this city or participate more economically and personally than those that actually do live in the city and and giving them the opportunity to be heard on some of the boards like I said May improve the skill set of those that are currently sit so I could be swayed I can't the uh my my thing is is like Merl talked to an individual who's who's a property owner just outside of this of city but there's a lot of property in the city that's owned by big operations and um are those individual corporate members going to be eligible for a committee post because those people aren't going to be inclined to hear about sustainability they're not going to be inclined to hear about limitations on uh height and and Fa fabric of the community type issues so I'm good with the chter the way it sits Vice chair we talked about never having enough people come out sit on committees I'm not sure allowing somebody from out of out of the city that's going to take care of that problem I I'm really not I would rather see us figure out some way if we're going to be going forward is how do we get the people to Tarpon to come and sit on the board versus bringing somebody from outside in and that and he's probably a nice person please don't take me wrong incorporate into the city but I have to I have to say no I I have to I have to point um pipe in on this residents there's a relationship between residents and our elected officials there's an accountability there that a a property owner who is not a resident does not have that accountability relationship I don't think that allowing someone who's a nonresident to be part of a board helps us I don't think that's the way we should go about addressing how we get people on the board I think there's many other ways to approach it first um before we were to consider something like that that would be to my mind the absolute last ditch effort because we give up that very important accountability relationship um oh something else I was going to say about that as well do I hear voices I missed it do You Hear Voices yes next door oh no they're in your head no what are you talking about what else is you what else is you what are they telling you to do you don't want to know what they're saying thats a good one Carrie I I I I think there's other things we can do I'm really that is oh the other thing I was going to say is if you have a property owner or a business owner owner that has a vested interest and a significant concern to voice there's other ways to be involved in the city our boards are open our committees are open they can come and provide public comment they can reach out and and discuss individually with members of the there's a lot of ways to influence what happens here without us opening that I considered a Pandora's Box particularly after what John mentioned about ownership or property by major corporations um I like the way you think out of the box ml but this suggestion doesn't fly with me like I said it just popped in my head and and I hadn't had really time to think about it very much I I I I think it was a I think it's a good discussion but I I'm going to recommend that we um we uh we we table it um what about better enforcement of people who are qualified to be on boards well that's a we have a we have a a state a recommendation for the board to that they look at that so I don't want to open that conversation right now okay um are are we going to take this farther let me pull no no I'm good you're good no no yeah I just wanted itk convincing but you swayed me can I now say we finished discussing changes to the Charter until we get our recommendations back from uh Mr Salman okay need a motion I'll so move I don't think so we was just we never actually even opened it up we were just heard the comment okay so let's move on the next thing we need to to do is to go over the um uh the updated recommendations to the board of commission for Life me I've just now lost that what did I do with that um all right so um I have an question for the attorney with regards to our recommendations for the Board of Commissioners um we have opted to defer a number of our the the changes we had discussed to a list of recommendations for the board if they do not want to action any of those are there any of them on there that we would go back and consider actioning for a change so that's one question and the question for the attorney is is can we ask for for them to let us know what their decision is with regards to our recommendation when they come back with their recommendations for the charter changes as well you follow me on that you can ask them I mean that's all you can do gu that's all we can do you want to borrow mine for now yeah I'm going to need to I don't know where might use mine yeah I want I had written on something on the top of it but I will oh oh oh look it look it look it I found it okay um all right so um based on what we had last our discussions last time on more on Building height I added the first uh one there on Building height restrictions and then I I changed the other language based on your recommendations of last time um so the only uh let's see we had a we had a change suggestion by Mike to the first one that said any change of this ordinance requires a super majority and then under Revitalize the Marine Commerce Committee I have the the comments on the back that expand that further um one of the things I think we also discussed is recommend that the city that actually come from law the police department uh have a Harbor Master is not a for Authority yes if you flip the page okay we have under scope number one investigate establishing a Harbor Master for the anot river gotta see it okay I was listening so I would like a a motion to accept these recommendations with The annotation that we made earlier about changes the ordinance for Building height restrictions requiring um super majority um ask the set of recommendations we will make to the Board of Commissioners is it is that the back and the front or just the back it's the back and the front um the Revitalize the Marine Commerce Committee we went into some detail on what we thought that should look like um then and I just put that on the back page so it was complete and of itself I can put C back page no it's all right I just I um are you taking comments on the scope I just want to um well I'd like a motion first and then we can take comment and then we can do discussion I'll make a move that we adopt these recommendations okay second second in a second all right let's open for discussion I'll start with you under um scope where it says that uh it's four and five actually they're kind of together the so the the we have two boat launching ramps in Tarpon one launches into the manate migration Zone which it's kind of funny the city changed the rules on Spring byou but they have to run the gauntlet first to get to the safe zone so it's kind of funny the other is we launch into the pristine grass Flats of St Joseph's aquatic preserve a Des State designated aquatic preserve with with pristine grass Flats I think that we should ask them to find additional boat launching ramp spaces and potentially close those to or make them nonc combustable engine launches for canoes kayaks rowboats whatever um it's just we talk about sustain you know we're talk it's it's like we're uh bipolar we talk about sustainability and stuff you know which we rightfully should but then we're tearing up the grass flats that provide the trout and the red fish and the flounder and the everything and then you know they they talk about manate death and manate scarring and and we're launching right into their main migration R can I sure can I recommend make boat ramps that are in manate migration areas and grass Flats be uh exclusively for non-motorized craft non combustion well I think we have to non combustion well before we do that K unless you want to get lynched we have to come up with the new we have to provide our alternative launching ramps first and then oh we're getting there and then close it I'm just trying to think out where we have that land that we could do that honest with you I you probably know so provide alternative boat launch locations and make boat ramps that are in manate migration areas and grass Flats uh be exclusively ster for non combustion engine on the East Water watercraft watercraft was nevered we may be talking about the same thing I thought so you can put a battery the directions get confusing bladed motor in no it's combus non combustion electric motors yeah well you can have a battery driven blade that does the same amount of damage as a well electric motors electric motors don't have enough power to cut any to cut anything that's that's about to change Mercury's coming out with 100 horsepower electric yeah I don't I don't think that we can assume that that is true could you require one of those cages or we get the new launching ramps it's probably take care of it yeah I think new launching I I I kind of like the non-motorized yeah okay yeah I think as as long as we replace it with something that's badly needed further out the river yeah yeah like you say we'd be lynched otherwise increased number of ramps motorized uh watercraft nonmotorized water one not motor anyway so right next to what used to be flatteries and marar now I guess Jean strs has it yeah yeah the 10 acres right next to it and then maybe it'll go to a six say six provide wasn't that's part of the problem that's probably far yeah okay so yeah I like that's those are good suggestions to that they they did dge it and then they came and said you can't use it okay um it's 3:30 and uh Mr couscous has disappeared so let's take a five minute break come back at you know 3 how about 3:40 we'll go 9 minutes e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e um Michelle can you share with us what this is it up I'm sorry um that was if you would like it R brought it showing the heights of the current areas of the build of the heights allowed I believe so would it be correct to assume well I can't answer anything she just brought that and if you see on the side she pointed out on the left hand side at the bottom it shows the height per color area right so those are building another in other words number of stories is how we should interpret this So currently looking at this the uh manate Village at this point could go five stories that's that's if it were to if it were completely torn down and re and rebuild because they just rebuilt it at two or one you know I'm still amazed nothing's gone in there I thought they were building it out for a purpose me too I think a good person with a color chart could help him whoa what is this South Gateway special district wait that's the that's manate Plaza manate no but look it's the docks yeah no that's sdb which is two oh okay well it's that's it's a little bit lighter than yeah you have to look at the print in the color you can hardly IED on that too yeah when you go down Ford Avenue those condo I can't remember the name of it on South Ford Avenue what's that five story there's one there's a five and there's one that's like six or seven that sits way back but that's the stuff there was all the whole strip all the way to the end Mike was that way both directions and it got changed in the 70s that's why they never added another building they have all that property added building yeah that's why it got changed okay yeah and there's no she doesn't have anything indicated for our like the the fruit ball um it's in green it's in green and oh that's the park um Madam chair you still have a you do have a motion on the floor I know I was distracted by the data that showed up all right let's get back to our discussion on um the Marine Commerce Committee as part of the recommendations for the Board of Commissioners so we've uh changed uh four to say provide alternate boat launch locations and make boat ramps that are in manity migration areas and grass Flats be exclusively for motorized watercraft and five increase the number of boat ramps for [Music] motorized water craft watercraft and then add six uh provide trailer parking access the the grass Lots one car you could embellish it by saying it's an aquatic preserve which it is okay so that's uh that's the second change to this are there any other discussion points no okay uh let's see Mike I believe you made this motion did I get that or did you make the motion I don't think I did Michelle who made the motion Mr uh do you accept those changes I do uh Merl do you accept the changes all right is there any further discussion Michelle would you call yes M Jennings yes Mr yes Mr s yes Mr chair PenAir theair yes okay well that's that um so we've finished our uh work for now um the next things that will happen on this commission is that uh our City attorney will work all these up into uh referendum language and language that goes to the Board of Commissioners have an opportunity to approve that we spoke last week about having that language available sometime during the week of August 12th with our next meeting then being August 19th is that still a good plan yes all right is that acceptable to the city clerk yes is that acceptable to our commission members yes yes yes we come back okay so that's our first what she said our feature schedule so our next meeting is August 19th with information coming in the PRI week and if all right so that's uh that's that let's go to board and staff comments I'll start with h city clerk none okay no comments Mr it's been a [Laughter] pleasure Mr SE no comment no com Mr cus I'm I'm going to Echo in more words that that what John said that you know looking at this committee and looking all the Mondays that we would be meeting and to see how diligent this this group had gone through this Charter and uh um I'm just really really proud of the work we did so far I obviously there's more work to be done but uh you know that's a testament to our chair to keep us moving forward and uh again well job well done thank you well thank you very much um I'll second Mike's comments and say that it's been a very collegial atmosphere we've all got a lot of work done but in a open courteous time sometimes humorous way and I agree with all of you and it's also been very educational so I've really enjoyed it thank you well um from my perspective uh I've done one of these before I learned a tremendous amount um being the chair of this U I don't know how else I would have approached this because my memory is in s spreadsheet that's how that's that's my version of AI personally so um I thank you all for being patient with me as I grew into the role it took a few weeks um I thank very much uh the city clerk and the deputy city clerk for supporting us because we have you know this has been a long process and I really appreciate what you bring to the table Mr solsman you have been responsive to every one of our requests I greatly appreciate you on here and I look forward to seeing what you provide to us going forward I can only go downhill I guess and since this is being recorded and then usually is watched I just want to express my appreciation for every member of the public who's come to speak to us for every member of our elected officials who've come to speak to us to us and I applaud them because this time every single one came we had an issue last time where we had one commissioner that did not bother showing up um so I appreciate the 100% um that came through I appreciate the city managers uh responsiveness to our need for information I appreciate that he's empowered his employees to come and answer our questions I also appreciate the fact that um we've had access to every one of the charter officials as well as the um the the police chief and the fire chief um it's been a great experience and we have put together a solid set of recommendations from a tremendous amount of information that we have had to um discern with our collective experience and perspectives into a solid set of recommendations so thank you very much and with that I adjourn our meeting today see in the 19th m e e