##VIDEO ID:tfpNc7isYZI## The charter revision Commission meeting for Wednesday, August 28th, 2024 at 10 a.m. Michelle would you call the roll, please? Doctor? Ruth. Here. Mr. Collins. Here. Doctor. Bucuvalas. Here. Miss Jennings. Here. Mr. Curtis. Absent and excused, Mr. seaman. Maybe he's trying to find parking and Mr. Tamraparni. Yes. Okay since Mr. Saltzman is delayed a bit, I'd prefer not jumping into the charter, since he needs to hear our comments, on the other hand, I did happen to bring our recommendation. Summary. May I ask for a modification of the agenda to talk about that and review it until Mr. Saltzman arrives? So moved. Second. All in favor? Yes. Yes. Any opposed? Okay, let's let's get on to that. All right. It looks like this. Two page, two sides. And I will start off by saying I have no idea where those two zeros came from. In front of recommendations to the board. The title. Okay. So this I updated after our last meeting together, and I entered. I put in the changes as as requested. If you just take a minute to look it over, and let me know if there's anything further that I've missed or need to address, yes. I third from the bottom. Follow the city's established guidelines when allowing changes to our local. Which where is that third from the bottom allowing follow the city's established guidelines? Oh, yes, well, the city does. Okay. The city, for instance, does not have guidelines to deal with the Greektown Historic District, which is only a national district. So to say, allowing changes to our local and national districts, it doesn't accommodate that fact. And, well, we have we have a local historic district. We have a national historic district, and we have a national cultural district. It's the same thing. Two national districts, two national districts, and one with the. We don't have a local district anymore. No we one of the national districts is also local. That is the downtown district. And the fruit bowl and the fruit bowl. That's. No, that's part of the that was amended to be part of the original national Register district. Yeah. Okay. The what? You're talking about, Carrie, is the local ordinances, the controlling ordinance that gives it gives the national Register District the ability to regulate design and things like that. So it's you have the National Register District and a controlling ordinances. That's the local ordinance that gives the power to the National Register. Okay. So how should this read, well, Tina, you can finish. You brought it up. Well Well, that depends what the intent is. Exactly. And I think we might have to go over that, you might say follow the. You might say have that sentence, and then you might have another sentence. You know, in the case, in the case of National district, that is not locally designated the city must establish guidelines. Okay. Something along those lines. When I was with the Historic Preservation Commission, we followed the national guidelines. They were adopted as city guidelines at that point. And now the city did a big study to establish their own guidelines, which basically incorporates that for the local historic districts. Are you saying there's no national guidelines anymore? No. There are. I'm saying I'm saying that that there's no local designation for the Greektown Historic District. Maybe that's this doesn't address, Greektown? Yes, it does. When you say is Greektown National District, it's an it's a cultural district. No. No. No. Yes. No. Yes. Yes. Excuse me. No. You wrote it better than I would, because. Because I did the nomination as a city employee, and I worked with the National Register on on this. So yes, I was chair of the Historic Preservation Committee at that time, and it was made clear to us that this was a cultural designation. But what the national budget, what the no, what the National Register says, this is a normal historic district with an added overlay of cultural significance. It's not different than a historic district, except that there's an added overlay of significance. Otherwise it's the same as a historic district. Okay, because that's interesting, because at the time it was established, we were directed that there weren't since the residents had not voted to accept basically the designation, the local designation, there was no architectural controls in place, even though in the in, in the in the documentations that came with regards to the cultural designation there. I mean, in the packet, you could imply that there were architectural controls with the language that was in it. So how could you imply you mean on a national because of national controls? Well, the documents we got back for the Greek cultural, the Greek. Well, I know that that would be the nomination. So it was implied that there were. But we were told there wasn't in terms of how we address changes in the in the Greek town area. There are no real teeth in the national controls. Exactly. You know, you can you can demolish anything, you know, in any any nationally recognized. So right now, as far as historic, when you're when you're changing the building structures in our in our I'll call it, I'll call it the language I'm familiar with and then we can work that, the, the local historic district of the fruit bowl and up through downtown. ET cetera. And then there's the National Historic District, which goes around spring by, you know, those are the two. That's what I was referring to here, Carrie. Yeah. Let me just stop you for a second. Yeah, just for history. The National Register District originally was the downtown from Orange Street to Lemon Street and Easter Ring, I think. Or maybe a little further, maybe down to Levis, and there was a local local ordinance that that controlled the. And that's what created the Historic Preservation Board so that they would enforce the local ordinance. Okay. There was no vote of anybody, and there's not a vote required to establish a local ordinance at the time. The original National Register district was created. They also simultaneously created a local ordinance without any vote. That was just okay. Wave the wand. Years later, many years later, they decided to ask to include the fruit salad area, fruit bowl area, whatever you want to call it. And also the Greek town. But they were separate votes. The Greek, the fruit salad bowl said, yes, we want to be in and the Greek community said, no. Hell no, unfortunately. So that's where we're at. If you wanted to do something, you could say that you would encourage the city Commission to adopt a local ordinance to, provide protection to the Greek town Historic district. I don't know that there's an appetite for that, but that's what you could ask. There. There is. I mean, there is there's a lot of people that want, but not the same, necessarily the same. Yeah. You know, and then then there needs to be some this, this when, when we discussed this months ago, the issue revolved around the historic Preservation Board being more like cowboys and not following their guidelines. So this was not a discussion about Greek town. This was a discussion about our existing districts and encouraging the city to make sure the board members were knowledgeable and would enforce the rules that they were supposed to enforce. Well, the way this is worded implies all national districts. Yeah, that's and that's why we're here to discuss that. I didn't intend to expand the scope. It was it was to make sure that our boards are basically, acting in accordance with our ordinances. Well, I think the issue, the real issue we're talking about with the boards is specifically with the preservation board is there's state statutes that say what type of members you can have. And the city wasn't paying attention to the state statute. Right, Tina? They were just applying. They were appointing people who didn't have any qualifications. Right. To meet the state statute. And that was with the above were requesting the city maintain CLG status. And that is part and parcel of that, making sure that maybe it should be appropriate, maybe it should just be one and tie those two together and request the city maintain CLG status through appropriate appointments to the preservation board, and then follow the city's established guidelines. When I don't know, Tina, I don't know you know more about where the second National Register district is in terms of, yeah, I think they're they're ready for some kind of ordinance, but not as strict as this. I mean, but a modified, possibly a neighborhood conservation overlay. Okay. Okay Did you. You could say and establish guidelines to preserve other national districts, because there may be others coming up, potentially other designated historic districts like Union Academy or something. Right Okay. This is trivial, but I think it might not be a bad idea to put what CLG is, and the CLG plans. Certified local government for anyone who's watching, okay, so let's put this aside. Mr. Saltzman has returned, thank you very much for, sending out the updates in such a timely fashion, I trust everyone had a chance to review them, and, are you ready or do we need to wait a few minutes? No. Whenever you're ready. And is it possible to have the, the changes on the Michel? Are you able to bring those up? I am not. I didn't know we were doing that. Give me a minute. I can go put it on thumb drive. Well, I was going to say you've got you have the ordinance there on a hot button. You could just track our conversation as we go. Began this week. My brother is I'm just going to watch it. Oh, my. Or if you want to, just give me. Give me the mouse. I'll let me see if I can. I don't know if the mouse will work that far away, but you. September You know. August Brutal. You can go on to page two. Or we have the first read today at the elementary school. Right. It was. Okay. That's good. I'll lose my seat, so this is an old version. Is it the old one? This is an old version. Yeah. It's been updated. Okay, well, we're going to go on and continue. All right. So, let's go to page two where we have the first change from, Monday's meeting, this is the, the first. Whereas for the swapping. Any changes needed? I was good with it. Looks like he caught i. Looks like Andy caught it. Yeah. Looks good. Okay. It's Yay! There to, two paragraphs later. Maintaining has been added. That makes sense. Yeah it's already been created. Yeah. Is there any are there any other changes needed to page two? And welcome, Merle. Thank you. Parking was horrible today. Yeah. It's always a challenge. Okay Page three. We have the update for section 26 for the sidewalk. The planning and the change of funding. And I will just make a comment on the second, whereas that's read you might want to bold the where is. No. That didn't come up. Yeah I'll do that. Any further questions on that page. Moving on to page four. There are two updates addressing the naming of the, the Tarpon Springs Hospital Foundation and the charter. And to emphasize that it's city owned property. Yes. Can we back up to page three? Oh, I got to go backwards. All right. What else? I think it might be clearer if you put, sidewalk improvement plan and budget and increase in fiscal expenditures or budget for. And we didn't. We didn't, I don't think I think we talked about improvement plan. I don't recall talking about a budget. Okay, let's let's take a look while we're here. Yeah. I mean, I think it's just saying that if fiscally we're going to spend 300,000 versus 100. Yeah, well, within a fiscal year or within the year. Okay. It's the way I wrote it. Write it up. Yeah. I mean, they could add more. Obviously Okay. I think this is okay the way it is. Okay. Except the bold. And remember, it's just the where I'm more concerned about the exact language that when you review it, okay. Moving on to page four and the updated part on the hospital. Any recommended changes to that? Okay. The top half of the page, completes the whereases. And now we go into the changes to the actual sections. Okay. Yes. Andy, the. Are you with me? What? Are you with me? Yes, sir. I'm listening. Okay. The. And it says any subsequent leases or agreements with the hospital involve only city owned property. That's. I think that's pretty clear in the in the existing lease. Yes, but that's what the language that you guys originally, wanted in there from the first time we had the meeting, that language was added at that point. That's not it's not new to. Thank you. Michel. And, so hang on one second and remember that. So whereas if you want to look at the more. Yeah. It's just we don't want to set any hair on fire around town. Right. Yeah. The Yeah. I mean, it's is there, is there a change that you or something? You feel uncomfortable with? I'm having a difficult time hearing. Oh, yeah. I was sort of having a sidebar with Andy about it, but he kind of addressed it. The You know, I spent some time, I spent some time reading it. It's the length of the lease is so long that, but I do think that the ownership part ought to be clear for historical purposes only. I, I looked at the first two pages, and I thought it was clear just from that. I mean, city owns the land. Yeah. They own the building. They, you know, they control the name, etcetera is the other entity. But what was what was inaccurate was who the lessee was. Right. That was the part that was inaccurate, which this straightens out. Yeah. If we were going to make a change to this, the only thing I would recommend is you would have it on the first. Whereas here, I would add the DBA and I mean, advent Hospital, just actually I didn't do that on purpose. Yeah. Right. Okay. Because that could change at any time. And I was thinking about that when I made the changes in the whereases. No, I understand, but I didn't put that on purpose because we are not we have nothing to do with the DBA. Right? Right. We have a. When I looked at the lease, I saw clearly who we were leasing with, and so I wanted to make it as clear as possible. That was the only entity that the city was dealing with, and they were dealing directly with that entity. I think putting in the DBA adds to some of the confusion, because today they can be DBA, Advent Health, tomorrow it could be DBA somebody else. Right. And I didn't want to put I would suggest putting it in the whereases and only the first time is so that the people who are voting on it know what we're talking about. And I thought, I thought that the people that are voting well, the way I look at this one is it is a clarification section. And the clarification is that we had incorrectly had had the leasee in there. But, I mean, I understand what you're saying. I'm not in favor of that because it's been like three different, operators since the lawsuit. There was university community, there was somebody else, and now it's the advent who are very nice people. And and well financed and well run. So the lease says the Tarpon Springs Hospital Foundation, Inc. Okay, any other questions, comments on this section. So we're not changing it. We're leaving it as it is. Okay page five. This is back again. The charter, the change charter language for the swap issue. Okay. Okay. Any any other comments? Okay Page six. There was no change. Page seven. There was no change. We stop at page seven. Yes. Is that section 11? 11. Section 11. Terms of offices. Section four. Section 11. I'm sorry. Oh That's right. I should have been read this. Right. This one. Terms of offices. Remember we were talking about this issue on on the language. Oh, yeah. Yeah. So my so I don't have tha. Yes, I this this bottom of page eight. I'm sorry the way I my thing didn't have pages I was guessing it's page six. I think you made a change to page six without reading it. Well so I'm trying to get to section 11. Terms of offices. Terms of office. That's the bottom of eight. Okay. And, after our meeting, Irene contacted me and Michelle, and this was kind of what I was talking about at the meeting, the language here was a little difficult. So if you look at where we put under, qualifying period 30 days prior to the qualifying period, that was what I had talked to Irene about, that she had difficulty with. And she's saying, she would like us to remove prior to the qualifying period. There is no such qualifying period. She works from the date of the election, depending on the date when the ballot language is due. So instead of eight days like I currently do, I will set the qualifying period to allow for 30 days. So if we leave it as the qualifying time for the office of City Commissioner, shall be 30 days period, instead of prior to, the qualifying period, because she said there's no qualifying period. I know it's confusing, but, it would just read the qualifying time, for the office of city commissioner shall be 30 days. It's not written right. Yeah. Period. Okay. Yeah, that makes sense. That wasn't the intent. The way it's written is not the intent. The intent was that the public should be notified 30 days prior to the qualifying time for candidates. Right. And that was the next sentence? That's the next sentence. Except it needs to be changed. No that. Well, let me finish. It needs to be changed to qualifying time. So she. So instead of qualifying. Qualifying time shall be 30 days. And 30 days before the qualifying time. A notice is sent out as opposed to qualifying period. So we should say a notice by first class mail shall be sent to all city registered voters 30 days prior to the qualifying time. Yeah. Instead of period. Identifying all commission seats open for election and indicating who currently holds the seat and their eligibility for reelectio. But the first sentence is what's throwing me the qualifying time for the office of city commissioner shall be 30 days prior. We should actually remove that sentence. Yeah. In its entirety, because the qualifying time is set by the code section, and we don't want to put it in the charter because each. That's what I was trying to say. The qualifying time. It could be different. Then we're not saying that the that the qualifying time. So there were two things we were trying to change here. One was the eight day period to 30 days. Right. And the second one was that before that time starts 30 days prior, we want a notice given to all voters. So let's take the second one first. I think we're good with the second one by changing period to time to time. Okay. So everybody's good with that. Now let's go back to the first one. I agree with removing prior to the qualifying period because that just made it right. So okay. So if we leave the first one as the qualifying time for the office of city commissioner shall be 30 days. Yes. Because changing that from 8 to 30. Okay. In the charter. So those if everybody's good, I'll make those two changes for the office of city commissioner shall be 30 days. Period Period. Okay. Period. Yeah. Yeah. That also has the benefit of getting taking that confusion out about qualifying period. So yeah. So I'll remove that and we're good. That was the one that Irene was concerned about. Okay. Okay. So she notified us on her vacation. So we're going to do two things. We're going to notify the public 30 days prior to the qualifying time starts. Yes. And then that qualifying time lasts 30 days. Yes. Yes sir. Okay. Thank you. On that one. Ask them one more question. No no, we got it. Don't ask. Okay. Thank god. Commissioner. Is it mayor slash city commissioner? Oh, she's saying where? It says the qualifying time for the office of city commissioner. Oh. Well, the only reason I did that is because the sentence before says candidates for the office of city commissioner. Okay. That's the only reason why I. I used city commissioner. Okay, here's a question. If it says city commission does that include the mayor? In my opinion, it does, because the municipal election to select the board of commissioners is the first sentence and that the mayor is part of the commissioner. Yes. He's the commissioner, but also the mayor. Okay, so it's complete. It's more complete. Yeah, I have that's how I and that's how the language was consistent on there. That's why I chose Board of Commissioners versus mayor. It didn't work. Yeah. I mean, that makes sense to me. That's why I didn't. Okay, I am going to ask that we look at page six, which did have a change based on our conversation. It was just to make the sustainability plan its own paragraph, and I did that. Yes, but it's not in red, which is a change. Oh. Oh, sorry. That's okay. Where is it? I just wanted to call. Our our our group's attention to that. Yeah, we read number. Yeah. I added, I yeah, I write or I read it. I okay. Sorry. I was doing everything quickly to get it to you. I'll leave that one alone. Saves all those attorney bills for us. If you're doing it quickly, we just need you to. But you and I wanted you guys to get it so that you wouldn't have. You'd have time. Okay, Mr. Saltzman, you know, there's the three roles. You can get something cheap. You can get something fast, and you can get something good, but you can only get two of the three. Well, you got you got good and fast. Fast. All right, so that's I don't see any changes for what was done on six, and we're good with what was done on eight, and there were no changes on seven. Okay, so moving on to nine unless somebody else has a comment. Okay. And then the it was just a grammar correction on paragraph E. Or our grammar people happy. Yeah. Okay. I look to the right for that. There were no additional changes on page ten, Carrie, can we. Yes. What? Page ten. Ten. I know we talked about it. It wasn't a change. The very last paragraph. Somebody said that it was redundant to something else, but I couldn't find that. Could somebody tell me? Are you talking about under 13? No, yeah. 13. Andy. Right. Here it is. The express intent. Yeah Where did you guys think it was? Well because we decided it was redundant with what was in the prior. In the paragraph above. Okay I mean, the first, if you read the first paragraph, except for purposes of inquiries and investigations, the board of Commissioners or its members individually shall deal with city officers and employees who are subject to the direction and supervision of a charter officer solely through the charter officer who supervises that city officer, employee, employee. And they're not allowed to give orders or directions, and that was that's duplicative with what's in that last sentence. That's why it was removed, except for specific I hear you, I hear you, it's specifically calls out the city manager that they have to go through the city manager, but. It's Whatever. And, yeah, I, I got you on that. I mean, it never hurts to have it specifically to the city manager. The whole idea is, is that the commission talks to the city manager. Yeah. City manager deals with everything else. If the commission is unhappy with what's being done, then they replace the city manager. I mean, there has been issues with people trying to go around and that's that's I like the specific, but I'm not going to you want the language to say the specific carry but okay. I mean it's but I understand what you guys are saying. It's a little duplicative. But we voted as a group to remove it. We can we can vote as a group to continue to put it back in. I mean, that's not a big deal. The thing I like about it, honestly, is from a legal standpoint, is that saying the intent is to go. So when everybody goes, well, I was talking to this person. Well, the intent is you work through the city manager and the city manager is responsible for that. I believe we put this one in specifically five years ago, and I and I think it's I mean, in my opinion, I think it's a good expression of what the charter is saying. Okay. That's just my opinion. Some commissioners, it has to be pretty plain that they can see that. So all right. So maybe we should we need to leave that in there. I think all right. So I'm going to pull everyone. Doctor Bucuvalas. I'm fine with leaving it in. Miss Jenny. Stet. Stet Okay, Mister chair. Penny. Leave it in. I think it makes clarity. Leave it. Yeah You said leave it in. Okay. Let's have a motion. A second and a vote. So moved. Do you need to run over there to do that? No. Okay. So we have a motion. We have a second, Mr. Chair. Okay. Please call the vote. Doctor. Yes, Miss. Jennings. Yes. Mr. Simmons. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Okay. So any other changes requested for page ten? So that would take out the whereas yes, I will remove that. Where. Okay. So let's go ahead and note that we're. Thank you. Yeah that was a good update. Okay. So there are two paragraphs on page two that will be deleted. All right. Any further changes regarding section 13 or page ten? No. All right. Page 11. Was one, one change here with wording. That was by section I. Yeah Any other comments changes, discussion on this page? No. Okay Page 12. The slight change here was, Acting City manager, and all this is adding the charter provision that was already in place. You all wanted that to show that we took it out. So when we added this. My recollection was, is that when we added the definitive assistant city manager, we changed that. And we took out that paragraph so that it's duplicative. It's I don't disagree with you, but I don't think we took it out. My notes didn't show any change to acting City manager, but yeah, I it's it doesn't make sense. Yeah I, I can, I can pull my notebook. It will have the history but that doesn't mean there's so much as if we have an assistant city manager, which we are requestin. Do we need an acting city manager? Since we've already said that assistant? Is the acting. I mean, to me, to me, we don't need that paragraph that that acting city manager paragraph, because we've addressed it with the assistant. There was a big discussion on is the assistant city manager going to be the acting city manager? And upon the absence of the city manager, I mean, it was a pretty, pretty long discussion about it. But I mean, there could be situations where the assistant city manager is also gone or like in the initial period, until they hire somebody where there's not an assistant city manager. So the other provision covers that possibility. Yeah Well, I hope we're on the board in five years, and then we can take it out when we have an acting city manager and everything's moving smoothly. Okay. Whatever you guys want. Assistant acting. I mean, who knows how long it might take for this to actually happen? Yeah. If ever. Well that that's assuming it gets voted in. Yeah. Yeah. And that doesn't happen till next year anyway. So. Yeah And then it has to be budgeted for. And they have to hire someone or appoint someone. Okay So the paragraph was requested to be added yesterday. Just for understanding, and I appreciate you bringing that up. I mean, it's a good point. I but I, I agree with morale. There's going to be a transition period. It makes sense to leave it. Which one? You requested us to put in it. No, no, I think I requested that you did. No, no, no, not that one. Oh, okay. Me? That was me. I could swear it was. It was John. I tell you. Do I sound like John? No, not at all. But I thought it was John. Well, you know, we do have a record of. We do have a record of it. If it's important to know. Are we done with commenting on page 12? No further changes. All right. Page 13. That was a correcting, the direction for residents. Within the city boundaries to changing it to within ten miles to be consistent with earlier in the paragraph, and then down on section 11, I my comment here when I was reading this. When it says the city shall appropriate a minimum of $300,000 per year to be expended on sidewalk improvements during the year, the funds are budgeted. I thought it was 100,000. Well it mark specifically really just frowned on the 300. He just, you know, I thought the change we were going to allow them to take up to 300,000 out. Yeah I just didn't I was I looked at this several times and I was trying to figure out the consistency of if you're allowing them to take out 300,000, do you want them? You want them to appropriate 300,000. In other words, match it, right? Isn't that the idea? No I think that was maybe some of our thought, but Mark said that it was just an onerous requirement to on the budget. So I mean, I thought we had settled on. We'll give them the 300. We'll divide it up and spend the money for the sidewalks, but they have to put 100 in. Yeah. Okay. So I'll go back to, the city shall appropriate a minimum of 100,000 per year to be expended on sidewalk improvement during the year. The funds are budgeted and the amount withdrawn does not exceed 300,000. Yes, that's what I recalled. A technical question because because this is a very, please add anything. This is a very confusing. Yeah. Section. I was dealing with language. Well, then we should make it less confusing. Okay, so the intent was. So we're all on the same page. Then we can make the language less confusing. The intent was that we were going to divide the. We're going to take 300,000 a year out of the. What it needs to say is $300,000 per year out of the sidewalk. Improvement fund and then the city has to budget out of the general fund, 100,000 and then and that takes place until the funds, the Sidewalk Improvement Fund is depleted is how we kind of talked about it. Now, that's clear, because the question I was about to ask was an appropriate do appropriate. Do they not appropriate their 100 plus the 300 from that fund? So appropriate muddies the water there. It needs to see the difference Andy. Oh no. What you just said is, as is clear as can be. And I would rather use that language to say that the city will take, they will budget $100,000 from the general fund annually, and take up to a maximum of $300,000 from the sidewalk Improvement Fund annually until expended until until the fund is expended. That sounds good to me. Sounds good to me. That's clearer. And I like that much better because it was doing this matching thing. And it was it wasn't. It was difficult to try to put that language. Yeah. And when you say the budget, make it a minimum of 100 K, right. So I think you need to separate the general fund right from the take up to 300 K. And so that first. So the paragraph that starts off with the city shall appropriate, it should say the city shall appropriate a minimum of $100,000 per year from the general fund to be expended on sidewalk improvement during the year the funds are budgeted and then the next paragraph should say, city may take the city may take up to $300,000 from the sidewalk improvement fund per year until the fund is expended. So then, yeah, that the amount withdrawn that will be stricken completely with the new language will be put in, and then the third bullet point there or dash point will stay. Yeah that that's a real important part. Much clearer. Thank you. Can we discuss these? The city shall adopt a sidewalk improvement plan by 2029. Yeah, that's what you all added. An actual plan to be made. We don't have a plan. Could we do it in by 2027? Whatever year you want while we're alive. Maybe I'm saying that they're doing a budget now for 2025. When they do the 25 one, make it 26. Yeah make it 26 because they haven't done it right to start with. So now we're going to go from 4 or 5 years of leeway to try to do it right. And I will if everybody's good with that I'll make that change. So Jim, do you want to consensus on 2626? It would be better at 26. Makes a lot of sense. Yeah, I think what we were doing was making sure it was done by the time the next Charter Revision Commission was in place to see what the plan was. That's why we had to take all that time you give it to them. What's that? They'll take all that time every minute. Right? So I'm fine with changing the date, what do you all. That's fine. Yeah. Good Better. I you know, I'm inclined not to do 2026 because this won't be put in place until, you know, 25, 2025. And if they're going to do a good job, I think they need time. According to Renee, it takes some time to do these plans. So that would require, you know, surveying the existing thing and budgeting and figuring out, I mean, for the whole plan. So yeah, they they gave us a list of all the streets in the city that need to be done and what they say is the appropriate time to do them in sequence. Well, they just don't follow it. But that's also not complete. I mean, if you drive out Riverside, there's like, you know, for 2 or 3 miles, there's no crosswalk across Riverside. There's no. And you can look at other areas where things are really broken. They need to do a good job on this. And that's why if we make it 26, I'm concerned they don't have time to do it adequately. 27. I'm more comfortable with and I agree moving it from 29 makes sense. 2727 is fine. We took 2927. Yep. Yeah. Okay. I'll make a motion that the last sentence under the second paragraph in section 11 be changed to Sidewalk Improvement Plan by 2027. Second. Roll call please. Yes, miss. Jenny? Yes Yes, Mr. Chair. Yes Vice chair. Yes And let also adopt the language. For Let's see, the city shall appropriate. In, a minimum of $100,000 from their general fund, a year to be expended on sidewalk improvement during the year. The funds are budgeted this city may take up to $300,000 from the Sidewalk Fund until the funds are expended. And then deleting the sentence that says the amount withdrawn does not exceed 300,000 per fiscal year, I in my notes, I have $300,000 per year. Yes. Per year? Yes. Okay Per year. Okay. That needs to be motioned. Second. And then voted on as well. So moved. Second. Call the vote, please. To vote. Yes, Miss. Jenny. Yes Yes. Yes. Vice chair. Awareness. Yes. Yes And that takes us to page 14. I should say the rest of page 14. There were no changes based on our discussion on Monday, and then let's migrate. If there's no further comment on 14, let's go to page 15. This was the changes made for how the hospital, the city hospital section to be very clear that as a city owned hospital and land, and that the change was made for the lease name. Okay In my readings of this thing and it's. It's very I'll leave that off. I'm sorry. No I'll leave that off. I was the Board of Commissioners require all leases of the city owned hospital property leased by the Tarpon Springs Honda Foundation. That's who is running it. The foundation. I don't know who they are or where they came from, but they have all of that. But we were very interested as a group of making sure that the city owned hospital, because they don't like that in the in what they've have put out. I didn't see that now. Listen, I didn't read this whole thing. I read all the adjustments that they made. They changed when they got what they wanted. Changed by the city, but there weren't any. That said, the city owns it. I can't comment on that. I didn't write the lease. No, I know, but this is why this is so important. Is that that's in there starting actually, I yeah, I know it was. I understand what you're saying. I looked at the appendix, attachments which describe the property, and I believe that's where the information comes from, because I looked through the same thing that you're talking about. Let me see if I can find it, because I was looking for where does it say what the city owned? I think they're going to have the lease through 74, and then they have 25 years. Oh, no, it's 2070 plus 22. 225 more. 15 and ten. It's the 70. And then plus 15 plus and 70 plus two additional terms for a period of 15 years each. I that's great with me. As long as I guess everybody always knows who owns it. That's that's the most important you have to worry about. It is in, in a, in a in a reversion. Well, the other thing is if some if some entity other than the Tarpon Springs hospital Foundation is the lessee, then this would change again. There there's a there's some language in this thing where it talks about we can't allow anybody else to come in and put a hospital. The whole board of commissioners and the mayor signed that. I never understand, but it's in there. So that's why I'm so worried about keeping this. The city owns this place, so it's clear the foundation and the city hereby confirm and agree that the lease premises consists solely of the land owned by the city and leased to the hospital pursuant to the lease. So is that why the emergency room was for our hospitals put in Palm Harbor? Well, there's. They did build the emergency room, and they did it in time. It was part of it. That was part of the lease requirement. Part of the lease requirement? Well they updated our no. That was the update was part of the lease requirement. Yeah, right. But then they put the satellite. Oh yeah. They have multiple ones. Carry what those are those are feeders to the hospital is what those emergency rooms are. You go to the emergency room, they go, oh you need to go to the hospital. I mean, and they so they acknowledge that the foundation is, is leasing land, from the city. I agree that the lease premises consists solely of the land owned by the city. And there was something else in there about land where where the hospital had allowed a tower on it for communications or something to that effect. And The hospital's the recipient, the recipients are total. They got that property. It's And I, I can't blame them because that's been a very good attorney. They have. But the board of commissioners or the mayor signed every one of these adjustments that gave everything away when I went to Greece. I just drives me crazy because the hospital is very important to this community and. Yeah. Okay, well, if this is, if there are no other changes to this, let's just make sure we, Did we vote on the change to section 13? Michelle Not today. I think you did a previous. I'm sorry. Yes. No, I think on Monday's meeting. I'm sorry. I cannot hear you. I think we voted that on Monday's meeting, but I can check my notes. No, the section 13 was. We just decided to leave the paragraph in. We did vote on it. Yes, you did. And we took the Whereases out. Okay, I'm just dotting the i's and crossing the T's here. I thought you meant. And then we made so we only really have two significant updates here. And that in the sidewalk. One we just voted on. And was there any other changes for us? Oh, he's going to put a bold there. That's not a big deal. Change. And that. That's it for, charter ordinances. Irene had me ask the city attorney, do we need to vote on the ordinances with the changes as a whole? Well, I would recommend that we adopt this with the changes noted today. I agree to be put forward to the Board of Commissioners. I'll move. Second. Any discussion? Call the vote, please. Doctor? Yes, miss. Yes, Mr. Stevens? Yes, chair. Yes. Vice chair. Yes. Yes We're going back to these. Oh yeah, okay. So we have a public comment. We don't have public here, so no public comments. I did bring, a we did start talking about the recommendations for the board of commissioners, until Mr. Saltzman arrived, I are you all right? If we finish that conversation on this document? Okay, so. Yes Just my. I do have a question for the attorney. Is this something you need to write up, or is this something we just present however you want it? What is recommended? I mean, the recommendations, obviously. Are extremely important. And so we can write it up. I can write it up if you want and have the board look at it, I'll send you the file for this. Yeah. We can we can have a separate meeting. I mean, this is not time sensitive as the other, but it makes for a complete picture. That's my concern. Is that right now, we're presenting some something to the board of commissioners here. And this is this is this is what we want to see in the charter change. However, this is an important part of this because these changes, they don't need to be made by charter, but they should be made by the board. When is the ordinance going to the boar? Tuesday. Tuesday. I'm sorry. Tuesday. The ordinance is going to the board. The ordinance will go to the board the first day Tuesday. Yes The question is, do we bring this up Tuesday? Do we bring this up? I would not bring it up Tuesday. Tuesday is a very long meeting. I don't think you're going to get the attention needed. Yeah. No I agree it's kind of a chaos thing. It's too bad we can't move move this as well. But we're not going to. It would. All right. Yeah. It would make sense just to tell them at that meeting. I think that we have some important recommendations that we will follow that relate to things that we weren't able to deal with in the charter. So is this something I need to schedule them with? The city manager? Yes. Okay. I may wait for the new city manager. That's fine. That's what I'm saying. There's not a time period on this, and remember, depending on what happens Tuesday night, you will have new members on the board. Well, no matter what happens Tuesday night, you're going to have, at least one new member on the board. So that person needs to get, you know, up to date before they look at what what you're recommending. Right? So they need to have a better understanding. So I would give it a little bit period of time for that reason. Okay Can we talk about it. Yeah. Okay. So let's just we all understand that I will make mention that we have a series of recommendations that will be presented at a later time at as I am able to schedule with the new city manager. Okay yeah. Let's talk about it. So we just had a conversation. Did we finish the one about the requesting city maintain CLG status, by having appropriate appointments to the Historic Preservation Board and following the city's established guidelines when allowing changes to our local and national historic districts. Do you want me to take our local out? I mean, the local and out. I would prefer that you add, and establish guidelines for. Oh, that's right. Here it is. And establish, guidelines to, the national conservation Overlay to with guidelines to preserve other historic districts. You could just put established guidelines and then they can decide whether it's okay established guidelines to preserve other historic districts within the city. Tina, shouldn't it be a local ordinance to so that it has the teeth? Because the guidelines. Okay, so local ordinance to establish a local ordinance. Right. You're right. To establish guidelines for all nationally designated for architectural review purposes, I guess. Okay. Hold on. So we're going to also ask them to create a local ordinance to establish guidelines to preserve other historic districts in the city. Are all designated designated historic districts. Okay. So in other words, we're going to ask them to create local ordinance. To preserve all designated historic districts within the city. To establish to establish guidelines for all designated historic districts. Who is. To create local ordinance to establish guidelines to preserve all designated historic districts within the city. Yeah Okay. All right. I will update that. Are there any other changes to the front? The first page that has the title recommendations to the Commissioner. The first paragraph. I'm sorry. Which the first. The first paragraph. The building height restrictions, which I've, I've said I'm okay with building height restrictions in the historic districts and things like that, but, Mr. Saltzman, the height variance from the board of Adjustment, the only way to appeal a board of adjustment is to go to the circuit court. Right. You don't go back to the commission and ask them to ratify it. That is correct. So it's not written correctly to say that it goes to the commission for a supermajority, because the appeal goes to the circuit court. Okay. So the thought was to put it back to the commissioners so that is not possible. Well, I think the we're the commission can come in is they have the ability to have a height restrictions through their ordinance, through the land Development Code and the zoning codes and then the whatever's in that code, then the board of Adjustment has to operate within that code. That is correct. So in other words, they can't approve a variance for height. No. But they can have height restrictions in the code. Which they already do. Right. Which we do. Which we already have tons of. So I'm just trying to say that that legally you don't send the board of adjustment decisions back to the commission. That's not where it goes. Okay. Well, this was we as I recall, we talked about having a supermajority on this. If we can't do that, do we just get rid of this? I mean, I think that we should ask them to just strictly ask them to review height restrictions in the community or something, or review the existing height restrictions that are we have height restrictions in the code. I mean, Renee told us that and I mean, we all knew it anyway. But, like the and there are different heights all over town, right? Like, like Tarpon Avenue is like a two story and 19 is more in parts of the sponge docks have a little more height because they were always trying to accommodate a hotel, so if we just get rid of that second sentence, so it says adopt an ordinance for building height restrictions and then any change of this ordinance requires a super majority approval for board of commissioners. That's correct. So I guess you I guess you could, I mean, Andy's a lawyer, but I guess you could do do that. I mean, the ordinance, if you have a height restriction in your code, the. I don't know if you I mean, Andy can tell you, but I don't know if you want your land development code in your zoning code to require supermajorities. I mean, we live in a democracy. If you get the majority, you win. I, I tend to agree with John, but that's, you know, you all can recommend whatever you want. If the board can decide, okay, I think we should just recommend for a review of the height, height, height restrictions in the zoning and land development codes. Yeah, if I capture it. Yeah. So how about if I say we'll recommend they review the existing building height restrictions in the zoning and land development codes with the intent to keep our small town feel. There you go. I'd even put it in specifically in the historic districts. I say I would say specifically in the historic districts, which Andy said gives it more teeth that the towns that took the limited approach of protecting, you know, certain areas. It's better more than the right that I mean, you have to look at a couple of things. One, obviously there are restrictions based on FEMA requirements. So that deals with those issues, automatically. And then the other areas, if you're taking a historic area, it supports it by limiting height and other things to make it remain the historic area that it is. And those are I see those all over the state because that's trying to preserve, you know, the character all those things. And those are justifiable. Well, how about instead of saying only in the historic we say, especially in the historic. Yeah, that's what I said to you. And then you specifically, I use the word specifically in the I'd say especially I mean, especially emphasis, whatever you want to do with emphasis, right. Instead of districts, can I say areas? Sure Just because that's, I think, more encompassing. Yeah. Well the difference they are a district. The difference is it's a defined area in a district. It makes it better for the court. Right? Right. Okay. Well, like, Union Academy is not a historic district at this point, but it's a historic area. And it may become some kind of district, but then it's not there yet. But then it when it gets to be a district, it's already covered. Right. Right. If you say area. Right. No. Can we do both? Can we say with emphasis on our historic districts and areas, if it never becomes a historic district, then it would still be covered. If you don't say historic district, you can put in whatever language you want. I mean, I think the intent is. And the understanding is, is that what you're doing it? Please look at the height restrictions and please especially look at the historic districts, whether what's current or what future to preserve those, districts, to maintain the way they are. Right. So I think that whatever you put in there, I think the board's going to understand what you're what you're suggesting. All right. Thank you. Good good. Good suggestion, are we going to leave the supermajority? No. That's all gone. The last sentence is all gone. Well, I was I was taking it all out. Okay. And replacing that entire thing with. Recommend a review of the existing building height restrictions in zoning and land development codes with the intent to keep our small town feel, with emphasis on our historic districts and historic areas. Sounds good. So, okay, you need a motion on it. Well, I'm going to do all of it. Okay Any other changes to this page, the only thing I was going to bring up was under the civil Service Board. It didn't say that. We asked them to notify them that they if they if they keep the board, they need to fill it civil service board. They need to fill the positions. Well, in the last sentence says appoint and maintain membership. Oh, sorry. I didn't I misread i. Thanks, Michelle. Okay Can we move on to the back page and the marine Commerce Committee summary? I think you've scared the devil right out of that new guy coming. It's good weather. Who's the new guy? Who's coming when he reads all this stuff and it's all good stuff. It's our recommendation. So we need. We need this list. I don't think that's him. I think he'd appreciate it. Well we're about to find out. And I'm the messenger. It's from this committee. It's from the committee? Yes. And? And it's unfortunate we couldn't write this whole thing in the charter, because every one of them needs to be done. And continually. That's. Yes But we made a decision that these things would not be in the charter. That was by the group. Okay. Any changes there? I just think the wording in five is a little awkward. I agree with the, you know, the intent, but just the wording. Oh, instead of launching it should be launches. It should be boat launches, not boats. Yeah, and maybe boat launches that are in Manatee. Migration areas, grass flats and other aquatic protected be exclusively for non-motorized watercraft. I lay out for the next. I think this could be changed to support. Dredging is an ongoing process. Thanks and livelihood is. Why Oh, I am going to have a very. Oh. I'm sorry. That was. No that that's. That was spell check. Well, livelihood is correct, but yeah, I'll I'll fix that. All right. Any other suggestions? I tried to incorporate all comments from our last discussion here. Okay. Let me review the sections summary summary. So we can vote to accept this, first thing I'm going to do is get rid of the two zeros in front of recommendations. The Board of Commissioners on the title. Second thing, I'm going to replace the building height restrictions with the paragraph that says we recommend review existing building height restrictions and zoning and land development codes with the intent to keep our small town feel, with emphasis on our historic districts and our historic areas. The next thing is down where the two paragraphs that says re, request the city maintain CLG status and follow the city's established guidelines. When allowing changes to our local and national historic districts. I'm going to combine that into one paragraph. I'll expand what CLG means. The first sentence I'm going to expand to indicate that they need to have appropriate appointments to the Historic Preservation Board, and to then follow what's in the next sentence. And then we're adding an additional sentence that says create local ordinance to establish guidelines to preserve all designated historic districts within the city. And then on the back page, we're going to change item five to say, require boats, boat launches that are in manatee migration areas, flatlands and other aquatic protected areas to be exclusively non-motorized watercraft and then the sentence that follows the Numerated list getting rid of the two and then then this is and it'll read support dredging as an ongoing process. And then fix the typo for livelihood to make that one work. How about for the last sentence, the very last sentence to say representation by those engaged in marine commerce? Good. Okay. So the last sentence we'll read representation by those engaged in this industry to be represented. Okay. Well they they had me on there as a Coast Guard auxiliary member. I don't know how you include this industry, this in related industries. Okay Organizations. Organizations. Yeah Organizations. This industry. And related organizations to be represented. Okay Can I get a motion and a second to approve those changes to this? So move. Second. Any further discussion? Michelle, would you call the vote on that Doctor Ellis? Yes, Miss Jennings? Yes, Mr. seaman? Yes, Mister chair. Penny. Yes. Vice chair. Kolanos. Yes, chair. Yes Okay, I will make those changes and forward that to our city attorney and. I will mention that we have a list. When the when these ordinances are presented on Tuesday night. Is anybody going to be there besides me? That's the show? I might come for the show. Okay. Anybody? Oh, it's going to be an interesting meeting. I'll just say that. Who's bringing the popcorn, John? You or me? I'll bring the feeling. That's a dea. All right. Well, September second. Right. Third. September 3rd. Third. Third. Yes. Then I'll be there. It's the third. Okay And, Mr. Saltzman, you will not be there. Will you? No, I will be at another city commission meeting. Okay. Well, I want to just again say thank you for all your support. And Michelle, also, Irene, if you're watching, you all have been great to your vacation. Well, this is not the end of it, right? Because we have to take into consideration the city's comments. Right. So we have to reconvene to take in the city's comments. You will reconvene after the city has their comments back to you on the areas that they want changed. They might want to ask us to add some things. Yeah. Yes. And then we will vote whether to accept their changes or not. That is correct. Okay. We are not done yet. When is that likely to be? They have 30 days. 30 days? Okay. 30 days. And then. Because right now we are. I think we have to have all the final stuff done by November. Yeah. Don't forget the date. But there is a November date. Now, I'm. I'm trying not to heavily buck October at this point. So Okay. Well, you'll have a chance to see the attorneys updates to the recommendations at that point, too. All right. I'm just going to do round robin on board and staff comments. Michelle, do you have anything? No problem. Mr. Saltzman. No comment, Mr. Chair. Mr. seaman? No. I think as a group, we worked very well together. Very with great collegiality and expertise. Yes. And I appreciate you supporting me. And how I chose to, do this, not rushing to a vote, allowing discussion and then time to think about what everybody said. Because I think if you rush to a vote right away, people tend to stay in their swim lanes as opposed to having time to contemplate and think about it, so thank you for letting me, not call the votes all the time immediately after things were discussed, because I think that thought period is important. Okay. I call this meeting adjourned. You're going to come in.