All right, thank you. Good morning everyone. We will call the Legislative Affairs and Intergovernmental Relations Committee meeting for March 27, 2025 to order. Clerk, okay, with the roll call please. Gabbard. Here. Anoats. Here. Driscoll. Here. Exander's. Here. Floyd. All right, we have an agenda before us. I'll entertain a motion for approval. All in favor? Aye. and we have our February 20th, 2025 minutes. I need a motion for approval. All in favor? Aye. And we have our February 20th, 2025 minutes. I need a motion for approval. All in favor? Aye. All right, let's get right into our new business and we will start with the current state in Tallahassee. We are joined this morning by Laura Beamer from the Southern Group in David Thompson from the city to give us a little bit of an update on Tallahassee. I know that Chair Gertis and the mayor were just in Tallahassee this week and so David I'll go ahead and turn it over to you and Laura for an update on what's happening in Tallahassee. Fantastic. Well, I'm gonna, oh, here's the mic. I'm just gonna give it to Laura first for an overview of where we are at the moment and then we'll get into, here's the mic. I'm just going to give it to Laura first for an overview of where we are at the moment and then we'll get into a little specifics from the trip. Perfect. Good morning, Laura. Good morning, everyone. From Sennetown, Aki. As you probably read, the House and Senate have released their initial buckets. Roxas still waiting on a couple of the buckets. We're waiting on Ted in the house. And we're waiting on the Senate their initial budgets. We're actually still waiting on a couple of budgets. We're waiting on Ted in the house and waiting on the Senate and their butter project lists still. So their budgets are very, very different. You probably read the paper that the speaker has proposed a sales tax cut. Just guess what? We got a five billion dollar hit in revenue, and then the house also had about $590 million out of the D.O.T. work plan yesterday. So TBD, all this works, the health and the Senate, but it's very different at the beginning, and then we go to conference, and then we're getting out of the end. So stay tuned. We're so waiting to see if there's going to be any type of hurricane recovery budget package. I hope to have an update about that. You know, I might find some more hopefully I can update David and let you all know. So far we have the Macact casino going funded in the Senate budget. Obviously we're still waiting on the water projects. So I also can be updated as that all evolves as well. Really great having the chair in there. It made it until Hassee. It's always a good look to have them walking the halls and you know, to show the members that they care and that, you know, what our queries are and that, you know, we're really to kind of taught assay and make the efforts a lot easier. So I appreciate them coming up this week. It was a good trip. We have to be meetings with our delegation and with DEP. So I don't think if you want to talk about the trip or... Yeah, so I'll jump in from there. So first of all say thank you to our council members for Being present at these shows and it goes for DC as well. It means a lot To legislators as as Laura said and for trusting me with dinner recommendations. I appreciate That a responsibility as well So just just getting into some of the specifics on on our Tallahassee trip. We met with the members of our delegation, as well as staff from the Office of Policy and Budget and the Department of Emergency Management. I would say this is probably the most productive Tallahassee trip that I've had thus far. I think we're really hitting our stride as a city, as advocating clearly for what we're working on. And I'll start with just the bills that the city has been particularly involved with. On the crane regulation, our delegation has been working with the house sponsor who's doing a broader over ROLA emergency bill. Senator Siggley is carrying it on the Senate side. We see that as the vehicle for some of the crane regulation. They're looking at what we can work in coordination with the Chamber and the associated building constructors. But we do think there's going to be some opportunities. One of the things that I think we talked about in the crane meeting that the cow had was the wind speed for one of the cranes that fell was able to be lower because of a technical exemption for a temporary structure. That's something we think is a common sense thing that the temporary crane should also be as strong as the building. We saw what the consequences of that will be. So we're working with that and Don Tire has been very involved with that and giving us that language. We obviously talked about the affordable housing on houses of worship, or processing and working with the house sponsor who's doing the live local 3.0 bill to get our language in there in the way that's reflective of the city. And I think I'll just say this as the broader piece of this and a bit of the balance with Tyler Hasse is we probably get some provisions we really care about in bills that we also have concerns about it. And this is just kind of the state of where things are and that that will apply for both the live local 3.0 and for the emergency bill. A couple other ones that I know of note to the council members is the bill that would eliminate CRAs moving forward. We spoke with our delegation. They were pre-unanimously opposed to that legislation. They understood the value of the CRAs and how successfully we've done them in Pinellas County as a whole. So that message was heard loud and clear. Council Member Harding, I know you were working with some of our staff on some public nuisance of the state's abatement legislation as well, and so we were able to communicate that to our delegates. on some public nuisance abatement legislation as well. And so we were able to communicate that to our delegation as well. And then, Chair, I know you have been working on the unlawful speed in the Wake Zone bill. So I'm sure you'll give a little update on that. But really seeing positive movement on the specific priority bills for the city. Fantastic. Thank you. Council member Harding, I don't want to put you on the spot, but do you want to share with the committee what you've been working on? It's absolutely not me. Oh, okay. Well, that's okay. It's trust me, but it's the power of the legal department that's been looking into how we haven't used the tool in a while. And the tool itself, can we look at putting more teeth behind it? And I'll be honest with you, they use big words. That was the idea was to make it, especially on the police side, to give it more teeth and make it a broader tool for them to apply. Legal, did you want to add anything? Is context? I don't have any chat. OK. I'm not the one in legal who's been working on it, so I don't want to speak. That's all right. But I can have anybody wants any more information. We can certainly set that up. OK, yeah. I mean, I don't know if it's appropriate as things continue to move forward, you know, just to flag it. I don't know if it's appropriate as things continue to move forward, you know, just to flag it. I don't know what bill specifically we're jumping to that. Talking about. Yes. And I have to double check that it's on the tracker. But it's House Bill 1343 and Senate Bill 1022, which is fines for public nuisance abatement. So this This is one of the areas where the state is looking at giving us more power to go after public in 2022, which is fines for public nuisance abatement. So this is one of the areas where the state is looking at giving us more power to go after public nuicences. This is largely kind of reflecting when some of these limits write for fines and duration and what things would be considered are older and reflecting them up. It's similar, which I'll actually mention, I know some of our council members care a lot about trees and historical preservation. Another bill that's going through the legislature that increases the fines we're allowed to charge to developers who tear down historical structures. What they found is that in several places, the financing is easier for them to just pay the fine and tear down the building rather than actually doing it. So they recognize that that's a tool that's not really effective in our toolbox and looking and expanding some authorities there. So that could potentially be like an incentive to do adaptive reuse. Yes. Something like that. Okay. Perfect. Yeah, I had a meeting not long ago with Derek Coborne about different ideas for how we could incentivize adaptive reuse. So that's perfect. Okay, great. Thank you for that update. And then you also mentioned, you know, the unlawful speed. So I just wanted to let everyone know that since I returned from Tallahassee earlier this month, it has also passed its first Senate stop. So that is very good. So it's made one stop in the house, one stop in the Senate. It has passed both. It has two more stops in both. But there are a few amendments that are going to be filed. So Rep Cross and Senator DeSigley are working very hard on that. And we hope to see those amendments come through and it be slated again hopefully in the next week or so. So it's getting a little later in session. Start to get a little nervous when you still have committee stops to go, but I feel very confident from the feedback that we've gotten from all of the legislators who have heard the bill so far that we have a lot of momentum. So I think that we'll be able to see that come to fruition. And Senator Sikley shared that he's carrying the overall transportation bill for the Senate. So if the individual bills don't necessarily look like they're moving, we have an opportunity there. Yes, there's always an opportunity. So thank you. Committee. transportation bill for the Senate. So if the individual bills don't necessarily like their moving, we have an opportunity there. Yes, there's always an opportunity. So thank you. Committee members, anything else for questions or comments, chairgartists? Thank you. First, I just wanna thank David and Laura for the hospitality and telehassy. I would have been lost without both of them in that building. It's incredible how quickly you can get lost. But it was a very good trip. I came way, very positive. Our delegation has done a great job this far. I think I got to see all of them. I didn't get to spend a bunch of time with a couple of them, but I think one of the big things that I was very happy about is David and I got to meet with policy and budget, both on the historical side and the on the environment side. And that opportunity to kind of explain the importance of Manhattan Casino, the historical aspect of that, the anchor of the deuces, I really think they heard us. I felt heard. And then on the environment side with our lift stations and some of the resiliency projects, we got really good questions there from policy and budget. So I really came away positive about those appropriations. I just want to, public, you just think Senator Hooper and Senator Roussant, they have really championed some of these and Senator Hooper has a lot of love for Senator Roussant and obviously Senator Roussant has a lot of love for St. Petersburg and and obviously Senator Rusan has a lot of love for St. Petersburg, and so that flows through and that was seen. And so I just wanted to thank both of them for their time. And then I was amazingly impressed, and I was gonna bring this up later at council, but I'll just knock it out now. FDEP, Office of Policy and Budget, all were extremely complimentary of the city. It was pretty incredible. FDEM specifically, they're using us as the poster child across the city on how we operate it after these two storms. And so that's a major kudos to administration and major kudos to councils that have come long before me. And for the preparation of that, my question to them was what are our opportunities? And they couldn't give me an answer in the meeting. And so I always think there's an opportunity. And so I'm looking forward to continuing that conversation with them, but I would be remiss if I didn't bring up that they really speak highly of this city across the organization at the state level. And I think that speaks a lot to all the people that put a lot of hard work into, not just storms, but the operation of the city as a whole. So anyway, I'll be quiet, that was long enough. But just again, thank you, David, thank you, Laura, and always enjoying my time up there. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you. Any other council members? Council member Driscoll. Thank you. There is, I'm just, I'm looking at the tracker that we have. There is, am I, and I'm sorry, I can't, I don't know the number right now, but I can look it up, but it's the one regarding expanding requirements for voter education. Okay. I don't think we have that on there but I can. I think it's an expansion of Lucy's law. Okay. So it's easy to look up but unfortunately not fast enough from me right here on this line. But that is one that I have read about and you know I've always been really strong on voting safety and and vessel safety both for people themselves who are voting but then also the surrounding waters and environment so I would love to have that one added. Thanks to council chair and David, everybody who wanted, Tallahassee, it sounds like we were very well represented and that it was a really productive trip. And I really do appreciate that. There was one that I wanted to find out if you had some more information on that HB 1535 the one that you said was a broader bill addressing emergencies and including hoisting equipment. Yes. So if either you or Laura could tell us a little bit more about how that's being received, where it's at and how it's looking. Absolutely. So as it is a broader bill, there's several sections. So there's regarding how you handle elections after a natural disaster, permitting and building regulations after a natural disaster, the crane and hoisting equipment, those are the, oh, and emergency preparedness procedures. So to what Chair Gertis said, the emergency preparedness procedures, we are pretty much in compliance already with all of them. Amber met with Senator DeSigley, who is the Senate sponsor of that bill. We've been in communication. We're kind of, as Chair said, the model for that section. The elections won. We do want to have some conversations just because, and Brett shared some feedback on the bill yesterday. It specifically calls out natural emergencies. There are other emergencies where we may want to have those powers to have some flexibility with how we operate elections and making sure that they make sense regarding municipal elections specifically. For the building regulations, this is probably the most concerning to the city and where it comes in, there might be something we like in a broader bill that we don't like. The house version of this emergency bill states that municipality could not introduce land development building code regulations that are more restrictive or burdensome for two years after the city came within a hundred miles of the track of a hurricane. And our staff analysis, that basically means from hurricane Irma in 2017 to now, we would not be able to do any kind of regulation that could be perceived as more restrictive or burdensome if not we'd be able to be sued. The Senate version is much tighter. It specifically puts that prohibition for counties that were impacted or in the public disaster declaration for Debbie Helene or Milton. So there is some difference there. And then the crane language is only in the house bill. We're working with Senator Desiglio on the Senate side. So that's kind of the overview of that. We're working with Web Cross as well on getting some changes to that house bill. FLC is also engaged on that one. We understand where the legislature is coming from with trying to get people to rebuild quickly. But something that we talked about is if we are trying to make any efforts to improve our CRS rating for flood insurance, those would probably be seen as more restrictive or burdensome. And it's counter intuitive to make it impossible for us to make our community more resilient after a storm when you're acknowledging that these clearly are issues. So we're continuing to have those conversations. Right. Right. That's good. Well, I appreciate that update and really knowing where things stand sometimes with these larger buildings. There are things you like and things you don't. And you have to decide if you're willing to take the nuts are great along with the grades. So yeah, I appreciate that analysis in the update. Absolutely. Thank you. Can you remember handwits? Thank you. Vice Chair handwits, my apologies. All right. On the CRE, tell us a little bit more about that. Laura, if you can start with some of the history, and maybe you can add David afterwards, like, has this issue something that comes up all the time? They've tried it before. Why don't so since we have, I mean, just so we're talking about it, I know this is a nature that's coming up. Let's just give a little bit more of a history on it. Yeah, I mean, so the house sponsor, it's a personal issue to him. They're, we don't know exactly where, but I always don't know where in South Florida. There were some CRAs and we're operating, ethically I guess you would say. And so he's kind of taken up his cause. The bill was by last year, obviously he's pushing it through the house this year. What we've been told is the Senate does not have the appetite to proceed with the bill. So as of right now we've heard that it's not going to be moving on the Senate side, and much there is in drastic negotiations to really pair it down to just affect certain CRAs. So the feedback that we're getting is that it's it's time to move the session. But I suspect it will come back to the feedback again this year and it will come back again next year. But the sponsor has been heavily lobbied from the cities and counties all across the state you know especially cities like ours who do see our days correctly, particularly you know transparently so I guess the video says we don't expect it to move the values and it will probably come back next year. Okay, sounds good. David, do you have anything to add to that? Yeah, I'll just say, you know, in 2019, the state puts some additional accountability and transparency restrictions on CRAs. When you listen to the discussion about the bill, it was, can we not just enhance those rather than eliminating them entirely? The big concern for this, and I say this because this is what's in the bill, not to create chaos or fear about it, but it eliminates CRAs by 2045, but what's really concerning for us is that it prohibits new debt or for projects that were not already budgeted for budget life first of 2025 from being started. And because we do our CRAs on a yearly budget basis, that pretty much puts an end to all of our CRAs. So... the life first of 2025 from being started. And because we do our CRAs on a yearly budget basis, that pretty much puts an end to all of our CRAs. So effectively. So we're very clear, we've made that very, that explanation very clear to our delegation. And as Laura said, it doesn't look like it's moving all the Senate side. Well, thank you. Thank you for the clear explanation of the actual impact of the bill to us and Laura for the history. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. I'm going to give it to Council Chair Gertis for a second, because I think you have something to add to this. Thank you, Chair. I'll just, I'll jump on that one first. I think it was communicated pretty clearly from us that the Senate is only willing to fight this battle if it is specific to a CRA out of compliance. And they're willing to put some more oversight to CRAs, but they are not willing to carry this as it's written today. And it would have to be drastically different. And that was from multiple senators on both sides of the aisle. And so I just wanted to give that insight and just kind of back up with David and Laura are saying. Just quickly, I wanted to go back to council member Driscoll's point on some of the restrictions. The mayor and I sat in with the FLC meeting with the minority leader, Driscoll. And the point of this could restrict us in our insurance rating hadn't been talked about yet. And so I think you're gonna see that conversation start because I'm like, guys, we're like months away from possibly getting another 5% decrease and we're certainly chasing the 5% after that and if we're unable to maneuver then you're costing people money period and story and I think that gave them a bit of a different lens to use on the floor and so I'm hoping this conversation changes because up to this point I think everybody was looking at it at a much higher level and they weren't looking at how this really could affect people's pocketbooks. So it wasn't just about restriction and making things harder. It's no we're trying to make things less expensive. And so it was a lens that I thought was clearly communicated both from me, the mayor, Bruce, Bruce Rector, the mayor of Clearwater, and we were in there with some other coastal cities that all agreed with that. So I just wanted to add that, that David, thanks for bringing that up, but it was a new lens that shifted while we were there. so I was very happy that we were a part of that meeting. So I just wanted to add that that David thanks for bringing that up but it was it was a new lens that shifted while we were there so I was very happy that we were a part of that meeting. So thank you for the opportunity chair. Thank you. Thank you. I appreciate you. Um council member Fick Sanders I think I saw your hand. I did good morning everybody and I don't even know if this is a place for it but um since we're all together, we just had this conversation a week or so ago. A lot of times we find out was gone on in the city on the news. And I did hear this morning that there is conversation in Tallahassee again about single use plastics. Is that something that needs to be on our radar now? I'm learning about it now, so I will look into it. Okay, thank you, sir. Is that all you had? Yes, all ahead. Okay, very good. Council member Givens. Thank you so much, Chair. I just want to make sure it's clear that we are our constituent strongest advocates. So as we are on the heel, I know you guys are doing it. and I commend you all for going up there and taking time out of your schedules to fight for and to advocate and to be the voice of our constituents who can't travel to Tallahassee in DC. So again, I just want to make sure, and I want to find out what we were hearing on the hill regarding advocacy efforts for insurance consumers. What are we hearing up there when it comes to the consumer guide? I understand there are some bills out there that are supposed to be helping make sure that these insurance companies are fulfilling their financial obligations when it comes to delivering on the promises that they've made to those who they are ensuring. I want to make sure that we are fighting for those constituents who are still battling every day six months later with those insurance companies. So I just want to know what are we hearing up there? Yes, yeah. David, can I just add something to that real quickly? Because I actually, one of the things I was going to ask about is a couple of bills that I flagged as well that pertain to insurance. So there's House Bill 1551 and it's Senate Companion 426. That actually, if that would pass, would actually regress the work that had been done a couple of sessions ago to that we're actually starting to see some relief for property owners. Some of those reforms are starting to work and we're starting to see more carriers. Some of the rates go down. People are actually starting to be able to get out of citizens because they can get another carrier at a comparable rate. And if this would pass, it would actually go back and regress some of the stuff about the attorney's fees, which were a huge issue. And then not only for our constituents to Councilmember Givens Point, but also for us as a city that could have some detrimental impact. I mean, we just talked about our property rates and how, you know, we're very happy that they're not going up at that same rate that they were, this bill could impact that. So I just wanted to go ahead and add on before you answered so that you had kind of a, we could talk about it all together because insurance is one of the most important things that impact our residents. So. That counts when we're getting them. Yeah. So I'll start with specifically like the day-to-day resident impact. So we've got a regional director for the CFO's office, Aubrey Fay. We've been communication throughout the hurricane. And she helped us set up the insurance village that we had at the CFO, at Shore Acres, where people could come and actually get their checks written right there and work with that. So we've been getting, and I'll say, is there any individuals you all are working with who have had issues with their insurance? Please share that with me. We'll flag that up for the CFO's advocate office. As far as specific legislation, I'm going to take a look at the ones that you mentioned. I have not heard anything off the top of my head specifically on what we're looking at for legislation. But I will flag that Rep Hilary Kassel, who has been one of the leaders on insurance, has been to state keyed. Several times she was here, she brought a group of people out from South Florida to help us do remediation in our communities after the hurricane. We ran into her in the elevators and spoke briefly, but she has been a leader on that and she understands specifically how St. Pete and our beaches communities were impacted by the storms and the consequences of this insurance. So, you know, I want that message has been communicated to the leaders on who are leading on this issue in telehousing. She is the sponsor for House Bill 1551. Okay. Got it. So, I know she and I will say she does have some different opinions on how she and her experience on how the attorney sees plays roles. I'm giving her so much credit right now because I worked with her in the days after her McCain-Holene. came here, she brought large groups of people from Southeast Florida. She did great work in our community. She's a wonderful person. I think this is probably well-intentioned but insurance advocates and people who are experts in that space say that this bill is bad for Florida. So I really want us to dig into it and really understand it and understand what the impacts because it is moving. When I look at the tracker right now, it has, it's now in, it looks like it's third committee stop and it has been favorable so far. So I am a little concerned about that and then not sure where its Senate companion is, but certainly we want to make sure we're paying attention to that. Absolutely. And in the spirit of insurance and cost there actually is one fly one more bill which is HB 301. It's on the tracker but that suits against the government. So that would raise our liability caps to $1 million and $3 million for suits. That got very close to passing the legislature last year, but the House in the Senate could not agree on what the numbers should be and when those should go into effect. But as close as it got last year, I would not be surprised to see it actually make it through the legislature this year, and we'll see what the final threshold numbers and implementation period come down to you. Okay, perfect. Councilmember Givens, did you have anything else? No, ma'am, thank you. Okay, so the last thing that I have is something I didn't see it on the tracker, but maybe I missed it. It's Senate Bill 1192 and SJR 1190. Those are specific to property tax exemptions for resiliency. Certainly something that we would normally be supportive of. However, it was just brought to my attention by my amazing legislative aide, Kim Amos, that there is some in Senate Bill 1192 that it would actually freeze property taxes for 20 years for homeowners who elevate their homes. That could be a huge impact to us financially. I mean, we want to encourage that, right? We want to encourage people to elevate. Mike Twitty led a great initiative a couple of sessions ago, and then the voters didn't vote for it, right? And so you're jumping out of your seat like you did. Yes, he is there this week, I did see that. And he's talking about the specific language with legislature. And he felt positive about being heard. Okay. And so I certainly can reach out to him and provide an update. But I he felt good. So there was some changes to the language that he's working on with them. Okay. All right. Yeah. I've talked to him a couple of times through session and he's got some great stuff that he's working on up there and we're so fortunate to have him in this community as an advocate. And I think that you know sometimes these things areintentioned, we want to make sure that we are incentivizing elevation and mitigation. At the end of the day, even if it passes, it will still have to go to a referendum. It has to get the 60%. It didn't pass before when it was just on the additional assessment. So I don't know how it would be looked at now when it's a 20 year. That's heavy. So I don't know how the voters would think about that, but we certainly wanna make sure that we're looking at that and anything that has to do with property tax exemptions, how that affects us and what our contingency plan is on that. Absolutely. So we'll look like Chair said, we saw him up there, we'll keep engaged on that. The broader tax property tax bills, those don't look like they're moving. Yeah. Everybody generally understands if you take away the property tax ability, that's public safety, that's the first thing that gets cut. And to make it up, you're probably going to have to increase sales tax, which would, or would you get? And the speaker just said they wanted to reduce sales tax, right? So I think those two things are our add-ons. Where do we get the money? Like right? And then, so I always think like, in true legislature fashion, you know, like they'll, to break something sometimes to see how it fixes, right? Couple years go by and they go, oh, wait, maybe that didn't work so well. Well, what's on the table now? Yeah. Maybe state income tax, right? What do we have left? Yeah. And state income tax makes us so competitive economically. And I just think like it is a slippery slope that does not end up anywhere good for anyone. So,. And I said one, if I don't know what I'm going to share from our, meaning with the emergency management office, for elevate Florida as of yesterday, there were 854 applicants within the city of St. Petersburg and 23, 2,384 applicants within Pinellas County. So we're monitoring that. It's gonna be an expensive program, but we're going to. Have they actually awarded anyone yet? Like are they at that point in the first round? No, they haven't awarded anyone yet, at least when we spoke. There's still, I think the deadline is in April. Okay. Okay. I'm sure I apro love it. Thank you. So they're going through that process. Yeah, I think that was okay. Okay, very good and Laura, you know, looking at the budget has there been additional funds allocated in the budget for keeping that program moving forward. The Elevator Florida program, have we seen anything like that in the budget? I have not, but we know we're still waiting on House release the 10 budget. So we haven't seen what the House is proposing. I'll have to double check the Senate 10 budget. Okay, and then how about hometown heroes? Has that been refunded? That I'll have to check to get back to you. Okay, all right, no worries. Okay. Very good, thank you. Council chair, Gertis. I'm sorry, I'm usually not this getting to talk. You had a great time in telehastic. FDM has actually asked the legislature for specific funding to fund this program so they didn't have to wait for $DM dollars to come through. Nobody has been willing to take that up this far. And so I think FDMs, you can tell they were quite disappointed with that. And so they think FDMs, you can tell they were quite disappointed with that. Yeah. And so they're a little bit in limbo. They've got some money. They were wanting to go general revenue and allocate to this program and they just weren't willing to find nobody was willing to sponsor it. From a hometown haulers program, the mayor actually specifically asked about the hometown haulers program because- I'm sorry, hometown heroes? Or excuse me. I was talking about hometown haulers. That's okay. Back off of that one. But they are, they're looking at a couple of different funding sources from the state level, but they were hoping to find somebody to sponsor that. We talked to Senator Hooper and Senator DeSigley about it, and so I think they're mulling it over. So that's kind of where it is at this point. Yeah, I mean, they've done a great job at funding that the last couple of sessions, but I mean, honestly, that money runs out as quickly as it gets funded. So I'd love to see that and even more so. Okay, all right, very good. Anybody else have anything for Tallahassee before we move on? No? All right, well thank you, Laura. We appreciate you. We know how busy you are this time of year and it was great to see you earlier this month and we look forward to seeing you back here in St.P. after session. Thank you. All right, thanks. All right, committee, we will move on to our current state in Washington, DC. And patiently waiting has been Rob Diamond with Capitol Council. Nice to see you, Rob. Thank you for being with us. And I know that Councilmember Hanoet's Driscoll and Givens were all in DC this month this month for the NLC trip. And so David, I'm gonna turn it back over to you and you can lead the discussion on DC and the NLC trip. Absolutely, well, it's great to be back in DC with everybody and to have such a phenomenal crew as always advocating on our behalf. I want to, a matter, I want to give Rob an overview on where we are in DC at this moment. The Congress is back this week after being out last week, so we've got some developments and some things we're cooking. All right, Rob. Thank you, David. Good morning, everybody. And let me echo again that. Thanks for remembering true of a wash The wash is terrible for the national city meetings and for our own city advocacy days The House and Center of Act in session for a few weeks up through Easter Then this will be a busy busy work period Dirt our trip that we were able to to meet with eight different House and Senate office, those in staff, including our delegation at a number of important committees, including small business innovation, and importantly, a both House and Senate Homeland Security, committee and staff who have oversight, obviously, disaster response programs. I'm very grateful for the members talking about their experiences and the city's experiences of the frontline and covered community. And we were strongly advocating our concerns over because of those programs. And in particular to the staffing of both HUD and VMET in terms of the Ministry of disaster response relief money. So I'm going to appreciate it for the city really raising their voice in that regard. While we were in Washington, the Congress did finally pass a full-ble year FY25 continuing, but as a solution so we now have a budget that takes itself to the end of the fiscal year. In September, that's the good news. The bad news is that that budget did not contain any community funding project requests anywhere. They eliminated all of them nationwide in every district. So we will need that conversation about how we want to address those projects. We want to roll those forward into about 26 requests, etc. So I know both the regulators, the Human Council, are aware that I wanted to make a flag on the community project funding. I also point out that the continuing resolution included re-authentization of National Flood and Insurance Program. In September, no changes there. This will continue to be an opportunity for moving forward into the year to seek additional reforms and changes through that program. Moving forward now, the House and the Senate will shift towards the 8.26 spending debate. As you know, that is likely to take place through a process called reconciliation. And we've talked before that was a very partisan exercise. Essentially, the Republican only, the House and the Senate remain in very different places on what their reconciliation packages look like and what they contain. The House is looking to do one bill that includes extension of the 2017 tax cuts as well as order, energy, natural security. The Senate is still working on a two step process. Then that reconciliation of sort of the big picture is happening real time with leadership from the House and the Senate and the White House be making literally as we speak. So we'll know more of the next week or two how that process will come together. I do want to flag two items of concern. One is obviously an enormous amount of swirl around tariffs happening right now in Washington and the Trump administration. and I've been very aggressive in using those as a tool to be negotiating with other countries just yesterday. Another round of 25% tariffs and it's on foreign automakers. We get to monitor it and share information with the city in particular. The impacts could have on steel, construction, capital costs, etc. What I'm interested in is that they are significant, they're not small numbers in terms of those tariffs. The tariffs are potentially being made. Most of the ones that could have potential in back are delayed until later in April. And it's not to say that that's a first deadline either, but I want to make sure that we are conscious of any potential impact in the city on that. And the second flag I have is, and I've been discussing this with David and the endoyal of the mayor's team. Recent comments out of the program on that security and the Secretary about the elimination of FEMA as an agency. This was brought up both on Friday and Monday, on the White House by Secretary Nome. And I think we need to ask some very hard questions as a front line city as to what those plans would be, how they would improve the results and disaster aid responsiveness. And make sure we carefully engage with our delegation if and when those plans to eliminate a few men as an agency to move forward. I'll stop there and again, I want to express my thanks to the members of the council to making the trip to your advocacy. It's very important. And I thought it was a very productive trip. So thank you. All right, thank you, Rob. Council members who went to DC. Vice Chair Hanowitz, do you want to start? I'll start. Yeah. Well, first of all, I want to thank Rob and his team and David for guiding us through Tallah. I mean, through DC, I want to say, frankly, Chair Gurdas said he came away very positive from Tallahassee, there are times I wish I was the talent of the American Dates Pack. I wish you were in Tallahassee, like an alternate universe. Everybody's filing because they know. Yes, this was not the same atmosphere. The last time I went to DC where there was an ability to talk about things that we could be obtaining from the federal government and grants and how you apply for them and do the things that you're supposed to do to actually get money back to our city from the federal government. Quite the opposite kind of tone over there, which was basically, oh, you think you're getting this money, guess what? And it happened while we were there when they were talking about passing the continuing resolution and eliminating all earmark projects for 2024, which affected us directly. I know that we're going to see if it happens in 2026. But I will tell you, in general, not get into weeds. I mean, natural legal cities, in general, there seem to be kind of a lack of agency direction that kind of set the tone for a lot of the meetings where it's like kind of what we don't know what's happening. Even with the attorneys we're talking about some of the legal issues, they had a panel of attorneys talking whether it was the immigration issues, the detainers talking about grants and the federal government deciding, well, agency policy has changed, so there's termination clauses and grants that could be used to terminate because the agency policy had changed. So, and the fact that there's going to be legal challenges and some of these are going to go to the Supreme Court. I mean, that's where that's the environment we're in. I wish I could say better. I had a great meeting with Congresswoman Kaster. I mean, she's fantastic. She's always been a great ally of the city and looking out for us and trying to do everything she can. Even under those circumstances, we talked about the Terrace and how it can affect dollar projects. The cost to cities and municipalities, counties, everyone. We all pay for that and she wanted to make sure that we can send that message so they can go ahead and make it clear that this is going to affect projects nationwide, you know, for everyone. And then obviously we just had Homeland Security Secretary Kristi known with her comments. And Rob, you had spoken to us regarding your concerns even before she made those comments in terms of cutting staff and agency workers and the people that are going to actually be doing that work because at the end of the day, it doesn't happen if no one's there. And I just, what I want to hear a little bit more Rob in terms of what they're saying. I mean, she vowed to eliminate FEMA. How do you see, and it seems like they're trying to get, they have agency workers that at the end of the day, they are gonna decide, I guess her team is gonna decide whether or not they're gonna keep these workers or not, and then slowly get rid of workers if their terms come up, or is that what they're looking at? We generally don't know and that's why I raise my concern about what is the plan. It's what we said you're going to eliminate FEMA but obviously the the purpose how we don't have any detail on the how. We just have her comments at the White House both on Friday and Monday that it is her technician to eliminate the agency. Again, no further detail, no written executive order, no memorandum from the Secretary of Grey all night, you know, how that You know, we did just see this with the Department of Education where we sort of long knew as much talk about the activities attempting to wind down that department. And we did in the last two weeks see, you know, a formal executive order, a formal member, and the Secretary, who were starting to see what those details will be like on how they wanna shrink the role of the Department of Education from a federal perspective. But unfortunately, we have no detail on what she tends to do with FEMA and again why I'm encouraging us to be asking these hard questions immediately. No one will be more impacted by this than the city of St. Pete. And so, you know, we've got to ask those questions about how is this going to be better for us. I'm not saying it couldn't be, but we need to know how. Right. Well, David and Doyle, and maybe you want to add, I mean, there's a lot of FEMA money that we are told that we are supposed to get reimbursed for the cost of hurricane. I mean, as it is right now, we're at 250 million, approximately in terms of cost. The majority of that is supposed to be coming from FEMA. Where are we on this? So this is one of those areas where you look at what's happening at the cabinet level and it doesn't all seem to be aligning. Last week, President Trump signs an executive order about emergency preparedness, you know, doing some changes to the national resiliency strategy, critical infrastructure policy, continuity risk register, all of those things. And those have to be housed somewhere. And so the secretary on one hand saying she wants to eliminate a subfunction of her agency, you kind of are like, well, we're going to need to see how those two things align. Because of exactly what Rob said, is there has to be some follow-up to that of what the plan is, and can you do the things that President already said an executive order about if you issue, if you try and dismantle the agency. For the reimbursement, I don't know if you wanted to speak on the reimbursement. I mean, I would refer to Aubrey, maybe if she has some detail, it's my understanding that we haven't received any guidance that we're not going to be reimbursed. We're somewhere in the conversations. to this point, we haven't been given guidance that we're not going to be getting the re-emergence. And I would add, my concern is not over the funding of the city, you know, has been awarded. I do feel confidence that that will be there. There is no appetite that I have seen both in the administration and were the Congress to claw back or deny anyone that has to with these money that was authorized and appropriated. If anything, there's actually an additional conversation about how more money can be awarded to a rate of California wildfires, etc. My concern again is that administration and implementation by the agency and what what potential large scale staff cuts and or outright elimination of a federal agency could impact and how you guys get that money So I Be nitpicky, but I'm hearing nothing about the dollars. What I'm very concerned about is how we get access to the developers. And Aubrey Phillips, thank you for having me. So I'll back up what Rob was saying. We are not hearing anything that is making us think that the existing funds that have been allocated or planned for are at risk. However, we are as you all are as well, monitoring the news coming out, working proactively to understand potential impacts and the scope of any changes that may have. One of our big concerns is how are these staffing cuts at agencies, whether implemented or being planned, how that's going to impact the responsiveness as we work to get grants implemented and spent down. And then we are working closely with David and with departments to be able to navigate that emerging guidance and direction as it comes out so that we can be as responsive as possible to make sure that any funds that have been awarded Stay secured in our community Okay, and so I mean what I'm hearing is basically Yes, that we may get the funds. They're just me that get to us because they won't have a means to get to us Which is what their goal may be in the at the end of the day It's a concern about the personalities and the ability to administer the property. Right, I got it. I got it. The other concern that was raised by the attorneys and one of the panels was some of the termination clauses and some of these agreements and the language that's contained there and how they can go ahead and terminate these grants Yes based on policy So there there are termination clauses in many of these grant agreements What we are doing is making sure that we're prepared each agency seems to be taking a little bit different different tack and how they're implementing the direction that is coming out of this administration. So we're following those developments as they come about and standing ready to work with departments on if we need to change language in grant agreements to be in compliance not changing what we're doing but making sure that we're doing whatever we can to keep those funds secure for our community. Okay. Well Rob definitely. I think that's that good that. This is this very much needs to be a project by Rodman. That grant by grant approach every federal agency of frankly different program offices within different agencies are taking different tax year. In most cases you don't you still don senior enough political appointed officials in place to even be making decisions and provide real information on what the next step of sub-action here. So we are still very much in a way and see mode on much of that. What I do caution again about painting a broad brush as to how what we're great, my great money may or may not be at risk. It's going to be program office by program office. And again, my food is to the mayor's team for the laser light focus in that office. Well thank you Rob and Aubrey for that. And please keep us posted. I mean, this is obviously a huge item for our city in terms of disaster recovery. We have to budget. We all have to work on budgets. And when you're talking about $250 million of monies that get the hurricane as costus, and we're expecting a lot of that to be reimbursed, and that may not happen, then we have to plan accordingly. So, okay, well thank you so much. Thank you, Rob. Councilmember Driscoll. Thank you. I know we're starting to run short on time, so I'll try to be brief. The conference was very good. I went into this trip with the goal of learning more about how to navigate today's setup in D.C. I did learn a lot through the Transportation Infrastructure Services Committee and also in the MPO board member advocacy workshop that I attended. And then other workshops that I did while I was there. It seemed like the running theme was uncertainty for sure, but here's what we do know. We do know some of the things that the new administration does not want to hear about. And we do know some things that they have said that they do want to hear about. So interpreting that can be a little tricky. So when you hear someone say we want to focus on transportation projects in areas that have high birth rates and higher birth rates, what does that mean? So the questions I took with me to the conversation, what does this mean? And so let's use that as an example. The real question, the question that you ask yourself with a grant or anything that you're working on now is how does this help families? That's what they really are focused on, okay? How does, how do crosswalks and bike lanes and things like that help families? Well then, it gets easy to answer. Here's how this helps the Amputersburg families. You know, they can get to school more safely. And we know that Secretary Duffy, and I'm going to just say, since I'm like the sort of a transportation geek, these days, I'll just stay on that as an example. So we know that Secretary Duffy prioritizes safety. At least that's what he said. And his confirmation hearings and in some secret remarks. So we know that we are learning some language to use, some areas to focus on. It's just like with the, it's not really that different from before, where we knew that we had certain language that needed to be included in the Safe Streets and Roads for All Grant that we applied for, and ultimately received an award of $3.6 million to do crosswalks, bike lanes, you know, all of these things that actually do meet the criteria of today, we just talk about it in different terms. It doesn't change what we believe in, and it can still help us meet our goal. It's just about how to play the game, right? Yeah. So learned a lot about that. Had some great meetings with staffers for some of the staffers for committees, things like that. With emergency management, that was a really good one talking about what our experience has been. And what I found was, you know, as unsure as the staffers are with how rules are going to come out, they really did lean in on the St. Petersburg story. And you know, they saw the news, they saw the pictures. And so here we were at their table saying this is what happened is that this is what we learned and this is how you can help us with those lessons so those were really good conversations I thought I also had a chance to talk about the innovation district and the maritime and defense technology Hub with the staff for what we're in. Small Business Committee. Yes, the Small Business Committee. And she's familiar with St. Petersburg, loved hearing about what the Innovation District is right at the alley of the folks who are working in that space and the members of Congress who are involved. And even got a connection going where she wants to see if someone in their circle can help us with getting our skiff certified at the hub. And I think there are a lot of people who have learned more about what a skiff is and why it's awarded over the last week. And so I think we can all agree that this would be an excellent thing to have certified an operational right here in St. Peter'sburg. Since we returned, we got her connected with Allison Barlow, and I know that we'll help however we can, but I think maybe it was just getting it in front of the right person who happens to have that kind of an interest in both St. Petersburg and in helping us out with that kind of text. So good stuff. You just never know what gyms you might pull from uncertain times. Before I even got back, like before my flight even landed, there was an internal memo that was leaked out of the Department of Transportation that gave new guidance on how some of the IGA grants we're going to be looked at and reviewed and perhaps changed or denied at the very least. It meant everything was going to be slowed down. And getting that information is helpful, but it also makes the future of some of our grants, including the 3.6 million for SS4A. It's just really, I'm not sure what's going to happen with that now. Hopefully as time goes on, things are moving pretty fast. And yet, like Rob said, we are still waiting for a lot of information. I think that it is important right now to look at the grants that we still have hanging out there that don't have a signed agreement where we don't have the money in the bank and things being implemented and say all right is there is there another path for us or what can we do in the meantime because I don't want us to fill powerless. We are we still need this funding but there are still ways that we can can look at what our priorities are and how we can partner with others to make it happen. So I look forward to having those conversations. There is a chance I'll be going back to DC in mid-May with the American Public Transportation Association as also well as in DC. I became the chair of the PSU legislative committee. And councilmember Faxi, you're thinking the chair of PSU. So interesting things happen during municipal elections that can have a ripple effect. But I do plan to go and I hope that there will be some more clarity at that point. Rob, I hope to see you as well while I'm there. But there's definitely more to come. I was invited to, while I was there to get with the NLC contact for the Transportation Infrastructure Committee, she's fantastic. She would like for us to go and do some appointments together with some St. Pete specific ideas and asks. So I'm going to try to fit that into my schedule for sure so I can do double duty while I'm there. So more to come on that. Thank you so much. Thank you for the time Thank you and thank you for your hard work Councilmember Givens. Thank you chair. I appreciate it I don't know if it was a right-of-passage or what but I was sent to DC as well being the newest council member It was awesome being able to meet new elected officials from across the country Being able to make those alliances join different committees At NLC being able to have that opportunity to meet face to face with our federal representatives. That was a big deal. You know, we are like I said earlier, the voices of our constituents. And so being able to tell St. Pete's story and being able to paint that picture that we see on a daily basis, you know, we are here every day in St. Petersburg. There in DC come home, you know, once a month if they're lucky. And so being able to express the concerns that we have as elected officials, I took that as an honor being able to represent the city. I found common ground with a lot of our representatives, you know, St. Petersburg is interesting being that we're represented by Democrat and Republican. So being able to cross that aisle and find some common ground on issues like infrastructure, things like education, economic development, veterans, and health and human services. I was happy to hear that our representatives see what's happening in DC. They're speaking up, or if they're silent, that's on them. But I have pressured and I have lobbied my constituents and the folks who I know speak up and I encourage others to do the same. Send emails, make phone calls. We can only do so much as elected officials, but we can send a strong message if we can collectively organize together and stress the importance of these agencies like the SBA, HUD, FEMA, Rob, David, you know, we were in these meetings together. That was what we talked about with Representative Luna. We told her it's important that we have these agencies funded and staffed because our people depend on these dollars. I was happy and David, you can touch on that if you want to a rob that there wasn't interest in inviting some of these secretaries in agency directors to St. Petersburg to talk about some of our problems so I don't know if he'll be around long enough but FEMA director you know be nice if we can get him here. Secretary of the EPA you know these are conversations with people we need to be having you know these are tough conversations but they have to be had so I do encourage us all as elected officials to get in these rooms of folks who might not always think like us or agree with us and try to broaden their horizons. And let's hope that light bulb comes on because sometimes if they don't hear it, if they don't, you know, talk about it, it's out of sight out of mind. I also want to just emphasize that we did stress the continued funding of programs like the CDBG, the Farmville. That has a huge impact on my district and district seven when you talk about food panders and making sure that those organizations receive the funding that they need. We talked about early childhood education. We talked about early childhood development and a lot of these NLC meetings that we had. I'm happy to hear about programs that they have for free child care, something that I'm looking at exploring more of here in St. Petersburg. And like I said in closing, I just want to make sure that we have that clear message that we're all communicating to all of our representatives and to our constituents that our focus is on relief and recovery as a city, as a region, and regardless of what side of the aisle you're on, hopefully we can all agree that those are important issues that we should be addressing those quality of life issues. So thank you for the opportunity to go and represent the city. I appreciate that. All right. Thank you. Any other council members? Anything you'd like to ask? We've got Rob still with us, David. All right. Well, I don't see anything. Yeah. So I just wanted to fill in to answer your earlier question. There's $150 million in the Senate State Senate budget for hometown heroes. So that's that's where that is at the moment. The elevate Florida is is federal money. So that'll come through more clear clearly in the coming weeks. We'll see how all that ends. The counties also get some money. I think you remember when we had the last layer of meeting that they're asking for counties to contribute a portion of their HMGP dollars toward elevate Florida. So that's ongoing conversation. So we'll see what that total account is for there. Okay. So my question was for future funding. Yes. To continue the program. Yeah. After, like they kind of get through these first few rounds. So well, yeah. And I haven't heard anything about what the plan is going forward. So we'll keep an eye on this. Because I mean, it's great to create these programs. But if they're not sustainable and they don't continue year over year, just just like hometown heroes for example if they don't fund it and they don't continue to increase the funding at the rate that they're seeing adoption kind of like a flash in the pants. Yeah okay great. On the continuing resolution piece and the community project funding I feel like a broken record I come here every year and say we're delayed on the guidance. We are delayed on the continuing resolution piece and the community project funding, I feel like a broken record, I come here every year and say we're delayed on the guidance. We are delayed on the guidance. Doylin, I met with Congresswoman Luna's chief of staff. Last week, they will be looking at what the new guidance is whether or not they want to keep the project. We submitted same thing with Congresswoman Cassar's office on the status of that. One of the meetings that I took was with Rep Cleaver's staff. He is the ranking member of the Financial Services Committee on Housing. One thing I really have to commend the Council for in partnership with. When you speak to federal representatives, they are genuinely shocked about the work that St. Pete is doing and impressed by the steps we are taking. Sharing what we've done in housing, you know, allocating the significant amount of our dollar to awards, housing, you know, a few years ago, what we've already done with ADUs, the fact that we can say, hey, look, we understand the condom market and we're trying to make these steps so look at that as an affordable option. You know, they were like, would you all be interested in providing expert witness testimony and our hearings? You know, they're really seen the way that we're leading on this front and even already pushing for, you know, the Yes and God's backyard legislation. So we have some really positive conversations with that and we'll be staying engaged with them. I know I've mentioned the Fire Station Act before about getting federal funding for our fire department. We shared that with Congresswoman Luna's office. They're going to be looking into possibly sponsoring that conversation in the coming years. And I did want to touch briefly with Councillor McGiven said about the snap in the farm bill. We had the conversations about the extension, but there is serious concern that those benefits snap, wake the school meal program could be cut in the school meal program or in the reconciliation Package Mayor Welch joined about 115 mayors across the city with writing a letter to members of Congress about that. Congresswoman's castor's office is very helpful in communicating that. But to council member Gibbons point, there are some coming impacts that I think we as council and the community have to be honest about how we could impact us and share that. We think about the combined impacts of potential SNAP cuts, potential Medicaid cuts, and cuts to the low-income housing utility assistance. This is the cost of living burdens on every front for our residents. So kind of being clear right about that and taking the opportunity to communicate that. And the same way we talk about preemption at the state level, there are things that are going to impact our residents that are out of our control and helping them understand what the city's role in certain things are and what the federal government's role is going to be really important. And then we have the opportunity to meet with our new senator, Ashley Moody's staff, Councilmember Gibbons, said that and I did a follow-up to drop off some St. Pete's Wag. She's a Tampa Bay native, but we want to remind drop out this side of the bridge. So I'm really productive and appreciate all of the work from everybody. Very good. Thank you. thank you guys all for what you did. I know it's not easy and you take time away from your homes and your lives and your families to go up there and sometimes it feels like you're banging your head against the wall a little bit. DC's always been that way for one reason or another but you know these are certainly interesting times and so we just appreciate you continuing to advocate on our behalf and thank you Rob. Thank you for being with us. Thank you for sitting through the whole meeting and thank you for everything you're doing for us. We really appreciate you and we'll look forward to seeing you very soon. So thank you. All right anything else committee? Oh, hold on. Come on, quick questions. What about the guests? While I have you here, the guests and guests backyard. Yes. Have you met with past at all? Um, I have not. I don't know if anybody has met. We discussed with them last year or not this year. Not this year. Not this year, yeah. Okay. I know staff has met with us. I'd have to ask Amy if she brought it if it was discussed. I have not met. OK, I'm going to get on your account. OK. I can't. OK, thank you. This is it. OK, anything else? Nope. All right, very good. Well, with that. This is it. Okay, anything else? Nope. All right, very good. Well, with that, meeting adjourned. Thank you, everyone. Thank you. We're adjourned, Bruno. Thank you. I'm going to make a little bit of the dough. I'm going to make a little bit of the dough. I'm going to make a little bit of the dough. I'm going to make a little bit of the dough. you the Thanks for watching! you