you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you Thank you. Good morning and welcome to the City Council workshop this beautiful Monday September 16, 2024. Clerk, please call the roll. Councillor Member Barton. Here. Councillor Member Christmas. Here. Councillor Member Kramer. Here. Council Member Christmas. Here. Council Member Kramer. Here. Council Member Peniman. Here. Council Member Petrinoff. Here. Vice Mayor Hutchison. Here. Mayor Heitman. Here. Council Member Kramer. to the fact that the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one Asian, underguide, indivisible, liberty and justice for all. Thank you. Setting the agenda, Mr. British, are there any changes? Yes, thank you, Mayor. For the record, I advise you all late last week, and we are requesting today that you remove item 6c from the agenda. That was a short discussion and presentation. We were going to give regarding the Live Local Act. We're not quite ready to give a more meaningful presentation to you and considering the length that we anticipate with some of the items today. We're requesting that you approve removing it and then we will place it on a future agenda within the next month or so. Also want to point out that item 6E, we have a time certain labor negotiation session that is scheduled for 12.30 for the benefit of the public. We're anticipating this to be a two hour session. We have three different groups that we need to have conversation about. So this is going to be a more lengthy session. So we're anticipating between 1230 and 230 for that. The goal, Mayor and Council, is to get through your interviews this morning and through item 6A, which is discussion about boards and committees before your 1230 time certain. And then if we do better, great. If not, you'll come back after the time certain and take here a vitamin 6B and D and hopefully get you all out of here by 3, 30 or 4 o'clock at the latest. You said 5 o'clock last night. I know. I like that plan. I'm upping the goal. I like that goal. And thank you. 6C is exactly one of my biggest concerns about what we spoke about in the CRA and the CBRE contract. So thank you. I don't want to go discussing things without having fully understood. So with that, Mr. McConnell, any changes? No mayor, thank you. Okay, council. Just a question, Mr. Buddha-Swar, I thought that there was some sort of a state time deadline for discussing little evocal, for having this presentation as part of the requirement in the laws. Is that true? Staff would have corrected me when I advised them. There is a deadline and a deadline is associated with posting on our website how we would apply live local here in the city of New York. But not related to the presentation. But not related to our presentation and we do have some example statements from other communities who most communities have that complied putting that statement online yet we will comply and we're going to be asking the city attorney to review that language and we'll post that online so we're in compliance so the presentation was not one of those compliance items. Thank you. Okay no further questions, comments? I'll make a motion to approve the agenda as proposed with the exception of item 6C. The motion by Council Member Cursman and a second by Council Member Petronoff. All in favour, signed by aye. Opposed? Thank you, council. That takes us to item 4. Good morning, Jessica Rosenberg, Deputy City Clerk. This morning we have interviews for several boards and committees. I wanted to start out first with our Carver Finance Board of Directors. Mr. Lee Davidson should be here for his interview. And I wanted to point out that Mr. Davidson has put his name in for several boards you may have noticed. So while he's here, you can actually interview him for Carver, Crab, and Co-Inforcement. Unless you want him to come back two more times. Good suggestion. Sir, good morning. If you'll just sit at that table and introduce yourself for the record. To the right there's a it's a no no you can stay there just to the right there's I guess a little bit about me. So I was born right down the road at Naples Community Hospital. Been here my entire life. So it's great to finally get an opportunity like this to give back to the community and the city I've called home for 36 years now. Currently, civil engineer, work with a local small firm, Davidson Engineering, so we do a lot of work. City, Carrier County, Lee County, specialized in site development, land planning, utility design, storm water management, pretty much everything related to site development and especially again in the city and Naples we're fortunate to live and work here. So kind of brief summary of it. Thank you, thank you for applying and thank you for being interested in your hometown. The three boards that you've applied for? Can you just tell us why you've applied for those three? So a couple of them are kind of overlapping. So Carter and then obviously the community redevelopment agency. A lot of it has to do with affordable housing. I know especially people my age and younger seem to have a real struggle with it. Unfortunately, I've had a lot of friends, colleagues, employees that left the area because of issues with affordable housing. So it's very near and gear to me that issue. It's also kind of speaking to the community redevelopment agency advisory board is again interacting with it a lot. I see the benefit of it and it's something that's really unique in how it shapes the way the city and April will look 10, 20, 30 years from now. So it's something that I've always admired people that were involved with it and would like an opportunity to be involved myself. As far as the Co-Enforcement Board, again, and interacted with it, sometimes have had clients on the wrong end of it, but it's another opportunity to really interact with the public to make sure that people understand codes and what they're allowed and can't do with their land but also make sure that compliance is brought in a way that works for both people, the city and whoever happens to be before the board. So, yeah, I mean, I saw this come through leadership call here, these opportunities, these openings and it really, you know, I saw it as an opportunity to kind of get off the sidelines and end of the game, so to speak. Councillor McLainman? Quick question, that's might be for you, our attorney. I don't remember, we talked about this. You're allowed to be on how many boards or how does that work? We have multiple positions. We said that. I think we had a situation recently where there was a code enforcement board who applied for the East Naples Advisory Committee. They deemed it a non-issue for dual office holdings since the East Naples is strictly advisory. But if I'm not mistaken, the council kind of made a suggestion that we should stay away from dual board membership. So there's a dual office holding from the attorney general. Reality is if one's advisory and one's decision making then the attorney general has advised that it's not technically a dual office violation because you're not making a final determination on both. But it's more of a policy decision. It was a first for me. Normally if you serve on one board you don't serve on the other. I think the basis for that was it's a very narrow applicability of people that can apply for the e-snaples because you have to live within the area, which is why that decision was made. So in this case with all three would there be a conflict could only one be for this specific? Let me just look at what boards did you apply for, sir? It was a carver, the community redevelopment agency advisory, and then code enforcement board. Personally, I suggest against having one person serve on multiple boards. I understand it's hard to get people to volunteer, but it's more of a policy decision and I would suggest against it. Especially if you're gonna be part of code enforcement board because remember, those are final determination boards where they're dealing with violation. Yep. I just wanna clarify that a little bit. What high school'd you go to? Baron Collier. Go Cougars. I was gonna say the last time I've seen you is on the sidelines about O6 so it's a wow we're pretty good day. Okay thank you. Councillor Mourn. Chris? Mr. Davidson thank you for applying just to bring some more clarity to this issue that Council councilman Kramer brought up Are in applying for three board to the three boards did you do so with the Hope that you might be appointed to multiple boards or did you do so because you'd like to serve on one board at least and had interest in these three and hope that at least one of them might result in an appointment. I just want to understand your thought process. Yes, it was definitely the latter. I just saw, again, those three openings come across and I was just looking for an avenue to get involved. So I wasn't sure how rigorous or selective getting into a certain board would be, so I put my name in for all three. I appreciate that. And I concur with what we don't have a, this has come up before over the years. We had one time individual who served on both the crab and the DRB, which was problematic to me. And we probably should set a policy on this formally at some point, but I agree with our city attorney that it's, I would prefer not to have people serving on multiple advisory boards. There's another, well, first of all, I appreciate your interest in serving and giving back to the community that you've grown up in and now part of from a business standpoint and given the work you're doing and looking at your resume, you're certainly well qualified. There is another issue here because of what you do for a living. Davidson engineering is a, we see the name Davidson engineering here at this day as a lot as they represent many petitioners in the work that you do. And on the one hand, you know, you and the firm, others in the firm bring great relevant experience. But I guess this is a question for the city attorney. If Mr. Davidson were to be on any advisory board, and there was a matter that came before the board that involved Davidson engineering as a party. It would be simply a matter of Mr. Davidson recusing himself from that matter. There's no reason for him to be constrained from serving on a board. I'm assuming that's a question. No, I appreciate that. Depends on the circumstances, right? You're looking at the ethics code internally as well. The one thing that I was thinking of is a reoccurring conflict though, right? So if one of these boards and you may know better than us, if Davidson is appearing, you know, once a month in front of code enforcement, which I don't see happening, I think code enforcement is probably the board that they would not appear on because you're citing property owners. Yeah. You do want to avoid, because if you're recusing every month, then what's the point of sitting on the board? Right. But it would be fact specific. It would be fact, sorry. Yeah. And I don't know if you had any comment on that Mr. Davidson. I mean, yeah, I have no issue with accusing myself. And again, we do obviously do a lot of work in the city in Naples, but again, that's just kind of more as a private citizen trying to just get involved. Obviously, some of them like the Carver, I don't believe our firm has ever interacted with that board. Again, co-enforcement extremely rarely. And it's usually as an advisor to someone that might have issues but not directly. And then again, the community redevelopment agency, usually only we get involved with parking reallocation and issues like that so it's it's not very regular Obviously, it's more drb Planning and Okay, thank you mayor Thank you Appreciate you coming up and making the efforts to volunteer, especially from one true native Neapolitan to another, both of the surviving NCH-Burthing back in the day. I wanted to really try and primarily make an observation here for the other members up here with me. Mr. Davidson is also has applied for code enforcement. There are two positions that were open on the code enforcement. We've got two applicants. The other one applying for Carver here is Martin Lamb, so it seems to me that Lee Davidson might fit perfectly here for code enforcement position so we can fill all the positions we need. So again, just an observation that I made while I was looking over the material last night for everybody. Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Councilmember. Madam. Mr. Davidson, thanks for applying. What would your preference be among the three in all honesty? That is, I never thought it would come down to that, but I mean as far as I would have to say probably that the alternate for the CRA would be the probably my top choice by the big. Because that's a little probably my top choice by the big. Because that's a little bit more aligned perhaps with some of your interest that you articulated earlier. Correct. Yeah, it lines again with kind of more what I do for a living. So it has a little more technical knowledge of that than some of the other ones. Okay, that's very helpful. Thank you. Thank you. I have council member Petrono. My question was asked already. Okay. I swear. Yeah, just wanted to express my sincere thanks for applying It's been discussed, but I just wanted to point it out if If the interest In multiple boards were to come about, I see some issues with, if you're serving on Carver Finance, which I believe is a fiduciary responsibility, and then you serve on COVID enforcement where actions regarding Carver issues might involve fines, there could be a conflict there. And then crab decisions being favorable or unfavorable toward carver properties could also be an issue. So just pointing out the various friction points where I wouldn't support having you be on multiple boards. On the three that are on this agenda anyway, so I do believe you are well qualified to serve in one of these. So thank you very much. Appreciate it. Okay. Thank you again for sharing our participating in local government and we'll make our appointments on Wednesday. Thank you for being here. Thank you all. Next I'd like to invite our incumbent Martin late, hopefully metaphorically not to. Or vice versa. Thank you for being here and thank you for your service to Carver finance board. Thank you Mayor. And if you'll just, just state your name for the record. I'm Martin Lamb. Anything you want to add about your service? No, it's been delightful to sit on the board. I have two co-members who are really sharp. Staff has supported this tremendously. Unquestionably, there is a strong demand for affordable housing in Naples, and to the extent that I, in a very small way, can help support that. And maybe, who knows, maybe the board can be a resource to the CRA in any way, where there's cross, any way that we can support the CRA in what they're trying to do with affordable housing and the council in the mayor, of course, we would love to do because the need is evident and I'm sure you probably get out to the car of apartments from time to time. It really is a gem and a treasure for the city. Very well run. And to the extent that we can support that in any way, I think all of us can agree that that's award the goal. How is the management company in your opinion? They have independent management services, manages over 14,000 units over 12 states. The person that we deal with, Jim Hanigan, has always been very responsive. And so not to speak for the rest of the board, I believe that they've been very responsive and very on the wall. So anytime we want information, we let them know through the staff and they get it to us. And again, the people on the ground, Adele Hernandez, it's been there 25 years. She joined in 1999. She's aided by Benicio and Ricardo, and it is a very well-run property. I've been in real estate for 30 years and both in investment management and property management. And really, I'm proud of the staff there they do a great job. Thank you. I have council member or vice mayor Hutchison. Thank you Mr. Lamb. Appreciate your service and your interest in continuing on. You've done a fine job and it sounds to me like you have a real passion for what you're doing. So that's key. I just wanted to take an opportunity to ask you, since you're here now, in backing away from your role just simply in applying for this position. Could you tell us what the top two or three opportunities, either the CRA Board and or City Council should address in terms of the carver property? Thank you, Vice Mayor. I have to say, again, I believe that the property is well-run and I think most of the tenants there are pretty happy with the situation of how it's run and obviously it's a gem in the heart of the city, plenty of parking, the units themselves are nicely equipped. So the best I can think of is that if there is any, I know this has probably been looked at before and we've asked staff to ask CRA this question, whether there's any additional properties that are no longer used by the city but need to be repurposed or have been closed down or really anything, any excess property that the city may own that had been used for a different purpose that might conceivably be repurposed for affordable housing. So I guess that's the one open question I have. If so, obviously there'd be a lot of work in terms of turning it into affordable housing. But I don't have to tell you and the council how difficult difficult is to find a property that makes sense economically for the city and to provide additional affordable housing. So anything, we sort of have to think outside the box here in Naples. It's such a delightful place to live that a lot of people want to live here and we should be able to have our teachers and our firemen and our policemen live in the city and to the extent that we can come up with any idea that that would aid in that effort. I'd be totally supportive of. Are you, are you of the belief that teachers, firemen and others are currently living in Carver? I don't know that for a fact. I don't. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Turner. Kristen? Mr. Land, thank you for reapplying and for your contributions on the board up till now. As you know, we had a on at the August 23rd CRA board meeting here, we had extensive discussion around affordable housing including Carver And I believe you were originally planning on attending and representing Carver and then couldn't perhaps because of your surgery. I had surgery at day. I had surgery. But we had a very interesting discussion around Carver. And I don't know if you've had a chance to look at that meeting on video. But if you have, and I encourage you to do so, both the general discussion around affordable housing, which was the first couple hours of the meeting and specifically the Carver discussion. And this is all leading up to a question I want to ask that, you know, at that time we had with us, Mr. Williamson from America, community developers, who was the sub-lustee, as you know, for Garber, and which has done a very good job, I believe, over the years, including retaining the property management company that you spoke of. Based on that discussion and subsequent discussions, I know our staff has had with Mr. Williams, and there is real interest in seeing if we can develop a project to carry out some appropriate renovations for Carver. And we're not necessarily talking about expanding Carver or Density. I don't want to go down that. But just initially are their ways in which we could renovate some of those buildings and improve them and make it an even better property for the people who live there. So that's a discussion and progress that will be coming back to the CRA board at the appropriate time for discussion and appropriate action. But I say all this because what I see, because of the, not just the carver issue, but the growing interest in workforce housing, affordable housing in Naples, and particularly in that, in the CRA area, is that the carver board can really contribute to that discussion beyond your fiduciary responsibilities and be part of helping us get to the right answer, both with respect to the carver properties, renovations and other things. So we need people on that board who not only have experience but have the time and commitment going forward to spend on it because it may well involve more time, more meetings than you've typically had in the past. So I wanted to share those observations with you as the share of the CRA board. And also hear from you as to whether this is something that you think is not just a board member, but as a citizen of Naples you're interested in and able to make the time commitment to help us with. Thank you, a member, Chris. In my introduction I didn't really talk about my job, if you will. So I've worked on Wall Street, I've worked all over the world in real estate private equity, but lately I've run a very small investment shop and we buy workforce housing and improve it. When I came back from I was actually in Sydney, Australia and I moved to Naples in 2012 that the first during the great recession, or the hard times back then, the first city to emerge from that recession was Houston. So we started investing in Houston. And so I have an invested in Florida, but the mode of exactly what you're talking about, which is buying B and C class units that are older, unloved, and renovating them, unit by unit, as the units roll. So we don't vacate the entire property. We renovate that the units on a one by one basis and bringing them entities and that sort of thing to these properties, that's sort of what I do. So to the extent that there's an opportunity to pursue some sort of project like that at Carver, that would be right up my alley and I would be delighted to contribute in any way I can to that. I am semi-retired, I also teach at FTCU, but the, so I have time to commit to this more so than the Carver meetings in the past. Thank you for that. It's a very helpful additional background for us all to understand. Appreciate that. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you. Councillor Member Kramer? Yes. I just want to, Mr. Lamb, wholeheartedly thank you for what you've done and what you're willing to do. And I wish we could duplicate you for a whole lot of other boards. Unfortunately, it's become more difficult than I imagine for people who have a lot to say to get them involved in having a lot to do with what's going on in our city. But I am so grateful that we have you and folks like you that are willing to do it. Thank you. Thank you so much, Member Kramer. When I told my kids what I was doing this morning, Nicholas and Katie, who are golden eagles, said, oh please say hi to Coach Kramer. And fantastic kids you raised by the way. They are superstars. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Pinoment. Thank you so much for applying and I hope we keep the conversation going here because you bring a different element to our discussion about affordable housing. So hopefully there will be some way of continuing the conversation with you and with others that are interested in affordable housing. Do you have other colleagues that kind of? No, I wish I did. Okay. And after you see you, I see your part on the young entrepreneurs. That's right. Ready or something. Is anything coming out of there that maybe we all need to be thinking about I mean let's let's mine every opportunity Yeah, it's a good thought. Let me give some further talk to that better be wonderful. All right. Thanks so much for applying. Thank you Good luck with your ankle. Thank you And council member Barton Mr. Lamb just wanted to thank you for reapplying. Appreciate being here. Appreciate you. Volunteering. Thank you Okay, and council member Barton mr. Lamb just wanted. Thank you for reapplying Appreciate being here. Appreciate you. I'll turn thank you, sir My final question is do you know them? The mix now within Carver and whether we have a profit margin at all the the profit margin is very slim The the mix in terms of the units or the tenants within the units? Tenets within the units. I mean, I know we used to be mainly section 8 housing, but that has changed considerably. I think it's a good thing. Yes. But do you know? I'm sorry, I don't know if it's up my head, you know I'm sorry I don't off my head you know the mix because we The government subsidizes then right so financially When was the last time you had your budget or your financial meeting? I believe in July Okay, all right. Thank you And no other questions. Thank you for reapplying and for your commitment. Thank you all so much. However, thank you. Thank you. And get well soon. Thank you. I'd like to move on to the Code Enforcement Board and invite Stephen Greenwall to come up. Hello again. Good morning. Brian, how are you? Good to see you. Good morning. Good morning. Good morning. Welcome. Nice to see you. Yeah, third time. Any comments you would like to make? Before we talk about the Code Enforcement Board, I don't know if you guys are aware what we're doing at Greyhook's Country Club for affordable housing. Has it been, so you guys know what's going on there? We may not as a board. We purchased affordable housing, so the whole membership got together and made a huge investment to help support our staff. So that's something you may be wanting to invite the board of great oaks to a meeting or something and see how you can get other clubs, guess like that involved in helping the community. And I'm sorry, just state your name for the record. Oh, Stephen Greenwald, sorry. No. My apologies. Anything else you need to let us know before questions? No, I just I think I add value to the code enforcement board and Keep people keep telling me when my terms expired Please reapply so Thank you Thank you for your service Council questions Council member Christian. How long have you been, remind me how long you've been on the Code of the Forestry and Board of the Honest or Greenwell? I think this is my third term. This will be your third time really. He had a partial term and then a full term. And the partial term, so this is you who I'm sorry miss Rosenberg the full term for code enforcement is three years. And a partial term doesn't count in the computation. Right. Right. Okay. So you've been on four or five years and the I guess my my question question is really goes to your kind of high level observation about the board. What I've observed, what's interesting to me to think about is that the board doesn't meet, hold that, often. The regular meetings often are canceled a few weeks before they occur due to a lack of an agenda, which, you know, I'm told, is a reflection, is a good thing because it's a reflection of the fact that at the staff level we are seeking and achieving compliance with the issues that are before the city. But that's one piece of feedback I've gotten. But I'm interested in your observations as to how you think the the board's work has gone forward during your tenure on the board whether it's been effective and achieving what I think we all want to have as objectives and whether the work behind the scenes at the staff level is achieving what we want to achieve and anything else you want to add to that. I think a lot of the meetings get canceled because the staff behind the scenes is resolving it without the need to come to the meeting. Which is a good thing. Which is a good thing. Which is a good thing. The only thing I've observed is I think the board needs more construction professionals to understand the code. And I'm kind of shocked at some of the things I hear when if you don't understand the code What are you doing there? So I mean I understand you got to fill vacancies But when these decisions are, you know, final that could impact somebody in the community, it's not fair to not understand the code. And part of what I do at all these meetings is try to impart what I know about the code to the other members so that they can try to make a sound decision Help helpful comments. Thank you Thank you council member grammar Coach Good to see you again. It's I just want to thank you man for what you've done and what you will and to do and We had We need more smart, hardworking people that are willing to get involved. So just thank you for that. Yeah, I appreciate it. I wish, you know, I try to talk to a lot of people that I know and they just, they're either too busy or they just don't want to give any time, which is sad. But... Thank you, Councilmember Petrino. Thank you for reapplying. Appreciate it. One of the questions that I had was, what is the most difficult decision that you've made on this board, where you have disagreed with fellow members and how did you resolve that? If you watch the videos of my career on the board, you will see that I constantly vote against high fees. When I first got on the board, we went through like a little training session on what the code board is all about. And one of the things that was imparted on me was, if there is a safety risk on the agenda, that should we should use high fees to solve that safety risk. When there is no safety risk, we want to try to modify behavior with low fees. And what I've seen the last, at least the last term, is that the fees are so ridiculous for the violation that if you look on the videos, I'm constantly arguing to lower those fees. So that that answers your question. And I guess the following question to that is on your recommendation to lower fees, are you finding that these lower fees that are enacted do result in modified behavior? Absolutely. Okay. All right. And what do you like best about this position? What inspired you to reapply? Just a lot of the members on the board itself telling me to reapply. The building department telling me to ask me to reapply because I understand the code. And part of what we're trying to do is protect the city which is Code enforcement Okay, and do you actively build homes within the city limits? Yes, you do. Okay Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Have a council member Barton and Peneman It's a rainbow. Thank you for being here today Quick observation for you. First of all, I want to tell you we appreciate you taking the time to reapply and making the effort. You mentioned that it's difficult to get to fill these seats often because people claim they're busy. Well, we're all busy. Absolutely. So again, it's the effort that matters here and we appreciate you reapp-applying and equally as important having you on the board for those that maybe don't have the in-depth knowledge from a construction basis standpoint. Again, I appreciate being on that board and helping them to understand the code because as mentioned just a few minutes ago you build homes here in the city and you understand the code because that's what we do for living. And I will simply say please be patient with those that don't have that expertise because I know that those folks up here have been patient with me as I've been learning my way as a new city councilman so again I appreciate your time effort and and the knowledge and an expertise to bring the table. Thank you. I am patient. I got it. I have a council member. Sir, do you see any codes that are consistently violated? I'm not really. Not really. It seems like every time we do have enough on the agenda for a meeting, it's always different things. Okay. So there's nothing within me that needs to really be addressed or focused on relative to codes. No, not at all. Not that I can think of. OK. And when there is a violation in your opinion and your experience, do they tend to be knowledgeable about the codes and hope to get by with, or truly, they don't know the codes. Are you talking about the offenders? Yes. Absolutely they know the code. Okay. Absolutely. Okay. So is there anything that we could do to preclude anything like that? Could we? No, but I will tell you that when I know that they know the code, I do overrule my safety balance and fees and raise those fees when they're taking advantage of the system. I do do that. I think that's what I needed to hear. OK. So if you see a pattern, you have no problem with perhaps saying, you know, we've seen you too many times. Yeah, you know after you sit for a while and a while. What's going on with who? OK. All right. Thank you for all. Welcome. For all your time. Appreciate it. Vice Mayor. Thank you Madam Mayor. Thank you Mr. Greenwald. I wanted to drill down real quick on your comments regarding fines and fees. You have a hypothesis that fines need to be lowered and by doing so you get more compliance. Is that compliance with correcting the code violations or compliance with not violating the code in the first place. You're going to have to repeat your question, but I never specifically stated that lower fees get you higher compliance. What does it get you? It just doesn't get you anything. It gets you in reality that if your grass is too high and to find somebody $250 a day to cut the grass when there's not a safety violation, when you can find them $50 a day and there's still a huge financial impact or incentive for $50 a day and there's still a huge financial impact there in Son of for $50 a day to cut the grass Those are the kinds of things I'm talking about Okay, so your your hypothesis is on safety issues safety and when it's safety, you're believing that higher fines are very effective. Absolutely. And then your comment about lowering fines applies to what? Compliance of issues in the city that are not a safety concern to the citizens of the community. So if it's not a safety concern lowering the fines. I'm always arguing to lower the fines. Do you believe that just applies to code enforcement or should we lower fines on tickets and other things? Do you have an opinion? I have no opinion. Okay. So just lowering the fines on other than on code violations other than safety. Yeah, I mean, one of the things you have to realize on code enforcement, if you get a ticket for parking or a ticket for speeding, you get a ticket. At code enforcement, you get a find that continually adds up day after day after day until the issues resolved. That's the difference. And when I see an issue that's non-safety related and you give them a fine of $25 or $50 a day and you know it's going to take them six weeks to resolve. They're getting a big fine without without making it $250 a day. Right and so your your belief is if you lower it they're going to come into compliance sooner? No. No. Okay. All right. Maybe we'll have that discussion. It's just lowering fees. I just believe that you shouldn't have high ridiculous fees for non-safety issues in the city. I don't know how else to say it. I understand and others believe that too. Yeah. I hear you. Thank you. Thank you very much. You're welcome. Thank you for your service. I actually agree that having a higher fine doesn't really change the behavior. No, it doesn't. And that's what compliance is about is trying to make sure that people are following those codes. So thank you for your service. I would just one question. Sure. There has been one case that has been out there and hasn't been resolved and I receive emails about it and why that continues. How long does it take to resolve some of the issues? There's one we don't need to use names or anything but that's out there and trying to get it into compliance. It's a construction site. What's out? A construction site? Hi. You don't need to discuss the case but how? a construction site. You don't need to discuss the case, but how? I'm not going to discuss the case. Normally we resolve everything before we leave. So it's very abnormal to have anything extended onto another meeting. Correct me if I'm wrong. No. Thank you. I just want to thank you for your me if I'm wrong. No. Thank you. I just want to thank you for your service and thank you for reapplying. You're welcome. All right. Have a good day, guys. I'm going to stay here. I'd like to move on to Collier County Contactors Licensing Board. The first thing I need to tell you is Mr. Henry Johnson removed his name from consideration this morning in person. Second thing is, I would say I would invite Jennifer Cassidy to come up but I don't see her here. So I'll have to check on her. Next we can move on to the Crab Community Redevelopment Agency Advisory Board. And Mr. Schu-Kart is here for his interview. Good morning. Good morning. Good morning. You'll state your name for the record, please. Yes, ma'am. Good morning, everyone. Christopher Schu-Kart for the record. President of JCS Realted Group founded 21 years ago. My family also has a history in Naples and property and business ownership back to the mid-90s with the purchase of the Tides Inn Motel on Gulf Shore Boulevard, as well as a couple of residences on Keyway, New Zealand was our first foray into living in business ownership here in the city of Naples. And so it's been an amazing experience. We have obviously a terrific town. Also currently our corporate offices, well not really corporate, just our family offices, are located within the city limits at 2500 Ninth Street North. We own three properties that are within the CRA, two of which are on Fifth Avenue, one of which is within the design district, currently under construction and partial ownership in a new rooftop restaurant project. It's, as I said, under construction. Very exciting. Hopefully, October or ish 2025, that will be completed in an operation. I find that I've got a very good understanding of the the CRA area from my experience with business ownership and development within the CRA. I'm also president of the Fifth Avenue South Business Improvement District. I've held that position for a couple years. Prior to that, I was Vice President and prior to that, I was Treasurer of the Business Improvement District. And so I've enjoyed that position as well. And so again, I have a pretty good understanding of the CRA. And I'm just excited to further give back to the community in a little different way. And I just wanted to mention a couple other organizations that I've been a part of over the years. I've been a member of the East Naples Civic Association since 2004. I served on their board for many, many years. I was a treasure for several years and then also a president of the East Naples Civic Association for several years. As I had mentioned, my involvement with the Fifth Avenue South Business Improvement District, I'm a current member of the Kiwanis Club. Well, it was the East Naples Kiwanis but merged into the larger Kiwanis locally here. Part of the Naples area, Board of Realtors, member of the Collier Building Industry Association, member of the Marine Industries Association, and a member of the Naples Design District. I've got a letter of recommendation from the Naples Design District if I could give that to the board for their review. And with that, I'd love to answer any questions you may have. Well thank you. Thank you for applying. I find it very interesting that you have time to serve on this board. And with that, what is that you have the understanding for the CRA? Where do you see the CRA going that it's not going and what your contributions would be? Well, the first, from a timing perspective, they say if you want something done, give it to a busy person. And so I'm pretty well organized. And so I feel from a time management perspective, I can more than handle the additional time that would be required. From a CRA perspective, there's obviously a lot going on, more bigger lifting within the design district. And so a couple of the items that I think from my perspective are of importance is working through the master plan and really getting the land development code language drafted and in place for the master plan. I think that's important. I think some of the initiatives that have been spoken of the alley activation within the design district I think is important. Obviously there's a lot of Fifth Avenue smaller but larger important as to the Fifth Avenue business improvement district or the overlay district. And then I think the shuttle program is probably one of the more exciting ones that I'm looking forward to discussing and trying to figure out how to implement. I think it's a great program to be able to activate the design district and fit the avenue and have less cars on the road, which obviously there's a conversation daily about the amount of traffic that takes place. And I think that the shuttle program can help take a little bit of pressure off of it. It's not a total solution, but I think it's a lot of little things add up to some big movements. And so your president of the bid, how much just the bid bring in from the tax property taxes? Well, so we're self-tax. So it's all self-levy against ourselves. We had a bid budget brought in 750-ish thousand last year, 790 this year. We get about 5% less than that when you factor in prepay credits and fees that are charged for collection. So I think we worked off of a 740 this last year and they got net was around 700. And what's the most important thing about that bid in the CRA area? I think it's one common voice. I think that really unifies us as a group. I mean, there's a lot of ownership, fractured ownership within the Fifth Avenue, South overlay district. And so don't know if that something is a bid or if it's a full-time person. But I do know it's a large area. It's far larger than the one in the city. I think it's a large area. I think it's a large area. I think it's a large area. I think it's a large area. I think it's a large area. I think it's district needs something and I don't know if that something is a bid or if it's a full-time person, but I do know it's a large area. It's far larger than the Fifth Avenue South overlay district. And so, there's more businesses, there's more redevelopment taking place. So I think there, so the Naples design district, as as it stands now is a voluntary organization. That voluntary organization can only go so far. And I actually just renewed mine this morning. And so at $750 and if you have 50 members and I'm in the middle bracket of the dollar amount, those revenues really aren't going to go very far. You're going to tap out quickly with those revenues plus the people. You can only take a volunteer-based organization so far. So I think at some point in time there has to be a full-time paid person to bring that voice, that cohesive voice of all of the business owners and residents together. And I think whatever that vehicle is, whether it's a bid or as I said a full-time person, I think it's important. I have others just wanted to ask you though, what do you see? You said there's, you know, development. Where do you see and what's your vision for what the design district will look like? What does it need more of? What's it lacking? So one of the suggestions that I think I've raised it at a couple of the sharets for the design district and I may have even raised it in front of this board is a grant program and I just read about it the Fort Myers community redevelopment agency just this morning I read it in the one of the publications that they have a 50% matching grant up to $50,000 and so they and the grants would go towards improvements to the property. Landscaping, new storefronts, painting, stucco. And so I think that's an important piece of maintaining the kind of the charm and the character of that district. It gives the property owner and the business owner the ability to stay and renovate versus tear down and rebuild. And so I think there's gonna be a natural progression of tearing down and rebuilding. But I think the more of those buildings that we can keep, rehabilitate and repurpose, I think that really is gonna what keeps the character of the design district. And if you want it separate, from you wanted to have a separate and distinct identity. I think that would be one of the suggestions I would look towards is how do we figure out a way to keep existing properties. And through either a grant program or maybe there's a tax subsidy or I mean there's a hundred different ways to incentivize people to keep their property and not tear down and redevelop. Okay. Thank you. I have Council member of Pinneman. to keep their property and not tear down and redevelop. Okay, thank you. I have council member Pinneman. I just want to check with the city attorney to make sure there's no conflict here in any way. Thank you for the question. Again, I think it's facts specific applications specific. I can't apply that there would be a conflict as it seems right now, but if one of Mr. Schu-Kart's property came through the CRAB or CRA obviously he would have to recuse himself. That's the only situation I can see offhand. Okay, yeah. Thank you for that, because I'd hate to see this energy go away. If it doesn't have to. So I just want to make sure that we were running a much. Sure. And the only property specific is the parking? Would that be from the, from what we're talking about? Generally speaking, if you're the owner of any property that came forth through an application through the CRA or CRAB, there would be a conflict. Okay, but I think currently I think the parking allocations, the only petition that maybe would come through, but there may be others, but that's the one that comes to mind is the parking allocations. Okay. From property specific. And I gather you're willing to pay that price. For sure. Yeah, we'll go. All right. I would assume it would be a recusing of the vote. That particular situation. Okay. Just a log. We all know what the playing field looks like. That's all I care about. I know you too. Thank you for applying. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Petronov. I thank you for applying. I had, I was along the same lines of view of, you have a lot of business interests in this district. And changing any rezone, any discussion on microbuses, any discussion on grant programs. There are trade-offs with people that are not businesses that live in the community. So I think it's going to be very difficult, you know, and maybe you can share with me how you would manage those inherent conflicts that may not come up as a direct property being petitioned, but the way that we manage and allocate funds and what this, what you are recommending to the CRA to spend would be to balance the other interests within that CRA district, specifically resident housing. I don't know if I can speak directly to the resident housing question. I may need to further clear. It's more of a, you know, you have a lot of business interests in the city and there's, and you're a recommending board to the CRA on how we allocate money within the CRA. How are you going to, as a business owner within that, with interests? How do you balance that against, you know, benefits that would accrue to your business indirectly? Sure. Well, I mean, I think there's anyone who applies has a conflict because you have to either be a resident, a property owner, or a business in business in the city. So there's an inherent some degree of conflict no matter what. But I think that's what you would want is somebody who has a vested interest in the area and the community. And so from my perspective, I mean, maybe I have a greater reach than others would be, but I still think, it would depend on what the item is, but if it's for the greater good of the CRA, then I think that's the ask. And I always have a firm belief that the rising tide lifts all ships. And so if it's good for some part of the CRA, it's good for the entirety of the CRA. And whether that, whether there's, I mean, a specific to a, to a property, I guess I'd have to see an example, but I guess I could go back to my initial statement that there's an inherent conflict in general because everyone's, you have to be part of the community that you're in on the CRA. Within the CRA. Okay. Did that? Thank you. Did I? I think it's somewhat, I mean, you have a great interest. I mean, you've got a lot of interest. You're the president of the bed. You've got that, you know, it seems you've got lots of interest. And I'm thinking directly of those polls, the ballards that you would like to invest in that are over a million dollars to stop traffic on Fifth Avenue so that you can have special events. That is a chunk of money weighted against, you know, a million dollars that could be spent in infrastructure, resiliency, et cetera, or grants to residents, homes. And I think it's going to be a fine balance on how you or any other member in there, but especially you given the level of interest that you have around this district to be able to make sure that you are equally balancing the business side with all other investment opportunities. Sure. Yeah, and I think I'm I think I'm able to sit on to what you said, Councilmember Petronoff. I mean, we have all known. We have these boards. You could have put recommended someone else to be on that board to support your interest and what you guidance. I think there's a lot of transparency on you being on the board, instead of it being, you know, it's doing it behind the scenes. I think that's, I like the transparency about it, but there will be a fine line if you were to be appointed on whether it was for your own self-interest or the betterment of the whole district. Sure. Well, I think by the fact that I've invested so much time on the bid shows that my intent is to help the entirety of a group, even though I have ownership within the bid, I'm on the board helping the entirety of the bid. So I think that that's a testament, you know, action speak louder than maybe assumptions. Councillor, thank you. Councillor Memor, grammar. Yeah, I first thanks and I'm here on clear and ask a busy person. That's how I feel about like our planning staff that has to get ready for three meetings some weeks and still do their regular job. And then be in those meetings and all that. I'm like, wow, what do we do it? But anyway, I see it a little, I see that you have a vested interest for sure, but I don't think it's greater than the homeowner who really, all they really care about is their front door. Because the fact is you're dealing, not just with businesses but with patrons. And you have to keep the patrons happy and the patrons are, for most of the year, the people that you live next door to. And so, thanks for applying. Thanks for willing to dig in. I think the transparency part is excellent. And I wish there were more folks who were willing to make the investment, to not just fuss and talk about it and opine, but to get involved. Thanks. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Barten. Mr. Sch-Kart, thank you for being here today and volunteering to do this. Maybe I'll take a slightly different approach here to what I'm visualizing, but there's certainly an interest here and it's more of a vested interest than it is a conflict of interest. Could there be a conflict of interest? Yes, of course there could be a conflict of interest. Could there be a conflict of interest? Yes, of course there could be a conflict of interest. Your vested interest here is the fact that you own businesses and your own property in these, I'm going to say these because it's the CRA and within the CRA, the designed district. Therefore, their success is your success. I see your attempt to be on this board as nothing more than to help facilitate the success of the CRA and the design district of which specifically designed district is really important for us up here in our community to make sure that we do the right thing from a standpoint of developing that area properly. And what we need to do that are people like you on the advisory board to help us make decisions using your expertise and using your knowledge of how businesses run, how business should be developed and how what types of business should be going on in areas so that we up here can make it informed and educate a decision when we make those decisions ultimately for those particular areas. So again, I don't see this as being a conflict of interest issue. Could there be a situation where you need to recuse yourself absolutely, That's specific one of your properties is specifically involved, of course. But from a standpoint of your interest, I see you as having a vested interest and your vested interest means that you are interested in the success of this redevelopment area. So again, I appreciate your time, appreciate your attempt to get on the board so that you can help out. Thank you. Thank you Council Member Christian. Yeah I just had wanted to thank you for applying Mr. Schuchart and being willing to volunteer for this advisory board and obviously an important advisory board and also appreciate your comments earlier today and we need to have conversations about not just tactical conversations but strategic conversations about the future of the CRA and you obviously are somebody who has been thinking about that. Any of us can agree or disagree on a particular vision, but we need to have those conversations and we need people who are thinking in those terms. Just adding on to that, given the conversation in the last few minutes up here on the conflict of interest as Council member Barton appropriately just said there can always be conflicts of interest. They exist at the council level from time to time too and when we have processes for dealing with that, that people can engage in to resolve those. But one thing that's interesting about the crab, we need to remember is that it is, as a unique dimension among our advisory boards in that it explicitly says that membership is available to business owners in the district. That was intentional. It doesn't have to do with residency in the city, residency, but business owners in the district, and it was, I assume, it's been there from the beginning, and it was intentionally put there because we wanted the business owners to be stakeholders in this process and what happens to the future of the CRA. So having voices of business owners among others on the crab is a good thing, in my view, and made sense when it was put in there, and it still makes sense. So it's just another element as we consider the suitability of different applicants for this particular advisory board. And again, I guess the final thing I'll say is that emphasis on advisory, when we talk about conflicts of interest and so on, we've got to remember, we're talking about advisory boards here. These are boards and committees that make recommendations to us in the end we Final decisions kept made right here at this on this day. Yes Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I have a vice mayor Thank you Madam Mayor. Thank you Christopher for your interest You bring something unique to the table for the community and for the city council, and even for any members of the CRA board that might be here. If you, your interaction with the Fifth Avenue bid, you described a, not a career path, yeah, there's a career path really, probably a memory. Probably longer than I'd hope for at this point. Yeah, you went from treasure to vice president to president. Now, had you screwed everything up in the fifth avenue bid, this would be a very short discussion. Right? Probably. Yeah, it would be. But not that the bid doesn't have its issues. We still have all these different walking surfaces, all this different sidewalk issues. We've got, there's just different stuff that still hasn't been solved. From a larger perspective, I think that you and the people that you've surrounded yourself with on the bid have made Fifth Avenue a success. And for this council, if we want, and the Councilman Barton, you kind of referred to it, and I believe Councilman Cramer was saying the same thing, if we want to duplicate and minimize our mistakes in the development of the design district. I believe there is merit in bringing or assigning or providing someone like you a responsibility in that. So I wanted to say that. Number two, you've got skin in the game. If our mission is success and understanding that this is an advisory role and then whatever comes to us through this board, the crab, it's got to make sense to us. And in that process, the community's gonna be engaged, right? So that makes a big difference and the business owners in that area are gonna be engaged. You mentioned a shuttle program. If you're successful in getting on the crab, I know you're thinking about a shuttle program in terms of guests and visitors. Some of us may be thinking of a shuttle program that helps solve the employee parking issue. Not only in the design district and what may become an issue that we're dealing with on Fifth Avenue, but maybe a combined solution can be brought forward that will solve a lot of other issues in our community. And finally, if you think about timing, as we're trying to struggle with the decisions we have to make with infrastructure in the design district and a master plan? When's the right time to bring on or assign or provide a responsibility to someone like Mr. Schuchart? Is it before you get too far along with infrastructure decisions and master plan decisions? So the last thing I'll say is this. Mr. Schu-Kart, in his opening, provided us with some of his family history and where they've invested their money. What I've seen from Mr. Schuukart and he's, you can't argue with his passion, maybe you can argue with how he gets there a little bit. But I see someone who recognized something different than Fifth Avenue and someone willing to invest in those concepts in fact leading the way. So if we're really going to try to make this design district in the entire CRA function and function well. I believe now is the time to put something, someone like Mr. Schu-Kart into this role. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Thank you. Thank you. I just have one. You mentioned the bigger lifting in the master plan. What's that? Can you specifically which master plan? Well, the way I understand it is the master plan was developed, which was more conceptual in nature. And then there was to be a follow-up of a text amendment, or kind of where the details of how to get through it. And forgive me if I'm incorrect on that. I thought there was a next step of truly getting the land development code language implemented to further the actual conceptual plan itself. So you're, I don't wanna put words in a mouth. Are you referring to DPC? Yes, so DPC did the master plan for the design district and then that was the conceptual piece and then to actually put it into play, I thought that there was some piece of code to amendment. I didn't know which master plan you were talking about. Oh, my apologies. Yes. Whether it was the entire CRAA. The design district master plan. But, okay. And what is your vision? What do you think that D downtown or design district should look like? More hotels, more restaurants. I know you want cocktail lounges. But what is it that? Oh, man. restaurants. I know you want cocktail lounges but what is it that? Man, I can't get away from that one. So, you know, I think I think it needs to have a different identity as well. A lot of people have said is the different identity from Fifth Avenue. So it should have its own unique characteristics. I think hotel and transient lodging is a piece of that. A lot of everyone started as a visitor and then ultimately fell in love with the city and transitioned into a permanent resident. And so I think that's an important piece. Also, someone on vacation is probably spending more money than maybe a resident would on a daily basis while they're here. So I think from a business economic standpoint, I think that makes sense. I think we need workforce housing. If possible, if it's achievable, a lot of difficult conversations to be had through that piece of it. But, you know, I think that the, you know, the design district can be a lot of different things because it's a big area. It almost laid out in different quadrants and so I think it can be a lot and I think it'll end up being different than a fifth avenue or at least from a look and a feel maybe a tenant and a customer makeup perspective. And I'll just say that's why I wanted to note we and I can talk separately. I just, you know, D downtown or now the design district used to be called the heart of the city. And we have to be so careful. It's not that we don't like tourists, but we don't, in my opinion. It concerns me to turn us in more to a resort community where Fifth Avenue was depending on nothing but tourists. We want to be very careful to make sure that we are not getting rid of those small businesses. Because those small businesses are local members of our community. And we wanna make sure that we're very careful in how we design this in the design district. So I know you're, I've said this to you, you're a visionary and I appreciate it. I just wanna know your vision. So that's why I asked that question. Yeah, I agree. I think there's a balance to all of it within that district. And to the comments I made initially about incentivizing properties and businesses to reinvest into their back into their property, prolongs the redevelopment of it and keeps it more of a localized tenant mix. Thank you. thank you for applying and we'll make our appointments on Wednesday. Thank you so much. Appreciate your time. Mayor, we have a public comment slip on this item. It might be a good time to take it while we're talking about crab. It's makes to panion. Okay, let me take public comment. It's next on the agenda. If you don't mind, Meg, I don't want it because we've had Mr. Brotard care since 830. We should really have taken the ones in the room or some order. There's just one more committee and it's Morning Space Citizens Advisory Committee. Marcy Kram contacted me this morning and said she's ill and she's not going to be here. So our last interview will be with Mr. Bill Brotterick. Good morning. Thank you for your patience. You've been here since 830 and I'm sure you want to join all the boards now that you've had an opportunity to have the details of them but thank you. I think I'll take the council's advice and stay on one at least for the time being if that's okay. If you'll just state your name for the room. So I'm Bill Barotterick and my wife and I live in Admiralty Point, which is 10 acres right on Doctor's Pass and two buildings. And I'm currently a member of the board there of Admiralty Point. And I've had a kind of a long track record of volunteering in the community for most of my adult life. And I've enjoyed that very much. And I've been on the Morning Space Citizens Advisory Committee for three years. Last year I was elected chair by the fellow members and I'm happy to reapply for another three-year term. I think we do some good work on the committee and we're advisory. We advise City Council on the mayor. So we just like to just happy to be here today and meet with everybody, especially the new members of the committee of City Council. Thank you. Thank you for your commitment to the community and especially to this board. Is there anything that you would like to see change or work on within this board? Not at the moment we have two pretty significant projects underway right now, one involving swan lake, and that study is an attempt to see if a different chemical treatment can keep that lake cleaner, trying to avoid copper sulfate, and there's a separate industrial chemical that's being used, and the residents are really happy with how it's going so far, and I think the report is due to us and to you in the next month or so. So I'm actually to see how that comes out and then there's a second study that you all authorized last December, a $90,000 study to test water that's flowing into four of the six lakes that feed then into Moring's Bay and the purpose of that study is just to kind of get a sense of what's coming in from the watershed into these stormwater lakes and then from the stormwater lakes obviously don't enroll in Dumps in two Moring's Bay so I think we need four rain events for that study to be completed and we've had one and so that might be a little while before we get the results of that. So those are the two big things we have on the plate right now. And just as I try and watch all the meetings but you haven't talked about doing a overall watershed meeting with the county because that's really the issue is the flow coming from the county into our city lakes. Have you discussed that with I think who's Natalie is yours? She just took that over though, correct? I think she's had that role for quite a while. Yes. So have you discussed that master watershed plan with the county and the city in that basin? Well, there's a master lakes management plan if that's what you're referring to, which I think came out in 2019 No, I'll just ask that you maybe you might talk about it in another time Okay, that'd be great. I might want to ask about the looking at the watershed We talk about the components of everything coming into morning's face So I don't know if that's part and parcel of a giant plan, but the county. Yeah, okay, yeah. We really haven't talked to the county about it. Got it. Good. Okay, thank you. Councilmember Petronov. Thank you for reapplying. I am very anxious to see when the final presentation is going to be made, whether that chemical works. Even before I got on council two and a half years ago, there was talk about, and I guess we had salt water intrusion so we had to start from scratch a little bit. But whether or not that much cheaper chemical version of the microlift works as well or better than dredging. And it certainly is a lot less intrusive and a heck of a lot cheaper. Would you see that this is going to come forward in the next six months or so? Yeah, I think the report, all the work is done and now the consultants are wrapping up the report. I'm told it might even come out as soon as next month, so we'll see what happens. And with regard to dredging, there is differences of opinion as to whether something like micro-lift can avoid dredging, because they're kind of two somewhat different subjects. Dredging deals with the sentiment that can be a 4 to 2 feet deep at the bottom of these stormwater lakes and changing the chemicals, not going to change that. So I will have to defer to staff and the experts on whether this is going to have an effect on future dredging or not. But I can tell you that the residents that live right around Swan Lake are very happy with the results of the microlift, especially as compared to Devils Lake, which has still got lots and lots of green cover and things growing in it. So we'll see what happens when the study comes out. Okay, and are you involved with the check valves that are going to be installed in Swan Lake? The check valves? Did prevent salt water intrusion coming into the lake? I guess backflow valves. Well I think that's part of the normal process is it not to have backflow valves in these lakes. I think that the city engineers put them in as a matter of course as necessary. So that's kind of out of the scope of what you guys do. Because I did observe them last week. I think Bob Middleton pointed them out that they came in and they're massive. And I think people will be pretty excited when they go into Swan Lake. Yeah. I'm going to like after read your few comments. I'll let Mr. Bito Schrader or do you want to do that? Oh, I, you know, regarding the Swan Lake study, I just wanted to advise you all that that's on your look ahead schedule for the November workshop. So we've been working closely with the neighbor reps to coordinate a date when the vast majority of those who are interested in being here for the presentation are available. Otherwise, we could have met in October, but it's gonna be November, just accommodate schedules. Okay, great, thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you, I have council member Barton and Peniman. Mr. Broadwick, I real quick, I just wanted to thank you for reapplying obviously, but it takes members like you to, members of the members like you to, members of the community like you to be, to step up and be a part of this equation and we need you desperately so not only did you do that but you're willing to continue to do that. So again, thank you, really appreciate the efforts. Thank you. Thank you, Pinouin. It's going to echo the same sentiment I've been watching your meetings, your knowledgeable group, your focused, you've ran a great meeting and I appreciate your reapplying. Thanks so much. Thanks, Mayor. Well thank you, Mr. Brotter. Thank you again for your interest in serving the community. Maureen's Bay is vitally important and just keeping up with all the watershed contributors is full-time job. Things in that watershed are continuing to develop as the community develops that direction. I was made aware, of course, you know that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is moving ahead with some of their projects. And as you were talking, it just occurred to me that I don't know what kind of tactics they have planned in and around Maureen's Bay. But as we think about everything coming in one direction toward the Gulf. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is thinking a little bit differently about things coming from the other direction. And my ask is just consider touching base with the individual I think that's been appointed by Collier County, the Scott Schultz and District 4, I believe he's currently the chairman of the Collier County Coastal Storm Risk Management Committee, which is dealing with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. And the reason you would do that is just to make sure that nothing is interrupting what the Maureen's Bay Committee believes is necessary to keep that those water bodies clean and clear and functioning properly. Thank you. Great. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I think that should be a request. I think that should be a request that we coordinate staff to have. I know we have a core presentation coming to us that it go before the Moring's Bay Committee as a suggestion for that committee. So I have No Councilmember part I mean Kramer I'm looking at you going yeah, okay I just want to thank you again just like some your predecessors who put it out there and it and don't just talk Talk to talk but walk the lock so thanks very much for what you do Again, thank you for your service to this committee and for spending your morning with us since 830 and We'll make our appointments on Wednesday. That'd be great. Thank you all I concludes our interviews. Okay, thank you, Madam Clerk. And now if you'd like to speak in public comment, there are comment forms in the back of the room that can be filled out and given to the clerk. Our first speaker, man. Thank you. Thank you. Good recommendation from the clerk, but Mr. Barrett, I've been here for so long. I didn't want to keep him. Vice mayor, good morning, everyone. My name is Meg Stepanion. I'm the executive director for the Fifth Avenue South Business Improvement District. Mr. Schuchart invited me to speak on his behalf today. I could have written a letter, but I think what is important is to reinforce his application, his representation today as a stakeholder in this community and as well some of your feedback today that you recognize his leadership strengths. Chris has incredible relevant knowledge and expertise that will be valuable to the crab. I have an intimate knowledge, not intimate, but, you know, a working knowledge of the crab in the last 19 months of my being the executive director and really believe that his leadership, his expertise, his experience in governance is going to provide that committee with a greater purpose, a greater understanding of what they need to do to really tee up the projects that you guys receive. So you're going to have, I believe, with his sitting on that committee, much more efficient, much more, he knows what you're going to need. So they're going to come better prepared from an advisory standpoint to bring those projects forth to you in a more efficient, a more detailed manner. I think the characteristics that I have learned about Mr. Schu-Kart is his integrity, his creativity as you know, the strategic 30,000-foot view, but also at the end of the day, what is it going to take when you guys are sitting up here making the sausage? As I know, you've said vice mayor so many times. You're going to be better prepared with Chris Schu-Kart sitting on that committee to make those decisions that you're going to be better prepared with Chris Schuckart sitting on that committee to make those decisions that you're going to need to make. Chris collaborates super well in the environment. I know him best, which is at the Fifth Avenue South Business Improvement District. It is about rising tides lifting all ships. He does meet with other property owners and assists them in making certain decisions as a colleague, as making certain decisions as a colleague, as a friend, as a, you know, as a colleague, as a friend, really. And problem solving, he understands the local issues that are facing you guys. So I think that when Mr. Schu-Kart comes to you, I think it is in the most efficient way possible. He looks to make your time valuable, and I believe that his candidacy and his representation on the crab will assist you in that. So you will be better prepared with Mr. Schu-Kart being on the crab. That's all I have. Thank you. Thank you for coming in. Any further public comment? Okay, Councilor, we're way behind for a break. It's approximately 10.50 and we'll be back in 10 minutes. you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you Okay, we're back from our short break. We're continuing on with item 6A. And before we move forward, Mr. McConnell, I just wanna say this is your council, your charter members worked very hard at least having an understanding of our boards and our committees to look at what we can make more efficient and more consistent. And I really appreciate and we should be thankful to the fact that they were committed to making these changes. So thank you for your time this summer, for this very big project. So Mr. MacCotton. Thank you, Mayor, and I appreciate that. So I've hit my three month mark with the city. It's been very exciting. Congratulations. Definitely staying busy. I appreciate that. But what I tried to do over the summer, which I was committed to doing through the interview process is Try to get a grip on how the boards are currently operating With summer break it was kind of hard so I had to go back and see how some of the meetings went down I've had the pleasure of attending some of the planning board meetings and I've seen the design review so on and so forth But I want to start off with a majority of these changes in front of you today are strictly for consistency purposes. I do think it's pretty standard to have boards develop their own rules on how they want to operate with the understanding that city council will usually, at least for what I'm used to, have the final decision on whether those are appropriate. However, it is important to allow the board to develop these on their own because they're the board, they're there, they're seeing these petitions and these applications and they have a good grip on what's currently happening specific to that board. Now we can go item by item or board by board if we want to look at these. But once I made the changes, I thought about the fact that these are going to have to come before you in an ordinance change, which is going to have to be advertised twice and the statute will control how that occurs. So I thought once we go through some of my changes, it's an important to kind of shift the discussion to policies and procedures for zoning applications generally. What applications have to go to design review board, what applications have to go to the planning board before city council review. The reason I thought that was an important discussion to have is for efficiency. If we're going to go in and change these ordinances already, if there's going to be other changes that the council would like to make, I think now is the time. This conversation can go on as long as we need it to and we can schedule another workshop. But that was kind of the thought behind the two-step process. The first step being for consistency purposes, which I think from from my point of view, are more of recommendations and suggestions that I think we should do. And then the second part of this conversation being open for discussion on if we need to move some things around how we like the zoning processes currently in place and we can just have that conversation at that time. So if the council would like, if there's no questions, we could just start off with going board by board. I think what you'll notice in the agenda materials are very consistent language that I crafted. It was more of a copy and paste throughout the board just to ensure that whatever rules and policies that were adopted were eventually made it in front of you for consideration and discussion prior to implementation. And the reason that's important is because you don't want boards just kind of on their own, doing things that may be inconsistent with your own policies and procedures in these public hearings. And you'll notice that the one board I did leave office is the code enforcement board. And the reason that I did leave office is the code enforcement board and the reason that I did that is because of its control by statute chapter 162. There may be some cleanup there that I can do but ultimately the statute controls how that board operates and the notices and the hearings and you have a great code and compliant staff that is very aware and enforces those accordingly. Are there any questions about how we will move forward? Okay. So you want to start with? I think why not start with number one? The first one on the agenda is the CPRB. Citizens Police Review Board. Now I do want to preface this conversation with a recent House bill that was passed this year that relates to these citizen review boards. If there are any changes and I'm working with the chief and his staff, if there are any changes that I see are required to come in compliance with that house bill, then I'll just go ahead and make those once they come before you and the ordinance. I just, with the timing of this, I didn't have time to go in and kind of see if there were any internal changes I needed to make to come in and compliance with the statute. So putting that aside, what you see in red are the edits that I have suggested with, as the mayor alluded to, with our charter meetings. So I won't take all the credit, but these are just some things that I think are recommendations from our standpoint. So we can look over there on the screen. Thank you, David. Thank you. Please announce me. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Mr. Brutersvar, for putting that on the screen. So when we look at it just go quickly are there changes that anyone sees to the first with the police review board? Okay. I had just the fact that there was one somebody sent into me that if there's ever any reporting that also council is also informed of those reports. Okay. And I think you're referring to page two because I actually had a comment here Where says a report shall be submitted to the city manager again with the new house bill I'll make sure that that's if that's not a requirement I don't like to make it a requirement at times. I think it's appropriate to maybe say may because shall in the legal world means it must be done Unless that's the world the council if you of report, shall be submitted to the city manager and we can include something about maybe an informational item to the city council, then I can definitely make that change. I think it shall be submitted to the city manager and should be what was the terminology you used reported? As an informational item to the city council. Well, so what did say? A report shall be submitted to the City Manager, Chief of Police following the conclusion of the process and City Council. If the will of the Council is to have an informational item, I won't speak for Mr. Booter Schwab, but that could just be an internal policy. Once you put it in the code, the only way to change it is to amend the code. And we can't put it in the- But if you're not in the code, then it may not. I mean, our internal policies are very well. We need to look at our internal policies. Yeah, I'll jump in here. So two things. This entire section of the code may be moved, depending on what we need to do to comply with the recent bill that was adopted. Chief and I have had some conversations about an alternative to make sure that there is transparency and we do leverage any kind of authority that isn't preempted by the state locally to ensure that transparency going forward with issues that may surface so all of this may be But if the if the request of the council is to codify a process to ensure that new administrations in the future don't implement different policies, that is the way to do it. You know, that way there's a requirement to provide information to council, even if it's informational. If it's codified, it's in there and if you should admit administrations have to comply with that. So it's really up to you, you know, how important is it for you to get these reports, I believe, and the chief, you know, can correct me if I'm wrong, but these meetings when they're held, do we publish, do we, Chief, can you come up to the microphone? Do we publish, publish publicly the docket or the packet of information that's accessible by the public and do we publish minutes for these meetings that are also available to the public. So in effect, the final report is accessible. Correct. Good morning. Good morning. Good morning. Sure, the Mingus Chief of Police. It really depends on what we want to do with this and what action does the board, the council want. As internal affairs investigations go, they're governed by statute already. And we produce the document at the closure of that, which then is a public record. And then open to anyone to look at yourselves or whoever wants to come in and do public record requests. Usually what this board has done in the past, just to get a good handle on it, is use of force or any of those kind of complaints that come from the outside and we would then present it to them they would have time to review it all and then they would have a hearing and then that would be recorded in a document or report would be created from there. That's that's the past occurrence. Thank you. So, Mr. Bouchoir, when will that information, that legislation go into? We will be, we're, Mr. McConnell's, actively reviewing this situation. So we hope to- So this will come back at some point. Okay, so we have a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little initial review tells us that we at least need to do some modifications if not completely repeal. But for the, but we started this process of reviewing the boards and committees before we really understood what the state legislature did. So we'll be back to you one way or another on this board. Thank you. Okay. Any further input? We can move to the next board. Councillor Meigarh Petrano. No. Just that you know I'm assuming that we're going to table this and wait to have you come back once you've embedded what this legislation is going to do for this. In the recommendation that you said is there anyone that is opposed to Councilmember Petronaut's comment? So if I may before, that is what the process is currently, right? So we're starting off with this discussion unless you tell me, please stop or no, change this. I'm going to take these edits along with specifically for the police oversight, make any edits to you. It will come back before you in an ordinance format. We'll have another discussion via two readings and I'll make sure to include any edits that we see are necessary or not when it comes to this specific board. But to answer your question, yes, it will come back before you with a full underlined and striked through version of the ordinance itself. And real quick, we have this state issue that's that may change what actually comes back to you. But let's set that aside for a second. I think the one substantive piece of feedback that we heard from the group. We want to make sure that there's consensus or majority here. And that was to add city council as one of the recipients of the final report as an informational item for you. And you want opposed to that? OK. Next would be our crab. Oh, you know, I, I, council member Pendlement, did you have a comment to make? I'll do it later. Okay. I'm sorry about that. Okay. Council Member Christmas. Regarding comments on the crab, board and it's correct. That's where we are. Yep. So, yeah. I think this one needs a lot of work. Particularly section two, dash, five, seventy-three duties. You know, I started to work through it and try to make some edits and word-smith it. And the more I got into it, I realized that this language is really, it obviously, to me anyway, seems to be, in some instances, language that has, you know, probably goes back to the 90s when the CRA was first created and the crab was created and, you know, picking up on the DPC plan from that time and you look at the specifics under section B, you know, they're kind of, I think it really goes back to the time when Fifth Avenue was being redeveloped and parking, where you're doing all the parking stuff. And it's just outdated and outmoded. And there are so many things the CRAB and the CRA are involved in now that are not mentioned here, such as our efforts to support commercial retail residential of different kinds and other things. So my suggestion here is that we really need our CRA manager and other staff, including our planning director and our deputy city manager to sit down and look at this, look at it in the context of our community redevelopment plan and what's in there from the standpoint of policies and priorities and suggest, subsequently, what are the updated set of duties in responsibilities that should be enumerated here? And you don't have to list everything under the sun. But list the primary ones in an updated fashion. And then you can always have a final one that says other matters consistent with the state at enabling statute and city CRA plan. But my view is that this isn't even a draft that we can productively work from today, but rather should go back to the drawing boards and come back to us in the context of a zoning ordinance that updates these duties. Okay, so I appreciate that because I mean there are technical things in here. It's no longer the D downtown, it's the design district that need to be cleaned up and when you say things that we're doing that aren't in here, those are the things that we need to know and decide as a board on whether we want to add those into the duties and responsibilities or not. And I might add, just these are boards, well, the police review board was established by the police department. But these are boards that were established by Council. And that's the whole point of going through these. Now this was established in 08 for the Crab, but we have evolved. We have changed. We've even said that the Fifth Avenue overlay district was an incentive that was no longer needed. But that's where this whole board needs to have that conversation for the new members that we have. Because we have evolved. We have created Fifth Avenue South to be a great street. And we did discuss on whether we needed those incentives for redevelopment any longer or not. So this is where we do that. I understand going back but let's do some discussion. You want to do this discussion now? You don't have to have the final words into the right because that's we'll give it back to staff and we'll give it to the attorney to make sure that you know it comes back with the little target. I mean I'm not I'm I'm happy to have discussion but I mean just to get so I make my point as clear as I can look at B under section 2573 consider applications and make recommendations to city council for the following matters or applications within the community redevelopment area the fifth avenue overlay district and D downtown district I don't you know what that means I'm with. I mean that's not it that's this award salad that makes no sense at all and and and so it's just an example of what I'm talking about so I'm I'm happy to have a discussion but to me this isn't even a this template that we have in front of us, you know, trying to use this as a baseline to get to a good final product is for me difficult. It's up for it is the code. And that's what our staff is basing any of their decisions on. That's why this is- Oh, we have to change it. I'm just saying having an updated code- And when you say- The codes code to react to might be more productive. When it says consider applications, I can only give you my perspective on why that language was there. And it's more like considering the transportation, right, muddy. my interpretation is that's what that is. Well, crab is the recommending body the same way that PAB is the recommending body to council for certain land use petitions. Crab is the recommending body for petitions within the CRA. So there's like the parking, the on street parking payment in lieu of parking. There are certain petitions, we'll say, that go to Crab for the recommendation instead of the planning advisory board. So that's what that's talking about. That's detailing which of those applications would go to Crab for recommendation instead of the planning advisory board. Oh, now that's interesting. But the whole reason we had the Crab was so that they could hone in more on this area but it still would go through the planning advisory board because it's a change to. So planning. A site planning and a PD in this area would go to planning advisory board. There were certain petitions that would go to crab for recommendation would be like I said the on street parking. That is a pool of parking that is unique to the CRA and the D downtown so that's controlled by crab so that would go to crab for recommendation to council Payment in lieu of and that's for parking just within this district that would go to crab for recommendation So there's certain petitions that would go to crab instead of PAB, but it would Still go to PAB because parking pool would be a big piece Some site plan that might come before Site plan would go to PAB, but, but the actual control of that parking pool is the CRA. So CRAB would make that recommendation. Not the PAB. Can I answer a question there? The staff is the zoning within the CRA and its entirety, completely D downtown and with the exception of the overlay on Fifth Avenue, it's not, is it? So again, so for example, here under B, in terms of considering recommendations, consider applications and make recommendations. It refers to the Fifth Avenue overlay district and the D downtown. But. And the CRA. So it says within the community redevelopment area, the Fifth Avenue overlay and the D downtown. Yeah. So that was confusing to me. Yes. Because it should say something like, to me, it should say something like, to me it should say something like within the community development area, including the Fifth Avenue District, the Downtown District, and other districts, other zoning districts within the CRA. Words to that effect. Well, wait, other zoning districts? Well, there's parts of the CRA that are not in the Downtown downtown or not part of Fifth Avenue, so they're in some kind of a zoning district. Right. Right. That's correct. But this would be the time for us to also have a discussion on when we're going to update the new members on our decision to consider removing the Fifth Avenue in Senate because we, I mean, this is a new board. Before we had a consensus to discuss it and bring it back. Could you give us a little more information? I'll let. Ms. Martin, remember the discussion that we had on what the Fifth Avenue overlay is about and it's for incentivizing redevelopment. And the past conversation was, well, we see that Fifth Avenue has done a great job of redeveloping what would be the incentives so what is the and what are the incentives in the Fifth Avenue overlay there are multiple incentives could you share that so that we they have a I mean we don't need to come back for a different workshop the top of my head I will do my best there's parking incentives in the downtown you get a credit for the square footage that's already there. There's not an expectation that you will park 100% of your parking on-site. You can purchase spaces out of the garage for all your commercial. There is no parking requirement for on-street. There are no side-setbacks. There is no lot-coverage requirement requirement. There's a number of both form-based and monetary if you will incentives for redevelopment of the Fifth Avenue over. Which it came out of the conversations we had when we were talking about outdoor dining because outdoor dining on Fifth Avenue you can have outdoor dining but you do not have to have the parking which is what's created a problem for Fifth Avenue because we're allowing outdoor dining and we're not providing the parking. I'm trying to tie this in. the parking pool, the dollars, for parking, they just, we got variances. There was a, during the recession, there was a period of time where yes, there were variances or waivers to the requirement for parking or payment. So we got neither physical spaces nor payment for those. So basically, we had an incentive but they received the incentive without paying into the pool. So we haven't had it yet and we've had, I would think, majority of the redevelopment. That was just kind of trying to go over what the past conversation was. And then you said we talked about the side setbacks because that was an interpretation on whether to build to the frontage line. Well, yeah, it's a foreign base code. So the idea was, what do you want your street skate to look like? And this is supposed to be your urban downtown. So there are buildings up against buildings. You don't have 20 feet in between or 15 feet in between buildings like we have in more single family or multi-family districts. This is an urban downtown. So you have your buildings right up against each other and right up to the frontage line. The idea is that when you're walking down the street, you're walking down the sidewalk and there's storefronts. It's not, you don't have parking lots and then buildings. But again, that was kind of when Duané first came, his envision was more of having places like Trulux, where you had not Trulux. The French, the French or Toulier, where you have it within its outside or a verguina. It's outside, but it's not encroaching into the public right away. And then we went the extreme of giving outdoor dining to people who didn't have that build to line. So of course the developer is going to build two lines, but then they put a yogurt store and the yogurt store wants to have seating. So we put it in the right way, which created a problem because then we didn't have the proper amount of width for people and the amount of people on the street. So having incentives like that, what are the other ones? I mean, it's for me. So it's basically instead of setting a set of development standards like you have an irregular zoning district, you say this is what we want the buildings to look like. So there's, you know, no lot coverage requirement. There's multiple. Is that somewhere in the code that we could look at? It's all in the Fifth Ab overlay in chapter 58. So that tells you exactly what can be built and how. Chapter 58, you'll look in overlay districts. It's the Fifth Ab overlay. What's standards for site design and standards for building design. So the first thing is as we need to have that conversation on whether the incentives for the Fifth Ab and new overlay have served your purpose for redevelopment or not. Can I sit? I have penement and then petrion on. So hang in here with me guys, because I'm gonna kinda stray off the reservation a little bit. We just had an interview with a property owner and a business owner for the crab. What you all didn't realize was that sitting in the back of the room was a property owner that is in the crab district, Mr. Whitaker from River Park. And they're very much a part of this CRA as well. So I'm not surprised that after the discussion he got up and left, which is what I was going to say to you earlier. He's now retired. He was very interested in getting involved with the Crab, the City and so forth. That's information I had that you didn't have. So you know, the CRA thing is a little bit more complicated because we do have property owners as part of the CRA. So somehow rather in my opinion we need to address that as well. Otherwise, I'll get lost in the shuffle kind of like they did today. So that's exactly what I am trying to have this conversation in the fact that we have incentivized Fifth Avenue and I would say it's a star student areas that we have not looked at are other areas within DCRA. So point proven. Thank you. Councilmember Petronoff. I'm glad you brought this up mayor. This overlay because I think it was introduced probably when the recession hit and we wanted to incent get the businesses going again by giving, allowing them to build probably a little bigger to the lot line and trying to follow the Dewanning Plan of a heavy downtown commercial where there's less setbacks. And I think embedded in there was retail stores where this, you know, Fifth Avenue is pretty much migrating into a row of restaurants and no retail, which created the conundrum that everyone wants to come down here and eat at outdoor dining and there's no space for it, COVID hit, and it all moved outside with no parking requirement in outdoor dining in public spaces. So the $10,000 question did it work. And I would say yes, I think Fifth Avenue is thriving and this redevelopment worked. So based on that, do we want to remove those that overlay those incentives and are and can we Does it conflict with anything with hb250? I'm being able to to do that Should we choose to do that and then the second question is the Dpz Data came back from people saying you know, we don, we don't want to be in the design district, another fifth avenue. That came over and over and over again. It was glitz, we don't want the glitz and glam. We want to be where locals go and then that Mr. Gibbs said and where locals go, tourist follow. So it's a little different area with different possibly with different incentives or not. So I'm wondering do we do we understand enough that we would want to remove an overlay from this? So can we? Yes, we can because we put it there to incentivize redevelopment. That was the whole purpose was to incentivize redevelopment. So second to your question is in 08, we did outdoor dining and entertainment because of the downturn and we can confirm this by the record if we need to. In 2008, we actually put into the code regulations for outdoor dining prior to 2008 outdoor dining existed physically out there but we didn't have any regulations. So in 2008 is when we were was a 2001 or 2008 we actually put regulations in the code so that we could control the outdoor dining that was already happening. Okay. Because we almost created our own problem with parking and traffic and that we allowed a proliferation of outdoor dining seats and there's more than 1,000 now on Fifth Avenue with no parking requirement at all. And I think that this would be something that we probably should address given the feedback that we get from the residents surrounding the areas spilling into the road. But I think whatever we did back in08 worked. And so we need a path now toward making sure that it works for everyone, including the surrounding areas for parking, et cetera. Okay. I think you'll see that things are going to start to come together when we start going over some of the out, some of the codes that we discussed, but have not quite implemented. I'll let me have vice mayor and. Yeah, just real quickly. When I look at this agenda item and what we're trying to do, I heard discussion on the front end. I'm talking about the first item was what Mr. McConnell? What was that first item? The first item was language consistency throughout each board. But what was the first board that was the code police review board? Correct. So here we are on, I believe, the Crab or CRA. And we know that the wording is screwed up. I mean, in my opinion, not totally, but it's weird, right? In fact, in item B, it just needs one more word application at the very end after a district. And we'll have three applications in there. But that's tongue in cheek. But I think that we've provided direction that says, go update this area, this board, and come back with updated roles, duties, responsibilities to be more reflective of where we're at. And if we get in the weeds on individual items right now, I think we're gonna draw this out as we go through all these a long time. From a high level, I'm thinking that we need that to come back updated before we really dive in. That's my thought. And we'll get us, maybe a few more comments on this and get us past this one. But that's, that's all I really had. And by the way, another issue that I think is on the record now is updating the word D downtown, right? So there's some, some good direction in here, but I'm not sure we want to get down into the nitty gritty of parking and all that in this meeting. Thank you Madam Mayor. I'll only say this is our code and if they bring things, if staff is following it and they bring it to us and we don't understand why and we say you know look we don't want to give away parking anymore. It's hard for them. We need to not say, unfortunately, this is kind of a we get in the weed situation. I don't mean it's coming back to us. No, I understand. And my thoughts are, if we get really granular on, let's say, the parking and stuff like that, I'm not sure the community understood that we were going to do that. In other words, I think we're cleaning some things up, maybe even to the point of reorganizing some of these boards and committees, but do we want to make hard decisions today? And I don't even think it calls for a vote. No, we're a workshop. It's a workshop, so we're just providing direction. But my point is to what extent does the community think we're going to be hashing through all the individual items, and are they properly noticed to be able to provide input with some of the suggested changes. So thank you. This is not the first shot and this is definitely a beginning to making sure as Mr. McConnell said that we're consistent. I'll let you go ahead Mr. McConnell. No, I think this is a good conversation but what I'm hearing is I think a perfect agenda item with the chair's approval for the CRA meeting in November because I mean this board is created to help the CRA right so who better to I know it's the same body but who better to advise what's needed than the CRA so So I have clear direction at this point. I know staff probably does as well. I can work with the CRA director. I think everyone understands my edits were more of hey rules and policies, but this is a perfect opportunity to reopen this. It is a board that allows for business owners and not just legal residents. I mean, we can have a very productive conversation in November and bring forth something that's a little bit more productive. And I like that we do have to go through the process of bringing it to our boards. I highly recommend that staff put that on the next CREB meeting and CRA meeting, but that's where we're just trying to get to these duties. I will leave it at that. I comment. Yes. I think I agree. It's a good suggestion and as a way to move, to get the right words here and duties and responsibilities. I think the first step is staff has to go back and think about this and put forward a draft proposal. Take it to the crab and then bring it to the CRAB input. I think that's a good process. And then it'll come back here in terms of the ordinance change. I had to ask to be recognized for two other comments. Number one, you know, just to remind us that the agenda item here is to review and discuss the ordinances for the advisory boards. The comments about the Fifth Avenue overlay or our parking regulations and other codes are all very relevant. But that's not what we're here to do today. It's, and we're not in any of these codes if there is reference to parking or anything else that is a responsibility of a particular advisory board. You know, that just is simply enumerating that it is a responsibility of that particular advisory board. It's not getting into the substance and details to Mr. Hutchison's point of what is in our parking regulation and whether we want to change it or not. So I just make that point. The other thing I have to make a comment on because it comes up from time to time. I saw Mr. Wooder during the back of the room too and I'm always glad to see him and he's here and he's very active with the new CDC effort and I know where our staff is meeting with them regularly. If you look back over the last four or five years of this council, the bulk of the investment and activity that has come out of the CRA has been on the east side of 41. It has been in the design district and river park. And are we doing everything? We need to do there. Absolutely. I'm sure we aren't. But the, but speaking for myself, I'm very proud of how we made that pivot and what we're doing in terms of focusing on what had been for years the more neglected part of the CRA. And so we have done a lot and we can do more, but that is clearly when you look at the priorities of the CRA where they are at this point in time. So that has nothing to do with this ordinance and what should be in the CRAB ordinance or not. But I just had to make that point because with the efforts of everybody sitting at this day, that's where we're focused and you know, I just think it's worth making that point and reminding ourselves not as well as others Whether council member Kramer. Yeah, just I appreciate those comments sir and I Think so my game plan was we were going to, when I put it up on my screens in advance of the meeting, I'm putting them up and I'm making sure that I thought what we were trying to get through here is we're going to have some continuity and consistency in our board descriptions and duties. And we're not getting into the weeds about whether the board should exist, not exist. consistency in our board descriptions and duties. And we're not getting into the weeds about whether the board should exist, not exist, nothing else. Just a starting point is, well, let's get them all consistent. And that's just a starting point. That's a baseline. And I think we're going to be here for a long, long time if we do it. We've just been doing the last 45 minutes. So am I wrong? Is it without the game plan? Was just just consistent and then we can dig into it further? Or is this an important? Because there's other word salad. I'll leave it at this. There's more word salad to sell I'm saying. Yes, there is. But from this discussion comes the next discussion as council member Christm� just displayed that from this discussion for Crab shows that the duties may not be consistent and that's our responsibility. If we don't want those duties or we want to change those duties, that's what we need to look at. But is that today Are duties today? No, are we dealing with duties today in addition to the consistency? Or is it just, are we going to get a level set as one one my colleague says a lot? And then that's the starting point. Well, that's us. That's us. We're deciding how we're going. So this is a team. We're deciding how we're going. Can't get too much in the weeds, obviously, because we're just trying to get through consistency and what their responsibilities are. But we're just talking about parking a minute ago. I got a lot of, I've got a lot on that. If we're going to do that. Only because it's in their duties. That's how it's going to be. I understand, but my point. That's going to come up in every. We've got stuff in everybody's duties that we're going to be addressed right now. Right. So is that what we're doing? Are we digging into? Well, if you have a recommendation that you want us to consider, discuss later, go to a different board. I think this is our time to the agenda, we're just supposed to see if our city attorney has got some consistency in how these things are set up and then we'll move forward after that at a later date. That's what I'm thinking. It's just a conversation. Thank you. Mayor. I'll wait on second. Do you agree to complete Council Member? Yes. Yes. Do I have any other comments? Thank you, Mayor. I hesitate and making some comments in terms of expectations for today and direction going forward. But I think it's necessary. This is going to take multiple meetings to get to an end product. And I, you know, from a staff perspective, not from a legal perspective, but from a staff perspective, applying and facilitating your boards and committees on behalf of the city council, that's our job. So as we go through this process, you know, to your point, Mr. Kramer, one of the first things that needs to be done in our opinion is having consistency between boards and committees relative to how they run their meetings, how they structure their agendas, how their rules of procedures are approved by city council. And then also, you know, beyond the codified language of the code relative to each board and committee, consistency and onboarding. I think it was Councilwoman Peniman who mentioned one meeting or a couple of meetings ago about that onboarding process, making sure that boards and committee members know what their roles are because one of the problems that cities have that don't do a good job in onboarding their new members as they mission creep. They start talking about things that aren't within their powers and duties of that floor, and that can create not only very long meetings, but could potentially create exposure for cities, especially in quasi-judicial situations. So there's a training piece to this that I think is very necessary going forward. But back to this three part process, consistency across the board, and then to the mayor's point, duties and responsibilities. Are there things within the code for these various boards and committees that you as a council don't wish for them to have these powers and duties. Or are there things that you do wish for them to have that aren't currently in the code? I think the code is the code. So if we do have situations with boards and committees that have straight away from their powers and duties, that's correctable. We can fix that, but the written word in there is what we need to facilitate as far as staff is concerned. The third piece of this is where it gets really complicated. It's related to duties and powers, and that's process. So we started talking a moment ago about crab's role in the review of petitions and applications within certain zoning districts. How does that happen? We've talked about BRB and PAB in which comes first. That's another complicated part of this discussion that if there are changes that you wish to see in terms of sequence, that requires code changes within these exact same sections of the code that Matthew is reviewing with you today from first that high level consistency. So there's three pieces of this, and they're all intertwined. The duties and powers and process more so than the consistency on how boards are formed and operated. I don't know if that's helpful to you or creates more confusion, but I say all of that to emphasize the fact that this isn't an easy process and it's not a quick process. It's going to take some time and a lot of thoughtfulness as you go forward. But I think we're off to a good start here because we're having a conversation that has needed to happen for a very long time today and it's a start. So what I see happening is exactly what happened and for Crab and that is you know there are the consistencies need to be changed. We came up with a process of having it be reviewed through our committee and then our CRA and then coming back to us. So I mean moving forward, there are comments on this particular board. Let's make it now. I think they've been, did you have the notes on the name changes and? Yes, and the technical parts. The Secretary has one clarifying question. My suggestion of bringing this to the CRA in November did not include taking it to the CRAB, but rather working directly with the executive director for the CRA to provide the CRA written changes, which if the CRA at that point wants to defer to CRAB, I just want to make sure that we're agreeable to the sequence that I laid out so that you're not getting it on November and wondering what Crab did with it when I was never intending to bring it to them. I don't, I think that's a good process and then bringing it back to us, but eventually going through that board and letting them review it. Is that it? Am I with you? Yes. Okay. I guess I have a problem or concern with that based on what I'm hearing. I mean, if I'm open to having this be a process where our staff comes forward with something that would be then brought directly to the CRA board for approval. But if that's the case, I don't know that it's appropriate for it to go back to Crab at that point. Crab is advisory to us, not vice versa. So if it may be appropriate, this is sort of more of a legal or ethical question. about the crab code of ordinance, is it appropriate for the crab to have input and to propose changes to that ordinance or is it something they should have an arm's length relationship to because I was looking ahead when we get to the next one, the CSAB, Community Services Board, should we have a process whereby relevant staff, in this case, parks and recreation, reviews this, duties and responsibilities, updates it as they think appropriate, takes it to the CSAB for their input and then it comes back to council. That may be a legitimate process and may be a situation where we just want to have it staff to council. So I just I in section 2, it comes back to us. But things that we took out of their responsibilities such as parking and things like that would go to the crab. If I'm understanding that, things like that would eventually go for review to the crab. So. Things like that would eventually go for review to the crab. To clarify. Mayor, I just want to make one. I think there's a good distinction that Council Member Christmas is alluding to. So there's your code of ordinances, right, which is what's in front of you now. But part of the consistency that I'm getting at is your individual boards are going to adopt their own individual rules, right? Not just how they run meetings, but certain requirements and things like that that will eventually be approved by you all in the form of a resolution. My thought here though with the code of ordinances is it's really on city council since mostly all of these are advisory to distinction, to distinguish what duties do you want this board to serve? Right. And I'm just agree with you on one part and that is that the board creates their own duties because that's where we have gotten out of line. When they call for special meetings which it's also in two, five, seven, two, D. If they want a special meeting, they can just make sure that it's something staff can handle and that it's something council wants to be reviewed for a special meeting. And I'll just use the DRB had special meetings on a handbook and now I don't know how many years has it happened and we're just now getting it eight years they've been working on it doing or PAB on the comp plan you know they had special meetings for the comprehensive plan it never came to council had all these special meetings and then we said no we don't want to take their advice we're just gonna go with the basics yeah mayor I think I misspoke. I said rules, or I said duties. I did not mean duties. Duties are in the code. I meant the rules and bylaws that each board, yeah. Good clarification, rules and bylaws, which is where we were trying to get the consistency for submission of information. And OK, thank you. Now. Penement. Yes. No. My smear. In deference to the city manager. We were a little hung up on this one. Is there any reason why we can't set this one aside? Move on. Maybe try to get some of these done today and then come back to the more difficult ones. Is that a reasonable thing to do here? Not all of them are going to be this complicated. This one happens to be. I think at this point, hearing what we've heard and I know staff, I mean, I'm clear, if I could just get a head nod that what we're going to do for the Crab specifically is work with staff or could the executive director bring forth a discussion item at your November CRA meeting with more thought out changes to the duties, updates, et cetera for discussion at that point. Okay. I personally do not feel that the crab board need opine on this. I don't know if I have any support for that or not. I agree. Do you agree? I agree. know if I have any support for that or not. I agree. Do you agree? I agree. Yeah, I go. Yes. So go. Vice mayor. Thank you. So just for, I'm good with that. In other words, understanding that this is coming back and we're going to get a little bit more into the weeds, I just want to make my ask is as that comes back have staff please be prepared on item six under two dash five seventy three. Item six has the words heart of Naples plan and the words Gibbs planning group. I just asked that you consider whether both of those are relevant. Does anyone really know what those are? Don't answer that now. But just think about that. Next, I'm asking you to look at item number three. It reads incentives to induce private parking lots to be improved in landscape. Now let's look at item four after the comma, including incentives to induce existing parking lots. Now that seems to be different than private parking lots for some reason, but induce existing parking lots to be rebuilt. Now they didn't say improved, they said rebuilt. And I'm just asking that you look at that wording and make sure that's really what's intended and it goes on to say and landscape to serve more than one property. So as we talk about parking lots, just it's gonna come back, we'll get in the weeds, but just look at how the words are used. Thank you. Thank you. And that's just to add to that under 257-3----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- don't know why crab would be holding quasi-judicial, but if there's a good reason, then I understand that. And then 2573 is under B. Oh, we already mentioned that. Number two and three, whether they're even relevant any longer, what that means. And four, I think you mentioned four, six, and that's all I had online. And six has to be updated. I mean, it's just, it's long overdue. Any other comments? Okay. Mayor, just real quick to, you know, just to hammer home your point of things need to be updated. As if you haven't already, just pay attention to the last date under each section. That's the last time those specific sections of the code have been touched. So what has happened here in the city of Naples since 2008? It's when it was established. Yes, conditions have changed. Your code Okay. Moving on. Going to item community services advisory board. Yes. Again, what I suggested was some consistency like Mr. Buddhaoutichou are alluded to at the highest level right now when it comes to their bylaws and rules, not their duties. Which is in red on the second page. The one thing I did notice was something related to soliciting gifts. Obviously you can see that this was initially drafted in 1957 and in 1994 well before the ethics code. So I will work with Mr. Moralski, I think our ethics code is pretty robust. There's no need to have these specific things when they are applicable to all covered persons. So that's a change that I plan on making as well but open for questions. I had flagged that too. I was thinking that it should be pulled out and we should have the umbrella of the ethics over it. And it would apply to all the boards. Correct. Councillor Member Christiane. I don't have specific issues or concerns with duties and responsibilities on this one. It's not an area that I feel like I'm substantively close enough to really know whether these are the right ones or not. But again, I think people who are closer to it should take a look at it. And again, within our staff and make sure that any updates that they think are relevant makes sense. Under section 2 504 reports, I don't think we've had a community services board annual report to city council in living memory. No, I don't know whether we should or not, but it's just another example of the need to internally for staff and management to revisit that and think about what you want to recommend to us? Well again I mean this is hopefully information that you know, it's a code. We don't want Counsel's coming in changing the code. We wanted to be pretty broad pretty general But it is what runs this committee and this is also good for our staff to know that That's what the CSA be supposed to be doing. I personally, I've watched it since 08. I think that their review and their reporting is exactly what other boards are doing. We just haven't had it with CSAB. And one of the other things is the comp plan. They're supposed to be looking at the areas under parks and rec is the comp plan. There's supposed to be looking at the areas under parks and wreck for the comp plan and that hasn't been, I mean, that has not been done. So this is also a very good reminder of, you know, things we should be doing that we haven't been doing. And are there comments yes councilmember pinnum yeah on this specific one on the second page we there's number seven that has to do with the public arts program I don't know the history on that as to why that's given to the CSAB necessarily. I would probably personally strike that out of there. I just don't know the history behind it is for why that landed on their doorstep, but I would personally remove that. Well, it's kind of gone through everywhere. It's gone from the clerk to the planning department to the CSAB and to a public art committee that we abolished and now again. Right. Right. This is our code and we should clean it up. Yeah. Well, let's take a good look at that one. Yes, you're right. There was a public arts committee that was now marked. Right. Vice Mayor. Yeah, arts committee that was now marked. Vice mayor. Yeah, I had that one as well. Actually, it says we have a program called the dollar for art program. Yeah. And I think it's something else. I don't think we actually have a program called the dollar for. We do. Is it? Well, I think it's not called that. Right. It's not called. Right. So that's my content is so the moment let's get right and then in item five we said that CSAB is going to act as the de facto city tree board I'm not aware that the city tree board has a city tree board ever met yes it has so so we have a city tree board that's good to know and it's all CSAB. It's not anything separate. Okay. Well there you go. I learned something. But the dollar for our program I think there's maybe an opportunity there. Thank you. I do want to make clear on top of the changes you all are being requested. I feel like I have an obligation to update the code, pursuant to updated statutes as well. So like a brief, kind of a very narrow codification on something that hasn't been done specific to the boards and there were new tree trimming and permitting requirements that came out a couple of years ago. So if I feel the need to include some of those things, I just want to make sure that you're aware of that. So, Madam Mayor, I have a follow-up question for Mr. McConnell. So, in your mind, that would make its way into their duties in being compliant with whatever that state statute would be. Correct. Either removed or added. Yeah. thank you. Councillor Pettrano, I had just never heard of the tree board as well and I'm assuming that we have high involvement from Heather Shields in this so that she's always in the loop. Okay. She does that. Okay. Which indicates that we might want, and I think it's on the list, to review our tree. Isn't that on a look ahead? Yes. I mean, annually, you review our urban forestry program, and we describe how that works. And actually within that document, it does reference the CSAB who sits as a tree board so it's been there but it's a lot of stuff that you all have to review but we have we have what I wanted to do is because every time we do tree trimming we do all of our preventative maintenance programs we get a lot of concern from the community and I believe we have a responsibility to maybe better educate our community about why we do things. So we had on our look ahead to schedule this fall, I keep pushing it because there's some more pressing things that need your direction. This was going to be information only, but I do have, and Heather's already prepared this beautiful presentation to kind of talk about our program, how it's evolved. And some new things that we're doing to actually protect privately on trees within the city's right of way so that that is something that will be before you we can get into some detail at that time. Okay, I remember the urban forestry presentation that was yeah, but I'm not sure if it was on consent or not, but you know having gone through it I think it might be helpful if to include if we have a discussion on a quick discussion on FPNL's role too because I've gotten calls saying that we're trimming and its FPNL is out there. So just you know in every city in America they call this city what are you doing I was a power company but no I think that no, I think that's a good point. And we do try to work very, very closely with them to make sure they're not hat-racking and doing things that are going to harm our trees. But it is hideous. Thank you. So we have streets that are designated trees. So, there are certain streets and they have a designation of a tree. So, tree designated tree streets, yes. Okay. So, I think maybe that's something that would be a good workshop in the future. Yeah, and this conversation will be part of that report that we do in the future. Yeah and this conversation will be part of that report that we do in the future. Okay. Hi. Okay. Again, I think this also gives us an opportunity to realize the things that we should be implementing within the CSA board. So moving to the next one. Yeah, Mayor. If we could hop over the design review board to planning advisory. The reason being is because we went back and forth on this one a couple times. Staff had actually initiated some edits and comments a few years ago with a different city attorney. staff had actually initiated some edits and comments a few years ago with a different city attorney. And I've just noticed that the wrong version, the current code is not the code that was uploaded for the design review board. There are a few more sections because I believe there was an amendment in 2023 potentially earlier this year. So that was going to be my opening statement is if there are conflicts with the code and the code has not been updated or if it's in different sections it needs to be compiled together so that we don't risk the interpretations or. No, absolutely. If you refer to what we are in PAB. No, I'm referring the design review board. It's still under division four. A lot of these sections are the same, but what I've realized is this was a prior version printed from 2022 and in reality there was an ordinance change that the council approved earlier this year, if not late last year, that has a few more sections. Like I believe it goes up to 2-479 that talks about architectural and landscape architectural design standards. I just want to make sure we're working off the most up to date or else. Can we put the most up to date on this screen? Yeah, but in the interim because I know we're going to probably break for lunch soon. Can we just skip to planning advisory board and then I can make sure that's updated by the time we come back. Oh were you talking planning advisory or DRB? I wanted to hop over DRB to straight. I was just giving you reasoning as to why. Got it. Okay. PAB. Thank you. So PAB. I've sat out a couple meetings now and there are some comments in here. First one being, I attended the Ethics Commission on the second, I believe, of September, because of this first section that I've highlighted on page one, that was the only board that had this prohibition. Not even the City Council had this prohibition on its internal rules and policies. Again, I thought it was more appropriate to have maybe a citywide for all covered persons. My standpoint on this is quasi judicial, right? That's a heightened level of scrutiny. It's a different set of standards than just legislative. I think it's important for the record that you don't have a board member from the DRBE or the Planning Advisory Board who voted on a matter. Coming before you, the next meeting that is in front of you and then trying to sway your opinion or maybe they voted no and they're trying to get you to agree with them. I just didn't think that was really appropriate. Not saying that it's happened, that just was a little shock to see. Well, that's why it was changed. This restriction? Because we had a PAB member that was making decisions on a company he now works for. So that's why it was put in. Okay. I would imagine this would apply to all the boards. Correct. Because we had to apply this role for consistency. that we're going working on timing but I wanted to address that first comment. So it's been handled at this point. Vice mayor? Yeah just thank you for that Mr. McConnell. You made a statement that you, it's either being placed or you're highlighting it to note that it's in here, but you said you notice it's here but not in duties or powers for the City Council. So when you say you're working with Mr. Moroski, are you thinking about, and it kind of goes to the comment the mayor made earlier about things in different places? Are we going to see that in City Council somewhere in the rules and roles and responsibilities, duties of City Council as well? This kind of warning? This one? I actually thought it was more appropriate. You're going to see it in the ethics code. If you adopt the ordinance. That's covered in everybody. That's covered persons. The reason this is here is so that I remember when we're working through this. Now that this is going to be addressed in the ethics code, it needs to be deleted from the planning board. Good. Thank you. No problem. In the planning board. Good. Thank you. No problem. In the next one? So, I won't focus on my comments yet because that's more for the second part of this discussion when it comes to current zoning processes and policies and who reviews what. But the planning and advisory board, if you look at subparagraph F, thank you, David. Okay. Yes, paragraph F under? Yes. 552. Correct. All I did was include subject to city council's approval. This was the only board that I noticed that had the ability to, well, this is a different section, but we'll get to it. This, as we work through this, this was the only board that I realized had the ability on their own to adopt rules for their board without City Council approval. I think we'll get to that on the next page. Go for it. Correct. Vice Mayor. Yeah. Whoever's operating the screen, if you could go back up to F. Right there. F. Yeah. So this talks about the approval of maps and plates of subdivisions of land within the corporate city limits. There have been a variety of different emails that I've received while on my term in city council that speaks about maps and plants and whether or not they've been properly adopted. If we do this regulations governing the approval of maps and plants. Can we do that just here within our this body or the PAB without filing them at the county and other levels? Great question. I'll have to get back to you on that one. So I'm wanting it wrapped up. My ask is to wrap it up. I think it's a good, the purpose of some of this changing was anything that you do at the city level require staff. Yeah, period, right? And in order for the PAB to do this on its own, prepare and recommend, it would require staff. And for all we knew, they would recommend something that would come to the city council and you all would be looking at us like, why are you doing this? So the thought here was we can give them this duty, but it would be from with prior direction and consent from the city council so that they understand that everyone's on the same page with what's happening. I can look into the maps and plots overall approval though. Yeah and thank you and I'm only one of seven but my ask is that as we're looking over our maps and plants to make sure it's gone through the full sequence the it's checked every station and it's legitimate and proper appropriate for what we're doing we haven't left out a step Penement you know if it helps I I'm in full support of page 98 Changes that you've made there we're trying to move this down the road a little bit. Those are fines, as far as I'm concerned, if everybody else okay with those? Subject to City Council's approval by resolution, the planning board shall propose. The last question. You were there. The general rules and regulations. No such rules and regulations shall become effective until the proposed ours and ours. And any amendments and modifications there to have been approved by City Council. Said rules shall be available for public inspection. I think those two should I certainly approve those just as they're stated if that helps. Thank you, council member. When I was alluding to this board having the ability to develop their own rules, that was a section I was referring to. So for consistency I think it's a good change. I support that. Okay. I have a patching off and then Vice Mayor and then Christmas. In section 2.552D, I'm wondering, you know, where concurrency is this in their duties? concurrency actually is in a chapter 48, chapter 48, where it lists, so perfect question. This is specific to the boards and committees. These boards and committees are also specifically listed in different sections of your code. So the Planning Advisory Board, the design review board, those names are listed. So under chapter 48 when it talks about level of service and concurrency the planning advisory board is sprinkled through that entire section as the board that approves these annual reports. So it's not specific in here but under the concurrency section of your code it is. Okay, but right now we are revising jurisdiction, powers and duties, testimony and contact by council members. We're in this section. Shouldn't we, if this is laying out their duties, concurrency is a big one. And it's not in here. Is it, that you're saying that there's another chapter that's going to be layered on the additional duties and we're going to have that discussion? No, I think once we get to the discussion on duties, I was, I was, there was a second part of this first item that we're going to get to when it comes to who's reviewing what and why. I would agree with you. I think if a change needs to be made and they're going to continue to do concurrency, then we need to identify it in their duties. If they're going to continue to do comprehensive plan, which they're required to do, we need to identify it in their duties. If they're going to stop doing administrative appeals, we need to identify it in their duties, right? So I agree with you. That was just part of the second half of this discussion. Okay, so we'll second half that we will get to. Correct. Okay. The other piece that I had, so the concurrency will be discussed later, because it is part of their duties. And as far as I know we have not done that in a long time. I've never, it's an interesting read in here but I've, you know, I don't think it's being done. Yeah, it hasn't been done in roughly eight years but we're doing it now. Okay. All right, great. And then under the last page where it says, no such rules of regulations shall be effective until the proposed rules of regulations and any amendments. Duh, duh, duh, duh. I'm assuming that this kind of language is going to be in all of our boards. Correct. OK. And in all of the previous hand out, there's been, if not identical, very similar language in all of the other boards, just in different places. Okay. And then we're not to the flow chart yet, are we? No. Okay. Not yet. That's all I have. Thank you. We can be. But. So we're in what section is it that the submittal of information and their meeting dates? I believe that was in a resolution. That's in their rules and procedures. Correct. The PAB has adopted their own rules of procedure and that's where they. Right. So that's, I thought part of this that the rules and procedures were going to be consistent. So if council has, you know, two weeks prior to a meeting, then PAB would, because they had those suggestions. And I think so did Mr. Salfon, who made very good recommendations. So, Mayor, to your point, the section that's on the screen, is a section that I think is going to address that, because but for, or when you take out my changes, the Planning Advisory Board had the ability to develop their own rules when I came to filing procedure so on and so forth and they have. Once this gets implemented there will be a resolution that goes along with this that you will have a say in. As it sits right now you did not which is why I wanted to include this language. But I also- Wait so can you just help me understand that subject to Council's approval by resolution the boards can bring forward for recommendation to the Council for approval because that's how we got in this mess. They all started making up their own rules and Council didn't know it. So, if all of this, let's say we approved everything today, that just the changes that I'm suggesting, no board would be able to implement any rules of procedure or bylaws without council approval. Or change them. They could, they could suggest that. And they can offer it to our council. They could offer them to you in the form of a resolution, but you would be the final say That's just yeah just confirming correct Okay, they're comments Wait, we're was I Petrov then Hutchison Hutchison Thank you. Thank you. So I want to go back to that item D that's on the screen right now and it says it starts off with language that says proposed language that says subject to the city council's approval by resolution. Now go to the very bottom. No such rules and regulations shall become effective until the proposed rules and regulations and any amendments and modifications there to have been approved by the City Council. So what we're setting ourselves up, I believe, there's just a little bit more of a touch that needs to be done here. Councilwoman Petranoff asks the question, if that language is going to be in every place it needs to be, because if we don't and any kind of decision made or rule regulation, if we don't take this step of city councils approval by resolution, then it's going to be void ab initio, right? Because it didn't cross that final threshold of council approving it by resolution. So my ask is this, to look at that language have been approved by the City Council. Something can be approved by City Council, but yet fall short of being approved by resolution. So, my ass is just look at that and see if you're comfortable with consistency in the language itself. Just one comment to that. The only reason I said by resolution is because I worked with the city clerk and every set of rules of procedures for every single board have been approved by resolution. From the beginning at time. So I see it says city council's approval by resolution in one area but then I just see approved by City Council at the end. I've got it. Thank you. Any other comments? Oh, so we're clear. I think what I heard you say is that I'm focusing now on section 2, dash 552, A and B. What I heard, thought I heard us say, you say, is that if the proposed ordinance for the ethics code is approved by the ethics commission and then by us, it would contain language that would apply to all of our advisory boards and committees and would, therefore, preclude the need for the language, either in its current form or modified form in A and B of Section 2, dash five five two. That would just come out of the PAB ordinance because it would be the issues around that would be dealt with through the amendment to our ethics code. It would, I just do, I wanna clarify. It wasn't every board and it was already approved by the ethics commission. It was specifically the quasi judicial board. So really it PAB and DRB. PRB code enforcement and DRB and city council. But there would so this language. But the rest of your yes. Yes. And then the you know the the other comment I'll just make is that, and it's similar to what I was saying with the crab, that when you get down to Section 2-552-C and D,, and AF really deals with duties and responsibilities. And to me the way it's laid out here is it's kind of a, you can tell it's, it's, it's happened through a series of amendments starting in 1990, 1994, you know, 2021, I mean, I just think again, there's need for going through this and being clear as to what we are proposing for today, removing things that are outdated, adding things that need to be added, dealing with redundancies, there's just work that needs to go on in this section. In my opinion. That's all right. Okay, Vice Mayor. Thank you Madam Mayor. Could we go back up to that section that Councilman Chrisman was talking about right there. So it's talking about the language. It's intended by these provisions to specifically prohibit Council members from manipulating or influencing the recommendations. And the next few words says coming from the Planning Advisory Board but now we just included what? DRB and... Code enforcement. Code enforcement. DRB Planning Advisory Board and City Council. All right. Are we okay with City Council members manipulating or influence the recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Committee who suggest Pay recommendations for City Council Not familiar with what that committee is it's in our I believe it's in our charter I'll have to look into it So it was more for I'm gonna assume the answers know here But ultimately what I would just ask you to think about I will thanks I will okay yes councilmember you know that that little board is flawed anyway in that we select our own reps, don't we? It's a little flawed. Maybe it could take a closer look at that, or nuke it, under the other. Don't tell me there is a self-interested effort to your report. It makes a good sense. Hi. Thank you for bringing that up. OK. So the footnotes that are off to the side are going to be the next conversation. I think we've all, most of you have alluded to it at this point, but specifically when we come back and address DRB and planning and zoning, I think we should do it together. And I think we should have one discussion on duties and how zoning petitions, site plan amendments, concurrency, things get filtered through the process right now to see if there's some moving of puzzle pieces that the city council would like to entertain. And that's on page 200, the slow chart. Yeah, that's specific to site plans but we're gonna have a we'll talk about others like outdoor dining and live entertainment and conditional uses. Things of that nature. All right. We're getting close. Well, we are. So it's cross-referencing chapter 48 and chapter 46 and any others that might be applicable to any of the other boards that we reviewed where there's overlap. Right? Any other comments before we go into our executive assessment? Okay. Well, Mr. Booter-Schwar, do you have something that you need to read or Mr. McConnell? I agree with you, if you'd like. Thank you. Yeah, just for public transparency purposes, Mayor Council, we're requesting an executive session to begin now to discuss a collective bargaining pursuant to section 447.6051 Florida Statues 2022 and relative to the following bargaining units. Florida the Public Employees Council, number 79 of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, local union number 2017. Also, Collier County, lodge number 38 of the fraternal order of police and professional firefighters of Naples, International Association of Firefighters, IAF, local union 2174. I believe that's all I need to read at this point. As mentioned at the beginning of today's meeting, we're expecting this session to last about two hours, so we will break until about 2.30. And we'll come back and conclude this item for the remainder of this item. Correct? Yes. Thank you. Okay. With that, we're in recess. you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you Okay. Okay. Okay. We're back from our executive session and continuing on with the presentation on optimization. Yes. So thank you, Mayor, for the introduction. Just to clarify, this isn't necessarily a presentation on optimization. Thank you, sir. No worries. I believe that presentation was given to you, I don't know, a couple meetings ago. I included the site plan memo just to kind of help the conversation go along since this was something that was recently discussed. But big picture, this is more of a discussion again since we are amending the code of ordinances related to the boards and an effort to do everything at once, although there may be some high priority that the council wants me to push through, which I can obviously do. This discussion is really related around how certain zoning petitions get processed now, how site plan gets processed now. I'm going to try to keep it separate from the SB250 discussion, but it's kind of go hand and hand. To some extent, just because of the more burdensome language and the specifics when it comes to development orders and development permits which ultimately these are Right you as a council when you're seeing a conditional use or you're seeing an outdoor dining or a live entertainment You're essentially granting someone the right to do something with their property which by statute is a development permit Right and conditional use is a development order a PD development order, a PD development order. So these things are all controlled by statute. I want to set the stage with the fact that there is what local government attorneys refer to as a shot clock statute that developer attorneys have been very lenient with in Naples. Ultimately, local governments, if the application before you requires a quasi-judicial hearing, which most of them do, you have 180 days from the moment you deem the application complete to either approve, deny, or approve with conditions. And that is verbatim from the statute. What I've realized is there have been petitions that have And that is verbatim from the statute. What I've realized is there have been petitions that have been out there after applications been deemed complete for well over 24 months at times. No one's at fault, you know, but these are just kind of the base level of things that I want us to focus on because there are also sections in the code that require and I know Miss Martin can speak on this. Certain reviews within a very short period of time as quickly as 44 days that turn around and as we as this conversation evolves I do think it's important to probably remove some of those requirements. Can't be running a foul SB250 if we just default to the statute that's currently on the books. I do think it puts staff in my office in a very interesting predicament where we're having to turn around applications quicker than even the state requires us to do. And with that stage that I've said, we can start with something like a conditional use permit, we can start with specific zoning applications. I know planning staff is here to try to assist with what the current process is. And the discussion's really gonna relate to, do we wanna modify this process? Do we maybe want City Council to go first? Do we need PAB involved in everything? Do we need DRB preliminary and final? All of the answers to those questions could be yes and we won't touch anything, but I thought it was an appropriate one who's doing the work. And us having a better understanding on how that process works. And if we can make changes to that process that benefits staff, well, the petitioner, staff, the process of boards and committees, I think it's good for us to hear from you. I think one of the things Matthew and I spoke about is your code does provide some pretty short deadlines for a lot of the materials. And it's of 44 days. I mean the way the code reads is it's a minimum of 44 days, but that has been Applied to mean that if you submit an application within 44 days you will be in front of a board. And so just for council's benefit what has to happen within those 44 days is Most of that is driven by a 30-day public notice. So 30 days prior to the hearing date we have to send out a notice to all property owners within a thousand feet. It's a mailed notice. So that leaves us two weeks, pretty much two weeks, to accept the application, review the application for completeness, send it out to all the different reviewing departments in the city, review the application for completeness, send it out to all the different reviewing departments in the city, get their comments back, work with the petitioner to make sure everything addresses those comments, everything's up before we send out that notice because once we send out that notice, we tell the public that those documents are online and that's we are scheduling a hearing date. So that two weeks is a very short amount of time to get all the different departments in the city to review because keep in mind, it doesn't sound that short for one item, but when you have a PAB submittal deadline or a DRB submittal deadline, you could have 15 projects come in at the same time. So you have reviewers whose their only job is not to review the positions that come in. They still have to do their day-to-day tasks. So it's a short amount of time. And then it also feeds into, I know you heard from the PAB, both the prior chair and the chair that we have now, a desire to receive documents, to receive agenda packets sooner. PAB and DRB and Council, we get them seven days, we get a week ahead. And so if we do move that up, I would just ask that we also consider at the back end because if that shortens our amount of time by an extra week to get all of that done, that would give us one week to put up, I think so. It just, that would be my my plea. Yes. That's enough. That microphone. Thank you. So that 44 days that is more aggressive than the 180 days that you quoted. So are we talking apples to apples on what needs to be done? Well it depends because the statute, if it's administrative, actually says 120 days, but even then it's way less aggressive than 44. Okay, and then- So our code is more restrictive in that sense. And when does the point begin? What is day zero? From when the application is deemed complete, which I'm assuming from Ms. Marins. So is that point begin? What is day zero? From when the application is deemed complete, which I'm assuming from Ms. Martin's view. So is that site plan? And so where we have, where we've had an issue is that complete, we publish a, it's a matrix that's your required materials for each different type of application. So if you're submitting a conditional use, these are the drawings or documents that we need. If you're submitting a variance, these are the drawings that we need. Now does complete mean that you checked all those boxes? You have a site plan, doesn't show any dimensions. You have a disclosure, didn't fill it out correctly. Technically, it's complete, you submitted all the things you were supposed to submit. So petitioners are like, schedule me. I did all the things. I checked all the boxes. That still only leaves us the two weeks to get from complete, meaning everything is there, to everything is workable and correct, you know. So it's leave staff scrambling in those two weeks to work with the petitioners to get things corrected, to get additional information, to make all these changes. That's the. I would think that the day zero would begin when all the documents are completed correctly, and it's ready to roll and be reviewed. Not when, because the ones that I have brought to you and to Stephen have been PC. Things are missing, and it's like we are, staff is spending a lot of time scrambling and calling while you didn't fill this out. You didn't, you know, you didn't attach these drawings. I think it's a little unfair to penalize staff that a clock is going when you don't have the materials in the first place. But the good news is for building permits we can lean on that statute. The problem we're saying here is for the planning positions. We can lean on the statute except our code is actually more stringent. So you lean on the code? So we have to. We have to. Okay. So to that point, we will, it must have been put there for a reason so that. Well, it says in here the way it's worded exactly is that, sorry, let me find it. It's a minimum of 44 days. So if you submit. Can you put that code up on the screen? What section is it? I'm just looking at conditional uses so it's 46-34. And it says review and procedure review and approval procedure. So it says and this is I'm just going to the applicable portion. This petition must be completed in return to the city manager along with the required fee and the necessary supportive materials as required by the city manager including a development and site plan at least 44 days prior to the planning advisory board meeting at which the petition is to be considered. So we publish those dates, what that 44 day because that's the minimum. But what we're finding is if we try to say push back. I submitted my petition. We ought an agenda. Well, is it, I mean, is it as simple as saying, you know, a completed application? Because, you know, no other government agency would start a clock on an incomplete document. I think it could be wording, like deemed complete by the city manager. In this case, city manager is the designee. Do you see what I mean? Because there's a difference. The nuance there is complete versus correct. It's complete. You checked all the boxes. You submitted every document you were supposed to, but when we sit down to look at it. So is a process issue? Is it that they are not understanding what needs, what complete looks like, is that maybe we're not defining it correctly? Well, that's, yeah, complete as determined by the city manager's office, but I would say complete and correct, or some sort of learning to find it like that. I would actually, the code is a beautiful thing, and we can be very prescriptive. But in this situation, I would not prescribe what complete is. I think we all, whether you're an attorney or an engineer, or I mean, we all know what complete is, complete is, you've met the checklist and you have no deficiencies, period. Right? If your survey has to be no later than 10 years old and you gave me one less 20 years old, guess what? Your application is not complete because it doesn't meet the requirements of what the application is. I don't know what the requirements are. Well, and while we can get into the requirements, this is more of a recommendation for me. Right? This is more of a recommendation for me. When it comes to the timeline, I think 44 days is, I would clean up this language. I'm really looking for consensus that we should just abide by the statute because I think the statute is more than fair. Not only that, it actually prescribes a response time. So the applicant applies. Local government has 30 days to respond with deficiencies. Applicant has 30 days to respond with deficiencies. Applicant has 30 days to address those deficiencies. You go back and forth and then you have to set for hearing or you get administrative approval within a certain a lot of time. And I just think that's, I've always abided by that statue. Most local governments do. I just found this out last week. I was wondering why Erica was, you know, I mean, working every week to put these things together and it came to light that there's this 44-day requirement in the code. So that's one of the issues that we've run into and then I think larger picture in the overall process. We had the, what do we call that? We didn't call it a listening session. We call today forum. The forum with the design community, the focus group with the design community, and a lot of the feedback that we got was that the process as we have it today is cumbersome. And I think it kind of pointed back to the site plan process as the sticking point in that, you know, from the developer perspective, to get through the process, meaning from concept of a new development to building permit, the sticking point was the site plan process. And that's that administrative process before it comes to city council, for those in a plan development. Okay. I have a vice mayor. Are you complete? Not quite, but we can circle back. I have a couple more questions. Sure. Do you? I think we have two issues. One is that before going back to the hearing to the code like the rest of the cities in the state of Florida. And then two, I think we ought to take a look at, you know, when we say an item begins and not take, you know, incomplete or garbage in where stuff is missing. Because those are the things that I have looked at personally where it's, you know, they just don't submit it. And we shouldn't start at any clock based on that and I hope we're not. But I think 44 days is probably too tight and we should lean on the code and then maybe talk about process improvements to always beat it. So just we don't need to get into the details of it. Where are the, where's the criteria for when it starts, when it begins? What's the, there is nothing more than the sentence that I read to you. That's all the code says. In 4634. Well, that's so it's in each of the different, that's just conditional uses, but it's provided in the review and approval procedure for each of the different types. So you'll see it in reason, you'll see it in subdivision, you'll see it in all the different types of petitions. Each one has a separate section in chapter 46. And Mayor, if I may add, Madi Gillette here, in the original email that on the process improvement and optimization that Matthew reattached here, the link isn't live, but there is a planning petition process overview and it shows every particular application type and the code and all of the steps on how to get there. So it is part of the application when they come to the city and it's on the planning website. So it's not. We are on the planning website because I tried to follow that. When under that website where is it so that if you go to the planning website? Yes I'm not driving here, so I'm waiting for There we go And then if you go to forms planning on the left hand side Right, yep, yeah, I'm trying to drive there forms planning on the left hand side. Right? Yep. Yep. I'm trying to drive there. I'm trying to drive there. I'm trying to drive there. I'm trying to drive there. I'm trying to drive there. I'm trying to drive there. I'm trying to drive there. I'm trying to drive there. I'm trying to drive there. I'm trying to drive there. I'm trying to drive there. I'm trying to drive there. You're looking at a brief explanation, the applicable code section, the criteria in the code, and then who looks at that? So is it administrative? Would be staff-only? Does it go to the PAB and council? It'll also tell you if it goes to the crab or in the council. So that's the overview by petition type. And then this one here, the materials and fees, tells you all, this one is tiny, so you have to zoom in, but tells you all the different required documents for each of those petition types. So if you're looking at, you know, I'm submitting an appeal, it'll tell you the section of the code, the fee, and then who looks at it and then what are all the different. So that's what is provided to applicants when they're submitting their materials. And in the code, where is that? That's not in the code. That's just our application matrix. Okay. So can I ask a question in mind you, I'm learning as we all are in some regards of the city's code. Is there where do you get the application requirements in the code? Like there are like says the applications must include blank. Some sections will tell you some middle materials generally it refers to as determined by the city manager. Very few petitions actually tell you a list of required materials. I think it's only a design review that tells you what specific materials are required. Because if you look in this application matrix, this is a more general. This is where you'll find that all applications require a disclosure of interest. They all require a deed. They all require a survey. That might not be listed specifically in each of those, but that's also a policy determination by the city. You know, what information do we think is necessary for each of those petition types? Right and thank you for asking the question I was trying to get to because that's I mean if I'm a petitioner's agent I want to know where it is. I mean we don't you know we don't see in the code or in the website the requirements for everything. It's for you said it's just for DRB. Well, this is on the website, so you cannot submit an application without getting this document first. And every submittal we require a pre-application meeting so you cannot submit anything to the planning department without a pre-application meeting and in that pre-application meeting we go over all the steps in that overview and then all of these materials as well. So everyone who submits something is well aware of what's going to be required of them. But it's something it's a handout. They can walk away and go okay that's what they said to me today. But it's something, it's a handout. They can walk away and go, okay, that's what they said to me today in my pre-application. Yes. So we do have that document. Yes. It's available on the website. And it has criteria and it has a hyperlink to the code. Yeah, it references the code, which provides the criteria for each of those different petitions. Thank you. Yeah, very complete. I am complete. Thank you. Vice mayor. Thank you. The documents that is on the screen, whoever's in control, could they scroll down to the bottom? So on this document, I don't see a last revised date. Is there one? It might not be on. Okay. Just a suggestion. Yeah, we work on this constantly. Yeah. Whenever we touch a document, we should have a last revision date so we know which document is no longer applicable. Right? No longer being used. But in this matter that we're discussion right now, it seems to me that just my feedback, this city is turning and staff need to work on the process. If this is a petition requirement document and I haven't gone through every line of this, but we need to make sure there's clear definitions of terms and criteria related to the materials submitted by the petitioners and specifically be crystal clear what constitutes a properly completed application which is then ready to be processed by the various city departments. I'll give you an example. When I ran for office, I had to fill out certain documents. And if I didn't complete those documents, then I don't get to run for office. So whatever needs to meet up and address the fact that someone can submit an application and that there's a misconception about what is completed and what is not completed, we just got to close that gap. And I think that's what your ask is. I'm not sure why it's coming to us but I think it has to comply with Florida State Statutes. It probably has to comply with our own departments and I think if we're not really crystal clear let's be crystal clear and if it's updating whatever the documents are that define what a completed application is, let's just get it done. Yeah, thank you. I have pen and I. So hang in here with me for a little bit, because I'm really questioning whether or not the DRB needs to exist as the DRB. Could we, for instance, add two more positions, perhaps, an architect and a landscape architect to the PAB? And I'm looking at the purpose of the design review board, which is signage landscaping, lighting, and then contribute in a positive way to the public environment of the city. We also, which I think is kind of interesting, we have an advisory board that's advising an advisory board. Basically the DRB, then I think advises the PAB correct as to their findings. Yes or no? They job there actually different. The DRB is only looking at the design of the building and the PAB is looking at the zone. I understand. Okay. All right so that's not the case. So unfortunately this isn't a new thought on my part so I've derived a certain level of comfortability with it, but I just sort of wonder if that couldn't be easily. Yes, is there it? Is it in here? Because you're both turning a paper at the same time. Yeah, go ahead. Now, are you looking at the code? I'm looking at both. And I'm also looking at Charleston's. Because I think I'm on the same pages you on terms of we can eliminate one board at an architect to another. The way that they've described the DRB, you know, the way we have in the city and this is why I think it gets confused a lot is to promote public health safety in general welfare by reviewing proposed petitions, yada, yada, yada. Where it's actually an aesthetic board. It's looking more at aesthetics. And I think that that is getting people mixed up for staying in your lane. And then people walk away and say, well, I've shocked. That was approved by the DRB. When it's very clear that it's aesthetics that they are proving. And they really narrowed it down, you know, they were more finely defined in the last update of the DRB handbook to be mostly aesthetics and to stay out of the lane of zoning. And given that, it- The DAB has a very, sorry, the DRB has a very clear idea of their role, I think, where it gets misunderstood by developers and the media. Well, you'll see a project get preliminary DRB and all of a sudden the newspaper saying project approved by the city. It's, whoa, no, no. So that's a problem. You are right. Sometimes they get out of there a little bit because they'll talk about shading of one building to another. I remember distinctly in 2019 this came up and it was all your shading the pool of the adjacent neighbor. Well, you can shade the pool because the zoning allows that building to be where it is and it allows it to be a certain height and it allows it certain features. And so they sometimes they wiggle out of their lane a little bit. And when I read, I was looking for best practices over the weekend, and I liked Charleston's sort of definition of the, they call it the DRB, and it's a conceptual face. So they have two faces for it, and it talked about, you know, review the general height, scale, mass, 3D form of the building, or in addition to an existing building. And it talks a lot about aesthetics in here. And I think that we, you know, we either need to narrowly accept that definition or get an architect on this body, call it a PAB, call it something new. And we could create one form and eliminate two big steps. Would that be helpful to you though if we, such as she's speaking up and I'm speaking up, if we eliminate one board, move that particular discipline onto the PAB. Does that help you at all? Does that help the process at all? In less hearings, it's always going to be helpful to me. But I don't know. I value the DRB's input. I think they're looking at something very different. I haven't, you know, that's a board of architects. That's a very specialized review. And I think they do, you know, that's a board of architects. That's a very specialized review. And I think they do, you know, I can point to a number of projects where I think the design review board's input has really improved that project. As it's come forward, the hospital, you know, like the parking garage moving 40 feet. I think, you know, the DRB has had some really good input on some of these projects. But then, I think it's- The input mostly comes from an architect, though. But then, I think it's- But then, I think it's- But then, I think it's- But then, I think it's- But then, I think it's- But then, I think it's- But then, I think it's- But then, I think it's- But then, I think it's- But then, I think it's- But then, I think it's- But then, I think this building is perfect. I mean, you know, there's seven of you elected by the people. You know, I don't make those decisions, I bring those decisions to you. could be too archetype and it would save a 30 days that save pre-lim and final Well, it would save more because sometimes they go to drb twice For preliminary like Chick-fil-A. I just there on their second preliminary That's right and then they go to PAB Well, that was another one where the drb You know Well, that was another one where the DRB, you know, valuing put there. They told Chick-fil-A to- Are we off? Have we run off the rail here? I'll let- if I can speak after Councilmember Crick. Thank you. I just want to finish. I have a line of people here. So we- Peniman asks the question. So let's sit on that for a second. Sure. Okay. Thank you. Peneman asks the question. So let's sit on that for a second. Sure. OK. Chris. Yeah. Question and then I comment. Why? Sorry. Sorry. Question, Ms. Martin, then I have a couple of comments. The sufficiency letter that you send at some point to petitioners. Explain to us the relationship or difference between the sufficiency letter and the notice of completeness. Sure. So the sufficiency letter is only something that you'll see related to the site plan and what that means is that the Ptischner has submitted their site plan. It's been sent out to all the departments and through however many rounds necessary of R.A.I.s Request for additional information and they resubmit and they've it means that we've found a point where they've addressed all of the comments from staff but that is a review of technical sufficiency. That is, you know, your floodplain coordinator confirming that it meets FEMA. That's your fire department confirming that, you know, it has emergency vehicle access and fire truck turnaround. Utilities confirming that we have water to serve the site. So that sufficiency letter is just us saying that this wouldn't come when a site plan in a PD comes to council it's staff saying we have vetted that this project can be built. You don't say it should be built we're telling you that. And it only relates to site plan applications. It's only site plan. And the completeness issue that you've been talking about really relates to any application. Every application. It's relates to any application. Every application. Yeah. It's relates to the scheduling of a hearing. Yeah. Because we hear about sufficiency letters all the time and I wanted to clarify that not just for myself but I think because the two sound like aren't they the same. No, that's the product of a much longer process. Yeah. I know, is good. You know, on my comment, I'm not sure what the range of the discussion is on this item, but if we're talking about potentially eliminating or consolidating advisory boards or whatever, my two cents, well, first of all, I think I think one way or another warrants a much longer discussion and there's all kinds of potential unintended consequences with any direction you go. So my bias is that the DRB is, you know, that it needs, if anything, to be elevated in its role, not diminished. And that the urban design component of these application and petition reviews is something that we, as Naples Moose Fortress, the community's going to become much more important, not less. And I like the idea of having an advisory board that is solely dedicated to that set of issues. On the PAB side, not that I'm proposing this, but you know there's no reason we have to have a PAB. The council could designate itself as the local planning agency or whatever that term is. I understand it's been done in other parts of Florida. But short of that, because the current PAB itself has talked about, as any of us who have listened to their meetings, or read their minutes about trying to reduce their work load in terms of petition reviews, as I understand it and tell me, Ms. Martin, if I have this right, the state law requires the, in our case, the PAB, but whoever the local planning agency is, to, by state law, it has to review rez rezoning, text amendments, and PDs. Those three are the only thing that are required. Complanable. No. And if I may, PDs, PDs is not one of the sub-level. Maybe it's complex. PD only because the mechanism of a PD in this city is a reason. So it is because it's reason. So reason, and there's a third. What is it? Just amendments only to your land development code. Okay. So nothing in the code of ordinances. So that's chapter 44 on. No, I was that was my mind implied. And what's the conference plan and conference of plan I'm just spoke so those are the three that are required. Not required by statute required by our code. But my point is that we could if we wished say that the only petitions that the PAB will review going forward would be petitions involving those three items and all other matters, meaning I don't know, variances, conditional uses, I don't know what, there's a whole slew of them would come directly to council. And that would have, that would expedite certain processes. It would free up the PAB from reviewing, I don't know, I'm, staff would have to tell us, what percentage of current petitions that come to them would be no longer coming to them as a result of just looking at the last year or two of workload. And I just throw that out as another possible process change that we may want to make and consider. So, but my real point is all of these things are really, you know, deserve a lot of, you know, thoughtful consideration and conversation, not just amongst us, but perhaps getting input from some others who have been part of the process, either currently or in the past, and make sure we're not, you know, going down some roads that will regret. Yeah, I agree with you. That I wish that I would have been a part of putting some of this material together because the PAB report from I think Chairman Salfon gave a lot of great recommendations that we should be discussing. I have. Pardon. I think it's pretty quick. I think it's administratively speaking. Eric, you mentioned that the city of Naples planning petition requirement is some of the poll online but it's not part of the application process. It is part of the application process. It's just not in each section of the code. Okay. All I was gonna say, and I'll touch back on that. Talking about applications and we got tied up on a complete versus correct. And I mean, maybe semantics here, but I don't see how an application can be correct if it's not complete. So I mean so one doesn't come without the other and at least as far as my very basic definition of those two words, it has to be to complete to be correct. So I just want to clarify because it sounds like we're not doing our jobs. When you use the example of you had to fill out a bunch of paperwork when you applied. Yes, we check to make sure you have everything. It's the time it takes to make sure that the address that you put on your application is your actual address and the high school you reference. You actually went to high school there and check it's that is the amount of time. So that's the difference between complete and correct. It's all of that check to go through every drawing to make sure you've provided the correct dimensions. You've referenced your female elevation correctly. All of that, that's the difference between complete and correct. I guess my point is they can have an answer down. Right. And you're suggesting that an answer makes it complete, but that answer could be wrong and therefore not correct. And it takes us time to answer. And I would suggest that answer is incorrect. And I realize it takes time for you to see if that answer is correct. But I would suggest that that answer is incorrect and that application is not complete. So that 44 day doesn't start until we say this is correct. That's complete. Yeah, you got it. And so where I say that this comes into problems is you'll see developers will come forward. And before they've even had their first pre-app, they've laid out their timeline. They've laid out, we're going to preliminary DRB on this state, then we're going to go to PAB here, and then we're going to council, and then we're going to final DRB, and then we're going to get our building permit. And here it is and then you'll get calls constantly when we aren't meeting Those deadlines and so that's where it's tricky for us And to miss Marn's point Maybe it's just because I'm new and energized, but I have no problem being the no man in this situation And and I think it starts with the city manager having a lot of leeway in your code to develop The application Mine is well use it because we can do it in the short term the city manager having a lot of leeway in your code to develop the application. I might as well use it because we can do it in the short term before we go through this because I agree with council member christman. This is a conversation we're not going to end today. I just wanted to have it. But with the consensus of the council I would like to work on the application requirements specific to this and just see how much we can address that way administratively. Just putting it out food for thought. I have a primer. Thank you. I have to say the thought of adding people to a committee or a board. There's already plenty of chefs, so we don't need more of that cooking. Those meetings are already cumbersome. And I can't imagine a case where we'd add more people and they'd become more efficient. Having said that, my first meeting I think was when we had whoever was folks from that project over there that had been on the project for almost two years and a million dollars into it and had thumbs up from everybody and then came to us and we said no. So then we said that can't happen and the mayor met with those folks that crew of developers and had a very productive meeting, we're told, and came up with this, they had kind of a flow chart and the idea out of fundamentally kind of basic stuff was if there's something that we have to vacate or conditional use or some sort of variance, then it should come to council first so we can kill it or not kill it before they get too far down the road. And it seems to me that what our, see, attorney has provided is in align mode that where you can see the, I don't know if we can put that up, but if it starts in DRB with the preliminary, which is a much smaller bifurnd to take, much less cumbersome. And then, and it goes to that point, like, okay, if the easy side is, let's just pretend that it's code compliant and do not require any approvals. Wouldn't that be great? So then we just go straight to the building permit. Let's go. Let's roll. That would be fantastic. And it would encourage that behavior. So I'm all for modifying behavior, like my colleague said. Just do what you can do by right and it makes it everything a lot easier. On the other side, of course, we would have already, Morgan's kind of, client-plant comes to us and then if we thumbs up it, then it gets to go through the other process, which isn't necessarily by right, but there's a way home. And it is more cumbersome. Or it's more like, it's just what we do now, basically. It looks like. And so I just think there's merit to that. That means it's doing a pretty straightforward, easy solution. I don't know. This is currently what goes on. Okay, okay. What you're looking at. This isn't like me modifying anything. This was. Well, why am I, okay? So my question then is, how are we getting, it seems to me that we're getting stuff that, oh, because we want to get ahead of that. Okay. So on the right side then I apologize. On the right side of this then the City Council would come to the forefront. Is that correct? Yes. That's where we wanted to go. Yeah, the proposal was that there would be, I don't have a term so I'm going to throw something out there kind of like a conceptual review from City Council that would go first where City Council would take a look at it and say, yeah, this is something we think could be appropriate for this property, proceed, and then it would go on so that they don't get to this step before finding out that this is not even a concept that the Council would consider. Well, that's where I am. How do we do that? How do we make that go above that and then so we can kill it or not and then save people a lot of pain. I don't think you want to go ahead. I think you want to keep you want to stay here because but then it would just be an added review up at the top. I think well what I was seeing I got to see I was seeing that I was seeing that is the site the very top one was that point. I didn't even look down at city council. I just thought that was the city council point where we can say thumbs up or thumbs down on any variance vacation or conditionally use. And thumbs up or thumbs down it there. And what we have to do to get to that. And the other thing is the 44 days, that's simple, isn't it? Can we just say no? We're going to default to what the state calls for? Well, we can. There's just once, like, the 44 days initially doesn't bother me. It's the next sentence that said, petitioners receive later than 44 days will be placed on the agenda after the next meeting. Like that, to me, is, needs to be removed. Well, I'd be all for dumping the 44 days and doing whatever the state defaults to give us as much. But did you hear what was said? Space is possible. But they have to do this review. I just want to make sure because I don't. This is the first time we've reviewed these things very efficiency. That the application may come in and you could go back and forth several times, which could be maximum months So we do this for outdoor dining now We've started this for outdoor dining and live entertainment because it was not specified in that section of the code and it's been great So because all live entertainment and outdoor dining permits require a sign off from the Fire Marshall on the life safety plan What we have said is that one of the necessary requirements is an approved Life safety plan. So they do their back and forth with the Fire Martial to get everything correct before they submit so that we don't start that timeline until we know that it's correct. And so that's what we're saying is that you submit. We take that time to make sure everything's correct. And once we say it's correct, then we'll schedule you for a hearing. I'm all for whatever does that for you guys. Give you guys the most margin and to my partner Bartons. I mean, if you come to the school system and you don't have your paperwork, we'll see tomorrow. There's no day one and then we'll figure out if you gave the right info. And here's what else. Don't show up until we check the info. Until we verify the birch certificate, we'll call you. That's day one. So I just. But where are. So just to be clear, those criteria are within each application piece within the code Yeah, so in like what I was reading from is in chapter 44 the conditional use portion of your code which provides the Approval procedures for conditional use Okay, and did you have no I think that's it and I just want to be clear that I had skipped the whole second go to City Council, because I thought that that's what we're trying to do is make this thing more efficient and get a more palatable for everybody. Yes, but I think that we didn't go over DRB, but if you look at DRB, this is where they kind of get stuck. Like if you look at the purpose is to look at signage, landscaping, lighting and other development that contribute in a positive way. I don't know what that means. That could be anything. But that's where we need to start looking as some of these things in here allow for the fact that and I wish I brought it in the DRB receives packets that are complete. So you know we're trying to make it more efficient by saying hey do we and you were talking about the one that we had the lawsuit with if you know do you like this design before they go through that whole two-year process yeah but it was also for the transient lodging that was on Fifth Avenue is that the concept that we're looking for yeah you're right okay so somehow it would be you said, it would go to a preliminary review like Erica has said on the record many times. More of a napkin presentation of do you think that this looks like something you would want to have? Okay. I'm off for that. Yes, one second. I have. Are you sure? I can speak after Councilman. Councilman Chris. Now that this issue has come up again, I just have to say much angst it gives me the idea of this preliminary conceptual council review. And we've talked about it before. I think that, again, unintended consequences. If council is going to hear from any petitioner, we must hear it based on a set of specific criteria standards that are in the code. There has to be testimony from, you know, and given, and we must render a decision through a vote. And I understand the very good intentions behind trying to give petitioners an earlier understanding as to whether what they're proposing is going to go forward or not successfully. But I think that the unintended consequences are that if it's done in a generalized vague sort of a way where each of us are up here sort of sending signals and messages based on our own reaction of the project, any petitioner will just naturally take what they want from what they hear. And I think we have an exhibit A, an example of how a similar situation actually occurred here. And it had really bad consequences. And that's Naples Community Hospital. They came in and asked with all good intentions to present to us their proposal. And it was not a hearing, not based on any kind of a petition review. They just came in. They wanted to present. And they talked about the project in general terms. And the seven of us who were here at that time reacted and responded and said, you know, I like this. I don't like that. And they went away and I'm sure they heard what they wanted to hear human nature. And that started what became a two-year process that ended up with getting approved in a different form but was not a very good process from their standpoint or ours. And so I just caution us again that if we want to have a two-step process with council, a preliminary process, a step, and then a final step, we're going to have to be very clear in setting standards and criteria in our code for what that preliminary step is and have to really remember that if we give a preliminary approval and then we change our minds, even if it's good for good reason, boy, you could have a lot of litigation. You could have an awful lot of litigation. And so it's very complex. That's all I'm really saying. So, ma'am. Yes, Mr. McConaughey. Yeah, thank you. I appreciate that. I want to set the stage like this. Okay, so obviously I'm new to the city. I've represented other local governments. Similar comparison, it would be someone like Tarpen Springs, roughly 20,000 people kind of transient. It is, Naples is uncommon in that you have all of these steps to the process. Generally speaking, there is some kind of administrative staff group, whether that's a technical review committee or a development review committee, that once an application comes in is reviewed by all directors of the departments. So you have stormwater, you have traffic, you have all the engineers at play, you're making sure that concurrency levels are accurate, you have planning involved in the zoning, hate is a variance thing to be required, what are the setbacks, what are you applying for, so on and so forth, and then for a CUP, it goes straight to council. That's just what I'm used to. So when I got here, I'm not saying that this is wrong or right, it's different, but there's a way to do this and a way to do it the right way, because I can almost guarantee 70% of cities out there do it this way in Florida. Roughly. This is kind of a little bit different and it may be what city council wants but to council member Christmas part, if we do this we are going to have to legitimize our applications. We are going to have to make sure that we are crystal clear on what the requirements are. So by the time it gets to you all for for lack of a better term, it's fully cooked, right? All the questions I've been answered, it's right for a decision, and that decision makes you all feel comfortable. But then after what I'm used to is after the CUP is approved, final site plan is always administrative, at least from what I'm used to. I don't know if Palm Beach is different, but that's when you get into very, very specific. So, perfect example. When the poor royal was here, we said, you know, the images wanted to be the same, right? For some of the images they were showing on the poor royal club, those are pretty standard conditions to have, because now you have reassurances that I site plan, final site plan approval. Those things are going to look the way they presented. But remember, you're here to grant the use. I know we fall in love with pictures because it's hard not to. But you're here granting the use of the club. Not the shutters, not the size of the windows. And it's hard not to get involved in those. But I kind of wanted to just mention all of that because this is very doable if you all want it to be. But there's nothing wrong with what we're doing now. I mean, we could leave it as is. I have pet, Petr enough? I think it's inappropriate to start with preliminary D or B. I think the process, you know, needs to be a little bit more because you're starting with aesthetics. So you're starting with the shutters and the paint color and the size. And, you know, these are kicking off developments. I would think that you would start with the zoning first and making sure that and then put the paint on it and put the shutters on it and all the other, you know, items on their first because it does, people do walk away with it. You normally don't build something with the paint first. And so in order, like the heavy lifting, if we do go up in the process, sooner in the process, I totally agree about having the criteria nailed down exactly. The heavy lifting is going to be in that meeting. And then we should be comfortable at the final stages because we have sort of set the criteria. Unless they changed it and said, no, we want another ring. We want another this, if it's. But I think we could get this criteria right and eliminate steps and have the most appropriate conversations right up front so that, you know, developers aren't spending a year and, you know, a million dollars on all this stuff only to say, well, we're not really on board with this concept of, you know, of transient lodging, you know, additional transient lodging on Fifth Avenue or on, or the missed things of having a big box where Georgia Dragon was. And ultimately, if we look at our comprehensive plan, and we did not want to have big boxes in the city, we didn't want to have them downtown. And I think that all of that could be nipped in the city we didn't want to have them downtown and I think that all of that could be nipped in the but and save a heck of a lot of time for the developer make it easier and ask make it less contentious and have a more meaningful conversation right up front and of course it would have to be public because we want you know the public would be excited to look at these things too and it could be a very, you know, collaborative and meaningful thing right up front. Because it gets to us and they're angry. If we don't like the concept, they've just been about a lot of money in a year of doing it. And it's like they're, you know, it becomes very difficult. Yeah. If I can pick up on your thought process. This is Petr enough. You know to come to you first, that is not an abnormal thing. That's actually what I'm used to getting that entitlement first. But you're going to need a certain minimum amount of information to be able to make your decision based on criteria. So there's going to have to be work that's done to answer the questions that you'll have to make that conditional use decision. So step one, you cook it, the proposal, you know, well done, and then it gets to you to be able to render your decision. You may or may not be able to make that decision in the meeting, you may need to continue it. To get more answers to your question, But ultimately your decisions made, the entitlement is there. Then it goes to your architectural review board or your DRB in this case and they make it pretty. They make sure, you know, all of the different things that they're looking at get done. That can take one meeting. That can take five meetings. As long as nothing changes in their architectural design that affects your approval, once that's done, they move forward. If something changes in that design, feedback from the DRB that affects your decision, and it's got to come back to you. So. And I would want to call it more than just a DRB, because it's sort of a combination of PAB and DRB in that the PAB has been tasked with our comprehensive plan which has a lot of urban development in it. Yes. You know, it's so that's where I could just Mr. Bhutaswar. If you don't know that it's compliant with the comprehensive plan and that it's in concurrency or level of service. All of that makes a big difference to how you approve this process. No, to mayor to that point. No, to that point and your planners and your experts are on staff, not sitting on a board. Your staff has required respectfully, Ms. Maren, to determine that this is an incongence with a comprehensive plan, or else it shouldn't be before you. And it shouldn't be before the planning board, either. Right, the planning board function pursuant to statute is comprehensive planning and comprehensive planning alone. I understand how we treat PDs internally, but again, where I come from planning boards are not involved in zoning petitions. They're involved in land development code changes because it must be in compliance with the comprehensive plan and they're involved with recommendations and the comprehensive planning because they are required to buy statute. Zoning you mean? No. No, not zoning. You said, land development code changes. Correct. So, text changes to your land development code and comprehensive plan. And then zoning. Which are two legislative functions. And then zoning? No. Zoning is planning and if it's requires a CUP or it's outdoor dot. Resonings. Resonings. Well, that's where it comes is. There are reasons. Well, because Miss Maren laid it out. Your PDs are handled as a reason. So yes, I can I can understand that. There may be some things that we want to maintain and I'm not sitting here saying to remove anything, but the statute's pretty clear. Local planning agencies are legislative boards, which means they have legislative functions of reviewing comprehensive plans, land development codes. They are 100% of their agenda is zoning petitions. I've said at two meetings, every single thing on there is a zoning petition. It was of the 43 petitions reviewed by the PAB in 2324. 17 of them were legislative meaning compliment amendments, tax amendments and resums. 17 were legislative. The others were all quasi judicial so what 28 So to my so to my point You're fewer fewer than half involved matters that the local planning agency is required to address and The others could be Handled else directly by council. I Do want to point out just as we're having this conversation though that if we do move forward with this preliminary review by City Council your staff will not be able at that point to verify for you concurrency because it will not have gone through cycling so this is not going to be you're not going to get the staff report that you get from us for this preliminary review because they will not have provided all of those documents. That is truly a conceptual are you okay with this concept? That is not going to have the backup from staff saying that we've reviewed this for anything. This is, you know, conceptual. Let's talk about that. So the site planning process Can you describe how many site planning processes we have? We have one site plan process that is applicable to all you know new principal buildings projects over I think two additions over 2,000 square feet It's applicable to everything in a multi-family or commercial district And I think landscaping and parking improvements more than 10,000 square feet. So all of those projects go through the site plan process. That site plan process is administrative. It's reviewed by all the different departments in the city as many rounds as necessary to be found sufficient with code. Those site plans in a plan development go on to City Council, PAV and City Council for review. The rest of them are administratively reviewed. But they definitely go through DRB first. Not necessarily, but most of them. Most of the qualifications overlap. There are a few that wouldn't go to DRB if you're just redoing a parking lot. If that parking lots over 10,000 square feet, it would trip the site plan requirement but not necessarily DRB. But yes, the vast majority of them do go through design review as well. So that site plan process takes how long? It depends. You could do one round of review if you have a superstar's middle or it could take two years if you just don't make the corrections that staff's requesting. But that process is going on while it goes to PAB preliminary, I mean, DRB preliminary and to PAB. Nothing goes to PAB until the site plan is found sufficient. And when you say sufficient, that means all departments have reviewed it. And just going to the staff report, right? That means all departments have reviewed it and found it sufficient for their respective codes or policies. And there are sometimes when it says at this time, what does that mean and when in the process does that get complete? So that means that for whichever department will take a really technical one. So the fire marshal is going to review for life safety for the fire prevention code. They're not looking at the location of your smoke alarms at this point. They're looking to make sure that their vehicles can access the site and stuff like that. So they'll say that during building permit review they're going to look for those very technical requirements but during site plan, it's not a built, the site plan isn't building permit level review. Site plan is a step above conceptual because we are asking for a higher level of detail but it's not that, you know, I'm not looking to make sure every roof overhang is the exact dimension. I'm looking to make sure you're correct with your height and your setbacks and that the use is allowed in your district. So they're all at all levels for all departments. There's going to be another layer of much more detailed review at the building permit. And real quick if I can interject because I think this is an important thing to underscore here. From time to time when you have something before you that's a land use matter you'll see notes from certain departments that are reviewing that it's there are not a lot of details because we at this point in a review during land use, we're not going to have all of the details. So they'll say something to the effect that, you know, we'll see more details later or I forget how they freeze. Yeah, like the building department's not going to have structural drawings to make sure that the crosses are correct. So we're not reviewing during a site plan review process a bid set of plans. It's still making its way through and then after they get their entitlements, now they're finished and then final DRB, now they're putting together all of the details and they're answering some of the fire code questions, billing department questions, for the building code questions, those additional details come later and then it's got to satisfy the reviewers. Well you just said final design review? After you final design review board yes. Okay so I guess the issue with the hotel that the fire truck could not get around the Check-in area we didn't find that out till the building but we had Civil drawings is that we're how to I Don't know the details. Yeah, I don't I don't know the details of that, but that would be one. Sure, it's a good case study and it's also a good test to see if we have multiple checks and balances. So if something slips by during a certain phase, do we catch it in the next phase? I don't know the details. It sounds like there was a little issue that we didn't discover until building permitting when we got a little bit more into the details or we got more detailed drawings. But that's something we can try to dig up and find out what happened and how it got cured. Vice Mayor. Thank you quickly. I'm very concerned. Councilman Chrisman talked about his concerns with what I call a pre-look or a preliminary review by City Council of certain projects. Keep in mind that we have to measure this against SB 250, which says we are prohibited from adding a process, which can be interpreted as adopting a more restrictive or burdensome procedure concerning review, approval or issuance of a site plan. So if we're adding a process and someone can interpret that as burdensome or restrictive, we might want to think about that. But if we do think about that and we want to go down that road, my ask is that we clearly communicate what that preliminary review does not preclude our codes. And it does not imply approval of any variances or the addition of any steps to our land development processes. So as you consider this down the road, just kind of think about those comments. On this document here, now, with this document for our planning department or our city attorney, is this part of our land development code that chart that's on the screen? No, that was me putting into a visual representation what your code says. So your code says that in words, but it doesn't provide it in. And do we have that anywhere? The drawing, no. We don't. I created that for that. Just, okay, perfect. If we move forward with that, my ask is to put what on the bottom? The last revision date, right? Yeah. That's a word. Because we're already talking about revising it. The pre-application meeting required. There was a chart. In fact, it says it right away before you go off of that. You see in this one right here, you see this a street about a pre-application meeting is required prior to the submittal of all applications. Then go up, scroll down, and then right there, right there, on the lower left, another note about a pre-application meeting. Now go to the chart where you have all the criteria that's in the pre-application. It's a planning department chart that was up there previously. Yeah. It's gone now. So that chart, there it is. It does now. Now up in the upper right hand corner, you see that here we try to communicate again, a pre-application meeting required prior to submittal. So I suggest that if we're actually having these pre-application meetings that we cover effectively communicating what's the pre-application meeting includes no developer timelines are considered until that petitioner application is deemed complete by the city planning department. In other words, let's get it on the table right at the very front, be clear, and give documents that are reiterating what we're covering in this meeting because I think, do we have this meeting actually? Yes. Not only do we have this meeting for every submittal but when you submit an application on city view which is our portal, when you go to put in you cannot move forward until you enter the date of your pre-application meeting so if you have not had a pre-application meeting you cannot submit. And then what is it that we do that memorializes the completed application? Is it the, a certain document that Councilman Christman was talking about? What is it? Is it a stamp? Is it a, what is it? No, it's something that we would send to you in city view through the city view portal. Interesting, okay. And then finally, my last thing. On this chart here, when you're making notes you see D downtown waiver let's get that off there or revise it right no more D downtown or do we have D downtown we're still gonna have that's part of the CRA so we don't have the there was something we were talking about earlier about the design district okay but the hardening the hardening the hardening the hardening we were talking about earlier about. Design district. Okay. But. So it's hard to name. The heart of Naples. The heart of Naples. Yeah. So I was confusing. The downtown is a zoning district. Yes. Got it. All right. And they do offer a waiver. That is all I had on those notes. process we're talking about of a pre-look, a preliminary review process. We're all square with SB 250. So I'll do research, but if you're taking a four step process to one, I don't see how anyone could interpret that to me more burning something. I didn't, I didn't, maybe I missed it, but I didn't interpret our discussion of this pre-look, this back of the napkin thing as eliminating a process. So I think the way I heard it was, instead of preliminary DRB, you're having staff review it, and it's not going to be presented to you as a preliminary look. It's going to be presented to you within 180 days after staff has fully vetted it was with and gone through the conditions and gone through the criteria. So there's rules and guidelines around it. Correct. I mean we would never, I mean at least I wouldn't, I don't think Erica would, we wouldn't present something to you that wasn't ready to be presented to you but instead of this 44 day get ready for three meetings. Yeah. It's 180 days and then gives staff time to work through all the quirks and questions and issues and present to you something that's ready and ripe for decision. I think that's for all the petition types. I think what you're talking about is this concept of having the first step in that flow chart being a conceptual look or a conversation. Yeah, that's I'm thinking about adding another step and. I thought I heard that it would actually replace preliminary DRBF. Yeah. So it wouldn't be an additional step. It would just be swapping out a conceptual council review in set up preliminary. Yeah. That changes my answer a little bit. I'd have to look into that. Yeah. Exactly. Well, they're already just so you do. They're already submitting as Erica has stated fully baked product. It's a term of word today. Yeah, I'm sorry. I used it. I'm sorry. I don't know whether we should be speaking the same language. Like what is it? Is it fully baked or is it half baked? And I'm going to shut up. And where is it in the code that says that's what they need to do before it's finished? Exactly. I just take you back to Councilman Chrisman's great memory. So much better than mine. But the NCH project that here comes a good quick look at it and man it was years down the road it kind of took a different unintended consequences I think so thank you thank you for bringing that up but that was also because we had to make a change in zoning and whether we would even consider changing that zoning was why they came to us. Because they didn't want to go through that process if council wasn't interested and that's how we created the process to get them there. I have a pinnacle and I'm going to have to wrap it up because we have, let me just go ahead, pino. Yeah, I'm just looking at pages 5 and 6 or 103 and 104 that address the planning process. And my question to you is, I'm assuming you put these two pages together. Did we help you at all? I know this is 103 and 104. Yeah, and I want to talk exactly where I was going. And one of the things I wanted to remind Mayor and Council of is when we did the process optimization update to you all, we brought forth some of the points that were made by the design community at the folks group. And I think some of them spoke that day. I think you heard the letter from MHK Architects. They want that first look. I think they suggested, and these are the folks that are working all our applications and all our petitions that were invited to the focus group. So, I mean, we can work with the city attorney and we can start baking some more and figure out how we can do this and make it less burdensome, because for them, in real life, it's less burdensome if they get a first look to you and they can understand if the project can come or not. Well, again, please look at these two pages and make sure that we answered the call here and I'm not so sure we have. Thank you. Well, they answered our, if, Marty, if you'll just confirm, though, that the beginning of that memo said that what the intention was. And is this page five and six what you've done? So page five and six talked about, first of all, you'll see there at the top the mayor's focus group some of those, what I just said. Four. Right. Page four. I'm sorry page four. Thank you But then we also left kind of some things in your court saying you know We need some directions on page six where it says opportunities Identified those are the ones we've done opportunities requiring council approval is kind of what we're doing right now That's the sausage making that's going on right now so approval is kind of what we're doing right now. That's the sausage making that's going on right now. So, okay, we're gonna have to come back to that because we didn't a better presentation on that but if we can move to the next item it might have some. Okay. Thank you. Segway. We're done with. Okay, so just just to follow up. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. direction with crab and working with staff to try to bring something forward to the CRA for discussion when it comes to specific duties. Got a consensus across the board for all of my suggested edits when it came to consistency. With the understanding that this conversation that we just had as it grows on we may encompass more changes to some of these boards and moving some things around. Does that sound pretty accurate. Yes, and coming back just for detail is, you know, coming back with some of the recommendations that were given by Chairman Selfon and then where we are in some of the recommendations I think that the last PAB meeting they had, do we ever go over any of those suggestions on the timeline for submittals because they wanted to move the whole timeline so that they would agenda material be published two weeks ahead of the meeting instead of one. Right. Which is exactly one of the areas we didn't cover, which we need to cover because right now we get our information on a Wednesday and you have Thursday and Friday or staff has Thursday and Friday to go over that information with you and or the weekend to review over a thousand pages of information. So the recommendation we need to decide is a council, whether we need that extra time, and it will change the timeline. Can I make a selfish request? Yes. Since my department, I'm going to plug my own department here. Since my department oversees or facilitates the DRB, the PAB, and we bring items to council, I am publishing an agenda every Wednesday. I have a hearing every single Wednesday. I have council the first Wednesday. I have PAB the second Wednesday. I have council the third Wednesday, and I have DRB the fourth Wednesday. So I am publishing an agenda for a meeting every Wednesday while I'm in another meeting. So if we had a very delicate series of deadlines, so if we consider moving the publication deadline for one, can we move all of them? Yeah. That's whole. Because if we go out of that sequence, I don't think I could keep up to be honest. Well, that's the whole thing. So that we're consistent. Yeah, do it. And one area we didn't discuss and that is who publishes the DRB. So you publish DRB, you publish PAB. So the materials are not consistent sometimes. We don't have all the materials that were given to DRB or PAB in the council packets. So that is correct. I will refer a little bit to Matthew on this one because for a quasi-judicial item, what material, so the DRB preliminary DRB review is petition number 24, DRB 5. The item that's in front of City Council is 24 CU 7, conditional use. So the application, submittal material relevant to your review of the conditional use is that submittal material for conditional use 7. If that makes sense, we will always, always, if you read our stuff, we will always provide to you the DRB heard this item on this date and approved by resolution this and will always give you historical in 2001. This project received something. If you would like that material, please let me know. We do incorporate all of those materials by reference in your staff report. But if we were to publish every ordinance, every resolution, and all of the backup documentation for everything for every property, your packets would go from a thousand pages to ten thousand pages. So we, why would they have so much information when they're just preliminary review. Well, but where does that end? Because if we provide to you the entire background of a project, including any variances, any conditional uses, any prior approvals, we include that by reference. But we don't include the entire packet material for all of those previous submittals. It's to be a work time because we're not going to solve it right now. This is going to be a staff conversation of how to make that process better and we didn't even get to those items at the back of Motties. Memo, Vice Mayor? Yeah, Madam Mayor, we just went past, I think we just threw a consensus, approved something, and I need to go back through it and make sure I understand it. I believe we were discussing adding a week to a certain process. Could you make sure we're clear on that? So you took the first step today in requiring council approval of the rules and procedures for each board. Where that is laid out, where that agenda publication deadline is laid out is in the rules and procedures for each board. So like the PABs, rules and procedures say seven days. The DRBs, I think actually say that we will publish the Friday before the meeting, not even the Wednesday. So that's part of Matthews is- And what did we just do? I think you just said you would like it to all be consistently two weeks ahead. And so we did, so we just discussed that. Now what happens with that? One second. I don't think we're shifting dates right now. I didn't not take that. Okay, I just want to make sure I'm clear on that. So what did we just do, though? I think we just got a consensus that if we move one board, we're going to move all of them because her department handles them all. So that's just theoretically. Theoretically. Got it. A lot of work to be done. Yeah, before. Yeah, Just okay. I mean, I'm good. We struggle to meet Wednesday. So two weeks before it would be very difficult. Yeah. All right. I like it, but it gets involved. So thank you. And then mayor before we move on, there was one thing I also got concepts. I just wanted to confirm I can work with staff to the application process? Make sure the checklist is accurate and we're at least until we make these changes that we have some criteria for deeming a complete and so on and so forth. Got it. Thank you. So we're clear on what's coming back. We didn't go over the DRB administrative rules or any of the other boards on where they may have other code conflicts or not conflicts, but code references in how we're going to address that. Submittals will have to continue that conversation so that we have a better outlook of how that would look. And checklist for criteria, the PAB report. And then that DRB, how are we handling that Wednesday? We're going to go over it Wednesday. The DRB handbook, I think, is on Wednesday, but what I suggest is it's been a very good conversation. I've gone a lot of direction. I think the next couple of months we need another workshop specifically on just processes. Give you all some time to kind of mull over what was discussed and decide, DRB planning so on and so forth into your point mayor with the specific sections that it's included. I can spend the time now, but I would prefer to spend my time once the decision's been made on what policies and procedures were changing. Because I will have to go through the code at that point and make sure that there everything's codified accordingly. But I work at the pleasure of the council and we'll do it in whatever order you please. Yes? If I understand Mr. McConnell's suggestion correctly, I think it's the right one. I think he and Mr. Bhutishwar and the appropriate staff need to process all these comments about different ways in which we might modify our current approval process, just listening to the conversation myself today. I can imagine two or three different models that could be out there. You know, it would be productive at some point, appropriate point in time, we could see two or three different options. Here's how we do it now. Here's option A, option B, option C. Some of that was embedded in what was presented today, but get even more specific and talk through the pros and cons of different alternative scenarios. So I think if Mr. McConnell, if that's what you have in mind, and coming back to us when you're ready. I think that would be good. It is and at that point once the decisions made on the option then the next step would be codifying it and touching on concurrency level of service, everything else that we've discussed and emending the appropriate codes. I just asked both questions. Mr. Wooder-Schwer, do you have any comments? I don't. I think this has been a very, very good discussion. I'm glad we're spending the time that we're spending. We usually have half an hour of good conversations and we don't get to where we're at. So I think we've made good progress, whether you realize it or not, I think we've made good progress today. Petra, often then we'll move to the next time. Just one thing you're going to be coming back with three processes, potential, you know, how this thing would work. Can you, before you come back with it, run it up against SB 250? So that we, whichever one we pick, we think we can actually do it. Sure. Thank you. No problem. Speaking of which, we'll go to the next item. Great segue. Okay. Thank you, Mayor. So it's, this was meant to be a very, very high overview, specifically for some of the new council members. I wasn't really ready to get into details on historically what happened here because number one, I wasn't here for it. But number two, I think ultimately what I'm trying to get at is direction for me to revisit some of the things that were put on pause. See if there's any implications that I see potentially bring things forward again, or if I believe that they are more burdensome. I don't agree with leaving them on the books. I would request that you allow me to rescind them and remove them from the code altogether. So just with that preface, in June of 2023, Governor signed in SB 250, based on the impact from Hurricane Ian and Nicole. There's some very stringent language in there that talks about more burden some restrictions to your comprehensive plan. You can't put more to the constructions or development of homes that were impacted by the hurricane. You can't touch your comprehensive plan, land development code, and you can't adopt ordinances that are more burdensome to the site plan or development order, development permit application, which is what we just discussed when it comes to development orders and development permits. Now what Tallahassee did, the first version was within a hundred miles of where the hurricane hit. It went as high as Pinellas County. I had to deal with it in jurisdictions in that area as well. But then later that year, November of 2023, the governor essentially amended it with HB1C, which made it specific to nine counties. Collier being one of them, any municipality in that county, obviously Naples being the Crown Jewel, as Council member Barton will say, of Collier, is included. But the restrictions didn't change. The only thing that did change is they extended the time frame from October of 2025 to October of 2020, from October 1st of 2024 to October 1st of 2026. And then what it also did was it was retroactive. So although it came out in June of 2023 and it amended in November, it was retroactive to any ordinances that were adopted back into an including September 23rd of 2022, which included, I believe, roughly four ordinances that the City Council at that time had adopted and approved and had second reading and we're on the books. So from my understanding, prior City Councils had a discussion. Once this came out in June, and there was a consensus based on some options from the prior City Attorney that you were going to leave the ordinances on the books, you just weren't going to enforce them. So I ran into an issue which I had to state to you all on the last meeting for the golf show playhouse where I was asked a question from staff on an interpretation issue. I looked at the code. I interpreted what I thought was the code. Came to a determination just to realize that was the ordinance. One of the ordinances that you weren't enforcing. Legally, I see that as an issue. I think it acts as a deterrent, whether you think it or not to certain property owners and lawyers that will look at codes and assume things are one way when they're really another. I don't think it's a good practice to have them on your books. I think immunocode should be as clear and concise as possible for due process purposes. But instead of me sitting here stating that you should rescind all four and we should start from scratch, what I'm willing to do with the consensus from council is review the four that were adopted. Give you my opinion on what I think is more burdensome and what is not and allow you to weigh out the options, although most of you have been through this discussion before. And if some of them are not more burdensome or the risk outweighs or the reward, then we'll start enforcing them. And if some of them are more burdensome, then I'm going to ask that we rescind them and remove them off being a code. So that's this high level as I planned on going but I'm happy to answer any questions. Matthew real quick if I can jump in mayor. Yes. And Mr. McConnell's memo to you. He's also identified a number of items that were in progress of council's review. Some of these items like regulating outdoor dining in a right-of-way. We actually had a first reading on those items. These are also items that didn't get codified, but were in the process of discussion and per the advice of our previous legal council. We paused on those as well. So, correct me if I'm wrong. Matthew, but I think his intentions when he reviews what's on the books was also to review what we had paused to see if there are items that we believe we could bring forward and keep going on. Right? That is accurate. So those would be treated the same way. So yes, those I have, I'm going to try to do everything at once, but I think those are the priority because they aren't in the code right now. So those are really, if I go through one or two a week and they're ready to go, then they can just move forward through the public hearing process. I did suggest to Mr. Grudershaw that we would start with first reading again just for due process purposes. But if I get a consensus, I'll work as fast as I can. But to your point, Mary, yes, those are also included in the overview since the reasoning for them, not moving forward was SB 250. And that's for the additional ordinances that have been drafted but have not been adopted. Correct. Okay. And then I believe there's three of them in the bottom of the agenda memo. Yeah, there's actually a fourth that didn't make it in here and that was the Outdoor dining in public right away and also the interpretations in the code Did not make it in this Because it really I mean yeah, these are all interpretations to 250 but we're still implementing interpretations in the code, but by staff approval. Yeah. So just real quick to clarify, we did not begin a public discussion about this series of opinion letters, either from city attorneys or planning directors of the past, how we are applying certain sections of the code that are kind of ambiguous. There's, I forget how many items there are, but they date back to the 90s. I think the most recent interpretation that was made that we are enforcing was back in maybe mid 2000s, 2007, I believe. But the review of that list of interpretations was also something that our previous city attorney had advised us against while we were trying to figure out how SB 250 may impact these interpretations. The concern was since it wasn't codified very clearly. How we're interpreting these things, we may create an unattended consequence for ourselves by diving too deep into the review of this issue. So that is a pending item. It's actually, I think, our look ahead as something that we need to do at some point in the future because you know things will come. But see it's just the same. So it to me it's just the same. He's confused. The city attorney is confused by something we adopted but we're not enforcing. Our staff has interpretations that they're in using, but it hasn't been adopted. That was the whole purpose of this was to work on the conflicts within the code so that we didn't have these issues. And also with the, I mean, that's it. Yeah, and there's two sides to both of these stories. Sure, and that was a point I was getting ready to make, is that, you know, these memos and letters shouldn't sit in perpetuity. At some point, we need to codify them or come to a determination that we're not enforcing them and do something else. So this is something that should have been done a while ago, but then SB 250 came to play and we were asked to pause. So that's another conversation that we need to have. But of course, the city attorney will review that as a part of everything that he's looking at. Okay, Vice Mayor. Yeah, so thank you for that. The, and I want to recap what we just said, there are additional ordinances that we have drafted yet not adopted. So they're kind of in the process. We have items that are in the code yet not enforced. And then we have interpretations of areas of our code they're called ambiguous. In fact, I think we have a list of those that have been produced and identified. And the ask by the city attorney is to seek direction from city council on moving forward with working on each of these areas and coming back to city council with his advice related to each one of those areas and if I if I if I stated that correctly because what he really said was that when he the city attorney is In code not enforced he he specifically identified that group I Didn't hear him identify the additional ordinances drafted yet not adopted. My ask is that he include those and that he include those interpretation of those ambiguous areas of code. And the reason I'm I'm putting these three together, these three areas is because we need a parking place. There's going to be a point in time when we may want to revisit this depending on how SB 250 is handled on the expiration if it truly expires. But we did this City Council other City Council's have done a lot of work related to those three areas. And if we don't get them in one place and have an opinion from the city attorney, I think we would be missing a real good opportunity. So from my ask, I support the city attorney looking at that and coming back and advising us. We need that advice. He's telling us it's a problem and just how work is being processed by our staff in the community. So I support that, but I want to see if we can get it all together and have it in one place. Thank you. Councillor Mevers-Christman. So for those of us who have been on council for the last several years, we've had lots of past conversations on Senate Bill 250. And one thing I've learned from that is to perk up my years and listen carefully to what's being said and get very, very specific about what we're doing and not doing. The several of the ordinances that were passed but then shall we say, you know, put aside by Senate Bill 250, our term for it, we're very controversial contentious. the ordinances, not all of them, that are, you know, were drafted or begun, but not adopted, also our controversial. And what I want to make sure we avoid, if possible, is actions that fill up this room again with lots of concerned people. So that's, you I guess I'm sending to the city attorney. To me from a legal standpoint with respect to the adopted ordinances this is a no-brainer. The law is very clear. It was clear to me from the first day. I didn't like it, but it was clear that any ordinances that had been passed since the retroactive date were non-void abinitio. That means it doesn't mean they're still in our code and we just aren't forcing it. It means they're gone. And in some day when Senate Bill 250 is no longer effective, this council can start again with those if we wish to in terms of drafting them and discussing them and adopting them if it's our choice. But right now they don't exist. And so I agree with the city attorney that that that to remove any confusion or doubt on the part of anybody's mind as to whether they're on our books or not, they ought to be removed. My, I guess it's fine for our city attorney to do another review. We've already, this council is already determined, albeit with our prior city attorney that these four ordinances are not in compliance with Senate Bill 250. We've already decided that. And we simply, however, having decided that said, they'll stay on our books and not be enforced rather than declaring them no on void of an issue. So if Mr. McConnell proceeds with a new review of this, it will mean that people who are paying attention to these meetings will sit there and say, well, I wonder what he's going to decide. Maybe he's going to decide they are. They are. They don't fail to meet the Senate Bill 250 test. And the same thing will be true with these prospective ordinances. So I just think we have to be eyes wide open in terms of how we do this process and the fact that there are many, many parties out there who will be interested in this in paying attention and we want to do this. If we do go down this road, we should do it openly, clearly, transparently, and expeditiously to get to the end of the process as quickly as we can. I heard you loud and clear. And we've discussed this before. And these interpretations are interpretations of whether they're more burdensome or not. They could be more for resiliency and protecting our community for the health and safety. From some points of view, some points of view are going to be, you know, we already heard you're taking our property rights away. No We're looking out for the betterment of our community and for the state legislature to come in and specifically To us because Collier County doesn't seem to think that 250 is an issue They're continuing to make changes and that may be more burdensome, but they've moved forward and they're doing their job. They're looking at their codes, they're looking at their comp plan. No one takes away the authority of a state statute to review your comp plan and then gives it to a developer or a petitioner's agent to make a comp plan change but your own city can't. I'm sorry. I don't want to get into a debate about it. Major statement very clearly and I get it. But my interpretation is we are to look at the community needs and when you don't have a site plan or if you don't have in your code any regulations you can build lot line to lot line is irresponsible and that's why we started the conversation and again I'm not going to get its interpretations that legislature made. There have been many conversations on really what this means and taking away our home rule authority. I had a conversation this summer, and I don't want to say it myself. I'd like to have these people in the room to have this conversation, because clearly they stood there, bang their hands, and said, you're not going to make these code changes. We're going to go to the state, and we're going to stop you. And that's what they did. Oh, great. And you know what? That's politics. That's not proper planning, and that's not proper management. And it's also an interpretation. And to take this one step forward at the League of Cities discussing this 250, everybody knows it was for Naples. Everyone says it clearly. This was made for Naples. And they did a great job of shutting us down. We can go round and round about it but the attorney has brought up a conflict that we have to address. We've done the work reviewing these items should be public. I mean I hope just like Modi and staff sent out to the developers, you know, they want to start a war is what they told me. They started a war. We don't need to fight. This is not war. And it was also an election time. They knew it. They started the war. And we don't need to be a war. We need to be a community that looks at what we're going to look like in the next 30 years. And this matters a lot. It matters to the voters. So I think we should review these as stated. Hey, I haven't seen these. There might be things in there that we could make better in those four ordinances that maybe things we want to take out that don't make a bit of sense to this group and make in planning. But we can ignore the ordinances that have already for the comment of their in place and when we're not going to implement them. It's just wrong. I mean, I don't want to have a code that we say is there just to have a code. And it's already caused conflict. And this is where our work should be. And we should be doing it with a development group. And not from a war, but for development. It was horrible. And I wish to make sure that we move forward in making doing the right thing for this community. So with that, I don't wanna keep going over whose interpretation is interpretation, but the League of Cities is going to go back and trying to get rescinded or reversion on 250. We have a lobbyist that we can discuss. They can work with the League of Cities. Find out that interpretation that the state would not give us on whether it really was the intention for us not to make these changes and what really burdens some means because they wouldn't answer what burdens some meant. So we have to address these things. We have to address the interpretation staff we're using because right now that's what's creating problems within the community. Yes sir. Cramer? Yep and just one little clarification to be a question for our attorney. In talking to citizens because they call it's going to sunset in 2026, Some have the assumption that sunset means that those things that are on hold go into effect. And I just like to be re-reading what Ray says. That's not the case. Is it, sir, that we got to start from scratch, regardless when it's sunsets? Is that correct? My recommendation, because of the past date, would be it would not sunset. They sunset their void they're off the books anyways You'd have to re adopt. Yeah, that's what I thought thanks But I want to get a consensus on whether we're going to work on these things whether we stick to the I think we have two options then, because leaving them on the books and not enforcing them, respectfully, for my point of view, is not one of the options. So we either remove them and rescind them all, or you allow me an opportunity to go through them, even though I guess it's been done before, but I'm still willing to. Determine what I think is burdensome or not. It's going to be my interpretation. We can maybe be able to leave a portion of it on, remove the other portion, and there may be some that we remove entirely. Those to me are the two options. And opening up public wants to come in and have a discussion? No war? Still it. But this needs to be ASAP. We can't just keep lingering on with this. This needs to become a priority because it's not fair to the development world and it's not fair to staff and it's definitely not proper way to run a city. Well, it seems to me that the stuff we haven't been enforcing, it should be taken, we've got to get rid of that stuff. And then if we want to start over, start over. But. So we'll just discuss it and decide that. Okay. Based on the attorneys look at it, correct? In other words, we're not, we're not going to discuss those items prior to the city attorney taking a look at each item, right? We would let him do his job and advise us and then we discuss it. In a workshop? I don't know. Let's discuss it. Or in a workshop and then we decide that these particular things aren't... Yeah. We could do a workshop. decide that these particular things aren't. Yeah, we could do a workshop. I mean, I can't really get a motion at that point. I can get consensus. Public doesn't really come to workshops. I don't know if it's because it's my- Well, they should. I know it's because my- I'm encouraging staff to include them. We're having conversations like this about the land development code. They should be here. I think we can. I don't mind the two-step approach. I think we need to be realistic about timing, just being honest, because I just got the 40 interpretations too. I mean I can't do all of this by the next time we meet. You know, I mean this is gonna take me weeks to do if I'm gonna do it the right way. So I don't know if there's a workshop in the end of October. I just want to be honest with you all, with timing. Okay, we're gonna start with interpretations or start with the ordinances, that direction would be helpful too. All right. We're going to wrap it up. I have the comment. You're looking for a consensus correct, Donna? I can't support Mr. McConnell spending his time to review these four ordinances again, we did that already. This council, the prior council did this. With the, through the work of our city attorney, we made a determination that these four ordinances were more burdensome and restrictive and not in compliance with Senate Bill 250. I don't like it any more than anybody else does. I don't like the Senate Bill 250. I don't like the fact that we had to do it, but it was what we decided. And I just think it's a, given all the other things we have to do, why are we going through it again? But if a majority obviously would like to do it again, that's your decision, but I can't in good conscious support a redundant process. Barton? I agree with Councilman Chrisman from Stainpoint that again, I wasn't here, but you guys have obviously gone through this and it sounds like ad nauseam. And discuss this with the attorney at the time and you got opinions and your consensus at that point time was that all of these were in violation. They're still sitting there and I get that we need to remove them or do something with them. You guys have already gone, done that work. I don't think we need to go do it again. These four or four resolutions ordinances need to be removed. That's fine. What I don't support is reviewing them, dissecting them and then picking them apart and saying, okay, this is okay. Let's do this part of it, but we're going to get rid of this part. If we're going to do something like that, we need to start from scratch. We need a nice, clean sheet of paper and if we're going to discuss an ordinance and ease beyond the books, we as a council need to discuss that ordinance from A to Z, not start in the middle and pull things apart and say this is good, this is bad, this is incompliance, this isn't incompliance. So I think you guys have already done the work and referenced this, you've already come to the conclusion that it violates the SB250 and we should simply remove them. And again, if we want to start talking about some ordinances that are similar to these, then we can do that at that point in time with the Council with a fresh start. That's my opinion. Thank you. I get where you're coming from. I say we just get rid of them all and do nothing. I mean, I think that's the better thing to do and just say, okay, they win. Because we don't have the guts to make the changes that are needed to make this city in order for resiliency and for the character of this community. I mean, but this is about getting a consensus. I do want to ask so about the... Erica. So on the lot combinations, is there a staff approval for a lot combinations where staff can approve lot combinations or lot splits? Historically lot combinations were handled under the minor subdivision section of the code. However, prior to the amendment to the code, prior to E-N, prior to Senate Bill 250, no, we did bring those to City Council. Okay. So we'll just, I mean, really, I have vice mayor and then we'll wrap it up. Yep, for the city attorney. On these items that are on your memo here, specifically ordinances and resolutions. How do we unwind that? What does that look like? What is the process? What I'm used to is an ordinance. So you would adopt an ordinance rescinding these, but I can work with the clerk since they're already on your books. It may be easy enough to work with Munich code, but for due process purposes, I do think we should. We could do it in the form of one ordinance. Yeah. So for documentation, memorializing it and getting it in one parking space. That's what I would suggest. So thank you. One or another. Thank you. Any other comments? Yes, Council Member Puchanov? I think that, you know, in looking at these, we did remove these based on the Vose Farms opinion and some discussion on this. But I think there are some things in here that we could really take a look at, given the fact that Mr. McConnell may have a different opinion. And specifically, we already updated the comprehensive plan to include the new vision. We had taken that out. Parking requirements for outdoor dining. I think that that could be looked at especially on public property. And the lot combination, I think that was a solution that the developer and we like, because the alternative was, is it's denied. But we were just trying to preserve the identical land that was going to be green space by pushing the adjacent setbacks to the far sides of each property. So I think there's, you know, I think some of these we should take a look at, given and have the courage to do it. And I don't think it would be that harmful as well for, if at all, for the building community to give some more options in some cases. But it also, you know, it takes our responsibility more seriously in that the residents time and time again for the past decade have said that over development is a member one concern. And now, and we're getting, we're worried about pervious space and flooding and, you know, what is it, sunny day flooding. We've got things that are top of mind for the people that we work for. And I think we would be not courageous and not really doing the duty to the people that we work for by not exploring some of these. After this is vetted by Mr. McConnell to see if there is wiggle room in this. And realistically, this HB250 was, after the storm, a lot of these properties were gobbled up by a lot of investors with developers. And they're already built and they're sitting on the market and have been for months now. Because we're getting into slump anything over $5 million is kind of sitting there. So the horses out of the barn on this thing. So that is my, I would like to proceed very surgically with looking at the things that we really could retake a look at. Because I think that Mr. McConaughey is very different. Yeah, I think you're a very different attorney than the Bose firm. And I think you might have a different perspective. Councilwoman, I don't know. So you've offered us two options, right? One interpretation which would be probably keep us out of litigation. One would be a deeper dive that could get a little bit tenuous for us. If we're at the point now where you're seeking some sort of direction, right? Well, my intent is to keep you out of litigation regardless of the option you did. Sure. Well, I don't know who wrote this, but interpretation one was that a conservative approach that would likely result in minimal, if any, litigation and interpretation two would take a little bit deeper dive. I could, my personal personal situation with interpretation 2 was it takes up too much staff time. So if we you're looking for guidance here, my guidance would be that we suggest that we do interpretation 1 and not interpretation 2. Just to clarify, what I did was I included memos from prior city attorneys. I believe you're looking at the vote's firm. But the two options that I articulated, one of them was actually option two for them. The first one was rescinding what's currently on the books. And if we want to start from scratch, then we can do that. Don't know if that changes your answer. I feel like your intent was to still say, we're sinned, but I don't want to speak for you. You know, I'm concerned about staff time to be perfectly honest with you. So maybe the juices and worth of squeeze anywhere here. You know, it's kind of difficult to say. To me, this is just going to suck up a tremendous amount of staff time and interpretation too. And then I'm not sure what we accomplish particularly Okay, man, did I go down the line? Yes, I just want to say I don't think it's given in if we find the good ones and start over. I think it's a more pragmatic approach and a better use of our attorney's time. So I'm not saying they're bad. I'm saying, look, at this point, if they're on there and we're not enforcing them, we need to dump them and let's start from scratch. And then we've got the template. Like this should go pretty quick. Read it twice and let's roll. And I think there are some good ones. I think that's some good ones that are less burdensome. But dissect it. I just just the time required. I think there's so many other things we're doing that are really good. Let's keep that momentum and let's get that done. And then let's bring forward the things that are important. Remember, I can say, hey, this is the great one. Let's roll with this. It's obviously less burdensome. Let's get that done. Okay. So I have your opinion is to rescind them. No. I just asked the question how to rescind them. No, I just asked the question how to rescind them. Councilwoman Petronoff makes a good point. Remember just a little while back, Sarasota flooded dramatically. Our community floods. And I don't know just exactly how much of flooding can be relieved or addressed or we can, it's part of that resiliency conversation with getting into some of what we're doing with our land development. So for me, I go back to my ask and I'm not asking for, he's got the legal opinions, our him meeting, our city attorney he's got the former legal opinions that have been done on each one of these issues if he's looking at it with some input from our city attorney talking to city staff just getting a thought process around does this improve our resiliency if we do x, Y, or Z with one of these ordinances? I don't know, but I would appreciate a fresh look. I don't think rehashing everything in terms of the full legal opinion, but putting a little different eye on it and coming back and making suggestions, there's merit in that. So that's how that's my answer. All right, so we have four people. We're going to resend these just like I'm going to make the request that we resend the interpretations that have been used for the last since 1998 because they're the same thing. They're out there confusing people because people don't understand why certain things are being built and they're not in the code. And then I think that we then decide as we're is on the schedule what our priorities are and we start there. So I think that we have a consensus. I didn't ask you to set up a 1998 one of my interpretations that have been used by council member by staff for interpretations that have been given by other attorneys that this is not, it's, there's 30 of them or more. Mayor, I appreciate you clearing that for me. I just want to make one distinction because I think those two items are significantly different. One of them staff is not enforcing. It's just confusing everyone because it's on the books. Got it. The other 40 staff is enforcing. And I think I need an opportunity to go through those to make sure, because if you just were sent all 40 of those, I don't know enough about the answer. Well, it's not really. Well, who interprets the code? In my opinion, is it a land development code or a code of ordinance? Land development. My opinion is it a land development code or a code of ordinance land development? I Would do default to planning, but I also think legal is involved Okay, well our opinion was from past attorneys is only counsel can interpret the code what so No, no disrespect, but that's what you rely on us for. I'm just showing you the interpretations and the opinions differ. So we can argue about this all day long, the point is proven. So we have a consensus that we will resend these and you're going to look at the interpretations that staff is using that's not in the code. Kind of like the Underground parking garage. Yes, all 40. Perfect. Okay. Any other comments? Okay. Let's move to the next item which is 6C which has been removed for further understanding. Moving to the priorities. Mr. Widerschweer. Thank you, Mayor. I'm going to be very quick here. So wanted to just spend a moment to do a public update on council priorities. You all know that from time to time I will send you an email with a status report on the 16 items that have been identified as council priorities. For the benefit of the public and just as a reminder we have 16 priorities. Nine of these priorities were carried over from the previous council. We went through an exercise this past spring. The kind of narrowed the list. So nine were carried over and seven new priorities were added. A dashboard has been created. It's in your backup today for the benefit of the public to show where each one currently stands. When you take a look at the look ahead schedule that I provide you periodically, you'll see where these items are placed on future agendas. Not all of them are placed on future agendas, but it doesn't mean that something isn't happening behind a scene with staff or the city attorney to try to move these priorities forward. I don't have any specific priorities to review with you. I just wanted to make those general comments and give you an opportunity to ask any questions that you might have, including any concern that you might have regarding items that are lagging that you wish to bring forward. So with that, I'll pause and see what questions you have. Council Member Christmast. Just a comment, thank you Mr. Boussour. But when I reviewed this and then I went back to review the latest update and then I went back and looked at, reminded myself of the process we went through in the spring to get to the 16, you know, I reminded myself that we, and this was, this council, we identified 56 priorities amongst ourselves from which we reduced that numbered 16 tier one or whatever we call them, priorities. And if you look at the most recent update that you sent with the agenda material, one of the 16 is complete at this point. Of course, we know that many of the other 16 are in process some well along, some less well along. My point is simply saying we have already identified a lot of priorities. And it just, I try to force at least myself to remember each time I think of something new or somebody else does that we've got 56 items in the queue, 55. If you take out the one we've completed in effect and every time we come up with something new and additional or somebody sits out there in public comment and tries to add something to our list, we should just remember what we're already saying is important. That's the comment I want to make. Okay, any other comments? Parton and Kramer? And super quick, just that this is helpful because it does not only for the public, but it also for us, it reminds me of what we've already determined is super important to all of us sitting up here and obviously to our community and that's why we had these lists but again it's very very helpful for us to continue to put these lists out in front of not just those of us sitting up here at the table but also the public so that they can see what we're working on for multiple reasons. Number one, they can see how busy we are and how we're actively trying to better put betterment to the community Number one, they can see how busy we are and how we're actively trying to betterment to put betterment to the community. But also so they can see what's on the list because they might be in preparation of giving us grief about not doing something. And it's right there. We know it's important. We are working on it. These things don't happen overnight. You know, the peers are perfect example. I notice that they're on second page and we all like to, you know, we're just completely flabbergasted at that process but nonetheless it's important and we're working on it and we're trying to get it done. So again, I appreciate you putting it out there not only for us to remind us but also remind the public that we're working on it. Cramer? Just to echo that. And this is in addition to the day-to-day running of the city. With the staff that could use a whole bunch of other folks help on them. I mean, that's just what it turns into. The more you want done, the more folks you're going to need to get it done. And I have to, I'm not with petitioners up there many times. And I listen to them and I say, I just, you have to have no. That is not a priority for me. It's just not. And I hate the reality of it. The discipline to say, this is our priorities. We're going to see them through. And there is stuff going to happen on the road. And I also want to say, kudos. This is in addition to when we've had the tropical storm, we've had various flooding events. I mean, it's just time that's getting stolen. And so having said that, looking at what's left, and we're imagining this without a natural disaster, without a public health emergency, or whatever public emergency. And so I say all that to say, we need to stay disciplined and also for our public. Now, our staff is bus and their tail, and there's gonna be some patience required to get to what every all the stuff done that needs done. Thanks. Any other comments? Vice Mayor? Yeah, so I just real quickly. Number three on the list. I just wanted to make sure this is the outdoor dining regulations for potential changes. And it said we've got the second reading date coming up. Now, does that change with our discussion today? Thank you for catching that. After this was published and after this was published we continue to have our conversations about SB 250 and we at the staff level the non legal staff. We were of the opinion, we don't think this is more burdensome. Let's go ahead and bring to pause for a second. And I think kind of built in suspenders approach, we are planning per city attorney's request that we start that process over. Okay. Okay. Okay. KAB, back to council. Let's have a full fully vetted conversation and then bring that item. So when we update this next, we're gonna show the new timeline on the outdoor dining regulations in public right of way. That's what this was regarding. So that's kinda interesting. I don't wanna drill too deep and take up too much time, but so that process will start over. That's the only one of those processes. That was that on our list of the ordinances. So that process has been determined that we need to start over. Well this one just so happens to be on the priority list. Yeah. But with all the ones that were adopted in first reading it was clear that we're rescinding the ones that are on the books, but I just wanted an opportunity to review those. And because first reading happened over a year ago, I think it's only fair that you go to first reading again. All right, I understand. I just, it's just kind of, I've got a process that a little bit outside here. Number seven, complete the land use and building permitting process review and implement changes including to use more technology to improve efficiency. It says here staff will continue working with development community and will do we know what's been done, what has or is being done with the development community. Is there ongoing work you don't have to get in the details but is there something happening? We haven't had any follow-up meetings yet. But we had today was part of this follow-up work. We had a very very substantive conversation about process. We didn't get to talk about what the part, we didn't talk about pages four, five and six of the memo. The member we discussed that we were pretty good. But pages that memo you're referring to, Mayor, we went through that entire presentation and that entire memo back in June. And where we left off was there are things that we can do at the staff level relative to technology, process improvement, and then there are things that will require council changes. There also was a commitment to development community for small group sessions. Mary, you'll remember that we had everybody in the room from contractors to attorneys, and we had made a commitment that as we move through the process, perhaps we're just getting the contractors together, perhaps we're getting other small groups together to keep working together, that's still in front of us. Well, I would recommend that we use the workshops. I mean, that's the public process. Sure. That's bringing the conversation in the public with everybody together. These small little groups that go out, we already saw what happened to that. They ran Mr. Martin out of town. That was a big group. But I mean honestly we need to work together. Sure. And if not, I mean it takes four years to accomplish a task. Thank you Mayor. I'm going to try to move through this. So I think the point is well taken. This is one of the priorities. We're getting through to another storm season. Let's hope we get all through it before we layer on. If we don't get this is very important, right? Because remember those of us who are serving on council who just got on all the complaints from the community about the permitting and planning and all of that process review and all that other stuff. So it's important that we get that priority completed. Number 11, swell reclamation. Do you know if anything's going on with that? I don't have any details on that. I know that it's on the to-do list for public works. My ask is that, and I just picked out six of the 16. My ask is please just have your staff, your direct reports, give you updates. If we're not measuring it, it's not going to get done. And we're saying that these are priorities. Number 12, the Goal Show Boulevard Beach Outfall Project. Folks, I'm proud that that is moving forward. And that is something truly significant. And I think we even have a ribbon cutting at some point coming up. Not quite the ribbon cutting, but ground breaking ceremony. Ground breaking ceremony. Not ribbon cutting. October 15th. We will be advertising that to the public. So, yep, and for the public, the peer rebuilding project is on this list. It's number 14 and it says here, anticipate contract recommendation, either at 918 or 102 council meeting. Do we know? We're working, well, it's not gonna be 918 or 10 to council meeting. Do we know or should we're working well it's not going to be 918 but this is something that is actively happening we have all hands on deck good and that we're hoping that it's going to be 10 to and then my last one that I wanted to call out is number 15 and that's complete the Beach Ends Rebuild Project and it says invitations bid be issued in September Council approval of contract required in the fall of 2024. Everything is still that is still accurate. I don't want to commit to the September I know they're moving parts with final FEMA green light on these projects so that is something that I have staff working on giving me the most up-to-date report I hope to have that before the edit is weak and I'll convey it to you. I use this dashboard report to give me the most up-to-date information please just my ask is to please consider using your direct staff these are priorities we've got to get them over the finish line so we can add something else to the priority and let's keep getting stuff standing agenda item on every staff meeting thank you so much thank you Madam Mayor other comments Mr. Bhutishwar since we do we went over our boards today we kind of found out that CSAB could probably be working on the comprehensive plan part of Parks and Rec. That's in what their scope of work is today. Oh, and the code. One of their responsibilities, okay. Yeah. So can, I mean, if there's someone opposed to that, the CSAB to start working on the, I mean, we haven't delegated anything to them. That's our job is to delegate to them to look at the parks and Recreation piece and the comprehensive plan. Okay. It's simultaneously going with what you're with the scope of work, but it's to be facilitated by the Parks and Rec staff or planning staff through their board. I just I need some. Well, we've done it before the Parks and Rec board did it with the. I wasn't here. I don't know what the process was. So to review this, I just want to get some clarity. So to review this section of our top plan. I think it came up if I could just try to help on this mayor. I think when we were talking about boards and committees earlier, the point was raised that the CSAB might be able to play the role that the PAB is playing on the rest of the comp plan by focusing on the parks and recreation element of the comp plan and working with staff and the consultant in whatever way that's going to occur to be in a lead role on that. Is that a fair statement mayor? Is that what you were? Yeah. So I didn't know about the consultant but they could do the preliminary work of reviewing what's in there and so that they're familiar with it because they haven't been aware of it and if they hopefully I mean that's a public workshop it's going to be announced we can with your new media and communications plan. Hey we're having a workshop at the community services it well advisory board and we're discussing the complaint and the elements of the parks and rec. Okay, so in advance of the elective amendment process. It's part of their duties. Yeah, understand. Oh, okay. I'm just asking about timing. Do we do that outside of this review We're going to do in advance. Is that the request? I don't know what Who makes the regendas? I don't know who assigns them, but we haven't assigned them with anything so yeah I mean you can assign them to look at things of course Okay course. Okay. I think you're good. Okay. Anyone? Yes. Just one item. I don't know where this falls in but I think it's critical and I think we're at a critical point for this and we haven't done it in 10 years is where does getting the concurrency in chapter 48 fall. And all of the service levels and standards around that, is that in part of the- It falls on staff. Is it, is it, because it tells you, you know, what our service levels are to the people that employ us, to our residents on every level. And we are grossly behind on this. And it determines how we are going to grow and shape in the future. And I see it as being part of maybe how we are going to grow and shape in the future. And I see it as being part of maybe, but it's not quite there. It's number six, like an exercise that they would do. And it's not part of the comprehensive plan. It's part of the code of ordinancesances but they go hand in hand together? Well in chapter 46 or 48 requires PAB is sprinkled through the whole review process right before it's provided to you annually. Can't speak on what occurred prior to me being here but we had a conversation, Jay was part of it I think we were on an agreement that we need to pick this back up. It happened annually until roughly 2015, 2016. I called prior city attorneys. No one understood why. So yeah, it just stopped. But we're aware of it. We're working on it. We plan on addressing it. I think it'll be helpful to not only be planning board but the City Council when it talks about concurrency. It's a good practice at the end of the day. So that's all I can really speak on. And this feeds into the traffic study that was kicked off, was expanded, and is it, and now is either being worked on by the supplier or put on holder and limbo but you know we've how much traffic and a certain area handle before you stop either expand the road or or halt development because in here in this concurrency are development orders going forward or not going forward. And traffic is in certain parts of the city and we all know where they are. There are pinch points that are just in limbo as well. So I would say those are big priorities as well. And it even includes population growth and our water supply. And we share our water Expands well into the county that in areas that are super high growth areas Like the Davis triangle and the Mary the big Mary at going in et cetera So I don't know who's that land who's that lands on but this it is a I don't know where it falls in this but certainly it would be one of my 16 priorities that you know one of the cities. It's in the code it should be it should be happening. Okay, but you know so it is not part of our priorities. Well. So it is not part of our priorities. Well, I mean, there are a lot of things that aren't on your priorities. Last, I think Mr. Christmas said 50 something and then there's the data. There's lots of things that are on the to-do list. This is something that we recognize, something that I've discovered, Mr. Maconnell has discovered, a practice that happened many, many years ago. We're looking into it. It's something that we're going to deal with. The reality is this section of the code that we're referring to, the level of service, is outdated. There are references to an agency in the state that doesn't even exist. But something happened 10 years ago that ceased this annual report, this annual review. It doesn't mean that concurrency review doesn't happen. I think Mr. McConnell made that very clear, I think at PAP last week that every project is still reviewed. It has to. We're required to do that. It's this annual reporting process that's outlined in our code of ordinances that we need to look into what happened. But we believe that there is a good best practice here and what form does it take shape going forward? I don't know. What we do know is we have a dated section of our code that needs to be addressed. I think it's as simple as you just letting us know how you're handling it. Absolutely. Thank you. Yep, you're welcome. Complete on this. Okay, so just for me, the item three is coming back to us. So item four and item, you said eight is coming back to us, right? So item four is scheduled for the look ahead? Yes, October 14th. Thank you. That is still the date. And we are not looking at three coming back. Yeah, three is the item that we will start from the beginning. The ordinance is written. Oh, that's right. Okay. Thank you. And then for resiliency, is that just number nine and number 10? Number 10. Yes. So number 10, we owe you all an update on year one actions. January 2025 is when we had decided that it would be a good time to let a bunch of things happen. Remember, you all approved the list of projects for this upcoming year. Actually, one of those projects is the business case for resiliency. It's on your agenda for Wednesday. And then there's a number of additional things. Hopefully we'll be able to provide a status report to you in January. One of the things I think is a more critical conversation is how do we move forward now relative to the multi-basin studies? What's the next step and what's that timeline look like? Also by January, I think we'll be ready to kind of describe how we've organized our staffing internally to be able to move these projects forward. So that'll be in January at that workshop of the new year. Okay and and then number 16 that one's scheduled correct? Yes I don't recall the date off the top of my head but we believe we have settled on a date it's in November I believe. Let me just confirm for the benefit of the public. I think November was seventh was the joint meeting. Yes correct. But Commissioner Rezanski emailed us last week and asked about a presentation. On the noise study? No, excuse me, not noise study on the relocation. Okay. Yes. One of the things that I strongly recommend you do and we'll have it on a, either on a council agenda item or on a workshop between now and November 7th is to review a variety of matters and council's position on these matters including the relocation. So you all will do a bit of advance work in preparation for the joint meeting. So we know where council as a whole stands on certain issues. Okay. And with that we're going to go or is everyone complete with the priorities? Yes? Okay. Just to tag on to that though. You know as far as the site plan process in the review. So the NAA's expansion of the jets and the hangers, council, it doesn't come to council. It only goes to staff and to DRB. And I find that very interesting that process that DRB would be approving those and it not coming to council. Because the interpretation was that we approved it on a master plan or utilization plan so there was no reason to bring it before council that it would just go straight to DRB and final DRB. So it's just sometimes these processes are not quite so transparent even to us unless you're watching all of these committees and understanding who's actually reviewing what. So that takes us to public comment. Okay. Okay. Communications Correspondence. Cramer. Okay. Petra. Just one thing a reminder to all of us that Judge Martin is having the 25th anniversary tomorrow at 2 p.m. at the County Courthouse. I think it's 2 a to celebrate the adult felony drug court program. And this is well time that it's this month is national recovery month. So if you want to be there, is that 2 o'clock tomorrow? We usually do a proclamation for a drug court. I didn't realize they do it differently. And this is just a celebration of the 25th anniversary of it. And they're going to have a speaker there at the county courthouse. So it would be, you know, they've invited all of us. It would be great if you have any free time. I'm going to be there. And I think it's a great program. Thank you. Thank you. Vice mayor. I have nothing. Thank you. Christian? Yes. I have one item. I want to raise. We were copied yesterday on an email to Mr. Boudre-Schwar from a gentleman, Eric Jungworth, who is a consultant I gather and consultant to the Gulf Shore Playhouse, working on the project and raising a number of questions regarding the approvals that are needed by the playhouse in order to secure their temporary certificate of occupancy and allow there to be public access to the playhouse, both for the unveiling and start of the season on November one unveiling and and started the season on November one unveiling on the 17th. And I know Mr. Boussor just from checking my phone today that you responded this morning. And but I thought giving the timing, I thought it was important we talk about this because you read through the email from the Gulf Shore Playhouse folks and there's a real concern there given that I have a real concern. Let me put it that way regarding the number of items that staff is saying needs to be completed. A lot of them are things that, you know, I'm sort of scratching my head as to say in terms of thinking why on September 16th are we still discussing these things back and forth. And I think it's important that we, in the spirit of this partnership that we have, that we get these things resolved quickly so that the playhouse knows that they're gonna be able to move forward as planned. And again, I know you responded this morning. I haven't really had a chance to digest it fully, but perhaps you'd like to comment. Yes, indeed. Happy to comment during the meeting today as I do a lot. There's things happening behind the scenes. I'm communicating with staff. Still running a city even during the meeting here. And I can assure you that our team has been communicating and I had a meeting scheduled at 4 today with them anticipating an earlier finish silly me but I will be meeting with staff tomorrow to understand what must be done by October 16th or 17th and what can be done after that day to satisfy the final CO. So there's a whole list of things that I'm not dealing with on a day-to-day basis, but we have staff members who are dealing with them. I too was surprised at the long list of things that are still pending. And my understanding is some of these things have been on a list for a bit of time now, but they haven't been resolved for one reason or another, and perhaps there may be some things that are newer that are on the list. We will sort through all of that. Our commitment to the playhouse is that we are partners. We're going to work together here to make sure that we can get to opening day safely and then get the final CO at a later date. And then of course, we're still building a garage. There's still decisions that need to be made on first relative to upgrades to the public realm versus payment and alloo. We've had some conversation who's responsible, Jason developer, the city. There are still some open questions that we need to get answered with council. So we will sort through the list and we'll put them into two categories to make sure we can address the things that need to get addressed for opening day and then the others will come afterwards. Well speaking for myself, you know, I think this is what you're getting at, you know, anything that involves life safety issues has to be dealt with. Yes. And they acknowledge that. And there's no nuance on that. But it also seems to me, I mean, this is a new building. And just like any of us who have ever had an experience with constructing a new home, you close and you move in with a punch list. And things get done over time, subsequent to the move in, things that are not life-safety related and can be dealt with within a reasonable amount of time, understanding that this just comes with a territory with new construction. So I would just encourage you to and your team to think about it in that kind of a way. Absolutely. Thank you. Yes, my condolences. I'm Robert. Real quick, I'm just going to reiterate sentiment and that is and I I glance that you're in some Scandier email and I saw that you you're making a priority of it and I would just simply reiterate that I appreciate you making a priority of it and to obviously put emphasis on on public safety and those certain items that have to be have to be done in order to let the public in there But let's really try hard to get that done. Thanks Jay Councilmember Pennum a triple play Let's separate those from things that can be Addressed in another time, you know it's an anxious time for them. They are our partners. Let's be a good partner. Thank you. I'll just make it a home run. I agree. But not just that there are partners. I think anybody in the city deserves the same amount of support and processes that maybe this is something we should look at, but we seem to have that at the last minute. You know, there's this or that, and I hope that you will find if there is something we could have done better at this, I think think in conclusion. In the beginning, I will say Mr. McConnell, this is something that we discussed and Council needs to really talk about is when you do a project and you've asked them to do, this is their part, payment of lieu. These are the things in the details that should be worked out because there's given take in a development order and these things are being done at the end and I didn't even know that was part of the development order. That they had to do the first avenue changes in the crosswalk and I didn't know there was a payment in lieu of. So I don't know if we can make that better for people and when we're working on not just that project but others but I'd like for you to look into it together. Love to. Chalk that up to the list. Okay, well, I just will say thank you again to the charter members who worked on trying all summer long to bring back what we did today. And still more to do, patients is needed. And I just want to say thank you to Mr. McConnell for noticing those things legally that are in conflict. I appreciate your effort in that. So more to come, always smiles, thank you. And with that, council, we are adjourned until Wednesday. you you you you you you you you you you