you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you 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 regular meeting September 4th, 2024. I'm clerk please call the roll. here here here here here here here here here here here here today we are honored to have the Reverend Everett Cleason from Trinity by the Cove and then Reverend Vanessa Fletcher So if you'll stand for the invocation followed by the pledge. Let us pray. Almighty God, teach our people to rely on your strength and to accept their responsibilities to their fellow citizens. But they may elect trustworthy leaders and make wise decisions for the well-being of our society. Then we may serve you faithfully in our generation and honor your holy name. And we pray you, send down upon those who hold office in this city, the spirit of wisdom, charity, and justice, that with steadfast purpose, they may faithfully serve in their offices to promote the well-being of all people. You offer these our conditions and desires for your holy name. Amen. Please join me in the pleasure of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God in indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. Thank you, Father. It was Ms. Fledger here. No. Okay, that takes us to setting the agenda, Mr. Bluterswar. Thank you, Mayor. Good morning, Mayor and Council guests. A couple of changes to the agenda and one reminder. A request was received via email last night for Mr. Christopher Schookeart, President of JCS Realty Group, withdrawing a new special event request for the October Fest Festival, which was tentatively scheduled for October 5th. This item is listed on the consent agenda as item 8B1. Staff is requesting your approval to accept the withdrawal request and remove this item from the consent agenda. Also, staff is requesting that you pull item 8c, which is an announcement for the need of an executive session on September 18th. So we are hoping that you approve that so this announcement can be read out loud into the record under item 8A on the regular agenda. Lastly, the reminder is we are hopeful to be completed with this regular meeting well in advance of the special City Council meeting that is scheduled for 505 this evening to hold the first public hearing on the FY 2425 budget. With that mayor, that is all I have. Thank you. Councillor Meade. The other changes to the agenda. Councillor Neill, I have a question. Just a clarification, Mr. Buttigieg, you were recommending that 8C be withdrawn or moved. Moved. 8c moved to the regular agenda under the items pulled from the agenda. We'd like to read this announcement. I understand. Okay. Thank you. Well with that if there are no other changes I'll move for approval of the agenda with the removal of 8. Withdraw, the removal of 8B1 and the move of 8C to item 10 and the regular agenda. Second. I have a motion by Council Member Christmast and second by Council Member Petronoff. All in favour? Or signed by aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed? Thank you. It passes unanimously. We'll go to item four announcements. Prior to that, I will read a statement to you as your mayor. I take my responsibilities for the public role very seriously. I wanted to speak directly to the public on the incident that occurred last week. I have waited until now to address you. I believe the public deserves transparency regarding this issue. I have full remorse. The toll that this has taken on my family cannot easily be put into words. I am profoundly sorry for the impact that it has had on my friends, my family, my constituents, the city staff and the public. I am humbled by the outpouring of support that I have had and received from the community and I'm grateful for the understanding, compassion and kindness. It is my intention to reflect and address this on a personal level and I am determined to earn back your trust and continue to serve. This community with integrity, dedication you deserve. I have demonstrated 12 years of public service to a great city of Naples. I hope you accept my apology. We're moving on to item four. And that's do the right thing. Master Officer Sean Phillips. Good morning, everyone. I am Master Officer Sean Phillips, the city of Naples community. My name is Sean Phillips. Good morning, everyone. I am Master Officer Sean Phillips of the city of Naples community policing division. I am Master Officer Sean Phillips of the City and Naples Community Police and Division. I'd like to welcome everyone to the first ceremony of our 2024-2025 school year. And I'd like to start off by a few words from our chairman of the board, Mr. Patrick O'Connor. Thank you and good morning mayor and city council. I wanted to thank you for allowing this program. This starts out 12th year of the program. We've recognized 226 young adults in our community for doing the right thing and it's just a beautiful program. The community needs this. I just want to say, deep in my bottom my heart, thank you for allowing this to happen. Thanks. Everything you see before us today is made possible by the generosity of our sponsors throughout the community. At this time I'd like to bring up Ms. Parisa Bonja of Yoga 6. Parisa's business, Yoga 6, has not even opened within the city of Naples yet, but she's I'm going to go to the office. Parisa's business, yoga six, has not even opened within the city of Naples yet, but she's made quite an impact already. She sponsored our first yoga with a badge last week over at the Go Mess Center, which is interesting. We had a lot of fun. And when she found out about our do the right thing program, she said, how can I help? So she'll be offering free yoga classes to our recipients today. Boris on behalf of the city enables. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you so much. I appreciate it. So honored. Both our recipients today are from Gulfview Middle School. I'd like to bring up our first, Frankie D'Aluca. You can stand right there. It was Frankie's first day at Gulfview Middle School, and while walking through the cafeteria, she saw some cash on the floor, and she immediately picked it up and brought it to one of the counselors. And her main concern was that there was a child that would not be able to eat lunch that day because they had lost their money. Now frankly, when we speak about integrity, it's a phenomenal thing because it's easy to do things when people are looking, right? When people are looking and you just found that money, that truly embraces integrity. So thank you for doing the right thing. We appreciate it. We have some gifts here for you. Next up is Miss Lamayam Martin. When we got this nomination, I read it. It's one of the more difficult nominations to read. Lamaya, one of our summer youth camps, was speaking with another camper, and she was told that that camper had intentions of harming themselves that evening. Lamaya wasted no time, notified a counselor, those counselors notified the Naples Police Department, and we were able to get that child to help they needed. Lamaya, nobody was surprised when they saw your name attached to this. Lamaya is truly an outstanding member of our community. Pretty much every event we have, you will see Lamaya there, right? So Lamaya, you did an amazing job. Thank you for doing the right thing, and we have from D.S. for you as well. Applause Before we end, I'd like to thank Commissioner Cowell for his never ending support of our program and as well as Ms. Erin Deva, who's came from Senator Rick Scott's office and she'll be presenting letters of appreciation to our recipients. But before we end, Mayor would be okay if we came to the bench and got a photo. Okay, guys. Thank you again and we will see you in November. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'll take that to the speaker. Yes, thank you, Mayor. Mr. Mayor, why don't you do the introductions? We have a very special presentation today from the Rotary Club of Naples. Good morning, Chad Mayor, Parks from the Rotary Club of Naples. Good morning, Chad Merritt, Parks Recreation Facilities Director. I have members of the Rotary Club who actually have a presentation, so I don't wanna take away from their presentation, so I'd like to invite them up so they can introduce themselves and present their extraordinary gift. Thank you, Chad. Good morning, Mayor Heitman, members of the City Council. My name is Phil Vergalla, and the past president. With the Rotary Club of Naples, I'm here with our current president, Ashley Kelly, in our president-like Cathy Hedrick. The Rotary Club of Naples was chartered in 1951. For the past 73 years, our mission has been driven by the need to do good for our community to city of Naples. Most recently we replaced the life jackets at Lauderdale Park after there was destroyed by Hurricane Ian. Last year we got a chance to partner with the city at their Centennial event to raise money to rebuild the pier and when we heard they were going to redo Cambier Parks playground we want to get involved. So we raised some money and we're here to present the city with a check of $15,000 to help kick off the Rebuilding of Cambria Parkes playground. So Dr. Raghalla One Rotarian to another the vice mayor will receive that check and thank you. Thank you for all you do for our city and our community We really appreciate your... Thank you Mayor. Club. Let's get a photo of you. Thank you. I'm sure you endorsed the guy that said yes. Yes. Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you. Yeah, for the thank you, Dr. Regala. Every time, almost every year, the Rotary Club is before us. And many in the community know the role that the Rotary Club plays. But I wanted to speak just quickly for just a minute about my experience with the Rotary Club, and especially my relationship and experience with the past president, Dr. Phil Regala. I've had the opportunity to travel to Haiti with Dr. Regala into some of the most remote regions. And I wondered why he would be bringing me along. And then I figured it all out one day. We were up in the mountains and my role was to clean all the surgical instruments. And basically you have to cook those and make sure that they're clean for the next setup. Dr. Ruggala is just an amazing orthopedic surgeon. The things that he can do in the operating room are simply fantastic. I'm not going to go into the details. But one day he came out and he said, Terry, we've got a problem in OR, and we need a piece of this stainless metal to be cut shorter. It's too long to put in the leg and fix the problem that we're trying to fix in there. So I had to get cleaned up, get out of that room, cooking the utensils to make sure that they're sterilized, go out into a community that couldn't even speak the same language that I spoke, and find an automobile repair shop that could cut that surgical steel and polish it and get it ready to be sterilized and placed in the body of somebody who really needed it. It's just Dr. Regala to this day I'm touched by the hundreds of people that you've helped heal. And to the Rotary Club members that are here supporting Dr. Regala and all those that are not here, my sincere thanks for making those kind of things happen. Thank you, Dr. Rogelle. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Thank you to the Rotary Club for all you do. That takes us to item 4C. This food is far. Thank you, Mayor. I've got a little special presentation that I'd like to make today. As many of you know, we had three new elected officials join the day this spring Mr. Barton Mr. Kramer and Ms. Peneman and in preparation for our new elective officials our staff worked together to develop a formal onboarding program that we referred to as the City Council welcome tour. And this program was designed to ensure that newly elected City Council members understood the scope of City Operations, thus enabling them to make more informed decisions, and also to foster collaboration between City Departments, our staff, and promoting a holistic approach to addressing the community needs. Shortly after the swearing in of council members Barton Kramer and Penammon are newly elected officials enthusiastically participated in an immersive onboarding experience. I'd like to give a special thanks to council member Petrinoff who volunteered to test out the program prior to the arrival of our new Council members. This comprehensive initiative encompassed hands-on tours and interactive meetings with each city department director and staff aimed at providing insights into day-to-day operations, challenges, and ultimately fostering meaningful connections with our staff and with the community. The onboarding schedule included a total of 16 different meetings and tours and one online class. The duration of each range from an hour to a full day with departments. The onboarding began with an overview of city governance, with the city's charter official, including myself, the city clerk, and the city attorney. So I want to spend a second to let you all know what we put them through. So of course they met with the City Manager's Office and we talked a lot about our organizational structure, our form of government, our City Council manager form of government which is the superior form of government, local government in the United States. And also talked about administrative functions, strategic planning, etc. City Attorney's Office spent time reviewing rules of procedure. How you function as elected officials. There's lots of rules when you're a city council member and elected official. They have to learn about the legislative process, the quasi-judicial process. They have to understand due process, Florida's sunshine laws, public records laws. There's lots of rules that they must follow. In the clerk's office, the clerk developed a new handbook and to do staff and talked about record keeping. They spend time with our community redevelopment agency, understanding the role of that team. They spend time with code compliance, understanding how our staff regulates and enforces our many, many city codes. They spend time with finance and purchasing to understand how municipal budgets are developed, how we monitor our budget, and how we try very hard to spend every single taxpayer dollar as wisely as we can. They spend time with human resources to understand the life cycle of an employee from recruitment all the way to retirement and what happens in between. They spend time with their IT department, understanding all of the things that we do behind the scenes to ensure cybersecurity and modern day operations, leveraging technology. They spend time with their planning department, they spend time in the field with their building department, with inspectors to see how they do their jobs in the field to make sure things are built according to code and are built safely. They spent time with the Fire Rescue Department. Some of them may have even put on a helmet and bunker gear. They spend time with their police department. They did ride-alongs. I think one or two of you might even have gone out on the boat. I'm not sure. The Parks Recreation Facilities Department, they spent a day with them. They spent the day with the Public Works Department. They toured the wastewater treatment plant without a mask. It didn't smell too bad. And of course they completed their ethics training. I wanna just go through a quick slideshow here. Just show our elected officials when they were out in the field. I hear Zifoto with our clerk, Pat Rambosk. Here's some time that they spent Mr. Barton specifically with finance and purchasing, meeting some members of our team. In the planning department, that looked very academic in there. Spent time talking about the comp plan or land use codes and kind of how things move from an idea to a final approval Here's a field photo building department. I'm not sure what building that is it might be the Naples Oh, Beach hotel. Okay Beautiful view Here's some more out in the field. Miss Penamint, I don't know if you passed that inspection, or but moving on here, more time out in the field with the building department. I'm not sure who that is. Oh, council member Barton. Here's some time with police department. Mrs. Peniman. This is a view of what I call her, kind of our live crime center. A lot of technology in this room. And this provides us a lot of eyes and ears on the community with that having to physically be out in the community. A lot of intelligence, a lot of work is done in this room. Here's a little couple of snapshots of our parks and wreck staff out in the field. This is one of the cleanest waste water treatment plants I've ever seen. I think you all can attest to the care that our plant's superintendents and their staff both at the wastewater plant and water plant take care of these facilities. Don't let that brown water fool you. There's a couple more photos here learning about the treatment process. A couple more. Beth Beth were you the only one that went there? And with that I just wanted to thank you all for being good sports. We're hopeful that this process was helpful to you and getting you prepared to serve our community. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Yes, Council Member Barton. Just to quickly add to that, yes, it was an incredible experience and I'm anything but a politician so this was a very much a learning experience for me and to give me that type of basis to grow from was incredibly appropriate and helpful. And I also explained to Jay about halfway through that it was too late that the election results were in and he couldn't scare me off So I just continued to grind through the process and got it done But I really do appreciate you putting it up putting it together for us because it really was helpful. Thank you Thank you and thank you Councilmember Kramer. I just want to add I Six months before even announced that I was running. I thought I did a deep dive Talked everybody I, not just here, but friends that I have in municipalities, and that have served in various offices and former members, and I, I'm shocked at how little I knew. Stunned. And this is a necessity. So, Jay, beyond being, it's great opportunity. It's acting necessity for anybody that sits up here. And what you'll find is you get immersed in a culture of high achievers. And if you're mediocre, you stick out like a sore thumb in our city staff. So, Crude House to Jay and his crew and the high standards and the high accountability they have, we're very fortunate and have the best in the business here. So thank you. If I could. As a returning, I have to tell you that the experience before was they threw you in the pond and you sunk or swam. It was truly that way. Figured it out for yourself. We weren't exactly sure who the people were that were speaking. So it was quite a tough introduction, quite frankly, into a very new job. So I can say, unequivocally and unabashedly. That was the best experience I've ever had in public service. And I thank you very much. Your perspicacity relative to that is brilliant. So thank you very much. So Mr. Bitterschwar, that is a testament to your leadership and your staff for their commitment and giving their time to the new council members and thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Mayor. I would be remiss if I didn't thank the team. This was a lot of effort to pull this together. In addition to all the day to day that has to happen. So thank you to the team for all your efforts and thank you. That now takes us to item 4D, Commissioner Coal. Good morning and welcome. Good morning there. Good morning, Council. Good morning, citizens and April's. I came today kind of it's been a little time we haven't been around and I haven't a chance to address you guys in a few months in the summer but there was a few subjects that I think you wanted me to shed some light on moving forward for the record and county commissioner district four Daniel co-wall call here. I think the first subject that we wanted to shed a little light on is the people are asking and are interested in progress of what's going on with the many triangle projects. You know, the known as the Metropolitan which sits between Davis and US 41 East, Tammy and Michelle East. I got some information and I'll share it with the board or the council. We know the Ascent is the building that we all see right now. It's pretty much underway and Ascent is basically a 270 resident unit and there's a 6,200 square foot restaurant that's going to be on site. Development plan has been approved since 2022 and the building is under construction based on conversations with the developer. They are looking for a temporary certificate of occupants within the next 60 days. And then of course the Ellington which you see on the map is to the very end of the corner where the two roads come together. Ellington is a 24 resident condo building with 125 room hotel within it. There's going to be a 5,100 square foot restaurant. The site development plan has not has been approved since 2020 but as of this time they have not applied for a building permit for that particular area. Aurora, as you can see, is sits closer to Davis Boulevard section Probably in the middle area of the triangle That is a 56 residents unit of three floors of parking with retail on the first floor and a site development plan has been approved since 2023 the building permit has not yet been issued but in in a close to being able to be approved, I would expect construction to start within the next couple of months, but we're not probably looking for at least one to two years out on any kind of completion on that. And then of course, on the lower right hand corner on the screen, they just have referred to it as lot three. So these are four areas of the triangle that have been approved for construction. There's no plans have been submitted yet for lot three. This was intended to be a last portion of development according to the original PUD. So with that, I would just like to draw some attention that I noticed myself and I brought it up. You know, I was not part of this project when I got approved back in the day. I wasn't elected yet. But I did notice I was driving down Davis Boulevard back in July. And I noticed there was some black lines all over the building and I told myself, my god, looks like the concrete's cracking. It looks like there's going to be an issue with the, or something going on. And then a few weeks later, I started seeing this paint go up and I'll quote a person that emailed me and said, it looked like a Kleenex box. I mean, it's close to description, I could give it, right? He kind of hit the nail on the head. So knowing that we're pretty much a pretty conservative community and seeing the colors and the palette that was up, I started asking questions and let them be whole that this was not. This was a submitted piece of artwork, but it was not approved. There is a version that was approved, and that was actually this first picture you see. So you can see the permit issued to date, 113, 2022. So this is that, this is basically a staff approval, and this is what was approved with the plans for the site. I believe the developer was notified of that. And that now I believe what's gonna happen is they're gonna appeal this to the Board of County commissioners. I think they don't want to go back and change it. Now with that being said, knowing that this is more likely coming forward to board accounting commissioners, and this being in district four, my district, and so I put out last week, I want to say like Wednesday or Thursday, email to my email thread in my newsletter, basically asking the public what their thoughts were. And in a short time, as of yesterday, we've got some pretty good responses. There was, came back, and about 79.4% would like them to go back to the original approved artwork, and there was a 20.6% that was okay with it. But a majority of the people, besides the look of what's there, the majority of them were just basically saying that when somebody has rules, they should follow the rules. And if we let people get away with this and just a pill it later, we set up precedents. And I was surprised the citizens stood strong on that. And they felt that, and then, of course, the artwork being a little bit more subdued and kind of blends into the background of the building. But so that's where we're at with that. So I'm sure I'm going to hear this officially. And that's why I wanted to put it out to the public to make sure I got their input, especially in a district. It has to live around it, drive past it every day. So that was pretty much where I'm at. Now, you have any questions reference to this particular project? I'll try to answer something. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for paying attention to the details because people were wondering what happened and what those changes were. So I thank you for looking into that and finding out that. I have Vice Mayor and then Council Member Petrino. Thank you, Commissioner. I commend you on the mural correction, the attempts to correct it. And I hope that that works out in the way that you had mentioned, that it goes back to what I believe is a very attractive, muted, more of a muted depiction than what's currently been developed. The property I understand that you were not in office as this thing started taking shape. Of course, from my perspective, it's you look at Central Park in New York City and you see a beautiful space and then what do you see on the edges of it? You see huge development, towering buildings, and on the outside of Naples, this right at our border, this is what this feels like. So, just two quick questions. In your opinion, when the property is built out. Will it reduce traffic intensity, or will it be something else than a reduction? Will we see intensity and traffic? Well, I think just by the nature of adding businesses and things to basically a blighted piece of property is sat there for 20 years empty. I mean, there's gonna be an uptick in traffic. But through the studies and through, you know, like I said before, I think I said before this council that, you know, the 41 is a state road, that portion of Davis is a state road. So the Florida state has their own standards on density of traffic. Like, I think they operated a class D where like you use the city operated a class B, know you want a more reduced the county overall operates at a class C so they have different gradings and what's allowable not allowable but you know in reality in reality the state is fine with that stress and that's the way I have to deal with because we don't have jurisdiction over it and you know when they got approved that was part of our package. Yeah maybe maybe between us we can influence the state in a little different way. As you look at the project and you think about the practical traffic patterns if you're heading to Naples which a lot of these folks will be they're going to make a right hand turn on 41 because if they make a right hand turn on 41, because if they make a right hand turn on Davis, they're gonna have to go down there close to, I don't know, somewhere close to seed the table and make a U-turn. And so there's gonna be a line Q-in in my opinion. It's just gonna be rather difficult and unfortunate. The other matter that the community is interested in is the impact on storm water, has appropriate planning been put in place that this will not contribute to storm water flooding in that area. And that's a good question because I have actually asked that in the past myself, you know, just by the nature of how much permaul property we're covering with concrete and asphalt. And when staff came back to me and storming the county stormwater people in the state, basically they're holding them to a higher standard with containment cells within the property that can withstand like they have a have a certain, like, estimated time, like a storm, like, say, a 25-year storm or whatever, the amount of money, the amount of water that can be dumped in a certain amount of time, that will be held on property in these underground sisterns, filtered, when the water, the settlement, settle on these silt systems, they do, they did have to accommodate a system to get it over to our retention pond over the end of France, not for N. Linwood in that area. So that will take the water from this particular project. Now that's unique to this particular project because it sits in the center of those two streets. You know, they have the ability to go back that way to the main retention point. But other projects just let you know going on the outskirts, the northern side of Davis, or say the east western side of 41, they don't have that same luxury unless it was a gravity flow storm systems. And along 41 the state controls that gravity flow and what goes into that system. And that runs down into our basically to the bay eventually. Yes. It ends up that way. So it's not retained any long periods of time like the other side of the street is. So just being said that they have confidence that the water will be retained to that property for the time being that it would require them to slowly release it back to the retention. So I have proofs in the pudding, but they say it's engineered properly and that's the only way they approved it was that they had to have that higher standard. Well, thank you for that. And I hope that the folks in Sarasota County, you know, Sarasota just had tremendous amount of flooding. And whether right or wrong, they attribute it to development, intense development, sort of what's like going on on this property here. So I hope that, as you say, the proof is in the pudding, when it really comes to that point that we're able to look at this project and say that this is a demonstration on how to do it properly. I agree, I hope that's the direction everybody's in the process. Yeah, how to do it properly. I agree. I hope that's the direction. Everybody's going to be in the process. Yeah, let's hope it is. Thank you. Now there was a few other subjects. I think there was some interest in from the, unless there's more questions. I do. I have petronovs. I'm sorry. That's OK. Thank you for coming today. I really appreciate it. A couple things, I wanted to applaud you for doing a survey to your constituents. I think that's, we don't often take advantage of that tool, but that's a really good data point to, you know, check the pulse of what people want. I even heard comments about that mural in town. And the Kleenex box, I think, was right on. I also, you know, I'm happy that you are sticking to your guns and that the citizenry has said, we have rules. We have rules to follow and you have to stick to them. And I hope the other commissioners follow suit on that. I don't know how they mistaken a flowery painting when it should have been sort of a geometric kind of design. I'll just touch it because I think what happened, there was several arts submitted. This was one of them, but it was an unapproved one. And I think when they developed their initial website with their artists' renditions, if you look at their initial website, this painting is on the building. So I think at some point there was a loss communication, either in the construction work, the crew that was there, there was a commission to do the painting. I don't know if they just went through a website. All that's the one we're supposed to do. I don't know, you know, I don't know the exact answer on that. But, you know, life's about choices. You know, you make choices, we have to like sometimes, you know, pass up if that's what happened and they didn't really pay attention and say, you know, what was the approved law and looked at the plans or something and, you know, it is what it is. Well, we are a law and order, you know, especially down here, more of a law and order kind of society to have their roles and we should follow them and if we don't, they should be made to follow them and there should be consequences. So I'm really glad about that. This whole development really, I am speaking with lots and lots of constituencies. This is the model in town of what people don't like about redevelopment. When you ask them what is over building, they point to this Davis triangle and say this is it. And I am very worried about traffic just the way that the meetings are flowing and going east on Davis and how, you know, if you're turning out of there, how you are going to turn around and get back to the 41. Also, a little bit gives me pause in that this is a PUD, but I believe this is a CRA, is this a, a redid, an area of where, all along Davis, that, I'm sure. Yeah, yes. It falls within the two CRA, part of the Bay Shore CRA and the Triangle CRA. So I'm wondering what the vision is because Davis is a long road. Will we see a replication of these very large, very dense, very intense buildings, both sides of the road all the way down? And do they have the right to be able to build that high? I think I've been quoted in the past or I've made this statement before that this was a unique situation from what I investigated to find out how this all came about. This property was purchased by the county. It was an extremely belighted property. It had several empty businesses there for 20 to come with three decades. That we had a lot of homeless, we had a lot of drug use. It wasn't a great place, as I say. It was sitting so close to the city of Naples. Well, when the county obtained the property, we don't wanna hang on the property like this because it's not our business, it's a government. So we entertained the selling it. And the problem was when we were trying to sell it, people had to look at their investment, the return on investment. And if it was worth it to come in and develop it, understanders that are C4, let's say 75 foot by right build, are C4 property. They couldn't find the numbers or they couldn't get whatever for financing to make it work. So I think basically they deduce the deal up a little bit to get investors willing to come in to take this particular portion of the triangle. This doesn't include the whole triangle, all it is airport. So this had a special PUD with the density and heights to basically get investors willing to invest their money and take it off to people's hands. So the people owned it and it was their cash dollars paying to maintain it. So that was kind of like how the deal came about from my studying the history of how it came about. But just to let you know that the regular, the CRA, there's a height-res resist on a lot of commercial properties is right around 59 feet. So that's kind of an overlay within the CRA and some of these commercial lots that you're referring to has moved along these roadways. And I'll get into another project and I think you guys are some interest in as the JW Mary-O. Unless you don't have any more questions. Just one more question. And that is on the traffic study that was done for this particular development and in general in the county. Do you as normal course of city business take the word of the petitioners experts, like traffic experts, that say this is not going to be a problem. Or do you do, like some cities do, up north where they take money into escrow and then interface directly with a traffic study and make it 100% unbiased as city. Yeah, I can't speak directly, like I said, I wasn't involved in the nitty-gritty of this particular project or behind the scenes, but I can say that I know that the state is mandating a designated turn lane. Certain things like that, two 41 to be changed for this particular project. It wasn't gonna just stay the way it is and try to dump the traffic out there. They are going to have a designated turn lane going in and out, certain things like that. If you already been on Davis, they've already improved the left turn on Davis. They cut that out, put a median in there. And that, I don't know if that entrance, the main entrance program be out on 41, and I'm going to be the one that's most used. The only question that was answered was when you are approving, the planning board is approving development. Do they use studies like say for example a traffic study that they commission and do independently and the developer pays for it out of some escrow account that is set up in the city. Or does the developer really drive that traffic study and you submit it as or the planning department takes that study as the word? Well, yeah, the developer usually has tasks to pay for those upfront when they apply for their zoning and before they go to the planning commission and then before it comes before us. Do we take it? I mean, we require them to have a reputable engineering firm due to study. We're not going to just accept somebody that we don't know or somebody doesn't have a reputation that does it properly. Or there's some things that we tweaked. Or some things the county can do on their own, you know, with traffic count, things like that, you know, go out and we have done that in the past. We have put out the counters, you know, don't have traffic times and the slower times and compare how much difference there is. We have done that just on our own, you know. But typically, you know, they have a reputation also. These engineering firms, the duty studies. And if they're always wrong, and more likely they're never gonna get work anymore. So I have to say that anything I've been involved in so far, that I've been in commission for two years. And I think I've seen maybe a few foundations so far get built. Because nothing moves fast. Things that I've been part of approving. Now, will we know when those projects are done, will we check and double check? Sure, we will. But as far as I know, they've been in a business a lot longer than I have. And as far as I can tell, they're pretty accurate. They've been pretty accurate in the past. And I'm hoping in the future, they're pretty accurate with the studies. Can you show me? People understand residential properties are probably your lowest traffic cost. Because people don't come and go like a shopping plaza, like a publics would draw. A publics is non-stop in and out, in and out, in and out. For the time it's open. For morning till night. Where residential properties usually you get there, you're there. You leave once a day or you leave, maybe you might not even leave for two days. Because I think the White Deadies projects as they put their restaurants or clubs, the things all within the property itself. So people don't have to always leave all the time. They want to make this look, they want to have the same quality or restaurants and these buildings that you do on Fifth Avenue. Commissioner, I'll just say that it's one thing I think to Petronov's comments or questions is something we're looking at on how we evaluate our traffic and to the other half of that is how that particular density or traffic would affect the bridge and ultimately affect the already backed up traffic that we have heading west and south. So thank you councilmember Petra. And the last piece is when there's a saturation point. If these, you know, it sounds like it probably over time will be redeveloped and it'll be more intense along Davis because they have that by right. They can go higher. They can, you know, they're going to do highest and best use, which usually, and my mind goes a little bit more intense. That, you know, at some point there's a conversation about saturation of traffic. And you know, we never seem to be able to at least in the city have that conversation. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I have a council member, Penamann, and then council member Barton. Mr. Coal, out of these 350 some other residents, do you know how many are one, two, or three bedroom? I do not have that information. Could you get that information for us? I could try to find out. I appreciate that. Relative to the stormwater master plan on this particular property was that done that was done in the county, correct? The county did a master plan or took a look at this. Could we also have a copy of that? Sure. That would be great. did a master planner took a look at this. Could we also have a copy of that? Sure. That would be great. As to the traffic, Mr. Kramer and I are both on the MPO. I'll be glad to go to the head of the MPO and see if we have any, if the MPO has done any studies, that would be F dot. Relative to this particular area and I'll be glad to get that back to you. But if you could get those two items to us, that would be great. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I have council member Burton. Yes, actually. Yeah, he's on the empty. Yeah, it's me on the empty. Oh, sorry. That's OK. Just sit. I'm on the empty. Yes, you are. My comments are not specific to this project. So it's OK. I'll let Commissioner Coal continue. And I'll wait until he's wrapping up. Okay. Very interested in hearing about the Marriott. Okay. Well, the Marriott, I had a meeting. Actually, last meeting, I had a official meeting I had with them and their representation was on May 29th. As you know, in the summer we vowed not to hear any property applications for resounding or anything through to summer months. So what I'm thinking, we're going to start getting hit here real quick with a lot of requests. Now as of today's date I checked, well the meeting, I'll just say the meeting went in a direction where I basically, you know I spoke with them, I think this was the third time they went back to the drawing board, brought me some artists or conditions, things were wetting, caking, the building and doing all these these different things but the height of the building is still 130 feet. And by right, 75 feet for C4, the CRA does have a 60 foot limit. It does fall right on the outskirts of the sea within the boundary to CRA. So, I basically said, at the meeting, I said, you know, I have to sell this to the public. I know it's by right bill to hotel, about 75 feet. I says, but 130 feet and what the feedback I get from the triangle across the street, you know, it's a different set of rules. And I just notice not an appetite for that anymore. I mean, that kind of, it squashed most people's appetite to have anything built like that, especially across the street. They say they're going to go back to Dr. John Gour one more time. Now, as of right now, they did not pull their petition to rezone, but there's rumors that they are looking at different options. I'm hoping to see something here soon. I'm pretty sure we will, because we are moving into that season. But as of May 29th, like I said, the last third tip of attempt, I kind of pooped it to a point that they're relooking at it again. So just to keep you that, I can't say confidently that they're gonna change anything. If they're gonna pull their request, I can't confidently confidently that they're going to change anything. If they're going to pull their request, I can't confidently say that here today. But in a time we'll tell which direction they're going. So. Well, on behalf of the neighbors that think they live in the city and have reached out to me, thank you for your due diligence and negotiating so that this large infrastructure transient lodging and the impact it will have on a very stable neighborhood. So thank you. Did you have a question? I think I will. Okay. I was one other subject I think you guys wanted me to kind of touch on. I know that I've been quoted in a few publications lately referenced to the airport study meeting with the NAA. I will not meeting with the NNA. I went to the last meeting and kind of just spoke. My particular opinion about it and I told them they wanted to get in front of, I believe, your body and in front of the commissioners body. And I said I would champion that. I would go back, talk to management, in the sunshine, ask the commissioners if they have any appetite to sit down because they all got a copy to study eventually and they read it on their own. And at the end of that meeting, last Tuesday, that pretty much all five commissioners, myself and the other four commissioners really didn't have an appetite to take a step any further or validate anything more towards the moving the airport out into the county. I believe there was four properties that were picked to move the airport into the county. Those would all require a reason, which require a super majority of the commissioners. And from the attitude and the comments that were made in the commission meeting the other day, I believe there was no desire amongst all the commissioners to entertain that. You know, the NA is their own body, you know, and then there was some interest in if I, what I thought of maybe the flight schools may be relocating out to a mockley airport. You know, the two flight schools out there right now is Rex Air and Naples Air Center. I mean, I have no influence over these organizations, they're private. You know, they'd have to look on their own if it's feasibly economically for them, would work. But I don't know if you know the mosquito control, at least they were signing a lease with the county to take over to large hangar out there at a mockly airport to relocate their headquarters there out of the Naples airport. That fell through. They bowed out at the lease agreement and the reasoning for it was when they had a few bids done on the hanger itself to remodel it to make it adequate for their services, they came in extremely high and the mosquito control felt like they couldn't afford it. So as of this time, they are not in any position to move out the democracy airport. Now that said that does free up some more hangar space at a mockley airport because it's hangar space that they would have occupied. Now if these organizations want on their own, you know, look into it, you know, I wouldn't block it. You know, that's that's their initiative. If they feel that's a better serve place to run their schools, you know, than that, you know, that's totally up to them. But that's kind of my position on it. And I believe there's going to be a company putting in a few more hangers up there, because I think we just did a variance. Because if you know, if you guys have been a local airport on, if you ever have, but they have a drag race track there on the airport. And a portion of this new hanger might run through part of that drag race track. So they're trying to accommodate where the future of this is going to be. So a monthly airport is moving in a direction to have more hanger space here in the future. So like I said, that's totally up to these private organizations, you know, if that's something that they might be desired to do, I mean, but if they make that decision, that's where they want to go. I wouldn't, you know, deny them the opportunity to go out there. So. All right. Thank you. Council Member Barton, did you have any questions? Not specific to this, just in general comments. Commissioner Cole, thank you very much for being here today and give us the update. We appreciate it. My opinion is that we probably should do this more often so that it's probably like some please. I'll start over. Thank you very much for being here this morning. I appreciate the update. Commissioner Cole. My opinion that we probably should do this more often. This has discussions, public discussions between the two organizations of the city and the county. If for no other better reason than to simply help the public understand the relationship that we have with the county, between the county and the city. And it's actually that relationship that I'd like to just talk about a little bit here this morning. The relationship is very symbiotic in that, as one thrives, the other feeds off that success and vice versa. Now, I've got a biased opinion in that I believe that city enables is the crown jewel of the Collier Empire. I'm certainly not the only one with that opinion, but I certainly do hold that opinion. When folks up north talk about their vacation home or their second home down here, they talk about the fact they've got a second home or vacation home in in Naples, Florida, whether that home falls within the city limits or not. It of Naples both on a national and international level creates success for the county as well. The incredible property appreciation that's been experienced on both city and county level is unprecedented. It's an incredible amount of value that's being created, revenues that are being created here within both the county and the city. And that's also suggests that appreciation is, again, in my vice opinion, is primarily driven by the fact that people understand and know that Naples, again, on a national and international level, what it brings to the table. And therefore, people want to be here, even if it's a matter of living in the county and being city adjacent, but Naples adjacent on the last. And that's not to suggest that the county doesn't bring a lot to the table. They've got their own attraction. People come to visit Collier County and one of the most valuable assets that the county has is the vast amount of land they're able to accommodate a large amount of people and that's good for Naples because we've got a large number of people coming in when they go to the county to visit they inevitably end up in the city and our businesses thrive when people come to visit the city from the county. So again that's that symbiotic relationship that I referenced earlier. However, with that massive amount of people coming into the city, and keeping in mind that the residents of Naples were at 20,000, we're going to be at 20,000 forever. I'm fluctuating 19 to 20 to 21, but it's not going to increase. Even with all of this redevelopment taking place, we are not growing from a residency standpoint. Those buildings that are being built down on the Miracle Mile on the beach that are replacing those old buildings that were constructed. Those old buildings might have had 46 units in it. The new building, while they may be bigger, also has somewhere around the same amount of units. They're larger units, they're more expensive units, but about the same number anyway. So the massive amount of people that are coming into the city is primarily coming from outside the city. It's not the 20,000 residents that we have here. And with that, well now I'll quantify that as well. Let's put it in numbers for everybody. We average about 1 million cars per week coming into and out of the city. It's a slower parts of the year, it's 700,000, the rush, the season, it's 1.2 million. So roughly averaging, roughly around 1 million per week. That's a huge number. That applies a lot of stress on our infrastructure, both the physical infrastructure and the personnel infrastructure that we have here in the city. And with that stress comes a lot of problems. We've got more traffic violations, we've got more traffic stops, we've got more accidents, more injuries, we've got more medical emergencies taking place, the wear and tear on the roads. I believe if I'm not mistaken, our budget is 1.5 million for road resurfacing this year. It's 1.5 million. And if I'm not mistaken, our interlocal agreement with the county, they give us $200,000 annually. That hasn't been looked at in quite a long time. Probably needs to be looked at. A lot of wear and tear on our water treatment systems. And with all the developers going up on the edges of our city like we just discussed massive amount of issues with our stormwater and our resiliency that we as a city have to put a whole lot of money into and I get that hey do you know comes with the territory success number of people come in here people want to be here we want people to be here and with that means that we have to adapt and overcome and that takes money. And the issue here is that we found ourselves in a frustrating situation as the governing body up here and that is that we're in the middle of dealing with our budget and we find ourselves in a budget deficiency which is very, very frustrating. The budget, the efficiency is primarily driven by the emergency services that we have to provide here in the city. We have to increase the number of police officers. We have to increase the number of fire personnel. We have capital increases in the forms of vehicles. And these increases are being generated primarily by the number of people that are coming in and out of the city. It's not being generated by the residents of the city. However, the bill is falling on the residents of the city. And that's where that deficit came from. Our deficit is about 80-85% of the emergency services that we're having to adapt with, we're having to revise. So, again, I understand that that takes money to fix that and those are the trials and tribulations that come to the, to come to the dius up here. And we, as the elected officials, take our jobs very, very seriously as far as being stewards of the taxpayer dollars, extremely seriously. And our staff takes out very, very seriously. We just got done going through all the different budgets for all the different departments. And we are running lean. When we are lean and mean. And we're doing that on purpose, and we're proud of it. In fact, we were one of the lowest tax municipalities when it comes to milledrate in the state of Florida. One of the most affluent, but we're also one of the lowest taxed because we take it seriously. We don't have frivolous expenses. And that's where that frustration comes in. Primarily because we are seeing in a situation that's unprecedented from a standpoint of tax revenue being generated by property values. And that's not just property value appreciation, but it's property value appreciation due to the redevelopment from old properties to new properties and these can be significant changes. We're talking about a home down on Aqualine that might be might have a prior to being torn down might have a tax base of $700,000 and now that's been torn down rebuild has got a tax base of 13 million. I mean these are massive amounts of money and that means a whole lot of money coming into our coffers and in fact the staff did the math forest not too far back and we had a $3.8 million increase in tax revenue from last year to this year based on the property value appreciation here in the city in April. The county share of that was 27.8 million. Yet we're still running in a deficit. That's frustrating. We're about to see a significant more of that tax revenue increased coming into play with all the new developments going on right now due to the damage that was created that was called by Hurricane Ian. So we are an unprecedented time from the standpoint of mass amounts of money coming into our revenue streams, coming into our coffers. We should not be running at a deficit as a city. We have to spend more money and we get that. But nonetheless, we shouldn't be running at a deficit. And in fact, we should have a massive amount of money in our reserves because it's frightened me with the expenses that we have on our horizon right now. From stormwater, resiliency, capital improvements, we have to build a new police force station, we have to build a new fire station, we have to buy a new fire truck. We've got tens of millions of dollars that we have to put into the infrastructure of the city because of the amount of people that are here visiting. And the bottom line is if we, as a municipality, want to continue to service, not just our residents, but also those that come into visit because it's our responsibility to do so, then we need to have a fair and equitable relationship with our symbiotic partner. And with that said, what I would all I ask for today in reference to these concerns and challenges is that in the very near future, I'd like those of us up here to have a serious conversation and get some type of consensus for our staff so that they can have some directive to go to the their counterparts, their counterparts in the county to have real and meaningful conversations about what would be fair and equitable, because we shouldn't be running out of deficit. And, and Commissioner, Coal, all I ask of you is to simply take this back, this information, these concerns, these challenges that we're facing, these frustrations that we've got, taking back to your counterparts, the other commissioners, let them know, communicate with them, that we've got concerns here in the city from a budgetary standpoint that I think could easily be alleviated by us and you working together embracing that symbiotic relationship that I mentioned and making sure that we can find creative ways to potentially solve These challenges and dilemmas that we've got because I know the money is there We just have to figure out the right way to do it And I'm not talking about a massive revamp where we all the sudden we're we're taken in much more than we need these challenges and dilemmas that we've got because I know the money is there. We just have to figure out the right way to do it. And I'm not talking about a massive revamp where we all of a sudden we're taking in much more than we need. We don't want to take in much more than we need. We want what we need in order to properly service the visitors and our constituents and our residents. Our goal would be to effectively and efficiently manage the city and April's, which again, in my opinion, is the crown jewel of the kingdom of Gullier. And as I mentioned with that symbiotic relationship, it's in the county's best interest to make sure that we continue to thrive and vice versa. So again, I think that here in the near future we should be able to figure out a way to all pull in the same direction and figure out how to solve some of these dilemmas and challenges that we have here in the city from a budgetary standpoint. Councilmember Barton, I had the same notes to say and I think you eloquently have laid it out. I think there's every single one of us supports you and what you just said and just Commissioner Coal that is just reiterates our collaboration and need for a joint meeting officials to officials our staff work hard but they can only do as much as what we give them when you do a budget cut that affects them so we need to really meet as elected officials to elected officials and we'll let our staff do the footwork as councilmember Barton said we'll do our homework and then hopefully meet and work on some of these infrastructure your comprehensive plan and the build out of the city and even the county and and what we're going gonna look like in 30 years because we're on the cusp of it. And we have a lot of responsibility in our hands to evaluate where we're going and not be reckless. So thank you. Councilmember Christman. Commissioner Coowell, thank you for being here and you may be feeling at this moment like we've already had a workshop with the county today, but just to prolong this a little bit more. One or five. I did wanna bring up a couple of really one or two other related points that haven't been touched on. And the first involves our Beach Outfalls project as you know and as I understand it, we've been talking to the TDC about funding support, and as I understand it, there had to be a first of study done to determine whether this project qualified for TDC support that the city had to front the money for, around $40,000 or $50,000. And as I further understand it, that study has been completed, determined that the project is eligible and the money is now with your help and support and others reimbursed to the city. Now that's been determined to be eligible, that 40 or 50,000. But now is the big ask, which is $10 million for actually to help fund the project. And I just want to urge, ultimately, this will have to be approved by the commissioners, starting with the TDC and moving over. And I hope funding at some meaningful level can be provided sort of in the context of some of the remarks Councilman Barton made. Certainly there's not much of anything that more meaningfully can improve our quality of life, our beaches, our resiliency than this Beach Outfalls project and therefore provide a benefit not just at city residents but to everybody who lives and visits in Collier County. And so I think the rationale for the TDC to support this given their mission of encouraging visitorship and tourism makes a lot of sense. So I just wanted to put a plug in for this because I think this is going to be coming pretty soon for a vote both at the TDC and I guess ultimately at the commission level. Also in the spirit of collaboration, you know, the Beach Outfall project is ultimately a resilience project. A resiliency project. We're going to have a lot more. You have them as well. And if you look a little later on our agenda today, we have a item where we're going to be asked to approve an interlocal agreement with the county around a project in the CRA on Bayshore where you're going to do the storm water and we're going to do the water and to improve the infrastructure in that area. And it's another example of how we can work together and to make good things happen particularly in the context of resiliency. So if and when we would get together for a joint workshop, I think one of the themes really should be around resiliency because it really is an umbrella for so many of the priorities that we need to address. So thank you. Thank you for your very good points and And when it comes to redevelopment, on Bayshore it is a partnership. But when I know I'll make my comments on 13b when we get to it, but that interlocal agreement that we'll be making, it will cost the city from our funds or reserves to be able to upgrade the infrastructure that's in redevelopment. And it may not be the timing right for us in our capital improvement projects. So and it may affect some of the projects within our city. So it's these matters are crucial and I'm just thank you for being here and caring. Vice mayor and then we'll conclude. Yeah, thank you Madam Mayor and Commissioner Coal. Thank you again for appearing today and discussing some matters of importance. I wanted to circle back on one of those matters of importance and that's the it's's the Naples Municipal Airport. And even though I think the word municipal has been pulled from the airport, it's still the municipal, the Naples Municipal Airport. You had spoke about hangar space up in the Moccale, and how that hangar space could be utilized. Do you equate increased hangar space as the ability to accommodate additional air-port, aircraft traffic and airport use? Well yeah I believe that's the whole idea of the like I said the mosquito control is not moving now, so that's a large hanger that would have been utilized by them. So now that's vacant, it's open for rental to somebody else. There are some things that have to be done to it, physically from a construction standpoint. And I know that's the whole reason mosquito control pulled out is because they didn't want to invest the money. They just came in a lot higher than they expected. But yeah, like I said, the space in the mockery airport that is there that is available is available to anybody who's willing to participate or wants to look at it and speak to the county airport authority and see if there's a possibility. So, like I said, that particular space itself is not designated for any one thing right now. Right. And I would agree with you, the more space, the more accommodation is being made to increased air traffic and airport use. Now, we talked about, where you discuss briefly, how the commissioners are looking at the invitation to look at the Naples Municipal Airport, how that's being used, and whether or not that would serve a better purpose somewhere else. I'm not wanting to get into the weeds of that right now, but I want to remind all of the County commissioners that it wasn't too long ago that an aircraft crash happened on I-75 and but four Approximately a 20-foot wall two-foot thick that would of That prevented that plane from crashing into homes of county residents. Those weren't the city of Naples residents. That wall prevented what would probably have been an even bigger disaster. And if you look on that flight path, look at the Moorings Park Grand Lake, those high rises, those mid rises. They're right on the flight path. I've been there a lot. And those planes just come a few hundred feet over the top of those. So if that crash would have taken even more lives, I believe that the position of county commissioners, call your county commissioners, as to the highest and best use of where the property should be for increased air traffic, by the way. Air traffic isn't gonna stay the same. It's not gonna reduce. It's on a trajectory to be multiples of what it currently is. So please think critically without a loss of more life about how the airport is best used and where it's best used. Thank you. Okay. I know that was a lot, but truly honestly thank you. We appreciate you honoring the commitment to come and communicate with us and be a partner with us because we must collaborate in these very big issues. So thank you for your time and your commitment to your constituents within the city. Thank you. Have a good day. Okay council that Takes us to item 4e Mr. Rosanski or is there an introduction to this item? It's the Naples Airport Authority budget presentation. Good morning. Yes, good morning, Mayor. City Council, my name is Ken Warner. I'm the Senior Director of Finance Administration for the City of Naples Airport Authority. Mr. Ruzanski is here as well to answer any questions. Today I'm just coming to give you a brief overview of our fiscal 2025 budget. It is for informational purposes. It will go before our Board of Commissioners on the 19th of this month for a final approval. This is our August draft. You have the complete budget in your package there. I'm just doing a brief overview of the budget here. So the big thing is fuel revenue is our main source of revenue. We do not get any taxpayer dollars. It's all user fee funded the airport. So fuel sales can prize about 70% of our revenue. We do have a methodology where we do zero-based budgeting each year. We ask all our department leaders to start from scratch and build up their expense budget. Again, aviation fuel sales are the biggest component of our budget. We're projecting flat number of gallons for next year. However, we have a slight increase in the cost to cover increased operating expenses. The main operating expenses personnel is a little over half of our budget. We do that a couple of positions for next year. I have some CPI merit increases in there. Professional services fees increase. We have a million dollars as you're aware of. We are doing some flight procedure improvements. This is for the company that's doing that. We've increased, you know, have a million dollars for that. Contracted services, we're currently working with city staff to enhance our police coverage at the airport through an agreement with them. We've included 700,000 next year for that. Building maintenance, we do have some aging hangers that need some significant improvements that we're going to prepare. And then legal services, we are budgeting about 400,000 relates to the noise and lobbying efforts to improve that. So overall budget summary, you know, about $40 million in revenue, $35 million in operating expenses. And the non-operating, the biggest thing next year is about a $4 million insurance payment that we expect to receive. We did have significant damage during Hurricane Ian where the airfield was flooded. And we're having to replace all of the airfield lighting. And then overall, changing that position very similar to this year's estimated actual of 6.7 million. On the capital budget, you know, we do get some FAA grants and some F.reimbursment grants as part of the aviation fuel tax. Overall, about $39 million of projects for next year. A lot of those are already in process. The biggest one is the airfield lighting project, which is about $9 million budget for next year. And then this is what our Board of Commissioners will approve, state statute saying they'll approve the expenditures for next year. Leaving us a balance of about $45 million, about $16 million of that for reserves into the future. Then our noise initiatives and next year I'll let Mr. Ruzanski speak about those and I'm going to be happy to answer any questions. Thank you. Good morning. Morning, Mayor and Council. Thanks for having us here this morning. We know that you're keenly interested in our noise abatement initiatives. And so just a quick summary Ken's mentioned, the flight procedure development. That is a complex process. We have engaged a private firm who specializes in developing flight procedures. And I'd like to note on that, and the priorities there, including higher faster increasing the angle of approach to landing, to all runway ends, things like that. Those were the priorities that came out of the noise study that was submitted to the FAA. I'd like to note that the FAA is still reviewing that noise study, is not given us a response on it yet, but we did not want to wait the potentially 180 days that they have by law to give us a response to start work on some of those initiatives. So the flight procedures firm, we engaged, well let's see, it would have been, I think last fall, from not mistaken, and they've been working diligently both coordinating with various offices in the air traffic side, including the tower facility at RSW. A lot of the work that's taking place has to be coordinated with the support of the air traffic control facility at RSW. They are making progress. I wish it were a bit more expedient, but unfortunately that is what you get in working with agencies of the federal government. But I am optimistic that we've been able to start on this prior to even receiving a response on the noise study. We are developing, I think, in part response to Councilwoman Petronov's comments, a new system for reporting noise comments that continue to be through our website as it is, but also using an app. Make it more convenient for folks. We have implemented a program I know I've mentioned to you before that not only do we, as you know, send letters to those who fly during the voluntary curfew hours, but we've also established them criteria to recognize those operators who have gone above and beyond and offered corporate goodwill to try and improve the quality of life for folks in the community and have abided by the curfew and other criteria such as maintaining a maximum minimum safe altitude before landing. So we've doing that on a quarterly basis and that that is an evolving program because it's brand new. It's not something we've done before. Then the noise monitoring program I think has been fruitful. It's important to understand that placing noise monitors at somebody's home out in the community doesn't necessarily lead to any policy or operating changes at the airport because the FAA doesn't consider data received from those noise monitors, but it is helpful in understanding what people are actually experiencing. Council approach our elected representatives at the federal level to try and affect some change because as you all know, the only real way to affect any change in national air traffic or noise policy is at the federal level. With that, I would happy to answer any questions you might have. Thank you for being here and presenting your budget. Just a few questions. I know you've been the executive director for six, eight and a half years. Eight and a half years. And for the years that I've known you as I was leaving council, one of the main concerns I shared with you was the frequency and the amount of flights and how it affects our community. So when you say that the fuel sales are the largest income, but those are tied to agreements or leases and those fuel sales are also tied to the rental correct of those. In some cases, believe it or not, you have based aircraft that domicile at the airport and transient aircraft. The vast majority of our fuel sales are to transient aircraft. There is a, when Commissioner Kaua was up speaking, Vice Mayor asked a question about a correlation between capacity for hanger storage and activity at an airport. And I would agree with Commissioner Kaua's comments as they relate to the immaculate airport. I somewhat disagree. I don't believe it's quite as clear correlation on activity at the Naples Airport. We have a tremendous influx of transient aircraft in season, just like has been talked about today, we experience on the roadways and everywhere else in town. But yes, as an entity that has no taxing authority, we do rely on fuel sales, hanger rents and some of those related activities to recover our operating and capital expenses. So there were two things that council requested when you came in for the utilization plan and that was not to build any more hangers in order to reduce the frequency and the noise issues. But in this budget there are four new hangers, is that correct? We have a project that's been on the books for a number of years that was in several utilization plans for light aircraft hangers and that project is currently in design and is likely to go out to bid. This coming winter for potentially starting construction next spring or summer. Those are the only hangers that I'm familiar with. So just speaking from the public and their concerns and increasing the number of hangers when council in 2020 made unanimous vote no more hangers for that utilization plan. So how does that affect what council's concerns and reflect this new hangers and that you're adding? That project was on the 2018 utilization plan. And I think that's where it came about. If I recall correctly, I don't have it in front of me, but in 2021, there were additional new hangers on that 2021 utilization plan. And we did remove those in the good faith belief that we still needed to complete the master plan and work through the noise study. That was my understanding of why we removed those hangers from that 21. But the project that we're currently planning on was in the 2018 utilization plan. Thank you. I just need to clarify it for members of the public. So when you're looking at your budget and your budget is increasing every year and so are the federal grants. Does that contribute to your vision of growing a larger airport? We don't have a vision business development or marketing as part of our budget process. We do respond to the trends that we are seeing and like I talked about previously with Commissioner Coal, there is tremendous growth on every side all around us. And so with every new development comes both folks, which we're very interested in as well and concerned about candidly because with any every new development that comes or is proposed within proximity of the airport, we know that within that development there will be potential future residents who will both use the airport and then both complain about the airport. And so we pay very close attention to all the petitions in the city and the county. And even just recently this past week had a meeting with M Development about their proposal to help them understand because we weren't able to be part of that process, help them understand what impacts from aircraft overflight their future homeowners might experience. Because as you're aware, there's something like 9, 9 plus thousand jet take-offs to the Southwest last year. And so we want to make sure that those potential home buyers are keenly aware of the entire environment of where they're about to make a significant investment decision. Great, thank you. I have Council Member Chrisman and vice mayor. Thank you for being here Mr. Rosanski as always. The my understanding is that efforts that we had jointly talked about with the NA about a joint workshop sometime this fall are running into serious scheduling difficulties in terms of getting dates that everybody can be together so that may not happen anytime soon. So I'm going to use this as an opportunity to make some comments because it may be the only opportunity we have for a while. We heard Mr. Colwell's comments on the relocation study and that ball is in the court of the NAA board right now as to whether they want to move to a phase two or not. That's your decision. My view is that you need to have somebody on the other side who's interested in it, and the county is the primary audience for this, and the county has at least among the current commissioners have spoken. And that needs to be listened to. And when you combine that with my big worries about the relocation of the airport from the beginning, which is the unintended consequences. Number one, the potential for massive environmental desecration of a thousand acre or more site in the eastern part of the county and the and the potential if if you could magically if you could do some magical thinking and imagine that airport gone from where it is and move somewhere else and the 733 acres here in the city redeveloped commercially and residential the impact on on congestion and traffic and all the other things that we worry about here in town. It certainly gives me pause. So I make those comments just as one councilman is to as to on that matter. And being a trying always to be a pragmatist, I think there are three things pragmatically that we can work together on in the near term and medium term that could make a difference. Three buckets of things. The first is these noise mitigation measures and I think there's six rate of them that have been outlined higher faster at the top of the list. But I just can't imagine why anybody in the city of Naples who is concerned about noise and concerned about these issues wouldn't want to row in the same direction and try to do everything we can over the next months and years to try to get attention in Washington from for these for action on these ideas. You've got people working on it. It's a political issue. We know that. And we've got to work smartly from a political standpoint. So that's number one. Number two is I think somewhere in the material we were sent there's a reference to two million dollars in payments from the airport to the city for various services in effect two million dollars on an annual basis police fire other things and those are those are payments that the the airport makes to the city every year to reimburse the city for services we render. And I would encourage us to take a fresh look at that. I don't know when the last time was that we did an updated analysis of what those services are and how they should be measured and monetized. Things change, our costs have increased, both from a salary and wage standpoint, and in terms of the level of service we provide. And we ought to just take a fresh look at that and make sure that the reimbursement level is at the right level. And then the third thing is the rent that gets paid by the NAA to the city, the dollar a year. And you know, what we've all learned, at least on this day is, over the last several years, is that there are constraints at the federal level as to preventing or constraining the airport authority from unilaterally just taking action to adjust that. I think it's called a revenue diversion. And the fact that there has to be a due compensation or due action on the other side if there is going to be more revenue diverted to the city in this case for a rental payment. And there's language in the FAA authorizing legislation that we have to work through. Having said that, I know there's interest at the NA Board, and I'm sure with you about finding a way to write set that rent level if possible. And I just think it's important in the near term to have that analysis and discussion done, determination as to whether it is possible. And if it's not, you know, that's acknowledged that and understand that and put it to bed once and for all. If it's just not possible, rather than just keep having it be one of these cans to get kicked down the road. So those are three things that I think we ought to be spending time on rather than trying to do magical thinking about how the airport can be transported to another site in Eastern Colour County within our lifetime and where we can actually have some progress and have a more meaningful financial and meaningful and fair financial relationship between the city and the airport but also actually make some progress on noise. financial and meaningful and fair financial relationship between the city and the airport, but also actually make some progress on noise. Thank you for your comments. Very good. Vice mayor? Thank you, Mr. Rizanski and the other gentleman for the presentation. The budget is certainly an important item to be discussed for the Naples Airport Authority. And to be clear, this is just a presentation, right? You don't need council approval. You're coming for comment or just to have transparency on the budget. That's correct, Vice Mayor. Yeah, the NA Board of Commissioners adopts the budget and this I generally refer to it as a courtesy presentation. Excellent. I look back at the minutes from that November 17th, 2021 presentation. That was a utilization plan, not a master plan, but a utilization plan and not a budget, either. So just quickly, could you tell us, and I see in the notes that the master plan is typically a 20 year horizon document, meaning that once a master plan is developed, it's supposed to project out 20 years, right? Yes. That's what you said. It does. The FAA standard is for an airport to look at, you know, project best you can, what might happen at the airport over the next 20 years and can the airport meet that demand? Yeah. And the utilization plan has what type of horizon? Five years. Which is a more realistic planning timeframe. It's very hard to look out 20 years and be able to accurately anticipate what's going to happen. I've looked back through the NAA's pass master plans. And they include these projections for doubling and tripling of aircraft and operations and none of those have ever come to fruition. When was the last master plan completed? In 21. It was completed in 2021. Correct. So we have until 41 I guess, right? 20, 21, 20 years. You don't have to wait 20 years. There might be reason to do a new master plan in a shorter time frame. Right? 2021, 20 years? You don't have to wait 20 years. There might be reason to do a new master plan in a shorter time frame. It just depends on the circumstances at that particular airport. And the utilization plan, can you just, I want to make sure before I comment on it, what is for the lay person, the community out there? What is a utilization plan? I think that's because the city retains zoning authority at the airport. That's a local document that the city and the NAA use to coordinate future developments that may occur, that are expected to occur within the next five years. Okay. It's a zoning document, much like a planned unit. What is it in terms of zoning? You've made comments what that's similar to regarding other type of documents coming before the city much more often like land development. a land use plan municipal land use planning expert but you could make some correlation between a a PUD and the utilization plan. Okay yeah I think your comments words it's very similar and it operates in that fashion. The the Councilman Chrisman made a few comments and had three really good points. I wanted to tackle this in a similar manner in terms of things that really spoke to me about your presentation as well as some of the current trends at the Naples Airport. So since 2010, jet volume is up 300 percent from 17,000 flights a year or for that time period. Is that include other lighter aircraft or no? No, I believe that number was for jet aircraft. Yes. And it's worth noting that that's, we were, that was 20, 2022, not 23. Okay. 23, 22 was our all-time record for jet activity in part due to COVID and the fact that many other international destinations were still closed off to international travel at that time. So I think all of Florida and places like Naples experienced incredible demand that they've never seen before. The following year, 23, we did see a drop-off. And then with Hurricane Ian, we saw another drop-off. And still at a much higher level than it was in 2010, but a drop-off from that all-time high. Now we've seen a little bit of a recovery from Ian in the past year, as you might expect. But the most recent trend is that we are starting to see a normalization. Not, I mean, we're certainly still higher than 2019 pre-COVID Activity levels in terms of jet activity the overall number of takeoffs and landings is about roughly the same It varies between 110 120,000 operations per year However, we are seeing a bit of a normalization which I Can't necessarily give all the reasons for, but I can tell you in part that the cost, the cost to fly private is increased so dramatically over the past few years, with inflationary pressures and so forth, that some of the folks who chose to fly private at the beginning of COVID, we might just be seeing them start to go back to their more traditional travel patterns, whether it be on the airlines or otherwise. Still, I don't mean to diminish, still much higher overall than 2019 numbers, but we are seeing a normalization. So the 52,000 in 2022, you just used a number of 120,000. Oh, sorry, those are different numbers. The 53,000 you mentioned, that was the annual jet operations in 2022. There was a total of about 120,000, total takeoffs and landings, but within that number, about 40,000 of those are by jets. Okay. A little more than 40,000. Well then, okay. 40,000 in what year? This last year. This last year. Yep. So in 120,000 overall. Correct. Okay. So 80,000 flights, roughly, of other aircraft other than jets. Which would be light aircraft, you know. Okay. So that's a lot of volume. A hundred and if you extrapolate that, the mayor had talked earlier about looking out 30 years and trying to envision what the residents are going to be living with. You don't necessarily have a vision for growth, correct? I think that's when you know. We don't. Not within the airport authority. We simply respond to what the market is asking for. Please tell me you do have a vision for managing growth. We're very constrained. There's very little we can really do. The runways have a natural capacity in season. There's very little land left to develop. There's not much room left for growth at the Naples Airport. Yet we're building more hangers. And on top of existing place where aircraft currently park today. I see. You said that the hangers are for light aircraft. I noticed in the minutes that when you talked about some of the hangars that were proposed and recall now that the City Council threw a seven zero vote pulled aircraft or the hangar development from items one and item ten of the utilization plan at that time. So at 2021, November 2021 was the time that vote was taken. And those utilization plans extend for a horizon of five years. So from November of 2021, that should really take us until 26 or so. Is that your understand? Let me be clear, there is no hard and fast timeframe on the utilization plan. I use it to look at what might occur in the next five years, but it's not limited to that. So there's no requirement for the utilization plan to be updated then in 26. But the one that you present is the one you operate under. Correct. And those hangers, I do recall those hangers that we removed, again, were on the good faith belief that we were going to hold off on any further hanger development to the master plan and the noise study had been completed. In regards to those two specific hangar projects, the project that you've mentioned that we are currently in design on, it was initiated in 2018. Got it. Not really. You're saying not really and I don't want to get in the weeds on that. I need to met a mayor I want to ask to go to the slide where the budget is including some hanger development. Whoever controls that David. David. There's a different slide than that. And Mr. Rizansky, let's see. Okay. We might be. I don't know. Are you looking at the. Yeah, looking for the. The detailed budget document. The verbiage. Not the presentation. Yeah, the verbiage. No, this presentation that you had within the presentation, okay? And if we could find it. Is it about the same thing? Hold on. The next one, please. Right there, hold. Okay. And that's the one we were on originally. As slide eight, if you could go backwards. Okay, next. Back. Are the hangers in here in this slide? Yes. Where are the hangers? It's embedded within those cost allocations. Okay, is it? So what I'm trying to get to, City Council, again, had a resolution, and it does relate to the land use, more of the zoning. They ask that items one in 10 on your utilization plan be pulled from your utilization plan. Which we did. Okay. What I'm looking for is how the hangers that you're now wanting to develop were not included in one in 10, how they were the exception. They were already shown on that utilization plan. I'm not quite sure what you're actually asking for. You're wanting to build hangers now, correct? With this budget? That is the plan. We're just showing me where if you could. It would fall under the other infrastructure projects category. Okay. And which hangers are you wanting to- Those are the T hangers. The light aircraft hangers. Light aircraft and jet. No. No jets. No. Light aircraft. You had a statement in the minutes that said that included light aircraft and jets. So no jets on these hangers. These are for light aircraft with a wingspan of 50 foot or less. Okay and it didn't the resolution pulling the development of hangers. Even though you're saying it's light aircraft, it avoided that resolution, you believe it? It skirted it. And no, it was transparently on that document at the time in 2021, as well as when it appeared in 2018. Okay. It was in a plain sight for you all, for you to see. I just want to make sure that we're clean. I don't have it in front of me, so I can't point to it, but if I did, I would show it to you. Yeah, items number one in ten on that plan were hangar development. So how is this not included in hangar development? Those are two very specific projects that we remove from that plan. And again, you're asking me something about something three years ago that I don't have the benefit of the documentation to review. I would try and help you look at what you're pointing to, but I don't have those in front of me. Well, Council, you know what, we're not going to approve your budget. The NAA Board approves the budget. It was clear in our resolution, very clear, 70, that hanger development not continue. And number 10. No, not continued. And number 10- No, I disagree. And number 10- Those two specific- Don't interrupt me, please. Don't interrupt me. I don't interrupt you. Don't interrupt me. Okay? Number 10 was private redevelopment of older hangers, and it says 1980s. So it was very clear the message from Council on the 7-0 vote. I would hope that the NA board would respect that resolution and not continue with hanger development. Thank you Madam Mayor. Thank you. I have Council Member Perramon. Thank you for being here today. Are we assured that there will be no meeting with the gentleman at any point in time or should we? Yeah, we're trying to make some meeting dates work. We made an attempt as you all know. The checker calendars, one or two of you weren't available for the three dates that were offered and Chris and I are just in communication tag right now to identify some other dates later this fall so the intent is to have a joint workshop at some point in the coming months. Okay, thank you. On your revenues on your budget, I'm not finding any revenue from the flight school here. Do you derive revenue from the flight school? Rents and fuel sales, but they're called out in a line item. I think it's building and land grants And then there are two flight schools based at the airport. There are others not based that use the airport It's a public airport similar to Roadway public roadways within the city Okay Then relative to your noise initiatives. When a jet takes off, should it have the wind at its tail or should it be flying into the prevailing winds? They always strive to fly into the wind, into the prevailing winds? They always strive to fly into the wind, into the prevailing winds. Okay. Takeoff and landing. Okay. Based on the information that I've managed to find, and I've asked the airport several times for this, and it might be helpful for us to get this information frequently. The prevailing winds, particularly in the winter time, which is, I gather, when most of your traffic increases. The prevailing winds in this area and the winter time are from the neat northeast, which would tell me that there's really no need, necessarily, for us to have jet noise in this part of town. I'd like to pursue that a little bit further, perhaps some sort of when showing us what your data shows relative to winds would be helpful, because that would certainly help to ameliorate noise if you were taking off into the northeast that would put you down Goodlett or airport or even further east which would then reduce the noise within the city. So if somewhat could validate exactly where the winds come from, prevailing winds come from on an annual basis in April I think that would be very helpful for us to have. Happy to share. I believe we have shared some information to that effect with you. I know a number of months ago this question came up. You are correct that the winds predominantly, but not exclusively come from the Northeast. So that means that when you look at our maps of activity, the vast majority of takeoffs are to the northeast. However, that also means that the vast majority of arrivals are from the southwest using the same runway. So they would approach from over the Gulf and downtown before landing to the Northeast. And that runway is 513. 523. 523. 523. Yes, ma'am. Okay, does the flight school also use 523? Yes. Okay. And how many touch and goes during the day, does the flight school have? Do you have any idea? It varies throughout the course does the flight school have? Do you have any idea? It varies throughout the course of the year. Obviously there's more activity overall in season. The touch and go activity, I wasn't so sure. It followed that same trend. So we did look at it some time ago. But it does also follow that same trend. So there is more activity during the seasonal months and in the summer months. Okay. They use the flight schools and the light aircraft are a bit more concerned with the direction of the wind. Sure. They're more susceptible to cross winds. Sure. And they're also using 523. Yes. Okay. So it would be interesting to know how many touch and goes do occur, particularly during the busy season, I had the opportunity to get a pilot's license at one point in time. So I did a lot of touch and goes. Those can take 20 or 30 minutes. And in the meantime I'm assuming that all the flights that are coming in are waiting for somebody to do these touch and goes which could take up as much time as 20 or 30 minutes. Is that a fair statement? Yes and no. So back to your original question there's if I don't have it exactly, but there's roughly 15 to 20,000, not exclusively touching goes, but operations by training aircraft, 15 to 20,000. So about 10 to 15% of the airports total operations by flight school type training type aircraft. On busier days when we know there's going to be more jet activity, there is a much lower amount of flight training. They don't want to be in that pattern with the jets. There's delays, there's wake terps, a phenomena called wake turbulence, the light aircraft from more susceptible to. There's much fewer, and on certain occasions like holiday weekends, we actually send notice out to pilots that flight training, touching go type activity is prohibited. So they don't conduct those activities on those days. Okay, but you're, again, the number was 15 to 20,000 per annum. Approximately, again, I don't have this information in front of me, but that's my recollection. Okay. All right, I, I think that's all I need. So, okay. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Crater. Thank you, Mayor. Just to be clear on the hangar's question, and I understand it was in the queue before that with the new presentation was present. There was a second presentation that arrived and then which called for more hangars and then those were in good faith. Ended. There were two projects already in the queue. Right. But there was already in the queue that weren't related to that entire conversation. Correct. And also to be clear, I have a, I'm fortunate to have a boat when I quit coaching. I got a boat. And so keep it in a marina. And if we built shelters over the boats that are docked at the marina, that does increase the number of boats at the marina. I'm guessing this is the same case. In building these light aircraft hangers, does that increase the number of airplanes that are sitting on the ground? No. No, not at all. That's why I thought, common sense. We're just covered and we're protecting them from the elements, especially in a saltwater environment, which is, I think, really important. Okay. Thanks for that. That was just a clarification. And I also for context, I just want to say folks that are fussing about sound, I'm guessing they didn't live here when mosquito control flew DC-3s. And my window was, I thought they were going to burst out up. Now, that was happening as I was signing my closing documents. And at no time that I think, you know what? We're going to fix that. I'm just not sophisticated or smart enough to think that, I guess. Which we're in the second spot. And I'm going to revisit this in a second, but the technology improvements since them are remarkable. Airplanes are getting quieter and quieter and they're going to continue to do that. Which I'm grateful for. I just want to say we need to stop talking about moving the airport, just using that terminology. What we're trying to do is kill the airport, end it. It's not moving the airport. It's building an entirely new, everything else where, if that were possible. So if that's what we want to do, let's just call it what it is. To the airport, we want to build a new one. And I wish the Naples Daily News hope you're listening. And it's odd to me. And I, the Naples Daily News, maybe the reporting, I just reporting. But it seemed to be, there's somebody on the NA Board that almost, you know, louder like, is really interested in killing the airport. The former council appointed somebody to a board which is supposed to manage this organization that wants the organization to end. I've served on many boards and had boards that work for my organization. And I can't imagine somebody on the board that says we need to stop doing this. I don't understand that. I don't know how it's possible. And I'm hoping, I hope I'm wrong, but I don't think it's the. And I'm hoping, I hope I'm wrong, but I don't think it's the case that I'm wrong. A board member is an existential threat to your organization. That's nuts. And I have to say that people fussing about noise. Their hearts are good. They're smart. They're sophisticated. Sometimes we can't see the forest for the trees. As with my colleague, I'm a pragmatist and try to become and sense about stuff. This lease has 44 more years on it. Whatever's gonna happen, any happen if it's 44 years. The question is, how are we going to redeem that time? Here's what else. There's some cool stuff if you watch NOVA PBS. Some of you may not. Silent skies, I think, is the name of one of their documentaries about new electric planes. They did this whole flyover of all electric planes, which make no noise. That's what's coming. So let's kill the airport and just around the time or before we do that, we don't want to renew the lease. Plants don't make noise anymore. That's pretty short-sighted. The notion that planes are going to get louder is silly, if you're thinking that. Technology's not going to go that way. The notion that we're not going to use some sort of hybrid modeler go to electric planes, that would be silly as well. Technology's going that way. I'll turn to fuel sources. That's what our entire planet is working on right now. And so here's the question. Can we redeem the time? Can we make them get the biggest bang for the butt for our citizens in the city of Naples? By the way, the vast majority, I'm a guy who's got done campaigning. The vast majority say, Coach, what's the built the airport? That's goofy. And the county argument is, well, because they don't fly over their houses. That's not true. They do, too. My sister lived right on Bayfront on the corner pit house. And we love watching planes fly in. There's a whole bunch of people who go, that's cool, just for the record. They just don't come here and they don't beat a drum. So, the thought of respect to those folks. And my colleague mentioned change in the contract is cumbersome, FA-approving, all that. My understanding, you correct me if I'm wrong. My understanding is to unilateral change. First, to impose a higher price structure on you, that's cumbersome. But correct me if I'm wrong. Would it be possible to extend the lease and then we can renegotiate terms and then we can collect revenue? And is that would that be cumbersome to work through the FAA? Both of us agreed. Yeah, we want to extend it and here's what the new price structure is. Is that more doable? It is feasible to negotiate arms length transaction between two willing parties on changing the terms and conditions of the airport's least with the city. The NAA board would like, they've made it clear to me, that they would like to first address the issue of the relocation study, which is really an exploratory study. I've been here eight and a half years that actually came up back in the first, that question first came up back in 2017. It's come up many times throughout the airport's history, including two years after the creation of the airport authority, which was in 1969, and then this topic came up in 1971, and it seems to have come up every five to ten years after. And as many of you have talked about, there is projected incredible growth in the county and some of these issues. And then coupled with the noise issue and a recommendation and the noise study to explore it, those, that's some of the background context as to why the NAA undertook this exploratory study. But before, my understanding from the Board of Commissioners is that before there would be any discussion or consideration of the, the current lease that they, they want to first get your feedback collectively on the city council's position on the exploratory study. Thanks for that. So we know the county which has to be a participant in this once nothing to do with it. So that would be DOA on the exploratory study. From a pragmatic perspective, we're talking about over the course of this the current lease and we would extend it farther than that but if we negotiate it so in 40 years something like $200 million in revenue for the city of Naples. That's what you're leaving on the table. And we want resiliency, we want infrastructure. And the fact is, 40 years from now, it's still operating. We're not going to change anything in the next 40 years, but we can do. It's raised about $200 million for the cities to do the things that will benefit the city of Naples. To me, that's not a hard choice. Is it gonna fix the noise? Nope, it's not. We can continue to work to fix the noise and time and technology are going to fix the noise. That's going to happen. Whether it happens in the time frame that others want and those that just wanna wish it away and fuss about it, it's not going away while we're alive. How about that? And by the time your kids are in your house now, airplanes are quiet. So let's just do what makes sense. What makes sense is let's extend the contract. Let's stop the dagum moving it because it's killing it not moving it. And let's extend the contract. Let's renegotiate it. And let's create real revenue for real resiliency within our city. Thanks. Thank you. I just want to clarify the two. Did you say two million? I said about 200 million. You have to do them that. 200 million that goes to the city, but you meant. That's exactly what I meant. To the city. Come to the city. you meant to the city. Come to the city. We're leasing it. For a dollar a year? No, no. If we extend a lease, we can renegotiate. You just said. Oh, thank you. Okay, thank you for that clarification. It's just extended a lease. Yes, thank you. Okay, I have very quickly pleased because we've already gone through a petrenov penement and then we're going to conclude. I sense this is a hot topic and among a lot of us and I think that we really need to endeavor to get a meeting together, a joint meeting sooner than later because there's a lot of chatter in the community and we all have a lot of strong opinions. I see it a little different way than Councilmember Kramer. I do not see this study as killing it. I see it as looking and I agree with Commissioner be a little bit more 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 with a lot of visitations from the county. But in terms of looking at this strategically, the growth is in Collier County. And so I think we need to figure out or acknowledge that we are no longer fishing village and Collier County and that we are a city and we are growing population and we should an airport be located where it is maximizing safety going under the least human population as possible and going where the growth is and where all the growth is and that is east and north. So I would like for it to continue. One thing in the back of my mind is there is excess capacity at RSW today. Can you peel off layers and bring that into there? Because the big elephant in the room that has been just in a sideline mentioned is not when people fly. It is not what aircraft they fly. It is volume. And volume we have limited control over but we have already exceeded the number of flights that were that were taking place well past the utilization plan. Am I correct? The utilization plan doesn't give a projection for activity. Was it the master plan that did that? There are some forecasts in the master plan. Because it is way past then, it's just our current volume. And you know, in talking to the airport experts, they have the capability of having a landing or flight every two to three minutes. So it can get a lot bigger, a lot faster. And we've got entrance like JSX that is coming in. Their tickets are as low. I mean, they're able to fly in this airport and somehow not be commercial, but they're really operating like a commercial airline. And their tickets are as cheap as $300. So this thing can proliferate faster than, you know, than we really have an appetite for. Some of those noise monitors, some of the data that I have seen over people's homes, the decibel levels are exceeding 100 decibels, which it's an algorithmic sound, and that is considered at a dangerous level and it is frequent during certain seasons of the year, during certain times of the year, which impacts our citizens' quality of life. Now you can say, well, you should have bought, you should have known when you bought there, but some of the folks bought there in the 70s when it, you know, they are saying, you know, it's just got, it has just gotten untenable in the 70s when they are saying it's just got untenable in the city. So I'm glad that we are looking at some of these items to help reduce noise, but I think we need to keep an open mind strategically in the county where we would want to grow. And perhaps I know we just asked the people at the airport how far would you be willing to travel, but there are other stakeholders here as well, including residents, including county residents and city residents that would probably want to open up that 10 miles into even other areas like absorbing some excess capacity at our SW where it makes sense. The other points that I had were, in some of your capital expenses, are we building terminal waiting areas that operate for JSX, for example, if we do this or for other flights like elite jets where they are really acting like commercial jets, there are terminal areas and making it very easy for these commercial like takeoffs to increase volume. No, we already have those spaces. Okay, so there's nothing being done in any of these terminals. No dollars. No, there's renovations being made to the former, we call it the North Road Terminal now, it's the former commercial airline terminal. But that's on the phase of work is on the exterior side. There's nothing being done as part of this budget on the interior. There's a, in the future years, I do believe there's some renovation anticipated, but it's of existing spaces. Okay. All right. And I think that that's, I have a lot more points, but I think at this point in time, I think that I'm going to hold my questions and comments until we have a joint meeting together, which I hope will be in the month of October, given this level of, I'll call it, energy around this topic. I agree and try to work to that end. Thank you. It's important that we have a joint meeting soon. Thank you for being here today. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Puchinoffen. Mr. Rosanski. We are trying to stay focused in on the budget but I think because of the lack of knowing when we are going to have a joint meeting I think some of those questions have come in so my apologies for continuing on but pinnum men has a last question? I do. Your studies consistently show if we're going to move the airport, it's going to be 15-day, 10 years. So, I think we probably have to acknowledge that. So in the meantime, I guess we're going to have to try to figure out a way to get along. Quick question. If we were a regional operation, suppose we partnered with Marco and Paige and we were a regional operation, would we have as a regional operation more clout with the FAA, which would then translate perhaps with more flexibility to do more things such as perhaps moving an airport. Could we would regionalizing make, give us more cloud with the FAA? First of all, with the FAA. With the FAA. I don't believe so, not with the FAA. It might provide for some influence as to try and incentivize activities at one of those airports. But I don't believe it would much move the needle with the FAA. They look at it from a sense of the national system. And in that sense, and the way these airports operate, the customers, the passengers, the pilots, the businesses, they go to the nearest airport, nearest to their final destination. It's really difficult to convince somebody to go to another facility that might be 2030 plus miles away. That is the lore of air travel. That's why people pay a premium for the convenience because it's closest to their final destination. I don't like to think of them much as airplanes. I think of them oftentimes as time machines. For both private use, business use, emergency and life saving use. And they just happen to be aircraft that people are buying time, which sometimes is important for any one of those reasons. And but you do acknowledge that moving the airport, most of your studies have fallen within that, the parameters of 15 to 18 years. Believe, I remember correctly, that it was a minimum of 17 to 20 years, and I would categorize that as a minimum. I don't believe it's, we all know how long permitting and whether there's lawsuits or difficulties in purchasing and rezoning and all of those complexities, not to mention working with all of the businesses that are at the airport today. So I think that time frame is really a minimum. I realistically think that it would take longer. So I think what the real reality is here folks, when we have this conversation, we have to talk in terms of working within that rubric because it appears as though that's never going to change. So thank you very much for being here today. Last question and we're going to conclude. Thank you Madam Mayor. Just a few thanks. I wanted to wrap up. First of all, the head count at the airport is going to be improbosed to go from 98 in 2022 to 168. 168 people. Now why would that be? How much additional aircraft volume are we talking about? Another fact. Right now we're dealing with roughly 350 flights a day. In just four years, the period of time that some of you are on council, I'll be gone before then, but I might be back 450 a day in just four years. So it's going to grow by about 100 a day in my best estimation. Noise monitoring 80 to 90 decibels 30 to 40 times a day already. That's above the noise guidelines. Our code, a joint meeting? Yes, I would support a joint meeting, Mr. Boudre-Schwar. If I'm holding that up in any way, put me on Zoom. If I'm out of town or something, or I'll relook at a schedule. This is a very important issue. I've heard this statement so many times that if you moved here and you bought a house here, you just need to suck it up and deal with it. Basically, okay? But the same people that say that they're going to deal with traffic, they're concerned about traffic and napoles. How many of you have a road by your house? Even though you have a road and you know that traffic may increase, how come that's not the same thing? Why would you even say that you're going to deal with traffic differently than you deal with noise and increase volume at the airport? It's ludicrous. As a town and a municipality grows, different issues develop and it's fair game to deal with any of them. And I hope anytime anybody else brings up this thing about oh, you moved into a house by the airport. No, this airport serves the entire community. If you're in Royal Harbor, Port Royal, Aqualaine shores, you need to share in the joy that the airport brings. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Thank you. Just on the budget, Mr. Rosansky, where did we stand with taking grants direction or input from this council? Did we suggest or take a vote on whether you continue taking grants as it reflects the budget? I believe there are state and federal grant dollars included in this budget. I believe it was perhaps nearly two years ago that the council took a position asking the NAA to stop accepting state and federal grants. And the NA Board of Commissioners discussed it and decided that they believed it was in their fiduciary responsibility to continue to take grants. Okay. Thank you. As far as policies on fees, do you have a policy on your increases on your fees and annual review because I haven't really moved. I don't recall there's been an annual review of your fees. That's part of our budget process. We anticipate revenues and there is a rates and charges document published on our website. We're finalizing that now. And so happy to share that if you're interested. Please, like is it an 8% increase or you can just get that to us? On average, it's somewhere a 7% to 10% increase in fees. Okay. I don't remember, can you have anything more on that? I have a few old spots on the Hagarad that's seven attempts on. Thank you. And then as far as a hub or no hub, how many fractional or jets do we have as hubs? As a hub? I'm not sure what you, there's not really, in our, in general aviation, there's not really a term that I'm familiar with as a hub. Okay. Those those businesses they'll they'll fly to where their their customers want to go and I'll just remind council that we have surveyed many of them in the past and time and time again those surveys. That's been a couple years since we've done one of those surveys. Those surveys have indicated that somewhere 70 80 percent of the passengers are residents here in Naples. Okay. And then I will just say I think Council Member Christman is absolutely right. I mean we, you know I'm glad you're going through the process. I think it was a waste of money to look at moving the airport, especially when we're looking at environmental lands that are sensitive. That was just something that wouldn't make any sense at all. But when we're looking at, and it was brought up today, whether a mockery would take more flights or maybe more fractional airport traffic. I think that's where the conversation that you and I had from a congressional point of view with Chairman Rupert and with Mr. Bhutishwar, if the noise monitors aren't going to make a difference with the FAA, can you just give us, what are your incentives because there's like 1.2 million or 2 million and putting into lobbying? What do you see as us working as a common goal? That's a good question, Mayor. I think, you know, we tried a year plus to go. A year and a half ago maybe it was and we were unsuccessful. I think we have the noise monitors have provided some additional data points that we could go to our representatives and show them here's the impact that some people within our community are experiencing and try to try to use that to tailor some some very specific requests and light of that I I've heard several of you talk about volume and I We understand the COVID and the changes in the community around us, and Naples are very attractive, particularly to people with access to private air travel. And I don't think that trend is going to change. We have seen that during the peak activity periods, like on holiday weekends, there is already some aircraft that are choosing to go on their own to other airports because they don't want to deal with the delays. There can be delays of several hours in or out of here during those peak holiday weekends. So naturally that is happening, however, I would venture to guess that the vast majority of passengers of mostly residents are going to be very difficult to convince them to go to the Immokali Airport. If they had another option, closer to where their residents or business was located. So I think we will have to put our efforts and be creative about it, and think about equitable solutions that we can go to together jointly as the NAA in the city and be unified in making requests to our elected representatives. That's truly the only way that I know, in my nearly 25 years of professional experience, that we can effectuate change. It's very difficult, then airport, a public airport, was runways serve much like the local state road, US 41 or I 75. It provides access in and out of the community, and Congress has established a series of laws that protect that right of interstate travel. And it's very, very difficult task. There are other communities asking these same questions. And we could jointly try to talk to some of them. But I think first that it be beneficial for you as a governing body of the city to meet with the NAA board and have those discussions directly. Thank you. Thank you both for being here in the presentation on your budget. Mr. Boudreux-Warr will work with you in trying to get that joint meeting scheduled sooner than later. And thank you for your patience because I think we weren't sure whether we were going to have a joint meeting or not. So no, no, I appreciate you trying to keep the focus on the budget, but we come fully expecting there to be other questions. So I appreciate it. Right. Just last question, JASX. How does it related to a lease or operational plan? So I think we're close to signing what ultimately is a month to month agreement and they are operating under federal regulations that allow them to sell by the seat charter on these 30 seat aircraft. We understand that both the FAA and the TSA may change those regulations. They're likely to engage in some rulemaking effort. None of us know what that looks like yet. If you ask JSX, they'll tell you that they believe they're going to be the model for what those new regulations look like. But I don't have any insights as to what that may actually be. That really is a matter of federal jurisdiction. And if they do change the regulations, we'll be ready to respond to it. And that's more to come. We need to follow that closely. So if you can keep us informed, that would be fantastic. We certainly will. And one thing, I don't know exactly how this might play out this season. I do know that a lot of people are talking about and have booked their flights on a JSX flight, even though I've told JSX, I said, you're at risk. You're at risk of doing this marketing in the absence of an agreement and they understand that. They did, they did, it was included in their presentation. When you look at the airports between city pairs where they fly, there was particularly Opalaka Airport on the outskirts of Miami and Westchester County. Between those two city pairs, they did see a year over year reduction in private jet activity. So I can't say that definitively, it's going to result in a total decrease in jet activity, but anecdotally, I think when you look at between the city pairs where they fly, we're likely to see some reduction. Does that mean they'll probably also attract some new customers? I think that's just realistic expectation, but I do think that you will see some ebb and flow in the activity as a result. Okay. Thank you again for being here. Thank you. Okay, Councillor, just in the amount of time we do are in need of a break but we have public comment. I have two speakers and then we have the approval of the consent agenda. We have staff sitting in the audience if we could just get through those items and then take a break. So if you would like to speak in public comment, you can fill out the registration forms in the back and hand them to the clerk. Our first public speaker is Ashley Jenkins. Good morning. Good morning. Good morning, almost good afternoon. Good morning, council. Good morning, Madam Mayor. Good morning, city planner and city attorney. For the record, my name is Ashley Jenkins. Stay colder of 3, 4, 102. Right now, there are zero statutes of limitations on fraud, and I take deceiving the public as a strong concern. Sodium monofluoride phosphate is a known neurotoxin. Intentionally, mass poisoning the public with a known neurotoxin is considered to be one of the 10 greatest achievements in public health, according to the CDC and others in the alphabet gang of the federal government. The recent NTP report has suppressed as long as possible as it was set to come in the light in the middle of a glaring lawsuit for the EPA this last August. There is zero science to support drinking fluoride. It was intended to be applied to teeth when you look at all of the research, not to drink it, as that would be ingesting a toxin. Here are seven simple points. Sodium monofluoride phosphate is a poison. It is not to be ingested. It says so on every label. It is being ingested, which is defined under Oxford dictionary as swallowed or absorbed in city water. The health department has ample free toothpaste for anyone who believes that they require this for free. Removing this will save the city taxpayer dollars. Taxpayer dollars are buying sodium monofluorid phosphate. The municipal water places it in the water. People receive bills to pay for toxic water. The public is paying for profiteering and being sold poison water by the city municipality. It is causing harm as referenced by the inhabitants of the city. And the request is to remove the substance ASAP as many city councils and commissioners across the country are doing so in light of the new research. Stating of spate is a spate is not exaggeration unless I'm being gaslit by someone covering up fraud or someone has experienced cognitive delays from personal fluoridation. The individuals who put this toxic substance in our water wear a hazmat suit and a toothpaste label states if ingested contact poison control with new emerging information that was suppressed by the federal agencies suit and a toothpaste label states if ingested contact poison control. With new emerging information that was suppressed by the federal agencies from the public, Florida State Statute 859.01 is in question as sodium monofluoride phosphate is poisoning the public and the water. I've asked three times before on public record to set a meeting for the public. And I'm very thankful for the three council members who've just come back from the two months off, plus the additional council member who have met with me to further understand the situation for the public so that we can schedule public hearing. But I want to remind everyone on council that every Wednesday until we accomplish that, the public that I've asked personally not to come and take over your meeting with public comments and public testimony will begin now to come to public council. Irrespective of what I have asked them to do, because this is a huge public concern, okay? Thank you. Thank you. We'll have that discussion or correspondence. Last speaker is Janet Perry. Good morning, morning council. Excuse me. Called not COVID. I hope. Janet Ferry, Third Avenue South. I appreciate the conversation on the airport this morning. I'm pleased that you're going to have a conversation with NAA for the public in a workshop. Thank you for that. If the airport, I'd like to just ask you to consider this. If the airport is a valuable economic engine for this community, then let's make it safe for this community because the residents are valuable as well. Their lives, their quality of life are valuable. And when you look at runway 23, which takes the bulk of the jet traffic that we've been discussing this morning, there are tens of thousands of lives. Under that flight path, with these jets coming overhead, every two to three minutes, because of the volume increase, at under the minimum safe altitude. Sometimes at 400, 500, 600 feet. And those people under the jet path that's been enumerated and discussed at NAA meetings, there's 15 blocks of single and residential families, thousands, homes, I should say thousands of families and people. There's 93 retail shops with shoppers. There's 40 restaurants with diners. There's 150 hotel rooms with guests. There is Sainé and school with 300 students. There is the Methodist Day School. There's the Gulf Shore Middle School. 604 students. There's the Nor Show and Middle School, 604 students. There's the Norris Center, 200 seats. There's the Sudden Theater, 405 seats. Can be a park, 724 people attending events there. The first Presbyterian Church, River Park, Naples Community Baptist Church, the Macedonia Baptist Church, and the hospital, others that I could name, tens of thousands of lives, tens of thousands of quality of life residents who pay taxes, we should be able to find a solution for this economic engine that doesn't have such a hindrance and negative impact on so many of the residents in the heart of our city. So I hope you'll do that when you meet with the NAA, put your heads together, and come up with a solution because right now it is untenable and unsafe as sadly and traumatic tragically we know from the crash last season. Takeoff and landing is when these crashes happen. It will happen again and we can't have it happen over our school children or our residents. Thank you. Thank you. That concludes public comment if I could go to approval of the consent agenda council. So moved. I have a motion by our approval by Vice Mayor and a second by Councilman Cramer. All in favor sign by aye. Aye. Thank you. Council of passage unanimously. We'll come back after our short break of 10 minutes and continue with item 9a. you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you Are we swearing in? We're continuing on with our public hearings. Mr. McCollum. Thank you, Mayor. A resolution vacating 3-city of Naples Water Utility easements. The first being a strip of land, 10 feet wide in sections 11 and 2 of township 50 South range 25 East. Recorded an OR book 1918 page 1455. The second being a strip of land situated in track B of courthouse shadows recorded in O.R. Book 2522 page 323. And the third being a strip of land 10 feet wide lying in that part of track A of courthouse shadows recorded in OR, BARC, OR book, 3332, page 936 of the public records of Collier County Florida. More fully described herein, accepting a replacement water utility easement on property owned by JDA, Courhal Chattos LLC, a Florida limited liability company on a parcel of land being a portion of tracks A and B of courthouse shadows as recorded in the book 29 page 40 of the public records of Collier County, Florida said parcel containing 24,383 square feet more or less more fully described here in directing the city clerk to record and providing an effective date. Thank you. Mr. Middleton. Good morning, Mayor. Members of Council Bob Middleton, Public Works Director. I'll turn this over to Michelle Baines, our Deputy Utilities Director for a reigning opening comments and then turn it over to the petitioner. Thank you. Good morning, Mayor. Members of City Council. The purpose of the public hearing today is to consider the vacation of three existing water utility easements. These easements are located on a piece of property that many of you may be aware of was previously the site of a shopping plaza called Courtaus Shadows. In addition to these three easements that are being proposed to be vacated, the petitioners is actually proposing to replace that with a new utility easement. And I can spend a little bit of time talking about these existing utility easements and the proposed replacement easement and then I will turn it over to the petitioner. So these three existing water utility easements, the first one being as described the 10 feet wide in sections 11, 12 of township 50, range 25 East, recorded in OR book 1918, page 14, 55. That's the largest of the three easements and that was previously the location of an 8 inch water main owned by the city that served that shopping plaza. So that's 1987 that was conveyed to the city. The other two easements are much smaller easements and they were conveyed to the city in 1999. And those two easements one was conveyed as a water main upgrade associated with a blockbuster video located within the plaza and then the other easement also associated with some water made upgrades associated with the office max in that shopping plaza. In terms of the project itself a little bit of background so in 2020 the City Utilities Department received civil plans associated with a proposed utility relocation. And this was related to the demolition of the shopping plaza, the relocation of various utilities on site, and the construction of, I believe it's five, buildings, multi-residential buildings, totaling approximately 300 units. So this project took several years to permit and approve, which happens with these larger projects. These projects also take time in terms of accepting utilities and closing out the project. So back in 2020, when we reviewed the project, we issued our approval and the approval letter, which is dated, I believe July 29, 2020, did include some special conditions and one of the special conditions included the vacation of those easements and the acceptance of a replacement easement based on where the as-built location of the new water main was constructed. So we're actually at this point now where we can fully close out the project. So before you today is a vacation application submitted by the petitioner. The petitioner is JDA, courthouse shadows LLC. They submitted a vacation application in June of this year. We reviewed that vacation application. We deemed that application to be complete. So they've drafted up a replacement easement and that's again based on the as but location of the new water main. The new water main is a 10 inch water main. So this is an actual actually this is an upgraded water main. We had an eight inch water main previously. We now have a 10 inch water main. The water main is now fully looped in three locations and previously it was only looped in two locations. So we've seen some improvements based on this project. And then we've reviewed that easement that easement is a 10 foot wide easement, which is equivalent to what we had previously on the site. So we believe that it meets our needs in the future for operation and maintenance. And in terms of the vacation application, the petitioner submitted documents, including letters of no objection, the original plat for courthouse shadows, and several other documents that are included in your agenda packet. So with that, I will turn it over to the petitioner. So we have today Mr. Nick Broome and Mr. Jake Hale. They're from Johnson Development Associates. They are the petitioner. They are the manager for GDA, Court House Shadows, LLC. The petitioner's agent is Mr. Chris Mitchell. He's the chief operating officer for J.R. Evans engineering. And finally, we have Mr. Rich Yvonnevich, who's the attorney for the petitioner. So I will turn that over for them to provide their presentation. Thank you, Michelle. Good morning, Madam Mayor. Good morning, Councilmembers. For the record, I'm Chris Mitchell with J.R. Evans Engineering. And most of my slide deck is already been presented by Michelle. So I will go to the graphics that kind of show us what we're doing. This is the project. As Michelle mentioned, it was formerly courthouse shadows. It was commercial development. It's located directly across from the Cardi County Courthouse near the intersection of airport road and US this is a graphic depiction of the existing water main easements with the constructed apartments. So you can see that a portion of each is within the buildings at Mariah apartments. You have building one, building two, and building three that have the conflict. And if we slide to what we have now, this blue outline is the new water main alignment and Miss Baines spoke to this loop here. This was an addition at the request of the city which loops from Coley Court to the front, which goes to Tammy Amie Trail East. And so the vacation eliminates the existing water main that has a conflict with the buildings, which provides an incumbrance for the property. But yet there's no infrastructure there, and the new one then replaces it and protects the city's utilities from access and maintenance. And with that we'll take any questions. Just one quick one I think for you Ms. Baines. And do you feel that ten inches, given that this was a mall before, with the water use of what is typical of a little strip mall, to a 300 unit apartment complex? Do you feel like going from an eight inch to a ten inch is adequate? Well, I think Mr. Mitchell can speak to the engineering that was done related to the design. But the ten inch, the driver with that ten inch was the hydraulic modeling that was completed. It was really driven by the fire protection demands of the new, the five buildings that were proposed, these residential buildings. So that ten inch main, again, that size was really driven by fire protection more than just your typical daily demands related to people having showers and running washing machines and dishwashers. It was really fire protection that drove that ten inch selection of a ten inch water main. And I guess the question for you is, you know, given that these are now 300 units using a lot more water, I would imagine than a strip mall. Is that adequate for water supply? Yes, ma'am. As Ms. Bain said, the driver is fire protection. So where you may have a peak demand for domestic use, which would be your consumption, your washing and drying, your showers, may be in the hundreds, a couple hundred gallons per minute. Your fire flow could be upwards of 2,000, 2,500 gallons per minute. So almost always, the fire flow will dictate the size of the main. So then you model the main to make sure you have that adequate fire flow. Okay. Thank you. Mm-hmm. Yeah, thank you Madam Mayor. So just to be clear the the easement or the let me go to the upgrade from 8 inch to 10 inch, that's not storm water, that's potable water. Correct, a pressurized water made. Water made. Distributing potable water. Okay. And then the easement that we're considering vacating, we don't have any other assets that we developed when it was ours we didn't have any other assets in that easement that were vacating. Correct so this property is located within the city's water surface area so any other utilities would otherwise be owned by Collier County for example from a sanitary sewer standpoint and then any other utilities FPNL and others. All right. The easement that gets close to Tammy Amie Trail or US 41, what I'm seeing on the slide right here is that single portion of the easement that almost touches, almost touches 41 is that single portion of the easement that almost touches, almost touches 41, is that I'm reading that right that that is part of our easement that we're turning over, vacating. What you see on the screen is what is the replacement and to clarify a little bit, if there was a portion of the existing water main system that needed to remain in service, which that area does, we're removing the easement, but place in the easement back right over it based on as-build information. So no existing customer was impacted or will be impacted, and the city is not impacted. Okay. And this easement, so I wanna go back to that portion of the easement that right there, that portion that seems to be lying contiguous to 41. That is part of the easement that we're vacating, correct? Correct. And that easement is only for underground utilities. It doesn't provide an easement for signage. Correct, right? Okay. Right? Correct. Okay. All right. Thank you. Okay. Any further questions? Move approval? I have a motion for approval by Council Member Pinneman and a second by Council Member Chrisman. All in favour sign by aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed? Mr. McConnell, are you okay without a roll call or should I do a roll call? I would prefer a roll call. Thank you, sir. Okay. Madam Clerk. without a roll call or should I do a roll call? I would prefer a roll call. Thank you, sir. Madam Clerk. Vice Mayor Hutchison. Yes. Council Member Pennamon. Yes. Council Member Christman. Yes. Council Member Barton. Yes. Council Member Cramer. Yes. Council Member Paginon. Yes. Mayor Heightman. Yes, a passage in there, honestly. Thank you. Just if I can ask staff just a process question. So when How does this process work if there is a reason within the county? Do they inform the city first and then? Bring the project to us after it's been re-zoned. How does that process work for us with the city county relationship? So we're not, you know, the public works department, the city is not involved in the re-zone. I mean, certainly the county will extend a courtesy and inform us we have these weekly meetings where we review or we're part of calls where we're notified of projects you know whether they're re-zones that may be happening or being proposed so from an informational standpoint we may we may find out about that but we're certainly not part of the decision making process but Or clear about that. Yeah, but the project, for example, this project, it comes to us as a package, a set of signed and sealed civil plans. We receive an engineering report, typically in the engineering report. That's where they're going to describe what has happened to the property. If it was re-zoned, they provide that that background information so that's typically when we find out exactly what has happened to the property and what the proposed project what the scope is. That's I was just trying to get to how does it go from the county approval to the city being informed and that's through your weekly meetings with the county. So on Monday mornings, we're part of a conference call and their planning staff is on that call reviewing projects and we're included. Allison Bickett, our deputy city manager is included. Dan Orr and Steens now included. These are good, good meetings. That gives us sort of a heads up on what's being proposed. Not yet approved, but just being proposed. That's exactly where I was trying to get you. And then in the bottom of the public works. And then after that, we do inform the city manager and he passes all that information to you just as a heads up or in review of those type projects. Right, thank you. All right, Council, in our public hearings we're going to items pulled from the consent agenda which would be A-A. Mr. McConnell? I believe it was A-C. A-C. The executive session. Yes, sir. Mr. McConnell? I believe it was 8c. 8c? The executive session. Yes, sir. Thank you, Madame Mayor. The city attorney is announcing his request for an executive session close to the public for the purpose of seeking advice concerning settlement negotiations or strategy related to litigation expenditures associated with litigation-styled de Maria Peter versus City of Naples Office of the Judges of Compensation claims, OJCC Case Number 11-002-12FJC. On September 18th, 2024, at 12.30 p.m. in the city's conference room on the second floor of City Hall. The executive session is expected to last approximately one hour. The entire session shall be recorded by a certified court reporter. The reporter shall record the times of commencement and the termination of the session. All discussion and proceedings, the names of all persons present at any time and the names of all persons speaking. No portion of the session will be off the record. The court reporter's notes shall be fully transcribed and filed with the city clerk within a reasonable time after the meeting. The City Council will not take action during the executive session, but may take action concerning settlement negotiations or strategy related to litigation at a future public meeting. Following individuals will be present during the executive session. Mayor Teresa Heitman, council members Terry Hutchison, Ray Chrisman, Beth Petronoff, Bill Kramer, Linda Peniman, Byrne Barton, City Manager Jay Butishwar, City Attorney Matthew McConnell, Assistant City Attorney Ralph Brooks, and Attorney George A. Helm, the third, and a representative from Dines Court reporting. Thank you. And that takes us to item 11A. Can I use words? Would you like me to read the title, Mayor? Please. I'm 11 a. Would you like me to read the title there please a resolution determining amendment number two to site plan petition 20-sp16 for the purpose of approving a revision to the uniform sign plan as allowed during site plan or amended site plan review to increase the size of allowable signage for the golf short playhouse on property owned by golf short playhouse Inc. A Florida not not for profit corporation and located at 100 goodlet Frank Road South more fully described here and providing an effective date. Thank you. Thank you. Sorry. Yeah, Mayor, if I may, before we get into two staff's presentation. So the history behind this and I maybe I'll start with why I'm discussing this. I made an interpretation a few weeks ago and as you can tell in the staff report there is a section identified as 46-33 subparagraph H and this section talks about changes in the site plan. As I was preparing for the meeting yesterday with staff, it came to my attention that a prior council due to SB 250 decided to not enforce this section of chapter 46-33, specifically subparagraph H. And although those sections are in the code of ordinances, which is where I turn to analyze things, we are actually enforcing the prior version of this section, which is ordinance 2020. With that being said, there is no due to council's direction. There is no proposed significant change. None of that language in the staff report is relevant or accurate The whereas close clause in the resolution is citing a section that again is in the code But based on council direction is not being enforced This is part of a bigger conversation that we're going to have at the workshop on 916 Hence the issue why we need to get some direction on what we do with the code Because obviously I started a few months ago and that's where I turn and here we are So with that being said I Will turn to planning staff on a little bit of the history because I believe there was an amended amendment to the site plan that occurred in March of this year, which was amendment number one. This is technically amendment number two. However, if you don't have this language in the code and you are resorting back to what the 2020 version of the code states, amendments to site plans must go to the Planning Advisory Board for a recommendation prior to City Council review. The first amendment for this specific project in March did not do so. I was not here, I will not apply on why that did not happen. But I wanted to clarify this before we got started in the substance because of the direction in the staff report and the whereas clauses in the resolution. And I do want to say my apologies to Mr. Davies because by the time I found out of this, I would normally have called him and alerted him, but it was too late in the day and the meeting started earlier today. Thank you. At this point, thank you for the overall review. Do we have swearing in of the petitioners and, okay, and disclosers and moving forward? Yes, ma'am. Okay. It is quasi-judicial so yes. Thank you. For all those in the name of the testimony, please raise your hand. Do you swear a firm of the testimony you're about to give? Be the truth, the whole truth and that we're meant to give. Yes. Thank you, Council disclosures, Councilmember Pinneman. I've had no contact. No contact. No contact. No contact. The meeting with the site discussed this matter with staff. Cramer. The meeting with the site and talk to staff about this. Petrino. The meeting with the site spoke with staff. No contact. Vice mayor. No contact. I am familiar with the site. I have had conversations with the city staff and I remain to keep an open mind. Thank you. I am very familiar with the site and discuss this with staff and no further contact. End of disclosures. Thank you. Mr. Davies. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Good morning, Mayor and Council for the record and old Davies. With a lot of form of Davies to come to have the applicant. Happy to discuss this further, Mr. McConnell, but you do have authority to hear this matter today. I'll let Ms. Quarry address exactly what we're requesting today, which is a back plate on an already approved sign to allow the playhouse to open with Gulf Shore playhouse Baker Theatre and Education Center on the eastern and western facades. It is not a significant change as determined by your city manager and city attorney and I'll defer to staff to their presentation but as a legal matter you do have authority to hear this. Your city manager has authority to approve it administratively but it's my understanding based on discussions with city manager and Mr. City attorney that they wanted your input on this. To preview briefly the substance. There is a single slide PowerPoint that we wanted to share with you that articulates the difference between what you approved previously and what we're proposing today. And the only difference is the addition of a backplate. So when we were here before and you approved the uniform sign package, which is how we're proceeding pursuant to the playhouse public service district section of the PD and governed by the criteria within that PD document. You approved a series of signs. The difference between that and what we're proposing today is simply a backplate that blends into the building and is painted the same as the building to support the letters. What was previously approved was naked lettering. And now the request is to have a backplate to simply support those letters without changing the aesthetics and still meeting the criteria and the PD that you had previously approved. As you all know, the playhouse is very anxious to open next month. I believe that they had their final inspections today or yesterday and are anxiously awaiting the city to issue the TCO. But the signs identifying the playhouse need to get erected on the building. They have been manufactured and we need to be able to respectfully put Gulf Shore playhouse on the east and west facades so people can identify the building and of course the honor the Baker family and include their name on the sign as well. So the difference between, we were asked to come here today as in following your process for that, we submitted the requisite documents. We've been anxiously awaiting this hearing because this is what stands in front of the playhouse and putting their name and the Baker's name on the playhouse and anticipation of opening next month. And so from a legal perspective, we do believe that the city at an administrative level has authority to approve this. You certainly have authority to approve this. And all we're talking about here is adding a backplate that blends into the building that would support the letters that are depicted on your screen that show Gulf Shore Playhouse, Baker, Theater, and Education Center. With that, Ms. Quarry's here, I'm happy to answer any questions with certainly deferred to staff presentation, and we will await your questions. Thank you, Madam Mayor, thank you, Council. Thank you, Council, any questions for Councilmember Petrona. Just a couple. It doesn't look like this is the only change. It looks like if I'm looking here that it's gotten bigger So the the square footage of the signs aggregated has increased because The way that the the city staff is calculating that is that they're counting the square footage of the backplate Versus just the lettering right so that has increased from a square overall aggregate square footage standpoint. So the font size, you know, I'm seeing as approved and proposed, the font size and the proposed is larger on the piece on our deck that we received. Is that not that's not true? That's no. That's not intended to be the same. To be clear for the record, the only change is the addition of the back plate that blends in to support the letters. The bet. Oh, sorry. It's going to say that, unfortunately, that's not what the plans that were provided to staff state. It does. The lettering is larger. In addition to the back plate, Mr. Davies is correct that when we calculate sign area, we include that backer plate, but the lettering has also increased in size. It's laid out in the agenda memo. Those incremental increases that we've seen. Could you go through those increases that from your staff report? I'd be happy to. Okay, you'll get to that in a second. And then my other question is, one of logistics, you're saying it's going to be a backplate that's going to be essentially what you're saying is it's going to be invisible to, because it's going to be flush with the wall, the same colors, the wall. I assume the matted, matted the wall, because it's a certain material. If it's kind of shiny, it looks like a sign. It's what it is. Good morning. Good morning. Kristen Quarry, CEO of Gullscher Playhouse, 100 Goodlitt Frank Road South. Naples. First of all, if it is listed that there are letters of any kind, I thought I was coming in to speak to you about the simplest task of the day. So I apologize that this already seems to have gotten confusing. But if there is any technical, I'm looking at both pictures and I know that they are exactly the same size and they've been approved and they've always been the same size since we started the construction in 2021 and since we started the design in 2018. So the size of these letters were approved by the bakers. They were agreed to between us. And so the size of the letters should never have changed if there is something in a plan or in a memo somewhere that says the letters have increased in size. That is not our intent or not our understanding. What has occurred is I think many of you have probably built houses or built buildings new construction. And while it's easy and beautiful to put a picture on a screen or on a page and have lettering that says Galtrow Playhouse Baker Theater and Education Center in such a beautiful way, which I've been looking at since 2018 when the first designs of the building came out. Apparently, it's much harder to execute that in person and what they discovered when they got to the fly tower and they started to try to install these letters, which were approved previously and which are intended to light up to be illuminated. They determined that the actual, what we call the arbor, which is where all the ropes are, that pull up the drops and the furniture, were in the way of enough wires to actually illuminate each of these letters individually, much to my chagrin. Because you can imagine, my dismay having a $20 million donor and the bakers who are so dear to us, they're going to expect to come to the unveiling on October 17th and see their name and lights on the side of our building. So what we first tried to do was we tried to, they suggested, the sign people suggested we create a raceway, which essentially is like if this were the letter and this would be this little tiny strip of a backplate that would attach the letters essentially to the building. They looked horrible because you can imagine the top of the letter and the bottom of the letter are kind of like dangling in space off of this little tiny back plate. So it was my suggestion that we create a back plate that fully backs the letters. So Councilwoman Petronov, to your question, it's not gonna be flush with the building. There will be several, three inches that will come off the building, several inches that will come off the building. And so my hope, my sincere hope, is that it will blend in. It'll be the same color as the stucco, the same matte finish as the stucco. So my hope is nobody looks up there and goes, oh look at that back plate. My hope is that they look up and they see the beautiful sign that says, Galsha Playhouse Baker Theater and Education Center, and that they are fixed cleanly and smoothly to the side of the back plate as opposed to dangling off of a little raceway. So aggregate-wise, it does increase the sign because, of course, it adds another however many square feet behind the letters. But the size of the letters and the size of the, the size that it's taking up on the side of the building remains exactly the same as what you proposed. Actually, I think it's a little bit more, because the back plate was expensive. We didn't want to spend so much money. So they actually squeezed the letters tighter together. So the actual size on the side of the building will be a slightly smaller than it was before in terms of spacing of letters. Does that make sense? Councillor Pettinot. I understand what you're saying. We have conflicting information. So I would like to defer to the staff report to hear about size. Thank you. I have Vice Mayor and the Council Member Penman. Thank you, Madam Mayor. And thank you, Miss Quarry. Mr. Davies. So I also looked at the materials and it seemed that the signage letters were larger on the proposed sign as opposed to the approved sign. And so I'm hearing a couple things. One, it's an optical illusion, but that the materials that have been submitted to planning do in fact include letters of a larger size? The drawing does. The drawing. It must be, yeah, I don't know if the dimensions don't match the rendering. But you can see on the... So there's some confusion here. Yeah. And if there is, it's not us. It's not me who's trying to take advantage of you. I understand. I just for the other. My understanding was always that the letters were the same size and we knew they needed to be in order to come back to you and tell you this. So there's some confusion. There's a disconnect here on what we're really looking at and the materials that have been provided in the packet for the public to consider and for city council. So Mr. Davies, I heard you that City Council has the authority and Mr. McConnell, I'm just going to ask that you listen to this. So you're saying City Council has the authority to take action on this matter today. Mr. McConnell, is that true? The code is clear that City Council has the final review of site plans and amendments. Okay. So follow up question then. What does our signage approval process provide in terms of the various board engagement, even though we may have the authority? What's the proper way to do this. Mr. McConnell or shot good. Yeah I'm going to default to staff on how sign our sign applications are process. What should the process be and what changes if we approve this today what part of that process are we not going through? So this is different from a signage approval for any other project. This is part of a plan development. And so when this plan development was approved, they wrote, as you create your own development standards in a plan development, for this district of the plan development, they wrote into the PD that signage for this in this district could be approved as a uniform sign plan through the site plan process. So the signage is not intended to comply with the code of ordinances that the PD allows them to create a uniform sign plan for this building and have that uniform sign plan approved through the site plan process. In the site plan process, should this change have been looked at by either the DRB or the planning advisory board? Well that is part of the confusion and discrepancy that we're discussing today. So the uniform sign plan originally was approved was reviewed by PAB and approved by City Council when the site plan, the original site plan for this project was approved. You looked at a uniform sign plan. I remember that. Yep. Now a few months ago in March, City Council saw a revision to that uniform sign plan. At the time it was determined by the city attorney that the uniform sign plan could be amended by City Council outside of the site plan process that it was not required to go through that site plan process. So it was approved just as an amendment to the uniform sign plan. However, council required DRB approval review and approval of that prior to council's determination. Now we have a second amendment to that uniform sign plan. A second amendment. So on the first amendment, we went through DRB and then it came to council. Yes. We don't have any more questions. Yeah, just let's go straight to the staff report. Yep, just one more, Madam Mayor. Why the explanation about a backplate being needed to support these letters and the power, right, the electricity. Was that just mistakenly left off of the various times that we've looked at this previously? It was not known to us when we got approval on that time before that there would be any issue other than to put these signs directly affixed to the building just like we had always planned. And when they started to put their focus on it and executed suddenly it was it they were I was told that they hadn't properly made way through this arbor in order to get all the little electrical wires out and they needed to bring only one wire through. And therefore they needed a back plate or a race way to be able to bring only one wire through and therefore they needed a back plate or a raceway to be able to then get one wire through the building and then distribute them to each of the letters and I understand and we believe now that certified appropriate electricians people that know what they're doing have looked at this and it's ready for prime time. Yes, yes, that's true. But they didn't know before. Okay. You know, there are lots of frustrations I can use to really be building a $72 million building. Okay. This is the least of them. All right. Thank you. Thank you Madam Mayor. Thank you. This is for the petitioners. Agent Council Member Pintamin. Well, maybe it's a staff member. Both, please. I hope it's not. It may be a staff question, because I'm not discerning any difference in the lettering based on what we've received here. Okay. Let's go to the staff report if there's no more questions. Thank you. Don't worry. All right. Good morning for the record Leslie Donner the city and Naples Plain Department My resume and qualifications are on file with this petition and I've been previously certified as an expert in planning and zoning matters before council I also have a the history on this particular site plan you see me often bringing up the site plans from Naples Square and this plan development before you for approval as Erica had mentioned earlier, the original site plan for the Gulf Shore playhouse was considered and approved by City Council in November of 2021. And at that time as part of the site plan review process and consistent with the plan development council approved a uniform sign plan the for for the signage on this particular property and Then in January of this year the playhouse came before you and asked To make some changes to that uniform sign plan and you attorney at the time Had an opinion that that those could go those changes could go directly to City Council for review and approval. Council, you asked that the DRB weigh in on that and give the some feedback because of the urban design components and the aesthetics involved. So we took those amendments to the design plan to the DRB. They made some recommendations, some conditions, and then came back to Council and you approved that those changes. We would call that the first amendment to the uniform sign plan. And then fast forward a few months later and the sign permit was submitted for the signs that were considered or for the signs that were approved with that first amendment to the uniform sign plan. And that sign permit came to me and I identified that the square footage and the sign type was inconsistent with the plans that have been submitted for council and had been considered and reviewed. So we reached out to the petitioner and said, hey, this does not match, this doesn't line up. How would you like to address this? Are you going to revise these plans consistent with the approvals from council or do you want to amend the uniform sign plan again? So they submitted an application for second amendment to the uniform sign plan. And you'll see in the agenda memo that second amendment is what is before us today. And that as they mentioned includes this back plate, this backer board for the letters to be affixed to. And you've heard their testimony today as to the necessity for electrical and such matters. The thing that I think it's really important to remember when considering these changes is that the intent of the uniform sign plan is to allow some flexibility in signage. And so the language in the Naval Square Plan development, I'm going to read it for you. It says that during site plan or amended site plan review, city councils authorize to approve a uniform sign plan for signage on a building outside the designated sign plan. I'm going to pause right there. In our D downtown we have sign bans. So it says any on these buildings the signage goes in this designated sign band and there is not necessarily limitation on square footage of signage provided it fits in that sign ban. And so when the language for the Naval Square Plan development was developed, they took that and said, if a building or a developer doesn't want to follow that sign band signage, that they have this option for a uniform sign plan. And it states for signage on a building outside the sign band, including without limitation donor plaques, when the aggregate square footage of tenant signage on a building outside the sign band, including without limitation donor plaques, when the aggregate square footage of tenant signage depicted on the unified plan is, in the aggregate, less than 50% of the square footage of tenant signage permitted under the code. City Council consider that, and then it gives you six criteria. And so what the petitioner has provided in their plans, and they have always done this, which has been very very helpful for review as they have shown on the orange. You'll see in the package there the orange area shows you where the sign band would be and it gives you a total square footage of what that is. So anything on their uniform sign plan all the sign types has to be 50 less than 50% of that orange area square footage. So the original, the original uniform sign plan had a total square footage of 16% of that signage. So that was the one that was approved in November. When we came back earlier this year, that first amendment to the uniform sign plan, that signage increased to 42.7%. So it's an increase, but it was still under that 50% of the uniform sign plan, that signage increased to 42.7%. So it's an increase, but it was still under that 50% of the total sign area. And then with the plans that were submitted with the second amendment, now we're buttoned up at 49.3% of the tolls were footage. So we're still in compliance with that 50%, the aggregate 50%, but we are buttoned up pretty close to that 50% square footage. And the petitioner is right, when we calculate signage, we calculate around the rectangle, around the whole piece of the sign for wall signs. And so that does reflect an in increase in sign where it is difficult for staff to determine is the size of the letters. But ultimately, that backer plate is what's gonna determine the square footage of the sign. And so that is a that is a detail. I think it's an important detail, but ultimately when we're talking about the total square footage of the wall sign, that's going to be determined by that rectangle around that backer plate. So that that is how we got and you'll see that in the in the agenda memo. I tried to lay that out in a step by step is how we got and you'll see that in the in the agenda memo. I tried to lay that out in a step by step is how we got here With that you know staffs available for questions related to this you know, we were pretty well versed in this this Plan development hopefully we can answer any questions that you may have I'm not sure that on the letters, I don't discern a difference in size particularly from what we had before. So you're going to have to help me. Yeah, the dimensions are the same, but if you look at the measurements on the presentation drawing. The measurements don't match up with the perimeter of the letters. So it might have just been a poorly rendered drawing, but you can see, I don't know if this will get. So I'm looking at a difference per half. But look at these dimensions here. They clearly don't delineate the bottom perimeter of our top of those letters. So whether it's an optical illusion or just not rendered accurately to scale. I see where you're going with this. Okay. Yeah. So you're saying that you don't feel that it's a two point two. I mean if we'd be willing to you know note for the record that the dimensions are the same. But they. And if I may, we just wanted to show you a side by side without the back plate and the back plate. Please forgive us to the extent that certain dimensions came over from a different version. The idea was not to show you really any dimensions quite frankly. We snipped that from the plan that we had and just tried to show you side by side as we wanted to make sure that you understood just how minuscule this changes. And if I may, you know, we appreciate and respect and feel we have complied many times with the city's very technical processes. We respect that. We believe in process. We think that's very important. To staff's point about this being sort of the second amendment. The first amendment was a whole series of science, right? You'll recall, those of you that were on council at that time, we went through a detailed presentation, we went through the six criteria that Ms. Delmer mentioned and you determined that that full sign package, right? That was the first amendment that that met your criteria in the PD document. So we are back today to follow your process, which candidly could have been approved administratively, but I know that your staff wanted your direction. And what we wanted to show you with that side by side is because it's hard to even tell the difference between the two but the difference and the purpose of that was purely to be illustrative, not technical dimensionally, but to be illustrative to show you one with the back plate and one without the back plate. And the plans that your staff have reviewed and the documents that are included within your agenda memorandum are the proposed plan set. So one thing that might be causing confusion, I'm so sorry because I'm literally texting us. We're talking because I'm texting architect and owners rep. They are confirming that both in both cases the top letters are two feet, two inches in the bottom letter, one feet, two 10 inches. And our owners are pointed out that it might be that the font changed. And the reason the font changed was because once we had put up, we only had the B-A-K-E-R letters as a composite to try to do the race way to see if it would work. And I realized at that time that the font of the letters were based on an old font scheme that we had been using way back in 2018 when the building first got designed. So I asked for us to change the font to match more with what our current branding looks like, et cetera, so that the font letters changed. But the size, the architect just confirmed that in the new application, the size is exactly the same as the old, two feet 2 and 1 foot 10. So if there's anything on paper that looks different it could be because the font is slightly different but the size should be exactly the same. Ultimately should council approve this change in the resolution references a set of drawings called the revised uniform sign plan dated July 30. Those are the drawings that are up on your screen. Those have those particular dimensions and they also include that percentage, the sign percentage. That would be the document that I would be utilizing when the sign permit is resubmitted. So if that is consistent with what council's action is, that's the document that I will reference unless different actions taken by council. So what kind of action would you need on our part if that was our pleasure? Right now, this, that document is referenced in the resolution already. Okay. And so that it, nothing beyond keeping that reference in the resolution. OK. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Petronoff. My question was answered. Thank you. OK, Kristen. Thank you. So just a couple of questions. The just to make sure we're all clear, the action before us today as well as the other, the signage on the playhouse, including the proposed modification are fully within our code and discretion to grant. There's nothing that is inaccessible. City Council has the final approval authority for the uniform sign plan and amendments to it. So second, just again to remind us and for the record many months ago, early this year, we decided to send the proposed sign package to DRB, given that they designed review experts in our city to review it. They made recommendations, came back to us, we approved them. And that was the so-called amendment one. Yes. So this is the only other change. So that amendment, yes. Yes. This is the only change since then or currently before us. Yes. And what we're talking about is a change that evolves based on there. On the call of short playhouses. Construction management. And a lot and lighting experts will provide a more secure and properly illuminated sign on the east and west sides of the building. That's a question more to you in this curry. This is, thank you for bringing that up because adding the back plate makes it a lot more safe in heavy rains or a storm than if it were hanging off this raceway. So now we'll have the impact the same effect as if it were hanging on the side of the building proper. And maybe a question for you, Miss Curry, who do you think has the greatest interest in making sure that the signage on this building is not only safe secure, but also aesthetically attractive for the patrons, visitors, and residents of the city. Who do you think has the greatest self-interest in making sure that happens? I don't know what answer you're looking for. What's the right answer, but it feels like the answer is me. That's the answer I was looking for. And I would say it's you, your board, your management team, your construction experts who have the greatest both knowledge and self-interest that what is going to be put up there is not only from a construction standpoint appropriate but from a design and aesthetic standpoint is something you're going to be proud of. And we have, I just want to remind us all, especially perhaps some of the three members who just were elected earlier this year. We actually have a Memorim of Understanding and a private public partnership with the Gulf Shore Playhouse, we the city, don't we? It's sitting in a dusty drawer somewhere. But I know that. It's not, I'm watching it go up every day. And you know, we have, we have, way back I think it was in early 2021, we entered into a public private partnership with the Gulf Shore Playhouse around constructing this playhouse, building a garage, and doing everything we could on both sides to make this happen. And I bring that up because in one sense, this petitioner's like any other petitioner comes before us, but in other sense, this petitioner's like any other petitioner comes before us, but in another sense it's not. That's, it's unique. And in terms of the commitments that the city made at the front end. And we're looking at a, a, a, a theater that's scheduled to open in six weeks. Six weeks. that's scheduled to open in six weeks and have the first production two weeks after that, first public production two weeks after that. And there's a lot of things that need to get done. And I think we can micromanage some of these things to death, but I think this is a pretty simple one to me. We should approve this as an enhancement that's needed, makes sense, and let them get on their way and get ready for October 17th. Okay, thank you. I have a crammer and then vice mayor. This seems so insignificant, easy and common sense, and what are we doing? I talk about getting in the weeds. So thank you for your patience and your tenacity. Bring this thing world-class, unbelievable, amenity for our community. Thank you. And I want to make a move that we accept this proposal is presented and get it done. I'll let you make that motion when it's appropriate. Yeah, thank you again. It wasn't lost on me that you're at 49.3. And I think 50 is the metric where you trigger some different, perhaps different responses. I did the math and you're about 7,100 off of that. So it deals a deal, right? We can't go back on it now. And I would tell you the community, if the the dimensions fit we really should approve forth with so let's get this done council thank you I have one question about the illumination is it brighter or remains the same I have not seen any resubmitted permit plans after the initial rejection comments, but I don't believe the intent was to eliminate any brighter. I think it was to secure the electrical for the illumination. That's correct, Madam Mayor. Thank you. And are there changes to the monument sign? No, ma'am. Okay. Any further questions for staff? Closing remarks? No, thank you all very much. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. And I have no public comment. So with that, I'm going to take one second, Mr. Mayor. I know Councillor Embercramer is excited to get this motion. I just want to clarify what I said in the beginning there. The motion needs to include the modification of some of the, whereas, clauses in the removal of that section that I referenced. So if you approve it, can you just approve it with the authority for the City Attorney in Planning to make the appropriate modifications to the incorrectly cited sections. I would like to make a motion to approve this resolution with the City Attorney in City Planning working on whatever amendments are required to make it work. How's that? I have a motion by Council Member Kramer and a second by Council Member Barton. Madam Clerk, please. Council Member Peniman. Yes. Council Member Kramer. Yes. Vice Mayor Hudgeson. Yes. Council Member Christmas. Yes. Councillor Member Barton. Yes. Councillor Member Pejano. Yes. Mayor Hayden. Yes and thank you. Good luck. I want to thank staff because they could have just said oh well it's in oops and ignored it and we probably wouldn't have even caught it but I like the transparency and the honesty. So thank you. With that, we'll go to 11B. Mr. McComb. A resolution for the purpose of determining outdoor dining petition 24-0D6 for changes to the approved life safety plan for the restaurant known as the kitchen to include 27 tables, 150 seats, 33 bar stools, and 12 umbrellas on property owned by Victoria Square Properties LLC and located at 1200 central avenue more fully described herein and providing an effective date. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Sorry. Do you swear to the staff? Do you swear to the staff? Do you swear to the staff? Do you swear to the staff? Do you swear to the staff? Do you swear to the staff? Do you swear to the staff? Do you swear to the staff? Do you swear to the staff? Do you swear to the staff? Do you swear to the staff? received a phone call from the petitioners agent did not speak with him. Martin? Is it a sight met with petitioners? Had conversation with staff. Let's see. I've visited the site multiple times. I've eaten and drank at the establishments that are open. I've met multiple times with the petitioner regarding this matter. And I've spoken and met with staff regarding this matter. Cramer. I've spoken to the petitioner, his agent and our staff, and reviewed all the documentation. Petrino, visited the site, spoke with staff, looked at the site online as well and looked at what the press was and how it was advertised. Vice mayor? Yes, I've visited the site several times. I met with a petitioner and the petitioner's agent. I've had emails on this subject that are part of the public record. I've met with staff and I've kept an open mind throughout the process. Thank you. Thank you. I am familiar with the site. I visited the site with one of the owners or partners of this project, Met with staff and other than that, no con. So, petitioners, agent, good afternoon. Good afternoon, Madam Mayor, Vice Mayor, City Council, Claibh Rooker with a law firm of Jeffy Pasadoma 821 Fifth Avenue South. A housekeeping matter. I think a couple of letters, or at least one letter came in very late. Is that as a matter of routine, may part of the public record or how? How do I ensure? Thank you for recognizing that. Do you want to refer to what letter might have come in late? It was last night. A resident of Naples Square wrote in support of the petition. Okay. I have copies here. Okay. We'll include it in the record. If council has no objections. Seeing no objections can go into the record. Thank you. Our law firm represents the applicant TNB Florida LLC for this outdoor dining application related to the kitchen minibar restaurant located at 1200 central avenue The application seeks revisions to the already approved outdoor dining concept was which is an operation as we speak. Shown here is the resolution approving the outdoor dining a couple of years ago. Interestingly, that approval was granted by the City Council. Expressely, without any expressly associated indoor restaurant concept with it. So it is purely outdoor dining concept when approved two years ago to my knowledge the only such approval in the city. Since then the opportunity arose for the applicant to add indoor restaurant elements to the outdoor space, resulting in a unique creative restaurant concept that offers three different dining experiences. I don't know if this works. Shown here. Shown here is the proposed life safety plan which has been approved by the fire marshal. At the bottom of your screen is 12th Street to orient you to the left of the screen essential avenue on top of the screen is good that Frank Road. So north is going from right to left on the screen. The kitchen and minibar space is shown towards the top there. That is the already approved in operation space. The alley is a new indoor, one of the new indoor elements that were proposing to be added down towards the middle of the bottom. This is an eclectic graffiti-filled New York alley type of atmosphere. And then finally the district in the bottom right-hand corner, that provides more of an upscale jazzy ambiance, a more chic experience, if you will. All three elements work together as one restaurant, owned by one entity, the applicant, with the kitchen serving all three with different food choices, one point of sale system, one set of consolidated financials for revenues and expenses, and the kitchen that serves all three of these areas will be open at all times, any of the three dining elements are open. In a moment, the owner, Christopher Schu-Kart, will come up to provide a brief history of the evolution of this creative restaurant concept. It didn't all happen at the same time. Located in the city's design district. We are here today before you primarily for some requested revisions to the approved Life safety plan for the outdoor area and a requested change in operating hours for the outdoor area All of which will be detailed by Mr. Schu-Kart in a moment However in summary this application seeks to tweak the approved life safety plan but with no change to the Swear footage of the already approved outdoor dining area. Essentially the request is to approve a reduction in the number of tables but an increase in the number of seats around those tables. The application also seeks approval of a privacy wall in front of the restroom doors and an adjustment of the operation hours for the outdoor dining space such that it can open at 11 a.m. instead of 3 p.m. the existing approved opening hour for the outdoor space. Basically Mr. Schucart hopes to be able to offer lunch in the outdoor dining area. Finally here are a couple of renderings so hopefully put things in a better perspective. Here is the approved outdoor area. Notice the picnic tables, the palm trees, and the VW van. The kitchen shown here on the left-hand side of the screen will serve all three elements of the restaurant, the outdoor area, the alley, and the district which is up towards the top just out of view. Here is a closer view of the outdoor area. The seats you see are added around the palm tree tables. Those seats are not in existence today. Mr. Schu-Kart feels that the customers would like to have a place to sit rather than just stand around upon tree tables. And at the ends of the picnic tables, you see there two kind of bar stool seating seats at each end of the picnic tables. And those seats account for the majority of the additional seats being requested. And here on the left side of the screen, you see the privacy wall, which is designed to shield views into the restrooms, which are on a very extreme left hand side of your picture. Right now, the door's open. Patients can see right into the restrooms. So this privacy wall is added to provide some privacy. With that all concluded, and that's Mr. Schu Schuchart to come up, there are some suggested conditions from staff in the agenda memorandum and the draft resolution and I assume there will be an appropriate time to go through those and discuss them. Thank you. Thank you. Good afternoon. Good afternoon. Mayor, vice mayor, City Council members. My name is Christopher Schucart. I will be representing TMB Florida LLC as one of the managers of the LLC today. As you've read the staff report, it was probably the longest and most difficult staff report I've ever had to deal with in my 20 year history. We've certainly made a few missteps along the way. And we are, however, here to correct those, stand before you and work through every one of the issues. I would like you to focus on the fact that we have been engaged and involved in this process. We are ready, willing, and actually frankly we're excited to work through this and answer any and all questions that you have today. So the question is, how did we get here? On August, in August of 2022, as Clay had mentioned, we received approval for an outdoor dining venue, along with the construction of an indoor kitchen facility. On September 28, 2022, Hurricane Ian made landfall in devastated Southwest Florida. As a result of the hurricane, the wine store, which is located at 1200 Central Avenue, Suite 105 was devastated with three feet of water and they made the difficult decision to not reopen. Two doors down in Suite 103, my shower door was located and they received the same amount of water. And they looked at the space and decided it wasn't financially feasible and in their best interest to reopen in that location. They did, however, want to stay downtown. And so they were relocated next to the new kitchen facility and they are now currently located at 8 Goodlitt Road South. They were willing to spend the money. They wanted to have a larger space and front on central avenue. In November 2022, my partner and I, we had a discussion and knew that we had to make a decision. These spaces, the former shower door and the former wine store space, were going to get leased. And we had always discussed kind of jokingly that if those spaces ever came available, we would take them and annex them into our restaurant operations. And so we thought it was going to be more of a three to five-year plan, but we got thrust forward with the storm and decided to make the decision to lease those spaces out and have them annex and a part of our restaurant operation because if we didn't, they would have been leased out and extended into the future indefinitely. So in November of 2022, we signed a contract with MHK to do the design work for both district and the alley. They were already under contract for the outdoor dining and the kitchen facilities at that point. The district building permit was issued with the understanding that the kitchen facilities would be located in the adjacent yacht club subspace. They were going to operate a subshop during the day and then at night they were going to pivot and the kitchen was going to be utilized and they would provide all of the food necessary for District Unfortunately, the owner of yacht club subs decided that that was not for him and he did not want to stay late and produce food in order to qualify us as what we needed to be as a restaurant as defined in the code. So we decided to pivot and now the food for that facility, that dining room, comes from the approximate thousand square foot kitchen and food preparation facility located at two goodlet road south. Food orders in district are placed through a centralized point of sale system. We have computer terminals and we have handheld wireless point of sale systems where our servers can take orders from our patrons within district. The order is then sent to the kitchen. The food is prepared. A food runner takes the food and delivers it to the customer within district. It's the same process that is followed within any other restaurant within the city of Naples. Please note that there's no physical requirements that needed to be made in order to make this change. The food simply comes in from a different door than it was going to come in from through yacht club subs. In January of 2023, I received a phone call from Leslie Dolmer, the deputy planning director, stating that she had received our sign permit for the alley. And I said, well, that's great. We've already paid for it and it's ready to be installed. She said, well, there is a problem and we have no records on file for any sort of build out for the alley. And so I was taken back by it, we looked and come to find out there were no permits filed for that space. If you recall in my opening remarks, we had contracted in November of 2022 for both district and the alley. We had designed it. We just had never annexed it into the permits that were in place. There could be blame cast in a number of different directions. However, I'm here today to take all the blame and take accountability for the issue that happened and try to rectify the issues that are before us. We were notified in January of the issues and days later, some early part of February, 2023, we submitted a building permit for the unpermitted work with inside of the alley. I just want to give a little scale and scope of the matter. So our entire restaurant project build out was a little over $3 million. The unpermanated work within the alley was approximately $2,000. We had a plumbing line for a sink, we had a cold water line and a hot water line, as well as some miscellaneous electric work. Now there is some theme that goes with the alley concept, but from an unpermitted work perspective, it's small in comparison. Again, not trying to take away from the fact that we didn't get a permit for that work, but again, we immediately moved in to rectify the situation and got a permit filed, or filed a permit, as I said, within a short order after being notified of the issue. We went back and forth with staff on the building permit issuance for the alley. And I think we had gone back and forth three different times. We submitted, we got rejected, submitted, rejected, and then finally resubmitted. And we reached an impasse at that point. And so I just wanted to read an excerpt out of the application for the district, excuse me, an excerpt out of the alley building permit documents. All of the food for this restaurant dining room space will be prepared in the existing kitchen facility located steps away at two goodlet road south and will therefore be incorporated into the overall restaurant operations for TMB Florida LLC, whereby services, staff, facilities will be shared, including but not limited to bathrooms, both employee and public, mobsink, kitchen, etc. This small dining room space will also function as a private dining room for special events and private parties and will serve food till 1.30am. After months of back and forth as I mentioned, we received a letter of opinion on June 7th from Attorney Stokes stating three conditions. First, the entire operation needs to be licensed and held as a single establishment. This includes single business tax, a fire safety plan, which we have approved before you today. And a signage, and signage, which clearly reflects to the public that this is a single establishment, not three separate businesses. The second condition is the outdoor dining approval must be amended and approved by City Council, which brings us before you today. And of note, the three conditions that Mr. Stokes put forth we are willing and able to accept those today. I would like to now take a little further dive into the outdoor dining petition request before you. Clay had mentioned a few of them, but I wanted to just make sure we put them all on the record in case you have any questions. So the first item that we- David, could we put the life safety plan up? Or is that a me thing? Oh, there we go. Boop, that, okay. Great, thank you. So the first item in this petition is we shifted the entrance along central avenue that showed at the top left of your page that was shifted about three feet to the west to accommodate some existing conditions on sidewalk leading into the right away. As Clay had mentioned, we added an e-pay screening to block the view into the men's and women's restroom. That's one of those situations where we didn't realize once we built it, once you were sitting at the picnic table that you could see into the women's and the men's restroom. So we did a change in the orientation, we were requesting a change in the orientation of the picnic tables to create uniformity and ease of access and maneuverability for not only customers but our staff. We've added stools at the end of each picnic table, and one picnic table was removed. So we had originally received approval for eight picnic tables. We've now reduced it to seven and added two tools on the end of each picnic table. And again, this was through the course of the last ten months of learning and seeing how the operation works and trying to better serve our customers. We also added stools to each of the palm tree tables and as Clay mentioned, the majority of the seats that we are adding revolve around the palm tree table stools. So again, this is one of the evolution of the business, where we saw people not necessarily gravitating towards the palm tree tables as much because they want to sit down. Again, the people are there. We're just facilitating them in a different way to be at the existing table. Tables are existing, so we've added or proposing to add four stools at each of the palm tree tables. We've also added a couple of seats on our western side, just adjacent to the bowl, and again, those additional seats will still be accommodated through our approved life safety plan. We have added a proposing to add 14 fans to each of the umbrellas. Obviously we're an outdoor dining restaurant and climate control is a big issue. Climate control in the summer, climate control in the winter. So we are proposing to have fans during the summer months and heaters during the winter months. And once the temperature shifts, we'll take one out, add the other one back. And so we wanted to update that on our plan as well. One of the things that we didn't have on our plan originally is trash can locations. It's one of those things we didn't really get into the weeds enough when we were designing it, but in reality, obviously we need some trash cans. So we've placed the trash cans on the plan. We are proposing a mobile service bar location for special events and busy days. Again, it's phrased as a mobile bar, but it also functions as a way in which for people to order food. Again, go back to the mobile ordering device. That device is really a, it's like our cell phone, it's a mobile computer. You can order food from it, you can order drinks from it, you can close your checkout, you really can do everything from it. And so what we were requesting is the ability to have that brought in and brought out. It's not a permanent, but it's not permanent, but it's on wheels and would come in and out as needed. We've also added to the plan some rope and pilings to regulate the entry in the off hours. Again, one of those things we didn't think of, but we couldn't have the entire outdoor dining restaurant open if we weren't open from a security, from a safety, from a liability perspective. So we're proposing to have those so that we can regulate access into the outdoor dining area. As Clay had mentioned, we are also annexing in to the Life Safety Plan per attorney's stock requirement is the alley and district indoor dining rooms. And then last, we added on the plan the locations for live entertainment. In green you will see the locations of the currently approved live entertainment locations and in blue were proposed future live entertainment locations. We showed these on the plan and understand fully that they would have to go through and be approved by City Council. However, with the fact that we have an outdoor dining permit that has to have a life safety plan approved, we wanted to have full transparency and show it on the plan, show it that we've made it through life safety with that. Again, one of the requirements from staff was to remove that. Have no problem with it. We were just showing it as a transparency measure. I would assume that if we added it back later date we wouldn't have to come back and amend our outdoor dining plan. With that, I did want to mention one other thing in closing. So the original occupancy counts for the outdoor dining restaurant are the same occupancy as they are with the added seats. So we're not adding any occupancy. We're simply putting those people in different seats. And I think that's an important distinction when you're understanding whether our occupancy loads growing and it's not. We're occupancy loads staying the same. We're just moving those people into different seating locations. With that, I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have. Thank you. Council questions for the petitioner. Vice mayor? Christopher, thank you. Sorry. I won't hold you up long. I've watched this project and of course we've met several times as indicated during our disclosures and for council. I've seen this, you know, this is in the the CRA district, right? And we're going to be going through and seeing different concepts, perhaps as we further build out and develop that area of our town. I've seen these concepts like this over in the Miami, the Brickle area, as Ghost Kitchens develop, things like that, where it's not the standard restaurant model that we're used to. You go to, perhaps one of the restaurants on Fifth Avenue, they may have indoor dining and outdoor dining, but you don't see variations on that. Now you go to Third Street, in my opinion, you go to Third Street, South, you go over to Camp Yellows, there's some indoor dining, there's outdoor dining, there's a club room, and then there's even a patio outside the club room. So it's kind of interesting. Even Bahama Breeze, the new concept that opened up outside the shopping mall, different spaces being activated and used differently. Look at Virginia. Look at Virginia down on Fifth Avenue. Endor dining, patio, and then that walkway. Dining out there served by the same kitchen. So, and then devices, he's talking about how all the cells are going through one device. And I see a move if you would toward that. Now, I don't do it, but you folks probably do where you scan the menus and you're ordering off your phones. So technology is starting to come into play in some of these restaurants So I just wanted to briefly Commend you for a be and transparent about the mistake and by the way how many mistakes have we handled today a signage mistake On a playhouse, right? We heard about a mural mistake That's though these development Matters aren't easy and I'm glad I'm not doing it but thank you for being fully transparent and trying to provide a solution to get this solved. Thank you, sir. I have a question about the what's a mobile bar? So that was what I was referring to as a mobile service station almost where on busier days or maybe we have a special private party. Right I understand but what that means but what's the purpose of needing that? So the purpose of that is to service the customers if the- It's not a laptop it's a actual- So it's a structure it's I mean it's almost just like it like what this facility would look like here. Just a little wider and skinnier and it would there'd be a server there to take your food in your beverage order. They would make the drinks right then and there. The server the food runners would then bring the food order out to wherever you're you're sitting but as an additional serving point. And then, did the hours of operation change? The outdoor dining. While we were requesting to open at 11 o'clock, instead of 3 o'clock, currently on Monday through Thursday, we are not allowed to open for lunch. And so from a historical perspective, if you, so we came in originally and asked for lunch and this was a new concept. This was all outdoors, you know, it was different. As Clay had mentioned, you know, there's not anything like this had been approved in the city. And so I think the concept, and I don't want to speak for anyone on council at the time, but I think the concept was let's, let's put our toe in the water and see how this operates. And I remember clearly. Yeah. And so we won't go there. And we were fine with it because we knew that we would be able to execute and operate and be great neighbors to everyone around us. And we said at the time, don't be surprised when we come back in. And so here we are. The evening hours were they always till 130? No, the only 130 was for the indoor component. And we asked for an exception to New Year's Eve. Because obviously New Year's Eve falls on different days, and if it's not on a Saturday, you can't, if it fell on a Monday. That's got it. OK, thank you. OK. Council Member Christensen. Thank you. Christopher, you mentioned that there were three conditions that you had been requested to meet months ago Communication from our former city attorney Jim Stokes would you go over those three again? Certainly so Pull them up so I don't miss speak Okay, so the They say that he said that there's two but there's really three in the first one and then the last one is being approved by City Council. The entire operation needs to be licensed and held as a single establishment. This includes a single business tax receipt, a single fire safety plan and signage which clearly reflects to the public that this is a single establishment not three businesses. So the three in your nomenclature are the operating as one enterprise as has a manifest it through a single business tax receipt number one number two that the signage reflects that it is a single entity. And number three, that there's a single life safety plan for the entire enterprise. Correct. Is that what you're saying? Correct. And of note, we originally submitted for a business tax receipt as one entity. Yeah. And the office is right over here where you take it. submitted for a business tax receipt as one entity. Yeah. And the office is right over here where you take it. And so I know because I fill them all out and I submitted them myself. I got there and the gentleman in the intake said, you can't do it as one, you have to do it as three because there's three separate addresses. So went back to my office, tore up all the paperwork that I'd filled up before, refilled everything back out and brought that back in and submitted it as three separate BTRs, per their request. And I'm assuming that's why the request came back that we need to do it as one BTR, which again we're totally fine with, that's what we had done originally and then was told different. So happy to come back to the original method that we had submitted. So if you look at the, and we'll hear from the staff here momentarily, their report. But if you look at the seven recommended staff conditions on page 13 and 14 of the agenda memorandum staff report Number two is Consistent with the first Condition that you just spoke to says the spaces identified as the kitchen district and alley must operate under a single business tax receipt Yes, sir, and number four is consistent with one of the is the kitchen district and alley must operate under a single business tax receipt. Yes, sir. And number four is consistent with one of the three conditions that you indicated and you were willing to adhere to, which is all signage must reflect to the public that the operations and all endure in outdoor spaces are one single restaurant. So that's consistent. Correct. Could I make one comment on the signage? So we opened the kitchen or at least had conceptualized the kitchen and then district and then the alley and so in our minds we were thinking that's what it is it's one restaurant and we could have three different dining Room names. Clearly we can't. So we will be coming back and have to, we want to rebrand it. Because I don't think it, again, the original concept was the Kitchen. So we would come back and rebrand it something. And I don't know what that something is because we just, You know, we're just sort of figuring this out. So I don't, I just want to be abundantly clear that we would come back and briefrand at all of the locations and all of the dining rooms as a new name that most likely wouldn't be the kitchen. And I don't see, I'm just trying to, to, I appreciate what you just said in terms of how you would implement that. And I'm just trying to understand the differences, areas of agreement and differences of opinion at this point. And as I see it, the other five proposed staff conditions are conditions that you don't agree with. No, no, no. I was just giving context that we were originally provided the three. All right. We'll hear the staff. And we can, we're prepared to address all of them. I was just going back to where we were. That's helpful. The goal line was the three and now we've got the staff report will go over all seven of theirs and then we can talk about that. One final quick question. The kitchen, as it's known now, is up and running, corroborating. The district has been up and running, cooperating. The district has been up and running. Correct. You have a liquor license or multiple liquor license? We have one liquor license for the entire project. Same as our health license. We have one health license that would encompass the entirety of the whole project. Same with the business tax receipt concept. We have one business tax receipt from a local government perspective. One health license from a state health department. And one liquor license from an alcohol beverage and tobacco perspective. So your liquor license is for a restaurant. It's for the kitchen. What is the establishment identified on your liquor license? I assume that's how liquor licenses work. I don't know. But I assume when you apply for a liquor license, you say it's for a particular entity. What is that entity? Well, the entity is TMB Florida LLC. And it's DBA, all the DBAs. So if you look at our license, all the DBAs are listed. And the TMB Florida LLC is the named Licensee. So the liquor license would be applied to under the current branding you have to the kitchen, the district and the alley. Yes, sir. And I know one of the issues has been that our D downtown does not permit, as you will know, cocktail lounges or bars. I think it was mentioned in the staff report. Three or four times. Three or four. Or 15. You probably heard that. So, but it's not a conditional use, it's not a permitted use. Correct. In the D downtown. And so, anything that is operating as a, any of the three parts of this establishment has to provide food. Correct. At all hours of if we're open to 130 we've got to provide food. And I think one other question to be answered and staff may have their own opinion on this is are we are we are we saying that each of the three entities must provide at least 51% of sales through food or collectively must in aggregate must it provide 51% of sales of food in order to meet the test that is required through these licenses. Do you have an opinion on that? Well, I would assume if we're being asked to have one business tax receipt, then we would have one criteria to meet. If we came in as three business tax receipts, then I would say there may be an argument for they each stand on their own. I just wanted to get your view on that. Thank you, that's all I have there right now. Thank you. That's all I have there right now. Thank you. Christopher, thanks for coming over today. I need to be here. Yeah, just a couple of random general comments. First of all, it's a new unique concept for the area, obviously. And that involves you creating and building a new business, if you will. And when it's a new business and a new concept, there's no real blueprint for doing that. And you've got some trial and error as you go through, and it's an evolving concept. And obviously, you're doing this to make money and you want to create something that works efficiently and effectively as possible to generate revenue and also help out that particular area of the community from a standpoint of redevelopment that we're trying to accomplish over there. Frank, we've got we just built an $11 million garage. Well $11 million garage, whatever that number is. Thanks 17, sorry. A very expensive garage and whatever that number is. Thanks 17, sorry. A very expensive garage. And we have this county. Rounding air. We need to have people to have the desire to go over there and fill that garage and enjoy that space. And I will say in reference to changing the hours and reference to wanting to serve lunch, how much time have we spent up here as a governing body here determining that we need to have some walkable space over there in that area? We want to make sure that we've got pedestrian friendly area over there. And that means in my head, anyway, that people will potentially be walking around during the day might say, hey, I'd like to stop somewhere for lunch. So, serving lunch over there seems to make a perfect sense to me. So, I applaud you for, again, I understand that it's difficult to create a new concept and start a new business and that you need to try to fix it as you go when you see areas that might, but that might need some help. So I understand where you're coming from and the trials and tribulations and the difficulty of trying to do that as a business owner. And also, you know, having to deal with the governing body. As all of my colleagues up here know, I am one for small government. And I'd like to keep government out of the way of, if it makes sense, to keep government out of the way from getting in the way of businesses, providing services and helping our community thrive in areas that we're making a concerted effort to redevelop and create a certain environment. And frankly, I think this concept brings a lot of that to the forefront and brings a lot of that, provides a lot of that for the potential patrons that might be over in that area. Quick question on the mobile bar. I know that you said it's been approved on the Life Safety Plan. Did they have any restrictions as far as where you could put it or are? We have it in one spot. On the Life Safety Plan has it in one location. But it moves. So it's mobile in the sense that we don't keep it there all the time. Right. It leaves, and then comes back to that stage. It lives in that area, but they didn't say, okay, but we need to make sure it stays out of a certain area of the restaurant when you're utilizing it during the day. I mean, they understood the concept, and they said, yeah, we get it, make sure it goes back to its position in the evening. Yes. position at any evening. And the position is out of the dining area. And I understand that that concept that having that is, if you've got a private party in one of the other areas, you're going to have more people in there potentially. And you want to have another serving point. And that's a whole concept behind the mobile bar. 100%. And one of the things that I don't think any of us realize was the amount of demand for people wanting to have medium-sized groups. 20, 30, 50-person parties wanting to come in. If you were to call the Naples Princess, what's their minimum? 12 grand? 12 thousand dollars minimum to get on the Naples princess to have a party. So we didn't intend to have that be the draw but we've had a tremendous outpouring of people wanting to come have a good time and so that mobile unit helps facilitate that sort of revenue piece. Got it. And then as far as what we're really dealing with here, you've got different names on different areas of the establishment, but it's really talking about a marketing campaign. I mean, it's again, it's a new concept and a different idea and you want to label a certain part of your establishment as the alley and it brings a different vibe to the equation. And somebody might want to hang out in the air versus hanging out in the sunshine and watching football, a few steps away. But we're all talking about one entity here. We're talking about one restaurant that has three different areas. And again, from a marketing perspective, you'd like to try to utilize that and have different sections that bring different motifs to the equation. Yeah, no pun intended, but Bernstake House is a perfect example in Tampa. You go to the dessert room or that it's many different rooms and exciting pieces to that restaurant. Again, it's one restaurant, But there's a lot of different experiences all within that same restaurant. So you've got, you mentioned occupancy. We're writing some seats, but you're expecting the same roughly the same number of people on any given day, upon average. And we're not saying we're going to massively build this thing out to significantly increase the density. The densities don't change. We're just putting people in different locations. Yeah. Um, you know, and in reference to the, the food sales, 51% of the food, I completely agree with you frankly. You know, if the city's telling you you have to, you have to show us that this is one entity, then it should be one entity being required to hit that 51% mark. It wouldn't be fair for us to change the rules looking at it from one perspective and then make it use change rules look at it from another. So I'm right there with you on that you've got one single tax return for the entire concept. 100%. And then you said that the signage, obviously that might put a damper on your marketing campaign if you have to have the same sign on each location, but you're willing to act we ask in order to get the same moving in the right direction for you. I have to live to fight another day and I still think we can accomplish our goals, from a visual perspective on the exterior. As I said, I think one of the things our team and I, we get bumped one way and we figure out how to make a positive out of that. So we're gonna get bumped one way, we're gonna regroup, we're gonna come up with a better way to market it. And so we'll turn it into a positive. Okay. I appreciate the info. That's all I had for now. Okay. Another question. Hi. Thank you for coming. One quick question. What as of today, year to date, or since it opened, what percent of your sales are food versus alcohol? I don't have those figures with me. Because everyone that I have asked believes that this is more of a cocktail lounge versus that serves food than a food which is not an allowed use in the city or in this district versus a restaurant. And I think it's important that if we are defining it as this, and there was a reason why this was not an allowed use in this district, then we should be able to measure it and monitor it. I'm concerned about the way this rolled out, because there was a lot of hesitation in it first approving this, that it looked and it felt and it smelled like a cocktail launch at surf food. And now it feels that way even more with the addition of, I remember seeing the sign and it was the kitchen. Now you drive by and unbeknownst to the city, it's the kitchen and minibar. And then there's an open area that has different hours serving that's a cocktail lounge. The quotation and golf shore boulevard or golf shore life, it was a magazine where it said, and I think you quoted in this, downtown has four districts, okay, it's a cool craft cocktail lounge, staff only hip speak easy. It sounds very fifth avenue, you know, cocktail lounge serving food, something you would see on fifth avenue, which is something the district in all of the surveys said we you know cocktail lounge serving food, something you would see on Fifth Avenue, which is something the district in all of the surveys said we wanted to be unique from Fifth Avenue. But you know it really is important that we get an understanding of whether this I believe it's a cocktail lounge that serves food and we ought to do it the right way if you know at asking the broader question in this district, do we want to allow cocktail launchers? Because right now it is, you know, it was purposely, it's not a, it's not a permitted use. It is not even a conditional use. But if we hit the numbers, then we're a restaurant. Well, what, I mean, you must have some idea. What are the requirements was to provide some sort of documentation to prove that we meet those numbers. And so we can go through those. I mean, do you want to address it? I mean, We can go through staff report. Yeah, yeah. Okay. We're happy to go through that. It's in the resolution. I'll go right. Thank you. Okay. Let's move to the staff report. Thank you, council member Pensionman. Good afternoon. For the record, Leslie Dolmer, the city and April's planning department. My resume and qualifications are on file with this item. And I've been previously certified as an expert in planning and zoning matters. Item before you today is a resolution to turning out the redining petition 24 OD6 for a change in the life safety plan for the restaurant known as the kitchen to include 27 tables, 150 seats, 33 barstools and 12 umbrellas on the property located at 1200 Central Avenue. You've heard the petitioner's testimony today about the history on this particular project. Mr. Schu-Kart and I have been working on this particular piece of property and this concept for over four years now. I went back in my records and took a look at the first email and it was in early to mid 2020. So, you know, there's a long history here of evolving concepts. And, you know, at the end of the day, staffs is tasked to apply the code as it's written. And that's what we have done in this particular case. So I'm going to go through the material that I included on the agenda memorandum because there is a long history on this particular property. I think it's important. I'm not sure if that's the case. I'm not sure if that's the case. I'm not sure if that's the case. I'm not sure if that's the case. I'm not sure if that's the case. I'm not sure if that's the case. I'm not sure if that's the case. I'm not sure if that's the case. I'm not sure if that's the case. I'm not sure if that's a permitted use. The person has the right to develop that use, provided they comply with code as a permitted use. I also included in your agenda memo the list of conditional uses. Missing from conditional use is cocktail lounge. If in our code a use is not provided and it is otherwise listed someplace else in the code say for example highway commercial or some other commercial district where cocktail lounge is a conditionally used to the absent in the D downtown that means it is prohibited. So the intent when the D downtown code was written I can't speak to that I was not here when that code was written but its absence lens and indication that that was specifically done as the cocktail lounge as a conditionally listed in other commercial districts so that sort of informs the intent there to a degree. With respect to this specific location, when the petition was brought forward to City Council in 2022, the concept was a fully outdoor dining restaurant. And it was something that we have not seen quite in the same configuration. There was quite a lot of discussion about how that was going to operate Council in the resolution to approve had limitations on hours of operation with the understanding that fully outdoor dining space may have impacts on the neighboring residential areas that a restaurant with mostly indoor dining with a little bit of outdoor dining may not happen. So there was limitations put on those hours of operation that were reflected in that resolution. Let's see. So that was in August of 2022 as when that was established. The design review board took a look at the design elements of this and it was also granted final design review in 2022 to the design elements. But again, the life safety plan for the outdoor dining element was something that was within Council's purview and Council has the only has the authority to make changes to that. Then in early 23, we received a permit to combine units 104 and 105 of the building that we kind of called the bull building, that Western building. And which was to convert those units into a restaurant. Unit 104 is home to yacht club subs, and Unit 105 was the formal location of the retail wine store. The scope of work depicted on the combination of units stated that they would be using the cooking facilities and restroom of the former 104 space in the combination of this particular restaurant. There was not any indication in that application permitted that yacht club subs would continue to operate. It was implied that it was a full combination of both of those spaces. And that the overall restaurant concept would be using those existing kitchen facilities. Let's see. I recall in reviewing those particular permits because those were assigned to me with my history on this particular property. Having a conversation back and forth with Mr. Schucart asking for a menu and asking for assurances that this space was going to operate as a restaurant, as we had had the history already with the kitchen restaurant, that it was not permitted to function as a cocktail lounge, that it must function as a restaurant with those kitchen facilities, with food service, and back and forth a couple of times to ensure that that was what we were approving. And so my approval of that permit was conditioned upon it operating as a restaurant, utilizing the kitchen facilities of that 104 space. So again, that permit was approved subject to the condition that the combination of units 104 and 105 for the use of a restaurant with a cocktail lounge. Be advised that a cocktail lounge is defined as a vendor who sells primarily beer wine or alcohol beverages for consumption on the premises and I put the whole definition there. This restaurant, the proposed restaurant must arrive more than 51% in Grocery Avenue at food sales. So that was, again, sort of me, reiterating the point that this has to function as a restaurant. And that is the space known as District. Later, we came to find out that through, actually through review of Gulf Shore Business, that District did not appear to be operating as a restaurant but rather as a bar. Soly out of unit 105. The combination of units 105 was not completed as permitted and yacht club subs was continuing to operate out of that location. So we had a little concern with respect to that understanding. Following that city council, considered an application and approved a resolution for live entertainment for the outdoor dining area of the kitchen With limited hours of out of live entertainment that was permitted in the resolution as conditions Then we come to a series of DRB petitions the petitioner asked for a number of design modifications for the space, again, not changing the life safety plan, but changing some of the design elements. And one of them came out of the fact that I came and did a planning inspection and found that some of the elements weren't installed as they were permitted and as they were shown on the DRB plan. So again, there was a conversation of being consistent with what was approved and finding in the field that maybe that wasn't the case. And so there is a conversation about you got to install what you were approved for. This is the way these things work. And so we got those issues ironed out. And the last revision to that final design review petition, there were some changes to the Life Safety Plan. So that's again where I reiterated to the petitioner that the only body that has the authority to amend the Life Safety Plan at City Council, that DRB couldn't make those changes, that I couldn't make those changes, that any changes in Life Safety Plan, even for something that seemed seemingly minor, had to come back through this body, that's the code that we have on the books and it's our job to apply that. Then we come to January and came across some social media postings for a bar called the alley. And when I identified that the address was on the subject property, I was a little bit surprised because having had the history of really making it clear that a bar is not a permitted use in this district, I was surprised to see that. We had a conversation with Mr. Schuchart and it started the ball rolling on how to get the whole project to a place where it could be code compliant. But in the conversations where we were getting there, we uncovered a number of issues related to work without permits, to installation of signs without permits, to operation of businesses without proper business tax receipts, to operation of businesses without alcohol beverage license approval. For example, when you apply for an alcohol beverage license with the state, you submit to the local zoning authority an application that includes a diagram for the license premise. So we had a signed off on a beverage license for the license premise that was limited only to the outdoor dining area of the kitchen. And so in the process of discovering some of these things, there was no alcohol beverage license sign off for the district or for the Allian. We have not signed off on anything for either of those spaces pending this conversation on how to move forward. So there's a number of instances where things haven't been done the way they need to be done and the way the code requires them to be done. We had a number of meetings and discussions with the petitioner and it was an agent to try to identify a path forward. When we brought up the district, the petitioner stated that the food service for the district was not provided from its own kitchen facilities, but from the lower case kitchen facilities of the kitchen restaurant. Well, that's in the vial, that is not consistent with the permit that we approve for the operation of the district for that tenant space. And when we asked about the operations of the alley, the petitioner stated that the separate indoor space was not a bar, but just an independently themed dining room providing climate controlled seating for the kitchen restaurant. But we again express concerns about the separate signage, the separate operating hours, the separate marketing elements in all systems implying that both of these entities were in fact separate from the kitchen restaurant, kitchen restaurant capital K so The former interim deputy attorney deputy city attorney it provided an opinion that the operation of the kitchen restaurant reimagined To include indoor dining rooms could be feasible But only rooms could be feasible, but only upon the entire operation being held as out as a single establishment with a single business tax receipt, a single life safety plan, and signage that reflects to the public that it is a single establishment. Furthermore, any of these changes to the life safety plan again have to come back to this body, right? So any of those changes to life safety plan and ultimately the concept of the kitchen is a fully outdoor dining space needed to come back to this body for review. So the petitioner does submit an application. This application you see before you today, they are increasing the number of, they're decreasing tables by one, increasing seats. They provide the testimony today that that was providing stools around the tables or the rails that are around the palm trees in the space. They're also requesting to extend their hours of operation. Let's see. And I want to note and you'll see that in the recommended conditions in the staff report and the resolution, that they're also showing this portable bar in the northeast corner of the outdoor dining area, and indoor live entertainment areas in both the alley and district. I want to note that those live entertainment areas are not approved and will not be approved as part of this application. That would be a future application and future circumstances for Council consider. And that staff is recommending that the portable bar be removed as well because again a cocktail lounge, a bar is not a permitted use in this zoning district and providing that in this space is inconsistent with the primitive uses in this particular district. Ultimately, you know, having worked with Mr. Schucart on this particular property and in other locations throughout the city, you know, is very creative. And he is providing really interesting and unique experiences for the city of Naples residents, guest visitors. And that is a great thing. However, the more appropriate thing to do when we have new and creative ideas is to not find a way around our code, but to try to work within our particular code. And if our code does not address a particular use or particular concept, that the most appropriate thing to do is to vet that proposed use through a public hearing process, through a text amendment or in a code change, to consider if that is an appropriate use for the location. And so staffs recommending that if that is, if this concept is something that Council is really encouraged and excited by, the perhaps the most appropriate way to handle that is through a text amendment to address those particular uses. With respect to the specific outdoor dining application, I do have seven recommended conditions of approval. One of the things that is missing in this particular application if the petitioner is reimagining the concept as the testimony indicated today as a single restaurant, then an operational plan indicating how all those spaces are going to work as a single concept is something that we would like to see. We don't want to have ongoing issues with some of these spaces operating separately, operating as a bar. And so an operational plan is something we would want to see to see how this all works together. So that's the first condition. The second condition is the spaces currently identified as the kitchen, district, and the alley must operate under a single business tax receipt. Number three, prior to the issuance of the annual business tax receipt renewal, the property owner shall provide to the city evidence that 51% of gross revenue for the single establishment is in food sales. Number four, all signage must reflect to the public that the food and beverage operations and all indoor and outdoor dining spaces are one single establishment. One single restaurant establishment, new sign permits will be required. There's a number of signs on this particular property that have never been permitted. So this is just another reminder that we need to get those permits and have the appropriate review and oversight by City staff. Number five, hours of operation for the outdoor dining area depicted on the life safety plan. Should remain as approved in resolution 2022 14891. That is simply carrying over those original hours of operation that the council considered in 2022, 14, 8, 91. That is simply carrying over those original hours of operation that the council considered in 2022. Number six, the portable bar, short on the shown in the northeast corner of the outdoor dining area, a depictive on life safety plan will be removed. And number seven, that the indoor live entertainment areas depicted on the life safety plan are not approved and will require review under separate application. With that, staff's available for questions and clear questions. Thank you. Thank you. I was trying to find the resolution in here from the 22-14891. It's not included, is it? Yes, it is. In this packet? Yes, ma'am. it's not included, is it? Is it in this packet? Yes, ma'am. It's right following the landscape plan. Okay. Well, happy to read off those conditions or what it states if you need clarification. Yeah, I was looking for the hours of operation. Sure. The hours of operation will be Monday through Thursday from 3 p.m. to 10 p.m. And Friday through Sunday from 11 a.m. to 10 p.m. And Friday through Sunday from 11 a.m. to 11 p.m. Okay. If I may know one other thing that occurred to me during the remarks today, if Council is going to modify or extend the hours of operation, just wanna be clear that that does not modify or extend the hours for the live I just want to be clear that that does not modify or extend the hours for the live entertainment permit that was issued. So when you change this to that, we'll have to come back before council under a separate permit heading. So we're clear. And what are those hours? I don't have that one right off the top of my head. Hold on a second. All right. And then in this, in the resolution, it states that number six, the portable bar is shown and, no, that when you addressed, oh, number five, the hours of operation for the outdoor dining area depicted on the life safety plan shall remain as approved. So that, we need to look at that resolution. I mean that number in the resolution. Right. And if it's cleaner for Council just to state the hours of operation in this resolution, we can amend that condition. That was just my Council had a long conversation determining those hours of operation. And I felt like it was more appropriate for you all to approve any hours of operation for then for me to make a recommendation. Right. And maybe from now on, if we can include those minutes because then they could have read it prior to, I remember it. But for the new ones, then they would be able to see what the deliberations were and why we came up to 11 o'clock at night. So first of all, the one thing I like about Mr. Schucart is he's a visionary. I voted no on this because I saw the problems that were happening, but I didn't get into it. And it is best asked for permission instead of forgiveness, but we're here. And we want to do everything to help you succeed and your partners succeed, in my opinion. I just am looking at the details in this resolution now and there's a lot to clean up. And I just want to make sure, from my opinion, if, I mean, I don't know where everybody else is, but in approving this, that we get it right, so that you can operate this business. I have Hutchison Kramer Petronov-Krisman. Thank you Madam Mayor and thank you Leslie for all the hard work that you and your team have put forward on this. There is a lot to deal with here, but I think that we can probably manage it. For Councilman Barton, I really agree with a lot of what you said and your perspective on this. But let me ask a few questions before I get too far over my skis. One, how many businesses in our city are required to meet this 51% gross revenue threshold of food to other sales? Do we know how many were requiring that of? Any business that is established as a restaurant. Okay. If you have a BTR and your use as a restaurant, you have to meet the 51%. Good. So, as government, one thing that aggravates me is when we set certain metrics and we never measure them, right? Nobody's looking out after it. So, who is doing that? Who's how are we measuring business entity sales, a business entity, across the city and making determinations as to whether that 51% threshold is being attained. Who does it? So that's why this is such a difficult distinction because I don't think anybody is. That's incredible. I am that really upsets me and I'm not saying that to you, but I am infuriated that the government, our city government, would set a threshold that impacts how people operate and nobody's looking at it. I just don't understand that, but I'll move on. So now the question is, I don't think anybody knows this. How many staff would it take to administer this appropriately? To administer that check. That check. I assume that why we put it in the condition this way is that the probably most efficient way is that one of BTR's annually updated or renewed. They would submit those financial records and they would be reviewed with the renewal of the BTR. I understand that folks, this is no way to do business. I can tell you that. The seven conditions I wrote, I was trying to be because I have to do that. I've got memory issues and other things. Operational plan on each name, right? trying to be because I have to do that. I've got memory issues and other things. Operational plan on each name, right? Each one of those entities, and I'm not saying that those entities are registered with the state. When I say entity, I'm looking at the mini bar, the alley, the kitchen, and the district, right? No, the intent was an operational plan describing how all of that was going to function as one. If we heard the testimony say from the petitioner that they're considering rebranding the concept to comply with the one restaurant, then we just want to see how that's going to work. That makes sense. I love that. The single tax receipt. I've learned throughout this that a single tax receipt, we're making people jump through hoops kind of like this 51% threshold that nobody's measuring, by the way. The single tax receipt, in my opinion, needs to have the ability to have DBAs. To accommodate, it's nobody's trying to get away with something, but we want to make sure that businesses through a business tax receipt, we know what they're doing, and we, you know, I was on a cruise ship recently, and on the cruise ship, they had these little restaurants and bars, but I could move around between them, right? And I think that they were all properly licensed. And so the single-tax receipt, I believe, were running into an obstacle with the way we're requiring people to file these single-tax receipts. In fact, the petitioner stated himself that he was instructed to do something. He came to City Hall and he did it. And then that even wasn't enough. So that's my interpretation. I may be wrong, but there seemed to be a disconnect in there. Evidence of the percentage of sales, that's number three. So now we're going to have them come tell us just what their cells are and whether or not their is that 51 percent threshold is that us coming up with that or is that the definition of cocktail lounge in your code? Yeah. But we do that and we're not measuring it right. Yeah. Signage permits I get that. Signage needs to be permit. Hours of operation consistent and clarify for all hours, there needs to be clarity in all the hours of operation, including the ask for New Year's Eve, right? So we have an opportunity, we're all over the place on hours of operation. We have an opportunity to clean that up. I don't know if it's clearly stated and it's able to take action on that today but I hope so. The portable bar removed. I disagree with that. I think the portable bar idea helps facilitate and this is just from the business side. It's like what we do at a hotel. You know in a hotel in a convention, you've got a bar in there that you have these portable bars because it makes Common sense, right? I understand I'm not I think we need a little more detail in the mobile bar because from a life safety perspective That's an enforcement nightmare fire We get in the middle of an egress path because it's busy. That's I totally get it And it is merely a way to facilitate taking orders. That's different than dispensing alcohol. Yes. Totally agree. So I think there's some opportunity. What was number seven? Number seven is the reference to the indoor live entertainment areas are not permitted. Should this be approved that those would have to be filed under a separate permit. Okay. So on the life safety plan, you'll remember the petitioner pointed out green areas and blue areas. The green areas are live entertainment, outdoor live entertainment that have been previously approved by city council. The blue areas were indoor live entertainment that have not been submitted for an application or review. And I didn't want there to be any misunderstanding that those were approved with this. That's great excellent attention to detail and number eight was the live entertainment permit needs to be consistently adhered to. If there's any changes to operating hours that live entertainment permit stands on its own. Right. It doesn't necessarily have to be a condition unless council wants to. It was merely something that occurred to me in our conversation that if hours of operation change, that doesn't change your hours of operation for your live entertainment. Let's bring it up. Thank you. And this is my wrap up. I support serving lunch. I support a single fire safety plan with throughout all these concepts. I support a single business entity allowing DVA designations on the business tax receipt. What we have in place is what we have in place. But we've got a problem with the 51% of sales generated. I say that if we're moving forward with this, we allow the petitioner to come back with whatever the results are, but we have a bigger problem with that particular requirement as part of our zoning. I do approve this request for a late night opening. I think on New Year's Eve and I think overall I would just might ask is let us get the hours right, let's get it addressed. And then on the signage, I have no problem with the various signage designating different places within the enterprise. Just it's a different concept. So I agree with that. It's not a deal killer, in my opinion. But that's all I have. Thank you, ma'am. Since we have staff here that'll explain the BTRs, agree with that. It's not a deal killer in my opinion. But that's all I have. Since we have staff here that will explain the BTRs, I'm a little confused also on how we would create one entity. I'm going to give some guidance here. If we can get some things on the table and go to lunch, maybe push this back to the end. No. Just for the record, since since this cause I did issue. I mean, I'd prefer to finish. And it seems like we're making progress just my two cents. I'm just saying we have to take a break. It's up to the council. I've already had. As long as no one approaches anyone and discusses this outside of where we are currently. Okay. Because there's some details that I think the attorney to clean up, but maybe we, let's say, BTRs. If we could have that question answered because I don't know how you would have a, in the resolution, it states that we would have a single establishment for the alley. And then, but yet we're talking about a bigger concept. Clerk, do you mind swearing in, Mr. Young? I have a piece of you. And. Oh, sorry. Well, all those intend to give testimony of not already been sworn. Please rise and raise your right hand Do you swear or affirm that the testimony about to give will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth? Good afternoon Gary young deputy city manager of CFO First I'm gonna I'm gonna turn over to the business tax receipt to Lisa But I still want to give a couple things. First of all, there's been multiple legal opinions about whether or not we can hang criteria on the reissuances of a BTR. So let's be clear, I want to be clear about that and Lisa will go through that in more detail. And so when you say that there are a number of things on the book that are unemforceable when Tallahassee passes something down, says a BTR is nothing more than a renewable piece of paper that gives them an authorized use within it. So I want to be clear about that so that we don't go down a rabbit hole of what we are or we are not doing because we have a couple legal opinions that say what we are allowed to do. It doesn't mean it's still not on the books that says you should be doing this if you have no legal standing to do it you can't do it and that's the first thing. Second thing is it has to be verifiable and you have to have a mechanism to verify it right and so there's a lot of nuances there so I'm taking that general swipe on the conversation before Lisa gets into what B.s are pending and what specifically we accept or don't accept. And so, but I did want to do that and with that I'll introduce Lisa Douglas who is our business tax administrator. So, thank you. Just for clarification, Mr. Young, when you refer to what the state says, the 51% is a state law for an alcohol license or a city. No, the law says something about putting a hanging something on its renewal or that there's a zoning requirement that we must get. But when it comes to the renewal, there's certain things that we may not be able to ask what it is that our statute says please ask for. And that's the part that I think needs to have a third attorney because the first two agreed on it. A third attorney. I don't mean that for ceaselessly if I came across that way I certainly apologize but I think that opportunity to have reviewed that but in the meantime Lisa can give you that case history and that precedence and the way we operate under it and again as a certified building or business tax official in the state of Florida it's important to have her input in this right. Thank you for coming in. Hi. So just for coming in. Hi. So just for the record, Lisa Douglas, finance department, I am here the city's official business tax official. It's official. Just for the record, we have three independent business tax receipt applications for this address at 1200 to speak to Mr. Hutchinson. It is a DBA. They are in DBAs. It is L, it's M, I'm sorry, TMB Florida LLC, DBA, the kitchen and the minibar. TMB Florida LLC, DBA, the district. TMB, Florida, LLC, DBA, the alley. That is how we would issue a business tax receipt to a business, operating at a location using three different ways to advertise themselves to individual people. So. If these are pending. Yes, I said, didn't I say pending? Oh, sorry. Applications that have not been approved, Elsa. So when Mr. Schu-Kart came into the office, I think he was told that, you know, you need to apply for this application for the kitchen. And when our staff ask him the questions of, well, how are you going to be promoting this? How are you? I think you guys said on social media, there was an alley thing, that kind of stuff. That's where we had three individual applications. That is what we would do for any business operating within the city. The important thing is to go back to the mayor's question of the 51% rule that is under the alcohol and tobacco licensing. So when you're a restaurant, the state of Florida, not us, we get, but when Mr. Schu-Kart applied, we request of him his DPR information or the Department of Business and Professional Regulation Division of Restaurant certificate which he provided and it says his corporation name correctly. And then he also supplied to us the Division of alcohol and beverages in tobacco, which says TMB, Florida LLC and the kitchen, the minibar, district and the alley. Those are, that's the correct way that we would see in an application and that would go along with all of these things, okay? The question that I had or the statement that was made earlier, when we do a business tax receipt application, and I think what Mr. Young was saying is we've had two attorneys in the past, excuse me, we've had two city attorneys in the past, along with, I belong to a state organization called Fabto, it's the Florida Business Official, a tax official organization, That organization has had many of dialogue over whatever your local ordinance says, you have to abide by. So, but the application process, and I know this sounds really, trust me, I'm the bad guy in our whole city because the fire department doesn't like it. Planning doesn't like it. Planning doesn't like it. Everybody doesn't like it, but the rule says when you apply, it is just registering your business and that we check all of your state paperwork exists for your business to operate in the city and that we have checked the box to say you've registered, you have a state license, you have an alcohol tobacco license, I have your driver's license, that's all it is. And to put conditions on it, we can't. It's not, we have two attorneys, and I certainly welcome Matt, you're in put too, but we have two attorneys that say, even though our local code says we send it to the zoning for approval. We had ones that he attorney tell us that that event was against the law, although we continue to send it to the zoning office to get approval for them. So I just want to go the full gamut as to what we currently do so that there's no misnomer, be happy to answer any questions that you have that I haven't answered. Yes. Okay. On the licensing for the alcohol, are there different types of license that they go for and then what is the type of license that covers these entities and which entities or are all of them covered by this alcohol license? So I can't answer that in detail. And the reason I can't answer it is because it's a state regulated thing. When we get our application, we get the application for whatever they have submitted for the Department of Business and Puff Rational Regulation Tobacco. They literally have authorized all three of those businesses to operate and have an alcohol. According to this, the retailer of alcohol beverages under the state of Florida series 4COP and there are different levels. Mr. Schu-Kart could probably spit them out. Because I'm sure he knows them better but my point is is that when we get this we see that all of those entities have been registered with the state of Florida and the alcohol tobacco beverage and tobacco to operate at that address. Does that answer your question? Yes I'm getting it you know are are there, is there a license that says you can operate as a bar or are there separate, or is there a subset of an alcohol license that says you're operating as a restaurant and there's some mix of food and beverage? There's a seating requirement under DPPR for restaurants. So it's the restaurant component to it that you would have the number of seats underneath that dictate the restaurant. Okay, so for this application how many seats were there? Well. You're all set. Yeah, I'm trying to add them together. So, um, 44, 28 and 20. Okay. There have to be another time. So there's 90 and we've got 100 some seeds. Yeah. And I think it's, I think it's 40, 44 and 28. Is that correct? No, they should be one for the actual one. Okay, yeah, let's make sure we don't... Oh, sorry, I missed it. 105. So 105, 44, N28. So there, if I can jump in here a little bit, there are, I know enough to be dangerous about license types. There are different types, so for example, COP is an acronym for Consumption on Premise. So a four COP is an alcohol license that would allow for the consumption on premise of beer wine and spirits. And there are two types of 4COP. There is the SFS, which is a special food service distinction. And it requires that this is one that you see more often in a restaurant. And it has a low animal feed, but that's neither here and there. It consists of at least 2500 square foot of service area is equipped to serve meals to 150 persons at one time and derive 51% of its gross food and beverage revenue from from food and non alcohol beverages. The 4COP quota license type is one that you will see more often for bars, nightclubs, package stores, and does not have those restaurant requirements with respect to seats or to area. And so this one, anecdotally, this is a license type that is more expensive and you'll see those for the... So there is two distinctions there for those consumption on premise alcohol license names and which one did is was applied for a four COP. That is the restaurant one? No. The cocktail launch one. Yes. But but they're both used in restaurants. Yes. Okay. They both are used in restaurants. And just just for the record, I don't think we as a city regulate alcohol and tobacco licensing. And we just have to be careful about passing that end to say, I get something from the state of Florida and trust me, they go everywhere and they call us all the time and say, hey, can you tell me does this place have a business tax receipt? And we work very closely with them. So I know that they're in our city and I know that they're looking at those things and they ask us and they tell us that, hey, this happened and we have this place and it doesn't have a business tax receipt and we'll give them a call. So just, I just don't want there to be assumption that we're monitoring those because we don't on the renewal process. And this is where I think there was a condition, at least a misdiagnosed study, please let me know. But there was a condition that before renewal, we would verify that 51%. No, that's not it meant. It says prior to issuance of an annual BTR renewal and the property owner show provide the city evidence that we would be the marker in time that would be the impetus for them to provide that to us. We just finished that evidence that the 51% of the gross revenue for the single establishment is in food sales. But if they're going to give it to you, they need to give it to her. And she can't do it because the state law says she can't. We're not saying we need to have to. We're not saying that's to go to her. We're just saying they have to give it to us. That's the annual marker at which time they have to provide those records. Okay, and so Ms. Douglas, what you're saying is that if I misunderstood it and I think you clarified, as long as it's not tied to the renewal process, because we can't tie it to the renewal process. And I believe that annually restaurants are having to prove this to the state of Florida for that as well if I'm not mistaken. So if I may, Mayor. Mayor. Please. Thank you. So I would agree that he would have to prove it to the state of Florida if in fact he had a 4 COP related to 51% of food, which I don't know what license he has, and maybe he can speak on which one he does, but to clarify this whole conversation, the intent of this is every year prior to October 1st. Yes, correct. October 1st people have to apply for a BTR. It was strictly a timing condition. We thought it was the most appropriate instead of picking the first of this year or the first of that year to just say, okay, prior to you applying for and re-registering your business, you will supply 51% proof. Now what that proof looks like, I have no clue, I'm not in the count, but the reality is in order for this to be a permitted establishment, he cannot derive more than 51% from alcohol, or else he will be by definition a cocktail lounge. That's where it comes from. So you've got to have whether you put it in here. We have to have some checks and balance, or else he's not going to meet the definition of restaurant. And then my opinion is going to be it's not allowed legally. So that's how we got to where we did. Okay. Any more questions about BTRs? Perfect. Thank you. Thank you for coming in. So I want to go on to the other council members but just as far as the mobile, I just, yeah, so I don't have a problem with it, but guess what? We don't allow cocktail lounges. And if we start portable bars, then I just would caution us about that portable bar. I'm just, yeah, thank you, Madam Erin. I just, I just say that right now, we don't have a cocktail lounge, right? Thank you. Right, and just for the record though, he's changing it so that it will not be just a cocktail lounge. It'll all have one kitchen that provides food to all restaurants. Is that when I'm understanding? I believe that's currently what's happening. It's currently happening that way. It's currently a restaurant. Currently defined as a restaurant. Or else it would not be there. Well, maybe let me go on to the other members. I have a cramer. Thanks for being here to Yale. I have to say four years of back and forth and the only value that history has for me is that y'all have got to this point. You're not a bad guy because this concept evolved over time and staff isn't bad because they're trying to do their job. And we've got to a spot where we're right there at the tipping point. Right? I also want to, I worked front, front of the house, back at the house, and restaurants, my sister, on one, and the 51% thing is a sticking point for me, but it's coming from the state. So I'm not sure, but it's probably the same reason we have three weed stores on 41 and one within a stone straw of Naples High's baseball field. Somehow that's OK. We're not having hours of conversation about that, but we're going to talk about this, which frosts me if you can't tell. I don't know how they even get to the 51%. Are we going to deduct? Is it profit? Is it gross sales? Do we deduct servers? Do you attach the service to the alcohol versus the food? Because I can tell you, and our petitioner is not a restaurant to her person. He's an entrepreneur, and food costs. I mean, this stuff fluctuates. It's sometimes very difficult to make money on the food in the restaurant for the record, which is why everybody wants the liquor license. That runs a restaurant. Nonetheless, I got to go there, and it's a restaurant. That is not a cocktail lounge. No way. So, and not only that, it's really cool. Like when I got there, I first thing I thought, it's how do we not know about this? This is, and so different from anything on Fifth and Third. Entirely different clientele. Love my Fifth and Third people. This is really cool in another place where my kids live here and they and their friends are like, yeah that's where we would want to go hang out. They take your kids to the outdoor area, I mean it's just a really cool vibe. The vibe, that's the new name and then you separate the vibe, are we there? If we want this vibe to happen, we need to work on the resolution. Well that's where I am right now. So we may need to change what's permitted in D. I don't want to get, like that is another conversation. My question is, and they're willing to do it. If they're willing to go up to 51%, which state mandated, so there's nowhere to go with that. It's kind of state mandated, not really it's more of a part of the conditional use. But how do we kick this can down the road today as fast as possible and not hold them up while we fix our process? I want to get the questions out so we can have. Well, that's my question. I know. We have to work on the areas of confusion and what. As the hours, whether we can have the BTRs listed for three different entities or one, I guess the concept of everything will come back to us. Right. The address is matter. I believe we heard testimony from the petitioner in his remarks that there is an intent to sort of pivot and rebbrand this as one establishment. So we don't expect to see a variety of different signs of variety, different hours. If this is getting re-branded to a degree. It'll be the Victoria Square with a kitchen in it or Victoria Square. And this was part of the staff's confusion because there was no operating plan for us to be able to review and provide direction to council on how this was gonna function. I think I can read the council that we're trying to work with that. And I 100% appreciate that. And personally, I don't think we need an operational plan to understand what's going on here. We have one restaurant. We have an outdoor dining. We have an indoor dining, and then we have another indoor dining, and we have a kitchen. The kitchen. Services the food for the outdoor dining, the indoor dining, and the indoor dining and the indoor dining. Whenever any of those are open, the kitchen will be open, serving food. The outdoor dining can't be open any later than the indoor dining. That's what the code says. If the outdoor dining is open later than the indoor dining, that's not allowed. So the indoor dining has to close. The outdoor dining is open later than the indoor dining, that's not allowed. So the indoor dining has to close. The outdoor dining has to close before the indoor dining. That's what the code says. And so we're here to say 100% that's the case. We have the hours set for the outdoor dining. We've asked for an extension to go and serve lunch. That's the only revision for the outdoor dining permit that you're looking at today is adding lunch. And the New Year's Eve, again. No, I just want to clarify with staff because that's why I asked that question. When I looked at the approval, it said 11 p.m. Or maybe that was the- The Fridays, Saturdays,'s, the outdoor dining. Powers of operation for the outdoor dining, Monday through Thursday are 3 p.m. to 10 p.m. Friday through Sunday from 11 a.m. to 11 p.m. Correct. And we're asking for it to be moved to 11 a.m. And also to one. Every day. Didn't I read in here somewhere? It's 1 a.m.? Well, that's the indoor dining. So the indoor dining doesn't come before City Council for hours of operations. We're happy to go through those, but the kitchen irregardless of whether the outdoor dining is closed, the kitchen is still in operation. This is why we need a whole new plan. The reason we distinguished the hours of operation is because if this whole concept is reliant upon the lower case K kitchen, that is part of the big K kitchen and the hours of operation currently approved for the kitchen ended at 10 or 11. So what we were saying is in order to fold these indoor dining into the food service portion of the kitchen, the hours of operation for the kitchen need to extend to cover that indoor dining. We can't be producing food out of a kitchen that is closed at 10 a.m. or 11 p.m. That was the purpose of adding, because if you go on the website and you look at the hours of operation for the alley and then you look at the website for the district and then you look at the website for staff only, they all have different hours of operation. So we were saying to cohesively, if you are providing food for each one of those establishments They all have to have cohesive hours and I just need a clarification You just said staff only but do you mean the district? Well staff only is part of the district It's a no food service portion of the district I see what your concern is right okay, but Also, what's the minibar? Minibar. That's an uninsured permitted sign on the kitchen. There's no sign. Okay. Let me just finish. Oh, I'm sorry. Was that it? A permanent sign. There's a sign that shows the minibar as part on one of the walls of the kitchen, but it was not included in the sign permit. It was never permanent. Thank you. So I'll let the petitioner tell correct the record. So perhaps I can simplify what we're looking at is determining outdoor dining hours. Those are set by the 2022 resolution and we're simply asking to add lunch to those. That's it. The kitchen commercial grade kitchen facilities will be open. This can be made in express condition to simplify it. The kitchen facilities will be open at any time, any of the other elements are open. And finally with respect to the hours of the indoor establishment, the code already states. The code is clear. It states no later than 2 a.m., no earlier than 7 a.m. It's already in the code. So we're here on outdoor dining. Set the hours for that outdoor turf area. Include a condition that commercial grade facilities, kitchen facilities will be open at any time any of the other elements are open and you're done. Okay I understand that but if you looked at the resolution which is my legal document it says the kitchen district and the alley will operate as a single establishment. Yes. There are examples around the city where you have elements of restaurants and elements I believe Campy Ellis was brought up elements shut down before other elements of the existing same restaurant remain open. That's all we're right and they're just trying to get an operational plan so that it's clear to win those hours. That's all we're all operating under the same set of acts exactly so and I just laid it out. It's as simple as that. So right now I have a three line operation. Write it down. Give it to the attorney and we'll include it. That'll be easy. Okay. I'm sorry. Chris men. and will include it. That'll be easy. Okay, I'm sorry. Christmas. Just one quick clarification. So the only thing for the operational plan you need is the hours of operations for the kitchen facility. No. The outdoor dining. No, we don't want an operating plan. Staff's suggesting that an operating plan describing how all of these spaces are going to operate as a single establishment consistent with the former city attorneys' opinion that currently these are operating All of these spaces are going to operate as a single establishment consistent with the former city attorney's opinion that Currently, these are operating as separate without kitchen facilities, possibly as bars. How we make this all Complaint with code is that it is a single establishment and how that is determined how we would like to see that Determine so we're all operating on this under the same set of facts this through an operational So that's what I'm trying to define here today. So if we go away and we don't, let's say we don't get an approval today, what are the parameters? What is the goal line that I need to get to? Because I have said we're one LLC. We have one point of sale system. We have one management team that manages the entire operation. We have one insurance policy that runs the entire restaurant. We have indoor dining, we have outdoor dining. We have regulations that are set for the outdoor dining and as Clay said, the indoor dining regulations are already set by your code. So what information do you need? What additional information do you need for me? If the kitchen is always going to be open and as Clay said, put a stipulation that the kitchen will be open all the time whenever all the indoor dining is open. I have to meet that code anyways. We're just trying to get to that. I understand, but can I ask you a question? Does the district have indoor dining? Yes. Does the alley have indoor dining? Yes. So you have two places that have indoor dining. Correct. And one that's outdoor dining. Correct. Thank you. We'll get to that request. Let me just get the staff to answer the rest of the questions that council have. Councilman Christman. Thank you. What like others, I want to get, if we can, to a point where we can approve this, whether it's today or a subsequent meeting. And I think it's, as has been said, a creative, wonderful new addition to the city, potentially. But I guess I'm remain, believing we have further to go to get there than perhaps some others seem to feel. I think there's a couple threshold issues here. The first is that we have to be comfortable, I have to be comfortable anyway, that this is indeed a single integrated entity in its operations that serves food and alcohol in appropriate relation to each other and that, you know, it is a single integrated entity. There is the opportunity to move back and forth if you wish between these three venues. And I think it was said by staff that the code permits restaurants with a cocktail lounge. So in my view, what we have here is a restaurant in the case of what's now called the kitchen. And the cocktail lounge is called the district. And then you have the alley, which is sort of a combination of the two. And this is a new kind of a concept. If you just go over there, I've been there and eaten there And this is a new kind of a concept. If you just go over there, I've been there and eaten there and had beers there. And you can, you can, you know, they're three. They are distinct the way they're set up now. But they can be also described and run as an integrated kind of an operation. So if we're comfortable with that that's a big step. The thing that I'm still most uncomfortable with and I really don't understand is when we heard testimony today from Mr. Schu-Kart and we heard testimony today from Miss Dolmer and Miss Martin. There is a wide gap based on what I heard about where we stand with licensing and permits for this establishment. There is a great discrepancy in what I heard about the status of necessary permits and licenses. And whether it's with respect to the BTR, the alcohol license, other permits that may have been needed for the building department. And I'm at a loss as to what the status of that all is. We have establishments that are operating right now, serving food and drink to people. And we have based on what misdugless said pending applications for business for BTRs. Well, if you're open for business, don't you have to have an application that's been approved? Now, maybe I'm maybe I just understand. So the question is to actually misdogless what has been approved? Has anything well that's on just the BTR but again, you know I heard testimony for Mr. Schu-Kart about well we have one alcohol license for everything and then I heard testimony from Mr. Olmer there was quite different on from that. So and she made reference to other permitting that had not been, whether applied for or not, had not been received as would normally be the case. And again, this is an operation that is open. It's open. So there's some issues there that just need to be clarified. And these are really important issues. And so it's not just, you know, so there's these questions around what is, let alone what goes forward. Again, I want to see this work. But boy, this is, you know, I'm, I'm, I'm, I'm, I'm, I'm, I'm, I'm, I'm, I'm, I want to see this work. But boy, this is, you know, I'm looking at the time we've spent on this. You know, I don't want this to be a Port Royal Club Red Dew. We started at 1225. It was at 1225 only. Okay, I apologize. But, you know, I think we got a long way to go to work to a clear and final outcome on this. And I'm frankly wondering whether the smart thing to do for the petitioner, as well as for all the rest of us, would be to continue this to another time when these questions can be answered fully and brought back to us so we can have a more a more effective conversation. Great so let's get all the questions out on the table. I have Petrov, Peniman, and then Barton. Just a couple of comments and questions. You know, I wanted to really thank you for your excellent staff report. That was the best staff report I've received since I've been on council for two and a half years. It really helped flush out the history, which seems to be over four years. I had no idea it was four years. And flushed out what all of the issues are. Because, well, I admire how entrepreneur you are. You kind of got over your skis and started using spaces that were not permitted for uses. And different operating hours, et cetera, which is exacerbating this issue of trying to get this sorted out because we do want to see it succeed. But at this point, I don't even know what we are approving. Our code defines cocktail lounges as 51% of revenue. And we don't know even, it's been open for months and months. What, you know, are we approving a cocktail launcher? Are we approving a restaurant? And if we're, you know, if we are approving a restaurant, you know, I'd like to get an early read on, you know, the, on what it is right now based on the here to date revenue, since it's been open to see what we are approving. And then I think we need to have a more meaningful discussion of, do we want to have this type of thing in this district because it was purposely left out and we believe it's because it's near a lot of residences to have cocktail launches and we wanted to distinguish it from Fifth Avenue. On the other hand, we want to do this expeditiously and I think that I would be, I think we need these questions answered on, I think I heard unpermitted signs, some unpermitted work, some unknown hours, some advertising that, you know, where there were entities that popped up that we were unaware of. Maybe in the next meeting we can sort it out and say this is what we are approving, and this is what our work plan is, and this is what our liquor license looks like, and let's roll this out right. And then for us to add on to an agenda item a discussion that it does not involve Mr. Schu-Kart but involves you know a discussion on council and whether or not we want to have cocktail launches in this district. That's separate because right okay and that is it. Mayor can I just amend but add on to a man but add on to what Councilwoman Petron has just said. I think we need to also be careful about what it is we're saying we're approving and not approving. We're not approving. I don't believe anyway. Are being asked to approve whether or not Mr. Schu-Kart should be able to have a restaurant or not. I mean that's not our purview. We don't approve restaurants or other business establishments. It's, you know, they have to follow other rules and requirements, mostly set by the state, but we're not approving that. We are able to and are required to approve things like outdoor dining, live entertainment, signage, any number of things that go with that. But we're not here to make a judgment on his basic, on his restaurant. Now, if we were to determine that he was running a cocktail lounge separately, and that's against our code, that's a different issue, but I were to determine that he was running a cocktail lounge separately and that's against our code, that's a different issue, but I don't think that's the case. But I just think that, you know, we, and this is why I think if this could come back to us in a different form, it would be easier to make this decision. And again, I think it's really important to get this all this information clarified about licenses permits and the status of them and to the degree that they need to be applied for or received to have clarity on that. Okay. Just so that I can get that. Yes, it was operating differently, but with this concept, it's all gonna be operating as one restaurant with one kitchen. That is some of the testimony that we heard today, but then later testimony seemed to indicate that they wanted to continue to operate these spaces separately from a central kitchen. and later testimony seem to indicate that they wanted to continue to operate these spaces separately from a central kitchen. So I'm not, I don't know, it seems like it's evolved during this hearing. Okay. Thank you. We'll get clarification on that for before we make our decision. Council member Barton and then Pinnin. Okay. This is exaphrating. The testimony that we've received today from the petitioner is this is one operation period. Just because it's got different rooms, it's not making three different operations. I mean, this is, this should not be this confusing. This is one operation operating under one business license, operating one liquor license with one tax return. Just because they have two other sections that they wanna call the room something, does not make it a different part of, does not make it a different business. It's not, doesn't create a cocktail lounge. Secondly, the kitchen that serves the food is going to be open and serving food whenever any section of this operation is operating. Which means it's a restaurant. This is not a cocktail lounge. This is a restaurant serving food in three different areas. Simply because we have a mobile bar and you can move a bar into an area and you can serve drinks in that bar, it doesn't create a cocktail lounge. You're already able to serve drinks in that area where you're going to be put in the mobile bar. So nothing has changed. You're still serving drinks in there. It doesn't create a cocktail lounge. This is one operation, one entity that has three different sections. Two of them are indoor dining, one of them is outdoor dining. This really shouldn't be this difficult. I get what you're saying, but that's not how it evolved there. And we're happy to do that. But that's where it is today. But we're just trying to get clarification. I think we have. Well, we don't. I understand that we have confusion maybe in the room, but there has been, they have been Chris, the petitioner has been crystal clear. This is one operation, not three operations. There's not a separate cocktail round lounge being operated within this, within the confines of this business. It is one operation that has three different areas of seating. And as long as it's in our legal document and resolution and it's clear, that's great. But if you look at the resolution, it's not. So Councilman Pinneman, and then we're going to take a five to a minute break because we have to. And then we'll come right back. OK. So I'm reading and rereading the former city attorney's opinion here. Where is the level of discomfort with that opinion? Because it seems to me that it simplifies and makes this all work in a very safe way. I don't know We don't have a level of discomfort with the opinion if you note that his conclusions are Where we derived our conditions of a so your conditions were as a result of his opinion His conclusions found that you know this could operate as a single establishment if the following things were met and that is where we encourage the petitioner to apply for this outdoor dining petition and then where we derived our recommended conditions. Okay. And then vice mayor, we're going to take a break. So thank you. I'm going to, when you get the mayor's look, that's your opportunity to say just a few things extra. So I'll take advantage of that. So I think, in my opinion, my ask is that when we come back, we take and we resolve each item individually. Let's get them, let's start ticking these things off and getting them resolved or designating the path to get them resolved. And I don't, before we do that though, for our city attorney, we're not here to have this petitioner supply us, we're not gonna look at details on a 51% revenue today. Are we? I don't think we're prepared for that. Are we even able to use that in our decisions today? So I'll answer that after the break if I may. Okay. All right. The signs, I think we get through signs. I think City Council can handle signs. We handled a sign issue earlier today, but, or is it an administrative thing? The hours, I know City Council can do hours. So I think that we can have a petitioner tell us. I think it's been clear to us what the hours are. The way I understood it is every day open at 11 right and if that's not accurate somebody needs and then close when whatever the code says right and then on a holiday New Year's it's 130 I think is what the said and then there was some question about work being completed without a permit Is that code enforcement? Who we're not going to decide that today are we not yeah? And then the BTR the business tax receipt I think we're all clear Councilman Barton just talked about it. I believe we're clear on the BTR and if if we're not, then I think that's a city manager move where he can make an administrative. And then the mobile bar, I do agree. And I agree with the statements, the mobile bar from my perspective, I approve it. I do believe that on the life safety plan, it needs to have a designated space. That's all. So that's where I'm at on several of those issues. Thank you. So I will just say council, it really should be looking at the resolution. That's where. So the clarity is within section three and it's one through seven. And if we can come back. Mayor, if we could. I just want to finish this off with one final thought before we all take a break when you're done. Thank you. But I agree with the signage that you just made the comment, but if it's going to be one name and have different room names I mean, it's what's important is the address if I understand correctly, but staff is the expert that needs to need to let me know that and the type of Lickery license that you have, right? So hours, signage, there's no, I mean, operating plan should be easy. We can put it right here inside this resolution. Mr. McConnell, and then we're going to take a break. So what's before you all is Modification to a pre-approved life safety plan for outdoor dining Okay Confusion is that prior petition had no indoor seating It was strictly outside. Right So when you're looking at what's in front of you, it's modifying by adding tables, chairs, some umbrellas to the outdoor dining portion of what was previously approved. I think what we have to keep in mind though is because of the fact that we are using one kitchen which could very well be fine and meet the definition of restaurant. This is your opportunity to tie all of these individual rooms together. The confusing part is normally it would be administrative, right, but because of this outdoor dining. So just keep that in mind like this is an opportunity to tie this together. But what's in front of you is strictly a modification of a previously approved life safety plan just for the outdoor dining portion of this. But it's not. It is. There's a cocktail lounge involved in here. And that is indoor dining. So what's in front of you though to keep us focused is a modification to a previously approved life safety plan. I think where staff is coming from is it's hard to process this administratively because we need some conditions here to meet the definition of restaurant and not cocktail lounge because cocktail lounge is not allowed in this zoning district. You said it better than I so we're on the same page. Perfect. Everybody on the same page? Yeah. Okay. All right. Council, we're still in quasi-judicial. Please know conversation or you will need disclosures. And we will take a 10 minute break. you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you 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 recess. We have a resolution that we can possibly look at Mr. McConnell? Thank you, Mayor. So I don't know if we still want to answer questions from the council member, but council members, but based on how I ended the meeting before we went to break and just to reiterate, we are here on the modification of the approved life safety plan. I understand some of the confusion in questions as they relate to the indoor portions of this restaurant. But I think if we add some kind of operational hours of operation to the resolution as conditions which I believe the applicant can either speak to or confirm that he has no issue with It may help clarify the overall concept before you I did confirm with Miss Douglas There is the ability to issue one BTR with separate suite numbers. I think that again Clarifies that this is a single establishment So we can work through that if the council's ready Thank you. I just want to be clear. I didn't hear, I think council understands what has happened, how it's evolved and where we're at. It was just the clarification on the resolution and being clear to the operational plan. That's it. So if we, if there are other questions than that council, please let me know. So hearing none, I'll go straight to the conditions. If that's the will of the council. Yes. The will of the council Yes Believe number one is fine number two We just confirmed that this is a possibility under one BTR whether it's doing business as et cetera The applicant can fill those out if he hasn't already with the correct doing business as Which will be modified if he does rebrand at a future date. Number three, I do want to clarify because I understand that it could be a little confusing. We are not basing the issuance of the BTR contingent on the 51% of gross revenue. But in order to meet the definition of restaurant and not cocktail lounge, which is our definition, right? I understand that the state has its own, but we have our own definition of 51%. We can modify that to just say, you know, by October 1st every year, property owners shall provide the city evidence that 51% and that we can even make it specific to the planning department or the city manager, whatever the will of the council is, but we can take out the issuance of the annual BTR and just say biotobre first, which in fact is the date that BTRs are due. I don't see a problem. In fact, we probably should, as a city, be requiring proof of 51% sales in food for all restaurants that we need to verify that they are restaurants. They're operating restaurants. So as a city council, we probably should put that into operation where we, as a city, are verifying that with all restaurants. However, I find it completely inappropriate for us to single out this one restaurant and say we're going to hold you to this standard, but nobody else. Right. I think the difference or where the confusion is, is they're asking for that, but they still will receive their business Tax receipt it's not held on that because we're not the Reviewer so we're gonna ask them for proof that they're selling 51% food and then it doesn't really matter whether they are or not because we're not gonna do anything about it one way or another Well, I think because I can't wait, wait, I'm sorry. The reason for the 51% is. Is to not, is to be a restaurant because if you're a cocktail lounge which means that you serve 51% or more of alcohol sales. Are we holding anybody else to this standard? No one else is doing this in the downtown district. Keep in mind the downtown prohibits cocktail lounges. Right, so there are restaurants down there, right? They serve booze. And if we're not checking to see if they're selling 51% booze, then guess what? They are cocktail lounges. They're not a restaurant. Okay, but let's not single it out, but we were allowing a cocktail lounge to now become a part of one business that can still operate as a cocktail lounge. If the hours, let's get to the hours. Well then just on that point we can take out the condition if you all as a body want to deem this a restaurant based on what you're doing. I believe it would be unfair for us to hold these guys to a 51% standard when we're not holding any other restaurant in that area to a 51% standard. That's my opinion. Okay. So that's the- I would concur with that. I made that comment in other context and I think it applies here too. Okay. There's a majority. Yeah. We need to be consistent with what we've been doing. Okay, so that's on 51% under three. The only comment that I have on that as someone who's been here two and a half months where we had a summer break and we only have two meetings is. I don't feel comfortable. What's the point of codes if we're not, if we're just going to say, hey, you're not allowed to have a cocktail lounge, but because we don't require any other restaurant to prove it, we're just going to say we hope you're a restaurant, but we hope you're not. I think that's a different topic. We as a governing body maybe need to put some type of teeth into that code, but right now it's unfair for us to put teeth into that code only for this particular establishment? No, I'd like to further expand quickly. We need to enforce it to the extent we've been enforcement. It's checking off a box. Let's not kid anybody. That's what we're doing. Fair. Wait, can I just get clarification? 51% is something that is monitored by the state. For a certain alcohol and beverage expenses. So I like the concept. I think we remove it as a condition and at a later date, hopefully before the end of the year. We have a discussion on how we're going to monitor these citywide which would apply to the applicant and every other restaurant who's serving alcohol in the de-damp town. I agree. Keep going, please. I'm on a roll. Number four, the signage, I believe the applicant has agreed to this based on his rebranding comment so we can go ahead and leave that in. Hours of operation for the outdoor dining. I believe the applicant has requested a modification to the outdoor dining. Hours of operation. Now I have them. I will read them into the record and we will draft the conditions accordingly if it's okay with the council. The kitchen, which is just the kitchen, if we will, is open from 7 a.m. to close. So the reason it's open at 7 a.m. is to prep the food and this is where all the food. There's no seating besides an office area, but this is where all the food comes out. The mini bar or the outdoor dining area that's under the cabana will be modified from the life safety plan to be 11 a.m. to 10 p.m. Monday through Sunday. The alley currently known as the alley will be 11 a.m. to 1 a.m. Monday through Thursday and Sunday. And then Friday and Saturday will be 11 a.m. to 1.30. And these are the ones proposed by the applicant. Wait, can you repeat that again? Yes. So the alley from Sunday to Thursday will be 11 to 1. And then Friday and Saturday will be 11 to 130 a.m. Could you review the mini bar outdoor dining? I think you said 11 to 11. And it's Monday through Thursday 11 to 10 Friday Saturday Sunday 11 to 11 so there's an hour difference. I just want to make sure we're up That's what I have okay the resolution But are you trying to change it? No, no, he had said 11 to 11 the whole week for the outdoor dining portion. I just wanted to make sure we're all in the same pitch. Could you repeat it one more time for the outdoor specifically? So the minibar outdoor dining, Monday through Thursday, 11 a.m. to 10 p.m. And then Friday to Sunday, 11 a.m. to 11 p.m. And no changes to the closing time. The only changes we're looking at here is opening at 11 rather than 3. Correct, 100%. Thank you. It's set for the alley. Those are different. Yeah. Those are not on the life safety plan because remember there was no indoor component to the outdoor dining petition that was before you when it was approved. So what we're doing right now is although these are indoor restaurants, if they're deemed that are In compliance with code right that the hours of operation are 7 a.m. to 2 a.m. in order to deem this one establishment The applicant has agreed to put these operational hours in the conditions of the resolution to kind of help clarify this situation Okay, so the other Indoor dining area known as the district is 11 to 11 a.m. to 12 a.m. Monday through Sunday. Now the one thing I would suggest is the kitchen that means 7 a.m. to close. Latest operating. Yeah, because I mean there's a footnote at the bottom that ties the double asterisk. So I would prefer that we say the kitchen can open as early as 7 a.m. and may not close until the last indoor dining room venue closes. That was the intention. I just think that's. What was the first dining area? What were the indoors closing times? Was it I hear 230? No. But what did you hear? The latest would be the alley which is open to 130 on Friday and Saturday. Is that normal in this area 130? No. It seems like we approve usually closing it like 10 or 11. Is this a, is this a, this seems unusual to me? I don't think so. I think so. No, basically, no. Right now, right? Well, the code gives you the maximum, but you know what we usually approve is, there's nothing else. I think we're going to have to go to the next one. We're going to have to go to the next one. We're going to have to go to the next one. We're going to have to go to the next one. We're going to have to go to the next one. We're going to have to go to the next one. We're going to have to go to the next one. We're going to have to go to the next one. We're going to have to go to the next one. So there are ones that are open as late as 130. I assume so. I mean, Yabba is on 5th. He was to be open until 2 a.m. I believe. Those are for restaurants. When it comes to cocktail and just that. I think that's just for you. Conditional use. Those would be different powers of operation. I suggest for the alley that we make the blended one o'clock. Yes. I agree with that. Council, I need a consensus. Say it. One. Allie at one o'clock. What was the other option? 130. That's Friday, Saturday, Sunday, correct? I see a car accident and may it better this gift is available on the... Okay. Microphone please. That's a Saturday Sunday correct That's a very arbitrary for half an hour. I don't understand it whatsoever Okay, it gets the deal done. Let's go one o'clock one o'clock. Yeah, sure one Yeah, I've got a census for one and then that would make the kitchen hours would be one We're not gonna put a if if the council is okay with it, I'm not going to put a closing date and I'm going to say they can open up at 7 a.m. and they cannot close until the last indoor dining room venue closes because that's what the code says. Because if we, if we try to do this, I mean Monday through Thursday they're going to be open until 10 and then it's one and then it's 12 and it gets confusing. That's just a smarter way to do it. Thank you. Keep going. Okay. The portable bar shown in the northeast corner of the outdoor dining area depicted on the life safety plan will be removed is condition 6. Now I've heard different opinions. It's up to the council. If it does stay, I've heard that it should be in one location. That's really up to you. If I could come and I think the port of I think the portable bar serves a business purpose that is legitimate. But unless I'm missing something, it's kind of a oxymoron to say something is a portable bar, but it must stay in one place, isn't it? So, if I remember with the definition of the word portable, is... So, I'm sorry, you were on six. Yeah, I think the only question or maybe we can have Mr. Rambus is it's because it's depicted on the life safety plan and people need to be able to get around from it. I think it is important to determine like in East Mustang in this area, or I mean, it only comes out for events. I mean, maybe talk about it, but it is. I was making sure. So I think the purpose of the portable bars to within that restaurant space is to have it be portable and to be able to be moved. I think it's mean storage wise that if I come Mr. Rambos. Kyle Rambos, Fire Marshal. Yeah, I would agree. If it's moved around, it still needs to be moved and do certain locations that don't affect the egress. So, portable as in, they keep it up against the building, but when used, they keep it in one or two locations that they can, that are planned locations, not just putting it wherever they're at. But when it's not being used. When it's not being used, it'll be stored out of the way. When it is being used, it's used in certain locations that are identified. We just need to find a way to say that. Kristen, I mean, Hutchison. Used in areas identified on the life safety plan. Correct, there you go. So there's one area identified on the life safety plan. Correct. There you go. So there's one area identified on the life safety plan currently. It's single. There's a single area. Well, there's only one portable bar, then there's only one area for storage. No. One area for storage. Barton. Yeah, I think what we're dealing with here is that we need, we want to have spaces throughout the operation and throughout the different areas of the operation that would be acceptable from a life safety standpoint. So in other words, we're not putting the mobile bar right in the middle of where somebody goes into an exit door. People are trying to get out and there's a fire and you can't get out because there's a mobile bar sitting there. So I think what we're suggesting here is that we actually identify and one spot in the, and Chris you can speak to this, you want one spot in the, within the two indoor dining areas that would be acceptable for the portable bar to sit that you guys would approve from a safety standpoint. And one spot or two spots maybe that it could move around in the outdoor dining area, but something like that. But it would be specifically identified on the life plane. So to start the interrupt, it is on the life safety plan. We have one spot identified. We would love and some flexibility with it, but we've been here a long time. We'll keep it at the one location. We don't want to come back I mean maybe there's an easier way to Have an additional location added besides coming through this whole process but for today's discussion It's on so you've got a storage spot on there You've got a storage spot. We just have the actual physical location when it's in operation is on the plant So it's really not that portable No, no, we move it off the out of the restaurant. Okay. It doesn't get stored within the restaurant. I got you. So when you move it though, and you're using it during operating hours, is there any one specific, or any few specific spots where it can go and be used? On the life safety plan in the top left portion of the life safety plan, that's where we had earmarked it to go. Okay. Because I was trying to avoid this conversation, we said, we'll just put it in one spot and call what it is. That's where it's going to live when people are actually using it to make drinks. When we activate it, and it's not always activated, when it becomes portable, it will be ported to this location. Okay, I'll leave it. That's, yeah, the. Okay. Yeah, the night that's even simpler than what I was suggesting. So that's great. Thank you. Staff, can you point that on the, I don't know what he's talking about. So is that Mr. Rambas, the, I can't read it, does it say? It says portable, portable. And that's already approved by you for the life safety plan. Correct. Thank you. That was easy. No. That concluded it? No, there's one more. Yes, that's what I thought. The indoor live entertainment area is to pitch it on the life safety plan plan which I believe are the two blue areas if we can zoom out or scroll down. Thank you. We're not approved through this resolution and would require a review under separate application which I think the applicant alluded to. So I think what the applicant is trying to do is to pick them now so that when he does apply for live entertainment, he doesn't have to modify his life safety plan. I can't speak on whether or not that process is appropriate or not. I don't know if he's going to have to modify his life safety plan if he applies for a live entertainment application? Yeah, we haven't advertised a approval of live entertainment in any other locations. So we can't approve changes to live entertainment under an outdoor dining resolution. No. So seven is no. Well, so we had put it on there for just reference purposes. So one of the resolution says, if the life safety plan changes, which is what we're approving today, the only way we can change it is to come back here. And so what my thought was is I don't want to come back here. I'm sure Leslie doesn't want to come back here with me anymore. So we were just showing it on here for reference purposes, understanding 100% we have to go through the public hearing and the whole process and bring the live entertainment back. I was just simply trying to codify the life safety plan as it related to the live entertainment. If City Attorney says the adding live entertainment somewhere indoors doesn't require us to come back to City Council to revise our life safety plan for the outdoor dining, I'm 100% fine. I was just trying to maybe I was overthinking it. So I don't know the answer to that, but the reality is if he applies for a live entertainment, it's going to be before council anyways. And as just a companion item, I think the life safety plan should come along with it specific to where he's including life in But I don't want to amend the outdoor dining permit. I see what he say I agree with him He would not have to amend the outdoor dining permit to show the inclusion of the two live entertainment spaces shown today And I believe that was it. Mayor, I have one additional suggested condition. Councillor Mellon. It goes back to what I said shortly before we broke a recessed a little bit ago. Should we have a condition that says something like this that it would require staff verification of receipt and approval of all relevant license and permit applications before the city. In other words, we would, the condition would be that there would need to be staff verification that all permits and licenses required by this business would be in place and acted upon. And I'm relating to the conversation that we saw earlier that there were in staff's view, apparently, a number of, even as of today, some number of applications, some number of licenses and permits that either have not been applied for when they should have been so they're not in place or perhaps are not in the proper form. They should be perhaps understandably given the evolution of this project. But that, so I'm just offering that up as something that at least concerns me. And I don't know if this is the way to get at that, but it does concern me. So may I ask a... I need to clarify that. Yes. I just wanted to clarify if councilmember, councilmember, councilmember, was specific to state and federal permits or are you at? No. Including BTR and everything. I'm really well. I'm BTR, you consider a state app, no, it's a little correct. Yeah, I'm focused on low Yeah, I think that's mandatory Yes, but I think number two covers a single BTR condition that we have in there and I Won't speak for the building department, but I'm assuming in order to operate they're gonna have to get a final CO and go through the administrative process But we can I can definitely craft something But I do think can you read too over again? Let me ask, cut just an advice, Mayor. Yeah, yeah, no, I've got it right here in front of me. Okay, vice mayor. Yeah, so just real quickly, the petitioner has been at this somewhere close to four years. And without us getting into the weeds as to whether the cart was before the horse or the horse was before the cart on all these licensing and permitting issues, I don't feel comfortable in asking our staff to do anything other than what they do for all other Petitioners, right? Let's just be consistent because before we layer something else on that's never gonna get measured Let's conduct business as usual I'll just tell you that Staff is trying to apply the code. We're the problem. We're the problem. They are trying to apply the code, and that's why. Business is usual, and nothing special. OK. OK, let's wrap it up, Petra. I'm just thinking it doesn't need to be part of the ordinance, but it is already part of our process because in order to get the BTR, all of the permits have to be done and satisfied and everything ready to go. If I'm understanding this right, and these were these issues that staff has identified. So they all need to be cured before the BTR is issued and that's what we do with every business. There's a number of issues. You know, we continue to work with any developer, any business owner and ensuring that they're compliant with code. You know, that's our job. I'll continue to do that absolutely. There are a number of things that were contingent on direction on whether or not this could move forward as one business or not. Those will be more easily wrapped up with council direction today. So those links are an amended alcohol beverage license. We have to approve a sketch that shows the license premises. And we'll see that as one business, we can move forward with approving that sketch that gets their alcohol beverage license moving forward. The single BTR, that can be moving forward based on the conversation we're heard today. So there'll be other permits we might need to see, depending on the changes that they may propose under the rebranding, but we'll continue to work with the additional on whatever is necessary. And I think that's to Christmas point if you want to just put that on there so that it's a condition that will be clear. But I don't know. No. I'm persuaded. I think what Ms. Velmer is saying is that through the normal processes that she and working with this petitioner is with any, those issues will rise to the service and be dealt with and I'll withdraw my suggestion because I agree I don't think it should be a specific condition for this petition and back to sort of the principal we were talking about with the annual BTR 51%. We should avoid placing conditions on one petitioner that are not opposed on others. Got it. Thank you. I ask one question of Mr. Chair. Mr. Mr. your staff So do you have everything needed to approve the building permit for the alley? So I don't add that's wrong vengeance. Well, but that but I just want to because the reason we were here is they said that we had to have a life safety plan that was the last piece I just want to make sure there's nothing else from a council perspective that staff needs to issue that building permit because to Mr. Christmas Point we're trying to resolve the issues. I'm not a building inspector. They're not building inspectors. I don't have the building code and I'm not going to apply it on it. There you go. Okay. Can I ask one more question? Sorry. On the item number one, you said what was the resolution on item number one? Does that go away because we've answered the operational questions? That's a question for council. Well, I think the operational plan describing how all food and beverage spaces including those currently identified as the kitchen. I mean that's what we've been here for the last four hours, right? I just don't want to have to submit something else. I'm hoping that item can be stricken and we can go right to the testimony. As long as the resolution you're following and you're not I mean there's no food there's no food in the staff only right there is going to be food yes but but again could we ask staff what whether having clarified the hours I'd like to ask the staff our staff as to whether they believe there is further information and they quote unquote operational plan that you would like to have. I was unclear about the staff only space as well. Up until just now, there's a lot of different parts here. If you look on the website, there's a lot of. We've talked about answered questions. We've talked about different hours of operation and I think that's a lot of... We've talked about... Answered questions. We've talked about different hours of operation, and I think that's a great and helpful. But I still feel that something more comprehensive, something that we can take when the... When and if permits come in, where we're looking at licenses, we don't have to go back and listen to this meeting. We have something that makes it pretty expressly clear as to what's happening on the site. For example, when you all were considering a former council was considering the outdoor dining original outdoor dining permit, there was a single or two-page operational plan on how that space was going to function. That's all we're looking for. Something very similar to what's been provided before. So we want to keep your number one request as is. But that's what I'm not understanding. We've provided everything that we needed to provide. We have the hours. We put the stip- where did the stipulations that Clay gave you? The- So- The kitchen being open? All you gave me was hours of operation. An operational plan for a restaurant is where are you running food? I mean, these are, how are you operating this as a single establishment? And right now, you hear the council. They're getting ready to approve this with conditions. If you want to object to this, you can. But how are you going to run the three different areas as one establishment? Is we're an operational plan? And staff only. I'm not an entrepreneur. I'm not a restaurant. I don't own. And Mr. Schuchart, I just see it's the exact thing. So I don't want to put staff into a position of having to make an administrative decision when the district is not mentioned as having food. And the district doesn't have food. I'm not the district, the staff only. The staff only is part of the district. Is it okay to simply say we'll agree to submit the operational plan to staff, subject to approval. Within x number of days, but we're not coming back right to discuss that operational plan. We're because we're not really fair to staff because right now I feel like we've already put staff in a position. They wanted an operational plan. Mr. Schucart doesn't want to give them an operational plan. Council has said that we're okay with not getting a comprehensive operational plan to their liking. We've decided what it's going to be by establishing hours. Although that means that the kitchen should be left to one o'clock in the morning. So to just focus on what Mr. Brooker said, these are conditions. There's no condition that this comes back to the council. If you're okay with submitting an operational plan, satisfactory to city staff, he's already agreed to it. Let's modify it to number one and we can move on. Yes. Yes. Okay. I'm going to wrap it up. What did you just say? So number one is going to be modified to say and comprehensive operation. It's going to remain the same. The only thing I'm going to add modified to say and comprehensive operation. It's going to remain the same. The only thing I'm going to add is as approved by staff. Yeah, I'm fine with that. That's fine. Yeah, and I'm not sure when we use terms, terms need definitions. And so we use a term called an operational plan. And for the purpose, just on the record, I term called an operational plan and for the purpose just on the record I'm suggesting that operational plan and if somebody objects to this I'm I'm trying to make Sausages we go and get something done that needs to be done. Operational plan is the equivalent of a space designation, the use and the hours. I submit that. Unless you have a definition. I like your definition. Thank you. Do we have a definition? Not for this purpose. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. No public comment. Do I have a motion. I'll make a motion. Okay. Before we second, can I just go through these one more time? Yes. Sure. Please. Thank you. Number one. Reads as is with the addition of as approved by staff at the end. Number two remains the same. Number three is removed in its entirety. Number four remains the same. Number five, I was going to leave and modify the resolution depending on what planning staff want, but if they're okay with just Re editing this to read in the hours of operation for All three areas all four areas, then I think that's probably cleaner Eric unless the would you like the condition to actually modify the pre previously approved resolution or can we just Replace five with hours of operation for all four? Five with hours of operation. So just to confirm again, because we did make a modification to the timing. The kitchen is from 7 a.m. And does not close until the last indoor dining room venue closes. The mini bar outdoor dining is 11 to 10 Monday through Thursday, 11 to 11 Friday through Sunday. The alley is 11 to 1 Monday through Sunday. And the district is 11 to 12 Monday through Sunday. Okay. Thank you. Six will be modified. The portable bar shown in the Northeast corner of the outdoor dining area depicted on the life safety plan Instead of saying we'll be removed may only be used in that area something along those lines and then Seven We could probably remove unless staff wants to leave it to live out indoor dining. I think he will have to apply. I think that's been vetted through this process if we want to remove that one. I think everybody is under the same impression that it's coming back. Anything new, any changes are coming back. And along those lines, you know, the portable bar area, we could remove that one as well because it is shown on your life safety plan. The reason I wrote it that way was to remove. If we're going to keep it, then it's going to be stay in its place already on the life safety plan, the life safety plan, reference in the resolution. Do we need to depict where it will be located? It is. It is not there. Does it move? depicting where it would be located. It is. It is not there. Does it move? Like do you store it and use it in the same place? No, is that the usage? The identified area is the usage of where that portable, yes. So anytime the portable bar is being used, it will have to be used and consistent with the life safety plan. It's not there in violation of the life safety plan. But I don't think you're clear. It's not a plumbaid. Moabord. Okay, good. Yes. And I'm sorry, is there? I can't see the legend in the top right of that life safety plan. Is the portable bar defined like trash cans defined etc. Yeah, it was right here. On the left-hand corner. No, in the legend. Oh, in the legend. So if it needs to be... Oh, it's not. If it needs to be properly defined in the legend, my ask is that it get done. It's labeled right here on the plans. So we're fine. Yes. Sorry. Okay. Motion we're fine. Yes. Sorry. Awesome. OK. Motion by Council Member Kramer. I make a motion that we approve this resolution with the four conditions now. Six. Six, one, two, three, four. I didn't. Six. Six. Huh? I have four. We got rid of three, six, and seven. Oh, we we got rid of three six and seven oh We did get rid of six The four conditions as enumerated by our city attorney There's four conditions You get a second by council member Barton Madam Clerk please do hold the council. Council member Petra Nav. Yes. Council member Kramer. Yes. Yes. Nice to hear how you Nav. Yes. Council member Kramer. Yes. Yes. Nice to meet you, Mr. Hutchison. Yes. Council member Peniman. Yes. Council member Kusman. Yes. Council member Barton. Yes. Mayor Heightman. Yes. Mr. Schuchard, I want to say thank you for being a visionary. Thank you. Again, this is exactly what I was concerned about when I was the only one who said no. I don't think you were the only one. I think Mrs. Petronoff said no. Okay, well good. But I, I, we thank you, but remember staff is following the code. It can't be for one and not the other. I get it. We want it to be clear and fair. So they're, they're working with you and appreciate them. They've worked hard on this. I appreciate it. Thank you all for your help. Thank you. Thank you. Now we're going to go to. Thank you. 12 A? No. Yes. Yes. 12 A. May I? I'm Mr. McConnell. A resolution approving a Valley license agreement and right of way permit application. PRRW2404211 with Valley Pros LLC for Central Valley Service in the Fifth Avenue South Business Improvement District. Subject to the standard permit conditions, special conditions and general operating conditions, authorizing the city manager to execute the Valley license agreement and the right-of-way permit application and providing an effective date. Thank you, swearing in please. This isn't I don't think this is a no worries. Okay. I prefer you ask. Okay. Good. Petitioner. Good afternoon. Now let's start. Would you like to start? Not a quasi judicial hearing. Yes, please. Alison Bickett for the record. Public Works Department, Deputy City Engineer. For a little bit of brief background, I just want to provide. Valley Pros has been operating within the city for, since 2013, Valley was selected by the Fifth Avenue bid for services under the original resolution back in 2013 under resolution 13-1375. The original approval included three valet stations with Operation 3 Days a Week. Thursday through Saturday. In August of 2015, City Council approved a resolution for authorization of valley operations to valley pros on a seven-day per week basis for the winter seasons. Then in 2018, a minimum was made to expand service, pursuant to ordinance 2018-1411 to cover lunchtime demand. In 2021, VALEPRO submitted a right away permit application package to request a year round VALEP services with a modification of one location change due to the demands and interest of local restaurant owners. The request was approved under resolution 2021, Dash 14, 686 with annual renews up to three years. So we did set a time period at that time to kind of set so we can come back, bring these back after three years and reevaluate. And annually, the permit has been submitted and approved administratively through the City Manager. The City Manager has under the renewal has been authorized to make changes to the hours, locations and operations as need need be in the best interest of the public. After review of this request, it was recommended by legal for this year to further formalize the VAI service in the form of an agreement, which is included in your package. The agreement language covers most of the special, the typical special conditions, permit conditions, the department has historically incorporated with additional language incorporated by legal. The bid has also provided a letter of support with criteria they have requested as part of the operations and I'd like to just relay because there has been questions and inquiries as far as the connection there's no financial exchange of revenue between the bid and the valet pros. So they've just been authorized, they work together somewhat as a partner in cooperation and working with the businesses locally. So for this I want to turn it over to Rado, Rado Nicolub is in attendance today on behalf of valley pros with his business partner Dimitri to present on the operational details of their valley. Thank you, honestly. Good afternoon, everyone. Mayor, vice mayor, council members, city staff, and everybody else that's watching us probably. So we're here today to share to please state the name. Radostinnik Wolf for the record. Everybody knows Mr. Radodovalege, in my business partner, Dimitri. So we're here today to share some details and give you updates on our current operation. We have very well established operation. We've been working very hard for the past 10 years to create this win-win situation that benefits everyone in the downtown area. So I'm gonna start with a little bit of history. So you're gonna see where we started, where we are now, and to see how that evolved to like very well established operation. So we started, as Alison said, like in 2013, we were picked by the bit. There was a previous company before us, but they were not doing very well. And the service wasn't used. They did not have any parking spaces. They would put cars somewhere in the corners, walk in traffic, and create a lot of problems. So then we stepped in with a plan. We approached all the businesses that were working the evening, like banks, real estate offices. Everybody that doesn't work in the evening, like banks, real estate offices. Everybody that doesn't work in the evening after five, we told them that we're ready to pay rent, take care of their parking lots, secure their parking lots. And if they give it to us, we would take care of their tenants of them and everybody else. And whatever it's left, we'll use it to value cars there. So that's how we started. We picked up a few parking lots. We approached a bit, they approved that. We came to you. We got to prove for three days trial. So for the first year we did, we went from the previous company to like 2000 cars a year before us. And next year when we took over, with all the parking spaces on our plane, with three locations, only Thursday, Friday, and Saturday, we went to 6,000 cars. And then we were approved for full week, and then we contracted even more parking wads. And then we went from 6,000 cars to 20,000 cars, then to 25,000 cars. Currently, I'm not gonna get you bored with all the data, but currently last season, from October 1st until May 31st, we parked over 60,000 cars. With the biggest number one day Valentine's Day, 795 cars. And this is only in privately owned parking area that otherwise would not be available to the public. So that's how we created that win-win situation. We take care of the votes. Owners don't have the liability of people just going there, trying to secure it and everything. We secure it. It's our under insurance. We're there the whole time. When they want to use their parking spaces, they call me or call him. We're going to be there. Our tenants will be there. We keep spaces for them always. Or they can park with us free of charge. We secure everything, we ensure everything, we take care of the parking lots, we clean it, we maintain the parking lots for them in exchange for them giving us reasonable rent. That's why we can keep the price all reasonable. It's only $10. And it's the cheapest valley in town. Compared to Mercato and water sign shops, we are cheaper than them. But the difference between us and them is that we pay rent and they don't. So you can imagine how much effort and dedication we put to optimize the service. So we can keep the price no brainer. That's our goal. To keep everything like no brainer, working perfectly, and help everybody. We help the restaurants, we have the community. We work very well with the business owners. We are very well with all the neighbors. We always try to take care of them and whatever the request if somebody like you had an example somebody like the the sign the look of the sign I changed right like I said, what kind of sign do you want if you're on your property? I just can't tell, like, she told me next week the sign was there. So I'm there every day. I don't take day off. October 1st, May 31st, you can see me every time. I always pick up my phone. I'm always there in person and train all the employees. We currently have 40 employees. We currently have 40 employees. They're full time. This is their profession. They're not just college kids that want to go and make some extra cash. This is what makes their living. That's how they fit their families. And we have guys with us from day one. And they build relationship with older residents and older that ones and business that and we have people bringing them gifts for Christmas and like they know them and like you know And they trust them completely. They said like you're the only value we use So this is what kind of relationship we have with everybody in the area and we work very hard for that It's not like it doesn't come easy. It's a lot of micro-mages and a lot of managing because it's so many owners So many properties so many parking lots and we have to make everybody happy. And that's my job, and I think I'm doing well because we have no complaints, we have no accidents, we don't have turnover with employees, and we keep growing, and currently we have over 600 spaces in privately owned parking areas that usually otherwise would not be available to the public. So that's pretty much to parking garages. And the services, like usually like we aim to be very safety is our first priority, but also we want to be quick and efficient. So usually our cars are returning within three minutes, which is among the fastest values. So people sometimes they don't believe it is like, oh my god it's over here. And sometimes they claim the car because they're using the hotels to wait 20 minutes They claim the car and then they're not ready by the time the car is there so and All we want like and we hope we get your approval It's all we need is like six public spaces on two of our seven locations For staging because when we have the opportunity we take the cars in the parking lot but not everywhere is possible. For example the two occasions we need the parking spaces is like and west leg drive because there are multiple small parking lots where it's not convenient for people to pull in and it's not safe for us to maneuver in between the cars there and also to be hard to find them in the back. So we've been using like three spaces on each location for people just to pull in there, safely get out of the car. We don't want traffic. They can take their time, take whatever they need from the car and we move the car after that. We, West Lake location is open year-round. East Lake location is open only October until May, because then it gets busy and we need that additional location. Otherwise, it would be too busy to one point, and we don't want to create traffic or interfere with traffic and everything. We are always, after that, we, actually, we're always first want to bring new Stuff on on in our operation. We are the first one to bring the LED signage On the in Naples now we're the first one that brought the LED Displace on the stations which is not only more beautiful and matches the Area appearance, but it's very easy for people to see, understand, and we keep it simple and for everybody. And we are the only company with emergency action plan. So every employee signs the emergency express. So if we have fire department or police or everybody coming, we have the push point up. We know that they are coming to the area. So by attempt to arrive, we already have cleared the area, they have space where to pool and you know we always help like navigate the traffic and everybody. We work very well with the police as well. We help them in every possible way we can simple example like recent we had person that was worst with dementia. So we knew they were looking for them. I sent message in our group with the values. We found him in two minutes. So we kept him until the police came to collect him. So that's why we had one committee. We generally care about Fifth Avenue, Naples in general, and the community there, and I'll be there every day. So I know everybody knows me. It's for me it's pleasure to be there. It's my dream job came through and I do it very enthusiastic about doing it. And I keep making it better and better and better. And I think currently we have a perfect operation and I don't see where we can improve more, but I still like working in my, we got new hats, new umbrellas, all that kind of stuff for the guys. So I'll be for us and very trustworthy and you do care. You do care about our community. Thank you. Council questions. Comment, Kramer? I run Valet and one of my best friends on the VLA company that services high in places here in town. So I kind of took a dive into you guys and the level of service they provide is unparalleled. And what they do with public safety is a novelty and to have adults who do this for a living doing it every day. That doesn't happen in Valet. I guess that's not true. It happens in stationary places or big cities where you stay in one building. But to do it like you're doing it unbelievable. It's just a great plan. You'll provide it a great service and it is a win-win. So great job. Thank you. Okay. Council member, Kristen. Yeah, just to add to Councilman Kramer's comments. I think the proof of the quality of Rato's operation also was demonstrated a couple of years ago when as some of you remember we did have some conflicts with the temporary parking on East Lake and West Lake, particularly East Lake, and with some residents and the way in which that was resolved very quickly and harmoniously through the efforts of staff, but also Rado and his team, I think just showed the kind of approach and attitude that they have. And now it's grown in 10 years from three spaces to now seven, right? With the most recent addition, three sites. You know, I think we've got, and he's grown his business. I've been impressed. You're gonna be the valet for Gulf Shore Playhouse, correct? Gulf Shore Playhouse? Yes, we're going with the NCH. NCH, you sure have answered the NCH already. I mean, it's, you know, we've got a really good thing going with Rato and his team on Fifth Avenue. And we should be very happy about it. Thank you. Thank you. Staff report? Yeah, that was generally it. I just reiterate that we have been working very closely with our team if there's any concerns and we do have this as revocable. So when we are evaluating this annually and making sure that if there's any concerns that they can be addressed and it's outlined in the licensing agreement that I had mentioned before. There was, I think there was some question, it's because of the number of L.A. stations. It is included in here this time, where we've historically only included in the five L.A. stations that are operated from entirely within the right of way. There's a couple of locations that are actually on private property, but there's signage in the right of way. So that's where there may be some, just some confusion as far as the right of way. So that's where there may be some confusion as far as the Mervelli stations. That's all I have, but if you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer. Great. So the contracts that Valle Pro uses or the areas that they use that's by contract with Rotto and the bank building or? Yes, they have and they work privately and they lease those individual parking spaces directly with them. And the Fifth Avenue parking, you can have designated parking? Yes, it's not. D downtown is a little bit different where it cannot be reserved in the, this, this area generally we've been working through in the spaces where there was some overlap and some concerns about not, I think there may be one spot actually that's ever by the Fifth Avenue Parkway. Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe that it cannot be reserved but the other locations are all fully reserved parking spaces. And then do we have a plan for if any of these locations are to have future development on them within the next three years what their alternative plan might be, or how will we handle that? I think we would handle it as we previously. If there's been some issues, particularly we've been working through in with fire and the redevelopment with rooftop dining, there's some construction happening there. So we've made some revisions as need be, worked with them, and they've provided those revisions and updates to us which we've I've taken it through the City Manager's Office for review and reviewed between staff code enforcement fire making sure that we've cross checked so that there's no continued issues and if we need to make those corrections and permit accordingly. And then the only public parking is it within Fifth Avenue? Yes, where? The public parking. I may be so the you're talking about where it's not reserved parking. Is that what you're referring to? There was a location that's over there. There is no location. Everything's okay. Okay. I know we worked through this a while back and there was a spot that was ever by the bank off of the park. Actually that was the Sherwin Williams. Yes. Correct. We dropped that one. She said, Tom, we cannot secure it. So we contracted the fifter bank instead. Okay. So now we have the three banks there and my case parking was down there. So everything's in downtown area. So everything's private. Right. But the parking that's on Fifth Avenue in the Fifth Avenue area, we have free parking in Fifth Avenue somewhere. Free parking on Fifth Avenue. So they're only pulling up and they're utilizing per the code code they're allowed to pull up and you're not I mean in in Fifth Avenue where where's the public free to park on street and are parking lots anywhere that it's not reserved private lots okay any Okay. Any questions, Council? Petra now? Is this a one-year agreement, rolling agreement? So it's a three-year agreement. We're continuing with a three-year, with the annual renewals that we'll be taking through City Manager managers office to look a little bit closer and we can make sure there's any tweaks we need to make. We can work with them. Okay, that's good. I don't think we needed every year. You know, it's in this as a 11 year enterprise and I think administrative approval will be appropriate in those in between years. I want to thank you for coming in and hanging out with us all day. I'm sure you didn't plan to just spend the day with us, but really thank you. And I love your enthusiasm of your business and the way that you work with emergency services. I think that is really a unique twist. And I love your survey results. That you got, there's in our deck, we had something from the bid, and I think almost across the board, you know, in the high 90s, you were strong, you know, it was the highest score possible. So I think you're a great partner to the city. Thank you. Who would have been a good coach for that? And I'd like to, you know, if anybody else has any. Oh, I do. I have Councilman Christian and the Vice Mayor. I was just going to make a motion, Mayor. OK. Everybody else is through. Yeah, just congratulations for maintaining, helping, maintaining a really good relationship and an extension really of the city of Naples because you're actually touching a lot of our residents and our guests. And Council, I even though this relationship is going the way that we really hope, you know, couldn't hope for any better, really, not now, but I strongly suggest that we consider layering on a few things because when someone gets inside of a personal vehicle, you have access to a lot more information than most people. Certainly more information, perhaps, than a waiter or a waitress or someone like that. If you look at other communities around the nation, they have things such as inside these agreements, wording or verbiage that says that the valet operator will ensure that employees have valid drivers license and good standing, uniforms with name tags, expectation on how they handle customer complaints, and even a development of a code of conduct that goes further into what the expectations are. I do notice in the agreement that it has certificates of insurance. I just want to make sure that the sequence of that when they supply it, that it gives our risk manager an opportunity to verification before permits are signed off on. So there's just the meat and potatoes, the basic stuff that comes with giving a valet service, an operator. We do our due diligence and we have some safety nets. So anyway, that's again not today, but I do believe that we need to prepare for something a little more robust on this agreement for the future. Thank you. I might add that the operations that they have included in here, they do cover a lot of those items and when they, as far as the insurance, I do run that by risk management and make sure to verify that it's good. So we, I think we are on track with that. So I appreciate your comments. No further comments? Council, I just have a legal question. Yes, Mr. McIntyre. After you. I was just going to ask if those If those that insurance just for risk management points of view are attached And so once this is like any agreement with Public works. I mean any finance agreement Once it's approved then Lori gets involved and confirms the certificate of insurance And I just want to make one edit if I could because of the fact that this is going to be three years and we want the city manager to administratively review this. I think it's more appropriate for the city manager to execute it. I did identify that in the resolution, but I left the mayor as the signature on the signature page. So if we could just make that modification to the city manager. Yes. Thank you. So the resolution won't say mayor no say. The resolution was correct I believe it said city manager but the agreement itself had you listed mayor as the signature. Maybe I'm looking at the wrong resolution but the resolution is wrong. It should be changed to say city manager. So. My. The resolution and. The resolution and then I'm looking at. Under this agenda item list the mayor. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Well, if we could just have the motion include that it'll be city manager both places. Okay. I see city manager. I see. I see. I see. Sorry. I'm sorry. It is a per-allee license agreement. Okay. Yeah. A resolution approving of valid, valid license agreement. Mine has, it sounds like several of us have that. I'll make a motion to approve this with the- Can I just ask one question? But with that, when there are changes, may, usually it could be the city manager, but the city manager does ignite could be that Miss Bickett could make changes. So who knows who's made changes? If there's any changes that are made, it just goes on record. How does it get changed? If there's been any changes, I've always ran it through the City Manager's office and for it to kind of laid out and identified exactly what changes are being provided and asked for final approval of that from him and my recommendation. So that's just kept on file with this resolution of any changes or given to the clerk or how do we handle that? It'll be in the file of the annual approval that we do. We'll have notation and we'll have a record of any changes. If there are any, I don't know that they're really really good. I mean, I don't know if we ever had a formal way of reporting any changes that happened. We wouldn't report it back to you unless it was something. Not to us, substantive. Just so it's. No, we would have it in the file. We would have a record of what tweaks may have happened between years. Right. OK. And if there's something substantive, I think you all should know about. Yeah, it'll come back. I'll at least advise you. But possibly bring it back. All right. I'll make a motion to approve this item with the addition of the city manager as the individual who would be the right language? Oh, I have a right. I move to approve the resolution. Yeah. Wait, the agreement also has all signed the agreement, but he'll sign it. The agreement and the resolution will have the city manager. City manager never signs resolutions. So the only thing I think we're was confusing is in the title it says authorize the city manager to execute but the signature page of the valley agreement has the mayor as a We miss. We miss. Yeah, my apologies. Which you were saying. Okay. So the, I'll rephrase my motion to approve this resolution with the stipulation that the city manager will be the signatory to the agreement with Valley Pros. A motion by Council Member Christmas. Second. A second by Council Member Kramer. All in favor? No. All in favor sign by aye. Aye. Opposed? The motion passes unanimously. Thank you for what you're service to the community. Thank you for what your service to the community. Thank you. Thank you. So the licensing agreement. Okay. That takes us to item 12 B. Good afternoon, Mayor and Council, Eric Martin, Planning Director. We have, before you now, is just a discussion item. And this is requesting, or a discussion in the requesting direction on a scope of services, included in the draft request for proposal related to elective amendments to the comprehensive plan. So as you know, included in the draft request for proposal related to elective amendments to the comprehensive plan. So as you know, we have gone through the ear-based amendments to the comp plan, which is the required comp plan update cycle through the state. You will hear second reading of that. We did get approval back from the state on first reading. You'll hear second reading on September 18th, which is the adoption hearing. So if that is adopted, it'll get transmitted back to the state. And we will have completed that required update. But through the discussion of that year-based amendment, it became apparent that we'd like to amend the comp plan even further in what we're calling the elective changes. So changes that aren't necessarily required to meet state statutes, but changes that we would like to make electively to all the different elements of our comp plan. So I came before you in June with a draft of a scope of work for an RFP on the ideas that an RFP will be issued, sorry, request for proposals would be issued. And then we would receive proposals from firms. So this wouldn't be, we wouldn't just be drawing from our library of approved vendors. This would go out nationally. So we could get firms from wherever to give us their proposals to complete this project. So you'll see in the draft of the RFP, the agenda memo that I gave you is, I've just been updating the same agenda memo just so that you have a constant track of the history of this project. But really the only update here is that I discussed this RFP with City Council at your June meeting right before that meeting. I actually discussed this with the Planning Advisory Board. So I didn't have the benefit of enough time between PAB and council to incorporate the PAB's recommendation because we had already published the city council. So I did provide the planning advisory board reviewed the RFP and they actually elected a representative from the board of Miss Jennifer Fiori to compile their suggestions in a memorandum that they sent to me. I did provide that to City Council when you looked at the first, that your first look at the draft of the scope of work in the RFP and Council directed me to over the summer incorporate those suggestions from the Planning Advisory Board into the RFP and bring it back. And that's where we are today. So you'll see a modification to the scope of work that you saw before, which provides, you know, the purpose of what we're looking for, but then also the timeline and the detailed scope of what we would be expecting and in a timeline. It's not a timeline with dates, we're not there yet, but it just gives an outline of how we think that process would move forward. So I did many modifications in here, incorporating the PAVs suggestions. And really what we're looking for today is some direction from council. We can issue this is the portion that we would need approval from council so that we can actually issue that RFP would take. Well, what I haven't provided in here is if you look at the timeline in your documents, so starting on page four, you'll see phase one, phase two, and all the different steps and activities. Let me jump in two different timelines. There's a timeline to finalize this, issue the RFP, go through the selection process, and bring you a contract. That we can give you an estimate. It's going to take a couple of months to go through that process. The timeline for the actual complaint review, public engagement, PAB involvement council, involvement, that is what Erica is mentioning. We don't have that timeline yet. That will be something that we would work together on with the selected consultants to define the timeline that works best, especially this being a quasi-seasonal community and the fact that we want a lot of public engagement, that's also going to affect the timeline for the actual project itself. Yes, we would anticipate that that phase two, which is the public engagement phase, would happen during what we call the season, season months. So you want to have those meetings, those information gathering sessions when the highest number of residents are in town and able to attend. So when we were in the budget process, you made the statement that you heard loud and clear that this council was looking for a planner, a long range planner. So I'm just for discussion purposes. I'm in favor of getting a planner on staff and one that could work with the PAB to implement this that would understand our community. I'm all for consultants, but sometimes consultants are not here in this community understanding the importance of this community. 30 year planning tool and it'd be great if we could have yes, you'll be a part of it, but right, you're busy with doing other things. If we had a staff member that was actually on staff that could be a part of that, you know, I've been through a lot of consultants. We actually did you were you here when Robin did the last comprehensive plan in staff? She was my third. Right. So the first one was in-house? Or they have all been, they were 2010 was in-house. 2018 was in-house. And then this last round of ear-based amendments was we used to consult. We used to consult. I just I remember the process I know it takes time but there's nothing like having someone that's on staff that can work with you and understanding what you're dealing with with the comprehensive plan and being able to work with the community. I just can't help but continue to share my hopes that it would be someone in-house. Do you know the cost estimate? What did we pay for the last consultant? And that was just for an air-based change. That was just under 50,000. So under 50,000 do we have any estimate of what it's going to cost to get a consultant? I mean we paid 300 hundreds of thousands. Hundreds of thousands? And the majority of that what you're looking at is the public engagement portion. We can have someone in house but that public engagement portion we're looking at something similar to the visioning process. We're holding multiple meetings at different times of day in different locations in different areas of the city. It's not, I don't want to say marketing but that's, you know, it's making the public aware. How do you get that message out? How do you garner the highest number? That visioning process It's not, I don't want to say marketing, but that's, you know, it's the making the public aware. Had you get that message out, had you garnered the highest number, that visioning process was probably the highest turnout of any public engagement process I've seen in the almost 20 years that I've worked here. And that was because we had a consultant that put in the time to, you know, secure the venues. They have a full staff, the other benefit of having a firm do this is you have transportation experts, you have resiliency experts, you know, these larger planning firms have expertise in all of these different areas. I'm a planner. I don't look, I don't know transportation, I don't know stormwater, I don't know resiliency, I don't, you know, you can have a firm that has expertise in all of these different areas. That's very valid point. And the consultant wouldn't be writing the plan. It's not like we're going to say here we want to update our plan, you know, use your expertise to update this. It would all be based upon the public engagement Similar to the vision so it's it's getting that input from the public on what are the issues? What you know what what do we not like in our current plan? How would we like to amend it to address the issues of the public so and that was Stantec Um different stand tech did the public engagement portion So they did not do the writing of the vision. Stantec did the public engagement portion, the surveying, the meetings, and they gathered all the data. And then Johnson Engineering did the first draft of the vision document. If you remember how to all the graphics, they compiled all of that data into the vision document. And then, I can, for the life life of me can't remember the third firm, that then reviewed that one and produced what we have as our vision document. And so, do you recall how much stand-tech and Johnson engineering was? I don't, I can ask finance. Okay, I'm just trying to see if this budget increase, millage increase, we can get a in-house planner and be able to narrow down the request for proposal to be able to provide specific services of that piece, the public engagement process. So that's why I'm asking those questions, council, questions. Councilor questions. Mayor, to your point, if I may, this is an important process that I do think based on my involvement here, we should get started sooner than later. Regardless of if you hire someone long term, just my opinion, because what you can always do and the beauty of a firm and there's really only three or four that do what we're asking full-on comprehensive planning and that's all they do. You don't want an engineering firm, you want a planning firm and they'll usually bring along some kind of attorney as well that will kind of help because obviously Erica and I have day-to-day activities but you can always scale down the scope. The beauty of what we're doing right now is they're going to actually offer you a proposal on how they're going to accomplish this. And then you're going to be able to decide, okay, this person has a good plan, this person doesn't. And that's why it's an RFP, right? You're going to be able to pick the best qualified proposal. Is that how it will work? You're not going to just bring us from the selection committee who we're going to, I mean, that's usually the way it works. Yeah, and let's make sure we understand the rules here. So we have very prescribed rules related to selecting a firm. We'll bring you the recommendation for hiring, but there's a team of folks that are gonna be vetting and evaluating and reference check. Just like we do any other firm that we hire for a specific service, I think the point that Matthew was getting to is, you know, we will have more conversation between now and bringing you a contract about what the ultimate scope of service is will be. What we want to do is ask for it all. Right now, we can peer that back later because cost may be a factor. We may want to have X amount of meetings, a couple of less with Council and a PAB. We can tailor make what the ultimate deliverable will look like, but the faster we get moving, be able to get to know the community as well. That's going to take a little bit of time, but this isn't something we turn loose and see you in a few months. You figure out what's best for us. We're telling them. There are experts in facilitating these processes and they understand all the laws and limitations and things like that. But to Eric has point, there is no singular person that has all of the subject matter expertise that's required to write a complaint. They have to have a bench of people, a team of people, and that's the beauty of the firm, working closely with our staff in the community. And other departments as well. The natural resources on the coastal management element, you'll have Bob and his team with respects to the public work. I mean, we'll have all the different aspects of city staff. But one planner, you know, really the future ladies element is the planning element. But there are multiple other elements in the comrades of plan. That's why I'm just asking these questions because I want to understand whether this, if we are getting a proposal for much larger than what we need or Whether we need to home down on really what proposal we're lurking for and to you is You know will you be hiring and looking at the same time for A consultant and a full-time long-range planner. Cause that's big for me. Yeah, we haven't made that final decision yet. First, you gotta have public hearing tonight. And then the second public hearing and put the money in the budget. But what we left open was, you know, we're either gonna lean on external private sector help with these planning services on an ongoing basis or we hire someone. You know, that's a decision that we left open. We need to talk about it tomorrow. We want to make the right decision for the long term, but we'll, you know, we will move on a panel about that. But the reason I'm asking you is because you make this decision and we make the budget decision. Yes. And I want some assurances that we're going to have both. Yeah. We will. Especially when we're increasing the military. We will have additional resources and planning to help that to help that staff. If it's in a form of a city employee or contracted services we don't know yet. That's what we had talked about during the budget presentation and that's how it was presented. I'm just trying to get down closer and closer to where you're going. Yeah, and we're not there yet. Other than the commitment that we will add more resources to planning to help them. Okay. I have Chris and Petrinoff. Yeah, I just, I had several comments I wanted to make on this RFP, which I think overall I think Eric has done a fine job with it, but just several things had jumped out at me. First of all, I propose what I think we've just been talking about. When you step back and say who's going to drive this process, I think it's the staff and our consultant, whoever that is, or however that firm is selected. They are the subject matter experts. They are the subject matter experts. And I think I would hope and assume that Ms. Martin will be notwithstanding our other duties and workload will have to spend a good bit of personal time on this because she's our planning director. And maybe other members of the staff as well, including this new person, if we're able to recruit him or her relatively quickly. But I think some of the material that came in from the input from the planning, from the PBA, did not give enough attention to the role of staff and in effect the extension of our staff through the consultants because they're going to have to drive this process. Number two, in the RFP, it reminded me that the PAB just a little more than two years ago went through a process of reviewing the comprehensive plan. And from August of 2021 to February of 2022, those of us who were on council then can remember this, they spent almost a meeting a month. They went through a lot of additional meetings, the comp plan coming up with a whole set of recommendations that then for a variety of reasons we we decided not to we counsel decided the time that we were not going to pursue implementation of those and rather we were going to focus on some changes to the to the land use code instead. So those recommendations are out there. So talk about a good starting point for this next round to begin with. I'm not saying the PAV at that time exhausted every nook and cranny of our code in terms of what good ideas were, but it was a very in-depth extensive process And it ought to be a starting point that might actually simplify when we get to the point of Reviewing the code might simplify that process Point three the public engagement process as Erica said is really important. And if you look at the third page of the RFP top of the page, where it says the city wishes to engage a consulting firm with expertise in comprehensive plans and land development regulations, I think we need to also explicitly identify and public engagement, or maybe the comprehensive planning firm we hire should look to hire us as a subcontractor a firm with public engagement expertise, because this is really to know how to do public engagement is really a specialty skill. Not everybody has it. And it seems to me that the right sequence for this would be to begin by going out and having the ability to elicit feedback from the public, perhaps on a neighborhood by neighborhood bases, I don't know what the right way is, and that the review of the comp plan elements should come after that in terms of once you've had the public engagement, because the public gauge engagement you're seeking in my opinion is not, you know, what do you think of, you know, section 206 sub item A of our comprehensive plan, but to get big picture ideas and themes and priorities. Similar but a little bit different than what we did with the vision. So I think the public engagement piece maybe needs to be made more hefty in this RFP. And then timing, you know, if you look at the, I went back and looked again at the comp plan itself. I mean, it's an enormous document and it has probably 10 different elements in it. And how are we gonna go through that once we dig into it? And do we phase this over a couple of years, particularly if we're gonna be trying to do it when people are here during season. I think another question is how the PAB and Council interact. You don't want. I for one I'm not interested in delegating my full responsibility for this to the PAB. On the other hand I think the PAB has an important role to play and I don't want what the PAB does and what we do be redundant. And so I think we need to think that through more. I don't think that I won't speak for the PAB. They can, I guess, do what they want to do do but I'm not interested in supporting a recommendation that City Council appoint a representative of this board to be the point person on the conflant and I think it's our job for all of us equally and I think when we meet when we talk about the conflant we should do So as a body of seven, not hearing reports back from one of our designees. So as I went through this, those are the comments I wrote down and occurred to me. But I think all of them are, I think we have a good start with the framework of this RFP. And I agree with Mr. Boudre-Sourge comments that we should try to finalize this and get it out as soon as possible so we can begin the process. A great, but the scope of work is vital, as you said, and I don't want. I really want to focus in on that because we've had consultants in the past. It has been a policy concern in mind on the scope of work. And we did receive from the appointed person on the planning board some recommendations that I agree with can work hand in hand. The planning board is supposed to work on the comp plan. And you know, those are also considered workshops for the public. So, I mean, that's a form of engagement that can be advertised more than we would ever normally do. So, I agree with the planning boards recommendations. I don't see anything in here that I didn't see City Council representative I thought I just saw Pardon toward the end madman. I thought it was just a PAB. Oh from both City Council MPAB Yeah, I think that the consultant the staff manager PAB should be working together with the community and keeping us informed. One of our meetings can be a public engagement meeting. And we can also have a night meeting. We don't have to, you know, if we want to do a special night meeting for the comprehensive plan and involve us, the community, as the process gets longer. I just I don't want to go prove a contract and then a year later you know they're coming back to us and not to PAV. I think we need to be actively involved just as we have in the past from a staff point of view. So recommendation wise I think that what PAB has recommended, I don't know if it's a council person needs to be directed, but I definitely think that one person, you can't have all of PAB working with staff and consultant on this. I mean, I think one designated person would make it a lot easier for staff than having seven people working. But that's my opinion. I have Petronoff. My comments were already included in Grace comment. The one thing I'm a little unsure though is the output of this is going to be changes that we make just to the comp plan. And then I guess the next stage that trickles down from this since this is the high level document would be looking at the code of ordinances to ensure that you know and make the necessary changes that we need to do to. Okay. And that is out of scope in this. It's not in this scope. You've got to step one, four step two. So this would amend the comp plan and then yes, the next step would be to look at your land development code and see what needs to be changed in the land development code to be consistent with the comp plan. Okay. I want to ask the attorney something though on that line and city managers we've been talking this summer Council member Kramer So two thoughts concerns. I don't know what's that I have And I'm I'm the PAB in their effort and They're valuable. When it says PAB would like to take the lead in the comprehensive plan or no process, as much as it's possible. I don't, that's vague to me. I don't know what that means. And at the end, talking about the point person, a point person from here, which has raised suggested, we don't need somebody sitting in for all of us and I'll roll with that. I'm part of the PAB, but to be clear, is it Ericka or is it Jay or who, like, there has to be a point person. May I interject? I think this conversation about point individuals is something that we're going to need some direction on. You know, the scope of work, I mean, this is pretty good. This is pretty solid. It covers all the basis. It's inclusive of the input that we got from PAB. But two points, at one point I want to make and then I want to dive a little deeper on this point person thing. One, I heard comments during the last PAB or not the last PAB back before summer break about the selection process. And I just want to make sure that there is extreme clarity that the process for selecting consultants is prescribed in our procurement policy and they're also state statutes that guide how that works. You all can't be involved in the selection process because you award the contract so we will have subject matter experts reviewing this and we'll have criteria experience and knowledge of the year. There's a whole set of criteria that we will look at. We are allowed to have non-voting SME subject matter experts externally that can come in. A lot of cities do that. They'll call on a planning person from another jurisdiction to say, hey, can you sit on this committee to bring an outside perspective? We can do that to really enhance our selection process, but that's going to work its way through and then get to you all for the award of the contract. PAB doesn't award the contract. That's going to come directly to you. Back to this point person thing. Some reading this sentence and I know you included what PAB requested within this draft scope. On page four, first full paragraph, it says that the facilitator will conduct public meetings together input from community input to help the city determine if and how the existing compliance should be updated. The facilitator will work with the appointed reps from PAB and council, as well as city staff to organize meetings and then report back to PAB and Council. So my only concern with that statement, I think it could be helpful. I can accept a mirror of an argument with two point people being involved in a conversation to help staff report back to those two bodies. But the more people you have involved in trying to schedule meetings with the public, I mean, that's going to be really difficult. So I would recommend that you strike out the meeting piece but reporting back information. It's still kind of vague. I just want to make sure that there's clarity and expectations or manage. If we have point people and it's not staff and the consultant working with the full body of the PAB and a full body of the council, what are the specific responsibilities for these point people? And I just point out one thing that could be really cumbersome is working together to plan public meetings. I don't know how you do that, and I don't know what value quite frankly, having two other people giving input on meeting dates at. So I just wanted to point that out to just kind of poke some holes into the concept of the point person. I understand the intent, but I just worry that it may create more problems than be helpful. I understand that. That's not at all, I mean our PAB, you know, that's their job is to work on the comprehensive plan. An advisory capacity. An advisory capacity. Thank you. Where I always get concerned with consultants and I'm sorry to use DEP is an example but I'll use DEP, DPC, great firm, great idea. But what they came back with is let's ignite our back of the house and put brick pavers and lights and chairs and you know sounds great for Miami but we all bought into it. I'm looking for the RFP scope of work that really in look at who we are and where we want to be in the next 30 years and I think that's got to be really tightly honed down on. Or we're going to get this pie in the sky, you know, objectives. I understand your concern, Mayor. I think this is a little bit different, you know, with DPC and other design firms. We're asking them to use their creativity with public input and sometimes they maybe lean a more on their creativity and not so much the public input and they bring you a little bit more. This is a facilitating process. The input is going to come from the community, from the PAB, from Council and from staff, the people who know this community and they're going to articulate it into policies and narratives within your complex. It's not up to them to tell us what we want our community to look like. We're telling them so it's a little different. A very short concern. I don't want to take away from what your concern was. So if you want to consensus on whether there's a point person from council, I don't think there whether there's a point person from council council I don't think there needs to be a point person. We're all gonna be talking to staff and Does anybody else feel differently? Now with PAB I think maybe I don't Meetings and things like that, but I think if there's a point person that you know Maybe that works with staff or the consultant that is more Focused in on it and they're, and the PAV isn't drilling. What happened? Who said what? I mean, just to be, I'm only looking for the process. I just worry about meetings that we need to keep having with other departments, Erica, and other departments of consultants, and then we've got to call one other person who may be in town, may not be in town, and we're just holding up the process by trying to schedule another person that could slow us down. And then also, I mean, we gotta be careful with sunshine related things. So we're gonna, one individual is gonna have more information. Yeah, no, you don't want that. Actually, maybe it's about reporting back frequently. Yeah. Maybe that's what it is instead of it's one point. I think what would be good and probably even helpful for Erica is a periodic debriefing session with the point person. What are the whole group? Why me with the PAB monthly? Well, you can do that monthly. Give me nothing. That's exactly what's going on. That's a good one. Where we're not going on. OK. I have petr enough in the creamer. You know, I'm looking at the, for a court of order, and you say somewhat the duties and responsibilities are of our PAB. And it's exactly this. I mean they are supposed to be conducting the comprehensive planning program and preparing the comprehensive planning program or elements or portions thereof coordinate the comprehensive plan or elements. Recommend the comprehensive plan or elements to the city council for adoption and monitor and oversee the effectiveness of the comprehensive plan. So this is really a, this is a primary function of the planning advise report and we, you know, should be tapping into that and I think they've, they're going to do a lot of heavy lifting and, you know, I didn't know Councilmember Christman that some preliminary work was already done by prior PAV, but that would be a great document for the PAV to dust off and start chewing through, especially if it starts with the flu. You'll see in phase two, that's just the public engagement and planning advisory board input section. This, the way this is written, this will spend a lot of time in the PAV before it comes to City Council for review of drafting. Okay, so the question is just about this point person. before it comes to City Council for review of drafting. Okay, so the question is just about this point person. I mean, it's a given that there's gonna be lots of engagement back and forth with PAB probably more than with you all. And they're gonna try to get this into a really solid form. But before I lose this thought, you know, the point that PAB did a lot of work, we have a list at the end of the RFP here of documents that we're going to include. We need to include that document. I added it. OK, great. Thank you. So they have a starting point. They see where we kind of look. And we may or may not agree with it. So thank you. And I do want, to probably spoke too much, but I want to watch our time supreme. Just very quickly. So that's why I mentioned that. I don't want to be the new guy saying whatever to do without the point people I think makes more sense and also have just have to reiterate we have experts, we have a city planner and they're in advise or whatever. And I read their their bylaws too. And I was like, wow, this set. When I watched their meetings and I read what they're chartered to do, it was incongruent, quite honestly. And so I can see where they're fired up to go do, let's go do planning. Having said that, it's awesome. And they serve a vital role. But they're not, they can't be in charge of it. They can't be the point person if that's just want to call or whatever I don't think they're trying to be it, but it's want to say it for the record that our staff They're going to work in cohort and in conjunction with our staff and and I see any of the I've said this before any of the advisory boards are to help Make our staff's life easier. And I see them doing that, I see that gonna happen. But we just, I just wanna say it out loud that, you know, I always wanna talk about a point, but like there's gotta be a point of accountability and it can't be the PAB. It's gotta be either someone that was elected or someone that we fired. And so it's either gonna be us. And it's probably gonna be us and and it's probably going to be us and the folks will work for the city the city managers hired. So thanks. Thank you and I think the attorney is going to talk about statutory earlier and conclude here. I was just going to make one suggestion with the point person. I think where you designate a point person is just allow the PAB to designate someone to be on the committee to review the proposals. Then they feel involved as a non-vote. I mean, then they feel involved in the process. You know, the coordinating and meetings, you really gotta let your consultant do what they're hired to do. I've been through this process recently and they're gonna come in and they're gonna schedule and they're gonna notice the public meetings and that's what you're hiring them to do. So I think a good meeting in the middle is allowing the PAB to designate a member to be on the non-voting member to be on the selection committee. All right. I have one public speaker. Janet Perry. Good afternoon. Now, council, thank you for having me again. I'm a little confused particularly about the public engagement piece of this and where the last 2018 vision survey by Stan Tech fits into that or to this RFP because that was very expensive, very conclusive, very intense, very, very collaborative amongst the H.O.A.'s. So I feel a little bit as I'm listening to this that we're deviating from history a little bit because historically we've done a vision survey, it's gone to PAB, and it's gone to City Council to be written into the comprehensive plan. And by it, I mean the results of the vision survey and the will of the people. So it's been to Councilman Christmas Point, it's been our elected officials who have had their fingerprints on what we're trying to ask you to do collectively as a community. And I hope we don't deviate from that and broker it out. I think what led us to here today is the last time that Councilman Peneman was on the day, and when Rob and Singer was sitting in Erika's seat, there was a suggestion about both elective and non-elective changes to be made to the comp plan. And at that time, it was decided that only the mandatory changes would be made, and that we would wait and make the non-mandatory changes later after we had a public outreach. And at the time when that was done, Chair fight of the PAB led a very inclusive, comprehensive process. I was the president at that time of one of the HOAs. We all got together very collaboratively, perhaps our last Kumbaya moment. And we really worked together and we engaged our communities. And there was what St stand tech referred to as statistically relevant, beyond relevant participation by the community in that. So my question really is, are we deviating from the way that we update the comprehensive plan and what are we going to do with that 2018 survey that we accepted, we counsel accepted and promised if you will to incorporate into the comprehensive plan and started to with PAB's review of it. Is it going to be circumvented by new public outreach endeavors, initiatives, or is all that hard work somehow going to be incorporated in? Are we starting over? It just seems like a lot. So thank you. I understand the question and I think that's exactly what Mr. Bush were saying. Yeah and just real quick the vision plan was just adopted on second reading it's in the cons. Just transmitted. So I just went out, back out to the state. We had an adoption hearing, second reading adoption hearing. It was approved by council. We have to transmit to the state. We did that last week. The state has their waiting period. We have 30 days wait to see if we get comments back. So it was one of your first actions and then coming up, you'll have the ear mandated. So the vision has been incorporated into the complaint. And the visions are reference document for this review, if you look at the list. It is, yeah, so reference and related documents. So that will inform the resident's feedback in forms. And then with respect to the process, I can tell you that I before the adjustments to this RFP scope of work incorporating the PAB suggestion, I did use the RFP for the vision statement process. So this process that you're seeing here is exactly what was put out for bid for the visioning statement process. So we're following exactly the same process that was bid for the visioning process. Thank you. I have vice mayor and then we're going to wrap it up because this was about feedback, correct? Yeah. Yeah. The goal is after your input today, we're going to finalize this thing and we're putting it out on the streets. So the 2018 update that the PAB did and they also had extra workshops. It never was even really, I mean they just did it on their own which was what they should do but all of that time and money and energy never came to this council that 2018 recommendations. Well a couple of times but we didn't discuss it review it or the discussions over the priorities was to go in a different direction so no we did not take any action on those proposed changes. Just to be clear because this is important what I was referring to was something that occurred in 21 and 22, in terms of a set of PAB recommendations. Was there another set? There were two. So when in the state required, the mandated comprehensive plan cycle, the last one was 2018. Leading up to that, the PAB did workshop and proposed a number, the PAB and council, a number of elective changes. At the time, when we adopted that plan in 2018, the adoption, the direction from council, when we adopted was to only adopt the mandated changes and to not adopt any of the elective changes that had been suggested. Following that, so then we had our 2018 adopted complaint. Following that in 2020 and 2021, we did workshop again with the PAB proposed changes to the 2018 adopted plan. Those were the changes that were discussed. So we're really- So, really, you know, part of the baseline material for this effort should be both what was developed in 2018 that not implemented and what was developed in 21-22. So, I will tell you that the baseline for the 2020-2021 discussions was the 2018 suggested revisions. So, is it the 2018 that's implorated out of the agenda? Into the 2021 suggestion. suggested. The revision. So is it the 2018 is to close the rate? Into the 2021 suggestion. Yes. Well then that would be the baseline. Yes. And so my point is there is no deadline or specific time frame for elective amendments which will allow through an unrestricted public engagement. I certainly hope we tighten that up and have a better time frame. We will. Oh yeah I was just trying to let you know that we're not under unlike the the cotton and cycle mandated from the state. This doesn't have a it's not a clock. I get it but we have a clock. Yes. Yes. And and and mayor I just want to reassure the public and and you all it's great that we're not starting from scratch. It's great that the PAB has done all this work and that should be our jumping off point. So it's not a deviation. It's a picking up where we left off and let's finish up this process. So that's going to be a very important document in the RFP. So consultants who are interested know where we're at and then when we engage with someone, we'll set the parameters, we'll finalize this scope, and that'll be part of the first thing we do is how are we picking up off of, but that's gonna be helpful information. Hi, Samar. I'll wrap it up pretty quick here. Just to be clear, the ask on this item today is what? To give us the green light to move forward, if you are, I don't know if there was consensus about eliminating that point person item, but to finalize this put this in the city standard form, get this out for proposals, and then also per our procurement policies, I approve the selection committee. I'd like Matthew's recommendation of having the PAB pick someone to represent them on the selection committee, but to comply with our policies, they won't be a voting member, they'll be a non-voting member. I mentioned earlier that we can ask someone from the county of Marco Island'Eilan or someone from someplace else to also serve as a subject matter expert. They would be non-voting as well. It just adds more dimensions to the team. So I would recommend that you direct us to include someone from the PAB and I would request that we eliminate from the draft the point persons for council and the PAB and put this thing in the final form and get it issued. Okay Madam Mayor, I'll wrap this again quick. Thank you for that. That just kind of level sets and make sure we all understand what we're being asked to do today. A few thoughts. One, I do support, you know, Councilwoman Petranoff read from our documents about the role of PAB. And PAB certainly takes a lead role in the comprehensive plan and advising city council. So I don't see where we don't engage PAV, right? I mean, we're directed. It's wired in. And so we need to follow that. And if that's the case, then I do support having a PAV member on the selection committee. Non, I believe it's non-voting. By the way, as we go through this process, just, and I'm sure the city manager and others have advised on this, but we've got to be careful about sunshine so that it is hung up real quick. And that be the story instead of good work on. And it's a good point. we'll make it very clear. We have cone of silence rules that apply to you all and apply to staff and apply to the PAB. And they've got to know those rules. You can't be talking to consultants. This is a very, very prescribed process. Otherwise, we expose ourselves to a bid protest and all kinds of problems. And we'll go over those rules. Thank you. The Comprehensive Plan was last updated when? No, when was it last updated? Yeah, it hasn't been adopted by a later ear case. And so you'll be hearing on second reading on September 18th. So it's been a long time basically. You know, the full of the full. So 2018, it was adopted. And then we just completed our recent cycle and we'll be transmitting that hopefully transmitting that to the state following September 18th. So it does need to be updated. Things have changed, things are changing, it's a living process. I agree our recent vision plan results are recent enough to provide direction on elective changes is a starting point, right? And the PAB has done some great work. I support joint sessions with the PAB, and I believe that this RFP dealing with the consultant should be concurrent with hiring the right city planner. In other words, as we go through this process, this is valuable learning, this will get a potential city planner in alignment, in my opinion, with city council, and really learn what we intend for our community and what the community really wants. So, one other ask is the city staff working with the consultant, populate, and I'm sure it'll happen, but populate a calendar with effective communication, making sure that everyone's aware of the opportunities to get together and have input. Thank you Madam Mayor. Thank you. Thank you for that conclusion. Petra, I won't take but a minute but I think this is important to include this. There was a vote load of money spent by stand-pack and there was a huge population that responded. And I forget how many hundreds of pages because I read it when I was preparing to run for office. And it still resonates with our, and it should be included in the RFP so that they're not doing double work because we already did extensive outreach. And that data we know is still good because the community foundation just did a survey not you know in late 2023 that they presented to us and they stripped out the residents from just the city and those items popped up at the same rate as the STAN tech survey. So we know that we've got good input and that it's consistent and that these are the things that are concerned to the community. So I think that the community portion of the community assessment is what that was. Okay, yeah. I think that would be helpful to be included as well. And thank you. Excellent, excellent, excellent. Thank you for the suggestion. Okay, you have your direction. Thank you. All right. Now we're moving to item 13a. Thank you, Ms. Martin. Mr. Merritt has always laughed on the agenda. And I don't know how that happens, Mr. Buddha's wire. I'm not sure we're going to have to take a break here to switch over tapes to go into the 505. So can we finish this one? Yes, thank you good afternoon Chad Mayor Parks Recreation Facilities Director so I have with me Daniel she's gonna go through each of the three events a summary of it and then we'll kind of go one by one and open for discussion if needed. Sorry, sorry she's, I'm trying to. First time I'm trying to teach some new business. Yeah, let's go ahead and do, just get to the meat of the issue. Mayor council, as you know, special events end up on consent if we have no concerns. Items that end up on your regular agenda we have some concerns or something that really needs some discussion. So these first two items are new events. Well, one is we'll clarify that. Yeah, but let's get right to what our concerns are and see if we can get some help from you. Thank you. Okay, Council and Mayor. So the first one is the, oh, I'm sorry, Danielle, a few T.S. Special Events in Marketing. So the first one is the Collier County Heartwalk. The applicant is American Heart Association. They are a nonprofit. They event dates are November 2nd with a set up on November 1st and the location is Cambier Park and the estimated attendance is 2500. The staff concerns are PD staffing and the impact on traffic due to the requested road closures. However, Lieutenant Riley did present them with a site plan that he recommended and that did include a rolling closure at the starting line. So assuming that that is the outcome that they go with, the only concern would just be the amplified sound which would require your approval. And this is an event that's been in the city for years. Yes, a couple of years now. And the concern was PD. Yes, so the concern was that they originally wanted to close the roads around Canberra Park all of them so 8th, 8th, Canberra way. That's true. Yeah so we worked with them so that has changed since the application was submitted and this was put in and Lieutenant O'Reilly again has been working with them so if we I would say what has been proposed at this point would there's no issues from the police department and really shouldn't be I mean it's not a good council just real quick is this what we used to do this at golf you I think I think yeah I'm not sure where they used to do it. We talked we kicked around Baker Park a couple of times to see if we could get it there. I'm on the truck. Maybe that was for breast cancer. I'm sorry. Yeah. Yes. Okay. Yeah. Okay. I'm sorry. This one was at Canberra Park last year and they felt like there was too many people on the streets. From the sidewalk. On the sidewalks. So we don't have any issues if we follow that. So I'm hearing things have changed since we published this and staff does not have concerns. Yeah, so there's not any issues with that as proposed and I'm not sure if the organizer. Is that here anymore? Yeah, she left, but I'll move for approval. Second. Okay. I have a one-a-wait and get, okay, a motion for approval for the Collier County Heart Walk and a second by Council Member Kramer, all in favor. Signed by I. Hi. I host. Thank you, Council. Pass. Aye. Opposed? Thank you, council. Passes unanimously. Go to the 20th Annual Art Festival. The applicant for that is Art Fest Naples. They are not a non-profit. The event date is January 18th and 19th, with the setup on the 17th estimated attendance is about 1500 each day, and it will be held at Fleshman Park. Staff concerned with this one is the overnight parking with the vendors that has happened in the parking lot over the last however many years. City ordinance does state that vehicles are prohibited from overnight parking. Let me just see what it says. Unless a temporary use permit has been granted by the City Council. And this is mainly for RV so they were camping in the parking lot so it does require City Council approval. And this has been a, this is a repeat event to so apologize for that. We had some shuffling around on the title. Okay. Questions, Council? Just were there any issues with this has been going on for a few years. Have there been any issues as it relates to our V's parking in the parking lot? We haven't had any issues of late. I mean, I don't know years past, but we haven't had any issues with it. So is the issue why you pulled it off consent just the fact that they're not supposed to be parking overnight? Yeah, it requires so the RV parking does require further ordinance for City Council to approve that. Vice Mayor? Yeah, is there a contingency plan if things start going the wrong way? In other words, RV parking, I can't imagine that anything bad would happen, but how do we manage it? Do we have to have extra police around and those kind of things? I don't know that we would staff it anyway. They do this mainly to the kind of watch the other stuff every night. So it does cut down on resources from that side. I don't know if PD would have to and I've got the organizer if she if we need to discuss that but I wouldn't anticipate there being really any issues from that from PD. Okay, thank you. Okay, do I have a motion? I move to approve. Motion from Council Member Primer for approval. We have a second by Council Member Peneman. All in favor sign by aye. Aye. Opposed? And that was for the 28th Annual Art Festival, Naples Concert, pan? Yeah, and I'll handle this one because this one was approved prior. This was the Naples Concert ban and as we've done in the past and as was requested years ago. They don't have a contract any longer, but they do utilize the stage and they request as they do each year to waive the fees of the waiving of the fees is required by City Council to approve that. So we wanted to make sure that we put that in front of you again this year as we do each year. And for the new people, you know, if we, this is unique, we only waive it for this group of people. But can you give us a little bit background on why? Yeah, so years ago they did help raise about $400,000 for the renovation of the amphitheater. So back when that happened, the city entered into an agreement to allow them to play there and perform there for free and they didn't have any fees or charges from the park rental or the empty at a rental. So you can kind of see there and last year I did this and I kind of put it back in front of you again as it added up about what it calls and fees, which runs about 11,689 per year. And that's with staffing and et cetera. It's your restroom attendance and your special application fee and the rental fee for the amphitheater. But I'll say this from a parks and rec standpoint. If we try to hire a ban to play at the amphitheater to perform for the community, then typically you pay for that. So we have, again, everybody's seen Naples big band and we've never had any issues and it is heavily attended. We just need to make sure that. Sometimes you have to honor, the addition council member, Chris. I agree with that mayor. And if you look at the revenue aggregation that Mr. Mayor put together, they do six concerts a year. So it's less than $2,000 a concert that it's costing us. And if you want to look at it that way in terms of loss fee revenue and given the history of this organization and their contributions to the past. I think it's a small price to pay. Any other comments? It's a motion. It's a motion. Second. Second. I have a motion for approval by Council Member Christmasman and a second by Council Member Kramer. All in favor, signed by aye. Aye. Opposed? House is unanimous. And if I can just ask, in the future with this, if you want me to continue to bring it for actual discussion items, then I will. If you prefer me to put it on the consent, then I can do that. But I know the last time that it was kind of a discussion, and that's why I didn't put it on consent. It's always going to be a discussion until somebody doesn't remember history. And then it'll become another big discussion because someone will bring it up. But I'm okay with it, Councillor, if you are. I think unless something material changes. Yeah, if something drastic changes, then we'll pull it. I think it's a consent item. Perfect. Okay, Thank you. I was a lot to stay here all day for. Thank you. It's okay. Mr. Boudre-Schwarb in the time frame of the week with 13. I talked to the voice upstairs. We need five minutes of switch over time. We're ten minutes before our scheduled 505. So if we can get through the next two items in five minutes. Is the next item 13B something that can wait till the 16th and we can put it? No. No. No. You mean it's down to the wire? We just rake your gun in the back. Yes. This is that partnership issue with the county and We this is this is we can do it, but I will tell you I have my Just concerns about it, but let's go I want to knock it out real quick in five Mets and I can push the I can push the workshop meeting schedule Till the next one I can wait and we can finish this up. Okay, talk fast. Hopefully everyone read their information which I did which is why I have questions but we won't go into them now. A resolution approving an interlocal agreement between Collier County and the city of Naples regarding the joint storm modern utility improvement project for the Collier County community redevelopment agency Bayshore area one for the Joint Stormwater and Utility Improvement Project for the Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency, Bayshore Area 1, for the purpose of designing and constructing improvements to the City-owned water distribution system and county-owned stormwater system to address aging infrastructure and flooding concerns. More fully described herein, authorizing the mayor to execute the interlocal agreement and providing an effective date. Good afternoon, Mayor, members of City Council. This interlocal agreement that's provided to you guys as a draft, this is similar to another interlocal agreement that you guys executed back in December of 2023. As you know we have water lines that are located outside the city and extend out east and further north and you know we we meet on a regular basis with the county we meet on a regular basis with the CRA and this was another area this this Bayshore Area 1, where CRA staff indicated that they were contemplating significant roadside drainage improvements. So this is an area where we have existing water mains. These are water mains. Many of them are, you know, they were constructed back in the 1960s, 1970s. So these are water mains that in terms of age would be water mains that we would contemplate replacing. And based on the extent of the roadside drainage improvements at the county, or the CRAs contemplating, we recognize that we're going to have conflicts. So this is an opportunity for us to do a joint project to replace the water mains, to up size them to meet current standards, and actually share in the cost of restoration, you know, some of these costs that we would otherwise have to bear on our own. So instead of having the CRA go in there and do their roadside drainage improvements and repay roads and then have us come back in five years, ten years and replace the water mains and restore the roads again. We'd rather work together like we have before we have a successful track record with the county, with the CRA. We'd like to do this joint project and the interlocal agreement that's been drafted, reviewed by the county attorney attorney by the city attorney. Again, it's been modeled after a joint agreement that you guys just signed back in December less than a year ago. And if I could add Bob Milton Public Works Director, we've done these things for numerous years. And it's been a good partnership and it just makes sense to do things like this. If the county's going to be tearing the road up, putting in drainage systems, we'd go in and replace our infrastructure as part of that project. And like I said, this is not a new venture for the city in the county. And we're recommended that we proceed on with this one also. Yeah, I mean, I just ask a very pointed question. Mr. President. Yes, so the scope of work that the city needs to do, you know, the question, and I think it's a fair question. Yes, we want to be opportunistic. We want to leverage other projects because we ultimately could save money on restoration and things like that. But the question is, are we doing our work well in advance than we need to or is this work that's imminent that needs to be done within the next year or a couple of years? That's the question. I don't know if I can answer it directly, but what I'll tell you is the age of the infrastructure out there that's there now, if they start digging around it, we're probably going to spend more money replacing the old, repairing the old pipe than installing a new pipe. I'll just make these comments and it's not for today. But when we, I know it's consistent with the priorities of the city's water distribution system master plan, but where it falls into the priorities. And we in the city also have 60, 70-year-old pipes that need to be replaced. And we are already repairing pipes that have been religned. So I just want to thank Bigger and get a better, when we go through that water distribution review again that we're prepared to understand where the outside of the city infrastructure demands are and where the inside has laughed within the city. I think you're absolutely. I appreciate you being taking advantage of the opportunity. It's logical, again, but is it taking away from something we should have been doing in our own city because projects come up before us and it's not in the pipeline. So, I think Mayor, you mentioned that this morning briefly. So, you know, just as a quick snapshot of where we are in the city, you know, we're working, you know, Bob and I are working together on the storm outfall project. So as you know, we're replacing the Water Main for that project. That's 6,000 feet of new Water Main that's gonna go in. That's an upgrade. We're doing the first avenue south project with the CRA. So that's gonna be over 1,000 feet of new Water Main. And then finally south Gulf Drive. I know that project, the FDOT funding, that's not proceeding. However, we still need to replace, we still need to install a water main on South Gulf Drive to address these rear yard easements, where our water mains are located. So just to balance that I did want to just bring that up that we're doing our best to- That was pretty quick. And I get where you're coming from. I just want to be prepared when we have that conversation to go into detail. Thank you. Absolutely. Thank you. And with that, do I have a motion? Make a motion to approve 13b. Second. I have a motion to approve 13b by Council Member Christman. Second by Council Member Petman. And the second by Council Member Petronoff. Madam Clerk, please hold the council. Is that the member? Yes. Councillor Member Patron. Yes. Councillor Member Patron. Yes. Vice Mayor Hutchison. Yes. Councillor Member Petron. Yes. Councillor Member Christman. Yes. Mayor Heitman. Yes. Thank you very much. Do I have a motion to continue 13c? Second. I have a motion by Councilmember Ami Vice Mayor and a second by Councilmember Christman. All in favor sign by aye. Aye. Opposed? Thank you. 14 to 18. We're gonna have to, there's plenty of public comment we need to talk about, but at this point, we have to have five minutes to change. So do you wanna come back after the special meeting and go into correspondence and communication. What's the? I can do that. You can recess. You can recess this meeting meeting for city council. If you can't cause this meeting and go into another meeting and then come back. Okay. Let me ask a question. Gary, can we keep going for another 15 minutes and then start? No. I don't know the answer, but I'm sure you can. I don't know. That's what I actually, unfortunately. Yeah, I mean, it's... Why don't we just have announcements at the end of the special meeting? Yeah. Yeah. I'm sorry, sir. Why don't we just have announcements at the end of the special meeting? Yeah. I'm sorry sir. Why don't we just have announcements at the end of the special meeting? Corresponds at the end of the special meeting We can do that. I just 505 is 505. Yeah, we're 10 seconds away. Yeah, okay. All right So the motion to so adjourn this correct Okay motion to adjourn. We're adjourned This is pretty easy.