Clermont City Council Transcript 1-13-26

0:05:37 I call this meeting to order. Can you hear me out there?
0:05:43 I can't hear myself. So, welcome to our council meeting for January 13, 2025, the first one of the year of the new
0:05:50 year. In the interest of time, efficiency and ensuring that everyone who wishes to address the council uh
0:05:55 wishes to address the council given an opportunity to do so. Uh the following will apply to all comments made by the
0:06:01 public in person and virtually. Virtual participation in council meeting are now
0:06:08 available on your computer or smartphone via Microsoft Teams or by telephone. You
0:06:14 can learn how to participate virtually by visiting our website at www.cleoutfl.gov
0:06:23 and search for attend council meeting online. Each speaker will be permitted three minutes to address the council. In
0:06:29 an effort to be respectful during the meeting, please make sure your cell phones are set to silence. That include
0:06:35 the council. Thank you. Thank you for participating in your city government. Uh tonight's
0:06:41 invocation will be given by Minister Tyrone Jordan of New Jacob Chapel Missionary Baptist Church. Please rise
0:06:47 and remain standing for the pledge of allegiance.
0:07:05 Can we all bow our heads? Oh gracious father,
0:07:11 oh Lord, we come to this meeting, Father God, Lord, giving you honor and giving
0:07:16 you glory because Father God, you have created all every living being here and
0:07:22 every living being here on this earth. And Lord, we come boldly just to say thank you. And Father God, Lord, we ask
0:07:28 that you look down upon every council member that's here and everyone that's here, Father God. Lord, we praying that
0:07:34 you would reach out and touch them right now. Lord, as Solomon said, give me wisdom. Lord, we asking that you have
0:07:41 wisdom for the council, wisdom for the every administrative office that's here.
0:07:46 And Lord, we praying, Lord, that as we are different individuals, everybody's
0:07:53 not going to see eye to eye, but Lord, that's okay. Long as we when we leave here, Lord, we leave with no malice in
0:07:58 our heart. Father God, Lord, we ask that not only that you look down upon this council, but you look down upon the city
0:08:05 of Clermont and Lord, that you will grow it, prosper it, and Lord, let it be
0:08:11 a a city that's glorified in your name. And Lord, as we leave this place, but
0:08:17 not from your presence, we ask that you will give in each and every last one of us travel and grace that we go back to
0:08:24 our respected places and find it as we left it. Lord, we pray for that and many
0:08:30 more in thy glorious son named Jesus. And let every believing heart say, "Amen."
0:08:35 Amen. To the flag of the United States of
0:08:41 America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God,
0:08:47 indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you.
0:08:58 All right. I think the first thing on our agenda this evening is a presentation
0:09:03 uh on economic development and design tour of 30-8.
0:09:12 Yes, sir. Thank you. Yes. On December 2nd and 3,
0:09:17 um Oh, by the way, my name is Nathan Norris. I'm the economic development director for the city of Clermont. Um on December 2nd and 3D we uh undertook
0:09:25 to go on the economic development and design tour which was focused on 30A which is in the panhandle. This is a
0:09:32 place that's known for these very highend uh traditional neighborhood developments. The first ones that were
0:09:39 uh really the first one that was built in the United States was at Seaside. We went to see Seaside, Rosemary Beach, and Alice Beach. A lot of people would
0:09:46 wonder, well, why are we going to these really ritzy resort new towns for Clermont? And uh because we're really
0:09:53 not a ritzy resort town. Well, the reason is because that's the place you go to learn most efficiently about all
0:10:00 the principles whether it's economic development or design on how to handle downtowns and town centers or village
0:10:06 centers. Okay? In other words, uh, in planning, we call these places actually
0:10:11 urban places as opposed to suburban or rural. It just so happens that in Clermont, the areas that we have
0:10:18 available for redevelopment in the future and evolution is our downtown as
0:10:24 well as certain areas along our corridors like 50 and 27 that can over
0:10:29 time be reconfigured as opposed to a single family subdivision that's sort of
0:10:34 uh frozen in amber pursuant to HOA uh uh rules and the like where it's not going
0:10:40 to be redeveloped. And in fact, you know, when when we look at things like traffic um in in a place like Clermont,
0:10:47 we know where are the traffic spots. Well, the real big ones are on 50 and 27 oftentimes. And so part of the the
0:10:54 challenge from an economic development standpoint is how can we still grow without the negative consequences of
0:10:59 traffic or without the negative consequences of lo losing more nature and just gaining growth. So, one of one
0:11:06 of the ways to deal with that is to have village centers or town centers that enable people to maybe get close to 27
0:11:14 or 50 but not actually have to get on it and become traffic. As an example, for those of us who live in the downtown
0:11:19 area, that's a wonderful thing is that if I want to go eat with my wife, I don't have to to go out on 50 or 27. I
0:11:27 can actually walk down to the downtown and enjoy a a wonderful evening down there. So, that's why we were uh uh
0:11:33 essentially going to these places. Now, what was interesting was that uh most of the people who uh were on the tour
0:11:40 didn't realize what was going to happen on the bus. And what was it's a six-hour drive and uh I I ordinarily give tours
0:11:48 of places uh uh to clients or at least I did in the past. And uh so we had long
0:11:53 discussions while we were on there that really focused on a large number of questions that have to do with the the
0:11:59 the the core principles that are u important from an economic development or a a development and design
0:12:06 perspective. And those range from not only how how traffic I'm going to go through these just to give you a flavor
0:12:12 and then um I'll let you ask any questions you have. But uh we we talked about once again how how can we design
0:12:19 places that help decrease the need for people to get on 50 or 27. We talked about the pros and cons of the two
0:12:25 primary development systems we have in the United States whether we're building places uh that are really suburban in
0:12:31 nature or urban uh nature. We talked about the key characteristics of what makes land most valuable. We can sort of
0:12:38 forecast what's going to happen in the future. And so we talked about that. The three steps of placemaking, how to
0:12:43 design streets as outdoor rooms is a really big issue because we've got several blocks in our downtown area
0:12:49 where we uh uh we need the charm of the outdoor rooms that get created in the downtown. And so going and physically
0:12:56 experiencing that at these places was uh very valuable for the participants. Uh we we looked at how they handled roads
0:13:03 and streets differently. Like their county highway that they've got running through there 3A has a wonderful example
0:13:09 from Rosemary Beach coming out of it where they have one area that's heavily treated and one area that's the default
0:13:15 setting which is no trees and it's a radical transformation that that really shows how shade should be treated as a
0:13:22 basic in infrastructure element like water or sewer or electricity as opposed to just a cherry on top. We talked about
0:13:29 how to manage parking. Okay. Uh we talked about why block size is the most important um issue as it relates to
0:13:36 future redevelopment. We talked about the basics of uh formbbased codes, how to live larger in smaller spaces because
0:13:43 we've got affordability issues today where the cost of housing in Clermont is effectively doubled in a relatively
0:13:49 short amount of time. And how do we deal with that? Well, we've got to be able to get people to be able to live smaller
0:13:54 but live larger even though it might be in smaller spaces. Uh we talked about why placemaking is essentially the
0:14:00 essence of economic development in the 21st century because the key resource or talented people intelligent people can
0:14:06 get up and leave. They can go anywhere and right now we're very desirable. We can take advantage of that. Uh we talked
0:14:13 about how to improve local wealth capture. that has to do with fostering businesses that are local um where the
0:14:20 profits from whatever the business may be primarily come back into the economy as opposed to going off out of state or
0:14:26 something like that. We talked about how to build a robust entrepreneurial ecosystem. That does say one of the the
0:14:33 the the things that holds communities back in the United States right now is that we don't have a robust first step
0:14:39 to becoming an entrepreneur because we have more regulations at both state and uh and federal levels and and other
0:14:46 things. But how do you foster that those smaller spaces, those easier ways to become an entrepreneur was something we
0:14:53 talked about. We talked about missing missing middle housing which is the housing that we effectively haven't
0:14:58 built over the last 50 years. The missing middle is once you build uh let's say single family homes and maybe
0:15:05 town homes, we jump up to apartment complexes. But there's a whole mess of really wonderful building types that
0:15:11 were effectively discouraged or outlawed over the last 50 years. And we talked about how that works. Can't do it um
0:15:18 doing u effectively ones that don't aren't compatible with what's around them. Um we talked about the different
0:15:24 approaches of creating mixeduse town centers. One of the great things is that the firm that's doing our comprehensive
0:15:30 plan and our downtown code actually designed all three of these new towns and they're all radically different. So
0:15:36 you could go into them and say, "Okay, well this is why this was this way. This is another alternative that they created
0:15:42 so that the people who participated could uh uh you know sort of say well I like this one over that one." That gets
0:15:49 to one of the core reasons of going on this is because we needed our staff. This was all started off as a staff
0:15:54 thing and the reason was we needed our staff to be able to effectively guide and provide feedback to DPZ during their
0:16:01 planning process which uh starts you know officially in just a few weeks and
0:16:07 um um with without uh with knowing projects that DPZ has designed and
0:16:14 knowing that DPZ understands all the different facets of those places when they go to talk about something like a
0:16:20 street and a neighborhood and how they handle parking I mean, they can go back and say, "Well, remember when you were at Rosemary Beach, when we were on
0:16:26 Rosemary Avenue and we talked about how they handled parking and and how the the street will work." So, there's a common
0:16:32 place where everybody sort of has something so they don't talk past one another. And that's important on the staff just talking to one another about
0:16:39 it as well. Um, we talked about the role of third places. You know, your first place is where you live, second place is
0:16:46 where you work, third place is where you gather socially. And oftentimes when we build new communities, we don't actually
0:16:52 think about that third place being important to the sociability of the neighborhood. We find many developments
0:16:58 where people don't even know who lives four doors down from them. And this this third place is an important concept. Um,
0:17:04 just two other things I would mention. And one was the uh different techniques for how you connect to adjacent
0:17:09 property. That's one of the reasons why we get more traffic is because a lot of our our developments don't connect to
0:17:15 one another. So, you actually to visit somebody, you might have to go uh actually for a three- mile drive to get
0:17:21 to somebody who's really just a few hundred yards away. Um, and then we we
0:17:27 also looked at the uh architectural variety and looking at the different building types, the different building
0:17:33 uses, how they combine uses in clever ways. Places do double duty, the variety
0:17:38 of civic spaces that are very small. You know, you go to a place like uh Rosemary Beach and they don't have one big
0:17:44 massive pool for everybody. They've got five neighborhood pools that are designated uh throughout there that
0:17:50 provide a different experience for everybody. As soon as you provide a different experience for everybody, you've provided something that's of
0:17:57 greater value to the whole. So those were that was the the focus of uh really what we were doing is trying to to make
0:18:04 it so that we could uh communicate better as a team and uh and and also
0:18:09 learn at the same time what these basic fundamentals are that we should be getting right.
0:18:16 That sounds good to me. Mayor, I would like to present a report that you asked for at the last city council meeting in
0:18:22 addition to the presentation if I may. Please. Okay. Um, some of this may go over a few
0:18:29 of the elements, but um, I didn't take it as my job in the report to discuss um, all the things that they saw or
0:18:35 necessarily the purpose. I want to give you the who, what, when, where, why, and the funding and those aspects. Um, so on
0:18:42 December 2nd and 3rd, 2025, city staff led by department head Nathan Norris u
0:18:48 went to a trip to Seaside, Rosemary Beach, Alice Beach. The trip was suggested by Mr. Norris and authorized
0:18:54 by the city manager as well as the deputy city manager. The purpose of the trip was educational in nature, going to
0:18:59 largely planned modern communities to see what lessons might be learned as Clermont embarks on a multi-million
0:19:05 dollar revision of its comp plan and zoning code who went. The trip was originally intended to only be for
0:19:12 staff. In order to accommodate the staff who would be going on the trip, the city rented a large bus which could
0:19:18 accommodate up to 25 persons, the expense of which I will discuss later. When staff learned that there would be
0:19:24 additional capacity due to staff not being able to go whether as a result of sickness or conflicts or otherwise and a
0:19:30 lot of people were sick at that time. Uh they invited the council members. To my understanding all council members were
0:19:36 invited and had knowledge of the pending trip but all declined the invitation. With extra capacity the staff then
0:19:43 turned to stakeholders primarily led by Clermont Main Street. With the help of Clermont Main Street and their
0:19:49 stakeholders, the remaining seats were filled. The following staff went on the trip. Nathan Norris and Rob Fox from
0:19:55 economic development. Zay Ortell and Jessica McNelte development liaison. Uh
0:20:00 Chief David Azel from the Clermont Fire Department, Curt Henchel, John Cruz, Nick Gonzalez, and Justine Day from
0:20:06 Planning and Development Services, and Cody Corey from Parks and Wreck. The following non city staff went on the
0:20:12 trip. David Colby from the South Lake Chamber. Christine Dalton from Main Street Consultant. Uh Brett Jones, a
0:20:19 local subject matter expert, Lake Sumpter State College Board Chairman. Natalie Coller, Clermont Main Street
0:20:25 Executive Director, Gian Peno Roondo, an architect, uh who is uh actually created
0:20:31 some drawings for the city, Anna Sinclair, Strongtown's local conversation leader, and Phoenix Strange
0:20:36 and May Topino, youth representatives. Again, uh the trip started on Tuesday,
0:20:41 December 2nd at 7:15 a.m. arriving at the destination for lunch. The day's events ended around 900 pm when people
0:20:49 went to their hotels. Uh the next day, things started at 7:45 touring Rosemary
0:20:54 Beach and then Alice Beach, after which the party departed for Clermont on the bus. Half the time was reserved for
0:21:00 group discussion focused on takeaways from the location. Uh they returned to Clermont around 6:30 p.m. on the 3. In
0:21:09 terms of costs, Clermont staff costs were as follows. The transportation from
0:21:14 CharterUp was $3,450.98. The lodging at residents in was $1,210.
0:21:24 Dinner at Amigos, $23,848. Boxed lunches across both days totaled
0:21:31 approximately $533.83. water from Publix $5.15.
0:21:40 Uh the total was $5,43844.
0:21:46 Main Street contributed $2,200, leaving the city with a total final
0:21:52 expenditure of $3,23844.
0:21:58 In regard to the manner of the purchases, several city staff had purchasing cards. Uh the purchasing
0:22:03 cards from our economic development personnel were used for most of these expenses. Once the expenses were in
0:22:10 Clermont Main Street reimburse the city for the portion I just described. I will say that this is not a best practice. It
0:22:17 would be a best practice to authorize the expenses ahead of time and then to cap them before their use. Um, and to
0:22:24 that end, um, I have had a discussion with your procurement director on this, and it's my understanding that he has
0:22:30 amendments prepared to your procurement practices manual that would address this in the future. There's actually some
0:22:37 very substantial and great amendments in there. Um, among them, uh, they would
0:22:42 increase the procurement director's oversight of the use. There is a change in there that meal expenses, including
0:22:48 food and beverage, would not be allowable unless approved in advance and in writing by the city manager or an
0:22:54 authorized city event, program or activity. And uh there is a a good news section talking about meal purchases
0:23:00 while traveling being expressly disallowed from purchasing cards. I
0:23:06 don't know. I'm happy to try to answer any other questions, but that concludes my report.
0:23:11 Well, thank you, sir. Uh I did I think you covered all the areas I asked you for on your report. Um
0:23:19 first of all, anybody have any comments? Anything? Can I just ask one clarification
0:23:24 question? Um was anyone from were the members of the
0:23:30 planning and zoning commission offered? Uh I the answer is no. Okay. Um I I do
0:23:36 under that's a question I did ask when I was investigating. I think someone from the CRA was asked and I think there was
0:23:43 another stakeholder asked but the planning and zoning board members were not asked. Okay.
0:23:49 Um well one of my concerns with this is
0:23:54 first of uh I heard in your report that you said that uh all the council member was notified and asked.
0:24:02 I guess I'm not part of the council because I I was never asked. Okay. I knew nothing about the trip and I guess
0:24:07 that's why I asked for the report because uh I knew nothing about the trip. Um
0:24:14 and I find it a little strange that we take a trip like this and we have no council members on the bus. We have no
0:24:21 uh PNZ members on the members on the bus. Okay. Uh of course we have other
0:24:27 civilians. I heard you say you I guess youth representative and everything which um
0:24:34 before we take trips like this I think it need to come to the council for council approvals and everything uh to
0:24:39 see that um because my one of my concerns there we we got civilians and people unrelated to the city city uh
0:24:46 staff or anything something happened on that bus who's responsibility who who's reliable for them
0:24:53 that's city reliability I would I would assume we we potentially liable for them. Okay. So, we we putting
0:24:59 the city in jeopardy doing that thing doing these things. And the other thing is and I heard Mr. Nathan your report
0:25:06 said you went here went at the suggestion of DPZ.
0:25:12 Who who suggested the trip? I suggested the trip. Okay. Uh I I guess my question to you is
0:25:18 why well I guess I heard it in your u um report seaside because it's resort city
0:25:25 and everything but my my question there is why sea why seaside and all these cities up there that's resort cities.
0:25:31 What do they have in common with Clmont? Yeah that's a great question. No they have a great deal to do with Clermont
0:25:37 and Clermont's future. In fact, I learned, you know, I've been a consultant for about 25 years.
0:25:42 And during that time, I learned I used to take any client when I started. I'd take anybody. And then I learned that
0:25:48 all the clients that refused to go on the tour uh ended up being bad clients because they didn't want to learn from
0:25:55 the successes and the mistakes of others. And the most efficient place to go actually is 3A. Now, when I got here,
0:26:02 I was surprised how few people I met had actually been. And then I realized, well, it's six hours away. Why would you
0:26:07 want to go six hours away to get to a beach if you're in Clermont? So, it's not a common thing. And so, when I as a
0:26:13 consultant, when I would work with a city or I would work with a a developer client, the first thing is I'd go on a
0:26:20 tour of 30A and then we would go up to Montgomery, Alabama to a dead market, which you'd say that has nothing to do
0:26:26 with a robust market like 30A. And then we would go up to Atlanta where we'd see three additional projects in Atlanta
0:26:32 that were uh newer versions, newer applications of these principles and ideas. And for the same reason that we
0:26:38 needed to bring our staff to uh uh 3A on this, we didn't have the luxury of time to go up to Montgomery and and uh to
0:26:46 Atlanta and we could cover most of the principles just down there. Um, so, so that's why we wanted to go there is
0:26:51 because I've seen firsthand how valuable it is before you go through the planning process to understand these principles
0:26:58 in more than words because when you go and actually feel like one of the the key advantages of a place like our
0:27:04 downtown, we've invested all this wonderful money in these great streets, but the three advantages of a downtown
0:27:10 are the convenience of having a bunch of places to go to. You can get go to a barber, three different barbers in the
0:27:15 downtown. You can go eat at 20 different restaurants. You have all these wonderful amenities. You also have the
0:27:20 vibrancy of people walking around, which people enjoy. But the key thing is you have the the impressive charm of the
0:27:27 outdoor room that gets created when the buildings are close to one another. And when they're not, you can see where our
0:27:32 downtown sort of breaks down. Like right across the street from here, we have two suburban buildings across the street.
0:27:38 And you can see where you can watch people walk. They tend to stop right about at Seventh Street before they keep
0:27:43 walking because it's not an out doesn't have the charm of an outdoor room. You get that charm also in rural areas. Like
0:27:49 if you think about your favorite street in a rural place, you're going to have the trees that form a canopy and you're
0:27:55 going to be driving through that and that just makes humans feel good. So understanding those things firsthand are
0:28:00 critical to being able to leverage all this investment we have in DPZ. DBZ
0:28:05 ended up designing those three places at 3A. Just that's by accident. Even if they hadn't, that'd be the place to go
0:28:11 if you wanted to efficiently learn these things. So all the principles stay the same whether you're in a hot market, a
0:28:17 weak market, a resort market, a first home market. Um all the principles stay the same. So I think it does very much
0:28:23 I well when I look at when I go on the internet and I look at seaside, I don't see much commonality between seaside and
0:28:31 city of Clema. My question is I I think we got a little city south of here uh
0:28:36 which is about 30 40 minutes from here called Celebration that we designed on on on the uh uh Strongtown and concept.
0:28:45 Why couldn't we go visit that and see? And here's the other question. If I'm not mistaken, we've already hired DPZ.
0:28:52 That's correct. So So why do we need to go see see them now? Why didn't we take this trip before we hired them? It's a little late. I
0:28:59 don't a little late. Yeah, I I can't I can't speak to why they they were uh you know, why the trip didn't happen before
0:29:06 other than I wasn't here and I you know, you didn't have someone who understood uh perhaps the value of doing it at that
0:29:12 time. I'd love to give you a tour if you're ever in the panhandle. I'd love to take you down firstand I've been
0:29:18 there. See, that's why that's why, you know, I find it a little strange we take for us to take a trip all the way to uh
0:29:24 the panhandle, five, six hours away to look at a city that basically to me has nothing really in common common with
0:29:31 all. It's a seaside city. Oh, we got our waterfront here and everything, but basically um
0:29:38 I I it's great for seaside. I enjoy what I saw and what I've been up there. I
0:29:44 mean, I spend time in the panhandle quite a bit. Okay. Okay. um some my military duties took me up there and
0:29:50 everything so it's nice but uh still again I think we could have got a feel of what what we they're offering by
0:29:57 going to like celebration or somewhere around here without going to seaside and here I I'm just still trying to figure
0:30:04 out why we go up there to see their work after we've already hired why didn't we
0:30:09 do it before we hired well because we have to provide feedback and guidance and if we're not informed about the options you go to celebration
0:30:16 there's only one way to do a town center in celebration. They've done it, you know, one way. Here
0:30:22 we could see multiple ways, multiple techniques. And the interesting thing was that they were they were designed
0:30:28 not at the same time but at different times. So when you look at seaside and you see how it was, then you see the
0:30:34 next one which was Rosemary Beach, which they reacted to the you know the good and the bad of Seaside and then you see
0:30:39 Alice Beach was reacting to Rosemary Beach. So instead of just seeing one project like celebration which you know
0:30:45 once again it only has one town center that we can't learn that much from it because we don't see all the different
0:30:50 techniques being used whether it's uh you don't have deflected views in uh uh
0:30:56 celebration like you would find at a place like Rosemary Beach. You don't have there's all sorts of different
0:31:02 things. They don't have uh uh you they only have the one lake in in celebration. They don't have as much
0:31:08 housing variety at celebration as they do at these developments. um the architecture is a different approach.
0:31:14 Instead of a a language of architecture, they they just used historical styles at CE um celebration. So, there's a lot of
0:31:21 variety there. So, that that's the reason it was the most efficient way we could use a 14-hour day and a an 11-hour
0:31:28 day to to learn the basics. Right. You're right. It's a lot of variety up there. Matter of fact,
0:31:35 uh during my career in military, I had to take a road trip up in that area and
0:31:41 visit that area um for planning purp, but we went prior to making our decision to see everything and see if it was the
0:31:47 way we want to go. The other thing and back to the thing about you notified all the council members. I didn't have the
0:31:53 luxury of asking all the council because I don't want to violate sunshine law. But then again, I wasn't notified. I
0:31:58 knew nothing about this trip until I get win from the public, you know, about a trip that's being taken and everything.
0:32:05 And then of course, I wasn't happy with the answer I got when I asked the question about it. And
0:32:11 uh the thing that I was notified, I was never notified. And of course, then the next answer came back to me was the fact
0:32:16 that uh uh I didn't talk to you because you were busy is what I was told by my city manager.
0:32:24 Okay. I was busy. So he didn't he he bothered not to talk to me. Now I'm looking at the dates of this two
0:32:30 and three September. You're right. I was busy because I was in a conference. But guess what?
0:32:36 These dates had to be this trip had to be planned within what two three weeks before you went.
0:32:43 My my conference was I was on the book for that conference at least two months prior. So if any intention for me to know about
0:32:49 that or be included in that um you would have known but I was on them dates and that yes that I was busy. So you see how
0:32:57 that you see how that look. Okay. You plan a trip at the time you know I'm gone and of course you don't say nothing
0:33:03 to me and I got No, no, that's a great Let me clarify the origin of the trip. The origin of
0:33:09 the trip did not intend to include the council members in the beginning. Okay. And the reason was is because this was
0:33:15 for staff to be able to, you know, once again leverage the opportunity of DBZ
0:33:21 coming in and doing our comprehensive plan. And typically when I've taken government staff on these tours, if I
0:33:27 take the electeds along with us, the council members, they clam up. They
0:33:32 don't ask questions. I don't get what's really on their mind. And so that's why
0:33:38 uh we originally only ask staff, send an email out to them, and it was only right before Thanksgiving that it was clear
0:33:45 that we had this bus for at least 25 people. And we were only going to have it looked like 12 to 14 people. And so
0:33:52 that's when I went to the city manager um and said should you know do you want us to open this up to uh council members
0:34:00 to see if they can take advantage of it? And so that's that's why it wasn't planned months in advance. First of all I wasn't here till October 20th. This
0:34:07 got planned uh uh uh just what a couple of weeks later and then we just so so no
0:34:13 it wasn't a bunch of lead time. It was hurried because of the holidays because we wanted to do it before the holidays
0:34:19 because we knew that first of all during the holiday season we knew a lot of people have prior commitments that
0:34:24 weren't they weren't going to be able to participate and if we waited till after the holidays this is a busy time too for
0:34:30 a lot of people. So we didn't want to wait till the last minute because at the time DPZ was talking about potentially
0:34:36 starting their process in January even and uh I didn't want to wait till it was too late. A question another question is
0:34:44 u I heard you talking about a lot of a lot of discussions on the bus among
0:34:49 staff and everything um but I haven't heard anything about you trying to set up a meeting where you can pass any of
0:34:55 that information of your findings on the bus the communication with them on the bus um I do understand the fact it would
0:35:02 been difficult for all the council members any to be on the bus because of sunshine law
0:35:08 and and I mean um seems as though you got a lot of information on the bus, but
0:35:14 you haven't shared it with any of us other here. And I I feel like why not? Because we're responsible for hiring
0:35:20 DPZ. We're the one hiring the companies and everything. Uh I think that would be valuable information for this council. I
0:35:26 understand. And yet today, I haven't heard uh you schedule any kind of public
0:35:31 forum where we can you can brief us on all the discussions and and the type of
0:35:37 feedback you got and everything. because ultimately any approval
0:35:43 that's handled through uh any design anything DPD does it has to come through
0:35:48 us right so it be valuable I I think that would be valuable information whatever information you gather for us to know
0:35:55 for this council to know in advance um so maybe and then I can't help but think
0:36:01 if I hadn't asked for this report at the last council meeting whether we've been getting this report at all see Um,
0:36:09 I know you may not be able to answer this, but uh, Main Street, can you find it? Mr. Matthews Main Street, uh, can
0:36:16 you Well, I don't need to ask that because I think Mr. W cover that because, uh, my question was going to
0:36:22 be, was it the Main Street approved these funings in advance of the trip, but he he I think he answered that
0:36:28 question already uh, when he said that uh, you know, they wasn't approved in
0:36:33 advance. Normally, you approve these things in advance. So I would I would have would have liked to see where they Main Street because
0:36:41 seems though after I asked asked for this report and how much it cost and all this involvement all at once main street
0:36:47 cut a check two days later. Okay. So I just
0:36:53 when I have public residents coming to me asking me these things and I start searching and I I I'm starting to feel
0:36:59 like them something being done underhand and it's not this not good. Okay. We need to be very transparent what we're
0:37:05 doing in this city at all times. Okay. Um if you if you want to do these things
0:37:11 I think I know the uh city manager has authority but since it's such a small amount and everything has authority but
0:37:18 things like this need to be cleared too because you're putting this the city in jeopardy especially when you invite um I
0:37:24 call civilians in on the trip. Okay. So, uh, I just want to make sure we we
0:37:31 understand this and all and, uh, and and I'm still not quite sure on, um, I know
0:37:38 Main Street did a $2,200 reimbursement and that was there for people in Main
0:37:44 Street or what? Who was still responsible for the civilian? Uh, Mr.
0:37:49 Jones and and the youth reps. Did the city pick up
0:37:55 those those costs? I I I want to let me try and clarify then. Um my understanding is that the city did not
0:38:01 advance any funds for lodging for the non city staff. Um so the my
0:38:07 understanding based on my interviews with everyone is that the reimbursement from Clermont Main Street was meant to
0:38:12 cover the portion of the bus and brownbox lunches. Um so any any food that went on a pecard uh theoretically
0:38:20 was reimbursed. The the the bus was the biggest cost. Um, so it ended up I guess
0:38:25 that about 40% of the trip um was reimbursed and I believe Clermont Main
0:38:31 Street has a resolution approving that. Okay.
0:38:36 You believe they have a resolution? Well, you know, when I when I do a report, I have to rely on the interviews
0:38:42 and the documents that I'm given. So, well, I think I thank you for the report. I that's basically my those
0:38:50 concerns. I'm still have some concern because I'm still not clear on the on the u funding here. I do know when I
0:38:57 take trips, my wife uh escorts me a lot of time, go with me a lot, but anything
0:39:02 uh that cost me that we have to pay fees for, I pay for it personally myself on
0:39:07 it. Um I reimburse the city for it or I pay it at at that time at the uh at the
0:39:14 uh conference or whatever. So, um, because I don't want the city to be
0:39:19 responsible any any expenses that that, uh, she's not entitled to and I'm not entitled to. So, um,
0:39:26 mayor, I think that's a good analogy, by the way. I mean, I think that's why I don't I don't have legal concerns about
0:39:31 the bus expenditures and the capacity. It's like when there's extra capacity in a hotel room, we don't distinguish, you
0:39:38 know, it's the same thing. So, I that's why I don't have concerns about that.
0:39:43 Well, the hotel doesn't I mean well in this case I guess it could be a little
0:39:48 bit different because you you got civilians there and city picking up the cost. Okay. Um, like I say, when I go on
0:39:56 conference, a lot of times I I do go on conf matter of fact, this conference I was on here. Um, I had to I paid for my
0:40:02 wife's uh other than the dinners that she was actually invited to and paid for
0:40:07 by the Florida League of Mayors because they were one that always pick up the cost for dinners and they asked um they
0:40:14 encouraged us to bring our spouses with us. Okay. And they pick up the cost there. But anything else like in the
0:40:19 hotel room, breakfastes and anything else in hotel, I pick up the cost there. Yeah. had the city pick up the cost of the hotel.
0:40:24 Well, that's what I mean. But but so I understand that because we going to pay for the hotel regardless. If we got one person in there, two
0:40:31 people, we going to still pay for the hotel. But food and thing and the transportation and everything like that
0:40:36 I'm concerned with. Okay. And another biggest thing, like I say, the liability. If something had happened on that bus, who would have been liable for
0:40:44 for the people on that bus? and and since you asked for the report, we've had discussions about best practices regarding both the purchasing cards as
0:40:51 well as how to plan such events. So, I think um we're going to advance our best practices after this.
0:40:57 Okay. All right. That's that's all I have. Mr. Mayor, I think we you went over that
0:41:04 three minute limit, I think. Correct. I think you've made your point that you really are not happy that they didn't
0:41:09 invite you because you were busy. and we can understand that. But we also have sunshine laws are in effect and
0:41:15 obviously we couldn't all come on the bus because that would present a picture of of impropriy there. So I think it's
0:41:23 important that we distinguish between the power of the council and the power of the city manager. As you said, he has
0:41:30 the power to, you know, as long as the expense isn't outrageous to to, you know, have these type of uh things that
0:41:37 go on. And I think it's important that we understand this and also understand our limits of our time. We shouldn't be
0:41:43 able to go on for a half hour discussing a point that just we're concerned with.
0:41:51 I I agree. Um he is a city manager and that is his perview to be able to have
0:41:57 trips and underneath is in this spending is up to 50,000 without our discretion.
0:42:02 Correct. And the purpose of the trip was to benefit the city.
0:42:07 um and all of the people couldn't come because at that time I do remember December a lot of people were sick so we
0:42:14 have the space so he wanted to fill it. I don't see the issue the what the the
0:42:19 point of it was was to educate. So, it sounds like you got some education of do
0:42:26 we want to use that type of um way of building for our community down here?
0:42:32 Because that was the point of the trip, correct? Was to get ideas for us to see. Yes, ma'am.
0:42:38 My question is, do you have any pictures or any videos or anything for us to see since I didn't get to go? if I I can
0:42:44 plug my computer in and I can show you some of the important ones. But no, I I'd love to do it and I' I'd love to
0:42:50 take the mayor up on his offer to, you know, if we can put the the council members together, it would take just
0:42:56 about six hours to go through all the different details that I think are most important before DPZ shows up and starts
0:43:01 their work. So, if there's the ability to have a workshop or anything, I'd love the opportunity.
0:43:07 I'd be willing to as well. You know, I jump at it.
0:43:12 All right. Well, just let me know. Okay. I just have one other question. Sorry. Um could you in an email just email us
0:43:18 the budget lines where the 3200 city funds came from just so we're
0:43:24 aware. Yes, sir. Um and just in terms of notification, I I I hear what council member Peterson's
0:43:31 saying. I do think whether or not we all can attend, if one of us gets notified,
0:43:36 it should be good practice that we all get notified so that we're not left out.
0:43:41 Um, and whether or not we can go or not, just a notification. I don't think that's a unreasonable request. I don't
0:43:48 want you left out if I'm informed. Vice versa, right? Um, and so uh and
0:43:54 obviously staff was willing to have all of us go by asking, right, uh, some of us if if that's the case,
0:44:01 uh, uh, to be on there. So, they were had a plan to deal with the sunshine issue. Um, and it's not uncommon for us
0:44:09 to be in meetings where more of us are there. Uh, but I do think it's okay to
0:44:14 say publicly and I think to expect that if staff is informing or or inviting
0:44:22 council members that it's not selective uh so that it doesn't appear improper,
0:44:27 it's inclusive. Yeah. It just it seems odd to me that
0:44:32 you didn't get invited because it seemed like if my memor is right at the last meeting Rick said that he brought it up
0:44:38 to you but you said that you had something else planned. That's what was said at the last meeting. I do remember
0:44:43 that. Um but I wasn't there so I don't know what the conversation transpired
0:44:48 but it doesn't seem like that would be a cor something that he would do is
0:44:53 purposely not invite all of us. That doesn't seem like he would do that.
0:45:00 Okay. As as I say, let me let me clarify something. You're right. The city manager has up to $50,000 at his
0:45:06 discretion to to spend if it's an approved budget item. Key word, if it's
0:45:13 approved budget item, okay? He cannot just literally go out and spend $50,000 if it's not approved on budget. All
0:45:20 right? He doesn't have that kind of authority. All right? And this was a small amount. So, you know, that that so
0:45:26 much of that, but I can say my main concern was liability and then um
0:45:33 not I well you all say you got it but uh uh I I never got any anything on it. I had
0:45:40 to learn about this from the public, you know, uh when I have people come and ask me about stuff like that, it looks very
0:45:46 bad on my part and and on the city part that you we got people uh taking trips
0:45:52 and everything and I have no no clue about what they talking about when I come back and then when I ask about it,
0:45:57 I have to go through all these steps just to get get some clarification. Nobody want to talk. All right, I'm I'm
0:46:02 done with it. Um unless anyone else adds anyone anything
0:46:08 else to add. Uh next item on the agenda is the uh public comment. Beginning with
0:46:13 this meeting, we will now allow virtual comments. Okay.
0:46:22 If you wish to address the council in person, please come to the microphone. Come to the microphone and state your
0:46:27 name and address. Once in once inerson comments are concluded, we will move on to virtual comments. If you are
0:46:33 participating online on Microsoft Teams and wish to provide comments, please raise your hand and you will be called
0:46:41 on to unmute your microphones when it is your turn to speak. If you are participating by phone, you will press
0:46:48 star five on your phone to raise your hand. When called upon, you will press star six to unmute your microphone. For
0:46:55 all virtual participants, if you wish to comment on other items on the agenda,
0:47:00 please stay on Microsoft Teams or on your phone and raise your hand when your when your items come up on the agenda.
0:47:08 The portion of this this meeting of the portion of the meeting is of this meeting is only for items that are not
0:47:14 on the agenda. In the interest of time, efficiency efficiency ensuring everyone who wishes to address address the
0:47:19 council is given the opportunity to do so. Each speaker will be permitted three minutes to address the council. To avoid
0:47:26 disruption of the meeting, speakers should avoid inappropriate language, personal attack, and derogatory
0:47:32 statements and direct comments to the city council. Everyone is requested to be respectful of each other, even when
0:47:38 we disagree. Yes, ma'am.
0:47:46 Good afternoon. My name is Pat Woodhouse. I live at 2010 Sunset Lane Clermont. All of the council members
0:47:52 have received an email from me this week with photos regarding 1919 Sunset Lane.
0:47:57 Despite years of complaints, conditions at this property have not improved and they have worsened. If these violations
0:48:03 existed on the street where you live, you would not let be allowed to continue for years. We need enforcement of the
0:48:10 ordinances already in place and measurable action within the next 30 days. We have been dealing with this for
0:48:16 over five years. I want to be clear that we have great respect for the Clermont Police Department. However, this
0:48:22 situation cannot be solved by policing alone. It is not reasonable to expect officers to monitor one residents 24
0:48:28 hours a day for criminal activity. This is not only a police issue. The property meets the definition of chronic nuisance
0:48:35 property with repeated police EMS responses, including a raid approximately three years ago and a
0:48:41 fatality in the front yard two years ago. Under Clermont's property maintenance, nuisance, and fire safety
0:48:47 standards, the accumulation of drunk, junk, and debris in visible areas is a violation. The carport is stacked seal
0:48:54 uh from the floor to the ceiling. A boat's been in the front yard for years, and a stove has been sitting there since
0:48:59 before Christmas. My Christmas people that came to visit really wanted to know what was going on this property. These
0:49:05 conditions are visible, ongoing, and measurable. Code enforcement is aware of these violations. I'm in constant
0:49:11 contact with Andrew. Andrew was told last year to stand down and I'd like to know why. We were told a nuisance
0:49:18 committee would address the issue and according to code enforcement, it has never been convened. Fines don't work.
0:49:24 Code enforcement has has had their hands tied. There's regular activity involving homeless known to the police, known to
0:49:31 the city. We have observed behavior consistent with personal hygiene use, including people taking showers in the
0:49:37 backyard. If the property is used in a matter inconsistent with single family residential zoning, then it requires a
0:49:43 formal investigation. I pay taxes on three properties on Sunset Lane. I currently have a home for rent.
0:49:49 Prospective Tenants are always asking me about the mess in this yard. This is affecting my income as well as my
0:49:55 property values. Safety and neighborhood stability are also being affected. We're asking you to finally enforce the city
0:50:01 ordinances. Leans don't work. The city has hundreds of thousands of leans on fines on many properties and they're
0:50:08 never collected and that's per code enforcement. We need an immediate property maintenance and nuisance
0:50:13 enforcement, a formal fire and safety inspection and a zoning and use investigation. We're asking for
0:50:19 measurable action within the next 30 days. Our neighbors would be here to join us. Unfortunately, they work. Our
0:50:25 next step after this is we are going to go to the local news media. Thank you.
0:50:30 Thank you. Yes, sir.
0:50:36 Good afternoon. I'm Daryl Woodhouse, the other half. Uh, I live at 2010 Sunset Lane. Um, my family has been in Central
0:50:44 Florida since the 40s. My mom and her siblings graduated from Leburg High. My family has been on Sunset Lane
0:50:50 continuously since 1975. I've got family buried at Bushnell and Cape Canaveral that served both in World
0:50:56 War II in Korea. My grandfather served in World War II and was missing in action for a while. Point is, I have
0:51:02 deep roots in the central Florida area. This isn't just about junk in the yard and carport. There are 191 19 Sunset
0:51:10 Lane routinely has numerous cars stopping by. Usually, they're there for a few minutes
0:51:16 and they leave. This is repeated day after day after day. It's drug activity.
0:51:21 And you don't have to take my word for it. Ask Clermont PD and Fire. They're very familiar with that address.
0:51:27 Um, Squat woke up this the street at 5:00 a.m. a few years back because of this house. Uh, people also come and go
0:51:34 on their bikes all hours of the day and night with their backpacks. Again, many come by there for a few minutes and then
0:51:40 leave. Um, many are homeless that come that from the homeless camp behind Wawwa
0:51:47 on hooks. Again, police and fire are very familiar. I've seen hookers come by
0:51:52 to get cleaned up at this house and then get picked up on the street. There was an overdose death at 1919
0:51:59 Sunset Lane a year and a half ago. We see all this because my wife and our realtors, we work from home. We do pay
0:52:07 taxes on three properties. We take care of these properties. We do need a tenant for one of them and potential tenants
0:52:13 are exposed to this trash in this yard. It is it's frankly embarrassing.
0:52:21 You wouldn't put up with this on this street on your street. So, I'm just asking for the same respect. And it's not just us. The entire street is tired
0:52:28 of it. The entire neighborhood is tired of it. The owners of this house just live 10 minutes away. They are realtors
0:52:33 as well, so they understand what property values and how they're affected by properties like this. Their son lives
0:52:40 in the house. This is not a random tenant. This is their son. I'm usually a
0:52:45 live and let live kind of guy, but this has gone on long enough. The homeless camp is on state land. I want to know if
0:52:52 the state's been contacted. If not, I mean, I'll reach out to our representatives. I'm sure they would be
0:52:58 interested to know what's going on. Media outlets all have journalists that
0:53:03 report on activities like this. I've seen them in. So, it it's that will be
0:53:08 our next step. This is not a new problem. This has been brought to this board numerous times over numerous
0:53:14 years. We're just we're just done with it and we would like something done. Thank you.
0:53:19 Thank you. Um, ma'am, are you you you from Sunset Lane
0:53:25 as well? No. Okay, let me let me address I want to address this real quick and u uh because I did get your email and I think all the
0:53:32 council member got your email. Um, but it was going to be I just got a report back from the my police department
0:53:38 yesterday. They just sent it to me last night. Um, I didn't get chance today, but I was going to contact you because I
0:53:43 would like to sit down with uh with you all in the police department and go over that report and everything. And I know
0:53:48 it's been a problem and I I I truly understand that. Thank you. You're welcome.
0:53:54 and everything and uh I still don't understand. Well, you mentioned the Newsome law that we put in place a couple years ago to try to take care of
0:54:00 things like this. So, I would like to get a time to sit down with you and your your wife and everything with the police
0:54:05 chief and see what we can do. Appreciate that. Okay. Look forward to that. Thank you.
0:54:11 Yes, ma'am. Good afternoon. Thank you all for taking my request or listening for my request.
0:54:19 Um, just about a year ago, I came before this council. Um, and I we had to have
0:54:25 some new members on the council. Now, uh, requesting that the meetings be held
0:54:31 at this time at 3:00 in the afternoon. And I stated some of the reasons.
0:54:36 I'm going ask you to hold on. Isn't that on the agenda later? Oh, that's something that's on the agenda. So, uh,
0:54:42 we can't we won't be addressing that right now. Where on the agenda will it be?
0:54:47 Um, item number 21 is it?
0:54:53 Oh, 29. 29. Item 29. Well, unfortunately, I can't stay for
0:54:59 this whole agenda. I mean, you have speakers for over 40 minutes and I mean, your meetings last five to six hours at
0:55:07 times, and I just don't have that time. Ma'am um we if you want to you can join
0:55:14 us online. We are you can uh comment from online through virtual means. Okay.
0:55:20 Well that's not very welcoming. Thank you.
0:55:26 Yes sir. Joe Famasi 2693 Jumping Jack Way. I filed a formal uh complaint and
0:55:35 expressed my extreme dissatisfa dissatisfaction with the current closed loop negotiation process between the
0:55:41 city of Clermont and the Wellness Ridge Community Development District. It has become increasingly clear that while
0:55:47 both the entities are currently engaged in highstakes negotiations regarding infrastructure, funding, maintenance of
0:55:53 the roadways, tax and deanation flexibility, neither side actually
0:55:58 represents the residents of Wellness Way. As you know, the CDD is currently builder controlled by LAR. The
0:56:06 negotiations that they're doing is strictly restricted to get keeping their project moving forward, not the cost and
0:56:13 affordability for the clients, which would be me. Uh, as a result of this vacuum, the
0:56:20 decision is being made about our situation of our future financial
0:56:26 liabilities. Without the single resident vote or meaningful input, the interlock agreements
0:56:32 being signed today will impact our property values and our tax bills for the next 30 years. We ask that the city
0:56:40 and the CDD board establish a resident advisory committee immediately. The committee should be invited to sit in on
0:56:47 the interlock negotiations to ensure that the people who are actually live there and pay the bills are no longer
0:56:54 being treated as an afterthought in the dispute between the developer and the municipality.
0:57:00 As you know, I pay a non-advol tax to the CDD which is at uh almost
0:57:07 $2,500 a month or excuse me a year. And then also I pay the MSTU tax to the city
0:57:14 of Clermont. I'm talking to you, mayor, and I'd like you to put your attention to me, please. Thank you. So, the city
0:57:21 agreed to the MSTU tax. The city also activated the CDD. We have neither
0:57:28 representation in either things. And I've been coming here for a very long time about the MSTU tax. And now we have
0:57:34 the CDD that through the developer, they're getting impact credit fees from the city. And they actually used some of
0:57:42 those CDD fees to create the connector road and the wellness way which is
0:57:48 outside of our development. They kept the impact cre uh in credits. The
0:57:53 developer is did not give it to the CDD to help lower our cost. So we're paying
0:57:58 for the roads twice. We're paying for lights right now that are not on in the uh MSTU agreement. They say because
0:58:05 Seiko has not put up uh hooked up the lights yet. So I think that we deserve
0:58:11 as residents, we should be invited to these negotiations. Getting information from the CDD about
0:58:18 what has happened in these meetings or what their plans are are is very difficult. They are slow in turning that
0:58:23 information over me. I've already asked about their resolution 2025-04
0:58:28 from the CEDD and what the result was. What did I get? Oh, we're out of the office. We'll get to you soon. So I
0:58:35 appreciate that. Thank you. Thank you. Uh Mr. Fasi, um
0:58:44 if you stick around doing reports toward the end, I'll answer some of those questions for you. Okay.
0:58:50 Yes, sir. Yeah. My name is Cornelius Meeks. I live at um Auto Reserve.
0:58:56 I have a problem with my water bill. For the last three months, my water bill been going up by hundreds of dollars.
0:59:04 Every time I come to pay the bill, I I I complain and I get no redress.
0:59:09 So I I would like for the board to do something about it or to find out what happened. And I am not the only one.
0:59:15 Everybody in my community the bill going up by hundreds of dollars, the water
0:59:21 bill. I come here to pay the bill and complaining. I hear other people complaining and I'm not getting no
0:59:26 regress and it keep on going up. Last month it go by $200. This month it go by $100 again still.
0:59:33 So, I would like to know what's going on. Okay. Um, what was the I missed your address, sir.
0:59:38 Huh? What was your address again? 4477 Powder Horn Place Drive.
0:59:45 Powder Horn. Yeah, that Heartwood Reserve. Okay,
0:59:52 we will uh any anything else? Huh? Is that it? Yeah, that's it. I would like to get
0:59:58 some I would like to get some redress because if not I'm I have I have to go somewhere else because I can't afford
1:00:04 it. Well sir if you you'll stick around at the end of the report and when we get reports we will address that. In the
1:00:10 meantime I will say I will I will say this but for three for three months I've been
1:00:15 I've been I've been I've been complaining and and that's still getting overcharge. Can we have somebody from the water
1:00:22 utility? They send people they send people from the water but I get excused. I know the amount of water that I use. I've been
1:00:28 using the same the same amount of water for 20 years here. Here, sir. And I do know you're
1:00:33 right. It's other people that's complaining about this. And of course, my city manager in here, of course, this is one of the discussions I' I've had
1:00:40 with them a little bit about trying to figure out what we're going to do. And we're looking trying to look into into
1:00:45 uh what we're going to do about the water charges because I hate to say it, but I'm one of those complaining too
1:00:51 because I I'm not quite happy with way things going. I don't know exactly what's going on. and we trying to figure out why why everybody keep getting
1:00:58 different charges every month, you know. So, we are looking into it. But again,
1:01:04 city manager isn't here. I don't know where we are. Matthew,
1:01:09 absolutely. Where we're still we're investigating different softwares that'll help us with with the leak
1:01:14 detections and things like that. I'm happy to give you my card, sir, if you want to call me tomorrow. I will
1:01:20 investigate this and help you in any way we can.
1:01:25 Thank you very much.
1:01:39 Yes, sir. Farmer Banks Hellfrick. I live in the Clay Road District, South Lake County.
1:01:45 Farm tip of the day. There are two types of crops, perennials and annuals.
1:01:50 Annuals you have to plant every single year. usually get at least one season out of them. Uh perennials uh you plant
1:01:57 and you might get three four years uh out of them. Uh did you know that eggplants and peppers are actually
1:02:03 perennials? Um mayor council distinguished get distinguished guests, I have brought my
1:02:09 bucket here today to um make a point u that over 200 years ago, every single
1:02:16 one of us walked around with a bucket. Not a tractor supply plastic bucket. know we all had leather buckets for
1:02:25 carrying water. In fact, we were all part of the volunteer fire department.
1:02:30 Today, actually, I think it started today or a couple of days ago up in Tallahassee, they are talking about
1:02:37 eliminating property taxes or at least curbing them. Uh these are some of the uh one of the things that property taxes
1:02:44 pays for is not only police uh also roads, education, parks, libraries, and
1:02:51 fire departments. Um so what are the options on the table? First and
1:02:56 foremost, um to eliminate property taxes for all those over 65, which is not bad.
1:03:02 Um actually, it will put a burden on X YZ generations and also millennials. And
1:03:08 if they did not like boomers, they definitely will not like boomers after that.
1:03:14 The second one is to eliminate property taxes for those who have owned their house for at least 10 years, which uh is
1:03:20 not bad except for it does put a burden on first-time home buyers. Um a third one is something they do in other states
1:03:27 which does pretty well and it's not an elimination of property taxes. It's actually a decrease and that is you
1:03:33 freeze the uh price of ins of of taxes from the original date. Um and it only
1:03:40 goes up 1 to 3% every single year. It always comes back to the original spot. This is not an elimination. It is a
1:03:46 decline in or a decrease in property taxes. Um the next one is uh to um oh
1:03:53 gez what is the next one? I'll come back to it. Um if we eliminate property taxes
1:04:00 uh we do have to find our revenue stream somewhere else. And some of the ideas that they are talking about is to one
1:04:06 eliminate um tolls for non-residents I'm sorry for residents to um only have
1:04:14 non-residents pay for it and to increase it those tolls. A third one is to uh
1:04:19 increase property and I'm sorry not property but consumption taxes. Um, and these are some options that are out
1:04:26 there. When all is done and said, um, nine out of 10 of us in here do not
1:04:32 really enjoy paying property taxes. However, 10 out of 10 of us enjoy what
1:04:37 taxes give us. So, I always come back to what my mom had said and she said, "You
1:04:43 pay for what you get for." Uh, I'll be carrying the round around the bucket for the next month. They're $4.99 at um uh
1:04:51 Tractor Supply or two for $8. I am Farmer Banks. Thank you for allowing me to speak.
1:04:56 Thank you.
1:05:03 Yes, sir. Good afternoon. Happy New Year, mayor, city council members. Um
1:05:08 two things just this last 24 48 hours. The governor did come out, talk to Taylor. Of course, Taylor's about this
1:05:14 and he's backed away from some of the property tax issues this the last two days they're up in Tallahassee discussing. Um I do have a question for
1:05:21 the city attorney. Um for the non employees that went on the trip, did
1:05:27 they get their room paid for and their food paid for or was that a separate issue?
1:05:33 Mayor, do you want me to answer the question or uh I start with the city's pleasure, so I don't necessarily answer. I mean,
1:05:40 basically what happened was the um the lodging was the city did not pay for the lodging of any of the non city
1:05:47 staff. Thank you. It wasn't said that's why I was like okay sir you forgot to give your name and address with the
1:05:52 Kurt Shu I have a restricted address under Florida law.
1:05:58 Anything? Yes, sir. Yeah. The the second part was No, actually you covered everything. Uh
1:06:05 lodging, food. Okay. Thank you so much. have an awesome day. Thank you.
1:06:10 Yes, sir. And tell the public that that whole consent agenda scares everybody when
1:06:17 it's 19 long and you want to see number 21, 22, or 23. I'm actually going to be an adversary, an opponent of whatever,
1:06:24 but it doesn't matter. We need to help our citizens. Okay? I' I've always been an advocate of that. Now, the reason why
1:06:30 I'm here, and I'm sure that you're very surprised, I want to make a warning shot over the bow of the boat. In 2026, I've
1:06:38 decided, and I turned 70 last year. I've worked, as we know, for 25 years in here to give the public their say and to make
1:06:47 this fair and also to protect this lake. And now we have the downtown historic
1:06:53 district that some of you been here for years on here. Some of you done already two years. This is your first year. But
1:06:59 if I have to, I'm coming out of retirement. And I'm going to run the dream team like we had before. Tim
1:07:04 understands that because he knows about it. And these are people that really cared about this town. And I have talked
1:07:10 to y'all and talked to you till I'm blue in the face. I had to sit down and just go and absorb. And I've talked to some
1:07:16 of you that I do fine with. And I know your heart is good, but you're not here
1:07:21 for yourself. It's not here for your convenience. It's not here because it doesn't fit in your schedule. You knew
1:07:26 that you're public servants. And these people out here and the ones that are 75% that work, they come first. And if
1:07:34 that's not good for you, you shouldn't run. And I and and whoever I like it here and love you, you need to know the
1:07:40 truth. And now no one has done one thing to protect that lake. I spent two hours
1:07:48 yesterday with Nathan, our new guy, and he afforded that and went down there and walked all over with me. I think he was
1:07:54 overwhelmed that we've got a Florida outstanding body of water and no one's
1:08:00 done anything. No one. And then I'm going to try to protect it down there at Victory Point. That's all a roose. That
1:08:06 was a a a lovely wetlands that that lake had to have. Tim, you've been here long
1:08:12 enough. You know this. You know what I'm saying? Well, this Florida cracker girl, and I will not apologize for cracker, by
1:08:18 the way, to the people that don't understand. It's not a black misnomer thing. That's about our cow boys here in
1:08:25 Florida in the early days cracking the whip on the cows. So, that's what a cracker is. I'm going to go ahead and
1:08:30 make sure and yeah. And I'll go look at the last cracker barrel because my dad I mean my granddad is in that book. And
1:08:38 so, I'm tired of it. I don't care who I know, who I like, who I helped on their
1:08:44 campaigns. We're going to come first here. We're going to put it back. And these people that live in this downtown,
1:08:49 hell has come to them. Nathan got to hear that yesterday. He got to hear the music down there. So,
1:08:58 that's my warning. When I come back in at the next council in two weeks, I'm going to pass out a list of things that
1:09:03 I've asked for years to get done that nobody's done, and we'll see who's going to do something. If not, you got to go.
1:09:09 Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else?
1:09:16 Um, no one on the line. Okay, if there's no one, if there's no one
1:09:22 else in the audience and there's no one on the line, are we on close public comments? Move on to the next part of
1:09:28 the agenda. But before I move on, Mr. Matthews, is there any changes to the agenda?
1:09:34 Uh, yes, Mr. Mayor. Item 20 and 21 on the consent are being pulled by staff.
1:09:40 They will come back at some un undetermined time. Being pulled or table uh
1:09:46 they're be they're being withdrawn. Well, pulled. Well, we'll when we bring them back it'll be readvertised and
1:09:52 it'll be we just don't know when yet. Okay. Just just trying to verify. Not not pulled for discussion. I'm
1:09:57 sorry. Pulled for pulled off the agenda. Pulled off the agenda. Not table. So, we don't need to take any action. Yes, sir. Sorry about that.
1:10:06 You got overlooked in the public comment. Yes. Okay. Go ahead.
1:10:19 Good afternoon, city council. John Sedona, 3611 Brier Run Drive. I want to
1:10:24 thank you all for the opportunity to go over the attachments that I had emailed you and the city clerk on January 7th.
1:10:32 There were two on some articles. The first one reports on how the town of Groveland was able to reduce the Bright
1:10:39 Hill development by 45% and conform more with Groveland's new resign codes. The
1:10:46 second article is an interview with fire chief David Ael and his concerns about response times being over 10 minutes
1:10:52 long. The article goes on to suggest the tugof war between Clermont and Lake
1:10:58 County as far as whose ambulance should be here. So certainly increasing impact
1:11:03 fees might be a way to generate that type of revenue for us. Florida DOT is aware of all the needs to
1:11:10 update roads and infrastructure. They have many projects in the design and feasibility stages, but they fear that
1:11:17 the tens of billions of dollars needed will not be approved by the Florida State Legislature. So they are
1:11:24 suggesting mobility fees as a primary option. SB840 was supposed to correct the great
1:11:31 of SD 180, but it did not address the burdensome provision. So, even with
1:11:37 updated design codes, developers can still sue local municipalities.
1:11:42 That said, Clermont is going to need to augment these codes with something else
1:11:48 that would stand up in court. Dwayne Jones is the planning and zoning division manager for Groveland. His team
1:11:54 added a section 6.6 to mitigate some of the gray area of
1:12:01 80 while still applying standards to their new construction codes. Mayor
1:12:06 Megan Slattic from Oido raised impact fees in early 2025 and move towards
1:12:11 mobility fees as well. She suggested a threeprong approach. Develop the
1:12:17 mobility fee schedule, negotiate a fee split with the county, and get the right
1:12:22 consultant to compose it so it stands up in court. You have that gentleman's name in a separate email. Danielle Jeff is
1:12:30 from Highlands County Engineering. Highlands County has not initiated mobility fees, but they added several
1:12:37 processes into their code for maintenance and improvements such as shities for Highlands County. This is
1:12:44 working as a negotiating tool with developers. The packet also contained
1:12:49 two really good examples of smart town, walkable, open space, mixeduse
1:12:55 neighborhoods for your perview. Lastly, according to the 2025 Florida
1:13:01 Highway, State and Motor Vehicles crash dashboard, Clermont and Lake County, unfortunately have surpassed several
1:13:08 categories from 2024. Although we had less crashes, there were more deaths. Bicycle and pedestrian
1:13:16 crashes and deaths are both up from 2024. I have personally observed bikers
1:13:21 going upstate through 561 and there's no bike lane. Bikers tend to draft each
1:13:28 other in order to limit wind resistance. So if if one biker has an issue, the rest of the bikes scatter to avoid a
1:13:34 pileup, those bikers can sometimes wind up in a in a traveling lane. So now
1:13:40 we've got bikes and cars occupying the same space. Certainly, we could agree that the city and the county can rely on
1:13:47 bikers. That was all in your package. I appreciate your time and I thank you again.
1:13:53 Thank you, sir. Anyone else?
1:14:00 We Okay, that being said, we close in public comment and bring it back.
1:14:05 So, Mr. Mayor, as I was saying, items 20 and 21 are are being taken off the agenda. And item 22, the variance
1:14:11 request has been withdrawn by the applicant. So, that's not going to be heard either. So, that that one's completely withdrawn
1:14:17 as well. Yes, sir. Okay. And that's it. So, we need no action on either one of
1:14:23 those. With that being said, next thing on the agenda is the uh consent agenda
1:14:32 which is which contains items that have been determined to be routine and non-controversial.
1:14:37 If anyone in the order wish to address a particular item on the consent agenda, now is the opportunity for you to do so.
1:14:43 Additionally, if any staff or members of the city council wish to speak to a consent item, they have the same
1:14:49 opportunity. The consent agenda item consent agenda items tonight is items one through uh 19.
1:14:58 Anyone wish to have any any item report from the consent agenda.
1:15:05 Item number 11. 11. Okay. Best for propos. All right.
1:15:13 Um,
1:15:21 any others? Yes, Mr. Mayor. Um, I have a It could affect how I vote, so I'm just going to
1:15:27 ask for it to be pulled. Number nine and number 19. Number nine, uh, request for
1:15:33 qualification planning. Okay. And number 19.
1:15:39 Okay. Any other? Anyone else? Anyone
1:15:46 else? Seeing no other,
1:15:52 I think that's pretty much it. Uh, seeing no other, I entertain a motion on
1:15:58 item 1 through 8, item 10, 12
1:16:06 through 18. Is there a motion?
1:16:11 Okay, I'd like to make a motion to uh accept the consent except for 9/11 1911.
1:16:17 A second. Okay, I have a motion for approval of consent
1:16:23 agenda items um one 1 through 8, item 10 and items 12
1:16:30 through 18. Any further discussion? Hear none. All in favor, let it be known by
1:16:35 saying I. I. All oppose. Chair vote I as well. Motion carries 50. Okay. Item number nine.
1:16:51 Yeah. I just had some uh this is about the request for uh qualification
1:16:57 awarding for the planning and urban design services. Um my question was relative to um the
1:17:07 ranking crew who did this uh recommended that we hire
1:17:12 uh five or award five um companies. However,
1:17:19 then when it went to staff, they made the recommendation to add three. And I I
1:17:25 just want to get a better clarification as to why the five that were recommended
1:17:30 by the reviewers. Um what specifically is not included in those five that we
1:17:38 need to go further and and go uh a different route from the folks who did
1:17:43 the procurement process? AB: Absolutely. I'll I'll answer that. So
1:17:49 when when staff looked at the ranking, we decided that we needed to add a few more firms mainly because one of them is
1:17:57 is none of the the top five had firms that were members of the urban guild which are combination of expertise of
1:18:05 urbanism and architecture. And that's very important as we move forward with this comp plan and the formbbased code
1:18:11 to have someone that knows the expertise in that and can plan and design urban
1:18:16 things such as like if we wanted a community center or the missing middle projects things like that those
1:18:22 expertise in the top five were not quite there. also uh the efficiency of having
1:18:30 thorough knowledge of having for example DPZ on board as a continuing service since they're doing our comp plan and
1:18:36 code they're going to have thorough knowledge of the city and every aspect about it so having them as a continuing
1:18:43 services makes a lot of sense whether we use them or not it it makes a lot of sense to have them on board for specific
1:18:50 projects also um just having the rapport with with these firms terms I think is
1:18:57 going to be very important with some of these knowing that for instance DPZ is going to be working on the code the comp
1:19:03 plan they're going to be working with each individual staff member or each council members excuse me uh stakeholders having them have that
1:19:10 thorough knowledge and the ability to pull resources I think is is vitally important and when we looked at the
1:19:16 rankings there wasn't uh what we did as as a staff is we we cut it off rounding
1:19:21 up at at about 78 and that's where it put in uh an additional three people.
1:19:27 But we felt because of the variety of projects that are could be anticipated or may come in in the next few years,
1:19:35 we needed a wide range of expertise in a variety of of fields. And so having more
1:19:42 to us seemed to be the better solution. Was um was the urban guild was that part
1:19:49 of the RFP RFQ process? It was not. It was the RFP process or
1:19:55 RFP process was more generalized on a variety of services that may or may not
1:20:00 come up. So it was very general, but as we move forward with things like the
1:20:06 missing middle projects and infill development, it's important to have those special skill sets.
1:20:13 Dude, we could we have I hear what you're saying on that and I think like we give points for other
1:20:21 things when if that was something that these folks should have known that we were looking for, shouldn't we have said
1:20:28 that's something that we're going to give preference to? And and of the three that are added, how many of them are
1:20:35 urban guild? Um I don't know how many of I know DPZ
1:20:40 is for sure. I don't know if Jacobs is is a part of that or tool, but they also
1:20:45 have different skill sets that could be useful in a variety of projects outside of the urban guild type stuff.
1:20:52 Okay, those are my questions. Thank you. Okay, this is a public. Anyone in the
1:20:59 public wish to address this item may come to the microphone and state your name and address and have three minutes.
1:21:05 Anyone in the public wish to address this item may come to microphone and state your name and address and have three minutes.
1:21:11 Seeing no one I any no one online I close public comment um
1:21:17 bring it back to council my question along the same lines as Mr. vein. Um,
1:21:24 when we put this RFQ, did we put these qualifications in the RFQ? If this is
1:21:30 part of the requirement, why didn't we include these these qualification in the RFQ?
1:21:35 The qualifications is, as you may recall, this RFQ had a variety of services. Planning and urban design was
1:21:40 just one of them. It also had things like storm water and uh traffic engineering. It had a variet variety of
1:21:47 topics. We had 70 some odd applicants for this 27 alone just for the planning
1:21:52 and urban. We did not necessarily put very specific qualifications like that
1:21:58 because we didn't anticipate it at the time. This was uh before we had our economic development director on board
1:22:04 was was when this was written. I believe it was even written before we even had DPZ and the formbbased code on on staff.
1:22:12 So it was not anticipated to be that specific. It was written specifically to be general. So not knowing the exact
1:22:19 different types of stuff that was going to come up, we wanted it to be very adaptable for the changes that may or
1:22:25 may not occur in the next several years. Uh
1:22:32 what's what's the purpose of RFQ, I guess, is my question. What's the
1:22:38 purpose of it? Why do we submit a R uh put an RFQ out there? Uh well, we put an RFQ out because we may not have on staff
1:22:45 the expertise to do some of this some of the projects. And so we we do a request for qualifications to look for firms
1:22:52 that can fit that need. That's well that's always been my my
1:22:58 experience with RFQS and RF Us and the proposals and everything. But
1:23:05 if the top five on our list don't meet our qualification, why why why did we
1:23:11 even accept that proposal? Because they meet their qualifications in certain things that we might have
1:23:16 come up in the future. Certain things like traffic studies or other type of of
1:23:22 services that we might have. Dicks height is is an expert in landscape architecture, things like that. So, they
1:23:29 all meet the general scope of the RFQ. Well, well, you you you use the term
1:23:36 there. They may have they may have qualification that may be something in the future, but this isn't what we're
1:23:42 looking for right now, not for the future. We're looking for a specific item now again. So, why are we going out
1:23:48 here? Well, I guess my problem with with this is the fact that we put a RFQ looking for the best companies out there
1:23:54 that can meet our needs and our requirements at the time. Okay. And we accepting and of course we came back um
1:24:02 and say okay five and well normally when you do RFQ you're looking for one. Okay.
1:24:09 But now we sitting here asking for eight companies. So, what was the what was the I was just trying to figure out why did
1:24:15 we even do the RFQ if we could just go out here and pick eight eight companies and and go and I can tell you my experience it's
1:24:22 not uncommon to have multiple vendors on on standby because you're you want to rotate them on on the expertise that you
1:24:28 need when you talk about we're we're writing it for now. These are these are three to six year contracts and this
1:24:36 city is going to change a lot in the next three to six years. There's no doubt about that. With a new comp plan, a new formbbased code, uh, a variety of
1:24:43 infill projects, I think there's going to see a lot of changes that we wanted to be able to adapt to whatever's going
1:24:49 to happen. And and that's why, but again, Mr. Mayor, this is this is just a staff recommendation just like the the
1:24:56 committee is a recommendation. Council can elect to choose 1, 5, 10, 27,
1:25:01 whichever they they choose. Well, well, I think originally when it went out, they came I think this came back to us
1:25:08 before saying the top five and now we we change it to the top eight.
1:25:14 So, do we really know what we want? I go ahead. Well, I was just going to say I mean
1:25:19 there are occasions we see it all the time across the state with cities and counties where sometimes they'll approve
1:25:24 all of them like even if there's 20 and in fact I bid on one in in Tampa and
1:25:30 they approved all you know 30 firms for different practice areas. Sometimes the city will give you something, sometimes
1:25:35 they won't. The idea is just to give the staff the flexibility if something comes up. It's for all the things that we
1:25:41 can't necessarily predict so that if something is timesensitive, staff can pull the trigger without having to wait.
1:25:47 I think the original RFQ went out on this six months ago or seven months ago. So, it's been a process.
1:25:53 Yeah. Yeah, I know. It went out few months ago and it to come back to us two or three times and it seemed like every
1:25:58 time we uh I think when it first came back to us we we did the uh we was
1:26:03 looking for one we changed it to three and then five and now we had to eight. See we keep we keep moving the goalpost.
1:26:09 Okay. Is that's my that's my concern. Okay. Why we keep moving the goalpost.
1:26:14 Okay. And then when I look at the package you send me and if the way you
1:26:19 got them listed is that's the order how they were ranked by the committee.
1:26:25 See I look down there and I I see you know okay um certain companies didn't
1:26:31 make the top five. So now we going to move to goalpost and see these are one of the things that been happening with our RFQS in the last few months. And
1:26:37 that's been very concerning to me because I think we gonna end up getting ourselves in trouble because people
1:26:42 submitting their their bids and they come and they looking at everything. They know how they ranking everything.
1:26:48 Me and we come in here thinking they going to get the bid and we change everything and moving. So Mr. W, I'm
1:26:53 concerned about legalities here. You know, people are saying, "Hey, what's the shenanigans you all pulling?"
1:27:00 Mr. Mayor, I don't think that's what they're trying to do. I think the understanding is is to say if you have
1:27:07 um a building and you need the city needs someone who is an expertise in
1:27:13 accounting and then oh we also need an expertise in um electrical engineering
1:27:19 but we only have the company that can do accounting so then we got to send out a
1:27:25 whole another RFQ. This is to prevent that. So we they're being proactive.
1:27:30 That's what this is for. So when the need arises, they can just hire this person because they're on contract. So
1:27:37 they can go to them. You sounds good. You're right. They don't want to have to send out another
1:27:42 RFQ. But if I need somebody that uh I need an accountant, I'mma put RFQ out for an accountant. Okay.
1:27:48 But see, this this eliminates that because because they're already on contract. You know what I'm saying? They're already on contract. So like
1:27:54 when you were at the MWR with activities you had there, you had vendors that you
1:27:59 already knew that you could count on. So you went to those vendors, you didn't have to constantly put out a contract.
1:28:05 It's the same concept. Well, you mentioned MDRL. When I put out my my RQs in my in my dogs before, I I
1:28:13 chose one company and I did that. If I needed something different, I went and had and you're right, I had different
1:28:19 vendors and I didn't have to go out because I already had RFQS. This one specialized in this one. This one
1:28:24 specialized in this one. I didn't have eight different companies that I can choose off of one RFQ RSQ. See, but
1:28:31 anyway, u I'm just this just is I I'm just like I say, we've been we've been
1:28:37 working with this one in now for some months and it keep changing. Okay. And now we up to 888 award uh um vendors and
1:28:45 everything. So, well, Mr. Mayor, this is an RFQ. And for those in the public who maybe aren't
1:28:51 familiar with these processes, an RFQ is a request for qualifications. It's not a request for a bid or a request for a
1:28:57 proposal for a specific project. So, this was staff's and I I commend staff. In fact, uh Mr. Matthysse, if you say
1:29:04 you want all 27, that will be my motion and support tonight because I think
1:29:09 staff needs to be able to make decisions that are good for the citizens, which means the highest qualified professional
1:29:16 for the specific job at hand as quickly as possible at the lowest cost as possible. And if the staff has the
1:29:23 ability to send out a project to three or four different approved vendors and
1:29:28 say, "This is the project. Can you get me an estimate on this?" we're more likely to get good estimates. We spent
1:29:36 the greater part of last year talking about government pricing and how the system of procurement it lends to
1:29:43 government pricing. Now, in my background as a real estate attorney, I'm actually familiar with several of
1:29:49 these firms and they are all distinct. They are very different. At least the
1:29:54 ones that I know. I know five of the eight. And um of those, I have worked with some of those or seen them in
1:30:00 action. and they are very different and we would get very different results with
1:30:06 them. And so I think it's wonderful. Um, Mr. Matthysse, my only question to you is, do you want all 27? Do you want 12?
1:30:13 Do you want 15? Because I'm going to support the eight if that's all you need. But I really and sincerely want
1:30:18 you and your team to be able to be flexible and pivot and make sure that this city gets the best for the
1:30:24 situation that it needs. I the staff recommended eight. Now 10 would be great. I don't think I think
1:30:30 Freddy would have a heart attack if we went with 27 contracts, but but I think eight eight will
1:30:37 suffice. 10 would be even better, but staff wanted to try to keep it somewhere
1:30:42 between the five and 10. Did you say eight because you think you need to satisfy counsel or did you say eight because this truly and sincerely
1:30:48 is what you want and need because this was a long process and it's not going to be easy to go through again if you find you you don't have the tools that you
1:30:54 need to do the job that you need to do. I I would prefer 10 to be honest with you, but eight I think we can accomplish
1:31:03 most everything with the eight, but it's always good to have that flexibility if one's busy or like you said, the
1:31:10 competition of having multiple drives the prices more competitively and not not stuck with one or two where they can
1:31:17 I'm going to move to approve the top 10 qualified candidates for item number nine.
1:31:22 Second. Have a motion. Um,
1:31:28 so we're moving it from eight to nine of 10. Correct. That's the motion.
1:31:35 Have a motion uh to approve uh request number item number nine, request for
1:31:41 qualification awards and then with the change of moving it from the top eight to the top 10 um provided by
1:31:48 procurement. Any other further discussion? I it sounded like staff. The
1:31:55 reason why I really want to know because is it a number thing or is it a skill thing and now we've just diluted it down to a number thing and that doesn't make
1:32:02 sense to me. So I'm voting no. Well again
1:32:07 I heard you say Mr. Mr. uh Matthysse that you were looking for somebody with expertise in urban design. See that one
1:32:15 of the qualification but then if none of these have a qualification urban design why are they even there? why we need
1:32:20 them. I I'm sorry. I I hear what you're saying about you want to have the flexibility, but my thing is why even do
1:32:27 a RFQ if you like she was saying uh choose all 27. We don't need RFQ. Just
1:32:33 go out and grab your company, whoever you want and do it. They have to qualify. They have to go through the process of qualifying.
1:32:39 Well, according to what I read that we did to qualify and we doing this and like I say, that's my concern. the
1:32:45 company that's qualified in what we ranked as the best to meet all the qualification in the RFQ. We saying we
1:32:52 don't want or we we not trusting you to do everything. So, we gonna go down here now. We're going to take the top 10. We keep moving the gold fo eventually. We
1:32:59 going to get ourselves in trouble. Keep doing this. Okay. These guys put in a lot of work and effort in submitting
1:33:04 these the bids and these uh proposals and everything and then they they just basically just taking their proposal and
1:33:11 walking them out. Okay. If I were one of them, I guess I I guarantee you I'll be
1:33:16 looking to sue the city right now. I guarantee you that. Okay. But we do have
1:33:21 a proposed uh rec uh motion to take the top eight now. Uh top
1:33:28 10 instead of the top eight. All in favor, let it be if the question. All in favor, let it be known by saying I.
1:33:34 I. I. Opposed. Nay. And the chair vote nay as well.
1:33:40 Motion passes three to two. Uh item number 11,
1:33:48 I pulled this one. Uh my concern with this one was that the question of what to do with the real estate down at
1:33:54 Victory Point has not gone through any sort of visioning process with the council. I think that real estate that
1:34:02 uh well I have two issues. One is we haven't gone through a visioning process and the other is um this didn't go through the American Bicycle Association
1:34:08 or DPZ. And um so my concern with it is
1:34:13 that I think that if any decision we make on using city property in a different manner while we're in this
1:34:19 process with ABA and DPZ is assuming that we know more and better. Um we just
1:34:25 approved a couple hours ago a new redevelopment plan. Um and candidly with
1:34:31 the suggestion by staff um one of the biggest complaints that I see I'm not saying that the firm that won wasn't
1:34:38 qualified. I think there was about a onepoint difference between the two firms, but one is a firm that has
1:34:44 familiarity and use with jet skis, which I see the most complaints about from citizens in Clermont, and the other is
1:34:51 bicycles, and this is on the Coast to Coast Trail. So, I think staff did the best job that they can do in qualifying,
1:34:58 but I'm not sure that we as a council did a very good job of giving a vision before they went into this process, and
1:35:05 I think that that was missed. So, uh, I would prefer to push this off to a
1:35:10 workshop. Um, but if we had to take a motion based on what I've heard from the community, I would not vote to add more
1:35:17 jet skiis to the lake today. Well, my understanding from this what
1:35:24 you're speaking of is that this um RF this proposal they had two whacks add it
1:35:31 because the score was so close that the evaluators had them come and present um
1:35:36 and the other team Lux I think it is is still selected and they aren't just
1:35:42 doing what you're I don't see any um what do you say it's jet skis I see other things in here that they're doing
1:35:48 and they're veteranowned and they're locally owned as well. Um they're doing kayaks, um bicycles, paddle boards,
1:35:57 pedal boats. So, um I don't see what the problem is of allowing them to go forth.
1:36:03 Hold on. Um thank you. I'm sorry. This is a public hearing. Anyone in the
1:36:10 It's okay. This is a public hearing. Anyone in the public wish to address the light may come to the microphone and state your name and address and have
1:36:15 three minutes. Charlene Harrison, fourth Dotto Street,
1:36:22 Clermont. This is actually why I came after the thing tonight.
1:36:27 You know, there's a reason and a plan for procurement. And I know Freddy does a good job about what he does. But, you
1:36:35 know, we don't need to have a monopoly here. We've had that with the good old boys for a long time. We already have these people. You're saying the jet
1:36:41 skis. And I wasn't real impressed with that back then. Um, and we were almost
1:36:46 all of us, I think, felt like if you don't do this, we're coming down here and people with jet skis. And I don't know who all was involved in that, but
1:36:53 we need to give other people a choice. Now, I will tell you this, and I'm going to disclose this. I spent an hour and a
1:37:00 half with Valerie, the other one. She is my neighbor on the other street, but we
1:37:05 don't really see each other. We don't hang out. We're not friends. So, I'm not trying to push anything. But what I did
1:37:11 understand is that she got it where you heard it earlier tonight what I said about the lake and we don't need where
1:37:17 it's every party down there, every venue, everything. And I realized sitting with
1:37:24 her and she was glad that I brought it up because I wanted to find out in case this is something that should go to the
1:37:29 council and be in front of the public where they can. And points don't sometimes matter and I think we all know
1:37:35 that in politics, right? When people win, right? We all know that some people win and they shouldn't have won. Okay?
1:37:43 And so, and I'm talking from Washington all the way down, but we need to give other people a
1:37:49 choice to start with. We don't need to have a monopoly here where somebody's already got something else and now they're going to do that. And I did hear
1:37:56 that there was a bunch of stuff maybe involved in this. Where is the And this is non-issue
1:38:03 because it's going to be non-motorized, which is what we wanted. old say our
1:38:09 save our legs. We've wanted it. We've advocated this for 25 years. And so I
1:38:14 sat with a person that I know understood that. Now what you do is what you do, but it should come back here. Things
1:38:20 like this that's not like big development and stuff, it should come in front of y'all and let you make a
1:38:26 decision. I I mean I would advocate to pull this thing off the agenda and bring it back. But just think about that. We
1:38:32 don't give this to the same people here. Let somebody else have a chance. You know, y'all were there about the food
1:38:38 trucks and stuff and let them do and it's a bad thing. We got people that spent a bunch of money on bricks and mortars and then you can just bring a
1:38:44 food truck in. You don't have to pay for anything. Now we're starting to be a food truck city. I don't know when this
1:38:50 ends, but at this point, let's let somebody else have a chance. Come on. I
1:38:55 mean, that's not right. And it needs to be brought back in front of the public. And don't worry about points. Let's just
1:39:00 see what seems to be the best fit. you know, you have no harm to pull this off
1:39:05 and bring it back. That's would be my suggestion tonight. Thank you. Yes, ma'am.
1:39:16 Uh yes, Anna Sinclair, 575 West Mola. Um I'm actually don't like being here
1:39:22 speaking about this tonight because I am a big advocate for small businesses and this seems to be one of those cases
1:39:27 where there's two small businesses going for the same opportunity. So this is not really about the qualifications of the
1:39:34 businesses per se. It is about the fit of that particular business. In my mind,
1:39:39 this is more than a bike rental or a kayak rental or a paddle board uh
1:39:45 rental. This is about a vision for the city. This is a public private
1:39:50 partnership. And when it comes to public private partnerships, you need to think about economic impact um and the
1:39:57 services that that business can provide to the residents of Clermont. I did some research on both companies. Um, one
1:40:05 of them, Midpoint Rec mentions Clermont all over the place. The other one only mentions twice and that is going to be
1:40:12 on the address. So, the question here is what is the vision for that? We want a company that yes, it's local but only
1:40:18 have the has Clermont twice and the rest of the mentions of a place in their website is Orlando. Or do we want a
1:40:25 company that is proud uh to be in downtown that wants to showcase the best of downtown that has connections to
1:40:31 downtown businesses and that can create customized tours and customized experiences to people who already live
1:40:38 downtown but haven't had the chance to explore everything or are visiting downtown Clermont. So again, this is a
1:40:44 matter of fit. This is a matter of vision. I think that staff did the best that they could, but I think that
1:40:49 perhaps we need to table this and bring this back to council so that we can develop a vision for that place. This is
1:40:55 on the trail on the coast to coast trail. So we cannot just put anyone uh
1:41:00 there. We need to put someone who is going to be Clermont forward who is going to bring us to so that we you know
1:41:08 it it drives me crazy when people compare us to for example winter garden. I don't want to be I want the city to
1:41:15 have its own brand, its own name. And I think it's important that when we see opportunities like this, we think of
1:41:21 that. Not just points, not just, oh, this company has more time in business or they have bigger staff and things
1:41:27 like that. So that is all I have to say. Thank you for your time. Thank you. This is a public hear. Anyone
1:41:34 else in the public wish to address this item may come to the microphone and state your name and address and have three minutes.
1:41:57 Good afternoon, Vincent Neim, Regency Hills. I look at your agenda, your honor, and
1:42:04 the council, and I'm still confused on what the procedure is.
1:42:10 All right. The procedure of selection because as I'm sitting there,
1:42:17 he even confuses me even more because it sounds like
1:42:22 it sounds like you might want to undermine your staff. Okay. And that
1:42:29 I'm really confused because I'm still trying to get a grip on what the procedure is.
1:42:35 Okay. I'm hearing a score. I saw the score. numbers aren't adding up. And
1:42:41 then I'm also hearing that there was an opportunity for that individual both
1:42:48 both individuals to do a live presentation.
1:42:53 Now, all I'm saying to you is, and you all know our hearts in Clermont because
1:42:59 if it's South Clermont or if it's downtown, all I'm trying to say is where we're going to be putting millions and
1:43:05 millions into downtown Clermont by the waterfront.
1:43:10 Okay? I hope that you selected the right people to make this decision and, you
1:43:17 know, let's not insult them by undermining them. Thank you, your honor.
1:43:23 Thank you. Anyone else?
1:43:35 Good afternoon. Um, Valerie Shuitt, 931 West Montro Street. Uh, I am the founder
1:43:41 of Midpoint Recre. For the public who doesn't know, that is the other vendor in this story. Um, so this is a very
1:43:48 uncomfortable position to be in. I'm not going to lie. Um, and I'm genuinely grateful for um, this support. Um, I
1:43:57 want to make it clear, I did not ask or organize that. Um, I've been a part of Clermont Civic Community Life since
1:44:03 before Midpoint existed. Uh, and as a result, it's been a gift to have so many following this journey, uh, to find the
1:44:09 right operating home for my business. So, um, let me just say a few things. Um, we remain ready to activate Victory
1:44:16 Point responsibly if given this opportunity. Uh, it's been a journey. Last spring when I met with many of you
1:44:22 here on this dis to share a new idea. I heard some consistent themes. I heard we want waterfront activation. We need to
1:44:29 utilize victory point better. Um this shouldn't only be about tourism. It should be about engaging residents. Be
1:44:36 locally collaborative. Care for our lakes and our natural resources. Uh
1:44:41 support downtown economic vitality. So these are things that I heard um that greatly shaped my business. Um, and it
1:44:49 was a gift to be given this opportunity, of course, through the RFP process. Um,
1:44:54 I understand that Midpoint is the newer business in this lineup, and as far as the feedback I was given, that was, um,
1:45:02 you know, seen as the greatest liability, I guess you could say. Um, but I can assure you that is the asset
1:45:10 in this case. You have a locally attuned, locally tailored, experienced
1:45:15 entrepreneur. I am not new to business. Uh, and I have been operating for almost a year and a half now and building this
1:45:21 for about 2 years. Um, I've built something viable that is
1:45:27 completely from for and with Clermont. You know, in other words, it's not just enough to be from Clermont. I think you
1:45:34 need to be about Clermont in this kind of partnership setting. Um, not to mention, I am highly incentivized to do
1:45:41 right by this place. I live right over there. I show my face here. Um, I've
1:45:46 been endorsed by Clermont Main Street. Um, and the reality is I'm feeling the expectations and the responsibility that
1:45:53 comes with those connections. Um, I mean, Charlene lives right behind me. She could get to my house in 60 seconds
1:45:58 if she's mad. Okay, that's real accountability. Um, and I'm okay with it. So, I know tonight's decision isn't
1:46:06 simple. I I only assume good faith of the other vendor. Like I said, I mean, that's what makes this so uncomfortable
1:46:12 for me. Um, but I believe it is important that you
1:46:18 approach this as choosing a place-based and vision aligned partner. The
1:46:23 reputation is going to reflect on the reputation of the city being in a shared city space. And I believe I've built
1:46:30 something that is rightsized to grow with the building of trust and time that
1:46:35 is safe, that is flexible, that is creative. Um, and I am committed to
1:46:41 collaborating alongside the city. I believe that's something that I've demonstrated in my engagement. So, just
1:46:46 letting you know I'm here. And if you have any questions, don't hesitate to let me know.
1:46:52 Thank you. Yes, ma'am.
1:46:58 Sure. Good afternoon. Uh my name is Pa Langarita. Address is 6081 Osilla Loop,
1:47:04 Clermont, Florida. Um myself and Hector, my husband are actually the owners of the company awarded. We are
1:47:10 Lux Rentals. Um I did want to come up and you know I understand your concerns
1:47:16 um with our proposal you know we were very thorough. I know the point system um they did cancel that out. We did come
1:47:22 in here and present in person to the staff. Um then we had another meeting going over additional concerns that may
1:47:29 arise. I just want to let you know and stand here in front of you let you know we are u veteranowned and operated like
1:47:36 you said. You know we're very proud of that. We are Clermont residents. Um our daughter goes to school here. You know,
1:47:41 we are um very involved as well. Our company is we have a brand that we're
1:47:46 growing. We have been in business for over five years now. Um we do operate in the same manner at Orange Lake Resort
1:47:53 over in CMI. We do have multiple things. We're part of um Uncharter society. So
1:47:58 we're members with BRP, which is how we obtain all of our items. I understand the concern for jet skis. Um this is
1:48:05 completely separate. you know, victory point for us is something that we really want to put our heart into. Get involved
1:48:11 in the community. Um, our big goal, and we did state that in the presentation, is to bring the community, not just
1:48:18 tourism because that is our main driver for our business with the Jet Keys and everything else, but we do want to be
1:48:24 involved with the community. We want to create opportunity for kids to do internships. Um, you know, the
1:48:31 ecoourism, we're in this business already. We see the drive in it. Um we definitely do believe that this is going
1:48:37 to be an amazing opportunity for you know financially too for the city bringing in a lot of tourism. When we
1:48:44 bring the tourism we also speak about Clermont. We're you know we're very proud to be here. The lake the chain of
1:48:50 lace is what sells us. You know the jet ski doesn't sell us. It's the location. So for us it's very important for people
1:48:56 to know you come here come see the city. Um our goal is not just come see Orlando
1:49:02 the Disney parks and everything. Um, we want to bring the tourism and we want to align with, you know, the community. Um,
1:49:09 we're a family of, I know some people don't like it, food trucks. So, we are very involved. We have food trucks that
1:49:15 participate. We've been very involved for years. Um, I want to say over five years here. And our goal with Victory
1:49:22 Point is to continue growing that. um you know develop with the city. Bring
1:49:28 the waterfront like someone said you know bring people the opportunity to come out and see the beauty in it from
1:49:34 the water in a very safe way. Our main thing with our company um which is one
1:49:40 of the things we express completely is safety. Um we do hold a $5 million
1:49:45 general liability policy. Excuse me. We never you know that's very important for us our guides. Everybody's
1:49:52 always trained to us number one is safety out on the water. We do ensure
1:49:58 that we instruct everyone. Um and then on top of that, our Google reviews, you know, we we do a job a good job at
1:50:04 providing the customer service, which is why we ensure, you know, people continue coming back. We'd love that for not just
1:50:11 tourism, but the community alike. Thank you. Thank you.
1:50:19 This is a public form. Anyone in the public with the addresses I may come to microphone and state your name and
1:50:25 address and have three minutes. Anyone in New Orleans with the addresses
1:50:30 may come to microphone and state your name and address and have three minutes. Seeing no one in the house, I'm going to
1:50:36 close down the in-house part uh uh portion of public comment. And I think we have one online.
1:50:43 Go ahead, please.
1:50:48 Yes. Hi, this is Jenny May, 4062 Greystone Drive. Um, I just want to
1:50:54 piggy back. I mean, a lot of what I wanted to say has already been spoken about, but I believe that um that uh
1:51:02 Councilwoman Strange made a good point in regards to the vision and we really
1:51:07 have to focus on the vision of our uh downtown and Heart Lakes and we're in the process of that. So I think
1:51:14 selecting um a group like this um to be part of this vision um needs to be kind
1:51:21 of tabled or we need to wait um as she stated to have you know also DPZ or ABA
1:51:29 to have some input um or also even the economic development uh director I don't
1:51:34 believe they were part of the process as well um in that. So um you know I
1:51:40 they're both very very qualified firms um I believe the jet ski group has already is already already has a
1:51:47 business on the lake. Um so to have two locations I I agree with Miss Miss in
1:51:53 regards to monopolizing. I don't agree with monopolizing either. Um, so why not
1:51:58 have two of the best things, both of the companies allow Lux to, you know, continue doing their jet skiis, uh, but
1:52:06 allow another, you know, local business as well to to thrive. But wait until,
1:52:12 uh, the planning, um, groups, DBZ, ADA, um, you know, have a chance to also
1:52:19 review and see if that is, you know, corresponds with the vision of what we're looking forward to in the future.
1:52:25 And that's all I have to say. Thank you very much for your time. Thank you.
1:52:31 That's it online on virtual. Wayne, anyone else? There's no one on virtual
1:52:37 else on virtual. So, we're going to close down public comment. Bring it back to council. Um,
1:52:45 you have a comment, ma'am. I'll hold I'll hold off for now. Okay. My Now, this is just a lease,
1:52:52 right? For what? How long is how long did they get to use this for? One year 12 months.
1:52:57 It's a one-year lease with the option of extensions. Okay. So, um I don't see the problem of
1:53:03 giving them an opportunity to serve for a year. They are ready. They're not a startup. They've been in business. They
1:53:10 live here. They have the insurance. Um he's a veteran. Um I feel like why not
1:53:16 support them? Okay. Yes, sir. Thank you. Um to answer Mr. Neimik's uh
1:53:25 point about procurement process. Um we had a conversation I believe at the
1:53:30 December meeting after the uh presentations or it was at the December
1:53:37 meeting and we talked about having a workshop in uh I thought we said January
1:53:42 um but we're not having that uh and potentially it could be on the agenda
1:53:48 for February um is what I heard uh in my meeting with staff yesterday. So, um,
1:53:55 I'll put a pin in the conversation about workshops and scheduling and save that for the council item later. Um,
1:54:03 I didn't think about the perspective of perhaps as council we let staff down on
1:54:10 this item and I think we have to take ownership on that. This is not a go buy a dump truck,
1:54:19 a backhoe, a weed whacker, a uh item.
1:54:24 Not to not to minimize that. Those are all important things we have to do to provide service,
1:54:31 but oftent times it boils down to do they have the product that our staff really tell us they need and are we
1:54:37 getting a good deal. This is more about purpose and vision
1:54:45 and partnership and collaboration. We're not just buying a thing. We're
1:54:50 actually entering into a relationship here. And I've and I think we did not
1:54:56 set our staff up for success when they went out to bid this and then reviewed
1:55:02 it and and and uh did the interviews. I think we might have failed them in that.
1:55:08 Um, and I want to recognize that and I I want to say to the staff that I think we
1:55:15 I owe you an apology for that and I owe our applicants an apology for that because I think we created in some
1:55:22 respects this situation. If we don't want to delay a decision
1:55:30 here, um then I would I would make a
1:55:35 recommendation to to vote either down the recommendation of staff or to change the recommendation to um midpoint wreck.
1:55:44 And my rationale for that is that um I think that time in business
1:55:51 is potentially subjective in the sense that if I want to start a high-end
1:55:56 restaurant, if I were a U popcorn stand for 12 years, that doesn't necessarily
1:56:04 mean that I've been in business of a high-end restaurant. I've been in I've had business acumen. Well, I think
1:56:10 there's been demonstrated business acumen in that area. So I I went to look at what are the what are the areas that
1:56:17 talked about substance, the relationship, the partnership, the purpose, the vision, the collaborative areas. I looked at those and it's a it's
1:56:27 like a three-point difference the other way if we're going based off of of some points there. So I know that that's what
1:56:33 we have because we weren't a part of the uh the presentation and I'm not saying we should be, but I'm just saying that
1:56:40 that's the material that we have based off that. And then in doing due diligence and looking at everything, um,
1:56:47 one would I would expect someone to go and look at the two websites of
1:56:52 materials. Um, and I I would say to go back to the point of of business, I I've
1:57:00 looked at the recommended company's website and I I only found Clermont in
1:57:06 the address of the business. I everything that's advertised is Orlando and it's jet ski books. If you want to
1:57:13 go book an opportunity, it's jet ski and it's ATV and it's all in Orlando. Um, and so
1:57:20 it it makes me wonder like, okay, maybe there is this other entity out there, this other collaborative partnership
1:57:25 that they're in in CMI, but I don't find any of that in in there. And I mean, if
1:57:31 I were going for this type of partnership, I would make sure that that was front and center out there and and
1:57:38 show the deci the decision makers, hey, um, I'm I'm investing here. Um, I also
1:57:45 think that, you know, I'm I'm concerned about I if if a company's coming in saying,
1:57:51 well, I'm I'm willing to create websites and and and do uh publicity information
1:57:57 to promote your downtown. Well, we have entities that do that. I want someone that's going to collaborate with them. I
1:58:02 don't want someone that's going to be a competition with them. We're already giving money as a city to entities and
1:58:08 partnering with entities that promote what happens on our waterfront in our historic downtown. I want to
1:58:15 collaborate. I don't want uh our landlord role, if it boils, it kind of
1:58:20 boils down to that, our landlord role to to support someone that's going to work against our interests in our financial
1:58:27 investments. So, that's where I'm at. I I I I can't um I can't support the
1:58:34 recommendation. Um, and I really do have a a strong feeling here that I feel like we may have let staff down and let our
1:58:41 the applicants here down by not creating that um upfront piece that we should
1:58:47 have on this process. Mr. Bane, I think you make a valid point and the question you're alluding to is
1:58:54 why are we here? Um, it's a brilliant question and I think it's really important in this particular case
1:59:02 unless I'm missing something. I don't recall us having a visionary
1:59:08 meeting where we talked about doing something at victory point. No, we have talked about the master plan. We
1:59:16 have talked about doing great things and I think that's good and we need to do that. And to that end, we have taken
1:59:22 action. We've we've hired DBZ. We've hired the American Bicycle Association. We've we have taken action to those ends
1:59:27 to get a plan together. why we are here. Um, and I'll go back. I I I've said
1:59:34 before and I'll say again, the role of council is to establish the vision, the budget, and the policy of the city.
1:59:39 That's our role. That's where it stops. That's where it ends. But that is our role. I think that the question of what
1:59:44 to do with public real estate is a vision and policy question.
1:59:50 And it should have started with this council. Um, Mr. I did ask staff to have
1:59:57 the presentations made to this council. I wanted to see the presentations. But
2:00:02 why are we here? Unless I'm mistaken, we're here because one of our local business owners sent to us a request, an
2:00:11 unsolicited proposal that she operate a bike rental downtown Clermont at
2:00:17 Victory Point. Is that how this started? Yes. Um, can I just interject something, council member? Sure.
2:00:23 I and I hate to do it. I just don't want to mind three. Well, I I and I Well, the issue is um if
2:00:30 the city council is going to if it wants to consider overriding the rankings of
2:00:35 the committee, then it has to be based on the factors. I think as council member Bane stated, in other words,
2:00:41 council member Bane looked at the factors and suggested that there's a different way to weight them. What the
2:00:46 city council cannot do is discuss other factors as a basis for it, if that makes
2:00:52 sense. Fair enough. I I see I I I do actually agree with what M Mr. Bain said about
2:01:00 we didn't lead this and I think that's the biggest error that was made here. Um
2:01:05 I saw the same thing that Mr. Bane saw when I look at the scores of this and
2:01:12 and I want to be clear. I'm not saying even that I'm gung-ho on doing anything
2:01:18 at all. I want to engage in the conversation. and I'm willing to engage in the conversation, but I think that it
2:01:24 is foolish and unwise is what I mean to jump ahead of the American Bicycle
2:01:29 Association and DPZ. I have said that before, I will continue to say it, I think that should be a policy of this
2:01:35 council. Um, but that being said, if the the the will of council without a
2:01:40 workshop, and I can get there, is to do a bike rental downtown, I don't want to
2:01:45 be flippant about it's just a year. Starting a business is extremely difficult. I don't think one year is
2:01:50 something that we say you know let's give them a shot. I think it should be a longer term and that's where we get into
2:01:56 partnership and relationship. But when I look at the scores the only two places
2:02:02 that the prevailing organization won if you will this proposal not a bid
2:02:08 but a proposal by 67 points. It has to do with time in business and experience
2:02:14 of the individuals and those are in many ways the same thing and those were 30%
2:02:21 of the score. So those swung it midpoint wreck was leading in everything
2:02:28 substantive the introduction letter the proposed plan proposal requirements they tied in
2:02:35 business location and then the quality of the submitt. I mean, all we're talking about is
2:02:41 someone who presumably hasn't been in business as long as someone else, yet provides a better experience. So, I'm
2:02:47 not saying I wouldn't go for, you know, I'm not necessarily a person who says, "Let's give a new person a chance." I do
2:02:53 think that, but that's not what I'm weighing this on. It's really more I love the points about Clermont,
2:02:59 Clermont, Clermont, Clermont, Clermont. My campaign was I heart Clermont. You're going to win me on that every time if you run for that. I
2:03:05 love that. I I'm not sure I'm I want to vote yes or no, but I can say I would
2:03:12 not be inclined to vote for the suggestion by staff. And I agree with
2:03:17 you, Mr. Bane. I think that it's not it's unfortunate that we're here and so uh it put staff in a bad position. I
2:03:24 think staff did everything they needed to do, but I think what was missing was the vision and direction specifically from this council. So now we're having
2:03:30 to kind of go back and give that after the fact. I mean is one of the criteria that both
2:03:36 but both candidates have to live in Clermont. Oh, it's not a Okay. It's not a
2:03:42 criteria. However, they if you're a Clout res uh
2:03:47 live in Clout and you're a resident of Clout, they give you a little bit um couple extra points. I guess it is one
2:03:53 or two points different. Um but the thing here is in this case, both of them are from Clout. Both of them live in
2:03:58 Clout. And Mr. Bane, I understand you because I looked at the website too. Yes, nothing in Climouth because
2:04:04 basically not doing business in Clim because we do not offer this business in Climouth right now. So, there's a reason
2:04:10 why. Okay. Uh but here's my problem and go back to what Miss Strange was saying.
2:04:15 Um I don't think this is what I would I would like to see in in Victory Point. Is this the best use for Victory Point?
2:04:22 Okay. Um, yes, I would like to I've always said I would like to see bicycles and kayaks and canoes and paddle boats
2:04:29 on the on the waterfront rather than a waterfront, but I don't think it's in my I never vision it being in Victory
2:04:35 Point. Okay. Uh, to me, Victory Point was was was uh created as more of a
2:04:41 passive type park. I know we talked about putting uh some exercise equipment uh stationary exercise equipment as
2:04:48 you're running along, you can take a break and do this. putting this in there. I think that that'll spoil all that. U I used to have the vision and I
2:04:55 I still have the vision is uh one of the reason um we went out and we purchased
2:05:01 the two pieces of property over there by West Beach was to extend West Beach and
2:05:06 make West Beach bigger. Okay. And that was the whole idea. We take West Beach with the two pieces of property that we
2:05:12 had there when we purchased there, open it up and put bicycle rentals and everything uh make West Beach bigger
2:05:19 because um I don't even think it's a good fit down in a waterfront. See, to put it over there and everything and
2:05:25 it's better better um parking and everything over there. And see Victory
2:05:30 Point, here's other thing which we've gotten a lot of complaints about when we put the parking over there. We put
2:05:36 Victory Point over there for for activities and everything, but we never even put any park in there.
2:05:41 We put this parking lot in there a year or so ago over there next to it and and this c well you all wasn't on the
2:05:47 council when it all happened, but we we was crucified over the parking, but it it's one of the best parking lots we
2:05:53 have around there. Now, Victory Point is being utilized a little bit more as a passive type park. So, I wouldn't want to see that here. That's why I cannot
2:06:00 really support this. And it wasn't I don't think it was bought to the council for the council to give some type vision
2:06:06 on what we want to do and where we want to do it. U I don't have any problem with the uh let me say this and I've
2:06:11 said this over and over again. I think we have an outstanding procurement department and it goes back to what I
2:06:17 just said in the previous discussion about uh RFQS. Freddy and them do a fantastic job but yet and still we sit
2:06:25 up here and we we want to change the whole process. Okay, here we are again f to change change it again. Uh we just
2:06:32 talked about it and we f to talk talk about trying to do it again. See if this company out beded him that's fine. But
2:06:39 I'm not really to support this right now. Not because the company who the company is I'm not supporting because I
2:06:46 don't think it's the right location for for for uh for victory point in the vision I I that I see for for the city
2:06:53 of Clement. Okay. uh now but I'm hearing everybody talking about want to change
2:06:59 the whole of proposal but then again I'm sorry uh Freddy year after year after
2:07:04 year after year I know they won a national award for being one of the best procurement departments in in the
2:07:11 country and we keep interfering with their work. Why let them do their job
2:07:17 and then we we base it on what on their recommendation and go from there you
2:07:22 I know Mr. Freddy must be about to pull his hair out right about now. The changes we've been taking through in the
2:07:28 last 12 months is over these RFQS. So that's where I say I cannot support it because I I don't think it fit the
2:07:34 vision I have for victory point. Okay.
2:07:39 So I'll entertain a motion. Can I seek uh council's advice here? Um,
2:07:50 are we able to table or do we just vote down? You're able to do either.
2:07:56 Okay.
2:08:01 Well, I I will say if this is helpful at all because I sense the I truly think
2:08:06 the the issue is this didn't stem from from council and so there wasn't clear
2:08:12 direction. And so it's not that staff did something wrong. It's that there was execution before there was vision before
2:08:18 there was a plan. When you go through a process, you want to have a vision and engage the people and and ex then you execute once you do that. And so um it
2:08:28 for me what to do and how to make this decision would be greatly influenced if I had feedback from the American Bicycle
2:08:36 Association and DPZ. We don't have that. Do you want to table it until we can get that? it would help me to get that so
2:08:43 that I know what you we've hired the best of the best. I I want to hear from
2:08:49 them, you know, and so and this is Victory Point. This is downtown. This is the waterfront. This is the Coast to
2:08:54 Coast Trail. This, you know, I agree with Mr. Bane. They're not just we're not just buying fire trucks here where it's it's a price
2:09:00 issue. I think that for me that's a big deal is to be able to hear from that. And that's where I'm hesitating is I
2:09:05 don't want to impose my will ahead of the the the best of the best. And so if
2:09:12 I'm willing to engage, but that's where I'm at. And and I I can support that. As I say,
2:09:19 it's not I know it's my my vision and of course evidently don't look like your vision for victory point and you would
2:09:24 like to get get uh input from the consultants that we've hired already. I
2:09:30 mean we spent the money on them. So let's let's utilize them utilize them and everything. Again, I say it's not
2:09:37 because the the uh procurement process that I can't support. It's because it's just I just don't think it's the right
2:09:43 thing to be doing. And this I don't think we had any input on this to begin with.
2:09:49 So, so Bill, can we hear your thoughts? I mean, we're not usually this far separated,
2:09:54 but I mean, I'm interested in your thoughts. My understanding what is like there was we we're looking to rent this piece of
2:10:02 uh this whatever property is in Victory Point. So we we gave them that assignment to put it out. They put they
2:10:08 they created a we made a bid request two people bid on it. They evaluated and
2:10:14 picked party A. Now we're going back now and
2:10:19 saying okay we want to change the criteria of what the bid process was.
2:10:24 like now you're saying, "Okay, let's table it until we can get ABA to lean in on it." Is that something that we're
2:10:30 looking at now? And if I'm misremembering, I I sincerely apologize. I just don't remember
2:10:35 directing staff to go get a bid on this. Okay. And that's where I'm Okay. So, where did they So, where did
2:10:41 that come from initially? It it's my understanding that it was initiated by Midpoint Rec that they submitted an
2:10:48 unsolicited proposal for what could be done down there and and that initiated a process. Okay.
2:10:54 But personally, I would like to have seen that come to us so that we could weigh in on it and and at that moment I would
2:11:00 have said, "Yeah, let's let's get the consultants in. Let's figure out what we want to do and then go find the firm that's going
2:11:07 to do it and is that the right location?" And that's what has me hesitating. Let me let me say this. The
2:11:13 original uh I think midpoint went to the city and asked to
2:11:19 put put the rental down there and utilizing the building at one of the
2:11:25 city buildings at at uh Victory Point and that's when that's how the uh um RFP
2:11:31 was um put together and went out and said let's put it out for proposals, okay, and everything. But I don't think
2:11:37 this council or anybody else had any input on it at the time. Okay. and I didn't realize it actually went out.
2:11:43 Okay. Um and we didn't give any input and that's why I say it doesn't meet my vision for there and I probably wouldn't
2:11:49 have suggested doing RFP until we we had a better view on what we want to do down here. Okay. M
2:11:54 Mr. Matthysse, when would we be able to get this in front of DPZ or ABA and
2:12:00 bring it back? What's the most realistic timeline of that? DPZ is going to be in town this week and
2:12:06 I think a I think just this week if I'm not mistaken. next month. So, yeah, that'll be back in next month.
2:12:12 So, we can we can try to get it in front of them. So, if if we is it
2:12:17 are we saying February 10th, it could it could feasibly come back or would we need to say February 24th?
2:12:24 February 10th. So, the the deadline for agenda items would be Well, no, not agenda. I'm talking I
2:12:30 think he's referring to a workshop and uh do a workshop on this or well
2:12:36 I was it sounded like we wanted their input on
2:12:41 what that space is and these proposals and how that fits with what we could do
2:12:47 in that space. if we want to do a workshop with them specific to this or we want it to be a um a conversation
2:12:56 that we have after a report comes in, then that pushes it back even further. So, I I was thinking more of the first
2:13:03 part of that of of having them weigh in on that space and also weigh in on the
2:13:09 the proposals and for us to reconsider then uh uh awarding or not awarding at a
2:13:16 future meeting. If we want to go a different way, that's fine. That's what I was inquiring about. I was just going to bring Nathan up here
2:13:22 to remind me of the dates that they're going to be here just to make sure I they'll their full team will be here
2:13:28 from February 18th to 23rd. Okay. At that point in time, that week, they will be looking at the entirety of the
2:13:35 area there and that's when they would feel comfortable making a recommendation. They wouldn't feel comfortable before
2:13:40 they're dealing with all the other issues and hear from all the council members in our committee. What's the date of that, Nathan? What's
2:13:46 the date of that? February 18th. What's the date on the third What's the date on the third Tuesday in February?
2:13:53 17th. 17th. My I I was thinking we do a workshop on the se if they in town they
2:13:59 come in and the workshop we have a chance to give them some input uh listen to their vision in a workshop before we
2:14:06 bring this to council and have to sit there and and spend two hours in front of a council discussing it. But I think this is the public meetings,
2:14:13 right? They're going to be doing public meetings. They'll do public meetings. They'll do meetings with key stakeholder groups.
2:14:18 They'll be meeting with council. We can do it at some of the public meetings during that time. But that will wrap up on the 23rd, I
2:14:24 believe, of February, which is the closing presentation they'll give. And so they will be hearing from the public
2:14:30 as well during that week, which is another important that's that's important to me to have
2:14:35 public give some feedback as well. That's another reason I would like to see a workshop before it come before council. We can give input, public can
2:14:42 give input in a workshop environment. Okay. Mayor, if I may, I'm sorry.
2:14:48 I was just gonna say if they're in town that week, we could theoretically get them on the March 10th agenda here. If
2:14:54 they're on town and have time to meet with a lot of the public as well as all of council, I think we can theoretically
2:15:00 get it back here on March 10th. Nathan, uh, have they scheduled public meetings yet?
2:15:05 They have a schedule that we're going to talk about, uh, tomorrow. They get in tonight, actually, and uh, they'll be
2:15:12 here on Thursdays to specifically meet. So, so if they doing public meetings all that week and they they doing the
2:15:17 schedule, why can't we take one of those days where they where hopefully the council can be able to attend one of
2:15:23 those public meetings and discuss this in February in February? They would love to do that.
2:15:28 Okay, mayor, if that happens, I just want to talk a little bit about procurement logistics.
2:15:34 Um, nothing that any third party says will change the rankings. Right. Right. Right. Okay. I just want to make sure
2:15:40 that's understood. I mean, if if the council was looking for that, then it
2:15:46 would have to be rejected. That like every bid would have to be rejected and it would have to be rebid with a new committee. And so, I just want that in
2:15:52 mind. So, if the council desires tableabling, wants other input, that's that's fine, but it's not going to
2:15:58 change the rankings. I just, like I say, I I have no problem with what procurement did and the rankings they did and the way it came
2:16:05 out. Um, that's that's the way it is and everything. And I can say um I support
2:16:11 the procurement department and that's what as I said in the last discussion I'm always support them because I think
2:16:17 they do a fantastic job. I can't support because I don't it's not quite fitting my vision uh for what I what I like to
2:16:24 see in victory point victory point what we need to do with victory point um and doing a workshop with them like Miss
2:16:30 Strain say and being able to give a give some input on our vision. Okay.
2:16:37 See, my understanding that what you're telling us now is we can't we can't table it. We have to reject it because
2:16:43 if we table it, then we we have to still accept what the bid award is. We can't
2:16:49 reject what staff says is the award unless we change criteria for the award.
2:16:55 Let's say let's say they change we have to redo it and change the criteria that the applicant has to live in Clermont.
2:17:01 then it would be a clear winner because the other applicant doesn't live in gold.
2:17:08 They both got the local preference points, right? Um, no. So, I want to be very clear,
2:17:13 council member. I'm not saying that you have to change the criteria. I'm not saying that you have to reject if you
2:17:19 what I am saying is just tableabling it and getting other opinions or hearing uh
2:17:25 DPZ or whoever it is saying ah you know the vision of this bidder is better for
2:17:30 what we're doing that's not going to change your rankings okay you're still going to end up unless you reject them
2:17:36 with the same rankings that you'll have to consider and what that means is when you bring it back you if you do choose
2:17:42 to override the committee's rankings you're going to have to base on your evaluation of the criteria yourself, not
2:17:50 based on factors that aren't there. It has to be in what you see in your packet. Thanks.
2:17:55 Yeah, those criteria are still standing. And while we're saying if we end up getting
2:18:00 recommendation of doing something else for victory point, then we can turn we can vote it down. Not not on criteria,
2:18:06 just on the fact that it's not meeting our vision. Okay. So, it sounds like we can factor that
2:18:11 in. It would just have to factor it into points in terms of how we weigh those
2:18:17 categories in their significance. I think that's exactly right. I think it'd be the same thing as hearing from
2:18:22 anyone from the public and saying, "Hey, you make a good point about that criterion. I'm now reweighing it."
2:18:28 Okay. Um, well, I think Nope. Go ahead. I'll
2:18:33 yield. you said a word that just res resonated with me and that this is entering into a partnership and I do
2:18:42 think that is that is relational that's not transactional and um so I I things that jumped out at
2:18:50 me were the Clermont Clermont Clermont and then also um one of the
2:18:55 parties has Main Street's endorsement and this is going to be taking place in the CRA and I think factors like that
2:19:04 not necessarily where they live, but what they're promoting and what messaging they're sending are things and
2:19:10 and I hate to say reevaluate. I hate to say send it out. I don't want to do that. I just think that those things are
2:19:17 important when we're talking about a partnership. I'd like to make a motion to deny the I still have the floor.
2:19:23 Do I do I not still have the floor? Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Um,
2:19:29 so my my motion is to approve the award to Midpoint Wreck for one year.
2:19:41 M Mr. Uh, wow.
2:19:49 If if I'm not if I'm reading right, this was award was supposed to been awarded
2:19:54 to Lux. Yes. Right. So now we here again, we're just going
2:19:59 to forget about what everything and jump over what kind of what kind of legal ramification are we looking at?
2:20:05 Well, I'm going to second for discussion since we're discussing. Thank you. I I
2:20:11 twice now council members have put words in my mouth here uh at this meeting and and they're not my words. Um, I'm making
2:20:18 this motion because I think the criteria that was that points to midpoint wreck
2:20:25 in a higher category mean more in the relation that we are looking to build in
2:20:31 this in this place in this process than we are say the lowest bid or the the the
2:20:39 cheapest bid uh in a in a in a piece of equipment that we're just trying to get the best deal on. So those categories
2:20:46 that midpoint wreck scored higher in I view from my opinion uh based off of
2:20:52 what the attorney is saying that we can hear what others say just like we did here but it has to come back to points
2:20:59 and so with it being a point thing they're already ahead in my mind in that
2:21:05 in those areas based off of these points it's on the sheet that they're ahead in those areas. It would only weigh that
2:21:10 even more. That's why for movement forward purposes I'm making the motion to award it to them.
2:21:17 Now again Mr. W what our legal ramification here because basically Mr.
2:21:22 Bane you was not on the selection committee or award and so basically you trying to award a more point when you
2:21:29 wasn't on the committee. See hey and I that's what I keep saying we getting ourselves in a lot of water here trying
2:21:36 to redo everything that our procurement office have taken here. Okay, done here.
2:21:41 And and let me let me say and I and granted I know that looking at her package, she got a Main Street um
2:21:49 recommendation and all of these things, but the the score is the score. Okay?
2:21:54 And she lived down here in downtown right and win Main Street. She here all the time. So yes, she going to get those
2:22:00 recommendation, but I don't think we want to open ourselves up to liability here is jumping over these things. See,
2:22:08 we just did that. We just did that. I I will um tell the the council a
2:22:14 couple things on your point, Mayor. Um first is of course the safest thing is
2:22:20 to just always accept what the evaluation committee says. But that said, um you may recall that before the
2:22:26 Florida legislature took away your ability, uh plat used to come before the council and council had no discretion
2:22:32 whatsoever on approving those. It's different with procurements. The reason
2:22:37 why those come to you is because you are the final say. You are the final judge.
2:22:43 And the reason why you're able to override when it's based on the criteria is because you put out the criteria.
2:22:50 They bid based on those criteria. And you may disagree with the evaluation committee. You don't necessarily have to
2:22:55 agree with staff. Um, so of all the reasons that I've heard to um not
2:23:01 approve the first ranked bidder, council member Baines is the most legally
2:23:07 protectable and safest for the city. If that makes sense. And thank you. And
2:23:13 I'm not awarding points. I am saying that the C that it's a 9.7 versus 9
2:23:19 over8 9.3 over 8.7 9.3 over 8.7. I'm saying that as the decision maker, as
2:23:25 one of five decision makers, those categories that they ranked higher in already based off the evaluation mean
2:23:33 more to me than whether or not they rent uh an unrelated item somewhere because
2:23:39 that's what I see out there um versus they're not currently in business. I
2:23:45 don't see the equ I don't see where that ranks higher to me in my criterion of looking at these these scores. That's
2:23:52 why uh I think the 34 point the 37.3 means more than 34.4.
2:23:59 That's all I'm doing. I'm not awarding any more points. I don't want that to be said. I don't want that to be construed.
2:24:06 Um that's not what I'm doing. And I'm going to sit here and take as much time as I need to to defend the position that
2:24:13 I'm making because I do not want to be sat up here and and listen to my fellow
2:24:19 council members sit here and say that I'm doing something that I'm not doing. All I'm saying is is that the criteria
2:24:25 that is in the packet, the points that were already awarded mean more to me in those categories than the others. That's
2:24:32 my justification for wanting to award it to the different recipient.
2:24:37 not based off of anything new or that I'm adding in uh bonus points somehow at
2:24:43 the last minute. Um and we have just set at this meeting a precedent for going
2:24:51 against the recommendation of our not only the reviewers in the procurement
2:24:56 department but what our staff even after that already recommended. So,
2:25:02 and we did that based just off a number, not even points.
2:25:08 I actually agree with you 100%. And I I my analysis is the same as yours. I I
2:25:15 actually don't weigh the time and business higher than I do the quality of the application. Um my concern remain,
2:25:23 are we making the right visionary decision for the city? because I fear that we're even having this discussion
2:25:29 because there was there was a public application which we want the public to engage. That's a good thing.
2:25:36 And that initiated a staff action which is a good thing. We want the staff to be responsive to the public. But I keep
2:25:44 coming back to our responsibility is to the overall vision of the city and also
2:25:51 the assets of the city that are not ours. They belong to the citizens.
2:25:58 I I am I'm there with you on the scores. You You have me there. You have my vote
2:26:04 on the scores. Talk me through. We skipped that part of the process
2:26:09 where we we have ABA. We have DPZ and we have skipped that part where we engage
2:26:14 them and say, "What do you think? We want to do this thing. Is this the right
2:26:20 thing to do?" And it feels whimsical in in action. And I don't want to be
2:26:26 whimsical. I want to be intentional and and and exercise wisdom, not whimsical. And so and I I feel that the the the the
2:26:34 scores have a whimsy to them. So I agree with you. I actually think that's extremely wellounded. I just am trying
2:26:40 to get to that point. And if there's I also
2:26:48 feel comfortable saying we've hired the American Bicycle Association on the Coast to Coast Trail.
2:26:54 We want bikes. Okay. I I'm there. You I don't need someone to tell me that we need to do that. So, I'm 100% cool with
2:27:01 bikes. I'm 100% cool. This is near the boat house. It's non-motorized water sports. I served on that board for 10
2:27:07 years. I have the comfort to say I like the non-motorized. I like bikes. I'm there. I'm You can get me there. I
2:27:14 I'll just take that up with ABA when they come in, but how do I how do I get there? Yeah. And I I just think that um the I
2:27:22 don't see I don't see how tableabling helps us because if what the at city
2:27:27 attorney is mentioning in terms of we really need to go back to making it a pointbased decision
2:27:33 um that I I don't see how waiting for that if if
2:27:40 the passion of where we're wanting to go is this is this service and and partnership and experience that's going
2:27:48 to be provided. Uh I I don't see for me how getting hearing them say those same
2:27:53 things is going to change the scores any differently. So I I view it as either we vote to approve one of them or
2:28:02 we just reject it and start all over. I I think the tableabling piece makes it a
2:28:07 little bit more problematic to the mayor's point about are we venturing into potentially more issues. Um, and
2:28:15 that's why I just made the motion at this point to award, but I
2:28:20 that's what I would prefer to do rather than uh award to the recommended.
2:28:25 Can we do an award? I hold on just a second, Miss Miss Strange. I did have a motion. He made
2:28:32 that motion, but I did not get a second on that. I I can't recall. I second for discussion. Okay, go ahead.
2:28:39 I'll second it. See what happens. I thought you did. So, sorry. I did for discussion. or not. You did that was a valid second. Thank
2:28:46 you. Okay. Any other Yeah, we'll do uh we do have a motion uh for item number 11. I think we
2:28:53 on uh to award to midpoint instead of the recommended LS rental. Um any
2:28:59 further discussion and all in favor let it be known by saying I. I.
2:29:04 All oppose. Nay. Nay. And the chair vote nay as well.
2:29:13 motion uh fails uh 3 to2. I move to reject the uh RFQ or RFP.
2:29:20 Second. I have a motion and a second to reject uh reject deny item number 11 uh request
2:29:29 for proposal award. Any further discussion? All in favor let it be known by saying
2:29:34 I. I. All oppose. Nay. Um chair vote I as well. Motion
2:29:41 passes four to one. So basically we're asking uh
2:29:47 procurement to start all over with the process and what hold up on that until after we get some feedback.
2:29:52 Thank you. Okay. Thank you. So we're going to hold up and get so we get feedback from AVA and DPZ.
2:29:58 Correct. And then have new criteria so that then then the bidding process will be done with the new criteria. Correct.
2:30:06 Yeah. So uh next is uh item number 19. Thank you, mayor. I just asked this to
2:30:12 be pulled because in my agenda review comm uh meeting, uh I had conversation
2:30:17 with staff about uh potential should this be policy? Should this be procedure? Um I had kind of hoped this
2:30:25 would get some clarification. Um, but it looks like we're here as a as a procedure versus a policy. And I just
2:30:33 ask uh the the city manager after we have city uh citizen comment uh to
2:30:40 direct us here on whether it's best to go procedure versus policy.
2:30:48 This this is a city attorney directed item. It wasn't, you know, asked for by
2:30:53 staff. And the reason why I elected to do procedure and I I know staff
2:30:59 disagrees with that is that the city council has not created a policy on
2:31:04 this. So because we have in fact you've had an RFP tonight where the local preferences was used and again the main
2:31:11 point of this is to apply the smallest band-aid possible to what I considered an issue without going into too much
2:31:17 detail. And so because it was only used on RFPs, there was a great place for it in the procedures. And I without council
2:31:25 actually making policy, it is going to be on a workshop for you to make policy in February. Honestly, uh it doesn't
2:31:33 matter to me what the council does. It just has to be passed by resolution one way or the other. And um that's that's
2:31:42 why I don't know, mayor, if you want to open
2:31:47 it up or have uh Mr. Suarez also give some comments on that as well or I I I
2:31:54 defer to you. I'm ask Mr. because I want to know uh for the public to understand exactly
2:32:00 what's going on here. But Mr. Freddy, can you explain? Yes. Thank you. So, a policy is normally
2:32:05 approved by the city council. I I usually draft the policy for you guys to approve it or deny it either way. Uh
2:32:11 it's done by resolution. Policy is what you have here tonight is a is a procedure. Normally, the procedures are
2:32:17 approved by the city manager, not the city council. The procedures are more small more detailed. The policy is more
2:32:23 directed. The procedures is based on the policy to make myself clear. So um by
2:32:29 the council approving this the way it is tonight the procedures through a resolution it limits me to wait to
2:32:36 limits me to be able to edit or change anything in the procedures in the future because it's through a resolution.
2:32:42 No. Okay. That is not correct. Huh? That is not correct. So okay
2:32:47 the it doesn't Mr. Suarez is correct that this procedure can be approved by the city manager and traditionally has
2:32:53 been and should be. This part of it has to be approved by council. So any change
2:32:58 to a local preference always has to be approved by council. Right now since 2012, unfortunately the city has issued
2:33:06 procurements with this preference with no legal basis for it. Now just because
2:33:11 the council approves this does not mean at all that any other changes have to be
2:33:16 made by council. the city manager can continue to approve that. Okay. So, uh basically changing pro
2:33:22 procedures which we and the reason let me get this straight. One of the reason we come to this now is because we
2:33:28 started doing this anyway and just to cover ourselves we need to make Yes, mayor.
2:33:35 Okay. All right. Mr. Wall, what is your legal advice about what we've been doing since 2012
2:33:41 relative to the local preference? I I think it's wrong, but I think it's faultless in that um I've I've spoken
2:33:48 with Mr. Suarez about past results and uh I think that it'd be fair to say that we're not aware of a situation where it
2:33:55 would have made a difference, right? And therefore, I don't think that there are legal consequences, but this is to
2:34:01 bring our policies and procedures into line with the law. And I do want and I want to ask the
2:34:07 council to consider a policy in the future. Um I know that some have asked
2:34:12 to do that and it will be on a workshop I think next month. Thank you. Okay. If if I may say one more thing. Yes sir.
2:34:19 I would prefer for this to be a in a policy not in a procedure. That's my preference. That's my recommendation to
2:34:25 to the council policy. Okay. This is a public uh form. Anyone in the public wish to address
2:34:31 this item may come to the microphone to state your name and address and have three minutes. Anyone
2:34:37 in the public who wish to address this item may come to the microphone, state your name and address and have three minutes.
2:34:43 Seeing no one in the house, uh, no one online, we close public comment. Come
2:34:48 back to council. What state council? I have a question. This is probably legal
2:34:53 legal ease. So, it's probably more for Mr. W, but Mr. Suarez, I may ask you to explain. It seems to me that we are
2:35:00 adopting a policy to approve par page 17
2:35:09 paragraph D which comes under 5D
2:35:15 that is a policy and it is my understanding nothing else has changed in the procedures. So are we splitting
2:35:21 hairs or is there a legal significance to the dispute between you two gentlemen between whether this is a policy or a
2:35:26 procedure? There there's no legal significance. I I I respect Mr. Sorz's preference that he
2:35:32 would rather have it in the policies to me because you haven't set a policy. It's just better in the procedures. It's
2:35:37 a distinction without a legal difference so long as you approve this or whatever is like it by resolution. So my question
2:35:45 is if we just take uh page 17 paragraph 5D and we have our resolution that says
2:35:53 we adopt a policy that and you copy and paste it. Does that address Mr. Suarez's
2:36:00 concerns and your concerns? Well, it would address mine. Yeah, it would be legally permissible. And in
2:36:06 fact, that is what the city did back in 2010 pursuant to a temporary ordinance that adopted local preferences. It's
2:36:12 just that it expired in 2012. Is there a reason why we wouldn't do it
2:36:19 that way? You have three different options.
2:36:25 Okay. Why did you choose this way to present it to us? Because you haven't made a policy yet,
2:36:30 and I was hoping that the council would have a workshop to express what it actually wants. I don't think this
2:36:36 necessarily represents the final result of what you all will determine as policy because I don't know all of your
2:36:42 opinion. You may not want a local preference. So, so we have a workshop next month on
2:36:49 procurement policies. I think that's timely and important. Um, so what I'm
2:36:54 hearing you say is what you want to be clear to us and please correct me if I'm misunderstanding. Tonight, we're
2:37:00 adopting a policy to legitimize our actions for the last 13
2:37:07 years. A policy consistent with our actions for the last 13 years,
2:37:12 understanding that in a month we're still going to meet and revisit the procedures and what's important to us as
2:37:18 council members. And I is that accurate? That's what you want to make sure? I mean, it's accurate. I didn't think it
2:37:24 would be controversial, candidly. So, I I just thought it would be a band-aid and and that's but that's accurate.
2:37:31 Well, we have a dispute. So, I'm trying to and yeah, to be candid, I didn't want it
2:37:38 to be here. Uh but I have I think I have an obligation if if it's brought up where we where two staff are are sharing
2:37:46 two different perspectives. I had hoped it would get worked out before it even came to the meeting. Uh but it we we're
2:37:53 here. So, uh, I feel like we need to talk about it because I I've got two staff telling me two different things.
2:37:59 I'm just trying to make the best decision. I'm in the same boat. Um, so I'm going to move to approve item
2:38:07 number 19 as a resolution to revise the language. I trust our council to do it
2:38:14 to take paragraph 5D and incorporate it into the resolution. So, it is a policy
2:38:19 adoption. understanding that we have a workshop next month. Second.
2:38:25 Okay. I have a motion and a second for item number 19, resolution number 2026-00003.
2:38:38 Um here to policy and and we'll change it from uh procurement procedures to uh
2:38:44 procurement policy is okay. I I think it was to make it a resolution,
2:38:49 right? In and of itself, right? So it won't amend our procedures or our policies but it'll be a
2:38:56 resolution right resolution but in the within the language of the of the resolution it's
2:39:02 not procedure it's policy okay make it policy any further discussion have the motion
2:39:07 hear none all in favor let it be known by saying I I all oppose the chair vote I as well
2:39:14 thank you motion passes 5 all right item number 21 not 20 21 22
2:39:22 been dropped. So item number 23 variance requests
2:39:35 was pretty Oh, okay.
2:39:44 Good evening, city council members and guests. Justine Day with Planning and Development Services. Um, addressing
2:39:51 agenda item 23, 693 Skyidge Road Variance request.
2:39:57 This item was tabled at the September 23rd city council meeting to discuss with the applicant options to redesign
2:40:03 the request. The applicant, Peter Lum, is requesting
2:40:09 two variances to the land development code on
2:40:18 installed pavers. The property is located within the R1 single family medium residential medium density
2:40:25 residential zoning district. The first variance request is to allow for a
2:40:31 sideyard setback to be less than the minimum 7 and 1/2 foot requirement. The
2:40:36 variance request would allow an existing PA driveway expansion to encroach into the sideyard set back at zero feet from
2:40:43 the southwest property line. The second request is to allow for an increase to
2:40:48 the impervious surface ratio on the subject parcel to be over the 55% maximum.
2:40:56 After the initial public hearing, staff coordinated an on-site meeting with the
2:41:02 applicant that occurred on October 10th to discuss options of reducing or redesigning the request.
2:41:10 The applicant provided an updated plot plan utilizing a highlywood driveway on the south side of the property. This
2:41:17 proposed design would reduce the impervious surface ratio on the property to an estimate of 58%.
2:41:25 Upon review of the applicant's request, staff is not able to support the reduction to the side setback of zero
2:41:31 feet. Land development code section 125520 states driveways must maintain at
2:41:37 least 5 foot setback from the side lot line. However, the subject parcel has a
2:41:43 recorded 7 and 1/2 ft drainage and utility easement on all side and rear property lines. Thus, the driveway
2:41:49 expansion may negatively impact the abuing property due to storm water runoff.
2:41:55 Uh, section 101246 of the land development code requires a positive
2:42:01 finding on the review criteria in order to grant a variance. Staff has reviewed
2:42:06 the application as submitted and finds the application does not meet a positive finding on three of the five criteria.
2:42:13 Therefore, staff recommends denial of the variance request.
2:42:18 Okay. Thank you, ma'am. Is the applicant present?
2:42:28 Can I get it after city council? Mr. Mayor. Yeah. My name is Peter Lson at 693 Skyidge
2:42:34 Road. Thank you. Yeah. So, I did meet with the
2:42:43 um Mr. John and Justin Justine on my property we just discussed
2:42:49 this as as he saw that there is proper
2:42:55 drainage there's no um water settling at the side that's that's
2:43:03 um that the papers were at.
2:43:08 Now, what they suggested is or what we suggested the last time when we were
2:43:14 here that we could do a uh Hollywood driveway, which I did
2:43:22 supported. Yes, we could do a Hollywood driveway and up in the front I would actually take off more pavers, put grass
2:43:30 and climb back some some type of palm trees. Now, if we go with whatever they were
2:43:36 suggesting, most of my vehicles now will be on the street where we do have a lot
2:43:42 of accidents. And that's what I'm trying to avoid. I do have luxury vehicles that I do not
2:43:48 want to be spending excessive money on to replace mirrors
2:43:55 and do repairs because there were multiple accidents on the streets
2:44:01 that we submitted recently. Excuse me.
2:44:08 Yeah, that's it. Yes. Okay. Thank you. Uh if you don't mind, um I'm going open up to the public
2:44:13 and if we have any other question, we will call you back at a later time. Okay. Thank you. Uh this is a public
2:44:19 hear. Anyone in the public wish to address this item may come to your microphone and state your name and address and have three minutes.
2:44:25 Anyone in the public wish to address this item may come to the microphone, state your name and address and have three minutes.
2:44:31 Seeing no one in public, nobody online, we going to close public comment. Bring it back to council. What say council?
2:44:39 I didn't hear anything about the homeowners association when we were here last time. That was one of my requests
2:44:45 was to get with the homeowners association and come up with a resolution that works for them. Are they
2:44:50 here? I don't see a letter in the packet. When we met with the gentleman at his
2:44:57 home, um we did ask for um any approval letters to be sent to us just to include
2:45:02 in the packet. I did not receive that at that time or until this hearing.
2:45:08 I would like the gentleman Thank you. Um and I would like for the record to know what the status is with your homeowners
2:45:14 association. Okay. They pretty much said they would go with the recommendation of the city. Can you
2:45:20 ma'am ma'am come to the mic phone and can I get your name and address as well? Yeah, my name is Susan Lumston 693
2:45:26 Skyidge Road. Good evening everyone. Um the homeowners association pretty much said that they would go with the
2:45:32 recommendation of the city council. Whatever whatever your recommendation
2:45:38 is, they would pretty much go with whatever is recommended. And that the
2:45:43 gentleman that was here at the last go around, that's what he pretty much said. He was the representative at that time.
2:45:50 Okay. Yeah. Kurt, do we did we receive a letter from the HOA?
2:45:56 No, we did not. Uh, state and FA. Okay.
2:46:02 So, since I have the floor, I'll I'll say my concerns with this uh first and foremost are your the neighbor relations
2:46:08 and and having an agreement with your neighbors. I don't know if I missed it. Was there a support letter from the
2:46:14 neighbors on this one? I didn't notice it in the packet.
2:46:21 So, as you look that up, um, my second concern has to do with aesthetics and the heat from, you know, a full frontal
2:46:29 driveway, basically, which is what we're talking about. Um, obviously, we're working on our code. We don't have one.
2:46:35 We have to get by best we can between now and then. I do understand from the last hearing the issue with the driving
2:46:42 in that community. One of the things that jumped out at me as I was preparing for this hearing is there is a 30-foot
2:46:48 road rightaway. In other words, there is a 60 foot wide road in this neighborhood platted for the city. Um, if there was
2:46:57 actual on street parking, then folks in the neighborhood could park on street.
2:47:03 The problem is because the drive the front yards were built so close and so far into the road, there's only a 17oot
2:47:10 roadway. So, when you put two cars on each side, there isn't even enough room for a vehicle to pass through. So, I
2:47:17 think a couple things jumped out at me trying to problem solve. I'm more inclined to
2:47:22 problem solve if I know I have the HOA support. I will say that. I like the Hollywood Drive. You know, that was my
2:47:28 suggestion. I like that you're willing to do it. That's nice to hear that we're working together. Um, instinctively, I
2:47:35 in the in the problem of parking in this neighborhood, and Mr. Mayor, you spoke to it last time as I thought about
2:47:40 solutions. I could get I could get to Yes. with being able to use the garage,
2:47:47 use the driveway, that's four cars. The Hollywood driveway gives you two cars, and then parking perpendicular in front
2:47:53 of the house, leaving green open space. I also could get to a yes on parking in
2:48:00 the road rightway, as they would be able to do if the road actually existed in
2:48:06 that space. So, those are things that I can get to yes on. I remain hesitant and
2:48:12 would say if I'm going to have a yes tonight to anything that's not a code enforcement violation, it's going to be
2:48:18 subject to a letter from the HOA that says they approve what we come up with in writing. I want to see that from the
2:48:24 HOA personally. That's where I'm at. So, that's where I'm at. That's my that's my
2:48:30 time. So, what you're saying is the the the rules that we have as far as setbacks
2:48:35 don't apply if an HOA approves it. No, that's not what I'm saying. What I'm
2:48:41 mindful of is at the last hearing, I was compelled with the statements of my
2:48:47 fellow council members and the public that there's a legitimate problem in this community with the street,
2:48:52 with the size of the street, the width of the street, and the the parking availability with the size of the
2:48:57 houses. You know, we approved at some point in time, I say we, you know, 30 years ago, the council approved
2:49:04 sixbedroom houses, five-bedroom houses, sevenbedroom houses with enough parking for two cars, and it's not a walkable
2:49:10 community. So, I think that there was perhaps some foresight that was absent in the approval of the design of the
2:49:17 neighborhood. And so, what I don't want to do is punish the residents of the neighborhood. I would like to come up
2:49:23 with a ongoing solution for the neighborhood that other members of the neighborhood can enjoy. I think that's
2:49:29 part of the process we're going through with DPZ. So, those are just things doing my best to be creative up here
2:49:36 that I could get to yes on. Again, they're all going to be subject to is this what the community wants, right?
2:49:42 And what I heard last time was there's a legitimate need. So, those are just the thoughts in my head. And
2:49:49 I mean I I would you know I could agree with you at that point but then if we open up a precedent that you can do
2:49:56 driveways across the whole then the next neighbor will say well I'm going to do that too and I'm going to rent my five
2:50:01 bedrooms out and get five or six cars. We should assume that's going to happen. What would that you know what would that look like then? I mean isn't it our
2:50:08 responsibility and the and planning and zoning to to create a criteria a form
2:50:14 base that you know makes it aesthetic? you know, we don't want to make it look like it's part of Manhattan where it's
2:50:20 all cement, no, there's no dirt or grass or anything anymore. Understanding that, you know, that this like when you buy a
2:50:28 house, you when you first buy a house, you're going to look at the road. If there's not enough room to park in the
2:50:33 road, isn't that then going to be a criteria that you're going to use in your mind? Maybe I shouldn't buy here,
2:50:39 maybe I should buy in an area, especially if I have six cars that I'm parking where I need, you know, not an
2:50:45 afterthought. Okay, I buy the house and now I I I fill the front because I have six cars. And I can understand your
2:50:51 position in that too. But I don't know if if we can if we do this, are we opening up a can of worms where our
2:50:59 setback rules don't really apply if you have multiple cars or if you can't park in the street?
2:51:05 Well, a lot of our neighborhoods, the streets are narrow. So that that I mean so that ship is sailed on that one. Um,
2:51:12 so I don't think it's fair, like Miss Allison said, to punish them because
2:51:17 they bought in a neighborhood and at the time they didn't need all of that space.
2:51:23 And then life happens. People grow up, you have five, six bedrooms and they
2:51:28 don't have parking adequately. So we so we need to help them and not hurt them because they did not build the
2:51:34 community. They just bought in the community. You're absolutely right. But go back to
2:51:40 what Mr. Peterson was saying. You're setting precedent here and that's that's
2:51:46 the thing that scares me is the fact that now you going to have all all the houses in the neighborhood doing the
2:51:52 same thing. Right. Granted, it's the design. It goes back to the design of the neighborhood, which
2:51:57 is one of the reasons I decided to run for mayor because I didn't like some of the design in some of these neighborhoods when I was coming out here
2:52:03 because we was having these problems. Remember, I came from address management out of the post office. So, I was
2:52:09 involved with a lot of these subdivisions and everything. And when I'm going in the subdivision, I see these big old houses. You cut down.
2:52:15 Well, first of all, you cut down the lot sizes, right? And then you put these oversized houses on a smaller lot than the city ordinance
2:52:21 call for. And then you want to adjust the u setbacks and I'm saying, okay, you
2:52:26 build, for example, you build a five bedroomedroom house. Yeah. And only allow for two cars.
2:52:32 Yeah. That's that's to me that doesn't make sense. Okay. Um especially nowadays because you
2:52:38 know just about everybody in the house you got five people in the house everybody has a car you know adult
2:52:43 so that's my concern uh Mr. Peterson to go back to one of your questions for us. HOA, we cannot override HOA. HOA uh
2:52:50 rules take precedent over us. Okay. So So should we get HOA here before we make decisions to to have them to weigh
2:52:57 in and table it yet again because again they have an issue. I don't think it's
2:53:03 fair to them as residents to be punished because of how the neighbor is set up.
2:53:10 And I personally wouldn't want cuz I have an expensive vehicle too. I wouldn't want mine parked on the street and I know it gets hit on a continuous
2:53:16 basis. That's ridiculous, right? So, we we we've got to come up with a solution to help our residents here.
2:53:23 We we need to come up with a solution to help our resident. I understand they went back after the last meeting, you went back and you reduced some of the uh
2:53:30 took out some of the uh concrete. I understand. And it was my understanding that you reduced
2:53:36 it went from what uh 67%. 4% you reduced it down four uh
2:53:41 they reduced it by 4%. They reduced 4%. But we still 3% over the uh 55%.
2:53:48 So we need them reduce it more estimated if we can get them that me if they can get it go back and figure out a way to
2:53:54 get it down uh to that 55% or below. I have no problem with it. Okay.
2:53:59 Can staff help them with that? Because again I don't think it's fair to punish them. No. Well, well, they did some reduction
2:54:06 the LA after the last time I was told anyway from 60 something down, they reduced by 4%. But it's still 3% over
2:54:13 the max of 55%. And that's where I thought perpendicular
2:54:18 parking if you come into the driveway and you park perpendicular, you don't need the full front to be of
2:54:25 pavers. You can make it partial and now you've at least got some green. Yeah. Well,
2:54:31 I mean that's you could actually remove the pavers, put gravel and then park on the gravel. So then you got to solve the drainage
2:54:37 problem. That was that was going to be my next question. Um Kirk, if they took out a lot of that and
2:54:44 put gravel because I see some homes right around here now that just got the whole front yard gravel,
2:54:49 but that's perfect surface. So that would eliminate some of the problem, right? Would would that help?
2:54:56 Potentially. There's a potentially. Reason I say potentially is it depends. There's there could be
2:55:02 engineering on under the gravel um what kind of subbase because that's what engineering is going to look at to see
2:55:08 if it's going to shed water. Okay, that is a key issue here is how much water is going to shed off of that
2:55:15 property. There's also materials that you can put on grass that have they're almost like honeycomb and you put them
2:55:22 on the grass and they reinforce for the drive the car so you can park your car but you still have complete permeability
2:55:28 and you still have grass and that cools the air stabilized surfaces that look like grass. But if gravel is is probably
2:55:35 a substance, right? So they put it in that reduce
2:55:40 in general. Yes, they can design thick enough, right? It can't be just a I I don't think I don't think I would
2:55:47 support gravel though. And the reasons why is the heat and the the appearance
2:55:53 of it. Um if I'm being asked to have some design standards on this. I'm not real
2:55:58 excited about gravel in a a residential neighborhood. It's not consistent, I think, with the current neighborhood. I
2:56:05 think the folks that are applying, they want to do something nice and beautiful. That's why they did the pavers. And I I think those are two they're they're both
2:56:12 they go both work, but I'm not sure that it's I don't know that I would want to get there. Um
2:56:18 I I if they only need to get 3% lower and they get 3% lower, candidly, it
2:56:23 doesn't matter to me how they get there. But I'm just I was just saying gravel because I I noticed lately we it's a lot
2:56:31 of homes starting to appear around here with a lot of gravel in the front yards. Oh. And none of them have been brought
2:56:37 to as far as I know the code enforcement. So Oh yeah. And everything. That's why and I'm looking to re find
2:56:44 trying to find a way that you can reduce it, get down to to the 55% and still have park book call. But well, if if it's
2:56:52 council's direction, we can work with the applicant to try to get them down to that 53 55% and we can either bring it back
2:56:59 to you or if it's if it's your discretion, you can approve it as is with that condition that we get them down under that 55% if
2:57:05 that's you want to go. If they can do that, get them down to 55% and get a letter from the HOA.
2:57:11 Yes. HOA saying they okay with it. I I I have no problem with I have no problem either. But are we
2:57:18 prepared to say if they come back and they're not at 55% and they don't have an HOA letter that at that point they've
2:57:23 lost the favor of this council because that's where I'm at at that point. Yes. But there are two variance requests here
2:57:30 in this item and we're only talking about one right now. They still have the issue of this goes
2:57:37 to a zero foot. Right. That's what we're saying to bring initially. I think we said to bring it
2:57:42 to 7.5 on each side. I I didn't hear the 7.5. I only heard about the 55. So that's why I want to
2:57:47 make sure are we are we asking them last time that that they were going to bring it to 7.5 on each side for
2:57:52 drainage. So essentially we're saying we don't want to issue a variance is what we're
2:57:58 saying. Right. I'm okay with the Hollywood drive so long as the neighbor is okay with it because the entity that's likely to be
2:58:04 affected neighbor. But as long as they're at 55 or under and at 7.5
2:58:10 or more, right? I don't know if the Hollywood drive puts them at 75. Bas basically the 7.5 7.5
2:58:17 down to zero lot line that's the side setback. So if you look at where's the picture if they if they got
2:58:24 rid of that 7.5 setback I'm quite sure they uh um 7.5
2:58:30 pavers on the side I think it is they would probably be down to 55. And if I can make a quick clarification
2:58:36 driveways and parking areas can go up to 5t to the setback. It's structures that have to be seven and 1/2 ft. So they can
2:58:42 actually go up to five feet. So this is and that's correct. This should be this should be five instead of 7.5. And
2:58:48 7.5 is a setback. Five. The driveways and in the pavers can go up to 5t. They can go up driveway. So removing 2
2:58:55 feet 2 and 1/2 ft will definitely get them under that impervious surface. And there should be no need for variance if they
2:59:02 could bring it. Okay. Yeah. So they just that's that's what I was going to that's what I was trying to ask is essentially if we're if our if
2:59:08 what we really want them to do is is eliminate or or
2:59:14 bring in the side driveways two and a half two and a half feet on
2:59:19 the right side the one the one on the right side two and a half ft there's no variance needed we don't even sure that would eliminate
2:59:25 or bring them back to the 55 correct could you could you all do that would
2:59:31 you be okay with that Mr. MSON. Did you understand
2:59:40 that was why I suggested the Hollywood drive because it should achieve that for them
2:59:46 two strips instead of a full drive. Okay. Yeah. Well, and I
2:59:51 I think it I mean it probably if all this concrete or or brick block,
2:59:58 whatever whatever it is, if it if it meets code, I think it's warrants a conversation of like is this what we
3:00:03 want all of our front yards to look like? Because it really does have an effect more than just this neighborhood in terms of the heat that it's going to
3:00:09 produce, the water runoff it's going to produce. That's going to affect the entire city eventually if every neighborhood looks
3:00:15 like this. So, I mean, I know we can't punish them to fix our code. So I I do want us to work with them, but I think
3:00:20 it does warrant some additional conversation about is this really what we want every front yard to look like. I don't think we're punishing them to
3:00:26 fix our codes. Our codes are there. Easier for it. It behooves residents to store understanding they need to come to
3:00:32 the city and and understand what the codes are before they do things. Okay. I mean we we make the code for everyone.
3:00:40 Yes. The code is out. So the code is so that you have you know beauty inhibity.
3:00:45 Yeah. So we what we have is is a lot of residents just making these changes
3:00:51 without coming to the city. Two and a half feet.
3:00:57 Okay. Where are we? Uh can we have do we want to table this?
3:01:03 Are we able to do that? Give council uh staff a chance to work with them. Well, I think to Mr. Bane's point, if
3:01:09 they come 2 and 1/2 ft off and they're 5t off the property line and they're under the 55 ft or 55%, there's no
3:01:15 variance. So all we're doing is denying their application for a variance and giving them 30 days to come into
3:01:21 compliance. Yes. Right. I mean at that point because if we're saying
3:01:26 that's our tolerance level and they're that close to it is is that enough time 30 days because I
3:01:32 know they don't have to even come back to us if they 90 days. Can we do 90 days? Give them if they come back to us then you know
3:01:38 then we'll actually if we deny it and go that route it will have to go to code enforcement
3:01:44 right. So just to be clear, the issue is the right hand side here, right?
3:01:50 The pavers go up to the property line. If they were able to bring it back five feet, take away this area right here,
3:01:57 cut away two and a half gravel. Two and a half. Take away two and 1/2 ft of the pavers.
3:02:02 Make it 5T instead of 7 and 1/2 ft. Yeah. Is what you're saying? They're going to the property line now.
3:02:08 Uhhuh. They need to come back five feet off of the propert. They need to come back five feet off the property line. So that that pavers on
3:02:14 the side of their home will only be two and a half ft. No, it's five feet. No, about five feet. Looks like there's
3:02:21 a total of I'm sorry. There's a hill of 13 and 12 ft here right now. Okay. So remove five feet of that,
3:02:28 right? And they'll still they remove five feet. They'll still be pretty much in in cold.
3:02:34 Briefly talking to the applicant. They do have a little concern. We don't regulate if they park on the grass, but
3:02:40 they were a little concerned that they might have part of the car on the pavers and part of the car on the grass.
3:02:46 Couldn't they fill that spot in with with gravel? So, they're parking on gravel and grass.
3:02:52 That is possible. Gravel and and pavers. Not pavers.
3:02:58 Pavers definitely shed wire. It's just how they do the gravel if they decide to do it. Yes. you know,
3:03:04 I think they're trying to to solve their problem without having to, you know, rip it all out and so on.
3:03:09 The applicant is also asking about artificial turf. It's the same issue. It's when you put that base down.
3:03:15 Typically, artificial turf also does shed water, which is same as pavers. Their other option would be to put a
3:03:21 French drain down and then cover it with gravel. So then it drains. I thought they had a French drain, but I mean that's that's going to be a
3:03:27 costly process. I don't believe this one has a drain. They didn't have a French drain in this. Okay. I think we still are talking about
3:03:32 materials here and and if they do the the reinforced earth material on the
3:03:37 side of the house or in the front of the house, we still can have grass. We still have the the coolness of the grass and
3:03:45 you've got permeability. I think the question is, are we willing to tolerate
3:03:50 a new material because they can achieve the purpose they're trying to achieve with a different material.
3:03:57 So Kirk, let me let me let me get this straight now. We on the side there. If we take it down to 7 and 1/2 ft, five
3:04:04 take off 5 ft of that all the way to the street, we'll probably be under the 55%.
3:04:10 So all the all the concrete in the front of the house and everything wouldn't matter. That's correct. Okay. By rough
3:04:16 calculation, that would take off at least three 4% because they they still be under the 55%
3:04:22 limit. Correct. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay, I'd like to make a motion to
3:04:28 deny this variance request.
3:04:33 I have a motion to Where are we? Item number 23 deny
3:04:38 variance request. Is there a second? Second.
3:04:45 Okay. Have a motion and a second to deny item
3:04:51 number 23, Verance request for 693 Sky Ridge Road. Any further discussion?
3:04:59 Mr. Peterson, did you want to put some stipulation on there that they they go back? No, because if they comply, then they're
3:05:04 not it's not in once they comply, they comply. Yeah, they Well, yeah, at that at this
3:05:10 point, if we deny and they go back and comply, if they don't comply, it goes the code enforcement board at that
3:05:16 point. So, so any further discussions? What did we want to put? I think there
3:05:21 was some discussion. Council members Myers, you talked about a timeline like 90 days Would
3:05:26 the deny is denied? Would we could we include in the motion that they would have 90 days to
3:05:32 come in compliance? No, because Yeah. Well, you you can give direction to staff to amend the notice of
3:05:39 violation. Okay. To give a certain amount of time. Okay. Yes.
3:05:45 Okay. So I'm I'm amending the motion to deny with the staff giving them 90 days
3:05:51 to to uh remedy the the fall that's there whereby giving us like five foot
3:05:57 set back then on that side and either covering a grass or gravel and parking your cars wherever but you know at least
3:06:04 eliminating that. Okay. Okay. Thank you. And I I still second. Yes ma'am. Did you you had a question
3:06:10 ma'am? Yeah. We would like to leave here knowing exactly what we have to do to
3:06:18 comply, you know, so we have a solid plan of action. And when you leave here tonight, when
3:06:23 you leave here tonight, ma'am, I think we we're going to give you solid direction on what you need to do. We had the contractor come out and, you
3:06:31 know, give us some different scenarios on how we can maybe try to fix this. So,
3:06:38 one of the um suggestions that he had was if um artificial turf,
3:06:47 a lot of commercial places use artificial turf, a lot of residences use
3:06:52 artificial turf. My question is, is artificial turf an option? For me, artificial turf would not be an
3:06:59 option. Um, I'm an advocate for the new yard pattern book which focuses on
3:07:05 native landscape materials. It's one of the things that the city adopted. It's very important to me that we have
3:07:12 materials that are good for our community, for our environment. Artificial turf is known for the toxins
3:07:17 that it produces. It's not something that I would support. Not saying that the other council members won't support it, but it's not a material that I'm
3:07:24 going to get behind as as happy about. As a city, we're going in a direction of
3:07:29 working on our code and and how things are built so that they're beautiful and they're comfortable. And we want I I
3:07:36 think what you're seeing here is a group of people who want to see you being able to enjoy your property, right?
3:07:41 The challenge that we have is when you came last time, this is exactly
3:07:46 what your application looked like. Mhm. What we asked you to come back with was something that you could live with, that
3:07:52 your neighbors could live with, but you didn't. You came back with the same application that you made last time. And
3:08:00 we did make attempts to have conversation, but they told us that we
3:08:05 would be subject to another meeting before final decision was made
3:08:11 before we could do anything. We had the contractor aligned up and he was texting
3:08:16 me us continuously saying, you know, what could I do to rectify the situation
3:08:21 for you guys? But we said we had to wait until we had this meeting with the city council, this meeting before we could
3:08:28 move forward. So, we didn't want to do anything that would, you know, yeah,
3:08:34 go against the grain of what you guys were deciding for us and put us in further expense because, of course, as
3:08:40 we explained the last go around, we took out a loan to try to rectify the
3:08:45 situation and here we are again, we're having added expense to take out the
3:08:51 pavers that we paid to put in. So, now we're trying to rectify the situation.
3:08:56 So, we didn't want to do something and have to undo it again, which I hence the reason.
3:09:02 And what I'm looking for is a proposal from you to us on what you can do to
3:09:09 bring it into compliance. That's what I'm looking for. I'm seeing the Hollywood Drive, but I'm not seeing the
3:09:15 part the problem with the Hollywood Drive is it has the side of your property putting pavers close to your
3:09:20 neighbor. And the reason why the five- foot setback exists is because it's protecting your neighbor's property. And
3:09:27 if we don't know that your neighbor is saying, "Hey, we're cool with that. We're we're going to work it out. We're
3:09:32 I I as I sit up here as the decision maker, I can't I can't impose your will
3:09:39 on your neighbor. I I can't do that. I'm I'm frustrated by this process. I I wish
3:09:46 that I I feel like there's a solution that's so close and I hate to send you away with a no, but I don't have a
3:09:52 solution here and and I'm really is there
3:09:58 I'm not the person to come up with a solution. I think we pretty much uh resolved the fact that if they take out
3:10:05 the on the side here take down take out 5T of papers you saw 5 ft of pavers they will be within code
3:10:11 and everything ordinance and everything along the side of the house where you got 13 and 1/2 ft reduce that down by
3:10:16 five feet and you should you shouldn't have any problem and and I just want to suggest that if
3:10:22 if the council makes that decision it really just shifts to working between the applicant and code enforcement on
3:10:28 what the right solution is and if artificial turf actually satisfied the code. I don't think it does. It doesn't.
3:10:34 Um but that's going to be a discussion that has to be between um the applicant and staff after you make your decision.
3:10:41 I think what you're looking for is guidance here. Is that correct? Yeah. What I'm hearing guidance. So guidance would be that gentleman
3:10:46 behind you. He'll tell you exactly what you have to do to be in compliance. Yeah. Because even taking the 5t off the
3:10:52 of the side on the right hand side when you park the vehicle, it's tilting. Well, you could fill it with gravel or
3:10:58 other materials that could make it a level with the pavers. Yes. You know, you're whoever's doing your construction
3:11:04 is is well aware of that. Secondly, the person that did the pavers at the beginning knew he wasn't in compliance
3:11:10 if he was any kind of reputable contractor building it right to your property line. So, he's at fault. So, he
3:11:17 shouldn't really charge you to remedy a situation that he produced. Well, if if I come out to do a job for
3:11:24 you and you tell me that's what you want, I'm going to give you what you want. Of course, he should have he should have again, it goes back to as I
3:11:30 said before, it goes down back to the fight before you people uh residents start doing all these improvements, they
3:11:36 need to check with the city and see what the ordinance says. Okay. But right now,
3:11:41 uh we I'm hearing we going to deny it, but if you work with city and uh the gentleman behind you, Mr. Kirk, and to
3:11:48 get five feet off there, I think you're going to be in compliance and won't have no need to come back. Okay. So I just want to confirm gravel
3:11:54 is an option in lie of the grass. Well to me to me is is this option
3:12:01 but make sure you get your general I've got to ask the city council not to
3:12:07 get ahead of staff on this and just let staff again get with staff and let staff
3:12:12 give your recommendation because he did say earlier depend upon how the gravel is put in. So let let work with them.
3:12:18 Yeah. Mayor council staff staff will work with the applicant. There are options out there that are considered
3:12:24 per or there's pvious pavers. There's there's different options that we can come up with to work with the
3:12:30 outcome. Yep. All right. Thanks. Okay. I have a motion and a second for denial of u item number 23. Any further
3:12:37 discussion? No. Hearing none. All in favor let it be known by saying I. I. All oppose and chair vote as well. So,
3:12:44 ma'am, sir, get with please get with Kirk and uh work with them and they'll u
3:12:51 I think we put in there 90 90 days uh within the next 3 months or so figure out what we're going to do. And of
3:12:57 course, after that, I think if it's not meeting standard, it go to co code enforcement, I think. But thank you. And
3:13:05 other thing, please, I would also uh suggest that you get with your hoha.
3:13:12 Okay. Um, item number 24, ordinance number
3:13:18 2026-00001, final accessory dwelling unit.
3:13:24 An ordinance of the city of Clermont, Lake County, Florida, amending code of ordinances, chapter 2, administration,
3:13:31 article 6, financial matters, division 2, impact fees, amending section 2-264,
3:13:39 impact fee schedule, providing for a new impact fee schedule. Adjusting and reducing impact fees for accessory
3:13:46 dwelling units. Repealing all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with
3:13:52 this ordinance to the extent of such conflict. Providing for conflict, severability, cotification, the
3:13:58 administrative correction of scrivener's error, publication, and an effective date.
3:14:04 Thank you. So, I'll take this one. Mayor taking Okay. Yes. Mayor and council member, as you recall, in October 14th at the regular
3:14:11 council meeting, we had a a resident come in and speak out about the high price of our impact fees for ADUs. Um,
3:14:17 at that point, council asked us to go back and take a look at it. Um, so these
3:14:23 impact fees include parks, recreation, police, fire, water, and sewer. At that meeting, council directed staff to go
3:14:30 back and look at options that would make for more opportunities for workforce
3:14:35 housing or in-law suites or things like that. So staff is requesting that council adopt this ordinance 2026001
3:14:42 amending our our fee schedule. What they would ultimately do is reduce the the
3:14:48 accessory dwelling unit rate to 25% of the single family rate.
3:14:53 And so staff is recommending approval of that. I'm happy to answer any questions. Okay. Thank you. This is a public
3:14:59 hearing. Anyone in the public wish to address this item may come to the microphone and state your name and address and have three minutes. Anyone
3:15:05 in the public wish to address this item may come to the microphone, state your name and address and have three minutes.
3:15:10 See, no one in the house, anyone online, no one online, we close public comment, bring it back to council with state
3:15:16 council. Move to approve ordinance number 2026-00001.
3:15:22 Second. I have a motion and second to approve ordinance number 2026-00001.
3:15:29 Any further discussion? Hearing none.
3:15:35 Roll call. Council member Strange I. Council member Bane
3:15:41 I. Council member Myers I. Council member Peterson I. And chair vote I as well. Motion passes
3:15:48 50. Item number can I move for a 10-minute recess please? second. Sure.
3:15:55 Oh man, took the words literally out of my mouth.
3:25:26 Yeah. All right. Item number uh 25, Baron
3:25:34 request for U 45 11 L Gate. Uh Kirk, can I ask you
3:25:41 something? Um both of these are the same. These next two are the same thing.
3:25:47 So the the next two items are uh neighboring properties, right? Uh but they were submitted simultaneously. So
3:25:54 we we will present them separately and they'll be voted separately even though they may sound very identical.
3:25:59 Can we Well, that's that would be my question, Mr. W. Since they basically the same thing, can we be presented both
3:26:04 of them at the same time and then we vote on them separate? Uh you could choose to do that from an
3:26:10 evidentiary perspective. If there's an appeal, it makes it a little more difficult for us. Well, in that case,
3:26:15 I'm not trying to make it more difficult. Well, you could if you wanted, but well, I was just trying to see if we can say by hearing hearing the case both of
3:26:22 them, we act upon them separate. But if you if it's going to create legal ramifications, if you like, when I do the second item,
3:26:28 I can shorten that staff report to just what the changes are. How about that? Yeah. Yeah, I'll do that.
3:26:35 All right. Go ahead. All right. Well, like I uh I said it, those uh two items are going to be
3:26:41 presented separately. Uh but agenda item 25 uh is for 45 4511 Lionsgate Avenue.
3:26:48 The applicant Adam Levy is requesting a variance to the land development code located at 4511 Lionsgate. This property
3:26:56 is within the Hartwood Landing subdivision and is designated as a planned unit of de development zoning
3:27:03 district by ordinance number 2019. The variance request is to allow for a
3:27:09 sideyard setback to be less than the minimum five five feet required by the ordinance. This would allow for an
3:27:15 existing PA walkway to remain on the property encroaching into the sideyard setback at 0 feet from the south
3:27:22 property line. The proposed PA walkway is estimated to be 240 square ft and an
3:27:28 increase the property's impervious surface ratio to the maximum allowed. The variance has been requested as a
3:27:35 result of a pending code enforcement case for install pavers. The applicant
3:27:40 is has indicated that the area was flooding prior to the pavers uh being installed on the property. The lot
3:27:48 layout indicates a storm water flow from the back to the front of the property. After two attempts of requesting the
3:27:54 builder to fix the drainage drainage issue and nothing being resolved, the applicant proceeded to have a French
3:27:59 drain and pavers installed on the property. The work included the gutters being positioned in a way to redirect
3:28:06 the water off the property towards the road in order for the development's main
3:28:11 storm water drainage to catch the excess runoff. The applicant has also mentioned
3:28:16 a substantial hardship and claims that that the work was necessary due to the
3:28:22 property flooding within the walkways towards the back of the property.
3:28:27 Upon review of the applicant's request, staff is unable to support the reduction to the sideyard setback of 0 feet. Land
3:28:34 Development Code section 125-484 specifies that PUDS are specifically
3:28:40 approved after throughout thorough evaluation of the project's concept plan by the city council. Ordinance number
3:28:47 2019-09 was approved for minimum sideyard sideyard setback of 5T from the
3:28:54 side lot lines to accommodate a minimum 5-ft drainage and utility easement.
3:29:00 Enclosing this easement may negatively impact the abuing properties due to an increased storm water runoff and
3:29:06 negatively impact the entire subdivision's capacity for conveyance and containment of storm water as a
3:29:12 whole. Section 101-246 of the land development code requires a positive finding on the review criteria
3:29:19 in order to grant a variance. Staff has reviewed the application as submitted and finds application does not meet a
3:29:25 finding on three of the five criteria. Therefore, staff recommends denial on the variance request. And that concludes
3:29:31 tax report. Thank you. Is the applicant present?
3:29:40 Good evening, Mayor Council. Um my name's Adam Levy. I'm at 4511 Lionsgate
3:29:46 Avenue. Okay. Um, this is a little bit different request and obviously we had
3:29:52 the flooding issue there, but we also have a I have a medical issue and I've got a letter from my doctor stating that
3:29:59 it need that something need to be done to where I could at least walk and maintain my home if that makes sense.
3:30:05 So, I'll kind of read you the conditions not self-created nor is it based on a convenience or aesthetics even though it
3:30:11 looks really good by the way. Um, it's the safety driven accommodation necessary for reasonable use for to
3:30:18 maintain uh for maintenance of my property and so that my wife does not have to take the garbage cans around the
3:30:24 side which is quite embarrassing. So, I wanted to kind of be able to do that is
3:30:29 the kind of the man of the house there. Um, again, additionally, my neighbor and
3:30:35 this is going to sound very familiar Andrew Palmer and his wife Joan moved in next to me. This was an ongoing problem
3:30:42 that I had since the developer had the developer try to come out and fix the fix the problem and I've got pictures of
3:30:48 that. Um was unable and Andrew and his wife came all the way from from England
3:30:54 just to find another like me. So he's got knee issues. Um so we kind of
3:30:59 got together. We're just talking and then the next thing you know we're we're you know putting an actual drain in
3:31:05 fixing the issue and then putting the pavers for both of us. So, it really worked out well. I hope that you can
3:31:12 consider this variance for us. Thank you. Thank you. This is a public hearing.
3:31:18 Anyone in the public that wish to address this item may come to the microphone and state your name and address and have three minutes.
3:31:27 Hello. Oh my goodness, I am so nervous. Um, my name's Joan Palmer. I'm Adam's
3:31:33 neighbor. I'm unfortunate that I have a disabled neighbor and a disabled husband. So, you can see that I'm in the
3:31:39 middle of two men with some This is to the ladies, I'm afraid. Two men that do have uh issues.
3:31:44 Uh ma'am, excuse me. You at You at 14 I mean 4515.
3:31:50 Uh 4515, correct? Okay. Yeah. No, I was just saying so basically
3:31:56 I'm here now to support Adam's variant request. We coordinated this project
3:32:02 together due to shared medical problems and a fall risk that we had noticed had
3:32:07 happened. My husband did actually fall at one point. The pavers are the only safe solution for that area. Also with
3:32:16 the problem that we've Adam had had previously and that we had encountered since we've moved to the property with
3:32:21 the flooding. Um what what Adam's done does not affect anything with our
3:32:28 property at all. In fact, it's made it much much better for both us for for my
3:32:34 husband to move up and down the path, but also for the drainage problem that was there. French, as far as I'm aware
3:32:40 from Adam and my husband, French drainage was put in, which I think is in your package, all the information about
3:32:46 that. And it, to be honest with you, it does make the property look that much better as well. Thank you.
3:32:52 Thank you. This is a public hearing. Anyone in the public wish to address this item may say
3:32:57 step to the microphone and state your name and address and have three minutes.
3:33:02 Okay. Good evening, city council Vincent Neim, Regency Hills. Uh I love that
3:33:08 accent. I'm sorry. It brightens up everything. But to be totally honest with you, this is an
3:33:16 ongoing problem with the county. Okay. All right. We I'm a firm believer like
3:33:22 the mayor 65 foot uh lot lines 75 then went down 65. Okay, you realize I was
3:33:31 against this project being built but there was nothing I could do because we annexed it because we want to taxes. You
3:33:37 got 10 ft from my house to my property line is 10 feet. So could you imagine
3:33:43 that sharing with a neighbor? Okay. Now the best part when it rains oh it floods. Okay. Yeah. But no it really
3:33:49 floods. I I know that area cuz I live in that area. Okay. So, the best part is the houses
3:33:55 are so close it doesn't get to dry up. It's not Florida sand. The water puddle just stays there.
3:34:00 Yeah. They did a fence drain. They got HOA permission. I read the whole packet. Okay. They're doing everything possible.
3:34:08 They finally got it. And that's why they don't understand because the water is draining out to the driveway which goes
3:34:13 into the street which goes into the sewer which goes into the retention pond. So, you're still getting the
3:34:19 reclaimed water going back. So, we're not they're not chinching the the water
3:34:24 that was supposed to be saving. Let me just calm down because this is this is important because
3:34:31 I sit there all the time and I see how you guys at the kindness of your heart
3:34:38 and I hate to use this for example, but to make a sign bigger
3:34:43 when the rules are saying there supposed to be a certain square footage to grant the variance for that. I mean, we're
3:34:50 talking about this person's house. When they inspected that neighborhood, what I was against, and I'll, if you don't know
3:34:57 this, I'll educate you even more. They only inspect one house. That's it. And then everybody else gets
3:35:04 passed. I looked into this already cuz I was so against this neighborhood going
3:35:10 in, but it's in. So now we're neighbors. Okay. And it's the developers. They're
3:35:15 putting a size 13, as Lee Pervvis said, into a size six.
3:35:21 40 foot 40 foot lots, 65 foot lots, 50. Help me, your honor.
3:35:27 You know that they wanted 30 at one time. And how they got away with it, it was
3:35:32 like a piece of pizza, a pie, a triangle. It's ridiculous. So, these people are stuck with this problem.
3:35:38 Please find it in your heart. That's all I'm saying. And thank you for your time.
3:35:44 Thank you. This is a public hearing. Anyone in the public wish to address this item may come to the microphone and state your name and address and have
3:35:51 three minutes. Anyone in the public wish to address this item may come to the microphone,
3:35:56 state your name and address and have three minutes. Mayor, the uh the applicant did want to
3:36:02 address one more thing, but I just wanted to check with you. Just Okay, just a second. Let me let me finish with public comment. Uh no one in
3:36:10 in in the house or anything. Okay, I'll close public comment. Yes, sir. Thanks, sir. I wanted to present a
3:36:17 couple pictures Nick was actually able to help me with. Keep in mind I think they explained to
3:36:22 you if you put the pictures up there we got to keep Yes, sir. Okay. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Um also I wanted to make sure then I
3:36:28 didn't mention that HOA did approve us upon you which I believe you have in your packet and if you need any any
3:36:35 questions or any of the doctor notes from me or from Andrew I'm more than happy to provide those to you. This is
3:36:42 picture one kind of showing that this is after the second time that they came to
3:36:47 fix it. This is when they said it was so-called fixed. This is 4 days after
3:36:55 um which they just put dirt. They didn't do a drain of any kind. Um and of course
3:37:02 I went nowhere with them. So this is where it all came from. So I just wanted to make sure that you're aware of it and could see it. I
3:37:08 think I think I saw this picture in your package.
3:37:15 Okay.
3:37:20 I closed public comment. Bring it back to C. Um I'm be what I what I saw there when I
3:37:27 was looking at that picture. I think there was a problem with with the developer themselves and and the tilting
3:37:33 and the of of the land wasn't tilted proper like it should. and they should have been responsible for fixing that.
3:37:40 Far as I'm concerned, these are brand new homes out there. I think if I'm not mistaken, just been built in the last
3:37:45 couple years or so. And you got this kind of problem, as Mr. uh Vincent said, you got this kind of problem out there
3:37:52 in this area. Um, I'm not saying putting pavers in is the answer to it and
3:37:57 everything because again, I kind of look at this a little bit different than myself. I kind of look at
3:38:03 this one a little bit different than I looked at the most of them that goes up to the zero lot line since they are
3:38:09 pavers and both both home have pavers and everything. So it's one uh complete
3:38:15 uh pathway through there. Um and it's all my understanding if I'm mistaken
3:38:20 it's all draining towards the front of the yard and off. I do have some concern about it draining draining into our
3:38:29 drains. However, when it was explained to me, it's not going into the sewers. It's basically going to storm water, which that's where water going to go
3:38:36 anywhere anyway. Uh, but I still have a problem because here we are. We again,
3:38:41 we taking and trying to fix a solution and adding all these things without coming to the city and finding out uh
3:38:47 what the rules are. Okay? and we probably could have worked with you a little bit more in the city and
3:38:52 everything, but um I tend to tend to say I I I'm kind of I don't know which way
3:38:58 I'm going with this right now to be honest with you because uh should we have a moment of prayer, sir?
3:39:05 No, I'm I'mma hear what the rest of the council members what the rest of them had to say first.
3:39:10 Well, that's always a good idea, actually. Well, here's my my thoughts on it, sir,
3:39:16 is that a community or people who share common values, right? And decisions should always be made at
3:39:22 the smallest point of governance, which the home is
3:39:27 the smallest point of governance. And so, here we have two neighbors. Breathe easy. I got you. Okay. I'm Yeah, I'm
3:39:35 fully supportive of this. Um, the reasons why are what are the concerns
3:39:40 when we start dealing with a zero lot line? The concerns are the impact on the neighbors. Obviously, not a concern. These
3:39:47 neighbors are not only are these neighbors collaborating, but there are six letters of support from other neighbors and the HOA. So, these folks
3:39:54 are doing it right. This is what a community is. I commend you. I applaud you. You are a shining example of how
3:40:01 communities should engage. So, I'll go there. The second concern is the public concern. Storm water. In this case, the
3:40:08 water's one, they've got a French drain doing the same thing that the developer was doing. And two, it's actually
3:40:13 flowing into the grassy area. So maybe that'll actually help with the irrigation bill, which you're going to
3:40:19 need because utility rates, but that's another thing for another time. Um, you
3:40:24 know, and as far as the lot sizes, everybody's unique. Everybody wants something different. Everybody has their
3:40:30 own taste. You know, it's like shoes. They come in different sizes. People, everyone's different. And so you all
3:40:35 have come up with something that works for you. I don't see any first of all I think it's beautiful and I don't think
3:40:41 it does anything negative to the community at large. I'm not there's nothing about that you're you're not
3:40:47 exceeding your maximum surface imperous area. So that's the other part to me. They've stayed within the limits of the
3:40:53 code and the only issue is the impact on the neighbor, the impact on the storm water and I think you've addressed
3:40:58 those. So you both have my full support. I'm going to vote yes tonight. Thanks. So, so you put up a fence also
3:41:04 between you two. Is that what you did in addition to the pavers? Good fences make good neighbors.
3:41:11 Well, no, but the initial picture showed two walls. So, that's the same picture.
3:41:16 So, the so the when the fence the fence uh was there after they got
3:41:22 done with construction again when they said they fixed it, then they put the fence back up. Okay. Now, are these pavers,
3:41:30 you know, is you have a French drain underneath, right? Yes, sir. So, do you have drainage through the pavers? Is there like uh grading put between so
3:41:37 that water can get through the center? Absolutely. You know, I mean, I'm not a a drainage expert, but I would imagine
3:41:43 if it's impervious, it's hard for it to get through. So, the the pavers themselves have the
3:41:48 sand inside which the water can obviously go through, which goes into the French drain. Uh you've got a longer
3:41:54 tube running straight and then another one that wise into it. So you got one as I'm told.
3:41:59 So you just have sand between the pavers. Not a great system where the water can flow through.
3:42:04 No sir. They told us that water will flow through them and then we it demonstrated that. And you've had storms where you've seen
3:42:10 it actually function. We've had two really decent rains and Yes, sir. It was perfect.
3:42:15 Well, they they have the French drain that's underneath it and all so it all goes down in
3:42:20 I think I'm in favor. I think it looks good. I think that you have your neighbors, you have the letters, it looks like you've done a great job with
3:42:26 it and uh I'm for it. I'm for it, too. I was thinking we make a motion to approve it.
3:42:32 I'll second that motion. Yes. Uh Mr. Bane, were you about to say something?
3:42:37 Thank you. Um,
3:42:46 I have a little bit of a concern about kind of referencing an ADA issue because
3:42:53 I think that putting in the city getting involved saying putting in pavers to
3:42:58 meet ADA puts us in in some puts me into some uncomfortable position
3:43:04 there. Okay. um a and I don't know that it's it's within
3:43:10 the city to to to do that for a individual private entity on their own
3:43:16 home on their own parcel. I think we have to look at our code. So I I don't I
3:43:22 want to look at it from that that lens. Um and and I also don't think I have a
3:43:28 real big issue necessarily except that I
3:43:33 did you explore any other option to do drainage outside of adding the pavers on top of the draining?
3:43:39 So this really wasn't as much about the drainage as it was about both Andrew and I as far as being able to walk and and
3:43:46 actually fix our walk around our homes. I know that sounds almost ridiculous, but I have a huge fall rate. I just had
3:43:53 surgery. Andrew had two knees done. So, both our doctors of course were like, "You need to make sure that you're on
3:43:59 something stable." So, we looked at rock first because rock would have been the easy answer. The the problem was that
3:44:07 the rock is extremely unstable. I've got it in my garden area and I've already I
3:44:13 don't walk in that anyway. So, I'm just trying to say. So, that was number one. um pearavevel type things which was not
3:44:21 acceptable by me, my wife or I would think if I were a neighbor I would have been super upset about that. Um and then
3:44:27 as far as grass, I redid the grass twice trying to see if I could get it leveled
3:44:33 out some to even help to where I could even walk and I continually fell down.
3:44:38 So, and the other side of my house is not done just so you're aware. So, I've only done one side that I can actually
3:44:44 maintenance the house. Um, just a question for staff. Um, with
3:44:51 regard to this neighborhood and if this is a
3:44:57 an an issue that that is a problem, meaning multi- multiarcals.
3:45:04 If if the solution that the the folks in this neighborhood go to because of our
3:45:10 decisions tonight are to have zero lot lines with pavers in between every
3:45:16 house. By adding that
3:45:23 additional imperous product, what what is that going to do to the
3:45:29 capturing of all of that water in that neighborhood? And I looked to staff to kind of give me
3:45:36 some guidance on that. Glad you weren't ask concerned about the overall impervious because these are both under the maximum allowed for
3:45:43 engineering. I I'm talking about I'm talking about in general. So because we're adding impervious at all
3:45:51 the way to the zero lot line. So if we have basically a neighborhood of of in
3:45:56 between two houses, every every house in between the two is nothing but added
3:46:02 impervious surface and yes it it's it's draining into the where it's capturing there. Is that
3:46:09 facility able is that where it's being captured able to handle that increase
3:46:15 based off of the increase of the impervious uh pavers that are being added? keep it
3:46:21 because I I I mean it sounds like this is really twofold.
3:46:26 It's it's a it's a request upon the applicant to
3:46:32 be able to to utilize his sideyard based off of a of of his existing condition,
3:46:37 but also there's a drainage issue. And so I'm I'm trying to look at the drainage piece of it too of of if this
3:46:44 is a major problem in this neighborhood, are we going to see more and more of this? And it I don't want to create a
3:46:49 situation where if we have a potential flooding problem or drainage problem,
3:46:55 drying out problem. Now, if every house or if a lot more houses start doing zero
3:47:00 lot lines and pavers in between every house, we're going to see a lot more water running into that. That's going to
3:47:06 potentially create a bigger problem for this neighborhood. And I just am I I just want to understand that for the
3:47:11 retention of it. Well, all the lots in the neighborhood are designed to have runoff flow either forwards or backward.
3:47:18 This one is forward. Yes. So, regardless, any rain event, any
3:47:23 excess rain will come to the front of the lot, likely onto the driveway area or down into the rideway. Okay? And then
3:47:31 from there, it goes to their storm water that has the calculations for all of this area that the house and the lot are
3:47:37 on. So by so by adding the pavers, they're really not adding to the to the
3:47:44 runoff amount. Correct. Okay. Correct. That's I guess that's where I was getting at of that issue is
3:47:50 because you know when we talk about pavers typically we talk about impervious and talk about water runoff
3:47:55 and that's part of the concern and I just wanted to make sure that you know this tends to be more of a of a lot line
3:48:03 issue not necessarily a a water runoff impervious type of situation or
3:48:11 combination of the two. Okay. Thank you.
3:48:17 I move to approve item number 25, variance request, 4511 Lionsgate Avenue. I second it.
3:48:26 Have a motion. And a second and a second for approval of item number
3:48:33 25, Vance request 4511 Lions Gates. Any further discussion?
3:48:39 Mayor, I've got one additional comment you might want to consider. I'm sorry for the late comment.
3:48:45 We have a uh hold harmless agreement that we could we would like to apply to
3:48:51 this. Basically, the city has access to that area. We have an easement. Okay. We
3:48:56 don't own the property. We have access to it. Should the city ever need to get in there and alter anything, pavers or
3:49:04 whatnot, we'd like to get a hold harmless agreement signed. We have a form. It's pretty simple.
3:49:09 We would like to make sure that is a condition. is condition hold mean that we're not liable for
3:49:15 Yeah. If we go in there and have to alter it, right, it's not on us to put it back. I'm I'm in my motion to have a condition
3:49:21 be the hold harmless. I saw a thumbs up from the property owner. Okay, we have a motion in a second um
3:49:28 for approval of item number 25, Barance request for 4511 Lionsgate
3:49:34 Avenue. Um, and I'm going just say I'm I'm going go
3:49:40 ahead and support is the main reason because your two neighbors next door I usually have a problem.
3:49:45 But when both of you together, you know, and everything in this case and it's going all together, I I I can support
3:49:52 this. But then usually when just one neighbor do it right up to the neighbor's line, I have a problem
3:49:57 because even though that neighbor may say I'm okay, but that neighbor leave, then you can have a problem down the
3:50:03 road. Okay. But in this case, both of them together and I don't see nobody come. I don't think anybody come in and
3:50:08 complain about it, you know. So, uh, and as it was stated, I think I read it was
3:50:13 uh still under your 55%. So, um, any any further discussion? If not, all in
3:50:19 favor, let it be known by saying I I. All oppose and chair vote I as well.
3:50:27 50 uh 26
3:50:33 26 and I'll keep it short. Thank you. Yep. Uh so this is variance request 4515
3:50:39 Lionsgate A. This is the neighbor the the applicant uh Andrew Palmer is requesting that same variance located in
3:50:47 uh the Hartwood Landing subdivision and it's under the ordinance number 201909.
3:50:53 The variance would be for the sideyard setback to be less than the minimum five feet uh going to the zero feet lot line
3:51:01 of the north property line. Uh and then the proposed paver walkway is estimated to be 240 ft. This is a request as a
3:51:10 result of a pending code case enforcement. Uh as indicated there was flooding um on on the property uh that
3:51:19 was not uh resolved by the prop by the builder and uh then pavers were
3:51:25 installed. Uh the work has French strains um underneath and uh the storm
3:51:32 water runoff is still from the uh the back of the property to the north of the pro or to the front of the property. Uh
3:51:38 at this time uh staff is unable to support this request under section 12544
3:51:46 uh that specifies PUDS are specific specifically approved and thoroughly
3:51:51 evaluated by the city council and also by our criteria of section 101-246 of
3:51:58 the land development code requiring a positive finding on the review criterium and staff has reviewed the application
3:52:05 and does not find a positive finding on three of the five criteria. Therefore, staff recommends denial. And that
3:52:10 concludes SAS presentation. Okay. U before I go any further, have him if if we decide to approve Yes. If
3:52:18 we decide to approve this one, do we the whole harm agreement again? Okay.
3:52:23 Are you okay with the whole harmless agreement? Same one your neighbor signs. Same. Same.
3:52:29 Everything the same. Everything's the same. Okay. Explain anything. No, no, this is in the
3:52:38 application. That's fine. I hold on hold on. Don't get beside
3:52:43 yourself. Don't go too fast. Still got to open up to the public. Okay. It's all the same, but still anyone in the public
3:52:49 wish to address this may come to the microphone and state your name and address and treat. Shocking, isn't it?
3:52:55 Adam Levy, 4511 Lionsgate. I approve it because I love them. They're great
3:53:01 people and they really made it made a difference in our neighborhood. So that makes a big difference. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Again, anyone in the
3:53:08 public wish to address this may come to the microphone, state your name and address and have three minutes. Seeing no one inside the chamber any
3:53:17 nobody on on uh virtual. So we close public comment. Bring it back to council. What state council?
3:53:22 Well, I would like to make a motion to approve item number 26 4515 Lionsgate
3:53:28 Avenue. Second with Lord Hohar. Ho harm. Yeah. I'm sorry. And and I just
3:53:34 want to make sure for the record in case it's ever an issue in the future that we we had six neighbors in support plus the
3:53:40 HOA. The storm water maximum is not beyond the limit. Um the water is
3:53:45 flowing into the grassy area, not into the street. And um
3:53:51 I think that was it. Okay. So, yep. I'm ready to call the question unless there's need for
3:53:57 discussion. Okay. I think we get a second. I don't think I heard second. I think you got a second. Okay. Okay.
3:54:03 Have a motion and second for approval of item number 26 26 various request for 4515 L's gate with
3:54:10 the whole agreement agreement. Okay. Any further question?
3:54:17 None. All in favor? Let it be known by saying I. I. All oppose. Chair vote I as well. Motion
3:54:22 passes. Uh item number 27 council board appointments outside agency.
3:54:38 Um I don't know if if
3:54:45 is I was going to say I would think this is just our conversation. Right. Right. Um so I to my fellow council members
3:54:53 do we have a slide with with all the boards that we can put on? We do not have it on a slide. I
3:54:58 apologize. We can there is a uh one in the packet. I know it's one in the package, but I would just but we can put it up there if you'd like
3:55:04 to. I want to put one up so the people in in the chamber can see it as well,
3:55:10 but that's okay. Yeah, Mr. Bane, I know the slide up. This is something you were excited about or looking forward to. Is there
3:55:17 something you particularly are interested in on this? Well, yes, but also uh my question to um my colleagues
3:55:25 up here is it looks like there are two open spots on here,
3:55:32 right? Um are the dashes also open spots?
3:55:38 No, it's I think it says city manager. If you follow it across, it says there's a dash and it says the position is city
3:55:44 manager. Okay. And then under Okay, I got it. So the only thing we're talking is it
3:55:50 dark in here. Okay. So the only current open spots are the ones that say open. I had thought the
3:55:56 dashes were also open. Yeah. I think it's just the only two that say open. So my question to my colleagues
3:56:01 are or is um do any of your current appointments do
3:56:08 you want to change any of of your current appointments
3:56:13 or are you wanting to return to your current appointments and the two that
3:56:19 are open are the two that are open not say that those are the ones that I would default to serve on I don't want to see
3:56:24 make it sound like that uh but I think just to start the conversation it might be helpful to understand what are we
3:56:30 looking at in terms of actual boards to looking for appointments.
3:56:37 I I would personally would like to just stay in the positions that I'm in already.
3:56:43 As would I. And we're doing a master plan for tourism. So, I'm I'm happy where I'm at.
3:56:51 Yeah, we're happy. Every I think everybody may be happy where they are, but still we got an open position uh
3:56:56 alternate for the MO. That would be nice if you would like to help with that.
3:57:02 Opening on Main Street. Yeah. And looking at these um the the
3:57:08 the chamber position and the the MO were the the two that that stuck out to me as
3:57:14 as where I would really based off of passions want to serve. But
3:57:20 I'm willing to serve in any of them. Um, and if the two openings are the MO
3:57:26 alternate and Main Street, I am happy to be the council liaison to those entities.
3:57:32 Well, sir, I think if I look through this list, you don't want don't have any outside
3:57:38 any outside duties. So, yeah, if we can go, if you don't mind taking Main Street and then alternate for the MO. Uh, and
3:57:46 while I'm here, Mr. Mr. Um, Matthews, uh, Lake County League of City Board of
3:57:53 Directors. Can we we can we change that to say Heartland League of Cities?
3:57:59 We can definitely make that recommendation. Okay. That that that that organization has changed name. We went through some
3:58:05 changes in the last year and we changed the name from Lake County to Heartland uh due to the fact that we uh also
3:58:12 brought in not just Lake County, but we have Sumpter counties there as well. Um, and we were going to need letters um,
3:58:19 sent out to the league um, designating the fact that
3:58:24 I'm still there as a director. Mr. Peterson is my alternate. Okay. I think
3:58:30 they still requesting that. Um, what else we have open? That's it.
3:58:35 Well, Mr. Bane, you you most recently ran and and I recall doing that and that was quite the experience as you were out
3:58:42 knocking on doors. Is there anything that you know as a citizen as a campaign
3:58:47 campaigning person is there anything you see that we maybe in your observations
3:58:53 suggestions you might like to see other us consider doing differently or
3:58:58 um No, the only recommendation I would have to do this process differently is just based off of how I've seen other
3:59:04 boards like us city council or uh county commissions do this where we would get
3:59:09 this ahead of time be able to rank or preference where we would like to go so that we have that ahead of time coming
3:59:15 into the meeting rather than just simply say, "Hey, uh, this is where the person
3:59:21 who used to sit in this chair is, you just go there." And that works when it's one, but when it's more, it doesn't. And
3:59:27 so, I was just thinking about that process long term. Well, let me let me add as far as the Heartland League of Cities, I'm still up
3:59:34 there as the voting director, and that's because I'm ex-president, but I would be if I didn't have to be there. Oh, so you
3:59:40 were likely to take you want to take I see that as a hint. Well, well, no, I I'm I'm there because
3:59:48 I as the uh recent vi president of I I got to I still have duties. Okay.
3:59:54 But other than that, I Hey, I love to switch around and give Mr. Peterson the
4 hours the uh the vote and if that's what he want to give him the vote, but but I will go ahead and keep it under that.
4:00:08 And this is a gamble and everything. Well, no, not in this
4:00:13 case, but because I as the member, I am the vote member
4:00:32 on the board of directors and everything. So, and to go to your question, uh, council
4:00:38 member Strange, the other thing I think it would be helpful is understanding when these when these committees or
4:00:43 entities meet. Uh, so that you know, I was going to take you can you can look at your your
4:00:49 work schedule, your personal schedule and find out can I even serve as a liaison to this organization because
4:00:55 it's at a time that it does or does not work. Right. Mo um, Brian is like usually like every
4:01:03 two months. Yeah. So, like the next one is Feb February, then it'll be April, and then June, and
4:01:08 then October. Yeah, I think I remember it seeing it. Yeah. But I'm not I'm not familiar with what the Main Street uh board uh when
4:01:16 they actually meet. So, I will do my best to serve and and make it work.
4:01:21 They used the Main Street used to meet the third Wednesday of the month at 8:00 in the morning, I think.
4:01:26 Yeah. I'm not sure if they Well, I know when I used to attend it used to be 8 o'clock in the morning. Um,
4:01:33 Mr. Peterson, while I'm thinking about it, uh, please uh, no, I I should be okay. I'll probably be
4:01:38 back. Uh, then again, I may not because I'm actually out of town. The next meeting
4:01:44 of the Lake County League of Cities, the Lake County League, the Heartland City.
4:01:49 He just passed the Heartland League of Cities in February be on February 13th. I'mma actually be
4:01:56 in I think I got a mayor's workshop or something up in Oello that Thursday and
4:02:04 Friday, February 13th. Yeah. So, uh just just in case, please,
4:02:09 if you don't mind, in case I don't make it back down, I think the final thing I got on on Friday morning is a breakfast
4:02:16 that usually is usually in about 10:30, 11:00 and I may be able to make it back in case prepare.
4:02:22 So, are we keeping Mr. Mayor, are we keeping you the voting member and Mr. Peterson? Vote him in, but when I'm not there, he
4:02:27 Yeah. Yeah, that's the alternate. And then do we need do we need a vote for clarification? We do need a motion.
4:02:33 Okay. I I will move to um put my name in the two open spots,
4:02:39 the one for the no alternate and the Clermont Main Street liaison, and leave everything else the same.
4:02:45 Okay. Second. Okay. Have a motion and second to Miss Putin. Uh
4:02:54 Council member Bane in the main street as a leazison for the come out main
4:03:00 street and also as the uh deputy uh assistant MO
4:03:07 board. Okay. And leave everything as is.
4:03:14 And by the way, Mr. Peterson, that meeting in February is in your Matilda. Okay. Okay.
4:03:19 All right. He says that now. Well, that's one of the thing we meet in
4:03:25 know we meet in different cities every month. So you you do a lot of driving all over the place, you know, but uh no no other
4:03:33 discussion. All in favor be known by saying I. I. All oppose and the chair will as well. Okay.
4:03:40 Selection of uh Mayor Portim. Blank page.
4:03:46 I'd like to nominate council member Myers. A second. Second.
4:03:51 Okay. You have a motion and a second to nomin uh Oh, is there I'm sorry. Is there any other nominations?
4:03:58 Are you willing to do it? Okay. Okay. That's why I said nominate.
4:04:03 Since there's no more nomination nomination closed, but uh have a second and a motion and a second to u
4:04:12 leave council member Myers as mayor pro Tim. Any further discussion? Hearing
4:04:17 none. All in favor? Let it be known by saying I. All oppose and chair vote I as well. Motion passes 50. Item number 29
4:04:24 resolution number 2026-00002 considering amending the rules of
4:04:30 conduct resolution. Yes. A resolution of the city of Clermont, Florida, adopting
4:04:35 the city of Clermont rules of conduct related to the conduct of meetings, the public's right to participate, and the
4:04:42 activities and participation of council members, appointed board members, staff, and the public, repealing resolution
4:04:49 2024-04R, providing for conflict, severability, the administrative correction of
4:04:55 scriveners errors, and an effective date.
4:05:01 Okay, Council Member Baines. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, I'll I'll save my comments for when it comes back, but
4:05:07 I just want to present what is being proposed. Um, so what is being proposed?
4:05:12 Uh, the changes were highlighted and and uh stricken or added. Uh so at the
4:05:17 bottom of page 8:15 of the packet which is uh letter C number one council
4:05:23 meeting and agenda it changes the start time of council meetings from 3:00 to
4:05:30 6:30 p.m. Uh and it stays the second and fourth Tuesdays at that time. So 3:00
4:05:39 and uh changes to 6:30 on the first uh meeting, which is the second Tuesday,
4:05:44 and the fourth Tuesday of the month, it goes from 5:30 to 6:30.
4:05:49 We still had 5:30 in the in the rules on that. So that's why it still said that. Um on page 816,
4:05:57 uh item B, agenda items submitted by the public. uh letter D. Um
4:06:06 the way I read that was that it it uh it gave 10 minutes whether the person
4:06:12 needed it or didn't want it. And I think just clearing it up that it's up to an additional 10 minutes. If they only need
4:06:18 one, uh by all means, they don't have to talk 10, but if they want to talk up to 10, they have up to 10. So it's really
4:06:25 just more of a clerical thing in that. Um it's it's not taking time away from
4:06:31 the public in that area. um number page 817 D workshop meetings um that uh it
4:06:40 would uh eliminate the first because it currently it still says first and third
4:06:47 Tuesday of each month and uh I think um when the first was added the last time
4:06:56 uh there was a lot of discussion about it being a PNZ and it never really came to fruition that it was on the first.
4:07:02 So, uh, I just had that stricken from that to just say the third Tuesday and
4:07:08 put in the time of 6:30 p.m. so that matches the, uh, city council meeting
4:07:14 times in here in the council chambers. And any changes would be, uh, determined by vote of the city council. That's the
4:07:21 same language that's in the city council meetings. uh page 8/19
4:07:27 number one where it says in public meetings letter uh small lowercase B
4:07:33 council members will be allowed two sessions of three minutes per item. I've stricken that. Uh I'll save my comments
4:07:39 for when it comes back, but that's that's the change. And um finally, the
4:07:44 only other change is in the agenda on page 828. Uh it still had reports at the
4:07:50 beginning. And so since this was an official document, we just went ahead and uh I asked uh the city clerk about
4:07:55 that and we just moved the reports down to where it actually is on the agenda. So those are the areas of change and
4:08:02 I'll save my comments for after public.
4:08:08 Okay, this is a public uh form. Anyone in the public wish to address it may come to the microphone and state your name and address and have three minutes.
4:08:26 And as Clare 575 West Miniola, I apologize. I'm just reading uh the changes, so that's why I have my phone
4:08:32 out. Um I am in support of moving the meetings back to 6:30. It's very difficult to for working professionals
4:08:38 to uh assist uh to attend these types of meetings. Um that said, I would like to
4:08:45 clarify why was I'm sorry, I'm trying to find it. Um this particular section is
4:08:50 stricken out. Council members will be allowed two sessions of 3 minutes per item. These meetings run long and one of
4:08:56 the reasons uh because they run so long is because I apologize if this sounds rude, but sometimes uh council members
4:09:05 will argue for the same points over and over again. I think having a hard time
4:09:10 limit um and having uh effective management strategies would keep these meetings shorter and so that we don't
4:09:16 leave these meetings at 1:00 a.m. Um I think that is very important and yeah I
4:09:22 think that's it. That's the only question I have. So if you could please clarify why was that section stricken out.
4:09:30 Thank you ma'am. Yes ma'am.
4:09:36 My name is Fran Falcone, 3904 Duneway. Um, I'm just standing here in person to
4:09:41 follow up the email that I sent to all of you supporting the change to 6:30. I think that we need to open it back up to
4:09:48 people who are working. The fact that you've added the um online contribution
4:09:53 allows people who don't want to go out at night to be able to participate. Thank you. Thank you.
4:10:00 Yes, sir. 1905 Joe from 2693 jumpy jack way. Uh I do
4:10:07 agree moving the meetings back to six o'clock is uh prudent because a lot of
4:10:13 people do work and like uh the last uh respondent said you do have online
4:10:19 meetings now which makes more sense. Um, giving uh council members more than 3
4:10:25 minutes is not fair uh because the people from the public only have three minutes to argue a point. So, uh I think
4:10:34 that we need to keep it fair on each sides. Uh when I tried to pull a con uh
4:10:39 consent agenda item, I only had three minutes, but the the one that was involved in it got at least five minutes
4:10:46 and then I had no chance to rebut that. So, I think that it needs to be fair on each sides. needs to be held to three
4:10:52 minutes. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else?
4:11:02 Good evening, city council Vincent Eim, Regency Hills. I guess I'll be the oddball one. According to my watch right
4:11:07 now, it's 7:00. Meeting started at 3:00. Be prepared. You're going to release the
4:11:14 three minutes. Be prepared to go to 1:00, 12:00 in the morning. Your honor,
4:11:20 you've been at these council meetings. You know how late they go. I was also sitting in the audience for this. I know
4:11:27 you're not a fan on it, but I just want to remind you, okay? I used to like going home and having dinner with my
4:11:34 wife when it started at 3:00, but we're going to 7:00 now. Could you imagine if
4:11:39 this started at 6:30, four hours? We're in 10:30 right now. And you guys had a
4:11:45 small agenda. A small agenda. Okay. You don't think this was small?
4:11:51 You had You had 18 items, Brian. 18 items on the consent agenda. Three were
4:11:56 pulled. So, that's 15. That is small. Two applicants with the same thing. They
4:12:02 were no-brainers. Okay? I mean, I'm sorry. You know how I am. I speak wrong and I speak the truth.
4:12:08 I'm sorry if I agree with you or disagree, but I really think it's working. And that other one saying, "Oh,
4:12:14 we have this new technology." Okay. Elderly people don't aren't computer
4:12:19 techly suave. Okay, think about that. You know how many times I had my mother
4:12:25 call me up? How do I work this and that? Okay, they're not, you know, it's,
4:12:31 you know, then next how do I unmute it? So, what's a star five? You know, you're
4:12:37 going to get questions like that. All right. Thank you for your time and please consider it.
4:12:43 Thank you. 1909.
4:12:48 Good evening, council. Mike Kramer, 208 Nautica Mile. Just look around.
4:12:55 It's the same people at the end of the meeting, every meeting, whether it's late or not.
4:13:05 It doesn't matter whether you have it at 3 or 6:30. I agree with Mr. Neck. Do
4:13:10 yourself a favor. Stay keeping it at 3:00. Let's all get to bed on time. But it's not going to change overall.
4:13:18 The same people in basically the same seats.
4:13:24 You look out there and you know whether you've lost. If you see the last vestigages, you know you've gone really
4:13:31 late. Yeah. So please, we've gone through this enough times.
4:13:37 We're with you. The same half dozen people. Thank you for your time.
4:13:43 Thank you. Hello, Jim Krey, 2177 Cedar Ridgeway.
4:13:51 Uh, good good evening, Mr. Mayor and Council members. I would encourage you to go back to the 6:30 p.m. time. Uh,
4:13:59 that's a much better time for public meetings. There's not many people that can arrive at uh 3:00 in the afternoon
4:14:04 when they're working and going to school. And originally wanted to move it to have the uh uh the retired folks, the
4:14:10 older folks, and folks that needed public transportation to come at 3:00. you can see that that never really
4:14:15 worked out. So, I would encourage you go to 6:30 and also uh to encourage you to
4:14:20 uh work a little bit more on the agendas to make it a little bit uh shorter. It was only two years or so ago. I remember
4:14:26 I used to come, we'd be done here in an hour and a half, maybe two hours at the most. To go more than two, three hours
4:14:31 is just not really acceptable. You folks need to work on being a little bit more brief and getting to the points. Thank
4:14:37 you. Thank you.
4:14:43 Casier Kyler Murray at 574 East Dotto Street. I think it would be feasible to move the
4:14:50 meetings back to 6:30 and reasons why people work and there's no way they can
4:14:57 get to the meetings if they're working. There's no way they could voice their opinions if they're at work and they
4:15:02 can't get here. Okay. Um you talked about the elderly not not wanting to drive at night. Well, now you've made it
4:15:09 convenient. they can still watch the meeting and call in. So that's a good thing. So but that's my opinion to move
4:15:16 it back to 6:30. That way everybody will be involved. Thank you.
4:15:23 Thank you. Yes sir. This Taylor 3686 Canada. Uh I also think
4:15:30 that the meeting should be back to 6:30. Um as he mentioned earlier, it's the
4:15:36 same people here. The people that's here we care. We care about our city. So, I'm
4:15:41 gonna sacrifice and make it earlier if I have to, but it's a a major
4:15:46 inconvenience for me. And I'm retired and it's an inconvenience for me to come
4:15:52 in the middle of the day because I do have other things that I do. So, I think moving it back to the evening, it's more
4:15:58 convenient. And if you look around all the other uh municipalities around, it's
4:16:04 in the evening. And it's that it's that way for a reason. uh people work, um
4:16:09 citizens work, and it's always been custom that if we make our if we make it
4:16:14 shorter, don't have so much on the agenda, we can still do what we need to do and get out of here at a decent time.
4:16:20 If we start at 6:30, we can be out of here by 8 if we're doing it right. And it's been
4:16:27 many of times that we've done that. I've been coming to these meetings for past 10 years, and we can we can make it on
4:16:33 time. We just have to make it shorter. But I think the evenings work out so much better for the community. Um, for
4:16:40 people who really care and who want to be here, uh, make it make it convenient for us. And, uh, it's also for for you
4:16:47 guys that are out there. I mean, I don't I don't know how you all manage it in the middle of the day like that. It to
4:16:54 me it seems to be rather difficult, but evening works better, I think. Thank you.
4:16:59 Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else? This is a public meeting. Anyone in public wish to address this item may come to
4:17:04 your microphone, state your name and address and have three minutes. Anyone else? Seeing no one else. Anybody online?
4:17:10 One member online. One minute online. Okay, go ahead.
4:17:18 Jenny May, it's 4062 Greystone Drive at 7:12 p.m. Uh, it's
4:17:24 been 4 hours and 12 minutes. Um, so regards to the 3:00 and the 6:30, um,
4:17:30 I've used both, you know, person and technology. So, you know, either one
4:17:36 works. Now, in regards to my the reason why I'm I'm speaking up is uh something
4:17:42 that uh Mir had brought up which I just looked is the and and Mr. Pamasi um in
4:17:49 regards to the uh council members will be allowed two sessions of three minutes per item across that. I believe that
4:17:55 that should be put back in because if this does If you all do
4:18:02 decide to go at 6:30, then guess what? We'll be waiting for everybody to speak
4:18:09 and listen and make comments and all that and it'll probably be midnight by
4:18:14 the time uh this meeting is over over. So, I think that and also, you know, we all have uh three minutes as public. So,
4:18:21 I think uh the courtesy of you all also to have the three minutes as well as two sessions. So, that would be six minutes
4:18:28 um I think is appropriate. Um and also in regards to the agenda, if this does go to 6:30, then the agenda should be
4:18:36 reflected so that um everyone including you all don't go all to midnight. It's
4:18:42 it's going to be tough on you all as well as the public. And that's all I need to say. Thank you very much and
4:18:48 good evening. Thank you. Anyone else?
4:18:53 No one else in there. So in that case, we close public comment and bring it
4:18:59 back to council. State Council. Thank you. May May I start, Mr. Mayor? Um to address the the question about the
4:19:06 time limit. Um the way it's written, it it's not used. And I'm a firm
4:19:14 believer if we're going to have something as a policy that we actually implement it. Um and I think the way
4:19:21 it's currently written puts our staff in a really binding spot. Um, it also
4:19:28 creates a potential issue for when are we talking about two three minute
4:19:34 sessions to actually ask questions or are we talking
4:19:39 about two three minute sessions or a three-m minute session to make a statement because I really I view those
4:19:45 two things as very different. If we're doing our job and we need to ask questions based off of research, based
4:19:53 off of what someone up here spoke, I I'm uncomfortable
4:20:01 handcuffing any of us on seeking clarification and asking for information
4:20:07 based off of reports, based off of statements, based off of um research.
4:20:13 And if we do it that way and we actually truly enforce it, are we now requiring
4:20:19 whomever is controlling that to to stop the time every time we ask the question,
4:20:26 then the person answers and we start the time back again and then we stop it. I I think it creates a problem when it's
4:20:34 factf finding. I actually don't have a problem with a
4:20:41 rule on statements. I I really don't. But the way it's currently written is
4:20:48 it's just two three minute sessions. And I I I I'm very uncomfortable and I think
4:20:54 that we're doing our residents and our city a disservice if we say we are are truly limited to six minutes on a ve
4:21:01 like on a very very important item. I'm thinking like the comprehensive plan. Think about if you really only had six
4:21:09 minutes to ask any question or follow up on anything and that time was running.
4:21:14 Even if somebody goes on and answers your question for four minutes, that's four minutes of your six minutes. Uh I
4:21:21 I'm really concerned about that. That's the that's the premise of why I I struck it. if we can come to a hey you can ask
4:21:29 all the questions you need but when it comes time to statements but that leads me to my next point the flow of the
4:21:34 meeting the flow of the meeting is a problem whether we start at 3:00 6:30 or 9:00 a.m.
4:21:41 That's just a reality. The flow of the meeting is a problem. And so, um, other
4:21:46 boards and commissions, even in our city, uh, structure themselves such that, uh, at at at each meeting, there's
4:21:55 a flow. So, the item comes forward and then it's, okay, council member, you're the first person tonight. Council member
4:22:01 Myers, you do your stuff. Council member Peterson, Council Member Strange, Council Member Bane, the mayor. And then
4:22:06 the next meeting, it's we start with Council Member Peterson, and then work our way through. And there's a flow to it rather than this kind of back and
4:22:13 forth where we kind of ran into that tonight where folks were wanting to make a motion before but not even maybe even
4:22:18 realizing that there were some other statements that wanted to be made. And so we don't have a system that allows us to like buzz in and only our
4:22:25 microphones, you know, live when we get called on. So, but we could have a flow that could help us if we wanted to
4:22:32 implement a time limit on statements that okay, this is our Q&A. We go
4:22:37 through our Q&A and now it's your statement. Here's your three minutes and and you're on that and you're on the
4:22:43 clock. And when that goes off, it really is incumbent upon our rules do say our
4:22:48 city attorney is our um parliamentarian, our advisory parliamentarian, but it's
4:22:54 the chair of the the committee. It's so the council, it's the mayor. For P&Z, it's the chair. For code enforcement,
4:23:01 it's the chair. It's really up to whoever has the gavl to enforce that. um or we as council members have to start
4:23:07 implementing parliamentary procedure and and make it, you know, and I feel like sometimes when we do that, it gets a little like jabby. And I don't want to
4:23:14 create that because I think that that makes our environment harder and makes it seem like we're not getting along
4:23:21 when we're just trying to maybe move a conversation along. So, um 6:30 time,
4:23:28 not going to beat the dead horse. I know it's been discussed before, but we are the earliest municipality in Lake County
4:23:36 that holds council meetings at 3:00. The county, I understand, there's not a
4:23:41 municipality, they're a county. They're full-time is their job. I'm just saying that for municipalities, Tari is at
4:23:48 4:00. Leburg is at 5:30. Everyone else is at 6, 6:15, 6:30, or 7.
4:23:57 And I'm amanable to six. Uh I just put 6:30 in because I didn't want to propose
4:24:02 like a new time just kind of half-hazardly, but I'm amanable to that. And the reality of why I want a later
4:24:09 time for more involvement is because we've heard from residents how difficult
4:24:16 it is to get here during the workday. Um we've heard about how difficult it is on
4:24:21 certain days, depending on what's going on at city hall, to even park to attend the meetings. Um, we have heard that we
4:24:29 like the online participation and if someone chooses to not attend for
4:24:35 whatever reason, maybe they're not feeling well, maybe they just got a lot going on, but they want to chime in on their one issue, they can do that from
4:24:41 home. But to make a cart blanch rule based off of we think a demographic will
4:24:48 not attend, I think is not giving credit where credit's due to that demographic. Um, and it's just not realistic with our
4:24:55 population and it's not realistic with look around the city and see who's out and about and how many people folks are
4:25:01 are out and about. If we were in a rural community with dirt roads and no street lights, then yeah, I think driving late
4:25:08 at night might be more of a consideration. Um, but I I I just I feel
4:25:13 like we're doing a disservice to our community by having such early meetings. So that's where I'm at with uh this and
4:25:20 I can assure you here that whatever we decide that's going to be where we are at and we move forward
4:25:25 from my perspective anyway. I'd like to go only because I feel like I might be the one that's on
4:25:32 the fence about all this. So I want you all to hear what I'm what's on my mind. Ever since you brought it up, Mr. Bane,
4:25:38 I I tell you of all this has been a great issue for me thinking about it.
4:25:44 I'm trying to break it down in ways that make it easy to explain in in some form of three minutes or less. And I keep
4:25:50 coming back to why are we here at these meetings?
4:25:56 And I think that's really important. I think it's often the the different reasons why we might be here end up
4:26:02 collapsed. And in talking to a number of people, there's a couple things that have really
4:26:08 resonated with me. And one is when we come to these meetings, specifically city council meetings called for
4:26:14 purposes of conducting the business of the city. These are business meetings.
4:26:22 They're not intended to be town hall meetings. They're not intended to be workshops. Now,
4:26:28 we treat them that way in the way that we conduct ourselves. And you make valid points, Mr. Bane, about the need to
4:26:34 discuss and get the answers to the questions. But the reality is, but for the optics of the public
4:26:41 and my authentic wanting to hear what people have to say, I could come in and make a decision. I could make a vote,
4:26:47 make a motion, move on, and be done with the business of the city because I am prepared, because I do read the agenda,
4:26:52 because I am doing my research. So there's one approach to these meetings where they are intended for the business
4:26:58 of the city. And I think if we ran it as the business of the city, we could run these meetings as we have done in two
4:27:05 hours or less. I think realistically. So then there's the other reason why are we here? And that's public engagement.
4:27:12 Engaging the community, having a sense of relationship with the community and having people be able to hear why we're
4:27:18 voting the way we're voting because that's something I hear from the public. And and this the only reason that this
4:27:23 one has weighed on me is because I have heard unequivocally
4:27:28 present company accepted to people tonight recognizing the business of the city. But really if there are sides to
4:27:35 politics every side has said 6:30 6:30 6:30 and candidly Mr. Bane 5:30 didn't
4:27:42 cut it. And I don't think six o'clock is going to cut it. I think it's 6:30 or it's early. That that's what I'm hearing
4:27:47 there. There is no six o'clock makes people happy. 6:30 or it's early and people are not happy with that and I I
4:27:54 get that but I think that's because the public sense is that there's not a
4:28:00 way to engage in the business of the meeting the business of the city. The problem is this isn't a it's a business
4:28:07 meeting. We're here to do the business. So thoughts
4:28:13 I'm going to say the ugly one the ugly ones first because then I can skip over them. So the first is if 500 people show
4:28:19 up to these meetings that is 146th well no 152nd of the citizens of
4:28:28 Clermont that means 25,500 people think we're doing just fine if 500 people show up and I've never
4:28:35 seen 500 people show up. I don't know if I what that would look like. So, so I think there's a lot of people who
4:28:40 recognize this is the business of the city and they're trusting us to do it because we are a representative uh you
4:28:47 know constitutional a representative constitutional. So then there's the technology question and I think really
4:28:54 valid points are made that a lot of older people don't aren't familiar with technology. I even said in my meeting
4:29:00 today technology scares me and I am not typically considered an old person. Ask
4:29:05 my daughter, she might say something different. But I think that if our goal is to make available to working people,
4:29:13 candidly, I think working people in 2026 are familiar with technology and more able to throw in a little Bluetooth
4:29:19 while they're at work and participate if they wanted to participate. Being said, I'm not trying to encourage people to
4:29:25 dip out on their job. So here, and I also think my third point is that I
4:29:30 think 9:30 p.m. to 1:30 a.m. is far worse for us making sound decisions than
4:29:39 300 p.m. to 7 p.m. Because at the end of the day, we have to make the decisions on behalf of the 25,500
4:29:46 people who aren't here. All that being said, I've heard the resounding message from the public. So
4:29:52 here are things I want to put out as things to consider. One is I've asked before, I'll bring it
4:29:59 up because it's been a year. If we move public comment to the end, that allows
4:30:04 people to come after work for public comment. It also allows them to comment on what we voted on that day. Is it
4:30:11 going to allow them to skew our opinion at the meeting? No, because we've already made a decision. But then again,
4:30:18 if 10 people stand up during a meeting and speak on behalf of 26,000 people,
4:30:23 they weren't elected to do that. So, is it appropriate for us to give weight to a large group of people who might come
4:30:29 in? Maybe, maybe not. It's 2026. We have emails, we have Facebook, we have phones. People can reach us if they want
4:30:35 to engage ahead of the meeting. So, I'm not sure if that addresses the real concerns, but that's one thing. I've
4:30:41 suggested town halls once a month. Why? So that we can hear from the public. So, we can just sit and hear from the
4:30:46 public. Do it on a Saturday. Do it on a nighttime. Do it I I I'll work with you whatever date and time.
4:30:53 But I'll tell you what I think was probably the best suggestion if we want to meet the 6:30 meeting time and it was
4:31:01 this. If we start a agenda review, this
4:31:06 might have come from you to me through someone else. I don't know because I've heard you use this word before. Um
4:31:12 something like a workshop at 3:00. We all sit and have meetings with directors before we come here and we ask all the
4:31:18 questions. Well, what are we doing now? We're taking however much time we all let's say we all take an hour. That's
4:31:23 five hours of staff time to prepare us for these meetings. Well, if we were here at three al together in a publicly
4:31:30 noticed workshop, we could ask all the questions that we want to ask, have the benefit of each other's questions, have
4:31:36 the benefit of staff's questions. Now, they're spending three hours instead of five hours helping us prepare. And then
4:31:42 we could roll into that 6:30 business meeting with all our questions answered,
4:31:47 give a chance for the public to weigh in, but we're pretty much just voting. Like we're moving and voting. And that
4:31:54 kind of goes to the procedures of the three minutes. So for me, after how many
4:32:00 weeks you've been bringing this up, Mr. Bain, I want to address the public's concerns of a 6:30 meeting. I can't in
4:32:07 good conscience sit up here and say I'm good with 9:30 to 1:30 in the morning. I
4:32:12 I just don't think good decisions are made at those hours. So, if we can find a way to guarantee the meetings are over
4:32:20 by 9:30 is what I would say 10 o'clock on an exception. We need more time or if
4:32:25 we consider maybe the workshop with the 6:30 meeting, you can get me there. I don't know how we would do the 6:30 and
4:32:31 guarantee 3 hours um without the workshop starting at 3, but I'm I'm
4:32:36 wrestling with this because I can't in good conscious go to 6:30, though I want to for the public's sake because I know
4:32:43 what this takes. And so I'm not going to put us in a position of having meetings regularly
4:32:49 going until 10:30, 11 midnight. So I wanted to go so you could hear
4:32:55 where I'm at. Those are my points. I would like to say um part of the
4:33:01 reason that this meeting was pushed back was to help our seniors and it also helped us as a council to be able to
4:33:09 talk more and still be at be at our best because as you see our meetings are
4:33:16 marathons. They are not two hours. They are four, five, six and seven hours. sitting here
4:33:23 at 6:30 to go to 10:30 and 11 is not realistic. And the other thing that's
4:33:29 really really big for me because this is what I hear as a woman. I hear that you don't give a care about my safety, the
4:33:36 deputy clerk or the clerk or Allison, because it's not safe for us women to be on the road at 10:30 at night, 11 pm.
4:33:44 They have long commutes. Anything can happen to us. And I'm not comfortable just to say that, oh, we had a meeting.
4:33:52 So, we had a meeting. So what? Your life is put in danger. So what? You had a flat tire. We had the meeting at 6:30.
4:33:59 And guess what? We have the same amount of people that come at 3:00 that comes at 6:00. And when the 9:00 hour comes,
4:34:06 the only people that are sitting in here are department heads and spouses. Everybody else, the public has gone home
4:34:12 because the public has their life. And I don't I don't begrudge them that. So, if
4:34:18 our meetings could be 2 hours, of course I'd be okay with 6:30 to 8:30 because that's how it used to be. When I first
4:34:25 got on this council, our meetings were done at 8:45 and only on a rare occasion
4:34:31 did it go to 9:30 and 10. And that's because we may have had a lot of public comment, but we haven't had that since
4:34:37 then. Our meetings have gone at 11:00, midnight, 1:00 a.m., almost 2:00 a.m.
4:34:42 That is ridiculous. And I am sorry. I don't feel comfortable being on the road at that hour and I definitely don't want
4:34:49 our clerk and our deputy clerk who have long commutes to be on the road at that time. Anything can happen to us and
4:34:56 crime is up at night. More crime is committed at night than it is during the day. And we as women are targets. You
4:35:03 men are not. Nobody's going to mess with you all, so to speak, if you if your car breaks down on the side of the road,
4:35:09 heaven forbid. But for us, that's a whole different story. Whole different story.
4:35:15 And business hours are from 8 to 5:00 p.m. They are not at 6 to 1:00 a.m. for
4:35:23 a reason. And you know, I appreciate that. Oh, people want to come because
4:35:28 they're at work or whatnot. Well, we have the same people that come. We don't even have 1% of the population coming
4:35:35 here. And now we have technology. So, it makes it easier for you to actually
4:35:40 participate. as as council member Strange said, you can call, you can email, you can you can get on the teams.
4:35:46 There's so many different ways that you can communicate with us. But I do not think having a meeting at 6:30 that's
4:35:53 going to go to 10:00, 10:30 or 11 is worth us ladies, our lives being put in
4:36:00 danger because you don't know what's going to happen on the road. You hit a pothole and you get a flat tire. That's
4:36:06 all it takes. So I am I am strongly against p pushing these meetings back
4:36:13 again. If we could have these meetings at two, you know, for two hours, I wouldn't have an issue. But our meetings
4:36:18 do not go that long. We do not know how to edit ourselves. This meeting proved that. We continued to talk and talk and
4:36:25 talk and talk. Two and a half hours on consent. Two and a half hours on
4:36:30 consent. And it's been that way since September. And we haven't changed that.
4:36:36 So, I think it's unreasonable to expect us to sit up here for five and six hours
4:36:41 because we were elected. I'm sorry. I don't agree with that. And again, the public goes home at 900 p.m. They're not
4:36:49 here at 10:00. And then our staff, they're here, okay? And they're tired.
4:36:54 They have to drive home tired. And when you're tired, when you drive, you're more prone to get in accidents. Come up
4:37:00 here and be at work at 8:00. And don't mention about our police because our police that are supposed to be here,
4:37:06 they work overtime and after four hours they have to leave and bring somebody else. So that's costing the city even
4:37:12 more money because this is overtime to be here in the evening meetings. It's just not reasonable to expect us to
4:37:20 spend that kind of money and then to put our safety in danger just so that you can say, "Hey, I had a meeting at 6:30."
4:37:28 No. Change. I know some people don't like change, but life has changed. You've got to get over that. We we've
4:37:34 got to be flexible. That's why we have all of these other ways to um communicate with us. You know, this
4:37:40 isn't 1985 where you don't have a cell phone, you don't have email, you don't have text, you don't have Teams, you
4:37:47 don't have No, this is 2026. We have technology and we need to use
4:37:52 it. And again, I need you all to think we as women that puts us in danger. I
4:37:58 know you all don't have to think about that because you're men, but as a woman, no. I I I take Uhuh. I'm sorry. I don't
4:38:04 agree with that. I mean, we started this meeting at two.
4:38:09 Well, let's just say we started at 3:00. So, we're now five and a half hours in, but at 3:00, if you looked out, there
4:38:16 was a lot of people here. It's 7. It's 7:30 now. So, you're saying, where is
4:38:22 all the people that the working people? They could be coming. Nobody's really coming now. Nobody's even calling. Now,
4:38:27 your point was very valid. I don't even think it's 1% of the people that attend these meetings. It's the same people
4:38:34 that come to every single meeting. We know them by face. We know the sound of their voice. We know who comes. And like
4:38:42 you said, 3:00 there was probably at least 15, 20 seniors that I know out there and they
4:38:49 all came because they wanted to protest. And they even came up to the mic and they said, "No, you can't talk about
4:38:55 it." and they, you know, they embarrass that poor woman. I feel bad for her that she wanted to, you know, just say her
4:39:00 point. Listen, I come because I can come at three o'clock, but I can't come at
4:39:06 night. So, I don't, you know, I don't think that was very nice that we did that to her, but I apologize for you
4:39:12 people about her. So, I'm totally in favor of keeping it at 3:00. I would even make it early if possible, but
4:39:19 three o'clock is good. And then secondly, we initiated a time for the council to speak. I've never seen that
4:39:25 timer go off for us. It goes off for the public right away. But as soon as we talk, no. No. And we even gave us
4:39:32 ourselves an option. We can do three minutes and then Okay. Can I go a little bit longer? Yes. Okay. But we don't.
4:39:39 Nobody ever does anything for that. And there is members on that speak more than others
4:39:45 like myself. I'm kind of quiet. But I if I would respect a threeminut time for myself. With that being said, you know,
4:39:52 I I I have to deny this this resolution. So, I would make a motion to deny the
4:39:58 resolution before I didn't have a second, but
4:40:03 anyway, let me let me let me let me address some of these things.
4:40:10 First of all, I don't think anybody up here been involved with this council as long as I have. I've been our first step
4:40:15 room in this in this chamber, well, in the council way back in 2007. I've been
4:40:21 in that's at that time it used to start at 7 o'clock. We had a seven o'clock and
4:40:27 like I said 2007 first time I came in here it started at 7 o'clock back in the days. Okay. Um and the room used to be
4:40:36 packed with people. Of course, we didn't have the techn I admit we didn't have the technology, but the room was packed with people and and you really, you
4:40:43 know, came in and it was some nights even then starting at 7:00 and meeting went to long and I was in here to 11
4:40:50 12:00 some nights depending upon and listen here here's what I want you to understand and I keep telling you all
4:40:58 agenda. Look at your agenda the things you're putting on your agenda. When you
4:41:04 load your agenda with all these things up here in the consent agenda that has to be pulled because they haven't been discussed and then you sit here and
4:41:10 waste two, three hours going to the consent agenda trying to explain something. You going to be here all
4:41:16 night. Consent agenda is for as I read is for non-controversial items. But yet
4:41:23 and still we keep putting things on the consent agenda that we haven't been disc hadn't been discussed. So they get
4:41:28 pulled and then we sit here and we waste all this time on the consent agenda. The key, as Miss Maya said, we used to get
4:41:34 out of here at 8. So, I've been out of starting at 6:30 and been out here at 7:30, but the key was the agenda. We didn't
4:41:42 put things on the agenda that needed all this discussion. And go back to comment
4:41:47 you were kind of making, Miss Strange, is the fact that I have agenda review.
4:41:53 When I come down for my agenda review on Monday afternoon, I ask all the questions I need to ask about what'sever
4:41:59 on this agenda. If they can't give me, if I get they can't answer, they go and find the
4:42:04 answer for me. One of the things I did, which I think you I noticed you all still doing, you
4:42:10 all have all the department heads come into gender review. That to me, that's a waste of time.
4:42:17 Okay? I don't need all the department head coming into my gender review. I have consideration for my department. I
4:42:23 have my city manager, my deputy city manager, and my city city planner. If they can't answer my question, they go
4:42:28 get it for me. uh we may make in this where I had a experienced city man used to sit there at times and make the call
4:42:35 for me right there and get an answer for me before I leave this. So most time when I came in I didn't have to ask a
4:42:41 whole lot of questions. See I didn't have to and I'm not and so you have to
4:42:48 look at your agenda. That is the key to you getting in and out of here. stop forcing and trying to we're running
4:42:54 through things and trying to force and make everything so fast and we we we're like I say one earlier tonight we went
4:43:01 through a item for the fourth time because we
4:43:06 didn't sit down and talk about it when we was talking about the procurement process that was the fourth time that item going to come before us because we
4:43:12 rushing through and rushing through and hadn't sit down and thought about and talked it through. See, and every time
4:43:18 every time it came to it was on the consent agenda, and we end up having to pull it. So, you
4:43:24 need to we need to make really take a look at the consent agenda. Uh, Miss Strange, you talk about having uh coming
4:43:30 in here doing the gender review before council. Sunshine Law won't allow that.
4:43:35 Ain't no reason. We noticed it as a workshop. You sure can. There's no reason why we can't do an agenda review.
4:43:41 Well, I I don't have no problem with it with the processing. That's the other thing. We keep trying to change change the process. Uh you have individual
4:43:48 agenda review. Um I don't know when you all do yours, but I do mine on Monday and I ask all the questions. I get any
4:43:54 answers I I need to get answers on. I've had things developers come back and say, "Hey, we going to pull it because we
4:44:00 can't we understand what you're saying." Okay. Before I do that, uh parking is another issue I I have concern with.
4:44:07 Like today when I came down here, I could not only at two lucky I came at 2:00, so I was able to find one, but I
4:44:13 went out to the door and I was looking out in the parking lot. I think you said I'm staring out in the space. No, I
4:44:18 wasn't just staring out in the space. I was looking at the at the parking lot out there. That's what I was trying to get a read on how many parking spaces
4:44:25 because people come that want to come can't how they park here. And some that's one of the reason I'm hearing
4:44:30 some of them they come down, they turn around and go back because they can't get a park because guess what? the parking lot full of with workers. That's
4:44:37 where they at at 3:00. So, they don't have parking. So, some people are leaving. Um, and granted
4:44:44 today we had had a house full. And I thank you for answering my question, Mr. Pieces. And they was here because you
4:44:50 put out the word that we going to be talking about here. They came to complain. And that's when you see a house full of people when you sit out
4:44:56 and you complain and you go out and you recruit people to come in here and do that. And they all got up and left. But I've
4:45:03 been keeping a watch on this this chamber ever since we went to 3:00. And every time we start our 3:00 meeting, I
4:45:10 have 15 16 staff members in here and maybe three or four residents at 3:00.
4:45:17 That's been the norm. Just about every council member I do this. See,
4:45:22 when we was at 6:30, people came in. I'm going guarantee they came in because
4:45:28 they wanted to be here. And yes, they left usually by 9 10 o'clock at night if we was here. They was gone because they
4:45:33 came and took your they either did they probably come in and left like I used to do sometime but I didn't feel like I
4:45:38 wanted to stay because nothing interested on agenda you know I would leave early and then they go about
4:45:44 business or they'll take care of the business they got and they go but we can arrange this agenda to so we can start
4:45:51 at 6:30 and we can be out of here at 9:00 if if we want to and I uh for the
4:45:58 uh three minute time I will never and I said this before When y'all propose this three, I would never put a time in on
4:46:04 not one council member up here. Okay? Because as M. Strange say, we here to do
4:46:10 the business of the city. I cannot sit up here and time myself or trying to ask
4:46:15 question as Mr. and Mr. Bane was saying, ask question, get answers to things and figure out I'm making the best decision
4:46:22 for the city if I'm trying to rush myself. And as you made a comment to me earlier this this evening, Miss Mr.
4:46:28 Peterson, which you think I think you think I didn't hear that I went past three minutes doing the report. Yes, I
4:46:33 did cuz I had a ton of questions to ask. Well, we did make that motion, right? Well, it may be a motion, but again,
4:46:39 again, if I need to ask questions and go that I'm not looking to put no time in. I didn't put no time in on you. And even
4:46:46 tonight, I sit here like I always do and every one of you went past three minutes when you statements just now.
4:46:52 And I don't have no problem with it. I really don't. That's what we here for. to talk and say we can't I can't talk to
4:47:00 you all individually but this is the time we can talk at at this at this dis
4:47:05 so if you want to talk five minutes and get your point across and convince me fine I'mma sit here and I'mma listen
4:47:12 okay it's called doing the business of the people now for being here late at night hey I I I feel you and know it's
4:47:18 not safe out there and I I miss Miss Strange uh Miss uh Meyers
4:47:23 but when you ran for the office that's what it was we was here at night people always been here at night. It's unsafe
4:47:29 out there and I I I I fear for my wife all the time out there when she outside the house at night. I understand that. I
4:47:37 fear for myself when I'm out outside the house at night. However, when I ran for this office, I knew what it was. I knew
4:47:43 what time it was. I knew some nights it had to be here. And as Mr. uh Neim said,
4:47:49 when I first was elected, I had some one or two o'clock nights. Yeah. But but we've had every meeting
4:47:55 for a year and a half. That's been over two hours. And I and I agree. Every year for the the last year and a half, we've been
4:48:01 doing this and I've been saying the same thing. Agenda. Watch the agenda. Watch the agenda. But yeah, every week I see
4:48:08 the same thing over and over and over. But but to be fair, we've had agendas where you could be done in an hour and
4:48:14 we are not done because we do not edit ourselves. Let's be real. We do not edit
4:48:20 ourselves. We continue to talk and talk and talk. You know, we we go back and forth on issues. Like you said, we spent
4:48:26 two and a half we spent an hour and a half on one on one um item on the consent agenda. So, our meetings aren't
4:48:33 getting shorter because we have we're passionate. We want to talk and we're keeping on talking and is it hasn't
4:48:40 stopped. I don't see it stopping. I just don't see it stopping for us. Um again
4:48:45 and and let me let me say this as I say before I let every one of you talk and then interrupt anyway. Okay. Thank you.
4:48:52 Uh but then I go back again. You got to be careful with uh and the key to me is the
4:48:59 agenda. And I've been saying that for a year over a year now is the agenda. Watch the agenda. And
4:49:06 you're right. We spent two hours. I'm sitting here watching. We spent two hours on the cinogen.
4:49:13 See, which which which supposed to be what I always looked at. I mean, before I used to come in here and say consent
4:49:19 agenda, okay, two minutes, we done because we didn't have nothing pulled. But now, that's what I'm telling you. We
4:49:24 putting things on this consent agenda. Every week I'm sitting there and I'm going tell you after re review right
4:49:30 now, they looking at me and say, "How long you think the meeting going to be?" And I can go through there and say, "Well, this going to get pulled. This
4:49:35 going to get pulled. It's going to get pulled." And my estimate what I gave him today I
4:49:41 I said we're going to be first I said by 7:30 we'll be through with with it. Then
4:49:46 I went back and recalculated after they told me we pulled one or two item but here it is still we we still here 7:44.
4:49:52 I think you're skewing the bet then aren't you? See well well no I'm not skewing the bet because I went back and said 7 o'clock.
4:49:58 I changed minds to 7 o'clock. But then again, and I looked at him and I say, "Well, we shouldn't be in there more
4:50:04 than two hours. If that consent agenda, we didn't have to pull stuff off the consent agenda, we
4:50:10 wouldn't have been in here." I don't think we should have been here past two hours. But because I saw what was on the consent agenda and knowing something was
4:50:16 going to get pulled, that's why I did that. Uh I have no problem with town hall meeting. I do town hall. Another
4:50:22 thing was 6:30. Going back, moving back to 6:30, I think we'll get the people back in here to do
4:50:29 this. And that's what we here for. The business of the city and the business of the city involved in
4:50:35 the people sitting out there, the residents. Okay? And when we when they're not out here and we we kind of worry about uh
4:50:43 being here so long or taking not not want to hear from them, that's not taking care of the business
4:50:48 of the city, the residents. Okay. uh suggestion we may move com public comment but I'm totally against that
4:50:55 because basically that's one of the main things I come in here is public comment
4:51:00 so I can hear from the hear from the res what's bothering you because I can't be everywhere every place all the time just
4:51:06 like you all can so I want to hear what the public public comment what's your problem so I can take care of that see
4:51:12 and like I complain about the reports been moved back to the end of the end of the uh council because I used to use
4:51:19 report as way of answering them in public comment before they leave
4:51:25 before the people leave. But now I'm answer I'mma sit here and answer some questions just like I had to
4:51:30 have Mr. Fasi to state it after the report so I can answer some of his questions. See when reports up there I
4:51:36 was able to take care of that then see you know but see it's almost like we doing everything we can not to take care
4:51:43 of the people and avoid the people. Okay, we we we need to quit worrying about
4:51:49 ourselves. If you want to serve up here, quit worrying about yourselves and and take care of pe uh business of the
4:51:54 people. Uh we we knew what the requirements were when we and knew what it was when we got elected yet and still
4:52:00 we got elected. Now we got elected. We want to change everything for our own personal convenience. I don't think that's the case.
4:52:07 Yes, it is. I think what we have to do is we have to look at, you know, we have to look at progress, too. But we have to look at
4:52:13 technology. Like Miss Strange said, we, you know, it's not it's not 2000. Everybody
4:52:19 can let me let me can I finish up and then we'll move on because I I do want to get to get through reports and get
4:52:24 out of here. Uh but anyway, for his technology, you got people out there working, I if I was at work at 3:00 in
4:52:31 the afternoon, I can't get on that on that on that phone on the phone or nothing and call into this meeting.
4:52:37 You talking to me? Yeah. Well, well, we talking about technology, you know, because you got the technology. Everybody, these guys
4:52:44 still at work, so they can't not get on. Some of them can't get on the phone because their job won't allow that.
4:52:49 They can email. They can email. Well, they they they they email them, but that's a whole different story,
4:52:56 emailing and talking. And to be honest with you, I never email anybody when I
4:53:01 was at I wasn't on the city. If I had a problem, I came and stood at that podium because guess what? I'm old school.
4:53:07 Okay? I'm an old man. I'm old school. I want to look you in your eyes and talk to you face to face when I talk to you.
4:53:13 I can tell. You notice I do not email. Most people know that's one thing about you don't see me on the email. You don't see me on social media. You don't see me
4:53:20 doing that because no, I'm old school and I rather talk to you face to face. And that's why I go out here and I meet
4:53:26 people at their homes. I meet people in the street. That's why I do my uh lunching every once a month so I can
4:53:31 talk to people. I do a town hall. That's what I consider a town hall once a month. See, because it's about the
4:53:37 people business. As Mr. Matthews asked me yesterday doing my agenda review,
4:53:43 how many hours do you spend doing this job? I wish I can really tell you. Okay.
4:53:48 Yesterday I you asked me that. I went back and counted up. I I put in about 12 hours yesterday on so-called part-time
4:53:55 job. This is what I put in yesterday. This morning 8 o'clock. I was down here
4:54:00 in the meeting at 8 o'clock. So, so I, you know, I'm I'm constantly here and and and I I'm not complaining. I enjoy
4:54:07 it. I enjoy it and that's and I knew what the requirements were when I ran. I accepted that and I'm here to do it and
4:54:15 I'm constantly doing it. And people complain to me all don't know how I do and why I'm everywhere and what I'm
4:54:20 doing because it's it's what I ran for and this is what I said I would do for the people and this is what I'm doing.
4:54:25 But anyway, uh I'm I I'm still believe that we need to move it back to 6:30. I
4:54:31 don't have no problem with eliminating the uh time limit because people, it's
4:54:36 my chance to talk to you all. If y'all want to see and talk to me and tell me, give me feedback. I want to hear. I want
4:54:41 the people to hear. Okay? Don't Why are you restricting yourself for trying to trying to do business and everything
4:54:47 where you can't answer any other question you go and then say one of the things I don't understand is we have
4:54:53 gender reviews, but yet and still we still have to come in and ask a whole lot of question that could have been
4:54:58 answered at general review. And I like I told Miss I went in to Mr.
4:55:05 Van Wagner and Mr. Matthews a month or two ago and say, "Hey, I
4:55:10 don't want city staff there with me. I don't need a let them stay on their job and do their job.
4:55:17 Trust me, I think about staff. I don't want to see them sitting over there." And that that was my goal. One of my
4:55:22 goals is a short meeting. But then when I 2007, I used to come standing there and I'd be in here 11, 12, 1:00. all the
4:55:30 time. But I think before be uh last year or so or last couple years, we had got our
4:55:36 meeting down to before we be at 7:30, 8:00. But we had start going back and
4:55:41 looking at the agenda. So that's what we need to look at and quit trying to rush and do everything all at once. Hey, if
4:55:47 we have to put it off another week, go and put it off another week. Okay. That's where I stand. I do not I I I'm
4:55:53 in support of uh your motion, Mr. I made a motion. What was the motion? I made a motion to
4:55:59 uh deny resolution number two 00002R.
4:56:04 I second. I have a motion uh for denial of uh proposed changes to the rules of conduct
4:56:10 on item number 20. Is it uh item number 29?
4:56:15 Are are we we're voting so this is the parliamentary issue of making negative
4:56:22 motions. You want to vote the opposite of what you would vote if it were in
4:56:28 favor, right? Yes. So, parliamentary procedure is you you
4:56:34 you move the item and you vote it down if you don't support it. Yes. And Okay. Yes.
4:56:40 Um and so the the only thing I'll say is I do hope obviously it's going to fail. So
4:56:47 whether it's a motion to deny, motion to approve, uh it's going to fail. I I just want to say I think um I I think I hope
4:56:56 we address some of the structural things that need to be addressed because that
4:57:01 those matter regardless of what time we start. Um and um I'm not confident that
4:57:08 that's going to happen and I'm it really makes me sad to say that because I I
4:57:14 think we're um we're just not there in a functional state to be able to do that as a as a council. Um, I also think
4:57:21 that, um, we're sending a we're potentially treading into an area of sending a message that what happens
4:57:28 here, what's said here, what's asked here doesn't matter in our decision. That we're going to make our decision
4:57:33 based off of a a meeting or a review. And, um, I only get three minutes. So,
4:57:39 hey, sorry, that's not going to rise to the top of the three-minute question I have available to ask. Um, I I just I I
4:57:47 I worry about that path we're going down on that. Um, we all can be long-winded.
4:57:53 We're It's politics whether we like it or not. We want people to understand what it is that
4:57:59 we're doing up here and why we're doing it. But the reality is
4:58:04 we're shutting people out by doing the opposite and by saying that we're going
4:58:10 to just come to the meeting, call the item, vote, and move out because um you
4:58:17 know, whatever the reason is. Uh and I I do take offense. I'm sorry, Miss Myers.
4:58:22 I do take offense that when you say I don't care about the safety or I don't consider safety, uh I'm offended by that
4:58:29 statement. Um To sit there and say that I have never thought about your safety or anyone's
4:58:36 safety is out of line. Well, this is how from a woman's viewpoint because I am a woman.
4:58:42 I understand that. But you're saying I am. You can say that you view it. But that's not the first time tonight.
4:58:48 That's not the first time tonight that you have put words in my mouth or insinuated where I've come from. And I I
4:58:54 take offense to that. I take offense to that. And I want you to understand, okay, that I do consider safety. And to
4:59:01 sit here and say that a council member up here doesn't care about the safety of our staff or our fellow council members
4:59:07 or our residents simply because they have a difference of opinion on when a meeting time should start is out of
4:59:15 line. Well, I would rebut that because what I was saying, if you fully listened, if we
4:59:22 had the meeting end in two hours, that's one thing. Our meetings do not end in two hours. So that's what I was coming
4:59:29 from is because as you see our meetings haven't ended in two hours. Our meetings last four hours, five hours, and six
4:59:36 hours. And if we started at 6:30, that does put me and the other females our
4:59:42 safety in jeopardy. If we are on a road at night and we hit a pothole and we get a flat tire or something else happens, I
4:59:49 think of that and I am sorry if I offended you because that is not my intention to offend you by any stretch
4:59:55 of the imagination. But I am speaking from my perspective because it did not
5:00:01 seem that you put that into consideration. Miss Mars, I think that was in
5:00:06 consideration, but I know you you're a female and like I say, I I've always had consideration for for the safety of not
5:00:13 just female, but everyone in the city of Climouth. Um, that is always one of my concerns and all. Um,
5:00:21 to move back and word and think we don't think about your safety because we're
5:00:27 out there. But guess what? When you walk out that door, I say face the same challenges you face going on. Whether
5:00:32 I'm a male or female, we all face the same challenges of being safe out here on these streets. Okay?
5:00:37 More than likely, people aren't going to mess with a man versus a woman because they see women as weak versus men as
5:00:43 being strong. Typically, I know that's not always the case, but typically people are more inclined to go as a
5:00:50 woman because we are more of a target than you males are. I'm sorry, that is the way that is overview. I'm not saying
5:00:56 that we're not strong. I'm just saying um typically that's how when people want to do harm to us.
5:01:02 I'm going to say this. I f Well, maybe it's just me, but I f I beg to differ with you because when I see the female
5:01:07 out there, I'm more have to make sure make sure she's safe more so than I worry about that man sitting over that.
5:01:13 Okay. Uh now, and I I think most of police officers I know out there are that way. And and most of the people,
5:01:19 yeah, we do have a handful of bad people. And I know I I know I had some bad things going on in my community
5:01:25 today before I came down here that I've been trying to deal with and I hear and I still know they're going on. So we do
5:01:30 have some bad ones out there. But they think simply because it's not and you female that you you a target to be a
5:01:37 crime and I don't I would say to every all the females in Climouth don't go out after dark.
5:01:43 Okay. Okay. But uh again, I have a motion uh and the motion is to deny
5:01:49 to motion to deny. And how do I vote if I'm supporting the motion to deny?
5:01:54 You you vote I if you support the motion. So I'm going to vote I. I I don't know
5:02:01 what you're I'm not in support of 6:30 meetings under the circumstances. The motion is
5:02:08 to deny. So I vote I. So that makes sense. So I is in I is for
5:02:14 deny. I is for deny. Yes. Well, as usual, when I call a question, like I say, I have a motion in um second
5:02:21 for denial of item number 29, resolution number 2026-002R,
5:02:29 which is uh u consideration for resolution. Oh, okay.
5:02:36 Which is the change codes of conduct. Anyway, um all in favor, let it be known
5:02:42 by saying I. I. All oppose. Nay. And the chair vote nay as well. Motion
5:02:47 carries to also. Uh motion um resolution number 2026-002
5:02:56 is denied. Item number 30,
5:03:06 ordinance number 2026-00002. Intro.
5:03:11 An ordinance of the code of ordinances of the city of Clermont, Lake County, Florida, amending chapter 32, streets,
5:03:18 sidewalks, and other public places to remove the expiration date providing for conflict, severability, cotification,
5:03:25 the administrative correction of scriveners error, publication, and an effective date.
5:03:32 Okay, move the intro. Hold on, hold on. Uh,
5:03:39 and let me let me get some clarification here. I I guess cuz as I and I think we talked about this before
5:03:47 it has always been the policy of somewhat the procedure of this council that when we do intro, we just read the
5:03:52 intro, we vote to move it forward or not. Uh, of course this council, here we go again. We added time to it. This
5:03:58 council decided they wanted to even for intros at one point they wanted to hear from the public. Okay? you know, so uh
5:04:07 I've been having trouble trying to deal with that whether we gonna hear from the public on on this intro or not hear from the public on this intro. So I I guess
5:04:15 what I'm asking is what is it what is your preference? Do we hear from the public or we go ahead and just read the
5:04:20 intro, vote yeah and to move it forward or what? Okay, this is a first reading, is it not? It is.
5:04:25 It's not an intro. It's a first time that we read an ordinance so that the public has an opportunity to fully engage in the process of the government
5:04:32 if they want. Um but there is no public hearing necessary until the second reading. Okay. But we do need to make amendments
5:04:38 if we want to make an amendment and that requires public comment. That is correct. Okay. Yes. I would like to discuss the
5:04:44 ordinance so that we can conduct the business of the city and if that requires public participation I welcome
5:04:51 I would love to hear from the public on the issue of the golf cart ordinance and every other ordinance that comes before on an intro. Technically it's a first
5:04:58 reading call introally easy and we sit here and talk about the meeting but then hey we it's understanded time every time
5:05:06 in the induction time you added minutes to your to your meeting but at this point uh item number 30 huh
5:05:12 I'll withdraw my motion which motion I made a motion so I'll withdraw it okay um
5:05:19 thanks this is a public form anyone in the public wish to address this item may come to my microphone and state your
5:05:24 name and address and have three minutes Anyone in the public to address this item
5:05:30 number 38 may come to the microphone and state your name and address and have three minutes.
5:05:35 See no one in in the chamber want to address this. Anything on nine. Okay. Thank you. Now uh what's the council?
5:05:42 Bring it back to council. It was my understanding this was because we put a a sunshine on the initial resolution. So this was just removing
5:05:49 the sunshine and let it stay unlimited. Is that correct? The sunset in this case. If you approve
5:05:54 it, it'll become sunshine. It's kind of late. Yep. So, my in my discussions with staff
5:06:00 and preparing for this meeting, um about 25 people have applied for the permit.
5:06:05 So far, I asked staff and in my own experience, there's been no negative feedback on the golf carts that we're
5:06:10 aware of. In fact, more people are asking to be able to do it. Um but I did
5:06:15 feel that 25 people was not a very large population. And my suggestion is that we
5:06:22 approve this with a well we had debate in our meetings two years three years I
5:06:28 say three we maybe settled on two and a half year sunset so it comes back again
5:06:34 because I'm not quite sure we've been really we put a sunset on it in case
5:06:39 things we didn't anticipate kind of go sideways anticipate if there was going to police problems things speeding pro accidents
5:06:46 right so my suggestion was simply that we we move it forward forward. I think from what I can tell, I would support
5:06:52 moving it forward, but I do think it would be prudent to put maybe a two, two and a half, threeyear sunset so it comes
5:06:58 back again just one more time to see what happens. Thoughts? Yeah, I mean I agree with
5:07:05 that. I mean I think you know we put this motion out but I don't think we
5:07:10 like it's not like we didn't put any kind of golf cart parking, right? We didn't So we didn't take a lot of
5:07:16 things into consideration. I mean if you really want to have alternate you know
5:07:21 forms of transportation you have to like create this for the people too whether you have bicycle parking right golf cart
5:07:29 you know you have to do that have charging for the golf carts etc etc so
5:07:34 you're I think it's a good idea we maybe do it with another sunset for a year and then bring revisit it again to see if we
5:07:40 are getting participation I mean if only 25 people are using it it's not very much
5:07:46 right and we make it permanent because 25 people. So I I was thinking three years because it gives it real time.
5:07:51 Yeah. Okay. To see what happens, but I feel like those are substantive. Maybe they're not, but I thought they were substantive
5:07:57 potential changes. So I wanted to bring it up during the first reading. Okay.
5:08:04 Did you make that motion yet or are we still opening? Time. I'm not certain on the time.
5:08:09 Um I I I would prefer just to approve as is. Uh I would not like to have a second
5:08:15 sunset. Um, I think everything I've heard from residents is that uh they
5:08:21 appreciated and understood the value of the first sunset, but if they're going to now invest anywhere from 3 to 5
5:08:28 to$10,000 for a device that could now then just be sunseted in another two years, three
5:08:34 years, one year. I know ordinances can always change, but now we have it written that it has to change. And I
5:08:42 think it's just uh cleaner to move forward and we've had a year of review. Uh I would feel the same way for
5:08:49 transparency purposes on the on the backyard chickens when that comes up. Just if we don't have the issues, let's
5:08:54 move forward instead of just keep people going through hoops.
5:09:02 So we're saying to not have another just approve it indefinite.
5:09:07 I just had an idea so I'm running it by the four of you. Uh, Mr. W, we want to
5:09:13 go ahead and get is it okay if they being this supposed to be the first reading, can we go ahead and make a
5:09:19 motion to go ahead and just approve it without having to come back the second time? Of course, I don't think so
5:09:26 because it hadn't went went out and really advertised to the people, but I
5:09:31 need you. I just want to make sure I understand the question. Are are you asking whether or not if there are changes made on the
5:09:36 second reading, it'll have to come back? No. Well, I think Mr. Mr. Peterson question. If I understand him, he want
5:09:41 to make a motion to just go ahead and say move it forward without having to do anything else. It just to approve it as is.
5:09:48 Yeah, certainly you can do that. Okay. Without having to come back to the council again. Oh. Um, no, not not as is.
5:09:55 This will require a second read. Okay. That's what I and I think that's what he was trying to do.
5:10:01 But I think what we have to try to do is, you know, just make a motion to have golf carts is one thing, but we have to
5:10:07 incentivize it to the public, to the businesses around, have them maybe create like uh golf cart parking and you
5:10:14 get 10% off. So now that would stimulate people to get golf carts. you know, a
5:10:19 lot of people don't want to spend 10, 15,000 for a golf cart and, you know, they feel like they're the outcast in
5:10:26 here as opposed to, you know, so like I think of public's parking, they put there's a little golf cart parking in
5:10:32 there. So they they kind of want to have you there. They don't want to have you, you know, parking in a regular spot and
5:10:37 you know what I'm saying? So they Yeah. And so where I'm coming from is we're establishing policy and I just
5:10:43 want to be prudent that we're estab adopting good policy. You bring up a valid point about people's investment
5:10:49 which I'm had not heard. So that's why I'm asking the question. I just felt like 25 people wasn't a huge
5:10:55 no number and I was concerned with that having a permanent
5:11:00 policy that seems significant what vehicles are on the road. I'm unfamiliar with it. So I'm just
5:11:06 being cautious. But if the general feel is no, people like this were ready to move forward. I'll support it. I don't I don't I'm not fighting for the sun for
5:11:12 the sunset. I just thought it was worth considering. Let me let me uh I have no problem with
5:11:19 with moving it on down the road and and approving it. But what I think I'm hearing from you, Mr. Peterson, that
5:11:25 maybe we need to send some suggestion back to staff to add into the policy because she's concerned about the
5:11:30 parking and all that. I don't think, you know, I mean, it has to be incentivized to create, you know, right now I I don't think
5:11:37 people they don't have any place to go with their golf cart. you're going to park in. Now, if somebody's going to say, "Wow, I want," you know, like I
5:11:44 know in the villages they do, they split it. You know, they can take a parking spot and golf cart, golf cart, so people
5:11:50 would know what to do. And well, developers love that. They love to get credit for a parking spot that's half the size.
5:11:56 Yeah. Yeah. But then they can say, "Well, my concern right now is these are kind of
5:12:01 things because it's not in this ordinance right now. So rather than waste a whole lot of time by the time if
5:12:07 we turn around and bring it back to us in a couple of weeks and this stuff not in here, all these things, do we want to
5:12:12 get with council uh staff and make sure these things if you want them in there is in there before it come back to us so
5:12:19 we don't have to sit here and waste two hours discussing these things, right? I the way I interpret what I mean about
5:12:25 agenda to make sure things is done before they get here. The way I interpret Mr. Peterson is saying is that as we're going through
5:12:31 our comprehensive plan and our code changes that we want to make sure that uh Mr. Norris's crew and and DPZ and
5:12:38 they're incorporating into the new code parking that takes into consideration the golf carts and my approach was
5:12:45 simply do we want to adopt a full ordinance on golf carts before we have
5:12:50 those written into our code and we know that that's what the public wants. I think that's what the public wants.
5:12:56 Again, I'm not necessarily even advocating for the time. I think it's prudent to put the sunset, but I don't
5:13:03 think it's necessary. But I also don't think we need to put the parking in the ordinance. I think that's done through
5:13:09 the code rewrite. I mean, I was just talking, you know, like what my if you want, you know, like
5:13:14 you said, it's only 25 people permit. So, that's really nothing. So, do we want to continue? You know,
5:13:20 now these people already bought their golf carts to use in town because we're allowing it. Now, you can't really take
5:13:26 that away from this. No, you can't use your golf cart anymore. Well, and that's my concern with a permanent adoption is that feeling will
5:13:33 be even stronger if we don't have sunset. If we if we adopt it and there is no
5:13:38 sunset, then people will have a sense, if you will, again, please excuse it of
5:13:43 of perhaps entitlement to the right. They'll treat it as a right rather than a privilege because it's been given as a
5:13:50 right. Whereas if we give it as a test as we're going through the code rewrite
5:13:55 and we put a longer period because one year wasn't really enough and and maybe longer period an investment for a
5:14:01 three-year project seems like it's better to make than a one-year project. That was my thinking. But I could be overthinking it. I just
5:14:08 wanted to give everything that's happening downtown a chance to play out.
5:14:13 Yeah. And what if it what if it's a disaster? You know, right? we'd have to take away and change
5:14:20 an ordinance versus just saying, "Well, it's sunsetting and that was the plan, so we're letting it sunset." Okay,
5:14:26 I'm in agreement to that. Yeah. I mean, I just think that if we let, you
5:14:31 know, if you tell people you can use a golf cart, they go out and spend 105,000
5:14:37 for the golf cart and now you go, "Oh, no, you can't have it anymore." So, you can drive it in your driveway, that's
5:14:43 it. Right? You know what I'm saying? I don't you know either I think you should either do it or not do it or you
5:14:50 you know what I'm saying is it's the same thing as if you say you're gonna but you can have a you can use a bike trail but we're not going to make
5:14:56 any bike trails but you can use your bike but we're we're only going to have it for a year after that. No, I spent
5:15:02 5,000 for this fancy bike and now you can't use it anymore. Is that is that fair to the public?
5:15:09 Yeah. Well, um I keep hearing 25 people.
5:15:15 That's all. But guess what? I I think that's a lot of people in a in a community that is not a golf course
5:15:22 community. So 25 is a lot of people far as I'm concerned, you know. Uh I don't think anywhere along that course where
5:15:28 we have it is a golf course, but yet we got all these people behind golf carts, you know, doing it. So So I'm not the 25
5:15:35 people not really my concern. the thing is do we uh and I have no problem going ahead and and making it a permanent
5:15:41 thing. So, but I thought what we were doing here tonight was trying to decide whether we going to move it forward.
5:15:46 Okay. Well, I'm going to take my shot and see what happens. I'm going to move to approve ordinance number 2026-002
5:15:52 with a three-year sunset. See if I get a second. Great. Got a second. Cool. Let's call it.
5:15:58 Just clarification question. Is this still just the one quadrant? And where where's that language in here? Where am
5:16:04 I missing that?
5:16:12 doesn't have the borders, right? Didn't we have it? Didn't we just didn't we just prohibit it to one quadrant? The
5:16:18 northeast quadrant. The quadrant is uh anything south of north of Highway 50, west of 27.
5:16:25 But I don't see that actual language in here. And I So well, that that's exactly right. It that
5:16:32 is what was approved. Um because where I was thinking with this conversation about the additional sunset
5:16:38 is gosh guys, we're still it's still only one quadrant. Why don't we just let it
5:16:43 go? And that can be our that can be our test. If if we really run into issues,
5:16:48 this would be the area that we could really test that in um if we needed to.
5:16:54 Uh but we're still I guess though maybe not because this ordinance doesn't have it in here prohibiting just that
5:17:00 northeast quadrant. So it does say designated city roads. Did we maybe have another ordinance with
5:17:05 it last year? There must I think what happened was that's what I thought there were two versions and I think the
5:17:12 one this version that was edited probably was the original version. Um
5:17:18 because the let's I'm just looking through the old version that was
5:17:24 drafted. We may have to just start all over in terms of well but publication.
5:17:29 How do we designate the municipal roads? Because what's actually is convenient about this, this could be a happy accident that if there is a desire for
5:17:37 other parts of the city to be able to have the golf cart, this says designated roads. Yes. But we have the issue of
5:17:45 golf carts can't go across State Road 50. And so, yeah, if we open it up, it
5:17:50 really is trying to tell it's telling our residents they can't, but they really can. And so I think that was the reason why, if I remember correctly, one
5:17:56 of the ultimate reasons why the that northeast quadrant was designated. But you may have people down by the ark
5:18:03 that want to do it. There could be I fully agree. I I I Yes. I I I'm not uh opposed to opening
5:18:11 it up long term, but I I thought this was still just designated to one area,
5:18:16 and it looks like this ordinance doesn't. So then the cler the question comes to the city attorney. Do we have
5:18:22 to go back to the drawing board because this ordinance isn't the actual correct ordinance?
5:18:28 This Yeah, I mean, we could look, it's it's
5:18:34 certainly up to the city council um to determine where it wants the geographic
5:18:40 limitations to be. I'm looking at the codified version though that's on Munich
5:18:45 code and it defines municipal roads as any
5:18:50 road open for use to the public. But this is designated municipal roads and I remember we had discussion around
5:18:57 yeah was 12th Street one of them or not. So I'm wondering if that's correct.
5:19:02 I'm wondering was there a resolution that went with it or was there another ordinance that went with I don't remember the how it got there, but I
5:19:08 thought for sure it was voted on to just be that that quadrant. No, I agree with you, but I'm thinking
5:19:14 it was a second tool. It was block. It was voted on. We chose
5:19:20 that's quad. I see. I I'm sorry, guys. I apologize. So, when I look at the codified version,
5:19:25 it's 32-105. It does list your designated areas and it does limit it to the one quadrant.
5:19:32 So, in looking at this Oh, there it is. It's
5:19:37 Oh, let me let me find your what you're voting on right now. Yeah, we don't have a 3215.
5:19:43 This is 32102. Okay. So, all that's doing is amending. Let's see and make sure that all this is
5:19:50 doing is amending that section. Oh, yeah. So, 105 stays in effect. Correct.
5:19:55 So, you did know what you were doing. No. Um,
5:20:00 it looks to me that that's all you're doing. So, you would be amending that one section and
5:20:06 the rest of it stays the same. So, 105 still says it has the limitation. You still have
5:20:12 32-105. So, it just wasn't included because it it's not germanine. It doesn't change. Yes.
5:20:17 Good question then. Okay. Well, with that, I I then I would say I think we should just go ahead and
5:20:23 move forward. Uh, I encourage us to do that rather than having another sunset.
5:20:32 I got my second. So, I I'm willing to let it ride and let's see what happens. Let's see how tonight ends.
5:20:38 But I I I think I heard three years in that motion, though. Yeah. I I I I moved for three years sunset.
5:20:46 Yeah. You know, maybe not dying on any hills on this one. I
5:20:51 have a motion and a second to move ordinance number uh 2026-00002
5:20:59 and the three years into a three-year sunset. Mr. W my my legal question here
5:21:04 now that we making that motion that introduction do I have to do a roll call being it's ordinance?
5:21:10 Yes. Okay. Yeah. Now, now that you made that type motion, I think I have to do a roll
5:21:17 call vote rather than just a uh you know, because you you you're
5:21:23 actually changing everything here. All right. In that case, uh, Council Member Strange,
5:21:29 I. Council member Bang, nay.
5:21:35 Council member Myers, I. Council member Peterson, I.
5:21:41 And chair vote I as well. Motion passes 4 to one. So, we go into a three-year
5:21:47 sunset. Uh, And I let me just say say this, Mr.
5:21:54 Bane, I heard what I mean, Mr. Peterson, I heard what you're saying. If there was some things that you would like to see in this ordinance, I think you need to
5:22:00 probably get with with staff and try to try to get them added. Um, so when it come before us again and everything,
5:22:06 it'll be there. Um, because I don't think some of that stuff is there right now. All right, let's start with uh reports now. Wow.
5:22:14 Uh, Mr. Van Wagner is here. I let me say this. I I uh my prayers and and
5:22:22 everything goes out to Mr. Van Wagner and his his family. Um some personal issues they're trying to deal with and
5:22:28 everything. So I ask that you please uh keep them in your prayer and everything. In the meantime, I'm going ask Mr.
5:22:36 Magnus. Thank you, Mayor. I'll try to keep this short. I do have a lot to cover. Um city offices will be closed on Monday,
5:22:42 January 19th in observation of Martin Luther King Jr. Day. Uh there will not be a second council work or there will
5:22:49 not be a council workshop in January. The January 27th council meeting has been cancelled due to legislative days
5:22:55 in Hollywood. Hollywood Tallahassee. It's late night. Sorry, we're not in Hollywood. We're in Tallahassee.
5:23:02 No, I that conference will be in August in Hollywood.
5:23:11 Also, February 10th will be the next council meeting. We do have some upcoming events. Uh January 14th, coffee
5:23:17 with a cop at 1 Utopia at 692 or 7, excuse me, 792 West Montro Street. On
5:23:24 January 17th, Saturday is Arbor Day at Lake Hywath the Preserve, 8 to 2, uh or
5:23:30 until the 300 saplings have been given away. Uh Monday the 19th is MLK parade
5:23:36 and celebration. The parade begins at 10 o'clock at McKenna Park. celebration celebration begins at 11 o'clock at
5:23:43 Waterfront Park. And on Thursday, January 22nd, there's a ribbon cutting open house for the Clermont Fire
5:23:49 Department Public Safety Training Center at 412th Street from 5:00 to 7:00 p.m.
5:23:55 Because we're not meeting till February, there are some really good shows coming up. The Clermont Performing Arts Center
5:24:00 on the 16th, The Modern Gentleman, the 23rd, The Mansplaining with Tom Brasco. And on the 30th, Smok and Renegade. That
5:24:07 is all I have. Mayor and Council. Thank you, sir. Uh, city attorney Wah.
5:24:14 Thank you, Mayor. First of all, at the next PNZ meeting, we're going to have some training regarding best practices,
5:24:21 and those will include materials on Sunshine Law, public records, and what
5:24:27 the city's policies are regarding um just practices and interactions with the public. Um, second, I'm going to follow
5:24:35 up with uh an email to the this city council just because it's a new year with some reminders on the same laws,
5:24:43 some of the mandatory things that the city charter requires that I just think are a good idea to keep in mind. And uh,
5:24:50 you know, since it came up, maybe a little bit of Robert's rules. You know, motions to deny, for example, are in an
5:24:57 extreme acceptable in a board meeting, but are typically not the way we move things forward on an agenda. And I'll
5:25:03 I'll explain why. Um, we had a question earlier, I think, from Mr. Pumasi about
5:25:09 the Wellness Ridge CDD. And I I want to advise both him and the city council
5:25:14 that I mean there is an interlocal agreement being negotiated currently between the CDD and the city that
5:25:21 allocates responsibility between the city and the CDD. To the best of my knowledge they're entirely public as
5:25:27 well as public records. I mean I'm not a nothing has been agreed to. It is something that will have to come before
5:25:33 council um once it is negotiated. But it's things like, you know, who's responsible for roads in certain areas,
5:25:40 who's responsible for sidewalks or landscaping in certain areas. And the agreement may have some um relevance for
5:25:46 some of the matters that Mr. Famasi has raised, which I have looked into and I'll be able to talk about later. Um the
5:25:52 CDD has filed a petition with the city to expand to expand 168 acres. That will
5:26:00 come before you probably in March. It's currently under review by staff. Um, so
5:26:05 I don't have a lot to tell you about it right now except that we've received it. Staff is looking at it and it will come
5:26:11 before you soon. Um, and I think that's all that I have at this time. Uh, Mr. W, when you talk about CDD, um,
5:26:22 the I know the county we we have no control over the CDDs and everything.
5:26:27 Um, to go back to what Mr. from is saying like he's saying I think he was saying
5:26:33 that the uh funds are not being utilized down there. Any way we can
5:26:39 have the county you let us know what they doing with the funds and everything because they controlling all that and we don't we have no say so in that in that.
5:26:45 So um I I I have started looking into this and um at the city manager's request and at
5:26:52 Mr. Pamasi's. So I yes the answer mayor is yes. I'll try to present something to you about that. Okay.
5:26:58 Okay. Thank you. Uh, Council Member Bane.
5:27:06 Thank you, Mayor. Um, just a reminder to the public that uh, Thursday, Lake
5:27:11 County is having their 2025 comprehensive plan update meeting here in Clermont at Aurelia Cole Academy.
5:27:18 That's Thursday at 6:00. Um, I know we talk a lot about the city comprehensive
5:27:23 plan, but we are also in Lake County and Lake County what they do with their comprehensive plan as we see as we get
5:27:29 frustrated or concerned by what's, you know, designated as future land use and zoning areas. That's all part of the
5:27:36 comprehensive plan of the county. So, I really encourage residents to attend that and have their voice heard from a
5:27:42 city perspective. Um, is the it's my understanding I think it's the only one in South Lake that uh they're they're
5:27:48 holding. So they're holding it here in Clermont on Thursday. And then um I just wanted to ask my fellow council
5:27:53 members in terms of a potential workshop idea um on whether there is appetite for
5:27:59 us to uh new year set uh have a conversation to set uh goals in an
5:28:05 evaluation process for the city manager. Yes.
5:28:14 Okay. Yeah. I I I open it up because uh if it is, I think we I I would like to get
5:28:20 that potentially. It sounds like February might be pretty packed and and
5:28:25 there might be some changes coming to how long or when those that February workshop is. So if that's the case, then
5:28:33 if there's the appetite, um can we do that for March? Yes.
5:28:40 Yes. Okay. 31st March. March 31st is the March
5:28:46 council workshop. No, it's the it's the third. We voted on the third Tuesdays from January to
5:28:54 October, right? Is that Sounds right. Except for the budget month, I think is I'm here every Tuesday. You just tell me
5:29:00 when you need me. I'll be gone next Tuesday. 17th is what? Yeah, that's what I thought.
5:29:06 17th March 17th birthday.
5:29:14 All right, that's it. Okay. Thank you, Council Member Myers.
5:29:19 I just want to say happy new year to everybody. Happy New Year, Council Member Peterson.
5:29:26 Uh, I was at a I'm in the Irish club because I don't have any Irish in me, but I'm in the Irish club, Kings Ridge,
5:29:32 and I was inundated by Doesn't stop most people anyway. Top of the morning to you, lady.
5:29:39 I was inundated by I had gotten an email or a text message about the utility
5:29:44 bills. Yeah. Nobody knew what to do. They were totally what should I do? How do I do this? I don't have a computer. How am I
5:29:51 supposed So I called uh utility. I spoke with Dana. Really nice girl. She set up
5:29:57 now a inservice at Kings Ridge in a clubhouse for the 20th. That's awesome.
5:30:03 She's going to bring a laptop, do it all. Everybody's really happy. So, I just want to give kudos to her for her
5:30:08 quick action on getting that done, you know, because I think it's something especially when they came up with this
5:30:14 thing where they send you a notice on February on January 10th that it dies at
5:30:19 the end of the month. So, you have to do it, right? And you know, people were you and then they also hit everybody with that 3%
5:30:26 charge, which isn't anything, but to some people it was a big what the hell are you doing to me? But other than
5:30:32 that, I just wanted to I just wanted to comment how quick she was able to react and get this done. And I think it's it's
5:30:38 good that we do this maybe in other communities, possibly Heritage Hills or Summit Green, maybe have them contact
5:30:45 their uh wellness director or activities director. That would go there and do that maybe before the end of the month.
5:30:52 That's it. That's good. I love that. Yeah. Council
5:30:58 member Strange. Um, wanted to on behalf of the city, if you all don't mind, I wanted to welcome
5:31:04 Rutgers University to town. They are doing their winter training here for their softball team. So, that's
5:31:10 exciting. Um, also exciting news is Madden Media,
5:31:15 who is the um, public well, I don't know what they do. They do the media for Lake
5:31:20 County, whatever that is. Um they're doing a program called Off the Track and
5:31:27 it's they're interviewing four of the Olympic track athletes who are here in the South Lake area and they're going to
5:31:35 be taking them into South Lake Cities to do kind of a come downtown, come to this
5:31:43 event. So I did plug Clermont, Pig on the Pond, the great Clermont, and I might have plugged the spring games
5:31:48 because they're doing it in March. But if there's any other ideas for March, I will happily pass it along. I felt like
5:31:54 between downtown and those that gives them something fun to do. And they're going to be promoting the heck out of
5:31:59 that like worldwide. So hopefully that is good. And whoever's working with True
5:32:04 North, if you want to mention that to them when I they were totally excited to do work with the city related to that,
5:32:11 I've been talking about it, but the capital funds are opening now. Um, so I'd been in touch with Brian to talk
5:32:17 about, you know, if you have ideas or thoughts, you know, let's get ready for those because capital funds are opening.
5:32:22 It's not a lot, but it's something. And Ghost Sports, which is the Greater Orlando Sports Commission, is lining up
5:32:28 in a way that I'm really pleased to see to bring us as a city track, triathlon,
5:32:34 soccer, softball, golf, swimming, rowing, wakeboarding, and sailing pretty much any event FHSA up to college that
5:32:40 we can get. They're they're going to be bringing us all the bids that they have. Um, which would be anywhere from one to
5:32:46 five year kind of bid cycles. So, that's what's coming. I I told you we got some cool stuff.
5:32:53 That's all I got. Thank you. So, of course, now my report.
5:32:58 First of all, let me say um Mr. Mr. um Matthysse
5:33:04 impact fees. Sir, isn't there a study going on right now? Don't we have a study going for impact fees? I believe we do for some of our impact
5:33:10 fees. Yes. Okay. Uh I just I mean I think one of the callers he he and I got a lot of email. I think we all received
5:33:17 MA is concerned about impact fee and mobility fees. But I wanted to just clutter it up. Um understand that we
5:33:23 just increased our impact fees a couple years ago, two three years ago. I think
5:33:29 we did. Uh it hadn't been that long ago. We just increased the impact fees. And now we got another study going on
5:33:34 because you can only do uh do a change or impact uh do impact fees increases
5:33:40 every 3 to four years. Am I right? Four or five. Mr. Walk, how many years? Huh? That's the current law.
5:33:46 Three to four. You have to have three to four years. It take you three to four years before we can do them. But we're
5:33:51 in the process of doing the study now. Um so the email that you all been receiving and all the information all
5:33:57 getting thrown at about impact fees, that's where we are. I'm not quite sure about this this thing with mobility fee.
5:34:04 To me, I know I've asked this question before, mobility fees to me is nothing more than another impact fee. So, so
5:34:11 mobility fees typically take place of the transportation impact fee. And what it does is allows you to use it for
5:34:17 things like trails, anything that's mobility, anything that it could be microobility, right? So, anything like that. It just
5:34:23 it's it takes place of the transportation impact. But basically what what they trying the person that
5:34:30 keeping uh sending us all is trying to encourage us to implement uh mobility fees which I don't think we have the do
5:34:37 we have the right to do that Mr. W do that have to go through the county as well. We we do have a right to implement.
5:34:43 Okay. Okay. But then again you you hit the people with more fees and more money. So so just get that
5:34:50 consideration. That's what that email about. Uh again happy new year to everybody. Parking space. I've had a
5:34:56 request for um the I guess from the it's
5:35:01 dentist office uh Jim Davis across the street is that dentist autometry one of them over here and everything he's
5:35:07 saying you having a problem with with everybody that's parking in the parking lot there behind the restroom a lot of
5:35:14 uh if you don't mind looking in this mats. Yes sir. Um, my understanding is that
5:35:19 some of the teachers that's from the school, instead of them parking in the school parking lot, they parking over
5:35:24 here by the restroom and taking up all the parking. And now they complain. They coming to me complaining about the fact
5:35:30 that the the uh customers is coming and have nowhere to park. They having to park all over the
5:35:36 place. So, they actually requesting seeing if we can do a one one reserve parking space out there. So that's uh
5:35:42 one of the things they asked us to consider putting a parking sper parking space in front of his office out there by the restroom. Okay. Uh because most
5:35:50 of his most of his uh customers and uh clients are elderly people. So they
5:35:56 having to walk a long ways and everything. So want to give that consideration. Uh mayor's lunchon, thank
5:36:02 everybody for participating mayor lunchon. I thought 40 41 people attended this time and uh great um MLK they let
5:36:09 me elaborate a little bit more. any if you know anybody that want to do some vendors, be a vendor down there. I even
5:36:15 participate in the in the celebration at Waterfront Park, please uh I guess you
5:36:20 can contact me or contact my wife. And the parade, if any any of you all want to enter in a a vehicle or organization,
5:36:27 anything in the parade, let me know and uh we can try to get that done for you as well. Uh the parade will start uh
5:36:34 10:00 at McKenna Park, go through uh down the Sodto Street to East Avenue, East Avenue into into Waterfront Park,
5:36:42 and um
5:36:48 have what Well, I I don't did Did any I don't know if any council member replied back.
5:36:53 That's what I don't I don't really I don't really handle the parade portion, but I I will check into that tomorrow
5:37:00 and see what they doing with that. Uh I actually kind of like give that out to
5:37:05 to Lincoln Park Motorcycle Rams Club and they supposed to be doing all that portion, but we we'll check it. Are you
5:37:11 do you want to be in it? Yeah. Okay. Well, let me we'll try to we'll try to
5:37:17 work on that. Okay. Um, my concern, one of my concern with the
5:37:22 water bill, Mr. M Mr. Matthysse, is I I have a big concern with the gentleman that came up here. Everybody water bills
5:37:29 keep going up. And of course, I keep complaining to Mr. Van Wagner and other people about, you know, I'm not happy
5:37:34 with my water bill plus the fact that uh um that seem to be a serious problem and
5:37:39 we we need to try to get a get a hold of that. Why everybody bills keep going up every month? Um, you know, I don't I
5:37:46 don't know what's going on there. Um they getting these outrageous water bills every every month and all that.
5:37:53 And public works actually reached out to him as he was walking out and and got his contact and said that they'll be
5:37:58 talking to him tomorrow. They're going to look into everything and and be getting with him tomorrow morning. Yeah. So So we need Well, like I said,
5:38:04 we need to maybe maybe I know I talked to Mr. Van Wagner and mentioned to him, but we need to sit down and try to try
5:38:10 to get a hand on that. It's a a little tough and I know we also talked about uh coming up with better
5:38:17 ways to detect leaks and everything so so you guys don't get these outrageous.
5:38:22 Huh? Yeah. Outrageous bills and everything. So please please uh let's get on board to that. Mr. Famasi uh I
5:38:28 think he answered some of the stuff on uh uh your CDD. That's where we are. MSTU. Uh, I know last year we we we set
5:38:37 up a a workshop on ST STD S MSTU.
5:38:43 It's like MSTU. And I know I kept asking and the workshop between you all because
5:38:49 that's all between the county and you all and u I personally I trying to tell
5:38:54 you basically tell me what you want and I'll give you that. And the last
5:38:59 thing I can remember you talking to me about it was the fact that you all had some kind of agreement. I never
5:39:05 understood exactly what went on and it just kept going. And after asking four or five times, I finally got to the
5:39:10 point where I guess you're all happy with what you got. But if you're not Well, I explained the agreement before.
5:39:16 Can you come to the microphone?
5:39:24 So, at the county workshop, uh the county uh made an agreement with the residents. They were going to wait two
5:39:31 years. They're going to reduce the cost of the millage rate down to four. So, they said half. After
5:39:37 two years, if not enough commercial comes down to the wellness way, they would end the MSTU.
5:39:43 They go again. Yeah. That they would end it. So, so were you happy with that? Yes, we well we accepted those terms, but uh I
5:39:51 am, like I said, there's not a whole lot of commercial coming down there. Uh so we accepted that because the city uh um
5:40:00 also gets funds from that. uh your street department's not here right now because there's negotiations if I'm
5:40:08 incorrect that the MSTU from the city's end was used as a bargaining tool with
5:40:14 the CDD and uh the CDD has control of those
5:40:19 county funds. my CDD Wellness uh uh Ridge CDD which is aka LAR.
5:40:28 So I have two revenue sources that they're using. One from the county MSTU
5:40:34 to fund those lights which is what I was talking about earlier. All those lights are not on right now because I guess
5:40:40 from the what the county explained was Seiko has not hooked them up yet because there's some kind of issue.
5:40:48 And from what I understand, you just had a meeting here about the Wellness Way area. Correct.
5:40:54 Oh, not that I'm aware of. Maybe someone else on staff did. Yeah, they they have regular Wellness
5:40:59 Way meetings and we've also been meeting with the commercial developers about Right. So, how does somebody get access
5:41:05 from the public for those? Because those are supposed to be public meetings, right? These are not these are actually staff
5:41:10 technical ones. I don't with the CDD. Correct. Not with the CDD. Uh okay. When you negotiate with the CDD
5:41:19 uh and the city, are those open to the public? Um when those meetings occur, I I don't
5:41:24 know. I I'm not aware of when those meetings occur. The ones I'm referring to is uh economic development folks from
5:41:30 the county and the developers. That that's the one that you you I think
5:41:36 you're referring to the meeting. Well, we used to do year uh year or two ago where we used to meet with everybody
5:41:41 once a month. Now the county is starting to do that again. Right. Right. It's I guess meeting or something
5:41:47 and I don't think it's it's it's talking about the MSTU. It's not it's about development patterns
5:41:52 and Ziko to get the lighting and everything like that right in the wellness way area. So
5:41:58 shouldn't somebody from the resident be invited to those to witness those kind of things because you're talking to the
5:42:05 developers which are uh controlling a lot of our area and they're controlling
5:42:10 a lot of the cost and causing a lot of the cost running through the CDD. They run our HOA and we have no control over
5:42:17 our own area but we're just being told hey just pay the bill. I'm happy to bring it up to the county
5:42:23 meeting. Can you contact the county absolutely and everything and find out when they having a meeting and um you or
5:42:30 Mr. Van Wagner attend those and I would like for you to get concerns from Mr. from you about those because to be
5:42:37 honest with you, I've never never been a big fan of CDDs or IMSTUs, but um
5:42:44 I know we talked a lot about the MSTU last year and and I know I kept asking you and I felt like you all were pretty
5:42:51 much satisfied with where everything went and I we were forced into an agreement. So,
5:42:57 no, no, we were forced because uh this MSTU fight, if I remember right, then the
5:43:03 city suggested that we be DNA DNxed because of the MSTU workshop. Don't tell
5:43:09 me that's not true. It's recorded. Yeah. Well, it was it was you're right. It was a comment made about DNx NX
5:43:16 and you guys voted to go forward and look into it. Agreement with that either. So, no, I know. And then I found out that
5:43:23 the developers threatened to sue because of that because it would cause huge technical uh situation over it because
5:43:29 of all the agreements for the wellness way implementation plan. And and the county and the city
5:43:35 agreements. I get it. So it was it was it was worry about the developer suing.
5:43:41 I wasn't worried about being you all being d being NX dxed. Okay. I knew I
5:43:48 didn't think that was going to ever happen. My concern with you was the MSTU and everything else and they could say
5:43:54 whatever they want to say. I I just didn't see with legal reasons how they were going to do all that and everything. So my concern as I kept it
5:44:01 in iterating to you is let me know if you're happy what you what you what you well we we took the agreement that was
5:44:06 offered to us uh because it was made during the county workshop and uh the the tax was a
5:44:14 thorough way through the city because the city was involved in approving it because the county can't do that to that
5:44:19 area. It had to be approved by the city through your ordinance. Well, the city cannot they you're right. They they the
5:44:26 county have to implement MSTU, right? We can't do it, right? They have to but then we have to come for the office of
5:44:32 approval and I feel like we could have had some leverage in trying to correct meet your needs and everything down
5:44:38 there. That's why I had you all talk to them and work it out of what you already wanted, right? I got that. And my my other
5:44:46 question to you is when you approve the when you voted to approve the CDD, the Wellness Ridge CDD, they and in that
5:44:54 agreement, you're allowed to review their budget. Has anybody the council reviewed any of the CDD's budgets?
5:45:00 I I have not. No. No. So, nobody's taken that opportunity. And and when it's the CDDs first came
5:45:07 out, and I've learned a lot more about them when they first came because I went to my legal and what is this? And of
5:45:13 course, this new thing. So yeah, I sit down and on the recommendations everything, but after I got to learn
5:45:18 them, you know, I'm not a big fan of No, I understand that. Who who I don't know have a clue what you're talking about.
5:45:24 What's that? What is What is this meeting? Who is negotiating? What is going on? I'm
5:45:29 unaware of any meeting of negot Well, the CDD is negotiating with the city of Clermont about infrastructure
5:45:36 and what they're going to accept from the CDD because the CDD takes takes control of these development centers
5:45:44 after they've been after they approve it from the developer because it has to do with the bonds.
5:45:49 I'm with you. Who to your knowledge on behalf of the city is negotiating the street department uh second in
5:45:56 charge. Am I incorrect, Mr. Well, if if we're talking about the interlocal between the city and the CDD,
5:46:03 then I'm involved. Um, public services is primarily involved. Are there are there any sort of credits
5:46:10 being given? Is that being negotiated? Not that I know of. I mean, the agreement draft that I've seen has to do
5:46:17 with allocation of responsibility. Um there is there are provisions being talked about about reimbursements for
5:46:23 certain kinds of things on the border between the jurisdictions, but those aren't hammered out yet. Um so it's
5:46:31 really in a draft stage and right from what I from what I gathered I heard that the city is bargaining with
5:46:37 the MSTU money. I am not aware of that but I
5:46:42 I don't know how the city can borrow with him money because it's passed through but there's a lot of negotiations
5:46:49 about money going on. The problem is the CDD is took on they expanded their uh
5:46:56 their area of responsibility into the wellness way connector road and the wellness way.
5:47:01 But this would have to come before us. Yeah. This won't be something that's done at the staff level. Right. And these are my concerns because
5:47:08 they're making us take on areas now. Yeah. The roadways. No, you know. Yeah. I just didn't know
5:47:13 if it was going on at the staff level or if it's gonna come down. Well, it's coming. It's behind the scenes right now. You know what I mean?
5:47:19 They're working out an agreement. I mean, I'm I'm happy to share. I pulled up a copy. This is not this is not in
5:47:25 the darkness. I mean, these would be this would be subject to public records. This is only only thing I I knew is the fact
5:47:32 that I thought it was uh conversation going on about areas of responsibility. That's what it is.
5:47:38 Okay. That's what it is. There is nothing in here about what money comes from. I mean section two is maintenance
5:47:43 responsibilities. Who does what, who reimbures what if someone does something on behalf of the other, right?
5:47:49 Landscaping, irrigation, um a right of entry to do these things. And then there's the term. Um
5:47:55 correct. But there there is money being discussed about reimbursement for areas that are considered uh inside the CDD,
5:48:04 but they're also in the right away of the city. Correct. Yes. Yes. So, and that's going to affect me
5:48:11 financially because I'm paying from both pots that are paying that particular the services back for that middle area that
5:48:18 is owned by the county. With the council's blessing, Mr. Wall. When do you think that this
5:48:25 will be before us? 6 months, 2 months, 12 months? Uh, month, month and a half?
5:48:32 I mean, I'd like to have a better understanding of the nuances and complexities of this before this comes
5:48:39 to us. I don't I personally don't want this to be something that I get the week before and I'm expected to digest.
5:48:44 I mean, I would offer and ask that we have a workshop to understand it. I don't know that there's time to do that,
5:48:50 right? But individually, I want some serious understanding of this before it
5:48:55 comes to us. I appreciate that. Thank you. I I I'm just trying to bring uh light to the
5:49:01 darkness because this is all being negotiated. I've already turned in a bunch of information requests to my CDD
5:49:08 and they're very slow coming back. Right. Sure. And uh and they're not having their
5:49:13 meeting until January 28th. Well, for for me, just one of the five votes, I feel like um I I person we've had this
5:49:22 conversation. Who knows how I feel about this? I don't have a problem with CDDs and MSTUs. I think they're great tools.
5:49:27 I think in this case where there's an injustice or a feeling of injustice, perhaps an injustice is the citizens are
5:49:34 paying the rate as if the developer built all the things, but they have a CDD and an MSTU overlapping that paid
5:49:42 for the things, whether it's the road or the infrastructure. And so there's a sense by the citizens that they're
5:49:47 double paying. And so my only concern as you're in negotiations so that you can
5:49:52 be aware of my concern is that there isn't a double payment
5:49:58 that as long as they're not paying twice. There is a scenario where sometimes the
5:50:04 developers are doing the work of a contractor and they're getting paid as the contractor because they're building
5:50:09 on behalf of the city. Things like that happen. That is that's fine. What I
5:50:15 don't want is a double payment situation. I would not support that. So, I don't want anyone to be blindsided or
5:50:20 surprised if the Lar folks are watching. They know how I feel about this, too. So, I'm saying it to you. I'm saying it
5:50:26 to you. I'm saying it to you. Just make sure there's no double double dipping or hidden double dipping
5:50:32 because, you know, I'll find it. Well, here here's one of my concern which I think was happening before with MSTU and
5:50:38 uh CDD was they was collecting the money but they wasn't doing providing the services and everything. So, uh that is
5:50:45 that is a serious problem to me because first of all, like I said, I'm not a big fan of them because these people down
5:50:52 there is paying three taxes. Okay, you got your regular P value, you got a CD,
5:50:58 you got MSTU, and then you got your HOA fees. And that would be fine if they didn't pay the fee as if those things
5:51:03 already existed. That's where you're paying. They're just building the clubhouse this year and we've been paying the fee for
5:51:10 it for two years. Well, well, that was always my concern. You could, for example, when we was
5:51:15 talking about MSTU, that high rate they charge, right? Getting still, you know, you you just building a new new
5:51:20 community. You got a millage rate set way up here. It's going to be years down the road before you need to be replacing
5:51:26 anything. Well, in the meantime, what you doing with all this money you collect each year? That's my thing is it's become a slush
5:51:33 fund. Yeah. And now they've given it to the CDD uh uh that uh that already manages my
5:51:40 community to do the county's end in uh the roadways, their roadways. So all the
5:51:46 planting along Wellness Way, we paid for that through the MSTU and my CDD is
5:51:51 managing it for them. And uh you wonder why the uh developers can't get a
5:51:58 turning lane off of like the current commercial lot over there. They can't get a turning lane off of Wellness. They
5:52:04 had to build it only on Skullfield Road. So you can only go in and out of that one property in one turnin because they
5:52:12 planted all these new plants and everything and thought that was more important instead of making access for
5:52:17 commercial. That makes no sense. Okay. Thank you. So M Miss M. Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr.
5:52:23 Matthysse, can you can you check in on all of that for me, please, sir? And anything because that's always been one
5:52:29 of my concerns. They collecting all this money for the MSTU yet and still, you know, I I don't see no services need to
5:52:35 be rendered and so why they charging such a high rate at this this particular time for all these years uh down the
5:52:40 road before they do it and what's happening with the money. Okay? Because I don't think we getting any of it here
5:52:46 in the city. So So uh and that that's that's basically my report. Um,
5:52:53 anything else need to come before the city before the council? Anything else need to come before? If
5:53:00 not meeting the All right.