Clermont City Council Transcript 6/9/26

30:57 I call this meeting meeting to order.
31:00 Welcome to our council meeting for June 9th, 2026. Virtual participation in council meeting are available on your
31:07 computer or smartphone via Microsoft Teams or by telephone. You can learn how
31:14 to participate virtually by visiting our website at www.cleoutfl.gov and search for attend council meeting
31:23 online. In the interest of time, efficiency and ensuring that everyone who wishes to address the council is given an opportunity to do so, the
31:30 following will apply to all comments made by the public in person and virtually. Each speaker will be permitted three minutes to address the
31:38 council. In an effort to be respectful during the meeting, please make sure your cell phones are set to silence.
31:45 Thank you for participating in the city government. Uh tonight's invocation will be given by Joselyn Williamson from the
31:53 Central Florida free throw free thought community. Please rise and remain standing for the pledge.
32:02 Good afternoon mayor, council members, city staff and neighbors. As we gather today, let us recognize the
32:09 responsibility of public service and the trust placed in this room. June gives us much to reflect on. Junth reminds us
32:18 that freedom, though promised, has too often been delayed, denied, or unevenly protected. This month also asks us to
32:25 consider dignity, safety, mental health, and the burdens many people carry quietly. Pride Month reminds us that people should be able to live honestly,
32:34 safely, and without fear. PTSD Awareness Month, National Safety Month, and Men's Health Month remind us that strong
32:41 communities are built not only through laws and budgets, but through care, awareness, and a willingness to look out for one another. James Baldwin once
32:50 wrote, "Not everything that is faced can be changed, but nothing can be changed until it is faced." That is a worthwhile
32:58 consideration for public service. A community grows stronger when it makes room for every resident to be seen, heard, and considered. Today, as this
33:06 council considers budgets, services, public resources, and the practical needs of a growing city, let its work be guided by facts, fairness, and a care
33:16 for the people of Clermont. Let public dollars be handled with wisdom, disagreement met with patience, and public concerns heard with respect. And
33:25 may all of us remember that self-government asks something of everyone. honesty, humility, participation, and concern for one another. Thank you.
33:35 Thank you to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it
33:44 stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Amen. Please be seated.
33:59 This afternoon we have two uh presentation. The first presentation is a deputy city clerk CMC recognition.
34:11 Good afternoon mayor and councel. Good afternoon mayor and councel.
34:17 Thank you for the opportunity to recognize our deputy city clerk. I am speaking on behalf of the Florida Association of City Clerks as a past president.
34:31 It is my pleasure to recognize Deputy City Clerk Nicole Wisneski for earning certified municipal clerk CMC
34:38 designation through the International Institute of Municipal Clerks and the Florida Association of City Clerks. Achieving
34:46 this designation requires extensive professional development and a commitment to excellence in local government.
34:53 Nicole successfully completed the rigorous Municipal Clerk's Institute program through the Florida Institute of Government at Florida State University
35:01 along with additional educational, professional, and service requirements.
35:06 The CMC designation represents a significant professional achievement and demonstrates Nicole's dedication to
35:14 serving our community of Clermont with the highest standards of professionalism.
35:19 This accomplishment is only the beginning of a lifelong commitment to professional growth and I have no doubt Nicole will continue pursuing excellence
35:28 through advanced certifications and leadership opportunities within our profession to include master municipal clerk program. Nicole is now part of an
35:37 elite group of municipal professionals and this achievement would not be possible without the city's support for continuing education and professional
35:46 development. On behalf of the Florida Association of City Clerks, its board of directors, professional education committee, and members throughout the
35:54 state of Florida, congratulations, Nicole. We are incredibly proud of your accomplishment. Please congratulate Deputy City Clerk Nicole Wneski on
36:03 becoming one of Florida's newest certified municipal clerks. Nicole, display your certificate and wear your pin with pride as symbols of dedication,
36:13 professionalism, and commitment to public service.
36:27 Do she want picture?
36:39 Uh Tracy, I have one I just have one comment on that if I may. Do they with all that
36:47 newfound knowledge that that uh pay increase come with that.
36:54 I'm happy to say Nicole is now a supervisor in the clerk's office. Okay. So, thank you.
37:02 Uh the second presentation is the quarterly budget report for fiscal year 2026, quarter two.
37:18 Good. Good afternoon, Mayor, City Council. Scott Bore, finance director, and thanks for this opportunity to present to you our quarterly budget report for the current fiscal year 2526.
37:30 Uh, as a reminder to everyone, this uh report is available on the finance department web page on the city's website. And um this and it does include
37:39 I'm going to go through this report rather quickly. Um but this report does include with all the data tables presented in here drill down capabilities for additional detail in
37:48 the lower right hand corner of these reports. Um and at the conclusion I'll be glad to answer any questions that you may have.
37:56 So with that introduction, uh this first data table uh that you see before you is a city-wide presentation of total
38:03 revenues and expenditures grouped by various fund types. Uh beginning with our revenues up in the um the uh middle
38:10 portion of the data table. Uh you'll see our comparison for where we were the year to date 2025 and the current fiscal year. Currently, we're at uh $76.9
38:20 million in revenues received uh which is slightly less $3 million less than the same point last year. Uh that is because
38:28 of interfund transfers related to uh reimbursements from a bond fund that existed at that point for a capital project. Um and then moving down below
38:37 to the totals on the expenditures, it's a similar story. Year to date, we're at $55.3 million in total expenses across
38:44 all funds. Um but if you go up a couple lines, you'll see a uh similar decrease in expenditures in the enterprise funds for that same reason.
38:54 Taking the same uh presentation on a city-wide level and uh same data and looking specifically at the revenues in
39:02 the lower right hand corner of this data table, you'll see year-to date we're at 54% of our revenues at the midpoint of the fiscal year. So that's a good sign.
39:11 uh buoied by the very top line, our general fund where we're at 70% at the mid-year point. Uh that's primarily due
39:18 as mentioned in previous quarterly reports because of the seasonality uh distribution of ad valorum taxes. Um and
39:25 but in addition to that, we've received a few federal FEMA reimbursement grants in this first year that was unbudgeted.
39:33 So the next uh budget amendment we bring before you will reconcile that um likely at the end of uh at the next meeting in
39:40 the end of June. The 54% year-to- date across all city funds uh it tren is trending well in terms of our budget plan.
39:49 Still looking at a citywide presentation by fund group type. Now on the expenditures you'll see in the lower right hand corner we're at 34% of budget
39:57 across the entire city. Uh, one reason the the significant or the the primary reason for that is our capital spending.
40:04 Uh, if you look solely at our capital spending, uh, year to date, we spent $6.9 million of our $51 million budgeted
40:12 for capital projects. Now, that being said, in the third quarter, we have brought several capital projects before you in contracts. Those have been
40:20 approved. So, incrementally, we will see an increase in the third quarter. But at the mid-year point, which this report reflects, we were lagging behind in our
40:28 capital spending. Um the outlier in this group, third line down is our debt service funds. You see at 107%. I
40:37 touched on this in the last quarterly report. That is due to um higher than anticipated carryover um of the
40:45 accounting related to the close out of the wastewater treatment plant project.
40:49 Um I can happily tell you at this point the accounting on that has been completed. Um so that'll be incorporated into the next budget amendment before
40:57 you as well where we will reconcile uh those final expenditures.
41:05 All right. Now moving on to specifically to the general fund for the next few tables. Uh this first one much like the citywide presentation is simply showing
41:12 you the totals. Um on the revenue side by account type and then down below by expenditure grouping. Um in the middle
41:20 of the table you'll see fiscal year 26 year to date. We've received just over $41 million in uh revenue which is u
41:28 slightly higher than the same pace last year. And of course that is primarily tied to Alarm receipts. And then down below year to date $26.2 $2 million in
41:37 expenditures year to date. Um about $3 million higher than this uh same point last year. And that's primarily due to
41:45 the operating cost within the anticipated operating cost within the general fund.
41:53 Looking at it at a percentage- wise again 70% of all revenue has been received in the general fund. Um the tax
42:00 collections uh as you see on the top line 81% of our avalor been received year-to date. Um so there still is some
42:07 outstanding that will get up through the month of July typically.
42:12 Uh one thing to bring to attention that is um embedded within this report is something that I I look at closely and that is our sales tax distributions from
42:20 the state uh which appears in the intergovernmental revenue line. Um primarily specifically I'm referring to the local half cent sales tax rate.
42:30 Those distributions yearto date are right on target. We're right at 50%, but again, as I've mentioned in other budget presentations and in our budget
42:38 planning, sales tax distributions to uh the city is flat. Uh there's very little growth year-over-year on on sales tax
42:46 and that's continuing so far this fiscal year.
42:50 Then last slide specific to the general fund is uh on the expenditures lower right hand corner as you see we're
42:57 at 41% of our total year-to- date uh expenditures budgeted within the general fund. Um all spending categories as you
43:06 see to the far right um or all spending categories uh personnel contractual services professional services which is
43:13 not displayed but all those categories are below 50%. Um and then as you see there all of the department groupings
43:21 are below 50% which is a good sign with the slight exception of our smallest by far area that's economic development
43:28 which is slightly ahead of budget but all in all general fund is in really good shape in terms of the pace of spending our expenditures.
43:38 Last data table within the report is a uh our fund balance summary. And there's several things on here that I would like
43:45 to point out to you. uh starting on the far left corner where it says beginning fund balance as you recall we completed the fiscal year audit in March during
43:54 this third quarter. So all the uh figures you see within that quarter have been updated to reflect what those uh audited numbers are and in the case of
44:02 the general fund this number presented on here is net of what our fund balance policy is. Um, there's a discrepancy.
44:13 Again, we're showing you publicly during this presentation the report that is embedded on the city's website.
44:19 Unfortunately, and I apologize, there's a discrepancy in the PDF version that was attached to your um to your packet.
44:26 That language was not updated in that PDF version in your packet. Um, this is correct and I can assure you that that
44:34 number is net of that fund balance policy. So, as you read across here, you'll see we are currently projecting that at year end our fund balance or our
44:43 unreserved fund balance above and beyond that policy requirement will be approximately $24.1 million. And that is
44:51 a number that we'll continue to refine and um update as we go through the budget planning exercises, which we currently are. And uh we'll be up we'll
44:59 be distributing that proposed budget to you on or around July 1st. So that but that's where we could stood at the six-month point of the fiscal year.
45:10 Uh that concludes my prepared remarks.
45:12 I'd be glad to answer any questions that you may have.
45:18 Mr. Bor, uh do you have any concerns with us collecting all of the taxes? We're at 81%. Do you think we'll get to 100%.
45:26 Historically, we are in the 94 to 98% range annually. So if past perform and that's been consistent for more than a
45:35 decade. So as long as that holds true, no, I wouldn't have any concerns. And what was the issue with judgments?
45:41 There was a line item there on um judgments and collections. That one jumped out at me.
45:49 Probably in the general fund, I assume. Yes. Judgments, fines, and forefeitures.
45:55 What is that? And off the top of my head, I am not sure.
46:00 Okay. Well, I don't usually get to catch you. Um, can you speak briefly to our debt service? I noticed we had a large contribution last year to our debt
46:08 service. We're ahead on debt service this year. Are we getting ahead on our debts and paying off the debts or what's happening in the debt service funds?
46:14 Well, there's a couple things at play there. Uh, one is there's certainly a seasonality effect. Um, we pay the all of our principal debt payments are done
46:21 early in the year in the month of December and then we follow it up with some smaller interestonly payments in July. Um, so when you're looking at a Q2
46:29 report, the the figures and percentages do look skewed. Um, but we're certainly uh right on budget and that's frankly an easy budget number to plug into the the
46:39 budget. Um, conversely, u or a second point is that a reminder that in this
46:46 current budget, we did plan on a debt issuance related to a capital project downtown. Uh, that has not occurred and and at least from what I'm aware of,
46:54 that won't occur this fiscal year. Um, so we do have that in the budget that uh we could theoretically uh reserve in a
47:04 commitment form or just altogether take out of the budget at this point assuming my information is still current.
47:09 Is that amount included in the 24 million surplus? No. Okay.
47:16 Thank you. Appreciate all your hard work. Team's doing a great job. Thank you. Anyone else?
47:26 Okay. I just I just you um sales tax the half cent you say that's flat. Yes, sir.
47:33 We're we're not it's not all this increased in commercial uh coming in town but basically it's not increasing
47:42 or anything. It's still remaining in flat.
47:44 That's correct. That's what the data shows. Um I very much sir would like to have a better understanding of the
47:51 state's um allocation calculations and methods. Um I guess that was going to be my next question. Is it is it flat? Is it
48:00 remaining flat or is just the way it's been allocated to us? That's the question. Okay, that's the question.
48:05 But in terms of what we receive, it's definitely flat year-over-year.
48:08 Okay. All right. So I well if you don't mind let's let's check in the way they allocate that because it seems a little
48:16 strange for it to still remain the same year after year with all the all the growth and everything we have. So I think it more or less maybe doing with
48:23 the way they allocate and everything. So we'll do Thank you. So thank you. Anyone else?
48:30 Thank you sir. Great job.
48:36 All right. Next is public comments. If you wish to address the council in person, please come to the microphone and state your name and address. Once
48:45 in-person comments have concluded, we will move on to virtual comments. If you are participating online
48:52 uh Microsoft Teams and wish to provide comments, please raise your hand and you will be called on to unmute your
49:01 microphone when it is your turn to speak. If you are participating by phone, you will press star five on your phone to raise your hand. Then call when
49:10 called upon, you will raise press star six to unmute your microphone. All virtual participants, if you wish to
49:18 come in on other items on the agenda, please stay on Microsoft Teams or on your phone and raise your hand when the item comes up on the agenda. This
49:27 portion of the meeting is only for items that are not on the agenda. In the interest of time and efficiency and ensuring everyone who wish to address the council is given the opportunity to
49:34 do so, each speaker will be be permitted three minutes to address the council. To avoid disruption of the meeting,
49:42 speakers should avoid inappropriate language, personal attacks, derogatory statements, and direct comments to the city council. Everyone is requested to
49:50 be respectful of each other. Be respectful each other even when we disagree. Yes, ma'am.
49:56 Good afternoon, mayor, members of the council. Paula Hoisington, 564 East Dninnesota Street. Um, a couple of
50:04 meetings um back I made a comment about the no parking signs at Bloxom and Scott and I want to thank Stony and his team.
50:16 Um, I did call him. We met the next day.
50:19 He brought his team out. I got a neighbor that was directly on the corner to meet us there. We looked at the area, discussed the area, and the sign was put
50:28 up. So, I thank him very much and his team for doing that right away. I also want to thank Chief Gray and the police department.
50:36 Um, one for continuing to host the community meetings where the community can come in, find out what's going on in
50:44 their community, ask questions, and they provide data.
50:49 It's starting to work. If you see something, say something.
50:53 Um the chief is making it more comfortable for folks to feel comfortable saying what's going on. We
51:00 had some activity um about a week ago. I think I was in Boston then. Anyway, we had some activity on some areas that we were
51:08 concerned with and the community cannot thank the chief and the police department. I know it's
51:15 not the end. It's just the start, but we really do appreciate them paying attention to the area, listening to the
51:23 community, and taking action. So, I'd like to give them a hand, and thank you very much.
51:31 Thank you.
51:33 This is public comment. Anyone in the chamber wish to address anything that's not on the agenda may come to the microphone, state your name and address, and have three minutes.
51:49 I am farmer Banks Hellfrick. I live in the Clay Road District. Farm um tip of the day. Uh it's watermelon season and
51:58 this is a super cool hack on when to harvest watermelons. The vine that goes from the plant will go to um a vine
52:06 which will go to the actual fruit where they intersect. Uh on the opposite side, there will be a curly ue. That curly cue when it turns brown, your watermelon is ready to be harvested.
52:17 Mayor, council, distinguished guests, is our country ethically and morally bankrupt?
52:25 Are we um a country that is only transactional and we only do something for our own
52:33 return on investment for ourselves rather than for the community?
52:38 There's an old adage, you never see a hearse pulling a U-Haul trailer, which means you can't take it with you.
52:48 If you ask any hospice nurse what the reoccurring theme is, it is on our deathbeds. I wish I would have not worked as much.
52:57 I wish I would have spent more time with my family and friends. I wish I was more compassionate and kind and decent.
53:04 20 college students were given $10 each.
53:07 10 of them were told to go spend it on themselves. 10 of them were told to go spend it on someone else. Those that spent it on themselves came back and
53:16 their happiness was flatlined, stayed the same. Those who spent it on someone else, their happiness increased.
53:23 Joy is found in serving others.
53:27 During World War II, Oscar Schindler, a factory owner, saved over 1,400 Jews.
53:36 At the end of the war, the 1400 survivors came around and thanked him for saving their lives.
53:42 He broke down. He kicked his car and he said, "I didn't need this car. I could have saved 20 more of you."
53:48 I began this speech with a question and I'm going to end with a question.
53:55 If we are not here to serve each other, why are we? I am Farmer Banks Hellfrick,
54:02 candidate for state house district 25 and I serve.
54:08 May you all be blessed. Thank you for allowing me to speak. Thank you.
54:17 Uh anyone else this sir?
54:38 Good afternoon. My name is Kurt Shu. I'm retired military. I have a restricted address.
54:44 Mayor Tim Murry, council members, distinguished senior staff. Want to say thank you for the great state of Florida. I've been here a little over 13
54:51 years now when I retired from the military after 33 years. Um, I love living here in this community. I found it about 15 years ago and when I was
55:00 getting planned my retirement, I wanted to come here. Um, I thank the state, the veterans organizations for the opportunity to serve. Um,
55:08 I think un military service is often underrated.
55:12 Um, but this is about Flag Day. Flag Day is this coming Sunday. It's a very important holiday. People miss a lot.
55:20 Um, most important part about Flag Day though is actually that Flag Day is actually the Army's birthday.
55:30 And so if you served in the Army, would you please stand up? I know we got a Marine. Just the council, please, sir. Thank you, sir.
55:38 I know there's other service members. I just want to recognize them, Mr. Today is their day. Yes.
55:44 The Army is the only service that predates our country. Without the Minute Man, without those members who left
55:51 their families, often to freeze, cold, and outside houses being burnt down by the British, we would not live in this
55:58 country today. Um, I had the honor of serving in multiple contact tours with Army bosses. Probably the most distinguished two were ones kind of
56:07 famous. Um, Colonel John Mahalland, fifth group commander, 12 horsemen, Afghanistan when I was over there in 01
56:13 and 02. and General Carl Steiner. He was a famous Green Beret, was my boss in Lebanon. My father served in the army in
56:22 World War II, was drafted in December 41. My uncle was a Marine. Two of my uncles who were born in late 1800s. My
56:29 grandfather was born in 1870. Um, served in World War I. Um, and so people said, "Oh, you were got to go in the
56:36 military." I had no idea. I got a GED and I had nothing to do in the late 70s because I started working when I was 14.
56:44 The army provides a lot of people opportunity. There's amazing men and women that come out of the army. Some come out of West Point. Some are just
56:51 enlisted basic training. But those people who have the courage to put their hand and take that oath to bleed,
56:58 sacrifice, and die need to be recognized. All those that serve need to be recognized. I thank you for what you
57:05 do. God bless America. God bless you all. Thank you, sir.
57:14 Anyone else? This is public comment.
57:18 Anyone in the public in the chamber wish to address anything that's not on the agenda, may come to the microphone, state your name and address, and have three minutes.
57:26 Anyone else?
57:30 Anyone else? Seeing no one else in chamber, I close chamber. We have any no one online, so I'm going close public comment all together.
57:40 Uh Mr. Van Wagner. Before we go any further, do we have any changes to the agenda?
57:45 Yes, Mr. Mayor. We have one change. Uh item number 10 is being removed.
57:55 Item number 10. So it's totally withdrawn.
58:03 Okay. So we don't need any actions. Don't need to take any action. Okay.
58:10 All right. The next portion of the uh meeting is the consent agenda which contains items that have been determined to be routine and non-controversial.
58:18 Uh yeah, if anyone in the audience wish to address a particular item on the consent agenda, now is the opportunity
58:25 for you to do so. Additionally, if staff or member of the city uh council wish to speak on a consent item, they have the same opportunity. The consent items
58:34 tonight is uh for consideration is items 1 through 11 with the exception of number 10 which
58:42 has been removed. Okay. So any item need to be removed from the consent agenda.
58:50 Any item need to be I'd like to uh pull items number four and nine. Four and nine
59:02 and nine. Any other seven and eight?
59:08 Any other hearing? No other. I will entertain a
59:14 motion on items one, two, three, five, six, uh, and 11.
59:22 So moved.
59:23 Second. I have a motion and a second for approval of consent agenda item 1, two, three, five, six, and 11. Any further
59:32 discussion? Hearing none. All in favor, let it be known by saying I. I. All oppose. And chair vote as well. Motion carries. 5.
59:41 All right. Item number four. We can Oh, okay.
59:48 Want to talk about You pulled it, right?
59:49 Yeah. Yeah. I mean foreign foreign in I mean foreign in um it goes together with the other one. I'm pulling it not for
59:57 the merit of the project but for the timing of the project. I think what we really need to do now with the upcoming property taxes vote that's going to be
1:00:06 coming in November. We should look at all of these projects as a whole. maybe make a workshop meeting about it and then we could discuss what we have to do
1:00:15 because obviously our pool is going to be shrinking and we should think where we want to spend our money on and I think it it's important so that's the
1:00:23 reason I'm doing it agree okay
1:00:32 do I want to give the public a chance yes um and that goes for item nine also
1:00:40 This is a public hearing. Anyone in the public wish to address this item, item number four on the consent agenda may come to the microphone, state your name and address and have three minutes.
1:00:50 Anyone address want to address this item may come to the microphone and state your name and address and have three minutes.
1:00:56 See no one in chamber, anyone online, no one online. I bring it back to council. What say council?
1:01:02 Um I I tend to agree with you on that on that. that uh even though I think this is a this is a project that I I would
1:01:10 kind of like to see move forward um I don't know which way the which way the vote going to go on the property taxes
1:01:19 and uh I'm thinking if we have the fund in in this in the and listen to what I just heard in the budget report uh to go
1:01:27 ahead and do this project uh I would like to see this go ahead because even if the even if the taxes eliminated that won't that won't affect this upcoming
1:01:36 budget, okay? It affected next year's budget and uh and I know we need to probably be looking at everything and I
1:01:44 would I would totally agree with the fact that we probably need to be really looking at the fact of not um looking to
1:01:51 fund too many new projects right now and maybe even looking at what we're going to do set two or three
1:01:59 different budgets for the upcoming future. But I do know right now uh we do have a little bit of funding uh that this will be in and this has been a
1:02:07 project that's been in the making for for a number of years now. So if we could move it forward, I would like to see that will move forward. I I see what you're saying on with it.
1:02:16 But it's in my opinion, I think it's a need versus a want.
1:02:20 And with the uncertainty with how the voters are going to vote for property tax, I think we should only do needs and
1:02:26 not wants. And that's a that's more of a want in my opinion than a need.
1:02:36 Yes, sir.
1:02:36 Thank you. Um I This is tough because
1:02:43 we're talking about potential hypotheticals and whatifs and and and if it does pass as as written, it will have effects.
1:02:54 Mhm.
1:02:55 At the same time, we also have a community to care for and make investments in and we have to balance
1:03:02 that. Um, I don't know. I I'm torn on this because we don't currently have a
1:03:09 stage over here. And so, uh, I have different feelings about this than I do, um, the other item, Council Member
1:03:18 Peterson, that you pulled, the number nine, um, because it's currently existing. um and it goes to a maintenance thing
1:03:25 versus a new um item. But I also think that um I if we
1:03:35 find ourselves in a situation where we're able to do this project, we're not going to have any architectural or
1:03:42 engineering services done on it. And that price is only going to get more expensive
1:03:51 from today. I I doubt that's going to go down.
1:03:54 And and so this this architectural and engineering design, as I understand it, and please um Mr. City Manager or
1:04:03 someone uh correct me if I'm wrong, is just authorizing not just, but I should say it is authorizing the architectural and engineering design. It is not
1:04:11 actually approving full expenses for the project. It's to to find out um what that project would look like, what it
1:04:19 would cost, and what it would all involve, a timeline, etc. And so I am I'm torn. I I I I I can go either way on
1:04:27 on on this uh item, but I I certainly um recognize the uncertainty and the
1:04:34 concern and the and the kind of um unknown related to any kind of property tax amendment in the future. But I also
1:04:43 don't want to see us just not do anything for this community because of that. We do have some operations and
1:04:51 some obligations that we need to fulfill. Um, and I'm not sure if this one rises to that, but I think they're
1:04:58 going to be others maybe similar to the other item um that uh we need to still invest and make sure we're taking care
1:05:05 of our our resources and our our community members.
1:05:10 I share your thoughts. Uh, in fact, I share everybody's thoughts. Um, I am mindful that we have a workshop next
1:05:18 week where we're getting the National Recreation and Parks Assessment. And I think if the objective is to look at the 10,000 foot view, we'll have that next
1:05:28 week. And so, uh, I would support a motion to just table this until the next meeting of June 23rd. um in part because
1:05:38 one of the elements of the proposed constitutional amendment is potentially we don't know yet restrictive on
1:05:46 expenditures in parks and recreation. So I don't necessarily want to wait too long for projects that we had anticipated in fiscal year 26. That
1:05:54 being said, this didn't come to us in December. It is coming to us in June.
1:05:58 And so I think if if the council would support a motion to table this to June 23rd, it gives us the opportunity of the
1:06:06 NRPA presentation next week before we make a final decision on June 23rd on this item. So that'll be my motion is to table this to June 23rd.
1:06:14 Second that motion.
1:06:15 Okay. I have a motion and a second to table this item to June 23rd. Um any further discussion?
1:06:23 Uh yeah, I just want to add this. Mr.
1:06:25 Mr. Van Wagner uh for the workshop next week. Can you go back and and with uh finance and everything and look how much money we've
1:06:32 been spending each year uh uh renting stages and all that to put out. Okay. Because we we continue to
1:06:41 spend money each year out there uh putting these stages up and all. And so um to me look I'm looking at the cost
1:06:47 factor here uh saving here and all as well. So if we can have all that information for us uh at the workshop, we really appreciate it. Any further discussion?
1:06:57 No, sir.
1:06:58 If not, all in favor, let it be known by saying I. I. All oppose. Chair vote as well.
1:07:05 Motion passes 50. Item number seven.
1:07:09 Yeah, I pulled this one. My only real reason for pulling it was we have a a pattern of approving a number closer to
1:07:16 10 in the range of professionals that are um on our list in our roster so to speak. And in this case there were nine
1:07:24 that qualified if I read the packet correctly. Um and so I was I guess curious but I would be supportive of
1:07:32 approving up to 10 based on in each of these categories if that's a possibility. So that's the reason why I pulled both seven and eight. Not
1:07:40 necessarily strong opinions, but for some reason we're restricting the numbers and the numbers feel arbitrary.
1:07:46 So seeking clarification on that why we wouldn't just go for 10 or the maximum in this case was nine.
1:07:54 Okay. This this is a public anyone 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 three minutes.
1:08:04 This is a public hearing. Anyone in the chamber may come uh want to speak on this item may come to the microphone and state your name and address and have
1:08:11 three minutes. Item number seven. Seeing no one in the chamber, anyone no one online, I will close it. Um one of the
1:08:19 question I would have on that miss strange is the fact that uh I guess it goes back to Freddy and whoever did the scoring of these. Did they they just go
1:08:28 with six because the other three they felt like wasn't qualified or Right. That's what I was see exactly. So that's why I was seeking clarification.
1:08:36 So So uh I don't know if Mr. Matthysse can speak to Yeah, we I we'd have to call Freddy up here. I wasn't on that panel, so I
1:08:43 wasn't part of the discussion at all. So
1:08:59 good afternoon. Uh yes, the committee decides on their own how many they want to select. Okay. There's no pattern. There's no number.
1:09:06 There's no it's based on pure the decision of how they want to achieve that goal.
1:09:12 Was the committee comprised of electrical engineers from the community who are familiar with this subject matter?
1:09:17 No, not none other none of the committee members are uh from that experience.
1:09:22 And it was my understanding that we instructed staff to use professionals when under whenever we were doing an assessment of professionals. Is that not accurate? I thought we agreed that that we were going to do that.
1:09:32 I I don't recall to be honest with you, but I've always my thing is I've always left it up to put off.
1:09:40 It says in the policy that they can and they can seek outside, you know, experts on committees, but there's been no that's in our
1:09:48 policy. It's in our um procurement policies, but it's not a mandate mandate. Right. I thought we discussed at the workshop on procurement that
1:09:56 anytime a professional service provider was being assessed that we would get professionals in the community because our policy did allow it and that we gave
1:10:05 that direction at the workshop so that we could ensure that we actually have qualified people doing the assessment of the qualifications of the professionals
1:10:14 that we're assessing. Well, well, I do remember we had the discussion, but I I can, if I'm not mistaken, I wasn't too
1:10:22 thrilled with that because my question then is, okay, how do we go about selecting which expert to do the qual do be on the panel? See, uh, you know, then
1:10:31 we have to set up a whole new new procurement process, I guess, or selection committee to determine which expert we're going to use. Well, it's
1:10:38 already in our process and frankly, I'd rather have community members who are qualified, who are donating their time than having department heads who have no qualification in the subject area, who
1:10:47 are taking their time to do these assessments without the the experience to back it up. And my recollection was we had a a majority agreed that that was
1:10:56 prudent and practical. And this is now the second time that it's happened since that procurement meeting. And so, I want to bring it to the council's attention.
1:11:04 I mean, well, well, may maybe what we need you know, is a is a an amendment to the pol
1:11:11 or to have a discussion on an amendment to the policies because right now it's not required.
1:11:15 I I don't think we we ever agreed on on changing the policy and everything we talked about it, but I don't think we agreed to make that. We made gave him the opportunity to.
1:11:25 Okay.
1:11:26 I think what what you're talking about is changing a can to a shall.
1:11:29 Yes, exactly.
1:11:30 I I'd be happy to work with Freddy on amending or improving the policies. The only thing I would say is that with a requirement like that, it may not be
1:11:39 possible or feasible all the time on everyone to obtain that kind of subject matter expertise, especially for free.
1:11:46 Um, and so it it may be that we would also need an escape hatch kind of certification that we've made a good faith effort to seek them. But I think that's why we'd have to have really put
1:11:55 our heads into that. Well, my understanding that when you are part of procure procurement, you know how to
1:12:02 actually do the assessments um because you don't have to have expertise in that field per se. What it is is to make sure
1:12:10 that everyone has an opportunity and it's fair across the board. That's the purpose of it. Not to necessarily say, oh, you're an engineer, you're and
1:12:19 you're a scientist over here. It's if you have the qualifications to actually um assess it fairly. That's what the
1:12:26 whole purpose of this from my understanding um with procurement alto together and some of the questions are very much
1:12:34 check the box but others are an actual assessment of the qualifications of the individuals in the firm and their career
1:12:40 experience. That's where I have concerns that we may not be getting um the
1:12:47 highest quality results. Yeah, but I understand what you're saying, Mr.
1:12:52 Strange, but in this process when they submit the application, we how do we go about even if I'm an expert, how do I look at a piece of paper and tell
1:13:01 whether a person, this company, these people they have in the uh company is actually overqualified, qualified or
1:13:09 not. I don't have all that in the package they submit. Okay, that's the license. So, the people assessing these professionals don't have the license that they're assessing the professionals for.
1:13:18 But don't they have certifi but they have certification because you have to have warrants in order to do certain contracting or whatnot. So they do have
1:13:26 training in that. You know they're not just people just pulled out the air necessarily to assess it.
1:13:32 It's just department heads that are pulled out for a project to assess electrical electrical engineers. People who have never done electrical engineering and don't have the license
1:13:39 for it. That's my concern. Not not the items. Did they have their license? Are they insured? Those things I don't have any problem with procurement handling
1:13:47 those. But on the assessment of the qualifications of the applicants and their experience, I would much prefer to see people who
1:13:56 have the license that we're assessing doing an assessment of their peers than asking somebody who's never done it before to make a qualification
1:14:03 determination of of the individuals that are again they are trained in order to know how to do it because the policy the purpose is to be fair for everyone to
1:14:12 have a fair shot at doing it. Um, and from my understanding, because my husband does this for a living, it's never been you have to be the scientist in order to evaluate another scientist.
1:14:22 It's do you have the contract, you have the training, you have the, you know, the award, so to speak, certification to be able
1:14:30 to um assess that. And maybe that's more of what you want to have. What you're saying is to make sure that they have that certificate, that award, that they are qualified indeed.
1:14:41 Correct. Yeah. Well, and you see because they're ranking them on a scale of 0 to 10. So when you start ranking a a
1:14:48 professional's experience in a field, if you don't have the experience in the field to judge that person's qualifications,
1:14:56 you really can't. That's the nature of licensed professions is that they're often self-regulating for that reason.
1:15:04 So I thought we all agreed on that. If we didn't, then maybe I'm out of line, but I thought that we had an agreement.
1:15:10 I don't recall. I was going to say was a discussion but I don't think it was an agreement because similar thing for example Freddy
1:15:17 but that's the idea of that in this process right if I were a professional res what I would be doing is you be actually going through all the
1:15:26 application that everybody else go through and try to make the determination right correct so I mean I don't think I think we can
1:15:33 all sit down and and read the the um package sub package that they submit and determine
1:15:41 about where they're going without having to be experts. I mean, I've sat on um committees many times and without even having any expertise in the in the
1:15:49 field, but I was able to read the package and determine which what um which I thought was best. And I do it all the time at home because when I make
1:15:58 make purchases at home, I do the same thing. I'm not an expert in electrician, but I know how to sit down and have different electrician come in and tell me and I make a determination on which
1:16:06 which one I think is best. I I try to select the committees that have some experience in that field that were evaluating. They've done it before in
1:16:14 the past, so it's not the first time for them.
1:16:16 Um, so that's why I do my best to get the best we have in the city to evaluate these proposals.
1:16:21 Right. I I don't to council member Strange's point, I don't recall a consensus conversation. I do recall talking about it and that, but I don't
1:16:29 recall the consensus piece. And I I actually agree with the city attorney. I think if we're going to change policy, it should come as an a amendment to the
1:16:36 policy and and not just more of a conversation. Uh so we actually have a a record of what we're actually wanting to
1:16:44 have changed. But um Mr. Sorz, can can I ask you um who was on this one? Who served? Because I don't see it in our
1:16:52 packet. So I think we're we're we're making an assumption based off of without even in our packet knowing who was on the review committee. Yeah. Normally normally it's on there.
1:17:01 This one is not. Yeah, I know. That's why I was asking when it's done through open go the software that I use is on there automatically. This is on Excel spreadsheet because the the RFQ itself
1:17:09 was so massive so big I couldn't get it the program to work the I do have the list I don't have with me I can provide it to all you no
1:17:16 issue. Okay. Um and when we go about the procurement process national standards um is is is it a national standard to
1:17:25 have people in the field be the review or what's the guidance I guess I should say? I don't want to ask that leadingly.
1:17:32 What is the guidance on who should serve on a procurement committee?
1:17:37 Right? So, so it depends on what they're evaluating at the time. For example, if they're evaluating um something to do with streets, civil engineering, it will
1:17:46 be public works, other directors, maybe some finance depending what it is. Okay.
1:17:51 Um it all depends. There is no set, you know, you can definitely I can definitely invite people from the
1:17:58 public. I mean personal part to ser serving the committee as well that's not an issue at all. can definitely do that but uh till today we haven't just okay
1:18:08 done it in house and then my other question would be so if an evaluator is on a committee um are
1:18:15 they charged with the task of reviewing only the materials presented and the information answered and not based off
1:18:25 of well I know this entity and I know correct their knowledge or I know their work.
1:18:30 Yes. If there some this could be a conflict of interest that's why I keep try to keep them separate. For example, if a civil engineer if a civil engineer
1:18:37 is on the committee is evaluating some of the work that he could be in doing the in the future that I definitely would not be he would not be part of the committee. Right.
1:18:46 So it's a conflict of interest to look at each one individually.
1:18:49 Okay. Yeah. I I think uh I'm I'm comfortable with our process unless we change our process and then we should have that conversation. I think too when
1:18:57 we're looking at the numbers I one of the things I always do when I review these is I just look at if it's 6 8 10 whatever uh I look at where the breakoff
1:19:05 is in points and and we we staff is recommending six between number six and number seven there's a 12point
1:19:12 difference between number six and number nine there's nearly a 20 point difference that tells me that the folks
1:19:18 who reviewed this really did feel that it wasn't in our best interest to award
1:19:25 this to 7 8 9 um and so um I'm inclined to support staff on on the six at this point and
1:19:33 have the conversation about process if it comes forward miss uh Mr.
1:19:42 For example, this is engineering. We we have city we have engineers in the city.
1:19:47 We in this process we could have called one of our local our our staff engineers to sit on that committee. We would have been okay with Would that Miss Miss
1:19:55 Strange would that have been okay? Uh we have a lot of these experts in in the city that work for us. So why couldn't we use some of our own own people on
1:20:04 some of these committees? Um in fact yes sir Mr. W.
1:20:09 Well I again I I think that is something that's within the purview under our policies we can okay in this case if we could have
1:20:17 called because I know we got plenty electricians and everything that I would say they well qualified. I hope so.
1:20:22 Anyway, they working for us and everything that we probably could have do it. And do we need to change our policy? They put in in in the uh um
1:20:30 policy that basically when it come to things like this that need maybe need an expert, we can uh use some of our own people.
1:20:38 Well, that that's up to y'all. I mean, you know, I think that um the process as it stands has to have some level of discretion with the department head in
1:20:47 order to move quickly and efficiently and to keep the paperwork moving. And so I I think that's what was done here. And to council member Myers's point, you
1:20:55 know, from the legal perspective, the overriding concern is the fairness of the policy. And there is a public policy for the competitive bidding there. And
1:21:02 there's no real uh stricture on who we can have because sometimes you get really small cities, I mean way smaller
1:21:10 than Clermont where they they don't have the capacity to get and the best they can do is, you know, maybe a department head and the clerk or
1:21:18 something like that. So um there's also that overriding public concern is that we need to move the process. But in answer to your question, I mean just
1:21:25 directly, mayor, yes, we can. And it's up to you all if you want to amend the policy to have to raise the you know the
1:21:33 requirements of what you want to see in the qualifications of your committee.
1:21:38 Um I mean I'm I'm in agreement with what M council member Strange is saying about this. You know, you want to have
1:21:44 criteria that people are judging uh an item or making a decision on knowledge they might have. I mean, if if
1:21:52 you're like trying to talk about computer programs and and you're not a programmer, you have no idea whether that's good or bad. If you're looking
1:22:00 for a a brain surgeon, you're not going to be going to a plumber to give you advice on who to go to. You know, I think that's what we're trying to find
1:22:08 out. How do we come up with this happy medium as to how do we define you know I know we have can if we make shall that
1:22:14 that makes it a big block then so is there a happy medium that you had suggested that we we can do something
1:22:21 and then bring it you know bring the the funnel down to a finer point well I I'll tell you this and I don't know if it's a direct answer to your
1:22:30 question or not council member but I think the recommendation here is six is that right yeah six um I I as the city attorney always like
1:22:38 a higher number and the reason is that the less discrimination we do the more insulated we are from anyone ever saying
1:22:46 that we did it wrong you know so if you approve everybody I'm always happy with that and it gives staff more discretion but even with six I mean
1:22:55 there's a lot of choices I mean this is not really narrow if someone doesn't work out you get you work with the other
1:23:02 person on the next go round so you know in in terms of wanting to get it Right. I understand that. But I think
1:23:10 um when you are approving six, we're always going to be close to the bullseye.
1:23:16 Yeah. Okay. Was there Did you make a motion, sir?
1:23:21 I I'll make a motion to approve item number seven with six. Yeah. As presented. As presented. Do I have a second?
1:23:29 A second.
1:23:30 I have a motion and a second for approval of item number seven. Um with as presented. Any further discussion?
1:23:38 All in favor, let it be known by saying I. I. I. All oppose. Nay. I didn't hear you down there, Mr.
1:23:45 Peterson. Nay.
1:23:47 Nay. Okay. Chair vote. I as well. Motion passes three to two. Item number eight.
1:23:55 Uh, same issue. Um, you know, to the point I'm looking at this one again. Now, we've picked five instead of six.
1:24:02 It feels arbitrary to me. And I point out that um numbers 6, 7, 8, and nine
1:24:09 are all within two points of number five. I I don't know how we're making these decisions. Um I have speculation.
1:24:17 I haven't been happy with what I've seen um from the quality of coming out of procurement as of late. And so I am
1:24:24 objecting. Um so I think that I I can't support it.
1:24:33 All right, this is a public hearing.
1:24:34 Anyone in the public wish to address this item may come to the microphone to state your name and address and have three minutes.
1:24:40 Anyone in the chamber wish to address this item may come to the microphone to state your name and address and have three minutes.
1:24:47 Seeing no one, I close chamber. No one online. So, I have a closed public comment. Yes, sir. Mr. B. Uh,
1:24:54 I I I was just going to move to approve it, but I'll I'll I'll wait to see if there's any other discussion. I don't want to do that right away. Okay.
1:25:02 Okay, seeing no other discussion, I'll move to approve item number eight. Do I have a second? Second.
1:25:10 Okay, I have a motion and a second for approval of item number eight. And there any further discussion? Hearing none.
1:25:17 All in favor, let it be known by saying I. I. All oppose? Nay.
1:25:23 And Miss Mars, I say.
1:25:25 I. Okay. Chair vote I as well. Motion carries three to two. Uh item number nine.
1:25:32 I mean this is similar to the other item that you know I think we should table this item and discuss it as a whole. All
1:25:39 our capital projects that we're going to be doing because uh I know like you you said well let's not worry about it but it is only five months away. We're not
1:25:47 talking about years. And I think we really need to plan ahead because we we don't want to be caught uh like the
1:25:55 Titanic where, you know, where we steer ourselves into an iceberg. I mean, if if you know it's coming ahead, it's not like, well, five years from now. We know
1:26:03 it's five months from now. So, let's I would say table it and make, you know, have a workshop to discuss all of our projects and then we can make decisions from that point forward.
1:26:12 I support tableabling it for all the reasons we previously discussed. So that's what I'd like to make a motion. I second. Oh, I'm sorry.
1:26:20 I think you're all getting ahead of yourselves. Okay.
1:26:23 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 three minutes.
1:26:32 This is a public hearing. All anyone in the public wish to address this item may come to the microphone and state your name and address and have three minutes.
1:26:39 Seeing no one and no one online, I bring it back to council. What say council?
1:26:44 Now make your motion, Bill.
1:26:46 I'd like to make a motion to uh table item number nine and bring it to a workshop meeting to discuss further and I second.
1:26:53 Okay. I have a motion to second for the table item number nine. Is there any further discussion? Yes, sir.
1:26:58 Uh so is this a table to the next council meeting as the previous because you tableabling we have it usually as a date for clarification?
1:27:05 Well, we had it for the next workshop meeting. I don't know if that's too soon to to get our discussion, but it it could be something we can start our discussions on.
1:27:14 So, I think we have to table the item though to the to another agenda. You have to identify what agenda you're tableabling it to.
1:27:21 Yeah. Like if you want to move it to like the end of June, you want to move it to July meeting.
1:27:24 I would say move it to the July or August meeting. We're getting closer to finding out what's going on.
1:27:29 I'm glad you bring it up, uh, Mr. Bane, because uh, Mr. Peterson, for what this is worth, I think that, um, I think Mr.
1:27:35 Bane and I share a similar perspective on this that this was a 26 funded project. Um it's it's in many ways a
1:27:44 maintenance issue and what I would suggest to you if you would consider it is that we table it to the June 23rd meeting and if we get to the workshop
1:27:52 next week and we all feel like we're just not going to do this, we can always amend the agenda item if that's if that makes you comfortable again.
1:28:01 Yeah, it can it'll be on the agenda but we can table it again.
1:28:04 Yeah. Is that something you would be willing to agree to? I would agree to that.
1:28:08 Will you amend your motion then again? All right.
1:28:11 I'm gonna I'm gonna make a motion to table it to bring it to the workshop meeting on the 23rd. Okay. The council meeting on the 23rd. Council meeting on the 23rd.
1:28:19 Great. And you second that, Miss Meyers? Yes.
1:28:22 Okay. Motion is uh new motion to table item number nine to the workshop next week.
1:28:29 Um f any further discussion? Actually, I think the the table is the table to the 23rd meeting of the 23rd. This agenda item will go on the agenda for the 23rd.
1:28:40 Okay. To the 23rd. Let me say I think so. Let me say this.
1:28:44 As Miss Miss Strange said, this is a budgeted item. We already put it in the budget for 26. Okay. So, it's not like
1:28:52 we looking at new any expense uh expensive. And I totally agree with you, Mr. Peterson. we shouldn't be looking at new new expenses, but this is an item we already have in our budget.
1:29:03 Uh in the long run, it's going to save us a lot of money to go ahead and do this process because right now we spending hundreds of thousands of dollars every year to resaw these
1:29:12 fields. And the problem with it is when we resold the fields, we cannot use them for three, four months at a time.
1:29:20 So then we get all these complaints from residents, our fields are down. So the whole purpose of this and the reason we
1:29:26 budgeted it is to start uh uh put natural turf in on our field so we don't have to shut them down every year to
1:29:34 resurface and and create a problem with uh not enough facilities to go around and in the long runs we again we'll be
1:29:42 saving money in the long run and since it's already been budgeted I I have no problem with moving ahead but I totally agree with you with not knowing what's
1:29:50 going to happen uh in November I don't think We it should be looking at no new expenses and I know we already have this in the budget so I have no problem
1:29:58 moving ahead but I think just because it's budgeted doesn't mean it's it's needed and it is well it is needed. I'm not let me take
1:30:05 that word back. It is needed but is it something we want to do?
1:30:11 Yeah and I and that's why I asked the question about where we're taking things you know we're in a flux right now and I mean everybody's concerned now
1:30:18 with what's going on. Yeah. you know, and it it's an uncomfortable position to be in for a lot of people. Yeah.
1:30:24 You know, uh so we we wanted, you know, especially it's like you said, there's going to be cities that are going to be destroyed probably by this. Yeah.
1:30:31 Unless they make decisions today for five months from now.
1:30:35 I think two weeks I mean then we'll know the answer.
1:30:38 I think two weeks is prudent considering we have such a big presentation next week. If we didn't have that, it would feel different to me. But knowing that's
1:30:45 coming in and we can get the guidance and we can see what other projects there might be, I don't think two weeks would keep us out of this fiscal year to get it done.
1:30:53 So that's why I'm okay with this.
1:30:54 Agreed. And that's why I asked about the clarification on that because I'm not in favor of just putting it out there and postponing it forever. If it's a finite,
1:31:02 it comes back at the end of the month because two weeks shouldn't delay the overall project that much, but infinite
1:31:10 uh tableabling and and and uh moving it would. Um and I do see the difference between this and say something new. Um
1:31:18 so I'm willing to support it for tonight.
1:31:20 Okay. I'm just throwing out there how I feel about the reason we we're doing this and we've been trying to get these things done for a couple years now and
1:31:28 we finally got it into the budget. So I don't want to see it just go away and we still have these hundreds of thousand dollars expenses, repeat expenses every
1:31:37 year doing the same work over and over and over. Okay. When this would eliminate it and save us money in the long run. But I do have a motion to table this to June 23rd.
1:31:47 June 23rd. Uh and a second. Any further discussion? No.
1:31:51 Hearing none. All in favor? Let it be known by saying I. I.
1:31:54 All oppose. Chair vote I as well. Motion carry 5.
1:31:59 Uh, that's everything.
1:32:04 That's everything. I think we got them all. Okay. All right. So, item number 12.
1:32:18 Good afternoon, mayor and council members. Appreciate the opportunity to come before you and address some of the concerns that were raised at the last council meeting. John Gray, chief of police. I also have with me today Mr.
1:32:28 Duffy from Axon. He's going to do a brief presentation on what the product actually does and what it doesn't do and then I will cover the financial impact.
1:32:36 We'll go from there.
1:32:39 Thank you, Chief, and uh pleasure to meet you. Council members, is this slides on?
1:32:48 We can talk through this. We really only need Sir, can I get you to state your name? Oh, yes, sir. Uh Teddy Duffy from Axon.
1:32:54 Okay. Thank you. We really only need one slide. Uh what this tool and software does is translate languages. So say
1:33:04 there's a missing child and the parent only speaks Haitian Creole or Mandarin.
1:33:09 This software is going to allow you to translate immediately versus losing time, you know, in the critical event of an emergency. It's not writing any reports. It's not transcribing anything.
1:33:19 All it's doing is translating in the moment. Another important thing is that when an officer is out in the field, you don't want them looking at a cell phone.
1:33:25 You want them, you know, looking at a potential suspect or knowing what's going on around them. And today, really the best tool for this is a Google translate or chat GPT when you're
1:33:33 looking at your cell phone and not looking out. So, that's really what this tool enables you to do. Uh, very straightforward. I'd be curious, you
1:33:41 know, any questions on what it doesn't do. Um, anything that was, you know, top of mind for concerns in your presentation. Can you please speak to the issues raised by the
1:33:49 citizen at the last meeting about this software and how it may or may not feed into reporting or any documentation
1:33:58 because that was the issue that was raised and why we tabled it.
1:34:01 Okay. Yeah. So, it doesn't feed into anything like it's, you know, the body camera is recording when an officer speaking to a citizen. Um, so it's
1:34:08 recording the translation and the conversation. It's not feeding anywhere.
1:34:11 It's stored with all other evidence, treated the exact same way, protected the exact same way. It's not contributing to anything separate than that.
1:34:20 And in other words, it's not altering the underlying data or anything like that. If there was something created, it it's not going to modify it. Whatever
1:34:28 it's um is stored isn't going to be modified. There's nothing like that. Correct. Because I heard that concern as well.
1:34:35 No, that's a separate tool we offer called draft one. That is like um report writing based off of the transcript of an interaction that a body camera
1:34:43 recorded. that is totally separate from Axon assistant.
1:34:48 Is is a future thing going to be like face recognition with the uh software or is that way future?
1:34:54 Uh I I don't I don't have the purview into that but it's certainly not a part of you know with with everything that's going on with AI and everything else.
1:35:01 You would think we would want to have the best tools possible for our police officers to be able not only to communicate but to recognize that somebody's a threat.
1:35:11 I mean, I think it'd be inappropriate to comment on that. All this tool does is just provide translation services in the moment instantly, uh, with over 50
1:35:19 languages, nothing about facial recognition, uh, altering reports or evidence, et Mr. Peterson, hold on, hold on. Before
1:35:27 let me let me stop you there before we go any further. Let let me have the public come up and Okay. Um, if he was through with his presentation.
1:35:36 Yeah, this is it, sir.
1:35:37 All right. But this this is a public uh form. Anyone in the in the chamber that wishes to address this item may come to the microphone and state your name and address and have three minutes.
1:35:47 Anyone in the chamber wish to address this item may come to the microphone and state your name and address and have three minutes. See no one in the chamber. Anyone on No one online. I
1:35:55 close public comment now. Mr. Peterson, go ahead, please.
1:36:00 I'm sorry. The question I had is is this. It's all self-contained. It's not like a data link where if they lose a data link, the the system doesn't work.
1:36:09 So it's like you know let's say for whatever you know what is the communication is the software all embedded in the uh in the bo in the body
1:36:17 of the of the camera in on the body camera. Yes sir. And it communicates via LTE.
1:36:21 So then is and then there's a secure data link where it's getting stored in a permanent basis. So it can't be adulterated or anything like that.
1:36:29 Yes sir. It' be stored in Clermont.
1:36:30 That was the question evidence.com city attorney had said. Right. Good.
1:36:38 Now, I I just want I'm tech I'm typically not excited about technology, so I'll preface with that. I do think
1:36:45 it's necessary and I live in 2026, so I I'm not on a farm somewhere. I'm in Clermont, Florida. Um, but I do want to
1:36:52 feel comfortable because um I don't have in my packet or available to me any sort
1:36:59 of contract or other description than what you're seeing here today and the costs. So, I'm very interested in our
1:37:07 attorney and in you and in chief speaking to we're authorizing the purchase of Axon body 4 and could that
1:37:16 ever in the future for what we're paying without an amendment to the contract that I haven't seen. Would that allow
1:37:25 the expansion of the services from body 4 to data one to draft one uh draft one? Draft one. Thank you.
1:37:33 No, ma'am. Okay. without an amendment.
1:37:35 No, it's a separate contract. Yes, ma'am. Okay. Okay. Anyone else?
1:37:43 I'll speak to the financials real quick.
1:37:45 It's a little bit over $151,000 and we're using federal grant funds that are allotted to us through the designated immigration officer program to pay for
1:37:54 this. So, there is no money coming out of the general fund. That was one question that was raised. The way grants work, grants come into the general fund and they're assigned a special project
1:38:02 code. So 1 2 3 4 5 and then there'll be five more numbers and then there's a third set of numbers. That third set of numbers is our special project code.
1:38:09 That's how the grant funds are tracked.
1:38:11 That's how it's audited and how it goes all through that. So that's if there was any confusion about general funds being used, that's where it would be. But this is all federal grant fund money.
1:38:19 Is that for the duration of the contract or correct? We are paying for the remainder of the axon contract with the 151.
1:38:26 Sorry. So it's 151 this year paid by a grant. That's a five years. Over five years.
1:38:30 Five years. All covered. Yes, ma'am. All paid by the grant. Correct.
1:38:33 So the citizens of Clermont ar have to pay for this? No ma'am. Chief, how old is our present equipment?
1:38:39 How old is our present equipment? We just went switched to the Axon equipment in December.
1:38:44 Okay. And this is six months old. Six months. So it's just the upgrade.
1:38:48 Tech technology is advancing way faster than anyone would expect.
1:38:52 Um so it I am well aware of the concerns the community has when we go into uh technology. I've had conversations with council members, had conversations with
1:39:00 the public. I'm well aware of those concerns. We will do everything we can to progress the police department and make sure we're using the best practices
1:39:08 and safest practices with what the community feels comfortable with us having. like that is my promise to to the community and to the council.
1:39:16 Well, yeah.
1:39:18 And I understand that. And with technology, um, each year, I know we going to have to have to be spending this money to
1:39:25 upgrade. But I'm hoping with this one over a fiveyear period, we don't have to worry about too much upgrading. All right. So, it include upgrading as thing come along is, I guess, what I'm asking.
1:39:36 Correct. The Axon contract that we that was approved does include an upgrade package year two and a half three.
1:39:42 That's when if they came out with Axon body five, okay, body camera 5, then we would get the Axon camera body five. Draft one, correct me if I'm wrong, Mr.
1:39:50 Duffy, draft one would still be a separate product. So based on the cost, I would assume that I'm going to have to come before council if we ever wanted to move forward with draft one.
1:39:58 Okay. Okay. But but this package include over the next five years any any updates and software and all that.
1:40:05 Correct. Okay. Thank you. I just want to go and thank you for being able to allocate funds and utilize them so
1:40:13 you're not really doing a burden on the citizens, but we're we're getting like state-of-the-art equipment right now and
1:40:20 it's not costing us anything and we're making the city safer because of of translation. I can imagine this has to be a frustrating thing when somebody is
1:40:29 stopped doesn't speak English and they're getting threatened, you know, especially a foreigner or something and you know, god forbid they had a weapon
1:40:37 or anything. This is going to avert any kind of problems like that. And I just want to thank you for for bringing it in and even thank you twice for having it cost us nothing.
1:40:46 Yes. Thank you for that.
1:40:49 Yeah, you're welcome. Thank you guys for your support. We couldn't have done this uh gotten these grant funds without your support and you guys are proving us to
1:40:56 uh to participate in the designated immigration officer program. We've had a successful program. I think we have withtood the test of time with that
1:41:04 program thus far and uh if there's anything that changes, I I'll bring it back before the council. Thank you. Just one final question. Sorry, Chief.
1:41:11 Um do you have a um remind me since I'm new up here uh newer up here. Um, do you
1:41:20 report back to the council or to the city manager through the city manager to the council on how your technology is working through the year like a a look
1:41:28 back at the year assessment of that technology and the and the information that was utilized and approved and how that benefited or maybe needs to be changed moving forward?
1:41:37 Yes, we do. I communicate with city manager and the deputy city manager all the time about technology. So far, we've all been pleased with how it's performing and that
1:41:44 so people think a tech is just the body cams of this. We just rolled out ebikes.
1:41:48 ebikes are really they've been good. So, we we're continuing to look at different ways that we can be effective, efficient, and and again, the ebikes
1:41:56 were paid with seizure funds. So, that wasn't out of grant money. So, we're looking for ways that we can move the mission forward, not always hitting the
1:42:03 general fund. I just want to echo and say thank you for taking the concerns and and uh worries of of of of some out
1:42:11 there who uh you know want to make sure that we're doing right and and doing just and treating people equitably and fairly through the the police department
1:42:20 and through that interaction and I think uh you have uh instilled in this community that degree of trust. So thank you. Thank you.
1:42:28 Thank you. If the council will under indulge me, I'd like to take a stab at a motion here. Um, and if if I don't have
1:42:36 support, I don't have support. But I'm going to move to approve item number 12 ba with the condition that if the service that we are approving is ever
1:42:44 upgraded or changed in such a way that the service exceeds translation services that it come back to council for approval.
1:42:52 So, we're approving the five-year.
1:42:54 approving the five-year with the condition that if the service ever changes to exceed simple translation services that it come back to council
1:43:02 for final takes away I think it would have to do that anyway that would be additional cost anyway well not we don't know that and that's
1:43:09 my five years technology is going to change a lot and that's why I'm simply saying I don't think any of us have an issue with the translation services but
1:43:17 if they have a great product that ultimately in the next upgrade they want to incorporate I would like that to come back to the council. That'll be fine.
1:43:25 That's my motion. Yeah, I agree to that. Is there a second? And I second it. Thank you.
1:43:32 Okay, you have a motion and a second for approval item number 12 with the addition any changes in translation services uh and need to come back to council for approval.
1:43:43 Did I say that about right? Yes.
1:43:46 Okay. Any any further discussion hearing? None. All in favor, let it be known by saying I.
1:43:52 All oppose. And the chair vote I as well. Motion passes. Five.
1:43:58 Oh. Uh. Item number 13, Ser City Property. Yes, sir.
1:44:06 Good evening, Mayor, City Council members. Kurt Henel, Planning Development Services Director. What now?
1:44:14 Staff is proposing to surplus city property that does not serve a purpose for public use. The 1,335 foot parcel is leftover property between
1:44:23 the new lift station at the lumber yard and the private property to the west.
1:44:27 Initially, staff thought this parcel was included with a larger surplus property to the south uh donated by the lumberyard. But when surveyed, it was
1:44:35 discovered this was a leftover parcel owned by the city that did not serve a purpose and would only create a maintenance issue for the parcel. Once
1:44:44 the uh once the new lift station is constructed, the parcel would sit between two fences two fences approximately 100 ft apart, which that
1:44:53 yellow area is the parcel in question of 1,300 square ft. Uh this request was brought to city council for
1:45:00 consideration at the at their regularly scheduled meeting on May 12th, 2026.
1:45:06 Council directed staff to get with DPZ code design to determine if the surplusing this piece of property would
1:45:14 unnecessarily disconnect the trail or limit its future use and then bring the bring the uh request back to city
1:45:21 council for future consideration. Upon discussion with our economic development director and reviewing the site area, DPZ concluded that the proposed
1:45:30 ownership transfer uh does neither uh disconnect the trail or limit its future use. And argu arguably it generates
1:45:38 revenue for the city while eliminating maintenance.
1:45:47 Based on staff and DPZ's reviews, our recommendation is that the 1,335 foot parcel does not serve a purpose for
1:45:55 public use. Therefore, staff recommends the city surplus this property. The city will retain an easement over the parcel for any utilities that remain underground.
1:46:05 And that's staff's report.
1:46:07 Thank you, sir. This is a this is a public hearing. Anyone in the public wish to address this item may come to microphone and state your name and address and have three minutes.
1:46:19 Does anyone in the public wish to address this item?
1:46:23 Seeing no one in chamber, a closed chamber. Anyone on No one online. Wow.
1:46:27 Easy for just right on through. Uh bring it back to council. What say council?
1:46:32 I appreciate staff working with DPZ and and getting that additional information.
1:46:37 Um I was in support of this at that meeting um uh last month and I'm in support of it now. Um, and I'd like to see us move forward and approve this.
1:46:47 So, I do have a I have a motion, but if others have conversation, uh, if not, then I would move to approve item number 13. I second.
1:46:55 And if if I may, I just want to clarify what I'd ask the council to in its motion if it does want to approve. It's just that that staff recommendation
1:47:04 there along with the city retaining an underground or a utility easement.
1:47:10 I would make that motion to approve with the city retaining an easement over the parcel for any utilities that remain underground. Thank you, sir.
1:47:18 Second.
1:47:20 I have a motion and a second for approval of item number 13. It's presented with the stipulation that the city maintain uh easement underground course.
1:47:32 Any further discussion? I just want to th I just add in there. Well, I don't understand how we can sit here and say this is a surplus piece of property when
1:47:40 we have a easement. The city has an easement running through it. Okay. Um, and I I guess I'm I'm trying still
1:47:48 trying to understand why we just go in there. We cut out this little slip or piece of property. The whole thing we
1:47:56 own the trail, own that piece of property all the way down the line to the east and west as well. So, why didn't we surplus the whole thing uh and sell it all? Um, so I'm having problem
1:48:06 problem understanding the purpose and why we're surplusing and especially when we have easement with equip uh equipment running in in there that we would need
1:48:14 to get to from time to time. So I understand your concern. I share it.
1:48:18 My recollection is I was the one who created this problem last month. Um, what I understand is
1:48:26 we continue to retain ownership to the east of where the lift station will be
1:48:33 or the the whatever the I've heard people. It's okay.
1:48:38 Yeah, the water treatment. Um, my kids would love what I want what's in my head and I can't get it out. Um, but
1:48:46 this being 100 feet kind of in between the two fences, the two uses. um there's no meaningful use and I think staff made
1:48:54 a valid point and and so I share your concerns and I appreciate that staff, you know, went back and got the third opinion. I I like that we're getting
1:49:01 opinion from the the consultants that we have. I think that's good and I I feel like it puts us in a really good place that I'm comfortable moving forward now as am I.
1:49:10 You call a question.
1:49:12 I have a motion and a second on the floor to approve item number 13. Um any
1:49:19 further discussion? No hearing none. All in favor let it be known by saying I.
1:49:23 I chair vote nay. Motion carry 4 to1.
1:49:30 Item number 14.
1:49:36 Ordinance number 2026 023 an ordinance of the city council of the city of Clermont Florida amending
1:49:44 chapter 1 article 2 division 3 of the Clermont city code to create section 1-101
1:49:52 providing for administrative fines cost of repair cost of enforcement and leans providing for conflict severability
1:50:00 codification the administrative correction of scriveners error publication and an effective eight.
1:50:07 And again, this was something that um is requested by I think both the council as
1:50:14 well as staff. It would create a new section. It's not actually going to amend anything in your code. It's going to create a new section in your city
1:50:23 code um that does several things which it'll allow us to charge for the enforcement costs. Um, I know I
1:50:30 explained this at the last meeting, but just for the record, um, you know, if if someone goes out and a violator brings the property back into compliance, it
1:50:39 seems unfair that we shouldn't be able to charge for the costs of the investigation that occurred. Uh, similarly, if there is a violation that
1:50:47 happens, we should get those costs in the order um, if the board finds that there's a violation. But primarily it recognizes the fact that the city of
1:50:55 Clermont now exceeds 50,000 persons in population and therefore we can double the amount of fines uh charged. Part of
1:51:04 the reason that we have to create a new section for this instead of amending prior code sections is that it actually
1:51:11 doesn't spell out amounts in your city code right now for code violations. It spells out amounts for um other types of violations, but not code violations.
1:51:23 Um and so that's oh it also adds some authority to the uh code board. So for example in subsection C if the code
1:51:31 board finds that the violation or condition causing the violation presents a serious threat to the public health safety or welfare or if the violation is irreparable or irreversible in nature.
1:51:41 The city may secure, repair or demolish the property and take any other necessary action. Again, part of this is due to recent cases where we felt like
1:51:50 hands were tied a little bit and and residents, the public has spoken and you have spoken and so we're trying to address this this concern.
1:51:59 Okay.
1:52:01 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 three minutes.
1:52:08 This is a public hearing. Anyone in the chamber would wish to address this item may come to the microphone and state your name and address and have three minutes.
1:52:16 Seeing no one, no one online, bring it back to council. What say council?
1:52:22 I have a few questions. Uh, if I may, for the city attorney, I guess, um, you
1:52:30 said one of the questions I'm going to have is current amounts. So, current fines are not defined in our or fines are not defined in our current code.
1:52:39 Correct. It refers to chapter 162, the Florida statutes, where we borrow this procedure, but it doesn't actually say 250 and 500.
1:52:47 Okay.
1:52:48 Um, for this specific thing, okay, but 250 and 500 are what we typically have been doing at the code enforcement board level.
1:52:56 Actually, I think the regulation now ordinance now say you can find up to those amounts, right? Up to Yeah.
1:53:04 Um, that's right. it. So this is a new section.
1:53:12 Can I if we wanted this section to apply to multiple or subsequent issues and not
1:53:22 first time issues as it's written. Is that allowable?
1:53:29 Because my and where I'm coming from is is that I I do want the city as we tackle I think something that comes with
1:53:37 growth and maturity of a city is bigger issues. Sometimes things just get more complicated and I want to make sure the
1:53:44 city has the appropriate tools. But I also I don't want to lose track of the focus of it's my understanding that
1:53:52 nothing is changing with relation to compliance being the ultimate goal. And if compliance is the ultimate goal, I do
1:54:00 think we could, if we have the ability, differentiate between those first time, you know, first time incident versus a multiple repeat subsequent.
1:54:13 So, I I guess I would say two things in response to that. Yes, it does apply to repeats except now it's up to $5,000 a day for repeat violators.
1:54:21 Uh, yes. A day.
1:54:23 Um, and in other words, this is the statutory maximum. this is what the statutes allow you to do. You don't need
1:54:29 to. Um but in in subsection uh E here, I see that.
1:54:35 Yeah. And and this is consistent with what most cities and counties do that do have more than 50,000. And I'll say I
1:54:42 mean I operate as the special master for code enforcement in Citrus County. So I do this with the higher fine amounts and I've never I've never gone up to $1,000
1:54:52 a day on anything. And I think in practice it would have to be truly terrible to do the maximum. I mean I and
1:54:58 if your board did run a muck, we'd have to have a conversation about it. Um but you you do I mean it's a great point.
1:55:06 Compliance is the goal. And based on what I've seen from your code, they do keep that in mind. Now there's going to be situations where uh fines acrew in a
1:55:16 manner that it is a larger fine than the value of the property. And when that happens, your city staff does look at this and work to consider fine
1:55:25 reductions with the board. This happens as a matter of course everywhere in the state of Florida.
1:55:29 I would have some real constitutional concerns if that wasn't done.
1:55:33 So I I think we have the mechanisms in place to address what you're talking about. Okay.
1:55:37 Do you have any language you'd like us to consider, Mr. Bane? No, I think I I I realizing hearing hearing where we're at
1:55:45 with that with regard to first time, second time, it's it actually is included in here in this language. Um I think and that's where I I understand that it's a new section.
1:55:57 But one of the frustrations that I've had with how this has been presented, and I think I shared it at the last council meeting and shared it in my agenda review, is typically when we're
1:56:06 dealing with something like this, we have a current proposed and we can see where we're making changes. And and and
1:56:13 even though it's new, we're making changes. And it's not been real clear to me in in my packet where those changes
1:56:21 actually are currently listed or where the current is and how this one changes that with it through a tracking change or through we're striking this, we're
1:56:30 adding this or how this complements that. I think this has just been more of a we can find more if we want. Um, and
1:56:38 so I think it it it actually involves a little bit more than maybe um what at least I heard in terms of how it was
1:56:45 presented. So I I I I appreciate the additional clarification.
1:56:48 Yeah, I if if I could have amended the sections, I would have. It's just it's frankly very very badly drafted. So I think those cons the reason why it's a
1:56:57 new section is because uh frankly it's just an inadequate code. So we have to have a big upgrade. And I I can kind of
1:57:06 agree with you that because when I served on it, I think we made many changes. And um I just have one question. We talking about repeat offenders. I know one of the changes we
1:57:14 made when I was on the board was the fact that um when I first was on the board, each time it was a new case and we made
1:57:23 that change to say, "Hey, now if you've been uh fine and out of compliance once and we determine you was out of compliance, the next time we find you
1:57:31 out of compliance, we don't bring a new case. we we find you right away as as a repeat offender. So, can we apply that same principle to since it's a new
1:57:39 Yeah, that doesn't change. I mean, that is absolutely the case. So, just to explain it since you already speak the language fluently, but for the public, I
1:57:46 mean, the way it normally works with a repeat violator, well, with a firsttime violator is normally they get a time to comply before the fine begins, 30 days,
1:57:54 and then it's $250 a day. for a repeat violator, it's often the time from when it was discovered until the hearing and
1:58:02 then so let's say $1,000 a day and then you can now go up to $5,000 a day from the date of the hearing onward.
1:58:09 So what this represents is the city getting very very serious about it.
1:58:12 Okay. Yeah. I just want to make sure since you say a new section that we see apply that portion. Okay. Good.
1:58:18 I think my understanding was we were replacing the old section. What is happening to the old language? We're keeping um all the other sections that
1:58:26 exist which are primarily uh procedural but you know addressing council members Bane's point is it refers to chapter 162
1:58:34 for a lot of this. So chapter the Florida legislature years ago created this chapter 162 as a model for cities
1:58:42 and counties to adopt for its code procedures. And Clermont did that just like most cities and counties did. But
1:58:49 the manner in which it adopted it um left some gaps. In other words, it didn't say 250 and 500 specifically. It
1:58:57 said, you know, the fines available, you know, consistent with chapter 162. Now, we're making it explicit. Um if that
1:59:04 makes sense. But we're not altering anything about what's already in your code.
1:59:09 Is there a section in here that basically says if the old statute in any way contradicts the statute that this one or this ordinance, excuse me, that
1:59:16 this one controls? It it Well, that's Am I worrying about something I don't need to worry about?
1:59:20 Well, there are no conflicts. Um, but I don't know that uh yes, it says any ordinance or parts of ordinance in conflict here with hereby repealed.
1:59:29 Where is that? Section three, page four of five. Okay, I'm good. Did I have a motion?
1:59:37 I did not. No, I said did I have a motion?
1:59:40 Did he have a motion? Anybody make a motion? No. No, I was just asking the questions.
1:59:46 Sorry. Okay. Okay. I make a motion to approve item number 14, ordinance number 2026-023.
1:59:55 Second.
1:59:57 I have a motion and a second for approval of item number 14, ordinance number 2026-023.
2:00:06 Any further discussion? Roll call. Council member Strange. I. Council member Bane. I. Council member Myers.
2:00:14 I. Council member Peterson I and the chair vote I as well. A motion passes 50. Long time coming. Thank you
2:00:21 Mr. Mr. W for getting this done. Uh item number 15 is for a varance request.
2:00:31 Good afternoon mayor, city council members and guests. Justine day with development services presenting the variance for 2099 Ionito circle.
2:00:44 The applicant, Gerald St. Tilma, is requesting three variances for his property at 2099 Ibonito Circle due to a
2:00:52 pending code enforcement case involving installed pavers. The property is in the Belloterra subdivision and zoned R1
2:00:59 single family medium density residential district.
2:01:05 The first variance request is to reduce the required 7 and 1/2 ft sideyard setback to allow the existing astroturf to remain at zero feet from the property
2:01:13 lines on both sides of the property. The proposed reduction would also allow the existing PA patio to encroach into the
2:01:20 west side yard setback and remain at 3 ft from the property line. The second variance request is to reduce the
2:01:27 required 25 ft rear yard setback to allow the existing astroturf to remain at 5 ft from the north property line.
2:01:34 During review of the variance application, the applicant worked with a civil engineer to address storm water concerns and reduce the impervious surface area on the property to come
2:01:42 into compliance with the code. As a result, the third variance request that was originally anticipated is no longer needed.
2:01:52 The applicant stated that the backyard has a noticeable slope which created drainage and erosion concerns during the construction of the pool. Improvements
2:02:00 such as redirection of the gutters to a storm water drain and the installation of astroturf were implemented to prevent erosion and minimize storm water runoff.
2:02:09 The applicant mentioned a practical hardship due to the property's unique conditions.
2:02:20 I am not sure what is going on. It does not want to move. Okay. Technology, technology, technology.
2:02:42 Keep working on it. Just want to keep while he works on getting the slides back up. Um, slide four is just to go
2:02:52 over the review and the um recommendation. Hold on one second.
2:03:00 There we go. Thank you.
2:03:02 That's an old whole proc that's a whole present presentation.
2:03:08 Upon review, staff cannot support the requested reduction to the setbacks. The variance request is more than the minimum in order to make reasonable use
2:03:16 of the land as the paper patio could meet setback requirements if reconfigured. The city's engineer reviewed the improvements made the
2:03:23 astroturf and made to the astroturf and noted that it would require strict ongoing maintenance to ensure the
2:03:30 subbase functions correctly. Without proper maintenance, the storm water runoff uh could increase and negatively affect neighboring properties and the
2:03:39 overall drainage system. Under Land Development Code section 101246, a variance may only be granted with a positive finding on all review criteria.
2:03:49 Staff finds the application fails to meet two of the five required criteria.
2:03:53 Therefore, staff recommends denial of the variance request. This concludes staff presentation.
2:03:58 Thank you, ma'am. Miss African present, please.
2:04:15 Good afternoon, mayor and members of the city council, this distinguished staff.
2:04:22 My name is Francent Telma and my spouse and I reside at the property 2099 Ibuito
2:04:29 Circle in Clermont. We are here this afternoon to sincerely apologize for permitting oversight regarding our
2:04:38 backyard and we respectfully request your approval for variance.
2:04:44 Following the completion of our pool, we upgraded our backyard with artificial turf and a small paver area.
2:04:54 Our primary motivation for this project was the health and safety of our two
2:05:02 young children who are three and five years old.
2:05:07 Our youngest son suffers from severe pediatrician confirmed environmental allergies to grass, trees, and pollen.
2:05:18 To allow him to play safely outside with his sister, we needed to create an
2:05:26 allergenfree environment. In addition to our son's medical needs, the project addressed significant site constraints.
2:05:36 The builder originally installed non-errigated baya grass which was
2:05:43 failing due to our unique slope in the backyard causing ongoing concern with erosion and
2:05:51 drainage. To prevent that and minimize storm water oneoff, we redirected the
2:05:59 water from the left side garders to our storm storm water train at the edge of the property before the improvements.
2:06:08 We want to emphasize that we are firm believers in regulatory compliance due to our professional backgrounds.
2:06:18 Furthermore, we interviewed eight different contractors and unfortunately none of them indicated that a city permit was required for artificial turf.
2:06:29 We did our due diligence by obtaining full HOA approval. We were completely unaware of the specific city code
2:06:38 restriction and we deeply regret the oversight.
2:06:44 Additionally, we want to assure the city the the council that we fully understand the implication of having this improvement within the easement.
2:06:55 As homeowners, should any future utility or city maintenance require access, we accept
2:07:02 the responsibility and will cover the cost of removal and replacement.
2:07:09 Please thank you for your time, your understanding and our family's unique situation
2:07:16 and you your consideration of our vian request. We sincerely apologize.
2:07:26 Okay, sir. Uh I'm assuming that's your engineer behind you. Yes.
2:07:32 Did he have anything to add before I open up to the public?
2:07:35 My name's uh Julian Quintana. work for the engineer that did the report uh for Highland Engineering. Okay.
2:07:40 I'm just here to answer any and all uh drainage concerns. Yep. All right. Thank you.
2:07:46 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 three minutes.
2:08:02 Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen. My name is Zindera Arbisu. My address is 2093 Ibondo Circle in the subdivision of
2:08:12 Bellaterara. And I am the neighbor of Mr. and Mrs. St. Tilma. And I'm here to
2:08:19 support the approval of the variance request. Thank you. Thank you.
2:08:28 I think I have a letter from her, right?
2:08:30 Hello. My name is Claude Tito. I live I'm a homeowner 1609 residual drive and
2:08:38 uh Joel sent work for my company and um approve that variance.
2:08:44 Thank you.
2:08:48 Then my name is Lovely Pia. I live in 3024
2:08:56 Rob the same community of Gen Cinema. I'm here to approve the appal of the variance.
2:09:04 Thank you. Anyone else?
2:09:10 Good afternoon. I'm Maria Gutierrez. I live on 2093 Ibonito Circle in Bellotera
2:09:17 development and I'm here to support the approval for our neighbors. Thank you. Thank you.
2:09:26 Anyone else? Yes, sir.
2:09:34 Good afternoon. My name is Kurt Shu. I'm a retired military officer. Um, as someone who's filed 150 claims with the
2:09:40 VA for Americans with Disabilities Act, like to remind the council, the attorneys, and everyone on the city staff that in the American Disability
2:09:48 Act, someone asked for a reasonable accommodation, it's actually provided for in federal law. Thank you.
2:09:54 Thank you, sir. Anyone else? This is a public hearing.
2:10:00 Anyone in the chamber that wish to speak to this item may come to the microphone and state your name and address and have three minutes.
2:10:06 Anyone else? Seeing no one else, I close it. No one online. So, we will close public comment. Bring it back to council. What say council?
2:10:15 I have a couple questions. I don't know if this is for the engineer or the homeowner, but my question is, what is the expected useful life of the astroturf?
2:10:28 Uh that's more of a manufacturer uh kind of detail, but
2:10:37 it I mean if I had to guess about 20 years and staff mentioned that there was
2:10:44 some required maintenance that perhaps is sensitive. What might staff be referring to and can you speak to the maintenance requirements moving forward?
2:10:51 in in the report, it didn't necessarily uh mention a maintenance to the turf itself. I think that's more of an issue
2:11:01 if you ever needed to do maintenance on that wall and if they needed, sorry, like e utility easement maintenance.
2:11:09 Yes, the easement. Yeah. Okay.
2:11:11 Correct. You'd have to you'd have to excavate all that uh 57 stone, all the turf. Um, so it would kind of be a a
2:11:20 maintenance cost in that respect, but if the homeowner is willing to cover the cost, I mean, yeah.
2:11:29 Yeah. I don't know. Thank you. Yeah. Um, did you want to comment?
2:11:33 No. In other words, in this type of a situation, we would ask that uh a hold harmless and indemnification agreement
2:11:40 if if you did seem deem fit to approve it be signed by the owner so that if we did have to um you know make use of the easement or tear something up that
2:11:48 they're not going to sue it. Not saying they would, but we we usually get a document signed to protect us.
2:11:54 And I have one more question. I think it might be for Mr. Matthysse or Mr. Van Wagner. In a recent hearing, we talked
2:12:00 about an administrative variance, if I'm using the right terminology, staff. Is that the right word? Correct.
2:12:08 Administr would this item have been one that would have met the criteria of an administrative variance on any or all of the requested variances?
2:12:17 It it all depends on how we write it in the future code. So it could be written like I've seen jurisdictions where they give like a 20%
2:12:25 administrative if they call it relief administrative relief for any dimensional standard. So setbacks, height, things like that. I've seen them
2:12:32 as high as 50% and as low as probably 5 to 10%. So it's all depending on how we write it in the ordinance.
2:12:39 But they're under their overall impervious surface area here.
2:12:43 Correct. So they wouldn't need a variance for that. It would just be the setbacks of the pavers, the pavers and the side setback and the astroturf in the rear inside.
2:12:52 So, I want to speak to the council.
2:12:53 Where I'm at on this is I'm generally of the opinion that as long as the neighbors approve a zero setback. I'm
2:13:02 not sure I care so much if the neighbors are on the same page. Obviously, they are here. I commend you for that. Um,
2:13:09 astroturf is not an approved material and um, I think they do have in this
2:13:15 case a a valid reason to have a different kind of material. U, my inclination would be because we have
2:13:24 neighbors in support because they're under the engineering impervious surface area. I would be fine with the setback
2:13:31 issues. the astroturf. I would ask council to consider to put a useful life limit on the cup that we say within 20
2:13:40 years, you know, the cup would would end and they would have to come back. By then, their child will no longer be a child 20 years from now. Um, and so they
2:13:48 would be able to make an informed decision. So rather than it run with the land in perpetuity, that's kind of where I'm at on this, but I'm I'm open to other people's thoughts.
2:13:56 So approving a variance with a 20-year Yeah.
2:13:58 sunshine. I I I'm fine with that too because this is important for their child to be able to play outside. You know, it's unlike some of our others.
2:14:08 This is a real health issue.
2:14:12 So, Mr. Matis, did you I was just going to add I researched the astroturf and the average lifespan of astroturf for residential yards is 10 to 15 years.
2:14:20 Okay. With good maintenance. So, I might say 15. The child is three. So, that would get the child to 18. 18.
2:14:29 Well, I think the that depending upon the type of astroturf too, right?
2:14:33 Because it's different grade. Yeah, this is the the AstroTurf. It says it can go up to 20 years probably up to 20 years.
2:14:40 Up to 20 residential backyards generally 10 to 12 or 10 to 15 depending on pets, children, and weather.
2:14:46 And that's going to also re also depend upon how much use you put on that astro turf as well. Okay. More children a lot.
2:14:53 Yes, sir. Mr. Bay, thank you. Uh, Mr. Mayor, I to to piggyback on Council Member Strange's
2:15:00 question, I think um I think there might be something more than maybe what the engineer mentioned there. So, I don't know if city staff can address. I I
2:15:09 think you guys made a concern about the turf being maintained for water runoff, not necessarily for access to the
2:15:19 easement. That was what that that second to the last paragraph on page 199 indicates. Mhm.
2:15:24 That is how the email has read and I do have it if you want me to put it up on screen. Yeah, that would be good if if you can.
2:15:36 Can you enlarge it? Yes. Okay. Okay.
2:15:45 What section are we looking at?
2:15:47 So, I believe it's going to be section three.
2:15:51 Yeah, it says however. I think it starts, however, over time. Where is that?
2:15:57 The second line or second line of that last paragraph. However, over time. Okay. Thank you.
2:16:01 Do I think downstream of this lot might contribute to more runoff? I do.
2:16:09 So that I I guess that's where this is my rub with with AstroTurf is like
2:16:17 it's it's it's not really a great product for our
2:16:25 area in our yards because of that concern. And I I don't I so
2:16:33 for what it's worth, if if if you all remember this development, this development had some grading issues
2:16:40 that delayed its start for quite some time and so it's a sensitive area and I'm
2:16:48 hyper aware of that fact like that voice speaking saying but hey this this could
2:16:57 be a this had This had a lot of concerns by city staff when the developers were bringing this forward that it kept
2:17:04 having to go back to the drawing board to make sure that it was going to work and and now we got it to a point that it works and we're now potentially starting
2:17:13 at least one because variances are only supposed to be for the property. But um we we can't control what word of mouth
2:17:22 does. That's potentially going to change what we finally got to to approve
2:17:30 in in water runoff and and in in drainage and in in site planning. Um and I that's my biggest concern. I think
2:17:39 it's lovely. I think it's beautiful. The pictures are amazing. It looks like an oasis.
2:17:43 Um, and I am sensitive to the fact of and I would, you know, if we need to get into that conversation, I' I'd defer to
2:17:51 our city attorney to talk to us and advise us on the ADA regarding federal and state law. Um, but I I'm worried
2:17:59 about right now it may work great, but in two years that subbase, how do we know what
2:18:06 that subbase is doing? And if and if that subbase isn't performing like it's supposed to and over time it starts to run into one of the neighbors who
2:18:15 actually came up and said I support this. How do what do we do then at that point? They've got a they've got a variance. There's nothing we can do. We
2:18:23 we're held harmless but but it it it could affect the overall neighborhood long term. and and we're also getting
2:18:31 rid of in addition to that, we're we're essentially giving zero setbacks on the side and rear uh of the yard. So
2:18:39 essentially we've got pers and andor turf going right up to the lot line. Um no room for any additional kind of
2:18:48 drainage uh without ripping all this out. I I'm really concerned about that and I just I don't I'm not convinced that it should
2:18:57 be approved, but I'm also not convinced that it shouldn't be approved if that makes sense because I I I I do feel like
2:19:04 um there's some valid points being made, but I and I think there could be some compromises potentially on on setbacks,
2:19:12 but I'm really worried about that turf and that uh substance being used under it while it's the the uh preferred
2:19:19 substance, how the maintenance of it and what is that going to do over time?
2:19:24 I'd love to hear our attorney's response to what we could do to address that because I think those are well one of the things I want to u come back and I hope it may answer one of the
2:19:32 question if I'm not mistaken when I read the package uh along that one side of the fencing uh where you see the kind of like brownish material if I'm not
2:19:41 mistaken that is drainage right yes and then along the back edge of the property all the river rock and everything is in there is the rear
2:19:49 drainage which was storm uh drained right into the storm water if if I'm not mistaken.
2:19:54 So, there is drainage there. And of course, you everybody in here probably know how I feel about 7 and 1/2 ft setback uh side setbacks
2:20:02 and everything. I don't I I take them very serious. But when I looked at this project and and I noticed they they went back, they put it in the beginning
2:20:10 without knowing um all the requirements. They spend extra cash to go back and redo the subbases so they have better drainage.
2:20:19 to get it back down under the 55% uh perfect surface and they took the uh engineering I guess he I think I would
2:20:27 say he did a great job in putting in drainage on the side and then making sure everything on the back side of the property drain into the um drain the
2:20:34 storm water there. So, I don't see any problem with with drainage and all and and um I just want to commend them that
2:20:41 for going back and getting the permits and working with city staff, working with engineers to redo everything and spend extra money to
2:20:50 make sure it make made it met our specification, our requirements and all.
2:20:54 So, I have no problem with the project and I do understand about your about your uh child and everything as one that suffered with asthma and as my wife can
2:21:03 contest a couple weeks ago that grass got to me and I was down for about two weeks because the grass didn't get to me. So, so uh I I have sympathy for that
2:21:12 and understand that as well. So, yeah.
2:21:15 And having having kids that also had allergies to grass and everything. So, I can I can commend it. You understand? I can support it. Okay.
2:21:22 I can support it too. I think they did a wonderful job as well. And you know, you've got your engineer, you've got all
2:21:29 your neighbors um supporting and you went to your HOA first and foremost and got approved from there.
2:21:37 Um a lot of people don't do that. They just do what they want to do and then oh, I should have did A and B. You actually went to your HOA, you know,
2:21:46 before you did anything, you know. um and getting the news of your child being allergic to all of the different things that we have growing here in Florida is,
2:21:54 you know, very disconcerning. So, um I'm for it for it to be approved.
2:22:00 But I think when you're talking about setbacks, setbacks are for pavers, but turf can go right up to the property line. And grass will die too if if it's not maintained.
2:22:10 You know, your your your house has to get painted or you or the the stuckco is going to crack. So, everything has to be maintained. I mean astroturf isn't a bad
2:22:19 thing. You know, you think about water conservation, it's a good thing. And I and I think, you know, everything has to be maintained. And I think if we put a
2:22:27 15 year, none of us are going to be here in 15 years till like, come on. Speak for yourself. Speak for yourself. Okay.
2:22:36 You mean you mean on be alive? We're going to be alive. I know I'm going to be alive. Thanks a lot.
2:22:43 You mean city council star? You mean city council? Is that is that a threat? We don't know.
2:22:51 With that, I'd like to make a motion to approve the variance. And I second it.
2:22:56 Okay. I have a motion in a second to approve variance as presented with uh we need no um did you want to put the
2:23:04 15year or No, we'll put make it 30 years then. 30 years.
2:23:08 No, no, 15 year. I don't think we can because I don't think you could ever hold anybody for that.
2:23:12 Okay. M. So, so the motion's without that. Yes.
2:23:17 Okay. What about the hold harmless agreement to be included that the city attorney Yeah, that needs to be in there.
2:23:22 Yes, we put the whole Put that in there. Yeah. That notwithstanding. All right. So, give me the motion.
2:23:29 Yeah. We to approve it with with the with with the um on condition that on condition that the
2:23:36 hold harmless agreement that we use in these situations be executed. Right. There you go. That right there.
2:23:41 That's the word I'm going to use. And I second it. That was the wording. And no, no, no. No 15. No 15 year. Okay.
2:23:49 All right. We have a motion and a second with the amended amendments to the uh material presented. Is there any further discussion?
2:23:59 I would like to before we call the vote if that's okay. First, to Mr. Bane's point, there is a language in the HOA approval that says the owner is
2:24:06 responsible for any flooding caused by the turf on their neighbors property.
2:24:09 Yeah. Um, so I don't know if that addresses your concerns, but as you raised them and I shared them, I looked through again and that does address mine
2:24:17 um on that issue. It becomes a private issue and I think that everybody has notice of it as they're coming into this. Um, I will tell you, Mr. Peterson,
2:24:25 I can I can support your motion as it addresses the setback variances. I'm having a difficult time supporting it
2:24:33 with the astroturf. Uh, I would like you to consider the possibility of amending the motion to limiting the astroturf to
2:24:40 15 years so that it can be revisited at the time that the astroturf might need to be replaced. Anyway, um, the reason why I feel that way is it is not an
2:24:48 approved material. U, this is an exception due to an ADA issue. The person at issue presumably becomes an
2:24:55 adult in 15 years. And so I'd like you to consider that.
2:24:58 I mean, can that be enforced? That's I don't know if we can enforce something that but we can we I mean if you know you could put a 15year in there
2:25:07 but I mean yeah it can be enforced I mean if somebody like tracking I know people are track if they are then I would be I mean I could add that in there.
2:25:16 Well Mr. Wall let me ask you this question we put a 15 year and then 13 years from now they sell it.
2:25:22 So how we force it on the new homeowners? M no I mean technically it can be whether it's a good idea or not
2:25:31 I don't well my thought process is that astroturf does have a useful life and it's going to have to be replaced at some point and when that happens
2:25:39 presumably if it's these property owners they'll know because they're here if it's a future property owner um hopefully they will ask the city you know what are the requirements we'll be
2:25:47 able to see what are the new materials by then um I think it addresses their need for the variance for the material
2:25:54 change. And like I said, I continue to remain of the position that if the neighbors approve a zero lot line, I think that's between them and the neighbors and a future property owner
2:26:02 would come to it and be able to see it when they came to it. So that's why I'm I'm okay with it as it pertains to the setbacks. Um, and I would simply ask
2:26:11 that you consider putting 15 years on the astroturf. That's all.
2:26:14 Well, here's the other question. I guess with the 15 even after 15 years, um, they come back, do we disapprove it?
2:26:22 They could come back and ask the council then. I mean we do it or do we like I say you sell it at 13 years do we
2:26:29 grandfather this in and the new owners in two years coming in say hey we want to continue to have the uh astro turf and we we reook at it all again or do
2:26:38 they automatically get grandfathered in and be able to just go ahead and upgrade they astroturf I I think it's part of owning property
2:26:45 is doing your due diligence on you know what the materials are if there's any 15 years from now you know who knows what materials are going to be You amend the motion artificial.
2:26:54 Is is the motion being amended though? Amended with 15 years. Are you sure? On the astro. Yes.
2:26:59 On the astr and a new second. Okay. With the amendment motion and second with a 15 year life and homeless. All right.
2:27:11 Any further discussion? Wow. Not all in favor. Let it be known by saying I. I. All oppose and chair vote I as well.
2:27:19 Motion passes 50. Good luck. Thank you. Thank you.
2:27:24 Uh item number 16, resolution number 2026-011R.
2:27:31 A resolution of the city council of the city of Clermont, Lake County, Florida, granting a conditional use permit to allow for a mobile food dispensing
2:27:39 vehicle to operate on an improved parcel located in the C2 general commercial zoning district providing for conflict
2:27:47 severability, administrative correction of scriveners, publication, and an effective date.
2:27:55 Yes, sir.
2:27:56 Good evening, mayor, city council members, and guests. John Cruz Development Services. Um, the applicant is requesting a conditional use permit
2:28:05 to allow the operation of mobile food dis dispensing vehicle or a food truck on an improved parcel designated within
2:28:13 the C2 general commercial zoning district. The proposed location is 477 East Highway 50 within the Senoko Texico
2:28:20 parking lot. And on your display outlined in yellow is the parcel.
2:28:28 The applicant proposes to operate a single food truck Myamero with takeout service only. The food truck is proposed to be located on the east side of the
2:28:36 property adjacent to the convenience store. The final location will be confirmed during site review to ensure compliance with all applicable building
2:28:44 and fire safety codes. Currently, there is an existing food truck operation approximately 800 ft to the west located
2:28:51 at 300 East Highway 50. Bamero will operate in a similar fashion.
2:28:57 The applicant has provided written authorization from the property owner allowing the use of the property, including access to the restroom
2:29:03 facilities for patrons. Proposed hours of operation are 7 days a week, 400 p.m.
2:29:09 to 1000 p.m. The applicant will comply with all city regulations, Lake County Health Department, and state licensing requirements and standards.
2:29:18 Additionally, the applicant has indicated the food truck will stay on the property overnight and will go to a commentary to drop off waste. The city's
2:29:28 land development code does not identify food trucks as a permitted use within the C2 general commercial district. As such, the use requires approval of a
2:29:36 conditional use permit for this type of operation. The C2 general commercial district permits restaurants and food establishments when conducted in an
2:29:44 enclosed structure. staff finds the proposed use is compatible with the district and would not be more objectional than other permitted uses.
2:29:53 The planning and zoning commission recommended approval 4 to one with the condition that the hours of operation are in accordance with the existing
2:30:00 business. And if um city council decides to approve the resolution, we would have to make a change in the in the resolution for the hours of operation.
2:30:09 Currently, uh we verified um there Monday through Saturday till 900 pm and Sunday till 8:00 PM and that was
2:30:17 verified through uh one of the city employees. Today staff has reviewed the application as submitted in accordance with the development standards criteria
2:30:26 and finds the proposed use can meet the general criteria for granting a conditional use permit. Proposed use will not be detrimental to the health,
2:30:34 safety, and welfare of the surrounding community. Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit with the conditions contained in resolution number 2026-01R.
2:30:44 That concludes staff's presentation. Thank you. Is the applicant present?
2:31:04 Good evening. um audience and council member um Sebastian and he's my father
2:31:12 and he's my brother Romel and Alexander and um we are here to um ask
2:31:20 to um allow us to work here with the permit of course and me and my brother will be translating
2:31:28 to my father and we'll answer to our best of our abilities.
2:31:33 Okay. Can I just get you to give me your address, please, sir?
2:31:36 Oh, yeah. Um, where you live?
2:31:39 Oh, where we live? Um, 4:30 Overpool Avenue. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. All right. We're ready.
2:31:56 That's That's it. The presentation. Anything else you want to add? No.
2:32:05 Okay. If we have any other question, we we'll call you back a little bit later.
2:32:09 But this is a public uh form. Anyone in the uh chamber wish to address this item may come to the microphone and state your name and address and have three minutes.
2:32:19 Anyone in the chamber would like to address this item may come to the microphone and state your name and address and have three minutes. Seeing no one, no one online, we close it back.
2:32:27 We say councel. Um I I know that uh the planning and zoning commission staff
2:32:35 presented uh some language to address these so that we have some actual codified
2:32:43 information moving forward. And in fact I believe isn't it tonight one of the intros um is that uh that amendment to
2:32:51 the land development code. So, I think in the near future we we'll we'll be able to have some additional guidelines and information to help us here, but we
2:32:59 obviously have to work with where we are right now. And and and I'll just say given the location and what's currently
2:33:06 on the on the parcel, I I'm inclined to support the um the request um for this.
2:33:14 Um, and uh, I I think my question for for staff or my recommendation based off
2:33:24 of what staff is saying is would it be okay to say if we were to approve this and amend number three in section two
2:33:31 there to say the hours of operation will be consistent with the current business
2:33:39 hours of operation but not to extend beyond. And didn't we put a AM and PM time there? Would that suffice your your request and suffice legal?
2:33:53 Yes, it would.
2:33:54 Okay. So, with that then, what staff, what would you have a recommendation to not extend beyond for the AM and PM?
2:34:03 I mean, in terms of the AM, it says 4 PM in here already. And that's what, right?
2:34:08 Right. What? But if we're but if we're saying the current hours of operation, what time is the the the station open right now? What time does it open?
2:34:16 Because that's why I want to clarify because if the if the hours of operation is 8:00 a.m. to 10 p.m., then that means the food truck is 8 a.m. to 10 p.m.
2:34:24 Unless we alter that a little bit.
2:34:27 I think in his application, he said his hour was going to be from 4 to 10. Right.
2:34:31 Right. Um they said they were unsure exactly when the the business opened. I think it opens at 6:00 if I must say 6:00 a.m. if I
2:34:39 Well, if they're saying 400 p.m. I thought staff just said Monday through Saturday the gas stations open till 9:00 p.m. and Sunday until 8:00 p.m.
2:34:48 So if they're saying 4 is the start, how about 8 to 10? 8 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. That gives a reasonable window.
2:34:56 Okay. So, if we if if it would if my fellow council members would be inclined, if if I could make that motion
2:35:02 when it comes time to amend that item to say hours of operation will be hours
2:35:10 consistent with the current business hours of operation, but not to extend beyond 8:00 a.m. to 10 p.m.
2:35:17 So, basically, it's 8 to 10.
2:35:20 Okay. All right. But I I want to I don't want to do that and stifle conversation. So that's all I have for now. That's good.
2:35:28 My concern with this, first of all, I'm I'm in support of any sort of incremental development. I think that's really good. Um but the nature of
2:35:35 incremental is that it's shortterm and temporary. Um and so I would like to see
2:35:42 a uh sunset on this. I also believe that we're going to have a food truck ordinance within the next six months to
2:35:50 a year. And so what I don't know is what that's going to look like right now. And they came here first. So I don't want to deny them the opportunity to be heard.
2:36:00 But I would like us to consider doing the CUP for a limited period of time with the understanding that there will be a food truck ordinance
2:36:08 as I I believe and so it would then fall under whatever that ordinance restrictions are at that
2:36:15 point. So those are my only real concerns and related to Mr. vein. U when I was preparing for this, I would like to make sure that um the access to
2:36:25 restroom facilities is basically everything on page 250 are things facts that it's a single food truck. It's
2:36:32 authentic um diverse food options and a clean, safe, and professionally operated mobile kitchen. Um they've got operating
2:36:40 hours. They've got restroom facilities for the patient or patrons. I think that all of those conditions should be included in the in the cup because
2:36:49 they're things upon which we're relying in making our decisions and not each one of those is identified in the cup as it's currently written.
2:36:56 So, I just want to make sure those conditions are met and if we're open to having a sunset with the belief that we're going to have a food truck ordinance
2:37:04 if we believe that and if we don't, please let me know. It might change my opinion, but I think that we'll have one. So, I'd rather see them under the
2:37:12 umbrella of the the existing ordinance than having a cup that runs with the land that might have differing terms.
2:37:19 Right. I I you know, Clement is growing and and it it we're getting it's really good to see new entrepreneurs. This is a great way to start a business. You know, it goes from this to a brick and mortar.
2:37:30 So, it's a way for them to start. It's a great Venezuelan restaurant. Is that what it is? Venezuelan. So, you know, it'll be something unique. It'll be
2:37:37 something that I think would be nice and and as long as we're following the ordin I don't think if we change their times at to nine o'clock I don't think that's
2:37:45 going to affect you right n no not at all I didn't think so I you know so I'm in total support of this I think it's great that we're getting new
2:37:52 businesses into town like I think we said it previously it we want to have Clermont a place that you're going to live your children can can live and
2:38:01 raise a family and work in Clermont and not go the uh the 50 route out of Clermont every morning.
2:38:07 So, I'm in I'm in I'm in favor of this and I would I would vote yes to the ver to the uh food truck right now. I would too.
2:38:14 I'll vote yes. And Miss Miss Strange, I understand and I know we've been working been talking about a food truck uh
2:38:21 ordinance for for years. Yes. For a couple years.
2:38:25 Uh but I have a problem with with a sunset on this one. Uh because we have one across the street that we put across the street and I don't think we put a sunset on it and they got have three
2:38:33 across the street right across the street. One of the things I would like to see in here is the fact that if they decide they want to try to put additional truck in there, any
2:38:41 additional trucks that they need to come back to us. True.
2:38:44 Okay. And the fact that and as I think in the presentation they show it being on the pavement over there located on
2:38:53 the pavement set up on the pavement. I want to ensure that it it be on the pavement and not in the grassy area and behind the station and everything over
2:39:00 there. U if you look at where they have it set up. I think mayor to your concern it in section two number one it does say
2:39:06 that it only allows one food truck and it also indicates that the um
2:39:14 I thought it had a requirement of where the truck it's it's in there they have it's in there a little red box that say it's uh
2:39:23 identified it location it's on the pavement and I want to make sure that that is adhered to. Okay. And like I
2:39:30 say, it make sure if they decide to try to do another one, even though it's in there, that may make sure they they have to come back to us. Right. Well, it's it's in there as one.
2:39:39 It's in there as just one. So, they would have to come back.
2:39:42 Yeah. So, well, with I'm sorry. I didn't mean to cut you off. Um, with that being said, um, I I'd like to make the motion then
2:39:50 to approve, um, the the ordinance number, um, I'm sorry, resolution number 2026-011R
2:39:59 with the following, um, changes. one section two number three the hours of operation to be consistent with current
2:40:08 business hours of operation but not to extend beyond 8 a.m. to 10 p.m.
2:40:13 So the 8 to 10 and second to include the conditions in the staff report in the um
2:40:22 in the in the resolution in the actual um cup as council member Strange uh brought up. I don't want to include the
2:40:30 sunset because I don't think that that's equitable to this. I think if we do a sunset, we should do a sunset for every
2:40:38 single cup we've done. Um, and then bring them back under the new ordinance, but I do not want to see us do that just
2:40:45 with one. And that's where I would not why I would not want to include that in the motion.
2:40:50 So, is that your motion? Okay, I'll second it then.
2:40:53 Okay. and and uh the condition that you miss strange was talking about and that was included the restrooms and all that that yeah the items from the staff report
2:41:01 that it talked about the restroom it's one it's um all the other items that were in there that are not currently addressed let's make sure that they're addressed specifically
2:41:09 so you want to move them from the page where they say they are available into the CU into the actual the CU okay but I think the time you said was you
2:41:18 said the closing of the other visits was 9:00 Monday through Saturday and 8 on Sunday. Correct. Correct.
2:41:24 So we that's what we want to we want to stipulate that they have to maintain their closing hour to the adjacent business, not 10:00.
2:41:32 Right. But not to exceed 10 p.m.
2:41:34 Not to exceed. So it has to be within the consistent but then not to exceed.
2:41:38 So if if that business were to change their time to 11, the food truck could still only be till 10. Well, I don't think anybody I think
2:41:46 a gas station could very easily stay open till 11, but I I actually I didn't think they was open till that late at night over there.
2:41:54 No, I thought they closed around 6 or 7:00 over there, but if not, but that's fine. And the only other business, real business there. Well,
2:42:02 you got the auto parts place up the road and the uh what's that? Uh restaurant up the road. But other than that, the jewelry store right next door.
2:42:11 Yeah.
2:42:12 Okay. But okay, we have a motion and a second to approve resolution number 2026-011
2:42:24 with the added conditions. No sunset, right? No sunset. Any further discussion hearing? None.
2:42:32 All in favor, let it be known by saying I. I. All oppose. Nay.
2:42:37 And the chair vote I as well. Motion passes 4 to one. Good luck, sir.
2:42:45 You did a good job speaking for your dad, young man. Thank you.
2:42:51 Ordinance uh item number 17, ordinance number 2026-014. Intro.
2:42:58 An ordinance of the city council of the city of Clermont, Lake County, Florida, amending chapter 125 to establish
2:43:06 procedures for the review and approval of mobile food dispensing vehicles pursuant to section 509.102,
2:43:14 Florida statutes, providing for conflict, severability, cotification, administrative correction of scriveners errors, publication, and an effective date.
2:43:25 Okay, this is an introduction intro. It it is an introduction, mayor. However, um the planning and zoning board had
2:43:33 several conditions and things that they wanted you to consider along with this.
2:43:38 I'm not sure if they're all in the staff report, but I know they're not integrated into the text of the ordinance. And as part of the recommendation, it had re it had wanted
2:43:47 a workshop. So, what I'm concerned about is you approving the ordinance tonight on first reading, but then just
2:43:55 incorporating changes on second reading, which would require in my opin because the changes are material,
2:44:03 I think it would require a readvertising.
2:44:06 Um, I don't know if the council would consider it or not, tableabling until after the workshop, but that's my
2:44:15 recommendation is that's what I'm asking for as city attorney. Sure.
2:44:19 The workshop because of additional stipulations you want to put in here or that you might want as well. I mean, it's you'll see there's a lot of detail here. There's a lot of different things.
2:44:27 That's the one thing, no outdoor dining, but I mean if somebody wants to put a picnic table so that that would not be allowed, but a lot of I know there's
2:44:35 places along uh 27 that you know there's a food truck there and he's got some picnic.
2:44:40 Well, I don't want to miss I you know the the ordinance got good reviews from the commission. You know, everyone was happy that it was presented, but there
2:44:47 were several potential I think material things. So, long story short, I just don't want to add them at second reading. I'd rather add them at first
2:44:55 reading after you've had an opportunity to consider those things.
2:44:58 I move to table item number 17, ordinance 2026-014. Second. Second.
2:45:03 Have a motion and a second to table item number 17 till when till after we can workshop it.
2:45:13 I'm going to recommend August because July we're very busy doing the budget.
2:45:19 So no later than the September the first meeting in September.
2:45:24 August 18th is our next scheduled workshop and then September 8th would be our next council meeting in September.
2:45:31 But we could vote to the intro and then have the workshop and then do a final.
2:45:35 No, that's why he doesn't want to intro se September 8th. You say? Yes, sir. Is that okay, Miss?
2:45:43 Yeah, that works for me. September.
2:45:46 We have to do the budget. But I appreciate the request by PNZ and I think that it's um important that we meet with them. Okay. All right. I have
2:45:55 a motion and a second to table item number 17, ordinance number 2026-014
2:46:02 until September 8th. Any further discussion?
2:46:06 All in favor? Let it be known by saying I. I. All oppose. Chair vote. I as well.
2:46:12 Item number 18, ordinance number 2026-021.
2:46:16 Intro. An ordinance of the city of Clermont, Lake County, Florida, adopting the largescale comprehensive plan amendment for the city of
2:46:24 Clermont, Florida, pursuant to the local government comprehensive planning act, chapter 163, part two, Florida
2:46:31 statutes, setting forth the authority for adoption of the largescale comprehensive plan amendment, setting forth the purpose and intent of the
2:46:39 large-scale comprehensive plan amendment, providing for the adoption of the long largescale comprehensive plan amendment, establishing the legal status
2:46:47 of the large-scale comprehensive plan amendment providing for conflict, severability, administrative correction of scriveners error, publication, and an effective date.
2:47:02 Okay. Oh, you're going to do a presentation only if you would prefer.
2:47:06 Sorry, because of the transmitter, we have to Oh, we have to. Okay, my bad.
2:47:09 Oh, that's right. Transmittal. I'm sorry.
2:47:25 Good afternoon, mayor, city council members and guests. Justine Day with development services. The city as the applicant is requesting a large-scale
2:47:32 comprehensive plan amendment and reszoning of the subject property following a staff initiated annexation.
2:47:39 The approximately 88 acre property includes the Hammock Point and Hammock Reserve subdivisions which are fully
2:47:45 built out and contain 196 existing single family homes. The parcel has already been platted, developed and res
2:47:54 and is receiving city water city wastewater services. On October 28th,
2:48:01 2025, the city council approved the annexation with the understanding that the appropriate future land use and zoning designations would be established
2:48:09 at a later date in time. Staff is now proposing to the complete that process.
2:48:18 Sorry, one second.
2:48:26 The property is currently designated with the urban low density future land use category under Lake County. When reviewing the subdivisions under the
2:48:34 city's requirement, staff found the lowdensity residential feature land use category to be the most compatible. The planning and zoning commission
2:48:42 recommended approval 60 for ordinance number 2026-021.
2:48:49 Staff recommends transmitt of the large-scale comprehensive plan amendment and the introduction of the resoning ordinance number 2026-022.
2:48:59 If approved, the state will then have 60 days for review to provide comics back to the city regarding the proposed map amendment. Once complete, the findings
2:49:08 will be presented to the city council during a regularly scheduled hearing sometime in August for final determination. This concludes staff presentation.
2:49:18 Thank you.
2:49:21 It's an introduction. We have it and so now it's ready for transmitt. If we so desire, I entertain a motion.
2:49:31 I'll move ordinance number 2026-021 intro. Second.
2:49:38 Okay. I have a motion and a second for item number 18, ordinance number 2026-021 introransm. Uh any further further discussion?
2:49:48 All in favor? Let it be known by saying I. I. All oppose. Chair vote eyes as well.
2:49:55 I would move ordinance number 2026-022 intro reszoning. Got to read it in the record. I thought she just did, didn't she?
2:50:03 That that was just a trans.
2:50:04 Oh, I thought she said it in there. I heard her say it in there. So, my bad. Sorry. Sorry.
2:50:09 Wow. We We interrupt. Item number 19, ordinance number 2026-022. It's okay. You're not alone. I've done that, too.
2:50:17 Do you have anything else?
2:50:19 An ordinance under the code of ordinances of the city of Clermont, Lake County, Florida, amending the official zoning map of the city of
2:50:25 Clermont, referred to in chapter 122 of ordinance number 289C, code of ordinances, reszoning the real
2:50:33 properties described herein as shown below, providing for conflict, severability, administrative correction of scriveners error, recording, publication, and an effective date.
2:50:44 Okay, I entertain a motion. I'd like to make a motion to accept I've lost it. Sorry,
2:50:53 I went ahead of myself. Orders number 2026-21.
2:50:58 No, no, it was 22. 222. I second.
2:51:01 I was in the right spot. I have a motion and a second for approve of ordinance or for introduction
2:51:10 of ordinance number 2026- 022. Any further discussion?
2:51:16 Hear none. All in favor, let it be known by saying I. I.
2:51:18 All oppose. Chair I as well. Motion carries 50. Mayor, can I request you?
2:51:24 I was about to ask you, you was in a rush to do that and I think think I think that mean you need a break. Well, I don't need one, but I think uh we
2:51:31 should take one because I I I don't I don't want to break in the middle of the presentation and and we're getting to that point where we typically ask for a 10-minute,
2:51:38 right? That's fine. 10 minute be back at 5 5:30. Uh 17. Oh, well 5:30. Great.
2:51:46 Thank you. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
2:51:54 Heat. Heat.
2:55:29 Heat. Heat. N.
2:57:11 Heat. Heat.
2:58:33 Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat.
2:59:02 Heat. Heat.
3:00:59 Heat. Heat. N.
3:01:27 We'll come back to order. Move to the item number
3:01:33 20. So I have to bring up my report ask the 2045.
3:01:45 Ready, Chief?
3:01:46 Yep, I'm ready. All right. Good evening, Mayor and Council. I'm David Eel, fire chief with the Clermont Fire Department. Um, I kind of want to just preface uh what we're going to be doing
3:01:54 tonight. Uh, kind of go over what it is and what it's not. Uh we will be bringing an item back for consideration by council on the 23rd uh for us to move
3:02:03 forward with an application for a certificate of public necess convenience and necessity with Lake County. What we're going to talk about
3:02:11 tonight is just our analysis of going through that process, the costs, the different uh time elements and everything else in there as well as take into consideration a lot of the
3:02:19 questions that came up in the last workshop. So we've worked that into the presentation. So hopefully we answer that. Uh we've also supplied each of you with some supplemental documentation. Uh
3:02:27 part included in that is the uh proposed budget for the transport for next year.
3:02:32 Uh that is a worst case scenario. So we've got everything broken out by line item. And we also included the analytical model that we ran uh when we
3:02:40 started first having conversations with this with the county about 18 months ago. And that involved us taking our model and dropping ambulances at
3:02:48 different locations within the city until we were able to achieve that 10-minute response time for an ambulance on scene at the at the 90th percentile.
3:02:55 So, that's just in there to give you a little additional information and uh we'll go along have time for questions if anything comes up, but just wanted to just kind of put it out there that today
3:03:04 is information only. We're not looking for a decision or anything else. That'll be done at a later date after there's been time for further conversation if needed and for you to take all the
3:03:13 information in and absorb it. So you get the clicker. Okay.
3:03:21 So the certificate of public convenience and necessity uh what that is is that is the uh the first piece that is needed before we can approach the state and
3:03:29 requested an ALS license. uh by state statute uh that is governed by the counties. The county board of the board
3:03:38 of county commissioners is the sole authority in issuing COPCN's either for non-transport or transport services that
3:03:45 includes basic life support and advanced life support. So currently we operate under the county's license and we have our trucks are stickered to be able to
3:03:53 provide ALS non-transport services.
3:04:03 So what we looked at is uh the reason we did this this was something that came up as a priority of council as I stated 18
3:04:10 months ago. Uh we were looking at the operational demand and the system performance uh mainly that uh at that
3:04:17 point in time we were over 17 minutes at the 90th percentile for emergency responses from from our ambulances and we were looking to get those times down.
3:04:26 Um we uh went through the revenues, the expenses. Uh we had a lot of conversations with the county on how we might do that with a partnership and we
3:04:34 still uh to this point have not made a lot of progress going forward with uh with those conversations. So we're looking at going in a different approach
3:04:41 and looking to get our own COPCN so that we can operate and then have the options to do whatever we would like to do as a as a council for meeting those goals.
3:04:55 So, one of the things that we talked about, a little hard to see on this slide, um the operational demand. We we were talking about the different uh
3:05:03 volumes of calls that we have with our with our different service uh programs.
3:05:07 Um looking at this, you can see that our our EMS calls have increased a little bit each year. Um in uh
3:05:14 2023, we were at 5,451 and last year we were up to 5,829. So
3:05:21 we're seeing modest increases there. And between those years, we saw an overall increase of about 12 and a half% in our annual call responses. So I believe
3:05:30 we're trending to about 9,000 calls this year.
3:05:36 So you say 9,000 9,000 total calls, not not just EMS.
3:05:40 That's all that's all service demand. So can you go back one slide? Sure. Okay. So from 8,500 to 900.
3:05:48 Yeah. So we'll probably be over 6,000 on the EMS. You can see we were at 5829 last year. That'll that'll probably be up a little over 6,000 this year.
3:05:55 Thank you.
3:05:58 And this is a breakdown on the performance that we were seeing uh prior to ambulances being added and then what we're seeing now with additional
3:06:06 ambulances that have been added by the county. So for the ones that we want to look at is the Bravo and Echo 90th percentile. Those are what we call
3:06:14 emergent responses. The alphas are are considered lower priority. So we separate those out. Uh what we saw in
3:06:20 the in the last couple of months of 2025 is that we were at about 1554. So just under 16 minutes for an ambulance to arrive. Uh what we what we have year to
3:06:30 date through May 25th, uh we're looking at 12 minutes and 24 seconds uh to get the ambulance on scene at the 90th percentile. So while we've seen an
3:06:38 improvement, we still are not at the the number that we need to get to get to 10 minutes. And that was something that our model showed. Our model showed that we
3:06:45 needed to add six additional ambulances to get to that number. uh with the county adding four additional units, uh we've seen the time drop, but you know,
3:06:53 our our data is telling us that two additional ambulances are needed to get those numbers to where they need to be.
3:07:02 Can we go back?
3:07:04 So, and just one other thing to note, um the last uh two and a half months of 2025, uh there were a total of 99 uh responses
3:07:13 that exceeded a 15-minute arrival for the ambulance. uh compared with this year with the additional ambulances being added uh with you know almost uh
3:07:21 five full months of uh responses that that number is down to 83. So that there's definitely an improvement in the system.
3:07:38 Okay. Okay, so the EMS funding structure uh CLA the residents from the city of Clermont through the MSTU are currently
3:07:45 uh contributing approximately $2.9 million annually uh that goes to the county through the county uh MSTU. Uh
3:07:53 the MSTU and transport revenues are collected by Lake County and used to support countywide ambulance services.
3:07:59 Uh ambulance deployments decisions remain under the control of the county.
3:08:03 Uh that's something that we do not have a seat at the table as to how that how that takes place and where priorities are given. Um,
3:08:10 we currently have no direct control over how the MSTU has buil build funds and to improve services within the city and our
3:08:18 existing interlocal agreements remain effect and include provisions governing the MSTU participation. If we elected to assume EMS transport responsibilities,
3:08:26 the city would assume associated operational costs including dispatch, medical directions, supplies, communications, and fleet support.
3:08:36 And key question here is should we consider should we continue to fund EMS transport exclusively through the county system or preserve the ability to
3:08:44 directly manage these the resource our resources in the future.
3:08:56 So when we started looking at why we would we would want to do fire transport services. Um we looked at first off that EMS is about 70% of our overall business
3:09:04 volume. Uh it's by far our our biggest service delivery program. U ambulance times remain above the council
3:09:12 objectives. Part of what we uh we looked at inside of our strategic plan that we brought to council for approval.
3:09:18 and Clermont uh residents contribute millions annually through the through the MSTU to the system and local
3:09:26 deployment decisions are they're they're not within the purview of the fire department of this board. So we we have no say if if we want to change those uh
3:09:34 those metrics. So the question is uh no longer whether EMS transport is is feasible. The question is whether Clermont should should preserve the ability to control its own EMS future.
3:09:49 So, as we're getting into the financials, I'm going to let uh Assistant Chief Castler step in and talk a little bit to those ends.
3:09:58 Assistant Chief Rick Castler, uh of administration with the Clermont Fire Department. Uh so uh council uh the EMS
3:10:05 financial assumptions uh just some as we go through these numbers it's going to be the assumption that we're going to have two frontline ambulances two reserve ambulances with the asterisks
3:10:13 that are existing ambulance that we have would be included in the fleet. Um the startup costs are going to include outfitting uh radios or MDTs all the
3:10:21 equipment necessary to provide day-to-day operation. Uh and then some of the assumptions concerning collections are based off of numbers
3:10:29 provided to us when we started talking with the county 18 months ago about what the average uh collection rate was for per transport which is 42358.
3:10:38 Um so you'll see that and with the assumption of two transport units uh with an average of four calls per day uh
3:10:46 that brings us to 2920 um is what we believe that those could reasonably accomplish in a day. For reference, we had 5,600 transports in
3:10:55 the Clermont area in the last year approximately. Uh so with that, the projected annual revenue of the program starting with two ambulances would be
3:11:03 1.2 million. Uh staffing to to do that would be our division chief of EMS and EMS training lieutenant and additional 15 firefighters, paramedics for 247 coverage with two units.
3:11:15 So with an independent system, uh what is it going to cost? Right, that year one and recurring. So, uh, year one cost and recurring, uh, salaries are going to
3:11:24 stay the same, uh, plus or minus, uh, any adjustments based on the collective bargaining agreement. Uh, year one operating costs are going to be about
3:11:32 1.5 million. That includes some minor equipment necessary to outfit our personnel plus the units. And then the recurring operating costs for both of
3:11:40 those units is going to be about 957,000.
3:11:43 That includes uh what we anticipate having to pay to contract for ancillary services such as medical direction, medical supplies, and communications.
3:11:53 Uh capital equipment, that's to buy all of the big trucks, 1.5. So our gross program cost for year one was it going to cost in our budget? Approximately
3:12:02 $5.3 million with a recurring cost of about 3.2. If we modify that and less our expected revenue, we get a net program cost of 4 million on year one.
3:12:13 and two a little over 2 million on year two. If we add in the MSTU collection
3:12:19 and the city chooses to break away uh from the system and collect the 2.9 million from the MSTU, that leaves us
3:12:27 with a net cost year one of 1.15 and then we would actually show revenue in the recurring annual cost of about $878,000.
3:12:39 So cost per resident with the impact if we are fully independent starting with two units barring that we collect the
3:12:46 MSTU at four transports a day it's 2265 a year for per citizen or a revenue of
3:12:54 1721 per citizen for years two and on.
3:13:02 So this is just kind of looking at it the same way. Um the key advantage here is that that does provide local control
3:13:09 and its independence and has the ability for us to uh transport and provide any operational decisions necessary.
3:13:19 So you want to take over the timeline? Yeah, we can do that.
3:13:33 So in this slide, what we've done is we basically we taken a look at all of our current and future plan facilities and identified, you know, where where do we
3:13:40 have the the the capacity to be able to add ambulances. I know in our conversations with the county, that was one of the things that came, you know, continually came up is, you know, when
3:13:48 can we get an ambulance in one of your fire stations? And the reality is over the last year uh Clermont has continued to grow and the county is just now
3:13:56 starting to grow. So what's happened over that time period is we have expanded our footprint within our stations and we don't have the space to house any any any ambulances anywhere.
3:14:07 Even if we were to do it today, we don't have anywhere to put them. Uh case in point to that, there was a there was a letter sent from Chief Bishop back in
3:14:14 2017 to the county um in regard to fire station number two and he he effectively terminated the agreement to house
3:14:21 ambulances in fire station 2 because of the growth that we had more units there, more personnel and we no longer had the space in that facility to house the uh
3:14:29 house the ambulance crews. So what we what we did is we looked out going forward and looking at fire station one.
3:14:36 Uh right now we don't have the available space to put an ambulance in without doing some major renovations there and some restructuring on where crews are
3:14:43 located. We don't see a future uh provision for them to be able to be there. U looking at station two which we're getting ready to start construction on and anticipate that
3:14:52 it'll be ready to be operational on or before June of next year. uh that will be built so that we could possibly put
3:14:59 an ambulance in that location. Uh that that will the accommodations there will be for up to 10 people. So that is an option. Um station three is another
3:15:07 location where it would take significant modifications in order to create the room to be able to put an ambulance there. Uh station four that is currently
3:15:16 a shared station with the county and without one of the suppression units. Uh there's one from us and one from the county that's in that station. without
3:15:24 one of those suppression units being relocated. Uh we don't we do not have capacity to put an ambulance at that location either. Uh two other
3:15:31 opportunities that we have the fire station down in Wellness Way, station five. Uh we are intending to plan that so that we can have up to 10 personnel
3:15:40 in there. So that would facilitate providing the space for an ambulance crew. And then we are looking at the land on Old Highway 50 that we just
3:15:47 purchased. and that station there. We are looking at the uh putting capacity to have both an engine and a ambulance crew there. So, you know, as we work
3:15:55 this out over the timelines, uh there will be capacity in the future, but today it doesn't exist. And I think that's one of the key components here.
3:16:04 Uh when we talk about why we want to look at getting a COPC in um you know, attending some of the the county's presentations, one of the things that
3:16:12 they shared is that, you know, they the frustration with the lack of uh infrastructure. uh while they've added the ambulances, they are moving them up
3:16:19 to key locations within the city to get the response times down, but they don't have the infrastructure to have those ambulances there 247.
3:16:27 And our plan is to build that.
3:16:30 So, that's something that we can provide with the plan that we've got is to have that and ensure that they are they're going to be available on a 247 basis.
3:16:38 So, looking at a timeline, um phase one would be authorization and planning. Um that would be uh count you know council
3:16:46 approval of proceeding with the application getting the budget approved uh you know getting the personnel on board as soon as the funds are are
3:16:53 appropriated and that's going to take us about 18 months to get those personnel ready to go out into the field. And a
3:16:59 realistic uh timeline on that is having them start probably around January of 2028 is what we're looking at. So, we're going
3:17:07 to we're going to have to spend about a year getting them up to speed, getting them through paramedic school, getting them trained up as firefighters so that they can function as a as a dual
3:17:15 certified person on the ambulance. And then looking out, we're looking at uh adding a couple ambulances, you know, each year as we're going out, working
3:17:22 towards getting to having those six ambulances within Clermont to provide that model that uh that we built out.
3:17:29 and also anticipating that we're going to have some additional growth and as we have more people and the call volumes go up that there may be more of a need for additional ambulances.
3:17:39 So looking at a fully independent system and like I said this is a worst case scenario uh with six ambulances being in service uh estimating uh transports at
3:17:48 5600 a year. Our total operating cost would be at about $8.4 million. So projected revenue from that would be 2.4
3:17:56 million. And if we were to go if we were to receive the MSTU funds from that, that would be 2.9 million in revenue
3:18:04 back to the city and with a net cost of 3.1 million and uh we're looking at a cost recovery of about 63%. Um, one
3:18:12 other important thing to note, if you have six ambulances out there, uh, that will be effectively adding 12 additional firefighters to each shift. So for that
3:18:21 cost, uh, that's something that is a tremendous benefit. I mean currently uh we're we're operating uh with the minimum staffing of what is it? It's going to be 23.
3:18:31 Yes.
3:18:32 So it'll be 23 when station 5 goes online. So we're almost it's almost a 50% increase in the number of firefighters we'll have out there
3:18:39 that'll be available for uh you know not just the EMS calls but also fire calls and other things that are happening out there. So, um, you know, with it's
3:18:48 actually it's a it's a really really attractive price point and that's kind of what we've been looking at for our model is putting our engines along with an ambulance in the fire stations is to
3:18:55 be a highly effective way to have the crews crew size that we need to be effective out in the field not only with the first response unit but with getting the ERFs there.
3:19:09 You want to go through dispatch?
3:19:12 So currently for dispatch uh we are uh it's provided by the county. They do a fantastic job. Uh when we look at their
3:19:19 their times and how they provide their service, uh they are shaving uh minutes off of our response time. Uh based on
3:19:26 what Clermont PD pays to contract with the county for an independent dispatch, we're estimating that that would be about $600,000.
3:19:34 uh approximately 15,000 per year for the additional radios and maintenance agreement that we already currently have uh with the county that they provide. Um
3:19:42 so that's about 615 out of that 900,000 on the ongoing operating costs. Uh we have no desire to to to leave the county
3:19:51 when it comes to communications. They have one of the best in the country. Um it would make no sense. It would make sense for us to to to contract with them.
3:20:00 Um, I'll take those.
3:20:04 And then, uh, we were asked at the workshop what our historical agreements were. Uh, historically, county ambulances were housed in the fire stations. Uh, when I first started, u,
3:20:12 I'm in my 19th year, we did have ambulances at our fire stations. They have changed throughout the years as growth. Um, we have had to grow our fire suppression units uh, to meet demand and
3:20:21 maintain our ISO. And as that time has gone, we've grown and the buildings have not. Um, as chief said on our timeline, we are working on dealing with that. Um,
3:20:30 so that's our challenge. We we've run out of space for the for the ambulances.
3:20:36 Um, and then it asked the question, if we're going to invest in infrastructure, do we invest in it for ourselves or do we invest in it for somebody else when we're already paying?
3:20:48 This is a 2024 proposal.
3:20:56 So the 2025 county proposal that we uh this from October.
3:21:00 Yeah. So this was back in October when we approached the county. Uh Lake County proposed a shared EMS transport partnership with the with with
3:21:07 Clermont. Uh the city would fund, staff, and equip and operate the transport units with the county EMS system. And dis and the discussions also
3:21:15 included dispatch, medical direction, uh billing, deployment, and operational oversight. Um, the proposal required Clermont ambulances to be fully
3:21:24 integrated into the county's deployment model. So, what what I mean by that is the county was wanting us to cover countywide. So, with Clermont being a
3:21:33 little over 20 square miles, um, it didn't make operational sense to us that we would commit ambulances to serving a,200 square mile area. uh you know you
3:21:41 very easily with especially with challenges in the system if a ambulance was say to go to Leburg uh they could very easily be tapped for another call
3:21:48 in that area and literally spend their time anywhere but Clermont so that was something we were looking to put some limitations on. We were okay going a
3:21:56 little outside of Clermont where it made sense but uh that's that was really the main piece where things fell apart.
3:22:01 It was kind of an all or none deal how it was proposed to us.
3:22:05 So, uh, we didn't we did we're not in agreement that they could be assigned anywhere in the county based on system need. And, you know, if we're going to
3:22:13 be covering a lot of the, uh, the cost of those those resources, we need to make sure they're closer to home.
3:22:22 So, one of the areas that we've looked at, um, actually, um, Mr. Peterson shared this with us and I've had a chance to talk with their mayor and some of the other folks down there with the
3:22:30 city of Venice. Uh that was a very similar situation to what we're dealing with here. Uh Venice was having challenges with Sarasota County and
3:22:38 Venice uh after several years of going back and forth with the county has finally secured a COPCN for them to provide transport services and I believe
3:22:47 they're I believe it's two ambulances they're operating now. So um after 5 years of having those ambulances in service, uh they are actually showing
3:22:54 their operation being in the black. So they're they're actually revenue positive. So compared to what they were paying with, you know, with the county running the uh running the setup. So
3:23:04 that was something that was very uh enlightening u you know that you know you can do something a little different uh within a system. It doesn't have to be a one-sizefits-all for the entire
3:23:12 county, especially for a uh for an area like us where we're we're a lot more populated than other areas of the county.
3:23:22 So the key findings um like we said before EMS is now 70% of our total business volume. Our ambulances the
3:23:30 response times remain above the council adopted performance objectives.
3:23:34 Uh even despite recent system improvements uh the residents contribute almost $3 million uh to the system and
3:23:43 we we feel we get less than that in return for what we're receiving. Um the analysis de demonstrates that a municipal EMS transport system is
3:23:51 operationally feasible and can be implemented through a phased approach.
3:23:56 So at at full buildout EMS related revenues and projected uh costs to offset are approximately 5.3 million
3:24:04 annually reducing the city share of operating costs to about 3.1 million for the entire program and a COPCN will be
3:24:11 required for Clermont to move uh forward with any type of an independent operation.
3:24:20 So, next steps, uh, tonight was just a presentation to provide information, answer any questions that may be there, uh, determine if there's a need, um,
3:24:29 determine if we had a viable solution, if it's financially achievable, and then to answer any questions the council may have. Um, like I said earlier, this is
3:24:38 the primarily about access to care as well as local accountability and having a having the transparency of the operation.
3:24:54 So, u you know, we've provided the additional uh information in the packets. Um, what I would what I would uh pre offer to council is if there are
3:25:01 additional questions between now and the June 23rd meeting, uh, please reach out.
3:25:06 We'd be happy to have you come in, sit down for a deeper dive on any of the, uh, you know, any of the the the numbers in the presentation, the the the budget
3:25:15 or anything else that we provided. Um, we've got we've got more stuff that we can sit down and go through with you on it.
3:25:30 That it, Chief. What's up? That's it. That's the presentation.
3:25:36 Okay. Uh, give me a minute uh before I bring it back to council. This is a public hearing. Anyone in the public wish to uh comment on this, you may come
3:25:44 to the microphone, state your name and address, and have three minutes.
3:25:48 This is a public forum. Anyone in the chamber wish to address this item may come to the microphone, state your name and address and have three minutes.
3:25:56 Seeing no one, anyone online. Okay. What say council?
3:26:01 One of the things you said is that uh the MSTU is 9 2.9.
3:26:06 My understanding was that represents 20% of the revenues. 80% is through billing. Did you mention billing in here at all?
3:26:14 Uh we we used the county's average. Uh that was information that was provided us to to us from Lake County and the I believe it was based on 2024 data and
3:26:22 that's where we came up with the average of being $473 per transport. It's going to vary based on the type of transport and we have to also understand that not
3:26:31 every transport is going to is going to result in revenue. There are going to be people that are going to be unable to pay. So it's not going to it's not going to be 100% collection rate. So we were
3:26:40 going off of data that that the county had for the countywide system. But I mean if you would just let's say let's just assume you get everybody. So if
3:26:47 it's 2.9 in MSTU I calculate it would be 11.6 million for billing net if that's 80%. Let's say you cut that down some.
3:26:56 Let's say it's 11 only or 10. So now you got 10 plus 2.9 that's 12.9 annual. So
3:27:03 wouldn't that cover everything at that point?
3:27:06 Not 100% based on our projections and we are trying to stay a little bit on the conservative side.
3:27:10 Okay. breaking even is still a good thing to be.
3:27:13 I'd love to I'd love to be wrong and come back and say that we made a lot more money than we thought we did, but you know, we're basing it off of four transports and we're using the average for collection.
3:27:21 So, I mean, they could easily run five or six transports a day. You know, was you know, that's that's something that we can't predict. So, we're going with safe numbers on the uh on the projections,
3:27:30 right? One other thing you said like your personnel, you know, if if we're we're responding now primary, you get a
3:27:37 you get a call, you know, a baited to a echo call. You respond with a truck. Correct.
3:27:43 Correct. You didn't respond with the truck. That truck would stay in house.
3:27:46 There's a cost for for doing that too as opposed to just taking the ambulance out on on the first on the call. Is that correct or no?
3:27:54 That is correct. I mean, with with an echolle call, which is the the most severe type of call that we get, um, we would still we would still continue to send out both the the ambulance and the
3:28:03 fire truck, uh, a lot of times on those calls, you need more than two people to adequately be able to treat that patient. So, we would maintain that model. Uh, but if we were operating
3:28:12 independently, we we would have the ability to go in there and take a look at it. You know, where where does it make sense and where does it not make sense to send both units out to a call?
3:28:19 So those are things that we could have conversations with on, you know, with our medical director on and make those determinations as to where, you know, where are we willing to accept risk and where are we not?
3:28:33 Related to that, um, Chief, there's a couple different numbers and I want to make sure I'm tracking with you. Um, on
3:28:41 page my page eight, it shows two transport units with 2920 transports.
3:28:49 Do you feel Are my numbers accurate on that? 2,920 transports if we have two units.
3:28:58 So, that's only based off of each of those units running four calls a day. Okay.
3:29:02 So, we're estimating that they're only going to run four calls a day. That's a a reasonable number to expect based on our call volume or simultaneous calls
3:29:10 because that's the other one is we're busier during the day and so we have a lot of simultaneous calls. So what's the estimate that we could reasonably expect
3:29:17 that unit to do? So that's completely low. Um the realistic is it's probably going to be six seven eight right
3:29:25 um per day but for a safe number we went with four four transports per day per unit. So that's where the 2920 comes from out of that 5600.
3:29:34 Well that's what I wanted to understand.
3:29:36 So, the county is currently running 5600 calls with two units.
3:29:41 Now, now they've added additional four. Um, but prior to with the previous deployment, 5600 were covered by the
3:29:50 majority of basically two to three units. And I know Chief Simpson has a breakdown um of what those those call types were. When we went through this
3:29:58 exercise, he was able to tell how many calls were run by these units in their city because they do track that. But you were looking at the I believe your question was for the total number of transports during that year. Correct?
3:30:07 Yeah. Okay.
3:30:08 So, the county currently has six units dedicated to Clermont.
3:30:12 There are six units in the Clermont area, but they are countywide units, but they're countywide units. Okay. So,
3:30:19 I see. Um, but we know we have 5,600 calls in Clermont. So, presumably if we have four units, we could cover the next couple of years of calls if we had four.
3:30:29 Yeah. If we added two today, you'd see we'd we'd be at our numbers. You know, if the county left their six in in place and didn't move them,
3:30:37 we'd be pretty much at our at our benchmark.
3:30:40 But those six aren't dedicated to Clermont. Again, those are countywide.
3:30:43 Okay, that's what um All right. Uh give me some numbers. Advanced life support, we want to be under a six minute for emergency response, right?
3:30:50 For the first arriving, we want them there in six minutes. That's so we can start that definitive care. And we want the ambulance on scene 90% of the time,
3:30:58 no more than 10 minutes. And what is a fire response time?
3:31:02 Uh, pretty much the same thing. We want the first arriving crew with four personnel on scene inside of six minutes. Okay.
3:31:08 And we want the entire complement the effective response force, which is more like 16 people. We want them there inside of 10 minutes. Okay.
3:31:16 And then um have you taken into consideration in this presentation the possibility of reallocating or saving
3:31:25 funds at fire stations 2, five, and six by being able to have an ambulance and a fire truck at those stations versus having two fire trucks at those stations?
3:31:34 That is actually one of the more attractive things with us getting into transport. That is one of the things we're looking at with having the dual certified personnel. Uh like station 6
3:31:43 is a perfect example. If you had an engine company there with three people and you had an ambulance with two firefighters, uh you've got a crew of five operating out of that station.
3:31:51 So, you have not taken operational savings on the fire side into the presentation you give us today.
3:31:57 I touched on it lightly with uh you know explaining that we'd be adding 12 firefighters to the shift with six ambulances at a at a very very low cost
3:32:05 compared to what the traditional model would look like with putting an engine company out there with a lieutenant engineer and firefighter.
3:32:10 But your black and white numbers don't include that. They do not.
3:32:13 Okay. That's what I That's what I understand. This is purely transport.
3:32:16 And then on the subject um of is it BC90, the Minola Fire Station? That's
3:32:23 just north of Lincoln Park. Am I saying the right It says BC90 on the map.
3:32:28 Yes, that that that is I Yeah, that's the that's the depot the ambulances are operating out of.
3:32:33 So, I'm looking at this map. My understanding is that Minnola is going to be pulling out of BC90 or moving it to a different location.
3:32:40 I believe they're completely moved out now, but just for our awareness, these maps were built before the ambulances were in there. So, these responses do
3:32:47 not include those ambulance units being in that location. But for purposes of our current fire response, what would be
3:32:55 when this was printed with BC90 in effect, we were in the 420 to 540 time
3:33:02 for 199 calls in that region or in those regions, excuse me, not just the Lincoln Park area, but what's going to happen to
3:33:10 Lincoln Park, if anything, when now that BC90 is gone? That is one of the areas we're looking at and that's one of the locations that we've identified as an
3:33:19 opportunity for us to look at placing a unit in between fire stations and we've got a few other locations around the city where we've seen that same data coming up.
3:33:27 I would like to see that addressed by June 23rd. What what's going to happen there in that region since they're
3:33:32 pulled out already? Um, and then you're kind of I guess I'm looking at
3:33:41 basic math and please tell me if I'm wrong, but if we currently if there's
3:33:47 currently an MSTU for $2.9 million that the citizens are paying and that
3:33:53 pays for six ambulances presumably, not entirely for us, but presumably that pays for six ambulances
3:34:02 and 56 call 5,600 calls calls should be producing something like
3:34:08 what 2.4 million in revenue. So that's 5.3 million in revenue
3:34:16 between the MSTU and the collections which you've said to be low and
3:34:25 you're looking at back to the slide four ambulances could serve our needs.
3:34:31 the numbers that it it seems to me with conservative numbers that you're looking at a break even if we had four
3:34:39 ambulances because 5.3 you're looking at 3.2 million cost for four ambulances but
3:34:48 four ambulances that would cover four ambulances with 2.9 in the MSTU and 2.4 for coming
3:34:57 in from collections. It It seems like it's a net positive.
3:35:00 Yeah. The other piece we'd have to look at would be the workload on the crews as far as the the number of utilization hours that the crews are doing to to achieve that number. Um it's always more
3:35:09 attractive to do more with less. Uh but, you know, there's a there's a break point to where, you know, you're you're you're grinding your staff into the ground because of the amount they're
3:35:16 working. So, we're looking at, you know, optimal utilization numbers for for the units to be out there. And that's part of what we'll be doing is we're adding, you know, we'll be taking a look at, you
3:35:25 know, what's, you know, what's their percentage of time commitment to actually running calls and, you know, is that within a reasonable time frame? And there there's some guidelines out there
3:35:32 that, you know, we follow when we look at that as to determinate with the determinations for adding additional units.
3:35:38 Do we have a way of knowing how often the six ambulances that are designated for Clermont by Lake County are actually leaving the city of Clermont?
3:35:47 Um, that's something we could look into.
3:35:49 Um, I know we've got access to a lot of the data. I could have uh Chief Lugenbull look into that and I know he's he's done some early models taking a look at, you know, when they are being relocated to other areas.
3:35:59 And in your conversations with the county, has there ever been a commitment or or willingness to discuss a commitment by the county to designate
3:36:07 a certain number of ambulances specifically for Clermont and have them not be countywide, whether we operate it or they operate it?
3:36:14 I think the conversations that we've had with the county is the system is the system. you know, they they they they have a system in place that provides
3:36:21 countywide coverage and they don't want to deviate from that.
3:36:25 Okay. Thank you. That's all I have for now, Mr. May.
3:36:33 Thank you, Mayor. I um I'm going to take you up on your offer to to come back. I want to just I think I the these
3:36:40 presentations coupled with the two that we had at the workshop. I I want to make I I don't want to sit here and keep going back and forth with all the questions. So, I want to compile them
3:36:48 all into one list. Um, but I do have a couple of of upfront um just clarification because it'll inform like how I read this and ask questions.
3:36:58 So, the net city cost on slide 13 on page 13 for us you you have is 3.1 million.
3:37:04 On the next page, you talk about some dispatch costs of 615. Is that 615 in that 3.1?
3:37:13 Yes, it's everything's included.
3:37:15 Okay. So, I just want to make sure that that because it was on a separate slide, so I wanted to make sure it wasn't a add-on.
3:37:20 The 8.4 that you're seeing for total operating costs is inclusive of all of the 615 and everything else, maintenance and all the other things we got to do, supplies.
3:37:29 And like I said, this is a worst case scenario. This is with us doing 100% of the work and and the lift and having no
3:37:36 partnership with Lake County. So, there there's a lot of room there for conversations to to be had. Just because we get a COPC inn doesn't mean that we
3:37:44 have to break away and do our own thing and you know not share work together or anything else. Those partnerships can still exist. And to be honest, the
3:37:51 majority of what's in place today could remain. You know, if the if the partnership was there and if the the numbers look good and it was going to be
3:37:58 something that was going to be equitable to all parties. I mean, you know, why why wouldn't we look at something like that? So, that's the great thing about the COPCN. It brings the the the power
3:38:07 for us to make the decisions on what direction we go. Okay. Um, do you know when Venice uh got their COCN and and started their two ambulances?
3:38:18 Um, I know in talking with the mayor, they've been operational down there for about 5 years, but I'd have to I'd have to get some information.
3:38:25 Approximately. Okay. Cuz I I was actually I was I was looking at some data on Venice to try to see because I didn't know anything about the city of
3:38:33 Venice overall. Um and um it's a city that's about 20,000 or more fewer
3:38:40 residents um and about 3 to four square miles less. It's a small area.
3:38:47 And so I I'm just concerned about comparing comparing a smaller community with a median age much
3:38:56 older than ours. I think Venice's median age is like 69 and ours is is 42 compared most recent. That's where we've been very cautious about the revenues.
3:39:06 I'm I'm I'm just concerned about using that as an example really in any way because I I don't I don't know that it's apples to apples in that regard. And
3:39:14 it was more about showing that it can be done. Okay.
3:39:17 And it has happened elsewhere in the state where you know you've got municipalities operating underneath of a county system.
3:39:22 Okay. That's why I wanted to try to get some background information on that because I've heard that mentioned a couple different times. Um all right.
3:39:29 I'm going to compile all of my questions from all the different presentations so that I can uh discuss those with you before our next meeting. Thank you.
3:39:36 All right. I know we've just slightly scratched the itch, so when you're ready, please reach out. Yeah. Thank you. I appreciate it.
3:39:45 Okay. All right. Well, Chief, I guess I'm I'm I'm a little confused
3:39:52 because basically you said I think one of the biggest thing is to get our response time down.
3:39:59 But you saying you're saying that uh we can do this with two ambulance, but yet still we got we got four in the county right now and we we saying we still
3:40:06 having trouble getting response time down when they they providing us with four. So how we how you propose to keep the response time down with just two.
3:40:15 Well, that's something we're going to have to watch. You know, it's going to be a year-to-year thing. I mean, if you know we add two and the county leaves the four there and we don't see significant population increases and the
3:40:24 times stay around the 10-minute mark, then there's there's no need to go further. Uh, but you know, I we like I said, we we can't control the county
3:40:31 system. And if some of those units get relocated to other areas of the county, that's going to have a negative impact on our community. And as we see those times start to climb, that's when we're
3:40:39 going to come back and present that information and say we need to look at adding more ambulances to our system so that we can account for, you know, the
3:40:46 lack of resources to and being able to cover. The same would be true if the population increases and we don't add ambulances, which is effectively what's happened over the last decade.
3:40:55 Okay. And other other concern, another well quite a few concerns I have with it with the MSTU. We're doing 2.9 real
3:41:02 million right now. Um, and you keep talking about we get the 2.9 million MSTU back from the county.
3:41:10 But if they still providing service and we partner with them, you think they're going to give us that 2.9 back? How are we going to make up that? Well, I don't see that happening.
3:41:18 That that would have to that would have to be a council decision as to whether you wanted to change the agreement. Uh there is there there one option is that there is an exit clause for that. Um
3:41:27 another option would be just a partnership where we come up with some other form of how we're going to operate. I know one of the under the model that we were talking with the
3:41:34 county with back in October uh they were going to let us operate under their system and there would be a there would be a you know we would collect a portion of the MSTU plus whatever we uh we
3:41:42 collected as a transport that could still be done even if we had our own COPCM. county has that exact relationship with the villages where they come into certain areas of the
3:41:51 county and provide services. So those types of things could take place in both directions. So if they ran a call in Clermont, we could give them a piece of
3:41:58 the MSTU based on the previous year's transports and allow them to build and collect what they can collect. So that's something that could be reciprocated both ways.
3:42:07 Yeah. Well, I think maybe we need to look at the figures and if we still have to depending upon county exactly how much of that 2.9 million we getting back
3:42:16 cuz basically everything he's showing here is showing the whole 2.9 million.
3:42:19 Okay. And I don't see them giving back the 2.9 million if they still having to provide service.
3:42:24 It's it's a 5-year agreement. Uh we're in year three of the agreement. It's it'll be up for renewal in 2027. Yeah.
3:42:30 Or 28, sorry. So at that point, you know, council can make the decision or you could exercise the exit clause on that if you know, county wanted if the
3:42:38 city wanted to look at doing the MSTU just for, you know, us specifically if we were under that license. So, I mean, that's that's something that the council
3:42:46 is going to have to have a conversation on and take a look at. But like I said, there there's a lot of options out there on how we could proceed once we uh once we got into the uh into the business of transport.
3:42:55 Um I guess another one of my concerns if we only doing two ambulance is do you have any data on how many actual call each ambulance is making every day?
3:43:06 Well, we do and that's where we provided those numbers in there. That was the you know the 2400 roughly 2400 calls per year for the uh you know for the you
3:43:13 know for those ambulances running and that's how we came up with the uh with the anticipated revenues and that was you know anticipating that they would run four calls a day per unit. Well,
3:43:22 that's anticipating the way we run four calls for per for a unit. But if I have this ambulance here and you saying he he running he he's running four calls. Uh
3:43:30 what happen if he get we end up with six calls he need to run today. How how do we how do we compensate for that? And besides that if he's out on a call, you
3:43:39 got two ambullets sitting here and both of them is tied up somewhere. Of course, I guess that's where county come in at, right? Mhm.
3:43:45 And I know in part of your presentation you really just said we need six ambullets, correct? based on the model, we needed six additional in and
3:43:54 18 months ago when we first started looking at this.
3:43:56 Well, I I don't have I mean, if you want Well, what I've seen you presenting here is going to depend upon a big partnership with Lake County is what I'm
3:44:04 seeing. Okay. Uh uh because I don't see them giving back all this $2.9 million and if they still got to
3:44:12 provide ambulance service to us. Uh other concern I had, you say station number one will not have an ambulance.
3:44:18 Okay. Where is the closest am unit that would be?
3:44:21 Uh we are looking at other areas. Uh you know we've entertained the possibility of you know is there is there an opportunity to do something at 12 street. Uh that's something we're
3:44:30 looking into. Uh we've looked at you know like we talked about Lincoln Park.
3:44:33 That's another area where you know we're looking to see is there is there a location over there where we could locate something. And I think station 6 is a great example of what we could look
3:44:41 at. I mean that's something where we'll be doing a you know a what's called a a box modular building. It's a it's a hurricane rated structure, but it's not
3:44:48 a traditional fire station. So, that's something that can be built relatively quickly at a lower cost than a traditional brickandmortar building and have enough there to operate the uh the
3:44:57 station out of. So, for station six, the the proposal we've got in next year's budget, it's uh basically $933,000.
3:45:04 It's turnkey for that and that's for a station to house six people and that includes the building to park the uh the engine and the ambulance in.
3:45:11 Okay. Well, and that was you mentioned 12th Street cuz that would be my concern if we don't have a unit at station one.
3:45:17 Where is the closest one to 12 street be located? And if it's right now we even if we put one at station two which is
3:45:24 always down in Kings Ridge or one out of station three. I and which is another question I asked, have we even looked at any data and see
3:45:32 how much time is added to uh response time due to the traffic they have to incur? For example, I just sit down at
3:45:40 the waterfront on Saturday watching the ambulance try to get into the waterfront doing doing all the uh festivities down
3:45:47 there Saturday and it end up taking them about 12 minutes, but most of it we're fighting just trying to get through the traffic.
3:45:52 We do uh that model that you're that we presented to you uh that that's something that we typically run every year. U we can do it more often. is that
3:46:00 we you know we typically get the data updated quarterly from the uh from the from the vendor and that is where we can really take a look at you know where
3:46:07 where are we being impacted and we can look at specific service delivery programs we can look at specific units and you know those are things we take into consideration and we have the
3:46:16 flexibility with that model to move units add units u add stations increase the volume increase the volume you know so all
3:46:23 those things can come into play and that that's where we're getting a lot of our stuff and it's a I can't necessarily explain all of it. It's uh it's the it's made by the same company that the
3:46:32 countyy's going to with their uh with their ambulance deployment model and it uses a lot of back-end stuff where you know there's a there's a little black box there that does a lot of thinking
3:46:40 and coming up with things and it's uh it's scary how accurate that system gets sometimes. So it's it's a great planning tool that answers those questions for us.
3:46:48 Well, and I would like to you I don't know if the data you presenting here on the times and everything took in consideration there where you just say, "Hey, this is what it took to get there
3:46:56 and all." But I like I say I I did notice this weekend um while I'm sitting at waterfront we had three calls down the ambulance had to come in three times
3:47:04 and each time they had a lot of trouble getting there because of the traffic. So when we look at these call time is with the traffic situation we have here is
3:47:13 that being considered why why it's taking one or other reason why it's taking so long and especially when I look at you're saying you can't have one
3:47:19 at 12 of uh station one call on 12 street and close to am we have located is say station three
3:47:27 I think it'll take more than 10 minutes to get there that's that's why we're looking mayor we understand what you're saying see so so uh uh these kind of things I
3:47:36 mean I understand the goal and I would love to get there. Um, the other question I also I've asked you this several times before, I mean, if we
3:47:45 getting ETM, the ETS there within 6 minutes, 7 minutes, they're lending the medical
3:47:52 attention and everything. Um, why is such a big concern to have an ambulance there in in in 10 minutes?
3:48:01 Because service the life-saving services will be put on by the ones that's getting there in six minutes. ambulance is just coming to transport. Okay.
3:48:08 Well, it it's a little more involved than that, Mary. When you're looking at your your highest acuity calls, your your trauma alerts, stroke alerts,
3:48:15 sepsis alerts, and other types of calls like that, there there is definitive care we cannot provide in the field. We can stabilize a patient, but we can't treat them. And the only chance they
3:48:24 have is getting into a medical facility and having advanced procedures that they can do at a hospital that we can't do out in the field. There are some places
3:48:31 that they'll they'll have a stroke unit stood up and they can address those types of calls, but those are extremely expensive to operate. It's nothing that we have the capacity to put in place.
3:48:40 So, when you have those patients, our only option is to get them to the hospital as quickly as we can. And the data shows that the quicker we get them there, the more likely they have for a positive outcome.
3:48:50 And I I I totally agree with that. The quicker we can get them there, the better. Um, but getting there, I mean, I've I've
3:48:57 been out on on calls and and seen scenes and been in locations where EMS got there for quite was there, but before we
3:49:04 can even stabilize the patient, uh, they had to work on them for 15 20 minutes.
3:49:08 Yeah. And ambulance just sitting there and ambulance almost beat them there and they sit there all this time tied up and it depends on the call. You know,
3:49:16 the different call types are going to have different treatment modalities and you know, some of those I mean, we're not going to spend the 15 minutes on scene. We're going to get them load it up on a transport unit and we're going
3:49:25 to get them to the hospital as quickly as they can. But if like for a case like you're talking about, if you have a somebody that's in cardiac arrest, we're going to work them until we get a heartbeat back.
3:49:33 Well, you know, I mean, I I I I applaud the initiative want to do it on our own, but I I can say I remember when we used to try to do it on our own and what it
3:49:41 cost and I and these numbers that I'm looking at, they not they're not adding up and I think they're going to be a little bit more costly than what what we
3:49:48 p what we projecting here. And as Mr. B say I'm going to have to go back and look at a little bit more. But I do want to commend
3:49:56 uh I will say this uh to Lake County. I was at a location a couple of weeks ago.
3:50:02 Uh young lady fell out with heat and stroke uh heat exhaustion I guess at at a funeral and actually ambulance got there before our fireman got our fire
3:50:10 truck got there and you know and they were I'm like wow I'm shocked you know.
3:50:15 Uh EMS were actually responding. I was actually physically there when it all happened. I'm like okay wow. Uh so times are getting better.
3:50:22 Yeah, they they have improved.
3:50:24 Absolutely. So, I wanted to make sure I I meant to call the county and let them know that I have seen some improvements cuz I do see a lot of ambulance calls
3:50:31 and services. And like I said on Sunday, on Saturday there, I watched all three calls and really watching the times of
3:50:38 when am I saw with them on Saturday was the fact of trying to get get through the crowd and get there and even though
3:50:45 it still took them 12 minutes or so to get there and and that's something we've actually been working with the county on and partnering with some of our bigger events. Uh we've been requesting the
3:50:53 county to come in and stage an ambulance at those locations just for that reason because of access issues and the county has been very forthcoming on that. So
3:51:01 and I guess that going to be my one of the things I was going to ask you when we have events like that and pick on the pond and everything. I think we have an
3:51:08 amal station there and everything can in the future I think well I was going to say this to Mr. Van Wagner actually uh one of the things when they come in and
3:51:16 ask for events like this, can we almost insist that they have an ambulance or something bigger? Do they have to pay for that? Uh Mr. W. What? Um especially
3:51:25 when it's hot like that cuz like I say, three people, I mean, they were falling out pretty bad down there.
3:51:30 Depends on the event. If it's a private event, uh we do have some events that are charged for the personnel that are on standby, but if it's a city event like, you know, Red, White, and Boom, uh
3:51:39 something like that, u we provide all of our services at no cost. And you know, I you know, that would be the request of the county if they brought a transport unit in.
3:51:46 Yeah. Okay. Well, well, like I said, I I still have to look at some of the numbers because they not quite adding up to me. Of course, I'm not a real don't
3:51:54 claim to be a real CP mathematician, but some things not adding up in here to me.
3:51:59 And I I'll take a look at it. But and I say I don't have any problem trying to do it on our own, but the numbers need to add up. And I don't see us I just
3:52:06 don't want to get into trying to provide a service halfway provide a service and then we have to still turn around and char you paying the county to help pay
3:52:14 for and we charging our residents additional fund funds to do that. We pay they paying twice. Okay. Is my big concern.
3:52:21 I understand that and the the invitation is open. If you'd like to come over and grill us and just hit us with everything until you get your questions answered, we'd be more than happy to do that.
3:52:29 Okay.
3:52:30 All right. But we we continue to work it and see where we go. And uh of course I think Mr. Bane
3:52:39 cover Venice for me because I was concerned why I understand now that you chose Venice because they did it. But of course I don't compare Venice with with
3:52:46 Clim because they half our size and of course they only operating with two. We you we one minute we saying we need two and next minute we saying we need six to
3:52:54 do it. You know we're all over the place. So, we need to come up with a sure program what we need. And if we going to do it, as I said before, let's
3:53:02 go all out and do it. So, let's look at if we need six, we need to do six. And if you got to just break away from the county, break away from the county. Uh,
3:53:10 other than that, um, I mean, I don't have no problem doing a partnership, but then your figure is going to have to change because I don't see them giving up all the MS, all that MSTU. Okay.
3:53:22 Always open to sitting down and having the conversation.
3:53:24 All right. Can I ask one follow-up question? Do I have Is that okay with counselor? Just one.
3:53:30 Um, if we're getting 6,000 calls for EMS a year, that's 16 calls a day.
3:53:37 Is that how you're coming up with four ambulances with four calls a day?
3:53:41 Uh, we were we were just being conservative with adding those those ambulances in there knowing that we had eight in the area already. So, we would
3:53:48 be adding two additional for 10. And just take a look at the breakout on that. But how much how much time does let's imagine you're going to a local
3:53:55 hospital, not Orlando. If you're going to a local hospital, how much time does each call take to get to the scene, treat the patient, transport them, and get back to another call?
3:54:06 We can say it it does depend. It does vary. Um, but if you look at our average call duration is 30 to 45 minutes, plus
3:54:13 then they've got to travel to the hospital and they're going to and treat once they transport treat that almost looking at another call. Um, we're estimating an hour and a half to two hours per call.
3:54:23 So, in theory, they could run 12 calls a day.
3:54:25 They could. I know there's some trucks that run more. There's places in the state where they run 30 calls a shift. Okay. Thank you.
3:54:31 And that and that would all depend, as you say, depend upon the call in the area transport, right? Because if they end up, well, most of them I've I've
3:54:39 talked to say if they make a run to ORMC, they tied up for two to three hours at least.
3:54:44 That will definitely increase the turnover time.
3:54:46 Absolutely. So, but most of the time they're going to be dealing local, right? South Lake or something like that. And once they once they bring the patient to the hospital, then they're
3:54:55 available again. They could be they could be summoned from the hospital to go to the next call. So, yeah, it's a it's a fairly low percentage.
3:55:02 As long as they're staying within our community, they're they're servicing our community as opposed to if Lake County had to go to OMC, they're out of our community.
3:55:11 Yeah. And a lot of a lot of the times you see that it's because like we have a trauma patient and you know, weather conditions won't permit a flyyou. So they have to be transported by ground or something along those lines.
3:55:20 And then one of the things you were said about, you know, alpha calls. Could we hit, you know, a future thing could be we could have uh a rapid transport unit
3:55:28 or a 60 car, you know, to go out and ascertain that or no?
3:55:32 Uh it depending on, you know, what we look at. I mean, you know, there are there are places where the alpha calls are handled by the ambulance crews and they don't send the the trucks out
3:55:41 there. in Lake County, we we with the exception of the ALS where they have trained staff on hands, we send we send a truck and an ambulance to everything. Okay.
3:55:50 Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. All right.
3:55:59 And I guess we will move to reports. Mr. Van Wagner.
3:56:07 Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This week is election qualifying week for seats one, three, and five. Qualifying closes at noon on Friday, June 12th.
3:56:19 Also, we have a workshop scheduled for Tuesday, June 16th.
3:56:27 I have a request for you. Also, we we had an approval with the CRA to do
3:56:34 a master plan for downtown and we have gotten a specific proposal
3:56:41 and it's my understanding from Freddy that I need to come back to the CRA with that specific proposal. Christian and I are going to vet that out if that's
3:56:49 truly the case. But if that is the case, I'd like to set aside a time to have a quicker CRA meeting to discuss that
3:56:58 master plan approval potentially. And I'm thinking that we could do that on the 23rd of June at 2:30 if that's
3:57:06 agreeable to you. And we'll I don't know if Miss Valerie is still here if that that's agreeable.
3:57:12 So that's a request I have for you. That's the that's a uh council meeting.
3:57:19 Yes. Well, in that today, you also asked to have a closed door.
3:57:23 Um, um, so we don't that didn't work for the shade session.
3:57:34 Oh, it didn't. So, okay. Let that not be an impediment. I can have it.
3:57:39 It didn't work. Okay. So, we we have another date. Well, we talk about that later, I guess. Would that be agreeable to you all?
3:57:46 It is if we need to do it. It it's my understanding that we already gave authority for you to move forward up to a certain amount of money.
3:57:54 This is this is going to be about I think the quote was $172,000 plus expenses. So if we need the
3:58:02 meeting, can we have it? And if I don't need it, cancel it and let you know.
3:58:06 I think I think as ordinance uh charter say you can do approval up to uh do everything up to 50,000 if it's a
3:58:14 budgeted item. anything over there. It still has to come back to and if it's not budgeted.
3:58:18 We already approved the vendor and the amount in the CRA. We approved up to 200,000 to get the master plan done. I I'll be surprised. I mean, I'll rely on
3:58:26 council, but I mean I mean on our legal counsel. Um but I think we already gave approval to move forward under with an amendment to the I I don't see a reason
3:58:34 to wait, but I mean if we have to legally, we have to legally. I would like to see it come back to council so we see see and and and present it and so
3:58:42 uh I can see what's in what the master plan is all about. So this would be a CRA meeting. Yeah. Okay. Okay.
3:58:48 So we have to get approval twice.
3:58:52 We're not sure. I'm going to look into that. Okay. Thank you. Okay.
3:58:56 Well well I'm not so much worried about Well, I am concerned about approval but you talking about presenting and going out and doing something and I haven't
3:59:03 seen the master plan. We already approved amending the master plan at the CRA meeting in January and gave a a
3:59:12 budget and a specific direction. All I'm saying is if they can move forward and get it going, we can possibly have it sooner rather than later so we can have
3:59:20 it before the the budget. Every week that we wait on these things, it just postpones it. And we're already waiting on decisions for things because we want
3:59:27 to get the final plans approved. So, I'm just saying if if you have legal authority, as far as I'm concerned, as far as I'm concerned, I don't I'm not asking you to come back. I'm not changing my vote on that.
3:59:42 Mr. W, can you please let us know what what's the legal is on that? Whether I'm just going to review the CRA meeting.
3:59:49 Okay. Thank you. Also, the wine stroll is on June 19th here in Clermont
3:59:56 downtown from 6:30 to 9:00 p.m. And I just want to make you aware of some upcoming meetings you're going to find on social media. We have the
4:00:05 comprehensive plan community meetings to help us shape the future of Clermont.
4:00:10 There's three dates we have so far. June 15th at 6:00 p.m. at the Clermont City Center. June 16th at 12:00 p.m. at the
4:00:19 Kings Ridge Ballroom. And June 17th at 6:00 p.m. is the Clermont Arts and Recreation Center.
4:00:27 Can you Can you send him out an email, please? Thank you. Yeah.
4:00:33 Yeah. Uh it's it's on social media. I'll check the website. See if it is. Okay. Okay. Thank you.
4:00:42 Thank you.
4:00:45 Um, one other thing I wanted to ask M, I know we talked about it and Mr. Scott
4:00:53 about uh, I asked you to have Mr. Scott sent out the the numbers on what we will be facing. Uh, if this tax bill passes
4:01:02 and everything, we got any date on when we'll be able to get those. I think we need to be able to look at I thought he sent that out later today, but I'll take a look.
4:01:10 Well, I don't know. I haven't looked at my email since 2:00. So, it it would have been later today.
4:01:14 Okay. So, but I'll I'll make sure it's got sent.
4:01:16 All right. I just think, you know, all the council members need to look at the numbers what we're looking at if it goes through. Okay. So, thank you, Mr. W.
4:01:24 Yeah. I mean, first of all, I guess I'll say I have been keeping up to date with the tax reform proposal that will go to
4:01:32 the voters. Um, and I've been in communication with staff on this. I think legally there's not really a whole
4:01:39 lot to tell you right now. Um I think it's pretty self-explanatory. You know, if it goes through, all things being equal, your adorums will only be able to be used for certain things as well.
4:01:50 Um it'll cap increases, things like that. But you do also have alternative funding sources and ways of mitigating
4:01:58 the budget impact. Um I think there may be new alternatives also coming up. So, um, those will be over time and I'll be communicating with you about those options. Look, a lot remains to be seen.
4:02:09 I mean, remember, it's not a simple majority. It's a 60% as well. Right.
4:02:14 So, um, next, there have been developments. We did file the Lake County lawsuit in the I guess I call the
4:02:21 impersonation case. Uh, someone impersonating Lead Solutions Group on our behalf. I have been in communication with Google's attorneys and we have a
4:02:30 plan. Uh I should have something more to report in about 3 weeks.
4:02:36 Uh we have an ebike ordinance that is under staff review. I've received comments uh that'll be presented soon.
4:02:43 We have a dark sky ordinance that should be on the July PNZ agenda. We have a notice provision regarding expanding the
4:02:51 notice for various approvals that will also be on the PNZ meeting in July. And hopefully there's a meeting being
4:02:57 scheduled about that. Um, and uh, shade sessions. So, I need new dates. I don't have dates that I can tell you that
4:03:06 don't work, but what we're looking at is July for Dean Ringers. Um, so I don't I know that you you've canled one meeting,
4:03:14 I think, if I'm correct. Uh, I don't know what works for you all and what doesn't.
4:03:21 It's the day you're thinking about. Well, I don't really have a preference.
4:03:26 Um, it would be I'll tell you this, uh, just based on my calendar, I would prefer
4:03:34 something the first or last week of July,
4:03:40 but you know, I guess your meeting is on the 28th. Is that correct?
4:03:52 We I think we could and I'll I'll confirm that with Dean Ringers if that works for you all.
4:04:00 The 28th at say two 2 o'clock. No, you've got a CRA meeting.
4:04:04 Oh, we got um So, the shade meeting isn't in public. Is that correct?
4:04:12 Correct. Yeah.
4:04:16 Uh yeah. I mean, no, I can't I can't do one.
4:04:19 Okay. All right. Uh, what about
4:04:26 July 7th before PNZ at like 5:30 or something like that?
4:04:37 Someone could attend remotely as long as we have a quorum in person. You said July 7th. Yeah.
4:04:43 At four o'clock. I I mean I don't really mind what time you've just The only thing you're up against on July 7th is the P&Z at 6:30.
4:04:51 How much time are you requiring?
4:04:53 An hour. I mean an hour worked last time. So four to five. Five to six is good. 5 to 6 would work fine.
4:05:00 July 7th to 5. July 7th at 5.
4:05:06 I'll confirm with Dean Ringer's attorney if that works for you and we'll get it noticed. Uh, anytime after 2 2:30 for me on July 7th will be okay.
4:05:16 Got it. Okay. Okay. Not five. Well, whatever time.
4:05:21 I'm just saying if if you need to move it, I I'm I'm available by 2:30 on on five works for me. Okay. Yeah.
4:05:29 Okay. Um, let me see what else.
4:05:34 Uh, that's it for the matters that I'm giving a report on. Okay.
4:05:43 Uh, Council Member Myers.
4:05:47 Good evening. My report is concerning the property tax revenue. Um, I just want to have our citizens to think on
4:05:56 these things before they cast their vote when it happens in November.
4:06:01 Um, my concern is that our citizens will not have a say so in how their tax dollars are spent. they will have to travel to
4:06:09 Tallahassee for their voices to be heard.
4:06:12 My other concern is if the city has a need, but Tallahassee doesn't see it as a need, then our citizens will suffer.
4:06:20 And so I admonish the public to ask, why all of a sudden should property tax be done away with? And how will the things
4:06:29 that property taxes cover for our city be met now?
4:06:34 Instead of property taxes being done done away with, why not lower our property insurance because the cost of property insurance has increased by
4:06:43 leaps and bounds. And that's truly a burden for the citizens in the state of Florida. And my other part is just to
4:06:50 simply wish all of the fathers um a happy Father's Day. I hope that you get
4:06:57 some good food, you're loved on, and you enjoy your day doing whatever it is you want to do.
4:07:03 I'll be happy to give my socks and tie.
4:07:13 Council member Peterson, I guess property tax is the is the subject of the day right now. One of the
4:07:20 things I mean I've getting call upon calls from the people in my community outside of my community and I was very impressed when I went to my agenda
4:07:30 review meeting this week that they had answers already and it was I was very proud of the way you were able to be proactive instead of reactive to this
4:07:38 situation. But the other thing I think we need to address now is uh we need to give we need to get our public
4:07:45 information officers out there to to do ads and everything. They can put ads in to say what's going to happen, you know, like because everybody's going to say,
4:07:54 "Would you like to get some free money?" Oh, yeah, sure. Okay. You know, so, but you don't see the opposite end of the coin. Well, what is that going to cost
4:08:01 you? You know, okay. So, you really don't need four tires on your car. Three will work. You know, it's got to balance it properly, you know. I mean, we we
4:08:10 have the we have the ability. We have people in there. I don't know if they can if we need additional personnel to do this because I think it would warrant
4:08:18 it right now to you know this is something that's going to be a huge financial loss and even if it cost us 5
4:08:25 10 15,000 to hire people in right now just to get this done whether it be video ads on Instagram Facebook things
4:08:34 like that to to reach the whole public go into print media where you know for the uh over 65 crowd that don't have
4:08:42 Instagram Instagram, but they read like the uh all the little papers they get.
4:08:46 You know, each community has their own little uh monthly publication. Put an ad in there. I know it'll cost us money,
4:08:53 but this is something that might cost us money to save us money. So, I think it's an important thing to do. And I think we got to be we got to start acting now. I
4:09:02 mean, November is coming up really quickly and we got to make sure that the public is aware of what what's it what it's all about. And you know, we don't
4:09:10 not that we want to steer the problem, give them both sides. Yeah, it's really good. There is unfairness in the in our property tax system. Maybe that should
4:09:17 be addressed by just removing it doesn't address it, you know. Uh and we I think public information is the way to go and
4:09:25 that's how we can maybe sway the tide and not get that 60%. Because a lot of people will vote yes to this if they don't have the true information in front of them. That's all I got.
4:09:38 Okay, Council Member Strange.
4:09:45 Uh, yeah. Following up on that, um, I hear a lot of people in elected
4:09:52 positions and and staff around the state express concerns with the property tax proposal. I, for one, actually think it's fantastic.
4:10:02 um mostly because I am looking at the numbers the the the real numbers the 50,000 limit on homestead was adopted in
4:10:11 1992 and if we look at the value of properties from 1992 to 2026 and we
4:10:18 consider the impact of that 50,000 cap in 1992 and we look at it in today's dollars 150,000 250,000 it's really not
4:10:26 that much different. um we're actually addressing inflation as we often talk about up here. Um back then that's I'm
4:10:33 sure what many of the conversations were. You're going to take 50,000 out, you know, what's that going to do? So I think it's just a responsible conversation that's consistent with what
4:10:41 Florida's been doing for the last um you know pushing what are we 35 years. Um so
4:10:48 I think with all the criticism I've given Tallahassee in the last 16 months and actually I think they came up with something good on this one. Um, I
4:10:57 encourage all of you and the public, if it's published, when you look at what Mr. Bora prepared and and I I asked them a lot of questions about this.
4:11:07 Um, I want to remember that when we go through budget, and I hope the public remembers when they go through budget, staff is always asking for more money.
4:11:15 It's just a fact. I mean, every budget you've ever seen is is more money. Um, and so then you'll quote cut it and say,
4:11:22 "Well, we've cut taxes or we've cut the budget." But in reality, we're not cutting the budget if all we're doing is
4:11:30 not increasing it as much. So if we actually look at the impact, the projected impact on our budget, and we
4:11:38 take into consideration it only applies to roughly a third of our budget, 40% of
4:11:45 our budget, it actually works out to be about a 5% cut in our overall budget over the next three years. That's it.
4:11:54 5%.
4:11:56 And and then we also have to remember that the restrictions on how we can use our money, it's only applies to the adverum tax. The other 60% can be spent
4:12:06 however we want to spend it. So it can feel like it's a lot. And I think to individual taxpayers it is a lot, but to
4:12:16 the government collecting from all the different sources that we collect, I actually don't think it's that big of a deal. It's a 5% cut. And 5%'s going to
4:12:24 be challenging, but it's only 5%. Um, so personally, I think it's great. Um, I
4:12:32 won't speak against it. Um, so that that's where I'm at on it. Um, I did have a couple follow-ups for staff. One
4:12:41 is, um, can maybe this is for Mr. W. Did planning and zoning get the criteria that we went over two months ago? We we
4:12:49 went over this at PNZ. Um, as I was drafting and working on it, I realized I needed more input from PNZ. And so what happened at the last meeting is I
4:12:57 presented my work and kind of where I was at and I'm going to get feedback from the board at the next meeting. So we're working on it.
4:13:06 So now we're into August. Oh yeah, easily.
4:13:10 Okay. Um, I think Mr. Matthysse, this might be a question for you. Um, a couple meetings
4:13:19 ago we asked staff to bring us back with an administrative variance ordinance. I haven't seen it. Are you working on that?
4:13:27 We are. We're working with staff on that and talking to um looking at some of the other jurisdictions and see what we think would be a good thing to bring back.
4:13:36 Okay. Do you have an estimated timeline on that? I do not. No. I'm I'm sorry. Okay.
4:13:44 Um, and finally, I do want to share with everybody that since my last update on tourism, there have been significant,
4:13:50 substantial, and material changes at the county level. Um, one is our tourism
4:13:57 director, Ryan Richie, has resigned and taken a position elsewhere.
4:14:02 Um, I do think this is an extraordinary loss for Lake County. He is very well connected in the industry of tourism and
4:14:10 um in in the the wake of him leaving um Lake County staff have taken upon themselves, my understanding, without
4:14:17 Board of County Commissioner approval to restructure the tourism office and put it under the Department of Economic Development. Many people in the tourism
4:14:26 industry nationwide consider this to be a bad move because economic development does not actually generate revenue.
4:14:32 tourism does and that frequently results in tourism funds being used for um governmental incentives and programs
4:14:41 that are not necessarily the intent of the tourism. I'll be speaking about this at the July meeting um with other tourism representatives on the TDC.
4:14:51 Um case in point, the capital fund program conveniently has not been published yet. It was supposed to come
4:14:58 out this month, but you know, we're holding off on that as we continue to work on how capital funds will be made available. I will tell you that I am
4:15:06 hearing from people in the community that conversations at the county office is that moving forward those funds will be used solely for Lake County projects.
4:15:14 I certainly hope that that information and that rumor is not true. Um I do not think it would be good for the citizens of Clermont who by the way generate 75%
4:15:23 of the TDT will benefit from these projects only being these funds only being available for county projects. It is also my understanding that the county
4:15:32 intends to um continue to fund LEAD which is fantastic. It's a public private partnership. However, the county is also expanding its economic
4:15:40 development department in the process, making lead report to county staff instead of the board of county
4:15:47 commissioners. So, that's my update on tourism and I am very much looking forward to the July meeting to hear what staff have to say. They do not plan to
4:15:56 replace the tourism director position in Lake County. They will hire somebody who will report to the economic development director who reports to the deputy
4:16:03 county commissioner who is the or county manager who is the former parks and recck director for Lake County. Um and then that person will report to the
4:16:11 county director. So the number one revenue driving agency in the county is now under the control of three different departments although it used to report
4:16:18 directly to the county manager. So I have strong opinions about the subject. I will certainly keep you posted.
4:16:30 Mr. Bane.
4:16:33 Thank you, Mayor. Um, I had heard the first portions of that, um, but hadn't
4:16:40 heard the additional information, so thank you for sharing. Um, Mr. Well, I I I know and this is top of
4:16:48 mind because I just got back from the Florida League of Cities um Institute
4:16:55 for Municipal Elected Officials um this past weekend about what um what cities
4:17:05 and municipalities can and can't do with relation to spending money and putting out information relative to budget.
4:17:15 or I'm sorry, ballot initiatives. Um, and um, I just want us to be cognizant.
4:17:24 I think all of us, and some folks already tonight have expressed some individual opinions. I think all of us have individual opinions and I think as
4:17:32 council members, we are well within our right, and correct me if I'm wrong, to express those opinions. However, when we
4:17:39 allocate city funds, I think we have to be very conscientious about skewing it
4:17:46 one way or the other. Um, even if it may benefit a position that all of us, let's say if
4:17:54 it's something we all agree on, we still that doesn't make it right. And so I can you give us some guidance uh not tonight
4:18:02 necessarily, but can you provide us guidance to what what we can and can't do? what are our guard rails? Um, so
4:18:10 that if we decide to fund any education just about the ballot initiative, the
4:18:18 ballot item, this is what it would have to say in order to comply. Yes.
4:18:23 Thank you. Um, in addition to I I so I was I just had a brief chat with the city manager at our
4:18:32 break and I I I I think we we came to a uh 100% agreement on this issue of the
4:18:39 flow of our meeting tonight being one that really I think fostered collaboration and cooperation and
4:18:47 conversation. Um, and at the at the last workshop where we had the trainer in here, we had talked about coming up with
4:18:56 a a a um a model that perhaps we could try to implement that that allowed for
4:19:03 unlimited Q&A, but but narrowed in our comments, including these reports, uh, to a time limit that we've agreed upon
4:19:12 in our rules. And so I'm taking a stab at that and I'm going to bring that back at the next meeting for us to vote on,
4:19:19 discuss, um, and hope that we could implement so that we can continue the progress we're making on the flow of our
4:19:27 meeting. Um, so that uh hopefully longterm it has a has a has multiple
4:19:34 effects, but some of those could be just how we and whoever's in our chairs work together, but also length of and um
4:19:43 maybe perhaps time of meetings. Um and then finally, uh this month is a month with a fifth Tuesday, and that means I'm
4:19:50 going to be hosting um my fifth Tuesday forum for this quarter. So that'll be on Tuesday, June 30 at 6 o'clock. And this
4:19:58 one is going to be at the historic village in historic downtown Clermont. So that's Tuesday, June 30 at 6 o'clock.
4:20:06 And anyone is welcome to attend. Thank you. Thank you, sir. The ma Mr. Mast m.
4:20:16 Thank you, mayor. I've got nothing to report and I'm not going to make any comments on the tax report. Oh, you're not? Okay. All right. Good.
4:20:23 Mr. Bane just scared me on that one. What's that?
4:20:27 Said, "Council member Bane just scared me on that one." Okay. Okay. I'm just teasing.
4:20:32 Well, I had it on my list to be careful uh to say to you all, be careful um what you're saying out there. Um you have a
4:20:41 right to voice your opinion and everything, but as a council member, you have to be careful and as a city employee, you have
4:20:48 to be careful on which way you go with these things. So um as he was saying, you have to somewhat be in a neutral position. However, as elected officials,
4:20:58 I think you're entitled to voice your opinion out there in your town halls or whatever uh and answer the question.
4:21:03 Just try to be honest and everything with them. Um so trying to get staff I think we may have a problem trying to get our public information office to put
4:21:11 things out there. So please, Mr. Wayne, uh I agree with Mr. uh Bane, if you will, uh go ahead and look into that
4:21:17 legal ramification, please. Um I want to thank everybody that was at my t uh lunchon uh last week. Uh end up with
4:21:25 30ome people there. Wasn't very good lunchon. Tax private uh issue came up at my lunchon which I had to end up
4:21:32 discussing there as as well. Um Mr. Mr.
4:21:38 Van Wagon, I I guess or maybe Nicole can answer that is I keep getting this question because in in the manager
4:21:45 update under the city clerks, they put out the fact that uh people had prefiled and a question to me is what is pre-filing? I don't have no clue. Okay.
4:21:56 So, what do they mean when they say pre-filed?
4:22:00 So, you cannot qualify until this week, qualifying week. You also have to put in
4:22:08 all your papers, your petition, then you're qualified to run. Pre-filing is you can turn in specific papers, you can
4:22:16 open up an account, but it does not guarantee that you qualify for your seat. Okay.
4:22:22 So, that's the difference between pre-filing and qualifying.
4:22:27 Okay. Well, I guess I guess the question I guess one of the other question I got on that was the fact that uh I turned in my paperwork for with my account and
4:22:36 everything, but I was still listed as just picking up a package. Okay. Well, everybody else listed it as pre and everybody was asking what's I I have no
4:22:44 clue. Okay. But I will find out. But now you explained it. I understand it. Uh let's go back to the property tax people.
4:22:55 I I I I I hear what they're saying about property taxes and and the cost and affordability of homes and everything,
4:23:03 but I don't think eliminating property tax is the way to go. I think we can do a better job on other things to help affordability because we can eliminate
4:23:12 you can get rid of your $4,000 a year property tax, but is that $4,000 a year property eliminate going to help you still make make payments on a $500,000
4:23:21 house? I don't think so. Okay. Uh so my thing is that why didn't they look at other revenue avenues and I think one of
4:23:28 the biggest things we can consider for it come to property tax in in this in this state is the fact that I think when you purchase a house now they base your
4:23:37 uh assessed value on 80% of the value of the house if I'm not mistaken. So why don't we drop that to 60%. So you buy a
4:23:44 $500,000 home instead of you you paying taxes on on on a h 100,000 or 400,000 now you're only paying it on 300,000 of
4:23:52 course you still get your homestead as well. I mean it's other things as Miss Meyer said I think insurance is killing us more than anything. I'm about ready
4:24:00 to not insure my home because the costing got up uh got up so high and is it even worth it? okay, insuring my home
4:24:07 anymore. Um, when I have to pay $400 or $5,000 a year for homeowners insurance and I got people telling me they paying
4:24:14 $8,000 a year for homeowners insurance, you know, a lot more than they paying in taxes.
4:24:19 Okay? So, why aren't we doing something about the I mean, these are kind of things. And the problem I have with taxes is the fact that when we eliminate
4:24:27 them, they going to put a lot of cities in a lot of desperate position.
4:24:31 Clermont I think may be okay but then if we're not getting our sales tax from the state and everything allocation like we should be right now what's going to
4:24:38 happen when we have to depend upon the state to you know keep giving us money and I'm keeping in mind is u our police and fire department steady
4:24:47 growing you just had a report talking about they want to do MS so how we going to fund all these things if we if we lose all this revenue next year okay uh
4:24:55 they talking about doing police and fire is up for a new contract next year if I'm not mistaken Okay. So, so you know, we we we got a lot of serious things look at and as I agree with Mr. Mr.
4:25:06 Peterson earlier, the fact is, hey, we don't need to be looking at new in uh expenses right now in the next year. I know this year we pretty much okay
4:25:13 because everything is budgeted and and if it passes, it won't take effect until next year. But but still, you know, that's why I don't have any problem with anything that's in the budget already.
4:25:24 We budgeted in there already. I don't have any problem going ahead and doing it. But we got a serious look at next year. Maybe we need to be doing two or
4:25:31 three different budgets, okay? If this happened, if this happened, if this happened, you know, all these different scenarios in case. Okay. But I I I just
4:25:40 I don't know. But this is one of the things I'm looking at and I'm concerned with and that's why I've asked I mean I asked the finance and Mr. Ben Wagner to
4:25:50 make sure we get the real numbers on what it would cost us, okay, in revenue over the over the years if this thing go
4:25:57 out there. What then? Of course, we need to sit down at that point and look and see, okay, what if where we going to go do what we're going to do with it? Okay.
4:26:05 Uh but I I I'm just I just think there's other things we can do to help affordability and biggest thing is to bring down the cost of these homes. I think they our homes are overpriced.
4:26:16 Okay. Two half a million. Uh I know I well know we it's hard to do, but then I look at myself. Okay, you can eliminate
4:26:25 my taxes. Okay. take away all my if you if this was implemented basically I would pay no taxes but you only save me $213.
4:26:35 $213 is what I would save if the if this if this go through course my but yet and still because my home I purchased in
4:26:43 2001 at a at a very low price but I'm still my house is still valued at a half a million dollars. Okay.
4:26:52 So these are the kind of things and that's that's what they need I think we need to be looking at people need to be looking at we got these high priority houses so how do we eliminate the high
4:27:00 cost of house homes and bring it back down to re reality and and they can afford okay uh this idea about because
4:27:09 you pay taxes on your house you never own it well then let me why don't you take off uh vehicle registration I have to pay vehicle registration every year
4:27:18 right that's a tax that mean I don't own my vehicle anymore because I'm paying registration. So, let's get rid of that, too. Okay. But anyway, that's that's
4:27:25 where I'm at and that's all I got to say. Uh I didn't mean to go go that far into this, but anyway, uh Mr. Van, I
4:27:35 would like for you and really and y'all sit down and start thinking about uh more public and private partnerships
4:27:43 because I think if this thing go through, that's that's going to be a real key to getting getting us keeping us on track and everything. more public and private partnership and go back to
4:27:52 even what we were saying just when ago about EMS maybe it is that's the answer public and private partnership okay so but that's one of the things I would
4:28:00 like for you to really look into um and I guess that's that's that's about
4:28:10 all I have I guess anybody else have anything
4:28:21 You okay? If nobody else has anything, uh, meet and adjourn.