[00:00:07]
2021 CITY COMMISSION WORKSHOP. CITY CLERK, WILL YOU PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL. >> MAYOR LEDNOVICH: HERE.
>> LEN KREGER: HERE. >> DAVID STURGES: HERE.
>> RONALD ROSS: HERE. >> BRADLEY BEAN: HERE.
WE ARE STILL DEALING WITH THIS. FACE MASKS OVER THE NOSE PL PLEASE. SIX FEET DISTANCING.
NO STANDING IN THE ROOM. APPRECIATE COOPERATION.
CELL PHONES SILENCED OR TURNED OFF SO WE DON'T HAVE ANY INTERRUPTION AND WE WILL CONDUCT OURSELVES WITH INTEGRITY AND DIGNITY. ALL RIGHT, VICE-MAYOR KREGER,
LEAD US THROUGH THE PLEDGE? >> LEN KREGER: CERTAINLY.
[4.1 STRATEGIC SUMMARY PRESENTATION]
AGENDA ITEM 4.1. IN OUR WORKSHOP, COMMISSIONERS, WE WILL BE DOING STRATEGIC SUMMARIES FROM VARIOUS CITY DEPARTMENTS AND CITY MANAGER TONIGHT WE HAVE.>> THIS EVENING WE HAVE MISS DEN DEN WHO IS THE CITY'S RECENTLY HIRED SIX MONTHS AGO HR DIRECTOR.
SHE IS PREPARED TO PRESENT HER DEPARTMENT'S STRATEGIC SUMMARY.
MISS MATSON. >> DENISE MATSON: GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS.
>> MAYOR LEDNOVICH: GOOD EVENING.
>> DENISE MATSON: FIRST, I JUST WANT TO GIVE YOU A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT AND OUR DEPARTMENT'S MISSION, WHICH IS TO SUPPORT THE TOTAL OPERATIONS OF THE CITY THROUGH RECRUITING, DEVELOPING, MOTIVATING AND RETAINING OUR CITY STAFF. AND ENCOURAGING EMPLOYEES TO BE CREATIVE AND INNOVATIVE ACHIEVING THE GOALS OF OUR ORGANIZATION. TO DELIVER QUALITY PUBLIC SERVICES TO OUR CITIZENS AND VISITORS OF FERNANDINA BEACH.
SO THE HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT HAS SEVERAL AREAS OF RESPONSIBILITY, INCLUDING RECRUITMENT AND SELECTION OF EMPLOYEES, MAINTAINING OUR HUMAN RESOURCES INFORMATION SYSTEM, WHICH IS OUR PAYROLL SYSTEM AND ALL THE DATA WE MAINTAIN ON OUR EMPLOYEES OR OUR WORKFORCE.
COMPENSATION AND CLASSI CLASSIFICATION.
EMPLOYEE AND LABOR RELATIONS. BENEFITS ADMINISTRATION FOR EMPLOYEES AND RETIREES. OUR PENSION PLAN ADMINI ADMINISTRATION, SAFETY AND WORKERS COMPENSATION, TRAINING AND THE MANAGEMENT OF OUR COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENTS AND PERSONNEL POLICIES AND PROCEDURES.
SO OUR DEPARTMENT HAS THREE FULL-TIME STAFF MEMBERS.
WE SUPPORT APPROXIMATELY 212 FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES AND 61 P PART-TIME STAFF. ADDED A FEW MORE SINCE WE ADDED THE GOLF COURSE TO THAT AND SUPPORT APPROXIMATELY 130 RETIREES. WE COORDINATE THE ANNUAL RECRUITMENT AND HIRING OF APPROXIMATELY 60 AND TEMPORARY AND SEASONAL STAFF, AND THAT IS MOSTLY OUR OCEAN RESCUE L LIFEGUARDS AND PARKS AND RECREATION SUMMER STAFF.
JUST TO GIVE YOU A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF SOME OF THE WORK PLAN -- WORK PLAN ITEMS THAT WE HAVE FOR THIS YEAR AND IN THE COMING YEAR. THE NEXT COUPLE OF SLIDES HERE WILL GIVE YOU AN OVERVIEW OF SOME OF THE PROJECTS WE ARE WORKING ON. SO OPERATIONS -- WE ARE LOOKING AT OUR PAY AND CLASSIFICATION PLANS.
THE SALARY RANGES OF OUR CURRENT POSITIONS IN OUR PAY PLAN HAS NOT BEEN CHANGED IN OVER 13 YEARS OR HAVEN'T BEEN ADJUSTED IN OVER 13 YEARS. HAVING A PAID PLAN THAT IS COMPETITIVE, BOTH EXTERNALLY AND INTERNALLY MAKING IT EQUABLY INTERNALLY HELPS TO RECRUIT, RETAIN AND MOTIVATE A QUALITY WORKFORCE AND THEREFORE REDUCE THAT TURNOVER COST.
PRESIDENT CITY'S EXPERIENCED APPROXIMATELY 20% TURNOVER IN THE LAST TWO FISCAL YEARS. AND THIS EXCLUDES OUR TEMPORARY AND SEASONAL STAFF. COMMISSIONER ROSS, YOU HAD POINTED OUT A QUESTION TO THE CITY MANAGER ON WHAT THE COST
[00:05:05]
IN TERMS OF INCREASED TRAINING AND DECREASED PRODUCTIVITY IS WITH A GREATER THAN 20% TURNOVER RATE.WHILE THIS IS DIFFICULT TO TRACK AND TO -- EXCUSE ME, TO PLACE A DOLLAR VALUE ON IT, THE INDUSTRY STANDARD HAS BEEN ABOUT 20% TO 25%. THE ANNUAL SALARY OF A POSITION. SO, FOR EXAMPLE AN EXAMPLE, WE HAVE A $40,000-A-YEAR EMPLOYEE TO SEPARATES 25% WILL BE ABOUT $10,000. SO THAT WOULD BE AN APPROXIMATE COST. POLICE AND FIRE POSITIONS WILL BE HIGHER THAN THAT BECAUSE OF THE -- BECAUSE OF THE EXPENSES INVOLVED WITH THEIR UNIFORM, THEIR TRAINING AND EDUCATIONAL REQUIREMENTS. AND JUST ON BOARD ITSELF WITH
THE PRE-EMPLOYMENT PROCESS. >> MAYOR LEDNOVICH: COMISSIONER ROSS, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION REGARDING IT?
>> RONALD ROSS: MY SLIGHT NOT OFF.
I HAVE MY MAGIC THING REVERSED.
IT'S OFF NOW. [LAUGHTER] SORRY. I HAVE A QUESTION OF JUST TURNOVER. WHAT -- IDEALLY, WHAT SHOULD
THAT RATE BE? >> DENISE MATSON: THE INDUSTRY STANDARD IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT IS ABOUT 10%.
>> RONALD ROSS: 10%, WOW. THANK YOU.
>> DENISE MATSON: YOU ARE WELCOME.
NOVEMBER 3 VOTERS IMPROVED AMENDMENT 2 WHICH INCREASES MINIMUM WAGE AT $8.56 TO $10 PER HOUR BEGINNING IN SEPTEMBER AND $1 PER YEAR THEREAFTER UNTIL IT REACHES $15 IN 2026.
THE IMPACT THIS SEPTEMBER WILL BE MINIMAL BECAUSE WE ONLY HAVE A HANDFUL OF EMPLOYEES THAT ARE CURRENTLY UNDER THE $10-AN-HOUR RATE AND THEY ARE ACTUALLY JUST UNDER $10.
SO THAT COST WILL BE MINIMAL. THE GREATER IMPACT IS IN THE FOLLOWING YEARS. AS OF TODAY, WE HAVE OVER 80 EMPLOYEES THAT ARE AT $15 OR LESS AN HOUR.
THAT IS ABOUT ALMOST A THIRD OF OUR WORK FORCE.
>> MAYOR LEDNOVICH: VICE-MAYOR KREGER, I SEE YOUR LIGHT ON.
DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THIS?
>> LEN KREGER: ARE YOU SUGGESTING THAT THE 20%
TURNOVER IS TIED TO WAGES? >> DENISE MATSON: YES, SIR.
>> LEN KREGER: DO YOU DO EXIT INTERVIEWS.
>> DENISE MATSON: MAJORITY HAVE BEEN WAGES.
>> LEN KREGER: MINIMUM WAGE AND ACCELERATE $8 AND YOU GET $9. HOW ARE WE ADJUSTING TO $15,
DOES $15 GET $16? >> DENISE MATSON: THAT WAS THE NEXT POINT I WAS GOING TO MAKE. NOT ONLY IS THE IMPACT TO THOSE MAKING $15 OR LESS, BUT THE IMPACT -- THE INTERNAL EQUITY FOR THOSE WHO ARE CURRENTLY WORKING.
AND WE WANT TO BE CAREFUL NOT TO CREATE AN ISSUE WITH FEDERAL LAW ON EQUAL PAY OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT IN NOT ADDRESSING THOSE EMPLOYEE THAT'S MAY BE ABOVE $15.
SO ONE OF THE -- WITH ALL THAT SAID, HUMAN RESOURCES IS WORKING ON REVIEWING THE PAY AND CLASSIFICATION PLAN.
AND YOU KNOW, COMPARING TO OTHER LIKE CITIES.
I KNOW FERNANDINA BEACH IS VERY UNIQUE JUST WITH THE TYPE OF SERVICES WE OFFER, BUT TRYING TO LOOK AT IT.
A REGIONAL -- ON A REGIONAL BASIS, WHAT OTHER MUNICIPALITIES PAY AND COMPARE IT TO OUR PAY.
AND ENSURE THAT WE ARE -- WE HAVE A COMPETITIVE AND WEAK TABLE PAY PLAN FOR OUR EMPLOYEES.
ANOTHER PROJECT THAT WE ARE WORKING ON IS -- OR WILL BE.
WE HAVEN'T STARTED THAT YET THE PENSION PLAN REVIEW.
WE ARE WORKING WITH THE CITY MANAGER AND CITY ATTORNEY TO CONDUCT AN ANALYSIS OF THE PENSION PLANS TO CONSIDER OPTIONS TO CONTROL THE CITY'S COST.
AND UNFUNDED LIABILITIES. THE FLORIDA DIVISION RETIREMENT IS REQUIRING THAT PLANS DECREASE INVESTMENT EARNINGS PERCENTAGES TO MIRROR WHAT THE FLORIDA RETIREMENT SYSTEM IS.
WHICH IS ABOUT 7% RIGHT NOW. THAT WILL IMPACT WHAT THE CITY IS REQUIRED TO CONTRIBUTE TO KEEP THE PLANS ACTUALLY SOUND.
THAT WOULD BE -- ACTUARIALLY SOUND AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN DO FOR THAT COST. AN ADDITIONAL -- I AM SORRY, THE ESTIMATED COST TO REVIEW THE PLAN WOULD BE PROBABLY LESS
[00:10:01]
THAN $20,000, BUT THAT WILL DEPEND ON WHAT OPTIONS ARE LOOKED AT AND WHAT -- WHAT COMPREHENSIVENESS I GUESS WOULD BE IN REVIEWING -- WHAT OPTIONS WILL BE AVAILABLE TO CONSIDER.SO THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE PROBABLY WILL BE LOOKING AT OVER THE NEXT YEAR AND WE HAVE NOT BUDGETED OR HAVE THAT IN THE IMMEDIATE FUTURE. OKAY, -- WHOOPS, SORRY.
LABOR RELATIONS AND UNION NEGOTIATIONS.
CURRENTLY THEY HAVE TWO LABOR UNIONS, THE COASTAL FLORIDA POLICE BENEVOLENT, OUR POLICE UNION, AND THE ORGANIZED FIRE FIGHTERS OF FERNANDINA BEACH WHICH IS OUR FIRE UNION.
OUR GENERAL EMPLOYEES UNION WAS DECERTIFIED IN DECEMBER OF 2019 ; HOWEVER, THERE IS A PENDING PETITION FOR CERTIFICATION WITH THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RELATIONS COMMISSION REPRESENTING GENERAL NONEVENTFUL TIME EMPLOYEES AND AT THE REGULAR MEETING, WE WILL BE CONSIDERING A RESOLUTION IN RECOGNIZING THAT UNION.
ONCE THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RELATIONS APPROVING THE PETITION, WE WILL BEGIN BARGAINING WITH THAT ORGANIZATION TO DEVELOP A COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT FOR EMPLOYEES. PERSONNEL POLICY REVISION.
THIS IS AN ONGOING PROJECT WE HAVE JUST TO ENSURE THAT OUR POLICIES ARE COMPLIANT WITH ANY LEGAL MANDATES, FEDERAL LAW CHANGES THAT COME THROUGH, AND IS UPDATE AS THE -- AS FEDERAL LEGISLATION OR OUR LOCAL POLICIES NEED TO BE UPDATED.
DIGITIZING OF RECORDS. AND I WILL GO INTO STAFFING NEEDS AFTER THAT. BUT ONE OF THE CHALLENGES THAT WE ARE FACING IS DIGITALIZATION OF OUR RECORDS.
WE HAVE A RECORD RETENTION REQUIREMENT FOR THE HUMAN RESOURCES RECORDS RANGING FROM FIVE YEARS TO 50 YEARS.
FIVE YEARS BEING A SIMPLE RECRUITMENT FILE.
50 YEARS AFTER AN EMPLOYEE TERMINATES OR SEPARATES FOR THEIR PERSONNEL FILE. WE CURRENTLY HAVE MORE THAN 50 CUBIC FEET OF RECORD STORED IN OUR HUMAN RESOURCES OFFICE AND ADDITIONAL RECORDS STORED OFF-SITE.
IN -- IN DIGITALIZEING RECORDS, IT ELIMINATES COST PRO NOT NEED DRAG STORAGE AND IT IS A PROTECTION IN THE EVENT OF A NATURAL DISASTER. THE DIGITIZING THE RECORDS, WE DO HAVE THE SOFTWARE ALREADY AVAILABLE WHICH IS LASER FICHE, AND REALLY JUST HAVING ADDITIONAL STAFF TO HELP US GET THOSE RECORDS, ALL OF 50 CUBIC FEET PLUS DIGITIZED SO IT IS EASILY ACCESSIBLE. ONE ADDITIONAL THING THAT WE DO ON AN ANNUAL BASIS IS REVIEW OUR BENEFITS PLAN AND WORK WITH OUR BENEFIT CONSULTANT TO CONSIDER OPTIONS AND THAT WILL BE DONE IN THE COMING MONTHS FOR RENEWALS FOR OCTOBER 1, AND WE WILL BE BRINGING THAT BACK TO THE COMMISSION LATER THIS
SUMMER. >> ON BENEFITS, WHAT IS YOUR ANTICIPATION ON MEDICAL COVERAGE INCREASE FOR NEXT Y
YEAR? >> DENISE MATSON: WE ACTUALLY HAD A CONVERSATION WITH OUR CONSULTANT JUST A FEW DAYS AGO, AND RIGHT NOW THINGS ARE LOOKING LIKE THEY WON'T CHANGE PROVIDED THAT OVER THE NEXT COUPLE OF MONTHS, EVERYTHING REMAINS THE SAME. IF WE HAVE SOME CATASTROPHIC CLAIMS FOR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. AND AS OF RIGHT NOW CAN BE NO INCREASE AND STAY THE SAME. GOING BACK TO STAFFING NEEDS, ONE OF THE -- ALONG WITH THE DIGITIZING OF THE RECORDS, THE ADDITIONAL STAFF MEMBER, WE WOULD BE CONSIDERING JUST DUE TO THE VOLUME OF RECORDS WE HAVE TO DIGITIZE AND THEN THE FEDERAL AND LEGAL MANDATES THAT CONTINUALLY BE PLACED ON HUMAN RESOURCES MATTERS, AND JUST KEEPING UP TO DATE WITH THOSE PERSONNEL POLICIES AND PROCEDURES AND WITH THE ADDITION OF THE LABOR UNION THAT WILL BE CERTIFIED HOP HOPEFULLY IN THE NEXT MONTH OR TWO, COMPLYING AND GETTING THOSE UNION CONTRACTS UP TO DATE.
[00:15:02]
THE ESTIMATED COST PER ADDING AN ADDITIONAL STAFF MEMBER WILL BE APPROXIMATELY $75,000, INCLUDING BENEFIT COSTS.HOWEVER, I AM STILL EVALUATING THE NEED FOR THE POSITIONS.
SO I AM NOT CERTAIN WHETHER WE WOULD BE LOOKING TO ADD IT NEXT THIS NEXT FISCAL YEAR OR FUTURE YEAR.
AND THEN THE PAYROLL SYSTEM UPGRADE.
I WILL FLIP TO THE NEXT SLIDE HERE, BECAUSE THAT WAS ADDED -- IN YOUR DRAFT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN THAT WAS PRESENTED TO YOU AT THE END OF JANUARY, THE DRAFT COPY, WE ACTUALLY DO HAVE CAPITAL PROJECT IN THERE FOR UPDATING AND UPGRADING OUR PAYROLL TIME KEEPING SYSTEM.
AND WILL BE A COORDINATED EFFORT WITH IT AND FINANCE.
WE WERE LOOKING -- WE CURRENTLY HAVE TYLER MUNIS FOR THE FINANCIAL PACKAGE. AND IT WOULD BE ADDING THE HUMAN RESOURCES PAYROLL FROM THAT SYSTEM.
THE ESTIMATED COST WE HAVE BEEN PROVIDED SO FAR WILL BE $
$302,000 FOR THAT. >> MAYOR LEDNOVICH: MR. STURGES, DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION.
>> DAVID STURGES: YES I DO AS A MATTER OF FACT, MR. MAYOR.
FOR THE NEED TO DIGITIZE THE RECORD OVER A TIME PERIOD.
WHY WOULDN'T IT BE A BETTER APPROACH WHILE YOU ARE LOOKING AT IT TO HAVE A PART-TIME EMPLOYEE FOR SEVERAL YEARS BECAUSE THESE RECORDS DON'T HAVE TO BE REMOVED IMMEDIATELY.
WE ARE CURRENTLY PAYING FOR THEIR STORAGE.
AND WHEN SOMEBODY GETS DONE WITH THE RECORDS, APPARENTLY THEY ARE STACKING THEM OR REMOVING THEM OUT OF THE SYSTEM BASE ON THE TIME PERIOD. I KNOW JUST LIKE ANY OTHER BUSINESS, IT IS CONSUMING, BUT MAYBE OVER A TIME PERIOD IF YOU STARTED WHITTLING DOWN WITH THE REGARDS WITH A PART-TIME EMPLOYEE YOU WOULDN'T HAVE TO PAY THE INSURANCE AND ALL THE OTHER BENEFITS FOR FULL-TIME EMPLOYEE AND MAYBE WITHIN TWO OR THREE YEARS AND TAKE THAT PART-TIME EMPLOYEE AND MOVE IT TO FULL TIME AS THE STAFF GETS BIG WE ARE THE CITY ANYWAY AT THAT POINT. THAT IS MY THOUGHT.
>> DENISE MATSON: I TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU.
THAT IS SOMETHING -- WHILE WE STILL HAVE LOOKING AT WHAT OUR NEEDS ARE IF WE NEED A PART-TIME AND FULL TIME.
FULL TIME PROVIDES US WITH THE ABILITY TO HANDLE MORE THINGS THAN JUST THE RECORD -- THE RECORD ASPECT, BUT ABSOLUTELY
SOMETHING TO CONSIDER. >> OKAY.
THAT'S IT. I AM JUST THROWING THAT OUT
THERE. >> DENISE MATSON: AS I STATED WITH THE CAPITAL PROJECT, WE HAVE THAT IN THE DRAFT PLAN NEXT YEAR TO BE CONSIDERED. AND JUST A QUICK REVIEW OF WHAT OUR DEPARTMENT HAS FACED THIS PAST YEAR.
WE DID HAVE TWO STAFF MEMBERS IN HUMAN RESOURCES THAT ARE N NEW, MYSELF INCLUDED. I HAVE BEEN WITH THE CITY ONLY ABOUT SIX MONTHS NOW, AND WE DID HAVE HUMAN RESOURCES GENERALIST THAT WAS JUST FILLED THE END OF JANUARY.
AND SO THAT HAS RAISED -- CAUSED SOME ISSUES AS WELL OR CHALLENGES JUST BEING A SMALL DEPARTMENT.
AND THEN, OF COURSE, COVID-19, WITH ALL THE LEGAL MANDATES, THE EMERGENCY PAID SICK LEAVE, THE CHANGES TO THE FAMILY AND MEDICAL LEAVE ACT THAT IMPACTED OR AS A RESULT OF THE PANDEMIC.
SO THAT IS JUST CREATED MORE -- MORE WORK OR MORE RESPONSIBILITIES IN MAKING SURE OUR EMPLOYEES ARE SAFE AND WE PROVIDE THE RESOURCES NEEDED FOR THEIR PROTECTION.
AND THEN OTHER LEGISLATIVE IMPACTS AS I MENTIONED RELATED TO THE PANDEMIC. BUT WE ALSO HAD TO IMPLEMENT A D.O.T. AND COMMERCIAL DRIVER'S LICENSE AND DRUG AND ALCOHOL CLEARINGHOUSE THAT ALL OF OUR EMPLOYEES THAT ARE COMMERCIAL DRIVER LICENSE HOLDERS HAVE TO BE RUN THROUGH THIS CLEARING HOUSE ON AN ANNUAL BASIS AND A REQUIREMENT BY THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. SO THAT WAS A MANDATE THIS PAST YEAR THAT WE HAD TO IMPLEMENT. AND THEN, OF COURSE, THE MINIMUM WAGE INCREASE THAT WAS COMING UP IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF MONTHS. SO WITH THAT, ANY QUESTIONS?
>> MAYOR LEDNOVICH: COMMISSIONER ROSS, YOU ARE
RECOGNIZED. >> RONALD ROSS: THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION. I GAVE YOU A WHOLE LOT OF QUESTIONS EARLIER AND YOU ANSWERED MOST OF THEM IN YOUR PRESENTATION. I TRULY APPRECIATE THAT.
>> DENISE MATSON: THANK YOU. >> RONALD ROSS: I WOULD LIKE TO ELABORATE A LITTLE BIT. YOU MENTIONED BECAUSE OF OUR -- WE ARE HAVING TROUBLE MAINTAINING PEOPLE BECAUSE OF LOW PAY. IF WE WERE TO GET IT SO IT GOT UP TO THAT INDUSTRY STANDARD OF 10%.
AND I AM TALKING ABOUT IN THE NEXT YEAR, THIS COMING UP BUDGET, HOW MUCH WOULD WE HAVE TO INCREASE WAGES TO MAKE US COMPETITIVE SO WE DON'T HAVE THAT TURNOVER COST.
[00:20:03]
DO YOU HAVE ANY HANDLE ON THAT? >> DENISE MATSON: I DON'T AT THIS TIME. WE ARE STILL REVIEWING THAT.
>> RONALD ROSS: DO YOU THINK YOU CAN COME UP WITH IN THE
NEAR FUTURE? >> DENISE MATSON: ABSOLUTELY.
>> RONALD ROSS: THE SECOND ONE IS PERSONNEL.
THIS COMING DO YOU ANTICIPATE HIRING ANYBODY NEW?
>> FROM HR SPECIFICALLY, I AM -- I DON'T KNOW THAT YET.
I DON'T BELIEVE SO. I THINK BECAUSE WE HAVE A NEW STAFF AND TWO OUT OF THE THREE OF US ARE NEW, THAT I THINK WE CAN WORK TO STREAMLINE PROCESSES AND NOT HAVE TO HIRE ANYONE OTHER THAN WE WANTED TO TRY TO TACKLE THE DIGITIZING OF FILES AND LOOK AT A PART-TIME PERSON.
SO I DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER ON THAT YET.
>> RONALD ROSS: YOU MENTIONED $200,000 COST OF SOFT WARE.
IF THAT WAS NOT APPROVED, WHAT WOULD BE YOUR EFFECT ON THE
DEPARTMENT? >> DENISE MATSON: IT WOULDN'T JUST BE OUR DEPARTMENT, IT WOULD BE CITYWIDE.
OUR HRS WITH KRONOS AND A VERY OLD SYSTEM.
THE CITY HAS HAD IT IN PLACE FOR MANY YEARS.
IT IS BECOMING NOT -- THEY ARE NOT ABLE TO UPDATE IT AND MAINTAIN IF LIKE IT NEEDS TO BE JUST BECAUSE IT IS -- IT HAVEN'T HAD THE UPDATES NEEDED. SO COULD WE STAY WITH THAT SYSTEM AND UPGRADE THAT FOR A LOWER COST, I AM NOT SURE WHAT
THAT WILL BE. >> RONALD ROSS: IS THAT $300,000 IN THIS FISCAL YEAR IS SOMETHING THAT YOU NEED?
>> DENISE MATSON: THAT WOULD BE A PRIORITY, YES.
>> RONALD ROSS: ONE LAST COSTS -- LISTEN TO ME.
ONE LAST QUESTION. WHAT WOULD BE AFFECT OF A 10% REDUCTION IN YOUR OPERATING BUDGET?
>> DENISE MATSON: I MEANT TO BRING THAT UP AND I KNEW YOU HAD MENTIONED THAT TOO. IF WE ARE -- THE OPERATING BUDGET FOR HUMAN RESOURCES IS ABOUT $64,000.
>> RONALD ROSS: BY OPERATING BUDGET I MEAN PERSONNEL COST.
10% CUT, BOOM. >> DENISE MATSON: WITH PERSONNEL COST, OUR BUDGET IS AROUND 350,000.
SO $35,000 WOULD HAVE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON OUR DEPARTMENT. I MEAN, THE MAJORITY OF OUR COSTS, OF COURSE, WITH IS PERSONNEL EXPERIENCES BUT WE MAY HAVE TO CONSIDER LAYING OFF A POSITION AND INCREASE IN STAFF CITYWIDE AND OTHER DEPARTMENTS ADDING A GOLF COURSE THAT WOULD BE CHALLENGE. IT WOULD IMPACT OUR -- HOW WE ON BOARD EMPLOYEES WITH OUR BACKGROUND SCREENING.
WE MAY HAVE TO CUT THE TYPE OF BACKGROUND SCREENING WE TO DO MAKE SURE OUR EMPLOYEES AREN'T CRIMINALS OR, YOU KNOW, HAVE ANY BACKGROUND WORK ISSUES. REDUCE OUR SAFETY PROGRAM THAT WE HAVE, EMPLOYEE EVENTS WHICH IS THE ANCILLARY COST ANYWAY.
AND PROBABLY OTHER ITEMS TOO. I DON'T.
>> WILL HAVE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.
>> IT WOULD. >> RONALD ROSS: THANK YOU SO
MUCH. >> MAYOR LEDNOVICH: VICE
VICE-MAYOR? >> LEN KREGER: WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT 20%. HAVE YOU DRILLED DOWN TO SEE WHERE -- WHERE WE ARE LOSING PEOPLE? IS IT POLICE, FIRE? IT CERTAINLY ISN'T -- ISN'T
MANAGERIAL STAFF. >> DENISE MATSON: IT IS NOT.
IT IS MOSTLY THE -- THE GENERAL LABOR EMPLOYEE RANGES IN -- MOST OF THE AVERAGE LENGTH OF SERVICE FOR THOSE LEAVING HAVE BEEN ABOUT FIVE YEARS. WE DID HOWEVER RECENTLY -- WE HAVE FIVE OPENINGS IN FIRE RIGHT NOW.
ALL OF THEM -- OR THE MAJORITY OF THOSE WENT TO THE CITY OF JACKSONVILLE. A LOT LARGER DEPARTMENT, BUT WE CAN'T STOP PEOPLE FROM MAKING THAT MOVE.
BUT I THINK WAGES DO AFFECT THAT.
>> SO YOUR WAGES WILL BE LOOKING SPECIFICALLY AT THOSE AREAS IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN THAN THE MAN GER Y'ALL AREAS.
>> DENISE MATSON: CORRECT. THE LOWER LEVELS.
>> ANECDOTALLY, THANK YOU IT WAS WELL RUN AND THANK YOU FOR JOINING OUR CITY AND BEING PART OF THE TEAM.
>> I HAVE ONE LAST QUESTION AND.
WE TALKED ABOUT THE SALARY RANGE NOT HAVING BEEN AFFECTED
>> SO IF I UNDERSTAND YOU CORRECTLY, IT IS NOT ONLY THE RISING MINIMUM PAGE THAT WILL EVENTUALLY GO TO $15 AN HOUR,
[00:25:06]
BUT IF WE READJUST THE SALARY RANGE, THAT ALSO WILL HAVE ANIMPACT. >> DENISE MATSON: YES.
>> ON COMPENSATION AND. ARE WE LOOKING TO DO THAT THIS
NEXT BUDGET YEAR? >> DENISE MATSON: YES.
AND THAT -- LET ME -- MANY EMPLOYEES ARE ALREADY WITHIN THE RANGE. SO IT WOULDN'T NECESSARILY BE IMPACTING EMPLOYEES THAT HAVE LONG TENURE WITH THE CITY.
I THINK IT WILL PROBABLY EFFECT THOSE THO THAT HAVE FIVE YEARS OR LESS AND THEY ARE AT THE ENTRY RATE OR JUST OVER THE
ENRY RATE OF THE RANGES. >> DENISE MATSON: THANK YOU SO
THANK YOU. I COMPLIMENT THE CITY MANAGER FOR HAVING THIS STRATEGIC PRESENTATION AS WE GO INTO THE BUDGET YEAR. IT HELPS US UNDERSTAND THE CHALLENGES THAT EACH DEPARTMENT FACES.
AND SOME OF THE BUDGET CHALLENGES WE ARE GOING TO FACE
[4.2 SEASIDE AT AMELIA SUBDIVISION WALKWAY]
FOR 2021-2022. CONTINUE TO ITEM 4.2.THE SEASIDE AND AMELIA SUBDIVISION WALKWAY.
THIS WAS PLACED ON THE WORKSHOP AGENDA BY THE MAYOR.
AND THIS -- I PLACED THIS ON THE AGENDA FOR THE FOLLOWING REASON: WE CLOSED THE WALKWAY THREE WEEKS AGO, APPROXIMATELY, AFTER THE CITY WAS NOTIFIED OF A SAFETY ISSUE.
THAT THE WALKWAY WAS SLIPPERY AND SOMEONE MIGHT FALL.
THE WALKWAY IS IN THE CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY.
AND THE CITY IS LIABLE FOR ANY INJURIES THAT OCCUR ON THE WALKWAY. HOWEVER, THE WALKWAY WAS BUILT BY THE SEASIDE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION.
WHAT IS NOT CLEAR WITH THIS ISSUE AND THE REASON WHY I WANTED TO BRING IT UP TO MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS IS WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING THIS WALKWAY.
AND WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS -- MAINTAINING THIS WALKWAY GOING FORWARD. SO THAT IS A DECISION THAT I BELIEVE THIS COMMISSION NEEDS TO MAKE.
IT WAS BUILT BY THE HOA. I DON'T KNOW WHETHER WE FOUND A
PERMITTING HISTORY OF THIS -- >> MAY I?
>> MAYOR LEDNOVICH: ABSO ABSOLUTELY.
>> IT WAS ORIGINALLY REPORT TO THE PARKS AND REC THAT THE W WALKWAY WAS SLIPPERY. JUST TO CLARIFY, THE MAJORITY OF THE WALKWAY, 391 LINEAR FEET IS LOCATED IN THE UNAPPROVED RIGHT-OF-WAY. AND I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY AND MUCH SMALLER. YOU SAY ONE-THIRD, 100 FEET OR LESS IS IN A PRIVATE PARCEL OF THE SEASIDE SUBDIVISION ON THE
CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY. >> MAYOR LEDNOVICH: THAT THE
CITY NORTH SIDE. >> NORTHWEST.
>> MAYOR LEDNOVICH: AS YOU APPROACH THAT DEVELOPMENT.
>> CORRECT. THE ONE THAT GETS YOU TO CR CROSSWINDS DRIVE OR THE POR PORTION.
AND REPORT CAME IN TO THE DIRECTOR'S OFFICE, POLICE VOTE, AND IT WAS -- POLICE VOIT. AND IT WAS SLIP -- MRS. VOIGH AND IT WAS SLIPPERY AND WE RECEIVED CALLS FROM MEMBERS OF THE HOA BOARD AND RESIDENTS WHO SAID PEOPLE HAVE SLIPPED AND FALLEN. THAT CONCERNED ME GREATLY AND MY RECOMMENDATION AS IT WOULD BE IS TO SLOWS IT AND TO BE AS CONCERNED AND AS SAFE AS POSSIBLE.
WE ARE NOT SURE. THERE ARE NO MITT RECORDS THERE ARE SOME MEMORIES AND THEY ARE BECOMING MORE VAGUE AS WE ALL AGE IT WAS BUILT BY THE DEVELOPER OF THE SUBDIVISION BUT IF IT WAS BY THE CITY, YOU ARE RIGHT.
THE PORTION OF THE WALKWAY SINCE LIABILITY HAS NOT BEEN TRANSFERRED FROM THE CITY TO THE HOA.
THERE IS NO AGREEMENT. THE LIABILITY IS ON THE CITY FOR THE MAJORITY OF THE WALKWAY AND ALL OF IT IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. SO.
>> MAYOR LEDNOVICH: OVER TIME, THE HOMEOWNER WALKWAY HAS BEEN EMBRACED BY THE PUBLIC. AND THE CITY HAS DONE SOME REWARES TO THE WALKWAY. THE GENERAL RECEPTION OF THE PUBLIC WHO USES THE WALKWAY THINK IT IS THE CITY'S WALKWAY.
[00:30:04]
IF YOU INDULGE ME FOR JUST A SECOND.I KNOW MR. GEORGE -- MR. MA MARTIN, MR. GEORGE INSPECTED
>> MAYOR LEDNOVICH: CAN WE HAVE MR. GEORGE GIVE US THE
CONDITION OF THE WALKWAY? >> IF I MUST.
>> MAYOR LEDNOVICH: YOU MUST. PLEASE SIR.
>> CHARLIE GEORGE, CITY ENGINEER.
I DID GO OUT AND LOOKED AT IT. I LOOKED AT IT DURING THE RAIN WHEN IT WAS THE MOST SLIPPERY AND I WORE SLICK SHOES.
IT IS WET AND NOT SLIPPERY. STRUCTURALLY IT IS STILL IN GOOD INTEGRITY. I DIDN'T SEE ANY INDICATION OF ROT OR SEDIMENT OR STRESS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
BUT IT IS NOT ANY TO DO WALKOVERS.
WHEN IT IS WET, IT IS SLIPPERY. BUT FROM WHAT I HEARD THE MAJORITY OF THE PROBLEMS ARE BICYCLES.
THEY ARE THE ONE SLIDING. NOT PEOPLE WALKING.
THERE ARE SOME ISSUES WITH LOW-HANGING BRANCHES AND ALL THAT CAUSE TROUBLE WITH THE HANDRAILS.
IF THE CITY IS GOING TO JUMP INTO THE MAINTENANCE OF IT, I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE A MORE IN-DEPTH LOOK AT EVERYTHING JUST TO MAKE SURE WHAT THE ACTUAL CONDITION AND AGE OF EVERYTHING IS. GIVEN NOT A WHOLE LOT OF HISTORY ON IT AND COME UP WITH A MAINTENANCE PROGRAM FOR IT IF WE ARE GOING TO TAKE THAT. I AM -- AFTER I LOOKED AT IT, I NOTIFIED MR. MARTIN AND TAMMY THAT I DIDN'T REALLY SEAT REASON IT NEEDED TO BE CLOSED AS LONG AS IT IS PROPER SIGNAGE WARNING PEOPLE THAT IT WAS WET AND CAN BE SLIPPERY.
I TRIED TO SLIDE AS MUCH AS I COULD WALKING CONTINUE TO.
AND I DIDN'T REALLY HAVE ANY PROBLEMS.
>> WHAT WOULD YOU ESTIMATE THE ANNUAL MAINTENANCE COST FOR
THAT WALKWAY? >> FOR WHAT I WOULD SEE THE MAJORITY OF THE MAINTENANCE WOULD BE REPLACING DECKING.
THE PARTICULAR PROCEED SEWER 10% A YEAR.
THE HANDRAILS NEED SOME WORK, BUT I DON'T THINK THERE IS A SAFETY ISSUE. THERE ARE SOME SPLINTERING AND AGING AND WEATHERING. AGAIN, 10% OF THAT.
TO COME UP WITH THE COST, $8,000 A YEAR.
>> MAYOR LEDNOVICH: FAIR ENOUGH.
>> BRADLEY BEAN: YES, THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.
THIS ISSUE BRINGS UP TWO DIFFERENT SLIGHTLY RELATED TOPICS TO ME. AND I WANT TO JUST TALK THROUGH THEM BOTH WITH THE REST OF THE COMMISSION.
NUMBER ONE IS THE SHORT-TERM RESPONSE OF HOW WE RESPOND TO THESE THINGS. WANT TO MAKE SURE WE ALL AGREE ON WHAT WE DO GOING FORWARD. AND THE SECOND IS WHAT WE WILL DO WITH THIS -- LONG-TERM WITH THIS PARTICULAR -- THIS PARTICULAR ITEM. FIRST, BASED ON WHAT.
I WENT OUT THERE AS WELL AND SAW IT IN THE RAIN, AND I AM ALSO AN ENGINEER -- NOT THAT KIND OF ENGINEER BUT I DID TAKE A LOOK AT THIS. AND I REACHED THE SAME CONCLUSION THAT IT IS NOT AS SLIPPERY AS CLAIMED BY VARIOUS SOURCE THAT'S -- I UNDERSTAND THAT THE CITY WILL TAKE LIABILITY. BUT RIGHT NOW THE SOLUTION WHICH IS WORKING IS THAT THERE IS A SIGN WARNING USERS OF THIS BRIDGE. AND THAT WOULD MITIGATE OUR LIABILITY. BECAUSE WE ARE LETTING PEOPLE KNOW ABOUT IT. AND WE HAVE THAT SIGN UP.
I WOULD LIKE THE FIRST RESPONSE TO BE TO PUT THE SIGN UP RATHER THAN BLOCK OFF -- BLOCK OFF. WE HAVE ISSUES AND BEACH ACCESS BEFORE IN THE PAST AND WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT RATHER THAN CAUSING A LARM THAN TEARING THIS DOWN.
WHEN I DON'T THINK IT IS AS SLIPPERY AS WE THINK.
I WOULD LIKE TO -- I WOULD LIKE TO SAY OUR BEST PRACTICE UNLESS THERE ARE PHYSICALLY BOARDS MISSING IF SOMEONE CAN FALL THROUGH, I WOULD SAY TO PUT A SIGN UP WARNING PEOPLE OF SLIPS AND FALLS. I WILL GIVE ANOTHER COMMENT OF WHAT TO THINK ABOUT LONG TERM. LET'S TALK ABOUT THAT.
IS THAT SOMETHING THAT THE REST OF THE COMMISSION WOULD LIKE TO
CONSIDER OR NOT? >> I WOULD LIKE TO ASK OUR CITY ATTORNEY POLICE BACH IF YOU COME UP.
RELIEVE US OF LIABILITY? >> IT DOES NOT RELIEVE US OF LIABILITY SPECIFICALLY. IT IS FACT SPECIFICS.
IT HELPS MITIGATE -- IT DOESN'T ELIMINATE MITIGATE, IT MEANS IT HELPS US. AND THE FACT IS, THAT BY THE TIME YOU GET TO THINK DEFENSE IN A CASE LIKE THAT IS YOU ARE ALREADY TENS OF THOUSANDS INTO ATTORNEYS FEES.
A JUDGE MAKES THAT DECISION. BASED ON THE FACT AND THE EVIDENCE THAT ARE PRESENTED AND WE WOULD LIKE TO AVOID GETTING THAT FAR DOWN THE ROAD. SO WEATHER CLOSING THAT IS -- I AM NOT BEING DEFENSIVE AT ALL. IT IS PRIOR TO AN INSPECTION.
[00:35:03]
IF WE DON'T -- IF WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY STAFF THAT WERE ABLE TO GET OUT THERE IS -- IF I AM ASKED, I AM GOING TO -- I HAVE TO GIVE OUT BEST LEGAL ADVICE. THE BEST LEGAL ADVICE IS CLOSE IT. IF THERE IS GOING TO BE DIRECTION FROM THE COMMISSION BASED ON COMMISSIONER BEAN'S DISCUSSION, IT WOULD BE TO THE CITY MANAGER AND TO MAKE SURE IF SOMETHING LIKE THIS HAPPENS THAT MR. GEORGE WILL HAVE TO DROP EVERYTHING AND GET OUT THERE AND INSPECT.I WOULD SAY TO CLOSE IT, AND I AM ASSUMING THAT THE MANAGER WILL TAKE THE ADVICE. THE WORSE THING THAT COULD HAPPEN WE JUST CLOSE IT AND DIDN'T INSPECT IT AND THERE IS SOMETHING DANGEROUS AND SOMEBODY GETS HURT.
IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT THE SIGNAGE -- IF IT IS A REALLY DANGEROUS THAN WE SHOULD BE OUT THERE IMMEDIATELY TO INSPECT
VICE-MAYOR? >> LEN KREGER: ON THIS ISSUE.
I HAVE SOME OTHER THINGS ABOUT THE HISTORY AND HOW THIS ALL HAPPENED. ON THIS ISSUE, THIS IS RATHER UNIQUE BECAUSE BASICALLY AT TIME, THE CITY DID NOT ASSUME RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AIRPORT. IT WASN'T THE RIGHT-OF-WAY.
THE CLOSURE BASED ON WHAT WAS PERCEIVED AS THE OWNER AND THE PERSON WHO WAS RESPONSIBILITY TO MAINTAIN IT.
ALTHOUGH WE HAD MAINTAINED IT PREVIOUSLY.
AT THE TIME THE DECISION -- I -- I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE DECISION. IF THE OWNER COMES UP AND SAYS UNSAFE, SLIPPERY AND WE FALL AND CLOSE IT BECAUSE OF THE LIABILITY. IF HAD BEEN OUR FACILITY AND AWARE OF IT AND PROBABLY TONIGHT.
WHEN WE HAVE RESPONSIBILITY, THAT IS ANOTHER STORY.
THERE WERE E-MAIL THAT'S WENT OUT AND I ACTUALLY RESPONDED -- I HAPPEN TO USE IT -- AND WALK IT ON A REGULAR BASIS.
I RUN ON THAT WALKOVER. AS -- AS CHARLIE SAYS, IT IS -- I WOULD SAY MUCH SAFE THAN SOME OF OUR BEACH WALKWAYS ARE.
BUT THAT PARTICULAR -- IT IS DIFFERENT THAN IF WE OWNED IT.
SO IF WE ARE GOING TO ASSUME WE WILL TAKE RESPONSIBILITY, THEN IT ANOTHER ISSUE HOW WE DO THE CLOSURES.
THE CLOSURES IN 2019 WITH THE BEACH WALKOVERS WERE BASE $ON ACTUAL ENGINEERING STUDIES. THEY WEREN'T CLOSED UNTIL THE ENGINEER DID THE STUDY AND TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.
END RESULT, I DON'T THINK THIS IS A BAD THING TO BE BROUGHT UP. I PROBABLY GOT MORE E-MAILS ON THIS THAN ALMOST ANYTHING ELSE IN THE LAST YEAR.
AND I THINK THE END RESULT WILL BE A GOOD RESULT, BUT THIS -- THAT IS SUPPOSED TO BE A ROAD. THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE A ROAD.
AND AT THE TIME, THE PEOPLE GOT UP IN ARMS IN WHAT WOULD BE THE RESULT OF CUTTING THOSE TREES DOWN.
THAT'S HOW IT BECAME A WALK OVER AND A WALK OVER IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. IT JUST SO HAPPENS AT THAT TIME MANY THINGS WERE HAPPENING IN THE CITY AND THE CLEAR CUTTING AND CITY MANAGER WAS FIRED ALONG WITH THE WHOLE PLANNING STAFF. SO THIS IS HOW IT TRANSPIRDZ.
WHAT DOES CONCERN ME IF THE CITY SHOULD DESIRE, THAT WE MAINTAIN IT. AND I BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD AT THIS POINT, THAT WE DO HAVE TO WOK OUT SOME AGREEMENT ON THE PROPERTY THAT IS NOT OURS. THAT IS OWNED BY A LONG ANSWER
TO YOUR QUESTION. >> MAYOR LEDNOVICH:
COMMISSIONER ROSS. >> RONALD ROSS: YES, SO, I MEAN FOR THE SPORT TERM. IF THERE APPEARS TO BE A DA DANGER, THE APPROPRIATE APPROACH IS TO CLOSE IT DOWN AND FIGURE OUT WHAT IS WRONG. IF IT NEEDS A SIGN, THEN IT IS CASE SPECIFIC IN THE ANSWER OF YOUR FIRST QUESTION.
SECOND QUESTION, I SUPPORT MAINTAINING AND REPLACING PUBLIC AMENITIES LIKE THIS BOARDWALK.
I FEEL LIKE IT IS USED BY THE CITY.
I THINK IT IS AN AMENITY. I THINK IT IS A GOOD THING.
I WILL POINT OUT WELL-KNOWN LOCAL BLOGGER RECENTLY WROTE THAT THE CITY TAXES PAYING FOR A, QUOTE, EVER EXPANDING GOVERNMENT AND BUYING MO MORE PUBLIC AMENITIES.
WE ARE TAKING A PRIVATE AMENITY THAT IS BUILT ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND EXPANDING GOVERNMENT BY ASSUMING THE MAINTENANCE. AND LONG-TERM SUSTAINABILITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY SHOULD TAKES PREFERENCE OVER SHORT-TERM EXPENDITURES. BEFORE ACCEPTING ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR THIS, THE CITY FIRST DETERMINE BY A QUALIFIED ENGINEER OR SOMEBODY WE CHOOSE TO HIRE CONSIDERED
[00:40:06]
THE CURRENT CONDITION INCLUDING A SUBSTRUCTURE.I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CLIMBED 390 FEET AND LOOKED UP THERE.
THE MAYOR PROBLEMS WEREN'T ON TOP, BUT THE MAYOR PROBLEMS WERE UNDERNEATH. AND SITTING FOR 20 YEARS IN AN OFTEN WET ENVIRONMENT AND YOU NEED TO KNOW WHAT GOING ON UNDERNEATH. WE NEED TO KNOW WHAT IT COSTS AND NEED A WRITTEN COST OF A MAINTENANCE PLAN, AND COME UP WITH A TRUE COST OF WHAT THIS WILL COST AND WE NEED TO KNOW WHAT IS THE LIFE EXPECTANCY OF THIS STRUCTURE.
TAKING OVER RESPONSIBILITY FOR IT.
REMEMBER WE ARE TAKING OVER RESPONSIBILITY FOR REPLACING IT AND ALMOST 400 FEET. $200,000, DEPENDING.
A CAPITAL ITEM. WE HAVE BEACH WALKOVERS AND ASSUMING ANOTHER CAPITAL COST AND FINALLY TAKE OVER ANOTHER 800,000 IN MAINTENANCE AND YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE AND I JUST WANT TO KNOW HOW ARE WE GOING TO PAY FOR IT.
THAT IS A SIMPLE -- YOU ARE GOING TO HEAR THAT A LOT FROM ME. HOW WE GET -- I AM NOT OPPOSED TO TAKING THIS OVER. I THINK IT IS A GREAT IDEA AND A COMMUNITY AMENITY. I THINK IT IS PRESERVED BUT WE NEED TO LOOK AT THE COST CAREFULLY AND FIGURE OUT HOW WE ARE GOING TO PAY FOR THAT COST GOING FORWARD.
THOSE ARE MY THOUGHTS. >> MAYOR LEDNOVICH: MR. GE GEORGE, WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADDRESS SOME OF THESE ISSUES RAISED BY COMMISSIONER ROSS AND COMMISSIONER BEAN?
>> I THINK COMMISSIONER ROSS IS ON THE RIGHT TRACK.
I THINK IF YOU MAKE ANY DECISIONS, I NEED TO GET UNDER AND DO A FULL DEPTH INVESTIGATION -- BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW HOW IT WAS BUILT. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IT WAS DESIGNED FOR SO I REALLY NEED TO DO A -- TO REALLY DIVE IN ON THE ANALYSIS TO DETERMINE WHAT IS ITS USEFUL LIFE LEFT.
IT IS DESIGNED FOR THE CAPACITY IT IS GETTING USED FOR AND THE CONDITION OF THE MATERIALS AND COME BACK TO YOU WITH THE REPORT OF THAT AND AN ESTIMATED COST OF REPLACEMENT COST AND MAINTENANCE PROGRAM BEFORE YOU MAKE ANY DECISIONS ON THIS.
>> MY QUESTION, MR. GEORGE, WOULD BE IN ITS CURRENT, IN THE
CURRENT STATE, IS IT SAFE? >> I BELIEVE SO.
>> DOESN'T REQUIRE ANY -- ANY COATING ON THOSE PLANKS THAT ARE NONSLIP, ANYTHING THAT WOULD ASSIST IN PREVENTING?
>> NO, IT'S BEEN MY MISTAKE WHEN YOU PUT COATING ON A HORIZONTAL SERVICE, YOU TRAP WATER UNDERNEATH AND YOU CAN'T TELL WHEN IT IS DETERIORATING AND ALL OF A SUDDEN IT FALLS APART AND YOU DIDN'T KNOW IT WAS HAPPENING.
>> GOT IT, THANK YOU, SIR. >> MAYOR LEDNOVICH: COMMISSIONER BEAN. PWAENZ PWAENZ THANK YOU, MR. --
>> BRADLEY BEAN: THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.
AND WITH THE COMMISSION AND MR. ROSS, THIS IS A CITY-USED AMENITY. I HAVE READ THE MANY TEST TESTIMONIES CENTS TO US AND I MYSELF DON'T LIVE NEAR THAT PARTICULAR NEIGHBORHOOD AND I USE IT OFTEN.
BUT THE COMMON SENSE APPROACH ARE TWO DIFFERENT OPTIONS.
THE CITY CAN TAKE IT OVER; HOWEVER, WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT THE HOA OWNERSHIP OF IT IS GONE.
THE CITY IS GOING TO OWN THIS AND TAKE CARE OF IT.
THE HOA SHOULD GIVE IT TO THE CITY, BECAUSE I DO NOT WANT THE CITY USING CITY FUNDS TO MAINTAIN SOMETHING THAT IS OWNED BY A HOA. OR THE OPPOSITE.
IF THEY -- IF THEY WOULD LIKE TO MAINTAIN OWNERSHIP OF IT, THEY OWN IT. THEY NEED TO OWN IT AND TAKE CARE OF IT. BUT I THINK THAT THE GENERAL CONSENSUS OF EVERYONE THAT IS E-MAILING ME THAT THEY WOULD LIKE THE CITY TO TAKE CARE OF IT.
I AGREE. MY ONLY ASK THAT WE ARE NOT GOING TO SPEND MONEY TO PURCHASE THIS AND HAVE TO GIVE IT TO THE CITY AND MAINTAIN IT AS A CITY ASSET.
THAT WOULD BE MY COMMENT ON THAT.
>> MAYOR LEDNOVICH: THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER BEAN.
SO -- COMMISSIONER STURGES, DID YOU.
>> DAVID STURGES: I APPRECIATE THAT.
THE ONLY COMMENTS I MAKE ABOUT THAT IS ALL THAT MAKES COMMON SENSE, BUT THE FACT YOU ARE TALKING OF ONE 400-FOOT STRETCH OF BOARDWALK. THE TREES AREN'T WHERE THE BOARDWALK IS AND FUTURE USE AND THE CITY ENGINEER WILL COME UP WITH A COST WHILE HE IS ASSESSING IT TO RELIEVE THE BOARDWALK AND FILL IT FULL OF FILL AND MAKE IT A PATHWAY THROUGH THERE. IF THAT IS AN OPTION, IT COULD BE AN OPTION. IF IT IS NOT, IT IS NOT.
THAT'S MY ONLY COMMENT. >> MAYOR LEDNOVICH: VICE
[00:45:01]
VICE-MAYOR. >> LEN KREGER: IT IS A WET WETLAND. NOTHING WILL HAPPEN WITH THAT.
IF YOU REMOVE IT, IT WILL BE REMOVED.
I THINK THE OPTION IS FINE TO LOOK AT IT.
IF WE TAKE RESPONSIBILITY, WE CERTAINLY HAVE TO HAVE THE HOA, SOMETHING HAPPEN WITH WHAT'S ON THEIR PROPERTY.
BUT, YOU KNOW, I THINK LIKE I SAID, AND THIS SITUATION IS DIFFERENT. IF WE OWN IT, THE PROCESS WOULD BE DIFFERENT. IF WE TONE, A HAZARDOUS THING
AND WILL CHECK IT OFF FIRST. >> MAYOR LEDNOVICH: OKAY,
POLICE POTT. >> THE CITY MANAGER AND I TODAY DISCUSSED WHAT WOULD BE THE -- WHAT WOULD BE THE OPTIONS FOR -- BETWEEN THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE HOA.
THE -- THE BEST OPTION, THE CLEANEST OPTION IS FOR THE CITY TO APPROACH AND OFFER TO TAKE OVER THE PORTION OF THE WALKWAY THAT IS ON THE PRIVATE PARCEL IN EXCHANGE FOR THE HOA DEEDING THAT PARCEL TO THE CITY. BECAUSE IT IS GOING TO BE REALLY HARD TO KNOW -- WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO SPRAY A ORANGE LINE SO THE CITY PARK BEGINS AND ENDS.
THAT WOULD BE OUR OFFER TO THE HOA.
>> BUT BEFORE YOU MAKE THE OFFER.
>> MAYOR LEDNOVICH: COMMISSIONER ROSS.
>> RONALD ROSS: BEFORE YOU MAKE THAT OFFER, WANT TO KNOW WHAT IT COSTS. WHAT LIABILITY.
>> YOU WANT AN INSPECTION BY THE --
>> RONALD ROSS: THAT IS WHAT I WOULD LIKE.
>> SURE. >> RONALD ROSS: YOU ARE TAKING OVER $300,000, $400,000 LIABILITY AND MAINTENANCE AND SO ON. I NEED TO KNOW WHAT IT IS GOING TO COST AND HOW WE ARE GOING TO PAY FOR IT.
>> MAYOR LEDNOVICH: VICE VICE-MAYOR.
>> LEN KREGER: GO OUT AND DO AN EVALUATION AND DETERMINE WHAT THE LIFE CYCLE IS AND WHAT WE ARE GOING TO DO.
LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE WITH THE DECISION, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE BUDGET WILL BE, $306,000. THIS WON'T GO IN THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT UNTIL IT IS BUILT AND THEN VOTE ON IT AND MAKE
THAT DECISION. >> THIS MR. MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS BY NO MEANS IS AN EMERGENCY ALTHOUGH WE TREAT A LOT OF THINGS LIKE THAT. IT IS REALLY NOT.
WE CAN TAKE AS MUCH TIME EVALUATE IT AND APPROACH THE HOA, BUT MY RECOMMENDATION IS THAT WE -- WE GET A REPORT FROM MR. GEORGE. AND WE WOULD REITERATE AND COMMENTS AT A PUBLIC MEETING THAT WE ARE PREPARED -- THAT MR. GEORGE'S REPORT AND PREPARED TO MAKE AN OFFER TO THE HOA. AND I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A RESOLUTION. IN OTHER WORDS, I MAY HAVE MADE CONTACT WITH THE HOA TO SEE IF THEY ARE EVEN INTERESTED AND PUT A FORMAL RESOLUTION ON FOR A VOTE.
IF WE DO TAKE THIS OVER, WE ARE COMMITTING TO REPLACEMENT IF YOU CAN'T AFFORD REPLACEMENT THEN REMOVAL OF THE STRUCTURE
ALL TOGETHER. >> MAYOR LEDNOVICH: SO TO SUMMARIZE, A, WE ARE NOT GOING TO CLOSE IT.
WE ARE GOING TO KEEP IT OPEN. MR. GEORGE DEEMS IT SAFE.
WE ARE GOING TO POST A SIGN, A WARNING SIGN THAT THIS IS SLIPPERY, HOWEVER YOU WORD IT. MR. GEORGE IS GOING TO CONDUCT AN INSPECTION. MISS BACH IS GOING TO CONTACT THE HOA. AND WE WILL PLACE THIS ON OUR WORKSHOP FOR THE 16TH TO REVISIT, IS THAT ENOUGH TIME?
>> NO I WOULD SAY SECOND MEETING IN APRIL REALISTICALLY.
>> MAYOR LEDNOVICH: SECOND MEETING IN APRIL? OKAY. IS THAT GOOD WITH EVERYBODY? THIS IS YES. THIS IS NO.
>> LEN KREGER: IF THE HOA DOESN'T WANT TO DO THAT, THEN THEY WILL BE RESPONSIBLE TO MAINTAIN IT.
>> MAYOR LEDNOVICH: YES, SIR. >> THE WHOLE THING OR JUST
THEIR PART? >> LEN KREGER: THE WHOLE TH THING. IF THEY DON'T DEED THAT PROPERTY TO US AND ALLOW NEWS THAT RIGHT-OF-WAY, THEN I WOULD SAY THEY ARE ASSUMING RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE WHOLE
THING. >> AND I WILL TELL THAT YOU LEGALLY, THEY DO NOT -- IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT WE SAY, SOMEBODY GETS HURT ON OUR SIDE OF IT, THEN IT IS OUR
RESPONSIBILITY. >> LEN KREGER: THAT'S FINE.
BUT THAT IS WHAT LEADS TO PROBLEMS. WE DID MAINTAIN IT. AND I DON'T SEE ANY WAY THEY ARE NOT GOING TO DO THAT. THAT THEY ARE NOT GOING TO ACCOMMODATE WHAT WE ARE ASKING THEM TO DO.
>> MAYOR LEDNOVICH: THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, 4.3.
SO WE WILL HAVE THIS ON THE SECOND MEETING IN APRIL TO
READDRESS. >> I WAS WAITING UNTIL --
[4.3 231 NORTH FRONT STREET PROPOSED RELOCATION]
>> MAYOR LEDNOVICH: ON ITEM 4.3, 231 NORTH FRONT STREET.
PROPOSE RED LOCATION. PLACED ON THE AGENDA BY
[00:50:02]
COMMISSIONER ROSS. >> RONALD ROSS: CAN YOU PUT
THAT PICTURE UP. >> MAYOR LEDNOVICH: YOU HAVE
THE FLOOR. >> RONALD ROSS: THE SUBJECT BUILDING ON THIS IS LOCATED PRIVATE PROPERTY 231 NORTH FRONT STREET IN THE CRA BUT NOT IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
THE BUILDING WAS BUILT IN THE 1920S.
USED AS A OIL STORAGE AND REPRESENTS A TYPICAL STILL HAVE BUILDING FOUND ON THE WORKING WATER FRONT.
THE OWNERS WANT TO REDEVELOP THE SITE -- ARE YOU ABLE TO PROVIDE -- WORKING ON IT? THERE WE GO.
THE OWNERS WANT TO REDEVELOP THE SITE AND APPLIED FOR DEMOLITION STAND SO IN OCTOBER 2020.
THEY GRACIOUSLY CONSENTED TO WAIT UNTIL JUNE OF THIS YEAR AND ASKED FOR A DEMOLITION PERMIT TO FIND AN INTERESTED PARTY TO REMOVE AND RENOVATE AND REPURPOSE THE BUILDING AND I WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE PROPERTY OWNERS FOR THAT GRACIOUSNESS. THE PREMIERE PEOPLE FOR RAZING AND MOVING PEOPLE HAD $100,000 QUOTE TO PUT ON A BARGE AND MOVE IT SOMEWHERE BY. A BLOCK GRANT OF $1100,000 SITTING AROUND TWO YEARS IN THE CITY THAT CAN BE USED FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT THAT CAN BE USED AS PART OF THIS.
I DID APPROACH SEVERAL RESIDENTS AND WHO ANTICIPATE
>> AND WAY OF RECTIFYING THAT AND FINDING SOME INTERESTED PRIVATE PARTY AND THE ABILITY TO MOVE THAT BUILDING AND DO SOMETHING WITH IT AND OF THE COMMUNITY AND INSTEAD OF WAITING UNTIL JUNE AND RUNNING AROUND BRINGING OUR HANDS.
THAT'S WHERE I AM. >> MAYOR LEDNOVICH: THANK YOU, SIR. COMMISSIONER.
>> MY QUESTION IS WHAT WILL IT COST AND HOW ARE WE GOING TO PAY FOR IT IS WHAT I AM LOO LOOKING.
YOU JUST MENTIONED THAT $100,000 QUOTE AND THE TIP OF THE ICEBERG IS COMPLETELY IFLY MOVE IT.
AND WHAT IS THE COST OF MAINTAINING IT ONCE IT IS IN
THE NEW PLACE. >> CAN I THEN A?
>> HANG ON A SECOND. >> I AM NOT SUGGESTING.
>> THAT IS THE BASIS -- >> I AM NOT SUGGESTING THAT THE CITY DO THIS AT ALL. NOT AT ALL, OKAY.
I AM SUGGESTING THAT THE ONLY WAY TO DO THIS IS TO FIND A RESPONSIBLE -- A BENEFACTOR IF YOU WILL THAT WILL BE WILLING TO COME IN AND DO THIS WITH THE PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP WHERE THE CITY DOES SOMETHING AND THE REMAINDER IS A PRIVATE ENTERPRISE. I AM NOT SUGGESTING THAT THE CITY TAKE THIS OVER. SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, I DON'T KNOW IF THE CITY CAN NECESSARILY FIND THAT PERSON.
I THINK THAT PERSON HAS TO COME TO US. AND I AM NOT 100% SURE.
I HAVEN'T HEARD FROM THAT PERSON YET, BUT IF THE PERSON WAS TO COME AND GIVE A PROPOSAL TO THE CITY, I WOULD BE ALL EARS TO HEAR HOW WE CAN HELP. TO SAVE SUCH A HISTORIC BUILDING. BUT UNTIL I SEE THE SPECIFIC PLAN, I CANNOT BE FOR OR AGAINST -- AGAINST THE PLAN AND
I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE FINANCE. >> MAYOR LEDNOVICH: VICE
VICE-MAYOR. >> LEN KREGER: WE ARE UP AGAINST THE WALL ON ANYTHING BECAUSE THERE IS A TIME FRAME.
MOVING THAT BUILDING -- IF -- IF IT IS NOT A CITY PROJECT, THEN WILL BE LOOKING FOR GR GRANTS, BUT THEY WILL NOT COME FOR A YEAR PLUS. YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT USING GRANT MONEY TO DO THAT. THAT IS CITY MONEY BASICALLY.
THE BUILDING -- IT IS 100% RIGHT.
$100,000. COULD YOU MOVE IT AND PUT IT SOMEWHERE, BUT THERE IS REALLY NOT A GOOD PLACE TO PUT IT OUTSIDE OF ACTUALLY -- THE BEST PLACE TO PUT IT IF YOU WERE GOING TO MOVE IT WITH ALL THE ADDITIONAL COST.
THE PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP WILL WANT TO MOVE IT SOMEWHERE WHERE
[00:55:02]
IT IS ECONOMICALLY FEASIBLE. YOU CAN'T GO UP TO -- A PARK -- EMINENT DOMAIN WHEN WE GET IT. AND GO TO B AND C AND D, OTHER PLANS AND YOU DON'T WANT TO SEE IT SITTING IN THE MIDDLE AND PUT WHERE THE GARBAGE DUMP IS. IT WILL BE PARTNERSHIP AND HARD PRESSED TO COME UP WITH SOMEBODY IN THE TIME IS AVAILABLE. UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE IS VALUE HISTORICALLY TO THAT BUILDING.AND I WILL MAKE A POINT HERE THAT SEEMS TO COME UP ALL THE TIME AND KIND OF CLARIFY. THIS PRESENTLY IS A WORKING WATERFRONT. RIGHT NOW -- YEA, IT IS, DEFINED BY THE STATE OF FLO FLORIDA.
>> I DIDN'T SAY IT WASN'T. >> OH.
WE HAVE A WORKING ORDER -- I THOUGHT YOU WERE SHAKING YOUR
>> SO YOU HEAR WE WANT TO BE A WORKING WATERFRONT.
WE ARE A WORKING WATERFRONT. IF THE SHRIMP BOATS COME BACK, I DON'T THINK WE WILL SEE THAT HAPPENING.
AND CULTURE -- CRITERIA CULTURE ISSUES AND WE ARE WORKING THE WATERFRONT AND WILL REMAIN SO AS LONG AS THAT MARINA IS HERE.
>> MAYOR LEDNOVICH: COMMISSIONER ROSS.
>> RONALD ROSS: THE ONLY REASON TO PUT IT ON THE AGENDA IS TO BRING ATTENTION. IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO DO IT, THAT'S FINE. IF NOT, THE BUILDING WILL BE
DEMOLISHED. >> MAYOR LEDNOVICH:
COMMISSIONER STURGES. >> DAVID STURGES: WITH THE SIZE OF THE STRUCTURE AND HOW OLD IT IS, THE VALUE WILL BE IN THE CEILING AND SOME APPEARS THAT COULD BE REMOVED AND INSTEAD OF MOVING THE WHOLE BUILDING, BUILD A WHOLE NEW BUILDING AND MAKE IT LOOK OLD. THAT -- THAT IS MY TWO CENTS, ESPECIALLY WITH THE TIME CONSTRAINTS THAT YOU HAVE.
AND THAT IS THE ONLY PROBLEM THAT I SEE.
BECAUSE EVERYTHING -- IT TAKES SO LONG AS FAR AS MOVING SOMETHING AND PUTTING IT IN AN AREA THAT COULD BE USABLE FOR
RENTAL SPACE OF ANY NATURE. >> MAYOR LEDNOVICH: WAS THE
DEMOLITION PERMIT GRANTED? >> NO.
>> MAYOR LEDNOVICH: OKAY, IF WE DO -- IT IS NOT LIKE --
>> GRACIOUSLY -- THEY WANT SOMETHING DONE BY MAY OR JUNE.
THEY GRACIOUSLY -- SO IF SOMEBODY OUT THERE WANTS TO DO
SOMETHING. >> MAYOR LEDNOVICH: VICE
VICE-MAYOR. >> LEN KREGER: DAVE MAKES AN EXCELLENT POINT. ONE OF THE THINGS THEY HISTORICALLY TALK ABOUT IS THE TRUSS SYSTEM.
CERTAINLY THAT CAN BE REMOVED. YOU SEE THAT HAPPENING IN MANY DIFFERENT PLACES AND REBUILD THE STUFF AND WORK IT OUT ON
THE DEMOLITION. >> OKAY, THIS ONE OF THOSE CITY CONUNDRUM THAT WE HAVE A HISTORIC BUILDING THAT REFLECTS WHAT WAS THE WORKING WATE WATERFRONT.
AND HAS VALUE IN THAT CONTEXT. THE GREAT FEAR, I THINK, THAT HAS BEEN DISCUSSED IS THAT WE INVEST THIS MONEY TO MOVE THIS BUILDING, AND AS YOU MENTIONED VICE-MAYOR, THE TWO SPOTS OF ARE SOUTH OF ATLANTIC. SO WE WILL SPEND $100,000 TO MOVE THE BUILDING CONTINUE TO LAND THAT WE COULD LEASE.
SO WE ARE GOING TO LOSE THE LEASE VALUE.
WE ARE GOING TO PUT THE BUILDING ON THIS LOT.
AND THEN WHO IS GOING TO TAKE CARE OF IT UNTIL WE FIND A COMMITTED BUSINESS INTEREST WHO THEN WILL HAVE TO SPENDS $200,000 TO $300,000 TO RENOVATE THE INSIDE AND THIS HAD A SPECIFIC PURPOSE IN ITS HISTORY.
I THINK ANY COMMERCIAL INTEREST IN THE BUILDING IS THEY ARE GOING TO ADD MORE WINDOWS. SO THE INTEGRITY -- THE HISTORICAL INTEGRITY OF THIS BUILDING IS GOING TO BE ALT ALTERED. BECAUSE YOU CAN SEE THE DESIGN OF IT. IT'S REALLY LACKS FOR ANY WINDOWS BECAUSE IT WAS AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE.
IT WASN'T A RESTAURANT OR A SHOP.
SO -- SO I WOULD LIKE TO PRESERVE THE BUILDING, BUT I ALSO DON'T WANT TO HAVE IT -- DEMOLITION BY NEGLECT.
OKAY. THAT IS THE CONUNDRUM WHERE WE ARE AT. SO COMMISSIONERS, DO YOU WANT TO HAVE THIS -- HAVE A RESOLUTION TO THIS BUILDING PLACED ON FUTURE AGENDA AND -- OR DO YOU JUST WANT TO LET THIS
DIE BY WORKSHOP. >> WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST.
[01:00:08]
>> AND THE CITY MANAGER PUT OUT A MAIN STREET, PUT OUT A RFP OF REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS BY THE END OF APRIL 30, AND IF YOU GET TAKERS, FINE, IF NOT YOU MOVE ON.
>> COMMISSIONERS, COMMI COMMISSIONER?
>> YES, BUT GUILT FURTHER AND POSSIBLY IF THAT FALLS THROUGH TO NEGOTIATE IT WITH THE DEMOLITION AND GET SOME OF THOSE TLAMENTS ARE HISTORICALLY AND
>> CAN WE TAKE A FIVE-MINUTE RECESS.
THE WORKSHOP IS ADJOURN AND WE
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.