[00:00:08]
2021, CITY COMMISSION WORKSHOP. IF YOU WOULD PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
>> THANK YOU. HOUSEKEEPING ITEMS. ALL PERSONAL DEVICES, PLEASE HAVE THEM EITHER TURNED OFF, AIRPLANE MODE, AND SILENT. WE ARE STILL UNDER COVID-19 RESTRICTIONS. FACE MASKS, EVERYBODY.
ABOVE YOUR NOSE. THEY ARE NOT MADE FOR TALKING.
IT WILL SLIP DOWN. IF YOU DO THAT, THAT WILL BE TERRIFIC. AS REQUIRED, WE TREAT EVERYONE WITH INTEGRITY AND RESPECT. SO DURING THIS COMMISSION WORKSHOP, THE COMMISSIONERS WILL HAVE DISCUSSION.
THERE IS NO PUBLIC COMMENT DURING WORKSHOP.
HOWEVER, IF YOU WANT TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT ABOUT MATTERS TAKEN UP DURING THE WORKSHOP, YOU CAN DO SO AT THE FOLLOWING CITY COMMISSION MEETING. JUST FILL OUT A PUBLIC SPEAKING FORM AND SUBMIT IT TO THE CITY CLERK.
DISCUSSIONAL BUDGET PLANNING, ENTERPRISE FUNDS.
HAS THIS BEEN INTRODUCED? >> DO YOU WANT TO DO THE PLEDGE
>> JUST TRYING TO BE HELPFUL. >> MR. ROSS, THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP. I APPRECIATE IT.
BUDGET PLANNING, ENTERPRISE FUNDS, PLACED ON THE AGENDA AT
[3.1 BUDGET PLANNING (ENTERPRISE FUNDS)]
THE REQUEST OF COMMISSIONER ROSS.COMMISSIONER ROSS, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR.
>> THE FIRST ITEM. GOLF COURSE.
>> GOING INTO IT'S BUDGET SEASON.
WE TRIED TO COME UP WITH IDEAS AND TALKED ABOUT THE GOLF COURSE AND THE MARINA TO IDENTIFY FUNDS, TO GO OVER SOME HISTORY AND WHERE WE ARE NOW AND WHAT KIND OF DIRECTION WE'LL GET THE CITY STAFF ON THE BUDGET. JUST SO WE ALL KNOW, THERE HAS BEEN A LULL FOR A LONG -- A LOAN THAT WILL BE PAID OFF THIS YEAR.
THE $110,000 PAVEMENT WILL NO LONGER HAVE TO BE PAID NEXT YEAR. THAT WILL BE OUT OF THE BUDGET.
THAT WAS FOR THE CLUBHOUSE RENOVATION.
THE TRAVEL EXPENSES THIS YEAR WERE $460,000.
THE NET INCOME IS PROJECTED TO BREAK EVEN WITH OPERATING EXPENSES THIS YEAR. THAT INCLUDES THE $220,000 SUBSIDY. OVER THE YEARS, GOING BACK TO 2013, YOU CAN SEE THAT EVERY YEAR THE CITY HAS GIVEN THE GOLF COURSE OVER $220,000. 220-PLUS.
ONE OF THE QUESTIONS FOR THE COMING -- COMING OUT, WHETHER THE CITY COMMISSION IS GOING TO AUTHORIZE ANOTHER SUBSIDIZING OF THE GOLF COURSE EVENT. OR ADVANCE IT.
IT'S JUST ANOTHER QUESTION. THE NEXT ONE, THE ONE DAY TRANSFER FROM THE UTILITY FUND. WHAT HAPPENED IN THE MAST TO MAKE UP FOR CAPITAL LACK OF OPERATING EXPENSES AND CAPITAL NEEDS, MONEY HAS BEEN TRANSFERRED INTO THE UTILITY FUND TO THE GOLF COURSE FUND. THEN BACK TO THE UTILITY FUND.
SO BASICALLY THERE IS A NET DEFICIT AT THE IT END OF THIS YEAR OF $1.5 MILLION, THAT NEEDS TO BE ACCOUNTED FOR.
THE AUDITOR HAS SAID THE SHUFFLING BACK AND FORTH NEEDS TO STOP. ONE OF THE QUESTIONS IS HOW WILL YOU DEAL WITH THAT $1.5 MILLION DEFICIT.
>> MR. ROSS, JUST ONE SECOND, SIR.
RIGHT BEHIND YOU, YOU WILL SEE A SIGN THAT SAYS NO STANDING.
RESPECTFULLY WE'LL ASK YOU -- ABSOLUTELY.
YES, YOU CAN, SIR. THAT'S ALL RIGHT.
MAKE SURE IT'S DISTANCED FROM MISS DUNCAN.
THANK YOU. >> SO THE $1.5 MILLION DEFICIT THAT NEEDS TO BE DEALT WITH. NEXT SLIDE.
THIS IS THE CAPITAL BUDGET. WE GOT TO THE OPERATING BUT WE HAVE TO CLOSE IT TODAY FOR THE GOLF COURSE.
I RAPIDLY WENT THROUGH IT AND I NOTICED THERE WAS NO MENTION OF
[00:05:03]
THE CAPITAL BUDGET. IF ANYBODY IS BIDDING ON THIS GOLF COURSE AND WANTS TO KNOW THAT -- THEY WILL WANT TO KNOW WHAT THE CITY COMMISSIONERS, THE COMMISSION IS WILLING TO COMMIT TO, TO SPEND FOR THE NEXT YEAR. I WOULD JUST SAY THE GOLF COURSE COMMITTEE MEETING, THE GOLF CARTS REPLACEMENT WAS THEIR NUMBER ONE THING THEY THOUGHT NEEDED TO BE FUNDED.WHETHER WE NEED BATHROOMS OR NOT TO BE PURCHASED OR LEASED, IS ANOTHER STORY. ONE OF THE QUESTIONS IS WHAT ARE WE WILLING TO COMMIT TO, IF WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A FEE AND WHAT WILL WE TELL PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO BID ON THIS WHAT THE CITY IS WILLING TO PUT ON THIS. NEXT.
SO THE QUESTIONS, WHAT I'M INTERESTED IN UNDERSTANDING AND THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS, ARE WE GOING TO DO A SUPPLEMENTAL PAVEMENT THIS YEAR -- PAYMENT THIS YEAR.
WHAT WILL WE DO ABOUT THE DEFICIT AND WHAT ARE THE CAPITAL PROJECTS WE ARE WILLING TO COMMIT TO.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT A DISCUSSION ABOUT THOSE?
>> I'LL TRY TO PUT THIS OVER. I AM WILLING TO SUBSIDIZE THE GOLF COURSE F NECESSARY, AS IT'S A RECREATIONAL FACILITY, INTO THE FUTURE. TO WHAT AMOUNT, I DON'T KNOW.
THE UTILITY FUND, WHICH WILL COME UP AGAIN WITH THE MARINA, I THINK -- I KNOW WITH WHAT THE AUDITOR SAID WE CAN DO.
WE NEED TO LOOK AT THE UTILITY FUND.
IF THERE IS $15 MILLION MINUS 4 MILLION.
MY CONCERN -- WE'LL LOOK CLOSELY AT WHAT OUR OPTIONS ARE.
AS FAR AS THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN, I PRUSSED THE PLAN THAT CAME UP THIS AFTERNOOE LOOKING AT AN EFFECTIVE RESPONSE, WE'LL HAVE TO HAVE AN EVALUATION OF WHAT LEVEL, IN DETAIL, MORE DETAIL THAN THE R.F.P., THE SERVICES WE REQUIRE.
SPECIFICALLY, NOTE JUST NICE THINGS, BUT REALLY DETAILED AND GET INPUT. GET INPUT.
THE WHOLE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN, IT WILL BE INTERESTING.
THOSE THINGS WILL HAVE TO BE RATED PRIORITY ALONG WITH ALL THE REST OF THE ITEMS. I AGREE THAT THOSE ARE ALL THINGS WE NEED TO LOOK AT. I WOULD LIKE TO LOOK AT THE CAPITAL IMPROVE PLAN AND PUT IN THE R.F.P. WHAT THE LEVEL OF SERVICE WE WANT AND THE COST TO GET THAT LEVEL OF SERVICE WITH THE R.F.P. DOES THAT COVER ENOUGH?
>> LET ME RECOGNIZE COUNTY COMMISSIONER -- COMMISSIONER
BEAN. >> YES, SIR, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT -- I WOULD SAY IS THE $220,000 IS THAT ALL WE GIVE TO THE GOLF? IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE BESIDE
THE $220,000 PAYMENT? >> THE ANSWER IS YES.
THE REASON THAT THE ANSWER IS YES IS BECAUSE, WHAT I CALL THE SHUFFLE, THE $1.5 MILLION. EVERY YEAR, IF YOU NOTICE THE NUMBER WENT UP EVERY YEAR BECAUSE WE PUT MORE MONEY IN AND THEN SHUFFLE IT BACK IT. WAS BUDGETED FOR $220,000.
AT THE END OF THE YEAR BECAUSE OF OPERATING LOS OF THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS AND SO ON, WE ADDED TO IT BY TAKING FROM THE WASTEWATER FUND. SO IS THE ANSWER IS YES.
>> I AM STILL COMFORTABLE WITH THAT MONEY.
I SECOND. THERE IS AN OPINION IT'S A RECREATIONAL ASSET AND A SLIGHT GENERAL FUNDS IN TERMS OF OUR TOTAL BUDGET IS WORTH TO MAINTAIN A PUBLIC GOLF COURSE THERE. I AM FOR THAT.
IDEALLY, OF COURSE, IF WE COULD CONTINUE TO WORK ON THE GOLF COURSE AND MAKE SURE IT'S BETTER AND BETTER OVER TIME.
I'M STILL HAPPY WITH THAT NUMBER AS OF RIGHT NOW.
WE SHOULD FINISH ADDRESSING THAT.
>> SO NO. 2. I MADE THIS POINT IN THE PAST.
I MAKE IT AGAIN. FOR 20 YEARS, THE CITY TOOK A TOTAL OF $1.2 MILLION OUT OF THE GOLF COURSE FUND.
[00:10:04]
NEVER REPAID THE MONEY. RIGHT? NEVER REPAID IT. SO THAT 1.5 IS REALLY 300,000.THE CITY OWES THE GOLF COURSE 1.2 MILLION THEY TOOK AND NEVER PUT IT BACK. THAT IS REALLY $300,000, UPSIDE DOWN. WHAT'S FAIR IS FAIR.
AS FAR AS -- I SAID THIS IN THE PAST.
I WILL CHEZ IT ONCE AGAIN. THE GOLF COURSE IS THE MOST-USED AMENITY IN THE CITY. 45,000 ROUNDS.
MORE ACTIVITY THAN THE AIRPORT. MORE ACTIVITY THAN THE MARINA.
THE MARINA IS $12 MILLION UPSIDE DOWN.
14.7 MILLION UPSIDE DOWN. YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT A DEFERENCE OF 300 GRAND. WITH A NEED OF 200 A YEAR INPUT.
AN IMPORTANT AMENITY AS THE GOLF COURSE S WE NEED TO CONTINUE TO SUPPORT IT. AS FAR AS THE CAPITAL PROJECTS ARE, I DON'T THINK WE CAN DECIDE THAT IN THE WORKSHOP, BECAUSE WE ARE LOOKING AT CAPITAL PROJECTS IN ISOLATION.
I DON'T HAVE ALL OF THE CAPITAL PROJECTS BEFORE ME TO SAY WE NEED TO DO A, B, C, D. WE CAN'T DO E, F, G.
THE I HAVE THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION, BUT I NEED TO TOTAL PICTURE ON THAT QUESTION. ANYONE ELSE?
MR. STURGES. >> I THINK I'M IN SUPPORT OF THE $220,000. I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT. I THINK ONCE IT GETS ORGANIZED, WHETHER IT GOES TO R.F.P. TO A DISTRICT CONTRACTOR OR THE CITY CONTINUES AND PICKS UP THE GAME, WHICHEVER COMES THE RIGHT OPTION. I'M ALL IN FAVOR OF SUPPORTING THE GOLF COURSE AND GETTING IT BACK INTO DECENT SHAPE.
I'VE TAKEN SOME PHONE CALLS ACTUALLY THIS WEEK ABOUT A COUPLE OF PHONE CALLS THAT THEY ARE HAVING A HARD TIME GETTING STAFFING THERE. THERE IS NOT ENOUGH GRASS GETTING CUT AND MAINTAINED. THOSE ARE THE TWO PHONE CALLS I'VE TOOK THIS WEEK. SO I THINK IT'S TIME TO STEP UP OUR GAME AND TO MAINTAIN. I'M WILLING TO SUPPORT.
THAT'S IT. >> MY FINAL QUESTION -- THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. POINT NO. 2.
WITH THAT UTILITY FUND, THE TAKING EVERY YEAR, DO WE THINK OF THAT AS TAKING? WHAT HAPPENS TO THE $1.5 MILLION IF WE DON'T TAKE IT. I WOULD CONSIDER THAT PART OF THE CITY ASSETS. WHAT IS THE ANSWER TO THAT?
>> THE SHUFFLE OF THE MONEY, WE ARE NEVER PAYING IT OFF.
THERE IS A DEFERENCE ON THE BOOKS.
IT'S AN ACCOUNTING GIMMICK. GIMMICK IS NOT THE RIGHT WORD.
IT'S AN ACCOUNTING MOVEMENT -- [LAUGHTER]
>> THERE IS THE UTILITY FUND THAT HAS ABOUT 14 -- I DON'T REMEMBER THE EXACT NUMBER IN IT. PART OF IT HAS TO BE KEPT THERE FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS. PART OF IT IS TO DO WITH THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT UTILITY FUND.
6 OR $7 MILLION IS ALREADY BUDGETED.
THE CITY COMMISSION DOES SELECT THOSE.
TO MAINTAIN THAT FUND. BUT THERE IS EXCESS MONEY IN THAT FUND. AND WHEN THE UTILITY FUNDS WERE ORIGINALLY BROUGHT, THE IDEA WAS ONCE IT WAS PAID OFF THAT WOULD BE A CASH FLOW THAT COULD BE USED TO PAY FOR NEEDS.
IF YOU GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS, COULD BE USED AS A SOURCE FOR FUNDING. DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION?
>> YES. I KNOW WE CAN'T -- THAT'S SOMETHING WE DON'T. BUT, NO.
MY POINT BEING IS THAT IN IT IS CASH FLOW, IS THERE A POSITIVE COMING OUT AT ONE POINT. I WOULD HAVE NO PROBLEM USING IT
AS A FUTURE SOURCE OF ITEMS. >> I THINK WE'LL DO A UTILITY ASSESSMENT, ALSO, OF THE CONDITION.
I THINK THAT'S THE FIRST STEP, TO DETERMINE WHAT KIND OF WE NEED TO VERIFY THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT, WHICH WILL ALLOW TOYS MAKE THAT DECISION TO MOVE MONEY.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THE GOLF COURSE?
[00:15:01]
>> SO MY THOUGHTS ON THE $220,000.
I THINK THAT'S REASONABLE AS FAR AS THE PLACEMENT, THAT IF THERE IS ENOUGH MONEY, WE ARE SURE WE HAVE ENOUGH MONEY GOING FORWARD TO FUND THAT SYSTEM, THAT'S A REASONABLE PLACE TO PUT MONEY FOR. THE CONCERN IS THAT IF YOU ARE BIDDING THIS OUT TO MEDIUM TO BID ON THIS -- OUT TO PEOPLE TO BID ON THIS, ONE OF THE QUESTION THAT WILL BE ASKED WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO PUT INTO THIS OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS, THREE YEARS, WHATEVER. WHAT DO YOU EXPECT US TO PUT INTO IT? WITHOUT ANSWERING -- I KNOW IT'S PREMATURE BECAUSE YOU ARE NOT LOOKING AT THE OTHER THINGS, BUT YOU ARE SAYING "HERE IS WHAT WE WANT YOU TO DO." WHAT ARE WE WILLING TO DO? SO I'M WONDERING HOW WE APPROACH THIS ISSUE. THAT'S ARE MY THOUGHTS.
>> CAN I ANSWER THAT? >> SURE.
>> SO I LOOK AT THIS PROCESS OF THE R.F.P.
REALLY, TALKING TO EXPERTS. TELLING THEM WHAT STATUS WE WANT THE GOLF COURSE TO BE IN. AND THEN LETTING THEM TELLING US, IN ORDER TO REACH THIS STATUS, I WILL DRAW ON THIS AND IT WILL REQUIRE THIS MUCH MONEY. I DON'T THINK WE KNOW THAT RIGHT NOW. I WISH WE DID.
SO WE COULD MAKE SOME DECISIONS. SO WE COULD MAKE SOME COMMITMENTS. BUT UNTIL WE KNOW THAT, I DON'T
THINK WE CAN DECIDE. >> THE GOLF COURSE, THIS IS SIGNIFICANTLY MORE THAN WE ARE PUTTING INTO IT RIGHT NOW.
I'M NOT AN EXPERT. I THINK THAT'S -- HOPEFULLY I'M
RIGHT. >> I THINK YOU ARE CORRECT.
ANECDOTALLY, I HAVE A FRIEND WHO HAS A BEACH HOUSE HERE FROM MY FORMER COMPANY, WHO PLAYED THE GOLF COURSE.
UNBIASED OPINION. HE FELT RIPPED OFF.
HE PLAYED THE SOUTH NINE AND SAID IT WAS AWFUL.
THIS WAS TWO WEEKS AGO. THAT'S UNSOLICITED, UNBIASED REVIEW. IT NEEDS WORK.
IT NEEDS WORK. >> I WILL MOVE ON THIS AND ALSO A SECOND. THE QUESTION IS WHERE IS ALL OF THIS EXTRA MONEY? I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, PARTICULARLY IF YOU WANT TO CUT TAXES AND ALL OF THIS MONEY WE KNOW WE SPENT THIS YEAR AND WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT IS SPENDING MORE NEXT YEAR. AT SOME POINT WE HAVE TO COME UP
WITH HOW WE WILL DO THAT. >> THE THING WE NEED TO APPROACH, THE R.F.P. PROVIDES DETAIL -- REALLY, MORE DETAIL THAN ANY LEVEL WE EXPECT. THERE ARE MANY MODELS OUT THERE.
THE NATIONAL PARKS SERVICE. THAT GOES INTO THE R.F.P.
THEY WILL RESPOND ON WHAT IT TAKES TO MAINTAIN THAT.
WE'LL GET IT BACK IN AND WE'LL SELECT R.F.P. ON THE BASIC OF THE NEEDS OF THE CITY AND WE CAN NEGOTIATE.
THAT'S WHEN WE DETERMINE WHAT OUR LEVELS ARE AND WE'LL HAVE MORE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT. SO I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT WE DO IT THIS WAY. TIME BECOMES CRITICAL.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? >> MR. MAYOR? JUST TO CLARIFY. IF YOU WILL BE REMINDED ON YOUR MOUSE PADS, ONE OF THE GOALS WE ESTABLISHED WAS DETERMINING THE RESOLUTION OF THE GOLF COURSE OUTSTANDING DEBT BY JULY 27 OF THIS YEAR. STAFF WILL CONTINUE TO WORK ON OPTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR YOU TO ADDRESS THAT ISSUE, WHICH INCLUDES NO. 2, THE $1.5 MILLION CONTINUING CASH FLOW DEFICIT.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> YES, SIR, YOU STILL HAVE THE
FLOOR. >> THE CURRENT FORECAST OF THE MARINA WITH OUR NEW OPERATOR IS $400,000 CASH FLOW POSITIVE.
THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE DEBT PAYMENT.
CERTAINLY WELCOME NEWS. THAT'S AN ESTIMATE.
THE MARINA PORTION OF THE MARINA NEEDS TO BE DREDGED IN NOVEMBER.
[00:20:02]
THAT'S THIS YEAR. AND THE COST IS GOING TO BE $700,000, PLUS OR MINUS. THERE IS $198,000 THAT WILL COME OUT OF THAT. NEXT.AGAIN, GOING BACK TO THE DIRECT PAYMENTS MADE SIMILAR TO THE GOLF COURSE. THOSE ARE THE NUMBERS THAT HAVE BEEN PAID OVER THE YEARS TO THE MARINA, AS A DIRECT SUBSIDY.
NEXT. THE MARINA HAS RACKED A LITTLE IN THE CASH FLOW TRANSFER, THE ONE DAY TRANSFER IS PREDICTED TO BE $2.8 MILLION AND THAT GOES BACK, MR. BEAN SAID THE SAME THING, MONEY WAS PUSHED BACK AND FORTH.
THAT IS HOW THE BOOKS WERE BALANCED.
NEXT. SO IF WE GET A PAYBACK, THE 2800 AMORTIZED, IT WILL BE $187,000. WE HAVE CAPITAL BUDGET, BEGGING, THIS ISN'T REALLY A CAPITAL EXPENSE.
FOR THIS YEAR THAT WOULD BE $500,000 EXPENSE FOR THE CITY TO HAVE TO COME UP WITH IN THE NEXT BUDGET.
THOSE WILL BE THE CAPITAL EXPENSES, WITH THE DREDGE.
>> IS THAT BEFORE THE GRANT. BEFORE THAT 12?
>> THAT IS, YES. >> THAT SAMENT REFLECTED?
>> NEXT ONE? WHAT WE THOUGHT WE HAD DONE, $6.2 MILLION TO THE CAPITAL FUNDING.
THE UTILITY, WE TOOK OUT A LOAN FOR $1.3 MILLION FROM THE CAPITAL FUND. THERE IS A CREDIT OF $8.4 MILLION. SO THE MARINA IS ABOUT --
JUST THE DETAILS ON THAT. THOSE ARE THE DETAILS.
THEY WANT 9.2%. IF IT MATURES IN 2026, IF YOU PUT IT OUT OVER 20 YEARS, THE DEBT PAYMENT IS SIGNIFICANTLY LESS. IT'S UTILITY FUND F YOU PUT THAT OVER 20 YEARS, IT'S SIGNIFICANTLY LESS.
DECREASING THE INTEREST. NEXT, PLEASE?
>> THE LINE OF CREDIT, IF FEMA PAYS IN FULL, WE JUST NEED -- WITH WHAT WE WANTED THEM TO PAY WHAT WE EXPECTED THEM TO PAY WHAT THEY ORIGINALLY SAID THEY WOULD PAY, WE NEED $1.6 MILLION.
IF FEMA DOESN'T PAY, PAYS LESS WE NEED $6.7 MILLION.
SO THE BEST LOWEST DATE PAYMENT THAT FEMA PAYS UNTIL NOW, THAT IS SORT OF THE WORST-POSSIBLE SCENARIO.
THE PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST IS $700,000 A YEAR FOR THE NEXT 20 YEARS THAT WE HAVE TO PAY ON THE MARINA.
THE BEST SCENARIO, THE ESTIMATE IS 20 YEARS OF $345,000 FOR THE NEXT 20 YEARS. ESTIMATES.
SO, AGAIN, THERE IS AN UPCOMING -- DO YOU WANT TO CONTINUE PAYING FOR THE MARINA WHAT IT WOULD BE AT $2.8 MILLION DEFICIT. WHAT CAPITAL PROJECTS WILL WE COMMIT TO. WHAT I HOPE WILL COME OUT OF THIS MEETING IS DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO TO DIRECT BIDS SO WE HAVE A GOOD IDEA GOING INTO THE BUDGET WHAT THAT COST WILL BE. THOSE ARE ESTIMATES.
THE BIGGEST PART OF THAT ESTIMATE IS WHERE THEY WILL PUT
THE SPOILS WHEN THEY DREDGE. >> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.
I HAVE NO PROBLEM GETTING BIDS. LET'S GET THE BIDS GOING AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. SAME THING AS WE SAID BEFORE, I CANT COMMIT TO WHAT PROJECTS UNLESS WE SEE A LIST OF THE PROJECTS TOGETHER. THAT WILL BE THE NEXT STEP.
[00:25:04]
>> LET ME POINT OUT, WE HAVE COMMITTED TO THESE PROJECTS.
WE PUT GRANTS IN. IT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT HERE.
IF WE DON'T DO WHAT WE SAID WE WOULD DO, THEY WILL NOT BE HAPPY ABOUT COMING BACK AND GIVING US MONEY.
WEAVER COMMITTED TO THOSE PROJECTS.
WE'VE COMMITTED TO THOSE PROJECTS.
>> WE'LL PRIORITIZE WHAT WE'VE COMMITTED TO AND SEE WHAT IS
WE CAN'T PRIORITIZE. WE'VE ALREADY COMMITTED TO THEM.
IF WE ARE NOT GOING TO PAY IT, WE NEED TO SAY.
IT'S UNLIKELY WE'LL GET ANY MORE MONEY.
EVERY YEAR IT'S 250,000 FOR THE LAST YEARS.
WE'VE COMMITTED TO THOSE. ESSENTIALLY.
>> HE COMMITTED TO IT. >> I JUST MEANT WE'VE COMMITTED TO ASK FOR THE 250. HOW MUCH GOES TO THE IMPROVE? WE COMMITTED $200,000 WITH 50% NET.
SO WE COMMITTED $400,000. WE DIDN'T COMMIT THE 675 OR WHATEVER. I DON'T WANT TO PUT THE CITY ENGINEER ON THE SPOT. HE HAS BEEN LOOKING AT SOME OPTIONS THAT I THINK IT'S WORTH LISTENING TO WHAT HE SAYS ABOUT
IT'S $250,000, 52 FOR THE MOORING FIELD AND THEN FOR THE DREDGING. 250 WITH A 250 COMMITMENT.
>> WHAT I'M SAYING WE COMMITTED 198, TO MATCH THE 198.
WE COMMITTED JUST UNDER $400,00. WE DIDN'T COMMIT TO DO THE DREDGING PROJECT, WHATEVER, $670,000.
WE HAVE A PLACE -- I WANT TO KNOW WHAT THE CITY ENGINEER'S
IDEAS ARE. >> AGAIN, HE IS STILL REVIEWING WHAT IS GOING OUT. I THINK WHEN HE FINDS MORE OPTIONS TO PRESENT TO YOU, HE WILL BRING THOSE.
NOW HE WOULD GIVE YOU GENERAL. >> I WANT TO SEE THE OPTIONS
>> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE ENTERPRISE FUND? HEARING NONE. YES?
>> I AGREE WE HAVE TO MAKE THE DECISION.
AS ONE OF OUR GOALS. I DO BELIEVE THAT THE ULTIMATELY THE MARINA COULD MOVE TOWARDS THE -- THERE IS ONE OTHER THING I DIDN'T MENTION, BUT I MENTIONED IT BEFORE.
I KNOW HE THERE ARE PROBLEMS WITH -- 700 SOME THOUSAND DOLLARS IN THE MARINA DEBT IS FOR THE FRONT STREET BUILDING.
SOMEWHERE WE NEED TO FIND A WAY TO TRANSFER THAT MONEY OUT.
THINK OF SOMETHING THEY WILL USE.
JUST TO CLARIFY. IT'S NOT QUITE THAT STRAIGHTFORWARD. THERE ARE MONEY ISSUES.
>> IT'S SOMETHING WOE NEED TO LOOK AT -- WE NEED TO LOOK AT.
>> AT THE END OF THE DAY WE STILL HAVE TO PAY THE MONEY.
THERE IS ONLY ONE BIG POT. YOU CAN'T SAY IT'S SOMEBODY
ELSE'S PROBLEM. >> THE MORE WE GET OUT OF THEM, THE MORE THEY CAN MOVE TO PROFITABILITY.
IF WE MOVE THE 700,000, IT -- THE MONEY IS STILL THERE.
>> THE MARINA DEBT, IF IT DOESN'T PAY, WE'VE GOT -- I MEAN, $700,000 A YEAR FOR 20 YEARS.
AND I THINK EVEN AT THE MOST PROITABILITY, AND I HAVEN'T SEEN THE NUMBERS, IT'S CASH POSITIVE $500,000 A YEAR, I THINK THEY WILL BE DOING WELL. $500,000 DOESN'T COVER THAT DEBT AND DREDGING. AND DREDGING, I'VE SPENT A
[00:30:02]
LITTLE TIME LOOKING AT OPTIONS. AS I SAID MANY TIMES BEFORE, THERE ARE TWO TIMES OF MARINA, DREDGED AND UNDREDGED.THERE WILL BE SOME DEGREE OF JUDGMENT ON THAT.
>> BEFORE YOU DROP THAT, HE PIQUED INTEREST IN MY BRAIN.
NORMALLY THE ANSWER IS, THE MARINA NEEDS TO BE PROFITABLE.
IF WE DO GET OTHER PIECES OF PROPERTY, ULTIMATELY -- AND I KNOW THIS IS CRAZY EVEN FOR ME TO SAY THIS.
BUT EXPANDING THE MARINA AND ADDING MORE SLIPS.
THEN YOU ARE BRINGING IN MORE INCOME.
>> FOR A LITTLE AMOUNT OF DEBT. WE'VE ALREADY ASSUMED ALL THE MONEY WITH THE MARINA THE WAY IT IS CURRENTLY.
THE MOST EXPENSIVE PART. >> I WILL ALLOW ONE MORE MINUTE.
I WANT TO GET THROUGH THIS WORKSHOP AGENDA.
>> THAT'S FINE. >> 5 TO $7 MILLION.
>> THANK YOU, SIR. ON TO ITEM 3.2, BEACH PARKING.
[3.2 BEACH PARKING]
THIS ITEM IS PLACED ON THE AGENDA BY COMMISSIONER BEAN.MR. BEAN, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR, SIR.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I HAD THIS ON THE AGENDA LAST MONTH. IT'S BEEN A COUPLE OF PACKED HOUSE MEETINGS. IT'S ADDRESSING A PROBLEM THAT WE SAW IN MARCH, IT'S A REPEAT PROBLEM, AND THE ISSUE IS THAT THE -- AT SEASIDE PARK, THE SIDE OF THE ROAD BEACH ACCESS, THE ISSUE THAT I SEE IS THAT AT 6:0T OPEN FOR THE RESIDENTS TO ENJOY THE BEACH. IT'S NOT OPEN ON TIME.
THAT'S THE ISSUE I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS.
THERE ARE A BUNCH OF POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS FOR THIS.
ONE OF THEM IS NOT HAVING A GATE AT ALL.
THERE IS OPPOSITION TO THAT. AT THE VERY LEAST I'D LIKE TO SEE, CAN WE PUT IN AN AUTOMATIC GATE, ONE THAT WILL OPEN AT 6:0T STAFFING OR NOT. AND THE BENEFIT OF THIS, EITHER ONE, IS THAT WE ALSO SPEND $2,500 ANNUALLY IN WAGES TO OPEN AND CLOSE THIS GATE, LOCK AND UNLOCK IT.
I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT WE CAN DO TO SOLVE THIS PROBLEM. I WANT TO GUARANTEES OUR RESIDENTS ARE ABLE TO GET ON THE BEACH TO WATCH THE SUNRISE.
IT'S IMPORTANT TO ME. >> CAN THE CITY MANAGER TALK
ABOUT THE POSSIBILITIES? >> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.
BASED UPON OUR MEETING YESTERDAY, COMMISSIONER BEAN, I HAD A MEETING WITH MR. GLISTEN THIS AFTERNOON AND RAISED THE DIFFERENT OPTIONS. SPECIFICALLY THE AUTOMATED GATE.
MR. GLISTEN POINTED OUT AT AT THIS TIME, THERE IS NO POWER AT THE SEASIDE PARK ACCESS. WHEN WE POWER THE AIR CONDITIONNER THE SMALL -- AIR CONDITIONER IN THE SMALL SHACK, IT'S A GENERATOR OR USED THROUGH THE GRACIOUSNESS OF MR. STEWART TO RUN POWER TO THAT LOCATION. THE POWER SOURCE TO TAP INTO IS IN THE TRAFFIC CIRCLE. YOU WOULD NEED THAT ALL THE WAY OUT TO THE GATE. THE ESTIMATE AFTER GATE SIMILAR IN NATURE TO WHAT WE HAVE AT THE MAINTENANCE YARD, WHICH IS THE SLIDING CHAIN LINK FENCE S OVER $20,000 FOR ACQUISITION.
THAT DOESN'T GET INTO MAINTENANCE COSTS OF THAT.
THAT WILL BE A PRICEY ALTERNATIVE FOR US TO CONSIDER.
WE ALSO TALKED ABOUT THE USE OF AN AUTOMATED -- JUST A SIMPLE GATE YOU PULL UP, THE BAR GOES UP AND YOU GO THROUGH AND THE GATE CLOSES BEHIND YOU. AGAIN, THERE IS NO POWER AT THAT LOCATION. GIVEN THE TYPE OF VEHICLES THAT GO THROUGH THERE, THE STURDINESS OF SUCH A GATE MAY NOT BE SUFFICIENT TO KEEP PEOPLE FROM DRIVING THROUGH THE GATE OR DRIVING AROUND THE GATE. STAFF, THROUGH MR. GLISTEN, EXPRESSED SIGNIFICANT CONCERNS ABOUT THE USE OF POWER NEEDED
FOR THOSE OTHER ALTERNATIVES. >> WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THAT, I BELIEVE IT WAS NECESSARY, PARTICULARLY MAY THROUGH OCTOBER. YOU KNOW, WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO HAVE IT OPEN WHEN IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE OPEN.
I WOULD SUGGEST THAT THE USE OF PHOTOVOLTAIC MIGHT BE AN
[00:35:02]
INTERESTING POWER SOURCE FOR A GATE.THOSE ARE PRETTY EFFICIENT NOW. IT WOULD BE LIKE LOW ON THE POWER GRID. WE NEED TO RESOLVE THAT ISSUE.
WE NEED TO MAKE SURE. I SUPPORT HAVING IT OPEN FOR RESIDENTS TO GO ON. I'VE TALKED IN THE PAST ABOUT HEADING BACK UP THIS FIRE STATION ACROSS THE STREET.
THOSE TYPE OF THINGS. WE GET INTO UNION ISSUES THERE.
IT SEEMS TO ME WE SHOULD HAVE A BACKUP SYSTEM AND SOMEBODY
CHECKS IT. >> WE HAVE A BACKUP, THE FIREFIGHTERS AND POLICE OFFICERS HAVE THE LOCK COMBINATION.
I BELIEVE SINCE THE INCIDENTS THAT COMMISSIONER BEAN REFERRED TO IN MARCH, WE HAVE NOT HAD ANY ISSUES SINCE THEN.
>> MR. STURGES. >> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.
I THINK THE GATE IS VITAL AND KEEPING IT UP IN THE EVENING TIME. BECAUSE PEOPLE FIND THEIR WAY ON THERE. I'VE HAD SEVERAL PHONE CALLS AND E-MAILS FROM RESIDENTS STATING THAT THERE IS A LOT OF DISTURBANCES AND THINGS BACK IN 2019 WHEN THIS ALL GOT ROLLED OUT. I THINK IT'S VITAL.
ON THE OTHER HAND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THE RESIDENTS HAVE ACCESS TO IT. I THINK THIS IS JUST A MANAGEMENT PROCEDURE MAKING SURE THE A OPTION IS THERE AND IF NOT THE B OPTION. THEY NEED TO START EARLIER, THEN THEY NEED TO START. I ALSO THINK WE HAD A DISCUSSION, WE HAVEN'T FOLLOWED THROUGH WITH IT.
BUT HAVING A CUSTOMER SERVICE LINE.
CURRENTLY I'M NOT AWARE THAT ECONOMISTS.
IF SOMEBODY HAS A PROBLEM THEY EITHER CONTACT A CITY COMMISSIONER, OR THEY CONTACT THE CITY MANAGER.
SOMETIMES. SO I THINK THE ISSUE REALLY IS A CUSTOMER SERVICE ISSUE AS FAR AS THE CITY.
THINGS LIKE TRASH AND POLLUTING. THE REALITY IS IT'S A CUSTOMER SERVICE AND EMPLOYEE ISSUE. AND I THINK SOMEBODY COULD GET OUT THERE AND OPEN THE GATE EVERY TIME.
THANK YOU. >> COMMISSIONER ROSS?
>> I LOOKED LONG AND HARD AT THIS.
THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT THE GATE THERE AND ALL THE OTHER THINGS, I WOULD SUPPORT NOT HAVING THE GATE THERE AND CHANGING THE HOURS. THE BIGGER ISSUE -- I'LL DIVERGE A LITTLE BIT. THE BIGGER ISSUE LOOMING ACROSS US IS THAT THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ARE GOING TO HAVE PAID BEACH PARKING TO A POINT. RESIDENTS WILL NOT HAVE TO PAY.
I HAVE SEEN THE PARKING LOT AT PETER POINT.
A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OF PLATES IN THAT PARKING LOT ARE OUT OF STATE PLATES. IF THEY HAVE TO PAY I THINK THERE WILL BE AN EXODUS OF THOSE PEOPLE MIGRATING NORTH TO OUR PARKING LOTS. SO I THINK THAT IS SOMETHING WE
SHOULD BE TALKING ABOUT. >> COMMISSIONER BEAN, ARE YOU DONE DISCUSSING THAT? I WANT TO GET TO THE PARKING
>> YOU ARE RECOGNIZED, SIR. >> I PUT THIS ON HERE NOT TO DISCUSS THE PAID BEACH PARKING. I WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT, BY SAYING BEACH PARKING, I'VE BEEN THERE MANY TIMES.
I AM NOT IN FAVOR MUCH PAID BEACH PARKING.
IT'S ON THERE FOR THE GATE. I UNDERSTAND THERE WE ARE NOT GETTING RID OF THE GATE. THERE IS NO STOMACH FOR IT.
WHAT THERE IS A STOMACH FOR IS SOLVING THIS PROBLEM.
RIGHT NOW IT'S NOT WORKING. I'M NOT WRONG, THAT BACK UP WAS THERE WHEN WE HAD THE ISSUES IN MARCH.
IT WAS NOT AN APPROPRIATE RESPONSE.
WE HAD NO WAY TO ACCESS THE BEACH.
THOSE PEOPLE MISSED THE SUNRISE. I WOULD LIKE TO EXPLORE THESE OPTIONS SUCH AS THE SOLAR GATES. THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING I'D LIKE TO EXPLORE. I WOULD BE COMFORTABLE DOING SUCH THINGS. IT'S IMPORTANT TO ME THAT THE BEACH IS OPEN AT 6:00 A.M. IF NOT, WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING ISSUE. I'VE SEEN ISSUES.
IT'S HUMAN ERROR. IT'S COSTLY.
IT'S INEFFICIENT. THERE WILL BE A COST TO START UP ON THE GATES WITH THE SOLAR PLANS.
IT WILL TAKE A COST. I BELIEVE IT'S WORTH IT TO MAKE SURE WE RETAIN ACCESS TO THE BEACH FOR ALL.
THAT'S WHAT I STANDS FOR. IF WE CAN GET QUOTES ON WHAT IT
[00:40:02]
WOULD COST TO GET A SOLAR PANEL WITH A GATE.IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE THE ROLLING KIND.
LET'S FIGURE OUT WHAT IT WOULD COST.
HOW MUCH MONEY WOULD IT TAKE TO MAKE THIS SWITCH.
IS EVERYONE OKAY TO GET BIDS? I KNOW WE ARE TALKING BUT IF WE DON'T HAVE NUMBERS IN FRONT OF US, WE CAN SAY IT IS EXPENSIVE, BUT I NEED TO KNOW WHAT THE COSTS ARE.
>> NO BIDS, NOT YET. >> JUST TO CLARIFY.
THERE IS SURGE A SIGN AT THE GATE THAT SAYS, IF THERE ARE GATE ISSUES, CALL POLICE DISPATCH."
THAT SIGN IS THERE. >> NO ONE EVER USES THAT.
>> BUT TO SAY THERE IS NOT AN OPTION.
THERE IS AN OPTION POSTING ON FACEBOOK IS NOT A RESPONSE.
THERE IS A SIGN THAT SAYS IF THERE IS A GATE ISSUE, CALL THIS
NUMBER. >> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.
I UNDERSTAND THERE IS A NUMBER THERE.
I UNDERSTAND THE NUMBER IS THERE.
I WOULD LIKE TO GET THIS OPENED. IF WE COULD MAKE IT AUTOMATED, I'M IN. [LAUGHTER]
>> HELP ME UNDERSTAND. IF THERE IS A NUMBER THERE.
AND THE GATE ISN'T OPEN. SOMEBODY CAN BE THERE IN 10 OR 15 MINUTES IF THEY CALL THE NUMBER, WHAT IS WRONG WITH THAT? HELP ME UNDERSTAND WHY THAT IS NOT OKAY? IS IT 15, 20 MINUTES OR IS IT HALF APPEAR HOUR.
HALF AN HOUR IS SIMPLY TOO LONG. I HAD A FULL-TIME JOB.
I WOULD GO OFFER TO THE BEACH. I LIKE TO SEE THE BEACH AND DRIVE AROUND THE BEACH. SOMETIMES MY BUNCH BREAK IS SO LONG. BEFORE WORK, IF YOU ARE DELAYED BY 30 MINUTES. A, YOU MIGHT MISS THE SUNRISE.
WHAT IF THAT IS WHAT YOU ARE THERE FOR.
TO SEE THE SUNRISE. THERE ARE SO MANY OPTIONS WHERE A 30-MINUTE DELAY WOULD BE DETRIMENTAL TO OUR CITIZENS.
OUR MOST-PRIZED ASSET IS OUR BEACH.
A 30-MINUTE DELAY IS NOT ACCEPTABLE.
>> WHAT IS ACCEPTABLE? >> AN ACCEPTABLE DELAY IS NO DELAY. WHAT THIS DOES, IT TAKES THE HUMAN ERROR OUT OF IT. THIS COMES FROM HUMAN ERROR.
PEOPLE CAN GET A FLAT TIRE ON THE WAY TO WORK.
I BELIEVE THIS IS A CRITICAL APPLICATION OF WHAT IT IS.
THERE IS NO ACCEPTABLE DELAY. THERE MAY BE MALFUNCTIONS IN THE FUTURE. I BELIEVE THIS IS THE BEST WAY.
>> SO BRADLEY, IF IT'S 30 TO $40,000, WHATEVER THE NUMBER IS, SOMEWHERE 2920 AND $40,000 TO GET THIS ARMORED GATE INSTALLED, WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO PROCEED WITH THAT NUMBER?
PUT AN AUTOMATED GATE OUT THERE? >> IT DEPENDS WHAT THE NUMBER IS. THAT'S A LARGE RANGE, 20 TO $40,000. IF IT'S A $20,000 GATE, I HAVE NO PROBLEM. IF IT GOES UP ABOVE -- MY POINT BEING, WE'RE ARBITRARILY THROWING NUMBERS AT SOMETHING THAT I BELIEVE HAS A NUMBER. LET'S FIND OUT WHAT THE NUMBER IS. I THINK IF YOU KNEE THE NUMBER AND IT'S A GOOD NUMBER, IT WILL BE IMPORTANT TO SPEND THE MONEY.
OBVIOUSLY THERE ARE NUMBERS WE WON'T SPEND.
>> ARE WE COMPLETED WITH THE GATE?
>> YES, THANK YOU. >> I WANT TO MAKE A COUPLE OF SUGGESTIONS. ONE OF THE PROBLEMS WE HAD WITH OUR AGENDA IS THAT WE LIST ITEMS THAT WE ARE GOING TO TALK ABOUT.
AND THEY ARE NOT VERY SPECIFIC. SO I WILL USE THE BEACH -- LISTING OF THE BEACH PARKING AS AN EXAMPLE.
NOT TO SINGLE OUT ANY ONE COMMISSIONER.
OKAY? IN TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THIS DISCUSSION WAS GOING TO BE ABOUT, ALONG WITH THE DATE, I ALSO HEARD THAT WE WERE GOING TO TALK ABOUT ON-BEACH PARKING.
OKAY? THAT SPREAD THROUGH THE COMMUNITY. THERE WAS A ALL OF THESE SUGGESTIONS ABOUT EXPANDING THE SIZE, THE AREA OF ON-BEACH PARKING. SO POINT ONE, IF WE COULD BE MORE SPECIFIC WHEN LISTING THE WORK SUBJECTS ABOUT WHAT THEY WILL BE. THAT WAY THE REST OF US CAN BE MORE PREPARED. WE WON'T HAVE A GUESSING GAME.
[00:45:04]
NOT ONLY ON OURSELVES, BUT AMONG THE PUBLIC.THEY SEE "BEACH PARKING." ONE THING I SAW, "OH, MY GOD, PAID BEACH PARKING. OH, MY GOD, NO ON-BEACH PARKING." WE ARE CREATING AN ATMOSPHERE OF FEAR. THAT IS ONE THING.
SECOND POINT. SINCE IT'S BEEN DISCUSSED AMONG THE PUBLIC THAT EXPANDING THAT AREA, I WANTED TO ASK THE COMMISSION S THERE ANY INTEREST. WE ALL RECEIVED E-MAILS.
IS THERE ANY INTEREST IN GETTING A STATE ATTORNEY OPINION FOR STATUTE 161.85 ON WHETHER THE CITY HAS ANY AUTHORITY TO EXPAND
ON-BEACH PARKING? >> BEFORE WE DO THAT.
WOULD YOU MIND EXPLAINING WHAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL WILL NOT
DO? >> AND IT'S 161.58 FLORIDA STATUTES. IT SAYS, AS OF 1989 WHEN THE STATUTE WAS FIRST ADOPTED, LIMITING PARKING AND DRIVING ON THE BEACHES. BASICALLY WHATEVER YOU HAVE AS A LOCAL GOVERNMENT IN 1989, IF YOU ALLOW IT, YOU CAN KEEP WHAT YOU HAVE. YOU CAN NOT EXPAND IT.
YOU CANNOT REDUCE IT WITHOUT A VOTE OF THE CITY COMMISSION.
IN OUR CASE IT REQUIRES 3 OUT OF 5.
WE ORIGINALLY ADOPTED LOCAL LAW HAD TO BE ADOPTED BY A THREE PLUS VOTE IT. REQUIRES, FACEOFF REDUCING PARKING, YOU HAVE TO DO A STUDY. THE STATE LEGISLATURE 1989 RECOGNIZED SOME HAVE ON-BEACH PARKING AND DRIVING ON THE BEACH. THEY AGREED TO ALLOWED THAT TO STAY IN PLACE AND NOT MAKE IT THAT EASY TO REDUCE THE SIZE OF THE PARKING EITHER. I THINK THAT THE STATUTE IS CLEAR. AN ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINION WILL TELL US JUST THAT. IF YOU READ THAT STATUTE, IT'S NOT THAT HARD TO READ. IT'S NOT THAT LONG.
A GENERAL OPINION, WITH ALL RESPECT TO ATTORNEY GENERAL'S, IS ANOTHER ATTORNEY'S OPINION. WITH REGARD TO ANY ACTIONS IN COURT, YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO USE THAT FOR PURSUASIVE VALUE, BUT IT'S A LOT OF WORK. BY THE TIME WE GET AN OPINION, WHICH IS PROBABLY 120 DO 180 DAYS, THE ISSUE PROBABLY WILL HAVE BLOWN OVER. I AM CONFIDENCE NA WHAT THE LAW IS WHAT IT SAYS. YOU CAN'T EXPAND IT OR REDUCE IT WITHOUT A VOTE OF THIS COMMISSION, AND A STUDY.
>> IS THERE ANY INTEREST BY THIS CITY COMMISSION TO PURSUE INCREASING THE ON-BEACH PARKING? I SEE ONE UP.
AND I THINK WHEN WE HEARD THAT ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY, IT'S BEEN FUNDED. I THINK THE ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REDUCES SIGNIFICANT IMPACT BECAUSE THIS HAS HAPPENED IN OTHER TOWNS, THAT THEY RECOMMENDED TO GET RID OF BEACH PARKING. BEFORE WE DID ANYTHING, THEY STUDIED THAT. LOOKING INTO THAT.
>> THANK YOU. >> I'LL BE INTERESTED IN ENTERTAINING IN 1989 WE HAD A BEACH PARKING AND DRIVING THAT
WE CURRENTLY HAVE NOW? >> YES.
>> ANYHOW, I WOULD THINK EXPANDING IT SLIGHTLY WOULD BE NICE. IT'S A SMALL WINDOW THAT WE HAVE NOW TO PARK ON THE BEACH IN THE CITY.
CHIP SAYS NO, BUT OBVIOUSLY IF IT WAS A SLIGHT INCREASE, I THINK IT WOULD HELP IMPROVE THE AREA OUT THERE.
I'M NOT SAYING EXPAND IT INTO A LARGE AREA.
JUST A SLIGHT INCREASE WOULD HELP THE PARKING.
I'VE SEEN IT GET BACKED UP BY 11:00 A.M. ON A SUMMER DAY.
ANYWAY, THAT'S MY OPINION. >> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.
I SECOND WHAT COMMISSIONER STURGES JUST SAID.
YES. >> FRIDAY YOU GOT THE ORDINANCE.
WE ARE IN THE PROCESS, BEFORE SUBMITTING THE TBRANT TO THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE, THE STUDY ASSISTANCE, BACK IN JULY.
[00:50:01]
WHEN THAT STUDY, WE'LL GET MITIGATION TO LEAD TO WHAT A CALLED. [INAUDIBLE] WHICH WILL REDUCE BEACH PARKING. THE MOMENT THE ISSUE COMES UP, SACK SAILOR IS PRIVATE PROPERTY. NORTH OF SAILOR YOU HAVE EASEMENTS, BUT DO THE EESSMENTS APPLY TO INCREASING PARKING? I'M OPPOSED TO IT. BUTCH THE IDEA, WHEN THE LEGAL REQUEST COMES UP, WHENEVER WE DO THEM.I THINK THIS CAN BE BROUGHT UP TO DISCUSS AGAIN, CERTAINLY.
>> I WOULD AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER ROSS AND VICE MAYOR KREGER, I WOULD SEE WHAT THE STUDY IS BEFORE PURSUING THIS IS IMPORTANT. WE SHOULD REVISIT THIS AT THIS TIME. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE COUNTY AND THEIR PAID BEACH PARKING AND ITS IMPACT ON THE CITY? VICE MAYOR?
>> ONE ISSUE THAT COMES -- THIS JUST CAME UP BEFORE.
EVERYTHING THAT WE START WITH HAS TO BE EQUAL RIGHTS BASED ON -- IT TALKS ABOUT THE U.S. CORPS OF ENGINEERS.
WE CANNOT -- I THINK IT IS A BIG ISSUE THAT WILL COME UP.
BUT WE CANNOT DISCRIMINATE. WE ALLOW THE CORPS TO HAVE SPACES AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC, WHO PAID FOR THE FEDS, 79% AND 90% OF THAT BEACH. SO WE SHOULDN'T GET TOO UPSET ABOUT ISSUES ON THE BEACHES BECAUSE THEY PAID FOR OUR BEACHES. I UNDERSTAND CHIP'S CONCERN.
AS WE MOVE FORWARD, HOPEFULLY WE CAN WORK EFFECTUALLY WITH THE COUNTY. WE WROTE A LETTER, ALONG WITH THE BEACH MANAGEMENT FILES, SO THEY UNDERSTAND THAT WE HAVE A UNIQUE SITUATION. IT IS INTERESTING.
>> COMMISSIONER ROSS. >> I'M NOTE ADVOCATING PAID BEACH PARKING ONE WAY OR ANOTHER.
IF THEY DO, THAT THERE WILL BE CONSEQUENCES IN THE CITY.
WE NEED TO START THINKING ABOUT HOW WE WILL DO THAT.
I WOULD SAY HAVING PAID PARKING WAS THE ANSWER.
THERE IS NO PLACE TO PARK, GUYS. NEAR THE WATER.
I MEAN WE CAN START LOOKING AT DOING SATELLITE PARKING AND SOME KIND OF TRANSPORTATION BACK AND FORTH.
WE NEED TO LOOK AT SOMETHING. ON HOLIDAY WEEKENDS, WE GO AROUND 2:00 IN THE AFTERNOON, ALL OF THE PARKING LOT ARE 100% FULL. THERE IS 175 CARS PARKING AT THE OTHER. AS I POINTED OUT, TWO MEETINGS AGO, WHILE IT'S EXPANDING, PEOPLE WILL BE COMING OVER AND USING THE BEACH. WE NEED TO START LOOKING AT WHAT ARE THE ALTERNATIVES. IF OUR RESIDENTS CAN'T PARK AT THE BEACH BECAUSE THEY ARE PUSHED OUT BY EVERYBODY ELSE, THEY WON'T BE HAPPY. WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT SOMETHING.
>> COMMISSIONER BEAN? >> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.
IF THE COUNTY DOES GO FORWARD TO PAID PARKING AND EVERYONE STARTS COMING TO THE CITY. I SAY LET THE PEOPLE COME.
WE ARE READY. I THINK THE CITY HAS OPEN ARMS. I WANT TO DO RIGHT BY OUR CITIZENS.
I CAN'T CHARGE THEM. >> TO WRAP THIS UP.
THE REALITY IS -- YOU HEAR ABOUT PARKING ALL THE TIME.
THIS IS AN ITEM. WE HAVE REACHED THE TIPPING POINT ON PARKING. THAT'S END OF STORY.
HOW DO YOU TACKLE THE PROBLEM? YOU HAVE ALTERNATIVES.
I LIVED IN EVERY BEACH FRONT COMMUNITY WHERE YOU SHUTTLE TO THE BEACH. THIS ISLAND IS ONLY 2 MILES WIDE AT THIS POINT. SO CENTRAL PARK, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT PROPERTY, SHUTTLE SERVICE TO THE BEACH, TO DOWNTOWN, BACK AND FORTH. WE NEED TO EXPLORE THAT.
AND WE NEED TO PROVIDE THAT SERVICE.
BECAUSE OTHERWISE CITIZENS, OUR RESIDENTS, WILL BE SHUT OUT.
>> BEAUTIFUL, I JUST REMEMBERED SOMETHING.
I USED TO OWN THREE-QUARTERS OF AN ACRE ON THE OCEAN THAT I
[00:55:05]
OFFERED TO THE CITY $120,000. YOU KNOW, 60 PARKING SPACES OUTTHERE, HAVE THE BOARDWALK. >> STEP OUT.
>> IT'S GONE. I THOUGHT I WOULD SAY THAT.
>> ALL RIGHT. WITH THAT, THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT RESPONSE WILL COME TO THE CITY MANAGER AT THE REGULAR MEETING. WITH THAT, WE ARE ADJOURNED
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.