[CALL TO ORDER]
[00:00:03]
MEETING OF MADAM CLERK, WE PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
MARY LEIBOVICH, YOU'RE VICE MAYOR.
YOU'RE GOING TO BE HERE, MR. ROSS. MR. STURGIS HERE.
CELL PHONES ON SILENT, PLEASE.
FOR AIRPLANE MODE WOULD BE APPRECIATED.
SO TAKE ANY MEASURES YOU NEED TO PROTECT YOUR HEALTH AND SAFETY AND DECORUM.
OF COURSE, WE WILL CONDUCT OURSELVES PROFESSIONALLY DURING THE MEETING.
[4.1 2005 CRA Plan Objectives & Strategies]
SO. SO WE HAVE JOINT CHAIRS.SO THIS IS THIS IS NOT A MEETING.
WHAT WE'LL WHAT WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO IS WE'RE GOING TO TALK BECAUSE FROM YOUR JUNE MEETING AND THEN SUBSEQUENTLY THE PLANNED MEETING OF THE C.R.
AND THE CRABB BEFORE THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE THAT WENT OFF THE TRACKS BETWEEN THOSE TWO EVENTS, THERE IS A LOT OF MISUNDERSTANDING THERE.
THERE ARE CONCERNS THAT WERE RAISED THAT NEED TO BE RAISED BY THIS GROUP BEFORE THIS GROUP DISCUSS THOSE.
AND WE NEED TO FIND SOLUTIONS TO THE CONCERNS.
HOW DO WE PUT THIS TRAIN BACK ON THE TRACKS? HOW DO WE MOVE FORWARD? THOSE ARE THOSE ARE THE THOSE ARE THE OUTCOMES I'M LOOKING FOR COMMITTEE MEMBERS, COMMISSIONERS AND THE OTHER OUTCOMES THAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR.
SO WE HAVE CONSENSUS AROUND WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO WHILE WE'RE SITTING HERE.
WELL, I AGREE. WE NEED TO PUT IT ON THE TRACK.
OUR TRACKS NEED TO CLARIFY KIND OF WHAT THE MISUNDERSTANDINGS AND GET IT STRAIGHTENED OUT TO GO FORWARD AS TO WHAT HAPPENED AT THE JOINT MEETING AND HOW THAT HAPPENED AND ELIMINATE THAT PROBLEM.
AND THEN. I THINK THERE'S A NEED TO GIVE SOME GUIDANCE TO THE COMMITTEE AS TO WHAT WOULD BE SOME IMPORTANT ISSUES RELATIVE TO WHERE THEY'RE GOING.
NOW, NORMALLY, WHEN WHEN I'M SITTING UP THERE WITH THE COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE LIGHTS.
AND UNDERSTAND IF THIS BOARD IS DOING SOMETHING WRONG THAT WOULD CREATE SUCH A SENSE OF HOSTILITY.
I'D LIKE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT IS, BECAUSE WE'RE A VOLUNTEER BOARD.
WE PUT HOURS INTO OUR MEETINGS.
OUR MEETINGS GO ON FOR ALMOST 2 HOURS.
I CATCH A LOT OF GRIEF FOR THAT.
BUT WE'RE TRYING TO GET SOMETHING DONE, TRYING TO EDUCATE OURSELVES, TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT IF WE DO PUT A RECOMMENDATION FORWARD, IT'S AN INFORMED RECOMMENDATION AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT HOPEFULLY WILL MAKE A DIFFERENCE.
AND WE'VE TRIED TO GET OURSELVES EDUCATED.
SO WHY DON'T WE START WITH THE IF WE FOLLOW THE ORDER OF LET'S START WITH THE CONCERNS OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS, AND THEN WE CAN GO TO CONCERNS OF THE COMMISSIONERS.
DOES THAT SOUND LIKE A GOOD WAY TO PROCEED? I'M OPEN TO IT. WE'RE GOOD.
THAT'S GOOD. OKAY. AS I TALK TO YOU AFTER YOUR HAND.
SO. SO LET ME TELL YOU WHAT I WANT TO TRY TO AVOID, OKAY?
[00:05:03]
I DON'T WANT THIS TO BE JACKIE'S COMPLAINTS.BUT I'D ALSO LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE OTHER COMMITTEE.
SURE. SO THAT WE ARE ALL ENGAGED IN THIS CONVERSATION.
SO YOU RAISED YOUR HAND, SO I WILL RECOGNIZE YOU.
I'D ALSO LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE OTHER COMMITTEE MEMBERS, AND WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO IS TO UNDERSTAND THE LENS, BECAUSE WE ALL HAVE OUR OWN LENS OF HOW WE SEE THINGS AND UNDERSTAND HOW YOU SEE YOUR PARTICIPATION AND WHAT IS HAPPENING THROUGH YOUR LENS, NOT THROUGH MY BIAS.
DOES THAT MAKE SENSE TO EVERYBODY? OKAY, SO I RECOGNIZE YOU FIRST.
[4.2 CRA Executive Board Comments]
SO AS I SAID, WE'RE A VOLUNTEER BOARD, BUT WE GOT NAMED, I GUESS IN OCTOBER.WE HAD OUR FIRST MEETING IN FEBRUARY.
WE'RE ONLY IN JULY RIGHT NOW AND WE'RE TRYING TO EDUCATE OURSELVES.
WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE SOME THINGS HAPPEN.
WE'RE LEARNING THE PROCESS AS WELL.
I'VE NEVER BEEN ON AN ADVISORY BOARD.
SO IT'S BEEN A LEARNING PROCESS FOR ME AND.
SO WHAT I SAW WHAT HAPPENED AT THE JULY 19TH MEETING, I WAS SHOCKED BECAUSE PRIOR TO THAT MEETING, THE FRIDAY BEFORE THE MEETING.
WELL, LET'S GO BACK TO JUNE 30, JUNE 3RD.
I HAD INTERACTED WITH JACOB PLATT.
HE'S NOT HERE TODAY, I DON'T BELIEVE.
AND WE TALKED ABOUT GETTING OURSELVES READY FOR THE PRESENTATION TO THE EXECUTIVE BOARD.
VERY CONSISTENT WITH WHAT YOU JUST SAID.
I DON'T WANT THIS TO BE JACK MORGAN'S BOARD EITHER.
SO WE TALKED ABOUT IT AND I SENT HIM AN EMAIL AND I SAID, THIS IS WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR BOARD IS TOTALLY ON BOARD WITH WHATEVER WE PRESENT TO THE CRT EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE.
NOW, WE TALKED ABOUT THAT IN OUR MEETING BRIEFLY, AND BECAUSE OF SUNSHINE LAWS, I CANNOT COMMUNICATE WITH MY MEMBERSHIP AND COORDINATE ANYTHING.
CITY STAFF AND CITY MANAGERS DELEGATED THAT TO JACOB TO WORK WITH US.
AND SO JACOB SET OFF WITH THE PRESENTATION TOGETHER AND I SAID, THAT'S GREAT.
MAKE SURE YOU COORDINATED. AND I PUT IT ALL IN AN EMAIL TO TO JACOB WITH A COPY TO DAN MARTIN, A COPY TO KATE NEWTON IN THE LEGAL AND A COPY TO TAMI BOPP.
AND I ASSUMED EVERYTHING WAS ON TRACK AND ON BOARD.
AND 45 DAYS LATER, ROUGHLY THE FRIDAY BEFORE OUR SCHEDULED MEETING, I GOT A PRESENTATION THAT HAD ONE LINE ON A SLOT AND I'M LIKE, THIS ISN'T WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT.
I SAID, THIS IS NOT WORTHY OF PRESENTING TO THE EXECUTIVE BOARD.
AND YOU'RE TELLING THIS TO I TOLD JACOB PLATT, THIS IS IN A PHONE CONVERSATION.
AND I SAID THIS, I'M NOT GOING TO PRESENT THIS.
YOU NEED TO TELL DAN MARTIN THAT I AM NOT GOING TO BE THERE.
AND YOU GUYS CAN DECIDE IF YOU WANT TO KEEP THE MEETING OR NOT.
I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS MY MEETING OR YOU GUYS WERE GOING TO TALK ABOUT ANYTHING ELSE.
I WOULD BE EMBARRASSED TO TRY TO PRESENT THAT.
AND I DON'T WANT TO WASTE YOUR TIME PRESENTING SOMETHING WITH SUCH FLIMSY NO BACKING TO IT AT ALL BY BULLISHNESS, NOT NOT A PRESENTATION.
AND YOU, MR. MAYOR, SAYING THAT THIS IS THE FIRST I'VE EVER HEARD OF IT.
AND UNTIL UNTIL YOU SAID, WELL, THERE WAS A RUMOR THAT I MIGHT NOT BE HERE.
[00:10:01]
AND I WAS LIKE, WAIT A MINUTE, WHY ARE YOU SAYING THIS IS THE FIRST YOU HAVE HEARD ABOUT IT WHEN YOU ACTUALLY HEARD FROM DALE MARTIN THAT I WASN'T GOING TO BE THERE THROUGH THE CHAIN OF COMMAND THE WAY IT'S SUPPOSED TO BEEN, I ASSUME TIMELY? I DON'T KNOW. WE DIDN'T TALK ABOUT THAT.SO IT SEEMED THAT IT WAS AN ATTACK ON ME PERSONALLY THAT WAS UNWARRANTED, THAT I WASN'T THERE TRYING TO SLIGHT THE COMMITTEE IN SOME WAY, WHICH IS ABSOLUTELY WHEN I CALLED YOU, I SAID I APOLOGIZE FOR THE MISUNDERSTANDING BECAUSE I THOUGHT I WENT THROUGH CHANNELS TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU ALL WERE NOTIFIED AND THEN YOU WERE UPSET BECAUSE I TALKED TO SOME OTHER COMMISSIONERS ABOUT THE BUDGET AND MENTIONED THAT.
AND SO THEY'RE AWARE THAT YOU WEREN'T.
SO I WAS I WAS DISAPPOINTED BY THAT BECAUSE I HAD GONE THROUGH THE PROCESS THAT I THOUGHT WAS THE RIGHT WAY TO WORK THIS. AND AND THEN ADDITIONALLY IN THE MEETING, WE HEAR COMMISSIONER ROSS ACCUSE ME OF CRIMINAL ACTIVITY.
OKAY, WELL, LET'S FIRST BACK UP TO OH, I WANT TO SAY, SIR, BECAUSE I'M GOING TO LET YOU BACK.
BUT I DON'T WHAT I DON'T WANT IS A PILE OF STUFF.
I'D LIKE TO DEAL WITH EACH ISSUE.
FAIR ENOUGH. SO THAT MAKES SENSE.
INSTEAD OF LISTENING TO 20 THINGS, LET'S DEAL WITH THESE ONE BY ONE.
SO I WAS JUST. NO, NO, NO, GO.
YOU'RE. YOU'RE FINE. YOU'RE FINE.
SO YOU FELT AN UNWARRANTED ATTACK BY ME BECAUSE I SAID THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I'M LEARNING.
YES. IF THAT'S HOW YOU FELT, I APOLOGIZE.
I APOLOGIZE THAT YOU FELT IT WAS UNWARRANTED FROM MY SEAT.
I WAS TOLD YOU MAY OR MAY NOT BE HERE.
THOSE EXACT WORDS, YOU MAY OR MAY NOT BE THERE.
BUT I WAS NOT TOLD DEFINITIVELY YOU YOU WEREN'T GOING TO BE HERE.
AND WHO WERE YOU TOLD BY? BY THE CITY MANAGER.
WHY WOULD HE TELL YOU THAT? WHEN I TOLD YOU THAT, I HAD TO ASK AND MR. MAYOR AND I CAN COMMENT THAT I WAS TOLD EXACTLY THAT BY JAY THAT I WAS INFORMED THAT HE MAY NOT BE THERE TONIGHT.
I WAS NEVER TOLD DEFINITIVELY.
AND THAT'S WHAT I PASSED ON TO THE MAYOR MONDAY MORNING.
MR. BEAN SAID YOU TOLD THEM YOU WEREN'T GOING TO BE THERE.
AND COMMISSIONER STURGES TALKED TO YOU AND YOU TOLD HIM YOU WEREN'T GOING TO BE THERE.
AND SO MY POINT AND WE TALKED ABOUT THIS ON THE PHONE IS I'M THE CHAIR.
OKAY. SO NOW WE UNDERSTAND EACH OTHER'S POSITION.
AND AGAIN, IF YOU FELT IT WAS UNWARRANTED, I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT.
BUT I FELT JUSTIFIED IN SAYING I THINK THAT'S BAD BUSINESS IN MY OPINION.
AND IF IF THE MESSAGE WAS GIVEN TO JACOB AND IT WAS MISINTERPRETED BY MR. MARTIN, WHY WOULDN'T MR. MARTIN CALL ME AND SAY AS MY LIAISON, JACK, ARE YOU REALLY GOING TO BE THERE OR NOT? LET'S FIGURE OUT WHAT WE SHOULD DO WITH THIS MEETING.
DON'T YOU THINK THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN A NORMAL COURSE OF BUSINESS TO MAKE A CONFIRMATION BEFORE YOU HAD FIVE OF YOUR MEMBERS SHOW UP FOR A MEETING THAT I THINK THAT MAY OR MAY NOT SHOW UP TO? I THINK THAT'S ONE WAY TO LOOK AT IT.
YES. YEAH, I THINK THAT'S A CONSIDERATION, SIR.
ALL RIGHT. SO SO HAVE WE PUT THAT ASIDE? I SUPPOSE, AS MUCH AS WE CAN, YES.
OKAY. WELL, AGAIN, THIS IS ALL COMING TO RESOLUTION AND SOLUTION.
SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU'RE SATISFIED.
ALL RIGHT. SO WHAT'S THE SO THE OTHER ACCUSATION THAT WAS MADE IN THAT MEETING IS THAT I VIOLATED SUNSHINE LAWS, WHICH IS A CRIMINAL ACCUSATION. AND I TAKE OFFENSE TO THAT BECAUSE I'M A VOLUNTEER HERE.
I SENT AN EMAIL TO JACOB AND I COPIED THE CITY MANAGER, CITY ATTORNEY TO THE CITY ATTORNEY'S CLERK AND NOBODY ALONG THE LINE EVER, INCLUDING MR. EVERS. THERE WAS ANY SEMBLANCE OF ANY VIOLATION OF SUNSHINE LAWS AND ACCUSATIONS WERE MADE.
AND I I'M NOT SURE THAT ANYBODY SAID, WAIT A MINUTE, THAT'S TOTALLY FALSE AND MALICIOUS AND SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN MADE.
I WAS SURPRISED IT WENT AS FAR AS IT DID IN THAT MEETING, AND I WAS VERY DISAPPOINTED.
[00:15:05]
AND I'D LIKE THE ASSURANCE OF THE CITY THAT I DID NOT BREAK A SUNSHINE LAW BECAUSE I, I GO TO THAT.I ASSURE YOU THAT FROM THE EMAIL THAT I SAW, YOU DID NOT VIOLATE THE SUNSHINE MEAN.
MEETING? I WAS, YES, I WAS CITY EXECUTIVE.
YES. AND DID YOU SAY THAT AT THE MEETING? NO. WHAT? IT WAS A VIOLATION OF THE SUNSHINE.
THAT I DID NOT VIOLATE SUNSHINE LAWS? NO. IF IT WAS BROUGHT UP AS AN ACCUSATION, ARE YOU DO YOU FEEL ANY REASON TO DEFEND ME AS A VOLUNTEER ADVISORY BOARD CHAIR TO SAY, WAIT A MINUTE, THAT'S NOT A VIOLATION? I THINK THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN THE TIME TO SAY THAT, DON'T YOU THINK? I DON'T RECALL HOW COMMISSIONER ROSS BROUGHT IT UP, BUT I DON'T THINK HE SAID HE'S VIOLATED THE SUNSHINE LAW AND HE SHOULD BE TERMINATED FROM THE BOARD IS HOW HE SAID YOU VIOLATED SUNSHINE LAW TO BE TERMINATED FROM THAT BOARD FOR HIS ACTIONS.
THAT'S WHAT HE SAID. YOU CAN LOOK AT IT IF YOU LIKE.
IT WAS PRETTY CLEAR TO ME AND THEN THERE WAS DISCUSSION THAT WENT ON AS WELL.
SO THAT'S A FAILURE ON OUR PART TO DEFINE WHAT IS AND WHAT IS NOT.
THE CITY VOLUNTEERS THAT ARE COMING TO THE TABLE IF A FALSE ACCUSATION IS MADE AS WELL.
THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. I'M SAYING IT'S A FAILURE OF PLACEMENT THE WAY THAT WE ACTUALLY DID.
I MADE THE CASE SPECIFICALLY ON THAT PARTICULAR EMAIL OF THE FAILURE OF THE CITY TO AND THE CITY MAKING ACCUSATIONS AND FAILURE TO SEND YOU TO RESPOND TO YOU IN WRITING.
BECAUSE ACTUALLY, CHARLIE GEORGE GOT UP AND MADE KIND OF A DEFENSIVE POSITION.
THERE WAS LITTLE QUESTION KNOW IF YOU HAD IF THERE WAS ANY QUESTION THAT THERE WAS A VIOLATION SOMETIME THEY SHOULD HAVE RESPONDED TO YOU THEN IN WRITING, AND THEY DID NOT DO THAT.
AND THAT WAS BROUGHT OUT AT THE MEETING AND I THINK LATER IN CAN TALK FOR HIMSELF.
AND I WAS PERSONALLY DISAPPOINTED THAT WE DIDN'T RESPOND APPROPRIATELY IN WRITING.
AND ASKING FOR INFORMATION FROM STAFF IS APPROPRIATE.
AND IF IT'S INAPPROPRIATE, THEY SHOULD COME BACK AND SAY THAT IT WOULD BE INAPPROPRIATE.
RIGHT. WELL, THEY DIDN'T NEED TO SEND AN EMAIL BECAUSE THERE WASN'T ANY VIOLATION.
WELL, SO BUT IT WAS BECAUSE IT WAS IMPLIED AND THEY SHOULD RESPOND.
BUT THEY DIDN'T RESPOND, RIGHT? YEAH, BUT I THINK WE DID ADDRESS THAT THERE, AT LEAST TO MY LIKING.
AND I MADE A STRONG CASE ABOUT IT.
AND I APPRECIATE YOU STANDING UP FOR THAT.
BUT I THINK, YOU KNOW, AS TO WHAT THAT ACTUALLY DOES ALSO IS BRINGS UP WHAT THE ROLES OF STAFF AND SUPPORT ARE FOR THE COMMITTEE. AND THAT'S, I THINK, ONE IMPORTANT THING THAT WE NEED TO CLARIFY HERE TONIGHT IS WHAT THE ROLE OF THIS BOARD IS, WHAT'S GIVING? BECAUSE THE RESPONSE THAT I HEARD AT THE MEETING WAS HE'S JUST CLERK.
WELL, HE'S THE ONLY PERSON I'VE EVER WORKED WITH ON THIS BOARD.
I DON'T. COMMISSIONER STURGIS, BRIEFLY. SO WHAT THIS BRINGS UP IN MY MIND ABOUT ORDER AND WHO SHOULD HAVE CONTACT OR SHOULDN'T HAVE CONTACTED, WHAT IS THE APPROPRIATE ANSWER? SHOULD HE HAVE MADE AN EMAIL TO DALE? SHOULD HE HAVE MADE AN EMAIL TO CAROLINE? SHOULD HE HAVE MADE AN EMAIL TO YOU? WHAT IS THE APPROPRIATE ANSWER? FROM FROM MY SEAT.
BUT WHAT I THINK IN A SITUATION LIKE THAT, OR A SITUATION WHERE I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT SOMETHING OR I'M NOTIFYING, I THINK OF THE PEOPLE WHO ARE INVOLVED.
SO. SO CITY ATTORNEY, CITY MANAGER, CITY CLERK.
SO I'M TRYING TO CLARIFY THIS FOR HIM.
IF THERE'S ANOTHER SITUATION AND CLARIFY FOR ANYBODY ELSE IN ANY OTHER BOARD, IF THEY WERE GOING TO MEET AND THEY WERE GOING TO DO A PRESENTATION OR A SPECIAL MEETING WITH US, PER SE, WHO SHOULD THEY CONTACT THREE DAYS BEFORE OR FIVE DAYS BEFORE?
[00:20:05]
HEY, WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE PUTTING THIS PRESENTATION.I'M JUST TRYING TO CLARIFY THAT.
YEAH. AND IF THERE'S ANY AND IF YOU'RE MAKING A REQUEST, JUST SEEK THE CHAIR THAT WAY.
I KNOW WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR.
I'M AWARE OF THE ACTIVITY THAT'S TAKING PLACE.
I WASN'T AWARE OF ANY OF THIS UNTIL MY MONDAY MORNING MEETING, THE DAY BEFORE THE MEETING WAS SCHEDULED. BUT AS I STARTED MY COMMENTS, I WAS GOING TO SEND AN EMAIL AND INSTEAD OF SENDING AN EMAIL, I CALLED JACOB BECAUSE I WAS TRYING TO HELP HIM SAVE FACE BECAUSE I THOUGHT IT WAS A BREACH OF.
MY TRUST IN BEING ABLE TO PRESENT WHAT I WAS EXPECTING.
SO I CONSCIOUSLY DID NOT SEND THE EMAIL TO CALL THEM OUT IN FRONT OF EVERYBODY.
I WAS HOPING TO JUST LET'S PUSH THIS OFF A LITTLE BIT.
SO THAT WAS MY JUSTIFICATION AND NOT SENDING IT TO EVERYBODY.
I WAS TRYING TO DO THE RIGHT THING BY THE GUY I'M WORKING WITH AND IT OBVIOUSLY BACKFIRED.
SO I'M SORRY I DIDN'T COMMUNICATE DIRECTLY WITH YOU.
YES, SIR. SO I UNDERSTAND THAT FRIEND OF MINE, BUT WE NEVER TALKED ABOUT ANY OF THIS OUTSIDE OF WHEN WE'RE SITTING HERE. HE WAS ACCUSED OF A VIOLATION OF SUNSHINE ACT.
THAT DID NOT HAPPEN. IS THAT CORRECT? YES. ACCORDING TO THE CITY ATTORNEY AND AS YOU'VE BEEN ISSUED, YOU'VE BEEN GIVEN AN APOLOGY FOR THAT.
THAT IS UP TO COMMISSIONER ROSS.
COMMISSIONER ROSS IS RIGHT TO HANDLE THAT.
ANY OTHER CONCERNS OR COMMENTS FROM THE GROUP? WELL, LISA, SO, YOU KNOW, SPEAKING FROM A MEMBER OF THE ADVISORY BOARD AND MY RECOLLECTION OF THE JUNE MEETING AND THE WAY THINGS ENDED, WE CAME UP WITH A LIST OF FIVE THINGS THAT WERE TO BE PRESENTED TO THE EXECUTIVE BOARD.
AND IN THAT MEETING, JACK HAD ASKED ME IF I WANTED TO TAKE ON THE RESEARCH BEHIND THOSE FIVE THINGS, AND I EXPRESSED THE WILLINGNESS TO ADDRESS ONE OF THEM, WHICH WAS THE COMMUNICATION PIECE, WHICH I DID WHEN THE PRESENTATION CAME OUT THE COUPLE OF DAYS BEFORE THE JUNE FOUR, JULY 19TH MEETING AND THE COMMUNICATION LINE WAS ON THERE, IT MISREPRESENTED WHAT WE SPOKE ABOUT AT THE ADVISORY BOARD MEETING.
SO I SENT AN UPDATE AND A CORRECTION BASED ON MY NOTES FROM THAT.
BUT I DIDN'T ADDRESS THE OTHER POINTS BECAUSE I HAD NOT SAID THAT I WAS.
AND IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT IT WAS ACTUALLY NOT MY UNDERSTANDING AS TO WHO WAS ADDRESSING THEM.
SO I WASN'T CERTAIN ABOUT THAT AT ALL.
BUT I THINK AS WE'VE GONE ON AND WE MET AND EVERY TIME WE'VE STRUGGLED IN OUR MEETINGS TO DETERMINE WHAT WHAT PATH WE'RE GOING TO FOLLOW AND WHAT, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE'RE GOING TO LOOK INTO AND WHAT OUR PURPOSE IS AND HOW WE CAN BE MAKE A MEANINGFUL CONTRIBUTION. I THINK EITHER WE NEED TO NOT EXIST, WHICH IS WHAT I PROPOSED IN THE BEGINNING, BECAUSE I FEEL THAT BETWEEN THE CITY STAFF, THE CRA EXECUTIVE BOARD AND OTHER ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE INVOLVED, PLUS THE PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS THAT ARE HAPPENING THAT ARE NOT NOT EVEN PARTNERSHIPS, BUT THE PRIVATE INVESTMENT THAT'S HAPPENING THERE, ALL OF THAT IS ALREADY WORKING IN THE CRA. AND I'M NOT SAYING THAT EVERY PROBLEM IS SOLVED.
IT'S CERTAINLY NOT. WE STILL HAVE AREAS THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED, BUT THERE IS A LOT OF INFRASTRUCTURE THAT'S BEING ADDRESSED AND THERE ARE A LOT OF THERE'S A LOT OF NEW CONSTRUCTION, THERE'S A LOT OF REHABILITATION.
[00:25:01]
SO I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT THE EXECUTIVE BOARD BE MORE SPECIFIC IN HOW IT IS.YOU THINK THIS BOARD CAN ASSIST YOU IN MAKING DECISIONS ON WHATEVER IT IS THAT YOU NEED TO MAKE DECISIONS ON IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA? OR I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE DO WITHOUT THIS BOARD.
SO IF I HEARD YOU CORRECTLY, BECAUSE I WANT TO REPEAT THAT, WHAT YOU WHAT I HEARD YOU SAY SO AND SO I WROTE DOWN IS IT ADDING TO THE CONVERSATION? AND THAT'S REALLY KEY.
YOU KNOW, IF YOU'RE SPENDING ALL THIS TIME IN MEETINGS AND YOU'RE NOT ADDING TO THE CONVERSATION, WHY ARE YOU WHY ARE YOU DOING IT? RIGHT. MAKES SENSE.
DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEAS ON HOW TO EFFECTIVELY ADD TO THE CONVERSATION? WELL, AGAIN, I THINK I THINK WHEN YOU LOOK AT WHAT IS ALREADY HAPPENING WHEN WE GET.
AND WE'VE DONE THAT PRETTY MUCH IN EVERY ONE OF OUR MEETINGS.
AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, SO I THINK THAT'S ONE THING.
THERE'S A LOT ALREADY HAPPENING, BOTH PUBLICLY AND PRIVATELY.
SO I THINK THAT HAS TO BE ACKNOWLEDGED BECAUSE IT'S NOT FAIR ANY MORE TO SAY.
BLANKET STATEMENT. NOTHING IS HAPPENING IN CRA.
THAT MAY HAVE BEEN TRUE FROM 2005 TO 2019, BUT IT'S NOT IT IS NOT TRUE NOW.
AND SO SO I THINK THERE'S THAT PIECE OF IT THAT I THINK IS IMPORTANT TO RECOGNIZE.
AGAIN, I DO THINK THERE'S STILL WORK TO BE DONE ALONG THE WATER.
BUT, YOU KNOW, IN OUR LAST MEETING, ONE OF THE ONE OF THE FIVE POINTS WAS CHANGED THE RULES.
AND I SAID, WHAT RULES WOULD WE CHANGE? AND THE ANSWER WAS ALL OF THEM.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S PRODUCTIVE.
YOU KNOW, THOSE RULES ARE IN PLACE FOR A REASON.
THEY WERE PUT THERE. SOMEBODY THOUGHT ABOUT THEM.
SOMEBODY MADE A CONSCIOUS DECISION TO MAKE THEM BECOME PART OF THE CODE.
AND SO THAT'S WHEN I START TO SAY, WHAT ARE WE DOING? WE'RE NOT GOING TO ABOLISH ALL OF THE RULES AND START OVER.
SO THAT THAT THAT WAS KIND OF A TURNING POINT FOR ME.
ANY COMMENTS ON ON THAT? MR. NAQVI, I HAVE A QUESTION.
YOU SAID YOU SENT AN EMAIL ABOUT THE LETTER THAT I HAD SENT.
WHAT DID YOU SEND THAT TO JUSTICE? YES, BECAUSE WE ALL GOT AN EMAIL THAT WITH THE PRESENTATION ATTACHED SAYING COMMENTS.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT SAID EXACTLY, BUT BASICALLY ASKING FOR FEEDBACK ON THE PRESENTATION.
AND SO WHEN I LOOKED AT IT, THE COMMUNICATION PIECE IN MY RECOLLECTION AND ACCORDING TO MY NOTES MISREPRESENTED OUR DISCUSSION ABOUT THE COMMUNICATION PIECE.
SO THIS IS WHAT HE SAID JUST BEFORE THIS MEETING.
SO IT WAS WHAT WAS GOING TO BE PRESENTED.
VICE MAYOR, YOU LOOK LIKE YOU GET A COMMENT.
YEAH, I THINK WHAT KIND OF BLEW IT OUT OF THE WATER IN TERMS OF WHETHER IT WAS FACEBOOK OR WHATEVER? THE DISCUSSION ABOUT FILLING WETLANDS AND HOW THAT TRANSPIRED AND ALL THE RULES, I THINK THOSE THINGS ARE EASY ENOUGH.
I THINK THIS COMMITTEE WAS NEW AND THAT GIVES GUIDANCE THAT CAN BE GIVEN.
AND I UNDERSTAND THERE WAS GUIDANCE IN TERMS OF SOME OF THE CODES THAT APPLIED.
I THINK THERE ARE SOME ELEMENTS THAT THAT ARE PRETTY MUCH NON-NEGOTIABLE IN TERMS OF THE COMMISSION AND COMMISSION REPRESENTING THE PEOPLE AND THAT WOULD BE FILLING THE WETLANDS.
I THOUGHT THAT THIS COMMITTEE ALSO WAS WAS LOOKING SPECIFICALLY, MORE SPECIFICALLY AT THE WATERFRONT AND WHAT THEY COULD DO IN PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS OR WHATEVER AND MAKE THE CASE FROM DAY ONE, LET THEM COME UP WITH THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS.
YOU KNOW, YOU'VE GOT SIGHTLINE ISSUES.
YOU'VE GOT WE HAVE SUPPOSEDLY APPLICATIONS IN THE DEP TO TO FILL OUT THERE.
AND HOW DOES THAT ALL APPLY? AND CAN WE EDUCATE THEM AND HELP THEM GET EDUCATED?
[00:30:04]
AND THERE HAVE BEEN COMMENTS SAYING, WELL, THEY SHOULD EDUCATE THEMSELVES.AND THAT'S WHERE I HAD OFFERED TO TO GO AND BE A LIAISON, SIMILAR TO WHAT I DID WITH THE AIRPORT ADVISORY, WHICH WAS KIND OF A MIDDLE GROUND AND NO POSITION OF CLARIFYING WHAT WHAT MIGHT OR MIGHT NOT BE WORK IN TERMS OF THE WETLANDS.
SPECIFICALLY, SIGHTLINES MIGHT BE SOMETHING THAT COULD BE LOOKED AT.
AND I LET THEM COME UP AND SEE WHAT THEY WANT TO DO.
AND THEY SAID RECOMMENDATIONS AS FAR AS PROVIDING THEM INFORMATION.
I THINK WE HAVE TO CLARIFY WHAT SAM IS TO DO AND NOT TO DO.
WE SHOULD BE PROVIDING INFORMATION.
THEY SHOULD GO OUT WITH THEMSELVES.
WE'VE HAD MANY, MANY OF OUR COMMISSION HAS ACTUALLY USED THE FREEDOM INFORMATION TO GET INFORMATION.
EVEN OUR STAFF USES FREEDOM OF INFORMATION.
SO TO HELP THEM GET THAT IS WOULD BE APPROPRIATE.
WE NEED TO DEFINE WHAT OUR RESPONSIBILITIES ARE WITH THE STAFF MEMBER.
BUT I, I THINK THERE IS, YOU KNOW, IF IF THEY WANT TO CONTINUE.
ADD VALUE TO THE PROCESS ON THE WATERFRONT SPECIFICALLY.
NOW THAT'S UP TO THE COMMITTEE AND HOW THEY FEEL.
AND WE'VE JUST KIND OF GIVEN HER POSITION.
BUT I DON'T KNOW HOW THE OTHER MEMBERS FEEL.
THEY'RE NOT INTERESTED IN THAT THEN.
SO WHAT ARE THE OTHER CONCERNS? IF I COULD JUST. YES, SIR.
I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT. I WANT TO ACTUALLY THANK COMMISSIONER ROSS, BECAUSE BEFORE I GOT ON THE COMMITTEE, HE TOOK THE TIME TO EDUCATE ME ABOUT THE 40 ACRES.
AND IT WAS A VERY EYE OPENING TO FIND OUT WHAT EXACTLY BELONGED TO THE CITY.
ONE THING WE DIDN'T KNOW IS WHAT YOU'RE ALREADY INTERESTED IN.
STUFF ABOUT WHAT CAN AND CAN'T HAPPEN.
AND THAT'S AN ISSUE. IT'S A BIG ISSUE FOR THIS GROUP BECAUSE WHAT YOU MIGHT THINK IS PERMANENT, YOU MIGHT NOT. AND UNLESS YOU GIVE US GUIDELINES ON WHAT IS POSSIBLE, HOW ARE WE SUPPOSED TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS? PART OF WHAT WE'VE DONE THROUGH THIS WHOLE PROCESS.
BUT I PURPOSELY PREVENTED MYSELF FROM DOING THIS PRE DETERMINING OUTCOMES.
THE WATERFRONT IS A JEWEL OF THIS COMMUNITY, AND IT COULD BE SO MUCH MORE.
AND THAT'S THE REASON I'M HERE.
I DON'T LIVE IN THAT PART OF TOWN.
I LIVE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF TOWN.
AND IT SHOULD BENEFIT EVERYONE, NOT JUST SOME PEOPLE.
AND THAT'S WHY I WANTED TO GET ON THIS COMMISSION.
THIS ADVISORY BOARD IS TO HELP DRIVE THAT DECISION.
SO WHEN I'M LONG GONE, WE'RE ALL LONG GONE, WE'LL LOOK BACK AND SAY IT WAS REALLY WISE DECISION FOR THE COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE, NOT FOR ANY INDIVIDUAL OR ANY SELF INTEREST. AND AGAIN, THAT'S WHY I AM HAPPY TO SERVE AS LONG AS I THINK I CAN BE PRODUCTIVE, AS LONG AS THE COMMISSION WANTS US HERE. MY MY REACTION TO YOUR JUNE MEETING.
I WATCHED THAT MEETING FIVE TIMES.
FIVE TIMES. THAT'S THAT'S ABOUT 7 HOURS OF MY LIFE.
I LOOK AT THAT DAY AND THERE WERE A LOT OF INFLAMMATORY STATEMENTS THAT WERE MADE. MR. CHACK SHOT. HE'S OWNED THAT PROPERTY FOR OVER TEN YEARS.
NOW, DO YOU THINK WHEN HE BOUGHT THAT LAND, HE CHECKED ON WHAT YOU CAN DO AND CAN'T DO? HE'S A SMART GUY. GIVE ME A BREAK.
YES, LOTS OF PROPERTIES AND LOTS OF DIFFERENT CITIES.
AND YOU'RE GOING TO TELL ME THAT'S THE FIRST TIME HE'S LEARNING.
AND THAT'S REALLY A NON NEGOTIABLE POSITION BY THE CITY.
AND FOR HIM TO SAY, OH, WE'RE STOP DEAD IN OUR TRACKS AND ALL WE'RE LEFT WITH IS A BIG MUD HOLE. NOW, I'M OFFENDED BY THAT.
[00:35:02]
I AM PERSONALLY OFFENDED BECAUSE WHEN HE TALKS ABOUT WETLAND MITIGATION, HE'S TALKING ABOUT MITIGATING WETLANDS SOMEWHERE ELSE, NOT ON AMELIA ISLAND, BECAUSE THERE IS NO OTHER MITIGATION ON AMELIA.AND WHAT HE WANTS TO DO IS A NET NET LOSS OF WETLANDS.
THAT'S WHAT HE'S ASKING YOU TO DO TO MAKE A PROFIT.
SO AND THERE WERE OTHER STATEMENTS THAT WERE MADE DURING THAT MEETING, SO TO SAY THE CITY IS AN OBSTACLE. WELL, YEAH, THAT'S HOW YOU WANT TO LOOK AT IT.
WE ARE AN OBSTACLE BECAUSE THE COMMUNITY IS LOUD AND CLEAR ABOUT WETLANDS.
WE'RE NOT GOING TO ALLOW PERIOD.
END OF STORY. SO FOR YOUR COMMUNITY.
SO YOU WANT TO KNOW THE RULES.
AND I TOLD MY COMMISSIONERS AND I'LL DO IT AGAIN.
IS THERE ANY COMMISSIONER HERE WHO WOULD LIKE TO FILL WETLANDS? RAISE YOUR HAND. ZERO.
NOW, IF YOU WANT TO FILL A WETLANDS, THERE ARE ELECTIONS.
FIND SOME CANDIDATES WHO WOULD LET YOU DO THAT.
FIRST OF ALL, THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY.
THE RULES GOVERNING THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY ARE FLAWED.
IT'S MARSHLAND. IT'S ABOUT THE HIGH WATER.
I MEAN, WHY WHY WAS THAT? WHY DID THAT EVEN OCCUR? I MEAN, THOSE ARE OUTSIDE THE JURISDICTION OF THE CITY.
I MEAN, THAT PROPERTY IS WHAT'S NEEDED.
AND I'M PRETTY SURE THAT THEY WILL.
SO YOU MAY OBJECT TO WHAT THEY SAID.
OUR MEMBERS MAY OBJECT TO IT AS WELL.
WE DIDN'T SAY WE AGREE WITH EVERYTHING THEY'VE SAID AND WE ARE READY TO FIRE IT UP.
WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO DO IS GATHER INFORMATION.
AND THAT PROPERTY IS A LOT DIFFERENT THAN THE OTHER PROPERTIES THAT ARE UP THE ROAD.
WE DIDN'T TELL THEM WHAT THEY CAN TALK ABOUT, WHAT THEY CAN'T TALK ABOUT.
WHAT WE ASK THEM DO IS SAY, TELL US WHAT YOU WANT.
LISA, JUST TO ADD ON, I THINK HE WAS THE ONLY PERSON WHO CAME.
SO I THINK WE WERE GRATEFUL THAT HE HE DID COME AND SHARE HIS EXPERIENCES.
AND TO YOUR POINT, WE DIDN'T WE DIDN'T GIVE THEM GUIDELINES.
AND IT WAS REALLY MEANT TO BE AN OPEN FORUM.
I DID HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH HIM SUBSEQUENT TO THAT MEETING BECAUSE HE MENTIONED CONCERN OVER THE DRAINAGE PIPE THAT COMES UNDER THE ROAD AND THAT IT MIGHT BE CARRYING SOMETHING.
HE WASN'T AWARE OF WHAT IT WAS CARRYING.
AND I SPOKE WITH THE HEAD OF THE STORMWATER DEPARTMENT IN THE CITY AND GOT AN ANSWER FOR THE NEXT MORNING AND CALLED HIM AND SHARED THAT SO THAT HE DIDN'T HAVE THAT CONCERN.
SO I THINK, AGAIN, WHEN THOSE CONCERNS ARE BROUGHT UP, WE CAN ADDRESS THEM AND THAT THAT SOLVED AT LEAST ONE LITTLE PIECE OF OF WHAT HE BROUGHT UP THAT NIGHT. SO I DO THINK THAT'S A GOOD EXERCISE.
AND I THINK THAT ADVISORY BOARD, YOU KNOW, JUST LIKE MAIN STREET, IT'S OFTEN EASIER FOR A PROPERTY OWNER TO SPEAK TO SOMEBODY, A THIRD PARTY, AND HAVE A VERY OPEN AND HONEST CONVERSATION.
[00:40:06]
WAYS. SO IT'S LANGUAGE AND DESCRIPTIVE.IT WAS VERY YEAH, IT WAS VERY ADVERSARIAL.
IT WAS. AND IN THE END, YOU KNOW, IT CERTAINLY DIDN'T TURN OUT THAT WAY.
SO I SAW COMMISSIONER STURGESS AND MR. COOKE. I'LL JUST BE VERY BRIEF.
SO IN THAT AREA, I DON'T KNOW THAT PROPERTY DIRECTLY, BUT THE ONLY POSSIBLE USE THAT I CAN EVEN IMAGINE, I THINK I SEE THIS ANOTHER MEETING WOULD BE A MARINA OF SOME NATURE IF THERE WAS A WAY TO PUT A MARINA THERE.
SO BUT ULTIMATELY, OTHER THAN THAT, I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE'S ANY USE FOR THAT PROPERTY.
SO. MR. COOK IT IS WHAT IT IS.
WHERE'S THE DEBT? WHAT'S THE DEFINITION OF WETLANDS AND TIDELANDS? THERE'S GOT TO BE A BREAK SOMEWHERE.
AND YOU ASK THAT IN THE MEETING.
AND JACOB DID NOT HAVE IT IN THE DEFINITION THAT SPELLED OUT IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT ZONE.
I DON'T KNOW OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.
I JUST FEEL LIKE IF A MAN COULD GET ALL THE PERMITS AND BE ABLE TO FILL IT IN, CREATE SOME LAND UP, BRING IT ALL THE WAY OUT THE SAME WAY AROUND NEW YORK. NEW YORK, MAN, THAT WAS MARSHLAND ADDRESS THAT BASED ON OUT THERE.
BUT THE OVERRIDING SENTIMENT OF THIS COMMUNITY AT THIS TIME IS DON'T FILL THAT IN.
CHRIS? YES, SIR. DO YOU KNOW THAT? BECAUSE I'VE TAUGHT BEFORE AND MET WITH ENOUGH PEOPLE IN THIS CITY OVER MY THREE AND A HALF YEARS OF BEING ON THE COMMISSION TO KNOW THAT.
SO I TALKED TO SEVERAL OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS PRIOR TO THAT MEETING BECAUSE THEY CALLED ME.
THEY DID NOT WANT TO COME IN LIKE MR. SCHACK DID, AND ACTUALLY PRESENT THE COMMENTS IN A PUBLIC FORUM AND CATCH THE WRATH FOR THE UNACCEPTABILITY OF WHATEVER THEY MIGHT SUGGEST. SO THEY SHARED A LOT OF THINGS WITH ME, WHICH I SHARED IN THE LIST, AND THAT DOESN'T MEAN I'M ADVOCATING FOR THE LIST, WHICH IS WHAT I SAID AT THAT MEETING.
YEP, I'M JUST TRYING TO GIVE FEEDBACK.
SO IF THERE'S ANY COMMON GROUND ANYWHERE OR ANY FLEXIBILITY, I DON'T LOOK AT THE ORDINANCES AND THE STATUTES AS INFALLIBLE LAWS THAT HAVE BEEN PUT ON THE BOOKS THAT SHOULD NEVER BE CHANGED.
AND SO WITH THAT ATTITUDE, I'M LOOKING FOR FEEDBACK THAT COULD SAY WHAT COULD OR SHOULD BE CHANGED.
I WOULD NEVER ADVOCATE FOR CHANGING ALL THE ORDINANCES, BUT I WOULD ADVOCATE FOR CHANGING ANY ONE OF THEM OR CONSIDERING CHANGING ANY ONE OF THEM WITH A REASONABLE CONVERSATION. MAKES SENSE.
YES, IT DOES. AND JUST FOR ANOTHER POINT OF REFERENCE, I DID TALK TO A NEIGHBOR.
AND HE SAID, JACK, WHEN ARE WE EVER GOING TO DO SOMETHING WITH THAT WATERFRONT? WE SHOULD DEVELOP SOMETHING OVER THERE SO THAT PEOPLE CAN WALK AND SEE THE WATER AND MAYBE HAVE A COCKTAIL OR FOOD OR WHATEVER ON THAT WATERFRONT.
I DON'T KNOW ANY COMMENTS ABOUT THAT.
SURE. MR. ROSS ACTUALLY, WE PROVIDED A WATERFRONT RIVER WALK AND WHAT'S GOING TO COME UP TOMORROW EVENING IN THE IS THE SEAFOOD.
SO ALL THAT'S ALREADY IN THE PIPELINE.
OKAY. SO SHOULD WE NOT CONSIDER ANYTHING NORTH OF THAT OR SHOULD WE TRY TO DO THE SAME THING NORTH OF THAT? OH, I'VE BEEN ADVOCATING THAT FOR FIVE YEARS.
ABOUT WHAT? YOU'RE ADVOCATING THE BOAT AND BOAT.
AND THIS TIME. I'VE BEEN ADVOCATING THAT FOR YEARS.
I'VE SPENT AT LEAST SIX OR SEVEN YEARS WORKING ON THIS PROJECT, AND I AGREE WITH YOU.
AND THERE'S ONE THING THAT'S HOLDING THAT UP AT THE MOMENT.
THERE'S ONE PROPERTY OWNER THAT'S HOLDING OUT AND THAT'S WHAT'S HOLDING THE WHOLE PROCESS.
[00:45:04]
RIGHT. DO YOU HAVE THE KEY FOR ANY OTHER DEVELOPMENTS ALONG THAT RIVER RIVERWALK SO THAT PEOPLE HAVE A REASON TO GO THERE? I ADVOCATE FOR AND I HAVE FOR YEARS I HAVE LITTLE POCKETS OF THINGS TO HAPPEN.YES, I'VE ADVOCATED THAT FOR YEARS.
I'M SORRY. I MEAN, ADVOCATED FOR TAKING OUT DOING SOMETHING WITH ATLANTIC SEAFOOD THERE SO THERE CAN BE A LITTLE PLACE LIKE THEY HAVE IN THE GARDENS AND PARIS AND EUROPEAN CITIES WHERE PEOPLE CAN HAVE A LITTLE BISTRO.
SO I'VE ADVOCATED THAT ALL CITY PROPERTIES.
I WAS JUST TALKING ABOUT THE OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS.
WOULD YOU SUPPORT THE SAME TYPE OF THING? THEY CAN DO WHATEVER THEY WANT THERE.
THEY'VE HAD 30 YEARS TO PUT WHATEVER THEY WANT THERE.
THEY HAVEN'T PROCEEDED BECAUSE THERE'S NO UPLAND.
THERE'S LIMITED AMOUNT OF SPACE TO DO IT.
I MEAN, THE CITY HAS MADE IT INCREDIBLY SIMPLE.
THEY'VE TAKEN AWAY THE PARKING REQUIREMENT, THEIR PARKING REQUIREMENTS OVER THERE.
BUT THAT'S THE BIGGEST PROBLEM THAT MOST OF THE DEVELOPMENT HAS.
THERE'S NO PARKING. THAT'S WHAT KEEPS PEOPLE FROM WANTING TO DEVELOP THERE.
THERE'S NO UPLANDS TO PUT IN ANYTHING.
NO, I AM OPPOSED TO RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT THAT'S BEEN HASHED OVER LOTS OF TIMES.
I AM OPPOSED TO THE FILLING OF WETLANDS, BUT IT'S GOT NOTHING TO POSE THAT WET.
IT'S NOT WETLANDS. THERE ARE THOSE PEOPLE CAN THEN A PROPERTY RIGHT NOW CAN GO TO THE DEPARTMENT OF THE EPA AND GO TO THE ARMY COURT AND ASK FOR PERMITS.
WHY HAS HE DONE THAT? HE SAID TEN YEARS.
I MEAN, I THE LAST FIVE YEARS, WE CHECK AND SEE WHAT PERMITS HAVE BEEN PUT IN.
NO PERMITS, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF MR. COOK. THE EXCEPTION, MR. KAVANAGH. SO, SO I APPRECIATE THAT A QUESTION REGARDS BECAUSE I'M SURE I VALUE YOUR KNOWLEDGE ON THIS. SO IF IF SOMEBODY PROPERLY WENT AND DID THAT AND THEY GOT APPROVAL, WHAT WOULD BE THE CITY'S POSITION? DEPENDS WHAT THEY'RE GETTING APPROVAL FOR TEN YEARS? NO, NOTHING. SO. SO THAT'S WHAT I GUESS IS WHAT I'M GETTING AT.
SO IF THEY WENT THROUGH ALL THAT TROUBLE AND GOT ALL THAT DONE, THEY STILL MIGHT NOT BUILD A BUILD.
YES, BUT IT DEPENDS WHAT THEY WANT.
I MEAN, THE CITY MIGHT REJECT THEM ANYWAY.
WELL, THEY CAN COME TO THE CITY AHEAD OF TIME AND SAY, I WANT TO DO THIS, AND BECAUSE I'M PUTTING THIS PERMIT IN, WILL YOU SUPPORT IT? NO ONE'S DONE THAT. NO, I SO I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT.
VICE MAYOR HAD A COMMENT AND MR..
COOK, THANK YOU. WELL, RIVER WALK GOES BACK TO PROBABLY 2008 PRE 2008 FURTHER BACK WHEN THE LANE PROPERTY WAS WAS BEING DISCUSSED.
WE'VE DISCUSSED THINGS THROUGHOUT THE YEAR.
MARILYN LIEBERMAN'S BUILDING WAS GOING TO BE A MARITIME EDUCATION CENTER.
WE TALKED ABOUT THE ONE ON ONE BUILDING BEFORE WE KNOCKED IT DOWN.
WE DO HAVE THE PROBLEM IN THAT NORTH END CERTAINLY OF OF THE RESERVE AND EVEN THE FINAL DESIGN WHICH WILL BECOME BECAUSE WE GOT THE MILLION DOLLAR STATE MONEY AND 500,000 GRANT, BUT THAT'S STILL UP IN THE AIR, WHICH IS CRITICAL TO DEVELOPMENT UP THERE.
AND THESE GUYS NEED TO KNOW WHERE WE'RE GOING AND WE NEED TO KNOW WHERE WE'RE GOING WITH THAT.
BUT WE'VE TALKED OVER AND OVER ABOUT THAT.
YOU KNOW, SO DEVELOPMENT THERE IS HAS BEEN TALKED ABOUT FOR MUCH AND THERE'S LOADS OF INFORMATION OUT THERE THAT WHAT WE'VE TRIED TO DO, NONE OF IT COME TO FRUITION.
AND I DO THERE ARE THERE ARE SOME EFFORT TO FILL IN NOW.
AND WE HAD TALKED ABOUT WE HAD TALKED ABOUT FILLING IN AND BASICALLY I NEVER SAW ANY REAL DOCUMENTATION, BUT BASICALLY MY UNDERSTANDING WAS THAT THE STATE WOULD NOT APPROVE THAT IN THE COURT WOULD BE UNLIKELY.
SO I DON'T KNOW WHERE THEY'RE AT ON THAT.
WE'LL SEE SOON BECAUSE APPLICATIONS ARE.
THANK YOU. AND MR. COOK. I'VE HAD ABOUT TEN YEARS WITH THOSE PIECE OF PROPERTY DOWN THERE.
[00:50:03]
AM I RIGHT OR YOU ARE? YOU ARE YOU ARE CORRECT.AND TEN YEARS AGO, THEY HAD FUNDING FOR A PART ELECTION TEAM AND THEY GAVE THE MONEY BACK.
SO HOW HOW HOW WAS THE CITY GOING TO GET ACROSS THESE OBSTACLES TO DO ANYTHING DOWN THERE? WE HAVE REACHED CONSENSUS.
LET ME WELL, LET ME FINISH IT THEN.
WE HAVE REACHED CONSENSUS ABOUT WHETHER WE WANT COMMERCIAL ON THAT LAND.
AND THE CONSENSUS WAS WE DON'T AT THIS POINT OTHER THAN ATLANTIC SEAFOOD.
THAT'S THE DECISION OF THIS CURRENT COMMISSION.
TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, MR. ROSS. PEOPLE KEEP SAYING AND YOU JUST SAY IT AGAIN, THAT THE CITY HAS DONE NOTHING.
WELL, THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY TALKED ABOUT THE DEAD PIECE DOWN HERE, WHICH DID THIS.
NEXT TO IT, HE'S TALKING ABOUT ONE ON ONE FRONT STREET.
WHAT? I'M SORRY. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE OTHER DAY, ONE ON ONE.
ACTUALLY, THE CITY HAS DONE SOMETHING A PURCHASED IT BE.
AND WHAT'S HOLDING UP THE SEAWALL AS WELL IS A PIECE OF PROPERTY BETWEEN THE TWO PIECES OF PROPERTY.
SO THE CITY HAS DONE A GREAT DEAL AND IT'S ALL THE INFRASTRUCTURE.
ALSO, THE CITY IS PUTTING IN THE INFRASTRUCTURE FOR NEW RAILROAD CROSSINGS.
THE CITY IS PUTTING A NEW INFRASTRUCTURE FOR FRONT STREET.
THE CITY IS PUTTING IN UNDERGROUNDING THE UTILITIES.
ALL THOSE THINGS ARE BEING DONE.
AND I REALLY DO GIVE THEM A LOT OF CREDIT FOR GETTING A LOT OF THINGS DONE.
THERE'S A NEW SIDEWALK BETWEEN CENTER AND ASH STREET THAT WAS NEVER THERE.
I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT ANYTHING.
EAST FRONT STREET. I'M CONCERNED ABOUT WEST OF FRONT STREET.
I KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON DOWN THERE AND I THINK IT'S GREAT.
AND IT'S ABOUT TIME SOME OF THAT STUFF HAPPENED.
BUT YOU'RE TRYING TO BLAME THIS ON SOUTHERN PROPERTY.
THAT'S CRAZY. I'M NOT BLAMING Y'ALL'S DOWNFALL.
HE'S NOT THE WHOLE I'M NOT TELLING YOU THAT.
YOU NEED TO GET THAT ON YOUR HEAD.
WELL, WE CAN DISAGREE, BUT THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR, TO DISAGREE.
WELL, YOU DID FORGET TO MENTION WE WE DO HAVE AN RFP OUT FOR ONE ON ONE FRONT STREET FOR COMMERCIAL FOR PROPOSALS, FOR PUBLIC PRIVATE. IT'S NOT OUT YET.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO FEEL. YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO FEEL.
I'VE BEEN LIVING ALL MY LIFE. I'VE SEEN IT WASHED AWAY.
I'LL GO DOWN THERE RIGHT NOW AND WATCH IT WASH AWAY.
YOU WILL FELL BEHIND THE HIGH TIDE LINE.
I AGREE WITH THAT, BUT NOT SEE WHERE THAT NEXT STEP IS.
AND THE CITY HAS A 5500 PIECE OF PROPERTY WHERE YOU CAN PUT A PIER SUPPORTED BUILDING, BUT A BARGE WHICH YOU REFERRED TO OR THOSE ARE THE TWO OPTIONS THAT CAN BE DONE ON THAT. YOU DON'T NEED TO SELL ANYTHING TO DO THAT.
AND THAT IS ALLOWABLE ON THAT 5500 FOOT SQUARE WHERE THE VENTURE BELONGS.
AND THAT'S WHY WE GOT THE MILLION DOLLARS FROM THE STATE LEGISLATURE AND 5 BILLION THOUSAND OTHER.
SO THAT'S GOING TO BE INTERESTING HOW WHEN A PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP OR SOMEBODY COMES IN AND THEY DECIDE THAT, I THINK WE SAID $85,000 A YEAR AND THEY'RE GOING TO BUILD SOMETHING AND WE DON'T HAVE A RESILIENCY ISSUE.
SO. MR. COOK WE'VE GOT X AMOUNT PROPERTIES DOWN THERE, AND THE PROBLEM WITH ALL THE PROPERTIES, EACH ONE NEEDS A DIFFERENT APPLICATION.
MY PROPERTY IS NOT LIKE THE CITY PROPERTY OR STATE, AND MY CONDITION IS DIFFERENT.
I'VE GOT LAND AND I'VE GOT IT BUILT UP AND I WON'T GET AROUND IT.
OR IS THE CITY WILLING TO? KIND OF HELP ALONG WITH WHAT THEY CAN HELP WITH.
[00:55:05]
BUT DON'T DO IT. NOT NECESSARILY BENT, BUT I HEAR.MR. ROSS. WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY HELP? I'M NOT IN THEIR SITUATION.
WELL, I MEAN, TO ME, IF YOU'VE GOT JUST AS MUCH PROPERTY, YOU'VE GOT THE CITY PROPERTY.
YOU'VE GOT TO MAKE THAT CAPTAIN OF THE LIVES PROPERTY THERE THAT SHOULD BE ALL CONNECTED IN UNDER ONE RESILIENT BULKHEAD.
SO THEY ASKING EVERYBODY WORK TOGETHER.
SOMEHOW OR ANOTHER, MAKE IT MAKE IT HAPPEN.
IT'S PRETTY WATERFRONT. I AGREE.
DIG A LITTLE BIT. DO I DO I HAVE THAT CORRECT? YES. THAT SHOULD BE BEFORE THE COMMISSION WITHIN THE NEXT 30 DAYS.
ALL RIGHT. SO THERE'S SOME PROGRESS TO CORRECT WITHIN A MONTH.
CORRECT. MR. GEORGE IS THE PRIMARY POINT OF CONTACT.
WE HAVE BEEN IN DISCUSSIONS WITH ALL FOUR OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS IN THAT AREA FOR SEVERAL MONTHS.
THE VICE MAYOR. THE WHOLE ISSUE IS PRETTY MUCH WHAT MR. COOK SAYING. IF YOU LOOK AT THE RESILIENCY WALL, WE DESIGNED THE ORIGINAL $26 MILLION, 20 MILLION.
IT GOES PAST MR. SIMMONS PAST ONE ON ONE AND ACTUALLY THEN CUTS OVER TO THE RAILROAD TRACKS AND GOES UP THE RAILROAD TRACKS BECAUSE THE ELEVATION ARE DIFFERENT.
AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
WE NEED TO BUILD THAT RESILIENCY ROLLING ALONG THE WHOLE WATERFRONT.
AND THERE'S WHERE YOU THAT IS A BEAUTIFUL WATERFRONT WALK THERE THAT SANDY I THINK IT'S VERY NICE AND THAT EXTENDS THE WHOLE WAY AND THEN THEY CAN AND THEN PEOPLE WILL COME IN AND HOW YOU FUND THAT BECOMES THE WHOLE RISK.
BUT WE ARE WORKING ON THAT DESIGN.
ON THE LET'S CALL IT THEIR FOURTH ARTICLE.
AND I ASKED HIM, I SAID, YOU KNOW, WHY CAN'T YOU DO THIS? BUT HE WAS TELLING ME THAT THEY GO OUT AND THEY SELL BONDS.
AND THAT'S THE REASON WHY JACKSONVILLE WAS ABLE TO DO ALL THESE THINGS TO DO.
AND I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S A TOOL FOR THIS CITY TO DO TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN.
YOU KNOW, I MEAN, WHAT OTHER SIN IS TOO SMALL TO DO IT OR WHAT THE CASE MAY BE? WE HAD AN IN-DEPTH DISCUSSION ABOUT A BOND THAT I REMEMBER.
AND THE REASON THERE IS NOT A BOND ON THE NOVEMBER BALLOT OR EARLY NEXT YEAR IS THERE WAS NOT COMMON GROUND OF WHAT THE BOND WOULD BE USED FOR.
SO THAT'S WHY THAT'S NOT HAPPENING.
IS IT OFF THE TABLE? IT'S OFF THE TABLE FOR NOW, BUT IT COULD BE.
WELL, YOU HAVE A NOVEMBER ELECTION AND WHO KNOWS WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN THERE.
SO YOU CAN HAVE TWO NEW COMMISSIONERS ON THE COMMISSION, AND THAT MAY THAT MAY CHANGE.
MR. ROSS, DID YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING? YEAH, THERE'S AN ASSUMPTION THAT EVERYBODY'S MAKING TO BE ABLE TO, QUOTE, FILL TIDAL WATER, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE. IT'S FILLING WATER.
ALL RIGHT. FILLING TIDAL WATER.
AND YOU NEED A PERMIT FROM THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS WITHOUT THOSE TWO PERMITS.
YOU CAN PUT A BULKHEAD AT THE HIGH TIDE LINE AND THAT WOULD GO THROUGH MR. GOODSON'S BUILDING AND IT WOULD NOT HELP LINEMEN AND SO ON AND SO FORTH.
THE DISTRICT CABINET WOULD NOT HAVE PUT A FEW FEET OF UPLANDS.
SO WITHOUT THEIR PERMIT, THIS WHOLE.
AND MR. SIMMONS, IF YOU HAVE WHAT YOU HAVE BASICALLY NOW.
SO WHAT I THINK THE CITY IS WORKING ON IS TO GO AND DO A PRELIMINARY ASK OF THE CORPS AND ST JOHN'S WATER MANAGEMENT AS TO WHAT THEY MIGHT ALLOW.
DID THEY SAY NO OR IT'S UNLIKELY THAT WE'RE GOING TO ALLOW THIS TO HAPPEN.
[01:00:05]
AND I MEAN HOW WATER I MEAN, HOW CORRECT IS THE METER WHICH IS OUT FURTHER BY A FOOT OR TWO? WELL, I CAN STRETCH OUT ON IT, BUT BASICALLY YOU'RE NOT GOING TO FEEL VERY MUCH YOU CAN STILL TO THAT POINT AND OR REPLACE BULKHEADS THAT WENT UNTIL BEHIND.SO BUT THE WINDOW OF OPPORTUNITY IS HERE NOW BECAUSE YOU'RE TRYING TO DO TWO THINGS.
IF YOU'RE GOING TO DO RESILIENCE AND TRYING TO GET THE CORPS AND THE DPP TO GO ALONG WITH YOU.
THE WINDOW OF OPPORTUNITY IS OPEN FOR YOU RIGHT NOW.
THAT'S NUMBER ONE. AND NUMBER TWO, WHAT? THE CORPS IS NO DIFFERENCE IN THE RESILIENCY.
IF YOU GO FORWARD, THE ONLY REASON TO PUT THAT LINE FORWARD AND TO FILL IS TO INCREASE ECONOMIC VIABILITY OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH IS NOT WHAT THE CORPS OR SAINT JOHN'S RIVER MANAGEMENT USUALLY CONSIDERS AS IS A REASON TO SELL TIDAL.
WHAT? SO AS YOU CAN SEE AND AGAIN, HAVING WATCHED THAT MEETING FIVE TIMES, THE SEAWALL WAS TOOK A LOT OF YOUR TIME.
AND YOU CAN SEE YOU CAN SEE HOW PROBLEMATIC IT IS FROM THE CITY'S VIEWPOINT OF TRYING TO PLAN THAT.
SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT A SEAWALL GOING ALONG THE RAILROAD TRACK, THAT'S WORST CASE SCENARIO.
THAT'S WE'RE TRYING TO KEEP OUT THE BARBARIANS, FOR LACK OF A BETTER DESCRIPTION.
SO THIS IS AN EVOLVING, CHANGING WORK IN PROGRESS THAT ISN'T GOING TO HAPPEN TOMORROW.
I APPRECIATE ALL THOSE COMMENTS BECAUSE I THINK IT'S IMPERATIVE ON THE CITY AND THIS ADVISORY BOARD TO LEARN WHAT IS POSSIBLE, JUST POSSIBLE, EVEN IF IT'S REMOTELY POSSIBLE.
IF IT'S POSSIBLE, WE SHOULD KNOW ABOUT IT BECAUSE YOU CAN'T.
AND WE ALSO HAVE TO KNOW WHAT'S ACTUALLY NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.
AND WHAT I'VE HEARD FROM TONIGHT, WHICH IS WHAT I SUSPECT, IS THAT WE JUST DON'T KNOW.
EVEN THE COMMISSION DOESN'T KNOW WHAT IS NOT POSSIBLE.
AND GOING FORWARD AND PUTTING THE RESILIENCY WALL UP AT DIFFERENT HEIGHTS ALL THROUGHOUT THAT CORRIDOR IS GOING TO MAKE A LOT MORE SENSE.
IF WE COULD DO IT UNIFORMLY, BUT WITHOUT HAVING ALL THE INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT THOSE PROPERTIES CAN LOOK LIKE WOULD LOOK LIKE, IT'S PRETTY HARD TO MAKE A DECISION.
AND SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE ALL OF US TO JUST TRY TO WORK TOGETHER FOR WHAT'S BEST FOR THE COMMUNITY AND THE PROPERTY OWNERS AND NOT BE AT ODDS WITH EITHER ONE.
WHICH IS WHY WE'RE TRYING TO SET THE PLAYGROUND.
OH, I'M SORRY. ONE OTHER SANDBOX.
SO I WILL REQUEST THE ORDINANCES AND EVERYTHING THAT HAS TO DO WITH THE PROPERTIES IN QUESTION.
CAN WE FIND OUT WHAT IS ACTUALLY WETLANDS AND WHAT IS THAT? WETLANDS, WHAT'S DESIGNATED? THAT'S THE TAX MAP THAT FIRST OF ALL, THE WETLANDS.
YOU CAN GET REAL DIRT CHEAP AND DIRTY WAY.
GO ON THE PROPERTY APPRAISER'S WEBSITE.
BUT ALL WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS PROPERTY CAVANAUGH'S PROPERTY AND THE COUNCIL'S PROPERTY.
NO WETLANDS ON THERE. THAT'S RIGHT.
OKAY. BECAUSE I'VE BEEN ON THAT WEBSITE AND I'VE LOOKED AT IT.
I'M WORKING WITH THE STATE IN ORDER TO DO THAT.
IT'S MY PROPERTY. I DON'T HAVE TO.
NO ONE'S ASKED ME TO. THERE'S NO ZONING OR ANYTHING.
I'M JUST DOING IT BECAUSE I THINK IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO.
AND I'M WORKING HARD TO TRY TO MAKE IT HAPPEN.
AND I THINK IF WE CAN JUST TALK TO PEOPLE, LET THEM KNOW ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF THE COMMUNITY, ABOUT HOW THIS WHOLE THING WILL COME ABOUT AND WHAT IT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE TEN, 15, 20 YEARS FROM NOW.
I THINK WE GOT A LOT OF PEOPLE TO BUY IT, BUT YOU CAN'T DO IT FROM AN ADVERSARIAL POSITION.
[01:05:01]
YOU NEED TO DO IT AS WE WORK TOGETHER BECAUSE WHEN WE'RE ALL GONE, IT'S STILL GOING TO BE THERE.I SPENT THE SEAWALL IS IS ACTUALLY IS CONSISTENT.
IT'S THE TOP GRAPHIC OF THE CITY.
SO YOU'RE GOING TO GO FROM 5.2 FEET.
THE SEAWALL STILL GOING TO BE NINE FEET OF.
SO I UNDERSTAND IT'S THE SAME LEVEL AS FAR AS THE OCEANS CONCERN.
THE WATER IS CONCERNED, BUT IT'S GOING TO LOOK TO 7.4.
SO I'M SORRY IF I SAID I HAVE NO ISSUE WITH ANY OF THAT.
I HAVE NO ISSUES WITH THAT. THE ISSUE IS HOW DO WE GET THAT DONE TO IMPROVE EVERYTHING DOWN THERE, NOT JUST PARTICULAR THE BOND ISSUE? YOU KNOW, I HAVE MADE THE. HE SAID I WOULD NOT SUPPORT THE BOMB UNLESS IT WAS FOR THE RESIDENCY WALL PERIOD, WHICH ACTUALLY KIND OF MUDDLED THE WHOLE ISSUE BECAUSE I THOUGHT IN MY MIND THAT THAT'S WHAT WOULD BE PEOPLE WOULD VOTE FOR THAT AS A REFERENDUM.
SO BUT THAT WAS WHAT HAPPENED.
AND YOU WILL HAVE SOME COMMISSIONERS TO THE POINT OF THINGS THAT CAN CHANGE AND WILL CHANGE AND ADVOCATE THOSE IN KIND OF A COLLEGIAL MANNER WITH YOU'RE SAYING, YEAH.
MR. ROSSI. SO ANY ROLE GET YOU THERE IF YOU DON'T KNOW WHERE YOU'RE GOING? SO I THINK THE PURPOSE IS BEING TO FIGURE OUT WHERE IS THE CRIME ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND SO ON.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT WOULD BE ONE OF OUR ONE OF THE OUTCOMES.
SO I'M JUST GOING TO READ YOU WHAT THE PURPOSE OF THE COMMITTEE.
THAT'S FINE, SIR. AND IT'S RIGHT OUT OF RESOLUTION 2012 118.
THE AMELIA RIVER WATERFRONT SIERRA ADVISORY BOARD IS CHARGED WITH THE TASK OF ADVISING THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ON ISSUES INCLUDING IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CRA PLAN.
SPECIFIC CONSIDERATION ON ATTRACTING AND RETAINING BUSINESS.
SOUNDS GOOD TO ME. SO THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO DO.
GO FOR. SO WHAT QUESTIONS DO YOU HAVE ABOUT WHAT YOUR RESPONSIBILITIES AND ROLE IS AND WHERE YOU SHOULD SPEND YOUR TIME? IS IT CLEAR? AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING.
WE HAVE BEEN PRIORITIZING THE ITEMS FROM THE 2005 PLAN.
WE'VE RANKED THEM, WE'VE GROUPED THEM, AND THAT'S KIND OF WHERE WE'VE BEEN HEADED TOWARD ON THIS.
SO YOUR NEXT YOUR NEXT MEETING IS WHEN? SEPTEMBER SIX, SEPTEMBER SIX, IN WHAT WOULD BE SO THREE WEEKS.
SEPTEMBER SIX FIRST WEDNESDAYS.
AND THAT WOULD BE, I THINK WE NEED TO WAIVE PLANNING FEES WITHIN THE CRA AND ENCOURAGE GROWTH THERE.
IS THAT WHAT YOU GUYS WERE THINKING OVER THERE? THAT'S THAT'S HOW YOU PHRASE THAT WAVE PLANNING FEES WITHIN THE CRA.
SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I WOULD DEFINITELY LOOK INTO.
WELL, I THINK I THINK IT'S A GREAT SUGGESTION.
THERE'S OTHER THINGS YOU COULD DO.
WHAT DO YOU WANT TO HAVE DONE? WHAT DOES THE COMMUNITY WANT TO HAVE DOWN THERE? AND YOU ENCOURAGE THOSE BUSINESSES OR THOSE ENTITIES TO DEVELOP THOSE PROJECTS THAT THE COMMUNITY WANTS AND HOPEFULLY CORRESPONDS WITH WHAT THE LANDOWNER WANTS AND WHAT INDIVIDUAL WANTS.
SO THAT SHOULD BE ON SIX SEPTEMBER, RIGHT? I'M ON MY LIST. I THINK IT'S A GREAT IDEA.
I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH MONEY THAT WOULD EQUATE TO, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S A PLAN B WOULD BE FOR YOU?
[01:10:05]
NEITHER DO I. THAT'D BE SOMETHING GREAT TO LOOK INTO AS WELL.BUT IT'S MORE THAN MONEY, TOO.
IT'S IT'S EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, I THINK.
I BELIEVE YOU'RE SAYING YOU'RE ENCOURAGING.
SO WHETHER IT'S THOUSAND DOLLARS OR NOTHING, YOU'RE MAKING THAT EFFORT.
IT'S ESPECIALLY OVER PSYCHOLOGICALLY.
ANYTHING ELSE? SO, COMMISSIONER STURGIS, YOU LOOK LIKE YOU HAVE A COMMENT, ROSS.
IT'S ANYWHERE BETWEEN 1000 TO 5000 WITH THE PLANNING FEES.
BUT TO ME, WHEN I LOOK AT THE NORTH END, THOSE ARE ALL EITHER PREVIOUSLY OWNED SHRIMP BOAT OWNERS OR THE SHRIMPING INDUSTRY.
TYPICALLY, THERE'S NOT A LOT OF SPACE IN THAT AREA.
THEY'RE GOING TO WORK WITH OUR SCHEME AND THEY'RE ALL COMMERCIAL AND EITHER IT WOULD BE A MARINA OF SOME NATURE OR RESTAURANT OF SOME NATURE OR SOME SORT OF BUSINESS THAT WOULD NOT HOPEFULLY WOULD INCORPORATE WITH A SEAWALL AND A WALKWAY ALL THE WAY DOWN.
BUT ULTIMATELY I DON'T SEE RETAIL AND I DON'T SEE ANYTHING INDUSTRIAL UNLESS THEY'RE GOING TO JUST RESTART UP SOME SORT OF INDUSTRIAL BUSINESS FOR THOSE FEW PEOPLE THAT HAVE DOCKS WHERE THEY COULD HOLD BOATS AND DO ANYTHING OF THAT NATURE.
SO ULTIMATELY, I DON'T THINK THERE'S AN ABUNDANCE OF THINGS.
YOU'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE A GAS STATION, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE A JEWELRY STORE, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE A THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE THINGS THAT ARE RETAIL ORIENTED LIKE THAT, IN MY OPINION. ON THE WATER, IT WOULD EITHER BE A RESTAURANT OR MARINA OR SOMETHING INDUSTRIAL THAT WOULD FIT IT.
THERE COULD BE A TOUR LIKE MR. MCCARTHY RUNS TOURS, THERE COULD BE DIFFERENT TOUR SERVICES.
THEY COULD RUN OUT OF THAT LOCATION, ANY ONE OF THOSE LOCATIONS DOWN THERE.
SO TO ME, THOSE ARE THE BUSINESSES I WOULD SEE THAT WOULD FIT IN THAT AREA.
I JUST REMEMBER HEARING, HEY, MR. MAYOR, SIR, IF I MAY BUILD ON COMMISSIONER STURGES COMMENTS.
ONE AGAIN, THE CITY STAFF HAS BEEN IN CONTACT WITH ALL FOUR PROPERTY OWNERS.
THAT IS MOVING FORWARD IN A VERY POSITIVE MANNER.
SO AND AGAIN, THAT OUR DISCUSSIONS HAVE BEEN BASED UPON THE DIRECTION THAT'S BEEN PROVIDED IN GENERAL BY THE CITY COMMISSION, THAT THEY SUPPORT A SEAWALL AND THE SEAWALL.
WE'VE TALKED ABOUT FUNDING, THINGS LIKE THAT WITH ALL THE PROPERTY OWNERS.
SO THOSE DISCUSSIONS ARE MOVING FORWARD VERY FRUITFULLY.
WITH REGARD TO THE PROPOSED USES, THERE ARE TWO PROPERTIES THAT ARE ZONED.
MR. GOODSON'S PROPERTY AND MR. CAVANAUGH'S PROPERTY ARE ZONED DIFFERENTLY THAN THE OTHER THREE.
BUT ACTUALLY ALL OF THOSE, THE THREE PROPERTIES, WHICH IS WATERFRONT INDUSTRIAL, THERE'S DOZENS OF USES THAT ARE PERMISSIBLE ON THOSE SITES RESTAURANTS, JEWELRY STORES, DOCKS.
IT'S ALL IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, CHAPTER TWO.
SO IF ANYBODY HAS IT, WHAT'S THAT? JUNKYARD. JUNKYARD? YOU CAN SEE PLANE DOCKS.
BUT THERE ARE THERE ARE A PLETHORA OF USES AVAILABLE AND IT'S NOT RESTRICTED.
IT'S NOT AS RESTRICTIVE AS SOME PEOPLE BELIEVE.
OKAY. VICE MAYOR, BACK A WHILE BACK, WE HAD TALKED ABOUT AMERICAN EDUCATION, SENATOR LIEBERMAN SO EVERYBODY WAS ONBOARD THE CRUISE LINE.
THAT WAS WHAT KEVIN WAS ABOARD.
WE TRIED TO TRANSLATE THAT INTO THE ONE ON ONE FRONT BUILDING, BUT IT WAS TOO FAR.
SO, YES, SIR, THAT GOT STYMIED BECAUSE OF SOME ADA AND SOME OTHER ISSUES.
AND AND SHE WANTED TO LIVE THERE.
BUT OTHER THAN THAT OTHER THAN THAT, I JUST I APPRECIATE IT.
I MEAN, AND THESE ORDINANCES I WAS AROUND, THEY WERE THERE.
YOU DIDN'T PUT GUYS PUT IT IN.
NOBODY DID TO A SITTING AROUND HERE.
I'M GOING TO SAY THEY'RE NOT VIABLE TODAY.
BUT WE SHOULD JUST YOU SHOULD LOOK AT EVERYTHING.
[01:15:04]
I MEAN, SAID THAT I KIND OF WANT TO STEP BACK FOR CAN FOR A MINUTE FROM WEST OR FRONT STREET.AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT IS I SAY WHAT'S ON THE AGENDA, WHICH I GREATLY APPRECIATE WHEN WE GOT INVOLVED WITH THIS, WE ALL THROW VOLUNTEERS.
I THINK WE ALL DID WITH BEST INTENTIONS.
I THINK WE'RE ALL HERE FOR THE BEST INTENTIONS, BUT WITHOUT INFORMATION.
AND WHEN THINGS HAPPEN DOWN THERE AND STUFF STARTS GOING UP AND BUILDINGS START GETTING BUILT IN THAT ZONE, AND I'M ON THE ADVISORY BOARD AND PEOPLE ASK ME WHAT'S GOING ON DOWN THERE? SO THAT'S THE FIRST I HEARD.
THAT'S WRONG. SO I THINK IT WOULD BE GREAT IF WE COULD.
I KNOW IT'S ON THE AGENDA. I'M SURE WE'RE ABOUT TO TALK ABOUT IT, TO BE INFORMED ABOUT WHAT ALL DEVELOPMENT IS ACTUALLY GOING ON DOWN THERE WHEN IT'S APPROVED, WHEN THE STICKS AND BRICKS ARE GOING UP. THAT'S HOW I UNDERSTAND THAT.
I'M MAYOR AND I FIND OUT ABOUT STUFF TWO AND THREE WEEKS AFTERWARDS.
WHAT'S GOING ON? IT'S FROM THEIR SEAT.
I RECOGNIZE YOU SAID THANK YOU FROM THE FROM THE CITY SEAT.
THERE IS A LOT GOING ON AND SO MISCOMMUNICATION OR NON COMMUNICATION.
YEAH. GETS LOST IN THE FLURRY OF THE PROCESS OF APPROVING, INSPECTING, EVALUATING ALL THE HISTORIC DISTRICTS, CRA, ALL THE VARIOUS BOARDS THESE PROJECTS NEED TO GO THROUGH.
AND I JUST FOUND OUT ABOUT SOME STUFF LIKE LAST WEEK THAT'S PRETTY SIGNIFICANT.
SO. MR. ROSS, DO YOU THINK THEY NEED TO BE INFORMED? ALL THEY'VE GOT TO DO IS GO TO THE MEANS OR READ THE MINUTES, AND THEN YOU WOULD KNOW, BECAUSE THAT'S HOW I FIND OUT.
THEY DON'T TELL ME I FIND THAT.
YOU GO TO THE BOARD, READ THEIR MINUTES.
I MEAN, THAT'S IF YOU WANT TO BE INFORMED, THAT'S WHAT YOU NEED TO DO.
AND SO A STAFF MEMBER DOESN'T REALLY NEED TO SEND THAT TO YOU.
I MEAN, IT'S ALL PUBLICLY AVAILABLE.
IT'S ON THE WEBSITE AND I GET IT.
AND ON SEE COMMISSION NUMBER TWO, I'M INTERESTED THAT THE TWO PROPONENTS FOR EITHER NOT RAISING TAXES OR CUTTING TAXES ONE ONCE AGAIN, BUT ANOTHER FEE THAT SUPPORTS SUPPORTS THAT IS SUPPORTS THE CITY PEOPLE WHO HAVE TO DO THE WORK. SO YOU CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS.
YOU CAN'T CUT YOUR FEES AND THEN AND YOU CAN'T CUT YOUR FEES AND THEN CUT YOUR TAXES.
I MEAN, IT TAKES A BODY TO DO THAT WORK.
I UNDERSTAND IT. BUT FUNDAMENTALLY, THE PROBLEM IS YOU KEEP ONE OF THE GIVEAWAYS.
WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THAT TOMORROW NIGHT, SOME OTHER GIVEAWAYS, BUT WE KEEP GIVING STUFF AWAY.
THAT'S OUR MODEL. GIVE IT AWAY.
I WOULD SUGGEST THAT THERE'S NO INCENTIVE THERE.
WHAT, ARE YOU KIDDING ME? THOSE PROPERTIES, THEY'RE SELLING $3 MILLION FOR PROPERTY WHERE THE THE FISH PEOPLE BOUGHT IT.
I MEAN, THE MARINE RESTAURANT HERE, $3 MILLION.
I MEAN, THERE'S NO NEED FOR INCENTIVES.
ALL THESE PROPERTIES ARE BEING DEVELOPED EAST OF THE RAILROAD TRACKS.
MOST OF THE PROPERTIES UNDER DEVELOPMENT ARE JUST THE TEN POINT IS NOW ABOUT TO DO ANOTHER MOTEL.
I MEAN, ALL THESE THINGS ARE BEING DONE.
AND SO ALL THESE PROPERTIES ARE BEING DEVELOPED.
WHY DOES THE CITY HAVE TO GIVE INCENTIVES? THE CITY NEEDS MONEY TO BE ABLE TO DO THINGS.
AND YOU DON'T WANT TO GET IT IN TAXES, YOU DON'T WANT TO GET IT IN FEES.
THAT'S THE THE BUDGET IS ANOTHER DISCUSSION.
MR. MAYOR, COULD I HAVE 10 SECONDS OF REBUTTAL? BECAUSE I THINK MY NAME WAS VERBALLY MENTIONED.
ABSOLUTELY. YES. YOU'RE ON THE CLOCK.
THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WELL, SEEING THAT AGAINST MY WILL, WE JUST RAISE TAXES 12%.
WE HAVE PLENTY OF ROOM TO CUT FEES, SO THAT'S JUST ALL I GOT TO SAY ABOUT THAT.
[01:20:04]
IT MIGHT BE FOR CERTAIN PROPERTIES IN A CERTAIN ZONE THAT MIGHT NEED SOME INCENTIVE.THAT'S MY WHAT'S MY THOUGHT IS I THINK IT'S AN INVESTMENT.
I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE CITY MANAGER WITH REGARD TO COORDINATION WITH THE OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS.
WHEN DID THAT START AS FAR AS WORKING TOGETHER WITH THESE PROPERTY OWNERS ON SEA WALL AND WHATEVER PROJECT YOU'VE GOT GOING ABOUT THREE OR FOUR MONTHS AGO? SO DO YOU THINK THAT HAD ANY INFLUENCE FROM THIS BOARD TRYING TO ENGAGE PROPERTY OWNERS TO WORK WITH THE CITY AND SENDING THEM A LETTER TO WORK TOGETHER? YOU THINK THAT WAS THE CATALYST TO MAKE SOME OF THAT HAPPEN? NO, IT PROBABLY STARTED BEFORE THAT.
THANK YOU. AS I THINK IT'S BEEN BROUGHT UP, CITY STAFF HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THESE ISSUES FOR YEARS.
OKAY. THERE'S JUST TWO THINGS I WANTED TO COMMENT ON AFTER ALAN'S COMMENT ABOUT HOW YOU KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON, BECAUSE THERE IS A LOT GOING ON AND WE'VE BEEN GETTING BRIEFED AT OUR MEETINGS ON WHAT THE CITY PROJECTS ARE, BUT IT'S A LITTLE MORE CHALLENGING TO KEEP UP WITH THE PRIVATE PROJECTS. AND AND I CAN TELL YOU FROM MY MY DAY JOB THAT IT REALLY IS GOING TO A LOT OF THE DIFFERENT MEETINGS.
BUT, BUT IT REALLY IS A CHALLENGE TO KEEP UP BECAUSE THERE IS SO MUCH DEVELOPMENT THAT'S HAPPENING.
SO I'M NOT SURE THAT WE CAN PUT THAT ON THE CITY STAFF TO KEEP US APPRIZED OF ALL OF THE PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT, JUST THIS I JUST GOT THE BUILDING PERMIT REPORT FOR THIS MONTH AND THERE'S OVER 300 BUILDING PERMITS THAT WERE ISSUED.
YEAH, I CAN APPRECIATE THAT VERY MUCH.
I'M NOT I'M NOT ASKING FOR EVERYTHING IN THE CITY.
AND I WOULD DO THAT AS A COURTESY FOR, YOU KNOW, ONCE A MONTH TO SAY, HERE'S AN UPDATE ON THE PROJECTS WITHIN THIS AREA. THAT'S IT. SO SO MY SUGGESTION ON THAT TOPIC WOULD BE HAVE A STANDING AGENDA ITEM BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE CITY MANAGER HAVE A STANDING AGENDA ITEM, NEW PROJECTS, STATUS, AND THAT WAY YOU'RE GETTING A REPORT BEFORE YOU EVEN ENTER ANY DISCUSSIONS ON WHAT'S GOING ON.
IT'S GREAT. THANK YOU. BECAUSE HE KNOWS COMMISSIONER STURGIS.
THANK YOU, MAYOR. I JUST BRIEFLY WANT TO SAY THAT IT IS IMPORTANT TO OFFER INCENTIVES TO THE PEOPLE IN THE CRA BECAUSE WHEN THEY DEVELOP SOMETHING IN THE CRA, ALL THAT TAX MONEY GOES BACK INTO THE CRA.
IT'S ALMOST LIKE A BIG CIRCLE THAT IT FEEDS ONTO ITSELF.
UNLIKE OTHER PROPERTIES IN OUR CITY, THE CRA IS A SPECIAL DISTRICT AND IT'S MEANT FOR BUSINESSES TO BE SUPPOSED TO BE REVITALIZING AND UNBLINDED AREAS.
ANY OTHER DEFINITIONS OF THE SANDBOX AND HOW BIG THE SANDBOXES? SO I JUST WANT TO GO THROUGH THE LIST THAT CHAIRMAN NIKE READ.
AND AGAIN, THESE THIS WAS THE INPUT THAT HE GOT.
THIS IS ISN'T MR. KNOX POSITION.
SO SO WE SO THEY HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT IS OFF THE TABLE AND THEY'RE NOT SPENDING TIME.
SO CHANGE THE BUILDING HEIGHT TO 45 FEET.
IS THERE ANY INTEREST ON THIS COMMISSION IN DOING THAT? THAT'S. THAT WOULD BE ENOUGH.
IS THERE ANY INTEREST IN CHANGING THE BUILDING HEIGHT AT ALL? OKAY. THIRD QUESTION.
LET'S SEE WHAT'S IN IT CURRENTLY.
YES. WHAT DO YOU SEE? IT'S 30 FEET ABOVE BASE FLOOD ELEVATION.
ARE THERE ANY EXCEPTIONS TO THAT? NO, NOTHING.
A VERY POWER LINE THAT'S GOOD, THAT'S BEING DONE, THAT'S FUNDED.
SIDEWALKS ON THE WEST SIDE, THAT'S STILL A LONG RANGE PLAN FOR, CORRECT? YES, SIR. OKAY. SO THAT THAT IS ON THE TABLE.
[01:25:03]
CONSIDER FRONT STREET IS ONE WAY.I'M GETTING I'VE GOT A COUPLE OF NODS.
OKAY. I GET ONE. ABSOLUTELY NOT.
I WOULD CONSIDER IT AS PART OF A LARGER PLAN.
ENCOURAGE OPTIONS FOR UPPER LEVEL RESIDENCES AND ROOFTOP ACCESS.
I AM NOT OPPOSED TO THEM SUGGESTING ALMOST ANYTHING.
UH, I THINK THINGS, SOME THINGS AREN'T GOING TO HAPPEN WITH THE CURRENT COMMISSION AND THE CODES.
I THINK THEY NEED TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE CODES ARE AND HOPEFULLY I CONSIDER THAT STAFF RESPONSIBILITY TO INFORM THEM AND I BELIEVE THEY DID IN SOME CASES.
THAT'S RIGHT. IT'S ALREADY SAID THAT THEY ENCOURAGE OPTIONS FOR UPPER LEVEL RESIDENCES AND ROOFTOP ACCESS.
ROOFTOP ACCESS IS ALREADY ALLOWED.
THAT'S NUMBER ONE. AND THAT'S PUTTING RESIDENTIAL ON THE COAST.
AND EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT YOU CAN'T PUT ONE RESIDENT ABOVE ONE.
I TOOK THIS AS ON THE WATER BECAUSE YOU MENTIONED YOU WOULD TALK TO FOUR PEOPLE OR THESE THREE PRIMARILY THESE ARE WATERFRONT PROPERTY, CORRECT? I GUESS THEY'RE JUST LIMITED TO THE WATERFRONT STORY IS.
YOU'RE NOT IN THAT ISSUE. NOT THAT ISSUE.
SO IF WE'RE SPEAKING TOTALLY ABOUT THE WATER, ALL MY ANSWERS ARE CORRECT.
YEAH. ALL RIGHT, SO GAUGE OTHER AGENCIES OF SEAWALL FUNDING.
THOSE ARE. THOSE ARE THE MAIN ONES.
YES, SIR. VICE MAYOR, I THINK IT'S NECESSARY.
NO, SIR. YOU KNOW, I WANT TO MAKE MAKES A GOOD POINT.
I THINK IF YOU REALLY WANT TO KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON, YOU BETTER WATCH IT HERE, SEE? AND NOT AS MUCH AS THE AGENCY.
BUT. BUT I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE A METHOD THAT WHERE SOMEHOW WE PROVIDE SOME OF THAT INFORMATION, WHETHER IT'S JUST FORWARDING THE AGENDA ON YOUR AGENDA, THE TDC AGENDAS.
AND THEN YOU CAN REVIEW AND YOU CAN YOU CAN FOLLOW UP ON THAT.
THAT'D BE GREAT. TRY TO ASK THE CODE REVIEW.
YOU SAID TDC, BUT THAT'S OKAY.
SORRY. WE KNEW WHAT YOU MEANT.
YEAH, YEAH, YEAH, MR. MAYOR, I DO. BUT IT IS.
THAT IS IT TO ME. YOU REALLY HAVE TO WATCH BECAUSE I DON'T THINK FOUR YEARS.
SO I'LL JUST POP UP AND WE DON'T KNOW BECAUSE IT DOESN'T REALLY COME UP FOR APPROVAL, BUT IT DOES GO THERE AND IT IS AN EASY WAY OF DOING THAT IS YOU CAN SIGN UP FOR ALERTS ON THE CITY WEBSITE THAT WHENEVER AN AGENDA IS PUBLISHED YOU WILL BE SENT AN EMAIL WITH THE LINK TO THAT AGENDA.
YOU WANT TO GET NOTIFIED OF IT, YOU'LL BE SENT AN EMAIL.
SO SIR, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK, WE HAVE A COMMISSION MEETING TOMORROW NIGHT.
SO WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU DO THAT.
SO, MR. STURGIS, THAT THE TRC IS BASICALLY THE TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE AND IT'S BASICALLY ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE CITY AS ANY SORT OF PLANNING, WITH ANYTHING TO DO WITH BUILDING, SPECIFICALLY COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES, REZONING, ANYTHING TO DO WITH ANY SORT OF REDEVELOPMENT OR DEVELOPMENT PERIOD.
IT'S REALLY SOMETHING YOU CAN JUST LOOK AT OR YOU CAN JUST LOOK AT THE AGENDAS, KNOW, DO I REALLY WANT THAT MEETING THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT? SO WE PUT A RARE EDITION ON SIXTH STREET.
I MEAN, IF THERE'S IF YOU'RE LOOKING FOR CERTAIN THINGS ALL RIGHT.
[01:30:03]
ABOUT? THE MOST SIGNIFICANT ONE IS THE CONTRACTOR IS MOBILIZING FOR THE RAILROAD SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS AND ACTUALLY HE'S GOING TO START AT HIS REQUEST.HE IS STARTING ON ALACHUA STREET FOR THE BUMP OUT FOR THAT.
SO HE'S ACTUALLY GOING TO WORK NORTH TO SOUTH AND MOST LIKELY BE MOVING FORWARD ON THAT MOBILIZING LATER THIS MONTH, IF NOT THIS WEEK.
I DID HAVE DISCUSSIONS WITH SOME OF THE CITY COMMISSIONERS ABOUT THE.
PROPOSED REQUESTS FOR PROPOSALS ON THE ONE ON ONE FRONT STREET PROPERTY.
IN DISCUSSIONS WITH COMMISSIONER STURGES AND COMMISSIONER ROSS, THEY HAVE ENCOURAGED THE CITY TO REACH OUT AND PERHAPS HAVE A BROKER MARKET THAT PROPERTY. I HAVE RECEIVED ONE LETTER OF INTEREST ALREADY FROM AN H TONIGHT.
[4.3 Request for Letter of Interest for 101 N. Front Street]
RESTRICTIONS OF THE BROKER.[4.4 Project Status Update]
TRACKS. THAT WAS COST PROHIBITIVE BASED UPON ALL THE ADDITIONAL BRICKWORK.SO WE'RE GOING TO ASK FOR A REVISION OF THAT PLAN.
I THINK WE'RE ON THE AGENDA FOR THE SEPTEMBER HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MEETING.
I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH PROPERTY OWNER OF THE PROPERTY ON PROPERTY THAT WRAPS AROUND THE CRAB TRAP.
I'VE GOTTEN HIS PERMISSION TO GET A SURVEY MADE TO RUN THE SIDEWALK FROM WHERE THE SIDEWALK ENDS IN FRONT OF CELTIC PELICAN TO GO ALL THE WAY UP TO ALACHUA STREET, GET AN EIGHT FOOT EASEMENT, TO PUT IN A SIX FOOT WIDE SIDEWALK TO CONNECT THAT SIDEWALK TO ALACHUA STREET FIRST BEFORE WE CAN DO THAT, BEFORE WE CAN ACTUALLY CONSTRUCT IT, AND I THINK WE CAN HAVE THAT CONSTRUCTED WITHIN THE NEXT 60 TO 90 DAYS.
I KNOW THAT THERE'S SOME SIDEWALKS AND ADDITIONAL BUILDING GOING ON ON NORTH SECOND STREET.
A VARIETY OF NEW HOMES ARE GOING AND NEW HOMES ARE GOING IN THERE.
THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES IS ONGOING.
THEY'RE DOING MORE ACTIVITY ON THE SOUTH PARKING LOT THAN THEY ARE IN THE NORTH.
WE'RE CONTINUING OUR DIALOG WITH YOU.
THEY'RE GOING TO BE REMOVING ASBESTOS FROM THAT SITE.
THEY'RE GOING TO SET A DUMPSTER TEMPORARILY DOWN AT THE SOUTH END OF PARKING LOT.
RD AND SO IT'S GOING TO BE FENCED FOR PUBLIC SAFETY AND THEY'LL TRANSPORT THEIR THEIR BAGS OF NASTY STUFF FROM THE MARINA RESTAURANT TO THE ENCLOSED DUMPSTER AT THE SOUTH END OF PARKING LOT.
AND I THINK THAT'S THE TOWNHOMES ARE BEING BUILT.
I BELIEVE MAYOR SCHAEFER IS MOVING FORWARD WITH THE STANDARD MARINE BUILDING.
EXPLAIN TO ME WHAT WHY WE WOULD GET A BROKER FOR THE ONE ON ONE BUILDING AND HOW THAT FITS IN THE RFP AND HOW WE'RE DEALING WITH THESE DECISIONS.
CAN WE SAVE THAT FOR A COMMISSION WORKSHOP? THANK YOU. I'M GOING TO ASK THAT. THANK YOU.
I AM CONSCIOUS OF THE TIME, MR. HOPKINS, SO I APPRECIATE THE APPROACH BECAUSE I HAVE A SIMILAR QUESTION.
SO IN THIS DEVELOPMENT OF THAT PROPERTY, IS THERE A PREFERENCE OF WHAT SORT OF STRUCTURE GOES IN THERE THAT THE CITY HAS ALREADY INDICATED? OR IS THIS JUST THE RFP THAT WAS THE DRAFT RFP IS JUST TELL US WHAT YOU'RE INTERESTED IN.
LOOKING AT THE CHART, MR. COOK I DON'T SAY JUNKYARDS ARE NOT PERMISSIBLE AND I W OR W ONE TO PUT EVERYBODY'S IN MIND.
[01:35:02]
SHARE THE CHART UP RIGHT HERE.BUT THERE ARE I APPRECIATE IT BECAUSE I THINK THIS IS GETS THE HEART OF THE MATTER BECAUSE AS YOU GO THROUGH THIS REDEVELOPMENT, IT'S IMPORTANT FOR THE COOKIE CUTTER SITUATION AND IT'S NOT OBVIOUSLY FOR US ON THIS SIDE OF THE TABLE TO MAKE THOSE DECISIONS.
IT'S REALLY THE RFP THAT WAS PREPARED INITIALLY BY MR. GEORGE IS THAT THIS IS NOTHING MORE THAN A LETTER OF INTEREST.
TELL US WHAT YOU'RE INTERESTED IN DOING.
TELL US WHAT YOUR FINANCIAL POWER IS.
AND ACTUALLY IT WAS ACCORDING TO THE RFP DRAFT RFP, THE FIRST STEP OF THAT TO GO WAS ACTUALLY TO THE CRA BOARD, THE ADVISORY BOARD, TO THEN MAKE A RECOMMENDATION IF WE GET SIX LETTERS OF INTEREST.
WHAT DO YOU GUYS RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY COMMISSION CONSIDER RIGHT NOW FOR THE BROKER AND PERHAPS COMMISSIONER STURGES WANTS THAT IN, IS IT PROVIDES A MORE TARGETED NOTICE OR EFFORT TO TO INTERESTED PARTIES THAT ARE MORE INTERESTED ON THE COMMERCIAL SIDE.
THANK YOU, MR. GNOCCHI. THEN COMMISSIONER ROSS EARNING THE 101 FRONT STREET RFP.
I DON'T I SEE A MAP IN HERE OF A PROPERTY.
I CAN'T READ ALL THAT SMALL PRINT.
I DON'T. DOES IT MENTION ANYTHING ABOUT THE PERMITTING FOR DEVELOPING OVER THE WATERFRONT? YOU AND I HAVE MET WITH CORPS OF ENGINEERS RETIREE, AND WE TALKED ABOUT TRYING TO RENEW THE PERMITTING WITHOUT MEDICATION THAT WAS AVAILABLE WHILE WE HAD THAT BUILDING AND SOON AFTER WE DESTROYED IT.
I'M JUST WONDERING IF THAT IS A RELEVANT THING TO PUT IN HERE AS FAR AS DO WE HAVE PERMITTING OR NOT, SO THAT WHOEVER PERMANENT IT'LL BE RESPONSIBILITY OF WHOEVER THE CITY DECIDES TO MOVE FORWARD WITH.
IS THAT THE RIGHT WITHOUT MITIGATION OR.
WHERE DO YOU GO? YEAH, THAT CONTINUES.
I THOUGHT IT HAD TO BE RENEWED.
ROSS SO LONG STORY SHORT, BROKER EXPOSURE.
SO IT'S JUST ABOUT EXPOSURE AND IT COSTS 7% AND 6% COST NOTHING.
IF THE BROKER WHATEVER YOU WORK AT THE BROKER, BROKER OR COMMISSION.
MR. COOKE I'LL GET BACK TO THE PDP AND CORE ENGINEERS TEAM IN TALLAHASSEE BECAUSE THEY HAVE SOME LARGE LANDS LEASED DOWN AND GOING OVER THERE TALKING TO THEM.
IF YOU MAKE COMMUNICATION, YOU MAY GET THINGS DONE OR EASIER.
DO YOU THINK THAT'S VERY EASY? WE ARE A LITTLE TIRED JUST LIKE ANY OTHER.
SO HAVE WE ACCOMPLISHED WHAT WE SET OUT TO ACCOMPLISH IN THIS MEETING? SO, I MEAN, ARE WE ARE WE CLEAR? ARE WE GOOD? DO WE HAVE RESOLUTION ON EVERYTHING? NO. PINK SLIPS? NO.
I JUST WANT TO THANK THE COMMISSIONERS FOR HAVING THIS JOINT MEETING AND TALK WITH US DIRECTLY.
AND I JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND COMMITMENT.
COMMISSIONERS AND ANYTHING I THINK I'M VERY OF THE MEETING.
I MEAN, I THINK I THINK THIS TURNAROUND WAS A BAD SITUATION INTO A VERY POSITIVE SITUATION.
ALL RIGHT. SO HAVING NO OTHER QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS, I WILL LINGER IN OUR MEETING.
THANK YOU SO MUCH. YEAH.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.