Council adopted Resolutions 2020-56 and 2020-57 to pursue a Small Cities CDBG housing rehab grant, committing $50,000 in General Fund leverage.
21 items on the agenda · 14 decisions recorded
On the agenda
- 1Call to Order – Roll Call▶ 0:00
- 2
Pledge of Allegiance
The Pledge of Allegiance was recited followed by a moment of silence honoring servicemen and women.
▶ Jump to 0:19 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:00:19] Thank you. [00:00:19] I ask you all please stand, join me in the Pledge of Allegiance and remain standing [00:00:23] for a moment of silence in honor of our servicemen and women at home and abroad. [00:00:28] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the [00:00:33] Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with [00:00:38] liberty and justice for all.
This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.
- 3
Moment of Silence
The council observed a moment of silence as part of the meeting's opening ceremonies.
▶ Jump to 0:44 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:00:45] Thank you. [00:00:45] You may be seated.
This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.
- 4
Approval of August 11, 2020 Work Session and September 1, 2020 Regular Meeting Minutes
approvedCouncil approved the minutes from the August 11, 2020 work session and the September 1, 2020 regular meeting.
- motion:Approve the August 11, 2020 work session and September 1, 2020 regular meeting minutes. (passed)
▶ Jump to 0:50 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:00:51] Next item on the agenda is the approval of the August 11th work session and [00:00:55] September 1st regular meeting minutes. [00:00:57] Move for approval. [00:00:58] Second. [00:00:59] Discussion? [00:01:00] Hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye. [00:01:03] Aye. [00:01:04] Opposed? [00:01:04] Like sign. [00:01:05] Motion passes. [00:01:06] Next, introduction of new firefighter.
This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.
- 5
Introduction of New Firefighter: Scott Sims
Fire Chief Chris Fitch introduced Scott Sims as the newest full-time firefighter for the City of New Port Richey. Sims, a Marine Corps veteran and current paramedic student at St. Pete College, was sworn in on August 28th by the city clerk due to COVID-19.
City of Clearwater Fire DepartmentSt. Pete CollegeUnited States Marine CorpsChris FitchMs. MannsScott Sims▶ Jump to 1:07 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:01:08] Ms. [00:01:09] Manns? [00:01:09] Yes. [00:01:10] I'd like to call upon Fire Chief Chris Fitch to introduce Scott Sims to you. [00:01:25] Thank you, Mayor and Council, for giving me the opportunity to introduce our [00:01:33] newest member of our team. [00:01:35] The department was faced with a full-time vacancy in the ranks due to a recent [00:01:39] resignation, and the position was filled based upon the ranking from the last [00:01:43] hiring process, which was conducted less than a year ago, as well as his [00:01:48] performance as a part-time firefighter. [00:01:50] Scott Sims was selected for the position and sworn in on August 28th by the city [00:01:55] clerk due to COVID-19. [00:01:58] And at this time, I'd like to invite Scott up here, socially distanced next to [00:02:02] me, as I say a few words about him. [00:02:13] Scott was born in Pensacola and later moved to Clearwater where he graduated [00:02:17] high school. [00:02:18] Then he immediately joined the Marine Corps where he became a mortar man in the [00:02:22] infantry with deployments to Korea and Japan. [00:02:27] Scott returned home, got married, started a family, and he and his wife now enjoy a [00:02:31] three-year-old son. [00:02:33] Scott completed his firefighting and EMT certification training at St. [00:02:37] Pete College, where he currently is enrolled in paramedic school, and he's set [00:02:42] to graduate in December. [00:02:44] Scott chose to follow in the footsteps of his big brother, who serves as a [00:02:50] firefighter paramedic for the city of Clearwater. [00:02:53] Scott served his country and he expressed to me how proud he is to serve and [00:02:59] represent the city of New Port Richey. [00:03:01] And I'm equally proud to have him as a member of our fire department family. [00:03:14] Thank you.
This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.
- 6
Presentation of Annual Report - Parks & Recreation Advisory Board
Dave Schrader presented the annual report of the Parks & Recreation Advisory Board, noting the board's value in earning points for city grant applications and its role advising council on Parks & Recreation matters. No questions were raised and no action was taken.
▶ Jump to 3:15 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:03:15] Next item on the agenda is presentation of the annual report for the Parks and [00:03:19] Rec Advisory Board. [00:03:20] Mr. Dave Schrader is in attendance this evening to present the annual report. [00:03:25] Thank you. [00:03:31] It should have been in your packet as far as the annual report that we had. [00:03:34] It was. [00:03:35] Okay. [00:03:36] Any questions on it? [00:03:41] I'm here. [00:03:44] One of the biggest benefits that our board gives to the city of New Port Richey [00:03:49] is that there is points awarded when we do our grant and funding situations. [00:03:54] And being that we do have an advisory board, we get many brownie points for it. [00:03:59] So that's one of the main things. [00:04:00] And we also are involved in advising city council on things that go with the [00:04:07] Parks and Rec Department. [00:04:08] But any questions, I'm here available. [00:04:11] Hearing none. [00:04:13] Thank you very much, David. [00:04:14] Thank you.
This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.
- 7Vox Pop for Items Not Listed on the Agenda or Listed on Consent Agenda▶ 4:18
- 8.a
Purchases/Payments for City Council Approval
approvedon consentThe consent agenda, including purchases/payments for City Council approval, was approved by voice vote without discussion.
- vote:Motion to approve the consent agenda including purchases/payments for City Council approval. (passed)
▶ Jump to 14:54 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:14:54] Go to the consent agenda for approval. [00:14:58] Discussion? [00:15:00] Hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye. [00:15:03] Aye. Opposed, like sign. [00:15:05] Motion passes. Next business item, confirmation of appointment of Ron Becker
This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.
- 9.a
Confirmation of Appointment of Ron Becker to Pasco County Library Cooperative Advisory Board
approvedCouncil confirmed the appointment of Ron Becker to the Pasco County Library Cooperative Advisory Board, filling the west Pasco County seat vacated by Joan Hook's resignation. Becker has served on the Library Board for over two years; the appointment requires final confirmation by the Pasco County Board of County Commissioners.
- motion:Confirm appointment of Ron Becker to the Pasco County Library Cooperative Advisory Board. (passed)
Pasco County Board of County CommissionersPasco County Library Cooperative Advisory BoardJoan HookRon Becker▶ Jump to 15:08 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:15:09] to the Pasco County Library Cooperative Advisory Board. [00:15:13] Yes. Joan Hook [00:15:14] has resigned [00:15:15] her position [00:15:17] on the Library Cooperative Advisory Board. [00:15:21] There is one position that represents the west part of Pasco County. [00:15:28] The recommendation that the Library Advisory Board has advanced to you [00:15:32] is that Mr. Ron Becker [00:15:35] be appointed to serve in that capacity. [00:15:39] He has been on the Library Board for over two years. [00:15:42] The term of office for the [00:15:45] Library Cooperative Advisory Board is a three-year period of time. [00:15:50] Your [00:15:51] recommendation must be confirmed by the Pasco County Board of County [00:15:55] Commissioners [00:15:56] in order for Mr. Becker to serve. [00:15:59] He is well qualified to serve [00:16:01] the city [00:16:03] and we are recommending that you consider [00:16:07] recommending Mr. Becker. [00:16:09] Thank you. I'll open it up for public comment. [00:16:13] Is Mr. Becker in the audience? He is. He is. In the back. This is your last chance to run [00:16:17] screaming out the door if you don't want us to do something. [00:16:22] Thank you. [00:16:24] We have a motion. Second. [00:16:27] Discussion? [00:16:28] Thank you. Glad he's happy to serve and we're fortunate to have so many [00:16:32] volunteers in our city. [00:16:34] Thank you. [00:16:35] All those in favor please signify by saying aye. [00:16:37] Aye. Opposed like sign. [00:16:40] Motion passes. Next resolution 2020-56.
This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.
- 9.b
Second Public Hearing: Small Cities Community Development Block Grant Application
discussedCouncil held the second public hearing on Resolution 2020-56, adopting a Housing Assistance Plan in conjunction with a Small Cities Community Development Block Grant application to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity for FFY 2019. Staff explained the plan provides up to $60,000 per property for owner-occupied housing rehabilitation as a 10-year forgivable deferred-payment loan for low and low-moderate income households up to 80% AMI.
Florida Department of Economic OpportunityMr. FoxMs. MannsFederal Fiscal Year 2019Housing Assistance PlanHousing Rehabilitation categoryResolution 2020-56Small Cities Community Development Block Grant▶ Jump to 16:44 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:16:44] This is resolution number 2020-56, a resolution authorizing the [00:16:48] adoption of a housing assistance plan in conjunction with the submission of an [00:16:52] application for a small cities community development block grant in the housing [00:16:55] rehabilitation category to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity for [00:16:59] federal fiscal year 2019. [00:17:03] Ms. Manns? As a requirement to participate in the community development block grant [00:17:09] program through the small cities [00:17:12] community development program [00:17:14] and to use the funds to support [00:17:18] the rehabilitation of housing [00:17:20] we have to adopt, by resolution, a housing assistance plan [00:17:25] and one is attached to [00:17:29] your council agenda item which in large part [00:17:33] identifies that you must be an owner-occupant to participate in the [00:17:37] program. You must meet eligibility criteria. [00:17:42] The type of work [00:17:44] to be done [00:17:46] relates to both the building code and the housing code. [00:17:51] We can spend a maximum of $60,000 [00:17:55] per property [00:17:57] and [00:17:58] there are [00:17:59] steps in [00:18:02] the program, as Mr. Fox indicated, where we will provide assistance to low [00:18:07] income people, [00:18:08] to low-moderate income people, and also to those that are 80% of [00:18:14] area median income. [00:18:16] The program is structured on a [00:18:19] 10-year forgivable [00:18:21] deferment payment loan program, so [00:18:24] if you participate in the program and you stay in your home [00:18:29] for 10 years [00:18:31] the full loan amount is forgiven. If for some reason you vacate the home [00:18:36] prior to a 10-year period of time, a percentage
This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.
- 9.c
Resolution No. 2020-56: Small Cities CDBG Housing Assistance Plan
approvedCouncil adopted Resolution 2020-56, approving a Housing Assistance Plan required to apply for a Small Cities Community Development Block Grant from the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity for housing rehabilitation. The program would provide up to $60,000 per property as a 10-year forgivable deferred loan to eligible owner-occupants at low to moderate income levels.
Ord. Resolution No. 2020-56
- motion:Approve Resolution 2020-56 adopting the Housing Assistance Plan for the Small Cities CDBG application. (passed)
Florida Department of Economic OpportunityMr. FoxMr. MurphyMs. MannsFederal Fiscal Year 2019Housing Assistance PlanResolution 2020-56Small Cities Community Development Block Grant▶ Jump to 16:44 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:16:44] This is resolution number 2020-56, a resolution authorizing the [00:16:48] adoption of a housing assistance plan in conjunction with the submission of an [00:16:52] application for a small cities community development block grant in the housing [00:16:55] rehabilitation category to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity for [00:16:59] federal fiscal year 2019. [00:17:03] Ms. Manns? As a requirement to participate in the community development block grant [00:17:09] program through the small cities [00:17:12] community development program [00:17:14] and to use the funds to support [00:17:18] the rehabilitation of housing [00:17:20] we have to adopt, by resolution, a housing assistance plan [00:17:25] and one is attached to [00:17:29] your council agenda item which in large part [00:17:33] identifies that you must be an owner-occupant to participate in the [00:17:37] program. You must meet eligibility criteria. [00:17:42] The type of work [00:17:44] to be done [00:17:46] relates to both the building code and the housing code. [00:17:51] We can spend a maximum of $60,000 [00:17:55] per property [00:17:57] and [00:17:58] there are [00:17:59] steps in [00:18:02] the program, as Mr. Fox indicated, where we will provide assistance to low [00:18:07] income people, [00:18:08] to low-moderate income people, and also to those that are 80% of [00:18:14] area median income. [00:18:16] The program is structured on a [00:18:19] 10-year forgivable [00:18:21] deferment payment loan program, so [00:18:24] if you participate in the program and you stay in your home [00:18:29] for 10 years [00:18:31] the full loan amount is forgiven. If for some reason you vacate the home [00:18:36] prior to a 10-year period of time, a percentage [00:18:40] based on 10% per year [00:18:42] would be surrendered, the rest would be repaid to the city in the form of a lien. [00:18:49] Thank you. We'll open this up for public comment. [00:18:53] Seeing no one come forward, bring it back to council. [00:18:57] Approval of Resolution 2020-56. [00:19:02] For the maker? [00:19:03] No, I think that [00:19:05] we got to get the grant before we start crowing about it, so if hopefully we [00:19:09] get it, then that detail will be [00:19:13] made available, but [00:19:17] what we haven't said is exactly what those moderate and median income levels [00:19:20] are, but I think they would fit many of the folks in the city, and I'd be [00:19:24] interested to get a response to [00:19:27] how much of our city's [00:19:28] old residential [00:19:30] network might be able to pay. [00:19:31] I can provide that number to you in the city manager's report this week, and I'll [00:19:35] give you a chart of what [00:19:38] the median incomes are for our area. That would be excellent, thank you. [00:19:42] To the second? [00:19:43] Mr. Murphy? [00:19:44] This is something that [00:19:46] is desperately needed, and I'm glad [00:19:48] we're getting it here. [00:19:49] Deputy Mayor? [00:19:51] In that case, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye. [00:19:54] Aye. Aye. Opposed, like sign. [00:19:57] Motion passes. Next is Resolution 2020-57.
This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.
- 9.d
Resolution No. 2020-57: Request to Leverage General Revenue Funds for Florida Small Cities CDBG Program Funding
approvedCouncil adopted Resolution 2020-57 authorizing the use of $50,000 in General Fund revenue as a local match to leverage a Florida Small Cities CDBG application for up to $750,000 in housing rehabilitation funding. The match earns an additional 25 points on the application.
Ord. Resolution No. 2020-57
- motion:Motion to approve Resolution 2020-57 authorizing $50,000 in General Fund leverage for the Small Cities CDBG housing rehabilitation application. (passed)
Florida Department of Economic OpportunityAltmanSpenceFederal Fiscal Year 2019Florida Small Cities CDBG ProgramGeneral Fund Revenue Housing Rehabilitation ProgramResolution No. 2020-57Small Cities Housing Rehabilitation Community Development Block Grant▶ Jump to 20:00 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:20:01] This is Resolution number 2020-57, a resolution authorizing the [00:20:05] use of $50,000 of City of New Port Richey funding as leverage for the [00:20:08] Small Cities Housing Rehabilitation Community Development Block Grant [00:20:11] application. [00:20:12] The city is submitting to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity [00:20:16] for federal fiscal year 2019. [00:20:19] Ms. Spence? [00:20:21] Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, this agenda item [00:20:24] relates to the fact that the city is eligible for up to $750,000 [00:20:29] in funding. In order [00:20:32] to increase the odds of receiving that amount, we would like to match $50,000 [00:20:38] By doing so, we would receive an additional 25 points [00:20:42] for the local match, [00:20:47] and we have programmed fund in the General Fund Revenue [00:20:51] Housing Rehabilitation Program to support the expense. [00:20:56] If you determine it's appropriate to leverage the General Fund [00:21:00] dollars to support the program, which means [00:21:03] if we get the $750,000, we really are spending $800,000 in the community. [00:21:09] Very good. Open it up for public comment. [00:21:13] Seeing no one come forward, I'll bring it back to Council. [00:21:16] Move for approval. Second. To the maker? Nothing. Second. [00:21:20] Deputy Mayor? No comments, thank you. Councilman Altman? [00:21:24] No. In that case, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye. [00:21:27] Aye. Opposed, like sign. Motion passes. [00:21:31] Next, Resolution 2020-58. [00:21:34] This is Resolution number 2020-58, a resolution of the City of New Port Richey [00:21:38] authorizing the implementation of the long-term and short-term objectives of [00:21:41] the City of New Port Richey Community [00:21:43] Development Plan. The long-term objectives [00:21:48] that are associated with this agenda item [00:21:51] include improving the physical environment, promoting public interest, [00:21:56] long-range considerations into short-range decisions, [00:22:00] lending technical knowledge to issues concerning social and economic [00:22:06] development, and identifying resources for major activities to improve the
This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.
- 9.e
Resolution No. 2020-58: Authorizing the Implementation of the Community Development Plan's Long-Term and Short-Term Objectives
approvedCouncil adopted Resolution No. 2020-58 authorizing implementation of the Community Development Plan's long-term and short-term objectives, including rehabilitating homes and identifying resources to improve quality of life for citizens in deteriorated conditions. The motion passed unanimously after no public comment.
Ord. Resolution No. 2020-58
- motion:Move to approve Resolution No. 2020-58 authorizing implementation of the Community Development Plan's long-term and short-term objectives. (passed)
▶ Jump to 22:11 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:22:11] quality of life [00:22:12] for the community. The short-term [00:22:15] objectives of the program are to rehabilitate homes in the city [00:22:19] and to identify [00:22:23] resources for improving the way of life for all citizens, especially [00:22:27] those that live in deteriorated conditions. [00:22:31] I'm prepared to respond to any questions that you have [00:22:35] related to the long- and the short-term objectives of the program. [00:22:39] Thank you. I'll open it up for public comment. Seeing no one come forward, I'll bring it back to [00:22:46] Council. [00:22:46] Move for approval. [00:22:51] We have a motion. Second. A second to the maker. [00:22:54] Nothing. Second. Deputy Mayor. Comments, thank you. [00:22:58] Mr. Allman. It's good to meet. In that case, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye. [00:23:04] Aye. Opposed, like sign. Motion passes.
This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.
- 9.f
Resolution No. 2020-59: Authorizing the Submission of the Small Cities CDBG Application
approvedCouncil adopted Resolution 2020-59 authorizing staff to submit a Small Cities Community Development Block Grant application to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity for FY2019, requesting $750,000 with a $50,000 match to repair or replace a minimum of 11 single-family residential properties within the city.
Ord. Resolution No. 2020-59
- motion:Motion to approve Resolution 2020-59 authorizing submission of the Small Cities CDBG application. (passed)
Florida Department of Economic OpportunityAllmanDeputy MayorFederal Fiscal Year 2019Resolution No. 2020-59Small Cities Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)▶ Jump to 23:07 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:23:07] Next, Resolution 2020-59. [00:23:10] This is Resolution number 2020-59, a resolution [00:23:14] authorizing the submission of an application for the Small Cities Community [00:23:17] Development Block Grant to the Florida Department of Economic [00:23:20] Opportunity for federal fiscal year 2019. [00:23:24] This is the last agenda item related to this [00:23:28] specific topic, and [00:23:31] this agenda item, if you approve it, will authorize the staff to submit the [00:23:38] application [00:23:39] in which we are proposing funding in the amount of $750,000 [00:23:45] with a $50,000 match, and which we are proposing [00:23:50] to address either repairing or replacing up to 11 [00:23:54] single-family residential [00:23:57] properties within the city's jurisdictional [00:24:00] limits, and we are recommending that you [00:24:05] pass the resolution. Thank you. We'll open it up for public comment. [00:24:11] Seeing no one coming forward, bring it back to Council. [00:24:14] Move for approval. Second. To the maker. Get it submitted. [00:24:18] Second. Deputy Mayor. Comments. Thank you. Mr. Allman. [00:24:23] Reiterating, this was a minimum number, so [00:24:26] to the degree that those funds can go beyond 11, I'm [00:24:30] looking at this. Yes, it could. That we could have more than 11 homes improve [00:24:34] because it's a minimum. Right, it's a minimum. [00:24:38] Thank you. I think this is the most separate [00:24:41] items we've had on one single topic ever at a meeting. [00:24:46] That's because we're entering the federal bureaucracy. [00:24:49] So we need to make sure we've got every T crossed and I dotted. [00:24:53] I really appreciate the work that you two have done. Thank you. [00:24:56] It is an enormous amount of work, I know, and [00:24:59] do appreciate it. But once these items are put in place, [00:25:04] subsequent years will be less [00:25:07] paper-worthy. Paper-worky? [00:25:12] Okay. If there's no further discussion, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye. [00:25:16] Aye. Opposed, like sign. Motion passes.
This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.
- 9.g
2017 Wayfinding Project - Phase 2 Project Closeout
approvedCouncil approved the closeout of the 2017 Wayfinding Project Phase 2, including a deductive change order of $3,448.75 and a final pay request of $91,794.70. A resident raised concerns about misspellings (e.g., 'France' instead of 'Francis'), inconsistent fonts, missing signage, and inadequate directional signs, which staff agreed to address as punch list items.
- motion:Approve a deductive change order of $3,448.75 and the final pay request of $91,794.70 for the 2017 Wayfinding Project Phase 2 closeout. (passed)
5500 Riva Dell PlaceCorner of Main and US 19Marine Parkway walkoverNorthbound US 19 at Trouble Creekeastbound Louisiana at the corner of Louisiana-Madisonsouthbound Grand Boulevard at LouisianaArete IndustriesGulf High SchoolGulf Middle SchoolKeiser UniversityPablocki Sign CompanyBill PhillipsGary GanzMurphyRobert2017 Wayfinding Project Phase 2Francis Avenue ParkGray Preserve▶ Jump to 25:20 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:25:20] Next, 2017 Wayfinding Project, Phase 2 project closeout. [00:25:24] At long last, this project is completed. It was implemented in two phases. [00:25:30] The first phase involved Arete Industries [00:25:34] and the second phase of the project was completed by Pablocki Sign Company. [00:25:40] The purpose of the agenda item [00:25:43] is for you to approve a deductive change order in the amount of [00:25:49] $3,448.75 [00:25:53] and additionally to approve the final pay request [00:25:57] in the amount of $91,794.70. [00:26:02] Thank you. I'll open it up for public comment. [00:26:10] Bill Phillips, 5500 Riva Dell Place. [00:26:29] It's hard to do that after 58 years of being in my house on Colonial Drive, but [00:26:33] Apartment 339, New Port Richey, Florida, 34652. [00:26:38] This project obviously is one of the kickoff events that we did [00:26:43] to start rebranding the city of New Port Richey. [00:26:46] We toiled over designs. We had a consultant. [00:26:51] I'm still not sure exactly what all the consultant brought to the table [00:26:55] because I have [00:26:58] four specific things I'd like to talk about. [00:27:01] One is it's almost a half a million dollar project [00:27:05] and there are signs that are incomplete. [00:27:09] You have the sign at [00:27:12] eastbound Louisiana at the corner of Louisiana-Madison. [00:27:17] It still has the word France instead of Francis Avenue. [00:27:22] Then you also have one on southbound Grand Boulevard at Louisiana [00:27:27] in front of Gary Ganz's business. It also says France [00:27:30] instead of Francis Avenue. [00:27:34] Over and above that, the directional signs on 19 that says downtown [00:27:39] and the rec center and City Hall. It says City Hall [00:27:44] Library and I'll get to that point in a minute. [00:27:47] You don't know you're at New Port Richey until you get to the intersection and you see [00:27:51] the brand new sign [00:27:53] that says Kaiser University. [00:27:56] That sign in some ways should have said [00:27:59] City of New Port Richey downtown blank, blank, blank [00:28:02] because the fonts on that are pretty good size. If there's a federal law that says [00:28:07] you're not allowed to do it, [00:28:08] so be it. At the same token, [00:28:11] you spent that money and that's your main entrance. [00:28:14] Eventually, we talked about a walkover, the one down at [00:28:18] Marine Parkway. [00:28:21] I'd like for you to look at that because all it says is downtown. [00:28:25] What downtown? You get to the intersection, you see the New Port Richey sign [00:28:29] and then you know where you're at. So you passed it, you gotta go down and make a U-turn [00:28:33] which causes a [00:28:35] traffic issue coming back. [00:28:38] Also, I think there's some inadequacies in the signage on Madison, [00:28:43] especially when you come to Louisiana from Gulf High [00:28:47] or from Gulf Drive or down. It doesn't give you any indication to turn left to [00:28:52] go to Gulf Middle School [00:28:54] or to the Gray Preserve or to Francis Avenue Park in either direction. [00:28:59] Your other signs on that go all the way back to almost Main Street [00:29:03] and also over by Gulf High. Over and above that, there's some inconsistencies in the [00:29:08] signs. [00:29:09] The font size, and I know the project was done by two or three different vendors, [00:29:14] totally understand, but your consultant should have picked it up. [00:29:18] You paid money for this to be done to check off to get them paid. [00:29:24] The font size and the material reflectivity [00:29:27] gives me some concern because obviously we know signs are [00:29:32] an abundancy. The spacing and the readability on some of the signs is very [00:29:37] tight [00:29:38] and it makes it very tough. And on some of the signs it says library city hall [00:29:43] and on others it says city hall library. So there's some inconsistencies. [00:29:47] And then, just obviously those points. [00:29:52] And then some signs near Gulf Middle School that talk about [00:29:57] Anna Congress in Louisiana. [00:30:00] Thank you. If you could provide us with a list of those to check, that would be super. [00:30:06] I'll send you an email. Excuse me, I apologize. I'll send you the emails with the photographs I took. [00:30:11] I don't mean to be overly about this, but that does set a tone, [00:30:16] and the tone needs to be consistent and correct. Thank you so much. [00:30:19] Thank you very much. Anyone else? [00:30:22] Seeing no one else coming forward, bring it back to Council. [00:30:26] Move for approval. [00:30:28] We have a motion and a second to that. [00:30:30] It's been so long since we've had some public input on an agenda item. [00:30:34] I can remember we did it for three minutes. We do, though, correct? [00:30:37] I'm sorry about that. [00:30:40] Second. [00:30:42] Just I noticed it indicated the LED board sign added to the monument sign, [00:30:49] and I guess not coincidentally, I saw it lit up today. [00:30:55] Welcome to New Port Richey, with our new font and logo from our recent work. [00:31:03] So nice to see that lighted up. [00:31:07] Very bright. [00:31:09] Since he brought something up, we have different sign companies making different signs. [00:31:14] Is there a longevity or some kind of guarantee that we have from different companies or different signs? [00:31:22] The quality of the work, yes. [00:31:25] And there are some punch list items that are outstanding, [00:31:29] and that will be resolved before a final payment is issued. [00:31:34] Okay, that's real important. [00:31:35] Mr. Murphy? [00:31:37] Is there a way or will there be any way we can put the new logo on? [00:31:42] Some of the signs actually have some room. It looks like we could do that. [00:31:46] We can look at the layout and determine if it is good. [00:31:52] I know there's different amounts of lettering on different signs, [00:31:56] but there may be some way to incorporate it, so we'll look at that. [00:32:00] If you're doing punch list items, coming northbound on 19 at Trouble Creek, [00:32:05] the last time I noticed it, the top sort of centerpiece was missing on that sign. [00:32:12] Robert has that. [00:32:14] Okay. [00:32:15] And for Mr. Phillips' benefit and the rest of you as well, [00:32:18] we are also looking at a much larger welcome sign structure of some sort [00:32:26] that will go right at the corner of Main and 19. [00:32:28] So it will be very obvious that there's a downtown to turn to visit. [00:32:33] Just a comment. [00:32:35] If we decide we need more signs, [00:32:37] are we getting them at the same rate that we paid for the signs we have instead of up? [00:32:41] No. [00:32:43] We would have to pay the rate at the time of the purchase. [00:32:49] Hopefully it would be comparable, but we don't have any contract for them to replace signs. [00:32:59] We will just have to order them directly. [00:33:03] Any other discussion? [00:33:06] Hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye. [00:33:09] Aye. [00:33:10] Opposed, like sign. [00:33:11] Mr. Mayor, I should have additionally noted the signs can be re-lettered, [00:33:15] so we don't have to buy a whole new sign and frame. [00:33:19] Well, I'm just saying that things are going to change. [00:33:22] Commercial is going to change. [00:33:24] The whole hospital district is going to change, and we'll probably need more signs.
This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.
- 9.h
2019 Fleet Maintenance/Utility Purchasing Warehouse & Storage Building Construction Project – Engineering Services
approvedCouncil approved a task order with Williams Architect Group, not to exceed $250,000, for pre-design and design engineering services for a new Fleet Maintenance/Utility Purchasing Warehouse & Storage Building to replace a 1973 steel-frame structure deemed inadequate by a 2019 structural assessment. Staff selected Williams via existing continuing service agreements after negotiations with the top-ranked RFQ firm failed and concerns arose with the second and third firms. Construction is anticipated to take 12 months following a four-month design phase.
- motion:Approve the task order with Williams Architect Group not to exceed $250,000 for engineering/design services for the new fleet maintenance/utility warehouse building. (passed)
Williams Architect GroupMr. AllmanMr. RiveraMs. Meehan2019 Fleet Maintenance/Utility Purchasing Warehouse & Storage Building Construction Project2019 structural assessmentLibrary renovations projectRFQ for engineering servicesSandbag operations▶ Jump to 33:29 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:33:29] Right. [00:33:30] Thank you very much. [00:33:31] Next is Fleet Maintenance Utility Purchasing Warehouse [00:33:35] and Storage Building Construction Project. [00:33:39] The proposed project is the result of a structural assessment that was conducted back in 19. [00:33:47] The specific recommendation is to enter into a contract with Williams Architect [00:33:54] for both pre-design and design services, and I'm sure Mr. Rivera has prepared some comments, [00:34:00] so we'll allow him to fully introduce the agenda item. [00:34:04] Thank you. [00:34:05] The attached task order from Williams Architect is in the amount not to exceed $250,000. [00:34:12] This is for the engineering services, design, and construction. [00:34:18] As Ms. Meehan had stated, the 2019 structural assessment analysis recommended [00:34:24] that the existing building be replaced. [00:34:27] The existing building is a steel frame that was constructed in 1973. [00:34:34] In addition to the utility purchasing warehouse, the fleet maintenance, and storage, [00:34:41] the site houses heavy maintenance equipment, ancillary equipment, [00:34:46] construction materials, and police seizure vehicles. [00:34:50] As the size of our operation grows and the services are more in demand, [00:34:56] the construction of a new facility is recommended to maintain the appropriate level of service [00:35:03] In 2019, we had submitted for an RFQ. [00:35:08] We had three engineering firms respond to that RFQ. [00:35:14] We started negotiations with the first-rank firm, and after negotiations failed, [00:35:21] we had a task order in excess of $500,000 for these services submitted, [00:35:27] so we could not reach an agreement on what we thought was a fair and equitable cost. [00:35:34] We reached out to the number two and number three firms. [00:35:38] There were some concerns with those. [00:35:40] One firm was downsizing the other firm. [00:35:43] Staff didn't feel like the city standards and criteria that we have that this firm could supply that, [00:35:51] so what we ended up doing was we took a look at our existing continuing service agreements [00:35:56] that we have with different engineering firms and architect firms, [00:36:00] and when we did our review, staff came out with recommending Williams Architect Group. [00:36:07] They are currently working with the city on the library renovations project. [00:36:12] Looking at their history, they have extensive experience in these types of facilities, [00:36:19] and so we would recommend that you approve this task order with Williams Architect. [00:36:24] We also took a look at the proposed amount. [00:36:29] This proposed amount was 12.65% of the construction budget of $2 million. [00:36:36] That's within industry standards, but it also included a needs assessment, [00:36:42] and typically your engineering for construction doesn't include that, [00:36:45] so if we back that number out, our percentage went down to 11.65%, which is even better. [00:36:52] The existing structure that we have, once we've completed the construction of the new building, [00:37:00] should you approve it, we will repurpose that as a storage facility for heavy equipment like the payloaders, [00:37:08] the VACONs, the BACOs, those types of vehicles and equipment that the sun is just taking its toll on them. [00:37:18] Then, of course, the front end of the structure we would propose to just have an overhang [00:37:24] to where our current sandbag operations where residents come and are filling up their sandbags, [00:37:30] typically that's during the bad weather. [00:37:33] We'll position that operation over to the front of the building to where even if it's raining or if it's lightning [00:37:39] or anything like that, that the residents can still get underneath some shelter [00:37:43] and still continue to get their sandbags. [00:37:45] So with that, we would recommend approval. [00:37:47] Thank you. [00:37:48] And the sand's a lot. It doesn't waste much. [00:37:50] It's a little bit drier. [00:37:53] Open it up for public comment. [00:37:56] I'm seeing no one come forward to bring it back to Council. [00:37:59] Move for approval. [00:38:00] Second. [00:38:01] We have a motion and a second to the maker. [00:38:03] The second? [00:38:04] No. [00:38:05] Deputy Mayor? [00:38:06] Yeah, this building's definitely in rough shape. [00:38:08] It's definitely time for a new one. [00:38:10] Mr. Allman? [00:38:11] Go ahead. [00:38:12] I'm ready to vote for it. [00:38:13] In that case, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye. [00:38:16] Aye. [00:38:17] Aye. [00:38:18] Opposed, like sign. [00:38:19] Motion passes. [00:38:20] Next. [00:38:21] When do we expect the building to be done? [00:38:25] We're looking at 12 months construction time. [00:38:28] So if our design can get completed within the four-month time frame, [00:38:33] it would be next calendar year. [00:38:35] Very good. [00:38:37] Next is purchase of watchguard in-car and body camera system.
This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.
- 9.i
You arrived here from a search for “George Floyd” — transcript expanded below
Purchase of WatchGuard In-Car & Body Camera System
approvedCouncil approved the purchase of 40 body cameras and 13 in-car cameras from WatchGuard for $264,554.34, financed over five years with the first year covered by equitable sharing funds and future years projected from Penny for Pasco. Council members emphasized the cameras protect both citizens and officers and noted the purchase has been planned for over a year, predating recent protests.
- motion:Motion to approve purchase of 40 body cameras and 13 in-car cameras from WatchGuard for $264,554.34, financed over five years. (passed)
5611 Georgia AvenueABC Action NewsWatchGuardBreonna TaylorCouncilman DavisCouncilman MurphyDebbie MannsDeputy Mayor StarkeyGeorge FloydJohnMitch JacksonMr. OlinBlack Lives MatterEquitable Sharing fundsPenny for Pasco▶ Jump to 38:38 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:38:41] Ms. Manns? [00:38:42] Yes, sir. [00:38:43] Every department that has police officers on its force [00:38:51] unquestionably feels complaints about officers [00:38:57] allegedly using either their power or their weapon inappropriately [00:39:02] or outside of typical law enforcement protocols. [00:39:07] In that respect, the chief has been advocating for some time now [00:39:13] to purchase a body camera system. [00:39:16] The advantages of the system are that they produce a clean picture of actually [00:39:22] how officers do behave in potentially contentious situations [00:39:27] and they provide improved evidence. [00:39:32] The recommendation before you is to purchase 40 body cameras [00:39:37] and 13 in-car cameras from WatchGuard in the amount of $264,554.34. [00:39:48] We are proposing to finance the purchase over a five-year period of time. [00:39:54] The amount that will be financed annually is $52,910.87. [00:40:03] Recently, the chief advised the finance director and I that we were the recipient [00:40:11] of some equitable sharing funds, and so we're proposing for the first year [00:40:15] of the program that we rely on the equitable sharing funds [00:40:20] to support the expenditure. [00:40:22] Future years at this time is projected to be paid out of penny for pasco [00:40:27] unless we get some additional equitable sharing dollars from the chief. [00:40:33] Very good. [00:40:34] Open it up for public comment. [00:40:37] Singh, if you could come to the mic, please, [00:40:41] and identify yourself, name, and address for the record. [00:40:51] Mitch Jackson, 5611 Georgia Avenue. [00:40:55] My only question is why do we have to finance it? [00:40:57] If we finance it, it just costs more money. [00:41:01] That's all. [00:41:02] Okay. [00:41:03] Thank you. [00:41:04] Thank you. [00:41:05] Anyone else? [00:41:09] Seeing none, I'll bring it back to council. [00:41:11] Move for approval. [00:41:13] Second. [00:41:15] To the maker. [00:41:16] As Ms. Mann said, the chief has been advocating for these cameras [00:41:19] for quite some time. [00:41:21] I'm just going to use this moment right now to just say how disappointed I am [00:41:25] in some of the press coverage our city has received. [00:41:28] The mayor was misrepresented by ABC Action News. [00:41:31] I called the reporter, let him know I was not happy with the report at all. [00:41:35] He said he was going to talk to his boss. [00:41:37] They didn't rescind it. [00:41:38] They issued a statement on the piece on their website. [00:41:43] But even the last news up that I saw here from ABC Action News, [00:41:48] they made it look like we're doing this because Black Lives Matter came in [00:41:51] our city and started protesting. [00:41:53] They came in here and demanded cameras. [00:41:55] We've been talking about this for well over a year. [00:41:58] So sometimes if you do your research and homework before you come into a [00:42:02] council meeting and scream at people and demand things, [00:42:05] you might see that we're already on the same page on a lot of issues. [00:42:08] But once again, very, very disappointed with ABC Action News. [00:42:11] This is something we've been talking about for a long time. [00:42:13] Our officers act in a very, very, very professional manner, [00:42:17] especially under the circumstances that they've been put in recently [00:42:21] with these protests from both sides. [00:42:24] So this will just verify in case something does happen, [00:42:27] that they do act in a professional manner. [00:42:29] It's going to protect our officers, not just the public. [00:42:31] So I'm excited about it. [00:42:33] Thank you. [00:42:34] To the second. [00:42:35] I'm just looking forward to finally getting these out to our police. [00:42:40] It's something that protects our citizens and our police officers. [00:42:44] So I'm glad finally we're able to see it come through [00:42:47] and get them out there to them. [00:42:50] Chopper. [00:42:51] Addressing funding, I just think that we probably went through a lot of work [00:42:57] to decide how to fund this and felt this was the best way, [00:43:00] and that probably we might, over the next few years, [00:43:03] not have that additional cost to our budget if we find different avenues. [00:43:08] So it may not cost us the interest. [00:43:12] Mr. Olin. [00:43:13] Right. [00:43:14] I'm also happy to see this put in place. [00:43:16] It has been talked about for many years, [00:43:18] and circumstances certainly have brought us to the point where it's a good idea, [00:43:25] and all parties agree, it appears. [00:43:30] So as to the funding, again, as Councilman Davis has said [00:43:36] and as our city manager has responded to the question, [00:43:41] if there is available equitable sharing and money is tight [00:43:45] and we were able to get some of those payments, [00:43:50] once we've financed it, the question will be, if we've already committed to it, [00:43:55] whether or not we'll be able to even avail ourselves of the equitable sharing. [00:43:58] But I'm assuming that we would, [00:44:00] and I appreciated your comments that we may take it from Penny for Pasco in the future. [00:44:05] We certainly can't obligate future councils to where they'll get the money from, [00:44:09] but we've made the commitment to buy it, and we can put it to use immediately. [00:44:14] So I'm in favor. [00:44:17] And creative funding is always important when you're in a budget year as tight as the one is this year, [00:44:23] which is just brutally tight. [00:44:27] We've had the first budget hearing, and the second one is coming up in a couple weeks or a week. [00:44:34] John's already warned us about the next year or two. [00:44:36] And the next year is probably worse as well. [00:44:39] So spreading out a quarter-million-dollar expense comes in handy. [00:44:44] We have been talking about the light cameras for, it has probably been a year or more. [00:44:50] It became an absolute critical item back in the spring when we saw what we call the [00:45:00] what happened up north with George Floyd and Breonna Taylor, and from spring on, the one [00:45:11] thing I can tell you that has been in the capital expenditure budget, I think, continuously [00:45:17] during that was we have to figure a way to get body cams onto our officers. It protects [00:45:25] the public, as Councilman Murphy pointed out, and it also protects the police officers. [00:45:31] We've seen both sides of that over the last six or eight months, where police misconduct [00:45:39] has been identified through videos, and also as close as Hillsborough County, where somebody [00:45:47] made a totally unfounded complaint against a deputy down there, and the body cam said, [00:45:54] nah, that didn't happen, but that particular deputy would have run the risk of being hung [00:46:01] out to dry for something he didn't do, and these body cams will provide clear evidence [00:46:10] that protects everybody around. In my discussions with people across the political spectrum, [00:46:19] it's been pretty much unanimous that this is a good thing for us to invest in, because [00:46:26] it does, it protects everybody, and so I'm very much in favor, as with Deputy Mayor Starkey, [00:46:37] I am very disappointed in ABC Action News. They completely took me out of context, showing [00:46:47] about 30 seconds of a 45-minute interview, and got people hopping mad that probably shouldn't [00:46:55] have been, but it is what it is, and that's why they pay me the big bucks to be mayor, [00:47:02] which for the record is $350 a month, so I had somebody today telling me I should be [00:47:10] answering my phones more quickly because of all the money I was making as mayor. Be that [00:47:16] as it may, this is something, it's one of the things that is on the Black Lives Matter [00:47:23] national agenda, that they think body cams are a good idea, well, heck, we agree, and [00:47:29] we've been agreeing since before they came out and said it, and that's why we started [00:47:34] moving forward as far back as we did on doing this. There's a lot of other things that have [00:47:40] been brought up nationally that we also agree on, you know, things like diversity training, [00:47:46] which we already do, you know, things like treating people with common decency, regardless [00:47:55] of race, creed, color, faith, sexual orientation, sex, and I think there's probably half a dozen [00:48:03] or other things, basically, you could summarize it, we just don't discriminate, period. And [00:48:12] we encourage the residents of our city and the businesses in our city to do likewise. [00:48:19] These are all just treating people as common decency and, you know, courtesy and treating [00:48:25] people based on, you know, who they are, what they're doing, and we've had, I think, pretty [00:48:34] much an open invitation, and I've said this before, that if somebody wants to come to [00:48:40] New Port Richey to live and work here and to make this their home and to help make New Port Richey a better place for everybody, come on down. We're ready. We want you to be a [00:48:52] part of our community. On the other hand, if you don't, well, please go somewhere else.
This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.
- 9.j
Purchase of Hardware and Software Upgrades for Police Department
approvedCouncil approved the purchase of 45 in-car printers, five office computers, and two APC power supplies for the Police Department, totaling $43,030.56. The purchase, originally slated for the 2021 budget, was brought forward using equitable sharing funds.
- motion:Move for approval of the purchase of hardware and software upgrades for the Police Department using equitable sharing funds. (passed)
Kim BogartMr. AltmanMr. Weed2021 budgetEquitable Sharing FundsPolice Department hardware/software upgrades▶ Jump to 48:54 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:49:00] But we're a very open and accepting community, and we try to be. So to see folks trying to [00:49:12] paint us as something other than that, I think is absolutely reprehensible. I'll get [00:49:19] off my soapbox. Anything else on the topic at hand? Hearing nothing, all those in favor, [00:49:26] please signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, like sign. Motion passes. Next is purchase [00:49:34] of hardware and software upgrades for the police department. Yes, sir. We don't typically [00:49:39] bring these type of purchases to you, and what we're talking about specifically is 45 [00:49:46] in-car printers, five office computers, and two APC power supplies, which I think is a [00:49:54] video redaction software. No? Okay. Yes? All right. Okay. Good. Then I'm not too far off. [00:50:03] The reason we're bringing it before you this evening is because we're asking to use equitable [00:50:07] sharing funds. The total purchases which were slated to occur in the 2021 budget were in the [00:50:15] amount of $43,030.56, and we're recommending that we go forward with the purchase now as a result [00:50:24] of the fact that we do have equitable sharing funds available. And Mr. Weed and Kim Bogart [00:50:31] worked very hard on getting this together for you this evening. Thank you. Open it up for public [00:50:37] comment. Seeing no one come forward, I'll bring it back to council. Move for approval. Second. [00:50:46] For the maker? Second. Deputy Mayor? Mr. Altman? Better buy some ink. Oh, do you use ink? Thermal? [00:50:59] Better buy some paper. Yeah, you'll use a bunch of it. There's no further discussion. All those [00:51:07] in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, like sign. Motion passes. Next is annual
This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.
- 9.k
Annual Review of Comprehensive Fee Schedule
approvedCouncil reviewed the annual Comprehensive Fee Schedule via Resolution 2020-41. The Mayor proposed three amendments: keep Peace Hall rental fees at current rates (rather than $50 increase) due to COVID closure, reduce beverage license fees back to $0, and simplify residential construction fees over $100,000 to a flat $2,500 with $3 per additional $1,000 over $1 million. Motion passed with the amendments.
- motion:Approve Resolution 2020-41 adopting the Comprehensive Fee Schedule for FY 2020-2021 with three amendments: keep Peace Hall fees unchanged, set beverage license fees to $0, and simplify residential construction fees over $100,000 to $2,500 (with $3 per additional $1,000 over $1 million). (passed)
Debbie FeastMr. UllmanBeverage license feesComprehensive Fee Schedule FY 2020-2021Peace Hall rental feesResidential construction feesResolution 2020-41▶ Jump to 51:14 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:51:14] review of the comprehensive fee schedule. Each year I present a recommendation to you in regard [00:51:21] to a review that the staff does of our comprehensive annual fee schedule, and we typically do that [00:51:29] around budget time. And since it's about that time, we have gone forward and [00:51:39] are recommending amendments to the comprehensive fee schedule. Some are reductions in fees, [00:51:44] others are additions, and Mrs. Feast has put together the fee schedule. If you have additional [00:51:52] comments, if not, we're prepared to respond to what questions you may have of us in regard to [00:51:59] the fee schedule. Very good. Did you have a presentation, Ms. Feast? No. Okay. Open up for [00:52:06] public comment. Seeing no one come forward, bring it back to council. Mr. Mayor, there is a resolution [00:52:13] associated with this. It's all right. It's resolution 2020-41, a resolution of the City [00:52:18] Council of the City of New Port Richey, Florida, providing a comprehensive table of fees for fiscal [00:52:23] year 2020-2021, modifying certain fees and providing an effective date. My apologies, it was not marked [00:52:28] as a resolution on the agenda. Sorry. That way. Any public comment on the resolution? [00:52:37] Hearing none, bring it back to council. I'd like to have a discussion before we go ahead and [00:52:41] decide what to vote on. Certainly. One is on page 151. It has to do with Peace Hall. [00:52:53] With COVID coming on and kind of shutting down Peace Hall, I would just like to leave the [00:52:59] rates at the current fees. The recommendation is to increase each of the fees by $50. [00:53:14] That's number one. Okay. Number two is go to page 155. It has to do with a beverage license [00:53:21] and, you know, we're trying to invite people to come and have a, you know, we have a bar and [00:53:27] restaurant downtown, bars and restaurants downtown. They have fees, and I think it's $300 and it was [00:53:34] zero. That's correct. We weren't charging in the past. Yeah, and zero too for any one, two, or three [00:53:41] day event. Now it's $50. They're pretty much presenting their life. They take all the information [00:53:48] from the city. They take it to the beverage department. Beverage department okays it. [00:53:52] They bring back a license and they give it to us, and I didn't think $50 or $300 was, [00:53:58] you know, they're being charged, you know, for multiple other things to get in existence just [00:54:04] to present the license that they got from the state, you know, to us for $300 or $50 for an [00:54:10] individual event. I just thought it should go, that should go back to zero and they left it zero [00:54:15] just because it's, we do the work to send them there, then the state does the work, [00:54:19] and then we bring it back and for turning in a license. I thought that that wasn't [00:54:23] really worth it, and then the third one is on page 156. [00:54:32] This has to do with [00:54:38] it's residential construction. Construction, and I just thought just because your house was over [00:54:43] a half a million dollars or over, it was $100,000, over $100,000, let's say up to $500,000. [00:54:51] If it was $490,000 or $475,000 and then there was an increase in the fee start at, [00:54:58] was it $2,100, and then if it goes over up to a million dollars, it goes to $360,000. [00:55:06] I mean, I didn't really under, or $3,600, you know, from $2,100 to $3,600, plus there's [00:55:11] additional for every thousand dollars of the value of it. I just thought if you're spending [00:55:15] over $100,000 up to a million dollars, why not just pick a number halfway between the two and [00:55:21] let's run with that. I think Debbie and I talked about something like $2,500, is that what we came [00:55:25] up with? $2,500 if it's that level, and then it was the, was it $350,000 and down to $250,000, just [00:55:34] choose a $300,000 because, you know, just a small variance in your whole fee changes, and I don't [00:55:40] really see why that should be, you know, once you get above $100,000. [00:55:44] That would seem to be more, almost more trouble than SWERF to track it. [00:55:47] Yeah, I mean, you know, could you please make my house, you know, $495,000 instead of $505,000, [00:55:54] you know, and play that game. So those are the three that I came up with, and I think that we [00:56:00] should, you know. Gentlemen, any thoughts? You want to make that in the form of a motion? [00:56:06] I'd like those three to be changed to my suggestions and otherwise approve it. [00:56:11] We have a motion on the floor. We have a second. [00:56:15] I'll second. How is that going to impact? [00:56:17] I haven't determined any projections on what that impact will be, but it will be a reduction in fees. [00:56:27] The only thing I want to additionally add is that the motion should include that it's $3 [00:56:34] $3 for a million and above for each additional $1,000. [00:56:41] Right, yeah, yeah, that's when I said $3. [00:56:43] I'm sorry, I thought you said $2.50. [00:56:45] Well, I said there was a $3.50 and $2.50 to make that $3. [00:56:48] Oh, okay. [00:56:52] Do we have a second? [00:56:54] And the other fees were $2,100 and $3,600. [00:56:58] Instead of pick a number of $25, I thought that was halfway too. [00:57:03] That sort of split the difference. [00:57:05] It probably was. [00:57:07] Deputy Mayor? [00:57:07] You did your homework on this one, Chopper. [00:57:09] You went through all the way up to page 150. [00:57:11] No, they're all good points. [00:57:12] I'll support it. [00:57:13] Yeah. [00:57:14] Well, especially with the Peace Hall being pretty much closed up for six months. [00:57:19] I mean, I come back and ask more. [00:57:21] Let's just get it back on the records and start using it again, you know, for $50. [00:57:26] Mr. Ullman, any thoughts? [00:57:28] No, I know it was a number of years when we converted to this kind of a calculated program [00:57:35] in an effort to get the building department, the planning department to be self-sustaining. [00:57:40] So, you know, with the amount of money that goes to other general fund departments, [00:57:47] the goal was always that the activity that was generated in the planning department [00:57:52] and building department could be assessed out in large part to support the operation [00:58:00] of that department. [00:58:01] And so I'm not opposed to the simplification for calculation to take a few battles out [00:58:09] for people that are going to build a house for more than a half a million or a million. [00:58:14] So I don't know how many of those we'll have. [00:58:17] But just for clarification, has the motion been made yet? [00:58:23] Yes. [00:58:23] I'm sorry. [00:58:24] That first $100,000, you haven't changed its cost? [00:58:29] No. [00:58:30] Only just for the larger houses? [00:58:32] Yes. [00:58:33] And so the battle lines will be drawn at the $100,000 mark now. [00:58:38] For the record, it lowers the price right after that happens. [00:58:44] It really does benefit those folks that are having a $110,000 house because you've lowered [00:58:48] their rate a little bit and made it smooth. [00:58:53] So accounting-wise, I don't think it hurts the city. [00:58:57] It doesn't seem to. [00:58:58] And to make it simpler, so I'll support it. [00:59:02] I'm going to guess it's going to wind up being pretty much a wash by the time it's done. [00:59:05] It's just, you know, when you're talking about a half a million dollars and whether it's [00:59:11] $5,000 below it or $5,000 above it, you know, when you played this game, I just didn't want [00:59:16] that game played. [00:59:18] Any further discussion? [00:59:20] Hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye. [00:59:23] Aye. [00:59:24] Opposed, like sign. [00:59:25] Motion passes.
This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.
- 10Communications▶ 59:27
- 11Adjournment▶ 1:18:01