Council approved up to $11 million in revenue notes for a parking garage and Fire Station #2, and legalized golf carts on Main Street.
23 items on the agenda · 20 decisions recorded
On the agenda
- 1Call to Order – Roll Call▶ 0:00
- 2
Pledge of Allegiance
Pledge of Allegiance and moment of silence in honor of servicemen and women.
▶ Jump to 0:18 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:00:18] We have a quorum, so I'd ask everybody please stand and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance [00:00:19] and remain standing for a moment of silence in honor of our servicemen and women at home [00:00:22] and abroad. [00:00:23] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for
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
Procedural item: Pledge of Allegiance and moment of silence.
▶ Jump to 0:30 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:00:30] which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. [00:00:42] Thank you. [00:00:43] 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 October 20, 2020 Work Session and Regular Meeting Minutes
approvedCouncil approved the October 20, 2020 work session and regular meeting minutes by voice vote.
- motion:Approve the October 20, 2020 work session and regular meeting minutes. (passed)
▶ Jump to 0:45 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:00:45] First item on the agenda is the approval of the October 20th work session and regular [00:00:49] meeting minutes. [00:00:50] Move for approval. [00:00:52] We have a motion and a second. [00:00:55] Any discussion? [00:00:56] Hearing none, all those in favor, say aye. [00:00:59] Aye. [00:01:00] Opposed? [00:01:01] Like sign.
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.
- 5Vox Pop for Items Not Listed on the Agenda or Listed on Consent Agenda▶ 1:02
- 6.a
Cultural Affairs Committee Minutes - September 2020
approvedon consentThe Cultural Affairs Committee Minutes for September 2020 were approved as part of the consent agenda.
- motion:Motion to approve the consent agenda, including the Cultural Affairs Committee Minutes for September 2020. (passed)
▶ Jump to 8:00 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:08:00] We'll go on to the consent agenda. [00:08:02] Move for approval. [00:08:05] We have a motion and a second. [00:08:07] All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. [00:08:10] Aye. [00:08:11] Opposed? [00:08:12] Like sign. [00:08:13] Motion passes. [00:08:14] Next, public reading of ordinances.
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.b
Environmental Committee Minutes - August and September 2020
approvedon consentThe Environmental Committee Minutes for August and September 2020 were approved as part of the consent agenda.
- motion:Motion to approve the consent agenda, including the Environmental Committee Minutes for August and September 2020. (passed)
▶ Jump to 8:00 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:08:00] We'll go on to the consent agenda. [00:08:02] Move for approval. [00:08:05] We have a motion and a second. [00:08:07] All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. [00:08:10] Aye. [00:08:11] Opposed? [00:08:12] Like sign. [00:08:13] Motion passes. [00:08:14] Next, public reading of ordinances.
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.c
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Minutes - August 2020
approvedon consentParks and Recreation Advisory Board minutes from August 2020 were approved as part of the consent agenda.
- motion:Motion to approve the consent agenda, including the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board minutes from August 2020. (passed)
▶ Jump to 8:00 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:08:00] We'll go on to the consent agenda. [00:08:02] Move for approval. [00:08:05] We have a motion and a second. [00:08:07] All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. [00:08:10] Aye. [00:08:11] Opposed? [00:08:12] Like sign. [00:08:13] Motion passes. [00:08:14] Next, public reading of ordinances.
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.d
Police Pension Board Minutes - August 2020
approvedon consentPolice Pension Board Minutes from August 2020 were approved as part of the consent agenda.
- motion:Approve the consent agenda, including the August 2020 Police Pension Board Minutes. (passed)
▶ Jump to 8:00 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:08:00] We'll go on to the consent agenda. [00:08:02] Move for approval. [00:08:05] We have a motion and a second. [00:08:07] All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. [00:08:10] Aye. [00:08:11] Opposed? [00:08:12] Like sign. [00:08:13] Motion passes. [00:08:14] Next, public reading of ordinances.
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.e
Purchases/Payments for City Council Approval
approvedon consentConsent agenda, including purchases/payments for City Council approval, was approved by unanimous voice vote.
- motion:Motion to approve the consent agenda. (passed)
▶ Jump to 8:00 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:08:00] We'll go on to the consent agenda. [00:08:02] Move for approval. [00:08:05] We have a motion and a second. [00:08:07] All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. [00:08:10] Aye. [00:08:11] Opposed? [00:08:12] Like sign. [00:08:13] Motion passes. [00:08:14] Next, public reading of ordinances.
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.
- 7.a
Second Reading, Ordinance No. 2020-2213: Authorize Issuance of Taxable & Tax Exempt Revenue Notes, Series 2020A & 2020B
approvedCouncil held second reading and approved Ordinance 2020-2213, authorizing issuance of up to $11 million in non-ad valorem revenue notes (Series 2020A taxable at 1.11% and Series 2020B tax-exempt at 1.54%) to finance a parking garage ($6.5M, repaid via CRA funds), Fire Station #2 ($2.4M), and library renovations ($1.8M), with the latter two funded through Penny for Pasco. The city has applied for a grant for the fire station and negotiated prepayment without penalty if awarded.
Ord. Ordinance No. 2020-2213
- motion:Move for approval of Ordinance 2020-2213 authorizing issuance of taxable and tax-exempt revenue notes Series 2020A and 2020B. (passed)
Bryant, Miller & OliveFord & AssociatesDwayne DraperMs. ManceWill ReedCRA fundsFire Station #2Library renovation projectOrdinance No. 2020-2213Parking GaragePenny for PascoSeries 2020ASeries 2020B▶ Jump to 8:15 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:08:16] Second reading ordinance 2020-2213. [00:08:18] This is ordinance number 2020-2213, an ordinance of the city of New Port Richey, Florida, authorizing [00:08:24] the issuance of non-ad valorem revenue notes in one or more series in the aggregate principal [00:08:29] amount of not to exceed $11 million to finance the cost of construction, renovation, design, [00:08:34] and or equipping of various capital improvements, including without limitation, an issuer-owned [00:08:40] parking garage, fire station, and public library, and paying costs related thereto, providing [00:08:45] that the notes shall be limited obligations of the city payable from non-ad valorem revenues [00:08:51] budgeted, appropriated, and deposited as provided herein, providing for the right securities [00:08:56] and remedies for the owners of the notes, providing for severability, and providing [00:09:00] an effective date. [00:09:01] Thank you. [00:09:02] Ms. Mance. [00:09:03] Yes, sir. [00:09:04] Mr. Mayor, as was introduced to you at your last council meeting, we are recommending [00:09:10] that you authorize the issuance of $11 million in non-ad valorem revenue notes for the purpose [00:09:19] of the establishment of the parking garage, the construction of fire station number two, [00:09:26] and the library improvement project. [00:09:30] The parking garage structure project represents $6.5 million of investment and will be paid [00:09:40] back through use of CRA funds. [00:09:44] The fire station project is $2.4 million, and the library renovations is $1.8 million. [00:09:54] Both of those projects would be funded through use of Penny for Pasco funds. [00:10:00] The interest rate on the taxable portion of the bond is 1.11%, and on the non-taxable [00:10:17] portion, it's 1.54% interest. [00:10:22] We have Mr. Dwayne Draper here this evening from Bryant, Miller & Olive, and we have Ford [00:10:29] & Associates, Mr. Will Reed, who serves as the city's financial advisor on matters such [00:10:39] as this, and they come prepared to respond to any questions that we didn't get a chance [00:10:46] to address at your first public hearing, and we're prepared to respond to those at this [00:10:53] time. [00:10:54] Very good. [00:10:56] Very good. [00:10:57] I'll open it up for public comment. [00:11:00] Seeing no one come forward, bring it back to council. [00:11:04] I'll move for approval if I have a comment or a question. [00:11:08] Do we have a second? [00:11:10] Second. [00:11:11] Second. [00:11:12] Okay. [00:11:13] To the maker. [00:11:14] Is there grant money that we can apply for, even though we're not going through the state [00:11:18] for the funding for the fire department? [00:11:22] You raise a very good point, and yes, we can, and yes, we have applied for grant funds to [00:11:31] finance a portion of the construction of fire station number two. [00:11:37] We won't know, though, until early next year whether or not that application was successful. [00:11:46] If it was, then we've negotiated an opportunity to prepay back a portion of the grant proceeds [00:11:57] without any prepayment penalty. [00:12:00] Great. [00:12:01] Thank you. [00:12:02] To the second. [00:12:03] Yeah. [00:12:04] This is a redux of this discussion once before, and having asked the question, at 1.1 percent [00:12:11] interest in paying the cost of issuance related to it or whatever other costs are involved, [00:12:17] and the city does have in the revised page for our agenda item that the second, I guess it's the series B, [00:12:32] includes various capital projects, and it says including without limitation an issuer-owned fire station, [00:12:39] public library, and the portion of the issuer-owned parking garage. [00:12:43] So just to say when the time comes, if we get that grant for the fire station, [00:12:48] and there are other because we've got capital projects at all directions here, [00:12:53] if there are other capital projects that are related or that are seen as available to be used for that, [00:13:00] that can also be a discussion, but the prepayment is an option if that's it, [00:13:06] but it's also an option for us to redirect some of those. [00:13:09] And Mr. Draper from Bryant, Miller, and Olive is probably best prepared to respond to that question. [00:13:14] Thank you. [00:13:19] Good evening. [00:13:20] It's Dwayne Draper at Bryant, Miller, and Olive. [00:13:22] Thanks for the question, and, yes, the way we've drafted the project definition for the tax-exempt series B offering [00:13:30] would allow you to have some flexibility as long as we utilize those funds on capital projects, [00:13:38] which would not affect the tax-exempt status of the bonds. [00:13:42] So that is a choice that you could talk about at that time were you fortunate enough to receive that grant. [00:13:48] Since we're getting this grant, wouldn't the grant go in and pay, [00:13:52] and then the money that we have in the loan, then we could take that and put us under the grant? [00:13:56] We'll take that and move that over? [00:13:58] Is that really what we're doing? [00:13:59] Yeah, you would be able to prepay the debt without penalty. [00:14:03] The city manager is correct, negotiated an out for that debt. [00:14:09] Heck, interest rate may be lower at that time and what have you. [00:14:12] Or you could, you know. [00:14:15] We can't really take that money. [00:14:17] We've got to pay that loan up before we get a grant, right? [00:14:20] And we're going to use the money that we're getting in the loan to move that money somewhere else, correct? [00:14:25] Correct. [00:14:26] Okay. [00:14:27] All right. [00:14:28] I just wanted to make sure that was working. [00:14:31] No, I'm good. [00:14:33] I'm excited about it. [00:14:34] It's letting us speed up the construction of Fire Station 2, [00:14:40] which we've been wanting to do for quite some time. [00:14:44] And it will get the library project off the ground quickly as well. [00:14:48] So good all the way around. [00:14:51] Any further discussion? [00:14:53] Hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye. [00:14:56] Aye. [00:14:57] Opposed, like sign. [00:14:58] 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.
- 7.b
Second Reading, Ordinance No. 2020-2212: Amendments to Golf Cart Ordinance
approvedCouncil passed second reading of Ordinance 2020-2212, amending the golf cart ordinance to allow golf cart operation on Main Street between River Road and U.S. Highway 19. Staff noted the next step would be working with FDOT to allow golf carts to legally cross the highway.
Ord. Ordinance No. 2020-2212
- motion:Motion to approve second reading of Ordinance 2020-2212 amending the golf cart ordinance to allow operation on Main Street between River Road and U.S. 19. (passed)
Main Street between River Road and U.S. Highway 19FDOTChief BogartMr. AltmanMs. ManceArticle 11 of Chapter 23Ordinance 2020-2212Section 23-210▶ Jump to 15:00 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:15:00] Next is Second Reading Ordinance 2020-2212. [00:15:04] Ordinance number 2020-2212, an ordinance of the City of New Port Richey, Florida, providing for amendment of Article 11 of Chapter 23, Subsection A of Section 23-210 [00:15:14] of the New Port Richey Code of Ordinances pertaining to streets on which golf carts are prohibited. [00:15:19] Providing for allowance of golf cart operation on Main Street between River Road and U.S. Highway 19. [00:15:25] Providing for conflict, severability, and an effective date. [00:15:28] Thank you. Ms. Mance? As indicated by the City Attorney and by Chief Bogart in his communication to you, [00:15:36] the allowance of this restriction frees up golf cart use on Main Street from the East City limits to U.S. Highway 19. [00:15:43] And we're recommending in favor of the second reading. Thank you. Open up for public comment. [00:15:52] Seeing no one come forward, bring it back to Council. Move for approval. Second. To the maker. [00:15:57] No, we're good. We've already talked about it. Second? No, nothing more. Mr. Altman? I'm fine, thank you. [00:16:03] In the next step, we'll be trying to convince FDOT to let the golf carts legally get across the highway, so we won't forget. [00:16:12] There's no further discussion. All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, like sign. Motion passes. [00:16:19] Next, Second Reading Ordinance 2020-2189. [00:16:23] This is Ordinance Number 2020-2189, an Ordinance of the City of New Port Richey, Florida, [00:16:28] amending Chapter 18 of Land Development Code pertaining to Historic Preservation, [00:16:32] providing for amendment of Section 18.01.02 thereof pertaining to definitions, [00:16:38] providing for amendment of Section 18.01.05 thereof pertaining to the Historic Preservation Board, [00:16:45] providing for amendment of Subsections C, E, H, and J of Section 18.01.05 thereof [00:16:52] pertaining to membership, terms of office, removal, meetings, notices, and records of the Board, [00:16:58] providing for reduction of the Board from nine to seven regular members,
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.
- 7.c
Second Reading, Ordinance No. 2020-2189: Amendments to Chapter 18 of the LDC RE: Historic Preservation
approvedSecond reading of Ordinance 2020-2189 amending Chapter 18 of the Land Development Code regarding Historic Preservation. Amendments reduce the Historic Preservation Board from nine to seven members, adjust appointment terms, lower the quorum to four, and change member removal to a simple majority vote, in support of pursuing Certified Local Government designation with the state. The ordinance passed on second reading.
Ord. Ordinance No. 2020-2189
- motion:Motion to approve Ordinance No. 2020-2189 on second reading, amending Chapter 18 of the LDC regarding Historic Preservation. (passed)
Mr. MurphyMs. MansonCertified Local Government designationChapter 18 of the LDCHistoric Preservation BoardOrdinance No. 2020-2189▶ Jump to 16:59 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:17:02] providing for removal of members by a simple majority vote of City Council members present at a meeting thereof, [00:17:09] providing for removal of automatic denials on failed motions of the Board, [00:17:13] providing for severability, providing for conflicts, providing for codification, and providing an effective date. [00:17:19] Thank you. Ms. Manson? [00:17:21] As was indicated to you at the first reading of this matter, [00:17:26] the purpose in large part of proposing amendments to our Historic Preservation Ordinance [00:17:34] is to move forward with the state in a designation as a certified local government. [00:17:42] The reason that that is to our advantage is twofold. [00:17:48] Firstly, it makes us eligible for grant activities. [00:17:54] Secondly, it allows us to designate properties that are over 50 years in age [00:18:00] and have particular historic or architectural character as historic properties. [00:18:09] And as indicated by the City Attorney, we are revising the ordinance to reduce [00:18:15] the membership of the Historic Preservation Board from nine to seven, [00:18:20] reducing the number of members appointed for two years from five to four, [00:18:26] and from three years to six to five, [00:18:29] reducing the votes necessary for the City Council to remove a member of the Historic Preservation Board [00:18:37] from five to a majority council member present, [00:18:41] and reducing the quorum from five members to four members. [00:18:47] With that, we're hopeful that you will approve the ordinance at second reading. [00:18:51] Thank you for opening up for public comment. [00:18:55] Seeing no one come forward to bring it back to Council. [00:18:59] For approval. [00:19:01] Second. [00:19:01] To the maker. [00:19:02] I just think it's more of a workable situation. [00:19:05] You can probably get a lot more done with seven than nine, [00:19:07] and if people aren't attending the meetings, then let's get them off the board [00:19:11] and if we're going to have boards, I think they should be productive. [00:19:16] And so I'm in favor of this. [00:19:17] Thank you. [00:19:17] To the second. [00:19:21] Mr. Murphy? [00:19:22] No, I'm good. [00:19:23] In that case, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye. [00:19:26] Aye. [00:19:26] Opposed, like sign. [00:19:28] Motion passes. [00:19:29] Next, second reading, Ordinance 2020-2211. [00:19:35] This is Ordinance Number 2020-2211, Ordinance of the City of New Port Richey, Florida, [00:19:39] providing for amendment of Article 12 of Chapter 13 of the New Port Richey Code of Ordinances [00:19:44] pertaining to mobile food vending, providing for amendment of Section 13-561, [00:19:49] thereof, pertaining to licensing and registration of mobile food vendors, [00:19:53] providing for exemption and registration of mobile food dispensing vehicles, [00:19:58] as defined by state law, providing for amendment of Subsection A of Section 13-564, [00:20:04] thereof, pertaining to location of mobile food vendors on public property, [00:20:08] providing for designation of public property and streets for operation of mobile food dispensing vehicles, [00:20:14] providing for amendment of Section 13-560, thereof, pertaining to definition of terms, [00:20:20] providing for a definition of mobile food dispensing vehicle and MFDV license, [00:20:26] providing for conflict, severability, and an effective date.
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.
- 7.d
Second Reading, Ordinance No. 2020-2211: Amendments to Chapter 13 RE: Mobile Food Vending
approvedCouncil adopted on second reading Ordinance 2020-2211 amending Chapter 13 to bring mobile food vending regulations into compliance with new state law, removing registration/permit requirements for state-defined mobile food dispensing vehicles and defining where they may operate. Councilmembers also discussed concerns about food trucks and other vehicles occupying downtown parking spaces, and directed the City Attorney to come back with broader parking time-limit language.
Ord. Ordinance No. 2020-2211
- motion:Motion to approve Ordinance 2020-2211 on second reading amending Chapter 13 regarding mobile food vending. (passed)
- direction:Council directed the City Attorney to come back with proposed language addressing parking time limits in downtown areas. (none)
Main StreetSwanson LotSouthgateDebbie MannsFrank StarkeyMr. AltmanMr. CassinMr. DriscollChapter 13Ordinance 2020-2211mobile food dispensing vehicle definition▶ Jump to 20:29 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:20:29] Thank you. [00:20:30] Ms. Manns? [00:20:30] On September 4th of 2018, the City Council effectuated an ordinance [00:20:38] which established guidelines for mobile food vending in the city. [00:20:43] And earlier this year, the Florida Legislature passed some legislation [00:20:50] which created an opportunity for us to come into compliance with the new law [00:20:57] regarding mobile food vending, as was indicated by the City Attorney. [00:21:03] They are no longer required to apply for a registration and permit, [00:21:12] so we are moving that section from the ordinance. [00:21:17] We are also defining how they may operate on public properties in the downtown zoning district [00:21:24] and in the commercial areas of the city. [00:21:27] We are restricting mobile food vendors operating on public property or public ways [00:21:35] in close proximity to residentially zoned properties, [00:21:39] and we established a definition for mobile food dispensing vehicle. [00:21:44] With that, we are hopeful that you will consider approval of the item at the second reading. [00:21:50] Thank you. I'll open it up for public comment. [00:21:54] Seeing no one come forward, bring it back to Council. [00:21:57] I move for approval. [00:21:59] Second. [00:22:00] Maker? [00:22:01] Nothing more. It's just keeping up with the state laws, and I brought that to Debbie's attention, [00:22:06] and she got with him and did it. Thank you. [00:22:09] Very good. To the second? [00:22:10] No, I'm good on it. [00:22:11] Mr. Altman? [00:22:12] Yeah, just a question. [00:22:14] In the ordinance, item B says, [00:22:21] Registration or permit fee for each mobile food unit to be operated by a mobile food vendor [00:22:25] shall be paid to the operation of each unit to be established by permit, [00:22:31] and then you've added the next C, which says mobile food dispensing vehicles. [00:22:36] So I'm assuming, I'm trying to understand the difference between those two terminologies. [00:22:45] Yeah, the ordinance, the current ordinance provides definitions for all of these terms, [00:22:49] for a mobile food unit and a mobile food vendor, [00:22:55] and we're adding the new definition for the new state term that's been defined by state law, [00:23:00] which is the mobile food dispensing vehicle, and that's a subset of the mobile food unit. [00:23:06] So this provides those specific exemptions that are required by the new law, [00:23:12] but if you don't qualify under that state definition, [00:23:15] then you're still subject to the registration requirements. [00:23:18] But you're not sure what that would look like. [00:23:20] Is that like a popcorn machine or something? [00:23:23] I'm not exactly sure. [00:23:25] I'm just trying to figure it out. [00:23:27] Yeah, I just wanted to exempt what the state law requires us to exempt. [00:23:31] Thank you. [00:23:32] The second thing is that it indicates that they can be operated only on public streets, [00:23:37] so you've sort of copied the language of the statute in there in order to confirm it. [00:23:43] But you had told us before that we could identify places where they wouldn't be allowed. [00:23:48] Correct. [00:23:49] And this doesn't stop us from doing that. [00:23:53] But when I read it, if I come in here and I say, hey, [00:23:56] this tells me I can be on any city street under the state law. [00:24:01] Correct. [00:24:02] So what the ordinance also does is it designates the particular zoning districts [00:24:07] that those operations are allowed in. [00:24:10] So you need to be in one of the designated zoning districts. [00:24:14] And then there are limitations within that, [00:24:16] including being in front of a single family or duplex dwelling, those kinds of things. [00:24:21] So it's geared towards the mixed-use zoning districts. [00:24:26] It allows it in those mixed-use areas, which are commercial and mixed-use. [00:24:30] So that's where it's allowed. [00:24:32] So it's allowed anywhere on any parking lot, on any public use in the downtown zoning, [00:24:38] as long as there's no residence in front of it or duplex or triplex or those items you mentioned? [00:24:43] Well, it's allowed in public streets in areas where they are legally parked. [00:24:48] So they have to be in a legal parking area and it has to be on a public street. [00:24:52] This does not allow unfettered use on public properties like city parking lots, city hall parking lots, [00:24:59] recreation center, those kinds of things. [00:25:01] So I'm going to vote for this, but I'd like my colleagues to know that I have a suggestion [00:25:07] that our main street going through town, where we're trying to get people to pull in and out, [00:25:12] where these trucks can potentially get in front of a business [00:25:16] and sort of block whatever displays or whatever they're looking to do. [00:25:20] I know some of them are doing that, and I know they're taking up multiple spaces sometimes. [00:25:25] I'd like to come back and talk to you all about putting a two-hour limit [00:25:32] or some kind of a limit on the parking spaces right out on the street. [00:25:36] I know Frank Starkey, for example, I've spoken to him about it. [00:25:39] A lot of our property owners and business owners are parking right on Main Street, [00:25:43] which is the most convenient space. [00:25:45] So, you know, Southgate makes you park in the back of the parking lot. [00:25:49] We want those limited spaces to get people to pull in and out, [00:25:53] and I'm opposed to having permanent vendors who are exempted from some of our restrictions [00:26:03] from being able to park there without any limitations, [00:26:07] as far as I can tell they can park there every day as long as they can find a space. [00:26:11] Ice cream truck can pull up right in front of the park and park in that parking space, which they always do. [00:26:17] So the only solution I can come up with is your legally parking argument to say, [00:26:23] I don't know how the rest of you all feel about it, but I think it's an option, it sounds like to me, [00:26:28] for us to put two-hour parking or whatever, you know, parking for people to go to their, as Mr. Cassin said, [00:26:36] my customers want to go, they can't walk that well, they want to park in the parking space and walk to my offices. [00:26:46] So I think there's a discussion to still have. [00:26:48] This is just opening up the entire downtown parking on the main roads for mobile vendors. [00:26:55] This started as, well, they'll only do it once or twice a year like they did out there at Southgate. [00:27:00] Now the law has told us we can't charge them. [00:27:05] You told us we could tell them where they could park. [00:27:08] I'd like this to be more restrictive. [00:27:11] We could either, what, change this down the road or... [00:27:14] Yeah, you have a couple options. [00:27:16] You can make some changes to this particular ordinance. [00:27:19] If there's something that you want to change that's extensive, I would recommend that you have me come back with that, [00:27:25] whether it be another second reading on this particular ordinance as it sits, [00:27:29] or if you have a specific suggestion you want to incorporate into a motion, you could do that. [00:27:36] But I don't necessarily recommend that because it's a language type of thing. [00:27:41] You could restrict the amount of time that they can be parked in any area, [00:27:46] and that's something you could do in this ordinance. [00:27:48] You could restrict parking overall in particular areas, or you can exclude them from particular streets. [00:27:54] Can we restrict commercial entities that park, or if we start restricting time, does that mean me or just commercial entities? [00:28:03] Can we do just commercial entities like a food truck? [00:28:06] Yes, you could restrict. [00:28:08] In this ordinance, we could restrict the amount of time that any food truck can spend in any one particular area. [00:28:13] We could definitely do that. [00:28:15] So if that's something you want to consider, then perhaps you'd task me with coming back with some language [00:28:21] and another reading and have another reading on it to address that particular type of restriction. [00:28:26] I'd like that idea, and also I'd like the amount of days a week. [00:28:31] Do you agree with that too? [00:28:33] Yeah. [00:28:34] Or was it just go there and park and be there forever? [00:28:37] I mean, they could. [00:28:38] Well, that could run into some potential complications with enforcement, [00:28:43] just trying to determine who's been there for any length of time and those kinds of things. [00:28:48] So I'd have to— [00:28:50] I think the area that we're talking about, it would be pretty obvious that the person's there on a regular basis. [00:28:57] I think the issue may be bigger than food trucks. [00:29:01] The Swanson Lot, thank heavens, is finally open again for people to park in. [00:29:08] We've got one business that's actually in the same building that I'm in [00:29:13] that I think has somewhere between six and ten vehicles that are parked there routinely. [00:29:23] And they were basically soaking up every bit of the on-street parking for a block or two from my office, [00:29:32] and they're now soaking up some of the Swanson Lot. [00:29:37] But it's one business that has a huge fleet that has been basically staying there. [00:29:47] In some cases, the vehicles park there for days at a time. [00:29:51] Yeah, the food truck blocks access, but we've got some other offenders that are absolutely— [00:30:00] is bad. And if you want to start talking about time limits, I don't know what those time [00:30:04] limits ought to be, but that's a discussion that might best fit into a different ordinance [00:30:11] that talks in general about parking. [00:30:13] Mr. Mayor, there is one sentence, and I don't want to make this more than it needs to be, [00:30:20] but I think, Chopper, you may be right that we should kind of have some feedback and think [00:30:25] through it, but if we were to add a sentence when you're talking about the residential [00:30:31] use and the places they can't go, we could add the simple comment, or in areas designated [00:30:40] for customer parking with time limitations, subject to those time limitations, if there's [00:30:48] nobody parking during the day and it's late at night and you've got parking spaces everywhere [00:30:52] and you've got a bunch of people out and about, and maybe there is a time frame, but [00:30:58] you could identify that through your parking rules as when someone could park for a limited [00:31:02] time. They do that all the time. [00:31:04] I'd like him, let's let him come back with a word, you know, I think I like that idea, [00:31:10] because he'll look at other cities and see how they're handling it. [00:31:13] Oh, you've got a motion on the side, that's fine. [00:31:20] Should we table this, or would you deal with the parking as a separate issue? [00:31:25] Well, again, either one is an option. If there's a concern overall about parking, then I would [00:31:33] say you deal with it in the parking restriction. This requires you to be parked legally to [00:31:39] operate, so if you add a parking restriction, that's automatically going to apply to this [00:31:44] ordinance. [00:31:45] I think that's the direction that I'd like to go, because it's a bigger issue than just [00:31:48] food trucks. [00:31:50] And you can always come back to this. I don't want to make it sound like this is the end [00:31:53] of it. You can always curtail this activity, so you can see how it goes if you want, or [00:32:00] however you want to approach it. [00:32:02] Any further discussion? In that case, hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by [00:32:09] saying aye. [00:32:10] Aye. [00:32:11] Opposed, like sign. And Mr. Driscoll, if you could put together something for us on a parking [00:32:19] time limit basis. [00:32:20] I will, Mr. Chairman. [00:32:21] Okay. Next is First Readings Ordinance 2020-2210.
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.
- 7.e
First Reading, Ordinance No. 2020-2210: Amendments to Chapter 7 of the LDC Re: Permitted Uses in R-3 Residential Zoning District
approvedFirst reading of Ordinance 2020-2210 amending Chapter 7 of the Land Development Code to add attached single-family townhomes as a special exception use within the R-3 Residential Zoning District, limited to downtown and downtown core future land use areas. The ordinance requires a minimum 5,000 sq ft project site with 2,500 sq ft per unit, and was approved on first reading.
Ord. Ordinance No. 2020-2210
- motion:Motion to approve Ordinance No. 2020-2210 on first reading, adding attached single-family townhomes as a special exception use in the R-3 Residential Zoning District. (passed)
5939 Grand BoulevardMadison and Central (southeast corner)Main Street past City HallWade TrimBrad CorneliusFrank StarkeyMr. AltmanMr. MurphyMs. MannsHistoric Preservation BoardHyde Park (referenced as example)Land Development Review BoardOrdinance No. 2020-2210R-3 Residential Zoning DistrictSubsection 7.03.02 of Chapter 7 Land Development Code▶ Jump to 32:27 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:32:27] This is Ordinance Number 2020-2210, an Ordinance of the City of New Port Richey, Florida, providing [00:32:31] for amendment of Subsection 7.03.02 of Chapter 7 of the Land Development Code pertaining [00:32:37] to permitted uses in the R3 Residential Zoning District, providing for the addition of attached [00:32:43] single-family townhomes as a special exception use within the R3 Residential Zoning District, [00:32:50] providing for conflict, severability, codification, and an effective date. [00:32:54] Mr. Mayor, the purpose of this agenda item is to allow for attached single-family townhomes [00:33:01] as a special exception in the R3 Zoning District. [00:33:05] Mr. Brad Cornelius is with us this evening from Wade Trim. He has been serving along [00:33:13] with me in the operation of the Development Department, and he'll represent the agenda [00:33:18] item this evening. Thank you, Brad. [00:33:20] Thank you, Ms. Manns. As Ms. Manns said, my name is Brad Cornelius with Wade Trim, professional [00:33:25] planner. Just so you know, I've been a planner in the state of Florida for 26 years, and [00:33:28] actually I worked with Mr. Altman a long time ago when he was with Pasco County. And so [00:33:33] as Ms. Manns said, I've been here helping the city out with your Development Services [00:33:36] Department. So I'm going to present this ordinance to you all this evening. [00:33:41] As Ms. Manns said, what this ordinance is, it's a request to add to your R3 Zoning District [00:33:46] the ability for someone to develop attached single-family townhomes within the R3 District. [00:33:54] Why this came forward to you is when staff and working with staff, you know, you have [00:34:01] such great redevelopment happening here in downtown New Port Richey. It's really just [00:34:05] amazing. And what we saw, there's a need to really expand the housing opportunities and [00:34:10] the type of housing opportunities here in this downtown. And this was one of the ways [00:34:13] we saw that that could happen. So the way we've structured this for your consideration [00:34:20] is the ability to do these attached townhomes would only be within your downtown and downtown [00:34:25] core future land use areas. So just within your downtown. And there's two reasons for [00:34:30] that. The first reason is, as I just said, we want to promote this redevelopment here [00:34:34] in downtown New Port Richey, and we think this is another good way to help that to occur. [00:34:39] But secondly, which is just as important, is those two land uses already have the allowable [00:34:43] densities that are already in place under your comprehensive plan to account or to provide [00:34:48] for this type of development. So there would be no need for a future land use amendment [00:34:52] or any change to your comprehensive plan for someone to do this because that land use is [00:34:56] already in place on these areas. And it also restricts where it could go. It can only go [00:35:01] here in the downtown. And by and large, where your R3 District area is in the downtown is [00:35:06] on your east side of your downtown. That's pretty much where those properties are. So [00:35:11] that's one of the big parts of this. The other part of this is that in terms of the development [00:35:17] standards, I will tell you initially when we put the draft together, our recommendation [00:35:22] initially was a project size of 7,500 square feet. However, when we went to the Land Development [00:35:29] Review Board and they reviewed it, they brought up the issue and said, well, you know, why [00:35:34] not 5,000? Because that is consistent with the minimum lot size in the R3 District. The [00:35:38] R3 District currently has a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet. So we agreed and we [00:35:44] said that does make sense. So in terms of development, the townhome project as a whole [00:35:49] would have to be on at least a 5,000 square foot area property. And each unit of that [00:35:56] townhome development would have to be on a 2,500 square foot lot, which equates to your [00:36:00] R3 zoning district lots anyhow. They're already 25 by 100. So basically you'd have one unit [00:36:06] on each of those lots. Again, we provide a definition to be clear that these aren't duplexes. [00:36:13] These are single family attached units that have their own property lines. So they are [00:36:19] not a duplex, they are a townhome. The last part that I want to present is in terms of [00:36:24] the development standards specifically and why we're having it as part of a special exception. [00:36:30] What that does, it gives the city at the staff level and development review committee [00:36:34] the ability to work with the developer to determine what is the most appropriate and [00:36:38] best development standards, whether it's setbacks, height, all the different development standards [00:36:43] that would apply that meet the needs for the development. But more importantly, meet the [00:36:49] needs of the city and protects the city's interests. So we have some flexibility in [00:36:53] working through that project. And what's also very important to that is that would then [00:36:57] come to the city council. And then you all would have that final determination on what [00:37:02] are those development standards, whether you agree or not with what the staff has worked [00:37:06] out. So ultimately the city council would make that determination on what are the appropriate [00:37:11] development standards for that project. So that is the ordinance that you have before [00:37:16] you this evening. I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have. [00:37:19] Questions? [00:37:21] Give me a couple examples of R3 territories. [00:37:26] Good one I give because we have a developer that's looking to do one at Madison and Central. [00:37:33] That corner there, that's an R3 property there. Right there on the corner, on the southeast [00:37:40] corner, that is R3. If we come down Main Street just past City Hall, that is R3. Those homes [00:37:47] and offices that are along there, some of that is R3 as well. So it's pretty much this [00:37:52] side of City Hall is where this would apply. [00:37:54] A lot of those are, some of those are commercial businesses right now, is that correct? [00:38:01] Right, right, right. [00:38:02] So then you would convert a commercial business to a residential? [00:38:06] If it has that underlying R3 zoning, that could happen, yes sir. It would have to have [00:38:12] two standards. First off, it would have to have the downtown or downtown core future land use. [00:38:17] And secondly, it would have to have the R3 zoning on the property. Those would be the [00:38:20] two requirements for someone to do something like that. [00:38:23] And these are going to be owner occupied? [00:38:28] It's not addressed in the code. They will be fee simple. They will be sold. They will be [00:38:37] individually owned whether or not they're rented or not. [00:38:39] Oh, okay. That's what I'm saying. Okay. [00:38:41] Yes. [00:38:42] It's not one person is going to build them all and he's going to start renting them out. [00:38:46] It wouldn't prohibit that from happening. [00:38:49] It would or would not? [00:38:50] It would not prohibit that from happening, but each of the units would be on a separate [00:38:54] fee simple lot. So theoretically, someone could own every one of the lots, but they would [00:39:00] each be on an individual fee simple lot. But they would have attached common wall. [00:39:05] Open it up for public comment. [00:39:10] You can give us your name and address for the record, Frank. [00:39:22] Can I take this off? Frank Starkey, 5939 Grand Boulevard. I just wanted to speak in favor [00:39:29] of the ordinance. Townhouses are a really good housing type. By nature, because they [00:39:38] face the street, they have a good urban behavior, so they actually enhance the quality of the [00:39:44] street compared to a duplex. In practice in Newport, what has happened a lot of times [00:39:51] is that the duplexes are front and back, so only one unit kind of has its side to the [00:39:56] street. These are both facing the street, so it's a good housing type to have in the [00:40:01] city's repertoire. I think the way Mr. Cornelius has written the ordinance makes a lot of sense. [00:40:08] I would prefer if it was an allowable use, but special exception is good for the reason [00:40:13] that he's explained, so I just wanted to speak in favor. [00:40:17] Thank you very much. Anyone else? Seeing no one else come forward, bring it back to Council. [00:40:23] Move for approval. [00:40:25] Second. [00:40:26] To the maker. [00:40:27] No, you know, we have a lot of housing in town that was built in the late 60s and early [00:40:32] 70s, and I think this would be a step in starting to dress it up and draw another group of people [00:40:39] to town. [00:40:40] To the second. [00:40:42] Just when we talk about the downtown and the area where the zoning is, it's also, I believe, [00:40:47] many of the houses built back in the 30s, some in the 20s, 40s. It's not the kind of [00:40:54] historic that we saw in Hyde Park, but one of the takeaways from going there and listening [00:40:59] to their planner who met with a good group of us was that we had a local architectural [00:41:07] ordinance, so as long as we don't have one now and you've got to bring these things to [00:41:12] us for our approval, that's good. Hopefully in the future with the use of our historic [00:41:21] preservation board, we'll come up with some standards that will, whether they're rentals [00:41:27] or homeowners, require them to be attractive and to attract the population we need. [00:41:35] Very good. Thank you. Mr. Murphy. [00:41:37] Obviously, I'd love to see that they'd be owner-occupied instead of rentals, but hopefully [00:41:44] that'll be the case. [00:41:46] Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye. [00:41:52] Aye. [00:41:53] 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.
- 8.a
You arrived here from a search for “Amended and Restated Interlocal Agreements (debt service and CRA advance repayment)” — transcript expanded below
Resolution No. 2021-08: Authorize Issuance of Taxable Non Ad Valorem Revenue Note 2020A and Tax Exempt Non Ad Valorem Revenue Note 2020B and Amended and Restated Interlocal Agreements
approvedCouncil adopted Resolution 2021-08 authorizing issuance of a taxable non-ad valorem revenue note Series 2020-A (not to exceed $2,617,294) and tax-exempt Series 2020-B (not to exceed $8,355,207) with Truist Bank as lender, to finance capital improvements including a parking garage, fire station, and public library. The resolution also approved two amended and restated interlocal agreements between the city and the CRA. Series A carries 1.11% interest maturing 10/1/2023; Series B carries 1.54% maturing 10/1/2030.
Ord. Resolution No. 2021-08
- motion:Motion to approve Resolution 2021-08 authorizing issuance of the Series 2020-A and 2020-B revenue notes and amended interlocal agreements. (passed)
Bryant, Miller and OliveCommunity Redevelopment Agency of the City of New Port RicheyTruist BankDebbieDwayne DraperMr. MurphyMs. ManceAmended and Restated Interlocal Agreements (debt service and CRA advance repayment)Fire station capital projectParking garage capital projectPublic library capital projectResolution 2021-08Series 2020-A Taxable Non-Ad Valorem Revenue NoteSeries 2020-B Tax-Exempt Non-Ad Valorem Revenue Note▶ Jump to 41:55 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:41:56] Thank you, gentlemen. [00:41:57] Next, resolution 2021-08. [00:42:00] This is resolution number 2021-08, a resolution of the city of New Port Richey, Florida, [00:42:05] authorizing the issuance of a not to exceed $2,617,294 taxable non-ad valorem revenue [00:42:13] note, series 2020-A, and a not to exceed $8,355,207 tax-exempt non-ad valorem revenue [00:42:24] note, series 2020-B, of the city to finance the cost of construction, renovation, design, [00:42:30] and or equipping of various capital improvements, including without limitation, an issuer-owned [00:42:36] parking garage, fire station, and public library, and paying costs related thereto, providing [00:42:41] that the notes shall be limited obligations of the city payable from non-ad valorem revenues [00:42:46] budgeted, appropriated, and deposited as provided herein, providing for the rights, securities, [00:42:51] and remedies for the owner of the notes, making such determinations as are required to afford [00:42:57] series 2020-B note bank-qualified status, approving the forms of any of and authorizing [00:43:03] the execution of two separate amended and restated interlocal agreements between the [00:43:09] city and the Community Redevelopment Agency of the city, making certain covenants and [00:43:13] agreements in connection therewith, and providing for an effective date. [00:43:17] Thank you. [00:43:18] Ms. Mance? [00:43:19] Sir, Mr. Dwayne Draper is ready to present to you what I imagine is the details of Resolution [00:43:29] 2021-08 and additionally the amended and restated interlocal agreements of which there are two, [00:43:38] one referring to debt service and the other related to repaying advances to the CRA in the city. [00:43:50] Great. [00:43:51] Dwayne Draper again with Bryant, Miller, and Olive, and I'll make my comments very brief. [00:43:56] This is the details resolution with regard to the ordinance that was enacted earlier [00:44:00] tonight. [00:44:01] Truist Bank is the lender, so this appoints them for that. [00:44:07] There's also provided the standard city anti-dilution test to give them the protection in terms [00:44:13] of overborrowing, which is a very standard request. [00:44:17] The interlocal agreements, which are referred to, are longstanding interlocal agreements. [00:44:22] With the city, they're just being amended to accommodate this borrowing and only with [00:44:26] regard to the portion of the debt service that relates to the parking facility. [00:44:31] The last two details I'll mention are the interest rate again, which Debbie mentioned [00:44:36] earlier, with regard to the taxable Series A, that's 1.11%. [00:44:41] The final maturity date is October 1st, 2023. [00:44:45] And for the tax-exempt Series B, that's 1.54%. [00:44:50] The final maturity date is October 1st, 2030. [00:44:53] They were structured together for aggregate annual debt service, level annual debt service. [00:45:00] and I'll answer any questions that you might have. [00:45:03] Questions? [00:45:06] In that case, let me open it up for public comment. [00:45:10] Seeing no one come forward, bring it back to council. [00:45:14] Move for approval. Second. [00:45:17] Now we've had our discussion earlier on the same issue [00:45:21] and we'll keep it rolling. [00:45:25] Second. Nothing more. Mr. Murphy. No, I'm good. [00:45:29] In that case, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye. [00:45:32] Aye. Opposed, blank sign. [00:45:35] 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.
- 8.b
Appointment of Candidate to Fill City Council Vacancy
approvedCouncil considered four candidates to fill a city council vacancy. A nomination for Joan Nelson-Hook failed for lack of a second, then Mike Peters was nominated and seconded, and the motion passed. Peters will be sworn in at the November 17 meeting and will serve until the April election for a one-year term seat.
- motion:Nomination of Joan Nelson-Hook to fill the city council vacancy. (failed)
- motion:Nomination of Mike Peters to fill the city council vacancy, effective upon swearing in at the November 17 meeting. (passed)
BillBob SmallwoodGeorge RomanoliJoan Nelson-HookMike PetersMs. MannsMurphyUllmanApril election one-year term seatCity Council vacancy appointmentNovember 17, 2020 swearing in▶ Jump to 45:38 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:45:38] We have successfully managed to make it all the way through here with no two-to-two ties, [00:45:42] so I think the next thing we ought to do is discuss the appointment of a candidate [00:45:47] to fill our city council vacancy to get us up to a full five spots. [00:45:53] Anybody want to have any discussion before we bring it? [00:46:00] Mr. Ullman? [00:46:02] No, are you going to take public comment? [00:46:06] I will, if any of you wanted to say anything before I do that. [00:46:11] I'll just like to thank all five, even though Bill stepped down tonight, [00:46:15] for stepping up and caring about the city as an individual. [00:46:22] Us up here had to get the approval of the community where, from now until next April, [00:46:30] I really appreciate the four of you that are left that are stepping up. [00:46:34] And I want to say one little thing in jest. [00:46:36] I don't know. I read through your resumes and I'm not sure that, you know, [00:46:40] I passed the mustard test to be up here with the competition that you guys are. [00:46:45] It's just a phenomenal amount of things that you've done for the city. [00:46:48] And I'm looking forward to working with whoever we choose. [00:46:53] Thank you. I'll open it up for any public comment. [00:46:59] For the record, we have four candidates that have thrown their names in the hopper. [00:47:07] Ms. Manns, could you read those off for us? [00:47:11] Yes, Joan Nelson-Hook, Mike Peters, George Romanoli, and Bob Smallwood. [00:47:18] Thank you. I've known three of them for decades, in the case of one of them, since he was a teenager. [00:47:27] And the fourth one I've known not quite so long, but a very impressive individual. [00:47:34] We've got a great group to pick from, so I will toss it open for discussion. [00:47:43] If I could interject a quick procedural note. [00:47:45] Yes, please. [00:47:47] The intention is that the successful candidate would begin serving on November 17th [00:47:55] and be effective as of the swearing in at the city council meeting that evening. [00:48:00] So I just want to make sure that that's in the record. [00:48:02] And I would think we would do that at the beginning of the meeting. [00:48:06] Correct. [00:48:06] So as to avoid the potential of any four-to-four ties. [00:48:12] So are we at the point of nominating someone? [00:48:15] If you want to make comments, that's fine. [00:48:16] If you'd like to nominate somebody, that's fine. [00:48:18] Yeah, I'd like to make comments, too. [00:48:21] I just think that everybody that has put in their file for their intent would be great additions to the city council. [00:48:27] And it wasn't easy or tough thinking about who that one person would be. [00:48:33] So I mean, I thank all of you for putting your name in and making that leap, wanting to be involved. [00:48:38] So thank you very much for that. [00:48:42] Anybody else want to comment or? [00:48:45] I'll make a nomination if you're looking at that. [00:48:47] Oh, I was going to go ahead if, yeah. [00:48:50] I'd like to go ahead and nominate Joan Nelson-Hook. [00:48:54] We have Joan Nelson-Hook nominated. [00:48:56] Do we have a second? [00:49:07] That nomination fails for lack of a second. [00:49:10] Do we have a nomination? [00:49:12] I'd like to nominate Mike Peters. [00:49:15] I'll second the nomination. [00:49:19] OK, to the maker. [00:49:22] I don't think I have anything more to say. [00:49:23] The resumes are available to the public, I believe, and they're available to us. [00:49:27] And so, Mr. Allman? [00:49:30] Yeah, I withheld comments because I've got that little Roberts rule of order in the back that says get a motion going so you can talk. [00:49:38] So I do want to, again, give great appreciation and to particularly to Joan. [00:49:45] And I'm sorry you sat without a second there. [00:49:49] To me, looking at the resumes, looking at the composition of our existing council, we always talk about how we've all been here forever. [00:49:59] Having talked to Mr. Peters, I realize he's from another very successful small downtown, has a degree in accounting, and has the accounting skills that I think really can come in handy on the economic development of the downtown. [00:50:14] So also, of course, Bob Smallwood and his wife have both been very active in the city. [00:50:20] And Bob, you're great. [00:50:23] I did speak to you before the meeting, and I would encourage you to continue to make your input. [00:50:29] It's valuable. [00:50:31] And so I guess to mimic what others have said, it's very difficult. [00:50:38] This great honor will only last about three or four months. [00:50:42] So there is election, and there is the opportunity for folks to run for office. [00:50:49] And so I think Mr. Peters, at the time and place we're here, is the right nomination. [00:50:56] Mr. Murphy? [00:50:58] Yeah, I mean, I have no reason to oppose anyone in the group for this spot. [00:51:06] It was kind of awkward where everybody's in the audience, and you have to pick the people that are sitting in the audience without really discussing with anybody else. [00:51:15] So it was kind of an awkward thing, but I appreciate everybody. [00:51:19] And for my pick, Joan Nelson-Hook, I really think that she's really involved and does a great job. [00:51:28] And there's always April, if you want to give that a run again, as fun as we had last time. [00:51:36] But I thank everybody for putting in, and everybody's really a great choice. [00:51:41] So thank you. [00:51:42] Thank you for everybody. [00:51:44] When the initial five were listed, and Mrs. Manns put the list out, I made the comment to her, and I mean it very sincerely, [00:51:57] that I would be honored to serve with any one of the five who had submitted applications. [00:52:03] I think you're all quality, quality people. [00:52:07] And furthermore, I told her, since I'm chairing the meeting, I couldn't second anything. [00:52:12] So I was going to be off the hook as far as picking somebody with a motion and a second, because it's very difficult. [00:52:21] I do consider you guys all superb. [00:52:25] And like I say, I've known everybody except Mike literally for decades, and you're good quality people. [00:52:35] I hope you will stay involved in the city, and there is an opportunity in future years to consider running. [00:52:44] I know two of you have run in the past, and would hope that you would continue your involvement. [00:52:52] Any further discussion? [00:52:56] Hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye. [00:52:59] Aye. [00:53:00] Opposed? [00:53:02] Motion passes. [00:53:03] Mr. Peters, if you would plan on being there at the very beginning of the meeting, we will get you sworn in at the next meeting. [00:53:12] Mr. Mayor, just for the record and for the clerk, I guess, could we confirm that the motion incorporated the attorney's, I don't recall hearing it, but yeah. [00:53:23] Attorney's commentary about the time that it would become effective. [00:53:27] It will run effective from that meeting, from the next meeting until the next election, which the swearing in will happen in April for that. [00:53:42] There is nothing to preclude the individual that has been appointed from running for that position. [00:53:48] There is nothing to preclude any of the other individuals that have shown an interest in serving on city council from running for either that position or one of the two positions that will be open for election. [00:54:02] Mr. Peters will be filling the term only until April. [00:54:08] That particular seat, based on what we did a couple of meetings ago, will be up for election and it will be for a one-year term. [00:54:22] The other two seats that will come up in April will be three-year terms. [00:54:28] Mr. Mayor, on that point, nothing would preclude Mr. Peters from running for the three-year term if he chose that he wanted to do that either. [00:54:37] In which case, somebody else would have an opportunity to run for the one-year term. [00:54:43] I'll fight you for that. [00:54:46] Given the election stuff that we still don't know the results from from yesterday. [00:54:51] I can appreciate it. [00:55:00] I'm termed out at the end of my next term, so somebody else will run for mayor. [00:55:06] Thank you all and congratulations, Mr. Peters.
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.
- 8.c
Request to Purchase Computer Voice Stress Analyzer Machine
approvedCouncil approved a request from the Police Department to use equitable sharing funds in the amount of $9,470.80 to purchase a Computer Voice Stress Analyzer (CVSA) machine. Chief Bogart explained the equipment will be used in investigations to assess truthfulness of victims and suspects, and also for background investigations of applicants.
- motion:Approve the use of equitable sharing funds in the amount of $9,470.80 to purchase a Computer Voice Stress Analyzer machine. (passed)
▶ Jump to 55:08 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:55:10] Next is a request to purchase a computer voice stress analyzer machine. [00:55:16] Yes, and the reason that this item is on your agenda is because we are requesting permission to use equitable sharing monies to fund the purchase in the amount of $9,470.80. [00:55:32] And Chief Bogart is prepared to respond to any detailed questions that you have about the equipment, which is intended for use to determine whether victims or suspects are telling the truth. [00:55:48] Very good. [00:55:49] Does it work on the TV? [00:55:57] We could have used it. [00:55:58] I was wondering if you had a question. [00:56:01] But a CBSA is actually quite an amazing tool. [00:56:05] The manufacturer cites a study that was done regarding a CBSA. [00:56:13] And that is that the equipment's accuracy was, the study was done of the equipment's accuracy over an 18-year period, [00:56:25] which resulted in an accuracy rate of 99.67%, and a verified confession rate of 96.4%. [00:56:35] A lot of times when we're conducting investigations, we could have an alleged victim that's lying or, let me just say, misstating the truth, or a suspect that is claiming to have not been involved. [00:56:51] And this gets us right to the meat of the matter much quicker. [00:56:56] Our department's operated without either a polygraph or a CBSA for a number of years. [00:57:01] And it is a very effective tool. [00:57:04] And it will increase our efficiency at getting to the bottom line when we're conducting investigations. [00:57:10] And we will also use it for our background investigations. [00:57:14] Right now, we neither use a polygraph or a CBSA. [00:57:18] And I would like to have that be part of our processing of applicants. [00:57:23] Thank you. [00:57:23] Open it up for public comment. [00:57:26] Process of applicants? [00:57:28] Seeing no one come forward, I'll bring it back to council. [00:57:32] The process of applicants that wouldn't want to be police officers? [00:57:35] Yes, or civilian, for that matter. [00:57:37] Any applicants for our department. [00:57:39] Oh, wow. [00:57:40] Other places that I've worked, and I've worked for at least five other types of departments, that every one of them had it. [00:57:49] My motion's going to die for a lack of a second if you keep talking. [00:57:53] No, I'm sorry. [00:57:55] Does it hook up like a lie detector test? [00:57:58] It's all through voice. [00:58:00] Just through voice, huh? [00:58:01] Oh, man, I've got to stop talking. [00:58:03] It's a pretty amazing piece of equipment. [00:58:06] That'll be the case. [00:58:07] I may have to depend on Mr. Murphy for the second. [00:58:11] Wow. [00:58:12] Second to the maker. [00:58:14] That's fine. [00:58:15] To the second? [00:58:17] I'm good. [00:58:25] Chopper, I've never seen you speechless, but in that case, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye. [00:58:32] Aye. [00:58:34] Opposed, none. [00:58:36] Okay, a request to purchase police vehicle equipment. [00:58:41] Yes, sir. [00:58:42] This agenda item was advanced by Mr. Brian Weed, who is requesting also the use of equitable sharing funds for the purchase, though, [00:58:53] of 17 vehicle console printer mounts and seven in-car routers, [00:58:59] which will be used in the police department principally to equip some of the new vehicles that we are receiving in fleet through our relationship with Enterprise. [00:59:16] Thank you. [00:59:17] When are those vehicles expected? [00:59:20] Actually, fairly quickly, within a month or so, I would expect to start seeing them. [00:59:25] In fact, I think there may be two sitting out at the garage. [00:59:29] Yeah, we have quite a few of them over in Orlando getting outfitted now. [00:59:33] Excellent. [00:59:35] Open it up for public comment. [00:59:38] Seeing no one come forward, bring it back to council. [00:59:41] Move for approval. [00:59:43] Second. [00:59:44] Maker? [00:59:45] I'm good. [00:59:46] To the second? [00:59:47] I'll second. [00:59:49] Mr. Davis is still worried about that voice analyzer. [00:59:58] Chief, I am thrilled to [01:00:00] have to hear that your officers are going to get some new vehicles. Those [01:00:04] wrecks that are in the fleet right now need to be retired. They're pretty [01:00:09] excited about it too. The officers, that is. Yes. Okay. If there's no further [01:00:15] discussion, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Like [01:00:20] sign. Motion passes. For the benefit of any of you in the audience that don't [01:00:24] realize, we entered into a lease agreement with Enterprise Leasing back [01:00:30] in April or May. A certain Robert, do you recall? Yeah, in that general time frame
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.
- 8.d
Request to Purchase Police Vehicle Equipment
discussedCouncil discussed the police vehicle equipment purchase as part of a fleet replacement program that will put vehicles on a five-year replacement basis, saving approximately $1 million over time. Fifteen patrol cars are scheduled this year along with a Leaf EV used for rental inspections.
▶ Jump to 1:00:35 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[01:00:37] which over the course of the next 10 years will save the city a boatload of [01:00:45] money. And have current vehicles. And they'll be current vehicles. We've got [01:00:49] vehicles in the fleet now that are upwards of 15 years old and this will [01:00:53] get everything ultimately on a five-year basis. We've got, I think, one of the [01:01:01] first vehicles to come in was the the Leaf EV that is being used for the [01:01:06] rental inspection system. And if you ever want to see what it looks like, if it's [01:01:13] not out doing rental inspections, it's usually in one of the parking lots here. [01:01:16] And then there were seven or eight patrol cars that are scheduled for this [01:01:23] year. Fifteen. Fifteen this year. Desperately needed for the police [01:01:29] department because those those police vehicles are run hard and they are [01:01:34] really, really old. So this is this is exciting and within the five years we [01:01:42] will have got everything on a five-year replacement basis. And Miss Mance, how [01:01:46] much is that saving us over the course of the... Almost a million dollars. That's [01:01:50] real money guys. So we're excited about it. New vehicles, better vehicles, and [01:01:57] saving the taxpayers a million dollars. That's a win in anybody's [01:02:02] anybody's book. Next is the 2021 Grand Boulevard Bridge Water and Wastewater [01:02:09] Utility Relocation Engineering Services. And as indicated, the project area is the [01:02:19] Grand Boulevard Bridge. And Mr. Rivera will be presenting the agenda item, which [01:02:26] is a request to enter into a professional services agreement with HDR [01:02:32] Engineering for design, plan preparation, bid documents, and permitting for the [01:02:40] project. Sure, and the task order is in an amount not to exceed $59,920. [01:02:46] Pasco County engineering staff notified our staff over the summer that they were [01:02:52] scheduling the replacement of the Grand Boulevard Bridge. We have two utility [01:02:58] facilities that are on each that are attached to each side of the bridge. [01:03:01] We've got a 16-inch portable water main and a 12-inch force main attached to [01:03:08] both sides. And so HDR Engineering is the same consultants that are [01:03:15] working for the county that's going to design and oversee the construction of [01:03:20] the new bridge. So we went ahead and piggybacked on so that they can go ahead [01:03:25] and do our design work. We can go out to bid with Pasco County. We'll come to you [01:03:31] after the design is completed, enter into a local agreement with Pasco, [01:03:36] and we'll go ahead and get that bridge replaced. Probably they're scheduled it [01:03:42] for the beginning of October of 2021, if they stay on track. So with that, we [01:03:48] recommend the approval of the task order. Thank you. Open up for public comment. [01:03:53] Oh, I'm sorry. Excuse me, Mayor. I did leave one thing out and I apologize. We [01:03:59] did take into consideration the design that you have for the Grand Boulevard [01:04:05] multi-use path, and so we also contracted with Watermaker Jensen. That was Jason. He [01:04:11] was here with the Railroad Square project presentation. He is going to go [01:04:16] ahead and send over a couple conceptual drawings over to the engineers so they [01:04:22] can incorporate the top side of the bridge to where when we get started with [01:04:27] our project, that portion will already be complete and we won't have to redo any [01:04:32] type of construction. That was going to be one of my questions. Open up for [01:04:36] public comment. Seeing no one come forward, bring it back to Council. Move approval. [01:04:41] Second. To the maker. Yeah, just the only thing that I was hoping I would hear is [01:04:46] that there has been some dialogue about raising the bridge to the same height as [01:04:50] Madison and whether there's been any response from them on that. We have [01:04:53] talked with them. They didn't really want to commit as far as calling out a [01:04:58] height that they could guarantee. They did say that they would look into it and [01:05:03] they would raise the bridge as much as the design engineers would be capable of [01:05:11] doing because they've got a tie-in to the intersection at Gulf and you've [01:05:15] got Townhouse Road that's right up there by the bridge and things like that. So [01:05:20] they are going to look into it, but they didn't want to commit to how high they [01:05:25] can get it. Well, if it relates to something the city can do, as example [01:05:29] with Townhouse Road, if that needs to be closed to make it work, there are two, [01:05:35] maybe three properties that exit out onto Grand Boulevard from there that do [01:05:39] have access from the other direction. May not be the most optimal thing, but I [01:05:45] think the elevation of that bridge is an important item, so I hate to leave it [01:05:49] just alone to that. Good news is it'll be our engineer, so you'll be able to keep [01:05:54] abreast of it or perhaps we, Debbie, we could be kept abreast of any opportunity [01:06:02] we may have to encourage that or get our residents out because they're the ones [01:06:07] that have brought it to our attention. I mean, we built the Madison Street bridge [01:06:12] on purpose to a height to prepare for the day when that bridge was replaced, so I [01:06:18] think it's a critical opportunity for the city that's going to increase a lot [01:06:23] more property values than what it could do to Mr. Hobby's law practice or to [01:06:29] that medical practice that's there. And if there's a figure, please bring it [01:06:35] back to us so we know how we can get the resident reaction. To the second. Yeah, I [01:06:42] agree with the Councilman Allman. We have to make sure that that's included, and I [01:06:47] know them saying, oh, well, you know, we'll see what we can do in a design and blah [01:06:51] blah blah, that just means it's a way out for them not to do it. So we need to [01:06:55] make sure they're doing it, and if we have to do something to make it happen, [01:06:59] then I think we should. I mean, just that's critical, and this is the time to
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.
- 8.e
2021 Grand Blvd. Bridge Water and Wastewater Utility Relocation - Engineering Services
approvedCouncil briefly discussed the engineering services for the 2021 Grand Blvd. Bridge water and wastewater utility relocation, noting the bridge needs to be raised to allow boats with Biminis to pass under at high tide, which would increase property values for waterfront homes. The item passed on a voice vote.
- vote:Approve engineering services for the 2021 Grand Blvd. Bridge water and wastewater utility relocation. (passed)
▶ Jump to 1:07:03 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[01:07:03] do it, so really like to see that happen. I agree 100%. You can't get underneath [01:07:11] there in a fixed Bimini with medium or high tide, so it's going to definitely [01:07:16] change the value of all those properties that are back there on the water if you [01:07:19] can get a boat back there with a Bimini on it. It's dodgy getting under there [01:07:23] with a small boat at high tide, so it definitely needs to go up. There's no [01:07:29] further discussion. All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed,
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.
- 8.f
Request to Purchase Stormwater Utility 4" Portable Pump
approvedCouncil approved the purchase of one four-inch portable stormwater pump for an amount not to exceed $47,881, using Florida Sheriff's Association contract pricing. Funds were appropriated in the FY 2020-2021 capital equipment improvement program budget.
- motion:Motion to approve the purchase of one four-inch portable stormwater pump for an amount not to exceed $47,881. (passed)
Florida Sheriff's AssociationMurphyCapital Equipment Improvement Program FY 2020-2021FSA 20-EQU 18.0▶ Jump to 1:07:33 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[01:07:33] like sign. Motion passes. Next, request to purchase stormwater four-inch utility [01:07:39] portable pump. As you are all aware, prior to large rain events, we rely on [01:07:48] pumps as a means to prevent and reduce flooding. We rent a lot of pumps. In this [01:07:57] case, we are recommending the purchase of one four-inch portable stormwater pump [01:08:03] for an amount not to exceed $47,881. The proposal pricing is in accordance with [01:08:13] the Florida Sheriff's Association contract bid award for heavy equipment [01:08:19] FSA 20-EQU 18.0, and we have appropriated funds in the capital, [01:08:29] equipment improvement program budget for the 2020-2021 fiscal year. Thank you. [01:08:38] I'll open it up for public comment. Seeing no one come forward, bring it back to [01:08:43] council. Move approval. Second. Not much to say about this one. Second. If needed, let's get it. [01:08:52] Mr. Murphy? No, I'm good. In case all those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. [01:08:57] Opposed, like sign. Motion passes. Communications is next. The only thing
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.
- 9Communications▶ 1:09:00
- 10Adjournment