First readings passed for the Aqua Reserve project on Seaforest Drive: voluntary annexation of 18.9 acres, land use change to MF-HDR-24, and PDD-RPD rezoning.
20 items on the agenda · 14 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 0:06 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:00:06] So to ask you all to please stand join me in the Pledge of Allegiance remain standing [00:00:10] for a moment of silence in honor of our servicemen and women at home and abroad. [00:00:14] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for [00:00:21] which it stands one nation under God indivisible with 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
Council observed a moment of silence in honor of servicemen and women at home and abroad.
▶ Jump to 0:10 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:00:10] for a moment of silence in honor of our servicemen and women at home and abroad.
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 November 16, 2021 Work Session and Regular Meeting Minutes
approvedCouncil approved the November 16, 2021 work session and regular meeting minutes with one minor edit noted regarding an abstention.
- motion:Motion to approve the November 16, 2021 work session and regular meeting minutes (with one minor edit). (passed)
▶ Jump to 0:34 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:00:34] Next item on the agenda is the approval of the November 16th work session and regular [00:00:43] meeting minutes. [00:00:44] Move for approval. [00:00:45] Second. [00:00:46] We have a motion and a second there was one minor edit that I sent to Judy. [00:00:55] It was chopper actually that was dealing with one of the motions when I abstained. [00:01:01] There's no further discussion all those in favor please signify by saying aye. [00:01:05] Aye. [00:01:06] Opposed like sign. [00:01:08] Motion passes. [00:01:09] Next we have a presentation for years of service to Mr. John Fussell.
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
Presentation of Years of Service Award to John Fussell
Council recognized Park Superintendent John Fussell for 35 years of service to the City of New Port Richey. Public Works director Mr. Rivera detailed Fussell's career from 1984 OJT warehouse assistant through water utility mechanic to Park Superintendent, highlighting accomplishments including reconstruction of the gazebo, fishing pier, park shelters, leadership of Toys for Tots, and Christmas in Chasco parade floats. Council presented him with an acrylic plaque.
Grand Boulevard and Kenwood AvenueHistorical Museum gazeboPeace HallSims ParkU.S. Highway 19 Center MediansChristmas in ChascoGulf High SchoolToys for TotsJohn FussellMr. RiveraMs. MannsOJT (On the Job Training) programParks Maintenance DivisionPublic Works Department Water Distribution DivisionYears of Service Award▶ Jump to 1:10 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:01:12] Yes we do. [00:01:13] It's an honor to be able to recognize a devoted city employee for his years of service in [00:01:19] particular. [00:01:20] Tonight it's John Fussell and I'd like to ask Mr. Rivera to say some to have some words [00:01:29] from Mr. Rivera if you'd like to come up. [00:01:34] I know you have words for Mr. Rivera. [00:01:36] I too have words for Mr. Rivera. [00:01:43] For Mr. Fussell for all of his contributions over the past 35 years. [00:01:49] Yes. [00:01:50] Well thank you. [00:01:51] I wanted to start off by saying that John started working for the city in 1984 as a [00:01:58] utility purchasing warehouse assistant. [00:02:02] He was a senior at Gulf High and he was part of the OJT program and the younger people [00:02:08] might not know what OJT means but it was a program that they had on the job training. [00:02:14] So we had a little luncheon today for the guys for John and I was trying to give them [00:02:22] some kind of idea about how long it's been that John's been with the city and a lot of [00:02:28] times you can say well the number one song for that year was this and I got to thinking [00:02:33] well half of the guys wouldn't know it anyway. [00:02:36] So one of the things I came across was back in 1984 the cell phone usage in America was [00:02:44] 40,000 users and 2021 it's well over 300 million or over 90% of the U.S. population. [00:02:53] That's how long John's been with the city. [00:02:58] So John finished his OJT and decided to go to work in the private industry. [00:03:03] In 1987 he came back, applied for the city and he was hired as a water utility mechanic [00:03:09] in the Public Works Department Water Distribution Division. [00:03:13] In 2007 he transferred over to the Parks Maintenance Division as a maintenance worker three and [00:03:20] then finally in 2010 he was promoted to Park Superintendent's position that he holds currently. [00:03:27] I have known John for over 31 years of the 35. [00:03:32] We've worked together in our current position six years now subsequent to the parks transfer [00:03:38] over underneath the Public Works Department and I have to say that in this time he has [00:03:44] always taken direction with the purpose of goal achievement and that's very important [00:03:50] when you are trying to dictate and reach goals as a team. [00:03:55] Some of John's accomplishments over the years, I just wanted to call out a few of them, but [00:04:01] again I want to say that it's just a few of them. [00:04:05] He reconstructed the city's gazebo over by the Historical Museum. [00:04:10] He did construction of many of the shelters in the parks. [00:04:14] He reconstructed the fishing pier located at Grand Boulevard and Kenwood Avenue. [00:04:20] The custom windows that you see at Peace Hall now, he was a part of that construction. [00:04:26] He has maintained the U.S. Highway 19 Center Medians, the landscaping since their inceptions. [00:04:35] He's also led the Toys for Tots program for New Port Richey since 2013. [00:04:42] He's overseen every special event in Sims Park since 2010 and then finally many of you [00:04:50] recognize that he has been involved in the design and build of numerous Christmas in [00:04:55] Chasco parade floats representing the city that have been recognized as the best float [00:05:01] for a non-profit organization. [00:05:04] The last thing that I wanted to bring to everyone's attention is a personal note. [00:05:10] In those six years that I've been working with John, he's never once not picked up the [00:05:16] phone when I've called him. [00:05:19] I think I can speak for all of our departments that work for Ms. Manns and for Council that [00:05:26] one of the things we do pride ourselves in is real-time acknowledgement and trying to [00:05:32] take care of everything on a timely fashion. [00:05:36] When it's late at night or you have a special event or it's a holiday or anything like that [00:05:41] and you can pick the phone up and respond to another person's request, to me that speaks [00:05:47] volumes and that's the type of person John has been. [00:05:52] So with that, I would like to take this time to publicly thank John on behalf of the city [00:05:57] for his 35 years of service to the residents of New Port Richey. [00:06:03] We believe that your actions have truly displayed what a life of public service should be. [00:06:07] We wish him well on the next chapter of his life and we hope that it gives him as much [00:06:12] enjoyment as he's given the residents of this city. [00:06:15] So, thank you. [00:06:16] And John truly has given in every respect. [00:06:19] I'd like to just add that John's service is exemplary. [00:06:25] Not only did he do his job, but he did his job better than most. [00:06:30] And the thing about John that I appreciate most is that he gave more of himself and gave [00:06:38] back to the community. [00:06:39] He didn't just do his job. [00:06:41] He consistently gave back to the community and you could tell in everything that he did [00:06:46] that he had great passion for the city. [00:06:50] And with that, we bought him an acrylic plaque, which we don't just do for any city employee. [00:06:57] And so, we'd like to ask you to come up front, John, so that... [00:07:31] I just want to say, I've probably known John for 30 years and for 30 years, he's rolled [00:07:37] his eyes at me every time he's seen me. [00:07:40] So, and there's probably well-deserved in it, even to last Friday where I got stuck [00:07:45] on city property, he came and towed me out. [00:07:47] So, he's been rolling his eyes for a long time at me. [00:07:55] Thank you for all of your service, John. [00:08:01] Next, we have recognition of the Gulf High School Florida City Government Week Poster
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
Recognition of Gulf High School Florida City Government Week Poster Contest Winners
Council recognized Gulf High School winners of the Florida City Government Week Poster Contest, themed 'My City, I'm Proud of It, I'm Part of It.' Two of the three winners were present and received gift cards; 29 entries were submitted.
Gulf High SchoolGulf Middle SchoolChastity VerdejoKayla MannMr. MorgensteinMr. WhitemanFlorida City Government Week Poster ContestMy City, I'm Proud of It, I'm Part of It▶ Jump to 8:05 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:08:06] Contest winners. [00:08:08] Thank you, Mr. Mayor. [00:08:12] It is my pleasure to present this item for you tonight. [00:08:16] As you're aware, we partnered with Gulf Middle School and with Gulf High School for our Florida [00:08:21] City Government Week Poster Contest. [00:08:24] Tonight, we honor our Gulf High School winners and we have two out of the three winners here [00:08:29] with us tonight. [00:08:31] We had 29 outstanding entries for this contest and it was truly very hard to whittle it down [00:08:39] to just three. [00:08:41] But I would like to invite our second place winner, Chastity Verdejo, and our third place [00:08:46] winner, Kayla Mann, down to the podium as well as... [00:08:56] As well as Gulf High School Principal, Mr. Morgenstein, and the art teacher who collected [00:09:02] all our entries for us, Mr. Whiteman. [00:09:10] Parents can come down if you want to come down closer, take the pictures, come on down. [00:09:19] So, our theme once again was My City, I'm Proud of It, I'm Part of It. [00:09:25] So this was our second place winner. [00:09:35] And then on behalf of the Mayor and City Manager and City Council, I'd like to present some [00:09:39] gift cards for you as well. [00:09:42] Just a little bit. [00:09:59] Yeah. [00:10:04] Perfect. [00:10:10] Thank you. [00:10:22] Thank you so much. [00:10:23] Thank you. [00:10:24] Thank you. [00:10:25] 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.
- 7
Presentation by the Environmental Committee RE: Prohibition of Polystyrene Containers at City Events
tabledThe Environmental Committee's presentation on prohibiting polystyrene containers at city events was deferred to a later date so the full council could be present.
- direction:Defer the Environmental Committee presentation on prohibition of polystyrene containers to a later meeting when the full council is present. (tabled)
▶ Jump to 10:34 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:10:34] Next on tonight's agenda is a presentation by the Environmental Committee regarding prohibition [00:10:39] of polystyrene containers. [00:10:40] Mr. Mayor, we've asked to defer this agenda item to December 26 so that the full council [00:10:46] can be present. [00:10:47] In that case, we'll go to Vox Pop for anything that's not on tonight's agenda or that is
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.
- 8Vox Pop for Items Not Listed on the Agenda or Listed on Consent Agenda▶ 10:50
- 9.a
You arrived here from a search for “Ordinance 2022-2247” — transcript expanded below
Purchases/Payments for City Council Approval
on consentFirst reading of Ordinance 2022-2247, an annexation ordinance for a tract of land on Seaforest Drive west of Elizabethan Lane in Pasco County, contiguous to existing city limits.
▶ Jump to 17:17 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:17:19] This is ordinance number 2022-2247, [00:17:22] an ordinance of the city of New Port Richey, Florida, [00:17:24] providing for annexation of the within described [00:17:26] tract of land located on Seaforest Drive, [00:17:29] west of Elizabethan Lane in Pasco County, Florida, [00:17:33] and contiguous to the existing city limits [00:17:35] of the city of New Port Richey, [00:17:37] as legally described in Exhibit A attached here too, [00:17:40] providing for amendment of the corporate boundaries [00:17:42] of the city in accordance with Chapter 171, [00:17:45] Florida Statutes, providing for conflict, [00:17:46] severability, and an effective date. [00:17:49] And Mr. Mayor, if I could point out to you [00:17:51] that as part of this agenda item,
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.
- 10.a
First Reading, Ordinance No. 2022-2247: Voluntary Annexation for JEA Property Holdings, LLC and Hudson Bay Developers, LLC
approvedCouncil held the first reading of Ordinance 2022-2247 for voluntary annexation of 18.9 acres off Seaforest Drive owned by JEA Property Holdings, LLC and Hudson Bay Developers, LLC, part of the Aqua Reserve project planned for 82 dwelling units (32 townhomes, 50 multifamily apartments). Council approved the updated annexation agreements and approved the ordinance on first reading; final hearing is expected in late January.
Ord. Ordinance No. 2022-2247
- motion:Motion to approve the two annexation agreements with JEA Property Holdings and Hudson Bay Developers. (passed)
- motion:Motion to approve Ordinance 2022-2247 voluntary annexation on first reading. (passed)
Seaforest DriveFGUA (Florida Governmental Utility Authority)Hudson Bay Developers, LLCJEA Property Holdings, LLCBrad CorneliusMs. MannsAqua Reserve projectDevelopment Review CommitteeLand Development Review BoardOrdinance No. 2022-2247Residential 24 future land use▶ Jump to 17:53 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:17:53] you will have to ask for a motion [00:17:55] to approve the two annexation agreements [00:17:58] that you should have at your place. [00:18:00] So after you open the public hearing, [00:18:02] I would ask that you entertain two separate motions, [00:18:04] one to approve the agreements, [00:18:06] and the second to approve the first reading [00:18:07] of the ordinance. [00:18:10] Okay. [00:18:11] In that case, we will open this issue up [00:18:13] for public comment. [00:18:17] Seeing no one coming forward, [00:18:20] I will bring it back to Council. [00:18:23] We do have presentations? [00:18:25] We do have a presentation on this item, Mr. Mayor. [00:18:28] And I might note that the applicant [00:18:31] for this agenda item is present this evening, [00:18:34] and the voluntary annexation will actually involve [00:18:41] three separate agenda items this evening [00:18:44] before it concludes. [00:18:47] And it relates to the Aqua Reserve project, [00:18:51] which we have introduced to you in the past. [00:18:54] Mr. Cornelius will more formally introduce it [00:19:00] as it represents a project which is very exciting [00:19:07] to the city as it calls for the development [00:19:10] of 18.9 acres of property [00:19:13] and the establishment of 82 dwelling units. [00:19:17] Mr. Cornelius, if you would. [00:19:19] Thank you, Ms. Manns. [00:19:21] My name is Brad Cornelius, [00:19:22] the way I'm serving as your contracted planner this evening. [00:19:24] And I have a short presentation [00:19:25] regarding this voluntary annexation, [00:19:27] just so it is on the record for you all this evening. [00:19:30] As the city attorney referenced, [00:19:31] you have the ordinance 2020-22-2247 [00:19:35] for the voluntary annexation. [00:19:38] First, in terms of the location, [00:19:40] as we've said, this is 18.9 acres. [00:19:42] You can see on the aerial, [00:19:43] it's located off of Seaforest Drive, [00:19:46] adjacent to the city's utility plant. [00:19:48] Then it goes over onto the south side of Seaforest Drive. [00:19:52] So that is the property that is being considered [00:19:54] for the voluntary annexation into the city. [00:19:58] In terms of what your process here is in the city, [00:20:00] you have basically a two-step process. [00:20:02] You have the pre-annexation agreement, [00:20:04] and then the actual process of annexation. [00:20:07] As the city attorney mentioned, [00:20:10] what you have before you this evening [00:20:12] is an amendment to, or an updated annexation agreement. [00:20:16] You did originally approve an annexation agreement [00:20:19] for this annexation on July 8th. [00:20:23] But what's happened since that time [00:20:25] is one of the properties has changed hands. [00:20:27] The developer now owns one of the properties. [00:20:30] So in order to make sure all the records, [00:20:32] all the documentation is clear and consistent and correct, [00:20:35] we have had the agreement updated [00:20:38] to reflect the current ownership of the property, [00:20:41] as well as the annexation petition [00:20:43] to be in both property owners' name, [00:20:44] both JEA Property Holdings, LLC, [00:20:49] and Hudson Bay Developers, LLC. [00:20:51] So before we had one annexation petition, [00:20:55] now we have two because we have [00:20:56] two separate property owners. [00:20:58] JEA still owns the piece on the north side of Seaforest, [00:21:01] and Hudson Developers owns the site [00:21:04] on the south side of the property. [00:21:06] So that is why that's before you this evening. [00:21:08] Again, there's no significant changes. [00:21:10] It's merely just updating to reflect [00:21:12] the current condition and ownership that's out there. [00:21:16] In terms of the proposal, [00:21:18] again, the two owners are JEA and Hudson Bay. [00:21:22] As Ms. Mann said, the final intent of this annexation [00:21:27] is to develop an 82-unit development [00:21:30] with 32 townhomes and 50 multifamily apartments, [00:21:34] which we'll get into in your next cases more specifically. [00:21:37] What is interesting about this, [00:21:39] when we bring it in, we do have to look at the densities. [00:21:41] What they are bringing it in is actually significantly less [00:21:45] than what they could do on this property. [00:21:48] They are coming in at 4.33 dwelling units per acre. [00:21:51] That's the net density, or I'm sorry, [00:21:53] the gross density on the property, 4.33. [00:21:57] This property under the county, [00:21:58] as it's currently designated, [00:21:59] could have up to 24 units per acre. [00:22:02] So it is much less than what could be going [00:22:05] on this property, so they're well under that number. [00:22:08] As I said there, currently the county has this [00:22:11] as a residential 24 dwelling units per acre. [00:22:14] And what the proposed city future land use, [00:22:17] which you'll have on your next case, [00:22:19] is to go to the residential 24 in the city. [00:22:21] So we'll match the county's land use. [00:22:24] There won't be any change in entitlements [00:22:26] on the property from the annexation. [00:22:28] With that, and again, it was very important to state [00:22:31] that this is much less than what could go on this property. [00:22:35] In terms of public services after annexation, [00:22:38] it's always an important part of annexation. [00:22:40] Once this property is annexed into the city, [00:22:42] the city will have responsible police, fire, [00:22:45] and sewer, and solid waste for this property. [00:22:50] I'm sorry, not sewer, water and sewer [00:22:52] would be provided by FGUA, [00:22:54] which this is in the FGUA service area. [00:22:56] Again, that's part of your annexation agreement. [00:22:59] But there is the potential in the longer term [00:23:02] for the city to become a bulk water provider [00:23:04] for this property, for this area. [00:23:06] It's part of other issues that are going on with FGUA. [00:23:09] So there is sufficient public services [00:23:11] to meet this annexation. [00:23:14] In terms of the statutory requirements [00:23:15] that we have to look at, [00:23:16] this is something that we have to assure that we meet, [00:23:19] is number one, it's contiguous to existing city boundary. [00:23:22] As we've shown on the map, it is contiguous [00:23:23] to the city with the piece with the utility plant. [00:23:28] It does not create an enclave in unincorporated areas, [00:23:30] meaning we're not surrounding an area [00:23:32] that's unincorporated, that's not occurring here. [00:23:35] And it's also reasonably compact, [00:23:37] meaning we're not just annexing along a roadway [00:23:40] in a long, linear pattern. [00:23:42] You know, it's a defined area. [00:23:44] So it is our recommendation and our finding [00:23:46] that it does meet all those requirements for annexation. [00:23:52] What the next steps would be, [00:23:54] again, as this goes through, [00:23:56] would be the future land use amendment, [00:23:58] which will be your next case, [00:23:59] to assign the city future land use for it. [00:24:02] And then also assigning the city zoning, [00:24:05] which is your third case this evening, [00:24:06] as Ms. Mann's referenced, these are the three cases, [00:24:08] your annexation, your land use amendment, [00:24:12] and then the rezoning as part of this process. [00:24:15] It is important to understand, this is the first reading, [00:24:18] so you're not actually approving anything this evening. [00:24:21] This will come back to you, probably at the end of January, [00:24:24] at your second meeting in January, [00:24:26] for your final hearing for the actual annexation. [00:24:29] This is your first hearing on it, [00:24:32] but as the city attorney said, [00:24:33] we are asking you to approve [00:24:34] the updated annexation agreements. [00:24:37] So my conclusion is, again, this annexation is consistent [00:24:41] with the updated pre-annexation agreement. [00:24:44] The Development Review Committee did review this annexation, [00:24:46] and we did recommend approval, [00:24:48] as well as your Land Development Review Board [00:24:50] also reviewed this annexation, [00:24:52] and they also recommended approval of the annexation. [00:24:55] With that, I'll conclude my presentation. [00:24:56] Happy to answer any questions. [00:24:58] Thank you. [00:25:01] Thank you very much. [00:25:01] Yes, sir. [00:25:02] On the annex, the voluntary annexation, [00:25:07] which is the first of the three motions, [00:25:10] do we have any public comment on that by itself? [00:25:15] Seeing no one come forward, I'll bring it back to Council. [00:25:19] I just have one question. [00:25:21] Since this is adjacent, what side of this is adjacent [00:25:25] to already existing city property? [00:25:28] What side? [00:25:29] Or sides? [00:25:30] I'm sorry, I'm not hearing very well this evening, [00:25:33] but it's on the east side? [00:25:35] Okay, it's the east side of city property, okay. [00:25:37] Right, right, yeah, the utility plan abuts it to the north. [00:25:40] Okay, all right. [00:25:41] Yes, sir. [00:25:43] I think you said it was an enclave below, [00:25:45] and you said it was. [00:25:46] No, it does not create an enclave, it does not. [00:25:47] Okay, but it wasn't an enclave itself either? [00:25:50] No, no. [00:25:51] Okay, all right, no. [00:25:53] Move for approval. [00:25:54] Second. [00:25:55] And that's for the agreements? [00:25:57] That's for the voluntary annexation, which is, [00:26:00] they told us was the first one. [00:26:02] Well, I need you to make a motion [00:26:04] to approve the agreements and then approve the ordinance. [00:26:06] So this would be a motion to approve the agreements? [00:26:09] Item 10A, first, oh, that's an ordinance, I see. [00:26:12] Yes, sir, a motion is to approve the agreements [00:26:16] with the two parties. [00:26:17] Second. [00:26:19] Any discussion? [00:26:21] Hearing none, all those in favor, [00:26:23] please signify by saying aye. [00:26:25] Aye. [00:26:26] Opposed, like sign. [00:26:27] Now we need one on the annexation. [00:26:30] Yes. [00:26:31] Okay, so we need a motion on the ordinance. [00:26:34] I'll make that motion to approve the ordinance [00:26:36] on first reading. [00:26:37] Second. [00:26:38] Ordinance 2022-47. [00:26:41] Second. [00:26:42] We have multiple seconds. [00:26:43] Any discussion from anybody? [00:26:46] Hearing none, all those in favor, [00:26:48] please signify by saying aye. [00:26:50] Aye. [00:26:51] Opposed, like sign. [00:26:53] 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.
- 10.b
First Reading, Ordinance No. 2022-2248: Small Scale Future Land Use Amendment from County RES-24 Classification to City MF-HDR-24 Classification for 18.9 Acres on Sea Forest Drive
approvedFirst reading of Ordinance 2022-2248, a small scale future land use map amendment changing approximately 18.9 acres on Seaforest Drive (south of Seagull Drive) from Pasco County RES-24 to City MF-HDR-24 classification. Council discussed density and a councilmember asked the City Attorney to look into whether the city could acquire excess density rights upon annexation.
Ord. Ordinance No. 2022-2248
- motion:Motion to approve first reading of Ordinance 2022-2248, amending the future land use designation for ~18.9 acres on Seaforest Drive from Pasco County RES-24 to City MF-HDR-24. (passed)
Seaforest Drive, south of Seagull DriveUnidentified CouncilmemberMF-HDR-24Ordinance 2022-2248Parcel 07-2616-0090-00100-0020Parcel 07-2616-0090-00300-0020Pasco County RES-24Voluntary annexation▶ Jump to 26:54 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:26:54] Next is first reading of ordinance 2022-2248. [00:27:00] This is ordinance number 2022-2248, [00:27:03] an ordinance of the city of New Port Richey, Florida, [00:27:05] providing for a small scale amendment [00:27:07] of the future land use map [00:27:09] of the city's adopted comprehensive plan, [00:27:11] providing for a change in the land use designation [00:27:13] for approximately 18.9 acres of property [00:27:16] voluntarily annexed into the city, [00:27:19] generally located on Seaforest Drive, [00:27:21] south of Seagull Drive, [00:27:22] having parcel identification numbers [00:27:25] 07-2616-0090-00100-0020 [00:27:33] and 07-2616-0090-00300-0020, [00:27:40] as shown on the map attached here too, [00:27:43] as Exhibit A and legally described herein, [00:27:46] providing for the amendment of the land use designation [00:27:48] for said property from Pasco County RES-24 to HDR-24, [00:27:55] providing for conflict severability and an effective date. [00:27:59] Any public comment? [00:28:02] Seeing no one come forward, bring it back to council. [00:28:06] I'll second. [00:28:08] Discussion to the maker of the second? [00:28:11] No, I do, yeah. [00:28:13] Yeah, I do, I wanted to just reflect [00:28:15] while we're under the motion on the comments made [00:28:20] related to the density and the change of density. [00:28:23] And as you referenced it and commented to us, [00:28:28] you indicated that it was well below [00:28:31] the 24 units per acre that's allowable. [00:28:37] And you said that as if it was a positive thing [00:28:40] because we want to keep density low. [00:28:46] I happen to agree that it's a great thing [00:28:48] that the density's low at that particular location [00:28:51] because for a lot of reasons. [00:28:55] And so I'm proud to be in favor of the motion. [00:28:59] But I do have a question for the attorney [00:29:01] related to this transaction, [00:29:05] I guess it's not a transaction, this issue, [00:29:07] which is that the city has a barrel of density rights [00:29:13] that we have, that we own, that allows us some flexibility [00:29:19] when in fact there may be a need [00:29:23] and a more appropriate place for density. [00:29:30] Is it possible that upon the annexation of this, [00:29:34] those are not our densities, they're the county's densities, [00:29:37] it comes in, I'm not sure the legalities of it, [00:29:39] but if there is an excess of densities [00:29:43] and the city has a collection of those, [00:29:48] I would be curious to the ability [00:29:50] for the city to acquire those. [00:29:54] We could certainly look at that. [00:29:59] Right. [00:30:00] So there may be something there that could be used. So I would pose that [00:30:03] question to the just to raise it and ask that it might be something that you [00:30:08] could look at as time goes on. Yes. Thank you. Hearing none, all those in favor, please
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.
- 10.c
First Reading, Ordinance No. 2022-2249: Rezoning of 18.9 Acres on Sea Forest Drive to Planned Development District - Residential
approvedCouncil held first reading of Ordinance No. 2022-2249, rezoning approximately 18.9 acres on Sea Forest Drive (south of Seagull Drive) from Pasco County Multifamily High-Density District (MF2) to Planned Development District - Residential Planned Development Subdistrict (PDD-RPD). With no public comment, the motion for approval passed unanimously by voice vote.
Ord. Ordinance No. 2022-2249
- motion:Motion to approve first reading of Ordinance No. 2022-2249 rezoning the Sea Forest Drive property to PDD-RPD. (passed)
Sea Forest Drive, south of Seagull DriveLand Development Code Zoning District Map amendmentOrdinance No. 2022-2249Planned Development District (PDD)Residential Planned Development Subdistrict (RPD)▶ Jump to 30:16 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:30:16] signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, like sign. Motion passes. Next is first reading [00:30:22] ordinance 2022-2249. This is ordinance number 2022-2249, an ordinance of the [00:30:29] City of New Port Richey, Florida, providing for amendment of the Land [00:30:31] Development Code, LDC Zoning District Map, providing for rezoning of [00:30:36] approximately 8.9 acres of property generally located on Cease Forest Drive [00:30:41] south of Seagull Drive, having parcel identification numbers 0726-1600-900-1000-0020 [00:30:49] and 0726-1600-9000-300-0020, as shown on the map [00:30:57] attached here to as Exhibit A, and legally described herein, providing for [00:31:01] amendment of the Zoning District Designation for said property from Pasco [00:31:05] County Multifamily High-Density District MF2 to Planned Development [00:31:11] District PDD Residential Planned Development Subdistrict RPD, providing [00:31:16] for development as provided in the site plan attached here to as Exhibit B, [00:31:19] providing for termination, providing for conflicts, severability, and an effective [00:31:24] date. Sure you got all the zeros? We'll hope. Any public comment? Seeing no one [00:31:33] coming down, I'll bring it back to Council. Move for approval. Second. We have a [00:31:39] motion and a second. Any discussion? Looks like a nice plan. In that case, all those [00:31:46] in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, like sign. Motion passes. Next is
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.
- 10.d
First Reading, Ordinance No. 2022-2250: Rezoning for 7932 Rutillio Ct.
approvedCouncil held first reading of Ordinance 2022-2250 to rezone approximately 0.46 acres at 7932 Rutilio Court from General Commercial (C2) to Light Industrial (LI). Staff and the Land Development Review Board recommended approval, finding it consistent with the comprehensive plan's future land-use map. Council passed the motion and discussed potentially rezoning the broader area at once rather than parcel by parcel.
Ord. Ordinance No. 2022-2250
- motion:Approve first reading of Ordinance 2022-2250 rezoning 7932 Rutilio Court from C2 to Light Industrial. (passed)
7932 Rutilio CourtAdmiral Air Cooling and HeatingCouncilman DavisMr. CorneliusMr. MurphyLand Development CodeLand Development Review Board recommendation Nov 16Ordinance 2022-2250Parcel 332516015B0000340▶ Jump to 31:54 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:31:54] First Reading Ordinance 2022-2250. This is Ordinance Number 2022-2250, an [00:32:01] Ordinance of the City of New Port Richey, Florida, providing for amendment of the [00:32:04] Land Development Code, LDC Zoning District MAT, providing for rezoning of [00:32:08] approximately 0.46 acres of property generally located at 7932 [00:32:13] Rutilo Court, having parcel identification number 332516015B0000340 as [00:32:26] shown on the map attached here to as Exhibit A and legally described herein, [00:32:29] providing for amendment of the Zoning District designation for said property [00:32:33] from General Commercial C2 to Light Industrial District LI, providing for [00:32:38] conflicts, severability, and effective date. Mr. Cornelius is doing so well [00:32:44] tonight, if you could please continue. Could I have the mic's power point, please? [00:32:50] 10D. Thank you so much. I have a short presentation for this rezoning. Again, as [00:32:59] the City Attorney read, this is a rezoning request for 7932 Rutilio Court, [00:33:02] Ordinance 2022-2250. The situation here, the owner of the property is Admiral Air [00:33:10] Cooling and Heating. Currently, it has a C2 zoning, which is a general commercial [00:33:15] zoning. It's a little bit less than a half an acre in size, and the existing [00:33:19] use that's there today, and this is why it's coming through the rezoning, is a [00:33:23] roofing company. That is actually the business that is there now. It does [00:33:27] require the industrial zoning, so that is why this is before you this evening. This [00:33:32] shows you the location of the property, and this is Orchard Lake Boulevard [00:33:41] coming here, Rutilio Court, and then here's the subject property here, this [00:33:45] warehouse building back here, and they get access through here on this [00:33:49] driveway there. So that's the subject property. As you all know, this [00:33:53] is an industrial area where this property is located. Current zonings in [00:33:59] that area, it's a mix. We have some old C2 zonings that still exist there, and [00:34:03] here's the subject property highlighted. It has the old C2 zoning still on it. You [00:34:08] can see other properties over the years have, a few have been rezoned to [00:34:11] industrial in that area. In terms of your future land-use map, this is your future [00:34:18] land-use map as it's currently adopted. The gray is industrial, so this is [00:34:23] identified within your comprehensive plan on your future land-use map as your [00:34:27] industrial area of the city. So that is what your comprehensive plan calls [00:34:32] for this to be developed as. In terms of the recommendation and the review from [00:34:37] staff, we did review this rezoning request and we did find it consistent [00:34:40] with your comprehensive plan, consistent with your future land-use map as well, [00:34:44] bringing into compliance with that future land-use map, and so the DRC, your [00:34:49] staff, we do recommend approval of this rezoning. It did go to your Land [00:34:53] Development Review Board. They did review it on November 16th. They also [00:34:57] reviewed it and they unanimously recommended approval of this rezoning as [00:35:01] well. I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have. Mr. Cornelius, [00:35:04] memory serves me, the property immediately to the east of that that's [00:35:09] in the county, is that currently zoned industrial? It has industrial on it as well. [00:35:13] So we're not really just spot zoning something with a whole bunch of C2? [00:35:17] Correct, yes sir. In my opinion, that whole area has been industrial forever. I [00:35:22] would have been surprised that it's C2. Should we have looked at the whole area [00:35:27] or should we just develop it one at a time? Yes, and I will tell you we have two [00:35:32] more lined up coming to you in the next two months in this same area, so that may [00:35:38] have something the City Council and City Manager would like to do, something we can look at. [00:35:41] In fact, we have looked at rezoning all of the properties in that area to [00:35:49] industrial, to light industrial, but there are some properties that are being [00:35:54] used as commercial properties, and they spoke out at the Land Development Review [00:36:04] Board meeting in opposition of rezoning to light industry. What kind of [00:36:12] businesses were they? I don't recall. We did an inventory. There's some retail [00:36:19] operations, some kind of office operations, and things like that. [00:36:24] There's several office type of uses in the area and things like that. [00:36:32] What does happen when they do come to us at staff with these businesses that need [00:36:37] the industrial zoning that may already be there? We bring them through the [00:36:40] process. We don't tell them they have to stop operating. You know, they can [00:36:43] continue their business. Well, I think one of those retail or commercial ones [00:36:47] are more on the north side of Orchard Lake than the south side. [00:36:50] That's, yeah, I would probably concur with you. Yeah. Yes, sir. [00:36:57] Public? Yeah, as soon as he finishes. If it already is zoned and, you know, one at a time is kind of not the way I think we should go. [00:37:07] Open it up for public comment. Seeing no one come forward, bring it back to [00:37:12] Council. Move approval. Second. Yeah, I just will agree with Councilman Davis. I [00:37:20] know we went through this the first time and, you know, I was around when that [00:37:25] special zoning occurred in order to really sort of isolate those businesses [00:37:30] that were not desired to have in our downtown or out on the highway, but it [00:37:37] would certainly be a shame for us to take and turn away from the future land [00:37:41] use designation there by, you know, poisoning the well, so to speak. So, I [00:37:52] will chime in with Councilman Davis that we might want to take this issue on to [00:38:01] the larger state, but to this, yes. The second? Anything? Nothing more. Mr. Murphy? No. [00:38:08] In that case, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, like [00:38:13] sign. Motion passes. Mr. Cornelius, somehow I think you're probably still up here, so [00:38:19] don't go away. Yes, sir. First reading ordinance 2022-2251. This is
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.
- 10.e
First Reading, Ordinance No. 2022-2251: New Private Property Rights Element for Comprehensive Plan
approvedCouncil held first reading of Ordinance No. 2022-2251, adopting a new private property rights element to the city's comprehensive plan as required by 2021 Florida legislation (section 163.3177). The element adopts the four state-prescribed statements of property rights and must be transmitted to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity for 30-day review before final adoption, which will be paired with the pending annexation small-scale amendment. Council approved the first reading and transmittal by voice vote.
Ord. Ordinance No. 2022-2251
- vote:Approve first reading of Ordinance No. 2022-2251 and transmittal of the draft private property rights element to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. (passed)
Florida Department of Economic OpportunityFlorida League of CitiesNaughty NurTampa Bay TimesBradDebbieDriscollAnnexationComprehensive Plan small-scale amendmentOrdinance No. 2022-2251Private Property Rights ElementSection 163.3177 Florida Statutes▶ Jump to 38:26 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:38:26] ordinance number 2022-2251, an ordinance of the City of New [00:38:30] Florida providing for amendment of the city's adopted comprehensive plan [00:38:33] providing for adoption of a new private property rights element in accordance [00:38:38] with section 163.3177 Florida statutes providing for protection of [00:38:44] private property rights, providing for conflicts, severability, and an effective [00:38:48] date. Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor, I have a short presentation. Could I have 10E, please? [00:38:55] Thank you very much. As the City Attorney mentioned, what you have this evening is [00:38:59] your first reading for a new element to your comprehensive plan. It's a private [00:39:03] property rights element. Why is this there before you this evening? In the [00:39:08] 2021 legislative session, the Florida legislature passed a law that requires [00:39:13] all local governments to adopt a private property rights element within your [00:39:17] comprehensive plans. It's part of your comprehensive plan, a standalone element. [00:39:21] So we all have to do it. Every local government in Florida is going through [00:39:24] this process right now. So that's why this is before you this evening. This is a [00:39:28] state mandate. We have to do this. In terms of how we have to do this, [00:39:34] fortunately the state also gave us direction. The state gave within the [00:39:38] legislation, they said there's four statements of private property rights. If [00:39:41] the local government adopts these four statements, you're fully compliant with [00:39:44] the law. And what those four statements are, and I'll just go quickly, is the right [00:39:49] of a property owner to physically possess and control his or her [00:39:52] interest in the property, including easement, leases, or mineral rights. The [00:39:55] right of a property owner to use, maintain, develop, and approve his or her [00:39:59] property for personal use or for the use of any other person subject to state law [00:40:03] and local ordinances. The right of the property owner to privacy and to exclude [00:40:07] others from the property to protect the owner's possessions and property. And the [00:40:11] right of a property owner to dispose of his or her property through sale or gift. [00:40:14] I think the most important, not to interrupt you, the most important part about [00:40:19] those four statements is that we're attesting to the fact that those [00:40:24] perspectives will be taken into consideration as it relates to planning [00:40:30] related decisions. Right, exactly, exactly. And what's also important to recognize [00:40:35] those statements really just recognize current constitutional judicial [00:40:39] recognition of property rights. We're not really going beyond and above what's [00:40:43] already in place. We're simply stating within our comprehensive plan that those [00:40:47] will be taken into consideration when we make decisions as a city for that. So [00:40:52] well what's proposed for you all this evening is your element is to adopt [00:40:56] those four statements as your new element. If you agree with that what [00:41:01] we're asking for you tonight is to approve the first reading as well as the [00:41:06] transmittal of this draft element to the Florida Department of Economic [00:41:10] Opportunity. This process requires the state to review what we do before we [00:41:14] adopt it. So if you do approve it this evening then we will send it to the [00:41:18] Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. They have 30 days to provide [00:41:22] us comment. We shouldn't get any comments and then once we get comments [00:41:27] back or no comments back then it'll come back to you for final adoption. The other [00:41:31] important part of this is prior to related to the annexation, this does tie [00:41:35] to the annexation in a way, we are unable to amend our comprehensive plan so the [00:41:41] small-scale amendment for the annexation can't move forward until we adopt this [00:41:45] property rights element. So as I said earlier why your second reading for your [00:41:49] annexation will be probably later in July or in January. We're going to bring [00:41:53] it back like we are tonight. They're all going to go together so we adopt the [00:41:57] property rights element at the same time that you all adopt a small-scale [00:42:00] amendment. So we're fully consistent with state law. So that's my short [00:42:04] presentation. It just sounds to me like some municipality took [00:42:08] advantage of private property rights and here we are. [00:42:13] Mr. Driscoll, does this have anything to do with what I've read in the Tampa Bay [00:42:20] Times that the legislature in its infinite wisdom is now allowing people [00:42:26] to open adult businesses in the middle of residential areas? I don't think it's [00:42:31] related to it. I think that this is just as Brad said it's just really a [00:42:38] codification of rights that already exist that are already out there in [00:42:42] constitutional and then judicial interpretation. I think we need to look [00:42:46] at that x-rated business issue. The legislature has been going riding [00:42:54] roughshod over local rule, home rule, and the right of cities and counties to try [00:43:04] to provide some semblance of order in their their respective areas and if what [00:43:13] I read in the Times is the least bit accurate, we need to find out if the [00:43:21] League of Cities is going to file suit because it's beyond the pale. I mean the [00:43:27] legislature does some stupid things but this one is really off the wall out [00:43:31] there. Yeah, we'll take a look at it, Mayor. Okay. I brought up at one time, not here, but [00:43:38] just in a meeting with you, Debbie, is that there's a an adult there's an [00:43:46] adult game room up across the street from Naughty Orr in New Port Richey and I [00:43:52] just want to make sure that our ordinances for downtown restricts that. [00:43:56] You know, it might be added to it if it isn't already there. Open up for public [00:44:01] comment. Seeing no one coming forward, I'll bring it back to Council. [00:44:14] Too big a can of worms for me tonight. In that case, all those in favor, please [00:44:21] signify by saying aye. Opposed, like sign. Motion passes. Next, public hearing on
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.
- 11.a
Public Hearing, Special Waste Hauling Applications for the 2022 Calendar Year
approvedCouncil held a public hearing and approved the 2022 special waste hauling permit applications for the six haulers operating in the city. Staff reported all haulers paid franchise fees and the $500 permit fee, with only one minor complaint during the year regarding operational times that was resolved.
- motion:Approve the 2022 special waste hauling permit applications for the six haulers. (passed)
US Highway 19County Recycling IncorporatedPeterson Service CorporationRepublic ServicesWaste ConnectionsWaste Management of FloridaWaste ProsMr. MurphyMr. RiveraMs. Manns$500 special permit application fee10% franchise fee2022 special waste hauling permit applications▶ Jump to 44:29 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:44:29] special waste hauling applications for 2022. Ms. Manns. Yes, it's that time of year [00:44:34] again. We have six waste haulers that provide service within the city and Mr. [00:44:40] Rivera is responsible to review their permit applications and to set forth a [00:44:50] recommendation as to the 2022 calendar year permit. Mr. Rivera, are you ready? [00:45:00] to talk about that to the council? [00:45:02] Thank you. [00:45:03] So there are six current haulers that operate in the city. [00:45:06] They're County Recycling Incorporated, [00:45:09] otherwise known as County Citation, [00:45:12] Waste Pros, known as Parker & Sons, [00:45:16] Waste Connections, Waste Management of Florida, [00:45:19] and then Republic Services, DBA Seaside Sanitation, [00:45:23] and then finally Peterson Service Corporation. [00:45:26] As I had mentioned, all six currently are operating [00:45:29] in the city. [00:45:31] We are collecting the 10% franchise fees from all of them, [00:45:34] and they have submitted their $500 [00:45:36] special permit application fee. [00:45:39] During the current year, [00:45:42] Public Works recorded one complaint. [00:45:45] We contacted the vendor, and it was taken care of. [00:45:49] That complaint was violating [00:45:52] the permitted operational times, [00:45:56] which, you know, that does happen from time to time. [00:45:58] I believe in this case, [00:46:00] the subdivision, the residential subdivision [00:46:03] backed up onto US Highway 19, [00:46:07] and the actual garbage collector was picking up [00:46:11] from one of the hotels that was there, [00:46:13] so they were operating correctly, [00:46:15] but they did work with us and adjusted the time. [00:46:19] The funding that we received from this [00:46:21] goes towards the general fund revenue source, [00:46:24] and we would ask that you approve this. [00:46:29] We would ask that you approve these applications [00:46:31] and let us proceed with finalizing them, [00:46:34] and we did send certified letters to all the haulers, [00:46:37] letting them know of this public hearing, [00:46:40] and strongly recommending that they attend [00:46:43] in case you did have any questions for them. [00:46:46] Thank you. [00:46:47] This is a public hearing. [00:46:48] We'll open it up for any public comment. [00:46:53] Seeing no one coming forward, [00:46:55] I will bring this back to Council. [00:46:58] To the maker? [00:47:00] No, I think we'll, [00:47:02] certainly the Councilman who's not here [00:47:04] has been talking a lot about our yard debris [00:47:08] and our yard waste and our program for that, [00:47:11] and the whole issue of recycling [00:47:13] and how we manage that part of our refuse [00:47:21] I think is gonna have discussion soon. [00:47:24] I don't know whether there are solutions, [00:47:26] but I think we have some haulers here, [00:47:28] so anybody that has any ideas, [00:47:30] there's been discussion of containerizing it [00:47:32] or ways to better improve it, I think, [00:47:39] and we have changes in the future, I think, coming as well, [00:47:41] but the motion is for approval. [00:47:46] The second? [00:47:47] Nothing. [00:47:47] Mr. Murphy? [00:47:48] No, I'm good. [00:47:49] In that case, all those in favor, [00:47:51] please signify by saying aye. [00:47:53] Aye. [00:47:54] Opposed, like sign. [00:47:55] 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.
- 11.b
Ratification of the Collective Bargaining Agreement between the West Central Florida Police Benevolent Association and the City of New Port Richey for FY22-24
approvedCouncil ratified the collective bargaining agreement between the West Central Florida Police Benevolent Association (PBA) and the City for FY22-24 (Oct 1, 2021 - Sept 30, 2024). The agreement transitions police officers from COLA-based to merit-based pay, increases field training officer compensation ($25/pay period plus $10/day stipend), commits to a salary market study, modifies shift exchange rules, requires biannual physical exams, and allows reopening of pay articles in years 2 and 3.
- motion:Motion to ratify the collective bargaining agreement between the West Central Florida PBA and the City of New Port Richey for FY22-24. (passed)
LifeScanWest Central Florida Police Benevolent AssociationMs. MannsFY22-24 Collective Bargaining AgreementMerit-based performance wage systemPolice salary market study▶ Jump to 47:56 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:47:56] Next is consideration of the ratification [00:48:02] of the collective bargaining agreement [00:48:03] between the West Central Florida Police Benevolent Association [00:48:07] and the City of New Port Richey [00:48:08] for fiscal year 22 through 24. [00:48:11] Ms. Manns? [00:48:12] Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, [00:48:14] as you are all aware, [00:48:16] the collective bargaining agreement [00:48:19] with the West Central Florida Police Benevolent Association [00:48:24] lapsed on September 30th of 2021, [00:48:29] and the city's negotiating team [00:48:33] has been in negotiations with the union [00:48:42] for some time now. [00:48:43] Actually, we initiated discussions with the union [00:48:49] during the summer of 2021. [00:48:55] I would have to say that there were a good number of issues [00:49:03] to review as part of the discussions [00:49:08] that occurred this year, [00:49:10] but in the end of the discussions, [00:49:13] I would have to report to you that what occurred [00:49:18] was certainly an exercise [00:49:20] in mutual interest-based bargaining, [00:49:23] and I'm proud to be able to represent to you this evening [00:49:28] the results of the discussions, [00:49:32] which are as follows. [00:49:36] There are three wage provisions, [00:49:41] three miscellaneous provisions, [00:49:45] and one duration provisions, [00:49:47] which I will outline for you [00:49:50] and which were represented to you [00:49:53] in your council communication. [00:49:58] The tentative agreement was attached [00:50:02] to your city council packet, [00:50:05] and the tentative agreement was effectuated [00:50:11] on October 21st of 2021. [00:50:16] The police officers ratified their vote [00:50:23] on October 27th of 2021, [00:50:29] and as you know, under Florida statute, [00:50:33] I then am duty-bound to successfully recommend to you [00:50:42] the terms of the agreement. [00:50:44] The wage provisions, first and foremost, [00:50:48] deal with a deviation which is part of a transition [00:50:53] that we have undergone for all city employees [00:50:59] away from a COLA-based wage increase system [00:51:05] into a performance-based wage system. [00:51:16] And we have come to an agreement with the police officers [00:51:24] on a merit-based performance system now, [00:51:28] rather than relying on an annual cost of living [00:51:34] system. [00:51:36] We have additionally adjusted the compensation [00:51:42] for their field training officers. [00:51:45] That's a very important position in the department, [00:51:51] and we are increasing the field training officers [00:51:57] rate of pay to $25 per pay period, [00:52:01] and they additionally receive a $10 stipend per day [00:52:07] for every day that they serve in an assignment. [00:52:13] Additionally, the city is, or I am recommending to you [00:52:20] that we enter into an agreement with PBA. [00:52:23] PBA is the only union, or the only employee group [00:52:28] that has not yet had a salary study conducted [00:52:35] to determine if they are making fair market value. [00:52:40] And we are going to, we have actually entered [00:52:43] into an agreement with a firm to have [00:52:48] that market study conducted, [00:52:51] and we will be working over the next year [00:52:54] to have that work done and to implement the results of that. [00:53:00] It may not be that we're able to take the bite [00:53:04] out of that apple in one year, [00:53:06] and we'll have to work with the union to determine [00:53:08] how we'll have to implement the results of that study. [00:53:13] The miscellaneous provisions of the agreement [00:53:19] have to do with the exchange of time between union members. [00:53:30] The previous contract indicated a number of hours [00:53:35] that a switch would have to relate to, [00:53:39] and we took the number of hours out [00:53:42] and we limited it to one shift in a 24-hour period [00:53:46] rather than specifying whether it was related [00:53:49] to a 12-hour shift or an eight-hour shift. [00:53:53] And we are requiring that union members undergo [00:53:59] a biannual physical examination to be conducted [00:54:04] by LifeScan or another organization [00:54:07] that's capable of providing a comparable examination. [00:54:13] And the last miscellaneous article relates [00:54:20] to standard operating procedures [00:54:23] and rules of the police department [00:54:25] and other applicable city policies and procedures. [00:54:30] And the union was requesting that the city [00:54:37] provide at least 10 calendar days notice of amendments [00:54:41] or modifications to certain policies [00:54:51] and that they be provided an opportunity [00:54:53] to discuss impacts or effects on unit employees' [00:54:59] wages, hours, terms, and conditions of employment. [00:55:02] And although that's appropriate in most instances, [00:55:07] the city had to establish the right [00:55:13] for declared emergencies when, [00:55:22] of course, declare management rights [00:55:25] to institute whatever policy was appropriate at the time. [00:55:31] And lastly, the city and the PBA agree [00:55:36] that for years two and three of the contract, [00:55:39] we could reopen the articles related to pay provisions [00:55:44] that has largely to do with the salary study [00:55:48] and up to two articles if it's appropriate to do so. [00:55:51] And with that, I'm recommending that you consider [00:55:56] ratifying the proposed labor agreement [00:56:00] and that we go forward with the proposed labor agreement [00:56:07] vote on this matter so that we can have a contract [00:56:11] spanning the period October 1st, 2021 [00:56:16] through September 30th, 2024. [00:56:19] Thank you. [00:56:20] Open it up for public comment. [00:56:23] Seeing no one coming forward, [00:56:25] I'm gonna bring it back to council. [00:56:27] Move for approval. [00:56:28] Second. [00:56:29] To the maker. [00:56:29] Good. [00:56:30] Second. [00:56:31] No, we've discussed this in shade meetings. [00:56:33] We're happy. [00:56:34] Mr. Allen. [00:56:37] In that case, all those in favor, [00:56:38] please signify by saying aye. [00:56:41] Aye. [00:56:42] Opposed, like sign. [00:56:43] 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.
- 11.c
Request to Purchase Tasers
approvedCouncil approved the purchase of 50 X26P tasers (electro-muscular disruption devices) from a sole-source supplier in Scottsdale, Arizona under a five-year contract not to exceed $156,000.47. The police chief explained the existing tasers are out of date and no longer serviced by the manufacturer.
- motion:Motion to approve the purchase of 50 X26P tasers from a sole-source supplier under a five-year contract not to exceed $156,000.47. (passed)
▶ Jump to 56:46 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:56:46] Next is a request to purchase tasers. [00:56:52] Having nothing to do with the previous item, I'm sure. [00:56:59] We need to buy 50 tasers and we are recommending [00:57:03] seven electro muscular disruption devices [00:57:08] for an amount not to exceed $156,000.47. [00:57:15] And the tasers are X26P electrodes [00:57:25] and they are being purchased [00:57:28] through a sole source supplier [00:57:30] located out of Scottsdale, Arizona. [00:57:35] They are being purchased through a five-year contract [00:57:41] and the five-year pricing is attached. [00:57:48] The first year, we are asking for $16,000 [00:57:53] to purchase the tasers and the next four years [00:58:06] are $35,000 with the final year being $35,000.47. [00:58:17] And the police chief is prepared to respond [00:58:20] to any questions that you may have [00:58:24] related to the need to replace the current equipment [00:58:31] in the police department or the selection [00:58:36] of this particular piece of equipment. [00:58:41] Chief, it's my understanding the existing tasers [00:58:44] we've got are well past their best use by date? [00:58:49] Yes, sir, they're out of date. [00:58:51] They're no longer serviced. [00:58:53] If one breaks, the manufacturer will not do repairs to it. [00:58:59] There's nothing in the provision that says [00:59:01] that you're gonna test them on council members, is it? [00:59:04] Selected ones. [00:59:07] I think if I read that correctly, [00:59:10] it was the deputy mayor that would be the test person, so. [00:59:14] I'll open it up for public comment. [00:59:18] Volunteers that would like to be tased [00:59:20] to make sure these work. [00:59:23] Seeing no one volunteering or coming forward, [00:59:25] I'll close it and bring it back to council. [00:59:27] Move for approval. [00:59:28] Second. [00:59:29] To the maker. [00:59:30] Nothing more. [00:59:31] To the second. [00:59:32] Resigning. [00:59:34] Mr. Haltman. [00:59:36] Is there an aftermarket for these old ones when they go? [00:59:39] I mean, is that something you don't [00:59:41] really want to sell, probably, is it? [00:59:42] Well, they give us credit for turning them back in. [00:59:44] I don't know if they salvage parts out of those, [00:59:47] which they sometimes do with certain pieces [00:59:49] of equipment that we have. [00:59:51] But for us, we need them uniformed across the board, [00:59:54] and these are really state-of-the-art tasers. [00:59:58] Sounded definitely an improvement. [01:00:00] sounds like a good move. It's expensive but the guys need them. And just as on [01:00:05] this side, we don't use them often but they're often enough and they are a [01:00:12] great intermediate approach to handle situations. That's an excellent way of putting it. [01:00:18] Any further discussion? Sir. Hearing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye. [01:00:24] Aye. Opposed, like sign. Motion passes. Next is Resolution 22-03.
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.
- 11.d
Resolution No. 2022-03: Establishing An Auditor Selection Committee
approvedCouncil adopted Resolution No. 2022-03 establishing an Auditor Selection Committee pursuant to F.S. 218.391. The City Manager amended the original recommendation from a three-member committee of elected officials to a five-member committee comprising the full City Council, with Crystal, Mrs. Feast, and the City Manager serving as advisors.
Ord. Resolution No. 2022-03
- motion:Move for approval of Resolution 2022-03 with the recommendation of a five-member Auditor Selection Committee instead of three. (passed)
CrystalMr. MurphyMr. PetersMrs. FeastAuditor Selection CommitteeFlorida Statute Section 218.391Resolution No. 2022-03▶ Jump to 1:00:25 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[01:00:31] This is Resolution number 20-2203, a resolution of the City Council of the [01:00:36] City of New Port Richey, Florida, establishing an Auditor Selection [01:00:39] Committee pursuant to Section 218.391 Florida Statutes, [01:00:44] providing for committee membership, providing for the duties of the Auditor [01:00:48] Selection Committee, and providing for an effective date. Florida [01:00:53] Statute Section 218.391 states that the Audit Selection Committee for a [01:01:05] municipality must consist of three members, one of which should be an [01:01:10] elected official. And originally when Mrs. Feast and I were putting together [01:01:17] this recommendation, we thought that it should be three elected officials. Since [01:01:26] that time, I've had more time to review the actual statute and Crystal and I [01:01:35] have had some additional conversation and I'd like to amend my recommendation [01:01:40] and I'd like it to, and my amended recommendation is that it should be a [01:01:45] five-member Audit Committee and that it should be just be the full council. And [01:01:54] that Crystal, Feast, and I will serve as advisors to the [01:02:03] committee. Very good. Open up for public comment. Seeing no one come forward, I'll [01:02:10] bring it back to council and I agree with the idea of making it all five. If [01:02:15] I've got to get stuck on this thing, the rest of you guys do too. Move for approval [01:02:20] with the recommendation of five instead of three. Second. Second. To the maker? Nothing more. [01:02:27] Second. No, sir. Mr. Murphy? No. Good. Let Mr. Peters know he just got appointed to [01:02:33] another... If there's no further discussion, all those in favor, please [01:02:39] signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, like sign. Motion passes. Communications. Mr.
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.
- 12Communications▶ 1:02:40
- 13Adjournment▶ 1:14:20