On the agenda

1. 1Call to Order – Roll Call▶ 0:00
2. 2

   Pledge of Allegiance

   The council recited the Pledge of Allegiance and observed a moment of silence in honor of servicemen and women.

   ▶ Jump to 0:08 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

   [00:00:08] We have a quorum. I would ask everybody to join me in the Pledge of Allegiance and remain [00:00:12] standing for a moment of silence in honor of our servicemen and women at home and abroad. [00:00:17] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for [00:00:23] 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. 3

   Moment of Silence

   Council observed a moment of silence in honor of servicemen and women at home and abroad, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.

   ▶ Jump to 0:12 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

   [00:00:12] standing for a moment of silence in honor of our servicemen and women at home and abroad. [00:00:17] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for [00:00:23] 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.

4. 4.a

   ↳You arrived here from a search for “CRA” — transcript expanded below

   Second Reading, Ordinance No. 2021-2244: City Council Salary Increase

   approved

   Council held the second reading of Ordinance 2021-2244, increasing the Mayor's salary to $800/month and other Councilmembers' to $625/month, the first such increase since 1988. After staff presentation and Council discussion, including objections from Councilman Davis about the process being outside the budget cycle, the ordinance passed 4-1.

   Ord. Ordinance No. 2021-2244

   • motion:Approve Ordinance 2021-2244 increasing City Council salaries (Mayor $800/month, Councilmembers $625/month). (passed)4–1

   🏢Regional Planning Council🏢Tampa Bay Water🏢Tourism Board👤Councilman Altman👤Councilman Davis👤Mr. Peters👤Ms. Mance#CRA#City Charter salary amendment provision#Ordinance No. 2021-2244#Salary comparability study

   ▶ Jump to 0:33 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

   [00:00:33] Thank you. You may be seated. We've got three items on the agenda. A second reading of an [00:00:41] ordinance, a public hearing, and we've got a walk-on item which is regarding resiliency. [00:00:48] So we'll take them in order. Next item is the second reading ordinance 2021-2244. [00:00:57] This is ordinance number 2021-2244, an ordinance of the City of New Port Richey, Florida providing [00:01:03] for an increase in the salary of City Councilmembers, providing for a monthly salary for the Mayor [00:01:07] Councilmember of $800, providing for a monthly salary for all other Councilmembers of $625, [00:01:14] providing for conflicts, severability, and an effective date. Ms. Mance? Mr. Mayor, Members [00:01:20] of the City Council, as you are all aware, the City Charter provides a method by which [00:01:26] the salary of the City Councilmembers may be amended, and in short, it's accomplished [00:01:33] by ordinance and it must proceed the next regular election by six months, which is why [00:01:40] this item is in front of you at this time. The current salary of the City Council was [00:01:47] established in August of 1988, therefore it has been 33 years since the salaries of the [00:01:56] elected officials have been amended. The salaries that are being recommended for your consideration [00:02:04] this evening are based on a salary study that was conducted by the City staff of comparable [00:02:15] communities, and in order to determine an appropriate salary, those communities were [00:02:23] identified based on the size of their community, their budget size, the number of employees, [00:02:32] their form of government, and an average was taken based on how much they provided in compensation [00:02:44] to their elected officials as a benefit for the City Councilmember of $625. In addition, [00:02:53] for the service that they provide to their community, and a matrix of such was provided [00:03:00] to the communication to you on this matter, and the average amount calculated out to an [00:03:12] annual salary for Mayor in the amount of $9,600, which is $800 per month, which is over the [00:03:23] $350 currently prescribed for payment to the Mayor. The Councilmember's salary currently [00:03:34] is at $300 per month. The recommended salary is $625 per month, which aggregates to a salary [00:03:44] of $7,500 on an annual basis, and from the staff's perspective, it is $625 per month. [00:03:53] We believe that the pay increase is appropriate, and there is money in the general fund budget [00:04:02] to cover this expenditure of funds through the end of this fiscal year, and if you vote [00:04:10] in favor of this agenda item, we will budget appropriately in future fiscal years to cover [00:04:18] the costs associated with this item. I would additionally like to note that this amount [00:04:26] certainly doesn't cover or certainly doesn't represent an adequate compensation level for [00:04:33] the amount of service that you do provide to the community, and we do appreciate your [00:04:39] service to the City, and thank you very much for all of the time that you have provided [00:04:47] and that you devote to the work that you provide for the residents and the business [00:04:51] community. Thank you. This is a public hearing. We'll open it up for public comment. Seeing [00:05:01] no one coming forward, I'll bring it back to Council. Move for approval. Do we have [00:05:11] a motion? Do we have a second to the maker? Yes, and I'm happy to make the motion as someone [00:05:16] who's going out before this salary will come into effect, and I think that it is one of [00:05:22] the most difficult things for someone who's already volunteering their time, as we all [00:05:27] are, and effort beyond our City Council. I just want to review that our City Council [00:05:32] meets twice a month during the summer. We meet almost weekly. We sometimes have work [00:05:37] sessions and Council meetings, as well as we serve as the CRA directors whose jobs are [00:05:44] to help to create economic improvements to our City. Just the time that we spend preparing [00:05:52] and attending the City Council meetings, the CRA meetings and the special work sessions [00:05:58] doesn't incorporate everything. What's also incorporated are the additional duties that [00:06:03] we take on, whether Mr. Mayor, you serve on the Tampa Bay Water, I'm on the Regional Planning [00:06:09] Council, Councilman Davis is on the Tourism Board. Those are also meetings with Board [00:06:17] agendas that require preparation and effort. I think this is, as the City Manager said, [00:06:23] not particularly commensurate for the time. For people of all income levels, hourly rates, [00:06:31] the hourly rate just went up again for the minimum wage substantially, and look at the [00:06:39] changes just in considering what the present value of the payment back in those days would [00:06:48] be just on inflation alone. We're only updating our salaries to reflect the historical rate [00:06:59] paid to the City Council. So people can make whatever they want out of it, but I think [00:07:04] it will help us to attract good, qualified candidates in the future. [00:07:07] This is nothing excessive or over the top. It's still at a level that's lower than many [00:07:14] cities and municipalities around us. Like Councilman Altman said, there's a lot of time [00:07:23] put in other places, other boards that we're on, other commitments. So I think it's after [00:07:30] 30-something years, I think it's well past due. [00:07:35] Mr. Peters? [00:07:38] So my observation is that the members of this Council serve not for the remuneration, not [00:07:49] for the salary. They serve out of their desire for the City to do well and to serve the City [00:07:57] and the citizens. That being said, the time, you know, I've learned that the time required [00:08:04] to do a good job is maybe a little bit more than I was initially led to believe. But I'm [00:08:14] happy to do so. And not everyone who serves, the time they spend in here takes away from [00:08:21] their other income. But future candidate members and candidates may not necessarily be the [00:08:29] same. So for that reason and for the reason of the fact is that, you know, other people [00:08:37] look at this and look at salaries in comparison to other groups. We don't need to be the highest. [00:08:42] We certainly don't need to be the lowest. So that's my take on it. [00:08:47] Councilman Davis? [00:08:49] I don't know if anybody here actually met with any of your constituents and talked to [00:08:55] them about this? I did. I talked to 17 different people of all ages, all walks of life, and [00:09:06] these are the things that came back. And it was 17 to 0 against the way we're doing this. [00:09:13] They felt that this should have been part of the budget. They are saying, really? You're [00:09:18] meeting on a Thursday and then you're meeting on a Tuesday at 4.30 in the afternoon? This [00:09:24] is kind of sneaking in the back door. You're elected officials. Why are you just trying [00:09:29] to push this thing through to only help yourself? And then special meetings. Aren't special [00:09:36] meetings basically for storms, health reasons, you know, maybe a state or county ordinance [00:09:44] that comes down that we have to modify ours to go along with those two? So then they of [00:09:48] course ask, is this illegal? Well, of course, I explained to them. I spent about a half [00:09:52] an hour with each of those 17 people explaining the whole thing. Of course it's legal. In [00:09:55] fact, I want to thank staff for actually putting this all together and the attorney in a very [00:10:00] quick manner. But isn't this going in the back door? We're meeting without, nobody came, [00:10:08] I wasn't at the last meeting. Mike wasn't at the last meeting. No one was here. No one's [00:10:13] here for this meeting. So I think we're kind of sneaking in the back door. And one of the [00:10:21] people that I talked to, a very prominent person in town, said this is almost selfish. [00:10:27] And so that was the way I decided to come and talk to you about all 17 of them. I think [00:10:33] we should have done this through budget. They all said that it was fair to raise the rates [00:10:38] since 1980, whatever it was. They had problems with that, but they just think we're going [00:10:44] in the back door and we're doing it all as a selfish move. Another year isn't going to [00:10:48] make a difference if we go ahead and do it right through the budget. So I have problems [00:10:52] with this, you know, looking at my constituents when it's 17 to 0, not wanting us to do it [00:10:58] this way. Thank you. I can certainly appreciate your point of view on this. It wasn't my point [00:11:07] of view. Well, in your discussions with your constituents, it's been 33 years. That's silly. [00:11:15] It's no skin off my teeth. If I were in it for the money, I'd have probably paid more [00:11:21] attention to my mileage reimbursements. We've got a spreadsheet and Mr. Peters is less than [00:11:28] me, but he's only been on for less than a year. It's not about the income. It's the [00:11:35] outcome that I think we've all been excited to see what we've been able to accomplish [00:11:41] as a group. But at the same time, the point is, I think, well taken that for some of us [00:11:49] who maybe don't have our own businesses and can't adjust our times accordingly, running [00:11:56] for city council can be an imposition. So if you want to make it possible for those [00:12:01] people to be able to run and serve, you need to pay some attention. I know Mr. Peters owns [00:12:08] his own business. He can pretty much set his own schedule and I'd do the same thing on [00:12:13] mine as a business owner. Other people aren't quite so fortunate. So with that, I would [00:12:23] have preferred that it had been done through the budget, but it has come up to us. It is [00:12:28] a reasonable change and so I'm going to support it. Is there any further discussion? [00:12:34] Yeah, maybe I'd reply. Chopper, I appreciate you taking the time to have that conversation [00:12:41] with people. So in those conversations, you know, the objections that were raised, you [00:12:47] know, I'd ask this question. Were they concerned about the dollar amounts or were they concerned [00:12:52] about the method? And so not saying that the ends justifies the means, but I'm just wondering [00:13:00] how many of those 17 would have voiced an objection had we presented it on a Tuesday [00:13:06] regular meeting or during the budget session that they would have objected to the amount [00:13:13] of the increase based upon the information given. Did you? Yes, without a doubt. They [00:13:20] don't have any problem. They understand that we should get a raise. They just think we're [00:13:24] going in the back door that we should have done it, you know. And once I started hearing [00:13:28] that and it ended up being 17 to 0, we're going in the wrong way, I came here and I [00:13:34] came here with their word, you know, to present it to you people. And I'm telling you that [00:13:40] I kind of backed my constituents because I came from all walks of life, you know, in [00:13:45] all ages. And so, I mean, I didn't expect to see that and didn't expect to hear that. [00:13:50] I mean, I didn't have any problem with it. I thought the staff did a great job, but the [00:13:55] constituents said we're going in the back door. And there's nobody here and there was [00:13:58] nobody here at the last meeting. So none of those 17 are here to speak tonight? No. I [00:14:04] said I'll present it. But I said they can't be here. They're still working. Mr. Mayor? [00:14:11] Yeah, and maybe that proves the point really why we do need to increase the wage because [00:14:15] they're at work and they can't be here. And to be able to make yourself available for [00:14:19] meetings of whatever course, so be it. So for the record, let's just reflect that when [00:14:24] we had our budget hearings, we did not have attendance at the budget hearings. So my [00:14:30] response to somebody like that would be you should come to the meetings because it's not [00:14:35] the back door if everything that's been said here has been said publicly and in the right [00:14:41] fashion. In fact, when I brought this up, some time had passed before it got on the [00:14:45] agenda. So to me, the proper answer to someone who spoke was, well, it was brought up and [00:14:50] then realized that there was a six-month period. We wanted this to go into effect for [00:14:55] the new members to be able to have that. And so that's why we did it. [00:15:00] And just also for the record, Councilman, you objected, said you were opposed to it when it was brought up. [00:15:06] So as much as you say that you were impressed by the documentation, you start out a conversation in opposition to something [00:15:15] and don't spend time to advise them of the reason we got ourselves into this pickle, but just share their dissatisfaction. [00:15:23] I would have hoped that you could have soothed the savage beast a little bit in whoever you were talking to. [00:15:28] I explained it all out. I spent at least a half an hour with each person. [00:15:31] So they got the whole picture and not me telling them what their opinion was. [00:15:36] And in that regard, I understand. [00:15:37] So I want to correct that. Your thoughts were not even close to that. [00:15:40] Thank you. [00:15:44] Anything else? [00:15:46] In that case, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye. [00:15:50] Aye. [00:15:51] Opposed? [00:15:52] Aye. [00:15:53] Motion passes 4-1.

   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. 5.a

   Public Hearing - Small Cities CDBG-CV Application

   discussed

   Council held the first of two public hearings on a Small Cities CDBG-CV grant application related to coronavirus response, with up to $5 million available per applicant. Staff proposed resubmitting a previously denied project to install approximately 14,000 linear feet (about $1.5M) of infill sidewalks near Francis Avenue Park, Gulf Middle School, and the New Port Richey Library. No action was taken; a second public hearing is scheduled for October 19th, and council suggested considering bicycle/multi-use trail design instead of standard 6-foot sidewalks.

   • direction:Council directed staff to consider incorporating bicycle trails/multi-use paths into the CDBG-CV sidewalk application rather than standard 6-foot sidewalks. (none)

   📍Francis Avenue Park🏢Florida Department of Economic Opportunity🏢Gulf Middle School🏢New Port Richey Library👤Councilman Peters#14,000 linear feet infill sidewalk project#Second public hearing October 19th#Small Cities CDBG-CV (Community Development Block Grant - Coronavirus)

   ▶ Jump to 15:55 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

   [00:15:55] The next item is a public hearing on the Small Cities CDBG-CV application. [00:16:02] Can we make these any harder for me to read? [00:16:07] I don't think so, Mr. Mayor. [00:16:09] This is a complicated one for sure. [00:16:12] And the request this evening is for you to conduct a public hearing on the application for Small Cities Community Development Block Grant funds related to the coronavirus. [00:16:31] And the city became aware of an opportunity in late September to apply for a funding opportunity from the Department of Economic Opportunities. [00:16:45] And a total of $41,931,595 is being made available through a competitive application process. [00:17:07] All local governments who are eligible and participate in the Small Cities Community Development Block Grant program within the state of Florida, and we are now one of them. [00:17:17] And you can apply for a $200,000 project minimally or a maximum of $5 million. [00:17:28] And we can apply for one single project or program. [00:17:34] And the project activities must meet one of the following five national objectives. [00:17:43] It can either benefit a low or moderate income person or household. [00:17:47] It has to be an indirect benefit activity, meaning that it has to at least meet 51% of the beneficiaries within a low, moderate income area. [00:18:01] A direct benefit, meaning that it would 100% be a beneficiary to a low, moderate income person. [00:18:09] It can prevent or eliminate slum or blight or address a particularly urgent community need. [00:18:16] Project activities must prevent, prepare for, or respond to the coronavirus and should demonstrate a either direct effect, costs directly associated with the coronavirus prevention, preparation, or response. [00:18:35] Examples being rehabilitation of a building to create additional quarantine and isolation rooms for recovering COVID-19 patients. [00:18:45] An indirect effect, meaning economic disruptions. [00:18:50] Examples meaning small business assistance. [00:18:56] Examples of some of the activities fundings can be requested for include, but not are limited to, rehabilitating a facility for testing, diagnosis, or treatment of COVID-19. [00:19:11] Acquire and rehabilitate or construct a group living facility that may be used to centralize patients undergoing treatment. [00:19:21] Installation of wiring, fiber optic cables, and permanently affixed equipment such as receivers for areas to receive broadband and internet access. [00:19:31] Or rehabilitate a senior center, community center, or homeless shelter by replacing the HBA system or installing an air purification system. [00:19:43] Acquisition and or rehabilitation of a building to expand capacity of homeless shelters to accommodate social distancing or isolation. [00:19:55] Installation of Wi-Fi routers, extenders, and affordable housing buildings or communities which contain at least 51% of low-moderate income residents. [00:20:08] Providing testing, diagnosis, or other services at a fixed or mobile location. [00:20:14] Providing equipment, supplies, and materials necessary to carry out a public service, such as child care for working parents with distance learning facilities for school-age children. [00:20:29] Construction of sidewalks, expansion to allow for social distancing, and delivering Meals on Wheels to quarantine individuals or individuals that need to maintain social distancing due to medical vulnerabilities. [00:20:47] The purpose of today's public hearing is to allow citizens the opportunity to bring forward possible projects that they would like to see the City of New Port Richey use potential CDBG-CB funding for. [00:21:07] Thank you. This is a public hearing. Open it up for any public comment. [00:21:12] Seeing nobody, can we keep that open for additional comments for some period of time? [00:21:23] We will be conducting a second public hearing on this matter at your meeting on October 19th. [00:21:36] But we do have a proposed project that I would like to just briefly introduce to you so that at that time we can talk in a little bit more detail about a proposed project, [00:21:52] which was previously submitted for funding and suggested by the Department of Economic Opportunity that it had enough merit that perhaps we should resubmit it for consideration under this funding cycle. [00:22:11] And it was a project to establish 14,000 linear feet of infill sidewalks, so to establish a sidewalk network in the area of Francis Avenue Park, Gulf Middle School, and also the New Port Richey Library. [00:22:36] And we would be constructing six-foot-wide sidewalk, which would accommodate social distancing for largely the school-age children that rely on the sidewalk network as a pedestrian walkway to and fro those social centers. [00:23:00] And others within the neighborhood that currently rely on the street as a walkway would be able to rely on a public walkway system of sidewalk rather than the street, which would be a good thing. [00:23:24] Thank you. We'll certainly continue for anybody watching this or in attendance. If someone has some other ideas, certainly bring them up. [00:23:33] On that particular idea, so 14,000 linear feet, help me with that, so that's about two and a half miles, am I thinking about... [00:23:40] It's closer to three. [00:23:42] 5,000 feet, so almost three miles then, right? Details on proposed ideas, have you... [00:23:51] We'll have that for you at the next meeting, but it's about a $1.5 million project. [00:23:55] And if there were some other, if residents had, or someone had some other ideas for use of the money they need, you know, between now and then, what would they do? [00:24:06] They would need to call the city manager's office, and we would encourage them to do that. The applications are due on a relatively quick turnaround time, and so the more advance notice we have, the more effort we can put into building a good application. [00:24:24] Other comments? [00:24:28] Remind me, this is a public hearing that we're holding in a special meeting. Is there a reason to hold this now so that we can have this also fit into some kind of a time constraint? [00:24:39] It is, yes. [00:24:42] Just to the point earlier brought, that these are all legitimate reasons to have special public hearings. And once again, there's nobody here to give us much input. [00:24:54] Remind me again that we have already put in an application to do this very project, or no? Because I had believed that we had already been looking to do this, and I'm sorry if I'd misheard what you were saying. [00:25:10] This project has been submitted for funding consideration in the past. It was not supported for funding, though. And so we would be sharpening our pencils and embellishing the application and resubmitting it for funding consideration for a second round of review. [00:25:35] May I suggest that you think a little differently as you rethink it? And when you start talking about six-foot sidewalks, then I automatically go to bike trails or bike paths, and we have an underway bicycle path plan thought process. [00:25:52] When we look at six-foot wide sidewalks in front of some of these residential neighborhoods, I'm not even sure how excited they're going to get. I appreciate that they meet this requirement for social distancing as part of this COVID. [00:26:06] By the time we get the money, we'll be on to a different peril, I imagine, to assume. So if we look at our own master plan of what we wanted to do, I would suggest that maybe we think about the routes of our bicycle trails and bicycle paths and who rides bicycles and incorporate that into our request. [00:26:25] Because I think, Councilman Peters, at one point you said, let's see who's riding bicycles. And I'll bet you we have at least an indirect benefit of bicycles right now. Not that it's something to be proud of, but bicycles are a mode of transport for people of lower income by themselves. [00:26:47] So now we say sidewalk for school kids, and they didn't get it. And low-income kids are not all school kids, just school kids in the neighborhood who ride their bicycles. I think we've got enough low-income neighborhoods that we meet that. I don't know how my colleagues feel. [00:27:04] But it might be nice to see if we can't, maybe we go for broke and look at some of the sidewalk connections that could become bicycle trails out to the Great Preserve or the library and back, whatever. [00:27:19] I think there are some good points to that. But middle schoolers can, in many cases, bicycle to school. I remember doing it when I was in middle school. [00:27:32] You're talking about a six foot wide sidewalk. What's the difference between that and a multi-use trail? Physically? [00:27:41] Typically a couple of feet. [00:27:44] Yes, it's eight. No, it's eight. [00:27:47] Eight feet? Is that multi-use? [00:27:49] That's two feet. [00:27:50] Okay, just curious. Yeah, that might be something to think about. [00:27:57] Do we need any action on this tonight? [00:27:59] We do not. [00:28:00] This is just a public hearing. [00:28:01] This is just a public hearing. Thank you.

   This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

6. 6Communications▶ 28:04
7. 7Adjournment▶ 50:37