On the agenda

1. 13.e

   Resolution No. 2024-16: Adoption of Pasco County 2024 Local Mitigation Strategy

   approved

   Council adopted Resolution No. 2024-16 approving the Pasco County 2024 five-year Local Mitigation Strategy, required for federal mitigation funding eligibility. Council members emphasized regional collaboration and urged completion of the city's vulnerability study and a future presentation on the regional resiliency action plan.

   Ord. Resolution No. 2024-16

   • vote:Adopt Resolution No. 2024-16 approving the Pasco County 2024 five-year Local Mitigation Strategy. (passed)5–0
   • direction:Council requested a future presentation on the multi-county regional resiliency action plan and encouraged completion of the city's vulnerability study.

   🏢FEMA🏢Florida Department of Emergency Management🏢Pasco County Board of County Commissioners👤Councilman Altman👤Councilman Mothershead👤Matt#DMA 2000#Pasco County 2024 Local Mitigation Strategy#Resolution No. 2024-16#regional resiliency action plan#vulnerability study

   ▶ Jump to 0:00 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

   [00:00:00] Congress requires local governments to have a mitigation plan. [00:00:04] DMA 2000 further requires the development and adoption [00:00:08] of a local mitigation strategy, making the plan essential for eligibility [00:00:12] of federal funding for mitigation projects and non-emergency [00:00:16] disaster assistance. To remain eligible for federal funds, it is [00:00:20] the responsibility of the local mitigation strategy working group, [00:00:24] which the city participates in, and emergency management to [00:00:28] update the LMS every five years. The city first adopted the [00:00:32] local mitigation strategy in 1999, with subsequent [00:00:36] updated local mitigation plans being adopted in 2004, [00:00:40] 2009, 2015, and 2019. [00:00:44] The LMS attached to your [00:00:48] agenda this evening has been submitted to the Florida Department of Emergency [00:00:52] Management for review and has been received [00:00:56] and has received approval. The Florida Department of Emergency Management [00:01:00] has also determined that the LMS plan is compliant with federal standards. [00:01:04] Once adoption has been completed by all participating jurisdictions [00:01:08] within the county, all documentation will be sent to FEMA [00:01:12] for their formal approval, and I'd like to add that Pasco County [00:01:16] Board of County Commissioners formally approved [00:01:20] the 2024 local mitigation strategy at their August [00:01:24] 21st Board of County Commissioners meeting. [00:01:28] The recommendation from staff is that city council adopt [00:01:32] the Pasco County 2024 five-year local mitigation strategy, and there's no [00:01:36] budget impact. I'd be, and I'm prepared to answer any questions that you may have. [00:01:44] Move approval, Mr. Mayor. [00:01:48] They're looking the other way. [00:01:52] Just giving them a chance. I've been thumbed before. [00:01:56] Move approval, Mr. Mayor. [00:02:00] It was well [00:02:04] stated, the importance of this action [00:02:08] for us to be qualified for funds, and I appreciate the efforts of the staff [00:02:12] that are participating in it. It is the tip of the [00:02:16] iceberg, really, for our resiliency efforts, and I would like [00:02:20] to remind, I guess, or hopefully [00:02:24] encourage the completion of our vulnerability [00:02:28] study, which results in also [00:02:32] a mitigation strategy of our own. That's something [00:02:36] I've been hopeful and waiting for a long time for, and [00:02:40] it's critical for us to have that in place so we can understand the kind of [00:02:44] projects that we could apply for for funding, which this action [00:02:48] opens us up for. [00:02:52] This is rich soil for us to be [00:02:56] plowing and planting [00:03:00] the potential for grants and other funds to [00:03:04] help to shore up our city's ability to [00:03:08] deal with the climate issues that we're facing. Along those lines, [00:03:12] I'd also like to ask that the resiliency action plan, which is a [00:03:16] multi-county, regional action plan that has been [00:03:20] promoted, which is not a plan with mandatory actions, but [00:03:24] really just a menu of [00:03:28] innovative actions that are being requested for cities [00:03:32] to look at, that we [00:03:36] can get an invitation to have that [00:03:40] presentation, which they've been asking to make among cities. [00:03:44] It's probably appropriate time. I know we're just in [00:03:48] the heat of hurricane season, but over the next few [00:03:52] months, if we could have that presentation, there are many [00:03:56] proposals that will address everything from [00:04:00] the hardening of our assets, which will come out of our [00:04:04] vulnerability study, to things like [00:04:08] our evacuation routes and our ability to deal with [00:04:12] even to the point of [00:04:16] establishing a standardized level [00:04:20] for new seawalls, which a number of those things [00:04:24] are efforts that are being made. So I look forward to the fact that [00:04:28] this is being done and [00:04:32] the follow-up steps that can lead to more production [00:04:36] for the city. Thank you. [00:04:40] I think it's great that we're working with all the municipalities, because we all have [00:04:44] something different that affects our communities. We're different than Dade City, [00:04:48] which is different from Zephyr Hills. So having them all together to be able [00:04:52] to address all of our concerns, I think, is a good plan. [00:04:56] The biggest part is [00:05:00] everybody's got to work together in teamwork to help each other out. [00:05:04] That's really what's important, and to be able to see [00:05:08] opportunities coming forward, and everybody's keeping their eyes open. [00:05:12] Good. [00:05:16] To Matt's point on collaboration, this is a great full Snapchat. I liked what [00:05:20] Councilman Altman had to say on the rich soil. That really hits it home. [00:05:24] It's 127 pages, and there's a lot of good information in here, and I'm always pushing [00:05:28] about access to maps and access to educational information [00:05:32] to inform the public. Not only is this a plan for staff to collaborate, [00:05:36] and as Councilman Mothershead said, [00:05:40] for us to see our differences, it also [00:05:44] shows what we need to do going forward, and when we're out knocking doors or talking to residents, [00:05:48] we can have the right data to talk about disaster response. [00:05:52] I haven't read the whole thing, but it's fun to read. [00:05:56] It's one of those ones where you see a lot of good information, a lot of good data. So thanks, staff, [00:06:00] Fire Chief, and everyone else for working on it. [00:06:04] All those in favor, signify by aye. Aye. Those opposed, 5-0.

   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.

2. 13.f

   Resolution No. 2024-10: Accepting the Local Mitigation Strategy & Floodplain Management Plan Report and Floodplain Species and Natural Functions Report

   approved

   Council adopted an amended Resolution 2024-10 accepting the Local Mitigation Strategy & Floodplain Management Plan Progress Report and the Floodplain Species Assessment and Natural Functions Report. The amendment adds a reference to the Floodplain Species Assessment Plan so the city receives full credit under the National Flood Insurance Program's Community Rating System.

   Ord. Resolution No. 2024-10

   • vote:Adopt amended Resolution 2024-10 accepting the Local Mitigation Strategy & Floodplain Management Plan Progress Report and the Floodplain Species Assessment and Natural Functions Report. (passed)

   👤Unknown staff presenter#Community Rating System (CRS)#Floodplain Management Plan Progress Report#Floodplain Species Assessment and Natural Functions Report#Local Mitigation Strategy#National Flood Insurance Program#Resolution 2024-10

   ▶ Jump to 6:08 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

   [00:06:08] Moving on to the Resolution 2024-10, [00:06:12] Accepting Local Mitigation Strategy, Flood Plan Management [00:06:16] Plan Report, and Flood Plains Species [00:06:20] and Natural Function Report. [00:06:24] This is Resolution 2024-10, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport, [00:06:28] adopting the Local Mitigation Strategy and Flood Plain [00:06:32] Management Plan Progress Report, and the Flood Plain Species [00:06:36] Assessment and Plan and Natural Functions Report, and providing an effective [00:06:40] date. [00:06:44] Okay, this may seem somewhat familiar to you, [00:06:48] and we did discuss this at your August 6th [00:06:52] meeting, and this [00:06:56] is also related to the community rating [00:07:00] system of our National Flood Insurance [00:07:04] Program, and we talked specifically about [00:07:08] the Flood Plain Species Assessment Plan and [00:07:12] the Natural Functions Report, and I'm sure [00:07:16] you'll recall me telling you [00:07:20] about the importance of protecting our [00:07:24] natural resources and that the plan advances [00:07:28] specific recommended action regarding [00:07:32] habitat, including the bald eagle and the tricolored [00:07:36] heron, and that portion [00:07:40] of the report was not included [00:07:44] as a reference in our resolution. [00:07:48] So I'm bringing it back to you this evening with an [00:07:52] amended resolution to include a reference [00:07:56] to the Flood Plain Species Assessment [00:08:00] Plan and Natural Functions Report, so that when I [00:08:04] submit it to [00:08:08] the community rating system people at the [00:08:12] National Flood Insurance Program, they'll give me full credit. [00:08:16] So I can tell you all about it again, [00:08:20] or I can just admit to you that it's the same as it was [00:08:24] last time, and I'm correct in error. [00:08:28] I'm glad to hear that. Any public comment? [00:08:32] Seeing no one come forward, bring it back for vote. [00:08:36] Second. [00:08:40] When does a CRS person come visit? Has [00:08:44] that person come out to visit, or are they still doing that? They come out to visit several times [00:08:48] over the course of our evaluation period, [00:08:52] which usually spans about 120 [00:08:56] days, and then after [00:09:00] the 120-day period lapses, it takes [00:09:04] them about another 90 days before they'll report to us with our [00:09:08] final score. [00:09:12] All those in favor signify by aye. Aye.

   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. 13.g

   Resolution No. 2024-17: Adopting the City of New Port Richey Disaster Preparedness Guide

   approved

   Council adopted Resolution 2024-17 formally approving the City of New Port Richey Disaster Preparedness Guide, as required by the Community Rating System (CRS) process. Chief Fitch presented the guide, which coordinates city emergency response with Pasco County Emergency Management. Council also discussed making a resident-facing version more accessible on the city website during emergencies.

   Ord. Resolution No. 2024-17

   • motion:Move approval of Resolution 2024-17 adopting the City of New Port Richey Disaster Preparedness Guide. (passed)5–0

   🏢Pasco County Emergency Management👤Chief Fitch👤Councilman Murphy👤Ms. Mance#2024 Disaster Preparedness Guide#Community Rating System (CRS)#Florida State Statute 252#Hurricane Expo#Resolution 2024-17

   ▶ Jump to 9:16 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

   [00:09:16] Those opposed, 5-0. Resolution 2024-17 [00:09:20] adopt the City of New Port Richey Disaster Preparedness Guide. [00:09:24] This is Resolution 2024-17, resolution [00:09:28] by the City Council of the City of New Port Richey, Florida, approving the City of Disaster [00:09:32] Preparedness Guide as attached here to. Chief Fitch. [00:09:36] Thank you, Ms. Mance. The goal for you this evening is [00:09:40] to formally adopt the City of New Port Richey Disaster [00:09:44] Preparedness Guide. Florida State Statute 252 [00:09:48] allows municipalities [00:09:52] to have their own emergency disaster management [00:09:56] program, which we have here in the city. It also requires [00:10:00] that we coordinate all of our efforts with Pasco County [00:10:04] Emergency Management. So that being said, we [00:10:08] have our own disaster preparedness guide that's been a long-standing [00:10:12] plan that we've had in the city for many, many years, and it gets updated [00:10:16] annually. We've recently been [00:10:20] made aware of the fact that going through the CRS [00:10:24] process, the community rating systems process, that this [00:10:28] disaster plan needs to be formally adopted [00:10:32] by City Council. So the purpose of the disaster preparedness [00:10:36] guide is to provide uniform guidelines for the effective coordination [00:10:40] of actions necessary to prepare for, respond to, recover [00:10:44] from, and mitigate natural and man-made disasters which might affect [00:10:48] the health, safety, or general welfare of residents. The disaster [00:10:52] preparedness guide includes governmental situation and authority, [00:10:56] geographic analysis, hazard analysis, [00:11:00] the stages of preparedness, as well as critical facility elevations and surge [00:11:04] heights with associated mapping. A major part of [00:11:08] the disaster preparedness guide are the individual department operational plans [00:11:12] that aid in allowing for effective coordination between [00:11:16] departments in regard to response and recovery strategies. [00:11:20] Lastly, current contact information of city staff that play [00:11:24] a vital role in emergency management as well as elected officials [00:11:28] are included in the plan to ensure proper communications can be [00:11:32] made when needed. Staff recommend City Council adopt the [00:11:36] resolution as submitted, the 2024 disaster preparedness guide. [00:11:40] I'm prepared to answer any questions that you may have. [00:11:44] Comments? [00:11:48] Before we bring it back for vote and discussion. [00:11:52] Move approval. Second. To the first. [00:11:56] Second. So I just have a quick one. On page, and sorry [00:12:00] I didn't have a chance to have my, for council up here, I didn't have a chance to have my [00:12:04] bi-weekly meeting with the city manager, so some of these questions [00:12:08] didn't get answered. I was under the weather. [00:12:12] For page 102, the communications [00:12:16] office will remain the dispatch conversation with the police department. [00:12:20] Is that going to change at all with us swapping things over to the county [00:12:24] or is there still a local dispatch here? They'll still [00:12:28] be a local in-house dispatch? Okay. [00:12:32] I don't have anything. I don't have a question. [00:12:36] Yeah, I just had one question and I'm kind of [00:12:40] looking now. Do we have, and maybe [00:12:44] I've missed it, but do we have, because I just like the name, you know, the [00:12:48] City of New Port Richey Disaster Preparedness Guide [00:12:52] would be something we could put on our website for our residents. [00:12:56] Wouldn't necessarily be, you know, the same information, but a guide for [00:13:00] some easy access for residents to look and so they'd see [00:13:04] what we have going on and where they can go to get help [00:13:08] or that kind of thing. One stop shop kind of thing. [00:13:12] We can look at putting together [00:13:16] something that we could put out on the website. [00:13:20] Every situation is different though [00:13:24] in the way we respond, and there's some information [00:13:28] that we do want to put out publicly and there's some information [00:13:32] about our internal operations. [00:13:36] Not that, just a guide for residents. [00:13:40] If I could add to that, on our website [00:13:44] we have an emergency management link, and in that link [00:13:48] is the Pasco County Emergency Disaster Guide [00:13:52] for 2024, which includes a lot of important information [00:13:56] which you spoke of, evacuation zone, shelter [00:14:00] sheltering information for city residents as well. [00:14:04] Maybe if it's during those times, it's put up on the main page [00:14:08] as a link, so they don't have to look for it, it's in their face. [00:14:12] Just move it when we have those issues, yeah. [00:14:16] Councilman Murphy, you reminded me [00:14:20] of the Hurricane Expo they did, and maybe expanding that beyond just hurricanes, maybe [00:14:24] disaster preparedness, because that, I guess it was the first one [00:14:28] that the city did, and I thought the turnout was pretty decent for the first one [00:14:32] and a lot of information, a lot of good community [00:14:36] vendors there. Even, kind of like they do during the [00:14:40] election time on Pasco Votes, how they have a banner that [00:14:44] pops up, so at the top, a big old red banner that says [00:14:48] Hurricane Watch or whatever, click here for more information. [00:14:52] Did you see that smoke on US 19? Here's what that's about. [00:14:56] And it'll get more people to go to the city website, so I love that. [00:15:00] I love that idea. All those in favor, signify by aye. Aye. [00:15:05] Those opposed, 5-0. RFP 24-202 Road Square Project Construction Management Services Award.

   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. 13.h

   ↳You arrived here from a search for “Hennessey Construction Services” — transcript expanded below

   RFP24-020 Railroad Square Project Construction Management Services Award

   approved

   Council approved a contract with Hennessey Construction Services for construction management services on the Railroad Square Project on a guaranteed maximum price basis. The fee is $219,353 plus 5.5% of the guaranteed maximum construction cost (negotiated down from 6%), with construction estimated at 35 weeks. Hennessey was the sole respondent to the RFP and has prior experience with city projects.

   • motion:Move approval of the proposed contract with Hennessey Construction Services for Railroad Square Project construction management services. (passed)5–0

   📍Nebraska Avenue from Adams to Grand Boulevard📍building on Bank and Main🏢Hennessey Construction Services👤Colin👤Mothershead#American Rescue Plan funds#CRA#Library Renovation Project#RFP24-020#Railroad Square Project#Recreation and Aquatic Center Project#Sims Park Improvement Project

   ▶ Jump to 15:06 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

   [00:15:18] This agenda is a request to enter into a contract with Hennessey Construction Services for the [00:15:32] construction management services related to the railroad square project. Although the railroad [00:15:39] project isn't completely designed, it is an appropriate time to determine a construction [00:15:48] delivery service. In that it's not completely designed, it's a perfectly appropriate time [00:15:54] to determine that a contractor at risk on a guaranteed maximum price basis is a good way [00:16:06] to go, particularly in lieu of the impediments on this project. We want an economical project, [00:16:17] we want a quality project, and we want it expedited in a fashion that will minimize [00:16:25] interruptions to our business community. We have, in that respect, decided that it would be good to [00:16:37] bring on a construction manager and to allow them to help us navigate the remaining design decisions [00:16:47] and to bid competitively all of the trades involved in the implementation of the project [00:16:58] and to be responsible for the coordination and implementation of the project. And so in that [00:17:11] respect, we let a request for proposals for construction management services. Hennessey [00:17:18] Construction Services, in this instance, was the only firm that responded to our request for [00:17:26] proposal. They, though, are a firm that's not unfamiliar to us. They have worked with us on [00:17:36] the Sims Park Improvement Project, they worked with us on the Recreation and Aquatic Center [00:17:42] Project, and the Library Renovation Project, and they've also performed work for us on our fleet [00:17:50] fleet building, which we will be conducting a groundbreaking on in coming weeks. We have had a [00:18:00] very favorable experience with them. We have interviewed them for the project and determined [00:18:08] that they, it's completely within their range to perform the services that we need on this project. [00:18:20] The fee for services that they have proposed is $219,353 plus 5.5% of the guaranteed maximum [00:18:36] construction cost. The $219,353 is what would be attributed to staff costs, and that would be for [00:18:48] pre-construction, for construction, and post-construction, and all of your fixed costs to get you through a [00:18:56] construction phase, and that is assuming a 35-week period of time for construction, because we don't [00:19:05] know yet how long construction will span. 35 weeks is a very generous amount of time for that project. [00:19:16] One of the discussions that we'll have with the property owners before this project is initiated is, [00:19:25] would you prefer that we take Nebraska Avenue from Adams to Grand Boulevard and bust it up and get it [00:19:38] repaired and put back in place in a shorter period of time, and or would you prefer that we do it in [00:19:48] phases and take a longer period of time? So that will determine how many weeks we're going to be [00:19:56] on the project, because we want to minimize the interruptions to the business community. [00:20:03] I know what I would pick, but I don't know what they will pick. [00:20:09] So we will see once we take their preferences into consideration in making that decision. [00:20:21] They actually proposed 6% on their contract for a percentage of construction costs, but after [00:20:30] some discussion and negotiation with them, they brought their percentage down to 5.5%, which is [00:20:39] well within industry standards. I think a favorable amount considering today's market [00:20:51] and their experience and quality as a construction manager. So we're prepared to [00:20:58] recommend that you consider allowing us to enter into a contract with Hennessey Construction [00:21:06] Services for this project. And Colin and I are prepared to respond to any questions you have on this. [00:21:16] Do we have any public comment? Seeing none, I'll move approval of the proposed contract. [00:21:26] Second. Yeah, I think that cost-plus kind of contracts are important in these days [00:21:36] whenever you ask somebody to estimate in a fluctuating supply environment and work [00:21:43] environment. You used to get higher prices, so everyone wants to work for a profit margin, [00:21:50] and that's what these kind of contracts allow for companies to do. So we've had good experience [00:21:58] with them. The only thing I would ask is that because we've had such good experience and they [00:22:03] are here and they have become reliable partners again, I guess, in terms of construction activity [00:22:12] with the city, that we would make sure we were in position, whether it was the CRA itself with [00:22:21] buildings like improvements to the building on Bank and Main. We talked the other day about [00:22:28] making improvements. You have to have somebody that can lead those kind of projects, and if the [00:22:32] city manager is in agreement, I would like the ability for us to have that organization either [00:22:40] piggyback or somehow that we find them in the position of being our go-to project manager, [00:22:51] that there may be other properties that we own that have the need for those services, and [00:22:57] these processes take so long to get in front of us. I'd like to see you be prepared to [00:23:05] encourage more use of their services. [00:23:12] Yeah, I think it's a really good move to get them to manage the process. It's going to be, [00:23:18] you know, it's going to put a lot of those business owners out for a while. [00:23:22] It's going to be a long project, and the sooner we can get it done, you know, the better. [00:23:28] I'm just having them be able to facilitate it, and you know, that's what they do. [00:23:33] It will greatly help. [00:23:38] I did have one question. The Recreation and Aquatic Center expansion project, [00:23:44] that was the most recent one, like the 2017 one. Which one was that? [00:23:48] Bumped out the front of the building and moved the workout room there to the front and built [00:23:57] the room on the side where we have the wet room. [00:24:02] Okay. Yeah, I read this over, and good points on the project management aspect. I think of those, [00:24:10] and I think that's a great idea, looking at other projects. A gigantic step in the right [00:24:14] direction for the Railroad Square project. I will voice what I voiced before, is that, [00:24:19] you know, those American Rescue Dollars, we are using them for this purpose, for economic [00:24:24] development. So I hope we can find, and I'll talk about more during communications, and [00:24:28] I'll mention Councilwoman Mothershead when we get there, find other ways to offset the fact that we [00:24:35] are focusing on economic development of our downtown with these funds. That we don't neglect [00:24:40] our other responsibilities as a city to our residents, because we know that during the [00:24:47] summer, a lot of our snowboards go up north, and our small businesses downtown suffer. [00:24:52] And so a key aspect of economic development is making sure the residents that are here, [00:24:56] that stay here during the slow season of the summer, they are also able to afford our downtown. [00:25:02] And that's finding ways to make them buy into our city. But other than that, I think this is [00:25:08] a great, I think this is more opportunities than it is setbacks. So I'm very excited for it. [00:25:14] Yeah, I think that we've worked really well with this company in the past, and I think that it's [00:25:18] a great choice to be working with them again. And having them as a project manager on this is [00:25:24] going to be great for us. I'm happy to see this project moving forward, and I know a few of those [00:25:28] businesses back there are going to struggle during this time. So I just think it's really important [00:25:33] that we take all of that into consideration with those businesses that are on that railroad square [00:25:39] area, just to make sure that we keep them up and involved in everything to make sure that it's [00:25:45] going to benefit them as well. Well, I'm going to vote for this, but I just want staff to [00:25:53] put a big emphasis on this Hennessy, because I'm going to mention a couple situations that I [00:25:58] wasn't happy with in the past. One of the things was that they saw how much money was in the pot [00:26:07] for Sims Park, and so they took 100% of it. They didn't come in with, they thought they could save [00:26:13] us a couple bucks. So not only did they come in and take every penny, but then they had to ask [00:26:18] our own staff to help finish the project for the last two or three weeks, otherwise they wouldn't [00:26:23] have done it in the time frame that they did it. That's number one. Number two is that they said, [00:26:29] oh yeah, we can do the rec center, but then when it got down to the nitty-gritty in the end of it, [00:26:35] they said, well, we want some more money. And so I wasn't really happy with that either. [00:26:39] And then one time they made a presentation about the new sign that came at Sims Park, [00:26:45] out in the front, where it says New Port Richey, and it's got two little concrete pillars there. [00:26:50] And I just said, I really think that with a little modification that that sign could have some of the [00:26:56] features of what some of our buildings have downtown. And that would be, you know, kind of [00:27:01] just tie it all together instead of just some blocks up with a sign that says New Port Richey, [00:27:06] you know, to tie it all downtown. And his comment was to me was, well, he's passionate [00:27:12] about the city. So I just want to let you know that I'd like all five of us in the staff to keep [00:27:18] an eye on Hennessey and make sure that we get our money's worth, because I have some hesitation [00:27:23] about it from the past staff, the past members, not so much the company, but the staff that they [00:27:30] provided us. So all those in favor, signify by aye. Aye. Those opposed, five nothing.

   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. 13.i

   All-Way Stop Sign Intersection – Madison St. & Massachusetts Ave.

   approved

   Council approved installation of an all-way stop sign at the intersection of Madison Street and Massachusetts Avenue after staff presented an engineering study showing the intersection met three of five MUTCD warrants, including crash history (13 crashes in 3 years) and proximity to Ritchie Elementary. Council also discussed potentially removing the northbound left turn lane due to blind spot concerns, exploring a future signalized light, and adding a pedestrian crosswalk near Massachusetts/Van Buren or Moore-Massett.

   • motion:Motion to approve installation of all-way stop sign at Madison Street and Massachusetts Avenue. (passed)

   📍Adams Street📍Madison Street and Massachusetts Avenue📍Massachusetts and Van Buren📍Moore-Massett and Massachusetts📍Van Buren and Main Street🏢Ritchie Elementary🏢Spartan Manor👤Frank Starkey👤Mr. Eichenmiller#Federal Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD)#Warrant A - crash experience#Warrant D - eight-hour vehicle/pedestrian/bicycle volume#Warrant E - school proximity

   ▶ Jump to 27:37 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

   [00:27:37] Okay, always stop sign intersection of Madison Street and Washington, Massachusetts Avenue, [00:27:43] excuse me. Mr. Eichenmiller, can you please represent the agenda? [00:27:50] Yes, ma'am. And thank you. Good evening, Mayor and Council. [00:27:54] As a result of resident complaints about high traffic volumes and speeds [00:27:59] and vehicle-pedestrian conflicts at Madison Street and Massachusetts Avenue, [00:28:04] currently the intersection has stop signs on Madison Street on the north and southbound [00:28:09] directions. As City Council is aware, stop sign installations are required to meet warrants [00:28:14] included in the Federal Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices. This is otherwise known as the [00:28:20] MUTCD. Criteria data is collected and reviewed by an engineer verifying warrants are met [00:28:26] prior to the stop sign installations. The report that you have attached shows that [00:28:32] three out of the five warrants were met in this case or were exceeded. The crash experience of [00:28:38] Warrant A, six reported vehicle crashes within a 12-month period were found. Five could be avoided [00:28:46] based on the data that was reviewed with the installation of an all-way stop. [00:28:52] Thirteen reported vehicle crashes in a three-year span and seven of which could have been avoided. [00:28:57] With the eight-hour volume of vehicles, pedestrians, bicycles, which is Warrant D, [00:29:02] the total average was 417 on Massachusetts Avenue with the warrant criteria at 300 for major [00:29:11] and the total average was 297 on Madison Street with a warrant criteria of 200 for the minor. [00:29:19] The other factors were Warrant E. Ritchie Elementary, as we all know, is approximately [00:29:26] a thousand feet from that intersection. In addition to all of this, you'll see that [00:29:33] the attached engineering report with the recommendations for the all-way stop sign [00:29:37] is attached and at this time staff would request council's approval for the installation of the [00:29:43] sign. Any public comment? Seeing no one come forward, we'll bring it back for a discussion. [00:29:50] I'm going to move to approve. Second. Quick question. So we're putting the stop sign there. [00:29:56] Is that left turn lane being removed? [00:30:00] By that review, we'll leave the, the left turn lane there. [00:30:04] However, the stop sign would remain. [00:30:06] All right. [00:30:07] And I, I would love the council's input on this. [00:30:09] That left turn lane is, and it says it right here in this report. [00:30:12] It hits it right on, the nail on the head. [00:30:16] Additionally, the intersection experience is numerous left turn conflicts. [00:30:20] You can't, when you're in that left turn lane, you cannot see [00:30:25] because of the way the right turn lane works, where you can turn. [00:30:29] So, the, the problem we run into is you, it, it creates a blind spot there. [00:30:34] And. [00:30:34] Are you referring to the left turn lane going north? [00:30:36] Going north. [00:30:37] On that way, correct? [00:30:38] Yes. [00:30:38] Yeah, so, what you would be installing then is stop signs on Massachusetts that [00:30:43] would create a four way stop at that intersection. [00:30:45] But my, my question is, so, if I'm in the left turn lane and someone's in the lane [00:30:51] that can turn right, who goes first? [00:30:56] We're talking Madison and, Madison and Mass, right? [00:30:58] Right. [00:30:59] So, are we, if we eliminate, in my mind, if we eliminate that turn lane, [00:31:03] you'd have a genuine four way stop as opposed to the four way stop and [00:31:08] a left turn lane that also has to stop. [00:31:11] That's certainly something we can review. [00:31:13] Okay, and, and the reason why I, I bring it up is because of that blind spot [00:31:17] when you're looking to the east, and but to, to your point, I mean, this is [00:31:22] rubber meets the road, I'm gonna be knocking on every door in that neighborhood [00:31:25] when this gets done because this is city government working. [00:31:28] People have complained about this for years. [00:31:30] Parents have said that it is a, it is a, is a hazard. [00:31:34] And so, I mean, we're listening and we're getting this fixed and it's going to, [00:31:39] as you can see by evidence, it's going to reduce traffic collisions there and [00:31:44] hopefully save some lives, not to be hyperbolic about it. [00:31:48] Just one other technical question and I, I, I credit Frank Starkey for [00:31:53] this with the bicycle conversation we had about reducing that. [00:31:57] Any blind spots there where, do we anticipate any backup of traffic on [00:32:04] Madison as a result of this pushing into, like say during car dismissal, or [00:32:09] the bus, would it back up far enough to impede traffic on Washington? [00:32:13] Because my thought is, is that Adams? [00:32:16] Yeah, it's the police department. [00:32:18] My thought is it could back it up to the point where now you're having some [00:32:22] confusion with Adams Street, or people avoiding that stop sign by going down Adams. [00:32:27] So, I don't see that recorded here in the study from staff's experience. [00:32:30] Does, does that pose as a problem where, say two years from now, [00:32:34] we're going to have to be considering a stop sign by Adams and, and may, or Madison. [00:32:41] I know that was a lot, so let me know if you need me to break it up. [00:32:43] Oh, one more question. [00:32:44] All right. [00:32:48] If I may weigh in real quick. [00:32:49] So, we look at all the traffic warrants under the MUTCD. [00:32:53] So we won't, I really can't answer your question until we implement this. [00:32:57] And then we evaluate and see how it's going. [00:32:59] I have no idea how far the cars will back up. [00:33:01] But this is a major safety issue at this intersection right here. [00:33:04] So we need to implement this and then evaluate. [00:33:07] That's really the only way we can answer your question over time. [00:33:09] Okay, I wasn't sure if there was a way to calculate it and [00:33:12] figure out how far it backs up, but I appreciate that. [00:33:15] Second observation would be that in the discussion of it meeting the merits for [00:33:22] a four-way stop, we had discussion up here before about intelligence traffic [00:33:27] signalization, so to your point about schools getting out and five o'clock [00:33:32] traffic and patterns coming in and going out being different. [00:33:37] It seems to beg the the opportunity for [00:33:42] us to be intelligent about that intersection. [00:33:44] It's a major way in from Massachusetts. [00:33:47] Massachusetts is really effectively the ridge road extension to the Pinellas, [00:33:54] to the Suncoast Parkway. [00:33:59] It is, I think, potentially a spot for a light, for a signalized light. [00:34:09] And I don't know if we've tested to that, or it's an expense, or [00:34:13] we have to talk to the county about it, but alternate to Highway 19, [00:34:18] if there's ever a traffic backup, or it's one of the very few north-south ways [00:34:23] other than, it's Congress or it's Adams or [00:34:31] coming out through Madison, which is a major road with a bridge on it going to 54. [00:34:36] So that's a pretty important intersection, I think, for [00:34:40] us to consider potential improvements. [00:34:43] I do appreciate your saying a left turn lane. [00:34:45] It's like the first guy to the stop sign goes first, and so [00:34:50] if he goes left, I'm going right because he's covering for me. [00:34:54] And that's probably how that kind of stuff works. [00:34:58] But it's going to require a little more complication than just four [00:35:03] cars coming into an intersection, so I appreciate your comment. [00:35:07] Thank you. [00:35:08] We've had the other second. [00:35:11] Yeah, and I travel that intersection a lot, and [00:35:15] it does get a little dicey there sometimes, especially when school's in, [00:35:18] because you have the road crossing there, and trying to get the kids across. [00:35:25] And sometimes people just, they come flying down that road, so [00:35:29] I'm surprised we haven't had more issues there than we have, but [00:35:33] it's good that we're getting ahead of it. [00:35:37] I agree that's a rough intersection, but I do agree with the left turn lane issue, [00:35:41] too, because I do think that that's an issue there, and it does block what you [00:35:46] can see, and you hope that the guy turning left is blocking for the guy going right. [00:35:50] But I think that it would make more sense to have just a straight four-way stop. [00:35:56] I think the idea of bringing up a stoplight there is probably even better, [00:36:01] because the people coming from the east are going 40 miles an hour. [00:36:07] Chief, you could actually put one of your dummy cars there in two days, and [00:36:11] then the third day, put a real car in, and you'd make a ton of money. [00:36:15] But there's just too many people going at least 40 miles an hour coming [00:36:18] from the Congress end, so it needs a lot more investigation in my mind. [00:36:26] But it definitely needs some help. [00:36:28] So all those in favor, signify. [00:36:29] I have a little bit more if you don't mind, Mayor, sorry. [00:36:31] This good conversation over here that generated a couple more thoughts, [00:36:34] if you don't mind. [00:36:36] Not to get greedy here, but while we're on the conversation, [00:36:42] I'd put money that Massachusetts and Van Buren, or [00:36:48] Moore-Massett in Massachusetts, would benefit from a pedestrian, [00:36:53] not a stop sign, but a pedestrian crosswalk. [00:36:57] Given the amount of kids that come from that neighborhood down to either the rec [00:37:01] center, Ritchie, golf, and that is one of those where you go from Madison and [00:37:08] Mass, and you would have to walk basically all the way to [00:37:13] Congress before you have another opportunity to cross. [00:37:16] They won't do that. [00:37:18] They won't walk all that way. [00:37:19] That's what I'm saying, they don't, especially with the laundromat right there. [00:37:24] That, there is a reason why they cross by the laundromat, by the Spartan Manor. [00:37:30] I just tried to go to Spartan Manor the other day and had to park across the street [00:37:33] and nearly got killed trying to walk across the street. [00:37:35] So putting a. [00:37:36] So there you go. [00:37:37] So I, I, I'm not a betting man, but I, I would bet one of those two or [00:37:41] three streets, a survey would check all the boxes for an intersection, or for [00:37:45] a pedestrian, and I know we're doing one on Van Buren in Maine, so [00:37:49] I don't know if it's a good time to work that. [00:37:51] Van Buren in Main, Main Street. [00:37:53] Van Buren in Maine, so if we're already having that conversation, [00:37:56] maybe try to work that in. [00:38:00] And, as long as, on the light topic, I don't, I honestly just, [00:38:07] like the chief was saying, we don't know until we do it. [00:38:11] So I don't know, I'd love to learn more about what that looks like. [00:38:14] As long as it doesn't include ten years down the line putting a [00:38:18] entryway sign feature.

   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. 13.j

   West Main Street Sidewalk and Drainage Project Close Out

   approved

   Council approved the close out of the West Main Street Sidewalk and Drainage Project, including a deductive change order of $25,426 and a final pay request not to exceed $144,802.05 to SC Signature Construction. The project included approximately 1,200 linear feet of sidewalk on West Main Street, drainage improvements near Burger King, and additional sidewalks in the Heights neighborhood. Councilmember raised ongoing drainage concerns near Burger King during heavy rain.

   • motion:Move to approve the deductive change order of $25,426 and final pay request not to exceed $144,802.05 to SC Signature Construction for the West Main Street Sidewalk and Drainage Project close out. (passed)5–0

   📍Heights neighborhood, south of Marine Parkway📍West Main Street📍north side of Main Street, west of the Main Street Bridge🏢Burger King🏢SC Signature Construction👤Dr. Mueller👤Ronnie#2024 Sidewalk Improvement Project#Capital Improvement Program#Change order approved May 7, 2024#West Main Street Sidewalk and Drainage Project

   ▶ Jump to 38:20 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

   [00:38:20] I don't think that's the appropriate spot for that. [00:38:22] All those in favor signify by aye. [00:38:25] Aye. [00:38:26] Those opposed. [00:38:27] Actually, we enter the street further down. [00:38:32] We enter, we enter the town, excuse me. [00:38:35] West Main Street Sidewalk and Drainage Project close out. [00:38:39] Dr. Mueller, could you represent the agenda item? [00:38:41] Yes, thank you. [00:38:43] The request you have before you is from staff to consider the approval of [00:38:47] the deductive change order in the amount of $25,426 and [00:38:52] the final pay request in the amount not to exceed $144,802.05. [00:38:59] From SC Signature Construction, this is for [00:39:01] the completion of the West Main Street Sidewalk and Drainage Project. [00:39:06] This project also included the city's 2024 sidewalk improvement project [00:39:10] as a change order approved by city council at its regular meeting held on May 7th, 2024. [00:39:17] As a part of the city's current capital improvement program, [00:39:21] this project included the construction of approximately 1,200 linear feet of [00:39:26] sidewalk along the north side of West Main Street, along with the construction [00:39:30] of drainage improvements that included the replacement and [00:39:33] upsizing of the existing stormwater inlet structure and [00:39:37] the existing drainage pipe located to the west of the Burger King restaurant. [00:39:41] This project also included the construction of a headwall south of [00:39:44] the restaurant and the construction of drainage swales to reduce the street [00:39:49] flooding during storm events. [00:39:51] Finally, the change order included the installation of approximately 2,730 [00:39:56] linear feet in the Heights neighborhood, south of Marine Parkway, and [00:40:01] approximately 170 linear feet of sidewalk on the north side of Main Street, [00:40:05] west of the Main Street Bridge. [00:40:08] Again, this project is a part of the city's current capital improvement program, [00:40:13] and therefore, staff recommends the approval of the deductive change order [00:40:18] in the amount of $25,426, and the final pay request in the amount not to exceed [00:40:23] $114,802.05, and I'm here for any questions if you have them. [00:40:29] Do we have any public comment? [00:40:34] We'll bring it back, and I just want to make a little note, we didn't have a vote [00:40:37] on the other, because I don't think we were sending a lot of questions more so [00:40:41] than an answer. [00:40:43] No, you voted. [00:40:44] You voted, yeah. [00:40:45] No, you voted yes. [00:40:46] Yeah, I know, but I don't, I'm just saying, I don't think that we, our answers [00:40:51] were all... [00:40:52] Oh, I see what you're saying. [00:40:53] Okay. [00:40:54] You know, and we voted yes, but we don't think... [00:40:55] On what? [00:40:56] Yeah. [00:40:57] Yeah, we're not sure what we voted yes on, because we gave you a lot of questions. [00:41:01] You voted to approve the stop sign. [00:41:02] Yeah. [00:41:03] Yeah, but then we also wanted to look at lights, and we also wanted the left turn lane, and [00:41:07] so... [00:41:08] But I think we should... [00:41:09] Well, I think that's the direction you gave staff, and I think they took that, and they'll [00:41:12] come back to you if it's something that can be done. [00:41:14] I just want to say it out loud here. [00:41:16] Okay, it wasn't part of the motion, that's the main thing. [00:41:19] Okay, all right. [00:41:20] Okay. [00:41:21] To your point, the left lane, is that something that staff needs to bring back, or is that [00:41:24] something that could have been worked into that? [00:41:25] Well, they're working on that. [00:41:26] They'll get, they'll bring it all back, I suppose. [00:41:29] Okay, anyhow, the West Main Street sidewalk and drainage project, close that. [00:41:34] I don't see anybody coming forward. [00:41:37] So we have discussion, vote? [00:41:38] Move to approve. [00:41:39] Second. [00:41:41] Yeah, I feel like with this one, there was a couple parts, and I blinked, and it was [00:41:47] basically already done. [00:41:48] So this is great, and so thanks, staff, for working on it, and it's important, and so [00:41:54] appreciate you getting it done. [00:41:57] I'm good. [00:41:58] I'm good. [00:41:59] Good. [00:42:00] Ronnie? [00:42:01] I just want to say, the people that live on the west side of Main Street still have some [00:42:06] problems and some questions about the drainage around Burger King when we have a serious [00:42:12] rainstorm. [00:42:13] So I just want you to monitor it, because it's, with all the work that we've done there, [00:42:18] it hasn't cleared the problem up. [00:42:20] So when it rains, go check it out. [00:42:21] That's all I can say. [00:42:22] We'll look at it. [00:42:23] Thank you. [00:42:24] Yeah. [00:42:25] I mean, it's, you know, it's those people that, city residents that live over there, [00:42:28] not county. [00:42:29] I'm sorry. [00:42:30] It hasn't cleared the what? [00:42:31] I didn't catch that part. [00:42:32] The parking lot? [00:42:33] The street doesn't clear it. [00:42:34] It doesn't clear the street. [00:42:35] Okay. [00:42:36] Thank you. [00:42:37] All those in favor, signify by aye. [00:42:38] Aye. [00:42:39] Those opposed? [00:42:40] 5-0. [00:42:41] Approval and update computer aid dispatch CAD user agreement with the Central Square Technologies

   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. 13.k

   Approval of Updated Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) User Access Agreement w/Central Square Technologies LLC and Pasco County Board of Commissioners (BOCC)

   approved

   Council approved an updated CAD User Access Agreement with Central Square Technologies LLC and Pasco County BOCC, incorporating minor non-substantive changes requested by the county to the original agreement approved on 4/16/24. Changes included naming conventions, addition of statutory references (768.28), and revised public records language. The integrated county police/fire dispatch project is targeted for a November-December rollout.

   • vote:Approve the updated CAD User Access Agreement with Central Square Technologies LLC and Pasco County BOCC. (passed)5–0

   🏢Central Square Technologies LLC🏢Pasco County Board of County Commissioners (BOCC)👤Chief Coach👤Ms. Manns#Account 001-0614-6418 software license support#Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) User Access Agreement#FY 23-24 approved police budget#Florida Statute 119 (public records)#Florida Statute 768.28 (sovereign immunity)#RMS/CAD integration project

   ▶ Jump to 42:42 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

   [00:42:51] LLC and Pasco County Board of County Commissioners, BOCC. [00:42:56] Yes, Chief Coach and I'll represent the agenda item. [00:43:00] Thank you, Ms. Manns. [00:43:01] Mayor, council members. [00:43:02] So the request for the city council is to approve the updated CAD user access agreement [00:43:07] with the BOCC, Central Square Technologies, for integrated county police and fire dispatch [00:43:12] services. [00:43:14] As you know, on 416.24, you approved the original one. [00:43:16] This is just basically housekeeping. [00:43:18] County came back to us and just requested some very minor changes. [00:43:22] They're not substantive. [00:43:23] They don't affect the pricing structure of this agreement. [00:43:26] So I've outlined them for you as follows, and before I get into them, we really are [00:43:31] getting excited because we're looking at a November-December timeline, and this is [00:43:34] like two major highways, RMS on one side, CAD on the other, kind of merging at the same [00:43:41] time. [00:43:42] There's a lot of moving parts to this project, but it is well underway, and it is going well, [00:43:46] and this is just a small piece of it. [00:43:48] So some of the changes that the county requested, I laid out for you on page one. [00:43:53] This is really simple. [00:43:54] They just want, they added the city of New Port Richey and took out on behalf of New Port Richey [00:43:58] Police Department and New Port Richey Fire Department. [00:44:01] On page two, they added language to number three. [00:44:03] They added interlocal and removed the access, and the county has the right to cancel the [00:44:07] access agreement by giving 30-day written notice to Central Square. [00:44:11] I want to point out that under the agreement, both parties can cancel this at any time. [00:44:16] Page two, the county rewrote number six, however, is the same meaning as the original version. [00:44:20] The only thing they really added was state statute 768-28, which addresses torts and [00:44:25] sovereign immunity. [00:44:27] This statute applied anyway to the old agreement. [00:44:30] And then on page two, the county reviewed number eight, which addressed public records [00:44:34] and replaced with new language as follows, accessing entity and Central Square shall [00:44:38] not assign their respective obligations under this agreement without prior consent of the [00:44:43] other parties. [00:44:44] I always want to note, for some reason, when we put in the public records language on these [00:44:48] agreements, the county takes it out because we're compelled by 119 to comply with it anyway, [00:44:53] so it doesn't change anything with this agreement. [00:44:57] So as we move forward with this project, [00:45:00] asking you to approve this user updated access agreement so we can continue on [00:45:05] with this project. This project again under the budget fiscal impact is [00:45:09] budgeted under account number 00106146418 software license [00:45:15] support for FY 23-24 approved police budget. If you have any questions I'll be [00:45:19] happy to answer them. Any public input? Seeing none we'll bring it back for [00:45:26] discussion and vote. The change of eight public records I know the city changed [00:45:39] their public records to be ten days I want to say we changed it to ten days [00:45:46] under this the if someone you know calls and or makes a written request to for a [00:45:55] public records from Central Square or something they're a custody custodian of [00:46:02] that no longer comes to say it goes to who who receives the request and gets it [00:46:08] to Central Square. Let me just ask the question this way I make a public [00:46:14] records request who do I send it to for this specific issue? Either us or the [00:46:18] county or Central Square but we all have to comply at 119 and this is a public [00:46:22] project so anything they do is public record but I will say that there are [00:46:25] some stuff that are exempt from public record disclosure and with the CAD [00:46:30] system but all of us are required to process these things under 119 by law so [00:46:35] we all have to process but most likely will come through us or the county. So [00:46:38] like if a resident they would request it to you they wouldn't be asked to no we [00:46:43] don't do those requests they wouldn't be asked to then jump through a hoop and go [00:46:46] to the county or go to Central Square we would just accept their request and get [00:46:51] it to the appropriate custodian of public records? Absolutely, absolutely. [00:47:02] All those in favor signify by aye. Aye. Those opposed. Five zip discussion regarding fire

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

8. 13.l

   Discussion Regarding Fire Inspection Fees

   Council discussed fire inspection fees adopted in the 2023-24 comprehensive fee schedule, raised by Mayor Davis due to complaints from local businesses about cumulative fees. Fire Chief explained the fees are allowed under FL Statute 633 and align with Pasco County and New Port Richey rates, and that costs (wages, overtime, billing, software) exceed the ~$29-30k collected in the first six months. Council reached consensus to make no changes at this time pending more detailed data on inspection counts and revenue.

   • consensus:Council consensus to make no changes to the fire inspection fees at this time, pending more detailed data on inspections and revenue. (none)

   🏢City of Port Richey🏢Pasco County Fire Rescue🏢Treasure Island👤Davis👤Mayor Davis#2023-24 Comprehensive Fee Schedule#Business Tax Receipt (BTR)#Community Redevelopment Agency / blight designation#Fire Department Labor Agreement#Florida Administrative Code 69A#Florida Fire Prevention Code#Florida State Statute 633

   ▶ Jump to 47:06 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

   [00:47:10] inspection fees. [00:47:13] Were you at the suggestion of Mayor Davis and it relates to fire inspection [00:47:26] fees that were that were adopted in conjunction with the 23-24 comprehensive [00:47:32] fee schedule. They are related to fire inspection fees and from from my [00:47:42] perspective as I indicated to you in the city manager's memo and in this [00:47:50] communication local governments commonly charged for fees to help fund services [00:47:57] particularly when those services benefit a particular group that receives benefits [00:48:04] from those services and in this case when this agenda item was presented to [00:48:13] you we indicated that Pasco County and New Port Richey was charging for fire [00:48:22] inspection services of commercial businesses. We indicated to you that we [00:48:29] were proposing the same fee that they charged. There weren't any questions that [00:48:34] the time the vote was unanimous by the council to support the fee and the fee [00:48:40] schedule in general. We've been we have implemented the fees since January of [00:48:46] this year and we haven't fielded any any problems since that time but I'm open to [00:48:55] discussion in the direction that you set forward for me in any respect. [00:49:01] Any other comments? We'll bring it back for discussion. [00:49:11] From the perspective of a businesses in the county versus the businesses in the [00:49:17] city, waiving these fees what what incentive do you see that playing into [00:49:22] if we move into the city it's the philosophy is more open to businesses. [00:49:28] I'm assuming that this when we're talking about these fees and I know I [00:49:34] don't I know from the perspective of our downtown business owners all the fees [00:49:41] usually hit at once and they experience this low period where it feels like they [00:49:46] can't get ahead and so in my mind the knee-jerk reaction is any opportunity we [00:49:50] have to reduce the burden placed on our small business owners we should [00:49:54] definitely seize that opportunity. At the same time I don't want to be [00:49:57] impulsive and assume that I know what's best for our fire department or that I [00:50:02] know what's best for our excuse me our business community as a whole without [00:50:08] first seeking more of a direction from our fire department and so can we talk [00:50:13] a little bit more about where that $30,000 what it was used for during this [00:50:17] fiscal year what what we budgeted those items for. [00:50:22] The revenue that we've earned from the inspections that have been conducted [00:50:30] goes into the general fund and it goes into the general fund to pay the staff [00:50:35] that conduct the inspections and the general fund is the fund of the city [00:50:42] that's the most constrained and I'll also mention to you that you did just [00:50:53] approve a program in conjunction with the adoption or the ratification of the [00:51:00] fire department labor agreement to allow the firefighters to inspect conduct [00:51:09] these commercial inspections which aren't always small businesses on an [00:51:14] overtime basis. Question is this factors into that overtime amount too which it's [00:51:20] not always but that tends to be a big glaring issue is how we can get overtime [00:51:24] down or compensate for it. In my mind and again don't want to be knee-jerk here [00:51:35] given that and staff has not fielded the necessary amount of requests to [00:51:41] point an issue to this I don't see the necessity for getting rid of the fees at [00:51:46] this time but I'm interested to see what results I mean we are my other concern [00:51:52] and why I'm cautious about this is we also just instated a fee correct me if [00:51:57] I'm wrong for fire department the fire department doing inspections or fielding [00:52:02] requests at and it might even be a it might be a fine for doing requests at [00:52:09] senior establishments or however you want to call them adult living assisted [00:52:14] living facilities is that correct? [00:52:20] And let me know if you need me to yeah could you repeat that question so there [00:52:24] we did we just established I don't want to call it a fee I think it was a [00:52:27] penalty or a fine or maybe it is a shared fee for responses to assisted [00:52:35] senior living facilities that don't have a health system on-site is that correct [00:52:42] or am I characterizing that properly? So we have not imposed a new fee for for [00:52:47] what you're speaking of that that is something the city attorney and I have [00:52:50] been working on trying to come up with a solution to a problem that we have and [00:52:55] we just gave direction on that so we voted we we voted or was it a [00:53:00] conversation we had maybe I miss miss remembering you don't currently charge a [00:53:04] fee no so I might have a conversation we were talking about that I saw pop up on [00:53:08] one of our memos to my mind goes leave it in place and in just speaking to us [00:53:14] the council here leave it in place and if it becomes an issue a chronic issue [00:53:19] then get rid of it but right now it's benefiting over time so well this was [00:53:28] brought at your request and basically if I recall your main concern was the [00:53:35] economic effect that it was having on existing businesses as an extra charge I [00:53:40] mean we charged one fee for the business tax receipt on an annual basis which [00:53:47] which may be lower than the inspection fee or in that same range so there's a [00:53:57] lot of ways to talk about this obviously but regulatory fees in general as I've [00:54:06] looked through the comprehensive fee schedule haven't been really going up [00:54:11] the only I don't know that I have a I don't know that I have a position other [00:54:23] than like you I've heard a lot of complaints about the cost of this and [00:54:27] that and these additional fees seem to come over and above someone getting [00:54:33] their tax bill and thinking that they're paying for their taxes and that then [00:54:36] leads the question of what am I paying for which then leads you to say well you [00:54:41] know you're paying for all of the variety of services the city has and [00:54:44] this is one of our ways to collect money to do business I would I would defer to [00:54:53] the will of the body here it may be you know each to each department and each [00:55:03] element of each fee sort of tries to justify its expenses and yet when we [00:55:09] look at the cost of fire services firemen's salaries and we look at the [00:55:17] other cities around that have had had that have given up their fire services [00:55:23] then you look back to the county and say what's the millage rate the county's [00:55:26] millage rate for fire is now well over two mils I think the cost of our fire [00:55:32] services are high I've always believed our revenue stream lies in the failure [00:55:37] of us to be able to take our sick people and our injured people to the [00:55:40] hospital with our own ambulances with our own trained staff and you know that's [00:55:44] been my bugaboo so as far as I'm concerned this is something we can [00:55:49] debate and argue about but the real the real burden to the city financially is [00:55:55] the fact that we're running with the brand-new state-of-the-art fire stations [00:56:00] and well-trained and an excellent fire department we're running at an expense [00:56:07] that that reflects the services we provide outside the city limits I've [00:56:12] said it before people who live in unincorporated Largo the county that [00:56:19] operates in that area has worked with the city of Treasure Island to provide [00:56:27] those services and they give them the money to do that so whether it's [00:56:31] recreation or fire or police or whatever I mean we really have to look at the [00:56:36] fact that we are a very small city that's providing services to a much [00:56:41] larger population whether it be an accident on the highway 19 or or an [00:56:48] injury wherever and we can look for all kind of places to find the money right [00:56:52] now this is where the city has found it I think we need a larger discussion on [00:56:57] on a lot of things but for $30,000 if you want to provide some relief to the [00:57:05] business community you can always say let's reduce the fee you know by [00:57:11] percentage and show some compassion for the complaints that we're hearing that [00:57:18] folks feel over overtaxed the the tax in the county for an occupational [00:57:24] license is much less than the tax for an occupational license in the city and I [00:57:31] mean people should be proud to live here and they should pay the fee and the [00:57:36] cost of it they incur so I'm I'm torn mr. mayor I'm glad you brought it up it [00:57:41] gives us a chance to talk about it but as the manager has said that she's [00:57:46] burdened we're trying to balance the budget and tough time anything we let go [00:57:51] of we have to figure out the opportunity cost is a lost opportunity to spend that [00:57:56] money on something else so I'll defer to you all on this one I mean I would just [00:58:02] like I mean since since you kind of want to talk about it was there something [00:58:06] particular you wanted to see change or was it just we've had this we've had [00:58:12] this project on for 100 years whenever the fire department came about and so [00:58:22] all of a sudden here well we're looking for new revenue let's um let's ask my 10 [00:58:27] departments where could we find more revenue and fire chief says well why [00:58:31] don't we just charge for our you know inspections you know and so okay and [00:58:36] somehow somehow perhaps maybe I wasn't on council at the time but it passed now [00:58:40] I've got the businesses saying well why are we doing this we got the BTR we've [00:58:44] got our ad valorem tax whether they own the building or they pay the owner of [00:58:49] the building you know all this is going in and all of a sudden now there's this [00:58:53] other special fee you know fire inspections and then we hear we need new [00:58:58] revenue we hear we don't have the staff to do it so it's being overtime so of [00:59:04] course this cost us more so you know I kiddingly said but you know put the [00:59:08] white shirts and blue shirts and or hire some or you know you know train [00:59:15] some more people out there to take a look at it you know when we have the [00:59:18] time I might just seems like you know hey well here's a good place we'll just [00:59:22] put some more fees in on these people and I just you know I that's the [00:59:26] attitude I got from the customers and customers the businesses in town and so [00:59:32] I heard enough of it so I brought it here and that's kind of what I've got [00:59:39] you know I wanted you guys to do your own homework own research come back with [00:59:45] what you had yeah so I'm kind of torn too I do think that we're our businesses [00:59:50] are stuff and they really are but as old as our buildings are fire inspections [00:59:57] are probably the most important for them [01:00:00] And I think that as we're growing as a city, we've got to charge for the additional services [01:00:07] that we're providing. [01:00:09] And I do understand that, but again, I know that our businesses are suffering with all [01:00:13] these additional expenses, too. [01:00:16] No, I'm not sure what the solution is. [01:00:21] You know, we don't want to charge, obviously, you know, I guess the big picture, I mean, [01:00:28] $30,000 doesn't seem like... [01:00:29] Well, see, we say $30,000, it doesn't say very much. [01:00:33] It doesn't tell us how many people have been inspected, you know, and what would be the [01:00:36] total at the end of the year. [01:00:37] I don't know what that is. [01:00:38] I just know that $29,000 and a change of $30,000 was what's been collected in the first six [01:00:45] months of this year. [01:00:46] The second six months might be $150,000, I don't even know, I don't have any clue. [01:00:51] Do you have an idea? [01:00:54] Can we just call out the fee amounts here so we know what we're talking about? [01:00:59] Is this what I'm looking at, fire? [01:01:02] It's not in here, I didn't see it in there. [01:01:03] Fire inspection, yes, right here. [01:01:04] Oh, yeah, okay, that's... [01:01:05] Okay. [01:01:06] It's $100 a year for up to a 15,000 square foot property. [01:01:12] No, no, that's not the one we were looking at. [01:01:14] That's not the one that was given to us. [01:01:16] If I could respond, Mayor and Council. [01:01:18] So, give you a little history. [01:01:20] This all came about due to the fact that our firefighters were performing fire inspections, [01:01:28] also known as company inspections, while they're on duty on the fire truck. [01:01:32] We're probably the only fire department in this whole region that I know of that has been doing that. [01:01:38] And why this came about now is the fact that we're running higher call volumes now than we ever have. [01:01:45] We're running an average, we're responding to an average of over 17 calls per shift. [01:01:51] Just yesterday, they ran 21 calls per shift. [01:01:56] Most fire departments, it's an industry standard, pretty much, that I know of, [01:02:02] that fire inspections get done by a fire inspector, not the firefighters that are on the trucks. [01:02:10] First of all, they don't have time to do the fire inspections, plus do between 300 and 500 hours of required training per month. [01:02:22] And then it's an inconvenience to the business owners because we're showing up in a fire truck to do a fire inspection [01:02:28] and we're interrupting their normal business activity numerous times. [01:02:33] We have to leave, go to a call, come back, try to finish the inspection, [01:02:37] go to another call, come back, try to finish the inspection a third time, and then do re-inspections. [01:02:43] It's been a problem. [01:02:45] So, to try to find a solution to that issue, the city manager and I did have discussions. [01:02:51] We're allowed to charge for fire inspections. [01:02:55] Florida State Statute 633 allows fire departments to charge businesses for fire inspections to do the inspection, plus administrative fees. [01:03:05] We're also, also in Florida... [01:03:08] What percent is the administrative fee? [01:03:11] The finance director can speak to the administrative fees. [01:03:15] She's got some detail for you. [01:03:20] So, as a solution to that, also in Florida, Administrative Code 69A, [01:03:25] Florida Fire Prevention Code, which the city has adopted, [01:03:28] all those allow for charging for fire inspections. [01:03:34] In theory, it takes the burden of every taxpayer in the city, [01:03:38] it takes that burden off their back paying for a fire inspection that that business is required to have. [01:03:44] So, every business in the city is required to have a fire inspection, [01:03:48] and we're required to perform the fire inspection. [01:03:51] So, they should be responsible for paying for that fire inspection that they are required to have. [01:03:58] When was the public notified of this? [01:04:01] So, the public was notified when City Council adopted the comprehensive fee schedule, [01:04:10] September 19th of 2023, and we did not roll the program out until January 1st. [01:04:15] So, between September 19th and January 1st, we sent out letters to the business owners... [01:04:22] That's not what I heard from the business owners. [01:04:25] They said they just got something over the summer. [01:04:28] So, we sent out letters to the business owners that were due for fire inspections in a 30-day window, [01:04:34] because we didn't want to send out letters in October, [01:04:37] and a business wasn't scheduled to have a fire inspection for six more months. [01:04:42] They would have forgot about the letter. [01:04:44] So, we strategically sent out the letters in a 30-day window, [01:04:47] so it was fresh in their minds that, hey, we're due for a fire inspection, [01:04:51] the fire department's coming out, and this is the reason why they're inspecting. [01:04:55] So, really, they didn't get a notice until the 30 days before their inspection? [01:04:58] 30 days before, correct. [01:04:59] So, that's what I'm saying. [01:05:00] They didn't get notification. [01:05:03] They didn't think they got notification until the inspection was there and the fee was there. [01:05:07] And, in addition, this is the same fee that's being charged by Pasco County Fire Rescue, [01:05:12] and the same fee that's being charged by... [01:05:14] That's a new one. [01:05:15] We don't necessarily follow... [01:05:16] ...the City of New Port Richey, and it's an industry standard. [01:05:20] What is the percent of administrative fees? [01:05:23] When we looked at the total revenue compared to what the expenses were, [01:05:26] they were associated with the cost around that program. [01:05:30] Wages, the overtime costs that we budgeted for this coming fiscal year. [01:05:35] The staffing costs for the billing, so administrative staff, finance staff, [01:05:40] for the billing aspect. [01:05:42] The costs associated with the inspection incentives that the firefighters are required to have. [01:05:51] The software support that's utilized for the billing and for the logging of the fire inspections. [01:05:59] All of those costs go into the... [01:06:02] They actually exceed what we're collecting. [01:06:06] So, if we budgeted $54,000 for next year, our costs would exceed that amount. [01:06:12] The actual costs that are being incurred by our department, [01:06:15] between the finance department and the fire department. [01:06:17] What is the number that it's going to be? [01:06:19] We're going to receive $29,000 for the first six months or something. [01:06:22] Five months, whatever it was. [01:06:24] What's the fee going to be for the year? [01:06:28] What is the revenue? [01:06:31] Total for the current year that we're in? [01:06:33] Yes. [01:06:34] I don't have that offhand, but I can get that for you. [01:06:36] That's kind of what we're talking about tonight. [01:06:39] It could be $29,000 for the first five or six months. [01:06:42] It could be $150,000 for the next six months. [01:06:44] It could be another $29,000. [01:06:47] The inspection fee revenue includes all inspection fees that come from permitting, [01:06:54] and also the firefighters going out in the field and performing the inspections. [01:06:57] That's what I'm saying, but that's only been from January to May or June. [01:07:00] $29,000, $30,000, whatever. [01:07:03] That also includes the permitting fees as well. [01:07:06] Those are existing fire fees that we've collected in the past. [01:07:11] These additional fees are the fire inspections for renewals. [01:07:16] Correct. [01:07:19] This is the annual. [01:07:22] $29,000 for the annual. [01:07:28] I'm just on the revenue stream. [01:07:31] May I ask a follow-up question? [01:07:34] You're talking about when things are due and how often we do them. [01:07:37] Safety is one of the issues that community redevelopment agencies have. [01:07:44] It's the one thing that they can do. [01:07:47] The fact that we have declared ourselves blighted recognizes the older stock of houses that's been brought up before. [01:07:55] The older stock of businesses, the importance of that. [01:07:58] Is there a differential between a new property and how much and how often you inspect them and an old property? [01:08:05] Or is this just an annual same chart? [01:08:10] In other words, when you said how many people are due, [01:08:14] it took us a long time to do the rental inspection program over more than a year. [01:08:19] What's the cycle of inspections? [01:08:21] Is it annual for everybody? [01:08:23] Is it annual for problems that you think might be worthy of inspection? [01:08:27] How do you determine that? [01:08:29] The Florida Fire Prevention Code has a detail in there that it's based on hazard class. [01:08:36] A restaurant that has flammable liquids in a fire load would be every 12 months. [01:08:42] A retail store that doesn't have all of those incendiary measures in the building would be every two years. [01:08:49] That's a minimum standard. [01:08:53] The city has the AHJ that can increase that, but we at least have to do the minimum. [01:09:01] So we could do every business every year once we get the fire inspection program up and running. [01:09:06] Well, we're not looking for more inspections than we need. [01:09:11] If somebody has a brand new building and all the good stuff in it and everything, [01:09:14] you would think it would be less other than just what's in it. [01:09:19] But offices, professional offices, you go in there, you find a couple of emergency lights that aren't working, [01:09:25] and you make them, fix them, and get them in shape. [01:09:29] I've been through your inspections before, but I'm glad that you brought it up. [01:09:35] It's an important discussion. [01:09:36] I don't know that we've got it. [01:09:38] It's on the agenda in case we wanted to do something to it. [01:09:43] We certainly can't suspend what they're required to do from doing it. [01:09:47] Well, that's not it. [01:09:48] It's whether we charge or not and what level of charging. [01:09:52] As I said, he said there was this fee of charging and then an administrative fee. [01:09:57] The administrative fee is more than what we're charging. [01:10:00] I don't get that either. [01:10:02] I don't understand that. [01:10:03] The city's costs are exceeding the fee that we're charging. [01:10:09] At the same time, it's a put your finger up to the wind in determining what those costs are [01:10:14] based on the testimony that you've got a guy coming and going and coming and going and trying to fit it all in. [01:10:20] I think that we shouldn't vote to change anything right now. [01:10:25] We're going to leave it the way it is until we can get some more information so we can actually get that data the way that it's listed out so we can actually see those numbers. [01:10:32] But other than that, I don't think we should make a change until we have that data. [01:10:36] I agree with not making the change at this time until we have more data, especially since I kind of asked at the very start of this what that $30,000 represented.

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

9. 13.m

   Resolution No. 2024-18: Annual Approval of the Comprehensive Fee Schedule

   discussed

   Council reviewed Resolution 2024-18 adopting the comprehensive fee schedule for FY 2024-25, including new EV charging station fees ($1/kWh plus idling fees), increases to credit card processing, recreation/pool/special event fees, development services fees, and fire department plan review fees. After extensive discussion and public comment—particularly concerns about EV charging idle time and city-sponsored event fees like Chasco Fiesta—the item was discussed but the transcript was truncated before a final vote was recorded.

   Ord. Resolution No. 2024-18

   • direction:Council directed staff to provide more detail on EV charging fees and to bring back discussion on how city-sponsored events (Chasco Fiesta, fireworks, etc.) should be treated for fee purposes. (none)

   📍1709 Nutting Thistle📍6153 Massachusetts Avenue📍Railroad Square🏢Chasco Fiesta🏢Pasco County Fair🏢Patriot Stokes👤Councilman Altman👤Councilman Murphy👤Crystal Fees👤Debbie Manns👤Lisa DeVincent👤Nathan Pollack#2023 FEMA rates#Chasco Fiesta#EV charging stations#FY 2024-25 Comprehensive Fee Schedule#Palm Room rental#Railroad Square special events#Resolution No. 2024-18#Resolution No. 418#fire inspection fee program

   ▶ Jump to 1:10:44 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

   [01:10:45] I was told overtime, but now I'm telling it's seven things that aren't even really paying for. [01:10:50] Is the overtime even making it in that $30,000? [01:10:53] Or are we just saying that to overlap? [01:10:57] But I did like what Councilman Altman suggested, that long-term potential solution. [01:11:03] Because to the mayor's point, we should be able to point at any fee and justify what it's for. [01:11:09] And that it's not just a way to collect money, but it has a purpose. [01:11:15] And so maybe if we had a differential that gives more functional purpose where the legitimate purpose of the fee is, [01:11:22] look, you have an older building, we're charging you on a more regular basis because you need more upkeep than a newer building. [01:11:29] Well, in fairness to the businesses, the 17 calls that you take in a given session, [01:11:37] if you look at what those calls are, I'm guessing many of them are medical-related. [01:11:42] And if you look at the fact we're not collecting a dime from that other than the taxes we collect from the residents [01:11:47] and the businesses who can say, why am I underwriting the cost of all these trips to the ALFs and those things? [01:11:54] So once again, and how much money is being collected by the county's fire department once we stabilize somebody [01:12:02] and bring them and have them transport the four or five blocks to the hospital? [01:12:07] And once again, this is a good opportunity for us to partner with them and not treat ourselves as two completely separate entities [01:12:14] and figure out how we can work together and keep our fire department. [01:12:18] Because the other cities have been giving up their fire departments and that doesn't happen in our city absent a charter. [01:12:25] From what I got here is that direction you might need, Debbie, is that we would just like more information on the whole project. [01:12:32] You know, instead of just $30,000 and what percent of the town got, you know, or what, you know, [01:12:39] what would be the annual fee that would be, versus the $30,000 being five or six months, [01:12:46] and what percentage of that is the whole city? [01:12:49] You know, how many more are you going to get the rest of the year? [01:12:52] How much more money are you going to get the rest of the year? [01:12:56] You know, you threw in all these other fees that, which would be staff here and staff there. [01:13:02] You know, and it's, we're looking at a fee to charge the customer for actually getting, [01:13:08] or the business actually charging them for getting the inspection. [01:13:12] You know, if we have the fees for all these other things, I don't think that really applies to, [01:13:17] that they should pick all those fees up, part of the city manager's fee, part of your fee, part of your staff's fee. [01:13:24] I mean, I would like to know exactly what the customer, or the resident, or the business, [01:13:31] is actually receiving for his pay, not all these other things. [01:13:36] Does this $30,000 not have a, like a GL account or a ledger that can be pooled? [01:13:40] It does. [01:13:41] No. [01:13:42] But it's... [01:13:43] General money. [01:13:44] It's, no. [01:13:45] General money. [01:13:46] The collection of it. [01:13:47] It's fire inspection fee revenue. [01:13:48] Yeah. [01:13:49] It does have its own GL account, but it's all fire inspection fees that have been collected, [01:13:54] that are recorded in that account, so from permitting, from the fire inspection program. [01:13:59] So the fees, the additional costs that go into that program that are offsetting the revenue, [01:14:06] like I said, is the software. [01:14:08] So the software that they utilize for their calls, they already have to log their calls. [01:14:12] This software allows them to bill electronically. [01:14:16] It has that feature. [01:14:19] The cost. [01:14:20] We budgeted $20,000. [01:14:21] I understand all that part of it. [01:14:23] You know, we're just looking at the $29,000 was actually what you charged for going out [01:14:28] and visiting X amount of businesses, which you can't tell me what that is. [01:14:31] And you don't know how many more you've got to do the rest of the year. [01:14:34] That's one of the questions I have. [01:14:36] All right. [01:14:37] I understand what you need. [01:14:38] Thank you. [01:14:39] Okay. [01:14:40] All right. [01:14:41] Thank you. [01:14:42] All right. [01:14:43] Thank you, Mayor. [01:14:44] Okay. [01:14:45] The next item is resolution number 418, annual approval of the comprehensive fees schedule. [01:14:49] This is resolution number 2024-18, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport [01:14:55] Ridgey, Florida, providing a comprehensive table of fees for fiscal year 2024-25. [01:15:00] 25, modifying certain fees and providing an effective date. [01:15:06] This is the time to talk about the annual fee schedule. [01:15:11] And, but before I turn it over to Ms. Fees [01:15:15] to fully present the item to you, [01:15:18] I wanna point out the fact that we are adding [01:15:21] a fee this year, or at least I propose [01:15:24] that we add a fee this year. [01:15:27] It's one that I've written to you about twice [01:15:29] in the city manager's report. [01:15:32] And I haven't heard anything from any of you about it. [01:15:36] And so I wanna specifically mention it to you [01:15:40] so that you're aware that it's in the schedule [01:15:42] and you give feedback tonight [01:15:45] so we know whether or not you wanna include it. [01:15:49] And it has to do with charging [01:15:51] for use of our EV charging stations. [01:15:55] And I did indicate to you that our annual charge [01:16:05] for that currently is about $11,000. [01:16:11] And originally when we launched the program, [01:16:18] we really considered offering the EV charging stations [01:16:24] as a form of economic development. [01:16:26] And so we wanted to attract people [01:16:29] to the charging stations and into the downtown [01:16:32] and give them a reason to roam around [01:16:36] while their cars were being charged. [01:16:38] I don't know if that continues to be the sentiment or not, [01:16:43] or if you want to begin charging for their use. [01:16:48] With that, I'll let Crystal submit to you [01:16:54] the other changes in the fee schedule for this year. [01:17:03] The program in front of you, the hard copy, [01:17:06] there were a few changes made from the copy submitted, [01:17:09] just highlights, really. [01:17:13] I'll go through the highlights to outline the changes [01:17:17] that are being reflected in this schedule from last year. [01:17:20] To start, the credit card usage fees, [01:17:23] over-counter payments, that fee will increase [01:17:25] from 2.95% to 3.95%. [01:17:28] That's associated with only over-the-counter payments [01:17:30] for credit card payments over-the-counter [01:17:35] that are presented to the customer service representatives [01:17:39] in our billing and collections department. [01:17:41] That fee is being passed back to the customer [01:17:44] that we're being charged by the collector, [01:17:49] the payment processor. [01:17:53] Down below, again, are the EV charging stations. [01:17:56] The user fee is projected at $1 per kilowatt hour, [01:18:01] and then additional idling fees [01:18:03] if the vehicle is left unattended for a period of time. [01:18:08] So after the first 30 minutes would be $5, [01:18:10] and then each additional hour afterwards would be $10. [01:18:13] We found that to be consistent [01:18:14] with other municipalities in the area [01:18:17] that do have the EV charging stations. [01:18:20] And then going to the library schedule, [01:18:23] no fees were changed. [01:18:25] We had a few changes to the description and the fee type [01:18:29] for fax service fees, send or receive self-service. [01:18:33] That was just explained a little bit more clearly. [01:18:35] And the description for the bookstore cost, [01:18:41] those fees vary, but those would be associated [01:18:44] with the books, magazines, discs, Blu-rays, CDs, and DVDs, [01:18:48] and this is per item. [01:18:53] And moving to recreation and aquatics, [01:18:57] the fee associated to special events [01:19:01] related to Railroad Square, [01:19:04] non-city business and non-residents, [01:19:06] the fee would increase from $500 to $750. [01:19:09] Swimming pool rentals for the residential resident [01:19:12] to rent the pool, an additional pool, [01:19:17] the increase would be from $25 to $50 an hour, [01:19:20] and a non-resident, $50 to $75 an hour. [01:19:26] And moving to the next page, [01:19:29] the swimming pool rental for swim teams, [01:19:32] those fees increased $5 for six lanes, $25 to $30. [01:19:37] Swim team shared four lanes or less, $15, $20 per hour. [01:19:42] The activity meeting room rental at the Palm Room, [01:19:48] the hourly rate for resident [01:19:50] was increased from $40 to $45 per hour. [01:19:54] The non-resident was increased from $55 to $60 per hour. [01:20:00] The kitchen fee, if required, [01:20:05] that fee increased from $40 to $50 per hour. [01:20:09] And additional staffing and materials, [01:20:12] fees will be included for rentals if it's necessary. [01:20:20] And each special event has an agreement, [01:20:23] so that would be discussed at the time of the SET meeting, [01:20:28] where the fees are discussed. [01:20:33] Then moving to development services, [01:20:36] there's various increases. [01:20:40] Such as the annexation, the code amendment, [01:20:43] conditional use, we have land use amendments. [01:20:48] These fee increases seem significant. [01:20:52] They are related to the marketing advertising costs [01:20:55] that the city incurs. [01:20:57] The advertising costs increased quite a bit [01:21:00] over the last few years, [01:21:01] and these fees are being passed back to the initiator. [01:21:09] There are asterisks by several of the fees [01:21:16] within the development department. [01:21:18] And down below, you'll notice that it indicates [01:21:20] the applicant responsible for the engineering [01:21:22] and surveying costs associated with those fees. [01:21:26] On page eight of this fee schedule, [01:21:32] there were fees that were removed, [01:21:37] such as revision fees. [01:21:40] We took those fees out and they will no longer be charged [01:21:44] for site plan revisions. [01:21:51] Moving to page nine of the fee schedule, [01:21:54] wireless facilities towers per occurrence [01:21:57] that fee increased from $1,000 to $1,500. [01:22:00] On page 11, the highlighted area, [01:22:13] the asterisks were an extension of the description. [01:22:20] Previously, the rate for residential new alterations [01:22:26] or repairs to electric was $150 minimum per unit. [01:22:33] However, if those residential units exceed the one, [01:22:39] the percentage decreases. [01:22:41] So two to six units is 10%, seven to 25 is a decrease [01:22:44] of 20%, 26 to 50, 30%, 51 plus is 40%. [01:22:49] And the same percentage decreases applied to commercial, [01:22:52] new and alterations and repairs. [01:22:56] On page 12, the temporary certificate of occupancy [01:23:06] and renewal of temporary certificate of occupancies, [01:23:09] fees increased as well as the residential permit revisions [01:23:16] and commercial permit revisions. [01:23:22] And the change of contractor to the issue permit. [01:23:25] The fees for expired permit reinstatement fees. [01:23:32] The current fee for each year that is delinquent [01:23:34] will only be charged. [01:23:35] There's no additional fees that apply to those. [01:23:41] And then moving to the fire department. [01:23:45] Fee increases relate to the plan review fees [01:23:50] for commercials, businesses, hospitals, [01:23:55] clinics, medical, nursing homes, hotels, motels, [01:24:02] and group homes. [01:24:12] We did propose a plan review fee increase [01:24:16] for this fire sprinklers and fire alarm detection [01:24:19] and storage systems. [01:24:28] An increase for the fireworks display from $150 to $200 [01:24:33] for especially vent permits. [01:24:38] And then additional, any other plan review fees [01:24:43] associated with fire pumps. [01:24:46] The fee increase is projected from $250 to $300. [01:24:54] Moving to page 15, construction inspections, [01:25:00] certificate of occupancy. [01:25:02] Fees increased from $50 to $75 [01:25:04] and the performance acceptance test. [01:25:08] Fees increased from $50 to $60 each. [01:25:12] The standby fees, rates were updated [01:25:17] from the 2021 FEMA rates to the 2023 FEMA rates. [01:25:27] And that covers all fee changes that were presented [01:25:32] in the 2023-2024 fee schedule and the changes for the 2025. [01:25:41] Thank you. [01:25:46] Do we have a public comment on that? [01:25:50] We have to come up here and talk. [01:25:56] Address please. [01:25:59] No, put it into the mic so the people can be recording [01:26:03] the people can see it at home. [01:26:05] My name is Lisa DeVincent. [01:26:06] I'm at 1709 Nutting Thistle. [01:26:08] I'm not in this, I don't know if that matters. [01:26:12] I'm in New Port Richey but I just have a question [01:26:14] about the EV chargers. [01:26:15] I have EV, I don't really use our chargers around here [01:26:18] because I live close so I don't need them [01:26:20] but I just had a question about the 30 minutes [01:26:22] after idling, 30 minutes, you have level two chargers. [01:26:25] So after 30 minutes, you're not gonna be fully charged. [01:26:28] Even with a supercharger, it takes at least an hour [01:26:31] to charge if somebody's coming like say from Orlando [01:26:33] or they're coming any distance. [01:26:35] Even with a supercharger that we don't have, [01:26:38] it takes at least an hour. [01:26:39] So I'm just saying when you're looking at your fees, [01:26:46] just kind of look a little bit more in that [01:26:49] because our level two on my vehicle, [01:26:52] it would take four hours to charge it. [01:26:55] And I have a hybrid. [01:26:56] So that's just my suggestion to kind of, [01:26:59] because even at Disney World, it doesn't cost that. [01:27:02] So just letting you know. [01:27:05] Thank you. [01:27:07] Matt, you got any input there? [01:27:10] Well, I don't like it. [01:27:13] No. [01:27:14] As he drives by every gas station. [01:27:16] Right. [01:27:19] No, I mean, I get we need to start recouping a little bit [01:27:24] for it but I mean, I did think, [01:27:27] I guess there's maybe a certain degree [01:27:28] it did kind of draw people in. [01:27:30] Hey, let me go to the city, I can charge her for free. [01:27:32] I'll go have some lunch or something like that. [01:27:35] So it may have drawn some people in there, [01:27:37] but I don't, I suspect we don't have any kind of [01:27:40] data on that to, you know. [01:27:42] I mean, I meant in comparison to other places [01:27:45] you may have had to pay. [01:27:48] No, no, sir, just excuse me, excuse me, excuse me. [01:27:56] But now, I mean, it's a, I mean, in my case, [01:27:59] it's a company expense, but it doesn't seem really [01:28:05] unreasonable now. [01:28:07] I didn't know, I mean, I've never plugged one in, [01:28:09] so I don't even know how to plug it in, [01:28:11] much less figure out how much charge you need. [01:28:15] Any other comment? [01:28:24] Nathan Pollack, Patriot Stokes, [01:28:25] 6153 Massachusetts Avenue. [01:28:28] So as far as the, yeah, I won't take three minutes. [01:28:31] I understand. [01:28:32] I didn't realize you had, I thought you weren't, [01:28:36] I thought it was still open a second ago, [01:28:37] so my apologies for speaking out of turn. [01:28:40] I just thought it was gonna go from one person to the next. [01:28:45] I've been at the park when it was completely packed [01:28:47] and the only four spots were open were the EV spots. [01:28:50] I think you only have, what, four handicap spots? [01:28:55] Is that accurate? [01:28:56] I don't know. [01:28:58] No, no, I think it's about four, four handicap spots [01:29:01] and you got four EV spots that were completely unused [01:29:04] with threats of towing somebody. [01:29:06] So to put it in a perspective, [01:29:08] maybe it was a poor decision to put them there [01:29:10] to begin with. [01:29:12] That's all I have. [01:29:19] How many time for us? [01:29:22] Brought up before the swimming pool hourly fees. [01:29:25] I just wanna understand, [01:29:27] swimming pool rental, two hour minimum, [01:29:32] resident first pool. [01:29:34] Do we give the resident the entire pool? [01:29:39] Opportunity to rent if they choose to for a private party. [01:29:43] Rent the entire pool? [01:29:46] And is that after hours or? [01:29:50] So this is a cost to having the staff there [01:29:53] on an hourly basis. [01:29:55] Thank you. [01:29:57] Because I was thinking they were renting. [01:30:00] like a shelter or something within the pool and maybe I missed that the yeah [01:30:09] obviously Railroad Square is not built yet so we'll see what happens when [01:30:13] that's all said and done the vending permits and the recreation that are [01:30:19] listed there are not in blue but I noticed that on page 6 park vending [01:30:34] $25 someone can vend in the park and sell food apparently all day if they're [01:30:44] able to for example if you have 15 or 20 vendors I'm assuming that those vending [01:30:57] fees are applicable to all of the folks that are parking during us or that are [01:31:02] in there during special events but I noticed that and this is sensitive spot [01:31:07] for me but all special programs additional charges and this is with [01:31:14] recreation but also when we look at the other services and particularly just the [01:31:19] fee alone for the 11 day Chasco Fiesta charged by the city was sixty some [01:31:25] thousand dollars I think we got the biggest share of the of the in kind and [01:31:32] but I think we have to write had to write a check for twenty some thousand [01:31:37] dollars back to the city most of that being and police and so we had paid [01:31:44] nearly ten thousand dollars for our own security at the gates to go through the [01:31:50] things to keep the police to be more in an observational method there but I [01:31:56] think that once again we should be looking at what is happening in other [01:32:01] places and I think some other places are going to go our way I know that the [01:32:07] Pasco County Fair is managed by the city of Dade City they charge nothing and [01:32:13] they identified costs up in the thirty or forty thousand for that event so what [01:32:20] we don't explain in here particularly is how we have events that are city events [01:32:27] and now we're going to we're taking over the fireworks event and we've said [01:32:32] many times here at the Diaz that there are certain events that are city events [01:32:36] and so I have begged for discussion about partnerships with those city events [01:32:41] if you have a charitable event that's raising money for a charitable cause and [01:32:46] you run them through the map the program I understand that but you say by [01:32:54] agreement and when it comes to security I'm not so sure that it's agreement it's [01:33:02] by directive if you want to use the park you have to agree to the charges that [01:33:07] we've decided we need to impose and the that whole program I think leads one to [01:33:18] request what are we doing with the fireworks what are we doing with the [01:33:23] other city recreation events that in many cases draw just as many people to [01:33:28] which our police come out so my plea is to say let's talk about the events that [01:33:33] the city really wants to sponsor and treat them as partners and not treat [01:33:38] them as if they're just another event that is a huge event because I am not [01:33:45] wanting to lower the amount of police presence at the events I'd like the [01:33:50] police presence it's there and it's well-received and it's important and we [01:33:55] have a whole bunch of people coming into our town that you get to observe and [01:33:58] watch I don't think that for an event that we try that there's trying to grow [01:34:04] and be the city event for a hundred years should be thrown into that path so [01:34:10] I know I'm speaking for my own benefit of my nonprofit that I'm part of but [01:34:16] it's its whole goal is to support the city's cultural activities it's not to [01:34:22] raise money for a charity for another charitable it's to raise money for the [01:34:28] public event and I think there's some ideas that I think Councilman Murphy you [01:34:33] brought up about residents having to pay charges so I asked for last year I'm [01:34:39] asking for it again before we get too far in so we just keep repeating the [01:34:43] same thing because I've got a budget to deliver to you for what happened in the [01:34:48] last year that I've been asked to deliver and it's showing a loss you know [01:34:53] I'm believing it wasn't a loss but it's showing a loss I have to look through [01:34:58] the financials before I hand it over to you but but every dollar that's made [01:35:03] from that event goes back into making that event stronger and bigger just like [01:35:06] all our other events so I would love for us to talk about how we're going to deal [01:35:11] with a fireworks show in the future how we're going to solicit sponsorships for [01:35:16] our own events and when you have movies in the park and these music events you [01:35:22] have opportunities for some revenue to be generated there I think but for $25 [01:35:28] per for a vendor you're not really recouping much of the expenses of those [01:35:33] events so I don't know what the answer is but maybe maybe these costs should be [01:35:44] should be reviewed for how we're applying them because anything that's [01:35:50] bigger than it's like well we'll just go back to the rack and we'll let them come [01:35:55] up with an agreement I think that our event and every other event should be [01:35:59] paying these fees but I'd be willing to say we we could handle these fees it's [01:36:15] some of the other fees that are so large that we can't handle so I'm not asking [01:36:22] for special benefit to these fees that are in recreation or in because we [01:36:28] charge a lot more than $25 a day for a vendor there and so that fee seem [01:36:34] reasonable so I think that really we just need to kind of as a group and I'll [01:36:39] try not to you know interfere but let you all talk about what you want from [01:36:43] the Chasco because it's to take a bunch of volunteers and find out that you may [01:36:49] or may not have the support of the city the next year especially if you have a [01:36:54] rain out or something so there's some ideas I think that we could do to make [01:36:58] sure our events are stronger the ones that we put on that we get up in front [01:37:04] of and say we're sponsoring which the city does sponsor that event look down [01:37:09] the road and pick out the whatever the half-dozen events and have a discuss have [01:37:14] a little back and forth because the economic benefit of bringing in things [01:37:37] that we want it's kind of like the mural thing if it's a part of our thing we [01:37:41] want to support it if it's not part of our yeah anyway so overall I see that [01:37:51] you haven't increased the fees a whole lot across the board I do know that the [01:37:55] resident renovation cost is probably a little high for the small ones that come [01:38:04] in because it's like $200 or 1% well 1% is 1% of 20,000 so if somebody comes in [01:38:12] I've heard complaints about air conditioning platforms or certain other [01:38:18] fees so it might be helpful if the improvements were less than $2,000 that [01:38:26] you only charge 50 bucks so maybe for next year or for whatever that's when [01:38:32] people get all angry is when they find themselves paying a lot for a small [01:38:38] thing and maybe it takes the staff just as long to review it I'm not I'm looking [01:38:43] like the I'm seeing the planning department not here but that's when [01:38:50] that's when we hear it whether it's a fire inspection fee or all I had to do [01:38:54] was pour a slab and it's costing me you know $100 $200 more based on the [01:39:01] valuation of your work versus well it is but it starts at 20,000 so I'm saying [01:39:08] it's a piece of evaluation it's a $2,000 project or $5,000 project but you got to [01:39:14] have a minimum because they're gonna have to look at it no matter how cheap [01:39:17] it is I understand that but I'm not sure if there could be a lower a small [01:39:22] project minimum and another renovation minimum you know anyway that's it for [01:39:31] me yes on the topic of these special events I know the special events team [01:39:41] does a wrap-up meeting and they send out like a summary of in-kind costs cost [01:39:47] owed to the city is that something council could be cc'd on since it's just [01:39:51] an email that goes out to the event if council is open to that I like seeing [01:39:56] numbers and it's not anything of interference because it's getting sent [01:39:59] out anyways and we're just on there so if we want to view it we can is that [01:40:04] something that or maybe forwarded from the city manager to us since we only [01:40:08] have like 12 to 18 events per year ranging from small to large because it [01:40:14] shows the breakdown it shows what every events being charged in kind it's public [01:40:18] record so we could manually request it but I figured just make it a [01:40:21] practice that we see it would be helpful when we have our discussion just [01:40:25] to kind of be able to compare and see what we had into the work session yeah [01:40:30] get a breakdown of the special events actually more events oh yeah there's [01:40:35] quite a few and I don't even get the after reports I'd like to take a look at [01:40:41] them man and make sure it's appropriate for you but it's certainly something [01:40:47] that I don't mind passing along yeah I mean especially have that prepared when [01:40:51] we do the in kind when it comes to work sessions and street festivals and all [01:40:57] kind of things that are happening now so to the point of the EVs I also don't [01:41:05] know much about my neighbor down the street has an EV and she charges at home [01:41:11] I heard the finance director talk about comparables to other cities what about [01:41:19] to like the wah-wah down the street that has superchargers do we know what they [01:41:24] charge and if we're competing with them if we're still you know grasping on to [01:41:28] that economic vitality it might it might be hard to hear okay [01:41:32] grasping on to that economic vitality aspect are we still trying to [01:41:37] incorporate that into the vision do we know what the private superchargers [01:41:41] charge around here you only checked with other public entities the public that's [01:41:47] these and where's the nearest public entity that has done it okay all right [01:41:55] well in that case a city does to Dade City [01:42:08] we're staying competitive with them too if we are shifting the focus away from [01:42:11] if we aren't shifting the focus away from economic vitality but if we're just [01:42:15] making it a municipal service then I think the $5 makes sense because you're [01:42:19] it's now a service it's not a it's not a incentive to come here I checked [01:42:25] I just pulled up a map you're right mr. Pollack it is for for for handicapped [01:42:34] spots there is one coasted close to the Cody River but I think that's for the [01:42:38] business on that topic I have two things first Parks and Recreation the kitchen [01:42:45] fee increasing is heroes still have a contract or is that not related [01:42:50] currently have a contract but this is when a private entity wants to use our [01:42:54] kitchen okay I didn't know that was a service that's awesome and then the the [01:43:07] solid waste collection fees if we could just help me understand which of these [01:43:12] are the new single waste hauler ones because I see commercial here but the [01:43:16] residential that's here doesn't look like it's reflecting that looks like our [01:43:21] public works residential or no not public I'm sorry page two what here is [01:43:28] because it looks like it's saying residential collection two days a week [01:43:32] 59 bucks straight quarterly but reaching out to me when we started this saying [01:43:38] that because they were zoned multifamily to or because they were zoned a certain [01:43:45] way they were being charged more is that the case or is it is it a straight fee [01:43:50] for all residential sorry let me back up is the two per week quarterly is that [01:43:58] representing the single waste hauler yes there is no difference based on density [01:44:05] or or am I interpreting this wrong it's charged by dwelling unit dwelling unit [01:44:12] so the two times per week it's $59.28 quarterly per dwelling unit so when we [01:44:21] look at commercial did does that same structure exist where say because my [01:44:27] mind goes to with the commercial we have businesses that obviously have a have a [01:44:38] lower volume but would like to have the same level of pickup there are small [01:44:44] businesses that emulate that residential model where they don't need a dumpster [01:44:48] but we're charging them a substantial amount more and so did we factor that [01:44:54] into the conversation when we did this single waste hauler because we got a lot [01:44:57] of feedback and I think we'd anyone that [01:45:00] and staff would admit that there were some blind spots [01:45:02] that the city manager and staff [01:45:04] have done a great job addressing. [01:45:06] But I think one of those blind spots that still exists, [01:45:07] I'd be happy to provide a list of a few businesses, [01:45:10] I don't have an exhaustive list, [01:45:12] of those that feel that they are not producing [01:45:15] what would be necessary to fall into that commercial status [01:45:18] and that they would like to see their rates adjusted [01:45:23] or given additional pickups. [01:45:26] Is that something I can send to you [01:45:28] and see if that fits in here [01:45:30] or if we can figure a way to work that out? [01:45:34] And to put it on council's radar as a discussion, [01:45:37] potentially, when we're deciding this next year, [01:45:39] if we want to adjust the model with our single waste hauler [01:45:42] to account for their smaller businesses. [01:45:45] On that point, I kind of had that conversation a little bit [01:45:48] about the commercial businesses versus residential. [01:45:50] And some of the feedback was that those commercial properties [01:45:56] sometimes have a different type of trash, [01:45:57] more glass, more different waste than a residential would. [01:46:02] So there was additional costs there. [01:46:04] So that was just something that was thrown out there. [01:46:06] Good point, and to your point, [01:46:09] it may even be strategic when we talk about, [01:46:13] I know our single waste hauler, [01:46:15] when I did my ride-along with them, [01:46:17] they had talked about a couple pain points [01:46:19] they're experiencing. [01:46:20] And one of them was the time in which [01:46:23] they're allowed to do commercial pickups. [01:46:25] And so my thought is, [01:46:26] perhaps some of these commercial fees are inflated [01:46:29] to represent the limited time constraints [01:46:31] they have to do their commercial services. [01:46:34] And if we could find, for example, [01:46:37] city manager, you might know this better than I do, [01:46:39] if I'm using arbitrary numbers, [01:46:41] if the commercial pickup time starts at 6 a.m. [01:46:45] or ends at 6 a.m. or whatever the case may be, [01:46:47] if we back that up as they've requested to 4 a.m., [01:46:51] giving them additional two hours to service our commercial, [01:46:54] maybe they'd be open to lowering their prices [01:46:57] because we're meeting them [01:46:59] to where they can provide their services. [01:47:01] Because that's something they communicate [01:47:02] as their top priority, is they, [01:47:04] logistically it is difficult for them to service commercial [01:47:08] at the given time constraints that our ordinances have. [01:47:12] So if we worked with them, maybe they'd work with us. [01:47:14] So I don't know if that's something to explore, [01:47:16] if there's a noise element or a safety issue. [01:47:20] I'd like to see, if council's open to it, [01:47:23] us probing our commercial a little bit more, [01:47:25] especially we had that conversation earlier [01:47:27] about how we can champion small business. [01:47:30] Well, let's see if we can lower some small businesses' [01:47:32] commercial single waste hauler fee [01:47:35] by extending the time that it's picked up. [01:47:40] Well, there is a noise ordinance. [01:47:42] And typically, when the haulers go out [01:47:46] in advance of the time they're allowed to, [01:47:48] we do hear from the residential community [01:47:54] about complaints of the noise [01:47:57] that's generated from the trucks. [01:47:59] Because most of our commercial district [01:48:03] abuts residential districts. [01:48:06] In the city, there's not a lot of depth [01:48:10] or distance between the districts. [01:48:13] So you'd have to take that into consideration. [01:48:17] Every one of those trucks goes past my house, [01:48:19] and I don't want 20 trucks going by my house at 4 a.m., [01:48:22] I can tell you that. [01:48:23] Because they are loud, and they do take that same route. [01:48:28] When they're leaving their facility, [01:48:29] you're gonna have that whole residential area [01:48:32] that they go through. [01:48:33] And if you're talking getting all those trucks [01:48:35] leaving there at 4 a.m. [01:48:37] Unfortunately, the position we're in, [01:48:39] having this single waste hauler, [01:48:41] is that we aren't negotiating with five haulers anymore. [01:48:47] And so if we do need to adjust, [01:48:49] and like I said, I don't think 5 a.m. is the time, [01:48:51] I think it's a lot different than that. [01:48:53] And so please, if the city manager can present those times, [01:48:57] and maybe in the Friday reports, [01:48:59] we can work with our single waste hauler to say, [01:49:02] look, if you adjust your route. [01:49:04] I feel like we have a lot more strategic advantage now [01:49:07] in having a single waste hauler, [01:49:08] where we can capitalize on the fact [01:49:09] that we can work with them to maybe adjust the route [01:49:11] that is producing noise complaints, [01:49:13] if it means lowering the cost for our small business owners. [01:49:17] And it's just a conversation I want to have, [01:49:19] if the council's open to it, [01:49:21] maybe getting a workshop going, [01:49:23] where we explore the cost, [01:49:25] identify those businesses more exhaustively [01:49:27] than the few I have, [01:49:28] see if it's a problem like the HOAs were, [01:49:31] and see if it's something we can't tackle long term. [01:49:33] Well, I think we need a work session on that. [01:49:34] I think you've got it moving. [01:49:36] Okay, so I'll just present some information. [01:49:38] If the city manager, she can use the report [01:49:40] to have access and we can do it. [01:49:41] And I'm sure they're not out before like 7 right now. [01:49:44] Yeah, we can do communication, use communication. [01:49:47] I'll do communications, if that works for everyone else. [01:49:48] Or just like we had a discussion about the fire inspector. [01:49:51] Perfect, I'll do it. [01:49:53] We're working our way down. [01:49:55] Oh, okay. [01:49:56] Go ahead. [01:49:58] That's all I had. [01:49:59] Oh, okay, sorry. [01:50:00] You can go down, though. [01:50:03] Back to the EV. [01:50:04] So all the chargers in the city are all one level, [01:50:09] like a level two, or we don't have any supercharged. [01:50:11] Well, I thought we did. [01:50:13] Yeah, I thought we did behind there. [01:50:15] So I'm looking at this, [01:50:16] and so each additional hour afterwards is $10. [01:50:20] Now, the supercharger is using a lot more power [01:50:23] than the one like out here in the parking lot. [01:50:28] So the usage is gonna be way different. [01:50:31] Yeah. [01:50:32] Okay, I think I'd have reflected that appropriately [01:50:34] in the fee schedule, then. [01:50:36] And then, and I'm looking at, [01:50:37] like think of this charger out here, [01:50:40] because I use it, and like, [01:50:41] so I've probably been here four hours, [01:50:42] and so it'd be 40, you know, $40, I guess, [01:50:47] according to this, each additional hour afterwards. [01:50:49] So it'd probably be like between 30 and $40, [01:50:52] and that doesn't charge very fast at all. [01:50:55] So I'm kind of thinking that may be a little bit of a, [01:50:59] Yeah, it's a little high for the slow chargers, [01:51:03] and charge more for the fast chargers. [01:51:07] All right. [01:51:10] I'm gonna be prepared to lower the fee, [01:51:13] and I've got a motion getting ready, so. [01:51:17] You know, let's get more information. [01:51:19] Oh, and then the fees that are proposed here, [01:51:22] is that covering the fees that we charge, [01:51:24] that we're incurring now, or no? [01:51:27] So we would cover that $11,000? [01:51:28] Yeah, I didn't see the 10 at the bottom. [01:51:29] Okay. [01:51:31] Yeah, I was gonna, I thought it was supposed to be. [01:51:32] Supercharger. [01:51:35] Do we need a proposal here for accepting these fees? [01:51:40] Yes, we need a motion on the resolution. [01:51:43] Yes. [01:51:45] Is there any one area that we should put on hold? [01:51:48] Maybe the EV charger at this point? [01:51:50] Okay, we'll. [01:51:51] You can remove any fee that you want, [01:51:53] or change any fee that you want. [01:51:54] Is there another fee that you want to remove? [01:51:56] I'm gonna try to make a motion, [01:51:58] and only address them with a small, modest change, [01:52:01] which could be adopted up later, [01:52:03] but I think we ought to go ahead [01:52:04] and approve an EV charging program. [01:52:07] So I'm gonna try, see if I can get a second, [01:52:09] and make a motion to approve the resolution, [01:52:13] number 2024-18, for the comprehensive fee schedule, [01:52:21] with modifying the idling fees [01:52:25] for the first 30-minute grace period down to $3, and. [01:52:32] Let me, before you put numbers on it, [01:52:36] from what I understand, [01:52:37] there's a couple different types of. [01:52:39] Yeah, I'm gonna hit that. [01:52:41] So why don't we just let them figure out a number for us? [01:52:43] I already got it figured out. [01:52:45] See if I can get a second. [01:52:46] So $3 for the first, [01:52:49] after the first 30-minute grace period, $3, [01:52:53] and then each additional hour after, [01:52:57] $3 for the lower level, [01:53:01] and $5 for the supercharger. [01:53:05] So we'll ease into the rates [01:53:07] and take them halfway, kind of, [01:53:10] but to your point, a less fee for the lesser, [01:53:15] for the one that's gonna cause more time to charge. [01:53:18] Right, correct, and the supercharger is gonna be an hour, [01:53:23] versus, you know. [01:53:26] We do have a motion. [01:53:28] All those in favor, signify by aye. [01:53:30] Aye. [01:53:31] Those opposed, five nothing. [01:53:34] Okay, the reappointment of Tim Driscoll [01:53:39] as the city attorney. [01:53:43] We have any public comment on that? [01:53:46] Seeing no one come forward, [01:53:47] we'll bring it back for discussion and vote. [01:53:52] I move to approve. [01:53:55] I'm sorry, we've moved real quick. [01:53:57] Did staff already read that item? [01:53:59] I just read it right now. [01:54:00] Oh, you read it, okay. [01:54:01] I thought staff usually has like a memo to add to it. [01:54:03] It's not a resolution. [01:54:05] Okay. [01:54:08] We have a, we have a. [01:54:09] We have a second. [01:54:10] Okay, we have a second. [01:54:11] This is the city attorney, right? [01:54:12] Yes. [01:54:13] Okay. [01:54:14] I think he's done a fine job while he's here, [01:54:16] and I think that we should renew his tenure here. [01:54:21] Second. [01:54:21] I'm in favor of renewal. [01:54:25] My turn? [01:54:25] I just wanna, I made a point when I was meeting [01:54:29] with the city manager, and it got elected [01:54:32] that any contractual employees that the city council [01:54:37] needs to approve, that I would use the same standard [01:54:41] that was used for me when I was an employee, [01:54:44] and for any employee that's working currently. [01:54:47] And so the most updated version of the evaluation [01:54:53] that I could find was provided by our HR department, [01:54:58] and it breaks it down into quality of work, [01:54:59] quantity of work, interpersonal relationships, [01:55:02] initiative and self-reliance, dependability, [01:55:04] communication, safety, appearance, and attitude. [01:55:06] This is probably outdated at this point in time, [01:55:09] but it's the most recent that could be found. [01:55:11] So I'm gonna go based off of it, [01:55:13] and just say that I think the quality of work [01:55:15] that the city attorney has provided has been exemplary. [01:55:20] Everything you see here is behind the scenes, [01:55:23] him putting together, and so I appreciate his due diligence [01:55:25] and the amount of time he puts into it. [01:55:28] The quantity of work, it's a one-man show, [01:55:31] staff in the office, and he works an incredible amount [01:55:34] to get everything situated, so I appreciate him there. [01:55:37] Interpersonal relationships, he's timely in his responses, [01:55:41] and understands that he's a chartered official [01:55:45] through contract, and so is open to communication. [01:55:49] I'm gonna skip initiative for a second. [01:55:51] Dependability, the only, dependability and communication [01:55:55] I'm gonna combine, in that I have made several requests, [01:55:59] and most of them have been responded to. [01:56:01] I did have to follow up once or twice [01:56:03] on an issue related to the signpoles, [01:56:06] and I think we need to still have a larger conversation [01:56:08] there, because I was given a response, [01:56:10] but I don't think we really nailed down [01:56:13] the rationale behind it, and so I think there's work [01:56:17] that needs to be done there, especially since that was [01:56:18] a constituency-created issue, not one that just was [01:56:23] a spur of the moment of an idea. [01:56:24] This is coming from constituents, and so I think [01:56:26] it's a point that I can go back to them [01:56:27] with a legal grounding for the rationale. [01:56:32] Safety and appearance and attitude, [01:56:33] those are pretty formal, and I don't really have [01:56:35] an HR hat, so I'm gonna skip those, [01:56:37] other than the fact that, I mean, [01:56:38] he's probably the only one up on the dais, [01:56:40] I can't speak for the department heads, [01:56:41] but the only one up on the dais that always wears a tie. [01:56:44] And then back to initiative and self-reliance, [01:56:47] that's not only something I could speak to, [01:56:48] but I'd love if you'd take an opportunity [01:56:50] if you want to talk about any initiatives [01:56:51] that he's undertaken with the city staff, [01:56:53] or that he's especially proud of in the last year, [01:56:55] since our last contract agreement. [01:56:59] Not to put you on the spot. [01:57:00] You want me to address it? [01:57:01] If you have any initiatives you've been working on, [01:57:04] or that you've accomplished, that we voted on. [01:57:07] I can't think of anything that stands out, [01:57:09] it's just something that I'm always doing. [01:57:11] I'm always working with the city manager and her staff [01:57:14] to improve whatever we do, and I have to say [01:57:16] that working with the staff at the city, [01:57:19] I've been doing this for about 35 years, [01:57:21] this is a really good staff that you have, [01:57:24] and we find things, I find things [01:57:26] through discussions with them, [01:57:28] and I look for ways that we can improve that, [01:57:31] either to limit the city's liability, [01:57:33] to make it more fair to the citizens and the residents, [01:57:37] or to improve on our ability to handle [01:57:40] the services that we provide. [01:57:41] So I think it's a constant thing, [01:57:43] I can't really think of anything that jumps out. [01:57:46] Maybe if I sat down, I'd think of something, [01:57:48] but I really don't look at it that way, [01:57:50] I look at it as a continuing responsibility [01:57:53] to make sure that we're always trying to do things [01:57:55] at the highest standard we possibly can, [01:57:57] and I have all the faith in the staff that you have [01:58:00] with your city manager, and the rest of the staff, [01:58:02] and the department heads, and their employees, [01:58:04] that they're constantly doing that as well, [01:58:06] so it's a very synergistic relationship that we have. [01:58:10] Thank you, and the last thing is that you did not ask [01:58:13] for an increase in rates, that is my favorite of the items. [01:58:17] And I will say that with respect to your request [01:58:21] on the sign, we can have a further discussion on that, [01:58:24] because I think that's gonna require the entire council [01:58:28] to weigh in on, because I think it is a very legislative [01:58:32] decision that you would have to make, [01:58:33] and I'd want to see that you've got the support [01:58:36] of fellow members to make that happen. [01:58:39] And that's just the hope, [01:58:41] that's what I expected to come through in the email, [01:58:44] but it seemed more like there's nothing we can do about it, [01:58:47] and maybe perhaps I interpreted it wrong, [01:58:50] but I did see that the sign ordinance [01:58:52] is on our workshops somewhere in the near future, [01:58:55] so looking forward to that, [01:58:57] and maybe we can get together beforehand so we can prep. [01:59:00] I appreciate it. [01:59:02] Okay, so I will say that I've had outreach by our attorney [01:59:07] for his availability to assist and to serve us [01:59:12] as individual council members as well, [01:59:14] so our attorney serves the city council, [01:59:18] not only the city manager, [01:59:20] and I fully understand that he understands that relationship, [01:59:27] and there are some extremely important, I think, [01:59:31] and innovative opportunities that the city has [01:59:34] in our desire to forward partnership agreements, [01:59:38] and I'm particularly interested in the biggest revenue [01:59:43] generation that we can get in our current circumstances [01:59:48] through the recreation service tax, [01:59:49] and I want to make sure that we have a full understanding [01:59:53] of our rights and our arguments to make, [01:59:56] that that could be the first of a number of opportunities. [02:00:00] a partner that, you know, could go beyond. And I think it's important that some of [02:00:07] our legal efforts are also spent in understanding what the county is, how [02:00:12] its tax structure is, and the financial end of things that we don't like to [02:00:17] talk about all the time. But the imposition that was discussed today at [02:00:22] the County Commission, I don't know what the outcome was, of ad valorem taxes on [02:00:27] recreation maintenance and ad valorem taxes on the assessment of street [02:00:34] improvements for residential streets. For those who don't live in the city, we'll [02:00:38] see those additional taxes on their tax bill this year if they're passed. And [02:00:43] those are based on the value of a home, which is really different from the non [02:00:47] ad valorem, you know, equal share to equal person, which kind of surprises [02:00:52] me. But it does generate more money that way, and so the county recognizes the [02:00:58] cost of operating all of the expansions that they've done to their libraries and [02:01:02] rec centers, where our city was the first to do that. And Dade City and some of [02:01:07] Zephyr Hills and others were hard-pressed to be able to provide [02:01:14] those services, and so turned a lot of that over to the county. So our city is [02:01:20] unique. We have the one full-service city in the county. There isn't another [02:01:27] city in this county that offers fire, police, recreation, swimming pool, and all [02:01:37] the activities that we do in our city. And that's because, you know, we do it and [02:01:43] we do it not only for our city residents, but so that we are the good neighbors to [02:01:49] our county residents. And I think we're finally at the right place and time [02:01:54] where the county recognizes the value of our city, whether it's at the tourism [02:01:59] meeting or at the transportation meeting. I'm really excited that all of us have [02:02:05] that attitude, because for a long time we were the red-headed stepchild, and we, [02:02:10] you know, and their folks were after us because we didn't have an impact fee. I [02:02:14] think we are going to have to start considering letting some of these county [02:02:18] fees potentially become fees to our residents, and then lowering our own [02:02:23] property taxes. As example, the maintenance of the recreation fees, if [02:02:29] they pass that in a year from now, if we could get a true group of people that [02:02:35] are using our facilities to let us have that share, I think that that is the [02:02:40] solution we really need to economically keep our CRA alive before it gets, you [02:02:47] know, too hard. Yeah, I'm asking that as we look forward, that that would be my [02:02:53] request, is to make sure that from a legislative standpoint, that you increase [02:03:00] your efforts, I guess, in terms of of our City Council initiatives as well. It's a [02:03:09] big job to take care of the city. We let the city manager run the operation of [02:03:13] the city, but some of these bigger policy issues need to have the [02:03:18] leadership of the County Commission and the City Council to help to push those [02:03:22] through to our benefit. So not only working with them as a team, but working [02:03:27] with our own administration, you are in a position where you can help to make that [02:03:33] happen, and I hope that you will take the opportunity to to do that. So I will

   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. 13.n

    Re-Appointment of Timothy P. Driscoll, Esq. as City Attorney

    approved

    Agenda item was nominally the re-appointment of Timothy P. Driscoll, Esq. as City Attorney. The transcript captured remarks praising the City Attorney's accessibility and service before the council voted in favor of the motion.

    • motion:Re-appoint Timothy P. Driscoll, Esq. as City Attorney. (passed)

    👤Timothy P. Driscoll

    ▶ Jump to 2:00:34 in the video

    ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

    Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

    [02:00:34] improvements for residential streets. For those who don't live in the city, we'll [02:00:38] see those additional taxes on their tax bill this year if they're passed. And [02:00:43] those are based on the value of a home, which is really different from the non [02:00:47] ad valorem, you know, equal share to equal person, which kind of surprises [02:00:52] me. But it does generate more money that way, and so the county recognizes the [02:00:58] cost of operating all of the expansions that they've done to their libraries and [02:01:02] rec centers, where our city was the first to do that. And Dade City and some of [02:01:07] Zephyr Hills and others were hard-pressed to be able to provide [02:01:14] those services, and so turned a lot of that over to the county. So our city is [02:01:20] unique. We have the one full-service city in the county. There isn't another [02:01:27] city in this county that offers fire, police, recreation, swimming pool, and all [02:01:37] the activities that we do in our city. And that's because, you know, we do it and [02:01:43] we do it not only for our city residents, but so that we are the good neighbors to [02:01:49] our county residents. And I think we're finally at the right place and time [02:01:54] where the county recognizes the value of our city, whether it's at the tourism [02:01:59] meeting or at the transportation meeting. I'm really excited that all of us have [02:02:05] that attitude, because for a long time we were the red-headed stepchild, and we, [02:02:10] you know, and their folks were after us because we didn't have an impact fee. I [02:02:14] think we are going to have to start considering letting some of these county [02:02:18] fees potentially become fees to our residents, and then lowering our own [02:02:23] property taxes. As example, the maintenance of the recreation fees, if [02:02:29] they pass that in a year from now, if we could get a true group of people that [02:02:35] are using our facilities to let us have that share, I think that that is the [02:02:40] solution we really need to economically keep our CRA alive before it gets, you [02:02:47] know, too hard. Yeah, I'm asking that as we look forward, that that would be my [02:02:53] request, is to make sure that from a legislative standpoint, that you increase [02:03:00] your efforts, I guess, in terms of of our City Council initiatives as well. It's a [02:03:09] big job to take care of the city. We let the city manager run the operation of [02:03:13] the city, but some of these bigger policy issues need to have the [02:03:18] leadership of the County Commission and the City Council to help to push those [02:03:22] through to our benefit. So not only working with them as a team, but working [02:03:27] with our own administration, you are in a position where you can help to make that [02:03:33] happen, and I hope that you will take the opportunity to to do that. So I will [02:03:38] support the motion this year. I still believe that from time to time it's [02:03:43] important for elected bodies to check their engineering firms and and to make [02:03:50] sure that we are getting the right value for the services. The public expects that, [02:03:56] but there's so much work to be done, and we're so much in the middle of it all [02:04:00] right now, this is not the time to do it. I will cast my vote with you this year. [02:04:05] Yeah, I just I'm gonna say that if I stop by your office, you'll put aside [02:04:09] whatever you're doing, you know, to sit down and talk with me, and I think that's [02:04:13] a plus. I don't sometimes always get into Debbie's office. She plays that I'm working thing, you know, I'm just kidding. [02:04:23] The door's always open. [02:04:25] Yeah, it is. [02:04:27] So she knows when you're coming. [02:04:29] She can hide. [02:04:31] She can hide. [02:04:33] I appreciate that, and I just think that you talk about the years of service that you've done for us, [02:04:39] you know, we don't ever hesitate to say, you know, hey, you guys should take a look at this. [02:04:44] You probably get a couple bucks for this idea or, you know, something. So, you know what, we [02:04:49] appreciate you backing us, and I think we saw a great example of that with our [02:04:52] work session today. You said, yeah, yeah, yeah, you can do that, you can do that, and [02:04:59] that's what we want, because, you know, you're the professional, so [02:05:02] appreciate that very much. So all those in favor, signify by aye. [02:05:06] Aye. [02:05:07] Those opposed. So Matt, we want to start with you. [02:05:10] Actually, I'm. [02:05:12] Let's hold communication left to CRA. [02:05:14] We have CRA? [02:05:16] I thought we weren't doing CRA. [02:05:18] I think we're skipping it. What are we doing? [02:05:19] We're not doing CRA. [02:05:20] No. [02:05:21] There's no way. [02:05:22] We can do it. [02:05:23] Maybe we'll all try to hold our tongues a little bit. [02:05:27] We got it? We got this? [02:05:30] Well, can we have a roll call, please? [02:05:33] Chairman Davis? [02:05:34] Yes. [02:05:35] Director Mothershead? [02:05:36] Here. [02:05:37] Director Murphy? [02:05:38] Here. [02:05:39] Director Altman? [02:05:40] Here. [02:05:41] Director Butler? [02:05:42] Here. [02:05:43] Executive Director Manns? [02:05:44] Here. [02:05:45] City Attorney Driscoll? [02:05:46] Here. [02:05:47] The approval of the August 1st, 2024 CRA meeting minutes. [02:05:50] Move to approve. [02:05:51] I'll second. [02:05:52] All those in favor? [02:05:53] Aye. [02:05:54] Aye. [02:05:56] All right. [02:05:57] Now getting to the nitty-gritty here. [02:05:59] Main Street entryway feature, a signature feature project, [02:06:03] close out. [02:06:05] Go for it. [02:06:07] Yes, sir. [02:06:08] The request before the CRA board this evening is to review [02:06:13] and consider the approval of the August 1st, [02:06:16] 2024 CRA meeting minutes. [02:06:19] The request before the CRA board this evening is to review [02:06:24] and consider the approval of the attached deductive change order [02:06:27] in the amount of $2,147.73, [02:06:31] and the final pay request in the amount not to exceed $241,871.80 [02:06:37] from Augustine Construction for the completion of the Main Street [02:06:40] entryway signature feature project. [02:06:44] This project also includes the city's Main Street Courtyard project [02:06:48] as a change order approved by the board of directors at its regular [02:06:52] meeting held on March 28th, 2024.

    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. 14Communications▶ 2:06:55
12. 15Adjournment▶ 2:20:34
13. 1Call to Order – Roll Call
14. 2

    Pledge of Allegiance

    Pledge of Allegiance.
15. 3

    Moment of Silence

    Moment of Silence.
16. 4

    Approval of July 30 and 31, 2024 Budget Work Session Minutes

    Approval of minutes from the July 30 and 31, 2024 Budget Work Sessions.
17. 5

    Approval of August 1, 2024 Special Meeting Minutes

    Approval of minutes from the August 1, 2024 Special Meeting.
18. 6

    Approval of August 6, 2024 Regular Meeting Minutes

    Approval of minutes from the August 6, 2024 Regular Meeting.
19. 7

    Approval of August 21, 2024 Budget Work Session Minutes

    Approval of minutes from the August 21, 2024 Budget Work Session.
20. 8

    Proclamation - Bob Langford

    Proclamation honoring Bob Langford.

    👤Bob Langford
21. 9

    Proclamation - Library Card Sign Up Month and Special Recognition of Library Card Design Contest Winners

    Proclamation declaring Library Card Sign Up Month, with special recognition of Library Card Design Contest winners Shaun Feagles and Faith Rogo.

    👤Faith Rogo👤Shaun Feagles#Library Card Design Contest#Library Card Sign Up Month
22. 10Vox Pop for Items Not Listed on the Agenda or Listed on Consent Agenda
23. 11.a

    Purchases/Payments for City Council Approval

    on consent

    Consent agenda item for approval of purchases and payments.
24. 12.a

    Second Reading, Ordinance No. 2024-2292: Amendments to TDR Ordinance

    Second reading of an ordinance amending the Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) ordinance.

    Ord. Ordinance No. 2024-2292

    #Transfer of Development Rights (TDR)
25. 12.b

    Second Reading, Ordinance No. 2024-2294: Rezoning for the Cottages at Oyster Bayou

    Second reading of an ordinance rezoning property for the Cottages at Oyster Bayou development.

    Ord. Ordinance No. 2024-2294

    #Cottages at Oyster Bayou#Rezoning
26. 13.a

    Board Appointment: Carol Kinnard, Historic Preservation Board

    Appointment of Carol Kinnard to the Historic Preservation Board.

    👤Carol Kinnard#Historic Preservation Board
27. 13.b

    Board Appointments: Flood Risk and Preparedness Public Information Committee

    Board appointments to the Flood Risk and Preparedness Public Information Committee.

    #Flood Risk and Preparedness Public Information Committee
28. 13.c

    Request for Funding for Hispanic Heritage Month Cultural Event

    Request for funding to support a Hispanic Heritage Month cultural event.

    #Hispanic Heritage Month
29. 13.d

    Recreation and Aquatics Center Shade Sail Replacement Project

    Consideration of the Recreation and Aquatics Center Shade Sail Replacement Project.

    #Recreation and Aquatics Center#Shade Sail Replacement Project