I'll call in order the November 20, 2025 City Council Meeting of the City of Clearwater, Florida. This time I'd like to announce that if you'd like to address the council tonight, to please complete a comment card. Comment cards are located by the clerk seated to the right of the dais. When called to speak, please hand your card to the clerk. This time I ask for everyone to rise. Well, we have an invocation tonight given by Father Bob Swift from St. Francis of the CC, and then remain standing afterwards for the Pledge of Allegiance. Good evening. Let us pray. Heavenly Father and God of peace, we invite you to preside over this meeting. May there be an embracing unity of spirit. Help this good council to listen politely to others as they share their points of view, always striving to serve the greater good. Amid all the calamity, the conflict, the confusion that just screams for our leaders' attention, we pray our council members will be filled with your spirit so they may serve with a special love, a special love of community that includes measures of safety for all of our citizens and visitors. And guide and inspire them, we pray, with the words of St. John XXIII. In essential matters, let there be unity. In non-essential matters, liberty. And in all matters, let there be charity. We ask this in your glorious name, Father. Amen. Thank you, Father. Please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance. The Pledge of Allegiance is to the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, a nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice. Before we proceed further in tonight's meeting, I'd like to introduce our day. As tonight, to my very far left, we have Deputy City Clerk Nicole Sprague. To her right, we have our City Clerk, Rosemary Cole. Good evening. To her right is our City Attorney, David Margolis. Good evening. His right is Council Member Ryan Cotton. Good evening. To my left is Council Member Mike Menino. Good evening. To my right is Council Member David Albritton. Good evening. To his right is Vice Mayor Lena Tickshere. Good evening. And to her right is City Manager Jeffery. That will move to Item 4.1 on the agenda, and that is November Service Award. We have one tonight, and that is our 35-year Employee Award. And for that, I'd like to call forward Lisa Perkins from CGS Energy. Next time, I'll ask the City Manager to read recognition. Lisa began her career at CGS Energy, formerly Clearwater Gas System, as a temporary accounting clerk, and was officially hired as a full-time accounting clerk, November 26, 1990. In 1995, she was promoted to a customer service representative in the gas sales office, assisting in new customer accounts. In 1997, she transferred to the customer service department, and in 1999, she returned to the gas division as the LP customer service representative. She handled all LP customers in 20 municipalities in two counties. She supported drivers, field crews, and customers alike. She was promoted to customer service specialist in 2015, taking on the CGS festival tracking previously handled by her supervisor, and taking over the LP billing detail previously handled by UCS. After a job audit was done in 2020, she was promoted to senior customer service representative. For over 25 years, Lisa served as the LP gas expert. Answering any and every question related to LP gas until the sale in 2023. She now serves as customer service representative, too, continuing to grow and learn along the way in all departments. Lisa's dedication has not gone unnoticed. She's been named the City of Clearwater Employee of the Month three times, and in one exceptional year, 2002, was honored as both the City Employee of the Year and the CGS Employee of the Year. Lisa continues to represent CGS Energy with enthusiasm and heart across a variety of charitable events and committees. She has served as the member of the City Achievement Awards Committee for 25 years since its inception in 2000, and was the coordinator for the annual food basket drive for the last 17 years, and was the chairperson for the United Way Day of Caring for 20 years. She has also acted as team captain for both Paint Your Heart Out and the World Changes Project. Her compassion truly shined in moments of service and kindness. One memorable example was when she assisted an elderly customer who had fallen in the parking lot. Lisa not only accompanied the woman to the hospital, but returned the next day to drive her home, eventually becoming friends. This is just one of the many instances where Lisa's empathy and care for others have stood out. Beyond her professional contributions, Lisa is known as the resident photographer and poet of CGS Energy, capturing both joyful and solemn moments that have become cherished memories for her colleagues. Her workspace is filled with pictures of her beloved daughter, Heather, son-in-law, Ricky, and granddaughter, Jordan, chronologizing every stage of their lives, a clear reflection of Lisa's love for family. As the longest-serving employee at CGS Energy, Lisa is a true wellspring of institutional knowledge, history, and connection. She even participates in regular lunches with retired CGS associates to mean strong bonds that have been built over decades. Whether through a warm smile, a thoughtful gift, or a heartfelt gesture, Lisa is always thinking of others. Her big heart, dedication, unwavering spirit make her not just a valued employee, but a vital part of the CGS Energy family. CGS Energy is blessed to have such a dedicated associate as Lisa for the past 35 years. She exemplifies the values of superior public service and contributes to a high-performing government through her dedication, professionalism, and consistent excellence. Thank you, Lisa, for serving CGS Energy and the citizens of Clearwater. Thank you. Well, you know, we get to 35 years like Lisa, and I say this over and over again, but I'm just so impressed with Lisa's commitment to CGS Energy. It's not just been a commitment to her job, her workplace. It's been a commitment to our citizens in our city. And, Lisa, we thank you so much for your dedication to Clearwater. That will move to Item 4.2 on the agenda, and the Clearwater Civic Champion Award presentation. For that, I'd like to call on Vice Mayor Nina Tickshere. Thank you. So, as we're all aware, we're living in a world where negativity is bombarding us at an alarming rate, and it can be crippling, it can be debilitating. And so, I think it's especially important to pivot and showcase or shine light on those who are positive and have a positive impact in our city and our community and to celebrate them. So, with that in mind, it is my great privilege today to present the Clearwater Civic Champion Award to someone who has made an immeasurable impact to our city, someone who brings energy, passion, and genuine love for Clearwater and to everything she does. And that person is none other than the one and only Eleanor Leida. I've known her for many years, and let me tell you, if you haven't had the pleasure of meeting her, you're missing out. Eleanor is the person who walks into a room and the whole place just gets brighter. She's the one with a smile that could light up downtown Clearwater, and her positivity is absolutely contagious. But Eleanor isn't just about making people feel good. She's a doer. If there's something that needs doing, whether it's organizing an event, lending a hand, or, yes, digging up plants from abandoned lots to help beautify our city, you can count on Eleanor to be there, sleeves rolled up, and shovel in hand. Eleanor is the first person to step in when there is a need, whether it's supporting local initiatives, starting up community groups like the East Gateway Association, or helping to organize projects that make Clearwater a better place. Eleanor does it all. She doesn't just talk about making change. She jumps right in when others merely talk about someday. Eleanor is already making things happen. And, of course, we can't forget her signature accessory, her I Love Clearwater button. Honestly, I think Eleanor might own a patent to it. It's more than just an accessory. It's a lifestyle. Her love for this city isn't just about what she wears. It's something that she lives every single day. She's a walking, talking testament to what it means to love your community. Now, I have to admit, one of the greatest mysteries about Eleanor is her age. Seriously, no one knows her age. It's like trying to figure out how many grains of sand in Clearwater Beach. Impossible. But I'll tell you this, though whatever her age is, she has the energy of someone who's just getting started. I suspect she has secretly discovered the fountain of youth, because the rest of us are definitely struggling to keep up. Eleanor, you inspire all of us. You inspire me. Your dedication, Tyler's work ethic, and passion for Clearwater are nothing short of remarkable. Your, hold on a second, I don't want to miss one word because you deserve every single one. You're the kind of person who makes all of us want to do more, be more, and give more to our city. So with all the admiration in the world, I present you with the Clearwater Civic Champion Award. You've earned this recognition, and frankly, it's about time. Thank you, Eleanor. I don't want to say hi to us. I don't want to say hi to us. Are you going to say something? I'm going to get you confused. What's the hell here? Start over here. Start over here. Yeah. Eleanor. Come on, let us congratulate you, and then on your way out here. I wasn't expecting it, and I just don't have words to express how I really feel. I love you guys. Thank you. Thank you. No, you're not. Yeah, let's just watch a step here. Thanks so much. Congratulations. Thanks for everything. Thank you for everything. We should be thanking you. You've done so much. You've really supported me a lot. You've done so much. This is all for you. Oh, that's nice. Thank you. Hey, Ryan. No, this is her. Eleanor is one of these people where I don't wish that I had her energy at her age. I wish I had her energy now. She just is the energizer buddy for our community, and particularly the East Gateway area. She has really, really done amazing work and touched so many lives with all your work, Eleanor. Congratulations on this award. We'll move to item 5.1 on the agenda. Approve the minutes of the November 6, 2025 City Council meeting. Minutes. Motion to approve the minutes. So moved. Second. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Unanimous. Are there any items to be pulled from the consent agenda tonight? Yes. Council members, I received a request to remove items 6.4, 6.5, 6.6, 6.7, and 6.11. Is there a motion to approve those items? Approve the consent agenda except for those items. So moved. Second. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Unanimous. We'll do item 6.4. Item 6.4. Approve a purchase order to Pinellas Regional Information Management Enterprise for the personnel and operating expense of Prime in the amounts of $323,537. And authorize the appropriate official executes. Good evening, Mayor, City Councilmembers. Mike Wallach, Deputy Chief of Police. As Chief Gandy mentioned at Monday's work session, the item before you is an annual payment to Prime, the Pinellas Regional Information Management Enterprise for $323,537 for the Hexagon Project. Prime will reimburse the city of Clearwater $246,320.40 per CAD legacy system. So the net to Prime will be $77,216.60. I'll be happy to answer any questions. Anyone here from the public tonight desire to speak to the Gandy on 6.5? I'm Mr. Haluba. And Ms. Texera, this may be a little negative. The interlocal agreement between Clearwater Police and other municipalities in Pinellas County is really kind of a joke. It's a meaningless agreement because right here in the documentation, it states Pinellas County, that is PCSO, is responsible for all 911 call-taking and dispatch for all Pinellas County Fire Department, EMS, and first responders throughout Pinellas County, Florida. On the other hand, there may be something positive here in that this agreement does erode some of the independence of these small, some people would say Pissaddy Police Departments, Largo, of course Clearwater, and the others. The good thing is that Pinellas County Sheriff's Office oversees these organizations, especially Clearwater Police, who, you know, they really don't like very much. Gandy and Wallach, who made the trip down from Pasco County Forest and Slaughter, in the past have allowed Clearwater Police officers to hold their official positions while engaged in public corruption. They didn't stop it. PCSO did. It's a good thing PCSO exposed the corruption that seems to be going on with Clearwater Police on a fairly regular basis. It does, you know, indicate how compromised Gandy, Slaughter, and Mr. Wallach really are. Since it's meaningless, you should both know. Does anyone else hear from the public that I desire to speak to this agenda? Seeing none, is there any council discussion? Not as there a motion. Move to approve agenda item 6.4. Second. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Unanimous. Agenda item 6.5. Approve acceptance of the Florida Department of Transportation's Speeding and Aggressive Driving 2026 Grant Award in the amounts of $75,000 for police overtime and authorizing appropriate officials to execute same. Good evening, Mayor, City Council members. Again, Mike Wallach, Deputy Chief of Police. As Chief Genshi mentioned on Monday's work session, the item before you is a $75,000 F Grant Overtime Opportunity for Speeding and Aggressive Driving. The grant contains both an education component and a public engagement component. The reason why we're here before you is there's an identification clause before the grant. I'll be happy to answer any questions. Yeah. Do you want to hear from the public desire to speak to this agenda? I'm Mr. Haluba. This $75,000 for speeding and aggressive driving infractions is really a drop in the bucket. It's not going to change a thing. Now, I heard Gandy the other day, and in my opinion, he made a very lame, disjointed presentation, but tonight we get nothing from Mr. Wallach. The only takeaway from Gandy's presentation is that traffic enforcement in Clearwater is sloppy and discretionary. It's a sloppy and discretionary policing activity. Clearwater Police has a history of questionable clean traffic stops. Nicholas Paloma, false imprisonment and sexual battery following a traffic stop. Let's not forget Violet Lou Hatcher, Mr. Wallach. After years of complaints and warnings, some of them directed to Gandy and Wallach in person, four years of progressive discipline guidelines didn't stop his bad behavior. Finally, he was terminated. This money may only cause and allow more questionable traffic stops by Clearwater Police. Mr. Rector, that should hit you at home. It wasn't enforced when Trevor Rector was pulled over and taken to jail. Well, you know, stick to the agenda item. This is about a grant. This is about traffic enforcement. Want me to name some other people? It has nothing to do with the grant. Stop interrupting me, sir. You're out of order. You're out of order. So stick to the talking about the grant. There is no safeguards in place to make sure this money is not misused. The project activity contact is our old friend, Lieutenant Jared Stiff, who used to be the sergeant-at-arms here. Now, this public document does provide his email. So, you know, anybody that's got a question about traffic enforcement, email him. But even better, it gives his cell phone number, 727-224-7193. Also has his cell phone number on it. Call this guy. Vote no. You're out of order. Does anyone else desire to speak to this agenda? If not, is there a motion? Motion to approve. Agenda item 6.5. Second. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Agenda item 6.6. Approved a five-year agreement with Axon Incorporated of Scottsdale, Arizona for Axon Sky Hero drone packages consisting of drones, robots, pole cameras, associated accessories, warranty, and training in the amounts of $96,760.80 in accordance with City Code of Warrant to Section 2.563, paren 1, paren A, single source, and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. Good evening, Mayor, Council. Lieutenant Justin Howard with the Clearwater Police Department. I'm here today seeking to replace existing equipment due to the equipment being an end-of-life. The replacement equipment is going to be purchased through Axon and is the Sky Hero technology package discussed during the work session. The package consists of interior drones, robots, and pole cameras. It comes with a full warranty for five years with built-in replacements and upgrades during the term. Happy to answer your questions. So anyone who's hearing from the public is already speaking to you. Mr. Lube, I've ruled you out before you begin, and the time starts, right? I've ruled you out of order twice. I'd ask you to stick to this agenda item, which talks about drones, robots, and computers. I will take that under advisement, and I appreciate it if you don't interrupt me, because that's out of order. Well, that's been a warning. You're out of order twice. There he goes again. Axion. Now, we heard Mr. Gandy. No, it wasn't. It was this guy, whoever he is. This is money for drones, robots, pole cameras, and associated accessories, whatever that means. If this equipment is at the end of its life, let it die. There's reasons why Clearwater Police is reviled and criticized so much, and this is one reason why, because people don't want to be under surveillance all the time. In this agreement, Clearwater Police must share de-identified segments of agency content, whatever that is. Maybe you can answer that, but you don't, because these people are too scared to ask a question. De-identified segments of agency content. What is that? So, Clearwater Police is not only going to collect random stuff on everybody and give it to Axion, but de-identified could mean that Clearwater Police stages events, has them recorded, you know, to alter reality to their benefit. This is nothing short of wrongful mass surveillance, and if it's worn out, let it go. This agreement and resultant data gathering defines totalitarianism, Mr. Rector. Total surveillance promotes repossession of free speech rights, the free speech rights, Mr. Rector, that are guaranteed in the U.S. Constitution. I would petition all of you to not be scared of this or be cowered, cowered into a corner. This is a vote no. Does anyone else from the public tonight desire to speak to agenda item 6.6? If there is any none, is there any council discussion? If not, is there a motion? Motion to approve agenda item 6.6. Second. All those in favor? Aye. Aye. Opposed? Anonymous. Agenda item 6.7. Approved first amendment to the Clearwater Undergrounding of Electric Utilities Project interlocal agreement with Pinellas-Sun Coast Transit Authority and authorized appropriate officials to execute same. Evening, council members. Marcus Williamson Public Works Director is discussed at the work session. This will be a pass-through from PSTA for some additional work they have to do for the CSX with Duke, so it's just a straight pass-through for us. Okay. Does anyone hear from the public tonight desire to speak to agenda item 6.7? Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of the council, city manager, whoops, city attorney's not here. Good evening. I am still Bill Johnson, and I thank you for your service to our fine city. I rise tonight to suggest a pause in this agenda item for the greater good of our struggling downtown. Clearly, this underground electrical drop to the CSX signal box is needed, but this is a chance to put a pause on this project and address the bigger character of Myrtle as Clearwater's major north-south main street. Main streets in this country are generally not burdened by above-ground power lines. The Development Code, Section 3-912, requires undergrounding of power lines when development occurs unless it's impractical. Impractical. Clearly, it is not impractical because the city is doing this at the new city hall just down the street, but new construction is underway on the northwest corner of Chestnut and Myrtle as well. Here's another picture of that. Instead of undergrounding at that building, an erector set of extensions have been appended to the existing power poles. Let's take the opportunity to underground all of the above-ground power lines along Myrtle between Chestnut and Cleveland, or better, between Turner and True Street. These are in Clearwater's downtown CRA, so it would be appropriate to use CRA funds, if not funded by other developers or Duke Energy, because at the end of September, the city had $20 million in the CRA special development fund. The future holds great potential for the development of the current county complex properties downtown. One hopes that the quality of that development will be like Water Street in Tampa. Let's set the level of standard for this project as well, which will be the gateway to our future downtown. Thank you very much. Thank you. Anyone else here with the public desire to speak to agenda item 6.7? If not, is there any council discussion? If not, is there a motion? Move to approve agenda item 6.7. Second. Opposed and favor? Aye. Aye. Opposed? Unameless. Good line, 6.11. Approved the 2026 City Council Meeting Schedule. Council members, as reviewed during the work session, I reviewed the anomalies, but I did want to make note in terms of one of the things that council did want me to do was schedule the strategic planning session. I could not find a date that works with all the calendars, so I did remove that date from the proposed calendar, and I'll bring back at another time when we can find a date that works for everyone. But otherwise, there were no other changes with the consensus of making those changes, canceling the one meeting in March, and then moving the April meeting, the second meeting, to the following week, which would be April 20th and the 23rd. Moving the January, there was a January meeting that we were going to move the strategic one. The strategic plan is the one that I removed from the proposed schedule. I'll bring it back once I can get a date that works for everyone. Okay. So there will be no meeting that week, I guess. Yeah. So that's why it's eliminated from the calendar. Okay. So is there anyone here from the public tonight that should I speak to 6.11? I'm Mr. Haluba, and I do have a copy of this proposed meeting schedule, which is still somewhat in flux, and that's perfectly okay. We've got a ways to go before it's 2026. But hopefully one of the things that can change is that I don't see anything on this meeting schedule about allowing any public comment, and I think that's just, you know, downright wrongful. Nothing about public comment. The city council continues to suppress free speech, and it continues to circumvent the rights promised citizens by the U.S. Constitution. It's amazing that you all have come to this conclusion. There's no town hall meetings on here, and there may be a reason why. I don't know what the real reason is, but the town hall meetings that were done were a disaster. There was nothing accomplished. I don't think any of you were really listening. You were more worried about, you know, the situation. One reason the town hall meetings were a disaster is, Mr. Rector, you allowed Frank Anthony Figueroa, Clearwater Police employee, to heckle everybody, not once, twice. And it disrupted the meetings that you were in charge of. So we're not having any more town hall meetings because they were disruptive? I don't think that's a good reason. But allowing anybody, including people that you don't like, who I could name, to become, you know, a heckler's veto on the proceedings is just wrongful. But I really believe that this schedule should have some time on it for public comment some way or another. And it does not, as we stand here today. Does anyone else here tonight desire to speak to the agenda item 6.11? Hearing saying none, is there any council discussion? If not, is there a motion? Move to approve agenda item 6.11. Second. Opposed, in favor? Aye. Opposed, unanimous. Agenda item 7.1. Approved amendments to the Community Development Code, updating the city's plotting process to address statutory changes pursuant to Senate Bill 784-2025, an act relating to plotting, and pass Ordinance 9856 on first reading. Good evening. Lauren Matske, Planning and Development. So tonight I'll be presenting two ordinances that are codifying changes that were made based on this year's legislative session. This ordinance, which is 9856-25, addresses the city's plotting process. Amending the code to move the authority to approve a final plat from the city council to the community development coordinator, which for the record is the planning and development director. So this would make it an administrative process consistent with the statutes. At Monday's work session, I reviewed our process and how the current plotting process works and how we were working with the city surveyor to identify how this process would work. But in short, the final plats, they'll continue to be reviewed by the city surveyor who will sign off on anything related to that, his statutory authority. And then the community development coordinator will make sure that the development review committee reviews to ensure there's conformance with the preliminary plat that was approved or the prior preliminary plat, sorry. So this ordinance also incorporates the statutory changes required for notices at both stages of the plotting process, as well as some staff proposed clarifications to the minor lot adjustment provisions. So as noted in the staff report, the proposed amendments are consistent with Clearwater 2045, which is the city's comprehensive plan, and further the purposes of the community development code. The community development board considered this item at its meeting on Tuesday and unanimously recommended approval. Can we go ahead and get a reading on this? Mayor, we have ordinance number 9856-25, an ordinance of the city of Clearwater, Florida, making amendments to the community development code by amending article 4, development review and other procedures, division 7, subdivision plats, section 4-701, purpose and applicability, section 4-702. Required approval, section 4-704, staff review and report decision, section 4-706, final plat review, staff and section 4-709, standards for review, adding new section 4-704, submittal of platting application, deleting section 4-705, community development board decision and section 4-707. City commission review, decision, final plat, and renumbering, renaming sections accordingly, certifying consistency with the city's comprehensive plan and proper advertisement, providing for separability and providing an effective date. Does anyone here from the public desire to speak to agenda item 7.1? I guess not. Thought maybe, but we don't know. So with that, is there any council discussion? Now is there a motion. Motion to approve agenda item 7.1. Is there a second? Second. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Unanimous. Okay. General item 7.2. Approved amendments to the Community Development Code, updating certain development review processes and timeframes to reflect current processes and address statutory changes pursuant to Senate Bill 1080-2025, an act relating to local government land regulation, and pass ordinance 9857-25 on first reading. Good evening again. Lauren Maskey, Planning and Development. So as I just mentioned, this addresses the development timeframes changes that came forth in Senate Bill 1080. As I noted at work session, these previews have already been implemented by staff as they're already in effect, so this codifies those changes into our Community Development Code. And also many of the timeframes were already part of our processes over many years in advance of this. So in lieu of walking through everything in detail again, because we went through this at work session, I'll just touch on a few things for the benefit of the public. So regarding the notifications and timeframes, the ordinance adds a requirement that there be notification when applications are submitted. It provides applicants time to address any issues, if there are any, with application completeness, and it codifies the timeframe by when the city must approve, approve with conditions, or deny any applications, or deny any applications, based on the type of approval required, and that would be either 120 or 180 days. There are two tweaks to the code established, to the established timeframes that staff is proposing. One would be that the Development Review Committee would be given 25 days to make a determination of legal sufficiency from the application deadline, where today it's 18 days to make that determination, and it's based on the letter issuing that the application is complete. So again, this ties to when the clock starts, and it allows staff to not be penalized if we issue our completeness letters earlier in the process. Additionally, requiring that the Community Development Board meeting be within 38 days instead of 33 days from the DRC's finding of legal sufficiency, and this is just kind of the math that works based on some of the longer months. It gives a little bit of room there. So these are all detailed on page three of the staff report. The second type of change was to the minimum standard development review process, the minimum standard development process, sorry, which is an administrative review process. Historically, or since my understanding is since the code was implemented in 1999, staff has always processed these as building permits instead of requiring a first round of review prior to the applicant being eligible for building permits. So this formally codifies the practice that's been in place for a long time. And last, staff proposed a variety of ad hoc changes to improve implementation or readability, to bring consistency with current practices. These were all outlined on pages four and five of the staff report. So these, in short, these are found to be consistent with the city's comprehensive plan and the Community Development Code. The Community Development Board considered these at their meeting on Tuesday and unanimously recommended approval. Then we get a reading on this. We have ordinance number 9857-25, an ordinance of the City of Clearwater, Florida, making amendments to the Community Development Code by amending Article 3, Development Standards, Section 3-914, General Standards for Level 1 and Level 2 Approvals, by amending Article 4, Development Review and Other Procedures, Division 1, Required Permits and Approvals, Division 2, General Procedures, Division 3, Permitted Uses, Level 1, Division 4, Permitted Uses, Level 2, Division 5, Appeals, and Division 6, Level 3 Approvals. By amending Article 5, Decision-Making and Administrative Bodies, Division 7, Community Development Coordinator, certifying consistency with the city's comprehensive plan and proper advertisement, providing for severability and providing for an effective date. Does anyone here from the public tonight desire to speak to Agenda Item 7.2? Hearing and seeing none, is there any council discussion? There's no discussion, is there a motion? To approve. Agenda Item 7.2. Second. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Unanimous. Agenda Item 8.1. 8.1 is the second reading of Ordinance Number 9854-25. That is an ordinance of the City of Clearwater, Florida, amending Code of Ordinances, Appendix A, Schedule of Fees, Rates, and Charges, Article 24, Public Works, Fees, Rates, and Charges, amending Section 3, Rates for Wastewater Collection, providing for severability and providing for an effective date. Does anyone here from the public tonight desire to speak to Agenda Item 8.1? Well, I'll give this card to you. Mayor Rector, council members, this is my first time getting in front of y'all, and it's a little nervy, but I feel it's worth it. I'm not big enough to change anything, but I believe I do represent somebody out there. I know I don't look it, but I can't afford $6.01 in the raise of the sewage water. I'm going to do my best, but it's hard. And I believe I speak for a couple more people besides myself. So I'm just going to make a short argument because I know it's not going to change much, but maybe we can compromise on something, okay? We get three days if we're late without water. Price is going up, so chances are somebody's not going to be able to pay their deal. Why not for the first five years, just like the raise is going, when you give us five days of grace period, that's a work week, 40 hours a day right there, 40 hours a week. I could pay my water bill if I had just that extra time, being that it's going to go up, okay? I'm not going to argue the problem. I'm going to try and throw some solutions out there. I noticed that we have two methods of contacting people that are basic when we can't pay our bills or when we're late, call or send a letter, email, let's do that, and let's also do texting. But I believe you can do that. You just got to get online and put it in. Why not make that automatic? That way somebody that's working in a plant, that's working in a warehouse, that can't use his phone will at least hear the text. And that way it gives them a head up. I got to go pay my water bill because the increase went up, $6.01. That's a lot of money, $6.01. I did some math. Somebody told me it's about 70,000 households in Clearwater. I don't know if that's correct or not. But my math comes out to next month. That's going to be $5 million plus some change. I'm from Saluda, South Carolina. Where I'm from, that's a lot of money. That's a lot of money. I'm sure y'all are going to do what's right in terms of putting it where it's supposed to go. But where it's coming from is people that can barely make it right now. Not everybody. Most people can afford it at $6.00. I'm just not one of them. And I'm not alone. There's other people that can't afford it as well. You know what $6 will get me? Walmart got a 12-pack of Oodles and Noodles for $3.97. That'll feed my family a foe for two weeks if I get two of them. Just from that raise of $6 and some change. But that's the big picture that I look at. Obviously, it's millions of dollars. Because after a whole year, it's going to be what? $25 million that you get? Thank you, sir. And I do apologize for taking over. You know? Yeah. Taking over time. No, you're fine. But yeah, I just wanted to make that, you know, maybe you can do something with them five days. Give us more time. Thank you. To pay it. Thank you for showing you. Thank you so very much. Yeah. Is anyone else here from the public to ask me this, Jim? I'm Mr. Haluva. The sewer rate was always predicated on the amount of water that was used. And now that's going to be broken out and charged a minimum amount like most of us have a minimum amount for the water itself. We have a minimum use charge for gas. We have a ridiculous charge for reclaimed water that they call a availability fee, whether we use it or not, Ms. Poirier. Beyond that, recycling is a proven disaster and a joke. Anybody that follows the recycle truck finds out it goes the same place as the brown ones do. Some days, and I've brought this up to Mr. Slaughter in the past, the very same brown truck in the morning picks up the garbage and comes by in the afternoon and picks up the recycling bin. And he says, well, they hose the truck out in between. It's asinine. But we get charged for it, whether we use it or not. And on my street, not a lot of people are using recycling. They're all getting billed for it. These overcharges that are allowed by Clearwater Utilities, they're in violation of enterprise funding accounting rules. You're supposed to get something from utilities, not a promise of availability. I don't get billed green fees for the golf course because I don't go to the golf course. So why do I get billed reclaimed water fee when I don't use reclaimed water? It's wrong. Clearwater Utilities, in these respects, is a publicly operated criminal organization. It collects money against the rules, actually against the law, for things that are not delivered. And if Slaughter was here tonight, he'd say, we do it because we can get away with it. That needs to stop. Does anybody else hear from the public tonight that desire to speak to this agenda? If not, is there any council discussion? I just want to add that what we're doing tonight on this, and we talked about it at the work session, is we're just correcting a mistake that was made in the prior package of fees that we approved before. That we, an outside company came in, did an analysis. They showed us the rates of other cities around us, including Tampa, St. Petersburg, and even a host of cities. And it showed that, as the point we just made, these are enterprise funds, so we have to maintain our system with the fees that we collect for this type of utility. And it showed that other municipalities are also, unfortunately, having to increase their fees to fix aging infrastructure and some things that have been needed for a long time. So we didn't want to do this and didn't want to do this when we approved it before. But, unfortunately, all the municipalities are having to do it because of the aging infrastructure and utilities that we have. So, with that, I did want to ask, the gentleman did make, and, by the way, he did really well for somebody who said they were uncomfortable up here. You did really well. But you did bring some things that I was curious about. Do we have any flexibility? And he was talking about some communications on, if City Manager, if you might explain to us what, do we have some opportunities to maybe add some of these enhancements that he was talking about to communication? Sure, absolutely. And a lot of the, you know, we do have multiple different ways to communicate. I was actually just looking at our website to make sure that I had a good understanding of that. But what I want to do is we'll make sure that we have someone from our team reach out to him personally because I also want to talk to him about the interpretation of the three days and also want to make sure that he's aware of all the resources that we have available to help with utility bills. So we will make sure that we have somebody from our team reach out to him. Yeah, he has some good questions. Absolutely. So we want to answer those for you. So with that, any further discussion? Councilman Menino? Yeah, Mayor, thank you. I thank you for giving a brief explanation to it. I think I just want to add to it that we feel those very same struggles and pressures in the community. We feel your concerns. You're not alone, as you said. There are a lot of people. Those inflationary pressures that hit yourself, your homes, our homes, are the same inflationary pressures that us cities and municipalities endeavor either as well. And we are not immune to them. So we incur those costs too. I feel your pain. I thank you for getting up here. As the mayor said, you did do a wonderful job for your first time. You have me fooled. You definitely did a great job. But I think we, as a business and as a city, we have to make those decisions sometimes that are tough in order to make sure we are running an efficient system. And there are costs in our infrastructure to maintain it and to keep it beyond safe and working properly. And this is one of the things we have to do in our projections of going forward to make sure that this is sufficiently working for our community. But I do feel sympathy for the gentleman's story. Thank you. Sure. Mayor, if I may, I just wanted to add, and it's something that we discussed when we were going through the rates, the rate increase is that, you know, we, the rate increase is because of projects that we have planned. And we keep a really close eye on our ability to actually make those projects come to fruition. Should those projects be pushed back or delayed or untimely, we will make sure that we adjust the rates accordingly to, you know, make sure that we are not collecting more from our residents than what we need to complete the projects in the manner and time from which we need to meet them. Mike Flanagan, Public Utilities Interim Director. I just want to piggyback on what the city manager stated there. We're also aggressively going after grant funding to see if we can impact these rates positively as well. Yeah. Just for the public, we are seeking grant funding for it all. But one of the studies, the reports we got back and advice from staff is over a period of time, just consolidating three wastewater treatment plants into one, just that project alone is over a billion dollars that we're going to have to cover over a span of seven or eight years. So I know the numbers that were shared that sounds like we're making, you know, profiting. We're not. We've got to somehow figure out how. We've got two plants that are very vulnerable for a hurricane, and time is a little bit of the essence to upgrade those. So the plan is to consolidate three into one, but that project alone is a billion dollars. So we seek grant funding, and we've been working hard. I was in Washington this week, and we've got another legislative session coming up in Tallahassee where we're asking our legislators to help us as much as possible to fund these projects. But until we get those grants appropriated, we just have to spend what we generate from fees. And so that's a large reason. And, again, when they showed us the scale, we were in the lower half of our user fees for cities in our area. So, again, we don't want to do this. We like to get grants. We like to cover it as much as possible. But it's necessary to provide this basic service to our citizens going forward. Any further discussion? If not, is there a motion? Move to approve agenda item 8.1. Second. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Unanimous. Thank you. 2.9 and 8.2. 8.2. Second reading of Ordinance No. 9855-25, an ordinance of the City of Clearwater, Florida, repealing Sections 2.160 through 2.64, 2.191 through 2.195, and 2.231, 2.234, establishing Sections 2.101 through 2.104, amending the composition of the Sister Cities Advisory Board in Section 2.251, providing an effective date. So you want to hear from the public the desire to speak to agenda item 8.2. Seeing none, is there any council discussion? Now, is there a motion? Motion approved. Motion approved. Second. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Unanimous. It's an item 9. It's an item 10, City Attorney Reports. The council has questions for me. Well, okay. I have a question about a letter that you shared with us that was sent to the Attorney General by, I believe, sent by Councilmember Albritton. I guess there was a letter we learned today that you sent to the Attorney General. Can you describe what the intent was and what it said? Well, yeah. The intent was to get clarification on exactly what we do at Garden Avenue. As I know it's going to come up, the church said they're going to go ahead and reapply. And I've read the document that our city attorney wrote, and I've read the letters that Mr. Potter wrote, and they're at odds with each other. And then we have a letter from the Attorney General that says, be careful. You don't want to, you know, do anything against the religious. They didn't mention the church, but he said the petitioner, which is the Church of Scientology. So I thought that I would write a letter for my benefit. It didn't have your name on it. It didn't have anybody's name on it but mine. And I wrote it to get some clarification on if it gets applied for again, what we should do. So that was my intent. I sent it out at the beginning of the week, and nobody else was involved in it. And I don't know if I'll get a response, but, you know, hopefully we'll get some clarification on it. So is this the letter that you sent? Looks like it, yes. But it is, I mean, it's got the city seal at the top. It's got the city seal. It's got my name on it. It doesn't have anybody else's name on this. And this is not illegal to have a city stationary with my name on it and nobody else's name on it because I wanted him to know it was from a city councilman with the city of Clearwater. And that's the way I signed it, David Albritton, city council member. So hopefully he'll write back to me if he doesn't. That won't help me any, but that was my letter to him personally. It wasn't representative of anybody else on the council. It wasn't representative of you. It wasn't representative of the city attorney or the city manager. It was for me. So you're asking for an opinion that looks like, could you please advise whether the city owns, that's acting on behalf of the city or trying to act on behalf of, we didn't discuss asking the attorney general for an opinion. So I'm really bothered, but did you collaborate with the city attorney or the city manager to generate this letter? No, but I've made it, I've made everybody aware on this dais. We haven't talked about it since May, but since we got that letter that was addressed to you, you know, I, I just want to make sure that we're not discriminating against anyone and that we're, that I'm following Florida law. So that's what I've asked him to advise me on and we'll wait and see what happens. Seeking an attorney general opinion is something that we should do collectively in my opinion. It's not something we should do around the other four of us. If any one of the five of us was going to write a letter to the attorney general asking for an opinion, we should have discussed this at a work session. This should not be where one of us does this. And, Sid, you had no knowledge of this, right, city attorney? I will answer the direct question that I've been asked. I learned about it on Monday morning from the city manager. I did not know either that it was being contemplated, being considered, or that it was sent. I first learned about it on Monday morning. Did, did, did any, anyone from Scientology or your representative from Scientology ask you to write this letter? I wrote it because I need to have, I need to be advised whether our attorney is correct or Mr. Potter is correct. They both seem to have quoted different, I guess, court cases that, in my, in my, this is for me, Mayor. This isn't for you. This is for my benefit. If I'm going to have to decide on something, I want to be advised, I want to get as much advice as I can on it, okay? Can I say something real quick? Which is why we have a city attorney. He has every right to do that, according to Florida Statute 16.01, Subsection 3, I agree that states that the attorney general may, upon written requisition of an officer of a county municipality, other unit, or local government, or political subdivision, give an official opinion and legal advice in writing on any question of law relating to official duties of the requesting officer. An elected official is an officer of a municipality. I agree that maybe we should have talked about it at a work session, but each one of us has the right to get an opinion of the attorney general. That doesn't mean he has to respond. I mean, we can see there's been other municipalities that, individual officers who have reached out, I think, over the tenure of this attorney general. I mean, is that true? It has. It's torn a lot of cities apart. But it has. I mean, I'm not being funny, I'm not being sarcastic, because the issue is this, just in terms of process. Mr. Cotton is absolutely correct. The statute, I think, is clear, that the attorney general has the right to give advisory opinions upon the request of any local official. That is in the plain language of the statute. I don't think there was anything illegal with what Mr. Albrin did. Historically, the Florida attorney general, at least in the years that I have been alive and the years that I can remember, has not given advisory opinions except on the request of a collegial body. Generally speaking, the attorney general, whether it was Pam Bondi, whether it was Charlie Crist, Bill McCollum, Ashley Moody, took the position that only the collegial body would be able to make that request, even though the statute, I think, is pretty clear, that the attorney general could grant it. The reasons historically have been that the attorney general does not want to get involved in controversial local issues and do not want to tear cities and counties apart or get in the middle or dragged into controversial issues, except when it's been discussed in the sunshine, so that way it's transparent to voters that we are, in fact, seeking an opinion and that it represents the will of the body. However, Mr. Cotten is absolutely correct that the attorney general has always had the right, upon the request of any elected official, to give those opinions. It's just that, candidly, before a current attorney general, it never happened, as far as I knew. In fact, the policy of the attorney general for many, many years had been he or she is not going to do something like that. We now have a different attorney general who has a different view on it and is more open to giving those opinions upon the request of one elected official. And, candidly, I think that's something that cities and counties are having to navigate. So we are starting to see situations across the state, not many, but I have seen a couple already where a council member or a county commissioner has made a request to the attorney general without the knowledge or consent of the collegial body or, in some cases, without the knowledge of the city attorney or county attorney, and it has caused quite a bit of friction. So that's kind of where we're at procedurally. Clearly, Clearwater certainly has no precedent for individuals filing those or seeking those. The two that I've been involved in since I've been city attorney did come to the collegial body for review. However, again, Mr. Cahn is absolutely correct that there's nothing illegal about the attorney general responding to this, if he so chooses, nor is there anything illegal about Mr. Albright choosing to seek the attorney general's advice. No one said that there was something illegal. I didn't say it was illegal. So the response that this wasn't illegal, no one's saying that. I didn't say illegal, Mr. Mayor. I said he has the right. My question was, did anyone from Scientology, a representative from Scientology, ask you to write this letter? I met with Scientology, but they didn't specifically ask me to write a letter. Because I talked to him before that I was, you know, I voted both ways on this. And the last time I, you know, said I was going to vote against it because I just felt like I needed to have advice from somebody. And since Uthmeyer, the attorney general, did chime in on this, I thought I would get an opinion from him. And so that's why I wrote it. So they didn't ask you. I didn't write it because they asked me. And you wrote it completely on your own. Yes, I did, Mayor. I don't know what you're, you know, a lot of things have been swirling around this last week about why is the date on there put in? Well, I didn't have the date on there. And I asked to put the date on before I sent it out on Monday. I wrote that myself. It didn't get written by anybody else. And it's none of your business. It's my, I'm asking the attorney general for an opinion for me. Not for you. I already know where you stand on it. So don't cross-examine me on this. I mean, this is for me. Well, it's important to the citizens of the government. Yes, it is. Exactly. That's why I did it. Whether or not you were lobbied to write this. No, I wasn't lobbied to do it. And I've stated this before on the dais before May when we were all talking about it. I said, you know, I've got a real problem here understanding that, you know, what exact law is here. Do we own it? Do we own that? I've heard that we don't own it. That is a platted right-of-way. And why are we treating this different? I want to get an opinion on that. Well, we have an opinion from our city attorney who wrote a memo. I read his memo, 30 pages of memo. We asked him to write, okay? So, you know, I like the attorney general. I support the attorney general. I can tell you that he is not a try or a fact. If you look at the webpage, an attorney general opinion does not have any control over us. It can't tell us what to do. He may not respond. And the reason why is because we all, in the practices of the law, we know there's something that you can't exparte a judge. You can't go around the court system and lobby the judge for your position. You have to work within so that the judge is not working. He's working strictly on the facts. My experience here is my conversations with them is that they're being lobbied hard by Scientology to give an opinion that they want. And, again, I like the attorney general, but I don't know how he can be unbiased with the lobbying that they have already done and how they've tried to frame the question. I've said all along that the way to decide this is to have a judge, impartial, no lobbying. We put the facts, the judge decides the facts, and applies the law to the facts. And then we find out what it is. And maybe perhaps we do that. To me, this is – and did you tell anybody not to tell the rest of us or tell the city attorney? No. I brought it in as a draft, and I said, look, I may be changing this over the weekend. This was on a Friday. I brought it in. I just said, look, I don't want to send this out until I know that this is what I want to say. That's as simple as that was. And then Sunday night I sent it out, okay? That's why you got it Monday morning or whenever you read your e-mail, because it goes out to everybody. It wasn't anybody in particular. I said, don't show – I just didn't need to get it released until I was ready to get it released. And I released it Sunday night. Councilman Mayer. I'll let the vice mayor go first. Thank you. I was actually going to request it to be put in two weeks on the agenda, solely because this has created a lot of noise, and with that causes confusion and misinterpretation of the facts. So I actually appreciate the opportunity to clarify, which I think you did, which was – this was Councilmember Albritton's initiative and action and did so solely. So I personally had nothing to do with it, and I think that was important, so there's no misunderstandings. When I learned about it, I've got to be honest, I was taken aback because, in my view, that's – it's like knocking on the same door that we all agreed to shut. I thought this was resolved. We all communicate – well, most of us communicated with the office, and we moved on. So when – I'm thinking if, you know, if you still want clarification, I thought there would be better options than this route, such as getting a second opinion from the private sector, where you're actually hiring an attorney with the expertise and would have the interest of the city solely, and that's just one option. But I was taken aback because I just feel like we're beating our – I don't understand why – I don't understand the ultimate goal. If you want clarification, then it would be an unbiased attorney with the expertise behind it, rather than the same person that we all agreed that chapter has been closed. You know what I mean? I just think it's an ineffective method, and a method I don't think is going to have any positive outcomes. Mr. Menino? Mayor, thank you. I, too, with respect to what has been said, found out Monday the same way everyone else did. I had no idea it was being thought of or was written until after the fact. I was not supportive of that direction. I kind of, in my opinion, as a dais, as a city and city leadership, we put a task and a duty on this city attorney, because we are not in this field of expertise, to give us the guidance on it, and you wrote a very thorough 30-page memorandum. We had opportunities at that point to agree with you or disagree with you. I think we all agreed with you and said that this is your profession, this is your job, your duty, and you give us, as a city and as a dais, legal advice and direction on how to proceed with all sort of topics, especially this one. In my mind, you did that. We got behind it and supported it, united as a dais. There was no questions. I wouldn't have done it. I wouldn't have handled it that way. But with that said, I do respect the gentleman, and he has the right to. He has the ability to. Mr. Cotton did read the statute that stated that. I don't think sitting on the dais and continuing for us to pepper question and ask and search for motives or why. It's done. It's written. It's mailed. It's emailed. We are waiting now with uncertainty on what that response may be. It would be a waste of time for us to talk about the multitude of directions this could go, because I think we would all sit here and admit this could go many, many different directions, for the good of the city, for the bad of the city, and everything in between. So I respect the gentleman's decision. He has that. He is an elected official. He has that right, and I will continue to do that. It doesn't mean that's how I would have pursued with it, and I do still stand by that, as a city, we asked for the advice and guidance. We were given it. At that point, like the vice mayor said, that door was closed. I feel that the ball was out of our court, and it's on to whatever anybody in the community at that point wanted to move forward. It was in their hands and not ours. But I do hope we don't continue to go back and forth and question the gentleman for motives and stuff. I think it's done. We understand his reasoning. He stated it. He had the right, and I think we should move on and find some way to celebrate the holiday spirit. You're going to leave me with that? Thanks. Appreciate it. You know, I mean, we did all find out about it Monday, and I think we just sit and wait. We have to see what's going on. But I will have to say that it's disappointing, and it is distasteful with the way that you just handled that, Mr. Mayor. That is, like, to call him out the way you did is lack of leadership. Okay, well, it's very disappointing that one of our colleagues would go around the four of us. You were just as surprised. I think we all know. He has the right. Well, okay, but to do that quietly, not wanting us to know, not wanting the city attorney to know, that's not how we work together. That's very disappointing. We all know when we send something. When I released it Sunday night, everybody was going to see it because that's when I released it into public record. Before that, it was in draft form. It's not that I didn't want anybody to see it. I just hadn't really completed my thought process on it yet. So there's nothing nefarious about why I did it. It's done, okay? And maybe I'll get a response. It's not to all of us. It's to me. And maybe I'll get a response, and maybe I won't. We'll just have to wait and see what happens. Well, I'd like to see that clarification because could you please advise whether the city owns the section of Garden Avenue in question or if it is a plodded right-of-way that the applicant can petition to vacate without paying fair market value. I don't know that it's within the attorney general's purview to settle property disputes between two property owners. And you're really asking for an opinion on a private civil dispute between two property owners or who owns the property. I don't think, and I even looked onto the website today, reviewing the rules for asking for an attorney general opinion, I don't think that falls within what they normally issue opinions on. But I would like to direct the city attorney to at least clarify with the attorney general what you just said or work with him to help clarify that you're not asking for an opinion, an attorney general opinion for the city. You're asking for an opinion for yourself. Yeah. Which you could have asked any attorney, you could have engaged your own attorney to get it if you didn't like the opinion that we're getting or trust the opinion from our city attorney. But I would like to have us clarify with the attorney general, the city's not asking for an attorney general opinion. It doesn't say the city, it says me. You. You're asking for an opinion privately for yourself. Yes. Not for an attorney general. He is an officer of this municipality. He can do that as a council member, just as the vice mayor could, just as you can, so there's no clarification that needs to. It can go on city letterhead. Anybody in this audience cannot petition an attorney general. That is why we have special petitions. That is why our city attorney can. That is why our city manager can. Because of that statute that I read out to you, that allows us to do that. Not in secrecy, through letterhead. That is why it says his name on it. What are we doing here? We're trying to just like get into the very nitty gritty here. It literally says his name on it. All of ours is omitted. He is an officer of the city of Clearwater. There is nothing else wrong there. This is crazy what you're trying to do here. You should be ashamed. He just said he wasn't asking for an opinion for the city. He's asking for an opinion for the city. But I'm trying to get to you to understand. That's what he's saying. It's not the city. It's him. He is an official officer of the city. I would like to make that clear for the attorney general. But it's his request, not our request. I'm pretty sure everybody understands that. But apparently you. So everybody understands that this is Council Member Albritton. All of our names have been removed. I've seen it to where it says your name on the very top below the insignia. Followed by the. Your name on the top. Followed by all of ours underneath. It's not there. Literally says Council Member David Albritton. His seat number. City of Clearwater. Nothing about you. Nothing about me. We all found out about it Monday from his official letterhead. So what are you. Speak plainly. What are you trying to get at here? This is ridiculous. Well, this is ridiculous. But the way you're handling it is absolutely ridiculous for a mayor. We do this one off. We try to hide it from one another. Crazy. He didn't hide it. He sent it to us. We all found out on Monday. You didn't talk about it with the city attorney, right? No, I didn't because I didn't need to talk about it with a city attorney. I felt like I needed to ask the question myself. I already have the opinion from the city attorney, a 30-page opinion. And I have other opinions from other attorneys. But I'm not bringing them into this because Uthmeyer is in it because he sent a letter to us about this. So that's why I'm asking for his opinion. And he was lobbied by the property owner. I don't know. It's a bold accusation. I don't know why he did that. I didn't say. It just said petitioner. So may not get a response. I may get a response. If I get a response, I will let everybody know what the response is. But it's my response. And I know you don't care about that because I know your position and Lena's position on it. It's for me. This is strictly for me. Okay? So let's just leave it at that. There's nothing more to be said on it. Any further discussion? Okay. We'll move to agenda item 11, closing comments by council members. Council Member Cotton. I hope you all enjoyed the show. And this is ridiculous. Council Member Menino? No, thank you, Mayor. I do not. Council Member Albritton? No, nothing from me. Vice Mayor Tick-Sherom. Yeah, let's add another positive. I attended the Mayor's Prayer Breakfast this morning. And I found it to be very inspiring from the featured speaker, which was Jordan Raynor, to the various community leaders that led prayer, specific to different sectors of the population, from first responders and so on, to the Florida Orchestra String Quartet. Very inspiring, a room full of people, doing great, you know, talking and praying, and I thought it was inspiring. And apparently, I needed it with the end of this day. But, so let's end on a positive note. Okay. Closing comments by Mayor. I don't have any comments tonight. So thank you all for attending. And with that, we will adjourn the November 20 meeting of the Clearwater City Council. Thank you.