City Council on 2026-05-21 6:00 PM - May 21, 2026

This time I'll call for the May 21, 2026 meeting of the Clearwater City Council. If you wish to address the council tonight, please complete a comment card. Comment cards are located by the clerk seated at the right of the dais. When called to speak, please hand your card to the clerk. Now move to item two on the agenda, our invocation. I'd like to ask everyone to please stand for the invocation tonight to be given by the Reverend Allie Wood from the First United Methodist Church of Clearwater and then afterwards remain standing for the Pledge of Allegiance. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Let us pray. Loving and almighty God, we thank you for all of the many blessings that you have given to us. Thank you for this beautiful place that we get to call home. We thank you for our city officials and staff, our first responders, those who care and maintain our city and our life together every day. Lead us this evening, O God. Guide us. Make us aware of all those who live in our city. Help us together to work in the business of this meeting, to be good neighbors in your name. We give you thanks for the freedom and the power that we have to live in this grace and as neighbors with one another, all of your children. We ask all of this in your name. Amen. Thank you, Reverend Wood. Please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the United States of America. Before we go further in tonight's agenda, I'd like to introduce our dais for tonight. To my far left is our Deputy City Clerk, Nicole Sprague. To her right is our City Clerk, Rosemary Cole. Good evening. To her right is our City Attorney, Owen Kohler. Good evening. To his right is City Council Member Elena Tashada. Good evening. To her right, my left, is Vice Mayor Ryan Cotton. To my right is Council Member Mike Menino. Good evening. To his right is Council Member David Albritton. Good evening. To his right is our City Manager, Jennifer Poirier. Good evening. To her right is Assistant City Manager Dan Slaughter. And to his right is Assistant City Manager Al Battle. That will move to Item 4.1 on the agenda, and that is the National Safe Boating Week Proclamation. This time, I'd like to call forward Betsy Scott, the flotilla commander, and Keller Miller, the past flotilla commander, and other Coast Guard Auxiliary Flotilla members for the presentation of this proclamation. Whereas May 16th through the 22nd is National Safe Boating Week, and whereas boating is one of the largest recreational activities for residents in this community, and whereas the protection of life, limb, boats, and marine property are the legal and moral responsibilities of every boater, and whereas the City of Clearwater encourages all boaters and boating organizations to consider this indication to renew their determination to use courtesy and common sense afloat at all times, and whereas to this end, all boaters are asked to continue the spirit of Safe Boating Week throughout the entire year. Now, therefore, I, Bruce Rector, Mayor of the City of Clearwater, Florida, on behalf of the Clearwater City Council, do hereby proclaim May 16th through the 22nd, 2026, to be National Safe Boating Week in the City of Clearwater. We're so blessed to be a designated U.S. Coast Guard city and to have such an outstanding auxiliary as we do here in Clearwater. And Memorial Day weekend is a perfect time to remind folks of boating safety, and I appreciate you coming here tonight to remind us of the great work you do all year long. It can get quite dangerous out there, particularly with folks who don't know what they're doing, operating watercraft, and you all save lives by the work that you do. So would you like to say something? Yes. Mayor Rector and Council, it is a very pleasure, and thank you for letting us come here again today and honoring us with this very meaningful proclamation. We love partnering with our community. On behalf of my shipmates, on behalf of the United States Coast Guard Auxiliary, FOTELA 11-1, we want to thank you for this proclamation. We are America's volunteer guardians. We give countless hours every year, hours as individuals, thousands of hours as our flotilla, tens of thousands of hours as our southeast district, for the love of boating and boating safety. If we have one thing to say, we told you this last year, wear your life jacket. Eighty-seven percent of boating fatalities were not wearing life jackets. They can and do save lives. Many people say, I'm an experienced boater and a good swimmer. Eighty-seven percent failed. Don't let optimum bias make you a statistic. Please, please wear your life jacket. Thank you, Commander. And I also want to point out, too, because Senator Miller came to the Big Sea of the Coastal Communities meeting here recently and reminded us all it's not just safety education, which you do a fantastic job at, but you're very involved in rescue operations and supporting the Coast Guard when difficult times come our way. So thank you for that, too, risking your own lives in some circumstances to save others. So we so much appreciate the flotilla and all the work you do all year long. So congratulations. Thank you. Thank you. Just welcome. Thank you. Watch your step. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you so much. Yeah, come on up. I'm gonna move to item 4.2 on the agenda. That's Code Enforcement Appreciation Week. Proclamation, I'd like to call for Sarah Green, Code Compliance Manager from our Planning and Development Department. Whereas Code Compliance Inspectors provide for the safety, health, and welfare of the citizens of Clearwater through the enforcement of community development code provisions, including zoning requirements, property maintenance standards, public nuisances, business tax receipts, and other city code and ordinances. And whereas Code Compliance Inspectors are often not credited for the jobs that they do in improving neighborhoods, providing quality service to the public for the betterment of the community, and the work sometimes goes unnoticed, even after Code Compliance has been accomplished due to their efforts and expertise. Whereas Code Compliance Inspectors are dedicated, well-trained, and highly responsible individuals who take their jobs seriously and are proud of their department in the city of Clearwater. And whereas the Florida Association of Code Enforcement has declared that the first week of June be set aside by local government to honor and recognize its Code Compliance Inspectors. Now, therefore, I, Bruce Rector, Mayor of the City of Clearwater, Florida, on behalf of the Clearwater City Council, do hereby proclaim June 1st through the 5th, 2026, to be Code Enforcement Appreciation Week in Clearwater. And I encourage our citizens to join us in expressing appreciation for the dedication and outstanding service provided by the individuals who serve as our Code Compliance Inspectors. And I heard, I saw you smile when I talked about being unappreciated. It's a very difficult job. Sometimes you're in the middle of, you know, disagreement between neighbors, and, and things can get, things can get very intense. And that you all fight through that and learn to navigate all that. And your goal, as we know, is to improve our community and protect our community. So, would you like to say a few words? Absolutely. Good evening, everyone. As you said, code enforcement can be considered a very difficult profession to be in. We generally don't win popularity contests. Yes, people are rarely excited to see us out in the field, especially when we're pulling up to your property to cite something. But despite that, we take pride in the work that we do. We think what we do is important for the betterment of the city and the residents in it. So, on behalf of my staff and I, we thank you for your proclamation and your kind words. We really appreciate it. Thank you. Good job. Watch your step. Good job. Great job. Now we'll move to item 4.3 on the agenda. Informational update on our Opportunity Zone 2.0 redesignation and nomination submission. I'd like to call forward Christopher Edwards from the Economic Development and Housing Department. Good evening, Mr. Mayor, City Council, City Manager, Assistant City Managers, other respective officials on the dais. Today's presentation is also another presentation from our previous meeting regarding informational update regarding City's Opportunity 2.0 nomination and redesignation efforts. This overview is basically based on updated federal guidelines that we have based on the recent tuning, well, last year, 2025, big, beautiful bill. Here's our presentation overview. We will just highlight what our 1.0 versus 2.0 key differences are, our quick facts as well as how those zones were selected and the selected census tract overview. This was first introduced as part of the 2017 Federal Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, as I alluded to earlier, and 1.0. We do currently have, as depicted on the screen, your existing census tract for the city. And this particular census tract, the criteria with the federal government has shifted from the initial 1.0 iteration of it, and the 2.0 iteration has changed. And as a result, the 2.0 qualifications have kind of shifted the existing map over, as you see, to the right. The Opportunity Zone Program overview, basically, we are in the process of nomination and redesignation as it relates to the state of Florida regarding the Florida Commerce, and that process involves us nominating census tracts. We are nominating it to the existing point, 258, 262, 264, and 0.01, and 264.02. These census tracts fit alongside of the existing criteria that has been established by the federal government. These are just some of the key differences, just to highlight the permanence of the current 2.0 iteration. As a result of the recent Big Beautiful Bill in 2025, they are now permanent, and therefore, also, the particular impacts have changed. So, before, first iteration was more real estate-focused. Second iteration is more real estate and commercial business investment-focused. And as I alluded to earlier, this is really a deferral on tax on invested gains as a result of this particular program. And we're basically competing against about 500 other applications and nominations across the state of Florida for this second iteration. There's a depiction of the four census tracts to your right. And as I mentioned earlier, there was a detailed economic distress criteria that was established that we are consistent with in this second iteration. And regarding our current state, we have submitted the nomination re-designation to the state Commerce Department, and we are in the process of being reviewed and considered among our competing communities in the state. This just gives you an overview of those census tracts, again, once those areas are covered in each four of the census tracts. And this is just more of a little bit more detail as far as how our criteria is established. We look at income disparities, financial stability, economic mobility, and other factors. We're sourcing from U.S. Census Bureau, Environmental Systems Research Institute, and the American Community Survey. And these are some of the sample projects, example projects that we submitted, that we felt were compelling stories to share for the attention of Florida Commerce, as well as Governor DeSantis, as he looks to make those recommendations and make the final cut in July. And this is just the next steps and timeline of where we are. Today, Florida Commerce has taken public feedback. We're now transitioned into the wait-and-see process. And as Anita Berry, our lobbyist, explained on Monday at our work session meeting, right now we're petitioning a local delegation regarding our efforts, and we're looking for hopefully a successful inclusion in that recommendation from the governor. There would be basically the rule, if designated, would take effect January 2027. And there would be a two-year transition period during which both 1.0 and 2.0 will be valid for investment. At this time, I'll take any questions that you may have. Any questions from the council? Thank you. Thank you so much. Good report. That were moved to item 5.1 on the agenda. Approve the May 7, 2026 City Council meeting minutes as submitted. It's a motion to approve the minutes. So moved. Second. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Unanimous. Moved to the consent agenda, or are there any items to be removed from the consent agenda? Item 6.6. Okay. Is there a motion to approve all the items except for agenda item 6.6? Moved to approve consent agenda items 6.1 through 6.9 with the exception of 6.6. Second. All those in favor? Aye. Aye. Opposed? Unanimous. Moved to the agenda item 6.6. Approve an agreement and purchase order with Loyalty Media LLC first due of Danville, Indiana for the implementation of fire prevention software and support services for the City of Clearwater Fire District in collaboration with Pinellas County in an amount not to exceed $15,910.60 pursuant to Clearwater Code of Board to Section 2.563.1 for NC piggyback and authorize the appropriate officials to execute SAM. Mr. Mayor, counsel, thank you. Since our last work session, there's been a change in the language of this contract in the City's favor. The indemnity clause was strengthened to incorporate the limitations set forth in Florida Statute 76828. And because of this, the effective date was changed to June 1st, reducing the subscription term by one month. This adjustment lowered the subscription fee from what I talked about on Monday, $15,910.60 to $15,106.90. So a reduction of $803.70, less than the amount stated on the agenda. I'm here for any questions. If you want to hear from the public, then I desire to speak to Agenda Item 6.6. Any further council discussion? If not, is there a motion? Motion to approve Agenda Item 6.6. Second. Before we make the vote, can we make the motion to, as amended, because of the... Make a motion to approve Agenda Item 6.6 as amended. Second. All those in favor? All right. Opposed? Unablished. Thank you. Move to Agenda Item 7.1. Approved to vacate a lake drainage and utility easement for a portion of East 20-feet portion of Lot 12A, Clearwater Lake Estate Subdivision, as recorded in Platte Book 66, page 37 of the Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida, and passed Ordinance 9881-26 on first reading. Thank you, Ms. Kopp. Good evening, Mayor, City Manager, Mr. Kohler, Robert Kassmer, Public Works Engineering Real Estate. Just to refresh from this past Monday work session, this vacation item is to vacate a 20-foot portion off the rear lake drainage utility easement. Public Works Engineering and Legal have reviewed it without any opposition. We approve it, and we ask that you do as well. Any questions, please? Okay. Does anyone here from the public that I desire to speak to this agenda item? Anyone seen done? Is there any council discussion? If not, is there a motion? Motion to approve agenda items up there. Let me need a reading. Excuse me. Let me need a reading. Ordinance number 9881-26. An ordinance of the City of Clearwater, Florida, vacating the platted east 20-foot portion of the lake drainage and utility easement lying on lot 12A, Clearview Lake Estates, as recorded in Platte Book 66, page 37, of the public records of Pinellas County, providing an effective date. Okay. Now, there we have it. We approve agenda item 7.1. Second. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Unanimous. Move the agenda item. Good evening. Thank you. Yeah, thank you. Move the agenda item 7.2. Provide direction on the proposed development agreement between MHG, Palm Pavilion, Hotel LP, Six Flags, Planted LLC, and the City of Clearwater property located at 10 Bay Esplanade and 18 Bay Esplanade, providing for the allocation of 91 units from the Hotel Density Reserve under Beach by Design, and confirm a second public hearing in City Council Chambers before City Council on June 4, 2026 at 6 p.m., or as soon thereafter as may be heard. Thank you. Good evening, Mayor, Mayor, Council. I'm Ted Kozak, Planning and Development. If we can – On your screen? It's blank. There we go. That's the prior. All right. Thank you very much. Yeah, thank you. You're welcome. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Thank you. A little bit of a summary of the site and conditions. There's 1.06 acres on the property. As you can see here, there's two components. There's two sides, and it doesn't go all the way to Mandalay, but we'll see in a moment which two parcels. So all the way to Clearwater Beach on the north side, Bay Esplanade, and the next parcel to the east on Kendall. The west side is the Palm Pavilion restaurant to be preserved. And then on the east side, improvements to be demolished. The tourist district is the zoning district. The resort facility is high as the future land use. And this is an old Florida district of Beach by Design. The development proposal includes a permitted density of 50 units per acre, 53 units, plus the, as requested, 91 units from the hotel density reserve. For a total of 144 units, 136 units per acre. The proposed height is 75 feet from base flood elevation to top of roof slab. That is nine floors. Parking on the first floor, first floor, first floor, four levels. Tongue twister. The site will be accessed, as we've talked about, from Kendall and Bay Esplanade. Amenities will be limited to the existing Palm Pavilion restaurant on the west side. That's 93, 89 square feet. Small amenity areas and miscellaneous back-of-house uses. The remaining floors will include lobby, the other back-of-house uses, and hotel rooms. There will be a small swimming pool on the fifth floor, and hotel rooms on the fifth through ninth floors. The project is consistent with the community development code and consisting of dynamics such as minimum lot area and width, minimum setbacks, maximum height, minimum off-street parking, landscaping as required, and beach by design and design guidelines as well as to be generally consistent. I don't know why it's not progressing forward. So you'll take my word for it on the elevations if we can. There we go. And the design guidelines of beach by design and standards for development agreements. So the proposal is in compliance with the standards for development agreements. This is consistent with the comprehensive plan and furthers the vision of the beach redevelopment set forth and beach by design. I'll take any questions. So for the public, I'm going to take public comment, but I did get some emails today with folks who live on the beach primarily concerned about this agenda item, and I think they thought that tonight was the only opportunity they were going to have to come speak on the issue. Tonight we're only setting this agenda item for another meeting. So tonight would not be the only opportunity for folks to come to speak on this issue. I want to share that with folks who said they couldn't make it tonight. So if you're watching on television on one of our social media platforms, you know that if you wanted to come tonight to speak on this issue, you'll have another opportunity. So with that, is there anyone here tonight who would like to speak on this agenda item? Come forward. If you'll line up right over here afterwards, we'll come on by now. Mayor, as appropriate as the applicant, I believe we have an opportunity to do a presentation. Oh, okay. Very good. Yes. Thank you, Mayor, Councilmembers, and others on the dais. We do have a PowerPoint. Sorry. Good evening, Mayor, Councilmembers. Katie Cole with the law firm of Hill Ward Henderson, representing the applicant, Beachside Hospitality Group, and McKibben Hospitality are the common names for the owners of this property. With me tonight is Eric Rowan from McKibben Hospitality and Ishvon Petronetz from Behar Petronetz, the architect of record. And as Mr. Kozak indicated, we are here to discuss the redevelopment of the Palm Pavilion Inn into a unified site plan with the existing Palm Pavilion restaurant and the addition of a new hotel. First, I wanted to share with you, I know you all are familiar with the conversion of the Palm Pavilion Inn to the Krabby's restaurant group already and familiar with Beachside's presence on the Pinellas County beaches. McKibben Hospitality, who is working on the hotel piece of this development, is also very familiar with Clearwater Beach. They operate and manage two hotels on South Beach, the Winter Hotel and the Hampton Inn there. While they're based in the Atlanta area, they have a significant presence also under construction in downtown Tampa with a hotel and others statewide. So I wanted to let you know that you have two locally operating companies here who are looking to move forward with this. The current request before you is to give direction regarding the approval of a hotel density reserve development agreement to allocate 91 units from the hotel density reserve. This opportunity is to create a timeless, unified development and retain the spirit of the historic Palm Pavilion restaurant. As you look at the slides, we're not retailing the historic Palm Pavilion restaurant. We're retaining it. I apologize for my typo there. But the opportunity for the full plans will be submitted to the Community Development Board in the next appropriate cycle if you all choose to allocate these units for this hotel. These are the existing conditions. As I know, everyone is familiar with the existing restaurant in the small Palm Pavilion Inn together with the parking lot between the two, adjacent to the public parking lot on Bay Esplanade near the fire station there. Here's a ground level view of the area. The proposed site plan includes 144 units, a height of 75 feet above design flood, and 173 parking spaces. I think it's important to note currently there are 32 parking spaces on the property to accommodate and service the hotel and the restaurant. And so this meets the 1.2 parking spaces per hotel room that the tourist code allows for. When looking at the hotel and the design considerations, it was obvious that, you know, there were two main overarching themes. And one was to be respectful of the historic Palm Pavilion restaurant, how it could be incorporated into the hotel. And then secondly, how to make the active site pieces of the hotel forward facing to the beach. So the pool deck is facing south and west away from the adjacent condominium building on Kendall. There's covered connectivity between the restaurant and hotel use. The modern design of the hotel is complementary of but not necessarily duplicative of the restaurant. And if anybody has driven down Kendall to the public parking on the beach there, you know that the back of house and solid waste collection is front and center. And so this serves to make some changes there and screen that from both the city's parking lot as well as the condominiums. This is the elevation looking north from the public parking lot. So you can see the hotel and the restaurant there. This is the first floor of occupied space, which is above the parking garage. You can see the pool deck that's located here facing the southwest toward the parking lot and the beach and the restaurant. Internal lobby, which is a requirement for the allocation of units to hotels pursuant to the hotel density reserve requirements. This says breakfast area, as you can imagine, limited service type of hotel with breakfast area and service here. So the hotel density reserve, you all have done this many times. I know that there aren't very many units out there available. So this is one of probably the last that you might see among these applications. The hotel density reserve was created by the beach by design through a holistic process looking at density and intensity in total barrier islands. There are specific requirements regarding the allocation of these units, which this application meets. We know that in speaking to the Beach Association, there's some concerns about traffic and the fact that the city is going to be doing a traffic study specifically on South Beach. We understand that. We respect that. Part of our application was a traffic study that was submitted and has been reviewed by staff. That full analysis of concurrency availability would be done at the time of site plan approval when that is submitted to your professional technical team. That level of detail and review has not been done. The question before you tonight is the allocation of units so the applicant and owners can move to the next step and request those approvals through the community development board process. This is part of the old Florida district and the design requirements limit limit height to 75 feet above design flood elevation, which is what this is. There are both setbacks and step backs because this faces, interestingly, the city's parking lot, Bay Esplanade actually continues on through that parking lot. And so this has two frontages, both on Bay Esplanade, which faces the city parking lot, and Kendall Street. So the design is respective of both of those frontages with both setbacks and step backs as required by the code. Just to put it in perspective, the two most recent projects were some time ago in 2015 and 2018. They are both the same height as what's proposed here. The Avalon Club Hotel is a resort-attached dwellings project, which, as you know, allows for basically condominium-sized units but short-term rentals. Pura Vida Condominium, according to their website, does not allow short-term rentals and has a limitation there and is still that high. So I was a little confused by their website, but that's what I found when I was looking for it. So that is nearby. I thought it was important to look at the height relative to what's being proposed. So with that, we're happy. I have the team here to answer questions with respect to the design or the technical operations of it. Happy to answer questions. I know there are some members of the public who also want to speak tonight. So happy to answer whatever questions we can. I apologize for the awkwardness. No problem. As you said, I think this is the first time it's come up in the two years that three of us have been on here. Yeah. It's a new process to have a legislative hearing during the public hearing process. I know it's different. You're exactly right. You should present first. So I apologize for that. Not a problem. So with that, I think we'll go ahead and take public comment and then we'll take questions for you. So thank you. So anyone from the public like to come up and speak on this? Good evening, Mayor and Council. My name is Neil Diamond. I live on the beach. I appreciate you hearing concerns this evening. First, Mayor, I'd just like to say that one of the concerns that we have being a member of a beach residence is that not that we just get a time to speak now, but it seems like when people go travel or may go north for two to three months, that's when these types of things are brought forward for us to comment on. So it's a little concerning. The timing doesn't seem to help us. I'm currently a resident at Bell Harbor. The concerns that I have or what I would like to do is to speak against the additional allocation of the rooms. I think the height that we've seen from the two properties that were previously mentioned, they really disturb the ability for people on the backside of the island to get to see the beach and the sunset and the things all that we've invested our money in. I also think that this sets a precedent for overdevelopment. We're creeping north now. We filled up South Beach, and now we creep north. And so it's just how much respect do we have for the people who live on the beach? And I don't know anyone other than perhaps the mayor that has to go through the roundabout every day and over the causeway to experience that activity and to simply add more and more and more. It's to a point where it's very disappointing that the development team feels that that's acceptable. I would also just emphasize the traffic issues in general today are very challenging, and to add even more to the North Beach side that I don't think that we control very well today. We try hard, but I don't think we do a good job of it. It makes it even more difficult. And the last thing I would say is I'm not confident that the infrastructure that we have is going to be able to support yet another development like this. And at what point do we stop? I would be in support of something that was much smaller, the allotted 53 units. That would be acceptable. Anything above that, again, I'm against, and I believe that there will be several other people that will be writing letters and also comment. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Sir, do you have your card? I do. Our next speaker, please. Good evening, Mr. Mayor, council members, and city staff. My name is Patrick Rafferty. I'm a resident of Countryside. And I want to bring to your attention some items to consider relative to this particular proposal. There is already a very critical traffic problem on Clearwater Beach. It has undergone numerous studies, but no resolution to date, and this development will make it only worse. Residents on the beach, residents wanting to visit the beach, residents wanting to go to the beach to dine out, and tourists are all affected by this. When my wife and I decide to go to the beach to visit or to go out to dine, we plan it as if it was a military operation. We pick the time to go. We hope the traffic is good, and we hope we have some good Irish luck as we make that journey. And oftentimes it does work out well for us. Development in this area simply is going to add to the traffic problem. Beach by Design was very, very successful developing the beach, but there is a limit to that success, which you need to be aware of, particularly with respect to the traffic issues that continue to get worse. And perhaps that limit has been reached. The council at some point, and I hope maybe this is that point, should say enough is enough. We need to stop adding to the problem and focus on the solution to the traffic issues on Clearwater Beach. Recently, I was pleasantly surprised when the Dunedin Council turned down a four-story project in Dunedin, even though it was pretty much in compliance with the legal requirements, because they stated it was not in harmony with the area that would be impacted. That took courage and the focus of them on the management of development proposals by saying no. They suggested the developer revisit their plan for a much smaller-scale proposal, just like the gentleman before me spoke with a revised plan at a much smaller scale. The Clearwater Council needs to find the courage to say we will plan for Clearwater, not the developers. And if we see an existing problem made greater and unresolved, we need to say no, enough is enough loudly. Thank you very much for your time. Thank you, Mr. Jeffrey. Thanks, Keith. You can come on up. I'm going to say this for the next agenda item, but we are time-limited on each discussion of each agenda item, so to the extent that we wait for applause, it cuts down on the time of your neighbors, perhaps, to speak. So I was at a Pinellas County Commission meeting where the chair, you know, asked people to just use happy hands so that we can see your support of whoever the speaker is, but it does potentially eliminate the opportunity of one of your neighbors to speak. So if we could hold down the applause for that reason, just show us your approval with your hands, that would be great. So please. Hi, my name is Teresa Ames, and my husband and I live at 817 Bruce Avenue, and we know about sewage. My house is on a corner, and I am up to three months now, and I just learned today it's going to be another two months that the entire street and my driveway, everything is ripped up all the way around my house while they're replacing the sewage pipes, which I hugely appreciate. And having said that, I'm going to try and not repeat too much what he said. I wanted to start by thanking you guys, because as stewards of our city, it is your task to look at the short-term and the long-term effects of your development decisions. And as previously stated, we have a couple buildings that are high right now. It doesn't mean that we need to add more. And you have no legal obligation to approve this request for the extra hotel rooms. In fact, that's why it's called an application. And when somebody buys a piece of property, assuming or has been told that they're going to get these hotel rooms, that's a problem. And I'm certainly hoping that is not what happened here, and that this council is not afraid to say no, because you have no legal obligation. I wanted to just real quickly touch on the traffic. There was a traffic study. It did say that everything was fine. However, that traffic study, as a standard in the industry, only addressed the intersection where the property is going to be. It did not address the business district. I'm sorry, my mouth is dry. It did not take into account the circle, and it did not take into account the pauseway. We also do military operations. We get out early in the morning. If we get out too late in the day, we're gone until after dinner because we can't get back on the island, right? To add another 175 cars coming and going is just going to be a huge mess. The other thing that I would like to talk about is the sewer pipes. My house, the whole island, flooded. We took on four feet of water in our lower level, and a lot of that was sewage, right? And it wasn't sewage that came that backed up into my house. It was sewage that came up the drains and into my house. And now you're going to add, you know, several hundred more people putting sewage into this system. There are a number of different developments that have gone up. There's another 18-unit condo hotel going up in that area. And it seems like each unit that is addressed, they say the traffic is good right here and the sewer is good right here. But that's not what we need to know. What we need to know is that with the huge amount of development that has happened in that area in the last few years, I have two cards, by the way. Okay. With that, ma'am, I need the cards, yeah, to... Sure. She'll recognize folks who are here, yeah. Hold on. She has to identify the folks who are here. Yeah, so you might be able to get one individual. Macy, can you raise your hand? I'm sorry, or Mary? She needs to be inside, ma'am, in order for you to get an additional minute. It's on the card. It's okay. While we wait for the individual, can you ask her to come in? I'm sorry, Mary Massarella, Massarella? Yeah. We just have to be consistent with the other speakers who are here tonight. She's coming. Okay. Okay. Okay, now we have another minute. Okay, I just want to go through the list of the things that I'm hoping you're looking at. With that many more people, you need more lifeguards, you need more police, you need more firemen, you need more EMTs, there's going to be more garbage on the street, you need more garbage cans, you need somebody to service those garbage cans, the internet, when it's busy, is abysmal. You add another several hundred people using the internet, how are you going to get more internet in? Who's going to pay for that? Who's going to pay for upgrading the sewers? It's going to add additional ambient lighting. That's another thing you need to do is that old Florida is really dark. If you're bringing in 144 hotel rooms, you need more light. And what I'm trying to say is that I, too, think that granting these extra 91 hotel rooms for that spot does not meet the requirements of the Beach by Design. I think that it violates them, that the amount of landscaping that is there certainly isn't an abundance of landscaping. And one of the things that Beach by Design says is, look, we need lots of landscaping. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Is there an ex-speaker? Thank you for the happy hands, too. I appreciate it. I didn't fill one out. Do I need to? Yes. Can I do that? Yes, you can. Okay. Well, first, thanks for letting me talk. I didn't prepare. I came in my casual wear. First, thank you all because I know many of you and the work you do is really appreciated. The fact that you're friends and neighbors and the transparency that this group has, I think, is outstanding. I also want to thank you. I just finished rebuilding my flooded house. And the city of Clearwater is amazing for that, especially on the department. They help with the inspections and approvals and things. So really well done. I live in Bay Esplanade. So I live in North Clearwater Beach. I'm part of the neighborhood. I'm also on the neighborhood association, Clearwater Beach Association. And I just want to make three quick comments for you guys. The first is, in the spirit of transparency, I don't know how these rooms are assigned, but the stories I hear don't sound good. So at the best case, you haven't been very transparent about the process. In the worst case, it looks really bad. So I think that's an issue you guys should address, how these rooms got transferred, how these are handled, especially going forward, as far as putting them back into a pool, making them available for other developers, et cetera. The second point I wanted to make to the developers, please come visit our neighborhood and talk to us. I think that would go a long way in letting us understand what you're trying to build, because this is our neighborhood. And then the last thing I would say is don't underestimate the emotional and upset that you'll create by putting a monster hotel in our neighborhood. So I look forward to a very open process, and thank you guys. Okay, next speaker. Is there anyone? Okay. Okay. Do we have one more? Yes. Good evening, Mr. Mayor, Council. I respectfully come before you. As stated before, last-minute notice, I just found out about this meeting yesterday. I don't see that thing very transparent. I've seen this before. I lived in Georgia. I'm a disabled vet and retired here at Clearwater Beach, because it was a beautiful community, quaint, lovely area. I love the old historic feel of it. That was my draw to this community. Traffic is already a mess. We're going to add to that flooding. High tide, we have water coming out of our sewers at high tide already. We're going to add to that the roundabout traffic accidents. We have a fire station right next door. How are they going to respond to an emergency if the traffic is all jammed up? That is a very important thing to look at. I am very much against raising up and adding these units and destroying our community. So I respectfully ask that there's more transparency about what these people are doing, because I just found out about this, and I live there pretty much 24-7. Because I have to plan, like everybody else, when I'm going to leave, how I'm going to get home, what time, because traffic is already a huge mess. So I ask you respectfully look at this, take the consideration of the community and the people that moved here for that historic feel, and look at that and talk to us about it before you vote and say, hey, go ahead and add up a huge mess. So I respectfully ask you to look at that, thank you. Thank you, sir. Anyone else in public? Okay. If not, we'll ask the principal to come back and name questions or discussion from the council. Do you have any, you know, you heard some of the public comments tonight. Do you have anything to share? No, I mean, we, sorry, it's on this little pillow thing. I, obviously, you know, I spend a lot of time on the beach. We can all appreciate that traffic is bad often. But what doesn't change is the fact that Beach by Design and the city created an opportunity for very specific allocation of these rooms to certain properties within the beach area. At the time that it created the reserve unit, it contemplated even the very high impact traffic that exists today. Beach by Design says that the old Florida district supports the development of new overnight accommodations in attached dwelling throughout the district with retail and commercial and mixed-use development fronting Mandalay between Bay Esplanade and Sunset. That's the vision right out of Beach by Design that is contemplated for this district. This is a transition to the neighborhood. Obviously, there's been condominiums constructed and other people living further south and perhaps was contemplated when Beach by Design was written. But the bottom line is this still is very much so a tourist area, tourist designation. We understand. We are happy to provide additional information about the internal capture with the parking lot that's available. The increase in parking from a ratio standpoint will be much better than the existing condition that exists today. And for the next meeting, we'd be happy to provide some internal capture information because the likely result, based on the guests in McKibben Hospitality's experience, is that many of their guests are not driving to Clearwater Beach. They're coming and staying and walking. But we don't need to have that conversation tonight unless you want to. Eric's happy to come up and have those conversations. We're also happy to connect. I did speak with Sam Hutkin this week and happy to connect with others in the neighborhood about this as well. Thank you. And happy to answer any other questions. But we would appreciate the direction and the opportunity to have a final hearing. Thank you. Any other questions? Just for a moment. Got a couple. Appreciate you being here. I think what I greatly appreciate is what you just said towards the end and the willingness to open the doors and communicate with the neighborhood. I know this is only the first step in the process, and I appreciate you and your team's willingness to have those discussions. I think that goes a long way, eases fears and concerns, and I greatly appreciate. I'm not sure if the next question is best for you or for staff. I just want to make sure there's a handful of times that where transparency was thrown out and questioning of the process of how we got here. Maybe somebody could just give us that reassurance. Was the allocation of the additional units from the density pool, was that transferred according to our standard precedent set on the majority of other projects on our beach? Well, in terms of how units come and go, the bank of units prior to this was 10. Then they came back because some projects just expire. These are 10-year development agreements. So one in February came back. 100 units came back on. So it's basically first come, first serve. But as of today, if these are allocated, there's 19 sitting in the bank, if you will. So there's a number of other projects that are underway. So the 1385 as allocated way back in, I think, 2007, there's 19 if this is allocated. I appreciate that. And you identify the 19 remaining. Help us understand what happens when those 19 remaining are allocated. Do we hit a hard stop? And does the code dictate that? What does that look like? Basically, there's a hard stop. There's no more units. So if it goes down to zero and then all the remaining units that have been allocated in the development agreement, of course, the development agreement, sorry, it's over. Perfect. Thank you. And then the last one, when these units and the amount of them were initially created, the formula, I would assume, took into account the current infrastructure of water, sewer, electricity, and all that good stuff, that math is already built into the front end of this? Yes. In the Beach by Design document and the preamble and in the center where it talks about hotel density units, it already covers the density and assuming that the 1385 and the studies at the time occurred, it assumed already the concurrency, the amount of infrastructure needed, and the traffic. So it's all in the document. And so all those 1385 were part of all the studies done at that time. So we're just – when these expire and come back on, it's still at the beach. It's just moving them around, you know, the pieces. But it's still the beach. Thank you. Appreciate the talk. I've got some emergency. Just to follow up, do we know of any dormant projects that are about to expire that's going to free up some rooms or more units? I have the spreadsheet back, but there's none that I can think of that's ready to expire. The, you know, people that keep their ear to the ground and keep track of the last 10 years, they know when they come and become available again. And so as I – right now, I can't think of any that are expiring any time in the near term, but that we have those 19 units available. Thank you. Okay. Vice Mayor Cotton. Yeah, thank you. I would like to, if you – when you get the chance and have that spreadsheet, if you could just send that information to us, that would just be useful to have, you know, for what we can anticipate on the horizon because if these are the last 19. Absolutely. That's public information. I mean, at least that gives residents, you know, where that light at the end of the tunnel is and knowing their neighborhood's safe and a little bit more reassurance on that front end. So thank you, sir. Of course. Anything else? Councilman Rowe. So this particular property I know a little bit about because Kenny Hamilton, my friend, used to own it. It sold it the end of last year. I guess the sale went through the beginning of this year. So I figured that they were probably going to do something because there were two entities, one that bought the restaurant portion and then one hotel unit that came and bought the hotel. So I knew something was going to happen with it. But you never know about the density units. We know there's a pool, and when they expire, people grab them up as they need it, and I guess that's what's happening here. Some came available, and so they grabbed it. So as far as I'm concerned, what we're doing tonight on this is we're allocating. We're saying that we agree with the proposed allocation of density units, basically, for this project. And when it will come back again for a second reading, and it will also come back when the plans actually go through the process of CDB and the building department, there will be another many chances for the public to come in and talk about what they like and what they dislike. So I think with that said, I'm going to make a motion to approve agenda item 7.2. Second. Any further discussions? And to clarify for the public, the item is not being approved. They're just confirming the date. It's the second public hearing date is what they're actually approving. which will be June 4, 2026, at 6 p.m., or as soon thereafter as it could be heard. So, again, like I said earlier, folks who emailed and wrote to us, and we're at 8 to make it tonight, you'll be able to come out on June 4th and speak to this agenda item again. So any further discussion? If not, all those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Unanimous. Okay. This is the agenda item 7.3. Amend Council Rule 6 to temporarily restore public comment regarding matters not on the agenda for an additional three-month period and adopt Resolution 26-10. Councilor, that's my item. What this resolution does is it extends the sunset date for citizens to be heard on items not on the agenda, discussed on Monday. The new sunsetted date will be August the 7th, 2026. Any questions at all? Any questions? Not as anyone here from the public that I desire to speak this agenda. Hearing none. Excuse me. August 7th. August 7th. Thank you. Slightly over. Patrick Crafty from Countryside once again. I applaud the decision that you take to extend the opportunity for the residents to be heard. A decision that says to residents that we want to hear from you is an excellent demonstration of the Council wanting to hear from the residents on any item that is not on the agenda. You will listen to us, and often you will hear what we have said and take action. That is the part I'd like you to remind yourselves about. We need to be listened to, but we also need to be heard and know that you are responding to an individual that might be speaking on an item that is not on the agenda by indicating to staff that this person needs to be contacted about their specific issue. I say many things to my wife. She listens well, but she doesn't hear most of them, I have found out. We don't want to have that happen when the citizens take their time to come up and speak to you on an issue that they find is very critical and important for you to know. But once again, I applaud your decision to go forward with this. I think it's a wonderful thing. There was some risk associated with it, but I think it's worked out quite well. Thank you once again. Thank you. Does anyone else like to speak on this agenda? Thank you all for having this many people come and say they're interested in what's going on in the city, and I thank you for bringing this back. I hope you'll continue to do that. I know you all went through some real problems in previous – you suffered through that, you got through it, and now we're on the other side of it, hopefully. I just hope that we'll continue to hear from the citizens. I know that Mr. Rafferty has been here every council meeting for many, many years, and there are so many other people like him, and the more they get engaged, there are some young kids in the other room learning about all this. They want to see what it's about. So it's a great thing that we can do, and I appreciate that you are contemplating continuing to do that. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else in this agenda? Tony from downtown Clearwater. I'm 520, Nash Keys. Yeah, I think this is one of the most important things that you guys could do. I think not having it is a violation of our rights. I think it should – I understand that you guys went through some grievances through some people who weren't even citizens of Clearwater that forced your hand on this subject, but I think that if we don't have it, it supports a poor president in general, I think it's something that needs to continue. It definitely has motivated me and other people to speak out on this. If it's something you guys want to have an active involvement with the community and have a good relationship, I think it's pivotal, it's super important. It allows not only accountability of our politicians, which is now needed in the country more than ever, but accountability of our citizens. So I think it's – to me it's a no-brainer. I lost a lot of faith in our local government when it was taken away, which is why I haven't been here as much, because I think if we can't have this fundamental right as Americans, what are we doing? It's – I understand there's risks and problems that go involved with being a politician. It comes with the territory. It comes with a business owner, me doing stuff. That's why you guys are in the seats. I think – but to take away our citizens' rights is a heinous act. So I hope you guys don't do it. Anyone else who likes to do this? If that is there, I mean you need to read the resolution. Resolution number 26-10, resolution of the city of Clearwater, Florida, admitting council rules, providing an effective date. Okay. Okay, any further discussion? If not, is there a motion? Move to approve agenda item 7.3. Second. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Unanimous. We are going to take a short recess before the next agenda item. We have a lot of folks, not only in this room, but in another room. And so we want to try to do our best to get everyone into this room for the next agenda item. So our staff is going to be working with everyone to make sure we can squeeze as many people in here as we can. And we'll take a short recess to adjust the room to do that. It's time we'll call the meeting back to order. And we'll move to agenda item 7.4 on the agenda. Approve certificate of city clerk regarding a citizen initiative petition requiring voter approval for the vacation of public right-of-way in the downtown. So, council, before Ms. Call speaks, I wanted to talk about some of the charter requirements. So, Article 6 of the charter sets forth a process for voters of the city to propose ordinances to council through a citizen's initiated petition. Section 6.04 states that any five voters may commence these proceedings by following with the clerk an affidavit and the proposed initiative ordinance. Section 6.05A requires that the initiative petition must be signed by voters of the city in equal number to at least 10% of the total number of voters registered to vote in the last regular city election. Section 6.05B requires that all papers of the petition must be in uniform size and style. Each signature shall be followed by the address of the person signing it and that the signature petition shall contain or have attached to it the full text of the proposed ordinance throughout the circulation. Section 6.05C, each paper of the petition shall have attached to it an affidavit from the circulator. Section 6.04 sets forth the procedure for filing the petition. Section 6.05A, once the petition has been filed with the city, the city clerk has 20 days to complete a sentence. Section 6.05C, which is a certificate as to the petition's sufficiency, grounds for this insufficiency are contained in 6.05, which is A, the number of signatures, B, the form and contents, and C, an affidavit of the circulator must be contained. So in 6.06A, the petition may be amended one time, and that's due to the lack of valid signatures. In order to amend, the committee must file a notice of intent to amend within two working days of receiving the certificate of the city clerk. The committee must also file a supplemental petition within 10 days of receiving the certificate of the city clerk. If the supplemental petition has been filed, the clerk has five days to issue a second certificate as to the amended petition's sufficiency. Section 6.06B allows the committee to seek counsel review of the certificate of the city clerk, and that's what we're here for today. In order to do so, the committee must file this request within two working days of receiving the certificate of the city clerk, and then counsel must approve or disapprove the clerk's certificate within 30 days. Section 6.08 sets forth the action on the petition. That is not why we're here today. But if the petition has been deemed sufficient, counsel may either adopt the proposed ordinance or submit the proposed ordinance to the voters if not adopted. In the last regular city election, there were 7,675 registered voters. For a petition to be sufficient, the petition would need to be signed by at least 7,067 voters. Now, on June the 13th, 2025, the petitioner's committee, comprised of five people, submitted a proposed ordinance for adoption into the code of ordinances. Now, the proposed ordinance require votal approval for the vacation of a public right-of-way located within the downtown Clearwater CRA. In October of 2025, the city became aware that the committee did not have five voters. The city contacted the committee, and on October the 7th, the committee added two additional members to the committee, and that third person that was not a registered voter became registered. The first day that the petitioner's committee included five voters was October the 7th of 2025. And then I'll turn it over to Ms. Call. Thank you, counsel. Before I start and go over the process, I do want to thank, because this was not done in a vacuum, so I need to thank the city manager for allowing me to have some of her staff help assist with the review of these petitions, as well as my staff. Although Ms. Sprig and Mr. Burroughs were intimately working with the petitions and reviewing the process, that meant that the work that they weren't doing, my staff had to pick up. So I really want to acknowledge all the effort, because it really was teamwork, as well as the interim city attorney. He assisted with the review process, making sure that it was being followed properly, as well as a certificate that I had to create based on the charter. So on March 17th, the petitioner's committee submitted approximately 8,051 signatures that were assigned by individuals. On March 25th, the Supervisor of Elections Office provided me the active voter rolls. And based on that information, that is how we reviewed the signatures that were being presented. Staff reviewed the submitted petitions based on the roll that was provided. If the name and the address that was listed on the petition did not match the voter roll, we took an extra step, because we realized the gravity of the matter, and we looked at the property appraiser's website, because sometimes we couldn't understand the handwriting, or maybe the number was a little off, so we verified the information based on that to make sure we had the spelling correct. Based on that information, we identified whether or not the individuals were found on the voter roll, and if they were not found on the voter roll because of a mismatched address, they had a different address that they had on the petition form that was different than the voter roll, we identified that. By confirming the information also on the county website, we also were able to identify on our information, we were keeping track of who was registered and who was not. We also identified the district that they belonged to. And two, I have a couple of examples to show. So this was one of the petition forms that was submitted by the committee. As you can see, the signatures have been redacted because they are protected by Florida statute. So they are exempt from public record. But the rest of the information is not. On the top of the form, it does clearly state that the petition form must also include the attached or proposed ordinance. That was not included in any of the petitions that were submitted at the beginning, on March 25th. Rather, on March 17th. Based on this information, we looked at the voter roll. Of this form right here, 20 petitions were submitted. Seven signatures were actually verified, meaning those were voters that were registered within city limits. They were Clearwater voters. The rest were not registered or belonged to another district. And as you can see, L.A., Largo, DTF is Dunedin Fire District. And anything that was blank was actually not registered or we could not find them in the active role. The committee also numbered their petitions. On this one, it's 261. Here you have, they submitted 18 signatures of them. Seven were verified and 11 were not registered. And we identified the findings there. Again, and are not registered, not found on the active voter roll. CTF, Clearwater Fire District. PP is Pettles Park. Largo Fire District. This is petition number 336. Here they had 7 not registered and 13 verified. And the last example that I have is petition 7A, and that is from the amendments. And here they submitted, during the amendment, they did submit 701 petitions. On this one, there were 18 that were submitted. 13 were verified. 3 were not registered or not found on the active voter roll. And 2 had signed previously. And here you can see where we identified whether the signature was accepted and where they signed previously. Now, we reviewed the petitions based on the current process as the Supervisor of Elections would do our candid petition process. Based on the initial review on the original submission, 2,702 signatures were determined to be valid. And 5,349 were identified as being invalid. 4,306 signatures were collected prior to October 7th. And this was prior to the committee actually being a complete five-voter committee. So anything that was collected prior to October 7th was not considered valid. So those signatures that were invalid were not counted. 3,745 signatures were collected on or after October 7th. Those were considered to be reviewable. And 1,043 signatures were signed by individuals who were not found on the voter roll and were determined to be invalid. 2,702 signatures were signed by individuals who are voters of the city of Clearwater and were considered to be valid. Now, the charter, as Mr. Kohler has stated earlier, does require that the proposed ordinance be attached to each petition form. In the first batch, none of the petition forms have included that ordinance. But despite that, we went ahead and counted them. The initiative petition was deemed to be insufficient due to the lack of required number of valid signatures as required by city charter. I completed the certificate of the city clerk on April 2nd, and as required by charter, it was sent to the committee registered mail. On April 6th, the petitioner's committee submitted their intent to amend their submission. And on April 17th, the petitioner's committee submitted 701 signatures. Upon examination, I determined that 506 signatures were valid and 195 signatures were invalid. And, again, that was because either they were not registered or they were registered in a different district. They were not Clearwater voters. On April 10th, 2026, the Pinellas County Supervisor of Elections identified that they did not provide the protected addresses voter roll. And we identified three additional signatures, which amended the initial finding with a total of 8,752 signatures, 3,211 were valid, and 5,541 were invalid. The total invalid signatures due to addresses not matching the voter roll were 35, and the number of instances where voters signed more than once was 40. The petitioner's committee requested that the 4,306 signatures be reconsidered and not excluded without reviewed. We have reviewed them, and 1,231 signatures were signed by individuals who were not registered voters of the city of Clearwater and were identified or determined to be invalid. 2,956 signatures were signed by individuals who are voters of the city of Clearwater, and they were considered valid. Therefore, even if signatures collected prior to October 7th are considered, the initiative petition and amendment are still insufficient due to the lack of required number of valid signatures. And I can go ahead and post the show that. As you can see, 8,752 signatures were submitted. 6,167 were considered valid. 2,391 were considered invalid, and the invalid signatures due to the addresses not matching were 90, and the total number of instances in where individuals signed their petition more than once was 104. Anything further? Yeah. And this call, I believe, completed her second certificate, but on April the 22nd, sent it to the committee, and then the committee requested this council review. So council has, really, two options. One is to approve the certificate or disapprove the certificate. The item set for tonight is not an action on the petition. It's not determined whether or not council wants to adopt a proposed ordinance or send it to the voters. It only deals with the sufficiency of the petition. So, approving the certificate is a final determination that the petition is insufficient for the reasons contained in Ms. Cole's certificate, such as the lack of valid signatures and the form and content. Now, council has another option, which is disapproving the certificate would also be a final determination that the petition is sufficient. But I would recommend that council would need to provide some type of rationale as to why the petition is sufficient, even though the clerk determined that the petition was insufficient. And council would also need to provide a justification as to how the petition meets the 10% threshold for sufficiency. Okay. And I just want to reiterate what you just said. Tonight, we're just evaluating the sufficiency of the petition. We're not debating if any one of the five of us wants to put a petition, a referendum proposal, on the agenda that would come at a subsequent meeting. We're not debating that tonight. We're just debating the sufficiency of this petition that's been pursued. Correct. Thank you. Okay. With that, I will take public comment. We invite you to come up. Of course, as I said at the beginning of the meeting, if you want to speak, you need a comment card. We have created a list because we knew there were going to be, or I guess maybe there were going to be a lot of folks here tonight. Those have signed up to speak. If you would line up against this far right role so we make sure everyone is entering this way. And as I said earlier, our council rules, rule six, allow for 60 minutes total for public comment on an agenda item. So, again, happy hands if you can to be kind to your neighbors. We've got a lot of folks who want to speak tonight. And the other thing I would share with you is once we take the first speaker, the 60 minutes starts running. So, I want everybody to be safe on the way up to the podium. But if you could, once your time's up, to move quickly away from the podium to give the next speaker an opportunity to speak. That would be a courtesy of a fellow speaker. So, with that, we'll take our first speaker. Jill Gibbs. Jill Gibbs, yeah. We might tell the next speaker in the line, too, as we have. I have Kelly Meyer and Lisa Tanzio, Tango? Gano. Gano. I do need to know. If you're accumulating, I need the other individual. I need it. I need a call. Vicki Lipsy. Thank you. You have an additional minute. Four minutes. Hi, council. I'm here to provide some rationale. It's actually really simple. You can cite trivial issues all you want, but it's really simple. The people have spoken. You've been elected to your seat to represent the will of the people. If you faithfully execute your job, someone will call a motion, put this on the ballot, and let we, the people of Clearwater, decide its outcome in August. We came across disturbing news over the past couple of weeks, which should help further explain exactly why the citizens of Clearwater want a voice in our downtown streets. Through our FOIA requests, we learned that our city staff, some who are sitting on this dais, have been fast-tracking the vacation of South Garden Avenue. They know full well that thousands of citizens do not want this. They know full well that what we want is to place a memorial to the African-American community known as the Garden Community on South Garden Avenue to remember what was once there. They also know that Florida's Attorney General said this in his letter to our former city attorney. Quote, if the general public is using the roads and streets in question, including public service vehicles such as garbage trucks, police, fire, or emergency vehicles, then the county should not close or vacate the roads or streets in question, as such vacation would be injurious to the public welfare or inflate individual property rights. These email exchanges between our city staff detail how they plan to push forward South Garden Avenue's vacation anyway and push it forward fast. In fact, according to their emails, the first vote to vacate South Garden Avenue was supposed to be tonight. Imagine with me for a moment a split screen. On one side, you'd see dozens of citizens, including my friend here who went house to house with me for days on end. You would see dozens of citizens in Clearwater, young and old, rich and poor, from all walks of life, from all political sides, going door to door, or sitting for hours at a variety of locations, spending over ten months and thousands of hours offering our fellow citizens the opportunity to petition the government to have a voice in the future of our downtown streets. On the other side of the screen, you'd see our city staff, whose salaries are paid for by us, sitting at their desks, typing fast as they conspire to utterly and completely ignore the admonition of the Attorney General and the desire of Clearwater citizens and give away South Garden Avenue as quickly as possible. And I'm wondering, was this entertaining for them to watch those of us who canvassed and the thousands of us who signed work our tails off in the heat and the cold to petition our government and save our streets while they, at the very same time, were working to give away said streets? Did any of you know that this was going on? What an absolute betrayal to the people of Clearwater. And one last thing, to those of you who think that you can fund the GOP enough to convince this council to do your bidding and ultimately silence the people of Clearwater, we, the people, will not be silenced. Mark my words, Clearwater has the most heartfelt and intelligent citizens who love their city deeply, and our response will show at the polls, both in 2026 and 2028. Thank you. Kelly Meyer. Joe Gano. Thank you. You have an additional minute, four minutes. Thank you. Good evening. It's been a long 14 months. I come before you on behalf of the Petitioner's Committee of Save the Garden, our citizen initiative. I urge you to reject the city clerk's certificate of insufficiency and amended certificate of insufficiency. The clerk's determination should be rejected because we have recently begun an audit and have found so far that the clerk rejected signatures of eligible Clearwater voters on inactive status contrary to the city charter. The clerk found petition forms did not have the proposed ordinance full text attached, but each petition form was circulated with the full text attached as each circulator's affidavit swears to. The clerk rejected signatures collected before the petitioner's committee was comprised of five voters, but that requirement violates the first amendment, and it's not a valid reason to reject otherwise valid petitions under the city charter. The clerk rejected valid signatures for improper reasons such as mismatched addresses, addresses that omitted a minor element like an apartment number, or which had a minor mistake in an address. The clerk rejected valid signatures because she misread the voters' handwriting. The clerk failed to specify the particulars wherein the petition was insufficient in her certificates as the city charter requires. For these reasons, we urge you to reject the clerk's determination that the petition is insufficient. Because of these serious errors, there is another option, I understand, that could be ahead of you. You could choose, one of you could choose, besides the mayor, to make a motion to put this proposed ordinance directly on the August ballot. Would one of you please have the courage to do that? And who is willing to second it? Just to open discussion on this option, thousands of your constituents are counting on you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Nick. That speaker plays, yeah. Gannon. Yes, quickly, yeah. And then on deck we have... Gavin Smith, Todd Moore, and Jeffrey Moore. Yeah, so Gavin can be ready to step up the sentence. I'm going to make sure everybody gets a chance to be heard, or as many as possible. Yeah, if you could fill out your card and have that completed before... Yes, before you submit your card, please make sure it's complete. Name and address, phone or email. Well, Mr. Mayor, council members, and supporting staff, thank you for hearing what I have to say. I'm not a resident of Clearwater, but I grew up in St. Pete. I love Pinellas County, and I was part of the team that went out in the heat to get signatures and sit for hours. Please listen to the people, what they have to say, and reject what the city clerk has approved on this ballot, and put the people's voices to be heard on that initiative. Okay? Do the right thing. Thank you. Gavin Smith. Next speaker, please. Gavin Smith. Gavin Smith. Is it not a Gavin Smith here? Todd Moore. My name is Todd Moore, and I reside in the city of Clearwater, and everything I'm getting ready to say is in regards to 7.4. So a quick back story on me. I was born at Morton Plant Hospital, raised in Clearwater. I attended each level of public school here, and I did my parents and three children. And my great uncle, just a side note, was a ticket taker at Capital Theater, so I've been here a long time. A lot of my family spent time downtown, but a portion of my time here, I lived on the beach, and it tends to make you forget about downtown, but I didn't like that. In the meeting on May 18th, Mr. Menino stated that he, and I quote, was born and raised in Clearwater, but only came down to downtown two times a year with his family. It makes me wonder why. I never attended a committee meeting until tonight, but I have watched and listened closely on YouTube for many years. I did not want to be here in person, but it's necessary for my well-being moving forward. So pertaining to Agenda Item 7.4 in regards to the citizen initiative requiring voter approval for vacation of public right-of-way downtown, this recent vacation request comes from the Church of Scientology. And now I hear their affiliates have put the vacation of public right-of-way, or two more requests, three in total. So being here my whole life, I've learned Scientology does not like you. And now I hear their affiliates put in, I'm sorry, they tolerate you at best if they want something from you. I come from experience because I work for a service company that dealt with them on a daily. So each of you, with the exception of one, arrived in Clearwater after the arrival of Scientology to our city. One of the many duties of the city council member is a citizen engagement. This includes listening to and engaging with community feedback, addressing citizen concerns, and representing the interests of all constituents. Myself and many others feel this has not been done. That one entity is getting a lion's share of your attention. Each of you will cast a vote, and it will be counted, and that vote will be very revealing. I, Todd Moore, signed a petition to require voter approval for the vacation of public right-of-way. Do not silence my vote. We miss you, Gabe. You were wrongly persecuted. Thank you. Next speaker. Jeffrey Moore. Jean Cowley is next. And Barbara Sori Love. Pat Teemer. Good evening, counsel. My name is Jeffrey Moore, and I signed the petition to require voter approval for the vacation of public right-of-way downtown. Please do not silence my vote. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Next speaker. Jean Cowley. Good evening, and thank you, counsel. After 50 years, I think we should be heard as we the people, and I think this initiative should be put on the ballot. I think we should listen to the citizens of Clearwater. Thank you very much. Next speaker. Barbara Sori Love, ma'am. Good evening. My name is Barbara Sori Love. I was born and raised in Clearwater, Florida. Attended schools that are no longer around in Clearwater, Florida, because they were erased with the exception of Pinellas High Innovation. Thank God for that. My fellow residents, esteemed council members, and Ms. Rose Marie Call and staff, I stand before you today, not just as a voter, but as a concerned citizen deeply troubled by recent events. Thousands of our friends and neighbors took the time to read, engage, and physically sign a petition for a cause they believed in, over 8,000 of them. Yet, with the stroke of a pen, the clerk's office has chosen to discard thousands of those voices. We are here tonight because that is fundamentally unacceptable. When citizens exercise their legal right to petition their local government, the role of our clerk is to be an impartial administrator, not a gatekeeper. By utilizing technicalities and bureaucratic red tape to toss out valid signatures, we are sending a dangerous message that the will of the people matters less than administrative convenience. Think about the thousands of citizens who took time to sign. Their addresses may have been slightly off or their handwriting messy, but their intent was crystal clear. To invalidate an entire petition over minor clerical discrepancies is a betrayal of the democratic process. We are not asking for special treatment. We are demanding basic fairness and respect for the voters who fund this very city. I urge this council and the clerk's office to immediately review this decision. We need a transparent, objective standard for signature verification that errs on the side of giving citizens a voice, not finding excuses to silence them. Let the people decide the outcome of this issue at the ballot box. Democracy is the strongest when the maximum number of voices are heard. Let us not go down in our city's history as an administration that hid behind red tape to avoid listening to the public. I call upon our clerk to reverse course, validate the signatures of the people, and let the democratic process work. Thank you. Pat Teemer. After Don Teemer, I have Shirley Johnson and Fran Heffron. Good evening, council members and city staff. My name is Pat Teemeier. It's always hard to pronounce. And I've lived in Clearwater for almost 12 years. With elections coming up in August, I'm sure that each of you remembers what it was like to collect 250 signatures to get your name on the ballot. Perhaps like me, at first, you thought that this could be done rather quickly. Today, I can say that I represent at least that number of people, maybe more, who were able to sign our petition initiative back in the summer and the fall of last year. I found out what a long slog it is to get even a few hundred signatures, but I was impressed that at least 90 other people joined in the efforts to gather not hundreds but thousands of signatures by March of this year. Together, the circulators represent the voices of many more thousands in Clearwater who want to see a different approach to making the decisions about vacating city-owned streets, rights of ways, and property in downtown Clearwater. Working on this petition drive was the first time that I have actually been involved in any kind of local civic action. Yay! I had never before been an activist, but felt that this issue deserved both my time and my effort. Along the way, walking my neighborhood or others nearby, I was encouraged to find that when someone did answer the door, the majority were excited to sign our petition and agreed with what it stood for. They knew that a new method of making decisions about city-owned property was needed. So here we are in 2026, the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, the birth of our nation. The Founding Fathers would fight for freedom both in the halls of debate and on the battlefield for a number of years, determined to have a government of the people, for the people, by the people. They designed a new kind of government that is the antithesis to the more common top-down government, which ignores its citizens and often silences their voices. They guaranteed that citizens be heard and their ideas respected in whatever issue was being debated. I beg you to listen to these Clearwater residents. Your need to do so is actually bigger than your individual opinions. You can honor the 250th anniversary of the USA by emulating the ideals that our Founding Fathers labored long and hard to establish. Listen to the voices of nearly 9,000 citizens and know that they represent many more. Put this initiative for a referendum on the ballot is what I ask. Allow the voters of Clearwater to make the decision concerning their streets and their public right-of-ways. It is the right thing to do. Thank you. Don T. Meyer. Mr. Mayor, council members, the first thing I want you to know about me is I'm married to that amazing woman that you spoke to. I've sort of rewritten what I'm going to say today. And, you know, we were told we need 7,100 signatures. We collected 8,500 pieces of evidence that the people when an initiative put on the ballot. And I seriously doubt that any fewer votes would have been collected if the person had been a registered voter instead of not being registered when the signatures were gathered. I think the truth remains that 8,500 voters want the referendum. I think it's very clear that that's true. And it seems to me that to pitch votes is against the very purpose of our collecting signatures for this initiative. It seems like pitching votes is the same thing as destroying evidence. It has the same effect. And I just think everybody knows that we have somewhere in the range of 8,500 signatures voting for this initiative. And I want to say one other thing. I've asked over and over again, why is it that there are individuals on this dais that seem to be hell-bent on closing the deal, deeding Garden Avenue to Scientology? All the reasons I come up with were not good. Still, I didn't want to presume motives or question character, but I saw something recently that really disturbed me. I picked up this brochure at the Welcome to the Good Life facility, and I opened it up. This is the first thing that I saw. It says, partnership and trust building cannot happen all at once. It must start with the largest and most influential players who must find in themselves the courage to lead. Specifically, this means the city of Clearwater and the Church of Scientology. These two organizations must become partners in the future of the city. If they cannot, no one else will. I don't know if you agree with what that says. I don't know if that's true or if that's just marketing. But it certainly would explain some of the things that have been happening in regard to Scientology. And the idea that they're pressing on. Thank you, sir. Appreciate you. Thank you. Thanks, paper, please. Grant Hepburn. That's a great, happy answer in the front row. Thank you. It does help us move things along, so I appreciate those of you who are doing this. Hi. I'm Fran Heffrin, and I'm an 81-year native of Clearwater. I'm here tonight because I do not want Garden Avenue sold. I don't see the point in selling any of our streets. And people come here for the sun, sand, water, and views. It's a place to spend a lot of time outdoors. And I think we can, there are people in our group, the Save the Garden group, that feel strongly about dissecting our city with selling off streets. And I knew there would be more interest in buying more streets once this one was sold. And so it's kind of like a never-ending battle. Our team, the Save the Garden team, have a lot of strong participants. We went to the Threshers Ball Stadium, not the Ball Stadium, but the parking lot. And for a few days, and sat out in that blistering sun trying to collect signatures, we would have people drive by and then turn around and come back once they had seen our signs, what we were doing. And they were dying to sign the petitions. And we went out in the island of the states in the beautiful sun and collected signatures. And my friend even nearly passed out just walking from door to door in the heat out there. And we also went in the neighborhoods, walking in the heat. But our team members thought it was worth it because this is a serious decision, I think. Why would the people of Clearwater want to start giving up their streets? I don't understand it. So I think it's only fair. Of course, we didn't get all the registered voters on our sign-up sheets. But I think if you put it on the ballot, the next ballot, you would get a ton. Thank you. Thank you. Let's keep the points. John Weidman. Thank you, Mayor, for your time. City Council, for your time today. My name is John Weidman. I live over by Clearwater Mall area. And I signed the petition as a registered voter to have the voters decide when property should be vacated and when it should not. As Ms. Barber has mentioned, the democratic process, that certainly is a democratic process, to have the voters of Clearwater. Some nearly 8,000 people signed a piece of paper and said, this is what we would like to do. We would like to have a voice in this. So I'm not going to be long. I just ask that you don't silence my voice or silence the voice of 8,000-plus people who want to preserve their city. They want to see it to grow in the right way, in a healthy way. And so that is my request. Please don't silence my vote. Don't silence the votes of what appears to be a majority of people here in the city of Clearwater. Thank you for your time. William Zipper. Zipper, yep. Hi, my name is William Zipper. I'm a citizen of Clearwater. I've been so for a little over a decade now. I would ask that I hope you guys all treat them nicely. They're here tonight, including even you, Ms. Call, the clerk. I know that we disagree on whether or not the petition should go through, but we're all citizens of Clearwater. This is all our city, and all voices here should matter, and all should be treated with respect. And it's because of my love for the city of Clearwater, for all of you, for all of you, and the respect that I have for the work that has been put in for this petition, and for the voice of everybody in Clearwater. But I think it's public property, which means it's the people's property, which means it should be the people's choice. If they want to give it away, but let them make that decision. God bless you, all of you. Please have a good night. Thanks, sir. Janice Basler. Good evening. My name is Janice Basler. I live and vote in the city of Clearwater. I canvassed my neighborhoods discussing this petition and getting signatures. This is the same neighborhood as you live, my councilman Menino, as I live very close to you, right across from State Street Park, the place you all just were very recently. I wanted to share about my encounters and talk about three groups of voters. First, almost every time I went out and knocked on doors, someone answered who identified to me as a member of the Church of Scientology. We had varied discussions about this petition, about politicians, about God. They were all very civil and informative, and no, not one of them signed the petition. But I thanked them for talking to me. The second group, and probably by far the most people, were very eager to sign this petition. Some have lived here for many years, others only a few months, all seem to express concern over why our downtown Clearwater is so vacant and empty. Some remembered when it wasn't like that. Others wondered why it was like that. They all wanted an opportunity to influence in regard to the downtown streets in the hopes of fixing what city employees and councils, past and present, have allowed to happen. The third group, very small group, maybe only 15 people, their stories both saddened and distressed me. These voters asked if their name would be seen by the Church of Scientology. And I said, yes, that was a possibility. They indicated they supported the initiative, but they chose not to sign. They said they were afraid. They were afraid that their business or their family or their neighborhood would somehow be targets by the Church of Scientology. Governor DeSantis says they would live in the great free state of Florida. These people were expressing feelings of fear, not freedom. I handed them a save-the-garden card and let them know to keep an eye on the website, and this initiative came on the ballot. They could then express their freedom and vote. Please don't choose to silence the voters who elected you to office. Thank you. Thank you, Ned. Cindy Cash. Thank you, everyone, for allowing us to speak tonight. I know this is long. And I want to thank the clerk because I'm sure this was just a monumentous job. I have one word, monopolies. Monopolies are not good. The only monopoly that's good is the game. Now, I've read that Scientology owns about 200 properties in downtown Clearwater. That's insane. And I've heard that they're not shy about using that information as a pressuring tool when they want something. And now they want a street, and I've heard that they want two more also. So that's just ridiculous. No one entity should have that much power over a city. If they do, then the voters really don't have a city. Only the most rich and powerful people do, and that is un-American. So do what's right and put it on the ballot. Then you'll know what the voters say, and you'll know that they're really voters. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Annette Sayek? Sayek? Zeejaki. Zeejaki. All right. Sorry. I apologize. My name's Annette Zeejaki. I grew up in Clearwater. I went to elementary school, middle school, high school, even got my AA from St. Petersburg Junior College. Recently, we moved away. We just moved back. What's happening in downtown makes us very sad. As you can see, I'm not a public speaker, but this is important to us. Please let us vote on this. Downtown Clearwater is a pass-through. People pass through us to get to Clearwater Beach. I don't want Dunedin. We didn't move to Dunedin. Please let us vote on this, and then it's not on you. It's on us. We just have to have a say. I did sign the petition. I was nervous. I'm nervous talking now, but please let us have a vote. Thank you. Ma'am? Mr. Carr? Michael Zeejaki? Thank you. Thank you very much. My name is Michael Zeejaki. I signed the petition to require order approval for the vacation of public right-of-way in downtown. Please do not silence by vote. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Next speaker. Rebecca Kay? Good evening, Mayor and Council members. I am asking you tonight to do something very simple. Let the citizens of Clearwater vote on this issue. The proposal involving the vacation of the public right-of-way in downtown Clearwater is not a minor procedural matter. It concerns public property, public trust, and the future direction of our downtown. When an issue generates this much public attention, concern, and organized citizen involvement, the answer should not be decided solely by five people on this dais. It should be decided by people who live here, pay taxes, and call Clearwater home. Residents from across the city have signed petitions because they want a voice in the decisions that permanently affect public space. Whether someone supports or opposes the street vacation itself is not the point tonight. The point is whether citizens deserve the right to participate directly in a decision of this magnitude. Approving the certificate for the citizens initiative petition does not predetermine the outcome. It simply respects the democratic process and allows voters to make their voices heard at the ballot box. If the council refuses to allow a public vote despite widespread citizen concern and verified petitions, many residents will understandably feel that their voices matter less than political influence, special interest, or private development goals. That would further damage public trust at a time when trust in local government is already fragile. Please show the people of Clearwater that public participation still matters here. Let the voters decide. Thank you. Jill Cunnings. Jill Cunnings. Good evening. I am a little nervous. There's a million places I'd rather be than here today, in addition to spending $30 to park to attend a council meeting. I'm a longtime citizen of the city of Clearwater and actually representative today is three generations. My mother, who will be 94, my daughter, who is 27. I think at this point it's regardless of accepting the petition or not arguing about, well, was this valid? Was this not valid? We clearly care. We clearly care a lot. I am personally not aware of a law compelling you to sell off a public street. I believe it is completely within your purview to put this on the ballot, regardless of the petition. People are very passionate about this, and there's tons of people we weren't able to reach. And I applaud everyone who works so hard with no money, with no outreach, old-fashioned. And I believe that if you put it to the voters, you may not like this, but that that will show that our elected officials are acting independently without bias, fear, or manipulation. I think it's a common denominator through all these meetings of the pushback of the Church of Scientology and not. Many years ago, you put on the ballot to sell off a public golf course, and Scientology was to buy that golf course. You put it to the voters, the voters said, no, we're not going to do it. I attended Monday's meeting, and we're talking about this beautiful revitalization of Clearwater. We're not going to achieve growth or aid in any form of growth if you're going to take away more property. The irony is the definition of revitalization is the act or process of bringing something back to life. It implies transforming something that is declined. How are you going to revitalize by taking away more things and making them inaccessible to the public? So in my closing, I truly ask that you put this initiative on the ballot. We don't need to squabble over signatures. I think let the people speak. And if it is your true and honest goal to create a welcoming atmosphere for downtown Clearwater, please do just this. Thank you. Yvonne Lissayer. Allison. Sorry. Hello. I'm Yvonne Lissaker. I resigned in Princeton, and I did sign that petition because I believed I was protecting public property. And now I'm going to have to use my notes because I've heard so many wonderful words. Clearwater, to me, is somewhat like a college town, a university town. You know where the town and the university, they work together. You know what I'm talking about. And they do it in a shared city. They're sharing that city. And our large institution happens to be the Church of Scientology, which, and I have to say, as it appears, I'm not a member, truly don't know everything about it, but it does appear to be very large, very influential, very wealthy. And then comes the bad news, and then comes the bad news, also, unfortunately, secretive. And I chose that word because it's more accurate, I think, than saying transparent. And that's the bad news is that it doesn't help new people who work so hard to revitalize this town. Also, it's not located in one spot in Clearwater. It's sprinkled throughout the city, which brings concerns to non-Scientology citizens who are getting a little worried about perhaps the overpurchasing of our land, of our shared city. So that's my request, is you would carefully consider the importance of voting, because voting says a lot of stuff. And what it's going to say, if we can vote, is that the non-Scientology citizens of Clearwater are not second citizens. Allison Zipper. Allison Zipper. Thank you. Hi, my name is Allison Zipper, and I reside in and am registered to vote within the city of Clearwater. And I signed a petition on a fall afternoon in front of the Clearwater East Library. And that petition would require voter approval for the vacation of public right-of-way in downtown. Please don't silence my voice. Thank you, ma'am. Next speaker, please. Patrick Raftery. Good evening, once again. Slightly older, but still the same person. We have heard the conclusion of the clerk on the validity of the petition. She has done what she should do by the ordinance requirements. And I applaud her for the work that was done and the people that assisted her in doing it. You have been asked to make an exception, possibly, to the findings that she has had. If you do that, keep in mind that you have now established a precedent for any petition that might be done in the future that does not meet the legal requirements. You are elected to represent all the residents and we are obligated to trust you will make decisions for the benefit of all of us and our city. There are some who will object to this vacancy simply because the Church of Scientology is involved. That is their right. There are others that would want to see progress made in Clearwater by both the city and the church. The United Land Institute in 2014 said the full potential of downtown Clearwater will not be met unless the city and the church will work together for that development. However, it is very obvious that there are a number of residents who have signed a petition objecting to the vacancy of that land. I say let the voters decide, but all of us, every speaker tonight, myself, and those that have not yet voted, need to keep in mind that when we the people vote and speak, that decision may not go the way that everybody wants it to go, but you will have to accept the vote and the will of we the people when all of the citizens and residents of Clearwater vote. So I highly recommend you allow it to go to vote, and to those that oppose the vacancy of the land, we must accept the will of the people when they vote. Thank you very much. Michael Mastrocerio. Again, thank you for letting me speak. I'm a registered voter. I think you all know that. I live here in Clearwater. Before I go any further, I want to make an apology to Dave Algreton and to the rest of the dais. If you ever thought that I said that any of you had taken money from the church, I never said that, and I would never say that. I respect each and every one of you, so I want to make that apology if it was mistaken by that. But in regards to why we're here tonight, I signed a petition to place the City Streets Initiative on the ballot. Several weeks ago, I asked the city clerk Rose at a board meeting if my signature was thrown out, and she said it had been thrown out, and I should sign again. Wow. How nice. But where were the other 4,300-plus residents that had their signatures thrown out? Were they told to sign again? I'm sure they were not. You have the power to either ignore the voice of the people to be heard or their vote to be cast. But I'm going to stop right there from what I was going to say because it's another story. But I've been humbled to hear all these people speak, young, old. They work so hard. I heard Rose say earlier her staff did a great job, and I applaud her staff because they work hard, and they get paid to do it. These people did a great job. They carried the water, and they got no money for doing it. So they've done a great job. I'll go another step further to say in the last election, I believe there was probably close to 32,000 votes, maybe less than that, cast, and it was a presidential election. Before that, the other election probably was about 24,000 votes cast out of all our voters. So that being said, you put this on the ballot like it should be, and I'll bet you you get more than you ever had in a presidential election. So you can let the people speak, let their voices be heard, or you can make the voices of yourself be heard without listening to them. But I think you all will do a great job and put it on the ballot. So thank you for that, and thank you again for the opportunity to speak before you. Thank you, sir. Mr. Mestercer, thank you. Is there somebody with a last name, Alan? The handwriting is not legible. All right, next person, Lauren Golden. Good evening. Transparently, I'm incredibly sad we're even here having a conversation about whether or not a controversial, secretive, private organization should receive any more space in this neighborhood. My name is Lauren Golden, and I'm a resident business owner, mother, and community member who deeply cares about the future of downtown Clearwater. I signed the petition to require voter approval for the vacation of public right-of-way, as did my husband and all of my neighbor friends on Lebeau Street, less than two miles north of here. I believe decisions involving public land and public access, especially in a downtown area, should remain in the hands of the public. Wanting voter approval, broader community input, and consideration of the greater good is not an unreasonable position. I'm here because I'm invested in creating a thriving, beautiful, and successful downtown. I crave growth, warmth, and liveliness for downtown Clearwater that my family, my two kids have been waiting here for two and a half hours. We are now past bedtime. That we can feel safe in and proud of. And I know I'm not alone in knowing that no single organization or private interest should hold more influence than the residents and taxpayers who call this city home. Whether someone agrees with the petition or not, the right for citizens to have a voice in major decisions like these matters. Please do not silence the voices of residents who took the time to participate in the democratic process. It's going to be very difficult to explain to my children, who have been watching all night, if you don't stand up for We the People. Thank you very much for listening. Thank you. Thank you. Let's speak with you. Tony Tello. Jessica. Thank you. You have one additional minute. I better have. So I'm a restaurant owner. I believe myself to be a big fan of downtown Clearwater. I'm an active citizen. I've been disheartened. I've been, to be honest, ashamed of our local government. I had a speech planned, but I think I'll tell a story because it's just easier. My wife is the person who wasn't a registered voter in this committee. My wife, put it this way, she can't even cheat a monopoly, let alone commit fraud intentionally. You know? So we're moving down to Clearwater. We have two little girls. The love of my life. And we were in the DMV. I was registered the same day she was. My little one's crying. She must have clicked something wrong. We all assumed she was a registered voter because we do things together as young couples do. So we assumed and we were part of the petition for that reason. To my dismay and my disgust, a couple days later, my mother-in-law was faced with a homicide detective that came into her house without a warrant or anything. I didn't ask to speak with her. My family on my in-law side is all Marines, active police officers, and I believe to call them patriots and an honor to call them my relatives. During this time, the objective came in. Both my mother-in-law and my wife were terrified. I think a homicide detective or something like that is, in my eyes, ridiculous, but to each their own. I told my wife not to worry, that it was just a thing with good faith in you guys and love for this community. I continued and said, don't worry. It's not a big deal. Things continued. I had another restaurant in downtown Clearwater. We were flooded, and I think it's directly in correlation with this petition, of complaints, harassments, not only from police officers, but also from anonymous phone calls. During this time, I was with my in-laws, and my brother-in-law, Joey, was on a phone call when we were at one of our relatives, one of his kids' birthdays. During that event, we received a phone call threatening not only my life, but the life of my family from none other but the Church of Scientology. We informed the city, told them what was going on. It continued from harassments, from ATF to local permitting and stuff, and I kept on telling my wife not to worry, but I have faith in you guys. It continued to the point where my street was blocked off, my events that I no longer had, I stopped doing, stopped being involved in city events. To my dismay, the same events were going on across the street. I, again, told my wife not to worry. It's just things happening. I no longer believe that. I was also told during when these things were thrown out that two votes were already in the back by someone. And I have friends in lows and high places from here to California and New York. I sit at bars, and I drink, and I hear people. I was informed by a gentleman who now shares coffee with you guys and talks, I'm not going to say who it was, that this was already thrown out, that it was already won. The conversations with a few of you guys were, it's not going to happen. I said, that's not true. It can't be happening. It's impossible. And that the people who on this board just sat were too scared, if not in cahoots, to throw this out. That there would be every action to throw it out. I ask you guys. Thank you. No, I have an extra minute. Thank you, sir. That was with the additional answer. I ask you guys to make me look like a liar. Thank you. Next speaker. Jan Boggs. Jan Boggs. I'm Jan Boggs. I live in Clearwater. I've lived here 21 years. And I love Clearwater. I love to walk around the area. Even downtown Clearwater, I've come down and walk. Not that it's real welcoming anymore. But I'm a registered voter. And I've signed as well as canvassed with others that have also canvassed and waived the signs along with many others to make it open for other people to sign the petition also so that their votes would count as well as mine. So I'm just praying for voter approval for the vacation of public right-of-way not to happen. And I want the voter approval for the vacation of public right-of-way in downtown Clearwater, the petition to require that. And just a little thing for thought is listen and silent are spelled with the same letters. And I don't think right now is the time for any of us to be silent. And I just hope that you will consider not silence in our votes. Thank you, ma'am. Diane Welter. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council, for listening to us. I'm a Clearwater registered voter. I've been here for 20 years. I respectfully request my voice and my vote to be heard. I signed the petition not to vacate Garden Street to Scientology. Myself and all my neighbors on Island Estates that I spoke with all signed the petition. I volunteered at St. Pete College Library and saw lines of cars waiting to sign the petition. The citizens showed strong support not to let any organization take over public streets without voter approval. Unfortunately, I feel like I'm losing faith in my city council and feel as if I have no voice, as the council seems to kowtow to an organization who erodes our tax base and offers no benefits to Clearwater except to themselves. It's public property. I think the public should decide. And I also believe that a house divided cannot stand and a city divided cannot stand. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am. Next speaker, please. Ellen Blythe. Genevieve likes Dimit. So I'm Vivi Dimit, and I live on Clearwater Beach, and I'm not a good public speaker, but I did want, and I did not have the opportunity to sign the petition, and I'm ashamed that I didn't go out and gather signatures myself, but I have spoken to a lot of my neighbors and friends, and I literally have not found one person that is in favor of not allowing the citizens to vote on this in our org of selling a public street. So obviously you've heard from a lot of people tonight, and a lot of people did sign petitions, and I think the right thing to do would be to allow people to vote. And I'm just wondering if there's a good reason why you would not, because, I mean, you don't have to have a petition to make a decision to put this on the, you know, to let people vote. So I just wonder what the reason would be not to allow that. Thank you so much. Thank you, ma'am. Yeah, thank you. Mayor, we have 33 seconds left for the hour. Yeah. How many speakers do we have left? We have five. Okay. Yeah, council, I'm persuaded by the folks who said they paid $30 to park tonight, so if we only have five, do I have to consider the council? Yes. We'll take them all. All right, next individual, Sylvia Patterson. Julie Holliday. So since we're in overtime, I'll make this quick. And I've, throughout the past hour, heard all the sentiments I have already expressed to you. And I signed this petition very early on, as well as my husband and my son and close friends. And we'd like our signatures to be counted and our voices to be heard. And the one thing I've gathered tonight that I don't understand is, why aren't you leaping at the opportunity to put this on the ballot? To take it out of your hands, give it to the voters, and nobody has to be angry with you or upset, but the public deal with it. They can be angry at each other, but put it on the ballot and let us vote. Speaker? Kathleen Warren. My name is Kathleen Warren, and that little girl, well, she's not so little, is my daughter, Andy Rose. And she has, as you can see, significant special needs. She can't speak, but she can make noise, and she can walk, but not long distances. I don't have a caregiver for her, so when I went out gathering signatures door to door or in a public setting, I took her with me. She's mostly patient. As I talk with people about this initiative to give the citizens of Clearwater the ability to vote rather than depend on their city council to handle proposals to vacate streets in downtown Clearwater. The two of us, along with the other hardworking people in the Save the Garden group, have worked tirelessly to take back our city and to save Garden Avenue. Mr. Albrecht, Mr. Menino, and Mr. Cotton, I feel like you truly hate your constituents, those people who supported you and voted for you to make the decisions they care about. Not one of you during your campaigns pledged to support Scientology or any other rich and powerful group that wanted to purchase property in streets in downtown Clearwater. All three of you pledged to make decisions for your constituents. You have over 8,000 of these voters telling you they want a voice in the decision to allow Scientology to purchase Garden Avenue. These citizens are frustrated and unhappy with the decisions of the city council for the past 50 years. Every one of these 8,000 people are appalled and frustrated that this city council continues to sell land and properties to Scientology. Why are you gentlemen unwilling to do what they want after you promised you would? Mr. Menino, I recently saw an ad you placed when you ran for this council seat, and I'm quoting verbatim from your ad. How have you stood up for the Clearwater residents? How have you protected our quality of life, represented our neighborhoods at City Hall, while you vote to sell Scientology a public street that your constituents don't want you to sell? I talked with one lady in the countryside area. When I explained to her why I was asking for a signature, she told me Ryan Cotton would not be voting to give Scientology Garden Avenue. I know him. I worked on his campaign. He's a Christian. He would never vote for this. Sadly, I had to inform her that you, Mr. Cotton, are one of the strongest advocates for giving the street to Scientology. She was aghast and disappointed and frustrated because she believed every promise you made when you ran for this seat. As I said in the beginning, I believe you must hate the citizens of Clearwater because you refuse to listen to them and do what they ask of you. The citizens of Clearwater do not want Scientology to take any more buildings or streets in their city. And I do mean take. Money means nothing for them. Thank you, ma'am. Thank you. Let's give it to us. Jo Beth Dixon. Jo Beth. I'm going to restate what so many people have said before me, that public streets should stay public. The public should have a vote or a say in any changes to public streets. They are public, they've been public, and they should stay public. And I moved here in 2002, and downtown Clearwater was a vibrant city with shops and restaurants up and down Cleveland Street. Little by little, the Scientologists have infiltrated that area through anonymous purchases and ambiguous LLCs. I was one of the people that went out to obtain signatures on the petition that Jill handed me, which was legal size. I filled the paper and did not have a second legal size piece for more signatures. So I took the back, copied it, and reduced it to standard size so that I could copy it on my computer, filled it with signatures, and those were not accepted because they were not on legal size paper. And I find that that is kind of one of those little picky things that was probably not really necessary, but it was really a way to keep people from putting their name on these petitions. I do not think you should ignore the voters, those that have spoken tonight, and even those that have not come but feel the same way we do. We deserve to be heard. Do not ignore us. Stephen Harris. I hope you all are disturbed about what we've heard from various folks about what's going on in our government, that somebody will take a peek at it. Maybe you're all together, but it sure sounds like there might not be things that are going according to oil. Each of you, you have already heard and you knew, in order for you to get on the ballot, it takes a petition signed by 250 people, then you give a $100 check, sign a few other things, and you're on the ballot. Now, that's against 250 people. That's against the voting population of, I don't know, but it's up near 100,000. That sounds pretty meager, doesn't it? Oh, well, guess what? It's okay that that's meager because putting you on the ballot is not that consequential. The vote is what's consequential. I'm going to give – each of you has a number that I'm going to give you. Keep it in mind as I continue to talk. Ms. Teixeira, your number is 9,537. Mr. Albritton, 8,029. Mayor Richter, 12,007. Mr. Menino, 10,497. And Mr. Cotton, 9,200. That's the number of votes that it took to get you each elected to the seat you're in now. Compare that number to the God knows what our real number is from what we've heard tonight. But clearly 8,000 is in the ballpark. That's people voting not for anything. That's 8,000 signatures for something that's not of consequence. What's the result of that if you put it on the ballot? It's a little extra ink on a ballot. You've got 8,000 voters who are only asking you to spend a little on ink. That's it. Now, last point. Here in Clearwater, we're facing perhaps even an existential threat. We've got the county moving out. We're going to have a lot of something going on. A lot. And it's going to take outsiders, respected outsiders, and financiers to come in and do the development the way we hope it will be done to revitalize Clearwater. I've been in that world. If you're taking that kind of risk in an environment where you've got a city government that has so convinced the world that you're in the pocket of Scientology, they don't come. The Sound, the Coachman Park, that wasn't outside money. That's our money. We're the only ones who are willing to invest in this. And you're going to scare away everybody else. Thank you, sir. That's the rest of the list, but I know there's two individuals standing. I'm from the Bel Air District. I can't even believe that we are here tonight fighting for the right to vote for public land. If I came home and my husband had sold my garage without even telling me and without asking, this is okay. So that's why it's just not even logical to me. Okay, so I feel we need to – we have a bigger thing going on here than Clearwater. Also, I think that all those boats that – or all those signatures that didn't get considered should be considered because, as far as I know, we are still the county seat. So people from other areas are really invested in Clearwater. We all come down here to take care of our business, you know, so – and we have for years. So we have – I've been here for years. Another thing is I can't believe we're considering closing down a street. I've lived in Florida my whole life. I've lived right here, actually, my whole life. And I've seen hurricanes do some weird things. Now, even if the citizens aren't driving down Gordon Avenue in a hurricane, although you'll go where you can when you need to get out of the way, there might be a need for putting fire trucks there or ambulances there or somebody to – or wreckers to move a wreck out of the way. We cannot be closing down streets. We live within minutes of the Gulf of Mexico. And that's my last name. Thank you for your hard work, keeping the lights on, and the fun and sun capital of the world. Thank you. Good speaker. Good speaker. Thank you. Good evening, council. This is actually my first city council meeting. I'm proud to be here, proud to be a citizen. And I would just like to say save the garden. Thank you. Jeremy, I'm there. You're good. So, all right, thank you for having me as a late add. Mayor, members of council, I'll keep this brief. I respect the viewpoint of the petitioners and those who signed. Their efforts were real, and the civic instinct behind it was very much worth acknowledging. But this process has proven two things. First, the petitioners are in the minority. And second, that they have not met the standard required by the charter to advance this petition. The city clerk's office has done their due diligence, and by all accounts, five times over. Duplicate signatures were identified. Unregistered voters were identified. Non-residents were identified. When invalid signatures are removed, the petition falls well short of the threshold required by the charter. That determination is well documented, well supported, and on the record. I understand the disappointment of the petitioner's field. Hard work that doesn't reach its goal is genuinely painful. But disappointment is not a basis to override the clerk's determination, and sincere efforts is not a substitute to meet the signature requirements. The clerk has done her job. The charter has been applied correctly, and the appropriate action tonight is to honor that determination. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Okay. Do we have any other speakers? Okay. Well, thank you all who spoke for respecting one another and, you know, for some applause. Most of you cooperating, kind of getting us to and from the podium so we can get through that quickly. I'm glad everyone who came tonight that had something to say could be heard. So we've ended the public comment time. Now it's time for the council to discuss this issue. So I'd ask for you to pay the same respect to the council that the council just paid to each of you. No one interrupted you while you were up the podium, and we allowed you to speak. And there may be things that you hear in our discussion that you don't agree with. I'd like for you to respect the fact that it's our time to discuss and not interrupt us while we're discussing. So thank you in advance for that. With that, first, is there anything that I guess you all might want to add over and above what you've already said? Yes, council. So in response to a comment that was made tonight and as well as an e-mail that council has been provided regarding the use of not counting or rather the lack, not counting the voters that were considered to be inactive. So an inactive voter is an individual who has not voted in the last two election cycles, and the supervisor of elections office has reached out to them, and the correspondence has not been returned or has been returned to them and unanswered. Those individuals were not counted, and they were listed as not registered because they were not on the active voter roll. What individuals need to understand is that due to a case law back in December 23, 2025, the state was directed not to count inactive voters when it comes to petitions. So that's why when the supervisor of elections office gave me the database, they only gave me the active rollers because by law they can only count active voters. And those are the individuals that were identified as active or rather appropriate and were accepted. Just a couple things. So there's a couple comments made during the public comment about the rejection of the petitioner's committee because it's not comprised of five voters, and that violates the First Amendment. I'm not aware of any case law that states that. In fact, I'm not aware of any legal authority that states that not being registered to vote is something that's curable. For the signature petition forms, there were some comments made about how the proposed ordinance is not required to be attached. I disagree with that. If you look at Charter Section 6.05B, it states, These petitions shall contain or have attached here through throughout the circulation the full text of the ordinance proposed or sought to be reconsidered. Also, on the signature petition forms in the first full paragraph, underlined, it says a copy of the proposed ordinance is attached. So it is a requirement. As to the clerk not specifying the particulars, If you look at the clerk's certificate, she followed the part of the charter in 6.06, and she specified the specific grounds, such as the grounds in 6.05A, lack of voters, and in B, not having the form of tax. Okay. I think the way we'll do this is, does anyone on the council have questions for the city attorney or agency? If there are no questions, I had one. The inactive voter was, how many was that? 16,000, roughly. Of the ones that were rejected because they were determined to be inactive. So based on the petition, 16,000 is what's found on the inactive roll for the city of Clearwater. For the petitions that were submitted, So in the amendments, they submitted, there were 148. But of the 148, only 91 were not registered. When they submitted initially, of the non-registered, it was 519. And when those that were submitted that were not counted because they were signed prior to October 7th, that was 549. So if you were to add all three, they still fell short of. Because a lot of the other signatures that were received did not live within Clearwater City limits. Got it. What I thought. So if there are other further questions, then would anybody like to comment or discuss before we? No, I've got some. Oh, okay. Sure. Put it back there. Okay, Vice Mayor. Okay, very good. Thank you. First off, to everyone here, I want to acknowledge the level of civic engagement we've seen here. Getting signatures is no easy task. Many of you acknowledge that every elected official sitting here had to go through the process and understands firsthand just how tasking it is to get 250 signatures. So gathering more than 8,000 signatures is absolutely commendable. And I genuinely respect the effort and participation involved. Civic engagement is healthy, it matters, and it's one of the strengths of our nation. But civic engagement must also operate within established rules and procedures. To the committee, it was said that not knowing whether a committee member was registered to vote was a minor clerical issue. Respectfully, I disagree. We teach our children from a young age to follow instructions and complete requirements properly. Rules matter because consistency matters. Intentions may have been good, but that doesn't erase the obligation to follow the process correctly. I also believe context matters. Many of us remember how the Save the Garden Committee specifically originally formed around the proposed Garden Avenue vacation request. At the time, presentations were made involving the Mac Dixon Memorial Park concept, which later had to be revised after concerns arose regarding the use of a family's name and involvement. The concept evolved into broader historic and downtown theme. And after the original vacation request was withdrawn, the committee transformed into the petition drive we have before us today. A few weeks ago, I reached out to several pastors personally within Clearwater's African-American community and simply asked whether there had been continued outreach or collaboration regarding the vision that had originally been presented. What I heard concerned me. Some were unaware the committee was still active. One had only vague knowledge of the petition itself. And to me, that raises an important question. If a demographic of our community is going to be publicly championed, that community should remain actively included. In my view, very first signatures should have come from the very people who were originally presented as partners in the vision, not used as a means to an end. Now, from my concerns as a Christian, our calling is to know Christ and make Christ known. It is to lead people towards grace, truth, redemption, and hope. It's the gospel that God sent his son, Jesus Christ, to live a sinless life, to be crucified, buried, and raised three days later. Later on, raising to the right hand of the Father God so that when we stand before him one day, it's not our works that justify us, but the sacrifice of Christ. So when I see fellow believers, specifically in this committee, publicly defining themselves primarily through opposition to their neighbors, it begins to resemble a modern-day crusade against a religious organization, more than an effort to reflect Christ in our community. And that's disappointing, because people are always watching how we conduct ourselves. And whether we reflect anger or we reflect Christ matters. I finally want to address the broader conversation that is downtown. As a second-generation Clearwater native, for decades, many residents, including myself, have asked the same questions. Why is downtown stagnant? Why are buildings sitting empty? Why is there no movement? Now we're beginning to see investment, redevelopment, entertainment, restaurants, construction, visible progress. That does not mean that every decision up here is going to be universally agreed upon. But we cannot spend decades asking as a community for activation and then oppose every sign of activity when it finally arrives. I also do not believe requiring every right-of-way vacation request to become a city-wide referendum is good policy for the future of downtown. Whether it's a small family business, a local entrepreneur, or a large developer, very few people will be willing to spend substantial time and money engineering, planning, designing, and navigating city review processes if the final outcome can simply become a political campaign that decides their project. That level of uncertainty does not just impact one organization. It impacts every future investment opportunity in our downtown and risks discouraging the very activation residents have been asking for for decades. I also believe government must be careful not to overstep into the realm of private property rights. While regulations and oversight certainly have their place, there's a slippery slope when government begins to decide who can or cannot own property based upon the size of their holdings or public sentiment. In my view, the role of local government is to apply law fairly and consistently to everyone. My responsibility is to represent all of Clearwater, every neighborhood, every resident, and to pursue results that move our city forward together. At the end of the day, tonight's question is actually very narrow. The question is whether or not the petition is legally sufficient. After reviewing the data that everybody has heard from the clerk and the city attorney, I do not believe it is. And for that reason, I will be supporting the clerk's certification. Thank you. We're all bitten. Okay. I've heard a lot of stories today, tonight, about the people who have been here 10, 20, 30 years in Clearwater. I understand everybody sitting out here in the audience hates church Scientology. Okay? But listen, let me finish. Let me finish because I'm just going to talk off the top of my head because I didn't write anything down, but I've got a lot swirling around up here. I've heard a lot of insults from people that, you know, we're getting paid off by the church and blah, blah, blah. You're not going to vote for us because we're not voting your way. I can tell you this as a retired contractor. You guys have been misguided because I'll tell you why. Because if you, if every referendum, if every vacation of right-of-way has to go to a referendum, you're killing every developer that's going to come down here and do anything in downtown Clearwater. They're not going to go through the time and money to do that. And, you know, I hear on the news all the time, we're losing our democracy. We don't have a democracy. We have a democratic republic. You guys elected us to make decisions. And we're up here. We make hard decisions. And we've got to take a lot of stuff. And, you know, you are very nice to us, but that's our job. We don't have to really care about that. What I care about is what's the best for the city of Clearwater. And you know what a vacation of right-of-way is, by the way? A vacation of the right-of-way is vacating a right-of-way over the top of land that's owned by somebody. And the city don't own it. The people that abut that road own it. And you're just vacating the right-of-way, which is a public use, over the top of it. So we're not selling any land. We're vacating a right-of-way of somebody that already owns the land. Okay? So all I hear is we're not going to sell any more land to the Church of Scientology. We're not selling any land. You know how many vacations I've done in the eight years I've been up here? I've probably close to 100, maybe, because people are always asking. We just did some last council meeting because developers come in. They want to vacate an alley or a right-of-way or a street to develop something. If that has to every time go out to a public referendum, nothing's going to happen. What you see right now is what it's going to be for the rest of the century, because we're going to scare away everybody that comes down here. And you've got to know that right off the top, that that's what's going to happen. And that's the only reason of this whole thing. And I've tried to tell people, be careful what you're signing. You're signing a petition to run Scientology out of Clearwater. You're not doing that. You're signing a petition to run developers out of Clearwater. So that's where I come from. I listen to you. You can listen to me, okay? Please don't interrupt the council. Please. I don't have two minutes. Folks, I'm asking you not to. Anyway. If you can't stop from interrupting the council, we're going to have you please leave. It's hard for me to identify who's speaking up, who's interrupting. I'm just asking you. We gave you the courtesy of listening to you. Please don't interrupt the council members while they're speaking. Look, I really enjoy your passion, and I'm glad you came out. I listened to every person tonight. I understand you're very passionate about it. We are all passionate about it up here. But because we don't vote your way doesn't mean we're voting for the Church of Scientology or any certain organization. We vote. Our job is to vote for what's best for Clearwater. That's all I wanted to say. Somebody else can take over for me now. Okay. Anybody else? Mr. Menino. All right. Thank you. We'll just take a deep breath for a second, and I'll breathe. I want to thank everybody who came out, shared your stories with us. Obviously, this topic in Clearwater is always emotional, and it has been for 50 years, and rightfully so. And with those emotions come frustrations. I feel those same frustrations come anger. I've felt that same anger over the years. But when people disagree with you from the dais, it doesn't necessarily mean your voices are not being heard. It doesn't mean that your voices are not being understood or counted. That's not necessarily what that means. Let me quickly take the suspense out of it so I don't have you sitting on the edge of your chair. What this is tonight, as the mayor said in the very beginning, is simply approving or disapproving the clerk's certificate. Our city charter in Clearwater, to me, is more than just a document, a staple piece of paper, a binder on all of our shelves. It's a foundation and a framework of our local government. It protects the voices of the people, just as it gave you this pathway. It also protects our city. When citizens engage in a petition process like this, we understand you clearly care. Nobody said you didn't. We get that. We also applaud and understand and recognize the hard work that goes into it. It's not easy. We've all seen your committee at special events, in the hot sun at 96 degrees, outside of our recreation centers or our libraries or at music festivals. We've seen you out there, and it's uncomfortable. I get it. But we and I, I applaud the effort. Whatever decision is made up here to certify or discertify should not take away from the passion, the effort, and the love that the committee and your group has put towards this petition process. It should be recognized. That very exercising of your rights in this democracy is directly related to how we shape our government. But that is why protecting the integrity of our charter and the provisions and the processes involved in it is also vitally important. Regardless of where anyone stands on a particular issue, every resident should expect and deserves the process to be fair, transparent, lawful, and accountable. I trust in our clerk's office that it was fair, it was transparent, it was accountable. She didn't just run through and check names one time. We've heard three, four, five times, and I commend, as I commend the committee for how much work that went into this, I also commend the hours of time and resources that our staff have devoted to not just counting, but to answering questions, answering emails, and facilitating a process that's fair, a process that must be fair. We as a dais, we as a leadership team, a clerk, a city attorney's office, we must all have confidence that those signatures that are collected are properly verified and the rules and guidelines are followed in a consistent manner. I believe they were in this instance. This decision today that's before us, it's not about politics. We have to be able to take that layer of emotions out, although it's challenging. It's about preserving the rule of law and protecting the integrity of the charter in the city of Clearwater and of our great city, that while we disagree, what we all agree in is that we love our city. We're passionate about our home, Clearwater. We all believe that Clearwater is one of the best cities, not only in the state and in the country. There's no questions about that. We believe in that. We're as passionate. There's no questions about that. But with that said, while I acknowledge and respect the timing and the passion put into it, I strongly feel that based on approval or disapproval, I'm going to support 100% the decision of the city clerk's office, as I know, in my heart of hearts, it was made with the utmost integrity, the utmost fairness, and as transparent as this process could be. Again, I thank you all for your passion in our community. I thank you for being out here and exercising your voices. Again, your voices are heard. They're not being silenced. I'm going to approve the clerk's certificate tonight. That's worth it. This has been so difficult for me. This is a conversation that I basically hear every day, but today was in surround sound. And a lot that was said, I agreed. A lot that was said, I was taken aback. But it's very important to me, and it's part of my everyday life. And so let me begin by saying that I want to go on record and formally acknowledge the Herculean effort behind this petition. While it's true that a portion of the signatures were disqualified due to a technical issue with one of the collectors, and others were disqualified for various reasons, the petition ultimately did not satisfy the procedural requirements. That does not diminish the fact that thousands of residents chose to publicly express their concerns through that process. Their voices will not simply disappear because of a procedural flaw, at least not in my mind. But these are part of the established rules of the process, and they are applied consistently. I also want to be clear about something else. I have no interest in disparaging or discrediting this rule. It is important to acknowledge that part of this initiative is rooted on a level of mistrust. And even though we might disagree, that feeling must not be ignored. But at this time, with all the information conveyed to me, I do want to state for the record that I have full confidence in our city clerk and staff. The validation process was thorough, it was well documented, and it was carried out with integrity. Again, recognizing that does not diminish the voices behind this petition. It simply affirms that the process itself matters. I have met with this group on more than one occasion, and I genuinely was impressed with the passion and commitment, and I enjoyed the conversations. I do, though, regret that we were ultimately unable to come to a compromise on the language or agree on other possible alternatives. Now, I want to be equally clear. I do not support the language of this petition. I do feel, after speaking with so many developers in the industry, there is a lot of potential negative impact, and I don't want to jeopardize where we're at with the revitalization of downtown. But, however, this agreement should never translate into dismissal, and I'm not dismissing it. This initiative deserves to be recognized for what it is, and it is a significant demonstration of civic engagement. As many of my colleagues know, and it's been mentioned before, collecting 250 signatures was difficult. I encountered people that simply did not want to have their name on a document that was public record. So the idea of anyone collecting 8,800 signatures is truly impressive, and it will not be ignored. But regardless of where one stands on the issue itself, the level of participation, in my mind, is simply described as incredible. It was mentioned before about votes, and you are correct. Looking up the last three election cycles, many of the council members received less than 8,800 votes, and those were anonymous. These people on the petition put their names and addresses on a controversial petition. That says something. I do, however, want to reiterate that while many signatures were disqualified, even if they were counted, the petition still fell short of the required threshold. And that is an important distinction in evaluating both the process and the outcome. But in my mind, your voices are not going away, and you still have another option. There's an election coming up. The individuals who signed this petition, and everyone else, will have the opportunity to ask the candidates where they stand on this issue. And they should insist on clear answers, not vague positions or carefully worded ambiguity, especially when it comes to something as consequential as the privatization of public roads. And ultimately, you will have your voice projected, and it will be reflected on the ballot. That is how the process works, and that is something we should respect. With all that said, I am very passionate about protecting public roads. It is valuable. It's a valuable part of our downtown. It is crucial to the success of our downtown. And I will continue to protect the access to those public roads. I will go last. So I first want to say this about our city clerk. This is not – one of the speakers tonight said that she had done a monumental job, and I want to echo that. This is a petition, really, a first impression for the city and for her. We've not encountered this kind of petition for many years, and I don't think since she's been city clerk. I can tell you that I have the highest respect for our city clerk. I don't know all the city clerks around the state of Florida. I know a number of them, but there are a lot of good ones, but I will put our city clerk up against any city clerk in the state of Florida. In my opinion, she's one of the best clerks in the state. She shoots straight down the middle. She works very closely with our supervisor of elections, Julie Marcus, when we're doing the petition cards. She doesn't actually review those. The supervisor of elections office does that, and I know Julie Marcus, our supervisor of elections, and Julie always says, you know, when it comes to election time during my job, I'm not Republican, I'm not Democrat, I'm independent. I'm to be fair to everyone, and I can tell you that our city clerk operates the same way and has done that here. You may disagree with her, you may not like how she decided things, but I can tell you she did it with integrity, and her office is one of the best in the state of Florida, and I want to commend her for that. I also want to say, secondly, that I appreciate everyone coming out tonight, particularly the ones who paid $30 for parking. Unfortunately, you know, soon we'll have a separate city hall, and they can have concerts over here, and we won't have a conflict, and you won't have to do that. So I apologize for anyone that had to pay for parking tonight. But I appreciate you coming out and sharing, because that voice is something that I hope we all hear, and I hope the community hears, because I know and we know, just from being candidates, it's how hard it is to get those petition cards signed. And the first time I ran for office, I just took everybody's word. They lived in Clearwater, they're in the city of Clearwater, and they're a registered voter. And lo and behold, I turned my first batch in, and a hundred or more got rejected. And what I learned is that, and what I've learned since being mayor, I get calls all the time from folks asking me to help them, because they have a Clearwater address. When I ask them where they live, I have to explain to them, you don't live within the city of Clearwater. I have to refer them to somebody else. Some of them live within the city limits of Largo, actually. So I know how hard it is. And people, when they tell you they're Clearwater, they're a Clearwater voter, they really think they are. And they voted, they just don't realize they haven't voted in the city election. And I know how hard it is to get 250 signatures. And it's really hard to get as many as you did. So I understand the frustration, and I've been there on a smaller level. Well, I can tell you the second time around, I learned a lot. And the second time around, I vetted them all before I turned them in. Public, available to the public, the registration rolls. You can find out who are registered voters within the city of Clearwater. So you can go through and scour those. Hindsight 2020, not going to help you this time, but if another petition comes up, it could help you. So I understand that, and I also understand this. The sentiment I heard expressed tonight is I've knocked on doors throughout the city of Clearwater. The folks who said that these signatures represent the general feeling of our city and community, I agree with that. I think it would be popular if it were on the ballot, because the sentiment that was expressed tonight, I think, represents a large part of the sentiment across the city. Right or wrong, whether you like that or not, I think that's the reality. But tonight, we, as I said at the beginning, we're not talking about that. We're only talking about whether or not this petition met the charter requirements to put it on the ballot, unfortunately. And I hope that we would keep our discussion, at least up here, to that. I don't want to get into a debate on other issues, but I do want to say I don't agree with attacking Christians on this issue. I know for a fact there are people in the audience that came out to speak tonight who are not Christians. There are folks here tonight that spoke. They are of multiple faiths. I know folks that signed this petition, they are agnostic or atheist. To attack Christians, single out Christians, just because some did express their faith tonight, that is unfair, and I don't agree with that. The sentiment that was expressed tonight is a lot of different faiths and a lot of different backgrounds, and I just wanted to say that. But moving on to where I landed on this, I viewed this, because I've been practicing law a long time, a lot like probably a lawyer would look at it. I looked at it as if I were a judge, how would I rule on a motion for summary judgment? How would I take the case away from the jury to not let the jury decide, but to say, no, on the law, there's no way they can prove their case. And so I looked at it every way I could to give the petition the benefit of the doubt. What if you did consider these signatures? So any of the people that were signed before the committee actually had five people on, I gave the benefit of the doubt on that. Where I really had trouble was on this inactive voter, and some of the folks who turned out were not registered to vote in Clearwater. They weren't Clearwater citizens. They thought they were, but they weren't. Well-intended, but there just aren't enough, even if you count those that were signed before they had a full committee of registered voters, to meet the threshold. And folks were talking about, you know, I think there were some folks, not everyone, but some folks wanted us to deviate from the charter. Folks, we can't do that. Our charter has to be amended by voters. So our charter says what our charter says, and it requires a certain number. It does say Clearwater voters. We can't change the charter, and the charter has requirements that just weren't met, in my opinion, in the clerk's opinion, by reviewing it with the signatures that were presented. So that's the only issue for us tonight. And so I'm going to support the clerk's determination that the petition did not have enough required signatures. Again, I understand the frustration. I understand what was said tonight and agree with a lot of it, that what was said tonight does represent enough people that you could get enough signatures. But for this petition that was turned in, I don't believe, based upon what the clerk's determined, I'm going to support her opinion that it was not sufficient. So if there's any further discussion, then we'll move to a vote if there's a motion. Make a motion to approve the certificate of the city clerk in agenda item 7.4. Second. Okay. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Unanimous. Thank you for coming tonight, those who came on this agenda item. Let me move to the agenda item 8.1. 8.1 is a second reading. I'll go ahead and read the title. Ordinance number 9864-26, an ordinance of the city of Clearwater, Florida, amending the future land use element of the comprehensive plan of the city to change the land use designation for certain real property located on the north side of Nursery Road, approximately 186 feet east of Rose Tree Court, whose post office address is 2446 Nursery Road, Clearwater, Florida, 33764, from residential urban to residential medium, providing an effective date. Anyone here tonight has a desire to speak to agenda item 8.1? Hearing the city of none, is there any discussion? If not, is there a motion? Motion to approve agenda item 8.1. Second. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Unanimous. General item 8.2. 8.2 is a second reading. Ordinance number 9890-26, an ordinance of the city of Clearwater, Florida, annexing certain real property located on the north side of the Nursery Road, approximately 126 feet east of Rose Tree Court, whose post office address is 2446 Nursery Road, Clearwater, Florida, 33764, into the corporate limits of the city, and redefining the boundary lines of the city to include set addition, providing an effective date. Is there anyone here tonight's desire to speak to agenda item 8.2? Hearing the same, none. Is there any council discussion? If not, it's their motion. Motion to approve. Agenda item 8.2? Second. Opposed. In favor? Aye. Aye. Opposed? Unanimous. Agenda item 8.3. Second reading, Ordinance number 9891-26, an ordinance of the city of Clearwater, Florida, and many of the future land use element of the comprehensive plan of the city to designate the land use for certain real property located on the north side of Nursery Road, approximately 126 feet east of Rose Tree Court, whose post office address is 2446 Nursery Road, Clearwater, Florida, 33764, upon annexation to the city of Clearwater, as residential urban, providing an effective date. Is there anyone here tonight's desire to speak to agenda item 8.3? Excuse me. He's the applicant of 8.128.3. Address is there. I'm sorry. The address you mentioned on 8.2, 8.3, and also on 8.3. There's 2448 Nursery Road. Which one are you on? 8.3? 8.2. You mentioned 2446 Nursery is 2448 Nursery. 244. 2448. Yeah. And on 8.3, you did the same. You said 2446 is 2448. Okay. It's 2448. I can read. So if you're on 8.3, I'll just read it again. And 8.4 is 2448 also. I live in that house. So let me just read it 1.3 again. I don't want to make sure it's correctly in there. Thank you, sir. So ordinance of the city of Clearwater, Florida, and many of the future land use element of the comprehensive plan of the city. To designate the land use for certain real property located on the north side of Nursery Road, approximately 126 feet east of Rose Street Court, whose post office address is 2448 Nursery Road, Clearwater, Florida 33764. Upon annexation to the city of Clearwater, as residential urban, providing an effective date. Okay. This is 8.3 now. I'm confused. Okay. Does anyone want to speak to agenda item 8.3? Okay. If not, is there any council discussion? If not, is there a motion? Move to approve agenda item 8.3. Second. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Unanimous. Agenda item 8.3. Ordinance number 9892-26, an ordinance of the city of Clearwater, Florida, amending the zoning atlas of the city by zoning certain real property located on the north side of Nursery Road, approximately 126 feet east of Rose Street Court, whose post office address is 2448 Nursery Road, Clearwater, Florida 33764. Upon annexation to the city of Clearwater, as a medium density residential, providing an effective date. Does anybody here tonight desire to speak to agenda item 8.4? General, I'm allowed to speak to this because I might see it on the board. Should I speak to it? Because this came before us on the board. Are you speaking in your individual capacity? Please. Are you speaking in your individual capacity? Yes, individual capacity. And the only reason I'm aware of it is because it came before us. And I'm just wondering, as you, maybe you have other details and you've got details about this, and I don't know what all the answers are to it. But I just want to make sure you're clear about it. This is a residential home for disabled or problem people. And I know the neighbors were all against him being able to address this and get larger. So I just, we as a board made a decision according to the law to go ahead and pour it. It's your own personal capacity. So anyway, I just wondered if you're all aware of what is going on there. And because there was a woman there that said the license wasn't even up to date. There's a number of things. And I'm not aware of it all. I'm just asking you, are you aware of it all before you vote? That's my biggest question. Anyone else desire to speak to this agenda? If not, is there any council discussion? Just on the comments just made, the staff report was in here, so we know the staff report. I don't believe we had anybody come forward from the community to speak on it tonight, other than your comments tonight. So I don't recall getting any communication other than what the staff support report was. Okay. Is there a motion? Motion to approve agenda item 8.4. Second. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Unanimous. Agenda item 8.5. Ordinance number 9893-26, Ordinance of the City of Clearwater, Florida, annexing certain unaddressed real property located on the north side of Sunset Road, approximately 252 feet west of North McMullen Booth Road, in Clearwater, Florida, 33759, into the corporate limits of the city, and redefining the boundary lines of the city to include set addition, providing an effective date. Does anyone here tonight desire to speak to the agenda item 8.5? Seeing none, is there any council discussion? If not, is there a motion? Motion to approve agenda item 8.5. Second. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Unanimous. Agenda item 8.6. Ordinance number 9894-26, an ordinance of the City of Clearwater, Florida, amending the future land use element of the comprehensive plan of the city to designate the land use for certain unaddressed real property located on the north side of Sunset Point, approximately 252 feet west of North McMullen Booth, in Clearwater, Florida, 33759, upon annexation into the city of Clearwater, as residential urban, providing an effective date. All those in favor? I hope that I desire to speak to the agenda item 8.6. Hearing is saying none, is there a council discussion? If not, is there a motion? Move to approve agenda item 8.6. Second. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Unanimous. Agenda item 8.7. Ordinance number 9895-26, an ordinance of the City of Clearwater, Florida, amending the zoning atlas of the city by zoning certain unaddressed real property located on the north side of Sunset Point Road, approximately 252 feet west of North McMullen Booth, in Clearwater, Florida, 33759, upon annexation to the city of Clearwater, as low-medium density residential, providing an effective date. The mayor from the public, I desire to speak to the agenda item 8.7. We see none. If there's no council discussion, is there a motion? Move to approve the agenda item 8.7. Second. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Unanimous. Move to agenda item 9. So this is to be heard on topics not on tonight's agenda. Bill Gibbs, Kelly Meyer, Rudy Michelek. Mr. Mayor, council members, city management, my name is Rudy Michelek. I'm here actually to talk tonight about the Hotel Density Reserve Pool, Beach by Design. Approximately 79 pages of desire, wishes, and specific details of requirements for construction within the Clearwater Beach area. The program is 30 years old, approximately. It's been updated once. To say that the initial design took in all infrastructure needs for the future, and all this stuff was considered, and we factored that all in. Well, one program we've got going right now, I believe, is the second, third year of a 10-year program of over $120 million for North Beach infrastructure changes. I'm sure that was not figured in the original design of looking at this. Secondly, within the program, there is a listing of a number of different number of units per acre based upon what part of the location of the beach you were in. And the reason I bring that up is between 2016 and 2018, Palm Pavilion had 35 units from the pool. They turned those back in in 2018. That was my introduction for coming to city council. 27 of those 35 units were used for 850 Bayway Hotel. And I bring that up because those 27 units with the 33 they had came to 60. So I was among a group that went to Michael Delk, who was in charge of planning at the time, and asked him, what is the density that you can have for a hotel? And he specifically said to us at the time, 90 units per acre. That's the standard. And the reason that's proved out is that they had two-thirds of an acre of land that they used for 850. Hence, they got 60 units they could build on that property. So that all ties out. So I was kind of amazed to hear of the earlier one where we're now putting 144 units on 1.06 acres. That seems like way too much. Anyhow, the things that I really want to point out is I think we're at a point in time in which this whole process needs to be reevaluated by city staff. We need to look at our infrastructure, at all the services we have available, and say, what is the build-out we really need? We need to look at the hotel room occupancy average for the year. How much, you know, do we really need more units down there, or have we already reached the number we have? So that ask is, please, let's have that evaluation. Let's put some of this stuff on hold. There is a report. It took us six years to get. You'll be able to see. There were 10 units as of February. They got nine more because 100 were added, 91 were taken out. Thank you. That leaves about 800. Thank you. Appreciate you. Anyone else at school? Let's read the handwriting. Is there a Marian? A Marian? This person is Stephen Huffs. For sure. Hey. Hi. How's it going? My name is Charles. I'm an SBC student. I go to college at SBC. I'm a small business owner here in Clearwater. I do know the crime that involves a case of, like, human trafficking. It's sort of a new form of human trafficking. It started in Pennsylvania, and it's made its way down here to Florida. It also pertains to theft of intellectual property through the U.S. BTO system. I have filed five patents. And also, a very gross amount of negligence with HIPAA violations. It was a malpractice case that's from Geisinger, Pennsylvania. They have a program called the Deep Focus Program and the Nudge Program. It's sort of behavioral modification, and it's meant to help people with drug addiction, mental health issues, things like that. But, I mean, I made a mistake at the time being a drug user and using their access by going to their hospital. And they are, I mean, they're pretty much violating rights by knowingly placing deep canal invisible devices in people's ears. It's either an invisible one on the ear or there is ones that go in the ear. They're known as phonic, lyric, or octagon zeal. They also use direct contact eardrum devices that mechanically vibrate your ear. It's similar to the Alter Ego wearable device, if you could look it up. And, I mean, I've also read up that they're using optogenetics. It's a fiber optic skull implant. I did have a couple surgeries involving no surgery. That's a study out at MIT and Stanford, and it does mess with your memory. And, also, that I think Prima devices have been put in me. And it says, also, I do know there may yet be other victims going on that's out there. And, I mean, I'm from there also. And since I reported to them and trying to get my records from Guy Singer, my bike's been stolen. My apartment's been almost broken into. So, now it's turning into gang-stopping. Right when I started ordering my records and I was told this was happening, I started ordering my records. They started saying that my records were destroyed. And then I told them, okay, well, I'm a college student. I'm doing a study. They sent me 400 pages of junk. And I have a couple of discs I don't even know how to use right now. Well, no, I don't have a computer to put them in. I don't know what records are on them. But, I mean, this is happening. And it's pretty much, it is, it's human trafficking. I can't get away from it. I can't leave. And, I mean, they're stealing information, intellectual property. I do have five patents that I've filed with the USPTO. And, I mean, I'm just not sure what to do about this. I have filed this. Well, I have gotten contact with HIPAA and the Attorney General's office. But it's only online. I don't know if they got it yet. But, I mean, my cousin is the DA to the Attorney General, like in Arizona. My aunt ran a hospital. Like, I have intelligent people in my family. I'm not stupid. I just fell into drugs when I was young. Moved here to get out of them. Because I got really depressed for, like, five, six years. But then I came out of it. And then, all of a sudden, I started drinking again. Thank you, sir. Yeah, appreciate you. Do we have any other speakers on? Okay. Thank you. That will move to agenda item 10. So, you may have a news. Nothing, sir. Tend item 11. So, the Attorney reports. Nothing, ma'am. 12, closing comments by Council Members. I wish I didn't, but I really need to do it. Nope. Okay. A lot of people need acknowledgement. Okay. So, first of all, there's been such a great stretch of events in our community. From Country Thunder Festival, which was a great success, to the various concerts at the Sound. And it's truly starting to feel like Clearwater is a music destination. And I couldn't be happier about it. Music has a magical way of bringing everyone together, and regardless of background, and I feel that it's, that feeling is growing within the city. I also loved experiencing Sharka Palooza. I was very impressed with the caliber of artists, and I couldn't avoid purchasing a lovely piece by Alyssa Marie. A heartfelt thank you to Mr. and Mrs. Talanga for including city leadership in the celebration of the Croatian Statehood Day, hosted at Duda Lukas. It was a beautiful evening, filled with culture, community, and connection. Exactly the kind of moments that make this city so great. Congratulations to our Clearwater Solid Waste and Recycling Team for bringing home another win at the Swan of Florida Rodeo, I guess, competition in Fort Myers, which showcased their skill, safety, and professionalism against teams from across the state. So, once again, they went out there and represented us really well. Most of us were honored to attend this year's Scouting America Community Award Breakfast, celebrating former Mayor Frank Hibbert. I want to congratulate Mayor Hibbert on this well-deserved recognition for his years of service, leadership, and commitment to our community. And in a world where criticism is plentiful and service is often thankless, it is important to pause and celebrate those who continue showing up for their community year after year. Thank you. Vice Mayor? Nothing. Thank you, sir. Vice Mayor, let me go. Thank you. Well, I won't hit on some of the same events we are at, but I will commend staff, leadership team on the successful three days of Country Thunder. Moving an event in less than 30 days, that magnitude and that size with over 36,000 attendees over three days is quite impressive. I've talked to a handful of the management team from Country Thunder while they were here. And every single one of them said that our staff was absolutely amazing and made their job so much easier. So thank you and congratulations to the staff. I also want to say, Mayor, thank you for inviting me to your breakfast this morning. I hope we don't have to do that at 7 a.m. very often anymore. But that was a great recognition of Frank Hibbard, our former three-time mayor. That recognition and acknowledgement is well-deserved. Mr. Hibbard, his legacy in the city of Clearwater will go far beyond our lifetimes. That's for sure. In future generations, his leadership is greatly appreciated. But he did a wonderful job hosting it. Vanna White should probably watch her job. You're coming for it. But thank you. That was it. That's for Robert. A friend of mine, Joe Burdett, writes great historical articles. He wrote one recently about Memorial Day, and I thought a condensed version would be fitting to read tonight. Monday, May 25th, this year marks Memorial Day. It is a day we gather every year, not to merely celebrate, but to remember, to turn our thoughts toward those who never returned home from war. It is a day that asks more of us than ceremony or tradition. It asks us to pause amid the comforts of ordinary life and reflect upon the extraordinary price at which that life was secured. On this day, we gather to honor names that history is too often allowed to fade into silence. We gather to acknowledge sacrifices that can never truly be measured, only remembered with humility and gratitude. Though we may never fully comprehend the burden carried by those who gave their lives in service to their country, we remain forever indebted to them all the same. A day was originally given to honor those who gave their lives in the war. May 30th was chosen because by late May, flowers were blooming across the entire country. This day was dedicated as Decoration Day. In 1968, Congress passed the Uniform Monday Holiday Act, officially establishing Memorial Day as the last Monday in May. Yet the meeting of this day cannot be found merely in legislation or calendars. It lives instead in remembrance and the deliberate refusal to allow sacrifice to disappear into the blur of history. There is an old tradition that on Memorial Day, the American flag is flown at half-staff until noon in mourning for the dead and then raised to full height for the remainder of the day in honor of the living who carry their memory forward. So while enjoying this day with your loved ones, take a moment to give thanks to those who gave their lives in past wars, allowing you to enjoy the freedoms we have in this country today. Thank you for sharing that. Very eloquent. So that leaves me. Do you want to touch on... I do want to... I don't know how you follow that, but I'm going to try. I do have something to say about Memorial Day that ties into what you just said. But first, I wanted to add on to what Council Member Menino said. We held a second annual Mayor's Community Leader Award breakfast. Last year, the award winner was Frank Chivas, and this year it was former Mayor Frank Hibbert. And it's to benefit Scouting America. In Clearwater, they have a beautiful camp out in North Clearwater, Camp Sewell, which they've put a lot of money into. And it's just great to see those young people engaging in the outdoors. I think that's one of the benefits of Scouting today is to get Scouts outside, kids outside, enjoying this beautiful nature we have here in Florida. So it was a pleasure to host that event out there and appreciate Scouting America and the Tampa Bay region for hosting us in that event again this year. The second thing, we can hear, we can't hear it on television, but as we sit here, we can hear the boom, boom, boom from the bass at the Baycare Sound. So while we're meeting tonight, there's a concert going on at the Baycare Sound. And maybe a couple of us may join that here in a minute. But tomorrow, it's an exciting thing for the same venue because here in less than 12 hours, it will be converted to a high school graduation space. So we don't have all the graduations this year because Tropicana Field's back in operation, and a lot of the high schools are over there. But the two Clearwater Public High Schools, Clearwater High School's graduation is at 9 o'clock tomorrow morning here in the Baycare Sound. And then Countryside will be at 5 o'clock tomorrow evening. So it's great to see that space used for these high school graduations to be a community gathering event place, and we welcome them here tomorrow. And then the last is Memorial Day, as Council Member Albritton so eloquently read Joe Burdett's essay. I attended an event last weekend at the Sheridan Sand Key for the Wounded Warriors Ability Ranch in Pinellas Park, and it's for wounded veterans who do wheelchair basketball, wheelchair rugby. They do all these sports. But it's for adaptive sports for veterans who have been injured severely in their service. And at the beginning, they gave photographs of each of the military members, service members, that have died in action from Pinellas County, and it was a long list. And that sets on me, you know, there will be tons of votes out there this weekend and people enjoying hopefully a beautiful weekend throughout Tampa Bay and Clearwater. But I hope on Monday, particularly those with children, will remind their family why we celebrate, we don't celebrate, why we honor and recognize those who have given the ultimate sacrifice for our country on Memorial Day. As you said so eloquently in the essay, it's important for us to not lose sight of that. All the commercialism of every holiday there is, that one we need to make sure we're remembering the reason for it. And hopefully we all gather together on Monday to remember those who gave that ultimate sacrifice. So with that, with nothing else to come before the Clearwater City Council, we will adjourn the meeting of May 21, 2026. We will adjourn the meeting of May 21, 2026.