May 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 to the right of the dais. When you're called to speak, please hand your card to the clerk. Now move to item two on the agenda, and that's our invocation. I ask for everyone to stand. Tonight's invocation will be given by Reverend Allie Wood from the First United Methodist Church, Clearwater, and then to remain standing afterwards for the Pledge of Allegiance.
Thank you, Mayor Rector. Let us pray. Loving and gracious God, we give you thanks for another beautiful day in this beautiful place that we are all privileged to live. As we gather together to do business, large business and small business, things that feel of utmost importance and things that feel like a passing issue, we ask that you would give us a heart and a mind for all of the people of Clearwater, that you would be with us in our decision-making, you would be with our leaders in their decision-making, and that you would allow us to work together to do the work that benefits all of us. We give you thanks for our first responders, for all those who work for our city, and for all of those who come together to continue to make it a place that is good and beautiful for all of us. 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 flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible with liberty.
Before we continue on tonight's agenda, I'd like to introduce our dais for this evening. To my far left is our Deputy City Clerk, Nicole Sprague.
Good evening.
To her right is our City Attorney, Owen Colbert. Good evening. To his right is Council Member Lena Tasheda. Good evening. To her right is Vice Mayor Ryan Cotton.
Hello.
To my right, Council Member Mike Menino. Good evening. To his right, Council Member David Albritton. Good evening. To his right, City Manager Jennifer Poirier. To her right, Assistant City Manager Dan Slaughter. And to his right, Assistant City Manager Al Battle. With that, we'll move to Item 4.1 of the agenda. I'd like to call forward Joan Dragon from the Suncoast Jazz Festival for a proclamation for the Suncoast Jazz Weekend that's being held here. I don't see Joan here today, but I'll go ahead and read the proclamation. Whereas the art of creating jazz music is a uniquely American form of music that originated over 100 years ago, and that has influenced and enriched not only American music and culture, but also the music and culture of the world. And whereas the Suncoast Jazz Festival is in its 36th year and brings increased attention to the City of Clearwater and its diverse and vibrant cultural arts. Whereas the Suncoast Jazz Festival continues to feature local, national, and international musicians, and whereas the mission of the Suncoast Jazz Festival and its volunteers is to give and contribute to the education of local young musicians to give them performance opportunities. And this year, we'll host two master classes for local students to foster the preservation of jazz. Now, therefore, I, Bruce Rector, Mayor of the City of Clearwater, Florida, on behalf of the Clearwater City Council, to hereby proclaim November 20th to the 22nd, 2026, to be Suncoast Jazz Festival Weekend in Clearwater. Thank you for being here, but I'd like to say a few words.
Yes, Joan is out of town on family business, and it's a chance for us to brag about her because she wouldn't do it if she was here. She's been doing this for 36 years. She started as a musician, then was a volunteer, then a board member, and then she's been executive director for 10 or 12 years. Anyway, we're all volunteers. We have a part-time marketing guy, a part-time publicist, and a part-time webmaster, and a part-time accountant. The rest of us on the board and everyone else is all volunteers. So it's a labor of love, and we're very proud of being able to contribute to the cultural betterment of Clearwater. And we also like that we're on Sand Key, which doesn't get enough love, right? People don't even know that Sand Key has a big chunk of Clearwater on it. So we're very happy that the Sheridan has been terrific to us over the years, and we hope anybody can come, and we have cookies for you. A lot of people here are volunteers. Alice has been doing this over 20 years, volunteering, taking care of our volunteers. She's our volunteer-volunteer person. Anybody want to volunteer? It's a perfect place for everybody. Claudia has been doing this forever. How long have you been doing this? Three years. Oh. Anyway, thank you, Mayor. I appreciate it. Thank you to everyone.
We want to thank you all for this fantastic. I wish Joan was here tonight because when you go over there and you see the event, you see it's fantastic the amount of talent that you bring in for this event. I know Joan's been right there bringing in that talent to Clearwater for 36 years, and so to see it all come together, it's just an amazing collection of music talent, and what you do for music education for youth in our community out of this is very important, too. So thank you for all that, and I encourage everyone watching tonight who's not watching tonight in Clearwater to attend this year's Suncoast Jazz Weekend.
Thank you.
Thank you. Thank you.
Careful of the muffler. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you so much.
Thank you so much. Beautiful. Thank you. Pleasure seeing it. Thank you. Oh, you're doing great. You're doing good.
All the volunteers.
Thank you so much. Okay, fine. I will. Thank you so much.
Thank you so much.
Oh, yeah, I'm aware.
That's all you saw.
Thank you so much. One, two, three, smile. Thank you for coming. Thank you. For the next one, we're recognizing Florida City Week, and I'm going to present this to our city manager on behalf of our awesome city team. So I'll go ahead and read it now, and then I'll just present it up here. Thank you. Whereas city government is the government closest to citizens and the one with the most direct daily impact upon its residents, and whereas municipal government provides services and programs that enhance the quality of life for residents, making their city their home, and whereas city government is administered for and by its citizens and is dependent upon public commitment to and understanding of its many responsibilities, and whereas city government officials and employees share the responsibility to pass along the understanding of public services and their benefits, and whereas Florida City Week offers an important opportunity for elected officials and city staff to spread the word to all citizens of Florida that they can shape and influence this branch of government. Now, therefore, I, Bruce Rector, mayor of the city of Clearwater, Florida, on behalf of the Clearwater City Council, do hereby proclaim October 19th to the 26th, 2026, to be Florida City Week in Clearwater. Thank you. Thank you, city manager. Thank you to our, you know, not quite 1,900, but we have almost 1,900 employees that work very hard to make this a great city. And thank you to many of you here tonight who are citizens of the city of Clearwater. It takes all of us working together to make this city great, and we've certainly done that over 111 years, and it's a great time to celebrate Florida City Week with this proclamation.
Wow.
Thank you.
Okay, now we'll move to 4.3 on the agenda, and this is our Creating Pinellas presentation, Art Everywhere Celebration of Culture and Creativity. Go on Amber Bryce, arts and culture director for the city of Clearwater.
Computer is updating, so good evening, mayor and council. I'm Amber Bryce, arts and cultural affairs manager. I have with me Margaret Murray, who's the CEO of Creative Pinellas, who's here to share more about Art Everywhere, which is a month-long county-wide initiative in partnership with Visit St. Pete Clearwater, celebrating arts throughout Pinellas County with a culminating event happening here in Clearwater. We do have a presentation, but we're having some technical difficulties, so.
Thank you, Amber. I'll just wing it. Good evening, Mayor Rector and the rest of the council. Thank you so much for having us here. So Art Everywhere is a new initiative that was spearheaded by Visit St. Pete Clearwater and Creative Pinellas as well as Clearwater Arts Alliance and St. Pete Arts Alliance to showcase the amazing art that we have here but also integrate it into our natural environment. So we're taking art out of the usual places like museums and galleries, and we're bringing art to beaches and parks and trails, which is incredibly exciting. It gives people a new opportunity to access arts in a new way. It gives us a chance to talk about the cultural richness of our community in a new way as well. What I'm really excited about is how, oh my gosh, the experiences that are happening in Clearwater are absolutely amazing. They are my favorite by far. So first of all, we're doing Opera for Earth, and it is a, oh my gosh, there are opera singers from, it's at the Clearwater Historical Society. There are singers and performances from Lebanon, Korea, Mexico, Cuba, Puerto Rico, China, Ireland, and Germany at the celebration, and it is November 14th again at the Clearwater Historical Society. So please everyone go out and enjoy that. And then, da-da-da, our very own Suncoast Jazz Festival, congratulations on the proclamation. We were able to fund them this year as well, and I'm incredibly excited to see all of the performances that they have. What I would like to say about this is that we had, there's such incredible artistic talent in this community. We had $3.6 million in requests for funding when we put this call out. We only funded, we were only able to fund $350,000 worth of that. But this means that we can continue year after year because there is just so much that we can capitalize on with the arts here. So I just wanted to say that really quickly before I started talking about what is going to be the closing night event of Art Everywhere, and that is Clearwater Illuminations. It's going to happen right in Coachman Park. We're working with Clearwater Arts Alliance and Sister Cities on this project, and it is spectacular. We're going to, it's, the Sister City is Nagano, and let me just make sure I pronounce this correctly, the Nagamo Tomio Festival, Lantern Festival. So it's modeled on that. There are going to be handmade wooden lanterns that people can create. They'll be able to do this with families. They'll be illuminated. There's going to be food vendors, cultural performances. This is going to be an incredible capstone, and I just want to thank everyone who's involved in approving this and making sure that it happens. So please attend all of these events and the nearly 100 events that will be happening during Art Everywhere, which is November 1st through December 6th. Visit St. Pete Clearwater if you go to their website. They have a passport that you can download, and you'll be able to see a map of where all of the performances are. I believe they're giving out prizes for people who attend events and everything. So thank you so much for this and for supporting the arts. I really appreciate it.
Thank you for coming tonight and sharing this, and thank you for all you and your organization does all year long to celebrate the arts in Clearwater and Pinellas County. Thank you.
Thank you so much. Have a good evening.
That will move to Item 5.1 on the agenda.
Approve the minutes of the October 1, 2026 City Council meeting as submitted.
Motion to approve the minutes.
So moved. Second.
All those in favor?
Aye. Aye.
Opposed? Unanimous. Move to the consent agenda. Are there any items to be removed from the consent agenda?
Not that I'm aware.
Is there a motion to approve the consent agenda as presented?
I move. Second.
All those in favor?
Aye.
Opposed? Unanimous. Before we move to the next item, which would be 7.1, I want to remind everyone that I personally have a voting conflict, so I will not be not only voting on this issue tonight, 7.1, but as I did at the prior meeting when this issue came before the council, I exited the dais. I don't have to. I have a voting conflict, so I'm not required to refrain from discussion, but it has been the tradition of both my two mayors who were predecessors, Mayor Angst and Mayor Hibbert, when they had a voting conflict that they did exit the dais. And so I did that before on this issue, and I'm going to do that again tonight. And so at this time, I'm going to recess so I can turn the gavel over to the Vice Mayor, and he will lead the meeting and discussion of voting on Agenda Item 7.1. We'll recess now for just a few minutes.
I'll now call back to order the City of Clearwater City Council meeting. Before we move on to Agenda Item 7.3, before we move on to Agenda Item 7.3, I'm going to ask the city attorney once again to just go over a little bit about this item before we move into it.
Yeah, Ms. 7.1. So I spoke about this on Monday, but so Mr. Menino does not have a conflict. When this item came before council on August the 6th, Mr. Menino abstained due to a conflict under 286.012. That's if there's a possible conflict of interest. After the meeting, I submitted an opinion request to the State Commission of Ethics. On August the 31st, they submitted a written response back that was five pages. Mr. Menino does not have a conflict, and therefore he is permitted to vote, and he should be voting if he doesn't have a conflict.
Very good. Thank you for that. I'll now turn it over to our Assistant City Manager, Al Battle.
Good evening, Mayor and Council. Before we get started, I just want to maybe recap what the procedure for this evening will be. I expect to be the only presenter, if you will. We did share with both proposers that they would not be making a presentation this evening because they did so on Monday. However, I believe both representatives from both groups are here in the event that you have questions. So with that being said, I will start my presentation, try to get through it as efficiently as possible, allow for the public comment to occur. And if you have questions of myself or any members of the professional city staff, as well as Prague Public Resources Advisory Group, Linda Gordner is here from that firm to answer any questions as well. So hopefully we have enough resources here to answer questions that you may have, but we'll get into it. So as an Assistant City Manager, the task was given to me by our City Manager and with your support to coordinate the review and analysis of the process for an unsolicited proposal for the Landings Golf Course. This evening, I want to use my time in front of you as a reminder of how we got here and to this point of the process. In my opinion, the process has had three distinct steps, reviewing and analyzing the proposal, formally presenting the proposal to Council and presenting the results of seeking additional proposals, and also presenting those results with a recommendation on how to move forward. I'll wait to talk about that recommendation at the very end of my remarks here in my presentation. In October of 2025, the City of Clearwater received an unsolicited proposal for the Landings Golf Course, a city-owned recreational property located at 1875 Airport Drive in our beautiful City of Clearwater. That proposal at that time was deemed insufficient, and in December of 2025, the City of Clearwater received an updated unsolicited proposal to redevelop the course. After a limited review of the updated proposal, it was deemed sufficient. The proposal, submitted by Sunshine Recreational and Entertainment Development, provided the opportunity for us to analyze and review a proposal given to us under the Florida statute that outlines the public-private partnership process. I want to note that prior to receiving the unsolicited proposal, the City was not actively pursuing other uses for the existing golf course. A high-level review was conducted of that proposal from January of 2026 to May of this year, allowing staff members to determine if the project was in compliance and sufficient before formally presenting it to council and holding public meetings to discuss the proposal. The unsolicited proposal from Sunshine was evaluated under the guidelines outlined in Florida statute 255065, commonly referred to as the Public-Provert Partnership Statute, which allows government entities to consider P3 partnerships for qualifying public infrastructure and development projects. The project submitted is a large, multi-use sports complex with the following features. A multi-purpose sports field, pickleball courts, aquatic and water park attractions, fitness and wellness facilities, restaurants and food service venues, publicly accessible walking and biking trails, and event and tournament programming for travel sports. The total estimated project cost for the project at that time was about $180 million, with construction anticipated to take three years to be completed. After reviewing and evaluating the proposal, City staff presented our findings and recommendations to the council on the August 6, 2026 meeting. The presentation included a summation of a city staff high-level review and third-party financial analysis by Prague, the Public Resources Advisory Group. A copy of the pre-development high-level review by city departments and the Prague report were attached to the August 6 agenda item. During the August 6 meeting, the proposal, Sunshine Recreational and Entertainment, also made a presentation that responded to the questions for the council as well as from the community. The staff recommendation to accept the Sunshine Recreational and Entertainment proposal and solicit additional development proposals was approved by the city council at that August 6 meeting. The process used to solicit additional proposals was conducted in compliance with Florida Statutes 255065, specifically Section 5 of that statute. In summary, this section of the statute states that if the city receives an unsolicited proposal, we may also decide to solicit for other proposals and allow between 21 and 120 days to receive such proposals. Consistent with the recommendation approved by the council at the August 6 meeting, public notice was prepared with the focus of seeking redevelopment proposals for a comprehensive P3 model for redevelopment of the landing golf course. On Wednesday, August the 19th, a request for proposals was advertised with the acknowledgement the city was in receipt of an unsolicited proposal and were seeking additional proposals. Additional proposals would be accepted on September the 21st of 2026, and prior to receiving those proposals, several residents expressed concern about the process to properly submit a redevelopment proposal. In response to this concern, the city's procurement division held a virtual pre-submittal meeting on Tuesday, September the 15th. On Monday, September the 21st, two proposals were received, an updated proposal from Sunshine and a proposal from Clearwater Golf Associates. Copies of both submittals are attached to the agenda evening in front of you this evening. An evaluation committee was convened to review and rank the proposals, and it was held on October the 1st, 2026. The evaluation committee assembled consisted of many of the departments who participated in the high-level review of the previously accepted Sunshine proposal, as well as the golf course proposal. The evaluation committee's scoring methodology included the evaluation criteria and respective point values were established in the solicitation documents before the proposal was received. Committee members independently evaluated each proposal based on three published criteria, experience and qualifications, project approach, and compensation. It is common for the city to assemble evaluation committees with representatives from multiple departments to provide a broad range of expertise and viewpoints. It is also common for the committee members to first conduct independent reviews and scoring before convening to discuss their evaluations. During the committee-based public procurement, evaluators exercise their professional judgment when assigning points within each evaluation criterion. Established in the work product is public record so that the process can be properly documented. The outcome of the committee meeting concluded with the top-ranked proposer being Sunshine Recreational and Entertainment, LLC, and at the council work session this past Monday, October the 12th, 2026, both proposers gave a five-minute presentation and answered questions from council members. Based on the review of the unsolicited proposal, acceptance of the proposal by the council on August the 6th, 2026, and based on the results of the evaluation committee from RFP 56-26, staff recommends accepting the unsolicited proposal and authorizing staff to enter into negotiations for an interim agreement with Sunshine Recreational and Entertainment, LLC. The purpose of an interim agreement is as follows. It allows the private entity to begin work on the project as an exclusive negotiating partner. The type of work the developer may complete during this time may include the following activities. Advancing the project planning process, including design, engineering, and environmental studies, and completing additional due diligence, such as detailed financing analysis and securing financial commitments. This work would be occurring as the developer is seeking to also negotiate a final comprehensive agreement with the City of Clearwater. Entering into an interim agreement is a recommended step. But approving this approach does not obligate the City of Clearwater to approve a final comprehensive agreement. The scope, terms, and rights of both parties under an interim agreement are limited and governed by the framework outlined in Florida Statute 255-065, Section 6. That concludes my presentation. The recommendation from staff is before you to accept the proposal and the recommendation from the evaluation committee and to authorize staff to enter into an interim agreement or negotiate an interim agreement on behalf of the City with Sunshine Recreational and Entertainment, LLC. I'm here to answer any questions that you have. Thank you, Mr. Rattle.
We'll go ahead and move into public comment at this time. We will have each speaker allotted three minutes to speak. A group speaker will be given three minutes plus one additional minute for those who waive their time to that person for a total of ten minutes. So, Ms. Nichole, if you could call the first speaker.
First speaker is Christine Michalik.
Thank you, Ms. Gregg, for pronouncing my last name correctly. I am Christine Michalik, and it's always an honor to speak before my city council, our city council. I am speaking today in opposition to the Sunshine proposal. On October 10th, I sent to the city council and several of the staff an email which was personalized. In that email, I summarized some things that I think are important, some facts. Sunshine is proposing not a sports complex to put forward, but a restaurant and entertainment business. It is proposing lighting on every field which will affect neighborhood residents. It is proposing a lit field with tall standards that can lead to obstructions in the airplane approach. It is also proposing a parcel that drains into the upper Stevenson Creek. Also, it has no binding responsibility for storm water. It is proposing that roughly 20 acres of the site is built on a historic landfill, and it is based on profit for the developer alone, which allows out-of-town teams first prime weekend spaces and therefore discriminates, again, our Clearwater Clubs, which will be given second choice. The proposal also puts restaurants, a food hall, an arcade, and a water park in a residential neighborhood, also competing with our downtown businesses and our beach. Finally, the proposal currently consists of 77 acres of grass that soaks up rain. As we all know from the 2024 Helene and Milton hurricanes, every neighborhood was affected, and we all know what happens when open ground and grass is turned into pavement. Finally, I will remind you that each of you city council members received a reminder of what you made to promise to us as citizens of Clearwater in your campaign. Each of you said in some way, and I repeat well to all of you, that you promised to represent all of city council, all of city members and residents. You promised that you would focus on safety of us residents. You promised that you would balance tourism with our quality of life. You promised also that you would bridge our neighborhoods with our leadership, all of you,
and eliminate any self-doubt we had in your leadership.
I am giving, I am not going to repeat what I said to you personally, but I have summarized that to each of you in this part. Thank you for your time.
Thank you. If we could, please just hold our applause. We'll make this get through it a lot quicker. The clerk will be able to call names, and we'll be able to hear everybody's comments much more efficiently. Thank you.
Natalie Waterman.
Good evening to my city council. I'm a condo owner in St. Andrew's Cove 2, which is, my view is directly the golf course. So I'm on the first floor. So I'm going to read this to you and try to say very fast because I only have three minutes, so I'm good at talking fast. Let's go. I'm here today to urge you to vote no on Devel Porter's proposal to transform our beautiful landings, green space into a massive recreational entertainment complex. What is being proposed is not simply an improvement to our community. It is a fundamental change to the character of our neighborhood, bringing a restaurant and entertainment complex, water park, approximately 2,000 parking spaces, artificial turf, no green grass, pickleball courts, and tournament-sized soccer fields into an area that deserves to be protected, not overdeveloped. We need to ask ourselves, at what point does development become too much, and who truly benefits from it would be Mr. Porter. Pinellas County already, sorry, already has an abundance of pickleball courts. The figures I have gathered indicate there are approximately 287 courts across the county, just in Pinellas County alone. There are 49 pickleball courts in Clearwater, 19 in Dunedin, 36 in Largo, 32 in Palm Harbor, 23 in Oldsmar, 25 in Seminole, 25 in St. Petersburg, and 18 in Tarpon Springs. Do you think we need more? With so many courts already available, another large-scale recreational complex really is not really what our community needs. Do we need to sacrifice one of our beautiful green spaces to add even more courts and sports facilities? Our neighborhood should not have to bear the consequences of a development designed to attract crowds from across the country and potentially beyond, coming from other states. This is not our local neighbors playing soccer and pickleball next door to us. They're traveling soccer teams. Tournament-sized soccer fields could bring large numbers of players, spectators, and visitors into our neighborhood. Add a water park, restaurant, entertainment facilities, and thousands of parking spaces, and we have a recipe for increased traffic congestion. Noise pollution, artificial lighting, and the loss of peaceful environment that makes our community very special. And what about the environmental impact? Replacing natural green space with artificial turf, parking lots, and extensive recreational infrastructure means sacrificing the beauty and natural character of this land. Once that green space is gone, we cannot simply replace what we have lost. We should also question whether this proposal genuinely serves Clearwater's local children and families. Local, I stress local. Would the community be better served by preserving and improving an existing golf course, investing in local recreational opportunities, or creating green space?
Ms. Waterman, thank you very much.
I've said enough. Thank you so much for your time and listening.
Again, if we could please hold the applause. I see some of our friends are doing jazz hands to show their appreciation for the speaker. If we could have the next speaker.
Yes, the next speaker has additional minutes. Melissa Stamos. And then, if I can confirm that the following are in the room. Frances Taughton. Thank you. Casey. Casey? Just, okay, thank you. Dora Krasikos. Linda Bridge. Julie Del Giorano. Thank you. Susan Markovitz. Sorry. Joan Schrader. Thank you. Ten minutes.
I could have made it longer. Good evening, Mayor and Councilmembers. I am standing here angry, heartbroken, and exhausted, and I am done watching residents fight for the very people we elected to protect our community. The landings is 77 acres of land, our land, and the people living beside it are not obstacles to a development plan. We are human beings whose homes, peace, and futures deserve more consideration than a developer's vision of a sports entertainment destination. We bought homes. We built lives. We raised families. We planted gardens. Established friendships. And created neighborhoods. We did not sign up to live next to a mini Disney sports entertainment complex. And we should not have to beg our own city government to understand the difference. You may see a development opportunity. We see our bedroom windows, our backyards, our elderly neighbors, our children trying to sleep, the streets we depend on to get safely home. When you discuss the future of this property, you are deciding our everyday lives. And from where I stand, this process has left residents blindsided, dismissed, and forced to scramble for a voice in decisions that could permanently change our community. A decision this consequential should begin with the city actively reaching all of its citizens, explaining the possibilities, asking what they want, and listening before a development proposal gathers momentum. Residents should not have to learn through neighbors, social media, or frantic grassroots organizing, that the land beside their homes could be something radically different. Posting a notice is not the same as informing a community. Giving someone three minutes or nine at a microphone is not the same as giving them a meaningful voice. And allowing public comment means very little if the public cannot see that its concerns influence your decisions. And this council is proving that over and over again. We have raised concerns about traffic, noise, lighting, drainage, environmental impacts, and the sheer immensity of what is being proposed. A one-time meeting with a potential developer focused on changing minor details is not approval by your constituents. How many times must we explain that these concerns are about our homes? How many emails? How many speeches? How many evenings away from our families? Why must ordinary residents work this hard to persuade their representative that their quality of life matters? You are elected to represent us. That obligation includes the people who will bear the heaviest consequences of your decisions. And you owe us answers about the law. Identify every applicable statutory requirement. Explain how this process satisfies each one. Make the supporting records available and address the public's question in plain language. If residents are challenging your compliance, answer those challenges with evidence. The attorney reviewed it is not enough. Neither are assurances that the developers' chosen companies will handle testing and inspections. Legal compliance is a responsibility you must demonstrate publicly. And where the law permits something, you still have to decide whether it is right, whether it is fair, whether it honors the trust placed in you. Because from the neighboring homes, this looks like a blatant money grab. An effort to squeeze revenue out of public land while residents absorb the disruption. You can call it economic development. You can call it a partnership. You can show us beautiful renderings and optimistic projections. But tell us what price you have signed to a peaceful evening in our backyards. What an uninterrupted night's sleep is worth. What is the value of being able to leave our neighborhood without fighting event traffic? Where in the financial presentation is the cost of residents losing the enjoyment of their homes they worked their entire lives to afford? We cannot pay our mortgages with promises that the project will be exciting for visitors. We cannot close our windows to traffic. We cannot turn down someone else's stadium lights. And we cannot reclaim mature open space simply because a future council decides that this was a mistake. And they will. Think about an ordinary evening beside this development. Overlapping whistles, cheering, announcements, headlights, cars leaving events, pickleball, thwacking relentlessly, children screaming, 2,000 cars in what used to be a small, nondescript, peaceful neighborhood. Now a commercial nightmare. Now imagine repeating that seven days a week. Imagine trying to rest. Imagine trying to comfort a child. Imagine being a retiree who chose this neighborhood for its peace. Those are the people you must picture when you vote. Before advancing this proposal, hold at least two heavily advertised public meetings. Reach beyond the people already following this issue. Give the broader community a real opportunity to understand what is at stake. Require independent traffic, drainage, environmental, noise, lighting, and airport compatibility studies before making commitments that could narrow our options. Publish the findings, explain the financial risks, examine alternatives that preserve open space, and show us that stopping this proposal is a genuine possibility if the evidence does not support it. There is a reason two other communities have voted to turn it down. But you aren't even allowing us a vote. You have the power to slow down. You have the power to insist that residents come first. If you press forward without answering these concerns, you are choosing to leave the people most affected carrying the uncertainty and the risk. Please look beyond the rendering. Look at the homes beside it. Look at the people standing before you. We are your constituents. We deserve transparency, accountability, and a government that protects the place we call home. Do not sacrifice our quality of life for somebody else's business plan. Stop this rush. Protect the landings. And remember who you were elected to serve. This council continues to disappoint its residents. Your constant 5-0 votes do not go unnoticed. They send a message that you have already made up your minds, that public input is merely a performance, and that residents are expected to sit quietly while decisions are made over our heads. This is not representation. This is not accountability. And this is not leadership. You are treating public land as though it were your bargaining chip. You are treating residents as though we are an inconvenience. You are treating our concerns as noise to be managed instead of warnings that you are obligated to confront. If you approve this proposal without full transparency, independent studies, and genuine public consent, you will own the consequences. Every traffic jam, every flood, every sleepless night, every loss of open space, every broken promise will be part of your record. Do not hide behind developers, attorneys, consultants, or unanimous votes. You are elected to make decisions, and you will be held responsible for the decisions you make. Enough already. Stop dismissing us. Stop rushing this process. Stop pretending that a handful of presentations and scripted assurances amount to public trust. It is time for the gloves to come off. We have been sucker punched by you, and you all know it. Listen to the people who live here, or admit that our voices never mattered to you in the first place. Again, require all of the necessary independent studies before commitments. Protect the landings, protect our homes, and stop sacrificing this community for a business deal. Thank you.
Thanks, Speaker.
Dr. Vega.
Good evening. I'm here today to speak to support for the Port of Development and Transforming the Landings into a sports and entertainment complex. As a founder of Tampa Flex, a nonprofit serving more than 180 athletes, ages 8 to 18, and as a longtime member of the flag and 77 football community, I urge the committee to award Port of Development a project to convert the landings golf course into a sports and entertainment complex with indoor turf fields. Our club shows both the demand for this facility and the cost of not having it. I field six boys' divisions and five girls' divisions, and our athletes have earned more than 40 D1 offers by playing this sport. Young people in our community are competing at the highest level. What they lack is a dependable place to train and play. To secure field time in the county is very difficult. When we do get it, the weather often takes it away. Just in this past month, as you know, we paid for park rental space, and they had to cancel practice because of the lightning and the rain. The athletes lost the practice, and the families and the sponsors who fund our program lost that money. As a nonprofit supported by parents and small business sponsors in our community, we can't absorb repeated losses like this. Every dollar spent on a field we can't use is a dollar not spent on our kids. Indoor fields can't be rained out, struck by lightning, or shut down by heat. They guarantee that every scheduled hour is usable hour, which protects the investment of families and sponsors. They also give both the boys' and girls' flag programs, which is growing rapidly with the Sport Olympics debut in 2028, a stable home to have instead of leftover time slots. A year-round complex would host leagues, camps, and tournaments that bring visiting teams and families to local hotels, restaurants, and shops. It would create jobs and give local youth a safe, structured environment that leads to scholarships and opportunity. Pairing athletics with entertainment and dining makes the destination families visit throughout the year, not just a single-purpose venue. The Port of Development's plan would convert underused land into a lasting asset for youth, families, and the economy for years to come. I respectfully ask that the committee approve this project so our youth can have a place to play for years to come. Thank you. Next speaker.
Joshua Bourne.
Good evening, Council. I'm Joshua Bourne, CEO of Pylon Football. As a former 14-year veteran in the armed services and former defense contractor, I left the defense industry to start coaching football. I've spent time helping athletes earn college scholarships on playing fields, the very type of fields that you're looking at building at the landings course. I'm here this evening to try and speak to you in regards to the opportunity of the complex and its environmental impacts that I've heard could be an issue with natural turf having the ability to have better drainage than actual natural grass. Artificial turf, rather. Sorry about that. I've managed a 65-acre sports complex here in Central Florida with both natural grass and artificial turf as a point of reference. When a community builds a quality sports venue, the economic and social return is real and immediate. Families travel. Hotels fill. Restaurants and retail benefit. And most importantly, local kids get a place to train, compete, and be seen by college recruiters for an opportunity to earn collegiate scholarships. I'm here to say that if the landing site is redeveloped, youth sports should be at the center of the use case. Our children are the future of the community, and education is paramount. Sports help athletes stay focused to earn an education. A sports-driven development at this site means that there will be tournament traffic, largely on weekends, and lots of opportunity for the community usage during the weeks. Local hotels will fill. Restaurants will benefit. And a recruiting pipeline for local athletes can be developed right here in your community. That's a real return a city keeps collecting for decades, not just on opening day. I'd ask the council to weigh youth sports' use case heavily as you consider this development, and I'm happy to be a resource for the city if needed to be. Thank you.
Patrick Rachtree.
Good evening, council members and staff. My name is Patrick Rachtree from Countryside Area of Clearwater. We have two proposals before us. Sunshine Recreational and Entertainment has received unanimous opposition from a number of neighborhood and residential organizations for a variety of concerns. I'm unaware of any organization of neighborhoods and residents that has endorsed this concept. This concept was also rejected by Largo residents, and if placed on a referendum for Clearwater residents, I'm confident it would be rejected. The recent revisions to this on the October 12th work session sweetened the revenue benefits to Clearwater and added a field house that could be used as an emergency response center. To that I say and remind you of what the ancient Romans said to us, beware of developers bearing gifts. There may be a need, but the landings is not the place for this. Clearwater Golf Associates has proposed a continuation of their 26-year operation for another 20 years, a $1 million capital investment, an increase of their annual payment, and a profit sharing of 3.5%. The first proposal is a development of high financial investment by the city and county, high risk of the unknowns on the property requiring remediation, revenue projections that are forecast akin to astrology, and five years of revenue from restaurants only. The second proposal is an upgrade only to the present operation. Ask yourself, do I have all the information I need from the city departments that have reviewed these proposals? Have I considered the objections of the various groups to the best use of the landings to benefit residents and the neighborhoods? Are the financial risk and the remediation unknowns too high for me to accept? Finally, do I have to decide this now, or can I pause it until I am confident that I have all the facts I need to make a decision? Council Member Albritton asked for additional facts if he could have the time to get them. I recommend rejection of both proposals at this time, awaiting further investigation of the facts and an upgrade from Golf Associates, possibly. They only had 30 days to prepare their proposal, which is not enough time. Let the Sunshine Group do their $50,000 remediation study, as those results may have an impact upon them. Set a timeline for these events to occur, and a final decision to be made by you when you possess all of the facts and are satisfied. If you are satisfied now and have complete knowledge of all those relevant facts and are prepared to vote tonight, I recommend a no vote on both proposals as not the best we can do for Clearwater, our residents, and our neighborhood. Thank you very much.
Don Hudson.
Don Hudson.
Oh, my apologies.
Okay.
Kate Colgan. Colgan?
Good evening, everyone. My name is Kate Colgan, and I come from probably the other side of Clearwater. I live off of McMullen Booth Road, north of Gulf to Bay, south of Drew Street. This was brought to my attention from my friend who lives right around here, and quite frankly, what got me over here is because of the process. So anyways, I am not against recreation. I'm asking council to slow down. And put the answers in writing before the city commits to this project. First, what does an interim agreement commit the city to? Please make the terms public and explain whether the city can walk away at no cost. I ask for clear, written exit terms before any agreement is approved. Before any final lease is signed, please require environmental testing of the landing site and publish the results. If cleanup is needed, the developer should pay with financial protection for the city and a walk away clause. Please spell out who is responsible so that taxpayers aren't left with the bill. Next, please put enforceable limits on traffic, lighting, and noise into the lease. Neighbors need written protections, not just assurances. What happens if the developer breaks a promise? Please include real penalties and explain how the city will enforce them. I also want a clear financial answer. If Toy Town goes ahead, how would that affect this project's finances? Before any final lease, please obtain and publish an independent analysis of whether both parks can attract enough tournaments, how much tourism tax money each would need, and who covers any shortfall. Please identify what funding is actually secured and what is still only being requested. Finally, with restaurants and a possible emergency center or shelter added, please explain in writing why the proposed use still qualifies as park and recreation and does not require a referendum. If it is a new use that requires a public vote, please put it to the voters. Please also state what recusal or disclosures apply to each landing's decision and release any legal opinion relied on before the final vote. I'm asking for public answers in enforceable conditions before commitments are made, not after. Please take the time to protect the city and its residents. Thank you.
Abigail Cancellor.
Good evening, Mayor and City Council members. My name is Abigail Cancellor. Most of you guys know me as the owner of Bulletproof Fitness right here on Cleveland Street. I was born and raised right here in Clearwater, and today I'm a young business owner in the fitness industry myself. Growing up here, sports was a huge part of my life. I spent my childhood swimming, running, training, and playing soccer competitively, and always finding ways to stay active. Looking back, I honestly wish we had something like Clearwater Sports and Rec Center when I was growing up. Now, as a business owner in the fitness space, I see recreation from a completely different perspective. As a business owner downtown, I could see this as a threat to my business, but I actually see it only as an opportunity for growth for any business downtown because projects like this will only bring more people to all of us and the right kind of people. People my age and not my age are constantly looking for things to do that revolve around being active, whether it's run clubs, fitness events, recreational sports, or just opportunities to get together and do something healthy. There's a real desire for more spaces that bring together people through movement and community, especially in today's day and age. And I think that's what's so exciting about this campus. It's not just about building athletic facilities. It's about creating a place where kids can discover a passion for sports, where adults can connect with their community, and where people of all ages can have opportunities to be active and move. Because it's not just a random soccer field in the middle of nowhere, like most soccer parents know, making it comfortable for everybody to be there is huge. I've seen firsthand how much athletics can shape someone's life, not just physically and mentally, but socially and mentally. As someone who grew up in Clearwater and has now chosen to build a business here, I'm excited about what a project like this could mean for the next generation and for the future of our community. A project like this would keep me here in Clearwater a whole lifetime to raise a family with kids. I believe thinking about the youth is very important when it comes to creating city projects because they are the future of this town. Thank you very much for your time.
Alexandria Gooden.
Good evening, Council members. Last month, I stood before you as a third-generation Floridian to express my support for Porter Development's proposal for the landings. Tonight, I returned because I believe this decision represents something much greater than the future of a single piece of property. Growing up in Clearwater, I never gave much thought to what it meant to call the city home. It was simply where my family lived, where I grew up, and where so many of my memories were made. But as I've gotten older, I've begun to understand something that I've never had to consider as a child. Just because a city was home to your family doesn't mean it always feels like a place where you can build your future. And I think that's something worth considering tonight. We often talk about preserving what makes Clearwater special, and we should. But preservation cannot simply mean keeping everything the way it has always been. It also means making thoughtful decisions that allow our city to remain a place worth calling home for generations to come. When I look at Porter's proposal, I see more than a recreational facility or a redevelopment project. I see an opportunity to invest in the everyday lives of the people who live here, a place where parents can bring their children after school, where grandparents can spend an afternoon with their grandchildren, where somewhere new can find a sense of community in Clearwater, and where lifelong residents can continue making memories in the city they've always loved. I recognize that this council has a responsibility to consider the financial implications, the long-term sustainability, and the concerns raised by residents. And those questions deserve answers. But I also hope that as you weigh those considerations, you remember the value of a community cannot always be measured by a balance sheet.
My family has spent three generations calling this area home. I would like the opportunity to make that forward.
And I want Clearwater and the future generations to inherit a city that didn't simply hold on to the past but had the courage to invest in its future.
For those reasons, I respectfully encourage this council to move forward with Porter Development's proposal. Thank you.
Patricia Kirby.
Good evening. Patricia Kirby, 1111 Spencer Avenue, Colorado, Florida.
So I live down the road from this area. I'm off of Keene Road in an, I don't want to say unincorporated, but not an organized neighborhood. But I do go to the CNC meetings, and I will say unequivocally that every single member in those incorporated, organized neighborhoods is opposed to this development. I would like to ask, I'd like to point out this number, 35,718, the number of people in 2020 of citizens who voted to protect the existing green space. That's 30% of Clearwater's total entire population. I would also like to point out, no offense to you, Council Member Menino, but you got 14,028 votes when you won City Council. The mayor got 14,387 votes. The combined total of your two vote counts is less than the number of people, population of Clearwater, that voted to protect the landings when the referendum was held. All we're asking is for you to honor the neighborhood's wishes. Peter Kagayama, author of For the Love of Cities, talked about all the different ways that cities can show citizens how to love them and be more lovable. So to get people to love their cities, people love green spaces, they love parks, they love walking trails, they love quiet, they love nature. They want what already exists there. They don't want a pickleball court in their front yards. That is the man sitting next to me in the audience right now, who didn't speak, who gave up, who donated his time, said, that pickleball court's going to be in my front yard. He said that the floodwaters from the hurricanes came within one inch of the sandbags outside his home. I promise you, making 77 acres of land impervious to water drainage is going to flood that area. It's going to be not a good thing. And I personally, I wouldn't want that on my conscience. I would not. I think that there's lots of locations in Clearwater that would be better choices for a complex like this. And you have the opportunity to make that choice a better outcome for everybody. The residents of that neighborhood deserve the right to say we don't want 80 decibels of pickleball noise in our neighborhood. We don't want the light pollution. We don't want the traffic. We don't want this particular project and proposal the way that it exists in our neighborhoods. And thank you so much for listening to the citizens.
Ms. Progg, if you could please hold one second. Ladies and gentlemen, please, just if we could keep the applause down, okay? We can't hear the speaker. You drown it out, and it's less efficient. I know, everybody hates it, but it's true. So let's please just be respectful to everybody and move this thing along, all right? Appreciate it.
Next speaker is Beth Davis with two speakers, Greer Pascoe and Sue Mancine. Okay, thank you. So you have five minutes.
I had two extra speakers.
You get three minutes, and they each get.
So I have five minutes? Yes. I would like to talk about process on P3 because I have five minutes, not ten. After ten months staring at one proposal, now we have had just a moment to process a 220,000-square-foot field house on the runway and a 60,000-square-foot food hall, not 30,000 square feet. And now 2,075 cars will be parked, more solid pavement, no resilient construction, and all over the aquifer. My brother-in-law is a pilot, and he said, I want three things when I land my small plane. I want no glare, no unusual objects, and no people. This field house is on the runway. Are you thinking about the homes and people in central Clearwater? We have four homes over 100 years old just in Marymount Park. Glenwood, Skycrest, Amber Lane, Country Club Estates, all of these will receive water, as will Morningside. It's flooded without this development. I can imagine what could happen. I think the traffic story is hilarious because you can't turn left on Palmetto right now. And you're going to put 2,000 cars for seven days a week in and out of this intersection. One lane, one extra lane is not going to make a difference for the traffic that will be in a two-mile radius and what will happen on King South. Just think about it. You do not want this traffic. You really don't. The documents you're considering from Sunshine are very many things. You have a PowerPoint from Monday. You have a two-page letter from Gulf. You have verbal promises that were made Monday that everything will be all right. And then the original 79 pages from December of financial plans that are not in compliance with the city of Clearwater codes. And Clearwater, of course, is liable for the results of this land, and your names will be on that agreement when you vote. The Houston proposal to extend the 20-year lease was consistent and fair and represented, by the way, the 50,000 people who played golf last year. It's a little more than the votes, even. And then surprise, P3 is a surprise to all of us. It comes up in December. We adopt the state, and now we're all learning how to live with it. And even the evaluation committee, and lots of my neighbors were there with them, and they were confused. And what do these numbers really, you know, relegate and mean, and how specific are they? And at your Monday work session, you didn't even hear their comments. I guess you did it one-on-one. So talk about public and transparency and what you know that we don't know. It seems unfair. I think the number one question on most things that you judge should be, is this in our code, our strategy, our comprehensive plan? Does it check our boxes or theirs? Please slow down. Listen to the night and to the handful of people who were free enough to be here. Each one of us represents 100, 150 people lined up behind us that wish they could be here. And by the way, you do need us. We do good research. And I want you to realize I'm glad somebody brought up Toy Town. Toy Town's a year ahead of us. The county's already working on the land. And those 244 acres off of I-275 in Roosevelt will probably be finished with a festival and a food hall. And they only have 2,000 parking spots. So how does that work? That it's 244 acres there and they'll make it work. But we think all of this traffic in our neighborhood will be just fine. I want you to dream. It could be a solar park of trees and event space that is all impervious. We could generate our own energy. Clearwater gas could have another resource to save the city and residents' money. Duke Energy agreed to help the city continue to improve energy resources, use it. We might make $2 million a year selling our own solar power. Dream. Please dream and slow down. We deserve a better process. It is a shame that you may even consider this with like seven days of information for us to even think about. I want you to vote no on both proposals and start over. I'm supposed to be positive, but I'm sorry. I really want you to vote no on both proposals and start over. And you do have several choices. Test the land for ourselves with the Brownfield grant you have on hand right now. Be done with this and move on. Let's do this better. We should be working together. The landings renewal can wait for another year. Once you approve sunshine, Mr. Ock said it, Wednesday night when you vote yes, we'll start testing the land. Well, how about we test our own land and take more time to represent the whole city? Please don't vote yes for this ever. Thank you.
And Jewel, who also has Shane Burrows. Is Shane here? Oh, I'm sorry. Thank you. You have four minutes.
Thank you very much. My name is Ken Jewel. I am the president of the Chargers Soccer Club. Originally, we were the Clearwater Chargers. We were founded here in Clearwater in 1972. We've grown to be the largest user group in the entire city. And we would be three to four times larger if we had facilities to accommodate that. And that is primarily from our rec program. Recreation, as you know, it's not like families travel from Tampa to play rec soccer in Clearwater. It all comes organically from within. And there's a huge demand internally as the game of soccer continues to grow. We just saw it with the World Cup that came here. And it just continues to get bigger and bigger, especially on the women's side as well. We would benefit incredibly. The city would benefit. Residents would benefit incredibly from the landings project. Would bring an opportunity to keep a consolidated one-stop shop for our families, which means if I have a child playing U13 and another child playing U16 and then I have a child in the women's program at U17, I don't have to travel to four different locations like they have to do today. I can do that in one location. And then I have other opportunities to entertain myself instead of sitting in a car or driving and coming back and all the inconvenience that it takes to bounce around from place to place. The Chargers, the Clearwater Chargers, has grown to be one of the most recognizable youth soccer names in the entire country. We've won three national championships. We have put numerous players from Clearwater into professional teams. Nathan Harriel currently plays for the Philadelphia Union. He's a U.S. Olympian and has played for the U.S. national team. Bobby Boswell played for the MLS Cup champions. Brianne Haberlin played for the U.S. women's national team. Zach McMath, who's now one of our coaches, was a 15-year MLS veteran, and MLS is Major League Soccer. That's the top U.S. soccer program. Jeff Antonella and Ben Sweat are two other residents that, just to name the few. We've really built a program that is a gem of Clearwater. And if we were given the opportunity to have a facility like the landings, we could certainly expand that and continue to make it a very impactful, even more impactful program, and continue to bring the name of the city of Clearwater nationally. Finally, we are missing out on a huge economic impact. We are the Chargers soccer club today, which is no longer just Clearwater. We have a Tampa location and we have a Lakewood Ranch location. All of our tournaments are held at Lakewood Ranch. Nobody in our club wants to keep those tournaments held at Lakewood Ranch. But they have the facilities and we have no other choice. We were just, there's not enough facilities. It's just too difficult. The demographics are impossible to hold the size tournaments that we can and will be holding. The landings project enables us to bring those tournaments to the city of Clearwater. As we all know, Disney Sports Complex is a huge, you know, entertainment facility. Nobody wants to go to Orlando. Everybody wants to stay in Clearwater. They love our beaches. They love our facilities. They love this area. It would be a huge draw and continue to expand the name of the city of Clearwater nationally. So I would encourage you to vote in favor of the landings project. It will dramatically impact thousands of Clearwater families for sure through the Chargers Soccer Club. Thank you for your time.
Dennis McDermott.
Good evening. I'm Dennis McDermott. I am a resident of Clearwater. And before I get started, I had prepared some remarks, but as I've been listening to people, I want to change some of the things I was thinking about saying. And the first thing I want to say is that I really have no objection at all. In fact, I think it's a great idea to have some kind of a regional sports facility to provide a place for all these kids. I happen to have two grandchildren who both have gotten their teeth cut in soccer. And, you know, there's nothing better than to watch a kid growing up and maturing that way. The thing that I keep hearing is that it has to be on the landings. Well, I don't believe that. I'm a geographer. I spent 40 years in real estate and financial services and spent a lot of time doing location analysis for various types of projects. And I wouldn't pick the landings as a good location for a regional sports facility ever. It's just there's just too many things going on that doesn't work. So what we've done is we've looked at this regional opportunity to have a world-class recreational facility, and we've placed it into a place that it doesn't belong. So I think the question isn't should we convert the landings into something else. That's for another time. The question is where does this great proposal, where does it belong? I sense that the current exercise that we're dealing with is really just a distraction. And, unfortunately, it's enabled city staff to do something that doesn't make any sense. The city staff that are involved in this are crying out for some direction and oversight. You know, they're looking for you to give them guidance on what should they be looking at. It isn't whether they should be looking at converting the landings into something else or which proposal is better. That's a whole different question. What we're dealing with here is where is a great location for this wonderful project. It's not at the landings. Thank you very much.
Good evening.
Thank you. My name is Eddie Löwen, Executive Director of the Chargers Soccer Club. Thank you, City Council, for bringing this to your attention. And I love the fact that you start your meeting with a prayer. It was amazing. For us as a soccer club, we say that the game reveals the player, and the immersion in our methodology, the principles, the values that we teach, reveals the person. So we really, as coaches, as an organization, we're trying to invest in our children. We want to bring our joy. We want to inspire them. We want to impact them. And this is really what we do, but we do it for 1,000 players, roughly, in five fields. So we currently train at Glen Oaks, at Eddie Seymour, and also at Joe DiMaggio on very, very bad playing conditions. As you know, football is played or soccer is played on the ground, should be on a good surface. But the balls are bouncing all over the place when we play because the fields are very uneven because we are overusing the grass areas that we have. Due to that, we have many injuries, many rolled ankles. And we have to maneuver about sometimes 100 to 200 players on one field. So we are servicing about 1,000 players on five fields in a week. And we're doing the best to service these families. And it's amazing. We love what we do because it brings joy to the kids, brings joy to the families. But we really don't have enough space to do what we do and do what we love to do. So we are highly in favor of the landings project, encourage the council to vote yes for it because we are investing in our future. So we are investing in our children. Thank you.
Donald Laskoski.
Good evening. Mr. Mayor, council members, thank you for having us. I just have a few short bullet points. Most of the other people have mentioned them before. Pinellas County. It's the most heavily populated county in Florida. There's not much green space left. And for what they're proposing is major fields. And the gentleman just said there's going to be thousands of children or parents traffic a week. I agree they should have a place to play. But perhaps something like out of the 77 acres, perhaps maybe grass fields, soccer fields for the youngsters to play on, bike fields, bike trails, basketball courts. There's currently basketball courts there now. There's children play. The airport, lights affecting takeoff and landings, concern. Height of the field house that was mentioned. What's going to happen there? Placing a large sport complex in a runway presents liability and safety concerns for the community. Sports complex that they're proposing, are the local families, is there a fee that's going to be associated with that? How are we going to afford that? How are children or parents going to afford that? And, again, I'm going to mention Toy Town if they were aware that another Pinellas County is building a large sports complex. So what's that going to take away from the revenue here? I don't know. Anyway, let's see. Oh, and also, Pinellas County, they voted on closing schools last night. So where are these children going? I don't know. Is there a lack of enrollment? Less population? Peaceful? We already mentioned the people's lives, how it's going to affect the lights, the traffic, congestion. Also, the birds and the wildlife. They'll be affected. Nesting habits. Environmental changes. I'm asking and urging, please consider what you're doing to vote no, at least for now. Put it on hold. Get other RFPs. This is, I think the complex is way too big, way too big for that area. By keeping the landings green, with simple bike and walking trails, and soccer and baseball fields built on real grass, I urge you to please reject these RFPs. Thank you.
John White. John White.
Christine O'Leary.
And then you have four, five individuals. Is Barbara Holton here? Barbara Turner-Delees. Jill Gibbs. Brooks Gibbs. And Christiane McGuire. Thank you.
Hi. Six minutes, five votes, 65 years. Good evening, and thank you so much for calling my name. I am a professional stand-up comedian, coach, and CEO whisperer. So naturally, when I heard what was happening at the landings, I thought, you can't make up this stuff. And I've tried. I'm new to the conversation. I've spent 29 hours in the last four weeks attending neighborhood meetings, evaluation committees, community meetings, council meetings, and work sessions. And months of doing anything I can to add to keep Keene Green, who have been going since supporting the winning vote at 61% on November 3, 2020, of 35,718 people. And that's when you were thinking about an industrial park. And the answer was no. I've listened, I've watched, I've written letters, Lena, thanks for being the only one who responded, and I've learned something fascinating about Clearwater. Apparently, five people can vote on what happens to public land, but thousands of people who live here, now that gets complicated. At my first Skycrest meeting, I sat in the front row and met City Manager Poirier, and she answered about, what about the vote and the landings? And here's how I remember it. You said something like, the city could let residents vote, and I said, oh, good! And you said, essentially, but they're not going to. Well, that was wah, wah, wah, what a short celebration of mine. Apparently, it's because the city itself changed the land use designation, and a public vote isn't required. How convenient, as the church lady says. There's a difference between we can't and we won't, and I think we all know it. I've noticed something else, five to zero, five to zero, five to zero. Technically, it's a vote, but it starts to feel like an agreement. And after five, zero, five, zero, that ends up start looking less like democracy, and more like one of those group texts where everyone goes, click, thumbs up. Yeah, sounds good to me. We're talking about 77 acres of green public space and a proposed 65-year lease. I was surprised and proud to hear that there's 1,900 employees here in the city of Clearwater. Now, imagine their cars, plus almost 100. 2,000 paved parking spots, hot, black, paved parking spots. Restaurants, bars, sports fields, and microplastic, and as I learned, playability, AstroTurf. 65 years. That's not a lease. That's like an arranged marriage for three generations. And the people who actually live here don't even get to RSVP to the wedding. I've heard concerns about flooding, trees, wildlife, environmental studies, watershed, brownfields, brownfield committees, and whether residents, regular people, can afford what's being proposed. You know, like when you get invited to a wedding and the plate fee for the wedding is 75 a head, so you should give 150. I've heard lots of questions and lots of input about economic development. And here's my question. When did public land become something the public has to pay for the privilege of enjoying? Pay to play? Come on. By the time this is started, you know what will be done? Toy Town. Toy Town is nine miles away, 17-minute drive, 244-acre entertainment complex in St. Pete. It's not Largo. Even Largo said no to a proposal like this. Even Largo. Because you know we think we're better than Largo. Come on, Clearwater. So Toy Town's on its way. They'll be complete with water attractions and Ferris Reels, restaurant bars, and tickets. Big tickets. And you know, it makes me wonder, what will leave this 65-year sports complex, what will they become? The sloppy second stepsister of entertainment. Even Cinderella got her happy ending. Clearwater calls itself bright and beautiful. I'm starting to wonder, Clearwater bright and beautiful, it feels like Clearwater one and done. I'd like to know, bright and beautiful, what it means for the future of this land is your land, this land is my land, and it's called the landings. Because I've watched the process. I have listened to the presentations. I heard Porter say over and over again something that unnerved me when I was in Maine. This is the end of the beginning. He explained, right now, this is the end of the beginning. I've seen residents show up again and again and beg you, like the Greenwood community, not to be erased. That's us too. And you are not listening. You're not. Call me dramatic. It looks like you're listening. It sounds good. But I don't get, and we don't buy, that you're getting it. Council members, your terms will end. Your names will eventually leave these chairs. Even if you abstain because of conflict, or the conflict changes, or you recuse yourself from this or from that, a 65-year decision will outlive all of that. I mean, Mayor Rector and I will be 128 years old, and the rest of you will be 118 years old. I mean, the city you just said is 111 years old. That's 29 years short of two times of 65. So the question, if you do have the authority to let people vote, and you do, you do, why wouldn't you? Why wouldn't you? What's the big deal? Why not, guys? What's the big deal? You have an opportunity to explain that choice and your legacy. And I know you care about that. This is your chance to show you care about that. And the people of my Clearwater, Councilman, deserve your very beefy and spicy answer. Let's go. Thank you.
Ms. Springer, I think that brings us to the hour.
I was just going to mention that.
Okay. How many speakers do we have left? Is there still a large stack?
Yes.
I would be for allowing those people to continue to speak. Do we want to take a recess and then decide after that? We'd like to talk about allowing more speakers now.
There's about 12 cards left. A couple of our group speaker, it looks like. Roughly 12.
12.
Do you want to take a small break or just? I'm good. I'm good. I don't care. Whatever everybody wants to know. I'm fine.
All right. We're through. Okay.
Let's continue through.
Next speaker, please. Thank you. Stan Evans.
Good evening, everyone. I'm sure you've heard one or two things from the wonderful community. First of all, I think it's really important to let you know I am a resident of Clearwater. I own property in Clearwater. I actually think that people who aren't residents shouldn't really be speaking on matters that actually deal with Clearwater. Now, how about the following? Just imagine yourselves. You're home, and all of a sudden, they're going to build this gigantic sports complex, and that's your backyard and your weekend. Why do I have a feeling that every single one of you would be opposed to that? It would screw up your weekend picnic, barbecue, outing, because of everything that comes around with it. Also, you know the demographics of Clearwater. The demographics of Clearwater, which is of us here, are not playing soccer. No offense. When was the last time one of you played soccer for the full entire term? You haven't. We have McMillan that has tennis courts, with courts on it that are painted for pickleball. I play tennis there three times a week, and there's courts that are available. As everyone else has said, this is green space that you're taking away, and we have a small percentage of green space in Clearwater anyway. We rank below the national average, and you're about to make it worse. And Mr. Battle mentioned something really important I want to repeat. He said tonight that you had up to 120 days to look at proposals. Why are you only giving 30? You have up to 120. Why are you moving so fast? And one correction, it's not a 65-year lease. Their lease could actually be 165 years. Who in the hell signs a lease like that? Are you kidding me? The reality is the following. It is for the citizens of Clearwater. Mr. Battle said you had up to 120 days, and you only used one-third of it. That's not right. I oppose the Porter Project at the landings. You want to look at a commercial location someplace else? That's not in the heart of a neighborhood, because you will be all kidding yourselves. You would not want that in your backyard. Thank you.
Sandra Weber.
Did you guys hear the next speaker?
Sandra Weber.
Howdy, everybody. How you doing? I know it's a hard night for you. I can tell that I can see it on your faces. Well, it's a hard night for these people. I didn't plan to speak, but here I am again. The landings is a special neighborhood. I drove through last Sunday. I hadn't really ever done that before. I discovered the neighborhood has a personality that I haven't seen in other neighborhoods in Pinales County. And I know a lot of the neighborhoods. So I think this complex would absolutely ruin it. Something else I just found. Pickleball. I've never played pickleball. Pickleball injuries are common, especially among older players. And the sport's rapid growth has driven a noticeable rise in ER visits. Most common is sprains and strains, Achilles tendon tears, falls and fractures, overuse injuries, eye injuries, back and knee pain. Why it happens is because many players are middle-aged or older, and they start out without a fitness base. And they skip warm-ups because the game feels gentle. The court is small, so movement is explosive in short bursts, which is hard on tendons and joints. The noise, the other downsides, the paddle-on-ball pop is a major neighborhood complaint, leading to lawsuits and court closures. Court crowding, because limited courts, long waits, and tennis court conversions causing friction, quality paddles, shoes, and court fees add up. It's addictive. So people play daily, and they don't recover. Paddle ball is addictive. Well, you know it. Anyway, we have a lot of older people, and I can just imagine the ambulance traffic in and out of the neighborhood with injuries every day. Any time, and of course, for liability, they're going to have to call 911 if there's an injury, right? I mean, I would hope so, all day long. I live by North Betty Lane. I get fire trucks, but don't really bother me anymore. But I can't imagine. And Pickle and the injuries are going up, guys. I haven't heard anybody talk about that. That's why I jumped up with this. But every single thing these other people have said, I second. And if you have common sense, you know that it makes sense. You know it makes sense. And I don't know what's behind the urgency. And, you know, I hope you do the right thing. You know what it is. Thank you.
Eric Sullivan.
Eric Sullivan, Sports Facilities Companies. Thank you for the opportunity to be here and talk to you tonight. You heard from us on Monday, so I'm going to keep it brief. But I do want to just hit some high-level points and make sure that, you know, we're speaking in fact and not opinion. And we really are looking at this from the process that it is. Our company has been here located in Clearwater for over 20 years. So this isn't just something that we talk about and we say it can happen in someone else's community. This is a community that we live in, we work in, we play in, we employ a lot of people in. And so we really want what is best for Clearwater. Our mission is to improve the health and the economic vitality of the communities that we serve. We think that this project does both. Now, anytime you work with these types of projects, there are sensitivities to it. I certainly do sympathize and empathize with differing opinions on what this could be or what this should be. But when it comes to what is the best team from experience, approach, and the economics of what this site can be, I truly believe that this can serve a broader reach in Clearwater and have a bigger impact on the community. As we think about where this project started with the outdoor fields, it was already a great project from the inclusion standpoint of how many people could use this. With the opportunity to add the indoor to it, I think that gets exponentially better. As we've worked from Texas throughout the Gulf Coast region, up and down our coast, as we've all been impacted by hurricanes, tornadoes, you know, in Texas they've got brownouts and other things that have been, you know, big issues. These facilities do serve as a place of emergency refuge, shelter, and support for staging emergency response vehicles and really providing community resilience. When we think about the economics of this, it's nothing against golf. We love golf. We like what the Houstons have done for years. But when we think about the impact this can make for the number of users, you've heard from a number of the youth organizations. This is also truly multi-generational. When we think about these venues, when they are done properly in communities, in neighborhoods, they serve the entire community neighborhoods. I know it wasn't popular when I talked about what happens to neighborhoods. It actually increases home values. That's not opinion. That's fact. It's data. These are things that are good for the communities. When we're talking about economic impact, room night generation, we're talking about over $75 million a year of direct economic benefit and impact. So when we talk about these things, certainly understand the sensitivities to it. Understand the decision you have. This is a process. Things related to drainage, things related to the remediation, things related to traffic, they will have to be addressed through this process. There will be a number of continuing opportunities to engage with the community, and we think this is a great project for Clearwater. We're hopeful that we get your support tonight with a positive vote. Thank you.
Kelly Bingman.
My name is Kelly Bingman. I own and operate Kelly's Catering for 25 years here in Clearwater. I have contracts with the Phillies and Major League Sports teams, and I work with the dieticians through all of the sports things that we've done. I own two commercial properties here in Clearwater, and this is, I think it's very, very, very, very selfish of people to say that this is not going to be good for the community because it is.
Ma'am. Everybody, please. Ma'am, just direct yourself.
Anyway, I have three minutes, so I just want to hurry up and say what I have to say. Okay, to say that the actual, the economic is only going to be for port of development is a complete, absolute piece of crap. I went from zero employees to 30 within the last 25 years. We are going to operate a 10,000-square-foot kitchen that is going to give good nutrition and good food. I am partnering up with Yo Mamas, that is the number six selling brand of sauce in the world. We're going to have healthy meals for these kids that need it. And, like I said, I think it's very selfish for people to say, I live in this neighborhood. What about everybody else? What about the 40 people that we're going to employ here in this community? It's going to be nothing but good for this community to actually employ other people who are struggling here. I have a lot of employees. One of them is here now, and hello, Brad. And I would be more than happy to do anything I can to support Clearwater. And, like I said, we're opening 10,000-square-foot kitchen that's going to give good nutrition to the kids and the players and all. Thank you very much for your time. And, like I said, I think everybody is selfish for saying, I live here, I live here, I live here. What about everybody else? Thank you, ma'am. What about everybody else? Thank you very much. Richard Stearns.
Good evening. My name is Richard Stearns. I am a Clearwater resident. I don't consider myself selfish. I'm also not a business owner that's going to profit off this. I don't have it in my backyard. But I'd like to bring up some facts that I came across as I was sitting listening to everyone else talk. One is that 5%, apparently only 5% of Clearwater, according to the Trust for Public Land, 5% of Clearwater's land is used specifically for parks and recreation. 5%. Now, I know there's 88 acres of brownfield sites that can be redeveloped for soccer fields in Clearwater and surrounding communities. I see that. I see that. I see that. I see that. It's available. But what I'd like the council members and mayor to do is turn around and look at the logo behind you. Show me the pickleball courts. Show me the parking lots. Show me the covered buildings. Show me that. Because I think the beauty in Clearwater, the bright and beautiful Bay to Beach, is not in buildings. It's not in AstroTurf. It's not in parking lots. It's in the bright and beautiful parks and sea and beaches that we have around us. That's it. Thank you.
Sean Cashin.
Sean Cashin, Gulf Coast Consulting. I'm the civil engineer involved with the project. Before I get started, could I get the PowerPoint presentation up, please?
Loaded? There it is.
It's up. Okay. I just want to talk briefly about the site plan. You all have seen the site plan. We have two access points off of Keene Road. We have the 40-foot buffer against the existing condominiums on the southwest corner. We are going to have a masonry wall along the south end of Airport Drive adjacent to the boundary and around the condo. And one thing I want to add, we are going to have a perimeter trail that's going to go around the entire site. I want to move on to the environmental portion. I just want to go over this real quick. All right. It's not showing up. You think you all have seen, there we go, the bullet points before. And I've spoken about it as well. The existing golf course was constructed in the early 1970s prior to swift mode regulations for water quality or stormwater. Any herbicides, pesticides, chemicals, fertilizers run off the golf course with little or no water quality treatment, discharged to Stevenson's Creek and to a lesser degree Alligator Creek, no water quality treatment. This redevelopment is an opportunity to provide a project that will provide water quality treatment up to very, very high level standards that will meet the statewide stormwater rules that were enacted earlier this year. It will be 85 to 95 percent removal of nitrogen and phosphorus as well as sediments. And it's an opportunity to provide a much higher level of water quality treatment prior to discharging to Stevenson Creek and Alligator Creek. Talking about the drainage and the floodwaters, at some of the community meetings, we heard about some of the concerns and issues with flooding near the condo development. As part of this redevelopment, we will design and plan a very comprehensive stormwater, floodwater, water quality system that will meet current rules and will provide ample storage for the stormwater and floodwaters that will alleviate, if not eliminate entirely, any flooding that is occurring there now. One other item, we have reached out to the Clearwater Air Park folks, and we are coordinating with them regarding this current plan and the field house and the other facilities within the development. So that is a work in process. So we have reached out to them. That's all I have. Thank you very much.
Roseanne Kiramonte, Victoria Bell. Good evening. Thank you all for your service. My name is Victoria Bell. I actually grew up here in Clearwater. This is my hometown. I live not too far away from here. I grew up playing sports. I grew up playing soccer. I love watching my kids play soccer here. I have a six- and an eight-year-old. Never had a problem getting a field. But this is not about who loves sports and who loves soccer. We're here about what's going to be done here tonight and about doing what's good and doing what's fair to the people who live in Clearwater. There's a few things I want to go through. I'm going to try not to be redundant. This is really about whether to be able to drive in and out of neighborhoods, being able to get down Keene Road without sitting in traffic for an hour. This is about covering 70-plus acres of grass with concrete and plastic on land that borders neighborhoods that are already in flood zones. That's a fact, not an opinion. This is about taking away a family's business and livelihood for three generations. That's a fact, not an opinion. This is about using our tax dollars to fund a project that will substantially have negative effects on those who live nearby. And I don't live nearby adjacently, but I don't want this for Clearwater. Everyone is saying we're losing out the tourism to Orlando or Manatee County. I don't want my Clearwater to be in Orlando. Has anyone driven their kids to Disney World? Do we want our Clearwater to be sitting on I-4? That's crazy. That's not selfish. That's us wanting the quality of life that we have here, preserving Clearwater, what makes it beautiful. I also don't want $46 million of tourism funds to be allocated to this project. Respectfully, I would request additional public meetings that would actually notify the residents of what's going on here. I spoke to multiple people this week, and they have no idea what's going on. I respectfully request a no vote on these proposals. And I want to see all the studies before we make a decision. I just heard the gentlemen speak on environmental studies. Where's the system that's going to prevent the flooding?
Thank you.
I want to see that. Jill Cunnings.
Jill Cunnings. I know you know I love my metaphors. Today it's not a dog and pony show. Today it's a song and dance. We've already been down this road. We tried to get rid of the landings years ago. It went to the voters. The voters said no. I believe somebody else referred to that. So I am just here to say the voters still stand where they stand. If you don't believe it, let the voters decide, just like everything else. Thank you.
Mindy Bullier. Mindy B. It's a Mindy. Mike Foley.
I'm a member of the Stevenson Creek Advocacy Group. And I didn't hear these words, highest and best use, remember, in real estate. And this is a lot about geography. And I want to talk a little bit about Glen Oaks. There was flooding there, and Glen Oaks was the solution because the high, when you want detention of water, you don't do it in the lowlands. You do it in the highlands. So this area should be looked at from a watershed management point of view. I know a little bit about watershed management because I was the chairman of the Environmental Advisory Board when we planned Glen Oaks. And we put soccer, it was a question, would it be okay to put soccer fields in Glen Oaks? Absolutely. And there's a couple of great ones there, and the gentleman spoke to using them. But water detention is real important in the higher areas. The airport is on high ground because it's the geography. That's the best place for your airport. You don't put it down in the lowlands. So that's got to be considered. What's the highest and best use of the landings? The golf course is fine. It soaks up a lot of water. It prevents flooding downstream, and it's good that you're putting that into your plan. And I don't know which plan you're going to go with, but I will say this. There's some brownfields issues up there, and I surely want those taken care of because I think the groundwater may be affecting Stevenson Creek, and that creek is restoring really nice. And in a few years, it's going to be even better. So that's all I have to say. Highest and best use of the land. Please consider that. Thank you.
Pascoe. Last one. Lisa Lonza.
Only last because I was late getting here, which is not unusual for me. I don't even have a prepared speech. I think I just want to say that I'm a retired government employee. I worked for the federal, the county. I was a teacher, taught vocational agriculture and natural resources for four years. I was an environmental specialist for North County for the Department of Agriculture from 1980 to 1996. Worked for the federal government, USDA, environmental, agriculture, all over the world. And I've always supported government, and I've always supported you whenever you wanted an additional tax, penny for Pinellas or the extra penny from the sales tax. But I'm at the point now, and my friends are shocked, that I'm actually starting to take a position for Amendment 3 because we consistently give you money, and you consistently misuse it. You don't use it for what we would like you to use it for. And, I mean, that's what you're hearing from the public. And I can't, you know, my friends are like, I can't believe it, Lisa, you're going to come out for this in support of this. I don't really want to. It really goes against my nature. But this is just an example of why, you know, there's so many times you've promised us things. You've used, not you, I'm talking about city council over the years, bait and switch, told us one thing. Oh, we're going to have kayak launching off of the downtown waterfront. We're going to have storage for small watercraft. We're going to have a fishing pier. We're not going to have a giant hotel next to the library. We're not going to take away your parking at the library. By the way, I want to thank the Church of Scientology for letting us park across the street for free. It's just a constant battle. It's exhausting. And why should we give you more money? This is 45, I mean, okay, you're going to say, well, Church of Obama tax, 45 million. We can use that 45 million for something else, like Weedon Island or some of our other county parks or state, well, mostly county and city parks, which is an interesting little point because they always said we couldn't use the tourist development tax for parks, but now the county is starting to use the tourist development tax for parks. So that's a little thing. Also, I guess I'll take up my time. Why not? I've been since like 19, like since 20, 80. Oh, my God, I got my ears all mixed up. In any case, about for the last eight years, I've been studying the Florida Ethics Commission website. I didn't even know there was a Florida Ethics Commission. So I've started studying it, and there's a video, a training video, and I started to say, wait a minute. You know, when our mayor was a candidate, and there's a newspaper article about it, he said, oh, no, no, no, we're concerned. Because he worked for sports facilities. Okay, you know the rest of the story, I think.
Do you need one? Do you need a break? Do you guys want a break? All right, we're going to take a break for five minutes, and then we'll get to council discussion. Thank you very much. Everybody, please, if we could.
Thank you very much.
Hello. Thank you, everyone. I appreciate it. Hopefully everybody was able to get up, stretch their legs. We are now going to move into agenda item 7.1, council discussion. So as we go into that, if anybody. We have one more. Oh, I do apologize. We do have one more speaker, and I knew that. If we missed it over here. Yes. So if we could have Mr. Mark Bunker, please approach.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
Thank you so much.
Hi, I'm Mark Bunker, and I'm here tonight to stand with those people who have been fighting to keep Keene green.
When I served on this council, we had a proposal to change the landings into an industrial park. At that time, many of these same people came before us, making it abundantly clear that they didn't want that type of development in their backyard. They didn't want the traffic, the noise, and the fundamental change to the very nature of their neighborhood. And I listened to those residents, and I opposed that proposal. And because that project required changing the use of the property, the voters of Clearwater had the final say. And they said no. More than 61% of Clearwater voters rejected that development. Now, six years later, we have another proposal, and this time the residents don't get a referendum. But I would ask the council a simple question. Just because you don't have to ask the voters for permission, does that mean you shouldn't listen to what they've already told you? I understand the appeal of this project, but there's a right place and a wrong place for everything. And the wrong place is an established residential neighborhood. And let's be clear, this isn't simply a neighborhood rec center. This is a regional destination with tournaments, restaurants, entertainment facilities, and water attractions. And that brings us to the important question, where does it end? What happens when those thousands of visitors come to the area for the tournaments and events? Not just what happens to the traffic on Keene Road or the noise or the light pollution. What happens five or ten years from now when developers start looking at all those visitors and see opportunities for hotels, restaurants, additional parking, and more commercial development? Will future councils face pressure to rezone the surrounding properties to accommodate that growth? Those are questions that deserve answers before we take this first step down that road. Once you transform the character of the neighborhood, it's not coming back. And I want to emphasize something. The residents of this neighborhood have already fought this battle. I stood with them then, and I'm standing with them now. They shouldn't have to keep defending their neighborhood every time someone comes along with another grand vision for their property. I urge you to respect their wishes, preserve the landings, and find a more appropriate home for this worthwhile project. Keep Keene green.
Okay, now we will move to council discussion, and I do see that we do have both Sunshine Recreational Entertainment LLC and Clearwater Golf Associates Incorporated, should anybody have any questions. So with that, we'll open up for council discussion.
I have some questions.
Sir.
Thank you. And I'm not sure if Mr. Battle wants to answer it or this side. Just for clarification, 165 years. Any discussion or any word of that, just so we can make sure we're factual and understanding?
Let me do this. Owen, can you first say what the charter allows? And I'll allow Mr. Ongs to maybe speak to what they've requested, because I think those are two facts that should be stated on the record.
So in terms of what the charter allows, is under the charter, the city can execute a lease for a term for 65 years with a 30-year extension without going to referendum, and that's in the charter. And that is their request.
Yeah. Thank you. And, Mr. Battle, can you tell me, I heard some comments about shifting to a pay-to-play. Is the golf course currently free? It is, but not to my knowledge. It's paid. Quick. Okay. Thank you. The perimeter trail that was discussed, free and open to the public, or is that it is free and open to the public? Perfect. Thank you. My questions are good for now. Thank you. Thank you.
Anyone else? Thank you. Mr. O'Brien.
All right. All right. This is one of those decisions where I believe we need to be thoughtful about what is being asked of us tonight, what is not being asked of us, and what we stand to gain or lose by moving forward. I understand the concerns of the residents who live near the landings. Their concerns deserve to be heard, taken seriously, and addressed whenever possible. They are our constituents, our neighbors, and the people who will live with the consequences of whatever decision we ultimately make. We owe them more than a promise to listen. We owe them a genuine effort to understand their concerns and determine whether we can address them. I believe that effort has begun. The developer has met with residents and city representatives, and to his credit, has demonstrated a willingness to listen and make changes where possible. What does not mean every concern will be resolved, nor does it guarantee that the final proposal will be acceptable. But it does suggest a willingness to work toward a solution rather than simply insist that the project proceed as originally envisioned. That's important because if we want responsible development in Clearwater, we should encourage a process in which residents are heard, developers are willing to adapt, and the city protects the public interest. That is what negotiations are for. I want to emphasize what is actually before us tonight. We are not being asked to approve a finished sports complex, sign off on every detail, or commit ourselves unconditionally to a final agreement. We are being asked to allow negotiations to begin or continue so that the city and the developer can work together through the details, examine the terms, address concerns, and determine whether an agreement can be reached that serves Clearwater's interest. There is a substantial difference between authorizing negotiations and approving a final project. Negotiations allow us to ask difficult questions, establish conditions, seek protections for residents, and determine whether the financial and economic benefits justify the city's participation. They allow the developer to demonstrate that the project can be shaped into something that works for the city and the surrounding community. And, just as importantly, they give us the information we need to make a better informed decision when the final agreement comes back before council. At that point, we will have another opportunity to examine what has been negotiated, evaluate the protections that have been secured, and decide whether the final proposal deserves our approval. If the agreement does not adequately protect the city and its residents, we will have to confront that fact. Moving forward tonight does not eliminate the responsibility to exercise sound judgment here, or later. But refusing to negotiate now would eliminate the opportunity to find out what might be possible. We should always recognize the potential economic significance of this proposal. The figures presented to us indicate that the project could generate more than $7.7 million for the city through taxes and county sales tax revenue. In addition, Pinellas County, through its TDC, Tourist Development Council, was expected to contribute $85 million toward the project. Those are substantial sums, and they warrant a serious examination of what this development could mean for Clearwater. Beyond those figures, we must consider the broader economic effects, the potential to attract visitors, generate spending at local restaurants and businesses, support jobs, increase activity in the surrounding area, and strengthen Clearwater's position as a destination for sports, recreation, and tourism. Those benefits should not be accepted on faith. They should be examined carefully, supported by credible projections, and weighed against the costs, obligations, and risks the city might assume. We need to understand the full financial picture, including the city's responsibilities, the lease terms, the long-term maintenance, the operating arrangements, and the protections needed to ensure the public receives a fair return. That is precisely why negotiations matter. We have an opportunity to explore whether we can secure the proposed economic benefits while addressing legitimate neighborhood concerns. We should determine what safeguards we can negotiate and what changes are practical, and what commitments the developer is willing to make. We should ask whether enforceable provisions can mitigate traffic, parking, noise, lighting, operating hours, access, and other neighborhood impacts. We should seek clarity about how the facility will operate, who will be responsible for its upkeep, how the city's financial interests will be protected over the life of the agreement. These are not reasons to avoid negotiation. These are reasons to conduct them carefully. I recognize that some residents may believe this project should not move forward under any circumstances. I respect their right to hold that position, but our responsibility as council members is to consider the interests of the entire community, including the residents closest to the site and the broader public that will bear the consequences of our decisions. We cannot dismiss neighborhood concerns in the name of economic development, nor should we dismiss a potentially valuable economic opportunity without first determining whether we can address those concerns. Those two responsibilities are not mutually exclusive. Our job is to see whether we can honor both. Clearwater has worked hard to create momentum for investment, tourism, and economic activity. Opportunities of this scale deserve serious consideration, but economic development should never be an excuse to abandon public accountability, and neighborhood opposition should not automatically end a conversation before we fully explore the details. The test is whether we can negotiate an agreement that is fair to the city, responsible to taxpayers, and attentive to the people who live nearby. I can tell you that as I sit here today, I have not reached a final judgment on this project. There are questions that deserve answers, financial details that deserve scrutiny, and neighborhood concerns that deserve continued attention. But I do believe we should give the process a chance to produce those answers. Tonight, we have an opportunity to keep the conversation going without surrendering our right, our responsibility, to say no later if the final agreement does not meet the city's standards. If the negotiations produce a reasonable agreement that protects our residents, safeguards the public interest, and delivers meaningful economic benefits to Clearwater, then we have accomplished something worthwhile. If they do not, we will have learned that before making a final commitment. So I support going into negotiations and getting all these questions we have answered and then making a final decision, which will not be tonight, by the way. Thank you, sir.
I don't want to repeat what has been said a lot, but let me just start off by saying that I was a little bit taken aback with all those comments about the votes being 5-0. I guess it's all about perception, because I've been painfully aware of the 3-2s. So I guess it's all about perception, because it's definitely not all 5-0s. But in terms of this agenda item, there's a lot that's been said, and I agree with a lot that has been said. But at the end of the day, in order to get all the questions answered and all further details, the process must continue. And I believe that this proposal has enough merit to warrant further consideration. Supporting the process of moving forward will allow us to have and explore more possibilities, address outstanding questions, including the financial ones, and make a more informed decision when that time comes, which is not now. So moving forward does not mean that we are obligated to agree, and I just wanted to reiterate that. But I do feel that we have enough to move forward.
Thank you. Does anybody else? Council Member Menino.
Thank you. Well, first, thank you to everyone that got up and spoke. It's not easy. It's appreciated. Thank you for your engagement in the process. This is how government should be and should work. And your participation, regardless of what side of the aisle you're on, means a lot to us. So thank you. Definitely emotions in the room. Inexpected so. Just a little bit. Besides emotion. Ms. Stamos, your speech was beautiful. Thank you. Moving. We had a comedic act, which was amazing. Brought us back spicier and beefier, and that's appreciated to bring a little laughter in the room and lower the tension. And the tension's high because the discussion's about our quality of life and your quality of life. And it means a lot to you, and it means a lot to you. It means a lot to us. We serve at your will, and we're proud and passionate of our community. And there are turns and twists in the road when we sit up here and we have to make decisions. And for one side or the other to say you have to listen to the residents, it's impossible to listen to all the residents. And we're, the room alone is split. You know, comparing the landings discussion six years ago to today, I don't necessarily think that's fair. You know, there were a lot of people that voted that that project didn't happen because they wanted to preserve recreation opportunities in our community. And voting no did preserve that recreation opportunity at the time. There is no doubt that the landings is a special place. It was said tonight. It is a special place. I have a lot of memories as a child playing golf there. Not very well, but playing golf. And it is a special golf course because what was said on Monday is 1,000% correct. It's not a long, open golf course where you've got to hit the ball 400 yards to play and have fun. It's shorter. It's closer. It's good for novice golfers. It's good for elderly. It's good for young kids. It has a place. Dog water for me was the same way. We lost that a long time ago to a housing development. That's how cities and communities at times move forward. But whatever decision goes forward, the landings will always be a special place, whether it becomes a recreational facility for the community and multi-generational for older pickleball players that may sprain an ankle, or our younger kids, as we've heard some of them, talk about the opportunities for them. And it will remain a special place. The good news is tonight there is no final decision being made. My mind is not made up, just as the gentleman said. My mind is made up that I think it's our due diligence to continue moving forward with the process. But I firmly believe there has to be conditions in place that protect our community, that protect the neighborhood, that protect our environment. And I commend the developers' group on meeting the community, whether it be at their facilities or your own. I was at your gym as well. And so far there has been a lot of concessions made. For me, some of the important conditions that need to be met, environmental remediation stays up there. You know, we've been told by professionals far smarter than myself that bringing this property into compliance does a lot environmentally to make this property cleaner and healthier, not just for the immediate land, but for our water table underneath, makes it healthier for the runoff and drainage that goes into our watershed. And that's important. There's continued, we heard on Monday, there was a commitment in writing yet. No, but we will ensure that we have conditions as we move forward. Continuing that there's some long-term monitoring of those health and conditions of the land and the air around it. That's important to protect our neighborhoods. Stormwater drainage, very important. I do know, I've been out there when it's wet, and those grounds get wet and it does flood. I've seen blue sky days when St. Andrew's Complex is, water has been up to the buildings, and I get it. But having an opportunity today, moving forward, to possibly bring this historic property into higher standards of stormwater drainage, and having the ability to protect those homes, not just during storms and blue skies for years and years to come, is important. So I want to see those conditions as we continue to move forward with the discussions. Traffic mitigation was an early, early things we talked about as I sat with the group. Anytime I've been asked, I've sat and heard your concerns and listened with an open mind and open heart. I never went into any of those meetings with a determination on what I thought. But traffic mitigation is a rightful concern and a challenge. And immediately within months, a developer said, well, we'll close access on Airport Road. We won't let traffic come from, you know, Drew Street or Hercules and cut through the back end and have a back way. You'll preserve that neighborhood and help with safety and keeping children and families safe and limit some of the traffic that goes through there to cut in and turn. I think that's important. That means a lot to me. I want to see that, hopefully, condition kept unless it's an emergency access. It's important to the neighborhood. I think it's important going forward. Using some of your property, our property, their property, however you want to call it, using some of that land to add an additional turn lane to mitigate some traffic so we're not hitting brake lights and running into the back of people, giving them a longer runway to get into your property. I appreciate that. That was a concession you made and didn't have to. You listened to the residents and threw that into the development. And I hope that conditionally remains going forward. I would like to see that as well. Economic and community value. There's no doubt, you know, a lot of things have been thrown out about soccer fields, soccer fields. These assets in our community, you might see a soccer goal on them, but they're far greater than that. They're open, long-range fields for 15. A gentleman said we haven't probably played soccer on those in the community for quite a while. I'm a retired professional soccer player. I grew up in Clearwater, won a national championship here for the Chargers, and I'm out there on the mentoring kids and kicking a ball and running with them weekly. So I'm probably an outcast in this group, but I don't play pickleball. So that's a definite. I don't want to get hurt. But on those open, long-range fields, for 15 years, I was voluntold, but volunteered to paint white lines on the fields, and it'd be amazing that I'd go out there and have a U6 rec game the next morning. I'm throwing lines down, and there's lacrosse lines that are different. On the same field, there's football lines. Then there's flag football lines. And now I'm putting U6 lines, and we're doing a different color for each one so the kids know which lines they're supposed to play in to know the boundaries. And now the adults or the middle school kids have different measurements in a field. And there's six different colors of paint on one field to try to allow our youth and the kids to participate in play. You can only imagine the confusion in the morning when referees and parents are trying to tell Johnny and Susie which lines they need to play on. And the reason that's being is because we don't have enough in our community in Clearwater, not necessarily looking as a regional asset. We don't have enough open, long-range fields for the needs in our community today. There's so much, and not just the tourism side of it, in our own community, the Hispanic and Mexican community. There's Tampa Bay club sports. There's Clearwater Chargers. There's lacrosse that come out there. There's youth football with the Cougars, the Tornadoes, with Greenwood Panthers. There's cheerleading that comes with that. These open, long-range fields are far more important than just for soccer. It checks a lot of boxes for our youth. I do support considered discussions. I do support moving forward. I do hope those conditions eventually are in writing. I know they will be. I know this is just a place in the process. And it's important to me that I think Clearwater deserves that investment in the benefits, multi-generational benefits of our community. But I think we can do it, and we can and we will have the ability, and if not, you won't have my support, but to move forward without compromising the safety of our neighborhood, without compromising the quality of life in Clearwater that we also come to love, and without environmentally impacting our environment negatively, and actually leave it and bring it up to better standards in a better place than it is today. So I'm a yes in moving forward, but, again, it's conditionally. I do support it. I do respect the voices on both sides and look forward to making sure we continue to check those boxes of protecting the neighborhoods, protecting the community, and expanding opportunities in our quality of life for our residents.
Thank you. Does anybody else? With that, I will keep it extremely brief. It's already been said, but this is simply to enter negotiations. And I believe that we do have, as elected officials, on behalf of all of Clearwater, a responsibility that when a project with diverse amenities like this come to our doorstep, that it's prudent for us to follow through and see if it works out. So I, too, will support this project going forward for negotiations and look forward to seeing what we can do to better Clearwater as a whole. So with that, I will entertain a motion.
Motion to approve Agenda Item 7.1.
Second. All those in favor? Aye. Against? That is 4-4 and 0 against. We will now take a brief recess to allow the mayor to get back in and start back then. Thank you very much. This time we'll reconvene the meeting and we'll move to Agenda Item 8.1 on the agenda.
So 8.1 is a third reading. Do you want me to go ahead and start reading the title? Please read it. Ordinance number 9860 at S26. Ordinance of the City of Clearwater, Florida, making amendments to the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan by amending the Quality Places Chapter to establish a new plan redevelopment district, PRD, overlay future land use category, which sets worth residential, non-residential, mixed-use, and impervious surface ratio, ISR bonuses, amend the residential low, RL, residential urban, RU, residential low-medium, RLM, residential high, RH, residential office general, ROG, commercial general, CG, and institutional high. Future land use categories to incorporate bonuses for qualifying development in the planned redevelopment district overlay. Add policies requiring the portions of the North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area CRA be designated with planned redevelopment district overlay on the future land use map. And referring to a new North Greenwood district on the zoning atlas. Add policies addressing non-conforming structures in uses and provide for termination of non-conformities through process established in the Community Development Code. Update existing policies for consistency with changes. Certifying consistency with the City's comprehensive plan and proper advertisement. Providing for severability and providing an effective date.
Is there one to hear from the public tonight that desire to speak to agenda item 8.1?
Yes. Kathy Clarity?
Okay, I've got these glasses to see.
Anyway, I'm Kathy Clarity, and I'm here about the future land use map and in one particular property.
I was here last meeting, too. I was here last meeting, too.
Basically, it is the, it's called, it's this property right here.
It is commercial vacant, if you go look it up in the county record. But basically what it is, the city purchased it in 2012. And let me read what it is. This property is situated in a strategic location along Stevenson's Creek adjacent to a small city-owned park and sanitary lift station. It is located at the convergence port of Stevenson's Creek and Spring Branch, Stevenson's Creek, where the buildup of sediment occurs at a faster rate than at other locations along the creek. These conditions create the need for periodic dredging to main stormwater floors.
Currently, the city has no access rights to this portion of the creek to perform its maintenance obligations. The city's dredging activities have been infrequent as staff is relying on acquiring temporary rights of access to private property owners. The cost of such temporary access rights and prices to acquire permanent easement rights have historically been high. This portion of the waterway is currently in need of maintenance and dredging. And so, and it was paid out of the Stormwater System Expansion Fund. And this was done in 2012. Okay? So basically, let's see. So then the city atlas maps were updated. And you see the stormwater part going up here. And there's that little park they were talking about, the Betty Lane. So this is a stormwater park to dredge the creek up there. All right? This is some lift work on the maintenance. This is what's under the bridges right now. It's all silted up. You guys need to dredge it. And this park allows the access to dredge that park. That's why it was purchased. All right? This is from Stormwater, which Mr. Slaughter gave me in 2024 when I saw this property going up as commercial in the 2045 plant. All right? This is a close-up of the Stormwater in 2024. This is what it shows now. Right now, it's been changed to a commercial vacant property. The stormwater park you bought in 2012 is now vacant. And I don't know why. I can't figure out why it was changed. And Betty Lane, which it was a park before, is now a stormwater runoff thing. All right? This is what it looks like as of yesterday. So it's all filled up with a runoff from the golf course. You've got cuttings and grass that goes into it. This is under the bridge. This is what it looks like from above. I mean, it's a stormwater park. It's in use. It's not a fancy park, but it's a necessary park. You guys keep talking about stormwater and infrastructure protections.
Thank you.
Protect the property. Appreciate you. Thank you. Thank you.
Next speaker.
Jerry Coles.
Good evening. I live on Overbrook, where I have Stevenson Creek behind my property. And I've been working with a lot of local people like Mike and a few others that we just want to prioritize the environmental aspects to make sure Stevenson Creek stays clean and the impacts of the PRD and whatever may impact that entire area. Traffic, obviously, and just general, the environmental concerns, make sure all of that's being looked at. That's all. That's all I have.
Thank you. Thank you, sir. Next speaker. Next speaker. That's done. Okay. Oh, we have one more.
It's a great opportunity to talk about something, and it relates to the golf course, the landings, as well as other golf courses the city manages. Is that what's down there? Oh, what?
This is on the overlay.
Well, I know it is, but she just talked about the overlay. This is about the overlay.
Do you have something to share on the overlay district?
Well, I was just going to, when she was talking about the golf courses, I just wanted to, because she was talking about the pollution from the golf course, and it needs to be cleaned out. I understand. And all the dredging. This is about this agenda item.
Okay. Thank you. Anybody else? Okay. Is there any council discussion? Yes.
Good evening, mayor and council members. Let me begin by telling you what a resident is not. A resident is not someone you know who happens to sit in a meeting. A resident is not someone who lived in North Greenwood 8, 10, or 15 years ago. A resident is not someone who wants to open a business in North Greenwood. A resident is not an investor. And a resident is not your bingo partner or someone who happens to attend your church. A resident is someone who actually lives in North Greenwood, whose home, family, and future will be directly affected by your decisions. And let me make something else clear. The Clearwater Urban League coalition does not speak for all residents of North Greenwood. Neither does any organization, committee, individual, simply because the city chooses to recognize them. Where is the evidence that the people who actually live there support these changes? Mr. Battle stated in his email that the city tries to follow what the majority of the residents support. What majority? Who counted them? Where's the documentation? Residents were initially left out of the information process. Decisions to move forward while many homeowners and renters had no meaningful understanding of what was being proposed. Then we were given reassurances that participation was voluntary, even though residents were told they could not opt out. We were told existing properties would be protected, yet the detailed rules and protections remained unfinished. That is misinformation, and it is undermining the public trust. Tonight, you're considering Ordinance 9860-26 and 9861-26, which will affect the future of North Greenwood. The city's own redevelopment plan acknowledges the risks of displacement. Yet, where are the enforcement protections? Before approving these ordinances, put real protections in writing. Protect long-time homeowners from being displaced by redevelopment related to financial pressures. Establish meaningful property tax and insurance assistance for qualifying residents. Protect renters through enforceable anti-displacement measures and relocation assistance. Protect inherited family homes through heirs' property and legal assistance. Prevent redevelopment incentives from rewarding projects that unnecessarily displace existing residents. And guarantee that existing homeowners are not forced into costly property changes simply because the city has changed the rules around them. The protections must be legally enforceable, adequately funded, and established before. Thank you, ma'am. I had extra minutes. I have two other guests, two other residents here that gave me their time.
Ma'am, I don't have a card for you.
They gave it to the guy with the Katrina George. It should be Alicia. Right. The guy with the dreads. Your employee. Yeah. Yeah. They gave me their time. Can we get folks to go in? If you haven't already filled out a card, if you would. They did it when we came in.
Okay. Thank you, ma'am.
So she's saying she has two extra minutes.
Okay. Yes. Okay. Two extra minutes then. Thank you.
We're also still waiting for answers about the 2020 finding of necessity. The inclusion of these properties, residents believe, were never blighted. Environmental conditions and the records we requested. To many of us, this has become smoke and mirrors. We were shown beautiful buildings and promised a better community, but nobody can tell us how the people already living there will be protected. My family's been a part of North Greenwood for generations. We've invested in this community, raised our families, and worked to improve the lives of young people. We're not against redevelopment. We're against redevelopment that replaces the people it claims to help. Mayor and Councilman, I'm asking you to stop the vote tonight. We're not asking you to not move forward with redevelopment. We're just asking you to postpone it until we can get the proper information to make the right decisions for our community.
Thank you, ma'am. Do we have any other speakers on this agenda?
Hello again. I wasn't planning on speaking on this either, but I live on the edge of North Greenwood, and I know the area very well. Well, this amendment, it's complicated. The whole CRA thing is complicated as far as I know. You guys have been doing this for a lot of years. I haven't, of course. I recall some clarification about the opt-in, opt-out option to residents. I believe it was Ms. Jimenina who mentioned that. And I understand that these people want clarification. I know that you have these meetings, and it's all nice, and people have drinks and food and whatever, and that's a nice thing to do. But we need to make things simple. We need to make these agreements readable to the average person. We want to know what this means and what this will mean for my property and my neighbor's property. North Greenwood, there's really no excuse for a city the size of Clearwater to have neglected North Greenwood for as long as I have. But that's what happens. I don't want to see people being ignored, finagled, tricked. I don't know. It feels really bad. It just feels bad, the whole CRA thing, because things seem to change. People who are involved seem to change, blah, blah, blah. And nothing really happens. It's too complicated. The processes are. You guys know that. It's long. It's arduous. But there's lots of room, I think, for misappropriation. I'll just say it that way. So it's hard for people to come out and talk. And people are tired. Everybody's tired. Okay? We're fighting for this. We're fighting for that. Please try to make things more simple for people. Please care about these people. I care about them. I don't have kids, guys. I don't have kids. I have a dog. Okay? And I care about my street, which has gone through a lot. I care about my community, which has gone through a lot and improved a lot. But I've worked hard, very, very hard, very hard, in different ways. Anyway, I've still got 16 seconds, guys. It's been a long night. And I'm just a good citizenship award winner from high school. And this is what I've been needing to do for a long time. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am. Thank you.
Any other speakers on this agenda? Okay. Any council discussion? Aye. If there's no discussion, is there a motion?
Move to approve agenda item 8.1. Second.
All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Unanimous. Move to agenda item 8.2.
8.2 is a third reading. You want me to read the title? Please. Ordinance number 9861-26. Ordinance of the City of Clearwater, Florida, and many of the future land use element of the comprehensive plan of the city to apply the plan redevelopment district PRD overlay as an overlay category in addition to the existing residential low, RL, residential urban, RU, residential medium, RN, residential high, RH, commercial general, CG, institutional I, and residential office general, ROG, and the future land use categories for certain real property located within the boundaries of land known as the North Greenwood Community Development Agency Area, CRA, and excluding those portions of the North Greenwood CRA, which are designated with the Central Business District, CBD, Recreation, Open Space, ROS, Preservation P, Industrial Limited, IL, Transportation Utility, TU, and water future land use categories as more specifically identified in attached exhibit A and as depicted in attached exhibit B, all within the city of Clearwater and providing an effective date.
Is there anyone here from the public tonight who desires to be heard on the agenda of 8.2?
Kathy Clarity. Continuing on, this is from the CRA, this is from the North Greenwood CRA downtown or development plan that you, the board approved several years ago. And this is what it says about North Betty Lane Park, which is the parcel of land I'm basically talking about. It says, The city acquired the lot on the southeast corner of North Betty Lane and Overly Street intersection to access Stevenson's Creek with dredging machinery. This parcel does not currently serve as a dedicated recreation facility. It has the potential to be enhanced to provide improved open space and access to Stevenson's Creek. Heavy equipment access to the waterfront must be maintained to provide the necessary maintenance to Stevenson's Creek in the future. So the development plan that the CRA works for the North Greenwood specifically says don't mess with this park. And somebody mess with that park, turn the stormwater park into a commercial vacant park, and it's just going to disappear if you pass it the way it is. So what I am asking, okay, and also, back in December of 2024, you guys passed an ordinance and added to the city ordinance that said that North Betty Lane Park was going to be added to the park. But that never happened. And now people, I think, so I don't know. It's like you guys are covering up this park. I mean, I have a records request in on who changed this and who did that. I don't know. Back in 2024, when I first looked at this stuff, this is what I got from parks. Art Crater wrote, this area is not a park and has never been a park. The area south of this is, in fact, a park named Betty Lane Park. Apparently, this map has been mislabeled, and I will ask our engineering department to make the correction. So maybe Art Crater changed it back here. I guess you guys can't see in the bottom there. Yeah. I mean, and Michael Delft, when I asked about it, he wrote me this thing. He said, we are not eliminating Betty Park. I checked with the parks director, and he told me it was inadvertently left off the master plan list, but that's being corrected. And he goes on to say, theoretically, you could ask if you had a legitimate question or concern. Your gratuitous assertions are a monumental disservice to the communities you purport to support. I'm not supporting any communities. I'm trying to keep you guys infrastructure. I mean, it's ridiculous to give up this precious land. I mean, this is great. It's a great development land, too, but it's also, it protects all of Stevenson's Creek, everybody downstream. I mean, if you need to dredge, you have a place you can dredge. It's got a lift pump on that place, all right? I was paddling around my paddleboard. That's how I found it because I thought, what a great spot to put paddleboards in and kayaks. You throw a $50,000 dock in there, and you've got a great asset to North Betty Lane. Do something positive. Don't develop it.
Thank you.
Any other speakers on this? Jerry Coles.
Again, I'm much more concerned about the environmental aspects than all that's been considered. Impact on traffic and everything else, but I appreciate your time. Thank you.
Thank you, sir. Any other speakers? Katrina George.
Question for the mayor and the commission. So, as you all are discussing various areas, I noticed after the landing, there was actually a discussion about what you all were discussing. So, as the information came forward about North Greenwood, it went to an automatic vote. So, is our vote less in North Greenwood than in other areas? Because I'm a little perplexed with the lack of, I guess, thought that came into making this rash decision and not actually taking in consideration the fact that residents were not provided proper information. How about lies coming forth about the information that was provided to our churches, but we got in a private meeting to find out, hey, they didn't even know the name of the pastors in the churches. So, how could they have provided information to the residents? Again, I'm not stating that moving forward and improvements in our area is not necessary. What I'm saying is, at this juncture, we need to make sure that we're making the right decisions for North Greenwood. All the residents are involved because Gloria Campbell does not speak for North Greenwood. She doesn't even live in Clearwater. So, all of these voices that are coming to the table, and they're filling the room with all of these people who don't live in North Greenwood, and they're, oh, yeah, I like that building. They don't live here. They're from Tampa. They're coming out of wherever else. The Girlfriend's Club. Whomever. They don't live here. Residents need to be made aware totally. Putting a sign on the side of the road is not proper notification for residents in North Greenwood before these decisions are made total, where it's going to affect our families. I don't know anybody up here that lives in North Greenwood. So, we're the ones that are going to be impacted by your rezoning and overlays. I think proper consideration needs to be made before these rash decisions that you all are making about our community.
Thank you, ma'am. Any other speakers?
I don't believe so.
Move to council discussion then. And just for a little clarity, I would like to have, Mr. Battle, would you explain what public forums we are having and are continuing to have to educate and to share information with the community?
Sure. Thank you, Mayor. So, with respect to the actions that you have in front of you tonight, this was part, I would call it like two phases, right? This is the land use and the comp plan amendments that would need to be put into place prior to making actual, put the zoning overlay in place. And so, the process has been, I would say, it's probably confusing because it's not as simple as going from idea to policy to ordinance because of the steps that are involved. I.e., we could not adopt a zoning overlay or any changes that would have been consistent with the North Greenwood redevelopment plan as developed without making these changes fundamentally to the comp plan and as well as to the zoning and to the land use map. So, the process that we're in right now is having public meetings to start to put together the form-based code with respect to what the future of North Greenwood will look like. So, there probably is some confusion that what we're doing now is the final product, but that is not the case. There will still need to be approval of the form-based code, which, as Ms. George alluded to, we showed pictures, we showed some ideas about what building types might look like, what building forms might look like. And there really are reference points, but what will be adopted is our hope, and I'll let Ms. Matzke speak to that as well, will be Clearwater's code amendments with respect to how they fit best in North Greenwood. So, the other part I would say is that there's nothing universal about the process of making these types of changes. There's no such thing as unanimity and a consensus that everyone agrees on what it should look like. However, the public engagement process is built to allow all who can participate and are willing to engage to at least have that voice. We take and bring to you what we think, from the professional planning and redevelopment standpoint, what those ideas should be. And we give them to you in terms of our professional recommendations. If there are still things that we need to change, the process is in place for us to continue to make those changes and amend it. Now, what happens in the future? What can we protect? What can we brace ourselves for? I think those are great things to talk about and use the power of the Redevelopment Trust Fund in order to invest in what those things can be, what we can do to protect existing residents. Right now, we have commercial and residential programs that we talk about at our meetings during the director's part of the report. Those things won't go away. As we build more money in that trust fund, we want to be able to provide more. But we also need the code to be in place to allow development to occur without having to do minor adjustments through the planning process that take time and money. So, look, the promise that was made when this North Greenwood CRA was put into place was that we would address it and do it in a way that would allow for it to compete with any part of the city from an economic return on investment and a competitive place for people to live and have the opportunities that everyone enjoys in Clearwater. So, we believe these steps are a step in that direction. More steps will come. We'll continue to engage. We're not going anywhere. So, we appreciate her comments and we'll continue to engage in that space.
And I also want to point out, just for the public, too, that we may not be discussing it as vigorously tonight as maybe other agenda items. Part of the reason for that is this is the third reading. We've had multiple meetings as a council to discuss this overlay. That's correct. And we've had plenty of discussion. We've asked questions for tonight. And before I go to other questions that folks might have for you, there is an upcoming community information. There are at least two, one this month, and I believe one in December.
There's one coming up very soon in October. The 27th, yeah, 27th is it? Yeah, where anyone from the community, particularly North Greenwood residents, want to learn more about it. Right.
They can do that process. That is correct. Yes, sir. Yes, sir.
Vice Mayor, I think you have a question.
Yes, sir. Thank you very much. Ms. George, I want you to know that I hear you and I understand that this is an important issue for you. And as the mayor said, you know, we have been through discussions, and this is just to set that overlay district. That doesn't mean that there's some magic wand that developers or investment opportunists will come in and just automatically get what they want. You know, at those times when they come in, and please correct me, Mr. Battle, they'll still go through the same development process that any other developer would go through. Therefore, there will be more public engagement to have the community members out and make sure that that project is something that you, your neighborhood, would want. And it would also go through the CRA board as well. So I just want you to know that this isn't just some rubber stamp for an end-all, be-all type thing.
I want to make one clarification. Yes, please. Ms. George, can you speak to that?
Yes. Hi, Lauren Maskey, Planning and Development Director. I'd like to make one clarification. There's not always public engagement related to individual projects being developed. Our code is structured around, you know, some have minimum standards, and they can go ahead and move to building permit. Others, we use the term flexibility, and if there's flexibility, it might be an administrative approval, or it could require a community development board hearing. And that's part of why it's so important that we are out in the community and listening to visions and fine-tuning the code, which is part of why we started by looking at buildings and trying to think, like, what fits the context? What does the community think is the context? And then how do we craft our regulations to try to get that when new projects come online? So through that, we do a lot of the pre-work, and assuming council approves that, some of those decisions may be administrative approvals, and others may still be recommended to be community development board hearings. Thank you.
I should have clarified what I was trying to convey. It's a multi-phase, like, residential building coming in, not something just unique to a smaller project.
And if I may, so, yes, the next meeting is on October 27th at the North Greenwood Rec Center. We have another one scheduled after that in early December. And, I mean, you know, this project's a little bit behind schedule for various reasons, and if we found that, you know, we felt that additional outreach was something we would recommend, we would be requesting additional time. So, you know, we would work through the city manager's office. We would give you our honest assessment of where we were and what maybe we might need before moving to a public hearing to move things through. The last thing I would like to say is, well, these two ordinances that you've considered are going through right now, they're written to where they're not effective until the rest of the pieces come into place. So if the city council never approves the new zoning district standards, these changes aren't effective.
One of the reasons why we went ahead and advanced these, sometimes we bring things through together
and other times we end up separated.
We advanced these because amendments of this level that are changes to our major policy document, the comprehensive plan, and to our future land use map, which provides that kind of assurance to the community, what's allowed in their area. Those require review by state agencies twice. So it's not a two-month process. It's really a nine-month process.
And so, you know, we wanted to go ahead and move that forward. But, again, everything's contingent upon approval of the next two phases, which would be the changing our zoning atlas and, you know, consideration of the new zoning standard.
So there's still a lot of work to go.
Anybody else? Yeah. That's Mayor Menino.
Thank you, Mayor. Thank you for explaining it. Ms. George, appreciate your words. Recognize your concerns. We've heard this discussion two times at Ford Pinellas. The first time it was on the agenda, I commend city staff for pulling it because there were a handful of letters that were written and concerns. You notice there need to be an additional layer of education, outreach, and engagement. Signed, scheduled a meeting in the North Greenwood Advisory Community Board that was not on the calendar just to specially address these concerns. So I commend staff on that. And we continue to have that educational process and community outreach. I do want to say that outside of the North Greenwood Neighborhood Advisory Board's unanimous support for this at multiple levels and three readings here, the CRA in our North Greenwood community, that wasn't our ideas. And that wasn't our wish list. That was the North Greenwood community did the heavy lifting for almost a decade of fighting for everything that they have in that CRA as of now and the map and what's gone into it. And they created it. They envisioned it. The community built it. And it wasn't us sitting on the dais. So I'm sorry that their voices can't be here to be heard today as well. But I think in that process of fighting for it, a lot of these concerns were addressed and were recognized and were vetted. And that's what gave many people in the community a bit of peace of mind and understanding that it is safe to move forward. And it is hopefully in the best interest for the quality of life, health, and safety of our North Greenwood community. But I do understand Mrs. George's concerns. They have been raised for years. I just hope we can continue through this process on education and outreach and making sure we get that clarity and understanding in the community. Thank you.
That's fair motion.
Agenda item 8.2. Second.
All those in favor?
Aye.
Opposed. Unanimous. Move to agenda item 9. Are there any citizens to be heard tonight on items that are not on tonight's agenda?
Yes. Linda Stoller. I'm sorry? I'm sorry.
Good evening. I'm Dr. Ellen Boylan, and I'm a resident of Clearwater. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. Proclamation to end all cooperation of local law enforcement with ICE, DHS. The Pinellas Coalition for Human Rights and to End 287G, in which you participate, in solidarity with the national Talk to Your Sheriff initiative, is a local accountability campaign focused on ending law enforcement cooperation with ICE and protecting the rights and safety of our communities. We represent a growing nationwide base of activists committed to engaging sheriffs and police directly, building local pressure, and advancing policies that protect constitutional rights and immigrant communities. A prosperous Pinellas County is one where every resident, immigrant or U.S.-born alike feel safe and valued and fully able to participate in county life. Our local public resources should be used to keep our communities safe, not to erode our public trust or take away our loving neighbors from people who depend on them. Our Pinellas Coalition includes Unitarian Universalists of Clearwater, Unity Church of Clearwater, the Florida Immigrant Coalition, the Workers' Circle, Indivisibles of Pinellas, and Tampa Bay Immigrant Solidarity Network. We are committed to the following, one, end profiling, end the practice of stopping, questioning, and detaining people based on their race, ethnicity, or the language they speak. Two, follow due process. Require due process and judicial oversight of warrants and detainers issued by ICE prior to any enforcement action. Three, treat with dignity. Require that lawful deportation first include safe and dignified return of the individual to their families, whether in the United States or outside of the United States. Project children. Require that children born in the United States be placed with U.S. citizen families or friends known to them and their parents when their parents are detained. All detained members of the same family must be placed together. Five, allow inspection. Require that each detention center be open to inspection by elected officials, be subject to independent public inspection, and free of nutritional, health, and safety violations. Therefore, given the gross violations of law and common decency committed by ICE and DHS, we call on all law enforcement agencies in Pinellas County, including Clearwater, to end their 287-G agreements and all participation in ICE, DHS, immigration enforcement.
Thank you, Ms. Speaker.
Belinda Engelman. And ma'am, did you fill out a card?
They told us to just sign the paper and not fill out a card. Oh, I'm sorry. This is Linda. I'm sorry. I'm Linda Stoler. Okay. Good evening. I'm Linda Stoler. Yeah. I'm here today, tonight, because I oppose the Clearwater Police Department 287-G agreement with ICE. These 287-G agreements are slippery slopes for local governments. Actual immigration policy decisions are made by the federal government, and then because of agreements like 287-G, local law enforcement is in a position of being a threat to the population they should be protecting. Actually, I really don't understand why Clearwater Police has a 287-G agreement with ICE. Why are they cooperating with ICE to enforce immigration laws? This is a federal responsibility. My immigrant neighbors are under attack, and law enforcement officers are being used by ICE to tear families apart and disrupt our communities. I've been a resident of Pinellas County for 44 years, and I've never felt threatened by our immigrant neighbors. But I do feel unsafe when I hear about neighbors being arrested, kept in the Pinellas County Jail, without bail, and deported. I understand that Clearwater Police officers are being trained to act as immigration officers. If so, why? Clearwater residents are feeling unsafe, afraid to cooperate with local police to stop real crime in our community, and this makes me feel unsafe. Signed agreements can be unsigned, and 287-G agreement, please. Thank you.
Thank you, ma'am. Thanks, Speaker.
Belinda Engelman, did you fill out a card?
My name is on the list. They said they didn't want us to do cards. Oh, okay. They wanted to be on the list. Okay. Okay. Thank you. I'm third, I think. Or fourth. Third. Mayor, council, I am a retired attorney that lives out on the same key, and I am here to ask you to end your 287-G agreement. I'm not quite sure whether it went before council or whether Chief Gandy signed it, but I do know that the statute, Florida Statute 908.11, says that the sheriff or the chief officer of the detention center in the county has to have an agreement, but the municipalities do not. Yet, all the municipalities that we've been going to and speaking to in Pinellas seem to have these agreements. I mean, maybe y'all can tell me, because I can't really decide why it is. I know some other counties in the state have tried to get out of them and were threatened by higher-ups. Maybe it's a thing where people feel they have to do it. Maybe they want to do it. We don't know, but we know that it's hurting the citizens of Clearwater. There is a Hispanic community here of about 15.5% or more, because everybody probably didn't get into that census, and it's higher than the number of Hispanic people in all of Pinellas County. So you have quite a few Hispanic people here that are really worried about the fact that now we're training ICE in Clearwater, and they feel they have to stay home because they might be drug out of their car like we see on TV. They might be run over. They might be shot at. I mean, it's a real concern for these people that this goes on, and I, for the life of me, can't figure out why. If you didn't have to sign it, you signed it. But nevertheless, you know, the 20 or 25 people that we understand were trained last month must be ready to go on the street if they haven't already gone on the street. I'm not sure about that. But I do know that it's not a good thing for Clearwater. It's not a good thing for Clearwater Beach. Think about if one of these incidences, like you see every night almost on the TV, were to happen in Clearwater Beach, would we have tourists wanting to come to Clearwater Beach? I think that's a real problem. And we also know that they produce a lot for our economic well-being. Many of them are in construction. Many of them are in the hospitality industry out at the beach. These are people that we need and we need to protect.
Thank you. Thank you, ma'am. Thank you. Next speaker.
Donald Hudson.
I think you called me earlier.
I do have a let's call.
Hi, I'm Donald Hudson, a 46-year resident of Pinellas County, talking about ICE. I'm concerned that our county and many of our cities are working with ICE and harming our public health, excuse me, public safety and public trust today and into the future. These detainees that are held in our county jail for 72 hours or longer are often breadwinners for their families. Most of them are living paycheck to paycheck. They have vulnerable people that are relying on them. Many of the detainees will lose their jobs for being unreliable. That destroys the family budget and increases the likelihood that bad things happen to children. Children may go hungry. Their second parent may have to leave them alone without the other parent who's in jail. Bad things can happen to children when they're left alone and especially if they have to be left with a friend or a neighbor. Also, in the future, I'm concerned that this is going to damage our policing. We have generations of people in this country that trust the police and will work with the police, me included. That's going to be harmed badly by the activities that ICE is performing. Much of the trust is being lost as federal agents are using harsh policing to cause excessive harm. Children pay attention. They sense their parents' fears. They are warned if the police are nearby. They know when people disappear because the police have taken them away. They are taught to avoid police. So in the future, these children, when they grow up, they are not going to work with the police. There's going to be a deterioration in the relationships between the police and the public, which may cause an increase in crime. I volunteer at a middle school in Clearwater, and I've actually heard students talking about when a child doesn't show up for class, they're wondering if ICE is taking them away. So public safety and public trust is being harmed by ICE, and my question is, why is Clearwater cooperating? Since I have a few more seconds, the adult voters in this country have turned on ICE. It used to be the most favorable political position for the Republican administration. However, a poll in August has shown that only 40 percent of the people now approve of what ICE is doing. So there are 13 points underwater. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Next speaker.
Kathy Flaherty.
Okay, I think people need to talk about what's guiding all this development and everything. And back in 2014, the city hired ULI, and they came and they were consultants, and it was basically a counter to the community-based development plan for the CRA. This was more of a commercial, like a developer plan, you want to say? Because basically it recommended using county developer funds for CRA stuff. I mean, our CRA TIFs, the county TIFs, to pay the developers. And one of the things was basically was a couple things. You had partner with Scientology, okay, so they're the largest player in the thing. They recommended that. And they also said that everybody, the historic African community and the Latino community, they just must also just partner along. And the result, I can see, and the North Greenwood, like the CRA, that was part of the 2014 ULI recommendations. And I think Lena and Albritt and you guys were part of that consulting thing. You went to different things to implement this ULI plan. So that's where that whole thing, so it was all developer stuff, and this was basically what North Greenwood is doing. They're trying to turn it into a marine district, and that's why I'm worried about that one place on the creek. Now, also, in my neighborhood is the Hispanic community, and I can tell they're scared to death about this ICE thing. My neighbors, none of my neighbors speak Spanish, okay, but I can, enough, they're scared. The kids don't play on the streets. I mean, it's terrorized my neighborhood. And in addition to that, we've got this really cool street market area that was finished in 2014 or 2020-25 that nobody knows about because you guys have taken all street market vendor activities and basically passed ordinances to stop anything in my neighborhood and take it all into the DDB. I mean, Lena, you can explain. I mean, you try to find food truck vending spots all over downtown through the DDB, but we have a $20 million food truck. Look, it says Festival Street. We've got bus stops. I mean, this was built up there, the Festival Core area. I mean, we have the Mercado. It's a totally separate thing. So what this ULI thing did, and then in 2019, you redid the CRA plan and implemented ULI and put DDB, which is this independent agency, basically in charge of the downtown development. They have nothing to do with development. They're property owners, but they're now in our development plan. And I'm sorry. You guys messed up Clearwater. Thank you, Ms. Clary.
Next speaker.
Eliseo Santana.
You know, my name is Eliseo Santana. I'm a resident of Clearwater, and I want to say thank you to each and every one of you because if it was taxing for me to be there, thank you. Thank you because you are giving your most valuable resource, which is your time, and you're giving it for the love of the city, my city, the city that I love. I want to say that I want to give you a little picture of two individuals so you get an idea because often we see demographics, we see things on paper, but what we have here in Clearwater is an unusual thing. The state of Florida, for example, the Mexican community, you have between 5% and 10% of the residents in the state of Florida are actually born in the United States as citizens, 5% to 10% in the state of Florida for the Mexican community. I'm Puerto Rican, we're all U.S. citizens, but I'm just putting that as an example. Here in Clearwater, and I've been working here with the community for the longest time, our demographics are much, much different. We have something of the nature of about 90% of the Hispanics, not just the Mexican community, the Hispanics are U.S. citizens, they have full documentations, they're capable of being here, they're able to work. That is an unusual thing for the city of Clearwater, we compare it with other places, so the decisions you make is to make our city, my city, a safer place, and you need to be aware of that. We have the average family, the Hispanic family that I deal with is a husband and wife, they both work, they have children, they have two children, they're in elementary school, one is in elementary school, maybe one is coming into it, and they have an elderly grandmother, because the elderly grandfather has passed away, so that elderly grandmother takes care of the two children, takes care of the household, while the two adults go out there and work. One of them works in Clearwater Beach, and very responsible, and their employer says, these people are like continually there, and yet they're afraid, because their grandmother, the grandmother that takes the kids to school, is afraid. Our city, our police department is very reputable, I trust our police department, and I know that they're not doing something wrong, but the media, the overall thing is to make it look like we are ice, they're ice workers, especially when you hear that they, that they've taken the training, and that brings it so that our community is not trusting of it, and we spent many years in community building that trust, and now it's disappearing. We need to change that. Let's eliminate it.
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Santana.
Richard Stearns, Marion McCoy, Petrina George.
I believe they left.
Mike Mastresario.
Good evening. I'm just here to say a few short words. First of all, I want to say thank you to Nicole for signing the certificate that Julie Marcus and the Board of Elections already are authorized, and I'm sure you all know about it, but we're talking about the Save the Garden initiative. I just want you to know that Dave Albritton, your friends, your neighbors, your schoolmates, Mike Meno, your friends and your neighbors, I don't know any of your schoolmates, Ryan Cotton, your neighbors, your friends, your schoolmates, all signed those petitions, and they are pleased that it has finally been approved by the Board of Elections that there's enough signatures to give you guys the opportunity to rethink what's going on in Clearwater, to give the vote to the people of Clearwater. You heard a lot of things tonight with a different situation. Again, there was a lot of voices that are being heard. There's a lot of voices that weren't here, but the difference is the people of Clearwater, the citizens, that's who I'm here tonight representing. I don't represent Save the Garden. I represent myself, my wife. We're citizens. And it's finally time that it has to take a piece of paper to do it, but you have to listen to the citizens. No matter what you do, you have to listen. So thank you. Again, Nicole, thank you for signing that. I got it framed. Appreciate it. Have a great night. Thank you.
Thanks, sir. Next speaker.
Beth Davis.
I want to talk a minute about P3s because I think we're all going to start living P3s. We've just been through a long one, right? And I'm not sure that all of you know that the communication that we did with Porter and Sunshine was on our shoulders. We had a meeting at the East Library with our neighborhood. We had a meeting at the Landings Golf Course Clubhouse and took and listened to people and said we need to meet with Porter, and we invited Porter and Sunshine to come meet with us. I had to find Trinity Presbyterian Church so we could have a meeting. They made their presentation. And the P3 communication just needs to be better. I think you probably hear that often. The city never has had a public meeting about this proposal. And when I think about public notices, yes, okay, I guess if you were paying attention, you knew there was a 30-day chance for people to bid. And those are those public notices like that. So I would say improve on communication. Maybe the website could also have public notices, you know, calendared so people could go read them and expand them and understand what's really in each of the public notices. And I think a P3 deserves a public meeting before you vote. And I respect your vote. Listen, I love the complex. I don't want it in my neighborhood. I don't, you know, I'm not going to get out of my house ever again. But, and I would love to enjoy it. But it's going to trap a lot of people in my neighborhood that are going to be miserable. So that's not fun when you want to help your neighbors. I think the evaluation committee should have a couple of residents on it. I think we have to improve this P3 process. And everybody's learning it. And the people that I know that went to the evaluation meeting just said it was very sad on how hard it was to score. It wasn't clear. There weren't specifics. And they couldn't say what was in code or not. And I know for myself when we got the printout, 79 pages, you know, we're all wasting our time and money trying to find copies. I wish they were available in the library, right? If the P3 was available, at least the P3 documents, and you can go look at it and study it and talk to people. Just so much wasted energy trying to understand what was fair and right that it was restaurant driven. 75% of the revenue were going, what? Like the square footage wasn't right to be allowed in our city code, which made us all feel alienated that a P3 could go through all of our time, your time, your time, I'm sure you can't be happier that the e-mails will slow down. And if the P3 had been clearer at the front that it will not be in compliance with the city, we know that. Say that to us. We're going to talk about moving forward, and we're not going to be in code. You know, they're going to give us a 99-year lease when they should have known you only take a 65-year lease. And that's when we start thinking, you're not paying attention. And it just makes it hard on the citizens, and we're all working together to make it better. The P3 process needs some help. And we're here to help, because that was not fun.
Thank you.
That was the last speaker.
That's it? That was our last speaker. And so we'll move on to item 10, and that is city management report. Item 11, city attorney reports. Nothing to add, sir. Okay. Move to item 12.1.
Annual evaluation of the performance and salary of the city manager and eligibility to sell back up to 10 days of general leave annually with an effective date of September 19, 2026.
So, first, I think let's share thoughts on evaluation. Anybody would like to go first? That's my Robert.
Okay. Yeah, I'll start it off. I ended up giving my evaluation a couple weeks ago. And I can tell you this. When I've been here, I've probably done this nine times, okay? I never give anybody. If it's an evaluation with four being the highest, nobody really, in my opinion, reaches four, because I think everybody can improve, even myself. I mean, I think I would never evaluate me as the best, because I know I have more potential to improve. So, but with that said, my evaluation to the city manager was 3.16, almost 3.2.
I think she's done an excellent job.
Some of the things that I see that she has really brought forth, that we talked about for many years, is the website and the postings to the public, where they can get on easy and see what's going on in the city. To me, that's big. She, as far as talking with me and keeping me up to date, we have weekly conversations. If I need something, I call her and she answers the phone. She's very good with that, keeping me abreast of everything that's going on.
And she's never, really, most of the time, never out of communication. I mean, if I have something that I need, I can call her almost at any hour. But the biggest thing, I think, is her fiscal management over the last couple of years, she's got all the different departments to cut their budgets and get down, even before it came out of Tallahassee, that we need to do that. I mean, she showed that she was very good at bringing it down. And so I do appreciate the fact that she doesn't want any more than what everybody else is getting this year on a percentage level, CPI, I guess. But what I do want to say is that for some reason, in her contract, she didn't have the eligibility to sell back her general leave if she wasn't using it. Everybody else had it, for some reason, got left out. So I'm going to say that I think that that is something we should give to her. So that's my evaluation.
Want to hear me?
We'll go down the road. Okay, so obviously we have our one-on-ones weekly and appreciate those opportunities to not only discuss how we can be better as leaders in the dais, but yourself as a leader for your 1,900 employees. I'm often reminded, Council Member, your responsibility is policy and mine is personnel. So thank you for that. Just kind of three areas I think that I want to discuss tonight that I give you high marks for, and especially recently as the community and all our communities navigate this Amendment 3, your communication and engagement with the community has been important. I greatly appreciate that. I don't know what the number is that you're up to. I lost count, but I think you're eight or nine or ten different community homeowners association meetings and representing our city extremely well, extremely knowledgeable. And I appreciate the consistency that that brings versus us randomly showing up at meetings or you or different staff members. The consistency of the solid voice is important to me, and you've been doing a great job with that. So thank you. Finding efficiencies in our government and our processes, that's been important. Harvard Bloomberg is a perfect example of that. I know we all look forward to what rolls out of that. I know staff is extremely excited. I know the dais as well, and we're all very supportive of that. I think that's been important, as well as the fiscal responsibility and fiscal respect for the taxpayer's dollar in the residents of Clearwater. And I know you truly value that. I know you get that direction without a doubt from this dais, and you execute that very well. It's not always easy on our staff and our team and your staff, but so often it's done without a complaint with a smile. And that's what we have to do, and that's what we do, and I appreciate that. The last thing I know was part of your goals was development across our community and not just development, strategic development and opportunities that make sense, gateways, U.S. 19 corridors, industrial area, downtown. I think you've been doing a great job with that, and it's evident in the direction our community is going from beach to bay. I appreciate those outcomes and your leadership in those fields. The last thing that I would say is I, too, am supportive of you purchasing your general leave. It was interesting that everybody else has it, and you don't. I hope that it's something, whether it's through an amendment or what, that it becomes a little more consistent and not something that we have to revisit every year in an evaluation. I think you deserve that and that your role in title deserves that, and I hope we put that in place. I do respect the fact that you asked for no more than what your employees are getting. That's commendable, especially when we've made it a commitment as a team, as a leadership team to, and it's been important to us because it affects our culture and happiness of our staff, is ensuring that we land in that 75th percentile. This is keeping you well outside of it. My concern somewhat is in the role of city manager is that we may get to a place where all of a sudden we need to put ourselves in that 75th percentile, and now we have a pretty monumental jump and a big dollar to get there. I think incrementally would probably be the best way to get there. But I do understand in the given economy, the circumstances and the environment surrounding the unknowns with upcoming amendments, I respect the fact that you want to be treated exactly like the employees on that side. So that was it. Thank you.
Mr. Menino, there is a written amendment to our contract that's part of this secured item. Thank you.
Vice mayor, have a moment.
My turn. I will go ahead and just read the comments that you're already aware of that are available for public record and that the three people left in the audience can hear. In regards to the other amendment that's in your contract, I am for that as well. I think you should have the same opportunities that all the other employees have. I also agree with the increase and think that it's noteworthy that you're taking what other employees would take. So, for my comments in your evaluation, I said that the city manager continues to maintain a professional and productive work environment while providing strong leadership for the city of Clearwater. She is diligent and responsive when matters are brought to her attention, working to find resolutions, and when necessary, bringing forward practical options for council's consideration. I particularly appreciate her willingness to keep me informed on important matters as they develop, including communication outside of normal business hours when circumstances warranted. City manager has also continued to work towards the council's goals of fiscal responsibility and limited government spending while maintaining the services our residents expect. This reflects in the development of the balanced budget that we've had this year that has actually absorbed the rollback rate, reduced operating expenses, and did not rely on reserves. She has demonstrated the willingness to address difficult financial issues directly and provide council with the information necessary to make informed decisions. I also appreciate the city manager's accessibility and willingness to work through issues, even when they may be differing perspectives. She remains professional and provides solutions and carries out the direction of council while maintaining the day-to-day operations of the organization. Overall, I believe that the city manager has demonstrated strong leadership, professionalism, responsiveness, and fiscal accountability throughout this evaluation period. She has been an effective city manager for Clearwater, and I'm confident she will continue to serve the city well. So thank you. Council Member Tashay.
So I appreciate all the comments from my colleagues. Jennifer and I have always maintained regular communications through our one-on-one meetings. I've been pretty much candid, so there's no surprises there. We've worked through so many issues. I've also appreciated her accessibility and willingness to discuss any issue facing our city, even when it's something that I'm concerned with and I actually call her after hours. So she's always been very accessible. I am uniquely cognizant of the demands and responsibilities of this position, especially in a city that is very unique in its challenges. So I appreciate the work that you do. So thank you. In terms of her request for salary and the buyback, I'm in alignment with my colleagues.
I'll go next. I've said this in prior evaluations, but for me, you know, it's been very important to in any employee relationship, employer-employee relationship, to praise in public, but if you have constructive feedback to provide that in private. And I don't think there's any one of the five of us who don't hesitate in our one-on-one meetings to share with you things that we think maybe not just you, but maybe the city could do better. So I will do just that tonight. I will stick to the praise part. And for that, I would like to share what I believe is the city manager's most important duty and one that I think you have done very well, and that is put together and maintain a staff that keeps the day-to-day operations of this city flowing and performing at a very high level. And in my opinion, we have one of the best city employee teams in the entire country. Some of that, you know, I can't give you entire credit for it because we had two awards here on Monday where we had a 25-year employee and a 30-year employee. So you've benefited from some great recruitment and retention of some prior city managers. But you have filled quite a few spots since you have been city manager, and you have done it with stumbling people. And I want to recognize that and applaud you for that because my hat is off to you for that because when I look at who we have serving our city, serving our citizens throughout the entire almost 1,900 employees, we have some great people. And you have played an integral role in putting that team together and keeping them. And so, again, my hat's off to you. We have a high-performing team as a city. We do have room for improvement. Every city does. And we're facing challenges, as we all know, that other municipalities are facing. And so we've got continued work to do to get better. But I can say without a doubt that you have done a great job putting our city team together, maintaining that team. We have a city that, in my opinion, operates day-to-day, serves its citizens better than any other local government in the entire country. That's the most important part of your job for me, and you are doing it well. Thank you. And with that, I will also just add that I also appreciate your wanting to keep your salary in line with, I think it's 4% is what the staff had. Keep in line with that. Thank you for that. I think that's very important. And I also support extending the same buyback for the leave as others have. So with that, is there an affirmative discussion? If not, is there a motion?
Motion to approve the agenda item.
Second. Second? I don't know. Second. No, I haven't said so. No, I think you said it right. Okay.
They said the 4.
Yeah.
Yes, I'm correct.
No, you had said the 4% in the written amendment. Okay, so we're fine.
We're good to talk. Okay. Moved and seconded. All those in favor?
Aye. Aye.
Opposed? Unanimous. Thank you. Move to the agenda item 12.2.
Annual evaluation of performance and salary of the city attorney.
We talked about this a little bit on Monday.
So by council rules, you have to have the review. Whatever you say. In terms of salary, I'm not eligible for an increase until October of 2027. That's in my employment contract. So there would be no vote, just to review, if you want to do it.
Nothing's changed since we hired you.
We'll take comments first. Okay.
Well, I'm going to have to comment on this because. Oh, mic's off again. Okay. So, Owen, you've served as our interim attorney twice since I've been here. And I'm glad you threw your hat in the ring for the actual city attorney job, which all of us voted you unanimously for. So I was real happy about that. I'll just read comments, overall comments. You've served as city attorney for several months and second command for several years, interim attorney twice. And the nice thing is, is you're so familiar with the city's culture and very thoughtful in all your explanations and the way that you present legal issues, probably better than any other city attorney we've had. I mean, you're very thoughtful in how you present it. And it's very easy to understand your process. And so I think, to me, that's one of your biggest shining, I guess, values to me and probably for the rest of the council. I won't speak. I won't let everybody else speak for themselves. But I did it on the evaluation, which is public record. I did evaluate you high with over a three point out of four. And I look forward to my less than 30 days of working with you until I go. But I know you'll be an asset for the new council coming in and for the next four years. So thank you.
All right. I'll go next on the 30-day evaluation period. This is great. We should do this every 30 days.
No? No.
No? All right. After I leave. I, too, think you're doing a great job, Owen. You knew what you were stepping into, that's for sure. And the issues that you've had to navigate us through in the last 30 days have definitely been challenges that I don't think any other city attorney in the state of Florida probably faces. And you've done it exceptionally well and continue to do it with a smile. I appreciate that. But some of the things I really enjoy about you absorbing and taking that role is your communication ability with us. And I'm sure it's not just in my meetings. I know it's in every meeting with council. And truly giving us, not telling us direction and telling us what we should do or what you think should be done, but giving us options. And attached to those options, identifying risk and risk-associated and possible outcomes from each. And then navigating that thought process and decision-making process through a legal lens. And that's important. I have enjoyed the 30 days. Your professionalism, integrity, work ethic, ability to communicate is the exact reasons why this council unanimously put their faith in you to take that role and lead the office. As far as your request for a 50% raise, I'm just kidding. I'm just kidding. I do want to say that in the process of establishing your salary, it was important that, again, the 75th percentile that we've tried to maintain in all of our 1,900 employees, you had no interest in being at that level. Your concern was with your fellow teammates in your office and what that would look like. And you wanted to make sure you had the ability to take care of them and to take care of your office and do it responsibly and to set the tone as a team player for your office. And I respect that. I think that meant a lot. But I appreciate the opportunity to continue to work with you for 31 days and counting.
Thanks, Mayor.
My turn. Owen, I'm just going to read the same thing for the public record. So, since your appointment as city attorney, you have demonstrated professionalism, sound judgment, and strong understanding of responsibilities of the position. You have transitioned well into the role and have been responsive to both counsel and the legal needs of the city. I particularly appreciate your ability to explain ongoing litigation and the complex legal matters in a clear and understandable way. You do a good job of breaking down the law, explaining the options available to the city, and providing guidance regarding how matters can be handled and who is best positioned to handle them. This allows counsel to better understand the legal considerations surrounding the decisions before us. You also represent the city well in public. Your presentations during council meetings are professional, thorough, and provide the public with the appropriate context regarding the legal matters that are before the city. Overall, I believe you have done very well since being appointed city attorney, not city manager, Slith. You have demonstrated strong legal knowledge, professionalism, accessibility, and the ability to effectively advise the council. I look forward to continuing to work with you as we move forward to address the legal matters that face the city. So, thank you.
Okay.
That's where to shade it.
I have nothing to add to the evaluation. I mean, the very reasons that you shined as a candidate are the very reasons that you are successful now. Nothing has changed. You've been very consistent. Your strengths, I think, actually have been showcased a little bit more as we were closer. But, honestly, no surprises there. I was happy before, and I'm happy now.
Okay. I just want to say that, you know, even though officially you've been maybe a short time as city attorney, really, because you served as interim for a longer period of time, it's been, it has been, not quite a year, but, I mean, it's been a good eight, nine months. And one of the things that I would say that I respect about you the most is the way you handled the transition and you, while also competing for the city attorney job, I never felt like you were doing anything in your conversations with us at the council to try to influence us to select you as the city attorney. I felt like, from the get-go, you were doing your job as the interim city attorney, regardless of whether or not we were going to select you. And I admire that. It's not easy for every lawyer to do. I've been in the profession for years. I know others may not have approached it that way, but you did. And I have the highest respect for you and appreciate the job you've already done for us as both interim and city attorney so far. So I don't think, though, we're going to change your contract or your salary that we just approved a month ago, but, um, but one of you know, we appreciate you and we'll continue to compensate you as you're agreed to be compensated for the time being. Okay. Nothing else there. Then we will move to agenda item 12.3.
Schedule a special budget work session meeting. Chair and Council, there is a request to hold a special budget meeting after the election, and three dates have been provided that you have clear on your calendar. December 2nd, Wednesday, December 2nd, Monday, December 14th, or Tuesday, December 15th, all three meetings between 2 and 5.
The last day?
The 15th. The 2nd, 14th, and 15th.
See, is that right after Thanksgiving? I think it is, isn't it? The 2nd? The 2nd.
Yes, sir.
Yeah, I would think I'd prefer not to do it on the 2nd. So what were the other two? The 14th.
The 14th and 15th.
Yeah, I'd be okay with either one of those. I don't know if anybody has any preference on Monday or Tuesday, 14th, 15th.
The 14th works for me. I'm good either.
Monday the 14th? Yeah. I'm so sorry. Oh. I know. It's just the three of us. I'll, um. The 14th. I'll YouTube it. The 14th work? Sounds like the 14th.
Thank you. We'll get that scheduled. The love for me. That's how I look down.
Okay.
I don't hear that. Move to agenda item 2.4. Discuss when the farewell to council members will be held.
I, um, I think, um, you know, we need to kind of rethink this because the way we move back our elections. But since we already have a work session scheduled for the prior day, I think we just move the work session back and make it the typical transition we've always had to be what I would do.
So can, can I provide some background? I think I spoke to some of you during the week for one-on-ones, but not all of you. So under the former charter, the newly elected official would take office the day after the, uh, results were certified by the supervisor of elections. So it was sort of a floating date under, um, the current charter when it was changed in 2024. Now the, the new council will take office the third Tuesday in November, and it's going to be for that and thereafter. So what that means for, um, this November, um, you know, we typically would have a council meeting the first week and the third week. So for the third week of November, we would have a work session on the 16th, and then we have the council meeting on, uh, the 19th, which is the Thursday. But the, the newly elected officials would not take office until the 17th, which is Tuesday. So if we keep it under the, the current schedule, current council will go to the work session on the 16th, um, set items on consent, and then the new council would come in on Thursday. I think another option would be is if you wanted to move the work session on Monday to Tuesday, then that's when you could have the farewell. And then the new council would come in on the work session. That's just an option.
And then, and then they would participate in the work session for the meeting that's coming that later that week. That's what would make sense to me.
Makes more sense, I think.
I'm, I'm good with the, the, the diast. I mean, I know if I was on my way out and put as much work and passion, um, as you two did, I would probably prefer the, my last hurrah on a council meeting night. Um, that would just be my personal opinion, but I, I don't, um, I don't have a, an issue if, if, if, you know, as a board, you decide to do a, move a work session and do it. It just seems like instead of moving and changing a calendar of a work session, um, just doing it that Thursday, the 19th. But I'm good with whatever.
I'm good with it. In fact, it'd probably be better during a council meeting instead of a work session to do the,
we can, we can still, we can still celebrate.
My only thing with that is if we do it at a council meeting, the people that come in then just have to automatically vote with maybe limited information other than what the public has. Um, I mean, I know that one-on-ones are extremely beneficial, especially bouncing ideas and different courses of action at times through both of you. I don't know that that would necessarily be fair to them. Um, so I think instilling them at a work session would be beneficial. So then if they do have additional questions, they can, I know it's still a more limited time frame. However, at least there's those hours that they can get more questions asked.
I'd prefer to have them participate in the work session for the meeting that they're going to be attending for the first time. So if you just move it back a day, that, a day that work session, then that happens, correct?
You're saying move the work session to the 17th.
Yeah.
That's an idea, yes. So, because I also think in the past, uh, I don't know, it was in 2024, I think the farewell occurred at the work session. So if the election results were certified, I think 10 days, the Friday before that work session, that first day in office would be the Monday. Here it's a little different because it's on Tuesday. So.
So can I comment? So I've gone through the two, the two ways, right? The work session and the evening meeting. The evening meeting has a little bit more of some ceremony and it is more special, but I also understand that someone coming in, you know, what I want to have a council meeting when a previous council did the work session. So I can see from both sides and I will be open to whatever you guys decide. I'm fine with either one. But I recognize, um, Mr. Menino's, um, comment as well as yours. And, you know, in terms of what's fair to the new coming would be work session. Um, for the leaving, um, for the leaving, well, even the incoming, I think being sworn in at the evening is much more ceremonial than during the day, but I'm open to either one.
Would you say that the certification happens 10 days after the third, that'd be the 13th. So that would be the Friday that they'd be certified?
I think they have to be certified.
That's when the results are certified by the supervisor of elections. And under our old charter, we would be able to administer the oath to the incoming immediately.
So we don't have to move the work sessions. We could do it at the work session on Monday, right? It's Fridays, 10 days. Now the issue is, is under the, uh, the new, the current charter, it's the newly elected officials
don't take office until the third Tuesday.
Oh, I see. Yeah. Okay.
Because if this were under the former charter, then if the results were certified on that Friday, which was the 13th, then they would take office that Monday, which would be the work session.
It just worked out this way.
I don't know that they'd want to be sworn in on a Friday, the 13th.
Started off on the wrong foot.
Well, it's the first time this has occurred because of the change from the election from March to the Monday. I'm fine.
And, and, and, you know, I, I think my point was for, for two of you who are outgoing, we can celebrate before the others are sworn in. We can do it at the last council meeting that you officially attended. I think that would be, uh, appropriate way to recognize your contributions both.
I missed that. I'm sorry. You were turning your way. Instead of recognizing your contributions at the work session. Okay.
We can, we can, we can show our appreciation for your leaving office at the last council meeting that you actually, I think.
So that would be, are we saying that we moved the meeting to the 17th?
That would be my recommendation. We move the work session that way, that way the new folks participate and get ready for the meeting that they're going to go to the 17th. Okay. Consensus? Do we need an information? No. Okay. That's just an improbable. Yeah, we are just doing it.
Mayor, if I could get a motion to move the work session to the 17th. Okay. Motion to approve the work session to the 17th. Second.
Okay. All those in favor?
Aye.
Opposed? You know this. Okay. Okay. We'll move to item 13. Closing comments by countess. Anybody? Councilor not to shade.
Okay, so first I want to congratulate all our wonderful Clearwater winners of Creative Little Things 2026 Best of Bay Awards. Special congratulations to Baycare Sound at Coachman Park, recognized as the best concert venue. Ruth Eckert Hall and Baycare Sound for their recognition as best space for sound. Clearwater Jazz Holiday for its recognition as best festival that supports the youth. And then our local businesses also received some wonderful honors, and this is just a few. Ocean Eye is best Clearwater Restaurant, Lenny's Restaurant for best breakfast, diner, and Reuben Sandwich, Nature's Food Patch for best health food market, salad bar, best smoothies, Akai, best vitamins, supplemental shop, and best place to shop green, Golden Diamond Source for best jewelry, and Wolfgang Bakery and Grooming for best pet boutique. So congratulations to all our winners and finalists. What a wonderful way to reflect the wonderful things that we have in our city. Next, I want to invite everyone to Canvas. On Wednesday, November 4th at 6 p.m., the Clearwater Art Alliance will host its annual fundraiser this year. It's called Canvas, and it will be at Island Way Grill. I'm very delighted to chair that fundraiser, and it will be celebrating our creative community while supporting arts programming and initiatives through Clearwater. So for additional information or tickets or other ways to support the organization, you can go to clearwaterartsalliance.org. I hope to see as many of you out there. Finally, I'd like to share an important public health reminder about dengue fever. I went to our monthly or bi-monthly Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council, and we had a wonderful professional giving us a presentation, and it was very informative. And so just so I can be clear, dengue is transmitted when an infected mosquito bites a person. A mosquito can acquire the virus by biting someone who's infected, and after that virus develops inside the mosquito, it spreads to other people. There's something important to understand. Unlike a honeybee, that only generally stings once. A mosquito can bite repeatedly, and that can infect many people with one mosquito. Symptoms can include fever, severe headaches, pain behind the eyes, muscle, joint pain, nausea, severe abdominal pain. And the reason why we have so much concern is because the numbers have been very high in Pinellas County, and the symptoms are pretty severe, very debilitating. So prevention is especially important. Eliminate all sources of sitting water. A few simple precautions can really help your family stay safe, and that's it. And again, congratulations to all the winners.
I'm pretty sure you went over the three minutes, but you may have saved a life.
I timed it as three minutes and 15 seconds, and I think it was worth it.
You may have saved a life. I've been short on all the other comments. Vice Mayor Jiménez? Yes, I do. Thank you very much.
Mine will be short and sweet. I do pride myself on trying to be as transparent as possible with all things that I say and do. It was brought to my attention by an organizer when referencing ordinance that we did at the last meeting
that my emails were incorrect. They provided that information to the tune of 98 unique emails that were sent in opposition for that ordinance. I had stated that there were less than 10. It does turn out that my iPad does not get all of the emails that, especially when an off-site third-party website may be the one sending said emails, it can go to a portion of our email system that is only accessible through a launch pad. So I will be checking that from now on if I know that there's important organizational things ongoing because that's where these emails ended up. So I would like to correct my previous statement that less than 10 emails came in. There were 107 with 98 unique email addresses, meaning 98 unique individuals. Secondly, we have the Clearwater Jazz holiday starting. So if anybody will be attending that, it starts tomorrow night going through Sunday. I hope it's very fun and gets people out to enjoy the wonderful weather that's been happening. Make sure you wear some off. Thank you.
That's good. Public health. Anybody else? No. Okay. I don't have anything myself either for item 14. So with that, we will adjourn the meeting of October 14, 2026. Thank you.