This time we'll call an order of the May 18, 2026 meeting of the City of Clearwater Downtown Development. We'll move to item 2.1 on the agenda. Approve the minutes for the April 20, 2026 Downtown Development Board meeting. So moved. Approve the 2.1. Second. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Unanimous. Move to agenda item 2.2. Approve the minutes of the May 4, 2026. So moved. Second. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Unanimous. Moved item 3 on the agenda. Are there any citizens here today who desire to be heard on a Downtown Development Board issue that is not on today's agenda? Hearing and seeing none, moved item 4.1. Approve a high impact grant funding request for Clearwater Jazz Holiday in an amount not to exceed $30,000 for the Clearwater Jazz Holiday event October 15th through the 18th, 2026 in Coach Moon Park. Good afternoon. Ann Lopez, CRA Assistant Director. Today, I'm presenting a funding request from Clearwater Jazz Holiday for the 26th event season. The 26th Clearwater Jazz Holiday is scheduled for October 15th through the 18th at Coach Moon Park. The event will continue utilizing the green space with designated general admission, reserved seating, and VIP areas. Ticket prices ranging from approximately $44 for general admission and up to $224 for VIP. Portions of this festival will remain free and open to the public, which will be side viewing areas and the bluff overlooking the green. At the Board's March 3rd, 2025 meeting, there was consensus that was reached to explore the possibility of a multi-year funding agreement with Clearwater Jazz Holiday. Since that time, staff from Parks and Recreation and CRA have met with event organizers to review operational needs, funding structure, and potential partnership opportunities. It is important to note that the current DDB funding policy does not specifically address a multi-year agreement. And additionally, under the high-impact grant guidelines, the maximum funding per application is $30,000. While the Board does have discretion to approve a different amount or consider a multi-year commitment, future funding would remain subject to annual budget approval. The applicant has submitted a total request of $148,000. Of that, $140,000 is for the October Clearwater Jazz event, and $8,000 is for the CJH Presents Holiday Experience event in December. Staff has reviewed both requests and has determined that the holiday experience does not meet the threshold requirement for high-impact grant funding. Staff's recommendation is that the applicant submit a separate DDB funding application for that event. For the Clearwater Jazz Holiday event itself, submitted budgets reflect a total expense of $1.15 million of projected revenues, I'm sorry, of expenses, and $1.02 of revenues, leaving a funding gap of $130,330. Clearwater Jazz Holiday received a $125,000 grant from the DDB to support their four-day event in 2025, and also received a $75,000 grant from Visit St. Pete Clearwater for marketing, tourism, sponsorship, and other related event expenses. Coder Jazz Holiday does anticipate applying for that funding again. They have applied through the Parks and Recreation Special Events Division for high-impact co-sponsorship, and in 2025, they received up to $62,820. For 2526, Parks and Recreation staff are recommending support up to $56,538, which does reflect a 10% discount, or I'm sorry, discount, reduction from the prior year. That co-sponsorship will be heard later this afternoon. After reviewing the application and the current policy framework, staff is recommending approval of a funding not to exceed $30,000 for the October 26 Clearwater Jazz Holiday event. This recommendation is consistent with the DDB's existing high-impact co-sponsorship policy and would support eligible expenses such as entertainment, production, marketing, security, insurance, and other related event operations. And with that, I would like to invite Steve Weinberger from Clearwater Jazz Holiday to present and answer any questions. Thank you, Ann, and good afternoon, everybody. Appreciate the opportunity to be here. We truly appreciate the partnership we've had with the city and with the DDB, and we're here today to build on that partnership in a way that is mutually beneficial to both the Clearwater Jazz Holiday and the city of Clearwater. As we've done the last few years, we've worked closely with both Parks and Recreation and the DDB staff with the goal to align our requests for support. At the same time, Clearwater Jazz Holiday is not a typical event. Now entering its 47th year, the festival is one of the city's most enduring and celebrated cultural traditions, reflecting a longstanding partnership and generating significant community connection, cultural value, and economic impact. At last year's DDB meeting, there was discussion about the value of exploring a multi-year agreement as we look ahead not only to the 47th Clearwater Jazz Holiday this year, but to the 50th Clearwater Jazz Holiday in 2029. We believe the opportunity for a multi-year agreement is mutually beneficial. For an event of this scale, planning begins many months in advance. As we sit here today, for instance, in late May, our annual budget and strategic planning process were completed earlier in the year. Sponsorship cultivation is already well underway. Membership support has been on sale, and our artist lineup is almost done with a public announcement in just a couple of weeks. Having greater long-term certainty regarding partnership support would provide meaningful stability as we develop future strategies and budgets, while also assisting the city and the DDB with their own planning and coordination efforts. That's important because an event of this scale tremendously benefits from long-term planning coordination. It also reflects what we believe is a shared goal to position Clearwater Jazz Holiday for renewed growth as we continue rebuilding momentum following our return to Coachman Park. In response to those conversations following last year's festival, we work with city staff to prepare draft multi-year agreement concepts to discuss relating to both the city's in-kind support as well as the DDB's funding partnership. And as Anne mentioned, it's also important to note that the proposed multi-year framework before you today also includes support for the CJH Presents holiday experience that occurs every year in December. That event reflects our broader, ongoing activation efforts within downtown, and we've traditionally been encouraged to apply for that support at the same time as we're asking for the funding for Clearwater Jazz Holiday, which is why it's in the request. We believe there are three key reasons for the DDB to exercise the discretion and flexibility that's built into the guidelines in support of Jazz Holiday at the requested funding levels. First, through the years, Jazz Holiday has consistently delivered economic impact, tourism, and visibility for downtown. It markets the destination throughout the entire year, brings attendees over multiple days, and drives activity not only within the park, but throughout downtown. Second, the 2026 festival format is intentionally designed in ways that meaningfully increase downtown activation with free and open access areas with side stages in the lower plaza and on the pier, along with free bluff viewing areas overlooking the main stage. These expanded access points are designed to bring people into downtown earlier in the day, encourage movement between the downtown corridor and Coachman Park throughout the event, and keep visitors engaged across the entire festival footprint. At the same time, several factors position the festival for growth in visitor activity this year, including the return of a consistent and proven festival format for the first time since 2019, increased awareness and momentum following last year's successful waterfront return, and the continued strength of Jazz Holiday as a longstanding cultural destination. And third, as Ann alluded, the financial structure supporting the festival is changing. As part of the multi-year discussions with Parks and Recreation, Jazz Holiday is expected for the first time to begin contributing to a portion of the city in-kind services through a phased year-over-year cost-sharing model. At the same time, starting this year, we're expanding free access areas within the festival footprint, which enhances the public benefit but also reduces a portion of our ticket revenue. So while Jazz Holiday has historically been and will continue to be a ticketed event, we've been working with the city to incorporate these meaningful free access components, and we believe this hybrid model with a ticketed main stage on the green with expanded free programming strikes the right balance between accessibility, financial sustainability, and preserving the quality of the experience. So as we work to do more in ways of increasing access and community benefit with these changes, we're also absorbing new costs and reduced revenue. And that makes the DDB support at the requested levels important to sustain the event at its current quality and its current community impact. Lastly, I would ask that this request be viewed within the broader context of the past several years. The period since 2020 has been anything typical for Jazz Holiday. We have navigated pandemic-related cancellations and restrictions, followed by multiple years of venue displacement during the Imagine Clearwater construction, along with significant weather impacts. Together, these conditions disrupted attendance patterns, visitor behavior, and the ability to generate consistent year-over-year data. Importantly, however, 2025 marked a true reestablishment year for Clearwater Jazz Holiday. It was our first full return to Coachman Park in our traditional Back to Our Roots Festival format in five years. That return provided us with valuable data that's now helping us. It's helping us guide refinements to our pricing, marketing, audience development, and overall event strategy as we move beyond into 2026 and beyond. We believe the festival is now positioned for renewed growth and stabilization. What we're asking for today is the ability to continue building on that foundation so we can together expand the level of economic activity, downtown activation, tourism impact, and community engagement that Jazz Holiday delivers to Clearwater. Today, we're respectfully asking to maintain funding at the requested levels and support the proposed multi-year agreement framework. Doing so will provide the stability necessary for long-range planning, growth, continued investment in an event that is one of Clearwater's signature cultural destinations. Thank you for the consideration, and we appreciate the support. Happy to answer any questions that I can. Okay. Is there anyone here from the public that desires to speak to this? Steve, you'll need to let the gentleman take the podium. Yeah. We'll call you back up and say if we have questions. Good afternoon. My name is Thomas Nurse. I've been a resident of Clearwater since 1959. I would say with gratitude and appreciation, the partnership that Clearwater and the Florida Jazz Holiday has had through all these years has provided a cultural event that is both meaningful, impactful, and I'm particularly excited. I also do serve on the foundation board. I have volunteered for all but three years of the Jazz Holiday. I've seen the growth, seen the change, seen the redevelopment of the park. This is a tremendous opportunity this year in the discussions that have gone on with the city to welcome back the residents, to have free access to both the beautifully built lower plaza and to enjoy the pier, have access to it by the hill. So I appreciate and thank you as a taxpayer. This has been one of the absolute best things Clearwater has contributed to this community over my lifetime, and I think we're ready for the next area of growth. Thank you. Anyone else here from the public today that desires to speak to this gentleman? I'm seeing none. Is there a board of discussion? Vice Mayor Cotter. Yes, sir. Thank you. Steve, thank you for being here and bringing this to us again. Clearwater Jazz Holiday has been part of Clearwater's history for quite some time, and I know that last year I did state that we should look to a multi-year type of agreement because you are key to a foundational piece of our waterfront and bringing such a great experience to people. You know, we are moving with the times, and with that comes some data that now we're able to pull from some of these events. And, you know, looking at last year's data, it looks like you, from what we gather from the map geographical area, we're able to pull roughly 10,500 people over your events time frame, ranging from 2,200 for one day up to 3,800 on another day. And with that, you know, I thought that I needed a little bit more data. I'm a very data-driven person, so I asked staff to give me some other numbers, and those are from some of maybe the most pre-COVID numbers is what I asked for. So luckily I was able to get some 2016 and – I'm sorry, 2017 and 2018 numbers. The visitors for that area in 2018, over your four days, were roughly 21,000 people. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but according to the data, the way that I'm reading it. And then for 2018, it would have been 16,000, almost 17,000, so 16.8,000. So I do think that COVID's obviously done a number to the event, right, and people not wanting to come back and get into it. But all to say, being at almost half, and I'm obviously willing to hear what the rest of the board has to say and see where we go from there, but being at half of the attendance of what we were at, I don't know that a multi-year deal for me right now would make sense. I'm very open to a one-year increment to see if we can get back to those numbers and then continue to move with – going forward from there, once we're back to these 17,000, 20,000 numbers of multi-year agreements at that time. So I'm going to sit back. I'm going to listen to the rest of the board. I wanted them to have that information to something that I had pulled as well, in case you hadn't heard that yet. So I'm here for the discussion. Councilmember Albert. Well, Steve, you and I go way back. You know, I was thinking back when we first started talking to you about – I was on the DDB back in 2010 and 11, and I think even then we were talking about a multi-year contract because I knew that by the time you came and asked for the funding that you had already spent a lot of that to – you know, it takes a year ahead of time to get a lot of these performers to sign up. So you can't just do it in a couple of months and then put on the kind of event you put on. And, you know, looking back 46 years, that's amazing. You know, you and I have talked about it. It is the event, I think, in Clearwater that people know the best when they're talking about – you know, now you've got a little bit of competition with the sound. But, you know, you went way back, and we've given us these great performances going back, gosh, almost a half a century. I mean, it's amazing. I'd really like to see this carry on and be successful. But, as, you know, Councilman Cotton said, you know, since COVID you've had a little bit of a different attendance, and it's kind of dropped. I think that it will pick up. I think you're – the one year that you tried to do it at the sound was – well, first of all, you had COVID, and then you had the sound disaster. You know, you are a holiday. It's a festival, not a concert. And you do so much better on the green and then with the multiple stages. Last year was great. I thought – and I can tell you that when we get up on stage to welcome the people there, I always say, how many people are from Clearwater? You know, and there's about a third of the people that raise their hands. And I say, how many people came in from out of Clearwater? And that's the majority of people raise their hands. So, to me, that's great. It's really great that people come in outside of Clearwater to see this because it's got such a history. I think we can build up again the attendance of Clearwater, get up into those numbers. But I can tell you probably all of us are looking how to cut budgets because, I mean, we've been doing that for a couple of years, and we've got some hard decisions really to make. You know, I got with you a couple months ago and said, why can't we just make it a three-day event? Would that help? It would maybe not be so expensive to put it on, and I think maybe that would be a way that you wouldn't have to ask for as much funding from the DDB and from the city of Clearwater. But you told me then that you had to have the four-day event in order to make things break even. I'm going to wait and listen to what everybody else says. I think right now I am going to probably be thinking that I would probably give you more than what's recommended, but I don't know if I can give you the whole amount. And I'd like to see a multi-year for benefit for you, I think, would be great, because then you know what to count on. As soon as the event's on, you know what you're going to get for the next year. But I'll just sit back a minute and let other council members speak. Any others? The request of allocation of $148,000 for three years, followed by $158,000 for the fourth year, that would represent approximately 40% of the DDB's net annual ad valorem revenue. That is an extraordinary percentage of the board's available funding to dedicate to a single applicant for approximately five days of programming, and that leaves a lot less resources for us to program the other rest of the year and all the other initiatives. My concern is not the value or legacy of the jazz festival itself, which I believe is meaningful and appreciated by many in our community. Rather, it is a responsibility we have to ensure that the DDB resources are distributed in a manner that supports the broader downtown ecosystem, multiple initiatives, and year-round activation needs and efforts. So while I deeply cherish the Clearwater Jazz Festival and all that it has meant to Clearwater over so many years, and while I have personally always enjoyed attending and supporting the event, I can't justify this level of funding request from this board for that reason and with sincere respect for the organization and its contributions to Clearwater. I am unable to support the request at the proposed funding level, but I am open for discussion for something else that would work. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Steve, for the presentation, and thank you for 46 great years of a legacy event in our city. Again, I've said it before, born and raised in Clearwater, and we used to come down to downtown Clearwater only two times a year, and that was Jazz Holiday and Fourth of July. It's been a lot of ups and downs. If anything can ruin the attendance of an event, it's a lack of a consistent date and location. Looking back at kind of our path that brought us here since 2020, Jazz Holiday has taken a pretty rough path from the pandemic to it looks like you were moved and displaced during our imagined Clearwater construction, which doesn't help but rolled into cancellations due to hurricanes in 24. 25, we finally started getting back on the map, and I think if my memory plays correct, I think Sunday was even a pretty rainy day that might have affected some of the numbers. I do appreciate Council Member sharing pre-COVID numbers because that's what I do remember, blankets and people all over the place enjoying the weekend and Jazz Holiday, again, because it's meant so much to the community, far greater than just any event. I hope that we can kind of look at this not through just a lens of scrutinizing one year of numbers because they are low. We treated Ruth Eckert Hall the very same way when we first opened the sound in the first year, and we were all very critical of numbers and data and meeting the metrics, and what we realized is T-I-M-E of consistency and support is truly what was needed to make it succeed. And I don't think anybody in the room around this dais would question the numbers and what just three short years did to a venue that's become so successful. I do hope that the board can find a comfortable place to get behind to continue to support you. I do know a multi-year agreement probably makes staff's life a little bit easier, as well as the organization for consistency, planning, and efficiency of running your operations. I'm supportive of maybe four is a lot because if we're not successful through year two and three, we kind of know and not being stuck for a fourth year, although a 50th year celebration is a heck of a milestone to celebrate. You know, whether that number is somewhere in that three-year range, so we can figure out is there an out at year two if our numbers don't hit where we need them to be in those discussions with staff? Possibly. But I think we don't just owe it to you. I think we owe it to our community and the foundation and the traditions that Jazz Holiday has meant to the community to try to bring some consistency back and to give you that support. I mean, I would assume being in the special events industry, your tickets are probably going on sale very soon, are they not? Probably in two weeks. We're trying to announce by our June 10th, CJH Presents event date, and they'll be on sale. Which is right around the corner and kind of hard to make. I mean, there's discussions of 30,000 recommendations to a $140,000 ask. Those are pretty drastic. I don't know how an event can operate with that margin and not knowing. I'm supportive of the ask and what we can do with it and give it some consistency. Whether the board finds comfort in two or three multi-years so we can see what we can build it up. I mean, after all, it's not the Jazz Holiday. It is the Clearwater Jazz Holiday. That means a lot to me. I want to be supportive and try to give you that consistency. We'll see what direction the board decides to go. I look forward to hopefully seeing it grow and getting your numbers back to the community where it was, where we know it all can be, and really, truly celebrating a great 50th down the road. Thank you. Thank you. Steve, we go back, I think, only three, maybe over three years. I, myself, attended one of your events. We always appreciate, we always work with businesses and the entire community in downtown Clearwater and help. We appreciate that a lot, and we obviously love Clearwater Jazz Holiday. My only concern, comparing to last year, is that from the merchant's perspective, who own the brick-and-mortar businesses in downtown, I was there myself for the entire venue, and we were all very excited. The expectations were very high. But, unfortunately, the results, for us at least, were not there. I think the only time that we've gotten any people was when it started raining outside, and the event had to pause for a certain period of time, and then we got the people into our businesses. And all the businesses were full. It was like 10,500 people. When we look at it, right now it's just over 1,000 people of a fully sold sound event, and that only happens one day. I think the attendance was a little low, and not having the reentry, in my opinion, was it kind of hurt businesses in downtown, because I can tell you that we were prepared for four days, full-staffed, and we had to send people home because we didn't get the people that we expected from the event. So, mainly, that's my concern. And are you planning on doing a reentry this time? Yeah, you know, I appreciate you bringing that up. I do think that the introduction of the work we've done with the city this year on the free and open components, the side stages in the lower plaza and on the pier, and the free bluff viewing areas don't require a ticket. And so what I think you'll see is more people coming earlier in the day to the Jazz Holiday, and they won't be restricted by a limitation where they can't go back and forth through the downtown corridor and the festival footprint. And so I think that that will make a noticeable difference on the issue that you're talking about, for sure. You know, absolutely. Would it be helpful or appropriate? Because there are a number of different comments that were raised from four days to three days to attendance metrics. I have some notes that may be helpful on those points that were raised by different people. Is it okay for me to address those points? Sure. I do have one question, just the following question on that. So the ticketed attendees are no reentry, but that's what I'm hearing, I guess. And it's been that way for as far back as I can remember for any of the Jazz Holiday events and is the most effective way of us managing an event of this scale. We're open to exploring different ideas, but from a management safety standpoint, for sure with the green and the ticketed items. And that's true also for large-scale events like the Happen at the Sound as well, from my understanding. But I'm open to talking with our event folks and the downtown businesses, not only on that issue, but also how we can work together and maybe help the businesses with more of a presence at the festival downtown. I believe the country thunder was one reentry, if I'm not mistaken, and it was a three-day event. Thank you for answering. I mean, we always appreciate your support. We know that you always work very closely with the community, and we value Clearwater Jazz Holiday, as always. Thank you. And, but these are the concerns that I have, so, and the attendance number. Thank you for answering. Thank you. Well, thank you for coming. I think you're amazing. I think what you do every year is absolutely incredible, and I think Clearwater Jazz Holiday is one of the most important holiday events of the year. from where I stand, I do want to, but remind me, what was the last year of funding request and how much money was granted? So the last several years have been at $125,000. And then from DDB, that's all from the DDB? From the DDB. From the DDB. And then how much was approved last year? $125,000 was last year, and then the request this year, as we talk about the four-year agreement, has been $140,000 for years one, two, and three of that agreement, and $150,000 for year four of the agreement, which would be our 50th anniversary. And a big part of the increase from $125,000 to $140,000 are some of the points that I mentioned as part of my presentation. Increased cost of production, generally, but also for the first time, we are beginning to now absorb some of the costs that the city has traditionally provided as in-kind support. And then we're converting to a public benefit these ticketed areas out around the green into free. So to be more specific, we've estimated about $15,000 worth of ticket revenue that we would charge to the free components that we're not now, as we've worked with the city on that issue. So those two factors, the additional costs that we're absorbing, the ticket revenue that is being reduced from our budget mid-year, we're asking the DDB for more money. And that's the difference between the $125,000 and the $140,000 asks for year one. Understood. Well, I am open, I'm definitely open to support more funding that is recommended by staff of $30,000. I'm not sure if I'm ready to go into multi-year agreement with $140,000 every year because I do want to maintain some sort of control over the funding. But I'm definitely willing to support you, and I'm willing to talk and find a compromise between the board members and give you as much as we possibly can. Thank you. I have some – is it appropriate? Let me make some comments first and then I'll share what I'm – and some questions. First, let me say that I'm – like a number of us up here, you know, we've all probably volunteered for Clearwater Jazz Holiday. I started doing that 12 years ago when I first got started here. So I've slung drinks and I've, you know, cleaned tables and all those things that go from making this not just a city event, but a real community event. So many volunteers support this event. You wouldn't be able to do it without the volunteers, not just the volunteers that help with the actual event, but the volunteers that help haul you along preparing for the event. So we certainly appreciate you and this long history in the city. It's just become something that Clearwater has identified us with is this festival every year. So my questions aren't intended to devalue the importance of the event to our community, the history of the event. It's very important to recommend. I want to see it be a success this year. But I do have some questions. And the first question is, I thought I heard her say earlier that we can't – so this is for the city attorney – we can't approve a year ahead. Can we only approve a budget item for the actual budget year we're in? We would have to have a non-appropriations clause in there. And that's – we have them in a lot of our agreements for the city. So just saying that if the money is not available, then – We can terminate the agreement. Okay. The second thing is, when would be the first opportunity if we did it annually? When would be the first opportunity for us to appropriate it for within the budget year? Is it when the budget year starts in October? It's the fiscal year, so October 1. So that's one of my questions for you, Steve, is, you know, it's May. Why are we here in May with a request rather than October or November after your event to come in and talk about what you need for the next year? Yeah. It's a good question. We have historically always taken the lead with Parks and Recreation and with the DDB on timing of the request, which started immediately after the last festival. And so we've gone through the appropriate steps that we always have with the – first with Parks and Rec on the in-kind support and then through this process with the DDB. And one of the values of having a multi-year agreement in place is to help with this issue that you're talking about. We begin planning, extending offers to the artists that are coming, selling our sponsorships. And as I mentioned in my presentation, that's – we've accomplished all of that. We're here in late May ready to announce the lineup and asking for the support. Every year, this is an issue that creates anxiety, I think, both from us and the city in terms of the process. And so we absolutely are hopeful that we can maintain funding levels at least at what it has been over the last few years because we have relied on that in terms of this planning going forward as we sit here now. There have been significant changes, as we're talking about, with new costs that we're absorbing, free areas that came out during the discussion that we're working to compromise with the city so we can have the best unified approach together. But the reality is, is we're mid-year, and there has been no signaling to us up until this point in time that we would need to adjust those budgets of traditional support in planning the event. If the funding support were to change dramatically from what it has been the last few years, that would be very significant to us, particularly in year one, which is one of the points that I wanted to point out, that what if we can't compromise on something that makes everyone feel unified and good about the level of support for this year. And so I am concerned about that, about making a change in this calendar year where we are now. Very open to talking about the future and also have some notes on the idea of a multi-year agreement, four years versus two years or things like that. I also wanted to respond to Council Member Cotton and Council Member Teixeira on a couple points they raised, but hopefully that answers your question. Well, I have other questions, too. And the last you and I talked was December, so it's been a while. So this was all, you know, what ended it landed with was fairly new to me when I read about the agenda because we hadn't talked about it since. When we talked in December, I told you, and so you're coming in for $140 and asking for $140, and you had $125 last year. And our conversation was, and it was a good conversation, but it was, you know, how do we get lower than $125? Because I shared with you, which is this board, everything we're doing as a city, we're trying to reduce the city's contribution over time. We repeatedly were asking return events to who are you partnering with throughout the community to try to reduce the city's contribution. And so that ask of you was what we're asking everybody to do. And so when you come in higher than what you had last year, it just first raises, you know, a little concern on my end that we're working to get it down. And you shared with me, you know, some challenges. And believe me, you've had COVID, you've had, you know, the displacement, Baker, ballpark where you had to have it. I mean, it's, you've had significant challenges. Understood. That said, you know, we've got to try to make improvement every year and kind of work out a new relationship. And so I ask you about the collaboration. You know, who are we collaborating with corporately? Because such a long-term event that the community loves, you would think that sponsors would just, you know, really love to tag themselves to this event. And so that's one type of collaboration I ask you to look at. And you felt like you were doing as much as you could do, but really we need where you do more to try to get this down over time. That would be my second problem with having a multi-year thing is you've got it flat here. And where our, I told you, I thought our goal was as a city was to try to, you know, staircase it down over time. So the multi-year, that's the other challenge made with this, is it's flat. And we really would like to try to get you to get to where the city's always going to play a role in this. We put parks and recs resources, police us, we make all these contributions in addition to this money. And we'll continue to do that. But the actual allocation, I think, you know, historically we've talked about trying to get repeat events to get that down. So that's one concern I have. And the other, you know, it's kind of the elephant in the room, so Councilman Rawl-Britton raised it. But he mentioned the competition with the sound. I hope that we don't see that as a community. I know that the one year it was there, it didn't work out very well financially. And they had a different structure on how they charge groups for using it, community events, than they do now. But, you know, we spent a lot of money on that amphitheater to be used for events like this. Taxpayer money. I would just like to see community collaboration to use that space in some way. And, you know, maybe it takes some out-of-the-box thinking to make it work for you all financially. But they have resources. You know, last night, the other night, too, is covered seating. You know, you have been fortunate, but I remember one year we had a complete washout for Jazz Holiday because of weather. Last night, 3,300 folks there from Willie Nelson, it rained in the middle of the program. And they continued on with the program. Everybody's undercover seating. A little bit of rain got on the stage. But there's that aspect to it as well. But I know that there have been challenges in trying to figure out all that. But I really think that increased collaboration could help everyone. They are very good at filling that venue. I think they could probably help, you know, your organization in some way. And I get that, you know, we've got a long history of doing it in a different way and been very successful doing it that way over the years. But I just think increased collaboration will help you get this subsidy from the city down zone. So that's why I share it with you in December. And so I guess where I'm at, I'm kind of in the middle ground. This is an important event for our community. I don't want to cut you off. I don't want to talk too much. The multi-year is a pretty big ask in light of what I just said. That said, I have a challenge in going higher than the 125 that we did last year. And I think that, you know, some reduction from that even to encourage the organization to seek more community involvement and more community contribution would be helpful at least to, as a board, to share that we're going to treat Jazz Holiday like, even though it's a unique event, very special for our community, but we are going to be fair with them as we're being fair with others and expecting them to reduce their subsidy over time. I appreciate it very much. A lot of good comments. And I have several notes because there are so many different topics that we covered. And I would like to do my best just to address some of them to the extent it's helpful at reaching a compromise, if I could. And I'll start with your comments, Mayor, from our discussion for the benefit of the other council members who weren't participating, of course, on just the idea of being less dependent on this particular funding. Because I think that's your sentiment with all of the events. We absolutely share that goal. And the goal is one of continuing to expand on private-public foundational support, sponsorships, earned revenue, all of that. We have worked aggressively for many years to diversify the revenues that reduce pressure on public resources. And I think that's where your sentiment is. At the same time, events of this scale are increasingly expensive to produce. Talent, staging, security, labor, insurance, infrastructure costs, they continue to rise. And the city's partnership has never simply been about subsidizing an event. It's been an investment that helps leverage substantial dollars in broader economic activity. Tourism exposure, community activation. There's a charitable component to our organization, which makes it very different than other events that the city is supporting. And cultural identity for Clearwater. Public-private partnership remains an essential part of major destination events, not just here in Clearwater, but all over the country. And it allows us to grow sponsorships. It allows us to attract visitors and maintain the accessibility for the community. So that's one point I wanted to address first in response to the mayor's comments. In response to the idea of how long can this agreement be, I think that we believe a multi-year agreement is the best path to aspire to collectively. It helps with sustainability and growth and timing of planning. But at the same time, we certainly understand the importance of maintaining flexibility and accountability as the festival continues to regroup its momentum following these different years of disruption. Because it's not just the pandemic. We've talked about it. It's being displaced from our home of over 45 years. The experiment in the sound. The hurricanes. It's more than just the pandemic that we have fought through. And so we understand the importance of being flexible. But we also understand the benefit of having a multi-year agreement. One option could be a multi-year framework that includes some type of review point. For example, following the first two years of the festival cycles, there's language in the agreement that allows the parties to reevaluate attendance trends, operational considerations, downtown activation impact, all of these different considerations that were raised together as the agreement progresses. Because our goal is not to limit that flexibility, but rather to create enough long-term stability to allow for a lot of things. More effective artist booking, sponsorship cultivation, marketing strategy, operational planning. And so there's those items that come to my mind when we talk about a multi-year framework. But with that said, if a four-year structure is not feasible or if there's not consensus to support it at the time, we would encourage consideration of at least a two-year commitment for those reasons. That we said, because I think that even a shorter agreement would provide meaningful planning stability while allowing us collectively to do those things as we work towards 50 years together. So that's what I would say on the multi-year agreement, that we are open to discussions that makes us feel comfortable together. But we do feel that at least a two-year agreement would bring the stability. On the funding, I would emphasize that maintaining support at or near the current levels, the last couple of years was $125,000, given the changes in the financial model that we talked about for this year where we are beginning to absorb new costs, where we're giving up some revenue, is really important. If adjustments are necessary because of the sentiment of the board, our hope would be to remain as close as possible to what it has been. And recognizing the value of the event and the impact that we've discussed. On that point, we've talked about many sponsor commitments have already been secured. Artists are being confirmed. Contracts are being finalized. Significant planning is underway. And my biggest concern is that substantial changes in support levels at this point in the process become particularly difficult for us to absorb operationally. And we would evaluate every path forward if that were the case, if the support today were less than what it has traditionally been. But depending on the magnitude of that reduction, it could require significant reductions in programming for this year and unwinding substantial planning that is already in place for this year and jeopardize our ability to produce the festival or to produce it at the scale that we have planned to do this year. I think looking at some of those issues requires a little bit of a longer runway together for our planning. And so my hope is that we can maintain the levels at or near what they have been at the very least, especially in this year one, as we work through this together and figure out what the best fit is. And then, Council Member Cotton, I've thought a lot about the challenges that we've worked through the last few years in terms of attendance. And I realize that in our first year back since 2019 in the format, that's the normal format, that attendance is not where we all want it to be. I think we all do recognize why it's not. There has been substantial disruption to relocating from our space for that long a period of time. But we also have reestablished it. We've got great marketing assets from pulling it off last year. I think we can expect to have the momentum going into the next couple of years of rebuilding that to where we were. I hope we all understand that. I think we do, but from some of the comments, I'm not sure. There's going to be some disruption having fought through the types of challenges we have. I'm very proud of the fact that we're still here, you know, and we still have kept the community impact that there is. But beyond the attendance numbers alone, I do think that there's tremendous value in what Jazz Holiday has represented for this community. And I'll reiterate that for nearly five decades, the festival has helped shape Clearwater's identity as a music and arts destination long before the sound, long before year-round amphitheater program, Jazz Holiday helped establish that reputation and the audience culture that's here. And so today, when the city speaks about Clearwater, Mayor, I know you brought up as a music city destination, is what we vision ourselves as now and aspire to. We've been a foundational part of that, and that identity has sustained over many generations. We also uniquely bring the community together extraordinarily broad cross-sections of the community. There are long-time residents, visitors, families, sponsors, students, artists, volunteers, downtown businesses, and community partners across multiple generations and backgrounds. We do that in a way that very few other events in Tampa Bay do. And so while attendance metrics are certainly important, I get that, I think the broader cultural, economic, tourism, civic value of an event like Jazz Holiday is also important to consider where we are right now. I hope that addresses some of the points that were raised. If it doesn't, I'm happy to say something. I'm trying not to have a debate here on the issue, but I understand what you're saying on not wanting to alter a program that's been successful in the four days. But I think another thing Council Member Albritton alluded to is competition in the sound. There's competition for music and people who like to go to music events more than there ever has been now here in Clearwater. And so that does affect, you know, what people are willing to spend money to go see and participate in whatever. They have multiple choices now where they didn't before. So that was a good point as well. But I don't know that the programming that we've always had for Jazz Holidays, the programming that we need today. And Country Thunder was three days, not four. We've had four or five bands I've never heard of. But, you know, one of the radio stations here in town, a couple of different radio stations, have essentially hosted one-day festivals in the sound. That have drawn, I think one of them recently had 7,000 or 8,000 people. So, I mean, the format maybe has changed, what the market will support. And so I understand the tradition. I understand all that. But if we need to try to reduce the load on the taxpayers, then maybe we need to think about what the market wants. And maybe the market doesn't want the same four-day format that we've had for years. Maybe there's a revised version. That would be just as spectacular. But we'll bring out more people and benefit the community better. On that point, we completely understand the city's interest not only in managing costs, but we want to be good partners in that discussion. We do. And while we may have some disagreement about the programming because we have evolved the programming significantly with Jazz Holiday, from a smooth and straight-ahead jazz fest in the 80s to something more akin to New Orleans jazz fest with everything in between now and a lot of contemporary music. So I think we have a little bit differing of opinion maybe on that. But the reducing from four days to three days is something we are definitely open to looking at. It's not a simple cost savings for us to do that. And one of the points on that is that it fundamentally changes the events model. And so while some expenses are reduced when you reduce from four to three, the fourth day, at least right now, with the format we have now, is generating critical earned revenue in the form of ticket sales, concessions, sponsor value that supports not just the festival, but the year-round education and outreach programs that the foundation supports. And so losing that day would likely, at least initially, without longer-term planning, create a net financial negative for us, not a savings. But the broader consideration is also our eligibility for Visit St. Pete-Clairewater Tourist Development Council funding is tied to attendance and visitor impact. So a four-day event, at least right now, gives us a larger platform to drive visitation. That funding is required mainly for us to use for marketing the destination outside of the region, which brings new visitors into Clearwater and to downtown. And so reducing the event days limits that reach, which in turn impacts our ability to attract visitors and grow the event over time. Importantly for this year, we've already planned around a four-day event, of course. But we're open. Any evaluation, I guess my overriding point on this is any evaluation of a three-day model or a lesser model will require, from our standpoint, a longer runway, a careful analysis. It's not something that we can be implemented without a responsible look at the overall reorganization of the Jazz Holiday Foundation to make that work. Certainly not in May of the year we're planning for the festival. So we're open to talk about that. We just can't implement it in this calendar year. Who has a question? I have a follow-up question. You mentioned new costs. And I'm thinking you're talking about in-kind support from the city. So do you have that data with you? How much in-kind support did you receive from Clearwater last year versus this year, for example? Yeah, and one of the things that may help, I know Chris Cook is here today, and he may be able to add very specifically to the conversation with those numbers, if I may. Mayor and distinguished guests here, we have Ann Lopez actually had this in the item, Chris Cook, Parks and Recreation. So $25,26 Clearwater Jazz Holiday in-kind was $62,820. And what we have proposed for you guys later today, the council members later today, is $56,538. And I'll just say with that, we have met with staff from the foundation right after last year's event trying to come up with ways on how they can meet what we're doing, which is trying to reduce everybody in a responsible way to reduce the cost while still giving them the services needed to run the event. Just a follow-up comment. Just to clarify my position, I differ from some of my colleagues I don't have where I'm not focusing on decreasing, you know, support. To me, it all boils down to one thing, our dollars achieving our mission, which is are we doing what we're supposed to be doing? And so you have to understand that allocating 40% of our revenue and leaving us with 60% to program the rest of the year and all the other applicants is tough. So if you could put yourself in my position, allocating 40% of your budget on one concert when you have four days' worth of programming to do. See what I'm saying? So it's not the value of what you're providing, but just my view on our budgeting. It's just hard to justify that. 40%. 40%. 40%. 40%.