City Commission - Workshop Meeting - Nov 18, 2025

Good afternoon, everyone. Welcome to the workshop meeting of the Delray Beach City Commission this November 18, 2025. If the clerk would please call the roll. Commissioner Marker. Here. Vice Mayor Long. Here. Commissioner Cassell. Here. Deputy Vice Mayor Burns. Here. Mayor Carney. Here. Mayor McCormick. Thank you very much. We have two items on our workshop agenda for this afternoon. The first is updates to the noise ordinance. We have Anthea Giannotas of the development services up in front of us getting ready to give us an update. So you are on. Go for it. Just kidding. My update is. It's actually we're going to do a team effort here. Oh, fun. Oh, I see. Oh, boy. There it is. Does it come with like pictures and crayons and all kinds of good stuff? Of course. So good afternoon, Lynn Jelen on behalf of the City Attorney's Office. Before I begin, I feel like I would be remiss if I didn't thank some people. As you know, this has been a very long effort. And I want to thank William Bennett from my office, Anthea Giannotas, Amy Alvarez, Rebecca Tesari from her team. This was really a team effort to get this done. We work with consultants and attorneys. And we really feel that what we're going to present to you today and then the first and second readings is really a good update. And it's going to allow the city to enforce, I think, one of the biggest complaints that you typically receive, which is noise complaints. So what am I doing wrong? Oh, there it is. Okay. So just a little timeline. We did start this effort back in 2022 when the previous commission approved the hiring of a consultant. Numbers that you're going to hear today for the decibels are based on a sound study that the consultant did. We utilized volunteers, staff members, and our consultant who walked the city and rated the noise. And from that data and sound meters that were placed throughout the city, he was able to compile numbers that in his dissertation and his belief are reasonable limits of sound. From there, since then, we've been working on this draft ordinance, which is before you today. And our goal is to get feedback from the commission today, from the public today, and we're looking at adoption in early 2026 in January. That will give staff an opportunity throughout January and a little bit of February to become trained. Our noise consultant does do training, so he'll be training staff on how to use a sound meter. And from there, we'll do a warning period like we've done when we enact new ordinances such as this. We'll do a warning period, and then from there, we'll start enforcement, so probably around March 1st is when full enforcement will begin, ideally. So what are objectives of code ordinance amendments when we do them? We want to create certainty. We want people to understand what the rules and regulations are so that they're able to comply with them. For the noise ordinance specifically and specific to our downtown area, we want to find a balance for the residents and the businesses. The biggest complaint that we hear, especially in the entertainment district, is how much noise is too much. You know, logically, in the entertainment district, you're buying into the noise, right? It's been established. It's been there. So people who come into that have to understand that there is going to be some variation in the level of noise that's permitted in that area. Other areas of the city, not so much. We want to manage expectations. So when people look at our code of ordinances, we want them to understand what is and isn't allowed and be able to manage that. And then, of course, we always want to ensure fairness and consistency, and that's through enforcement. So we want our code officers, our police officers, anybody that's designated by the city manager to enforce the code, we want them to be able to be fair and consistent. Because, as you know, when you don't uniformly apply your code, you could be subject to legal action. So what stayed the same? So you'll notice that a lot of it is a lot of clarification. But the main things that stayed the same were the boundaries of the entertainment district. We did create a new map, so it's a lot more clear where the entertainment district is located. The hours of permissible noise did not change, and the penalties did not change. Everything but the penalties is subject to discussion and change. The penalties are typically statutory, so those were not able to change, although we have a range, and we are able to, as long as we maintain within the range, we are in compliance with the law. So what changed? So first, the definitions. You'll notice that we have a lot of definitions now. And the brunt of those changes are in order to enable what we're going to start using as the objective standard. We'll go into it a little bit later, but the objective standard is where you're going to get your decibels, and it's going to be almost like speeding. So if somebody is speeding, if you know what the speed limit is on the highway, if it's 55, you know that if you're over 55, you're in violation of the law. If you're below 55, you're in compliance with the law. And so that's really how this is going to work now, as opposed to a subjective standard where the mayor and I might have different understandings of what is considered unreasonably loud noise. I go through that with my kids, right, turn down the music, it's too loud, and they don't listen. So I think that when you move things to an objective standard, that leans more towards that fairness and consistency in the application of your code. So what else? Like I said, we created a new map for the entertainment district, and we updated some of the old definitions so that they're in conformity with Florida law and Florida case law. One thing that you're going to notice in the definitions is we've established active hours and quiet hours. Active hours are going to be, in most districts of the city, it's going to be from 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. Quiet hours will be from 10.01 p.m. to 6.59 a.m. In the entertainment district, the active hours are going to go through 1 a.m., which is what we have now. It's just a different way of defining what those hours are. And the quiet hours are going to be from 1.01 a.m. to 6.59 a.m., and that's on Saturdays and Sundays. So that has not changed, but it's the way that we're defining it to make it more clear for people to understand those limitations. That's what's changed. We've also defined property in this section of the code, and it's going to look a little bit different than the way that Anthea would define residential, industrial, and commercial. And we did that so that it's, again, clarity, so that people understand that residential uses are different than commercial uses. If it's a mix of the uses, this ordinance will define how you establish the noise limits for those mixes of uses. And typically, if it's a mix of commercial and residential, the definition is going to tell you that you're going to go with the commercial. So exempt activities. Exempt activities are those activities that are generally permissible. A lot of them are conditioned and qualified when you look through the list. I think I counted there were 20 exempt activities. But, again, they're not full-blown activities that you're allowed to do. Some of them do have qualifications. So, for example, a special event in the city is considered an exempt activity for noise purposes, so long as you have received a special event permit through the city manager or the city commission. A motor vehicle is typically an exempt noise. However, it must be in compliance with Florida Statute 316, which is the Florida Statute that governs motor vehicles throughout the city. This portion of the code talks about landscape maintenance equipment, and that's going to be one of the topics that at the end of this I'm going to ask for some direction on. There was a point in time where the legislature was actually going to preempt cities from prohibiting lawn maintenance equipment. And these are complaints that you hear. The leaf blowers, you know, at 8 a.m. on a... Excuse me, was that gas only or all? It was for gas. Thank you. So, because those are the noisy ones. So, some jurisdictions have electric equipment. You know, the concern on that, and to play devil's advocate for that one, is that those are going to be more expensive, which is going to, the cost is going to pass on to the consumer, right? And so, we are able to regulate that. Right now, the hours for lawn maintenance equipment is from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. So, if you don't want to prohibit the gas-powered, you could certainly regulate the hours that they would be permissible to use. Construction, we didn't change the hours of construction, which is Monday through Friday from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m., 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. on Saturdays. We did make some changes to activities that occur on school property. Anthea reminded me that a lot of schools have after-school programs, and so we extended the noise that could occur from those properties until 6 p.m. When that's generally when the after-school program ends. Unamplified human voice, somebody who's not using a megaphone or a loudspeaker, that's going to be an exempt activity. Weapons, fireworks, so long as you're in compliance with Florida statute or city code, is an exempt activity. We did add air conditioning equipment, and for the most part, a lot of those did remain the same. We did clarify the permissible construction activity because we do get complaints about that from residents, so we did add some clarification to that. So, can I just ask a quick question? It says exempt activities, but we are going to be monitoring motor vehicle noise and vessels, so this chart, it can be read a couple of ways, but I think this is important that we are going to be able to monitor these other activities. Right, and we can already do that because the Florida statute's very clear that we can. This just enables us to enforce it through a civil citation program or through our own code versus giving tickets. But the motor vehicles, and I'll read you the language because it's very specific, motor vehicles operating on a public right-of-way in compliance with Florida statute 316. So, this is for like those mufflers that are just, I don't know what you call it, but they're modified. They're modified, that's what they are. If those are not in compliance with the Florida statute, then we are able to enforce that. The challenge with a lot of these is actually being at the right place at the right time, right? Because if a police officer gets a complaint that there's a very loud noise on the ave, we can't act on it unless the officer has personal knowledge of it. And so, if the car is not there or if the officer didn't witness or hear the sound, they're not going to be able to be properly enforced. So, I think that's a lot of the frustration. There are some crimes, and these aren't crimes, these are ordinance violations, but there are some crimes that an officer can prosecute without actually witnessing it. This is not in that realm. So, in order for that to happen, there would be spot checks or something like that that are going on pretty routine. Right. If they're doing traffic work on the ave and they witness it and they have their sound meter, they can do it. Okay. So, if a vehicle isn't modified, if it's just like a loud group of motorcycles or something, like cruising through downtown, are they out of compliance with Florida statute? Would there be any pretext to even pull them over? Do we have any legal ability? With the sound ordinance, yes. So, if an officer happened to catch them and it's super loud and they could pull them over just based on the perception that it might be above the festival limit? Well, I think they're going to have to – it's almost like the radar gun, right? They could check. They can point their radar gun and they'll be able to – and once they see that it's over the speed limit, then they can effectuate a traffic stop. This is going to be similar. So, they're going to have to have their tools in order to make this work. I have several comments when you finish here, but one of the things we did back in 2012 is we did try to enforce it along Atlantic for a brief while and they went out with these noise guns and we stopped the – for a while, we stopped these loud motorcycles and things that were, you know, people trying to enjoy a, you know, sidewalk cafe experience and they end up having to have treatment on their ears because some of the noise was – So, there – and there are other mechanisms that are available. I've got some comments, but I'm going to let you finish, but – I was going to ask – There are noise cameras, too. There are these – there's these things that can actually register, take pictures of these – of these vehicles as well that other – some other municipalities, you know, have adopted the use of. So, I was going to wait. Are you done with your presentation because I have a question? Okay. So, I'll wait because you may cover it. Yeah. Okay. All right. We'll keep going. So, those are the exempt activities. The next section talks about the prohibited activities, and these are the activities that are not allowed. So, we did include pedaling, hawking, and vending along the right-of-way. So, if someone is on – I'm sorry – along a roadway. And so, those are the individuals that you might see on Atlantic Avenue asking for money. If it's an unreasonably loud noise, shouting, or raise a voice within the city limits, that would be a prohibited activity. You know, movers during quiet hours is considered a prohibited activity. Sound or noise. So, someone's, like, leaning on their horn for an extended period of time. And, again, a lot of these are going to have to be witnessed, and they're going to have to rise to the level of being unnecessary or unreasonable. Sirens. Only police fire and emergency vehicles are allowed to have sirens. Projection of drums. Symbols. I just violated the ordinance. There's a lot of noise in here today. I don't know if it's intentional or not. First fine. Where are the cops? That's the first fine right there. The code enforcement back there? Come on. Where's Ms. Pryor? I think one of the ones that you're going to see on here that I think is helpful is noise from animals. It has to be over 20 minutes. You know, you get those complaints as well. That's plainly awful. Would the animal be fine or the owner? It would be the owner. And then the rest are just, you know, internal combustion engines associated without a muffler, motor vehicles so out of repair that it's just making a lot of unreasonable noise, amplifiers, loudspeakers, or other instruments attached to a motor vehicle for advertising purposes. Sometimes you'll see those on the app. Those are prohibited. So the next section is the brand new, entirely new one that we've been talking about, and this is where the decibels come in. So this is going to be the objective standard for enforcing our noise ordinance. And what this section does is it established, based on the studies that we did, the appropriate levels of noise during active hours and during quiet hours in residential, commercial uses within the entertainment district and community facilities. So this is entirely new. This is really what our staff is going to be trained on because it is a new way of enforcing our noise ordinance. And what this is going to do is, like I said, it's like speeding. So it's really going to give that baseline number. If you're above it, you're going to get a warning to lower the music, turn it off. If you don't comply, that's when the fines can begin to be dispersed. This noise ordinance does address ambient sound, and ambient sound is, you know, when you have those other noises around, it tells our enforcement officers exactly how to address that noise in order to be able to get a good reading so that, again, we're fair in our enforcement of the noise ordinance. And somebody's not going to come in and say, there's no way that they could tell that the noise was coming from me or it wasn't too loud. So this does, this is going to require training. It's going to require calibration. I think I have a picture of the, there it is, of the sound level meter. And this is what they're going to look like. They're just small handheld devices. They do require calibration. They do require maintenance. And they do require training. And so that's all addressed, um, in the noise ordinance. Um, the main training is going to be, you know, walking with the officers and taking them to the downtown during the nighttime to hear the different noise and understand, like, how you point the sound meter, where you point it to, and then if there's wind or if there's other noises, how you address that. And, um, it sounds complicated, but I, I don't think it's, it's particularly complicated. I think it's just a matter of learning something new and being able to utilize the, the tools that, um, the city manager's office is going to give our staff. Um, the sound level does have to be measured for a period of time. It's about 30 seconds. Um, and obviously the positioning of the sound meter is critical so that you have to be pointing it at who's ever generating the noise. Hold it for 30 seconds, get your reading. And if there's ambient noise, then you're going to have to, to make essentially calculations, but it's, it's, it's in there. It's in the code to, um, to be able to deduct the appropriate decibels based on, um, the differences in the readings based on the, on the wind or the ambient sound. Um, there will be circumstances where, um, the noise meter is not going to be used. Um, you know, it's not calibrated. It's not functioning that day. There's too much wind. And if the wind exceeds, exceeds 12 miles an hour, you can't use it. Um, and so we did account for that in this ordinance and, um, and that's where we put back in the, we didn't put back in, we didn't take it out, the plainly audible standard. And that's a subjective standard. It's very, very limited when it can be used. And that's for a good reason, because it, is it easier to not have to go through, you know, the burden of getting out your noise meter, measuring the noise, calculate, of course. But in order to have a fair and accurate system, the noise meter is going to be the best practice. And so in order to be able to, um, encourage our staff to use their noise meters, if somebody, um, isn't using it, they can use a plainly audible standard, which is a hundred feet away. Can I hear it with my normal faculties? And if I can, that's considered, um, unreasonable noise. The only penalty you can give is a warning. And I think that's fair. You know, if, if you don't have a, a concrete number telling you that someone's in violation of the law, then the best that you're going to be able to do is give them a warning and ask them to turn it down. Um, and so again, I think that's good for staff because it's going to encourage them to be able to utilize the tools that the city is going to provide them. And I think it's fair for alleged violators who, you know, it's not their fault that staff may not be prepared or may not be able to use, um, the noise meters. Um, so as I already indicated, the first encounter is going to be a warning. They're going to be giving, be given a time to, um, comply with the warning, which is really immediate. And that's what it says in the, in the code. It's reasonable amount of time is considered immediate because if your noise is too loud, all you have to do is turn the knob, right? So there shouldn't really be a whole back and forth. Um, if they're not able to comply, then that's when the, uh, the fines start kicking in 250 for the first, 500 for the second. Um, if it's a repeat violence, I mean, repeat violence, repeat a violator, it's up to 1,000 to 5,000. And then for irreparable and irreversible, it's 15,000. We hope that it never gets to that. We hope that, you know, after the warning, people are going to come into compliance. But, um, it needs to be made clear that we can give for every violation that they, an officer has to come back to after that first warning is a separate fine. So, you know, if somebody is difficult and the officer comes back every hour on the hour and the noise is still unreasonable or in violation, they can be given a separate fine. And we didn't have it so clearly spelled out in our last ordinance. Another, um, addition that we added to this ordinance is, and it's not in this section, it's in the next one, 99.09, is that if we give somebody, if the commission grants somebody a conditional use, um, to have, um, activity outside of their, uh, commercial business, um, if, if, if they have noise violations, those noise violations can come in as evidence in a conditional use revocation. And so I think that's important because, if you recall, when we initially made changes to Chapter 2, one of the biggest concerns was conditional uses and the inability to revoke them if somebody's subsequently violating them. What this does is it gives us extra, um, evidence to utilize in those revocation proceedings, especially when you have a situation where you grant a conditional use, the commission imposes conditions to mitigate the impacts, and the impacts are not being mitigated. We're getting noise complaints, noise violations are occurring. That can come in if the commission is in a position to revoke a conditional use. So I think that's helpful going forward if you're going to, you know, if you, if you're inclined to grant a conditional use, I think that helps you know that at least you'll be able to bring forth evidence to alleviate some of your concerns and to really gain compliance from people, right? Especially if they have a conditional use, so, so the outstanding questions I have for you today, um, we talked about it before, is the gas-powered equipment versus just regulating the hours of lawn maintenance, um, expansion of the entertainment district, or continue with a conditional use process that allows the, um, commercial activity to occur outdoors. And then, um, and then, um, we do need to purchase noise meters and train staff, which is going to result in us, um, um, spending money and, uh, a little bit of a delay in formally, um, commencing this process upon adoption. And that's all I have. Great. Um, Commissioner Burns. Yes, I was going to ask about the, um, the expansion of the entertainment district, um, and I see you have it on here, so good to see that. Um, because, you know, now that we have the West Atlantic Avenue goes through the West Atlantic Avenue to 95, I, uh, think that we should, um, expand the entertainment district. And I know that the residents and neighbors that live along that corridor are in support of it and have been wanting this to have that district, uh, expand it for quite some time. And that's basically, and just thank you for a very comprehensible, um, ordinance, um, a set that both the code officers and residents can understand. Uh, as you said, it's clearly spelled out, and thank you for that. That's it. Okay. Commissioner Cassell. Thank you. Yeah, I mean, this has been a long time coming. So thanks to you, city attorney and staff, all involved, for getting this done. It's exciting to implement. We've been getting so many questions about this. But I would respectfully question the expansion of the entertainment district. I sat up here when we were getting calls daily from the people living in that, uh, I think it's 400, 300, 400 block. Because of, no offense, the 404 Daiquiri, their ring doorbells were going off at 1 o'clock in the morning with music. And, uh, so I think we have to be careful when we look to expand the entertainment district. Because the people currently living there did not purchase with the expectation of hearing music till the middle of the night. I'm sorry, I'm speaking. Thanks. And that is, that was a true, those were complaints we were getting all the time. And everybody that was up here knows it. So we need to be thoughtful when we talk about expanding into an area that is currently residential. That area is residential. Right on Atlantic. And that area is rapidly changing. Just, just. No, I don't disagree with you. I'm saying we need to be careful. I'm done. Yes, thank you. I'm done. Okay. You ready? I'm ready. Okay. Follow Angela. Absolutely. So just a couple of questions. So on the, the gas powered equipment, um, I, I know our other communities that are around us are all grappling with the same thing. If we start to clamp down on that, um, do our, do our, and I'm probably asking a question I don't know the answer to, but are, are the majority of our landscapers going to be able to come into compliance with that? Or are we going to put our homeowners in a situation who want this landscaping service? And now we've taken a very important tool away from the landscapers that they are not going to be able to provide cleanup after they, after they mow, et cetera. So I think if you did, um, prohibit the gas powered equipment, then it will limit the ability of certain landscapers to come in and work in the city because if they don't have those or if they don't want to take on that expense, um, I, and I think it's going to be an added expense because I think if something's not gas powered, it's going to, there's going to be a cost associated with it. Um, I, my recommendation would be that if, if there, if, if you want to further regulate it, that's probably the best thing. 7 a.m. seems a little early. So, you know, I was actually surprised when I saw that, but that's what we had in there now. I mean, and 8 p.m. seems a little bit late. So, you know, we could adjust it with summer hours because I think it's, I'm sure it's trying to be a long range, you know, to capture daylight in the morning and daylight in the evening. We can change that. So, I mean, that is within your purview. You could make it same as, you know, you can do 8 to 4. You can, I think that might be an easier way to regulate it so that you're not getting the complaints early morning hours. I think that might, might be more appropriate in, in the short term until, until we find out if the landscapers can actually make the conversion to electric powered equipment because I, that could be a burden to a lot of those companies. I, I did read, I don't remember which municipality it was, but one municipality went with that change. And then I think they reversed it or they brought it to the voters. Right. Because. They lost all their companies. Right. And that's the concern. They can't afford to go out and buy all new equipment. Right. They can barely function. And 4 o'clock is too early. People are still working at 5 o'clock, 6 o'clock. I think you look around, go in your neighborhood and see who's doing the work. They can't afford to go buy all new equipment. This is, creates a burden. It's not. Maybe you do 8 to 6. I would be totally fine with that, but I'm not going to ask people to purchase new equipment at this point. And I think this is untested because cities keep vacillating. This was, was going to happen and then it got put on the back burner when there was an outpouring of concern. I think it's good to have a regulation of hours, but I think beyond that at this point in time, it would be too much, in my opinion. I think the 8 to 6 sounds like a good compromise to start and just see what it looks like. And my, my second question. Can you hold on that? Are there two other people that agree with the 8 to 6? I'm an 8 to 6. Well, I, you know, I, I, I've got several comments because I, I, I think that, you know, well, 8 to 6 sounds great unless it's on a Saturday. And then it's not so great. I was going to say, what are weekends? Because I'm, I'm, I'm, my view is, my view is, and I've seen it and I did a lot of study on this. You know, some communities have said, okay, nothing on weekends because people want to have quiet on the weekends. You know, this is their, their moment of tranquility, so to speak. Others have said, if they're going to have it during the week, some neighborhoods was like they would do it on Monday and Thursdays or Tuesdays. So that you would know that there's a day where you can't plan something because there's going to be noise in your neighborhood. There's all kinds of options out there. Could I ask a question? Do you think that applies to the average individual? If I pull out a gas-powered piece of equipment in my yard, is my neighbor going to complain about me? I don't have one, just so everyone knows. Yeah, you know, it's, it's tough. But it's, you're starting to really regulate a little bit beyond maybe what a municipality should. Again, that's what, that's what we're here for. So, um, I do think that's important, just to add that, is that not everybody uses a service in their home on the weekend from their own jobs. So, I, I, I, I, I'm, I'm, some sort of window. It could be later. I'm saying, but you're, but you're, but 8 o'clock, 8 o'clock doesn't work on a Saturday or a Sunday. I don't want to be able to have. I just want to remind everybody we would have to then enforce this. And we, the biggest struggle we have in this city is enforcement. So, we're talking about. Well, that's why, that's why we're making these changes to assist with enforcement. So, if on weekends we moved it to 9 or 9.30 or whatever, something like that with. Like the construction? Because construction's a lot on Saturdays but not Sundays. Right. And there's a finite amount of time that you could do it. Because I do think that you want to have weekends or, you know, I understand people want to get out there and do their work in their yards. This is their time to do it. But, um, if I'm sleeping next door, you know, I don't really want to hear lawn blowers at 8 or 9, you know, 7 or 8 o'clock in the morning. 9 o'clock? And. You're up, but I'm not. But anyway. Can I also just ask you to consider if you're going to adjust the lawn care that, you know, as Ms. Jean brought up, the construction activity. We have some areas with a lot of permits all released at the same time. There's nothing we can do to stop that. But do you want to have the Saturday construction hours also adjusted? Because right now they're 8 to 4 on Saturday. Not at all on Sunday. And they're there at 8.01. Oh, they are. It gets hot. People work earlier. But if it needs to shift to 9 as well, then we should maybe consider that together. I just have one more question. Sure. You may not know the answer to this. I don't know the answer to this. How will it work with motor vehicles? So if someone is driving with a illegally modified muffler down Atlantic Avenue, I'm assuming code can't pull a car over. It's going to have to be the police department chief, I'm assuming. Chief Hunter will be there doing it himself. He's the only one. He'll be running. He's the only one. The only one. He's very powerful. We're only training one police officer. He's very powerful. It's just like when you see the officer standing with his radar gun. It would be very similar to that. Code is not empowered to pull over vehicles, so they're not going to be able to do that. The city manager has a discretion to basically appoint anybody in the city to be an enforcement officer. Okay. But that's a really good question because specific to motor vehicles, the only employees with jurisdiction over motor vehicles is PD. And then a question. I think I know the answer to it, but I'm going to ask it anyways. So the police department issues a ticket for a loud muffler to an individual who may or may not live in our hamlet. They're still going to be obligated to pay for that, but we don't have in Florida inspections like they do in some states like New York. So the ticket will essentially be a fine, but there's no guarantee that that individual is going to come into compliance going forward. Well, we would issue a civil citation. Civil citations are similar to, like, parking tickets and things like that. They can go to court and things, and a court can order payment. It's not – I don't think it's going to affect their driver's license or things like that. Okay. But they are in existence, and they do show up on the clerk's website. Okay. Good enough. Thank you. Sure. Thank you. Mr. Long. All right. Four years in the making. We've gotten here. So, well, first of all, thank you, Anthea. Thank you, Lynn, and your respective teams. This is pretty cool to be involved in a policy of this sort of scope and scale and see it come to fruition. Have any other cities around us done anything like this? I mean, what other cities have – do they have anything, like, to this level of sophistication? Mm-hmm. Like, who else has it? Brevard. I think Miami Beach. The consultants that we work with work throughout the state. Coral Gables does. Coral Gables. Anything else in the county? In our county? Yeah. City of Palm Beach. I don't know. Palm Beach has a noise. I think so, yeah. Yeah. I mean, they have noise ordinances. I don't know if they're to the level of the dust. You know, when you Bentley gets a little bit rough, so you have to fix it. It just seems like we're kind of pioneering this in a way to a degree, which is pretty cool. And the point I want to get to about that is when we get all of our ducks in a row and kind of figure out the enforcement and everything is, how are we going to roll this out to the public? Because I think if we roll it out appropriately, there could be just a big deterrent effect in terms of people actually just following the rules, if we really market the crap out of this, for lack of a better phrase. That we are enforcing these noise ordinances. And maybe we incentivize people to, God forbid, get electric leaf blowers instead of the gas ones if we make it a little more inconvenient for them to do it. But, you know, I always go back to the kind of rule of thumb that, you know, your rights only go so far as if they don't encroach on the rights of others. So if you have a gas-powered leaf blower, but you're doing it at 6 a.m. on a Sunday, like you're sort of, you're making your neighbors miserable. So you don't have unfettered right to just make noise in your neighborhood. So I think it's reasonable to constrict those hours. I don't want to put landscaping companies out of business, though. So I think just constricting the hours, like everyone, I think that's fair. And if anything, if they want to work earlier and later, then they're incentivized to start, you know, gradually switching over to electric-powered leaf blowers. Which, by the way, aren't that much more expensive. They're just a pain because you've got to plug them in somewhere. Right, right. And they don't work as well. They just don't have as much power. Or as long. Yeah, exactly. Like you need the chargers is the issue. You can charge them or you can plug them into someone's outlet if they have outdoor outlets. So it's kind of a headache. But regardless, there are options out there. I think that's a fair way to do this for now. But I think that should be a continued conversation, frankly. I think if you could get to a point where you eventually phase out gas power, you know, I think that would be great. But I definitely don't want to put our landscaping companies out of business and have to just overturn this because no one can get it. I would just like to add some kind of, you know, just specific specifics that when I'm in a Zoom meeting that they don't do it right outside of my window. Because that's the only time they ever do it. My landscapers wait until I'm on a Zoom call and then they do it right outside of my office. So, I mean, I think we've covered most of this. I just think the rollout of this is going to be really important. I think like literally doing a press release and getting it out there to local media that Delray Beach is doing this. It also, it sends a message that in Delray Beach, we're prioritizing the quality of life of our residents and our visitors. If you come to our downtown, you're not going to have to deal with like really loud, annoying stuff. Like that's Delray Beach. I just think that's a really important part of our brand as a city. And so, again, thank you guys for years of hard work to get us here. This is pretty cool. Thank you. You finished? Yep. Okay. Vehicle noise. This has been, I mean, seriously, when I was up here a long time ago, they did take one of the weekends out there in the wintertime with their little guns and send out a bunch of citations for everyone violating. And there were a number of people who, with their motorcycles or their cars or whatever it was, you know, thought it was attractive revving up as you sat outside of, you know, Tremonti's and they would do whatever they would do. So I want to, and I know it's not in our thing here, but one of the things that is utilized and we should think about is whether or not these noise cameras at strategically located spots, like at Swinton, maybe at Second, maybe at Federal Highway, and then maybe down at A1A, wouldn't be a bad thing to at least see what they might work because they do generate revenues. I mean, they are, this is something that is enforceable. They've used it in other localities, just like going through one of those speed tickets with the red light. They will get it. They will capture it. They get your license plate. And you get a ticket in the mail. So, I think that, I mean, I know they're expensive. They're $20,000 a piece or whatever they are. Theoretically, it will make a lot of people happy who are dining on Atlantic Avenue. I mean, we talk about having all these things. We're helping downtown and everything. But I think if we kept the noise levels where people were actually enjoying the downtown experience, I think everyone would kind of agree to that. We've talked about the gas-powered, whether or not we want, you know, addressing the time frames, which we really need to do. I also, I mean, I know you don't want to use weekends, but maybe there's one or two days a week that you don't want to have them. I will do whatever you think. I don't disagree that similar to the construction activity. Oh, no, I think we do need to tie into that. I don't think you should be out there with a noise blower an hour before the construction can start. Right. You know, if you've got your jackhammer at 8, you ought to be able to have your blow at 7. So do you want me to change it? Because construction activity is 7 a.m. to 6 p.m., 8 to 4. Do you want the lawn maintenance to be consistent with that so that it would be prohibited on Sundays? I would, yeah, I mean, for me, yeah. I mean, I think these things should be prohibited on Sundays. Two other people? You see Rob? I mean, we've got one, two. I mean, yeah? I'm not going to say yes to Sundays right now. I think. What do you have? I don't come out of that industry, but what percentage of a landscaper's business is concluded on a Sunday? Are we, I'm just wondering. I see them every single day. I'm just trying to think of the other side of that decision. I mean, as the individual who's trying to sleep, I think it's great. But as the individual who may live in Delray who runs a landscaping business, is one-fifth of their business done on Sunday? I don't know the answer. What if you did 8 to 4 on Sundays just as a compromise? What was that? What if you did 8 to 4 on Sundays? Because right now on Sunday, it's every day from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. I would be great with 8 to 4 on Sunday. 8 to 4 is good. So do you want to try that? Sure. We can look at it later, see how that works. Thank you. Yeah, exactly. This is a fluid document, so we can always bring back tweaks and things like that. I think 20 minutes of a dog barking is a long time. I think you ought to look at 10. Because 20 minutes is, you know, you're pulling out the swords to do yourself after the first 15. I mean, you know, I think 10 is really a better number. Wait, I'm sorry. Can we just go back to the... Because you said the dog has to be continually barking for 20 minutes. No, until it's... And then who do you call? By the time you get there, you know, I just... So is there a consensus for 10? I think it's going to be hard to monitor anyway. Right. Is there a consensus for 10? Sure. I mean, when we had the issues with beach dog, I think five was considered unreasonable. I think two minutes was long. I mean, it was... It's interminable. I mean, it's interminable. That's fine. So 10 minutes? 6.30 in the morning, you know, a minute and a half is really long. All right, so 10 minutes? So I would say 10. I mean, 10. Is that okay with everybody? 10? It's fine. 10? Okay, that's fine. Sorry, Mayor, can you just go back to lawn equipment? What were we going to do? 8 to 4. Because right now it's 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. So we're doing 8 to 4. 8 to 4. 8 to 4 every day? Yeah. No, not every day. During the week, it can't be 4 o'clock. That's unrealistic. Oh, no, no, no, no. So 8 to 6. 8 to 6 Monday through Friday, maybe 8 to 5 Saturday and 8 to 4 Sunday. We should just keep it as easy as we can for staff. I would do 8 to 4. Then 5, because 5 is working hours, 8 to 5. Yeah, I mean, at Daylight Savings, 6 is fine, and at Non-Daylight Savings, 4 is fine. So Monday through Friday, 8 to 5? 8 to 5, that's fine. Saturday, Sunday, 8 to 4? Or 8 to 5? Well, first thing, I think 8 to 4 is, I mean, I would go with 8 to 4. All right, I'm going to do 8 to 5 Monday, Friday, Saturday, Sunday, 8 to 4. And then lastly, the entertainment district. I have gotten a lot of calls. Now, maybe it's from the same group that always calls, but they do have some problems at some of those restaurants with the residents who are now living there complaining about the noise. And I don't know the answer. I mean, it's nice to think you can expand the entertainment district because you can bring a lot of different kinds of businesses along that corridor, which is, you know, we're trying to encourage. On the other hand, there are people living there. And, you know, unlike when they were downtown and these people came in, downtown was always kind of an entertainment area and people expected it. So they built a condo next to this thing. They expected it. And so they got what they, you know, they wanted to a pre-existing condition. The pre-existing condition here is that it's not an entertainment district. So, you know, I'm very conscious of... I think we have to, if you go back and watch the meetings back at that time, we were getting a complaint every meeting, sometimes five or seven. No, no, that's why I'm acknowledging that. It's going to be a problem if we do that. I don't know if we can jump over the residential and talk about when you get the new area and have a block. But I think the way noise carries, I'm at the tennis center playing tennis on a Friday night. I can hear tin roof like I'm standing in it. I love it. I don't mind. But if I lived there and had to listen to it till 1 a.m., I'd be concerned. Can I just go back one second to the gas-powered? Our employees use gas-operated equipment, correct? That is correct. Okay. What time do our employees work with the gas-powered equipment right now? Not up until 4 o'clock. 7 a.m.? Saturday at 7 a.m. Okay. So how are we going to change that then? Final. Is that going to not apply to our employees? Like, that doesn't... It's going to happen. We would have to make adjustments accordingly as well once this is adopted, ladies and gentlemen. Understood. So we have to make adjustments in terms of the work schedule and the operations to that effect. And that's part of the transition process. We have an obligation to our citizens to let them sleep in the morning. I don't dispute that, but I wonder about the logistics of presenting this while our employees are out there at 7 a.m. using that equipment. We will simply pivot accordingly. We will have to address the logistics to get to that place so that we can demonstrate compliance as we have expectations of others to do so as well. So that will be part of the transition process and an operational function for which we will be obligated to offer. So on the last point, then, the entertainment district, I am not prepared to now move... I think we need a little bit more careful thinking before we expand the entertainment system. A little more... So I spoke... A little more... Oh, it happened again. He needs a new chair. Mayor, I'll change chairs with you. I'm super light. It probably won't happen to me. No, no, that's okay. No, it's because I put my... I curved my feet around the thing. So I'm just saying we need a lot more thinking. No, he hid it himself. No, no. So, um... I'm not... I don't know why... I'm not bothered by it. I don't know why everybody else is bothered by it. There's a couple of seatbelts. It's a little startling. I'm just going to say. I know, but you're okay. Someone's running for the defibrillator. So, um... Chief Hunter, the mayor's not wearing a seatbelt in his seat. That's right. But I learned to duck. So anyway... So that's what I'm saying. I think we need a little more... I'd like to really understand what the neighbors think before... I mean, I know some of them are going to say we hate it. But then the businesses out there say, look, we're going to be able to do a lot more. I mean, and we want to encourage business development along that corridor. We keep saying that we want to do it. And there's time constraints on it. So it's not like it's going to go on for everywhere. Yeah, I am. It's on for later. What's the time constraints? The entertainment district will, on Saturdays and Sundays, it'll go until 1 a.m. And it is louder. It is louder. I just spoke with Ms. Jada Singh from the CRA because they're getting ready to bring the updated set master plan through. So I think one idea that you could do is put the framework in place and then make the decision about the entertainment district with the adoption of that update. And then we would just adopt, we would just change the map here to follow that decision once that plan comes through for adoption. So the recommendations in that plan maybe would help guide what we do ultimately. And it's not quite here yet. But I'm also happy to consider, rather than making it a district which has set rules, that we would broaden or include within developments there a conditional use that they can take it to 1 o'clock. Exactly. Exactly. All right. So then we can control. They say we're going to take it to 1 o'clock, but we're not going to use it infrequently, which allows them the flexibility. I agree. If they can sell it to us and the community, then they can go to 1, then they can go. But otherwise, an automatic right to do it is what I'm concerned about because it really is going to be depending on what building it is, what kind of entertainment it is, what kind of, you know. And it should be like a site-by-site decision, like you just said, Mayor. So it will let you look at it. We allow that now for restaurants that are going to be next to a residential if they can show that they can, you know, they can stay later. Right. That kind of thinking. Do we need to amend the LDRs for that? I want to – I forgot to mention this in my comments. No, it's on me. I just wanted to circle back on this. I forgot to broach this. I meant to. I actually agree with Commissioner Burns on this. You know, we talk in terms of West Atlantic like it's a separate thing. You said – you compared it to downtown. Well, the area we're talking about is downtown. And the folks who come in here and complain, they don't live in a single-family neighborhood. They live in a mixed-use building on Atlantic Avenue. So I have limited sympathy for those folks who moved on to Atlantic Avenue and are complaining that there's a bar there now. And by the way, there's been many bars and institutions there over the years. It's not like all of a sudden there's people and noise there. It's not a new thing. So I don't know why we're pretending it is. Well, actually, it was new because what happened is they weren't allowed the outside entertainment use, and then that was provided. That's what caused the difference of noise being contained. We're not advocating that it's the Wild West out there. It's just louder than it is now. But all I'm saying is I'm going to recognize that you can do that up to 1 o'clock, but I think it – Yeah, we're going to do it piecemeal. What you're trying to do is automatic, and I'm trying to say I think really it's going to depend on – How often, Mayor, do we talk about – I mean, it's been talked about for literally probably over a decade developing West Atlantic and creating economic opportunity for that corridor, one street, one Atlanta, like one Delray. We talk about that in one hand, and then when we have an opportunity to actually start to roll that out, to plan for that, where we're going to say, well, let's – like, I don't understand why. I mean – But he's not saying that. He's saying let's do it on a conditional use so we can monitor it. Because then we know what's happening, and we have some control because currently that's not what we have. I don't know why they should still have different rules than downtown. It is downtown, and it's inevitable. Why not plan for that now? We have the opportunity to do it now. We have a way to enforce decibels now and keep it reasonable. You know, it's no – the folks who live in those apartments are no different than the folks that live at the apartments, you know, off Worthington Place right now, above Park Tavern, and the folks that live within earshot of – what do you call it? What's the one that has the bands outside all the time? Johnny Browns. Johnny Browns. Johnny Browns. Like, so you have people in the exact same type of places down there. You know, now it's just we have one group of folks that come in. I just – I don't see that as a reason to continue to make this part of our downtown not considered our entertainment district whenever we have – to me, the whole point of the entertainment district is to encourage more of those types of businesses to come downtown. Now, we have one that's successful. Why would we not want to encourage more? Well, which is why that conditional use allows us to control the time and let them see what they're going to do at 1 o'clock in the morning because I – because unlike Worthington Place, which had stuff around it way before Worthington Place building was built, and I was actually here then. That's a solution. That's a solution to this, but to me it's – It ends at 1. Not to see what they're going to do at 1. Whatever they're doing ends at 1. Well, it would end at 10, and then if you expanded the entertainment district over there, it would go through 1. Right. So it's an additional 3 hours. I just think we have the opportunity here to send a message that, like, we're going to finally view West Atlantic as part of downtown. And I like what Anthea said to move it along with the plan. You know, that works for me, but to have – and thank you, Commissioner Long. So do you want to just table that conversation about the entertainment district? I don't think there's support right now to extend it, but you can revisit it with the adoption of this – I think they get from 10 to 1 as a big jump without a conditional use. Right. That's all. I agree. I'm a big believer in conditional uses only because it gives you, like you said, some element of control when you're trying something new. You can't expand the district and then unexpand it, right? Right. You can't restrict it. So it's probably better to do it in baby steps. If you find that you granted conditional uses all along the Ave, then at that point it just makes sense to expand the district. But until you know what you're dealing with and the concerns of the surrounding areas, I do think it's better to do it in baby steps because once you do it, to undo it, it's going to be impossible. By the way, I acknowledge that we want it to be, and I'm not trying to let the one person who thinks that, you know, the noise is going to shut down the whole thing. That's – we don't even employ that kind of rule now for bars that are adjacent to residential neighborhoods. Ma'am, excuse me. It's 4.30 almost, and we have a whole other item to go. Okay. Well – I have my marching orders. Thank you. So you'll see this back in December. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. All right. We are finished with the workshop item number one. We now have workshop item number two, which is the discussion of the – to discuss the feasibility and purpose of the district, the West Atlantic Neighborhood Improvement District, and whether or not we should do this plan to develop a strategic plan and see what we can do going forward. I turn this over to Mr. Moore. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Good afternoon. And quite frankly, this presentation should be relatively succinct and brief, simply in long last because in response to direction offered by the commission during the August 19, 2025 city commission meeting is to engage community input relative to the consideration regarding the West Atlantic Neighborhood Improvement District. As previously discussed, this has been formalized going back to 1988. So 37 years ago, this was actually adopted and recognized by the state of Florida. And recently, the state of Florida Department of Community Affairs engaged in the audit of neighborhood improvement districts throughout the state of Florida and likewise the city of Derry Beach as being X as to what its intentions are. Part of the presentation should also afford an opportunity for clarification or alleviation of misgivings that have been perpetuated as a result of the various community engagement exercise, some of which were formal, some of which were rather informal. Because there are numerous steps that would have to be executed and engaged prior to fully considering funding logistics and a number of other dynamics that may make something like this become feasible for Derry Beach, Florida. Nevertheless, we are simply in position to address the question due to the state of Florida by one week from today. Tuesday, November 25th, 2025, two days before Thanksgiving, my favorite holiday for crying out loud, we are at liberty and obligated to respond to the state of Florida relative to the question as to whether or not the city of Derry Beach will continue in this regard. Likewise, we have leadership before you from the Department of Neighborhood and Community Services, which has been charged with facilitating community input and engagement to provide a brief summary for the city commission so appropriate policy direction can be considered. And again, to re-emphasize, this is not by any way definitive commitments in any regard with respect to funding, taxing, financial arrangement structure in any way. We've also involved leadership of the Derry Beach Community Redevelopment Agency. Thus, Renee Jada Singh is with us because part of this dialogue internally did feature her input and engagement. So she's in position to offer additional commentary should it be deemed appropriate by the city commission. Likewise, I think this will be an excellent opportunity for us to receive appropriate direction. But nevertheless, it would be numerous steps to be considered and executed before any definitive structure is made available and the saga would likewise continue. Nevertheless, the simple question is whether or not there's an interest to continue with the district or not do so. However, before addressing that particular question, we have Director of Neighborhood and Community Services, Jerry Pryor, accompanied by Neighborhood Planner, Terry F. Cousins, who did a lot of the legwork engaging with the community and, I must say, an excellent job in terms of being thorough. Ladies, if you would please proceed with your formal presentation, and for the sake of brevity and time, be succinct. Yes, sir. So thank you for your time, Commissioners, Mayor, City Clerk, City Attorney. Thank you for your time in allowing us to present. As City Manager Moore reiterated, this is an update as to the direction that we received on August 19th, right? August 19th, to do community engagement about the West Atlantic Northwest Neighborhood Improvement District. So I'm going to fly through some of these slides. It's the very beginning. It's the historical content. It's things that we've already seen. And also, as a footnote, this is the same presentation that we have presented to the community. And so repeating what Commissioner Moore, sorry, to City Manager Moore, These are just some of the things that we reviewed in the community about the West Atlantic Neighborhood Improvement District. Tara is going to give you the input that she did on the outreach. And so how is it funded? There was a big part of the discussion. It's through a millage, a millage determination that's made by Commission through ordinance. So should the Commission decide to move forward and say, yes, we want this? There's an advisory committee that would be phase two. And so Tara will cover that with you as part of the community input. Noise ordinance. I apologize. Yes, that will be $25 to go towards the noise meters. That's a 50-cent file. It's $2.50. $2.50. Sorry. We're in spam calls. Sorry. No, wait. First, we have to give you a warning. That's your warning. All right. And so this would be phase two is developing a committee. There's a minimum of five members, and then there's no maximum. You can have as many as you want, but a minimum, according to the ordinance, five members. That would be phase two should you decide to move forward. So what we need, this is what we would ask the community, participate in our community meetings, complete the surveys, share your ideas and concerns, and stay connected. And so I'm going to pass this off to Ms. Tara, and she's going to talk to you about the community outreach that we did from August until today. Thank you. So as they stated, my role is neighborhood planner, which a portion of my job description is community engagement. So when the directive was given to Jerry to engage the community concerning this particular topic, I hit the ball, hit the ground running. The commission meeting took place on a Tuesday, so there was an elders table meeting on that Thursday where I initially presented this to the group. What I thought would be introducing, but as previously stated, this has been in existence since 1988, and so many people were aware that the district existed, but just because we have come to the point in time where a decision needed to be made, if we would like to move forward in maintaining the district being active or dissolving, that's pretty much what I covered. Just going over some of the history of the neighborhood improvement district, what it is, if they were not familiar, what a neighborhood improvement district does. So if you notice on the slide presentation, in August was when the directive was given. As I just mentioned, I went to elders table, and then Jerry and I knew that we needed to put together some type of strategic approach, because when you look at the district, the targeted parcels or the targeted individuals, businesses, property owners that we need to engage and address and get feedback from is not the overall community. So we sat down and developed a plan, we came to the, we suggested possibly doing door hangers, surveys, we tightened up on the presentation to include the ad valorem in case there were questions regarding how it was funded. So the month of August was just strategizing the best way to approach the community with this information. As we got into September, there were opportunities for me to address the larger community. Commissioner Burns had a burning conversations, which we were able to come in at the latter part of that meeting. She had already had her guests in place, but we were able to come in and engage the communities as, for the community that attended that meeting. We then partnered with our communications team to put together the postcards because we thought that a QR code would be more efficient. So if we were to do the door hangers or we were to send out the mailings that all of the resident would have to do or the property owner or the business owner would have to do is click that QR code and the survey would come up for them. I did, I do want to note that the overall complaint that I did get over this whole thing was no QR codes. The community does not like QR codes. However, we did get some feedback that way. So we really got busy in October. We did the one-on-one canvassing. So I was able to go into the businesses directly, give them the information. Interestingly enough, a lot of the businesses along the West Atlantic corridor, when you look at it, there are several businesses, but in terms of who owns the property, there are only a few individuals that actually own property there. Actually, the same person will own several businesses in terms of property owners. So I was able to engage some of the property owners, some churches, and, of course, we had a town hall meeting. So as I was engaging the businesses and they had questions, I gave them the opportunity to bring those questions to more of an open forum so that they could ask their questions directly, get a clear answer. So that's where you see the town hall presentation, the Q&A session. We were grateful that DDA was present at that meeting along with CRA because most of the questions did have to do with the overlapping of the DDA district and the CRA boundaries. So with the DDA there, CRA, us talking about the West Atlantic, we had the business owners and many of the district residents, we were able to have a healthy conversation so that they were a little more informed of what this district could potentially become. I also had the opportunity to talk to the senior club at Pompeii Park, which was very beneficial because they oftentimes feel like they are not a part of the conversation. And since many of them would be affected by the district, they had some questions just in terms of a lot of changes that are happening in the Delray Beach area. So being able to get specifics of what this specific neighborhood improvement district would do or could be was helpful for them. And then as neighborhood planner, I have community events all the time. So I took advantage of some of the community events that I had throughout the month. I would ask the residents, what's your address? Show them the mapping. If they fell within the boundaries, I took that as an opportunity to inform them about the neighborhood improvement district. We also did the mass mail-outs throughout the month of October so that the community would be informed of our meetings and how this even came to be in terms of the audit that was conducted earlier this year. So if they had questions, where did this even come from? The mailing gave them information that this came about by way of an audit this year. And so they were a little more informed that way. Sure, I'm going to do my best to go over the overlap. So thank you for our GIS department and also CRA for helping us put this together. So a lot of conversation in the community was the overlapping. And it was something that we brought up back in August that there is areas where it overlaps. And potentially there could be parcel owners, property owners that are affected by all three entities, the CRA, the West Atlantic, and the DDA. Now, understanding that they're funded differently, correct? So CRA is the TIF funding. And then this is millage, special assessments. And so there is a little bit of a difference. And so CRA is while we're in the community is part of the CRA, it's not necessarily taxed the same as what DDA or this district would be. And so that was a big conversation with some of the community members. And I'm sure there are folks here that's probably going to ask questions about that. So in our outreach, this is kind of what we were talking about. So you can see in the map, so the boundary is in the black dotted line, and then the green is CRA, and then some of it's purple too. But the slash marks is the overlapping district. So those are the parcels that overlap, CRA, DDA, and the West Atlantic. Oh, sorry, I have the clicker. I'm looking at you. There you go. So I mentioned sending out postcards with the QR code. When the resident would click on the QR code, a survey would come up. I pulled a couple questions from the survey just to give you an idea of what that looked like. One of the questions was what improvements or properties would you like the district to focus on in the future? And so some of the options, they were able to pick all that applied. And they were improving the streets or sidewalks, installing more streetlights. And I can say it in order that got the most votes or got the most, the highest response, I should say. So installing more streetlights was 66.67%. And then up after that was improving the street and sidewalks. There was an equal amount of people for more low-income housing and moderate-income housing. We had, before that, was improving existing housing conditions. There was also an equal amount of better education programs and neighborhood cleanliness. And then lastly, improved water system. I also pulled another question, which was, do you support the continuation of the West Atlantic Neighborhood Improvement District? There was an 86.6% of yes, somewhat 6.6%, and no was also 6.6%. I will say my amount of responses was 15 responses. Fifteen people? Yeah. Again, the amount of responses was 15 responses, along with people letting me know that they just don't do QR codes. They don't like them. You want to go to the next one? I also pulled, the community had the opportunity on the survey to also leave their comments if they had any additional comments. So I pulled a couple of the comments. One was ethical and equitable management of any dollars allocated for the set transformation in the West Atlantic Neighborhood Plan. Another said that, basically said, yet another group is not the answer. And then I pulled one that says, I want to understand exactly what it will be spent on, how much per year. Additionally, how is the value of my home assessed and by who? And I pulled those because that was the nature of most of the responses that I got. So I ended each conversation, each presentation, each time I got an opportunity to talk to the community. I ended with just this call to action that this is not just a city program. It's a partnership with the community who live and work there. The community shapes the future by deciding priorities, participating in planning, and staying actively involved. On the last page, I do give you an opportunity, if you wanted to see the survey in its entirety, there is a link there that you could take a look at that as well. Thank you. We defer to the City Commission at this time for your input, your thoughts, and guidance, as we are obligated to respond to the state of Florida by one week from today. Well, I mean, I'll start, I guess. I think that this is getting authorization to do a taxing district is not an easy thing. So I think we owe it to the community to at least explore how we could make it work, because if we lose it, we'll never get it back. And what we're asking, I mean, as you rightly pointed out, it's nothing definitive, but, you know, we should really explore what it would mean and how we could flexibly make it, because there are going to be some people that don't want it, they don't want to pay taxes. There are going to be others that say, yeah, we're willing to pay taxes because we want to improve our neighborhood, according to this. I like the idea because it gives the local communities, you know, abutting the district an active role in developing the corridor, which I think is really important. And I just think it's something we should try and pursue. So Commissioner Burns, you did a whole study on this with your burning questions there. Not really. Burning thoughts, burning whatever. Burning conversations. Just a lot of conversations. Burning conversations. Yeah, burning conversations. Burning questions. We're burning bridges, that's the key. No, just have had a lot of conversation with folk in the community. And, you know, the district was created for a reason, and that reason, the purpose is still relevant today, in many ways even more urgent. However, you know, not wanting to create any additional burdens on people because this is tied to the millage. And thank you, Ms. Durant, for your email and your conversation today. But I think that before we eliminate anything, we do owe it to the community to explore activation options and get a little creative. And as the memo says here for the meeting today, that is to approve a review of the feasibility and purpose of the district. So I'm in favor of that. Mr. Long. I mean, I agree with both my colleagues who, so far, have spoken on this. What do we have to lose by exploring this? We didn't even know we had it for 30 years, you know. I think it behooves us to explore what we can do with it. There's really nothing to lose, in my opinion. But I do think that the lack of engagement from residents probably comes from the fact that right now this is a bit abstract as to what it really is. And until this commission sort of defines what we want to do with it, I think it's going to be tricky to get residents to really engage and have much of an opinion on it because we don't know anything right now. So I want to ask a couple questions. These are probably Lynn questions. So this is a taxing district with a board that would be getting funds from levying taxes. And would they then, this board, would they be able to give sort of priority to projects within that district in terms of, is there going to be a board that has a decision-making authority or at least an advisory capacity to discuss where these funds are going? If this is a taxing district, that's typically how it would work. Right. It's an advisory board. So it's an advisory board to the city commission. So similar to your other appointed boards, they would have consideration of, you know, their taxing district. And then those recommendations would come before the city commission. Got it. And would this district have the ability to raise revenues in other ways, like through grants or appropriations and things like that, outside of what the city is doing? Yes, it's specifically referenced in the ordinance. So technically, would it be codified somewhere that money raised by this district has to be used within the bounds of that district, even if the commission is ultimately making the decision? Right. Whatever grants or funding is received is specific to the boundaries of that district. Has to be done within the boundaries of that district. I mean, I think this could be a great economic tool to ensure that funds are directed towards an area of our downtown that has been overlooked for a long time. Again, you are talking about taxing residents. So I would want to know that residents are on board with it. But, again, until we explain what this is, I don't know how we're going to get residents to care enough about it to do a survey or really have much of a conversation about it. So I think that there's certainly an opportunity here. And I think that, you know, it's going to be you guys that do it. But I think it deserves a longer look. And I think that there's potential here that should be investigated. Thanks. Mr. Markert. Yeah, I'll be very quick. I agree with my colleagues. I think moving forward with the feasibility study makes sense on all fronts. Commissioner Cassell. I wholeheartedly disagree with the whole conversation because, and Mr. Moore, forgive me, but Section 8.3.7 of our ordinances is exceedingly vague. Right. It doesn't say a lot. But if you go to the Florida Statute 170, which is what carries the day for this, it's very clear on how this money can be used. And you and I had a conversation with Ms. Pryor about the fact that in reading this Florida Statute, this is infrastructure money. This is, you're asking, you're taxing the most incapable of incurring another tax to give you money to provide a service that you should already be providing. Read 170. I don't know why, when we get our agendas, that stuff is not attached. I had to go find our ordinance. Then I had to go find the statute. You and I had a conversation. You said that you and Ms. Pryor were working on figuring out if the money can be used outside of the way the statute designates. I'm going to go out on a limb and say, probably not. I mean, that's typically, the statute is very clear, and I can read it to everybody. It's one page long. But you're asking people, and it's not, it's up to 2 mil taxation on the people in the city that can least afford it. You got 15 responses, because in all probability, people don't even know what's going on. You're asking to tax these people additionally or place an assessment on them to give them the services that we are required to give them already. And we are going out and doing all that infrastructure work with the CRA, with our $140 million bond. So I don't even know why we're discussing this. And as far as getting grants, the CRA can get grants. The DDA can get grants. I don't know what we're thinking, but this doesn't seem right to me. I am not going to ask to go out and tax or special assess the poorest people in the city to get money to provide the services that we are supposed to be providing. What I suggest is we table this until my colleagues read the statute. We have consensus. Mr. Mayor, if I may, I'd like to clarify. There's no recommendations regarding taxation, special districting. That is what the district is for. It's for taxation. If I may, please. We have consensus. However, I think it's important to make a clarification. It's important to clarify. Thank you. This is all in response to the mandate from the state of Florida that we give them an answer. If we keep it, we have to activate it. No, no, we're not there as of yet. We're not there. That's where it's going. Montre, would you please forgive me, but the outbursts constantly are a little impolite. Thank you. Commissioner, if I may, please. There are several steps that need to be executed to get to that place. We are simply in position to respond to the state of Florida as to whether or not we have an interest in exploring a feasibility to continue that. I don't have interest in exploring for the reasons I stated. I understand. However, for the record, please be advised that there is no specific recommendations in that regard. Much of that would have to be evaluated via strategic planning and other analysis to help us get to where we need to be, what that may look like, what that may not look like. We're being asked to engage the district or eliminate the district. We're just not there yet. Were there emails in 2021 or 2020 about eliminating this district? I'm not sure. Well, this is 2025. We've got consensus to move forward. Okay, thanks, Mayor. We've got four people. Please, please. Can I throw a quick idea out there, just in response, actually, because I won't be here when you guys get to the point where you actually have to make a decision. Would it be possible to do a ballot referendum on this with – I mean, probably not, but would it be a way to have the folks within the district vote on it if they wanted to do it? I don't know if you could do it in that – just in that zip code. I don't know either. I don't know. That's tough. I'd have to look at it. It's interesting, though. I put it on the ballot during an election cycle, but have it just go to that district. Right, right. It eliminates the whole issue of unfairly imposing taxes on a group that isn't interested. But I think there are a lot of folks that might be interested, because I think there's a lot of folks that feel that that part of the city doesn't get the attention that the rest of the city does, and this gives them more agency in that. And so I – maybe that's the best way to get feedback from people. I would argue, though, if I may, that survey gave a whole list of uses. Was that a selection, or did they write that in? In other words, when you go on that survey and people chose, you know, different options, were those options you provided? Those were options we provided after looking at other neighborhood improvement districts. Those were some of the questions or the line of questionings that were asked. But are we asking people to choose something that we can't even provide? I'm asking a question about the survey. We've got consensus. I'd like to ask a question that's relevant. We're out of order. How am I out of order by asking a question? Because I've already called – we've got consensus. Okay, thank you, Mayor. We're moving forward. Mr. Mayor, Justice Summers. All this is a study. We're not – you're getting into – you're getting into the weeds. If you're asking people if they'd like to be participating in the district, and they're getting six things the money can do, but it can't do those – any of those things, then it's a misleading study. That's what I'm saying, and I believe it was. We'll get there. Mr. Mayor, just to summarize, for good measure, we will likewise respond timely to the state of Florida relative to the interest to proceed with the review process, and necessary steps in terms of what this looks like going forward will be provided over time. Again, for the record, there's no direction regarding taxation, assessments, or any other financial commitments at this time, anytime soon, quite frankly, as it relates to this particular subject, as there's numerous steps and engagements that would have to be executed and considered before the thought-to-offer recommendations are imminent. So we're not in that place. That's all we're doing. We're moving it forward, just letting them know that we're keeping our options open, which is what we're supposed to do. We are open to the – this is a meeting, and you have a very brief public comment period. Am I supposed to give them longer than – I mean, we're going to be starting our regular meeting shortly, so – That's in the next meeting. This is just a workshop. So technically, we have public comment. So if there are any members of the public who wish to speak, we're trying to start our regular meeting at 5, so if you can hold your comment until that period, that would even be better, but you have the right to get up and speak. So each one comes to the lectern. You have three minutes. Give your name and zip code for the record. Montre Bennett, 33444. It should be equal for all of downtown as far as entertainment district. If I complain always about 10 roof and nothing's changed, these people should be able to run to 1 o'clock and let their music blast. Okay, point blank period. Equal rights for everybody. Second, a group of us walked through this corridor and polled our own neighbors within this corridor, and they want this special district. We have a survey to prove who we've spoken to, and we'll give it to y'all at a later date. Next, thank you for telling me to stop my outbursts. We're true outbursts all the time on this diet. It's against your colleagues. So don't tell me nothing and you're not doing it right. That is an elected right. I mean, I'm not happy about it sometimes. They're not happy about it sometimes. Respect should be given to everybody. So if you're not going to be respectful, don't think respect will be given to you. Lastly, lastly, again, equal rights for everybody. Don't get rid of the red line. Slavery is over with. Racism should have been dead. And if those people chose to live there, that's their fault. Because everybody deserves the right to have fun, not just go past Swinton, but we should have fun east of Swinton, too. So thank you, and I'm complete. Thank you. Jamal Weatherspoon, 33444. Evening. Citizens. Days. With regard to there's no need to beat a dead horse about the downtown district. Downtown is downtown. Don't like noise. Don't live downtown. Common sense. It's every city. Now, with regard to the special taxing district, to further that, yes, there is evidence of very real community support and traction with the understanding that a millage increase isn't actually required. You can just reallocate the money that's already being assessed based on Avalorum taxes, especially when you factor in the decades of funds that have not really been reinvested into the Atlantic Corridor west of Swinton. It's really just riding the scales. To the next piece, I'd like to, in the interest of moving forward, just food for thought, petitioning the city commission to sponsor enabling legislation that any new tax district simply mirror the current DDA legal language, basic perpetual duration, powers to levy contract and promote boundaries from Swinton to 95, and making sure that the tax base is identical in structure, just geographically designated and restricted to West Atlantic. Seven-member board appointed by city commission with the requirement that at least four of said board members be West Atlantic property owners or business operators, and including resident representation, just to make sure that there is not just a community voice. You can patronize people all day and let them talk. But making sure that we are heeding what the community requires, since we are using people's money in their neighborhood. Again, parallel millage rate, identical to the DDA, with the critical detail that funds are ring-fenced and can't be transferred eastward. And the critical equity clause of redressing historical underinvestment and ensure equitable development within the West Atlantic corridor, right? This district was created in 1988. I've been here since 1989. I don't see where that money's going. So let's right this wrong, shall we? I'm complete. Thank you. Good evening. Ned Whaler, representing the Beach Property Owners Association, BPOA. I'm here tonight to speak to you about the noise ordinance. I had an opportunity to interact with the attorney and have offered some comments concerning the noise ordinance. We were here three years ago at a public meeting, presented comments. At that time, we submitted a memorandum in support of banning gas-powered leaf blowers and trimmers in residential districts of the Barrier Island citywide. This is not a new topic. You know that we represent property owners, residential property owners, on the Barrier Island. Our members, our property owners, own property there mainly because of quality of life experience that they have here and others throughout our city in residential areas. The reason we seek a ban on these gas-powered blowers and trimmers only, not lawnmowers, is because they produce excruciating noise. You cannot be outside of your home, in your yard, when these blowers are operating on your property or on your neighbor. The reason is the decibel levels run 85, 90, to 100 dB. They're in your yard. They're in your neighbor. They're in next door. They're across the street. They're here Monday, Tuesday, Thursday, Friday. You cannot enjoy any tranquility and quality of life in your home when these devices are operating because of the high noise levels. Battery-powered, electric-powered blowers and trimmers are literally 50 to 100 times quieter than gas-powered blowers. You know, the technology has advanced so far today that it's very cost-effective for lawn equipment contractors to make the transition. Perhaps we make the transition over a phase-in period. But the cost of a commercial-grade trimmer and blower that is battery-powered is less than $1,000. Operating, maintaining, and running a gas-powered device is not free. It has to be cared for. It has to be fueled. The fuel has to be acquired. Gas cans are required. Oil mix is required. Air pollution is created. The noise is a negative psychological and physical effect on everyone that experiences it. So we'd ask you to please give consideration to a ban as this thing moves forward. Thank you. Thank you very much. Andrea Bruton, 33445. As I sit here, I listened to some of the comments that were made today about the West Atlantic Corridor and the residents there that are now living there who complain about the noise. I was born here in 1965. And ever since I can remember, from Atlantic, from 95 to 3rd Avenue, there were thriving businesses along that corridor, including the first blocks of each side, the north and the south side. Most of those businesses were restaurants and nightclubs. So to say that they didn't know, there's a history. To say that this wasn't an entertainment district, there's a history of nightclubs and restaurants being along Atlantic Avenue. And with that being said, I have petitions from 133 residents in our community. Those petitioners are asking that you consider extending the entertainment district from Swinton to 95. There's a letter here written to the honorable members of the City Commission from concerned residents and supporters of the set. We the people stand united in urging the City Commission to extend the boundaries of the City's Entertainment District westward to I-95 to ensure equitable access to entertainment, culture, resources, and economic opportunities for the set, one of Derry Beach's most historic and culturally rich communities. For too long, the residents of the set have been excluded from the benefits of nightlife, live music, and cultural expression that are readily available east of Swinton Avenue. Selective enforcement of noise ordinances, largely based on complaints from a few individuals who knowingly moved into the areas near existing restaurants and nightclubs has unfairly silenced a community that has always been vibrant. We believe, one, the redevelopment of the set must include economic opportunities that reflect the community's heritage and meet the needs of the residents. Two, noise concerns must be addressed with balance, not by erasing cultural expression, but by using the same metrics the current district uses creating one downtown. Three, extending the Entertainment District to I-95 will help create jobs, support local businesses, encourage tourism, and bring vibrant life to an area long overdue for revitalization. We call on the City Commission to take bold and fair action by extending the Entertainment District I'm almost done, by extending the Entertainment District to I-95 as a part of the city's commitment to equity, redevelopment, and cultural inclusion. Let us dance, let us gather, and thrive just like every other part of this city. Thank you very much. Yes, please. Name and a zip code for the record, please. Mike Walsh, 33445. I come here at the request of all my neighbors, Francis Drive, which abuts Barwick. There's construction going on there. I've sent you five emails. It is a very dangerous intersection. Your own engineer states that the turning radius for that intersection is 15 feet. I brought some information. Even a VW Beetle has a turning radius of 17.7 feet. The average SUV is 23 to 25 feet. Point being, you cannot make a 90 degree turn in there. Secondly, Barwick is 35 miles an hour. Now, the other day, coming north, I wanted to see if I could turn into the lane to go on Francis. I had to slow down to 10 miles an hour, unfortunately, because there was no one on the north side of that lane. I could squeeze in there. I asked all of you to go out and try turning. Just make turns. It is not safe. And part of the reason I'm so animated about this is because I had an accident in the city at Bush and Swinton. And it's a similar thing. It's a T intersection. It was at night. I was on Bush. I had a flashing red. Swinton has a flashing yellow. I stopped at the line, which is before what I would call the actual intersection where the pavement tees. A woman had planted trees or a person had planted trees and things, so I had to pull out to look up to see oncoming traffic. As I pulled out, a car was coming. I stopped. He cut across because he can't make that 90 degree turn. He cut across, as most people do in more of a 45, took the front end off my car. When the police came, I got the ticket because I was in the intersection. Once I advanced beyond that white line, I was in his lane, even though I thought that I was in my lane. That's what you're building right there at Barwick. There will be accidents. Again, the math is pretty straightforward. I brought a handout for everybody, but these are facts. Your own engineer says the turning radius is 15 feet. I don't think you can find a car that has a 15-foot turning radius. So I'd like to pass this along, but I ask that this be considered before the final black time. I'm trying to save the city money because it's a bad intersection. I take it. I mean, I sent you back a whole detailed response. What you did is you put Victor, whatever his name is, what you did was put him to contact me. Again, that 15-foot radius he recognizes. He talks about traffic calming. But if you look at the brochure, which I'm giving back to you, the city has put this out, and it's called Neighborhood Traffic Calming. I'll give this to each one of you. Right. But it states in there, we're committed to ensuring the overall safety and livability of the residential neighborhoods through a collective city council. Okay, it's not safe at all, and no one on the street wants it. No one. I mean, you've all run for public office. I can get probably 95% of all the residents in Kingland. I've already sent you a copy of it. Yes, you did. To say, we don't want this. So you're building something that we don't want that makes it less safe. Anyway, I thank you. You've had your three minutes. Yes, sure. I understand. We have to keep doing the time. Can I pass this? Yes, please pass. Give it to the clerk. I'll step aside, and I'll give it to you. Thank you, folks. Thank you, Mr. Walsh. But please hit the pause button before we do something. Thank you. Are there any other members of the public? Seeing none, public comment is closed. I thought you were walking down. Oh, I'm sorry. Do you want to? Yes, please. Okay. Yeah. All right. Sorry. I'm representing the people on my street, Brooks Lane in Delray Beach, zip code 33483. Your name, please. Name and zip code, yeah. It's Kim Sweely, and zip code is 33483. And I'm here representing all of the people on my street regarding the flooding. It's gotten very severe. And I'm just going to read a letter that was sent to you. So did you email from you? Was it you today? From today you sent it? It was Karen Peterson, but she couldn't make it to me. Right. Okay. There was one today. So she asked me to read it, and I'll try to be as quick as possible. It says, please see the attached request regarding the ongoing increasingly severe flooding on our street. Many of us have submitted individual complaints over the years, yet the issue not only remains unresolved, it continues to worsen. We also have extensive photo documentation available upon request. As neighbors, we are united and ready to work collaboratively, but we need a clear point of accountability. We respectively ask that a specific city official be designated to advocate for us, communicate directly with residents, and spearhead this effort so the issue is no longer ignored, delayed, or passed from one department to another. Thank you for your prompt attention to this urgent matter, Brooks Lane property owners. And I have the signature of 12 of the property owners on here. Let's just go through the email as quick as possible. The subject is request for immediate action regarding persistent and severe street flooding on Brooks Lane. We, the undersigned residents and property owners of Brooks Lane in Delray Beach, Florida, formally submit this petition to voice our profound frustration and request immediate objective solutions to the recurring flooding that severely impacts our street. We understand that Delray Beach is a coastal city subject to high tides and significant rainfall events. However, the frequency, severity, and resulting damages we experience, even during predictable events such as king tides or full moons, suggest a critical failure in the maintenance of the and operational response of our local infrastructure. This is not a new issue. This situation has been an ongoing problem for years, and it has been brought to the city's attention repeatedly through various complaints and communications. Our concerns have been consistently ignored, and the lack of a sustainable solution demonstrates a continued failure by the city to protect its residents' property and safety. Our concerns include property and vehicle damage. On multiple occasions, water levels have risen to heights that inundate the street, causing substantial damage to vehicles parked legally or driving through on the street. Access and safety issues. During flooding events, the street becomes impassable, creating a safety hazard and preventing residents, emergency services, and essential workers from accessing or leaving their homes. Apparent negligence. We believe the current operational response is inadequate. We suspect a lack of prompt maintenance or negligent operation of existing pumps and drainage systems as the water remains stagnant for extended periods when a functioning system should be able to mitigate the issue. Lack of temporary solutions. The city has failed to implement sufficient temporary solutions. For example, portable pumps or barriers to provide relief during known high-risk periods while permanent infrastructure improvements are planned. The last bit is, the current situation is unacceptable and is directly impacting our quality of life and security. We urgently request the city of Delray Beach to conduct an immediate, transparent investigation into the operational status and maintenance records of the drainage systems affecting Brooks Lane. Deploy temporary pumping solutions during all predictable high-tide full-moon events and heavy rain forecasts until a permanent fixation. We need you to wrap up with that. Okay, this is the last couple sentences. Provide a clear, concrete timeline for the implementation of a permanent infrastructure solution to prevent future flooding of this nature. We seek immediate engagement with city representatives and expert staff to resolve the critical issue before the next flood event. Respectfully submitted, and here are the signatures. Thank you. Do you want to submit that for the record? I'll submit that, yep. Trying to read it as fast as possible. That's fine. Appreciate it. I got your email anyway. Okay. Thank you. Yes, sir. Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. My receipt card is 23444. I live on 1444 South West 10th Avenue. The reason I'm here... He needs to give his name. You give your name, sir. St. Louis, my village. I'm sorry. The reason I'm here, this thing been happened so long over this year. I live on this small unit, me and my wife. As a former President's Neighborhood Association, I know the system. I make sure I don't waste the water. We don't wash our cars at home. We bought plastic plates even to serve in the morning and lunch and dinner. We make sure we don't waste water too much. My bill came when I read the usage. It's $5,000, $6,000. Last September, it was $3,000. I thought this is normal using. But last month, it's $6,000. Double. I called Miss Jackie. They sent someone over there. The man who went to my house, he said it could be misreaded about the water meter. The water meter is new, probably two years. I called Mr. Arson. I told him about the water meter. He said to me, you went to city manager and complained. You went to Madam Commissioner, Mrs. Byrne. He's so upset with me. I asked him something wrong with the water meter because we took shower twice in the morning and the evening, me and my wife. We arrested the sprinkler system as well. We just took shower and my wife do laundry twice a week. Why we use so much water? We want to find out. I emailed Mr. Arson twice, ignoring my email. He never answered me. He's so upset with me because I checked the city manager and also I met with Madam Commissioner, Mrs. Byrne. He's so upset with me. So I want to know why I use so much water because if no leak. I appreciate it. We will have the gentleman standing right back there. Why don't you give him your address? That's what he says. He's thoroughly upset with him. He says to sign us upset with him. Mr. Hajimiri has sign information, so we'll be in touch. Sir? Why don't we let Mr. Moore handle this for you then? Okay. Okay. This is the last year. So you're done. Public comment is over. Before we adjourn, I want to make a quick comment. Just give me a sec. I'll make it quick. Since public comment is new to our workshops, it's a new thing, I think maybe there's an opportunity to refine the way we do it a little bit. We're going to agree. First of all, I think that public comment during workshops should specifically be about the items on the workshop. There's no reason to have general commentary during the workshops. Good point. So I would think there's several residents, perhaps some really important issues, but that should have been during our meeting, during general comment. So I think we should put that in the rules. Also, I think some of the... I was looking for it. I can't find it in the ones that are on here. No, but it's supposed to be limited to the item. Let's make sure then that we're enforcing that or that it's in the rules. Other thing is, I think that there should be an opportunity for the public comment to be before the items discussed. I think several of the folks who spoke today, particularly Mr. Wheeler and Ms. Bruton, made some really cogent points that could have been useful to reflect on during our dialogue about those items instead of hearing them after we've come to a consensus. So I think maybe flipping the order there, more similar to our meeting structure, would be appropriate. We will take that under advice and certain comments. I agree with that. We are adjourned. We are going to be reconvening at 530. Does that work for everybody here?