Good afternoon, everyone. I apologize for being late. Time is 1110, the call this meeting to order. I want to go to our left and do introductions. Joe Carlucci, District 5. Jimmy Paluzzo, District 7. Chris Billings, Municipal Code Compliance. Carly Shelf is of General Counsel. Thank you all for being here. This is meant to be a relatively quick meeting. You know, Council Member Carlucci, you were very kind in co-introducing this bill with me. This is incredibly important to our historic neighborhoods. I believe that you might have had a thought on some kind of change or alteration. I want to make sure that, you know, for the purpose of getting this bill quickly through committees, because we've been working on it for the better part of a year, I want to make sure that maybe we had a friendly amendment added on there and go. Yeah, no, I appreciate the question for that. You're recognized. Oh, man, I appreciate it. So, yeah, I've been working with Ms. Schell on it's a friendly amendment, but what I found as I kind of was diving through the bill was a lot of San Marco isn't historically designated, surprisingly enough, but it's also kind of by design. It's been a whole thing. So, if anything, it was just going to be to add an exhibit with a map that kind of draws in an area of San Marco and St. Nicholas that says it's all of these areas plus what's in Exhibit A, which is Exhibit A would just be a map highlighting the certain areas in my district. That would potentially fall into having these benefits. Understood. I personally would love to see that. I think the question was, does HPC as a body have purview over those areas? Because this is obviously going through HPC, and I just... Yeah. Do we want Ms. Schell to kind of jump in on that to verify, or are you... I mean, my goal was it would fall in... They would have purview as it pertains to this process. They might not have purview in, like, other senses, maybe like they do with certain other approvals that they give for demolition or improvements. But if they're going through this process to acquire a property that the city is foreclosing on, if San Marco Preservation wants to, you know, partake in a revitalization program like that's outlined in the bill, then they would have to go through the same process, which maybe if you can outline the process that HPC... What is it? HPC? Yeah, Historic Preservation Commission. Yeah. Yeah, what is that process that they have for it right now? Well, right now, there's nothing, right? So, there's the Demolition by Neglect Committee Task Force went through, hey, we think that it'd be great to have these kind of opportunities to make sure we can get these properties out of the hands of bad landlords and landowners who have just kind of consistently sat on properties. When it came to even Arlington as well, right, because we talked about Arlington and San Marco a little bit in some of our other notice meetings, I think our conversation was, well, one of the things we can do is if there is a property that might be in danger and there's a lot of code violations or liens, the city might be able to take it and put a, once it's in the city's possession, you can put a historic landmark status on it. And now HPC does have purview over it. That was something else that we kind of discussed. And I, you know, Michelle, I don't want to pretend I'm a lawyer here. I'm going to throw it to you if you want to lawyer it up and tell us how you feel about that. Oh, I agree with that. That's the way it could work, absolutely, is an undesignated structure. If the city came to own it, would easily landmark their own structure, yeah. Would they have to, sorry, through the chair real quick, while we're just having an open discussion, like would they have to landmark it in order to qualify for this program or whatever? So at that point the city would have options, right? If we owned it, we could landmark it and go through kind of the new process that this bill creates for disposing it through the donation first, then the like qualifying the bidders, you know, to get it in the hands of someone who can rehabilitate it. They would have to landmark it to do that. If they didn't want to, they could dispose of it in a different way. It would give the city options. Okay, understood. And we have historic preservation here as well. And I just kind of want to see, do you guys want to, come on up here. Come on up to the table. Just because I do want to get your impression, you know, as we've talked about this process, my biggest concern was always, are we putting too much on HPC's plate? You know, is the planning department comfortable with all this? And I think we've gotten to a pretty good place. I just want to make sure that you, how you guys, what your assessment is of, I don't have cooties. Dr. Sutton. While they sit down, just to be clear, HPC's only real involvement in this is the annual creation of an endangered homes list. Otherwise, there are a lot of other players involved city department-wise. But that's, they're kind of limited to that. I mean, yeah. Is that something, do you believe this is under the mission of HPC, that we should be able to look outside of what the traditional scope of your body is able to do? I don't see why you wouldn't, if these are contributing structures at a historic value. Through. Go ahead. Go ahead. We're just talking here at this point. Okay. So, one thing, if it becomes a landmark, then that actually does put a significant amount of more work on staff, because they're the ones that do those books and the research on making a project, like landmarking. But I have a question, I think this is a Carla, perhaps, on, under the eligibility on the list of 76.103, where we're identifying, is it possible on B, B, for the eligibility to do, like, the residential building must be contributing structure within locally designated historic district or individual landmark or, and, or whatever on this exhibit A list? And, or what? Or, not necessarily, and, or it's on this exhibit A that Councilman Carlucci was referencing. Could that be revised? So, yes. In my conversations with Council Member, Council Vice President Carlucci, we would add it throughout. So, it would be added here to this section. Also, and I would say the structures that are 50 years old and older within those districts, because we are trying to, that's what it would need to qualify for a landmark or a contributing structure in a district. So, on the maps, you know, and are we just limiting it to San Marco? St. Nicholas. And St. Nicholas, that's, so it would fit in that section B. If, if I may, I mean, I like the idea of doing St. Marco and St. Nicholas. This, probably would even suggest doing Durkeeville as well. I know they express interest in getting a part of this bill, but I don't know how that might be it. I, personally, I'm very, I'm very okay with that. I think that's a great idea. Especially if there are a lot of properties. I mean, let's also be, I think, I think you and I probably get this. I don't think in the first couple years of this program that we're going to be taking 185 properties. I think it's going to be like seven, you know, within three years or eight within three years. So, it's really going to be, I think, right? I mean, because you've got to go through the legal process. We've got to make sure that we have first position. For all we know, maybe that, maybe that owner recognizes like, oh, wow, something's happening. Let me, let me start taking care of it, right? All sorts of stuff can happen and really kind of change how this really gets enacted. But I'm probably fine with adding both of those locations. Who's going to draw up that map and who's going to draw it up by Monday? I noticed you were looking this direction. Yeah. What? We have people. I think planning can do it. I don't think you need it by Monday for committee. I think articulating San Marco. Is there a map in the code for the overlay? There's got it. Yes. We can just, during committee, reference that and say, say, Nicholas. Or, if there's a specific area of San Marco that you are particularly interested in, honestly, if you just took any map and just take a pen and outline what you're looking for, we can do a map based on that, as long as the streets are clear. I'll draw the map. Insurance and topography. Honestly, even if the map was wider than it needed to be, I think those houses wouldn't even qualify for all the rest of the safeguards in the bill. I'm comfortable eyeballing the San Marco and St. Nicholas one. We'll probably use the overlay for San Marco. St. Nicholas is a small enough area that it's easy to kind of circle on a map. Listen, I'm very comfortable with that, and I'm excited. I'm excited that you are more excited about this bill, right? I mean, like, this is meant to be, it's meant to, there's a lot of folks in the historic preservation space, I think you know this, who care just so much. And I feel like they constantly come to City Hall and are like, how come you guys aren't doing these things? And I think we're really kind of rewarding people who have put a lot of time and energy into this work. Well, I think, too, just to piggyback on that, like, yeah, it's a good bill for the historic preservationists out there. But it's also a good bill for, like, just normal neighbors and community members that are tired of looking at blight in their neighborhoods. So, yeah. I'm going to guess, I think I know who gave me this. Otherwise, though, I also, while I have you, I do want to make sure that we're both, and I think the other cointroducers are comfortable with, the process that exists right now, right? So, hey, the city takes over the property, waives everything, and then offers it up to one of the historic preservation nonprofits that have these different criteria. If they don't have the means to take it, it goes out to the private sector in a bid process, with the minimum bid being $10,000. That way, it's not going to. Yeah. I think that's, I'm comfortable with that. The one thing I wanted to, the step before that, though, who identifies the properties? Can they be, are they only identified by HPC, or can, like, San Marco Preservation, or myself, or whoever, like a random neighbor say, hey, I know about this bill. This house next to me has been dilapidated for, you know, 100 years. Can you guys look at this? Can it kind of be a proactive? For the purpose of, I think, when we look at this logically, there's probably going to be a person or two on HPC that's a member of the, you know, what's it called? San Marco Preservation. Right. I mean, there's going to be a Lindsay Ott type, or one of those. I know that there's going to be, I got Bill Hoff. But can they initiate the. . . I don't see why they, as a body, couldn't say, hey, I know these four properties. Let me talk to Code Compliance and see if there's a ton of liens on there. Okay. Oh, wait, they're all. You know what I mean? Like, that body is pretty strong. Like, they're going to, those members. . . HPC? Yeah. Okay. Like, it's strong. I mean, they did this task force. They did all this work. It's Shannon Blankenship with Rapp. You know, it was Michael Haskins. It was obviously our own staff and then just a bunch of do-gooders. So, but what's the process to get them to review it, is what I'm asking, like. . . Code Compliance is going to put up a list. Of all the houses in these areas that have liens. Okay, cool. And that's it. Perfect. And then, yeah, if they don't have one, they don't have one. Got it. Okay. Perfect. That's what I was looking for. And then it will be, you know, everyone will kind of discuss it. And they'll say, which of these do we actually have first position on? Got it. It might only be 10. So, to be clear, HPC will not be doing any kind of review on whether or not it's legally or, you know, a sound decision to move forward with enforcement on any of those. They are just going to kind of create this batch of this list of homes they want people to focus on. Like, we think these are, not we, but they would say, we think these are really important in danger of being lost. Here, administration, take a look at these, see if there's anything you can do to enforce current liens. Are there any financial resources we can focus towards these houses? And those are programs that might be created in the future. There may be current programs. But it's just to highlight, you know, the most important structures in the city. But then it's in the purview of the administration, really, to get the ball going and to, you know, make the ask of OGC to do an analysis on whether and what enforcement remedies are available, whether that's a good policy decision or not. So could HPC say, like, you know, here's 25 properties, but it's these seven that we're pretty sure are really ripe for the picking here, administration. Please go, you know what I mean? Yeah, we left it kind of open. I didn't put a number on it. I know we had kind of talked, like, oh, should they do five? Should they do ten? And we kind of left it as, well, let's let them do that in communication with the administration. If the administration is like, hey, last year we really didn't have any we could do anything with, can you give us a bigger list this year or whatever. And we also did say that it's, I think, a minimum of once a year, but it could be two or three different times that they look at it, if HPC and staff had that kind of thing with. At least once each calendar year so they could be in communication with the administration and they ask of, hey, could you guys do another list? We couldn't really do much with the list. But the intent of that was if we, again, probably not year one, but as the years go on, are they going to say, let's do a second assessment in the same calendar year? Sure. They should be able to do that, I think. Any other thoughts? Yeah, just so I have the flow chart right. So code compliance will identify, this is just random made-up numbers, a hundred properties with liens, right? Y'all's job is to come up with all the houses that have liens in the area. We have a list of, or we have the ability to pull every property in Jacksonville. Right. Identify them as historic or landmark, and then it also shows the associated fines, total, accumulative, and on the liens as well. So then you can categorize those in your top 100. Cool. So you'll have like a list of all of the properties, and then that list will get filtered out by HPC of like, okay, these are realistic ones that we want to pursue. That will be less than probably your list of 100. And then HPC will have a list, and then it will kind of go to the mayor's office, and they might whittle it down even further. So I just want to make sure when the list first comes out from code compliance, there's not like a sticker shock and everyone's like, oh, my gosh, there's going to be 150 of these. Like, no, no, no, that's going to get filtered down tremendously by HPC, and then it could get filtered down even more by the mayor's office. The administration at any given time would say, we're not doing any of this. No, thanks. Yeah, yeah. Just wanted to make sure it's all there. And part of it, part of the quote-unquote sticker shock might be that people say, maybe they're in Miami Beach, and they're like, oh, I do own that property. What the hell? I didn't know I had that many fines. Let me get rid of this. Like, some of those folks may actively now sell their property, which might also be good because now it finally gets in the hands of hopefully someone that can go on it. So, I mean, like, now they still have the liens and fines on there, but they may sell it to, I don't know, maybe someone else in the neighborhood community or developer that actually can do it. So there's a part of me that thinks that might happen for a few of them. Yeah, I agree. And so, basically, there's going to be a new exhibit. It's going to be attached to it. It's going to add Durkeeville, and it's going to add – St. Marko and St. Nicholas. Yeah, yeah. They can – yeah, let's add just one exhibit for the whole thing. That way it'll – we don't have to say it twice or whatever. Is it Durkeeville or Durkee Gardens? Durkee Gardens is a federal historic district, right, if I'm not mistaken. Yeah, national. We may need to talk about if there's some – A map. Just why I'm clear in, like, committees and what area we're talking about. Yeah, because we have a – we do have an overlay for that one. Okay. For Durkee's. So we had talked about including that throughout. So not only in the – they could – homes over 50 years in those areas could be on the endangered historic homes list created by HBC, but also then would also be subject to the disposition of properties in 122, all those sections. Is there – sorry, as we talked about an overlay. Is there not one for Eastside as well? Is there an overlay for Eastside at the moment? They are on the National Register District, so – How big does that district look? Let me see. I need to make sure the community's okay with that. I think that they would be. I just want to verify. Okay. The map may expand. Yep. To also change some of the headings in the code because it refers to nationally and locally designated historic property. So there will have to be some changes to that, too. That'll be – Well, if that already – you're right. We did put that in there, didn't we? So that would include Eastside and Durkee Gardens already. For the most part. In that one section, yeah. Okay. 122, 461. Okay. I'm seeing head and odds. But it will – it'll expand the definition of a preservation priority property. Okay. That's like our base definition of if the city owns these types of historic homes, how do we dispose of them? And that current definition is just – has to be a contributing structure or a local landmark. Okay. So it'll expand that to include also structures 50 years old and older in these geographic map areas, San Marcos, San Nicholas, Durkee, Garden, maybe Eastside, maybe – Also Normandy Boulevard in the area. Arlington. So just to be clear, so then it would be that it's within – I lost my little page here – that it's within the contributing structure or landmark or within this – 50 years and older within this area identified on the map. Is that about correct? Yeah. Second question. Yeah. Don't – I would imagine this can be fixed with just putting in some language. So in – for landmarks and the locally designated historic districts, there is a regulatory device, the COAs, which ensure that those properties are rehabbed according to preservation standards. However, in San Marco, et cetera, there is not that same – unless it's a landmark. Well, I think that's the point, is I think if the city does take them, they would landmark them. I mean, I don't know that – if they're going to get demolished, why would they – No, no, we're not demolishing. Yeah. Ah, yeah, no. We're preventing them. Yeah, yeah. No, sorry, right, right. Sorry, I wasn't paying attention. It doesn't matter. I don't care. But if it landmark, are people going to see that as a deterrent to taking the property? It's no more deterrent than in the areas where there's a current overlay. But let me tell you, the San Marco market, people will be able to – whether or not they have to go through the COA process, they will see the value of those homes. I think San Marco, Riverside, Avondale, and Springfield, it'll be a very robust market for developers, especially in San Marco. Prices are – We'll see, right? I mean, look, if it becomes a problem, then we'll deal with it. But I think when most people are buying a house in San Marco, they kind of already think it's historically landmark. So I don't think there's going to be, like, a major, major deterrent there. And again, we're talking about, like, maybe one home a year or something. Yeah, I mean, the expectation is it would get landmarked once the city takes it over and go through that process, which, yes, I guess that would mean you guys – however, do you ever work with someone like San Marco Preservation to go through that process? And I think, you know, let's just run through the mental exercise of what if the city doesn't landmark the San Marco property, right? And we're talking about structures that are neglected, right? Not to the point of, like, demolition is imminent because, you know, beyond saving, but can still be saved. And we get it to someone, okay, they don't have to get a COA. They can rip out all the windows and put new windows in. But also they could do that anywhere in San Marco. So I think the purpose of preserving, you know, some of the historic structure is still there, right? Even if you don't have to follow Department of Interior standards and file a – you know, get a COA approval for everything exterior. I think the purpose is still fulfilled. Also, let's be clear, the city could do that right now. If there was a property in San Marco at this very moment that had a ton of liens and fines, the city has the power at this very moment to foreclose on that property if they're in first position. Like, that does exist. This was all meant to create a very transparent process that for the purpose of helping out historically – historic properties. So, like, if they get – if the city takes that property and it's not a historic – doesn't have a historic designation, the – it would go back out – it would go out to bid under the other bid program. Yeah, competitive bidding, the adjacent landowner, what is that? Yep, all that stuff. All that. So it would be different. So it's in the best interest of this bill and of preservation that we take the property. I say we take – we go through the process of foreclosing on the property. Property is foreclosed upon. The city adds a historic market. That way it can now go through the process where it can go out to a bidding system where it's not that expensive to bid on. And sorry, we're just going through the middle. No, no, no, no. That makes sense, right? I mean, there's got to be – there's got to be a give and a take, so to speak, of, like, hey, if you're going to go through this new outline process, then it – then we want it to be a historic designated structure. And that is the intent of this legislation. Yeah. Otherwise, to your point, why would we even do this? The city could just do this automatically. Okay. All right. Feel comfortable? Yeah. Do you guys feel pretty comfortable? Do you have more questions about this? Yeah? You think? All right. Sorry. With certainty. We're good. We were just – in terms of – I promise we're good. They love this bill. We love the intention of it for sure. I think it's great. The intention of it. I love – the intention's nice. Can't wait for Palooza to be gone. No. And I really do hope you mean that. Like, I think we all really – you go to other cities. You see what they do when it comes to preservation. Carla, to her credit, has done an incredible amount of work on this. This poor woman has had to deal with me for a year. This is my baby. I love this. I – I mean, I feel like it kind of is at this point. So, for everyone to know, I messed with Carla one day. I just called her and I go, all right, we're tossing that bill to the side. Just throw it in the trash. We don't need to deal with it anymore. And there was just silence on the phone. You should have heard the silence when I called her and said, I have a large amendment that I would like to. She's like, ah. Yes. Okay, I do have a question because what you all were just talking about was then landmarking it before sending it through a donation. That would mean not changing the definition of preservation priority property, requiring it to be a landmark before it can go through the donation channel or the, like, bid qualification, getting it to someone who qualifies channel for disposition. Are we good with that? That means then it all – let me just repeat that. Yeah, yeah, yeah. So – We're really smart. So, you know, Council Member Carlucci, you had said throughout, adding San Marcos, St. Nicholas, and several other places now throughout. But you were just saying now you want it to be landmarked before it can be disposed of, before it can be sold or donated. I thought that's what was already outlined. If that's the case, we don't want to change it throughout. We don't – then we wouldn't change preservation priority property because that definition is has a residential structure, is a contributing structure, or a local landmark. So, I'll just interject right there. I don't want it to be, but I thought we were saying it had to be kind of uniform in the rest of this bill. I mean, I heard them say, like, look, it's just more work for them to do that. And – but if that's the process that all the other properties are going through, then I think you've got to keep it consistent. Okay. You know what I mean? Yeah. Okay. I don't – I don't want San Marcos, St. Nicholas to get all freaked out over it or whatever, but if that's the process in order to, you know, go through the preservation kind of angle of the foreclosure process, then so be it. Okay. All right. Then we'll just add it to Chapter 76 where the Historic Preservation Commission can add those types of homes in San Marcos, St. Nicholas, Durkeeville to the Endangered Historic Homes List. And then should the administration act on one of those and eventually come to own it, the city come to own it, they would landmark it before being – using the channels of donation to San Marcos Preservation or the bid qualification. Does that sound good? Sounds comfortable to me. I think that's okay. I mean, because we're, you know, having side conversations, but I think that that's okay because I think that there's not going to be that many of these. And if for some reason that becomes an issue or something funky down the road, I guess, you know, we could amend the legislation at that time. Yeah, I think they could still donate it under Florida law. I don't know that we could – but, yeah, we can cross that bridge if that ever becomes a thing and we need to do a little code amendment. We could do that. Yeah. Okay. I mean, if the city owns it too, like, they can obviously just remove the designation, right? We have to go back through the – Go through the same channel. Well, that's what I'm saying, though. Like, we wouldn't have to amend the bill, like, if that became, like, the main snag for whatever reason. Like, but the city owns it at that point. Yeah, I know you hate that, but – We've probably done it twice. Not doing that either. She's like, we would rather amend it. We don't like the assembly and run. Well, I'll be here, so I guess I'll be the one. Listen, man, if Amendment 3 passes, we're not going to have any of these departments anyway. Planning's just going to be done. Planning's just going to be done by random citizens at that point. All right. Chris, you've been pretty silent. You want to jump in? Tell us anything? What's going on in life? No, I really don't have much to add. Like I said, you know, we're just going to put the data together for you guys to help identify these properties, and we'll put it up to review. All right. Excellent. We do have one public comment. We will dive right in. Mr. Nooney, come on up. You have two minutes. Do you want the whole half hour? That is two minutes, sir. We appreciate it. Looking forward to seeing you tonight. Go ahead, Mr. Carlucci. Let's make it 70 years. Thanks. 70 years? That honestly does... Yeah, 50 years is... I did kind of think, I'm like, that really is probably a wide swat. That's probably when most of the homes were... Is that what... Yeah. I mean, I could probably make an argument for 80, but let's just do 70. I really would be fine with 82, but I think that makes more sense and doesn't... I just don't want to overburden them, right? I mean, that's... We're going to get this argument throughout the city. It's like, no, this is for historic, and if it's a historic area, it'd be easily... Yes, yes. I also think that it... If you're going to put a number in there. Yeah, and it could spook normal property owners who just own a home that was built in the 80s, you know, or 70s. Yeah. Okay. All right. I'm okay with 80. You want to do 80? Let's just start at 70. 70 it is. Is that okay with you, Carla? All right. He's at five. At least in... Anything for you. At least within two weeks. Yeah, probably next week. So we'll... It goes to a committee on Monday morning, but I would leave that up to you. You know, in committee, we don't need to... To offer an amendment, it doesn't need to be in writing, but if you think a map would be helpful, it's up to you. But next week, what would it be done? It needs to be done for the enrolled bill when it's... What committees does this go to? Ooh, I think three of the four rules. Neighborhoods. Neighborhoods and finance. It goes to TEU? Does it go to finance? It's the only one it didn't go to. I'm sorry. Go ahead. Rules, neighborhoods, finance. Can you come to the podium, please? Maybe not just for the record. No, I'm kidding, Heather. We're kidding. We're kidding. First timer. Neighborhoods. I'm a little surprised it's actually not in TEU. But, I mean, I'm a little bummed it goes to finance, but we'll see how that goes. I think it should still be. This is not a controversial bill, and I feel like we've done such good work with it. Anything else? Nope. Nope. That's it. Anything else from anyone else? Meeting's adjourned. You