City Council - Feb 05, 2026

Welcome to the City of St. Petersburg City Council Meeting. Your elected officials are Mayor Ken Welch, District 1, Hopely Gerdes, District 2, Brandy Gabbard, District 3, Mike Harding, District 4 and Council Chair, Lissette Hanowitz, District 5, Deborah Fig Sanders, District 6, Gina Driscoll, District 7, Corey Givens Jr., and District 8 and Council Vice Chair, Ritchie Floyd. Good evening, everyone. Welcome to the February 5th, 2026 St. Petersburg City Council Meeting. Clerk, you please have a roll call. Gabbard, Harding, Eric Hanowitz, here, Nick Sanders, here, Griscoll, here, Givens, here, Floyd, here, Gerdes, here. Please stand today for invocation, which is going to be given by the Reverend Tracy Ashley of the Clearview United Methodist Church, followed by a moment of silence, and then please remain standing for the Pledge of Allegiance. Good morning. Good morning. Let's pray together. Holy and living God, source of justice, mercy, and hope, we pause in this chamber of public trust, remembering that leadership is a sacred calling, a calling that mirrors your command to love our neighbors. This morning, I give you thanks for the gift of neighbors, not neighbors who look like us or vote like us, believe like us, but all neighbors. Teach us again what it means to be good neighbors, to not only care for our own backyards, but for the whole shared yard of this beautiful community, where flourishing of one is bound to the flourishing of all. Lord, we give thanks for wise and practical ways of living into this calling, including the yes in God's backyard law, a reminder that faith is not only something we profess, but something we practice by making room. Room for shelter, compassion. Room for solutions rooted in love of neighbor, so that dignity has an address and hope has a front door. God bless the faith leaders who step forward into this service of common good. God bless the neighbors they serve. God bless the council members who choose to lean into these laws for the good of neighbors and neighborhood alike. God bless those willing to lead with courage, compassion, and foresight, who see not just policies on paper, but people in real places with real needs. Grant them the resolve to lead the way, not only for this city, but as an example for communities all across Florida, showing what is possible when leadership is guided by the common good and love of neighbor, which remains at the center of every decision. May our decisions reflect not what is convenient, but what is compassionate. Not what protects privilege, but what protects people. Let this city be known as a place where neighbors do not turn away from one another, but where goodness is measured by how the most vulnerable are treated, and where love takes shape in policies, partnerships, and daily acts of care. Remind us that policy can be pastoral, and that budgets reveal our deepest values. Guide us, ground us, move us, strengthen us, soften us, and unite us, so that together we live into a vision of community, rooted in dignity, belonging, and the common good for all. Amen. Now a moment of silence for Officer David S. Crawford. February 21st, 2011. End of watch. Thank you. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, be in justice. Thank you, Reverend, for that beautiful invocation. Clerk, we have, I mean, Council Members, we have an agenda before us. I'll entertain the motion for approval. Second. We have a motion and a second. Clerk, you please open the motion for voting. Council Members, please enter your votes. Seeing that all present Council Members have voted, Clerk, please tally and announce the vote. Madam Chair, the motion to approve the agenda passes unanimously. Thank you. We have a consent agenda before us. I'll entertain the motion for approval. Move approval. Second. We have a motion and a second. Clerk, you'll please open the machine for voting. The car is on the consent agenda. Thank you. Council Members, please enter your votes. Seeing that all present Council Members have voted, Clerk, please tally and announce the vote. Madam Chair, the motion to approve the consent agenda passes unanimously. Thank you. Clerk, are there any speakers for open forum? If so, can you please read the rules? If you wish to address City Council on subjects other than public hearing or quasi-judicial items listed on the agenda, excuse me, please sign up with the Clerk. Only the individual wishing to speak may sign the open forum sheet. Only city residents, owners of property, business owners in the city, or their employees may speak. All issues discussed under open forum must be limited to issues related to the City of St. Petersburg government. If you are speaking to an item on the agenda, you may only speak once during the open forum or when the item comes up on the agenda. In order to provide an opportunity for all citizens to address Council, each individual will be given three minutes to speak and after which the microphone will be muted. If you wish to address City Council through the Zoom meeting, you must use the Raise Hand Feature button in the Zoom app or enter star 9 on your phone at the time the agenda item is addressed. When it is your turn to speak, you will be unmuted and access to state your name and address. At the conclusion of your comments, or when you reach the three-minute time limit, you will be muted. All raised hands will be lowered after each agenda item. Regardless of the method of participation used, normal rules apply, including the three-minute time limit on comments, the requirement that any presentation materials must be submitted in advance of the meeting and the rules of the quorum. If live public comment is to disrupt the violations of the rules of the quorum, the chair is authorized to accept public comment by alternate means, including by email only, and I will call them two at a time. Thank you. First two speakers, when you're called up to the podium, please state your name, address, or cross street for the record. First two speakers, Mark Ferguson and Robin Davidoff. Please go to either podium. Hello, Mark Ferguson, 7937 9th Avenue South, St. Pete, Florida. Thank you for letting me speak here, City Council. I'm here to talk about the gas plant proposals that are on the board, the nine proposals that came in. I've looked over all their proposals, and I think this needs to move forward rather than wait. This place has been a parking lot for too long. We have to get construction going to move everything forward. ARC Investments, to me, checks all the boxes. This development would refine St. Pete. The property, like I said, has been a parking lot for too long. It's time to move St. Pete into a better place to live, work, and visit. Besides creating plenty of jobs, entertainment, and everything else, she's planning to do different things, maybe in college, medical. I mean, the whole thing is really a huge undertaking, and I believe they have the best company to work with. The Ellison Group I've been working with for about three years now, and they've been real good to work with. I know they work well with the city, and I know they're really involved with this proposal. Also, if the Rays can, we all know the Rays are looking in Tampa. That's where they want to be first, and I'm totally 100% believe they're going to stub their toe, and we have to be ready for them when they come back to us and listen to them. But in her proposal, she's keeping the first phase open for about three years to see if the Rays are going to be there or not. With that being said, with all the money that it's going to cost to build a new stadium, in my opinion, and this is only my opinion, me and my family went to Toronto last year and saw a Rays game. The Toronto Blue Jays redid their stadium the last three years. It was built in 1989. It opened one year before the Tropicana Field opened as a Suncoast Dome. It looked brand new. It looked unbelievable. It was spacious. They changed some things inside, but putting $300 million or $400 million into a facility that we're already putting $100 million into makes a lot of sense to me instead of building a new ballpark and then building around it. This way you can start building right away and get things moving because all those residents that are going to live on that gas plant are going to be involved with baseball. And that's going to be a home run for us in the county and the state. Thank you very much. Good morning. Good morning, President Hanowitz and members of the council. My name is Robin Davidov, and I reside at 4830 Osprey Drive South. I'm speaking today both as a concerned resident and on behalf of the 430 members of the League of Women Voters of the St. Petersburg area. We are here today to urge you to vote yes on the resolution item H2. The administration has repeatedly stated that because there have been years of planning regarding the 82-acre gas plant property, it is now time to hand the reins over to a private developer. However, our members are deeply concerned by a fundamental gap in this logic. In the world of urban development, the natural outcome of years of planning is a plan. We ask ourselves, where is the city council approved master plan for the gas plant district? The city knows how to plan. We have comprehensive approved plans for this Grand Central District, our waterfront, the innovation district, even for bear reports. I'm not even sure what those are. Why is it that we have formal roadmaps for every major development effort in this city except for the single largest taxpayer asset in our community? Finally, we must address the issue of oversight. We cannot, in good faith, ask a developer to write the master plan for a project they intend to profit from. While developers bring valuable expertise and market knowledge, which should enhance the effort, allowing them to lead the planning process creates an inherent conflict of interest. The city must lead. The city must own the vision. Developers should be the ones who help us execute a plan that the citizens in this council have already vetted and approved, not the other way around. Our taxpayer-funded gas plant redevelopment must be transformational, not transactional. Thank you. Thank you. Next two speakers. Reverend Ben Atherton-Zeman and Maria L. Stroess, please go to either podium, state your name, address for Cross Street, for the record. Good morning. I'm Reverend Ben Atherton-Zeman. My pronouns are he and they, and I'm the minister at the Unitarian Universalist Church of St. Petersburg, 100 Mary Lake Drive. I'm here to speak about the city's relationship with DHS in particular and ICE in particular, but I do want to add my words of support to my colleague from the League of Women Voters. Any plans for the gas plant development should include our city's most vulnerable people at the center of those plans. A few weeks ago, leaders in Minneapolis put out a call nationally for clergy to come there and witness and support, and I felt a stirring deep in my heart that I needed to be there, but I was not sure I was ready. I didn't have the right clothing. I don't even own a pair of wool socks. But in the Hebrew Bible, the prophet Isaiah says, I will lead by ways they have not known along unfamiliar paths. I will guide them. Now, this year, ICE has killed Keith Porter, Herbert Sanchez Dominguez, Victor Manuel Diaz, Parady La, Luis Beltran Yanez Cruz, Luis Gustavo Nunez Cacheras, and Geraldo Lunas Campos, and yet many of us remained silent. Then they killed Renee Good, and hundreds of clergy came to Minneapolis. I was one of 1,200 clergy. Then they killed Alex Preddy, and now millions of us are in the streets. We should have been there all along, but we're here now. So, members of city council, like me, you may be unsure of the right thing to do, but I was led along unfamiliar paths, and I found the Minneapolis churches to be filled with mountains of donated coats, piles of boots, and a small hill of wool socks. The prophet Isaiah speaks with the voice of his God when he says, I will lead by ways they have not known. And many of us have different beliefs than Isaiah, but still we are guided along unfamiliar paths. Our morality guides us. Our conscience guides us. Your constituents guide you. Any way we're connected to ICE as a city puts blood on our hands. Members of the city council, you know this. You are not our enemy. Let's join together to protect our citizens, defund ICE, and keep our community safe. Thank you. Thank you. Excuse me. So, there is no clapping in open forum. This is an opportunity for people to speak to city council. We have 30 minutes. I want everyone that wants to speak before city council to have that opportunity. If you spend time doing other things, people don't have the time to speak, and we want to hear them, as many people as possible. Thank you. Good morning. My name is Maria L. Scruggs. I'm a resident at 980 Melrose Avenue South, and I am here to speak in support of your agenda item H-2. And the one thing that I'd like to do since the sister from the League of Women Voters has adequately issued a very distinct and appropriate message to this council, I also want to piggyback off Pastor Ashley's comments in her prayer. And my hopes are that all of you all not only listen to that prayer, but that you embrace the prayer. And the words in it, and when she talked about leadership being a sacred calling, and that people being the center of every decision that you make, there leaves only one decision for you guys to vote, one decision that is appropriate and speaks to the needs of the people of the city of St. Petersburg. And that is to support a planning process. As the sister said from the League of Women Voters, every major project that has occurred in St. Petersburg has been led by a master plan. I have been back in St. Petersburg since 1987. And what I can tell you is that this city has been intentional and purposeful on leaving the people that have been the descendants of the gas plant out of the process. And that has occurred because there has not been a strategic planning process that I have been advocating for since the development of the South St. Petersburg CRA. I urge you, council members, to not fall in that trap again and not allow us to go to another 30 years where we'll be sitting down in front of an update on the gas plant, and we won't be able to identify one substantive thing that the descendants of the gas plant or the citizens in whole of St. Petersburg have been able to benefit from. Thank you. Thank you. Next two speakers. Next two speakers, Madam Chair. Andreas Calaverci and Jane Payne. Please go to either podium. State your name, address, or across street for the record. Good morning. Good morning, council. My name is Andreas Calaverci. I live at 1701 Central Avenue. I'm the co-founder and general partner of Tampa Bay Ventures, a Central Lab resident and someone who works from Spark Labs in South St. Pete. We are a venture capital firm dedicated exclusively to investing in early-stage companies right here in the Tampa Bay region, helping create the industries of tomorrow in our backyard. In 2024, we made the deliberate decision to bet on this city's future by relocating our firm to the innovation district of South St. Pete from Tampa. We did this because we see this city's transformative ethos and immense potential to become a hub for industries of the future, such as tech, healthcare, autonomous systems, and even space. And many of those companies are being built in this city today. Today, I'm here to oppose the resolution that would once again lead to inaction on the redevelopment of the gas plant district in favor for yet another independent study by parties with no deep constituency or ties to this region. The city has studied the site. Independent analysts have studied the site. And we have planned, engaged the community, and established clear guiding principles for what the constituency that you all represent want from this. The groundwork is laid. Now is the moment for decisive action, not deference to additional layers of external analysis that lack aligned incentives with us, the residents. I, for example, live 650 feet away from the site. So I have a deep vested interest in the future of the site, as well as the future of this city, including given that we bet the entire future of our business and our industry that's emergent here in Florida on this city. By rejecting this pause and moving forward with a comprehensive master plan redevelopment, you can deliver the transformative infrastructure that you were all elected to deliver for this city. This isn't just about land or buildings. It's about creating the environment where industries of the future choose to take root here, drawing capital, honoring the site's history, and building a stronger, more dynamic St. Pete. Council, I would ask that you do not force younger residents and ambitious residents like myself to make an opportunity cost trade, to ask, is the city of St. Petersburg aligned with creating the type of future that we all would like to move here or grow up here to create? I urge you to act now for your constituents, of which I am one, for the talent we need to attract and retain, and for the bold future that the city actually deserves. Thank you. Thank you. Go ahead. I'm Jane Payne. I live at 125 22nd Avenue Northeast. Thank you for this opportunity. I'm here to talk about St. Pete's relationship with ICE. The Trump administration has pushed ICE to significantly increase arrests per day as part of its mass deportation campaign. ICE director Todd Lyons empowered federal ICE agents to make warrantless arrests of people they think are undocumented immigrants if they're likely to escape the scene before an arrest warrant can be obtained. Mr. Lyons memo noted, this on-the-spot determination as to the likelihood of escape is often made with limited information about the subject's identity, background, or place of residence, and no corroboration of any self-serving statements made by the subjects. The memo tells agents who make warrantless arrests to fill out a form afterward that documents the factors they considered in determining that someone was likely to escape. When agents set out to arrest a particular person, others in the vicinity who also get arrested are called collateral aliens. I didn't think things were going so well before ICE loosened its rules for agents. Now ICE agents have the most intoxicating power of all, lack of accountability. Immigration officers are supposed to identify themselves as ICE officers authorized to make an arrest as soon as it is practical and safe to do so, which could mean whenever. Meanwhile, panic and danger can ensue for those being pursued. If some armored, armed, and masked man came after me, I think my instinct would be to run or hide, which would make me one of those people likely to leave the scene and therefore arrestable without a warrant. Or, if I was standing with a group of migrants at the Home Depot parking lot, I might be rounded up as one of the collateral aliens. But all of that is no matter for the ICE agents. They can fill out a form afterwards that documents all these factors. Anyone who's ever given a witness statement after a car wreck knows how inaccurate that can be after a dangerous incident with heightened feelings. Even though ICE officers are supposed to have de-escalation training, we haven't seen much evidence of that put into practice. We have seen innocent people hurt, arrested, and killed. ICE needs to reevaluate its mission and its tactics, not be given more of a free hand to commit crimes against people who didn't commit crimes. Please end your agreement and relationship with ICE and St. Pete. Thank you. Thank you. Next two. No. Okay, this is what's happening. You're taking away time from people. It's 30 minutes. Every time that happens and I speak, that's part of the 30 minutes. We have to maintain decorum. Everyone who speaks is valuable, whether they're talking about one subject or the other, and we treat them the same. So please, respect the decorum in City Hall. Next two speakers. Peter Belmont and Jeff Evans. Please state your name, address, or across the street, and you can go to either podium. I'm Peter Belmont, 103 Wadwood Lane, Southeast. It's always nice to see you. I want to talk about some legislation. We know it's a legislative session, so Tallahassee does some funny things. They have an act that's proposed. It's Senate Bill 1342, Hounsville 1138, and it's by our local representatives, Lindsey Cross and Daryl Roussan, and it's about transit-oriented development. So it's a good thing in one sense, but we know Tallahassee does things in weird ways, and so it will mandate you do certain things and preempt you from doing other things. It will mandate that you allow within up to a half a mile intense development. Within a quarter mile, it mandates you have development up to 12 FAR. To give you some context, the residences at 400 are 8 FAR. The new arthouse at Central is 7.5 FAR. So crazy FARs within neighborhoods like historic Kenwood. And it also then says you cannot require parking, you cannot require setbacks, and it makes a very limited exemption for National Register historic districts, but they have to be created before 2000. That is not Kenwood. And so I hope you will help myself. I hope you will help preserve the burg to make this bill something that is workable and to stop the crazy preemption in all the work that we have done over the many years in making Kenwood one of the most desirable neighborhoods in the city, and making Central Avenue with its mix of smaller and historic buildings that hounds local businesses, the street that keeps St. Pete Clearwater, it says, is the coolest street in the city. Thank you. Thank you. Right, sir. Jeff Evans, 334 2nd Avenue South. I'm the founder of a technology company, and I'm here to vigorously oppose the resolution to delay development of the gas plant. I appear before you as an employer. I moved here from Silicon Valley, California, for one primary reason, and that is quality of life. There's a secret that is getting out, and I hope that you intend to let that secret spread. That is that quality of life here is fantastic. This is a fantastic place to live, to thrive, and indeed to build a business. My business is an employer, and we are looking to hire high-tech workers, primarily from your universities. One of the great advantages you have here in St. Petersburg is a thriving system of university higher education where you are producing top-notch talent that is on par with that produced in California, and those graduates have excellent futures as recipients of high-paying jobs that I intend to be a vigorous creator of those jobs. And the attraction of high-quality talent is essential, and along with that, the gas plant envisions an ecosystem of work and life balance that is unparalleled and better than California. So I move. Please do not delay resolution of the gas plant development. Thank you. Thank you. Next two speakers. Next two speakers, Madam Chair, John Stewart and Karen Berman. Please go to either podium. State your name, address, or cross street for the record. Good morning. My name is John Stewart, and I live at 2130 Burlington Avenue North. For 37 years, I was a public high school teacher in Pinellas County. The ideal for a teacher in the classroom is to have authority. Authority happens when students know their teacher respects them and the subject and has their best interests interests at heart. Instead of focusing on rules, authority lets the teacher and students focus on the magic of learning. If there isn't authority, the fallback option is control. The teacher keeps control by rules, by punishments, by rewards. Authority in the classroom is a grace, emphasizing human interaction and trust. Control in the classroom is the law, emphasizing the structure and depending on rules to keep order. My wife and I live in the aforementioned Kenwood, an affluent neighborhood filled with marvelous historic architecture. One night several months ago, we awoke to emergency lights flashing through our blinds and onto our bedroom ceiling. I went outside to find police vehicles with flashing lights stretching for several blocks. I immediately thought, is this ICE? But dismissed the idea, even though a neighbor told us the same thing had happened a few nights before. This is a blue city with a black Democratic mayor in a neighborhood full of houses with rainbow flags and banners, including ours. They wouldn't cooperate with ICE and DHS. It can't happen here, can it? My wife is also a retired public school teacher. We have a natural affinity for all public servants, teachers, social workers, firefighters, police. They don't choose these professions for the glamour and the big bucks. But for us, the authority of the St. Pete Police Department has been shaken. The Republican billionaire's private, publicly funded militia is attempting to control Minneapolis with cruel criminal chaos. But even if the GOP never sends their armed domestic terrorists to St. Petersburg, damage has been done. When we residents of St. Pete see police cars, we will be suspicious of their authority and worry that Republican billionaires have sent their masked militia to try to control us. Please renounce and abolish the agreement 28-287-G so that the police department can restore their authority and our respect. Thank you. Okay, I've said it many times already. We're getting to the end and I don't want to go into recess. Please, it's disrespectful for everyone, including others that are speaking on a different subject. Every comment here is important to us. I understand some of you feel strongly about a one subject, but as you see, we have a community that wants to speak about many subjects, including things that you may not care about. And I want to hear all of them when we can within the time frame. So please, Ms. Berman. Good morning. I did not come here to speak about the gas plant, but I just want to make a statement that I wholeheartedly support a city plan, as I know you all can put together, for the gas plant, and don't support corporations creating that plan for us. So, I am here, first of all, I'm at 224-26th Avenue North. I'm here to remember and honor Renee Good and Alex Preddy and so many others who could have easily been myself or someone I love. These are not usual times for our democracy, not usual times for our humanity. I know you understand that an alarm has been sound. As a person of Jewish faith, I hear it all too clearly. It's surreal, but very real. 287-G agreements are designed to extend the reach of this administration's deportation machine by getting localities to do ISIS work at their own expense. Police lead to social profiling, civil rights violations, isolation of immigrant communities, and family separations. Police will stop and harass Latinx residents and increase rates while immigrants withdraw from their communities, avoid business that requires them to give their personal information, and decline to participate in public events where law enforcement may be present. In 287-G jurisdictions, ending these contracts is essential, an essential first step to disentangling local law enforcement from ICE. Let's not invite hatred and fear onto our streets. St. Pete is better than this. Vulnerable people's lives are at stake, their partners, their children impacting education, housing, their finances, our communities. Let's end this fear, end the 287-G agreement in St. Pete. Take the lead, City Council, and other cities will most certainly follow. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am. Next speaker. Andy Oliver, please go to the podium, state your name, address, or across street, and you have three minutes to address City Council. We're at our last three minutes, too, Madam Chair. Reverend Andy Oliver, pastor of Allendale Unite Methodist Church. Right now in St. Petersburg, people of certain skin tones, with certain accents, are afraid to leave their homes. They're afraid to go to work, to the doctor, to church, to the grocery store, because our city has a 287-G agreement with ICE. Families are watching loved ones with no criminal record disappear into detention in the Tampa Bay region. In a meeting with Congresswoman Kathy Castor last week, a social worker in our community told us that undocumented women, even some Latinx green card holders, have been raped and abused, are afraid to report these crimes to our police because they fear deportation. This agreement is not making us safer at silencing survivors. Mayor Welch, you told Tiger Bay that your hands are tied, but in the South Miami lawsuit over 287-G, attorneys for the state of Florida admitted in court that municipalities are not required by law to enter into these agreements. Mayor Welch, we cannot simply trust this agreement won't be used, as you recently suggested. I attended multiple clergy meetings where Chief Holloway shared selective statistics about how our police were helping people experiencing homelessness. And then the Tampa Bay Times did a public records request, and we all learned that over 500 people who were experiencing homelessness were arrested just for sleeping outside. I will never trust the chief or our police again after that lie of omission, not when it comes to protecting the vulnerable. Mayor Welch, you said at Tiger Bay you were worried about threats by our governor. But let me tell you the truth. The biggest threat to you leaving office is not the governor. It's that the people who believed in you, organized for you, voted for you, knocked on doors for you, trusted you, will not stand with you further if you continue to stand with ICE. There are worse things than being threatened with removal. It's far worse to live with the fact that when the moral issue of our day came across your desk, you chose to side with evil. Please don't let that be your legacy. A decade ago, my bishop threatened my clergy orders if I officiated another same-sex wedding. I had a choice, protect my future or stand with my people. If I had chosen myself, Allendale would surely be closed today, irrelevant, hollow, disconnected from the community that we serve. Instead, we chose moral courage. Mayor, leadership in this moment is you boldly saying, not in my city. And leadership is council passing a non-binding resolution, doing anything in their power to keep ICE out of our city. Mayor Welch, I beg you, stand with the people who elected you. Choose courage over caution. Choose justice over comfort. Tear that 287G agreement in half and do it today. Thank you. You're adults. You understand what decorum is. This is the fourth time that I have to have this conversation. I don't understand how it is that it's that difficult to understand you don't clap. Clapping does not make his words stronger. His words are his words. And we hear them. Sir, are there any more? Sir, there are, Madam Chair, however, our first 30 minutes is up. However, an opportunity will be made at the end of the council meeting. Thank you. We go now. Please note, City Council will also recess at approximately 1025 for the Dr. Carter G. Woodson flag raising at 1030. And we invite everyone to join us to honor Black History Month. Next up, we have reports. F1. Good morning. Evan. Hi. Good morning, council. I'm going to give a brief introduction and then turn this over to Ryan Hunter with FDOT. So the purpose of this update is just to update City Council on some of the major projects happening in the city of St. Petersburg by FDOT. They have a number of roads in the interstate that they maintain and improve. And we've got quite a bit going on right now. Ryan Hunter's title has recently changed. He is the modal development administrator. And I'll invite him up to provide the update. Thank you. Good morning, council members. Brian Hunter with the Florida Department of Transportation. And like Evan said, today I'm just going to give a brief update on some of the major projects we have within St. Petersburg. Let me make sure they move people because we can't. It's hard to hear when people are talking. They close the door. Okay. Thank you, sir. So the first one, you've probably all seen it. It's probably our biggest project that we have under construction right now. It's the Howard Franklin Bridge. So the new southbound Howard Franklin Bridge is about 98% complete. We anticipate opening the two new express lanes in each direction sometime in the spring and wrapping up this project in the fall or summer. The demolition of the old northbound bridge is about 75% complete. So that's really the biggest thing remaining. We also have a little bit of minor work on the pedestrian and bicycle trail that is going to be on the side of the bridge and the connections to local networks from there. On the Tampa side, it's going to connect up to like Cypress Park, that area in West Shore. And then in St. Petersburg, we're going to connect to a new trail that is going to be under construction in a couple months on 4th. So on the west side of 4th, there'll be a new multi-use path north of Gandy Boulevard all the way up through the Big Island Gap area connecting to the Howard Franklin. And then we're also planning on building a new trail connection over on Ulmerton, and I'll talk about that in a little bit. The next three projects I'm going to talk about are capacity projects on I-275. It's broken up into three segments. The first one is from 38th Avenue North up to 4th Street. That's the project that's currently under construction right now. We anticipate that being completed in 2030. That one will build two new express lanes in each direction, except for in the area of the Gateway Expressway, where there's already one. We'll be adding a second one. So that'll tie into the express lanes on Howard Franklin Bridge. And this includes noise barriers basically from the south of the project all the way up to Gandy Boulevard. And this was part of the Moving Florida Forward initiative, and that moved this project forward about 10 years. So we're really happy that all those projects around the state were chosen as part of that and really advanced some infrastructure improvements that we have throughout the state of Florida. The next project is the one just to the south from 375 up to 38th Avenue North. That will continue those express lanes down to 375, and it also includes noise barriers from 375 up to 38th Avenue North. The project is currently in design. It is unfunded for construction at this time. There's a couple of small right-of-way parcels that we need to acquire as well as part of that. And then moving to the south, we have what we're calling our lane continuity improvement. So south of 375 down to 54th Avenue South. If you drive that stretch of road regularly, you know you have to move lanes constantly. So this project will address that problem and make it so that there's at least a couple of continuous lanes so we don't have to have as much weaving in that area. That one is also currently in design. It is also not funded for construction, and a little bonus project is down at the Skyway. We are converting that to an all-electronic tolling. We know that southbound in the afternoon rush hour, there's a lot of delay caused by the tollbooths. So we have a project that's going to go to construction in the next couple months that will remove the tolling infrastructure and the collection devices, and it'll be all electronic tolling, and then in 30 or 31, we have a project that's going to remove the booth area completely. So it'll be just a gantry tolling like you see on the Gateway Expressway or the Veterans Expressway. So that'll completely remove that as a bottleneck in the system moving south. So we're excited to see that one come forward. And then the next thing that I'm going to talk about is our I-175 action plan. So this came out of the downtown mobility study that the city and Ford Pinellas completed. It asked us to take a look at I-175 and what could be done. So we started early last year, and we anticipate completing this later on this year. And what we're really looking at is how do we get people that are on a limited-access, higher-speed facility, how do we get them when they take one of the slip ramps and go to 4th or 5th to understand that they are now on a city street and get them to slow down? You're doing 55, now you need to be doing 25, and it's not really the longest area to get people into that transition. So we're looking at some signing and payment marking things visually that will tell you, hey, you've left this interstate. Now you're in a city. So slow down. So I'm shortening up some of the distance between some of the striping on the road, putting things that make it feel a little tighter so you naturally slow down a little bit. And also, you know, the city of St. Petersburg has done a really good job of making their city roads and infrastructure feel like a city. So we want to continue that into that area, tighten up some of those radiuses so when you're making a turn you have to slow down, and putting in the bicycle and pedestrian facilities to support that mode of movement. And then the two bridges that go over I-175, we're also looking at the option to our opportunity to widen them so that we can put like a green space and a wide trail through there so that it really feels like you're in a city, not just on a bridge, and make it a little more pleasant place for people to be. So like I said, we are looking to wrap that up sometime in the fall of this year with some recommendations, and we'll continue working with the city on ways to get those implemented. On 4th Street, a couple years ago, I think it was like middle of 2024, we finished the median modification and safety project from 30th Avenue North up to 94th. So that project really changed some of the medians, put in additional pedestrian and bicycle crossings, and used high-visibility crosswalk material so that people knew they were approaching a crosswalk. And it's a small sample size, but since that project has been completed, we've seen a 23% reduction in bicycle and pedestrian-related crash along that corridor. And one of the reasons that we have seen that is because we did a pretty extensive educational campaign prior to construction, during construction, and afterwards. These are the first pedestrian signals in this area that are like that and with that many in a row, so we felt it was important to go out and explain to people how to use them and how to react to them. So that educational campaign was pretty successful, and we got a lot of comments back after it opened up that the infrastructure may not have been working, you know, the timing and everything of the signals for folks. So thank you to the city for helping us go out there and quickly retime it. I know before this project, I thought you just went in and hit a couple buttons and did smart people stuff, and the signals just changed, but I found out each signal takes about 8 to 16 hours to actually do the signal timing because they have to solder and do a lot of manual stuff. So we really appreciate the city helping us get that done quickly so that we can make it work better for both motorists and pedestrians primarily. And we are going to continue that same design language going south. This project will go into construction in 2027, so it's from the southern end of that project all the way down to basically where the one-way pairs start. We're going to add two new pedestrian crossings, one in the area of 7th and one in the area of 12th or 13th. We're going to do some medium modifications, left turn improvements, and do a lot of safety improvements in that area, and that way when people are driving on 4th Street, they will have a consistent user experience from downtown all the way up through 94th. And like I said, this one will be going to construction in 2027. And before I leave that slide, I did want to mention one other project that didn't make it into the slide deck, but 3rd and 4th Street downtown. So we have – that was a recommendation from the downtown mobility study was to convert both 3rd and 4th Street in downtown to two-way instead of one-way pairs. It provides better access to businesses. It prevents wrong-way driving incidents that can happen, and really just is an overall safer operation. So we've been working with the city and Ford Pinellas to get that project funded. It is funded for design in fiscal year 29 and construction in fiscal year 31. And we're working with the city staff as well to transfer ownership of those two roads to the city so that they can be designed and built in the way that makes sense for your community. So that's something I think that we'll be coming back to you all pretty shortly on to get your consideration of transferring those roads and the funding for design and construction to you all as well. And then before I leave you, I just want to remind everybody that please drive safe on the road. Everybody out there is important to somebody, so if you're driving, slow down, pay attention to your surroundings. If you're a bicyclist or a pedestrian, please do the same. Make sure that we all get to go home safe to our families and the people that care about us. And with that said, I'll be more than happy to take any questions. Thank you. We have a few council members who have questions or comments. Council Member Driscoll. Thank you. And thank you, Administrator Hunter, for the presentation. Congratulations on the new title. It is always so good to see you at our four Pinellas meetings each month. You're always so helpful. And the staff, you know, everybody from your office. You've just proven to be a really good partner with these projects. But I do love that you're here today. So instead of talking about the whole county, we kind of get you all to ourselves here in St. Pete today. A few questions about the different projects. First, the one on for I-275, the capacity building from 38th Ave north, going north there. I wanted to find out how it was that you arrived at starting at 38th Ave, because we actually have kind of a bottleneck problem that happens at 22nd Avenue north. So just south of that is where many people find that crunch happening at peak times. So when the project started, I thought, why didn't they start at 22nd? So a lot of that has to do with just funding, to be honest with you. The available funding and the reasonable construction time is where we make a lot of those determinations on how long it is. We don't want to be out there for a, you know, nine-year construction project. We want to have, you know, three to four years, and then we can move down to the south. And there's a lot of really big projects in the Tampa Bay region right now, so contractor availability as well is another consideration. But we do plan on continuing that down to address that 22nd bottleneck. Great. Thank you. I appreciate it. I'm glad that you are aware of it. Yes. Well, next, regarding I-175, I know you guys have done some public input sessions. And from what I've heard, there has been some robust feedback given. Can you tell us about what you heard that was notable? So we have heard a lot from the community that they'd like us to remove I-175. That is not possible. FDOT policy and statute doesn't allow us to do lane repurposings on the strategic intermodal system, which that is the state has the roads that we consider the most important for the movement of people and goods, and that's the strategic intermodal system. And so we have a policy that doesn't allow us to do lane repurposing on that facility. And so, I mean, I think we've gotten a lot of really good feedback ideas. We met with the community. We walked the corridor with them so that they could really point out where some of those issues are that we could help to address. And I think we're all moving in the same direction. We're all playing for the same team. We may just have different goalposts, but I think we all can agree that we're trying to make it a safer and better neighbor to the community. So I think, you know, there's some differences in how far we can go versus how far they'd like us to go, but I think we're kind of all moving in the same direction. Some folks would like to go farther than we can, but, you know. Right, right. And you talked about a couple of the improvements, like adding a trail, some green space, making it a bit more pleasant. Yes. And I don't know if this was brought up because I know that there are many people who are very focused on eliminating that. I'm hoping that we can get to more conversations about what better looks like if we're not going to do that. Because over the years, I've identified some different ways that we could make that over and under the interstate more pleasant and more accessible for people. And one element of that is the pedestrian bridge that goes over. It is not easy to walk it. You can't really bike it. It is really difficult to use. And I know that today there are much better options for pedestrian overpasses. And considering that in the coming years we will have redevelopment taking place in that area, when is the time to talk about a better option? So one of the recommendations we have is to improve the accessibility of that pedestrian overpass. So we would build a ramp that goes down into Campbell Park so that it's ADA approachable. Right now you have that tight spiral. And then on the north side, have two ramps, one that goes in either direction. So whichever way you're going, you can get down. And that way it doesn't intrude across the street there. We'd stay on the south side of 4th. And then underneath the bridges, we are also recommending that we have the sloped walls right now that really lead to maybe like a five to six foot in between the curb and where the slope starts making those vertical walls so that we can widen the pedestrian area and maybe move people behind those pillars that are there so that you have a little more separation from the roadway. Improved lighting underneath there and really just make it a little more welcoming underneath the bridge. And then on the west side, connecting some of the sidewalks. There's no sidewalk connection if you continue west from there. So kind of from both streets making some sidewalk improvements. So we've looked at all that. But if you have any ideas, feel free to get them to Evin and we can definitely incorporate them. We're willing to look at anything out there. We do want to be a good neighbor to everybody. Thank you. Thank you for that. So just to go over, I'm just going to list four things about that. So the pedestrian bridge, the area underneath where 16th Street goes through underneath, that can be greatly improved. The beautification, I appreciate what's been done so far. I think that more could be done to make it a beautiful space when you're looking at it from the side. Go stand in Campbell Park, look north, and say, how can we make this more fabulous, you know? And then really making it more safer for pedestrians and bicyclists all around. And then when you get to the end, when you come off I-275, you take 175, you get to 4th Street. That intersection, I know you guys have made some improvements with the signal timing there, but it's still a mess. And I don't know how to fix it, but that's what you guys are here for. So I do hope that you'll continue to take a look at that. Yeah, we do have some recommended improvements down there where right now if you're going southbound, heading west, you can pretty much do that at highway speed. So tightening that up and then reallocating some of the lanes. So if you're on 175 and you want to go south, you don't have to get over two lanes. You just have one merge and kind of tightening it up so that it operates a little better, feels a little more city-sized, and also makes it safer. All right. Thank you. That's all I have. And thank you again for being here today. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Councilmember Cappert. Thank you, Chair. And thank you, Brian, for being here today. Good to see you. I want to start at the beginning of the presentation. You just kind of skimmed briefly over it, but very important to my district. You talked just quickly about some trail improvements, and I believe you said along Gandy. So can you talk about that a little bit more? So the trail is from – the 4th Street Trail will be from Gandy up to the Howard Franklin Bridge, the ramp, and that will connect into the multi-use path that crosses the bay on the Howard Franklin Bridge. And then there's a little piece that's going to be part of the I-275 construction project that is under construction right now. They're going to construct from the end of the Howard Franklin Bridge to the existing sidewalk, boardwalk, trail that's on Olmerton, so that that is all tied into that regional network and allows people to cross the bay in something other than a car, which isn't something we've had since the Friendship Trail Bridge went away. Okay, well, that's very exciting. I know that the residents that I represent will be very happy to see those improvements. We are currently going through the District 2 master plan, so would invite FDOT to be at the table. Obviously, Evan and Cheryl are very involved. Cheryl has been to the meetings so far, but certainly want to include you all and continue to keep transportation top of mind. It's a very busy area. We don't have a lot of multimodal assets at this point in time, so anything that we can do to continue to make that safer for pedestrians and bicyclists, that would be great. So welcome you to the table in that conversation. Thank you. I want to also thank you, speaking of improvements, for the 4th Street up to 94th. That has certainly been, you know, it was a bit of a challenge at first for people to get used to, as all change is. But I have definitely seen a difference. Looks like a lot of people, you know, have kind of slowed down a lot through there. I think we've had less incidents, certainly, overall. So very, very thankful for that. And thank you for listening to the feedback, because at first, you're right. There was some kind of wonky pieces about it, but you all responded, and so I just wanted to thank you publicly for that. Thank you. And then my last comment, just to echo Councilmember Driscoll, 175. We still continue to have a lot of conversations with our community members about that. It is going to be very integral to whatever happens at the historic gas plant site. And the call from the communities to reconnect those neighborhoods is still very strong in our community. And so we need you to be very considerate of that and continue to listen to that. And thank you, Councilmember Driscoll, for your advocacy on that, because you are the representative for that area. And I just appreciate all of your thoughtful comments and suggestions. And I echo everything that you said. So thank you. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Councilmember Gapper. Thank you, Madam Chair. I mean, Curtis. Thank you, Madam Chair. I already went. I know. G and G. And now another. And G. And G. Administrator, thanks for being here. Thank you for the update. I actually have a couple of questions, not on any of the ones that you brought up. And so I know over the last few years, 66th Street, Alt-19, we have installed, thanks to a FDOT grant, smart intersections. And I know with the bringing those to integrating those into our system, I think some of the timing has changed. I didn't know if you had any updates from, like, 54th Avenue North to Pasadena Avenue. And if you don't right now, that's okay. But I'd love to connect on that, because we have three of the busiest intersections all happening within, like, 600 yards of each other at 22nd Avenue, Tyrone Boulevard, 22nd Avenue, 66th Street, Tyrone Boulevard, 66th Street, all right there. And so – and I am supremely grateful for the smart intersections and the grant. I think it's going to – but I think up to this point, it's been a little frustrating for people. And just – I want to be able to communicate with our neighborhoods about what's going on there and some of the updates and how that's coming along. Because I know technology is catching up, too. And so I just wanted to quickly bring that up. And then I didn't know if you had any update – again, sorry, all of this was on the east side of town, which I love. Don't get me wrong. I'm ready for more lanes on the interstate. But I was wondering if you could give an update on Fifth Avenue on when some of the crosswalks are going to come online, things like that. Because I know there was just an investment in Fifth Avenue as well, which obviously spans the entire city as well. Yeah, so on the first one, I'm not certain how all that's working out. But we can definitely follow up. I'd love that. Thank you. Yeah, I'll get you some information. And we can send our folks out there to make sure that anything that's wonky, we can address that. And I'll also follow up with information on Fifth and see where – I know we have projects programmed for the western piece of Fifth. I just don't know when they are. No problem. And I appreciate that. And to Councilmember Gabbard's point, change always comes with some frustration. I'm born and raised like four blocks from that cluster of intersection that I was talking about. The timing of those lights has been the same pretty much ever since I started driving. Okay. And so I can imagine frustration, people seeing it different. But it's different at different times, which I think is the smart intersections working, people getting used to it. Just the ability to be able to explain to people what's going on, what it's looking for, how is it operating. I think those are some of the important points that would be super helpful for me to communicate so people aren't frustrated with us or you. Okay. Yeah, I'll get you that. Yeah. Very much appreciated. Thank you for the update. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you. Councilmember Gibbons. Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you so much, Administrator Hunter, for being here. Just a couple of quick questions. First of all, let me start with preface by saying I'm very excited that we are going to be eliminating the toll boost, the Skyway. That's going to help a lot of people who commute back and forth across the Skyway Bridge and folks like me who live near the Skyway Bridge because that certainly does back up way to 22nd Avenue South. So very good news. What is the timeline on that? I know you kind of mentioned and alluded to it. Yes. So the first phase will be what we're calling all electronic tolling light will be where we take out the collection devices. You'll still have the lane dividers that are going to be out there that you currently drive through now, but nobody will have to stop there. They'll just keep driving. That one is probably going to kick off construction. We have a resurfacing project, and it's going to go along with that, and that starts in the next couple of months. And so it's probably, if I was a betting man, I would say that it's probably a one-year construction timeframe on a project like that, including the resurfacing. And then fiscal year 30, so sometime after July of 29 or July 30, I can't remember which year it is, but that'll be when we go in and we remove all that, the lane dividers and the overhead structure and everything, and just put a single gantry across there. And so that's – it's a little further out. It's a little bigger of a project for us, but that'll – hopefully the first phase will make a difference, and then that second one will really make the difference. Exciting news. And then lastly, you kind of alluded to it earlier, but with the historic gas plant redevelopment being imminent, obviously there have been discussions and conversations regarding some of the former cemeteries that existed underneath I-175. Can you give me an update, or perhaps someone from the city can, regarding where we stand with getting access to some of that FDOT property, because that was what I was told had prevented further GPR, was we were waiting to get word from FDOT regarding whether or not we could access those sites. Yes, sir. I haven't been involved in those conversations, so I wouldn't be able to add anything to that conversation to you today, but we'll definitely – I'll follow up with you and get you some information. Administration, do you have an update there? No, we'll follow up and continue to talk to FDOT. We'll get back to you. Appreciate it. Thank you very much, Chair. Thank you. Well, Administrator Hunter, great update, great feedback. I do have one thing. I think council members covered a lot of what I was interested in, but on the 4th Street resurfacing, 3rd Street to 29th Avenue, and sometimes you have those medians. We are in a drought, and obviously irrigation, those medians don't have irrigation, and I know I've mentioned this to Evan, and making sure that we have drought-resistant plants. And I know that there have been different drought-resistant plants that I've seen, like in the Tampa medians and all that, so hopefully we can look at those different options for those medians when you are kind of redoing the resurfacing. Yeah, absolutely. We are always happy to help a city beautify the streets, so if there's anything that we can do, we'll definitely take a look at it. I love that. And on that note, thank you very much for being here. Okay, thank you, Evan. Okay, next up, we have new business, H1, Vice Chair Floyd. Thank you. I have one here. I am respectfully requesting referral to the Housing, Land, Use, and Transportation Committee for an update on Yes in God's Backyard or Yigby recent legislation, specifically the city's efforts to direct technical assistance to faith-based organizations and a discussion on next steps. I'll move approval. Second. We have a motion and a second. Clerk, can you please open the machine for voting? Council members, please enter your votes. Seeing that all present, council members have voted. Clerk, can you please tally and announce the vote? Madam Chair, the motion to approve agenda item H1 passes unanimously. Next up, we have H2. Madam Chair. Yep. Go ahead. Would it be possible for us to move this to after the flag raising? I just anticipate there'll be a lot of robust conversation. Sure. And we have about 10 minutes, so. I actually, as a matter of fact, we have three more items. I think we should be good. So, we can move it. Okay. Thank you. You're welcome. So, the next up would be I1, which is my action item from. Move approval. Second. We have a motion and a second. Move approval of I1A. And you have a second. Motion and a second. Clerk, can you please open the machine for voting? Is it I1A or just? Yes. Yep. There you go. Okay. Seeing that all council members have voted, clerk, you please tally and announce the vote. Madam Chair, the motion to approve agenda item I1A passes unanimously. Okay. Next up, we have I2A. Thank you, Madam Chair. Respectfully requesting city council approval to combine the following items on the BF&T referral list, Planning and Development Services Department Management Evaluation Annual Progress Update from 2024, and the St. Petersburg Fire Rescue Department Management Evaluation Annual Progress Update from 2025, and I'd move approval. Second. We have a motion and a second. Clerk, can you please open the machine for voting? Council members, please enter your vote. Seeing that all present, council members have voted. Clerk, you please tally and announce the vote. Madam Chair, the motion to approve agenda item I2A passes unanimously. Okay. Next up, we have eight legal item. Madam Chair, as you know, periodically we'll bring a resolution forward when we think we can benefit from specialized legal services. The public-private partnership statute is complex, and we haven't used it before. Considering the workload and the office, and in an effort to expedite this, we think it'd be beneficial to use outside counsel. And I will say, this is for the initial review, consultation, et cetera. It's possible it would be more than this amount, but we thought that this was a good starting point just to dive in and have a kickoff meeting and get their initial thoughts. Okay, great. Move approval. Second. We have a motion of second. Council Member Gabbard. Just a quick clarification or question out of curiosity. I'm so aware from, you know, our interactions with Mr. Tankersley that this is being recommended because of the AMI unsolicited bid that came in. And from my conversation, you know, I was told that there were two different potential routes that might be able to be taken with the statute. Is that the purpose of bringing in Bryant-Miller-Olive, or...? Yes and no. It's not limited to that. Okay. There are different ways to go. Right. We're bringing them in for more high level. Okay. So it's not just that issue, but they've done this before in other cities. This is not something that St. Pete has done. Yeah. So we just want their take on the most efficient way to do it, the things to look out for, what the options are related to what you just said is one. Okay. Well, certainly, you know, automated metering is something that has been permeating our conversations in the city for a very long time, especially after the hurricanes. And so whatever expediency looks like, I think is really important. Hello, Mr. Tankersley. Good to see you. So, you know, certainly support. If this is the path to get forward to expediency on getting those automated meters, then I certainly support it. So thank you. Thank you for your due diligence. All right. Thank you, Chair. And Council Member Harding. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Claude. I thoroughly enjoy the direction we're going in. I echo Council Member Gabbard. And Jackie, thank you. Just for clarification, are we headed into uncharted territory, or is there precedent for this? I would say this P-3 statute has been used before by other jurisdictions. So I wouldn't say the process itself is uncharted territory for the city because we have not embarked on this before for us as an organization, for us as a legal department. It is. So that's why we think we can benefit and speed things up by talking to Bryant Miller Olive rather than – there's no need to reinvent the wheel here, in our opinion, when we know that they've worked on other projects. We think it could streamline it. And also because of some competing priorities in our office, too, we feel like if we didn't get some assistance from BMO, that could slow it down or bump other projects that also have a very high priority. Understood. And I apologize. This is a difficult question. Because of the nature of the work, any type of a time frame or any thoughts? I could circle back after we have that initial meeting with Bryant Miller Olive. We don't normally schedule meetings with outside counsel until after you have approved the retention of outside counsel. That's unusual, but we did do that in this case, recognizing that we would want to move it along as quickly as possible. We have a meeting subject to your approval, obviously, of this resolution with outside counsel the week after next with the city stakeholders, subject matter experts, as well as legal. So once we have that meeting, we could circle back on an overall timeline. But that's one of the reasons that we're engaging Bryant Miller Olive is to get an idea of what we're looking at big picture, how long it would take, and the immediate next steps versus the long-term plan. Thank you very much. If I could, Chair, too, just for the benefit of City Council, we are still reviewing the proportionally and financially. So that will also be a part of the discussion as well as the legal part of the discussion. So we're working through all that together, and we'll be getting back to City Council on, you know, our thoughts overall on the proposals. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Chair. We have a motion and a second. Clerk, you'll please open the machine for voting. Council members, please enter your votes. Seeing that all present council members have voted, clerk, please tally and announce the vote. Madam Chair, the motion to approve agenda item J-1 passes unanimously. Thank you. Now, do we have speakers for H-2? We do have one. We just have one card? Okay, I think we could start H-2, even if we go a little bit over, to kind of move it along. Very good. All right. Thank you, Madam Chair. Item H-2 before you today is an approval of a resolution requesting City Administration to pursue a planning-first framework for the Historic Gas Plant District prior to advancing any developer selection. And, Madam Chair, if I may, I just have a few comments before we go into discussion. So, City Council, before you today, I've brought this resolution that I'm seeking your support on, and I just want to be very clear that this is not about any particular development. I believe that today we are not just voting on a resolution. We are deciding how history will remember our stewardship for St. Petersburg's most valuable remaining asset, the Historic Gas Plant site. My intention is very straightforward. I am asking City Council to take this moment to ensure that we get it right, as this may be our last chance. It is my impression that we as the city are currently operating from a reactionary position. We have nine proposals on the table, as varied as the opinions of our residents, yet we are flying without a radar. I've heard it said that we would need the wisdom of Solomon to choose the right proposal, but what we really need would be a Solomon who is an expert in land-use planning and complex redevelopment. Best practices show that by setting a strategic rubric of priorities, we will have the best chance of success instead of perpetuating the unfulfilled promises that continue to permeate our community. This is not about slowing down. This is about leveling up. We should be handling this like the world-class city that we know we are and can continue to be. In October, I brought City Council a new business item that requested a discussion on bringing in a planning organization, such as ULI Tampa Bay, to give us an unbiased assessment of what best practices should be to create a development that would place community engagement at the forefront of progress. I want to thank you all for your unanimous support that day. And as I explained then, it was not a reaction to a single bid. It was a call for a professional framework. In April, I attended a meeting with the mayor and the administration where I suggested that a third party be brought in to guide us through the next steps. I said then, and I quote, we are too close to this. We need assistance. Then over the summer, the ULI suggestion was made again to administration by the downtown partnership. For months, these requests went unanswered while we left space for an unsolicited bid to dictate our pace. Now, we are chasing a speeding bullet. I am simply asking us to catch our breath and take a beat and take a moment to consider the residents that we serve. If the city were to choose to work with ULI, I have been told that the time for completion could be as soon as six months. And I feel confident that we have the community stakeholder organizations at the table that would be willing to discuss partnership funding if there was a commitment to this approach. A six-month engagement initiative is a small investment for a massive return. It would allow us to negotiate from a position of strength, not desperation, provide a guidebook so that our residents can finally trust the process, and answer critical questions still outstanding such as, should we even sell this land at all, or should we retain it for the city's long-term financial stability? We all know that six months is a short period of time in city government, and any developer truly committed to our city will wait a few short months for a decision that is rooted in due diligence. Since October, I have been meeting with a group of stakeholders from across our community. This diverse group represents every corner of our city and thousands of residents and business voices. Some of them have offered letters of support, which you have received for today's resolution. Others have been concerned, frankly, on how this might move forward when the administration seems resolved to forge their own path. The one common theme in these conversations is confusion over the process and uncertainty of outcomes. One thing is clear. All of that uncertainty and hesitation to engage with this plan could go away tomorrow if city council and administration would simply agree to work together on a short exercise with a long-term benefit. A comprehensive planning framework, such as the one that I am proposing, would utilize all of the work that has been done today and not start over from scratch. Every plan, every study, every agreement would be gathered and considered against the constraints of today's environment. Let's not forget that in late 2024, our city changed forever. After spending 18-plus months devoting every resource our city had to securing a development deal, everything was literally blown away overnight. Almost 500 days after Helene flooded a large part of our city and Milton dealt the second blow two weeks later, we must recognize our city is not the same. It may never be the same, and we should ask the people who are still recovering their feelings on this. Using old plans and agreements that were walked away from cannot be our game plan now towards progress. Just last week, we discussed in numerous committees reduced budgets that have been impacted by declining real estate values and threats from Tallahassee that would take away our main source of revenue, potentially crippling city services. We are undoubtedly walking into uncharted territory, and while we strive for St. Petersburg to maintain its special character and vibrancy, we cannot rush hastily into the most important asset we have left, which is our land. So it is for all these reasons and more, Madam Chair, that I stand on this resolution and the impact I believe that it can have on the final outcomes, and I respectfully move approval of Agenda Item H-2A. Mobile comment? Ron Diner, please go to either podium, state your address, or Cross Street. For the record, you'll have three minutes to address City Council. I'm Ron Diner. Brightwaters, Cross Street is Ramona. I'm here to ask you to support Council Member Gabbard's resolution calling for the City to pause the current proposal-first process for the gas plant and instead move forward with the City-led plan-first approach. More than, based on the more than 400 letters and messages that you have received, there is substantial public support for doing exactly that. The proposals themselves reinforce why a pause makes sense. This is one of the most desirable large redevelopment sites anywhere in the country, yet only two submissions address the full 86 acres. While one includes a developer with national experience, no other major national developers submitted full site approvals, proposals. When a process produces such limited participation for an asset of this scale and importance, it's reasonable and prudent for the City to step back and make sure the framework is right before moving forward. Those two proposals also share something important. They call for the developer to decide where the streets go, what gets built where, and how the project is phased, but the City gets to pay for the streets. Once the City bills and pays for the streets, the land value is widely estimated to exceed a billion dollars. Yet the two full site proposals would commit most of that land today for far less, one offering $275 million and the other material less. This leads to a basic question. If the City is paying for the streets, why shouldn't it do its own planning, build the streets, and sell the land parcel by parcel over time? Developers would still do what they do best, build buildings. It's also important to know that there's no operational urgency forcing a decision right now. The Rays will continue playing at the site for at least three and maybe four years. That gives the City time to do this carefully and correctly. As elected representatives, residents are looking to you to exercise your independent judgment and protect the public interest. Pausing now to put planning first would not delay development. It would strengthen it, reduce risk, and help ensure the City retains control over a once-in-a-generation public asset. I respectfully urge you to support the Gabbard Resolution. Thank you. Thank you. I believe we have more cards now. The last speaker is Michael McGrath. Please go to either podium. State your address or cross street. For the record, you'll have three minutes to address City Council. Hi. Good morning. Michael McGrath with Sierra Club, Florida, representing our Suncoast Local Group as well, which has over 2,500 members here in Pinellas County and St. Pete, 1701 38th Street North, St. Petersburg, Florida, 33713. It's a privilege to speak for this council again, and I'm speaking in support of the resolution. We sent a letter back in October when this entire issue was coming to a head again for council, and this is a once-in-generation opportunity for us to envision what a community can look like, what planning can look like, how we can professionalize this entire experience for our residents. It makes me think we can all be proud of, right? From the Sierra Club side of things, we have our priorities. We want to make sure that our incorporated into the site, as well as sustainability, making sure that things are having clean energy on site, eerie readiness, making sure that we can actually create meaningful green spaces around Booker Creek and also our parks over there, making sure that site can actually be multimodal, right, and pedestrian-friendly as well. But to be able to do all of that, we need to take a planning-first approach as opposed to just selling off the land to developers so they can create something that is in their vision as opposed to what the community desires as well. So we respectfully ask that you support Council Member Gabbert's resolution today and take a fresh line of this entire process, listen to community input, and also make sure that's something that we can actually all be proud of 50 years from now as opposed to a hasty decision now. Thank you. Any more speakers? Okay. Well, I have a motion. There are a second. These are your comments. Council Member Harding. Thank you, Chair. And thank you for the opportunity. Thank you to all who made comments. And thank you to Council Member Gabbert for bringing this up. It is an enormous topic. I have struggled with this more so than anything in my year tenure. I struggle with, at the biggest picture, I wonder if the electeds that took us to a strong mayor form of government really envisioned something this big when they set up the rules or the ways that we were going to govern ourselves because this is much bigger than what a city normally deals with. The plans were made public, I believe, Monday, and like all of you and members sitting on this dais, I've been reading through them. And my first issue is the timing of this. To Mr. Diner's point, we are years away from starting this project as a whole. The Rays will play three more seasons, and there might be a strike. These are things that we've talked about before. We could go to four years. Something could happen with how they intend to build somewhere else, and the administration at that point might decide to extend some time. We are not in a rush to get this done. Probably the biggest issue that I've had is I have had the opportunity to talk to some of these groups, and one of the questions that I bring up is the 23 points that the mayor alluded to in his note to council. And one of the groups that I talked to, and their plan is well-developed, but they didn't consider those 23 points. So is that the will of the people, the will of the council, the will of the administration, or the wants really incorporated in all of this? The ARC came first. I really enjoyed their presentation. I found phenomenal points in it and phenomenal ideas in it. Blake and his team really came out second, and their plan also had just some phenomenal aspects to it. The Housing Authority has some really good points to add, and most recently, Will Conroy and his team came out with a whole different layer that makes just absolute incredible sense. doesn't really define the vertical of this, what it looks like, but more defines the way that we approach this, and really addresses the point of what does one of the parcels look like that isn't going to be developed in 10 years, the value to the city, in getting rid of it today, or in giving all of this to one developer versus maintaining control at some level. So I appreciate, and I'm going to stop and ask the question just to make sure that we're all on the same page. This is what Council Member Gabbard has put forward as non-binding, correct? Correct. Yeah. I just want to make sure that everyone out there listening understands that council doesn't have the power to instruct administration on this. It is, in Council Member Gabbard's effort, it is just making the will of the council known through the vote that we're going to take. And so I don't find a rush. I appreciate the efforts of the nine. It is phenomenal, the ideas that we've seen. I appreciate the effort of the mayor in wanting to move this forward. For me, I don't see the need to rush this to fruition. I don't see the need for the city to dispose of this asset in the form and format that we're addressing. And I look forward to what my colleagues have to say. And I appreciate the time, Chair. Great. Thank you. Well, given that we're getting to 1030, we will take a recess at this time for the flag raising. And we're going to continue our robust conversation on H2A after we return. Thank you all. Now is the greeting time. The sun is here and the savannah is so freaking warm. And today we remember why elephants never forget. Thank you. Thank you, Denzel, for sharing your powerful words with us today. Your poem honored the depth, resilience, and brilliance of black history. We're grateful for your voice, your artistry, and the truth you carry through your work. We look forward to hearing from you again on February 18th at Mayor's State of the City. To continue the first for the city, I am pleased to introduce Chair Hanowitz, who represents District 4. She's the first ever Hispanic to be elected to City Council. Let's welcome her. Thank you, everyone. Wow, that's a hard act to follow. Let me tell you, we were in City Hall doing City Council business. And it is wonderful to come out here to hear beautiful music, beautiful poetry, and beautiful culture, because that's what we're here to do today. So thank you, Mayor. And good morning, everyone. I hope you're staying warm. I know we're trying to. So on behalf of City Council, thank you for joining us as we raise the Dr. Carter G. Woodson flag in recognition of Black History Month. And as we reaffirm our responsibility that extends far beyond February, the Woodson flag is more than a symbol. It is a reminder to reflect, to learn, and to ensure that the decisions we make for our city to honor the history and contributions of those that came before us. Black history is not just a part of St. Petersburg's history. It's woven in its very fabric. The struggles, the sacrifices, and achievements of Black leaders and communities have shaped this city and this country, recognizing that history means more than celebration. It means understanding how our past informs the present and how it must guide the future we are building together. Thank you to everyone at the Woodson African American Museum for your steadfast leadership and for championing the importance of preserving, teaching, and elevating our histories in meaningful and profound ways. As a daughter of Cuban exiles, I know how deeply our histories shape who we are. Honoring where we came from matters because the world we live in today was built by those who came before us, by communities that persisted even when the path forward seemed impossible. Dr. Carter G. Woodson, often called the father of Black history and the founder of what we now recognize as Black History Month, challenged our nation to fully acknowledge the historic contributions of Black people. That challenge remains with us today. The lessons of Black history, of courage, resilience, and community, strengthen us when we take them seriously and allow them to inform our work. So today, as we raise our flag, we recognize ourselves to listening, learning, and building a city that honors every contribution and every story. And I am proud to serve a city that continues to do this work together. Thank you, everyone. Thank you, Chair Hanowitz. We will now hear from a representative of the Woodson African American Museum of Florida, Ms. Vanessa Sweat. Good morning, everyone. I am Vanessa Sweat, the office manager of the Woodson African American Museum of Florida, Mayor Welch, Chair Hanowitz, members of council, distinguished elected officials, community leaders, honored guests. Thank you for joining us this morning as we gather to honor the life, legacy, and enduring vision of Dr. Carter G. Woodson, the father of Black history. Dr. Woodson devoted his life to ensuring that the stories, scholarship, and contributions of African Americans would be preserved, presented, interpreted, celebrated, and taught, not as footnotes, but as the foundational truths of this nation's history. As our country looks ahead to commemorating 250 years of independence, many still struggle to tell the full truth. The reality is that this nation's success was built not only on ideals of freedom, but on the hard work, brilliance, resilience, and extraordinary ingenuity of African people who were enslaved and brought to this land to fortify its wealth and prosperity. Those who are learned know this truth. Others may resist it, but history gold does not bend to comfort. It calls us to courage. In 2016, when the then chair of the Woodson Board, now executive director, Terry Lipsy Scott, appealed to the mayor of the city of St. Petersburg to raise the flag honoring Dr. Carter G. Woodson, she did so with clarity and conviction. She knew it was time for our city to take a lead, to become a truth teller, and a beacon for integrity and inclusion. This flag was not simply a symbol. It was a statement that black history matters and that the untold stories deserve to be seen, heard, and honored. Though Ms. Scott is not with us this morning, she asked me to remind us of this. African American history will not be ignored at this nation as they mark its quincennial. We will honor the lives and the legacies of those who made this nation great. We will not allow their stories to go untold. In that spirit, the Woodson, in collaboration with the Smithsonian and Florida Humanities Council, will open a major exhibit in July, one that centers African American experiences and highlights the countless roles black Americans have played across centuries of American history. As the Woodson African American Museum of Florida continues to serve as a catalyst in the community and beyond for preserving black history, we thank you for standing with us today. We thank you for honoring the resolute history of courage, resistance, resilience, and excellence. In closing, we would love for you all to take an active role in this day of celebration. So when I say black history, you say American history. Black history. American. When I say tell the truth, you say honor the legacy. Tell the truth. And let me leave you with this final affirmation. When I say lift every voice, you say and tell the story. Lift every voice. Thank you so much. On behalf of the board, the staff, and the friends of the Woodson, thank you for your continued support and for your allegiance to America's full, honest, and inclusive story. Thank you, and happy Black History Month. Thank you, Ms. Vanessa, for your hard work and passion, not only at the Woodson African American Museum of Florida and Ms. Terry, but for the city of St. Petersburg. I also want to recognize and thank Ms. Caprice Edmond, the Pinellas County Schools Board Chair, for being here with us as well today. Okay, we are excited to have with us today Mrs. Nancy Ream, a talented local artist with a background in illustration and graphic design. She is the creative force behind this year's commemorative Black History Month poster, which you can have signed at the table provided. Okay, we will now have mayor and city council members gather for a group photo, followed by the raising of the Black History Month flag. Yes. Thank you. This concludes our Black History Month flag raising ceremony. Thank you for joining us. Have a great day. Now back in session, and we are going to start back up with the item we left off on, which is H2, and I believe by Sheriff Floyd, it is your turn to speak. Get back in the mindset as the words start coming out of my mouth. So I think I'll be brief. I am generally supportive of the resolution because I understand where people are coming from when we discuss needing to have a holistic plan done internally first. But I think the only thing I want to be said about it outside of that is the idea that I'm not going to evaluate whatever plan gets put in front of me because I don't like the process. It's not how I operate. I'll evaluate whatever gets put in front of me, no matter how it gets there, obviously barring anything heinous. And I also want to say to administration, I think that I'm very sympathetic to the position that I think has been expressed that is there's been a lot of work done to discuss what needs to go on at the site and the plans that have been made over the years, and we don't want to drag that out. And so I just encourage administration to lean on all of that work so that we can quickly get through this because I don't want it to be delayed either. I think that's the biggest thing is I don't want this to cause us to get hiccups and not be able to accomplish things over the time frame that we want to. And so if it meant that like we just gathered all the information that we've done to study the site already and then put something together, wrap the neat bow on it for it to be applicable to this, I think that that would be fine. I don't know that. And I also think that we could do that internally as well. Although I am supportive of looking outside. I think that because we've done so much work on the site, we could easily get all that work together, create a plan internally and say, this is what we think is best based off of community feedback and then get a little bit of community feedback on that. So I don't see those two. I don't see how this could actually, I'll take it back. I sit, I'll say it this way. I see how we could easily move forward with the path that we're on and still do a holistic planning program as well. And so that's why I'm generally supportive, even though the resolution's not written exactly how I would have written it. But I hope that if this passes the day, administration can take the steps that I think are totally possible to get things done expeditiously. Thank you. Council Member Driscoll. Thank you. And thank you, Council Member Gowler, for bringing this forward. A few thoughts that I have. First, I'm thinking back to, I think it was October when, you know, we voted to send a committee discussion on doing a ULI or other type of study on this. And I've been looking forward to that discussion. I don't know when it's going to take place. But this feels like something that should happen, or I think this should be part of that committee discussion because I think it would do, I think it would serve the public and city council better to have a better understanding of what we would include in the study. And then say, this is what we want. And it is unfortunate that the administration has moved forward in the way that they have, even though we had that unanimous vote to at least have a discussion about a study. And as mentioned earlier, the administration has had, like, almost a year to get up to speed on this and to catch up with what is wanted. It's really unfortunate that this hasn't been done already. In my opinion, this is something that should have been an administration discussion that started in March, the day after the race canceled the deal. But here we are. We have received nine proposals. Nobody's looked at all of them yet and really studied them in depth. But just from what you've read so far, you can see that there's a lot of, there are a lot of just brilliant ideas in there. And I don't want to, I don't want to put a halt to discussions around that because I would hate to hinder, I would hate to hinder the process in a way that might hurt us in the long run if we hit the pause button completely right now. I do think we should take our time. I do think that the administration would be wise to include city council in discussions as we move forward. I really believe that we can do both here. Move forward with having this study. I think it needs to be, we need something that's current. And we also need to have conversations with the proposers. And, you know, the administration can have discussions. Now, I would not want a selection to be made before the study is done. The sooner we can get that on a committee agenda, the better, because I don't want to delay that. But my, what I have in mind is, sure, have conversations with the development teams that have proposed something at the same time that the study is going on. And once that concludes, you kind of lay the study over the plans and see what fits, what needs to be amended. And that way we can keep moving forward with the entire thing on these parallel tracks. So that is what I would be in favor of. But I'm really, I have a sense of urgency about getting this study done. And if the administration isn't going to take it seriously, the city council can. And we do have the power to do that. So I think some of this comes from frustration with not talking about and getting this study underway. That's what I want to see move forward. So I'd like to have a consideration of moving this to that, sort of adding this to that referral item for committee and really getting some commitment on when we're going to have that discussion. Those are my initial thoughts. Thank you. Council Member Gabbard, do you want to, there are a couple more people on this meeting. Yeah, it was only in response to Council Member Driscoll. So, I mean, I completely agree. I think that we're kind of in, like I mentioned, a place of confusion about what our process moving forward even is. And so through the committee stakeholder, or not the committee, through the stakeholder meetings that I have been having, I've had two, and it's a pretty robust group around the table, that has really been, you know, the two sides of the coin is we want there to be a plan, but we do not understand what that process might be going forward and how we can interject a plan, and can it run parallel, or does it need to happen before the selection? That is where City Council comes into play, in my opinion. And so as far as the committee meeting that we need to have, really this, if this does not pass today, I'm not quite sure where that referral item really stands, because if this body doesn't feel worthy of saying, listen, we do need to take a beat, we do need to have these conversations, it is not to throw out any of these proposals that are ahead of us. It is just to have that moment for City Council to talk about what a plan may look like with administration in our committee. And so if this were to pass, we would be prepared to have ULI come and give us a committee presentation as soon as that could be scheduled. And so it is not my intention for this to drag on. We have been very diligent in our conversations with the stakeholders to make sure that everything that has been done to date can be taken into consideration as part of that plan. So, you know, the word choice of pause was very diligent. Every word in this resolution was very diligent and very much given the weight of what those words mean. And when I say pause, it is not to delay progress into perpetuity. It is to have this moment for a cohesive conversation between administration and City Council, and at that point, chart a path forward that will create this plan that will then guide the administration through their selection process if they so choose to utilize that at that point. So that was my purpose. I wanted to kind of address, you know, how quickly can we have this committee conversation because we would be ready to bring that conversation as soon as the item could get agended. If it doesn't pass, then I don't know what that looks like. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Faith Sanders. The first thing that came to my mind, and I'm going to be that voice, the first thing that came to my mind was stop playing with my people. Stop playing with my people. And I say that to say everybody wants to play in, and I wholeheartedly agree with Councilmember Driscoll, and I think that we can do this both ways. But go with me in thinking in the fact that where the circle driveway is, I'm real nostalgic when it comes down to the gas plant. Where the circle driveway is, I was baptized at eight years old. That's where I was. That is who I am. And every time I hear someone wants to tell us what's best for us, as though the words of the descendants did not mean anything, I quiver. When I hear the people at the table, who are those people? Because we've had those voices. When I hear, and Mr. Diner made it very clear to me, what came to me is sell it parcel by parcel. That's gentrification by block by block to me. So it's easy to say, let's pause this. It's easy to say, let's not move forward. If you've had no vested interest, I see the opportunities. I see the possibilities that go with this. But again, I say stop playing with my people. Stop playing with the history that that gas plant means to the city of St. Petersburg. We have done studies since, what, 2015, if not before? I was a part of that process. We can take bits and pieces of everything. Yes, we need a plan. You don't go get your teeth pulled out without first doing an exam. I get it. But we're at a point now where I'm looking at, we have nine proposals. You're right. Nobody has actually looked at all nine of the proposals. But I can guarantee you, whoever gets this bid is going to acquiesce to what we tell them to. I really feel that way. And so please, please, please, if it, well, I'm not supporting, I'm not, I support Council Member Gabbard wholeheartedly. I don't support the resolution. Because I'm looking at the unattended consequences parcel by parcel. We have been talking about this for I don't know how long. And I know six months doesn't mean a whole lot to a whole lot of people. But I will tell you this. I want some of the descendants that took their time to have these conversations with us to be here to see something done. And when I actually heard about this study before, realizing that a lot of the people doing the study have no vested interest. And when I listen to some of the same African Americans who have, who say they have a vested interest in this gas plant, acquiesce to what the voices are saying, not pertinent to bringing to fruition what our descendants have asked for, that makes me really sad. It makes me really sad. So my thing is, okay, administration, you probably could have done a better job of communication. That's nothing new. That is nothing new. But to intentionally continue, that sell parcel by parcel, I've been talking about that for the past few years. I don't want to see that happen. Because bit and bit, we already know, sitting here on this dais, selling pieces of land parcel by parcel, we cannot dictate what that is. And slowly, our generational history will be auctioned off. We have no say. We have no input. We look up. Our children's children will not be able to recognize what was there. We'll have a plaque that says the gas plant. We'll have a plaque by Booker Creek, but the words of the ancestors will not be filled in those words on a plaque. So, with that being said, I agree with you, Council Member Driscoll. This can happen concurrently. I think that the nine proposals, I have not looked at all of them, but I think that the nine proposals we have, we're still open for communication. Administration. Rob, if you can answer this for me. Before something is even selected, because I want to have a role in this, because, again, at eight years old, I was baptized in that driveway on the corner of 16th and 30th. Can I please get some type of agreeance that, if this passes, what are we going to do to cross that timeline? Can we not have that conversation concurrently? Because I'm not supporting another pause. I'm not supporting another opportunity. And I'm glad someone said it. Sell it parcel by parcel. That's one of my greatest fears, is that we sell it parcel by parcel. Listen, they didn't take it from us parcel by parcel. They've moved communities. They've moved neighborhoods. They've moved businesses. It wasn't parcel by parcel. So, when I hear parcel by parcel, that really does touch me in a way that, no, I'm not going to support anything. Where we can have privatization come in, private sales, parcel by parcel, to take away the dreams of the descendants that we've already had so much time and taken their efforts. They have hope in us. They have hope in us that we're going to do the right thing. And if planning works with that, I want to do it concurrently. But I do not want to pause. I do not want to stop anything. Do I want better communication? Absolutely. Do I want us to know where we're going? Absolutely. And the way that's going to happen is though we're involved in that. We have to be involved in that. So, I've said my little two cents. But I'm just hoping that the voices, I'm not going to let those die. And hearing that young lady sing that song this morning only cemented my stand on where I am with this. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Council Member. And I'll just respond to your question. I mean, the administration is certainly aware of the new business item related to a discussion in committee on ULI. And we're happy to have that conversation. We'd be happy to add in that committee meeting an explanation of the process that we intend to follow. We could certainly look back at the plans and the proposals that have been submitted previously and summarize those and explain our vision for the site based on the previous planning that's been done and have that discussion with city council and committee. We're happy to do that. And I will say this. When you say our vision, our vision needs to be our vision. Not just administration. Our vision needs to be our vision. We certainly understand that. And I think that we've shown that previously in the previous process. We had three or four different committee of the holes. We certainly stayed in touch with city council. We tried to include your priorities in the final agreement that was signed. And so we certainly understand that and respect that. Thank you for that. Council Member Gerdes. Thank you, Madam Chair. Well, just before some quick comments. I think no matter where this lands and the process that we get through here, everybody cares deeply about what happens to this property. And I just I thought it was important because supporting not supporting an item, I think, sometimes can get wrapped up. And I think this is one of those things where everybody cares so deeply about what happens. And frankly, a lot of us have spent hundreds, if not thousands of hours of time on on this site. I think that's very important to say out loud. And so, you know, we've had a lot of conversations, frankly, over the last few years about kind of administration's role and their process and our and our role and our process. And this just seems to try to intertwine those in a way that I I I don't find comfortable. I don't want and I've said this multiple times on this dice about multiple projects. I don't like going backwards. I don't like doing that, especially when I feel like we have momentum. I don't want to set that aside. And I think Council Member Figg Sanders did a did a great job of explaining some of my feelings on it. I met with the gas plant descendants four or five times over two thousand twenty three and two thousand and twenty four. And so Council Member Figg Sanders, I will leave that to you. I won't even bring up those meetings because I think you've stated that very well. And so, again, I'm just I'm hesitant about this. I appreciate administration's point of view of wrapping this into a conversation. If that ends up happening, look forward to that conversation. But at this point, this is the administration's process. My guess is, is they're going to make a selection or they're going to have interviews and then make a selection. And then they'll let us know about that. And then they'll go into what I assume is a robust negotiation. And then we'll be involved in committee of the holes, I'm assuming, just like we were in the past. And then we'll get something to vote. And if we feel like at that point that that's not what the best thing for St. Petersburg is, that's our opportunity to say so. And I just don't want to mince those two things. And so I just wanted to be on the record. And so I won't be supporting this today. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you. Council Member Driscoll. Thank you, Madam Chair. I know that you are the last to speak. I've already spoken, so I would be perfectly fine with pausing while you give your remarks. We have Council Member Gibbons who has. There we go. Going up. Thank you so much, Madam Chair. And I've tried to digest all of this, and I'm listening to everyone's points, and each point is valid. This is a very conflicting position to be in. I was not around to witness the days pre-Tropicana Field. However, I have heard stories of there being a thriving community that exists at the present-day historic gas plant site years before baseball. So my concern is that here we are once again about to make the same mistake twice. You know, I've heard the word gentrification mentioned, but let's not forget who are the true owners of this land. It wasn't the city of St. Petersburg. This land was owned by residents. It's Black History Month, so let's keep it real. Black residents, black churches, black-owned businesses, and it was stolen. It was taken from them by eminent domain. And so because of that, it was gentrified by force. And so we have an opportunity to reverse that gentrification. We have an opportunity to plan. Now, I've heard it said before that, you know, we've been planning, we've been talking, we've been having conversations. Well, I wasn't privy to any of those conversations. And honestly, I haven't been privy to any of the conversations that's been taking place on the side of administration because we haven't had an opportunity to discuss this face-to-face in almost a year. And so I don't know what's going on. I have felt excluded from the conversation since I've been on the dais. And so now that I'm here, I'd like to not just exercise my voice but the voice of my constituents who elected me. You know, they have a tough position because they don't get to vote. We do. The eight of us do. And so it's our job to do what we can to act in the best interest of the public, not in the best interest of the mayor, not in the best interest of developers. You know, I love the spirit of this resolution. And even though I feel, Council Member Gabbard, that the resolution lacks teeth, I understand the spirit of it. And because our powers under a strong mayor form of government is limited, we have to exercise the only muscles that we got. And those muscles are our votes. And so I have a lot of questions. I, you know, like many other people up here, have had an opportunity to look at all nine proposals. I've had an opportunity to vet some of those proposals, have conversations with those developers. But guess who has not? The public. There's a number of descendants who are not included in those previous conversations because apparently it was exclusive, not exclusive. So I want to make sure that we give everyone an opportunity to be heard. I want to make sure that we have experts at the table. I look forward to furthering this conversation and committee because I do think the ULI will be very beneficial having that study back and deciding where we go from here. You know, years past, we planned. We planned 2017. We planned 2020. We planned in 2022. But guess what? A lot of things has happened since then. Natural disasters. Contracts and agreements being canceled. What I want to prevent is I don't want to make the same mistake that we made with Ray's Hines. If we fail to plan, we plan to fail. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you. Okay, I'll go because obviously everyone else has spoken. Look, I don't know how this is all going to end up. I don't think any of us do. If you would have asked everyone a year ago, more than a year ago, where we were, they thought they had the answer. Okay? So that's the reality. The reality is no one knows where this is going to land. Whether it's a developer that developed everything, whether the city keeps it, whether it's done black by block, no one knows. So what is a city's role? A city's role is in planning. And as Council Member Floyd mentioned, he's supportive of the resolution because that's, I mean, by share. He's supportive of the resolution because that is a central tenet of what government does, frankly. This is not going to come as a shock to anyone because I felt the last process was rushed. I did. And I did not like that because I think, as has been said by various council members, this is extremely important to our community. And so when we had the conversation last time, when the last agreements were before us, it was like we couldn't even hold it up for a month or two or whatever it was. And yet here we are. The sky did not fall. So you've had plans that have been approved, plans that all of a sudden were approved, and now then they were changed and another RFP went out. So we've had various forms of this issue come before us through various administrations. So this is a resolution. As it's been said, it's not binding. It's, you know, frankly, I never have a problem sharing what I think without a resolution. But if a resolution comes and it shares my feelings, I have no problem, you know, we have to vote. So I'm going to vote for the resolution because I believe in planning. I said it to administration when we spoke. Look, the last plan didn't even have a fire station in the area. Seriously. This is not an area of the city that's small. It's 86 acres of land in downtown, and it does not work by itself. It's part of our city. It's part of a whole ecosystem, whether it's our fire services, whether it's our police services, whether it's our water infrastructure, whether it's our stormwater system, all these things matter. And so to me, it is a disservice to the public if government does not plan. Because I tell you this, I don't want to hear in the future, we don't have a plan for this. We have been talking about so many things at City Hall for so long without an answer, without money, without this, without that. Whether it's MSC, whether it's the Senior Center, whether it's the Mahaffey, whether it's the Marina. I mean, you can pick whatever subject, and here we have an opportunity to kind of provide services to our public that matter. And this includes the descendants and everyone else, because the stronger we are as a city, when the government, by the way, the state government, is trying to limit the resources we have, it is important to figure out the right path with this land. I have no idea what the state is going to do with real estate taxes in the future. So all this conversation, and who knows where we're going to be after they decide whatever their next new idea is. So my whole position on this is I don't think there's anything wrong with planning. I understand the administration is going to do what administration is going to do, because that's their role, and that's fine. They're going to have an opinion, we're going to have an opinion, we all each have an opinion, and then we see where it lands, and I don't think it hurts to say that planning is important. So that's all I have to say on this. Thank you. Council Member Driscoll. Thank you, and it's been great to hear from all of my colleagues the thoughts on this. I really am supportive of this in most ways, and there are a couple of reasons. We've mixed up the process. According to the new business item that was approved unanimously for discussion and committee, it was to discuss doing a plan-first approach. And, you know, we're still not in the right order of things. I do think that going on parallel paths would help to fix that. It's disappointing because we know from the last time that we went through this that nothing else is going to get done. All of the administration's energy is going to go to, you know, playing around with these proposals and the people who have proposed them, and, you know, this will end up being more of a distraction while other needs in our city are not getting the attention that they need. And it's discouraging because here we are again with this being the hot topic. While we don't know what's going on with the marina, we don't know what's going on with the Municipal Services Center. We have a Mahapy theater that's, you know, in dire need of repairs. When was the last time that we really heard about that? And notice no one has come back yet to work with us to make final decisions on changes to how the in-town tiff is spent. That might be convenient for some. We haven't had a discussion on making changes to what we need to do with the CBA process, and that's about to start again. Look how far behind we are. We could have been working diligently on establishing the right framework since March 13th of last year. I liked how one of the speakers earlier said, we need transformational, we need transformational, not transactional. And I am very concerned that that is the exact path that we are going to go down. Having said that, I was also happy to hear that there are other council members who would like to have a little bit more involvement in the process, if that is going to move forward. There are absolute non-negotiables that I have that pretty much every proposal would be a no vote from me because of that. We haven't even had discussions as a group with the administration about what we are looking for, let alone what an independent study could show us. Again, the order of things in the process has been a bit mixed up. One thing that I would like to see if talks move forward is to have the groups that have proposals do a short presentation to city council. Maybe that's early, maybe that's down when it's narrowed down to finalists to do committee of the whole meeting, or two where we have a short presentation followed by a short Q&A session. It can be lightning around, it could actually be kind of fun, but it gives us an opportunity to hear from them together, weigh in on this together, and ask questions together in the sunshine where we can talk to each other. That is how we can help to guide the selection process. There is so much more that city council can do that we're not grabbing onto, and I commend Council Member Gabbard for reminding us that we do have a great deal of control. And that does include the final vote. And so it is extremely important for the administration to be listening right now. If we could have, here's where I'm at with voting today, okay? I want this committee meeting, and I think this whole thing should be happening in that committee discussion, where all council members, even those not on the committee, can be part of the discussion. If we could get a date certain today, and if that could be soon, I think we can really get to where city council is much more influential in the process. So I'm looking for that, because I believe that the goals of the resolution, as they've been explained, and the way that I'm interpreting this, is that what we want from this resolution can be achieved if we get this committee discussion done and get moving on this study. So, you know, I'm just, I'm kind of split on it, because I do want us to keep moving forward, having conversations. I don't want these proposers who have spent time and treasure putting together their best, putting their best foot forward, and some of these great ideas. I want to have those discussions. I don't want it all to just go away. But we've got to get things back in the right order here. And I'll make it clear that I will not, I will not vote to approve any kind of a deal that doesn't have this study included and implemented. So that's where I'm at right now. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Council Member Gabby. Chair, if I could, just for informational purposes, just wanted to, so all council members know, next Thursday at the Public Services and Infrastructure Committee, we are bringing back the in-town TIF discussion. So we look forward to having that conversation with everybody next week. And the Marina Design Build RFQ is in evaluation right now with staff. Okay. Thank you. Council Member Gabbert. Thank you, Chair. And I'll be brief. And I just really first want to thank all of my colleagues for your thoughtful consideration of the resolution today. I hope that you appreciate the thoughtful intent that came behind this, and specifically the words right in the middle of the title of the resolution to be very, very clear what the terminology of a pause is directly in relation to. And it is a pause from administration of any action to select, negotiate, or advance a developer ahead of a plan. And so that wording was very intentional because it is my fear that without council, having any sort of guidance, any sort of conversation, that a selection will be made, and then we will have to just respond again to what is being brought to us. And so this pause is not to pause any conversation moving forward. There are a lot of other things that can and should happen, one of which is an appraisal that we have been told needs to happen and is supposed to happen on the property. The list goes on. This is not to pause everything. This is not to pause individual meetings that administration can have with these developers. This is not to pause any of the discovery. This is to pause the selection, the negotiation, and the advancement of a specific developer choice on this site before city council gets an opportunity to create a plan in concert with the administration. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you. Oh, and if I can't, I'm sorry. I do just want to bring up that memory lesson before we left. I made the motion. However, I do not have a second as of now. I have it on my list. Thank you. I'll second it. Okay. We have a motion and a second. Council Member Fig Sanders. Thank you. And again, I appreciate all the conversation, but I still haven't received an answer as to who's at the table and who are the stakeholders, who will be the stakeholders of this study. And that's very important to me, and I think everyone needs to be cognizant. Again, going back to the history of the gas plant and how it all unfolded before, because, yes, I was around. It wasn't important to me at the time because I was, like, only 10. But I still don't want us to forget who the true stakeholders should be. Right now, I don't know who the stakeholders are intended to be right now. Right now, I still don't know who was at the table. I know who was at the table before, but I don't know who was at the table now. And I don't know what the intent is going to be from this. So I think that was one of my concerns. And I still have that concern. So whatever the process may be, I want to know that my no is not a denial of the process and what your intent was. But I'm not going to forget our descendants. I'm not going to forget what the original starting point of this whole process many years ago was about. And I just can't see myself getting caught up in the bander with trying to take something that was intentionally designed to hear the voices of our descendants because we want to be heard about this is what we should. Everybody's already said it. We don't know what's going to happen with this. We don't know where it's going. But I will say my no is going to be as cleansed as the day I was baptized in that driveway of the Ray Stadium. So just no is going to continue to be no as long as I think that our descendants are not being collectively heard. And I do have a problem with outsiders telling us what we need. I get it. I get it. But I still do have a problem with outsiders telling us what we need. Outsiders telling me what we need is just as bad as people that have never been there. I live that experience in telling you what you need. So thank you. Thank you, Chair. Council Member Gabbard. Hi, me again. Sorry. So the question's been asked. I don't work in the shadows. Very transparent. So I will share with everyone today. It's a matter of public record. If anybody cares to call for it. Who has been at the table in the two stakeholder meetings that I have worked on. I want to remind you that that was my promise to all of you. Was to bring a group of stakeholders together that potentially could look at assisting the city with some funding. So that is the exercise I've been going through. We have had two meetings. Obviously, ULI has been at the table. The first meeting that we had, ULI actually did a, national ULI did a presentation for us. And so they were at the table both from the local Tampa Bay chapter and from the national level. We have had at the table the St. Pete Chamber, the League of Women Voters, the Pinellas County Urban League, the St. Petersburg Downtown Partnership. We have had at least two members at our table who are gas plant descendants, ULI obviously, others from the chamber, the Pinellas County Urban League. I said that. The Bay Area Apartment Association, the Foundation for a Healthy St. Pete, and the NAACP were all three invited. Unfortunately, the timing did not work out for them to be able to attend, but those three were invited. The Suncoast Tampa Association of Realtors, the Sierra Club, no home run for St. Pete, and myself and my legislative aide. So that is everyone who has attended. There, yeah, there is a list of those individuals, and the group keeps growing. As I talk to people, Reimagine 175, I spoke with them. I believe you received a letter of support from them. You know, that list will continue to grow, and this was just the beginning. This is what I see as a catalyst to be able to move forward with a comprehensive conversation throughout many diverse groups within our community. And so this is just the start, but I did want to be transparent with you. I respect your lived experience immensely, Councilwoman Fig Sanders, and I just want to be very transparent in the process that I've been going through so far. Thank you. So I will say, you know, when I speak about planning, and to be clear, and I don't know the process of what ULI ends up doing, but my planning is much broader, and I want to make sure that the city itself has answers as to what our services are necessary and the things that are needed in that area and in our city. Because here's the thing, we have 86 acres, and then later on we're like, well, we don't have enough land for this fire station, or our MSA building needs to be here, but now we did this. And I just want a better roadmap, because I know we have so many smart, professional people that know all the needs that we have to provide these services. And this touches upon every department in our city, and I think it's important. There is, of course, the planning for, okay, what are the things that we would like there, but then there is a planning of what are the things that we actually need for a city itself before you get to all the other stuff. So I just want to make it clear that mine may be a little bit broader, but with the spirit of everything, I also want to put out a word of caution for those that are watching, because I know a lot of people are interested in how council members are going to vote, and some council members have already stated, this does not bind council members to any future vote. So it should not be also considered an indication of what they would vote on in the future, based on whatever comes before them. And I want to make that very clear, because it's very easy to say, take this vote today, and extrapolate it to something else. Not one of us has seen an agreement or contract before us, and for someone to presume that we are going to vote one way or the other without something before us, based on whatever we may vote on this resolution, I want to make sure that is definitely not what should be happening. We're voting on what's before us, which is a resolution that has been presented by Council Member Gabbard, and that's it. So I have a motion and a second. Clerk, you please open the machine for voting. Council members, please enter your votes. Seeing that all present council members have voted, Clerk Cowley, and announce the vote. Madam Chair, the motion to approve Agenda Item H-2A passes. This is 6-2, with Council Members Driscoll, Floyd, Gabbard, Gibbons, Hanowitz, and Harding voting yes, and Council Members Fig Sanders and Gerdes voting no. Thank you. Okay. Next in our agenda is open forum, and before we start open forum, I want to remind everyone, last open forum, I gave not just two, but four warnings, and I was being very patient. But our rules do not allow applause. There should be decorum. And if this is disrupted one more time, I can accept public comments by alternate means, including by email only. And with that said, do we have any speakers? Thank you. Okay. I'm going to call two at a time. When I call your name, please go to an open podium. State your name or cross street for the record, and you'll have three minutes to address city council. The first two speakers are Natalie Stackard and Ruth Whitney. I don't think they're here. Ruth is definitely not here. Okay. The next two speakers are Jameika Williams and Linda Dobbs. Hello, Council Members. My name is Jameika Williams, and I reside at 1010 Crescent Lake Drive. I'm here today as a community organizer and a resident who believes deeply that local government should serve the people who live here, not outside interests, not political pressure, and not short-term convenience. I want to start with the historic gas plant development. I know that there has been in-depth discussion ahead of this, but I want to reassert that this land carries real history, real harm, and real responsibility. One solution I urge you to consider is a community land trust model. Here is not just a policy choice. It's a commitment to repair, to affordability, and to community control. A land trust ensures that this land remains a public good permanently instead of becoming another asset extracted for private gain. That's why I also strongly reinforce support of holding off on this Tropicana development decision until after the mayoral election and until there is proper transparent planning. It's apparent that the current administration is ignoring the will of the people and apparently counsel, which I find abhorrent, since you all are elected officials. This is one of the most significant land decisions the city will make for generations, and I believe that rushing it, especially when an incubate mayor is up for re-election, undermines public trust. And selling this land off to out-of-town developers before the community, especially the ones affected, has a real say, repeats the same mistakes that created displacement in the first place. These issues are about timing, power, and who gets to decide. And that brings me to the ICE agreement, the city sign. I understand that the city may have felt pressure from the governor, but pressure does not remove responsibility. And in any other workplace, if a boss threatens you into doing something you don't believe in, you still have a right and an obligation to name that as harassment and pushback. Local government is no different. Cities across the country have organized against the state when policies harm their residents. And you guys are not powerless. Signing agreements that entangle us with ICE, undermines trust, harms immigrant communities, and make people less safe, not more. And saying we have no choice is not leadership. Local government can and must stand up for its people, and my hope is that you do just that. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, there are two speakers left, one in the chamber and one in Zoom. I'm going to call the one in Zoom now. Mary Ann Holtz, I'm going to let you into the meeting space. When I do, please state your name and address for the record or cross streets, and you will have three minutes to talk. Or no, no cross street. Okay. Can you hear us? Yes. Yes, I can now. Okay. My name is Mary Ann Holtz. I live at 4569 8th Avenue North. I've lived in St. Pete for 49 years. On January 27th, I wrote this council and the mayor expressing my concerns about budget priorities. One of the issues I addressed is that our police department signed the 287G agreement to cooperate with ICE. In light of the rapid escalation of brutality and lawlessness of the tactics of ICE, I urged our city to end its 287G agreement with ICE. I received a reply, the only reply I received really with any information, not from the mayor, it was just, I'll keep your information, but from the council chair's legislative aide, did copy me the response that you all had received from the police department, which is as follows. To clarify, our department is not a part of Immigration and Customs Enforcement. We assist ICE only when, during the course of a lawful encounter, an individual is identified as a suspect or subject in a criminal investigation. If it's determined that the individual has an active warrant, we are legally obligated to execute that warrant, whether it's ICE-related or not, fairly and consistently. We're not seeking, nor do we receive funding to support ICE operations. As of today, none of our detectives or officers has received training under the 287G program, therefore none is the deputies. That's the end of their statement. What the police department's statement doesn't address is whether they will cave in and push some of our officers into that 287G training, and it doesn't address what our city's plans are when ICE comes into St. Pete and does sweeps with no judicial warrants like they're doing in other cities, grabbing people based on racial profiling, and what the plans are for our city when ICE begins attacking peaceful protesters and those acting to protect immigrant neighbors. How is our city planning to protect our residents from ICE? As long as we have this agreement, it looks like there's cooperation planned. Experts who have studied authoritarian takeovers of governments note that early compliance only leads to the regimes taking more and more control. Let St. Pete stand up now and say abolish ICE. Thank you. Thank you. The final speaker is Charles Rogers. Please go to an open podium, state your name and address for the record. You'll have three minutes to address city council. My name is Charles Rogers. I live at 520 16th Avenue South. I came today representing the Progressive Jewish Coalition. This is in regards to the 287G agreement, but I would like to discuss my experience that led to me coming here today. On Monday, the Jewish Progressive Coalition went along with the Council for American Islamic Relations to the state capitol. I believe we were there to be heard out, to have representatives hear my words, maybe listen to me. While we were on the way there, the attorney general sent out a tweet saying that CARE was coming to essentially wreak havoc and he increased security measures, essentially trying to threaten us, get us to not come. We still came. We still showed our voice. We still spoke. We showed that we are dedicated Americans that want to protect each other, that want to look out for each other, that believe in the idea of disagreements within our religion and our right to have that. Beyond that, the 287G agreement, along with the bills that the state has passed, looks like it allows them to designate people as terrorists, domestic terrorists with little to no real, nothing behind that other than saying that you don't agree with the American ideology. Look how diverse this room was. Look how diverse it was outside. What is the American ideology? What I'm asking my city council that I did not get when I went to the state capitol because every single representative that agreed to meet with us, we just met with staffers. I'm asking you to hear me out as someone who is afraid for my neighbors, who's afraid for the people who have stuck their neck out to protect the people around them. I'm afraid for myself. I've already put my education on the line, my career on the line, just based on humanitarian principle alone. What I'm asking this city council to do is to consider that maybe this agreement looks good on paper, beginning at not having ICE come in, but they can easily escalate it. This agreement may look nice now, but what power do they have if they decide to pressure them to deputize more officers or do sweeps? If we don't make a stand now, if we don't say something that we won't have a chance to in the future, you may not see someone like me again because I may get detained on with no due process simply because of my advocacy in the past. Now, what I would just like the city council to consider, I've heard a lot of people talk about protecting their constituents, doing what's right for their constituents, especially minority constituents who have been displaced, disregarded. We have more people that we need to consider. Thank you. Okay, we close open forum. Announcements. Councilmember Floyd. Thanks. I'm just going to take a minute since we're in the sunshine to talk about one of the topics that a lot of the speakers have talked about today, the 287G agreement. I've been attending the N287G campaign meetings since their start, and they, I believe, have had a clear-eyed view of what the legal situation is in regards with our agreement. And so I'm going back and forth with them now more than ever, and I just wanted people to be aware that I'm trying to find any path forward that I think will represent our city's values and the things that our community is asking us for, because I have the same concerns that have been brought up today. But I wanted to let everybody know, because we don't get to talk about that that often. So I'll bring forward anything I can as soon as, you know, it's agreed upon by community members. Thank you, Vice Chair Floyd. Councilmember Gibbons. Thank you very much, Chair. And again, I just want to acknowledge the concerns of those who have shown up. You know, I've had the opportunity to speak with Chief. I've also spoken with Sheriff Calterry regarding the ICE agreement. And, you know, I've made it clear that I want to do all that I can to support our immigrant community, which is one of the reasons why, you know, I've raised the red flag and I've sounded the alarm regarding TCM, which ends this week for our Haitian residents. So I want to make sure that we're doing all that we can to help all of our immigrant communities. So I'm working with Gulf Coast Jewish Family Services, as well as some other pro bono attorneys to try to get some immigration help for them. And then lastly, in the spirit of Black History Month, we'll be hosting another Lincoln Cemetery cleanup this weekend, 658th Street South in Gulfport, and that'll be Saturday from 9 to 11. So anyone who can come out is welcome to come out. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Gurdon. Thank you, Madam Chair. Mayor, this weekend is our annual City Hall Stars game. And, of course, off the top of my head, I have forgotten the time of it. I'm looking it up. 11.30. 11.30. 11.30. We'll be taking on the Kids and Cubs. Before the game, we'll be giving out some grant money, which is always a good thing to celebrate, and looking forward to seeing everybody out on a beautiful weekend. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you. Councilmember Driscoll. Thank you. I will be unable to attend the City Hall Stars game, which I was going to say, unfortunately, but it's actually fortunate for you. It means you have a better chance of winning. Not true. With me, not there. But the reason I cannot participate this year is because I will be participating in our annual Science Fest in the Innovation District that is right next to Marine Quest, which has become just a really big annual co-located festival. And in the past, there have been times when I get roped into a science experiment or two. It can be quite fun. So I'm looking forward to that. And then I'm going to hustle over to Raptor Fest at Boyd Hill. And that is one of my favorite things out of the whole year as well. So very busy weekend. It's that time of the year. Hopefully, we'll have some good weather and that everyone can get a chance to get out there and enjoy some of these great events we have in the city. Thank you. Mr. Member Floyd. Thank you. I was reminded while Council Member Driscoll was speaking that I am absurdly busy this weekend for a lot of reasons, but one of them is Bungalow Fest in Historia Kendrick. Yeah, I saw that. You mentioned that as well. They're celebrating like a centennial of the neighborhood and the houses in the neighborhood. And so I think if you have a few free moments, you should come check it out. It's a good experience. Thank you. Well, thank you, Council Members, for a great meeting and a lot of good dialogue. Happy Black History Month to everyone. And this meeting is adjourned. Thank you. Thank you.