City Council - Oct 19, 2023

Welcome to the City of St. Petersburg City Council Meeting. Your elected officials are Mayor Ken Welch, District 1, Copley Gerdes, District 2, and Council Chair, Brandi Gabbard, District 3, Ed Montenari, District 4, Lisette Hanowitz, District 5, and Council Vice Chair, Deborah Fig Sanders, District 6, Gina Driscoll, District 7, John Muhammad, and District 8, Richie Floyd. Good afternoon, everyone. We will call to order the October 19th, 2023 City Council Meeting, beginning with a roll call. Gabbard? Here. Montenari? Here. Hanowitz? Here. Nick Sanders? Here. Driscoll? Here. Muhammad? Here. Lloyd? Here. Gerdes? Here. We will begin our meeting today with an invocation that is going to be given by Pastor Paul Gibson from Trinity Lutheran Church. Following that, we will have the Pledge of Allegiance, so please stand at the stand. So sorry. Let us pray. God of peace and of justice, we cry out to you when peace and justice seem in short supply. We feel powerless as we listen to words of hatred and gaze on images of horror, and we can do nothing. Remind us of the ways that peace can be created. Help us to cultivate peace within our own hearts. Help us to nurture peace in our family. Peace in the workplace. Peace in our community. Help us to find common ground with people who think differently than we do. Help us to respect them, to honor them, and to listen to their truth. Give us the humility to recognize that they have things to teach us, and that with their help, we can bring to all people the joy, the hope, the peace, and the justice that we desire. Bless this meeting of our City Council, that it can be a model of all the blessings of good government. That it can be a place where voices are heard and decisions are made in ways that protect the vulnerable and the weak. Help us to honor the strength that is found in our diversity as well as in our unity of purpose and of will. Keep us mindful of the unnecessary suffering that is happening in foreign nations as we address the unnecessary suffering that is happening around the corner. Keep us mindful of what happens when fear is channeled into hatred and violence as we work to alleviate pain and distress in our community. Surround us with agents of love and support as we endeavor to be beacons of light in a darkening world. We ask this in the name of all that is holy and just and true. Amen. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. You may be seated. Thank you, Pastor Gibson. As always, we appreciate you being here today, and it was a beautiful invocation. Thank you. Council members, we have an agenda before us today. I'll entertain a motion for approval. Move approval. Second. Okay, we have a motion and a second to approve the agenda. Seeing no request to speak, clerk, please open the machine for voting. Council members, enter your votes. Seeing all council members have voted, clerk, please tally and announce the vote. Madam Chair, the motion to approve the agenda passes unanimously. Next, we have our consent agenda before us today. Clerk, do we have any public comments on the consent agenda? Madam Chair, we do not. Okay, I'll entertain a motion for approval of the consent agenda. Move approval. Second. All right, we have a motion and a second. Seeing no request to speak on the consent agenda, clerk, please open the machine for voting. Council members, enter your vote. Seeing all council members have voted, clerk, please tally and announce the vote. Madam Chair, the motion to approve the consent agenda passes unanimously. All right, next we're going to go and take up a good news item. This was item F3. This is going to be presented by Assistant Police Chief David Garrado and Administrative Services Bureau Assistant Director Megan McGee. But before we turn it over to the two of you, Council Member Gerdes, you're the one who pulled this item. So I wanted to see if you had any comments. Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate it. Frankly, I just wanted to celebrate both our department and administration as they continue to go after grants. And I just think it's a wonderful thing we've been able to accomplish over this year and continue to try to accomplish, and especially for ones that try to decrease crime and help decrease crime in our city. So just wanted to celebrate it for a few minutes. I think it's both a win for our residents and another win for administration receiving a grant. But thank you very much, Madam Chair. All right, very good. Well, thank you all for being here today. Do you have a few words about the item that you'd like to share? Yeah, council members, first I wanted to say thank you very much for having us here today. My name is David Garrado. I just took over as one of the assistant chiefs, and I'll have our Administrative Services Bureau. So I wanted to take the opportunity, although I've met, I think, all of you informally. I wanted to formally introduce myself and tell you I very much appreciate you pulling the item for the Good News Agenda. I think a lot of excellent work went into funding this. As you all know, this is a very, the CADRMS upgrade project. It's a large project, both in terms of its scope for countywide law enforcement and public safety, but also in terms of its funding requirements. So the funding that was secured here was substantial, and I think a lot of great work went into it. I'm going to bring Assistant Director McGee up to go through some of the specifics of that, but I just wanted to thank you all for having us here today. Thank you, and thank you for being here. Thank you, Chief. Good afternoon, everybody. Megan McGee, Assistant Director. Thank you again for pulling this as a Good News item. It's nice to arrive and be able to present some good news. I do appreciate it. So the city was awarded a $750,000 technology grant from the Office of Community-Oriented Policing Services. This funding will aid the city in being proactive to secure needed data storage as part of that large, ongoing, multi-agency project to update and integrate our CADRMS system. CAD is an acronym for Computer Aided Dispatch RMS Record Management System. The PD anticipated that we would need additional storage as the new system will have enhanced GIS features and other capabilities. The project is multi-jurisdictional, also involving Pinellas County, Clearwater, Pinellas Park, Largo, Tarpon Springs, and the unincorporated cities that are serviced by the Pinellas County Sheriff's Office. The goals of the project are to improve response through a shared system and enhance mobile functionality. Supporting a necessary public safety need that our citizens rely on every single day. When first responders, police, fire, and EMS operate on a single system, they're able to share real-time information on a multi-jurisdictional criminal events, as well as coordinate responses to large-scale incidents. So through this grant, we're able to leverage technology to safeguard our data with redundancy to ensure continued operational capability in any type of emergency situation. And again, this enhanced data storage will help us expand our platform for real-time crime analysis. And since this is a good news item, I thought it would be appropriate to also use this opportunity to give a quick shout-out to our emergency communications division. This project definitely involves them quite a bit, and they do an incredible job. And as many of you know, they received the public safety communications CALEA accreditation last year. We are the only comm center in Pinellas County that has achieved that excellence. And also a shout-out to Chief of Staff Doyle Walsh. This particular grant initiated as a legislative community project back in 2022. And also thanks to then-Congressman Charlie Criss for his support in moving this forward. So I'm happy to answer any questions about the grant. If you have an incredibly detailed tech question about flash storage data array, I may not be the right person, but I can definitely get you any answer that you need. Well, thank you, Ms. McGee. Thank you for all the work that you do for us. Thank you for the presentation. Council members. Administrator Curtis. Thank you, Chair. I just wanted to take a moment publicly to congratulate Assistant Chief Gerardo. I've worked with him over the years on numerous different items. He's always been so responsive and productive, and it's a well-deserved promotion for him. Absolutely. Thank you very much. Thank you, and congratulations. Thank you. All right, Council members, we need a motion to- Move. Second. All right, we have a motion and a second. Seeing no requests to speak and no cards on the item, clerk, please open the machine for voting. Council members, enter your votes. Seeing all council members have voted, clerk, please tally and announce the vote. Madam Chair, the motion to approve agenda item F3 passes unanimously. Thank you again. Good to see you. All right, next we will move on to open forum. Clerk, can you please read the rules for open forum? If you wish to address City Council on subjects other than public hearing or quasi-judicial items listed on the agenda, please sign up with the clerk. Only the individuals 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 raised hand feature button on 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 asked to state your name and address. At the conclusion of your comments, or when you have reached 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 rule applies, including the three-minute time limit on comments. The requirement that any presentation material must be submitted in advance of the meeting and the rules of decorum. If light public comments is disrupted by violations of the rules of decorum, the chair is authorized to accept public comments by alternate means, including by email only. And, Madam Chair, we do have some speakers. Okay, very good. Please call the speakers two at a time. We have one speaker, and that is Lolita Campbell. Please step up to either podium. State your name and address for the record. You'll have three minutes to address council. Good afternoon, council members. My name is Lolita Campbell, 450 Caroline Parkway, St. Petersburg, Florida. I am a public policy student at St. Petersburg College, and I stand before you today in support of the audience 561H. The new city code will significantly contribute to the well-being and the progress of providing affordable housing to the citizens of St. Petersburg. This ordinance seeks to create Chapter 28 and provide a tax abatement specific for affordable housing projects allowed through Senate Bill 102, also known as the Live Local Act. Affordable housing is a topic that resonates deeply with many people within the community. It is an issue that not only impacts the lives of countless individuals and families within the city of St. Petersburg, but also shapes the very essence of the community. As St. Petersburg continues to grow and flourish, city and county leaders must ensure that the growth is inclusive, compassionate, and sustainable. And that's precisely what audience 561H aims to achieve. But by creating incentives for affordable housing projects, this audience addressed a critical need in St. Petersburg. It encouraged the development of housing that is accessible to those who may otherwise find home ownership or even renting within the city limits too expensive. It enables the city to offer housing to those in need the most within the community. But why is this so important? The benefits are manifold. Affordable housing not only provides a safe and stable place to live for residents, but also foster economic growth. When people have access to affordable housing, they have the opportunity to spend more on other necessities and contribute to the local economy. It creates jobs, ensures that we build a diverse, inclusive community that truly represent all residents. Moreover, Ordinance 561H aligns with the broader goal of making St. Petersburg a beacon of progress, compassion, and innovation. It sends a powerful message to our citizens, our neighbors, and our partners that we are committed to a brighter future for all. I would like to also emphasize that the ordinance does not just benefit those in need. It benefits everyone living in St. Petersburg, as it contributes to the social and economic vibrance of the city. It's a win-win for the community. In conclusion, I urge members of St. Petersburg City Council to vote in favor of the Ordinance 561H. Let us all embrace the responsibility to ensure that everyone within the community has access to affordable housing. Together, we can build a strong, more prosperous, and more inclusive St. Petersburg for generations to come. Thank you. Thank you. Madam Chair, no more speakers. All right, we will close open forum, and we will go to our new ordinance item and take up item E1. Clerk, please read the title. Proposed ordinance number 561-H, an ordinance of the city of St. Petersburg, amending the city code to create a new Chapter 28 housing. Creating Chapter 28, Article 1, in general. Providing definitions. Creating Chapter 28, Article 2, affordable housing tax relief. Providing authority. Providing applicability. Providing a process for use. Providing penalties. And providing for an effective date. The public hearing for this item is November the 2nd. Okay. We are joined by Assistant City Attorney Brad Tennant and Housing and Neighborhood Services Administrator Amy Foster. Ms. Foster, do you want to start? Good afternoon, Chair and Councilmembers. Since this is first reading, we don't plan to provide a presentation until second reading. However, this was heard in budget, finance, and taxation on August 24th. We've incorporated both your feedback as well as the AHAC Committee's feedback, but we are available. Mr. Green is here as well as Mr. Tennant, if you have any questions you need resolved today. Councilmembers? Move approval. Second. All right, we have a motion and a second. And do we have any cards on this item? We do not, Madam Chair. Okay, very good. So, Clerk, please open the machine for voting. Councilmembers, enter your votes. Seeing all Councilmembers have voted. Clerk, please tally and announce the vote. Madam Chair, the motion to approve agenda item E1 passes unanimously. All right. Thank you, Mr. Tennant. Thank you, Ms. Foster. Chair, Big 3 is not here yet. Could we go to F1, please, if you don't mind? Absolutely. We'll take up item F1, which is our reallocation of funding and emergency rental assistance. This is, we are joined by Housing and Community Development Assistant Director, Avery Schuyler. Hello. Good afternoon, Chair and Council. Dr. Avery Schleicher, Assistant Director for Housing and Community Development. Administration presents a request to you to approve a resolution accepting $956,923.83 in funding from the U.S. Treasury. This is to be combined these funds with the emergency rental assistance, which is ERA 2. Second allocation of $1,549,783.33 for payment of homeless prevention, which will include utility and rental and heirs and housing stability services. A little background is that originally the resolution of 2021-408 was approved September 9th on 2021 and accepted the initial ERA award for emergency rental assistance. Since then, Treasury reallocated that funding from the first round to all other areas, from all other areas in the nation, and that created the ERA 2. Today's request of the $956,923.83, this is the last reallocation from the Treasury Department for ERA received by the city. The total funds for ERA 2 is $12,299,099.93. All funds must be spent by September 30th, 2025. The statute requires that before the city can use ERA 2 funds for the construction of affordable housing, we must demonstrate that a 75% obligation requirement has been met for financial assistance and housing stability. $1,999,099,517.94 has already been allocated for construction of affordable housing. The city has only spent 71% of the ERA 2 allocations on financial assistance and housing stability. Therefore, part of our request today is to obligate $3,506,707.16 for those funds. Through a notice of funding availability published in the Tampa Bay Times and the Weekly Challenger, we solicited and received responses, and we are looking to award homeless prevention contracts to BOLI centers for rental and heirs, St. Petersburg Housing Authority for rental heirs, security deposits and application fees for housing choice vouchers, and CASA Housing Stability Services for domestic violence survivors, also along with entering into bulk utility air agreements with Duke Energy and the city's billing and collections department. We will have $181,707.16 that we're leaving open in case any of our contracts or the agreements need additional funds at the end of when, if they spend down quickly. And with that, administration is recommending approval of this resolution. All right, very good. Thank you for the presentation. City Councilmembers? Move approval. Second. Okay. Do we have any cards on this item? Madam Chair, we do not. Okay. We'll go to Councilmember Floyd. Thank you. So thank you so much for the presentation and the program in general. I support it wholeheartedly. I just wondered where we could get more information on, like, how some of the, like, utility arrear stuff is going to happen. We are in the process of developing that right now. We have already met with Duke Energy and billing and collections a few times. Duke Energy already has this program established. They've done this in other counties. And so they've got a whole database that they utilize that can weed out who are renters versus homeowners. They already know income pretty much. And what they do is they self-identify and then contact those individuals on their list. And they say, we've got these funds available to you through the city of St. Petersburg. This is a fantastic opportunity. Would you like to opt into the program? If so, we have a few questions for you. Everything within ERA2 is much different than ERA1. In ERA2, all residents can self-attest to their COVID impact, which we found that inflation is definitely the number one cause, and the Treasury Department said we can absolutely use that. They can self-attest their income. Everything is literally a check of a box this time. So they've made it much simpler. That's great. And then there was 1.5 for our billings department as well, and that's similar. We're going to use similar programs. We're going to hope to. We're in talks right now with billing and collections. So just seeing which model will work best for them within the city's different models and processes. Okay, great. Thank you very much for the info. I look forward to hearing about how it's gone in the future as well. Thank you. Thank you. All right. We have a motion and a second. Seeing no further request to speak, Clark, please open the machine for voting. Council members, enter your votes. Seeing all council members who voted, Clark, please tally and announce the vote. Madam Chair, the motion to approve agenda item F1 passes unanimously. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Cycler. Okay, it looks like we are back to F2. Hi, Chris. All right. F2 is our Big Three Entertainment Mahaffey Theater update, and we are joined by Development Coordination Managing Director, Chris Balestra. Thank you, Madam Chair, members of council. Very happy, proud today to bring forward a good news item in a report form to provide, allow the Mahaffey Theater to provide an update to you of what's going on with the theater. I'll very quickly preamble it with you. I should say this body approved a five-year agreement September 9th, two years ago, 2021. So we're two years in, and that followed two five-year terms previously with Big Three Entertainment. So effectively, we're in our 13th year of our relationship with Big Three Entertainment, led by Mr. Edwards. And the success is palpable in terms of not just the metrics, contract compliance, but the community response to what's going on. So with that, a video has been prepared, if I could share with council that, and then allow Mr. Edwards to answer questions. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Edwards, for being here with us today. Good to see you. 13 years ago, the city of St. Petersburg entrusted the management of the Mahaffey Theater to Big Three Entertainment and Bill Edwards. Edwards' experience as a music business professional and his St. Petersburg ties made him the ideal candidate to run this cultural gem. It was in tough shape. But again, you look at something and you go, well, you know, what happens if you change this and you fix that and you fix this? I mean, the bottom line to it is look behind me and you can see how wonderful and beautiful this place is. I was very proud a while back when the National Geographic took a picture of some young girls doing a dance recital in the dressing room. We'd be done with all the lights and the mirrors and everything, and it became their major magazine for the year. They mentioned the Mahaffey Theater, and I thought, wow, we're on the map. To date, Edwards has invested over $10 million of his own money to bring the Mahaffey Theater into a new era. These improvements changed the entire experience for both attending shows and performing on the stage. Today, the Duke Energy Center for the Arts Mahaffey Theater is an important cultural player in the St. Petersburg arts community. In recent years, we have welcomed Christina Aguilera, Todd Rundgren, Wanda Sykes, Cirque Dreams Holidays, Rick Springfield, Patti LaBelle, Inc. Martini. All I wanted to do was just say thank you so much to everyone here at Duke Energy Center in the Mahaffey Theater because I don't want to leave. Back in 2011, Bill Edwards took a keen interest in the Class Act's Youth Educational Performance Series. Once a city-sponsored program, Edwards and his foundation, the Bill Edwards Foundation for the Arts, assumed responsibility for the program, educating, engaging, and entertaining more than a half a million students in the Tampa Bay area, and have recently expanded the program to include youth art festivals, and a summer camp for young actors. The 23-24 season is on track to be the biggest ever. The lineup, as promised by Bill Edwards back in 2011, is as diverse as ever, with something for everyone. Comedian Taylor Tomlinson, country music legend Clint Black, Morrissey, On Your Feet, the story of Emilio and Gloria Estefan, Gladys Knight, and many, many more. This season, we are especially proud to introduce Sonata, a world-class dining experience that will feature brilliant cuisine from award-winning and New York Times Best Chef Florida, Ted Dorsey. Sonata, the vision of Bill Edwards, will open in the fall and will specialize in coastal cuisine rooted in southern hospitality and presented in the most elegant atmosphere with waterfront views. In addition, we have partnered with Trish Duggan and the Imagine Museum to present one of the finest installations of artwork in downtown St. Petersburg, where we will combine the performing arts, the visual arts, and the culinary arts. With the support of the Bill Edwards Foundation for the Arts and our many donors, sponsors, and partners, we can continue to bring world-renowned performances to this cultural treasure that the community has grown to love. It's with everyone's support that our vision continues to grow. Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll now turn the mic over to Mr. Edwards. Good afternoon. Hello. Well, it was a banner year this year, and we're going to have another one this coming year. So the good thing is that we've got a lot more children in the theater this year, and we've expanded the class acts to about 16 shows a year, and many more children are coming. We've funded that with a foundation, Bill Edwards Foundation for the Arts, and so we're not charging the children for buses or anything like that. We've kind of picked up the slack on that, and of course, it takes funds to do that, so we have a foundation, and they're here. Amy Miller is the president of our foundation, and who else we got here? We've got Chef, how are you doing? That's Ted Dorsey, and he's a well-known chef in the area. I'm sure you've heard of him. He used to have the, what was the name of that place? The mill. Right. Okay, and the mill and growing of the city didn't go well together, so it was good for me and unfortunate for him, but it turned out to be fortunate for everybody because he we had to close down because this business dropped about 80%, and that was perfect. We needed to put together a chef at another place I had, which I've now sold. And so this gives us the opportunity to use the theater and the kitchen and everything, and we've found room and space, and we've been working on the art and the kitchen and all that stuff to make it work. So now it's going to be a restaurant you can go to for lunch or dinner, whether you have a show or not. But you can go before the show or after the show, and we'll be open to the public. And we're hoping to fill that all the time. And you're sitting in a restaurant that's surrounded by amazing art that's been provided by the Imagination Museum. And so I think that's a big coup for us and for the city to have all those things in one place, to have three different arts in the same place. So with that, I'd just like to thank you all for your help and allowing us to do these things. And soon, very soon, we hope to have the restaurant open, and we'll invite you in for a free taste. How's that? You can be the guinea pigs. There you go. Council Member Hanowitz. Thank you, Chair, and thank you, Mr. Edwards, and everyone for everything you do for the Mahaffey Theater. I have to say, this year, I saw my little girl dance in one of the dance shows for the first time at the Mahaffey Theater, and she's eight years old. And I will tell you, it was amazing because it's a big stage, and you see the little kids there, first time. There were kids that were younger, and it was great to watch them come on stage. But to have children in our community, to have an opportunity to be on stage in such a fantastic venue is really fantastic, whether they're on stage or they're coming from the public schools to watch performances. Have that in our community, to me, I just think it's invaluable. So I wanted to share. I saw the little girls that you, they were the picture, and that just tugged my heartstrings because I experienced that this year as a parent. The fact that you're evolving with the community, with the restaurant, and growing with us, the art installation, and making changes to grow as the city grows, I think it's fantastic. And I look forward to continuing to see the Mahaffey grow. Thank you. Councilmember Montaneri. Thank you, Madam Chair, and good to see you, Mr. Edwards. Good to see you, members of your board here. And Joe, good to see you also. So there's a lot to like in that video. And you have to be very, very proud, and your board and everybody involved with the Mahaffey needs to be proud. There's a couple things that caught my eye. $10 million of your own funds invested in the Mahaffey Theater. That's a substantial investment in a city asset. And thank you very much. Cheers to my eyes. Well, thank you for doing that. And then just some of the notes that I took, the CLAS Act youth, half a million young people that participated in your changing lives with every one of those people. And a lot of times you're introducing them to the arts. And I'm a big believer in planting seeds, giving people a new experience, and you've been doing that for a good part of your life, not just with the Mahaffey, but with other things around the city. And I'm very grateful to that. And then this Sonata restaurant paired up with the Imagine Museum. It sounds like a win-win-win situation for the city and the Mahaffey and everybody involved. So thank you for that. I did want to ask Chris a couple questions because I understand that there's some back maintenance that needs to be done. And then I went back and looked at the agreement that we approved back in 2021. And so I understand that I want to go through just a couple of these things, but I want to have a longer conversation with you. But I understand that there's some issues with the electrical system, switch gear, and some other upgrades that need to be done. And can you kind of talk to us a little bit about that? Certainly. The Mahaffey Theater, of course, goes back to 1965. So it has got some miles in its rearview mirror. Of course, we took down the Bayfront Center, which was an integral part of it, and rebuilt the lobby and surround area. And it came out very successfully. With that, though, there is, and I wouldn't say gremlins, but there's some electrical issues that it's time to deal with. That, along with it's time to replace the audio system, there's just some general repair and maintenance. But they're large projects. Obviously, when you do these kind of things in an asset of this nature, things have to be perfect. You have people paying a substantial amount of money sometimes to sit down and see a show. There cannot be a glitch. Failure is not an option. So working with Bill and his team to identify all the critical path items, this year we have about $930,000 of improvements in progress on the city side. Of course, as part of our agreement with Big 3, they handle a lot of basic R&M, up to $275,000 a year, and beyond that is up to the city. So we've got about $900,000 in progress this year, and there will be more over the next couple of years. So we have a plan. It's going to take, you know, two to four years to get it done. But the electrical is one of the ones that we're on top of right now. From what I've heard, what I don't want to happen is something happened with the electrical system, and, you know, something goes dark at the Mahaffey Theater, whether it's in the middle of the orchestra playing or any other entertainment venue. And then I don't want Mr. Edwards to be on the hook for those sorts of problems. No, I don't want that phone call. Nobody wants those, yeah. So in our agreement, we have $400,000 allocated for capital improvements. And it seems to me, with all the work that needs to be done, that we're probably going to need substantially more funding. I believe so, and I'm working with our engineering team. We're even looking at the potential for the 2027 penny, which comes up as well, if we have the ability to pull resources out of that. And working through every possible angle of the monies. We've got, again, a plan on what to do when. Right now, on the electrical, there's a study in progress right now. There's a switch. There's a breaker replacement. There's a couple minor things happening as we speak. But there's a larger study, effectively a forensic study. Again, with the implosion of the Bayfront Center, there was a lot of things that were basically just tied off and not looked at again. And we want to make sure that that doesn't complicate anything that happens anywhere from lobby to back of stage to the house. And, again, we're going to work as quick as we can to advance that. Again, we've got some of it in progress right now, along with sound system improvements. But the larger part of the electrical project is next. And I'd like to try to advance that as quick as possible. But right now, the study will determine the duration and what needs to happen, along with the associated budget to go with that. We have estimates, but we're not sure about the accuracy of those because we want to have the study complete first. Okay, good. Well, thank you for that update. So you went through some of the issues that are internal to the Mahaffey Theater, which is a source of great pride for all of them. I want to talk about one other thing that's external, and that's the fountain. The fountain hasn't been in operation for a while. Can you talk a little bit about the fountain? Yeah, that's actually in progress now. So that should be phase one of that repair should be done in January. It should be operational in January. Okay. And we have some more work to do on some of the infrastructure to it. But the fountain is a part of the agreement with Big Three, but it's a larger capital issue. It all ties back to the electrical and the main panel in the building. And on the electrical, to wrap up on that subject, it has nothing to do with the ability, with nothing to do with Duke Energy, nothing to do with, in fact, we've got more power than we know what to do with in the building. Having prior Bayfront Center there, it's just a matter of effectively a detailed cleanup of what already exists. So the fountain is a part of that project, and that one is in progress right now. Okay. Well, like I just said, the Mahaffey Theater is a source of great pride for our community. And we have people that travel all over the place to come to St. Petersburg and enjoy a show, enjoy the orchestra. And I want to make sure that the experience is a good one. Yes, sir. Agreed. For them. Mr. Edwards, thank you again for everything you do for our city. And thank you for believing in St. Petersburg and being a great leader at the Mahaffey Theater. If I have a minute, I'd like to continue on with what you were discussing. Sure. Because two years ago, the Grand Prix was in the building, and the whole block blew, and we lost a breaker. Okay? And the breaker's a big, giant, old breaker from back in the, I don't know when they built that, 60 years ago. Okay? So the breaker's gone. It's been blown out. It's been blown out for two years. I would have thought by now we probably could have made one, had one made, something like that, put it back in. I think the surge was from everything that was going on between Alley and Field and the fact that the race takes over the theater and throws us out for a week or a little more. And during that period of time, they bring in cars and put them on our marble floors, and they do a lot of things. It's not really functional for a theater, but it happens, and we live with it. But, you know, we've had, I put a lot of my own money to fix these things in, but I can't keep doing that. It's about time that somewhere in the city's budget, there should be money set aside to take care of their own real estate. And I put $10 million in somebody else's real estate, more than $10. And as of this week, in this year, I put in over a quarter of a million dollars to make things work. So it's about time that the city realized that they have to take care of their own real estate. And you brought it up, I just thought I'd share. There's several things that total up to about close to $6 million that have to be repaired. And, you know, I don't have that kind of money to repair them, so they'd go on and repair it. And there are things like soundboards. You know, so if an act gets on and we turn on our soundboard and it blows, which is 15, 20 years old, it's over. All this stuff is dated. The speakers, the things in the ceilings, they're all dated. So they all need to be replaced. And I don't have the money to do it, and the city doesn't seem to have it in their budget to do it. And I'm trying to figure out, well, how do you take care of your real estate when somebody's been a good steward of it? But it needs work, and it needs money to supply it to take care of the things that need to be taken care of. I mean, 20 years ago, the city put $20 million in that building. It needs to do it again. You know, that's the bottom line. I don't think it's that much, but probably. You know, so these things, we live with them every day. You know, if we turn on a, we've got a big show coming up, and it's sold out, and we turn on a board, and it starts humming, making noise. We have to shut it off and pray that it's going to go back on again. So these are things that outlive their life, and they need to be replaced. And thank you for bringing it up. But the things that need to be taken care of, and, you know, I just think it probably should be in the budget of the city to take care of its real estate. So with that, I'll just leave it alone at that. Totally agree. Thank you for coming in and presenting to us. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you. Council Member Driscoll. Thank you. Mr. Edwards, the contributions that you've made to our city can be seen all over. For so many years, you have invested not only with your funding, but with your heart, and I think that shines the brightest of all. And I am so, so grateful for you. Thank you. You really were one of the key players in the renaissance of our city, and you haven't stopped. I mean, you are still going strong, and this video is such a great example of that. As a board member for the Florida Orchestra, I'm grateful for the partnership that you have with the orchestra. And as a person who is a big cheerleader for the performing arts, I can always point to the Mahaffey and say, this is where we've got the big stuff going on. And it's because of you, and it's because of your team. So I'm also grateful for Joe and for Amy, for the partnership that you have with Duke Energy, and we've got Jeff from Duke with us today. And now, adding to this incredibly successful team is Chef Dorsey. Amazing news. I always thought it would be so cool if we could get a restaurant going. And not only did you do that, but you got Ted. I mean, it's just incredible. So I can't wait. I can't wait to try it out. I always enjoy my time at the Mahaffey, and I know with the Florida Orchestra, we see that a large number of the patrons of the orchestra are actually coming from Tampa. And the same performances they could see at the Strauss, but they choose to cross the bridge and come to see the Florida Orchestra play at the Mahaffey because of the Mahaffey. And the restaurant experience is just going to elevate that even more. So I'm really excited about that progress. Very happy to hear that we've got some repairs in the works, including the fountain. And I would like for us to, together, take a look at what the needs are and make sure that we can actually get ahead of it instead of always playing catch-up. I do agree that we need to make sure that we're taking care of this incredible asset that we have in our city so that it can get better and better and really stay modern. So that even as we move forward with the redevelopment of the historic gas plant district, we know that's going to have some entertainment opportunities. But what we have with the Mahaffey is incredibly special, and it's worth the time and investment. I hope that that is something that we can develop concurrently with the master plan for the Center for the Arts as we move forward with that plan. So I'll be having some follow-up conversations with the administration regarding that and how we can really get things in line to ensure that the Mahaffey and Big Three Entertainment can continue to welcome people to great performances for many years to come. Thank you. Thank you for all you do. And thank you, Chris, for everything that you do to keep this partnership going strong. Thank you, Chair. Vice Chair Fink Sanders. Thank you. First of all, welcome and thank you, Mr. Edwards. Your honesty, I had to just say thank you for that. That just touched me. It's like, okay, well, he's telling the truth. He's being extremely honest about it, and so I wanted to thank you for your honesty. But as I looked at the video, one of the things that resonated with me is your intentionality about diversity, about ensuring the things that you've done in the community, both inside and out, you know, you have those that have never met Bill Edwards, but they know Bill Edwards' name because of the philanthropy that you've done. So I have to say thank you for that because I'm a big proponent of letting our children, and I say are, all of them are ours, have those experiences that they would not normally have. So I want to thank you for that. But I really do appreciate your honesty, and I just, I welcome the report, and thank you so much for what you do. Thank you, Chair. Well, Chris, first I'll start with you and say thank you. I am continuously impressed by you and the way that you steward all of the properties that we own, all of our facilities. Thank you for everything that you do. You are a treasure to us, so I just wanted to take a moment to say that because I don't think we say that to you enough. We give you a lot of hard jobs, so thank you for everything. Mr. Edwards, thank you as well. Your vision for our city and how you continue to be part of the growth is just remarkable to me. I have always admired you and always been very thankful for everything that you have done for us. I am very excited for this new reiteration. It said in the video how we marry the culinary arts with the performance arts with the visual arts, and I love that. As someone who loves the arts, grew up in performance art, and just absolutely love how we can tie all of that together and make an already fabulous facility even better and have more draw for more people, I think that is brilliant. But it's an example of just how you've always been. So I definitely share in my colleagues' concern over the maintenance of the facility. We have to have a serious conversation about this because this asset is too important to us to let it fall into further disrepair. So I think there's some definite warranted conversations coming forward around what that looks like, and it will be a heavy lift. But the last thing we want is for the performance art community to see that we have a facility that's falling apart, that they can't trust that things are going to work whenever it's showtime. So we'll make sure that we stick with that and continue to move forward in those conversations. But as a patron, as you know, my family loves coming to shows there, and I just love what you do for, like you said, the youth, our youth in the community, and the exposure that you give to make sure that kids from all walks of life have access and exposure to the arts, thank you a million times over. We owe you a huge debt of gratitude. So thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. And I'll close with that. One final item is I just would like to share. We, under the city development umbrella, we have several public-private partnerships. And as evidenced by your comments and the success that we've had with the relationship with Big Three Entertainment and Mr. Edwards, I would call this Exhibit A a good path to do public-private partnerships throughout the city. It's a great way to leverage the private sector and make a better place for the community. So thank you very much. Thank you. All right. Well, thank you all. We will move on now to item F4. And this item was actually pulled to reports by Councilmember Montaneri. This is a resolution for the construction phase services of the Benoit Golf Club Canal Dredging and Maintenance Project. We are joined by Engineering Director Bridgesh Preyman. But before we go to Mr. Preyman, I am going to go ahead and turn it over to Councilmember Montaneri since this was your item. Thank you, Madam Chair. This is an issue that I've been dealing with in my city council district for the last four or five years. And at this area on Snow Isle, when we have heavy rain events, it turns into a big lake. And the city's been working on this for, well, it started back in the 1920s when the developer created a canal on what's now the Benoit Golf Course. And the canal was maintained by the city until the late 70s. And then the city stopped maintaining it. And flooding's been just a big problem in this issue. And so along the way in 2007 and then recently in 2020, 2021, and 2022, there's been various studies on how to address this problem. And when I saw this on the consent agenda, I just wanted to bring this to everyone's attention, including the residents of Snow Isle, that help is on the way to start addressing this problem. So I'll turn it over to Mr. Preyman. The council, after that introduction, I'm about right to say I asked for approval. I kind of covered everything. Was that your presentation? Pretty much, yeah. You don't get off that easy. Clerk, dim the lights. Good try. Oh, man. I tried. So I'll skip a little bit of the history on it. And if I may just flip to the first slide just to give a general idea of the location. So this is actually from our intranet system. We did an internal map. And what you're seeing in the blue is the channel itself. Now, the orange line is the main roadway that goes through that neighborhood, coming in and out. Unfortunately, probably back in, like, 2006, we did another stormwater project connecting to the waterway to the south, which was the Brightwater-Snell Isle drainage improvements. But there's also another direction of flow that flows towards the Appian Way section. Now, as Council Member Montaneri mentioned, and correctly so, what happens during a deluge, or sometimes even a regular rain event, and it's being more and more prominent with sea level rise, that canal is tidally impacted. So we're starting to lose that hydraulic capacity in that channel. So one of the things we want to do, obviously, we have originally intended to put a pump station out there, and we have an emergency pump there. But if I can give a comparison of, in our kitchen sinks, we size our pipe that flows the water in. Think of that as the pump. And the outlet that flows out, think of that as the channel. So we have to make sure that we properly size that pipe. So as we put the water into that channel, it flows out, and our sink's not filling out. Otherwise, we could put a fire hose into there as our pump, and we'll flood the kitchen sink. So think of that situation with this channel. So we want to make sure and do a proper analysis of the hydraulic capacity. Open it up. Let's get that flow going. And it's more of a volumetric flow. And as we get that going, we'll then be able to properly size the pump station. So we'll be more cost-effective in our analysis and more efficient. So this is the situation at hand. On the left, you'll see that pumps. But what's very interesting is because of the tidal condition, the pump is pumping as fast as it can, but it can't overcome the inundation of that flow coming in because it doesn't have that hydraulic capacity in the channel to keep it going out. So we essentially want to open it up and create that hydraulic capacity. On the image on the right, that's the extent as to how much upstream that system flows, that drainage basin. And I've always used the example of cutting that golf ball open and laying it out, those micro-basins. The boundaries between all those basins within the neighborhood is generally within six inches to a foot. So if water is coming in and it starts to rise in one basin, it's going to flow over into another one, flow over into another one. And that's how we have that continuous flow in other directions. That roadway that you're seeing there is the main roadway going into that neighborhood. So it's affecting residential traffic, essential services, emergency accesses, school buses. So it's a major impact on operations and public safety. So that's why we're moving forward with this project in a strategic manner. This is the condition of the channel right now. Again, we're looking to open at hydraulic capacity. So when we go to the next step, we understand how much we actually have to size. So what's the project objectives? This channel, this canal, serves as the outfall for upstream sections of the neighborhood. As you can see, it's collecting flow from multiple directions, going towards that channel on the underground system, not the overland, underground system. But because we can't pump it out fast enough and that backing up, it's resulting in that staging of that water. So the hydraulic limitation of the channel results in that staging. So what's the objective? We're looking to increase that capacity. We're looking at approximately 3,300 linear feet of dredging, of canal cleaning, and disposal of that dredge material with a construction time frame of approximately six months. So with that, I will entertain any questions. All right. Councilman Rettner, did you have any questions? No, I don't have any questions. I just wanted to thank Rich Ash for the report. And you explained it a lot better than I did. Move approval. I was going to do that. Second. Sorry. We have a motion and a second. So seeing no further requests to speak and no cards on this item, right? Clerk, please open the machine for voting. Council members, enter your votes. Seeing all council members that voted. Clerk, please tally and announce the vote. Madam Chair, the motion to approve agenda item F4 passes unanimously. Very good. Thank you, Mr. Freeman. Appreciate it. All right. Next, we will do our council committee reports and take up item H1, which is our October 12, 2023 BF&T meeting. And Council Member Gerdes. Sorry. No, you're fine. We got to it quick. Should I play some, like, Jeopardy music? You're fine. See it. Okay. Thank you. Sorry. No, you're fine. I was getting ready to do the same. Respectfully requesting City Council approval for the scope of services for a management evaluation for St. Petersburg Fire and Rescue, an authorizing administration to issue a request for a proposal. I'll move approval. Second. All right. We have a motion and a second. Seeing no requests to speak, clerk, please open the machine for voting. Council members, enter your votes. Seeing all council members that voted, clerk, please tally and announce the vote. Madam Chair, the motion to approve agenda item H1A passes unanimously. All right, City Council, well, that's all the business we can take up for now. So we will stand in recess until our 501 public hearings. We'll bring City Council back to order and begin our public hearings for this evening and take up first item J1. Clerk, can you please read the title? Opposed ordinance number 1157-V, an ordinance approving a vacation of a portion of right-of-way, approximately 332 square feet, an area on the west side of 8th Street North, generally located at 1100 8th Street North, setting forth conditions for the vacation to become effective and providing for an effective day. And Madam Chair, we do have part. Okay, we will turn it over to our Deputy Zoning Official, Scott Boyard, for our presentation. Good evening. Good evening. Madam Chair and members of Council, for the record, Scott Boyard with Development Review Services. I do have about a four or five minute PowerPoint presentation if you'd like to see it. Yes, please. All right. The request before you is to vacate a portion of right-of-way on the west side of 8th Street North, generally located at 1100 8th Street North. The request includes the vacation of approximately 332 square feet of right-of-way on the west side of 8th Street North. The applicant will be dedicating a similarly sized portion of private property as right-of-way through replatting to provide a right-of-way boundary along the west side of 8th Street North that follows the existing curvature of the street. A condition of approval is included in the ordinance requiring replatting of the abutting properties. Here's an aerial with the portion of the right-of-way to be vacated, highlighted in yellow. The portion of private property to be dedicated as right-of-way via replat is shown in red. And the yellow line depicts the proposed new boundary line that follows the curvature of the existing sidewalk and pavement along the west side of 8th Street North. This is a photo looking north on 8th Street North, just south of where the street begins to curve. And here's a closer view where the sidewalk and pavement start to curve. This is at the intersection of 11th Avenue North and 8th Street North. The request is within the boundaries of the Historic Uptown Neighborhood Association, which has a neighborhood plan for the area that identifies issues and opportunities, which include reduce the number of vacant lots and unoccupied homes, as well as neighborhood residential goals to support compatible infill development and other uses of vacant lots. And collaboration between the city and developers to provide guidance and support for housing and site design in harmony with the Historic Uptown's fabric and character. This request to vacate partial right-of-way was submitted concurrently with a redevelopment application, DRC case 23-5100003, that was approved by DRC on September 6th. That is relocating a grandfather dwelling unit from an existing duplex at 809 10th Avenue North to the vacant lot that's on 8th Street North for a new single-family residential development, which addresses the plan's issues and opportunities to reduce the number of vacant lots and fulfills the plan's goal of compatible infill development on vacant lots. The application was routed to city departments and private utility providers for review with the following comments provided that are included as conditions of approval. Engineering is requiring dedication of public right-of-way for 8th Street North along with public easements for utility and sidewalk purposes. Water resources is requiring an easement dedicated over a sewer main that runs north-south within the 8th Street North right-of-way. And TECO provided an email stating that they have facilities in the area which the applicant will need to address and attain a letter of no objection from TECO. Staff is recommending approval of the request for partial right-of-way vacation subject to the conditions within the ordinance. This concludes my presentation. I'll be happy to answer any questions. All right. Thank you. Let's go to public comment, please. Don Mastry. Please state your name and address for the record. You'll have three minutes to address counsel. Pardon? State your name and address for the record, and you'll have three minutes to address counsel, Mr. Mastry. Only three minutes. My name is Don Mastry. My address is 200 Central Avenue. Scott has thoroughly described the project. I think it meets the LDRs, the comp plan, and the Uptown Historic Neighborhood Association's plan. And I would answer any questions that you have. Thank you. I read there has been no public attend the DRC meeting or no opposition at all, so. Very good. Thank you, Mr. Mastry. And that was the only speaker? That's the only speaker, Madam Chair. Okay. City Council? Move approval. Second. All right. We have a motion and a second. Seeing no request to speak, clerk, please open the machine for voting. Council members, enter your votes. Seeing all council members have voted, clerk, please tally and announce the vote. Madam Chair, the motion to approve agenda item J-1 passes unanimously. All right. Thank you. And thank you, Mr. Bulliard. All right. Item J-2. Clerk, please read the title. Opposed ordinance number 559-H. An ordinance approving the first amendment to the development agreement for property generally located at the northwest corner of Gandy Boulevard Interstate 275 Interchange. Recognizing that the subject agreement is by and between Gateway J-Bill Property Owner, LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company, Gateway J-Bill Phase 2 Property Owner, LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company, and GEP 11 Gandy, LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company, collectively as the owner of the property, which has succeeded both J-Bill Inc. as owner of the property and Gray Star Development East, LLC, a development of the property, and the city of St. Petersburg, Florida, a Florida municipal corporation, authorizing the mayor or his designee to execute the agreement and provide it for an effective date. Madam Chair, we do have a card. Okay. And we are joined by Urban Planning and Historic Preservation Planner, Britton Wilson. Ms. Wilson, good to see you. Good evening, Council. Council, again, Britton Wilson, for the record, presenting the first amendment to a development agreement between the city and Gray Star Development, or formerly J-Bill when approved by Council in 2021, and was reviewed concurrently with a land use and zoning amendment, which amended a 17-acre portion of the J-Bill parcel shown here in the dashed outline, which approved a land use change from industrial limited to planned redevelopment commercial, and rezoning from employment center to commercial quarter suburban for the purpose of providing multifamily housing to include workforce housing. And a development agreement was entered into for the entire 93-acre parcel to commit the developer to construct at least 200,000 square feet of industrial uses prior to or concurrently with the multifamily housing and to dedicate at least 20% of the housing to workforce housing. In July of 22, construction began for 412 multifamily units to include 83 workforce housing units, as well as 290,000 square feet of industrial space, where only 200,000 was required by the DA, with an estimated completion by the end of this year. However, during construction of the industrial buildings, adverse subsurface soil conditions were encountered, resulting in significant building delays, resulting in only 143,000 square feet of industrial space being completed concurrent with the multifamily units, which is short 57,000 square feet from the required 200,000. Due to these unforeseen circumstances that were out of the control of the developer in the city, the development agreement is proposed for modification to require 143,000 square feet of industrial uses be delivered concurrent with the multifamily housing instead of the original 200,000. However, an additional 147,000 square feet of industrial space will be delivered by February of 2025, which is an increase of 45% for a total of 290,000 square feet. And the building permit and foundation for the additional space is to be completed no later than the final CO for the multifamily buildings. As noted in the staff report, the proposed amended DA is consistent with many goals, objectives, and policies of a comprehensive plan, such as calling for incentives for the private sector to help meet the community housing needs. And with that, staff recommends a finding of consistency with the comprehensive plan, an approval of the First Amendment to the development agreement because it demonstrates a reasonable good-faith effort to complete the project, and because allowing 412 multifamily units, including 83 workforce housing units, to sit empty for one year is contrary to public interest. And that concludes my presentation. Staff and the applicant is here to answer any questions you may have. All right, let's go to public comment. Dawn Mastry. State your name and address for the record. You'll have three minutes to address counsel. My name is Dawn Mastry. My address is 200 Central Avenue. And Britton has accurately and thoroughly described the request. This is certainly not something that was wanted or brought on. And I think the city is going to end up getting more, 90,000 square feet more. And I would point out that 165,000 square foot building has already been completed and leased. So the project is moving along. And I'd answer any questions that you might have. All right. Thank you, Mr. Mastry. No more cards, Madam Chair. Okay. City Council. Move approval. Second. All right. We have a motion and a second. Seeing no request to speak. Clerk, please open the machine for voting. Council members, enter your votes. Seeing all council members have voted. Clerk, please tally and announce the vote. Madam Chair, the motion to approve agenda item J2 passes unanimously. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Wilson. All right. We'll move on to item J4. Clerk, please read the title. Proposed ordinance number 560-H. Ordinance of the City of St. Petersburg, Florida. Amending sections 3-7 G5 of the City Code. Relating to procedures for the approval of special events in the Edge District Specialty Center. And providing for an effective date. And, Madam Chair, we do have one card. All right. We are joined by Assistant City Attorney Michael Dima for this item. Hello, Mr. Dima. Good evening, Chair, City Council. You have before you an ordinance that creates a council approval process for a waiver of the 60-day lead time that we discussed a couple weeks ago. So this will facilitate not just a special event that you're hopefully addressing next via resolution, but going forward, should there be a request from Edge District to accommodate a quicker turnaround on certain events that they can come and ask for that waiver going forward. And, of course, I'm here to answer any questions that you may have. Thank you. So we have a card on this item. We'll go ahead and go to public comment. Excuse me, Matt. You're fine. Roger Curlin. Please go to either podium. State your name and address for the record. You'll have three minutes to address council. Thank you. Roger Curlin, 4535 6th Avenue North here in St. Petersburg. And I am the Executive Director of the Edge Business District Association. Nathan Stonecipher is busy planning for the Saturday Criterium, so he sends his regards. He's here with the team that flew in for this weekend's events. Again, it's going to bring much-needed revenue into the district, a lot of visitors. It's going to help showcase St. Petersburg as a fabulous city to do national events. And, again, we thank council so much. And I'm here to answer any questions, but we're in support, obviously, from the association and the district. Thank you. That was the only speaker? That's the only speaker, Madam Chair. All right. Move approval. Second. Okay, we have a motion and a second. Seeing no request to speak, clerk, please open the machine for voting. Council members, enter your votes. Seeing all council members have voted, clerk, please tally announce the vote. Madam Chair, the motion to approve agenda item J4 passes unanimously. 4A. Yeah. 4A. Yeah. I would like separate action on right. I'm sorry. That's okay. Should I start over? I think if you clarify that that was for the question, so the ordinance can be amended first to allow you to. Move approval of item J4A. Second. Okay, so we have a- We did that already. Yeah. Hold on. Is that, what do you want? If Council Member Driscoll intended A first- I did. And everybody else had that same understanding- Yes. That vote is fine, and you can move on to a separate motion on 4B. Okay, so item J4A has been voted on. J4A passes unanimously. Okay. Move approval of item J4B. Second. All right, so we have a motion on item J4B. All right. Seeing no request to speak, clerk, please open the machine for voting. Council Members, enter your votes. Seeing all Council Members have voted, clerk, please tally announce the vote. Madam Chair, the motion to approve agenda item J4B passes unanimously. Very good, thank you. All right, so now we will move on to item J5, and clerk, please read the title. J5 is a resolution? It's a resolution, I apologize, my apologies. So we are joined by Engineering Director, Brajesh Preyman, and Mr. Preyman, the floor is yours. Thank you, this is as part of the special assessment district process, consistent with Florida statutes 170 and city code, article 4, I'm sorry, 6 local improvements and special assessments. So this is for improvements along an alley between 1st Avenue North and 2nd Avenue North, between 22nd Street and 23rd Street. This is an example of a great opportunity where we were able to combine needed infrastructure work and producing resulting in a lower SAD assessment towards our residents. The presumed rate could be approximately $35 for the average lot, and there's one lot which is three times the average size of the other lots, so that could be approximately $140 per month. So with that, I did not prepare a presentation, but I'm available to answer any questions. Okay. Are there any cards on this item? Madam Chair, we do not. Okay, Council Member Hanowitz. Thank you. And thank you, Brajesh, for this. I was just wondering, you mentioned that there were ongoing improvements, and so the opportunity was provided to the homeowners. I just want to make sure, is that something that's ongoing with these projects, and how does that happen? Just like that process that you notify the homeowners that they can partake and then get, you know, special assessments. We're going to take advantage of that on the public works side by leveraging where we are going to improve our infrastructure, because the underground construction cost is what really drives the cost of these special assessments or roadway construction. So working with our utilities, either the stormwater or the water resources department, if they identify corridors that they have to replace their lines in unpaved alleys, we will do proactive reach out to those residents to see if they want to move ahead with an SAD, because it will be probably about one-third of a cost by doing it that way, which is where we are right now. That's great. And then you're keeping records. Are you keeping records of the ones that are doing this? Yes. To share with the residents so they understand? Okay. Yeah. Okay, great. Thank you for the information. Move approval. Second. All right, we have a motion and a second. Seeing no further requests to speak, clerk, please open the machine for voting. Council members, enter your votes. Seeing all council members have voted, clerk, please tally and announce the vote. Chair, the motion to approve agenda item J5 passes unanimously. All right, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Pridman. Thank you. All right, next is item J6. This is a resolution approving the pathways to removing obstacles to housing grant application. And hello. We are joined by Housing and Community Development Assistant Director Avery Slyker. Hello, welcome back. So this is as required by the Notice of Funding Opportunity. The administration is presenting a request to you to approve a resolution for the pathways to removing obstacles or pro-housing grant application. To be submitted to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development for an opportunity to receive $10 million in funding. The HUD Pro-Housing Opportunity has $85 million in funding. HUD is looking at only awarding 20 awards nationwide. So this will be a highly competitive competition. It is to identify and remove barriers for affordable housing production and preservation. And it is supporting communities that are actively taking steps to remove barriers to affordable housing. The city's application focus is on using production and preservation efforts within the Deuces community as our foundation. As we then create new affordable initiatives in preparation for the historic gas plant affordable housing. While we also are including supports for citywide strategies to address barriers. Specifically, what our grant is going to be looking at is planning and incentives for infill development. Planning and incentives for conversion of market rate housing into affordable housing. Improving connectivity between underserved communities and well-resourced areas. Workforce development for affordable housing contractors and subcontractors. Piloting a gap financing program for affordable housing development. And a study that will not only evaluate our efforts, but then share results and lessons learned with other jurisdictions and municipalities. We will be looking at $10 million, which is the max award amount for one grant. It is a six-year grant. There is no match required, but we do have to show qualified finance leveraging. And all leveraging that we have identified through the city is a natural alignment with our already existing city efforts. Things that we'll be using are in-kind salaries, fringe, and administration through existing program funds, such as the HUD Home Investment Partnership Program, which is HOME, and the State Housing Initiative Partnership, which is SHIP. And, again, we, administration, recommends approval of this resolution. All right. Thank you. Any public comment on this? Madam Chair, we do not. No cards. Okay. Council Member Gerdes. Thank you, Madam Chair. I just quickly wanted to make a comment and maybe one question. I really liked the deliverables in this. I thought not only were they well thought out, but I thought they were clear, and I thought they really hit on a bunch of items that have been important, not only to the community, but to all of us, and I know administration, too. I know that you mentioned a study. Does that study happen? If we were to be awarded, that study would happen all during the study? So it would be watching on tracking of those deliverables? Yes, they will. That was the big question I had, is how we're going to track it, and really at what anchor points are we going to get updates to make sure we're keeping up to what we're supposed to be doing? We've spoken to USF, who's extremely interested in this, and they have a plan for us already. This is right up their alley, and they said we will be with you from StepGo. Great. From the first award on. Awesome. That's what I wanted to hear. Thank you very much. That's all I had, Chair. Thank you. Okay. Council Member Hanowitz. Thank you, and thank you for the presentation. It's good to hear that USF is going to be a partner on this. That's good news. In terms of the grant award period, so when do you know, when are they going to make their selections? We never know. So at this point, is it kind of open? They are anticipating it to begin in 2024. Okay. No information. Okay. That was my question. Thank you. All right. Council Member Floyd. Thank you. Yeah, thank you for the presentation. I just quickly, you're coming here asking for a resolution in support of us applying for the grant. That seems a little different. It does. Yeah. It does. This is something when I was at the Homeless Leadership Alliance, something they often had us do with some of their larger grants is that we would have to go before the continuum of care board to get their approval and then make sure we posted for public notice. And we had to do the very same with this application. So this application, we were given a lot of different opportunities for different public notices. So what we chose to do is we placed it on our website, letting our partners know, and asking for public feedback. We've actually received one comment. So we're pretty excited about that. Usually we don't hear comments. And we had one comment from a community partner who said, I've lived in the city for over 20 years and did not know half of this information. This is amazing. Okay. So we're going through this in order to solicit. Aye. And okay, to apply. Okay, all right. Aye. Just slightly different than normal and that's why I bring it up. Very different. Yeah. Okay, all right, thank you. Move approval. Second. All right, we have a motion and a second. Seeing no further requests to speak, clerk, please open the machine for voting. Council members, enter your vote. Seeing all council members have voted, clerk, please tally and announce the vote. Madam Chair, the motion to approve agenda item J6 passes unanimously. All right. Thank you, Mrs. Slykler. Appreciate it. All right, item J3. Clerk, please read the title. Proposed ordinance number 556-H, an ordinance amending the St. Petersburg City Code by replacing Chapter 2, Article 11 with a reorganized and revised Article 11 relating to the community benefit program, enhancing readability, and providing clarifying amendments to procedures governing the community benefit program and providing for an effective date. And Madam Chair, we do have some cards on this. All right. And on this one, we do have an ordinance and a resolution, so we need which one first? One at a time, ordinance first. Ordinance first. So ordinance will be A, resolution will be B. Okay. Very good. So we're joined by Economic Development Director Brian Caper, and we do also have Assistant City Attorney Michael Dima for any legal questions. So we'll go ahead and begin with the presentation. Great. Thank you. Good evening, City Council. So I want to start with some changes that have been made to the program after our first reading two weeks ago. The first being that we have changed in the ordinance the affordable office component to affordable commercial use. And for the purpose of this ordinance, affordable commercial use is defined as 90% of the market rate rent for the particular area in which the project occurs. So for example, if the project was located in downtown, we would look between the interstates to the water, determine what the average asking rents are in that area, and then for the purposes of the streamline provision, if a developer elected to go forward with that route, they would have to ensure that the space being offered is 90% of that average asking rent. If it was located, for instance, on the Deuces Live corridor, we would look at 22nd Street South between 9th Avenue and 18th Avenue, determine what those market rate rents are, and then the developer would have to offer that at 90%. We've made a clarification to specific zoning categories, which we define now as specified zoning districts, which are essentially the downtown core, EC2, which is Employment Center 2, that is our innovation district area, and CCT2, which is Grand Central. We have made some significant changes to the streamline process based on comments made from City Council. The first is to bifurcate AMI levels. So for projects, and this is, again, specific to the streamline process, not the standard process with the CBA, for projects that are occurring in these specified zoning districts, again, downtown, innovation district, and Grand Central, any housing that is provided must be at least 30% at 120% AMI. And the reason that is 120% is because the delta between market rate rents and 120% AMI is fairly significant in our downtown area in the innovation district in Grand Central. However, as you move outside of those zoning categories, the delta between market asking rent and the AMI starts to shrink, especially at 120. And as a matter of fact, at 120, in some of our areas of the city, it's actually market rate. So if you are outside of those zoning categories, in order to receive credit through the streamline process, a developer must agree to have 30% of their units at an 80% AMI level. We've also increased the payment contribution from $100,000 per unit to $150,000 per unit. And this is for a payment in lieu. So if a developer elects not to do the 30% in their project, they would have to make a payment of every unit up to 30% for $150,000. And the reason we increased that was to decrease that discrepancy between what it costs to actually construct the unit versus what the payment would be. When we talked with developers, they told us it's going to cost more than $100,000 to construct that unit, so I'll just make the payment in lieu. And we don't want that. We want to ensure that the units are actually being delivered in the project. So we've tried to bring that a little bit more in line with what it would actually cost or cost to construct that unit. Additionally, as you may recall, we had an OR provision in the streamline process. The OR has gone away. Regardless if it is a multifamily project, a mixed-use project, a commercial project, a developer will have to do all of the following in order to utilize the streamline process. They must utilize at least 10% participation from our small businesses, women-owned businesses, and minority-owned businesses with a goal of 30%. And we would negotiate on a project-by-project basis to determine what that right percentage is between 10% and 30%, but our goal going into those negotiations would be 30%. They must design and construct the covered project to lead silver standards. They must utilize apprentices who are participating in an apprenticeship program that is registered with the state of Florida. Only if they are able to demonstrate that they have reached out to an apprenticeship program in the state of Florida, and there are none, only in that circumstance, would they be allowed to utilize an industry certification program, company-sponsored training, or on-the-job training. And that would have to be documented. As part of our impact report and as part of our CBA process, they will have to demonstrate who they have contacted, how they have contacted them, what the outcome was of that outreach, to the satisfaction of the city that says, okay, you have made that good faith effort, that best faith effort, now you can utilize a different program. You must also utilize disadvantaged workers, and again, set percentages would be negotiated on a project-by-project basis. Also, if you're in one of those zoning categories we talked about earlier, downtown, innovation district, or Grand Central, you would have to have at least 20% of the parking spaces required for your project be available for public parking. So, quick illustration, if by code they are required to provide 100 spaces as part of their project, 20 of those must be available for public parking. The city will conduct a public meeting with the Community Benefit Advisory Council, this is the standing committee, on benefits that are being proposed through the streamline process. We would receive that input from the CBAC, again, the standing committee, and then we would present that to city council when we come forward with the full community benefit agreement. Any request for an amendment to the CBA project that has already been approved through the streamline process would first be re-evaluated to determine, is it even still a CBA project? Maybe they've eliminated a component of it, or they've added something where maybe it changed tiers, maybe it's fallen off entirely. We would first look to see, what does that impact on the CBA ordinance? Then, provided it is still a CBA project, they have to now go through the standard process. So, this just prevents a developer from telling us they will do these things in the streamlined process and then changing at a later date. And finally, we've made some clarifications to the ordinance regarding payments made by developers for covered projects. This is any time there's a payment made in lieu of actually performing something on the project, that goes to our CBA fund, and that gets reinvested throughout our community. So, if a developer made the payment for $150,000 rather than construct that unit in their project, that $150,000 goes to the CBA fund, that CBA fund gets reinvested in our community redevelopment areas and our qualified census tracts. The rest of this presentation is similar to what we discussed at first reading, so I'm going to go through this fairly quickly, but just highlight a couple key points. For city council, we have updated the timeline process for the standard CBA process. So, the very first step in this is to do a community impact report, which will have the developer outline what are the impacts made by this project on their local neighborhoods, construction impacts, local hiring impacts, tax revenue, impacts on city services. They will then present that at a community meeting to the public, where they will hear feedback from the community as to what community benefits are desired in that particular neighborhood. And then we will move forward with our CBAC negotiations. We've also eliminated exemptions from the CBA ordinance, which was replaced with the streamlined process. And we've also added in some consideration of alternative benefits. This is because we understand that not every benefit has been contemplated by the city. There are a lot of things out there that we may not know or that the community may wish to have incorporated into their project that is not currently part of our ordinance. So, we want to have that flexibility that would allow for additional benefits that are not explicitly contemplated by this program to be considered by the CBAC and by city council. Just to recap, all of the program meetings and outreach that has been conducted since we have started this revision, we started with going to our standing CBAC. We had a committee of the whole meeting. We've gone back to the CBAC a number of times, as well as held one-on-ones with all of those standing members. We have talked to the Chamber of Commerce. We have talked to the development community. And, of course, we have talked with members of city council. As it relates to the community benefit agreement tiers, we do have three tiers. The tiers remain as part of this program. Tier one would be any project with a participation value of 15% of total construction costs. This is a reduction from what is currently written in the ordinance, which is 20%. So, we have lowered that, but we have upped the minimum threshold from $400,000 to $500,000. And that's simply because we realize construction costs have increased significantly since the ordinance was passed. So, we are trying to keep a balance of what projects actually fall under our CBA program. Tier two is 20%, and tier three is 25% of public participation. And any project, regardless of what that percentage is, that has $30 million or more, we feel is a very significant public investment in that project. And that should automatically be a tier three program or project, excuse me. We've talked a little bit about the streamline process, so I'm going to go forward to the standard process. This is if a developer does not elect the streamline process. The first step is to submit that community benefit impact report. Then, we will appoint our ad hoc members, so we will set up the nine-member advisory board. We will have that community meeting where we talk to the public and solicit ideas and input for desired community benefits. Then, we negotiate a term sheet that talks about what the benefits will be included in the project. We negotiate this back and forth with the CBAC. Ultimately, the CBAC would make a vote as an advisory council to city council, either recommending for or against the benefit package that has been negotiated. And finally, that comes forward to city council for their consideration and their approval. Again, on alternative community benefits for covered projects, this is to just allow additional flexibility for elements that may not be contemplated explicitly in our ordinance or in our guidance document. So, allowing for that flexibility for different ideas, different needs of the community, different ideas from developers. We want to make sure that we have that flexibility to consider all ranges of options as we move forward with the community. Inapplicable projects, we have made a few changes to this as well. Any lease agreement which does not contain an option to purchase would not be applicable to the CBA ordinance because it follows the city's procurement code. Construction or renovation of city-owned facilities follows the city's procurement code, which calls for things like paying the living wage, having an apprenticeship program, and utilizing SBEs, MBEs, and WBEs. Public construction projects or projects that are owned by the local, state, or federal government agency. A project that has 100% affordable and workforce housing because in that aspect, we feel the 100% affordable housing project is the community benefit. Annexation of real property into the city's boundaries, which currently today is inapplicable for the program, so we're not recommending any changes to that. Projects that include the preservation of historic property, again, that is currently inapplicable in the ordinance. We're not recommending changes to that. And finally, a project located in the South St. Petersburg CRA or a qualified census tract that can demonstrate to the city that they would have a financial hardship by having to incorporate these benefits into their project. Where they would just say, rather than have to go forward with this because of the added time or expense, we're not going to do the project. We're going to walk away from the project. And that's certainly not what we want this program to do. We're trying to make better projects, not have developers walk away. Finally, touching on the guidance document, which is part B of this two-part, the resolution, the guidance document is a checklist for city administration to document that the requirements have been followed. And this ultimately serves as kind of the cover page to city council when we bring that community benefit agreement forward. It specifies details on the three tiers that we discussed and community benefits that may be enacted in each of those tiers. However, as previously mentioned, we have an other in each of those categories because we realize it's not an exhaustive list. There are some ideas for consideration. There are things where the community may want to see certain elements that we hear in that community meeting, but it is certainly not exhaustive. We have not made any substantive changes to the guidance document. It is currently adopted by resolution. However, because of the changes we've made to the ordinance, we have changed some of the language, the terminology, and the definitions contained in that guidance document. And therefore, this is just making it compliant with the ordinance changes that are in front of you today. And with that, I thank you very much for your time and happy to answer any questions you may have. All right. Thank you, Brian. Let's go to public comment. First two speakers is Shea Smith and Jim Jenko. Please step to either podium. State your name and address for the record. You'll have three minutes to address council. All right. Thank you, and good evening to you, council. I wanted to bring up specifically. Oh, 1401 9th Avenue North. And your full name. Shea Smith of the Laborers International Union of North America. Thank you. So I wanted to thank each and every one of you council members for really giving insightful perspectives and coupling that with actions to make this way better than what it was. However, with the mention of best faith and even good faith efforts, I believe that we could iron those out even the more, specifically with SBEs, MBEs, and WBEs. I appreciate the city for taking into account the comments at the CBAC, but I am concerned about potentially uneven amounts of maybe SBEs being used or WBEs and it not really being equitable and intentional to meet those thresholds. So I am asking to not put this forward until that specific enhancement is done, but I really do thank you for the work that has been done for good faith efforts. But I do think there's other points that would need to be fleshed out to make sure that accountability is there. So thank you. Thank you. Hi. Good evening, Council. Jim Ginecco, also 1401 9th Avenue North. President, West Central Florida, AFL-CIO. I'm here to represent the Florida Building Trades as well, Building and Construction Trades Unions, representing the unions and the industry of construction. Really appreciative of all the assurances that we heard tonight and the guarantees from staff. Would really like to see that in the ordinance, everything that was mentioned tonight. Not to be repetitive, but just want to second what my union sister said, that there's just a few more details that we think could be firmed up. We think we're close and we can get there. And in just a few more conversations, we're really appreciative of the dialogue and the meetings that we've had and the collaboration and having a seat at the table. And I think we're close. I think we're going to get to where we need, but there's just a few more details that need to be ironed out and buttoned up. We're definitely in favor of all of the positive language for state registered apprenticeship and the requirements requiring the contractors to show their efforts and not seek a waiver on a baseless claim that there's not a program for a trade that certainly exists. So we think we just need to tighten up a few more things, have a few more discussions, and then we'll be ready to support it. But at this moment, not ready to support it just yet. Thanks so much. Next speakers. The next two speakers is Alec Wilkoski and Ruth Whitney. Please go to either podium. State your name and address for the record. You'll have three minutes to address counsel. Hi there. Alec Wilkoski. I live at 3752 38th Avenue North in St. Petersburg. I'm a field rep for the West Central Florida Labor Council, just to kind of iron out what some of those details were. You know, I took a look at the ordinance earlier today, and I appreciated that, Mr. Caper, for, you know, explaining that they'll need to be best practices. Faith efforts and documentation, but I don't see in the ordinance where it specifies that. I looked at the Exhibit A, the guidance document, and there's no mention of where that is. And so I understand this. Maybe this is a practice of this administration to expect those high standards. But I have a concern about, you know, going forward under a future administration, whether that same practice would be upheld. Or maybe I'm missing something, too, in the ordinance, but I couldn't find the, you know, showing the documentation about that. There was just a box for the impact report on the guidance document. And so I was hoping that in the discussion that follows, we could address those concerns, because right now, we can't support this. Thank you. Ruth? Mm-hmm. She's here. Good afternoon. My name's Ruth Whitney. I live at 714th Avenue North, St. Petersburg. I am a member of the Community Benefits Advisory Committee, but I speak for myself, not for the council. In the guidance document that you heard about, has nothing, nothing about affordable housing. Affordable housing is extremely important need in St. Petersburg, and the city council needs to add a new requirement for tiers two and three for building projects that require some percentage for the units that are being built that are at or below average of 80% AMI. As being part of the council, we haven't met for months to discuss this, and many, many changes have been made. So the council should decide what percentage of these units should be 80%. And since the streamlined project has 30%, it could obviously be something like 10, 20, 50, 30, less than 30. Now the streamlined project, I heard what our wonderful director of economics said about 120% of the AMI for some areas. I'm not as knowledgeable as you and he about these areas, but it seems to me, if you're going to get such benefits from our city, as the steam line project permits, that we shouldn't be giving any of these builders 120%. It's, as he also said, in some parts of the city, that is almost market rate. So there's no benefit here for the city, if it's the regular market rate that you're saying is a benefit. And so that goes for number one and number two in the steam line project. Number three in the steam line project, for non-residential products, I quote, it says, all improvements constructed on site will be limited to affordable commercial use. Now this is a steam line project. You're getting away from the community benefits advisory council. What benefit does commercial, affordable commercial use have for the community? This is, the whole purpose of this is to provide for the benefits for the community. And what are the benefits that are coming from that? Now in another version of this, it said affordable office space. But what a benefit to the community is affordable office space. Thank you, Ms. Whitney. Any other speakers? Madam Chair, no more speakers. Okay. City Council. Council Vice Chair Fick Sanders. Thank you, Chair. And good evening to everyone. And thank you so much for all of your input in this. And again, Brian, thank you for addressing some of my concerns in the documentation of this, especially including the best effort practice, which is important. And I stated this the last time during first reading, that we have been working on this an extremely long time, a very long time, and what we have before us still is not where we want to be. I know we're close, and we're working really hard to try to get there with that. There are some things that we talked about. The best effort practice, great. You've added it. I don't see where it was put in the, forgive me if I don't have it in front of me, in the, what was it, the guidance? The language related to best faith efforts is part of the impact report. Okay. I wanted it in the guidance document. We actually, we do have that drafted. However, we did have a conversation and have continuing conversations with administration related to the city's procurement ordinances and determining alignment between what we have in our ordinances for procurement related to the use of apprentices versus what we have in potentially the guidance document related to apprentices. So we are working on making that language kind of comply across the board, regardless if it's a city-led effort or it's a public-private partnership. Now, you know why I'm smiling, because I was told it was going in the guidance document for today's vote. So, pause. Vice Chair, if I could respond to that, certainly understand, and if we didn't get back to you on this decision, I apologize. You know, we really think that we understand where you're coming from with this language. But we would really prefer, from the administration side, a vote tonight on what's before you. And then we would prefer a new business item to go to a committee and have a thorough discussion about this language and also about our purchasing ordinance. So we could cover the whole topic in a committee, that that would be our preference. Thank you. And I agree with that. However, so I, I, I walked in the room thinking that that was going in the guidance document for us to vote for tonight. So I pause on that one. The term flexibility, that's what scares me. The term flexibility, and when we talk about using the term or, and, and we are, we all received the document today in regards to that or, and I heard what Ms. Smith said about that or, and as I read it, I translated it as such in regards to, okay, y'all, I'm just showing my age. Um, where it says small business, minority owned business, or, so that 10% can go to that small business before it even gets to the minority or the women owned first. So that does, that particular or, it's something about those ors, right? It's something about those ors that seem to close opportunities for certain categories of business owners. That's my second pause. Um, my, my, the hugest pause in this, and this is to address, um, Council Member's Floyd question last reading. And now to hear Dr. Whitney say that the CBAC has not met in months. The whole purpose of the CBAC is to get their direction. And I know Council Member Floyd asked, or are we getting the information per agreeance of the CBAC? If they have not met in months, whose agreeance are we getting this information from and moving forward with? I'm struggling with that one, too, because we know how important, um, their feedback is to this process. We've worked on this for years. This is year number seven. And so to say we're close and almost there, when are we going to get there, right? When, when are we going to get there? So, you know, I'm appreciative. I am always appreciative for every step that we make. Um, but I think I just took a real pause to find out that it wasn't in that guidance document as I was told it was going to be. Um, so I'm going to leave that there for my, my colleagues to actually share, um, their feedback. But I want us to ensure, and, and I don't think we realize how important it is to use our workers here at home. Um, and that, the commercial piece, I agree with the 90 percent, um, on that piece because it's based on location. I get it. The rent may not be, market value might not be as high in, um, on the deuces. But why do minority business owners only have to have businesses on the deuces, right? So those are just some of my concerns, but I'll just, I'll just leave it there. Vice Chair, if I may address two of your points, um, related to the, the, or. So the SBE, the small businesses, minority-owned businesses, or women-owned businesses, that would be negotiated on a project-by-project basis. And, and every one of those projects, regardless if they elect to take the streamlined process or the standard process, does go to at least the standing CBAC, as well as, if the standard process, the full CBAC and City Council. So there will be multiple opportunities, um, to provide input as to what that appropriate mix would be, as it relates to small businesses, minority businesses, and women-owned businesses. And we realize that, in each project, there will be different needs, and there might be different availability, um, which is where that, that flexibility does come into play. But there would be opportunities for both the CBAC, as well as City Council, um, to have input, and, and ultimately the final say on what that appropriate mix is. Um, as it relates to meeting with the CBAC, we met with the CBAC in August. And then we, after that, we held one-on-one meetings with every standing CBAC member. The only changes that have been made to this ordinance since meeting one-on-one with the CBAC members was related to the feedback that we heard from City Council during first reading. So, um, you know, we have kept them in the loop. They have received packets every time we have made a change to the ordinance, or even the, the presentation materials that has been shared with the CBAC. Um, so we have been keeping them engaged in this process as we've continued to move forward. But just to, to highlight, the only changes that have been made since the last time we've met with them were related to the changes from City Council at first reading. Okay. Chair, can I ask another question? Absolutely. Legal, this question is for you. So, you know, I'm a firm believer that if it isn't, um, written down, it never happened. Um, or we don't have anything to reflect back to. So, what would be the process? Because I am going to do a new business item. I think what we're missing is communication. It's a whole lot of different people saying different things. There's a whole lot of moving parts. Um, the CBAC and Council, I would love to just have that conversation with this. Because like I said, we're going on year number seven with this. Um, and so I just want to make sure that everybody's on the same page. And it doesn't seem to be that way. Because I came in here thinking one thing. And now it's something completely different than what I thought. So, what would be our benefit to Council and CBC having our own conversation to address some of these needs to make it a little bit more equitable to a point that we're getting closer to the finish line? I know we keep saying we're closed. We're almost there. But I need us to get there. Okay. Um, I mean, Vice Chair, are you asking whether there could be like a joint meeting of the City Council and the CBAC? We wanted to update and we wanted to amend this ordinance. Yeah. Yeah. Well then, I mean, pending what happens today, I mean, I wouldn't see it as being any different than referral to committee and starting up that conversation again with maybe another round of amendments, potentially. If that's where you're getting at Vice Chair, that would be standard operating protocol there. I'll just add one thing. Council Member, I think like Michael's indicating, any ordinance, any resolution can always be changed over time. So, the items before you tonight, I'm not trying to influence you one way or another, of course. The items before you tonight don't preclude what you're talking about. They can be companion items. And you can certainly, if you chose to, you could move forward with this, then submit the new business item and continue to adopt the dialogue. When we bring back any ordinance amendments or changes to the resolution that you would want, that's an easy thing to accomplish from us, from a legal standpoint. Okay. Thank you for that. Thank you. You're welcome. Council Member Muhammad. Thank you, Madam Chair. And Brian, thank you for your work to get us to this point. Very similar motif you'll probably find in my comments as well. So, I'm going to try and not be redundant. But since we met, and I appreciate the one-on-one that we had, that you addressed the questions that I had as well. But since we met, I received feedback from members of the CBAC asking us to consider other points and have deeper discussions about the CBAC recommendations. And while I do understand that CBAC is advisory, I think it's important to note that three of the members of the standing committee actually helped to write the original policy. And they have continued to be engaged. And so with that in mind, I value deeply their efforts, their thoughts, their considerations and contributions. I'm having difficulty supporting the CBA policy as it stands right now. Hearing that we do have, and this is kind of my, and I'd like to hear from my colleagues. But the options before us is part of a pattern where we say, okay, we'll vote for what we have now and then come back and revisit it later. That gives me pause as well, because we have a lot of major projects coming up. And the timeline for when we come back and when we make the amendments, we may miss opportunities in doing so. Which leads me to my other point, the current ordinance has really only been tested once, and it worked successfully. Is that fair to say that? Like it did what it intended to do, we got the input, we got the feedback, we got recommendations from CBAC. However, the administration chose to do something different. As it relates to the Moffitt TBA project, Councilmember, that is correct. However, there were, I think, a number of procedural issues that were encountered during that process, which the ordinance, as it is now presented today, does look to rectify. Things like setting the full CBAC first before holding that community meeting, so everyone has an opportunity to hear from the community at the same time. So do we need an ordinance to change that, to change that particular part, those procedural things? Do we have to pass an ordinance to say, you know what, this thing didn't work the way that it was supposed to? Is that a policy thing, or does it have to come before us to say, you know what, these are the lessons learned? We can change that going forward until we get to the finish line and not close to the finish line. It would be, because right now it is in an ordinance, it would be the revision of the ordinance. So, yes, we would have to move forward with how it is today in order to have those changes effectuated. Okay, thank you for that. And, again, I do have significant concerns with it. I unite with an email that we all received this afternoon about the concerns that came in. And so I don't think I'll be supporting this now, but I'm going to continue to listen from what I hear from my colleagues. And I also would like to, again, seeing how it happens, but I would love to have a joint meeting with the CBAC and City Council, similar to what we did with the CAC for the CRA. And in that process, everybody's together, we can hear it in real time, what the feedback is, you know, from the CBAC and Council, and then workshop it collectively, instead of piecemealing it, because we've all played telephone. And I think that contributes to some of the miscommunication, because you're talking to people individually, one time to the council, one time to the committee, and things get lost in that. And so I would prefer for us going forward, as we, again, try to get this to where we want it to be, to have a joint meeting with all of us, so that we can workshop it and avoid those miscommunications along the way. Thank you, Madam Chair. And Chair, if you don't mind, if I could just make a general response to that. Please. I just want to say, from the administration standpoint, that we certainly understand the concerns around apprenticeship and the language. We're absolutely open to having that discussion and taking a look at that. But I would like to also remind council that one of the things that we've really been working on is certainty in this process. And we are, you know, potentially going to be seating a CBA committee fairly soon. And we would like some certainty around, you know, going forward with this process. So I just wanted to add that to the conversation. Thank you. Council Member Driscoll. Thank you. Regarding the apprentice language that's in here, does that match the language in our, in other ordinances? No, this is unique to this ordinance. Have we discussed that before and whether or not it might make sense to have something that's... The emergence of syncing up with the existing procurement language, that issue emerged very close to this hearing. What hasn't, what isn't new is the conversation over what the ordinance and or the guidance document can say about efforts expended by a developer to bring apprentices on. So that's, that's not a new conversation. And that dates back to, I believe, June, CBAC meeting. And right now, administration feels, you know, I'll just kind of speak on, based on our conversations, that the agreement process, the negotiation process can accommodate all of that. And that maybe a one-size-fits-all isn't appropriate for codification. And that you could take it project by project. And in the agreement, define what level of effort is required by a developer to bring apprentices on. And that, that process can absolutely accommodate that. Yeah, I would like to just add to that, that it's very unusual for us to make a language change that's significant on the day of the meeting, on the day of the public hearing, on the dais. And we're concerned about that from our perspective and from council's perspective. And we just think it's something we should sit down and talk about. If council feels very strongly about this language change, we can live with it. But we just feel like there needs to be a discussion. Thank you. And I, I would agree with that. I'm hoping that if Vice Chair of Fix Enders is going to do a new business item, that it would include, and everyone would participate in a robust discussion about this. Because it is something that we value. We've worked very hard on the apprenticeship ordinance that we have and on strengthening it. And we want to continue to pave the way for those opportunities wherever we can. We want to make sure that the clarity that we're, that we're giving really includes the message that this is a priority for us. And it's something that, that we value. The, you know, this ordinance is still very new to all of us. As it was said before, we've only, we've only gone through the process once. And we knew, even when we passed it the first time, that it was really just the launch of something that would go through continuous improvement. And I hope that it always will because it is, it's so thick, you know, it's so weighty and consequential that it does beg for examination on a regular basis. So what I've been looking at is, these changes, it's not perfect, but it's, it's better than what we have now. So it is moving the ball forward a bit and if we can commit to having more conversations and continue to fine tune it, I think it's worth it. I'm grateful that there were 10 meetings from the, from June 5th until we got to first reading as, as shown in the presentation. Um, that's a lot of opportunity for input from a variety of sources. And so I feel like everyone has had an opportunity to have their voice be heard in this. Um, and again, I, I'm not satisfied, but I, I hope I never am because I always want to be looking for ways to make this better. And I look forward to those future conversations for, for today. I'll support this. Thank you. Council member Hanowitz. Thank you, chair. And, um, as to the new business item, if, um, council member fixed, Andrews brings it for, I think that would be a very good discussion. Um, I do think that if you're going to look at language like that, you should look at it broadly, including our procurement process and make sure everything's aligned. That makes sense to me. Um, and I think it is an important conversation that we need to have so I can understand why you want to make sure that we are doing this right across the board. Um, in terms of, you know, when was it that this, cause this was passed before I was on city council. When was it that was passed? What year? July of 2021. So July of 2021, um, it was passed and we've had one project and that was the Moffitt and that's the only project that's come through this. Correct. Right. And it went through the process and then not make it through to city council. Correct. Right. So we haven't even, we're here spending so much time. We had one project go through it, never made it to us. Now we're going through this and making all these changes. Still don't have anything else. And we haven't even tested it and we're trying to fix it so we can get something through this so we can have people get jobs and apply for jobs and do all these things. And that's what I want to see. I really want to see that. That's all. And we could see what happens and if there's lessons learned from that, then we take those lessons. And so that's where I'm at. So I will support it and I am willing to continue having these conversations, but I would like to see that affordable housing that we want. I would like to see all these things happen that we want. I want to hear, you know, from this CBABC and do all these things, but I don't want to want to move the ball forward and I'm happy to make continuous improvement along the way. So I'll be happy to support it. Council Member Floyd. Thank you. First, I want to talk about something I talked about last time. Actually, no. First, I want to say thank you very much to administration because I really like this is not always the case for me, but I really felt like y'all heard us last time and brought us a lot of changes that were much more in line with what we were thinking. But, of course, I still have some other questions. Surprise. So first, I want to start with something I brought up last week. There is clarification in here that public projects will not have to go through this CBAC process. And I brought up last time that that concerned me because it feels like we're exempting a project that's publicly owned but is built for a certain private purpose, which is the new Ray Stadium development. And so it concerns me that we're, you know, using sort of what I view as a loophole to make sure that we don't have to do it on here. I know y'all are not thinking that way. Y'all are thinking like you're going to get good stuff out of it anyway. But I just don't want it to look like that to the public. So really, my question actually is for legal on this one. So the way that the ordinance is currently written, do we already feel like that the new stadium development would be exempted from the CBA process based off of the way the ordinance is already written? Same answer I gave you last time. I believe so. Yeah. Okay. Okay. All right. Cool. I don't, I know we kind of danced around that last time, but I wanted to be like really explicit this time. Okay. So, you know, that doesn't change here based off of this. I mean, I guess what does a challenge to that even look like? I think it would have to come from outside. A challenge to how the ordinance was. No, no, I'm sorry. Let me be more clear. You know, you, you're saying you believe that the development would be exempted. Um, who would be there to, like, how would someone go about arguing that it's not exempted? You, like, would that require a legal challenge? That would, a legal challenge, yeah. Seek a declaratory judgment or injunctive action in circuit court. Okay. But we do feel like it would be exempted. We just feel like, uh, this would make it clear. Uh, absolutely. Okay. All right. Well, that clears that up for me. Thank you for that one. Um, okay. Uh, I have one other quick thing, which is, uh, one of the speakers talked about housing requirements, uh, tiers two and three. Uh, do you care to just speak to that a little bit? Absolutely. So currently in, in tier two, uh, the development of affordable and workforce housing is an item that may be selected by a developer. So when you look at the tiers, it's effectively kind of a menu, if you will, of various community benefits that could be considered by the developer as well as by the community. Um, the construction of affordable and workforce housing is one of those elements. There is a, a payment in lieu option with that as well. Uh, it, it is not necessarily a requirement of a project and not every project will have a residential component with it. But certainly if we heard from the community at that community meeting that that was the number one concern from, from that area would certainly be something we would push, uh, and, and look to negotiate, uh, on behalf of this process. Also, just to clarify any tier, uh, any higher level tier is also, uh, completely encapsulates the lower tier. So any project that is a tier three project also includes everything in tier one and everything in tier two. So by that very nature, the construction of affordable and workforce housing is also a, a option in tier three as well. Oh, okay. Okay. Um, all right. That clears that up for me. Thank you. All right. Now I have some stuff on, uh, sort of what everyone else is talking about around the apprenticeship stuff. So we've spoken, um, and let's work with legal as well, uh, about simply including like the language that written documentation of how they went about it needs to be included. Um, but it seems to me like administration's determined, you just want to keep that in your, uh, I'm sorry, impact report and okay. And, uh, and, uh, and have a further conversation, uh, about it in context of our broader procurement, uh, our apprenticeship ordinances went before. I actually don't think that's a very good idea. Uh, our apprenticeship ordinance is caught up in court right now. And I've been wanting to, um, revisit that my entire time on council. And I've been unable to because of the court, uh, because of the current appeal. Um, and I worry that if we were to pass this all, uh, over right now and then try to get into a broader conversation, it would be stuck, uh, just the same as the other sort of things that I'd like to look over in it. So, um, I don't think it's a big change to say we just want them to provide written documentation. So is that something that, uh, I could make a motion on right now to include in this? Where would you want to include that council member Floyd? Okay. All right. Uh, let's, well, that's a more difficult aspect. I would be looking for legal guidance in that scenario. Well, um, there has been, uh, some language developed in the guidance document that reflects those types of efforts and the documentation there too, and I guess that would be probably the easiest way to do that if there was such a motion. Yeah, yeah. I would like to just see that they have to provide the written documentation like they do in the impact report, but I'd like to see that codified, uh, because the, uh, I don't know. I trust this administration to do it, but I don't know what the next one's going to do, and I don't know how long it's going to be before we can visit our apprenticeship ordinance again. And so, um, uh, I'd like for, you know, uh, your guidance as to how to go about, uh, appending that today. Yeah, I would say I would, um, it's something that we could work on if that is council members request whenever, unlike an ordinance, I'm sorry, unlike a resolution, if you're giving us some guidance and it's clear and we feel comfortable with the language, whenever it's an ordinance change on the dais, we would need to draft something, hand out a red line to council, so you see exactly where it's going, what the language says, uh, we have to be very precise when it's codified. So I think that would be, that would be our process for tonight. If you, for example, if you made a motion requesting us to do that, council could vote on that motion. Um, but you would, we would need to hand out some specifics to you to ultimately be incorporated this evening. Do you have something you want to add? I, I, I agree, um, that that's kind of the, the, the precision for changing an ordinance on the dais is, is absolute. Um, I, again, though, there is some language here that, uh, reflects a change to the guidance document, which is adopted by resolution. And I think, I mean, pending what city attorney thinks here that, you know, that we could get that language out and share it with y'all, um, pretty quickly. Mm-hmm. Okay. Um, okay. Well, I see everyone else has something to say now, so I'll let them go through that and we'll, uh, come to a decision, but I'd like to see, uh, one way or the other, that included today. Thank you. Councilmember Gerdes. Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, I'll just comment on, on Councilmember Floyd's quickly. I, I'm concerned about getting language in the next few minutes if, if, if that's what this dais decides and then making decision without talking to legal one-on-one one, without having a one-on-one with Brian, without having a one-on-one with administration on a relative, and, and by the way, I support the language, but I want to make sure we're doing it the right way. And, and that's, that's, uh, from what we're hearing is a, is a pretty substantial change. Again, one I support, but I want to make sure we're doing it in the right way and we're getting the details right. We're not just throwing it in to throw it in. And so I, I just have concerns about that. I, I think in general, in the last 20 months, I've had concerns about those types of things every time we talk about them. Um, I, I'll quickly talk on the other things that, that, that have been mentioned again. I, I, I am, I am for making sure that our apprenticeship program, uh, uh, ordinance gets due diligence and it's documented. I'm, I'm for those things, but again, I want to have those, I want to have that language right. Um, uh, quickly on the, or of SBE, MBE, WBE, that just seems to me, um, to make sure that, uh, that we have the availability and we're not being very strict right off the bat. So we say, okay, well, if there's, uh, you know, no WBE in that category, now there's no or there, so we can't go anywhere else. And, and, and so they don't, they don't check that box that, that to me just doesn't, doesn't jive. The, the last thing I'll say is I, I totally appreciate that we're trying to get this exactly right. I just don't think we're ever going to thing is things are going to continue to change. We are continue. We are going to always make changes to this ordinance. I think we're always going to make changes to this guidance document. And I think we miss more, not making those changes along the way and trying to be perfect than we do making the changes along the way because of the information in front of us. So that's, that's just kind of my two cents. It, you threw me off a little bit, but that's not your fault. But, uh, um, so that's, that's where I'm at at this point. Thank you, chair. All right. Well, seeing that the final council members looking to speak our second round, I'm going to go ahead and go. Um, so, okay. I want to, first of all, kind of go back and say thank you, uh, to you for, um, taking the, uh, we'll just call it what it was criticism last time. Um, and coming back with something after all of us having one-on-ones with you, I was very impressed that, um, you had already presented us with changes to address our concerns before we even had those one-on-ones. Um, I just want to say personally, I think that speaks volumes about who you are and how you approach the work that you do. So thank you for that. Um, my biggest two issues last time that we had this conversation was the or, we'll just keep calling it that, the or, um, the or is gone, right? They do one, they do two, and they have to do everything else regardless of which one they pick. That is correct. And that was critically important to me. So I want to thank you for making sure that that was done. Um, I don't think it's too much to ask whenever we're going through a streamlined process and we're making something much more sure for developers and much, much easier, let's be honest. Um, I don't think it's too much to ask for us to get everything that we want within that. So thank you for that. And I also want to thank you for the language change that, um, removes the streamlined process completely. If a developer comes back with an amendment, um, at first when I read it, I was confused quite honestly, cause I was like, wait, the whole paragraph's gone, but no, it's the way that you rewrote it, which I think was done beautifully. And I'm very supportive of that. So thank you. Um, I heard a lot of kind of what I was going to say, just kind of around the history of this process. Um, so I don't want to, you know, be too redundant, but I do just want to say that, you know, this is a policy that this council and this administration should be very, very proud of. Um, we worked very hard to get the first reiteration and we knew then that it was not perfect. Um, but it obviously worked that first time. Um, and so we're here again, trying to make it better, but I agree. It's still not perfect. Um, the issue about the apprentice, uh, piece and, um, you know, some of the good faith effort that I've been bringing up in other meetings on other topics as well. Um, I do think that we need to have a stronger conversation around that. Um, but I don't know that tonight is the appropriate time to do that. I'm not a fan of making sausage on the dais, especially when we've had 10 meetings or whatever it is to get us here today. We should have been having these conversations at the beginning of this change process. And, and I'll take my piece of that. I, I should have put a pin in that then to the labor community who has brought this up and said, we, we need to make this better. My apologies that I didn't catch this earlier. I wish it wouldn't have been this last week that we've been having these conversations. Um, I do have some concerns and, uh, council member Floyd, you brought it up because, you know, continuing to try to dig into this and how this aligns with our apprenticeship ordinance. I just want to ask legal, um, if we were to go down the path of having another conversation separately about our apprenticeship ordinance and lining that up with a future CBA policy change, what are the legal ramifications around that as it stands today? Well, as you know, we have a pending lawsuit, um, regarding the apprenticeship and disadvantaged worker ordinance. So right now we are waiting on the district court of appeal to give us an opinion on the challenges to that ordinance. Um, any changes we make to that ordinance would, would not be a recommendation from the legal department. Your, your discussion regarding lining up this ordinance with existing language is fine, but we wouldn't be able to, um, well, it's not recommended that we change the ordinance pending litigation, the apprenticeship ordinance pending litigation. And if there are changes that have to be made based on that lawsuit, any identical language placed in this ordinance would maybe have, may have to be changed as well. Got it. Okay. Um, and just so I'm clear because, you know, when I brought this up in our one-on-ones, um, specific to the good faith efforts and all of that, and you did provide me with the impact report and then looking at the guiding document, I do wish there was some additional language there, but I just want to be very clear. Ultimately, we make the final decision. Um, so the advisory board can bring us and say, this is what we, you know, recommend, but ultimately we're going to look at it and we're going to say, if we think that good faith effort was good enough. And so that being that we are the last stop gives me a lot of confidence as well, because I can hear from all of you that this is important to us. This is a value to us. This is what we care about. Um, so while I want to see what it looks like to continue to evolve this policy and make it closer to perfect, I agree that at this time we need certainty with what is coming down the pike. And we need to make sure that we're moving something forward that our CBAC can utilize, um, with projects that we know are going to be coming. So to leave it where it is and let it die on the vine because it's not perfect today, if we would have done that back in 2021, we wouldn't have a CBA policy at all. So, um, I'm going to support this tonight. Um, knowing where we're at with the legal challenges at this time, I don't know that I would support to open that up again and have a conversation at this time. But if things change and things evolve and they come out in our favor, then absolutely. I would support that in a heartbeat. What I would would support today would be if I don't know if it needs to be a new business item. I think it could technically be a motion today to have a joint council CBAC meeting. I would support that. Absolutely. So if somebody wanted to make that motion, um, so that we can work towards that path for the third reiteration of the CBA policy, I would certainly support that as well. So, um, that's where I stand. I'm supportive tonight, but I'm also supportive on us moving forward with further conversation jointly as, uh, the two committees together. All right, council member Hanowitz, we'll go back to you. Oh, wait, no, hold on. Council member Montenari didn't go yet. So I'm going to council member Montenari. Thank you. You're welcome. Thank you, madam chair. Well, I've, uh, at, as we discussed at, uh, first reading, I have a big, big problem with this, uh, ordinance, um, on, on multiple levels. Uh, I'm glad chair Gabbard that you talked about the, uh, the pending lawsuit that we have, because that was, uh, some of the questions that I had, uh, at, at first reading. Um, this is, uh, this ordinance from a business point of view and a developer's point of view, it's just very, uh, cumbersome for, for a business to, to go through. And we saw that with the Moffitt deal. And, uh, so here's the problem that, that I have. There's, there's a lot in this ordinance that I disagree with. Um, the, the way I'm, I stand now, though, this is better than what we currently have. And it's, um, I, I, I'm leaning towards voting for it, uh, because it is better than what we have. But there's a lot of things that are in this ordinance that, that are, that are very, uh, difficult for me to, uh, vote, vote for. Um, let me just, uh, mention on, uh, council member Floyd's, uh, idea. Uh, I, I, too, don't want to make any changes on the dais. I just don't think that's a good way to do policy. And, uh, uh, I think, uh, as council member Gerdes, uh, articulated, uh, that, that's something that we need to have meetings with legal and with administration before we make, uh, make any changes. So, leaning, leaning towards a yes, but, uh, still have some issues with this ordinance. Thank you. Council member Hanowitz. Thank you. And I just pressed my button, uh, because of council member Floyd's comments on the pending litigation and making those changes. When you said that that's a reason for you to go forward, you know, my, my reaction was even more reason not to, it was the polarity and, and because I knew what, what legal was going to say. Um, I was concerned right now you have a pending DCA opinion that's going to come out. And honestly, you don't know if you're going to make, if, if whatever is done is, is going to make matters worse or not. And frankly, when you have your legal attorneys, when you have legal basically telling you it's not recommended to make any changes pending litigation right now, there's probably a good reason why. And so I, and, and, and look, we can disagree with that. I'm just saying for me that I, I can't not, I cannot, um, uh, ignore that in, in light of what's happening. I want to have that conversation, but I think it has to be a thoughtful conversation even more so because of the litigation really. And I think it's better for everyone. So I just wanted to put that out there. I can understand where you're coming from. Um, but, but I think we just have to be much more thoughtful about it. Thank you. Council vice chair, fix Sanders. Thank you. Thank you. And thank you everyone for, um, the conversation. And, and let me be, if not crystal clear, hopefully as clear as I can be coming into, um, the discussion. Um, and when we say that, now I'm totally not about having committee meeting on the dais. I'm totally not about adding verbiage to ordinances or resolutions on the dais. So, um, that was not something that I would have supported. But, again, I came in with total acceptance of what we have, knowing that we were nowhere close to where we needed to be, with the exception of knowing that, looking at the input statement, impact report, where it asks about apprenticeships, jobs available for apprenticeships, the organizations contacted, providing the date, method, and contact information, and the results. Which will be asked per project. I was okay with that. I was okay with not having the required apprenticeship information added right now. I was going to support that. Where I came into understanding that it had been clearly added to our guidance document. Am I still confused? So, Vice Chair, if I may, after our discussion yesterday, we talked with legal. Legal did draft some language related to that based on the language that was given to us from City Council. In conversations with administration this morning, we had a greater conversation related to really twofold. One was bringing changes forward on the day of and the concerns that we had with that. And number two was ensuring alignment with our other city policies. And that's where we got into the discussion with the procurement code. That is why, at this point, you do not see it in the guidance document. However, we do believe that, for the time being, right now, it is still covered in our impact report. And as mentioned by City Administrator Gerdes, we are certainly open to those conversations moving forward as we workshop this and we have that broader discussion. So, will we not agree that it would have been better for me to hear that before I opened up and saw your presentation? Right. Right. So, that was my setback. Two, in regards to this being a new conversation, this has not been a new conversation. This has been a request that has been going on forever, since the beginning of it. So, I understand. And I'm not even asking for perfect. I'm not even trying to get close to perfect. Right. I'm not trying to do that. But what I'm trying to do is ensure the fact that when we have constituents and our residents come time after time, volunteer their time. And, again, I do understand that it is advisory. But that's what we say we're going to do. We want to listen to the residents in helping us make certain decisions. So, if administration is going to make the decisions, why have an advisory council? So, I do support us definitely having that joint meeting. I came in wanting to support this, thinking we had a whole lot more clarity as to what good faith effort looked like, even if it was vague in the document. And I still don't see what the issue would have been in adding it to the guidance document. I wasn't asking for the ordinance. I wasn't asking for, you know, an update on the impact report. So, this is me. This is my one vote. But I was looking for us to get at least a little closer in the apprenticeship area. And because, you know, we're glad to have that conversation isn't accomplishing what it is that the CBAC has asked for. So, you know, again, I was full yes on this until, you know, because this, you know, a lot of these things we've been asking for for a very long time. And I guess if I hadn't been involved with this since before 2016, I think I would be a little bit more understanding. But I've seen some ordinance come and take place and go through in a matter of weeks. And we've been working on this for years. And I know that it's not going to be perfect. I know this. I know it hasn't been tested. I know this. I just need us to come to a realization at some point, when is enough going to be enough? We're going to talk something to death. But while we're doing all this talking and we still haven't accomplished at least trying to get that midway piece, yeah, I'm a little disappointed about that. Because we were willing to have concessions and just kind of have an understanding that, okay, well, we can't get this, but we'll take this. Only to come to find out, even that wasn't even addressed. So, thank you, Chair. I'll leave it there. Before I go to Council Member Mohamed, legal did advise me that our policy and procedures manual does state that any future referral item does need to go through an MBI. I know that I said if there was one that came today, I would support it. That answer is still yes, but technically that is against our policy and procedures. So, I just wanted to clarify that for everyone since that was something that I kind of threw out there. So, I'll let it be there. And Council Member Mohamed. Thank you, Madam Chair. And that's a perfect segue into what I was wanting to say. I was reading your mind. You did, because I definitely would be supportive of an immediate move to host this joint session, because that is a sticking point for me. Hearing from the CBAC members that they haven't met as a group. And respectfully, Brian, there has been significant changes since August. There's been significant changes since, you know, two weeks ago when we met. And so, to hear that, you know, that there hasn't been significant changes when we're looking at significant changes right in front of us, I think is another one of those things that give me pause when we look at that. But I am looking forward to continuing the conversation about what needs to happen. In addition to what we discussed around the good faith and apprenticeship piece, the 90% market rate. Who does that benefit? And does it benefit, you know, every member of our community? And so, really a conversation about, should it be 70%, should it be 70-30? Like, looking at those types of splits. Not seeing size limits for SBEs, I think it might have been mentioned, but an SBE, how are we defining small? It's not really documented. When we say small, you know, what's the company size? And so, being able to have that consideration. There's also the payment in lieu of, you know, doing the affordable housing. So, we're saying, if you don't want to contribute, if you don't want to build it, then you would contribute $150,000. Like, how do we get that number? What is the actual cost of building affordable housing? And so, is that significant, being able to have that type of conversation? The definition of AMI that we have, we're using St. Pete, Clearwater, Tampa as an AMI. I'd like to have a conversation about having the AMI be more localized to St. Petersburg. So, these are some of the other things that I would like to consider and discuss in addition to, you know, what's been lifted up by my colleagues. And so, again, I'm looking forward to continuing the dialogue, however this vote goes tonight, I think. All right. Council Member Floyd? Thank you. So, I don't know if this is for legal or administration, but we are making changes to the way we deal with apprentices in this ordinance. Can someone speak to that? I don't think we're making changes. Is we're just putting this basic requirement into the streamlined process. Okay. Okay. Or it's part of the menu of items. Mm-hmm. And, Mr. Kaper, it might be a requirement, in fact, on some of the tiers, if you use the standard process. Mm-hmm. But it doesn't get into the level of detail that the procurement code has for apprentices on public construction. Okay. So, is this language the utilization of apprenticeship, da-da-da-da-da, registered with the state of Florida, if those apprentices are not available? That language was already in this ordinance, or that's new? So, that's new. That, in fact. So, we are making changes, then, the apprentice piece of this ordinance. Of this ordinance, yeah. Yes. Yeah, this ordinance is specifically. That is, it's prioritizing the use of state registered apprenticeship programs, which was something that was very key emerging from the CBAC meeting in June and from other stakeholders since. Yeah. So, the reason I bring that up is to Council Member Hanowitz's point. Like, we're currently in here touching it right now. And so, I know it's not to the extent of the procurement apprentice ordinance, and I don't, I'm saying I don't want to get into that one. That's the one that I'm saying. But, like, what I'm saying for this one, and it could just be in the guidance is, but I've heard from my colleagues, I just want to make sure I'm clear, is it wouldn't be a significant change to just simply say, like, written documentation of your efforts is required, and that's it, just that. That's all that I would have hoped for that we could have accomplished today. I think that that would have assuaged a lot of people's concerns. And, you know, I also, you know, I don't see how this is any different than, we've amended ordinances up here before. We've taken a recess so we can move the setbacks to five feet on the NTM one. But, you know, this one, when it comes to, like, making sure we do everything we can for working people in our city, like, to have everyone freeze up and not want to do that, is pretty disappointing to me. And so, I just want that to be on the record. I hear you all, and I understand, but I do think that there's a path forward on this that doesn't touch the apprenticeship ordinance, and I don't want to touch the apprenticeship ordinance. So, I hope we can still take that path forward. I know, Vice Chair, you said you were interested in having a conversation going forward on this. It can't be on the apprenticeship ordinance, though, but we can talk about what we do here still. And I think, you know, if that wants to include aligning with our apprenticeship ordinance, I don't know if that's a good idea right now. But this is a conversation we can still have. So, I would like to make sure that, like, as we go forward, we do have it. But I'll leave that to you for now, since you said you want to put in the new business item. Thank you. All right, Council Members. So, Item J3A, we do still need a motion and a second. Move approval of J3A. Second. We have a motion and a second. Seeing no further requests to speak. Clerk, please open the machine for voting. Council Members, enter your votes. Seeing all Council Members have voted. Clerk, please tally and announce the vote. Madam Chair, the motion to approve Agenda Item J3A passes 5-3, with Council Members Driscoll, Gabbard, Gerdes, Hanowitz, and Montaneri voting yes. Council Members Fig Sanders, Floyd, and Mohamed voting no. Okay, and now we have J3B. Move approval. Second. Okay, we have a motion and a second on J3B. Seeing no requests to speak. Clerk, please open the machine for voting. Council Members, enter your votes. Seeing all Council Members have voted. Clerk, please tally and announce the vote. Madam Chair, the motion to approve Agenda Item J3B passes 5-3, with Council Members Driscoll, Gabbard, Gerdes, Hanowitz, and Montaneri voting yes. Council Members Fig Sanders, Floyd, and Mohamed voting no. All right, very good. And that will conclude our public hearings. Before we go to open forum, we're going to take a 10-minute recess. So, Council will stand in recess. Thank you. Is that yours? What's that? Oh, that is mine. I forgot. What did I draw? It's heavy. It's heavy. It's heavy. It's heavy. You know, what the case is. Oh. Please. Please. Don't matter for the open forum. It's the 5th and 7th right there. All right. Thank you. Appreciate it. All right. Some of this sucks. I don't know. All right. Yeah. Okay. We're going to have to do this. Because there's names I don't understand. Okay. It's him. Oh. Yeah. How do you know? And they're still feeling it all. . In the forum. If you wish to address city council on subjects other than public hearing or quasi judicial items listed on the agenda, please sign up with the clerk. Only the individuals 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're 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 asked to state your name and address. At the conclusion of your comments or when you have reached 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 decorum. If live public comments is disrupted by the violation of the rules of decorum, the chair is authorized to accept public comment by alternate means, including by email only. And Madam Chair, we do have some speakers. Okay, very good. If you'll call the speakers two at a time. When the clerk calls your name, we have two podiums, so please go ahead and go to either podium. State your name and address in the city for the record. The first one is Shahab Ahmed and Lama Hassan. Please go to either podium. State your name and address for the record. You'll have three minutes to address council. Good evening, council members. My name is Shahab Ahmed, 5010, Terrace Palms. My name is Shahab. I work with... I'm sorry. For your address, we need the city as well to make sure it's the city of St. Pete. It's Temple Terrace, but I'm here on behalf of residents of St. Petersburg. I'm sorry, sir. Our rules are clear that you must live in the city of St. Petersburg or have a business in the city of St. Petersburg in order to speak during open forum. I'm sorry. Thank you. Thank you. Ma'am. My name is Lama Hassan. I live in 5011 Starfish Drive, St. Pete in Coquina Key. I'm with the Dream of Defenders, and I'm Palestinian. The resolution that was passed by city council on October 12 uses unbalanced and false rhetoric that has been regurgitated by politicians like yourselves and the media. This rhetoric has dire consequences, especially when you omit the humanitarian catastrophe that's being suffered by those currently living in Gaza. Hate crimes in Florida and the U.S. have increased against the Muslim, Palestinian, and Arab communities, including the murder of a 60-year-old, six-year-old Palestinian, Wadiah El-Fayyum, in Chicago. We cannot stand by and allow you to be complicit on behalf of the city in spreading hate. Council person Driscoll, you called this a barbaric war. What do you call the bombing of a hospital where at least 800 people were massacred? And just yesterday, Israel bombed a school, taking the lives of even more Palestinians. And before I walked in, I saw a church where 400 Palestinians were seeking shelter was bombed by Israel as well. Is that not barbaric? You also dare to use, end quote, Bishop Desmond Tutu, who compared Israeli government actions to South African apartheid. At Council person Hanowitz, you said it's a crime for indiscriminate killing of human beings, children, mothers, fathers, and families. Israel wiped out more than 50 entire lineages. This is 50 families that no longer are on the registry. Where is your outrage for them? Does the definition of terrorism that you used last Thursday not apply here? Are these not innocent civilians, or does that not matter because we're brown? At Council person Montanari, you said, The Holocaust happened because people didn't stand up, and they looked the other way. I have to ask you, what direction are you looking in? For 16 years, Gaza has been blockaded by Israel, controlling everything. Israel restricts the movement of Palestinians, the flow of basic goods and services to a trickle. Basic nutritional requirements every human being needs to live a healthy life has been denied to Gazans. Clean water and medical supplies are hard to come by. The conditions in Gaza in recent years have been most accurately compared to a concentration camp. I'm not going to list out the number of people that have been murdered by Israel, because that's something that you can look up. Because we are not just numbers. We are people. We are human beings that are fighting for freedom against an occupation that's backed by our tax dollars. So we demand that you repeal the racist resolution that was passed by this Council, and if any resolutions of condemnation are written, to focus on the injustices against Palestinians. Thank you. So the rules of decorum state, there is no applause, no cheering, none of that. We will hear public comment gladly, but we do ask that you respect the rules of this chamber. Next two speakers, please. Sam Obeid and Cheyenne Collins. Please vote to either podium. State your name and address for the record. You'll have three minutes to address Council. Please. Good evening, Councilmembers. My name is Sam Obeid. My address is 190 112th Avenue North, St. Petersburg, Florida, 33716. Yes. Like I said, my name is Sam Obeid. I'm Indian born and raised. I came to the U.S. in 2007. I moved to the Tampa area in 2008. I moved to St. Petersburg last year. I went to the University of South Florida where I got two master's degrees. Now, I'm also queer. I'm an immigrant. I'm a woman of color. And I'm Muslim. While I was at the University of South Florida, I was a graduate assistant. And working at, in a building that they call USF World. It is the building that welcomes international students and engages in all of USF's global activities. I was one of their marketing coordinators. While I was in that space, in a simple conversation with some of my colleagues, it was disclosed that I am, in fact, Muslim. Very casually, one of my colleagues goes ahead and says, Do you speak any terrorist? Everybody laughed. He laughed. Everybody that was in the room laughed. I'm used to being discriminated against. I'm used to, you know, casual racism, casual queerphobia. It's not unusual to me by any means. But when this particular comment was made, especially in a workplace, I have to admit I was a little bit surprised. And I can see from your expressions, too, y'all can understand that that is incredibly inappropriate language to use at a workspace. What I'm trying to say here is that while that might seem so casual, and in some instances, I suppose to some folks, hilarious, this is the kind of casual conversation or casual language that can result in some very harmful behavior. The language in the resolution that supports Israel includes some of the language that can lead to some very harmful behavior. We are already seeing it happen in the death of a six-year-old child. We will continue to see that happen if cities do not release language that protects other people, too, that protects Palestinians, that does not equate Palestinians to terrorists, that does not equate Arabs to terrorists, that does not equate Muslims to terrorists. The Department of State today put out language telling people that they should be cautious of people in large tourist areas and watch out for violent attacks against Americans. Many of us are also Americans, but they have put a target on our backs. And if your resolution is not repealed, you have also put a target on our backs. Are you ready for that? Next speaker. My name is Cheyenne Collins. My address is 6605 Orchard Drive North. That's in St. Petersburg. I'm a local nurse, and so something that we should all have as nurses is critical thinking, which requires you to analyze the entire situation before making a determination or a statement. And so where I'd also like to see a little bit more critical thinking is within my city council. It doesn't seem like with this resolution you guys are capable of doing that. And so what I ask of you is at least judging a situation based on all of the information and not just giving out one side that makes you feel better. One quote I heard from a council member was, we're rocking the boat. Is that honestly what you think you're doing? That's hilarious. You're not rocking any boats. You're licking boots. That's it. Two speakers. Next two speakers are Emily Pasnak-Lapchick and Tatiana Haberkamp. Please go to an open podium. State your name and address for the record. You'll have three minutes to address city council. Are either of the two speakers in the room? Okay. Next two speakers. Bentley Stewart and Jake Giffon. Please go to an open podium. State your name and address for the record. You'll have three minutes to address city council. Thank you. My name is Bentley Stewart. I live at 4721 6th Avenue South St. Pete. Shalom. Salaam. Peace. We all want peace and there is no peace. There is no peace because there is no justice. To refer to Israeli-Palestinian relations as conflict obscures the asymmetrical power imbalance. The Nigerian novelist Chamondi Adichie in her TED Talk, The Danger of a Single Story, defined power as the ability not just to tell the story of another person. She quotes the Palestinian poet, Marie Burruti, that if you want to dispossess a people, the simplest way to do it is to tell their story and to start it with, secondly, start the story with the arrows of the Native Americans and not with the arrival of the British and you have an entirely different story. To start the story with the failure of the African state and not with the colonial creation of the African state, you have an entirely different story. To start the story on October 7th with the action of Hamas and not with the ongoing displacement of Palestinians beginning in 1948 with the creation of Israel, you have an entirely different story. If we focus on the rockets of Hamas and ignore Israel's routine bombings of Gaza, referred to by Israeli government officials as mowing the grass, we get a different story. The danger of starting the story with the actions of Hamas is that it conflates critiquing Israel's occupation of Palestine as being anti-Semitic. Our fear of anti-Semitism should not run us towards Islamophobia and genocide. Human rights groups and UN officials have called Gaza the world's largest open-air prison, over 2 million people, half of whom are under the age of 18. What crimes have all these human beings committed to be condemned to prison? Now that the Israeli defense forces have warned around 1.2 million residents to evacuate northern Gaza, the question arises, where are they supposed to flee to? There's nowhere to go. So no longer is it the world's largest prison. It's the world's largest concentration camp, a death camp. A resolution that stands with the state of Israel is to be complicit in genocide. Standing with Israel now does not bring back the Jewish lives tragically lost in the Holocaust. Being a friend to Israel would be to stand up to Israel, because friends don't let friends commit genocide. Sir. Thank you. My name is Jake, 9100, Dr. MLK Drive. Your last name, please. Gaffan. Sorry. Thank you. Sorry. I stand before you today mourning. I mourn for my fellow Jews that have been killed. I mourn for the two million Gazans, half of which are children, who have only ever lived under skies of falling bombs. Both of our peoples, Jews and Palestinians, have had the deadliest, most traumatizing century of our existence. The Nakba and the Holocaust defines our everything. It is out of our struggles with death that I speak to you today. The city council's decision to support Jewish people in the struggle against anti-Semitism by supporting Israel is inadvertently anti-Semitic. Zionism and its support for Israel is not universal amongst Jews, and it's very offensive to imply anything close to that. It's infuriating and saddening to hear a council member state that one of the reasons the Holocaust happened was that everyone looked away, that no one wanted to rock the boat, and that that is why he stands with Israel. Who is rocking the Israel boat ever? The whole, like, ever. It's never been controversial in America. Everyone supported Israel. Every institution that matters in the U.S. supports Israel fervently. The thing is, is that the world was watching in the Holocaust. Millions upon millions rocked the boat as hard as they could, but ignorance and profitable silence won. Now we have 75 years' worth of footage and heavily documented history and firsthand experiences related to Israel's constant, unprovoked slaughtering of Palestinians and their children. Massacre after massacre, and nothing but steady sailing and no boat rocking. To acknowledge this, to not acknowledge this is mind-blowing. In Israel, interfaith marriage is illegal, freedom of movement is prohibited for Palestinians, and Palestinian homes are taken every day by the IDF. Palestinians simply do not have rights. How can we sit by and stand with an ethno-state with Jim Crow laws? The message City Council is putting out is not that you support life, not that you support Jews, not that you stand against hate, but simply that you, like the rest of the people who refuse to rock the boat, simply don't care about the ongoing ethnic cleansing of the Holy Land, or that you just simply misunderstand it. And that these two million gods and lives, at least to our eyes, they seem expendable to you. To end, I'd like to quote Desmond Tutu, where he said, Also, I just found out tonight that Israel just bombed and destroyed the third oldest church in the world. This comes after a year of gassing the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and the consistent invasions of Al-Aqsa. And it just kind of is abhorrent that we're not more deeply understanding what's going on here. Thank you. Next two speakers. Next two speakers are Allison Rowland and Ali Abdel-Gader. Please go to an open podium. State your name and address for the record. You'll have three minutes to address City Council. Go ahead. Allison Rowland, 633 7th Avenue North, St. Petersburg, Florida. I'm a resident of St. Petersburg, Florida, and I do not stand with Israel, and I represent many in my community in saying that St. Petersburg should renounce their resolution to support the state of Israel. As Israel has broken international law numerous times just in the past week while participating in what they call a war against Gaza, but is truly a one-sided attack on a community with no actual military in the acceleration of a years-long genocide. St. Petersburg, Florida, will be on the wrong side of history if it continues to support Israel, whilst using harmful language such as describing Palestinians as barbaric, as stated in the resolution. This will undoubtedly encourage racism and hatred against Palestinians, Arab people, and Muslim people in our community and beyond. We have already begun to see the repercussions of this kind of language with the murder of a six-year-old child from a Muslim family in Illinois this week, which was a hate crime. If I can't appeal to your logic, I hope I can appeal to your humanity. The defenseless Palestinians currently being murdered by one of the largest, strongest, most well-funded militaries in the world are human. They're nurses, doctors, emergency health care workers. They are Christians, Muslims, Jewish people, family, women, and children. They're human. They want freedom to live just like you and I do. Please don't condone their murder by standing with the Israeli government. We ask that you repeal the resolution in support of Israel. Thank you. Thank you. Go ahead. My name is Ali Abdelkader, 2449 Burlington Avenue, 33713 St. Petersburg. I'm here to denounce the resolution passed in support of Israel. This resolution is based on lies. We have seen many of the lies play out over the past week, including the egregious lie that there were beheaded babies, that was repeated by DeSantis, repeated by our president before he was forced to retract it because there was no proof of that. The lie that was spreading around in the media that there were mass rapes in Israel, which was retracted by the media after it was proven that there was no proof for that. And the lie in this resolution that this attack was unprovoked. Because as many of our speakers have said, this is not an unprovoked action. To call it unprovoked is to ignore 75 years of history. And these lies have had dire consequences. Just over the past week, what have we seen? We have seen Gaza bombed, 5,000 civilians dead. Half of the people living in Gaza are children. We have seen a continuation of genocidal rhetoric from the Israeli regime, calling Palestinians human animals, saying that they are fighting against the children of darkness. And we have seen, even in this country, the Islamophobic murder of a six-year-old boy in Chicago. So your actions have consequences. You are complicit in this murder if you do not repeal this resolution. And I'd like to speak more about how this is not unprovoked. Because the only way you could think that is if you are ignoring the ongoing genocide of Palestinian people. The only way you could think that is if you have no idea what the life of an average Palestinian is like. Especially in Gaza. In Gaza, the borders are completely controlled by Israel. It is not an independent territory. Israel controls how far Ghazans can go out into the sea. It controls what goes in and goes out, including people. It controls how much food is allowed to come in. And they intentionally only allow enough food to avoid malnutrition. Israeli officials call it putting Gaza on a diet. Every few years, there is a massive Israeli bombing campaign. Just imagine for a second. Put yourself in the shoes of a young man who was born in Gaza. This is how you spent your entire life. You have no job because there is no economy. There is no economy. Israel controls what goes in and out of your country. Maybe you make money salvaging garbage. And you have seen many major bombing campaigns over your entire life. What would you do if you were in that situation? How would you resist against an occupation, against an illegal occupation? The UN General Assembly in 1978 reaffirmed the rights of people who are under colonial occupation to resist that occupation by any means necessary, including armed struggle. But even peaceful protest was met with sniper fire during the Great March of Return protest in 2018. Next two speakers. Next two speakers are the clan Flanagan Burt and Chase Harrell. 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 Lucian Flanagan Burt. I live at 4,254th Avenue South, St. Pete. And I don't claim to be as well spoken or as educated as the rest of our speakers here. But I am also here to denounce the resolution supporting the state of Israel. I must ask, does the city of St. Pete support war crimes? On Thursday, the Human Rights Watch accused Israel of using white phosphorus munitions in its ongoing military operations in Gaza and Lebanon. The allegations which ate the Human Rights Watch based on verified video and witness accounts from October 10th and 11th. Protocol 3 of the 1980 Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons prohibits incendiaries or the use of other substances to attack civilian populations. The Gaza Strip has unique characteristics, boasting a dense population of approximately 2 million within a mere 141 square miles. St. Petersburg has a population of 260,000 in 137.6 miles. I would consider Gaza quite the dense population of civilians who are not speaking out or perpetuating this violence. So I ask you, how can one be against war crimes and support perpetuators of such? Thank you. Next speaker. My name is Chase Harrell. I live at 633 7th Avenue North, St. Petersburg, Florida. To echo what a lot of people have said, supporting Israel just kind of sounds like we support Britain in their occupation of the West Indies. We support America in its manifest destiny to kill all the natives. We support any other number of terrible things that have happened that we've just kind of let happen. You know, we just kind of like let people just take over another group of people and then it's just part of history. And then it gets like overlooked and that sounds like something that we're just trying to do again here. And I don't really understand why the City Council of St. Petersburg, Florida has, A, anything to do with this. B, like why is it the top of our priorities in the city are homelessness, lack of affordable housing. We have food deserts on the south side. So many issues that are like, wow, maybe we should tackle this. But actually, let's talk about something that, A, it seems like we don't know much about. And then, B, we didn't really ask anybody who actually lives here. And then, C, it's like, yeah. I mean, I think I've made my point. But my question to the City Council is, are we going to read up on things? Or are we going to just kind of say what we want because we're afraid we're going to be labeled as anti-Semitic? Like, to support Israel, in my view, is to kind of be okay with oppression because they're Jewish, which is how the Holocaust happened in the first place. You know, we were afraid to stand up. We were afraid to stand up to Hitler. We were afraid to let Jewish immigrants in. We were afraid to help people. So oppression happened. And now that the oppressions happen to them, we're afraid to speak up when they commit oppression. And to me, that's wrong. And to me, it's wrong for the city of St. Petersburg to, I don't know, pass a resolution. When there's so many other things that need to be done first. I'm not going to keep flaming you guys. You guys have been flamed a lot. And we'll probably continue to be flamed after I get off this podium. But that's my piece. Thank you. Thank you. Next two speakers. Next two speakers are Ilana Tennis and Lydia Guevara. Please go to an open podium. State your name and address for the record. You'll have three minutes to address City Council. You can go ahead, ma'am. Go ahead. My name is Lydia Guevara. I live at 3455 2nd Avenue North in St. Pete. I'm here to demand that you repeal the resolution in support of Israel. It's filled with lies that completely distort what's happening, which is a genocide being enacted on Palestinians by Israel with our tax dollars. This resolution is enabling this genocide. This resolution does not represent the people of St. Pete. We do not support the racist apartheid state of Israel that has been displacing and killing Palestinians for decades. We stand with Palestinians fighting for their freedom, which they have every right to do. Thank you. My name is Ilana Tennis. I live at 4200 54th Avenue South, St. Petersburg. Since 1948, at least, the state of Israel has forced millions of civilians to flee Palestine and replace those people with new approved civilians to settle that desecrated land, all with U.S. support. This is settler colonialism. There is no conscionable reason to support Israel through military aid while that state is simultaneously exterminating a people. We have a humanitarian obligation to Gaza. By repealing the resolution in support of Israel, St. Pete will put a bug in the air of Florida lawmakers, thereby influencing the U.S.'s political position. In doing so, we have the potential to stop billions of dollars from flowing into a war machine and instead open a humanitarian corridor to attend to the dying and wounded of Gaza City. Repealing this resolution might affect you, the City Council body of St. Pete, personally, politically, or professionally. These consequences might be disastrous or positive. You could lose political support, put your body in danger, and jeopardize your seat on this council. I understand why you might be hesitant to repeal your resolution in a political climate where such repeal is deeply unpopular. But there are moral callings that necessitate a risk to mind, body, and position. And whatever risk you incur from deciding what you decide here will be nothing compared to the people who have been destroyed by this war. I've watched children cry in the wreckage of a bomb. I've seen people dismembered, cut open, and blown apart. And I've seen this for years. The events of the past week are the latest iteration in a legacy of injustice. But most importantly, there is still time, and Palestine must be free. Thank you. Thank you. Next two speakers. Next two speakers are Carla Correa and Tiffany McClain. Please go to an open podium. State your name and address for the record. You'll have three minutes to address City Council. Hi. Carla Correa, 345 Fifth Avenue North. And I'm here with the Party for Socialism and Liberation. We know that this body doesn't speak for us when it comes to issues locally here in St. Pete. You know, when you allocate 40% of our budget to go to the police, when you give no money to fund the homelessness crisis here, when you give our money to corporations, and you sure as hell don't speak for us when you side with Israel. Our demand is that this resolution is repealed immediately. No, the people of St. Pete do not stand with apartheid Israel. In fact, you all need to be condemning Israel for their 75-year genocidal occupation against the Palestinian people. We believe that the state of Israel doesn't even have the right to exist. And we refute the argument that this claim, this righteous claim, is anti-Semitism. It's anti-colonial. It's anti-genocidal. Zionism requires the ethnic cleansing of Palestinian people, which we've seen for the past hundred years. First, with the help of the British, and later, and currently, the United States. And I wish some of you would crack open a book and learn something. Zionism does not equal Judaism. And this argument is only used to shield Israel of their colonial violence. We also demand that the definition of anti-Semitism that this body passed, using the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism, be repealed immediately. And that definition includes the critique of Israel. We're not going to be silenced. We're not going to be shamed into going along with this narrative that Israel is the oppressed and Palestinians are the oppressors. You're completely flipping the narrative. And to quote Desmond Tutu is completely insulting and manipulative and just shows that you are trying to frame Israel as the people who are the victims here when they're clearly the oppressors. Palestinian people have the right, under international law, to resist occupation and resupport them. Israel just bombed a hospital in Gaza, massacring over 900 people. And this body has the nerve to feel sorry for them? That is a shame. This isn't complicated, this isn't nuanced, and what's crazy is you all aren't even taking the both sides position. You're just straight up siding with the oppressor. And that's a shame. So you're siding with the people who are using white phosphorus against the people, who are bombing schools and hospitals, who are shooting journalists, the elderly, children. That's what you're siding with, and we're going to keep organizing for a free Palestine, and we will see a free Palestine in our lifetime. From the river to the sea! Next speaker. Tiffany McClain. Tiffany McClain. She lives in Spring Hill. Okay. The next one is Bella McKenzie. I think she's also in Spring Hill. Okay. Tammy McClain. Hudson. Hudson. Okay, then keep going. Fatima side. We have the next speaker. She's here. And I can't pronounce the second name. It's H-A-J, I think it's I-R-A-H side. She's here. Yes. Hi. Please state your name and address for the record. You'll have three minutes to address counsel. Okay. My name is Fatima Said. I live in 4050 40th Avenue North, St. Petersburg, Florida. I'm here as a registered nurse, an immigrant woman, a Christian, and I'm only 27 years old. I'm here to urge you to renounce this support in the resolution with Israel. Why is that? We need to look at the history here, the history of the Palestinian people. And we need to look at the numbers, right? Numbers don't lie. And you'll see a lot of data and a lot of numbers in your job. Right now, the Israel Army is the fourth most powerful army in the world, having atomic power as well. It counts with $3.5 billion annually of support of taxpayer money that they receive annually. You're talking about this powerful country attacking a nation that has no president, just a prime minister, have no army, have no atomic power either, and has a terrorist group. Yes, Hamas, which a lot of Palestinians, Christians, Muslims, you name it, have condemned the actions of Hamas. That's true. But as we know, as a nation, we also have groups in our country, in America, that are radicals, as the KKK and other groups that are within our nation. Imagine that the American people will be bombed and targeted by a group of people that don't represent our American ideals. You don't see that that makes sense. Imagine your family, your loved ones being targeted in that manner. That's exactly what is happening in Palestine. A lot of people, a lot of civilian casualties are going on, and we must do something. You're looking here at the next generation. All these young people are going to live with the consequences of the decisions you make today. We'll have to carry that on our shoulders. We're just asking you to look at the numbers and to not support further violence and war at this time, having a lot of people dying, families, babies, children, on the other side as well. We should not condemn any war at this point. We should talk about a ceasefire and about peace, because if we stand on the wrong side of history, how can you live with yourselves? Next speaker. Hello. My name is Hedira Syed Garcia. My address is 4050 40th Avenue North, St. Petersburg, Florida, 33714. I just want to say hello, good evening to everyone here. After reading the resolution put forth about the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people, I am convinced that the stated resolution was written in the same spirit as those who supported other apartheid states, like India during the 50s, South Africa during Nelson Mandela's time. But what is an apartheid state? We have heard that said a lot, and I didn't know that. So I looked it up on Google, and it says that an apartheid state refers to the implementation and maintenance of a system of legalized racial segregation in which one racial group is derived of a political and civil right. An apartheid state is a crime against humanity, punishable under Rome's statue of the International Criminal Court. That was from Cornell Law University. The Palestinian people in this very moment have no running water, no portable water, no electricity. They have no military, no army, and there are people there that are doing the things, but they don't speak for the people that are there. Yet, they are still portrayed as their aggressors, while Israel is portrayed as the victim, even though in a span of six days, they have dropped 6,000 bombs. To put that into perspective, that is more bombs than the United States dropped in a year in Afghanistan. 50% of the Gaza population, it is under 18. Those are children. Israel is bombing right now. The idea that this is a war is nonsensical. This is a genocide that we are witnessing right now. When the history of what has happened is written, what side are we going to be on? There are only two sides, pro-genocide or anti-genocide. I am a voter, and I have voted every single member in this room. You speak for me. You will write my history. I voted for you guys to be here. You represent me right now. I can't do anything about this, but you can. You can do that for all of us here. Please, please repeal this resolution. Thank you so much. The next few speakers is Reverend Ben Aderson Zeman and Saad. It's R-A-H. He's coming. Please go to either podium. Please state your name and address for the record. You'll have three minutes to address counsel. My name is Reverend Ben Atherton Zeman. I live at 3680 42nd Way South in St. Petersburg. I'm the minister at the Unitarian Universalist Church around the corner. Thank you, council members, for taking this opportunity to listen to your residents. I know it's been a long day for you all, but I really appreciate your time. I was out of state last week. I'm still getting caught up on all this, and I only learned about this gathering a few hours ago from some of my colleagues who you've heard from. So I've been in the process of listening and learning, and last week I wanted to do something when I saw the news, and it sounds like you did too. I didn't know what to do, so I checked in with my congregants at the church, with my Jewish congregants, with my Muslim congregants, and friends, and they were not okay. This was very hard for them. I didn't know what else to do, so that's what I did. And since then, I've been listening and learning from our Palestinian residents, like Yemma, from our Jewish residents, like Jake. And I believe that you had good intentions with this resolution that you passed last week. Like me, you wanted to do something, but you still can, and you can do it better. So I think you have an opportunity, since we have such articulate and wonderful residents, to learn from them. So I want to echo what they asked, even though I'm, like the young man before me, not the most informed. I am here mostly to listen, but also to urge you to listen, and in order to really do that, you do need to repeal what you've passed. For those who do pray, I wish that we pray for peace, pray for Salaam, pray for Shalom, for the people of Palestine, for the people of Israel, and for an end to colonial occupation. Thank you again for your time. Speaker? Saad Ramouni, 3737, 16th Avenue North, St. Petersburg, Florida. First, I'd like to just tell this body of young kids how proud I am of them. Very articulate, very well-spoken. Good job. I was very impressed also with this body and how you parse words, and words are very important. You spoke about how or could make a lot of difference, how flexibility could have an impact on many decisions, and I agree with that. I parse words for a living as well. In your resolution, you said that you stand with Israel because it is defending itself. Now, I'm going to put away my own feelings, and we're just going to talk about international law. I hope that all of you can agree that Israel is an occupying force or power. Can we agree on that? It's international law. An occupying power, by definition, is in an offensive posture. It cannot defend itself because it is the occupied who defends themselves. When they exact revenge on that body, then they're on the offensive, and they're committing atrocities and war crimes. Now, I know there is not a lot of time to go into history, but I want to tell you one thing that you should really take to heart. To look at the events that are unfolding before our eyes, starting from October 7th, is the epitome of dehumanizing the Palestinian people. Because what you're telling them is that whatever happened since 1948 does not matter. And on October 7th is where we're starting to pay attention. The thing that you have to keep in mind is that we're not here because we are Muslim or because we are Christian or because we are Jews. As a matter of fact, some of the most fervent supporters of Palestinians are Jews. My best friend is Jewish, and he's more active than I am on this topic. But the Jewish, or our Jewish cousins, I should say, because Jews and Arabs are cousins, have gone through some horrible times because they were dehumanized. The Nazis called them rats, and that's how they justified their killing. The Israeli government now is calling Palestinians human animals because they were laying the road for a genocide. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Thank you. Next, we have a speaker in Zoom. Yes, Madam Chair. Okay. Dr. Christy Faust, I'm going to unmute you now, please. I'm going to allow you to talk. Please unmute yourself. State your name and address for the record. You'll have three minutes to address city council. Can you hear me? Hi, Dr. Christy Faust, 753 29th Avenue, South St. Pete, zip code 33705. So what's happening in the Middle East is terrible. And I've sat and struggled these past few weeks with the feeling that I'm not doing enough, and I've sat with it, uncomfortable, listening and reflecting. But in our area and in the world, there have been events that have triggered members of this council to propose resolutions in response to discrimination or to perceive discrimination very soon after the events happen. In both of those instances, I heard council members bring up valid reasons why the resolution should not be passed or why they should be rewritten with more clarity. In both cases, I saw the majority of council disregard those reasons and pass them as written. Now, as a St. Pete resident, I'm here to ask you to repeal both the anti-Semitism resolution and the pro-Israel resolution that were recently passed. Before jumping in, let me state fighting anti-Semitism is incredibly important. The Jewish people have been targeted and oppressed in so many ways throughout history. Yet speaking against the actions of Israeli leaders does not target the Jewish religion or culture. I've been inspired to see so many Jewish allies join together across the country and in the world in solidarity with the Palestinian people for a ceasefire. As outsiders to this conflict, we should reject reject the previously adopted anti-Semitism resolution and adopt one that is in solidarity with all oppressed people, which includes showing up in solidarity with our Muslim siblings at the bare minimum. Ultimately, this resolution should be expanded to include the LGBTQ plus community since they are specifically being targeted in Florida. I also support the repeal of the pro-Israel resolution that was recently passed. Whether intended or not, that resolution creates the opportunity for a Islamophobic wave to take hold of our area. Jewish folks deserve to live lives absence of discrimination, and our Muslim siblings do as well. Now is not the time to trade one form of hate for another. We could choose to feed two birds with one seed and repeal both resolutions to be replaced with one, a resolution to adopt and uphold the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, both for St. Pete residents and when viewing conflict from afar. Trying my hardest to assume best intent, I hear the members of this council saying and trying to enact policy that will, in their eyes, support oppressed people. The recently adopted policies are way off the mark. I look forward to seeing a more inclusive resolution in line with the values of the council and our inclusive city. Thank you. And that was our only Zoom speaker? Yes. Okay, so go back to speakers in person, two at a time. The next two are Madeline Curtis and Amanda Alfaro. Please go to either podium. State your name and address for the record. You'll have three minutes to address council. My name is Amanda Alfaro, and I live at 509 77th Avenue North. And I thought I'd just start by... St. Petersburg? Yes, St. Petersburg. And I thought I'd start by giving a little background of myself. I'm an Arab American. I'm Jordanian and Palestinian. And I was in fifth grade when 9-11 happened. And I honestly became the most patriotic fifth grader you could imagine after that. And as I reflect upon that, as an adult, it's clear to me that I was just trying to prove to the world that I was on all these awful things that Arabs... That they were saying about Arabs at the time. And so today... And, you know, I carried that with me as a young adult. I ended up getting my bachelor's degree in international studies with the focus area on conflict resolution. I got my master's degree in international development in the Middle East. I spent two years building a database of non-state militias. I've gone overseas and worked with refugees from both Syria and Iraq. And so this is a topic that I hold dear. And so I would like to take the time today to speak to you about what is terrorism. So the definition of terrorism is violence used for political aims. And that is exactly what the Israeli government is doing. Since 1948, when the Nakba happened, which means the Great Catastrophe in Arabic, 750,000 Palestinians were displaced from their homes. And honestly, that still happens today. Israeli soldiers can come to a Palestinian person's home with the IDF and they forcefully remove them from their home. And that is the core of why we're at this conflict now. And so bringing it back to what terrorism is, we've seen evidence that the Israeli government has been using white phosphorus on the Palestinian people. They've been using, they've been not allowing humanitarian aid into the region. They haven't, they cut off water, food, electricity. This is the definition of collective punishment because the Palestinian people are not Hamas. And Hamas is a terrorist organization and what they did was awful. But we cannot continue to allow this to happen. And when you guys pass that resolution, you are, you are supporting that. And I just really want to encourage you guys to take the time to learn about the conflict before you pass a resolution that did contain some harmful language that affects us Arab Americans who live in this city. But thank you for your time. Thank you. I'm Madeline Curtis. I live at 509 77th Avenue North, St. Pete. I'm 13 and my mother and I are Palestinian and Jordanian. You mentioned that Israel is defending their lives at this conflict. But if we look back, Israel has been attacking Palestine since 1948. In no way am I condoning the act of Hamas, but you should understand that the Palestinian people are completely separate from Hamas. They're suffering and just want to live. Thousands of people have died from attacks that have been occurring for 75 years. The Israeli government has called them human animals. I would want you to take the time to educate yourself on the history of this region. Thank you for your time. The next two is Morgan Gillum and Cody Hessen. Please state your name and address for the record. You'll have three minutes to address counsel. Go ahead, sir. Hi. Cody Hessen, 750 North Village Drive, St. Petersburg, Florida, 33716. So I don't have anything prepared. I didn't come here to speak originally, but seeing as the city council speaks for its residents, I felt a certain purpose. So I decided to put my name on the sheet and come up here and say a few things. A lot of things probably will be repeated, such as the fact that Israel is using white phosphorus, which is, you know, that is probably should have prepared something because I'm drawing a little blank. War crown. Thank you. Thankfully, I have three minutes to get back on track. I've seen a lot of videos of Israeli soldiers laughing and making comments about killing Palestinians, almost as if it's like a game to them. And it kind of is if you look at the death toll. Like they it's it's so bizarre to see it called even a conflict on the news because it's it's like a four to one ratio of people being murdered. It's it's it's it's crazy. Some people here have said if you see if if like the KKK, for instance, had attacked another country and that country decided to retaliate by bombing a small area where they could be just in retaliation. But it doesn't it doesn't feel like that. It feels more based on the rhetoric, based on like the position of the people, the soldiers. It feels like it's intentional. It feels like it's designed. It feels like it's like well thought out. And that is like that's an apartheid state. It's it's a government that has established itself to slowly dismantle, take over the homes, take over the land, drive the people out so that they can take it for themselves. And I don't want the city I live in to support that. I don't want to have come here, not said anything. And then that resolution had passed. So thank you for your time. Sorry, that was a little awkward. Should have prepared something. Next time I'll do that. Thank you. And is there? OK, it's Morgan. Yeah, I thought there was another speaker. Could you read the last name again? Morgan Gilman. Morgan Gilman. No. OK. Next two speakers. Bo Macy and Bobby Ewan. Please state your name and address for the record. We'll have three minutes to address council. Hello. Go ahead. Thank you. Bo Macy, 2420 8th Avenue North, St. Petersburg, Florida. Hello, city council. I don't know if I can change your minds. I probably won't. But while I'm scared and tired, they are dying. I can't stay silent. Hundreds of Palestinians blown apart and dying in rubble. Rubble. I am Jewish. I am trans. I've lived in St. Pete for most of my life. And I've always been, at least to some extent, comfortable with the city protecting my rights and the rights of populations being oppressed. I don't see that here. I do not see that in unilaterally supporting a settler community promising to bomb a hospital and then doing just that and then bombing a refugee camp and then threatening to blot out an entire land of people, which they are now doing, wholeheartedly and mostly unopposed. There's a humanitarian crisis in Palestine right now, and the city's resolution is telling the leaders of Israel, bombing them out currently, that we're OK with this. What links me to Judaism does not link me to Israel, and it shouldn't have to. That state does not represent my interest, and neither does a colonial state committing ethnic cleansing for us. The use of war crimes and missile attacks on sick children will not represent me. No matter what came before it, it simply can't. This resolution won't support humanity. What this resolution will commit the people of St. Pete to is standing against freedom and independence, and especially against our most vulnerable. And that certainly makes me think twice about supporting city events and actions, and I know it will for others. Are you really OK with supporting genociders? And why? And as constituents, how can we be OK with that, with this? I have only so much to add except to listen when Palestinian community members and others speak up to tell you that this resolution won't make us safer, it won't protect Jews, and it certainly won't protect the people of St. Petersburg or those in Israel. The Islamophobia we are already seeing in this country just after attacks by Israel is frankly shocking but familiar. We have seen Muslim children stabbed for this. You are inviting discrimination and violence into this city. You are telling me that by speaking of this, I am not safe, as a Jewish person or as anyone. Please repeal these resolutions. Please do not commit us to this hate. Thank you. Please. Hi. Bobby Ewing, 345 5th Street North, St. Pete. I'm an organizer with the Party for Socialism and Liberation, and I'm here to demand that city council repeal the resolution supporting the state of Israel and condemning Hamas and Iran. The resolution falsely states that the attack against Israel was unprovoked. This is not true. The attack was in response to over 75 years of colonial occupation, apartheid, ethnic cleansing, and genocide. The establishment of the state of Israel started with the Nakba in 1948 when Zionist colonizers forcibly displaced over 700,000 Palestinians from their homes and land, and millions more have been displaced since then. Palestinians in the West Bank live under military occupation, and Gaza has been under a brutal siege for decades. The vast majority of people who live in Gaza are not able to leave. Gaza is only 141 square miles, and it has a population of over 2 million people, with half of them being under the age of 18. Israel constantly violates international law. They have used white phosphorus against the people of Gaza. They have a well-documented history of targeting journalists and medical personnel, in addition to regularly bombing hospitals and schools. They have refused to comply with UN General Assembly Resolution 194, which states that Palestinian people have the right to return to their homes and the land that they've been expelled from. The Palestinian people also have the right to resist colonial occupation by any means necessary, as stated in a UN resolution from 1978, which, quote, reaffirms the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples for independence, territorial integrity, national unity, and liberation from colonial domination, apartheid, and foreign occupation by all available means, including armed struggle. The entire international community has condemned Israel and their genocidal response to the completely justified counter-offensive on October 7th. They have killed over 4,000 people and have dropped over 6,000 bombs on Gaza in less than two weeks. Yesterday, the UN Security Council voted for a ceasefire, and the only country to vote no was the United States. Multiple countries, such as Colombia, have expelled Israeli diplomats and threatened to suspend diplomatic relations with Israel entirely. Government officials from around the world, including Spain's Minister for Social Rights, Iono Ballara, have called for Netanyahu to be investigated by the International Criminal Court for War Crimes. Hundreds of thousands of people around the world have taken to the streets in support of the Palestinian resistance, including tens of thousands of people across the United States. City Council's resolution in support of Israel openly supports a century of genocide and colonization. The entire world stands with Palestine. City Council must repeal the resolution in support of Israel and instead pass a resolution in support of the Palestinian people and their right to resist colonial occupation by any means necessary. Thank you. The next two people is Kelsey Powell, and I believe it's Tanya, and forgive me, but I cannot make the last name. I believe she's here. Please state your name and address for the record. You'll have three minutes to address Council. Yeah, you can go ahead. Hi, my name is Tanya Liberato. I live at 783 Placido Way, Northeast, St. Petersburg, Florida. I did not come here to speak. I came here to support. But I was asked to speak on behalf of some people. I definitely speak on behalf of myself. I am not Arab. I am not Muslim. I am not Jewish. I am human. And I am saddened by everything. I am impressed by everyone. I am so excited to know that these people are educated. I grew up in the 1980s. Great decade, but really stupid. I was taught in school that Israel was made as a gift of the world to them for the horrors that happened during World War II. And that was all I was told. I was never taught in school that actually the Palestinian people were living there, that they were moved, that all of these things that these people have told you, that we were uneducated. My generation was uneducated as to what actually happened in the Middle East. And I am saddened and embarrassed for the United States of America for allowing that to happen. And so I know that I also speak as an educated or so-called school-educated woman in America, in St. Petersburg, that many of your constituents do not know what actually is the history of Israel and Palestine. They do not know what has happened to the Palestinian people, the Arab people, the nations out there. They do not have the history. And these people are so wonderfully here to educate you, us. I don't know what your background is, why you passed this resolution, but you are misinformed. We are informing you. I hope you take this to heart. Because when you do make resolutions like this, you speak on behalf of the city of St. Petersburg in favor of this genocide that has occurred. I believe I can speak that all of us are under the age of 75. This has been a war that has gone for as long as all of us have been alive on this planet. And it should have stopped years ago. It should never have started. It is horrific. It is ongoing. And it is not okay to say that Israel can do whatever they want and that we are in favor of them, that this is a government that has oppressed people for years, killed people, moved people. We are seeing children deprived of basic essentials, food, water, electricity. We are seeing children lose their fathers, mothers, brothers, and sisters for no reason besides where they were born. Innocent civilians being sprayed with chemical weapons, this is not a religious issue. It is a human rights issue. And it does affect people in America by what you say. Thank you. Next speaker. Kelsey Powell, 3122 62nd Street, North St. Petersburg. I am with Progressive People's Action Mutual Aid Organization. I am a lifelong resident of St. Petersburg. And I am here, like literally everyone else, to speak out against the resolution. It is dangerous and it is wildly inaccurate. It is also very reckless. It contains a lot of Islamophobic dog whistles. As a resident, I'd like to ask you to repeal it. I'm not okay, personally, with the city council aligning itself with ethnic cleansing. Neither is anyone else in the room. I don't have much faith in the council to listen to us. Every single city council I've been to for the last several years, over a dozen, you have explicitly voted against every single person in this room except for one property manager. But anyways, I do want our Palestinian residents and any other resident who has experienced a lot of Islamophobia to know that there are many of us here who will stand with you and support you. And we do not support this resolution that blatantly reinforces Islamophobia. Again, like everyone else has said, there's so much evidence. It is just pouring out this week. Please, it is so reckless to do this without putting a little more time into looking into it. Thank you. Next two speakers. Next two speakers, Dylan Dames and S.D. Miller. Please go to either podium. State your name and address for the record. You'll have three minutes to address council. Hi, council. My name is Dylan Dames. I live at 12001 Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Street North. St. Petersburg. St. Petersburg, sorry. I can be the man that I am today without the work that happened in 2020 and 2021 for racial justice. And I'm an international student, and for that reason, all of the people that I organize and the people that organize me emphasize how careful we would need to be and that we would need to do our research when protesting violence. And it was Palestinian people that told us how to form blockades and how to deal with tear gas. And I'm not speaking on behalf of any organization. I'm here as myself, as Dylan Dames, because none of the work that I do matters without solidarity. So I don't know. I don't have an organizing strategy this time. I don't have my organizing hat on. But if this was something that you were able to rise to the challenge of in five days, I hope that you would do the same in the interest of a ceasefire. And whatever limitations you face to stand with Palestinian people, that you would challenge them with the same gusto that you challenge other limitations. Thank you. Hi, I'm S.D. Miller, 871 Ibis Walk, place north, St. Petersburg. I am Jewish. I am the grandchild of a Holocaust survivor. I was raised Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jewish. My grandfather would be rolling in his grave right now if he saw what I was wearing and who I am speaking in support of. I have been to Israel twice. And for that, I consider myself complicit in the ongoing genocide that is happening against Palestinians right now. Something I heard a lot growing up was next year in Israel, many times a year during the high holidays. And what I wasn't told was the cost that it would take to get there. And now that I am almost 30, I understand and I'm still learning that the state of Israel is not the end-all, be-all solution to achieving safety and prosperity of Jews worldwide. And I don't necessarily believe that what is said here tonight is, you know, going to change things massively. I hope that it does. I always hope that it does. Conditions on the ground in Gaza are not going to be improved by all of our well-spoken constituents here. And I've also seen a lot of you guys watching the clock and rolling your eyes. And I just have to say that you would not be here right now with so many people speaking out if you were actually representing our voices in the resolutions that you are passing. And it is obvious that in these resolutions defining anti-Semitism and in support of Israel that you are not representing your constituents right now. So I cannot, in good conscience, support the state of Israel. Quite frankly, I condemn them. And if I were to be killed in an attack and had my death used to justify the ethnic cleansing of indigenous persons, I would be mortified. I grieve for every life lost, and I will not condemn Palestinians to extinction for resisting by any means necessary. At the end of this resolution that I'm reading right now, it says, Therefore, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of St. Petersburg, Florida, that the City Council supports and stands with the State of Israel as it defends itself against the barbaric war, condemns Hamas and Iran, and calls for Hamas to immediately end the violent attacks and release all hostages. Hostages that are probably dead from Israeli bombs. Israel has to end this, not Gaza. So, yeah, repeal. Thank you. The next speaker is only, our first name is Danny, and the second one will be L. Cheston. Please go to either podium, state your name and address for the record. You'll have three minutes to address counsel. Hi, my name is Danny. I refuse to give my address in solidarity with those who are forced to live outside in this capitalist system. It says you don't work, you don't eat. You, Gabbard. You, Brandi Gabbard. Every single one of you. Sir. May you all. You need to leave the chambers. Shame. Sir. Everyone. The City Council stands in recess. In the interim of these chambers, I want to hear what everyone who has signed up has to say. But we will not allow disruption, and if anyone else has an outburst, the meeting will be adjourned. Ma'am, you have already been called, so please go ahead. Thank you. My name is Ellen. I'm with the Party for Socialism and Liberation. I live at 4101 9th Ave North in St. Pete, 33713. I urge this council to roll back your initial resolution of standing with Israel, the colonial state that has taken accelerated action to wipe out Palestinian people and is funded by our tax dollars. We come in here time and time again urging this council to stop handing money to developers and corporations who exploit workers here in St. Pete. We tell you to stop blurting the walls of racist police, to stop funding projects that do nothing to solve the housing crisis here in our city. We are met with opposition. The council acts like their hands are tied because this capitalist system is the best we can do. And here you go again, upholding oppression. But your hands are not tied. You have a choice to uphold the system that funds the mass killing of innocent people and puts profit over our basic needs. A system that upholds white supremacy and causes homelessness and displacement. But you also have a choice to look to the oppressed people of our neighborhoods and abroad and choose them over a few wealthy elites that try to perpetuate a fear of Arab people so they can maintain their stronghold over the Middle East. Genocide is not popular despite the media trying to justify it. What is popular are things like rent control, free transit, health care, protections for workers against corporate greed, just to name a few. And most importantly, sovereignty. There are so many things this council could work towards resolving that actually help the people. Instead, you speak up in favor of mass displacement and ethnic cleansing of Palestinians? You support more money going to the siege of Gaza? This is a shame. The people of St. Pete never consented to our tax dollars going to apartheid. And we do not consent today. To anyone who wants to join us in the streets and demand the end to U.S. aid to Israel, we are holding a rally at 56 in Fowler and Tampa on Saturday at 3 p.m. Because their fight is our fight. Free, free, Palestine! Free, free, Palestine! Meeting adjourned.