The URL can be used to link to this page

05/01/2014 City Council Agenda Location: Council Chambers - City Hall Date: 5/1/2014- 6:00 PM Welcome. We are glad to have you join us. If you wish to speak, please wait to be recognized, then state your name and address. Persons speaking before the City Council shall be limited to three (3) minutes unless otherwise noted under Public Hearings. For other than Citizens to be heard regarding items not on the Agenda, a spokesperson for a group may speak for three (3) minutes plus an additional minute for each person in the audience that waives their right to speak, up to a maximum of ten (10) minutes. Prior to the item being presented, please obtain the needed form to designate a spokesperson from the City Clerk (right-hand side of dais). Up to thirty minutes of public comment will be allowed for an agenda item. No person shall speak more than once on the same subject unless granted permission by the City Council. The City of Clearwater strongly supports and fully complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Please advise us at least 48 hours prior to the meeting if you require special accommodations at 727-562-4090. Assisted Listening Devices are available. Kindly refrain from using beepers, cellular telephones and other distracting devices during the meeting. 1. Call to Order 2. Invocation 3. Pledge of Allegiance 4. Presentations 4.1Check Presentation by Police Department Volunteers Attachments 4.2Clearwater Bombers Day Proclamation - Dean Robinson, Event Organizer Attachments 4.3Relay For Life Proclamation - Bob Barry, American Cancer Society Attachments 4.4Older Americans Month Proclamation - Jason Martino, Director of Federal programs for the Area Agency on Aging Pasco-Pinellas, Inc. Attachments 4.5Drinking Water Week Proclamation May 4-10 - Tracy Mercer Attachments 4.6Municipal Clerks Week Proclamation Attachments 5. Approval of Minutes 5.1Approve the minutes of the April 16, 2014 City Council Meeting as submitted in written summation by the City Clerk. Attachments 6. Citizens to be Heard re Items Not on the Agenda Public Hearings - Not before 6:00 PM 7. Second Readings - Public Hearing 7.1Continue to June 5, 2014: Approve the Annexation of a portion of the road right-of-way located on Belcher Road, north of Sunset Point Road to Montclair Road, including all of the right-of-way within the intersection of North Belcher Road, Montclair Road, and Old Coachman Road, consisting of a portion of Section 06, Township 29 South, Range 16 East; and pass Ordinances 8558-14, 8559-14, and 8560-14 on second reading. (ANX2014-02005) Attachments 7.2Adopt Ordinance 8547-14 on second reading, annexing certain real property whose post office address is 2205 McMullen Booth Road, Clearwater, Florida 33759 into the corporate limits of the city and redefining the boundary lines of the city to include said addition. Attachments 7.3Adopt Ordinance 8548-14 on second reading, amending the future land use plan element of the Comprehensive Plan of the city to designate the land use for certain real property whose post office address is 2205 McMullen Booth Road, Clearwater, Florida 33759, upon annexation into the City of Clearwater, as Residential Suburban (RS). Attachments 7.4Adopt Ordinance 8549-14 on second reading, amending the Zoning Atlas of the city by zoning certain real property whose post office address is 2205 McMullen Booth Road, Clearwater, Florida 33759, upon annexation into the City of Clearwater, as Low Density Residential (LDR). Attachments 7.5Adopt Ordinance 8552-14 on second reading, annexing certain real properties whose post office addresses are 1940 North Betty Lane, 1258 Sedeeva Circle North, 1978 North Betty Lane, 2084 Lantana Avenue, 2075 The Mall, and 1241 Union St., all in Clearwater, Florida 33755, together with certain Rights of Way of North Betty Lane, Sedeeva Circle North, and Lantana Avenue, into the corporate limits of the city and redefining the boundary lines of the city to include said addition. Attachments 7.6Adopt Ordinance 8553-14 on second reading, amending the future land use plan element of the Comprehensive Plan of the city to designate the land use for certain real properties whose post office addresses are 1940 North Betty Lane, 1258 Sedeeva Circle North, 1978 North Betty Lane, 2084 Lantana Avenue, 2075 The Mall, and 1241 Union St., all in Clearwater, Florida 33755, together with certain Rights of Way of North Betty Lane, Sedeeva Circle North, and Lantana Avenue, upon annexation into the City of Clearwater, as Residential Urban (RU). Attachments 7.7Adopt Ordinance 8554-14 on second reading, amending the Zoning Atlas of the city by zoning certain real properties whose post office addresses are 1940 North Betty Lane, 1258 Sedeeva Circle North, 1978 North Betty Lane, 2084 Lantana Avenue, 2075 The Mall, and 1241 Union St., all in Clearwater, Florida 33755, together with certain Rights of Way of North Betty Lane, Sedeeva Circle North, and Lantana Avenue, upon annexation into the City of Clearwater, as Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR). Attachments 7.8Adopt Ordinance 8555-14 on second reading, annexing certain real property whose post office address is 3119 Johns Parkway into the corporate limits of the city and redefining the boundary lines of the city to include said addition. Attachments 7.9Adopt Ordinance 8556-14 on second reading, amending the future land use plan element of the Comprehensive Plan of the city to designate the land use for certain real property whose post office address is 3119 Johns Parkway, upon annexation into the City of Clearwater, as Residential Urban (RU). Attachments 7.10Adopt Ordinance 8557-14 on second reading, amending the Zoning Atlas of the city by zoning certain real property whose post office address is 3119 Johns Parkway, upon annexation into the City of Clearwater, as Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR). Attachments 7.11Adopt Ordinance 8561-14 on second reading, annexing certain real property whose post office addresses are 1942 North Betty Lane, 1996 North Betty Lane, and 1235 Palm Street, all in Clearwater, Florida 33755, together with certain right of way of North Betty Lane located south of State Street, into the corporate limits of the city and redefining the boundary lines of the city to include said addition. Attachments 7.12Adopt Ordinance 8562-14 on second reading, amending the future land use plan element of the Comprehensive Plan of the city to designate the land use for certain real property whose post office addresses are 1942 North Betty Lane, 1996 North Betty Lane, and 1235 Palm Street, all in Clearwater, Florida 33755, together with certain right of way of North Betty Lane located south of State Street, upon annexation into the City of Clearwater, as Residential Urban (RU). Attachments 7.13Adopt Ordinance 8563-14 on second reading, amending the Zoning Atlas of the city by zoning certain real property whose post office addresses are 1942 North Betty Lane, 1996 North Betty Lane, and 1235 Palm Street, all in Clearwater, Florida 33755, together with certain right of way of North Betty Lane located south of State Street, upon annexation into the City of Clearwater, as Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR). Attachments City Manager Reports 8. Consent Agenda 8.1Declare list of vehicles and equipment surplus to the needs of the City; authorize disposal through sale to the highest bidder at the Tampa Machinery Auction, Tampa, Florida; and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (Consent) Attachments 8.2Authorize the Chief of Police to sign Memoranda of Agreements between the State of Florida acting by and through the Department of Management Services, Bureau of Federal Property Assistance as the State of Florida Single Point of Contact, and the City of Clearwater Police Department for the conditional transfer of surplus military equipment that will be repurposed for use by the police department in furtherance of law enforcement operations. (Consent) Attachments 8.3Approve a Contract (Blanket Purchase Order) to Honeywell International, Inc. – Building Solutions of Chicago, IL for an amount not to exceed $180,000 for the quarterly Maintenance Fees, from May 1, 2014 through April 30, 2015, per the contracts dated November 17, 2008 and April 28, 2010, and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (Consent) Attachments 8.4Award a contract (Blanket Purchase Order) to Jet Age Fuel of Clearwater, FL for an amount not to exceed $3,700,000 for the purchase of unleaded and diesel fuel for city motorized equipment, as per City of Clearwater RFP 19-10, during the contract period May 1, 2014 through April 30, 2015 and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (Consent) Attachments 8.5Award a contract (purchase order) to Richard H. Martin Roofing of Largo Florida, in the amount of $184,632.00 for the installation of a sprayed polyurethane foam roof system and acrylic coating on the roofs of Building C and G of the Public Services Complex, per Bid 13-14 and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (Consent) Attachments 8.6Award a Contract (Purchase Order) for $195,643.50 to Alan Jay Fleet Sales of Sebring, FL for the purchase of five 2014 Ford F450 utility body pickup trucks, in accordance with the Florida State Term Contract 071-000-14-1, 2.564(1)(d), Code of Ordinances - Other Governmental Bid; authorize lease purchase under the City’s Master Lease Purchase Agreement, or internal financing via an interfund loan from the Capital Improvement Fund, whichever is deemed to be in the City’s best interests; and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (Consent) Attachments 8.7Approve a Contract (Blanket Purchase Order) to Waste Equipment and Parts LLC of Tampa, Florida to rebuild two Automated Side Loaders for an amount not to exceed $150,000, and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (Consent) Attachments 8.8Approve a contract (Blanket Purchase Order) to Wingfoot Commercial Tire of Clearwater, FL, for an amount not to exceed $510,000, for the purchase of Goodyear Tires for city motorized equipment, from May 1, 2014 through February 27, 2015, in accordance with Sec. 2.564(1)(d), Code of Ordinances - Other governmental bid; and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (Consent) Attachments 8.9Approve proposal from Construction Manager at Risk Certus Builders, Inc. of Tampa, FL for the demolition phase of the Residual Processing Building (RDP) storage conversion project (13-0053-UT) for the guaranteed maximum price of $208,923.40 and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (Consent) Attachments 8.10Award a contract (purchase order) to Layne Inliner, LLC, Sanford, FL, in the amount of $1,028,387.50, for the cleaning and video inspection of Stormwater outfall locations throughout the City of Clearwater and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (Consent) Attachments 9. Other Items on City Manager Reports 9.1Authorize the execution of a Joint Participation Agreement (JPA) between the City of Clearwater and the State of Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) for the rehabilitation of hangars at the Clearwater Airpark and adopt Resolution 14-10. Attachments 9.2Authorize a Joint Participation Agreement (JPA) between the City of Clearwater and the State of Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) for the rehabilitation of hangar C at the Clearwater Airpark, adopt Resolution 14-12, and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. Attachments 9.3Provide direction regarding changes to City Council Rules. Attachments 9.4Approve the 2014 Clearwater Federal Priorities. Attachments Miscellaneous Reports and Items 10. City Manager Verbal Reports 10.1City Manager Verbal Reports Attachments 11. Other Council Action 11.155th Anniversary Nagano Trip - Mayor Cretekos Attachments 12. Closing Comments by Mayor 13. Adjourn City Council Agenda Council Chambers - City Hall Meeting Date:5/1/2014 SUBJECT / RECOMMENDATION: Check Presentation by Police Department Volunteers SUMMARY: Review Approval: Cover Memo Item # 1 City Council Agenda Council Chambers - City Hall Meeting Date:5/1/2014 SUBJECT / RECOMMENDATION: Clearwater Bombers Day Proclamation - Dean Robinson, Event Organizer SUMMARY: Review Approval: Cover Memo Item # 2 City Council Agenda Council Chambers - City Hall Meeting Date:5/1/2014 SUBJECT / RECOMMENDATION: Relay For Life Proclamation - Bob Barry, American Cancer Society SUMMARY: Review Approval: Cover Memo Item # 3 City Council Agenda Council Chambers - City Hall Meeting Date:5/1/2014 SUBJECT / RECOMMENDATION: Older Americans Month Proclamation - Jason Martino, Director of Federal programs for the Area Agency on Aging Pasco- Pinellas, Inc. SUMMARY: Review Approval: Cover Memo Item # 4 City Council Agenda Council Chambers - City Hall Meeting Date:5/1/2014 SUBJECT / RECOMMENDATION: Drinking Water Week Proclamation May 4-10 - Tracy Mercer SUMMARY: Review Approval: Cover Memo Item # 5 City Council Agenda Council Chambers - City Hall Meeting Date:5/1/2014 SUBJECT / RECOMMENDATION: Municipal Clerks Week Proclamation SUMMARY: Review Approval: Cover Memo Item # 6 City Council Agenda Council Chambers - City Hall Meeting Date:5/1/2014 SUBJECT / RECOMMENDATION: Approve the minutes of the April 16, 2014 City Council Meeting as submitted in written summation by the City Clerk. SUMMARY: Review Approval: Cover Memo Item # 7 CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES CITY OF CLEARWATER April 16, 2014 Present: Mayor George N. Cretekos, Vice Mayor Doreen Hock-DiPolito Councilmember Hoyt Hamilton, Councilmember Bill Jonson, Councilmember Jay E. Polglaze Also Present: William B. Horne II – City Manager, Jill S. Silverboard - Assistant City Manager, Rod Irwin - Assistant City Manager, Pamela K. Akin - City Attorney, Rosemarie Call - City Clerk, Nicole Sprague - Official Records and Legislative Services Coordinator To provide continuity for research, items are listed in agenda order although not necessarily discussed in that order. Unapproved 1.Call to Order – Mayor George Cretekos The meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall. 2.Invocation - Pastor Chuck Engelhardt from Heritage United Methodist Church 3.Pledge of Allegiance - Vice Mayor Doreen Hock-DiPolito 4.Presentations - Given. 4.1 Service Awards The April 2014 Employee of the Month Award was presented to Rose Lara, Public Utilities. 4.2 SAR Proclamation, April 20, 2014 - Art Hays, Sons of the American Revolution 4.3 Swim Across America Proclamation, May 31, 2014 - Tony and Janice Schicchitano - Swim Across America organizing committee; Brooke Bennett - 3- time Olympic Gold Medalist 4.4 Civitan Awareness Month Proclamation, April 2014 -Richard Fuller 4.5 2014 Florida Healthy Weight Community Champion Recognition Award - Dr. Council 2014-04-16 1 Draft Attachment number 1 \nPage 1 of 21 Item # 7 Claude Dharamraj, County Health Department Director; Megan Carmichael, Tobacco Manager 4.6 Arbor Day Proclamation, April 26, 2014 - Chuck Porthouse, Parks Service Supervisor 5.Approval of Minutes 5.1 Approve the minutes of the April 3, 2014 City Council Meeting as submitted in written summation by the City Clerk. Councilmember Jay Polglaze moved to approve the minutes of the April 3, 2014 City Council Meeting as submitted in written summation by the City Clerk. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 5.2 Amend and Approve March 20, 2014 City Council Meeting Minutes Councilmember Bill Jonson moved to amend the March 20, 2014 council meeting minutes, page 15, line 15 as follows: " Moved to deny giving the requested guidance to staff that we would allow a marina in this location, and further that we would require that public comment in a public meeting be held and as well as the ULI study prior to rehearing that request." The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Vice Mayor Doreen Hock-DiPolito moved to approve the March 20, 2014 City Council meeting minutes, as amended. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 6.Citizens to be Heard re Items Not on the Agenda Tom Nocera said he recommends Council delay the lease negotiations with the CMA until after the lawsuit is settled. Robert Formeister said congress is considering a bill for a Smoke Free America and expressed concern regarding available personnel to enforce such a law. Ruth Ann Morris and Carol Gray expressed concern with the light pollution in Cooper’s Bayou due to stadium lighting and requested consideration to modernize the lighting codes. Joseph Corvino requested Council to receive public input prior to the CMA lease negotiation. Council 2014-04-16 2 Draft Attachment number 1 \nPage 2 of 21 Item # 7 William Berger expressed concern regarding the traffic calming devices installed in his neighborhood. The City Manager said staff contacted Mr. Berger regarding the threshold criteria for installing traffic calming devices. The City has established 65% of interested neighborhood participation as the criteria. Staff stopped surveying the community when 70% of the community residents supported the traffic calming devices. Staff has modified the survey procedures to insure those who oppose the traffic calming devices have an opportunity to express their opposition. At least 70% of the residents in Mr. Berger’s neighborhood supported the traffic calming devices. Public Hearings - Not before 6:00 PM 7. Administrative Public Hearings 7.1 Continue to May 15, 2014: Approve the Annexation of a portion of the road right- of-way located on Belcher Road, north of Sunset Point Road to Montclair Road, including all of the right-of-way within the intersection of North Belcher Road, Montclair Road, and Old Coachman Road, consisting of a portion of Section 06, Township 29 South, Range 16 East; and pass Ordinances 8558-14, 8559-14, and 8560-14 on first reading. (ANX2014-02005) Councilmember Bill Jonson moved to continue Agenda Item 7.1 to May 15, 2014. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 7.2 Approve the annexation, initial Future Land Use Map designation of Residential Urban (RU) and initial Zoning Atlas designation of Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) district for 1940 North Betty Lane; 1978 North Betty Lane; 2084 Lantana Avenue; 1258 Sedeeva Circle North; 2075 The Mall; and 1241 Union Street (all parcels are located in Section 03, Township 29 South, Range 15 East), together with certain rights-of-way of: North Betty Lane, Sedeeva Circle North and Lantana Avenue; and pass Ordinances 8552-14, 8553-14 and 8554- 14 on first reading. (ATA2014-01001) The City of Clearwater Public Utilities Department is expanding sewer service into the Idlewild/The Mall neighborhood located generally east of Douglas Avenue and west of Kings Highway, north of Sunset Point Road and south of Union Street. This neighborhood contains a large concentration of properties within unincorporated Pinellas County. To date, 28 properties have voluntarily annexed into the City as a result of this project and nine more properties are currently in the process of annexing. Another 59 agreements to annex (ATAs) have been executed for properties not meeting annexation contiguity requirements but desiring to receive sanitary sewer service. Council 2014-04-16 3 Draft Attachment number 1 \nPage 3 of 21 Item # 7 This application is the first group of parcels with recorded ATAs that have become contiguous in the Idlewild/The Mall Septic-to-Sewer Project area. It includes six ATAs signed by the current owners within the last year. The Planning and Development Department is initiating this project to bring the properties into the City’s jurisdiction in compliance with the terms and conditions set forth in the agreements. These properties are occupied by six detached dwellings on 0.762 acres of land. The Development Review Committee is proposing that approximately 0.211 acres of right-of-way throughout this area on North Betty Lane, Sedeeva Circle North, and Lantana Avenue not currently within the city limits also be annexed. All properties are contiguous to existing city boundaries in at least one direction. It is proposed that the properties be assigned a Future Land Use Map designation of Residential Urban (RU) and a Zoning Atlas designation of Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR). The Planning and Development Department determined that the proposed annexation is consistent with the provisions of Clearwater Community Development Code Section 4-604.E as follows: The properties currently receive water service from the City. Collection of solid waste will be provided to the properties by the City. The applicants will connect to the City’s sanitary sewer service when it is available, and are aware of the fee that must be paid in order to connect and the financial incentives available. The properties are located within Police District II and service will be administered through the district headquarters located at 645 Pierce Street. Fire and emergency medical services will be provided to these properties by Station 51 located at 1720 Overbrook Avenue. The City has adequate capacity to serve these properties with sanitary sewer, solid waste, police, fire and EMS service. The proposed annexations will not have an adverse effect on public facilities and their levels of service; and The proposed annexation is consistent with and promotes the following objectives and policy of the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan: Policy A.7.1.3: Invoke agreements to annex where properties located within enclaves meet the contiguity requirements of Florida Statutes Chapter 171. Objective A.6.4: Due to the built-out character of the City of Clearwater, compact urban development within the urban service area shall be promoted through application of the Clearwater Community Development Code. Objective A.7.2: Diversify and expand the City’s tax base through the annexation of a variety of land uses located within the Clearwater Planning Area. Council 2014-04-16 4 Draft Attachment number 1 \nPage 4 of 21 Item # 7 The proposed Residential Urban (RU) Future Land Use Map category is consistent with the current Countywide Plan designation of these properties. This designation primarily permits residential uses at a density of 7.5 units per acre. The proposed zoning district to be assigned to the properties is the Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District. The use of the subject properties is consistent with the uses allowed in the district. The properties at 1978 North Betty Lane, 2084 Lantana Avenue, 2075 The Mall, and 1241 Union Street exceed the district’s minimum dimensional requirements. The properties at 1940 Betty Lane and 1258 Sedeeva Circle North meet the District’s minimum dimensions through the Flexible Development requirements. The proposed annexations are therefore consistent with the Countywide Plan and the City’s Comprehensive Plan and Community Development Code; and The properties proposed for annexation are contiguous to existing City boundaries along at least one property boundary; therefore, the annexations are consistent with Florida Statutes Chapter 171.044. Vice Mayor Doreen Hock-DiPolito moved to approve the annexation, initial Future Land Use Map designation of Residential Urban (RU) and initial Zoning Atlas designation of Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) district for 1940 North Betty Lane; 1978 North Betty Lane; 2084 Lantana Avenue; 1258 Sedeeva Circle North; 2075 The Mall; and 1241 Union Street (all parcels are located in Section 03, Township 29 South, Range 15 East), together with certain rights-of-way of: North Betty Lane, Sedeeva Circle North and Lantana Avenue. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Ordinance 8552-14 was presented and read by title only. Councilmember Jay Polglaze moved to pass Ordinance 8552-14 on first reading. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was: "Ayes": Mayor George N. Cretekos, Vice Mayor Doreen Hock-DiPolito, Councilmember Hoyt Hamilton, Councilmember Bill Jonson, and Councilmember Jay E. Polglaze. "Nays": None. Ordinance 8553-14 was presented and read by title only. Councilmember Hoyt Hamilton moved to pass Ordinance 8553-14 on first reading. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was: "Ayes": Mayor George N. Cretekos, Vice Mayor Doreen Hock-DiPolito, Councilmember Hoyt Hamilton, Councilmember Bill Jonson, and Councilmember Jay E. Polglaze. "Nays": None. Council 2014-04-16 5 Draft Attachment number 1 \nPage 5 of 21 Item # 7 Ordinance 8554-14 was presented and read by title only. Councilmember Bill Jonson moved to pass Ordinance 8554-14 on first reading. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was: "Ayes": Mayor George N. Cretekos, Vice Mayor Doreen Hock-DiPolito, Councilmember Hoyt Hamilton, Councilmember Bill Jonson, and Councilmember Jay E. Polglaze. "Nays": None. 7.3 Approve the Annexation, Initial Land Use Plan Designation of Residential Suburban(RS) and Initial Zoning Atlas Designation of Low Density Residential (LDR) District for 2205 McMullen Booth Road (Metes and Bounds Tract 32/18 in Section 33, Township 28 South, Range 16 East); and pass Ordinances 8547-14, 8548-14 and 8549-14 on first reading. (ANX2014-01003) This voluntary annexation petition involves a 0.469-acre property consisting of one parcel of land occupied by a single-family dwelling. Upon annexation, the applicant will be joining this parcel by unity of title with a 0.513-acre parcel to the west (within the City) on which a barn for boarding horses is located. The property is located on the west side of McMullen Booth Road, approximately 1400 feet north of Union Street. The applicant is requesting this annexation in order to allow the two parcels to be joined, and to receive solid waste service from the City. The property is contiguous to existing city boundaries to the north and west. It is proposed that the property be assigned a Future Land Use Plan designation of Residential Suburban (RS) and a zoning category of Low Density Residential (LDR). The Planning Department determined that the proposed annexation is consistent with the provisions of Community Development Code Section 4-604.E as follows: The property currently receives water service from the City. Sewer service is not readily available to the applicant’s property. Collection of solid waste will be provided by the City of Clearwater. The property is located within Police District III and service will be administered through the district headquarters located at 2851 N. McMullen Booth Road. Fire and emergency medical services will be provided to this property by Station 50 located at 2681 Countryside Boulevard. The City has adequate capacity to serve this property with solid waste, police, fire and EMS service. The proposed annexation will not have an adverse effect on public facilities and their levels of service; and Council 2014-04-16 6 Draft Attachment number 1 \nPage 6 of 21 Item # 7 The proposed annexation is consistent with and promotes the following objective of the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan: Objective A.6.4: Due to the built-out character of the City of Clearwater, compact urban development within the urban service area shall be promoted through application of the Clearwater Community Development Code. Objective A.7.2 Diversify and expand the City’s tax base through the annexation of a variety of land uses located within the Clearwater Planning Area. Policy A.7.2.3 Continue to process voluntary annexations for single-family residential properties upon request. The proposed RS Future Land Use Plan category is consistent with the current Countywide Plan designation of this property. This designation primarily permits residential uses at a density of 2.5 units per acre. The proposed zoning district to be assigned to the property is the Low Density Residential (LDR) District. The single-family dwelling use of the subject property is consistent with the uses allowed in the District; however, the property is currently allowed the general agricultural activities use, including the boarding of a maximum of three horses per acre (minimum of one-half acre required), under the County’s code. This property is less than one-half acre in size, and therefore the County’s code does not allow for any horses on site. The annexation ordinance associated with the 0.513-acre parcel to the west permitted the property owners to retain their rights to general agricultural activities as allowed in the County (Ordinance No. 8124- 10/ATA2009-04002). Once this parcel is joined with the adjacent parcel to the west, the total parcel size of 0.98-acres would allow a maximum of two horses. The property exceeds the LDR District’s minimum dimensional requirements. The proposed annexation is therefore consistent with the Countywide Plan and the City’s Comprehensive Plan and Community Development Code; and The property proposed for annexation is contiguous to existing City boundaries to the north and west; therefore the annexation is consistent with Florida Statutes Chapter 171.044. Planning and Development Director Michael Delk said staff confirmed the original annexation ordinance reflected a legal permitted use in the county to board horses at this location. Staff has narrowed down the horse boarding provision in the current ordinance to provide for the boarding of horses at the allowable rate of two horses per acre. The ability to board horses will be lost if boarding falls below the allowable rate, property is sold or parceled-off. Assistant City Attorney Leslie Dougall-Sides said based Council 2014-04-16 7 Draft Attachment number 1 \nPage 7 of 21 Item # 7 on property acreage, Pinellas County would allow the boarding of two ungulates on this location. Vice Mayor Doreen Hock-DiPolito moved to approve the Annexation, Initial Land Use Plan Designation of Residential Suburban (RS) and Initial Zoning Atlas Designation of Low Density Residential (LDR) District for 2205 McMullen Booth Road (Metes and Bounds Tract 32/18 in Section 33, Township 28 South, Range 16 East). The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Ordinance 8547-14 was presented and read by title only. Councilmember Jay Polglaze moved to pass Ordinance 8547-14 on first reading. The motion was duly seconded. Councilmember Hoyt Hamilton moved to amend Ordinance 8547-14, page 1, Section 3, as follows: “…However, such use shall be limited to the keeping of the number of horses allowed by said Pinellas County Code Section based upon the acreage of the parcel being annexed, alone or in combination with any other parcel joined to it by a recorded Unity of Title.” The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Upon roll call, the vote to pass Ordinance 8547-14, as amended was: "Ayes": Mayor George N. Cretekos, Vice Mayor Doreen Hock-DiPolito, Councilmember Hoyt Hamilton, Councilmember Bill Jonson, and Councilmember Jay E. Polglaze. "Nays": None. Ordinance 8548-14 was presented and read by title only. Councilmember Bill Jonson moved to pass Ordinance 8548-14 on first reading. The motion was duly seconded. Vice Mayor Doreen Hock-DiPolito moved to amend Ordinance 8548-14, page 1, Section 3, as follows: “…However, such use shall be limited to the keeping of the number of horses allowed by said Pinellas County Code Section based upon the acreage of the parcel being annexed, alone or in combination with any other parcel joined to it by a recorded Unity of Title.” The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Upon roll call, the vote to pass Ordinance 8548-14, as amended was: "Ayes": Mayor George N. Cretekos, Vice Mayor Doreen Hock-DiPolito, Councilmember Hoyt Hamilton, Councilmember Bill Jonson, and Councilmember Jay E. Polglaze. "Nays": None. Council 2014-04-16 8 Draft Attachment number 1 \nPage 8 of 21 Item # 7 Ordinance 8549-14 was presented and read by title only. Councilmember Jay Polglaze moved to pass Ordinance 8549-14 on first reading. The motion was duly seconded. Councilmember Hoyt Hamilton moved to amend Ordinance 8549-14, page 1, Section 3, as follows: “…However, such use shall be limited to the keeping of the number of horses allowed by said Pinellas County Code Section based upon the acreage of the parcel being annexed, alone or in combination with any other parcel joined to it by a recorded Unity of Title.” The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Upon roll call, the vote to pass Ordinance 8548-14, as amended was: "Ayes": Mayor George N. Cretekos, Vice Mayor Doreen Hock-DiPolito, Councilmember Hoyt Hamilton, Councilmember Bill Jonson, and Councilmember Jay E. Polglaze. "Nays": None. 7.4 Approve a First Amendment to an existing Development Agreement between Clearwater Grande LLC, (the property owner) and the City of Clearwater, providing for the allocation of up to ten units from the Hotel Density Reserve under Beach by Design, where 80 units were previously obtained on June 19, 2013, for a new overall density of 125.96 units per acre where a maximum density of 150 units per acre is allowed, adopt Resolution 14-08, and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (HDA2014-02001) The 1.437-acre subject property is located on the south side of South Gulfview Boulevard approximately 894 feet west of Gulf Boulevard. The subject property is currently developed with a 91-room hotel (Quality Inn) and its associated parking lot. The existing building is located on the east side of the site and oriented north/south. The property is located within the Tourist (T) District and the Resort Facilities High (RFH) Future Land Use Plan category. The subject property is located in the Clearwater Pass character district of Beach by Design. The proposal is to amend a previously approved development agreement (DVA2013-03001) providing for the allocation of up to 10 additional units from the Hotel Density Reserve under Beach by Design where 80 units were previously obtained on June 19, 2013 for an overall density of 125.96 units per acre where a maximum density of 150 units per acre is allowed. Council 2014-04-16 9 Draft Attachment number 1 \nPage 9 of 21 Item # 7 The requested 10 units will bring the overall number of overnight accommodation rooms to 181 units with an overall density of 125.96 units per acre. The proposed density is below the maximum of 150 units per acre for properties that receive units from the Hotel Density Reserve. On February 14, 2014, a minor revision was approved that primarily reduced the mass of the building. Almost 5000 square feet of area was removed from the parking garage through improved design efficiencies and the use of mechanical lifts on the top floor of the garage. An additional 12 spaces were gained through the revisions for a total of 218 spaces where 206 were originally approved. Other minor design changes include the addition of balconies to many rooms which previously had none, a reduction in building height by three feet four inches and the addition of a roof design which better reflects the Hampton Inn and Suites prototypical roof parapet. On March 3, 2014, the property owner submitted a Flexible Development application to amend the approved development project consistent with the density changes proposed as a part of this development agreement. This First Amendment to an existing Development Agreement proposes to amend the development project to retain the existing 91-rooms in the Quality Inn and to add the requested 10 units to the 80 units already obtained from the Hotel Density Reserve to build a 90-room overnight accommodation to be known as the Hampton Inn and Suites. The development proposal will not degrade the Level of Service (LOS D or better) on surrounding transportation facilities nor adversely affect the nearby signalized intersection, which is consistent with Metropolitan Planning Organizations concurrency management for transportation facilities. The proposal is in compliance with the standards for development agreements, is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and furthers the vision of beach redevelopment set forth in Beach by Design. The proposed First Amendment to the Development Agreement will be in effect for a period not to exceed ten (10) years and includes the following main provision: Amends Section 4.2. Parking to be deleted and replaces to read as “The Project shall include 218 parking spaces, as defined in the Community Development Code, of which 211 will be provided by a parking garage with 7 additional surface spaces being provided adjacent to the parking garage. The parking garage, its accesses, and the surface spaces will be shared with the existing adjacent Quality Inn site and contains sufficient parking for both hotels.” Council 2014-04-16 10 Draft Attachment number 1 \nPage 10 of 21 Item # 7 Councilmember Bill Jonson moved to approve a First Amendment to an existing Development Agreement between Clearwater Grande LLC, (the property owner) and the City of Clearwater, providing for the allocation of up to ten units from the Hotel Density Reserve under Beach by Design, where 80 units were previously obtained on June 19, 2013, for a new overall density of 125.96 units per acre where a maximum density of 150 units per acre is allowed. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Resolution 14-08 was presented and read by title only. Councilmember Jay Polglaze moved to adopt resolution 14-08. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was: "Ayes": Mayor George N. Cretekos, Vice Mayor Doreen Hock-DiPolito, Councilmember Hoyt Hamilton, Councilmember Bill Jonson, and Councilmember Jay E. Polglaze. "Nays": None. 7.5 Approve the annexation, initial Future Land Use Map designation of Residential Urban (RU) and initial Zoning Atlas designation of Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District for 3119 Johns Parkway (Lot 3, Johns Parkway subdivision) together with all abutting Right of Way of Johns Parkway; and pass Ordinances 8555-14, 8556-14 and 8557-14 on first reading. (ANX2014-02004) This voluntary annexation petition involves a 0.241-acre property consisting of one parcel of land occupied by a single-family dwelling. It is on the south side of Johns Parkway, approximately 360 feet east of McMullen Booth Road (County Road 611). The applicant is requesting this annexation in order to receive sanitary sewer and solid waste service from the City. The Development Review Committee is also proposing that approximately 0.052 acres of right-of-way on Johns Parkway not currently within the city limits also be annexed (please refer to the attached annexation map for the specific locations). The property is contiguous to existing city boundaries to the south and the east. It is proposed that the property be assigned a Future Land Use Plan designation of Residential Urban (RU) and a Zoning Atlas designation of Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR). The Planning and Development Department determined that the proposed annexation is consistent with the provisions of Clearwater Community Development Code Section 4-604.E as follows: The property currently receives water service from the City. The closest sewer line is located in the Johns Parkway right-of-way. Collection of solid waste will be provided by the City of Clearwater. The property is located within Police District III and service will be administered through the district headquarters located at 2851 Council 2014-04-16 11 Draft Attachment number 1 \nPage 11 of 21 Item # 7 North McMullen Booth Road. Fire and emergency medical services will be provided to this property by Station 49 located at 565 Sky Harbor Drive. The City has adequate capacity to serve this property with sanitary sewer, solid waste, police, fire and EMS service. The proposed annexation will not have an adverse effect on public facilities and their levels of service; and The proposed annexation is consistent with and promotes the following objective of the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan: Objective A.6.4 Due to the built-out character of the City of Clearwater, compact urban development within the urban service area shall be promoted through application of the Clearwater Community Development Code. Objective A.7.2 Diversify and expand the City’s tax base through the annexation of a variety of land uses located within the Clearwater Planning Area. Policy A.7.2.3 Continue to process voluntary annexations for single-family residential properties upon request. The proposed Residential Urban (RU) Future Land Use Map category is consistent with the current Countywide Plan designation of this property. This designation primarily permits residential uses at a density of 7.5 units per acre. The proposed zoning district to be assigned to the property is the Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District. The use of the subject property is consistent with the uses allowed in the district and the property exceeds the district’s minimum dimensional requirements. The proposed annexation is therefore consistent with the Countywide Plan and the City’s Comprehensive Plan and Community Development Code; and The property proposed for annexation is contiguous to existing city boundaries to the south and the east; therefore, the annexation is consistent with Florida Statutes Chapter 171.044. Councilmember Hoyt Hamilton moved to approve the annexation, initial Future Land Use Map designation of Residential Urban (RU) and initial Zoning Atlas designation of Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District for 3119 Johns Parkway (Lot 3, Johns Parkway subdivision) together with all abutting Right of Way of Johns Parkway. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Ordinance 8555-14 was presented and read by title only. Councilmember Bill Jonson moved to pass Ordinance 8555-14 on first reading. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was: "Ayes": Mayor George N. Cretekos, Vice Mayor Doreen Hock-DiPolito, Council 2014-04-16 12 Draft Attachment number 1 \nPage 12 of 21 Item # 7 Councilmember Hoyt Hamilton, Councilmember Bill Jonson, and Councilmember Jay E. Polglaze. "Nays": None. Ordinance 8556-14 was presented and read by title only. Vice Mayor Doreen Hock- DiPolito moved to pass Ordinance 8556-14 on first reading. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was: "Ayes": Mayor George N. Cretekos, Vice Mayor Doreen Hock-DiPolito, Councilmember Hoyt Hamilton, Councilmember Bill Jonson, and Councilmember Jay E. Polglaze. "Nays": None. Ordinance 8557-14 was presented and read by title only. Councilmember Jay Polglaze moved to pass Ordinance 8557-14 on first reading. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was: "Ayes": Mayor George N. Cretekos, Vice Mayor Doreen Hock-DiPolito, Councilmember Hoyt Hamilton, Councilmember Bill Jonson, and Councilmember Jay E. Polglaze. "Nays": None. 7.6 Approve the annexation, initial Future Land Use Map designation of Residential Urban (RU) and initial Zoning Atlas designation of Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District for 1235 Palm Street, 1942 North Betty Lane, and 1996 North Betty Lane, together with certain right-of-way of North Betty Lane, located south of State Street; and pass Ordinances 8561-14, 8562-14 and 8563- 14 on first reading. (ANX2014-02006) This voluntary annexation petition involves three parcels of land totaling 0.329 acres. All parcels are occupied by a single-family dwelling. The three lots are located south of Union Street, east of Douglas Avenue, north of Sunset Point Road (SR 576), and west of Kings Highway. The applicants are requesting annexation in order to receive solid waste service from the City, and will connect to city sewer when it is available in the future, as part of the City’s Idlewild/The Mall Septic-to-Sewer Project. The Development Review Committee is also proposing that approximately 0.091 acres of right-of-way on North Betty Lane not currently within the city limits also be annexed. The properties proposed for annexation are contiguous to existing city boundaries along at least one property Council 2014-04-16 13 Draft Attachment number 1 \nPage 13 of 21 Item # 7 boundary. It is proposed that the properties be assigned a Future Land Use Map designation of Residential Urban (RU) and a Zoning Atlas designation of Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR). The Planning and Development Department determined that the proposed annexation is consistent with the provisions of Clearwater Community Development Code Section 4-604.E as follows: The properties currently receive water service from the City. Collection of solid waste will be provided to the properties by the City. The applicants will connect to the City’s sanitary sewer service when it is available, and is aware of the fee that must be paid in order to connect and the financial incentives available. The properties are located within Police District II and service will be administered through the district headquarters located at 645 Pierce Street. Fire and emergency medical services will be provided to these properties by Station 51 located at 1720 Overbrook Avenue. The City has adequate capacity to serve these properties with sanitary sewer, solid waste, police, fire and EMS service. The proposed annexations will not have an adverse effect on public facilities and their levels of service; and The proposed annexations are consistent with and promotes the following objectives of the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan: Objective A.6.4 Due to the built-out character of the City of Clearwater, compact urban development within the urban service area shall be promoted through application of the Clearwater Community Development Code. Objective A.7.2 Diversify and expand the City’s tax base through the annexation of a variety of land uses located within the Clearwater Planning Area. Policy A.7.2.3 Continue to process voluntary annexations for single-family residential properties upon request. The proposed Residential Urban (RU) Future Land Use Map category is consistent with the current Countywide Plan designation of these properties. This designation primarily permits residential uses at a density of 7.5 units per acre. The proposed zoning district to be assigned to the properties is the Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District. The use of the subject properties is consistent with the uses allowed in the district and the properties exceed the district’s minimum dimensional requirements. The proposed annexations are therefore consistent with the Countywide Plan and the City’s Comprehensive Plan and Community Development Code; and Council 2014-04-16 14 Draft Attachment number 1 \nPage 14 of 21 Item # 7 The properties proposed for annexation are contiguous to existing City boundaries along at least one property boundary; therefore, the annexations are consistent with Florida Statutes Chapter 171.044. Councilmember Hoyt Hamilton moved to approve the annexation, initial Future Land Use Map designation of Residential Urban (RU) and initial Zoning Atlas designation of Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District for 1235 Palm Street, 1942 North Betty Lane, and 1996 North Betty Lane, together with certain right-of-way of North Betty Lane, located south of State Street. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Ordinance 8561-14 was presented and read by title only. Councilmember Bill Jonson moved to pass Ordinance 8561-14 on first reading. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was: "Ayes": Mayor George N. Cretekos, Vice Mayor Doreen Hock-DiPolito, Councilmember Hoyt Hamilton, Councilmember Bill Jonson, and Councilmember Jay E. Polglaze. "Nays": None. Ordinance 8562-14 was presented and read by title only. Vice Mayor Doreen Hock- DiPolito moved to pass Ordinance 8562-14 on first reading. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was: "Ayes": Mayor George N. Cretekos, Vice Mayor Doreen Hock-DiPolito, Councilmember Hoyt Hamilton, Councilmember Bill Jonson, and Councilmember Jay E. Polglaze. "Nays": None. Ordinance 8563-14 was presented and read by title only. Councilmember Jay Polglaze moved to pass Ordinance 8563-14 on first reading. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was: "Ayes": Mayor George N. Cretekos, Vice Mayor Doreen Hock-DiPolito, Councilmember Hoyt Hamilton, Councilmember Bill Jonson, and Councilmember Jay E. Polglaze. "Nays": None. City Manager Reports Council 2014-04-16 15 Draft Attachment number 1 \nPage 15 of 21 Item # 7 8. Consent Agenda – Approved as submitted. 8.1 Approve settlement of the liability claim of Ms. Victoria Kossaris for payment of $90,000.00 and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (consent) 8.2 Approve Revocable License Agreement from April 17, 2014 through April 16, 2015 with All Around Amusements, LLC (AAA) to provide entertainment concessions at Pier 60 Park, and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (consent) 8.3 Approve the Purchase Contract for the City’s purchase of real property from CSX Transportation, Inc. located adjacent to Ross Norton Park, with a purchase price of $72,000 and total expenditures not to exceed $78,000, and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same, together with all other instruments required to affect closing. (consent) 8.4 Award a Contract (Purchase Order) for $348,861.50 to Alan Jay Fleet Sales of Sebring, FL for the purchase of eleven 2014 Ford F350 pickup trucks, in accordance with the Florida State Term Contract 071-000-14-1, 2.564(1)(d), Code of Ordinances - Other Governmental Bid; authorize lease purchase under the City’s Master Lease Purchase Agreement, or internal financing via an interfund loan from the Capital Improvement Fund, whichever is deemed to be in the City’s best interests; and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (consent) 8.5 Award a Contract (Purchase Order) for $980,566.35 to Rush Truck Centers of Tampa, FL for the purchase of three Peterbilt Model 320 Front End Loaders in accordance with the Florida Sheriff's contract 13-11-0904 Spec 14, 2.564(1)(d), Code of Ordinances - Other Governmental Bid; authorize lease purchase under the City’s Master Lease Purchase Agreement, or internal financing via an interfund loan from the Capital Improvement Fund, whichever is deemed to be in the City’s best interest; and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (consent) 8.6 Award a Contract (Purchase Order) for $189,642.00 to Nortrax SE, LLC of Wesley Chapel, FL for the purchase of one 2014 John Deere 644K Front End Loader, in accordance with the Florida Sheriffs Contract 13-11-0904, 2.564(1)(d), Code of Ordinances - Other Governmental Bid; authorize lease purchase under the City’s Master Lease Purchase Agreement, or internal financing via an interfund loan from the Capital Improvement Fund, whichever is deemed to be in the City’s best interest; and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (consent) Council 2014-04-16 16 Draft Attachment number 1 \nPage 16 of 21 Item # 7 8.7 Award a Contract (Purchase Order) for $218,000.00 to Powerscreen of Florida, Inc. of Lakeland, FL for the purchase of one Powerscreen Portable Materials Screening Plant-Engineering equipment, in accordance with Bid 07-14, 2.561(1)(a), Code of Ordinances - Notice Inviting Bids; authorize lease purchase under the City’s Master Lease Purchase Agreement, or internal financing via an interfund loan from the Capital Improvement Fund, whichever is deemed to be in the City’s best interest; and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (consent) 8.8 Award a Contract (Purchase Order) for $527,408.00 to Container Systems and Equipment Company, Inc. of Daytona Beach, FL for two Crane Carrier Low Entry Crew Cab Chassis with Loadmaster Excel Rearloader Body in accordance with the Florida Sheriffs Contract 13-11-0904 Spec No. 014, with 2.564(1)(d), Code of Ordinances - Other Governmental Bid; authorize lease purchase under the City’s Master Lease Purchase Agreement, or internal financing via an interfund loan from the Capital Improvement Fund, whichever is deemed to be in the City’s best interest; and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (consent) 8.9 Approve a contract (purchase order) to Communications International Inc., of Vero Beach, FL in the amount of $94,858.59 to construct a microwave link from Clearwater Police department to the main radio tower, in accordance with Sec. 2.564(1)(b), Code of Ordinances-Sole Source and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (consent) 8.10 Approve a two year extension to BPO BR508064 with Xylem, Inc. of Apopka, Florida for Flygt pumps, replacement parts and factory authorized service for the contract period of May 01, 2014 to April 30, 2016, and authorize the appropriate the appropriate officials to execute same. (consent) 8.11 Approve a one-year extension and an increase of $73,690.00 and to existing contract (BPO BR508863) with Water Specialists Technologies LLC, of Sanford, FL for a three-year (Fiscal Year 2013 Fiscal Year 2015) total contract amount of $206,788.80, of which $183,686.25 is the balance needed for the remainder of Fiscal Year 2014 and for Fiscal Year 2015 for the purchase of copper precipitant TR-50, and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (consent) 8.12 Approve the conveyance of a Distribution Easement to be granted to Duke Energy for the installation of electrical facilities to provide service to a water production well at Kapok Park, and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (consent) 8.13 Accept a Fire Hydrant and Utilities Easement conveyed by Sunset Point Council 2014-04-16 17 Draft Attachment number 1 \nPage 17 of 21 Item # 7 Apartments, Inc. over property located at 1401 Sunset Point Road, Clearwater, FL, subject to approval of said easement by the United States of America, Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). (consent) 8.14 Accept a Sidewalk Easement conveyed by 520HC, LLC over property located at 520 Howard Court, Clearwater. (consent) 8.15 Reappoint John Funk to the Community Development Board as the alternate member with term to expire April 30, 2018. (consent) 8.16 Reappoint Jerri Menaul to the Public Art and Design Board (Artist Qualification) with a term to expire April 30, 2018. (consent) 8.17 Approve a Legal Services Agreement hiring the Law Firm of Richards, Gilkey, Fite, Slaughter, Pratesi and Ward, to represent the City in reviewing the purchase agreement and condominium documents pertaining to the proposed parking garage at the Pelican Walk Shopping Center for an amount not to exceed $40,000, and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (consent) Councilmember Hoyt Hamilton moved to approve the Consent Agenda as submitted and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 9. Other Items on City Manager Reports 9.1 Ratify and Confirm Change Order 2 to Wharton-Smith, Inc. of Sanford, Florida for the Marshall Street WRF Clarifier 1-4 Rehabilitation project (11-0053-UT) for a time extension of 34 days for a total extension of 93 days. Clearwater City Council awarded a $1.79 million contract in August 2012 to Wharton-Smith for the Marshall Street WRF Clarifier 1-4 Rehabilitation project (11-0053-UT). The project notice to proceed was September 17, 2012 with a September 16, 2013 completion (365-day contract). The project was substantially complete on December 18, 2013. The delay was due to initial problems with implementing a successful dewatering plan by Wharton-Smith prior to draining the clarifiers and encountering uneven clarifier floor elevations that required modifications to the center columns of the equipment. The project contingency covered the modification costs as unforeseen field conditions. The city paid no additional project costs due to the late completion date. Administrative Change Order 1 added 59 days to the contract, deducted an Owner Direct Purchase (ODP) item and approximately $25,000 in tax savings to the city, and retuned $3,451 of unused contingency to the project. The project was completed under budget. Council 2014-04-16 18 Draft Attachment number 1 \nPage 18 of 21 Item # 7 Councilmember Hoyt Hamilton moved to ratify and confirm Change Order 2 to Wharton- Smith, Inc. of Sanford, Florida for the Marshall Street WRF Clarifier 1-4 Rehabilitation project (11-0053-UT) for a time extension of 34 days for a total extension of 93 days. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 9.2 Approve the Scope of Services Assignment, the recommended list of agencies to participate in ULI Resource Persons Interviews, and the Advisory Services Agreement with Urban Land Institute and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. The Scope of Services will provide direction for the ULI Advisory Service Panel (ASP) regarding the future continued growth and development of downtown Clearwater. The area to be considered is that area delineated in the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan (CDRP). The CDRP is largely co-terminus with the established community redevelopment area, but contains additional areas not included in the Community Redevelopment Area. The Advisory Service Panel is requested to review and comment on the overall philosophy and direction of the plan. In addition, the panel is being directed to address more specifically the Old Bay District, East Gateway, and the downtown core and waterfront areas. It is anticipated that the panel will conduct their review the week of June 15. A daily summation of the activities and events associated with the week long process is available. In support of this effort, a list of resource persons and a briefing document will be provided to the ULI Advisory Service Panel team. Funding for the ULI contract is budgeted in Special Program project 181-99860, Strategic Direction Action Plan. Staff was directed to include representatives from the following organizations in the ULI Resource Persons Interviews: Metropolitan Planning Organization/Pinellas Planning Council, Clearwater Beach Chamber of Commerce, Morton Plant/BayCare, Clearwater Free Clinic, Clearwater Historical Society, Francis Wilson Playhouse, Ruth Eckerd Hall/Capitol Theatre, and Jolley Trolley. It was suggested that staff consider reaching out to the following individuals if additional participants are needed: Peter Leach, Geoff Weber, Terry Tsafatinos, Mr. Crum, and Tom Kennedy. It was suggested that organizations identify representatives with a cross-section of opinions. Council 2014-04-16 19 Draft Attachment number 1 \nPage 19 of 21 Item # 7 In response to questions, Assistant City Manager Jill Silverboard said the City Manager, Assistant City Managers, Planning and Development Director and staff, Economic Development and Housing Director and staff, Library Director, and the Parks and Recreation Director will be engaged in the interview process. Staff has not identified all staff members involved; there is a sensitivity to the number of staff members participating in the interviews. Assistant City Manager Rod Irwin suggested adding representatives from the East Gateway Business and Neighborhood Association to the interview process. One individual spoke in support. Councilmember Bill Jonson moved to approve the Scope of Services Assignment, the recommended list of agencies to participate in ULI Resource Persons Interviews, and the Advisory Services Agreement with Urban Land Institute and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Miscellaneous Reports and Items 10. City Manager Verbal Reports 10.1 City Manager Verbal Reports The City Manager said the City of Largo last night passed a resolution initiating a conflict resolution process with Pinellas County involving the proposed EMS changes. The City of Largo will be sending out a letter to all municipalities seeking intention to participate, or not, in the conflict resolution process. The City will have a short timeframe to respond to Largo’s letter; a response must be provided prior to the next council meeting. Staff is requesting Council to schedule a special meeting on the proposed changes of EMS and address Largo’s request. Staff anticipates the special meeting will last approximately two hours. There was consensus to schedule the special meeting on Monday, April 21, 2014 at 3:00 p.m. 11. Other Council Action 11.1 North Beach Sand Issue The City Attorney said Wendy Hutkin and Steve Samaha of the Clearwater Beach Association (CBA) approached her regarding the City facilitating a discussion between the CBA members and the property owners who have built obstructions on the beach in Council 2014-04-16 20 Draft Attachment number 1 \nPage 20 of 21 Item # 7 hopes of finding a resolution to this conflict. Council will approve an agreement once the facilitator has been selected. One individual spoke in support and thanked the City for their assistance in the matter. One individual suggested if property owners rightly own the land to the water, the City should contact Pinellas County regarding the assessment of property taxes should include all land, not just the platted area. Councilmember Bill Jonson moved to accept the City Attorney’s recommendation to proceed with a facilitator. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 12. Closing Comments by Mayor Mayor George Cretekos reviewed recent and upcoming events. 13. Adjourn The meeting adjourned at 7:56 p.m. Mayor City of Clearwater Attest City Clerk Council 2014-04-16 21 Draft Attachment number 1 \nPage 21 of 21 Item # 7 E:TiIOi YOUR VICE COL! This petition has collected 1138 signatures using the online tools at iPetitions.com Printed on 2014-05-01 Page 1 of 91 Citizens for Backyard Chickens About this petition Category:GovernmentRegion:United States of AmericaTarget:Clearwater CityCommissioners Background (Preamble): Green practices sweep the nation and our individual communities, yet we have found that there is at least one useful practice that is not allowed in Pinellas County, backyard poultry keeping. Backyard poultry keeping is not permitted for residentially zoned properties in the unincorporated portions of Pinellas County even if they have addresses in communities that do allow backyard poultry such as St. Petersburg, Largo, Gulfport, Bellaire and Dunedin. Thirty percent of single family households in Pinellas County have the legal right to keep backyard poultry for their own use. We believe that this right should be extended to all Pinellas County residents by amending the zoning ordinances that prohibit this practice. We believe that allowing backyard poultry in Pinellas County will promote individual sustainability practices and public welfare without sacrificing the safety or health of the citizens in our county. Petition:We, the undersigned citizens of Pinellas County, request that the ordinance(s) of Pinellas County be amended to allow the keeping of backyard poultry in residential zones within the county. We make this request because we sincerely believe that backyard poultry keeping will be beneficial to the citizenry of the county in the following ways: 1. Poultry eat insects and weeds and also act to till garden areas while providing a natural fertilizer in the form of organic manure. 2. The sandy soil in our community requires the addition of large amounts of organic amendments in order to produce healthy plants with an efficient yield of fruits and vegetables. Purchasing such amendments from a garden center is quite costly, thus reducing gardening efforts among citizens and the hindering the success of backyard gardeners. Poultry manure is an age -old organic fertilizer that is very cost effective for those keeping small backyard flocks. 3. In addition, citizens concerned about healthful foods know that nothing toxic or harmful was fed to their personal poultry and that the manure is safe for their gardens. 4. The keeping of backyard poultry can reduce local use of pesticides and inorganic fertilizers and the associated pollution from such products in storm water run -off into Tampa Bay and the Gulf of Mexico. 5. Poultry provide a sustainable food source (daily eggs) that can be more flavorful and nutritious than those produced in a commercial eggery. 6. Poultry are natural recyclers. Being omnivores, they can eat table scraps as well as insects and weeds and turn out both food and fertilizer. 7. In the event of a hurricane emergency, storm projections show that Pinellas County could become Page 2 of 91 isolated (even an island) for some period of time due to storm surge. While many residents live above flood levels, ingress and egress could be significantly reduced and supplies of food, water and fuel for county residents could be interrupted. As a prudent practice, it behooves county residents to be as independent as possible with respect to food supplies during hurricane season. Growing a garden, preserving one's own food and having a good source of protein (poultry eggs) would enhance the personal sustainability of Pinellas County residents, and would therefore enhance the security of our community in the event of a natural disaster. 8. Backyard poultry are outstanding pets. They are easy to care for. They provide educational opportunities to teach children where food comes from and how to be responsible pet owners. Watching poultry and their relationships among one another is very entertaining; in fact, it is said to be the forerunner of modern visual entertainment. As with any request for an ordinance change, questions regarding the health, safety, and welfare of the citizenry must be addressed. Listed below are the most common concerns brought up when discussing backyard poultry for Pinellas County: 1. Noise — Contrary to popular belief, most poultry are not loud. Being social animals, they like to "talk" to one another. Hens usually cackle at a volume of 20 -40 decibels, which is about the same volume as conversational human speech. Poultry that would not be appropriate for backyard flocks are any birds that have a normal voice volume that exceeds the noise nuisance codes of the county. This would include such species as male chickens (roosters), guinea hens, and peafowl. Domestic poultry sleeps at night and awakens at dawn. There is no crowing at night, except among certain species that would of course be inappropriate in an urban setting. 2. Smell — Poultry are not inherently unsanitary or smelly animals. In fact they like to be clean. Like any animal, their habitat can become soiled if not properly maintained or if they are confined to too small a space. We recommend at least 2 square feet of floor space per bird. A normal backyard flock would not produce any more waste than any other similar sized pet. 3. Disease — Properly housed and cared for, poultrydo notpose any greater threat to human health than any other animal. When asked about the risk to public health or safety in such a densely populated county as Pinellas, state veterinarian, Dr. Bill Jetter, replied "I do not think maintaining small flocks of poultry in urban settings would create a significant threat to public health or safety." Of course, poultry are no different from other birds kept in a home setting; one should follow standards of good hygiene practice. A publication on avian diseases from the Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (IFAS) at the University of Florida states "Bird- keepers should be aware that they can contract certain illnesses from their birds. The frequency of disease transmission from birds to humans is low, but the very young, the elderly, and those with compromised immune systems should be cautious. Many of these diseases are transmitted by ingestion of food contaminated by fecal matter ". Prevention of most of these diseases, therefore, simply involves proper hygiene and sanitation. Wearing a face mask to avoid inhaling bird dust is also recommended. Maggie Hall, Public Information Director, Pinellas County Health Department reports, "I don't believe that we've encountered any cases or outbreaks of disease that were attributed to keeping poultry in backyards. Nevertheless, we advise individuals who have poultry to take precautions like washing their hands after tending to the flock and watching over small children when they are interacting with the animals ". Page 3 of 91 We acknowledge your need for careful consideration of this matter, and trust that your examination will find multiple benefits for the citizens of Pinellas County. We respectfully request your favorable action to amend county ordinances to provide for the keeping of backyard poultry in residential zones. Sincerely, The Undersigned Page 4 of 91 Signatures 1. Name: Erin Bennett on 2014 -04 -11 20:31:52 Comments: 2. Name: Hayley on 2014 -04 -11 20:36:04 Comments: 3. Name: Karma Schaefer on 2014 -04 -11 20:42:30 Comments: 4. Name: Carlleen Barrington on 2014 -04 -11 21:06:42 Comments: 5. Name: Michelle Melching on 2014 -04 -11 21:28:18 Comments: 6. Name: sheri bennett on 2014 -04 -11 21:35:15 Comments: With the price of food, we need to become more self sufficient. Thank you 7 Name: Ruth Hughes on 2014 -04 -11 22:01:22 Comments: We want the option to have chickens in Clearwater just like our surrounding counties. Thanks. 8. Name: Julie Garakop on 2014 -04 -11 22:09:30 Comments: chickens should be allowed( -: 9. Name: Kelly trusty on 2014 -04 -11 22:17:27 Comments: 10. Name: Eric Kurten on 2014 -04 -11 22:47:08 Comments: 11. Name: russell melching on 2014 -04 -11 23:05:16 Comments: 12. Name: Iucy pospisil on 2014 -04 -12 00:02:12 Comments: 13. Name: Carrie bentley on 2014 -04 -12 00:47:28 Comments: Page 5 of 91 14. Name: Ashley White on 2014 -04 -12 01:14:15 Comments: 15. Name: Teresa Worthley on 2014 -04 -12 01:16:57 Comments: The chicken should be allowed! 16. Name: Ramona Osterhoudt on 2014 -04 -12 01:20:51 Comments: 17. Name: Annie Uttley on 2014 -04 -12 01:56:15 Comments: 18. Name: Cindy Neuhausen on 2014 -04 -12 02:30:54 Comments: all of Pinellas Co. should be able to do this - wake up to fresh eggs from your own backyard - Nice! 19. Name: Connie Mills on 2014 -04 -12 02:32:12 Comments: 20. Name: Christine breen on 2014 -04 -12 03:03:23 Comments: 21. Name: Patti Stoffel on 2014 -04 -12 04:04:40 Comments: 22. Name: Angela Merz on 2014 -04 -12 04:37:51 Comments: 23. Name: Gail Barrett on 2014 -04 -12 12:14:10 Comments: 24. Name: Megan Hollern on 2014 -04 -12 13:07:29 Comments: I want chickens! 25. Name: Tara Hoomes on 2014 -04 -12 17:00:19 Comments: 26. Name: Nichole on 2014 -04 -12 22:13:47 Comments: Supporting fresh and local! no better food than growing it in your own back yard! 27. Name: Ann Williams on 2014 -04 -13 21:39:22 Page 6 of 91 Comments: 28. Name: Valerie Rensonnet on 2014 -04 -14 19:19:05 Comments: 29. Name: Cristina Mniece on 2014 -04 -15 19:16:28 Comments: 30. Name: Greg phebus on 2014 -04 -16 00:53:07 Comments: Let citizens have them... They are a fantastic addition to any home /family 31. Name: Stinah Marvel on 2014 -04 -16 02:52:28 Comments: everyone should be allowed to self sustain! 32. Name: Connie Carr on 2014 -04 -16 03:25:43 Comments: I am becoming more self sufficient. I have chickens, do gardening, have a compost pile, etc. I think everyone should have that right. 33. Name: Carla Goff on 2014 -04 -16 03:25:57 Comments: 34. Name: Michelle smith on 2014 -04 -16 03:35:09 Comments: 35. Name: Patty Reel on 2014 -04 -16 03:37:08 Comments: 36. Name: Lucy Allin on 2014 -04 -16 03:41:48 Comments: Allow chickens! 37. Name: Theresa Batcheller on 2014 -04 -16 05:06:51 Comments: 38. Name: Sherry Spivey on 2014 -04 -16 05:08:17 Comments: No reason not to 39. Name: tony goldenberg on 2014 -04 -16 05:57:38 Comments: make it easy for people to feed themselves and their neighbors. 40. Name: Cindy T on 2014 -04 -16 07:56:38 Comments: Page 7 of 91 41. Name: Danny Evans on 2014 -04 -16 08:54:01 Comments: 42. Name: melissa on 2014 -04 -16 13:25:57 Comments: 43. Name: Cindy Beard on 2014 -04 -17 03:45:47 Comments: 44. Name: Stephanie Loehr on 2014 -04 -17 03:47:14 Comments: 45. Name: Sara Love on 2014 -04 -17 03:48:55 Comments: power to the poultry and self reliance! 46. Name: Mary Gray on 2014 -04 -17 03:56:10 Comments: People should be encouraged to grow veges, and keep chickens to help with the rising cost of living. Apart from that, it's a completely natural way of life and a great way to bring up a family. 47. Name: Rae on 2014 -04 -17 03:56:46 Comments: progress towards self - sufficiency and a healthier option. 48. Name: Judy Bass on 2014 -04 -17 04:00:31 Comments: I think everyone should be able to grow there own food. You can have laying hens without a rooster make noise every morning waking the neibors 49. Name: Elizabeth McCay on 2014 -04 -17 04:01:08 Comments: 50. Name: lynn Weiler on 2014 -04 -17 04:12:31 Comments: I want and need organic eggs. My town allows backyard chickens. It is deplorable and inhumane to keep chickens install cages inside a dark building and force them to lay eggs like slaves without comfort. 51. Name: Tanner Johnson on 2014 -04 -17 04:13:18 Comments: 52. Name: Shelley Koogle on 2014 -04 -17 04:30:17 Comments: 53. Name: MARIA PIA on 2014 -04 -17 09:03:26 Comments: Page 8 of 91 54. Name: Julie Brumbaugh on 2014 -04 -17 11:04:34 Comments: 55. Name: Kelly B on 2014 -04 -17 11:59:46 Comments: 56. Name: Cindy Ramirez on 2014 -04 -17 12:34:53 Comments: chickens are awesome! 57. Name: Amber Smith on 2014 -04 -17 14:23:59 Comments: 58. Name: Dawn B. Spivey on 2014 -04 -17 14:24:50 Comments: Backyard Chickens is my "go to" for all my poultry questions! 59. Name: Jennifer Horne on 2014 -04 -17 14:29:18 Comments: 60. Name: Debra Rist on 2014 -04 -17 14:34:49 Comments: 61. Name: morgan on 2014 -04 -17 15:18:23 Comments: we all need the option to be more self sufficient 62. Name: jennifer W on 2014 -04 -17 15:31:45 Comments: 63. Name: Denice Johnson on 2014 -04 -17 15:32:07 Comments: 64. Name: Helen Cooper on 2014 -04 -17 17:34:53 Comments: 65. Name: Michele Hirsch on 2014 -04 -17 17:45:25 Comments: 66. Name: shelby Frazier on 2014 -04 -17 18:08:04 Comments: chickens should be allowed 67. Name: Lori Falkenstien on 2014 -04 -17 18:36:43 Comments: Page 9 of 91 68. Name: Starr on 2014 -04 -18 00:17:55 Comments: 69. Name: Sabrina Harbison on 2014 -04 -18 01:27:43 Comments: 70. Name: Kristen Esposito on 2014 -04 -18 02:48:11 Comments: We want the option to have chickens in Clearwater just like our surrounding counties. Thank you. 71. Name: kari shafer on 2014 -04 -18 02:54:14 Comments: 72. Name: Teri Stoikes on 2014 -04 -18 03:07:43 Comments: 73. Name: Pat Rose on 2014 -04 -18 14:47:59 Comments: 74. Name: Megan Russell on 2014 -04 -18 15:49:26 Comments: 75. Name: Amber Crigger on 2014 -04 -18 15:50:14 Comments: 76. Name: Jody heckert on 2014 -04 -18 15:50:48 Comments: 77. Name: Tommy Hutcherson on 2014 -04 -18 15:50:57 Comments: 78. Name: KRISTIE NELSON on 2014 -04 -18 15:51:22 Comments: 79. Name: Kimberly Spratley -Smith on 2014 -04 -18 15:51:27 Comments: 80. Name: Michelle Mathis on 2014 -04 -18 15:51:44 Comments: ABSOLUTELY 81. Name: hollie colandrea on 2014 -04 -18 15:51:49 Page 10 of 91 Comments: I think everyone should have chickens. they are a easy keep animals that won't bother neighbors. 82. Name: Ed Butler on 2014 -04 -18 15:51:51 Comments: allow chicken's 83. Name: Kenneth Bowman on 2014 -04 -18 15:53:16 Comments: 84. Name: Joe Harris on 2014 -04 -18 15:53:48 Comments: 85. Name: Kelly hottman on 2014 -04 -18 15:54:06 Comments: government assistance became needed when Americans became less self sufficient. a couple chickens and a small garden go a long ways. 86. Name: Toby Bunow on 2014 -04 -18 15:54:12 Comments: 87. Name: holly on 2014 -04 -18 15:55:00 Comments: 88. Name: Rebecca Arbogast on 2014 -04 -18 15:55:06 Comments: 89. Name: Van Braue on 2014 -04 -18 15:55:50 Comments: 90. Name: Jessica Thornton on 2014 -04 -18 15:55:53 Comments: Please reconsider allowing small flocks to be kept. It is a great way for people to become a little more self - sustainable, and chickens are simply a joy to have. 91. Name: Tuezday Doby on 2014 -04 -18 15:56:16 Comments: 92. Name: Heather K Young on 2014 -04 -18 15:56:22 Comments: 93. Name: Allison Hartman on 2014 -04 -18 15:57:13 Comments: 94. Name: Scott Smith on 2014 -04 -18 15:57:50 Page 11 of 91 Comments: 95. Name: Jennifer Campbell on 2014 -04 -18 15:58:23 Comments: 96. Name: Mallory Bevan on 2014 -04 -18 15:59:04 Comments: 97. Name: Evelyn Rollason on 2014 -04 -18 15:59:47 Comments: Please consider backyard chickens in your town! 98. Name: Butch Smith on 2014 -04 -18 16:00:51 Comments: 99. Name: Danielle Pearce on 2014 -04 -18 16:02:55 Comments: 100. Name: Shilo Webb on 2014 -04 -18 16:03:43 Comments: 101. Name: Samantha on 2014 -04 -18 16:05:31 Comments: 102. Name: Marcia Leingang on 2014 -04 -18 16:06:53 Comments: 103. Name: Lara Rosevelt on 2014 -04 -18 16:07:01 Comments: With the economy the way it is, it is essential that families can supplement the high costs of food. Chickens do that! 104. Name: Courtney Durham on 2014 -04 -18 16:07:10 Comments: 105. Name: Dale Urschel on 2014 -04 -18 16:08:52 Comments: A properly raised small flock can be very beneficial to a neighborhood, environment, and economy. 106. Name: Sherry on 2014 -04 -18 16:09:57 Comments: 107. Name: antonia hernandez on 2014 -04 -18 16:10:29 Comments: Page 12 of 91 108. Name: Mike tecce on 2014 -04 -18 16:10:53 Comments: Love my chickend 109. Name: Lisa Eckert on 2014 -04 -18 16:13:02 Comments: 110. Name: Rebecca Joy on 2014 -04 -18 16:13:28 Comments: 111. Name: john farmer on 2014 -04 -18 16:16:00 Comments: 112. Name: Sue Phebus on 2014 -04 -18 16:16:40 Comments: 113. Name: Raymond Simpson Comments: on 2014 -04 -18 16:20:30 114. Name: Stephen Meyer on 2014 -04 -18 16:22:31 Comments: 115. Name: Judy Silva on 2014 -04 -18 16:23:22 Comments: 116. Name: Aaron Darling on 2014 -04 -18 16:25:57 Comments: chickens are good they should never be banned. 117. Name: Kristina Farrell on 2014 -04 -18 16:31:19 Comments: 118. Name: tony christensen on 2014 -04 -18 16:32:06 Comments: 119. Name: Jessica Henry on 2014 -04 -18 16:33:00 Comments: 120. Name: shari fill on 2014 -04 -18 16:34:12 Comments: we should be encouraging self sufficiency in this country, not making it harder for people! 121. Name: Robbie McCrory on 2014 -04 -18 16:34:57 Page 13 of 91 Comments: 122. Name: Penny Gerst on 2014 -04 -18 16:36:06 Comments: 123. Name: jamie funk on 2014 -04 -18 16:41:13 Comments: 124. Name: lisa dupree on 2014 -04 -18 16:44:18 Comments: 125. Name: Jimmy Morrow on 2014 -04 -18 16:45:30 Comments: Residents should be allowed to raise there own chickens and produce there own eggs in there back yards. If the noise is your concern then make it where they can have poultry of a non - crowing kind (no roosters). 126. Name: angel rodriguez on 2014 -04 -18 16:48:15 Comments: 127. Name: Deborah Scott on 2014 -04 -18 16:53:40 Comments: 128. Name: Sharon Goodman on 2014 -04 -18 16:57:23 Comments: 129. Name: Susan Davidson on 2014 -04 -18 17:04:06 Comments: 130. Name: shelah layton on 2014 -04 -18 17:10:27 Comments: 131. Name: Jim Pescha on 2014 -04 -18 17:10:38 Comments: Cities all over Florida, like Orlando, Tampa and Jacksonville are allowing backyard chickens. This is something that every city should allow. 132. Name: Danielle Williams on 2014 -04 -18 17:11:00 Comments: Chickens are great animals to have. They keep the bug population under control, lay fresh, healthy eggs, provide FREE natural fertilizer, and don't take up a lot of space or cause any problems. Every person should be able to have their own chickens if they wish to be more self - reliant. 133. Name: Jessica Letcher on 2014 -04 -18 17:11:55 Comments: Chickens are neighborhood - friendly. Hens are low noise, they eat ticks, they Page 14 of 91 provide companionship, and they are a great, low- maintenance food source. Please consider that it was not so long ago a government initiative, much like the victory garden, to help families remain self - sufficient. 134. Name: Frank Hutto on 2014 -04 -18 17:13:18 Comments: 135. Name: Sara Hampton on 2014 -04 -18 17:14:24 Comments: 136. Name: Mylinda Smith on 2014 -04 -18 17:18:35 Comments: Life is "Just better with chickens" They don't bark and make wonderful lawn ornaments! PS... no rooster required for fresh eggs. Everyone should have the right to have a few chickens. Please pass this law for our friend. 137. Name: gerry on 2014 -04 -18 17:23:30 Comments: 138. Name: melisa j shockley on 2014 -04 -18 17:32:35 Comments: 139. Name: Andrea unger on 2014 -04 -18 17:34:02 Comments: 140. Name: Korey on 2014 -04 -18 17:35:58 Comments: 141. Name: Mike on 2014 -04 -18 17:59:40 Comments: 142. Name: Pam albrigjt on 2014 -04 -18 18:08:45 Comments: signed 143. Name: Jessica Bradbard on 2014 -04 -18 18:16:36 Comments: everyone should have the right to backyard chickens 144. Name: Jason Bradbard on 2014 -04 -18 18:17:35 Comments: everyone should have the right to backyard chickens 145. Name: Loren Lopez on 2014 -04 -18 19:00:17 Comments: Page 15 of 91 146. Name: Tara Arnold on 2014 -04 -18 19:29:40 Comments: 147. Name: David Irwin on 2014 -04 -18 19:40:11 Comments: 148. Name: Jennifer Smith on 2014 -04 -18 19:47:52 Comments: please allow backyard chickens in oak ridge tn. 149. Name: Holly lyter on 2014 -04 -18 19:54:24 Comments: 150. Name: Julie Hansen on 2014 -04 -18 19:57:07 Comments: 151. Name: Taylor Waxley on 2014 -04 -18 20:44:32 Comments: 152. Name: Jessica Palenchar on 2014 -04 -18 20:48:28 Comments: 153. Name: Denise Shaw on 2014 -04 -18 21:02:09 Comments: 154. Name: Lauren Cole on 2014 -04 -18 21:13:57 Comments: 155. Name: Jim Mattern on 2014 -04 -18 21:14:41 Comments: 156. Name: Nicole Gregg on 2014 -04 -18 21:29:27 Comments: 157. Name: Barbara A. Spencer on 2014 -04 -18 21:46:19 Comments: 158. Name: sabre armstrong on 2014 -04 -18 21:56:39 Comments: 159. Name: Nermina Krneta on 2014 -04 -18 22:25:47 Comments: Page 16 of 91 160. Name: Cynthia Clark on 2014 -04 -18 22:29:50 Comments: Let her have her chickens as long as they aren't a nuisance. 161. Name: Tammy Babcock on 2014 -04 -18 22:55:47 Comments: 162. Name: mike maggard on 2014 -04 -18 23:45:15 Comments: 163. Name: Koreen Brennan on 2014 -04 -18 23:55:46 Comments: Urban agriculture is improving property values, reducing crime, bringing more tourists and generally improving life in cities all over the country. Clearwater could be one of those! Legalizing chickens has not adversely impacted other nearby cities or the county. 164. Name: Tony on 2014 -04 -19 00:47:54 Comments: 165. Name: joyce white on 2014 -04 -19 01:01:55 Comments: 166. Name: Debra Baker on 2014 -04 -19 01:01:57 Comments: chickens should be allowed. 167. Name: Chuck Whetstone on 2014 -04 -19 01:03:53 Comments: 168. Name: Carol Schofield on 2014 -04 -19 01:06:13 Comments: 169. Name: andrew heltsley on 2014 -04 -19 01:10:39 Comments: power to the poultry! 170. Name: Kathryn Dee on 2014 -04 -19 01:12:44 Comments: 171. Name: Eric parsons on 2014 -04 -19 01:14:15 Comments: i love chickens 172. Name: Theresa on 2014 -04 -19 01:31:53 Comments: Page 17 of 91 173. Name: Cathy Bersier on 2014 -04 -19 01:34:21 Comments: YES! this wuill save money, save work as the chickes can prep the soil, create food for people, create better soil, as they break the pest cycle - awesome! 174. Name: deann rhodus on 2014 -04 -19 02:12:52 Comments: 175. Name: Kevin White on 2014 -04 -19 03:28:18 Comments: 176. Name: Terry Egley on 2014 -04 -19 10:56:03 Comments: Anyone and everyone should be allowed to keep chickens! 177. Name: Robbie Roach on 2014 -04 -19 11:33:12 Comments: 178. Name: Ken Horkavy on 2014 -04 -19 12:00:07 Comments: 179. Name: Jen Chew on 2014 -04 -19 12:15:36 Comments: 180. Name: tammy labiche on 2014 -04 -19 12:22:34 Comments: 181. Name: Amy Clark on 2014 -04 -19 12:26:17 Comments: 182. Name: Annette Jordan on 2014 -04 -19 12:41:17 Comments: 183. Name: Albert on 2014 -04 -19 13:08:16 Comments: Many opportunities here for real improvement in our neighborhoods. Chickens, ducks, quail, turkeys, rabbits. All good for the environment. 184. Name: Peter Arnold on 2014 -04 -19 13:51:43 Comments: 185. Name: mechele maso. on 2014 -04 -19 14:30:21 Comments: 186. Name: Sarah Barnhill on 2014 -04 -19 19:32:41 Page 18 of 91 Comments: 187. Name: Caren Henson on 2014 -04 -19 19:52:34 Comments: Yay for chickens! 188. Name: Debra on 2014 -04 -19 19:54:52 Comments: 189. Name: Judson Giddens on 2014 -04 -19 19:56:15 Comments: chickens should be allowed especially with the price of groceries nowadays . and the added ingredients in our foods. 190. Name: atterson on 2014 -04 -19 19:58:37 Comments: 191. Name: Carrie Reilly on 2014 -04 -19 19:59:09 Comments: 192. Name: Danielle on 2014 -04 -19 19:59:51 Comments: 193. Name: Allison penzotti on 2014 -04 -19 20:00:11 Comments: As a Florida resident I agree. I believe that we should be allowed to own chickens and ducks if we so chose. It's much healthier raising your own chickens for meat than buying in a store. And much more cost efficient!!! 194. Name: Richard winand on 2014 -04 -19 20:00:52 Comments: wish y'all best of luck 195. Name: Jackie Pittman on 2014 -04 -19 20:00:59 Comments: 196. Name: Heather phifer on 2014 -04 -19 20:05:34 Comments: 197. Name: Elizabeth Leatherwood on 2014 -04 -19 20:07:43 Comments: 198. Name: angela thacker on 2014 -04 -19 20:14:58 Comments: 199. Name: Shannon McCarthy on 2014 -04 -19 20:21:28 Page 19 of 91 Comments: 200. Name: Annette on 2014 -04 -19 20:21:28 Comments: 201. Name: Kaitlyn Moore on 2014 -04 -19 20:23:06 Comments: Kaitlyn Moore 202. Name: connie fitch on 2014 -04 -19 20:35:47 Comments: 203. Name: Cheryl Towery on 2014 -04 -19 20:35:47 Comments: 204. Name: Natalia on 2014 -04 -19 20:45:38 Comments: 205. Name: April McKaskle on 2014 -04 -19 20:50:21 Comments: 206. Name: Naomi Kell on 2014 -04 -19 21:06:26 Comments: Let people keep aminals! 207. Name: Nancy Mitchell on 2014 -04 -19 21:10:00 Comments: 208. Name: Vincenzo Finizola on 2014 -04 -19 21:14:30 Comments: 209. Name: tara lennox on 2014 -04 -19 21:23:57 Comments: 210. Name: Lisa Ryan Willes on 2014 -04 -19 21:41:53 Comments: 211. Name: Elizabeth on 2014 -04 -19 21:45:25 Comments: 212. Name: Diane Spatz Weyer on 2014 -04 -19 21:48:54 Comments: 213. Name: Paula Riggs on 2014 -04 -19 21:51:58 Page 20 of 91 Comments: Let people have chickens! 214. Name: Laurie shaw on 2014 -04 -19 22:27:43 Comments: 215. Name: ginger rehm on 2014 -04 -19 22:28:46 Comments: change the permitting to allow the chickens! 216. Name: Josh Austin on 2014 -04 -19 22:45:20 Comments: 217. Name: Craig Storey on 2014 -04 -19 22:45:31 Comments: 218. Name: Oliver Klosov on 2014 -04 -19 23:17:22 Comments: weirdest looking chicken ever 219. Name: Toyanne Blanchard on 2014 -04 -19 23:22:34 Comments: 220. Name: Linda boylen on 2014 -04 -19 23:41:04 Comments: 221. Name: Marion BuddePhillips on 2014 -04 -19 23:51:22 Comments: 222. Name: Linda Letourneau on 2014 -04 -20 00:21:21 Comments: 223. Name: Scott Stengel on 2014 -04 -20 00:29:41 Comments: 224. Name: Stormee on 2014 -04 -20 00:42:57 Comments: 225. Name: Crystal Clapp on 2014 -04 -20 00:47:58 Comments: Every homeowner should be able to own a flcok of chickens. 226. Name: Becky Orlando on 2014 -04 -20 00:48:02 Comments: 227. Name: Jennifer Whitley on 2014 -04 -20 00:48:30 Page 21 of 91 Comments: 228. Name: Lynne Piepkorn on 2014 -04 -20 00:49:29 Comments: Let them have them. Concentrate your efforts on more important things. 229. Name: Jessica Dauderis on 2014 -04 -20 00:50:42 Comments: 230. Name: Lori Wallace on 2014 -04 -20 00:51:34 Comments: 231. Name: Danelle Apolinar on 2014 -04 -20 00:53:48 Comments: Everyone should have chickens! 232. Name: Ron Martin on 2014 -04 -20 00:53:52 Comments: hope you get your flock 233. Name: Naomi on 2014 -04 -20 00:56:23 Comments: 234. Name: dennis doyle on 2014 -04 -20 00:56:39 Comments: 235. Name: john vandekerckhove on 2014 -04 -20 00:56:51 Comments: 236. Name: Kaitlin Bell on 2014 -04 -20 00:57:11 Comments: 237. Name: James Kanagy on 2014 -04 -20 00:59:08 Comments: 238. Name: whitley smith on 2014 -04 -20 00:59:33 Comments: chickens benefit everyone fertilizer, heathly eggs ect.! 239. Name: Chez Bearden on 2014 -04 -20 01:01:09 Comments: 240. Name: mike barber on 2014 -04 -20 01:03:17 Comments: 241. Name: Kenea Renae on 2014 -04 -20 01:03:33 Page 22 of 91 Comments: 242. Name: Tasha on 2014 -04 -20 01:03:48 Comments: 243. Name: trish berkenbike on 2014 -04 -20 01:04:47 Comments: 244. Name: Michele gambrel on 2014 -04 -20 01:05:08 Comments: chickens should be allowed 245. Name: Diana Byron on 2014 -04 -20 01:06:21 Comments: 246. Name: Jason Philyaw on 2014 -04 -20 01:07:06 Comments: LET THEM HAVE CHICKENS!!! 247. Name: sherrie andzelik on 2014 -04 -20 01:14:11 Comments: 248. Name: Spencer Knight on 2014 -04 -20 01:16:46 Comments: 249. Name: Theresa Collins on 2014 -04 -20 01:17:55 Comments: Everyone should have the right to have chickens if they want them!!! I don't know what I would do without mine. They are my prozac. 250. Name: Corie Jackson on 2014 -04 -20 01:18:00 Comments: 251. Name: Liz M on 2014 -04 -20 01:18:56 Comments: 252. Name: Phil Mancini on 2014 -04 -20 01:21:23 Comments: 253. Name: Clara Crank on 2014 -04 -20 01:21:45 Comments: 254. Name: Charlotte Bays on 2014 -04 -20 01:24:47 Comments: We live out in the country inside a gated community with anything from campers to 1/2 millon dollar houses and they said NO! Page 23 of 91 255. Name: Crystal Mancini on 2014 -04 -20 01:25:47 Comments: 256. Name: Monica Baute on 2014 -04 -20 01:34:21 Comments: 257. Name: Matt paimer on 2014 -04 -20 01:35:53 Comments: 258. Name: n. chapin on 2014 -04 -20 01:45:06 Comments: 259. Name: Lynda Roberts on 2014 -04 -20 01:48:07 Comments: 260. Name: Jennifer Soltren on 2014 -04 -20 02:01:28 Comments: 261. Name: Jessica on 2014 -04 -20 02:06:44 Comments: Chickens make you happy! we all need a little chicken in our lives! 262. Name: Jen Oney on 2014 -04 -20 02:08:14 Comments: 263. Name: Felena Chandler on 2014 -04 -20 02:20:38 Comments: 264. Name: Patrice Mykytka on 2014 -04 -20 02:28:11 Comments: 265. Name: James Grant on 2014 -04 -20 02:39:34 Comments: 266. Name: Debra Vanier on 2014 -04 -20 02:40:46 Comments: 267. Name: christy Bozeman on 2014 -04 -20 02:58:57 Comments: 268. Name: David Norris on 2014 -04 -20 03:03:19 Comments: Page 24 of 91 269. Name: Kellie Dye on 2014 -04 -20 03:05:29 Comments: 270. Name: justine eby on 2014 -04 -20 03:21:50 Comments: Supporting Backyard chickens forever... 271. Name: carolyn zollo on 2014 -04 -20 03:22:43 Comments: 272. Name: Kelsey Gese on 2014 -04 -20 04:36:29 Comments: 273. Name: Rebecca Radacky on 2014 -04 -20 05:34:11 Comments: 274. Name: Peggy Woodrum on 2014 -04 -20 06:33:13 Comments: 275. Name: kathy locke on 2014 -04 -20 09:51:32 Comments: 276. Name: william land on 2014 -04 -20 10:05:18 Comments: 277. Name: Suzanne Andrew on 2014 -04 -20 10:40:53 Comments: Chickens are cleaner, quieter and more sanitary animals to keep around than dogs; there's no good reason to not allow backyard chickens! 278. Name: Sherry Nugent on 2014 -04 -20 11:14:08 Comments: 279. Name: alien rasmussen on 2014 -04 -20 11:19:18 Comments: love my chickens had chickens for over 40 years 280. Name: Iauren sutton on 2014 -04 -20 13:46:57 Comments: 281. Name: Gina Loyd on 2014 -04 -20 14:08:40 Comments: 282. Name: Deb Kaiser on 2014 -04 -20 14:10:12 Page 25 of 91 Comments: 283. Name: Kayleigh Wilson on 2014 -04 -20 14:52:41 Comments: 284. Name: Kathy Coldiron on 2014 -04 -20 15:11:40 Comments: 285. Name: Brenda Parker on 2014 -04 -20 15:38:55 Comments: 286. Name: Shelley Tatum on 2014 -04 -20 15:44:41 Comments: I'm behind this all the way! 287. Name: Stephanie German on 2014 -04 -20 15:52:43 Comments: 288. Name: krystale willet on 2014 -04 -20 16:07:02 Comments: 289. Name: Bevin Mcllwain on 2014 -04 -20 16:09:03 Comments: I would also like to add that, aside from producing food and being beneficial to the environment, chickens also make excellent companion animals! If hand raised from chicks and properly socialized with humans and other animals while they are young, chickens are very friendly birds who will sit with their owners for hours, which makes them ideal therapy animals for disabled individuals. Chickens are extremely intelligent birds and can learn and memorize very complex concepts meaning they can be taught everything from simple tricks to agility courses, and they usually pick it up within the first few minutes of training. I hope you seriously consider allowing your citizens to keep chickens as I am positive that they are pets that people of all ages will enjoy! 290. Name: Daniel McBrayer on 2014 -04 -20 16:12:15 Comments: Backyard Chickens are safe and help feed the very people who vote. 291. Name: Sasha Hanson on 2014 -04 -20 16:16:15 Comments: Best thing ever! Having your own eggs and 1 less thing to buy at the store! 292. Name: Debbie Joyner on 2014 -04 -20 16:16:37 Comments: 293. Name: Jackie Larkin on 2014 -04 -20 16:21:51 Comments: Page 26 of 91 294. Name: Donald Allen on 2014 -04 -20 16:27:38 Comments: Fresh eggs every morning! 295. Name: audrey schmalzried on 2014 -04 -20 16:34:55 Comments: 296. Name: Ellen Ashe on 2014 -04 -20 16:45:49 Comments: They deserve the right to have chickens. 297. Name: Michele Aultman on 2014 -04 -20 16:46:03 Comments: We want chickens! The hand that feeds us CONTROLS us....we need to take back our food from government and big business!! 298. Name: Amanda Sylvester on 2014 -04 -20 17:09:50 Comments: 299. Name: Laura Frost on 2014 -04 -20 17:11:23 Comments: 300. Name: Rachel Scarborough on 2014 -04 -20 17:16:10 Comments: 301. Name: Melissa Bice on 2014 -04 -20 17:18:30 Comments: A reasonable number of hens should be permitted for anyone with property to put them on. 302. Name: Brandon Berryhill on 2014 -04 -20 17:19:45 Comments: 303. Name: Gaia Fiorella on 2014 -04 -20 17:21:35 Comments: This is such an important issue. I don't believe it is asking too much to be allowed to make the decision on your family's nutrition or well being. Backyard chicken keeping is not only great for the fresh eggs, but also great for the manure to enrich the soil, among other things. Responsible people should be given the choice, not outright forbidden. 304. Name: marvin love on 2014 -04 -20 17:24:09 Comments: good luck 305. Name: jere Brannon on 2014 -04 -20 17:25:21 Comments: everybody needs chickens and fresh eggs. 306. Name: lanny on 2014 -04 -20 17:25:28 Page 27 of 91 Comments: 307. Name: Susan Anderson on 2014 -04 -20 17:28:40 Comments: I live in Largo and LOVE my backyard chickens. They are quiet and I keep everything clean! 308. Name: Stephanie Mann on 2014 -04 -20 17:30:11 Comments: 309. Name: marcy Mitchell on 2014 -04 -20 17:31:20 Comments: 310. Name: Siri Mitchell on 2014 -04 -20 17:36:48 Comments: 311. Name: Keri Silva Comments: on 2014 -04 -20 17:38:55 312. Name: Andrew Twitty on 2014 -04 -20 17:41:11 Comments: 313. Name: Maria on 2014 -04 -20 17:47:08 Comments: 314. Name: Michael Graveman on 2014 -04 -20 18:05:35 Comments: No Farms No Food 315. Name: Rochelle Johnson on 2014 -04 -20 18:07:49 Comments: 316. Name: Linda Garcia on 2014 -04 -20 18:14:29 Comments: 317. Name: joel dewitt on 2014 -04 -20 18:31:22 Comments: 318. Name: Cyndi Casarez on 2014 -04 -20 18:47:34 Comments: 319. Name: Kindal Trapp on 2014 -04 -20 19:18:34 Comments: Page 28 of 91 320. Name: Patrick M. McSwain on 2014 -04 -20 19:31:33 Comments: This is a no- brainer, people shouldn't have to petition the government on order to raise a few chickens. 321. Name: Camaray on 2014 -04 -20 19:52:19 Comments: 322. Name: Danielle Owen on 2014 -04 -20 20:25:39 Comments: 323. Name: Jackson Haynes on 2014 -04 -20 21:34:53 Comments: 324. Name: bill davis on 2014 -04 -20 22:26:33 Comments: 325. Name: Julia Laughlin on 2014 -04 -20 23:10:26 Comments: 326. Name: angie flores on 2014 -04 -20 23:15:26 Comments: 327. Name: Amanda Henderson on 2014 -04 -20 23:49:30 Comments: 328. Name: Mary on 2014 -04 -21 00:05:50 Comments: Best part about having ones own chickens is that you are no longer supporting battery chickens. No animal, NO ANIMAL should have to be locked up in a cage with no room to walk around! 329. Name: Lois Roberts on 2014 -04 -21 00:10:05 Comments: I have backyard chickens. They make great pets and help a lot with relaxing. 330. Name: Debra Rist on 2014 -04 -21 00:14:43 Comments: 331. Name: Susan Nixon on 2014 -04 -21 00:20:57 Comments: please allow backyard chicken. Fresh eggs are great and if u raise your own chcikens u know u will have good eggs. 332. Name: Philip Baute on 2014 -04 -21 00:22:05 Comments: Page 29 of 91 333. Name: terry garcia on 2014 -04 -21 00:38:56 Comments: 334. Name: Debra Redalia on 2014 -04 -21 00:39:36 Comments: Backyard chickens, please : -) 335. Name: Kim Holder on 2014 -04 -21 00:41:01 Comments: 336. Name: S Saraceno on 2014 -04 -21 00:41:55 Comments: 337. Name: Sherry Kule on 2014 -04 -21 00:58:11 Comments: 338. Name: Kim kapacziewski on 2014 -04 -21 01:05:42 Comments: 339. Name: Tracy Bryant on 2014 -04 -21 01:10:41 Comments: 340. Name: Richard Crites on 2014 -04 -21 01:12:03 Comments: 341. Name: Benny Halevy on 2014 -04 -21 01:20:56 Comments: No roosters 342. Name: melissa tuttle on 2014 -04 -21 01:21:41 Comments: bugs , feed, us with eggs chichens , every one needs chickens ! 343. Name: Kathy Jackson on 2014 -04 -21 01:28:45 Comments: I would like the right to raise chickens in Clearwater 344. Name: Amy Wells on 2014 -04 -21 01:31:05 Comments: 345. Name: Amy Leitzen on 2014 -04 -21 01:34:38 Comments: Backyard chickens help improve the environment by reducing the effects of air pollution associated with trucking food across country to grocery stores, and also improves the health of people by eliminating the need for antibiotics for large scale chicken farms due to overcrowding conditions to produce maximum profitability...it's just good common sense! Page 30 of 91 346. Name: terry flanagan on 2014 -04 -21 01:43:23 Comments: 347. Name: Tammy Bush on 2014 -04 -21 01:51:58 Comments: 348. Name: Carrie Grebenev on 2014 -04 -21 01 :54:54 Comments: 349. Name: Noreen Saunders on 2014 -04 -21 02:08:24 Comments: 350. Name: cheryl on 2014 -04 -21 02:11:24 Comments: 351. Name: Teri Westbrook on 2014 -04 -21 02:34:05 Comments: Raising your own chickens...so you know what you're eating! Not to mention they're cute. 352. Name: Wende Beedle on 2014 -04 -21 02:45:23 Comments: 353. Name: Dianna ecker on 2014 -04 -21 03:02:44 Comments: 354. Name: john ray on 2014 -04 -21 03:07:13 Comments: lets see some chickens 355. Name: Jessica Ruff on 2014 -04 -21 03:16:28 Comments: 356. Name: Leslie Vance on 2014 -04 -21 03:24:32 Comments: I love Backyard Chickens. Alot of good information from this grou[ 357. Name: Amanda Seelbach on 2014 -04 -21 04:24:40 Comments: Poultry is a great for of food for our country. I believe everyone should have that right. 358. Name: Cate on 2014 -04 -21 04:25:05 Comments: 359. Name: Kathy Evans on 2014 -04 -21 04:53:08 Page 31 of 91 Comments: Chickens that provide families eggs should never be prohibited from a property that is well kept and kind to the birds. 360. Name: Jenny O'Konski on 2014 -04 -21 04:56:33 Comments: homesteading is a good thing! 361. Name: scott on 2014 -04 -21 05:06:01 Comments: legalize the chickens 362. Name: Adam Bekel on 2014 -04 -21 06:35:40 Comments: 363. Name: marcelle la cour on 2014 -04 -21 08:18:49 Comments: 364. Name: Betsy on 2014 -04 -21 09:10:47 Comments: 365. Name: Christopher Blauvelt on 2014 -04 -21 09:18:16 Comments: Christopher 366. Name: Claudia Cambigue on 2014 -04 -21 10:01:51 Comments: Please expand eligability to keep and raise chickens for home use in Cleareater 367. Name: Jeannie Cumbo on 2014 -04 -21 10:44:42 Comments: 368. Name: Devin Thomas on 2014 -04 -21 11:15:33 Comments: Chickens are a great addition to any community! 369. Name: Ed on 2014 -04 -21 11:38:34 Comments: great! 370. Name: Kris Northam on 2014 -04 -21 11:40:08 Comments: 371. Name: joy milford on 2014 -04 -21 11:53:13 Comments: 372. Name: gilbert holden on 2014 -04 -21 12:01:51 Comments: Page 32 of 91 373. Name: kim schulttz on 2014 -04 -21 12:12:40 Comments: backyard chickens are an invitation to get to know your neighbors and educate others in kindness to animals. 374. Name: Mindy newsome on 2014 -04 -21 12:17:26 Comments: 375. Name: Sherry Nugent on 2014 -04 -21 12:19:36 Comments: 376. Name: Johna Yoh on 2014 -04 -21 12:44:48 Comments: 377. Name: Brian Ritchie on 2014 -04 -21 12:45:29 Comments: 378. Name: Kurt Paine on 2014 -04 -21 13:23:31 Comments: 379. Name: Andrea Wisner on 2014 -04 -21 13:45:46 Comments: 380. Name: tammie brister on 2014 -04 -21 13:51:12 Comments: 381. Name: kim gonzalez on 2014 -04 -21 13:52:04 Comments: Fresh and local food should be encouraged, not discouraged. Let them have chickens! 382. Name: Ozlem Alcin- Jennings on 2014 -04 -21 13:58:52 Comments: 383. Name: KRISTIE NELSON on 2014 -04 -21 14:49:25 Comments: 384. Name: Ronald Altic on 2014 -04 -21 14:56:40 Comments: Urban Agriculture including the raising of chickens and fish should be encouraged throughout the city. After all, there may come a time when the trucks stop running. We should be prepared in advance. 385. Name: justin on 2014 -04 -21 15:34:58 Page 33 of 91 Comments: 386. Name: Kasey Sims on 2014 -04 -21 15:39:05 Comments: 387. Name: wendy wood on 2014 -04 -21 17:08:48 Comments: 388. Name: jessie on 2014 -04 -21 17:48:41 Comments: 389. Name: Lucila Madden on 2014 -04 -21 17:59:49 Comments: 390. Name: Marit Eisenman on 2014 -04 -21 18:05:40 Comments: 391. Name: Donald Johnson on 2014 -04 -21 18:31:01 Comments: more chickens = "LESS BUGS" 392. Name: Chris Nestor on 2014 -04 -21 18:48:21 Comments: Chickens are great pets that help provide for the family. 393. Name: McKinnley Workman on 2014 -04 -21 18:58:40 Comments: 394. Name: Jacob Galvin on 2014 -04 -21 19:00:49 Comments: 395. Name: Theresa McGuire on 2014 -04 -21 20:59:34 Comments: 396. Name: Colleen Holland on 2014 -04 -21 21:24:10 Comments: 397. Name: Anthony Herring on 2014 -04 -21 21:31:02 Comments: 398. Name: Rachel Chancy on 2014 -04 -21 21:52:30 Comments: Please allow reasonable chicken legislation. 399. Name: Kali Tay on 2014 -04 -21 22:59:00 Page 34 of 91 Comments: 400. Name: Michelle Williamson on 2014 -04 -21 23:00:56 Comments: Please allow back yard chickens!! 401. Name: Penny silcock on 2014 -04 -21 23:48:40 Comments: I fully agree to allow chickens to be in house plots 402. Name: Clinton on 2014 -04 -21 23:52:58 Comments: chickens for life... 403. Name: catherine sonier on 2014 -04 -22 00:23:37 Comments: Everyone should have the right to eat and produce fresh healthy eggs for themselves. . 404. Name: Emmy on 2014 -04 -22 00:54:40 Comments: Chickens for everyone! 405. Name: jill nunn on 2014 -04 -22 01:01:36 Comments: chickens are great 406. Name: Paula Cole on 2014 -04 -22 01:01:57 Comments: 407. Name: Beth Cramer on 2014 -04 -22 01:02:38 Comments: everyone should be able to enjoy chickens and put food on their tables 408. Name: Julee Stoner - Wingate on 2014 -04 -22 01:05:00 Comments: Backyard chickens are beneficial for gardens and a natural remedy for pest removal. They do not cause a ruckus, however supply hours of joy and peace. I have 5 chickens and 1 rooster. They provide enough eggs for my husband and I and for people in need. We donate our surplus eggs to orgaizations and family. Backyard chicken keeping is a peaceful hobby and if penned correctly, or by clipping their wings, they do not run all over the neighborhood. My chickens stay about 200 feet from their coop and I live in the country on about 2 acres. Thank you for your time and considering Backyard Chickens as a hobby in your area. PS if some are worried about roosters, hens can lay just fine without one. 409. Name: Jennifer Mitchell on 2014 -04 -22 01:11:39 Comments: 410. Name: Lisa Curl on 2014 -04 -22 01:17:08 Comments: Page 35 of 91 411. Name: Pat Fain on 2014 -04 -22 01:18:54 Comments: 412. Name: Melissa George on 2014 -04 -22 01:31:34 Comments: 413. Name: Angie Brensinger Pollock on 2014 -04 -22 01:32:03 Comments: 414. Name: Erin Montgomery on 2014 -04 -22 01:33:30 Comments: 415. Name: Gabrielle Bergeret on 2014 -04 -22 01:42:50 Comments: 416. Name: cheryl laconetti on 2014 -04 -22 01:43:28 Comments: many benifits for small price 417. Name: Debbie Frazier on 2014 -04 -22 01:51:50 Comments: 418. Name: Brenda Chumney on 2014 -04 -22 01:55:52 Comments: 419. Name: Lauren cortina on 2014 -04 -22 02:16:05 Comments: 420. Name: Jessica Schmitt on 2014 -04 -22 02:30:22 Comments: I LOVE my backyard chickens. They are healthy, loved, and keep me supplied with eggs, meat, and my children chores /responsibility. I would never move somewhere where chickens were not allowed! I LOVE my chickens!!! 421. Name: Elizabeth Fancie Sparbel on 2014 -04 -22 03:27:02 Comments: 422. Name: James Gladwell on 2014 -04 -22 03:54:10 Comments: Chickens should be allowed. If kept clean, the noise and smell is minimal compared to rowdy dogs barking all night. This is food, and someone being self reliant is a good thing! :) 423. Name: Kaetlyn on 2014 -04 -22 03:59:00 Page 36 of 91 Comments: 424. Name: Kendrean Padgett on 2014 -04 -22 04:02:35 Comments: 425. Name: Holly Mercer on 2014 -04 -22 04:03:54 Comments: love chickens 426. Name: Brandy Lewandowski on 2014 -04 -22 04:07:33 Comments: 427. Name: Nikki Stone -Hurst on 2014 -04 -22 04:13:53 Comments: 428. Name: Shelby Murdock on 2014 -04 -22 04:22:04 Comments: Chicken are surprisingly great to have around. non invasive, beautiful, and allow owners and others to have a steady supply of fresh eggs! my neighbors have made maany comments about how they didn't expect them to be so quiet! 429. Name: Angela Nice on 2014 -04 -22 04:46:07 Comments: 430. Name: isobel on 2014 -04 -22 09:09:02 Comments: 431. Name: Kim on 2014 -04 -22 11:06:00 Comments: 432. Name: amanda holloway on 2014 -04 -22 11:19:07 Comments: 433. Name: Shelly Riley on 2014 -04 -22 11:26:26 Comments: 434. Name: Kelly Hawk on 2014 -04 -22 11:51:17 Comments: 435. Name: carmelle Tidd on 2014 -04 -22 12:05:50 Comments: 436. Name: Lisa Laravie Boisvert on 2014 -04 -22 12:09:17 Comments: Responsible chicken ownership be allowed in all communities. Page 37 of 91 437. Name: James Wilkins on 2014 -04 -22 12:28:16 Comments: 438. Name: natalie kittrell on 2014 -04 -22 12:40:49 Comments: 439. Name: Jean Cooke on 2014 -04 -22 12:44:56 Comments: 440. Name: brad dwiggins on 2014 -04 -22 12:59:49 Comments: 441. Name: KRISTIE on 2014 -04 -22 13:09:45 Comments: 442. Name: Kris Nicholas on 2014 -04 -22 13:22:42 Comments: Chickens make wonderful additions to any family. Especially those with small children. They are gentle and easy to care for. Mine are no problem to anyone. My neighbors have never complained. No noise, no smell. I keep them clean, fed and watered and they are happy to provide fresh eggs daily. Hens will lay eggs without a rooster. The rooster is only needed if you want fertilize and hatch the eggs. Hens are harmless. 443. Name: Rhonda Ingalsbe on 2014 -04 -22 13:29:14 Comments: 444. Name: Jane Stephenson on 2014 -04 -22 13:30:20 Comments: Backyard chickens are not the same as large scale chicken production. Everyone should be allowed to keep chickens in a safe and courteous manner in order to reap the benefits of fresh eggs, sometimes meat, and pest control. 445. Name: Rachel Moutoux on 2014 -04 -22 13:41:02 Comments: Backyard chickens are a wonderful asset to any community. Chickens are a food source, they eat bugs and fertilize the soil. 446. Name: Chris Tarver on 2014 -04 -22 13:52:58 Comments: 447. Name: Callie Baumgardner on 2014 -04 -22 14:03:59 Comments: 448. Name: Lori Hamilton on 2014 -04 -22 15:06:32 Page 38 of 91 Comments: I fully support backyard chickens. 449. Name: Anita A Long on 2014 -04 -22 15:35:16 Comments: We should all be allowed to have chickens. 450. Name: Heather Horst on 2014 -04 -22 15:45:49 Comments: 451. Name: Emilee Geurin on 2014 -04 -22 15:50:54 Comments: 452. Name: Scott Beach on 2014 -04 -22 16:51:19 Comments: 453. Name: Amy Maloy on 2014 -04 -22 17:00:27 Comments: 454. Name: Diana Byron on 2014 -04 -22 17:22:58 Comments: 455. Name: wayne jackson on 2014 -04 -22 18:07:21 Comments: 456. Name: marietta Ioyd on 2014 -04 -22 18:09:39 Comments: nothing better than chickens running around eating al the pest in you yard 457. Name: angie paluch on 2014 -04 -22 18:46:06 Comments: everyone should be allowed chickens! 458. Name: Bobbi Jean on 2014 -04 -22 19:15:04 Comments: 459. Name: Bobby Beard on 2014 -04 -22 19:23:35 Comments: Food freedom is a God given right. 460. Name: Eva Smith on 2014 -04 -22 20:10:55 Comments: 461. Name: Paula Provost on 2014 -04 -22 20:19:08 Comments: 462. Name: sandra mclean on 2014 -04 -22 20:50:42 Page 39 of 91 Comments: CHIKENS for ever ! 463. Name: kristen johnson on 2014 -04 -22 21:08:20 Comments: 464. Name: Robin Travis on 2014 -04 -22 21:56:21 Comments: People going to have to something as food cost are going up up an up more each day. 465. Name: Robby Huggins on 2014 -04 -22 21:58:48 Comments: 466. Name: Misty on 2014 -04 -22 22:06:55 Comments: 467. Name: Emily Mummolo on 2014 -04 -22 22:10:22 Comments: 468. Name: Lorelye Roberge on 2014 -04 -22 22:15:30 Comments: 469. Name: Rebekah Strate on 2014 -04 -22 22:31:51 Comments: share the love 470. Name: Jules Ratton on 2014 -04 -22 22:40:06 Comments: request that the ordinance(s) of Pinellas County be amended to allow the keeping of backyard poultry in residential zones within the county. 471. Name: JoAnna Slskin on 2014 -04 -23 00:03:13 Comments: 472. Name: Jay James on 2014 -04 -23 00:15:12 Comments: 473. Name: Nicole MacDougall on 2014 -04 -23 00:26:39 Comments: 474. Name: Laurie Paulk on 2014 -04 -23 01:14:56 Comments: Chicken should be allowed. 475. Name: Lisa Hertenstein on 2014 -04 -23 01:32:13 Comments: Page 40 of 91 476. Name: Stacy Murphy on 2014 -04 -23 01:51:12 Comments: 477. Name: Stephenie Compher on 2014 -04 -23 01:53:07 Comments: 478. Name: Vincent E. Fox on 2014 -04 -23 02:02:14 Comments: 479. Name: Lorraine c on 2014 -04 -23 02:29:01 Comments: 480. Name: Tina Downer on 2014 -04 -23 02:34:42 Comments: Anyone should be able to have chickens in their yards, that's our right as American citizens. 481. Name: Glenda Peavy on 2014 -04 -23 02:39:24 Comments: 482. Name: Missy Neal on 2014 -04 -23 03:31:51 Comments: 483. Name: Jacqui Ainsworth on 2014 -04 -23 03:53:55 Comments: 484. Name: Jordan Byrd on 2014 -04 -23 03:58:05 Comments: 485. Name: Amy J. Thomsen on 2014 -04 -23 11:09:14 Comments: Before back yard chickens were introduced we did not have very much in the form of organic fertilizer, no added protein from eggs and fresh, healthy raised meat for our families. This has benefitted our connunity in ways that abound the affore mentioned improvements. A sense of community surrounded us as we all helped each other out with our chickens. They are gentle loving creatures who do not make messes of any sort if properly taken care of. 486. Name: shannon on 2014 -04 -23 12:20:08 Comments: I am fully behind this endeavor! A chicken is NOT a filthy animal if you simply take the time to care for it PROPERLY. 487. Name: Katherine towwery on 2014 -04 -23 12:33:40 Comments: Page 41 of 91 488. Name: Cheryl Robinson - Atwood on 2014 -04 -23 12:38:35 Comments: 489. Name: Lori Coleman on 2014 -04 -23 12:51:12 Comments: 490. Name: alice barton on 2014 -04 -23 12:59:04 Comments: raising chickens is a great experience and is good for children too. teaches responsibility to them. 491. Name: Darla Malone on 2014 -04 -23 13:33:11 Comments: We are concerned about our food supply. We are a family of 5 with a large backyard so we have 6 hens. During the Spring and Summer they lay enough eggs for us to share with family. 492. Name: Linda Conley -Watts on 2014 -04 -23 13:53:00 Comments: love my chicke s and the food they provide for us. fertilize for flowers and garde , and the endless entertainment they provide. 493. Name: Karleen Bakke on 2014 -04 -23 14:12:59 Comments: 494. Name: kelly Lambeth on 2014 -04 -23 16:35:19 Comments: love having backyard chickens 495. Name: Linda Workman on 2014 -04 -23 17:38:25 Comments: If chickens aren't allowed, dogs shouldn't be either. Dogs are louder, have stinkier feces, their feces can not be used as fertilizer, and they don't eat bugs. 496. Name: miya mata on 2014 -04 -23 18:10:39 Comments: green is important! 497. Name: Rebecca O'Brien on 2014 -04 -23 18:20:44 Comments: Chickens are historically present in most Americans yards. They are beneficial both economically and ecologically, and can aide in the development of local 498. Name: Carolyn Redmond on 2014 -04 -23 18:59:44 Comments: Hens are not noisy nor disruptive. They should be allowed. 499. Name: elizabeth ailstock on 2014 -04 -23 19:05:47 Comments: everyone should have the option of having their own chickens if they so choose Page 42 of 91 500. Name: claude ailstock on 2014 -04 -23 19:45:26 Comments: 501. Name: ej bennett on 2014 -04 -23 19:46:15 Comments: 502. Name: ej bennett on 2014 -04 -23 19:46:30 Comments: 503. Name: ej bennett on 2014 -04 -23 19:46:45 Comments: 504. Name: ej bennett on 2014 -04 -23 19:46:54 Comments: 505. Name: Cassandra McDorman on 2014 -04 -23 19:52:22 Comments: 506. Name: danielle bennett on 2014 -04 -23 20:20:42 Comments: 507. Name: christopher bennett on 2014 -04 -23 20:21:40 Comments: 508. Name: christina jimenez on 2014 -04 -23 20:22:03 Comments: having chickens is not only cost effective for the family that has them but also helps cut down on outdoor pest and provides natural pest control. its good for the environment and helps promote a healthy community. 509. Name: michael bennett on 2014 -04 -23 20:22:24 Comments: 510. Name: victoria mcdorman on 2014 -04 -23 20:23:29 Comments: 511. Name: anna clutter on 2014 -04 -23 20:24:16 Comments: 512. Name: celie fritzgerald on 2014 -04 -23 20:27:21 Comments: Page 43 of 91 513. Name: Kristy Marker on 2014 -04 -23 20:30:58 Comments: 514. Name: Daren Hurlbut on 2014 -04 -23 21:22:34 Comments: We have about 50 birds in our back yard and fresh eggs are the best 515. Name: Teresa Niles on 2014 -04 -23 21:28:15 Comments: 516. Name: Catherine rushin on 2014 -04 -23 22:30:54 Comments: 517. Name: jennifer price on 2014 -04 -23 23:47:03 Comments: 518. Name: Pam Hall on 2014 -04 -24 00:01:56 Comments: Chickens are quieter and safer than dogs 519. Name: missy stotier on 2014 -04 -24 00:35:09 Comments: 520. Name: Tina Wallace on 2014 -04 -24 00:57:40 Comments: 521. Name: Laurie Dietrich on 2014 -04 -24 01:08:58 Comments: Pets with benefits make a lot of sense! Good luck! 522. Name: Rhonda Johnson on 2014 -04 -24 01:21:34 Comments: 523. Name: Wonnell Hernandez on 2014 -04 -24 01:43:45 Comments: 524. Name: Eric Barber on 2014 -04 -24 01:44:39 Comments: 525. Name: Becky S. Berger on 2014 -04 -24 01:52:39 Comments: Backyard chickens are nice pets and they help eat bugs and fertilize the yard aswell as make breckfast.The benefits are greater than any negative impact. 526. Name: Roanne Phipps Elsayed on 2014 -04 -24 02:26:27 Comments: Page 44 of 91 527. Name: Jen Cole on 2014 -04 -24 03:24:25 Comments: 528. Name: Julie Brodzik- Emmett on 2014 -04 -24 11:38:30 Comments: 529. Name: Gabrielle White on 2014 -04 -24 12:14:23 Comments: 530. Name: Laura Lynn on 2014 -04 -24 12:56:46 Comments: 531. Name: KRISTIE on 2014 -04 -24 14:29:19 Comments: 532. Name: Sandie Prickett on 2014 -04 -24 14:38:06 Comments: Back yard chickenslllll Allow it! 533. Name: Hope Mccullough on 2014 -04 -24 15:21:50 Comments: We want chickens in our yards! 534. Name: Michelle Grove on 2014 -04 -24 15:22:35 Comments: 535. Name: AnnMarie Wanders on 2014 -04 -24 15:35:03 Comments: 536. Name: Dugi Jenkins on 2014 -04 -24 15:56:14 Comments: 537. Name: Michelle Williams on 2014 -04 -24 16:34:42 Comments: Not only do my chickens provide me with a food source, they are soo good for my blood pressure. I love to watch and feed them 538. Name: marilyn holter on 2014 -04 -24 16:36:58 Comments: as long as kept up and no roosters. had them in Tucson, Arizona and never had a problem with neighbors 539. Name: Brandi Wing on 2014 -04 -24 16:44:54 Comments: Signing. Page 45 of 91 540. Name: lashanana on 2014 -04 -24 18:24:51 Comments: 541. Name: Stacy Loew on 2014 -04 -24 19:01:16 Comments: 542. Name: Crystal Bergman on 2014 -04 -24 20:42:27 Comments: Backyard chickens all the way! 543. Name: Rebecca Linger on 2014 -04 -24 20:52:03 Comments: Backyard chickens are wonderful! They will create very happy citizens! 544. Name: Sandra on 2014 -04 -24 21:33:16 Comments: Please let her raise chickens! Please let everyone raise chickens! 545. Name: Gayle Romero on 2014 -04 -24 21:48:53 Comments: 546. Name: Karyn Cleavely on 2014 -04 -24 21:51:14 Comments: 547. Name: Eric Connery on 2014 -04 -24 21:53:30 Comments: 548. Name: Bunny Goodjohn on 2014 -04 -24 21:55:05 Comments: 549. Name: Danielle Pearce on 2014 -04 -24 22:31:31 Comments: 550. Name: Gabrielle Williams on 2014 -04 -24 22:40:27 Comments: 551. Name: carmen valverde on 2014 -04 -24 22:41:11 Comments: backyard chickens should be allowed everywhere! 552. Name: Sonya Mavis on 2014 -04 -24 22:49:22 Comments: 553. Name: C on 2014 -04 -24 23:13:02 Comments: signed. Page 46 of 91 554. Name: Audrey Michele Baseheart on 2014 -04 -24 23:19:57 Comments: 555. Name: Jennifer Kuhn on 2014 -04 -24 23:24:47 Comments: Chicken's should be allowed!!! 556. Name: Laura Miller on 2014 -04 -24 23:33:03 Comments: 557. Name: Nancy on 2014 -04 -24 23:38:02 Comments: 558. Name: Bonita Hudson on 2014 -04 -24 23:46:49 Comments: 559. Name: Jen Murphy on 2014 -04 -24 23:47:58 Comments: 560. Name: Jackie Welborn on 2014 -04 -24 23:52:00 Comments: 561. Name: sara eagleboy on 2014 -04 -25 00:36:15 Comments: Chickens are so fun to keep. I think that if everyone kept a small flock to offer their family eggs, the world would be a better place. 562. Name: Barbara Wagner on 2014 -04 -25 00:40:54 Comments: Both of my children have backyard chickens. It is an environmentally friendly sustainable action. Provides eggs as well as natural peat control and fertilizer. 563. Name: Jamie Robinson on 2014 -04 -25 01:18:03 Comments: 564. Name: Clarence Shrader on 2014 -04 -25 01:18:54 Comments: Everyone needs to have some chickens to have eggs county eggs are better for you anyway 565. Name: Rhoda Smith on 2014 -04 -25 01:20:39 Comments: 566. Name: Rhoda Smith on 2014 -04 -25 01:20:39 Comments: Page 47 of 91 567. Name: Rhoda Smith on 2014 -04 -25 01:20:39 Comments: 568. Name: Samantha Nicole on 2014 -04 -25 01:21:13 Comments: 569. Name: Rosie Alexander on 2014 -04 -25 01:24:29 Comments: 570. Name: Roger Holgate on 2014 -04 -25 01:26:24 Comments: 571. Name: Phyllis Clayton on 2014 -04 -25 01:39:33 Comments: I agree. All single family households in Pinrllas County should be allowed to keep chickens in their backyards. 572. Name: Sheri Branch on 2014 -04 -25 01:42:51 Comments: We all have a right to eat! 573. Name: carol on 2014 -04 -25 01:50:04 Comments: I Like my backyard chickens!! I do not understand why goverment can tell us what we can and cannot have in our backyards...we pay for our land and taxes. Chickens is God given...Amen!!! for provision. 574. Name: JoLynn Sapp on 2014 -04 -25 01:53:41 Comments: I'm all for it! Folks could keep noise down by limiting the age and number of roosters, too. 575. Name: Amber Scott on 2014 -04 -25 02:24:07 Comments: 576. Name: shelly on 2014 -04 -25 02:28:54 Comments: 577. Name: trish lizotte on 2014 -04 -25 02:33:14 Comments: 578. Name: Bob Cruts on 2014 -04 -25 02:35:28 Comments: 579. Name: Sherry Nugent on 2014 -04 -25 02:49:06 Comments: Page 48 of 91 580. Name: Susan Semens on 2014 -04 -25 02:54:58 Comments: 581. Name: Charlyne M. Eichner on 2014 -04 -25 03:19:10 Comments: 582. Name: Charlyne M. Eichner on 2014 -04 -25 03:19:30 Comments: 583. Name: Charlyne M. Eichner on 2014 -04 -25 03:19:32 Comments: 584. Name: Ann Jones Patterson on 2014 -04 -25 03:45:30 Comments: 585. Name: Judy on 2014 -04 -25 03:55:10 Comments: 586. Name: Judy King on 2014 -04 -25 04:01:07 Comments: Everyone needs backyard chickens! 587. Name: jennifer rygula on 2014 -04 -25 06:43:58 Comments: 588. Name: Candace Mattison on 2014 -04 -25 07:26:31 Comments: More people need to do everything they can to become self sufficient, and backyard chickens is a great step in the right direction. 589. Name: Sam Hardman on 2014 -04 -25 11:54:33 Comments: Give them there rights back , this is America 590. Name: Tony Gilnett on 2014 -04 -25 12:37:15 Comments: 591. Name: Stephanie Crowder on 2014 -04 -25 12:50:49 Comments: 592. Name: S Gluchowski on 2014 -04 -25 13:00:44 Comments: 593. Name: Deborah White on 2014 -04 -25 13:05:27 Comments: Everyone should have the option of relying less on others and more on Page 49 of 91 themselves for what they need. It's a shame that in many places we are no longer allowed to do what our forefathers did- DO FOR OURSELVES! 594. Name: Henry Farmer on 2014 -04 -25 13:14:39 Comments: 595. Name: jill on 2014 -04 -25 13:44:47 Comments: 596. Name: Julie Tornillo on 2014 -04 -25 14:03:14 Comments: 597. Name: Kathy on 2014 -04 -25 14:08:27 Comments: chickens rock! 598. Name: Jennifer Peterson on 2014 -04 -25 14:10:17 Comments: 599. Name: Mark Stoddard on 2014 -04 -25 14:24:03 Comments: Save the chickens 600. Name: Tammy Butcher on 2014 -04 -25 14:26:25 Comments: There are more problems in this world than to worry about somebody wanting chickens...whether they are for food or for pets, let them have their chickens. 601. Name: Peter Houston on 2014 -04 -25 16:12:35 Comments: 602. Name: Felena Chandler on 2014 -04 -25 16:42:20 Comments: 603. Name: kimberley strunk on 2014 -04 -25 18:05:55 Comments: 604. Name: Jordan Mains on 2014 -04 -25 18:36:23 Comments: Backyard chickens have so many benefits and should be allowed! 605. Name: Stephanie Artman on 2014 -04 -25 18:42:21 Comments: I LOVE CHICKENS!! :) 606. Name: Lori Lofton on 2014 -04 -25 19:41:56 Comments: Page 50 of 91 607. Name: Patty Cates on 2014 -04 -25 19:44:35 Comments: ALLOW 608. Name: Pooja Thakkar on 2014 -04 -25 19:53:46 Comments: 609. Name: Gret Anglin on 2014 -04 -26 01:40:01 Comments: 610. Name: Jeremy Obermeyer on 2014 -04 -26 02:00:04 Comments: Chickens are an excellent backyard animal! They provide meat and eggs, cut down on bugs, supply great fertilizer for your garden, and they are just flat out entertaining! If you have children, chickens can also be used to help teach them responsibility. 611. Name: Katherine Bertram Comments: on 2014 -04 -26 02:02:58 612. Name: Richard Randazzo on 2014 -04 -26 02:35:48 Comments: anyone should be able to have chickens where they reside at. 613. Name: candace trowel! on 2014 -04 -26 02:50:25 Comments: Let her raise her babies 614. Name: Adam Grimes II on 2014 -04 -26 04:02:29 Comments: 615. Name: Patty Taylor on 2014 -04 -26 04:03:51 Comments: 616. Name: Telisa Harnage on 2014 -04 -26 05:08:23 Comments: 617. Name: Erin Kelly -Cody on 2014 -04 -26 06:09:37 Comments: 618. Name: Anastacia Caldwell on 2014 -04 -26 11:35:29 Comments: 619. Name: Tammy Werner on 2014 -04 -26 11:47:53 Comments: Page 51 of 91 620. Name: Lesa J Smirh on 2014 -04 -26 12:33:41 Comments: I live in a town and have a few chickens and I put them in the coop of a night so that my rooster does not wake the neighbors and no one complains at all about them. 621. Name: Danielle Morin on 2014 -04 -26 13:11:15 Comments: 622. Name: Lakeisha Spruell on 2014 -04 -26 13:53:09 Comments: how could u say no 2 those sweet animals 623. Name: K Williams on 2014 -04 -26 14:28:18 Comments: It should be everyone's right to grow their own food and not be dependent on any system. 624. Name: Susan Purcell on 2014 -04 -26 15:10:36 Comments: Yes, to backyard chickens everywhere. 625. Name: Catherine on 2014 -04 -26 16:39:00 Comments: Chickens are wonderful! Everyone should have the right to keep backyard chickens! 626. Name: Jessica Huffman on 2014 -04 -26 17:18:17 Comments: this person has a right to keep chickens,just as others have a right to keep a dog or cat. Chickens are inquisitive, small,and fun pets. The thinking they are dirty and noisy is totally false. please let them keep chickens !!! 627. Name: Cindy Parsons on 2014 -04 -26 21:14:20 Comments: 628. Name: Peter Laws on 2014 -04 -26 21:19:30 Comments: nice quiet friendly pets 629. Name: vicki haggerty on 2014 -04 -26 21:34:02 Comments: please allow the chickens 630. Name: Allison on 2014 -04 -26 21:44:33 Comments: 631. Name: steve olson on 2014 -04 -26 21:47:13 Comments: Page 52 of 91 632. Name: Amy C. Renaud - Mutart on 2014 -04 -26 22:15:32 Comments: 633. Name: mary beth hopkins on 2014 -04 -26 22:29:56 Comments: 634. Name: Jessica Belanger on 2014 -04 -26 22:57:24 Comments: Everyone needs backyard chickens. 635. Name: Kristin Bryan on 2014 -04 -26 23:09:57 Comments: 636. Name: candy clay on 2014 -04 -27 00:13:18 Comments: 637. Name: Alison Abbott on 2014 -04 -27 02:32:41 Comments: 638. Name: Kathy Lebs on 2014 -04 -27 03:10:58 Comments: 639. Name: frances blakeslee on 2014 -04 -27 07:04:59 Comments: people have had chickens for years its wrong to deny anyone these beautiful food giving creatures 640. Name: john schurman on 2014 -04 -27 11:00:31 Comments: 641. Name: Tammy R. Pratt on 2014 -04 -27 12:55:33 Comments: 642. Name: Diana Martin on 2014 -04 -27 13:10:12 Comments: Allow Backyard Chickens 643. Name: lynda roberts on 2014 -04 -27 13:45:39 Comments: our country was founded on chickens 644. Name: Adam Karnes on 2014 -04 -27 13:55:18 Comments: 645. Name: Debbie Beranich on 2014 -04 -27 13:56:43 Comments: Page 53 of 91 646. Name: Karla Faith on 2014 -04 -27 13:56:52 Comments: 647. Name: Zach Slimak on 2014 -04 -27 13:58:13 Comments: 648. Name: Lucia Yednak on 2014 -04 -27 14:00:30 Comments: 649. Name: Linda Meyers on 2014 -04 -27 14:02:52 Comments: 650. Name: Ben on 2014 -04 -27 14:08:10 Comments: 651. Name: Michelle Williams Lawson on 2014 -04 -27 14:09:22 Comments: 652. Name: paul miller on 2014 -04 -27 14:14:26 Comments: power to the chickens 653. Name: cheryl mierendorf on 2014 -04 -27 14:22:06 Comments: chickens are a valuable source for families and communities. 654. Name: melissa on 2014 -04 -27 14:30:39 Comments: chickens are wonderful, i havent had to buy eggs since we started with them. dirty bedding useful for garden. win, win. 655. Name: nena osorio on 2014 -04 -27 14:32:47 Comments: At one point it was our PATRiOTiC duty to raise chickens to sustain our families. Everyone should be allowed to raise chickens. 656. Name: megan on 2014 -04 -27 15:05:41 Comments: signed 657. Name: suzanne wagner on 2014 -04 -27 15:29:55 Comments::) 658. Name: Leslie Tanner on 2014 -04 -27 16:01:17 Comments: Page 54 of 91 659. Name: Wynn Sigman on 2014 -04 -27 16:05:41 Comments: Ridiculus ordinance! 660. Name: Rick Kangas on 2014 -04 -27 16:11:17 Comments: getter done 661. Name: Sandra Wagoner on 2014 -04 -27 16:21:10 Comments: 662. Name: Mike Taylor on 2014 -04 -27 16:38:13 Comments: Every one should be able to enjoy the benefits of home raised chickens and eggs. 663. Name: Sheri Farmer on 2014 -04 -27 17:00:05 Comments: 664. Name: Van Braue on 2014 -04 -27 17:30:37 Comments: 665. Name: Marion Kupper on 2014 -04 -27 18:41:44 Comments: If cared for chickens give us eggs, meat,fertilizer and help teach responsibility to children. They also make great pets. Great for backyards. 666. Name: Theresa Ontiveros on 2014 -04 -27 19:27:29 Comments: 667. Name: Margie Gordon on 2014 -04 -27 20:31:42 Comments: I agree with every word in the petition! I have backyard Chickens and am able to enjoy them as my pets as well as have some healthy eating! This is America, we are supposed to have SOME rights! 668. Name: Ginger Kritz on 2014 -04 -27 21:36:44 Comments: 669. Name: tammie brister on 2014 -04 -27 21:48:35 Comments: 670. Name: miya mata on 2014 -04 -27 21:52:54 Comments: 671. Name: Jimmy Pratt on 2014 -04 -27 22:09:50 Comments: Page 55 of 91 672. Name: Cody Pratt on 2014 -04 -27 22:10:29 Comments: 673. Name: angela thacker on 2014 -04 -27 22:28:57 Comments: 674. Name: Matt Hillman on 2014 -04 -27 22:37:04 Comments: This should be a non - issue. People should be allowed to grow /raise their own food if they desire. 675. Name: Betsy Horton on 2014 -04 -27 23:06:32 Comments: Healthy homegrown food! 676. Name: Devin Christopher on 2014 -04 -27 23:10:31 Comments: It IS a God -given right to provide food for yourself and your family. Chickens are not "unsafe" or "unsanitary". Poorly, unnaturally, industry kept chickens are unsafe and unsanitary. 677. Name: Kelly Duff on 2014 -04 -27 23:17:43 Comments: 678. Name: lisa sands on 2014 -04 -27 23:32:00 Comments: chicken should be allowed 679. Name: tyler schmalzried on 2014 -04 -27 23:36:27 Comments: 680. Name: Theresa on 2014 -04 -28 00:31:14 Comments: 681. Name: Nicole Warriner on 2014 -04 -28 00:43:07 Comments: 682. Name: Shelly Truitt on 2014 -04 -28 00:51:29 Comments: 683. Name: Cindy Carney on 2014 -04 -28 01:47:57 Comments: 684. Name: billy caudill on 2014 -04 -28 01:52:57 Comments: i think every body should cause fresh eggs is better for you Page 56 of 91 685. Name: Brenda Cox on 2014 -04 -28 02:20:23 Comments: Having your own chickens is so much better than store bought eggs or for meat. You know whats in them. I think they are healthier for you. They get bugs out of your yard, and reduce stress. Don't have to have a rooster to have eggs so they are not a noise problem. Most places around me allow at least 6 hens within city limits. It's good for kids to experance animals. I am a registered voter. 686. Name: Michelle Humphries on 2014 -04 -28 02:43:36 Comments: 687. Name: Felicia on 2014 -04 -28 02:58:00 Comments: 688. Name: Al Caporaso on 2014 -04 -28 03:01:43 Comments: 689. Name: tsambika aysh on 2014 -04 -28 07:35:21 Comments: 690. Name: payton royal on 2014 -04 -28 09:10:15 Comments: I like eggs 691. Name: April Dymond on 2014 -04 -28 11:58:44 Comments: 692. Name: Lisa Cunningham on 2014 -04 -28 13:11:15 Comments: Lisa Cunningham 693. Name: Katherine Reinhart on 2014 -04 -28 13:32:33 Comments: Anyone who wants backyard chickens should be allowed. As long as they are fenced and not a nuisance. 694. Name: Sheila Page on 2014 -04 -28 13:45:28 Comments: 695. Name: Jonathan Creech on 2014 -04 -28 14:02:18 Comments: 696. Name: Courtney Herman on 2014 -04 -28 14:50:27 Comments: people should be allowed to raise chickens as long as they care for them 697. Name: Sue Robbins on 2014 -04 -28 16:05:30 Comments: Page 57 of 91 698. Name: Jasmine Conley on 2014 -04 -28 18:01:22 Comments: 699. Name: Jessica gifford on 2014 -04 -28 18:11:35 Comments: 700. Name: cecily on 2014 -04 -28 18:14:25 Comments: 701. Name: Kirby M on 2014 -04 -28 18:26:14 Comments: 702. Name: ransom creech on 2014 -04 -28 18:32:15 Comments: Give the chickens some love. 703. Name: Nina Martin on 2014 -04 -28 18:52:46 Comments: Give a cluck! Freedom for backyard chickens! 704. Name: Tracy Ashley on 2014 -04 -28 19:20:42 Comments: I am in favor of all people being allowed to keep backyard chickens. 705. Name: Barbara Hirsch on 2014 -04 -28 20:56:57 Comments: I think everyone should be able to experience the joy of raising chickens, eggs are wonderful and as long as there is room availible for them, away from complaining neighbors, it should be allowed.l have chickens and love them to death! 706. Name: Ashley on 2014 -04 -28 21:15:15 Comments: 707. Name: ladonna Smith on 2014 -04 -28 21:21:39 Comments: love the eggs and chickens cut down your flea and bug population 708. Name: Laura Linn on 2014 -04 -28 22:12:03 Comments: A few backyard chickens are not a problem an should be allowed. They are no more of a nuisance than any other pets and supply fresh eggs for those of us who need to be careful what kinds of food we eat. A no rooster clause would be ok, for noise issues... 709. Name: patti on 2014 -04 -28 22:20:12 Comments: Page 58 of 91 710. Name: Shea Sparks on 2014 -04 -28 22:22:39 Comments: 711. Name: Alisha Horton on 2014 -04 -28 22:22:52 Comments: 712. Name: SheIli Patterson on 2014 -04 -28 22:26:45 Comments: Raising chickens should be allowed we have to find ways to provide somehow 713. Name: kristel on 2014 -04 -28 22:26:47 Comments: 714. Name: bruce heiserman on 2014 -04 -28 22:29:12 Comments: 715. Name: William Rice on 2014 -04 -28 22:33:18 Comments: 716. Name: Jennifer Packard on 2014 -04 -28 22:33:27 Comments: 717. Name: brandi wilson on 2014 -04 -28 22:35:25 Comments: i dont see where its hurting anything.. its not like shes out selling drugs or anything 718. Name: Jennifer Bonnell Rigg on 2014 -04 -28 22:36:58 Comments: backyard chickens should be allowed everywhere! 719. Name: Dabrina Dutcher on 2014 -04 -28 22:41:37 Comments: This was once the expectation of a patriotic citizen and seemingly it will be again. 720. Name: Jennifer Fahey Kropfinger on 2014 -04 -28 22:44:15 Comments: 721. Name: Kathy Lawson on 2014 -04 -28 22:44:45 Comments: Let people be self supportive and have back yard chickens for eggs and meat. 722. Name: Bill Maciejewski on 2014 -04 -28 22:48:02 Comments: I want to get a petition going in my own town to do this. Page 59 of 91 723. Name: Jonathan trantham on 2014 -04 -28 22:48:23 Comments: Love my chickens! 724. Name: Jessica on 2014 -04 -28 22:50:37 Comments: 725. Name: Miranda on 2014 -04 -28 22:50:47 Comments: I believe EVERYONE should be allowed to have backyard chickens! They are a source of food for most of us. I can whiteness to that because I myself use chickens as a sus5ainable source of food. They do not harm anyone and as long as they are kept where they should be then they should be allowed in anyones "backyard ". 726. Name: Cherish Leppert Holland on 2014 -04 -28 22:52:03 Comments: 727. Name: Lacey McCulloch on 2014 -04 -28 22:52:25 Comments: 728. Name: Ginnie McCarthy on 2014 -04 -28 22:54:09 Comments: please allow chickens for those who want to produce their own eggs 729. Name: Michael Mastin on 2014 -04 -28 22:56:47 Comments: 730. Name: Theresa Clark on 2014 -04 -28 22:57:30 Comments: 731. Name: Valerie Rohwer on 2014 -04 -28 23:03:47 Comments: 732. Name: Lori Hohl on 2014 -04 -28 23:09:27 Comments: 733. Name: Jackie Conley on 2014 -04 -28 23:11:48 Comments: 734. Name: Mary Call on 2014 -04 -28 23:12:20 Comments: 735. Name: Robert Johnston on 2014 -04 -28 23:15:08 Comments: Page 60 of 91 736. Name: Loretta Johnston on 2014 -04 -28 23:19:18 Comments: 737. Name: Angie Buck on 2014 -04 -28 23:21:42 Comments: 738. Name: bobbie Ieblanc on 2014 -04 -28 23:22:59 Comments: 739. Name: Steve Ruddell on 2014 -04 -28 23:23:54 Comments: chicken are wonderful 740. Name: amber Shoemake on 2014 -04 -28 23:24:18 Comments: 741. Name: michelle hughes on 2014 -04 -28 23:24:50 Comments: 742. Name: Jammie Boaen on 2014 -04 -28 23:25:40 Comments: 743. Name: rebecca ford on 2014 -04 -28 23:27:56 Comments: please allow the people of your community to raise their own food. thank you!! 744. Name: sarah despain on 2014 -04 -28 23:30:08 Comments: 745. Name: Angie Putensen on 2014 -04 -28 23:30:25 Comments: 746. Name: Kelli Hinkle on 2014 -04 -28 23:30:55 Comments: 747. Name: Lyndsey on 2014 -04 -28 23:31:00 Comments: 748. Name: Michael Long on 2014 -04 -28 23:31:26 Comments: 749. Name: Kaye Risser on 2014 -04 -28 23:31:35 Comments: Page 61 of 91 750. Name: S Nimz on 2014 -04 -28 23:33:53 Comments: Chickens contribute to self sustainability and security. 751. Name: Jamie Carney on 2014 -04 -28 23:35:34 Comments: 752. Name: Gregory stane on 2014 -04 -28 23:36:14 Comments: 753. Name: Chris Jones on 2014 -04 -28 23:36:53 Comments: Chickens are a wonderful addition to the backyard, and allow people to start taking charge of their own food sources. 754. Name: Tiffany on 2014 -04 -28 23:37:16 Comments: 755. Name: Travis Tuttle on 2014 -04 -28 23:38:08 Comments: 756. Name: Lori Daley on 2014 -04 -28 23:38:45 Comments: 757. Name: Jamie Tuttle on 2014 -04 -28 23:40:05 Comments: 758. Name: Vicki Cagan on 2014 -04 -28 23:42:37 Comments: Fresh eggs . Nothing better. 759. Name: julie hutchison on 2014 -04 -28 23:45:09 Comments: Chickens are a good thing 760. Name: angle Clark on 2014 -04 -28 23:45:35 Comments: 761. Name: Amber Gagnon on 2014 -04 -28 23:45:45 Comments: 762. Name: Teresa Kennedy on 2014 -04 -28 23:46:41 Comments: 763. Name: Christy Gusloff on 2014 -04 -28 23:46:47 Page 62 of 91 Comments: Chickens Rule...everyone should have them 764. Name: Debbie Stewart on 2014 -04 -28 23:47:10 Comments: Chickens do no harm. They are not a nussiance. 765. Name: Joanne Caron on 2014 -04 -28 23:47:49 Comments: 766. Name: Lacey Gniewek on 2014 -04 -28 23:49:24 Comments: 767. Name: David Barnewall on 2014 -04 -28 23:49:39 Comments: 768. Name: Aliena Reynolds -Sword on 2014 -04 -28 23:49:44 Comments: KEEP FIGHTING!! 769. Name: Carrie Mahoney on 2014 -04 -28 23:50:10 Comments: Backyard chickens are awesome! Who wouldn't like fresh eggs daily? 770. Name: Jessie Schares on 2014 -04 -28 23:51:09 Comments: 771. Name: Heather Gerard on 2014 -04 -28 23:51:50 Comments: Chickens are an unobtrusive and earth friendly way to suppliment a families food supply! They are certainly less of a nuisance to neighbors than dogs or roaming cats! 772. Name: Melissa Clark on 2014 -04 -28 23:54:09 Comments: 773. Name: Amber Lesovoy on 2014 -04 -28 23:56:03 Comments: 774. Name: Theresa Morris on 2014 -04 -28 23:56:18 Comments: 775. Name: Kelly Assad on 2014 -04 -28 23:58:13 Comments: 776. Name: Shannon White on 2014 -04 -28 23:59:00 Comments: Page 63 of 91 777. Name: derry mary on 2014 -04 -28 23:59:38 Comments: 778. Name: john hossink on 2014 -04 -28 23:59:45 Comments: 779. Name: frankie miller on 2014 -04 -29 00:00:12 Comments: 780. Name: michelle lynch on 2014 -04 -29 00:02:57 Comments: 781. Name: Kim Slimak on 2014 -04 -29 00:04:31 Comments: 782. Name: Darla DeFord on 2014 -04 -29 00:06:37 Comments: 783. Name: marva dewoody on 2014 -04 -29 00:08:00 Comments: 784. Name: LaDonna Briscoe on 2014 -04 -29 00:09:04 Comments: 785. Name: josh hursey on 2014 -04 -29 00:09:31 Comments: 786. Name: Janet Gillies on 2014 -04 -29 00:11:27 Comments: 787. Name: Brent Beelner on 2014 -04 -29 00:13:31 Comments: Let have some chickens 788. Name: Tami Serena on 2014 -04 -29 00:14:34 Comments: Everyone should be allowed to have chickens!!! 789. Name: Jess Hall on 2014 -04 -29 00:14:54 Comments: 790. Name: Whitney Espinoza on 2014 -04 -29 00:17:53 Comments: We should all have the right to produce our own food free of the poisonous Page 64 of 91 Chen forced upon us by the food industry. No one has the right to make health decisions for you. 791. Name: Becky Bloodworth on 2014 -04 -29 00:17:56 Comments: 792. Name: Glada Woods on 2014 -04 -29 00:18:33 Comments: 793. Name: Rebecca Radacky on 2014 -04 -29 00:19:09 Comments: Petitions should not need to be signed to own chickens. J/S Florida- 794. Name: Moire Pemberton on 2014 -04 -29 00:20:10 Comments: I think they should be allowed like other animals 795. Name: Alana Cooke on 2014 -04 -29 00:22:50 Comments: 796. Name: joanne on 2014 -04 -29 00:23:30 Comments: everyone should have the opportunity to enjoy raising chickens and Farm fresh eggs!! no farmers= no food!! 797. Name: Leslie Pleakis on 2014 -04 -29 00:23:48 Comments: 798. Name: Catey Scott on 2014 -04 -29 00:25:00 Comments: 799. Name: Kevin Camara on 2014 -04 -29 00:25:55 Comments: 800. Name: Nadine Nadeau on 2014 -04 -29 00:25:56 Comments: People have a right to raise chickens, especially as a food source 801. Name: katie trory on 2014 -04 -29 00:28:11 Comments: good luck ? 802. Name: Jo Griffin Stirewalt on 2014 -04 -29 00:29:54 Comments: 803. Name: Kristin Morrison Greenday on 2014 -04 -29 00:31:57 Comments: EVERYone should be allowed chickens!! Page 65 of 91 804. Name: Nicole mobus on 2014 -04 -29 00:34:15 Comments: 805. Name: Vanessa Cabe on 2014 -04 -29 00:38:31 Comments: 806. Name: Julie on 2014 -04 -29 00:39:18 Comments: Petition 807. Name: Christy Smith on 2014 -04 -29 00:41:10 Comments: 808. Name: Kimberly Thomas on 2014 -04 -29 00:43:12 Comments: 809. Name: sheri smith on 2014 -04 -29 00:48:09 Comments: 810. Name: Michele Gambrel on 2014 -04 -29 00:52:13 Comments: chickens should be allowed 811. Name: Melissa Comments: on 2014 -04 -29 00:53:48 812. Name: Helen on 2014 -04 -29 00:54:41 Comments: 813. Name: Nancy Denmark on 2014 -04 -29 00:56:45 Comments: this should be allowed for the health benefits and fine properly should be no problem 814. Name: Jennifer Kiser on 2014 -04 -29 00:58:27 Comments: Good Luck! Everyone deserves the right! 815. Name: Rebecca Wyland on 2014 -04 -29 00:59:03 Comments: 816. Name: Ingrid Jones on 2014 -04 -29 00:59:19 Comments: 817. Name: Holly on 2014 -04 -29 01:00:04 Page 66 of 91 Comments: We should have the right to grow our own food! 818. Name: Emily on 2014 -04 -29 01:00:53 Comments: 819. Name: Kathy Huizar on 2014 -04 -29 01:01:22 Comments: 820. Name: Katie Snyder on 2014 -04 -29 01:04:11 Comments: 821. Name: Jenni jones on 2014 -04 -29 01:04:29 Comments: 822. Name: Jesse Flagler on 2014 -04 -29 01:05:05 Comments: 823. Name: Debbie Byess on 2014 -04 -29 01:12:56 Comments: 824. Name: Rikki Lalonde on 2014 -04 -29 01:12:58 Comments: 825. Name: Ashley on 2014 -04 -29 01:14:51 Comments: everyone should be able to own chickens! 826. Name: Daphne Goldsberry on 2014 -04 -29 01:17:16 Comments: 827. Name: Amy on 2014 -04 -29 01:20:04 Comments: 828. Name: Libby Britt on 2014 -04 -29 01:22:29 Comments: 829. Name: Deidre Harms on 2014 -04 -29 01:30:52 Comments: 830. Name: charles harms on 2014 -04 -29 01:33:40 Comments: so long as thier kept in humane surroundings and the roosters are within noise regulations. Page 67 of 91 831. Name: Debra Felgar on 2014 -04 -29 01:34:13 Comments: 832. Name: Jenn Ireland on 2014 -04 -29 01:38:39 Comments: Self sustainability is the god given right to everyone. 833. Name: jaime krause on 2014 -04 -29 01:39:34 Comments: 834. Name: Christine Bing on 2014 -04 -29 01:44:04 Comments: 835. Name: Rhonda Ramey on 2014 -04 -29 01:47:32 Comments: 836. Name: Kayla Sims on 2014 -04 -29 01:48:48 Comments: 837. Name: Eden Ecklund on 2014 -04 -29 01:48:59 Comments: 838. Name: kimberlee milliron on 2014 -04 -29 01:49:16 Comments: i believe in this 839. Name: athene gross on 2014 -04 -29 01:49:21 Comments: i think everyone has the right to own chickens. no difference then have a couple dogs. 840. Name: Tammy Storey on 2014 -04 -29 01:49:35 Comments: 841. Name: Michelle McBrayer on 2014 -04 -29 01:50:05 Comments: 842. Name: Katie on 2014 -04 -29 01:50:23 Comments: Chickens for everyone!! 843. Name: alley bradford on 2014 -04 -29 01:50:52 Comments: 844. Name: Selina Pagan on 2014 -04 -29 01:51:08 Comments: Chickens help lower bug population thus creating a happy healthy home Page 68 of 91 environment. 845. Name: jessica on 2014 -04 -29 01:52:31 Comments: 846. Name: Carrie Nye Hartwick on 2014 -04 -29 01:53:20 Comments: 847. Name: Cathy Smith on 2014 -04 -29 01:53:29 Comments: 848. Name: jenny on 2014 -04 -29 01:53:48 Comments: 849. Name: Holly Mccoy on 2014 -04 -29 01:54:06 Comments: 850. Name: Brya Rahn on 2014 -04 -29 01:54:22 Comments: brya1113 @yahoo.com 851. Name: Kelly downs on 2014 -04 -29 01:54:39 Comments: 852. Name: barbara on 2014 -04 -29 01:54:49 Comments: 853. Name: fiona hennessy on 2014 -04 -29 01:54:53 Comments: 854. Name: wendy thurner on 2014 -04 -29 01:55:21 Comments: 855. Name: Emily K. on 2014 -04 -29 01:55:21 Comments: 856. Name: Tammy Lebich -Beech on 2014 -04 -29 01:56:00 Comments: 857. Name: donald cox on 2014 -04 -29 01:56:10 Comments: 858. Name: Tom Knueven on 2014 -04 -29 01:56:31 Page 69 of 91 Comments: 859. Name: Myrtle Conley on 2014 -04 -29 01:59:29 Comments: 860. Name: Andy Kinman on 2014 -04 -29 02:00:57 Comments: 861. Name: Robert Sumner on 2014 -04 -29 02:02:07 Comments: 862. Name: Mari McPherson on 2014 -04 -29 02:03:18 Comments: 863. Name: Brenda Jarrell on 2014 -04 -29 02:03:26 Comments: 864. Name: amie coppedge on 2014 -04 -29 02:03:43 Comments: 865. Name: BeckySue on 2014 -04 -29 02:04:03 Comments: 866. Name: Cathy Willdermood on 2014 -04 -29 02:04:19 Comments: 867. Name: Joshua Lloyd on 2014 -04 -29 02:04:32 Comments: 868. Name: Anne Bureau on 2014 -04 -29 02:05:26 Comments: 869. Name: Adam Mason on 2014 -04 -29 02:07:51 Comments: Americans should be allowed to raise any animal that will provide food or income without a petition 870. Name: Stefan Piwers on 2014 -04 -29 02:07:56 Comments: 871. Name: George Lester on 2014 -04 -29 02:09:21 Comments: Page 70 of 91 872. Name: wayne jackson on 2014 -04 -29 02:10:57 Comments: 873. Name: Kimberley Davis on 2014 -04 -29 02:12:14 Comments: 874. Name: Danielle Clouse on 2014 -04 -29 02:12:33 Comments: 875. Name: Gage Marinelli on 2014 -04 -29 02:13:33 Comments: 876. Name: Ariel on 2014 -04 -29 02:13:57 Comments: Everyone should have chickens, they are MUCH quitter than screaming kids, and barking dogs! 877. Name: Anthony Lewis on 2014 -04 -29 02:14:15 Comments: 878. Name: nicole sandy on 2014 -04 -29 02:15:34 Comments: 879. Name: Bridgette Wynn on 2014 -04 -29 02:16:04 Comments: 880. Name: Jessica Rogers on 2014 -04 -29 02:19:00 Comments: chickens in your back yard are a pleasure and great source of food eggs and meat 881. Name: Laurie Johnston on 2014 -04 -29 02:19:47 Comments: Allow chickens 882. Name: Haley Huddleston on 2014 -04 -29 02:20:55 Comments: 883. Name: Bob heupp on 2014 -04 -29 02:21:18 Comments: 884. Name: Michelle Loper on 2014 -04 -29 02:21:58 Comments: 885. Name: Jodi Blacques on 2014 -04 -29 02:22:55 Page 71 of 91 Comments: 886. Name: linda jenkins on 2014 -04 -29 02:23:14 Comments: 887. Name: Jenny Keefe on 2014 -04 -29 02:23:17 Comments: 888. Name: Marianne Slagle on 2014 -04 -29 02:23:55 Comments: 889. Name: Darin Shaw on 2014 -04 -29 02:24:29 Comments: 890. Name: Beverly Skaggs on 2014 -04 -29 02:24:56 Comments: Eggs from my chickens are fresh and are without any kind of meds pumped into them. Everyone should have the right to raise their own food whether it be a garden or chickens. 891. Name: lee metcalf on 2014 -04 -29 02:25:15 Comments: 892. Name: Jennifer Lucas on 2014 -04 -29 02:26:15 Comments: 893. Name: Stephanie Howard on 2014 -04 -29 02:27:03 Comments: 894. Name: Wayne Taylor on 2014 -04 -29 02:27:45 Comments: 895. Name: Wayne Taylor on 2014 -04 -29 02:27:47 Comments: 896. Name: kathleen rabon on 2014 -04 -29 02:27:54 Comments: Chickens are quiet and peaceful, should be allowed everywhere 897. Name: Lorianne Frisbie on 2014 -04 -29 02:30:45 Comments: 898. Name: Alison on 2014 -04 -29 02:31:26 Comments: Page 72 of 91 899. Name: Linda Taylor - Rollins on 2014 -04 -29 02:32:17 Comments: 900. Name: Rachel Rabenhorst on 2014 -04 -29 02:34:10 Comments: 901. Name: Kendra Darby on 2014 -04 -29 02:38:13 Comments: please allow urban residents the right to be a little mofe self sufficient. 902. Name: Joanne Wiedemann -Wolf on 2014 -04 -29 02:38:17 Comments: 903. Name: Jana cates on 2014 -04 -29 02:38:44 Comments: 904. Name: Melanie Kies on 2014 -04 -29 02:40:48 Comments: 905. Name: Laura Passomonti Praksti on 2014 -04 -29 02:42:19 Comments: 906. Name: Charisse Berryhill on 2014 -04 -29 02:45:17 Comments: Everyone should be able to raise there own food!! 907. Name: Kathy Haan on 2014 -04 -29 02:46:04 Comments: Everyone deserves to raise a little fluff!! 908. Name: Nita deben on 2014 -04 -29 02:46:46 Comments: 909. Name: mike beason on 2014 -04 -29 02:50:25 Comments: 910. Name: Sarah weaver on 2014 -04 -29 02:52:22 Comments: 911. Name: Darlene Estay on 2014 -04 -29 02:52:39 Comments: 912. Name: Janice Keene on 2014 -04 -29 02:54:34 Comments: Page 73 of 91 913. Name: Shannon mayhew on 2014 -04 -29 02:55:23 Comments: Let her have her chickens! 914. Name: Kim Berry on 2014 -04 -29 02:56:42 Comments: Fresh eggs are healthier than store bought and everyone should be able to contribute to the food their family eats. 915. Name: Heather on 2014 -04 -29 02:57:36 Comments: 916. Name: Shae on 2014 -04 -29 02:57:38 Comments: 917. Name: Lindsey on 2014 -04 -29 03:07:37 Comments: 918. Name: Christin Elliott on 2014 -04 -29 03:09:09 Comments: 919. Name: Iinda reed on 2014 -04 -29 03:09:38 Comments: i believe everyone in amrica should have chickens or rsbbits for sustainability 920. Name: Denise (Nikki) Duncan on 2014 -04 -29 03:10:43 Comments: Chickens give so many benefits to a home and a community. Not only providing food but also entertainment, education, responsibility and just a sence of calm by just being around them. So many benefits. 921. Name: amber on 2014 -04 -29 03:14:03 Comments: 922. Name: Thomas Hottman on 2014 -04 -29 03:15:45 Comments: 923. Name: Kenneth Hutchison on 2014 -04 -29 03:16:11 Comments: 924. Name: Christi Stewart on 2014 -04 -29 03:18:43 Comments: 925. Name: karen richey on 2014 -04 -29 03:19:01 Comments: Page 74 of 91 926. Name: Allison Berndt on 2014 -04 -29 03:26:42 Comments: 927. Name: Mary zambrano on 2014 -04 -29 03:34:12 Comments: save the backyard farms! 928. Name: misty wireman on 2014 -04 -29 03:34:46 Comments: 929. Name: dannielle Filpansick on 2014 -04 -29 03:36:16 Comments: 930. Name: Michael Vasicek on 2014 -04 -29 03:36:24 Comments: 931. Name: Kristen Moniz on 2014 -04 -29 03:39:13 Comments: 932. Name: charles new on 2014 -04 -29 03:40:28 Comments: 933. Name: Cassandra Holtby on 2014 -04 -29 03:41:09 Comments: 934. Name: Howard Lofton on 2014 -04 -29 03:42:49 Comments: Let there be chickens 935. Name: Jennifer Madden on 2014 -04 -29 03:43:42 Comments: Everyone deserves to raise their own. 936. Name: Jared Carroll on 2014 -04 -29 03:44:58 Comments: America the beautiful 937. Name: jessica crespo on 2014 -04 -29 03:48:36 Comments: 938. Name: Amanda Swink on 2014 -04 -29 03:50:11 Comments: 939. Name: Paige Burton on 2014 -04 -29 03:53:17 Comments: Page 75 of 91 940. Name: Jerry Landon Fagan III on 2014 -04 -29 03:53:41 Comments: 941. Name: Lynn Bennett on 2014 -04 -29 03:54:24 Comments: 942. Name: Susan Mosa on 2014 -04 -29 04:04:16 Comments: Chickens will cause no harm!! 943. Name: Desiree' Riches on 2014 -04 -29 04:21:11 Comments: Everyone should have the right to raise and grow their own food. 944. Name: Cody white on 2014 -04 -29 04:27:07 Comments: 945. Name: Dawn Clark on 2014 -04 -29 05:01:35 Comments: 946. Name: Marne Long on 2014 -04 -29 05:22:50 Comments: 947. Name: brandy sall on 2014 -04 -29 06:00:27 Comments: 948. Name: Meshele Tomplait on 2014 -04 -29 06:03:03 Comments: 949. Name: Allison Vandiver on 2014 -04 -29 07:00:45 Comments: 950. Name: Rachel Albritton on 2014 -04 -29 07:51:07 Comments: 951. Name: Heather mason on 2014 -04 -29 08:21:25 Comments: 952. Name: Crystal Lam on 2014 -04 -29 09:19:26 Comments: 953. Name: Larry Hummel on 2014 -04 -29 09:27:45 Comments: Page 76 of 91 954. Name: Tammy Hull on 2014 -04 -29 10:15:49 Comments: 955. Name: Pam Snyder on 2014 -04 -29 10:20:01 Comments: 956. Name: Angela Cook on 2014 -04 -29 10:24:47 Comments: 957. Name: lisa meier on 2014 -04 -29 11:03:01 Comments: go chickens! 958. Name: Sarah singleton on 2014 -04 -29 11:07:47 Comments: 959. Name: Kaylyn on 2014 -04 -29 11:10:52 Comments: 960. Name: Sandee Taylor on 2014 -04 -29 11:12:28 Comments: 961. Name: Nichole Gersper on 2014 -04 -29 11:21:37 Comments: 962. Name: Cheryl Postma on 2014 -04 -29 11:21:55 Comments: Allowing dogs but not chickens? A few birds are going to be Tess noisy and more sanitary than a dog. 963. Name: Brandon Carroll on 2014 -04 -29 11:22:29 Comments: 964. Name: aurelia thurman on 2014 -04 -29 11:25:24 Comments: 965. Name: Amanda Gearhart on 2014 -04 -29 11:28:39 Comments: 966. Name: Sandra on 2014 -04 -29 11:42:40 Comments: 967. Name: cheryl on 2014 -04 -29 11:46:06 Page 77 of 91 Comments: 968. Name: shayla boese on 2014 -04 -29 11:56:10 Comments: 969. Name: Laura Lewis on 2014 -04 -29 11:59:42 Comments: 970. Name: Jesse Reitz on 2014 -04 -29 12:01:02 Comments: 971. Name: Kaitlin Calarco on 2014 -04 -29 12:08:31 Comments: 972. Name: Carol Alley on 2014 -04 -29 12:10:32 Comments: 973. Name: Jerri Lynn Sauer on 2014 -04 -29 12:11:06 Comments: 974. Name: Teri McInnis on 2014 -04 -29 12:12:25 Comments: 975. Name: Shannon LaCount on 2014 -04 -29 12:14:27 Comments: Chickens make ppl happy! Everyone should be allowed to have chickens!! 976. Name: Sarah Bray on 2014 -04 -29 12:19:49 Comments: 977. Name: Susan Kilgore on 2014 -04 -29 12:22:16 Comments: 978. Name: Cheryl Deig on 2014 -04 -29 12:23:01 Comments: 979. Name: Beverly Ong on 2014 -04 -29 12:25:21 Comments: 980. Name: Heather Clark on 2014 -04 -29 12:26:58 Comments: 981. Name: Tina Slaughter on 2014 -04 -29 12:27:03 Page 78 of 91 Comments: 982. Name: Trisha Pratt on 2014 -04 -29 12:27:52 Comments: a few hens never hurt anyone!! 983. Name: Chrystal Cammarata on 2014 -04 -29 12:28:45 Comments: 984. Name: Courtney Durham on 2014 -04 -29 12:32:27 Comments: 985. Name: andrea Jackson on 2014 -04 -29 12:35:00 Comments: 986. Name: Erika Barry on 2014 -04 -29 12:35:15 Comments: 987. Name: Nancy McGreevy on 2014 -04 -29 12:35:38 Comments: 988. Name: rachel centner on 2014 -04 -29 12:35:43 Comments: 989. Name: Andrea Clark on 2014 -04 -29 12:37:57 Comments: 990. Name: Roy Nix on 2014 -04 -29 12:41:44 Comments: I raise chickens in my backyard for eggs. I live in the city limits. 991. Name: Randy hinkle on 2014 -04 -29 12:43:14 Comments: 992. Name: milton carter on 2014 -04 -29 12:44:05 Comments: yes to chickens 993. Name: Dawn Ervin on 2014 -04 -29 12:48:03 Comments: 994. Name: Paula Sparks on 2014 -04 -29 12:48:13 Comments: 995. Name: Amanda Eager on 2014 -04 -29 12:48:57 Page 79 of 91 Comments: I see no diffrence between my chickens and peoples dogs &cats! 996. Name: Brooke Hinchey on 2014 -04 -29 12:52:20 Comments: 997. Name: Jay L Crowe on 2014 -04 -29 12:53:26 Comments: Raising chickens is easier, safer, and more rewarding than raising cats or dogs. There is no risk of bites, no midnight barking, and no risk of strays. 998. Name: Elaine Nowell on 2014 -04 -29 12:53:33 Comments: 999. Name: Lisa Gregory on 2014 -04 -29 12:54:27 Comments: 1000. Name: Trish on 2014 -04 -29 12:54:29 Comments: 1001. Name: Stephanie Mann on 2014 -04 -29 13:07:27 Comments: 1002. Name: Torry Creek on 2014 -04 -29 13:08:10 Comments: 1003. Name: amanda ashcraft on 2014 -04 -29 13:18:37 Comments: 1004. Name: ellen green on 2014 -04 -29 13:21:00 Comments: 1005. Name: Sylvain Carle on 2014 -04 -29 13:21:11 Comments: 1006. Name: L Finney on 2014 -04 -29 13:24:10 Comments: even allowing small groups is beneficial to the owner 1007. Name: wendy on 2014 -04 -29 13:28:19 Comments: 1008. Name: Jessica on 2014 -04 -29 13:39:43 Comments: Page 80 of 91 1009. Name: Deborah Eversole on 2014 -04 -29 13:40:28 Comments: 1010. Name: Heather Toohey on 2014 -04 -29 13:43:48 Comments: 1011. Name: Justine Decker on 2014 -04 -29 13:47:50 Comments: 1012. Name: Sarah escott on 2014 -04 -29 13:49:22 Comments: 1013. Name: justin hardy on 2014 -04 -29 14:20:58 Comments: 1014. Name: LaTasha Hawkins on 2014 -04 -29 14:30:00 Comments: 1015. Name: Trisha Rothoff on 2014 -04 -29 14:59:25 Comments: 1016. Name: Peter del Ray on 2014 -04 -29 15:02:26 Comments: 1017. Name: Sara Henslee on 2014 -04 -29 15:24:46 Comments: 1018. Name: Rebecca Costine on 2014 -04 -29 15:45:15 Comments: chickens are small and easy to keep. most people would never even know they are there unless you have a rooster. 1019. Name: Elisha Pollitz on 2014 -04 -29 16:15:29 Comments: 1020. Name: Lisa Geater on 2014 -04 -29 16:47:48 Comments: Please allow backyard chickens for all residents 1021. Name: Karla Kean on 2014 -04 -29 16:50:32 Comments: 1022. Name: Nick Bobish on 2014 -04 -29 16:52:11 Comments: I agree Page 81 of 91 1023. Name: Barbara Shaw on 2014 -04 -29 16:53:40 Comments: missoakley3 @operamail.com 1024. Name: Arianne on 2014 -04 -29 16:55:09 Comments: Good luck! I'm fighting my city on the same issue. 1025. Name: Arthur Torsiello on 2014 -04 -29 16:57:27 Comments: chickens should be allowed in all towns and ciies 1026. Name: Summer Stevens on 2014 -04 -29 17:00:13 Comments: Backyard chickens cause far fewer problems than pet dogs, and yet chickens are banned much more often. :A( 1027. Name: Jan Reuter on 2014 -04 -29 17:00:36 Comments: 1028. Name: Richard Smith on 2014 -04 -29 17:04:11 Comments: 1029. Name: Brandi Spencer on 2014 -04 -29 17:05:19 Comments: Anyone should have the right to be self sufficient, no matter where they live 1030. Name: LeRoy Martinez on 2014 -04 -29 17:11:15 Comments: 1031. Name: deb bino on 2014 -04 -29 17:17:01 Comments: what happen to our freedom! -allow the birds!!! 1032. Name: robert clark on 2014 -04 -29 17:17:06 Comments: 1033. Name: linda chantelois on 2014 -04 -29 17:24:40 Comments: 1034. Name: Arlene Pfeiffer on 2014 -04 -29 17:29:25 Comments: I have had chickens in different areas that I have lived. They bring joy to many with their antics. They help with the gardening and the noise is minimal. I cannot understand why anyone would object to one's keeping chickens. 1035. Name: joe on 2014 -04 -29 17:30:07 Comments: Page 82 of 91 1036. Name: Mark Shaw on 2014 -04 -29 17:32:51 Comments: 1037. Name: gaylord on 2014 -04 -29 17:45:19 Comments: i,am planing to relocate to pinellas fla when i leave virgina 1038. Name: Lori Swindell on 2014 -04 -29 17:46:50 Comments: 1039. Name: Lowell Palm on 2014 -04 -29 17:54:37 Comments: 1040. Name: Deborah Holland on 2014 -04 -29 18:04:50 Comments: people should be able to keep their own chickens 1041. Name: Starr Durant -Rason on 2014 -04 -29 18:09:21 Comments: Where is Pinellas Co? Florida ?? Let anyone keep a small flock of chickens if they want, as long as their intentions are good for the chickens. 1042. Name: Tamara Shurling on 2014 -04 -29 18:10:16 Comments: 1043. Name: joe strach on 2014 -04 -29 18:28:22 Comments: 1044. Name: Richard Herndon on 2014 -04 -29 18:54:43 Comments: 1045. Name: Sonja Loyd on 2014 -04 -29 18:56:19 Comments: i believe anyone should be able to raise their animals,But in citys and close knit neighborhoods should be limited to the amount 1046. Name: Joel H. Eizenstat on 2014 -04 -29 18:58:51 Comments: 1047. Name: Lynn on 2014 -04 -29 18:59:28 Comments: 1048. Name: eileen on 2014 -04 -29 19:16:58 Comments: live and let live. Page 83 of 91 1049. Name: Amanda on 2014 -04 -29 19:18:40 Comments: 1050. Name: Karen Jacobsen on 2014 -04 -29 19:18:40 Comments: 1051. Name: Lin on 2014 -04 -29 19:20:36 Comments: 1052. Name: Deborah J. Mirabeau on 2014 -04 -29 19:24:29 Comments: I have ;had chickens for 6 years, most of my neighbors donn't know I have them. Those who do say they never hear or smell them. 1053. Name: Margaret Shozda on 2014 -04 -29 19:28:15 Comments: 1054. Name: charleen Leonard on 2014 -04 -29 19:35:30 Comments: Keeping chickens isn't much diffrent then exotic bird keeping and I know that's allowed so chickens ought to be allowed as well. 1055. Name: Beverly Taylor on 2014 -04 -29 19:35:55 Comments: 1056. Name: Judy Jacobs on 2014 -04 -29 19:53:56 Comments: This kind of restriction on personal property makes no sense. The law does not serve the people it is supposed to protect, so change the law. It's easy. Just do it. 1057. Name: william mcgunagle on 2014 -04 -29 19:59:05 Comments: 1058. Name: Gina Powell on 2014 -04 -29 20:02:52 Comments: Keep your chickens !!!! 1059. Name: Kimberly Hall on 2014 -04 -29 20:03:52 Comments: 1060. Name: Sheri McNeil on 2014 -04 -29 20:05:35 Comments: although I do not live in your area, I worked with our city to change our code to allow backyard hens. There have been no problems since the ordinance change 3 years ago. In fact, the city went back and loosen the restrictions after the first year and are looking to change it further to allow backyard hens at school, church and community gardens. Page 84 of 91 1061. Name: Christina on 2014 -04 -29 20:06:03 Comments: 1062. Name: patty on 2014 -04 -29 20:11:37 Comments: lay on 1063. Name: ACE on 2014 -04 -29 20:23:00 Comments: 1064. Name: Jay M on 2014 -04 -29 20:38:45 Comments: 1065. Name: Susan Horlick on 2014 -04 -29 20:41:29 Comments: I love my chickens! 1066. Name: Natalie on 2014 -04 -29 20:47:00 Comments: People should be allowed to do what they want on their own property 1067. Name: Deborah Stull on 2014 -04 -29 20:53:54 Comments: 1068. Name: Marilyn Silvers on 2014 -04 -29 20:56:10 Comments: 1069. Name: Robert Magnes on 2014 -04 -29 21:28:19 Comments: 1070. Name: Theresa Melof on 2014 -04 -29 21:33:58 Comments: I had to fight for years to keep my chickens! Lots of scare tactics about how awful it would be. It has been nothing but a bonus to the community with no downside at all! 1071. Name: Lori Lofton on 2014 -04 -29 21:39:23 Comments: 1072. Name: Ronald Williams on 2014 -04 -29 21:43:56 Comments: The food that big companies and with the blessing of the goverment is posioing us, let us grow our own healthy food, you keep you Groth hormones and GMO foods! 1073. Name: Marsha on 2014 -04 -29 21:46:32 Comments: Page 85 of 91 1074. Name: sue king on 2014 -04 -29 21:55:00 Comments: 1075. Name: Lynda Altman on 2014 -04 -29 22:04:09 Comments: 1076. Name: Terry L. Norris on 2014 -04 -29 22:11:18 Comments: As long as they don't keep roosters, there should be no problems keeping backyard chickens. 1077. Name: Karen Barker on 2014 -04 -29 22:19:55 Comments: 1078. Name: Maria Warren on 2014 -04 -29 22:21:27 Comments: Everyone should be able to have their chicks 1079. Name: juliet on 2014 -04 -29 22:22:27 Comments: 1080. Name: Becky Johnson on 2014 -04 -29 22:24:42 Comments: this should include bee keepers, too. 1081. Name: Virginia Stevens on 2014 -04 -29 22:36:17 Comments: Pinellas County: STOP your governmental overreach!!! 1082. Name: Rose Hilliard on 2014 -04 -29 22:47:06 Comments: This is America & citizen's have the right to safe and sustainable food from their own property. The government needs to stay out of it. 1083. Name: Ann Hubbs on 2014 -04 -29 22:50:39 Comments: 1084. Name: Tobiah Trompeter on 2014 -04 -29 22:50:59 Comments: 1085. Name: w Iindauer on 2014 -04 -29 22:59:01 Comments: 1086. Name: Rebekah on 2014 -04 -29 23:20:57 Comments: 1087. Name: Linda O'Hara on 2014 -04 -29 23:36:54 Page 86 of 91 Comments: Chickens are a benefit to all; and backyard chickens are a healthier and more moral option than factory poultry. 1088. Name: Fred Beck on 2014 -04 -29 23:39:55 Comments: Allow backyard poultry. 1089. Name: Esther wisdom on 2014 -04 -29 23:40:49 Comments: Why not be organic This is going green!!! 1090. Name: sue hoffman on 2014 -04 -29 23:51:08 Comments: This is stupid!!! And unreasonableuill 1091. Name: Michael Smith on 2014 -04 -29 23:54:24 Comments: Let them keep there birds 1092. Name: David Cotton on 2014 -04 -30 00:21:36 Comments: don't punish those of us just trying to make ends meet 1093. Name: Carol Munsey on 2014 -04 -30 00:23:24 Comments: 1094. Name: dave beyer on 2014 -04 -30 00:33:41 Comments: 1095. Name: Michael Ryan on 2014 -04 -30 00:45:42 Comments: 1096. Name: Decie McKnight Hattaway on 2014 -04 -30 01:40:26 Comments: 1097. Name: ursel_marcal on 2014 -04 -30 01:40:47 Comments: I have backyard chicken and its the best. I agree not to keep males within city limits. 1098. Name: LJ Lanfranchi on 2014 -04 -30 01:44:14 Comments: LJ 1099. Name: Mark Bales on 2014 -04 -30 01:44:31 Comments: 1100. Name: P Kaufman on 2014 -04 -30 01:59:48 Comments: Being responsible for animal care is a good lesson for children to learn. Page 87 of 91 Providing some of ones own food helps with food security and food safety. 1101. Name: james Comments: on 2014 -04 -30 02:09:28 1102. Name: William Brown on 2014 -04 -30 02:17:11 Comments: 1103. Name: Dawn sommer on 2014 -04 -30 02:17:48 Comments: 1104. Name: Gerard Mantia on 2014 -04 -30 02:19:34 Comments: 1105. Name: Ronald Wehrheim on 2014 -04 -30 02:29:48 Comments: 1106. Name: Vicki Connor on 2014 -04 -30 02:57:06 Comments: With prices as high as they are and the concerns about the quality of our food, why not let people keep chickens in the yard for food. It benefits everyone. Next thing you will tell us that people cant grow their own food. We need to get back to some of the old ways. Maybe we will be a healthier more self reliant country. 1107. Name: leah cruz on 2014 -04 -30 03:08:40 Comments: 1108. Name: servando cruz on 2014 -04 -30 03:12:57 Comments: There are so many benefits of raisng your own chickens. 1109. Name: Ed Burgess on 2014 -04 -30 03:21:40 Comments: 1110. Name: cassandra johnson on 2014 -04 -30 03:36:41 Comments: 1111. Name: Sue Beaty on 2014 -04 -30 03:47:59 Comments: 1112. Name: Marie Mlngus on 2014 -04 -30 04:10:51 Comments: The right to farm comes from God, not government. 1113. Name: David Witchard on 2014 -04 -30 04:35:35 Page 88 of 91 Comments: 1114. Name: michelle Comments: on 2014 -04 -30 04:37:21 1115. Name: Susan Hall on 2014 -04 -30 05:37:15 Comments: 1116. Name: Aura Wright on 2014 -04 -30 06:02:16 Comments: 1117. Name: RL Maiden on 2014 -04 -30 06:20:11 Comments: 1118. Name: Anthony G. Yates on 2014 -04 -30 10:00:12 Comments: A person should be able to raise chickens on their property! 1119. Name: Debbie Cox on 2014 -04 -30 10:16:44 Comments: Every American should have the right to have at least a few chickens to help sustain their families! 1120. Name: Deborah Long on 2014 -04 -30 11:47:09 Comments: 1121. Name: wanda powell on 2014 -04 -30 11:49:46 Comments: 1122. Name: Kathy Moore on 2014 -04 -30 11:52:38 Comments: There is no reason citizens should not be able to keep a few chickens. 1123. Name: Barbara Luedtke on 2014 -04 -30 12:29:44 Comments: 1124. Name: nancy welch on 2014 -04 -30 12:31:15 Comments: 1125. Name: robert belanger on 2014 -04 -30 12:48:31 Comments: 1126. Name: Tery Gohsman on 2014 -04 -30 13:29:44 Comments: Page 89 of 91 1127. Name: Patrick C. Conway on 2014 -04 -30 14:38:19 Comments: 1128. Name: David A Balise on 2014 -04 -30 14:41:03 Comments: we should all have the right to do whatever we like on our property 1129. Name: Friar Mike Loblein on 2014 -04 -30 15:17:27 Comments: We, as a society, have an obligation to return to a more self sufficient lifestyle. We are allowed to have a garden in our yards because it is asthetically pleasing, and we feel better about ourselves when we consume something that we produced. Chickens are in that catagory. There is nothing tastier than a fried egg that came from your own coop. Between the eggs for consumption, the manure that can be used to replenish the soil of our gardens, as well as the personal contentment that comes from observing Mother's creatures. Chickens are a low maintenance, fairly unobtrusive pet, that continually gives back to its caretakers. Allow backyard chickens in Clearwater, Florida. 1130. Name: Annette Rollins on 2014 -04 -30 16:07:26 Comments: 1131. Name: Larry Griffith on 2014 -04 -30 17:58:27 Comments: Chickens have been around for hundreds of years and should be allowed for people to have anywhere they want them.People need their own home grown chickens and eggs that are raised healthy. 1132. Name: Debbie Triacca on 2014 -04 -30 21:35:50 Comments: 1133. Name: Anne Npu;r on 2014 -04 -30 21:51:28 Comments: Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The ability to support oneself is the bottom line. Backyard chickens and homesteading, we want it back. 1134. Name: Lindy Wang on 2014 -04 -30 22:31:29 Comments: I can see forbiding roosters because they make a lot of noise but hens do not bother the neighbord when confined to the owners property. 1135. Name: Sara Hart on 2014 -04 -30 23:03:13 Comments: Chickens are nicer neighbors than dogs! 1136. Name: jose verdi on 2014 -05 -01 01:24:29 Comments: 1137. Name: Richard Sankey on 2014 -05 -01 02:58:32 Comments: if we don't fend for ourselves, who will? Page 90 of 91 1138. Name: cheryl santa on 2014 -05 -01 14:52:30 Comments: Page 91 of 91 City Council Agenda Council Chambers - City Hall Meeting Date:5/1/2014 SUBJECT / RECOMMENDATION: Continue to June 5, 2014: Approve the Annexation of a portion of the road right-of-way located on Belcher Road, north of Sunset Point Road to Montclair Road, including all of the right-of-way within the intersection of North Belcher Road, Montclair Road, and Old Coachman Road, consisting of a portion of Section 06, Township 29 South, Range 16 East; and pass Ordinances 8558-14, 8559-14, and 8560-14 on second reading. (ANX2014-02005) SUMMARY: Review Approval: Cover Memo Item # 8 City Council Agenda Council Chambers - City Hall Meeting Date:5/1/2014 SUBJECT / RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Ordinance 8547-14 on second reading, annexing certain real property whose post office address is 2205 McMullen Booth Road, Clearwater, Florida 33759 into the corporate limits of the city and redefining the boundary lines of the city to include said addition. SUMMARY: Review Approval: Cover Memo Item # 9 Ordinance No. 8547-14 ORDINANCE NO. 8547-14 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA, ANNEXING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF MCMULLEN BOOTH ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 1400 FEET NORTH OF UNION STREET, CONSISTING OF METES & BOUNDS TRACT 32/08 IN SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 28 S, RANGE 16 E, WHOSE POST OFFICE ADDRESS IS 2205 MCMULLEN BOOTH ROAD, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33759, INTO THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY, AND REDEFINING THE BOUNDARY LINES OF THE CITY TO INCLUDE SAID ADDITION; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the owner of the real property described herein and depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A has petitioned the City of Clearwater to annex the property into the City pursuant to Section 171.044, Florida Statutes, and the City has complied with all applicable requirements of Florida law in connection with this ordinance; now, therefore, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA: Section 1. The following-described property is hereby annexed into the City of Clearwater and the boundary lines of the City are redefined accordingly: The East 223.00 feet of the South ½ of the South ¼ of the Northwest ¼ of the Southwest ¼ of Section 33, Township 28 South, Range 16 East, less the East 100.00 feet thereof, Pinellas County, Florida. (ANX2014-01003) The map attached as Exhibit A is hereby incorporated by reference. Section 2. The provisions of this ordinance are found and determined to be consistent with the City of Clearwater Comprehensive Plan. The City Council hereby accepts the dedication of all easements, parks, rights-of-way and other dedications to the public, which have heretofore been made by plat, deed or user within the annexed property. The City Engineer, the City Clerk and the Planning and Development Director are directed to include and show the property described herein upon the official maps and records of the City. Section 3. Notwithstanding any current or future provision of the City of Clearwater Community Development Code, the property owners shall have the right to engage in the permitted use of “general agricultural activities” which is currently allowed pursuant to Pinellas County Code Section 138-432(1) within the Pinellas County R-R, Residential Rural, Zoning District. However, such use shall be limited to the keeping of the number of horses allowed by said Pinellas County Code Section based upon the acreage of the parcel being annexed, alone or in combination with any other parcel joined to it by a recorded Unity of Title. Attachment number 1 \nPage 1 of 2 Item # 9 2 Ordinance No. 8547-14 Section 4. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon adoption. The City Clerk shall file certified copies of this ordinance, including the map attached hereto, with the Clerk of the Circuit Court and with the County Administrator of Pinellas County, Florida, within 7 days after adoption, and shall file a certified copy with the Florida Department of State within 30 days after adoption. PASSED ON FIRST READING AS AMENDED PASSED ON SECOND AND FINAL READING AND ADOPTED George N. Cretekos Mayor Approved as to form: Leslie K. Dougall-Sides Assistant City Attorney Attest: Rosemarie Call City Clerk Attachment number 1 \nPage 2 of 2 Item # 9 Exhibit A CITY O F SAFETY HA RBOR 0 3 0 4 5 2163 2155 29 9 7 29 9 4 30 6 5 2191 30 5 9 2245 2270 29 8 9 2 9 9 2 2 1 1 4 2145 30 2 0 30 9 3 30 8 1 30 2 1 30 5 6 3 0 0 2 29 9 3 2163 2167 2159 2155 30 6 2 30 3 5 30 2 3 30 6 7 30 7 9 30 8 6 30 4 2 30 1 1 2237 2250 2251 2263 22682267 2276 2175 30 5 3 30 6 0 30 2 4 30 6 0 30 3 2 2245 2258 30 9 2 30 5 4 2171 2999 29 8 6 2144 2133 30 3 0 2 1 2 1 2 1 0 9 30 4 0 30 6 9 30 1 3 30 4 0 30 8 0 2199 30 0 8 30 1 6 3 0 5 7 30 3 7 30 2 9 3001 30 4 1 30 2 9 30 4 7 30 7 3 30 9 1 30 8 0 30 1 7 2243 2244 2257 22622261 30 3 6 30 4 8 2238 2239 2273 30 8 5 30 6 8 30 7 4 2225 2256 2231 2269 2249 2255 2295 2265 30 3 0 A UNIO N ST McMULLEN-B OOTH RD LEANNE CT HIWAFFEE ST ST EVEN ST LAUREN LN CIELO CIR E PATRICK PL 66 95 25 29 8 1 29 8 5 29 8 0 2205 2270 30 1 30 2 4 30 3 mp -N o t t o S c a l e - -N o t a S u r v e y - Proposed Annexation Owner(s): Ann D. Adams and Russell C. Witt Case: ANX2014-01003 Site: 2205 McMullen Booth Road Property Size(Acres): 0.469 Land Use Zoning PIN: 33-28-16-00000-320-0800 From : To: RS (County) R-R (County) RS (City) LDR (City) Atlas Page: 245A Attachment number 2 \nPage 1 of 1 Item # 9 City Council Agenda Council Chambers - City Hall Meeting Date:5/1/2014 SUBJECT / RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Ordinance 8548-14 on second reading, amending the future land use plan element of the Comprehensive Plan of the city to designate the land use for certain real property whose post office address is 2205 McMullen Booth Road, Clearwater, Florida 33759, upon annexation into the City of Clearwater, as Residential Suburban (RS). SUMMARY: Review Approval: Cover Memo Item # 10 Ordinance No. 8548-14 ORDINANCE NO. 8548-14 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN ELEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF THE CITY, TO DESIGNATE THE LAND USE FOR CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF MCMULLEN BOOTH ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 1400 FEET NORTH OF UNION STREET, CONSISTING OF METES & BOUNDS TRACT 32/08 IN SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 28 S, RANGE 16 E, WHOSE POST OFFICE ADDRESS IS 2205 MCMULLEN BOOTH ROAD, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33759, UPON ANNEXATION INTO THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, AS RESIDENTIAL SUBURBAN (RS); PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the amendment to the future land use plan element of the comprehensive plan of the City as set forth in this ordinance is found to be reasonable, proper and appropriate, and is consistent with the City's comprehensive plan; now, therefore, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA: Section 1. The future land use plan element of the comprehensive plan of the City of Clearwater is amended by designating the land use category for the hereinafter described property, upon annexation into the City of Clearwater, as follows: Property Land Use Category The East 223.00 feet of the South ½ of the South ¼ of the Northwest ¼ of the Southwest ¼ of Section 33, Township 28 South, Range 16 East, less the East 100.00 feet thereof, Pinellas County, Florida. Residential Suburban (RS) (ANX2014-01003) The map attached as Exhibit A is hereby incorporated by reference. Section 2. The City Council does hereby certify that this ordinance is consistent with the City’s comprehensive plan. Section 3. Notwithstanding any current or future provision of the City of Clearwater Community Development Code, the property owners shall have the right to engage in the permitted use of “general agricultural activities” which is currently allowed pursuant to Pinellas County Code Section 138-432(1) within the Pinellas County R-R, Residential Rural, Zoning District. However, such use shall be limited to the keeping of the number of Attachment number 1 \nPage 1 of 2 Item # 10 2 Ordinance No. 8548-14 horses allowed by said Pinellas County Code Section based upon the acreage of the parcel being annexed, alone or in combination with any other parcel joined to it by a recorded Unity of Title. Section 4. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon adoption, contingent upon and subject to the adoption of Ordinance No. 8547-14. PASSED ON FIRST READING AS AMENDED PASSED ON SECOND AND FINAL READING AND ADOPTED George N. Cretekos Mayor Approved as to form: Leslie K. Dougall-Sides Assistant City Attorney Attest: Rosemarie Call City Clerk Attachment number 1 \nPage 2 of 2 Item # 10 Exhibit A CITY O F SAFETY HA RBOR RS I RS R/OS RSRS0 30 6 5 2191 30 5 9 2245 2270 29 8 9 2 9 9 2 2 1 1 4 2145 30 2 0 30 9 3 30 8 1 30 2 1 30 5 6 3 0 0 2 29 9 3 2163 2167 2159 2155 30 6 2 30 3 5 30 2 3 30 6 7 30 7 9 30 8 6 30 4 2 30 1 1 2237 2250 2251 2263 22682267 2175 30 5 3 30 6 0 30 2 4 30 6 0 30 3 2 2245 2258 30 9 2 30 5 4 2171 29 9 7 2999 29 9 4 29 8 6 2144 2133 30 3 0 2 1 2 1 2 1 0 9 30 4 0 30 6 9 30 1 3 30 4 0 30 8 0 2199 30 0 8 30 1 6 3 0 5 7 3 0 4 530 3 7 30 2 9 3001 30 4 1 30 2 9 2270 30 4 7 30 7 3 30 9 1 30 8 0 30 1 7 2243 2244 2257 22622261 30 3 6 30 4 8 2238 2239 2273 30 8 5 30 6 8 30 7 4 2225 2256 2231 2269 2249 2255 2265 30 3 0 A UNION ST McMULLEN-B OOTH RD LEANNE CT HIWAFFEE ST STEVEN ST LAUREN LN RENAISSA NCE DR CIELO CIR E PATRICK PL 66 299 5 2276 302 5 29 8 1 29 8 5 29 8 0 2205 2155 2163 30 30 3 2295 ump -N o t t o S c a l e - -N o t a S u r v e y - Future Land Use Map Owner(s): Ann D. Adams and Russell C. Witt Case: ANX2014-01003 Site: 2205 McMullen Booth Road Property Size(Acres): 0.469 Land Use Zoning PIN: 33-28-16-00000-320-0800 From : To: RS (County) R-R (County) RS (City) LDR (City) Atlas Page: 245A RS Attachment number 2 \nPage 1 of 1 Item # 10 City Council Agenda Council Chambers - City Hall Meeting Date:5/1/2014 SUBJECT / RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Ordinance 8549-14 on second reading, amending the Zoning Atlas of the city by zoning certain real property whose post office address is 2205 McMullen Booth Road, Clearwater, Florida 33759, upon annexation into the City of Clearwater, as Low Density Residential (LDR). SUMMARY: Review Approval: Cover Memo Item # 11 Ordinance 8549-14 ORDINANCE NO. 8549-14 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE ZONING ATLAS OF THE CITY BY ZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF MCMULLEN BOOTH ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 1400 FEET NORTH OF UNION STREET, CONSISTING OF METES & BOUNDS TRACT 32/08 IN SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 28 S, RANGE 16 E, WHOSE POST OFFICE ADDRESS IS 2205 MCMULLEN BOOTH ROAD, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33759, UPON ANNEXATION INTO THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, AS LOW DENSITY RESIDENTAL (LDR); PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the assignment of a zoning district classification as set forth in this ordinance is found to be reasonable, proper and appropriate, and is consistent with the City's comprehensive plan; now, therefore, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA: Section 1. The following described property located in Pinellas County, Florida, is hereby zoned as indicated upon annexation into the City of Clearwater, and the zoning atlas of the City is amended, as follows: The map attached as Exhibit A is hereby incorporated by reference. Section 2. The City Engineer is directed to revise the zoning atlas of the City in accordance with the foregoing amendment. Section 3. Notwithstanding any current or future provision of the City of Clearwater Community Development Code, the property owners shall have the right to engage in the permitted use of “general agricultural activities” which is currently allowed pursuant to Pinellas County Code Section 138-432(1) within the Pinellas County R-R, Residential Rural, Zoning District. However, such use shall be limited to the keeping of the number of horses allowed by said Pinellas County Code Section based upon the acreage of the parcel being annexed, alone or in combination with any other parcel joined to it by a recorded Unity of Title. Property Zoning District The East 223.00 feet of the South ½ of the South ¼ of the Northwest ¼ of the Southwest ¼ of Section 33, Township 28 South, Range 16 East, less the East 100.00 feet thereof, Pinellas County, Florida. Low Density Residential (LDR) (ANX2014-01003) Attachment number 1 \nPage 1 of 2 Item # 11 2 Ordinance No. 8549-14 Section 4. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon adoption, contingent upon and subject to the adoption of Ordinance No.8547-14. PASSED ON FIRST READING AS AMENDED PASSED ON SECOND AND FINAL READING AND ADOPTED George N. Cretekos Mayor Approved as to form: Leslie K. Dougall-Sides Assistant City Attorney Attest: Rosemarie Call City Clerk Attachment number 1 \nPage 2 of 2 Item # 11 Exhibit A CITY O F SAFETY HA RBOR 0 30 6 5 2191 30 5 9 2245 2270 29 8 9 2 9 9 2 2 1 1 4 2145 30 2 0 30 9 3 30 8 1 30 2 1 30 5 6 3 0 0 2 29 9 3 2163 2167 2159 2155 30 6 2 30 3 5 30 2 3 30 6 7 30 7 9 30 8 6 30 4 2 30 1 1 2237 2250 2251 2263 22682267 2276 2175 30 5 3 30 6 0 30 2 4 30 6 0 30 3 2 2245 2258 30 9 2 30 5 4 2171 29 9 7 2999 29 9 4 2144 2133 30 3 0 2 1 2 1 2 1 0 9 30 4 0 30 6 9 30 1 3 30 4 0 30 8 0 2199 30 0 8 30 1 6 3 0 5 7 3 0 4 530 3 7 30 2 9 3001 30 4 1 30 2 9 30 4 7 2155 2163 30 7 3 30 9 1 30 8 0 30 1 7 2243 2244 2257 22622261 30 3 6 30 4 8 2238 2239 2273 30 8 5 30 6 8 30 7 4 2225 2256 2231 2269 2249 2255 2295 2265 30 3 0 A UNIO N ST McMULLEN-B OOTH RD LEANNE CT HIWAFFEE ST ST EVEN ST LAUREN LN CIELO CIR E PATRICK PL LDR LDR OS/R 6 5 25 29 8 6 2205 2270 30 1 8 30 2 4 30 3 0 p I LMDR MDR -N o t t o S c a l e - -N o t a S u r v e y - Zoning Map Owner(s): Ann D. Adams and Russell C. Witt Case: ANX2014-01003 Site: 2205 McMullen Booth Road Property Size(Acres): 0.469 Land Use Zoning PIN: 33-28-16-00000-320-0800 From : To: RS (County) R-R (County) RS (City) LDR (City) Atlas Page: 245A LDR Attachment number 2 \nPage 1 of 2 Item # 11 Exhibit A Attachment number 2 \nPage 2 of 2 Item # 11 City Council Agenda Council Chambers - City Hall Meeting Date:5/1/2014 SUBJECT / RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Ordinance 8552-14 on second reading, annexing certain real properties whose post office addresses are 1940 North Betty Lane, 1258 Sedeeva Circle North, 1978 North Betty Lane, 2084 Lantana Avenue, 2075 The Mall, and 1241 Union St., all in Clearwater, Florida 33755, together with certain Rights of Way of North Betty Lane, Sedeeva Circle North, and Lantana Avenue, into the corporate limits of the city and redefining the boundary lines of the city to include said addition. SUMMARY: Review Approval: Cover Memo Item # 12 Ordinance No. 8552-14 ORDINANCE NO. 8552-14 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA, ANNEXING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTIES LOCATED GENERALLY EAST OF DOUGLAS AVENUE AND WEST OF KINGS HIGHWAY, NORTH OF SUNSET POINT ROAD AND SOUTH OF UNION STREET, CONSISTING OF PORTIONS OF SECTION 03 TOWNSHIP 29 N, RANGE 15 E, WHOSE POST OFFICE ADDRESSES ARE 1940 NORTH BETTY LANE, 1258 SEDEEVA CIRCLE NORTH, 1978 NORTH BETTY LANE, 2084 LANTANA AVENUE, 2075 THE MALL, 1241 UNION STREET, ALL IN CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33755, TOGETHER WITH CERTAIN RIGHT OF WAYS OF: NORTH BETTY LANE, SEDEEVA CIRCLE NORTH AND LANTANA AVENUE, INTO THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY, AND REDEFINING THE BOUNDARY LINES OF THE CITY TO INCLUDE SAID ADDITION; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the owners of the real properties described herein and depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit B has petitioned the City of Clearwater to annex the properties into the City pursuant to Section 171.044, Florida Statutes, and the City has complied with all applicable requirements of Florida law in connection with this ordinance; now, therefore, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA: Section 1. The following-described properties are hereby annexed into the City of Clearwater and the boundary lines of the City are redefined accordingly: SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT A (ATA2014-01001) The maps attached as Exhibits B and C are hereby incorporated by reference. Section 2. The provisions of this ordinance are found and determined to be consistent with the City of Clearwater Comprehensive Plan. The City Council hereby accepts the dedication of all easements, parks, rights-of-way and other dedications to the public, which have heretofore been made by plat, deed or user within the annexed property. The City Engineer, the City Clerk and the Planning and Development Director are directed to include and show the property described herein upon the official maps and records of the City. Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon adoption. The City Clerk shall file certified copies of this ordinance, including the map attached hereto, with the Clerk of the Circuit Court and with the County Administrator of Pinellas County, Florida, within 7 days after adoption, and shall file a certified copy with the Florida Department of State within 30 days after adoption. Attachment number 1 \nPage 1 of 2 Item # 12 2 Ordinance No. 8552-14 PASSED ON FIRST READING PASSED ON SECOND AND FINAL READING AND ADOPTED George N. Cretekos Mayor Approved as to form: Leslie K. Dougall-Sides Assistant City Attorney Attest: Rosemarie Call City Clerk Attachment number 1 \nPage 2 of 2 Item # 12 Exhibit A LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS ATA2014 -0100 1 ========================================================================================= No. Parcel ID Legal Description Address 1. 03-29-15-83970-000-0550 Lot 55 1940 North Betty Lane Together with all of abutting Right of Way of North Betty Lane. The above in SOUTH BINGHAMTON PARK subdivision, as recorded in PLAT BOOK 12, PAGE 81, of the Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida. ========================================================================================= No. Parcel ID Legal Description Address 2. 03-29-15-28098-000-0120 Lot 12 1258 Sedeeva Circle North 3. 03-29-15-28098-000-0350 Lot 35 1978 North Betty Lane Together with all of the Sedeeva Circle North Right of Way abutting Lot 12. The above in FLORADEL subdivision, as recorded in PLAT BOOK 15, PAGE 7, of the Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida; ========================================================================================= No. Parcel ID Legal Description Address 4. 03-29-15-12060-003-0060 Block C, Lot 6 2084 Lantana Avenue 5. 03-29-15-12060-003-0090 Block C, Lot 9 2075 The Mall Together with all of the Lantana Avenue Right of Way abutting Lot 6, Block C. All the above in BROOKLAWN subdivision, as recorded in PLAT BOOK 13, PAGE 59, of the Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida. ========================================================================================= No. Parcel ID Legal Description Address 6. 03-29-15-15840-001-0160 Block A, Lot 16 1241 Union Street All the above in CLEARDUN subdivision, as recorded in PLAT BOOK 13, PAGE 47, of the Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida. Attachment number 2 \nPage 1 of 1 Item # 12 Exhibit B 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 87.7 45 60 4 0 40 40 15 87.7 12060 15840 46998 80388 ABC F G H K L M M A B C A B C E TRACT "B" 12 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 14 15 16 2021222324 (25) 1 2 10 11 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 2324252627282930 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 2324252627282930 11 12 13141516 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9101112 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21222324 25 26 27 28 29 30 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 151617181920 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 78 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 78 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 78 9 10 12 8 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 18 60 63 30 36 50 21060 I J 1 13 14 15 9 10 11 1 2 3 5 6 7 9 10 1112 13 141516171920212218 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011 100 77 78 79 80 101102103104105 72737475 76 106 107108 109 110 111 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 DUNEDIN UNION ST IDLEWILD DR BE T T Y L N WOO D L AWN TER PALM ST THE MALL PO I NSE T TA AV E BERMUDA ST LANTANA AVE 13 3 1 13 2 1 13 2 5 13 1 7 12 4 4 13 3 0 13 2 2 13 0 9 2083 13 1 0 13 0 0 13 1 0 2025 13 2 5 13 1 7 12 9 5 12 8 7 12 8 3 12 7 7 12 7 3 12 7 1 12 6 7 12 6 5 12 6 1 12 5 3 12 4 9 12 4 5 12 4 1 12 9 1 12 9 6 2020 12 6 0 12 5 6 12 5 2 12 4 6 12 6 5 12 6 1 12 5 7 12 4 5 12 4 3 12 9 0 12 8 4 12 8 0 12 7 2 12 9 3 12 8 2 12 8 3 133 3 2020 2067 13 4 1 13 3 7 2048 2050 2058 20252021 12 5 5 2088 2040 2044 2014 2066 12 5 9 12 7 1 12 6 3 2077 2076 2063 2049 2057 2080 2084 2071 2077 2081 13 4 5 2075 2079 2071 13 5 3 13 4 9 2000 2049 2053 2067 2068 2070 2072 2080 2071 2079 2047 2048 2052 2063 2065 2069 2010 2026 2028 13 0 0 201913 0 1 12 9 1 12 3 5 2022 2024 2028 2030 12 8 6 2021 2027 2022 2026 12 6 6 12 6 2 12 3 4 12 9 2 12 6 6 12 6 0 12 5 4 12 5 0 12 4 6 12 4 2 204412 9 3 12 7 9 12 7 7 12 7 1 12 6 7 12 6 5 12 5 9 12 5 5 12 5 1 12 4 7 12 4 5 12 3 9 12 3 5 12 7 6 12 6 8 12 6 4 12 6 2 12 5 6 12 5 0 12 4 2 12 3 4 12 3 2 2060 2064 206612 8 3 12 7 9 12 7 5 12 6 7 12 5 5 12 5 7 12 5 1 12 4 5 12 3 9 12 3 5 12 7 8 12 7 4 12 7 0 12 6 6 12 6 2 12 6 0 12 5 6 12 5 0 12 4 6 12 4 4 12 3 8 12 3 4 12 5 3 12 7 5 12 7 3 12 7 1 12 6 5 12 6 7 12 6 3 12 5 9 12 4 7 12 4 5 12 4 1 12 3 7 1999 1997 2060 2056 2064 2035 20392043 2017 2075 2031 2 0 1 5 12 4 4 ½ ON.T.S Proposed Annexation Map 1 of 2 Owner(s): MULTIPLE OWNERS Case: ATA2014-01001 Site: Idlewild Septic-to-Sewer Project Area: Six lots south of Union Street, east of Douglas Avenue, north of Sunset Point Road (SR 576), and west of Kings Highway Property Size(Acres): ROW(Acres): 0.762 0.211 Land Use Zoning PIN: 6 PARCELS - SEE NEXT PAGE From : To: RU (County) R-4 (County) RU (City) LMDR (City) Atlas Page: 251B Attachment number 3 \nPage 1 of 2 Item # 12 Exhibit B PIN (Address): 1. 03-29-15-83970-000-0550 (1940 North Betty Lane) 2. 03-29-15-28098-000-0350 (1978 North Betty Lane) 3. 03-29-15-12060-003-0060 (2084 Lantana Avenue) 4. 03-29-15-28098-000-0120 (1258 Sedeeva Circle North) 5. 03-29-15-12060-003-0090 (2075 The Mall) 6. 03-29-15-15840-001-0160 (1241 Union Street) Attachment number 3 \nPage 2 of 2 Item # 12 Exhibit C LAKE 60 60 60 60 60 60 6060 60 60 80 60 80 38 30 60 60 60 40 60 38 60 60 45 45 60 45 30 40 3 0 40 28098 83 9 7 0 87912 M O O G C 4 6 12 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 12345678910111213 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38394041424344 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 7 8 9 16 17 18 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19202122 1234 5 10 11 12 13 14 12 13 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 6 7 1415 1617 1819 2021 2223 2425 2627 2829 3233 3435 3637 3839 4041 4243 4445 4647 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 5 6 7 12 13 14 5 6 7 8 4 5 6 7 8 22 1 1 1 1 1 1 BE T T Y L N STAT E ST W O O D L AW N T E R SEDEEVA CIR N CHENANGO AVE BERTLAND WAY COLES RD MACOMBER AVE ALOHA LN 12 9 0 1950 1952 12 9 4 12 9 0 12 8 6 12 8 2 12 7 8 12 7 4 1918 1942 1969 13 2 7 1928 2014 12 2 4 13 1 0 13 0 0 2025 1979 1971 13 2 9 1927 1925 1923 1913 1915 19 17 12 1 9 12 1 5 1918 1924 1926 1932 1938 1936 1940 1920 1928 1920 1947 1949 19 33 1943 12 3 0 1946 1952 1954 1958 1960 1962 1964 12 8 8 12 8 4 12 8 0 12 7 6 12 7 4 12 8 7 12 7 9 12 7 5 12 7 3 12 7 1 12 6 7 1961 196912 5 5 12 5 1 12 3 7 1239 1278 1276 1274 1272 1270 1268 1266 1264 1260 1256 1244 1240 1236 1234 1230 12 9 5 12 9 1 12 8 7 12 8 3 12 7 7 12 7 3 12 7 1 12 6 7 12 6 5 12 6 1 12 5 3 12 4 9 12 4 5 12 4 1 12 3 5 12 3 1 12 2 5 12 9 6 12 5 2 12 4 6 1981 12 3 1 12 2 6 12 2 0 12 3 3 12 2 5 12 3 2 12 2 6 12 2 9 12 3 3 12 3 7 1910 1936 1932 12 7 3 1938 1936 1930 12 9 5 12 4 4 1940 1926 12 9 5 1992 1994 3 1935 1921 1919 1927 1931 1933 1937 12 8 7 1918 1940 1944 1921 1923 1925 1927 1929 1937 1941 12 8 9 12 8 5 12 8 1 12 7 7 1978 1974 12 8 3 1963 1245 1249 1251 1257 1261 1258 12 8 6 12 6 12 6 12 6 0 12 5 6 12 3 12 3 4 1999 1997 1987 1996 1995 7 12 2 4 12 1 8 12 1 6 12 1 6 2 12 4 4 ON.T.S Proposed Annexation Map 2 of 2 Owner(s): MULTIPLE OWNERS Case: ATA2014-01001 Site: Idlewild Septic-to-Sewer Project Area: Six lots south of Union Street, east of Douglas Avenue, north of Sunset Point Road (SR 576), and west of Kings Highway Property Size(Acres): ROW(Acres): 0.762 0.211 Land Use Zoning PIN: 6 PARCELS - SEE NEXT PAGE From : To: RU (County) R-4 (County) RU (City) LMDR (City) Atlas Page: 251B Attachment number 4 \nPage 1 of 2 Item # 12 Exhibit C PIN (Address): 1. 03-29-15-83970-000-0550 (1940 North Betty Lane) 2. 03-29-15-28098-000-0350 (1978 North Betty Lane) 3. 03-29-15-12060-003-0060 (2084 Lantana Avenue) 4. 03-29-15-28098-000-0120 (1258 Sedeeva Circle North) 5. 03-29-15-12060-003-0090 (2075 The Mall) 6. 03-29-15-15840-001-0160 (1241 Union Street) Attachment number 4 \nPage 2 of 2 Item # 12 City Council Agenda Council Chambers - City Hall Meeting Date:5/1/2014 SUBJECT / RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Ordinance 8553-14 on second reading, amending the future land use plan element of the Comprehensive Plan of the city to designate the land use for certain real properties whose post office addresses are 1940 North Betty Lane, 1258 Sedeeva Circle North, 1978 North Betty Lane, 2084 Lantana Avenue, 2075 The Mall, and 1241 Union St., all in Clearwater, Florida 33755, together with certain Rights of Way of North Betty Lane, Sedeeva Circle North, and Lantana Avenue, upon annexation into the City of Clearwater, as Residential Urban (RU). SUMMARY: Review Approval: Cover Memo Item # 13 Ordinance No. 8553-14 ORDINANCE NO. 8553-14 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN ELEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF THE CITY, TO DESIGNATE THE LAND USE FOR CERTAIN REAL PROPERTIES LOCATED GENERALLY EAST OF DOUGLAS AVENUE AND WEST OF KINGS HIGHWAY, NORTH OF SUNSET POINT ROAD AND SOUTH OF UNION STREET, CONSISTING OF PORTIONS OF SECTION 03 TOWNSHIP 29 N, RANGE 15 E, WHOSE POST OFFICE ADDRESSES ARE 1940 NORTH BETTY LANE, 1258 SEDEEVA CIRCLE NORTH, 1978 NORTH BETTY LANE, 2084 LANTANA AVENUE, 2075 THE MALL, 1241 UNION STREET, ALL IN CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33755, TOGETHER WITH CERTAIN RIGHT OF WAYS OF: NORTH BETTY LANE, SEDEEVA CIRCLE NORTH AND LANTANA AVENUE, UPON ANNEXATION INTO THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, AS RESIDENTIAL URBAN (RU), PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the amendment to the future land use plan element of the comprehensive plan of the City as set forth in this ordinance is found to be reasonable, proper and appropriate, and is consistent with the City's comprehensive plan; now, therefore, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA: Section 1. The future land use plan element of the comprehensive plan of the City of Clearwater is amended by designating the land use category for the hereinafter described property, upon annexation into the City of Clearwater, as follows: Property Land Use Category SEE EXHIBIT A Residential Urban (RU) (ATA2014-01001) The maps attached as Exhibit B and C are hereby incorporated by reference. Section 2. The City Council does hereby certify that this ordinance is consistent with the City’s comprehensive plan. Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon adoption, contingent upon and subject to the adoption of Ordinance No. 8552-14. PASSED ON FIRST READING Attachment number 1 \nPage 1 of 2 Item # 13 2 Ordinance No. 8553-14 PASSED ON SECOND AND FINAL READING AND ADOPTED George N. Cretekos Mayor Approved as to form: Leslie K. Dougall-Sides Assistant City Attorney Attest: Rosemarie Call City Clerk Attachment number 1 \nPage 2 of 2 Item # 13 Exhibit A LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS ATA2014 -0100 1 ========================================================================================= No. Parcel ID Legal Description Address 1. 03-29-15-83970-000-0550 Lot 55 1940 North Betty Lane Together with all of abutting Right of Way of North Betty Lane. The above in SOUTH BINGHAMTON PARK subdivision, as recorded in PLAT BOOK 12, PAGE 81, of the Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida. ========================================================================================= No. Parcel ID Legal Description Address 2. 03-29-15-28098-000-0120 Lot 12 1258 Sedeeva Circle North 3. 03-29-15-28098-000-0350 Lot 35 1978 North Betty Lane Together with all of the Sedeeva Circle North Right of Way abutting Lot 12. The above in FLORADEL subdivision, as recorded in PLAT BOOK 15, PAGE 7, of the Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida; ========================================================================================= No. Parcel ID Legal Description Address 4. 03-29-15-12060-003-0060 Block C, Lot 6 2084 Lantana Avenue 5. 03-29-15-12060-003-0090 Block C, Lot 9 2075 The Mall Together with all of the Lantana Avenue Right of Way abutting Lot 6, Block C. All the above in BROOKLAWN subdivision, as recorded in PLAT BOOK 13, PAGE 59, of the Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida. ========================================================================================= No. Parcel ID Legal Description Address 6. 03-29-15-15840-001-0160 Block A, Lot 16 1241 Union Street All the above in CLEARDUN subdivision, as recorded in PLAT BOOK 13, PAGE 47, of the Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida. Attachment number 2 \nPage 1 of 1 Item # 13 Exhibit B 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 87.7 45 60 4 0 40 40 15 87.7 12060 15840 46998 80388 ABC F G H K L M A B C A B C E TRACT "B" 12 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 14 15 16 2021222324 (25) 1 2 10 11 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 2324252627282930 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 2324252627282930 11 12 13 14 1516 17 1 234 5 6 7 8 9101112 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21222324 25 26 27 28 29 30 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 151617181920 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 78 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 78 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 78 9 10 12 8 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 18 60 63 30 36 50 21060 I J 11 13 14 15 6 9 10 11 1 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 1112 13 141516171920212218 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011 95 96 97 98 99 100 77 78 79 80 101102103104105 72737475 76 106 107108 109 110 111 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 DUNEDIN RU RU RU RU RM RU RU RU RM RU UNION ST IDLEWILD DR BETTY LN WOO DL AWN TE R PALM ST THE MALL PO I NSE T TA AV E BERMUDA ST LANTANA AVE 13 3 1 13 1 7 13 4 1 12 4 4 2014 2066 12 7 1 12 6 3 13 3 0 13 2 2 2080 13 4 5 2068 2070 2072 13 1 0 13 0 0 2026 2028 13 1 0 13 0 0 2025 13 2 5 13 1 7 13 0 1 12 9 5 12 8 7 12 8 3 12 7 7 12 7 3 12 6 5 12 6 1 12 5 3 12 4 9 12 4 5 12 4 1 2022 12 9 1 2020 2022 12 6 0 12 5 6 12 5 2 12 4 6 12 6 5 12 6 1 12 5 7 12 4 5 12 4 3 12 9 0 12 8 4 12 8 0 12 6 6 12 9 3 12 4 5 12 8 2 12 8 3 12 6 3 2060 1333 13 2 1 13 2 5 2020 2067 13 3 7 2048 2050 2058 20252021 12 5 5 2088 2040 2044 12 5 9 2077 2076 2063 2049 2057 2084 2071 2077 2081 2075 2079 2071 13 5 3 13 4 9 2000 2049 2053 2067 2080 13 0 9 2071 2079 2083 2047 2048 2052 2063 2065 2069 2010 2019 12 9 1 12 7 1 12 6 7 12 3 5 2024 2028 2030 12 9 6 12 8 6 2021 20272026 12 6 6 12 6 2 12 3 4 12 3 5 12 9 2 12 7 2 12 6 0 12 5 4 12 5 0 12 4 6 12 4 2 2044 12 9 3 12 7 9 12 7 7 12 7 1 12 6 7 12 6 5 12 5 9 12 5 5 12 5 1 12 4 7 12 4 5 12 3 9 12 3 5 12 7 6 12 6 8 12 6 4 12 6 2 12 5 6 12 5 0 12 4 2 12 3 4 12 3 2 2060 2064 2066 12 8 3 12 7 9 12 7 5 12 6 7 12 5 5 12 5 7 12 5 1 12 3 9 12 3 5 12 7 8 12 7 4 12 7 0 12 6 6 12 6 2 12 6 0 12 5 6 12 5 0 12 4 6 12 4 4 12 3 8 12 3 4 12 3 0 12 5 3 12 7 5 12 7 3 12 7 1 12 6 5 12 6 7 12 5 9 12 4 7 12 4 5 12 4 1 12 3 7 12 3 5 1999 1997 2056 2064 2035 20392043 2017 2075 20312015 12 4 4 ½ ON.T.S Future Land Use Map 1 of 2 Owner(s): MULTIPLE OWNERS Case: ATA2014-01001 Site: Idlewild Septic-to-Sewer Project Area: Six lots south of Union Street, east of Douglas Avenue, north of Sunset Point Road (SR 576), and west of Kings Highway Property Size(Acres): ROW(Acres): 0.762 0.211 Land Use Zoning PIN: 6 PARCELS - SEE NEXT PAGE From : To: RU (County) R-4 (County) RU (City) LMDR (City) Atlas Page: 251B RU RU RU Attachment number 3 \nPage 1 of 2 Item # 13 Exhibit B PIN (Address): 1. 03-29-15-83970-000-0550 (1940 North Betty Lane) 2. 03-29-15-28098-000-0350 (1978 North Betty Lane) 3. 03-29-15-12060-003-0060 (2084 Lantana Avenue) 4. 03-29-15-28098-000-0120 (1258 Sedeeva Circle North) 5. 03-29-15-12060-003-0090 (2075 The Mall) 6. 03-29-15-15840-001-0160 (1241 Union Street) Attachment number 3 \nPage 2 of 2 Item # 13 Exhibit C LA K 60 60 60 60 60 60 6060 60 60 80 60 80 38 30 60 60 60 40 60 38 60 60 45 45 60 45 30 40 3 0 40 28098 83 9 7 0 87912 M O O G C 4 6 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 12345678910111213 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38394041424344 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 6 7 8 9 15 16 17 18 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 1920212223 1234 5 10 11 12 13 14 12 13 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 6 7 1415 1617 1819 2021 2223 2425 2627 2829 3233 3435 3637 3839 4041 4243 4445 4647 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 14 5 6 7 12 13 14 5 6 7 8 4 5 6 7 8 22 1 1 1 1 1 1 RU RU RU RU RU R/OS RU RU RU RM RU RU BE T T Y L N STAT E ST WOODLAWN TER SEDEEVA CIR N CHENANGO AVE BERTLAND WAY COLES RD MACOMBER AVE ALOHA LN 12 9 0 1910 1936 1932 1950 1952 12 9 4 12 9 0 12 8 6 12 8 2 12 7 8 12 7 4 1938 1936 1930 1918 1942 1969 13 2 7 19261928 2014 12 2 4 13 1 0 13 0 0 1994 2025 1979 1971 13 2 9 1925 1923 1913 1915 1917 12 1 9 12 1 5 1918 1924 1926 1932 1938 1936 1940 1920 1928 1918 1920 12 8 5 1949 1933 1943 12 3 0 1946 1952 1954 1958 1960 1962 1964 12 8 8 12 8 4 12 8 0 12 7 6 12 7 4 1974 12 8 7 12 7 9 12 7 5 12 7 3 12 7 1 1961 1963 12 5 5 12 5 1 12 3 7 1239 1278 1276 1274 1272 1270 1268 1266 1264 1260 1256 1244 1240 1236 1234 1230 12 9 5 12 9 1 12 8 7 12 8 3 12 7 7 12 7 3 12 7 1 12 6 7 12 6 5 12 6 1 12 5 3 12 4 9 12 4 5 12 4 1 12 3 5 12 3 1 12 2 5 12 5 2 12 4 6 1981 1987 12 2 4 12 3 1 12 2 6 12 2 0 12 1 6 12 3 3 12 2 5 12 3 2 12 2 6 12 2 1 12 2 9 12 3 3 12 3 7 12 7 3 12 9 5 12 4 4 1940 12 9 5 1992 1927 13 1935 1921 1919 1927 1931 1933 1937 12 8 7 1940 1944 1921 1923 1925 1927 1929 1937 1941 12 8 9 12 8 1 12 7 7 1947 1978 12 8 3 12 6 7 1969 1245 1249 1251 1257 1261 1258 12 9 6 12 8 6 12 12 6 12 6 0 12 5 6 12 3 12 3 4 1999 1997 1996 1995 17 12 1 8 12 1 6 12 2 3 12 2 2 12 4 4 ON.T.S Future Land Use Map 2 of 2 Owner(s): MULTIPLE OWNERS Case: ATA2014-01001 Site: Idlewild Septic-to-Sewer Project Area: Six lots south of Union Street, east of Douglas Avenue, north of Sunset Point Road (SR 576), and west of Kings Highway Property Size(Acres): ROW(Acres): 0.762 0.211 Land Use Zoning PIN: 6 PARCELS - SEE NEXT PAGE From : To: RU (County) R-4 (County) RU (City) LMDR (City) Atlas Page: 251B RU RU RU Attachment number 4 \nPage 1 of 2 Item # 13 Exhibit C PIN (Address): 1. 03-29-15-83970-000-0550 (1940 North Betty Lane) 2. 03-29-15-28098-000-0350 (1978 North Betty Lane) 3. 03-29-15-12060-003-0060 (2084 Lantana Avenue) 4. 03-29-15-28098-000-0120 (1258 Sedeeva Circle North) 5. 03-29-15-12060-003-0090 (2075 The Mall) 6. 03-29-15-15840-001-0160 (1241 Union Street) Attachment number 4 \nPage 2 of 2 Item # 13 City Council Agenda Council Chambers - City Hall Meeting Date:5/1/2014 SUBJECT / RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Ordinance 8554-14 on second reading, amending the Zoning Atlas of the city by zoning certain real properties whose post office addresses are 1940 North Betty Lane, 1258 Sedeeva Circle North, 1978 North Betty Lane, 2084 Lantana Avenue, 2075 The Mall, and 1241 Union St., all in Clearwater, Florida 33755, together with certain Rights of Way of North Betty Lane, Sedeeva Circle North, and Lantana Avenue, upon annexation into the City of Clearwater, as Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR). SUMMARY: Review Approval: Cover Memo Item # 14 Ordinance No. 8554.14 ORDINANCE NO. 8554-14 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE ZONING ATLAS OF THE CITY BY ZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTIES LOCATED GENERALLY EAST OF DOUGLAS AVENUE AND WEST OF KINGS HIGHWAY, NORTH OF SUNSET POINT ROAD AND SOUTH OF UNION STREET, CONSISTING OF PORTIONS OF SECTION 03 TOWNSHIP 29 N, RANGE 15 E, WHOSE POST OFFICE ADDRESSES ARE 1940 NORTH BETTY LANE, 1258 SEDEEVA CIRCLE NORTH, 1978 NORTH BETTY LANE, 2084 LANTANA AVENUE, 2075 THE MALL, 1241 UNION STREET, ALL IN CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33755, TOGETHER WITH CERTAIN RIGHT OF WAYS OF: NORTH BETTY LANE, SEDEEVA CIRCLE NORTH AND LANTANA AVENUE, UPON ANNEXATION INTO THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, AS LOW MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTAL (LMDR); PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the assignment of a zoning district classification as set forth in this ordinance is found to be reasonable, proper and appropriate, and is consistent with the City's comprehensive plan; now, therefore, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA: Section 1. The following described property located in Pinellas County, Florida, is hereby zoned as indicated upon annexation into the City of Clearwater, and the zoning atlas of the City is amended, as follows: The maps attached as Exhibit B and C are hereby incorporated by reference. Section 2. The City Engineer is directed to revise the zoning atlas of the City in accordance with the foregoing amendment. Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon adoption, contingent upon and subject to the adoption of Ordinance No. 8552-14. PASSED ON FIRST READING Property Zoning District SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT A Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) (ATA2014-01001) Attachment number 1 \nPage 1 of 2 Item # 14 2 Ordinance No. 8554-14 PASSED ON SECOND AND FINAL READING AND ADOPTED George N. Cretekos Mayor Approved as to form: Leslie K. Dougall-Sides Assistant City Attorney Attest: Rosemarie Call City Clerk Attachment number 1 \nPage 2 of 2 Item # 14 Exhibit A LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS ATA2014 -0100 1 ========================================================================================= No. Parcel ID Legal Description Address 1. 03-29-15-83970-000-0550 Lot 55 1940 North Betty Lane Together with all of abutting Right of Way of North Betty Lane. The above in SOUTH BINGHAMTON PARK subdivision, as recorded in PLAT BOOK 12, PAGE 81, of the Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida. ========================================================================================= No. Parcel ID Legal Description Address 2. 03-29-15-28098-000-0120 Lot 12 1258 Sedeeva Circle North 3. 03-29-15-28098-000-0350 Lot 35 1978 North Betty Lane Together with all of the Sedeeva Circle North Right of Way abutting Lot 12. The above in FLORADEL subdivision, as recorded in PLAT BOOK 15, PAGE 7, of the Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida; ========================================================================================= No. Parcel ID Legal Description Address 4. 03-29-15-12060-003-0060 Block C, Lot 6 2084 Lantana Avenue 5. 03-29-15-12060-003-0090 Block C, Lot 9 2075 The Mall Together with all of the Lantana Avenue Right of Way abutting Lot 6, Block C. All the above in BROOKLAWN subdivision, as recorded in PLAT BOOK 13, PAGE 59, of the Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida. ========================================================================================= No. Parcel ID Legal Description Address 6. 03-29-15-15840-001-0160 Block A, Lot 16 1241 Union Street All the above in CLEARDUN subdivision, as recorded in PLAT BOOK 13, PAGE 47, of the Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida. Attachment number 2 \nPage 1 of 1 Item # 14 Exhibit B 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 87.7 45 60 40 40 40 15 87.7 12060 15840 46998 80388 ABC F G H K L M M A B C A B C E TRACT "B" 12 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 14 15 16 21222324 (25) 1 2 10 11 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 232425262728293031 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 232425262728293031 10 11 12 13 14 1516 17 1 234 5 6 7 8 9101112 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21222324 25 26 27 28 29 30 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 151617181920 21 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 78 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 78 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 78 9 10 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 18 60 63 30 36 50 210 I J 11 13 14 15 16 9 10 11 1 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 1112 13 141516171920212218 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011 97 98 99 100 77 78 79 80 101102103104105 72737475 76 106 107108 109 110 111 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 DUNEDIN UNION ST IDLEWILD DR BETTY LN WOODLAWN TER PALM ST THE MALL PO I NSE T TA AV E BERMUDA ST LANTANA AVE LMDR MDR LMDR 13 3 1 13 2 1 13 2 5 13 1 7 12 4 4 13 3 0 13 2 2 13 0 9 2083 13 1 0 13 0 0 13 1 0 2025 13 2 5 13 1 7 12 9 5 12 8 7 12 8 3 12 7 7 12 7 3 12 7 1 12 6 7 12 6 5 12 6 1 12 5 3 12 4 9 12 4 5 12 4 1 12 3 5 12 9 1 12 9 6 2020 12 6 0 12 5 6 12 5 2 12 4 6 12 6 5 12 9 0 12 8 4 12 8 0 12 7 2 12 9 3 12 8 2 12 8 3 133 3 LMDR LMDR 2020 2067 13 4 1 13 3 7 2048 2050 2058 20252021 12 5 5 2088 2040 2044 2014 2066 12 5 9 12 7 1 12 6 3 2077 2076 2063 2049 2057 2080 2084 2071 2077 2081 13 4 5 207 207 207 13 4 9 2000 2049 2053 2067 2068 2070 2072 2080 2071 2079 2047 2048 2052 2063 2065 2069 2010 2026 2028 13 0 0 201913 0 1 12 9 1 2022 2024 2028 2030 12 8 6 2021 2027 2022 2026 12 6 6 12 6 2 12 3 4 12 6 1 12 5 7 12 4 5 12 4 3 12 3 5 12 9 2 12 6 6 12 6 0 12 5 4 12 5 0 12 4 6 12 4 2 12 3 1 204412 9 3 12 7 9 12 7 7 12 7 1 12 6 7 12 6 5 12 5 9 12 5 5 12 5 1 12 4 7 12 4 5 12 3 9 12 3 5 12 7 6 12 6 8 12 6 4 12 6 2 12 5 6 12 5 0 12 4 2 12 3 4 12 3 2 2060 2064 206612 8 3 12 7 9 12 7 5 12 6 7 12 5 5 12 5 7 12 5 1 12 4 5 12 3 9 12 3 5 12 3 3 12 7 8 12 7 4 12 7 0 12 6 6 12 6 2 12 6 0 12 5 6 12 5 0 12 4 6 12 4 4 12 3 8 12 3 4 12 3 0 12 5 3 12 7 5 12 7 3 12 7 1 12 6 5 12 6 7 12 6 3 12 5 9 12 4 7 12 4 5 12 4 1 12 3 7 12 3 5 1999 1997 2060 2056 2064 2035 20392043 2017 2075 2031 2 0 1 5 12 4 4 ½ ON.T.S Zoning Map 1 of 2 Owner(s): MULTIPLE OWNERS Case: ATA2014-01001 Site: Idlewild Septic-to-Sewer Project Area: Six lots south of Union Street, east of Douglas Avenue, north of Sunset Point Road (SR 576), and west of Kings Highway Property Size(Acres): ROW(Acres): 0.762 0.211 Land Use Zoning PIN: 6 PARCELS - SEE NEXT PAGE From : To: RU (County) R-4 (County) RU (City) LMDR (City) Atlas Page: 251B LMDR LM D R Attachment number 3 \nPage 1 of 2 Item # 14 Exhibit B PIN (Address): 1. 03-29-15-83970-000-0550 (1940 North Betty Lane) 2. 03-29-15-28098-000-0350 (1978 North Betty Lane) 3. 03-29-15-12060-003-0060 (2084 Lantana Avenue) 4. 03-29-15-28098-000-0120 (1258 Sedeeva Circle North) 5. 03-29-15-12060-003-0090 (2075 The Mall) 6. 03-29-15-15840-001-0160 (1241 Union Street) Attachment number 3 \nPage 2 of 2 Item # 14 Exhibit C LAKE 60 60 60 60 60 60 6060 60 60 80 60 80 38 30 60 60 60 40 60 38 60 60 45 45 60 45 30 40 3 0 40 28098 83 9 7 0 87912 M O O G C 4 5 6 11 12 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 12345678910111213 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38394041424344 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 7 8 9 16 17 18 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19202122 1234 5 10 11 12 13 14 12 13 2122 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 6 7 8 15 1617 1819 2021 2223 2425 2627 2829 3435 3637 3839 4041 4243 4445 4647 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 5 6 7 13 14 6 7 8 4 5 6 7 8 22 1 1 1 1 1 1 BE T T Y L N STAT E ST SEDEEVA CIR N CHENANGO AVE BERTLAND WAY COLES RD MACOMBER AVE ALOHA LN LMDR OS/R LMDR MDR 12 9 0 1950 1952 12 9 4 12 9 0 12 8 6 1942 1969 13 2 7 12 4 4 1928 2014 12 2 4 13 1 0 13 0 0 2025 1979 1971 13 2 9 1927 1925 1923 1913 1915 19 17 12 1 9 1918 1924 1926 1932 1938 1936 1940 1920 1928 1920 1947 1949 19 33 1943 12 3 0 1946 1952 1954 1958 1960 1962 1964 12 8 8 12 8 4 12 8 0 12 7 6 12 7 4 12 8 7 12 7 9 12 7 5 12 7 3 12 7 1 12 6 7 1961 196912 5 5 12 5 1 12 3 7 1239 1278 1276 1274 1272 1270 1268 1266 1264 1260 1256 1244 1240 1236 1234 1230 12 9 5 12 9 1 12 8 7 12 8 3 12 7 7 12 7 3 12 7 1 12 6 7 12 5 3 12 4 9 12 4 5 12 4 1 12 3 5 12 3 1 12 2 5 12 9 6 12 6 0 12 5 6 12 5 2 12 4 6 1981 12 1 6 12 3 1 12 2 6 12 2 0 12 3 3 12 2 5 12 3 2 12 2 6 12 2 9 12 3 3 12 3 7 LMDR LMDR 1936 1932 12 8 2 12 7 8 12 7 4 12 7 3 1938 1936 1930 1918 12 9 5 1940 1926 12 9 5 2010 1992 1994 12 1 5 1935 1921 1919 1927 1931 1933 1937 12 8 7 1940 1944 1921 1923 1925 1927 1929 1937 1941 12 8 9 12 8 5 12 8 1 12 7 7 1978 1974 12 8 3 1963 1245 1249 1251 1257 1261 1258 12 6 5 12 6 1 2022 12 8 6 12 6 6 12 6 2 12 3 2 12 3 4 1999 1997 1987 1996 1995 7 12 2 4 12 1 8 12 1 6 2 0 12 4 4 ½ ON.T.S Zoning Map 2 of 2 Owner(s): MULTIPLE OWNERS Case: ATA2014-01001 Site: Idlewild Septic-to-Sewer Project Area: Six lots south of Union Street, east of Douglas Avenue, north of Sunset Point Road (SR 576), and west of Kings Highway Property Size(Acres): ROW(Acres): 0.762 0.211 Land Use Zoning PIN: 6 PARCELS - SEE NEXT PAGE From : To: RU (County) R-4 (County) RU (City) LMDR (City) Atlas Page: 251B LMDR LMDR LM D R Attachment number 4 \nPage 1 of 2 Item # 14 Exhibit C PIN (Address): 1. 03-29-15-83970-000-0550 (1940 North Betty Lane) 2. 03-29-15-28098-000-0350 (1978 North Betty Lane) 3. 03-29-15-12060-003-0060 (2084 Lantana Avenue) 4. 03-29-15-28098-000-0120 (1258 Sedeeva Circle North) 5. 03-29-15-12060-003-0090 (2075 The Mall) 6. 03-29-15-15840-001-0160 (1241 Union Street) Attachment number 4 \nPage 2 of 2 Item # 14 City Council Agenda Council Chambers - City Hall Meeting Date:5/1/2014 SUBJECT / RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Ordinance 8555-14 on second reading, annexing certain real property whose post office address is 3119 Johns Parkway into the corporate limits of the city and redefining the boundary lines of the city to include said addition. SUMMARY: Review Approval: Cover Memo Item # 15 Ordinance No. 8555-14 ORDINANCE NO. 8555-14 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA, ANNEXING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF JOHNS PARKWAY, APPROXIMATELY 360 FEET EAST OF MCMULLEN-BOOTH ROAD (COUNTY ROAD 611), CONSISTING OF LOT 3, JOHNS PARKWAY SUBDIVISION, WHOSE POST OFFICE ADDRESS IS 3119 JOHNS PARKWAY, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33759, TOGETHER WITH ALL ABUTTING RIGHT OF WAY OF JOHNS PARKWAY, INTO THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY, AND REDEFINING THE BOUNDARY LINES OF THE CITY TO INCLUDE SAID ADDITION; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the owner of the real property described herein and depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A has petitioned the City of Clearwater to annex the property into the City pursuant to Section 171.044, Florida Statutes, and the City has complied with all applicable requirements of Florida law in connection with this ordinance; now, therefore, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA: Section 1. The following-described property is hereby annexed into the City of Clearwater and the boundary lines of the City are redefined accordingly: Lot 3, Johns Parkway subdivision, according to the map or plat thereof, as recorded in the Plat Book 29, Page 41, Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida; Together with all abutting Right of Way of Johns Parkway. (ANX2014-02004) The map attached as Exhibit A is hereby incorporated by reference. Section 2. The provisions of this ordinance are found and determined to be consistent with the City of Clearwater Comprehensive Plan. The City Council hereby accepts the dedication of all easements, parks, rights-of-way and other dedications to the public, which have heretofore been made by plat, deed or user within the annexed property. The City Engineer, the City Clerk and the Planning and Development Director are directed to include and show the property described herein upon the official maps and records of the City. Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon adoption. The City Clerk shall file certified copies of this ordinance, including the map attached hereto, with the Clerk of the Circuit Court and with the County Administrator of Pinellas County, Florida, within 7 days after adoption, and shall file a certified copy with the Florida Department of State within 30 days after adoption. PASSED ON FIRST READING Attachment number 1 \nPage 1 of 2 Item # 15 2 Ordinance No. 8555-14 PASSED ON SECOND AND FINAL READING AND ADOPTED George N. Cretekos Mayor Approved as to form: Leslie K. Dougall-Sides Assistant City Attorney Attest: Rosemarie Call City Clerk Attachment number 1 \nPage 2 of 2 Item # 15 Exhibit A 30 50 211 40 30 304040 3040 200 40 20 20 30 3030 30 24 24 05155 2242822410 44172 83843 04902 * 17519 * 1 234 1 2 345 6 7 8 95 6 78 1 2 3101112131415161718 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1012 123 45 67 8 9101112 1314 151617 18 19 20 21 22 1 2 3 4 56 24/01 5.69 21/1021/11 21/12 21/13 21/14 21/15 A C(C) 2 1 2 1 DOWNING ST JOHNS PKWY McMULLEN-BOOTH RD OYSTER BAYOU WAY 25 123 3136 3128 31 0 9 31 1 1 31 0 8 31 0 7 31 0 5 31 0 1 31 1 4 31 1 5 31 4 0 31 6 1 31 6 3 31 5 5 31 4 7 31 4 5 31 3 7 31 3 3 31 2 9 31 2 7 31 2 5 31 0 9 31 0 1 31 3 5 31 4 3 31 2 3 31 2 7 31 3 9 31 4 4 31 4 8 31 4 6 31 0 8 316 0 31 2 0 316 2 31 3 0 31 5 2 31 3 6 31 3 2 31 5 4 31 2 6 201 31 1 8 31 0 3 31 1 9 31 3 1 31 0 7 31 0 1 3112 3118 31 0 6 31 0 7 31 0 5 31 1 9 31 1 7 31 1 1 31 1 3 31 0 9 31 1 5 3135 3127 3131 3129 3125 313331 0 6 31 1 0 31 0 8 31 1 2 31 2 0 31 1 6 31 1 8 31 1 4 31 3 1 31 0 0 31 5 8 -N o t t o S c a l e - -N o t a S u r v e y - Proposed Annexation Map Owner(s): R. Benjamin & Amber M. Radjeski Case: ANX2014-02004 Site: 3119 Johns Parkway Property Size: Right-of-way: 0.241 acres 0.052 acres Land Use Zoning PIN: 16-29-16-44172-000-0030 From : To: RU (County) R-4 (County) RU (City) LMDR (City) Atlas Page: 292A Attachment number 2 \nPage 1 of 1 Item # 15 City Council Agenda Council Chambers - City Hall Meeting Date:5/1/2014 SUBJECT / RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Ordinance 8556-14 on second reading, amending the future land use plan element of the Comprehensive Plan of the city to designate the land use for certain real property whose post office address is 3119 Johns Parkway, upon annexation into the City of Clearwater, as Residential Urban (RU). SUMMARY: Review Approval: Cover Memo Item # 16 Ordinance No. 8556-14 ORDINANCE NO. 8556-14 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN ELEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF THE CITY, TO DESIGNATE THE LAND USE FOR CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF JOHNS PARKWAY, APPROXIMATELY 360 FEET EAST OF MCMULLEN-BOOTH ROAD (COUNTY ROAD 611), CONSISTING OF LOT 3, JOHNS PARKWAY SUBDIVISION, WHOSE POST OFFICE ADDRESS IS 3119 JOHNS PARKWAY, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33759, TOGETHER WITH ALL ABUTTING RIGHT OF WAY OF JOHNS PARKWAY, UPON ANNEXATION INTO THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, AS RESIDENTIAL URBAN (RU) PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the amendment to the future land use plan element of the comprehensive plan of the City as set forth in this ordinance is found to be reasonable, proper and appropriate, and is consistent with the City's comprehensive plan; now, therefore, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA: Section 1. The future land use plan element of the comprehensive plan of the City of Clearwater is amended by designating the land use category for the hereinafter described property, upon annexation into the City of Clearwater, as follows: Property Land Use Category Lot 3, Johns Parkway subdivision, according to the map or plat thereof, as recorded in the Plat Book 29, Page 41, Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida; Together with all abutting Right of Way of Johns Parkway. Residential Urban (RU) (ANX2014-02004) The map attached as Exhibit A is hereby incorporated by reference. Section 2. The City Council does hereby certify that this ordinance is consistent with the City’s comprehensive plan. Attachment number 1 \nPage 1 of 2 Item # 16 2 Ordinance No. 8556-14 Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon adoption, contingent upon and subject to the adoption of Ordinance No. 8555-14. PASSED ON FIRST READING PASSED ON SECOND AND FINAL READING AND ADOPTED George N. Cretekos Mayor Approved as to form: Leslie K. Dougall-Sides Assistant City Attorney Attest: Rosemarie Call City Clerk Attachment number 1 \nPage 2 of 2 Item # 16 Exhibit A 30 50 211 40 30 304040 3040 200 40 20 20 30 3030 30 24 24 05155 2242822410 44172 83843 04902 * 17519 * 1 234 1 2 345 6 7 8 95 6 78 1 2 3101112131415161718 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1012 123 45 67 8 9101112 1314 151617 18 19 20 21 22 1 2 3 4 56 24/01 5.69 21/1021/11 21/12 21/13 21/14 21/15 A C(C) 2 1 2 1 RU RLM RU RU RM R/OL DOWNING ST JOHNS PKWY McMULLEN-BOOTH RD OYSTER BAYOU WAY 25 123 3136 3128 31 0 9 31 1 1 31 0 8 31 0 7 31 0 5 31 0 1 31 1 4 31 1 5 31 4 0 31 6 1 31 6 3 31 5 5 31 4 7 31 4 5 31 3 7 31 3 3 31 2 9 31 2 7 31 0 9 31 0 1 31 3 5 31 4 3 31 2 3 31 2 7 31 3 9 31 4 4 31 4 8 31 4 6 31 0 8 316 0 31 2 0 316 2 31 3 0 31 5 2 31 3 6 31 5 4 31 2 6 201 31 1 8 31 0 3 31 1 9 31 2 5 31 3 1 31 0 7 31 0 1 3112 3118 31 0 6 31 0 7 31 0 5 31 1 9 31 1 7 31 1 1 31 1 3 31 0 9 31 1 5 3135 3127 3131 3129 3125 313331 0 6 31 1 0 31 0 8 31 1 2 31 2 0 31 1 6 31 1 8 31 1 4 31 3 1 31 0 0 31 5 8 31 3 2 -N o t t o S c a l e - -N o t a S u r v e y - Future Land Use Map Owner(s): R. Benjamin & Amber M. Radjeski Case: ANX2014-02004 Site: 3119 Johns Parkway Property Size: Right-of-way: 0.241 acres 0.052 acres Land Use Zoning PIN: 16-29-16-44172-000-0030 From : To: RU (County) R-4 (County) RU (City) LMDR (City) Atlas Page: 292A RU Attachment number 2 \nPage 1 of 1 Item # 16 City Council Agenda Council Chambers - City Hall Meeting Date:5/1/2014 SUBJECT / RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Ordinance 8557-14 on second reading, amending the Zoning Atlas of the city by zoning certain real property whose post office address is 3119 Johns Parkway, upon annexation into the City of Clearwater, as Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR). SUMMARY: Review Approval: Cover Memo Item # 17 Ordinance No. 8557-14 ORDINANCE NO. 8557-14 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE ZONING ATLAS OF THE CITY BY ZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF JOHNS PARKWAY, APPROXIMATELY 360 FEET EAST OF MCMULLEN- BOOTH ROAD (COUNTY ROAD 611), CONSISTING OF LOT 3, JOHNS PARKWAY SUBDIVISION, WHOSE POST OFFICE ADDRESS IS 3119 JOHNS PARKWAY, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33759, TOGETHER WITH ALL ABUTTING RIGHT OF WAY OF JOHNS PARKWAY, UPON ANNEXATION INTO THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, AS LOW MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LMDR); PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the assignment of a zoning district classification as set forth in this ordinance is found to be reasonable, proper and appropriate, and is consistent with the City's comprehensive plan; now, therefore, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA: Section 1. The following described property located in Pinellas County, Florida, is hereby zoned as indicated upon annexation into the City of Clearwater, and the zoning atlas of the City is amended, as follows: The map attached as Exhibit A is hereby incorporated by reference. Section 2. The City Engineer is directed to revise the zoning atlas of the City in accordance with the foregoing amendment. Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon adoption, contingent upon and subject to the adoption of Ordinance No. 8555-14. PASSED ON FIRST READING Property Zoning District Lot 3, Johns Parkway subdivision, according to the map or plat thereof, as recorded in the Plat Book 29, Page 41, Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida; Together with all abutting Right of Way of Johns Parkway. Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) (ANX2014-02004) Attachment number 1 \nPage 1 of 2 Item # 17 2 Ordinance No. 8557-14 PASSED ON SECOND AND FINAL READING AND ADOPTED George N. Cretekos Mayor Approved as to form: Leslie K. Dougall-Sides Assistant City Attorney Attest: Rosemarie Call City Clerk Attachment number 1 \nPage 2 of 2 Item # 17 Exhibit A 30 50 211 40 30 304040 3040 200 40 20 20 30 3030 30 24 24 05155 2242822410 44172 83843 04902 * 17519 * 1 234 1 2 345 6 7 8 95 6 78 1 2 3101112131415161718 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1012 123 45 67 8 9101112 1314 151617 18 19 20 21 22 1 2 3 4 56 24/01 5.69 21/1021/11 21/12 21/13 21/14 21/15 A C(C) 2 1 2 1 DOWNING ST JOHNS PKWY McMULLEN-BOOTH RD OYSTER BAYOU WAY I LMDR MHP MDRO LMDR LMDR LMDR 25 123 3136 3128 31 0 9 31 1 1 31 0 8 31 0 7 31 0 5 31 1 4 31 1 5 31 4 0 31 6 1 31 6 3 31 5 5 31 4 7 31 3 7 31 3 3 31 2 9 31 2 7 31 2 5 31 0 9 31 0 1 31 3 5 31 4 3 31 2 3 31 2 7 31 3 9 31 4 4 31 0 8 316 0 31 2 0 316 2 31 3 6 31 5 4 31 2 6LMDR LMDR 201 31 1 8 31 0 3 31 0 1 31 1 9 31 4 5 31 3 1 31 0 7 31 0 1 3112 3118 31 0 6 31 0 7 31 0 5 31 1 9 31 1 7 31 1 1 31 1 3 31 0 9 31 1 5 3135 3127 3131 3129 3125 313331 0 6 31 1 0 31 0 8 31 1 2 31 2 0 31 1 6 31 1 8 31 1 4 31 3 1 31 0 0 31 4 8 31 4 6 31 5 8 31 3 0 31 5 2 31 3 2 -N o t t o S c a l e - -N o t a S u r v e y - Zoning Map Owner(s): R. Benjamin & Amber M. Radjeski Case: ANX2014-02004 Site: 3119 Johns Parkway Property Size: Right-of-way: 0.241 acres 0.052 acres Land Use Zoning PIN: 16-29-16-44172-000-0030 From : To: RU (County) R-4 (County) RU (City) LMDR (City) Atlas Page: 292A LMDR MDR MDR MDR Attachment number 2 \nPage 1 of 1 Item # 17 City Council Agenda Council Chambers - City Hall Meeting Date:5/1/2014 SUBJECT / RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Ordinance 8561-14 on second reading, annexing certain real property whose post office addresses are 1942 North Betty Lane, 1996 North Betty Lane, and 1235 Palm Street, all in Clearwater, Florida 33755, together with certain right of way of North Betty Lane located south of State Street, into the corporate limits of the city and redefining the boundary lines of the city to include said addition. SUMMARY: Review Approval: Cover Memo Item # 18 Ordinance No. 8561-14 ORDINANCE NO. 8561-14 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA, ANNEXING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED GENERALLY EAST OF DOUGLAS AVENUE AND WEST OF KINGS HIGHWAY, NORTH OF SUNSET POINT ROAD AND SOUTH OF UNION STREET, CONSISTING OF PORTIONS OF SECTION 03 TOWNSHIP 29 N, RANGE 15 E, WHOSE POST OFFICE ADDRESSES ARE 1942 NORTH BETTY LANE, 1996 NORTH BETTY LANE, 1235 PALM STREET, ALL IN CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33755, TOGETHER WITH CERTAIN RIGHT OF WAY OF NORTH BETTY LANE, LOCATED SOUTH OF STATE STREET, INTO THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY, AND REDEFINING THE BOUNDARY LINES OF THE CITY TO INCLUDE SAID ADDITION; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the owners of the real properties described herein and depicted on the maps attached hereto as Exhibit B and C have petitioned the City of Clearwater to annex the properties into the City pursuant to Section 171.044, Florida Statutes, and the City has complied with all applicable requirements of Florida law in connection with this ordinance; now, therefore, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA: Section 1. The following-described properties are hereby annexed into the City of Clearwater and the boundary lines of the City are redefined accordingly: See attached Exhibit A (ANX2014-02006) The maps attached as Exhibit B and C are hereby incorporated by reference. Section 2. The provisions of this ordinance are found and determined to be consistent with the City of Clearwater Comprehensive Plan. The City Council hereby accepts the dedication of all easements, parks, rights-of-way and other dedications to the public, which have heretofore been made by plat, deed or user within the annexed property. The City Engineer, the City Clerk and the Planning and Development Director are directed to include and show the property described herein upon the official maps and records of the City. Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon adoption. The City Clerk shall file certified copies of this ordinance, including the map attached hereto, with the Clerk of the Circuit Court and with the County Administrator of Pinellas County, Florida, within 7 days after adoption, and shall file a certified copy with the Florida Department of State within 30 days after adoption. Attachment number 1 \nPage 1 of 2 Item # 18 2 Ordinance No. 8561-14 PASSED ON FIRST READING PASSED ON SECOND AND FINAL READING AND ADOPTED George N. Cretekos Mayor Approved as to form: Leslie K. Dougall-Sides Assistant City Attorney Attest: Rosemarie Call City Clerk Attachment number 1 \nPage 2 of 2 Item # 18 Exhibit A LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS ANX2014 -02006 ========================================================================================= No. Parcel ID Legal Description Address 1. 03-29-15-83970-000-0560 The East One-Half of Lot 56 1942 North Betty Lane Together with all of abutting Right of Way of North Betty Lane. The above in SOUTH BINGHAMTON PARK subdivision, as recorded in PLAT BOOK 12, PAGE 81, of the Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida. ========================================================================================= No. Parcel ID Legal Description Address 2. 03-29-15-12060-015-0030 Block O, Lot 3 1996 N Betty Lane The above in BROOKLAWN subdivision, as recorded in PLAT BOOK 13, PAGE 59, of the Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida; ========================================================================================= No. Parcel ID Legal Description Address 3. 03-29-15-15840-002-0150 Block B, Lot 15 1235 Palm Street All the above in CLEARDUN subdivision, as recorded in PLAT BOOK 13, PAGE 47, of the Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida. Attachment number 2 \nPage 1 of 1 Item # 18 Exhibit B Proposed Annexation Map 1 of 2 Owner MULTIPLE OWNERS Case: ANX2014-02006 Site: Idlewild Septic-to-Sewer Project Area: Three lots south of Union Street, east of Douglas Avenue, north of Sunset Point Road (SR 576), and west of Kings Highway Total Property Size: Right of Way Size: 0.329 acres 0.091 acres Land Use Zoning PIN: Parcels—see next page From: To: RU (County) R-4 (County) RU (City) LMDR (City) Atlas Page: 251B Attachment number 3 \nPage 1 of 2 Item # 18 Exhibit B PIN (Address): 1. 03-29-15-83970-000-0560 (1942 N. Betty Lane) 2. 03-29-15-12060-015-0030 (1996 N. Betty Lane) 3. 03-29-15-15840-002-0150 (1235 Palm Street) Attachment number 3 \nPage 2 of 2 Item # 18 Exhibit C Proposed Annexation Map 2 of 2 Owner MULTIPLE OWNERS Case: ANX2014-02006 Site: Idlewild Septic-to-Sewer Project Area: Three lots south of Union Street, east of Douglas Avenue, north of Sunset Point Road (SR 576), and west of Kings Highway Total Property Size: Right of Way Size: 0.329 acres 0.091 acres Land Use Zoning PIN: Parcels—see next page From: To: RU (County) R-4 (County) RU (City) LMDR (City) Atlas Page: 251B Attachment number 4 \nPage 1 of 2 Item # 18 Exhibit C PIN (Address): 1. 03-29-15-83970-000-0560 (1942 N. Betty Lane) 2. 03-29-15-12060-015-0030 (1996 N. Betty Lane) 3. 03-29-15-15840-002-0150 (1235 Palm Street) Attachment number 4 \nPage 2 of 2 Item # 18 City Council Agenda Council Chambers - City Hall Meeting Date:5/1/2014 SUBJECT / RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Ordinance 8562-14 on second reading, amending the future land use plan element of the Comprehensive Plan of the city to designate the land use for certain real property whose post office addresses are 1942 North Betty Lane, 1996 North Betty Lane, and 1235 Palm Street, all in Clearwater, Florida 33755, together with certain right of way of North Betty Lane located south of State Street, upon annexation into the City of Clearwater, as Residential Urban (RU). SUMMARY: Review Approval: Cover Memo Item # 19 Ordinance No. 8562-14 ORDINANCE NO. 8562-14 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN ELEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF THE CITY, TO DESIGNATE THE LAND USE FOR CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED GENERALLY EAST OF DOUGLAS AVENUE AND WEST OF KINGS HIGHWAY, NORTH OF SUNSET POINT ROAD AND SOUTH OF UNION STREET, CONSISTING OF PORTIONS OF SECTION 03 TOWNSHIP 29 N, RANGE 15 E, WHOSE POST OFFICE ADDRESSES ARE 1942 NORTH BETTY LANE, 1996 NORTH BETTY LANE, 1235 PALM STREET, ALL IN CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33755, TOGETHER WITH CERTAIN RIGHT OF WAY OF NORTH BETTY LANE, LOCATED SOUTH OF STATE STREET, UPON ANNEXATION INTO THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, AS RESIDENTAL URBAN (RU); PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the amendment to the future land use plan element of the comprehensive plan of the City as set forth in this ordinance is found to be reasonable, proper and appropriate, and is consistent with the City's comprehensive plan; now, therefore, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA: Section 1. The future land use plan element of the comprehensive plan of the City of Clearwater is amended by designating the land use category for the hereinafter described property, upon annexation into the City of Clearwater, as follows: Property Land Use Category SEE EXHIBIT A RESIDENTIAL URBAN (RU) (ANX2014-02006) The map attached as Exhibit B and C is hereby incorporated by reference. Section 2. The City Council does hereby certify that this ordinance is consistent with the City’s comprehensive plan. Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon adoption, contingent upon and subject to the adoption of Ordinance No. 8561-14. Attachment number 1 \nPage 1 of 2 Item # 19 2 Ordinance No. 8562-14 PASSED ON FIRST READING PASSED ON SECOND AND FINAL READING AND ADOPTED George N. Cretekos Mayor Approved as to form: Leslie K. Dougall-Sides Assistant City Attorney Attest: Rosemarie Call City Clerk Attachment number 1 \nPage 2 of 2 Item # 19 Exhibit A LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS ANX2014 -02006 ========================================================================================= No. Parcel ID Legal Description Address 1. 03-29-15-83970-000-0560 The East One-Half of Lot 56 1942 North Betty Lane Together with all of abutting Right of Way of North Betty Lane. The above in SOUTH BINGHAMTON PARK subdivision, as recorded in PLAT BOOK 12, PAGE 81, of the Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida. ========================================================================================= No. Parcel ID Legal Description Address 2. 03-29-15-12060-015-0030 Block O, Lot 3 1996 N Betty Lane The above in BROOKLAWN subdivision, as recorded in PLAT BOOK 13, PAGE 59, of the Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida; ========================================================================================= No. Parcel ID Legal Description Address 3. 03-29-15-15840-002-0150 Block B, Lot 15 1235 Palm Street All the above in CLEARDUN subdivision, as recorded in PLAT BOOK 13, PAGE 47, of the Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida. Attachment number 2 \nPage 1 of 1 Item # 19 Exhibit B Future Land Use Map 1 of 2 Owner MULTIPLE OWNERS Case: ANX2014-02006 Site: Idlewild Septic-to-Sewer Project Area: Three lots south of Union Street, east of Douglas Avenue, north of Sunset Point Road (SR 576), and west of Kings Highway Total Property Size: Right of Way Size: 0.329 acres 0.091 acres Land Use Zoning PIN: Parcels—see next page From: To: RU (County) R-4 (County) RU (City) LMDR (City) Atlas Page: 251B 50 50 66 60 60 60 15840 80388 A B C A 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 2324252627282930313233343536 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 2324252627282930313233343536 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 18 60 60E J 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 1 1 1 1 DUNEDIN RU RU RU PALM ST UNION ST BERMUDA ST DO U G L A S A V E 12 5 5 12 5 9 12 6 3 12 7 2 12 6 6 12 6 0 12 5 4 12 4 6 12 4 2 12 2 6 12 2 2 12 2 0 12 1 0 12 3 1 12 6 5 12 5 9 12 5 5 12 5 1 12 4 7 12 4 5 12 3 9 12 3 5 12 2 5 12 2 1 12 1 7 12 1 1 12 0 1 12 6 4 12 6 2 12 4 2 12 3 4 12 2 8 12 2 0 12 1 6 12 1 2 12 0 6 12 5 5 12 5 7 12 5 1 12 4 5 12 3 9 12 3 3 12 3 1 12 2 1 12 1 5 12 1 1 12 0 9 12 6 2 12 6 0 12 5 6 12 5 0 12 2 4 12 2 2 12 2 0 12 1 2 12 0 6 12 5 3 2077 2063 12 6 3 12 5 9 12 4 7 12 4 5 12 4 1 12 3 7 12 2 7 12 1 5 12 1 1 12 0 7 11 9 9 T r a f 2030 12 5 0 2031 12 5 6 12 5 0 12 3 2 2049 12 3 5 12 4 6 12 4 4 12 3 8 12 3 4 12 3 0 12 3 5 12 2 3 12 1 9 2061 -N o t t o S c a l e - -N o t a S u r v e y - RU Attachment number 3 \nPage 1 of 2 Item # 19 Exhibit B PIN (Address): 1. 03-29-15-83970-000-0560 (1942 N. Betty Lane) 2. 03-29-15-12060-015-0030 (1996 N. Betty Lane) 3. 03-29-15-15840-002-0150 (1235 Palm Street) Attachment number 3 \nPage 2 of 2 Item # 19 Exhibit C Future Land Use Map 2 of 2 Owner MULTIPLE OWNERS Case: ANX2014-02006 Site: Idlewild Septic-to-Sewer Project Area: Three lots south of Union Street, east of Douglas Avenue, north of Sunset Point Road (SR 576), and west of Kings Highway Total Property Size: Right of Way Size: 0.329 acres 0.091 acres Land Use Zoning PIN: Parcels—see next page From: To: RU (County) R-4 (County) RU (City) LMDR (City) Atlas Page: 251B LAKE 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 38 30 60 60 60 38 60 60 45 45 60 45 4 0 60 30 60 40 3 0 4 0 40 28098 83 9 7 0 M O O P C 4 TRACT "B" 6 12 5 (25) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 6 7 8 9 10 11 12345678910111213 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38394041424344 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 1 2 3 4 5 10 11 12 13 14 1112 18 13 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 6 7 1415 1617 1819 2021 2223 2425 2627 2829 3233 3435 3637 3839 4041 4243 4445 4647 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 4 5 6 7 8 22 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 OS/R RU RU P RU R/OS RU RU RM RU RM R/OS RU RM RU RU BE T T Y L N STATE ST WOODLAWN TER CH E N A N G O A V E SEDEEVA CIR N BERTLAND WAY MA C O M B E R A V E 12 9 0 1950 1952 12 9 0 12 8 6 12 8 2 12 7 8 12 7 4 1969 13 2 7 2025 1971 13 3 3 13 2 9 1925 1923 1918 1924 1926 1932 1938 1936 1940 1949 1946 1952 1954 1958 1960 1962 1964 12 8 8 12 8 4 12 8 0 12 7 6 12 7 4 12 8 7 12 7 9 12 7 5 12 7 3 12 5 5 12 5 1 12 7 8 12 7 6 12 7 4 12 7 2 12 7 0 12 6 8 12 6 6 12 6 4 12 6 0 12 5 8 12 5 6 12 4 4 12 4 0 12 9 5 12 8 7 12 8 3 12 7 7 12 7 3 12 7 1 12 6 7 12 6 5 12 6 1 12 5 3 12 4 9 12 4 5 1936 1932 12 9 4 12 7 3 1938 1936 1930 1918 1942 12 9 5 12 4 4 1940 19261928 12 9 5 2014 13 1 0 13 0 0 1992 1994 1979 1927 1935 1921 1920 1928 1919 1927 1931 1933 1937 12 8 7 1918 1920 1940 1944 1921 1923 1925 1927 1929 1937 1941 12 8 9 12 8 5 12 8 1 12 7 7 1947 1978 1974 12 8 3 12 7 1 12 6 7 1961 1963 1969 1245 12 9 1 12 9 6 12 8 6 12 6 6 12 6 2 12 6 0 12 5 6 12 5 2 12 4 6 1999 1997 1981 1987 1996 1995 12 4 4 ½ -N o t t o S c a l e - -N o t a S u r v e y - RU RU Attachment number 4 \nPage 1 of 2 Item # 19 Exhibit C PIN (Address): 1. 03-29-15-83970-000-0560 (1942 N. Betty Lane) 2. 03-29-15-12060-015-0030 (1996 N. Betty Lane) 3. 03-29-15-15840-002-0150 (1235 Palm Street) Attachment number 4 \nPage 2 of 2 Item # 19 City Council Agenda Council Chambers - City Hall Meeting Date:5/1/2014 SUBJECT / RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Ordinance 8563-14 on second reading, amending the Zoning Atlas of the city by zoning certain real property whose post office addresses are 1942 North Betty Lane, 1996 North Betty Lane, and 1235 Palm Street, all in Clearwater, Florida 33755, together with certain right of way of North Betty Lane located south of State Street, upon annexation into the City of Clearwater, as Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR). SUMMARY: Review Approval: Cover Memo Item # 20 Ordinance No. 8563-14 ORDINANCE NO. 8563-14 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE ZONING ATLAS OF THE CITY BY ZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED GENERALLY EAST OF DOUGLAS AVENUE AND WEST OF KINGS HIGHWAY, NORTH OF SUNSET POINT ROAD AND SOUTH OF UNION STREET, CONSISTING OF PORTIONS OF SECTION 03, TOWNSHIP 29 N, RANGE 15 E, WHOSE POST OFFICE ADDRESSES ARE 1942 NORTH BETTY LANE, 1996 NORTH BETTY LANE, 1235 PALM STREET, ALL IN CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33755, TOGETHER WITH CERTAIN RIGHT OF WAY OF NORTH BETTY LANE, LOCATED SOUTH OF STATE STREET, UPON ANNEXATION INTO THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, AS LOW MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LMDR); PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the assignment of a zoning district classification as set forth in this ordinance is found to be reasonable, proper and appropriate, and is consistent with the City's comprehensive plan; now, therefore, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA: Section 1. The following described properties located in Pinellas County, Florida, are hereby zoned as indicated upon annexation into the City of Clearwater, and the zoning atlas of the City is amended, as follows: The maps attached as Exhibit B and C are hereby incorporated by reference. Section 2. The City Engineer is directed to revise the zoning atlas of the City in accordance with the foregoing amendment. Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon adoption, contingent upon and subject to the adoption of Ordinance No. 8561-14. PASSED ON FIRST READING Property Zoning District SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT A LOW MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LMDR) (ANX2014-02006) Attachment number 1 \nPage 1 of 2 Item # 20 2 Ordinance No. 8563-14 PASSED ON SECOND AND FINAL READING AND ADOPTED George N. Cretekos Mayor Approved as to form: Leslie K. Dougall-Sides Assistant City Attorney Attest: Rosemarie Call City Clerk Attachment number 1 \nPage 2 of 2 Item # 20 Exhibit A LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS ANX2014 -02006 ========================================================================================= No. Parcel ID Legal Description Address 1. 03-29-15-83970-000-0560 The East One-Half of Lot 56 1942 North Betty Lane Together with all of abutting Right of Way of North Betty Lane. The above in SOUTH BINGHAMTON PARK subdivision, as recorded in PLAT BOOK 12, PAGE 81, of the Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida. ========================================================================================= No. Parcel ID Legal Description Address 2. 03-29-15-12060-015-0030 Block O, Lot 3 1996 N Betty Lane The above in BROOKLAWN subdivision, as recorded in PLAT BOOK 13, PAGE 59, of the Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida; ========================================================================================= No. Parcel ID Legal Description Address 3. 03-29-15-15840-002-0150 Block B, Lot 15 1235 Palm Street All the above in CLEARDUN subdivision, as recorded in PLAT BOOK 13, PAGE 47, of the Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida. Attachment number 2 \nPage 1 of 1 Item # 20 Exhibit B Zoning Map 1 of 2 Owner MULTIPLE OWNERS Case: ANX2014-02006 Site: Idlewild Septic-to-Sewer Project Area: Three lots south of Union Street, east of Douglas Avenue, north of Sunset Point Road (SR 576), and west of Kings Highway Total Property Size: Right of Way Size: 0.329 acres 0.091 acres Land Use Zoning PIN: Parcels—see next page From: To: RU (County) R-4 (County) RU (City) LMDR (City) Atlas Page: 251B LMDR Attachment number 3 \nPage 1 of 2 Item # 20 Exhibit B PIN (Address): 1. 03-29-15-83970-000-0560 (1942 N. Betty Lane) 2. 03-29-15-12060-015-0030 (1996 N. Betty Lane) 3. 03-29-15-15840-002-0150 (1235 Palm Street) Attachment number 3 \nPage 2 of 2 Item # 20 Exhibit C Zoning Map 2 of 2 Owner MULTIPLE OWNERS Case: ANX2014-02006 Site: Idlewild Septic-to-Sewer Project Area: Three lots south of Union Street, east of Douglas Avenue, north of Sunset Point Road (SR 576), and west of Kings Highway Total Property Size: Right of Way Size: 0.329 acres 0.091 acres Land Use Zoning PIN: Parcels—see next page From: To: RU (County) R-4 (County) RU (City) LMDR (City) Atlas Page: 251B LMDR LMDR Attachment number 4 \nPage 1 of 2 Item # 20 Exhibit C PIN (Address): 1. 03-29-15-83970-000-0560 (1942 N. Betty Lane) 2. 03-29-15-12060-015-0030 (1996 N. Betty Lane) 3. 03-29-15-15840-002-0150 (1235 Palm Street) Attachment number 4 \nPage 2 of 2 Item # 20 City Council Agenda Council Chambers - City Hall Meeting Date:5/1/2014 SUBJECT / RECOMMENDATION: Declare list of vehicles and equipment surplus to the needs of the City; authorize disposal through sale to the highest bidder at the Tampa Machinery Auction, Tampa, Florida; and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (Consent) SUMMARY: All vehicles and equipment have been replaced as necessary, or are no longer required. Tampa Machinery Auction is the Tampa Bay Purchasing Cooperative Auctioneer of Record. Tampa Machinery Auction holds a live auction monthly and accepts internet bids at the time of the live auction. Type:Other Current Year Budget?:No Budget Adjustment:None Budget Adjustment Comments: Current Year Cost:Annual Operating Cost: Not to Exceed:Total Cost: For Fiscal Year: to Appropriation Code Amount Appropriation Comment 0566-00000-364413-000-0000 TBD Sale Proceeds Review Approval: Cover Memo Item # 21 Fleet Surplus for May 2014 Auction REASON FOR REPLACE- ITEM #ASSET #YEAR DESCRIPTION SERIAL NUMBER MILEAGE SURPLUS / DISPOSAL MENT # 1 G0334 1992 YANMAR L90 GENERATOR 1118843 11014HR AGE/CONDITION/DISPOSAL 2 G1272 1994 FORD RANGER PICK UP TRUCK 1FTCR10U3RTA63729 49152MI AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G2950 3 G1965 1998 GRAVELY PR0 200 SAND PRO 338 491HR AGE/CONDITION/DISPOSAL 4 G1868 1997 SPARTAN SQUAD FIRE TRUCK 4S7AT1697VC023626 123725MI AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G3965 5 G1869 1996 FORD E373 1FDKE37H3THA50819 99512MI AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G3788 6 G2008 1998 FORD TAURUS 4 DOOR 1FAFP52U9WA270274 56407MI AGE/CONDITION/NOT REPLACED 7 G2162 1999 JOHN DEERE TRACKHOE FF0200X500780 3787HRS AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G3893 8 G2170 1999 SPARTAN FIRE ENGINE 4S7AT9095XC031394 70,929MI AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G3964 9 G2223 2000 BROYHILL LOAD-N-PACK 80HD 991295-5.13 6165HRS AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G3978 10 G2418 2001 PETERBILT SIDE LOAD GARB 1NPZL00X62D713758 81101MI AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G3772 11 G2456 2001 CHEVY SILV. 1500 EXT CAB PU 2GCEC19V611378153 95120MI AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G4057 12 G2458 2001 SUNRAY ARROW BOARD AB25-088 XXX AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G4032 13 G2459 2001 SUNRAY ARROW BOARD AB25-087 XXX AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G4031 14 G2529 2003 CHEVY SILVERADO 1500 1GCEC19V33Z309981 126006MI AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G3954 15 G2615 2002 GRADALL EXCAVATOR SN0316331 2317MILES AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G3983 16 G2669 2003 EXMARK WALK BEHIND MOWER 407511 XXX AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G4006 17 G2723 2002 INT 4700 RECYLING TRUCK 1HTSCAAL62H547067 69835MI AGE/CONDITION/NOT REPLACED 18 G2724 2002 INT. 4700 RECYCLE TRUCK 1HTSCAAL82H547068 66790MI AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G3952 19 G2725 2002 INT. 4700 RECYCLE TRUCK 1HTSCAAL62H547070 56164MI AGE/CONDITION/NOT REPLACED 20 G2726 2002 INT. 4700 RECYCLE TRUCK 1HTSCAALX2H547069 53104MI AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G3953 21 G2747 2003 GMC SONOMA PICK UP TRUCK 1GTCS19X038203764 73288MI AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G4035 22 G2756 2003 FORD CROWN VICTORIA 2FAHP71WX3X189200 91151MI AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G4018 23 G2758 2003 FORD CROWN VICTORIA 2FAHP71W73X189204 94996MI AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G4019 24 G2773 2003 PETERBILT FEL GARBAGE TRUCK 1NPZLTOX63D714962 74,238MI AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G3984 25 G2828 2004 MADVAC LITER COL VEHICLE 3211 525HRS AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G4003 26 G2835 2004 JACOBSEN GROOM MASTER 89892601831 3279MI AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G4004 27 G2844 2004 FORD CROWN VICTORIA 2FAFP71W34X139148 95353MI AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G3924 Attachment number 1 \nPage 1 of 4 Item # 21 28 G2851 2004 FORD CROWN VICTORIA 2FAFP71W94X139140 94793MI AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G4020 29 G2852 2004 FORD CROWN VICTORIA 2FAFP71W24X139142 106298MI AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G3930 30 G2888 2004 STERLING ACTERRA JAWS TR.2FZACHDC65AN64443 102686MI AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G3829 31 G2916 2004 HONDA GENERATOR EA6-3143695 XXX AGE/CONDITION/NOT REPLACED 32 G2922 2004 HIGH CUBE TV SEWER VAN 1FDXE45S64HA07068 49200MI AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G3970 33 G2977 2005 TORO SAND PRO 2020 MOWER 250000201 3027HR AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G4005 34 G2978 2005 CHRYLSER 300 4 DOOR SEDAN 2C3JA43R15H616154 99095MI AGE/CONDITION/DISPOSAL 35 G2987 2005 FORD CROWN VICTORIA 2FAFP71W55X143980 94870MI AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G4021 36 G2988 2005 FORD CROWN VICTORIA 2FAFP71W55X143994 96440MI AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G4022 37 G2989 2005 FORD CROWN VICTORIA 2FAFP71W95X143982 89531MI AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G4023 38 G2996 2005 FORD CROWN VICTORIA 2FAFP71W95X143996 104241MI AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G4025 39 G3032 2006 STERLING ACTERRA JAWS TR.2FZACHDCX6AV96734 96124MI AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G3978 40 G3169 2006 FORD CROWN VIC PPV 2FAFP71WX6X131180 113397MI AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G3947 41 G3171 2006 FORD CROWN VIC PPV 2FAFP71W36X131179 94587MI AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G4026 42 G3175 2006 FORD CROWN VIC PPV 2FAFP71W96X131171 104525MI AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G3950 43 G3181 2006 FORD CROWN VIC PPV 2FAFP71W06X131172 93391MI AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G4027 44 G3208 2006 VIBRATING WACKER 5612295 XXX AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G3834 45 G3340 2007 FORD CROWN VIC PPV 2FAFP71W17X136866 98824MI AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G4028 46 G3480 2008 FORD CROWN VIC PPV 2FAFP71V78X156788 105113MI AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G4029 47 G3496 2008 E-Z GO TEXTRON 1200G UTILITY 2603527 307HR AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G3897 48 G3680 2010 KAWASAKI MULE 4010 4X4 JK1AFCM18AB504660 1208HRS AGE/CONDITION/REPLACED G3999 PALLET OF FIRE SHOP PARTS PALLET OF POLICE STROBE BARS PALLET OF MISC. ELECTRONICS Attachment number 1 \nPage 2 of 4 Item # 21 Attachment number 1 \nPage 3 of 4 Item # 21 Attachment number 1 \nPage 4 of 4 Item # 21 City Council Agenda Council Chambers - City Hall Meeting Date:5/1/2014 SUBJECT / RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the Chief of Police to sign Memoranda of Agreements between the State of Florida acting by and through the Department of Management Services, Bureau of Federal Property Assistance as the State of Florida Single Point of Contact, and the City of Clearwater Police Department for the conditional transfer of surplus military equipment that will be repurposed for use by the police department in furtherance of law enforcement operations. (Consent) SUMMARY: The Federal Property Assistance (FPA) Program acquires and distributes U.S. Department of Defense and federally owned tangible personal property declared excess/surplus by the military and federal government. This property is allocated to the State of Florida for the benefit of state and local law enforcement, public agencies and private/nonprofit health and education organizations. The Florida Department of Management Services, Bureau of Federal Property Assistance, does not disseminate the transfer paperwork and Memorandum of Agreement until after the surplus equipment has been received by the receiving government entity. As a condition of receiving surplus military equipment from the State of Florida, the requesting government entity is required to sign a Memorandum of Agreement to indemnify and hold harmless the State of Florida, Department of Management Services, for any and all lawsuits arising out of the use of the property. On February 13, 2013, the city’s Resource Management Committee approved the Police Department’s acquisition of three Humvees, and on March 5, 2014, the Committee approved the acquisition of a Mine Resistant, Ambush Protected (MRAP) Vehicle by the Police Department. Therefore, the Chief of Police is requesting the authority to accept the surplus military vehicles and the authorization to sign Memoranda of Agreements with the State of Florida, Department of Management Services, for the surplus equipment. The costs incurred with the transfer, delivery, and repurposing of the acquired vehicles will be funded by special project code 181-99387, Federal Forfeiture Sharing. Type:Other Current Year Budget?:No Budget Adjustment:None Budget Adjustment Comments: Current Year Cost:$ 16,000 Annual Operating Cost:0.00 Not to Exceed:Total Cost:$16,000 For Fiscal Year:2013 to 2014 Appropriation Code Amount Appropriation Comment 181-99387 16,000 Cost will be funded by Special Project Code 181- 99387, Federal Forfeiteure Sharing Review Approval: Cover Memo Item # 22 Attachment number 1 \nPage 1 of 4 Item # 22 Attachment number 1 \nPage 2 of 4 Item # 22 Attachment number 1 \nPage 3 of 4 Item # 22 Attachment number 1 \nPage 4 of 4 Item # 22 City Council Agenda Council Chambers - City Hall Meeting Date:5/1/2014 SUBJECT / RECOMMENDATION: Approve a Contract (Blanket Purchase Order) to Honeywell International, Inc. – Building Solutions of Chicago, IL for an amount not to exceed $180,000 for the quarterly Maintenance Fees, from May 1, 2014 through April 30, 2015, per the contracts dated November 17, 2008 and April 28, 2010, and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (Consent) SUMMARY: The City of Clearwater signed two contracts with Honeywell Building Solutions to retrofit various buildings with energy saving devices under the State of Florida Energy Savings Contract 973-320-08-1. These contracts included provisions for guaranteed savings under the Performance Contracting specifications. The first contract was signed November 17, 2008. Several lighting changes were completed, air conditioning units were replaced and a dehumidifier was installed in the pool area to create a better environment and protect the steel structure from rust and deterioration. The contract term is 20 years. The savings in the fourth year was $40,516 above the guaranteed savings of $201,896. The second contract was signed on April 28, 2010. This contract included lighting changes in numerous buildings, air conditioning replacements and automated HVAC controls in various City buildings and pool pump replacement at the Long Center. The contract term is 15 years. The savings in the third year was $42,030 above the guaranteed savings of $410,020. The contracts require Honeywell to maintain all the systems installed for the term of the contract. This Blanket Purchase Order covers the maintenance and audit costs for one year. Type:Operating Expenditure Current Year Budget?:Yes Budget Adjustment:None Budget Adjustment Comments: Current Year Cost:$138,122 Annual Operating Cost: Not to Exceed:$180,000 Total Cost:$138,122 For Fiscal Year:5/1/2014 to 4/30/15 Appropriation Code Amount Appropriation Comment 565-06531-530300-519-000 180,000 Other Contractual Services Review Approval: Cover Memo Item # 23 City Council Agenda Council Chambers - City Hall Meeting Date:5/1/2014 SUBJECT / RECOMMENDATION: Award a contract (Blanket Purchase Order) to Jet Age Fuel of Clearwater, FL for an amount not to exceed $3,700,000 for the purchase of unleaded and diesel fuel for city motorized equipment, as per City of Clearwater RFP 19-10, during the contract period May 1, 2014 through April 30, 2015 and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (Consent) SUMMARY: This blanket purchase order covers the purchase of unleaded and diesel fuel delivered to the city fuel facility located at 1701 N. Hercules Avenue. This fuel is used for all city equipment. This is the final extension of a five-year contract. The current average price for unleaded is $3.46 per gallon and diesel is $3.95 per gallon. Per the U.S. Energy Information Administration, the estimated average retail price for diesel in 2015 is $3.73 per gallon and the estimated average retail price for unleaded will be $3.39 per gallon. This is a not to exceed price. The City does not pay federal taxes, but does pay state taxes at the time of payment and submits for reimbursement on a monthly basis. Type:Purchase Current Year Budget?:Yes Budget Adjustment:None Budget Adjustment Comments: Current Year Cost:$1,079,788.46 Annual Operating Cost:$3,233,357.86 Not to Exceed:$3,700,000 Total Cost:$3,700,000 For Fiscal Year:5/1/2014 to 4/30/2015 Appropriation Code Amount Appropriation Comment 566-06611-550500-519-000 $3,700,000 BPO Bid Required?:Yes Bid Number: City of Clearwater RFP 19-10 Other Bid / Contract:Bid Exceptions:None Review Approval: Cover Memo Item # 24 City Council Agenda Council Chambers - City Hall Meeting Date:5/1/2014 SUBJECT / RECOMMENDATION: Award a contract (purchase order) to Richard H. Martin Roofing of Largo Florida, in the amount of $184,632.00 for the installation of a sprayed polyurethane foam roof system and acrylic coating on the roofs of Building C and G of the Public Services Complex, per Bid 13-14 and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (Consent) SUMMARY: The roofs of buildings C and G at the Public Utilities Service Complex have developed leaks and are in need of coating to protect the buildings and extend the useful life of the roof systems. Building G was originally scheduled to be repaired in Fiscal Year 2015 but staff recommends the repair be done prior to the upcoming hurricane season. Richard H. Martin Roofing provided the lowest responsible bid. The bid date was March 6, 2014. Midyear amendments will transfer $142,000 Sewer Revenue (388422) from Capital Improvement Program (CIP) project 0315-96739, Reclaimed Water Distr Sys to 0315-96523, Public Utilities Admin Bldg R and R, and $42,710.47 from Stormwater Retained Earnings to 315-94512, Roof Repairs for total funding in the amount of $184,710.47. Type:Operating Expenditure Current Year Budget?:No Budget Adjustment:Yes Budget Adjustment Comments: See Summary Current Year Cost:$184,632.00 Annual Operating Cost: Not to Exceed:$184,632.00 Total Cost:$184,632.00 For Fiscal Year:2013 to 2014 Appropriation Code Amount Appropriation Comment 315-94512-563600-519-000 $42,710.47 See Summary 315-96523-563600-539-000 $141,921.53 See Summary Bid Required?:Yes Bid Number:13-14 Other Bid / Contract:Bid Exceptions:None Review Approval: Cover Memo Item # 25 City Council Agenda Council Chambers - City Hall Meeting Date:5/1/2014 SUBJECT / RECOMMENDATION: Award a Contract (Purchase Order) for $195,643.50 to Alan Jay Fleet Sales of Sebring, FL for the purchase of five 2014 Ford F450 utility body pickup trucks, in accordance with the Florida State Term Contract 071-000-14-1, 2.564(1)(d), Code of Ordinances - Other Governmental Bid; authorize lease purchase under the City’s Master Lease Purchase Agreement, or internal financing via an interfund loan from the Capital Improvement Fund, whichever is deemed to be in the City’s best interests; and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (Consent) SUMMARY: The five Ford F450 pickup trucks will be purchased through the Florida State Term Contract 071-000-14-1 and quote dated December 20, 2013. One of these vehicles will be replacing G3428 (2008 Ford F250 utility body pickup truck) with 109,008 miles. This truck is assigned to the Gas Department. Four of these vehicles will be replacing replacing G2103 (1999 Ford F350 utility body pickup truck) with 101,048 miles, G2431 (2001 Chevy 3500 utility body pickup truck) with 91,1429 miles, G2863 (2004 Ford F450 utility body pickup truck) with 87,093 miles and G3015 (2006 Ford F450 utility body pickup truck) 97,650 miles. These trucks are assigned to the Public Utilities Department. These vehicles were included in the Fiscal Year 2013/2014 Garage CIP Replacement Fund. Type:Purchase Current Year Budget?:Yes Budget Adjustment:None Budget Adjustment Comments: Current Year Cost:Annual Operating Cost: Not to Exceed:$158,800.00 Total Cost: For Fiscal Year:2013 to 2014 Appropriation Code Amount Appropriation Comment 316-94241-564100-519-000 195,643.50 LP/CIP Bid Required?:No Bid Number: Other Bid / Contract: Florida State Term Contract #071-000-14-1 Bid Exceptions: Other Government Bid Review Approval: Cover Memo Item # 26 City Council Agenda Council Chambers - City Hall Meeting Date:5/1/2014 SUBJECT / RECOMMENDATION: Approve a Contract (Blanket Purchase Order) to Waste Equipment and Parts LLC of Tampa, Florida to rebuild two Automated Side Loaders for an amount not to exceed $150,000, and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (Consent) SUMMARY: The Solid Waste Department recommends two automated side loaders, G3502 and G3504 be rebuilt and used to collect recyclables in our single stream recycling program. The rebuilds would significantly reduce the financial impact on the recycling program, increase efficiency and reduce the overall fleet. The rebuilds would give an additional five years of service without incurring any additional debt service to the program. The cost to purchase two new automated side loaders is $564,000 and the debt service on that amount would severely impact the recycling program. As this expenditure would be incurred by the Solid Waste Fund, a mid-year budget amendment will be made to increase Other Contractual Services by $150,000 in cost center 02082 Residential Solid Waste. The Solid Waste revenues should be more than sufficient to cover this additional expenditure, but in the event the revenue is not sufficient, this would be paid from the Unrestricted Reserves of the Solid Waste Fund. Type:Operating Expenditure Current Year Budget?:No Budget Adjustment:Yes Budget Adjustment Comments: Current Year Cost:$150,000 Annual Operating Cost:0 Not to Exceed:$150,000 Total Cost:$150,000 For Fiscal Year:2013 to 2014 Appropriation Code Amount Appropriation Comment 0-424-02082-530300-534 $150,000.00 Bid Required?:No Bid Number: Other Bid / Contract: City of Tallahassee, FL RFP # 2490 Bid Exceptions: Other Government Bid Review Approval:Cover Memo Item # 27 City Council Agenda Council Chambers - City Hall Meeting Date:5/1/2014 SUBJECT / RECOMMENDATION: Approve a contract (Blanket Purchase Order) to Wingfoot Commercial Tire of Clearwater, FL, for an amount not to exceed $510,000, for the purchase of Goodyear Tires for city motorized equipment, from May 1, 2014 through February 27, 2015, in accordance with Sec. 2.564(1)(d), Code of Ordinances - Other governmental bid; and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (Consent) SUMMARY: This blanket purchase order is a piggyback of the Florida State Term Contract 863-000-10-1. This contract covers period beginning May 1, 2014 through February 27, 2015. The State of Florida renewed this contract for 10-months effective through February 27, 2015. This contract covers the purchase of several different sizes of tires for use on all city vehicles. Type:Purchase Current Year Budget?:Yes Budget Adjustment:None Budget Adjustment Comments: Current Year Cost:$440,000 Annual Operating Cost:$475,000 Not to Exceed:$510,000 Total Cost: For Fiscal Year:5/1/2014 to 2/27/2015 Appropriation Code Amount Appropriation Comment 566-06611-550700-519-000 $510,000 BPO Bid Required?:No Bid Number: Other Bid / Contract: Florida State Term Contract #863-000- 10-1 Bid Exceptions: Other Government Bid Review Approval: Cover Memo Item # 28 City Council Agenda Council Chambers - City Hall Meeting Date:5/1/2014 SUBJECT / RECOMMENDATION: Approve proposal from Construction Manager at Risk Certus Builders, Inc. of Tampa, FL for the demolition phase of the Residual Processing Building (RDP) storage conversion project (13-0053-UT) for the guaranteed maximum price of $208,923.40 and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (Consent) SUMMARY: On June 6, 2013, City Council approved the use of Construction Manager at Risk Services (CMR) for Continuing Contracts with Biltmore Construction Co., Inc. of Belleair, FL; Peter Brown Construction Solutions of Clearwater, FL; Certus Builders, Inc. of Tampa, FL; Creative Contractors, Inc. of Clearwater, FL; Honeywell Building Solutions of Orlando, FL; Keystone Excavators, Inc. of Oldsmar, FL; and J. Kokolakis Contracting, Inc. of Tarpon Springs, FL for a period of three years. These firms were selected in accordance with Florida Statutes 255.103 and 287.055 under Request for Qualifications 15-13 based upon construction experience, financial capability, availability of qualified staff, local knowledge and involvement in the community. This contract will provide for exterior and interior demolitionof process equipment in the Residual Processing Building and Generator Building in order to convert the two buildings into storage facilities at the Northeast Water Reclamation Facility. Work includes: engineering and permitting services, coordination between sub-contractor and City staff, and exterior and interior demolition of the Residual Processing Building and Generator Building. The construction duration for this project is 75days, commencing upon the Notice to Proceed. Future maintenance of the building will be provided by the Northeast Water Reclamation Facility and Building Maintenance staff, same as for the existing building. There will be neither additional staff requirements nor additional operating impacts for this project. Sufficient budget and revenue are available in Capital Improvement Program project, 0327-96664, WPC R and R. Type:Capital expenditure Current Year Budget?:Yes Budget Adjustment:None Budget Adjustment Comments: Current Year Cost:Annual Operating Cost: Not to Exceed:Total Cost:$208,923.40 For Fiscal Year: to Review Approval:Cover Memo Item # 29 1 Proposal Date: 03/19/14 TO: Khang Nguyen City of Clearwater 100 S. Myrtle Ave. Clearwater, FL 33756 RE: Residuals Processing Building (RDP) Storage Conversion City Project #: 13-0053-UT Certus File #: 14072 A. Objective This is a proposal from Certus Builders, Inc., of Tampa, Florida, for the guaranteed maximum price of $208,923.40 for the exterior & interior demolition of the Residual Processing Building (RDP) & Generator Building at the Clearwater Northeast Water Reclamation Facility (WRF). B. Scope of Work: 1. Engineering and permitting services: Engineer for interior pit fill and drive thru concrete work, and prepare permit application package. 2. Coordination: Coordinate the activities of Certus’s staff and sub-consultants with those of the City and administer communications among the project team members and with the City’s staff. 3. Exterior work: Demo and remove exterior silos, tanks, stairs, electrical and field office. 4. Interior work: Remove interior machinery, bins, stairs, catwalks, electrical and duct work. Demolish interior office contents, remove owner identified items from MCC, demo west walls, fill interior pit, remove tipping bin doors and cover, and replace trench drain grates. 5. Generator building: Remove concrete pads and muffler and demo exterior patio walls. 6. The demolition work will have no impact on plant function. The Northeast WRF must remain operational and in compliance with other agencies’ standards and requirements. Attachment number 1 \nPage 1 of 2 Item # 29 2 C. Cost Detail Summary: Description Amount Cost of Work* $ 150,738.38 Contractor’s Overhead @ 10% $ 15,073.84 Contractor Fee@ 5% $ 8,290.61 Subtotal $ 174,102.83 Contingency (20%) $ 34,820.57 Guaranteed Maximum Price $ 208,923.40 *See attached cost detail breakdown and clarification for additional info. D. Project Duration: Project duration shall be 75 calendar days from the date of Notice to Proceed. E. General Conditions & Technical Specifications: This proposal is submitted in conjunction with the existing Construction Manager at Risk Services Continuing Contract entered into with the City of Clearwater on June 17, 2013, based on RFQ #15-13. For work performed, invoices shall be submitted to the City of Clearwater, Engineering Department, Attn: Veronica Josef, Senior Staff Assistant, P.O. Box 4748, Clearwater, Florida, 33758-4748. Contingency services may be billed only after written authorization is provided by the City to proceed with those services. CERTUS BUILDERS INC. By: _________________________________ Dean Sumner CEO Countersigned: CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA ____________________________ By: _______________________________ George N. Cretekos William B. Horne II Mayor City Manager Approved as to form: Attest: ____________________________ ___________________________________ Camilo A. Soto Rosemarie Call Assistant City Attorney City Clerk Attachment number 1 \nPage 2 of 2 Item # 29 PROJECTSITE MC M U LLEN BOO TH RDS.R. 580CITYSERVICEAREA LAN D M A R K DR LOCATION MAP ²Prepared by:Engineering DepartmentGeographic Technology Division100 S. Myrtle Ave, Clearwater, FL 33756Ph: (727)562-4750, Fax: (727)526-4755www.MyClearwater.com CRM KN N.T.S.201A 21-28s-16e03/12/20 14Map Gen By:Reviewed By:S-T-R :Grid #:Date:Scale: NORTHEAST WASTEW ATER PLANT SITERDP Storage Conversion13-0053-UT Document Path: V:\GIS\Engineering\Location M aps\RDP Storage Northeast Plant.mxd Attachment number 2 \nPage 1 of 1 Item # 29 City Council Agenda Council Chambers - City Hall Meeting Date:5/1/2014 SUBJECT / RECOMMENDATION: Award a contract (purchase order) to Layne Inliner, LLC, Sanford, FL, in the amount of $1,028,387.50, for the cleaning and video inspection of Stormwater outfall locations throughout the City of Clearwater and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (Consent) SUMMARY: City Storm Pipes have decreased capacity when they contain sand, tree roots, barnacles and many other types of debris. This contract will involve removal of debris to improve the function and integrity of the Stormwater infrastructure. The City of Clearwater Engineering Department will direct the contractor to high priority pipe systems as established by review of inspection reports and maintenance records. This contract is being awarded based on unit price only for a total value not to exceed $1,028,387.50. Although three contractors attended the prebid meeting, only one decided to submit a bid due the specialty nature of the work. The unit prices proposed are reasonable for this type of work. Sufficient revenue is available in Capital Improvement Program project 0315-96124, Storm Pipe System Improvements. Type:Capital expenditure Current Year Budget?:Yes Budget Adjustment:No Budget Adjustment Comments: See summary Current Year Cost:$1,028,387.50 Annual Operating Cost: Not to Exceed:$1,028,387.50 Total Cost:$1,028,387.50 For Fiscal Year:2013 to 2014 Appropriation Code Amount Appropriation Comment 0315-96124-563700-539- 000-0000 $1,028,387.50 See summary Bid Required?:Yes Bid Number:13-0045-EN Other Bid / Contract:Bid Exceptions:None Review Approval: Cover Memo Item # 30 BI D I T E M S Q T Y U N I T U N I T P R I C E A M O U N T 1 Pr o j e c t S i g n 1 L . S . $ 1 , 5 0 0 . 0 0 $ 1 , 5 0 0 . 0 0 2 Mo b i l i z a t i o n 10 E A $ 2 , 5 0 0 . 0 0 $ 2 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 3 Cl e a n i n g V i d e o R e c o r d i n g 40 , 0 0 0 L . F . $ 5 . 0 0 $ 2 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 4 Ou t f a l l H e a d w a l l / U p s t r e a m S t r u c t u r e R e s t o r a t i o n ( G r ou t / S e a l ) 10 C Y $ 2 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 2 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 5 Ou t f a l l C o n c r e t e R e s t o r a t i o n 10 0 S F $ 2 5 0 . 0 0 $ 2 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 6 Cl e a n a n d P a i n t T i d e f l e x V a l v e 40 E A $ 3 0 0 . 0 0 $ 1 2 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 7 ≤1 2 " D i a m e t e r P i p e 1, 0 0 0 L . F . $ 8 . 0 0 $ 8 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 8 15 " D i a m e t e r P i p e 2, 0 0 0 L . F . $ 1 0 . 0 0 $ 2 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 9 18 " D i a m e t e r P i p e 2, 0 0 0 L . F . $ 1 1 . 0 0 $ 2 2 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 10 24 " D i a m e t e r P i p e 2, 5 0 0 L . F . $ 1 2 . 5 0 $ 3 1 , 2 5 0 . 0 0 11 30 " D i a m e t e r P i p e 2, 0 0 0 L . F . $ 1 3 . 5 0 $ 2 7 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 12 36 " D i a m e t e r P i p e 2, 5 0 0 L . F . $ 1 4 . 0 0 $ 3 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 13 42 " D i a m e t e r P i p e 2, 0 0 0 L . F . $ 1 5 . 0 0 $ 3 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 14 48 " D i a m e t e r P i p e 2, 5 0 0 L . F . $ 1 6 . 0 0 $ 4 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 15 54 " D i a m e t e r P i p e 2, 0 0 0 L . F . $ 2 5 . 0 0 $ 5 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 16 60 " D i a m e t e r P i p e 2, 0 0 0 L . F . $ 2 8 . 0 0 $ 5 6 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 17 ≤1 2 " D i a m e t e r P i p e 50 0 L . F . $ 9 . 0 0 $ 4 , 5 0 0 . 0 0 18 15 " D i a m e t e r P i p e 50 0 L. F . $1 1 . 5 0 $5 , 7 5 0 . 0 0 ST O R M W A T E R O U T F A L L P I P E C L E A N I N G P R O J E C T # 1 3 - 0 0 4 5 - E N BI D O P E N I N G : T H U R S D A Y , M A R C H 2 7 , 2 0 1 4 A W A R D - TH U R S D A Y , M A Y 1 , 2 0 1 4 Me d i u m C l e a n i n g ( 1 0 - 2 9 % a c c u m u l a t e d d e b r i s v s . p i p e v o l u m e ) Li g h t C l e a n i n g ( 0 - 9 % a c c u m u l a t e d d e b r i s v s . p i p e v o lu m e ) Ge n e r a l 18 15 " D i a m e t e r P i p e 50 0 L. F . $1 1 . 5 0 $5 , 7 5 0 . 0 0 19 18 " D i a m e t e r P i p e 1, 0 0 0 L . F . $ 1 2 . 5 0 $ 1 2 , 5 0 0 . 0 0 20 24 " D i a m e t e r P i p e 1, 0 0 0 L . F . $ 1 3 . 5 0 $ 1 3 , 5 0 0 . 0 0 21 30 " D i a m e t e r P i p e 50 0 L . F . $ 1 4 . 5 0 $ 7 , 2 5 0 . 0 0 22 36 " D i a m e t e r P i p e 1, 0 0 0 L . F . $ 1 5 . 0 0 $ 1 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 23 42 " D i a m e t e r P i p e 50 0 L . F . $ 1 6 . 0 0 $ 8 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 24 48 " D i a m e t e r P i p e 1, 0 0 0 L . F . $ 1 8 . 0 0 $ 1 8 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 25 54 " D i a m e t e r P i p e 1, 0 0 0 L . F . $ 2 8 . 0 0 $ 2 8 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 26 60 " D i a m e t e r P i p e 50 0 L . F . $ 3 5 . 0 0 $ 1 7 , 5 0 0 . 0 0 27 ≤1 2 " D i a m e t e r P i p e 50 0 L . F . $ 1 2 . 0 0 $ 6 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 28 15 " D i a m e t e r P i p e 50 0 L . F . $ 1 3 . 0 0 $ 6 , 5 0 0 . 0 0 29 18 " D i a m e t e r P i p e 1, 0 0 0 L . F . $ 1 4 . 0 0 $ 1 4 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 30 24 " D i a m e t e r P i p e 1, 0 0 0 L . F . $ 1 6 . 0 0 $ 1 6 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 31 30 " D i a m e t e r P i p e 50 0 L . F . $ 1 8 . 0 0 $ 9 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 32 36 " D i a m e t e r P i p e 1, 0 0 0 L . F . $ 2 2 . 0 0 $ 2 2 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 33 42 " D i a m e t e r P i p e 50 0 L . F . $ 2 4 . 0 0 $ 1 2 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 34 48 " D i a m e t e r P i p e 1, 0 0 0 L . F . $ 2 6 . 0 0 $ 2 6 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 35 54 " D i a m e t e r P i p e 1, 0 0 0 L . F . $ 3 2 . 0 0 $ 3 2 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 36 60 " D i a m e t e r P i p e 50 0 L . F . $ 3 6 . 0 0 $ 1 8 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $8 9 4 , 2 5 0 . 0 0 37 $1 3 4 , 1 3 7 . 5 0 $1 , 0 2 8 , 3 8 7 . 5 0 BI D D E R ’ S G R A N D T O T A L BI D S U B T O T A L (I T E M S 1 T H R O U G H 3 6 ) Ow n e r ’ s 1 5 % C o n t i n g e n c y He a v y C l e a n i n g ( 3 0 % a n d g r e a t e r a c c u m u l a t e d d e b r i s vs . p i p e v o l u m e ) Attachment number 1 \nPage 1 of 1 Item # 30 PDFConvert.21772.1.SectionV_for_Signature Page i 7/29/2013 SECTION V CONTRACT DOCUMENTS Table of Contents: CONTRACT BOND ................................................................................................................................. 1 CONTRACT .............................................................................................................................................. 3 CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT FOR FINAL PAYMENT ................................................................. 7 PROPOSAL BOND .................................................................................................................................. 8 AFFIDAVIT .............................................................................................................................................. 9 NON COLLUSION AFFIDAVIT ......................................................................................................... 10 PROPOSAL ............................................................................................................................................. 11 CITY OF CLEARWATER ADDENDUM SHEET ............................................................................. 14 BIDDER’S PROPOSAL ......................................................................................................................... 15 SCRUTINIZED COMPANIES AND BUSINESS OPERATIONS WITH CUBA AND SYRIA CERTIFICATION FORM ..................................................................................................................... 17 Attachment number 2 \nPage 1 of 18 Item # 30 PDFConvert.21772.1.SectionV_for_Signature Page 1 of 17 7/29/2013 BOND NUMBER: ____________________ CONTRACT BOND (1) STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF SEMINOLE KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That we LAYNE INLINER, LLC as Contractor and _____________________________________________________________ (Surety) whose home address is _____________________________________________________________________ HEREINAFTER CALLED THE "Surety", are held and firmly bound into the City of Clearwater, Florida (hereinafter called the "Owner") in the penal sum of: ONE MILLION, TWENTY-EIGHT THOUSAND, THREE HUNDRED EIGHTY-SEVEN AND 50/100 Dollars ($1,028,387.50) for the payment of which we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns for the faithful performance of a certain written contract, dated the ______________day of ___________________, 2014, entered into between the Contractor and the City of Clearwater for: STORMWATER OUTFALL PIPE CLEANING PROJECT #13-0045-EN a copy of which said contract is incorporated herein by reference and is made a part hereof as if fully copied herein. NOW THEREFORE, THE CONDITIONS OF THIS OBLIGATION ARE SUCH, that if the Contractor shall in all respects comply with the terms and conditions of said contract, including the one year guarantee of material and labor, and his obligations thereunder, including the contract documents (which include the Advertisement for Bids, Form of Proposal, Form of Contract, Form of Surety Bond, Instructions to Bidders, General Conditions and Technical Specifications) and the Plans and Specifications therein referred to and made a part thereof, and such alterations as may be made in said Plans and Specifications as therein provided for, and shall indemnify and save harmless the said Owner against and from all costs, expenses, damages, injury or conduct, want of care or skill, negligence or default, including patent infringements on the part of the said Contractor agents or employees, in the execution or performance of said contract, including errors in the plans furnished by the Contractor, and further, if such "Contractor" or "Contractors" shall promptly make payments to all persons supplying him, them or it, labor, material, and supplies used directly or indirectly by said Contractor, Contractors, Sub-Contractor, or Sub-Contractors, in the prosecution of the work provided for in said Contract, this obligation shall be void, otherwise, the Contractor and Surety jointly and severally agree to pay to the Owner any difference between the sum to which the said Contractor would be entitled on the completion of the Contract, and that which the Owner may be obliged to pay for the completion of said work by contract or otherwise, & any damages, direct or indirect, or consequential, which said Owner may sustain on account of such work, or on account of the failure of the said Contractor to properly and in all things, keep and execute all the provisions of said contract. Attachment number 2 \nPage 2 of 18 Item # 30 PDFConvert.21772.1.SectionV_for_Signature Page 2 of 17 7/29/2013 CONTRACT BOND (2) And the said Contractor and Surety hereby further bind themselves, their successors, executors, administrators, and assigns, jointly and severally, that they will amply and fully protect the said Owner against, and will pay any and all amounts, damages, costs and judgments which may be recovered against or which the Owner may be called upon to pay to any person or corporation by reason of any damages arising from the performance of said work, or of the repair or maintenance thereof, or the manner of doing the same or the neglect of the said Contractor or his agents or servants or the improper performance of the said work by the Contractor or his agents or servants, or the infringements of any patent rights by reason of the use of any material furnished or work done; as aforesaid, or otherwise. And the said Contractor and Surety hereby further bind themselves, their successors, heirs, executors, administrators, and assigns, jointly and severally, to repay the owner any sum which the Owner may be compelled to pay because of any lien for labor material furnished for the work, embraced by said Contract. And the said Surety, for the value received, hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the contract or to the work to be performed thereunder or the specifications accompanying the same shall in any way affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the contract or to the work or to the specifications. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, witness the hands and seals of the parties hereto this __________ day of ________________, 2014. LAYNE INLINER, LLC By: _____________________________ ATTEST: _________________________________ _________________________________ SURETY WITNESS: By: _____________________________ ATTORNEY-IN-FACT _________________________________ COUNTERSIGNED: _________________________________ _________________________________ Attachment number 2 \nPage 3 of 18 Item # 30 PDFConvert.21772.1.SectionV_for_Signature Page 3 of 17 7/29/2013 CONTRACT (1) This CONTRACT made and entered into this ___ day of ____________, 2014 by and between the City of Clearwater, Florida, a municipal corporation, hereinafter designated as the "City", and LAYNE INLINER, LLC, of the City of SANFORD, County of SEMINOLE and State of Florida, hereinafter designated as the "Contractor". WITNESSETH: That the parties to this contract each in consideration of the undertakings, promises and agreements on the part of the other herein contained, do hereby undertake, promise and agree as follows: The Contractor, and his or its successors, assigns, executors or administrators, in consideration of the sums of money as herein after set forth to be paid by the City and to the Contractor, shall and will at their own cost and expense perform all labor, furnish all materials, tools and equipment for the following: STORMWATER OUTFALL PIPE CLEANING (PROJECT #13-0045-EN) in the amount of ONE MILLION, TWENTY-EIGHT THOUSAND, THREE HUNDRED EIGHTY-SEVEN AND 50/100 Dollars ($1,028,387.50) In accordance with such proposal and technical supplemental specifications and such other special provisions and drawings, if any, which will be submitted by the City, together with any advertisement, instructions to bidders, general conditions, proposal and bond, which may be hereto attached, and any drawings if any, which may be herein referred to, are hereby made a part of this contract, and all of said work to be performed and completed by the contractor and its successors and assigns shall be fully completed in a good and workmanlike manner to the satisfaction of the City. If the Contractor should fail to comply with any of the terms, conditions, provisions or stipulations as contained herein within the time specified for completion of the work to be performed by the Contractor, then the City, may at its option, avail itself of any or all remedies provided on its behalf and shall have the right to proceed to complete such work as Contractor is obligated to perform in accordance with the provisions as contained herein. THE CONTRACTOR AND HIS OR ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS DOES HEREBY AGREE TO ASSUME THE DEFENSE OF ANY LEGAL ACTION WHICH MAY BE BROUGHT AGAINST THE CITY AS A RESULT OF THE CONTRACTOR'S ACTIVITIES ARISING OUT OF THIS CONTRACT AND FURTHERMORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THE TERMS, STIPULATIONS AND CONDITIONS AS CONTAINED HEREIN, AGREES TO HOLD THE CITY FREE AND HARMLESS FROM ANY AND ALL CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES, COSTS OF SUITS, JUDGMENTS OR DECREES RESULTING FROM ANY CLAIMS MADE UNDER THIS CONTRACT AGAINST THE CITY OR THE CONTRACTOR OR THE CONTRACTOR'S SUB CONTRACTORS, AGENTS, SERVANTS OR EMPLOYEES RESULTING FROM ACTIVITIES BY THE AFOREMENTIONED CONTRACTOR, SUB CONTRACTOR, AGENT SERVANTS OR EMPLOYEES. Attachment number 2 \nPage 4 of 18 Item # 30 PDFConvert.21772.1.SectionV_for_Signature Page 4 of 17 7/29/2013 CONTRACT (2) In addition to the foregoing provisions, the Contractor agrees to conform to the following requirements: In connection with the performance of work under this contract, the Contractor agrees not to discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, sex, religion, color, or national origin. The aforesaid provision shall include, but not be limited to, the following: employment, upgrading, demotion, or transfer; recruitment or recruitment advertising; lay off or termination; rates of pay or other forms of compensation; and selection for training, including apprenticeship. The Contractor agrees to post hereafter in conspicuous places, available for employees or applicants for employment, notices to be provided by the contracting officer setting forth the provisions of the non discrimination clause. The Contractor further agrees to insert the foregoing provisions in all contracts hereunder, including contracts or agreements with labor unions and/or worker's representatives, except sub contractors for standard commercial supplies or raw materials. It is mutually agreed between the parties hereto that time is of the essence of this contract, and in the event that the work to be performed by the Contractor is not completed within the time stipulated herein, it is then further agreed that the City may deduct from such sums or compensation as may be due to the Contractor the sum of $1,000.00 per day for each day that the work to be performed by the Contractor remains incomplete beyond the time limit specified herein, which sum of $1,000.00 per day shall only and solely represent damages which the City has sustained by reason of the failure of the Contractor to complete the work within the time stipulated, it being further agreed that this sum is not to be construed as a penalty but is only to be construed as liquidated damages for failure of the Contractor to complete and perform all work within the time period as specified in this contract. It is further mutually agreed between the City and the Contractor that if, any time after the execution of this contract and the surety bond which is attached hereto for the faithful performance of the terms and conditions as contained herein by the Contractor, that the City shall at any time deem the surety or sureties upon such performance bond to be unsatisfactory or if, for any reason, the said bond ceases to be adequate in amount to cover the performance of the work the Contractor shall, at his or its own expense, within ten (10) days after receipt of written notice from the City to do so, furnish an additional bond or bonds in such term and amounts and with such surety or sureties as shall be satisfactory to the City. If such an event occurs, no further payment shall be made to the Contractor under the terms and provisions of this contract until such new or additional security bond guaranteeing the faithful performance of the work under the terms hereof shall be completed and furnished to the City in a form satisfactory to it. Attachment number 2 \nPage 5 of 18 Item # 30 PDFConvert.21772.1.SectionV_for_Signature Page 5 of 17 7/29/2013 CONTRACT (3) The successful bidder/contractor will be required to comply with Section 119.0701, Florida Statutes (2013), specifically to: (a) Keep and maintain public records that ordinarily and necessarily would be required by the City of Clearwater in order to perform the service; (b) Provide the public with access to public records on the same terms and conditions that the City of Clearwater would provide the records and at a cost that does not exceed the cost provided in this chapter or as otherwise provided by law; (c) Ensure that public records that are exempt or confidential and exempt from public records disclosure requirements are not disclosed except as authorized by law; and (d) Meet all requirements for retaining public records and transfer, at no cost, to the City of Clearwater all public records in possession of the contractor upon termination of the contract and destroy any duplicate public records that are exempt or confidential and exempt from public records disclosure requirements. All records stored electronically must be provided to the public agency in a format that is compatible with the information technology systems of the City of Clearwater. Attachment number 2 \nPage 6 of 18 Item # 30 PDFConvert.21772.1.SectionV_for_Signature Page 6 of 17 7/29/2013 CONTRACT (4) IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to the agreement have hereunto set their hands and seals and have executed this Agreement, in duplicate, the day and year first above written. CITY OF CLEARWATER IN PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA By: ________________________________ (SEAL) William B. Horne, II City Manager Attest: Countersigned: ____________________________________ Rosemarie Call City Clerk By: ________________________________ Approved as to form: George N. Cretekos, Mayor ____________________________________ Camilo Soto Assistant City Attorney (Contractor must indicate whether Corporation, Partnership, Company or Individual.) ____________________________________ LAYNE INLINER, LLC______________ (Contractor) By: _________________________ (SEAL) (The person signing shall, in his own handwriting, sign the Principal's name, his own name, and his title; where the person is signing for a Corporation, he must, by Affidavit, show his authority to bind the Corporation). Attachment number 2 \nPage 7 of 18 Item # 30 PDFConvert.21772.1.SectionV_for_Signature Page 7 of 17 7/29/2013 CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT FOR FINAL PAYMENT (CORPORATION FORM) STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF SEMINOLE On this day personally appeared before me, the undersigned authority, duly authorized to administer oaths and take acknowledgments, _________________________________, who after being duly sworn, deposes and says: That he is the ________________________________________________________________ (TITLE) of LAYNE INLINER, LLC, a Florida Corporation, with its principal place of business located at 2531 JEWETT LANE, SANFORD, FLORIDA, 32771(herein, the "Contractor"). That the Contractor was the general contractor under a contract executed on the ______ day of __________________, 2014 with the CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA, a municipal corporation, as Owner, and that the Contractor was to perform the construction of: STORMWATER OUTFALL PIPE CLEANING (PROJECT #13-0045-EN) That said work has now been completed and the Contractor has paid and discharged all sub-contractors, laborers and material men in connection with said work and there are no liens outstanding of any nature nor any debts or obligations that might become a lien or encumbrance in connection with said work against the described property. That he is making this affidavit pursuant to the requirements of Chapter 713, Florida Statutes, and upon consideration of the payment of ___________________________ (Final Full Amount of Contract) in full satisfaction and discharge of said contract. That the Owner is hereby released from any claim which might arise out of said Contract. The word "liens" as used in this affidavit shall mean any and all arising under the operation of the Florida Mechanic's Lien Law as set forth in Chapter 713, Florida Statutes. Sworn and subscribed to before me ____________________________________ AFFIANT This _____day of ____________, 20___. BY: ______________________________ _________________________________ NOTARY PUBLIC _________________________________ My Commission Expires: PRESIDENT Attachment number 2 \nPage 8 of 18 Item # 30 PDFConvert.21772.1.SectionV_for_Signature Page 8 of 17 7/29/2013 PROPOSAL BOND (Not to be filled out if a certified check is submitted) KNOWN ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That we, the undersigned, ______________________ __________________________________ as Principal, and _____________________________ ______________________________ as Surety, who’s address is ___________________________ ____________________________________________________, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Clearwater, Florida, in the sum of ___________________________________________ Dollars ($_______________) (being a minimum of 10% of Contractor's total bid amount) for the payment of which, well and truly to be made, we hereby jointly and severally bind ourselves, our heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns. The condition of the above obligation is such that if the attached Proposal of ______________________ ____________________ as Principal, and _______________________________________ as Surety, for work specified as: _____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ all as stipulated in said Proposal, by doing all work incidental thereto, in accordance with the plans and specifications provided herefor, all within Pinellas County, is accepted and the contract awarded to the above named bidder, and the said bidder shall within ten days after notice of said award enter into a contract, in writing, and furnish the required Performance Bond with surety or sureties to be approved by the City Manager, this obligation shall be void, otherwise the same shall be in full force and virtue by law and the full amount of this Proposal Bond will be paid to the City as stipulated or liquidated damages. Signed this ______ day of ____________________, 20____. (Principal must indicate whether corporation, partnership, company or individual) ____________________________________ ____________________________________ Principal By: ________________________________ Title ____________________________________ ____________________________________ Surety (The person signing shall, in his own handwriting, sign the Principal's name, his own name, and his title; where the person is signing for a Corporation, he must, by Affidavit, show his authority to bind the Corporation). Attachment number 2 \nPage 9 of 18 Item # 30 PDFConvert.21772.1.SectionV_for_Signature Page 9 of 17 7/29/2013 AFFIDAVIT (To be filled in and executed if the bidder is a corporation) STATE OF FLORIDA ) COUNTY OF _______________) _________________________________________ being duly sworn, deposes and says that he/she is Secretary of _________________________________________________________________________ a corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Florida, and having its principal office at: _____________________________________ _________________ ________________ ______ (Street & Number) (City) (County) (State) Affiant further says that he is familiar with the records, minute books and by-laws of _______________________________________________________________________________ (Name of Corporation) Affiant further says that ____________________________ is ______________________________ (Officer's Name) (Title) of the corporation, is duly authorized to sign the Proposal for _______________________________ or said corporation by virtue of ______________________________________________________ (state whether a provision of by laws or a Resolution of Board of Directors. If by Resolution give date of adoption). ____________________________________ ____________________________________ Affiant Sworn to before me this ______ day of ______________________, 2014. ___________________________________ Notary Public ___________________________________ Type/print/stamp name of Notary ___________________________________ Title or rank, and Serial No., if any Attachment number 2 \nPage 10 of 18 Item # 30 PDFConvert.21772.1.SectionV_for_Signature Page 10 of 17 7/29/2013 NON COLLUSION AFFIDAVIT STATE OF FLORIDA ) COUNTY OF _______________) _______________________________________ being, first duly sworn, deposes and says that he is _________________________________ of ___________________________________________, the party making the foregoing Proposal or Bid; that such Bid is genuine and not collusive or sham: that said bidder is not financially interested in or otherwise affiliated in a business way with any other bidder on the same contract; that said bidder has not colluded, conspired, connived, or agreed, directly or indirectly, with any bidders or person, to put in a sham bid or that such other person shall refrain from bidding, and has not in any manner, directly or indirectly, sought by agreement or collusion, or communication or conference, with any person, to fix the bid price or affiant or any other bidder, or to fix any overhead, profit or cost element of said bid price, or that of any other bidder, or to secure any advantage against the City of Clearwater, Florida, or any person or persons interested in the proposed contract; and that all statements contained in said proposal or bid are true; and further, that such bidder has not directly or indirectly submitted this bid, or the contents thereof, or divulged information or data relative thereto to any association or to any member or agent thereof. ____________________________________ Affiant Sworn to and subscribed before me this ______ day of _______________________, 2014. ____________________________________ Notary Public Attachment number 2 \nPage 11 of 18 Item # 30 PDFConvert.21772.1.SectionV_for_Signature Page 11 of 17 7/29/2013 PROPOSAL (1) TO THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA, for STORMWATER OUTFALL PIPE CLEANING (PROJECT #13-0045-EN) and doing such other work incidental thereto, all in accordance with the contract documents, marked STORMWATER OUTFALL PIPE CLEANING (PROJECT #13-0045-EN) Every bidder must take notice of the fact that even though his proposal be accepted and the documents signed by the bidder to whom an award is made and by those officials authorized to do so on behalf of the City of Clearwater, Florida, that no such award or signing shall be considered a binding contract without a certificate from the Finance Director that funds are available to cover the cost of the work to be done, or without the approval of the City Attorney as to the form and legality of the contract and all the pertinent documents relating thereto having been approved by said City Attorney; and such bidder is hereby charged with this notice. The signer of the Proposal, as bidder, also declares that the only person, persons, company or parties interested in this Proposal, are named in this Proposal, that he has carefully examined the Advertisement, Instructions to Bidders, Contract Specifications, Plans, Supplemental Specifications, General Conditions, Special Provisions, and Contract Bond, that he or his representative has made such investigation as is necessary to determine the character and extent of the work and he proposes and agrees that if the Proposal be accepted, he will contract with the City of Clearwater, Florida, in the form of contract; hereto annexed, to provide the necessary labor, materials, machinery, equipment, tools or apparatus, do all the work required to complete the contract within the time mentioned in the General Conditions and according to the requirements of the City of Clearwater, Florida, as herein and hereinafter set forth, and furnish the required surety bonds for the following prices to wit: Attachment number 2 \nPage 12 of 18 Item # 30 PDFConvert.21772.1.SectionV_for_Signature Page 12 of 17 7/29/2013 PROPOSAL (2) If the foregoing Proposal shall be accepted by the City of Clearwater, Florida, and the undersigned shall fail to execute a satisfactory contract as stated in the Advertisement herein attached, then the City may, at its option determine that the undersigned has abandoned the contract, and thereupon this Proposal shall be null and void, and the certified check or bond accompanying this Proposal, shall be forfeited to become the property of the City of Clearwater, Florida, and the full amount of said check shall be retained by the City, or if the Proposal Bond be given, the full amount of such bond shall be paid to the City as stipulated or liquidated damages; otherwise, the bond or certified check accompanying this Proposal, or the amount of said check, shall be returned to the undersigned as specified herein. Attached hereto is a bond or certified check on __________________________________________ ____________________________________ Bank, for the sum of __________________________ ____________________________________________________________ ($_________________) (being a minimum of 10% of Contractor's total bid amount). The full names and residences of all persons and parties interested in the foregoing bid are as follows: (If corporation, give the names and addresses of the President and Secretary. If firm or partnership, the names and addresses of the members or partners. The Bidder shall list not only his name but also the name of any person with whom bidder has any type of agreement whereby such person's improvements, enrichment, employment or possible benefit, whether sub contractor, materialman, agent, supplier, or employer is contingent upon the award of the contract to the bidder). NAMES: ADDRESSES: __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ Signature of Bidder: ____________________________ (The bidder must indicate whether Corporation, Partnership, Company or Individual). Attachment number 2 \nPage 13 of 18 Item # 30 PDFConvert.21772.1.SectionV_for_Signature Page 13 of 17 7/29/2013 PROPOSAL (3) The person signing shall, in his own handwriting, sign the Principal's name, his own name and his title. Where the person signing for a corporation is other than the President or Vice President, he must, by affidavit, show his authority, to bind the corporation. Principal: ___________________________________________________________________________ By: ___________________________________ Title: ___________________________________ Business Address of Bidder: ____________________________________________________________ City and State: ________________________________________________ Zip Code _______________ Dated at ___________________________, this ______ day of ____________________, A.D., 20__. Attachment number 2 \nPage 14 of 18 Item # 30 PDFConvert.21772.1.SectionV_for_Signature Page 14 of 17 7/29/2013 CITY OF CLEARWATER ADDENDUM SHEET PROJECT: STORMWATER OUTFALL PIPE CLEANING (PROJECT #13-0045-EN) Acknowledgment is hereby made of the following addenda received since issuance of Plans and Specifications. Addendum No. _____ Date: _____________ Addendum No. _____ Date: _____________ Addendum No. _____ Date: _____________ Addendum No. _____ Date: _____________ Addendum No. _____ Date: _____________ Addendum No. _____ Date: _____________ Addendum No. _____ Date: _____________ Addendum No. _____ Date: _____________ Addendum No. _____ Date: _____________ Addendum No. _____ Date: _____________ Addendum No. _____ Date: _____________ ____________________________________ (Name of Bidder) ____________________________________ (Signature of Officer) ____________________________________ (Title of Officer) ____________________________________ (Date) Attachment number 2 \nPage 15 of 18 Item # 30 PDFConvert.21772.1.SectionV_for_Signature Page 15 of 17 7/29/2013 BIDDER’S PROPOSAL PROJECT: STORMWATER OUTFALL PIPE CLEANING (PROJECT #13-0045-EN) CONTRACTOR: ____________________________________________________________________ BIDDER'S GRAND TOTAL: $_______________________________________________ (Numbers) BIDDER'S GRAND TOTAL: __________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ (Words) BID ITEMS QTY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT General 1 Project Sign 1 L.S. 2 Mobilization 10 EA 3 Cleaning Video Recording 40,000 L.F. 4 Outfall Headwall/Upstream Structure Restoration (Grout/Seal) 10 CY 5 Outfall Concrete Restoration 100 SF 6 Clean and Paint Tideflex Valve 40 EA Light Cleaning (0-9% accumulated debris vs. pipe volume) 7 ≤12" Diameter Pipe 1,000 L.F. 8 15" Diameter Pipe 2,000 L.F. 9 18" Diameter Pipe 2,000 L.F. 10 24" Diameter Pipe 2,500 L.F. 11 30" Diameter Pipe 2,000 L.F. 12 36" Diameter Pipe 2,500 L.F. 13 42" Diameter Pipe 2,000 L.F. 14 48" Diameter Pipe 2,500 L.F. 15 54" Diameter Pipe 2,000 L.F. 16 60" Diameter Pipe 2,000 L.F. Medium Cleaning (10-29% accumulated debris vs. pipe volume) 17 ≤12" Diameter Pipe 500 L.F. 18 15" Diameter Pipe 500 L.F. 19 18" Diameter Pipe 1,000 L.F. 20 24" Diameter Pipe 1,000 L.F. 21 30" Diameter Pipe 500 L.F. 22 36" Diameter Pipe 1,000 L.F. 23 42" Diameter Pipe 500 L.F. 24 48" Diameter Pipe 1,000 L.F. 25 54" Diameter Pipe 1,000 L.F. 26 60" Diameter Pipe 500 L.F. Heavy Cleaning (30% and greater accumulated debris vs. pipe volume) 27 ≤12" Diameter Pipe 500 L.F. 28 15" Diameter Pipe 500 L.F. Attachment number 2 \nPage 16 of 18 Item # 30 PDFConvert.21772.1.SectionV_for_Signature Page 16 of 17 7/29/2013 29 18" Diameter Pipe 1,000 L.F. 30 24" Diameter Pipe 1,000 L.F. 31 30" Diameter Pipe 500 L.F. 32 36" Diameter Pipe 1,000 L.F. 33 42" Diameter Pipe 500 L.F. 34 48" Diameter Pipe 1,000 L.F. 35 54" Diameter Pipe 1,000 L.F. 36 60" Diameter Pipe 500 L.F. BID SUBTOTAL (ITEMS 1 THROUGH 36) 37 Owner’s 15% Contingency BIDDER’S GRAND TOTAL THE BIDDER'S GRAND TOTAL ABOVE IS HIS TOTAL BID BASED ON HIS UNIT PRICES AND LUMP SUM PRICES AND THE ESTIMATED QUANTITIES REQUIRED FOR EACH SECTION. THIS FIGURE IS FOR INFORMATION ONLY AT THE TIME OF OPENING BIDS. THE CITY WILL MAKE THE TABULATION FROM THE UNIT PRICES AND LUMP SUM PRICE BID. IF THERE IS AN ERROR IN THE TOTAL BY THE BIDDER, IT SHALL BE CHANGED AS ONLY THE UNIT PRICES AND LUMP SUM PRICE SHALL GOVERN. Attachment number 2 \nPage 17 of 18 Item # 30 PDFConvert.21772.1.SectionV_for_Signature Page 17 of 17 7/29/2013 SCRUTINIZED COMPANIES AND BUSINESS OPERATIONS WITH CUBA AND SYRIA CERTIFICATION FORM PER SECTION III, ITEM 25, IF YOUR BID IS $1,000,000 OR MORE, THIS FORM MUST BE COMPLETED AND SUBMITTED WITH THE BID PROPOSAL. FAILURE TO SUBMIT THIS FORM AS REQUIRED, MAY DEEM YOUR SUBMITTAL NONRESPONSIVE. The affiant, by virtue of the signature below, certifies that: 1. The vendor, company, individual, principal, subsidiary, affiliate, or owner is aware of the requirements of section 287.135, Florida Statutes, regarding companies on the Scrutinized Companies with Activities in Sudan List, the Scrutinized Companies with Activities in the Iran Petroleum Energy Sector List, or engaging in business operations in Cuba and Syria; and 2. The vendor, company, individual, principal, subsidiary, affiliate, or owner is eligible to participate in this solicitation and is not listed on either the Scrutinized Companies with Activities in Sudan List, the Scrutinized Companies with Activities in the Iran Petroleum Sector List, or engaged in business operations in Cuba and Syria; and 3. Business Operations means, for purposes specifically related to Cuba or Syria, engaging in commerce in any form in Cuba or Syria, including, but not limited to, acquiring, developing, maintaining, owning, selling, possessing, leasing or operating equipment, facilities, personnel, products, services, personal property, real property, military equipment, or any other apparatus of business or commerce; and 4. If awarded the Contract (or Agreement), the vendor, company, individual, principal, subsidiary, affiliate, or owner will immediately notify the City of Clearwater in writing, no later than five (5) calendar days after any of its principals are placed on the Scrutinized Companies with Activities in Sudan List, the Scrutinized Companies with Activities in the Iran Petroleum Sector List, or engages in business operations in Cuba and Syria. ____________________________________ Authorized Signature ____________________________________ Printed Name ____________________________________ Title ____________________________________ Name of Entity/Corporation STATE OF _____________________ COUNTY OF ___________________ The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this ________ day of _________________, 2014, by __________________________________________ (name of person whose signature is being notarized) as the ________________________ (title) of _________________________________ (name of corporation/entity), personally known to me as described herein ____________, or produced a ___________________________ (type of identification) as identification, and who did/did not take an oath. ____________________________________ Notary Public ____________________________________ Printed Name My Commission Expires: __________________ NOTARY SEAL ABOVE Attachment number 2 \nPage 18 of 18 Item # 30 City Council Agenda Council Chambers - City Hall Meeting Date:5/1/2014 SUBJECT / RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the execution of a Joint Participation Agreement (JPA) between the City of Clearwater and the State of Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) for the rehabilitation of hangars at the Clearwater Airpark and adopt Resolution 14-10. SUMMARY: The FDOT has agreed to provide 80% funding to rehabilitate the maintenance hangar to include: replacing insulation, upgrading electrical/wiring throughout the hangar, adding outside lighting, replacing indoor lighting with cost effective LED lighting, repairing leaking roof, rehabilitating office to include new ceiling, repairing door closures and painting and adding signage in front of hangar at the Clearwater Airpark in the amount of $160,000.00. A midyear budget amendment will establish the capital project 315-94881, Airpark Hangar Rehabilitation in the amount of $200,000.00 recognizing the FDOT grant funding in the amount of $160,000.00 and allocating general fund reserves in the amount of $40,000.00. Review Approval: Cover Memo Item # 31 RESOLUTION NO. 14-10 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A JOINT PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CLEARWATER AND THE STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, TO REHABILITATE THE MAINTENANCE HANGAR TO INCLUDE: REPLACING INSULATION, UPGRADING ELECTRICAL/WIRING THROUGHOUT THE HANGAR, ADDING OUTSIDE LIGHTING, REPLACING INDOOR LIGHTING WITH COST EFFICIENT LED LIGHTING, REPAIRING LEAKING ROOF, REHABILITATING OFFICE TO INCLUDE NEW CEILING, REPAIRING DOOR CLOSURES AND PAINTING AND ADDING SIGNAGE IN FRONT OF HANGAR AT THE CLEARWATER AIRPARK; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) has agreed to provide funding to rehabilitate the maintenance hangar to include: replacing insulation, upgrading electrical/wiring throughout the hangar, adding outside lighting, replacing indoor lighting with cost effective LED lighting, repairing leaking roof, rehabilitating office to include new ceiling, repairing door closures and painting and adding signage in front of hangar at the Clearwater Airpark under Joint Participation Agreement Financial Project No.: 425922-1-94-01, Contract No.: ARB47, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “A”; now, therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA: Section 1. The City Council hereby accepts and approves the Joint Participation Agreement between the City and the State of Florida Department of Transportation, Financial Project No.: 425922-1-94-01, Contract No.: ARB47 at the Clearwater Airpark. Section 2. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon adoption PASSED AND ADOPTED this _______ day of _____________, 2014. ____________________________ George N. Cretekos Mayor Attachment number 1 \nPage 1 of 2 Item # 31 Approved as to form: Attest: __________________________ _____________________________ Camilo A. Soto Rosemarie Call Assistant City Attorney City Clerk Attachment number 1 \nPage 2 of 2 Item # 31 Attachment number 2 \nPage 1 of 27 Item # 31 Attachment number 2 \nPage 2 of 27 Item # 31 Attachment number 2 \nPage 3 of 27 Item # 31 Attachment number 2 \nPage 4 of 27 Item # 31 Attachment number 2 \nPage 5 of 27 Item # 31 Attachment number 2 \nPage 6 of 27 Item # 31 Attachment number 2 \nPage 7 of 27 Item # 31 Attachment number 2 \nPage 8 of 27 Item # 31 Attachment number 2 \nPage 9 of 27 Item # 31 Attachment number 2 \nPage 10 of 27 Item # 31 Attachment number 2 \nPage 11 of 27 Item # 31 Attachment number 2 \nPage 12 of 27 Item # 31 Attachment number 2 \nPage 13 of 27 Item # 31 Attachment number 2 \nPage 14 of 27 Item # 31 Attachment number 2 \nPage 15 of 27 Item # 31 Attachment number 2 \nPage 16 of 27 Item # 31 Attachment number 2 \nPage 17 of 27 Item # 31 Attachment number 2 \nPage 18 of 27 Item # 31 Attachment number 2 \nPage 19 of 27 Item # 31 Attachment number 2 \nPage 20 of 27 Item # 31 Attachment number 2 \nPage 21 of 27 Item # 31 Attachment number 2 \nPage 22 of 27 Item # 31 Attachment number 2 \nPage 23 of 27 Item # 31 Attachment number 2 \nPage 24 of 27 Item # 31 Attachment number 2 \nPage 25 of 27 Item # 31 Attachment number 2 \nPage 26 of 27 Item # 31 Attachment number 2 \nPage 27 of 27 Item # 31 City Council Agenda Council Chambers - City Hall Meeting Date:5/1/2014 SUBJECT / RECOMMENDATION: Authorize a Joint Participation Agreement (JPA) between the City of Clearwater and the State of Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) for the rehabilitation of hangar C at the Clearwater Airpark, adopt Resolution 14-12, and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. SUMMARY: FDOT has agreed to provide 80% of the funding to rehabilitate hangar C at the Clearwater Airpark. The scope of this work will include but is not limited to the razing of hangar D, which is currently a shade hangar, and replacing it with a T-hangar. The rebuilding of the T-hangar will include design, concrete, electrical, plumbing, civil engineering, stormwater management and the creation of an oily water recovery system in the hangar in the amount of $400,000.00. Upon execution of the JPA, a midyear budget amendment will establish capital project 315-94882, Rehabilitation of Airpark hangar C in the amount of $500,000. Recognizing the FDOT grant funding in the amount of $400,000 and allocating Penny for Pinellas funds in the amount of $100,000. Review Approval: Cover Memo Item # 32 Attachment number 1 \nPage 1 of 27 Item # 32 Attachment number 1 \nPage 2 of 27 Item # 32 Attachment number 1 \nPage 3 of 27 Item # 32 Attachment number 1 \nPage 4 of 27 Item # 32 Attachment number 1 \nPage 5 of 27 Item # 32 Attachment number 1 \nPage 6 of 27 Item # 32 Attachment number 1 \nPage 7 of 27 Item # 32 Attachment number 1 \nPage 8 of 27 Item # 32 Attachment number 1 \nPage 9 of 27 Item # 32 Attachment number 1 \nPage 10 of 27 Item # 32 Attachment number 1 \nPage 11 of 27 Item # 32 Attachment number 1 \nPage 12 of 27 Item # 32 Attachment number 1 \nPage 13 of 27 Item # 32 Attachment number 1 \nPage 14 of 27 Item # 32 Attachment number 1 \nPage 15 of 27 Item # 32 Attachment number 1 \nPage 16 of 27 Item # 32 Attachment number 1 \nPage 17 of 27 Item # 32 Attachment number 1 \nPage 18 of 27 Item # 32 Attachment number 1 \nPage 19 of 27 Item # 32 Attachment number 1 \nPage 20 of 27 Item # 32 Attachment number 1 \nPage 21 of 27 Item # 32 Attachment number 1 \nPage 22 of 27 Item # 32 Attachment number 1 \nPage 23 of 27 Item # 32 Attachment number 1 \nPage 24 of 27 Item # 32 Attachment number 1 \nPage 25 of 27 Item # 32 Attachment number 1 \nPage 26 of 27 Item # 32 Attachment number 1 \nPage 27 of 27 Item # 32 RESOLUTION NO. 14-12 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A JOINT PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CLEARWATER AND THE STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, TO REHABILITATE HANGAR C AT THE CLEARWATER AIRPARK. THE SCOPE OF THIS WORK WILL INCLUDE BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO THE RAZING OF HANGAR D, WHICH IS CURRENTLY A SHADE HANGAR, AND REPLACING IT WITH A T-HANGAR. THE REBUILDING OF THE T-HANGAR WILL INCLUDE DESIGN, CONCRETE, ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING, CIVIL ENGINEERING, STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AND THE CREATION OF AN OILY WATER RECOVERY SYSTEM IN THE HANGAR; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) has agreed to provide funding to rehabilitate hangar C at the Clearwater Airpark. The scope of this work will include but is not limited to the razing of hangar D, which is currently a shade hangar, and replacing it with a T-hangar. The rebuilding of the T-hangar will include design, concrete, electrical, plumbing, civil engineering, stormwater management and the creation of an oily water recovery system in the hangar under Joint Participation Agreement Financial Project No.: 425922-2-94-01, Contract No.: ARB48, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “A”; now, therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA: Section 1. The City Council hereby accepts and approves the Joint Participation Agreement between the City and the State of Florida Department of Transportation, Financial Project No.: 425922-2-94-01, Contract No.: ARB48 at the Clearwater Airpark. Section 2. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon adoption PASSED AND ADOPTED this _______ day of _____________, 2014. ____________________________ George N. Cretekos Mayor Attachment number 2 \nPage 1 of 2 Item # 32 Approved as to form: Attest: __________________________ _____________________________ Camilo A. Soto Rosemarie Call Assistant City Attorney City Clerk Attachment number 2 \nPage 2 of 2 Item # 32 Attachment number 3 \nPage 1 of 1 Item # 32 City Council Agenda Council Chambers - City Hall Meeting Date:5/1/2014 SUBJECT / RECOMMENDATION: Provide direction regarding changes to City Council Rules. SUMMARY: At the April 14, 2014 work session, it was suggested that consideration be given to moving the Consent Agenda earlier in the council meeting. Staff is suggesting the Consent Agenda be placed after Citizens to be heard regarding items not on the agenda, but before public hearings. Staff is also recommending adding a Presentations category after public hearings, which will be reserved for government agencies or groups who are providing formal updates or requests to Council. Special recognitions and awards would remain at the beginning of the meeting and would be reserved for Proclamations, service awards, and other special recognitions. During the same meeting, a suggestion was made regarding opening Closing Comments by the Mayor to Councilmembers. Comments would be limited to three minutes. Currently the Mayor closes the council meeting reviewing upcoming and recent events. At the April 28 work session, it was suggested that Rule 8, Debate of Motions, Tie Votes, be amended to clarify how Councilmembers may end debate. Interactive discussion between Councilmembers on an agenda item may be ended at any time by a motion to call the question. Review Approval:1) Legal 2) Clerk Cover Memo Item # 33 Resolution No. 09- RESOLUTION NO. 14-18 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA, AMENDING COUNCIL RULES; AMENDING RULE 6, MOVING THE CONSENT AGENDA IN THE ORDER OF BUSINESS, ADDING SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES, PRESENTATIONS AND CLOSING COMMENTS BY COUNCILMEMBERS TO THE ORDER OF BUSINESS; AMEDNING RULE 8, CLARIFYING HOW COUNCILMEMBERS MAY END DISUCSSION OF AN AGENDA ITEM; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Council desires to amend the rules to facilitate efficient meetings; now, therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA: Section 1. Rule 6, Council Rules, is amended as follows: RULE 6 ORDER OF BUSINESS A. Invocation B. Pledge C. Special recognitions and awards (Proclamations, service awards, or other special recognitions) D. Minutes of previous meetings E. Citizens to be heard regarding items not on agenda. Each speaker will be asked to give their name and address and to limit their comments to a maximum of three minutes. F. Consent Agenda FG. Public hearings (not before 6:00 p.m.) Legislative and administrative matters: 1. Presentation of issues by City staff. 2. Statement of case by applicant or representative (5 minutes). 3. Council questions. 4. Comments in support and comments in opposition. See subsection (3) below regarding time limitations for speakers. 5. Council questions. 6. Final rebuttal by applicant or representative (5 minutes). 7. Council motion to determine disposition. Attachment number 1 \nPage 1 of 3 Item # 33 Resolution No. 14-18 2 Quasi-judicial Hearings (those giving testimony will be sworn-in): 1. Staff states its recommendation and briefly summarizes its reasons for the recommendation (2 minutes). 2. Applicant presents case, including its testimony and exhibits. Witness may be cross-examined (15 minutes). 3. Staff presents further evidence. May be cross-examined (10 minutes). 4. Public comment. See subsection (3) below regarding time limitations for speakers. 5. City Council discussion, and may question any witness. 6. Applicant may call witnesses in rebuttal (5 minutes). 7. Conclusion by applicant (3 minutes). 8. Decision. Second Reading of Ordinances 1. Public comment. See subsection (3) below regarding time limitations for speakers. All time limits may be extended upon request, and upon approval of request by majority of City Council. G. Consent Agenda H. City Manager reports.Presentations (by government agencies or groups providing formal updates to Council) I. City Attorney reports.City Manager reports. J. Council Discussion Items (work session only). City Attorney reports. K. Other Council action (if agendaed from work session).Council Discussion Items (work session only) L. Closing comments by Mayor.Other Council action (if agendaed from work session) M. Closing comments by Councilmembers (limited to 3 minutes) N. Closing comments by Mayor. Section 2. Rule 8, Council Rules, is amended as follows: Rules 8 Debate of Motions, Tie Votes Council may discuss an agenda item after a motion being made. Such discussion may be interactive between the Councilmembers and may be ended at any time by a motion on the itemto call the question. Attachment number 1 \nPage 2 of 3 Item # 33 Resolution No. 14-18 3 *** Motions and any amendments can be withdrawn or modified by the maker at any time prior to the Chair stating the question on the motion; after that time, the permission of the Council majority must be obtained. The Chair cannot close debate as long as any member who has not exhausted his right to debate desires the floor, unless a vote on the previousto call the question is called forpasses. Section 3. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED this _______ day of _____________, 2014. ____________________________ George N. Cretekos Mayor Approved as to form: Attest: __________________________ _____________________________ Pamela K. Akin Rosemarie Call City Attorney City Clerk Attachment number 1 \nPage 3 of 3 Item # 33 Revised 10-04-2012 by Resolution 12-17 1 COUNCIL RULES RULE 1 SCHEDULING COUNCIL MEETINGS/WORK SESSION AGENDAS (1) The City Council shall meet on the first and third Thursdays of each month at 6:00 p.m. in its chamber. However, in July, the City Council shall hold one regular night meeting on the third Thursday of the month. There will be no regular meeting on the third Thursday of December or the first Thursday of January. The Council will make this determination at the time the annual meeting calendar is being compiled. The day of the meeting may be changed by majority vote of the Council. (2) Except as may be rescheduled from time to time when necessary due to conflict, a work session shall be held at 1:00 p.m. on the first working day of the Council meeting week. Work sessions are primarily designed for information gathering and guidance, and no formal Council decision approving or disapproving an agenda item or items scheduled for public hearing may be made. No public input will be accepted at work sessions except by consensus of Council. Only items on the work session agenda will be discussed. Items not on the agenda may be brought up by the Council or staff during the work session asking they be scheduled for subsequent meetings or work sessions. (3) Community meetings will be scheduled as requested by the Council. RULE 2 REQUIREMENTS FOR QUORUM A quorum for the transaction of business by the City Council shall consist of three (3) Councilmembers. RULE 3 MANDATORY MEETING ATTENDANCE FOR CITY OFFICIALS The City officials whose regular attendance shall be required during the sittings of the Council shall be the City Clerk, City Manager and City Attorney or their substitutes. Attachment number 2 \nPage 1 of 8 Item # 33 Revised 10-04-2012 by Resolution 12-17 2 RULE 4 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF “CHAIR” The Mayor shall be the presiding officer of the City Council, and shall be referred to as the “Chair” when sitting in that capacity. In case of the absence of the Mayor, the Vice- Mayor shall assume those responsibilities, and if both are absent, the senior Councilmember in years of service shall preside. The Chair shall preserve order. The Chair may call to order any member of the Council who shall violate any of the rules; and shall decide all questions of order, subject to a majority vote on a motion to appeal. The Chair shall recognize all members who seek the floor as provided in Rule 8. The Chair shall not make or second a motion. RULE 5 DUTIES OF VICE-MAYOR IN ABSENCE OF MAYOR Pursuant to Charter section 2.05, "the Vice-Mayor shall act as Mayor during the absence or inability of the Mayor to perform the duties of the office of the Mayor." For the purpose of that section, the Mayor shall be considered absent if there are duties of the office which must be performed and the Mayor is not present and able to perform them. RULE 6 ORDER OF BUSINESS (1) The order of business for a regular meeting shall ordinarily be: A. Invocation B. Pledge C. Special recognitions and awards (Proclamations, service awards, or other special recognitions) D. Minutes of previous meetings E. Citizens to be heard regarding items not on agenda. Each speaker will be asked to give their name and address and to limit their comments to a maximum of three minutes. F. Consent Agenda FG. Public hearings (not before 6:00 p.m.) Legislative and administrative matters: 1. Presentation of issues by City staff. 2. Statement of case by applicant or representative (5 minutes). Attachment number 2 \nPage 2 of 8 Item # 33 Revised 10-04-2012 by Resolution 12-17 3 3. Council questions. 4. Comments in support and comments in opposition. See subsection (3) below regarding time limitations for speakers. 5. Council questions. 6. Final rebuttal by applicant or representative (5 minutes). 7. Council motion to determine disposition. Quasi-judicial Hearings (those giving testimony will be sworn-in): 1. Staff states its recommendation and briefly summarizes its reasons for the recommendation (2 minutes). 2. Applicant presents case, including its testimony and exhibits. Witness may be cross-examined (15 minutes). 3. Staff presents further evidence. May be cross-examined (10 minutes). 4. Public comment. See subsection (3) below regarding time limitations for speakers. 5. City Council discussion, and may question any witness. 6. Applicant may call witnesses in rebuttal (5 minutes). 7. Conclusion by applicant (3 minutes). 8. Decision. All time limits may be extended upon request, and upon approval of request by majority of City Council. G. Consent Agenda H. City Manager reports.Presentations (by government agencies or groups providing formal updates to Council) I. City Attorney reports.City Manager reports. J. Council Discussion Items (work session only). City Attorney reports. K. Other Council action (if agendaed from work session).Council Discussion Items (work session only) L. Closing comments by Mayor.Other Council action (if agendaed from work session) M. Closing comments by Mayor. (2) Motion process for agenda items with Ordinances or Resolutions: agenda items will be presented by staff followed by questions by Council, public input, a motion and second on the agenda item, discussion/comments by Council, vote, a motion and second on the ordinance or resolution, discussion/comments by Council, and vote. Attachment number 2 \nPage 3 of 8 Item # 33 Revised 10-04-2012 by Resolution 12-17 4 Motion process for other agenda items: agenda items will be presented by staff, questions by Council, public input, a motion and second on the agenda item, discussion/comments by Council, and vote. (3) Public comments in support or opposition of items before the Council shall be limited to a total of 60 minutes, which can be extended upon Council approval. Unless otherwise specified, persons speaking before the City Council shall be limited to three minutes per speaker. Representatives of a group may speak for three minutes plus an additional minute for each person in the audience that waives their right to speak, up to a maximum of ten minutes. A form will be provided to document the request for additional time and those agreeing to waive their right to speak. No person shall speak more than once on the same subject at the same meeting unless granted permission by the City Council. When time limits are set for speakers, unused time cannot be passed from one speaker to another. Extensions of time limits can be given if approved by the Chair. RULE 7 AGENDA/EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS/ WAIVER OR CHANGE OF RULES (A) The City Manager or City Attorney may agenda an item. Any Council item must be agendaed for discussion at a work session prior to the item being placed on a Council Agenda. Any citizen may request a member to agenda an item, even though staff has assured petitioner that adverse action may result. The Chair cannot depart from the prescribed agenda but the Council may do so by a majority vote or by consensus in response to a suggestion from the Chair. Continuance may be granted by a majority vote of the Council upon the motion of any Councilmember. The public will be allowed to speak on an item to be continued if that item is an advertised public hearing, but no other action shall be taken. (B) Except for items advertised for public hearing, items may be removed from the agenda. Emergency items may be added to the agenda by the City Manager or City Attorney without prior notice. Councilmember requested items that have not been considered at a work session can be discussed at a Council meeting upon a majority vote of the council to do so. The agenda may be reordered. (C) Any expenditure of funds requiring Council action must be on the agenda, with appropriate support material. No action may be taken on expenditures not on the agenda unless the Council determines by the affirmative vote of a majority plus one to permit action to be taken. (D) The rules may be waived or changed only upon the affirmative vote of a majority plus one. RULE 8 DEBATE OF MOTIONS, TIE VOTES Attachment number 2 \nPage 4 of 8 Item # 33 Revised 10-04-2012 by Resolution 12-17 5 Council may discuss an agenda item after a motion being made. Such discussion may be interactive between the Councilmembers and may be ended at any time by a motion on the item. Otherwise, any member of the Council making a motion shall address the Chair and await recognition before speaking. The person making the motion is entitled to the floor first for debate. No one is entitled to the floor a second time on the same motion as long as any other member who has not spoken on the issue desires the floor. The Chair must recognize any person who seeks the floor while entitled to it. When a motion is made and seconded, it shall be stated by the Chair, if necessary, before any debate shall be in order. All questions shall be stated and put by the Chair, and the Chair shall declare all votes. Motions and any amendments can be withdrawn or modified by the maker at any time prior to the Chair stating the question on the motion; after that time, the permission of the Council majority must be obtained. The Chair cannot close debate as long as any member who has not exhausted his right to debate desires the floor, unless a vote on the previous question is called for. A tie vote shall constitute a continuance of the item to the next regularly scheduled meeting, but upon a tie vote on the same item at the next meeting, the item shall not be rescheduled except upon the request of the City Manager, the City Attorney, or a Councilmember. RULE 9 NON-DEBATABLE MOTIONS The following motions are not debatable: To adjourn; To lay on the table; To take from the table; Call the previous question. RULE 10 RECONSIDERATION Any member of the Council who voted with the prevailing side may move a reconsideration of any action of the whole Council provided that the motion be made at the same meeting at which the action was taken. A motion to reconsider shall be in order at any time (during the meeting at which the action was taken) except when a motion on some other subject is pending. No motion to reconsider shall be made more than once on any subject or matter at the same meeting. RULE 11 RESCISSION OF COUNCIL ACTION Attachment number 2 \nPage 5 of 8 Item # 33 Revised 10-04-2012 by Resolution 12-17 6 Council action may be rescinded by a majority vote. The motion may be made by any Councilmember. RULE 12 BREAKS/RECESSES The Council shall, at the direction of the Chair, take a break as needed and may recess for meals if the members of the City Council agree by their vote. RULE 13 COUNCIL MINUTES Copies of the minutes of regular meetings shall be furnished prior to the next meeting. Such minutes shall stand confirmed at the regular meeting of the Council without the reading thereof in open meeting unless some inaccuracy or error be pointed out by some member of the Council present, and in such event, an appropriate correction shall be made. Upon request, the City Manager will cause the City Clerk to provide any Councilmember with transcribed excerpts of tapes of City Council meetings. RULE 14 RULES OF ORDER Except as provided herein, or as may be required by Florida law or the City Charter, the rules of the City Council for the conduct of its business shall be as provided in the most recent edition of Robert’s Rules of Order. RULE 15 RULES OF DECORUM At all times, the Council, staff and public shall conduct themselves in a respectful and civil manner. The Chair shall rule out of order any person who, in the Chair’s determination, is making obscene, profane, impertinent, irrelevant, immaterial, inflammatory statements or inciting violence or fighting. The determination of the Chair or a majority of the Council shall be final on such matters. No member of the audience shall, during a Council Meeting, make or cause to be made any audible or disruptive sound or noise. Signs or graphic displays of any kind shall not be displayed in Council chambers, except in connection with a presentation made to the Council by a speaker at the podium. All persons shall at all times conduct themselves in accordance with these rules and failing such shall be removed from the Council Chambers. In the event of such removal such person shall not thereafter be readmitted to the Council Attachment number 2 \nPage 6 of 8 Item # 33 Revised 10-04-2012 by Resolution 12-17 7 Chambers during the same meeting. The Chair may recess the meeting, if deemed necessary, in order to restore order. Attachment number 2 \nPage 7 of 8 Item # 33 Revised 10-04-2012 by Resolution 12-17 8 Resolution No. Date Adopted 77-44 5-12-77 77-129 11-23-77 78-65 6-01-78 80-62 5-15-80 80-101 9-19-80 80-118 11-06-80 81-32 4-16-81 81-92 8-06-81 82-33 4-01-82 82-36 4-15-82 82-115 12-16-82 82-119 12-16-82 83-42 4-07-83 83-75 7-07-83 85-47 6-20-85 86-18 2-20-86 86-30 5-01-86 88-61 12-01-88 89-21 4-20-89 92-79 12-17-92 93-04 1-07-93 93-44 7-01-93 93-45 7-01-93 93-75 12-02-93 94-8 1-03-94 94-16 1-31-94 94-31 4-21-94 94-67 8-15-94 94-74 9-15-94 95-16 2-02-95 95-35 3-16-95 95-77 10-05-95 96-11 1-18-96 96-68 10-17-96 01-43 12-13-01 06-21 03-16-06 07-32 10-17-07 10-11 10-21 12-17 03-18-10 08-05-10 10-04-12 Attachment number 2 \nPage 8 of 8 Item # 33 RECOMMENDATION: List outline separately for Regular Council Meeting and for Worksession, rather than combining. The order of business for a regular Council meeting shall ordinarily be: A. Invocation B. Pledge C. Special recognitions and awards D. Citizens to be heard regarding items not on agenda. Each speaker will be asked to give their name and address and to limit their comments to a maximum of three minutes [moved to first item after recognitions and awards]. E. Minutes of previous meetings and/or Consent agenda a. Consent agenda could include the approval of minutes of the previous meeting. F. Presentations (if any - scheduled as needed) PUBLIC HEARINGS (not before 6:00 pm) G. Administrative Public Hearings H. Quasi-judicial Public Hearings I. Second Reading of Ordinances CITY MANAGER REPORTS J. Items pulled from Consent agenda K. Other Items from City Manager L. City Manager Verbal Reports CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS M. City Attorney Items N. City Attorney Verbal Reports OTHER O. Other Council action (if agendaed from work session) P. Councilmember closing comments (limited to 3 minutes each) [Note 1] Q. Closing comments and announcements of upcoming events by Mayor [Note 1: Typical agenda for public bodies – the public gets three minutes at meetings] Attachment number 3 \nPage 1 of 3 Item # 33 The order of business for a Council Worksession Meeting shall ordinarily be: A. Presentations B. Departmental Review of upcoming Council Agenda Items C. City Manager Verbal Reports D. City Attorney Verbal Reports E. Council Discussion Items (agenda via City Manager) F. Council Sub Committee reports if any Attachment number 3 \nPage 2 of 3 Item # 33 Page 4, Rule 8 Council may discuss an agenda item after a motion being made. Such discussion may be interactive between the Councilmembers and may be ended at any time by a motion on the item motion to call the question. Otherwise, any member of the Council . . . Attachment number 3 \nPage 3 of 3 Item # 33 From: "Jonson, Bill" <bill.jonson@myclearwater.com> Date: April 28, 2014, 7:02:58 AM EDT To: "Horne, William" <William.Horne@myclearwater.com> Cc: "Call, Rosemarie" <Rosemarie.Call@myClearwater.com>, "Akin, Pam" <Pam.Akin@myClearwater.com> Subject: Council Rules and Policies Discussion Agenda Item I am attaching a draft modifications to our Rules for discussion at today’s worksession. Could you distribute to the Council? Thank you, Bill Attachment number 4 \nPage 1 of 1 Item # 33 City Council Agenda Council Chambers - City Hall Meeting Date:5/1/2014 SUBJECT / RECOMMENDATION: Approve the 2014 Clearwater Federal Priorities. SUMMARY: Review Approval: Cover Memo Item # 34 City of Clearwater 2014 Federal Legislative City of Clearwater, Florida Federal Legislative Agenda Attachment number 1 \nPage 1 of 35 Item # 34 Prepar Vice Councilmember Hoyt Hamilton Questions regarding the information Greg Burns (202) 737-8162 Copyright Prepared by Van Scoyoc Associates for the Clearwater City Council Mayor George Cretekos Vice Mayor Doreen Hock-DiPolito Councilmember Hoyt Hamilton Councilmember Bill Jonson Councilmember Jay Polglaze Bill Horne, City Manager Questions regarding the information in this book may be directed to: Rosemarie Call (727) 562-4092 April 2014 Copyright 2014 Van Scoyoc Associates Inc. in this book may be directed to: Attachment number 1 \nPage 2 of 35 Item # 34 201 Water Resources Stevenson Creek Estuary Restoration Project Support continued Corps participation in the Stevenson Creek Estuary Clearwater. Support continued Federal participation in, and funding of, Corps of Engineers’ Continuing Authorities Programs, particularly Section 206. Development Act, with an increased authorization limit from $5 million to $10 million projects. Clearwater Pass Maintenance Dredging Support adequate annual funding for the Corps of Engineers Operations & including additional funding for dredging not identified in the annual Administration budget. additional funding specifically provided for “Small, Remote, or Subsistence Navigation” dredging activities. Waters of the United States Monitor activity related to the EPA’s proposed rule on waters of the U.S. proposed rule that could lead to unrealistic and over local governments. General and Local Government Issues National Flood Insurance Program Monitor changes to flood insurance rates for homeowners and businesses in the City of Clearwater. Monitor FEMA’s implementation of H.R. 3370, the Monitor FEMA’s attention to deadlines as set forth in H.R. 3370, particularly with regard to specific reports and/or other actions. Support passage of H.R. 3370, as well as improve the National participants. Tax-Exempt Bonds Oppose legislation that would threaten the tax exemption on state and local bonds, including a 28 percent cap on tax-exempt municipal bonds. Remote Sales-Tax Legislation Support legislation that requires companies making catalog and internet sales to collect and remit the associated taxes. Transient Occupancy Taxes Oppose legislation that would exempt by the consumer, thereby costing Pinellas Occupancy Taxes from visitors to the region. Public Pension Reform Monitor federal legislative proposals related to public pensions Transparency Act) which could significantly impact the City of Clearwater 2014 Federal Legislative Agenda Stevenson Creek Estuary Restoration Project Corps participation in the Stevenson Creek Estuary Restoration Project continued Federal participation in, and funding of, Corps of Engineers’ Continuing Authorities Programs, particularly Section 206. Support a new authorization of the Water Resources Development Act, with an increased authorization limit from $5 million to $10 million for Section 206 Maintenance Dredging adequate annual funding for the Corps of Engineers Operations & Maintenance account, including additional funding for dredging not identified in the annual Administration budget. additional funding specifically provided for “Small, Remote, or Subsistence Navigation” dredging activity related to the EPA’s proposed rule on waters of the U.S. Oppose any aspects of the proposed rule that could lead to unrealistic and over-burdensome regulations that would negatively affect al Government Issues National Flood Insurance Program changes to flood insurance rates for homeowners and businesses in the City of Clearwater. FEMA’s implementation of H.R. 3370, the Homeowner Flood Insurance Affordability Act. EMA’s attention to deadlines as set forth in H.R. 3370, particularly with regard to specific Support efforts to fix any unintended consequences that may occur , as well as improve the National Flood Insurance Program for the benefit of all threaten the tax exemption on state and local bonds, including a 28 percent exempt municipal bonds. legislation that requires companies making catalog and internet sales to collect and remit the legislation that would exempt online travel brokers from paying taxes on the full room rate paid Pinellas County the opportunity to collect appropriate Transient Occupancy Taxes from visitors to the region. federal legislative proposals related to public pensions (e.g., the Public Employee Pension which could significantly impact the Clearwater Employees Pension Fund Project in the City of continued Federal participation in, and funding of, Corps of Engineers’ Continuing horization of the Water Resources for Section 206 Maintenance account, including additional funding for dredging not identified in the annual Administration budget. Support additional funding specifically provided for “Small, Remote, or Subsistence Navigation” dredging aspects of the burdensome regulations that would negatively affect changes to flood insurance rates for homeowners and businesses in the City of Clearwater. urance Affordability Act. EMA’s attention to deadlines as set forth in H.R. 3370, particularly with regard to specific unintended consequences that may occur after the Flood Insurance Program for the benefit of all threaten the tax exemption on state and local bonds, including a 28 percent legislation that requires companies making catalog and internet sales to collect and remit the travel brokers from paying taxes on the full room rate paid County the opportunity to collect appropriate Transient e.g., the Public Employee Pension Clearwater Employees Pension Fund. Attachment number 1 \nPage 3 of 35 Item # 34 Transportation Transportation Authorization Monitor proposed changes to Federal highway and transit programs. transportation revenue streams. Support Clearwater’s priorities via this legislation or other means. Alternative Fuels Tax Incentives Support the extension of a $0.50 per gallon equivalent tax incentive for natural gas when used as a motor fuel. Public Safety Public Safety Funding Support at least level funding from FY 201 of Homeland Security grants, e.g., Community Oriented Policing Services, Byrne Justice Assistance Grants, Assistance to Firefighters Grants, and Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response Grants. Support any City of Clearwater applications for these funds The Corporation for National and Community Service Program Support continued annual funding for grant programs within the Community Service, particularly for the AmeriCorps State and National grant program. Economic Development & Social Services Department of Housing and Urban Development Support at continued adequate funding Block Grants and the HOME Investment Partnerships p overall efforts to support those that are least fortunate. Environmental Protection Agency’s Support continued adequate annual funding for the program, including at least $90 million for the Section 104(k) competitive grant program. legislation to reauthorize the Environme Supportive Housing for the Elderly and for Persons with Disabilities Urban Development’s Section 202 and 811 Programs Support continued adequate annual Federal funding of the Depart Development’s Supportive Housing for the Elderly Persons with Disabilities program (Section 811). Homeless Assistance – Continuum of Care Program Support continued adequate annual funding for Department of Housing and Urban Development Homeless Assistance Grants, particularly for the Continuum of Care Program. Economic Development Administration Support continued funding of the Econ grant applications through EDA programs. proposed changes to Federal highway and transit programs. Monitor efforts to enhance Federal Support any and all opportunities to secure funding for priorities via this legislation or other means. the extension of a $0.50 per gallon equivalent tax incentive for natural gas when used as a motor at least level funding from FY 2014 for a wide variety of Department of Justice and Department of Homeland Security grants, e.g., Community Oriented Policing Services, Byrne Justice Assistance Grants, Assistance to Firefighters Grants, and Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response Clearwater applications for these funds. The Corporation for National and Community Service – AmeriCorps’ State and National Grant continued annual funding for grant programs within the Corporation for National , particularly for the AmeriCorps State and National grant program. Economic Development & Social Services Department of Housing and Urban Development Formula Programs (CDBG & HOME) at continued adequate funding for future fiscal years for both the Community Development Block Grants and the HOME Investment Partnerships programs because of their critical role in the efforts to support those that are least fortunate. Environmental Protection Agency’s Brownfields Program continued adequate annual funding for the Environmental Protection Agency’s b program, including at least $90 million for the Section 104(k) competitive grant program. legislation to reauthorize the Environmental Protection Agency’s brownfields program. Supportive Housing for the Elderly and for Persons with Disabilities - Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Section 202 and 811 Programs d adequate annual Federal funding of the Department of Housing and Urban Supportive Housing for the Elderly program (Section 202) and Supportive Housing for Persons with Disabilities program (Section 811). Continuum of Care Program continued adequate annual funding for Department of Housing and Urban Development Homeless Assistance Grants, particularly for the Continuum of Care Program. Economic Development Administration continued funding of the Economic Development Administration. Support City of Clearwater through EDA programs. efforts to enhance Federal any and all opportunities to secure funding for the City of the extension of a $0.50 per gallon equivalent tax incentive for natural gas when used as a motor for a wide variety of Department of Justice and Department of Homeland Security grants, e.g., Community Oriented Policing Services, Byrne Justice Assistance Grants, Assistance to Firefighters Grants, and Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response AmeriCorps’ State and National Grant Corporation for National and , particularly for the AmeriCorps State and National grant program. (CDBG & HOME) Community Development because of their critical role in the City’s ’s brownfields program, including at least $90 million for the Section 104(k) competitive grant program. Support Department of Housing and ment of Housing and Urban (Section 202) and Supportive Housing for continued adequate annual funding for Department of Housing and Urban Development City of Clearwater Attachment number 1 \nPage 4 of 35 Item # 34 Energy & Environment Offshore Energy Exploration Monitor the potential expansion of offshore energy exploration in Florida’s Federal waters. Land and Water Conservation Fund Support a $900 million annual appropriation from the Land and Water Conservation Fund, including at least $100 million for the state grant program. the potential expansion of offshore energy exploration in Florida’s Federal waters. Fund a $900 million annual appropriation from the Land and Water Conservation Fund, including at least $100 million for the state grant program. the potential expansion of offshore energy exploration in Florida’s Federal waters. a $900 million annual appropriation from the Land and Water Conservation Fund, including at Attachment number 1 \nPage 5 of 35 Item # 34 FEDERAL ISSUE: Stevenson Creek Estuary BACKGROUND; HOW IT MAY AFFECT U.S. Army Corps of Engineers with standing authorization, known as the Continuing Authorities Programs (CAP), to respond to a variety of water resource problems without the need to seek specific congressional authorization or funding for each project. In theory, this decreases the amount of time required to budget, develop, and approve potential projects for construction. The CAP Section 206 program authorizes the Corps of Engineers to restoration and protection projects in partnership with non dictates that the maximum Federal cost for planning, design, and construction of any one project is $ million. Each project must be economically justified, The City and the Corps of Engineers have been engaged on Creek Estuary Restoration, since 1999. dredge and remove polluted material from Stevenson Cre feeds into Clearwater Harbor. The construction phase of the project began in August of 2009, but performance issues with the first and second firms material. These issues resulted in the increased project costs to the point that $5,000,000 cost limit. The City has contributed 100 percent of project overruns, which million since the project began. The Corps has made enough progress in their disputes with the first and second contractors to allow for the project to finally move forward, and it is expected to be c May of this year. However, the Corps to date has been unable to provide the City with any relief from the cost overruns. Last year, the Senate considered its version of a new authorization of the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA), S. 601, which included a provision that would increase the per project CAP Section 206 limit from $5 million to $10 million. Corps communicated that a provision like this is the only route to p City for the project’s cost overruns. 14, with Senator Bill Nelson voting for and Senator The House also passed a version of WRDA was not included in the final bill, and conference report is expected to be released by the spring or ea have indicated that passing a final version of WRDA remains a priority for RECOMMENDED POSITION: Support Restoration Project in the City of Clearwater. Corps of Engineers’ Continuing Authorities Programs, particularly Section 20 authorization of the Water Resources Development Act, with million to $10 million for Section 206 projects Stevenson Creek Estuary Restoration Project BACKGROUND; HOW IT MAY AFFECT THE CITY OF CLEARWATER: Congress provides the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers with standing authorization, known as the Continuing Authorities Programs (CAP), to respond to a variety of water resource problems without the need to seek specific ation or funding for each project. In theory, this decreases the amount of time required to budget, develop, and approve potential projects for construction. program authorizes the Corps of Engineers to engage in aquatic ecosystem in partnership with non-Federal government agencies. Current law dictates that the maximum Federal cost for planning, design, and construction of any one project is $ Each project must be economically justified, environmentally sound, and technically feasible. The City and the Corps of Engineers have been engaged on a Section 206 CAP project, the Stevenson since 1999. This objective of the Stevenson Creek Estuary Project is and remove polluted material from Stevenson Creek to improve the health of the The construction phase of the project began in August of 2009, but encountered major delays due to t and second firms selected to dredge the creek and remove polluted . These issues resulted in the termination of these previously awarded contracts costs to the point that the Corps’ Federal expenditures have reached th The City has contributed a $2,692,308 cost share to the project, and which have ballooned the City’s investment in the project to nearly $4.1 The Corps has made enough progress in their disputes with the first and second contractors to allow for the project to finally move forward, and it is expected to be c May of this year. However, the Corps to date has been unable to provide the City with any relief from the its version of a new authorization of the Water Resources Development included a provision that would increase the per project CAP Section 206 limit from $5 million to $10 million. In a letter to former Rep. C.W. “Bill” Young on this matter, t that a provision like this is the only route to providing any reimbursement to the the project’s cost overruns. S. 601, passed with bipartisan support in the Senate by Nelson voting for and Senator Marco Rubio voting against its final passage. passed a version of WRDA in 2013, H.R. 3080. However, the CAP increase provision was not included in the final bill, and its inclusion is being hashed-out in conference committee. conference report is expected to be released by the spring or early summer. House and Senate leadership have indicated that passing a final version of WRDA remains a priority for 2014. Support continued Corps participation in the Stevenson Creek in the City of Clearwater. Support continued Federal participation in, and funding of, Corps of Engineers’ Continuing Authorities Programs, particularly Section 206. Support authorization of the Water Resources Development Act, with an increased authorization l for Section 206 projects. : Congress provides the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers with standing authorization, known as the Continuing Authorities Programs (CAP), to respond to a variety of water resource problems without the need to seek specific ation or funding for each project. In theory, this decreases the amount of time engage in aquatic ecosystem Federal government agencies. Current law dictates that the maximum Federal cost for planning, design, and construction of any one project is $5 environmentally sound, and technically feasible. a Section 206 CAP project, the Stevenson Estuary Project is to ek to improve the health of the waterway which encountered major delays due to to dredge the creek and remove polluted contracts and have expenditures have reached their authorized t, and has provided ed the City’s investment in the project to nearly $4.1 The Corps has made enough progress in their disputes with the first and second contractors to allow for the project to finally move forward, and it is expected to be completed by May of this year. However, the Corps to date has been unable to provide the City with any relief from the its version of a new authorization of the Water Resources Development included a provision that would increase the per project CAP Section 206 In a letter to former Rep. C.W. “Bill” Young on this matter, the roviding any reimbursement to the S. 601, passed with bipartisan support in the Senate by a vote of 83- s final passage. However, the CAP increase provision out in conference committee. The final rly summer. House and Senate leadership enson Creek Estuary continued Federal participation in, and funding of, Support a new thorization limit from $5 Attachment number 1 \nPage 6 of 35 Item # 34 FEDERAL ISSUE: Clearwater Pass BACKGROUND; HOW IT MAY AFFECT channel, the Army Corps of Engineers are supp maintenance dredging of Clearwater Pass. The Clearwater every 5 years due to shoaling, which fishermen, charter boats, and other recreational vessels occurs about every 10 years. Clearwater Pass was last dredged and fully paid for by the 2012, but the City of Clearwater paid the entire Corps may have funding available to complete the dredging City for about a third of the cost of that dred The dredging project has a double benefit, as the sand that is removed is then used to renourish North Clearwater Beach. To fund dredging projects that are not generally budgeted for by the Ad competition for funds from the Army Corps of Engineers, Congress has adjusted their funding strategy in the age of no-earmarks to add additional funding for what Congress terms “Additional Funding for Ongoing Work.” Among these amounts, Congress in Fiscal Year additional funding to the Corps for “Small, Remote, or Subsistence Navigation” operations & maintenance (O&M) activity. This will likely be the funding from which the compete in the future to maintain the channel. purpose, while in FY 2014, Congress provided $40 million in additional funding. RECOMMENDED POSITION: Support & Maintenance account, including additional funding for dredging not identified in the annual Administration budget. Support additional funding specifically provided for “Small, Remote, or Subsistence Navigation” dredging acti Pass Maintenance Dredging BACKGROUND; HOW IT MAY AFFECT THE CITY OF CLEARWATER: As a Federal navigation channel, the Army Corps of Engineers are supposed to be 100 percent responsible for the cost of Clearwater Pass. The Clearwater Pass requires maintenance dredging about , which cuts off an important navigation channel for local commercial and other recreational vessels. However, due to budget constraints, this only dredged and fully paid for by the Corps in 2001. The Pass was again dredged i paid the entire $750,000 cost of the project, as it was uncertain may have funding available to complete the dredging. Eventually, the Corps did reimburse the for about a third of the cost of that dredging operation. The dredging project has a double benefit, as the sand that is removed is then used to renourish North To fund dredging projects that are not generally budgeted for by the Administration due to the difficult competition for funds from the Army Corps of Engineers, Congress has adjusted their funding strategy in earmarks to add additional funding for what Congress terms “Additional Funding for these amounts, Congress in Fiscal Year (FY) 2012 provided $30 million in additional funding to the Corps for “Small, Remote, or Subsistence Navigation” operations & maintenance (O&M) activity. This will likely be the funding from which the Clearwater Pas compete in the future to maintain the channel. In FY 2013, Congress provided $30 million for the same purpose, while in FY 2014, Congress provided $40 million in additional funding. Support adequate annual funding for the Corps of Engineers Operations & Maintenance account, including additional funding for dredging not identified in the annual additional funding specifically provided for “Small, Remote, or Subsistence Navigation” dredging activities. Federal navigation osed to be 100 percent responsible for the cost of ass requires maintenance dredging about cuts off an important navigation channel for local commercial budget constraints, this only was again dredged in uncertain when the , the Corps did reimburse the The dredging project has a double benefit, as the sand that is removed is then used to renourish North ministration due to the difficult competition for funds from the Army Corps of Engineers, Congress has adjusted their funding strategy in earmarks to add additional funding for what Congress terms “Additional Funding for 2012 provided $30 million in additional funding to the Corps for “Small, Remote, or Subsistence Navigation” operations & Clearwater Pass must In FY 2013, Congress provided $30 million for the same orps of Engineers Operations & Maintenance account, including additional funding for dredging not identified in the annual additional funding specifically provided for “Small, Remote, or Attachment number 1 \nPage 7 of 35 Item # 34 FEDERAL ISSUE: Waters of the United States BACKGROUND; HOW IT MAY AFFECT the U.S. Supreme Court over the past decade imposed restrictions on the scope of wetland regulation governed by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) that regulate “dredge and fill” activities in navigable waters and their adjacent wetlands. Opponents of these restrictions have urged Congress to redefine waters of the U.S., and apply that definition to all aspec As legislation along those lines failed to pass previous Congresses, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) and now a proposed rule, to redefine waters of the U.S. There is concern that their effort may significantly expand the definition of waters of the U.S. to include tributaries, ditches, canals, and all water bodies that can potentially drain into navigable waters, interstate wa The EPA claims that the proposed rule “does not protect any new types of waters that have not historically been covered under the Clean Water Act.” However, they also say that “60 percent of stream miles in the U.S. only flow seasonall that “other types of waters” will have “protection… evaluated through a case specific analysis of whether the connection is or is not significant.” At the end of 2013, the EPA released a for concluding that virtually all bodies of water contribute flow to waters jurisdiction and should therefore be subject to regulation under the CWA. On March 25th of this year, the EPA and the ACOE jointly released the proposed rule the U.S. subject to Clean Water Act jurisdiction. and application of the CWA, including: · All water bodies would be subject to Federal jurisdiction or case exempted from jurisdiction. This would include: Waste treatment systems water reuse facilities Prior converted crop Artificially irrigated areas that would revert to upland without irrigation Artificial lakes or ponds created by excavation or by diking dry land (stock watering ponds, irrigation, settling basins, or rice growing) Artificial reflecting or swimming pools Small ornamental waters created in dry land Water-filled depressions incidental to construction Groundwater, including groundwater Gullies, rills, non-wetland swales, and puddles Ditches excavated entirely in upland areas that drain only uplands or non waters, and have no more than ephemeral flow Ditches that do not contribute flow to otherwise jurisdictional waters Waters of the United States BACKGROUND; HOW IT MAY AFFECT THE CITY OF CLEARWATER: A series of decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court over the past decade imposed restrictions on the scope of wetland regulation Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) that regulate “dredge and fill” activities in navigable waters and their adjacent wetlands. Opponents of these restrictions have urged Congress to redefine waters of the U.S., and apply that definition to all aspects of the CWA. As legislation along those lines failed to pass previous Congresses, the Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) over the past several years developed e waters of the U.S. There is concern that their effort may significantly expand the definition of waters of the U.S. to include tributaries, ditches, canals, and all water bodies that can potentially drain into navigable waters, interstate waters, or the territorial seas. The EPA claims that the proposed rule “does not protect any new types of waters that have not historically been covered under the Clean Water Act.” However, they also say that “60 percent of stream miles in the U.S. only flow seasonally or after rain” but that they deserve protection under the CWA and that “other types of waters” will have “protection… evaluated through a case specific analysis of whether the connection is or is not significant.” At the end of 2013, the EPA released a report on the connectivity of water to provide a scientific rationale for concluding that virtually all bodies of water contribute flow to waters will be subject to Federal jurisdiction and should therefore be subject to regulation under the CWA. of this year, the EPA and the ACOE jointly released the proposed rule to define waters of the U.S. subject to Clean Water Act jurisdiction. The proposed rule proffers major changes to the scope and application of the CWA, including: s would be subject to Federal jurisdiction or case-by-case review unless expressly exempted from jurisdiction. This would include: Waste treatment systems designed to meet the requirements of the CWA water reuse facilities Prior converted cropland (as determined by the EPA) Artificially irrigated areas that would revert to upland without irrigation Artificial lakes or ponds created by excavation or by diking dry land (stock watering ponds, irrigation, settling basins, or rice growing) l reflecting or swimming pools Small ornamental waters created in dry land filled depressions incidental to construction , including groundwater drained through subsurface drainage systems wetland swales, and puddles tches excavated entirely in upland areas that drain only uplands or non waters, and have no more than ephemeral flow Ditches that do not contribute flow to otherwise jurisdictional waters : A series of decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court over the past decade imposed restrictions on the scope of wetland regulation Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) that regulate “dredge and fill” activities in navigable waters and their adjacent wetlands. Opponents of these restrictions have urged Congress to As legislation along those lines failed to pass previous Congresses, the Environmental Protection Agency developed guidance first, e waters of the U.S. There is concern that their effort may significantly expand the definition of waters of the U.S. to include tributaries, ditches, canals, and all territorial seas. The EPA claims that the proposed rule “does not protect any new types of waters that have not historically been covered under the Clean Water Act.” However, they also say that “60 percent of stream y or after rain” but that they deserve protection under the CWA and that “other types of waters” will have “protection… evaluated through a case specific analysis of whether report on the connectivity of water to provide a scientific rationale subject to Federal to define waters of major changes to the scope case review unless expressly designed to meet the requirements of the CWA, including Artificially irrigated areas that would revert to upland without irrigation Artificial lakes or ponds created by excavation or by diking dry land (stock watering drained through subsurface drainage systems tches excavated entirely in upland areas that drain only uplands or non-jurisdictional Attachment number 1 \nPage 8 of 35 Item # 34 · The term “adjacent” would apply to “neighboring” waters located within a riparian area or floodplain subsurface connection or confined surface hydrologic connection · All tributaries would be waters of the U.S. and are defined as any water body with a bed, bank and ordinary high-water mark, even if that tributary for any length has a man culvert, pipe, dam) or a more natural break (wetland, debris pile, boulder, underg Tributaries can be natural, man ephemeral, intermittent, and seasonal streams. · Federal jurisdiction of “other waters” would be determined on a case alone or in combination with other similarly situated waters in the area are determined to have a “significant nexus” (anything more than speculative or insubstantial) to navigable waters, interstate waters, or the territorial seas. Being designated as waters of the U.S. triggers regulatory requirements and legal responsibilities beyond simply identifying water bodies subject to a CWA permit. Many of these water bodies are already regulated under the CWA. However, as a “water of the differently. For example, storm water discharges are regulated at the point that an outfall discharges into a receiving water. If designated as “water of the U.S.” the flow of runoff have to be regulated with numeric effluent limits rather than the discharge the “maximum extent practicable,” which is a lower standard. This is particularly troubling for Florida given its unique flood control systems t which would likely fall under the new definition of waters of the U.S. and would be subject to stringent and expensive new regulation. Congress has paid some attention to this issue over the past several years. In the House, t efforts to attach legislative “riders” to various appropriations bills to stop implementation of the rule. However, these efforts have ultimately failed, allowing EPA and other Federal agencies to continue their work. Meanwhile, on the other side of the issue, nearly 100 members of Congress recently wrote to the EPA asking that they release the rule as quickly as possible (although the letter did not outright support the content of the rule). The public comment period for the rule closes POSITION: Monitor activity related to the EPA’s proposed rule on waters of the U.S. aspects of the proposed rule that could lead to unrealistic and over negatively affect local governments. he term “adjacent” would apply to all adjacent waters, not just wetlands, and would include “neighboring” waters located within a riparian area or floodplain or waters with a shallow subsurface connection or confined surface hydrologic connection, as determined by the EPA. ld be waters of the U.S. and are defined as any water body with a bed, bank water mark, even if that tributary for any length has a man-made break (bridge, culvert, pipe, dam) or a more natural break (wetland, debris pile, boulder, underg Tributaries can be natural, man-altered, or man-made unless expressly exempted. This includes ephemeral, intermittent, and seasonal streams. Federal jurisdiction of “other waters” would be determined on a case-by-case review if they either alone or in combination with other similarly situated waters in the area are determined to have a “significant nexus” (anything more than speculative or insubstantial) to navigable waters, interstate waters, or the territorial seas. Being designated as waters of the U.S. triggers regulatory requirements and legal responsibilities beyond simply identifying water bodies subject to a CWA permit. Many of these water bodies are already regulated under the CWA. However, as a “water of the U.S.” these water bodies will be regulated differently. For example, storm water discharges are regulated at the point that an outfall discharges into a receiving water. If designated as “water of the U.S.” the flow of runoff into the storm water system have to be regulated with numeric effluent limits rather than the discharge from the system regulated to the “maximum extent practicable,” which is a lower standard. This is particularly troubling for Florida given its unique flood control systems throughout the state, all of which would likely fall under the new definition of waters of the U.S. and would be subject to stringent Congress has paid some attention to this issue over the past several years. In the House, t efforts to attach legislative “riders” to various appropriations bills to stop implementation of the rule. However, these efforts have ultimately failed, allowing EPA and other Federal agencies to continue their er side of the issue, nearly 100 members of Congress recently wrote to the EPA asking that they release the rule as quickly as possible (although the letter did not outright support The public comment period for the rule closes on July 21, 2014. activity related to the EPA’s proposed rule on waters of the U.S. aspects of the proposed rule that could lead to unrealistic and over-burdensome regulations that would negatively affect local governments. adjacent waters, not just wetlands, and would include waters with a shallow determined by the EPA. ld be waters of the U.S. and are defined as any water body with a bed, bank made break (bridge, culvert, pipe, dam) or a more natural break (wetland, debris pile, boulder, underground stream). made unless expressly exempted. This includes case review if they either alone or in combination with other similarly situated waters in the area are determined to have a “significant nexus” (anything more than speculative or insubstantial) to navigable waters, Being designated as waters of the U.S. triggers regulatory requirements and legal responsibilities beyond simply identifying water bodies subject to a CWA permit. Many of these water bodies are already U.S.” these water bodies will be regulated differently. For example, storm water discharges are regulated at the point that an outfall discharges into storm water system will the system regulated to hroughout the state, all of which would likely fall under the new definition of waters of the U.S. and would be subject to stringent Congress has paid some attention to this issue over the past several years. In the House, there have been efforts to attach legislative “riders” to various appropriations bills to stop implementation of the rule. However, these efforts have ultimately failed, allowing EPA and other Federal agencies to continue their er side of the issue, nearly 100 members of Congress recently wrote to the EPA asking that they release the rule as quickly as possible (although the letter did not outright support activity related to the EPA’s proposed rule on waters of the U.S. Oppose any burdensome regulations that would Attachment number 1 \nPage 9 of 35 Item # 34 FEDERAL ISSUE: National Flood Insurance Program BACKGROUND; HOW IT MAY AFFECT established the NFIP to address the nation’s flood exposure and challenges inherent in financing and managing flood risks in the private sector. Private insurance companies at the time claimed that the flood peril was uninsurable and, therefore, could not be underwritten in the private insurance market. A three prong floodplain management and insurance program was created to (1) i most at risk of flooding; (2) minimize the economic impact of flooding events through floodplain management ordinances; and (3) provide flood insurance to individuals and businesses. Until 2005, the NFIP was self-supporting payments. Today, the program is in roughly $25 billion in debt due to a number of large storms, the most recent being Sandy. In mid-2012, Congress passed, and the President signed a 5 Insurance Program (NFIP) that attempted to restore the program to firmer financial footing by making a number of changes to the program that impacted the City’s residents. This is known as Biggert Then, on March 21, 2014, H.R. 3370 was enacted, the attempts to address some of the so-called unintended consequences of Biggert What the New Law Does 1) Caps Annual Rate Increases for pre · Ensures that those pre-FIRM primary residence policyholders whose rates have gone up will have rate increases within their specific insurance property class of between 5 and 15 percent per year (18 percent for any specific home). · Provides actual refunds to policyholde (guidance within 8 months, reimbursement between 14 · Removes the sales trigger 2) Reinstates Grandfathering · Does away with Section 207 of BW12 which will stay with the property (homes that were built to code post increases due to changing flood maps) 3) Develops surcharges to pay for the cost of the bill · Creates an annual surcharge of $25 for all primary residences and $250 second home owners 4) Provides options to lower policy rates · Provides for policy deductibles of up to $10,000 · Allows for monthly payment of premiums 5) Focuses on future mitigation and affordability National Flood Insurance Program BACKGROUND; HOW IT MAY AFFECT THE CITY OF CLEARWATER: In 1968, Congress established the NFIP to address the nation’s flood exposure and challenges inherent in financing and private sector. Private insurance companies at the time claimed that the flood peril was uninsurable and, therefore, could not be underwritten in the private insurance market. A three prong floodplain management and insurance program was created to (1) identify areas across the nation most at risk of flooding; (2) minimize the economic impact of flooding events through floodplain management ordinances; and (3) provide flood insurance to individuals and businesses. supporting as policy premiums and fees covered expenses and claim payments. Today, the program is in roughly $25 billion in debt due to a number of large storms, the most 2012, Congress passed, and the President signed a 5-year reauthorization of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) that attempted to restore the program to firmer financial footing by making a number of changes to the program that impacted the City’s residents. This is known as Biggert 014, H.R. 3370 was enacted, the Homeowner Flood Insurance Affordability Act that called unintended consequences of Biggert-Waters. Caps Annual Rate Increases for pre-FIRM Primary Homes FIRM primary residence policyholders whose rates have gone up will have rate increases within their specific insurance property class of between 5 and 15 percent per year (18 percent for any specific home). Provides actual refunds to policyholders who will have overpaid after the passage of the bill (guidance within 8 months, reimbursement between 14-16 months) Removes the sales trigger Reinstates Grandfathering Does away with Section 207 of BW12 and reinstates “grandfathering” for primary homes which will stay with the property (homes that were built to code post-FIRM will not have rate increases due to changing flood maps) Develops surcharges to pay for the cost of the bill Creates an annual surcharge of $25 for all primary residences and $250 for business and Provides options to lower policy rates Provides for policy deductibles of up to $10,000 Allows for monthly payment of premiums Focuses on future mitigation and affordability In 1968, Congress established the NFIP to address the nation’s flood exposure and challenges inherent in financing and private sector. Private insurance companies at the time claimed that the flood peril was uninsurable and, therefore, could not be underwritten in the private insurance market. A three- dentify areas across the nation most at risk of flooding; (2) minimize the economic impact of flooding events through floodplain as policy premiums and fees covered expenses and claim payments. Today, the program is in roughly $25 billion in debt due to a number of large storms, the most zation of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) that attempted to restore the program to firmer financial footing by making a number of changes to the program that impacted the City’s residents. This is known as Biggert-Waters. Homeowner Flood Insurance Affordability Act that FIRM primary residence policyholders whose rates have gone up will have rate increases within their specific insurance property class of between 5 and 15 percent rs who will have overpaid after the passage of the bill for primary homes FIRM will not have rate for business and Attachment number 1 \nPage 10 of 35 Item # 34 · Requires FEMA to develop specific guideline mitigation opportunities to receive lower premiums · Ensures that future mitigation activities will provide premium discounts · Provides additional funding and a new deadline of 2 years from enactment for the FEM affordability study, which will have to consider mitigation assistance and means premium assistance · Requires a future FEMA “affordability framework” 6) Flood Insurance Advocate · Creates a Flood Insurance Advocate What it Doesn’t Do · Does not offer relief to second homes and businesses (subject to continued 25 percent annual increases until actuarial rates are reached) · Rates can increase more than 18 percent each year if Community Rating System (CRS) rating is “downgrad or increase in coverage Meanwhile, the City will need to remain vigilant to ensure the public fully benefits from the changes to Biggert-Waters enacted on March 21, 2014 1. Educate the community about H.R. 3370 and how it will help some constituents 2. Gather hard data related to business owners and homeowners who are not helped by H.R. 3370 3. Monitor FEMA implementation of H.R. 3370, including: a. Rate increases and the schedule of such increases b. Create a Flood Insurance Advocate to educate and assist policyholders and coordinate outreach c. Allow for optional high d. Clearly communicat regardless of whether their premium rates are full actuarial rates e. Changes to map revision protocols i. Before commencement of any map updating process, notify each community affected by explanation of why such model ii. Provide each affected community a 30 regarding the appropriateness of the model to be used iii. Upon completion of the first Independent Data Submission, transmit a copy of such information period during which the supplement or modify the existing data, and incorporate any data that is consistent with prevailing engineering pr iv. Notify a community’s member of f. Study of voluntary community of study) g. Follow any FEMA effort to secure private markets Requires FEMA to develop specific guidelines within one year to provide policyholders with mitigation opportunities to receive lower premiums Ensures that future mitigation activities will provide premium discounts Provides additional funding and a new deadline of 2 years from enactment for the FEM affordability study, which will have to consider mitigation assistance and means Requires a future FEMA “affordability framework” Flood Insurance Advocate Creates a Flood Insurance Advocate lief to second homes and businesses (subject to continued 25 percent annual increases until actuarial rates are reached) Rates can increase more than 18 percent each year if a policy lapses, the community’s Community Rating System (CRS) rating is “downgraded” or there is a decrease in deductible ty will need to remain vigilant to ensure the public fully benefits from the changes to enacted on March 21, 2014. Such steps include: about H.R. 3370 and how it will help some constituents Gather hard data related to business owners and homeowners who are not helped by H.R. Monitor FEMA implementation of H.R. 3370, including: Rate increases and the schedule of such increases a Flood Insurance Advocate to educate and assist policyholders and coordinate ptional high-deductible policies for residential properties Clearly communicate full flood risk determinations to individual property owners ether their premium rates are full actuarial rates Changes to map revision protocols Before commencement of any map updating process, notify each community by the mapping model that FEMA plans to use and provide an explanation of why such model is appropriate Provide each affected community a 30-day period to consult with FEMA regarding the appropriateness of the model to be used Upon completion of the first Independent Data Submission, transmit a copy of information to the affected community, provide the community a 30 period during which they may provide data to FEMA that can be used to supplement or modify the existing data, and incorporate any data that is consistent with prevailing engineering principles Notify a community’s member of Congress and Senators voluntary community-based flood insurance options (no date set for completion Follow any FEMA effort to secure reinsurance of coverage provided by the NFIP from s within one year to provide policyholders with Provides additional funding and a new deadline of 2 years from enactment for the FEMA affordability study, which will have to consider mitigation assistance and means-tested lief to second homes and businesses (subject to continued 25 percent annual community’s ed” or there is a decrease in deductible ty will need to remain vigilant to ensure the public fully benefits from the changes to about H.R. 3370 and how it will help some constituents Gather hard data related to business owners and homeowners who are not helped by H.R. a Flood Insurance Advocate to educate and assist policyholders and coordinate full flood risk determinations to individual property owners Before commencement of any map updating process, notify each community plans to use and provide an day period to consult with FEMA Upon completion of the first Independent Data Submission, transmit a copy of provide the community a 30-day may provide data to FEMA that can be used to supplement or modify the existing data, and incorporate any data that is (no date set for completion reinsurance of coverage provided by the NFIP from Attachment number 1 \nPage 11 of 35 Item # 34 4. Work with Congress to ensure FEMA meet the following reports and/or other actions: a. 8 months: guidance to provide refunds to pre b. 12 months: guidelines for property owners describing alternative means of flood mitigation, other than elevation, that can reduce flood risk and inform property owners about how mitigation can lower premiums c. 14 to 16 months: actual refunds provided to those who overpaid d. 18 months: Affordability Study (using $2.5 million in funding) e. 18 months: “Draft Affordability Framework” that addresses the “issues of affordability of flood insurance sold” via the NFIP. Draft framework shall consider: i. Communication to consumers of flood risk ii. Targeted assistance to policyholders based on ability to iii. Individual or community actions to mitigate risk or lower the cost of flood insurance iv. The impact of increases in premium rates on participation in the NFIP v. The impact of rate map updates on affordability f. 18 months: a report insurance for the following: i. Small businesses with less than 100 employees ii. Non-profit entities iii. Houses of worship iv. Residences with a value equal to or less than 25 percent of the median hom value of properties in the State in which the property is located g. 18 months: allow for the monthly payment of flood insurance premiums h. Ensure reporting from FEMA to Congress of number of annual policy premiums that exceed one percent of the total coverag 5. Work with Congress to fix any unintended consequences that may occur the National Flood Insurance Program for the benefit of Rep. David Jolly’s Proposed Legislation Shortly after his election to complete the term of the City’s long David Jolly (R) introduced legislation that would further amend Biggert relief provided in H.R. 3370 to businesses and “owner Insurance Premium Parity Act of 2014 1. Repeal the requirement that owner charged actuarially sound rates 2. Restore the grandfathered rates for these prop 3. Apply to these properties the 18 percent cap on yearly rate increases provided for selected primary homes in H.R. 3370 H.R. 4313 is cosponsored by Florida Reps. Gus Bilirakis (R) and Kathy Castor (D). RECOMMENDED POSITION: Monitor businesses in the City of Clearwater. Flood Insurance Affordability Act. particularly with regard to specific reports and/or other actions. consequences that may occur after the passage of H.R. 3370 Insurance Program for the benefit of all participants Work with Congress to ensure FEMA meets the deadlines set forth in H.R. 3370, including the following reports and/or other actions: : guidance to provide refunds to pre-FIRM primary homeowners who overpaid : guidelines for property owners describing alternative means of flood mitigation, other than elevation, that can reduce flood risk and inform property owners about how mitigation can lower premiums : actual refunds provided to those who overpaid : Affordability Study (using $2.5 million in funding) : “Draft Affordability Framework” that addresses the “issues of affordability of flood insurance sold” via the NFIP. Draft framework shall consider: Communication to consumers of flood risk Targeted assistance to policyholders based on ability to participate in the NFIP Individual or community actions to mitigate risk or lower the cost of flood The impact of increases in premium rates on participation in the NFIP The impact of rate map updates on affordability : a report assessing the impact of rate increases on the affordability of flood insurance for the following: Small businesses with less than 100 employees profit entities Houses of worship Residences with a value equal to or less than 25 percent of the median hom value of properties in the State in which the property is located : allow for the monthly payment of flood insurance premiums Ensure reporting from FEMA to Congress of number of annual policy premiums that exceed one percent of the total coverage provided by the policy Work with Congress to fix any unintended consequences that may occur, as well as improve the National Flood Insurance Program for the benefit of all participants Rep. David Jolly’s Proposed Legislation Shortly after his election to complete the term of the City’s long-time Rep. C.W. “Bill” Young, Rep. David Jolly (R) introduced legislation that would further amend Biggert-Waters by extending the rate relief provided in H.R. 3370 to businesses and “owner-occupied” second homes. H.R. 4313, the Insurance Premium Parity Act of 2014 would: Repeal the requirement that owner-occupied second homes and businesses be automatically charged actuarially sound rates Restore the grandfathered rates for these properties Apply to these properties the 18 percent cap on yearly rate increases provided for selected primary homes in H.R. 3370 H.R. 4313 is cosponsored by Florida Reps. Gus Bilirakis (R) and Kathy Castor (D). Monitor changes to flood insurance rates for homeowners and businesses in the City of Clearwater. Monitor FEMA’s implementation of H.R. 3370, the urance Affordability Act. Monitor FEMA’s attention to deadlines as set forth in H.R. 3370, gard to specific reports and/or other actions. Support efforts to fix any after the passage of H.R. 3370, as well as improve the National Flood Insurance Program for the benefit of all participants. s the deadlines set forth in H.R. 3370, including FIRM primary homeowners who overpaid : guidelines for property owners describing alternative means of flood mitigation, other than elevation, that can reduce flood risk and inform property owners : “Draft Affordability Framework” that addresses the “issues of affordability of participate in the NFIP Individual or community actions to mitigate risk or lower the cost of flood The impact of increases in premium rates on participation in the NFIP assessing the impact of rate increases on the affordability of flood Residences with a value equal to or less than 25 percent of the median home : allow for the monthly payment of flood insurance premiums Ensure reporting from FEMA to Congress of number of annual policy premiums that as well as improve time Rep. C.W. “Bill” Young, Rep. Waters by extending the rate occupied” second homes. H.R. 4313, the Flood occupied second homes and businesses be automatically Apply to these properties the 18 percent cap on yearly rate increases provided for selected od insurance rates for homeowners and FEMA’s implementation of H.R. 3370, the Homeowner FEMA’s attention to deadlines as set forth in H.R. 3370, efforts to fix any unintended , as well as improve the National Flood Attachment number 1 \nPage 12 of 35 Item # 34 FEDERAL ISSUE: Tax-Exempt Bonds BACKGROUND; HOW IT MAY AFFECT bonds have been tax-exempt for almost 100 years, a number of Federal proposals the past few years that have targeted or reduce Federal spending. With local governments facing severe budget difficulties, any proposal to limit the tax exemption would put more pressure on local finances by reducing demand bonds and increase borrowing costs for state and local governments, ultimately leading to higher taxes or reduced services. Specifically: · The Administration proposed as part of a jobs and deficit reduction plan to limit the benefit of itemized deductions and certain exclusions to 28 percent for higher income taxpayers. · The Administration’s plan also includes a new debt reduction trigger which could further limit the exclusion for tax-exempt bond interest income below 28 percent. The new tr tax savings from tax-exempt bonds every year, increasing the risk and the cost of all tax bonds. · The Administration’s National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, Simpson-Bowles, recommended a tax reform issued state and local bonds. · The Bipartisan Policy Center would end the tax exemption for all new private · Senators Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Dan Coats ( Simplification Act which would replace tax · Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) authorizes tribes to issue tax · The Congressional Budget Office proposal to replace the tax exemption of municipal bonds with a direct subsidy for is It is estimated that the difference in the rate of earnings the C to offer prospective buyers of their taxable bonds would depend on the market, but typically would range from 1.5 to 2 percent more for those offerings. On $1 million borrowed, this would likely cost $20,000 more in interest per year. Taking this further, if the C years at taxable bond rates 2 percent higher than if the bonds were tax taxpayers over the 30 years could be roughly $30 million. In early 2014, Rep. Dave Camp (R- jurisdiction over tax issues) released a comprehensive tax reform discussion dra the individual and corporate tax code. Rep. Camp’s comprehensive tax reform proposal contains changes that would affect municipal bonds. Specifically, bonds would become more expensive to offer because high-income individuals who are most likely to invest in surtax on their income above a certain threshold and would not be able to deduct the tax It is unclear how much of an affect this could have on costs, but sur In the Senate, Senator Wyden recently became the Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, which is the committee of jurisdiction over tax issues. This is significant due to his abovementioned efforts related Exempt Bonds BACKGROUND; HOW IT MAY AFFECT THE CITY OF CLEARWATER: Although municipal exempt for almost 100 years, a number of Federal proposals have been offered over ed this exemption, particularly as part of the debate to end the sequester or reduce Federal spending. With local governments facing severe budget difficulties, any proposal to limit the tax exemption would put more pressure on local finances by reducing demand bonds and increase borrowing costs for state and local governments, ultimately leading to higher taxes or proposed as part of a jobs and deficit reduction plan to limit the benefit of ized deductions and certain exclusions to 28 percent for higher income taxpayers. The Administration’s plan also includes a new debt reduction trigger which could further limit the exempt bond interest income below 28 percent. The new trigger could limit the exempt bonds every year, increasing the risk and the cost of all tax The Administration’s National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, recommended a tax reform plan which would end the tax exemption for newly issued state and local bonds. he Bipartisan Policy Center proposed a tax reform plan, also known as Domenici would end the tax exemption for all new private-purpose bonds. OR) and Dan Coats (R-IN) introduced the Bipartisan Tax Fairness and Simplification Act which would replace tax-exempt bonds with taxable bonds and a tax credit. OK) proposed a tax reform plan which would repeal the program which thorizes tribes to issue tax-exempt bonds for economic development purposes. Congressional Budget Office released a report on revenue-raising options which includes a proposal to replace the tax exemption of municipal bonds with a direct subsidy for is It is estimated that the difference in the rate of earnings the City and other local governments would need to offer prospective buyers of their taxable bonds would depend on the market, but typically would range e offerings. On $1 million borrowed, this would likely cost $20,000 more in interest per year. Taking this further, if the City were to amortize a $100 million loan over 30 years at taxable bond rates 2 percent higher than if the bonds were tax-exempt, the additional cost to taxpayers over the 30 years could be roughly $30 million. -MI), the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee (with jurisdiction over tax issues) released a comprehensive tax reform discussion draft that proposes to rewrite the individual and corporate tax code. Rep. Camp’s comprehensive tax reform proposal contains changes that would affect municipal bonds. Specifically, bonds would become more expensive to offer because who are most likely to invest in municipal bonds would have to pay a 10 percent surtax on their income above a certain threshold and would not be able to deduct the tax It is unclear how much of an affect this could have on costs, but surely there would be an impact. Wyden recently became the Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, which is the committee of jurisdiction over tax issues. This is significant due to his abovementioned efforts related Although municipal have been offered over exemption, particularly as part of the debate to end the sequester or reduce Federal spending. With local governments facing severe budget difficulties, any proposal to limit the tax exemption would put more pressure on local finances by reducing demand for tax-exempt bonds and increase borrowing costs for state and local governments, ultimately leading to higher taxes or proposed as part of a jobs and deficit reduction plan to limit the benefit of ized deductions and certain exclusions to 28 percent for higher income taxpayers. The Administration’s plan also includes a new debt reduction trigger which could further limit the igger could limit the exempt bonds every year, increasing the risk and the cost of all tax-exempt The Administration’s National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, also called plan which would end the tax exemption for newly- proposed a tax reform plan, also known as Domenici-Rivlin, which IN) introduced the Bipartisan Tax Fairness and exempt bonds with taxable bonds and a tax credit. proposed a tax reform plan which would repeal the program which exempt bonds for economic development purposes. raising options which includes a proposal to replace the tax exemption of municipal bonds with a direct subsidy for issuers. ty and other local governments would need to offer prospective buyers of their taxable bonds would depend on the market, but typically would range e offerings. On $1 million borrowed, this would likely cost $20,000 ty were to amortize a $100 million loan over 30 he additional cost to MI), the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee (with ft that proposes to rewrite the individual and corporate tax code. Rep. Camp’s comprehensive tax reform proposal contains changes that would affect municipal bonds. Specifically, bonds would become more expensive to offer because municipal bonds would have to pay a 10 percent surtax on their income above a certain threshold and would not be able to deduct the tax-exempt interest. ely there would be an impact. Wyden recently became the Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, which is the committee of jurisdiction over tax issues. This is significant due to his abovementioned efforts related Attachment number 1 \nPage 13 of 35 Item # 34 to municipal bonds with Senator Coats in the 112 same legislation during the 113th Congress. Meanwhile, in the Administration’s Fiscal Year 2015 budget, President Obama again proposed a 28 percent limit on all itemized deductions for high apply to all new and outstanding municipal bonds in 2015. According to a study conducted by the National Association of Counties, if this 28 percent cap had been in place o costs to state and local governments would have increased by over $173 billion, while a full repeal would cost nearly $500 billion over the same time period. These provisions are likely to continue to receive tepid responses members of Congress, including 12 members of the Florida delegation, signed letters to leadership asking that the tax exemption for municipal bonds not be altered. RECOMMENDED POSITION: Oppose local bonds, including a 28 percent cap on tax bonds with Senator Coats in the 112th Congress, though to date he has not reintroduced the Congress. Meanwhile, in the Administration’s Fiscal Year 2015 budget, President Obama again proposed a 28 mized deductions for high-income individuals. If accepted by Congress, this would apply to all new and outstanding municipal bonds in 2015. According to a study conducted by the National Association of Counties, if this 28 percent cap had been in place over the past decade, borrowing costs to state and local governments would have increased by over $173 billion, while a full repeal would cost nearly $500 billion over the same time period. These provisions are likely to continue to receive tepid responses from many in Congress. Last year, 140 members of Congress, including 12 members of the Florida delegation, signed letters to leadership asking that the tax exemption for municipal bonds not be altered. Oppose legislation that would threaten the tax exemption on state and local bonds, including a 28 percent cap on tax-exempt municipal bonds. though to date he has not reintroduced the Meanwhile, in the Administration’s Fiscal Year 2015 budget, President Obama again proposed a 28 income individuals. If accepted by Congress, this would apply to all new and outstanding municipal bonds in 2015. According to a study conducted by the ver the past decade, borrowing costs to state and local governments would have increased by over $173 billion, while a full repeal would from many in Congress. Last year, 140 members of Congress, including 12 members of the Florida delegation, signed letters to leadership asking threaten the tax exemption on state and Attachment number 1 \nPage 14 of 35 Item # 34 FEDERAL ISSUE: Remote Sales-Tax Legislation BACKGROUND; HOW IT MAY AFFECT only required to collect sales tax in states where they have brick to consumers to report to state tax departments any sales taxes they owe for online purchases. Often, consumers do not report those purchases when completing t at a competitive disadvantage because they must collect sales taxes while out many large online and catalog retailers, in effect give their customers a discount by collecting local sales taxes. Consumers are left with the confusing yet legal responsibility to report the sales taxes owed on online purchases on their tax returns. The current sales tax system is perceived as being unfair to brick residents, including local stores as well as national chains like Best Buy or Home Depot. It is also a drain on local government revenues. In 201 billion nationwide. To correct this inequity across the country during the 112th Congress that would allow states to collect these taxes from out not have a physical presence in their state. Though it received some support, it was not passed by either chamber. In the 113th Congress, the bill was reintroduc Senate (S. 743 and H.R. 684). This version of the bill would create two systems, from which states can choose, to facilitate the process of collecting these taxes. The first is the already establis Sales and Use Tax Agreement would accomplish this by simplifying state and local sales and use tax laws. 24 states have already signed this agreement, which is also supported by the National Association of Counties. The second alternative tax laws and administration thereof. who make less than $1,000,000 in total In May 2013, the Senate passed the legislation with significant bipartisan support by a vote of 70 Senator Nelson voting for the measure and Senator Rubio against it. In the House, the Marketplace Fairness Act (H.R. 684) face significant support with 66 cosponsors, including Florida Representatives Deutch, Crenshaw, Ross, Wilson, and Diaz-Balart. It also has the support of l Florida Chamber of Commerce, Associated Industries of Florida, Florida TaxWatch, Florida Retail Federation, and Amazon.com. Most recently, Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte ( passed legislation, but with targeted changes. Those mentioned would include language aimed at facilitating the compliance and auditing system, as well as a new provision that would replace the Senate’s $1,000,000 exemption with a phase these taxes. There is no timetable for action in the House. Should the House consider related legislation before the end of the 113th Congress, it would have to Tax Legislation BACKGROUND; HOW IT MAY AFFECT THE CITY OF CLEARWATER: Currently, retailers are to collect sales tax in states where they have brick-and-mortar stores. The burden then falls to consumers to report to state tax departments any sales taxes they owe for online purchases. Often, consumers do not report those purchases when completing their tax returns. As a result, local retailers are at a competitive disadvantage because they must collect sales taxes while out-of-state retailers, including many large online and catalog retailers, in effect give their customers a discount by collecting local sales taxes. Consumers are left with the confusing yet legal responsibility to report the sales taxes owed on online purchases on their tax returns. The current sales tax system is perceived as being unfair to brick-and-mortar retailers that employ local residents, including local stores as well as national chains like Best Buy or Home Depot. It is also a drain on local government revenues. In 2014, uncollected sales tax is estimated to cost local governments $23 across the country, Congress introduced legislation in both the House and Congress that would allow states to collect these taxes from out-of-state retailers that do not have a physical presence in their state. Though it received some support, it was not passed by either Congress, the bill was reintroduced as the Marketplace Fairness Act in both the House and Senate (S. 743 and H.R. 684). This version of the bill would create two systems, from which states can choose, to facilitate the process of collecting these taxes. The first is the already establis Sales and Use Tax Agreement would accomplish this by simplifying state and local sales and use tax laws. 24 states have already signed this agreement, which is also supported by the National Association of Counties. The second alternative would allow for states to meet minimum requirements for their state tax laws and administration thereof. To protect small, online retailers, this legislation also in total remote sales from the requirement to collect the tax. In May 2013, the Senate passed the legislation with significant bipartisan support by a vote of 70 Senator Nelson voting for the measure and Senator Rubio against it. In the House, the Marketplace Fairness Act (H.R. 684) faces an uncertain future though the bill has significant support with 66 cosponsors, including Florida Representatives Deutch, Crenshaw, Ross, Balart. It also has the support of local, state, and national business groups, such as the Chamber of Commerce, Associated Industries of Florida, Florida TaxWatch, Florida Retail Most recently, Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) has indicated that he is working with House Judiciary Goodlatte (R-VA) to introduce an alternative measure based on the Senate passed legislation, but with targeted changes. Those mentioned would include language aimed at facilitating the compliance and auditing system, as well as a new provision that would replace the s $1,000,000 exemption with a phase-in period for these businesses to comply with collecting for action in the House. Should the House consider related legislation Congress, it would have to be reconciled in conference committee with the Currently, retailers are mortar stores. The burden then falls to consumers to report to state tax departments any sales taxes they owe for online purchases. Often, heir tax returns. As a result, local retailers are state retailers, including many large online and catalog retailers, in effect give their customers a discount by collecting no state or local sales taxes. Consumers are left with the confusing yet legal responsibility to report the sales taxes s that employ local residents, including local stores as well as national chains like Best Buy or Home Depot. It is also a drain , uncollected sales tax is estimated to cost local governments $23 House and Senate state retailers that do not have a physical presence in their state. Though it received some support, it was not passed by either ed as the Marketplace Fairness Act in both the House and Senate (S. 743 and H.R. 684). This version of the bill would create two systems, from which states can choose, to facilitate the process of collecting these taxes. The first is the already established Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement would accomplish this by simplifying state and local sales and use tax laws. 24 states have already signed this agreement, which is also supported by the National Association would allow for states to meet minimum requirements for their state also exempts sellers collect the tax. In May 2013, the Senate passed the legislation with significant bipartisan support by a vote of 70-24, with s an uncertain future though the bill has significant support with 66 cosponsors, including Florida Representatives Deutch, Crenshaw, Ross, ocal, state, and national business groups, such as the Chamber of Commerce, Associated Industries of Florida, Florida TaxWatch, Florida Retail House Judiciary introduce an alternative measure based on the Senate- passed legislation, but with targeted changes. Those mentioned would include language aimed at facilitating the compliance and auditing system, as well as a new provision that would replace the in period for these businesses to comply with collecting for action in the House. Should the House consider related legislation be reconciled in conference committee with the Attachment number 1 \nPage 15 of 35 Item # 34 Senate-passed bill. There have also been conversations related to ceding sales taxes on online and catalog purchas decide how to handle the issue individually. RECOMMENDED POSITION: Support sales to collect and remit the associated taxes. There have also been conversations related to ceding authority over the leveling of sales taxes on online and catalog purchases to states. The legislation could essentially let each state handle the issue individually. Support legislation that requires companies making catalog and internet sales to collect and remit the associated taxes. authority over the leveling of ould essentially let each state legislation that requires companies making catalog and internet Attachment number 1 \nPage 16 of 35 Item # 34 FEDERAL ISSUE: Transient Occupancy Taxes BACKGROUND; HOW IT MAY AFFECT attempts were made by senior Senators to insert language into various pieces of legislation that would have exempted online travel brokers (Expedia, Travelocity, etc.) from remit collected from consumers to the appropriate local government. For instance, if were to pay $60 for a room in the City of Clearwater would be able to, under the proposal, only remit $6 dollars to the local government instead of $10 (using a 10 percent bed tax for illustrative purposes). In late 2009, 17 Florida counties, including Pinellas, companies alleging that the companies development tax ordinances. During 2012, there were several Florida State Circuit Court cases that ruled in favor of the online travel brokers. Two cited that Fl Court Judge ruled more directly in July that the discounted rates they paid for the rooms. In late September of 2012, the District of Columbia g online travel firms should repay back in the years after the D.C. City Council passed legislation mandating they do so conditional settlement was reached in this case with six online travel firms. Although they have a right to appeal the D.C Superior Court decision, they agreed to pay $60.9 million in back taxes to the D.C. government. Between 1998 and 2010, the amou million. These examples demonstrate how courts across the country have ruled differently on this issue over the past few years, which has led online travel purveyors to continue to seek Federal legislation that would codify their goal of not remitting taxes on the price of the hotel room paid by 2012, several of these online discount travel brokers (including Expedia, Orbitz, and Priceline) organized and registered to lobby under a new organization called the “Interactive Travel Services Association,” whose purpose is to advocate on several issues, including “tax In May 2013, Expedia and other online hotel room purveyors attempt Fairness Act to achieve their transient occupancy tax objectives and the bill was passed out of the Senate without this language In 2012, Pinellas County collected a record $27.1 million in transient occupancy taxes, which are used to support the tourism industry in our region. With another record County increased that total by collecting more than $30 million in bed tax revenue. Recently, officials with the Clearwater Marine Aquarium have suggested using a portion of the transient occupancy tax that currently goes toward paying the debt on Tropicana Field for the proposed Clearwater Marine Aquarium, once it sunsets in 2016. This “stadium tax” alone generates nearly $5.5 million per year in revenue. Given the importance of this project to the City of Cl significance of this revenue source and the need to ensure it is not constrained by detrimental legislation. : Transient Occupancy Taxes BACKGROUND; HOW IT MAY AFFECT THE CITY OF CLEARWATER: In the 111 attempts were made by senior Senators to insert language into various pieces of legislation that would have exempted online travel brokers (Expedia, Travelocity, etc.) from remitting the full bed tax rate collected from consumers to the appropriate local government. For instance, if an online travel broker the City of Clearwater and then sell that room to a consumer for $100, they nder the proposal, only remit $6 dollars to the local government instead of $10 (using a 10 percent bed tax for illustrative purposes). 17 Florida counties, including Pinellas, filed an action against a number of online travel the companies have failed to collect and/or pay taxes under the During 2012, there were several Florida State Circuit Court cases that ruled . Two cited that Florida law is not clear on the issue, while a Circuit Court Judge ruled more directly in July that the online travel broker only owes local tourist taxes on the discounted rates they paid for the rooms. In late September of 2012, the District of Columbia government won a suit where a judge ruled that back taxes on the full retail price of hotel rooms they sold in the years after the D.C. City Council passed legislation mandating they do so. In February of 2014, conditional settlement was reached in this case with six online travel firms. Although they have a right to appeal the D.C Superior Court decision, they agreed to pay $60.9 million in back taxes to the D.C. government. Between 1998 and 2010, the amount owed in the lawsuit was estimated to be over $200 ourts across the country have ruled differently on this issue over the past few years, which has led online travel purveyors to continue to seek Federal legislation that would codify their goal of not remitting taxes on the price of the hotel room paid by the consumer. 2012, several of these online discount travel brokers (including Expedia, Orbitz, and Priceline) organized and registered to lobby under a new organization called the “Interactive Travel Services Association,” advocate on several issues, including “taxes and fees related to travel.” Expedia and other online hotel room purveyors attempted to amend the Marketplace nsient occupancy tax objectives. Ultimately, this effort was unsuccessful and the bill was passed out of the Senate without this language. County collected a record $27.1 million in transient occupancy taxes, which are used to support the tourism industry in our region. With another record number of visitors to the area in 2013, the County increased that total by collecting more than $30 million in bed tax revenue. Recently, officials with the Clearwater Marine Aquarium have suggested using a portion of the transient occupancy tax that rently goes toward paying the debt on Tropicana Field for the proposed Clearwater Marine Aquarium, once it sunsets in 2016. This “stadium tax” alone generates nearly $5.5 million per year in revenue. Given the importance of this project to the City of Clearwater, and this level of funding, underscores the significance of this revenue source and the need to ensure it is not constrained by detrimental legislation. In the 111th Congress, attempts were made by senior Senators to insert language into various pieces of legislation that would ting the full bed tax rate an online travel broker and then sell that room to a consumer for $100, they nder the proposal, only remit $6 dollars to the local government instead of $10 (using a an action against a number of online travel have failed to collect and/or pay taxes under the respective tourist During 2012, there were several Florida State Circuit Court cases that ruled orida law is not clear on the issue, while a Circuit local tourist taxes on the overnment won a suit where a judge ruled that old to consumers In February of 2014, a conditional settlement was reached in this case with six online travel firms. Although they have a right to appeal the D.C Superior Court decision, they agreed to pay $60.9 million in back taxes to the D.C. nt owed in the lawsuit was estimated to be over $200 ourts across the country have ruled differently on this issue over the past few years, which has led online travel purveyors to continue to seek Federal legislation that would the consumer. Earlier in 2012, several of these online discount travel brokers (including Expedia, Orbitz, and Priceline) organized and registered to lobby under a new organization called the “Interactive Travel Services Association,” es and fees related to travel.” the Marketplace rt was unsuccessful County collected a record $27.1 million in transient occupancy taxes, which are used to number of visitors to the area in 2013, the County increased that total by collecting more than $30 million in bed tax revenue. Recently, officials with the Clearwater Marine Aquarium have suggested using a portion of the transient occupancy tax that rently goes toward paying the debt on Tropicana Field for the proposed Clearwater Marine Aquarium, once it sunsets in 2016. This “stadium tax” alone generates nearly $5.5 million per year in revenue. earwater, and this level of funding, underscores the significance of this revenue source and the need to ensure it is not constrained by detrimental legislation. Attachment number 1 \nPage 17 of 35 Item # 34 RECOMMENDED POSITION: Oppose taxes on the full room rate paid by the consumer, thereby costing collect appropriate Transient Occupancy Taxes from visitors to the region. Oppose legislation that would exempt online travel brokers from paying taxes on the full room rate paid by the consumer, thereby costing Pinellas County the opportunity to collect appropriate Transient Occupancy Taxes from visitors to the region. travel brokers from paying County the opportunity to Attachment number 1 \nPage 18 of 35 Item # 34 FEDERAL ISSUE: Public Pension Reform BACKGROUND; HOW IT MAY AFFECT CA) and Senator Richard Burr (R-NC), t have stated that public pensions are significantly underfunded and are aiming to ensure what opinion, will be more realistic asset projections compared with expected liabilities. Specifically, the legislation would require additional reporting of assets and liabilities and more significantly, require that assets in a public plan such a projected to grow at the rate of Treasury securities instead of more optimistic projections tied to historic stock market indices, thereby greatly increasing plan liabilities. This might require projected growth r of less than 1 percent annually instead of growth rates of 7.75 percent, which is what the Florida Retirement System used between 2009 and 2011. The legislation would also disallow any future federal bailout of public pension plans, and would penaliz disclosure requirements of the bill by removing the tax the legislation would likely make local government participation in would also aim to make them more secure. In 2012, Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT), the Ranking Member of the Senate Finance Committee, released a report saying that public pension debt “threatens America” and that “defined benefit pension plans are inappropriate for state and local governments.” He concluded his report by stating his intention to introduce a legislative solution in the future. Rep. Nunes and Sen. Burr both reintroduced the Public Employee Pension Transparency Act in the 113 Congress. Rep. Nunes’ bill (H.R. 1628) has 10 cosponsors in the House, while Sen. Burr’s companion bill (S. 779) has two cosponsors in the Senate. RECOMMENDED POSITION: Monitor Public Employee Pension Transparency Act Pension Fund. : Public Pension Reform ; HOW IT MAY AFFECT THE CITY OF CLEARWATER: Rep. Devin Nunes (R NC), the sponsors of the Public Employee Pension Transparency Act, have stated that public pensions are significantly underfunded and are aiming to ensure what opinion, will be more realistic asset projections compared with expected liabilities. Specifically, the legislation would require additional reporting of assets and liabilities and more significantly, require that assets in a public plan such as the Florida Retirement System (FRS) projected to grow at the rate of Treasury securities instead of more optimistic projections tied to historic stock market indices, thereby greatly increasing plan liabilities. This might require projected growth r of less than 1 percent annually instead of growth rates of 7.75 percent, which is what the Florida Retirement System used between 2009 and 2011. The legislation would also disallow any future federal , and would penalize local governments that do not comply with the disclosure requirements of the bill by removing the tax-exemption on their bonding authority. local government participation in pension plans more expensive, yet would also aim to make them more secure. UT), the Ranking Member of the Senate Finance Committee, released a report saying that public pension debt “threatens America” and that “defined benefit pension plans are priate for state and local governments.” He concluded his report by stating his intention to introduce a legislative solution in the future. Rep. Nunes and Sen. Burr both reintroduced the Public Employee Pension Transparency Act in the 113 Rep. Nunes’ bill (H.R. 1628) has 10 cosponsors in the House, while Sen. Burr’s companion bill (S. 779) has two cosponsors in the Senate. Monitor federal legislative proposals related to public pensions sion Transparency Act) which could significantly impact the Clearwater Employees Rep. Devin Nunes (R- Transparency Act, have stated that public pensions are significantly underfunded and are aiming to ensure what, in their Specifically, the legislation would require additional reporting of assets and liabilities and more (FRS) are projected to grow at the rate of Treasury securities instead of more optimistic projections tied to historic stock market indices, thereby greatly increasing plan liabilities. This might require projected growth rates of less than 1 percent annually instead of growth rates of 7.75 percent, which is what the Florida Retirement System used between 2009 and 2011. The legislation would also disallow any future federal e local governments that do not comply with the exemption on their bonding authority. Ultimately, pension plans more expensive, yet it UT), the Ranking Member of the Senate Finance Committee, released a report saying that public pension debt “threatens America” and that “defined benefit pension plans are priate for state and local governments.” He concluded his report by stating his intention to Rep. Nunes and Sen. Burr both reintroduced the Public Employee Pension Transparency Act in the 113th Rep. Nunes’ bill (H.R. 1628) has 10 cosponsors in the House, while Sen. Burr’s companion federal legislative proposals related to public pensions (e.g., the Clearwater Employees Attachment number 1 \nPage 19 of 35 Item # 34 FEDERAL ISSUE: Transportation Authorization BACKGROUND; HOW IT MAY AFFECT short-term authorizations, Congress passed and the President signed the the 21st Century Act (MAP-21) on July 6, 2012. MAP at roughly the levels of the previous authorization ($48 billion) through September 30, 2014, which means that Congress will need to begin to craft the follow of the 113th Congress. MAP-21 eliminated, consolidated, or changed transportation grant programs into formula programs, and left much discretion to state Departments of Transportation on how to allocate funding One of those changes was the removal of dedicated funding for several programs, including Safe Routes to School, Recreational Trails, and the Transportation Enhancements program. The legislation instead created a new Transportation Alternatives these activities will be reduced by approximately $300 million annually from current levels of funding. Fifty percent of Florida’s $49.9 million annual TAP allocation for Fiscal Years 2014 and 2015 sub-allocated within the state based on population, and census populations above 200,000 will be given project selection authority ov Funding available to the City of Clearwater Organization (MPO). In developing MAP-21, Congress did not address the need for a long nation’s transportation infrastructure. Fuel taxes, which currently provide most of the money for surface transportation, do not provide a solid long growth, even if Congress were to authorize a modest increase sources of income for an expanded program, or alternate very different than the one currently in place. Less Federal funding via a future transportation reauthorization bill would mean significantly less funding available to and ultimately the City of Clearwater programs. In the 113th Congress, Rep. John Delaney ( investment in U.S. infrastructure through the public-private partnerships. The Partnership to Build America Act (H.R. 2084) would create dollar “American Infrastructure Fund” (AIF) loan guarantees. The bill would not require annual appropriations, being funded instead through of 50-year bonds that are not guaranteed by the Federal government and pay incentivize U.S. corporate investment i amount (to be determined by auction) bonds. The fund would then provide loans or loan guarantees to states and transportation, energy, education, communications, and water infrastructure projects. continue to encourage public-private partnerships by requiring that a minimum of financed projects be public-private partnerships, from which comes from private capital. H.R. 2084 currently has bipartisan support with : Transportation Authorization BACKGROUND; HOW IT MAY AFFECT THE CITY OF CLEARWATER: After several years of term authorizations, Congress passed and the President signed the Moving Ahead for Progress in n July 6, 2012. MAP-21 funds Federal surface transportation programs revious authorization ($48 billion) through September 30, 2014, which means that Congress will need to begin to craft the follow-on legislation to MAP-21 well before the end , or changed many programs, transformed nearly all discretionary transportation grant programs into formula programs, and left much discretion to state Departments of Transportation on how to allocate funding among the remaining programs. e removal of dedicated funding for several programs, including Safe Routes to School, Recreational Trails, and the Transportation Enhancements program. The legislation instead created a new Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP). Under this consolidated program, funding for these activities will be reduced by approximately $300 million annually from current levels of funding. Fifty percent of Florida’s $49.9 million annual TAP allocation for Fiscal Years 2014 and 2015 state based on population, and census-designated urbanized areas with populations above 200,000 will be given project selection authority over its portion of these funds. the City of Clearwater will go through the Pinellas County Metropolitan 21, Congress did not address the need for a long-term, sustainable plan to finance our nation’s transportation infrastructure. Fuel taxes, which currently provide most of the money for surface nsportation, do not provide a solid long-term foundation for generally desired transportation funding authorize a modest increase. The choice then becomes finding new sources of income for an expanded program, or alternately, to settle for a smaller program that might look very different than the one currently in place. Less Federal funding via a future transportation reauthorization bill would mean significantly less funding available to FDOT, the Pinellas County MPO, the City of Clearwater, to support both surface transportation and transit projects and Congress, Rep. John Delaney (D-MD) has proposed legislation in the attempt to spur investment in U.S. infrastructure through the repatriation of corporate funds overseas and increasing private partnerships. The Partnership to Build America Act (H.R. 2084) would create “American Infrastructure Fund” (AIF) that can be leveraged as high as $750 billion The bill would not require annual appropriations, being funded instead through year bonds that are not guaranteed by the Federal government and pay one percent incentivize U.S. corporate investment in these bonds, they would be allowed to send home a certain dollar ion) in overseas earnings, tax-free, for every dollar they invest in the then provide loans or loan guarantees to states and local governments transportation, energy, education, communications, and water infrastructure projects. This bill would private partnerships by requiring that a minimum of 25 percent of e partnerships, from which at least 20 percent of the project’s funding H.R. 2084 currently has bipartisan support with 60 cosponsors ( After several years of Moving Ahead for Progress in 21 funds Federal surface transportation programs revious authorization ($48 billion) through September 30, 2014, which 21 well before the end many programs, transformed nearly all discretionary transportation grant programs into formula programs, and left much discretion to state Departments of e removal of dedicated funding for several programs, including Safe Routes to School, Recreational Trails, and the Transportation Enhancements program. The legislation instead ed program, funding for these activities will be reduced by approximately $300 million annually from current levels of funding. Fifty percent of Florida’s $49.9 million annual TAP allocation for Fiscal Years 2014 and 2015 will be designated urbanized areas with er its portion of these funds. opolitan Planning term, sustainable plan to finance our nation’s transportation infrastructure. Fuel taxes, which currently provide most of the money for surface term foundation for generally desired transportation funding . The choice then becomes finding new ly, to settle for a smaller program that might look very different than the one currently in place. Less Federal funding via a future transportation the Pinellas County MPO, , to support both surface transportation and transit projects and MD) has proposed legislation in the attempt to spur repatriation of corporate funds overseas and increasing private partnerships. The Partnership to Build America Act (H.R. 2084) would create a $50 billion $750 billion for loans and The bill would not require annual appropriations, being funded instead through the sale one percent interest. To send home a certain dollar they invest in the ernments to finance This bill would 25 percent of AIF of the project’s funding cosponsors (30D, 30R), Attachment number 1 \nPage 20 of 35 Item # 34 including Florida Reps. Patrick Murphy, Joe Garcia, companion legislation, S. 1957, was recently introduced by Senator Michael Bennett ( cosponsors (7R, 4D, 1I). The legislation appears to be garnering nearly equal support from both parties, which is a positive indicator. Meanwhile, in early 2014, House Ways and Means Committee Chairman, released a comprehensive tax reform discussion draft that billion into the Highway Trust Fund from some of the proceeds fr related to repatriating income from foreign subsidiaries of U.S. corporations. This would help to fill about half of the Highway Trust Fund’s anticipated shortfall needed to fund a six transportation bill at current spending levels. Regardless of the potential merits of such a proposal, which still would only provide a partial and temporary solution to the Highway Trust Fund revenue shortage, Rep. Camp’s proposal is unlikely to move forward this year. Most recently, the Administration’s Fiscal Year 2015 budget offered a proposal for a $302 billion four year transportation reauthorization bill to follow MAP corporate tax reform in order to address the Highway Tru many proposed provisions within, which include: · $206 billion for investments in the from MAP-21). · $72 billion to invest in transit systems and expand increase). · $9 billion in competitive funding $5 billion ($1.5 billion annually) to increase funding for the TIGER program. It also calls for the permanent authorization of the program. $4 billion ($1 billion local policy reforms to encourage better performance, productivity, and cost effectiveness” in transportation systems · $10 billion for a multimodal freight grant program for rail, highway, and address the greatest needs for increase efficiency of the movement of goods in the U.S. and abroad. · $4 billion for continued annual Innovation Act (TIFIA) loan program The proposal also calls for policy changes to increase local participation in Federal transportation funding decisions, which echoed testimony provided in a recent House Transportation and Infrastructure hearing about the reauthorization of new transportation programs. Several comments were made in support of providing some additional level of local control over transportation funding decisions, particularly given that local governments can help leverage funds, under MAP-21. RECOMMENDED POSITION: Monitor Monitor efforts to enhance Federal transportation revenue streams. secure funding for the City of Clearwater’s . Patrick Murphy, Joe Garcia, Ted Yoho and Dennis Ross. In the Senate, companion legislation, S. 1957, was recently introduced by Senator Michael Bennett (D cosponsors (7R, 4D, 1I). The legislation appears to be garnering nearly equal support from both parties, House Ways and Means Committee Chairman, Rep. Dave Camp ( released a comprehensive tax reform discussion draft that includes a proposal that would transfer $126.5 billion into the Highway Trust Fund from some of the proceeds from another provision in the proposal related to repatriating income from foreign subsidiaries of U.S. corporations. This would help to fill about half of the Highway Trust Fund’s anticipated shortfall needed to fund a six-year surface at current spending levels. Regardless of the potential merits of such a proposal, which still would only provide a partial and temporary solution to the Highway Trust Fund revenue shortage, Rep. Camp’s proposal is unlikely to move forward this year. t recently, the Administration’s Fiscal Year 2015 budget offered a proposal for a $302 billion four year transportation reauthorization bill to follow MAP-21. Like Rep. Camp’s plan, it also suggests corporate tax reform in order to address the Highway Trust Fund’s insolvency issues, and pay for the many proposed provisions within, which include: for investments in the highway system and road safety (a 22 percent annual increase $72 billion to invest in transit systems and expand transportation options (a 70 percent annual $9 billion in competitive funding: $5 billion ($1.5 billion annually) to increase funding for the TIGER program. It also calls for the permanent authorization of the program. ($1 billion annually) for new grant program “to incentivize innovation and local policy reforms to encourage better performance, productivity, and cost in transportation systems. multimodal freight grant program for rail, highway, and port projects that the greatest needs for increase efficiency of the movement of goods in the U.S. and annual funding of the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and loan program to encourage more private investment in infrastructure. The proposal also calls for policy changes to increase local participation in Federal transportation funding decisions, which echoed testimony provided in a recent House Transportation and Infrastructure hearing about the reauthorization of new transportation programs. Several comments were made in support of providing some additional level of local control over transportation funding decisions, particularly given that local governments can help leverage funds, yet have little to no influence over funding decisions Monitor proposed changes to Federal highway and transit programs. efforts to enhance Federal transportation revenue streams. Support any and all opportu the City of Clearwater’s priorities via this legislation or other means. the Senate, D-CO), and has 12 cosponsors (7R, 4D, 1I). The legislation appears to be garnering nearly equal support from both parties, Rep. Dave Camp (R-MI), includes a proposal that would transfer $126.5 om another provision in the proposal related to repatriating income from foreign subsidiaries of U.S. corporations. This would help to fill year surface at current spending levels. Regardless of the potential merits of such a proposal, which still would only provide a partial and temporary solution to the Highway Trust Fund revenue shortage, t recently, the Administration’s Fiscal Year 2015 budget offered a proposal for a $302 billion four- 21. Like Rep. Camp’s plan, it also suggests st Fund’s insolvency issues, and pay for the (a 22 percent annual increase (a 70 percent annual $5 billion ($1.5 billion annually) to increase funding for the TIGER program. It also to incentivize innovation and local policy reforms to encourage better performance, productivity, and cost- port projects that the greatest needs for increase efficiency of the movement of goods in the U.S. and Transportation Infrastructure Finance and more private investment in infrastructure. The proposal also calls for policy changes to increase local participation in Federal transportation funding decisions, which echoed testimony provided in a recent House Transportation and Infrastructure hearing about the reauthorization of new transportation programs. Several comments were made in support of providing some additional level of local control over transportation funding decisions, particularly given yet have little to no influence over funding decisions proposed changes to Federal highway and transit programs. any and all opportunities to priorities via this legislation or other means. Attachment number 1 \nPage 21 of 35 Item # 34 FEDERAL ISSUE: Alternative Fuel Tax Incentives BACKGROUND; HOW IT MAY AFFECT authorization bill known as SAFETEA vehicle fuel. The $0.50 per gallon equivalent incentive is provided to businesses, individuals, and tax exempt entities that sell the fuel and essentially becomes a rebate. at the end of Fiscal Year 2009, but has since been extended three times to the end of calendar year 2013. Unfortunately, Congress was unable to agree on a broad package of tax extenders prior to the end of 2013, allowing the natural gas credit and many other provisions to expire. In the fall of 2011, the City of Clearwater opened Bay area, and takes advantage of this tax incentive provided to the City is estimated to be $75,000 years. Unfortunately, Congress was unable to agree on a broad package of tax extenders prior 2013, allowing the natural gas tax credit and 54 other provisions to expire. Extending these provisions has frequently been mentioned as being a priority by prominent members of Congress. Most recently, Senate Finance Chairman, Ron Wyden (D legislation entitled the Expiring Provisions Improvement Reform and Efficiency (EXPIRE) Act would renew the alternative fuel tax credit end of 2015. Meanwhile, in the House, Representative Dave Camp (R Committee, has stated that he believe the tax code, meaning not subject to nearly annual expiration. policy to determine which extenders should be made permanent ups. The cost of extending all of these expired this reason, most believe Congress is unlikely to act on reinstating November 2014 elections. RECOMMENDED POSITION: Support natural gas when used as a motor fuel. Alternative Fuel Tax Incentives BACKGROUND; HOW IT MAY AFFECT THE CITY OF CLEARWATER: An older Transportation known as SAFETEA-LU provided a tax incentive for natural gas when used as a motor per gallon equivalent incentive is provided to businesses, individuals, and tax exempt entities that sell the fuel and essentially becomes a rebate. The $0.50 incentive originally expired at the end of Fiscal Year 2009, but has since been extended three times to the end of calendar year 2013. Unfortunately, Congress was unable to agree on a broad package of tax extenders prior to the end of owing the natural gas credit and many other provisions to expire. Clearwater opened the first public natural gas filling station in the Tampa takes advantage of this tax incentive with every gallon of gas sold. For 2012, t estimated to be $75,000 and is expected to grow significantly over the Unfortunately, Congress was unable to agree on a broad package of tax extenders prior 2013, allowing the natural gas tax credit and 54 other provisions to expire. Extending these provisions has frequently been mentioned as being a priority by prominent members of Congress. Most recently, Senate Finance Chairman, Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Ranking Member, Orrin Hatch (R-UT) have entitled the Expiring Provisions Improvement Reform and Efficiency (EXPIRE) Act renew the alternative fuel tax credit for two years; retroactively to the beginning of 2014 Meanwhile, in the House, Representative Dave Camp (R-MI), the Chair of the House Ways and Means believes “certain tax extenders should be considered as permanent parts” of t to nearly annual expiration. He indicated that he will take a policy to determine which extenders should be made permanent through a series of hearings and mark expired tax credits is around $50 billion, which needs to be offset. For this reason, most believe Congress is unlikely to act on reinstating any of these incentives until after the Support the extension of a $0.50 per gallon equivalent tax incentive for natural gas when used as a motor fuel. : An older Transportation LU provided a tax incentive for natural gas when used as a motor per gallon equivalent incentive is provided to businesses, individuals, and tax- The $0.50 incentive originally expired at the end of Fiscal Year 2009, but has since been extended three times to the end of calendar year 2013. Unfortunately, Congress was unable to agree on a broad package of tax extenders prior to the end of filling station in the Tampa For 2012, the rebate over the next several Unfortunately, Congress was unable to agree on a broad package of tax extenders prior to the end of 2013, allowing the natural gas tax credit and 54 other provisions to expire. Extending these provisions has frequently been mentioned as being a priority by prominent members of Congress. Most recently, UT) have proposed entitled the Expiring Provisions Improvement Reform and Efficiency (EXPIRE) Act that to the beginning of 2014 until the MI), the Chair of the House Ways and Means certain tax extenders should be considered as permanent parts” of He indicated that he will take a policy by through a series of hearings and mark- on, which needs to be offset. For these incentives until after the the extension of a $0.50 per gallon equivalent tax incentive for Attachment number 1 \nPage 22 of 35 Item # 34 FEDERAL ISSUE: Public Safety Programs BACKGROUND; HOW IT MAY AFFECT many Department of Justice (DOJ) and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) programs are provided as block grants with each state receiving a certain amount of funding, generally linked to population. That funding is then passed through to local jurisdictions to help support police, management, and homeland security functions of government. In other instances, funding from federal programs is made available to local governments via competitive grant solicitations. Specifically, program funds can be used to hire poli or firefighters through Staffing For Adequate Fire & Emergency Response Grants (SAFER), purchase equipment through the Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) or Assistance to Firefighters Grant (AFG). The City of Clearwater benefits from annual allocations from several of these other programs offer competitive grant opportunities from which the City has Most federal public safety programs saw a However, in FY 2013, some actually received a slight increase provided slight increases for the COPS, JAG, AFG and SAFER programs from FY 2013, after year steady decreases. The COPS hiring program received an increase in funding from $ 2013 to $214, while the JAG program the AFG and SAFER fire-related grants each receiv 2014. For FY 2015, the Administration proposed a $60 million increase for the COPS hiring program to $274 million, and proposed level funding for the JAG program. reduction in funding to $335 million has been proposed for each program. RECOMMENDED POSITION: Support Department of Justice and Department of Homeland Security grants, e.g., Community Oriented Policing Services, Byrne Justice Assistance Grants, Assistance to Firefighters Grants, and Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response Grants. Public Safety Programs BACKGROUND; HOW IT MAY AFFECT THE CITY OF CLEARWATER: Federal grant funding for (DOJ) and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) programs are provided as block grants with each state receiving a certain amount of funding, generally linked to population. That funding is then passed through to local jurisdictions to help support police, fire, emergency management, and homeland security functions of government. In other instances, funding from federal programs is made available to local governments via competitive grant solicitations. Specifically, program funds can be used to hire police officers through Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) or firefighters through Staffing For Adequate Fire & Emergency Response Grants (SAFER), purchase equipment through the Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) or Assistance to Firefighters Grant (AFG). The City of Clearwater benefits from annual allocations from several of these Federal programs, while offer competitive grant opportunities from which the City has traditionally Most federal public safety programs saw a decrease in funding from Fiscal Year (FY) 2011 to FY 2012 However, in FY 2013, some actually received a slight increase. The FY 2014 omnibus appropriations bill provided slight increases for the COPS, JAG, AFG and SAFER programs from FY 2013, after year steady decreases. The COPS hiring program received an increase in funding from $208 program received a $10 million increase to $276 million. Meanwhile, related grants each received $2.5 million increases to $340 million for FY For FY 2015, the Administration proposed a $60 million increase for the COPS hiring program to $274 million, and proposed level funding for the JAG program. For both the AFG and SAFER, a $5 million reduction in funding to $335 million has been proposed for each program. Support at least level funding from FY 2014 for a wide variety of Department of Justice and Department of Homeland Security grants, e.g., Community Oriented Policing Services, Byrne Justice Assistance Grants, Assistance to Firefighters Grants, and Staffing for Adequate rants. Support any City of Clearwater applications for these funds Federal grant funding for (DOJ) and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) programs are provided as block grants with each state receiving a certain amount of funding, generally linked to population. fire, emergency management, and homeland security functions of government. In other instances, funding from federal programs is made available to local governments via competitive grant solicitations. Specifically, ce officers through Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) or firefighters through Staffing For Adequate Fire & Emergency Response Grants (SAFER), purchase equipment through the Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) or Assistance to Firefighters Grant (AFG). programs, while traditionally sought funds. decrease in funding from Fiscal Year (FY) 2011 to FY 2012. The FY 2014 omnibus appropriations bill provided slight increases for the COPS, JAG, AFG and SAFER programs from FY 2013, after years of 208 million in FY received a $10 million increase to $276 million. Meanwhile, both to $340 million for FY For FY 2015, the Administration proposed a $60 million increase for the COPS hiring program to $274 For both the AFG and SAFER, a $5 million for a wide variety of Department of Justice and Department of Homeland Security grants, e.g., Community Oriented Policing Services, Byrne Justice Assistance Grants, Assistance to Firefighters Grants, and Staffing for Adequate applications for these funds. Attachment number 1 \nPage 23 of 35 Item # 34 FEDERAL ISSUE: The Corporation for National Grant Program BACKGROUND; HOW IT MAY AFFECT signed the National and Community Service Trust Act for National and Community Service programs under the umbrella of one central network of national service programs the United States to meet critical needs in education, public safety, health, and the environ the success of the program, and underscoring its bipartisan support, Strengthen AmeriCorps Program Act, which members in all categories. For the past 18 years, the City of Clearwater’s Police Department has received Federal funding from the AmeriCorps’ State and National grant program through Florida’s State Service Commission, Volunteer Florida. The Clearwater Police Department’s program offers a two college students, which provides them the opportunity to work directly with law enforcement officials. These students are offered shadowing oppo participating in day-to-day activities in the police department. After the two years, if the students have proven themselves, they have the opportunity to be hired on as police officers. Since the inception of this program, the Clearwater Police Department has hired on permanently 20 police officers and promoted 4 to supervisor positions. The aforementioned bipartisan support for CNCS programs, including the AmeriCorps’ State and National grant program, has waned in Congress du and 2013, the House of Representatives approved their version of and Education Appropriations bill, which included a 74 percent funding reduction overall, and eliminated all AmeriCorps grant programs. Ultimately, in FY 2012, the CNCS was funded at $1.048 billion, with the AmeriCorps’ State and National grant program receiving $344.3 million. 2013, this program saw an $18.1 million reductio some of its funding restored in the FY 2014 omnibus appropriations bill to $335.4 million. the Administration’s budget proposes level funding from FY 2014 for AmeriCorps’ State and Nati grants. RECOMMENDED POSITION: Support Corporation for National and Community Service grant program. Corporation for National and Community Service – AmeriCorps’ State and BACKGROUND; HOW IT MAY AFFECT THE CITY OF CLEARWATER: President Bil signed the National and Community Service Trust Act in 1993. This initiative established the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS) and brought the full range of domestic community service programs under the umbrella of one central organization. This legislation also created AmeriCorps, network of national service programs that provide intensive community service opportunities to meet critical needs in education, public safety, health, and the environ the success of the program, and underscoring its bipartisan support, President George W. Strengthen AmeriCorps Program Act, which authorized nearly double the number of AmeriCorps ars, the City of Clearwater’s Police Department has received Federal funding from the AmeriCorps’ State and National grant program through Florida’s State Service Commission, Volunteer Florida. The Clearwater Police Department’s program offers a two-year public safety program to local , which provides them the opportunity to work directly with law enforcement officials. These students are offered shadowing opportunities such as going on ride-alongs with police officers, and day activities in the police department. After the two years, if the students have proven themselves, they have the opportunity to be hired on as police officers. Since the inception of this Clearwater Police Department has hired on permanently 20 police officers and promoted 4 The aforementioned bipartisan support for CNCS programs, including the AmeriCorps’ State and National grant program, has waned in Congress during the past few years. In both Fiscal Year (FY) 2012 and 2013, the House of Representatives approved their version of the Labor, Health and Human Services, bill, which included a 74 percent funding reduction for CNCS program AmeriCorps grant programs. Ultimately, in FY 2012, the CNCS was funded at $1.048 billion, with the AmeriCorps’ State and National grant program receiving $344.3 million. 2013, this program saw an $18.1 million reduction in funding to $326 million post-sequestration, but saw some of its funding restored in the FY 2014 omnibus appropriations bill to $335.4 million. the Administration’s budget proposes level funding from FY 2014 for AmeriCorps’ State and Nati Support continued annual funding for grant programs within the Corporation for National and Community Service, particularly for the AmeriCorps State and National AmeriCorps’ State and President Bill Clinton established the Corporation and brought the full range of domestic community service This legislation also created AmeriCorps, a community service opportunities throughout to meet critical needs in education, public safety, health, and the environment. Due to George W. Bush signed the nearly double the number of AmeriCorps ars, the City of Clearwater’s Police Department has received Federal funding from the AmeriCorps’ State and National grant program through Florida’s State Service Commission, Volunteer public safety program to local , which provides them the opportunity to work directly with law enforcement officials. with police officers, and day activities in the police department. After the two years, if the students have proven themselves, they have the opportunity to be hired on as police officers. Since the inception of this Clearwater Police Department has hired on permanently 20 police officers and promoted 4 The aforementioned bipartisan support for CNCS programs, including the AmeriCorps’ State and years. In both Fiscal Year (FY) 2012 Health and Human Services, CNCS programs AmeriCorps grant programs. Ultimately, in FY 2012, the CNCS was funded at $1.048 billion, with the AmeriCorps’ State and National grant program receiving $344.3 million. In FY sequestration, but saw some of its funding restored in the FY 2014 omnibus appropriations bill to $335.4 million. For FY 2015, the Administration’s budget proposes level funding from FY 2014 for AmeriCorps’ State and National funding for grant programs within the , particularly for the AmeriCorps State and National Attachment number 1 \nPage 24 of 35 Item # 34 FEDERAL ISSUE: Department of Housing a HOME) BACKGROUND; HOW IT MAY AFFECT receives direct allocations of funding from two Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) formula programs: the HOME Investment Partnership Grants (CDBG). HOME funds are designed to create affordable housing for low annually as formula grants to participating jurisdictions, including establishes HOME Investment Trust Funds for each grantee, providing a line of credit that the jurisdiction may draw upon as needed. The program allows local governments to use HOME funds for grants, direct loans, loan guarantees or other forms of credit enhancement, or rental assistance or security deposits. CDBG is a flexible grant program that provides communities with Federal funding to address a wide range of unique community development needs. The CDBG program provides annual grants on a formula basis to units of local government and Since Fiscal Year (FY) 2010, nationwide funding for HOME and CDBG funding has been cut by 48 percent and 25 percent, respectively. In FY 2012, HOME was reduced by 38 percent, from $1.6 billion in corresponded to a 40 percent reduction for the City’s explained that this was due to changing demographics in the C they use to make their funding decisions. In FY 2013, HOME was reduced to $948 million mandatory sequestration cuts, and the City also saw a reduction to $ appropriations bill restored the program to its FY 2012 funding level of $1 billion an allocation of $299,956. For FY 2015, million to the program to $950 million. Similarly, CDBG funding was cut by nearly 12 percent, from $3.3 billion in FY 2012, which resulted in a 14 percent funding reduction was also due to HUD changes to the formula used to calculate allocations. was slightly increased to $3.078 billion in the Continuing Resolution even after sequestration City received an increase to $756,298, while t reduction to $3.03 billion for the CDBG program; providing Clearwater with an allocation of $726, 298. The Administration’s FY 2015 budget suggests a RECOMMENDED POSITION: Support the Community Development Block Grants and the HOME Investment Partnerships p their critical role in the City’s overall Department of Housing and Urban Development Formula Programs BACKGROUND; HOW IT MAY AFFECT THE CITY OF CLEARWATER: The City of Clearwater direct allocations of funding from two Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) formula programs: the HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) and Community Development Block HOME funds are designed to create affordable housing for low-income households and are awarded annually as formula grants to participating jurisdictions, including the City of Clearwater establishes HOME Investment Trust Funds for each grantee, providing a line of credit that the jurisdiction needed. The program allows local governments to use HOME funds for grants, direct loans, loan guarantees or other forms of credit enhancement, or rental assistance or security deposits. program that provides communities with Federal funding to address a wide range of unique community development needs. The CDBG program provides annual grants on a formula basis to units of local government and states, including the City of Clearwater. ince Fiscal Year (FY) 2010, nationwide funding for HOME and CDBG funding has been cut by 48 percent and 25 percent, respectively. 2012, HOME was reduced by 38 percent, from $1.6 billion in FY 2011 to $1 billion duction for the City’s allocation from $500,323 to $302, explained that this was due to changing demographics in the City as well as changes to the type of data they use to make their funding decisions. In FY 2013, HOME was reduced to $948 million mandatory sequestration cuts, and the City also saw a reduction to $290,091. The FY 2014 omnib restored the program to its FY 2012 funding level of $1 billion and the City received . For FY 2015, the Administration has proposed in its budget a reduction of $50 million to the program to $950 million. Similarly, CDBG funding was cut by nearly 12 percent, from $3.3 billion in FY 2011 to $2.948 billion in , which resulted in a 14 percent funding reduction for the City from $838,241 to $719,955. This reduction was also due to HUD changes to the formula used to calculate allocations. In FY 2013, funding was slightly increased to $3.078 billion in the Continuing Resolution even after sequestration City received an increase to $756,298, while the FY 2014 omnibus appropriations bill provided a reduction to $3.03 billion for the CDBG program; providing Clearwater with an allocation of $726, 298. The Administration’s FY 2015 budget suggests a reduction in funding for the program to $2.8 billion Support at continued adequate funding for future fiscal years Community Development Block Grants and the HOME Investment Partnerships program overall efforts to support those that are least fortunate. Formula Programs (CDBG & The City of Clearwater direct allocations of funding from two Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) (HOME) and Community Development Block income households and are awarded the City of Clearwater. HUD establishes HOME Investment Trust Funds for each grantee, providing a line of credit that the jurisdiction needed. The program allows local governments to use HOME funds for grants, direct loans, loan guarantees or other forms of credit enhancement, or rental assistance or security deposits. program that provides communities with Federal funding to address a wide range of unique community development needs. The CDBG program provides annual grants on a ince Fiscal Year (FY) 2010, nationwide funding for HOME and CDBG funding has been cut by 48 2011 to $1 billion, which ,011. HUD ty as well as changes to the type of data they use to make their funding decisions. In FY 2013, HOME was reduced to $948 million after the . The FY 2014 omnibus and the City received the Administration has proposed in its budget a reduction of $50 2011 to $2.948 billion in reduction for the City from $838,241 to $719,955. This In FY 2013, funding was slightly increased to $3.078 billion in the Continuing Resolution even after sequestration, and the he FY 2014 omnibus appropriations bill provided a reduction to $3.03 billion for the CDBG program; providing Clearwater with an allocation of $726, 298. reduction in funding for the program to $2.8 billion. for future fiscal years for both rograms because of Attachment number 1 \nPage 25 of 35 Item # 34 FEDERAL ISSUE: Environmental Protection Agency BACKGROUND; HOW IT MAY AFFECT Protection Agency (EPA) administers a cleanup program to provide financial assistance to state, local, and tribal governmental entities for certain types of contaminated industrial sites, referred to as “brownfields.” Sites eligible for this assistance tend to contamination may present an impediment to economic development, but where the risks generally are not high enough for the site to be addressed under the Superfund program or other related cleanup authorities. The brownfields program focuses on providing Federal financial assistance for “orphan” sites at which the potential need for cleanup remains unaddressed. EPA’s brownfields program awards two different categories of grants: one competitive and one formula eligible for the former of the two. Within the competitive grant program, the EPA offers assessment, cleanup, and revolving loan fund grants. An eligible entity may apply for up to $200,000 per site. In the near fut a need to obtain additional cleanup funding for various sites. $200,000 of Federal funding per project To facilitate site remediation and reuse, the funding maximum should be resources to remediate orphan brownfield sites. Clearwater’s Brownfields Area (CBA) covers 1,842 acres and includes over 7,000 properties. Over 125 of these sites have reported contamination. from less than one acre to over 40 acres. The CBA economic development potential has greatly decreased over the past 30 years. Private disinvestment combined with environmental decline has left an indelible mark on the area, characterized by business and job loss abandoned lands tainted by former gas stations, dry cleaning facilities, As a result of crime, distress, and economic deterioration, the CBA was designated a Justice Operation Weed & Seed site Historically Underutilized Business Zone (HUBZone) by the U.S. Small Business Administration. The City of Clearwater has implemented one of the most successful having completed over 100 assessment projects, but environmental issues that need to be addressed contaminated sites in the CBA that may require env funding for these and previously assessed sites to complete reuse planning and cleanup Last year, the City did not receive funds from EPA’s FY 2013 Brownfields Assessment Grant round of funding, in part because the EPA needed to fund projects in other communities that have not success as Clearwater with this program. In January of 2013, the City reapplied for an FY 2014 EPA Brownfields Assessment Grant in the amount of $400,000 ($200,000 each to assess potential hazardous substances and petroleum or petroleum produc In Fiscal Year (FY) 2012, Congress provided the EPA with $144.1 million for their brownfields grant programs. Of that amount, a little more than $94 million was available via the Section 104(k) competitive grant program. In the two fiscal years prior to FY 2012, funding was relatively similar for both the overall and the competitive grant programs. In FY 2013, the Section 104(k) competitive grant program Environmental Protection Agency’s Brownfields Program BACKGROUND; HOW IT MAY AFFECT THE CITY OF CLEARWATER: The Environmental ction Agency (EPA) administers a cleanup program to provide financial assistance to state, local, and tribal governmental entities for certain types of contaminated industrial sites, referred to as “brownfields.” Sites eligible for this assistance tend to be where the known or suspected presence of contamination may present an impediment to economic development, but where the risks generally are not high enough for the site to be addressed under the Superfund program or other related cleanup he brownfields program focuses on providing Federal financial assistance for “orphan” sites at which the potential need for cleanup remains unaddressed. EPA’s brownfields program awards two different categories of grants: one competitive and one formula-based. The City of Clearwater is only Within the competitive grant program, the EPA offers assessment, cleanup, and revolving loan fund grants. An eligible entity may apply for up to $200,000 per site. In the near future, Clearwater nup funding for various sites. Unfortunately, the current of Federal funding per project is extremely restrictive, as many site cleanups exceed $1 remediation and reuse, the funding maximum should be increased to allow orphan brownfield sites. Clearwater’s Brownfields Area (CBA) covers 1,842 acres and includes over 250 regulatory listed sites in Over 125 of these sites have reported contamination. These sites range in size from less than one acre to over 40 acres. The CBA economic development potential has greatly decreased Private disinvestment combined with environmental decline has left an indelible mark on the area, characterized by business and job loss, impacting the CBA by leaving a legacy of abandoned lands tainted by former gas stations, dry cleaning facilities, print shops, and other similar uses. As a result of crime, distress, and economic deterioration, the CBA was designated a U.S. Department of Justice Operation Weed & Seed site in 1996, and a portion of the area has also been designated derutilized Business Zone (HUBZone) by the U.S. Small Business Administration. implemented one of the most successful brownfields programs in the country, having completed over 100 assessment projects, but continues to have significant health, welfare, and to be addressed. Clearwater has identified more than 125 additional that may require environmental assessment. The City will need Federal eviously assessed sites to complete reuse planning and cleanup. Last year, the City did not receive funds from EPA’s FY 2013 Brownfields Assessment Grant round of funding, in part because the EPA needed to fund projects in other communities that have not success as Clearwater with this program. In January of 2013, the City reapplied for an FY 2014 EPA Brownfields Assessment Grant in the amount of $400,000 ($200,000 each to assess potential hazardous substances and petroleum or petroleum product impacted properties within the CBA). In Fiscal Year (FY) 2012, Congress provided the EPA with $144.1 million for their brownfields grant programs. Of that amount, a little more than $94 million was available via the Section 104(k) competitive rogram. In the two fiscal years prior to FY 2012, funding was relatively similar for both the overall and the competitive grant programs. In FY 2013, the Section 104(k) competitive grant program : The Environmental ction Agency (EPA) administers a cleanup program to provide financial assistance to state, local, and tribal governmental entities for certain types of contaminated industrial sites, referred to as be where the known or suspected presence of contamination may present an impediment to economic development, but where the risks generally are not high enough for the site to be addressed under the Superfund program or other related cleanup he brownfields program focuses on providing Federal financial assistance for “orphan” sites at which the potential need for cleanup remains unaddressed. EPA’s brownfields program awards two ased. The City of Clearwater is only Within the competitive grant program, the EPA offers assessment, cleanup, and revolving loan fund Clearwater may have Unfortunately, the current limitation of , as many site cleanups exceed $1 million. increased to allow for necessary regulatory listed sites in These sites range in size from less than one acre to over 40 acres. The CBA economic development potential has greatly decreased Private disinvestment combined with environmental decline has left an indelible impacting the CBA by leaving a legacy of print shops, and other similar uses. U.S. Department of has also been designated an derutilized Business Zone (HUBZone) by the U.S. Small Business Administration. rownfields programs in the country, gnificant health, welfare, and more than 125 additional ironmental assessment. The City will need Federal Last year, the City did not receive funds from EPA’s FY 2013 Brownfields Assessment Grant round of funding, in part because the EPA needed to fund projects in other communities that have not had as much success as Clearwater with this program. In January of 2013, the City reapplied for an FY 2014 EPA Brownfields Assessment Grant in the amount of $400,000 ($200,000 each to assess potential hazardous In Fiscal Year (FY) 2012, Congress provided the EPA with $144.1 million for their brownfields grant programs. Of that amount, a little more than $94 million was available via the Section 104(k) competitive rogram. In the two fiscal years prior to FY 2012, funding was relatively similar for both the overall and the competitive grant programs. In FY 2013, the Section 104(k) competitive grant program Attachment number 1 \nPage 26 of 35 Item # 34 received level funding from FY 2012 before sequestration, a bill, it received $90 million, which restored some of the cuts due to sequestration. In the 113th Congress, before he passed away, Senator Frank Lautenberg (D Brownfields Utilization, Investment, and Local Development (BUILD) Act to reauthorize the brownfields program through 2015. The bill would maintain the current authorization level of $250 million per year, increase the $200,000 funding limit per project to $500,000, limit to $650,000 if necessary, and provide for the creation of multipurpose grants, allowing local governments to obtain up to $950,000 to do site inventory, assessments, planning, or remediation for one or more brownfields sites. The Senate’s BUILD Act was passed out of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee in April of 2014 and has 10 cosponsors. In the House, Rep. Louise Slaughter (NY) introduced companion legislation under the same title, H.R 2 cosponsors. RECOMMENDED POSITION: Support Protection Agency’s brownfields program, including at least $90 million for the Section 104(k) competitive grant program. Support brownfields program. received level funding from FY 2012 before sequestration, and in the FY 2014 omnibus appropriations bill, it received $90 million, which restored some of the cuts due to sequestration. Congress, before he passed away, Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) introduced S. 491, the Utilization, Investment, and Local Development (BUILD) Act to reauthorize the brownfields program through 2015. The bill would maintain the current authorization level of $250 million per year, increase the $200,000 funding limit per project to $500,000, while giving EPA the discretion to raise the limit to $650,000 if necessary, and provide for the creation of multipurpose grants, allowing local governments to obtain up to $950,000 to do site inventory, assessments, planning, or remediation for one re brownfields sites. The Senate’s BUILD Act was passed out of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee in April of 2014 and has 10 cosponsors. In the House, Rep. Louise Slaughter (NY) introduced companion legislation under the same title, H.R 2896. The House BUILD Act has four Support continued adequate annual funding for the Environmental program, including at least $90 million for the Section 104(k) Support legislation to reauthorize the Environmental Protection Agency’s nd in the FY 2014 omnibus appropriations NJ) introduced S. 491, the Utilization, Investment, and Local Development (BUILD) Act to reauthorize the brownfields program through 2015. The bill would maintain the current authorization level of $250 million per year, while giving EPA the discretion to raise the limit to $650,000 if necessary, and provide for the creation of multipurpose grants, allowing local governments to obtain up to $950,000 to do site inventory, assessments, planning, or remediation for one re brownfields sites. The Senate’s BUILD Act was passed out of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee in April of 2014 and has 10 cosponsors. In the House, Rep. Louise Slaughter 896. The House BUILD Act has four Environmental program, including at least $90 million for the Section 104(k) legislation to reauthorize the Environmental Protection Agency’s Attachment number 1 \nPage 27 of 35 Item # 34 FEDERAL ISSUE: Supportive Housing for the Elderly Housing and Urban Development’s BACKGROUND; HOW IT MAY AFFECT Development (HUD) Section 202 program helps expand the supply of affordable hous services for the elderly by providing interest finance the development of housing. The capital advance does not have to be repaid as long as the project serves very low-income elderly persons for 40 years. The Section 202 program also provides project rental assistance funds to cover the difference between the HUD-approved operating cost for the project and the tenants' contribution towards rent. Project rental assistance contracts are approved initially for funds. The HUD Section 811 program is authorized to provide funding to develop and subsidize rental housing with an availability of supportive services for very low Section 811 program provided interest developers of affordable housing for persons with disabilities program. However, in Fiscal Year 2012, Congress moved toward providing funding for entered into partnerships with state health and human services and Medicaid agencies to multifamily housing complexes that provid In Pinellas County, the non-profit Boley Centers, Inc. receives distribute to several housing complexes throughout the County, including Apartments in Clearwater, which provides housing for disabled veterans. In Fiscal Year (FY) 2012, the HUD Section 202 program received $374.6 million, and the Section 811 program received $165 million. For FY 2013, b $156, respectively in the Continuing Resolution Supportive Housing for the Elderly Supportive Housing for Persons with Disabiliti For FY 2015, the Administration’s budget proposes an increase in funding for the Section 202 and 811 programs at $440 million and $160 million, respectively. RECOMMENDED POSITION: Support of Housing and Urban Development’s Supportive Housing for Persons with Disabilities : Supportive Housing for the Elderly and for Persons with Disabilities Housing and Urban Development’s Section 202 and 811 Programs BACKGROUND; HOW IT MAY AFFECT THE CITY OF CLEARWATER: The Housing and Urban Section 202 program helps expand the supply of affordable housing with supportive services for the elderly by providing interest-free capital advances to private, nonprofit sponsors to finance the development of housing. The capital advance does not have to be repaid as long as the project erly persons for 40 years. The Section 202 program also provides project rental assistance funds to cover the difference between the approved operating cost for the project and the tenants' contribution towards rent. Project rental ts are approved initially for three years and are renewable based on the availability of The HUD Section 811 program is authorized to provide funding to develop and subsidize rental housing with an availability of supportive services for very low-income adults with disabilities. Traditionally, the interest-free capital advances and operating subsidies to nonprofit developers of affordable housing for persons with disabilities, in a similar manner to the Section 202 program. However, in Fiscal Year 2012, Congress chose not to fund these activities, and instead have for rental assistance. These funds go to state housing agencies entered into partnerships with state health and human services and Medicaid agencies, and are distributed that provide a range of services for the disabled. profit Boley Centers, Inc. receives HUD Section 202 and 811 distribute to several housing complexes throughout the County, including the Jerry Howe Transitional , which provides housing for disabled veterans. Fiscal Year (FY) 2012, the HUD Section 202 program received $374.6 million, and the Section 811 For FY 2013, both of these programs received reductions in the Continuing Resolution. In the FY 2014 omnibus appropriations bill Supportive Housing for the Elderly program experienced an 8 percent increase to $384 million, while Supportive Housing for Persons with Disabilities program suffered a 19 percent decrease to $126 million. For FY 2015, the Administration’s budget proposes an increase in funding for the Section 202 and 811 programs at $440 million and $160 million, respectively. Support continued adequate annual Federal funding of the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Supportive Housing for the Elderly program (Section 202) Supportive Housing for Persons with Disabilities program (Section 811). ns with Disabilities - Department of : The Housing and Urban ing with supportive free capital advances to private, nonprofit sponsors to finance the development of housing. The capital advance does not have to be repaid as long as the project The Section 202 program also provides project rental assistance funds to cover the difference between the approved operating cost for the project and the tenants' contribution towards rent. Project rental years and are renewable based on the availability of The HUD Section 811 program is authorized to provide funding to develop and subsidize rental housing Traditionally, the ital advances and operating subsidies to nonprofit , in a similar manner to the Section 202 these activities, and instead have to state housing agencies that have , and are distributed HUD Section 202 and 811 funding to Jerry Howe Transitional Fiscal Year (FY) 2012, the HUD Section 202 program received $374.6 million, and the Section 811 received reductions to $355 and In the FY 2014 omnibus appropriations bill, the increase to $384 million, while the 19 percent decrease to $126 million. For FY 2015, the Administration’s budget proposes an increase in funding for the Section 202 and 811 annual Federal funding of the Department (Section 202) and Attachment number 1 \nPage 28 of 35 Item # 34 FEDERAL ISSUE: Homeless Assistance BACKGROUND; HOW IT MAY AFFECT the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act population in the United States. It originally created several and Urban Development (HUD) that focused on combating the root causes of homelessness. McKinney-Vento Act has been amended many times, most recently in signed the Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing (HEARTH) Act updated and expanded the definition of homelessness and McKinney-Vento. Under the HEARTH Act, programs, the Supportive Housing Program Occupancy (SRO) program, were grouped under The CoC program provides competitive grant communities seeking funds to develop problem of homelessness through a coordinated community building a system to address them. not caused merely by a lack of shelter, but involves a variety of underlying, unmet needs economic, and social. Under the CoC program, the SHP provide state to a more stable living situation. The homeless achieve residential stability, and increase their independence through progr their skill and/or income levels. The S+C program provides rental assistance that, when combined with social services, provides supportive housing for homeless people with disabilities and their families. The program allows for a variety of housing choices such as group homes or individual units, coupled with a range of supportive services. The SRO was created to expand suitable residential opport accomplished through compensating improvements made to kitchen and bathroom facilities in eligible SRO assistance for the residents that occupy those units Under the HEARTH Act, HUD also program, which include the following: housing search repair; provision of security or utility deposits; rental assistance with moving costs; and/or other activities that help homeless or would benefit individuals who have moved into permanent HUD requirement is that established or renewal projects, which are most likely to receive funding, and Tier II funding is dependent on the resources still available and the strength of the C Homeless Leadership Board (HLB) HUD CoC Program Combined Application on behalf of Homeless Assistance Competitive Grants – Continuum of Care Program BACKGROUND; HOW IT MAY AFFECT THE CITY OF CLEARWATER: In 1987, Congress passed Vento Homeless Assistance Act in response to the issue of an increasing homelessness population in the United States. It originally created several programs within the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) that focused on combating the root causes of homelessness. has been amended many times, most recently in 2009, when President Obama signed the Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing (HEARTH) Act updated and expanded the definition of homelessness and made changes to existing programs Under the HEARTH Act, three previously separate HUD homeless assistance Supportive Housing Program (SHP), Shelter Plus Care program (S+C), and Single Room grouped under the single umbrella Continuum of Care competitive grant funding to local governments and non-profits to develop a Continuum of Care system designed to address the critical problem of homelessness through a coordinated community-based process of identifying needs and The approach is predicated on the understanding that homelessness not caused merely by a lack of shelter, but involves a variety of underlying, unmet needs provides assistance to help the homeless transition from their current state to a more stable living situation. The goals of the program are to provide assistance that helps the achieve residential stability, and increase their independence through programs that program provides rental assistance that, when combined with social services, provides supportive housing for homeless people with disabilities and their families. The program allows for a of housing choices such as group homes or individual units, coupled with a range of supportive SRO was created to expand suitable residential opportunities for homeless individuals. This has been compensating owners of eligible SRO residences, for a period of 10 years, for to kitchen and bathroom facilities in eligible SRO residences, and providing the residents that occupy those units. also added 12 new eligible activities for funding under the single the following: housing search mediation or outreach to property owners; credit repair; provision of security or utility deposits; rental assistance for a final month at a locat with moving costs; and/or other activities that help homeless individuals move immediately into housing or would benefit individuals who have moved into permanent housing in the last 6 months. quirement is that established CoC’s rank their projects for funding into two categories: Tier I renewal projects, which are most likely to receive funding, and Tier II new or renewal projects, wh funding is dependent on the resources still available and the strength of the CoC’s application. The (HLB) is the CoC for Pinellas County, and is responsible for the HUD CoC Program Combined Application on behalf of its member agencies. Continuum of Care Program In 1987, Congress passed in response to the issue of an increasing homelessness n the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) that focused on combating the root causes of homelessness. The President Obama signed the Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing (HEARTH) Act, which programs under assistance and Single Room Continuum of Care (CoC) program. profits, and requires a Continuum of Care system designed to address the critical based process of identifying needs and on the understanding that homelessness is not caused merely by a lack of shelter, but involves a variety of underlying, unmet needs - physical, assistance to help the homeless transition from their current goals of the program are to provide assistance that helps the ams that increase program provides rental assistance that, when combined with social services, provides supportive housing for homeless people with disabilities and their families. The program allows for a of housing choices such as group homes or individual units, coupled with a range of supportive unities for homeless individuals. This has been of eligible SRO residences, for a period of 10 years, for providing rental the single CoC mediation or outreach to property owners; credit for a final month at a location; assistance individuals move immediately into housing housing in the last 6 months. Another new CoC’s rank their projects for funding into two categories: Tier I new renewal projects, whose oC’s application. The , and is responsible for the annual Attachment number 1 \nPage 29 of 35 Item # 34 The CoC competitive grants are funded in the Homeless Assistance Grants account Year (FY) 2012, the whole account received $1.901 billion Tier I new and renewal projects, from which several HLB CoC pr $166,740 to renew two CoC project housing with 16 single-family units, single adults, including veterans. The transitional housing to victims of domestic violence and their families $110,754 in FY 2012. In FY 2013, the amount for the Homeless Assistance an anomaly, or an exception, in the continuing resolution sparing it from deeper sequestration cuts. HLB has requested nearly $3.82 million for 2 $185,736 for three Tier II projects. At the time of the completion of this agenda, HUD had announced it initial funding decisions for Tier I renewal projects received more than was requested at near three projects in the City. This need underscores the importance of this funding to the City and the region as a whole. For FY 2014, Congress ultimately settled on an increase to $2.11 bil bill for Homeless Assistance Grants, and in FY 2015 the Administration proposed an increase to $2.4 billion for these grants. RECOMMENDED POSITION: Support and Urban Development Homeless Assistance Grants, particularly for the Continuum of Care Program. competitive grants are funded in the Homeless Assistance Grants account for HUD and i the whole account received $1.901 billion. Approximately $1.5 billion went to , from which several HLB CoC projects were funded. This included projects in the City: Baty Villas, which provides permanent supportive , and Carlton Home, which provides long-term group living for 8 The Haven of RCS (Religious Community Services), domestic violence and their families, a new Tier II project, also received the Homeless Assistance Grant account was increased to $1.93 billion due to an anomaly, or an exception, in the continuing resolution sparing it from deeper sequestration cuts. HLB has requested nearly $3.82 million for 23 Tier I projects (22 renewals, one new) and an addit $185,736 for three Tier II projects. At the time of the completion of this agenda, HUD had announced it initial funding decisions for Tier I renewal projects for FY 2013, and the HLB renewal projects actually received more than was requested at nearly $3.8 million. These projects included $262,855 in funding for is need underscores the importance of this funding to the City and the region For FY 2014, Congress ultimately settled on an increase to $2.11 billion in the omnibus appropriations for Homeless Assistance Grants, and in FY 2015 the Administration proposed an increase to $2.4 Support continued adequate annual funding for Department of Housing nd Urban Development Homeless Assistance Grants, particularly for the Continuum of Care Program. for HUD and in Fiscal pproximately $1.5 billion went to CoC ojects were funded. This included : Baty Villas, which provides permanent supportive term group living for 8 Haven of RCS (Religious Community Services), which offers Tier II project, also received Grant account was increased to $1.93 billion due to an anomaly, or an exception, in the continuing resolution sparing it from deeper sequestration cuts. The projects (22 renewals, one new) and an additional $185,736 for three Tier II projects. At the time of the completion of this agenda, HUD had announced it he HLB renewal projects actually These projects included $262,855 in funding for is need underscores the importance of this funding to the City and the region lion in the omnibus appropriations for Homeless Assistance Grants, and in FY 2015 the Administration proposed an increase to $2.4 annual funding for Department of Housing nd Urban Development Homeless Assistance Grants, particularly for the Continuum of Care Program. Attachment number 1 \nPage 30 of 35 Item # 34 FEDERAL ISSUE: Economic Development Administration BACKGROUND; HOW IT MAY AFFECT Development Administration (EDA) projects throughout the country. Successful projects usually leverage roughly 200 new jobs and $24 million in private investment for every $1 million of EDA investment. The City of Clearwater has identifie with the highest growth potential. The City recently entered into an agreement with the Tampa Bay Innovation Center to create and implement a “Virtual Incubator Program,” and learning opportunities to help foster and grow this promising industry in Clearwater. It is expected to offer all of the benefits of the traditional “bricks and mortar” incubator, but without a physical location. Should this prove to be a successful endeavor, it may be possible to work with the EDA to fund co location space and partially transition the City’s program to a more traditional business incubator model. The President’s Deficit Commission, as well as more recent elimination of EDA, as its mission is seen as duplicative by some. In June 2012 the “Economic Development Revitalization Act,” which would have reauthorized the Economic Development Administration (EDA) through 2015. EDA’s authorization expired in September 2008, but funding via the appropriations process has kept it functioning without an authorization. In addition to reauthorizing EDA, the Senate legislation would increase the authori $300 to $500 million annually. Despite the failure to pass the legislation, the EDA will continue to operate through the annual appropriations process if provided sufficient funding by Congress. The FY 2014 omnibus appropriations bill million in FY 2013 to $246.5 million. in its FY 2015 budget to just over $248 million. RECOMMENDED POSITION: Support Administration. Support City of Clearwater : Economic Development Administration BACKGROUND; HOW IT MAY AFFECT THE CITY OF CLEARWATER: The Economic Development Administration (EDA) is primarily a granting agency that funds economic development ojects throughout the country. Successful projects usually leverage roughly 200 new jobs and $24 million in private investment for every $1 million of EDA investment. identified information technology and software as one of its . The City recently entered into an agreement with the Tampa Bay Innovation Center to create and implement a “Virtual Incubator Program,” which will offer mentoring and learning opportunities to help foster and grow this promising industry in Clearwater. It is expected to offer all of the benefits of the traditional “bricks and mortar” incubator, but without a physical location. is prove to be a successful endeavor, it may be possible to work with the EDA to fund co location space and partially transition the City’s program to a more traditional business incubator model. The President’s Deficit Commission, as well as more recent Congressional proposals, has proposed the elimination of EDA, as its mission is seen as duplicative by some. In June 2012, the Senate failed to pass the “Economic Development Revitalization Act,” which would have reauthorized the Economic nistration (EDA) through 2015. EDA’s authorization expired in September 2008, but funding via the appropriations process has kept it functioning without an authorization. In addition to reauthorizing EDA, the Senate legislation would increase the authorized funding for the program from $300 to $500 million annually. Despite the failure to pass the legislation, the EDA will continue to operate through the annual appropriations process if provided sufficient funding by Congress. riations bill provided an increase in funding for the EDA from $220.6 million in FY 2013 to $246.5 million. The Administration proposed a small increase in funding the EDA in its FY 2015 budget to just over $248 million. Support continued funding of the Economic Development City of Clearwater grant applications through EDA programs. The Economic is primarily a granting agency that funds economic development ojects throughout the country. Successful projects usually leverage roughly 200 new jobs and $24 industry clusters . The City recently entered into an agreement with the Tampa Bay which will offer mentoring and learning opportunities to help foster and grow this promising industry in Clearwater. It is expected to offer all of the benefits of the traditional “bricks and mortar” incubator, but without a physical location. is prove to be a successful endeavor, it may be possible to work with the EDA to fund co- location space and partially transition the City’s program to a more traditional business incubator model. Congressional proposals, has proposed the the Senate failed to pass the “Economic Development Revitalization Act,” which would have reauthorized the Economic nistration (EDA) through 2015. EDA’s authorization expired in September 2008, but funding via the appropriations process has kept it functioning without an authorization. In addition to zed funding for the program from $300 to $500 million annually. Despite the failure to pass the legislation, the EDA will continue to operate through the annual appropriations process if provided sufficient funding by Congress. provided an increase in funding for the EDA from $220.6 The Administration proposed a small increase in funding the EDA omic Development through EDA programs. Attachment number 1 \nPage 31 of 35 Item # 34 FEDERAL ISSUE: Offshore Energy Exploration BACKGROUND; HOW IT MAY AFFECT currently occurs in both the western and central Gulf of Mexico. However, nearly the entire eastern Gulf is protected from drilling until 2022 by the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act of 2006 (GOMESA). State waters in the Gulf of Mexico extend waters beyond that point. In the 112th Congress, the House of Representatives voted to expand offshore oil drilling, including in the eastern Gulf of Mexico in an effort to lower gas prices and incre House passed three pieces of legislation that would reve Department of Interior to revisit oil projects that were rejected af make acreage of the Outer Continental Shelf that is currently unavailable to lease available for drilling, including the eastern Gulf of Mexico and the Atlantic Coast Senate, but it failed to receive the necessary votes t Late in 2011, the Administration proposed its OCS Oil and Gas Leasing Program for 2012 the program, the Administration does not propose to lease any areas in the Atlantic for oil and gas drilling. In response to the plan, 180 members of Congress from both political parties sent a letter to the Administration asking that they open up more areas of the OCS to drilling, the eastern Gulf. Four members of the Florida House delegation signed the le However, the Administration also signaled its intentions in its five Program to allow seismic analysis to determine resource potential in the Atlantic step in moving forward with that plan, which OCS from Delaware to parts of Florida. In February, the Department of Interior’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) finalized a Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) on seismic exploration in the Atlantic Ocean, which opens the door for industry groups to conduct the first new oil and gas surveys in three decades. Specifically, the final plan allows for the deployment of high air-guns in Federal waters to pinpoint the depth and size of oil and gas deposits, and though it is viewed by many to include the most stringent regulations to mitigate against the effects these air guns may have on wildlife, some continue to oppose the PEIS. This PEIS could be signed as early as April, though any decisions about any future oil and gas exploration leases in areas off the Atlantic would be made by President Obama’s successor. the seismic surveys be completed in time for Leasing Program for 2017-2022, some believe that drilling could take place in areas identified as having resource potential as early as 2020. Senator Mary Landrieu (D-LA) applauded the decision and took expanded revenue sharing between the Federal government and states that have oil and gas production off their coasts, something which she has long favored. : Offshore Energy Exploration BACKGROUND; HOW IT MAY AFFECT THE CITY OF CLEARWATER: Active energy currently occurs in both the western and central Gulf of Mexico. However, nearly the entire eastern Gulf is protected from drilling until 2022 by the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act of 2006 (GOMESA). State waters in the Gulf of Mexico extend 10.5 miles from shore. The Federal government controls Congress, the House of Representatives voted to expand offshore oil drilling, including in the eastern Gulf of Mexico in an effort to lower gas prices and increase domestic revenue. Specifically, the House passed three pieces of legislation that would reverse all current oil moratoriums, require the Department of Interior to revisit oil projects that were rejected after the Deepwater Horizon spill age of the Outer Continental Shelf that is currently unavailable to lease available for drilling, f Mexico and the Atlantic Coast. Similar legislation was introduced in the Senate, but it failed to receive the necessary votes to be considered. Late in 2011, the Administration proposed its OCS Oil and Gas Leasing Program for 2012 the program, the Administration does not propose to lease any areas in the Atlantic for oil and gas 180 members of Congress from both political parties sent a letter to the Administration asking that they open up more areas of the OCS to drilling, including additional areas in astern Gulf. Four members of the Florida House delegation signed the letter. However, the Administration also signaled its intentions in its five-year OCS Oil and Gas Leasing seismic analysis to determine resource potential in the Atlantic, and recently took a big step in moving forward with that plan, which could eventually lead to offshore drilling in the Atlantic OCS from Delaware to parts of Florida. In February, the Department of Interior’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) finalized a Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) on seismic air-gun testing for offshore oil and gas exploration in the Atlantic Ocean, which opens the door for industry groups to conduct the first new oil Specifically, the final plan allows for the deployment of high guns in Federal waters to pinpoint the depth and size of oil and gas deposits, and though it is viewed by many to include the most stringent regulations to mitigate against the effects these air guns may have on wildlife, some continue to oppose the PEIS. This PEIS could be signed as early as April, though any decisions about any future oil and gas exploration leases in areas off the Atlantic would be made by President Obama’s successor. Should the analysis of the seismic surveys be completed in time for potential inclusion in the next DOI OCS Oil and Gas 2022, some believe that drilling could take place in areas identified as having LA) applauded the decision and took the opportunity to discuss the need for expanded revenue sharing between the Federal government and states that have oil and gas production off their coasts, something which she has long favored. Senator Landrieu recently became Chair of the Active energy drilling currently occurs in both the western and central Gulf of Mexico. However, nearly the entire eastern Gulf is protected from drilling until 2022 by the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act of 2006 (GOMESA). 10.5 miles from shore. The Federal government controls Congress, the House of Representatives voted to expand offshore oil drilling, including in the ase domestic revenue. Specifically, the , require the ter the Deepwater Horizon spill, and age of the Outer Continental Shelf that is currently unavailable to lease available for drilling, . Similar legislation was introduced in the Late in 2011, the Administration proposed its OCS Oil and Gas Leasing Program for 2012-2017. Within the program, the Administration does not propose to lease any areas in the Atlantic for oil and gas 180 members of Congress from both political parties sent a letter to the additional areas in Oil and Gas Leasing , and recently took a big could eventually lead to offshore drilling in the Atlantic In February, the Department of Interior’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) finalized a gun testing for offshore oil and gas exploration in the Atlantic Ocean, which opens the door for industry groups to conduct the first new oil Specifically, the final plan allows for the deployment of high-volume guns in Federal waters to pinpoint the depth and size of oil and gas deposits, and though it is viewed by many to include the most stringent regulations to mitigate against the effects these air guns may have This PEIS could be signed as early as April, though any decisions about any future oil and gas exploration Should the analysis of potential inclusion in the next DOI OCS Oil and Gas 2022, some believe that drilling could take place in areas identified as having the opportunity to discuss the need for expanded revenue sharing between the Federal government and states that have oil and gas production off Senator Landrieu recently became Chair of the Attachment number 1 \nPage 32 of 35 Item # 34 Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, which has jurisdiction over these issues, and is generally seen as agreeing with the committee’s Ranking Member, Senator Lisa Murkowski (R the need to open more areas of the U.S. OCS for exploration. In the 113th Congress, Senators Landrieu and Murkowski Inequity with Revenues (FAIR) Act, which promotes new drilling by offering increased revenue sharing and also includes renewable energy proposals to entice support from gen Specifically, states would receive 27.5 percent of royalties from offshore fossil or renewable energy, and an additional 10 percent if the state creates a fund to support clean energy and energy conservation programs. Currently, States receive 50 percent of royalties from onshore fossil fuels development on Federal lands; this revenue sharing program would also be expanded to include renewable energy. Additionally, revenue sharing under the FAIR Act would apply to all OCS goals of this legislation is to entice Senators beyond opening up areas for oil and gas exploration where there is currently a moratorium, through the prospect of direct royalties to their states. Last year, the House of Representatives by the Chairman of the Natural Resources Committee, Rep. Doc Hastings (R for increasing U.S. oil and gas exploration. This bill production by requiring the Obama administration Oil and Gas Leasing Program to include lease sales and parts of California. Though the west coast of Florida would remain off until 2022, H.R. 2231 would require that the Obama Administration lift its current moratorium on lease sales for the east coast of Florida in its current 2012 37.5 percent revenue sharing incentive for a coasts. The Administration issued a veto threat for this legislation and it is unlikely to be considered in the Senate. Although he is retiring after this term, Rep. Hastings keep up the pressure to open further areas to future drilling. RECOMMENDED POSITION: Monitor Florida’s Federal waters. and Natural Resources Committee, which has jurisdiction over these issues, and is generally seen as agreeing with the committee’s Ranking Member, Senator Lisa Murkowski (R the need to open more areas of the U.S. OCS for exploration. s Landrieu and Murkowski introduced S. 630, the Fixing America’s Inequity with Revenues (FAIR) Act, which promotes new drilling by offering increased revenue sharing and also includes renewable energy proposals to entice support from generally anti-drilling advocates. Specifically, states would receive 27.5 percent of royalties from offshore fossil or renewable energy, and an additional 10 percent if the state creates a fund to support clean energy and energy conservation ently, States receive 50 percent of royalties from onshore fossil fuels development on Federal lands; this revenue sharing program would also be expanded to include renewable energy. Additionally, revenue sharing under the FAIR Act would apply to all OCS revenue. One of the primary goals of this legislation is to entice Senators beyond the four Gulf oil and gas producing states opening up areas for oil and gas exploration where there is currently a moratorium, through the prospect House of Representatives passed the Offshore Energy and Jobs Act, H.R. 2231, by the Chairman of the Natural Resources Committee, Rep. Doc Hastings (R-WA), an active proponent for increasing U.S. oil and gas exploration. This bill would expand offshore energy exploration and production by requiring the Obama administration to submit a new five-year offshore plan for the OCS to include lease sales off the coasts of Alaska, Virginia, South Carolina the west coast of Florida would remain off-limits to any new drillin require that the Obama Administration lift its current moratorium on lease sales for the east coast of Florida in its current 2012-2017 lease plan. This legislation also provides a 37.5 percent revenue sharing incentive for any states with oil and gas leases within 200 miles from their issued a veto threat for this legislation and it is unlikely to be considered in iring after this term, Rep. Hastings and his House colleagues are certain to keep up the pressure to open further areas to future drilling. Monitor the potential expansion of offshore energy exploration in and Natural Resources Committee, which has jurisdiction over these issues, and is generally seen as agreeing with the committee’s Ranking Member, Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), on introduced S. 630, the Fixing America’s Inequity with Revenues (FAIR) Act, which promotes new drilling by offering increased revenue sharing drilling advocates. Specifically, states would receive 27.5 percent of royalties from offshore fossil or renewable energy, and an additional 10 percent if the state creates a fund to support clean energy and energy conservation ently, States receive 50 percent of royalties from onshore fossil fuels development on Federal lands; this revenue sharing program would also be expanded to include renewable energy. revenue. One of the primary the four Gulf oil and gas producing states to support opening up areas for oil and gas exploration where there is currently a moratorium, through the prospect the Offshore Energy and Jobs Act, H.R. 2231, authored WA), an active proponent would expand offshore energy exploration and year offshore plan for the OCS Virginia, South Carolina, limits to any new drilling require that the Obama Administration lift its current moratorium on lease This legislation also provides a ny states with oil and gas leases within 200 miles from their issued a veto threat for this legislation and it is unlikely to be considered in leagues are certain to the potential expansion of offshore energy exploration in Attachment number 1 \nPage 33 of 35 Item # 34 FEDERAL ISSUE: Land and Water Conservation Fund BACKGROUND; HOW IT MAY AFFECT Conservation Fund (LWCF) Act of 1965 was enacted to help preserve, develop, and assure access to outdoor recreation facilities for our nation. The law created the Land and Water Con U.S. Treasury as a funding source to implement outdoor recreation goals. The LWCF has been the principal source of monies for land acquisition for outdoor recreation by four Federal agencies—the National Park Service, Bureau of Land and Forest Service. The LWCF also funds a matching grant program via the National Park Service to assist states (and local governments as sub outdoor recreational facilities. A portion of the appropriation is divided equally among the states, with the remainder apportioned based on need, as determined by the Secretary of the Interior. The states award their grant money through a competitive selection process establish their own priorities and criteria. Finally, beginning in Fiscal Year (FY) 1998, LWCF has been used to fund other federal programs with related purposes. The LWCF is authorized at $900 million annually. multiple sources, nearly all of the revenues are derived from oil and gas leasing in the Outer Continental Shelf. Congress determines the level of appropriations each year, and yearly appropriations hav fluctuated widely since the origin of the program. Of the total revenues that have accrued throughout the history of the program ($33.5 billion), less than half have been appropriated ($15.8 billion). FY 2001 marked the highest funding ever, with appropriations exceeding the authorized level by reaching n provided the most LWCF funding of the past twenty years for the state grant program: $144 million. However, this has trended downward over the past decade. provided $306 million for land acquisition, which included essentially level funding from FY 2013 for the formula state conservation grant program at $45.09 million also included an additional $3 million for a competitive state cons competitive program will not be available until Congress is briefed Interior on the design of the program and the grant's criteria. This past January, 31 Senators signed a letter to its FY 2015 budget, with a continued focus on recreational access. proposed increasing LWCF funding to $ $48.1 million. The Administration’s budget also the LWCF at its fully authorized level of The current authorization for the LWCF is set to expire at the end of 2015 Max Baucus (D-MT) introduced S. 338, the Land and Water Conservation Authorization and Funding Act of 2013, which would do the following: 1) Amend the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 to make permanent the authorization. 2) Make revenue into the LWCF without further appropriation. Land and Water Conservation Fund BACKGROUND; HOW IT MAY AFFECT THE CITY OF CLEARWATER: The Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) Act of 1965 was enacted to help preserve, develop, and assure access to outdoor recreation facilities for our nation. The law created the Land and Water Conservation Fund in the U.S. Treasury as a funding source to implement outdoor recreation goals. The LWCF has been the principal source of monies for land acquisition for outdoor recreation by four the National Park Service, Bureau of Land Management, Fish and Wildlife Service, and Forest Service. The LWCF also funds a matching grant program via the National Park Service to assist states (and local governments as sub-recipients) in acquiring recreational lands and developing ional facilities. A portion of the appropriation is divided equally among the states, with the remainder apportioned based on need, as determined by the Secretary of the Interior. The states award their grant money through a competitive selection process based on statewide recreation plans and establish their own priorities and criteria. Finally, beginning in Fiscal Year (FY) 1998, LWCF has been used to fund other federal programs with related purposes. The LWCF is authorized at $900 million annually. While the fund accrues revenues and collections from multiple sources, nearly all of the revenues are derived from oil and gas leasing in the Outer Continental Shelf. Congress determines the level of appropriations each year, and yearly appropriations hav fluctuated widely since the origin of the program. Of the total revenues that have accrued throughout the history of the program ($33.5 billion), less than half have been appropriated ($15.8 billion). FY 2001 marked the highest funding ever, with appropriations exceeding the authorized level by reaching nearly $1 billion. In FY 2002, Congress provided the most LWCF funding of the past twenty years for the state grant program: $144 million. However, this has trended downward over the past decade. The FY 2014 omnibus appropriations bill ion for land acquisition, which included essentially level funding from FY 2013 for the formula state conservation grant program at $45.09 million, before sequestration. However, Congress $3 million for a competitive state conservation grant program. Funds will not be available until Congress is briefed by officials in the Department of on the design of the program and the grant's criteria. This past January, 31 Senators signed a letter to the Administration urging full funding for the LWCF in its FY 2015 budget, with a continued focus on recreational access. For FY 2015, the Administration ding to $305 million, including an increase for the state grant program The Administration’s budget also proposed making mandatory and permanent the LWCF at its fully authorized level of $900 million beginning in FY 2016. The current authorization for the LWCF is set to expire at the end of 2015. Last year, former Senator introduced S. 338, the Land and Water Conservation Authorization and Funding Act of 2013, which would do the following: Amend the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 to make permanent the LWCF available for expenditure to carry out the purposes of the Act without further appropriation. : The Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) Act of 1965 was enacted to help preserve, develop, and assure access to servation Fund in the The LWCF has been the principal source of monies for land acquisition for outdoor recreation by four Management, Fish and Wildlife Service, and Forest Service. The LWCF also funds a matching grant program via the National Park Service to recipients) in acquiring recreational lands and developing ional facilities. A portion of the appropriation is divided equally among the states, with the remainder apportioned based on need, as determined by the Secretary of the Interior. The states based on statewide recreation plans and establish their own priorities and criteria. Finally, beginning in Fiscal Year (FY) 1998, LWCF has been While the fund accrues revenues and collections from multiple sources, nearly all of the revenues are derived from oil and gas leasing in the Outer Continental Shelf. Congress determines the level of appropriations each year, and yearly appropriations have Of the total revenues that have accrued throughout the history of the program ($33.5 billion), less than half have been appropriated ($15.8 billion). FY 2001 marked the highest funding ever, with early $1 billion. In FY 2002, Congress provided the most LWCF funding of the past twenty years for the state grant program: $144 million. The FY 2014 omnibus appropriations bill ion for land acquisition, which included essentially level funding from FY 2013 for the . However, Congress ervation grant program. Funds from the by officials in the Department of the Administration urging full funding for the LWCF in he Administration an increase for the state grant program to permanent funding for former Senator introduced S. 338, the Land and Water Conservation Authorization and Funding Amend the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 to make permanent the LWCF’s available for expenditure to carry out the purposes of the Act Attachment number 1 \nPage 34 of 35 Item # 34 3) Require that not less than 1.5 available for projects that secure hunting, fishing, and other recreational purposes. This bill currently has 41 cosponsors (3 RECOMMENDED POSITION: Support Conservation Fund, including at least $100 million for the state grant program. not less than 1.5 percent of the annual authorized funding amount to be made available for projects that secure recreational public access to existing federal public land for hunting, fishing, and other recreational purposes. cosponsors (37D, 2R, 2I), including Senator Bill Nelson. Support a $900 million annual appropriation from the Land and Water Conservation Fund, including at least $100 million for the state grant program. of the annual authorized funding amount to be made recreational public access to existing federal public land for a $900 million annual appropriation from the Land and Water Attachment number 1 \nPage 35 of 35 Item # 34 City Council Agenda Council Chambers - City Hall Meeting Date:5/1/2014 SUBJECT / RECOMMENDATION: City Manager Verbal Reports SUMMARY: Review Approval: Cover Memo Item # 35 City Council Agenda Council Chambers - City Hall Meeting Date:5/1/2014 SUBJECT / RECOMMENDATION: 55th Anniversary Nagano Trip - Mayor Cretekos SUMMARY: Review Approval: Cover Memo Item # 36