Loading...
08/06/2026 City Council Meeting Minutes August 6, 2026 City of Clearwater Main Library- Council Chambers 100 N. Osceola Avenue Clearwater, FL 33755 a Meeting Minutes Thursday, August 6, 2026 6:00 PM Main Library - Council Chambers City Council Page 1 City of Clearwater City Council Meeting Minutes August 6, 2026 Roll Call Present: 5 - Mayor Bruce Rector, Vice Mayor Ryan Cotton, Councilmember David Allbritton, Councilmember Lina Teixeira and Councilmember Michael Mannino Also Present: Jennifer Poirrier— City Manager, Daniel Slaughter—Assistant City Manager, Al Battle —Assistant City Manager, Owen Kohler— Interim City Attorney, Rosemarie Call — City Clerk, and Nicole Sprague — Deputy City Clerk. To provide continuity for research, items are listed in agenda order although not necessarily discussed in that order. 1. Call to Order— Mayor Rector 2. Invocation 3. Pledge of Allegiance 4. Special recognitions and Presentations (Proclamations, service awards, or other special recognitions. Presentations by governmental agencies or groups providing formal updates to Council will be limited to ten minutes.) — Given. 4.1 End of Session Report - Anita Berry, Johnston and Stewart 4.2 Presentation by Middle School Students - Clearwater Sister Cities, Inc. (Nonprofit Partner) Students who recently participated in the Clearwater Sister Cities Inc. Middle School Exchange Program to Nagano, Japan, will provide a presentation highlighting their experiences. 4.3 Presentation by Clearwater high school students - Sister City Exchange Trip to Nagano, Japan Clearwater resident high schoolers who recently participated in the Sister City Exchange Program to Nagano, Japan, will provide a presentation highlighting their experiences. 4.4 Sister Cities International Youth Leadership Summit, Washington, D.0 - Presentation by Clearwater Youth Ambassador Page 2 City of Clearwater City Council Meeting Minutes August 6, 2026 A Clearwater student ambassador who attended the Sister Cities International Youth Leadership Summit in Washington, D.C. will provide a presentation on their experience. 4.5 Sister Cities International Young Artists & Authors Showcase - Recognition of Clearwater Student Winner Staff recognizes Clearwater student Robert Kopec who was selected as the first-place winner in the Sister Cities International Young Artists &Authors Showcase (YAAS) in the Original Music category for ages 15-18. The YAAS program is an international youth competition that celebrates creativity and cultural understanding through student submissions in art, literature, poetry, photography, and music. Submissions are centered around an annual theme and are evaluated based on originality, composition, and interpretation of the theme. Selected grand prize winners in each category and age division receive a $1,000 prize, second place winners receive $500, and third place winners receive $250. After winners are announced, their work is featured on the Sister Cities International website. Any Sister Cities International member program is eligible to participate in YAAS, making it an important opportunity to engage local students, English teachers, and art educators in international cultural exchange. This recognition highlights the student's achievement at the international level and reflects Clearwater's ongoing commitment to fostering youth participation in global Sister Cities programs. 4.6 Juvenile Welfare Board of Pinellas County 80th Anniversary Proclamation - Karen Boggess, Interim CEO and COO of the Juvenile Welfare Board of Pinellas County 4.7 Florida Water Professionals Month Proclamation - Mike Flanigan, Public Utilities Director 5. Approval of Minutes 5.1 Approve the minutes of the July 16, 2026 City Council meeting as submitted in written summation by the City Clerk. Councilmember Allbritton moved to approve the minutes of the July 16, 2026 City Council meeting as submitted in written summation by the City Clerk. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Page 3 City of Clearwater City Council Meeting Minutes August 6, 2026 6. Consent Agenda — Approved as submitted. 6.1 Appoint Sean Austin to the Neighborhood and Affordable Housing Advisory Board, as the citizen representative, for a term through August 6, 2030. (consent) 6.2 Approve a Client Services Agreement with Arthur J. Gallagher Risk Management Services, LLC to provide insurance brokerage services for the city's Master Property Program and other insurance coverages as needed for an initial three-year term with one three-year renewal option pursuant to Clearwater Code of Ordinances Section 2.563(1) (c), piggyback, and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (consent) 6.3 Extend Owen Kohler's appointment as Interim City Attorney through October 1, 2026. (consent) 6.4 Authorize a Guaranteed Maximum Price proposal to Keystone Excavators, Inc. of Oldsmar, FL, for renovations and improvements to Countryside Community Park, located at 2640 Sabal Springs Dr., in the amount of$1,449,136.15, pursuant to Request for Qualifications (RFQ) 51-24, Construction Manager at Risk Services for Continuing Contracts, and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same (consent) 6.5 Authorize an addendum to the existing Professional Services Agreement with RecTrac, LLC d/b/a Vermont Systems, of Essex Junction, Vermont, for the Payment Services software, PayTrac, to run coterminously with the existing agreement pursuant to Clearwater Code of Ordinances Sections 2.563(1)(a), Single Source, and 2.563(1)(d), Impractical, and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (consent) 6.6 Award a construction contract to Concrete Protection and Restoration LLC, for Carpenter Complex Repairs in the amount of$962,933.00 pursuant to Invitation to Bid 26-0046-PR and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (consent) 6.7 Approve Change Order 3 to Skanska USA Building, Inc., for The Sound Canopy Gutters Installation Project in the amount of$694,055.00, increasing the contract from $72,362,827.92 to $73,056,882.92; approve a project budget increase of$2,513,593.13 to align the budget with revenues received and provide funding for additional project-related costs, and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (consent) 6.8 Authorize the purchase of heavy- and light-duty vehicles and equipment in a not-to-exceed amount of$22,251,080 pursuant to Clearwater Code of Ordinances Sections 2.563(1) (c), Piggyback; 2.563(1)(d), Noncompetitive Purchases, and 2.561(5), Small Purchases; declare the vehicles and equipment being replaced as surplus and authorize disposal Page 4 City of Clearwater City Council Meeting Minutes August 6, 2026 through public auction or trade-in, whichever is determined to be in the best interest of the City, pursuant to Code Sections 2.623(7)(c), Public Auction, and 2.623(7)(e), Trade-In; authorize lease purchase under the City's Master Lease Purchase Agreement or internal financing through an interfund loan from the Capital Improvement Fund, whichever is determined to be in the City's best interest; and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (consent) 6.9 Approve Amendment No.1 (no monetary change) and Renewal No. 1 to the 2021 Pinellas County Technical Rescue Team Agreement (Agreement) with the City of Clearwater and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (consent) 6.10Authorize an increase on purchase orders to Joe Payne, Inc. and Quorum Services for Florida Building Code inspections and plan review services in an amount of$350,000.00 for a cumulative not-to-exceed amount of$1,200,000.00 through September 30, 20267 pursuant to ITB #02-23, and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (consent) 6.11Authorize a purchase order with Verizon Wireless for cellular and mobile data services in an amount of$2,540,500.00, for the term August 24, 2026 through August 23, 20297 pursuant to Clearwater Code of Ordinances Section 2.563(1)(c), Piggyback, and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (consent) 6.12Approve an Encroachment Agreement between the City of Clearwater and Florida Gas Transmission Company, LLC for the installation of a natural gas distribution pipeline to cross over Florida Gas Transmission pipeline facilities and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (consent) Councilmember Mannino moved to approve the Consent Agenda and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Public Hearings - Not before 6:00 PM 7. Administrative Public Hearings 7.1 Approve the City of Clearwater's FY2026/2027 Annual Action Plan, which is the second Action Plan of the 2025/2026 - 2029/2030 Consolidated Plan, to implement the goals and objectives set forth in the Consolidated Plan and authorize the appropriate officials to enter into agreements with HUD and organizations approved for funding, together with authorization to execute administrative adjustments to same as needed. (APH) The FY 2025/2026 - 2029/2030 Five-Year Consolidated Plan (Con Plan) Page 5 City of Clearwater City Council Meeting Minutes August 6, 2026 identifies the City's goals and objectives with respect to the city's administration of HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) and Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program funds. Every 5 years, the city is required to update its Con Plan. Under the Con Plan, the City is required by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to create and implement a plan each year to identify the sources and uses of these funds for housing, community programs, and economic development. This plan, referred to as the Annual Action Plan, provides HUD with the City's Housing Division budget and proposed expenditures based on the entitlement funds and estimated program income that the City will receive in the upcoming fiscal year to meet the goals and objectives established in the Consolidated Plan. Funds will be used to develop viable communities and sustain existing ones. In addition, the funds will be used to provide safe, decent, and affordable housing to assist extremely low- to moderate-income households. This year's Annual Action Plan allocates federal funds to provide housing opportunities to extremely low- to moderate-income households for new and existing homes, construction and/or renovation of public facilities, fund public services programs and to provide commercial fagade loans to businesses in opportunity areas. The Annual Action Plan serves as a budget for planned projects and identifies unallocated funds available for additional project(s) throughout the budget year. Staff requests authorization to make administrative adjustments during the budget year to fund additional project(s), including shifting funds between projects within budgetary segments. The FY2026/2027 Annual Action Plan, is due to HUD on August 16, 2026. All organizations that will be receiving an allocation will have agreements prepared and executed by October 1, 2026. Staff performs compliance monitoring with funded organizations on an annual basis. On May 27, 2026, a notice of 30-day comment period and public hearings was published in the Tampa Bay Times. On July 7, 2026, the City's Neighborhood and Affordable Housing Advisory Board (NAHAB)will host the first of the two required public hearings and review a motion recommending City Council approval of the FY2026/2027 Annual Action Plan. Grant Application Process for CDBG Program The City partners with several non-profit agencies to implement the goals and objectives established in the Consolidated Plan. To obtain these partners, the City annually publishes in February a Notice of Funding Availability in the local newspaper and on its website. This notice informs the public of the resources the City will make available and the eligible uses of those resources. It also informs them of the 30-day application period for requesting funds. The applications were due on March 4, 2026. The City received 18 completed and Page 6 City of Clearwater City Council Meeting Minutes August 6, 2026 qualified applications. A Technical Review Committee (TRC) comprised of a professional in the social service and grants community, a member of the NAHAB, a representative of the Homeless Leadership Alliance, and the City Clerk reviewed and ranked the applications. Applicants were provided an opportunity to present their proposed projects at the March 17, 2026, NAHAB meeting. City Housing staff also reviewed each application to ensure it met HUD's baseline requirements. With guidance from the TRC and NAHAB and based on available funding, City staff prepared recommended funding allocations. The NAHAB met on April 14, 2026, and approved the recommended allocations. NAHAB approval is subject to City Council approval of the Annual Action Plan. Recommended CDBG Grant Allocations (Competitive) The City may allocate up to 15% ($136,899.30) of its CDBG entitlement funds for Public Services activities. This year the city received five requests for funding subject to the 15% cap. Staff recommends allocation of funding based on TRC scoring. Staff decided to allocate funds consistent with scoring and will fund 4 of the 5 projects. The city received six requests for funding of Public Facilities improvements that would qualify under the CDBG guidelines. The TRC and staff reviewed each application, and it was determined that all six could be partially or fully funded. Staff is recommending funding of all eligible components of these six requests (plus project delivery costs paid by the city including inspection fees, environmental review record and other fees). The total staff-recommended allocation for the six projects is $721,000. These investments will help daily operations of each public service provider with improved facility functionality, efficiency, and safety features. Other Recommended Allocations (Non-Competitive) Staff recommends funding of the following additional activities/programs: • Small business/microenterprise, childcare, and fagade improvement activities ($433,254.00), • New Construction, Rehabilitation, Purchase Assistance (f/k/a Down Payment Assistance), Tenant Based Rental Assistance and Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO) set aside funds ($6,438,653.74), including SHIP. • Homeownership Education & Counseling ($52,000) utilizing SHIP • Property Acquisition & Demolition ($65,522.00) • Program administration ($308,203.00), including SHIP BACKGROUND: Anticipated Resources Page 7 City of Clearwater City Council Meeting Minutes August 6, 2026 In FY2026/2027, the City anticipates receiving $912,662.00 in entitlement funds for the CDBG Program and $360,339.74 in entitlement funds for the HOME Program. The City is also reprogramming: $4,324,874.00 in prior year HOME entitlement and program income funding; $210,000.00 in anticipated FY2026/2027 HOME program income; $583,136.00 in prior year CDBG entitlement and program income funding; $22,000.00 in anticipated FY2026/2027 CDBG program income; $315,779.00 in CDBG Revolving Loan Program funds for housing infill and rehabilitation; and $223,200 in Revolving Loan Program funds for economic development activities. Funds provided through the CDBG Program may be used for housing, community and economic development, public services and facilities, acquisition, relocation, and administration. Funds provided through the HOME Program are limited to housing-related activities and administration. The neighborhood and affordable housing advisory board approved a recommendation to approve the plan as written to council on July 70, 2026. Staff is requesting approval of the plan so that it can be submitted by the August 16, 2026, due date. STRATEGIC PRIORITY: Objective 2.4 - Supports equitable housing programs that promote household stability and reduces the incidence of homelessness within Clearwater. Vice Mayor Cotton moved to approve the City of Clearwater's FY2026/2027 Annual Action Plan, which is the second Action Plan of the 2025/2026 -2029/2030 Consolidated Plan, to implement the goals and objectives set forth in the Consolidated Plan and authorize the appropriate officials to enter into agreements with HUD and organizations approved for funding, together with authorization to execute administrative adjustments to same as needed. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 7.2 Appoint ten members to the 2026 Affordable Housing Advisory Committee to include the appointment of a locally elected official and adopt Resolution 26-12. Florida Statute Section 420.9076 states that counties and cities receiving State Housing Initiatives Partnership (SHIP) program funds are required to establish annually an Affordable Housing Advisory Committee (AHAC) and prepare a Local Housing Incentive Strategy (LHIS). The statute further provides that the committee be made up of eight to eleven members appointed by the City Council. The committee must consist of one locally elected official and one representative from at least six specific categories. The required categories and Page 8 City of Clearwater City Council Meeting Minutes August 6, 2026 recommended individuals are listed below: • Banking industry/mortgage: Robyn Fiel • Area of labor engaged in home building: Frank Cornier • Advocate for low-income person: Christine Bond • Not-for-profit provider of affordable housing: Charessa Doty • Representative of employers: Kelly A Batsford • Clearwater resident: Sean Austin • Member of the local planning agency: Michelle Chenault • Essential Services representative: Cheri DeBlaere • Locally elected official: Mike Mannino • Area of residential home build with a connection to affordable housing: Todd St. John-Fulton The duties of the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee shall include reviewing policies and procedures, ordinances, land development regulations and the City's adopted comprehensive plan and shall recommend specific actions or initiatives to encourage or facilitate affordable housing while protecting the ability of the property to appreciate in value. The LHIS must be submitted to City Council by December 31, 2026, and will encompass the definition, vision, strategic focus areas, and action plan (including potential amendments to procedures and existing regulations) in order to facilitate the development of affordable housing in the city. Resolution 26-12 was presented and read by title only. Councilmember Teixeira moved to appoint ten members to the 2026 Affordable Housing Advisory Committee to include the appointment of a locally elected official and adopt Resolution 26-12. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was: Ayes: 5 - Mayor Rector, Vice Mayor Cotton, Councilmember Allbritton, Councilmember Teixeira and Councilmember Mannino 7.3 Provide direction on the unsolicited proposal submitted by Sunshine Recreational and Development LLC in accordance with Florida Statute 255.065 Public Private Partnership for the purpose of development and leasehold interest of a city-owned property at 1875 Airport Drive, commonly referred to as the Landings Golf Course for a large-scale recreational and sports tourism complex. The City of Clearwater has received an unsolicited proposal to redevelop the Landings Golf Course, a city-owned recreational property located at 1875 Airport Drive in Clearwater. The property currently operates as a municipal golf course and driving range serving residents and visitors. Page 9 City of Clearwater City Council Meeting Minutes August 6, 2026 On November 2, 2025, Sunshine Recreational and Entertainment, LLC submitted an unsolicited proposal. This proposal was determined to be insufficient to evaluate. On December 30, 2025, Sunshine Recreation and Entertainment, LLC submitted an amended proposal which was accepted for further review and evaluation. The proposal has been evaluated under the guidelines outlined in Florida Statute 255.065, which allows governmental entities to consider public-private partnerships for qualifying public infrastructure and development projects. A copy of the December 30, 2025-proposal from Sunshine Recreational and Entertainment LLC, along with supplemental information from the applicant have been provided. The proposed project includes the following features: • Multi-purpose sports fields • Pickleball courts • Aquatic and water park attractions • Fitness and wellness facilities • Restaurants and food service venues • Publicly accessible walking and biking trails • Event and tournament programming The total estimated project cost is $179.6 million, and according to the proposal construction is anticipated to take approximately three years to complete. A high-level review and evaluation of the proposal was completed using a third-party financial firm, Public Resources Advisory Group (PRAG) and several city departments. PRAG and departments were asked to review and evaluate the proposal and provide feedback from multiple perspectives such as financial viability, development risk, site plan considerations, recreational compatibility, and economic development impact. Preliminary input on these issues was considered essential to evaluating and analyzing the unsolicited proposal. An outcome of this review determined that the multi-sport complex recreational use presented is consistent with the Open Space Recreational zoning use of the City of Clearwater and a referendum of the voters to consider the project is not required. The council will hear presentations from city staff and the applicant - Sunshine Recreational and Entertainment LLC. The city staff presentation will also provide an opportunity for the Public Resources Advisory Group to provide details about the results of their review. Upon conclusion of the presentations and public comment, the council has several decisions at its disposal: • The council may accept the proposal as a qualifying project under Sec. 255.065, F.S. and direct staff to proceed with the unsolicited proposal in accordance with Sec. 255.065(3)(c). • The council may accept the proposal as a qualifying project under Sec. 255.065, F.S. and direct staff to solicit other proposals in accordance Page 10 City of Clearwater City Council Meeting Minutes August 6, 2026 with Sec. 255.065(3)(b). • The council may reject the unsolicited proposal from Sunshine Recreational and Entertainment LLC. It is the opinion of city staff that the results of the review and evaluation of the proposal provide enough information to warrant acceptance as a qualified project for consideration by the Clearwater City Council. Therefore, it is recommended that, based on the preliminary feedback from city departments and the PRAG review and analysis, the city council should direct the City Manager to seek additional proposals. Additional proposals will be solicited by posting an advertisement and allow 30 days for proposals to be submitted. All valid, accepted responses will be shared with the City of Clearwater City Council. STRATEGIC PRIORITY: Objective 2.1 Strengthen public-private initiatives that attract, develop, and retain diversified business sectors. Objective 2.3 Promote Clearwater as a premier destination for entertainment, cultural experiences, tourism, and national sporting events. Mayor Rector declared a voting conflict and stated he would not be participating in the discussion or vote. Councilmember Mannino declared a voting conflict and said he would not be participating in tonight's discussion or vote because it appears there may be voting conflict and the State has not responded to the Interim City Attorney's request for determination. The Council recessed from 6:51 p.m. to 6:54 p.m. Assistant City Manager Al Battle provided a PowerPoint presentation. PRA representative Wendell Gaertner provided a PowerPoint presentation. Applicant representative Brian Aungst, Jr. provided a PowerPoint presentation. In response to questions, Mr. Aungst said there will be no amplified noise except on the center field which is in the center of site. The hours of operation will be negotiated if the proposal moves through the process. He said the proposed PA system is for emergency and lightning strike Page 11 City of Clearwater City Council Meeting Minutes August 6, 2026 notifications. To address the neighborhood's noise concerns, the developer is proposing to cover all pickleball courts and to include a 6-ft. wall around the entire site except for the road adjacent to the airpark. Mr. Aungst said the project now includes 24/7 security and free parking. Six individual spoke in opposition. Eight individuals spoke in support. One individual supported the City calling for a referendum since the proposal requires the golf course be converted to a sports complex. One individual suggested that the developer meet with the impacted neighborhoods and questioned if the City has conducted a thorough analysis of the proposed project. One individual submitted an eComment in opposition (see page 21). Eleven individuals submitted emails in opposition (see pages 22 to 34 and 36 to 41). One individual submitted an email in support (see page 35). Discussion ensued with comments made that Council is not approving the project but allowing the proposal to move to the next step and that the developer has met with the neighborhood and changed the unsolicited proposal after hearing concerns from the neighborhood. Councilmember Allbritton moved to accept the proposal as a qualifying project under Sec. 255.065, F.S. and direct staff to solicit other proposals in accordance with Sec. 255.065(3)(b). The motion was duly seconded and carried with the following vote: Ayes: 3 - Vice Mayor Cotton, Councilmember Allbritton and Councilmember Teixeira Recused: 2 - Mayor Rector and Councilmember Mannino The Council recessed from 8:26 p.m. 8:30 p.m. Page 12 City of Clearwater City Council Meeting Minutes August 6, 2026 7.4 Amend Council Rule 6 to temporarily restore public comment regarding matters not on the agenda for an additional period of time and adopt Resolution 26-13. On February 5, 2026, the City Council adopted Resolution 26-02 which temporarily restored a time for citizens to publicly address the City Council regarding topics not on the agenda. The changes to Rule 6 included the following: • This portion of the meeting occurs near the end of the meeting. • The time period for citizens to comment on non-agenda items is 30 minutes. • No time-sharing among or between individual speakers or groups is allowed. • These changes sunset without further City Council action. On May 21, 2026, the City Council adopted Resolution 26-10 which extended the sunset provision until August 7, 2026. The City Council desires to extend the restoration of Citizens to be Heard on topics pertaining to city business but not on the agenda for an additional period of time. Resolution 26-13 extends the sunset provision until November 20, 2026. Following its expiration on November 20, 2026, the phrasing of Council Rule 6 will revert to the version that existed on February 4, 2026 without further council action. Resolution 26-13 was presented and read by title only. Councilmember Mannino moved to amend Council Rule 6 to temporarily restore public comment regarding matters not on the agenda for an additional period of time and adopt Resolution 26-13. Ayes: 5 - Mayor Rector, Vice Mayor Cotton, Councilmember Allbritton, Councilmember Teixeira and Councilmember Mannino 8. Second Readings - Public Hearing 8.1 Adopt Ordinance 9929-26 on second reading, approving a 30-year Franchise Agreement with Duke Energy Florida, LLC. for the purpose of providing electric and power services in the City of Clearwater, approve a Memorandum of Agreement with Duke Energy Florida, LLC, and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. Every ratepayer in Florida receives electricity from one of three distributors: either the electric utility is municipally owned, or it is an investor-owned utility (IOU), or it is a non-profit electric cooperative. The Public Service Commission Page 13 City of Clearwater City Council Meeting Minutes August 6, 2026 (PSC) grants each utility, regardless of ownership, a monopoly to serve as the sole distributor of electricity within a given service area. Water utilities and natural gas utilities operate in a similar way. To enable private IOU's to access, and often excavate, the public right-of-way, IOU's typically enter into franchise agreements with local governments. These agreements can be customized in several ways, including provisions relating to franchise fees and tree trimming. In December 1995, the City granted a 30-year electric franchise to the Florida Power Corporation. Florida Power was a Florida company. However, the franchise agreement allowed Florida Power to freely assign and transfer their rights to different entities. In the years that followed, Florida Power was acquired by Duke Energy, a publicly traded North Carolina company. Duke Energy has provided local electric service since 2012. As the 30-year franchise agreement reached its conclusion, the City evaluated the financial and operational feasibility of the City distributing electricity directly to customers, similar to the way that Clearwater operates its water and sewer utility and the Clearwater Gas Company (CGS). In 2024, the City hired NewGen to prepare a feasibility study to advise the City as to the infrastructure needed and probable cost for the municipalization of electric utilities. In September 2025, NewGen presented an electric feasibility presentation to City Council. Based on that presentation, City Council voted to move forward with an appraisal. In June 2026, the City received the appraisal from NewGen. Since the expiration of the franchise agreement in December 2025, the City and Duke have been operating on a month-to-month basis under the provisions of that franchise agreement. During this time, City staff and Duke have engaged in negotiations for a new franchise agreement. Under the proposed franchise agreement, Duke will continue to construct, operate, and maintain its electric utility facilities to the City and its residents. The new franchise agreement will be for a 30-year period. The City will continue to receive a 6% franchise fee. In addition to the new franchise agreement, the City and Duke will enter into a memorandum of agreement. The duration of the memorandum will coincide with the term of the franchise agreement, and provides as follows: • Create a Vision Community Action Plan, performed by Vision First Advisors (or another mutually agreed third party) at Duke Energy's sole expense Page 14 City of Clearwater City Council Meeting Minutes August 6, 2026 to best achieve its strategic goals. Provide ongoing Economic Development support in furtherance of the recommendations developed in the Action Plan in amounts of$20,000.00 annually for the first five years of the Memorandum. • Create a Downtown Retail Development Strategy, performed by Retail Strategies (or another mutually agreed third party). Provide funding of the Development Strategy through five installments of$30,000.00, followed by a site readiness review based on the strategy, with all work coordinated to support the City's strategic goals. • Assist with the City's increased infrastructure resiliency goals to further support economic growth and development of annual donations of $100,000.00 for six consecutive years. • Site-readiness evaluations of city-designated downtown areas and the Hercules Industrial Park, on schedules jointly determined by the Parties. • Providing five annual payments of$20,000.00 in economic development funding for the North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Agency through Grove @ 1105. • Complete construction of a looped electrical feed for the City Police Headquarters at 645 Pierce Street. • Donate $10,000.00 annually for the first twenty 20 years of this Memorandum for the City's beautification efforts. • Duke and the City will draft and execute a 20-year Naming-Rights Sponsorship Agreement (NRSA) for Coachman Park improvements, to include shade producing structures, with Duke contributing $30,000.00 annually throughout the NRSA term. • Provide annual updates identifying third-party users attached to Duke poles throughout the city, with coordination assistance as needed. • Provide annual GIS updates of Duke's distribution network. • Allow the City continued use of property adjacent to the Clearwater Beach Restoration Center, adjacent to the Countryside Recreation Complex and Library at 2191 Soule Road at no cost. Allow parking access within Duke's right-of-way at the Carpenter Complex and BayCare Ballpark. • Leverage Duke-maintained attic stock of electrical equipment for City Page 15 City of Clearwater City Council Meeting Minutes August 6, 2026 Manager-designated critical, time-sensitive projects. • Duke quality assurance process to include ADA accessibility of power pole installation to comply with ADA requirements. • Vegetation Management Plan. • Appear annually at a regularly scheduled council meeting to provide information on resiliency plans within the city. Three individuals spoke in opposition. One individual spoke in support. One individual said Duke Energy offers rebates to low income households and suggested that the program should not be limited to an area. Ordinance 9929-26 was presented and read by title only. Vice Mayor Cotton moved to adopt Ordinance 9929-26 on second and final reading. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was: Ayes: 5 - Mayor Rector, Vice Mayor Cotton, Councilmember Allbritton, Councilmember Teixeira and Councilmember Mannino 9. Citizens to be Heard on topics pertaining to city business but not on the agenda. Bill Jonson thanked the City for holding the Dollars to Donuts event. He said he was looking forward to seeing the term sheet with the Phillies and suggested the final agreement should be non-binding until the results of the statewide amendment is known. Lisa Lanza encouraged all to use the PSTA Snapper, an on-demand micro transit service. 10. City Manager Reports — None. 11. City Attorney Reports — None. 12. Other Council Action 12.1 Conversation regarding naming City Hall and the Municipal Complex - Councilmember Mannino Page 16 City of Clearwater City Council Meeting Minutes August 6, 2026 Councilmember Mannino said the request to name the plaza at the new City Hall after Mr. Horne was not to undo the honor but to elevate his legacy. Discussion ensued with consensus to name the plaza after Mr. Horne. Two individuals spoke in support. Councilmember Allbritton moved to name the plaza at the new City Hall after former City Manager William B. Horne, II. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Councilmember Teixeira requested that the County RFP for the buildings be placed on the next agenda and requested consideration to postpone major items on September 14, 2026 to another date since she will not be present. 13. Closing comments by Councilmembers (limited to 3 minutes) Vice Mayor Cotton reminded all that school will be back in session next week and wished students a wonderful school year. Councilmember Teixeira reviewed recent events and congratulated the cast of the Chocolate Factory at Ruthe Eckerd Hall for a wonderful production. 14. Closing Comments by Mayor Mayor Rector reviewed recent and upcoming events and encouraged all to thank a teacher for all they do, as they prepare for a new school year. 15. Adjourn The meeting adjourned at 9:16 p.m. Mayor Attest City of Clearwater Page 17 City of Clearwater City Council 15. Adjourn Meeting Minutes August 6, 2026 The meeting adjourned at 9:16 p.m. Mayor Attest City of Clearwater City Clerk City of Clearwater Page 18 FORM 8B MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR COUNTY, MUNICIPAL, AND OTHER LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS LAST AME—FIRST NAME—MIDDLE NAME �—r7/L ij� t Ja- AMA/ NAME OF BOARD, COUNCIL, COMMISSION, AUTHORITY, OR COMMITTEE CITY COUNCIL MAILING ADDRESS 600 CLEVELAND ST, SUITE 600 THE BOARD, COUNCIL, COMMISSION, AUTHORITY OR COMMITTEE ON WHICH I SERVE IS A UNIT OF: Lit CITY ❑ COUNTY ❑ OTHER LOCAL AGENCY CITY COUNTY CLEARWATER PINELLAS NAME OF POLITICAL SUBDIVISION: CITY OF CLEARWATER DATE ON WHICH VOTE OCCURRED August 6, 2026 MY POSITION IS: d ELECTIVE ❑ APPOINTIVE • WHO MUST FILE FORM 8B This form is for use by any person serving at the county, city, or other local level of government on an appointed or elected board, council, commission, authority, or committee. It applies to members of advisory and non -advisory bodies who are presented with a voting conflict of interest under Section 112.3143, Florida Statutes. Your responsibilities under the law when faced with voting on a measure in which you have a conflict of interest will vary greatly depending on whether you hold an elective or appointive position. For this reason, please pay close attention to the instructions on this form before completing and filing the form. INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 112.3143, FLORIDA STATUTES A person holding elective or appointive county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which would inure to his or her special private gain or loss. Each elected or appointed local officer also MUST ABSTAIN from knowingly voting on a measure which would inure to the special gain or loss of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he or she is retained (including the parent, subsidiary, or sibling organization of a principal by which he or she is retained); to the special private gain or loss of a relative; or to the special private gain or loss of a business associate. Commissioners of community redevelopment agencies (CRAs) under Sec. 163.356 or 163.357, F.S., and officers of independent special tax districts elected on a one -acre, one -vote basis are not prohibited from voting in that capacity. For purposes of this law, a "relative" includes only the officer's father, mother, son, daughter, husband, wife, brother, sister, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, and daughter-in-law. A "business associate" means any person or entity engaged in or carrying on a business enterprise with the officer as a partner, joint venturer, coowner of property, or corporate shareholder (where the shares of the corporation are not listed on any national or regional stock exchange). * ELECTED OFFICERS: In addition to abstaining from voting in the situations described above, you must disclose the conflict: PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating to the assembly the nature of your interest in the measure on which you are abstaining from voting; and WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this form with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes. * * * * * * * APPOINTED OFFICERS: Although you must abstain from voting in the situations described above, you are not prohibited by Section 112.3143 from otherwise participating in these matters. However, you must disclose the nature of the conflict before making any attempt to influence the decision, whether orally or in writing and whether made by you or at your direction. IF YOU INTEND TO MAKE ANY ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT WHICH THE VOTE WILL BE TAKEN: • You must complete and file this form (before making any attempt to influence the decision) with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who will incorporate the form in the minutes. (Continued on page 2) CE FORM 8B - EFF. 11/2013 Adopted by reference in Rule 34-7.010(1)(f), F.A.C. PAGE 1 APPOINTED OFFICERS (continued) • A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the agency. • The form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed. IF YOU MAKE NO ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION AT THE MEETING: • You must disclose orally the nature of your conflict in the measure before participating. • You must complete the form and file it within 15 days after the vote occurs with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who must incorporate the form in the minutes. A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the agency, and the form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed. DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S INTEREST C3%z :g A•7 , hereby disclose that on 60`5- �Q , 20 7..k : (a) A measure came or will come before my agency which (check one or more) inured to my special private gain or loss; inured to the special gain or loss of my business associate, inured to the special gain or loss of my relative, inured to the special gain or loss of , by hom I am retained; or ,� �inured to the special gain or loss of ��i i / 1L, 17/C5 1 """ti6a-'btu'' , which is the parent subsidiary, or sibling organization or subsidiary of a principal which has (b) The measure before my agency and the nature of my conflicting interest in the measure is as follows: ITEM 7.3 - Provide direction on the unsolicited proposal submitted by Sunshine Recreational and Development LLC in accordance with Florida Statute 255.065 Public Private Partnership for the purpose of development and leasehold interest of a city owned property at 1875 Airport Drive, commonly referred to as the Landings Golf Course for a Targe scale recreational and sports tourism complex. If disclosure of specific information would violate confidentiality or privilege pursuant to law or rules governing attorneys, a public officer, who is also an attorney, may comply with the disclosure requirements of this section by disclosing the nature of the interest in such a way as to provide the public with notice of the conflict. Date Filed g /0 Signatu NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES §112.317, A FAILURE TO MEN? REQUIRED DISCLOSURE CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: IMPEACHMENT, REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN SALARY, REPRIMAND, OR A CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED $10,000. CE FORM 8B - EFF. 11/2013 PAGE 2 Adopted by reference in Rule 34-7.010(1)(f), F.A.C. FORM 8B MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICTFOR COUNTY, MUNICIPAL, AND OTHER LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS LAST NAME—FIRST NAME—MIDDLE NAME a, n o , MLS MAIUNG ADDRESS 600 CLEVELAND ST, SUITE 600 , Po leer = NAME OF BOARD, COUNCIL, COMMISSION, AUTHORITY, OR COMMITTEE CITY COUNCIL THE BOARD, COUNCIL, COMMISSION, AUTHORITY OR COMMITTEE ON WHICH I SERVE ISA um' OF; Pi CITY OCOUNTY __ 0 OTHER LOCAL AGENCY CITY CLEARWATER COUNTY PINELLAS NAME OF POLITICALsuaoMSlort CITY OF CLEARWATER DATE ON WHICH VOTE OCCURRED August 6, 2026 MY POSITION IS: of ELECTIVE d APPOINTIVE WHO MUST FILE FORM 8B This form is for use by any person serving at the county, city, or other local level of govemment on an appointed or elected board, council, commission, authority, or committee. It applies to members of advisory and non -advisory bodies who are presented with a voting conflict of interest under Section 112.3143, Florida Statutes. Your responsibilities under the law when faced with voting on a measure in which you have a conflict of interest will vary greatly depending on whether you hold an elective or appointive position. For this reason, please pay close attention to the instructions on this fomn before completing and filing the form. INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 112.3143, FLORIDA STATUTES A person holding elective or appointive county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which would inure to his or her special private gain or loss. Each elected or appointed local officer also MUST ABSTAIN from knowingly voting on a measure which would Inure to the special gain or Toss of a principal (other than a govemment agency) by whom he or she is retained (including the parent, subsidiary, or sibling organization of a principal by which he or she is retained); to the special private gain or loss of a relative; or to the special private gain or loss of a business associate. Commissioners of community redevelopment ageneses (CRAB) under Sec. 163.356 or 163.357, F.S., and officers of Independent spedal tax districts elected on a one -acre, one -vote basis are not prohibited from voting in that capacity. For purposes of this law, a 'relative' includes only the officer's father, mother, son, daughter, husband, wife, brother,, sister, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son -In-law, and daughter-in-law. A'business associate' means any person or entity engaged in or carrying ona: business enterprise with the officer as a partner, joint venturer, coowner of property, or corporate shareholder (where the shares of the, corporation are not listed'on any national or regional stock exchange). • • • • • • ELECTED OFFICERS: In addition to abstaining from voting In the situations described above, you must disclose the conflict: PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating to the assembly the nature of your interest in the measure on which you are abstaining from voting; end WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this form with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who should Incorporate the form In the minutes. . • • • • • . • • • • • . . . APPOINTED OFFICERS: Although you must abstain from voting In the situations described above, you are not prohibited by Section 112.3143 from otherwise participating In these matters. However, you must disdose the nature of the conflict before making any attempt to influence the decision; whether orally or In writing end whether made by you or at your direction. IF YOU INTEND TO MAKE ANY ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT WHICH THE VOTE WILL BE TAKEN: • You must complete and file this form (before making any attempt to Influence the decision) with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who will Incorporate the form In the minutes. (Continued on page 2) CE FORM SB • EFF. 112013 . Adopted by reference In Rote 34-7.010(1)M FAC. PAGE CamScanner APPOINTED OFFICERS (continued) • A copy of the form must ba provided immediately to the other members of the agency. • The form must publicly at the next meeting rafter the form Is flied. IF YOU MAKE NO ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION EXCEPT BY,DISCUSSION AT THE MEETING: • You must disclose orally the nature of your oonflid In the measure before paftidpiting, • You must complete the term and file It within 15 days after the vote occurs with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who must incorporate the form In the minutes: A copy of the form must be provided Imrrrediatey to the other members of the agency, and the form must be read publicly at the herd meeting after the forrn Is filed. DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S INTEREST I, 1'\tit.vW. t A1Rf Lad • hereby dlsdos� that on RAST. CO.-... (a)A measure came or will come before my agency which (check one or more) _ inured to my special private,gein or loss; 7.7 inured to the speaal gain or loss of my business assodete, - inured to the speaal gain or loss of my relative,e M clouts/ n t? inured to the specie! gain or loss of " ri1P C.►. f VJeetef (lvV'q .s 4t.e r C1(%b by whom I am retained; or (J inured to the speaal gain or loss of , which is the parent subsidiary, or sibling organization or subsidiary of a principal which has retained me. (b) The measure before my agency and the nature of my conflicting interest in the measure is as follows: dTEM 7.3 - Provide direction on the unsolicited proposal submitted by Sunshine Recreational and Development LLC in accordance with Florida Statute 255.065 Public Private Partnership for the purpose of development and leasehold interest of a city owned property at 1875 Airport Drive, commonly referred to as the Landings Golf Course for a large scale recreational and sports tourism complex. • If disclosure of specific information would violate confidentiality or privilege pursuant to law or rules governing attomeys, a public officer, who is also an attorney, may comply with the disclosure requirements of this section by disdosing the nature of the interest in such a way as to provide the public with notice of the conflict. NOTICE UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES §112.317, A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED DISCLOSURE CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: IMPEACHMENT, REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN SALARY, REPRIMAND,:OR A. CML PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED $10,000: CE FORM 89 - EFF. 11/2013 Adopted by reference In Rule 34-7.010(1)(x), FAC. PAGE 2 CamScanner City Council on 2026-08-06 6:00 PM Meeting Time: 08-06-26 18:00 eComments Report Meetings Meeting Agenda Comments Support Oppose Neutral Time Items City Council on 2026-08-06 6:00 PM 08-06-26 43 2 0 1 0 18:00 Sentiments for All Meetings The following graphs display sentiments for comments that have location data. Only locations of users who have commented will be shown. Overall Sentiment III Support (0%) IIIIIIM Oppose (50%) MIIIII Neutral (0%) MIMI No Response (50%) City Council on 2026-08-06 6:00 PM 08-06-26 18:00 Benda Name Comments Support Oppose Neutral 6.1 ID#26-0939 Appoint Sean Austin to the Neighborhood and Affordable 1 0 0 0 Housing Advisory Board, as the citizen representative, for a term through August 6, 2030. (consent) 7.3 ID#26-0900 Provide direction on the unsolicited proposal submitted by 1 0 1 0 Sunshine Recreational and Development LLC in accordance with Florida Statute 255.065 Public Private Partnership for the purpose of development and leasehold interest of a city -owned property at 1875 Airport Drive, commonly referred to as the Landings Golf Course for a large-scale recreational and sports tourism complex. Sentiments for All Agenda Items The following graphs display sentiments for comments that have location data. Only locations of users who have commented will be shown. Overall Sentiment Support (0%) NM Oppose (50%) 111111111 Neutral (0%) NMI No Response (50%) Agenda Item: eComments for 6.1 ID#26-0939 Appoint Sean Austin to the Neighborhood and Affordable Housing Advisory Board, as the citizen representative, for a term through August 6, 2030. (consent) Overall Sentiment III Support (0%) MINI Oppose (0%) MIMI Neutral (0%) MEN No Response (100%) o Elizabeth Davis Location: Submitted At: 5:47pm 08-05-26 since there is no place to make this request, I apologize. but 7.3 should be moved up into the agenda. Respect for the people who live here who would like a voice would be nice. Please don't push your conversation to the 10 pm hour. You do work for the People, not Mr. Porter and Aungst. Agenda Item: eComments for 7.3 ID#26-0900 Provide direction on the unsolicited proposal submitted by Sunshine Recreational and Development LLC in accordance with Florida Statute 255.065 Public Private Partnership for the purpose of development and leasehold interest of a city -owned property at 1875 Airport Drive, commonly referred to as the Landings Golf Course for a large-scale recreational and sports tourism complex. Overall Sentiment NOM Support (0%) MOM Oppose (100%) 111111111111 Neutral (0%) MIMI No Response (0%) Elizabeth Davis Location: Submitted At: 5:43pm 08-05-26 Clearwater 2045. You voted for this! Your values! This proposal has 20 years of rebates. Protect the environment of local neighborhoods; invest in Greenprint 2.0. You have each supported safety for residents, families, and enhancing the lifestyle of existing neighborhoods. Why then would you consider one unsolicited proposal to develop every sq inch of the current Landings? We need long fields? Yes A few inside pickleball courts? Plan the new green space as needed. Parking spaces? Make them green. Energy? Expect 100% solar. Contribute back to our energy debt. Don't increase it. 65 years ago was 1958. So much will happen over the next 65 years. Control our assets in a shorter controllable time. Our other leases are renewable every 10 or 20 years. Why would we walk away from the option to improve and adjust our control and revenue? Just vote No! Now! Other bidders should have our standard fair window of time. Is that 90 or 180 days? Say no now to this singular takeover of time. Let the lease run its course and make a plan from staff and community that can officially be put out to bid. Aug. 5, 2026 Mayor Bruce Rector Vice Mayor Ryan Cotton Council Member Mike Mannino Council Member David Allbritton Council Member Lina Teixeira City Manager Jennifer Poirrier City of Clearwater 600 Cleveland Street Clearwater, FL 33755 Re: Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition Opposition to The Landings Proposal Dear Mayor Rector, Vice Mayor Cotton, Council Members, and City Manager Poirrier: On behalf of the Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (CNC), we write to express our strong opposition to the unsolicited proposal to transform The Landings into a 77 -acre recreational venue. Multiple neighborhood organizations have already raised significant concerns regarding this proposal, including its potential conflicts with the City Charter, the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan, stormwater management requirements, environmental impacts, traffic congestion, noise, lighting, and the detrimental effect it would have on the quality of life in the surrounding neighborhoods. Most recently, we learned that approximately 22 acres of the site contain a landfill located only six feet below the surface that would require remediation before development could proceed. This discovery substantially increases the complexity, cost, and financial risk associated with the project. Beyond the environmental and infrastructure concerns, the City faces considerable financial exposure should the developer fail to deliver on its promises. When combined with what appear to be overly optimistic revenue projections, the potential risk to Clearwater taxpayers becomes even greater. The Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition joins the growing number of neighborhood organizations urging you to reject this proposal. Of particular concern is that this unsolicited proposal is inconsistent with Clearwater's Comprehensive Plan, which emphasizes responsible growth, neighborhood stability, compatibility with adjacent land uses, and infrastructure that supports—not overwhelms—existing neighborhoods. By these standards, this proposal falls far short. Not long ago, Clearwater voters overwhelmingly rejected a referendum that would have permitted light industrial use on this same property. The community's desire to protect this area has not changed. Although this proposal is presented as a recreational development—thereby avoiding a zoning change and another public referendum—its scale, intensity, and impacts present many of the same concerns that residents previously rejected. The only meaningful "benefit" offered to nearby residents is their proximity to a facility that would fundamentally alter the character of their community while diminishing the quality of life they have worked so hard to preserve. As elected officials, you have a responsibility to ensure that Clearwater's neighborhoods remain a priority as our city grows. Growth should enhance our community, not come at the expense of the residents who already call Clearwater home. At the table of development in Clearwater, neighborhoods deserve a seat—not to become the item on the menu. The decision before you is clear. Protect the surrounding neighborhoods, preserve the quality of life of your residents, uphold the principles of Clearwater's Comprehensive Plan, and reject this unsolicited proposal that primarily advances private financial interests rather than the long-term interests of our community. On August 3, 2026, the membership of the Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition voted 15-3 to oppose The Landings proposal. We respectfully ask that you honor the concerns of Clearwater's neighborhoods and vote against this proposal. Sincerely, Patrick Raftery Acting President Chelsea Gird Secretary Cheryl Acton Treasurer Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition MEMORANDUM DATE: August 4, 2026 TO: City of Clearwater Council Members, Mayor and City Manager FROM: [Your Name], Resident of Clearwater SUBJECT: Formal Request for Aviation and Environmental Impact Evaluations Regarding the Proposed Landings Sports & Entertainment District Dear Mayor, City Manager and Council Members, I am writing to formally request that the City Council mandate comprehensive, independent impact studies before taking any further action regarding the unsolicited proposal by Porter Development to lease and redevelop the 77 -acre Landings Golf Club property. To date, the public presentations regarding the proposed sports complex have focused exclusively on economic projections and recreational amenities, completely omitting critical discussions on how this high-density development will impact the'adjacent Clearwater Executive Airport (CLW) and the local ecosystem. As a stakeholder in this community, I request that the City Council formally address the following four omissions: 1. Violation of Historical Land -Use Precedent: The 77 -acre property at 1875 Airport Drive was deliberately carved out as an open -space buffer zone in 1970 when the airpark transitioned from sprawling grass strips to a single paved runway. The City of Clearwater explicitly repurchased this property in 1980 to ensure permanent municipal control and absolute compliance with emerging federal aviation land -use compatibility guidelines. Paving this land reverses 56 years of deliberate, federally compliant city planning. 2. FAA Safety Compatibility Zone Restrictions: The property directly borders the CLW airfield. Under FAA Title 14 CFR Part 77, federal protection extends to "imaginary surfaces" that slope upward and outward from the runway edges. The insertion of structural stadium lighting, expansive high -velocity sports netting, and facilities capable of gathering thousands of citizens presents direct geometric and visual conflicts with these protected slopes and runway approach zones. High-density public assembly directly underneath low -altitude flight paths presents an unacceptable liability next to an active general aviation runway. 3. Impairment of NextGen Aviation Infrastructure: The City of Clearwater recently authorized a $13.7 million capital investment, breaking ground in July 2026 on a state-of-the-art FBO terminal to prepare CLW for Next -Generation aviation growth. Paving the adjacent 77 acres for`sports fields eliminates the precise acoustic, safety, and physical buffer zones required to scale these emerging aerospace technologies, such as electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) air taxis and unmanned commercial drone delivery routes. 4. Compromising Regional Disaster Recovery Operations: CLW is unique in Pinellas County due to its geographic elevation 'of 71 feet above sea level, placing it safely outside of local coastal flood=zones. In -the event of a`catastrophic regional hurricane where commercial flight hubs like TPA and PIE are rendered inoperable due to flooding, this airport is designated to segue as an emergency staging ground. Heavy -lift emergency helicopters (such as National Guard CH -47 Chinooks) require massive, open, unflooded terrain to stage fuel, medical tents, and supplies. Paving over this open parcel directly diminishes our long-term logistical capacity for emergency disaster relief. 5. Severe Environmental and Ecological Displacement: Since the course's inception in 1970, these 77 acres have acted as an invaluable urban green space, providing an established habitat for local avian populations and migratory wildlife. Replacing this natural canopy with synthetic turf, concrete, and 2,000 parking spaces will cause irreversible ecological displacement. Furthermore, forcing wildlife into artificial retention ponds directly adjacent to an active runway severely heightens the risk of catastrophic bird strikes for departing aircraft. I request that no leases or development agreements be approved until an official FAA Flight Safety Compatibility Review and an Independent Ecological Impact Assessment are delivered to the public. Thank you for your time, service, and careful attention to the security of Clearwater's public infrastructure. Sincerely, Linda G. Byars 1726 Marion Street Clearwater, Florida 33756 Iindabyars70@gmail.com 727-656-2544 CaII, Rosemarie From: Sent: To: Subject: Daniel Holuba <dholuba12@yahoo.com> Wednesday, August 5, 2026 1:41 PM Battle, Alfred; Kohler, Owen; Rector, Bruce; Poirrier, Jennifer; ClearwaterCouncil; Cotton, Ryan; Teixeira, Lina; Slaughter, Daniel; Mannino, Michael; cedmonds@tampabay.com; clatvala@pinellas.gov The Landings Conversion To: Clearwater City Council Et al RE: Landings Conversion The Landings conversion proposal is riddled with uncertainties, fallacious logic, short sightedness, and self dealing characterized by blatant conflicts of interests. This is a very, very bad idea. A reasonable initial quick review should have shut it down out of hand. No one should believe this was an unsolicited proposal, as Dirty Bird Battle claims. Dirty Bird has a history of unethical behavior in both Jacksonville and Ft. Lauderdale. As it is unfolding, Battle was needed because of his previous unethical history. Rector and Sports Facilities Management 'needed a scapegoat and a fall guy to be involved in this obvious self dealing, abuse of the public trust. It appears Rector has had a plan to convert Clearwater city parks to private Sports Facility Management preceding even his election. When it's all said and done, Poirrier, Slaughter, et al may very well label Dirty Bird as a mistaken DEI experiment and run him out of town too. Just the fact that Aungst Junior is involved is a super red flag. Anyone taking an unbiased review of the pro forma financial documents will conclude they are highly specialized, based on faulty financial assumptions, and pie in the sky hyperbole. These financial documents are not based on sound generally accepted accounting principles, but rather some dreamt up sales puffing just to make the dog and pony show seem possible and legitimate. Dirty Bird Battle was drafted apparently as a disposable front man for this farce. The main initial income projected to be generated from restaurant operations? Thousands of restaurants have closed just since the "affordability crisis". A hack, unbranded restaurant built over a landfill, in an offbeat location is going to be the primary profit center? No way. The very idea of attempting to convert a public park space into a profit center is an abhorrent and disgusting violation of the public trust. The conversion cost is wildly underestimated. This project, just from a financial standpoint, has a ludicrously improbable chance of success. Beyond the financial flim-flam, the proposed finished project has many quirks. Miniature golf? Nobody does that anymore. Who's bright idea was that? "By the 1980's, the primary revenue for putt -putt business came from video game arcades and birthday parties in the clubhouse rather than the course. The sport's heyday was far in the rear-view mirror by the time the 1980's came to a close". The putt- putt idea is likely an impracticable loser. Water feature? Water features are historically noted for placing users at risk of waterborne diseases. Fecal matter, urine, germs, viruses, bacteria, etcetera, are nearly always present. Pathogens such as Cryptosporidium, Norovirus, even Naegleria Fowleri are not uncommon in public "water features". This can be somewhat mitigated with chemical applications. This type of recirculated water treatment has inherent limitations. As if the water borne diseases are not enough of a deterrent to this project, the chemical treatment carries its own risks. Exposure to chemicals such as chlorine or other "pool shock" products are also potentially unhealthy. Things such as hypochlorite compounds are known to be unstable. That is, they may, in certain situations, release toxic gases. A water feature is expensive to maintain, even if it 1 were possible. The potential for a health disaster outweighs any possible enhancement to this project. Another unaddressed functional problem ignored by the project presenters. The mock up of the Landings proposal shows retention ponds directly adjacent to the airport. That is a very bad idea. Birds, in particular Ducks (not Dirty Birds) are drawn to bodies of water. This increases the possibility of small craft aviation and birds coming in contact with each other. "According to the FAA Wildlife Strike Database U.S. airports recorded over 17,000 bird strike reports in 2023, roughly 47 bird strikes per day" Putting a pond next to the airport, where waterfowl will congregate, is another very bad idea. In the unlikely event that a bird strike causes a single engine cessna airplane to malfunction during takeoff, will it crash on the adjacent soccer field during a game with adults and children present? There is only one way to prevent it for sure 100 percent. Vote no on the Landings conversion. The soccer fields are being proposed as some sort of world wide destination when completed. There are lighting requirements for this type of facility. FIFA standards require horizontal and vertical illuminance uniformity. Light standards, up to 100 feet tall will likely be required to meet these standards. That is the equivalent of a ten story building. This intrusion will cause light pollution to the surrounding neighborhoods. An "opaque" six foot fence will not mitigate this. 100 foot light standards also pose a safety risk to airplanes operating out of the airport, day or night. Another very bad idea. The idea to close airport road is another very bad idea from an axcess perspective. The Landings golf course was a good idea to repurpose a former landfill. "Converting a closed landfill into a public recreational space requires designing facilities compatible with the site's structural limitations. uneven compression of the waste mass could cause cracks in the protective cap. Reuse of such a site is restricted to lightweight, flexible amenities such as municipal parks, hiking and biking trails, and golf courses". Augnst Jr. wants to dig up the contents of the dump. This will necessitate involvement of the EPA. It may very well release a great amount of methane gas. Any backfill will remain unstable for many years. It is just a stupid idea. Just consider what may be encountered in the Landings dump dig up. • Hazardous chemicals — Flammable, corrosive, toxic, or reactive substances like household cleaners, solvents, pesticides, and fertilizers. • Asbestos — Found in older insulation, flooring, and building materials; can cause serious lung diseases if disturbed. • Treated lumber — Pressure -treated wood with chemical preservatives that leach into soil. • Medical waste — Needles, sharps, prescription medications, used bandages, and other medical supplies. • Batteries — Car batteries (lead -acid) and lithium batteries contain toxic metals; alkaline batteries are usually OK. • Fluorescent bulbs — Contain mercury vapor. • Old electronics — TVs, desktop computers, laptops, and "smart" appliances with circuit boards or tubes contain lead, mercury, and other hazardous materials. • Tires — Trap methane gas and can float to the surface in landfills. • Wet paint or liquid chemicals — Paints, lacquers, and adhesives can contaminate soil and water. • Motor oil, fuel, and propane tanks — Flammable and pressurized, posing explosion risks. • Explosives — Fireworks, ammunition, or other explosives are strictly prohibited. • Large amounts of food waste — Especially from restaurants, can attract pests and create odors. • Contaminated soil or materials — Soil with hazardous chemicals or asbestos. The conversion of the Landings will ultimately unleash a plethora of unforeseen and irreversible effects. This conversion only benefits the Sports Facilities Management organization, Bruce Rector, and Mike Mannino at the expense of the general citizenry. This is a misguided proposal to subjugate and violate the public trust. The Landings is a sealed pithos. Do not open it ! just say no ! VTY 2 Call, Rosemarie From: christine oleary <christineoleary@me.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 5, 2026 12:15 PM To: Rector, Bruce; rector4FL@gmail.com Cc: City Council; ClearwaterCouncil Subject: 33765 begging you VOTE NO ON PORTER DEVELOPMENT ;CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Clearwater. Donot click links or open attachments unless you, ,'recognize the sender and know the content is safe Because once it is gone, it is gone forever, truly. Thank you for reading this, I appreciate your attention to hear my call. I am part of the enormous, organized group of the good people who have been opposed to Porter's Proposed Development and have been since hearing about this almost a year back, back when we thought and assumed the City would want our feedback, more than the hosted City Library, catered asks for feedback events I also attended, and brought this up but they were looking for 'more creative ideas from people who live in community'- opposing the development is the best of the best idea for the most, biggest bang for the buck, that won't make anyONE money, but will help the people, animals, nature and quality of life. Thank you for reading on, I appreciate you doing this. This was back when we all thought we would have a chance to vote at the referendum because we thought you The City of Clearwater had to let us VOTE, nope! —AND WOW HERE WE ARE! You don't have to let us VOTE because I think I heard you or Porter say City holds the power to say it is The City of Clearwaters Landings AND a Park and Rec decision to forward. I am begging YOU to VOTE NO TO PORTER DEVELOPMENT because we can't. I say no, resist, deny, and unequivocally oppose to replacing the communities existing, thriving, wet, living green space, next to a dump, train tracks and a airport with more pavement of parking, pavement of pickleball courts, pavement of restaurants, pavement of the floor and pool bottom of a waterpark. No because of the flooding. 1 This message needs your attention • This is their first email to your company. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast Because once it is gone, it is gone forever, truly. Thank you for reading this, I appreciate your attention to hear my call. I am part of the enormous, organized group of the good people who have been opposed to Porter's Proposed Development and have been since hearing about this almost a year back, back when we thought and assumed the City would want our feedback, more than the hosted City Library, catered asks for feedback events I also attended, and brought this up but they were looking for 'more creative ideas from people who live in community'- opposing the development is the best of the best idea for the most, biggest bang for the buck, that won't make anyONE money, but will help the people, animals, nature and quality of life. Thank you for reading on, I appreciate you doing this. This was back when we all thought we would have a chance to vote at the referendum because we thought you The City of Clearwater had to let us VOTE, nope! —AND WOW HERE WE ARE! You don't have to let us VOTE because I think I heard you or Porter say City holds the power to say it is The City of Clearwaters Landings AND a Park and Rec decision to forward. I am begging YOU to VOTE NO TO PORTER DEVELOPMENT because we can't. I say no, resist, deny, and unequivocally oppose to replacing the communities existing, thriving, wet, living green space, next to a dump, train tracks and a airport with more pavement of parking, pavement of pickleball courts, pavement of restaurants, pavement of the floor and pool bottom of a waterpark. No because of the flooding. 1 No because of the waterways. No because of the toxicity of pollution. No because of the heat, noise, traffic, construction and upheaval mess. No because replacing open space with money making machines and pay to play spaces is not needed or right. No because it would decimate the quality of the day and life as we know it, and I think you do too. Thank you for your support when you have your opportunity to represent the good people, when we all do not. Stand up, stand out and no 5-0, no no no! LESSSSSSS0000000000000000! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Homeowner Christine O'Leary, LLC 1892 McKinley St & 101 N Corona Clearwater 33765 ChristineOLeary.com Christine@ChristineOLeary.com 917.207.9910 2 CaII, Rosemarie From: Stan Evans <stanevans3@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 5, 2026 12:03 PM To: ClearwaterCouncil Subject: Before Thursdays Vote: Please Consider WHO this project is REALLY BEING BUILT FOR [CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Clearwater. Do not click links or open attachments unless you, recognize the sender and know the content is safe. _ _ _ __ _ Dear Mayor and City Council Members, My name is Stan Evans. I am a Clearwater resident and property owner. I respectfully ask that you take one more look at the proposed redevelopment of The Landings before Thursday's vote. Rather than debating whether soccer or sports are valuable, I believe the more important question is this: Who is this project really being built for? Here are the questions I hope you'll consider: • • This is 77 acres of public land. Decisions of this magnitude should reflect the long-term needs of Clearwater residents, not just projected tourism or outside visitors. • The proposed site plan is heavily devoted to soccer fields. Looking at the rendering, the most prominent uses of the property appear to be soccer fields and parking. • + The proposal includes approximately 1,944 parking spaces. That suggests this facility is intended to attract large regional tournaments and visitors, not simply serve neighborhood recreation. • it Clearwater's median age is approximately 48 years old. Is a soccer -centered complex the highest and best recreational use for a city with these demographics? • ffi Clearwater already has multiple parks and sports complexes with soccer facilities. Before eliminating one of the city's public golf courses, has the City demonstrated that additional soccer capacity is a higher priority than preserving existing recreational options? • The Landings is one of only a handful of public golf facilities in Clearwater. Once it is gone, it cannot simply be replaced. 1 This message needs your attention • This is their first email to you. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast Dear Mayor and City Council Members, My name is Stan Evans. I am a Clearwater resident and property owner. I respectfully ask that you take one more look at the proposed redevelopment of The Landings before Thursday's vote. Rather than debating whether soccer or sports are valuable, I believe the more important question is this: Who is this project really being built for? Here are the questions I hope you'll consider: • • This is 77 acres of public land. Decisions of this magnitude should reflect the long-term needs of Clearwater residents, not just projected tourism or outside visitors. • The proposed site plan is heavily devoted to soccer fields. Looking at the rendering, the most prominent uses of the property appear to be soccer fields and parking. • + The proposal includes approximately 1,944 parking spaces. That suggests this facility is intended to attract large regional tournaments and visitors, not simply serve neighborhood recreation. • it Clearwater's median age is approximately 48 years old. Is a soccer -centered complex the highest and best recreational use for a city with these demographics? • ffi Clearwater already has multiple parks and sports complexes with soccer facilities. Before eliminating one of the city's public golf courses, has the City demonstrated that additional soccer capacity is a higher priority than preserving existing recreational options? • The Landings is one of only a handful of public golf facilities in Clearwater. Once it is gone, it cannot simply be replaced. 1 • This proposal would permanently transform one of Clearwater's remaining large public green spaces. Whether residents support development or not, this decision deserves careful consideration because its impact will last for generations. r Porter Development previously proposed a similar sports complex in Largo. That proposal ultimately did not move forward. I believe residents deserve to understand what lessons were learned from that experience and how this proposal differs. I am not asking you to oppose recreation or economic development. I am asking you to ensure that the future of 77 acres of publicly owned land truly reflects the needs and priorities of the people who live in Clearwater. Whatever decision is ultimately made, I hope it is one that residents will still be proud of 20 or 30 years from now. Thank you for your service to our community and for taking the time to consider my thoughts before Thursday's vote, which 1 apprec Respectfully, Stan Evans 2001 Harding St Clearwater, FL 3376 Best regards, Stan Evans 2 CaII, Rosemarie From: mwfoley . <mwfoley@hotmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 5, 2026 11:57 AM To: ClearwaterCouncil Subject: Landings issue. CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Clearwater. Do not click links or open attachments unless you; ?recognize the sender and know the content is safe! _ _ oppose the sports complex plan for the landings along Keene Road. I think the golf course there should remain. Mike Foley 1809 Apache Trail Clearwater FL 33755 727 221-1146 1 CaII, Rosemarie From: Samantha Pasco <samanthapasco@hotmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 5, 2026 12:24 PM To: Cotton, Ryan; Teixeira, Lina; Mannino, Michael; Allbritton, David; Rector, Bruce; Poirrier, Jennifer; Battle, Alfred; Slaughter, Daniel; Call, Rosemarie; Kohler, Owen Subject: The Landings Golf Course Development - Strongly Oppose CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Clearwater. Do not click links or open attachments unless r --- ' g -- --- P unless `recognize the sender and know the content is safe.r Good Afternoon, I would like to take a moment to express my strong opposition to the development project proposed for The Landings Golf Course. As a Pinellas county resident, I drive this route daily to take my kids to school and to get to work. My husband and sons frequent the golf course and enjoy the beautiful green area and glimpse of Florida outdoors. Developing this area will hurt the natural scenery and wildlife that takes refuge here. Please vote no on this development. Respectfully, Samantha Pasco Get Outlook for iOS 1 This message needs your attention • This is their first email to your company. I Mark Safe 1 Report Powered by Mimecastj Good Afternoon, I would like to take a moment to express my strong opposition to the development project proposed for The Landings Golf Course. As a Pinellas county resident, I drive this route daily to take my kids to school and to get to work. My husband and sons frequent the golf course and enjoy the beautiful green area and glimpse of Florida outdoors. Developing this area will hurt the natural scenery and wildlife that takes refuge here. Please vote no on this development. Respectfully, Samantha Pasco Get Outlook for iOS 1 CaII, Rosemarie From: NORMA MAYAS-<nlbmayas@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, August 3, 2026 11:51 AM To: ClearwaterCouncil Subject: Keep Keene green CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Clearwater. Do not click links or open attachments unless youl recognize the sender and know the content is safe. j We've lived in the Marymount area for over forty years. Raised my girls here and I'm concerned about your plans to build in the Landings golf course. We are worried about the noise, traffic and what it would do to our peaceful neighborhood. Please don't let the builders ruin our neighborhood. Thank you Norma Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone 1 CaII, Rosemarie From: Theresa Bromm-Boesen <tbrommboesen@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, August 2, 2026 9:39 PM To: ClearwaterCouncil Subject: The Landings Property I!CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Clearwater. Do not click links or open attachments unless you, recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Good evening City Council, We stand with Keep Keene Green! We are writing to defend our neighborhood from developers working hand in hand with the city of Clearwater to take over our neighborhood and to disregard the needs of local families. This is not a benefit to the neighborhood! This is a takeover of precious green space and a threat of stormwater overrun!! The amount of traffic and noise visited on residents living on these peaceful streets will overwhelm residents going to and from their homes. It is ludicrous to build ANOTHER sports complex in the city of Clearwater, when there are many sitting unused for the majority of the time! Honestly, who needs one more pickleball court? Let alone two dozen!!! We have two major concert venues Run by Ruth Eckerd Hall. We do not need another! This needs to go to a referendum for the residents of this neighborhood and the rest of Clearwater, who currently enjoy the landing and the green space! This is our community space, and we deserve to Vote!! The city of Clearwater needs to stop catering to the few and support the many!! Stop now!! Theresa and Peter Boesen Tbrommboesen(agmaiLcom 1 This message needs your attention • This is their first email to you. Mark Safe I Report Powered by Mimecast Good evening City Council, We stand with Keep Keene Green! We are writing to defend our neighborhood from developers working hand in hand with the city of Clearwater to take over our neighborhood and to disregard the needs of local families. This is not a benefit to the neighborhood! This is a takeover of precious green space and a threat of stormwater overrun!! The amount of traffic and noise visited on residents living on these peaceful streets will overwhelm residents going to and from their homes. It is ludicrous to build ANOTHER sports complex in the city of Clearwater, when there are many sitting unused for the majority of the time! Honestly, who needs one more pickleball court? Let alone two dozen!!! We have two major concert venues Run by Ruth Eckerd Hall. We do not need another! This needs to go to a referendum for the residents of this neighborhood and the rest of Clearwater, who currently enjoy the landing and the green space! This is our community space, and we deserve to Vote!! The city of Clearwater needs to stop catering to the few and support the many!! Stop now!! Theresa and Peter Boesen Tbrommboesen(agmaiLcom 1 Call, Rosemarie From: Gayla Larson <nbslarson@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, August 2, 2026 4:45 PM To: ClearwaterCouncil Subject: RE: Recommendation for the Council on the Sunshine LLC Plan for The Landings Attachments: Clearwater Landings Proposal Letter.pdf 1CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Clearwater. Do not click links or open attachments unless your —, 'recognize the sender and know the content is safe.[LL _ _ j Please accept the attached letter and include it for consideration during your work session which begins at 1:30 pm tomorrow, Monday, August 3, 2026. We anticipate the final decision on the referendum will occur at your August 6, 2026, meeting. Gayla Larson, Secretary (727) 393-2069 Donations to enable our continuing work are welcome and tax-deductible via our website: lttps://twvnorthpinellas.org/Donate/ "This right to vote is the basic right without which all others are meaningless. It gives people, people as individuals, control over their own destinies." - Lyndon Baines Johnson 1 This message needs your attention • No employee in your company has ever replied to this person. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast Please accept the attached letter and include it for consideration during your work session which begins at 1:30 pm tomorrow, Monday, August 3, 2026. We anticipate the final decision on the referendum will occur at your August 6, 2026, meeting. Gayla Larson, Secretary (727) 393-2069 Donations to enable our continuing work are welcome and tax-deductible via our website: lttps://twvnorthpinellas.org/Donate/ "This right to vote is the basic right without which all others are meaningless. It gives people, people as individuals, control over their own destinies." - Lyndon Baines Johnson 1 L LEAGUE of. WOMEN VOTERS® OR H ? 4E S COUNTY August 2, 2026 Sent via Email to ClearwaterCouncil@myclearwater.com City of Clearwater Government 100 South Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, FL 33756 RE: Recommendation for the Council on the Sunshine LLC Plan for The Landings Dear Mayor and Council The League of Women Voters of North Pinellas County has been asked by Clearwater residents to review the decision by the Council not to hold a referendum for all city voters on the application by Sunshine LLC to construct a multi-purpose athletic development on The Landings Property. While the League has not specifically conducted a study of this proposal, the League did study the previous light industrial plan and reached the conclusion that this was not a good use of public property. The League did find that a public referendum, according to the Clearwater Charter, was required. A referendum was conducted and the project lost. This proposal would remove the 70 -acre open property and put it under the control of a private corporation removing this open green space totally from the residents as usage would depend on paying a fee. In the support of fair government and representative government, the League believes that this issue should be decided by the residents through a referendum on the next ballot. Thank you for your attention. Tanya andry, President League of Women Voters of North Pinellas TL/BH/gl PO Box 8602, Clearwater, FL 33758 1 (727)386-8525 1 Iwvnpc.info@gmail.com 1 www.Iwvnorthpinellas.org WWW.CFYPINELLAS.ORG 1501 N. BELCHER RD, SUITE 700 CLEARWATER, FL 33765 727-477-0624 Cl.A D OF C -I LI5 2 ES Hoyt Hamilton CHAIR Daneen Gurney VICE CHAIR Craig Gilman TREASURER Michael Walek SECRETARY Fred Miller PAST CHAI R Chad Britts Chad Burgess Amy Connors Dawn Daugherty Mike Demaio Miguel Diaz Yolanda Fernandez Danny Fisher Bill Fisher Brandy Halladay Hoyt Hamilton William Hancock Carmine LaCognata Sean Overton Daniel Slaughter Michele Smith John Timberlake Rick Vaughn (iC !>-7.7./riARV 14,EN; E 2S Al Capogna Frank Chivas Mark Robinson Brian Aungst Sr. TRUSTEE EMERITUS To Whom It May Concern, On behalf of Clearwater for Youth (CFY) Pinellas, I am pleased to offer our support for the development of the Regional Sports Complex by Porter Development on property owned by the City of Clearwater. This project represents an investment in the health, well-being, and future of our youth athletics in Pinellas; County while creating a premier destination for youth athletics, recreation, and regional sporting events that will benefit residents throughout Pinellas County. For more than 50 years, CFY has remained committed to ensuring that every :child has access to quality athletic opportunities and facilities regardless of financial circumstances, Today, CFY partners with and supports more than 50 youth athletic programs throughout Pinellas County. Through our three core areasof giving— youth athletics, education, and water safety—CFY positively impacts more than 15,000 children and 7,000 families annually. In 2026, CFY projects more than $1.2 million in community investment, further demonstrating our commitment to expanding opportunities for local youth. The proposed Regional Sports Complex. aligns directly with CFY's mission of removing barriers to participation and creating greater access to quality recreational opportunities. As participation in youth sports continues to grow, the need for modern, safe, and accessible facilities has never been greater. This complex will provide much-needed space for practices,: league play, tournaments, camps, and community programming while fostering confidence, leadership,. teamwork, discipline, and lifelong healthy habits among young athletes. CFY supports the vision and development of the Regional Sports Complex and believes it will create lasting benefits for young Pinellas County residents, youth athletic organizations, and the local economy for generations to come. ACCRb 1e glve..org Kevin Dunbar Executive Director CFY Pinellas /2/i7/7 - Hoyt Hamilton BOT Chairman CFY Pinellas Con6Dtuutationt on your 2026 Platinum Seal of Transparency! M required by 5ection170 of the Internal Revenue Code. we atter acknowledge that you received no goods, of services in return for.this gift Please cave this letter for your tax reconfa. Clearwater For. Youth, Inc, tax identification number is S9-140/3073. CH7198 - A COPY OF THE OFFICIAL REGISTRATION AND FINANCIAL INFORMATION MAY BE OBTAINEO:FROM THE DIVISION OF CONSUMER SERVICES BY CALLING TOLL-FREE (eco -435.7352) WITHIN THE STATE. REGISTRATION DOES' NOT IMPLY ENDORSEMENT, APPROVAL OR RECOMMENDATION BY THE STATE. CaII, Rosemarie From: DENNIS MCDERMOTT <walrus751@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2026 11:15 PM To: Poirrier, Jennifer Cc: Call, Rosemarie; Owen.Kohl@myclearwater.com; Matzke, Lauren; Kader, Art; Rector, Bruce; Cotton, Ryan; Allbritton, David; Mannino, Michael; Teixeira, Lina; Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition; Howard Latham; Melissa Stamos; beth davis; Jandi Withrow; Joanne Kliesh Subject: The Landings Attachments: Letter to Poirrier July 30 26.pdf; Addendum A - P3 Examples.pdf I,CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Clearwater. Do not click links or open attachments unless you; ;recognize the sender and know the content is safe.' _ Ms. Poirrier, Please accept my attached public comments in advance of the Council Work Session scheduled for August 3, 2026. I will be out of town and unable to attend in person. Thank you in advance. Dennis McDermott (727) 542-6302 1 This message needs your attention • You've never replied to this person. 1 Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast Ms. Poirrier, Please accept my attached public comments in advance of the Council Work Session scheduled for August 3, 2026. I will be out of town and unable to attend in person. Thank you in advance. Dennis McDermott (727) 542-6302 1 Dennis McDermott • 1726 Lakeview Road • Clearwater, Florida 33756 July 30, 2026 Jennifer Poirrier, City Manager [via email to Jennifer.Poirrier@mvclearwater.com] City of Clearwater 600 Cleveland Street, Suite 600 Clearwater, FL 33755 RE: City Council Work Session; August 3, 2026: "The Landings" Discussion Dear Ms. Poirrier: I understand the City has completed its review of the unsolicited proposal to repurpose The Landings submitted by Sunshine Recreational and Entertainment LLC, and that this proposal will be presented to the Clearwater City Council during the Aug. 3, 2026, Council Work Session. Let me first comment on an unsolicited proposal that was submitted to the City of Clearwater in 2020 seeking to repurpose The Landings, a proposal which was soundly defeated by voters at a referendum. 1. The result from that vote provided a clear message to City leadership that Clearwater residents don't support a wholesale, abrupt and arbitrary change of use for The Landings property. 2. Following the defeat of that prior proposal to repurpose The Landings, elected and appointed professional leadership of the City could have used the experience as a learning opportunity to develop an appropriate standard response to unsolicited proposals to repurpose City property zoned Open Space / Recreation [OS/R] which had not already gone through the public referendum process and thus been identified and approved by voters as being available for alternative uses. 3. Following the above logic, a reasonable and defensible response from the City could have been to return this unsolicited proposal to the developer with a note saying, "We are not currently entertaining proposals for this property." I am providing this public comment based on a combination of careful research and professional experience. Public/Private Partnership: The Developer took a strong position in its narrative focused on creation of a strong foundation for 'A visionary Public -Private Partnership (P3) between private development partners and the City of Clearwater to redevelop The Landings Golf Course into a dynamic, city -owned sports and recreation complex.' There are a number of reasons why this proposal fails virtually all of the basic tests for a legitimate P31. Clearwater 2045: The entire nature of this current proposal seems to be out of compliance with the recently adopted Clearwater Comprehensive Plan ["Clearwater 20451 which was approved by the City Council at its meeting on January 18, 2024. The proposed use is an unplanned, unnecessary and out -of -compliance use of a scarce and valuable City green space. Land Cover, Land Use and Economics: The developer contends this proposed Project is well -aligned as a permitted land use under Open Space / Recreation. The project operating economics tell an entirely different story. Over the first 5 years of operation, the net operating income from the Project is $39.6 Million -- of which $25.7 Million — 65% -- is derived from hospitality -related activities. Viewing this purely through an economic lens, this Project is a Restaurant and Hospitality Complex which features Sports and Recreation activities for customers. 1 Some examples of strong P3 projects are included in Addendum A. D. McDermott Comments July 30, 2026 Page 1 of 2 Dennis McDermott • 1726 Lakeview Road • Clearwater, Florida 33756 Property Tax and Economic Impact Assumptions: Financial projections provided by the Developer rely on blue-sky assumptions which upwardly distort potential as -built project economics while ignoring a broad variety of identifiable risks. Proposed Local Solution to an Unsubstantiated Regional Need: The proposed use attempts to satisfy an undocumented and unsubstantiated regional need and/or opportunity for multi-purpose fields, yet the socio-economic burdens due to the proposed Project fall almost entirely on the taxpayers of the City of Clearwater. The Project as described will create direct and quantifiable negative social, economic and environmental hardships for Clearwater citizens and visitors alike, such as (a) traffic congestion and gridlock; (b) degradation of air quality due to increased fossil fuel emissions combined with a loss of tree canopy; (c) Excess light and noise pollution in a currently peaceful open -space enclave in a predominantly residential area. No measurable benefit(s) will accrue to City taxpayers and/or stakeholders. Synthetic Turf: Replacement of natural turf with synthetic materials made from petrochemicals has irrefutable negative environmental impacts, including (a) current and recurring microplastic pollution; (b) toxic chemical leaching; and (c) a high carbon footprint. While synthetics can conserve water use, they disrupt local biodiversity, contribute to the urban heat island effect, and ultimately end up in landfills at the end of their relatively short lifespan. Relative to asphalt or concrete surfaces, artificial turf offers significant advantages; relative to natural grass, artificial turf offers only heartache. As a lifelong student of urban geography and economics, I concluded long ago that the role of local municipal government is both tactical and strategic. • Number one [Tactical]: Fairly, effectively and efficiently meet the current needs of local municipal stakeholders [public safety, water, sanitation, streets, parks and recreation, etc.]. • Number two [Strategic]: Identify, analyze and prioritize longer term issues, problems and opportunities of a local/regional nature, and to work closely with regional neighbors to develop long-term sustainable solutions to these problems. Repurposing The Landings into a restaurant and hospitality venue with a focus on sports and recreation does not fall into either a Tactical or a Strategic bucket. Please follow the message from Clearwater residents that this proposal must be rejected. Thank you in advance for your time and consideration, and please feel welcome to contact me with questions or comments. Sincerely, h( Dennis McDermott Phone: (727) 542-6302 • email: walrus751@gmail.com e -copies to: City Clerk R. Call; City Attorney 0. Kohl; Planning Director L. Matzke; Parks & Rec. A. Kader; Mayor B. Rector; Members of City Council; Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition; Keep Keene Green + Addendum A, attached D. McDermott Comments July 30, 2026 Page 2 of 2 Appendix A: S'eve. rt�1I Examples of Good 1rlibilliii�c..Pp ivatro P�Iiiiit leli : '1��Illp' This short summary evolved from the premise that a good Public -Private Partnership ("P-3"): A. Begins with a genuine public opportunity identified through planning; a mandate; clear and consistent public demand; or other public factors; B. Requires a private partner which is able to operate and maintain a public asset more cost- effectively than the public partner thus generating a cost -savings that can be shared with the private partner; and C. Is based on fair and equitable sharing of both risks and rewards. How can we spot a really good P-3? Here are several examples of good Public -Private Partnerships which have been recognized for their fiscally responsible, symbiotic and effective results: Buffalo, NY: The Olmsted Parks Conservancy Frederick Law Olmsted -- America's first landscape architect— designed and built an urban park system across the City of Buffalo in the late 19th century which consists of 850 acres of beautifully designed parks, parkways and traffic circles. By the early 1970's, fiscal problems in Buffalo [and in nearly every major Northeastern U.S. city] led to a pattern of deferred maintenance and disinvestment in public infrastructure, including parks. Around 1978, civic leaders created the Buffalo Olmsted Parks Conservancy and began focusing on preservation and restoration of the Olmsted parkland primarily through private philanthropic activities. In 2004, the Buffalo Olmsted Parks Conservancy entered into a Public -Private Partnership with the City of Buffalo to become the official steward of the Buffalo Olmsted Park System, overseeing its management, operations and maintenance. The City still owns the Parks; the Conservancy manages an extensive park system which includes golf courses, tennis, baseball, basketball, pools, ice rinks, soccer fields, pickleball and more. Operating under a 20 -year Management and Restoration plan and guided by its community-based Advisory Council, the Conservancy's experienced and professional staff is now revolutionizing the way public open space and common ground is cared for in Buffalo. Clearwater, FL: Crabby's Dockside In April 2015, the City of Clearwater issued RFP 20-15 to demolish an existing structure located at 37 Causeway Boulevard and construct and operate a new restaurant on that city -owned site for a term not to exceed thirty years. The record reflects deep and careful vetting of responses to this RFP by the Selection Committee which resulted in the recommendation of a `preferred lessee' to City Council at a Work Session on August 31, 2015. Clearwater Beach Seafood, Inc. {d/b/a/ Crabby's}was awarded the opportunity to negotiate an agreement with the City, resulting in 30 -year lease which began upon `Substantial Completion' (2017) and which expires on 4/01/2047. The City continues to own the land itself [part of the Clearwater Beach Marina]. The Restaurant operator was required (at its own expense) to demolish all improvements on site; build the new building; obtain a certificate of occupancy for the Building; then to occupy and operate its restaurant in the Building. The land is exempt from ad valorem taxation because it is municipally owned. Most recent net taxable value of improvements was $2,451,257, resulting in gross ad valorem taxes of $47,437 billed in 2025 (the City's share was $14,426, about 30% of the total). In addition to ad valorem taxes, the restaurant pays a monthly fixed base rent of $14,250 to the City, plus a percentage rent that varies according to food and alcohol sales. The For -Profit restaurant operator delivers a very popular experience to residents and visitors and enjoys a premier location at a fair price; the City receives a strong financial return from a popular destination venue. Compiled by Dennis McDermott {walrus751 @mail.com} from public sources deemed reliable. July 30, 2026. Page 1 of 2 Appendix A: Several 1���,. raumpll ' (Jfr'Good I"r'LilJ1lle=Pr ivate Partne .shlihi�ps Fort Lauderdale, FL: Prospect Lake Clean Water Center In 2017, the City of Fort Lauderdale completed a utility strategic master plan which showed that their existing Fiveash Water Treatment Plant was 70 years old and the majority of its components were at the end of their life cycle. Simply repairing the facility was estimated to cost about $200 Million. The City commissioned a comprehensive study in 2019 conducted by a consulting engineering firm. The study recommended that the City replace the Fiveash WTP and suggested the location and treatment options for the new facility. In December 2020, an unsolicited proposal was submitted to the City to design, construct, operate, and maintain a new drinking water facility, following the findings of the engineering report as a basis for their offer. The unsolicited proposal was submitted by a private partnership consisting of IDE Technologies, a water treatment solution provider and Ridgewood Infrastructure, an established U.S. infrastructure investor focused on water, utilities, power & renewables, transportation and communications. Under Florida law, the City was obligated to request additional proposals from other qualified parties. After receiving three other proposals, the city reviewed the submissions and ultimately selected the proposal from IDE and Ridgewood. Under the terms of its proposed P3, the project team pledged to design and construct a new water facility within 42 months and then operate and maintain it for 30 years. The P3 structure of the project shielded the City from the uncertainty of cost escalations on the $485 Million project and brought world-class private -sector technological expertise and global operation and maintenance experience to the Project. Financing of project capital costs came from the City (75% using Municipal Bonds at an attractive rate) and the private partners (25%). Prospect Lake Clean Water Center is scheduled to come online in September 2026 at which time the city will begin making monthly payments of nearly $2.5 million to the private partners. The City recognized the private partners assumed many risks (construction time, budget and long-term performance) as well as operation and maintenance risk, Fort Lauderdale will be responsible for costs of electricity and chemicals used at the facility as well as labor costs. The offset is an adequate supply of clear and clean water for 30 years as well as a steady, pre -known budget. The city will retain ownership of the facility, and the private sector project team will be responsible for its operation and maintenance. It is a true partnership. Clearwater, FL: Clearwater Country Club: Clearwater Golf Club LLC leases a City -owned golf course located at 525 Betty Lane North, known as the Clearwater Country Club. The lease -- which expires on April 30, 2051 -- requires the Club to pay annual rent to the City of 3% of Gross Revenues, plus the Club agreed to perform significant renovations and construction valued at approximately $1.2 Million over the course of a five-year period ending April 30, 2027. The lease states, "The additional upgrades and improvements are in the public interest, necessary to maintain the City property asset, and beyond the normal routine maintenance obligations of the Club." City records indicate the Club invested over $2 Million in private funds for upgrades and capital improvements to the Golf Course property and buildings over the initial years of the lease [beginning in 2011 ] thus creating a much -improved asset for the City while providing excellent golfing and recreational opportunities and programs for Clearwater residents and visitors. 0000 Compiled by Dennis McDermott iwalrus751 Pgmail.com} from public sources deemed reliable. July 30, 2026. Page 2 of 2 Call, Rosemarie From: beth davis <beth.g.davis@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2026 2:44 PM To: ClearwaterCouncil Cc: Poirrier, Jennifer; Battle, Alfred; Slaughter, Daniel Subject: The Sports Complex lowers revenue for the city over the next 20 years ICAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Clearwater. Do not click links or open attachments unless your recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Clearwater City Council Members and Managers, Simply put: This is a very bad deal for the City of Clearwater. The City of Clearwater should reject or heavily renegotiate the unsolicited public-private partnership (P3) proposal for the Landings Golf Course redevelopment in its current form. While the project promises robust sports tourism, the evaluation report by the Public Resources Advisory Group (PRAG) reveals that the deal structures nearly all the financial risk onto the City while offering minimal guaranteed upside. The City will be substantially better off, both in terms of guaranteed income and risk mitigation, by continuing with the golf course lease as it stands for the next 2 to 3 years while concurrently issuing a competitive Request for Bids (RFP) for a sports park from other experienced developers and management companies. A comprehensive analysis of why this proposal is heavily flawed for the City includes the following key takeaways: Major Financial Risks & Red Flags • Near -Term Financial Loss: The existing golf course brings in steady, guaranteed revenue ($40,276 in 2024), with a projected 20 -year present value of $1.225 million. Porter's proposal requests complete rent abatement for the first 5 years and partial abatement through year 20. Over 20 years, the present value of Porter's lease is only $1.187 million. The City would actually lose direct revenue in the near term compared to keeping the golf course. • No Revenue Sharing: In a standard P3 deal, the municipality benefits from a project's financial upside. Porter's proposal features zero revenue sharing with Clearwater. Private 1 This message needs your attention • You've never replied to this person. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast Dear Clearwater City Council Members and Managers, Simply put: This is a very bad deal for the City of Clearwater. The City of Clearwater should reject or heavily renegotiate the unsolicited public-private partnership (P3) proposal for the Landings Golf Course redevelopment in its current form. While the project promises robust sports tourism, the evaluation report by the Public Resources Advisory Group (PRAG) reveals that the deal structures nearly all the financial risk onto the City while offering minimal guaranteed upside. The City will be substantially better off, both in terms of guaranteed income and risk mitigation, by continuing with the golf course lease as it stands for the next 2 to 3 years while concurrently issuing a competitive Request for Bids (RFP) for a sports park from other experienced developers and management companies. A comprehensive analysis of why this proposal is heavily flawed for the City includes the following key takeaways: Major Financial Risks & Red Flags • Near -Term Financial Loss: The existing golf course brings in steady, guaranteed revenue ($40,276 in 2024), with a projected 20 -year present value of $1.225 million. Porter's proposal requests complete rent abatement for the first 5 years and partial abatement through year 20. Over 20 years, the present value of Porter's lease is only $1.187 million. The City would actually lose direct revenue in the near term compared to keeping the golf course. • No Revenue Sharing: In a standard P3 deal, the municipality benefits from a project's financial upside. Porter's proposal features zero revenue sharing with Clearwater. Private 1 equity investors would pocket 15% to 28% returns while the City gets a flat, heavily abated rent with no escalation features. • The 99 -Year Lease is Effectively a Sale: The requested 99 -year lease—plus two 25 -year tenant -controlled extensions—amounts to a 149 -year handover of city land. Worse, the deal states that at the end of the lease, the City must purchase the improvements at fair market value instead of inheriting them for free, which completely violates standard P3 protocols. • Unsecured Funding: The entire $179.6 million budget relies on a massive $107.8 million commercial loan and $44.9 million in Pinellas County tourist taxes. Neither funding source has a written commitment or term sheet, creating a severe default risk before construction even starts. Flawed Operational Assumptions & Irreversible Landscape Changes • An Irreversible 50 -Year Destruction: Moving forward with this specific development means you cannot simply bring back a golf course if the project fails. This layout represents a major, permanent change to a green landscape that took over 50 years to mature and develop. If the Landings course remains green for the next few years, it protects this irreplaceable asset and gives the City crucial time to observe how mega -sports complexes actually perform economically in our unique climate. • A Restaurant and Water Park Deal in Disguise: Though pitched as a "youth sports destination," the pro forma reveals that the project cannot survive on sports tournaments alone. Over half of Phase I revenue is driven by a food hall and a putt -putt course, and restaurants generate up to two-thirds of the net income. Restaurants face high operational failure rates, leaving the City vulnerable to a commercial default on a permanently altered landscape. • Conflict of Interest in Data: The Economic Impact Report and Market Study provided by the developer were written by The Sports Facilities Companies—an active partner in the development team. Clearwater has no independent market study proving local demand or validating the developer's aggressive pricing assumptions. • Phasing Risk: The project splits hard costs into two phases. Phase 1 burns through the bulk of construction funds on site flattening and fields, while the true commercial income -generators (like the water park and fitness center) are pushed to Phase 2. The City could easily end up with an uncompleted, non-viable property and a destroyed ecosystem. Strategic Recommendations for City Council If the Landings Golf Course remains functional today, it protects your immediate cash flow while you build a better future. The City Council should take the following actions: 1. Renegotiate a 20 -Year Golf Lease: Secure stable, predictable revenue for the immediate 2 - to -3 -year window while you evaluate options as a golf course or sports complex or something else altogether. 2. Issue an Open Request for Bids (RFP): Open the market to competitive, reputable developers and venue management firms to see who can offer real revenue-sharing percentages and shorter, safer lease durations (such as standard 30 -to -50 -year terms) on this choice city owned 77 acre parcel. 3. Demand Financing Term Sheets: Freeze any exclusive legal progression with Porter Development until they produce absolute bank commitments that explicitly protect city land from foreclosure displacement. 2 Do not sacrifice a half -century of green infrastructure for an unbacked, high-risk gamble that strips the city of its revenue. Sincerely, 3 CaII, Rosemarie From: beth davis <beth.g.davis@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 5, 2026 5:51 PM To: ClearwaterCouncil Cc: George davis Subject: your 2045 Pian and Greenprint 2.0 CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the Ci y ofCleaw r ate r. Do not click links or open attachments unless your _^mo ti (recognize the sender and know the content is safe( j You have each supported and campaigned for safety for residents, families, and enhancing the lifestyle of existing neighborhoods. Why, then, would you consider one unsolicited proposal to develop every sq inch of the current Landings? We need long fields? Yes A few inside pickleball courts? Plan the new green space as needed. Parking spaces? Make them green. Energy? Expect 100% solar. Contribute back to our energy debt. Don't increase it. 65 years ago was 1958. So much will happen over the next 65 years. Control our assets in a shorter controllable time. Our other leases are renewable every 10 or 20 years. Why would we walk away from the option to improve and adjust our control and revenue? These are the last golden acres of the top of Pinellas County. There are probably revenue sharing bids out there if you just open the door properly. Giving the next 10 years away with abatements does not suit our budget well. Just vote No! Now! Other bidders should have our standard fair window of time. Is that 90 or 180 days? 1 This message needs your attention • You've never replied to this person. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast You have each supported and campaigned for safety for residents, families, and enhancing the lifestyle of existing neighborhoods. Why, then, would you consider one unsolicited proposal to develop every sq inch of the current Landings? We need long fields? Yes A few inside pickleball courts? Plan the new green space as needed. Parking spaces? Make them green. Energy? Expect 100% solar. Contribute back to our energy debt. Don't increase it. 65 years ago was 1958. So much will happen over the next 65 years. Control our assets in a shorter controllable time. Our other leases are renewable every 10 or 20 years. Why would we walk away from the option to improve and adjust our control and revenue? These are the last golden acres of the top of Pinellas County. There are probably revenue sharing bids out there if you just open the door properly. Giving the next 10 years away with abatements does not suit our budget well. Just vote No! Now! Other bidders should have our standard fair window of time. Is that 90 or 180 days? 1