►
From YouTube: City council meeting Feb 1 2022
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
Thank
you
all
for
being
with
us
this
evening,
tuesday
february
1st
first
council
meeting
of
the
month
at
this
time,
I'll
call
on
nathan
barrett
for
the
prayer
and
at
the
conclusion
of
the
prayer,
jane
shambra
will
lead
us
in
the
pledge.
Mr
barrett.
B
Lord,
we
thank
you
for
this
day.
We
thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
live
in
the
greatest
city
on
earth.
We
ask
for
you
to
be
with
us
today,
help
us
to
make
the
right
decisions
for
our
family.
I
ask
for
your
blessings
upon
each
and
every
one
in
this
room
and
everyone
in
the
city
of
biloxi,
in
the
name
of
jesus,
amen,.
A
Thank
you,
mr
barrett,
and
thank
you,
mrs
shambra,
this
time
I'll
entertain
a
motion
to
suspend
the
rules
by
mr
lawrence
is
air.
Second,
a
second
mr
barrett
and
discussion
all
in
favor
of
suspending
the
rules.
A
All
right
there's
a
motion
to
approve
the
agenda
as
amended
by
mr
lawrence's
air.
Second,
a.
B
A
C
Well,
it's
the
beginning
of
february,
and
we
all
we
have
28
days.
We
got
a
lot
backed
into
february
a
couple
of
things
to
note.
You
know
this
is
a
beginning
of
black
history
month,
as
well
as
the
lunar
new
year,
and
we
wish
everyone
to
have
a
tremendous
time
in
this
february.
C
We
also
have
a
celebration
coming
up
in
february
the
13th,
the
founder
founding
day
of
biloxi
and
we're
going
to
unveil
while
he
was
only
five
foot,
something
we
got
a
seven
foot
statue
of
fred
hayes
going
up
at
the
lighthouse
and
that's
going
to
be
a
big
celebration
out
of
since
adam
and
eve
there's
only
been
24
men
to
circle
around
the
moon.
He
was
one
of
24
as
well.
As
the
you
know,
tremendous
mission
in
apollo
13..
C
G
Hey
thank
you
for
having
me
david
newman
with
the
cpa,
firm,
pilcz
williams,
larosa
located
in
biloxi,
I'm
here
to
deliver
your
september,
30th,
2020,
audited
or
financial
statement.
Audit
report
real
briefly
I'll,
just
go
over
the
highlights
with
you.
It's
a
121
page
report.
But
if
you
go
to
page
14,
that's
the
independent
auditors
report
and
on
that
report
it
will
tell
you
you
had
an
unqualified
opinion
over
your
basic
financial
statements.
G
C
E
A
Thank
you,
mr
newman.
Thank
you.
Yes,
sir,
and
that
concludes
my
report.
Thank
you
again,
mr
mayor.
There
are
new,
departmental
reports,
council
reports,
I'll
start
with
mr
lawrence.
E
H
I
think
the
llama
brewery
they
had
some
got.
Some
donations
put
those
sort
of
baskets
and
people
just
sort
of
like
a
golf
course,
but
like.
C
H
We
control
that
area
underneath
the
interstate
through
our
we
have
a
lease
free
lease
penndot
to
use
that
area
underneath
for
really
parks
and
recreation
type
purposes.
So
we
have
the
walking
track
we're
talking
about
some
bicycle
tracks,
upgrading
down
the
road-
and
you
know
this
is
sort
of
the
latest
edition
of
that.
E
H
E
E
The
other
thing
is,
I
need
the
extra
demand
I've
had
a
couple
phone
calls
about
keegan's
bayou
with
some
of
the
plans
we
have
for
the
future,
we're
going
to
try
to
develop
it
judge
it
out.
C
I
We
have
a
gomesa
project,
that's
been
in
play
for
a
couple
of
years.
Now
that
has
not
been
funded.
It
involves
not
only
dredging
of
of
keegan's
bayou,
but
also
a
number
of
amenities,
including
a
kayak
launches
and
so
forth.
We've
recently
taken
that
project
and
put
it
into
the
restore
act
portal
portal,
in
hopes
that
you
know
working
with
the
governor's
staff
that
we
may
be
able
to
get
it
funded
through
that
direction.
I
It's
four
or
four
million
dollars,
but
what
we've
done
differently
this
year
is
we've
got
a
letter
signed
by
the
81st
group
commander
wing
commander
at
kiesler,
stating
that
they
that
keegan's
bayou
is
a
threat
to
kiesler,
because
it
has
not
been
dredged
and
it's
beginning
to
back
up
into
the
base.
I
think
that
may
just
get
somebody's
attention.
I
As
you
know,
councilman
there's
a
very
lovely
little
park
area
that
with
a
walking
track
and
fancy
ornamental
lighting
and
so
forth,
that's
just
been
kind
of
overgrown
and
nobody
really
knows
it's
there
right
right
off.
I
E
Know
the
value
is
backed
up
when
the
drainage
car
was,
the
body
is
higher
than
them
now,
so
you
got
to
drop
them
so
they'll
drain,
like
I
said,
with
all
what
you,
the
new
construction
way
more
water
going
to
come
through
there,
but
definitely
need
to
be
adjusted
and
a
woman
back
bay.
Looking
great
they're
about
finished,
they
walk
away
on
back
bay
by
the
old
hospital.
E
I
C
E
That's
that
thing
is
looking
good
people
gonna
be
shocked
when
they
finish
without
how
good
that
is,
and
we
have
to
walk
up
and
down
good
great
walkway.
You
know
we
can't
say,
but
I
wouldn't
have
to
say,
walk
right
now.
I
didn't.
C
I
I
I
E
You
do
better
making
everything
concrete,
get
rid
of
grass
all
together
and
we
don't
have
to
maintain
and
cut
it
anything.
You
know
some
more,
the
more
concrete
you
put
out
there,
there's
any
cleanup
or
anything
wood.
So
that's
a
good
thing
on.
I
know
we've
been
waiting
to
hear
from
any
good
news
on
money
for
the
bridge
from
homeland
security.
We're.
C
Still
chasing
that
there's
some
opportunities
that
d.o.t
may
have
and
we've
in
contact
with
our
folks.
You
know
keith
hurd
and
some
of
those
d.o.t
connections
we're
trying
to
push.
We
may
be
going
to
dc
to
ask
over
and
above
just
the
normal
3.3
billion,
220
or
12
or
15
million
for
infrastructure,
but
we're
still
chasing
it.
Yeah.
E
And
peter
the
scotland
house
there's
any
news.
I
know
we
put
that
out
to
have
that
a
report
on
what
we
can
do
with
it
clean
it
up,
fix
it
up.
H
H
Stacy,
I
think,
is
those
are
going
up
for
sale,
probably
the
first
of
first
of
next
week
or
probably
tomorrow.
So.
E
J
Yes,
so
recently
I
got
about
three
emails
in
a
row
from
constituents
and
they
were
praising
our
public
works
for
coming
out,
doing
jobs
that
we
put
orders
in
and
they
immediately
came
out
and
did
a
phenomenal
job
leaving
it
like.
They
never
were
there
in
the
first
place,
and
it
was
just
you
know
we
never
get
a
thank
you.
So
I
wanted
to
make
sure
that
billy
knew
that
we're
thankful
and
keep
up
the
good
work.
I
K
Mr
mayor,
excuse
me
dredging
any
movement
on
any
dredging
projects.
C
Yeah
we
had
a
couple
of
meetings
about
the
submerged,
it's
kind
of
put
us
in
a
in
a
bad
place.
With
regard
to
submerged
vegetations,
we
kind
of
discovered
that
there
may
be
some
opportunity
that
if
we
were
to
dredge
some
of
the
submerged
stations
and
some
of
the
places
we
had
looked
at
initially,
there
may
be
some
mitigation
almost
like
the
tree.
If
we
had
another
area
where
this
vegetation,
if
so
many
square
feet
or
acres
of
vegetation,
would
have
to
pull
up
and
relocated.
So
that
was
a.
I
guess.
C
A
revelation
that
we
didn't
know
was
was
possible
so
that
may
kick
in
another
round.
I
know
several
of
the
locations,
so
we
couldn't
touch
it
because
of
the
submerged
vegetation,
but
there's
a
window
there.
I
think
we're
going
to
try
and
look
through.
I
We
have
a
dredging
master
plan
that
has
a
long
list
of
projects
and
they've
been
priced
by
area.
We
don't
have
any
dredging
money
right
now.
We
have
a
300
000
ask
and
this
year's
tidelands
request,
which
is
before
the
legislature
today.
So
one
of
the
things
I
would
ask
you
to
do
if
you
could
pile
on
with
us
with
kevin
felter
and
scott
delano
or
any
other
legislature,
and
let
them
know
that
we're
desperate
to
do
some
dredging.
I
As
the
mayor
says,
the
problem
with
dredging
has
gotten
twice
as
expensive
because
we
not
only
have
to
dredge
the
area
before,
but
we
have
to.
We
have
to
actually
restore
that
same
square
footage
of
grasses,
grasses
or
whatever
submerged
vegetation
at
another
site,
and
we
don't
have
a
lot
of
sites
to
work
with.
We
we're
thinking
about
the
shoreline
of
hiller
park,
pushing
this
pushing
it
out
some,
perhaps
some
in
causeway
park,
perhaps
sherman
canaan
harbor
down
on
the
beach
one
of
the
one
of
the
areas
where
the
city
owns
some
land.
I
That's
on
the
bay
where
we
can
build
out
and
and
and
mitigate,
shall
we
say
hitler
park.
We
could
probably
get
300
square
yards
of
mitigation
out
of
that
shoreline
and
then
we
could
go
dredge,
300
square
yards
somewhere
else,
but
it's
dmr
permitting
has
made
it
very,
very
difficult,
and
I
and
I
feel
for
anybody-
that's
got
a
waterfront
property
that
is
getting
shallower
and
shallower
because
there's
just
not
a
whole
lot.
We
can
do
right
now.
K
Yeah
and
a
lot
of
it's
not
just
the
waterfront
property,
it's
getting
shallower
and
shallower,
it's
all
the
small
canals
where
people
buy
homes
with
access
to
the
water
from
from
their
backyards
and
those
are
just
getting
filled
in
value.
What
is
three
hundred
thousand
dollars
in
thailand?
Thailand's
funds
get
us
what
maybe.
C
I
Thailand's
and
as
you
have
seen
over
time
as
we
get
these
tightlands
grants,
they
tend
to
be
small.
I
mean
it's
rare
that
thailand's
grant
is
more
than
five
hundred
thousand
dollars,
they're.
Very
rarely.
A
big
million
dollar
grants
anymore,
because
they're
spreading
the
spreading
the
thailand's
trust
fund
money
across
the
entire
gulf
coast,
which
doesn't
leave
a
whole
lot
for
biloxi.
I
I
If
you,
if
you
wish
I'll,
be
happy
to
share
that
master
plan,
one
page
list
of
all
the
project
sites
with
you
and
and
they're
really
my
priority
so.
B
Mr
damning,
mr
barrett,
just
a
couple
things
really
quick.
I
guess
everyone's
gonna
talk
about
dredging
tonight.
I
brought
it
up
a
couple
weeks
ago,
but
parker's
creek
boat,
launch
is,
is
just
getting
really
bad.
That's
the
only
city
boat
launch
in
our
ward
and
it's
it's
getting
really
really
bad.
Second
thing
is
park.
The
work
at
the
park
is
coming
up
coming
around
really
nice.
I
just
wanted
to
follow
up.
B
I
know
that
we
approved
the
contract
a
couple
of
weeks
ago
for
the
fencing
around
the
pickleball
court
and
the
basketball
court,
but
we
haven't
done
anything
yet
on
the
fencing
around
that
pump
station.
Is
that
something
that
that
we
can
get
going
pretty
soon?
It's
just
real
unsightly
and
then
the
other
thing
I
was
gonna.
I
know
we've
done
it
in
the
past
on
some
other
projects.
B
Is
there
any
way
that
we
could
do
some
type
of
lease
or
partner
agreement
with
mississippi
power
coast
electric
for
some
lighting
out
there
as
well
it?
You
know
it
gets
dark
at
five
o'clock
and
it's
there's
no
lights
anywhere
around
it's
pitch
black.
If
we
could,
you
know,
do
some
get
get
some
kind
of
partnership
with
them
or
lease
deal
or
something
like
that
with
them.
On
that,
that's
all
I
have.
L
I
Are
your
eagle
point?
Neighborhood
is
having
a
lot
of
fun
these
days
with
the
the
boring
that
at
t
is
doing
they're
going.
They
have
just
given
us
their
projects
now
for
the
boring
in
wards
four
and
six,
and
I
would
invite
both
of
those
councilmen
to
get
a
ti
time
with
us,
and
let
us
walk
you
through
the
plans,
because
it's
we're
now
now
we're
not
going
to
let
them
do
everything
at
once.
I
But
it's
a
very
aggressive
plan
where
att
has
is
boring
all
over
the
city
if
they
and
and
as
councilman
barrett
found
out
yeah
the
hard
way
and
some
of
the
places
where
they're
boring
yeah.
B
I
B
Hey
just
I'm.
A
B
On
that
subject,
one
thing
that
I
recommend
that
several
people
have
brought
up
is:
whenever
they're
planning
you
know,
people
have
the
stuff
coming
into
their
house
on
certain
sides
of
the
house
and
at
t's
putting
boxes
in
it
would
be
nice
to
for
them
to
look
and
see
where
those
things
are
on
those
people's
houses,
because
they're
putting
the
fiber
box
in
and
they're
gonna
have
to
go
up
on
the
other
side
of
the
house
because
or
not
they're
gonna
have
there's
no
way
to
get
there
unless
you
go
through
their
driveway
again
to
you,
know,
cut
or
bore
under
their
driveway
to
get
that
fiber
into
the
house,
and
so
they,
where
they
place
those
boxes
on
which
side
of
the
house
that
they
place
them,
is
important
based
upon
where
the
people
have
all
their
wiring
and
stuff
going
into
the
house.
I
I
would
point
you
as
they
love
to
say
on
tv.
I
would
point
you
to
a
gentleman
named
jody
ewing
in
in
the
engineering
department
who
controls
all
the
dig
permits
and
he'll
shut
them
down
in
a
heartbeat
if
they're
not
behaving
about
cleaning
up
afterwards.
C
I
just
went
through
that
in
my
house,
not
with
atnt,
but
in
the
in
the
corner
or
like
in
the
cul-de-sac.
There'll
be
one
and
they'll
go
to
your
home.
They
did
it
on
the
wrong
side
and
we
had
to
go
to
the
other
side.
But
it's
not
as
difficult
because
the
fiber
is
very
easily
buried
from
the
box,
not
to
the
house.
But
it's
something
to
pay
attention
to.
Okay,.
A
Is
that
it?
Thank
you.
I
just
have
one
thing
for
the
next
council
meeting
february
15th,
I'm
requesting
a
departmental
report
on
the
number
of
public
safety
employees
that
be
firing
police
who
were
directed
to
quarantine
by
the
city
or
department
policy
or
cdc
guidelines
and
charged
annually
for
the
duration
of
their
quarantine
and
I'll.
Follow
that
up
with
an
email,
so
you've
got
exactly
what
I
want
it
does
two
weeks
from
now.
Does
that
give
the
administration
enough
time
to
pull
that
together?
A
A
When
you
come
to
the
table
here,
the
mic
is
on.
Thank
you.
If
you
would
sign
in
on
the
sheet
there,
with
your
name
and
address
and
state
your
name
clearly,
so
the
council
clerk
can
record
your
name
accurately.
Is
there
anybody
on
my
left,
your
right
that
would
like
to
address
the
council,
ms
campbell.
F
The
heading
on
the
first
is
mitigation,
slash
replacement
requirements,
entry
funds,
other
u.s
southern
cities,
and
then
the
second
is
has
the
heading
comparisons
by
tree
committee
for
february
1st
2022
city
council
meeting
thanks.
M
M
I
wanted
to
know
what
is
the
city
going
to
do
about
the
beautification
of
downtown
biloxi?
We
have
the
brick
pavers,
that's
nice,
but
there's
no
trees,
no
flowers.
Are
they
planning
on
doing
something
with
that?
That's
one
question.
The
second
question:
is
there
any
grant
money
for
startup
businesses
to
help
with
opening
up
a
business
in
downtown
biloxi?
M
A
Heard
heard
your
questions
and
what
I
would
urge
you
to
do
is
get
in
touch
with
either
the
mayor
or
mr
leonard
to
his
right
and
and
they
should
be
able
to
talk
with
you
about
that
or
provide
you
some
information.
Yes,.
N
As
carol
said,
I've
provided
you
we've,
provided
you
with
a
couple
documents
and
just
wanted
to
give
you
kind
of
a
synopsis
on
what
this
is
so
basically
relating
to
the
changes
to
the
tree
ordinance.
We
want
to
be
sure
that
they
do
two
things:
incentivize,
preserving
the
protected
trees
and
that
the
replacement
trees
that
are
removed
are
replaced
with
a
sufficient
quantity
in
species,
so
that
we're
we
are
truly
replenishing
the
native
stock
of
trees.
N
N
Are
removed,
they're
removed
from
the
equation
there,
and
then
I
offer
you
the
comparisons
of
the
old
three
to
one,
the
newly
proposed
two
to
one
versus
the
scaled
mitigation
ratio,
and
basically,
our
you're,
seeing
what
you're
seeing
there
is
that
the
mitigation
or
the
the
number
of
trees
that
are
going
to
be
requiring
mitigation
are
significantly
decreased
with
the
water
oaks
going
away,
and
so
what
we
just
want
to
see
happen
is
we
want
to
ask
the
question
is
what
can
we
do
to
strike
a
balance
between
mitigation
requirements
and
incentivizing,
retaining
our
largest
trees?
N
And
that
is
one
thing
that
we
saw
that
the
mitigation
the
scaled
mitigation
ratio
did?
Is
it
provided
a
way
to
incentivize
saving
those
30
and
40
inch
inch
live
oaks?
So
I
urge
you
to
consider
that
and
then
the
second
page,
the
second
handout
is
just
a
comparison
of
area
cities
across
the
southeast
that
have
much
more
rigid
mitigation.
N
Ratios
than
what
we're
considering,
and
so
we
just
give
you
this
to
to
see
what
some
other
worthwhile
cities
are
doing.
A
O
Hi,
my
name
is
julian
woodall
and
I
have
some
concerns
about
the
the
pops
ferry
bridge
proposal
or
at
least
from
what
I
hear.
It's
still
a
proposal
about
this
private
company
coming
in
and
trying
to
make
a
toll
bridge
apparently-
and
I
just
have
some
concerns
about
that
and
worry
about
how
it
could
affect
the
local
neighborhoods
and
the
schools
around
the
area,
as
well
as
the
marina
nearby.
A
I
I
think
it's
fair
to
say
that
it's
a
bit
premature
for
for
questions,
yet
there's
nothing
that
that's
come
to
the
council.
I
know
that
there
is
the
mayor,
you
may
I
know
you're
dealing
with
the
bridge
building
company
or
whatever,
and
just
so
we
don't
get
trapped
and
go
down
some
some
rabbit
holes
here.
Just
very
briefly,
a
summary
where
we
are
right.
C
These
are
ideas,
these
are
explorations.
You
know,
some
of
the
initial
thoughts
were
a
normal
bridge
cycle
would
take
15
years
to
do
one
of
the
reasons
why
we
listened
to
that.
That
idea
was
they
could
be
possibly
driving
on
a
bridge
in
four
or
five
years.
So
that's
a
you
know
it's
worth
listening
to
again,
it's
a
long
way
from
you
know
becoming
reality
or
even
you
know,
the
council
has
agreed
to
kind
of
listen
to
what
they
have
to
propose.
I
think
they
did
a
mail
out
over
the
weekend.
C
Again,
it's
a
regional
problem:
it's
not
just
a
biloxi
problem,
although
it's
not
a
biloxi,
it's
not
a
state
bridge,
so
we're
having
some
efforts
to
get
the
ability
to
help
the
state
get
the
state
to
help
us
get
the
federal
government
to
help
us
in
in
trying
to
do
something
similar
to
the
biloxi
ocean
springs
bridge
after
hurricane
katrina.
C
That's
a
300
million
bridge.
You
know
those
because
of
the
disasters
why
that
happened
so
we're
pressing
to
see
what
we
can
do
again.
There
may
be
some
short-term
fixes
to
keep
the
bridge
from
getting
stuck.
You
know
when
in
traffic
that
people
get,
but
you
know
are
the
long-term
would
be
to
a
high-rise
bridge
without
a
draw-
and
you
know
a
four-lane
as
opposed
to
tulane.
So
it's
these
are
still
ideas.
Well,.
O
K
Okay,
so
you're
either
in
ward,
4
ward
6,
depending
on
where
the
line
falls
right,
pay
attention
we'll
be
doing
a
ward,
4
town
hall
meeting,
but
we'll
be
doing
a
segment
all
about
the
bridge.
So
we'll
have
a
ton
of
information.
We'll
have
the
engineers
that
are
proposing
it.
The
administration
will
all
be
there
and
we'll
do
it.
We'll
do
an
extensive
q
a
session
too,
to
help
address
everyone's
concerns
and
needs
to
try
to
figure
out
where
we
need
to
go
as
a
community
so
be
on
the
lookout
for
that
all.
A
A
All
right
that
concludes
citizens
comments,
we'll
move
on
to
the
policy
agenda.
A
The
motion
was
by
mr
gaines
and
the
second
was
by
mr
lawrence.
Mr
gaines
is
not
here
tonight,
mr
lawrence,
any
comments
yeah
jerry.
L
What
this,
what
this
ordinance
proposal
would
do
if
passed
it
would
it
would
prevent
anyone
park
or
a
private
person
from
renting
out
their
rv
or
mobile
home
for
short-term
rental.
L
E
L
No
only
park-owned
would
be
affected
by
this.
In
other
words,
the
park
would
not
be
able
to
establish
short-term
rental,
but
if
a
private
citizen
comes
into
an
rv
park
with
their
own
rv,
there's
no
limit
on
how
long
they
can
stay.
They
just
would
not
be
able
to
rent
it
out
to
someone
else.
They'd
be
allowed
to
use
theirs
for
short-term
rental.
B
B
K
K
Though,
in
theory,
I
could
rent
my
rv
to
somebody
in
the
county
and
they
could
drive
it
in
and
park
it
at
the
rv
park
on
a
daily
basis,
new
tenants,
I
I
just
find
that
we
we're
getting
observed
with
short-term
rentals.
I
think
if
a
park
wants
to
do
short-term
rentals,
you
know
we
see
look
at
the
communities
that
have
short-term
rentals.
These
blighted
properties
get
improved
all
the
time.
If
rv
parks,
people
don't
rent
dumps,
they
just
don't
they
go
on
and
they
compare
property
to
property.
K
I
think
mobile
home,
especially
if
somebody
wanted
to
improve
their
blighted
mobile
home
park
for
short-term
rentals.
That
would
be
a
a
net
gain
for,
for
for
mississippi
I
mean
for
biloxi.
Excuse
me
we'd
all
benefit
from
that
having
an
improved
neighborhood
having
more
money
flowing
in
the
community.
K
I
I
just
think
that
we're
missing
the
mark
on
this
and
I'm
not
sure
why,
unless
it's
just
to
prevent
certain
people
from
doing
certain
things
and
and
then
I'd
have
to
vote
against
the
ordinance
in
general,
because
I
think
it's
it's
on
a
principal
basis
that
violates
a
principle
basis
of
my
own
mobile
home
parks.
Rv
parks
are
designed
for
short-term
rentals,
so
to
restrict
who
can
rent
to
who,
in
that
mobile
home
is
is
is
absurd.
I
think
that
we're
restricting
the.
L
The
just
just
some
of
the
thinking
behind
the
ordinance
you
know
the
ordinance
already
prohibits
boats
and
our
ports
and
harbors
from
being
used
for
short-term
rental,
again
you're
you're,
turning
that
rv,
if
it's
an
rv
that
you
own
or
that
or
that
you
live
in
then
you're
familiar
with
that
that
vehicle
you
know
about
it,
but
when
you
take
it
and
you
turn
it
into
a
hotel
room
and
you
have
people
coming
in,
that's
not
familiar
with
it.
L
It's
it's
a
little
bit
more
difficult.
You
know
the
we
have
to
go
out
and
inspect
it
for
safety.
The
fire
department
has
to
go
out
and
inspect
it
before
we
issue
a
permit
for
them
to
use
it
for
short-term
rental.
So
it's
just
that
the
the
safety
of
the
structure.
K
Those
people
are
very
rigid
themselves
with
with
their
processes
and
require
licensing
and
people
compare
and
people
rates
and
and
they
get
they
get
disqualified
off
these
sites
and
they
get
disqualified
all
these
sites
as
users
of
the
sites
too,
if
they
get
bad
reviews
from
renters,
are
from
from
the
the
people
that
rent
the
the
structures
of
whatever
kind
it
is,
and
so
I
just
I
just
think
we're
limiting
economic
opportunity
here
and
we're
basing
it
off
of.
K
K
I
don't
I
don't.
I
won't
disagree
with
that,
but
it's
irrelevant
to
the
argument:
unless
we're
going
to
start
limiting
people
from
living
in
rvs
and
mobile
homes,
because
it
doesn't
matter
who's,
the
person
in
the
home
he's
still
a
person
in
a
home
or
an
rv,
and
as
soon
as
I
buy
an
rv,
it's
the
first
time
I've
ever
been
in
it
right
it.
K
I
don't
think
that
that
people
are
so
out
of
touch
with
what
they're
doing
that,
because
they
haven't
lived
in
this
rv
for
a
long
time
that
they
won't
know
what
to
do
or
how
to
handle
themselves
within
an
rv.
They
wouldn't
be
renting
an
rv
on
a
short-term
basis
if
they
weren't
familiar
with
the
rv
itself
or
with
an
rv
situation
or
system
itself.
So
I
just
I
can't
support
it.
K
J
Also,
if
you
have
to
send
someone
out
to
check
it
out,
then
if
it's
not
meeting
your
standards,
you
could
also
at
that
point
say
this
one
we
do
not
approve
and
whether
we
approve
it
or
not.
If
people
are
going
to
do
it
behind
the
books,
then
they're
going
to
do
regardless.
So
we
would
at
least
like
to
be
an
up
and
up
with
them
and
send
someone
out
to
check
it
and
say
yeah.
This
one
doesn't
meet
the
standards
or
it
does,
and
maybe
you
can
get
it
to
the
standards
yeah.
A
A
couple
of
comments,
I'm
assuming
probably
the
best
information
you
could
get
about
safety
and
short-term
rentals,
and
I
guess
how
prevalent
or
or
whether
the
nice
ones
stay
in
business
and
the
the
ones
that
aren't
well
maintained.
Don't
stay
in
business
probably
would
be
from
airbnb
and
vrbo.
F
L
A
E
Lawrence
yeah,
I
do
the
people
that
live
in
the
mobile
homes
and
these
parks,
90
of
them,
live
there
every
day
and
the
people
that
come
in
and
out
for
a
weekend,
you're
talking
about
two
different
worlds:
nobody's
renting
that
trailer,
short-term
rentals
those
people
live
in
those
trailers
and
a
lot
of
people
to
majestic
oaks
up
there
to
park
whatever
it
is.
E
They
don't
want
short-term
rentals
in
it,
because
it's
just
like
a
neighborhood,
the
majority
of
people,
probably
90
percent
of
them,
live
there
full-time
and
that's
their
home,
and
they
don't
want
people
just
coming
in
and
out
so
I
mean
I
I
disagree
with
robert
on
that
I
mean
I
just
think:
that's
no
different
in
the
neighborhood,
the
people
that
live
there,
I
mean
you
go
checking
how
many
people
actually
live.
There
live
there
full
time.
I.
L
E
I
don't,
in
fact
I
think
we
spend
more
time
with
short-term
rentals
than
anything
we've
been
doing
like
that
and
they're
not
getting
the
city
anything.
It's
just
another
expense.
You
can't
prove
we're.
Gonna
get
a
penny
from
nothing.
We
never
know
where
we
get
paid
from
anybody
hey,
b
and
b,
where
they
all
they
get
all
the
money
we
ever
get
it
from
them.
E
Who
knows
we
don't
know
if
they
can't
prove
we
get
the
money
back
and
that's
supposed
to
be
a
commercial
piece
of
property,
then
he's
going
to
charge
more
for
the
water.
We
don't
want
to
do
that,
and
this
is
all
the
rules
we
have
in
place
for
short-term
rentals
and
we
don't
follow
on
our
own
rules
and
then
the
final
department
got
to
go
check
them
the
whole
time
once
a
year.
E
That's
just
another
expense
for
the
city,
and
I
don't
know
we
gained
short
term
other
than
those
discussions
every
week
for
an
hour
and
a
half.
So
I
mean
I
don't
see
where
we're
going
with
that
with
the
short-term
world.
It's
not
doing
you
need
neighborhoods,
you
need
people
living
there.
I
think
it'd
be
a
town,
you
don't
build
a
town
or
a
short-term
rental.
A
L
Exactly
we're
doing
this
is
century
oaks.
It's
located
just
west
of
lucky's
furniture
and
the
majority
of
their
property
is
already
zoned
rmh.
They
have
a
small
portion,
they
own
in
the
front.
That's
owned,
nb
right
now,
and
all
they're
asking
to
do
is
for
a
a
strip
of
that
property
in
the
front
to
be
rezoned
rmh
to
go
along
with
the
rest
of
the
park.
This
is
there's
no
issue
here.
It's
they're
not
adding
to
the
park
or
anything
else,
they're,
just
changing
the
part
of
their
zoning
to
rmh
again.
L
My
guess
is,
it
has
something
to
do
with
financing
either
they're
getting
ready
to
sell
the
park,
and
the
park
does
not
want
to
splits
on
a
piece
of
property
or
they're.
Trying
to
get
financing
and
and
the
bank
would
rather
have
them
all
be
zoned
the
same
way,
rather
than
have
split.
Zoning.
F
L
Nothing
on
it
right
now,
but
there
is
a
part
of
that
nb
zone
property
where
they
already
have
manufactured
homes
there
so
split
zoning
is,
is
not
something
that
planning
departments
like
to
see.
It's.
We
like
to
clean
these
things
up,
but
this
was
their
request.
So
that's
why
I
say
that
my
guess
is
they're,
probably
getting
it
ready
to
either
sell
the
park
or
refinance
it.
J
E
You
got
to
be
kidding
me.
We
just
passed
something
for
short-term
rentals.
It
won't
take
them
that
long
to
take
them
in
there
once
you
do
that,
you're
done
again
all
that
nice
seeing
your
park
and
all
of
that.
That's
not
the
purpose
of
this
and
nothing
new
at
the
bank.
You
already
took
km
on
the
first
one,
so
you
want
to
turn
the
whole
city
blocks
in
the
short.
A
A
A
I
see
the
I
made
the
motion
and
it
was
seconded
by
mr
geins
a
couple
of
questions
mr
creel
up
front,
and
I
think
I
asked
this
last
time,
but
I
can't
recall
what
the
answer
was
somewhere
along.
A
L
I'll
have
to
check
on
that,
mr
tisdale,
okay,
I'll.
A
L
L
L
All
commercial
projects
and
all
newly
proposed
subdivisions
would
be
required
to
replace
at
two
to
one
for
every
tree
that
they've
removed
we've
added
in
the
language
where,
if
you
remove
a
protected
tree,
you
have
to
replace
it
with
a
protected
tree.
That
was
another
concern
of
the
tree
committee.
So
that's
in
this
proposed
ordinance,
we've
added
the
mitigation
trust
which
is,
is
what
I
just
mentioned.
Where
we
can,
if
it's
approved,
then
we
can
offer
that
developer
the
option
of
paying
into
the
trust,
rather
than
replacing
the
trees
on
their
own
piece
of
property.
L
If
there's
not
room
for
it
now
all
of
those
things
we've
added
in
just
as
we
discussed
last
week,
you
have
two
options
before
you
tonight
option.
A
would
would
go
one
step
further.
It
would
require
the
private
homeowner
that
removes
the
tree
on
their
piece
of
property
to
be
required
to
mitigate
and
option
b
would
exempt
the
private
homeowner
from
having
to
mitigate
other
than
that.
Both
of
these
options
are
exactly
the
same.
A
B
L
L
So
what
option
a
would
do
is
if,
if
you
or
I
own
our
privately
owned
piece
of
property,
where
we
have
an
existing
house,
if
we
remove
a
tree
from
that
property
option,
a
would
require
us
to
go
back
and
mitigate
that
tree
at
two
to
one.
But
option
b
would
exempt
private
lots.
You
know
homeowners
from
having
to
do
that.
L
It
would
if
the
bank
is
approved,
then
the
private
owner
could
pay
into
the
trust,
just
like
the
other
developments
would
do.
E
L
E
L
A
Any
other
questions
I
I
have
a
question.
Okay,
we
were
looking
at
a
scaled
mitigation
ratio
earlier,
you
said,
that's
been
taken
out
and
it's
now
proposed
as
a
two
to
one
ratio
for
mitigation
purposes.
L
Two
to
one
across
the
board,
based
on
our
conversation
last
week,
that
with
two
to
one
we
would
be
doubling
what
the
cities
around
us
are.
Requiring
ocean
springs
gulfport,
the
iberville.
All
of
them
require
mitigation
at
one
to
one.
We
would
be
requiring
it
two
to
one
right.
A
The
scaled
mitigation
actually
is
what
I
preferred,
because
the
ratio
changes
based
on
the
size
of
those
protected
trees
that
you're
removing,
if
it's
two
to
one
across
the
board,
as
is
currently
proposed.
If
I'm
taking
out
a
tree,
that's
28
inches
36
inches
in
diameter.
I'm
purchasing
two
mitigation
trees,
whereas.
L
The
trade-off
for
that
would
be
the
trade-off,
for
that
would
be
the
people
that
are
removing
smaller
trees
that
are
replacing
it
two
to
one.
So
you
would
get
that
balance
that
we're
looking
for,
rather
than
making
making
it
cumbersome
on
the
one
person.
That's
removing
a
tree
you'll
be
getting
fewer
trees
on
the
person
that
removes
a
larger
tree,
but
you'd
be
getting
more
trees
based
on
the
people
that
are
removing
the
smaller
trees.
A
Right,
but
there
is
much
less
protection
in
terms
of
protection
for
larger
established
trees,
simply
because
I
can
remove
a
big
tree
for
the
cost
of
two
small
trees
or
it
and
under
the
scaled
version,
I
think,
is
what
was
proposed
based
on
the
the
diameter
of
the
tree
that
was
being
removed.
It
would
have
been
up
to
five
or
six
trees
based
on
the
diameter
of
those
protected
trees.
That's
what
I
prefer.
A
That's
what
I'd
like
to
see
in
this
measure,
but
it's,
but
I
just
wanted
to
be
clear
that
was
taken
out
and
you're
looking
just
at
a
two
to
one
ratio
right
now,.
L
L
So
in
essence,
what's
happening,
they're,
paying
on
a
12
to
one
ratio
for
the
one
tree
that
was
removed
because
the
two
paying
the
two
to
one,
in
addition
to
replacing
two
to
one
that
cost
is
doubled
in
order
to
pay
in
case
we
have
to
do
the
installation
or
if
there
has
to
be
a
sprinkler
system
in
there.
So
we
just
think
the
the
six
to
one
or
the
twelve
to
one
ratio
is
excessive
and
we
think
that
this
is
reasonable.
That's
the
reason
we
proposed
it.
I
have.
A
A
lot
of
not
everybody
knocking
at
my
door
every
day,
but
a
number
of
people
who
said
you
know
fair
hope.
Alabama
is
just
a
nice
little
place
if
you
want
to
model
yourself
for
beautification
purposes,
fair
hope's,
a
good
place
to
look
for,
and
thanks
to
miss
wyman.
I
think
she
did
the
research
if,
if
you
replace
a
tree,
five
inches
to
nine
inches
five
to
ten
inches,
basically
a
protected
tree
over
there,
you
pay
500
bucks.
A
So
what
I'd
like
to
point
out
is
and
I'll
go
back
to
my
my
point
in
all
of
this
is
if
you're
going
to
protect
these
older
trees,
we
need
to
do
a
good
job
of
protecting
them.
The
second
thing
is,
if
you
want
to
see
a
canopy
like
we
used
to
have
when
some
of
us
were
growing
up
or
even
before
the
last
hurricane
somebody
has
to
bear
the
cost
of
that
or
you
won't
have
a
canopy.
A
Now
this
mitigation
bank-
and,
as
I
recall
I
I
had
mentioned
it
up
front-
I
just
thought:
if
you're
mitigating
this
would
be
great
for
developers
to
write
a
check
put
it
in
there.
We
can
put
the
trees
where
we
need
them,
but
at
a
ratio
of
two
to
one
I
don't
think
we're
doing
enough
to
protect
these
big
protected
trees,
and
I
I
worry
about
that
going
forward.
That's
that's
all
I'll
say
on
this
topic.
I
would
offer
and
go
ahead.
K
Fair
hope,
alabama
is
a
completely
different
scenario:
they're
21
000
people
and
in
2010
census
there
were
22
thousand
people,
so
they're
contracting.
They
have
a
very
restrictive
tree
ordinance
and
I'm
not
saying
that's
why
they're
contracting,
but
I'm
not
saying
that's
why
they're
not
contracting?
Why
that's
not
not
why
they're
contracting
you
follow
me
in
again.
K
The
observation
of
the
seven
cities,
with
the
with
these
extremely
convoluted
tree
ordinances,
was
hand
selected
out
of
literally
thousands
of
cities
in
the
southeast,
and
my
question
is:
why
were
these
selected
because
they're
more
convoluted
than
what
we're
proposing
or
is
it
because
we're
losing
development
to
those
areas?
I
think
that's
really
what
we
should
be
worried
about.
The
people
that
we're
losing
development
to
are
the
city
is
right
around
us
and
their
their
three
mitigation
requirements
are
one
to
one
so
literally
twice
as
weak
as
ours.
K
I
would
say
if
we
talk
about
that,
we're
talking
about
as
as,
if
we're
winning,
but
I
think
developers
would
talk
about
that
as
if
we're
losing
and
so
so
that
that
does
strike
a
chord
for
me
that
we're
going
in
the
wrong
direction
when
it
comes
to
development.
K
I
know
I
might
be
the
guy
that
hates
trees
and
if
I
was
famous,
then
they
would
have
little
caricatures
of
me
burning
down
trees
and
making
paper
out
of
them
and
printing
money
on
them,
because
that's
like
all
I
care
about,
I
guess,
but
that's
not
the
truth.
The
truth
is,
though
we
have.
We
have
the
intention
of
doing
exactly
what
this
document
says.
What's
the
ordinance,
what
this
ordinance
should
do-
and
it
says
incentivize,
preserving,
live
oaks.
Well,
a
one-to-one
does
that
it
preserves
them.
K
If
one
comes
out,
one
goes
back
in
preserves
it
replace
protected
trees.
Well,
if
one
comes
out,
one
goes
in
we're
not
replacing
protective
trees,
we're
adding
more
protected
trees.
So
so
the
language
is
incorrect.
Here
I
think
what
we
should
be
doing
is
is
putting
the
onus
on
putting
back
what
we
take
out.
K
Just
do
what
they
should
do,
which
is
take
one
out
put
one
back,
I'm
in
favor
of
what
all
the
cities
around
us
are
doing
one-to-one,
because
that's
how
we
keep
our
competitive
advantage
coming
to
biloxi
is
better
than
going
to
d'iberville
coming
to
biloxi
is
better
than
going
to
gulfport,
but
it's
not
if
they
have
to
work
so
much
harder
to
get
here,
and
so
I
get
that
this
is
a
little
less
restricted
than
what
was
originally
proposed.
I
would
like
to
see
it
be
even
less
restrictive.
That's
all!
I
have
doc.
A
Thank
you.
Anybody
else
to
comment.
I
would
offer
an
amendment
that,
rather
than
the
mitigation
ratio
of
two
to
one
I'd,
offer
an
amendment
to
revert
back
to
the
scaled
mitigation
ratio
that
was
originally
presented.
I'll
make
that
motion
is
there
a
second.
A
If
it's
lucky
or
until
the
next
council
comes
along
and
perhaps
doesn't
wait
with
the
mitigation
ratio
entirely,
because
the
other
cities
are
doing
away
with
the
mitigation,
radio
ratios
just
a
thought,
there's
a
motion
in
a
second
to
amend
it
to
a
one-on-one
ratio.
The
motion
by
mr
deming
second
by
miss
newman
any
other
discussion
all
in
favor
of
that
ratio
all
opposed.
A
There
being
no
there
being
no
further
discussion
on
this,
I
think
mr
creel,
you
said
there's
one
thing:
we
still
have
to
decide
well,.
A
This
this
is
for
the
residential
homeowner
who
who's
not
a
developer.
Homeowner
wants
to
remove
an
oak
tree.
Do
they
mitigate
or
not
that's
option
a
yes,
okay
wondering
how
to
proceed
on
this
point.
A
H
A
Okay,
well,
the
only
thing
is:
there's
there's
still
a
decision.
We
have
to
make
whether
it's
option
a
or
option
b
and
and
I'll
go
ahead
and
make
that
motion
now
that
we
approve
this
and
and
and
option
a
as
noted
for
residential
property
owners,
that
is,
they
would
be
required
to
mitigate
two
to
one.
A
Any
discussion
on
that
and
to
be
clear
jerry
what
this
means
is,
I'm
a
homeowner.
I
want
to
go
out
and
cut
down
that
oak
tree
and
go
cut
it
down
tomorrow.
Well,
you
come
get
a
permit.
You
have
to
get
a
permit.
Even
though
there's
there's
no
mitigation,
you
still
have
to
go
to
the
community
development
office
or
download
it
online.
Protect.
A
A
O
H
A
L
A
E
Yeah
I'm
going
back
to
the
fine
street
thing
20
years
ago.
We
did
the
exact
same
thing
at
that
time,
though
ferraro
was
putting
up
7
million.
We
had
a
grant
for
5
million.
Now
you
stopping
before
you
get
the
property,
it
was
22
million
to
do
that.
What
is
the
cost.
C
Not
crossing
that's
what
that's
where
the
5
million
grand
was
titled
at
the
time
the
owner
was
supposed
to
come
up
with
seven
million.
We
were
supposed
to
put
a
four-lane
boulevard
that
would
cost
17
million.
This
is
a
whining
widening
of
that
thing,
two-fifth
street,
as
well
as
inclusive
of
some
of
the
things
that
we're
going
to
do
at
highway,
9.
two
different
animals,
a
whole
different
structure,
we'll
have
a
third
lane
on
fine
street.
We'll
get
some
credit.
C
I
think,
with
the
work
that's
going
on
now
with
the
fema
project
to
offset
some
of
that
cost.
So
it's
it's
going
to
give
give
us
a
better
access
with
a
bridge
around
the
low
area
right
to
the
east
of
the
warehouse.
I
think
that
palace
owns
so
apples
and
oranges
at
this
point,
but
we're
thinking
it's
going
to
be
a
total,
including
raising
the
intersection
at
howard,
avenue
and
pine
street
up.
So
you
know
the
flooding
that
takes
place.
C
I
think
that's
a
whole
is
a
bowl
right
there
and
we
we
did
a
little
bit
on
first
street.
I
think
walt
waltz
here
and
the
proposal
is
to
see
if
we
can
get
it
even
higher
at.
E
C
And
we're
hopeful
that
we
get
something,
that's
a
lot
of
money,
but
it
costs
a
lot
of
money
to
to
do
anything
to
streets.
But
basically
we
raise
the
first
street
at
pine
street
we're
going
to
raise
howard
avenue
at
pine
street.
So
you
don't
have
to
get
isolated
if
you're
at
your
your
property
and
trying
to
go
east
so
there's
a
whole
lot
of
development
opportunities.
C
The
original
things
that
are
going
in
the
amusement
park,
as
well
as
some
of
the
possibilities,
that's
going
to
happen
just
north
of
margaritaville,
the
the
beach
indoor
water
park,
as
well
as
some
of
the
things
that
margarita
built
the
original
fishery
margaritas
as
far
as
development
opportunities
about
364
million
dollars
on
on
that
and
that
that
spot
is
what's
talked
about.
E
C
Hopefully,
three
or
four
feet
and
again
the
gulf
regional
planning,
commission
and
some
of
these
other
folks
have
talked
to
us
about
the
ability
to
tie
in
and
we
you
know
you
know.
I've
talked
about
the
exit
from
ocean
from
the
bleux
ocean
springs
bridge
to
howard
avenue
and
keeping
that
at
a
grade
such
that
the
water
will
not.
When
you
know
and
high
tide,
billary
will
tell
you
why
the
reason
even
high
tide
water
backs
up
through
there.
E
E
I
understand
where
we're
going
to
spend
that
kind
of
money,
and
I
don't
know
I
know
development
margaritaville,
they're
doing
quite
well
on
both
sides
of
the
street.
I
just
don't
quite
get
the
raising
the
street
and
that
much
money
to
widen
time
street
that
don't
go
anywhere
runs
on
side
of
harris
and
it
runs
right
to
the
railroad
track.
I
mean
I
don't.
C
C
E
E
F
A
A
A
Again,
this
is
put
on
a
little
late,
I'd
like
to
know
more
information
and
I'd
like
to
look
at
exactly
and
I'm
sure,
there's
a
reason
for
for
why
the
mayor
wants
to
do
this,
but
I'd
like
to
spend
some
time
if
y'all
are
meeting
sometime
in
the
near
future.
I'd
like
to
sit
down
and
look
at
that
as
well.
K
E
A
Okay,
all
in
favor
of
the
consent
agenda
is
presented
and
we'll
come
back
for
exceptions
bless
you
all
right.
It's
approved
on
a
5-0
vote,
any
exceptions
other
than
5h
and
5i,
which
were
tabled.
Mr
lawrence,
any
exceptions,
miss
newman
any
exceptions.
Mr
deming,
mr
barrett.
Ok,
there
being
none
we'll
move
to
code
enforcement
hearings,
mr
creel.
L
A
A
L
Is
this
would
be
south
of
the
gate?
It's
just
down
from
the
house
that
we
just
tore
down
at
367.
A
A
P
P
Money
coming
in
councilman,
I
know
past
couple
meetings.
First,
it
started
at
1.5
million
and
then
I
think
at
the
last
meeting
I
reported
mima
was
looking
to
submit
to
us
1.9.
But
since
then
it's
going
to
take
a
little
bit
longer
because
there's
an
additional
490
000.
They
want
to
add
to
that
and
get
one
big
trunk.
P
So
we're
looking
at
2.474
million.
It's
gonna
take
a
few
more
weeks
to
get
it
to
us,
but
it's
close
to
an
additional
half
million.
So
I
decided
that'd
be
a
good.