![youtube image](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/pqFA-Jwlarg/mqdefault.jpg)
►
From YouTube: Board of Commissioners 7-6-22
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
B
A
D
Yes,
I'm
going
to
do
that.
Anyone
that's
going
to
speak
tonight
on
this
evidentiary
portion
of
the
motion.
If
you
could
please
stand
up,
raise
your
right
hand,
I'm
going
to
go
ahead
and
swear
you're
under
oath
anyone.
That's
going
to
speak
tonight
appreciate
your
cooperation.
You
swear.
The
testimony
you're
going
to
give
tonight
is
going
to
be
the
truth,
the
whole
truth
and
nothing
but
the
truth.
A
Another
announcement,
Mr
dagnall,
our
attorney
in
court-
is
not
going
to
be
with
us
this
evening.
Also
I
want
to
just
mention
the
documents
that
we
received
today
and
try
and
dispose
of
those
early
on.
We
receive
concerned
citizen
of
Tarpon
Springs
motions
for
clarification
in
Morgan's
response
to
that
clarification
submitted
by
Ms
Graham
in
her
email
dated
July
5th
at
12,
10
pm
and
Mr
McLaren's
email
dated
July
6th
at
3
23
pm,
respectively
into
consideration
and
I'm,
going
to
just
state
that
we're
going
to
include
that
in
consideration.
A
A
A
E
E
E
Mr
Mayor
members
of
the
commission,
as
stated
in
our
papers,
We
Believe
concerned,
citizens
will
seek
to
prevent
the
issuance
of
a
mandate
after
the
circuit
court
rules.
We
believe
it
will
rule
in
our
favor.
Also,
you
know
the
the
circuit
court
hasn't
ruled.
Sometimes
it
takes
months
for
the
Circuit
Court
to
rule,
so
that
needs
to
be
taken
into
consideration.
I'm,
aware
of
a
petition
for
certiorari
that
has
been
filed
with
this
same
appellate
panel,
that
has
been
fully
briefed
since
February
and
it's
not
yet
been
ruled
upon.
E
As
as
presented
last
time,
we
believe
that,
at
a
minimum
the
stay
sought
by
concerned
citizens
will
last
between
18
months
and
24
months
at
a
minimum.
Additionally,
as
indicated
previously,
the
4.25
percent
interest
rate
that
we're
utilizing
in
our
calculations
is
pursuant
to
Florida
Statutes.
That's
the
statutory
interest
rate
and
I
I
put
on
the
board
for
consideration,
a
document
that
we
submitted
back
in
June.
You
can
see
it's
the
the
that's
it
utilizes,
both
that
statutory
interest
rate,
as
well
as
a
forecasted
profit
amount
and
the
the
18
months.
G
Or
the
Rules
of
Evidence,
this
is
a
chart
and
they
haven't
provided
Originals
or
duplicates
of
the
data
from
which
the
summary
is
compiled.
It
hasn't
been
made
open
for
examination,
copying
or
both
at
a
reasonable
time
or
place
so.
A
G
Yes,
thank
you.
Mayor
I
am
objecting
to
the
inclusion
of
this
chart
into
evidence.
It
violates
90-956
of
the
Florida
evidence
code,
it's
a
chart.
They
haven't
provided
Originals
or
duplicates
of
the
data
on
which
the
information
is
based
and
it
hasn't
been
provided
at
a
reasonable
time
or
place.
So
it's
there's,
there's
no
foundation
for
this.
Thank.
A
B
H
A
A
E
F
I
grew
up
in
Tampa,
Bay
I
went
to
Florida
State
University
and
received
a
bachelor's
in
real
estate
and
finance.
They
were,
after
thereafter,
I
received
my
realtor's
license
and
held
that
for
a
period
of
time
and
have
since
been
involved
in
the
acquisition
disposition
or
development
of
a
billion
dollars
of
real
estate.
Mostly
apartments
and
I,
currently
oversee
half
a
billion
dollars
worth
of
apartment
development
in
Florida.
F
F
Just
for
clarification,
our
contract
with
the
land
seller
is
wall,
it's
Walmart
and
that's
as
of
November
of
2018..
All.
E
E
And
is
that
reflected
here
on
this
chart
where
it
says
cost
basis
your.
E
Right
there,
93
956,
968
right,
correct,
okay
and
those
were
developed
that
developed
number
was
developed
before
the
decision
was
made
and
before
there
was
any
dispute
with
concerned
citizens
or
anyone
about
this
project.
Is
that
right,
correct
and
you
made
decisions
based
upon
that
estimate?
Correct
now,
you'll
see
on
this
chart
the
word
average
margin.
Do
you
see
that
I
do?
What
does
that
word
mean.
F
Well,
I'm
going
to
parse
it
margin
is
the
difference
between
total
revenues
and
total
development
costs
on
a
project.
So
if
you
have
a
project
that
has
150
of
revenues
and
the
total
cost
of
that
project
is
a
hundred
dollars,
the
difference
is
that
fifty
dollars
and
we
normally
stated
as
a
percentage
so
in
that
instance,
it
would
be
50-
would
be
the
margin
on
a
specific
deal.
Average
margin
is
the
average
of
multiple
margins.
E
So
it's
really
a
profit
margin
right,
correct!
Okay,
are
you
familiar
with
Morgan
group's
profit
margin,
I.
F
E
And
what
is
the
profit
margin
for
Morgan
group
as
depicted
on
this
chart?
We.
F
E
Right,
sir,
and
using
the
average
margin
and
the
project
total
projected
development
costs
for
this
project,
did
you
come
to
a
projected
profit
to
be
earned
on
the
project?
Yes,.
F
E
Right,
sir,
now,
given
the
stay,
will
Morgan's
receipt
of
those
projected
funds
be
delayed
in
your
opinion,.
F
E
Life
all
right
and
using
the
4.25
statutory
interest
rate
and
the
18
months
delay
that
I
described.
Did
you
come
to
a
projected
loss
associated
with
the
delay
in
your
receipt
of
those
profits.
F
E
All
right,
sir,
now,
if,
if
something
happens
during
the
period
of
the
stay
that
prevents
Morgan
from
developing
the
prop
the
project
and
the
stay
is
ultimately
determined
to
be
the
reason
for
the
project
not
being
developed,
can
you
talk
about
what
damages
Morgan
would
suffer
as
a
result
of
this
day,
I.
F
Can
to
date
we
have
spent
over
3.6
million
dollars
in
design
and
consultant
fees
for
this
project,
putting
forth
an
incredibly
thorough
application
to
the
city
and
other
governmental
agencies.
We
would
also
have
a
loss
of
the
44
million
eight
hundred
and
nine
thousand
one
hundred
and
sixteen
dollars,
and
we
would
also
have
the
loss
of
the
delayed
damages
amount
of
two
million
eight
hundred
fifty
six
thousand
five.
Eighty
one.
The
sum
of
those
figures
is
51
million,
265
697
dollars
all.
E
Right,
sir,
let's,
let's
step
back
a
minute
when
you
look
at
the
total
projected
value
of
the
project,
which
would
be
the
the
projected
cost,
plus
the
projected
profit,
what
it?
What
what
project
value
does
that
provide.
F
We
have
submitted
comparables
sales
comparables
to
the
city
and
the
sales
comparables
have
an
average
sales
value
per
unit,
which
is
how
things
are
compared
of
three
hundred
sixty
nine
thousand
eight
twenty
nine.
Now
the
sales
comparables
that
we
submitted
are
deals
all
within
the
Tampa
Bay
Area.
There
are
deals
that
have
traded
in
the
last
six
months.
They
are
all
of
similar
construction
type
to
ours,
three
or
four
story
apartment
buildings.
E
And
are
these
sales
comparables
that
are
on
the
second
page
of
this
submission
that
that
was
made
on
on
June,
21st
or
those
are
comparables?
You
used
correct.
F
There
are
for
their
tapestry
Lake,
Park
and
Lutz
built
in
2016,
that's
177
unit
apartment,
building
that
sold
for
355
932e
unit
in
June
of
22.
Ulta
Clearwater
and
Clearwater
2021
build
314
units
that
sold
in
December
of
21
for
one
million
100
250,
which
is
370
000
223
unit
Bainbridge,
Sun,
Lake
and
Lando
Lakes
2001
build
268
units
in
total,
340
000
a
unit
and
then
Santos
flats
and
Brandon
2021,
build
296
units
and
that
sold
for
404
730
a
unit
I
think
that's
more
indicative
of
where
the
Market's
headed
from
a
valuation
perspective.
F
E
Sir,
thank
you
Mr
salami.
Did
you
use
this
to
check
the
the
values
that
you've
asked
this
shrub
unifor
in
terms
of
a
bond,
and
is
that
your
testimony
this
evening,
I.
A
Mayor
and
Mr,
commissioner,
thank
you
if
y'all
could
just
stay
there.
The
commission
is
allowed
to
ask
questions
at
this
point
and
do
I
have
any
takers.
A
I've
got
some
questions
or
a
couple
of
them
anyway,
the
time
frame
for
the
let
me
put
my
glasses
on
the
time
frame
for
the
calculations.
As
far
as
the
value
of
the
project
was
made,
the
in
your
decision
making
process
was
when
early
on
three
years
ago,
five
years
ago,
or
can
you
recall.
F
A
A
E
F
A
I
A
A
And
as
far
as
your
I
know,
this
doesn't
go
into
the
calculation,
but
your
engineering
cost
to
date.
Do
you
have
a
feel
for.
F
A
Fine,
thank
you.
That's
all
I
have
now
we
give
Ms
Graham
an
opportunity
to
cross-examine
commissioner
mayor.
A
Have
oh
I'm
sorry,
commissioner:
kulias.
K
B
F
K
F
F
Site
work
is
an
ongoing
process
throughout
the
life
of
the
construction
of
the
project.
But,
generally
speaking,
you
know
it's,
let's
say
18
months
to
24
months
worth
of
site
work.
F
K
Last
Tuesday
Mr
McLaren
stated
that
this
is
truly
unprecedented.
If
the
state
was
granted,
then
we
being
Morgan
group
are
being
treated
different
than
any
other
rezone
application.
That's
had
an
application
approved
in
the
city
of
Tarpon
Springs.
This
means
we
are
being
singled
out
and
beaded
being
treated
differently.
Correct.
E
Can
testify
to
that
yeah
that
that's
what
I
said?
There's
never
been
to
my
knowledge,
another
rezoning
applicant
who's,
whose
approvals
were
stayed
by
this
Commission.
E
Yes,
it
is,
we
are
truly
being
treated
differently
than
any
other
rezoning
applicant
in
the
history
of
Tarpon
Springs.
To
my
knowledge,.
K
F
K
F
F
F
The
only
face,
that's
really
coming
to
mind,
is
Mark
I,
remember,
meeting
with
Mark
and
I
think
maybe
Heather
was
there.
Let's
have
it
I,
don't
recall,
I'm,
sorry,
I'm
not
going
to
guess
I,
don't
recall
who
was
there.
B
K
Were
there
any
Board
of
Commissioners
that
was
notified
about
this
project
from
2018
leading
up
to
the
TRC
meeting
of
the
project
back
in
2020.
I.
K
E
Have
a
term
I
I
I
have
to
object
to
that
I
mean
we
were
given
no
notice
that
this
witness
was
going
to
be
asked.
Questions
about.
You
know
purported
meetings
with
the
city
commission
that
may
or
may
not
have
ever
occurred.
The
email
that
we
received
yesterday
asked
for
Cindy
tarapani
to
appear
yesterday.
She
has
a
conflict,
cannot
be
here,
and
you
know
there
was
no
indication
that
the
question
was
about
phases
of
the
project.
This
is
not
a
phased
project.
E
A
Cool
yeah,
let
me
just
say,
Mr
McLaren,
I
I,
know
it's
your
objection
for
the
record.
Thank
you.
Mr.
K
K
F
F
K
F
F
I,
because
we
think
that
the
land
planner
I
don't
even
buy
site
planner
I'm
gonna
refer
to
the
land
planner.
The
land.
Planner
is
a
highly
qualified
individual.
F
F
All
right
I'm
having
this,
what
I
do
recall
is
when
I
was
notified
of
this.
You
know,
conflict
I
was
disappointed.
You
know
think
about
it.
From
my
perspective,
you
have
you
know
a
certain
amount
of
votes
that
can
vote
on
a
project
right
and
if
one
now
has
to
accuse
themselves
and
can
no
longer
be
there
just
this
situation
generally
speaking
any
situation,
it's
less
than
ideal.
F
K
F
F
F
What
influence
there's
none
there?
If
anything,
I
will
tell
you
the
terrapannies
are
a
champion
of
this
city
and
I.
Think
they've
done
a
lot
for
it.
That's
my
opinion,
may
not
be
others,
but
I
think
the
city
owes
them
a
lot.
They've
got
a
long
family
lineage
in
the
city,
and
you
know
it
and
it's
not
hard
work.
It's
volunteer
work.
What
you're
doing
right
time
out
of
your
day,
you
should
respect
that,
but.
J
I
listened
to
the
YouTube
I,
don't
have
a
court
stenographer,
so
I
just
want
to
repeat
some
of
the
things
that
you've
said
and
just
follow
with
me,
and
if
these
were
things
you
said
I'd
like
you
to
explain
it
at
the
end,
so
you
said
that
you've
done
the
fdot,
the
Swift
Mud,
everything
is
approved
and
you
can
get
a
permit
any
day.
J
E
The
fdot
permit,
I,
believe
your
language
was
was
was
done.
E
I
think
that
I
said
that
the
that
we
have
received
two
fdot
permits
an
access
permit
and
a
utility
permit,
and
that
there
was
a
third
fdot
permit,
which
is
a
drainage
permit
and
all
the
the
application
is
final
and
we're
waiting
on
a
on
on
an
approval
that
could
happen
at
any
moment.
J
E
No
I,
don't
think
that's
correct.
I,
never
said
all
the
permits
have
been
done.
What
I
said,
commissioner
Eisner
is
that
the
Army
Corps
permit
have
been
completely
applied
for
and
where
we
were
waiting
on
an
approval
from
the
Army
Corps
any
day
and
in
fact
we
received
that
permit
on
June,
29th
and
I
sent
it
to
the
commission
yesterday.
So
what
I
said
then
and
I
said
say
again
now
is
that
I
we
had
prepared
all
the
permits
and
we
were
waiting
on
an
approval
which
we
actually
did
receive
one
day
after
the
hearing.
E
What
I
also
indicated
was
that
we
believed
our
our
our
application
for
the
Swift
Mud
permit
was
complete,
I.
Think,
three
days
after
the
hearing,
we
received
some
questions
from
Swift
Mud.
We
have
now
responded
to
those
questions,
and
so
again
we
believe
we
have
answered
all
the
questions
of
swiftbutt.
Our
application
is
final
and
we
are
waiting
on
an
approval.
J
E
J
E
Question
the
permit
was
for
off-site
improvement.
The
the
corps
of
engineer
does
not
have
jurisdiction
over
any
on-site
Wetlands,
so
the
off-site
permit
is
all
we
needed
to
get
and
that's
exactly
what
we
did
get.
E
Okay,
so
are
you
providing
evidence
based
on
your
own
investigation
in
this
hearing,
commissioner
Eisner.
J
I
just
am
telling
you
that
what
they
said
is
not
what
you
said
and
if
I
have
to
speak
about
as
stay
and
also
about
delays
on
what
it
can
cost
I
have
to
understand
that
you've
done
what
you're
supposed
to
do.
So,
if
they're
giving
me
different
information,
then
you're
giving
me
they're
the
ones
that
are
the
ones
that
distribute
the
permit.
You
do
not.
E
J
D
A
C
I
just
have
a
couple
of
questions.
You've
mentioned
several
times
during
the
course
of
the
multiple
hours
of
proceedings.
We've
had
that.
It's
excuse
me,
your
constitutional
right
to
develop
this
property.
Is
that
correct.
E
C
So,
do
you
have
a
constitutional
right
in
your
eyes
to
profit.
E
We
have
a
constitutional
right
to
to
reap
the
rewards
of
whatever
the
development
that.
E
Trying
to
answer
your
question,
sir,
if
you
would
please
allow
me
to
do
so,
Mr,
commissioner,
sir,
we
have
a
right
to
develop
the
property
and,
if
that
prop,
if
that
development
returns
a
profit,
then
we
have
a
right
to
receive
that
profit.
If
the
development
does
not
turn
a
profit,
we
have
a
right
to
lose
money
right
now.
The
real
estate
market
is
very
good
and
we
believe
the
evidence
will
show
that
we
can
and
will
produce
a
profit
on
this
project.
C
Okay,
so
let's
switch
horses
a
little
bit.
You've
mentioned
that,
basically,
all
in
your
development
costs
are
going
to
be
somewhere
in
the
neighborhood
of
93
plus
million
dollars.
That.
C
What's
the
progester
time
now,
if
this
state
holds
and
your
not
allowed
to
develop
this
property,
What
Becomes
of
the
I
I,
think
you
say:
you're
you're
somewhere
in
the
neighborhood
of
I'm,
sorry
I'm,
going
to
paraphrase
this
3.6
million
dollars
into
The
Pursuit
cost.
So
far,
so
we've
got
somewhere
in
the
neighborhood
of
89,
000
or
89
million
dollars
that
won't
have
been
spent.
C
Is
there
no
value
to
this
money?
Does
it?
What
do
you
do
with
this
money?
So
if
the
stay
holds-
and
you
don't
spend
this
money,
your
this
money
is
not
an
escrow
for
this
project,
you're
going
to
do
something
else
with
this
money
to
make
profit.
Why,
in
your
calculation,
should
anybody
any
responsible
party,
whether
it's,
whether
it's
the
concerned
citizens,
group
or
the
city
or
or
whomever
be
responsible
for
profit
on
money
that
you
have
not
spent.
E
Well,
that's
that's
the
way
that
the
development
World
works
is
there's
not
a
it's
not
like.
You
just
replaced
the
project
with
a
like
kind
reply:
project
down
the
road.
This
is
his
investment
opportunity
that
we
have.
We
have
exercise
the
opportunity
we
have
jumped
through
every
single
hoop
that
this
commission
and
this
city
laid
out.
We
have
received
our
approvals
at
this
point.
We
have
a
right
to
spend
the
money
and
receive
whatever
return
we
can
and
if
and-
and
we
don't
have
to
give
up
this
project
to
go,
pursue
another
one.
E
We
can
pursue
this
project
as
well
as
other
projects,
so
it's
not
like.
We
can
just
turn
off
the
light
and
and
and
pursue
a
project
down
the
street.
That's
not
the
way
real
estate
development
works.
We
have
the
property
under
contract.
We
have
the
right
to
develop
it.
We
have
a
right
to
receive
a
return.
Whatever
that
return
may
be,
our
indications
are
that
the
return
would
be
significant.
A
For
commissioner,
thank
you
very
much.
Thank
you
vice
mayor,
commissioner
Carr.
H
Thanks
mayor,
so
just
a
come
back
around
last
meeting
we
as
a
board
voted
majority
to
put
a
stay
in
place
and
then
did
a
continuation
to
this
meeting,
and
this
is
to
hear
if
we
were
to
establish
a
bond
if
needed.
Is
that
right,
correct,
okay?
So
these
are
the
questions
that
we're
asking
the
parties
that
are
presenting
for
us
so
related
to
that
the
state
the
state
has
already
voted
on.
H
We
understand
that
that's
already
happening
so
tonight
we're
trying
to
establish
if
a
bond
should
be
put
in
place
or
not,
and
then
what
that
value
I'm
assuming
would
be.
H
How
much
time
do
you
believe
and
I
don't
doesn't
matter
who
answers
this
is
remaining
to
get
all
the
other
agencies
permits.
I
know
you
said
you
received
the
Army
Corps
permit
until
you
can
come
to
the
city
and
say
Here's,
my
book
of
all
the
permits
we
would
like
now
to
apply
for
our
permit.
I,
don't
know
statute
Mark.
What
that
looks
like
for
the
city
to
process
four
weeks
or
whatever
it
may
be.
E
We
have
again
I
think,
commissioner
Carr.
We
have
two
outstanding
approvals
that
are
needed
from
outside
agencies.
One
is
for
the
fdot
drainage
permit,
the
one
that
is
the
more
substantial
fdot
permit.
That's
that's
harder
to
get.
Is
the
fdot
access
permit
to
US-19,
where
they
evaluate
all
the
safety
and
everything
that's
already
been
approved,
so
the
drive
the
drainage
permit
we
have
applied,
for
we
are
literally
expecting
it
every
day.
Our
consultant
indicated
today
with
Kimberly
horn
that
he
was
hopeful.
He
might
even
have
it
today.
E
We
don't
have
it
today,
but
we're
hoping
for
it
any
day
the
Swift
Mud
permit.
Again
we
had
some
questions
on
July,
the
1st.
We
have
responded
to
those
questions
that
response
is
in
the
materials
are
provided
earlier
today
in
response
to
the
the
the
motion
of
concerned
citizens
and
based
on
the
experience
of
our
our
our
consultant,
who
is
handling
that
we
expect
approval
within
if
not
this
week.
Hopefully
next
week
certainly
expect
approval
within
the
month.
H
Okay,
so
your
your
estimate,
best
best
estimate,
best
proposed
estimate,
I
suppose
with
all
the
other
permits
received
and
what's
pending,
is
maybe
one
month
out
from
today.
E
We
believe
you
know,
and
and
these
are
best
estimates
we
don't
know
for
sure
right-
I
mean
they're,
they're
governmental
permits
things
happen,
so
I
can't
say
we
will
have
them
right.
I
think
our
best
estimate
is
we
would,
we
would
hopefully
have
all
the
permits.
That's
our
estimate
by
the
end
of
the
month.
Okay,.
E
H
E
Think
that
that's
a
conservative
estimate,
commissioner
I
I
have
I
have
been
somewhat
frustrated
recently
with
the
pace
of
some
of
the
appeals
that
I'm
working
on.
But
you
know
I
think
that's
a
conservative,
realistic
estimate
as
to
where
know
this
would
end.
E
E
You
know,
I'm
trying
to
be
conservative
I
would
hope
that
if,
if
we
were,
if
we
did
Prevail
at
the
second
DCA,
perhaps
you
know
at
some
point
the
fighting
would
stop,
but
can't
ever
can't
ever
be
sure.
So
you
know
it
could
be.
It
could
be
three
years.
You
know,
I
mean
who,
who
knows,
but.
E
Don't
think
it's
going
to
be
three
months,
I
mean
you
know
it
could
take
the
Circuit
Court
three
months.
It
could
take
the
Circuit
Court
six
months
to
to
rule
I
I,
don't
know
they're
busy
and
you
know
the
courts
are
jammed.
So
it's
difficult,
I,
think
18
to
24
months
is
a
conservative.
Yet
realistic
estimate.
We've
tried
to
be
conservative,
we're
not
putting
we're
not
putting.
You
know
the
biggest
possible
number
on
the
board,
we're
putting
a
conservative
estimate
up,
because
that
was
that
was
what
I
thought
would
be
appropriate.
Okay,.
H
And
then
for
clarity,
so,
let's
just
hypothetically
say
one
of
the
the
Court's
rules
against
the
Morgan
group.
At
that
point,
then
concerned
citizens
would
be
considered
I'm,
not
sure
how
that's
a
one,
the
Zen
that
null
the
application
that
the
who's
been
approved
by
the
board.
At
the
point.
E
E
Right
and
then
they
would,
the
commission
typically
would
take
into
account
whatever
the
the
Appellate
Court
said.
If
pellet
Court
said
the
approval
was
illegal,
then
you
know
the
the
presumption
is
that
this
board
would
then
deny
the
application
right.
So
that's
that's
typically
what
would
happen
Okay.
E
H
K
Mr
McLaren
at
the
last
last
Tuesday,
you
said
you
believed
you
need
to
obtain
the
arm
or
the
Swift
Mud
permits.
First
before
you
could
receive
the
Army
Corps
Engineers
permits
correct.
E
K
Okay,
so
we
clarified
that
and
last
Tuesday
I
asked
a
question
about.
If
permitting
took
six
months
and
the
court
rulings
were
over
in
10
months,
then
the
city
would
have
four
months
of
delay
exposure
and
you
replied,
stating
you
were
not
sure.
Have
you
had
time
to
review
that
topic
and
elaborate
more
on
if
Morgan
group
was
delayed
by
the
city.
E
I,
don't
know
that
I
recall
that
specific
question
and
answer.
So
let
me
let
me
just
say
this:
if,
if
you
know
we,
we
were
delayed
four
months
as
a
result
of
this
board's
action,
then
our
position
would
be
that
we
were
delayed
four
months
in
the
return
on
our
investment,
and
so
the
four
months
would
be
the
measure
of
Damages,
not
18
months,
so
that
that
question
I
believe
is,
is
a
yes.
E
Citizens
has
proven
the
right
to
to
a
stay.
The
the
stay
you
know
has
not
gone
into
effect
yet
because
there's
been
no
order,
and
so
upon
entry
of
the
stay.
If
there's
any
delay,
Associated
or
caused
by
that
stay,
then
it's
our
position
that
we
that
our
our
rights
are
being
violated.
Yes,
sir.
K
E
It
would
be
on
a
rational
basis,
review
property
rights
and
right
to
earn
profit
on
land
is
a
is
a
rational
basis,
review
I.
Believe
it's
a
it's
the
issue
it
would
be.
Are
we
being
singled
out
and
being
treated
differently
than
any
other
similarly
situated
applicant
and
then
is
there
a
rational
or
legitimate
basis
for
treating
us
differently?
So
that
is
the
analysis
so.
E
K
E
I
believe,
yes,
I,
think
that
it
has
I
think
there
are
some
factors
in
play
now
that
that,
hopefully
it
will
continue,
but
if
I
knew
the
answer
to
whether
or
not
it
will
continue,
then
I-
probably
wouldn't
be
here
in
front
of
you.
Billing
hours
to
Morgan
group
I
would
be
on
a
beach
somewhere
I
completely.
K
E
We
represent
all
all
types
of
developers
and
all
types
of
situations
and
I've
had
Commissioners
and
councilmen
and
folks
recuse
themselves
from
time
to
time,
and
the
reasons
for
that
are
multiple,
so
you
know
wouldn't
surprise
me
if
we
had
you
know.
Obviously,
commissioner
tarapani
did
recuse
himself.
So
all
right,
yeah,
yeah
I
mean
things
like
that
happen,
and
that's
why
the
recusal
the
option
to
recuse
is
in
place
is
to
protect
situations
like
that.
So
things
like
that
do
happen
from
time
to
time.
K
E
K
E
Don't
think
the
I
don't
think
the
application
itself
or
the
approval
process
that
that
is
is
mandated
by
your
your
code
is
in
any
way
particularly
unique.
Every
municipality
has
different
requirements,
but
I
don't
think
it's
like
any
anything.
Special
I
can
tell
you
that
23-hour
hearings,
you
know-
and
things
like
that
are
unique.
I
mean
this
is
this
is
so
so
that's
unique,
but
I
don't
I
mean
you
know.
E
This
is
a
this
is
an
apartment
project
and
you
have
your
code
Provisions
that
we
have
to
jump
through
and
that
that
happens
in
in
virtually
all
jurisdictions.
A
J
J
H
E
I,
don't
think
it's
particularly
unique,
commissioner.
Eisner
things
happen
from
time
to
time.
There
are
politics
involved.
You
know,
I,
believe
that
the
Planning
and
Zoning
commission
previously
approved
this
project
overwhelmingly
and
then
reversed
itself.
E
So
you
know
all
types
of
of
political
and
other
issues
are
involved
in
in
some
of
these
votes
from
time
to
time.
So
the
things
I
see
in
in
local
government
and
the
votes
and
how
they
change
from
time
to
time,
I
wouldn't
say
anything
is
particularly
unique.
It
happens.
J
In
a
quasi-judicial
hearing,
did
you
find
it
unique
that
the
current
mayor
and
last
time,
commissioner,
gave
you
a
complete
findings
of
fact
of
why
he
was
denying
it
and
the
other
Commissioners
that
were
voting
spoke
in
generality
and
did
not
were
not
specific
on
why
they
were
approving
it?
Is
that
unique.
E
I
I,
don't
know
that's
the
case
Mr
commissioner
I
I,
don't
recall
specifically
the
statements
of
each
and
every
commissioner
at
every
hearing.
We've
had
so
I
really
can't
comment
on
that
without
reviewing
the
record.
So
you
don't
remember
that
at
all
I
remember
the
hearings.
I,
don't
remember
the
comments
of
every
single
commissioner,
sir.
J
E
No,
that's!
That's
not
what
I
said.
Sir
I
said
that
they
filed
a
they
filed.
Three
very,
very
lengthy
petitions
right
and
the
court
threw
them
all
out
because
they
didn't
have
standing
to
sue.
They
could
not
establish
sand.
Standing
court
also
made
a
lot
of
other
comments.
Rejecting
many
of
their
arguments
and
I've
talked
about
all
of
that
at
the
last
hearing,
and
so
so
so
it
wasn't
like
they
handed
in
the
wrong
document
or
they
checked
the
wrong
box.
E
J
E
J
E
Then
yeah
I
mean
if
it
took
two
to
three
years.
Yes,
but
none
of
our
consultants
and
and
no
one
could
reasonably
believe
that
if
our
application
is
complete,
that
it's
going
to
take
two
to
three
years
for
us
to
get
a
permit
from
Swift
Mud.
A
G
Okay,
at
this
point,
I'd
like
to
First
renew
my
objection
as
far
as
the
chart
Mr
Salam
has
not
established.
He
has
not
provided
a
CV.
First
of
all,
he
has
not
established
the
documents
on
which
he's,
depending
on
to
to
provide
these
these
statements,
he
actually
had
a
piece
of
paper
here
which
he
has
not
provided
and
I
cannot
effectively
cross-examine
him
because
of
this
I
also
object
to
the
hearsay
that
was
admitted
regarding
the
the
numbers.
G
In
his
opinion,
he
was
just
kind
of
randomly
talking
about
numbers
that
aren't
even
supported
on
the
document
itself.
I
do
have
a
couple
questions
for
Mr.
G
A
F
D
G
Well,
and
just
for
clarification,
the
the
cross-examination
there
is
10
minutes.
A
We're
resetting
the
time
to
give
you
the
proper
amount
past
your
objections.
F
F
G
Did
your
attorney
Mike
actually
I
will
not
ask
that
you
didn't
provide
any
certification
or
any
notice
for
this
chart
before?
Did
you.
G
F
G
F
F
G
Morgan
group
doesn't
have
a
monetary
judgment
against
concerned
citizens
of
Tarpon
Springs.
Is
that
correct.
G
D
G
I'm
actually
almost
done
with
Camille
So.
Okay,
all
right
yeah
Morgan
group
can't
break
ground
on
their
project
today.
Can
they.
G
F
G
The
bottom
line
it
says,
total
average
and
I
mean
you
know
I'm
a
lawyer,
I'm
so
I'm.
You
know
officially
bad
at
numbers,
but
I
would
think
that
average
means
that
you
take
the
numbers
that
are
in
the
chart
and
then
you
add
them
up
and
divide
them.
But
it
doesn't
look
like
that's
what
that
bottom
line
says.
Can
you.
F
Clarify
that
bottom
line
has
a
combination
of
totals
and
averages
under
total
units.
That's
the
total
number
of
units
in
that
summary
under
sales
price.
That's
the
aggregate
sales
price
for
all
of
those
deals
under
per
unit
price
or
price
per
unit,
as
it's
listed,
that
is
the
average
and
that's
the
reference
that
most
industry
professionals
will
use
to
compare
pricing
between
deals,
because
if
you
look
at
a
sales
price,
it's
not
going
to
tell
you
what
that
average
unit
is
right,
and
so
that's
how
you
extrapolate
value
and
apply
to
other
properties.
G
F
G
A
A
A
G
Thank
you
mayor
all
right.
Thank
you
very
much.
Camille
I
have
a
couple
questions
for
Mr
McLaren
now.
Thank.
F
G
Okay,
so
Mr
McLaren
you
had
submitted
yesterday
a
June
29th
Department
of
army
document.
Is
that
correct.
E
G
G
Are
you
familiar
with
the
the
water,
the
jurisdictional
determination
of
navigable
Waters
document
dated
June,
7th
2021.
G
Okay,
can
I
can
I
show
this
to
you.
G
So
the
Army
Corps
actually
has
a
jurisdictional
determination
form
that
was
dated
June
7th
2021
and
on
this
form
it
actually
includes
a
number
of
wetlands
and
it
says
that
some
of
them
have
tidal,
hydrology
and
all
this
so
have
you
so
you
have
or
haven't.
E
G
I
G
You
mayor
so
first
I'd
like
to
speak
to
the
motion
to
clarify
our
scope.
The
scope
of
the
requested
stay
is
actually
only
15
days
after
the
Circuit
Court
decides
this
case
in
the
Circuit
Court.
This
is
how
the
law
Works
under
the
Florida
rules
of
Appellate
Procedure,
and
it's
not
only
the
law,
but
it's
actually.
We
are
the
party
asking
for
this
day,
and
so
that's
all
we're
asking
for
from
you
and
we're
doing
this,
because
we
know
that
that's
all
that
you're
able
to
Grant
Morgan
responded
that
concerned.
G
Citizens
is
trying
to
game
the
system
and
and
the
delay
ultimately,
the
Circuit
Court
issuing
the
Mandate,
and
we
would
reply
that
this
is
pure
speculation
and
if
we
were
going
to
ask
for
a
stay
on
the
Mandate,
that's
the
circuit
Court's
decision,
not
yours
anyway,
and
this
is
very
relevant
because
it
talks
it
affects
how
long
the
stay
will
be
and
a
potential
Bond.
Last
week,
Morgan
and
your
Council
said
it
would
be
18
months
for
an
appeal
up
to
the
next
level.
G
G
I
would
also
like
to
quickly
clarify
the
issue
of
judicial
immunity.
I
think
that
the
the
issue
of
liability
has
come
up
a
number
of
times
and
I
I
want
you
to
know
that
you
are
here
acting
as
a
judge
in
a
judicial
capacity
and
to
have
judicial
immunity
for
your
decisions.
G
This
is
this
is,
as
everyone
is
saying
tonight,
a
unique
situation,
and
the
reason
why
is
that
the
procedure
is
governed
by
the
Florida
rules
of
Appellate
Procedure,
and
so
in
this
case
you
are
handling
this
in
a
purely
judicial
capacity.
It's
not
a
legislative
policy.
This
isn't
a
quasi-judicial
procedure
where
you're
weighing
criteria
in
the
city
code,
you
genuinely
should
be
wearing
robes
tonight.
G
Citizens
is
simply
appealing
a
decision
based
on
the
application
of
the
wrong
law
and,
more
importantly,
Morgan
group
cannot
show
that
this
stay
is
causing
the
delay
as
they
do
still
need
to
apply
for
permits
any
way
you
cut
it
and
the
the
purpose
of
a
bond
is
to
protect
a
non-appealing
party
like
Morgan
group
and
their
rights
pending
the
appeal,
but
it's
not
to
give
the
non-appealing
party
a
windfall
and
that's
actually
in
one
of
the
cases
that
they
cited
the
capital
Development
Group
case.
G
For
that
reason,
we're
asking
the
commission,
acting
in
your
judicial
capacity,
to
award
the
stay
tonight
without
a
bond,
but
include
the
condition
that
the
commission
may
reconvene
at
a
later
date
to
determine
an
appropriate
Bond
after
the
final
state
and
federal
agency
approvals
and
the
evidence
which
I'm
about
to
show
will
show,
there's
still
work
to
be
done
in
the
permits.
G
Now,
as
far
as
the
evidence
I
had
provided
you
some
documents
through
judicial
notice,
the
other
day
they're
based
on
judicial
notice,
because
the
sources
of
accuracy
cannot
be
questioned.
The
evidence
shows
that
very
least
permitting
is
not
complete
and
there's
still
work
to
be
done.
The
Swift,
Mud,
permitting
website
shows
it's
incomplete.
Actually,
one
of
the
new
documents
that
were
was
uploaded
on
July
6th,
which
the
Morgan
group
supplied
was
a
umam.
She
and
I
know.
G
G
The
interesting
thing
about
that
is
that
you
know
it
says:
mitigation
area
is
connected
to
an
area
that
is
historically
dredged
to
create
a
tidally
influenced
open
water
and
the
way
that
the
Army
Corps
permitting
works
for
a
404
permit
is
for
discharges
of
dredge
and
fill
material
into
the
Waters
of
the
United
States,
which
is
a
tidally
based
water,
I've
included
in
the
documents,
a
information
sheet
from
the
Army
Corps
that
talks
about
the
process
for
a
404
permit.
It
takes
two
to
three
months,
although
it
may
vary
based
on
workload.
G
I
am
earlier
in
my
career.
I
worked
a
lot
on
Everglades
issues
with
the
Army
Corps
of
Engineers,
as
a
working
with
an
environmental
nonprofit
and
I
can
tell
you
that
you
know
things.
You
know
it
is
a
process.
I
would
also
say
that
you
know
there
is
a
whole
definition
in
the
document.
I
gave
you
as
to
the
complete
application
and
what
is
in
a
complete
application.
The
only
permit
that
you've
been
provided
is
a
720
foot,
Nationwide,
sorry,
a
nationwide
permit,
which
is
basically
like
a
broad
brush,
hey
like
we.
G
We
permitted
this
a
long
time
ago
for
all
kind
of
little
things
such
as
720
foot
culverts
in
the
right-of-way.
It
does
not
appear
that
any
application
has
been
submitted
for
the
site
itself
concerned.
Citizens
maintains
our
objection
to
a
bond,
as
there
are
other
permits
outstanding,
there's
also
the
fdot
drainage
permit,
which
I
believe
may
also
have
some
questions
regarding
the
an
Army
Corps
permit.
That's
something
that
would
need
to
be
looked
at
this
day
is
not
causing
a
delay
regarding
the
evidence
put
on
by
Morgan
group.
G
It
is
unsupported
by
facts
and
it
was
mere
speculation.
They've
provided
no
Foundation
as
to
the
numbers
that
Camille
provided
tonight,
I'm
not
going
to
go
back
to
last
week,
but
I
will
just
say
briefly
that
I
I
think
that
we
have
provided
ample
evidence
as
far
as
the
quality
of
our
case
and
that
we
do
have
we.
G
We
have
met
the
standards
for
this
day
and
given
that
we
respectfully
request
that
you
issue
this
stay
tonight
and
you
can
add
a
condition
that,
once
the
permits
are
actually
approved
from
the
other,
permitting
agency
that
we
would
be
willing
to
come
back
and
at
that
point
discuss
whether
or
not
there
should
be
a
bond
and
if
so,
what
the
number
and
the
Damage
would
be.
And
all
of
this
is
in
conjunction
with
the
thought
that
we're
also
waiting
for
the
circuit
court
and
15
days
after
that
has
issued.
A
Thank
you,
Ms
Graham.
Is
that
it
with
your
presentation?
Yes,
okay,
let's
go
to
questions
for
the
commission.
Does
commissioner
Eisner
you've
got
your
light
on
I
did
Miss
Graham.
J
Hi
Miss
Graham
hi.
Would
you
be
able
to
elaborate
a
little
bit
on
the
jurisdictional
determination
that
you
spoke
of
earlier.
G
Yes,
hold
on
one.
G
So,
commissioner,
and
actually,
if
I
may
I,
do
want
to
make
sure
that
this
is
proper
for
evidence.
The
document
that
I
had
pulled
up
was
is
something
that
could
be
judicially
noticed.
I
haven't
it's
available
on
the
Army
Corps
website.
G
When
you
search-
and
let
me
see
so,
there
is
this
document-
it
was
from
7th
2021
that
actually
spoke
about
the
jurisdictional,
determination,
form
and,
and
in
plain
language,
what
that
means
is
that
if
you
are
filling
in
Wetlands
on
a
property
and
it
involves
dredge
and
fill
one
of
the
first
things
you
need
to
do
is
saying
like
Okay,
where
are
the
wetlands
on
the
property
and
are
any
of
them
connected
to
Waters
of
the
United
States
and
without
getting
too
much
into
the
weeds,
there's.
Also
a
distinction.
G
That's
currently
happening
between
State
delegation
of
404
permits
for
assumed
Waters,
which
are
not
connected
to
Tidal
flows
and
I.
G
Think
it's
called
remaining
Waters
or
retaining
Waters
that
are
genuinely
connected
to
a
large
water
body
and
tidal
flows,
and
in
this
case
Anclote
River
would
be
a
tidal
water
body
and
the
the
one
last
thing
I
just
want
to
say
about
that
is
you
know
this
document
was
issued
on
June
7th
2021,
while
the
Trump
rule
involving
wotus
or
the
Waters
of
the
United
States,
was
still
in
effect
and
actually
later
last
year,
I
think
it
was
November
or
December.
G
The
rule
was
vacated
by
the
EPA
and
right
now
the
the
EPA
and
the
Army
Corps
are
they're
kind
of
in
a
position
where
they're
re
re-looking
at
some
of
these
determinations
and
there's
a
different
standard.
G
Well,
I
I
mean
I'll
just
say:
I,
don't
work
for
the
Army
Corps
of
Engineers,
so
I
don't
want
to
testify
to
their
specific
policies.
But
when
you
read
the
background,
it
certainly
looks
like
they
would
not
be
enforcing
it
and
that
they
would
be
doing
a
new
rule.
Yeah
I
knew
what
my
determination.
J
Okay,
when
you
made
a
mention
about
the
time
frame
that
it
would
take,
I
think
you
said
three
months
or
six
months
for
a
new
applicant
for
an
application.
Is
that
correct
for.
G
G
That's
what
the
Army
Corps
manual
says.
It
says
two
to
three
months,
whether
or
not
that's
true,
given
current
Staffing
levels,
I
think
you
know
that
I
mean
I.
You
know
it's
what
it
says.
J
G
You
know
that's
something
that
I
I
wouldn't
feel
comfortable
speaking
to
if
you
like,
I,
could
take
my
hat
off
and
tell
you
that
I
believe
for
an
everglaze
restoration
project.
It
would
take
much
longer
than
two
to
three
months,
but
that's
because
there
are
all
sorts
of
other
evaluations,
but
those
are
much
much
larger
than
generally
much
larger
than
things
like
this.
Okay.
G
G
I
would
say,
no
I
think
that
it's
very
clear
that
it
the
plain
language
of
what
the
permit
says,
is
it's
off-site
and
it's
based
on
a
nationwide
permit,
which
is
basically
like
we're
checking
the
Box.
It
at
least
looks
like
from
an
inspection
that
no
application
for
the
site
itself
has
been
submitted,
and
so
I-
and
you
know,
since
this
jurisdictional
Wetland
issue
is
also
in
flux.
G
I
would
say
that
it
doesn't
appear
that
the
court
has
had
a
chance
to
even
analyze
this
now
it
could
be
that
the
core
does
look
at
this
at
some
point.
Once
Morgan
group
comes
back
with
an
application
and
they
say
you
know
what
it's
okay,
actually
you're,
only
building
in
Wetlands
there's
no
title
influence
we're
good
to
go,
but
I
haven't
seen
any
of
that
set.
I
haven't
seen
anything
in
writing.
I
haven't
seen
any
of
those
documents
provided
at
this
point.
So.
J
J
Because
that's
what
I
was
kind
of
trying
to
figure
out
and
ask
I'm
ignorant
to
this,
so
I
just
wanted
to
know
if
they
have
applied
for
all
of
the
applications
and
permits
that
they
were
supposed
to
do
or
they
weren't.
G
I
mean
I
would
just
say
to
that,
commissioner,
that,
based
on
the
information
provided
to
me
and
what
is
publicly
available,
I
haven't
seen
anything
applied
for
at
this
point.
Where.
J
A
You,
commissioner,
Eisner
commissioner
Carr.
H
Thanks
mayor
City
attorney,
the
attorneys
were
sworn
right
under
oath.
That's.
H
G
Stay
issued
tonight
and
without
a
bond,
and
once
there
are
all
federal
and
state
permits
that
are
actually
issued
and
everything
is
good
to
go,
then
we're
not
agreeing
to
a
bond.
We
would
agree
to
coming
back
and
discussing
whether
there
should
be
about
excuse
me
should
be
a
bond
and,
if
so,
how
much.
And
at
that
point
there
can
be
evidence
presented.
Okay,.
H
So
let's
say
the
court
doesn't
Rule
and
your
group's
favor.
Do
you
feel
that
the
Morgan
group
would
be
penalized
during
that
process?.
G
H
G
I
think
that
that
I
in
to
answer
your
question,
commissioner
I
think
it
depends
as
far
as
the
timing
of
when
the
permits
are
issued
and
I
mean.
I
would
also
argue
that
you
know
they.
You
know
they
might
have
this
approval
from
the
city,
but
they
you
know
they
don't
have
the
approval
from
the
other,
the
other
agencies,
and
so
they
have
no
right
at
this
point,
to
break
ground
or
or
do
anything
until
yeah.
H
Let's
just
say
hypothetically
based
on
sworn
testimony
tonight
by
the
Morgan
group
a
month
to
receive
the
appropriate
permits
by
the
state
and
whatever
appropriate
agencies,
and
then,
let's
say
I,
don't
know,
estimate
four
weeks
through
the
city
anytime.
After
that,
do
you
think
that
would
be
considered
a
a
loss
then
opportunity
for
the
Morgan
group.
G
G
You
know
I
I,
you
know
don't
feel
qualified
to
to
testify
to
the
benefit
of
Morgan
group
and
you.
H
Know
I'm
just
trying
to
understand,
because
you
everything
that
was
said
by
the
Morgan
group
you're,
like
throwing
up
objections
and
things
like
that
so
I'm
just
trying
to
understand
so
so,
if
the
Morgan
group,
if
the
stay
was
to
be
the
motion
in
order
to
move
forward
with
the
stay
and
some
no
bond
or
Bond
or
whatever,
that
is
what
would
be
the
impact
of
the
mortgage
group.
Then,
since
you
put
it
completely
since
you
want
to
object
everything
that
they've
provided
at
a
high
level,
what
would
your
number
be
then.
G
Number
of
there's
there's
no
way
I.
Can
that
would
be
unfair
for
me
to
say
that,
and
all
I
can
say
is
that
as
long
as
they
don't
have
apartments
for
sale
and
they're,
not
open
they're
I
mean
I
I
do
understand,
you
know,
there's
an
argument
for
delay.
I
think
that's
fair,
but
I
think
as
long
as
they're
still
waiting
for
other
permits.
I,
don't
think
that
someone
can
say
in
good
faith
that
the
stay
is
causing
a
delay
because
they're
waiting
on
something
else.
G
Think
it
would
be
highly
speculative,
given
the
current,
the
the
you
know,
the.
H
H
Again,
you've
questioned
and
again
I'm
just
trying
to
get
clarification
here
based
on
your
statements,
so
you
question
the
18
to
24
months
by
the
Morgan
group.
What
is
your
expectation
from
the
an
appeal
through
the
court
system
right
now.
G
So
to
further
clarify
as
well,
what
we're
asking
for
and
I
said
this
before,
but
I
want
to
make
sure
that
you
all
really
understand
this,
and
the
only
thing
that
you
as
a
lower
tribunal,
the
commission,
have
the
jurisdiction
to
Grant
legally,
is
up
until
the
circuit
court
issues
their
mandate,
which
is
15
days
after
their
final
opinion.
Now,
as
long
as
that,
and
you
know
to
see
how
long
that
takes
I
mean
that
that
could
be
tomorrow,
that
could
be
six
months.
It's.
It
is
very
hard
to
know.
G
H
I'm,
not
an
attorney
I,
don't
know
if
that's
the
case
or
not
I've
got
one
attorney.
That's
saying
one
thing:
another
attorney
is
saying
another
can
I
go
to
our
City
attorney
and
ask
if
that's
the
case,
City
attorney.
D
So
the
rule
specifically
says
and
I'll
read
it
out
loud
stay
entered
by
a
lower
Tribunal
shall
remain
in
effect
during
the
penency
of
all
review
proceedings
in
Florida
courts
until
a
mandate
issues
or
unless
otherwise
modified
or
vacated
and
I'm
reading
directly
from
the
rule
that
was
in
concerned
citizens
motion
for
clarification.
So
it's
clear
to
me
that
it
provides
for
all
review
proceedings
and
not
not
the
current
proceeding.
A
G
Well,
I
did
want
to
clarify
if
I
could
Mr
Mayor
that
our
argument.
G
The
argument
is
that
it's
during
all
pendency
until
a
mandate
issues
and
then
we've
cited
the
rule
of
what
defines
a
mandate
and
a
mandate
is
15
days.
After
of
an
opinion
issues,
and
so
the
Mandate
happens
at
the
circuit
court
and
I've
had
a
case
that
I've
cited
I,
don't
know
if
you've
had
a
chance
to
review
it,
Mr
Trask
or
if
you.
A
G
G
G
G
If
either
concerned,
citizens
or
Morgan
group
decided
to
appeal,
and
then
that
went
to
the
second
district,
then
that
could
take
a
longer
time.
But
at
that
point
the
stay
kind
of
evaporates
and
someone
would
have
to
argue
for
the
stay
at
the
circuit
court
level.
So
your
jurisdiction
is
done
and
it
would
have
to
have
a
new
stay.
H
So
how
many
appeals
have
you
done
to
come
up
with
your
justification
of
one
week
to
six
months
over
the
past
year
outside
of
this
concerned,
citizens
of
Tarpon
Springs
I've.
G
Some
of
them
took
one
of
them
took
a
year.
The
other
one
was
in
the
first
district
now.
The
other
thing
I
would
say
is
that
they're
in
the
second
district,
so
they're
not
in
a
circuit
court,
so
I
I
don't
have
a
comparison
for
the
Circuit
Court
in
Pinellas,
okay,.
H
And
then
so,
with
the
state
I
I'm
still
I
just
want
to
clarify
that
you
don't
think
there
should
be
a
dollar
amount
to
any
bond
right.
That's
what
your
stance
is
at.
K
K
G
About
that
is
you
know,
there
are
a
couple
factors.
The
first
is
what
the
capacity
is
of
concerned
citizens
as
far
as
what
they
could
do
to
put
up
the
bond.
The
other
issue
is
actually
finding
a
surety
who
would
decide
to
you
know,
give
us
a
give
concerned.
Citizens
a
bond,
I
mean
I,
think
you
know
sometimes
sureties
they
they
might
require
higher
collateral,
they
might
require.
You
know
an
individual
to
indemnify
a
bond.
G
G
K
Okay,
what
would
your
argument
be
for
concerned
citizens
if
a
lawsuit
was
made
based
off
rational
basis.
G
Well,
I
think
that
you
I
would
have
to
see
what
the
argument
was.
They
I
mean
I
think
that
you
have
a
certain
amount
of
discretion.
I
would
definitely
urge
you
to
make
sure
that
your
decision
is
based
on
the
specific
legal
criteria
and
the
test
which
I
know
that
you
have
very
good
legal
counsel.
That
is
ensuring
that
any
decision
you
make
is
based
on
that,
and
there
is,
you
know
a
certain
amount
of
discretion
in
the
rational
basis.
Test.
I
would
actually
say
that
you
know
there's
a
pretty
recent
case.
G
I
think
it's
from
2017,
where
Mr
McLaren
was
actually
representing
a
developer.
It's
Rickman
versus
Pinellas
County,
where
they
sued
Pinellas
County
on
a
kind
of
similar
issue
in
a
1983
claim
and
they
lost
and
they
didn't
meet
the
rational.
They
said
that
Pinellas
County
had
a
rational
basis
for
their
decision.
K
Okay,
and
would
anybody
from
concerned
citizens
be
willing
to
put
up
a
personal
guarantee
of
some
sort
if
a
bond
was
ass
of
this
board,
I.
A
You
commissioneros
I
just
have
one
question
as
far
as
a
bond
would
the
concerned.
Citizens
be
actually
two
questions.
Would
the
concerned
citizens
be
filing
it
as
a
a
legal
entity?
I,
don't
know
whether
you're
a
501c3
or
an
LLC,
I
I,
don't
know
what
your
corporate
structure
is,
but
would
it
be
as
individual
members
are
as
a
as
a
legal
entity,
it.
A
Legal
entity,
yeah
okay
and
for
the
record,
if
I
may,
ask
the
the
amount
of
assets
that
the
concerned
citizens
have
of
Tarpon
Springs.
You.
G
A
Fair
enough,
thank
you
Ms
Graham!
That's
all
I
have
I,
don't
see
any
other
lights
on
Mr
McLaren
you're
crossing
your
cross-examination.
Please,
sir.
B
E
And
councilors,
thank
you,
Miss
Kramer
speaking
about
the
Army
Corps
of
Engineers,
and
what
experience
do
you
have
with
the
Army
Corps
of
Engineers.
E
G
Well,
what
I
would
say
about
that
is:
there's
a
jurisdictional
determination
which
I
had
shown
you.
That
was
what
that
basically
does.
Is
it
says
this
is
where
the
wetlands
are
on
the
property
that
was
done,
June
7th
and
it's
on
the
actual
site
of
the
Anclote
Harbor
site.
This
off-site
permit
Nationwide
permit
that
was
issued,
June
29th,
that's
not
on
the
site.
That's
on
U.S,
Highway,
19.,.
G
Apples
and
oranges,
as
far
as
the
Trump
rule
it
it
had
been
vacated
by
the
EPA.
So
it's
there's
a
process
where
they're
not
looking
at.
E
G
I
know,
that's
that's
not
correct.
It
was
actually
vacated
in
December
2021.
E
Okay,
is
there,
do
you
have
any
information
or
anything,
to
support
a
a
conclusion
that
Morgan
group
is
impacting
any
Wetland
on
site?
The
Army
Corps
of
Engineers
has
jurisdiction
well,.
G
No
application
scent
and
also
I
would
say
that
the
umam
I'm
trying
to
find
it
in
the
Swift
Mud
information
that
you
had
provided.
G
E
G
G
Oh,
she
works.
She
is
a
public
information
officer
who
can
speak
to
the
the
specific
she
what
she
can
do
is
she
looks
at
the
status
of
an
application
of
what
has
been
applied
for
and
what
has
not
been
applied
for,
and
so.
E
G
E
E
Are
you
aware
that
the
the
bond
we're
here
about
tonight
that
is
to
to
cover
Morgan's
loss
if
the
city
makes
a
mistake
tonight?
Do
you
understand
that
can.
E
E
E
You
said
I
believe
you
said
that
this
you
represented
that
this
commission
is
sitting
in
its
judicial
capacity.
Yes,
okay,
this
it's
a
quasi-judicial
capacity
this
this.
This
commission
is
not
a
an
article
3
judicial
tribunal.
Is
it
man
well.
G
I
would
actually
think
that
we
can
agree
to
disagree
on
that
because,
if
you
think
about
the
authority
that
we're
here
tonight,
it's
under
the
Florida
appellate
rules
of
procedure
under
9.310,
where
you
are
the
lower
tribunal
and
you
are
looking
at
something
which
is
through
the
arm
of
a
Judicial
lens
I
mean
it's
not
you're,
not
here
tonight.
Looking
at
you
know,
these
are
the
criteria
that
you
need
to
meet
in
a
variant
of
the
hardship.
G
All
that
no
I
mean
this
is
a
purely
legal
issue
and
I
mean
I,
think
you
know,
and
we
had
actually
an
interesting
conversation
yesterday
on
the
phone
which,
if
you
don't
mind,
I
I,
would
like
to
disclose
to
the
commission
that
we
do
think
that
the
the
rule
probably
could
stand
to
be
clarified
and
updated,
because
we
think
that
it
would
be
helpful
for
these
types
of
decisions
to
be
held
at
a
circuit
court
level,
at
least
where
you
know
they
are
such
highly
legal
and
judicial
arguments.
E
G
E
G
E
G
That's
right,
but
they
did
use
a
rational
basis.
Review
correct
and
I
would
argue
that,
since
this
is
neither
legislative
or
quasi-judicial
and
it's
judicial
it
you
know
still
would
be
under
the
rational
basis
review
and
you
know,
even
though
it
might
be
painted
with
a
different
brush.
It's
still
under
the
same.
E
E
Okay,
you
had
the
comparable
sales
information
on
since
June
21st
right
and
you
had
an
opportunity
to
review
those
sales
and
determine
whether
or
not
they
were
truly
comparable
and
do
your
research
I.
G
E
E
Yes,
I
have
just
a
moment,
Mr
Mayor,
to
talk
to
him.
My
my
partner.
E
Thank
you,
Mr
Mayor,
for
the
record.
At
this
point,
we
would
move
again
to
recuse
commissioner
Eisner
from
these
proceedings
based
on
his
independent
research
and
earlier
testimony
concerning
saying
thank
you.
A
You're
you're
making
a
request
at
this
time
to
recuse
commissioner
Eisner
from
further
participation
in
this
matter.
At
this
point,.
E
Based
upon
his
admission
that
he
did
independent
research,
which
is
our
grounds.
A
One
PM
the
business
at
hand,
is
a
request
from
Mr
McLaren
for
commissioner
Eisner
to
recuse
or
recuse
himself,
I've
spoken
to
the
city,
manager
and
I'm.
Sorry,
City
attorney,
and
let
me
ask
Mr
Eisler,
there's
two
things
we
need
to
do.
A
One
I
want
to
ask
Mr
Eisner
if
he
has
done
some
investigating
or
pursued
seeking
information
on
his
own
and
as
I'm
told
that
that's
not
appropriate
in
this
in
these
types
of
proceedings,
and
so
my
question
to
Mr
Eisner
is:
do
you
believe
that
the
information
you
gained
on
your
own
outside
these
proceedings
can
be
set
aside
and
not
influence
you
on
any
formal
decision
this
evening?
That.
A
That's
yes,
yes,
okay,
Mr
trash
based
on
that
I,
don't
see
a
need
for
Mr
I'm.
Sorry,
commissioner
Eisner
to
recuse
himself.
He
didn't
see
anything.
D
Beyond
that,
he
needs
to
make
that
decision
on
his
own,
like
we
did
at
the
last
hearing,
whether
or
not
he
wants
to
recuse
himself
or
not,
based
upon
the
answer.
They
just
give
I
assume
commissioner
Eiser
you're,
taking
a
position
you're
not
going
to
recuse
yourself.
A
B
K
Like
to
divulge
yes,
mayor,
I
did
have
a
brief
conversation
with
Peter
delacos
at
the
Fourth
of
July
picnic
in
which
he
did
email
me.
Some
documents
that
were
all
related
to
the
backup
that
are
all
on
the
backup
in
which
I
did
send
to
the
City
attorney
and
I
did
receive
a
a
couple
texts
regarding
the
army
of
core
Engineers
number
I,
never
contacted
them,
and
I
did
not
reply
back
from
Mr
herbowski,
and
that
is
it.
A
Okay,
thank
you.
Is
there
anyone
else,
yeah.
A
Not
sure
what
the
date
was,
but
I
received
a
couple
of
text
messages
with
some
phone
numbers,
I'm
presuming
they
were
an
813
number,
so
I
would
assume
they're
the
Army
Corps
I
did
not
utilize
them
did
not
respond
to
Mr
robotsky's
text.
Message
on
that
and
that's
by
the
way
there
was
a
public
records
request,
and
at
least
the
information
that
I've
just
stated
is
in
that
public
records
request
that
the
Morgan
group
had
requested.
So
does
that
satisfy
the
issue?
Okay,
all
right!
A
A
You
mean
for
additional
time
correct
the
normal
procedure
at
this
point.
It's
the
normal
procedure,
which
is
four
minutes
plus
two.
So
it's
six
minutes
so.
M
M
Then
why
would
you
give
them
a
bond
for
what
I
mean
she
said
if
they
get
their
permits,
then
she'll
come
back
and
talk
about
doing
a
bond,
but
there's
absolutely
no
reason
to
give
it
to
them
now,
and
you
know
clay
Coulson
and
Leslie
blackner
sued
the
U.S
Army
Corps
of
Engineers
and
beat
him
in
federal
court
over
this
nwp
stuff.
This
Nationwide
permit
because
they
were
handing
them
out
like
candy,
so
he
will
be
reminding
the
Army
Corps
of
Engineers.
M
Of
that,
like
we
did
with
Walmart
guess
what
happened
in
the
Walmart
days
we
got
Walmart's
permit
revoked,
they
had
to
start
all
over
again,
so
guess
what
once
we
remind
them
to?
Oh,
you
guys
should
really
look
into
that
little
Culvert
thing
that
you
just
granted
because
oh
there
might
be
a
few
eyes,
not
DOT.
If
you
T's
not
crossed
we're
going
to
do
that
and
oh
boy,
they
sure
play
fast
and
loose
with
the
truth,
don't
they
acting
as
if
those
Wetlands
on
there
are
not
jurisdictional
bite.
M
That's
just
laughable,
of
course,
they're
jurisdictional,
the
Army
Corps
and
hundreds
of
people
from
our
town.
Citizens
have
called
the
corps
and
they
know
now
that
it's
game
on
and
they're
gonna
make
sure
this
process
is
lengthy.
That's
what
they
do.
There's
a
comment
period.
Let
me
remind
you
the
guys
that
are
helping
me.
The
experts,
you
know
with
they
held
up
the
Ridge
Road
extension
for
almost
20
years,
just
with
comments
20
years.
M
N
M
He
should
have
asked
you
guys
to
vote
on
whether
or
not
you
would
approve
that
language,
but
he
didn't,
he
just
went
ahead
and
did
it
and
he
cited
a
local
rule.
That's
just
a
joke,
so
the
Florida
Supreme
Court
is
the
next
stop
and
then
maybe
the
U.S
Supreme
Court,
which
is
where
this
can
ultimately
go.
M
M
Let
me
tell
you
something:
you
don't
need
to
give
them
a
bond,
not
at
this
juncture,
let's
wait
10
years
and
see
if
they
can't
get
their
core
stuff
through
and
then
maybe
we'll
talk
about
it.
But
until
that
happens
they
get
nothing
and
you
still
have
time
to
settle
Mr
coulson's
case.
You
know
that
30
days
hasn't
passed
yet
Morgan
group
isn't
even
a
party
to
that
case.
Yet
it's
just
you
and
Coulson.
You
guys
could
do
that.
Take
care
of
it.
Make
this
whole
thing
go
away?
M
You
won't
see
my
pretty
little
face
down
here
anymore,
so
that
needs
to
be
seriously
considered
and
get
your
city
attorneys
to
put
in
writing
in
the
form
of
an
email
or
a
memo
why
he
won't
do
it
why
he
won't
settle
that
put
in
writing
why
he
won't
settle
the
case
and
pretends
that
it's
not
a
real
sediment.
Just
because
there's
no
money
involved,
I'll
bet,
there's
some
money
involved,
all
right,
yeah,
but
Mr
coulson's
not
asking
for
any.
M
I
Mayor
Commissioners
good
evening,
Mr
Carter
good
evening
text
Carter.
Thank
you.
I
needed
that
reminder.
Text
Carter,
1810,
Mariner
Drive
in
Tarpon,
Springs
I,
listened
to
both
parties.
Tonight
I
do
agree
that
attorney
Graham
has
given
you
a
really
good
solution
for
tonight.
It's
one
that
allows
you
to
go
ahead.
Put
the
stay
in
place.
Let
Morgan
group
do
what
they
say.
They
are
going
to
do
around
permits
and
getting
the
approvals
necessary
to
Stage
their
city
permits.
I
No
rubbing,
no
clearing,
none
of
the
site
investigation
work,
none
of
this
site.
Changing
work
will
take
place
until
that
happens.
Come
then
you
come
back
and
if
all
the
permits
are
in
place
and
all
the
work
is
done
to
be
ready
to
do
the
city
permits
and
to
start
preparation
for
construction,
you
can
have
that
hearing
at
that
time.
It's
a
great
solution.
I
wish
I'd
thought
of
it.
I've
spent
50
years
in
engineering
and
construction
and
built
10
times
as
many
projects
as
as
Camille
claims
and
I
do
hope.
You
get
there
buddy.
I
Okay,
a
good
career
is
a
great
thing
to
have
behind
you.
What
I
do
know
about
developer
projects
is
that
developer
projects
when
they
do
their
estimates
they
build
in
risk
and
risk
includes
permitting
time.
It
includes
changes
in
construction
plans.
It
includes
all
kinds
of
things
that
they're
now
asking
a
bond
to
indemnify
them
from
that
risk,
so
that
they're
not
having
to
take
the
risk
and
they
can
go
ahead
feeling
like
abandon
the
project,
because
we
were
delayed,
we
get
some
money
and
we're
okay,
we
don't
feel
like
the
citizens
concerned.
I
I
N
Brian
crasado
616,
Palm,
Avenue
I
just
want
to
bring
up
something.
We
have
the
ROI
up
here.
What
they
intend
to
make.
There
are
a
lot
of
things
standing
in
the
way
the
economy
is
getting
ready
to
slam
shut.
Labor
costs
are
very
high.
Construction
costs
are
very
high.
N
N
I
have
written
several
letters
to
the
Commissioners
over
time
about
this
development
at
Anclote,
Harbor
and
I've
been
concerned
for
two
reasons:
one
is
the
environmental
impact
and,
secondly,
is
the
traffic
impact
which
I
don't
think
either
have
been
resolved
at
this
point,
so
I
am
concerned
that
it
appears
developers
seem
to
be
presenting
the
opinion
that
they
have
a
legal
right
to
do
anything
they
want
to
do
within
Tarpon
Springs.
They
can
sue
us,
they
can
push
for
their
for
their
peace
of
mind.
N
They
can
even
require
that
a
group
of
concerned
citizens,
regular
people
in
the
city
of
Tarpon
Springs,
should
have
to
put
up
money
to
be
able
to
take
them
to
court
for
what
they
feel
are
irregularities
in
the
process.
I
think
most
of
you
on
the
council
are
on.
The
commission
were
elected
with
the
premise
that
you're
also
against
this
project
and
I
think
that
that
is
probably
why
you're
in
those
seats
and
so
I'm
asking
you
two
things.
L
L
Began
questioning
Mr
McLaren,
and
these
were
the
questions
that
were
the
paraphrase
as
Morgan
group
obtained
a
Swift
Mud
Ace
permit,
Mr
McLaren
said,
should
be
done
relatively
soon
and
then
Mr
panayoti
said
Ed
on
the
Swift
Mud
board.
Is
that
an
influence?
And
then
this
is
where
he
asked
if
the
Army
Corps
of
Engineers
dependent
on
the
Swift
Mud
permit
and
Mr
McLaren
implied,
after
speaking
with
someone
that
he
thought
it
was,
and
then
the
discussion
was,
how
do
you?
L
How
is
it
you
don't
know
about
the
process
and
said
on
the
Swift
Mud
and
then
that's
where
Mr
paniotti
directly
asked
if
the
swim
Bud
permit
is
to
be
done
in
six
months,
but
the
legal
issues
are
10
months.
How
is
it
that
the
citizen
should
be
required
in
the
Mr
McLaren
didn't
answer
directly?
He
kind
of
went
off
into
some
other
things
about
the
one
and
the
two
rules
that
should
be
applied
to
and
things
of
that
nature.
L
So
just
want
to
brief
you
on
that
now
also
on
page
10
of
the
Morgan
group's
response
we
keep
hearing
about
this
rule
9.190.e3,
which
has
been
red
and
red
and
red,
but
again
I'm,
going
to
repeat
it
as
stay
pending.
Review
may
be
condition,
maybe
conditions
on
the
posting
of
a
good
and
sufficient
amount.
Other
conditions,
or
both
there
is
no
requirement
to
do
it.
L
Yet,
on
page
34
and
they're
closing
about
the
bond
in
highlights
Bolden,
if
necessary,
Morgan
will
present
testimony
evidence,
as
the
hearing
is
the
amount
of
bond,
including
that
the
minimum
amount
of
the
required
bold
required
Bond
must
be
at
least
blah
blah
blah.
Well,
it's
not
required
they've
misrepresented
to
you
again
again
and
again.
L
L
L
L
Because
these
people-
and
you
know
you
know-
for
months-
we
had
yard
sales
and
handing
out
flyers
for
donations,
we're
a
small
groups
organization,
fighting
the
Morgan
group,
20
000
Apartments
over
five
states
all
over
the
country
if
they
have
plenty
of
cash
flow
and
I
sure
would
like
to
hear
some
discussion
about
how
you
really
value,
because
technically
I
am
a
licensed
real
estate
sales
associate
voluntary
and
active
I.
Take
my
cus
every
two
years
and
the
way
you
really
value
projects,
if
you
plan
on
keeping
them,
is
on
cash
flow
and
expenses.
L
What
they're,
providing
you
are
comparable
sales
that
means
they
planned
on
Flipping
it.
Yet
how
many
times
over
the
course
of
the
years
this
last
year
and
a
half
we've
had
hearings,
they
said,
oh
no.
We
want
to
be
members
of
the
community,
we're
going
to
be
here
we're
here
for
the
Long
Haul,
yet
the
evidence
they
provide
you
for
the
valuation
is
based
on
selling
the
units
flipping
it
so
they're
wanting
to
charge
us
for
their
delay
in
flipping
the
units
and
yes,
I,
agree.
The
property.
Market
is
hot.
L
L
I
Good
evening
Commissioners
mayor,
my
name
is
John:
colianos
I
live
at
1020,
Peninsula,
Avenue
and
I
am
a
CPA
I'm.
Also
a
certified
business
valuator
and
I'm
I
hold
the
designation
of
a
master
analyst
in
financial
forensics
I
have
experience
at
calculating
and
analyzing
calculations
of
opportunity
losses.
Most
recently,
I
was
hired
by
the
hired
and
testified
for
the
City
of
St
Petersburg,
and
one
of
several
engagements
hired
by
them.
I
I
First,
the
first
thing
we
do
when
we're
analyzing
a
a
potential
loss
and
that's
what
we're
talking
about
we're
talking
about
a
potential
loss.
Is
you
look
at
the
methodology
you
look
at
that
methodology
and
you
ask
whether
or
not
it
meets
a
standard
of
an
acceptable
and
relevant
methodology.
So
you
have
to
ask
yourself
and
it
and
a
lot
of
it's.
It's
understandable
reason
right.
I
Do
you
understand
the
rationale
and
the
reason
behind
that
methodology
and
let
me
make
it
perfect,
clear,
I've
I've
done
no
analysis
on
this
matter
and
I'm,
not
making
any
determination
of
anything
on
this
matter.
I
just
thought,
given
that
I
have
this
experience
and
then
I'm
a
citizen
of
the
town
that
I
might
want
to
just
share
a
little
bit
of
information
with
you.
So
the
first
thing
is
we
look
at
standard,
but
equally
is
important.
I
We
look
at
application
of
the
standard,
the
application
of
the
facts
you
this
all
these
things
are
based
on
assumptions.
None
of
us
know
what's
going
to
happen,
30
days
from
now,
six
months
from
now,
let
alone
18
months
from
now.
We
don't
know
that.
So
you
look
again
at
the
reasonableness
of
the
of
the
application
of
assumptions
you,
you
are
you're,
it's
appropriate
to
apply
any
factors
that
might
mitigate
the
the
potential
loss.
Like
you,
you
guys
talked
about
possible
delays
in
additional
permitting
and
things
of
that.
That's
a
fair
Apple.
I
You
also
have
to
look
at
when
again,
when
I'm
doing
an
analysis,
especially
like
the
one
I
did
for
St
Petersburg
is
I
had
to
look
at
the
underlying
data
right
you
were
given.
You
were
given
profit
margins.
I
You'd
want
to
see
how
those
profit
margins
were
calculated
right.
Those
are
sometimes
broad
when
we
look
at
the
words
Prophet
net
income
gross
profit,
there's
all
kinds
of
terms,
but
those
terms
I
I
always
want
to
zero
in
on
what
the?
How?
How
did
we
come
up
with
that
those
percentages?
I
And-
and
so
that's
really
important-
that
we
have
that,
and
we
know
what
the
and
what
costs
were
included
in
those
in
calculate
those
percentages
when
we're
using
something
like
a
market
method,
kind
of
a
market
method
that
was
used
here,
it's
often
best
to
have
a
large
sample
right.
I
We
I
I
like
to
have
as
many
potential
opportunities
and
samples
in
my
in
my
decision
making,
because
it
Smooths
out
a
lot
of
things,
because
we
don't
know,
there's
lots
of
things,
you
don't
know
when
you
have
a
small
sample,
you
don't
know
where
they
are.
What
the
the
locations?
The
kinds
of
buildings,
all
those
things
that
could
come
into
play
that
could
have
an
effect,
but
when
we
have
large
samples,
then
it
kind
of
Smooths
out
all
those
things
so
Mr.
A
Coulianis
you're.
I
Don't
think
I'll
need
it,
but
thank
you
so
much
the
anyways,
it's
I'm
here
as
a
citizen
that
happens
to
have
experience
in
this
matter
and
am
just
sharing
when
you
go
into
your
deliberations,
that
you
look
at
methodology,
application
of
methodology
and
assumptions
that
are
made
and
what
are
those
backups
and
if
you
don't
have
the
backups
that's
difficult
to
to
make
those
kinds
of
to
understand
or
to
be
able
to
rely
on
those
assumptions.
So
thank.
N
To
say
that
whether
you
are
coming
from
a
position
as
a
commissioner
or
as
a
Judicial
from
a
Judicial
perspective,
that
the
goal
is
to
make
a
fair
decision
from
what
I
see
every
day
and
even
what
I've
heard
just
tonight
on
all
the
different
projects
and
things
that
go
on
I
think
that
the
only
way
to
apply
environmental
justice
and
social
Equity
here
is
to
Grant
the
stay
without
a
bond.
That's
all
I
have
to
say
that's
my
request
this
evening.
Thank
you.
Thank.
N
Jackie
Turner
792
Chesapeake
Drive,
as
many
have
said,
I
also
do
agree
that
the
bond
requirement
of
keeping
this
Stay
doesn't
fit.
As
was
noted,
it
does
say
that
that
stay
pending
review,
what
we've
got
may
be
conditioned
on
a
bond.
That's
not
a
requirement.
This
isn't
something
set
in
stone.
So
something
to
think
about
is
I
realize
yes
and
respect
that
you
know
the
business
here
with
Morgan
group.
They
have
fronted
some
money,
that's
the
nature
of
doing
business
real
estate.
N
It's
there's
some
speculation,
there
you're
making
an
intelligent
decision,
but
you
also
know
that
you're
going
into
this
that
you've
got
to
put
some
money
up.
You
may
make
a
lot.
You
may
lose
some,
so
that's
the
risk
that
they
have
determined
to
take
just
being
in
the
business
that
they're
in.
Why
do
you
want
to
very
unfairly
and
just
harmfully
penalize
concerned
citizens
of
Tarpon
Springs
because
they're
not
comfortable
taking
the
basic
Financial
Risk?
That's
the
nature
of
their
business.
A
N
Hi,
hello,
thank
you.
My
my
name
is
Randy
Myers
I
lived
at
13..
Can
you
hear
me
I
guess
I
should
ask.
N
Can
you
hear
me?
Yes,
yes,
okay,
thank
you.
My
name
is
Randy
Myers
I
live
at
1389
sale,
Harbor,
I'm,
a
sail,
Harbor
resident
at
South
River
and
around
the
bend
from
this
project.
I
am
a
member
of
concerned
citizens
and
the
friends
of
the
Anclote
dump.
I
will
remind
the
team.
Again.
We
are
a
Grassroots
organization
that
has
identified,
we
think
a
number
of
issues
in
the
project,
application
process
that
render
the
process
Incorrect
and
and
thus
really
not
complete
and
must
be.
N
We
think
it
must
be
Revisited
and
corrected
and,
as
you
know,
we're
you
know,
there's
a
lot
of
effort.
Many
irons
in
the
fire
regarding
that
and
thus
including
us
asking
you
for
this
stay
and
I
want
to
thank
you
for
the
board
of
commission
for
the
state
decision
we
do
have.
We
have
no
profit
game
in
this.
I
am
uncertain
that
or
why
a
bond
is
required.
As
a
number
of
member
of
this
concerned,
citizens
and
friends
I'd
appreciate
if
no
no
bond
requirement
was
was
placed
on
this
day.
N
I
think
you've
heard
a
lot
of
good
arguments
from
from
our
peers
as
to
why
that
is
as
well,
so
I
don't
spend
any
more
too
many
more
of
your
time.
Thank
you.
Thank.
N
It's
Robert
rockline,
755,
North,
Lake
Boulevard
in
Tarpon,
Springs
and
I
would
bet
that
I
am
a
concerned.
Citizen
I
live
about
a
Tiger
Woods
Drive
and
iron
Fairway,
shot
away
from
the
border
of
this
property
from
my
front
door
for
the
last
19
years,
I've
been
a
building
official
for
various
jurisdictions
and
I've
never
heard
of
an
applicant
requiring
a
bond
from
either
the
jurisdiction
or
other
parties.
If
anything,
it's
a
bond
required
from
the
applicant,
for
you
know
any
any
unintentional
or
negligent
harm
or
damage
to
any
public
or
private
property.
N
You
know
they
look
for
the
past
the
path
of
least
resistance
if
it
was
up
to
them
they'd
apply
one
day
and
bring
out
the
hammer
the
next
day,
but,
like,
like
other
speakers,
said
this
is
a
voluntary
Venture
by
a
private
party.
So
it's
their
job
to
perceive
the
risk
versus
reward
and
any
balance
they're
from
they.
They
should
be
anticipating
delays,
whether
it's
something
out
of
left
field
like
supply,
chain
issues
or
inclement
weather
or
a
hurricane.
So
you
know
their
their
request
for
a
bond.
I
think
is
ludicrous
to
put
it
lightly.
N
In
this
case
and
the
concerned,
citizens
stand
more
to
lose
in
the
big
picture
if
this
goes
forward
than
they
do.
My
only
other
question
is
and
I'm
not
sure.
If
it's
been
answered
in
in
Prior
meetings
or
prior
investigations,
do
we
have
any
proof
of
the
Morgan
group's
ownership
of
this
parcel,
and
if
so,
when
did
they
take
possession?
How
much
did
they
pay
for
it
and
if
they
didn't,
is
there
any
effect
in
their
participation
in
throughout
this
application
process?
N
Because
if
there's
some
illegality
in
there,
I
I'll
fly
down
tomorrow
and
give
them
a
kick
in
the
pants
I
think
that
should
be
thoroughly
investigated
to
find
out
when
and
if
they
took
any
ownership
in
this
or
are
they
just
acting
as
the
agent
of
the
owner,
which
is
probably
still
Walmart
from
everything
that
I've
heard
searched
online.
Thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
comment.
A
You
Mr
Trump.
We
have
one.
We
received
one
email
that
does
not
quite
relate
to
the
bond,
but
it's
related
to
the
item.
I'm
just
going
to
allow
some
Liberty
to
have
that
read
into
the
record.
It's
a
brief
email,
Ms
Jacobs!
If
you
could
do
that,
please.
B
Yes,
thank
you.
This
is
from
Andro
Mahi
Nicola
1398
cell
Harbor
Circle
I
am
deeply
concerned
of
this
of
the
irreversible
destruction
to
the
beautiful
ecosystem
that
this
plan
of
greed
will
cause.
How
much
more
destruction
must
Tarpon
Springs
encounter
visitors
and
residents
are
drawn
to
the
area
for
the
natural
beauty.
Enough
of
the
destruction
of
the
natural
ecosystem.
You
will
destroy
the
beautiful
wildlife
and
soon
Tarpon
will
look
like
a
sea
of
houses
with
no
natural
beauty
might
as
well
be
another
disgusting.
B
Desolate
area
like
California
any
member
voting
for
the
destruction
of
the
natural
habitat
is
nothing
more
than
fulfilling
financial
gain
and
greed.
Look
around
and
look
at
the
destruction
of
the
greedy
Builders
have
done
to
us.
19.
looks
like
the
project
in
the
inner
city.
Is
this
what
you
want?
Tarpon
Springs,
to
look
like
put
your
greed
aside
and
think
of
the
natural
habitat
that
can't
be
replaced.
B
A
Jacobs
that
ends
the
public
meeting
I'm,
going
to
close
that
now
and
we're
going
to
go
to
commission
discussion
amongst
ourselves.
We've
got
three
choices
for
this
evening.
One
is
not
to
require
a
bond.
Secondly,
to
not
require
a
bond
with
a
condition
to
meet
again
in
the
future,
after
certain
conditions
are
met
and
then,
thirdly,
a
bond
for
a
specific
amount
and
a
time
frame
for
which
to
obtain
the
bond.
A
So
I'm
going
to
go
ahead
and
go
to
I'm
going
to
ask
each
I
know.
Commissioner:
Carr's
got
his
lights
on,
but
I'm
going
to
start
down
with
from
a
seniority
perspective
and
go
vice
mayor
Lunt.
First,
please!
If
you
have
any
comments.
C
Yeah
actually
I
have
a
few.
My
apologies,
if
they're
not
exactly
cogent,
I've
been
kind
of
trying
to
put
them
up.
Well,
we've
been
talking.
C
The
Morgan
group
was
pushing
around
a
lot
of
figures,
a
lot
of
large
figures,
we're
talking.
You
know
somewhat
of
an
alleged
51
000
or
51
million
255
612
dollars
in
possible
losses
that
might
occur.
Should
this
not
happen,
so
the
Morgan
group
not
happen
or
the
envelope
property
not
be
developed.
C
My
thought
is
that
they
build
risk
into
their
proposals.
They
build
risk
into
everything
they
do.
They
have
probably
built
risk
into
this
project
as
well.
I
wouldn't
be
surprised
if
they
had
re-evaluated
that
risk.
Given
the
circumstances
of
the
last
several
months
also
I
think
they're
giving
us
what
may
be
their
perfect
figure.
C
As
Mr
kuleanos
explained,
there's
not
a
lot
of
detail
behind
the
numbers
that
they've
shown
us.
We
have
to
sort
of
take
them
at
their
word
that
there's
enough
substantiating
evidence
behind
that
to
to
require
or
to
to
come
to
those
figures
they
mentioned
their
Pursuit
cost.
So
far
are
3.6
million
dollars.
C
I
would
suggest
that
that
3.6
million
dollars
to
a
large
part
would
be
something
that
they
would
know
was
at
risk
in
a
Pursuit
cost
because
I'm
sure
not
every
deal
they
pursue
comes
to
fruition,
so
there
there's
that
they
mentioned
they've
already
applied
for
permits
from
the
city.
C
This
means
that
we
once
again
are
going
to
have
to
determine
whether
you
are
meeting
our
comprehensive
code
and
and
I'm
I'm.
You
know
that's
for
a
different
discussion.
There's
been
some
valid
arguments
on
both
sides.
My
personal
feeling
is
that
this
is
far
exceeding
what
we
really
wanted
to
get
into.
As
a
city,
commission
I
think
we
should
not
require
a
bond.
I
also
think
that
we
should
let
it
play
out
in
the
actual
court.
H
D
D
H
H
H
Obtaining
all
applicable
permits
from
other
agencies
Etc,
so
I
guess
what
I'm
getting
around
is.
My
thought
process
in
this
is
to
propose
no
bond
until
the
applicant
has
received
all
permits
from
Swift
Mud
DLT,
whoever
else
they
need
to
receive
them
and
then
submits
a
permit
request
to
the
city
of
Tarpon
Springs.
At
that
point,
the
concerned
citizens
would
have
three
and
a
half
weeks
or
whatever,
to
produce
a
premium
for
a
bond
to
protect
whoever
the
city
and
the
applicant
have
losses.
At
that
point.
D
So
if
you're,
if
it's
going
to
be
a
partial
stay,
in
other
words,
allow
them
to
continue
on
with
their
applications
with
All
State
agencies,
then
then
you
need
to
specifically
provide
that,
because
right
now
the
motion
to
stay
is
to
stop
all
actions
relative
to
all
permits,
and
so,
if
you
want
to
accept
that
out,
we
need
that
to
be
set
out
in
the
actual
order.
This
would
be
a
motion
to
stay
in
issuance
of
city
permits,
but
not
necessarily
A
stay
on
the
other
permits.
D
So
it's
in
the
last
paragraph
on
page
13
and
14,
and
it
reads
as
such
concerned:
citizens
respectfully
request
the
commission
as
a
lower
tribunal
in
this
proceeding,
one
stay:
the
enforcement
of
resolution,
20
21-52,
ordinance,
2021-15
and
resolution
2021-60,
that's
the
one
that
you're
referring
to
and
two
stay,
the
issuance
of
any
building
permit
tree
removal,
permit
certificate
of
occupancy
or
any
other
permit,
contract
land
use
approval
or
any
other
approval
from
the
city
relating
to
the
Anclote
Harbor
project
until
the
disposition
of
the
petitions.
A
D
E
D
A
D
E
A
H
H
K
Thank
you,
mayor,
City
attorney
I
have
a
few
questions.
Oh,
is
this
a
quasi-judicial
or
evidentiary
hearing
right
now,
I.
D
K
Are
the
affected
parties
the
same
from
the
previous
board,
or
does
this
board
decide
who
the
affected
parties
are?
Currently
it's.
K
This
all
goes
to
court.
You
know
the
city
of
Tarpon
Springs
has
sued,
this
current
board
will
be
deposed,
and
will
the
previous
board
be
deposed.
D
It
all
depends
on
what
the
lawyers
want
to
do.
They
may
ask
for
other
people
to
be
deposed,
but
it's
not
necessarily
something.
That's
a
given.
K
Okay,
we
we
did
have
our
other
litigation
attorney,
Jay
Daniel.
He
did
devise
that
you
know
this
is
just
an
unprecedented
situation.
It's
Unique
all
around
for
all
parties
for
where
we're
at
now.
It's
special,
this
obviously
hasn't
been
seen
before
you
know.
Mr
Daniel
did
also
state
that
we
as
a
board.
We
have
a
wide
lateral
movement
and
options.
K
Because
that's
what
we're
here
to
talk
about
is
mitigation
of
loss
and
and
for
the
record
I
did
get
a
response
back
from
our
City
attorney
Friday
afternoon
about
3
30
to
4
30
PM
that
Mr
Ed
Armstrong
did
reply
back
why
the
land
planner
was
needed
for
the
project
in
which
I
did
reply
back
early
Saturday
morning.
So
I
do
believe.
K
There
was
ample
time
and
I
do
believe
that
everyone
was
well
aware
of
what
hearing
we're
having
today
and
last
Tuesday
the
city
of
Tarpon
Springs
and
not
stopping
my
opinion,
anyone's
constitutional
right
to
build
or
say
you
can't
I
think
this
is
a
process,
that's
pretty
much
saying,
let's
wait
and
see
and
I
believe
we
should
go
with
and
I
don't
know
if
we
can,
with
a
way
of
granting
the
state
seeing
if
all
the
bonds
are
all
the
permits
are
issued,
then
having
another
meeting
here
to
decide
if
there
will
or
won't
be
a
bond
I
think
it's
the
best
way
for
for
the
city
to
create
an
you
know,
mitigating
losses
and
talk
about
how
soon
things
can
happen,
because
right
now,
if
we
do
that
I
believe
the
the
ball
is
in
Morgan
group's
Court,
they
will
try
to
do
everything
they
can
to
obtain
the
permits
that
they
that
they
need
to
in
a
timely
manner.
K
And
maybe
we
can
and
then
have
a
discussion
back
here
on.
Should
there
be
or
should
or
shouldn't
there
be
a
bond.
So
that
would
be
my
recommendations
and
I.
Don't
necessarily
say
that,
once
the
permits
are
granted
that
there
definitely
has
to
be
a
bond
I'd
like
to
have
another
special
meeting,
whatever
the
public,
the
legal
public
interest
is
to
be
able
to
notify
everybody
and
come
back
here
again.
So
that's
all
I
have
mayor.
A
Thank
you,
commissioner.
Yes,
commissioner
Eisen,
are
you
still
without
comment?
Correct?
Okay,
first,
let
me
say:
I'm
not
a
gambler
and
we're
asking
the
gamble
tonight
as
far
as
setting
a
bond
predicting
whether
the
courts
will
rule
in
two
days,
six
months,
18
months,
there's
a
in
my
opinion,
conflicting
information
that
we
received
and
many
of
the
experts
that
could
answer
those
questions,
including
agents
of
those
state
and
federal
regulatory.
A
A
And
also
the
one
thing
I
said
last
time,
which
I
still
really
believe
wholeheartedly
that
I'm
here
for
the
public
interest
and
that
this
discussion
has
been
largely
been
about
money
and
I
know
that
there's
been
we've
talked
about
the
environment
but
I'm
also
very
sensitive
to
people.
The
people
that
are
on
US,
19
I've
said
that
publicly.
So
that's
nothing
new
here,
so
I
I
do
feel
that
there's
a
public
interest
element
in
this
matter.
A
I
also
think
that
there
is
a
way
to
Cross
or
pretty
much
proceed
in
a
fair
way
to
both
parties
without
causing
any
angst
on
either
side
and
then
also
to
let
the
courts
deal
with
this
matter
and
then
we'll
find
out
what
the
ultimate
decision
is
and
unfortunately
and
I
I
again,
I,
don't
know
the
whether
the
timing
of
the
courts
and
and
bonds
and
things
like
that
are
going
going
to
coincide,
but
in
the
time
in
the
meantime,
what
I
would
like
to
do
is
approach
this
and
I've.
A
Given
this
some
thought
and
also
I've
had
conversations
with
Ms
Vincent,
not
even
involving
this
bond
hearing
in
Past
Times
with.
When
would
we
be
required
to
issue
a
construction
permit?
It
has
to
go
back
to
that
Florida
State
Statute.
That
says
that
the
city
can't
hold
up
a
construction
permit
or
a
building
permit
from
the
city,
because
Swift
Mud
hasn't
issued
its
permit
or
the
Army
Corps
hasn't
issued
its
permit
and
what
Mrs
Vincent
provided
me
was
in
the
wisdom
of
our
staff
they
built
in
protection
in
that
development
order.
A
The
development
order
actually
resolution
2021-60.
That
was
the
approval
of
the
application
and
they
provided
several
conditions
in
that,
and
that
also
includes
the
outside
agencies.
It
doesn't
allude
to
the
the
bond,
it's
I'm,
sorry,
the
the
process
of
the
state,
whether
state
agency
should
stop
I
doubt
that
they
do
anything
we'd
say
anyway,
but
it
does
it's
very
specific
that
we
issued
this
resolution
in
cooperation
with
the
Morgan
group
and
the
commission.
A
The
three
that
actually
voted
for
the
project
and
the
provisions
in
there
are
are
fairly
comprehensive
and
they
go
beyond
the
state
and
federal
permits,
so
I.
What
I
would
like
to
do,
and-
and
that
is
the
one
thing
that
is
an
absolute
in
this
matter-
are
those
conditions
and
there's
approximately
seven
or
nine
conditions
in
this
resolution,
which
the
residents
don't
have,
and
it's
certainly
not
the
backup.
A
But
it's
items
four
five:
seven
through
thirteen
of
section
four
of
the
resolution
and
the
approach
that
I
would
like
to
suggest
this
evening
to
kind
of
make
sure
that
we
sweep
everything
up
the
Federal
permits
and
anything
else
that
the
staff
May
re
may
need,
which
is
already
part
of
this
resolution,
that,
in
effect,
Morgan
group
has
agreed
to
is
resolved
prior
to
any
city
permits
being
issued.
A
And
so
what
I'd
like
to
do
is
take
the
Approach
at
least
suggests
to
the
commission
that
that
we
take
the
approach
that
a
bond
is
not
required
before
the
date
that
all
of
the
items,
as
I
mentioned,
four
five.
Seven
through
16
of
section
four
of
resolution,
2021-16
are
verified
complete
by
the
city
staff
and
at
that
time
the
city
commission
would
meet
again
within
seven
days
of
that
date
to
reconsider
a
bond
and
I.
A
B
I
ask
a
question:
mayor:
Ed,
Armstrong
I'm,
an
attorney
with
the
law
firm
of
hillward
Henderson
600
Cleveland
Street
Suite
800
in
Clearwater
I
was
listening
very
carefully,
sir
I'm.
Not
certain
is
what
you're
saying
an
attempt
to
modify
the
approvals
that
were
granted
no
previously
by
the
commission.
No.
A
A
We're
not
modifying
resolution
2021-16
I'm,
simply
tying
the
requirements
of
the
the
the
conditions
of
resolution
2021-60
as
a
condition
for
issuing
to
make
a
determination
of
when
the
commission
would
come
back
and
reconsider
the
bond
at
that
time.
In
other
words,
at
that
time
you
would
have
all
of
your
state
federal
permits
in
hand
you
would
have
whatever
else
is
needed
from
the
standpoint
of
the
that's
required
in
here,
and
that
at
that
time
the
staff
would
deem
it
to
be
complete
right.
A
H
A
Hang
on
a
second
commissioner
Carr,
let
me
just
think
about
this.
Second,
all
right
go
ahead.
H
I
was
gonna,
say,
I
think
you
you
have
at
least
three
of
us
that
are
yeah
I'm
aligned
with
what
you're
saying
my
thought
process
was
to
set
a
bond
tonight,
so
we
don't
have
to
meet
a
second
time
or
a
third
time,
but
I
understand
what
you're
saying,
but
that's
fine
with
me,
I'm
it's
aligned
with
what
I
my
thinking
is
in
this
too
and
I
believe
there's
another
commissioner.
That's
somewhat
aligned
with
that
as
well.
A
B
A
Goes
what
I
want
to
do
is:
are
there
any
commission
or
other
Commissioners
that
have
any
comments
that
they
want
to
make
in
this
regard?.
K
Yes,
mayor
I,
just
want
to
after
clarifying
with
both
attorneys
and
speaking
on
this
matter,
with
the
rational
basis
that
would
be
used
it.
It
does
give
many
aspects
and
it's
more
wide
open
unless
our
City
attorney
wants
to
correct
me
on
issues
including,
but
not
limited,
to
the
not
limited
to
the
public
interest
from
safety
road
hazards.
You
know
all
types
of
stuff
that
that's
why
I
wanted
to
make
sure
they
did
state
that
the
rational
basis
would
be
their
route
to
go,
and
you
know
this
whole
project.
K
That
is
probably
one
of
the
reasons
why
you
have
this
eclectic
Bunch
that
you
have
up
here
right
now,
and
so,
but
we
also
want
to
protect
the
city
we
want
to
do
what's
right,
we
don't
want
to
make
sure
we're
not
hindered
from
being
able
to
do
Capital
Improvement
projects
down
the
road
that
to
help
to
shape
the
city.
But
I
do
hear
from
a
few
of
the
Commissioners
that
there
is
a
safe
approach
to
make
sure
that
there
is
no.
K
A
You
what
I'm
going
to
do
is
I
need
to
have
a
a
I
need
to
have
a
10-minute
recess.
I
need
to
discuss,
is
Ms
Vinson's
still
here,
she's,
not
okay,
that's!
Okay!
Let
me
I
need
a
10-minute
recess
to
discuss
this
with
the
City
attorney.
A
Our
our
meeting
is
reconvened
at
9,
42.,
I.
Obviously,
I
spoke
to
both
the
City
attorney
and
City
Manager
on
this
and
I
want
to
make
it
clear
for
the
record
or
whatever
we
want
to
describe
it
at
this
point
that
we're
not
changing
any
of
the
conditions
of
approval.
We're
allowing
the
Morgan
group
to
proceed
with
anything
that
they're
doing
outside
of
the
the
city
of
Tarpon
Springs.
There's
no
campaigned
on
our
part
that
we're
going
to
seek
putting
a
stay
on
that
outside
and
I.
A
Note,
Mr
Armstrong's
objection
for
the
record
and
I
still
believe
that
we
should,
in
terms
of
a
a
comprehensive
approach
to
this,
to
make
sure
that
there
aren't
any
loose
ends
that
wants.
These
items
are
complete
then
we
would
reconvene
to
because
that
would
be
the
earliest
that
the
Morgan
group
could
pull
a
permit,
regardless
of
whether
their
Federal
permits
or
have
been
issued
or
state
agent
permits
have
been
issued.
A
There
are
several
other
items
up
in
here
that
have
to
be
satisfied
as
well
before
a
development
permit,
whether
it's
building
construction
or
grubbing
permit
is
issued,
and
so
it
would
still
be
in
the
resolution.
21
I'm,
sorry
2021-60
items,
four,
five,
seven
through
16
of
section
four
I'm,
not
including
actually
let
me
just
go
back
and
I-
was
still
asked
the
City
attorney
about
six,
that's
beyond
us.
A
So
basically
it
would
be
items
four
through
16
that
that
would
have
to
be
verified
complete
by
the
city
staff,
at
which
time
the
commission
would
meet
again
and
I
think
seven
days
and
what
I
mean
by
that
is
seven
calendar
days.
A
We're
we're
24,
7
operation
here
at
the
city,
so
seven
calendar
days
from
that
date
to
reconsider
a
bond
and
I
think
that
would,
in
in
my
conscience,
satisfy
the
issues
that
the
concerned
citizens
have
and
also
addressed
any
concerns
as
far
as
risk
or
loss
that
the
Morgan
group
may
have.
H
A
You
could
hand
that
to
Mr
commissioner
Carr,
that's
something
I
I
wrote
down
earlier
today.
A
That's
something
that
basically
I
just
described
to
make
sure
that
okay
yeah,
that
would
be
the
motion
and
that
I'm
looking
for
that
motion
unless
and
we
can
try
it
and
see
what
happens
if
we
want
to.
If
we
don't
want
to
bond-
and
we
can
do
not
second
emotion
and-
and
there
be
another
motion
for
no
bond
at
all-
or
we
can,
you
know,
make
a
motion
for
a
bond
and
then
go
from
there
is
first.
Let
me
ask:
is
there
any
other
discussion.
A
H
Yeah
I
just
got
one
comment
to
make
sure
the
initial
stay
vote.
I've
still
voted
no
for
I
still
didn't
think
that
the
concerned
citizens
met
the
requirement
that
was
needed.
But
in
this
aspect
we
need
to
figure
out
what
we're
going
to
do
with
the
bond
requirement
and
I'm
going
to
support
what
was
discussed
tonight
here
from
the
mayor
and
the
other
commissioners.
H
So
with
that,
I
will
make
a
motion
to
not
require
a
bond
and
the
time
being
until
and
there
would
be
a
further
I'm
sorry
there'll,
be
a
new
meeting
set
seven
days
after
the
Morgan
group
has
supplied
all
the
requirements
and
the
resolution
2021-60.
H
H
A
We
have
a,
we
have
a
motion
and
a
second
are
there
any
commissioner
comments.
Do
we
go
to
public
comment
on
this?
No
okay.
Do
we
have
any
commissioner
comments
on
this
roll
call?
Please
Mr.
B
K
H
A
J
J
I
can
make
a
comment
now.
I
want
to
thank
city
manager.
That
was
an
excellent
fireworks
that
you
set
up.
I
got
nothing
but
good
feedback
from
everybody,
so
you
are
commended.
Thank.
A
M
J
A
Okay,
Vice
Maryland.
Do
you
have
anything.
C
Outside
of
the
fireworks
I,
say,
I
think
both
the
city,
employee
picnic
and
the
the
picnic
was
thrown
for
the
city.
Citizens
were
both
Stellar,
but
they
were
out
of
scope
and
it's
good
that
everybody's
sort
of
recovering
from
covet
and
out
and
mixing
around
it
was
great
to
see
the
kids
having
a
great
time.
So
thank
you.
K
A
Thank
you.
It
was
it.
It
was
actually
a
peaceful
day
for
the
most
part,
except
for
the
fireworks
every
now
and
then
and
the
dog's
not
being
happy
but
other
than
that
it
was
a
very
pleasant
day
and
I
really
don't
have
anything
else.
I
just
don't
mind
telling
the
residents
that
this
is
a
pretty
stressful
time
for
the
commission
of
inheriting
a
lot
of
this
from
the
former
commission
and
we're
dealing
it
with
it.
A
The
best
that
we
can
in
his
fair
manner
as
we
can
to
both
parties
and
I,
know,
there's
still
going
to
be
arguments
one
way
or
the
other.
But
again
all
we
can
do
is
the
best
that
we're
able
to
and
and
and
just
keep
looking
forward.
We've
got
the
budget
coming
up
with
some
challenges
there
and
we're
going
to
focus
on
doing
things
for
the
residents
in
that
one
and
I
feel
really
good
about
that,
and
we've
got
some
other
items.
Exciting
items
coming
up
pretty
soon
as
well.