HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.23.2026 City Council Minutes City of Clero:oszt
MINiJT'ES
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
June 23,2026
CALL TO ORDER
'The City Council met in a regular meeting on Tuesday, June 23, 2026, at 3:00 pm in the Clermont City
Council Chambers. Mayor Murry called the meeting to order at 3:00 pm with the following Council
Members present: Council Members Strange,Bain,Petersen and Myers_
Other City officials present were City Attorney Waugh, Deputy City Manager Matthys and City Clerk
Howe.
INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Father Mark Wajada of Blessed Sacrament Catholic Church gave the invocation, followed by the Pledge
of Allegiance.
PRESENTATIONS
Parks and Recreation Director Forman recognized Park Ranger Carlos Quavos for his heroic actions during
an incident at Waterfront Park_ An 85-year-old woman suffered n serious fall,and Ranger Quavos quickly
used an A"I'V to transport her while supporting her to waiting paramedics, signifrcantly reducing response
time_ He noted that Carlos'prompt actions may have improved the woman•.outcome and recognized both
Carlos and his supervisor,Corey, for their dedication and service_
Chris Carmody of Gray Robinson, presented an overview of the 2026 Florida Legislative Session,
highlighting the citys successful advocacy efTP ts, strong relationships with the Lake County legislative
delegation, and the overall state budget process_ He discussed the Legislature's focus on reducing state
spending, Funding priorities for infrastructure and public safety, and the city's legislative appropriation
request,which is expected to receive favorable consideration_The presentation also provided an update on
proposed property tax reform, including potential increases to the homestead exemption, changes to
rollback rate calculations, and the anticipated financial and operational impacts on local governments iF
approved by voters. Additional legislative updates included sovereign immunity, noting that increased
liability caps could also significantly impact hospital districts and may influence the Governor's decision
on the legislation, as well as updates on nuisance abatement, local government authority, and other bills
affecting municipalities_ Mr_ Carmody concluded by noting that several proposals impacting local
governments did not advance during the session_
Council asked questions regarding the timing of federal funding requests through Congressman Webster
and were advised that,although many earmark requests have already been submitted,it remains beneficial
to work with his office on funding opportunities and grants before he leaves office. Additional discussion
focused on the implementation of the proposed property tax reforms,including clarification that the changes
would not affect the city'.Fiscal Year 2027 budget but could impact Future budgets, and that maintaining
current millage rates under the revised rollback formula may require a supennajority vote. Questions also
addressed the potential effects oFproposed sovereign immunity changes,with the presenter explaining they
could increase insurance costs For local governments and hospital districts, which may factor into the
Governor's decision on the bill_ T'he discussion concluded with clarification that the nuisance abatement
legislation strengthens enforcement authority beyond illegal gambling to other nuisance activities, while
guidance on the new Diversity,Equity and Inclusion law continues to evolve.
i
City of Clermont
MINUTES
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
June 23,2026
PUBLIC COMMENT
Otis Taylor, 3686 Caladesi - expressed concerns about the condition of the city's bike lanes and the
maintenance of the Victory Point area,requesting cleanup to improve safety and appearance.
Paula Hoisington, 564 E. Desoto Street — thanked the Mayor and City Council for partnering on the
Juneteenth celebration, shared that the event had a strong turnout, recognized student art contest winners,
and encouraged continued youth participation to promote learning, cultural awareness, and community
engagement.
John Fox,811 Crooked Branch Drive—expressed concerns regarding the clear-cutting and development of
a nearby property, including potential impacts to wildlife, traffic, and surrounding neighborhoods, and
requested information on the development approval process.
Mayor Murry advised that the development was subject to an established review process, and City staff
would follow up with the resident to provide additional information.
Kurt Schuh, Clermont resident—thanked City Clerk staff for their work with public records requests and
shared information regarding a new TSA Precheck benefit for qualifying disabled veterans.
AGENDA CHANGES
City Manager Van Wagner informed the Council of the following agenda change:
City Manager Van Wagner requested for this item to be tabled for September 22,2026.
Item No. 14-Ordinance No.2026-014,Amend LDC Final
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLERMONT, LAKE
COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 125, TO ESTABLISH PROCEDURES
FOR THE REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF MOBILE FOOD DISPENSING VEHICLES
PURSUANT TO SECTION 509.102, FLORIDA STATUTES; PROVIDING FOR
CONFLICT, SEVERABILITY, CODIFICATION, ADMINISTRATIVE CORRECTION
OF SCRIVENER'S ERRORS, PUBLICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE.
City Clerk Howe read the title aloud.
Council Member Bain motioned to table Ordinance No. 2026-014 to September 22,2026.
Seconded by Council Member Petersen. The motion passed 5-0 with all members present
voicing aye.
City Manager Van Wagner requested approval for an emergency purchase of two air conditioning units for
the second and third floors of City Hall following a recent lightning strike that impacted the existing system.
The estimated cost is approximately$300,000,with staff proposing to utilize the city's continuing services
contractor,Westbrook,to assist with obtaining pricing and expediting the replacement.City Manager Van
Wagner noted that current temperatures on those floors have reached up to 95 degrees, creating an
unsuitable working environment, and that temporary repairs are being pursued while the replacement
process begins.
2
City of Clermont
MINUTES
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
June 23,2026
Mayor Murry and Council Member Bain supported moving forward with the emergency replacement of
the City Hall air conditioning units, citing ongoing system failures, extreme temperatures, and the impact
on staff working conditions. City Attorney Waugh confirmed the purchase could proceed under the city's
emergency procurement procedures.
Council Member Bain motioned to approve as presented by the City Manager. Seconded
by Council Member Myers.
Council Member Strange requested clarification and supporting information regarding the $300,000
emergency air conditioning replacement request, including the cost and timeline for repairing the existing
system versus replacement.Assistant Director of Public Servies Maiworm advised that the temporary repair
was estimated at approximately$14,000 and could restore cooling by the following day but noted this was
the seventh air conditioning/heating-related issue this year due to the age of the system.Discussion followed
regarding emergency procurement procedures, with City Attorney Waugh explaining that the city has
flexibility to proceed under the emergency process, while Council considered obtaining additional quotes
for the long-term replacement to ensure responsible use of taxpayer funds.
The motion passed 4-1 with Council Member Strange opposed.
CONSENT AGENDA
Mayor Murry advised the next item on the agenda for consideration was the Consent Agenda and requested
anyone wishing to have any item pulled for discussion to please come forward at this time.
Item No. 1 —Council Meeting Minutes Consider approval of the May 26, 2026, and
June 9,2026,meeting minutes.
Item No. 2—Board Appointment Consider appointing Christopher Gonzales to
the Code Enforcement Board.
Item No.3—Resolution No.2026-018R Consider the release of a utility easement located
Utility Easement Vacation at the Church at South Lake,originally dedicated
to the Clermont Towne Centre plat.
Item No.4—Resolution No.2026-019R Consider approval of Fiscal Year 2026 Budget
Amend FYE 2026 Amendment No. 3.
Item No.5—Bid Award and Budget Amendment Consider award approval to Q-ICE Builders LLC
Installation of Two Fishing Piers in the amount of$157,200 for the replacement of
two fishing piers damaged by Hurricane Milton,
and additional $30,000 funding for the addition
of an ADA-accessible concrete walkway.
Item No.6—Bid Award Consider awarding term contracts to Concrete on
Ready Mix Concrete Services Demand, LLC, and BSLN-US-8 Construction
Services, LLC for ready-mix concrete services.
3
City of Clermont
MINUTES
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
June 23,2026
Item No. 7—Bid Award Consider awarding bid to Suncoast Chrysler Jeep,
Public Services vehicle Inc.,dba Suncoast Chrysler Jeep Dodge Ram,for
the purchase of one(1)Dodge Ram 4500 Chassis
Cab with Dump Body Upfit in the total budgeted
amount of$84,800.
Item No.8—Bid Award Consider awarding Request for Bid No.26-094 to
Purchase of a Portable Air Compressor JAG Tech Enterprises, LLC for the purchase of
one (1) portable air compressor in the budgeted
amount of$63,692.75.
Item No.9—Request For Proposal Award Consider RFP award and execute a Term
Police Department Janitorial Services Contract with ESB Light LLC d/b/a PrimeWork
General to provide Janitorial Services for the
Police Department.
Item No. 10—Facility Use and License Consider approving an agreement addendum
Agreement Addendum allowing a portion of the space to be leased to
Boys& Girls Club/Thrive Thrive Communities,and the Use Agreement for
the secluded space designated for their home
school program.
Item No. 11—Easement Agreement Consider an access agreement with the property
1166 Short Street owner to provide access to 12th Street via Short
Street.
Council Member Strange stated that her Lake County tourism update from the June 9 meeting was missing
from the draft minutes.
Council Member Strange requested clarification regarding Item No. 5,the installation of two fishing piers,
and confirmed that the budget amendment was related to grant funding received for the project which relates
to Item No.4.
Council Member Strange pulled Consent Agenda Items No. 10 and No. 11.
Assistant Director of Public Servies Maiworm explained that Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA)funding originally allocated to replace the two fishing piers was redirected,with FEMA approval,
to help fund the 8th Street Pier project. As a result, the City is now funding the replacement of the two
fishing piers through the budget amendment.
Council Member Strange pulled Consent Agenda Item No. 5.
City Clerk Howe clarified that the requested update regarding the Tourist Development Council was
included in the draft minutes under the third bullet point on page 16.
Council Member Bain motioned to approve Consent Agenda Items 1-4 and 6-9. Seconded
by Council Member Petersen. The motion passed 5-0 with all members present voicing
4
City of Clermont
MINUTES
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
June 23,2026
Item No.5—Bid Award and Budget Amendment,Installation of Two Fishing Piers
Council Member Strange requested clarification regarding the funding for the replacement fishing piers,
asking whether the decision to redirect FEMA funding from the hurricane-damaged piers to the 8th Street
Pier project had been made by the city and whether the project referenced was the Meet Us in the
Middle®/8th Street Pier.
Assistant Director of Public Servies Maiworm clarified that FEMA fully funded the demolition of the old
8th Street Pier,and the FEMA funding originally allocated to rebuild the two waterfront fishing piers was
reallocated to the Meet Us in the Middle®project.
Council Member Strange asked whether Council had approved the reallocation of FEMA funding and
whether those funds could instead be used for the replacement fishing piers. Assistant Director of Public
Servies Maiworm responded that the reallocation had been approved through the FEMA process but would
verify whether the funding could be redirected back to the original project.
Mayor Murry opened public comments.There were no comments.Mayor Murry closed public comments.
Council Member Bain motioned to approve Consent Agenda Item 5. Seconded by Council
Member Myers. The motion passed 4-1 with Council Member Strange opposed.
Item No. 10—Facility Use and License Agreement Addendum,Boys& Girls Club/Thrive
Council Member Strange requested clarification of the proposed agreement, asking whether it was a new
contract or an assignment of an existing agreement and,if new,whether it had been competitively bid. She
stated that additional background on the procurement process would help the public better understand how
the agreement was being considered without a separate bidding process.
City Attorney Waugh stated that he was not involved in negotiating the agreement and only assisted with
drafting the contract based on terms that had already been provided to him.
Parks and Recreation Director Forman explained that Thrive approached the city seeking space to operate
a homeschool program at the Arts and Recreation Center. After determining they needed more exclusive
space than available through the Boys & Girls Club, staff coordinated with the Boys & Girls Club, who
agreed to the arrangement,which reduced their fee and provided an opportunity to recruit students into their
after-school program. He confirmed the agreement did not go through a formal bidding process because it
originated from a direct request for space.
Council Member Strange asked for clarification on why the agreement did not follow the city's typical
bidding process.City Attorney Waugh explained that bidding was not required,as the agreement is a license
for use of an existing facility and does not fall under applicable public notice requirements. He noted the
item required Council approval due to the property interest involved.
Mayor Murry opened public comment.
Paula Hoisington, 564 E. Desoto Street—requested clarification on the nature of the Thrive homeschool
program and how it relates to the Boys&Girls Club program operating at the Arts and Recreation Center.
Mayor Murry clarified that Thrive is a homeschool enrichment/daytime youth program serving primarily
older students,not a traditional homeschool program,and will partner with the Boys&Girls Club to utilize
available facility space.
5
City of Clermont
MINUTES
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
June 23,2026
Mayor Murry closed public comments.
Council Member Bain stated that the agreement allows Thrive to partner with the Boys&Girls Club to use
available Arts&Recreation Center space when not in use.He explained that Thrive will pay for the space,
reducing the Boys & Girls Club's fees by approximately $45,000, generating $21,000 in revenue, and
providing a net positive financial impact on the City while supporting youth services.
Council Member Strange expressed concerns regarding potential conflicts arising from two separate
agreements for the same facility, including shared space and belongings. She questioned whether the
arrangement could instead be handled through an amendment with the Boys & Girls Club or a broader
process for other organizations to utilize available space. Council discussed that the collaboration benefits
both organizations and the city financially,with separate termination provisions in each agreement.
Council Member Strange motioned to approve Consent Agenda Item 10. Seconded by
Council Member Bain. The motion passed 5-0 with all members present voicing ave.
Item No. 11—Easement Agreement, 1166 Short Street
Council Member Strange requested clarification regarding the item, stating she felt the request may be
unnecessary because Short Street is a public street. She noted the property had previously come before
Council multiple times and expressed concerns about supporting the item without additional justification.
City Attorney Waugh explained that the item was brought forward at Council's direction to preserve Mr.
Hess's access in the event the city was to vacate the public street in the future. He stated that establishing
an easement agreement would protect the access rights even if the street were later vacated.
Council discussed the purpose of the proposed easement and the legal considerations regarding access
rights. City Attorney Waugh explained that Florida law generally provides access options for landlocked
properties through existing rights or reasonable access to a public road,and the easement was requested to
provide additional assurance of continued access if the remaining portion of Short Street were ever vacated.
It was clarified that most of Short Street had already been vacated, but the remaining portion provides
access to 12th Street, and Mr. Hess requested a permanent easement to protect that access due to future
development and potential changes.Discussion included maintenance responsibilities,with staff noting the
easement area would be maintained by the property owner, and the possibility of future consideration of
converting the area into a private road.
Mayor Murry opened public comments.
Tod Howard, 1986 Brantley Circle — provided clarification that the requested easement is intended to
preserve Mr.Hess's access to his driveway and garage in the event the remaining portion of Short Street is
vacated in the future,which could otherwise impact his property access.
Mayor Murry closed public comments.
Council Member Petersen motioned to approve Consent Agenda Item 11. Seconded by
Council Member Myers.The motion passed 4-1 with Council Member Strange opposed.
6
City of Clermont
MINUTES
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
June 23,2026
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Item No. 12—Task Order Approval, City Hall Park Stage
Parks and Recreation Director Forman reminded Council that this item, previously discussed during the
workshop,is for the design of the stage project at City Hall.
Mayor Murry opened public comments.
Valerie Schuett, 931 W. Montrose Street—suggested postponing the item, noting that a future discussion
could impact this decision.
Mayor Murry closed public comments.
Council Member Strange motioned to approve Item No. 12.Seconded by Council Member
Petersen.
Council Member Bain expressed support for delaying action rather than denying the item, stating that
tabling it to a future meeting would allow continued discussion and preserve the opportunity to revisit the
project if desired.
The motion failed 2-3 with Council Member Strange,Council Member Myers and Council
Member Petersen opposed.
Item No. 13—Request for Proposal Award,Lake Felter Park
Parks and Recreation Director Forman presented the recommendation to approve the conversion of the
existing natural grass athletic field at Lake Felter Park to a high-performance artificial turf system to address
maintenance challenges and provide year-round playability. Legacy Sports Surfacing submitted a proposal
of$510,000,with an additional recommended organic infill alternate of$98,500, for a total recommended
award of$608,500,within the$700,000 budgeted amount.
Mayor Murry opened public comments.There were no comments.Mayor Murry closed public comments.
Council raised concerns regarding a foul odor coming from the Lake Felter Park restrooms. Parks and
Recreation Director Forman advised this issue was separate from the turf project and would be coordinated
with Public Services for further evaluation.
Joyce Skowron,2354 Caledonian Street—questioned the maintenance costs of the artificial turf system and
what maintenance responsibilities or reductions would result compared to the existing natural grass field.
Parks and Recreation Director Forman explained that maintenance costs for an artificial turf multi-purpose
field are minimal, primarily involving routine upkeep such as sweeping, compared to the existing grass
field,which costs approximately$20,000 to$30,000 annually to maintain and requires periodic resodding
that can cost several hundred thousand dollars.
Council Member Bain motioned to approve Consent Agenda Item 13.Seconded by Council
Member Myers.The motion passed 5-0 with all members present voicing aye.
7
City of Clermont
MINUTES
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
June 23,2026
Item No. 14—This item was addressed earlier in the meeting.
Mayor Murry recessed the meeting at 5:05pm.
Mayor Murry reconvened the meeting at 5:16pm.
Item No. 15—Application for COPCN,Fire Dept.ALS
Fire Chief Ezell presented a proposal for the city to apply for a Certificate of Public Convenience and
Necessity (COPCN) with Lake County as the first step toward potentially establishing a city operated
Emergency Medical Services (EMS) transport system. The presentation outlined current response time
challenges, the need for additional ambulance infrastructure, a phased approach beginning with two
ambulances,estimated costs and funding sources,and emphasized that obtaining a COPCN would preserve
the city's future option to provide transport services without committing the city to implementation or
expenditures.
Mayor Murry opened public comments.
Kurt Schuh, Clermont Resident — questioned whether previous discussions with Lake County regarding
EMS transport had already resulted in a denial and sought clarification on the status of those conversations.
Discussion clarified that the COPCN application is the next step in the process,and if Lake County denies
the request, there may be options to challenge the decision, but it could involve a more complex legal
process.
Mayor Murry closed public comments.
Council discussed the potential EMS transport program,noting that the current request is only to apply for
a COPCN and does not commit the city to creating the service.Discussion focused on the projected startup
and ongoing costs, potential savings from reduced fire apparatus usage, the role of Municipal Service
Taxing Unit (MSTU) funding, and concerns about timing, including the COPCN approval process and
existing agreements with Lake County. Fire Chief Ezell explained that obtaining the COPCN is the first
step in preserving the city's ability to provide transport services in the future, with further decisions
requiring Council approval. Council requested a copy of the application and additional information
regarding the MSTU agreement and termination timelines.
Council Member Petersen motioned to approve Item No. 15, application for the COPCN.
Seconded by Council Member Myers. The motion passed 5-0 with all members present
voicing aye.
NEW BUSINESS
Item No. 16—Variance Request,4741 Collina Terrace
Development Services Planner Day presented the variance request. The applicant, Kemp Signs& Service
Inc., is requesting a variance to the Land Development Code to install a ground sign on a property that is
currently undergoing site review.The subject property is located at 4741 Collina Ter.,within Pod H of the
Plaza Collina Planned Unit Development.
8
City of Clermont
MINUTES
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
June 23,2026
Land Development Code(LDC)Section 117-15,limits ground signs for single-occupancy commercial sites
to a maximum height of ten feet.The applicant is requesting a variance to exceed the maximum height for
an overall height of fifteen feet,measured from finished grade to the top of the sign.
The applicant indicated that the existing topography on the site limits sign visibility at the proposed location.
The subject property also has an existing ten-foot-wide utility easement along the southern property line
that restricts where a ground sign can be placed.These site constraints prevent the sign being located closer
to the property line and required it to be setback further than the minimum setback.
The applicant submitted a grading plan showing a five-foot change in elevation from State Road 50 to the
proposed sign location.The photos provided show that the proposed sign would not exceed the established
line of sight created by the existing signs within the Planned Unit Development, due to the lower grade at
the proposed sign location. The sign will meet all applicable LDC requirements, including landscaping,
which may further limit visibility of the sign without the variance.The request appears to meet the minimum
allowed to make reasonable use of the site due to existing site constraints not caused by the applicant.
Under LDC Section 101-246,a variance may only be granted with a positive finding on all review criteria.
Staff find the application provided substantial evidence meeting all five of the required criteria.Therefore,
staff recommends approval of the variance request.
A representative from Kemp Signs& Service was present and explained that the requested sign variance is
due to the required setback and underground utilities. The proposed sign is located farther back from the
property line than a previously approved sign variance and, because the grade drops approximately five
feet,the requested additional height would bring the sign to the same effective height as if it were placed at
the property line.
Mayor Murry opened public comments. There were none.Mayor Murry closed public comments.
Council discussed the proposed sign height adjustment and clarified that the request is intended to align the
sign with other nearby signs due to the site's topography. Mayor Murry noted that similar variances have
been approved for other properties in the area to address elevation differences and maintain a consistent
line of sight.
Council Member Petersen motioned to approve Item No. 16, variance for sign height.
Seconded by Council Member Myers. The motion passed 4-1 with Council Member
Strange opposed.
Item No. 17—Variance Request,Perimeter Park III
Development Services Planner Gonzalez presented the variance request. The applicant is requesting a
variance to allow a retaining wall height exceeding the six-foot maximum permitted under Land
Development Code Section 125 521(c)(2).The subject property, located on Ray Goodgame Parkway,was
annexed into the City on March 10,2026, with an Industrial future land use designation and Planned Unit
Development (PUD) zoning to allow M 1 industrial uses. The PUD approval provides flexibility in site
design while establishing specific conditions for project development. The conceptual plan included
approximately 185,000 square feet of industrial/warehouse space across three buildings. Waivers were
granted for cut and fill, and a special condition was imposed requiring a 100 foot right of way dedication
for the planned extension of Hooks Street due to physical site constraints caused by a depression area,
9
City of Clermont
MINUTES
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
June 23,2026
During the initial site review,the applicant did not anticipate the extent of grading that would be required
until detailed site design was underway.The project engineer has since advised that increasing the retaining
wall height is necessary to address challenges associated with the site's topography. As a result, the
applicant is requesting a variance to allow three retaining walls to exceed the 6-foot maximum height,with
a proposed maximum height of up to 20 feet, rather than the limit established under Land Development
Code Section 125 521.The tallest portions of the retaining walls are located along the north-west and north-
east corners of the property, oriented inward toward the project. Lake County, which will construct the
roadway extension,has noted that the proposed retaining wall adjacent to the future Hooks Street extension
will require structural design analysis and calculations due to the roadway being elevated above the existing
grade.
The requested variance to allow a retaining wall height of up to 20 feet is inconsistent with the character of
surrounding properties. The proposed height may be considered excessive and potentially intrusive to
adjacent properties. Because the site is currently undeveloped, the project could be designed in a less
intensive manner that avoids the need for a single 20-foot wall,including options such as stepped or terraced
retaining wall configurations to reduce visual and physical impacts.
Section 101-246 of the Land Development Code requires a positive finding on all the review criteria and
findings to grant a variance.Staff have reviewed the application as presented and find the application cannot
meet a positive finding on two of the five criteria. Therefore, staff recommends denial of the variance
request to the Land Development Code.
Dave Schmitt of Dave Schmitt Engineering,Inc.provided an update on the requested wall variance,noting
that the design has been revised multiple times. The developer reduced the building length and shifted the
building location,resulting in a reduced wall height of approximately 3-10 feet on the west side and 10-15
feet along the north side. The applicant confirmed the wall will remain inward facing and requested
approval of the revised variance.
Mayor Murry opened public comments.There were no comments. Mayor Murry closed public comments.
Discussion ensued regarding preserving Clermont's natural hills and topography, with concerns raised
about altering the terrain and the importance of adhering to existing code requirements.It was clarified that
the project involves filing and stabilizing an existing low area rather than removing hills, and that the
proposed wall would provide structural support for the site and future Hook Street improvements.
Council Member Strange motioned to approve Item No. 17.
Development Services Planner Gonzalez requested clarification regarding the requested wall height,
confirming that the variance was for the revised 10 to 15-foot height rather than the original 20-foot request.
Council discussed the revised wall height request, noting concerns with exceeding the City's code limits
while also considering the need for roadway support and the developer's dedication of right-of-way for the
Hook Street extension.Staff clarified that the wall is intended to stabilize and support the site due to existing
topographic conditions, not to remove hills, and that the developer had reduced the building footprint to
minimize the wall height. Council discussed whether a reduced height could be structurally feasible but
ultimately agreed the item should be considered as presented.
10
City of Clermont
MINUTES
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
June 23,2026
Seconded by Council Member Petersen. The motion failed 1-4 with Council Member
Strange, Council Member Bain, Council Member Myers and Council Member Petersen
opposed.
Item No. 18—Variance Request, 1391 Citrus Tower Blvd.
Development Services Planner Day presented the variance request. The applicant, Ingrid Cajiao, is
requesting a variance to the Land Development Code(LDC)to install a sign on the existing building located
at 1391 Citrus Tower Blvd. The subject property is located within the Citrus Tower Commercial Center
and is designated with the C-2 General Commercial Zoning District.
LDC Section 117-8 specifically prohibits the installation of roof signs within the city limits.The applicant
is requesting a variance to install a roof sign on the upper slope of the hip roof of the existing building.
The applicant indicated that the building's design prevents a wall sign from being installed on the existing
fagade due to the building lacking a vertical flat wall surface below the roof line.The applicant is claiming
a practical hardship due to the code restricting sign placement to areas that are not physically available on
the building.
When reviewing prior occupancies on the subject property, staff have found areas on the existing building
where wall signs were previously installed. In 2008, First Green Bank installed a wall sign on the west
fagade of the cupola.In 2019,Ellie Lou's Brews&BBQ installed a wall sign on the west fagade under the
roofline, between the supporting pillars. Similar wall signs would be supported in these locations under
LDC Section 117-15.
Staff's review of the building elevations shows locations for both primary and secondary walls signs.Under
LDC Section 117-15,the building may have one primary wall sign on each wall of the building,parallel or
perpendicular to a road.This would allow up to three primary wall signs,one each on the north,south,and
west side of the building.Additionally,the code permits secondary wall signs on up to two walls,provided
they do not exceed fifty percent of the primary sign's square footage.
Staff are unable to support the variance request due to it not being the minimum allowed to make reasonable
use of the building. The LDC provides multiple compliant signage options for a single-occupancy
commercial site,and previous businesses at the subject property were able to meet the intent of the LDC.
Under LDC Section 101-246,a variance may only be granted with a positive finding on all review criteria.
Staff find the application fails to meet three of the five required criteria.Therefore,staff recommend denial
of the variance request.
Ms.Alisa appeared on behalf of the applicant.She stated that the original sign application proposed placing
the sign in the same location as the former bank's sign,but the request was denied.As a result,the applicant
submitted a variance request for a second sign. She added that, if approval were granted to place the sign
in the original location,the applicant would be willing to use that location instead.
Council requested clarification regarding the applicant's previous comments. In response, Ms. Alisa
explained that the original proposal was submitted as a standard sign permit application, not a variance
request. She stated that the application sought to place the sign in the same location as the former bank's
sign but was denied administratively.
11
City of Clermont
MINUTES
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
June 23,2026
The applicant then proposed a different sign location,which required a variance application. She reiterated
that,if the original sign location were approved,the applicant would prefer to install the sign there instead.
Mayor Murry opened public comments.There were no comments.Mayor Murry closed public comments.
Council discussed the apparent inconsistency between the applicant's original sign permit denial and staff s
presentation indicating that the same sign location would have been permissible under the City Code.
Development Services Director Henschel clarified that the original proposed location matched the location
of the former First Green Bank sign and confirmed that such a sign would be allowed if it met the applicable
code requirements. Following the clarification, Council determined that the requested variance was no
longer necessary.
Council then discussed the costs incurred by the applicant because of pursuing the unnecessary variance
process. Ms. Alisa stated that the applicant had incurred expenses for the variance application, revised
drawings, and professional services, and that the process had delayed the project by several months. City
Attorney Waugh advised Council to consider the potential precedent of reimbursing applicants and
recommended requiring documentation of any reimbursable expenses.
Council reached a consensus to reimburse the applicant for the variance application fee, subject to
verification of the costs, and discussed allowing the applicant to return with documentation should
additional reimbursement be requested. Staff also noted it would explore whether any additional resolution
could be addressed administratively within its authority.
Council Member Strange motioned to reimburse the applicant for Item No. 18, 1391 Citrus
Tower Boulevard all the fees that were paid for the variance that was brought before
Council Seconded by Council Member Bain. The motion passed 5-0 with all members
present voicing aye.
Item No. 19—Resolution No.2026-005R,Salt Shack
Development Services Planner Kruse presented the item.City Council approved Resolution 2026-005R in
March 2026 with the addition of a condition for a 15-foot-wide easement for the future construction of a
public boardwalk along the north property line. The applicant is unable to comply with this condition
regarding public access. The condition came about as a recommendation from Planning and Zoning for
staff to work with DPZ on a possible trail connection behind the restaurant. Staff worked with DPZ,who
recommended the 15-foot easement dedication. The applicant originally agreed with the condition at the
Council hearing.However,the property owner(Lily Pad LLC)is unwilling to grant the easement.
The applicant is asking for a review and waiver of this condition, which is under Section 2: Land Use,
Condition 4 within the resolution:
Prior to issuance of any development permit or certificate of occupancy,the applicant shall grant the City
a 15-foot-wide easement for the future construction of a public boardwalk.The specific location,alignment,
and terms of the easement shall be determined later in coordination and cooperation with the city and
applicant.
Staff are seeking direction from Council on the existing easement condition.
12
City of Clermont
MINUTES
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
June 23,2026
The applicant's attorney, Jimmy Crawford, explained that the request was to waive a condition of the
previously approved Conditional Use Permit amendment requiring public access through the property. He
stated that the condition had been proposed shortly before the Council meeting and was accepted by the
applicant at that time;however,the applicant later determined it could not legally comply because it leases,
rather than owns,the property.He explained that the lease does not authorize the applicant to provide access
to non-customers and that doing so would also create insurance and liability concerns.
Mr. Crawford stated that, after identifying the issue, the applicant worked with City staff and the City
Attorney to develop a solution.He requested that Council waive the public access condition,noting that the
applicant remains committed to cooperating with the city on future waterfront access and related projects
but is unable to comply with the condition as written. He also introduced representatives from Salt Shack,
who were available to answer questions.
Mayor Murry opened public comments.There were no comments.Mayor Murry closed public comments.
Council discussed the intent of the original condition, the applicant's inability to comply due to lease and
ownership limitations, and the legal and practical implications of maintaining the requirement. Council
considered whether the waiver should be permanent or limited to a specific timeframe, as well as the
potential impact on future waterfront connectivity,the city's ability to pursue an easement directly with the
property owner, and the importance of supporting continued investment in the property while preserving
future public access opportunities. Staff confirmed that all other Conditional Use Permit conditions,
including parking requirements and associated fees,would remain unchanged.
Council Member Bain motioned to waive 2.4 on Resolution No.2026-005R. Seconded by
Council Member Myers.
Council Member Bain clarified that the waiver of the Conditional Use Permit condition would be permanent
rather than for a limited period.
The motion passed 3-2 with Council Member Strange and Council Member Petersen
nosed.
Item No.20—Citizen Request
Jayson Stringfellow provided an update on efforts to move forward with a proposed downtown parking
garage at the 71 Street and Minneola site, noting that while there are differing opinions regarding design,
size, and location, there is general agreement that additional parking is needed to support downtown
businesses and visitors.He requested Council direction to move the project forward by accomplishing three
goals: obtaining Council consensus to proceed with the project, establishing a design/architectural
committee to develop options for the garage's design,artwork,and related elements,and creating a timeline
to bring recommendations back to Council for consideration. Mr. Stringfellow emphasized the importance
of preserving pedestrian connectivity, accessibility, and public art opportunities while achieving the goal
of approximately 300 additional parking spaces. He stated that representatives from Finfrock, a parking
garage design-build consultant, were available to answer questions regarding the proposed garage design,
construction,and related considerations.
13
City of Clermont
MINUTES
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
June 23,2026
Council discussed that the presentation was intended as a request for discussion rather than formal action
and expressed the need for additional review of financing,design options,location,and public input before
making decisions. Council acknowledged the need to address downtown parking concerns and supported
continuing the conversation through a process that allows for community involvement, further evaluation
of options,and future direction.
Tod Howard clarified that they were not requesting a vote on the parking garage but was seeking direction
to allow City management to continue moving the project forward.He emphasized the growing downtown
parking challenges,the impact on businesses,and the need to address related infrastructure improvements.
Mr. Howard provided a preliminary funding approach, including a combination of reserves, Community
Redevelopment Agency(CRA)funding,and potential financing options,while noting that additional details
would need to be evaluated. He stated that the goal was to establish a path forward, allow staff and a
committee to continue evaluating design and funding options, and avoid further delays in addressing
downtown parking needs.
Kyle Myers, Vice President of Project Development for Finfrock, introduced the company as a Central
Florida design-build firm specializing in parking structures with experience constructing more than 300
garages. He explained that the conceptual garage design presented was developed in response to the city's
Request for Proposal (RFP)and was intended only as an initial concept based on the site,topography,and
project requirements. Mr. Myers noted that because of the competitive procurement process, the design
team was unable to engage with stakeholders beforehand but emphasized that the design could be refined
through a public input process. Drawing on a similar project in Ocala, he explained that public feedback
led to modifications to the final design and stated that Finfrock was present to answer questions and assist
the city as discussions move forward
Mayor Murry opened public comments.
Ana Sinclair,575 W.Minneola—spoke in opposition of placing a parking garage at the 7th Street location.
Bill Downs, 790 W. Minneola — urged Council to move the downtown parking garage project forward,
stating that the lack of parking is limiting downtown business growth and that further delays will only
worsen the issue.
Valerie Schuett,931 W. Montrose Street—spoke in opposition of placing a parking garage at the T`' Street
location.
Brendan Curl, 860 2°d Street—spoke in opposition of placing a parking garage at the 7th Street location.
Mr. Sinclair— W. Minneola Avenue — spoke in opposition of placing a parking garage at the 7th Street
location.
Mayor Murry closed public comments.
Council discussed the proposed downtown parking garage and agreed that additional parking is needed to
support downtown businesses while emphasizing the importance of a transparent and deliberate public
process before making any final decisions.
14
City of Clermont
MINUTES
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
June 23,2026
Discussion included the possibility of issuing a Request for Proposal(RFP)for a public-private partnership
to explore parking solutions, as well as the potential formation of a committee to work with stakeholders,
the selected consultant,and staff to develop design concepts,public art,landscaping,and other architectural
elements before bringing recommendations back to Council. Additional discussion focused on defining
project parameters, evaluating financing and location options, encouraging public engagement, and
determining appropriate next steps, including workshops,committee recommendations, and a timeline for
future Council consideration.
Council Member Strange moved to have a citizen committee to work with city staff and
professionals identified by our Attorney who meet the legal criteria to come 0 with
designs for agarage at the 7th Street property and City Hall and deliver concept plans with
estimated budget within 60 days while also simultaneously staff advertising an RFP for
public/private partnerships for gage or parking_development solutions within boundaries
of CRA in downtown Clermont to be delivered at a meeting for Council decision on
September 22,2026.
Council Member Strange summarized her motion as pursuing two parallel approaches to address downtown
parking needs. The first approach would be to appoint a committee to work with staff and the City's
consultants to develop concept plans and budget estimates for potential municipal parking garage locations
at the 7th Street site and City Hall, with recommendations to be presented to Council within 60 days. The
second approach would be to solicit proposals from the private sector for public-private partnership parking
solutions within the Community Redevelopment Agency(CRA)downtown area,allowing interested parties
to propose projects on City-owned or private property,with the results of the solicitation to be presented to
Council within 90 days. During the discussion,City Attorney Waugh advised that a Request for Proposals
(RFP) might not be the appropriate procurement method because it requires specific deliverables and
suggested using an alternative competitive solicitation process, to be determined in coordination with
Procurement Director Suarez.
Council Member Strange amended her motion to update the second part to people we don't
know. Seconded by Council Member Bain.
Council Member Strange clarified the RFP was intended to invite innovative concepts for any suitable city
owned property and would not be limited by the committee's work or delay the 60-day timeline. Staff were
given discretion to determine the appropriate solicitation mechanism rather than issuing a traditional RFP,
recognizing that a formal RFP would require defined project specifications.Council also noted that previous
parking garage concepts for City Hall and 7th Street could be used as a starting point for the committee's
evaluation.
The motion passed 5-0 with all members present voicing aye.
15
City of Clermont
MINUTES
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
June 23,2026
Item No. 21 —Resolution No.2026-023R,Parks and Recreation
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLERMONT, LAKE
COUNTY, FLORIDA CREATING A SPECIAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR
PARKS AND RECREATION; PROVIDING FOR THE MEMBERSHIP OF THE
COMMITTEE; APPOINTMENT BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND DUTIES;
PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT, SEVERABILITY, ADMINISTRATIVE
CORRECTION OF SCRIVENER'S ERRORS, PUBLICATION AND EFFECTIVE
DATE.
City Clerk Howe read the title aloud.
Deputy City Manager Matthys presented a resolution establishing the Bishop Field Special Technical
Advisory Committee,as directed by Council during its previous workshop.He explained that the committee
would be created pursuant to the Land Development Code(LDC)as a special technical advisory committee,
which differs from standing boards and committees because it provides greater flexibility.He recommended
approval of the resolution and requested that Council provide seven to ten potential member names to assist
with appointments,as well as any additional direction regarding the committee's scope of work and specific
objectives.
Mayor Murry opened public comments.
William Repine, 180 W. Desoto Street—expressed support for improvements to Bishop Field but opposed
proposed parking behind nearby homes, citing concerns about noise, food trucks, stormwater runoff, and
impacts to adjacent residents.
Jacob Simpson, 193 W. Desoto Street — supported improvements to Bishop Field within its existing
footprint, expressed concerns about expanding parking and its impacts on neighboring homes and families,
and stated that he had applied to serve on the Bishop Field Special Technical Advisory Committee.
Brendan Curl, 860 2nd Street — expressed concerns about increased noise, trash, stormwater runoff, and
pollution entering Crystal Lake while negatively affecting the privacy and quality of life of the surrounding
neighborhood.
Chris and Andrea Simmons, 940 2°d Street—supported improvements to Bishop Field while preserving its
historic character and existing footprint, but expressed concerns about additional pavement, noise, trash,
food trucks, and stormwater runoff impacts on surrounding residents, requesting neighborhood
representation on the advisory committee.
Mayor Murry closed public comments.
Discussion ensued about preserving Bishop Field's historic character,maintaining the existing green buffer,
and avoiding additional parking, pavement, or uses that would negatively impact the surrounding
neighborhood.
16
City of Clermont
MINUTES
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
June 23,2026
Council Member Strange suggested that committee recommendations consider the preservation of the
park's aesthetic, priority use for Clermont residents and youth baseball, potential Major League Baseball
grant opportunities, maintaining Bishop Field as a baseball facility rather than a multi-purpose field, and
the site's importance as a gateway to downtown. Council discussed committee composition, including
residents near the park, former or current professional baseball players with Clermont ties, South Lake
Little League representation,and a baseball related local business representative,with consideration given
to including residents from Second Street and Desoto Street. Staff was directed to use the existing
application process and encourage interested residents to identify Bishop Field Committee service, with
preference given to Clermont residents and representation from nearby neighborhoods.
Deputy City Manager Matthys requested clarification regarding the proposed composition of the Bishop
Field Special Technical Advisory Committee. Council confirmed the desired membership would include
two current or former professional baseball players with Clermont ties, two nearby residents (preferably
one from Second Street and one from Desoto Street), one South Lake Little League representative, one
Clermont business representative related to baseball,and consideration of adding a high school or collegiate
level player or coach as an additional member.Council discussed the importance of having a diverse group
with relevant experience while recognizing that overly specific requirements could make it more difficult
and time-consuming to fill the committee. Council agreed that staff could seek individuals meeting the
desired criteria while maintaining flexibility if all positions could not be filled.
Council Member Strange motioned for the creation of a Bishop Field Special Technical
Advisory Committee comprised of at least seven individuals with backgrounds in
professional baseball South Lake Little League baseball,business owner from Clermont,
local residents within 500 ft.,and that that committee be focused on bringing back direction
and recommendations to council for Major League Baseball grant opportunities with a
design standard that preserves the historic value of Clermont with a use that is focused on
Clermont residents with an infrastructure consideration to the gateway to the city location
on East Avenue and that the use of the field be a baseball field without adding extensive
parking or other uses to the site. Seconded by Council Member Bain.
Deputy City Manager Matthys asked whether the motion also included approval of the resolution
establishing the committee.
Council Member Strange added to her motion the approval of the resolution to create the
committee. Seconded by Council Member Bain.The motion passed 5-0 with all members
present voicing aye.
Mayor Murry requested that City Manager Van Wagner review the parking space configuration near Bishop
Field on East Avenue and Broome Street and consider removing the first parking space adjacent to the
intersection to improve visibility and safety for vehicles exiting Broome Street.
Mayor Murry commended staff on the re-paving of East Avenue and expressed support for adding bike
lanes to improve safety,particularly for children traveling to school.
17
City of Clermont
MINUTES
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
June 23,2026
Assistant Public Services Director Maiworm advised the current striping is temporary,with final markings
to be installed after further evaluation of bike lane options and parking configurations.
Item No.22—Location of Community Meetings
Council Member Bain spoke regarding the distinction between public meetings and community meetings,
specifically referencing the DPZ community meetings.He noted that public meetings are formally noticed
by the City Clerk, open to the public, and include notification that Council Members may be present and
participate in discussions. He expressed concern that meetings involving Council Members should be
structured as publicly noticed meetings when appropriate to ensure transparency,public participation,and
compliance with Sunshine Law requirements, rather than informal community meetings that may limit
access or create the appearance of noncompliance. He emphasized that future meetings should be held in
locations accessible to the public or in private venues that allow public access.
Council Member Petersen highlighted the value of community meetings, including those held in gated
communities as part of the DPZ process, to ensure input is received from a broad range of residents. He
asked for clarification regarding Council Member participation,and the City Attorney explained that while
an individual Council Member may speak,caution is needed to avoid multiple Council Members engaging
in discussion that could create Sunshine Law concerns.
Mayor Murry opened public comments.
Valerie Schuett, 931 W. Montrose Street — supported maintaining smaller neighborhood community
meetings to encourage resident engagement while ensuring the meetings remain accessible and open to the
public.
Otis Taylor, 3686 Caladesi Road—questioned the purpose of the meeting and their inability to attend if it
was intended to be a public meeting conducted by the city.
Mayor Murry closed public comments.
Discussion continued regarding the format and accessibility of community meetings, with Council
Members expressing differing views on balancing broad public participation with outreach to residents in
gated communities. Topics included whether citywide information gathering meetings should be publicly
noticed and accessible to all residents,Sunshine Law requirements affecting Council Member participation,
the need for clear terminology distinguishing public meetings from community meetings, and the
importance of providing opportunities for residents throughout the city to participate while ensuring
Council Members can attend and engage appropriately.
Item No. 23—Ordinance No. 2026-024,Stormwater Management Intro
City Clerk Howe read the title aloud.
18
City of Clermont
MINUTES
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
June 23,2026
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLERMONT, LAKE
COUNTY,FLORIDA,AMENDING CHAPTER 18 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES,
TO INCLUDE DEFINITIONS AND PROHIBITIONS RELATING TO ILLICIT
DISCHARGES AND ILLICIT CONNECTIONS TO THE CITY'S MUNICIPAL
SEPARATE STORM SEWER SYSTEM AND TO ESTABLISH INSPECTION,
MONITORING, AND ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITY RELATING THERETO;
PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT,SEVERABILITY,ADMINISTRATIVE CORRECTION
OF SCRIVENER'S ERRORS, CODIFICATION, PUBLICATION AND EFFECTIVE
DATE.
Council Member Bain motioned to introduce Ordinance No. 2026-024. Seconded by
Council Member Myers.The motion passed 5-0 with all members present voicing aye.
Item No. 24—Ordinance No.2026-028,Duke Energy Intro
AN ORDINANCE GRANTING TO DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, LLC d/b/a DUKE
ENERGY, NON-EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS OF WAY UTILIZATION FRANCHISE;
PRESCRIBING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS RELATED TO THE OCCUPANCY
OF MUNICIPAL STREETS AND RIGHTS OF WAY IN THE CITY OF CLERMONT,
FLORIDA,FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING ELECTRIC SERVICE;PROVIDING
FOR SEVERABILITY OF PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
City Clerk Howe read the title aloud.
City Attorney Waugh introduced the proposed ordinance to renew the city's franchise agreement with Duke
Energy,explaining that the existing 30-year agreement expires next month. He summarized the negotiated
terms, including a new 10-year agreement under which Duke Energy would provide certain right-of-way
support at no cost in exchange for the city waiving permit fees for specified right-of-way work.
Mayor Murry opened the public hearing.There were no comments.Mayor Murry closed the public hearing.
Council Member Strange disclosed that she knows Duke Energy's legal counsel and with City Attorney
Waugh's approval,spoke with her regarding the possibility of expanding underground utility infrastructure.
She explained that the conversation focused on incorporating provisions into the franchise agreement to
address concerns not currently included in the ordinance. Specifically,she requested that,before the second
reading, staff and Duke Energy develop a supplemental agreement addressing four key areas: (1)
implementing a plan to underground utility lines whenever poles are replaced; (2) prioritizing the
replacement or undergrounding of infrastructure in areas experiencing frequent blackouts and brownouts,
particularly in the downtown area where aging infrastructure has been identified as a concern;(3)replacing
older utility infrastructure with underground facilities whenever feasible during infrastructure upgrades;
and (4) coordinating undergrounding efforts with future trail, sidewalk, and other capital improvement
projects so that utility lines are buried whenever excavation is already occurring.Council Member Strange
stated she was comfortable proceeding with the first reading,with the expectation that these issues would
be addressed and brought back for consideration before the second reading.
19
City of Cler
mont
MINUTES
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
June 23,2026
Council Member Petersen asked that Duke Energy provide information at a future meeting regarding its
solar streetlight leasing program. He noted the program offers a cost-effective option in which Duke
maintains and repairs the equipment if needed, has a long-life expectancy, and could help make the city
more energy efficient and environmentally friendly.
Katie Christian, Duke Energy's Director of Government Relations, explained that undergrounding is
regulated by the Florida Public Service Commission,with Duke's undergrounding plans based on reliability
and storm-hardening requirements established at the state level. While the city cannot require Duke to
underground utilities through the franchise agreement, she noted Duke has entered memorandums of
understanding (MOUs) with other municipalities to coordinate underground efforts, infrastructure
upgrades, and reliability improvements, and suggested a similar agreement could be developed with the
city. City Attorney Waugh suggested referencing the intent to enter into a separate MOU within the
ordinance. The discussion also included the possibility of quarterly coordination meetings,to be included
in the MOU rather than the franchise agreement, to coordinate projects and identify opportunities for
underground as infrastructure improvements occur. Staff and Duke Energy agreed to work together on the
details of the MOU before the second reading.
Council Member Petersen motioned to introduce Ordinance No. 2026-028 with Council
Member Stran eg�pulations for an MOU. Seconded by Council Member Myers. The
motion passed 5-0 with all members present voicing aye.
Mayor Murry recessed the meeting at 9:15pm.
Mayor Murry reconvened the meeting at 9:21 pm.
Item No.25—True North Communications Assessment
Lorri Shahan of True North Marketing provided a high-level overview of the communications assessment,
explaining that the review included the city's brand identity,website,social media presence,communication
materials, competitive benchmarking with comparable cities, and stakeholder interviews. Based on the
findings,the consultant recommended implementing a comprehensive communications strategy to improve
alignment, consistency, efficiency, and public trust; establishing formal communications policies,
procedures, and crisis response processes; investing in communication tools such as social media
management software,project management software,business-level Al,and a community survey platform
to improve efficiency and public engagement; expanding the city's brand standards into a comprehensive
brand guide while continuing to build upon the existing"Choice of Champions"identity through consistent
messaging; and creating a dedicated three-person communications team consisting of a Communications
and Engagement Director, a Digital Content and Multimedia Manager, and a Community Engagement
Coordinator. Overall, the recommendations are intended to strengthen public engagement, improve
coordination across departments, enhance the city's brand, and establish a more strategic, proactive
approach to communications.
Mayor Murry opened public comments.There were no comments.Mayor Murry closed public comments.
20
City of Clermont
MINUTES
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
June 23,2026
Council discussed the recommendations from True North Marketing regarding the creation of a
communications department and implementation of a comprehensive communications strategy. Council
questioned whether the recommended project management tool could be used citywide to track major
projects, timelines, responsibilities, and priorities, and Ms. Shaban confirmed it could be utilized beyond
communications. Discussion included staffing needs, budget considerations, and the recommendation to
hire a Communications Director first, with additional positions added as funding allows. Deputy City
Manager Matthys also recommended retaining True North temporarily to assist with developing policies,
procedures,crisis communications protocols,media training,and a strategic communications plan.
Council further discussed the balance between in-house communications staff and outside consultants,the
need to streamline social media efforts, and the importance of centralized messaging while allowing
departments such as Police, Fire, and Parks & Recreation to maintain appropriate communication roles.
Council supported developing an in-house communications team,emphasized the importance of dedicated
crisis communications capabilities,and discussed strengthening the city's branding efforts,including more
consistent use of the"Choice of Champions"brand.Council expressed general support for moving forward
with establishing the Communications Department and utilizing existing staff strengths while adding
resources as needed.
Council Member Strange motioned to direct staff to move forward with a transitional
consulting agreement with True North and immediately move for the fulfillment of the
positions as described by True North so long as we stay within the current budget and that
if we need to exceed that budget that staff come back with specific requests and an
explanation for what theyneed. Seconded by Council Member Myers. The motion passed
5-0 with all members present voicing aye.
Council Member Bain asked whether the approval would require additional action for the positions or if it
would authorize them at this time. City Attorney Waugh confirmed the current action would approve the
positions.
The motion passed 5-0 with all members present voicing aye.
Council Member Myers motioned to adjourn. Seconded by Council Member Strange.The
motion passed 3-2 with Mayor Mum and Council Member Bain opposed.
21
City of Clermont
MINUTES
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
June 23,2026
ADJOURN: With no further comments,this meeting adjourned at 10:08 pm.
7
� �f Rl
APPROVED:
AK Tim Murry,Mayor
AT
Tracy Ackroyd owe,MMC
City Clerk
22