Apr 28, 2025 Commission Meeting

[00:00:02]

OKAY. WELCOME. RESIDENTS, NEIGHBORS AND GUESTS.

[CALL TO ORDER]

HE'S BEEN WITH ME ALL DAY. WELL, NOT ALL DAY, BUT A GOOD PORTION OF THE DAY.

HE KNOWS THIS CITY INSIDE AND OUT. NOW HE IS MET WITH AND DEBRIEFED EACH OF THE DEPARTMENT HEADS AND THE CITY MANAGER.

WE DIDN'T GET THE CITY ATTORNEY IN FRONT OF YOU, SO, I DON'T KNOW, WE MIGHT HAVE TO DO A REMEDIAL CRASH COURSE ON THAT, BUT THIS IS MAYOR BROWN. HIS NAME IS ELI BROWN.

HE'S A FIFTH GRADER FROM ABE. HE'S THE BIG MAN ON CAMPUS THIS YEAR.

MOVING ON TO MAYPORT MIDDLE NEXT YEAR, AND CAN YOU STAND UP AND SHOW THEM YOUR GREEN JACKET? ALL RIGHT. SO THERE'S A PURPOSE TO THE GREEN JACKET.

HE IS A GOLFER, AND COMING UP QUICKLY. SO WITH THAT WE'RE GOING TO OPEN THE MEETING IN A MINUTE, BUT FIRST, WE'LL START WITH AN INVOCATION AND PLEDGE.

COMMISSIONER. HEAVENLY FATHER, I THANK YOU FOR THIS DAY IN ATLANTIC BEACH. FATHER, I THANK YOU FOR ALL THE CITIZENS AND THE STAFF LORD AND THE ATLANTIC BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT WHO IS HERE TO PROTECT US.

FATHER, I PRAY FOR YOUR PROVISION OVER TONIGHT'S MEETING THAT YOU WOULD SPEAK TO EACH AND EVERY ONE OF US, LORD, THAT WE WOULD OPEN OUR EARS TO HEAR FATHER IN OUR HEARTS TO UNDERSTAND, AND I JUST PRAY YOUR WISDOM ABOVE ALL.

IN YOUR NAME WE PRAY. AMEN.

THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER. WELL DONE. MAYOR, WOULD YOU OPEN OUR MEETING, PLEASE? THIS CITY COMMISSION MEETING DATED APRIL 28TH, 2025 WILL NOW COME TO ORDER.

THE FIRST THING IS A ROLL CALL. DONNA.

THANK YOU, DONNA. OKAY. ITEM ONE, A APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF COMMISSION WORKSHOP.

[1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES]

DO WE HAVE ANY CHANGES OR CORRECTIONS? HEARING NONE.

THE MINUTES STAND AS PRESENTED. NEXT IS ONE B APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON APRIL 14TH, 2025. ANY CORRECTIONS OR CHANGES TO THOSE MINUTES? HEARING NONE, THE MINUTES STAND AS SUBMITTED.

SO WE'LL MOVE INTO COURTESY OF THE FLOOR TO OUR VISITORS.

WE WILL OPEN IT UP TO EACH OF THE PEOPLE WHO WISH TO SPEAK.

WE GOT TWO ITEMS BEFORE WE GO THERE. ACTUALLY, I'M GOING TO BACK UP.

[Additional Item]

SO WE HAVE COMMISSIONERS, IF YOU LOOK AT ITEMS EIGHT A AND NINE A THEY'RE KIND OF OUT OF ORDER.

WHAT I'D LIKE TO HEAR IS A MOTION TO SWAP THE TWO AND GO TO NINE A FIRST SO THAT WE ACTUALLY HAVE THE BUDGET TO COMPLETE EIGHT A.

DO I HAVE A MOTION? I MAKE A MOTION TO SWAP NINE A FOR EIGHT A.

SECOND WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, ANY DISCUSSION? AYE. ALL IN FAVOR SIGNIFY WITH I. AYE. OPPOSED? OKAY. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. SO WE'LL DO THAT.

NOW BACK TO COURTESY OF THE FLOOR. WE'LL START WITH WITH ITEM TWO A, WHICH IS WATER CONSERVATION MONTH PROCLAMATION,

[2. COURTESY OF FLOOR TO VISITORS]

I HAVE TWO PROCLAMATIONS TODAY. I'M NOT GOING TO READ BOTH OF THEM, BUT THIS ONE I WANT TO READ BECAUSE THE RECIPIENT OF THIS ON BEHALF OF WATER MANAGEMENT IS A CONSTANT ATTENDEE IN THIS CHAMBER AND DESERVES RECOGNITION.

SO THIS IS WATER CONSERVATION MONTH, WHEREAS WATER IS A BASIC AND ESSENTIAL NEED OF EVERY LIVING CREATURE, AND WHEREAS THE STATE OF FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICTS AND THE CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH ARE WORKING TOGETHER TO INCREASE AWARENESS ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF WATER CONSERVATION, AND WHEREAS, THE CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH AND THE STATE OF FLORIDA ANNUALLY DESIGNATE APRIL TYPICALLY A DRY MONTH.

[00:05:05]

NOW, THEREFORE, I, CURTIS FORD, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH, FLORIDA, DO HEREBY PROCLAIM THE MONTH OF APRIL AS WATER CONSERVATION MONTH IN ATLANTIC BEACH AND ENCOURAGE EACH AND EVERY CITIZEN AND BUSINESS TO HELP PROTECT OUR PRECIOUS RESOURCE BY PRACTICING WATER SAVING MEASURES AND BECOMING MORE AWARE OF THE NEED TO SAVE WATER. FOR THIS, THE 26TH YEAR OF WATER CONSERVATION MONTH, THERE WILL BE A SPECIAL FOCUS ON IMPROVING OUTDOOR IRRIGATION EFFICIENCY.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I HAVE SET MY HAND CAUSED THE OFFICIAL SEAL OF THE CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH TO BE AFFIXED THIS 28TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025. CURTIS FORD. MR. CONKEY, WHERE ARE YOU? WOULD YOU COME FORWARD, PLEASE? I'M NOT COMING DOWN TODAY, BUT I WANT TO PERSONALLY PRESENT THIS TO YOUR DEDICATION.

THANK YOU. IT WAS NOT ON THE AGENDA, BUT I DO HAVE A PROCLAMATION FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. OH.

DO YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING? YES, PLEASE. YES, PLEASE. THAT WOULD BE. PLEASE GO AHEAD.

MAYORS, AND YOU'LL LOOK SHARP IN ABOUT FIVE YEARS, AND A NAVY BLUE MIDSHIPMAN'S UNIFORM AND COMMISSIONER BOLE AND I ARE VERY EXCITED BECAUSE YOU MAY HAVE A FUTURE HOMEOWNER HERE WHO WAS DRAFTED IN THE SIXTH ROUND BY THE JAGUARS.

CURRENT NAVY MIDSHIPMEN. THE SAFETY THAT WILL HOPEFULLY MAKE THE JAGUARS AND FIND NEPTUNE BEACH, AND I'M SURE HE'LL GET HEAVY SWAY AND HELP FROM MY COMMISSIONER BOLE TO RESIDE HERE.

SO, BUT THIS IS THE 27TH YEAR, AND I WANT TO THANK YOU MAYORS AND COMMISSIONERS FOR YOUR RECOGNITION THAT THE STATE HAS RECOGNIZED THIS TIME OF THE YEAR AS WATER CONSERVATION MONTH. 27 YEARS AGO, THE STATE FOUND THAT WE NEED TO REALLY START PRESERVING OUR WATER.

WE DO HAVE ISSUES, AND WE'RE GROWING. THEY HAD ONLY KNOWN 27 YEARS WHERE WE ARE NOW IN THE GROWTH AND THE DEMANDS.

THE NORTH FLORIDA REGIONAL WATER RESOURCE PLAN IS WHAT I WANT TO TALK ABOUT AS OPPOSED TO LEAKS, THIS IRRIGATION THAT BECAUSE WE ALL HAVE HEARD THE STATS AND YOU'VE HEARD THAT MANY TIMES FROM ME, BUT THIS IS THE PLAN THAT VERY FEW KNOW, BUT THE PEOPLE IN PLACES LIKE MR. KILLINGSWORTH AND HIS STAFF AND THE PEOPLE WHO WORK THE CONSUMPTIVE USE PERMITS KNOW THAT WE ARE STARTING TO RESTRICT PERMITS BECAUSE SINCE 2017, WHEN THE FIRST PLAN CAME OUT, WE NOTICED THAT THE AQUIFER IS STRESSED.

WELL, THE MOST RECENT VERSION, WHICH CAME OUT IN LATE 23, FURTHER SAYS THE SAME THING, AND WE HAVE THIS THING CALLED MINIMUM FLOWS AND LEVELS, WHICH ARE THE RESTRICTIVE MOMENTS. THAT'S BASICALLY THE LOW OIL LIGHT FOR THE AQUIFER, TELLING US AT THE SURFACE WE HAVE ISSUES THAT WE NEED TO ADDRESS.

SO WE'VE BEEN DOING THIS, AND THE WATER SUPPLY PLAN FOR THIS AREA COVERS 14 COUNTIES, OF WHICH EIGHT ARE IN THE SAINT JOHNS RIVER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT.

8000MI², AND IT BASICALLY IS CHARTERED TO MANAGE THE WATER.

WE DO THAT THROUGH MANAGING THE WATER RESOURCES AND SEPTIC USE PERMITS LIKE YOU HAVE A PERMIT.

JEA HAS A PERMIT. CCUA HAS A PERMIT AND IT COVERS A 20 YEAR PERIOD.

WE KNOW THAT FROM 2015 TO 2045 THAT THE INCREASE IN POPULATION IN THIS DISTRICT IS GOING UP BY 49%.

WATER USE IS GOING TO BE INCREASED BY 32%, AND BY 2045, WE'LL BE PULLING 700 MILLION GALLONS A DAY FROM THE AQUIFER.

SO THAT IS ESSENTIAL. ONE OF THE ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF THIS PLAN IS WATER CONSERVATION, AND THERE'S A CONSERVATION ELEMENT IN YOUR CONSUMPTIVE USE PERMIT.

THOSE ARE IMPORTANT BECAUSE IF WE ARE EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT IN HOW WE APPLY THOSE, WE CAN GET ABOUT 80 MILLION GALLONS A DAY.

SO THAT MEANS THERE ARE OTHER THINGS WE NEED TO DO. ALTERNATIVE WATER SUPPLY, RECHARGE AND SUCH, AND IF YOU HAD A GOLF COURSE, THEY PROBABLY ARE REQUIRED TO USE RECLAIMED WATER.

SB64 IS GOING TO HAVE A BIG IMPACT WHEN YOUR RECLAIMED WATER CAN NO LONGER GO TO SURFACE WATERS.

SO WE ARE CONSTANTLY WORKING WITH OUR GOVERNMENTS ON THIS.

WE HAVE AN ARTESIAN WELL PLUGGING PROGRAM, AND THAT HAS LAST FIVE YEARS SINCE WE HAVE FUNDED IT TO THE TUNE OF $3 MILLION, SAVED ALMOST 77 MILLION GALLONS A DAY. SO WE'RE DOING OUR PART TO TRY TO HELP THAT, AND WE'RE TRYING TO PUSH THE NARRATIVE.

SO WATER CONSERVATION IS SOMETHING YOU HEAR ALL THE TIME, BUT IT'S LIKE A NEW YEAR'S RESOLUTION.

[00:10:01]

YOU GOT TO HAVE A PLAN, DISCIPLINED IMPLEMENTATION, AND ACHIEVABLE METRICS THAT WILL BRING US TO HAVING SOME MEANINGFUL SUSTAINABILITY.

NOW, I PUT THIS ALL IN FRONT OF EVERYBODY TODAY.

IT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD PUT ON YOUR REFRIGERATOR AND CONSTANTLY REMIND YOU THAT WE HAVE NOW GONE INTO THE SUMMER MONTHS, SO YOU CAN NOW HAVE TWO, BUT THIS IS THE TIME OF THE YEAR THAT YOUR CUPS ARE PROBABLY YOUR UTILITY IS TELLING YOU WE'RE GETTING STRESSED ON RECLAIMED WATER.

THE TIP OF THE ICEBERG IS THE FACT THAT WHEN YOU SEE UTILITIES START TO IMPLEMENTING RESTRICTIONS, JEA IS NOW RESTRICTING WATER USE OF RECLAIMED DOWN IN THE NOCATEE AREA.

SAINT JOHN'S UTILITY IS IMPLEMENTING ORDINANCES TO BASICALLY TURN OFF VALVES ON RECLAIMED WATER BECAUSE WE NEED TO PRESERVE IT.

SO WHEN YOU SEE THE UTILITIES DOING THINGS, WHEN YOU SEE CONSUMPTIVE USE PERMITS BEING RESTRICTED, THAT IS THE TIP OF THE ICEBERG, THAT IF WE DON'T TAKE CARE OF IT IN ABOUT TEN YEARS, WE'RE GOING TO BE USING THE WATER THAT IS NOW BEING BROUGHT ON AS A TEST BED AND HAVE BROUGHT ON TEST BED PLANTS, BASICALLY TAKING WASTEWATER AND CONVERTING IT TO POTABLE WATER, AND THEY CALL IT AN H2O PURIFICATION, AND THEY'RE GOING TO USE IT FOR DEEP WELL INJECTION DOWN BELOW THE AQUIFER.

CCUA IS USING IT FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES. THE WHOLE STATE IS WATCHING THIS AREA AND HOW WE HANDLE THIS.

SO THIS IS A BIG, BIG DEAL, BUT THIS IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE EVERYBODY'S GOT AN IRRIGATION SYSTEM AND WE NEED TO KNOW HOW TO USE IT, BUT IF YOU WERE WATCHING THE NEWS ON NEWS FOUR, JAX, THEY CAME OUT WITH A THE RECENT US STUDY THAT SHOWED 40% OF CITIZENS DON'T KNOW THAT THESE RULES ARE ACTUALLY MANDATORY OR THERE ARE RULES.

I THOUGHT THEY WERE VOLUNTARY. SO WE HAVE EDUCATIONAL TO DO.

WE'RE ADDRESSING THAT AT THE WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT. WE HAVE HIRED STAFF.

SO WE'RE GOING TO BE PUSHING OUT MORE INFORMATION SO THAT PEOPLE UNDERSTAND WE DON'T WANT TO BE WHERE APOPKA IS RIGHT NOW, WHERE THEY ARE NOW FINING PEOPLE FOR USING, MISUSING WATER, RESTRICTING, TELLING PEOPLE NO NEW GRASS WHILE WE'RE IN THIS DRY PERIOD BECAUSE THOSE ARE AN EXEMPTION TO THE RULES. SO WE DON'T WANT TO BE THERE.

WE WANT TO BE GOOD USERS. SO I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR THE COMMISSION'S AND THE MAYOR'S DILIGENCE IN THIS, YOUR STAFF AND THE CITIZENS WHO ARE DILIGENT IN PROTECTING THEIR WATER BECAUSE IF WE DON'T TAKE CARE OF OUR WATER, CRISIS MANAGEMENT IS NOT THE WAY TO MANAGE THEM.

WE'RE HERE TO HELP. SO THANK YOU AGAIN AND HAVE A GREAT NIGHT, AND WELCOME TO THE SEAT.

THANK YOU, MR. CONKEY. I DID NOT KNOW THAT MR. CONKEY WAS GOING TO GO INTO THE DETAIL AND TALK ABOUT SENATE BILL 64 BUT MY ATTACHÉ HERE TODAY LEARNED ABOUT SENATE BILL 64. NOW, WE DIDN'T CALL IT SENATE BILL 64, BUT WE WENT AND DID A TOUR OF THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT, AND WE TALKED ABOUT THE FACT THAT IN ABOUT EIGHT YEARS FROM NOW, I THINK 8 OR 9 YEARS, WE WILL NO LONGER BE ABLE TO DISCHARGE OUR TREATED WASTEWATER INTO THE SAINT JOHN'S RIVER. DO YOU REMEMBER HOW MUCH I SAID IT WOULD COST TO DEAL WITH THAT? $60 MILLION? 50 MILLION? 50 TO $60 MILLION. SO THIS IS A FIFTH GRADER, AND WE'RE GOING TO TEACH THEM EARLY. THEY HAVE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE ENVIRONMENT.

THAT'S A BIG COST, BUT IT ALSO IS A AN IMPORTANT ECOLOGICAL IMPACT TO THE STATE OF FLORIDA THAT WILL WILL COME SOONER THAN YOU EXPECT. SO THANK YOU, MAYOR BROWN. I HAVE A PROCLAMATION.

I'M NOT GOING TO READ THIS, BUT I JUST WANT TO ADDRESS IT.

PROCLAMATION REGARDING 2025 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT WEEK, AND IT SPECIFICALLY ADDRESSES THE IMPORTANCE OF THE CDBG, WHICH IS THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT WHICH WE ACTUALLY UTILIZE IN THE CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH THROUGH THE CITY OF JACKSONVILLE, AND THIS WEEK I HAD THE PLEASURE OF ATTENDING A THREE BEACHES EVENT WITH CITY MANAGER KILLINGSWORTH, AND HE SPOKE TO THE ISSUE OF ALL OF THE THINGS THAT WE HAVE ACHIEVED IN THIS CITY BASED ON THOSE FUNDS.

SO WE AS A CITY, SUPPORT THE CONTINUANCE OF THE CDBG.

MR. CITY MANAGER, CAN YOU JUST HIT 4 OR 5 OF THEM THAT YOU REMEMBER THAT WE HAVE FUNDED THROUGH CDBG? SURE. THE MULTI USE PATH ON LEVY ROAD WAS FUNDED THROUGH CDBG.

THE BASKETBALL COURT AT MEMORIAL VETERANS PARK IS FUNDED THROUGH CDBG, THE UPCOMING PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENTS TO THAT PARK ARE ALSO FUNDED THROUGH CDBG, AND PROBABLY THE MOST LIKED AND APPRECIATED IS THE SPLASH PAD OUT AT DONNER PARK WAS FUNDED THROUGH CDBG.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MR. KILLINGSWORTH. OKAY LET'S SEE, WHERE ARE WE AT? WE ARE. OH REALLY BIG DEAL TONIGHT. ITEM TWO B, WE'RE MOVING TO POLICE DEPARTMENT.

OFFICER DYLAN DORE IS BEING SWORN IN. CHIEF.

[00:15:09]

SO WE WANTED TO START A NEW TRADITION HERE TONIGHT WHERE WE BROUGHT OUR NEWEST POLICE OFFICERS BEFORE THE COMMISSION IN THE COMMUNITY TO ALLOW THEM TO SHARE IN THE OATH OF OFFICE THAT OFFICER IS GOING TO TAKE. SO, OFFICER DORE, IF YOU DON'T MIND, WOULD YOU PLEASE STAND HERE, PLEASE? SO, OFFICER DORE, LET ME CHARGE YOU TO REMEMBER, SIR, THAT THE OATH OF OFFICE YOU ARE ABOUT TO TAKE, AND THE POLICE OFFICER'S CODE OF ETHICS ARE JUST WORDS ON A PIECE OF PAPER. UNLESS YOU BRING THEM TO LIFE, UNLESS YOU LIVE THESE THINGS OUT AND TAKE ACTION TO MAKE THEM REAL EVERY DAY.

THAT'S WHAT I HOPE YOU WILL DO AS YOU COME TO WORK FOR US HERE IN ATLANTIC BEACH.

OFFICER, WOULD YOU PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND? I STATE YOUR NAME.

DO SOLEMNLY SWEAR TO ENFORCE THE LAWS, AND CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, AND THE ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH, FLORIDA.

I ACCEPT THE LAW ENFORCEMENT CODE OF ETHICS. AS MY STANDARD OF CONDUCT AS A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH, FLORIDA.

CONGRATULATIONS, OFFICER DORE. SO AS PART OF SHARING WITH OFFICER DORE'S FAMILY AND OUR FAMILY ATLANTIC BEACH WE'RE GOING TO ALLOW ASHLEY, HIS WIFE, TO CEREMONIALLY PIN ON HIS BADGE, AND , ASHLEY, JUST REMEMBER.

SO THIS IS LIKE A FREEBIE IF YOU HAPPEN TO MISS WITH A PIN AND YOU GET HIM RIGHT, IT'S OKAY.

IT'S NOT A BATTERY. IT'S OKAY. IT WAS AN HONEST MISTAKE THAT HE MIGHT.

YEAH, JUST A LITTLE PAYBACK FOR WHATEVER HE FORGOT TO DO LAST WEEKEND AROUND THE HOUSE. YEAH.

OFFICER, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MR. MAYOR.

THANK YOU FOR SHARING WITH US IN THIS EVENT. WE HOPE WE WILL DO THIS AGAIN WHEN THE NEXT OFFICER COMES TO WORK HERE.

WE WILL APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU BOTH. OFFICER DORE, WELCOME TO THE DEPARTMENT, AND WELCOME TO THE CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU. OKAY, NOW TO THE PUBLIC INPUT.

DONNA, DO WE HAVE PEOPLE SIGNED IN TODAY? YES, WE HAVE FOUR, MAYOR.

OKAY, SO WE'RE GOING TO PULL OUT ALL THE STOPS.

IT'S ONLY FOUR PEOPLE. SPEAK AS LONG AS YOU WANT, BUT DON'T EXCEED FIVE MINUTES, PLEASE.

OH. OH, I KNOW BOLE MR.. COMMISSIONER. OKAY. FIRST.

OKAY. CAROLYN ZISSER.

GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. MR. KILLINGSWORTH.

MR. GABRIEL AND ELI. WELCOME. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE PROGRESS YOU HAVE MADE IN THE NECESSARY REVISIONS AND AMENDMENTS TO ORDINANCE 124 PERTAINING TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP COMMITTEE.

I HAVE CAREFULLY REVIEWED. OH, MY NAME IS CAROLYN ZISSER.

I'M A RESIDENT OF ATLANTIC BEACH AND ALSO AN ATTORNEY.

SO I REALLY READ THE NEWEST REVISIONS WITH THE EYES IN MY CAPACITY AS ATTORNEY AS WELL AS A CITIZEN. SO THERE ARE TWO SECTIONS. THERE ARE ONLY TWO SECTIONS OF ORDINANCE 124, WHICH STILL NEED FURTHER REVISION AND CORRECTION, AND I HOPE THAT THOSE WILL BE INCORPORATED BY THE COUNCIL, ACCEPTED BY THE COMMISSION, ACCEPTED AND IT AND BE INCORPORATED INTO THE ORDINANCE FOR THE NEXT FIRST READING.

THE FIRST OF THE TWO IS SECTION 2356 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES, WHICH YOU'LL FIND ON PAGE 69.

IT STILL LIMITS THE WORK TO REQUESTS OR ASSIGNMENTS BY THE CITY COMMISSION OR CITY MANAGER.

THE LANGUAGE REALLY SHOULD BE REVISED TO RECOGNIZE THE ESC'S ABILITY TO SUGGEST PROJECTS AS WELL, SO THAT IT CAN BE RECIPROCAL. SUBJECT, OF COURSE, TO THE APPROVAL OF THE CITY COMMISSION,

[00:20:02]

THE EXISTING LANGUAGE IS UPON REQUEST BY THE CITY COMMISSION OR THE CITY MANAGER, AND I I WOULD SUGGEST ADDING THIS LANGUAGE IN INITIAL QUOTE AND OR UPON REQUEST OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP COMMITTEE AND ONE QUOTE.

THE ESC SHALL STUDY AND PROVIDE WRITTEN RECOMMENDATIONS SO THAT RECOMMENDATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS CAN COME BY BOTH THE COMMISSION AS WELL AS THE ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP COMMITTEE, AND OF COURSE, THE FINAL DECISION IS UP TO THE COMMISSION.

THE SECOND POINT IS REALLY A SCRIVENER'S ERROR.

I THINK A WORD WAS LEFT OUT AND UNINTENTIONALLY.

SECTION 23-58(C)(3) APPOINTMENTS AT PAGE 72. A SCRIVENER'S ERROR SHOULD BE CORRECTED BY ADDING THE WORD APPROVED AS SET FORTH BELOW. SO THE SENTENCE WOULD BE.

THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS SHALL BE RECOMMENDED. THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS OF THE ESC SHALL BE RECOMMENDED BY THE BOARD MEMBER REVIEW COMMITTEE AND SHALL BE PUT IN THE WORD, PLEASE. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION.

I ALSO AGREE AND COMMEND SECTION 2357 REGARDING THE CITY STAFF ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT OF THE ESC, AND I'M SURE THE MEMBERS OF THE ESC APPRECIATE THAT AS WELL.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR ASSISTANCE AND PLEASE LET ME KNOW HOW I CAN FURTHER ASSIST.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MISS ZISSER. DON WOLFSON.

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR BROWN. GOOD EVENING. MAYOR FORD, COMMISSIONERS, CITY ATTORNEY, CITY MANAGER, CITY CLERK. MY NAME IS DON WOLFSON. MY ADDRESS IS ON THE RECORD.

FORMER MAYOR OF ATLANTIC BEACH. I COME TONIGHT TO THANK YOU FOR DEFERRING ACTION AT THE LAST COMMISSION MEETING, AND TAKING THE OPPORTUNITY TO GET FURTHER AND FURTHER INPUT FOR THE INPUT AND CONSIDERATIONS OF OUR CITIES AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS FOR THESE PROPOSED ORDINANCES REGARDING 124 REALLY 9525124.

I AM NO EXPERT. THE EXPERTS THAT I BELIEVE HAVE THE INSIGHT INTO WHAT IS GOOD FOR THE COMMITTEE AND WHAT SOME OF THE SHORTFALLS ARE REALLY ARE THE, THE CITIZEN MEMBERS OF THAT COMMITTEE, AND I DO NOT THINK THAT I KNOW WHAT THEY KNOW.

THEY THEY ARE THE FRONTLINE FOR OUR ESC, BUT I DO WANT TO JUST ENCOURAGE STAFF TO UNDERSTAND THE UNIQUENESS OF OUR COMMUNITY AND THAT WE HAVE DIFFERENT GUIDELINES.

WE HAVE DIFFERENT GUARDRAILS BECAUSE WE ARE A VERY UNIQUE CITY AND WE SHOULD MODEL OURSELVES THROUGH STANDARDIZATION UNNECESSARILY.

I MEAN, SOME OF IT'S GOOD, BUT SOME OF IT, SOME OF IT MIGHT NOT BE APPLICABLE FOR US, AND I JUST HAVE HEARD SO MANY TIMES THAT, YOU KNOW, CITIZENS HAVE COME UP AND THEY'VE SAID, WELL, OF COURSE WE'RE NOT CITY OF JACKSONVILLE, WE'RE NOT NEPTUNE BEACH, WE'RE NOT JACKSONVILLE BEACH, WE'RE NOT NOCATEE.

YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT NONE OF THOSE. WE ARE ATLANTIC BEACH, AND SOMETIMES STANDARDIZATION MIGHT NOT BE IN OUR BEST INTEREST, SOME ASPECTS OF IT. SO I REALLY APPRECIATE WHAT YOU ARE DOING AND TAKING THIS TO HEART AND LOOKING AT THIS BECAUSE IT'S VERY IMPORTANT BECAUSE AS I AS I PERSONALLY KNOW, I MEAN, YOU SIT IN THESE COMMISSION SEATS TEMPORARILY.

YOU SIT IN THESE POSITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT TEMPORARILY, BUT THE CITY DOES LIVE ON, AND IT'S IMPORTANT TO LOOK DOWN THE PATH, THE ROAD THAT WE'RE TAKING AND TO UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO AS CITIZENS AND STAFF TO MAKE THIS A MUCH BETTER PLACE THAN IT IS TODAY, AND THAT TAKES A LOT OF WORK FROM ALL OF US WE'VE GOTTEN HERE, BUT YOU'RE TAKING IT A LITTLE FURTHER.

SO THAT BEING SAID I JUST HAVE ONE THING TO ADD TO 125.

THIS IS PERTAINING TO THE PARKS, AND I ASK YOU TO LOOK AT THE POLICY DOCUMENT SECTION THREE UNDER

[00:25:01]

IT SHOULD BE CORRECTED, AND THEN NUMBER FIVE.

THAT'S NUMBER TWO. NUMBER FIVE. I BELIEVE THAT MAYBE THE CITY SHOULD PUT A CLAUSE IN THERE, AND INSTEAD OF IT BEING SO PRECISE, IT SAYS BUSINESSES OPERATING IN PARKS AND CITY PARKS AND FACILITIES ARE REQUIRED TO MOVE ALL EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS AT THE END OF THEIR ACTIVITY. I THINK THAT'S GOOD, BUT MAYBE THERE MIGHT BE A CAVEAT.

THERE MIGHT BE A CIRCUMSTANCE WHERE THAT DOESN'T REALLY APPLY, AND THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN TO THAT LITTLE SCHOOL AND ASHBY PARK, WHERE THEY MIGHT LEAVE A COUPLE THINGS THERE INSTEAD OF HAVING TO PICK THEM UP AND MOVE THEM EVERY TIME THEY FINISH USING IT FOR THE DAY, AND THAT CLAUSE COULD ALLOW THE CITY MANAGER TO HAVE SOME LATITUDE BY ADDING THAT CLAUSE, UNLESS PERMITTED BY THE CITY.

JUST A SUGGESTION, AND THEN THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YES, PLEASE. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY.

COULD YOU DO YOU HAVE THE PAGE NUMBER? YEAH. I DON'T HAVE TIME ANYMORE.

BILL, I'VE GOT TO SIT DOWN. I'M ASKING QUESTIONS.

OKAY. YEAH. IT'S ON. IT'S ON PAGE TWO OF THREE.

UNDER ROMAN NUMERAL THREE. BUSINESS ACTIVITIES, REGISTRATION APPLICATIONS.

DO YOU SEE THAT? NUMBER FIVE. FIVE ON MY PAGE.

TWO OF THREE I HAVE. OKAY, I GOT IT, AND THEN NUMBER FIVE SAYS DELEGATE HIS OR HER AUTHORITY.

I'LL SHOW YOU. CAN I ? PLEASE.

I JUST WANT TO CAPTURE THOSE CHANGES. SO I JUST AGAIN, THANKING ALL OF YOU FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP AND FOR YOUR PATIENCE AND FOR HELPING THE CITIZENS TO COMMUNICATE WITH YOU OPENLY AND CANDIDLY.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. THANK YOU, MR. WOLFSON. SARAH BOREN.

HI. GOOD EVENING, SARAH BOREN. I LIVE ON EIGHTH STREET, AND I'M THE CURRENT CHAIR OF ESC.

FIRST, I WANT TO THANK THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE ABLE TO COME TO OUR INAUGURAL AWARDS EVENT.

ESC HAS RECEIVED A LOT OF COMPLIMENTS ABOUT ITS POSITIVE COMMUNITY FEEL AND BUILDING ASPECT.

SECOND, I, TOO, ALSO WANT TO THANK STAFF AND THE COMMISSION FOR LISTENING TO THE COMMUNITY AND CONSIDERING SOME AMENDMENTS TO ORDINANCE 124 SUCH AS ADDING, POTENTIALLY ADDING BACK IN THE TREE SUBCOMMITTEE AND THE BMRC AND THE ANNUAL WORKSHOP WITH THE COMMISSION COMMISSION TO FURTHER DISCUSS THESE AMENDMENTS AND KIND OF GET A LITTLE BIT MORE INTO THE NITTY GRITTY, I WOULD LIKE TO INVITE THE CITY MANAGER, THE CITY CLERK, KEVIN HOGENCAMP AND AMANDA ASKEW, OF COURSE, TO ESC'S MAY 9TH MEETING AND BY GETTING EVERYONE IN ONE ROOM, I THINK WILL ALLOW US TO DISCUSS WHERE THE PAIN POINTS ARE.

WHERE WE CAN COLLABORATE AND HOW WE CAN MAKE PROCESSES AND COMMUNICATIONS MORE EFFICIENT.

I HAVE BEEN THINKING A LOT ABOUT COMMISSIONER BOWLES COMMENT OF HOW WE CAN GET FROM A TO B BETTER, AND HIS QUESTION OF WHAT ESC NEEDS FROM THE COMMISSION.

SO I APPRECIATE THOSE QUESTIONS AND COMMENT. I'M SORRY.

YOU SAID MAY 9TH. THAT'S A FRIDAY. OH, SORRY.

MAY 7TH. APOLOGIES. WEDNESDAY AND COMMISSIONER KELLY'S ADVICE ON HOW ESC SHOULD BE ABLE TO KIND OF EXPLAIN HOW THE MAJORITY OF ITS PRIORITIES HELP AB'S RESILIENCY.

THEREFORE, I WANT TO SUBMIT A SUGGESTION TO REFINE TO POSSIBLY REFINE AND IMPROVE THE CITY'S STATED STRATEGIC PLAN THEMES TO HELP WITH PRIORITIES ALIGNMENT. SO IN THE VISION STATEMENT AND I'M SORRY, MY COMPUTER, MY PRINTER, OF COURSE, BROKE RIGHT BEFORE I CAME HERE.

I MEANT TO GIVE YOU GUYS COPIES, BUT IN YOUR VISION STATEMENT AND I'LL PASS THIS AROUND.

ALL THE GRAY IS CURRENTLY IN YOUR STRATEGIC PLAN THEMES.

THE YELLOW HIGHLIGHTED ITEMS ARE FUNCTIONAL BEAUTY OF OUR BEACH, OUR MARSH, AND OUR TREE CANOPY AND SHADY STREETS.

THAT IS NOT IN YOUR STRATEGIC PLAN THEMES AS A BUCKET, AND SO I THINK THAT'S ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT WE'RE RUNNING UP AGAINST IS THAT SINCE 2018, THIS COMMISSION HAS HAD ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP AS A PRIORITY AND RESILIENCY AS A PRIORITY, AND THE PAST TWO YEARS, IT'S WELL, TWO YEARS AGO, IT KIND OF SLIPPED ON THE LIST, AND THEN LAST YEAR IT KIND OF GOT SUB BULLETED,

[00:30:06]

ONE I THINK COMMUNITY CHARACTER NEEDS TO BE DEFINED.

I'VE I'VE SPENT TIME TALKING TO A LOT OF PEOPLE AND SOME, YOU KNOW, LOVE THE BIG MCMANSIONS THAT ARE COMING IN AND OTHERS DON'T, AND SO I THINK THERE'S DIFFERENT DEFINITIONS OF COMMUNITY CHARACTER, AND I THINK WE MIGHT BE KIND OF GOING DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS.

SO I THINK THAT SHOULD BE HELPFUL. IT WOULD BE HELPFUL IF THAT'S DEFINED.

I WOULD LIKE TO ADD A BUCKET OF ACHIEVE A SUSTAINABLE AND RESILIENT COMMUNITY FOR ALL, AND THEN THE THIRD WHERE IT SAYS MAINTAIN A STRONG FINANCIAL CONDITION. I ABSOLUTELY, 100% AGREE WITH THE CITY MANAGER ON THIS.

I WOULD JUST LIKE TO MAKE IT A LITTLE BIT BIGGER BECAUSE I THINK MAINTAINING ORGANIZATIONAL EXCELLENCE SUITABLE FOR IMPLEMENTING THE CITY'S VISION, INCLUDING STRONG FINANCIAL CONDITION, EXCELLENT COMMUNICATIONS AND GOLD STANDARD CUSTOMER SERVICE.

SO I THINK BY HAVING THOSE BUCKETS, WE THEN AREN'T GOING TO GET INTO THIS MISALIGNMENT.

SO I'LL PASS THIS AROUND, AND THEN I HAVE A COUPLE OTHER THINGS I'VE BEEN THINKING A LOT.

OKAY. I STILL BELIEVE PERSONALLY THAT ORDINANCE ONE, TWO, FOUR HAS A LONG WAY TO GO.

THE COMMUNITY HAS LOUDLY AND CONSISTENTLY SAID IT WANTS ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP AS A PRIORITY.

I AM STILL TRYING TO GENUINELY UNDERSTAND HOW 124 IS MAKING ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP BETTER, AND I HAVE SEVERAL QUESTIONS. I WON'T GO INTO ALL OF THEM, BUT I HAVE A COUPLE. SO THERE SEEMS TO BE KIND OF I'M GETTING MIXED MESSAGES, SO I N AN INTERVIEW, I HEARD THAT YOU KNOW, THERE'S HAPPINESS WITH ESC'S PRODUCTIVITY, BUT 124 IS GOING TO REDUCE OUR PRODUCTIVITY OR OUR ABILITY TO PRODUCE OUTPUT.

AT THE JOINT WORKSHOP, I HEARD, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T CARE HOW MANY HOURS YOU MEET, BUT THEN THE NUMBER OF OUR MEETINGS ARE BEING CUT .

AS FAR AS LIKE TERM LIMITS, I THINK THE PREMISE FOR CHANGING THOSE IS JUST UNTRUE, BUT THEN, YOU KNOW, BASED ON THE TABLE FOR ALL THE COMMITTEES, ALL OF THEM HAVE THREE, OOPS, SORRY, THREE TERMS, THREE YEARS. SO ARE YOU GOING TO CHANGE ALL THE COMMITTEES AND BOARDS AND STANDARDIZE THINGS? I'LL STOP THERE AND PUT MY OTHER QUESTIONS IN AN EMAIL, BUT I'LL PASS THIS AROUND.

THANK YOU, MISS BOREN. I DIDN'T INSTRUCT THE MAYOR FOR THE DAY ON WHEN TO GAVEL.

SO YOU YOU GOT THOSE EXTRA SECONDS? YES. HEY, SARAH.

SO ON. I'M JUST LOOKING AT MY CALENDAR. MAY 7TH, I HAVE BEACHES.

WATCH. DO YOU REALLY MEAN THE 14TH? I PROBABLY DO.

NO, NO, WE'RE THE SECOND WEDNESDAY. YEAH, THAT'S THE 14TH.

OH, OKAY. SO, YEAH, I'M WAY OFF. I'M SORRY. IT'S IMPORTANT TO ME BECAUSE I'M OFF THE SEVENTH, SO. YEAH. NO I'M CLEARLY WAY OFF, SO. YEAH. MAY 14TH, WHATEVER THAT SECOND WEDNESDAY IS, I'M STILL IN APRIL.

OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY. DAN GIOVANUCCI.

OH, YEAH, I GOT IT. GOOD AFTERNOON, CITY CLERK, CITY COMMISSIONERS, CITY MANAGER, ESTEEMED MAYORS, INCLUDING THE SMALLER ONE, MR. CITY ATTORNEY, THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO YOU.

MY NAME IS DAN GIOVANNUCCI. I LIVE ON 5TH STREET HERE IN ATLANTIC BEACH, AND I ALSO SERVE ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL ESC.

FIRST, I WANTED TO ACTUALLY THANK YOU FOR THE ADVANCES THAT HAVE OCCURRED.

I THINK WE'RE MOVING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. WE MAY NOT AGREE WITH ALL OF THEM, BUT THAT'S OKAY, TOO. RIGHT. WELL, WE'RE MOVING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION, AND I APPRECIATE THAT.

I ALSO WANT TO NOTE THAT I THINK SOMETHING THAT'S GOTTEN LOST IN THIS PROCESS IS THAT MANY OF US, CERTAINLY ME, RECOGNIZE THE PRIMACY OF THE, OF THIS COMMISSION AS OUR ELECTED BODY, AND ULTIMATELY, WHAT THE COMMISSION DECIDES IS WHAT WE'RE, YOU KNOW, GOING TO DO.

SO IT'S IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND THAT WE DO RESPECT EVEN WHEN WE DISAGREE AND I THINK THAT'S A VALUABLE MESSAGE THAT I'M NOT SURE HAS GOTTEN ACROSS ALL THE TIME. OR, AND IT SHOULD IT SHOULD CERTAINLY GET ACROSS BECAUSE WE KNOW YOUR WORK IS HARD AND WE KNOW YOU'RE WORKING TOWARD THE SAME GOALS AS WE ARE, SO WE JUST HAVE TO FIGURE IT OUT, BUT I ALSO WANT TO SAY THAT I LOOK FORWARD TO COLLABORATING ON SOME GREAT SOLUTIONS.

YOU HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO HEAR MANY OF THE PROPOSALS, WHICH CAME FROM EXPERIENCE OF CITY STAFF AND FROM OUR EXPERIENCE IN THE LAST THREE YEARS

[00:35:02]

THAT'S THE NICEST WORD I CAN THINK THINK OF, RIGHT? SO HOPEFULLY WE CAN MOVE THROUGH THIS QUICKLY. WE HAVE SOME GREAT IDEAS AND WE'D LOVE TO DO THAT COLLABORATIVELY R ATHER THAN HAVING THINGS JUST IMPOSED ON US, WHICH, YOU KNOW, EVEN THOUGH WE'RE VOLUNTEERS AND EVEN THOUGH WE'RE CITIZENS, SERVING IT ALWAYS FEELS BETTER WHEN IT'S COLLABORATIVE, AND I THINK THAT'S PART OF WHAT ANYONE SERVING IN THE CITY WOULD LIKE TO HAVE, AND THAT'S HOW WE BRING GOOD INDIVIDUALS INTO SERVICE, RIGHT. KNOWING THAT 'S HAPPENING. SO THANK YOU FOR ALL YOUR EFFORTS.

THANK YOU, MAYOR FORD, FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP. THANK YOU, YOUNG MAYOR BROWN.

HOPE TO SEE YOU UP THERE WITH THAT, WE'LL HAVE TO KEEP HIS LITTLE HIS LITTLE SIGN BECAUSE HE MAY HE MAY HAVE TO USE IT SOMEDAY.

THANK YOU ALL. THANK YOU, MR. GIOVANNUCCI. CLOSE LITTLE TRIP.

THAT'S ALL I HAVE, MAYOR. THAT'S ALL. OKAY, WELL.

THANK YOU. WE'LL CLOSE THAT SEGMENT OF COURTESY OF THE FLOOR, BUT WE'RE USING THIS SEGMENT.

WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO NOW IS WE'RE GOING TO LISTEN TO OUR MAYOR FOR THE DAY, BECAUSE HE HAS BEEN WORKING HARD WITH HIS CONSTITUENTS TO BRING ACTION AT THIS MEETING, AND SO I'M GOING TO LET MAYOR BROWN, YOU ACTUALLY MET WITH YOUR CLASSMATES, RIGHT? OKAY. LET'S GIVE YOU THE MIC. SO YOU MET WITH YOUR CLASSMATES, AND YOU TALKED TO THEM ABOUT WHAT THEY THOUGHT WAS NECESSARY TO BE DONE IN THE CITY, RIGHT? YES, SIR. SO CAN YOU SHARE SOME OF THAT WITH US? ME AND MY CLASSMATES DECIDED THAT WE NEEDED SOME MORE DOG WASTE STATIONS AROUND IN THE PARKS.

LET'S HAVE THE CITY AND STAFF DETERMINE WHETHER MORE DOG WASTE STATIONS ARE NEEDED IN CITY PARKS, AND PURCHASE AND INSTALL AS NEEDED. OKAY. SO I KNOW WE DIDN'T HAVE TIME TO PUT THAT IN THE FORM OF AN ORDINANCE.

SO AT THIS TIME, AND WE'VE HEARD FROM OUR CITIZENS ABOUT RUSHED ORDINANCES, DID YOU NOTICE THAT? SO I THINK WHAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE IS, WOULD YOU LIKE FOR US TO GET A CONSENSUS WITH THIS COMMISSION THAT WE DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO STUDY THIS AND REPORT BACK WITH SOLUTIONS? OKAY. SO, COMMISSIONERS I'D LIKE TO HEAR A CONSENSUS, BUT DO YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR MAYOR BROWN? I HAVE A QUESTION. ARE THERE SOME PARKS THAT HAVE THAT NEED IT MORE THAN OTHERS? I DO BELIEVE SO. I BELIEVE THAT JACK RUSSELL NEEDS A COUPLE MORE BECAUSE DOGS ARE BROUGHT THERE A LOT, BUT THERE IS ONLY ONE, I BELIEVE. THAT'S A GOOD POINT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MAYOR.

OKAY. DO I HAVE CONSENSUS TO DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO STUDY AND REPORT BACK TO US ON THAT? YES. YES. OKAY. YOU HAVE YOUR APPROVAL FOR THE CITY MANAGER TO FULFILL THAT REQUEST.

NOW, LET'S GO TO YOUR NEXT ONE. WE HAVE ALSO DECIDED THAT WE NEED MORE BIKE RACKS AND PARKS.

BECAUSE ON SUNDAYS, JACK RUSSELL GETS FULL WITH THE BIKE RACKS AND PEOPLE HAVE TO START TYING THEIR BIKES TO TREES, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT'S NICER WEATHER. THIS IS ALSO A PROBLEM IN A COUPLE OTHER PARKS.

LET'S NOW HAVE THE STAFF FIGURE OUT WHICH PARKS NEED THESE BIKE RACKS.

THEN THE CITY STAFF TO DETERMINE THE COST FOR THESE BIKES AND DEVELOP A PLAN TO BUY AND INSTALL THEM AS NEEDED.

THANK YOU MAYOR. NOW THAT WAS I'M VERY PLEASED TO HEAR THAT YOU ACTUALLY THOUGHT ABOUT BUDGETING FOR THAT.

OKAY, SO I KNOW THE CITY MANAGER PROBABLY DOESN'T, YOU KNOW, APPRECIATE IT QUITE LIKE THE MAYOR DOES, BUT BUDGETING I'M TEASING CITY MANAGER. SO, COMMISSIONERS DID YOU UNDERSTAND THE REQUEST FOR THE BIKE RACKS? BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH. DO YOU HAVE QUESTIONS? SO JACK RUSSELL'S THE PARK THAT YOU WANT THEM IN? YES, PLEASE. WHAT ABOUT JORDAN OR BAKER? THOSE TWO WOULD BE A GOOD OPTION, BUT I WAS MAINLY FOCUSING THERE BECAUSE THEY HAVE THE FARMER'S MARKET.

OH, OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY. RATIONAL THINKING.

COMMISSIONER BOLE. I KNOW YOU HAVE A QUESTION FOR OUR MAYOR. NO, I'M ALL FOR BIKE RACKS.

COMMISSIONER RING. NO QUESTIONS. IT SOUNDS GOOD SO FAR.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. DO I HAVE CONSENSUS TO DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO STUDY AND REPORT BACK AND TO DETERMINE BUDGETING FOR THAT? YES, YES. OKAY, MAYOR, YOU'VE SUCCEEDED TWICE IN A ROW.

[00:40:01]

CORRECT? YES. YES IT IS. SO SO THE REQUEST IS TO AT LEAST LOOK AT THESE CROSSWALKS WITH FLASHING LIGHTS, AS WOULD BE APPROPRIATE, AND STUDIED AND DELIVERED BY THE ENGINEERS OF THAT INTERSECTION AS WE REDEVELOP IT.

SO COMMISSIONERS? COMMISSIONER BOLE . WHEN WE STUDIED THAT, OBVIOUSLY, WE'D LIKE TO TAKE A LOOK AT HOW THAT SLOWS THE FIVE WAY DOWN.

I KNOW WE KNOW APPROXIMATELY HOW MANY SECONDS CARS.

IN OTHER WORDS, THAT WOULD CREATE ANOTHER ISSUE.

SO I'D LIKE TO GET THOSE NUMBERS, TOO, BUT THERE ARE CROSSWALKS JUST BEFORE THEM ON SEMINOLE AND ON PLAZA. SO I'M NOT SURE IT MIGHT SEEM COUNTERINTUITIVE THAT YOU HAVE TO GO DOWN THE BLOCK TO, TO CROSS THEM, BUT THEN IF YOU COME ALL THE WAY UP, IF WE WANT FIVE OF THOSE FLASHING THEY'RE LIKE WHAT? HOW MANY THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS APIECE, THAT'S A BUDGET ITEM.

SO Y'ALL JUST STAY OUT OF THE ROAD GOING TO AND FROM SCHOOL.

I CROSS THERE EVERY DAY AND IT WOULD JUST BE SAFER IF WE ADDED THOSE CROSSWALK LIGHTS AT ACROSS WHICH ROADS? I WAS GOING TO SAY ALL OF THEM, BUT.

WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE FOR THE CITY MANAGER TO ADDRESS THIS WITH THE DESIGNER AND ACTUALLY COST AND BUDGETED AND OH, BY THE WAY, IF WE GET SOMEBODY ELSE OUTSIDE OF THE CITY TO PAY FOR IT, IT'S BETTER THAN IF WE HAVE TO PAY FOR IT HERE.

WOULD YOU AGREE? YEAH. IT'S DEFINITELY BETTER IF I MAY, MAYOR FORD.

THANK YOU, MAYOR BROWN, FOR BRINGING THAT UP, BECAUSE IT'S A VALID POINT, BUT WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT THE FIVE WAY STOP AND HOW I'VE SEEN SOME CHILDREN GO IN A FULL CIRCLE. IMAGINE THE STOPLIGHT BLINKING AND THEN BLINKING AND THEN BLINKING AND THEN BLINKING BECAUSE THEY'VE DECIDED TO GO THIS WAY. SO WHAT YOU BROUGHT UP MAYOR BROWN IS AN ISSUE WITH PEDESTRIAN CROSSING THERE THAT I FEEL THAT PEANUT SHAPED ROUNDABOUT MAY FIX BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO OFFER A MEDIAN FOR OUR PEDESTRIANS A SAFE WAY IN THE MIDDLE.

AS WHAT WE SEE RIGHT NOW, THERE IS NO SAFE SORT OF ISLAND FOR PEDESTRIANS.

SO HAVE YOU LOOKED AT THE PROPOSED DESIGN YET? I GOT A QUICK GLANCE EARLIER, BUT NOT ANYTHING IN DEPTH.

I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT, MAYOR BROWN. THAT'S A REALLY GOOD POINT, THOUGH.

THANKS FOR BRINGING IT TO OUR COMMISSION. OKAY, SO GREAT COMMENTS.

DO WE HAVE CONSENSUS TO DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO STUDY THIS AND REPORT BACK? SURE, SURE. I THINK WE HAVE CONSENSUS. SO YOU HAVE THREE OUT OF THREE.

YOU CAN NOW REPORT BACK TO YOUR CLASSMATES AND LET THEM KNOW WHAT YOU DID TODAY ON THEIR BEHALF, AND I ASKED MAYOR BROWN IF HE WOULD BE WILLING TO SERVE AS OUR MAYOR IN THE FUTURE.

I CONFESS THAT, HE SAID, I'M NOT SURE. OKAY, BUT BUT THIS IS A POSITIVE EXPERIENCE THAT MAYBE WILL INFLUENCE THAT DECISION DOWN THE ROAD, BUT THANK YOU FOR THE HARD WORK TODAY. SO WE'RE GOING TO CONCLUDE THIS, BUT I WANT TO JUST SHARE THIS.

FIRST OF ALL, I'M DELIGHTED TO SUPPORT MAYOR FOR THE DAY, AND THIS IS A ACTUALLY BORNE OUT OF THE FUNDRAISING AT ATLANTIC BEACH ELEMENTARY.

SO WHILE MAYOR BROWN DESERVES TO BE HERE TODAY AND HAS EARNED THE RIGHT TO BE HERE, THIS WOULDN'T HAPPEN WITHOUT THE SUPPORT OF HIS PARENTS AND MAYBE EVEN HIS SISTER, LEILA.

LEILA, THANK YOU FOR SUPPORTING YOUR BROTHER. YES.

LET'S GIVE HIM A HAND. GIVE THEM A HAND. SO IT IT TAKES FAMILIES TO RAISE OUR CHILDREN.

EVEN THOUGH ALL OF US ARE TRYING TO HELP RAISE THEM, BUT I'M SO VERY PROUD OF WHAT ELI HAS DONE TODAY AND WHAT HE WILL DO GOING FORWARD, BECAUSE ELI AND I ARE GOING TO JOINTLY PRESENT TO HIS CLASS, AND SO, AS YOU WOULD UNDERSTAND, NOT A WHOLE LOT OF CIVICS GOES ON IN, IN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL.

SOME DOES. HE'S IN FIFTH GRADE, BUT THIS GUY IS WAY AHEAD OF THE REST, AND HE'S GOING TO HELP TEACH SOME OF THE OTHERS.

[00:45:02]

IT'S A CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION PRESENTED TO ELI BROWN, MAYOR FOR A DAY REPRESENTING ATLANTIC BEACH ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DATED APRIL 25TH, 2025. SIGNED BY ME, CURTIS FORD AS MAYOR. THANK YOU.

YOU ARE. HOLD ON. MAYOR BROWN HAS REQUESTED HIS.

CAN I GET A PHOTO FROM MRS. FORD OR SOMEBODY REAL QUICK WITH THE MAYOR? ANYBODY? YEAH. THANK YOU. MAYOR.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT, THAT CONCLUDES COURTESY OF THE FLORIDA VISITORS.

THE BROWNS MAY STAY OR EXIT. THEY DO HAVE SCHOOL TOMORROW, AND AGAIN, LILAH, THANK YOU FOR COMING TO SUPPORT YOUR BROTHER TODAY.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. NOW WE'LL MOVE TO ITEM THREE.

[3. CITY MANAGER REPORTS]

BILL KILLINGSWORTH. SO BEFORE YOU HAVE THE 90 DAY CALENDAR SO THE NEXT TOWN HALL IS AT GAIL BAKER ON JULY 19TH.

THE ONE FOLLOWING THAT IS OCTOBER 18TH AT ADEL GRANGE CULTURAL CENTER, AND THEN WE HAVE THE CURRENTLY WE HAVE FIVE BUDGET WORKSHOPS SCHEDULED JUNE 9TH, JUNE 23RD, JUNE 4TH, JULY 14TH, JULY 28TH AND AUGUST 25TH.

ALL OF THOSE ARE AT 5 P.M.. WHAT IS NOT ON THE 90 DAY CALENDAR? BUT I BELIEVE YOU ALL SAID YOU WERE AVAILABLE FOR IS MAY 12TH AT 5:00 FOR THE PRIORITY SETTINGS.

IS THAT RIGHT? THAT IS INDEED CORRECT. I WILL GO AHEAD AND GET THAT SCHEDULED.

LINDA LANIER HAS GRACIOUSLY AGREED TO HELP PROCTOR THAT ON THE 12TH AS WELL.

YEAH. SO WITH THAT, MR. MAYOR, I'D RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE 90-DAY CALENDAR.

DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER CORRECTIONS? I HAVE A QUESTION.

THE 27TH SAYS THE DRAFT SAFETY PLAN WORKSHOP AT 5 P.M., BUT I DID SEE AN INVITE COME THROUGH THAT SAYS 5:30.

COULD YOU JUST CLARIFY, IS IT 5 OR 5:30? THAT'S THE VISION ZERO PLAN? YES, THE SAFETY ONE. IT'S THE MAY 27TH ONE, 5:00, RIGHT?5:30.

SEE, I WOULD HAVE BEEN HERE A HALF HOUR EARLIER.

05:30. SO IT'S 5:30 AND IT JUST NEEDS 30 MINUTES BEFORE THE COMMISSION MEETING? OKAY. THAT'S A PRESENTATION BY THE VISION ZERO TASK FORCE.

OKAY. OKAY. [INAUDIBLE] THEY WILL. SO THAT'S A CORRECTION, DO I HAVE A CONSENSUS TO ACCEPT THE 90 DAY CALENDAR, AS AMENDED, THAT WE APPROVE THE 90-DAY CALENDAR.

OKAY. OKAY. WE HAVE CONSENSUS. THANK YOU. WHAT ELSE? MR. KILLINGSWORTH. IF YOU WANT TO MOVE INTO UNFINISHED BUSINESS, WE CAN DO THAT.

WE CAN MOVE INTO UNFINISHED BUSINESS, BUT BEFORE WE DO THAT, CAN I ASK YOU I THINK YOU HAD SOME GOOD NEWS TODAY ON THE AQUATIC GARDENS PROJECT.

YEAH. SO WE FINALLY GOT THE CONTRACT FROM THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT TO START THAT WORK.

I SIGNED THE CONTRACT. I EXPECT I'LL SIGN THE CONTRACT WITH THE VENDOR THIS WEEK, AND THAT'LL BE ABOUT A $3 MILLION PROJECT.

ALMOST 97% OF IT FUNDED BY EITHER THE STATE OR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, AND IT REFRESH OUR MEMORIES.

YOU ACTUALLY ALREADY PLACED THE ORDER FOR THE CULVERT.

YEAH. SO THIS COMMISSION GAVE ME THE AUTHORITY TO SIGN THE CONTRACT AS SOON AS THE CONTRACT WAS APPROVED.

BASED ON THAT APPROVAL THE VENDOR HAD ALREADY ORDERED THE STRUCTURES NECESSARY.

SO I BELIEVE THEY'RE IN GREEN COVE SPRINGS RIGHT NOW AND SO ONCE WE GET THE CONTRACTOR ON BOARD AND HE GETS MOBILIZED, IT SHOULD MOVE ALONG PRETTY QUICK. IF I MAY, MAYOR.

[00:50:01]

IT DOESN'T INCLUDE ALL THE BULKHEADING THAT WE ORIGINALLY PLANNED.

THAT WAS THE EXPENSIVE PART. SO WHY NOT? THAT WAS THE PART THAT MADE IT COST PROHIBITIVE.

OKAY, SO WE'RE NOT DOING THERE'S NO BULKHEAD.

OKAY. BUT THERE'D BE A DITCH REALIGNMENT. THE DITCH THAT'S BEHIND THE SHOPPING CENTER THERE.

I THINK IT HAS 390 DEGREE TURNS IN IT. SO WE'RE GOING TO MAKE THAT A LITTLE MORE CURVILINEAR SO THAT WATER CAN FLOW MORE RAPIDLY THROUGH THERE.

WE'RE GOING TO INCREASE THE SIZE OF THE CULVERT AND INCREASE THE SIZE OF THE DITCHES TO HOLD MORE WATER, AND WHERE DOES IT FLOW FROM OR FLOW TO. SORRY THAT WATER FLOWS SOUTH.

OKAY. SO IT GOES TO NEPTUNE.

HOPKINS CREEK. YEAH. HOW LONG DOES IT TAKE/WILL THIS TAKE? THE WORK WILL PROBABLY BE GOING ON DURING THE HURRICANE SEASON.

OKAY. RIGHT. THAT'S WHAT I'M THINKING ABOUT. I WOULD FIND IT HARD TO BELIEVE THAT THEY WOULD BE DONE BEFORE JUNE.

YEAH, I THINK SO, AND SO WE ACTUALLY HAVE SEVERAL OF OUR AQUATIC GARDENS RESIDENTS HERE TODAY.

THE REAL QUESTION IS WHEN WILL THE CONTRACTOR MOBILIZE? AND I KNOW YOU DON'T KNOW THE EXACT DATE, BUT WHAT'S YOUR GUT FEELING? I'M A LITTLE HESITANT TO SAY THAT BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE THE CONTRACT BEFORE ME NOW.

SO NORMALLY WHEN WE GET THE CONTRACT, THAT'S WHEN WE GIVE THEM A DEADLINE ON.

THEY HAVE TO PROCEED WITHIN SO MANY DAYS, BUT MY EXPECTATION WOULD BE THAT THEY WOULD START BEFORE JUNE, BUT GIVEN THAT WE'RE INTO THIS WEEK, MAY 2ND GENERALLY A NOTICE TO PROCEED, THEY, THEY GENERALLY GET MORE THAN 30 DAYS OR A MINIMUM OF 30 DAYS FOR THE NOTICE TO PROCEED.

BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO RAMP UP AND GET AND YOU'VE ALREADY BEEN PRESENTED WITH THE CONTRACT, SO YOU JUST HAVE TO I SIGNED WAS THE CONTRACT BETWEEN US AND THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT.

SO NOW I'LL GET THEIR CONTRACT BEFORE ME AND WE'LL GET THAT ONE SIGNED.

ALL RIGHT. JUST A SPECIAL REQUEST POSTHASTE. LIKE TOMORROW WOULD BE GOOD.

OKAY, SO THIS IS IMPORTANT, AND I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY AGAIN, THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU CHANGE A PROJECT.

SO WHEN WE COSTED THIS, I GUESS LAST YEAR, THAT'S WHEN WE DETERMINED THAT COSTS HAD JUST BALLOONED OUT OF SIGHT, AND WE HAD TO MODIFY THE PROJECT, AS YOU JUST HEARD, ELIMINATION OF THE BULKHEADING BECAUSE THAT WAS THE MAJOR EXPENSE, AND BECAUSE OF THAT, IT HAD TO GO BACK THROUGH EVERY AGENCY INVOLVED IN THIS, AND SO IT'S BEEN A LONG JOG TO GET THERE, AND I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU FOR PURSUING THAT AND STAYING WITH IT AND I PRAY THAT WE HAVE A GOOD SEASON WITH NOT TOO MUCH RAIN, LADIES. SO WE'RE THERE WITH YOU. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU FOR THAT.

MR. KILLINGSWORTH ANYTHING ELSE? ARE YOU DONE? UNTIL YOU GET TO 5A. OH, OKAY. WELL, THEN, DO YOU WANT ME TO.

WE'LL GET THERE IN A MINUTE, BUT LET'S GO TO ITEM FOUR.

[4. REPORTS AND/OR REQUESTS FROM CITY COMMISSIONERS]

SO IF YOU'RE INTERESTED, GO UP TO THE BEACHES TOWN CENTER AGENCY WEBPAGE.

THEY'D LOVE TO HEAR FROM YOU. I'LL SAVE THE REST OF MY LATER.

OKAY. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER KELLY. SO I FEEL LIKE I'VE SEEN SOME OF YOU OVER AND OVER AGAIN LAST COUPLE DAYS.

YEAH. WE HAD A MARVELOUS CELEBRATION OF ALL THE ENVIRONMENTAL GOOD THINGS HAPPENING.

ON WEDNESDAY, AND THEN WE RECONVENED ON THURSDAY TO CELEBRATE THE, THE SCOUTING PROGRAM AT THE HUT AND THE, THE OPPORTUNITIES TO RESTORE THE BUILDING AND SUPPORT THE PROGRAMS, AND THEN WE HAD A REALLY WELL ATTENDED ARTS IN THE PARK. SO THE RECREATION COMMITTEE WAS ON THERE WAS ON THEIR BEST FOOT FORWARD FOR ALL THE EVENTS THEY'VE HAD THIS MONTH, AND THE COMMUNITY HAS COME OUT TO SUPPORT WHAT WE'VE GOT TO OFFER.

SO THANKS VERY MUCH. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER.

COMMISSIONER RING. WELL, APRIL WAS A VERY BUSY MONTH FOR OUR RECREATION AND PARKS, AND I JUST WANT TO THANK PUBLIC WORKS AND ARCC AND ALL OF CITY STAFF WHO'S INVOLVED IN MAKING THAT HAPPEN.

ALL OF THOSE LITTLE NUANCE I DID, I HEAR IT WAS 6000 EGGS THAT WERE .

10,000. OH, 10,000 EGGS THAT WERE STUFFED BY BY STAFF HANDS.

DON'T YOU HAVE SPECIAL ELVES THAT COME IN FROM SANTA'S WORKSHOP? NO YOU DON'T. SPECIAL BUNNIES. ANYWAY, I WANT TO THANK ALL OF STAFF'S TIME FOR THAT.

[00:55:03]

I HEARD THAT WE HAVE THE BEST EGG HUNT IN ALL THE BEACHES AND JACKSONVILLE TOO.

I DID WANT TO MENTION ONE OTHER KUDOS. SO YESTERDAY WAS SUNDAY AND ON THE WAY HOME I SAW A HUGE TREE.

A HUGE OAK TREE LOOKED VERY VERY HEALTHY TREE HAD FALLEN ACROSS ALL OF CAMELIA STREET.

THERE WAS NO WAY IN AND NO WAY OUT, AND SO I MESSAGED OUR CITY MANAGER, WHO JUST SO HAPPENED TO BE BY HIS PHONE AND GOT BACK TO ME WITHIN FIVE MINUTES. TEN MINUTES, AND WE STARTED WELL, MY HUSBAND STARTED WITH THE CHAINSAW OUT THERE TO DO AS MUCH AS HE COULD, BUT HE DIDN'T HAVE TO GO TOO FAR BECAUSE WITHIN 45 MINUTES, THOMAS FROM PUBLIC WORKS CAME WITH A MASSIVE TREE.

TRUCK. I'M SURE THERE'S A BETTER TERM FOR THAT, AND CUT THE REMAINING OF IT DOWN, AND WITHIN AN HOUR AND A HALF, THE STREET WAS CLEARED. I JUST WANT TO THANK CITY MANAGER FOR BEING BY HIS PHONE ON A SUNDAY AND FOR PUBLIC WORKS FOR BEING ON CALL.

NOT ALL HEROES WEAR CAPES. SO THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER.

I'VE JUST GOT A COUPLE COMMENTS AND THEN SOMETHING REAL IMPORTANT, BUT VERY GOOD, SARAH AND COMPANY ON THE INAUGURAL EVENT.

JUST SO PROUD OF WHAT YOU GUYS DID ON CELEBRATING AND THEN THE EASTER EGG HUNT.

I'VE OBVIOUSLY BEEN TO THE PREVIOUS TWO AND THEN THIS ONE.

SO THAT'S THREE IN A ROW. THIS ONE WAS EXECUTED THE BEST, AND NOT THAT THE OTHERS WEREN'T, BUT 10,000 EGGS, AND THERE MUST HAVE BEEN ALMOST 2000 CHILDREN IN THAT PARK, AND THEY DID IT SO WELL.

IT WAS SO WELL ORGANIZED, AND THE TRAIN RIDE AND THE HORSE RIDE AND THE AND THE PETTING ZOO, JUST REALLY GOOD STUFF. SO KUDOS TO ALL INVOLVED, VERONICA AND HER STAFF OR HER PEOPLE AND THE PARKS FOLKS AND SO ON, BUT I WANT TO BRING UP SOMETHING THAT IS GOING TO BE A CHALLENGE FOR US, AND SO THIS IS KIND OF MY FIRST FORAY INTO THIS IN THE PUBLIC SQUARE, AND SO, COMMISSIONERS, I WOULD LIKE FOR YOU TO BE PREPARED TO DISCUSS AT THE NEXT MEETING.

THIS PAST YEAR CITY MANAGER KILLINGSWORTH EXECUTED A CONTRACT WITH THE JFRD TO EXTEND OUR CONTRACT FOR TWO YEARS.

WHILE WE WORK THROUGH WHAT WE'RE REALLY GOING TO DO.

SO WE WENT THROUGH A WAS IT A 20 YEAR? WE WENT THROUGH AN INITIAL CONTRACT OF 20 YEARS, 25 YEARS.

THAT'S RIGHT. SO WE WENT THROUGH AN INITIAL 25 YEARS, WHICH WAS FROM THE POINT OF TURNING OVER FIRE SERVICES TO JFRD AND NO LONGER HANDLING THAT AS THE CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH, AND THAT EXPIRED, AND ONE WOULD INTUITIVELY THINK THAT YOU JUST EXTEND OR YOU JUST DO A NEW CONTRACT AND GO FORWARD, BUT IT VERY CLEARLY THAT SHOULD BE CHALLENGED BECAUSE WE BELIEVE AND I THINK I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK FOR YOU, CITY MANAGER, BUT I BELIEVE WE'RE IN AGREEMENT THAT FIRE SERVICES ARE A COUNTY SERVICE.

YES, AND THEREFORE SHOULD BE PAID FOR BY THE COUNTY WITH OUR OWN MONEY THAT WE GIVE TO THEM IN AD VALOREM TAXES.

SO WE HAVEN'T QUITE GOTTEN AGREEMENT ON THAT, BUT THERE HAS BEEN SOME DIALOG.

SO BEFORE I GIVE MY COMMENTS ON WHAT NEXT CAN YOU ADVISE US? DO WE HAVE ANY ONGOING DIALOG, OR ARE YOU WAITING TO HEAR BACK FROM THE FIRE CHIEF? SO I'VE HAD ONGOING DIALOG WITH THE CHIEF OF STAFF FOR THE CITY OF JACKSONVILLE AND WITH THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER WITH THE CITY OF JACKSONVILLE.

THE CHIEF OBVIOUSLY, THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER AND I HAVE TALKED ABOUT BUDGET AND NUMBERS AND HOW THAT WOULD WORK.

AT THIS POINT IN TIME, I'M WAITING ON A FINAL RESPONSE FROM THE CITY OF JACKSONVILLE, AND I MENTIONED THAT I HAD A JUNE BUDGET WORKSHOP, AND SO I WOULD NEED, YOU KNOW, TO HAVE SOME GUIDANCE FROM THEM ON WHAT THEY WERE PLANNING ON DOING SO THAT I COULD BE PREPARED FOR OUR PUBLIC JUNE WORKSHOP AND MY EXPECTATION IS I WILL HEAR FROM HIM PRIOR TO JUNE.

OKAY. THANK YOU, AND SO YOU CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M INCORRECT ON THIS, BUT I BELIEVE WHAT THE PROPOSAL WAS THE STARTING PROPOSAL FROM OUR SIDE WAS THAT WE TRY TO WIND THIS CONTRACT DOWN OVER A THREE YEAR PERIOD, AND WE'RE ALREADY WELL INTO THIS YEAR.

TO WHERE IN THE CONTRACT RIGHT NOW IS OVER $1 MILLION A YEAR.

FORGET HOW MUCH, BUT. SO THE PROPOSAL WAS THE FIRST YEAR UNDER THE TWO YEAR EXTENSION WAS $1.5 MILLION, AND THEN WE WOULD TAKE IT TO $1 MILLION IN THE NEXT PAYMENT, AND THEN $500,000 AND THE THIRD PAYMENT, AND THEN FROM THAT POINT ON FIRE WOULD BE A SERVICE PROVIDED BY DEFAULT.

OKAY. THANK YOU. SO HERE'S WHERE I GET TO THE MEAT OF THE ISSUE.

[01:00:03]

SO WHAT I WOULD LIKE THE COMMISSION TO CONSIDER AND GIVE DIRECTION ON NEXT MEETING.

WE'LL HAVE ANOTHER CONVERSATION ABOUT IT, AND I THINK WE SHOULD PUT IT ON THE AGENDA, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO CONSIDER TELLING THE CITY OF JACKSONVILLE THAT WE ARE AT THIS TIME, BASED ON THE LACK OF RESPONSE, BECAUSE IT'S BEEN MANY MONTHS, WE'VE BEEN IN CONVERSATION THAT WE ARE GOING TO SUSPEND PAYMENTS TO THE CITY OF JACKSONVILLE FOR FIRE SERVICE, BUT BUT THAT WE WOULD PUT THOSE PAYMENTS INTO ESCROW PENDING THE OUTCOME OF RESOLUTION OF THE ISSUE, WHICH THEN WOULD DRIVE THE CONVERSATION. ARE WE GOING TO DO THAT THROUGH LEGAL MEANS? WE'RE GOING TO DO THAT THROUGH AN ARBITER. HOW ARE WE GOING TO GET THE RESOLUTION TO THAT BUT WE NEED TO AT I BELIEVE AT THIS TIME WE NEED TO TAKE ACTION, BECAUSE I DO NOT BELIEVE THE CITY OF JACKSONVILLE IS AT ALL CONCERNED ABOUT ANY TIMELINESS ON THIS, AND LET ME JUST LEAVE YOU WITH A FINAL THOUGHT ON THIS.

OUR CITY TO THE SOUTH. NEPTUNE BEACH PAYS THIS MUCH FOR FIRE SERVICE.

WE PROVIDE IT WITH THIS FIRE STATION, AND THE CITY OF JACKSONVILLE REIMBURSES US FOR PROVIDING IT FOR FREE TO THEM.

SO HOW DO WE JUSTIFY THAT WE CONTINUE TO PAY OVER $1 MILLION OF TAXPAYER MONEY IN ATLANTIC BEACH, WHEN THE CITY TO THE SOUTH PAYS ZERO? VERY, VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THAT, AND I WANT AT THIS TIME I'D LIKE TO TAKE ACTION.

YES, COMMISSIONER? BILL WAS SITTING NEXT TO ME WHEN I POSED THE QUESTION, WHAT DO WE GET AT THE BEACHES FROM DUVAL COUNTY? AND I WAS TOLD, AND I'M SURE YOU REMEMBER THIS, THAT WE GET TO USE THE COURTHOUSE WAS THE ANSWER FROM THE HEAD OF THE.

THEY SAID THAT IN THE MEETING. WELL WE DO. YEAH.

WELL IT'S AN IT'S AN EXPENSIVE COURTHOUSE. MAKE MONEY.

IF YOU LOOK AT COURTHOUSES THEY ACTUALLY MAKE MONEY, BUT MY POINT IS I GOT THE IDEA THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BLOW THIS OFF.

YEAH, I'LL JUST BE FRANK. I THINK SO. COMMISSIONER KELLY I HAVE A LOT OF CONCERN BECAUSE WE CAN'T EVEN GET THEM TO RENEGOTIATE THE INTERLOCAL, AND I DON'T KNOW IF WE I COULD IT'S GOING TO BE A TRICKY, TRICKY ROAD.

WELL AND WITHOUT GETTING I WAS ACTUALLY TRYING TO SET THIS UP FOR NEXT MEETING.

SO WE'LL GET INTO SOME MORE, BUT THE IDEA AND I CERTAINLY THINK THIS IS A POSITIVE.

MR. KILLINGSWORTH WANTS TO BLEND THE SEPARATE INTERLOCAL ON THE FIRE INTO OUR MAIN INTERLOCAL, AND WE REALLY FELT LIKE BY DOING THEM BOTH TOGETHER, WE WOULD GET THE MOST MILEAGE AND THE MOST BANG FOR THE BUCK FOR ATLANTIC BEACH.

SO WE'LL SEE. I WOULD CERTAINLY EXPECT THIS IS NOW PUBLIC RECORD THAT WE'RE HAVING THIS CONVERSATION, AND I WOULD EXPECT CITY MANAGER, FEEL FREE TO LET THEM KNOW THAT THIS IS BEING NOW ADDRESSED BY THE CITY COMMISSION, AND IT COULD RESULT IN A, B, OR C. SO LET THEM KNOW SO THAT HOPEFULLY THEY'LL ACTUALLY GET OFF THE DIME AND START TELLING US WHAT WE CAN DO.

COMMISSIONER. THANK YOU, MAYOR, FOR BRINGING THIS TO THE COMMISSION TODAY.

I HAVE ACTUALLY ASKED CITY MANAGER A FEW TIMES OVER THE COURSE OF THE PAST COUPLE OF MONTHS.

WHERE ARE WE AT IN THE JFRD AGREEMENT? THE STATION IS STILL OWNED BY ATLANTIC BEACH.

STATIONS TO BE BUILT BY JACKSONVILLE ARE INCREDIBLY EXPENSIVE.

TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS. SO THAT PROPERTY IS STILL MAINTAINED BY OUR CITY.

AM I CORRECT IN THAT? WE STILL OWN THE BUILDING, AND WE'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR EXTERIOR MAINTENANCE.

YEAH, THE EXTERIOR MAINTENANCE? NOW, THE INTERIOR.

IF THEY WANT TO PAINT OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, THEY WOULD HAVE TO DO SO.

I THINK THAT THE BALL IS IN OUR COURT BECAUSE WE'RE THE ONES PAYING AND I INITIALLY BROUGHT THIS UP IN 2023.

MY FIRST BUDGET CYCLE AS A COMMISSIONER TO THAT CURRENT CITY MANAGER AT THE TIME WHO SAID, YOU KNOW WHAT? LET ME LOOK INTO THAT. THAT'S AN INTERESTING THAT'S AN INTERESTING LOOK AT THIS CONTRACT.

IT SHOULD HAVE EXPIRED IN 2024. THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN OUR LAST YEAR.

THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN 25 YEARS, AND THE WAY YOU READ IT, IT READS LIKE A MORTGAGE, AND YET WE CONTINUE TO PAY.

SO WE SHOULDN'T HAVE PAID. LAST YEAR THAT WAS MY THINKING, AND I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD PAY ANOTHER PENNY AFTER THIS YEAR.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO MORE WE'LL HAVE A EVEN MORE ROBUST CONVERSATION NEXT MEETING, BECAUSE YOU'LL HAVE TIME TO GET YOUR THOUGHTS TOGETHER ON THAT.

SO THANKS FOR ENTERTAINING MY REQUEST. WE'LL MOVE NOW TO ITEM FIVE, A UNDER UNFINISHED

[Items 5.A & 5.B]

THAT'S DISCUSSION ON ESC ORDINANCE AND PROPOSED AMENDMENTS.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. SO LAST TIME WE HANDED OUT A SHEET OF AMENDMENTS I BELIEVE ROUGHLY HALF OF THEM CAME FROM

[01:05:07]

WHAT I THOUGHT I WOULD DO THIS EVENING, AND THEN THE OTHER HALF CAME FROM OTHER PLACES SOME OF THEM FROM THE TOWN HALL, SOME OF THEM FROM CITIZENS AND SOME OF THEM FROM COMMISSIONERS, BUT I THOUGHT I WOULD DO IS GO THROUGH AND MY UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT WAS ASKED LAST TIME WAS TO INCORPORATE THOSE AMENDMENTS SO THE COMMISSION COULD SEE THEM IN CONTEXT.

SO WHAT I THOUGHT I WOULD DO IS GO THROUGH THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS AS WE GO THROUGH THE PAGES IN ORDER AND THEN HIGHLIGHT WHAT WHAT THOSE AMENDMENTS ARE. I'M GOING TO ACTUALLY START ON PAGE 65 OF THE AGENDA.

THE ORDINANCE STARTS ON 63, BUT THERE AREN'T ANY CHANGES THAT ARE A RESULT OF RECOMMENDED AMENDMENTS SINCE THE FIRST READ.

UNTIL YOU GET TO PAGE 65 AND I'M GOING TO HAVE TO PUT MY CHEATERS ON BECAUSE IT'S YELLOW, GREEN AND RED AND THEY'RE BUZZING ALL AROUND MY HEAD RIGHT NOW.

SO THIS FIRST ONE I BELIEVE WAS ESC RECOMMENDED AMENDMENT, AND WHAT IT SAYS IS THE ESC MAY REVIEW ANY PERMIT APPLICATION FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THIS CHAPTER AND MAY PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE ADMINISTRATOR REGARDING THE PERMIT APPLICATION.

AS WE MOVE ON TO THE NEXT INSERT, WHICH COVERS DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES THIS IS ON PAGE 69.

THIS ALSO WAS A RECOMMENDED AMENDMENT. SO I'LL READ THE WHOLE SECTION, AND SO YOU GET IT ALL IN CONTEXT.

THE ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP COMMITTEE SHALL PROVIDE GUIDANCE AND SUPPORT TO THE CITY COMMISSION AND THE CITY MANAGER.

THE CITY COMMISSION WILL HAVE AN ANNUAL JOINT COMMISSION AND ESC WORKSHOP TO DISCUSS THE COMMITTEE'S PRIORITIES AND ANNUAL WORK PLAN.

UPON REQUEST BY THE CITY COMMISSION OR THE CITY MANAGER SHALL PROVIDE A WRITTEN RECOMMENDATION IN THE FOLLOWING AREAS LISTED BELOW.

THE CITY COMMISSION WILL PRIORITIZE THE COMMITTEE'S WORK PLAN RELATED TO THESE RECOMMENDATIONS.

DO YOU WANT TO OPEN IT UP TO QUESTIONS AS WE GO OR WAIT TILL THE END? GIVEN THAT I THINK THE FIRST TWO, I THINK WE JUST GO WITH IT, AND WHAT I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE DO IS NOT MISS THE OPPORTUNITY YET.

WE'VE HEARD FROM AT LEAST 1 OR 2. WE'VE HEARD FROM SEVERAL CITIZENS ON SOME YOU KNOW, SCRIVENER ERRORS AND OTHER THINGS.

SO AS WE HIT THOSE LET'S ADDRESS THAT. ANY QUESTIONS? DID YOU SAY WE'RE JUST GOING TO GO SECTION BY SECTION, MAYOR? WELL, I THINK WE'LL JUST ADDRESS EACH TIME HE READS THROUGH SOMETHING.

LET'S ADDRESS IT NOW SO WE DON'T COME BACK TO IT.

WE'LL GET LOST. SO ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT? IF I MAY, I TOOK A NOTE FROM CAROLYN ZISSER'S. YES. ABOUT ADDING AND OR UPON REQUEST OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP COMMITTEE.

WHERE IS THAT IN HERE? THERE WOULD BE ON PAGE 69.

OKAY. 23 - 56. YES. REQUESTING RECOMMENDATION.

I BELIEVE IT WOULD BE UNDER DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES.

HAVE WE GOTTEN THERE YET. WE'RE THERE. YEAH. HE JUST WENT THROUGH THERE RIGHT NOW.

YEAH. SEE THE SENTENCE UPON REQUEST BY THE CITY COMMISSION OR CITY MANAGER.

INSERT AND SLASH OR UPON REQUEST OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP COMMITTEE, AND THEN FINISH IT OFF.

I'M OKAY WITH THAT, BUT , COMMISSIONERS, YOU TELL ME.

I JUST WE SKIPPED SUBTREE COMMITTEE. WE HAVEN'T GOT TO THAT YET.

OH. WELL, YOU'RE SAYING WE'RE ON 69 SUBTREE COMMITTEES ON 65? NO. PAGE 69 OF THE AGENDA. THAT'S THE PAGE I'M LOOKING AT.

WELL, LET'S JUST ADDRESS THIS AND WE'LL FIND TREE COMMITTEE IN A MINUTE.

OKAY. MAYOR? YES. I THINK WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE IS THAT WE GET A TWO WAY FLOW OF COMMUNICATION.

YES. I'M FINE WITH THAT. YES. IN THAT, YOU KNOW, THE WAY IT WAS WRITTEN, IT WOULD BE ONE WAY.

I THINK THIS IS A GOOD IDEA TWO-WAY. THANKS, AND I HADN'T.

I'M LOOKING FOR YOU GUYS TO ARTICULATE IT AND LET ME JUST FACILITATE, BUT THAT'S WHAT I HEARD FROM MORE THAN A FEW CITIZENS, SO I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY HARM IN DOING THAT.

I THINK IT'S A POSITIVE. IS THAT OKAY? YEAH. OKAY, SO YOU'VE GOT THAT.

[01:10:08]

SO THE NEXT ITEM WAS THERE WAS AN IDEA OF I NSTEAD OF THREE YEAR TERMS CHANGING IT TO TWO, FOUR YEAR TERMS. SO I'LL READ THAT SECTION. IT SAYS ALL MEMBERS SHALL SERVE, AND THEN INSTEAD OF THREE, FOUR, INSTEAD OF THREE YEAR TERMS, FOUR YEAR TERMS, MEMBERS SHALL NOT SERVE MORE THAN TWO CONSECUTIVE TERMS ON THE COMMITTEE AND SHALL NOT BE ELIGIBLE FOR REAPPOINTMENT UNLESS ONE TERM HAS PASSED SINCE THE PERSON WAS TERM LIMITED, AND THEN THE REST OF THAT SECTION WOULD REMAIN THE SAME.

ON THIS SAME PAGE, WHICH IS PAGE 72 OF THE AGENDA, I BELIEVE THIS IS WHERE MISS ZISSER IS, AND I AGREE THERE'S A WORD MISSING. COMMITTEE MEMBERS SHALL BE RECOMMENDED BY THE BOARD MEMBER REVIEW COMMITTEE AND SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION.

AGREED ON THAT? YES. EVERYBODY IN, YES, COMMISSIONER.

I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THAT WHOLE X-ING OUT OF THE BOX.

SO IT LOOKS LIKE WE'RE GETTING RID OF DISTRICTS.

IS THAT WHAT IS THE SLASHES THROUGH ALL OF THE MEMBER REPRESENTATION BY DISTRICT AT LARGE WAS THE FIRST ONE.

THAT'S HOW WE SET IT UP IN THE BEGINNING. OKAY.

YEAH. THIS THIS SECTION IS THAT'S ALL MARKED OUT IS HOW THE ESC WAS SET UP IN THE BEGINNING WHEN THEY MADE THE VERY FIRST APPOINTMENTS. OKAY, SO NOW BUT WE'RE NOT DOING AWAY WITH DISTRICTS.

NO, THIS ACTUALLY ESTABLISHES THAT IT HAS TO BE BY DISTRICT.

OKAY I SEE. OKAY. SO THAT STRIKETHROUGH IS HOW THE VERY FIRST ESC WAS SET UP.

OKAY, AND IT'S JUST NOT NEEDED ANYMORE BECAUSE ESC HAS EXISTED FOR A WHILE.

BASICALLY THE NEXT PARAGRAPH WHERE THEY DO GEOGRAPHIC OKAY.

SO, AND THEN THIS OTHER ON PAGE 73 WHICH IS THE NEXT PAGE.

YOU'LL SEE IT'S ALSO HIGHLIGHTED IS GRANDFATHERING.

SO ANY MEMBER SERVING ADOPTED AS OF THE ADOPTING OF THIS CODE CAN FINISH OUT A TERM.

SO THERE WAS SOME QUESTION THAT WAS ALWAYS MY ASSUMPTION THAT ANYBODY WHO HAD A REMAINING TERM WOULD BE ABLE TO FINISH A TERM INCLUDING THOSE MEMBERS WHO ARE NOT REAPPOINTED YET, BUT SERVING BECAUSE OUR MEMBERS ON COMMITTEES SERVE UNTIL THEY'RE REAPPOINTED OR REPLACED, BUT THIS CODE WOULD WOULD ESTABLISH THAT BY CODE THAT ANY SERVING MEMBERS WOULD BE GRANDFATHERED IN TO CONTINUE SERVING THEIR TERM. SO I HAVE A QUESTION THERE.

SO CURRENTLY IT'S THREE THREE YEAR TERMS CORRECT OR PERIODS, AND IF WE APPROVE THIS IT WOULD CHANGE TO TWO FOUR YEAR WHICH IS EIGHT YEARS NOW MAX VERSUS NINE YEARS BEFORE PREVIOUS.

RIGHT? WHAT I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND IS IF SOMEBODY WAS ARE YOU SAYING THEY WOULD BE GRANDFATHERED IN IF THEY'RE ALREADY INTO THEIR THIRD THREE YEAR TERM, OR THEY WOULD BE GRANDFATHERED IN IF THEY'VE ALREADY STARTED UNDER THE RULES IN EXISTENCE NOW, WHICH IS A TOTAL OF MAXIMUM OF NINE YEARS. THE WAY I READ THE RECOMMENDATION WAS THAT THEY COULD FINISH OUT THERE.

SO IF THEY'RE IN THEIR THIRD TERM, THEY COULD FINISH OUT THE THIRD TERM.

OKAY. SO COMMISSIONERS, THAT'S MY QUESTION AND WOULD LIKE YOUR FEEDBACK.

IF IF WE TAKE IT ON THAT BASIS, THEN IF THEY'RE IN THEIR FIRST OR SECOND TERM BUT HAVEN'T GOTTEN INTO THEIR THIRD, THEY WOULD NOT IN FACT BE ABLE TO SERVE NINE YEARS, AND QUITE FRANKLY, I THINK IF SOMEBODY STARTED WITH THE IDEA THAT THEY HAD THREE, THREE YEAR TERMS, THAT'S PROBABLY HOW WE SHOULD FINISH IT FROM THE FIRST TERM, SECOND TERM AND INTO THE THIRD TERM, BUT YOU. YES, MA'AM. I'M NOT SURE WHY I NEVER ASKED THIS BEFORE.

IS WHY IS THIS BETTER? WHY IS THIS FOUR YEAR THING BETTER THAN A THREE YEAR THING? IT'S A LABOR OF LOVE, AND FOUR YEARS MIGHT SEEM LIKE A LONG TIME.

THAT WAS A RECOMMENDED. THAT'S NOT A STAFF AMENDMENT.

THAT WAS A RECOMMENDATION. THAT'S AN ESC THING? THAT WAS NOT AN AMENDMENT. THAT WAS AN AMENDMENT THAT EITHER CAME FROM THE TOWN HALL OR FROM SOMEWHERE ELSE.

WELL, WHAT WAS THE FIRST ITERATION ON THE FIRST DRAFT? THE FIRST ITERATION WAS TWO, THREE YEAR TERMS. I THOUGHT SO. OKAY. SO? SO THAT WAS A COMPROMISE, BELIEVE IT OR NOT.

THERE WAS A COMPROMISE. SO, COMMISSIONERS, LET'S SPEAK UP NOW BECAUSE I'D LIKE TO GET CLOSER TO A FINAL DRAFT BY THE NEXT MEETING.

[01:15:02]

DID YOU DO THIS? DID YOU DO THAT RULE TO THE OTHER COMMITTEES? TO CDC AND TO REC? DID YOU DO IT TO THEM, TOO? WELL, AT THIS POINT, THIS IS STANDARD. ULTIMATELY, THIS WILL DRIVE WHATEVER HAPPENS TO THE OTHERS.

YES. OKAY, BUT I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND HELP YOU OUT, COMMISSIONER WE'RE NOT DRIVING THAT ACTION ON THE OTHER COMMITTEE THAT IS BEING REVISED ON SIZE, WHICH IS THE ARCC. SO THE ONLY THING WE WERE DOING ON THE ARCC COMMITTEE WAS TRYING TO MAKE THEM CONSISTENT ON THE NUMBER OF MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE.

WELL, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION AND WHAT YOU SAW IN THE ORDINANCE BEHIND THE MEMBERSHIP AND TERMS. SO IF YOU CHANGE THE TERMS ON ESC, IT WOULD BE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO CHANGE THE TERMS ON ARCC AS WELL.

OKAY. YES, COMMISSIONER? WOULD THAT INCLUDE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD AS WELL? THAT'S A BOARD, NOT A COMMITTEE. OKAY. SO AND THAT WOULD ALSO INCLUDE THE BMRC AND THE PENSION BOARDS.

WELL NO PENSION BOARDS ARE TOTALLY UNIQUE AS WELL, AND THEIR BOARDS.

OKAY. THE BMRC IS A COMMITTEE. SO LET'S JUST AGREE WE'RE DEALING WITH COMMITTEES, NOT BOARDS.

SO ON THE BMRC , THAT'S DIFFERENT. IN FACT, YOU HAVE AN ACTION COMING TO YOU SHORTLY ON THAT, BUT WHAT ARE THE TERMS? DONNA, WHAT ARE THE TERMS FOR MEMBERS ON THE BMRC? I THINK IT'S THREE, THREE YEAR TERMS. OKAY. SO BY RESOLUTION, NOT A--WELL, BUT I THINK WE'RE ABOUT ARE WE GOING TO CODIFY THAT INTO A ORDINANCE? THAT'S NOT BEFORE US. I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING FOR THAT RIGHT NOW. OKAY, SO, CITY CLERK, YOU'RE LOOKING AT THIS TABLE THAT YOU CREATED, WHERE YOU'RE LOOKING AT ALL THE TERMS AND YOU'VE SHOWN IT TO ME BEFORE IN YOUR OFFICE.

WOULD IT MAKE SENSE TO KEEP THEM ALL THE SAME, WHETHER IT'S A BOARD OR A COMMITTEE, EVEN THOUGH WE'RE RIGHT NOW WE'RE LOOKING AT ESC? WHENEVER POSSIBLE. YES, BUT THERE'S EXCEPTIONS TO THAT.

I MEAN LIKE PENSION BOARD I BELIEVE IT'S THE POLICE.

PENSION BOARD DOESN'T ALLOW YOU TO HAVE AN ALTERNATE.

CORRECT. THEY BOTH PENSION BOARDS HAVE A COMBINATION OF TWO ELECTED MEMBERS AND TWO CITIZEN MEMBERS CHOSEN BY THE COMMISSION, AND THEN THE FIFTH ONE IS CHOSEN BY THE BOARD ITSELF, BUT THEN CONFIRMED BY THE COMMISSION.

SO THEIR SETUP IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT. IT'S DICTATED, YOU KNOW, DIFFERENTLY THAN, YOU KNOW, THERE'S FOUR STATUTES THAT GET INVOLVED IN HOW YOU CAN SET THOSE UP AS FAR AS TERMS GO.

IN TERMS, YES. OKAY. SO WE'RE LOOKING AT STREAMLINING FOR STAFF EFFICIENT AND ORGANIZATIONAL EFFICIENCY.

THEN IF I'M LOOKING AT THIS TERM, WOULDN'T IT JUST MAKE SENSE TO KEEP THEM ALL THE SAME.

YES. WHAT ARE THE CURRENT TERMS ON THE CDB. LOOKING FOR MY THAT TABLE THAT IT DIDN'T MAKE IT TO ME. I CAN ACTUALLY PASS THIS OUT IF IT HELPS.

I HAVE COPIES. YES, THAT WOULD HELP, AND WHAT? WHAT IS ON THAT COPY? IT HAS ALL THE DIFFERENT THINGS ABOUT ALL THE COMMITTEES AND BOARDS, THE MEMBERSHIP, THE. OKAY, BUT A LL RIGHT, BUT THIS ISN'T A WORKSHOP, SO I DON'T I DON'T WANT TO GET SIDEWAYS.

I SUPPORT THE TWO FOUR YEAR TERMS AND THEN THE, THE FOUR YEARS OFF.

SO YOU CAN SERVE A TOTAL OF 12 YEARS. CORRECT, AND THAT'S BEEN BROUGHT TO ME BY CERTAIN COMMITTEE MEMBERS.

SO I SUPPORT THAT. OKAY, OKAY. SAY THAT AGAIN.

YOU SUPPORT TWO, FOUR YEAR, TWO FOUR YEAR TERMS WITH FOUR YEARS OFF AND THEN COME BACK FOR ANOTHER.

YOU'D BE A TOTAL OF 12 YEARS. YEAH, BUT WITH A SEPARATION OF FOUR YEARS.

RIGHT, AND I THINK I THINK PART OF THE LOGIC THERE IS TO GIVE, GIVE OTHER PEOPLE A CHANCE.

I MEAN, AFTER EIGHT YEARS CONSECUTIVELY THAT, YOU KNOW, IT WOULD MAKE MORE SENSE IF PEOPLE WERE BANGING ON THE DOOR TO SERVE ON THE COMMITTEE. RIGHT? OKAY, SO. I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH THAT.

SO, COMMISSIONER , I JUST DON'T LIKE THE HODGEPODGE, AND THAT'S WHY I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT CHART, BUT YOU'RE COMPARING BOARDS TO COMMITTEES RIGHT NOW.

WE'RE JUST THE WHOLE PREMISE. MAYOR, IF I MAY, IS, AS IT WAS BROUGHT TO ME, WAS TO STREAMLINE FOR STAFF'S REASONING.

SO IF WE'RE STREAMLINING FOR STAFF'S REASONING, THEN THIS ISN'T EVEN THIS ISN'T EVEN A DISCUSSION THAT SHOULD BE HAD.

I SEE APPLES AND ORANGES HERE. I SEE APPLES AND ORANGES LOOKING AT ESC HERE, AND THAT'S WHAT THE AMENDMENTS DISCUSSED.

[01:20:06]

WELL, AND AM I CORRECT? OUR BOARDS ARE QUASI JUDICIAL.

CORRECT. THERE ARE, THEY ARE, BUT WELL, THE PENSION BOARDS ARE NOT QUASI JUDICIAL, ARE THEY, JASON? IT COULD BE IF THEY'RE OPINING OR UNDER THEIR JURISDICTION IS SOME AS A PARTICULAR EMPLOYEES PENSION ISSUE.

SO THEY VERY WELL COULD BE QUASI JUDICIAL. IT'S NOT JUST PROPERTY.

IT'S PERSONAL. OKAY, BUT IF THAT IF THE COMMISSION WOULD PREFER THAT EVERYBODY SERVE TWO, FOUR YEAR TERMS, WE COULD CERTAINLY GO THROUGH THE DIFFERENT BOARDS AND COMMITTEES, AND REMEMBER WE CAN AMEND THIS AGAIN AS IT STANDS.

IS IT THREE. THEY'RE ALL THREE, THREE YEAR TERMS. DONNA. YES. SO IT'S GOING TO BE MY VOTE TO KEEP IT THREE THREE YEAR TERMS. I AGREE THREE THREE I'M SORRY. WHAT IS THE STATEMENT HERE.

THE EXCEPTION OF THE COMMISSION MEMBER ON THE BOARD MEMBER REVIEW COMMITTEE, THAT'S A ONE YEAR TERM.

THAT'S EASY. YEAH. SO WHAT DID YOU JUST RECOMMEND TO LEAVE IT ALONE? OKAY. SO YOU WANT TO LEAVE IT ALONE. YOU WANT TO LEAVE IT ALONE? I'M GOOD WITH THE TWO, FOUR YEAR TERMS, AND THOMAS.

THOMAS ISN'T HERE. SO WE CAN HAVE THIS DISCUSSION AGAIN NEXT MEETING, BUT FOR RIGHT NOW LET'S KEEP IT AT TWO FOUR YEAR TERMS, BUT HERE'S THE QUESTION AGAIN. DO WE HAVE ENOUGH CLARITY ON WHETHER SOMEBODY IS ALREADY IN UNDER THE CURRENT RULES OF THREE THREE YEAR TERMS? IS IT CLEAR THAT THEY WOULD ONLY SERVE OUT THE REMAINDER OF NINE YEARS IF THEY WERE ALREADY INTO THE THIRD TERM? WELL, THAT'S THE WAY I READ THE AMENDMENT. I THINK IF YOU WANTED IT SO THAT THEY COULD CONTINUE UNDER THE RULES IN WHICH THEY WERE APPOINTED, THAT'S HOW YOU WOULD FRAME IT. I WOULD LIKE TO RECOMMEND THAT WE MAKE THAT CHANGE, COMMISSIONERS TO IF SOMEBODY STARTED UNDER THE RULE OF THREE, THREE YEAR, CONSECUTIVE THREE YEAR TERMS, THAT THEY BE ALLOWED TO FULFILL THAT EVEN IF THEY'RE ONLY IN THE FIRST THREE YEAR TERM.

I THINK THAT MAKES SENSE, THAT IF WE'RE IN AGREEMENT ON THAT, LET'S MAKE THAT CORRECTION.

THE GRANDFATHER CLAUSE. THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO. YEAH, BUT HE WAS DEFINING GRANDFATHER AS ONLY IF YOU ALREADY GOT TO THE POINT WHERE YOU WOULD BE IN THE MIDDLE OF ONE OF YOUR TERM IN THE MIDDLE OF THE LAST TERM.

I SEE. SO YOU'RE SAYING, LIKE, IF THEY'RE SERVING TWO THEIR SECOND YEAR OF A NINE YEAR, THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO FINISH OUT THE SEVEN.

THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. YEAH. I DON'T THINK THE CITY CLERK.

ANY ISSUES WITH THAT? KEEP UP WITH WITH WHAT YOU'RE DOING HERE, AND THEN THINK ABOUT IT'S JUST MANAGING THE RECORDS AND THE DATES. I THINK WHEN I DISCUSSED THIS WITH JASON BEFORE, WHEN WE REALLY DIDN'T KNOW WHAT WE WERE GOING TO END UP WITH WHICH THIS EXERCISE IS VERY GOOD. I WAS SUGGESTING THAT SOMETHING WOULD NEED TO BE DONE TO KIND OF SPELL OUT WHAT THE TERMS WILL BE FOR EVERYBODY. YES, AND SAYING WHAT TERM THAT ACTUALLY MEANS FOR THEM BY DOING THIS ORDINANCE.

IN THE PAST WHEN WE DID THE STANDARDIZATION AND WE CHANGED THE ACTUAL TERM ENDING DATES FOR EVERYBODY TO MAKE THAT STANDARD.

YEAH. THAT WAS WE HAD A RESOLUTION THAT WENT WITH IT THAT JUST SPELLED OUT, OKAY, THESE PEOPLE WILL BE THIS WILL BE THEIR MIGHT HAVE EVEN BEEN THEIR THIRD TERM, BUT THEN THEY GOT CHANGED TO THE SECOND TERM TO MAKE SURE THAT THE STAGGERING WAS DONE RIGHT.

SO THAT MIGHT NOT BE A FACTOR IN THIS CASE BECAUSE WE ALREADY HAVE THE SAME, YOU KNOW, ENDING DATE OF DECEMBER 31ST, BUT JUST TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA THAT WAS REALLY HELPFUL BECAUSE EVERYBODY WAS CLEAR ON WHAT TERM THE TERM ENDING DATE WAS FOR EVERYBODY, AND THEN YOU WOULD KNOW WHETHER IT WAS YOUR SECOND OR THIRD TERM OR FIRST YEAR, AND IF I MAY ADD TO THAT, YES, FIGURE OUT WHERE WE'RE AT. I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY IT MAY NOT HURT AS A PRACTICE TO.

WELL, NUMBER ONE, I LIKE WHAT YOU'RE DOING IN TERMS OF LET'S BE VERY CLEAR ON ARE WE DOING LIKE, YOU KNOW, WHAT YOU'RE MENTIONING? IS IT IF WE'RE GOING FROM, YOU KNOW, THREE, THREE YEAR TERMS TO THE TWO FOUR YEAR TERMS, LET'S BE VERY CLEAR ON WHAT THE, THE, THE CONTINUITY IS FOR THE BOARD MEMBER.

SO IN OTHER WORDS, IF YOU HAVE SOMEONE WHO'S IN THE FIRST OF THREE, THREE YEAR TERMS THAT THEY IN FACT CAN SERVE THE REMAINDER, WHATEVER IT IS, I WOULD ACTUALLY ARTICULATE THAT AND PUT THAT IN THIS ORDINANCE, AND THEN WHAT I WOULD ALSO DO IS TO DONNA'S POINT WHEN WHEN THE DUST SETTLES AND WE'VE APPROVED AN ORDINANCE WITH HOWEVER THIS SHAKES OUT, I THINK AT A LATER DATE, WE BRING A RESOLUTION WITH THE ACTUAL MEMBERS OF THE

[01:25:03]

SO I WOULD SUGGEST BOTH, OKAY. WHEN WE APPROVE THE ORDINANCE, DOES THAT MEAN WE PUT A DATE ON IT? THAT'S LIKE A FEW WEEKS OR A MONTH LATER THAN THE ACTUAL NIGHT WE APPROVE IT? NO, I THINK IT CAN BE APPROVED EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY, AND IT'LL HAVE CLARITY ON WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO WITH THE MEMBERS AND THEIR REMAINING WITH THE CURRENT MEMBERS AND THEIR REMAINING TERMS JUST BASED ON WHATEVER THEY END UP APPROVING, AND BASED ON THAT, WE WILL THEN PREPARE A RESOLUTION WITH THE ACTUAL MEMBERS NAMES, TERMS AND WHAT HAVE YOU IN A RESOLUTION THAT COMES LATER AND THAT WILL OFFER AN OPPORTUNITY FOR ANY CLEANUP OR CLARITY IF THERE NEEDS TO BE.

OKAY, MR. KILLINGSWORTH. SO I JUST WANTED TO I WROTE SOMETHING DOWN.

I JUST WANT TO SEE IF IT CAPTURES THE INTENT.

SO ANY MEMBER MAY CONTINUE UNDER THE RULES IN WHICH THEY WERE APPOINTED.

THAT WOULD BE THE GRANDFATHER. STRAIGHTFORWARD. THAT'S PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD.

I LIKE LESS AS LONG AS WE CAN SAY WHAT WE WANT TO SAY, LESS IS BETTER THAN MORE.

YEAH. SO OKAY, LET'S MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT. OKAY.

SO PAGE 74, THIS IS WHERE WE GET INTO THE TREE SUBCOMMITTEE.

YOU'LL SEE THE HIGHLIGHTED UNDERLINE T EXT. THE COMMITTEE SHALL ESTABLISH A TREE SUBCOMMITTEE IN ACCORDANCE WITH SUBSECTION F BELOW. THE TREE SUBCOMMITTEE SHALL DEVELOP AND RECOMMEND POLICIES, PROGRAMS, AND INCENTIVES AIMED AT PRESERVING, PROTECTING, AND ENHANCING THE COMMUNITIES TREE CANOPY, AND THEN ON PAGE 75, THIS IS THE SUBSECTION F BELOW THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE TREE SUBCOMMITTEE.

MEMBERSHIP TERMS. NUMBER ONE BRAND ONE. THERE IS HEREBY ESTABLISHED A SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP COMMITTEE, REFERRED TO IN THIS SUBSECTION AS THE SUBCOMMITTEE.

THE SUBCOMMITTEE SHALL SYSTEMATICALLY REVIEW TREE PERMITS SUBMITTED TO THE CITY FOR COMPLETENESS AND DETERMINE COMPLIANCE WITHIN THE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 23.

AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN THIS SUBSECTION.

THIS SUBCOMMITTEE SHALL PRODUCE A BI-ANNUAL REPORT ON THE TREE, CANOPY AND TREE.

PERMITS. THE SUBCOMMITTEE SHALL CONSIST OF THREE MEMBERS AND ONE ALTERNATE MEMBER.

THE ALTERNATE SHALL SERVE, IN THE CASE OF THE ABSENCE OF ANY OF THE THREE MEMBERS.

THE MEMBERS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP COMMITTEE MAY VOLUNTEER TO SERVE ON THE SUBCOMMITTEE, AND SHALL BE APPOINTED TO THE SUBCOMMITTEE BY THE ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP COMMITTEE.

ALL THE MEMBERS OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE SHALL BE MEMBERS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP COMMITTEE.

THE ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP COMMITTEE SHALL APPOINT OR REMOVE THE MEMBERS OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE BY A SIMPLE MAJORITY VOTE.

FILLING VACANCIES SHALL TAKE PLACE ON THE NEXT REGULAR SCHEDULED MEETING OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP COMMITTEE.

AFTER A SEAT ON THE SUBCOMMITTEE HAS BECOME VACATED, MEMBERS OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE MAY SERVE FOR AS LONG AS THEY SERVE ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP COMMITTEE FOR IN TWO. THE ORGANIZATION OF THE TREE SUBCOMMITTEE.

THE ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP COMMITTEE, SHALL ESTABLISH A REGULAR MEETING SCHEDULE OF THE TREE SUBCOMMITTEE.

THE ADMINISTRATOR OR DESIGNEE SHALL ATTEND ALL MEETINGS OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE.

THE CITY STAFF MEMBER DESIGNATED BY THE CITY MANAGER SHALL ACT AS CLERK FOR THE SUBCOMMITTEE.

THE CLERK SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CLERICAL ADMINISTRATION OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE.

THE CLERK SHALL ALSO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MAINTENANCE AND PRESERVATION OF ALL RECORDS OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE, IN COORDINATION WITH THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE.

I NEED A DRINK OF WATER. YES, SIR.

SUBSECTION C, THE SUBCOMMITTEE SHALL UTILIZE THE RULES OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP COMMITTEE.

ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER SHALL BE FOLLOWED TO CONDUCT MEETINGS.

ALL MEETINGS SHALL BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. THE SUBCOMMITTEE SHALL KEEP MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDING RECORDING OF THE VOTE OF EACH MEMBER UPON EACH QUESTION, OR IF. ABSENT OR FAILING TO VOTE, INDICATE SUCH FACTS.

IT SHALL BE KEPT. IT SHALL KEEP RECORDS OF ITS EXAMINATIONS AND OTHER OFFICIAL ACTIONS, ALL OF WHICH SHALL BE PROMPTLY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE AND SHALL BECOME PUBLIC RECORD. THE SUBCOMMITTEE WILL OPERATE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE FLORIDA GOVERNMENT AND THE SUNSHINE LAWS.

SO THAT'S THE TREE SUBCOMMITTEE. SO YES, COMMISSIONER, GO AHEAD.

OKAY, SO I DID SEE THAT IT STARTS ON 60, PAGE 65 WITH THE HIGHLIGHTED AT THE VERY TOP.

THE ESC MAY REVIEW ANY PERMIT APPLICATION. RIGHT, BUT THEN IT GOES INTO THE TREE SUBCOMMITTEE.

I'M SORRY. WHERE ARE YOU AT AGAIN? WHAT PAGE? TOP OF PAGE 65. YEP, AND THEN IT'S HIGHLIGHTED.

[01:30:03]

HAVE WE ADDED BACK THE TREE SUBCOMMITTEE? SO IF THE COMMITTEE IF THE COMMISSION ACCEPTS THAT AMENDMENT, THEN YES, YOU WOULD ADD BACK THE TREE. DID THAT COME FROM ESC'S RECOMMENDATION? WAS THAT ACTUALLY THAT WAS NOT ONE OF THEIR FORMAL RECOMMENDATIONS.

I THINK THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT CAME OUT OF THE TOWN HALL MEETING.

OKAY. THERE WAS A RECOMMENDATION TO EITHER PUT THE TREE SUBCOMMITTEE BACK OR TO CREATE A STANDARD, A STANDALONE TREE COMMITTEE. OKAY, AND WOULD THIS BE SOMETHING YOU WOULD LOOK TO DISCUSS AT THE NEXT.

IT'S THE MAY 14TH ESC COMMITTEE WITH ESC MEMBERS TO TAKE A VOTE ON.

I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR WHAT THEY THINK, HOW THE LOGISTICS OF THAT WOULD WORK.

YEAH, IT'S WRITTEN LARGELY AS IT WAS ORIGINALLY WRITTEN.

THE DUTIES ARE DIFFERENT, SO IT HAS THEM PRODUCE AN ANNUAL OR BI ANNUAL REPORT ON THE STATUS OF THE CANOPY AND THE AND THE PERMITS.

BECAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT, AT LEAST I HEARD, WAS THAT THERE IS A DESIRE TO CONTINUE SOME FORM OF OVERWATCH ON THE PERMITTING PROCESS, BUT THE VARIANCES OUT. NO, THE APPEAL PROCESS.

SO A VARIANCE GOES TO CDB. OKAY. THE APPEAL PROCESS FOR A PERMIT WOULD CONTINUE WITH ESC.

WHAT'S CHANGED IN TERMS OF THEIR FUNCTIONS IS THE ORDINANCE WOULD SPECIFICALLY ASK THE SUBCOMMITTEE TO LOOK AT TREE CANOPY PRESERVATION AND POLICIES AND PROCEDURES TO EFFECTUATE THAT AND NOT HAVE THEM LOOK RIGHT NOW, THE TREE SUBCOMMITTEE, BY ORDINANCE, THE TWO FUNCTIONS THAT IT HAS IS THE APPEAL PROCESS AND REVIEWING INDIVIDUAL PERMITS, AND THERE'S A THREE DAY HOLD FOR THE APPLICATION REVIEW PROCESS AND THEN A FIVE DAY HOLD.

THOSE TREE PERMITS ARE MINISTERIAL AT THIS POINT BECAUSE OF FLORIDA STATUTE.

WE'VE BEEN PREEMPTED FROM THAT, FROM THAT. SO BASICALLY, IF AN APPLICANT COMES IN AND FILES A PERMIT AND THEY'RE WILLING TO MITIGATE UNDER OUR CODE, THEY CAN AND THERE'S NOTHING WE CAN SAY.

ALSO, IF AN APPLICANT HAS OR NOT AN APPLICANT, BUT A CITIZEN HAS A LETTER FROM A CERTIFIED ARBORIST THAT SAYS THAT THE TREE IS DYING OR A DANGER TO THE HOME, THEY CAN TAKE THE TREE AND NOT EVEN FILE A PERMIT.

SO HAVING THOSE DUTIES UNDER TODAY'S LEGISLATION, STATE LEGISLATION DOESN'T MAKE SENSE, BUT HAVING SOME OVERSIGHT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE DOING PERMITTING CORRECTLY, I THINK, MAKES SENSE, AND I'VE ALWAYS BEEN SUPPORTIVE OF THAT, AND HAVING A GROUP THAT ARE SPECIFICALLY LOOKING AT HOW WE PRESERVE THE CANOPY.

SO THAT'S WHAT THAT ADDITION ESTABLISHMENT OF THE TREE SUBCOMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP IN TERMS OF WHAT THEY'RE DOING WITH THE BI ANNUAL TREE REPORT.

THAT'S WHAT IT'S DOING A BI ANNUAL TREE REPORT AND DEVELOP AND RECOMMEND POLICIES, PROGRAMS AND INCENTIVES AIMED AT PRESERVING, PROTECTING AND ENHANCING THE COMMUNITIES. SO IT'S GIVING THEM VERY SPECIFIC SCOPE OF WORK, WHAT THEY'RE DOING, BUT TAKING AWAY THAT PERMITTING APPLICATION AND THE PROCESS.

YEAH. CORRECT. THE DAY TO DAY REVIEW PROCESS. NOT NOT THE GLOBAL REVIEW PROCESS, BUT THE DAY TO DAY REVIEW PROCESS.

THANK YOU. I'M GOING TO AT THE RISK OF DRAGGING THIS OUT, I'M GOING TO TRY TO ARTICULATE WHAT I THINK PART OF THE ISSUE IS HERE.

SOME AND MAYBE ALL OF THE TREE SUBCOMMITTEE AND OR ALL OF THE ESC AND/OR MANY OF OUR CITIZENS MAY, IN FACT, BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD PUT FRICTION IN THE SYSTEM WHERE WE CAN HAVE A DIALOG WITH PEOPLE ASKING FOR A PERMIT TO REMOVE A TREE THAT WE WOULD REALLY RATHER THEY SAVE AND TRY TO INFLUENCE THEM AND I JUST I'M GOING TO GO ON RECORD THAT I'M AGAINST THAT.

I DON'T WANT TO STRONG ARM PEOPLE WHO ARE FOLLOWING THE CODE.

I WANT TO COME AS CITY MANAGER SAID, THAT'S A MINISTERIAL DECISION BASED ON THE CODE.

ON THE OTHER HAND, I CLEARLY UNDERSTAND THAT IF WE COULD HAVE, IF WE COULD HAVE EDUCATION OF CITIZENS BEFORE THEY MAKE A BAD DECISION, WOULDN'T THAT BE GOOD? AND SO REALLY, WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR IS GETTING THAT EDUCATION TO THE CITIZENS WELL IN ADVANCE AND OR UTILIZING THE DEPARTMENT THAT IS ISSUING THE PERMITS TO GET THAT COMMUNICATION TO THE CITIZENS IN ADVANCE OF MAKING A BAD DECISION, AND I KNOW THIS IS A KIND OF A SILLY EXAMPLE, BUT I HAD SPOKEN TO THE CHAIR OF THE COMMITTEE, SARAH ABOUT UTILIZING SIGNAGE ON THE ENTRY TO THE CITY INFORMING PEOPLE MOVING HERE THAT OUR CITY IS A TREE CITY,

[01:35:01]

IN RIVERSIDE AVONDALE, WHICH IS A DESIGNATED HISTORIC DISTRICT.

THE RIVERSIDE AVONDALE PRESERVATION BOARD. THEY MONITOR REAL ESTATE TURNOVER, AND SO WHEN THEY HAVE A NEW OWNER BUY A HOUSE WITHIN THE DISTRICT. THEY DELIVER A LITTLE WELCOME PACKAGE, AND PART OF THAT WELCOME PACKAGE IS, OH, BY THE WAY, YOU'RE IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT, AND HERE'S THE RULES AND REGULATIONS THAT APPLY TO YOU.

I MEAN, MAYBE THAT IS A IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S IMPORTANT TO THE COMMISSION, MAYBE THAT'S A ROLE FOR THE TREE SUBCOMMITTEE BECAUSE IT WOULD BE CITIZENS, A CITIZEN, IT WOULDN'T BE STAFF MEMBER, REGULATOR TO CITIZEN.

THAT'S A GREAT IDEA. GREAT EXAMPLE. FANTASTIC IDEA.

OKAY. I THINK WE'VE WORKED THAT ENOUGH. SO MOVING ON, AND SO THEN THE LAST THING IS ALSO ON PAGE 76, THAT'S JUST A STANDARD. WE LEFT IT OFF, BUT IT SHOULD BE THERE.

THAT'S THE STANDARD SCRIVENER'S ERROR MESSAGE THAT IF WE HAVE TO RENUMBER THINGS BECAUSE OF AMENDMENTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, THAT UNICODE AND WE CAN DO THAT. OKAY, AND THEN THAT WOULD BE ALL FOR 9525-124 SO I'LL BRING ONE MORE THING TO THE ATTENTION.

I CAN'T REMEMBER IF IT WAS STATED HERE TODAY, BUT THERE IS A CONCERN ABOUT THIS CITY MANAGER OR CITY STAFF CONTROLLING THE NUMBER OF MEETINGS THROUGH THIS ORDINANCE. ACTUALLY AND LIMITING IT TO TWO, UNLESS THERE'S APPROVAL BY THE CITY MANAGER, I BELIEVE. SO, COMMISSIONERS, DO YOU WANT TO MODIFY THAT MEETING RIGHT NOW? IT'S NOT THAT I'M SUGGESTING THAT WE SHOULD AGREE THAT WE SHOULD HAVE THREE AND FOUR MEETINGS A MONTH.

BY ANY COMMITTEE, BUT DO WE REALLY WANT TO LIMIT IT THERE, OR DO WE WANT TO BE MORE CLEAR ABOUT WHAT'S REASONABLE WHEN WE NEED TO HAVE MORE MEETINGS? YES. WELL, FIRST OF ALL, THEY HAVE TO BE IN THE SUNSHINE, AND THAT MEANS THEY HAVE TO BE.

ON THE OTHER HAND, WE'VE GIVEN THIS ONE GROUP A LOT OF RESPONSIBILITIES, AND REGARDLESS OF OUR INFLUENCE ON THEIR THEIR PRIORITIES AND GOALS. THEY'RE ALL EXPERTS IN THEIR FIELD, AND THEY ALL TEND TO WANT TO EXPAND WHAT THEY GET DONE, AND SO I MAYBE THE, YOU KNOW, WE TRIED TO CONTROL THIS EXPLOSION OF EFFORT BY CONTROLLING THE COMMITTEE, AND MAYBE WE SHOULD LOOK AT IT FROM A DIFFERENT DIRECTION AND SAY, MAYBE WE NEED TO. MAYBE WE NEED TO EXPAND THE NUMBER OF STAFF HOURS AVAILABLE, WHICH IS A BUDGET ISSUE, BUT IF WE WANT TO EMBRACE ALL THE THINGS THAT COULD GET DONE MAYBE THAT WE SHOULD LOOK AT IT FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE.

YES. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER. I'D LIKE TO SEE SOME FLEXIBILITY. IN OTHER WORDS, THERE MAY BE A TIME, YOU KNOW, ENVISION A HURRICANE, A LARGE STORM WHERE ESC MAY NEED TO MEET MORE THAN NORMAL.

RIGHT. SO I THINK WE SHOULD BE FLEXIBLE. I THINK WE SHOULD LET THE CITY MANAGER DO HIS JOB, GO AHEAD AND NEGOTIATE, COME TO AN AGREEMENT AND PRESS ON AND THAT THERE MAY BE, LIKE I SAID,

[01:40:01]

WELL, THANK YOU FOR THAT COMMENT, AND QUITE FRANKLY, WE NEED TO BE CLEAR WITH ALL OF OUR CITIZENS, IF THEY'RE NOT SATISFIED WITH THE DECISION FROM A CITY STAFF MEMBER, THEY CAN ALWAYS APPEAL DIRECTLY TO THIS COMMISSION AND WE CAN GIVE DIRECTION WHERE NECESSARY. I DON'T KNOW THAT MORE MEETINGS WOULD BE OF OF THAT GREAT BENEFIT, AND WE HAVE OUR LIMITATIONS ON AVAILABILITY OF THIS FACILITY OR OTHER FACILITIES TO RECORD AND SO ON, BUT I DO UNDERSTAND THE CONCERN THAT MAYBE LESS GETS DONE IF WE HAVE LESS HOURS AND LESS TIME AND SO ON, AND SO WE MAY NEED TO LOOK AT SOME THINGS THERE.

I FORGET WHICH ONE OF YOU MENTIONED POSSIBLY EXPANDING STAFF HOURS.

SO WE SHOULD HAVE THAT DISCUSSION, BUT I, I DON'T FEEL AS IF WE HAVE TO HAVE THAT DEFINITIVE ANSWER BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD.

YES, COMMISSIONER? I KNOW WE DISCUSSED THE TREE SUBCOMMITTEE, BUT WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER SUBCOMMITTEES? THEY WOULD BE ELIMINATED. THEY WOULD BE ELIMINATED. SO THE ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP COMMITTEE, ESC OUTREACH SUBCOMMITTEE, SUSTAINABILITY, THAT WOULD ELIMINATE THREE OF THEIR MEETINGS A MONTH.

WHAT WERE YOU LOOKING AT, CITY MANAGER, OF CONDENSING IT TO TWO.

SO ESC PROPER WOULD BE TWO MEETINGS A MONTH OR AS APPROVED BY THE CITY MANAGER.

OKAY. SO LIKE IF THEY NEEDED TO MEET AGAIN FOR, YOU KNOW, LIKE THAT PRESSURE RELIEF VALVE WAS PUT INTO THE ORDINANCE.

OKAY. SO ONCE THE OTHER SUBCOMMITTEES WOULD BE ELIMINATED, ASIDE FROM THE TREE SUBCOMMITTEE, THOSE OTHER ONES THAT WOULD BE ELIMINATED. IT WOULD IN TURN ELIMINATE SOME OF THOSE MEETINGS ANYWAY.

SO THE TREE SUBCOMMITTEE WOULD BE A SEPARATE DESIGNATED MEETING WOULD NOT BE ONE OF THE TWO, AND IT WOULDN'T BE ALL OF THE ESC MEMBERS ON THAT TREE SUBCOMMITTEE.

JUST THREE. IT'S MODELED AFTER THE CURRENT TREE SUBCOMMITTEE.

THREE MEMBERS AND AN ALTERNATE. OKAY. IF YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE ALL OF IT, THEN IT BEGS THE QUESTION WHY YOU NEED A SUBCOMMITTEE? YEAH, AND THAT BRINGS US BACK TO. YEAH, COMMISSIONER? IF I MAY DEFEND THEY HAVE AN OUTREACH COMMITTEE WHICH ESSENTIALLY DOES WHAT THE RIVERSIDE PEOPLE DO AND THEY'RE THE ONES WHO HELP WITH THE SCHOOL AND, AND ARBOR DAY AND ALL THOSE THINGS, AND WE NEED TO HAVE ARBOR DAY TO KEEP OUR TREE CITY DESIGNATION.

SO YOU KNOW, ARE WE ELIMINATING, YOU KNOW, HOW ARE WE GOING TO RE ACCOMMODATE THE ORGANIZATION THAT MAKES THOSE THINGS HAPPEN THAT THEY DO.

SO I HAVE A QUESTION FOR CITY ATTORNEY. IN CERTAIN CASES, IF IF THE MAIN COMMITTEE IS TAKING A SUBCOMMITTEE OR A GROUP AND JUST DIRECTING THEM TO DO SOME ACTIVITIES DO WE HAVE DO WE HAVE THE SAME COMPLIANCE WITH WITH THE SUNSHINE? MAYBE LET ME TRY TO UNDERSTAND THAT QUESTION.

SO YOU'RE SAYING IF THE COMMITTEE ITSELF IS DIRECTING THE SUBCOMMITTEE TO HAVE A MEETING, IS THAT.

YEAH. WELL, DIRECTING THEM TO DO SOMETHING. SO TO ME, I DON'T KNOW YOU KNOW, TO IN MY MIND, I THINK ABOUT LEGISLATING. OKAY. IF THEY'RE TRYING TO DO SOMETHING TO NOT LEGISLATE, BUT TO DO SOMETHING THAT REQUIRES CITIZEN ENGAGEMENT, THEN OBVIOUSLY SUNSHINE WOULD APPLY.

IF THEY'RE JUST TRYING TO FULFILL THE DIRECTIVE OF THE ACTUAL ESC TO GO OUT AND DO THE SCHOOL TRAININGS AND OTHER THINGS. WHY WOULD WE NEED COMPLIANCE WITH SUNSHINE? I MEAN, THE SUNSHINE ONLY COMES IN TO THE EXTENT THAT THE MORE THAN ONE OF THE BOARD MEMBERS, WHETHER THEY'RE ON THE SUBCOMMITTEE OR THE PROPER, YOU KNOW, COMMISSION PROPER OR COMMITTEE PROPER.

ARE YOU GOING TO DISCUSS THINGS THAT MAY COME BEFORE THEM ON A VOTE? SO OFTENTIMES IT LOOKS LIKE THIS IS A THIS COMMITTEE CERTAINLY HAS A LOT OF GRAY AREA BECAUSE THEY ALMOST BORDER THE LINE BETWEEN DOING RECOMMENDATIONS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, BUT ALSO DOING SOME OUTREACH AND THINGS IN THE COMMUNITY, AND SO IF THEY'RE GOING TO IN FACT, DEPLOY TO YOU KNOW, DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE COMMUNITY TO GIVE SOME UNILATERAL INFORMATION OR ENGAGE IN SOME EVENT OR SOME SOMETHING OF SOME ARBOR DAY.

YEAH, SOMETHING OF SOME, LIKE SOCIAL SIGNIFICANCE, PERHAPS.

IT ARGUABLY WOULD NOT NEED TO COMPLY WITH SUNSHINE BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT ENGAGING IN SOME BEHAVIOR OR DISCUSSION OF SOME SORT THAT MIGHT COME BEFORE THEM TO VOTE ON. DO YOU SEE WHAT I'M SAYING? SO LIKE AT THE END OF THE DAY, THE KEY IS WHATEVER THIS EVENT OR SOCIAL ENGAGEMENT OR THING IS THAT THEY'RE GOING TO THAT MORE THAN ONE BOARD MEMBER IS GOING TO ENGAGE IN,

[01:45:04]

SO YEAH, THAT WOULD NOT YOU KNOW, IT. IT'S ALWAYS CASE BY CASE, AND I'VE, I'VE MET WITH MISS BOREN OBVIOUSLY TO GO OVER SOME VARIABLES.

IT'S HARD TO COME UP WITH EVERY SINGLE, YOU KNOW, VARIABLE THAT MAY MANIFEST, BUT FOR THE MOST PART THE KEY IS ARE THEY WHATEVER THEY'RE DOING OUT IN THE PUBLIC? IS IT SOMETHING THAT WILL, YOU KNOW, WILL END UP WITH TWO BOARD MEMBERS TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING THAT THEY MAY END UP VOTING ON AND OFTENTIMES IT'S NOT, BUT SOMETIMES IT IS.

SO WE HAVE TO JUST BE CAREFUL OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

OKAY. WE'LL MOVE ON. SO THAT WAS ALL FOR 124.

AMENDMENTS TO 9525-125. OKAY. I WON'T CUT IN, BUT COULD I JUST SAY A PREAMBLE THIS A LITTLE BIT? HERE'S SOME NOTES I TOOK FROM THE LAST MEETING.

I DON'T THINK WE WANT TO SET A PRECEDENT WHERE, YOU KNOW, AND WE ACTUALLY PROVED THAT WE NEED THIS ORDINANCE, AND WHY DO WE DO THAT? WE ASKED ONE OF THE ONE OF THE PEOPLE, HEY, DO YOU HAVE LIABILITY INSURANCE? YOU KNOW, YOU LEAVE STRUCTURES IN THE PARK. DO YOU HAVE A SAFETY RESTRICTION? SO THOSE ARE ALL THINGS THAT WILL BE IN THIS ORDINANCE, THAT THE CITY MANAGER WILL GO AND SIT DOWN.

THE PRECEDENTS I DON'T THINK WE WANT TO SET IS THAT EVERY FOR PROFIT COMES IN HERE, MAKES A CASE AND WE KIND OF NEGOTIATE, AND IN FACT, JASON, THIS IS A QUESTION FOR YOU.

THE AGREEMENT THAT WE CAME TO IS THAT BINDING? IS THAT A CONTRACT? IS THAT AN AGREEMENT? I THINK THE AGREEMENT FORM THAT WE'VE DISCUSSED THAT I'M AWARE OF IS REALLY AN INDEMNITY.

IT'S A LIKE A HOLD HARMLESS INDEMNITY WHERE BASICALLY THEY'RE WAIVING THE RIGHT OF ANY, YOU KNOW, ISSUES THAT MAY HAPPEN, AND OF COURSE PROTECTING THE CITY.

IT DOESN'T REALLY GO TOO FAR BEYOND THAT NOW.

IT DEPENDS ON I THINK, YOU KNOW, I DON'T WANT TO GET AHEAD OF OURSELVES HERE, BUT YEAH, IF WE'RE GOING TO PUT IN A PROVISION, FOR EXAMPLE, FOR EXPENSES TO BE REIMBURSED BECAUSE OF A PUBLIC EXPENDITURE, WE MAY WANT TO ADD THAT RIGHT INTO THE AGREEMENT, BUT THE AGREEMENT ITSELF IS REALLY AN INDEMNITY HOLD HARMLESS.

THAT'S WHERE I WAS GOING WITH THAT BECAUSE IT'S NOTHING BEYOND THAT. WE DON'T YOU KNOW, I AGAIN, MY EMPOWERMENT SPEECH FOR THE CITY, THE CITY MANAGER, YOU KNOW, TO NEGOTIATE THAT HERE.

YOU KNOW, IT'S REALLY IN MY OPINION HE SITS AT A DESK.

PROS AND CONS OF REMEMBER WHEN WE PUT RESTRICTIONS ON HIM THAT RESTRICTS HIS NEGOTIATING POWER IF HE ALREADY IF THEY ALREADY KNOW HOW MANY CARS CAN BE THERE, HOW MANY KIDS, HOW MANY PEOPLE, ETC., ETC.. IN FACT, COMMISSIONER RING MENTIONED A CONCERT.

CAN THEY SERVE ALCOHOL? THESE ARE ALL THINGS THAT WILL GO IN AN AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY MANAGER.

I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT PIECE BECAUSE I THINK WE'VE KIND OF SET A PRECEDENT WHERE, YOU KNOW, WE NEGOTIATED HERE IN THE IN THE ROOM, YOU KNOW, WHERE IT SHOULD BE IN HIS OFFICE.

THAT'S RIGHT, AND JUST TO PIGGYBACK ON THAT REAL QUICK, IS THAT REALLY, AT THE END OF THE DAY, THIS IS GOING TO BE THE WAY THIS SHAKES OUT IS SOMETHING THAT'S MORE OF A CHECK THE BOX FEATURE FOR THE CITY MANAGER.

SO IN OTHER WORDS, IS THERE THE INDEMNIFICATION IS THE HOLD HARMLESS.

WHAT'S THE TERM, BUT BEYOND THAT THERE'S REALLY NOTHING ELSE TO NEGOTIATE BECAUSE WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT ANY PARTICULAR FEE STRUCTURE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

AGAIN, THE ONLY PLACE I CAN SEE A LITTLE DISCUSSION PERHAPS, IS IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SOME IMPLEMENTS OR IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE BEING ADDED TO A PARK OR SOMETHING, AND WHATEVER THAT EXPENDITURE IS, I SUPPOSE WE COULD HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT THAT, BUT OUTSIDE OF THAT, IT'S REALLY CHECKING THE BOX ON INDEMNITY AND PROTECTION PROVISIONS, NOTHING ELSE, NOT THE TYPICAL STUFF YOU WOULD DEAL WITH IN A CONTRACT.

OKAY. I JUST I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR ON THAT.

COMMISSIONER. SO WHEN YOU SAY INDEMNITY SO ANY DAMAGE OR EXCESSIVE WEAR AND TEAR, IS THAT PART OF INDEMNITY OR IS THAT A SEPARATE CHECK IN THE BOX THAT'S TYPICALLY IN A STANDARD PROVISION, SOMETHING THAT WEAR AND TEAR, THINGS LIKE THAT, THAT ARE YOU KNOW, SOMETHING THAT'S REALLY ON THE SIDE OF THE CITY AND THE AGE OF THE EQUIPMENT OR THE PARK INFRASTRUCTURE OR WHAT HAVE YOU THAT'S ACCEPTED OUT TYPICALLY.

SO INDEMNITY, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THINGS OR INSURANCE, FOR EXAMPLE, THERE'S A PROVISION FOR A PARTICULAR SET OF INSURANCE PARAMETERS AND THRESHOLDS THAT ARE BOILERPLATE THAT WILL BE IN THERE THAT THEY'LL HAVE TO HAVE FOR THIS ENTERPRISE,

[01:50:02]

I MEAN, THERE'S ALWAYS SOME LEVEL OF NEGLIGENCE THAT THE CITY WILL HAVE TO THE EXTENT THAT IT HAS NEGLECTED, YOU KNOW, SOME IMPROVEMENTS ON THE PROPERTY OR LEFT YOU KNOW, INSTEAD OF A SWING SET, YOU KNOW, A SHARD, YOU KNOW, NOT THAT THIS WOULD EVER HAPPEN, BUT I'M JUST SAYING THAT TO THE EXTENT IT'S YOU KNOW, NOT THE CITY'S, YOU KNOW, ISSUE OR THING THAT THEY'VE NEGLECTED.

AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT'S WHOEVER THIS VENDOR IS THAT THEY'RE GOING TO PROTECT THE CITY FROM ANY OF THEIR ACTIVITIES, THAT THEY'RE THAT THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, HAVING ON THE PROPERTY.

SO WITH THE BASEBALL PEOPLE THEY'RE OPERATING, I THINK THEY'RE STILL OPERATING WITHOUT A CONTRACT R IGHT, AND SO THEY HAVE AND THEY HAVE DONE MARVELOUS IMPROVEMENTS AND WE ALL, YOU KNOW, THAT'S LOVELY, BUT THEY'VE ALSO OVEREXTENDED SOME OF THEIR PRIVILEGES, AND WE STILL DON'T HAVE A CONTRACT WITH THEM TO SAY, HEY, WE SAID YOU CAN GO TO HERE, AND YOU WENT TO THERE, AND WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT 'S PART OF OUR THOUGHT PROCESS AS WELL.

YEAH. THE IDEA WOULD BE TO HAVE SOME PARAMETERS ON THAT TOO, IN TERMS OF GEOGRAPHY, TIME, PLACE, MANNER, THAT SORT OF THING, AND , YOU KNOW, THIS THING AGAIN, N OT TO GET INTO THE POLICY SIDE OF IT, BUT THE ORDINANCE , AS IT'S DRAFTED IS A REMEMBER, AT THE END OF THE DAY, THE GENERAL RULE IS THESE ARE PUBLIC PARKS AND PEOPLE HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO FREQUENT THEM. IT'S NOT A REGULATION.

I HEARD SOME PEOPLE, I THINK VERY MISTAKENLY LAST TIME SAY, OH, WE'RE REGULATING KIDS OR PEOPLE ON THE PARK.

NO. ABSOLUTELY NOT. THE PARKS ARE PLACES OF PUBLIC CONSUMPTION AND ASSEMBLY.

SO LET'S LET'S PUT THAT OUT THERE. THIS IS AN.

WELL, BUT IF YOU'RE A BUSINESS ACTIVITY, A FOR PROFIT TYPE ENTERPRISE THAT SEEKING TO DO MORE THAN THE TYPICAL, YOU KNOW, FIELD TRIP OR WHAT HAVE YOU. I'VE HEARD, YOU KNOW, FOR EXAMPLE, IN AN EDUCATION PROVIDER THAT CERTAINLY THEY COULD HAVE FIELD TRIPS THERE, BUT IF THEY'RE THERE ON LIKE EVERY TUESDAY AND THURSDAY, THEN THEY'RE PROBABLY SHOULD, YOU KNOW, ON A FREQUENT BASIS WITH, WITH PARTICULAR CALENDARS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

WELL, THEN THERE VERY WELL MAY AND SHOULD BE SOME SORT OF DOCUMENTATION OF HOW THAT TRANSPIRES.

AGAIN, NOT WITH THE WITH THE GOAL OF NOT LIMITING THEM, BUT WITH THE GOAL OF JUST PROTECTING THE CITY.

I THINK THAT'S WHAT THE INTENT IS. I THINK CITY ATTORNEY.

YES, COMMISSIONER. ME WITH THAT IN MIND, WHAT WOULD BE THE SET OFF? SO WOULD IT WHAT IT WOULD BE THE FREQUENCY THAT WOULD NOW TRIGGER THE CONTRACT.

THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. THAT COULD BE A GRAY AREA BECAUSE IS IT EVERY TUESDAY AND THURSDAY FOR SIX MONTHS STRAIGHT? IS IT ONCE EVERY SPORADIC, YOU KNOW, TWO MONTHS.

I, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN SOMEONE WHO'S ACTUALLY UTILIZING IT ON A, ON AN ONGOING ROUTINE BASIS VERSUS SOMEONE WHO'S JUST REALLY HAVING A FIELD TRIP.

RIGHT. YOU KNOW, I MEAN, THERE'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE SOME JUDGMENT ON THAT.

I SUPPOSE THAT'S ALSO PART OF THE REASONING FOR HAVING A PROVISION IN HERE THAT IF THERE'S SOME, FOR EXAMPLE, A DENIAL OR WHAT HAVE YOU, THAT THE COMMISSION CAN BE.

DO WE HAVE SOMETHING LIKE THAT CITY MANAGER LISTED HERE, THE STRUCTURE THAT SETS IT, OR THE FREQUENCY OF UTILIZATION OF THAT PARK TO SET IT OFF, THAT SAYS NOW THAT'S GOING TO TRIGGER A CONTRACT.

NO, WE DON'T WE DON'T HAVE THAT LEVEL OF SPECIFICITY, BUT ONE OF THE AMENDMENTS IN HERE, WHICH WAS A PART OF THE I BELIEVE THE OUTSIDE KIDS AGREED TO, WAS AN APPEAL PROCESS. I THINK THERE WAS A THE CONCERN WASN'T SO MUCH THAT IT WAS MORE AN ARBITRARY DENIAL BY CITY MANAGER, BUT AN APPEAL PROCESS WOULD SPEAK TO THAT.

SO IF THE CITY MANAGER MADE A DETERMINATION THAT, OKAY, YOU'RE DOING THIS QUARTERLY AS PART OF YOUR BUSINESS ENTERPRISE, YOU NEED TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY.

THEY COULD THEN COME AND APPEAL AND SAY, HEY, WE'RE ONLY DOING THIS QUARTERLY. WE DON'T THINK WE SHOULD HAVE TO DO.

THE CITY MANAGER COULD MAKE THEIR CASE AS TO WHY HE THINKS OR SHE THINKS THEY HAVE TO, AND THEN THE COMMISSION CAN DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT.

JUST SO I HAVE AN IDEA HOW MANY NOT OR FOR PROFIT OR EVEN NONPROFIT PROGRAMS ARE WE RUNNING OUT OF OUR PARKS? SO LIKE, I KNOW WE HAVE COASTAL KICKS AND, YOU KNOW, ATLANTIC BEACH BASEBALL, AND THEN THERE'S THE FARMERS MARKET SOCCER.

WELL, AND YOU HAVE ALL THE ACTIVITIES AT ADELE GRANGE, MOST, IF NOT ALL ARE NONPROFIT.

BUT DON'T THOSE HAVE CONTRACTS, MAYOR? NO, THEY HAVE PERMITS OR WHICH IS IT? SO IT DEPENDS ON WHETHER IT'S A CITY FUNCTION OR A PRIVATE FUNCTION, BUT IF IT'S A PRIVATE FUNCTION, THEN THEY GO THROUGH THE EVENT PROCESS. IT'S A CITY FUNCTION.

[01:55:05]

FOR SOMETHING THAT'S LIKE A STAGE PRODUCTION IN ADELE.

THAT WOULD BE THEY WOULD HAVE A CONTRACT THROUGH THE CITY IF THEY'RE RENTING IT FOR A WEDDING, THEN THEY WOULD JUST GET AN EVENT PERMIT. SO I'VE STATED THIS BEFORE.

IT ALWAYS CONCERNS ME. THE MORE AND MORE YOU THINK YOU CAN COVER ALL THE BASES AND YOU PUT IT INTO WRITING, INTO YOUR POLICY OR INTO AN ORDINANCE. THE MORE YOU FIND OUT THAT THERE'S SOMETHING YOU DIDN'T CONSIDER THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE.

SO I'M A BELIEVER THAT WE HIRED THE CITY MANAGER TO DO HIS JOB.

HER JOB, AND IF THAT PERSON DOESN'T, WE HAVE REMEDY.

WE HAVE REMEDY THROUGH THIS BODY TO GRANT AN EXCEPTION TO LISTEN TO AN APPEAL, WE HAVE REMEDY TO HIRE A NEW CITY MANAGER.

WE HAVE REMEDY, BUT I DON'T WANT TO DO A ORDINANCE WITH AN ADDITIONAL FIVE PAGES OF EVERYTHING WE CAN THINK OF.

THAT MIGHT BE AN ISSUE. FAIR ENOUGH. WHILE WE'RE ON THAT TOPIC, THOUGH, DISCUSSING, YOU KNOW, NOT BEING ABLE TO GO THROUGH EVERYTHING AND THINK OF EVERY THE MOST WE CAN NOW THAT WE'RE RELOOKING AT THESE TWO ORDINANCES THAT HAVE SUBSTANTIAL, I THINK, AMENDMENTS ON TOP OF THE AMENDMENTS, WHEN WE GO TO READ THIS ON MAY 27TH, ARE WE READING IT AS A FIRST OR A FINAL READING? WELL, IT'S. WELL, IT'S A SECOND AND FINAL READING, EVEN THOUGH SO MUCH HAS CHANGED AND CHANGES ARE ABSOLUTELY, YOU KNOW, PART OF THE PROCESS. IF YOU FEEL LIKE AND THIS IS SORT OF A JUDGMENT CALL WE'D HAVE TO MAKE IF IT'S THAT SUBSTANTIALLY CHANGE, WHICH I'D ARGUE THEY AREN'T EVEN WITH ALL THESE DISCUSSIONS, BUT IF THEY ARE, YOU CAN DECIDE AT THAT TIME IF YOU WANT TO HAVE YET ANOTHER HEARING.

OKAY, AND RENOTICE IT. THE ISSUE OF SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE COMES IN TERMS OF WHETHER YOU WANT TO HAVE ANOTHER HEARING OR NOT OR WHETHER YOU SHOULD PUT IT BACK, YOU KNOW, TO THE BEGINNING AND HAVE IT GO THROUGH TWO READINGS VERSUS ONE, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THIS IS WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO NOT HAPPEN, IS WE'VE KICKED THIS BUCKET DOWN FROM 35 DAYS AGO.

NOW WE'RE KICKING IT BACK FORWARD. YOU KNOW, MULTIPLE MEETINGS.

I DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO DO THAT AGAIN. N OBODY DOES.

THANK YOU. I DON'T THINK ANYBODY DOES. WHAT WE DO IS I THINK, MAYOR, IS THAT WE PREPARE FOR THAT FINAL OR FIRST READING SO THAT WE'RE WORKING, AND THIS IS WHY I APPRECIATE THIS DISCUSSION, EVEN THOUGH IT'S BEEN LENGTHY, BUT WE'RE GETTING INTO THE WEEDS SO THAT THIS IS PRODUCTIVE BECAUSE WHAT HAPPENED THE 35 DAY WAIT PERIOD, I'M NOT SURE MUCH CHANGED BETWEEN FEBRUARY AND THE LAST READING A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO, IF ANYTHING AT ALL.

SO WHAT I JUST SAY TO MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS IS THAT THIS IS PRODUCTIVE, BUT I WANT TO KNOW IF IT'S A FIRST OR A FINAL READING.

SO I'M GOING TO ASK THAT WE NOT ANSWER THAT. OKAY, AND THE REASON WHY IS I WANT TO SEE WHAT WE HAVE WRITTEN AT THE NEXT MEETING.

WE'LL HEAR AGAIN FROM THE CITIZENS. WHAT WAS THE DATE ON THE 27TH IS WHEN WE'RE WE'RE GOING TO ACTUALLY, AND THAT SHOULD BE, AND I'LL TURN IT OVER TO CITY ATTORNEY.

THAT SHOULD BE THE FINAL READING AND THE VOTE ON THE 27TH UNLESS ANOTHER MOTION IS MADE.

YEAH. THAT'S CORRECT. YEAH, BUT WE SHOULD KNOW MORE WHEN WE COME TOGETHER AT THE NEXT MEETING, AND ALL OF OUR CITIZENS WHO CARE TO OPINE WILL KNOW MORE BASED ON WHAT'S IN THE AGENDA.

THAT TRANSPARENCY IS PARAMOUNT TO ME, AND SO WE WILL DO THAT AND THEN DECIDE IF WE NEED TO MAKE ANY CHANGES TO FIRST OR SECOND READING.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. SO, MR. MAYOR, THERE WERE BASICALLY FOUR AND I THINK NOW WITH MR. WOLFSON'S CATCHES THE EYE, I THINK I DISAGREE WITH THE FIRST ONE.

HE IS RIGHT THAT THERE IS AN ERROR THERE, BUT I THINK HE CAUGHT THE WRONG ERROR, BUT WE'LL GET TO THAT IN JUST A MINUTE.

SO WHAT I'M GOING TO SAY IS THAT THE FOUR AMENDMENTS THAT I'M GOING TO MENTION FIRST WERE ALL AGREED TO ACTUALLY ON THE RECORD LAST MEETING BY THE PROPRIETOR OF OUTSIDE KIDS THAT WITH THESE FOUR AMENDMENTS THAT SHE APPROVED OF THE LEGISLATION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL. THE FIRST OF THOSE CHANGES WAS THAT THE CITY MANAGER'S AUTHORITY TO CHARGE FEES IS LIMITED FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF PUBLIC EXPENDITURES. SO THERE WAS SOME CONCERN THAT A CITY MANAGER MIGHT WANT TO TRY TO EARN A PROFIT OUT OF THIS.

SO I SAID, YOU KNOW, THAT'S NOT TYPICALLY THE WAY GOVERNMENT WORKS, BUT TO MAKE IT CLEAR, IT'S THAT I CAN THE CITY MANAGER CAN ONLY ASK FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF PUBLIC EXPENDITURES.

[02:00:04]

AS I'VE STATED EARLIER, THERE WAS A CONCERN THAT THERE MIGHT BE SOME ARBITRARY.

THE CITY MANAGER LIKES THIS VENDOR BUT DOESN'T LIKE THAT VENDOR, SO THEY GIVE A YES TO THE ONE THEY LIKE AND A NO TO THE ONE THEY DON'T LIKE.

SO, THIS GIVES AN APPEAL PROCESS. THIS IS THE SAME APPEAL PROCESS THAT'S USED IN OTHER SITUATIONS THAT COME BEFORE THE CITY.

SO, I'LL READ IT. APPEALS OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS OF THE CITY MANAGER.

APPEALS OF A DECISION OF THE CITY MANAGER MAY BE MADE TO THE CITY COMMISSION BY ANY PERSONS AFFECTED BY A DECISION OF THE CITY MANAGER, MADE UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THIS CHAPTER. SUCH APPEAL MAY BE FILED IN WRITING WITH THE CITY CLERK WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER THE RULING, DECISION OR DETERMINATION BEING APPEALED, AND SO THAT'S THAT.

THE THIRD ITEM WAS THERE WAS A DESIRE FOR SOME TIME TO ELAPSE TO GIVE FOR PROFIT, SOME TIME TO GET ORGANIZED AND COME TALK TO THE CITY MANAGER. SO THAT THEY HAD TIME TO START OUT IN COMPLIANCE AS OPPOSED TO BEING FOUND OUT OF COMPLIANCE AND THEN STARTING FROM THAT POSITION. SO, THERE WAS A DESIRE TO SET THE EFFECTIVE DATE TO JULY 1ST, 2025. SO, YOU'LL SEE THAT SECTION THREE HERE, EFFECTIVE DATE.

THE ORDINANCE SHALL TAKE EFFECT ON JULY 1ST, 2025, AND THEN THE NEXT AMENDMENT IS ACTUALLY IN THE POLICY.

IT'S ON PAGE 23. I'M GOING TO GO TO THE ONE THAT WAS THE FOURTH.

THE FOURTH ONE THAT WAS AGREED TO WITH THE REPRESENTATIVES FROM OUTSIDE KIDS IS IT'S THE THIRD ITEM ON OUR REGISTRATION APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS. SO, AS IT'S WRITTEN, IT SAYS THE APPLICANT SHALL IDENTIFY THE PROPOSED PARK OR RECREATION FACILITY.

SO, THE DESIRE THERE IS NOT TO HAVE TO DO A SEPARATE CONTRACT FOR EVERY PART THAT MAY BE UTILIZED, BUT TO DO ONE CONTRACT. I THINK THAT WAS THE INTENT, BUT IT WOULD MAKE IT MORE CLEAR IF IT SAID THE APPLICANT SHALL IDENTIFY THE PROPOSED PARKS OR FACILITIES. I WILL THEN GO ON TO THE TWO THAT WAS BROUGHT UP IN PUBLIC.

COMMENTS. I THINK WHAT THE LANGUAGE SHOULD SAY IS IT SHOULD SAY FILING.

WE DON'T WANT THEM JUST TO FILL OUT AN APPLICATION. WE WANT THEM TO FILE AN APPLICATION.

WE WOULD STRIKE THE WORD OUT. SO THE SENTENCE WOULD BE BY FILING AN APPLICATION, THE APPLICANT AGREES TO ABIDE BY ALL REQUIREMENTS STIPULATIONS AND PAY ALL FEES ASSOCIATED WITH TISSUE. POTENTIAL ISSUANCE OF PARKS AND RECREATION.

BUSINESS ACTIVITY REGISTRATION, AND THEN THE LAST ONE THAT WAS BROUGHT UP IN PUBLIC COMMENTS THERE IN SECTION FIVE IS, BUSINESSES OPERATING IN PARKS AND CITY PARKS AND FACILITIES ARE REQUIRED TO REMOVE ALL EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS AT THE END OF THE ACTIVITY, UNLESS OTHERWISE PERMITTED BY THE CITY. OKAY, AND THAT WOULD BE AT THIS POINT SIX AMENDMENTS TO 125. OKAY. THAT ONE I THINK IS A LITTLE EASIER, AND WE HAD THAT AGREEMENT FROM THE PROPRIETOR OF OUTSIDE KIDS. THAT REALLY GAVE.

IT WAS INFORMATIVE, I SHOULD SAY, AND WE'RE GOING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION ON THAT.

SO ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY. SO WE'LL COME BACK WITH ALL OF THAT RETYPED AND CLEANED UP AT THE NEXT MEETING. RIGHT, AND WE'LL HAVE ANOTHER ROBUST DISCUSSION AND DECIDE WHAT NEXT.

SO IF I MAY, MR. MAYOR. SO, SIR, THE COMMISSION'S DESIRE IS BASICALLY TO REPEAT THIS EXERCISE NEXT.

COMMISSIONER. YES, YES, YES. I DON'T WANT TO REPEAT THE EXERCISE.

OKAY. SO, I THINK THAT WE SHOULD GET AN AMENDMENT.

IN OTHER WORDS, I THINK THERE'S ENOUGH INFORMATION AND DISTILL DOWN AND CITY ATTORNEY, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG.

VERY, VERY OFTEN AN ORDINANCE COMES WITH THINGS LINED OUT RED, RED LINES.

SO YOU CAN EITHER AMEND IT, YOU CAN VOTE FOR IT, YOU CAN VOTE AGAINST IT, BUT , YOU KNOW, IF WE KEEP GOING DOWN THIS ROAD, YOU KNOW, MAY 27TH IS GOING TO COME, AND THEN AS COMMISSIONER RING SAID, WE'RE GOING TO PUSH IT BACK. SO, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO GO ON RECORD AND SAY, I THINK WE'RE GOOD WHERE WE'RE AT, ESPECIALLY ON 125, AND I'D LIKE TO SEE A VOTE FOR IT ON THE 27TH.

THAT'S JUST MY OPINION. THAT'S THE WAY IT STANDS TODAY, RIGHT? YES. WELL, I THINK WE HAD A DRAW, IF I DO RECALL ABOUT THE TERM LIMITS, IT WAS 2 TO 2.

SO, WE DON'T HAVE THAT AMENDED ON THE 27TH AND VOTE FOR IT.

YEAH. YOU. AMANDA? NOPE. OR MAKE IT YOUR DISCUSSION ITEM ON THE REPORTS AND SEE IF THE MISSING

[02:05:08]

JUST SO I UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE. YOU KNOW, AS IT STANDS NOW, THE SECOND AND FINAL READING, WHICH THERE'LL BE A PUBLIC HEARING WITH ON BOTH THIS ITEM AND THE ONE RIGHT BEFORE IT WITH THE ESC AND BUSINESS ACTIVITIES AND PARKS. IF NOTHING ELSE, THEY WILL BE HEARD ON MAY 27TH, AND YOU'LL VOTE ON IT UP OR DOWN OR POSTPONE FURTHER.

MY UNDERSTANDING IS THIS EXERCISE TONIGHT WAS AN ATTEMPT TO GET SOME CONSENSUS FOR AT LEAST A PACKAGE OF AMENDMENTS THAT WOULD BE PRESENTED TO YOU ON THE 27TH. IS THAT WHAT WE'RE DOING? WELL, OKAY. NOW THIS, THAT THANKS FOR BRINGING THAT UP.

BECAUSE WHAT I'D REALLY LIKE TO HAVE IS A FINAL VERSION WITH AMENDMENTS TO WHERE IF THERE IS ONE FINAL AMENDMENT, SO BE IT, BUT NOT SIX. OKAY, SO WE REALLY NEED.

THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING THAT WE ACTUALLY REPRODUCE THIS DOCUMENT WITH WHAT WE THINK IS FINAL FORM OR CLOSE TO IT AT THE NEXT MEETING.

YEAH, AND ABSOLUTELY, AND I DON'T WANT TO MAKE IT SOUND LIKE THERE'S NO YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY IN A POSITION AT THE FINAL MEETING TO AMEND FURTHER, ADD, SUBTRACT, BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WHATEVER CONSENSUS WE HAD TODAY, WOULD THAT BE A DIRECTION TO THE CITY MANAGER TO THEN BRING AT LEAST A PREPARED SET OF AMENDMENTS BASED ON TODAY'S DISCUSSION FOR CONSIDERATION? OF COURSE. AGAIN, YOU CAN FURTHER AMEND IT ADD, SUBTRACT OR WHAT HAVE YOU.

I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT. I HAVE A PROBLEM MOVING TO 27.

THAT'S WHERE I'M AT. OKAY. YES, COMMISSIONER.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT ON MAY 27TH, IF THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DOING, THAT WE'RE READY AND WE'RE PREPARED.

SO THE WORK IS DONE BEFORE THEN SO WE DON'T KICK IT DOWN AGAIN, AND THAT I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

COMMISSIONER BOLE. NOW, A QUESTION ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP MEETING AND THEM GIVING THEIR WEIGH IN ON THESE AMENDMENTS, I THINK, WOULD BE VALUABLE FOR US TO HEAR. THE PROBLEM IS, IS MAY 12TH COMES BEFORE MAY 14TH, AND SO THEREFORE WE'RE LOOKING AT THE NEXT AMENDMENT BEFORE OR THE NEXT VERSION BEFORE THE CITY MANAGERS HAD A MOMENT TO OR THE STAFF, WHOEVER THAT MAY BE, HAS HAD A MOMENT TO SIT DOWN WITH THE ESC DURING THEIR COMMITTEE MEETING.

SO I WANTED TO SEE IF THERE WAS A WAY PERHAPS THE CHAIR COULD MEET WITH THE CITY MANAGER OR CITY STAFF TO LOOK AT THAT, BUT I KNOW SHE WOULDN'T BE THE SOLE VOTE, BUT AT LEAST TO HAVE SOME WEIGH IN BEFORE MAY 12TH SO THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT ONE THAT'S A LITTLE MORE PRODUCTIVE. OKAY, THAT'S A REQUEST TO YOU, CITY MANAGER.

I MEAN, I'D BE GLAD TO MEET WITH THE CHAIR. WE'LL NEED TO TAKE PLACE PROBABLY AFTER THE NINTH.

I'M OUT, AND THEN WHATEVER. THAT MONDAY, IT'S THE COMMISSION.

WEDNESDAY BEFORE. SO, LIKE, NEXT FRIDAY ENDS IN THE NINTH.

THAT WEEK. I THINK I'M ONLY HERE THURSDAY. OKAY.

THE REST OF THAT WEEK AND THEN THE WEEK AFTER THAT, I AM HERE.

SO I GUESS THE CHALLENGE IS THAT THE 12TH. IS THAT NEXT MONDAY, RIGHT? YEAH, AND THEN THEIR MEETING IS ON THE 14TH. WHICH HAPPENS AFTER I MEAN I COULD IF SHE'S WILLING, I COULD MEET WITH HER THIS WEEK BECAUSE IF THE 27TH IS THE FINAL READING THEN I'D LIKE TO HAVE IT AS FINAL AS WE COULD ON THE 12TH, WHICH. OKAY, SO I'LL GO AHEAD AND ASK SARAH, ARE YOU AVAILABLE THIS NEXT WEEK? SO, I CAN MAKE MYSELF AVAILABLE, BUT THE PROBLEM IS, IS THAT I CAN'T SPEAK FOR THE REST OF ESC THEY I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY'RE THINKING ABOUT ON THE AMENDMENT, SO I DON'T I DON'T I'M NOT COMFORTABLE SAYING, YOU KNOW, SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF ESC SO I'M NOT SURE IT'S GOING TO BE A USEFUL MEETING, BUT I'M HAPPY TO MEET I'M GOING TO SOLVE THIS RIGHT NOW, IF YOU WILL AGREE.

THERE IS NO LACK OF COMMUNICATION FROM CITIZENS TO ME.

OKAY. SO, I SUSPECT THERE'S NO LACK OF COMMUNICATION FROM CITIZENS TO YOU AND SPECIFICALLY MEMBERS OF THE ESC , SO THEY HAVE EVERY AVAILABILITY TO CONVEY TO US OVER THE NEXT TWO WEEKS WHETHER THEY STILL DISAGREE OR WOULD LIKE TO PUSH OR ADVOCATE FOR WHATEVER IT IS THEY WANT, BUT I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO KEEP PUNTING ON THIS.

HOLD ON, HE RAISED FIRST. JUST, YOU KNOW, OUR DEPUTY CITY MANAGER WILL BE HERE ALSO THROUGH, YOU KNOW, I'M SURE ANYTHING THAT THEY BRING UP WITH HIM, YOU KNOW, WE CAN GO BACK AND TALK ABOUT.

I JUST MY PROBLEM IS WE'VE GONE AS COMMISSIONER I THINK 6 OR 7 WEEKS INTO THIS.

[02:10:05]

YEAH. VOTE AGAINST IT, AMEND IT, YOU KNOW. WHATEVER.

YES, COMMISSIONER. I JUST NOTICED IF WE'RE NOT GOING TO VOTE BECAUSE THE, THE BUSINESS ONE WILL GET ALSO GET VOTED ON THE 27TH BECAUSE WE DEFERRED IT TO THAT DATE CERTAIN, AND THEN IN IN 35 DAYS IT'S GOING TO GO INTO EFFECT.

SO WE MIGHT WANT TO DELAY THAT PROPOSED IMPLEMENTATION.

IMPLEMENTATION DATE TO AUGUST OR SEPTEMBER. YOU CAN AMEND IT TO THAT WHEN IT COMES UP.

RIGHT. WELL JUST SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT BECAUSE OTHERWISE IT'S A QUICK TURNAROUND.

I WAS ACTUALLY ALREADY THINKING MAYBE THE SAME THING. SO, WE CAN HAVE THAT DISCUSSION WHEN WE GET INTO THE FINAL VOTE.

SO YEAH. SO, I'M OUT, BUT I MEAN, CLEARLY THE DEPUTY CITY MANAGER AND AMANDA COULD ATTEND, RIGHT. SO, I JUST WANT TO KIND OF CLARIFY, I MEAN, DO YOU WANT BOTH ORDINANCES TO COME BACK NEXT WEEK OR JUST THE 124? I THINK JUST 124.

RIGHT. SO THE AMENDMENTS AS I READ THEM HERE, PLUS THE TWEAKS THAT WE GOT FROM THE PUBLIC COMMENTS, THAT'S WHAT YOU WANT ME TO BRING BACK ON THE 27TH.

SAY THAT AGAIN. 12 OR 12TH. THE 12TH. SO THAT WAS MY QUESTION IS DO YOU DO YOU WANT ME TO BRING BACK THE 125 ON THE 12TH FOR DISCUSSION AGAIN, BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE THERE'S CONSENSUS WITH 125 IS PRETTY CLEAR.

I THINK WE'RE READY TO VOTE ON THAT PERSONALLY.

SO, ON THE NEXT COMMISSION MEETING, IT'LL JUST BE 124 FOR DISCUSSION.

125 WILL BRING THE AMENDMENTS AS YOU ALL DISCUSSED THEM TONIGHT.

YEAH, I'M GOOD WITH THAT. COMMISSIONERS. ARE YOU OKAY? OKAY. ALL RIGHT. GREAT. VERY GOOD. THANK YOU.

ALRIGHT. MOVING ON TO THE CONSENT AGENDA. THIS IS GOING TO BE MY FAVORITE PART OF THE NIGHT.

[6. CONSENT AGENDA]

THERE WILL BE NO SEPARATE DISCUSSION OF THESE ITEMS. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WILL BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY.

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION AND STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS HAVE BEEN PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COMMISSION ON THESE ITEMS. ITEM 6.A APPROVED RESOLUTION. NUMBER 25-37 6B APPROVED.

RESOLUTION NUMBER 25-38 AND 6.C. DECLARE THE LISTED PROPERTIES AS SURPLUS AND AUTHORIZED DISPOSAL OF EACH IN THE MOST BENEFICIAL WAY TO THE CITY. IS THERE ANY REQUEST TO PULL ANY OF THESE OUT OF THE CONSENT AGENDA? NO, NO. THE SEWER GUY. WHAT HE WANTS. OKAY, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. ITEM 6.A THROUGH 6.C AS WRITTEN.

SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION, AND SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR SIGNIFY WITH AYE.

AYE. OPPOSED. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. MOVING TO SEVEN COMMITTEE REPORTS.

[7.A. Reappointments to the Board Member Review Committee (BMRC)]

SO, THE RECOMMENDATION, IF YOU HAVEN'T ALREADY READ IT RIGHT NOW THE THREE SEATS ON THAT BOARD OR ON THAT COMMITTEE THAT ARE SUBJECT TO CONSIDERATION TONIGHT IS MAYOR CURTIS FORD, MEMBER ONE, SEAN KEANE, MEMBER THREE, AND PAMELA WHITE, MEMBER FOR BOTH SEAN KEANE AND PAMELA WHITE HAVE AGREED TO SERVE.

IF YOU CHOOSE TO REAPPOINTMENT THEM, I WOULD LIKE YOU TO APPOINT ME, BUT YOU CAN CHOOSE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR SOMEBODY ELSE IF YOU CHOOSE. SO, THE RECOMMENDATION IS TO REAPPOINT EACH OF THE THREE, AND BY THE WAY, TO CLARIFY, BECAUSE THIS WAS NOT CLEAR TO SOME PEOPLE, THE APPOINTED MEMBER FROM THIS COMMISSION ONLY SERVES FOR ONE YEAR.

SO, YOU REAPPOINT ME OR WHOEVER EACH YEAR. SO, I MOVE THAT WE REAPPOINT THE MEMBERS AS LISTED IN THE AGENDA.

STAFF REPORT. SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND DISCUSSION.

HEARING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR SIGNIFY WITH I. OPPOSED.

MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. CAN I SAY ONE THING, MAYOR? YES. I JUST FROM THE REST OF US. I KNOW THE KIND OF TIME THAT THIS GOES INTO THIS COMMITTEE,

[02:15:01]

I'M THE EASIEST ONE. THANK YOU, COUNSELOR. THANK YOU I APPRECIATE THAT, AND NOW THAT EVERYBODY IS GONE, I'LL ANNOUNCE WE DID SET THE DATE FOR REOPENING IT AND MORE SPECIFICALLY FOR BACKFILLING THE SHORTFALL WITHIN THE ESC , AND THAT DATE IS WHAT DATE? MAY DATE. MAY 15TH.

SO THAT'S GOING TO COME UP PRETTY QUICK. SO ANYBODY THAT'S WATCHING OR THAT'S HERE THAT CARES TO HAVE SOMEBODY SIGN UP ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS CONTACT THE CITY CLERK AND SHE'LL GIVE YOU INSTRUCTION ON WHAT TO DO. IT'S ACTUALLY ON, ON THE WEBSITE, BUT YEAH, THERE'S AN ONLINE FORM AND I CAN HELP THEM GET TO IT.

YEAH. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. MOVING TO ITEM 88A RESOLUTION.

NUMBER 25-24 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH, FLORIDA.

OH, WAIT A SECOND. I HAD ALREADY ASKED THAT WE SWITCH THOSE.

SO, I'M GOING TO MOVE DIRECTLY TO ITEM NINE A ORDINANCE NUMBER 2025-179 PUBLIC HEARING AND FINAL READING,

[9.A. ORDINANCE NO. 20-25-179, Public Hearing and Final Reading]

MR. KILLINGSWORTH. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. SO, THIS BUDGET APPROPRIATION DOES TWO THINGS.

IT ADDS A $36,000 IN SALARY, WHICH WOULD ALLOW US TO OVERLAP A BUILDING OFFICIAL WITH A BUILDING INSPECTOR SO THAT WE CAN HAVE OUR BUILDING OFFICIAL ON BOARD PRIOR TO OUR BUILDING INSPECTOR RETIRING.

IT'S A GREAT OPPORTUNITY FOR THE CITY WHEN HE COMES ON BOARD.

HE'S AGREED TO TAKE FACE TRAINING, WHICH WOULD ALLOW HIM TO ALSO DO CODE ENFORCEMENT AND TO LOOK AT BEST PRACTICES IN TERMS OF CUSTOMER SERVICE AND WHETHER OR NOT IT WOULD BE BETTER FOR US TO HIRE JUNIOR STAFF PEOPLE OR RETAIN UNIVERSAL TO DO A BUILDING INSPECTION FOR THE CITY. THE OTHER ITEM IS THE CITY IS UPGRADING ITS WATER TREATMENT PLANT, AND WE PUT OUT FOR BID THE WORK, AND UNFORTUNATELY, THE BID CAME BACK $743,000 MORE THAN WHAT WE BUDGETED FOR IT.

STAFF HAS CONCERNS THAT IF WE WAIT, IT MIGHT BE ANOTHER $800,000 BY THE TIME WE GET BACK AROUND TO IT.

SO THE ENTERPRISE FUND IN WHICH THESE FUNDS COME FROM IS QUITE HEALTHY.

THIS IS ACTUALLY SOME DEFERRED MAINTENANCE AND SO IT'S SOMETHING WE NEED TO DO.

STAFF WOULD THEREFORE RECOMMEND THAT THE COMMISSION ADOPTS ORDINANCE 2025-179.

OKAY, AND THEN THERE'S A PUBLIC HEARING. YEAH.

I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING NOW. DONNA, DO WE HAVE SPEAKERS FOR THAT? NO, WE DO NOT. OKAY. HEARING NONE, WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND MOVE DIRECTLY TO A RECOMMENDED MOTION AND THEN DISCUSSION.

I RECOMMEND WE APPROVE ORDINANCE NUMBER 2025-179.

SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND, AND DISCUSSION.

OKAY. HEARING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR SIGNIFY WITH AYE.

AYE. OPPOSED MOTION CARRIES, AND MOVING BACK TO ITEM EIGHT A RESOLUTION NUMBER 25-24 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF

[8.A. RESOLUTION NO. 25-24]

MR. KILLINGSWORTH. SO, THIS IS APPROVAL OF THE CONTRACT FOR THE BUDGET MODIFICATION OR THE BUDGET ORDINANCE, RATHER, THAT YOU JUST APPROVED? THE CITY'S WATER SYSTEM PROGRAMS INCLUDES UPGRADING OUR WATER TREATMENT PLANTS, THE UPGRADES AT WATER TREATMENT PLANT NUMBER ONE ARE NEARING COMPLETION, AND THESE UPGRADES NEED A NEW HIGH SERVICE PUMPS AND VARIOUS VARIABLE SPEED DRIVES AND THE ELIMINATION OF THE CHLORINE GAS TREATMENT IN FAVOR OF A SAFER LIQUID CHLORINE FEED SYSTEM.

THE BUDGET CURRENTLY INCLUDES $1.3 MILLION FOR PART OF THIS PROJECT FOR THE UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK AND $2.3 MILLION AND NOW WITH THE APPROPRIATION OF THE $743,000.

A TOTAL OF $4,343,000 TO UPGRADE WATER TREATMENT PLANT NUMBER TWO.

STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS THAT COMMISSION ADOPTS A RESOLUTION, 25-24, AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO FUND THE CHANGE ORDER TOTALING 4,343,000 FOR THE WATER TREATMENT PLANT. TWO UPGRADES. THANK YOU.

I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE RESOLUTION NUMBER 25-24, AS WRITTEN.

[02:20:01]

AFTER WE DO THIS, ASSUMING WE APPROVE IT, WHAT'S LEFT IN THE ENTERPRISE FUND FOR THEIR OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, I CAN'T REMEMBER IF THE. I THINK IT'S RIGHT AROUND 16 MILLION.

YEAH, I THOUGHT IT WAS. IT'S A BIG NUMBER. YES.

YEAH. OKAY. SO, NOT WORRIED ABOUT INSOLVENCY TODAY.

WE'LL GO. GO FORWARD. OTHER QUESTIONS. DISCUSSION.

HEARING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR SIGNIFY WITH I. AYE.

OPPOSED. MOTION CARRIES. MOVING TO ITEM. WHAT IS THAT? 9.B? 9.B. ORDINANCE NUMBER 5-25-46. INTRODUCTION.

FIRST READING. AN ORDINANCE BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, CHAPTER EIGHT FLOOD HAZARD AREAS TO SPECIFY ELEVATION OF MANUFACTURED HOMES AND TO CLARIFY PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED BUILDING ELEVATIONS, PROVIDING I'M SORRY THAT IT'S NOT ON THERE FOR SOME REASON.

IT'S NOT ON THE SCRIPT. WHERE IS. IT'S A RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FOR THE PROJECT.

IT'S NOT HERE. SO. OKAY, WE'LL BACK UP AND USE THIS DOCUMENT.

OKAY. WE'RE NOW GOING TO ITEM EIGHT B RESOLUTION NUMBER 25 DASH 39 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH,

[8.B. RESOLUTION NO. 25-39]

THIS IS THE RESOLUTION. I KNOW, I KNOW, BUT I DON'T NEED TO READ THAT.

OKAY? OKAY. YEAH. OKAY. SO, AT THIS TIME CITY MANAGER.

SURE. SO, THIS IS A RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF FEDERAL FUNDING FOR $1,080,000 FOR CONSTRUCTION OF SIX DUNE WALKOVERS. SAND DUNE WALKOVERS ARE FOURTH STREET.

THERE'S CURRENTLY NO WALKOVER THERE. FIFTH STREET, THERE'S CURRENTLY NO WALK OVER THERE.

13TH STREET IS A DILAPIDATED WALKOVER THAT'S PARTIALLY BURIED 14TH STREET.

THERE'S CURRENTLY NO WALKOVER. 11TH STREET IS ANOTHER DILAPIDATED WALKOVER, AND THEN FIRST STREET, THERE'S CURRENTLY NO WALK OVER. IT'S ESTIMATED THAT EACH OF THEM WILL COST $180,000, AND THE FEDERAL FUNDING WOULD.

COVER THE ENTIRE COST OF CONSTRUCTING THE SIX WALKOVERS.

GOOD QUESTION. YES. HOW ABOUT 15TH STREET? THE ONE THAT'S FALLING IS 16TH.

I'M SORRY. YEAH. SO, THAT'S THE BIG MONEY ONE.

REALLY? YEAH. WHAT'S THE BIG MONEY ONE? BUT WE DON'T HAVE A RESOLUTION THERE BECAUSE OF THE RETAINING WALL.

SO, THERE'S A RETAINING WALL THAT. OKAY. I JUST WAS GOING TO POINT THAT OUT BECAUSE AYE.

AYE. 6.A NEED TO FIX THAT MORE THAN I DO A COUPLE OF NEWER ONES.

THAT'S JUST MY OPINION. THERE IS, BUT THERE'S A THIRD PARTY THAT WE HAVE TO WORK THROUGH. I'M FAMILIAR WITH IT.

YES. PLUS MANAGING THE SAND THAT KEEPS BUILDING UP ON ALL THESE WALKOVERS DUE TO OUR RENOURISHMENT.

IT'S A PROBLEM. I UNDERSTAND, BUT , YOU KNOW, I GUESS MY PRIORITY IS.

I AGREE WITH THAT EXPECTATION. WE'RE GOING TO GET THIS MONEY.

YES, THERE IS AN EXPECTATION. I'VE SPOKEN DIRECTLY TO RUTHERFORD TWICE ON IT, AND HE IS ADVOCATING STRONGLY TO GET THIS MONEY FOR US.

WELL DONE. THANK YOU. YEAH. SO, DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE? I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE RESOLUTION NUMBER 25, DASH 39.

SECOND. SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

A SECOND IN THIS CASE, FROM COMMISSIONER BOLE.

DISCUSSION. HEARING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR SIGNIFY WITH AYE.

AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. NOW GET ME BACK ON TRACK.

AM I ON? I'M ON NINE. BE GOING TO NINE. BE. TAKE YOUR PAPER BACK.

[9.B. ORDINANCE NO. 25-25-46, Introduction and First Reading]

AN ORDINANCE BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH. AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, CHAPTER EIGHT FLOOD HAZARD AREAS TO SPECIFY ELEVATION OF MANUFACTURED HOMES AND TO CLARIFY PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED BUILDING ELEVATIONS, PROVIDING FOR APPLICABILITY, APPLICABILITY, AND SEVERABILITY, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

MR. KILLINGSWORTH. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. SO PERIODICALLY, THE STATE ALWAYS HAS A CONSULTANT ON BOARD FOR THIS, BUT PERIODICALLY THEY REVIEW OUR FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT CODE IN CHAPTER EIGHT FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE STATE.

THIS INCORPORATES THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS AS WELL AS KIND OF AN INTERNAL FIX.

SO IN CHAPTER 24 FLOOD ELEVATION IS STATED AS 2.5FT ABOVE BASE FLOOD ELEVATION.

IN CHAPTER EIGHT, IT ACTUALLY SAID 4.5FT. SO, WE'RE CORRECTING THAT SO THAT IT MATCHES CHAPTER 24 AT 2.5FT.

[02:25:08]

SO, WE'RE INCORPORATING THOSE INTO OUR FLOODPLAIN ORDINANCE, AND THEN THERE'S ALSO A REQUIREMENT.

SO, THE REQUIREMENT WAS FOR EVERYBODY THAT IT WAS DEPENDING UPON WHERE YOU ARE IN THE STATE.

SO, FOR US, IT'S 2.5FT YOUR BASE FLOOR ELEVATION ABOVE THE FLOODPLAIN.

THE STATE'S CHANGED THAT FOR MANUFACTURED HOUSING, SO IT'S 2.5FT MEASURED FROM THE BOTTOM OF THE FRAME OF THE MANUFACTURED STRUCTURE.

SO, IT'S NOT THE FIRST FLOOR, BUT IF YOU GOT A 12 INCH FRAME, THEN YOU WOULD BE AT YOUR FIRST FLOOR WOULD ACTUALLY BE AT 3.5FT, AND THEN IF AMANDA WOULD LIKE TO COME UP AND ADD OR CORRECT ANYTHING, I SAID, I WOULD WELCOME HER.

OKAY. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE ORDINANCE NUMBER 25-25-46, SECOND MOTION IN A SECOND. PARDON? YEAH.

DISCUSSION. I JUST HAD A QUESTION. I KNOW THIS CAME BEFORE US IN 2023, IN CHAPTER 24, AND I SPOKE WITH THE CITY MANAGER AND OUR NEIGHBORHOODS DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR, AMANDA ASKEW, LAST WEEK ABOUT THIS.

SO, 4.5FT WAS HER INITIAL RECOMMENDATION. COULD SHE COME UP? BECAUSE I WANT TO MAKE SURE I GET THIS RIGHT, AND THEN AS WE'RE LOOKING AT THE FEMA NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM, WOULD PUTTING IT INTO 4.5FT VERSUS 2.5FT, AND I KNOW THAT WOULD MEAN THAT WE'D HAVE TO GO BACK AND DO ANOTHER ORDINANCE ON CHAPTER 24 TO WRITE THAT IF THE COMMISSION DECIDED TO, BUT WHAT WOULD THAT DO AS FAR AS OUR INSURANCE, PROPERTY, HOMEOWNER'S INSURANCE, FLOOD INSURANCE, ESPECIALLY THOSE ON THE WATER.

SO RIGHT NOW, WE ARE AT A RATE. WE WENT FROM A SEVEN TO A 6 IN 2020, AND THAT SAVED 20% FOR OUR HOMEOWNERS.

WE ARE UP FOR A REEVALUATION THIS YEAR. ACTUALLY, WE'RE GATHERING ALL THE PAPERWORK.

WE DO MEET WITH THE STATE EVERY FIVE YEARS, AND THEY MAKE SURE ALL OF OUR PAPERWORK IS IN ORDER.

THERE IS A SCALE THAT THEY USE. I CAN'T TELL YOU EXACTLY ON THAT SCALE, HOW MUCH THAT WOULD REDUCE OR IN FLOOD INSURANCE, IT'S BETTER TO BE A LOWER NUMBER. SO, I DON'T KNOW IF IT WOULD TAKE US FROM A SIX TO A FIVE.

I HAVEN'T ASKED THAT QUESTION, BUT YOUR ORIGINAL QUESTION WAS THE 4.5FT.

WAS THAT YOUR RECOMMENDATION? ANYTIME YOU CAN GET HIGHER IS BETTER BECAUSE THAT REDUCES YOUR CHANCES OF FLOODING.

IT DOES COME WITH A COST. THE MORE YOU ELEVATE A STRUCTURE, THE MORE EXPENSIVE IT TENDS TO BE, BUT I WOULD ARGUE YOU WOULD SAVE MONEY IN THE LONG RUN VERSUS GETTING FLOODED AND HAVING TO REBUILD.

REBUILD. I WOULD RECOMMEND ANYTHING HIGHER TO GO UP SPECIFICALLY.

IF YOU LOOK AT SOME OF OUR MAPS ONLINE, YOU CAN SEE WHERE WE HAVE PREDICTED FLOODING IN THE FUTURE.

WE DO THINK THAT MORTGAGE COMPANIES ARE NOT GOING TO LEND TO PEOPLE IF YOU ARE NOT ELEVATED.

SO YOU COULD HAVE A SITUATION WHERE YOU WANT TO SELL YOUR HOUSE AND SOMEONE'S NOT QUALIFIED TO BUY IT BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO GET A MORTGAGE.

SO RAISING THE STRUCTURE IS BETTER FOR FLOODING AND BEING RESILIENT IN THE COMMUNITY, BUT IT DOES COME WITH A COST AS WELL.

SO I WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE AN AMENDMENT AND BUT BEFORE I PROPOSE AMENDMENT TO THIS WOULD THIS HINDER YOU FROM TURNING IN ALL YOUR PAPERWORK AND GETTING THAT NEW SCORE FROM 7 TO 6? IF WE DID, IF WE DID, IF IT DID PASS THE AMENDMENT BECAUSE CHAPTER 24 WOULD NOW NEED TO BE AMENDED TO SAY, FOUR AND A HALF. WELL THE STATE'S NOT GOING TO LOOK IN CHAPTER 24, BUT YES, WE WOULD NEED ULTIMATELY TO UPDATE IT.

THE STATE IS COMING THIS SUMMER. WE LIKE I MENTIONED EARLIER, WE ARE WE ARE BACK AND FORTH.

THEY WILL BE HERE THE END OF JUNE, BEGINNING OF JULY.

SO IF WE MADE A CHANGE AND THERE WAS A RIPPLE EFFECT, WE WOULD NEED TO EVENTUALLY UPDATE CHAPTER 24.

WOULD YOU RECOMMEND DOING 4.5FT TODAY INSTEAD OF THE 2.5FT? AGAIN? YES. IF YOU GET YOUR STRUCTURE HIGHER, IT'S BETTER.

4.5FT WAS IN LINE WITH SOME OF THE PREDICTED MODEL FLOODING IN THE FUTURE, BUT ULTIMATELY, STAFF WILL BE SATISFIED WITH 2.5FT. WE COULD ADVOCATE FOR MORE.

WE'VE EVEN TALKED ABOUT IN THE FUTURE. HIGHER THAN THAT, AND A LOT OF COASTAL COMMUNITIES,

[02:30:01]

SO IN THEORY, YOU'RE NOT REDUCING THE HOUSE HEIGHT, YOU'RE ALLOWING FOR THAT PARKING, AND THEN THE 35FT TO BE MEASURED FROM UNDERNEATH WHERE THAT PARKING IS UP. SO POTENTIALLY HAVE A 40 FOOT HOUSE OR 39 FOOT HOUSE, POTENTIALLY.

THE HABITABLE SPACE DOWNSTAIRS WOULD HAVE TO BE FLOOD PROOF.

TYPICALLY, YOU HAVE BREAKAWAY WALLS AND THAT WOULD JUST BE LIKE GARAGE TYPE SPACE, AND THIS WOULD ONLY AFFECT THOSE IN THE FLOOD ZONE.

SO NOT ALL OF IT WOULD BE GIVEN THAT, AND THEN THE BENEFIT TO THE COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE IS OUR CRS WOULD THEN LOWER THE CLASS, WHICH COULD POTENTIALLY HAVE A BETTER IMPACT ON OUR PROPERTY.

FLOODING INSURANCE. YES. POTENTIALLY LOWER POTENTIALLY.

STAFF DOESN'T WANT TO BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW HOW MANY THEY END UP GIVING US AND COULD JUST BE SIX AND A HALF.

MOVING US FROM SIX TO. OKAY. IS THERE A MOTION HERE? YES. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE AMEND ORDINANCE NUMBER 25-25-46, TO HAVE IT AT 4.5FT INSTEAD OF 2.5FT. I HEAR A MOTION. I DO NOT HEAR A SECOND.

THE MOTION FAILS. SO BACK TO THE MAIN MOTION.

WE'VE ALREADY MOVED ON THAT. OR HAVE WE NOT? OKAY.

SO. YEAH. ALL RIGHT. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON.

I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE 25-25-46. SECOND, WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND DISCUSSION.

HEARING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR SIGNIFY WITH AYE. AYE.

OPPOSED MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. OKAY. MOVING TO TEN MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS, SPECIFICALLY TEN.

[10.A. Public Hearing - APP25-0003 - Appeal of a decision of the Community Development Board (CDB) for variance ZVAR25-0005 at 1889 Beach Avenue]

CBD FOR VARIANCE XVAR 25-0005 AT 1889 BEACH AVENUE.

ITEM. I'M SORRY. I'M SORRY. YOU NEED A BREAK. OKAY. EVERYBODY GOOD WITH A FIVE MINUTE RECESS? YEAH. GO AHEAD. GIVE YOU A CHANCE TO GET READY.

OKAY. EVERYBODY. I GUESS EVERYBODY NEEDED IT, BUT NOT EVERYBODY. IT'S A LATE ONE. WHAT WAS THAT? IS THAT MILO OUT THERE? HOW DOES THAT HELP COORDINATE THIS? AND. WHAT? WE RECOMMENDED 2 OR 3 YEAR OLDS.

THAT'S RIGHT. THEN ABOUT SIX YEARS OUT, I THINK THE THOUGHT PROCESS WAS MORE THE COMMISSION. I MEAN, I THINK.

MIC].

[02:38:20]

THIS MEETING WILL RECONVENE AT THIS TIME, AND I'M GOING TO RESTATE ITEM TEN, A PUBLIC HEARING APP 25 0003 APPEAL OF A DECISION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD CDB FOR VARIANCE VARIANTS.

ZVAR25-0005 AT 1889 BEACH AVENUE, US. ITEM 10.A1, IS DISCLOSURE OF EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSIONERS. HAVE YOU HAD ANY EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS ON THIS? NO, I HAVE NOT HAD ANY EITHER. SO THAT SATISFIES THAT CITY ATTORNEY PROCEDURAL REMINDERS? SURE. DECISIONS LIKE THIS ON APPEALS, REZONINGS WAIVERS OR WHAT HAVE YOU ARE CONSIDERED QUASI-JUDICIAL .

SO, THERE'S JUST SOME, YOU KNOW, SOME CERTAIN PROTOCOLS THAT WE NEED TO FOLLOW.

ONE IS THE EX PARTE COMMUNICATION. YOU'VE ALREADY GONE OVER THAT.

SO, IF ANYONE'S SPOKEN TO ANYONE REGARDING THIS MATTER, WHETHER IT'S THE APPLICANT OR SOMEONE IN THE IN THE PUBLIC THAT SHOULD BE DISCLOSED.

WE'VE ALREADY GONE OVER THAT. THE SECOND ITEM IS THAT BECAUSE IT'S QUASI-JUDICIAL , THESE ACTIONS MUST BE BASED ON WHAT IS CALLED SUBSTANTIAL, COMPETENT EVIDENCE WHICH MEANS THAT THE DECISION MUST BE SUPPORTED BY FACT-BASED TESTIMONY OR EXPERT TESTIMONY, NOT THE GENERALIZED CONCERNS OR OPINIONS OF OTHER FOLKS IN THE PUBLIC.

[02:40:03]

THAT'S FOLLOWED BY ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO ARE IN OPPOSITION.

THEY'D HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK, AND THEN AFTER THAT, ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR ANYONE IN SUPPORT, THEN THE APPLICANT WOULD HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO REBUT AND THEN WE TAKE IT BACK FOR CONSIDERATION, AND WITH THAT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

SO WE SWEAR IN ALL PRESENTERS, SPEAKERS ON THIS.

SO WHO IS SPEAKING TONIGHT? RAISE YOUR HAND, PLEASE.

OKAY, AND CITY CLERK. CAN YOU SWEAR IN OUR PARTICIPANTS? PLEASE. WERE TO TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH.

YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. LET'S SEE. CITY STAFF OVERVIEW.

AMANDA. READY? YES. SO GOOD EVENING. AMANDA ASKEW, THE NEIGHBORHOODS DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR.

I'M HERE TO PRESENT THE APPEAL OF THE VARIANCE AT 1889 BEACH AVENUE.

THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE ORIGINALLY FROM 24-151(K)(1) TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK FOR A GENERATOR AT 1885 BEECH AVENUE.

THE CODE DOES REQUIRE ALL MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT, INCLUDING AIR CONDITIONERS, TO BE SET BACK FIVE FEET.

THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD MET IN FEBRUARY OF THIS YEAR AND DID NOT APPROVE THE VARIANCE REQUEST.

THE RECOMMENDATION WAS FOR A DENIAL, AND IT WAS A 4 TO 3 VOTE.

THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD RECOMMENDED A DENIAL BASED ON THE FACT THAT THE NONE OF THE REQUIREMENTS IN SECTION 24-65(C) WERE MET FOR THE VARIANCE REQUEST. A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THIS PROPERTY.

THIS PROPERTY IS 50FT WIDE AT THE STREET AND QUITE DEEP.

I BELIEVE IT'S 188FT. IT IS AN OCEANFRONT LOT.

IT'S ZONED RESIDENTIAL GENERAL TWO FAMILY, WHICH IS RG.

IT IS LOCATED, LIKE I SAID ON THE EAST SIDE OCEAN FRONT.

IT IS A MAIN HOUSE, AND THE MAIN HOUSE IS CLOSER TO THE OCEAN, AND THEN THERE IS A GARAGE APARTMENT WHICH FACES THE STREET THAT THE PROPOSED GENERATOR IS LOCATED ADJACENT AND ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE GARAGE APARTMENT.

THERE IS EXISTING MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT LOCATED ON THE GARAGE APARTMENT.

IN 1990. IN THE EARLY 90S, OUR CODE DID NOT REGULATE THE PLACEMENT OF MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT, AND IT WAS ORIGINALLY A PLACED AND APPROVED AND BUILT ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THAT GARAGE APARTMENT.

THAT'S WHERE THEY ARE PROPOSING TO LOCATE THE GENERATOR AS WELL.

IN THAT AREA WITH THE MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT IN IN 2019, THE ZONING CODE WAS UPDATED TO REQUIRE THAT MINIMUM OF FIVE FOOT SETBACK. SO THAT'S WHAT IS TRIGGERING IT TODAY FOR THE REQUIREMENTS.

SEE IT IS A LITTLE BIT CONFUSING, BUT THE GROUNDS FOR YOUR DECISION IS THE SAME GROUNDS THAT ARE USED IN THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD, WHICH IS 24 DASH 65 C, YOU HAVE TO MEET ONE OF THE SIX CRITERIA.

I'LL GO THROUGH THEM SUPER QUICK. NUMBER ONE IS EXCEPTIONAL TOPOGRAPHIC CONDITIONS.

NUMBER TWO IS CONDITIONS OR CIRCUMSTANCES IMPACTING THE PROPERTY DISPARAGINGLY FROM NEARBY PROPERTIES.

THREE. EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES PREVENTING THE REASONABLE USE OF THE PROPERTY.

FOUR IS OWNERS' EFFECT OF REGULATIONS ENACTED AFTER THE PLATTING OR DEVELOPMENT? FIVE. IS IRREGULAR SHAPE OF THE PROPERTY AND SIX IS SUBSTANDARD SIZE OF THE LOT WARRANTING A VARIANCE.

YOU WOULD. IN ORDER TO APPROVE IT, YOU HAVE TO FIND ONE OF THOSE CONDITIONS ARE MET.

IF YOU DON'T FIND ANY OF THOSE CONDITIONS ARE MET, YOU WOULD DENY IT, AND THE REVIEW AND VOTE ON THE APPEAL IS AN APPROVAL ON THE VARIANCE, AND A DENIAL WOULD NOT APPROVE THE VARIANCE.

SO, IT GETS A LITTLE BIT TRICKY THERE. I'LL ENTERTAIN ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE FOR STAFF.

CAN YOU STATE AGAIN THE MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT THAT'S ON THAT? IS THAT THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY? THE MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT WAS THERE BEFORE WE CHANGED THE ORDINANCE.

SO NOW THAT WOULDN'T BE LOCATED THERE BECAUSE THAT'S ONLY SIX FEET, I THINK.

YES. SO IT WAS BUILT IN THE 90S. IT MET CODE.

WE REALLY DIDN'T HAVE CODE ON THE PLACEMENT THERE.

THEY'RE LOOKING TO ADD AN ADDITIONAL PIECE OF EQUIPMENT, SO THE EXISTING AIR CONDITIONING PADS ARE ALREADY THERE.

[02:45:02]

SO, WHILE WE'RE LOOKING AT THAT ONE MORE TIME, CAN YOU RECALL WHAT IS THE ESSENTIAL PURPOSE WHEN WE CHANGE THE CODE, WE WANTED MORE ABILITY TO ACCESS EITHER SIDE OF THE HOUSE BY YOU KNOW, FIRE DEPARTMENT OR.

I MEAN, WHAT'S THE REAL MULTIPLE BENEFITS TO HAVING SPACE BETWEEN MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT AND YOUR PROPERTY LINE AND SOMETIMES NEIGHBOR'S HOUSES? SO IN SOME ZONING DISTRICTS, YOU HAVE A MINIMUM OF A FIVE FOOT SETBACK.

SO, IN THEORY, POTENTIALLY YOU COULD HAVE A FIVE FOOT SETBACK ON THIS PROPERTY, AND THEN YOUR NEIGHBORS COULD HAVE A FIVE FOOT SETBACK.

SO, YOU'D ONLY HAVE TEN FEET CLEARANCE IN BETWEEN THE TWO PROPERTIES.

WHEN YOU HAVE MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT, YOU TYPICALLY NEED YOUR MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT SET OFF YOUR HOUSE.

YOU DON'T STICK YOUR AIR CONDITIONER RIGHT ON YOUR CONDENSER, RIGHT ON YOUR HOUSE FOR MECHANICAL PURPOSES.

TYPICALLY, YOU WANT AIR CIRCULATING AROUND THE STRUCTURE.

SO, THEY'RE USUALLY SET ANYWHERE BETWEEN 12 TO 24IN OFF OF THE ACTUAL STRUCTURE ITSELF.

SO, IF YOU'VE GOT FIVE FEET AND YOU'RE GOING 12IN NOW YOU ONLY HAVE FOUR FEET.

IF THE MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT YOU THINK OF YOUR AIR CONDITIONING PAD OR GENERATOR IS A COUPLE FEET, THEN YOU GET RIGHT UP CLOSE TO YOUR PROPERTY LINE.

IF YOU HAVE A FENCE ON THAT PROPERTY LINE, SOMETIMES IT'S DIFFICULT TO PASS THROUGH.

NOT SO MUCH NOW, BUT IN THE PAST MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT WERE NOISY.

I MEAN, IT'S COME A LONG WAY. YOU KNOW, YOU DON'T HEAR GENERATORS AS MUCH AS YOU HAVE IN THE PAST.

SOME OF THOSE REQUIREMENTS FOR SETBACKS WAS TO LESSEN NOISE, POTENTIALLY FROM YOUR EQUIPMENT TO YOUR NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE.

YEAH, AND THE ONLY REASON WHY I BROUGHT IT UP, I REALIZED BASED ON CURRENT CODE, WE WOULD SET PRECEDENT IF WE GRANT THIS.

ON THE OTHER HAND, WE ALREADY HAVE MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT THERE THAT'S IN THE AREA THAT WE WOULD NOT ALLOW TODAY.

SO I'M JUST I'M WANTING TO MAKE THAT CLEAR THAT IS THE CIRCUMSTANCE.

SO. OKAY. OKAY. THANKS. LET'S SEE. SO, WE'RE READY FOR APPLICANT PRESENTATION.

THANK YOU SO MUCH, MAYOR. COMMISSION. MY NAME IS HANNAH ROLLOW.

I AM AN ATTORNEY AT ANSBACHER LAW. OUR OFFICE IS LOCATED AT 503RD STREET SOUTH.

MY BAR NUMBER IS 1026 157, AND I'M HERE TODAY ON BEHALF OF MR. EMMONS. HE OWNS THE PROPERTY AT 1889 BEACH AVENUE, AND WE ARE APPEALING THE DECISION FROM THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD AS IT RELATES TO DENYING THIS VARIANCE, AND WE'RE ASKING THE COMMISSION TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE.

FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS. MR. EMMONS, EARLIER, WHEN HE WENT IN FRONT OF THE CDB WAS UNREPRESENTED, AND ALTHOUGH HE WAS UNREPRESENTED, HE DID A FANTASTIC JOB IN GETTING FOUR OF THOSE MEMBERS TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF THE VARIANCE HE WAS SEEKING.

THE REASON AS THE STAFF PERSON STATED EARLIER THAT THE CDB ULTIMATELY DID NOT VOTE IN FAVOR OF THAT WAS BECAUSE THEY SAID THAT THERE WAS NO EXCEPTION UNDER THOSE SIX OF SECTION 24-65(C) WHEN WE LOOKED AT THIS, WE SAW AT LEAST TWO EXCEPTIONS.

AND SO, I'M HERE TODAY TO PRESENT THOSE TWO REASONS FOR YOU AND EXPLAIN WHY YOU SHOULD APPROVE THIS FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE COMMUNITY AND FOR THE APPLICANT TODAY.

SO, THE TWO DIFFERENT REASONS THAT THERE ARE LISTED UNDER SECTION 24-65(C) ARE BOTH THREE AND FOUR EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES PREVENTING THE REASONABLE USE OF THE PROPERTY AS COMPARED TO OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE AREA.

SOMETHING THAT I BELIEVE THE MAYOR JUST WENT THROUGH IS THAT WE'VE ALREADY GOT EQUIPMENT IN THIS EXACT AREA.

IN FACT, THE EQUIPMENT THAT WE'RE LOOKING TO INSTALL NEXT TO THE AIR CONDITIONING UNIT AND THE POOL PUMPS IS MUCH SMALLER.

IT'S A SMALL SIZE GENERATOR, AND I'VE GOT A PHOTO HERE.

IF I MAY APPROACH, I CAN PASS IT AROUND FOR YOU ALL TO SEE. IT'S. I THINK IT'S ALSO INCLUDED IN YOUR MATERIALS.

PLEASE. PLEASE DO SO YOU CAN SEE THIS IS WHERE THE PAD WOULD BE.

THE PROPOSED GENERATOR IS ACTUALLY, LIKE I SAID, SMALLER AS YOU CAN SEE.

THEN THE AIR CONDITIONING EQUIPMENT RIGHT NEXT TO IT.

NONE OF THE NEIGHBORS IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THESE PROPERTIES OR IN GENERAL, HAVE OBJECTED TO THIS.

WE DON'T HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE NOISE THAT WOULD BE EMANATING FROM THIS.

MR. EMMONS WAS VERY THOUGHTFUL IN SELECTING A GENERATOR THAT IS NOT ONLY USEFUL ENERGY WISE BUT ALSO PRODUCES

[02:50:05]

THIS IS THE ONLY REASONABLE PORTION OF THE LOT WHERE YOU COULD INSTALL THIS GENERATOR, AND SO THIS REALLY IS THE ONLY LOCATION ON THE ENTIRE LOT WE COULD DO THIS.

THE REASON NUMBER FOUR THAT APPLIES TO THIS AS IT RELATES TO SECTION 24-65(C), IS THAT THERE'S AN ONEROUS EFFECT OF REGULATIONS AND ENACTED AFTER PLANNING OR AFTER DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY, OR AFTER THE IMPROVEMENTS THEMSELVES WERE CONSTRUCTED.

SO ALL THREE OF THOSE REASONS APPLY TO THIS PROPERTY.

THE PLAT THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, AND THIS IS REALLY THE MAIN ISSUE HERE FOR THESE PROPERTIES, RIGHT ON BEACH AVENUE IS FROM 1936, AND THEY ALL HAVE THIS 50 FOOT WIDE WIDTH TO THEIR LOTS, AND SO BECAUSE OF THAT, THERE WAS NO SETBACKS CONTEMPLATED WHATSOEVER, NOT EVEN A ONE FOOT SETBACK ON THESE LOTS.

BECAUSE OF THAT, WE'RE LIMITED IN WHERE WE COULD PUT ANY OF THE EQUIPMENT, WHICH IS WHY I BELIEVE BACK IN THE 1990S, THIS WAS ALLOWED, IN ADDITION TO THE FACT THAT THIS 2019 CHANGE TO YOUR ORDINANCES WAS NOT YET IN EFFECT.

BECAUSE OF THOSE THINGS, WE BELIEVE THAT FIRST, THERE WON'T BE ANY SUBSTANTIAL OR EVEN NOTICEABLE CHANGE IF THIS VARIANCE IS APPROVED.

SECOND, THIS WILL ALLOW THE HOMEOWNERS WHO ARE HOMESTEADED AND LIVE HERE IN ATLANTIC BEACH.

THEY'RE PART OF THE COMMUNITY. TO HAVE SOME HURRICANE PREPAREDNESS FOR THEIR PROPERTY.

THAT WAY, IF WE HAVE AN EXCEPTIONAL STORM WHERE WE LOSE POWER AGAIN, THEY'RE ABLE TO NOT ONLY SEEK SHELTER IN THEIR, YOU KNOW, GARAGE FLOOR APARTMENT, BUT ALSO PREVENT MOLD FROM OCCURRING.

AND ESPECIALLY GIVEN THE INSURANCE ISSUES THAT ALL OF US ARE HAVING IN THESE COASTAL RESIDENTIAL AREAS RIGHT NOW.

THERE'S ESSENTIALLY AN ARGUMENT THAT YOU'RE ABOUT SELF-INSURED AS IT RELATES TO MOLD DAMAGE FOR HURRICANES, ESPECIALLY IN THESE OCEANFRONT PARCELS, AND SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU ALL TO ALLOW THIS OWNER TO PROTECT THEIR PROPERTY AND PREPARE FOR HURRICANE SEASON, AND IF YOU HAVE ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS AS IT RELATES TO THIS APPLICATION I'M AVAILABLE TO DISCUSS IT WITH YOU AND ANSWER THOSE FOR YOU NOW.

COMMISSIONERS, THERE SEEMS TO BE PLENTY OF ROOM BEHIND THE BUILDING TO THE EAST.

SO THERE'S ACTUALLY A WALKWAY OVER SO WE CAN'T HAVE IT ON THE EAST SIDE, WHICH IS THE BEACH AVENUE SIDE, BECAUSE THE REGULATIONS DON'T ALLOW THAT. WE CANNOT PUT IT ON THE SOUTH BECAUSE THERE'S A WALKWAY, AND SO IT WOULD BE OBSTRUCTING IT, AND WE CAN'T PUT IT ON TOP OF THE ROOF EITHER BECAUSE OF THE HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS, AND SO THIS REALLY IS UNFORTUNATELY THE ONLY AREA WE CAN HAVE IT NOW BETWEEN THE GARAGE AND THE MAIN BUILDING THERE, THERE DOESN'T SEEM TO BE ANY IMPEDIMENT TO PUTTING IT BACK THERE.

WE'VE GOT A POOL RIGHT THERE, WHICH IS THE MAIN ISSUE WITH TRYING TO KEEP THE WATER AWAY FROM THE EQUIPMENT.

ALSO TRYING TO KEEP ALL THE EQUIPMENT TOGETHER JUST FOR THE PURPOSE OF, YOU KNOW, KEEPING THE LOTS SLIGHTLY AS WELL.

YES, YOU CAN SPEAK SO ON THE SIDE THAT YOU REFER TO, THERE ARE FIVE DOORS.

THERE'S A SLIDING GLASS DOOR INTO THE GARAGE; THERE'S A DOOR INTO A BATHROOM.

THERE'S A DOOR INTO A CLOSET. THERE'S A SINGLE DOOR.

SO, THERE'S NO, THE GENERATOR CAN'T BE CLOSE TO A DOOR OPENING.

SO THAT'S WHY IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO BE ON THAT EAST SIDE OF THE GARAGE.

THAT'S NOT CLEAR BASED ON THE MAP OR THE SITE SURVEY.

WITH THE COMMISSION. LIKE TO SEE A PHOTO OF THE, TYPICALLY, THE SURVEYS DON'T INDICATE WINDOWS AND DOORS.

SO, I BELIEVE THAT'S WHY THE SURVEY DOESN'T INDICATE THAT HERE, BUT AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, THIS IS THE SIDE THAT FACES THE OCEAN, AND SO THAT'S WHERE YOU'D BE PLACING THIS GENERATOR ESSENTIALLY IN FRONT OF THE OCEAN.

I HAVE NO DESIRE, BUT , COMMISSIONER, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE THIS PHOTO? COMMISSIONER KELLY? SURE. YES, YOU CAN BRING IT UP.

OKAY. SO. ON THAT OKAY.

SO, THE POOL, C IS THE POOL IS NOT EVIDENT ON THE DOCUMENT WE WERE GIVEN, BUT IT'S IN THE PHOTO IN FRONT OF US, AND JUST SO EVERYONE KNOWS, AND I APOLOGIZE, THIS IS MR. EVANS CHRIS EVANS, FOR THE RECORD, HE'S THE PROPERTY OWNER.

I JUST HAD A FEW MORE THINGS YOU MAY SPEAK TO.

SO THE GENERATOR IS ONLY FOR THE GARAGE APARTMENT, WHICH IS A SMALL UNIT.

[02:55:01]

IT'S NOT A BIG UNIT, AND IT'S FROM GENERAC. IT'S GONE THROUGH COSTCO.

THEY ARE VERY QUIET THESE DAYS. THEY HAVE NOISE SUPPRESSION.

THEY'RE VERY LOW DECIBELS. THEY TELL ME THAT THEY'RE ABOUT.

THERE'S NOISES, A VACUUM CLEANER, AND THESE THINGS THEY ONLY COME ON ONCE A MONTH FOR MAINTENANCE PURPOSES.

[12. CLOSING COMMENTS BY CITY COMMISSIONERS AND CITY MANAGER]

SO, THESE THINGS WOULD COME ON DURING THE DAY.

THEY WOULDN'T BE COMING ON AT NIGHT INTERRUPTING ANYONE LIKE THAT.

JUST ONE MORE THING FOR CLARITY. I KNOW THAT IN THE MATERIALS YOU'VE GOT FROM THE STAFF, AND YOU HAD A QUESTION ABOUT THAT SURVEY WITH THE POOL, JUST SO EVERYONE'S AWARE THAT THE HOUSE AS ORIGINALLY BUILT WAS BUILT WITH THE POOL BACK IN THE 1990S.

IT IS IN THE EXACT SAME FOOTPRINT, SO NOTHING HAS CHANGED SINCE THEN.

OKAY. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THE COMMISSION HAS.

NO. THERE'S ONLY ONE POOL, AND YOU CAN KIND OF SEE IT IN THE SATELLITE IMAGERY THAT THE STAFF PUT IN YOUR REPORT.

OKAY. THANK YOU, AND WE'RE GOING TO MOVE NOW TO PUBLIC COMMENTS AND WE'LL OPEN IT UP.

WELL, WE DIDN'T HAVE ANYBODY SWEAR IN FOR THAT, RIGHT? AND I DON'T HAVE ANY CARDS. OKAY. SO, I'M GOING TO CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENTS AND MOVE TO CLOSING COMMENTS.

REBUTTAL. IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU'D LIKE TO SAY ON THAT? NO. THANK YOU. JUST WE APPRECIATE YOU HEARING THE APPEAL TODAY.

AND AGAIN, IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS, WE'RE AVAILABLE TO ANSWER THEM, BUT I THINK THAT THIS REALLY FITS IN WITH THE GENERAL SCHEME, AND MR. EMMONS HAS ONE MORE COMMENT. GO AHEAD. YEAH. I JUST LIKE TO SAY THANK YOU FOR GIVING ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THIS WITH YOU TONIGHT.

SURE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OKAY. SO. WE CAN DELIBERATE. I GUESS DO WE WANT TO DO A MOTION FIRST? I'LL DO I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THIS REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE.

OKAY, WE HAVE A MOTION. SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND.

SO NOW WE CAN HAVE SOME DISCUSSION. THANK YOU FOR THAT MOTION.

MAY I, I USUALLY GO LAST, BUT MAY I START OUT? OKAY. IT'S A TOUGH ONE BECAUSE I THINK MOST OF US ARE INCLINED NOT TO OVERRIDE THE CDB AND NOT TO DO THINGS THAT WOULD SET PRECEDENT AND SO ON, BUT I'M PRETTY FAMILIAR WITH THE PROPERTY, HAVING LIVED A COUPLE OF DOORS AWAY.

I'M, I'M GOING TO STATE SOME THINGS THAT ARE NOT THE ACTUAL REASON FOR APPROVAL, BUT CLEARLY THIS IS NO MORE ONEROUS THAN HAVING THE OTHER MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT THERE BASED ON THE DIAGRAM WE WERE GIVEN.

THE ADJACENT NEIGHBOR IS NOT HERE TO OBJECT TODAY, SO THAT KIND OF INDICATES THAT THEY'RE SATISFIED WITH THAT AND KNOWING THAT IT WILL PRODUCE NOISE, AND I DIDN'T EVEN ASK YOU WHAT DECIBEL OUTPUT, BUT I HAVE A GENERAC SO I'M FAMILIAR WITH THEM.

SO, I THINK IN TERMS OF WHAT'S REASONABLE AND KNOWING THAT THIS PROPERTY WAS PLANTED SO LONG AGO AND IT WAS BUILT IN THE 1990S AND WE USED TO ALLOW MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT IN THE SIDE SETBACK.

I JUST HAVE TO GO TO ITEM NUMBER, FOR ONEROUS, EFFECTIVE REGULATIONS ENACTED AFTER PLANNING OR DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY OR AFTER CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS, AND SO I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF IT, BUT I WANT TO HEAR FROM THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS.

COMMISSIONERS, THE REASON WHY I WOULD LIKE TO APPROVE THIS IS FOR THE THREE AND THE FOUR, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, THE EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES PREVENTING THE REASONABLE USE OF THE PROPERTY.

THOSE AC UNITS ARE ALREADY THERE, AND THEN YOU HAVE THE POOL AND THEN THE ONEROUS EFFECT, IT BEING THAT THIS WAS BUILT IN 1936, A 50 FOOT WIDE AND THEN THE RENOVATIONS HAPPENING IN 1990, I THINK THAT THEY MADE A STRONG CASE FOR THREE AND FOUR.

YEAH. WELL, I CAN'T SEE WHERE ELSE THEY WOULD PUT IT.

I MEAN, I LOOKED THE YEAH, AGAIN, THE BIGGEST THING FOR ME IS IF I HAD AN OBJECTION FROM THE NEIGHBOR, I'D HAVE TO REALLY LOOK DO SOME SOUL SEARCHING ON THIS, BUT I WOULD.

I WILL VOTE YES ON THIS. SO, IF THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION.

COMMISSIONER RING, WHEN SHE REHABBED HER HOUSE, MOVED HER AIR CONDITIONING TO MY SIDE OF HER HOUSE.

[03:00:08]

OKAY, LET ME NOTE THIS FOR FUTURE USE. I DID NOT KNOW THIS.

THAT WAS LIKE TEN YEARS AGO. OKAY HEARING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION.

ALL IN FAVOR? OH, QUESTION. YES. PROCEDURAL QUESTION.

YEAH. DID I MISS SOMETHING? DO WE NEED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO INCLUDE THE REASONS? THE THREE AND FOUR? NO. WE WILL. NO, THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND, BUT I DO APPRECIATE THAT YOU HAVE OBVIOUSLY REFERENCED THE CRITERIA THAT ARE MET BECAUSE IT DOES NEED TO MEET AT LEAST ONE OF THEM, AND IT LOOKS LIKE THERE WERE TWO THAT WERE CITED.

SO YEAH, BUT NO, NO NEED FOR ANY AMENDMENT. OKAY.

THANK YOU. OKAY. SO, HEARING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION.

ALL IN FAVOR SIGNIFY WITH AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

CONGRATULATIONS. OKAY. WE ARE, I THINK DOWN TO THE NITTY GRITTY.

CITY ATTORNEY. DO YOU WANT TO HEAR FROM ME. WHAT SAY YOU? I HAVE NOTHING TO REPORT. OKAY. THANK YOU. CITY CLERK.

ARE YOU GOOD? OKAY. LET'S MOVE TO CLOSING COMMENTS BY COMMISSIONERS.

COMMISSIONER BOLE. YEAH. COMMANDER CONKEY, I THINK SOMEBODY MAY HAVE MISSED IT.

THE JAGUARS DRAFTED THE NAVY SAFETY. NO DEFENSIVE BACK HAS EVER BEEN DRAFTED IN THE PROS, AND THE JAGUARS PICKED OUT A NAVY GUY.

AWESOME. WE LOVE OUR JAGS. OKAY. COMMISSIONER KELLY? NO, I'M COMMISSIONER RING. YEAH, I JUST WANT TO SAY ABOUT RAISING THAT LIMIT UP TO 4.5FT FOR FLOOD ZONES.

IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT. IT'S NOT SOMETHING I WAS THINKING ABOUT SO MUCH IN 23 WHEN IT FIRST CAME BEFORE US.

BUT THE WATER'S COMING, AND AS WE HAVE ORDINANCES BROUGHT BEFORE THIS COMMISSION, WHETHER I'M HERE OR NOT FOR YEARS TO COME, I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE DO NEED TO CONSIDER AS SOMEONE WHO LIVES ON THE WATER.

OKAY. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER RING. CITY MANAGER KILLINGSWORTH.

WINNER OF THE OVER UNDER. I THINK THIS TIME, BOTH JASON AND I.

OKAY. COMMISSIONER RING, I RESPECT YOUR MOTION.

I RESPECT YOUR COMMENTS, AND I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE A CONVERSATION ON IT.

THERE'S A LOT MORE THAT GOES INTO THIS. YOU WOULD HAVE A FIRE.

FIRST OF ALL, THAT WON'T DO ANYTHING TO CHANGE YOUR ELEVATION.

YOU HAVE TO REBUILD YOUR HOUSE AND BUILD IT UP IF YOU WANT THAT.

SO, YOUR ASK WAS TO CONSIDER GOING TO 4.5FT BECAUSE IT MIGHT IMPROVE OUR INSURANCE RATES.

MIGHT NOT BUT YOU BELIEVE THAT SEA LEVEL RISE IS GOING TO GET US IN THE END, AND WE CAN DEBATE THAT AT A FUTURE DATE, THE REALITY IS TO GO FROM TWO AND A HALF TO FOUR AND A HALF IS A MAJOR KILLER ON COSTS AND CONTRACTORS AND SO ON.

IF, HOWEVER, WE WERE TO GIVE RELIEF ON THE HEIGHT OF THE HOME BASED ON THAT EXTRA, THEN MAYBE THAT'S WORTHY OF CONSIDERATION.

THEN SECONDLY, IS PART OF THE DIALOG SHOULD BE IF YOU'RE BUILDING OFF GRADE, WHICH I THINK AMANDA STARTED TO ARTICULATE, IF YOU'RE BUILDING OFF GRADE, THAT'S ONE THING, BUT WHEN YOU'RE BUILDING ON A SLAB, THE STEM WALL GOES UP ANOTHER TWO FEET.

THE BACKFILL FOR THAT, THEN THE GRADING AWAY FROM THE FOUNDATION, YOU'RE CHANGING SIGNIFICANTLY.

ATLANTIC BEACH AND SO BEFORE WE JUMP ALL THE WAY FROM TWO AND A HALF TO FOUR AND A HALF, WE REALLY NEED TO HAVE A ROBUST CONVERSATION ON THIS, AND SO WE WILL I AGREE WITH YOU THAT WE SHOULD HAVE THAT CONVERSATION, BUT I DOUBT SERIOUSLY THAT WE'LL JUMP FROM TWO AND A HALF TO FOUR AND A HALF.

SO. ALL RIGHT. NO FURTHER DISCUSSION. THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.