Everybody, good evening. It is 5:30, so let's call this meeting to order. Mary, will you please call the role? >> Council member Steve Freriedman >> here. >> Council member Deb Gillis >> here. >> Council member Anna Richards >> here. >> Vice Mayor Sharon Mahoney >> here.
>> And Mayor Don Horton, >> I'm here. >> We have a sing. Let's see. Uh, Captain Ed Davidson, would you please lead us in the pledge? I aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under
God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Are there any requests for deletions or emergency additions? None over here. None over there. Um, all
right. I would like to, if if you guys are okay, I'd like to move our motions, uh, especi well number a uh, the resolution on the charter review in case everybody's watching and all that to uh, resolutions, which would be nine cuz we
have no resolutions tonight. Is that okay with all of you guys? >> Okay. >> So, moving the motions up. >> Excuse me. I'm going to move the motions up to uh item nine, which is under resolutions, but we have no resolutions
tonight. So, >> perfect. Just want to make sure I was >> That's great. Okay. >> Both items. >> Um uh yeah, why don't we do that? We could we could do that if y'all are if y'all want to do that. Okay. So, we'll get the
charter review and the baseball field uh out of the way. You good with that, Steve? >> Deb, Anna? Okay, everybody's good. Um, let's see. Let's move on then to uh uh reports and presentations. Uh, Jennifer.
>> Yes, thank you. Um, so in your packet under uh tab A, there's a proposed um plan that was developed um by the workforce affordable housing committee um for potential
um either changes to the code that we could make or policy direction that we could do for incentives and things relative to the uh early evacuation affordable housing allocations. s as you
know we have 292 left of the 300 that we received from the state of Florida and um haven't seen a lot of movement on those and as you know uh affordable housing is a dire need in the village and so the affordable housing committee was trying to find a way to encourage uh
the use of those allocations and this was something that they came up with um the first section um where it talks about the A through N that's just the regular regulations that were placed on those allocations by the state and is in
our code and comp plan. Um and then the the recommendations start at number one. So, um we worked on this um for a pretty good while actually when the mayor was on the committee is when it started. Um and if I'd let him speak to that if you'd like, but um we we hashed it out.
We talked back and forth about a lot of different things. And so these are some of the things they came up with. So, um, I'd be happy to talk more about it with you. But I wanted to get it in front of you if you want some more time to digest it and then we can bring it back to another meeting. But what we're really looking for is for you to give staff,
myself, my staff some direction on where to go with some of these recommendations. If you're if it's positive, negative, if you think we should go in that direction or how you want to proceed. So, >> thank you, Jennifer. Um, any comment from anybody up here? Do you want to uh
take this and study it and maybe call some of the members of the I'm sorry. Do you want to call some of the members of the affordable housing committee and talk to that or uh just take this and consume it? Is that Deb? >> I would prefer to take and consume it
tonight, not talk about it. >> Okay, Steve. >> I agree. That's fine. >> Okay. >> All right. So, >> and just the affordable housing committee next meets on February 2nd. um if there's any interest um we might be able to do a joint meeting if if there's
enough uh council members that want to attend I'm happy to post it as well. So if that's something that interests you and you want to talk about this let me know and I'll be happy to post it as a joint meeting too. So okay >> um we can do that as well. >> What time deal? >> Uh they meet at 5:00. One thing I
noticed is is there might be a little bit of a conflict between item 9 C and number three, but but other than that, uh, we could talk about that. So, um, I think it's the best thing to do is to take this and kind of >> Okay. >> figure it out and and give the committee
a call or talk to some of the peoples in the committee. >> Okay, great. >> I'll wait to hear from everybody then. >> Great. Thank you so much. >> Thank you. >> Uh, we have nothing scheduled for our citizen advisory committee reports. Uh any mayor and council communication from anyone? You guys are really ready
to go to this game. I've watched this game, aren't you? It's all about the you, isn't it? Okay. Uh village attorney. >> Yeah, blame the guy who didn't go to Miami to bring something up. So >> that's okay. I'm a Texas Aggie. >> Okay, there you go. I'm UCLA, so we we
weren't anywhere near the college playoffs this year or or read time recently. >> Um so I I emailed you all uh the other day or yesterday, I think it was. It came to our attention that um if you all recall there was a uh an opinion called the Shans decision that was came out
against the city of Marathon um and uh we had previously it's a takings case uh that uh uh greatly expands the uh um uh when takings cases might be brought. It also uh shifts the use of TDRs from uh
whether that constitutes a taking to whether that would reduce any amount that might be um awarded to somebody as part of a taking. So the um Florida Supreme Court recently uh uh came to our attention recently declined
jurisdiction. Uh Marathon is planning to uh seek review from the United States Supreme Court. uh they've retained um Supreme Court, US Supreme Court uh attorney that there's people that's all they do and that's what their practice is. They've retained somebody to work
with them on on their behalf for that and uh they have asked us uh if we would support them uh through an amicus brief uh once they get to to that point. The uh uh we have supported them in the past. We filed an amikas brief uh with
the uh before them with the Florida uh third district court of appeals. Um and then we had previously talked about potentially doing one with the the Florida Supreme Court. Uh there's no there's not necessarily a guarantee that we would file a an amikas brief under the US Supreme Court rules. Um it's
disfavored to file one if you're not going to be adding something uh that is not otherwise brought up in the brief. Uh but uh without getting into too much detail or strategy, I did speak with the city attorney for Marathon as well as the county attorney for Monroe. Uh, and we talked about ways because they they
do have a word limit and ways that that we might be able to bring in some of the things that are outside of just the pure legal issues like the environmental issues, the B pass the unique BPASS rogo issues, the areas of critical state concern that we might be able to help
Marathon um, and then they wouldn't have to eat into their word limit in their uh, in their petition. Uh and uh so I wanted to see if that was something that you all were still uh uh supportive of and comfortable with um uh which would be us potentially filing an amigus brief
um to support Marathon if we had uh a basis under the US Supreme Court rules. >> Thank you, John. So really all you need is a consensus at this point, right? >> Yeah. Yeah. As long as the majority of you are okay, we'll we'll continue with the um uh the path we've been on. If the
majority say, you know, no, you know, we we wouldn't like to, I'll I'll let the uh uh Marathon folks and the county folks know that uh that, you know, we wouldn't be joining in. >> Steve, yeah, I I think this presents an interesting uh situation for us because
um I sent some questions to John when I got the email. Um one of those was, you know, what what percentage of petitions actually get heard by the Supreme Court? That's 1%. Mhm. >> Um so I I think um he also made some
good points about uh the the word um limit so that we could present some other arguments that they might not be because of their limitations. So that would be one advantage for joining it. Um I just think it's a big question of of expense like what is this going to
cost the village to do this for a 1% chance of it getting heard. Um, John suggested that possibly they might come up with a flat fee. Don't know what that what that is, but I think we need to know what the approximate costs of of continuing in with this would be before
we really uh make a decision. >> I think it's a fair question and and I actually brought that up with with John as well and uh he was he was I think he's comfortable probably coming back with a with a fee because it's it it's really just a document that you're not
going to be attending. You don't have to present. It's just a document that you are going to do in order to uh vocalize our our side of the or our uh our our side of or what we think on it. Right. >> Yeah. So, and and I got a little more
clarification from my appellet partner too. Um so, in terms of you know what the an amus brief would look like, there's there's actually the first am there's a potential for two amiggas briefs actually. So the first issue is trying to get the Supreme Court
to take jurisdiction. That's, you know, are we, you know, is this case one of the 1% that they will actually take up and you can file an Amigus brief to support that? If it gets taken up, you have the opportunity to file a second one on the merits. Um, you know, it's
going beyond, you know, is uh just why the Supreme Court should take it up. So the the first one is uh is is not as comprehensive. Obviously, the ones on the merits is a little more comprehensive, but we're not even there yet. And that's, you know, hopefully we get there because that means that
they've taken the case, but we're not even close to that right now. So, um, in terms of like a flat fee for doing, uh, the the first AMAS brief, um, uh, he told me we could do it for 175 and that way, you know, we would be be all in on
the on the brief. if they take up jurisdiction, we'd have to bring it back as to um you know what what the uh uh the cost might be because we we'd have to see what the issues are that they take up. Um but that would be probably be a little bit more comprehensive and and the the expense would be a little
bit greater there. Um >> okay, Lib. >> Well, um I'm in support of us doing this. I think it's important that we stay in this game. TDRs are uh very important in this village and takings
and the the whole thing could have big ramifications on Nyla Marada. So I just think it's important that we stay in this game. So yes. >> Okay. Anna, >> well I was think about it because I was trying to I my thing too was the cost.
Like what's it how much is it going to entail? like because I don't want to spend a lot of taxpayers money on stuff that technically isn't affecting us but it could affect us. You know what I mean? >> Yep.
>> So I think it's going to come down to time and money really. >> Sure. >> I disagree with everybody. It's fine. >> Yeah. So I think I think there's a consensus right now that to move on uh watch the costs >> uh and uh but we we have we have
standing in here. We >> we have skin in the game. So >> good. Yes, Steve. >> If if that's the consensus, I'll go along with that. I would just also encourage um to urge our attorney to contact Key West. They have I don't think they've joined in. They don't
really have potential takings cases. That might be it. But they also have a lot more resources than we do. Um, and I think you said Monroe County is involved in it. >> Yeah. And they they have been and the the county attorney indicated he was going to be I guess they've got a meeting coming up. He was going to be
seeking authority for that as well. And then we also talked about getting others involved, other um uh you know, I'll call them friends, you know, non non-municipalities, but municipality related groups, whether they're planning groups or in the past the Florida Association of County Attorneys, I think
had indicated they were going to join in. So the the hope is to get others involved as well. Um and I should also indicate with the cost, obviously, if if we determine that there is not a basis to file an amus, then obviously there would be no cost. But I just felt I should probably mention that.
>> Yeah, I just think that's important to get as many communities involved on the same page as possible. >> Yeah, I think Key West was probably just uh had their mind on other things at at the time. So, yes, Deb, you still need some >> I I just had a question. Didn't um didn't your email say something about we
were up against the deadline and this was about the the only meeting that we could actually discuss this in before the deadline, so we need to at least say a yes or no. >> Yeah, exactly. There there's a and sorry I should have mentioned that. Yeah, there's a a deadline for when Monroe County needs to file their petition and
there's a deadline for when an amikas needs to file. I don't have the exact dates but we were we were pushing up on that. Um and and obviously we we have we need lead time to prepare uh a brief. So um uh yeah we were pushed up on that and then since we're not in active
litigation, we're just in Amikas uh we also we could not meet in an executive session uh because of that. we, you know, we have to discuss it either here on the day or or in one-on- ones. >> I'm seeing a I'm seeing a nod by everybody up here. So, there is a consensus for that. Okay.
>> All right. Thank you. I'll I'll let them know down in America. >> Would you consider a very brief public comment? >> Well, we're going to move on to public comment right now. So, why don't we just go on and head into that if that's okay. Uh we'll move into public com comment. Uh Marne, are there any uh signed up
>> other than Captain Ed? We don't have anyone signed up. Well, there you go. >> Your turn, Ed. Works out. >> Okay. Uh, good news. Um, uh, environmental groups, major environmental groups have been involved
in this already. Um, these are lawyers that I've worked with for 25 years, Richard Groso, whom you guys know, uh, and and some others. Um, and I would expect because remember the estimate is
somewhere near a billion dollars of takings giveaways if the folks who are in in that side of things have a free hand. And we we think there's lots of good public reasons why why that shouldn't it shouldn't happen that way.
This was a big surprise. this the the Shan's decision was contrary to 20 30 years of land use law in Florida. It was a big shock to everybody. Um and and and we think it's on shaky grounds. Uh at
any rate, there are a lot of environmental interests that are that are going to be uh involved in this. And I'll talk directly to John. Uh I'm going to be obviously lobbying like hell u to be sure that we get some some muscle behind this. should never have happened.
People sort of weren't being as fierce about the issue as maybe they might have been, but the the implications um are staggering um and and way out of proportion to whatever is fair. any anybody who
bought property in the Florida Keys since critical concern was declared as a public notice that there are limits to development in the Florida Keys for good sound public reasons, environmental reasons, carrying capacity reasons, infrastructure costs, all those things. And um
and until this decision until Shans there is a very limited likelihood that many uh taking cases would would prevail as a monetary burden on on the public. Um that's changed. This is a really serious
threat and we we need to be general quarters on all this and I'm going to do my part. >> Thank you. Ed Martney. Anyone else? No, sir. >> Nobody on Zoom. >> Nope. Just checked. >> Very good. Public comments closed. Uh so
we'll move on to uh what we moved up as far as motions. U this is the appointments to the charter review committee. Uh we approved the resolution uh last Tuesday. So, uh, I
think the way if it's okay with y'all, we're going to pick our person that the one that we had, you know, that we had decided and then I think Marne's got um the other list of names. If somebody wants to add to that list of names, let
Marne know after we pick our first five and then uh and then we can take that list and maybe circle two uh and then see if we've got a consensus on who those are. Is that good? >> Yep. >> Good. >> Yeah. Just to be clear. So, we'll we'll pick our five and then the remaining
two. You want to do a vote on the the people that have actually >> Yeah. I don't think we ought to do a motion or a second and all that. I think we ought to take that list that Marne has and circle two names and see what overlaps with between the the five >> for the remaining two positions. >> Yes, sir. Yes, sir. You good with that? >> Yeah. >> Okay.
>> Everybody. >> All right. Um why don't we just start off with the vice mayor? Sharon, you want to you want to tell us who your cho choice is? Yes. Um, Richard Black for me. >> Okay. Anna >> Roger Young. >> Okay. Uh, Deb
>> Lorian Le. >> Lori Leland. And Steve. >> Susan Raphael. >> Susan Raphael. Okay. And I'm going to pick Ty Harris. Ari, you got all that? Okay.
I just want to make sure that we have a complete uh list cuz so I think I don't know if you guys got emails that I didn't get in terms of other names. >> Um >> I I don't think I I'm not sure that I got any today, but I think all the ones
that I got had sent to Marne. >> I created a ballot. >> Okay, very good. council member with spots for writeins. So, everyone that um had expressed interest to me and everyone else that I was aware of that had expressed interest was um listed
here and a couple of those folks are folks you just named. But there is a write in spot. So, you can either write it in yourself or you know just tell me who you want. >> Okay. >> Here, let me just write it in if we >> let's just write it in if it's not on
the list. If it's not on the list, you can write >> just write it in your >> maybe let people know this so they'll know that they're eligible for >> Oh my goodness. >> Some of them already >> Yeah. So obviously we can
>> there's a there's a couple of them here that we can scratch off. We're not going to pick from because they're already picked, right? >> There's one on here also that has said that they cannot serve who's >> I'm sorry. >> Oh, okay. So we can cross her off.
Leslie cancer. Sir, >> you're not on speaker D now. Okay, somebody turned it on for you. How about that? >> Good job. >> Magic. >> Lori or I'm sorry, Leslie Ryan said that she could not serve. >> Okay.
>> But but uh Jim Ryan, her son said that he'd like to serve. >> Well, then you can write him in if that's >> right. Okay. >> It's just not on the list. >> And then I don't see John Lentini on this list. John who applied sent me a his interest.
>> Okay. >> I'm not on here. That was >> Tuesday he sent it. >> I didn't see that either. >> I didn't put anybody on that I wasn't uh aware had applied. >> Also, Marilyn Smith. >> Oh my goodness gracious.
>> If they only sent it to one council member, I wouldn't have, you know, put it on the list. >> I just want to make sure we have everybody that that expressed interest. That's at least on this list for people to answer. >> Everybody should fill those in. Then if you anybody knows anybody else, please
put them on list. >> I think that's I think that's it for me. Did you say? >> Yes, ma'am. Two >> two names. >> Yeah. And just a reminder to make sure to write your names on the top for uh public records purposes. >> Done.
No peeking. Let's see if there's some overlap. >> We could maybe do that. Us too many. >> Well, we're gonna I think we're going to have public comment on B and we move that up right after that. So, >> I'm sure she could do it fast.
>> Okay. >> We may have to vote twice. Maybe have to vote again. Who knows? >> That's what I anticipate. >> Yeah, it >> was a big list. I didn't realize I didn't realize it was going to be that big. >> Surprise. >> Yeah. Well, that's good. I'm glad
there's interest. >> It's a big deal. Yeah, that's why I appreciated at least picking from the pool of people that showed interest. >> I guess we could have brought the Jeopardy music, too. >> Okay. Um, we have three folks who
received two votes. So, um, those folks would be Elizabeth Jolan, Craig McBay, and Joe Roth. Would you like another round of ballots? >> I suppose so. >> Oh, yeah.
>> Because it's an even number, we need >> just write it down. >> Choose the same ballots and you just >> So, what do we make her do? So now we're circling two again, right? >> How did you guys do it in the first go around? Yeah, I'm just wanting to make sure that we can we can tell which one
is the first round. >> Use the highlighter. >> Yeah, the highlighter. That's a good idea. >> So either that or I suggest just writing it. >> Who's on first? No. Are we are we voting for two again now? Is it >> two positions and three people?
>> But are they voting for You're voting for two? >> Yes. Two. >> Yeah. Uh Joe Roth, >> Craig McBay, and Elizabeth Jolan. Okay. We want the two that we want highlighted. Correct. >> Okay. Steve,
>> so we can differentiate up there. Would you do me a favor? >> Oh, never mind. I have my personal second. Good thing she's left-handed, >> right? Um we have um a majority have
voted for both Craig Bay and Joe Ross. >> Perfect. >> All right. So re to recap the committee will be um Richard Brown, Roger Young, >> I mean Richard Black. Richard Brown, >> one of those colors. >> Richard Brown has passed away. I'm
sorry. He's a good friend of mine. Uh, so Richard Black, Roger Young, Lori Miller, um, Susan Raphanelo, Ty Harris, Joe Roth, and Craig McBay. >> Lori, Lori Leon, >> it's still Lori. Okay, very good.
>> Lori Miller, Lelon. Lori Lelon Miller. Sorry, Lori. I know you're watching. >> Thanks everybody for, you know, participating, being interested. >> Absolutely. Thank you everybody for showing an interest in this committee. Very important. Very good. We're good.
So, we'll move on. Uh we moved uh uh uh the next one up, which would be the baseball field licensing agreement. Uh Ron, why don't you lead us off on that, please? >> Uh let me just read the title. This is um Tabax. A resolution of the village council variants Florida approving a
baseball field licensing agreement with the school board of Monroe County Florida authorizing village manager to execute the baseball field licensing agreement providing for implementation corrections and an effective date. >> Very good. Ron, take it away. >> Thank you. Uh if you're if you're following from home or you are in the audience, if you look at our meeting
agenda tonight, uh there's a there's a resolution that I put two separate license agreements to be clear. One is the one that we had on the agenda in December which was not considered. Since then we've got more input and the the next one is the is I put a red line
another red is what's changed from last meeting. So when you vote I'm asking you to vote on the red line when yes or no. If the red line version passes we'll obviously make it a regular looking one. But for tonight's purposes and for the public I thought it'd be easier to compare the two by having the red line
version. And before we get to it, I want to uh give a shout out to the baseball review committee that we've had appointed. Uh one of the members is here, Jamie Engel. And I want to particularly say that Jamie has put a lot of hours in. And I wanted to thank Jamie personally for her >> and Tony and I and Tony Hammond's here.
Uh so uh and Richard Brown Black, >> but but the the review committee did a very good job. We had a lot of input. You know, private citizens like Captain Ed and Sandy also had input. So I think it's a good product. Now, understand that if it passes tonight, it will be different than the school board's. So,
it's not done. It just means it means that they now know our position. They'll we know their position. We still have to negotiate the final product, but I think this is a good step forward to getting us farther down the field. >> Well, u I I would say there's a lot of
kudos to go about this. This has been a lot of work and hard work and and I I thank Sharon our vice meer for mayor for sitting in on a meeting and uh you know really trying to gather the everything
together and and this redline version. I I think my my first question to really to Sharon to Jamie and to uh uh Tony is this is the version that everybody is
very happy with it. I know Jamie spent a lot of time in on this and I got to tell you I'm so appreciative of the work she did on this. It's uh this this the public should understand how much she cares about this baseball field and the kids and doing it the right way. and and
I'm very thankful for her and I told her that many times today and I'm going to do it again publicly because it's it's good work. So, um Sharon, take it away, please. >> Well, again, we um brought both sides together. There was great opposition in
the beginning and we had a wonderful meeting where Richie and Tony and Richard Black and Jamie and myself and Ron and uh sat down and and went back and forth. And the result of this is what is really great for the kids here.
And it gives the village control over what we own and a say in every step that's made. And again, we should have a say. This is our property. The kids are so important. We want the best field. We want the best of everything for them. But our position has to be where it's
not going to just be done without our say. Every move now will have to go through this council and the public. And that's what we were shooting for. again. Jamie and I must have talked a million hours on the phone. Richard Black, Tony, I've called him and bugged him. And Richie and Ron's taken 10 million phone
calls for me. And this is a finished product that I am very proud of. And I think this puts the village 20 years down the road where uh it'll be a great thing for everybody to say that the village, the property, everything is in
our control. So, thank you to everybody big time. >> Sharon, thank you. Thanks for your effort. I I think your leadership on that was stellar. So, thank you. >> And I believe even uh >> uh we're probably going to hear from some public and I think we should and uh hopefully we can wrap this thing up. Is
that good? So, Marne, is there anyone signed up to speak on this matter? >> Uh yes, Captain Ed. For the record, I'm Captain Ed Davidson, chairman of IRS 501c3, Florida Key Citizens Coalition, and four-year
elected member of the school board. Uh, I know these folks. Um, the red lines are tremendous piece of public work. This is what should happen when elected officials listen to the citizens. Uh, and it's way
better. It was out of control. We were being dictated to by people that pay us 10 bucks a year for access and and were threatening at various points to lock it up. Um, couple of though issues to bear in mind. Uh, I didn't notice this myself
until about the third time I read it. Start time to be determined still. Well, the start time has been 2:30 in the afternoon for 24 years. uh if if if for instance they want to start in the morning and add programs
that we haven't even talked about, it'll double the wear and tear. Uh it will uh pull 36 hours uh a week during weekdays from our own uh families. Um and then there's a comment about weekend
use. Well, there was no weekend use specifically for 24 years before this and and that was reserved for families. Uh big issues 20-year proposed term with two tenure renewals. This is a 40year
lease, but director Lefair has adamantly refused at public school board meetings to even discuss uh funding guaranteed funding mechanisms for replacing the astro turf uh past the typical industry 8-year warranty period, leaving uh 32 of
those 40 years unfunded. That's pretty serious. This lease should last as long as the guaranteed funding. uh if they're not going to guarantee uh uh replacement funding at eight years, this should be an eight-year lease. It should be as long as the guaranteed uh
useful life of the plastic rug that they're going to put on our ball field. Really serious item. Page 11, 6A. Licences shall comply with all applicable federal, state, county, municipal laws, ordinances, resolutions,
governmental rules. Right. That's That's pretty clear intent. A violation of any such laws, etc., etc., shall constitute a material breach of this agreement. Couple lawyers in the room know what that means. Uh, how can
this possibly not be interpreted to mean exactly what it says? How can this license be signed by the village in light of the multiple deliberate persistent instances of lack of public notice of planning meetings not held in accordance with the Florida sunshine law during a 4year period? Let's not forget
when there were no licenses in effect. The old ones expired in 2021 um and and Ron didn't register the new one in until 2025. It was a four-year
period with all of the planning. Two design bill contracts were all underway without consulting with us at all. And the second one was on consent agenda by the school board. Uh thank God we've come to where we are now. But you need to remember who we're dealing with and
how how they deal during that whole time. Director Lefir's 14 to 16 member Founders Park baseball field design team of public officials contractor consultants met repeatedly. We're talking about what in the long run with maintenance is going to be a 12 to 14
million project taxpayers money. Um there were I did a freedom of information act. I got three sets of minutes out of four years. Three sets of minutes. um and no notice of public
access, no public advertisement uh of the meetings. This is uh deliberate and overt and Mr. Attorneys uh this darkness needs a substantial do it over again in the sunlight cure. We can have a a planning sharet. There's
lots of ways to deal with this, but uh this is some pretty serious stuff. Um and and here here's a real glitch. Uh page 17 number 15. This agreement sets forth the entire agreement between lensure and lency respect to the subject
matter. It supersedes all prior and contemporations understandings agreements written or oral and the parties. No, it actually doesn't. This is a subpart of the interlocal agreement. It does not override the interlocal agreement. And I believe our
attorney has acknowledged that issue uh previously. Um but it cannot be allowed that. Thank you. >> To erase all of their promises that they made. >> Thank you, Ed. >> Marne. >> Yes. Next up, we have Mr. Riser. He is
on Zoom, so give me just one second. >> Okay, Mr. Rishme, go ahead. >> Thank you. So, I hope you all can hear me. I tried to get in on public comment, but I'm stuck in traffic trying to get home for the game. Uh, I certainly want to express my appreciation for all the
time and effort that has been put in to working out this agreement. I know in December I was under the impression that there was a strict deadline if we didn't do something by that December meeting that they were going to pull out.
Obviously, that didn't happen. So, I'm just hoping that we can all stay on good terms and make sure that we stick to our guns and stick to the agreement that you all had worked out. Thank you. >> Thank you, Jim. Barney,
>> there's no one else. Mr. >> Chair, I want to say something. Um, I appreciate all Captain Zed's points, but a lot of the stuff you brought up is in the past. this new agreement takes away
the past and we only can move forward. We can't go back in time and yeah, a lot of things were done wrong that we all found out. But I say we should focus on the agreement gives us control. We only can start from now and we can just prevent things like this from happening
again. So, um I think this is fair and I think it's good. I appreciate like Tony has told me there are games on Saturdays. They are always have been. And so there's a lot of things that have changed with the times. There's a lot of
things that happened that weren't right, but we can now change this. Everything that is done, like the building that they're going to build or renovating the other one, we have a say in it. There will be public workshops and everybody
can give their input. So, this is a new beginning and we can't look back. We can just move forward. So, that's all I want to say. Thank you, Sharon. Thank you, Barney. Are there other public speaker? >> No, sir. >> Okay. Uh, hearing no more speakers. Do I have
a motion? >> I'll make a motion to approve. >> Do I have a second? >> Second. >> All right. Marne, I'd like to call the vote on this. >> Vice Mayor Sharon Mahoney. >> Yes. >> Council member Anna Richards. >> Yes. >> Council member Steve Freriedman.
>> Play ball. Yes. Council member Dab Gillis. >> Yes. >> And Mayor Don Horton. >> Absolutely. >> Passes 5. >> Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. A lot of work. Thank you guys. >> I I seriously thank you. This this is probably the most public input on
anything I can ever remember and and not and and so not everybody's going to be happy, but but I think as a whole, this is a great document and and I'm thankful for all the hard work that happened in this. So, let's move on to uh ordinances. Let's see. Um Jennifer,
would you like Well, John, you're going to read the ordinance in. >> Yep. And they're they're compion, so I can read them both uh together. These are ordinances that are on second reading. Uh tab B is an ordinance of Alamara Village of Islands, Florida, amending policy 3-2.1.2, two specific standards and requirements for workforce
affordable housing providing for the transmitt of this ordinance to the state department of commerce providing for severability providing for an effective date upon approval of this ordinance by the state department of commerce and then the companion when tab C is in an ordinance of I am village of violence Florida amending village code sections
uh 30-476 building permit allocation evaluation criterion award providing for the transmitt of this ordinance to the state department of commerce providing for severability and providing for an effective date upon approval of this ordinance by the state department of commerce Good evening, council. Thank you. Um, this may feel like deja vu. We were just
here in November um and approved these on second reading unanimously. Um, due to some administrative um faults in um the department, we rendered these um past the 10-day deadline to commerce. So, they were rejected by commerce. Once
they're rejected, we have to rehear them on second reading. So, this is simply a rehearing for another vote so we can rerender them within the 10day timeline. Um, which we will do tomorrow. Um, so we don't miss it again. Um, and so that's simply all this is. Nothing has changed.
There's no new information. It's just uh hopefully a simple revote. >> So, if it passes, I can sign them tonight and you can zip them right up there. Right. >> Yes, sir. I have the documents with me. >> Okay. >> Is there any public comment on this
morning? No sir. >> I have a motion >> and we'll take the motion the vote separately. So um >> we'll take Okay. So we'll take item B uh first. Is there a motion to approve item B under ordinances?
>> Motion to approve. >> I'll second. >> There's a motion second. Mari, will you call the role? >> Council member Anna Richards. >> Yes. >> Council member Deb Gillis. >> Yes. >> Council member Steve Freriedman. >> Yes. >> Vice Mayor Sher Mahoney. >> Yes. and Mayor Don Horton. >> Yes. >> That motion passes 5 Z.
>> All right. Is there a motion on tab C or U item? >> I'll make a motion on tab C to approve. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Marty, will you please call the role? >> Council member Deb Gillis.
>> Yes. >> Council member Anna Richard. >> Yes. >> Council member Steve Freriedman. >> Yes. >> Vice Mayor Sharon Mahoney. >> Yes. >> And Mayor Don Horton? >> Yes. That motion passes 5-0. >> Thank you. Moving on, John. We're in the quasa judicial section. Um, so please be
advised that the following agenda items are quasi judicial in nature. If you wish to comment upon these items, please inform the village clerk by filling out the available signup form. An opportunity for persons to speak on each item will be made available after the applicant and staff have made their presentations on each item. As a reminder, testimony and closure judicial
items must be in person. Zoom testimony is not permitted. These proceedings will be handled in accordance with the village code requirements. All testimony, including public testimony and evidence, will be made under oath or affirmation. Additionally, each person who gives testimony may be subject to cross-examination. If you do not wish to be either cross-examined or sworn, your
testimony shall be disregarded. The general public will not be permitted to cross-examine witnesses, but the public may request the council to ask questions of staff or witnesses on their behalf. The full agenda packet on each item is hereby entered into the record along with the village code and comprehensive plan. Any correspondence that was received by the village staff is
included in the file and part of the record. Persons representing organizations must present evidence of their authority to speak on the organization. Further details on the quad judicial procedures in section 30-256 of the village code may be obtained from the clerk. Tonight, there are two quasi judicial items, their tabs
um D and E. At this time, I'd like to ask anyone who intends to speak on the quasi judicial items, either D or E, please raise your hand to be sworn in by the clerk if you intend to speak. In the matter in which you are about to give testimony, do you swear or affirm that you will tell the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth? >> The witnesses have been sworn. >> Uh, Mr. Mayor, tab D is stated as follows. It's a resolution of the village council of Alamarda, village of Islands, Florida, considering administrative appeal of the environmental determination by the villages biologist filed by Barton W.
Smith, agent for Bonefish Holdings LLC. Appellant for property located on Old Highway having real estate number 004520-00000000 004260-000000. This is going to be all about 004427-000000428-00000000 004429-0000000095045-0000300 095045-0000
and 00009-5045-0000201 on upper Matic Humbi Key as legally described herein, providing for the transmitt of this resolution to the state department of commerce and providing for an effective date on the approval of this resolution from the state department of commerce. >> I'm sorry, John. >> I'm sorry, John. I missed the third one.
>> Yeah, exactly right. >> We'll also need the >> Maybe we give them a bonus point if they would just unify into one real estate number. >> Do you need disclosures, too? >> I do. That's what I was getting to. So, council, if you'll begin, if you'll please disclose any exparte
communications you may have had. Uh, this is tab D. And if you if you remember, please uh state uh not only the person u but also uh the substance of the conversation that to the best you recall. >> Anna,
>> um I don't think I've spoken to anybody besides staff. chair. Uh, >> this was on the last council this. So, I spoke to people last two years ago, a year ago, whenever this came up, but nothing recently. So,
>> Steve, uh, just staff. >> Yeah, >> just staff. >> Uh, I've spoken to staff. I will disclose that uh prior to Hurricane Irma, many years before Hurricane Irma, I actually consulted for the owner back
then on this piece of property uh in my private business, but I haven't I don't even know if he's still the owner and I haven't spoken to him and since Hurricane Andrew or excuse me, since Hurricane Norma >> and your work has concluded, you have no other >> 100%. Yes, sir.
>> Okay. in years ago. Uh this >> if if we have to go back that far, I was sitting on council when uh other it wasn't this subject, but the other subjects concerning this property was in front of council. >> That's been concluded.
>> Okay. Yeah. But didn't didn't involve uh involve this. >> Very good. >> Yes, we are good. >> All right. >> Um let's see. So staff will take the lead. Daniel. >> Uh good evening, Mayor and Council. I am Daniel Parabach. I am the senior environmental planner and village
biologist. Um, before I begin, I uh I'm probably going to reference the Kiw manual. So, I'd like that entered into the record. And I also printed off copies of my presentation in case you want a a hard copy. All right, I'll read the description, but I will forego reading all the parcel
IDs. >> Excuse me, Bart. Bart, hang on a second. >> I We got a presentation here. Do y'all have a problem over there? >> Okay, thank you. >> I'll bring it. >> I have an extra copy for you. >> Just for the record, we Yes, we have not
received a presentation until this time. The applicant is required to provide a presentation in advance of the hearing. Although now we have received it. So we just want to make sure that's noted. >> The code does not require that we provide a presentation in advance, but it does require that the applicant
provide their information in advance 48 hours in advance. >> Okay, >> John, we're still good, right? >> Yes. >> Okay, Daniel, proceed, please. >> All right, so I'll read the description, but I won't read all the parcel IDs unless John wants to do it for me. Uh the subject property is located on Upper
Madakumbumberbe Ki with real estate numbers as stated in the title. Uh the property is within the native residential zoning district. The agent Smith Hawk attorney law has requested administrative appeal on behalf of the the appellant Bonefish Holdings LLC. The request was to permit fill in the
portion of the wetland and allow the development of a single family dwelling unit and associated facilities or provide sufficient financial relief to the appellant based on the complete deprivation of any economic or productive use of the property. So in other words, the applicant is appealing
the village's determination that no fill is permitted within the wetland on the property. So here we go. See if I can do this right. Everybody has the same problem with this remote. All right. The property that
this is just the location. It's on the ocean side of upper Madakumbai Ki is just south of the shell shack on the old highway. A little bit of history on the property. In uh fall of 2017, as you all know, Hurricane Irma, the property was cleared
and disturbed without permits. Um this was confirmed by the Army Corps, South Florida Water Management District, and the village. Um on in on October 2017, Army Corps issued a cease and desist on the property and the water management district and the
village issued notice of violations for the wetland violations and illegal clearing. In 2018 2019, a consent order was issued to settle the state and federal violations. As a part of that order, wetland restoration and a conservation easement were required for the village.
a special magistrate issued an order for the beach berm and hammock to be restored and that happened in early 2020. So from 2019 until the semi-reent present uh the three-part restoration occurred and that incurred that uh included restoration of the wetland, the
beach berm, and the hammock. The restoration included debris removal, regrading, replanting of native vegetation, and maintaining the property invasive, exotic, vegetation free for two years. Uh, this is what the property was mapped
as in 2015, uh, but prior to the legal clearing and disturbance. Uh I have a code expert there that just reminds everyone that these maps are a starting point and that all habitats must be fieldverified. Also that uh the code does not recognize unlawful conditions when considering
development. And so this map represents what has been fieldverified uh the site to be today. I'm happy to report that all the habitats have been successfully restored back to undisturbed conditions and no portion of the property can be considered disturbed anymore. So it has
gone a full restoration and it went well. So KEP, the word you're going to hear a 100 times tonight. So KEW stands for the Florida Keys wetland evaluation procedure. It's specifically designed for evaluating wetlands in the key. It was specifically designed for just
Monroe County. Uh in simple terms it's a basic scale of 1 to 10ish. Uh low being the low one being the lowest function, 10 being the highest function. Uh this process is not subjective. It's objective. It's scientific based and it's a fairly simple process. The manual
walks you through it. If XYZ then 1 2 3 etc. Uh a little bit on the timeline and the timing. So, in December of 20 uh 2022, uh New Leaf Environmental submitted a wetland report for this property. The report lists two wetlands, both red flag
wetlands, uh meaning no development. And if they're red flag wetlands, that means no key score can be assigned because it's automatically undevelopable. In July of 24, uh preapp was held to determine the amount of development possible on the on the property. Uh staff informed the applicant based on their submitted report from 22 that no
development in the wetland was allowed. The preapp was withdrawn by the applicant after the in-person meeting which prevented that determination to be uh in writing in the so the next month in August the owner hired a second biologist Dr. Phil Frank to determine
the correct wetland classification and on-site assessment with village staff. Uh Dr. Frank and staff agreed that there's no freshwater wetland that indeed is a salt marsh wetland and the correct wetland score key score is 7.5. In November of that same year, New Leaf Environmental provided a new key web
reporting that it is not a fret freshwater wetland and the score it should be 4.85. In April of 25, we had a new PARAP meeting and staff stated that based on the prior assessment with Dr. Frank and
uh village staff that the New Leaf environmental score of 4.85 is not accepted. That village determination is now being appealed tonight. All right. Uh so before we go on, uh the Kiw process and manual written by the EPA in conjunction with state agencies
and Monroe County. Uh they do offer periodic training and it's offered this pastime. It was taught by the gentleman who developed the actual manual um which was kind of a special treat to to attend and I attended that. It was in May of uh 2024. Uh the training was three days and
included biologists from all the municipalities, the county and then almost all of the private biologists that do key web scoring. So it was a nice group of people. You had uh public and private biologists there. Uh it was a really good training. The training is 3 days and we score 20 sites um all
together and it they go from Key West all the way to North Kargo. Um I was in attendance for all three days. Unfortunately, Mr. McCoy could only make it on the first day, which was kind of a shame because on the third day at the end, we had a debriefing with the gentleman from the EPA. And he says they
do it periodically, a to give updates to all the biologists on the methodologies that are to be used in this process, but b it's to get all the biologists who work on this stuff, both public and private, together to come to consensus on how wetlands should be scored in the county. And we took out all our sheets
and we compared them from day one to day three. And day one, we were all over the map. Day two, we're getting better. And by day three, we were only ten of a point away from each other. Like we had 20 people that were almost dialed in on the exact same score, which is really cool. Um, moving on. The key web scores
for this property. Um, I've been involved since early 20 went too far. 2018. Uh, I've spent over 30 hours on the site. I I sometimes Oops, wrong way. One day we'll figure this out. Anyway, I sometimes I feel like I spent more hours
on the site than any any human being. Um, I saw it from the restoration all the way till today. Um, and that doesn't include the 6-hour process I spent with Dr. Frank doing the key analysis. Um, and that analysis uh yielded the correct score of 7.5. And that score was
corroborated by Dr. Frank during the analysis when we did that field assignment. Um, I'd like to point out that Dr. Frank is also a village qualified biologist and he was one of the original biologists who did all the key web scoring when it was first when it first came out in the '90s. Um so New Leaf Environmental claims that the score
should be 4.85. And comparing the two sheets um if you see Oops. Did I I still went too far. Why is it going backwards, Frank? >> I clicked the same button.
It's going the wrong way. Go one more. There you go. All right. Um, so in comparing the two sheets, a lot of the categories have the same score. So, uh, we agree on a lot of the scoring for several of the categories. Um, but now it'll go to the right one hopefully. Uh,
I found some errors in the scoring when I reviewed it. The New Leaf score sheet there. you're on the do for Thanks, R. Um, for example, the number of habitat types uh under the key web the the habitat all
the habitats on and adjacent to the site have to be counted and there are five different sites that are on and adjacent to this wetland. You have mangrove, salt marsh, buttonwood, beach, and hammock. The New Leaf score sheet only counted the adjacent habitats and it only
counted one/2 of those. So, this one discrepancy almost accounts for a full point. So, if we were just to correct this one section, it would make the score 5.75, which would make it not developable. And that's just one of the the errors I found. Um, so then we can
go, Frank, if you could do it for me, that'd be awesome. So, what does that mean for the property? Uh, correctly scoring this wetland does not prevent development on the property. There are uplands on the property that can be developed if the hammock is determined to be moderate quality.
not not yet. Uh over 10,000 square foot could be cleared and if it's high quality about 3,400 square foot of the hammock could be cleared. Also the it this property is assigned TR number six. So they do have an existing building right and what that means is that if they came in for a permit tomorrow
within that allowable clearing, we would be able to approve that permit for the property. Let's see. Okay, next slide, please, Frank. All right. So, in conclusion, uh the property is a wetland restoration success story. It took almost a decade of hard work to improve and restore both
the wetland and uplands. Um all habitats have successfully been restored to undisturbed conditions. Um next slide, Frank, if you don't mind. Uh the high functioning wetland when evaluated correctly through KEW receives a 7.5 as corroborated by the third party uh
biologist Dr. Phil Frank. um as the the score is based on an objective scientific process which the village has followed correctly and based on the the most recent full 3-day key web training course. After reviewing uh the most recent New Leaf environmental score sheet, several mistakes were found and
the score cannot be correct. Correctly scoring this wetland does not prevent development on this property or remove the building. >> I'd like >> Thank you very much, Daniel. Is there any questions? me. Daniel, you were here the last time this came up in front of us and correct me if I'm remembering
this correct that um I want to say that the property was appraised for and I'm just making up this number. Let's just say 3.9 million in Florida forever was going to buy it with us in the village, but they wanted
2 million more and it was up to the village to bring in the 2 million. Is this correct? Am I remembering this right? I wasn't involved with any of that. I think that >> Yeah, Pete could speak. >> Is that right? Am I right, Pete? >> Sort of. >> Okay. Well, I knew it was something. So, I mean, I
>> Excuse me. >> Yes, I do. Because >> I think we need to get you on the record, Pete. This is quasi judicial. You should >> He was sworn in because No, I just mean on the microphone. >> I remember something about we were trying to buy it. Am I correct? >> That's correct.
>> Okay, go ahead. So um in fact the council at the time did discuss this and came up with a value and an offer was made. >> So that was done in conjunction with the Monroe County Land Authority acting as our agent under the interlocal agreement we have with them. So an offer was made
of $4.84 million uh to the owners. Uh the property was appraised at $3.59 million. Um so the difference that difference was made up by the council. The council had agreed to make that difference up. Yes, I'm not crazy.
>> The offer was rejected by the owner. No counter offer made. That was it. >> Okay. So, I am not crazy that I am right that this came in front of us and that it was up for sale and we had looked at >> still for sale. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Sure. Can I just while Peter's up here,
Mr. Mayor, can I just clarify? It's my understanding that the village is not actively seeking to acquire this property uh at this time. Once it was rejected, we we moved on. >> Correct. Correct. Thank you, Peter. >> All right. Thank you, Peter.
All right. Is there any other questions of Daniel at this moment? Uh, do I uh ask Bart to give his presentation now? >> Okay, Bart, your turn. You're up. Let's do it. Good evening. Good to see you all
tonight. Happy New Year. Bart Smith on behalf of Bonefish Holdings. I also have a presentation and I've uh I've learned from the prior presentation that I am not going to use the clicker. I am going to ask you to go forward >> and backwards
>> and backwards. And so just when I say go forward one, just go forward one and we'll we'll try to not be jumping around. >> That works. Uh so so uh uh there are certain things we we can definitely uh go through quicker because uh we are
we're working off the same property. If you can go forward slide. All right. This is the property's information that was discussed. I also won't go through that many zeros. Uh it's approximately 7.43 acres. What's very important to note though is that
it's a it's flume is residential conservation and native uh and its land use district is native residential. Next slide. Uh this is an aerial depiction of the property uh as it looks today. Uh as you
can see real quick uh to the north and to the south are developed properties. Next slide. Uh this is the the flood maps that shows that most of the property is actually an AE flood zone. Uh next slide.
So why it's uh interesting that I bring up the point about the current zoning is it actually when it was purchased it was not zoned that it was it was actually zoned improved subdivision and it was also zoned suburban residential which had a much higher density. It was one
unit per lot and it was also uh uh for the suburban residential it's uh 0.5 allocated per acre. Uh and that was part of the the county zoning maps and it was purchased under this zoning category with expectation that it would be developed under that zoning category. Of
course, the village incorporated in 1997. They started changing zoning maps in 2001 and it ultimately led to it being downzoned to the native res residential uh zoning. Next slide.
Uh I think I just went through that. Next slide. So uh my my client has owned this property for quite some time. A lot of you are aware of that. He's tried in many iterations to develop this property. He's come through with Oh, let
me So, he's he's gone through a lot of different iterations attempting to develop this. uh as as many of you are aware uh it's uh it's been a long labor of love to try to find some way to develop this property. It's been when
since acquired, it's been downzoned. Uh we've had the the the matters of trying to get development rights and we've ultimately uh had to work on getting uh permits through the state agencies. The all of this is part of the file and has
been part of the files for years. There's been a significant significant amount of attempts to provide for a benefit, a reasonable economic use of this property. And at this juncture, it's down to a single family home
attempting to develop that on the property. And so, if we can move to the next slide. So, as you're aware, Hurricane Irma hit uh the property had code cases. Uh they're actually brought forth by first by the state uh South Florida Water Management District. Uh the property was
required to be replanted to the satisfaction of South Florida Water Management District. It went through multiple uh inspections. It was the permits were closed and then the applicant then went back to South Florida Water Management District and
applied for a permit for to fill a portion of the property. and and so it went through South Florida Water Management District for it first to get an application to fill. Next slide. Uh next slide. So these are more areas just showing
what happened with the with the the the post Irma to where it is now and and in 2024 the CL the applicant applied for a fill p permit from the South Florida Water Management District. Next slide. So ultimately after satisfying all the
conditions of South Florida Water Management District which is the state agency that governs uh o and overseas wetlands disturbed wetlands. Uh the state agency has issued a fill permit. It has issued a permit for for the area
that we have applied for the area we intend meets the criteria to be filled. The state agency utilizes the same criteria as the local governments to determine whether a wetland is permitted to be filled.
The state agency that required the property be restored after it was restored has now approved and permitted a fill per permit for what is being requested
in this application and for what we are deeming a a property that's key web score allows for the filling of this area. Next. Oh, and by the way, the the area at issue, uh, it's on this slide, too. You can go forward
is 086 acres. So, so, so let's be clear. This is a 7.3 acre property been approved for 86 acres to be filled. Now, the rest of it would then go under a conservation easement. So, ultimately
6.5 acres are preserved. 086 acres are are allowed to be filled. The state agency has authorized this and so we have applied to the the village for uh the same uh uh fill and ultimately uh it
has been determined by the village biologist that he disagrees with our analysis of the kiwup and so that's why we are here today. um the and to be and to to to go even further, it specifically provides for the construction of a single family
residence with associated uh facilities and storm water runoff directed to the swailes. Next slide. Wow, nice sketch. So the permit itself uh beyond that uh required payments into the mitigation
bank which have been done. It provides for buffers from the the uh areas that'll be preserved. It specifically goes into the delineation of the different areas including uh the areas
that are uh that are suitable to be filled and it states that no work is to be proposed within wetlands under the conservation easement and that uh the uh that the permit itself has been mi
mitigated uh to the state's satisfaction. By the way, that mitigation has been paid. Next slide. This is the permit that's been approved. It identifies the uh areas that uh will be utilized for the single family home,
the areas that will be subject to a conservation easement and it identifies the wetland areas that will remain including identifies uh the areas that will be permitted to be filled under the state permit which by the way the state agencies follow the same guidelines,
same requirements that the local governments are. So we are not sitting here saying we're the only one that believes that this is qualifies to be filled. The state's already approved it. It's permitted it
to be filled. So uh there was some history on the key web scores. I was not involved in creating the key web score and rather than go into the technical aspect of it,
I'm going to bring Mr. Mike McCoy up here to explain his analysis of the key web score uh and address some of the uh statements made by uh Daniel and uh Mike. If you forget anything, I'll cue you and at this point I'll turn it over
to him. And if you do have questions for him, feel free to stop them. Thank you. Thank you, Bart. >> Thanks, Bart. >> And after he's done, I'll have some uh final conclus comments and remarks. Thank you. No doubt.
>> Thank you. Thank you again. This is uh Michael McCoy from New Leaf uh environmental and uh despite uh Daniel and I taking a few jabs at each other tonight, we go way back and uh we're colleagues so it's it's all in a good professional spirit.
Uh so I did the um keyhip scoring for the site. Um I >> Oh, next slide. >> Yes. Quick bit of background. Um, so over 20 years of experience as an environmental consultant, most of them in uh, South
Florida. Uh, Daniel's correct about attending the Keyhip training. That's actually my second full keyhip training that I attended uh, two out of the three days, but maybe I dodged Daniel during the second uh, day. And uh, Mike Roberts, who I'm uh, again go way back
with, actually looked at me for the third day and said, "It's the lower keys. Don't you do almost all of your work up here?" He's like, "Come on, buddy. It's just you don't need to attend the last one, which is actually what motivated me to uh do work that that pays the bills on the third day. Um, and I will note that on the first
two days, two of those sites are ones that I'd actually scored myself and worked with the county uh on those. And in that same spirit and noting that uh despite what some of the uh scoring differences between me and uh the village biologists were called uh
errors. If you know anything about this wonderful uh key whip system which is if you read the manual for it uh that uh I know Daniel brought holy mackerel it is it's a lot to absorb. Um so there can be differences
between two uh competent you know biologists and what they would think. So as part of the effort in my scoring and what I've previously submitted uh I did an information act request uh first from the village on uh key web scores uh submitted for this property and for any
uh similar uh properties uh for the last 5 years and uh I was told that there are none uh that the village has that are approved kb scores. So then I did similar information act request to the county and received uh a number of sites
and I chose um nearly all of them two of them that they sent me didn't uh actually match but I had six and so I did an analysis where I actually uh use those to make sure that my scoring is in line with the other approved in this case county scoring that's going on and
then uh after receiving the the villages score uh which um I I think just for a point of clarification um I've worked with again Dr. Frank for years and we had asked him after the village had told us that there was this other uh score that he prepared. He said he didn't. He had a meeting but he never prepared a
score for the site. Uh because again I wanted to incorporate anything that uh anybody else had done. So um in my own analysis there are uh five uh discrepancies between the score that I provided and the village uh biologist
score. Um I don't know how long I have if I want to go over uh each of those. Okay. So, uh, it's roughness score, habitat type, wetland dependent species, uh, threatened and endangered, uh, use, uh, foraging score, and disturbance, uh,
regime score, which are categories. It's kind of hard to read, uh, up on the screen, but those are the different categories. So, for the first one, uh, the roughness score, uh, my score was.5, the villages score was 1.0. Um however
uh when you uh look at the guidance for this. Yes. >> Just for clarification. >> Yes. And if anybody needs time to go through the manual, look at something that I'm referencing, please let me know. Uh but I want to try to keep most
people awake through going through scoring. So I'm going to try to keep a good pace going. So just throw up a hand if you're like I don't know where you are. Um so on that roughness scoring uh with the class of uh Buttonwood Marsh uh
I scored it as a um uh.5 uh but the village scored it as a one. I cross referenced that with uh all of the um sites that I was given by the county uh
which are similarly completely uh vacant and fully vegetated sites. >> Next slide. >> Okay. These are these are the the memo that you have with the the different properties. >> Uh correct. >> Okay. Keep going. >> Thank you. Um so each of these
properties are like this one um fully vegetated with native vegetation wetlands uh on them and um uh completely uh undeveloped. So out of the six uh
that I used in there um all of them uh had the score that I provided or lower. And again, so these are all going to be uh Buttonwood salt marsh uh wetlands or uh mangrove uh wetlands which are the
same uh or or rougher density. And so in that I'm just showing that uh the score that I gave is more in line with uh you know industry standard um than what the village provided. >> And just for clarification, so all these other scores were accepted by the county
biologist as proper Q-up scores. >> Correct. And that's uh what I provided in that uh document. You can see these are all uh past approved uh county approved key web schools >> and these are all on the record. >> Correct. >> Correct. Uh second is the uh habitat
cover uh types. So the village lists uh five cover types. I know that's one thing that uh uh Daniel brought up. Last slide. Thank you. Um however uh the groups uh that are listed in large part uh where he mentions uh the five habitat types
are kind of splitting hairs and saying well we have uh mangrove vari well we really have a you know high and a low or we have this area we have we can split it into several uh subcategories. Uh however that is uh not what is uh
typically done um and instead uh the key manual itself switch back and forth here has a statement uh with uh the classes. This is on page 20 of the key manual uh which specifically
talks about these habitat groups lists uh mangro forest under intertitle and then under super title open salt marsh and buttonwood salt marsh. Those are three separate habitat uh categories that are listed by the village biologist. However, the county kiwet
manual does say may have to combine the above uh class with the following classes into one signature. So again, once you do that and you follow the manual, you'll see that the splitting of it isn't warranted. And the manual actually gives guidance to show that
these should all be part of one. Um for uh the next one, um threatened and endangered. Um, oh, actually there is one that um uh did not make it into the the memo, so I'll
just uh but it is up on the sheet uh which is wetland dependent uh species use which uh look on the scoring sheet that's wetland dependent use diversity and uh on their um new leaf score is a 1
with the village having a score of uh.5. Uh however uh there's uh with all of the wetland dependent species u listed in uh by the village biologist uh has a number of different kinds of uh birds uh but
the kiwip manual calls bird use as one uh not you know each separate uh species of bird. And uh for their second and uh third species is listed raccoons and apossums uh which are pretty ubiquitous uh throughout uh the keys and are not
considered wetland dependent in that neither of them absolutely need u wetland habitat to complete their life cycle. And in the six reference sites that I obtained and provided, not a single one lists either raccoons or apossums as a wetland dependent species.
But being in the upper keys would all of course have those. >> To be clear though, the the village biologist added to the score because of wetland because of possums and raccoons. >> Um that's that's the difference between his score and mine. Correct.
Um the next one that you'll see on my um memo uh threatened endangered use foraging and resting score where the new leaf score is a 0.1 the village score is a.5. Um for that uh the biggest difference is
that uh the village score uh listed two uh potential threatened endangered species that could use uh the site. Piping clovers and peraggreen falcons. Um, however, uh, the paragine falcon has been delisted and is no longer a threatened or an endangered species. And
so that's why that score is most correctly at a 0.1 for one species as opposed to 0.5. And that's a uh both that's a federalist. Um, the last one is the uh disturbance regime score with uh New Leaf providing
a score of.3 and the village providing a score of uh.7. um where the main difference here is the key web guidance says that uh what you're supposed to look at is uh adjacent development and if there is any
adjacent development then that's what downgrades it and so the scoring uh styles are if it is um you know completely surrounded by intense development that gets it a zero. If it is completely surrounded by you know protected wilderness that would be a
one. And so the uh score that was chosen by the village biologist is a 7 which says close to development but buffered from it. Uh however uh especially considering where uh on the property the proposed development is, it actually has um uh a
budding land use that's fairly intensive. It has old road uh covering uh one side of the entire property. And uh then on uh both of the opposite sides are previously developed residential lots. And so with that uh being the uh
assessment area that actually gets it a score of uh.3 for having uh adjacent development. Uh again uh not only looked at the keyb manual but I looked at uh all six of the reference sites that uh the county provided and in those uh.3
was the highest score given to the similar circumstance and all six of the ones I provided are currently undeveloped sites with both wetlands and uplands which have single family residential homes on either side and a
public road bordering one side. So, it's a really really solid match. We're not, you know, saying, well, you know, these things aren't exactly. It's it's a pretty much exact match. So, again, that's a a difference there in the scoring.
So, um, with that said, I think that's my explanation for >> So, based on your your training experience and professional expertise, do you stand by your key web score of a 4.85? Uh, >> yes, I do.
I have a question for Mr. >> Yeah. Before I have him sit down, if you have questions for him, I'd prefer you do it now before I wrap it up. >> I was just saying and after you guys are done with your questions, you um I'm not sure staff has the ability to cross-examine, too. So, >> yeah.
>> Uh Mike, how many KW scores have you done in your career? >> Several dozen at least. I couldn't. >> And they range from the lower keys, the upper keys, or middle keys. >> Exactly. All throughout the keys. Exactly. And in addition to just keyhip
scores, of course, for wetland permitting, uh, as a former wetland permit reviewer myself, I've conducted, you know, you ma'am, uh, water and other, um, assessment methodologies that go throughout this state and some others. His >> historically, how long have you been in
business? >> Uh, as New Leaf Environmental since 2017. Okay, thank you. Sure. >> Anybody else have any question for anyone up there right now? >> Not at this time. >> Not this time. Okay, very good. Thank
you, Mark. Carry on. >> Thank you. All right. Uh, next. Oh, put the slideshow up again. Uh, so so that that gets us where we are today. So we we submitted our key. It was rejected. We were provided a key score
that was 7.5. Uh we've uh we requested because we disagreed with it that it be placed in writing. We've appealed that to you today and at this juncture it is our request that
uh that you overturn uh the denial of the applicant's key web score. That's that's where what we're here for. We've submitted the key web score as we're required to. It was rejected or denied. We've appealed that. We believe Mr.
McCoy has provided evidence that his or is accurate. Not only is it accurate, he's gone above and beyond what you normally do. Normally, you're just scoring the property according to the manual. Because of the importance of this, he not only scored the property, he reconciled that score with other similar properties throughout the county
to confirm that all his scores are in line with those for any of the areas that are even in question. And all of them mirrored his score. I do believe that he's created he's he's he's provided the most accurate key web score. It allows for the filling of the
property. It is consistent with the South Florida MA Water Management District's determination that this area can be filled. Next slide, please. And so with that, uh
uh uh keep going. Next slide. Next slide. Uh next slide. Next slide. >> And I and I would remind everyone that
that even your maps identify this area as disturbed with hammock and disturb disturbed area that we're requesting to fill. All of this is consistent with our position. Next slide. Next slide. So with that, we would request that
based on the evidence provided, the state permit that we have a BPASS unit attached and that uh that the the uh the scoring that has been done by Mike McCory. We request that you overturn the rejection
of the key and approve the key up. I would be remiss to not bring up Shans because it's been brought up. Uh Shans is the law and we disagree. This is this is if we cannot get this approved, there
is no utilization of this property. This property is 7.6 acres. This property we're requesting the minimum development possible, which is a single family home. My client has tried to work on this property, developed it for 24 years. The
zoning's been downzoned. It's rights have been taken away. It's asking for the minimum possible which has been approved by the state. I remind everyone a property was just bought in the ina Marada for 27 million that was an acre.
Let's not create a liability. Let's allow the development of single family home and then conserve the remaining 6.5 acres. It's a reasonable resolution to this case. It's based on a very factually driven uh key web score. And
so with that, I will hope that you uh uh overturn the decision to reject the key web score and allow us to proceed. Thank you. >> Thank you, Bart. Jennifer, >> does staff have a rebuttal or another
>> I think um Daniel might want to cross-examine the witness. >> Come on up, Daniel. >> You need me or him? >> Him. I I'll keep it short. We're 30 minutes from kickoff. Um, so, uh, uh, I would like to point out
just a couple things. Um, the the local governments and state agencies do have different criteria for permitting. Um, just because you get a permit from South Florida Water Management does not mean that that approved permit criteria is the same for the local governments. We actually have an open code case right
now for a similar case where a wetland was approved to be filled by D and was filled by the owner and but he didn't get permits from the village and now he's in trouble with the village because we did not approve the fill. Um so if you're going to develop in Alam Marada you need approval from the village of
Alam Marada to do so. So just because they have a approval from the state does not necessarily mean that that development is approvable by us. Um, and in terms of the key web, I won't get down super into the weeds with this. Um, but I will point out that on the roughness scale, uh, the if there's
woody vegetation, buttonwoods, mangrove, um, you go all the way to the top of that scale, so you can't really split hairs there. The the the manual is pretty clear. And then Frank, can you do me a favor back there? Can you grab my presentation and go back to that habitat 2024 map? Thanks.
Um, in terms of the possums and raccoons, I just kind of put that in there as an example. The if you only you only need three different animals that are wetland dependent. Um, in the wet season when I was working there, it's like 3 ft deep. Um, I saw frogs. I saw actually was really cool. I don't know
if it's escape pet, but I did see a freshwater turtle and I'm on the record. I did see that. Um, so that right there that automatically brings that that category to one. So, um, work on that for me, Frank. Thank you.
>> While Frank's doing that, I got a couple of questions for you if I can. >> Um, through both of these reports or through your report, I kept seeing you refer to a red flag wetland, which is, I guess, a high score in the Key,
something that automatically stops development when it's deemed a red flag wetland. Is that >> right? fits red flag, it doesn't receive a score at all. >> Okay. And um uh I uh Mr. McCoy also said that he had requested from the village
uh any keys that the village has done and the village didn't produce any. Didn't you do one next to SD Marine or the old smuggler's Cove uh quite some time back? >> Harry and I uh we did keys together. >> That'd be Harry Dashman. >> Yeah, Harry Dashman. But none of those
keywaps were a part of any submitt to the village. So, we have no record of those. >> Okay. >> You're still moving on. Okay. >> Yep. He's got it here. Um, just, you know, I don't want to harp on this point, but I it could be professional interpretation in the manual. Can you go
back to that 2024 map, please? We can do it. Um, and I'd also like to point out as another fact too is I wasn't the only one on the site that day doing this key. Uh, Phil Frank was there. Uh, we spent six hours on the site. We spent two hours back in the office. It was a full
day. We sat down after the site assessment and scored it together. He did not provide his client a written score cuz that's not what he was paid to do for that job. But he and I, I'm on the record. He was with me and we went through the process together. We both ranked it exactly the same. 7.5.
There we go. All right, Mike. Time for me to be a bad guy. >> All right, so the assessment area, which is basically that blue outline. So that's the wetland area. The manual says you have to look at habitats in that blue area and everything touching it. So
just this simple map, not picking hairs and calling different habitats, just the basic habitats. You have mangroves touching it, you have beach berm touching it, and you have hammock touching it. So that is four. Do you disagree with that, Mr. McCoy? >> And I will remind you that if it is
four, that score is one. And no matter any other differences, that would make it not developable. >> Right. Well, we just have a different way of interpreting the uh keyhip manual. And again, that is because and do you lump together and you say, well,
I'm going to call this area upland native beach berm. And then over here, I'm going to say this more upland native hammock. And I'm going to say this area is a wetland outside of my assessment area, which is a mangrove versus this mangrove wetland is part of my assessment area.
So that's why I obtained the sites from the county to see how they were scoring. And they have a very similar matrix where they have a wetland surrounded by uh upland areas and they scored it all the same way that I did, which is why I
got those. >> Um the just one last point I'll make is um each site is different. uh comparisons with other key webs done by other biologists are helpful um but they're not conclusive and also I I would state that this site is kind of a rarity as it was fully disturbed and
then restored so therefore I don't think any of the other county sites were received a full restoration um anyway that was that was all I I had um and then if you have any questions I'm happy to answer >> are there any questions of Daniel >> um Daniel does the state use the South
Florida water management use uh district utilize uh the key web scoring when they do uh any reviews? >> The key web is designed specifically for the county. >> It's done just in the county. >> For the county, >> so the state doesn't even pay attention to that. >> They can issue permits regardless of key
scoring. >> Okay. >> Mr. Mayor, can I >> uh Deb, go ahead. I'm sorry. No, go ahead. I'll defer to council. >> No, whatever. Um during the both presentations um you said that
development was possible in certain areas and part of it would depend on the quality of hammock as as to how much you could clear and and I understand it completely. Uh in in your presentation you said that no development was
possible. Oh sorry I'm pointing to the wrong guy. Um, those are exact opposite statements. Comments. >> Well, there is a TR on here, too. >> Yeah. And there's a TR on here. >> There's a TR, but you have to be able to
actually have an developable area that is capable of actually developing a home and it has to be a reasonable home. And so, the reality is >> reasonable home. >> Well, even 1500 ft, you can't develop with the the habitat and setbacks and everything else on it. So no, you cannot
develop this property unless you fill port a portion of it. >> Dan, you had testified that there was a developable area on the property. >> There is sufficient area with setbacks and I believe without any variances either that you could build a single
family home in the upland without filling wetland. >> Okay. >> Sharon, >> are you talking about the property >> like would be on US1? >> It would be close to US1 outside. >> It's not on the water then. >> No. Okay. >> Yeah, I get it. I just want to make sure.
>> I believe the widest part would be the southwest corner >> and that's solid hand. >> Wait, wait, wait, wait. I just wait. I'm I'm trying to cuz you got time for rebuttal and I know that the council's asking questions of witnesses. So, I want to I don't want to confuse the issues. I want to make sure council's done asking questions and witnesses and
then >> No, I just want to clarify though the the the the fill area is on US1 as well that we're proposing. It's not on just for clarity. >> Well, let me ask you a question. The fill area is on US12. What are you doing between there and the old road?
>> Not US1, sorry. Old road. Old. I apologize. >> Okay. >> Okay. Thank you. >> All right. Um, anything else from council? Uh, Jennifer, >> I just like to ask a question of Daniel. Daniel, >> sorry. >> How many key webs have you done?
>> That's a good question, too. Um, I would say uh more than 30, less than 50. And they've been throughout the lower keys, upper keys, middle keys, >> from Key West to North Kargo. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. I was going to ask that. Thank you, Jennifer.
>> Are there any other questions or comments from the council? Okay. Uh let's see. Bart, would you like to We >> We have to get um anybody signed up uh to testimony in uh in support and then anybody who's in opposition first.
>> Okay. Is there anyone in in the audience that would like to uh speak in support of this appeal? >> I think Marty said >> no one signed up for this item. >> Hearing none. Is there anyone in the audience that would like to speak in
opposition of this appeal? Marty, anyone signed up? >> No, sir. >> Hearing none. Very good. Thank you. All right, Bart, if you would like to close. >> Yes. And just to clarify on that answer and and we can pass this around. It's
actually in in the actual uh submitt as part of our appeal. The potential developable area and it is not capable of actual development is that little gray line right there. it is not capable
of development. So we we're proposing a reasonable development. We've obtained the state permit. We have a qualified biologist that's done numerous key web scores. He's gone through provided justification for each of his scores.
You're determining whether that score is reasonable or whether it should have been rejected. We believe that we provided evidence that it is reasonable and that you should over return the rejection and accept the score that was created by our biologist. And with that,
I thank you for your time and go Kees. Thank you. Um, does staff have a closing? >> Daniel, no. Jennifer, >> I'm all set. Thank you. >> Very good.
Well, council, and we need a discussion. Do we want to make a motion uh based on the testimony and the evidence that's been presented tonight? >> Deb. Well, I'll make a motion, but I'm going to have to because it's one of
those negative positive things is I want to um reject the appeal. I want to I want to stay with staff's original >> decision. >> Okay. Move to deny the appeal. >> Move to deny.
>> Move to deny the appeal. Thank you. >> So, there's a motion to deny the appeal. Is there a second or discussion from councel? She said she had a negative and a positive. So, what was >> that? I just didn't know how to make sure I was wording it properly.
>> I'm denying the appeal. That's what I want to >> deny the appeal. Well, because it seems to me that there's a discrepancy in building and not building and staff is saying you can build on it. And what I'm understanding, what I think I'm understanding is there's a discrepancy
in what somebody thinks is a reasonable home versus not reasonable. and staff has already said that they can do it. So, I'm gonna go along with staff's and second her motion. >> So, there's a motion and a second on the
table. Um, Marne, >> will we please call the role? >> Council member Deb Gillis. >> Yes. >> Is that the correct answer? >> Council member Anna Richards. >> Yes. >> Council member Steve Freriedman. >> Yes.
Vice Mayor Sharon Mahoney. >> Yes. >> And Mayor Don Horton. >> Yes. >> The motion passes 5 to zero. >> We are >> You guys ready for Sorry. >> Let's do it. >> I was hopping in, but I wasn't sure you're ready. >> Nope. Let's We're We're off to the last
one. Think people >> Yep. We're still in still in quasi judicial. This is tab E. It's a resolution of the village council of Alamada Village of Islands, Florida. Consider a request by Cory Sherber applicant to abandon and vacate a portion of Tide Avenue rightway as shown on the sketch of description as drawn by
Massie Richard Surveying and Mapping LLC dated May 31st 2025 reserving to the village all rights o over any public utility easements and providing for an effective date. Uh council again before we begin if you can disclose any exparte communications. This includes both who you spoke with as well as the substance
as best you may recall. All right. Uh, Anna, >> um, I'm gonna say Corey Sherber, Roger Young, Lee Young, and, uh, yeah, >> I I we've addressed it and we're good.
>> Yeah. No, I just have to say who I've who I've spoken to. >> Yeah. And you mean the substance to the best you can recall any? >> Well, the substance is if you look at the drawing, my initials are on the drawing. I did the drawing. So, I'm very aware of the property.
>> Does that mean you have to recuse herself? Does that mean she has to recuse herself if she's connected in that way? Just out of curiosity. >> I stumped him. Is your is your work finalized on this? >> Yes. Is
is there any contingency payment or open payment regarding whether or not this gets approved? >> No. >> Give me one second while you guys are going through your >> I'm sorry. >> You guys go ahead. >> You want to disclose? >> No, I No one.
>> No one. Okay. Steve, >> no one except staff. Okay, very good. Uh, Deb will be back in a minute. Uh, I spoke to Roger Young because he was the neighbor of the applicant. So, that's all. So, you look that up, John, and we'll wait for Deb
and we'll play the Jeopardy game. >> Nothing to disclose. >> She has nothing to disclose. >> You guys went too fast for me. >> Yeah. >> I have nothing to disclose. Except I feel better.
>> Okay. You can't blame being late on me now. >> No me. >> Y'all can keep going. >> You can blame it on me. >> Sorry. >> No, that's quite all right. >> Making sure we're doing >> it's all good. We want to be on the >> Why don't we proceed? That's why I said why don't we proceed because you can even if you have I think you can be here
but I'll I'll get an answer by the time we vote. Very good. >> Thank you, council. Jennifer Deborri, planning director for the village of Island Marada. I'm here tonight for the road abandonment request for Tide Avenue. Corey Sherber, the applicant has submitted the application for a right ofway abandonment seeking to abandon and
vacate a portion of the village owned rightway containing approximately 1600 square ft of Tide Avenue at the northwestmost point of Tide Avenue as shown on exhibit A of the sketch description in your packet. During the public notice process, a letter was sent
to uh certified mail to the adjacent property owners located within 300 feet of the proposed right-of-way abandonment. The property was posted and notice was posted in the local publication. As of the writing of this report, no comments have been received. The adjacent properties surrounding the
requested road abandonment petition are within the residential single family R1 zoning district. The area proposed for abandonment is a paved and improved portion of the rightway known as Tide Avenue and is currently being used as the end of Tide Avenue. All of the property surrounding the area requesting
to be abandoned is owned by the applicant. The applicant seeks to abandon seeks the abandonment as described above in accordance with the procedures set forth in section 50-56 of the village code of ordinances. The applicant has listed the following reason for the proposed abandonment. The
surrounding party parcels have unity of title. Village staff has determined that the requested abandonment of rightway is consistent with chapter 50 article 4 abandonment of rights of way and easements of the village code. And pursuant to code section 50-56B, all
affected property owners are required to agree to the abandonment. And please note that the applicant owns the only property that will be affected by this abandonment. The Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority Board of Directors provided a letter that with no objection. However, the Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority owns
facilities have facilities located within the area of the requested abandonment and the applicant will be responsible to relocate the water man and meters under an FKA permit. The Florida Keys Electric Co-op has not provided any letter regarding the abandonment of the right of way. The
village's wastewater department and fire department have reviewed the requested abandonment and have recommended the following conditions of approval. They must maintain fire department access width of 15 ft to within 50 ft of the front door or sprinkle the building. If any gates are proposed, clear width of
15 ft required and axbox system access required. If approved, all utilities will be relocated at applicant property owner's expense and affected storm water capacity shall be corrected at the applicant's property owner's expense.
The if ownership of the subject property transfers from the village to private ownership, the parcel that gains additional property area is subject to the assessment of advoran property taxes based on the assessed taxable value. This has the potential to increase the village's general fund revenues from
adaloring taxes in the future. Staff has reviewed the request for a right-of-way abandonment and determined that the request complies with the applicable provisions of the code of ordinances. Staff recommends that the council approve with the following conditions. The proposed right-of-way abandonment application by adoption of the attached
resolution and the conditions are must maintain the fire department access with 15 feet within 50 ft of the front door or sprinkle the building. If any gates are proposed, clear width of 15 ft required and knockbox system access required. If approved, all utilities
will be relocated at the applicant owner expense. Affected storm water capacity shall be corrected at the applicant owner's expense and the applicant will be responsible to relocate the water main and meters under an FKA permit. I'm here to answer any questions you might have. >> Thank you so much. Jennifer, is there
anything the applicant would like to state? >> Do you have any questions about >> You got to step to the speaker. Sorry to do that to you, but your name and and and where you >> We also just need to make sure they were sworn in. I'm not sure that they were sworn in. Were you sworn? >> Yeah, but I don't know where. Yeah, >> but did you raise your hand and get
sworn in? >> Yeah. >> He did. Okay. >> Um, so basically as far as the relocation of the utilities go, nothing's being relocated, but it's being the water man and the sewer is
being shortened to so that the utility companies will still have access to it in the rightway, the new rightway line. So, like as far as the expense of it, it's not that big of a deal. We're just shortening it. I'm building a new house
there. I have to run new services anyway. So, those would have had to been done either way. So, I guess that's all I got. >> Okay. Uh let's see. Are there any questions from council for Mr. Sherbet?
>> No. >> I got one question. Are you going to remove the paving uh that that it I'm assuming it's paved up to your property line? >> Yeah, it's paved into it partially. Um we're going to remove that, but it's going to become driveway. So, it's going to essentially be the same just at a
different pitch going up to the house. >> Okay. >> So, yeah. >> Um All right. Steve, did you anything? Um >> and you have no objections to any of the conditions that were mentioned? >> No. Nope. >> And that's mostly for fire access. Is that Is that right?
All right. Then are is there any testimony from anybody in the public in favor of this request? >> I have no one signed up. >> Okay. Hearing none. Are there anyone that would like to oppose this request?
>> I also have no one signed up. >> Jennifer, do you have anything else to add? >> I do not. >> Very good. John, do you have anything you'd like to add? Yeah, since this is quasi judicial, uh, Councilwoman Richards would, uh, will need to recuse on this. >> She'll recuse herself. Okay. So, you got
to fill out that pretty little form. >> You got to You've got a couple of days to fill that out. >> We got 11 minutes. >> Okay. >> Uh, hearing no further testimony. Uh, do I have a motion to approve the
abandonment of the rideaway? I'll make a motion to approve approve the abandonment. >> There's a motion on the table. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Very good. Marne, will you please call the role? >> Council member Deb Gillis. >> Yes.
>> Council member Steve Freriedman. >> Yes. >> Vice Mayor Sharon Mahoney. >> Yes. >> And Mayor Don Horton. >> Yes. >> The motion passes four to zero. >> All right. Is there anything else that we need to do tonight for the good of
the village? Okay, I hear a motion to adjourn. Meeting is adjourned on time. >> Good job.