Grab your snacks, Barry. Emily Emily playing. >> Welcome everybody. Glad to see you all this morning. Have we got everybody up?
Pardon me. We don't have >> We don't have a growing us. >> We're too short. >> I saw I saw >> been told that a lot [laughter] >> joke. Sorry.
Reasonable joke. You'll warm up. Well, I know that um school board member Jer can move. >> I mean, we can go ahead and knock out comment, >> right? Uh >> okay. Until >> to
>> come on in. Okay. Thank you. >> Think we have a quorum now. Thank you. >> Welcome everybody. Glad to see you all. Um we uh are going to start off with uh public comment and we have one person at
this point to speak on two different topics. So Melanie um your name and address for the record. You'll have three minutes and since you're speaking on two, you will get three minutes for one and three minutes for the second one. >> Thank you.
>> Two topics. Thank you. >> Um okay. I have materials that I prepared that is being passed out. So, if you would do me the pleasure of looking it over, I'd appreciate it. >> Name and address, please. >> Excuse me. >> Name and address. >> My name is Melanie Andrad. My address is
3349 Argonaut Drive, 32312. Uh, good morning and happy new year uh to the chair and members of the committee. I've had the pleasure of speaking to you all a couple of times in a personal capacity and as a community member of Tallahassee Alert. Uh, but
today I'm coming to you in a professional capacity. Uh, I represent Florida Health Justice Project as the policy director. We're a nonprofit legal organization that advocates for vulnerable Flidians through education, legal representation, litigation, and
legislative advocacy. Uh, excuse me, a healthc care nonprofit. We're a legal nonprofit focused on healthcare advocacy. Okay. So, I'm here today to encourage this committee to adopt a motion requesting that staff present to the
Lyon County Board of County Commissioners possible funding sources to address medical debt for Lyon County residents. Initial estimates show that with a small one-time investment of $500,000, we can pay off $50 million in medical debt for county residents. Doing
so would directly advance the board's vision of a safe, healthy, and vibrant community. Medical debt relief gives families breathing room. It stabilizes household finances and helps residents remain productive members of our local economy.
Uh it also supports families who are working to build wealth and change the trajectory of their lives and by extension the future of our community. Medical debt is not the result of irresponsibility. People do not plan to get sick, injured, or to experience pregnancy
complications. Health care is not discretionary. It's often a matter of life or death. Medical debt frequently arises from insurance denials, billing errors, or disputes involving third party payers, even among insured individuals.
Many residents carry medical and dental debt indirectly after paying bills with credit cards, personal loans, or borrowing from family or friends. I I also want to say this is not a fringe issue. Medical debt affects tens of millions of Americans and is one of
the most common forms of consumer debt. It's also the main cause of bankruptcy. According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, in 2021, 58% of bills in collections and on consumer credit records were medical expenses. The
burden is not shared equally. 27.9% of black households carry medical debt compared to just 17.2% of white non-Hispanic households. >> Melanie, you are out of time on this topic. >> Sorry. We do we do have this in hand. >> I I don't need three minutes for
housing. If I could just >> Can I use some of my housing time? My is very short. >> A minute for housing and two more minutes for this. >> Okay. >> Or do you want a minute for housing? >> Do that. I'm almost done. >> Go ahead. Thank you. Leon County is especially well positioned to act right
now and we have early concrete estimates to guide us. Initial analyses again from the nonprofit undue medical debt indicate that if Leon County invests just 500,000, it could eliminate approximately 50 million in medical debt for county residents. That is a 100 to1
return, a modest one-time public investment that delivers permanent relief to tens of thousands of families, if not more. And we don't have to imagine what this looks like. I have something that I think staff would appreciate. I have a clear Florida example. On August 13th, 2024, the
Orange County Board of County Commissioners approved a $4.5 million contract with undue medical debt funded through the county's allocation of the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021. That investment allowed medical debt to be analyzed and purchased at a fraction of its face value, and it's already used
approximately 3 million of the program budget to abolish hundreds of millions in medical debt for residents. Leyon County has access to similar onetime funding sources that were designed for exactly this kind of high impact non-recurring investment. Medical debt relief is not an entitlement. It is a strategic reset with immediate and
lasting benefits including improved credit, greater housing access, workforce stability, and better maternal, infant, and family health outcomes. This is also a moment about trust and leadership. Residents are watching how our local governments respond to rising healthcare costs and economic pressure. Taking action on
medical debt sends a clear message that Leyon County understands healthcare as a shared responsibility and is willing to lead with data, dignity, and compassion. I respectfully urge this committee to move forward a motion requesting staff bring recommendations to the board of county commissioners to consider an initiative that would alleviate medical
debt for county residents. The need is real, the return on investment is extraordinary, the timing is right, and the impact would be life-changing for families across Leyon County. Thank you. >> All right, good job. Mhm. >> Uh, you now have a a minute to speak on housing.
>> Thank you. So, in a personal capacity and as a member leader of Tallahassee Alert, which stands for African-American Local Election Review Team, I'm here to respectfully urge this committee to vote in favor of a motion that requires the continued existence of an affordable housing trust fund that supports the
preservation of affordable housing and prioritizes affordable rental housing. We're in an affordable housing crisis and while staff is working hard to respond, the charter should provide the lasting structural framework to meet this challenge. We should move to protect affordable housing as a charter right as opposed to an ordinance for
three reasons. One, it's not guaranteed. It's subject to budget approval uh to board approval every year. It's not renter first yet renters are the biggest need uh which the county itself has said and we don't have receipts that the public can easily see. The report lists dollars and bonds, but regular people
need clear answers. How many you how many units for very lowincome renters and how long will they stay affordable? Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Do we have any other public speakers >> right here? >> Right here. Mr. Fill out a card later.
>> Mr. Sims name below the radar. >> My name is Stanley Sims. How you doing? Good. Um, I'm here because and I apologize, but I really would I don't know if you will get to it, but I would
love for you all to discuss the possibility of recalling elected officials. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. Are there any other public speakers at this time? >> All right. Well, our agenda today, I I'd
like to hear a motion to approve the minutes from the last meeting. That's part of our consent. We'll move into our two agenda items where there >> movement and second. All those in favor of approving the minutes from the last meeting, please say I. I
>> oppose. Nay. Thank you. Motion carries. And uh today is the final opportunity for any of us to uh come up with any other charter amendment ideas that we would like to have discussed and put on the record. So, doesn't have to be done right this minute, but during this
meeting. Am I correct? >> This is the best time. Okay. >> Okay. We have anything? >> Um, >> yes. Uh, recognizing that this will be your last meeting um to introduce new proposals for the committee's consideration. Um, we wanted to put this first on the agenda to make sure we do
have an opportunity um to allow that any ideas that um anybody wants to propose. Um, we'll continue to follow the same process that we've had the two-step. If you have something to propose, uh, you can introduce it and then when we go back around, uh, you'll have the opportunity to explain it and answer any
questions. Um, and should there be more than one, we'll do, um, what we did previously in terms of, um, round robin or going to one and then the other. Um, so with that, um, I'll hand it over to your chair to recognize anybody that has
a new idea to propose. Um, Mr. Wilcox, turn it off. The, um, the county and the city share a comprehensive plan uh, and via an interlocal agreement and they recently
updated that plan. I think we'll probably talk about as we talk about affordable housing today. But uh that that plan, that joint plan between the both the city and the county seems to um significantly avoid jurisdiction shopping, meaning people going out and
saying, "Well, if I annex into the city, I can get this deal, and if I'm in the county, I can get that deal." Uh the second piece to that puzzle, the development puzzle, which I think we touched on the very first day we were here, was is the land development code.
Could we, and I think I know the answer to this, but I'd love to see an analysis of it. Can we take a look at what it would take to have a joint land development code between the city and the county? Excuse [clears throat] me, getting over a cold. Um, I just just an
idea. All right. Anyone else have some discussion on that? Or is that anything that uh Chassity do you want to speak to or um I guess then if you'd like to make um just if you'd like to make a motion to
put this on the agenda, you know, for more discussion to come later on. >> Sure. I' I'd like to make a motion just to bring back an item to consider uh a joint land development code between the city and the county, whether that's something that's appropriate for the charter review committee. >> Right. All right. Do I hear a second on that?
>> Second. >> Second. Dr. Kesler, is that you? >> Yes. >> Now's the opportunity for any questions. >> Oh, yeah. Yeah. Uh, if [clears throat] we have any are there questions on this particular topic? Miss Tigerson, [clears throat] excuse me.
>> Happy New Year, everyone. So, it would that also be in relation that everybody >> I can't hear you. Can I mean is your Can you hear me? >> Yeah. Well, >> in order to combine both the city and the county, would that also be in
relations to what the businesses are having trouble getting permitting? And um clarify just a little bit what you're asking. >> Sure. So, with the with the rewrite, the recent rewrite and adoption of the the joint comp plan, um it will necessitate
that both the city and the county now go into rewrites of their land development codes. They'll be doing so individually right now. >> Okay. um at a cost to both the city and the county. A joint code would bring the two of those together and they could pay a single consultant or it could be a
single effort through staff to to write a a a joint code. Um we talked about functional consolidation on the heels of actual consolidation the other day. This is just one more opportunity for functional consolidation. And also it means that just because my the neighborhood across the street annexed
into the city, it does not follow a different set of rules than what's going on in the county. >> Okay, understood. Um and I had something similar. So I I agree with him. >> Thank you. Uh Mr. Ray, >> yeah, I just like to say that cities and
counties are entirely different kinds of enterprises um and should govern differently. So I'll be voting no. >> Okay. Thank you very much, Mr. Harley. Um for people who are maybe less familiar Barry with this process um the comp plan
would have some general guidelines some general goals right and then on the land development code um so let's just take something like um you're designing a commercial shopping plaza um the comp plan would have would address
how many shade trees or or rather be that we should have shade a trees in that parking lot and then the land development code would specify precisely how many or or it would it would provide rules. Can you give me an idea of where the land development code would come in on something like that?
>> No, you're roughly that that's correct. The land develop I'm sorry, the comp plan is your 30,000 foot view, right? Your land development code is on the ground as we actually approve these developments. [clears throat] Excuse me again. Uh what are the rules of engagement? Like how, you know, how many trees do you need to
have in there? uh if you've taken out trees, what are your credits for that? Now, that's covered under the EMP, which is one of the things we talked about earlier and the fact that we do and we did it via charter uh create a joint uh environmental management section to to
our our our uh respective codes. Um this would kind of take that one step forward and say, okay, well, that's for the environmental aspects such as storm water and that of of our development. What about the other aspects of our development? >> [clears throat] >> Um, and it doesn't mean that everything that applies in the city has to apply in
the county because as you kind of move outward in what we call a transct necessarily, you're going to have areas like where we're sitting right now in the urban core that are going to have a different set of rules than, you know, somewhere out in the the hinterlands of the county. Uh, so the county would kind
of be reviewing that development out there because it's in the county. City would be reviewing the county. So they'd still have their own purview. They'd just be doing so underneath the the same code. So they're kind of playing along the same sheet of music. >> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Lewis. Mr. Haynes,
>> having uh previously represented a district that was majority rural, I would say that that would put undue pressure and undue costs on individuals who live in the county. uh particularly in those rural areas uh a lot of people
move there because they can't afford to live in the inner city and those costs are too high. So having a code that dictates a individual meeting the same density, same kinds of environmental standards and same kinds of other
permitting requirements with them in the county uh would be an undue burden on them and a much higher cost as well. >> Thank you Mr. Haynes. Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, I just want some clarity. I see typed up as number seven, joint comprehensive plan. I heard Mr.
Wilcox mention land use plan or or you know, I just want to clarify, you know, code or something he said, but that's not the same thing. >> Yeah. Land, >> right? I just want to clarify what should be on the board versus what we're talking about. You know, that's all. Thank you.
>> Oh, yeah. Land development code, right? >> And [clears throat] if I could speak to Mr. Louises real quick. It it wouldn't necessitate that the folks out in the rural area abide by exactly the same rules as the folks in the urban area. The codes don't do that today. They wouldn't do that under this proposal. It
would just be that the the city and the county are sharing the same code. So you'd still have it it would still be contextsensitive to the rural area um and just the way the comp plan is and and and different for the urban areas just the way the comp plan is right now.
Yeah. >> There any other questions before we take a vote on >> pardon me? >> Oh, sorry. Over there. Hey. >> No. Okay. Thanks. >> I understand. This is >> Sar. I'm
>> Yeah. And just to um make sure you guys can hear me. Just to also in piggyback on what um chairman um Wilcox is saying, I just want to not chairman. I'm sorry. Chanty. Hang on. Hang on. But
So sorry. Sorry. Yeah, Miss President. So sorry, but I just want to say just to make sure equity is also included in in everything that we do even with when it comes down to um the the land we're asking for the land development codes
and everything to be changed. But what I'm seeing when it's different, it depends on what construction company or what land developer come order of preference if you can understand what I'm saying. So equity in everything that we do. I don't know if we how we can put
that on the board. Um or but I if you just type the word equity, I think it'll solve it all in everything that we do as far as when we do when we're looking at both of the plans. Um one developer may get preference over
another. And so I just want to make sure when we pulling those things together that equity is included. >> All right. Any com Mr. Hurley had a comment on this one? >> Currently the city and county sit as the joint
city county comprehensive plan when we have meetings which are simultaneous meetings of the city and the county. Um, and and would this then also require that land development code changes
made by an individual body would need to be ratified in those public meetings. >> Mr. Wilcox or >> Sure. Sure. >> Um, I'm not speaking to Barry here. Obviously, he's an expert on these
issues. Um but at that level you'd be shifting more into um like DRC review and we we have a we have a lower level review um as we meet out some of the issues uh related to land development code and we have a DRC and the city has
a DRC as well. These these things that are uh again uh sort of hashed out at that level. Um, and so something like this might contemplate uh some sort of joint DRC. Um, if if that were to have uh if that were to happen. Uh,
ultimately, this is one of those things we would have to uh look at to um determine um its application in a charter context. Again, I I might struggle a little bit with with that. Certainly, it's one of those things that the board may or this committee may say, "Hey, this is something that the board
we're interested enough in it that the board from a policy standpoint or the two commissions uh should take a look at." But while I'm speaking to it, just something to keep in mind. Increasingly, these um these land development codes
are um um getting closer aligned. Uh we and just to keep it in a sort of a high level way to think about this, we have a statewide building code. So we operate, city and county operate off of one building code. And then we have a joint one level down if you will, we have a
joint comp plan. So some of those again higher level uh land um uh land use issues and that sort of thing. And then when you get down to land development code, again, you are talking about some of those uh jurisdiction specific issues where
there might be legitimate differences between city and county on setbacks or lighting or um uh some things. And you also start getting into because it's pretty it would be a pretty um extensive review to kind of bring those things together cuz you're also talking about
um what we charge for permit reviews. uh how long permit reviews take and in the different areas and some of them, you know, might be pretty close in that sort of thing, but to completely align them and and and you'd have to really look at the benefit uh that you're getting from that. On top of that, um the state
legislature increasingly is putting the same shot clocks. We call them shot clocks. The time we have to review permits. Uh we're putting cities and counties on the same uh sort of shot clock as well as certain things like um statewide storm order rules that are coming down the pike that will uh that
have uh been put in place now that apply to both cities and counties. So increasingly you're seeing a lot of alignment occurring sort of naturally. Uh but I'm sure in when it comes to a land development code is very very well knows there's a lot of details when you start getting into sort of sight
specific and jurisdiction specific approvals. Uh and and so in some cases those specifics might be really close to one another. In some cases they may be far apart and I think what Barry's saying is a review of those things uh
for um uh for some uh additional uh alignment may be good but again that it's pretty extensive uh exercise. It may be something that this board wants to recommend, this committee wants to recommend to the board. And again, it's not so sure, but that's something that if you approve it, we'd come back and
bring you some some recommendations on. >> Mhm. >> Thank you, Vince. Miss Favors had [clears throat] a comment on that. >> Uh, I think my question, can you hear me? I think Vince answered my question, but I was really trying to understand from Barry whether or not the and maybe
you don't know the answer to this. um whether or not your goal in this is to have like a single document that identifies everything and it may be different city and county but it's one document that you refer people to
>> so that it's not confusing >> but I said that's bad for business you want to do I'm just kidding >> what I would say to that is you know right now and Vince touched on this perfectly is we we have a the comp plan is a bit unique because we do have a joint planning department that oversees the comp plan and we share that comp
plan. Um, but to Vince's point, we do also abide by the same exact Florida building code because that's dictated to us by the state. But that doesn't mean that we don't have a building department at the city and a building department at the at the county that has complete autonomy from one another to make
decisions and interpretations and things like that. It just means they're playing off the same sheet of music. So, if I'm a contractor and I go to the city, um I the the rules for building the structure are exactly the same as they are in the county. Um this is that missing middle
piece of you know, we have this land development code like I said that that that differs in some ways greatly, but in many ways just just minor enough to be to be a bit annoying quite frankly. And uh you could still have two growth management departments who oversee the
uh the implementation. I would anticipate you would uh you'd just like you do with the EMP right now. So you'd have two different environmental departments, one in the city and one in the county who review those EMPs. They have two different sets of fees. Um but they uh but they use the same document
as the guidance for what they're looking at there. So that's kind of my goal is maybe streamline and add to that uh functional consolidation that we've talked about um by having them basically playing off that same sheet of music. not trying to usurp the power of either
the city or the county uh in doing so. >> So, what what are you asking staff to come back with? >> Just an analysis of whether or not that's something that's uh suitable for the charter review committee uh to look at or whether that's something that would be more suitable for a a a intergo um you know a
>> governmental Yeah. >> award or something. >> Yeah. Right. Exactly. >> Um I think u Mr. Ray was next and then Mr. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Yeah, I [clears throat] would say that um you know since time in Memoriam, we've had a deal as a single municipality county
where if you want to live in the county and have that set of rules, you may do so. If you'd like to live in the city and have a different set of rules, you may do so. I think that served everyone well. I think it gives a clear choice. I think moves like this kind of muddy that. Um, and I think that I really agree with a lot of the speakers that
came before me in that preserving what's good about the current arrangement and avoiding the complications that Vince and others have have mentioned is best um is best accomplished by by opposing this. So, I'll be continuing to vote no. >> Thanks so much, Mr. Lewis.
>> Barry, help me with the possibility of impact fees. I I'm a in my other life I I own a construction company and I built here in Len County and Cassing County primarily and as you know the fees are
exponentially different >> right >> in that regard. So will your proposal impact that in any kind of way? So how >> that wasn't the intent. Um again the county and the city could charge their own fees because they're kind of doing it their own way with their own staff and there's a lot of nuts and bolts to
that. We don't currently have any impact fees. Uh we're incredibly unique as a as a local government, both city and county here in uh Tallahassee, because throughout the rest of the state, your impact fees are fairly significant. Um
you might be talking about $50,000 worth of impact fees on a single family home in in some areas around Florida, but we don't have any here. >> Okay. >> Thank you, U Mr. Hurley, then Mr. Ray. And then I kind of like to go ahead and take a vote on this. We have a lot of material today to cover. Mr. Hurley,
>> I I think that we all want to do something about the permitting process, both the city and the county. And I appreciate where this comes from. Um what I'm struggling with is trying to understand jurisdictionally how this impacts um the city
commission's authority. So for example, um if we wanted to do site readiness out at the airport, city has all this airport land out there. the land development code that the city commission would set for their own land, city- owned land. Um, they currently
have the ability to determine their land development code for their own land. Would a proposal like this require them to get a county commission to sign off? I'll give you two examples from the current situation is right now with the comp plan, if somebody wants to change
the future land use map in the unincorporated area, only the county commission votes on that. If they want to vote change in the city, only the city votes on that. So they have their autonomy in that regard. When it comes to policies, text, joint use stuff, my understanding is that both uh parties
have to agree to changes in the text. Uh so in your scenario, if they wanted to reszone some property around the airport to make it to basically grow the airport use, as as long as that property is in the city, the city would vote on that reszoning uh solely. if it was in the county, the county would vote on it
solely just like they do with the comp plan right now. Um, and in terms of the EMP, my understanding is that if there's any proposed changes to the text of the EMP, it does require both the city and the county to agree to those changes in text. So, it' be very similar to what we're doing right now on on two different
>> and the EMP is environmental management plan. Is that >> correct? Yeah. Yeah. >> Or EMA, I'm sorry, environmental management act, right? Sorry. >> Final comment, Mr. Ray. >> Last comment. I promise. Um and regard again last last view. Um regardless of
your um opinion about the um the wisdom of this plan, I don't think that uh this kind of policy, this granular level policy, I do think that um this probably isn't a charter u issue. So just like put that up there. >> All right. Without um further discussion, I'd like to go ahead and
take a vote on uh a joint city county land development code uh discussion and Alice coming up at a [clears throat] later date. All those in favor of moving forward with getting this on an agenda coming up, please say I. I.
>> Those opposed, no. >> No. I >> think we want to take a roll call vote on this, please. >> Anita Favors. Max Hurley, >> no. >> Daryl Jones, >> Howard Kesler, >> yes. >> Henry Lewis,
>> no. >> Heidi Altway, >> yes. Uh, Ryan Ray, >> no. >> Chamariel Robersonson. >> No. >> Temple Robinson. >> Can I pass? >> No.
>> I mean, I really need to study it more. I'm not prepared to vote. I can say present. >> Analysis. >> No. >> Um, did Bruce uh Strobble? >> Yes. >> Jarrett Terry?
>> Yes. Patrina Tuckerson, >> yes. >> Barry Box, >> yes. >> Vice Chair Haynes, >> no. >> Chair Lindley, >> yes. >> That's seven, yay. Eight, nay. >> The motion fails.
>> Okay. All right. Okay, ladies and gentlemen, we're going to move on with um agenda item number one, which is funding mechanisms for affordable housing. And I think uh Chington has taken the lead on this discussion. Um
also in your agenda, >> you'll find uh that one on starting on page 11 and 16. There's a lot of detail if you want to follow along on that. >> Yeah. >> As always with us. >> Well, good afternoon friends. Um happy new year uh members. Um good afternoon.
As you may recall, uh, the committee requested information on funding mechanis mechanisms available to the counties to support affordable housing. I have a couple of quick slides to present, then I'll turn it back to the chair for any questions that uh, you may
have. So, like we share in the item, the county utilizes all available funding sources to invest in affordable housing. That's including SHIP, which is the dedicated and primary funding source for affordable housing for our programs,
bond financing, federal grants, sales tax, and general revenue. These revenues support a wide variety of programs and services detailed in the items that range from down payment assistance to rental development that
are increasing and preserving the stock of affordable housing here in our community. The highest affordable housing need in Lyon County is rental units for low-income households. They are the most costburdened households in our community, meaning
they spend more than the 30% HUD recommended amount of their income on housing costs. And and so they typically are actually spending closer to 50 to 60% of their
income on housing costs. So to address that need, over just the past five years, the county has invested $5.8 million in direct funding and authorized more than $195 million in
bond financing that has or will construct more than 1,200 new affordable high units within the next 12 to 18 months here in Lyon County. That's the largest development of affordable housing in our community's
history. To build on that success and respond to the continued need, the board just recently dedicated general revenue or property tax in the amount of $250,000 to build more affordable rental units for lowincome households.
Also through blueprint, the board and city commission last year established annual funding in amount of $250,000 in one cent sales tax to respond to the need and collectively invest in more affordable rental projects here in our community.
As a result of these board actions, which did not require a charter amendment, the county's annual investment in affordable housing increased to $500,000. Now, most county charters do not include language regarding affordable housing because all authority the authority to
address affordable housing is already provided in Florida statutes, including the various funding mechanisms that we are already utilizing. But there are four of the there are only four of 20 charter counties that include provisions for the establishment of an affordable
housing trust fund. But those communities as well as our board, that is something that we already have the the um authority to establish. And in fact, Lyon County, we already have an affordable housing trust fund
established by ordinance that has been in place for nearly 30 years. So longer than we've actually been a charter county. Florida statutes provides counties, including us, the authority to increase affordable housing through ordinances,
policies, partnerships, and investments. And so, for that reason, um, and to address the ongoing community need, we are utilizing all available funding sources to invest in affordable housing here in Lyon County. So therefore, rather a charter amendment, the
committee could alternatively make a recommendation encouraging the board to continue the county's commitment to increasing and preserving the stock affordable housing. However, of course, um here we also provide the option, as you'll see in the item, the committee wish to move forward with a proposed
charter amendment, which is option number three. With that, I'm happy to answer any questions. >> Thank you, Shington. what you said. >> Yes. Yeah. This does not include the funding that I mentioned does not include the funding that the city also provides for housing.
>> It's a lot of detail in your agenda item as you probably have already read about what the county is doing in compliance with state and federal uh programs as well. So, >> correct. Yeah. And we do have an affordable housing committee that works on this annually
that Mr. Strug is on there year round. So we kind of have um possib you know three or four decisions to make. We can accept this report uh and move on as if it's not something we want to get into a charter amendment. We can suggest the
county go forward suggest a policy um uh support from this board to the Leyon County Commission. Um there are other suggestions or we can uh any any direction from this otherwise
if you'd like to discuss it. >> Madam chair >> commissioner I mean >> let me first commend the county for what it's doing. Uh I said as a member of the uh uh LA has a housing authority and uh we
certainly appreciate the support that the county has given. When you put the slide up, it says there are 1,200 affordable housing units. That's kind of kind of a misnomer in that those units are 1,200 in total, but each one of them
are not affordable. Part of them are market rate and the Tallahassee Housing Authority provides the the vouchers for individuals to pay the difference between the market rate and their income level in that regard.
So don't I don't want everybody to think that 1,200 affordable housing units have been built in that regard. Secondly, let me >> finish. Okay. >> Thank you. >> Uh we are in the process right now of
building two new complexes. One on uh Lake Bradford and CMI, 158 units. And we're also in the process of literally uh transforming the one on Alabama Street as well to become new units that
will be hopefully some of them affordable, but others are market rate as well. So, I'm not I'm not going to support the uh proposal for putting it in, but I do want to encourage the county to continue and increase its support in that regard. But don't
think that every one of those units we are building now are quote unquote affordable units. >> Are you >> excuse me? Are you making a motion for option two, which is to encourage the county? I mean, I'm kind of what I was hearing. >> I'll make that motion. Yes.
>> May I offer a substitute motion? >> Go ahead. >> Not Not yet. We're on the main motion. The main motion. We had a second from Mr. Haynes. All in favor of going forward with uh option two, which is direct staff to include a policy recommendation on
affordable housing. >> Wait, I'm I'm sorry. Point of order. >> Just for discussion on what was for number two, >> right? But don't we have to vote on whether to go forward? >> I'm sorry. Discussion.
>> You're right. You guys coffee. I need Excuse me. We're good. Discussion on option two. So we have an option two on the table at this point. Excuse me. >> Um >> I'm in discussion, Madam Chair. >> Yeah, sorry. And then we can get through
a substitute if we after we discuss this. Is that the rules of order? Okay. Uh Mr. Stroble. >> Okay. Um, I guess I want to start with getting a better understanding of how much of the funding that is provided is
guaranteed and would be adjusted in future budgets. And then the second the second question that'll follow that is when we say there we've created this many affordable units, how many of them are affordable to very lowincome individuals? Do we have that information? Is that something that's
regularly tracked? >> Yes, it is. Um so the first um question is we get annual funding through the state um um for ship annual that ranges between6 to $700,000 annually as high as a million dollars and as well as the
dollars that were set that were established um this or last year now by the county and um and through blueprint are annually. There's the annual fundings and they will be built up and and set aside annually for affordable housing.
>> Yeah. And that's all we can use it for >> with the bulk of it being state appropriated funding. Am I understand that correctly? >> No. >> No. Yeah. Yes. Now, when it comes to those properties, all 1,200 units are for low income. They
are dedicated for low income. So, the way they're breaking down is that apparent u approximately 40% are for low income. that is identified as those earning 80% or below of the area median income. That is low income.
Approximately 50% are set aside for very low income. That's about people making 60% or below the area median income. And about 10% is for extremely low. Those are people that are earning 30% or or below for um for
um for um of AMI of the um area median income. So those do not um those are dedicated specifically those and they have to be set aside and have to be established specifically for people who
are earning um those dollar amounts those household income amount and they're dedicated. Most of these projects are between um must be established for at least 50 years or longer. Some will be for perpetuity. >> Which units are you referring to?
>> We've committed >> the ones that we've committed dollars to. So, we're talking about the projects. >> Go back to your slide. >> Columbia Gardens. >> Columbia Gardens is one. >> Um, Ridge Road. >> Yes.
>> Social 1600. The Hub. Um, Social Tallahassee. >> What is >> Lake Bradford Apartments? And most recently, Leon Arms. No, >> I'm sorry if this is being handed around. I just want to keep up the discussion without this interruption for a minute.
>> Right. >> Are the projects that I'm talking about specifically? >> Thank you, Mr. L. >> So, so that that that's to answer the question that um Dr. Stuvil requested. And >> when when you say Columbia Gardens is
uh low income and I do agree that we provide affordable housing there, but most of not all of those units are low-income units. Most of those units in fact are
market rate as is the other units that are being built right now. those projects based on what they what they came before us and what how they were approved by by Florida Housing Finance Corporation was that those projects had to set aside units.
>> They they do set aside those units but it's not set total is not 1,200 in total in the county is is my point >> right? Yes. So when you look at all of it um we're talking about specifically the low income. So when we're talking about that number gets closer as as Dr.
to lose the same close to 1,500. But when we when we're looking specifically at those units that must be set aside dedicated based on the tax credits and the bond funding that they're receiving specifically for lowincome households
that must be dedicated for that population. >> I don't do all of those units contain have a total of 1,200 combined? >> You've got >> I don't think so. Yes. Let me just So, just to answer the question, we get into counting units and all that. It's
anything where where we've provided funding for all of that funding has to go toward low-inccome units. So, there may be more units than that. And I'm sure there are when you nick in the market rate units. >> And that's my point there is that >> the county is not technically providing
1,200 lowincome units in Lyon County. >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. Yeah. Yeah. I'm sorry. Yes, we are. Yeah. Yes, we are. >> Okay. >> We have we have a waiting list of about 3,500 people right now
>> uh in the county and even more and we're trying to to replace our housing stock as quickly as possible and quickly as we can get funded. In fact, we've got two proposal spending right now uh for apartments over in the uh district uh
323 and 4 3204 area because that's one of the areas that is truly truly in need of replacement in that regard. But uh if you say that there are,200 units that the county has provided, I I'll go with that. But uh uh we're not doing that through the housing authority.
>> Okay. >> No. Yeah. Not all of it is through the housing authority. Correct. Thank you. Uh right now, I mean, I know we're we're getting into the weeds a lot importantly, but uh like to continue discussion of whether to move forward with a policy recommendation on this.
Mr. Hurley, is this something you've been handing out? Is that >> Yes. Thank Thank you, Madam Chair. >> Um >> I just want to kind of take a a step back here, y'all, and and uh let's talk about the process moving forward. If uh any motion is passed today on this, um
we're going to have at least two more um rounds of staff uh feedback. Um and the conversations that I've had with staff um have explored some of the different funding opportunities that may exist. Um
I would ask that we consider a substitute motion from this after we dispose with this motion. Um, and I've passed around um some thoughts on this. I I wanted to ask uh staff if they would um
uh does the city of Tallahassee currently receive any of the county's gas tax? >> Yes. um a share of two of the local option gas tax. Uh we split it approximately 50/50 with the city.
>> Is that annually to the city? >> I don't know off the top of my head. >> We we talked about yesterday is $1.3 million. Um I'm mentioning this because there are monies that we can find within the county and within the city budgets. There's at least $1.3 million annually
that we have found in the gas tax. And I would like to have as this item um as we go through this process of this item to look at all options that may exist to have staff um review this document,
review any other ideas that uh may come from this body and to bring back an item which would you know give us some options about the various types of dedicated revenue sources that may exist. So if you look at page three of this, there are some thoughts about dedicated revenue sources that may
exist. And I really ask you to look at the last page of this document. If there's one thing you look at, which is the different counties that have passed this, starting with Broward in 2018, which pass with 72%. 2 years later, Elatchua County passed a
ballot amendment with 64%. 2 years after that, Bvard County passed a ballot amendment with 54%. A Republican county, y'all. Um, Orange County, two years after that, passed it with 74%. And 2 years after that, we
stood here in Lyon County before a charter review commission. And we don't know how much it's going to pass in Lyon County, but what I do know is that all four of those counties passed it through the charter review committee. But the distinction, Madam Chair, Madam
Chair, go ahead. >> Yeah, just I'm sorry. Just quick point. Um, which shouldn't be lost. Uh, is just that, um, as you heard Shinkton say in the very beginning. I just want to make sure everybody gets it, that that we've established the trust fund already. So
again, I think in these cases, it may very well have been that they you had this charter effort to establish it uh for the board to take action, in which case again, what you've heard here is that we've already established the trust fund. Obviously, many all of these policy issues are fair for discussion
and whether we could do more or anything like that, but I just wanted to for your all's consideration point out the fact that u that that trust fund has been established here. >> Thank you. And um Mr. County Administrator. As you know, um the Orange County ballot amendment in 2024, if you look at the language on this
attachment, it says um to require the continued existence of an affordable housing trust fund. And they put that language in there because just like Leyon County, as you state, they already had one. And so it was reaffirming it. And it passed with 74%. And so, um you
know, I just ask that we bring this back at at another meeting. We go through this process of several different public hearings and we consider some of the various options for funding sources and for um expenses. So if for example if you look at the [clears throat] the actual uses of
the fund here on page four this would be for things like the acquisition of land or existing housing units for construction or rehabilitation of affordable housing or gap financing for multif family housing. That's something that's very important to the builders in this
community. um for down payment assistance um potentially for renters or community land trust or land banking activities, something I know is important to the administration. And so um I ask you all that we continue this process and I look forward to hearing any feedback that you all have on how we
can make this um as strong and powerful as a valid amendment as possible to really bring down housing costs in our community. >> Okay. Uh thank you uh Miss Favors. Uh, I need some help in recalling something. It seems to me that early on
in our maybe our first or second meeting, Dr. trouble. Did you provide a document that suggested some wording changes to the charter that would um focus on
letting the public know that this is a a priority and an important issue for the county to consider forever? Kind of. I I don't remember exactly what it was, but did that get lost or did we how did how did we vote on that?
I'm I'm not sure specifically um which item you're you're speaking of, but I know there was >> affordable housing related. >> No, it wasn't affordable housing. It was >> security and that was spoken in regard to the bill of rights item. Uh you know, uh what did we do with that? >> That item's going to be coming back at
your next meeting. >> Does that include affordable housing or could it in include wording that in would uh have affordable housing? >> It could, but that's up to the committee. That's just something to think about if we continue this whole
process because >> it seems to me that we're talking outside of charter right now. We um >> right now we're amendment policy re policy recommendation the board and Mr. Hurley's >> kind of moving a step forward but I
haven't heard we're going to dispense with this motion at the moment but it's something you'd like to >> Yes. Right. So I asked um you all that we uh >> make a substitute motion after this motion to uh get feedback from anyone
with various ideas and we have staff uh analyze this so that stakeholders have time to give feedback and and so that staff can truly look and analyze all of our thoughts collectively. Thank you. >> And you're just for my understanding. Pardon me. to make.
>> We're not at this. I mean, we have to dispense with this motion. >> Well, point of order. >> If you want to make a substitute motion, you would make it now. But I'll motion stand. And this I I'll I'll make a
substitute motion then that we um take uh this as well as any ideas currently at this table including um committee member Lewis's points um and and uh that we have staff look at this and bring back different options um both for a bot
amendment and also we re represent the options that staff has presented in this item. >> Okay. So further information though it could be policy recommendation or ballot language. Correct. Yeah. >> But further discussion on that. >> Do I hear a second on the substitute
motion please? >> Second. >> Motion's been made and seconded on this uh substitute motion. Let me just get this straight. What was the >> discussion on this? >> More discussion on this before we vote on this. Okay. Sorry about this Robert's
rules mess over in my brain. Okay. Do we have comments on that, Mr. Jones? >> No, not on that. I'm ready to >> We're sorry, Mr. Stville. >> So, I I know there's the hesitancy to put things in the charter and I I sense that and I understand it, but we could
look at what they did in Elatchua and Orange County. There is precedent for it. Um there's they've been doing it in other areas as well. I was just reading about uh the situation they had in New Orleans around adjusting this um their charter um and dealing with affordable housing as well. We have an affordable housing crisis. I don't think it's
something we could shy away from. It's no fault of anyone in the county. This is something that is a I would say a national issue. I think that staff here in Leon County has been doing a great job to fight it. But I think the charter where we could bolster them and give them the tools that they need and the legal or I guess we would say the
governing structure to address what is a crisis. And I I think that as we try to u kind of play defense with the charter and keep it from any changes, we may be limiting are placing limits on ourselves that aren't necessary. So if there is an opportunity to amend the charter in a
way that allows us to create a better structured approach to address this affordable housing issue, I think this would be something appropriate to look at and it would be stronger than simply making a recommendation to the board. we would give them something they can actually work with and then the board would handle the official implementation
of session that's going forward. >> Mr. Johnson, >> well, there's both the substitute motion as well as the original motion made by Dr. >> Sure. You're on. Thank you. >> But the substitute motion and the original motion made, I guess I bring a
lofty notion to what the chart the potentiality found in the charter. I can tell you from my perspective as a school board member, I would have never thought that we would have elected members of a school board who were not
in support or or would be in support of vouchers that they would believe that it was appropriate for us to take taxpayer dollars and give them to charter schools. But it has happened not only here locally but there are entire school
districts that have school board members who believe in the charter movement. So what the reason I believe so strongly in the charter and the languages that we the the options that we have discussed about things like primary health care,
affordable housing and food insecurity is that if if they're found in the charter language then it becomes the will of the community beyond the >> political
>> the political but uh but it it takes away the political animus found there and so yes I agree that it is great that we are doing great work in affordable housing we're doing great work uh even
in responding to food insecurity but then when you have when that time may come when you have a pharaoh who knew not Joseph >> here then we have a opportunity found in our charter to ensure that those values remain sacrian to us and so because
there's going to come a time when Vince is gone and the other persons who are now the complexion of this community could very well change but they will still be held accountable to a charter that we put forward and that's why
that's why I think sometimes it's lofty language now maybe it may be found better in the bill of rights which is also I believe a part of the charter but I still believe that if we think that these are community values worth esteeming and hold and holding in high
regard that we would make the types of votes and then leave it to the expertise found in this for the staff to provide the nuances as to how we get it. But the direction from the charter and from subsequently from the community is then most clear.
>> So that's where I stand. So, I understand the recommendation, but I don't I'm concerned about [clears throat] specificity that may herang or or or um [clears throat] impede what we know may be best
practices for our community. And that's why I'm I'm I'm open to bringing them staff bringing back intel based upon what we have set them forward to come back with that will then inform the charter language that we would
ultimately forward to the commission. >> Thank you, Mr. Jones. Uh if there are no further comments, I'd like to go ahead and take a roll call vote on the substitute motion, which is Would you like to rephrase yours? Exactly. It's beyond policy.
>> Yeah. have staff um look at uh the documents presented and as well as any feedback including feedback from um committee member uh Lewis and uh bring back different options uh both for about amendment and for other recommendations
that >> sort of a two-part yes >> both policy or potential uh charter language amendment >> right >> all right if we can have a roll call vote on this please substitute motion >> Anita favors Yes. >> Max Hurley.
>> Hi >> Daryl Jones. >> No >> Howard Kesler. >> Yes. >> Henry Lewis. >> No. >> Heidiway. >> The clock is ticking. Lady. >> Yes.
>> Ryan Ray. >> Yes. >> Shamar Robersonson. Yes, >> Temple Robinson. >> Yes, >> Bruce Stubble. >> Yes, >> Harry.
>> Yes, >> Katrina Tugerson. >> I so feel what Heidi and Shamro did, but yes. >> Barry Wilcox, >> yes. >> Vice Chair Haynes, >> yes. >> Chair Lindley, >> no.
Uh the motion passes 12-3. >> 12 to 3. >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you, >> Madam Chair. >> Yes, sir. >> What did we vote on again? >> We vote we voted on asking asking the staff to bring back a lot of information
on both policy recommendation and a potential potential charter of all. I got messed up because it was your idea. >> Okay. All right. We're going to move on then. Thank you. Thank you on that. U
we have a moment, please. Hey, everything is I mean I mean >> Okay. All right. Thank you. Just need a conference there. Okay. We're going on to uh agenda item number two
>> which is the funding mechanism for primary healthc care access for lowincome residents. Shankton, are you handling this? >> Yes, I am. Um so one more time. So okay. So I again I've got a couple of slides to share here also um demonstrating the county's commitment to ensuring
low-income residents have access to health care services with the authority that we already have um and available to the county commission. So as you may know health care for low-income households is primarily the responsibility of federal and state
governments through programs like Medicaid. However, for more than two decades, the county has been dedicated to ensuring uninsured and uninsured low-income residents that don't qualify for those programs have access to highquality healthcare services. That's in addition
to funding that the counties in um that counties, including ours, counties, not cities, but counties are mandated to contribute to healthcare annually by federal law. In total, the county invests $7.7
million annually in mandatory and discretionary programs and services for healthcare, which we then also utilize those dollars to leverage to sec we're leveraging to secure an additional $2.5 million annually in state and federal funding
for greater access to health care services to county residents through our discretionary program known as CARET. We're partnering with local healthc care providers like Bonami Health Center, Neighborhood Medical Center, and
Appalache Center to provide lowincome residents access to primary dental and mental health care services. We also partner with Capital Medical Society, WeCare, and Family Pharmacy to provide specialty and pharmaceutical services to
our residents who are low income and don't have access to those services. These programs have eligibility requirements. Um they have reimbursement rates and other program designs that are established by the county commission and we are regularly meeting with our
partners to constantly enhance and update those programs. That's an ongoing process that occurs and then we provide we receive input from them and then annually we're bringing recommendations to the board to make updates and enhancements to those programs.
In fact, we've increased the funding levels and reimbursement rates in the caret program multiple time multiple times in the past three years to ensure the program is meeting the changing needs in the community. Overall, we've increased our investment
in health care for low-income residents 15% annually through CARET and mandated programs. That equates to roughly about an increase of around $600 to $700,000 annually in health care.
This further demonstrates that the board already has the authority to address and expand healthcare services for low-income residents in the community and has has done so successfully through policies, programming, and budgetary decisions without the need for a charter change.
There are no county charters in Florida that include language regarding the specific issue of of policy issue of healthcare. And so I'll share again as we you know we've shared in previous meeting members that you know the county charter is generally addresses larger organizational city issues and not
specific policy issues. So again, as I shared earlier, alternatively, the committee could look at uh making a recommendation encouraging the board to continue to um look at uh to continue the county's longstanding commitment to ensure low-inccome residents have access
to health care um high quality health care services rather than a charter amendment. However, you know, option three is still there as I've mentioned before um for the committee should they wish to move forward with a proposed charter amendment. And with that, Madam Chair, I'm happy to answer any questions.
>> Okay. Thank you. Uh Dr. Robinson, I think this was your initi initiative. Uh >> it is. >> Care to proceed? Um colleagues, the World Health Organization,
National Institutes of Health, National Association of Community Health Centers, health organizations across the world, across the country know that access to primary health care
in a community is one of the few proven mechanisms that benefits the economy by lowering overall health care cost, reduce hospitalizations. It boosts your workforce, increase your
productivity, people have fewer sick days, fosters economic growth, and lack of access to health care does just the opposite in a community. Leyon County has done fantastic work at [clears throat]
helping to provide access to primary care in our community for underserved and underinser under under underserved and underinsured people. So my lifting this up by no means is a complaint about
what has been done. The problem is despite all that we have done, the headwinds that the residents in Lyon County are facing economically and will continue to face as change thing uh
things change will further impede access to primary care, not just for uninsured or underinsured people, but for everyone. So, we have a workforce problem. We can't solve that here. So what I'm asking
um for consideration in a charter amendment is not the how or not how much but for it to be included the importance of this to be included so that for years
to come when we are all said uh dead and gone that Lyon County will go on record showing that it believes that it is important important to the welfare of the community that we value this that we will continue to pay attent attention to
this and fund this in ways whatever ways possible moving forward the Lyon County Primary Care Program's mission is to improve the health of citizens by providing quality and coste effective health services
through collaborative community partnerships. Those are your partnerships. The funding has increased in various forms, but some of the funding has remained the same over the past 10 years. And we have been
very creative, Miss Thomas, Mr. Lammy with the partners at moving these chess pieces on the board, regrouping chest pieces and being strategic in using the funds that we
have to provide primary care services. So, what I'm lifting up is a way for us to codify how important this is to direct staff to draft a proposed charter amendment affirming that Lyon
County values access to primary care as a leading determinant of economic vitality and overall community well-being. And then the hows, the who's, the how much, that is done
in a different place, probably by the same team of people, but that it's codified in our charter, that this isn't something that we want to do just for them and those, but for the residents of Lyon County, forever
and ever, amen, i.e. Randy Traps. >> Okay. Thank you very much. Um, Dr. Roersonson, I believe, is up next. >> Yeah. So, I want to echo what Dr. Robinson said about the importance of primary care in this community and also
talk about the burden of federally qualified healthc care centers. Even though they have some in part funding from the federal government, we have to keep in mind that they are serving homeless populations that are often coming from other counties with primary
care too. So as we see the change in landscape of health care, I have additional concerns about the burden of primary care on FQC's and this is a very important issue and it may not be a
chartered issue on what I'm about to say but it it it's an issue. A lot of rural residents are being served by bond and neighborhood medical center for primary care as well with their other funding. So, it's important for Lyon County residents that we we put a focus on
primary care because a lot of things are changing with insurance with different grant programs, etc. So, to her point, I agree. I don't think that we need to flesh out how much is given, what percentage, etc., but continue to put a
focus on this and continue to leverage other funding sources from our neighbors, etc. Because when we house people in emergency shelters, for example, that come from rural areas and then they need to use the services of our health care services in Lyon County,
this pot of money can't be used for them because they're not Lyon County residents, but they are burdening the health care system in this area. So, it's just something that we need to keep an eye on and just make sure uh we have the appropriate funding sources and partners to take care of it.
>> Thank you. At this point, we don't have a motion on the table for uh any action. I don't know if someone would like to make that motion. >> I'd like them to make the motion. I'm not sure what you have in mind, but to direct staff to draft a proposed charter
amendment affirming that Lyon County values access to primary care as a leading determinant of economic vitality and community well-being. Okay, the motion's been made and second. I'm not sure who second it was. >> I put my name
>> Daryl Jones second motion. >> Okay. All right. Uh, at this point, is there further discussion on this? >> Oh, okay. Um this point take a take a roll call vote
on this on the motion which is uh option three uh to direct staff to adopt a proposed charter amendment on healthcare. Um we'll take a roll please. >> Yes. >> Max Hurley. >> I >> Daryl Jones.
>> Yes. >> Howard Kesler? >> Yes. >> Henry Lewis. >> Yes. >> Heidiwe. >> Absolutely. Ryan Ray, >> yes. >> Tomorrow Robersonson, >> yes. >> Temple Robinson, >> yes.
>> Bruce Strubal, >> yes. >> Jarrett Terry, >> yes. >> Katrina Tugerson, >> yes. >> Barry Wilcox, >> yes. >> Vice Chair Haynes, >> Chair Lley, >> yes. >> Pass is unanimous. >> Unanimous pass. Wow, that's amazing.
Well, moved right along. >> [laughter] >> Okay. >> I wasn't expecting that, >> Madam Chair. >> Yes, sir. >> After we heard from Mr. Wilcox to add his recommendations, did that in cuz we then went straight into the item. Are we
still is there still opportunity for us to make recommendations? >> Sure. Uh if that's the will of the committee. Yeah. The chair, you can go back. >> Yeah. >> This is the final opportunity of this meeting to propose any uh new >> in terms of timing. We Oh, all right.
>> Can go around again on that. Okay. >> I because we went straight into the item and I don't know if anyone else had any recommendations to make. >> Yeah. >> Um I let me put >> cuz I do. >> Okay. Well, that's what I was waiting for.
>> Proceed. Yeah. Thank you. Um again with my lofty not perception of the charter. Um and I know that in this current political environment that there is conversations that or matter of fact
even in this current political environment beyond our community values like diversity, equity, and inclusion and local business preference are words
that have now become verboten. And I don't know if there is but I think that we under home rule and if these are community we talk about and I have talked about ad nauseium what I perceive
are community values I'm interested in and I'm not certain if it already exists in our charter maybe it may I'm not sure but I am interested in Holding up diversity, equity, inclusion
as a charter value as well as where feasible local preference where local firms are esteemed in our local economy in comparison to firms that exist outside of our
community. I I don't want to consider those persons who live outside of our community as carpet baggers. cuz that's a strong word. But I do believe that support, charity, love, goodwill starts at home.
And so I'm interested in put uh offering um charter language that would esteem diversity, equity, inclusion, and local preferences as community values where where Lyon County.
>> We're making a motion to that effect. >> Yes. That it be added to our list of for consideration. >> To be added to the list for consideration. Yes, >> there a second to that motion. >> I'll second that. >> Motion's been made and seconded to
include a further discussion on uh uh diversity, equity, and inclusion >> and local preference >> and local preference >> as community standards. Okay. >> As a part of our charter. >> All right. Motion's been made and
seconded. Oh, Miss Miss Favors. And this is to move forward with a an item come an agenda item for future meeting on this topic. >> We are we're asking for staff to develop something with wording that we'll have a chance to review. >> Yeah.
>> No, at that at that point it would be to have additional analysis brought back. >> Mhm. >> Um and then once you're you have that analysis at that point >> it would a decision would be made. >> But she's right. The staff will bring back further discussion. >> Yeah. >> Analysis.
>> Yeah. An analysis. Yeah. Mhm. >> All right. Um we'll take a roll call vote on this, please. >> Hello. >> There's I'm sorry, Dr. >> Yeah. Just one more point on that. So, with the understanding that there are additional laws and things at the state
and federal level that may relate to diversity, equity, and inclusion. And I know the county receives funds from state and federal government. If this were to be voted forward in the analysis, could it include the ramification of receiving funding, etc.,
or impede on funding from the federal government and state government because there are some new laws and things against DEI? >> Okay. The county attorney, I think, had a comment on that, please. >> Thank you. So, uh, and committee member
Jones can clarify that is not his intent, but what he said was, uh, staff analysis on, uh, language related to a community value, which does not create any sort of actionable
uh, item or directive of any sort. Uh so there would not be a concern based strictly on that about any potential preeemption or conflict with federal or state law. If the committee asks for something that is actionable that
becomes more problematic. >> Got it. >> Thank you, Mr. Hurley. >> Um was that the intent of the motion maker? >> Um >> it's a community value. Yeah. >> So [clears throat] it's essentially nonbinding is what you were trying to
>> So as your local MWSBE uh deputy director in OEV I understand the political ramifications of it. We are wrestling with those issues right now. All right. We have seen communities that are pivoting to SBE programs that
are race and gender neutral. However, as a community value, we believe that diversity, equity, and inclusion matters to us and that local businesses, which now is at the state level, is now no longer
permissible, but it matters to us. And I just think that it just it may it is not intended to be full of sound and fury signifying nothing but it is intended to say that this is what we believe as Leyon County no different than the other values that I have
supported. We believe in affordable housing. We believe in primary health care for our neighbors. We believe uh in food security for our neighbors. And we believe in what is we know the value found in our diversity living equitably
and treating people equitably. And that we believe in that having all voices bound at the table at all times and in all circumstances as a value as a community. >> Thank you. Uh Miss Favors, we don't have
any other discussion on the topic before we take a vote. Uh, all right. I'd like a roll call vote, please. >> Anita Favors, >> yes. >> Max Hurley, >> I. >> Daryl Jones, >> yes. >> Howard Kesler, >> yes.
>> Henry Lewis, >> yes. >> Heidi Altway. >> No. >> Ryan Ray, >> yes. >> Shamar Roersonson, >> no. >> Temple Robinson, >> yes.
Bruce Stroble, >> yes. >> Jared Terry, >> yes. >> Katrina Tugerson, >> yes. >> Barry Wilcox, >> yes. >> Vice Chair Haynes, >> I. >> Chair Lley, >> yes.
>> Motion passes 13 to2. >> Further discussion on that. Yes, Mr. Hurley. >> Um, thank you. uh under the Lyon County Charter right now. Um what happens if there is a vacancy
in the in a county commission seat? >> It depends on uh when the vacancy occurs. It's a timing issue. Depending on the timing, it may be an appointment by the governor until the next election or there may be an immediate election.
It just depends. >> So, let's say that at this exact moment there was a vacancy, what would happen? >> I'd have to look at the time frames. I don't have the statute memorized. >> Okay. Um,
so, uh, I'm wondering this board's, uh, interest in exploring and having more information come back about what happens when there's a vacancy created to include, um, cons the consideration of the costs associated with and, uh, the
benefit from uh, holding an election. Um, I can tell you that the value to this community in the difference that one county commissioner can make, our our chair can tell you is supreme. Um, there
is a lot that one county commissioner can do. And I think that the value of a county commissioner and that their decisions over the course of their career is worth far more than the cost of an election which you know I know
that we there actually is a member of the supervisor of elections office um in the audience and thank you for being here. I I wouldn't call on you in this moment unless you you'd like to, but I you know from previous conversations it costs around $150
$200,000 for a special election. And uh I ask you guys to consider that number and consider the totality of a county commissioner's career and all of the decisions that they will make in how much is that worth to a community. Um, and so I just wanted to hear from this
body what you all thought about an item to come back about changing the process for what happens when there's a vacancy >> here. >> Okay. >> Sharling. >> Yes. Uh-huh. >> To the extent there is a statutory
scheme for that, we are preempted from putting anything in our charter that conflicts. Yes. Absolutely. 100%. So there's no mechanism at all to have an election. >> If the timing is such that the statute
says there is a governor's appointment, we are preempted. It is decided by statute. Period. >> Okay. I was wrong. >> Well, thanks big man to do that. >> Thank you guys. >> Oh, ladies and gentlemen, we have
actually we how many meetings? We have three meetings left and quite a lot to discuss on on those topics coming up. So, um I don't know if there's anything else we want to bring up today that today's the last day for any other proposals to come forward. So,
>> okay. >> I um if I could I'm not super committed to this, but I just wanted to idiate about this um a bit. Uh many years ago, our county commission was drawn into districts uh to um to basically encourage or or to protect minority
voter participation. Um these days both of our atlarge um >> Excuse me, I didn't hear the last thing you said. >> Oh. Um uh basically historic racism in our community uh create necessitated the the creation of districts that were minority access. Yeah. Districts. Yes.
Um, and these days, uh, both of our atlarge county commission districts are occupied by African-Americans. And I don't think that the same, um, dynamic exists as it did. Um, I know a very comparable community in Elatchua County, a liberal college town like ours, actually just went to at large, all at
large districts. Um, I think that all of our uh, county commission districts are minority access in 2026. Um, and I think actually kind of the opposite has happened. And I think we've got racial polarization and I think our current district scheme um actually creates kind of like whites only districts frankly
liy white districts that are not accessible to an African-American. For instance, county commission district 4 uh I think because of racial polarization probably would never elect an African-American whereas at large both seats have and can and will. And so I just wonder just want to get it out
there. I'm not necessarily married to this but I would say that a comparable jurisdiction has gone to all at large. um the county district the county voters at large have demonstrated their ability and their history of electing African-Americans and I wouldn't want districts that were originally uh
intended to protect the rights of minority voters to now disenfranchise them which I think may be um happening today. So um in their wisdom uh the city charter uh districts were uh there was a a urge uh from certain quarters to uh to
create districts I think kind of like to create a wider and more Republican access uh seat frankly. Um that was I think rejected and we keep it all at large. I think that the city is a whole community of interest organically and I think that was the right move and I just wondered if there was any interest on
this committee and um going towards all at large uh at the county level since of course we um since the dynamics are different since the last time this issue was uh visited. So just wanted to put it out there for the good of the order. >> Madam Chair, >> yes sir. >> I would love to hear what Dr. Lewis has
to say about >> and I would like to speak to >> Same here. I would too and I would defer to his discretion after >> as the individual who was first elected to the district one because of what you just said.
>> Yeah. >> I uh I uh I hadn't really thought about it until you brought the issue up. But as I as I think about it a little bit more, I do think that uh having districts still maintain the integrity
of the process and make sure that at least part of this community even if dynamics in terms of moves change, there is representation of all individuals on on the commission. And I do think that we need to be able to maintain that as
to the extent possible in that regard. Uh I'm proud that Lyon County has uh uh graduated to the level of understanding and DEI really to elect to at large
commissioners from uh countywide, but certainly uh with the dynamics that are happening in our government right now, I think it's wise for us to maintain what we got. Uh my data used to say, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."
Um, heard that. I would defer to the uh I wouldn't make a motion then. I just wanted to kind of ideate and see what folks's views are. I think that the former commissioner view is uh good enough for me. So, thank you. >> Chair Chair Linley, you recognize. Oh, well, it sounds like it's done, but uh as a person who ran for office for
[clears throat] the county commission twice at large, um the cost of that is quite tremendous, and I think in a way might eliminate a lot of people uh wanting to run for office to to uh represent their districts, their neighborhoods. I agree with you. I mean,
it's been a great thing to see that. I don't think we really need that for racial diversity in our community. We have pretty strong [clears throat] uh voting record on that. But it is a lot more expensive, a lot more time consuming. Cost of running for public office now is tremendous.
>> Or even districts. >> Um yeah, may I? You're done. >> Yes. >> Back to me. >> I just didn't want to miss the opportunity and and to say that um uh this is a charter issue you're talking about. [laughter]
>> This is one of them. And again, whether you decide to pursue it or not, this is a charter issue. So, I just wanted to point that out. >> Thank you, Mr. Administrator. >> Okay. >> Heard that. >> Uh I'm kind of a mind to adjourn at this time unless we have further discussion. I don't think the staff is ready to prepare the uh discussion on the next
items that we will be picking up at the next meeting. >> I just wanted to mention one other one. Um >> Okay. >> I I sorry, Nikki. I I was trying to pull up our email, but I I couldn't find it. Um, I sent you a Florida statute citation for this. Uh, I'll try to
explain this. Um, in Florida statute, there is a provision that counties can opt into and they have to do it every 10 years and they can support economic development projects. Uh, and they it gives them an additional tool to do tax
abatement on economic development projects, but the county commission has to pass it every 10 years. Um, and I'm wondering if we could have it just that kind of explained back to us to where if that was uh something that people wanted more information about that we could
pursue it. Uh, I'm I don't really have my mind made up about it. This has been raised to me and I just wanted to better understand it and have this body better understand that. >> Would you like to take >> proposing for an analysis to come back on that? Yeah, it's such that it was
open enough to where if we wanted to that we could pursue that, but if not, you know, we could just get the information as well >> to where we preserve the ability to bring something back. I'm basically saying I am proposing this as an idea. I'm not saying I necessarily support it. I just want to have staff provide
information about it. >> Well, this the schedule is for today's the last meeting that we have to bring forward new because we can't just keep on endlessly. Yeah. >> Um, >> so I think it's your call whether you want to make a motion and see what the will of the committee is. I wasn't quite
100% clear on what your proposal is truthfully. >> Um, well, before I make the motion, was did member Jones have a concern or question >> lofty concern [laughter] he's our economic development? Yeah. Uh so I'll make a motion to bring back uh an item explaining any options that may
exist for uh tax abatement for economic development projects uh through a ballot amendment and the background on that statute. >> Motion's been made. Do I hear a second? >> Failing that the motion dies for lack of a second. Thank you Mr. >> Madam Chair.
>> Yes sir. >> My question is Mr. Long. Do we current don't we have current statute that uh provides provision where the county makes intentional investment in safety
for properties adjacent to schools? >> I may need a little bit more information. >> I know that we it is a practice to make certain that there are sidewalks and other infrastructure, but that's all that's already found in statute, right?
That's not a just a priority, but it's it's it's a part of our policy as a county, right? >> It's both. There's a some state revenues that we take advantage of because we have a program in place like the safe sidewalks to schools program, which is one of those types of programs. Um
that's one that's the one that comes immediately to mind related to infrastructure around schools. But yes, we do have a specific um safe um uh safeways to schools um or sidewalks to schools program which puts in our local program uh sidewalks that connect
students to schools and neighborhoods at the top of the list for sidewalk funding. But at this last meeting where we can make recommendations, I don't have to make a recommendation for a charter amendment to potentially talk about ensuring safe access for children to to
school sites in Lyon County because it already exists. >> I wouldn't think so. >> All right. Thank you. >> All right. Um, we've had a great meeting. I want to thank the staff technical and uh in every way for an amazing amount of work
to prepare all of these items for us. They've done a great job and thank you and uh we have more to come three more meetings. Uh I believe is the inspector general item coming up next time or do we have a are we sure of the order? So, um,
>> I guess as a heads up to the committee, um, the proposer of that item, member Kesler, will not be in attendance at our upcoming meeting. So, at his request and in coordination with with staff, we are going to have that item come at your first meeting in February. So, that way
he'll be able to be in attendance uh, when that's being introduced. >> Okay. Thanks. Thanks for that. So, our next meeting is um, January 22nd. Do I hear a motion to adjurnn? So moved. >> All in favor say I.
>> I don't think we need