--------- all this meeting back into order um >> before we get >> before we get going heard his before we get uh be >> before we get uh start on the public hearing um I am going to make uh take
the per point of uh privilege as chair to we have one speaker here that I know is waiting to speak on one of the annexation items. It's uh Commissioner Jeremy Matlo. So, I'm going to allow him to have his three minutes to speak now because he has another obligation to attend to. Commissioner Matlo, you have
the floor. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. I didn't know your son would be here, so I'll try to keep my my remarks brief and appropriate. Uh I just wanted to come and address the Lake Jackson annexation item. I know it seems the city and the county um have
been at odds on this decision and it seems to be a growing process uh where the city and the county go back and forth. I think you made the appropriate decision earlier this year not to expand uh the urban services area. We work collaboratively to establish that during our comprehensive planning uh process.
And I know this annexation may feel like an attack coming from across the street. But I would like to say I think you're well within your rights of what your staff has recommended to go through the mediation process. You know, if you look at the timeline of this decision, we're
looking at having a new city manager uh 3 weeks after this decision could be made at the city. We're looking at having a new mayor two months after this decision uh could be made. So, I think it's imperative that the city and the county continue to have a great uh working relationship and I think what your staff is recommending today doesn't
threaten that relationship at all, but actually strengthens it uh with our constituents. Uh thank you for allowing me the time and uh you'll have a good meeting. >> Thank Thank you, Commissioner. >> All right, commissioners, we are on our first public hearing now. Item number 24, Mr. County Administrator.
>> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Commissioners, item number 24 uh is based on recent guidance from the county's external auditor. Uh this item requests the board to conduct the first and only public hearing to consider an ordinance amending chapter 2 section 2-27 of the Leyon County Code of Laws to revive the
statutory citations and codify the existing car allowance in the calculation of board salaries. We're recommending option one. We have no speakers on this item and would be happy to answer any questions you might have. All right, commissioners. We are looking
for a motion. Move >> staff recommendation. Mr. Chair, >> we have a motion for staff recommendation. Is there a second? >> Second by Commissioner Cummings. Any discussion? All right. Seeing none, all those in the motion on
the floor signify by saying I. I. Okay. >> Passes unanimously. Number 25. Item number 25. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman, commissioners. Uh it's that time of year again, so bear with us. The next several items uh is your uh annual requirement on the
certification of the nonadvalorum assessment role. Uh the first item, item number 25, as required by Florida statutes, is the first and only public hearing for the adoption of the fire service assessment role for all properties being assessed for the first time and the authorization to certify
the entire assessment role to the tax collector. Um uh again, the fiscal impact uh is noted in the item. We're recommending option one. And I just wanted to check again real quick, commissioners, to make sure that you didn't have any speakers on this item. I
do not see any. So again, happy to answer any questions you might have. >> All right. Uh, thank you, Mr. Commissioner. Item number 25. We have a motion. >> So motion moved for staff recommendation. For staff recommendation, >> yeah,
>> a second by the vice chairman. Any discussion? >> All those in favor signify by saying I. I >> pass unanimously. >> I >> We are now on on number 26. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Commissioners, is required by Florida statutes, this is
the first and only public hearing for the adoption of the storm water assessment role for all properties being assessed for the first time and certification of the entire assessment role to the tax collector. Uh the storm water assessment is included in the truth and mill uh act property tax notice and remains unchanged for the
next fiscal year. We're recommending option one. Uh we have no speakers on this item. Happy to answer any questions you might have. >> So move, Mr. Chairman. Option recommended. >> Our motion uh staff recommendation moved by Commissioner Proctor, second by Commissioner Maddox. Any discussion? >> Seeing none, all those in favor of the
motion signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. Unanimously, we're on 27. >> Mr. Chair, uh let the record reflect me in the affirmative with the vote with the previous votes taken. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Thank you. Item number 27
>> as required by Florida statutes. Commissioner Chairman, commissioners, uh this is the first and only public hearing on the adoption of the updated solid waste assessment rate resolution. The adoption of the assessment role for all properties being assessed for the first time and the certification of the entire assessment role for the solid
waste disposal services. This item uh incorporates uh all the fiscal impact uh and and all of the other relevant information. We're recommending option one. We do have one speaker on this item. Actually, I'm being told that we uh don't that speaker was joining us virtually and we do not have that
speaker on. So, with that, commissioners, we'd be happy to answer any questions you might have. >> Thank you. Looking for a motion >> move option. >> Second motion moved by Commissioner Per recommendation. Any discussion? >> Okay, seeing none, all those in favor of motion signify by saying I.
>> I. >> Any opposed? >> I >> myself passes 61 with myself and descent. Um item number 28. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman, commissioners. This item requests the board to conduct the first and only public hearing to approve a resolution adopting the non-advorum assessment role for the
purposes of collecting sewer service usage charges and readiness to serve charges on certain real property located in the Bair Anowwood subdivision and certification of the entire role to the tax collector. Again, commissioners, pursuant to the interlocal agreement for the provision of sewer services, uh the
city is responsible for providing the sewer services. The county is responsible to collect and remit uh to the city of Tallahassee the full amount of all charges related to sewer service through the non-adorm assessment on the annual tax bill for properties without metered uh services through the city of
Tallahassee. For the Bair Anowwood subdivision, we collect uh and remit charges for about 10 parcels next year. The the project serve more than 120 uh properties in total. With that, commissioners, we're recommending option one. We do not have any speakers on this
item. Happy to answer any questions you might have. >> Thank you. Um commissioners item number 28 looking for a motion. >> I move option one, Mr. >> Okay, so we we have motion moved by Commissioner Cummings for staff recommendation that was seconded by Commissioner Miner. Any discussion?
>> Discussion, Mr. Chairman. >> Go ahead, Commissioner Proctor. >> Commissioners, this is uh again and I'm sorry, Commissioner Matt Low. He left his he left uh has left. But this is an instance where uh the people down in the bail air community are now being
assessed for sewer. And I want you to know that these people cannot vote. And as I look at um on page um page um not even sure where we are. Attachment three
for me. I'm looking at page U. >> Yes, sir. >> Local agreement. >> Um jeez, I didn't bring my Anyway, um I'm looking at a map. I'll just show it to you.
When you look at this map right here down on page um 10 86 I think and you can see that the Bair community and many of these communities are using city services and they're being assessed and taxed now. They can't
vote in city elections and I believe what is needed is that all these citizens who live in the urban service area ought to be able to vote in municipal elections. Um they're paying taxes. here. We are facilitating them to pay taxes. We're setting them up to pay
the city money, but the city is doing nothing to afford them uh the right to vote. And I believe that what is needed is a um we need a change in county attorney. I don't know if that's a comp plan amendment, a city ordinance, but
everybody living inside the urban service area uh for which the city is reaping uh major millions of dollars from these citizens, but they cannot vote. Uh this is select gerrymandering against folk who they're charging uh but
who reciprocally these people can't. Uh this is not democracy, taxation without representation. 250 years of an idea that for them does not extend. So, I'm troubled. I'm supporting this because um
that it does provide services. But what we need to do immediately, I'm asking for all of y'all support is allow these people to be free. Um these people on on and the rest of them down there on reservations. Uh and anytime you put a a
a cluster of people together and deny the infrastructure of water uh and they're not being denied that, but being denied sewer and just like an Indian reservation, a cut off and um we need to
have central sewer running all across um inside of this area that I'm lifting up. And I said it about a thousand times now. Um, and I I again am troubled by what we're what we're doing here today and not troubled because the services are come, but the fact that they cannot
vote uh for the taxes that they're being charged. Thank you so much. >> Thank you. Uh, any other comment, commissioners? I um I will be voting no on the next uh four items. Uh I just I want to reiterate my position. So for
the being consistent, I I understand how we got here by needing and by wanting to implement sewer into certain parts of the rural communities that don't have uh central sewer. However, I feel like the structure of which, you know, we have continue to
move forward with this um by basically building hundreds of millions of dollars in infrastructure and then giving that infrastructure away. Um, so then to to another government. So then that government then charges a sir charge on our residents. They're already making
money on it and then they're also charging a sir charge on county residents. Um, one thing I am very very happy about is the Florida legislature this year passed a cap on those sewer fees on the sewage on the search charge
that which um, municipal governments can charge residents in the unincorporated area. It was 50%. it was 25%. Um, very pleased to see that that's going to save a ton of our neighbors a bunch of money. Um, however, I still just don't believe the structure of which we're investing
hundreds of millions of dollars over time and then giving that infrastructure away and I could support leasing it. Um, but I just I just can't support it. So, thank you. Um, we'll now item number 28. Motion moved was by Proctor, seconded by
Commissioner Miner. >> No, I didn't move that. Um, Cummings. Oh, I'm sorry. I apologize. Who second it? Miner. A motion moved by Commissioner second by Commissioner Miner. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> Any opposed? >> I.
>> Uh, passes 52 with Commissioner Proctor and I in descent. Item number 29. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman, commissioners. This item I request the board to conduct the first and only public hearing to approve a resolution adopting the non-advelorum role for sewer services and ready readiness to serve charges on
certain rural property located in the Clarin Lakes Plantation subdivision units one and two and certification of the entire role to the tax collector. Uh again commissioners uh like the previous item pursuant to our interlocal agreement uh the city's responsible for providing sewer service county is responsible to collect and remit to the
city of Tallahassy's the full amount of readiness to serve charges related to sewer services through the non-advorum special assessment on the annual text tax bill. This applies to approximately 1320 parcels in Karn Lakes Plantation. Uh where we have a recommendation before
you of option one. We have no speakers on this item. Happy to answer any questions you might have. Thank you. Commissioner is looking for a motion. Item number 29. >> So move moved by the commissioner Maddox, second by the vice chairman. Any discussion? >> Point of information. >> Yes, sir. >> What is the voting status of people who
live on the plantation up there? Do they vote in city elections? >> They don't vote in city elections. >> So they do not. >> Okay. Um are they in the urban service area? They are not right.
>> Well, we got people who live in the urban services area who are not getting the urban services and they can't vote. And uh I'm not sure the status of killarm lakes plantation, but I am sure of the status of uh these communities
down inside of Capitol Circle, Bell Air, all all that ground in there. Um they can't vote and they don't have sewer pipes and again they're living on reservations. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> Yes, sir.
>> Yeah. I just wanted to say I'm going to be voting against this item, not because I don't understand the principle of a readiness to serve charge, but mostly because of the city's massive and unsubstantiated increase in this fee
last year. I feel like I will have to wait four or five years before I can vote for this item so that that giant increase can be justified given the the nature of it from just recently. So, thank you, sir. >> Thank you, uh, Mr. Immediate Pass
Chairman. All right, Commissioner. Yes, sir. Commissioner Maddox. >> Mr. Administrator, what what happens if if it doesn't pass? >> I've got Anna here. I'd like to ask her. We're we're in an agreement with the city on this. So, we'd have to I'd defer
to the county attorney's office on on the on the agreement. >> Uh we would be in breach and default of our agreement and our contractual obligations. And I'm confident we would get sued by the city. Okay. >> And if sued, we would lose. >> Okay. So, my question is
when do we when do we review the agreement again? When do we >> There is no interm agreement. >> There's no end to the agreement. >> No. >> So how do we So there's no way to change it >> unless the parties agreed to mutually end the agreement. There is no set term.
It is an evergreen agreement. >> Um I'm looking for a way I I I mean I don't disagree with the with the stance that that our chair takes and even uh Commissioner Welch has has spoke of and even Commissioner Proctor. I'm looking
for a way for us to renegotiate or get out of this agreement. You're telling me there is there is no way. We we could we could ask for renegotiation. They're going to say no, of course. Um but aside from that, there's there's no way for us to unilaterally get out of this
agreement without any penalty. >> No. >> Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Thank you, Commissioner Maddox. I think um um currently there's probably not a sentiment to renegotiate, but I think after November there'll be some a
sentiment change at city hall and hopefully we can circle back to some of these items and and come up with a deal a deal that's more favorable for all parties. Um any other discussion? >> All right, seeing none, motion move. Who moved the motion? I apologize. Was it
Commissioner Cummings? Seconded by you? >> Yes. >> Seconded by Commissioner Maddox. All those in favor signify by saying I >> I. >> Any opposed? >> Nay. >> No. >> Commissioner Proctor, are you in affirmative or negative? >> Negative. >> Okay. So, passes 43. Next item. Mr.
County Administrator. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Commissioners, this item requests the board to conduct the first and only public hearing to approve a resolution imposing nonadorum special assessment for the purposes of sewer search charges and readiness to serve charges on certain rural property located in the northeast Lake Mson sewer
system project area. a resolution adopting the non-adorm assessment rule and certification of the entire role of tax collector. Uh again, we're recommending option one and u and option two and uh we have no speakers on this item.
>> All right, commissioners to confirm motion item number 30. >> So move staff recommendation. >> Motion move by the vice chairman for staff recommendation. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Second by uh Commissioner Maddox. Any discussion? All those in favor of the motion signify
by saying I. >> I. >> Any opposed? >> I. >> Nay. So it passes uh four two with Commissioner Miner. Are you affirmative or negative on staff recommendation on item 30?
>> Okay. Passes 52. Um and we're on item number 31. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Commissioners, this item requests the board conduct first and only public hearing to approve a resolution imposing the non-adorum assessments for the purpose of collecting the sewer service charges uh and readiness to serve charges on
certain rural property located in the Woodville sewer phase one project area. The resolution adopting the non-adorm assessment and the certification of the entire assessment role to the tax collector. We're recommending options one and two and we have no speakers on this item. >> Great. Thanks so much, Mr. Cra. Is there
a motion? So move >> motion move for staff recommendation. Um is there a second? >> Second by the vice chairman. Any discussion? >> Discussion. >> Yes sir. >> What is the um u tangible amount that will be imposed upon uh persons in the
affected area? How much we're talking about perom non-participants and they will be assessed they will be assessed um $378.90 for the previous fiscal year plus the $469 for this fiscal year. Um, and then
the properties, uh, the three that are connected are, um, they vary, and it's all on page one, uh, 1376, but they vary, um, roughly $1,200 for last year and then, um, 11 or $1,200 for this year
across the 20 properties. >> So, why are they being retroactively charged? >> They are. So, the properties that are connected, they pay from the um from the date of connection through um through the end of last fiscal year or through
the end of this fiscal year, excuse me. And then they'll pay um for next fiscal year. Everybody pays for next next fiscal year as well. >> I I'll defer you, Mr. Chair McGoy. How much are they paying this year total? >> Um you know, I actually don't have that
written down. >> So, what is it combined? >> Oh, wait. Hang on. I do >> I think they're paying for last year and this year all >> they are. Yes, they are. Um they are paying the nonparticipants are paying $848 total. Um and then the participants $400 total.
>> Okay. So Mr. I don't want to steal your thunder on that. Wait a >> go ahead. Oh, go ahead. Go ahead. Go ahead. >> So the participation fee to participate cost uh the property owner what amount? >> Um it'll it'll be uh roughly $2,400 on
their tax bill. And that covers the time of when they connected through uh the end of next fiscal year. >> So the grants that we're receiving from the state, we got money to put pipes in the ground. >> Mhm. >> Covered done. Uh the monies that we have
to assist and to help uh persons sign up in particular for the Woodr Wood of the uh Walkola Springs protection area. Uh do we not have monies uh that would pay for the hook hookin fee uh for these
citizens in particular in this sensitive sensitive area? >> It does um it does cover not only the pipes in the ground, but it also does help the citizens uh roughly $10,000 per citizen or per per property that connects um as long as they connect during construction. But once the system
is is functioning and accepted by the city, at that point it's the responsibility of the homeowner. So this is the responsibility of the city uh for the citizens of Woodville and what happens to them and not the county.
>> I'm sorry I don't understand the >> So the city is large and in charge over the county citizens of Woodville. >> The city charges them for the sewer fees. >> So what happens to the amount that we have grant money to help them tap into uh the sewer system? Why are they still
paying $2400? The 2,400 that they pay includes the um the readiness to serve fee, which is a fee that everybody pays, which covers the city's cost to maintain and operate that system so that it's available if and when those property owners choose to
connect. Uh those properties that usage fee that the city uses comes off of the property. Uh and then they also pay the search charge >> differ from citizens who live in uh kills community. It's the same. >> The the only difference with >> all people are being treated alike who
have sewer whether it's Aenddale neighborhood or the other neighborhood that won or if it's um um High Grove or whomever. >> That's correct. So all while all properties um that we collect for so Beller Anowwood uh Northern they all pay
the same fee for this coming fiscal year. Ville and Northeast Lake Mson, they pay the PR-rated share. Going forward, they will have the same bill. >> Connect. Is it when the city ready to operate or is it when the signals official connection? When when is the
>> Absolutely. So for the properties that physically connect to the system, it is at the time when they physically connect and they no longer use their septic, their septic system is abandoned. For those properties that choose not to participate, at that point, it's when the city takes over ownership and operation and maintenance of the system.
is the date. >> All right, I'm going need to go and I like Vince to go back and visit this off off off off offline and um to reup my understanding and to make sure that um this is not um honorous upon uh the
citizens which there's a fee amount occurring now that I I had not anticipated clicking and also there is an operational function which I had not understood the city to have um um last word decision making uh
out here in the county when we put those pipes. And from my understanding, these are pipes the county paid for uh put down and then we have the city to operate uh and flow uh the uh materials
to wherever it goes. And um I just want to revisit this fence somewhere down the road next next couple weeks. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Thank you, Commissioners. I I I've consistently had an issue with this. Um we're basically charging uh neighbors
for two years in one year. $2,000 in one year for sewers. A lot of money. >> Yep. >> A lot of money. Yep. >> And we're acting like these people down here are just affluent with cash. And I don't like that we're doing this. Um, this is expensive. It's hard times and I
mean inflation is creeping up on folks and I just I feel like we could do a better job of um managing some of these expenses. I I don't know why we can't um basically charge them one year their normal rate for this year and then catch
them up on last year over a period of time. Um, I think, you know, it'd be a better a better way to uh look out for our neighbors, particularly on this issue. And Anna, by the way, you do a great job. I know this is not um directly related to you. I'm just talking about the system and and structure as a whole. Um, so I'll I'll
be voting against this item as well. Mr. Vice Chair, I saw you were in the queue. Did you want to say anything? I >> I like where you're going. Is there is there any option for us to do that to say when we send them notice to offer to allow them to pay the last year over a number of years?
>> No. The city tells us a number and we have to impose and collect that amount. So the city could decide to do that but the county has absolutely no authority or discretion to make that choice. What >> when is the deadline for collection?
>> It goes on the tax roll. >> Yeah. Commissioners, this is a barbaric structure. Um I mean this is just point blank a terrible structure. I don't know why in the past this was not bid out to
other other um partners. I spoke to Talquin. Um they said that they would have loved to look and and had a conversation related to to providing sewer in unincorporated area. The county could easily have have visited to run our own sewer where we control the cost.
But this is I I I can't stand the fact that we are allowing um another government to dictate how over it is. We cannot uh make recommendation on behalf and in the interest of citizens in our
jurisdiction to uh uh pay forward monies uh and structure it in a way that they're not clobbered for two years and one year can we so >> the county could make that request and
for purposes of putting this on the tax is a timesensitive issue for the upcoming tax roll cycle. >> What is the total amount of funds from last year that they'll be getting ketchup dollar funds that they would be
playing ketchup like not for this year but for last year that they would be double paying this year? >> So they are paying um one property is paying $1,276 um for previous year. Uh, one property is pay property is paying 1,93 because
they had different times at which they >> Okay, so there's three properties. Um, if those three property owners have any financial troubles that we the county would be able to some some way be able to assist and and uh I'm just I'm just spitballing out loud. I understand that we owe the city money regardless but
provide some money for one year. >> Commissioners not know of um again we treat all these users the same connected to the system and you know I think it's easy because we don't want to revisit it you know every time benefit uh of this
service dollars worth of value of going forward. I I'm at a bit of a loss in terms of of of how we could reconcile that because it really just reflects when they connect to the system. >> Yeah. Yeah, in the spirit of treating them all fairly though, some are not being treated fairly. Some are paying for so doesn't it doesn't feel like it's
fair. >> Um, who moves staff staff recommendation? Who who moved for staff recommendation on this? >> I did. >> You did. >> Okay. Commissioner Maddox second. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Any oppose? I
>> So passes 52 with myself and Commissioner Proctor in descent. We are back to um Thank you, Anna, by the way. Um we are back to general business 18. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Commissioners, very quickly in terms of an
introduction's actions at your June 16th budget workshop regarding the development following uh legal and county attorney's office, the item also provides information relative to FY27 discretionary funding impacted by Senate Bill 1134 which prohibits local
governments from and providing funding in there. However, I do want to provide some clarification that the discretionary funds appropriated by the board will still remain in the tenative budget uh to allow the impacted organizations that are identified in the item to make changes and adjustments to their structure and programming to
comply with uh Senate Bill 1134 prior to the January 1st uh statutory deadline. So, I just I wanted to provide that clarification. Uh no additional uh action is needed uh by the board at this time on that issue. There was just a couple of other outstanding the u clerk
of the courts on on her budget. Um and we did so and and there are no changes recommended uh here. Uh the the item also that are provided in option three. You'll recall that back in percent 0 to 5 performancebased system. Uh the board
wanted to send these wages without raises without utilizing general revenue fund balance uh based on the values of of um do the true uptick there of about $80,000 employee board a performance-based system on that. With respect to anything else commissioners,
again the item is very comprehensive and reflects the actions that you took at your budget workshop. We're happy to answer any questions you might have. And I should note that we do have three speakers on this item. First speaker, Kimmy Hogan. >> I'm here tonight as the president for
the Oasis Center for Women and Girls, and I'm just coming work together to understand the impacts of Senate Bill 1134. We look forward to working with y'all to make sure that we're in compliance. So, thank you so much. >> Next speaker, uh, Dr. Jasmine Bryant.
>> Okay, got it. Thank you, Stephanie Schum. >> Good evening, county attorney. Um, just wanted to say thank you for um the coordination and conversations we've had over the last couple days with your county staff and working to get forward and and all of the things for is and
y'all were embodied to exist. So, obvious director, so um if she could be here, she would. Um but we really appreciate the time, effort, and energy over the last couple days from staff and commissioners on uh trying to navigate this forward. So appreciate it.
>> Just um the u we're recommending the >> Commissioner Mox for a motion. Um, if I could bifurcate the motion or the item cuz I need to recuse my Can I can I can a motion be for um everything in option
one except for funding related to family promise or do I have to just do everything except for one A? Um it would really be option 1 A because the funding levels for the other categories lost
>> B uh through J. >> Second >> B through J. >> Yes sir. >> Okay. Um motion move for options B through J. Matic second by the vice chair. >> Uh >> yes.
>> Yes, Mr. Chair. Just just for clarification, um those items, those line items, if I understand the the county administrator, I just want to make sure >> entities include Henry Hill, uh uh the NAACP
community to see if they can fall within >> I'm sorry, that's not a part of this motion. >> What? >> That's not a part of this motion. This motion excludes that part because I have to recuse myself from that part. >> Oh, so all of that. Oh, >> yeah. This is B through J.
>> BJ. >> Okay, great. With general budget, >> looking specifically at the um the uh medical examiner. >> Okay. >> Question. How does how does the schedule of fees compare to Jacksonville or and
Pensacola? Uh how do we compare uh with those numbers? And I'm not clear on how we're arriving at some of the increases. Rashan is probably, you know, still >> um Commissioner, I'm not Bill's um fee schedule, but the the um district
medical examiner um based off of um >> So, they just tell you what what their fees are. Okay. >> Yeah, but they're not um increasing this year. >> Three. Um I'm looking at an expert witness fee. Uh it's going from $5 to
$600. Uh they're criminal per hour from 241 to 258. Um the charge to outline counties is not changing. That's that $84 that use of morg fee um that we're speaking of. But
the other fees are the independent medical examiners um fee. And as part of our agreement with them, we adopt this fee schedule each year. >> Well, I marked this up. We've got that in three places and I think that we more
facilities is because once we pay and you see the autopsy amount is going up um you know a couple hundred dollars and the use of the morg fee um >> basically we county so our cost operate
at the line counties. >> Is this thing um taking in more money than it puts out? >> No sir. >> Okay. How do we catch up with that and how do we charge more money for use of the morg facilities? >> Well, it's based off each year we do an
analysis of our actual cost. That's our security cost, um, utility costs, the cost of operating the facility. So, we do that analysis each year and we charge out each county their share based off of the number of bodies.
cuz I'm um built a new facility and we've put our shoulders and we put our money on the line and and u commissioner we don't have a library. Um could we say that next year we won't have a morg. I mean if you're just going on things that
sustain themselves and we're undergirling a morg that ain't no not not not paying for itself. One way we can cover that and I don't more facilities but we should be at $1,000 to address that. Commissioner Proctor's
right. I just wanted to assure the board during next year's budget process. This may very well be an issue that comes to you with recommendations to increase all those fees for the outline counties. >> Well, yeah, we should not be upside down and paying for all the area counties.
They need to be charged and u we can't carry all that. Could you elaborate what the what? So we're subsidizing. >> We're not subsidizing. So the morg morg here for the outline counties. So we
charge each county their share. So we're operating Leyon Countyies that use the morg. So we charge each county their fair share. So we're not subsidized the county. >> They're upside down. Where where we from? >> We're not. >> We're not. >> No. No. >> Okay.
So the count we payies for bodies that um come into the facility. >> Is it a circuit morg? >> Yeah. And we're district too. >> Yeah. >> All showing is the current charges. >> See what we have before us. We don't know. We have the and then what the new
charge is going to be um October one of this year. And there's some incremental increases there. But in terms of loss, revenue taken in in this area, expenditures, um whether we've taken in more than
we've put out, that's not showing. So typically when that stuff don't show, you're taking a butt whipping and you're losing money. So if you don't show me the money, I presume you're losing it. That's my presumption. >> No, we're not. >> Okay. Good. Okay. It's not presented.
All right. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. >> Michelle. Thank you. Um I saw someone else in the queue. That's it. Okay. What's the vote on this item we're on? I mean this option. So we have a motion moved by Commissioner Maddox, second by the vice chair for options B
through J. >> All those in favor of the motion signify by saying I. >> I. U. >> Passes unanimously. >> Mr. Chair, I'll be recusing myself from item 1A uh because I am uh CEO of Family
Promises Big Ben, which receives CHSP funding and is in the preliminary budget. >> Great. Thank you, Commissioner Maddox. Looking for a motion for option A. >> So moved by Commissioner Miner, second by >> Second by Commissioner Cummings. Any
discussion? >> Mr. Chairman, I'm >> Commissioner Miners. Commissioner Miners in the queue. Commissioner Proctor. >> Okay. I'm sorry. >> Thank you, Mr. Mr. Chairman, um yes, move option uh 1a. Um I've had a lot of discussions with um the leadership of the commission on status women and girls
about how the effects of SB1 1134. If you all may remember that we have um an enabling resolution jointly passed between the city and the county that creates the citizen on the commission on the status of women and girls of Lyon County. Uh we had a lot of discussions
with them there. This is with the new anti-Dei legislation now statutes. It's really confusing. There's a lot of ambiguity there trying to figure out exactly what the implications are. And um we just need more time for the CSWG leadership to talk with the county. I
don't think this has to be part of the motion, but I just I just want to acknowledge that that there's there's a lot more work to do. Just trying to understand exactly what the interpretation of uh the statutes related to 1134 poses for us and and and basically we need to continue to assist
them on determining the options for them. So, I just we don't need to put that as part of the motion, but I did want to make that part of the record because it's um uh if there's something that might need to be adjusted, changed, I I'd expect that would be able to come back at the next county commission meeting. Is that correct? Uh Mr. County
Administrator, >> I don't know if Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, I I'm not sure if it would be at the the next commission meeting, but there is uh time again until the January 1st effective date. And so presumably we'd have that time to work with the organizations to to um find uh a solution to that should one
exist. >> And I know that our county staff have been working with them already and I'm very grateful for that. Um I I'm assuming that that assistance will continue but just wanted to point that out. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> Thank you, Commissioner Miner, Commissioner Proctor, O'Keeffe and Cummings. >> Mr. Chairman, um I want to inquire that
option three is a part of uh a >> we're going to I'm going to take them all up individually. >> Oh, and okay, we'll come to the back. So what is what are we um looking for in general? one a >> yeah I'm asking what are the elements of a what what >> that's the whole that's basically the entire budget line item budget correctly
let me say then u understanding its context um I'm well pleased with what our staff has done this year I'm well pleased with what our staff uh has listened to and uh with respect to our
um our um future goals and navigating those courses um I think I think no dou out that looking u at yonder's um next year cloudy waters and we'll know better in November rather to um just how much
to panic but with respect to this year I want to compliment our staff u for taking out u uh a sharp pencil and making sure that we're tight and right to note also that per the law of the
state of Florida we're required to have a balanced budget. And one of the things which uh the amendment three does, it will place us uh into uh waters of uh uncharted, unbalanced. And on the
numbers that we're using this year, these numbers will not sustain and will not keep pace and will not keep up the services of which we're undergirling. And I think that um um it's okay for us
to contemplate looking at these numbers right now. These ain't the numbers that can fill the void if amendment three uh is actually passed. So I'm I am concerned. Um I take a deep breath. Um,
I hope that the future will not bring us to uh a different kind of look, but for this one year, and that's all we're we're charged to do, one year at a time, is to balance a budget and to flow resources and distribute it across our
community uh as positively as effectively as we can. And commissioners, I want to commend you all. Um, it ain't been easy, Mr. Chairman. You've led us to u the product that we have tonight. And I hope that our citizens can appreciate um the
magnitude of the work. And also just to caution that we would be very challenged to ever um to replicate uh this performance in the future under the austere recommendations of a proposed
amendment three. Um those things being said, Mr. Chairman, um you're going to go through two and three separately. Uh, I'll keep the rest of my gunpowder dry. Thank you. >> Thank you. Uh, Mr. Vice Chair, then Commissioner Cummings. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to clear up
my understanding. It was said that regarding funding the Council on Status of Women, Girls, we don't have to make any changes or decisions until January 1st. But the budget year goes October
1st. Starts October 1st. And typically we fund them starting with the budget year. Is that correct? >> That's correct. >> And the law doesn't take the law that's that's impacting the future doesn't take effect until January 1st. >> That's correct.
>> And the core issue is finding out between now and January 1st if changes can be made to the structural organization etc. in a way that would make them compliant following January 1st. That's correct.
>> Okay. Does the motion as it sits now fund the CSWG starting on 101 2026? >> It it is contingent well that their funding going forward after January 1 obviously would be contingent on their compliance with the new legislation.
With respect to funding, I guess they meet quarterly. It would potentially be the administrative support for one meeting potentially. Um, that's something that we could work out, but the money is there, >> but it's not specified to CSWG as current as a at the moment.
>> It it is we have that money identified. Nothing's changed in the in the existing budget. >> So, if I we vote on this motion and exactly the same thing comes back at our September hearings on 101, CSWG is going to start getting their funding and the the only change
would be on January 1. that organization as currently constituted can be funded up through December 31st of 2026. After that date, as currently constituted, they cannot. The goal in the meantime is to try to figure out a way for them to be
reconstituted in a way that is compliant and that would enable them to be funded even after January 1, 2027. >> Quick quick question. I'll come back to you real quick. Sorry, Mr. Basher. Is that a us thing or them thing? Meaning like do they have to rebrand themselves or do we have to like what is that?
>> The CSWG is a creature of the city and the county. So the current enabling resolution that was adopted by both the city and the county will be void as of January 1 of 2027. So if they are to
continue to be an advisory body to the county, the county will have to take action prior to January 1, 2027. >> Okay, good. >> Thank you. Uh >> point of information, I'd just like to know how many such organizations stand
in that same posture. >> Let's come back. Let's come back. Let's go. Let him let the vice chair finish and then we'll go to the commissioner Cummings. But I think this is worth, you know, having conversation maybe at the end of the meeting. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. The reason I want to be so specific is because my
understanding from the agenda is at our workshop that we're ratifying, CSWG was pulled out of the discretionary amount based on the idea that they would not be in compliance. And now we're having discussion that we're ratifying the budget from the workshop. We know
the money's still there, but I was pretty sure we would need to put in the motion that we want the money there for CSWG to start on 101 and then it can change it as it needs to or it dead ends on December 31st. >> No, we we weren't seeking that. We were going off the ability that we've got the
money there should we get them in proper posture. Um and and also working with the county attorney's office. Again, if we didn't need to make any changes prior to January 1, the money would be available to to perfect to pay him. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Cummings. Thank you for your patience.
>> Thank you for your patience. You're recognized. >> Oh, thank you, Mr. Chair. And I wanted that same clarification, uh Mr. chair as it relates to the Henry Hill Foundation, the NAAC, NAACP.
Um, and I think we already indicated that soul Santa, choose for school, Frenchtown rising, we felt that they were exempted from that particular legislation, but is the posture now that we're going to go forward and allow
those entities, Henry Hill, NAACP, uh, to see if they can restructure to fall within the parameters of the legislation or are they excluded? did. Uh, Miss Miss Madame Attorney,
>> what I would say based on the current usage of that funding that the county provides, that funding would not be permissible, but just like with CSWG, staff is talking with these organizations to figure out if there is
a way to fund them. Now whether it's for this specific thing or something else in the future, it's going to be a fact and case by case analysis and it's going to be very dependent on their particular circumstances. >> Okay. Thank you. I just wanted to make
sure I understood and made sure that was the clarification. So just like we're working with CSWG, we'll be working with these other entities to see if we can bring them within um the language of that statute.
so that we can fund them as well. And and I I know initially we had an exclusion based on our initial interpretation, M Mr. County Administrator, of of that statute, but I appreciate uh the input of you and staff
and the flexibility to give um entities the opportunity to see if restructuring uh is possible >> so that we can continue the the funding. So I appreciate all the work of staff and you know the input of individuals
that have come and spoken to us from the various uh various entities too because you know we don't really want to exclude anybody but on the other hand it's a balance and we have got to adhere to the law. We don't want to blatantly uh violate uh even though we might not
agree with it. We we have got to u as elected officials we've got to make sure we abide by the statute. So, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Yes, ma'am. Thank you so much. Um, Commissioner Proctor and Commissioner Miner. >> Um, thank you, Chairman.
What happens on uh December 1 to the money if it uh is aborted? Uh what happens to the balance of the money that has been aborted after two months and it has u 10 months ago?
Does it automatically revert to the general fund? Yes. Okay. I think that as a matter and walk with me, Commissioner Keefe, um as a matter of accounting, if all of these folk get cut off at the knees, we should
have a um u our board should have a report of what monies are there, what monies is unspent. uh and we have to redirect the urgency of demands. Uh where would
we be redirecting distributing these dollars? So we just can't let it, you know, something for C CSWG end up being spent on turtles in Lake Jackson. No. uh we've got to find
something similar close to uh the programmatic thrust with which they were doing I think. So I wanted to put that out there. Number two um and I wanted to know how many organizations are similarly situated as CSWG
and you have an inventory. Okay. >> Yes. In our review, very few. Again, as included in the agenda item, there was only about three organizations. And you have to consider too uh especially through the CHSP process, we fund lots of organizations and where we determined
that their programs were already consistent and where our evaluation again was important that we looked at everything that we funded, but we couldn't tell you how many dozen other programs there are that we found to be consistent currently. and with and with 1134. Uh the only ones where there were
questions are the ones that we identified. >> Okay. Well, I believe that it's it's not premature um to create a boiler plate or a uh some generic model with which the conversion of language can occur and
that we're uh helping to facilitate that conversion of uh language that is no longer legal to um modified um language that is legal. And I think that we need a a generic boiler plate um
um um model to go by. I want to ask um commissioners, and I know this could come up under my my time, but um I I heard someone say this weekend that maybe for a time such as this, um that there are those who ought to do
something, to say something, and to do good. And I wonder to what extent and what role do constitutional officers uh do they lay low, say nothing about amendment three? Uh is this something collectively that we all who going to be
impacted by it? Unify uh opposition. Um I'm not ashamed to tell y'all I asked the governor to withdraw amendment three last week. Um it would be nice if um I don't know if we could ask the governor unified joint letter all these other
constitutional officers but every man lays down at night to sleep for himself. Um I did what I would allow me to sleep well. But um are we going to just in silence and silence is the best
corporate response that we have to u something that one man and cronies are getting together. That's a part of what the undergirling essence and theme has occurred beginning this meeting. uh you
know from ICE um to secret cameras to flop cameras uh everything is matching to say this uncertainty that's coming from crude mindsets crude uh spirits visions and I I think uh commissioners
that um I don't know how y'all feel but I believe that um that our um our constitutional officers should not lay law and if we if we going to fight uh what is the fight? What is game plan? What can we do? Is fact involved in
this? Uh those are the big questions tonight. I mean this what we done we could tie a yellow ribbon around it. Thank you Vince. Thank you chess. Thank you staff. You done your part. We ready for 20 67. But what the legislature is throwing flaming arrows at us to burn
our house down, to burn our local uh uh governmental uh institution down and we going to sit in silence is our best response. >> Mr. Park, the county attorney wants to chime in real quick. Um, I would like to
reemphasize uh to the board that there are some statutory constraints on uh the ability of the county or anyone speaking on behalf of the county to weigh in on anything that's going to be on the
ballot. And this is I've talked about this before. This all is derived from section 106.113 of the Florida statutes. I sent you a memo with some information about that. So, I would ask that if you are thinking of
doing something and you would like to talk about whether that would run a foul of that state statute that you please um give me a call. >> Can I respond to the county attorney? >> Of course. >> Um madam county attorney, I heard what you said and I heard what attorney Cumin said. Um I heard Dr. Martin Luther King
said that um bad laws should not be o obeyed and um civil disobedience is when you recognize that bad laws are set up. The kind that say people can't can't vote uh because of their color. They can't go to a school. They can't buy a
house because of their color. There's some things that are inherently uh morally um um inconsistent with the spirit of what was celebrated last weekend, Declaration of Independence. Boston Tea Party was not supposed to
happen had they followed the law. They would just paid the taxes and and and be damned and be damned by English rule, colonial rule. But at some point laws that uh subvert uh the autonomy of
people when laws oppress, suppress, and repress people, that law needs to be dealt with. It needs to be changed. So I'm aware of what the county attorney said, but we are we are fundamentally
altering and losing the autonomy of home rule. And then we're being by law volunttold that we can't speak to what is the most constitutional of purposes of why we exist and that's to set the local property taxes. This is
our job. The rest of this stuff is uh um superolous to what is really our job. If we did nothing else uh at CSWG and all the rest of that all of that is just other stuff. Our job is to provide
a balanced budget, pay for um state attorney, uh public defender, tax collector, and all the rest of them in the jail. We when we do that, we done our job. We don't even have to meet no more this week this year. >> Commissioner Pro, I need to go to Commissioner Mun or other commission.
>> Mr. Chairman, as I wrap up, as I wrap up, um I am saying that we are such a fundamental place right now that on the issue of taxes, we just going to get it snatched from us and then we told it's
illegal for us to comment on what is our job and that's what we do, tax, and we can't talk about that. I disagree with that. And if anybody want to stand against that, um, I'll be standing, but I'll be doing so if alone.
>> Thank you, Commissioner Parker. Commissioner Mind, then we're going to vote on this item. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, I just going back to CSWG. I I was just reminded that um the CSWG contract with the county and with the city ends on September 30th. So, that complicates
things in terms of the timeline here. Um, so we we've got to help them resolve the the structural uh non-compliance with the statute related to 1134. Um, as well as figure out how to
continue that contract past September 30th. So I I see the county administrator nodding his head. Um, that's some pretty severe calesthetics, but you feel that that is something that's doable. Our next regular meeting is September 15th. >> Yes. Yes. We'll we'll we'll jump right
on it. We just didn't want to presuppose too much. Yes, it is a body that's that's enabled and created by the city and county. However, again, we do respect that they've got their organization and we needed to engage them on what their, you know, organization would look like after this. Uh, and so, but if if if that is their
desire to continue to to be um organized under this enabling resolution going forward, that sort of thing, we can quickly make the changes that are necessary, you know, with with their agreement. Y >> um you know hopefully you know to be consistent with the statute. >> Okay, sounds good. I I again I
appreciate staff working on this so closely with the CSWG. It's been very timeconuming I know but a part of it has to do just with the ambiguity of of the of the statute. So uh really want to thank everybody for their assistance and uh looking forward to what we see in September. Thank you Mr. Chairman. >> Thanks Commissioner M. What I was going
to recommend is commissioner at the end of this meeting maybe bring that up in their commissioner time to have an item come back or direct staff to kind of get working on that. So, um, appreciate the comments. Yeah. All right, commissioners. We're voting on options, uh, 1A with Commissioner Maddox has a,
um, a conflict. So, um, he's recusing himself. All those in favor of the motion, who moved the motion? Uh, Commissioner Miner, who second it, the vice chair. Um, signify by saying I. >> I. >> Any opposed?
>> I. passes 6 with um Commissioner Maddox uh recusing himself. We are now on we're still on the same item, but we still have to take up option two. So, schedule the first and only public hearing to consider an ordinance amending the Leon County. Okay, we have looking for a motion on option two.
>> Move option two. >> Second. >> Uh motion moved by um Commissioner Mer, second by the vice chairman for option two. Any discussion? All right. Seeing none, all those in favor of the motion signify by saying I. >> I. >> Passes.
>> Unanimously with Commissioner Maddox outside of the chambers. We're now on option three. Commissioner Proctor. Mr. >> Chairman. Commissioners. Um option three. I like to move a 4% across the board. Less county administrators can say that we can tolerate a 5% this year.
>> Okay. So, we have a motion move for um >> let me let me ask point of information. Uh, can our budget space provide for a 5% miss county to come on up and tell us we we would we would probably caution that we know that
we can do this. There's still budget balancing that happens right up until the end of the year. For example, what enabled our ability to do the 4% is a decrease over our budgeted expectation relative to to employee healthcare. We still have other costs that might increase by the year. DJJ, Medicaid, few
others. So, it's a constant balancing. I could tell you that we can do four. I'd have to defer to Rashonda about anything beyond that. >> So, we could do four without using any um reserves. Five, we would have to use some fund balance, but we can cover four in the budget without using fund balance
or reducing expenditures other places in the budget. >> Right. Um, chairman, I move um that we do an across the board 4% for uh fiscal year 2067. >> Okay, we have a motion. >> Okay, motion moved by Commissioner
Proctor for 4% uh employees across the board raise. Second by Commissioner Cummings. Um I have Commissioner Miner, then the vice chair. Commissioner Miner. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We've had a similar discussion about this for I think the last three years.
um do we do an across the board um salary increase or do we do a performance pay increase, you know, from 0 to 5 with a either 3% or 4% average. Um I've said the same thing the last few years. I I I really do support the
performance pay increase. Um, it's a it's a really effective supervisor's tool to reward the folks in your department, in your team that are really working hard, that are doing, you know, an A+ job. Um, that's a tool that you really need to use. And we haven't been
using this for at least three years, if I remember correctly. We've had across the board increases. And, um, our staff are incredible. I've said this many times. I I've worked as a consultant for many governments over the years, both local, state, and federal. Um the staff
that work at Lyon County government are among the best I've ever seen. Uh they they deserve a raise. They deserve an they deserve this type of um recognition, but it's very important for managers and supervisors within departments and teams to have that as an
extra tool when it comes to rewarding the the the star performers and making sure that that they feel like they are appreciated by Lyon County, they're encouraged to stay at Lyon County. And uh I think that's a as someone who's
been a manager, who supervised teams, who has had a say in salary increases, pay performance pay increases. It's a really important tool. So I I can't accept the motion on the floor. Um I hope that if this does fail, um that we'll consider doing the 0 to 5
performance pay increases with an average of 4%. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> Uh Mr. Vice Chair, >> thank you. um our employees certainly deserve this and deserve more. The the reason I opposed this when it came uh
ahead of this to come here is if we to if we don't do this our standard is 3% average um merit pay. So I want to be clear not supporting this doesn't mean we do any any raises. It means we would do standard average of 3% on merit. Um
but we are in advance of uh property tax funding significant changes. We're freezing uh non-essential hiring. We're freezing any absolutely non-critical travel. And we're taking these preventative measures. And I think in a year when we are establishing with
constituents and Florida voters that we take their their costs seriously that we we don't stay on our standard policy and not increase um even though our employees do deserve it. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Verer. Commissioner Proctor.
>> U Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Miner has thrown up that argument he he's he's talked about and um what we don't need our managers to do is to uh what we do need to do is to put a flat rate increase cuz um regardless of what
managers individually perceive or think of employees, um it's a morale crusher um to uh single out all of that and gas prices for all the employees alike uh at the
pumps. They face the same publiclix um daycare the same thing. That's what we we've been trying to carry folk uh and lift them and lift them above the affordability crisis and um we continue to say that uh Leyon County's government
performs at a very high level and we don't say well Vince Long does and Ken Mars but Matt don't be doing nothing and other jokers back over there in the corner they don't do nothing but I like the fall he good you know we ain't going
to do that so I hear you Mr. minor, but this is a family and when Christmas come, you don't give one of your girls, you know, 10 baby dolls and the other one don't get nothing or she get two, you know. So, that's what I that's how I see it in the spirit of family. And as I
look at u uh the increases for Leon County constitutional officers and the salary formula under chapter 145 of Florida statutes from 1985 uh to 202526
each one of the county commissioners and I know well that I' I've worked harder than some of you all. I think you had a good year because you brought millions of dollars from the federal government. Should you get more? Um, Cummings ain't brought no money from the federal government. Ain't brought nothing from the state. Should she get a raise this
year? What did Nick do this year? I don't know. But it it's not based on that. All us is going to get the same goddamn thing. You hear me? And it ain't enough. >> All right. Commissioner, we hear you. We want the 4% raise. So, chairman,
chairman, when I look at this thing from 1985 from the supervisor election, tax collector, county commissioners, school board members, and some of them ain't did nothing. That's why they ain't get reelected. Can't get reelected, ain't done nothing. But they still get paid
the same increment. And that's what I'm saying. That uniformity. Y'all would nut up if I actually got paid commensurate to what how hard I work and you didn't get the same thing, right? That's what I'm saying. Thanks, Commissioner. Okay, we have a motion on the floor for
4%. Commissioner Welch, you want value? Y'all would be able to pay. >> Commissioner Welch, you want to talk on this item? >> They'd be paying me like Vince. >> Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, I'm
going to stay consistent on this item. I appreciate Commissioner Proctor's uh hard work and agree he should get paid more, but um uh that to me is performance pay. So, I'm going to stick with support for performance pay. Um,
and again, I I think that this issue cannot exist on its own. It has to exist in the light of our future potential tax revenue shortfalls. To our staff, I want to reiterate that I support you and I
think you are great. I'm trying to save your jobs as opposed to potentially having to cut them. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> Thank you, Mr. Med pass. Mr. C administrator, I think we need to start something in November for the next chairman. There needs to be a button
that controls Commissioner Proctor's microphone that we can just turn off. All right. Um, Commissioner Cummings, you want to close us out before we vote on the item? Thank Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I want to just thank Commissioner Proctor for
being concerned about the value of the employees of Lyon County. And I think at some point we have to recognize that we are all here uh dayto day we have staff day to day that does exceptional work
that does great work and every time we are on this day uh Mr. Chair, we commend every agenda item. We commend staff for being diligent, consistent for for the analysis on the issues that are brought
before us and they're clear that we can understand. Uh some of us might ask more questions than others, but I don't think it's because of a lack of understanding or lack of clarity on the part of the issues that's brought to us. and explain
to us under the leadership of the county admin the county administrator. Uh granted, we don't know what's going to happen in the fall with the election, but I have comfort commissioners because
the county administrator and our budget director says that from a budgetary standpoint, we can give employees across the board raise. And in my opinion, uh, Mr. Chair, across the board
raise takes out a lot of the biasness on the part of some supervisors, takes out that favoritism, takes out that I I don't like this person, and therefore, you're going to get the minimum. It it erases all of
that and it gives a raise to everybody across the board because just face it, we are all suffering from inflationary issues on every front from gas prices to grocery store uh prices to clothes prices. We have children, we have
daycare. We have all children, grandchildren. We have all types of issues that we all uh have to address from a monetary standpoint, from our paychecks. None of us are exempt or excluded from the high prices at at the
pump. And so I just think it's only fair for our staff and I think it's only fitting and it is what's right for us as commissioners, especially when we got a county administrator that says from
budgetary standpoint we can do this because guess what next year we might not be able to do it uh next year the county administrator might sit right there and say it cannot be done we already in a deficit but we are not there now so I support the motion uh on
the floor Mr. Chair and I just implore the other commissioners as well to um put your money where your mouth is. >> Amen. We praise our employees. So, let's show them how much we really appreciate
the hard work that they do on the scenes and behind the scenes as well. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Thank you. All right, commissioners. Commissioner Meyer brief because I want to take it to a vote. >> Quick R quick. I put my money where my mouth is, but I also with experience
that I have with managing people, it's really important to be able to recognize the folks that are doing extremely well and to motivate the folks that might need a little bit of encouragement uh with that pay performance. So, um listen, I have a different perspective
than you do. Um that's just just how it is. Uh but uh there's I I I hope there's that to say put your money where your mouth is. I I find that a little uh offputting and uh I have a different perspective than you, that's fine. We are elected here, seven of us with
diverse views and that's how it's supposed to work. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> Thank you, Commissioner Miner. >> Uh we're voting on the item. Appreciate everyone's comment. Um all those in favor of the motion moved by Commissioner Proctor, second by Commissioner Cummings for option three,
signify by saying I. >> I. Any opposed? >> Nay. >> No. >> Okay. >> Passes 43 with Commissioner U Commissioners Miner, Commissioners Welsh, and the vice chairman in descent. Any other action related to this budget?
This uh the the budget item before I go to the next agenda item. Seeing none, we're going to go to the next item now. Mr. County Administrator. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman, commissioners. This item before you seeks board authorization to submit a formal objection to the voluntary act
annexation petition from Mossy Head LLC for three parcels at the intersection of Tram Road and Capital Circle Southeast. As detailed in the analysis, commissioners, the proposed annexation uh does not currently satisfy the statutory compactness requirements and
warrants formal objection proceedings under the interlocal agreement between the county and the city for annexations as required by the interlocal agreement. The sanaxation petition uh is being brought to the board prior to the city commission's public hearing on the petition tentatively scheduled for
September 9th. Uh the item recommends the board authorization to file a formal uh objection in order to engage in discussions with the city prior to their public hearing and if unresolved proceed to mediation. Uh the county attorney and I are available to answer any questions you might have. We are recommending
option one and I have one speaker card on this item. >> Thank you. Before we get to the speaker, commissioners, I want to say this. The next four, we have five more agenda items. Four of them are are pretty meaty. And so, commissioners, here's what I I would like to be able to get through these items. I want everyone to
feel heard. Let's be very efficient with our our comments. Um, if I feel like we're not moving the needle on debate, I'm just going to take it to a vote. So, you know, I know these are very important items. I know a lot of our neighbors care about them. I know there some of them are very important to some of our commissioners. However, I want us
to be able to move these items forward and then I know we have important topics to discuss in in commissioner discussion as well. So, let's just make sure we're being efficient. Um, Mr. County Commissioner, go ahead. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman, commissioners. The only speaker on this item, Robert
Vulpi. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Commissioners, uh, Mr. administrator. Could we put the the image of the the site up on the the screen or >> please your name and address for the record? >> Yes. Robert Vulpi Holtzman on with the
law firm of Holtzman Vogle 119 South Monroe Street on behalf of the applicant >> on behalf of the the applicant >> the applicant Mossy Head LLC. >> Commissioners, while they're pulling that up, I will keep my comments brief. This is 18 1/2 acres inside of Capitol
Circle at the intersection of Tram Road and Capital Circle Southeast. It is well inside of of lands that have that are in the city. Um it has access to public services to city services. It's in the urban service area. The county and the
city have a history of cooperation on voluntary annex annexations such as this. um this this parcel or these three parcels like I said 18.58 acres there is a.17 acre parcel up in the northwest corner
of this this property that is owned by um uh an individual that inherited that from an estate. The property owner has been working with them on a possibility of acquiring that. that that is the reason for the recommendation that it creates this single parcel that has
frontage on a county road. Um it is not interfering with the provision of services. It's not interfering with um any other issues that would the city would provide. Typically, if you had a maybe a different situation where there was an a full enclave where it
surrounded a piece of property or where there was interference with providing of services, that might be a different scenario. But in this this situation, we're inside Capitol Circle in the urban services area. And your process provides
for a uh discussion, I guess, a a meet and confer between the city attorney or the city manager and the county administrator. It provides for after that mediation, which would be paid for by the county and the city. Um really we we believe that's an unnecessary delay
in this process and I would ask that you uh approve option two which is to not object to this annexation. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Uh Mr. Maddox. Yes. Thank you.
>> Mr. Chair, I would ask that we wave the rule to make a motion before discussion for this item. >> Um, I'm happy to do so just for this item though. >> That's fine. >> Okay, that's so um we have a motion to wave the rules by Commissioner Maddox um
for option for item number 19, seconded by Commissioner Miner. Um all those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Passes unanimously. Commission. >> Um, madam attorney, now as I understand it, the objection to
this item and the next item are the same. >> They elements of them are the same. So in this particular application, it only is the creation of one pocket. There are multiple enclaves
and pockets created in the next petition. And there is a question about contiguity in that one as well. Got >> so this is a the sole issue of concern with respect to this particular application is this pocket. >> Got madam attorney. um as we interpret
the rules and things that have to be checked off. Um is there any wiggle room there in those in those in those? Cuz as as I think about it, you know, just as when everybody satis when everything is satisfied, we we sit up here and we say,
"Well, we can't object to this um annexation because they've checked all the boxes." Um if things aren't satisfied, as I understand it, then we could be sued and go to mediation and stuff as well, right? How does that work? cuz I'm I'm I'm I'm struggling here and the reason I asked for a
discussion without us actually um having emotion is because I'm struggling with the fact of I understood what Mr. Vulp said. I understand completely what you said and where you're coming from, but it still it still doesn't satisfy even with that piece missing and the
fact that they don't own it doesn't change the fact this is that it does not satisfy what needs to be satisfied in order for it to qualify. um with our with our standards of what's allowable for annexation.
>> Yeah. So there are statutory criteria that have to be met for a voluntary annexation. Reasonable compactness and contiguity. Now as is not necessarily unusual, the statute is not a model of clarity about
what reasonable compactness means. But the term compactness is defined as a piece of property in a single area and it precludes any action which would create enclaves, pockets or finger areas
and serpentine patterns. Um any annexation proceeding in any county in this state must be designed in such a manner as to ensure that the area will be reasonably compact. Now three phrases were used. pocket, enclave, and finger, Aries, and
serpentine patterns. Okay, enclave and finger and pocket all can't mean the same thing. The only one of those terms that are further defined in the statute is enclave, but uh the term pocket has been defined in case law to mean a small
isolated area or group. Now, I know that this piece, this remnant piece, if you will, that is owned by this other property owner and is within this pocket is not owned by this applicant and it's very
small. But the statutory requirement is what it is. >> Now, what is before you now is as authorized in the interlocal agreement between the city and the county. If we
identify that there is a potential statutory problem with the petition, it triggers this informal process to meet and confer and if that doesn't work to go to mediation. Now, to be very clear, this is not a veto. The board does not
have the authority to veto this annexation. All it does is provide the board with an opportunity to either say we don't object, we recommend changes, or we want to object and go to the informal meet and confer and potential
mediation process. If none of those work and you know there are there are time frames in the interlocal agreement, this is not an indefinite delay. The interlocal agreement provides how long those processes can take. But at the end of that time frame, even if we still
haven't reached consensus on whether we think it meets this compactness requirement, they can still go ahead and vote to approve this annexation. Then it becomes an issue of whether somebody wants to formally litigate it.
>> Whether it's us, whether it's somebody else, >> we haven't approved it. >> And we Yeah. And we would not have I mean we we would have raised the legal objections that we are permitted by law to raise and that and we would engage in
the process we are authorized to engage in under our local agreement. That's the only thing currently before the board. >> Um Mr. Chair, I've been uniform on this and I I I can't >> Could you repeat that? >> Yeah, I' I've been uniform on this, Mr.
Chair. And it it's been times and Commissioner Proctor has brought up annexation and others up here brought up annexation. We've even had uh folks in our uh our constituents come and speak on annexation. And when they when they've said that to me or what I've said to them, and I say all the time is
that if if everything's checked off and it and it satisfies the letter of the law, we have no right to object that I've always said that, you know, we we can't move in that direction because we don't have any right to object. um in this in this place that we're in right
now, what I'm looking at is that it does not check off everything is that and that there is a piece that that that our county attorney and our staff has a question about. And and I understand, Mr. Vape, that you don't own a piece of property, which puts me in a in a place. is kind of like, well, you don't own a
piece of property, but but by virtue of of of what our def our our our uh county attorney has interpreted the definition of to be, we're not on we're not on dry land right now to approve this without
objection. And so, um, I'm I'm moving in the direction of of going with staff recommendation simply because I've been uniform on. I need everything to, um, to qualify without objection from staff and
from our planning uh, our planning staff um, in order for in order for me to be in a place that I'm comfortable moving with annexation. Now, as as the as the I didn't know this part, as the county as the county attorney has said, we can object. The city can approve and the
only way it changes is if someone sues us or someone sues the the the applicant or the city. Otherwise, it's it's in the city. Um, and I don't know how long that period of time they have to sue is, but I would imagine that I I know I wouldn't
be in favor of us suing. Um, if if the city moved in the direction of going ahead and approving this property, I'm not I'm not going to, you know, fall on that sword. But I still to be uniform in what I've done, what I've said, I'm I'm I'm I'm tempted to move in a way of
approving staff recommendation to object here. Thank you. >> Thank you. Quick question to follow up on that before I go to commission the vice chair. Um is the reason for the city to if let's say we object and the city votes to annex it in. So it gets annex in. Is
that because our interlocal agreement with the city or is that state law? >> That's state law. >> Okay. So state law says that a local government a mutable government could could basically annex into unincorporated area without the
county's approval. Well, again, we don't get to approve. We get to object. I mean, this isn't a veto or approval. This is a an opportunity to raise objections if we feel like the statutory criteria for annexation haven't been
met. Our interlocal agreement at this point provides that informal process early. Now, if they go forward and they vote to annex in any way, the county would have standing to litigate that if
we wanted to, um, as other people might have standing to litigate if they wanted to over that if they feel like the city didn't meet the statutory requirements, but that's a different question for a little bit further down the road. That's that piece isn't what's currently before the board.
>> Gotcha. I was just making sure I I understood and clarified, Mr. Vice Chair. >> Thank you. I move staff option one to object um as laid out in option one. >> Here we have staff uh we have staff recommendation moved by the vice chair.
Is there a second? >> Seconded by commissioner miner. We're in discussion. Mr. Vice Chair, >> thank you. In the interest of time at at the chairman's discret uh direction. Let's move along. I think we're all on the same page. If we if we're not we're not we can talk about it, but it doesn't meet the requirements. We allow stuff
all the time that we don't like that does meet the requirements. There's a reason those requirements are there. I'm going to skip the part where I explain in plain language why that is out of the sake of expediency. Thank you. >> Appreciate that, Mr. Vice Chair. Commissioner Miner. >> Thank you, Commissioner. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman. I appreciate it. Um, Mr. Vulpi talks about how this this remnant is is is incon inconsequential and so it we should just kind of move option two and and I understand what he's saying but if it's inconsequential then it
theoretically would not take long to negotiate between the city and the county to find a resolution. Um, and the mediation, I understand that is expensive, but if it's something that is really a remnant, so small, insignificant, I suspect that the city and the county could work together
pretty quickly, not even going to mediation, but within that first, you know, conferring with each other to make this happen. So, I approve of the motion on the floor. >> Thank you. All right, commissioners. I don't see any other commissioners in the queue. Commissioner Welch, any any comments?
>> No, sir. I'm ready to vote. >> All right, great. Well, I'm going to um call the question. So, we have motion moved by the vice chair, seconded by Commissioner Miner for staff recommendation option one. All those in favor of the motion signify by saying I. >> I. >> Any opposed? >> I
>> passes uh unanimously. We are on option number 20. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh commissioners. Similarly, uh this item seeks the board authorization uh to submit formal objections to a voluntary annexation petition from Orchard Pond
LLC for five parcels located north of Gardener Road west of North Meridian Road. Commissioners has presented in the item. The proposed annexation would create one or more unincorporated enclaves and pockets in violation of Florida statutes and warrants formal objection proceedings under the
interlocal agreement between the county and the city for annexations as required. Again, in the interlocal agreement, this voluntary annexation petition is being brought to the board prior to the city commission's publicly uh public hearing tenatively scheduled for September 9th. Um, commissioners,
uh, again, uh, the county attorney and I are here, uh, and available to answer any questions you might have. We're recommending option one, and Mr. Chairman, we do have about 20 speaker cards on this item. >> Okay. All right. Um, 20 speaker cards about an hour. All
right, Mr. Kenny, Mr. I'm going to set a um a time uh a time for public comment for 90 seconds per speaker and we'll start with the first speaker. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman, commissioners. Our first speaker is uh joining us virtually, Stephen Martin.
>> Okay. Can you hear me? >> We can. >> All right. Thank you. Not sure where to start on this. I had three minutes here, but I can understand expediency after what we've been through. When reviewing the comp plan, city residents spoke out and in response, one of you noted that
your jurisdiction lies beyond the city limits and covers the unincorporated areas. I don't completely concur with that and if there's time, which there won't be, I would have returned to that. This property though and much of the surroundings are un unincorporated.
You owe by what your own logic is, these surrounding unincorporated residents your attention and action to serve their interest. They chose to live away from the city and value the area as it is. The parcel is 1,700 plus acres. Current
rural zoning allows one dwelling per 10 acres. There's enough area for well over a hundred different dwellings. A lobbyist claims the property is financially unsustainable. what current zoning allows should be more than adequate to take care of the
owner and his family for generations. So I question about economic unsustainability. I'm familiar with this lobbyist in another parcel annexed about 20 years ago despite initial county opposition very similar in ways to this desired
annexation. In both cases an enclave was created or would have been created and would have violated a state statute. you just went through this. In this instance, though, they decided to deanex a strip afterwards to circumvent that
requirement. And that's kind of doing it underhandedly. The county commission caved into the city on what became canopy development, which has been anything but a smooth process, unlike the lobbyist claims how smooth it's been. At least one of you
has acknowledged in private talk with me that you don't think it's been a very smooth process there. I've noted before to this body about learning from our mistakes. >> Mr. Mr. Martin, please uh wrap up your comments. Time has passed. >> Especially when acknowledged. Let's not
go through another mistake like Canopy where you cave into the city. Stand firm on this and do what you can for the sake of the unincorporated area that you have responsibility for. >> Mr. Martin, please. Mr. Martin, please wrap up your comments. Thank you. >> I just I don't know who else we can go
to if we can't go to the county commission if we're unincorporated. Thank you. >> Thanks so much, Mr. Martin. Next speaker. >> Next speaker, Gary Hunter to be followed by Vivian Young. >> Thank you, chair, commissioners, staff. Uh thank you for having me. You say I've
got 90 seconds. >> Yes, sir. You represent the client. >> I do. >> So, when we're when we're debating the item, any commissioner can call you back up for questions as well. >> Sure. Sure. And I I'll be quick. Um Gary Hunter again, 119 South Monroe Suite, 5 South Monroe Street, Sweet 500
Tallahassee, here on behalf of Orchard Pond LLC, the the applicant. Um let me let me say uh just briefly um I have the highest respect for Miss Ostein. Uh we were we used to work at the same law firm. I've known her for a long time. Um
I u fundamentally disagree with her on her legal opinion regarding this annexation, this proposed annexation. Um that that being said, let me say a few things about um Mr. Fipps and what he's proposing with this annexation.
Importantly, the property is rural today and after annexation, it will be rural. There's no pending application before the city uh to change it from rural. Um the the site's rural today, it stays rural once it's within the city. Um you
know, while much of while much of Florida has changed over the last 90 years and and obviously we have all seen that um some of us more than others, um the FIPS property for 90 plus years has remained conservation land. Exactly what
you see there today generally is what's been there for beyond 90 years. But the FIPS family has owned it for the last 90 years. Um, that said, you know, I I recognize there Gosh, 90 seconds goes fast. I I
recognize there are folks here who are opposed to the annexation. I think what they're really opposed to is ultimate development plans for that parcel. There are zero development plans for that parcel. The intent ultimately is to sit down with the public and go through the
public hearing process. it makes more sense for that to happen in the city. Um this is a 1700 acre track uh immediately adjacent to the city. Um the parcels across Meridian Road are all within the city. And um you know this this piece if
it ultimately does develop is appropriately developed within the city after you know the public hearing processes that that development would require. Um so again I'm here to answer questions if you have any. Um, appreciate your consideration. Obviously
disagree with the recommendation of staff. >> Thank you, Mr. Hunter. Commissioners, when we're in debate, if if any commissioner would like to call Mr. Hunter back up for questions, you're you're more than welcome to do so. Next speaker, >> Vivian Young. Good evening. I'm Vivian Young with 10,00 Friends of Florida. Um, may I drop
off some materials for you to distribute? As some of you know, 10,000 Friends of Florida is a statewide notfor-profit organization. We focus on sound planning principles, citizen engagement, and issues of that nature. We've been around
for 40 years. I am a member of the uh fellows of the American Institute of Certified Planners and have been with 10,000 Friends for 30 years, working with communities all around the state. 10,00 Friends of Florida is objecting
um to this issue, and we uh urge support for staff recommendation number one. Um, as Gary Hunter said, this is just an annexation, but as you all know, annexation is the first step in getting
development approved for the property. So, it is um necessary to do this to allow the property owner to develop and we have fundamental concerns about that. There's a lot of speakers tonight and I
am going to focus specifically on uh fiscal responsibility which I know many of you are very familiar with. Um if you look at pages 5 to nine of the materials that I passed out um there are serious fiscal responsibilities associated from
a local government's perspective from these types of issues. um developers only often cost cover the cost of internal in infrastructure improvements. Um more importantly, local government fiscal analysis often only covers um the
does not cover the long-term lifestyle, excuse me, life cycle costs of development, meaning the maintenance of roads and other issues that are borne by taxpayers. um new development of this sort would
siphon uh funds away from other areas within the urban service area. And finally, it is folly for local government to even be considering this with um amendment three on the ballot in November um because local governments
will be subsidizing any new development. Thank you very much. Um I urge you to support staff recommendation number one. Thank you. >> Thank you. Next speaker, >> Sophie Won Spear to be followed by Ben Nasilius. >> Good afternoon. My name is Sophie Wakon
P. Address 704 Deep Park Circle, Telasi, Florida. Thank you for the opportunity to share comments. I am the current president of the friends of Lake Jackson standing here today to leave you with three take-home messages on behalf of the lake.
Rural zoning is the least damaging zoning for land bordering the aquatic preserve. Number two, septic versus sewer is not the right debate. What endangers the aquatic preserve is its development density? And three, the eagerness of the city to annex should be
a big concern for us all. I hope we can work together to slow them down and change their mind. Today, we welcome staff recommendation to object given the legal issues raised and we hope that all of you will vote in favor of that recommendation.
The rural land we're talking about borders the northern part of the aquatic preserve. Unlike its impaired southern counterpart, this part has remained relatively healthy so far, precisely because it has been kept rural and thus left mostly undeveloped.
Last year, you heard arguments against changing up to the comp plan that would have led to an increase in allowed development density, even if DP wrote that such increase would endanger waterershed and water quality. You also heard that it would lead to an unmanageable increase of traffic on
Meridian Road. You wisestly voted against these changes and we are grateful. The arguments against voluntary annexation are the same and more because once this property is annexed, the dominoes are set for continuous properties to the south and
west to be annexed as well with the prospect of an urban lake surrounded by suburban sprawl on the horizon. >> Thank you. Thank you and happy best day. >> Thank you. Next speaker,
>> Ben Nilios to be followed by Ian Fipps. >> And when you're on deck, just like in T-ball, feel free to go ahead and line up in the back. >> Absolutely. Well, uh, thank you very much for the opportunity to speak. My name is Ben Nilius, 724 Point Court, uh, and I work at Tollimbers Land
Conservancy, uh, Research Station Land Conservancy here in Lyon County. I want to start off by saying we support staff recommendation one and thank you for your leadership when this topic of development and uh potential USA expansion came up during the comp plan process. To keep it brief, I want to share a couple of concerns about
development of this property uh in the future as well as rural working lands in Lyon County. First off, I want to say that um development in the Lake Jackson basin will almost certainly have negative impacts on the health of the ecosystem and the water quality of the lake. Um,
some of that was touched on by Sophie and I'm sure will be touched on by others. I'd also like to reiterate that so far there's never been any kind of demonstration of need for development at this scale in this area of the county. In fact, I I know you'll remember from the comprehensive planning process that
the county planning department or county city planning department estimated 23,000 residential units are what we need by 2050. Today, the Office of Economic Vitality estimates that we have about 20,000 units that are in process, whether that be pre-development or development. That's roughly 90% of that
projected need by 2050. And I'd say that goes a long way towards it. This, of course, doesn't include projects like the Wani Arch, which has about 12,500 potential units that could come down the pipeline as well. Finally, I want to touch on the precedent that this annexation would set for rural property in the area. For more than 25 years,
we've protected the USA and used it as the most efficient mechanism to create dense urban growth patterns and protect the working lands that uh provide food, fuel, fiber, and recreation for all of us. All that to say that we support staff recommendation one and thank you for your leadership on this topic.
>> Thank you. Next speaker, >> Ian Fipps to be followed by Don Inman Johnson. >> Hello. Um, my name is Ian Fipps, son of Colin Fipps and first cousin of Jeff Fipps. The Fipps family has been conserving land in Tallahassee for 90
years. We plan on carrying on this legacy for future generations. Conservation and preservation has been the priority during that entire time and still continues today. This is my view and knowledge. I'd like
for you to take a look at our past history for the community of Tallahassee and surrounding areas. For example, what my father has done in his lifetime just in this area. He sold land on the south side of Miller Landing Road for people to build. But with doing that, he built
a soccer complex on Miller Landing, then created another on Meridian south of Forest Meadows. Look at our soccer community now. But he didn't stop there. He then sold property on Miller Landing Road to help create EKP Park, 58 acres
of trails and habitat. With that being done, he then went on to start the Red Hills horse trails for the community to enjoy. And one of the last things no one really knows about is that he put his property behind Fipp's farm
into conservation with tall timbers. The idea developing or decision of land use on or any part of our property is not an easy decision and has to be done. It is extremely important to Jeff and the family that this is done in a way that
would respect by our grandparents parents long-term health for the environment. When we look at this land, we are just not thinking about the present. We are looking at the future preservation of land and water for generations to come. We know things need
to change, but we also need to preserve, too. >> Thank you. >> Thank you for your time. >> You looks like Don Edmond Johnson might have left. Looks like unless she move seats on me. Uh Alexandria Okonnell
to be followed by Lynn Teis. >> Hi again. I just wanted to uh throw my support in for recommendation one and let people that are much more qualified to talk on this issue speak. Um, other than my overt support for
recommendation one, I would just like to say that whatever we can do to protect the, um, canopy roads and beloved scenery of Tallahassee, our protected wetlands, um, and all the stuff that makes living here
feel very beautiful. I think we should do that. Thank you. Thank you, >> Lynn Tacis to be followed by Katherine Fid. >> Hey there. Here's the highlights. Meridian Road wasn't built for urban scale development. It's already at a
level D um level of service and it only has room for 40 more cars before it reaches capacity near the property. We know road expansions don't look happen overnight. If we look at Bannerman Road, it's going to take approximately 21 years to finish. when it came as a
blueprint project in 2014. It ends in 2035, which means it will be old enough to drink before it's ready to drive. We know road projects are expensive. Nearly 60 cents of every blueprint dollar is spent on just three road expansion
projects. Combined, their price tag exceeds half a billion for less than 15 miles of road. We know that the people on the hook for paying for road expansions is every person in this room.
We also know that if this annexation moves forward, it will greenlight development and will require a road expansion we cannot afford. I for one don't believe that people in this city that already struggle to put food on their table should be subsidizing a
developer by paying for a road that wouldn't have been necessary otherwise. Please vote yes on staff recommendation one to formally object to annexation and send a message that the needs of our community outweigh the desires of one individual. If you'd like to learn more
about this issue and its impact, I'd love to discuss it further with you or you can visit before we buildt.org. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Katherine Fid to be followed by Joe Jenkins. Katherine Fid to be followed by
Joe Jenkins. Going once, going twice. >> Joe Jenkins to be followed by Eric Draper. >> Okay. Hi, my name is Joe Jenkins. I live at 1701 West Pensacola Street and I am here before you today to ask that you
please go with option one for I guess proposal number 20 and that we object to the annexation of the 1700 acres um north of Lake Jackson. First and foremost, I am not a legal expert. I am not a law student. However, according to
my understanding of Florida state law and additionally your own staff's understanding of Florida state law, the annexation doesn't follow the recommendations again according to the state that it's quote reasonably compact, contiguous to current city limits and not creating an isolated
unincorporated enclave. I drove Meridian Road yesterday. I drove all the way up to where the proposed site would be. And that from the middle of the city took me about 25 minutes. And Meridian Road, driving about 7:00 p.m. at night, was kind of already a little crowded. So, I couldn't really imagine building an
entire community up there with now we have thousands of people living up there and now there's all this traffic on this road that we can't really widen because it's a historic canopy road. And that would be kind of rude if we just decided to destroy it like that. And that's not even mentioning the fact that there is the environmental impact on Lake Jackson
that other people before me have mentioned and other people after me have mentioned. Lake Jackson has almost 300 different species of birds that migrate through it. Not necessarily each year, but that's still a huge amount of birds. That's about 75% of the bird species that are found in Florida. And to oh
again, Lake Jackson itself is already currently at its total max daily limit for pollution. That means that if the lake continues to get more pollution, um I fear those birds might not be there. Those fish might not be there. The people who in Tallahassee go there to recreate, they might not want to go there if it's a gross polluted lake. So, I just think that there should be a
little bit more consideration put before both commissions, both the county and the city to object. So, that way the city and the county can have a discussion to be like, hey, is this something we should recently go forth with? Can we annex less land? Can we annex a certain part of the land? Thank you so much for your time. I sincerely
appreciate it. >> Joe should introduce agenda items. Uh, Eric Draper to be followed by Jeff Teis. >> Thank you. Eric Draper, 3627 Dexter Drive. Um, here to support the staff recommendation. Ask you to support that.
Um, I live in a neighborhood that uh uses Meridian. This Pine Tip Hills neighborhood about 250 homes uh developed 40 50 years ago. Um, Meridian has gone from being a sleepy rural road to a very congested road. at certain
times of the day. And I think that the um we need to have some type of traffic study or a real understanding of what the impact would be of annexing this additional land into the city. Um of course that would be followed by some development activity. We're not in uh
reflexively in my neighborhood against development. We live in a development, but uh we need to understand what the traffic impacts would be on the current residents who have been there for a long time. By the way, this is a this is a part of the county, not part of the city where we live. So, I ask you to support the staff recommendation. Thank you.
>> Thank you. >> Great. >> Jeff Takis. >> Good evening, commissioners. My name is Jeff Takis. I live at 2133 Miller Landing Road in Tallahassee. I'm here today this evening to ask you to vote yes on staff recommendation number one
and object to the proposed annexation of the land near Lake Jackson. I believe that the concerns raised by the county attorney regarding enclaves and the proposal being in contravention with state statute is valid and worthy of your objection vote this evening. Several months ago during the comp plan process despite what Mr. Hunter said
this evening, "We all learned that the land owner in this scenario has desires to put a large-scale development on the property with the density of that development being more than what they are currently zoned to do." During that comp plan process, you heard concerns about the devastating impact this development would have on the traffic on
the already clogged Meridian Road, the damage it would cause Lake Jackson, and many unanswered questions surrounding it. In response, you held firm and led the charge to not include this land in the urban services area. That was the right decision. then and at the right time and I thank you for your
leadership. Now, as this issue finds its way back to you yet again, I ask you to please take the lead and object to this annexation. None of those concerns that were that were raised during the comp plan process have changed, nor have any of the questions been answered about
what this proposed development will be when you made that good decision to move the urban services area back to the way it was. Please vote yes on staff recommendation one and object to this annexation. Thank you. Thank you. >> Robin Stevenson to be followed by Tim
Strotmire. Robin Stevenson. Okay. Tim, I may butcher your the next two last names, but Tim Strotle Meyer Muller. Thank you. Sorry about that. Tim, you can clarify.
>> No problem. Um, I actually wasn't going to speak out on this issue because I'm not an expert. However, when it comes to the state of Florida, when people talk about the relationship that development has with the uh state of environmental degradation,
the two are directly correlated. Uh I went to high school and spent the latter half of my adolescence in central Florida and frankly uh the area is turning into somewhat of a wasteland relative to what it used to be. We are in the most biodiverse region
on the North American continent on a planet that is on track currently for cataclysmic uh ecological changes. I think that every opportunity we have to protect our wildlands,
we should seize. You've been tasked with the responsibility of sh stewarding that land and protecting nature while we still have it. Please reconsider. I support the motion that opposes development. Thank you.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you. Our final speaker on on this item, commissioners uh Uriel. Mr. Uriel, again, you're going to have to help me with your last name just one more time. I'll get it by the second time. state your name for the record so the county administrator can get in next time.
>> Oh yeah. So my name is Uriel Gachok. I live at uh 218 Broward Street. Um and I am here because I well originally thought cameras but the reason I'm here is I did hear about this and I'm sure
most of the commissioners are old enough like I am to remember when you could see in actual spring in Wakulla Springs and I think that is what we're fighting for. I also want to bring attention to a recent article in the city where the city spent about $700,000
to buy one home to alleviate flooding in um near the golf course north of town. This was as a result of poor planning on the behalf of the city and the type of planning that would allow the type of development with deep-seated large
reaching denser populations in that area which as many people have stated would create serious ecological problems. So I want to encourage the uh commissioners to prevent that kind of development to be allowed on this land considering we
are already spending I think the estimate was about 200 or about 2.5 u million dollars cleaning up where we allowed people to build things where they shouldn't have been. So I urge you to vote and take the staff's recommendations option one to not encou
this uh annexation. Thank you. Thank you, >> Mr. Vice Chairman. That concludes your speakers on this item. >> Thank you. Do you have any rec uh reports or any cover by staff before we go to the commissioners? >> Nothing additional. >> Thank you. Uh recognize Commissioner Miner.
>> Thank you, Mr. Vice Chair. Uh I move option one. >> There a second. >> Thank you. >> Um thank you, Mr. Vice Chair. Um you know, Mr. Mr. Fipps came up here a second ago and talked about his family having a legacy for conservation and
he's absolutely right. Um uh the the Fipps family has decades of conservation of this area and uh I'm grateful for that. I think a lot of people in the community are grateful for that. Um with regard to this agenda item,
uh I met with our our county attorney on this at length and our job is to look specifically at the merit of this agenda item. It's a narrow uh scope volunte voluntary annexation request. And as we talked about at the previous agenda
item, there are check boxes to check. Uh if they're not checked, then it's not compliant with Florida law. And um our county attorney has told me that we've got uh at least four pockets or enclaves, which is not consistent with
Florida law when it comes to annexation requests. Now, why why do Florida statutes even have that requirement? Why why is avoiding pockets and enclaves even important? Well, during our discussions, she made the best example that I can think of. Let's say that we
have to provide fire service to all uninorporated areas. If there's a pocket out there in city land that belongs to the county or that county has jurisdiction of, we're obligated to provide fire service to that pocket of
property that is out there. And so that's a really good example. There are other services too. They're, you know, county services versus city. Um, that's a great example of why pockets and enclaves are something to be avoided when it comes to annexation requests. So by I'm not going to belver the point. I
can talk longer if I need to, but be we talked about it during agenda item 19. Uh we objected to that request for the same reason. I'm urging my colleagues to uh vote option one to support the objection. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, our vice chair.
>> Thank you. Uh I have the vice chair in the queue. >> Yes. Thank you. >> Um thank you, Commissioner Miner, and thank you to staff and thank you for everyone who uh came to speak. Um, this is pretty simple. Uh, you got to check the boxes and literally the boxes can't
be checked in this one. That's that's pretty much the core problem and um I'm glad to be part of the commission that is going to hold uh land owners to the rules that we have. So, um I support the motion. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Uh anyone else in the queue? >> I got a quick question. >> I know Commissioner Welsh wants to speak on this item. >> Mr. Sure. Go ahead, Mr. Maddox. >> Madam Attorney, just like the other one, uh like you spoke in the other one, if we object, it just simply uh gives the C the opportunity to take it up and they
uh so so uh if they're so inclined to to annex, then they annex and then someone has the opportunity to sue uh if they like, but um if they annex and it goes it goes forward. Correct. >> That's correct. It's the same process. >> Same process. Okay. Just want to make
sure. Thank you, >> Commissioner Welch. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, I'm going to support the staff recommendation, but I want to provide a little bit of nuance to this
conversation. And I mean, you could have said the same thing about the previous item. And I know that a lot of people have reached out to us in opposition to this um this potential annexation, but I think it's important for people to
understand that this is not going to likely stop this annexation. For us to raise this objection does not stop the eventuality that this will be decided by the city commission. Now, I understand that the city commission
might look differently at some point in the near future or will look differently at some point in the near future, but this is not the end of this conversation as it relates to this piece of property. And so I just want everybody to
understand that the emotional anti- you know growth anti-development sentiment that's surrounding this is I don't want people to get like upset when this comes back at the city or in
another form. People need to understand this is like this annexation. There's not a whole lot we can do about this ultimately. Now, second to that, I understand that people are wary of this. I'm wary of it. I think that the
traffic implications are legitimate concerns. Um, but I think the environmental implications are are relevant to be discussed. I mean, as it currently sits, my understanding is that this property could currently be
developed to the tune of like one house for every 10 acres. There's like 5,000 acres roughly in this larger property. You're talking about 500 homes. All of them would be on septic tank tanks all surrounding Lake Jackson as opposed to
this 1700 acre parcel being uh brought into the urban services area or or annexed into the city and provided with water service and sewer service that would pro serve to protect the Lake Jackson basin more so than under its
current level of environmental um regulation. So I I think that that is kind of the other side of this that's not being discussed. But listen, I'm not an environmental scientist. I don't know obviously the implications of
of homes and businesses in that area would be those implications aren't known yet. So I try to approach these things as fairly as I can. And as I look at this issue, I think there's too many questions. there's too much uncertainty about what may or may not be there in terms of
development in the future and those decisions are going to have to be made by the city of Tallahassee. Um, but what I can lend my concern to is Meridian Road. Uh, I think anybody that travels Meridian Road understands that it is it
is at capacity or near capacity and uh creating any level of density in that location is going to be problematic for Meridian Road. Now, I don't know what the solutions are going that are going to be presented to solve that problem for Meridian Road. And I think that before we cast judgment, we should
understand what those solutions are. I mean, is Mr. Fitz going to build a secondary road to Meridian Road? Is he going to widen Meridian Road at his own expense? I don't I don't know what what the future developers want to do. I have no idea. So, I just want people to keep all of that in the back of their minds
and put this into that context that there's many many questions and and we don't know the answers to those questions. So, speculating on those things at this point with these sort of uh hysterical responses that we tend to see around the idea of growth and development are premature. I understand
that the implications of bringing this into the city and then expanding the urban services area to this property is with the intention of developing it, but we have no idea what that development would look like. The applicant is telling us they don't know who their developer would be. They have no idea when they would sell it or when they
would develop it. So, I just want to put those things into context ahead of this vote. Um, I'm going to support the staff recommendation mostly because I support the county attorney's uh council, right? And I think all of us should respect the
county attorney's council. And if this is her her analysis of the issue, then then I trust her. She knows this stuff better than than I do uh than most of us do. And so uh that's my statements on it. Uh Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the
opportunity to uh to speak. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Welch. Commissioner Bunner, are you back in the queue? Yeah. >> Okay. Close us out. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate it. Um, Commissioner Welch, thank you very much for those comments. Um, again, the county attorney and I spoke at this
at length, and there there are two there there are two things we're talking about here. One is the the narrow scope of the voluntary annexation request, which does not meet Florida statutes, which is not compliant with the law. Um and then there are some other issues which you know would come after the annexation. U
those other issues are not relevant to our discussion here. They aren't applicable to our deliberation on this agenda item, but they're important and and and need to be said. So you've heard this a lot of this already. um when we dealt with the comprehensive plan of rewrite last year, uh a proposal that
was very similar to uh allowing 1,700 acres, 2,000 acres um to be expanded into the USA. Um I've had discussions with the property owner, with the attorney, uh and others about the intention develop on that land. Um what
I've heard is thousands of acres and additional commercial intensity. So I've heard it directly from them that that's the intention. Um, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection during the comp plan rewrite wrote not one but two letters expressing concern
saying that largecale development up there in that area could be detrimental to the Lake Jackson Aquatic Preserve. And then our county staff have said what many of our speakers have said here tonight, which is that um, Meridian Road, the Canopy is already near
capacity. uh it's on the National Register of Historic Places, but yet um adding thousands of housing units up there would put uh a lot of additional pressure on a road that is already heavily congested. So, I say all of that because it's not because it's part of
our deliberations here tonight, but because this annexation is step one. we have to talk about it whether we vote option one or something else based on the criteria of it meeting the request criteria which it does not but I do want to point out those other things because
most of the speakers have been talking about what the evocations are of of this um thank you very much I I uh appreciate the time Mr. Chairman. >> Thanks, Commissioner Miner. All right, we have a motion on the floor moved by Commissioner Miner, second by um
Commissioner Cummings for staff recommendation. All those in >> I'm sorry, >> you have you have a comment. >> Quick question. >> Okay, please. Um madam attorney um after annexation
extension of the urban services area boundary would be dependent on a city vote or a city and county vote. How does that work? >> Bear with me for just a second. I can't find my document, but
it would require an amendment of the comprehensive plan and it would be a vote of both the city and the county and the comp plan provides for what can and should be considered when there's an expansion of the USA. There was discussion about and debate about that
during the last comp comp plan amendment cycle. Um um and the board would this will come back before the board for a potential uh expansion of the USA at some point in the future if that uh push is made.
>> Okay. Thank you. I I I I wanted a clarification on that because um I would I would imagine that the land owner with some of the conservation and things that you that I've I've heard you guys are looking at cemeteries and stuff like that. Um there would be a need for
I'm guessing that there were more resources in the city that would help with conservation um that would require um a move of that boundary. So we may be entertaining that eventually uh if it moves in that direction. I think the thing that that when I thought when I
looked at it all that I wondered as we as we talked about it is when we did the comp plan or when they did the comp plan I wasn't wasn't here but we have urban fringe as a part of our comprehensive plan and the urban fringe was defined as
the area of the county where future growth was supposed to occur. So if if we ever contemplated moving a boundary or putting some areas within the city limits, you look at those urban fringe areas first. And so um you know right now as it says there's nothing that
precludes rural rural land, which is what we're talking about now from becoming urban uh becoming urban or extending the boundary to that rural land from the urban services area. Um,
and there's nothing that precludes that says that the urban fringe needs to be prioritized as it as it was intended to as our future growth. Um, I'm interested to see how this all works out. I I want to I want to say that um Mr. Fipps was
speaking. I I do I do agree with and have seen the the famil family's um propensity to to cons to uh conserve and and really honor that land and they they do have a 90-year um track record of doing such. Uh but I will say that my my
vote today is strictly based off of the recommendation and the lawless the lawfulness of it based off of uh the statutory requirements for annexation that our county attorney says is not there. And so I'll I'll vote in favor of of option number one, but look forward
to um conversations that will come cuz I know there will be more conversation around. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Thank you, Commissioner Maddox. All right, commissioners. Motion on the floor moved by Commissioner Maddox for St. Commissioner Miner for staff recommendation, second by Commissioner Cummings. All those in favor of the motion signify by saying I.
>> Any opposed? >> I. >> Passes unanimously. Um next item. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Commissioners, uh, as directed by the board at your June meeting, this item provides information and legal analysis regarding data centers, including an option to
begin the process of enacting a one-year moratorum on the development applications for largecale data centers. This item seeks board's acceptance of the report and direction should the board wish to pursue a moratorum. Adoption of a moratorum would require two public hearings uh, which would
happen in September and October. With that, we're recommending options one and seeking your direction on option four. Uh, and we're happy to myself and the county um attorney happy to answer any questions you might have. And we do have several speaker cards on this item. >> You have how many speaker cards?
>> Uh, five. >> Okay, go ahead. 90 seconds per speaker, please. >> First speaker, Tiffany Hill. Good evening. I'm Tiffany Hill. I reside at 1401 Lola Drive here in Tallahassee. And I want to speak about the data
centers that I mean just like with the Flock cameras. I I think that we don't need to um we need to vote against that. um data centers are um they use up a lot of water um which we're already having
issues with trying to protect our water source right now. So we don't need to add on to um that that problem. Um the other thing is that they use a lot of utility um and you know utility costs
here for especially um residents who already having um trouble with um housing affordability which will include utilities um that is going to cause a strain. The other thing is the noise the
noise um frequency from the fans. um me as a as a veteran and knowing a lot of other veterans um suffering from tonitis and and other healthc care um uh conditions. Um I think that you know
that noise from the fans are going to affect uh a lot of health issues. um being um a veteran who's who participated in Gulf War, it took them a long time to find out that you know a
lot of the fallout from that um affected us veterans um as far as toxins go. And so I cons I ask you to consider not to move forward um uh what to to do the moratorum. I'm sorry. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Next speaker, Yen Bailey. >> Next speaker. >> Next speaker, Alexandria Okonnell. Okay, this is the last one, I swear. Um, you guys made such a packed agenda I had to stay. But um according to my
understanding of the options the recommendations placed forward when I was reading through it seems that um please correct me if I'm wrong uh recommendation two um skips any more conversation about this and would mean you guys would go ahead and create a uh
an ordinance for moratorium. Is that is that correct? >> Yes ma'am. >> Okay. Um I think that we should do number two. Let's stop talking about it. A lot of folks um in this area have a lot of concern around data centers. Uh they probably would be here talking to
you about them if it wasn't 8:30 on a Tuesday. Um we will have some city discussion, I'm sure, when we have our new electorate in after November. Um and the stance from the city will
probably change drastically depending on the makeup of the new city commission. I hope that our county sees the threat that these pose to our natural resources as well as the health and well-being of a lot of folks and as previously mentioned u affordability costs will go
up. Um so please consider recommendation two um and go ahead and make that moratorum happen. Thank you. >> Thank you. Next speaker. >> Thank you Nick Zateslo. >> Hello. Uh my name is Nick Zateslo. Uh I am a resident in Tallahassee and I'm running for Congress here in North
Florida. Uh I've spent 25 years at the intersection of public policy and technology and business and you know why I'm here. Um I want to talk about these moratoriums and data centers that are coming up. I think it's time to join together to protect our people and our land and our environment and our economy from what's coming and what's here. Um
after going to so many counties and talking with people across North Florida on this issue, um I've come up with some ideas of what to do and I hope this is helpful. We need a dual trigger on power and water. Ask each how much their machines can actually use, not what they claim, like what happened down in PK
County. We need closed loop cooling as the default standard. You need to require it. Mandatory ownership disclosure so we know who we're actually dealing with and not shell LLC's like what happened in Jackson County. And decommissioning bonds so we aren't back here in 5 years holding the cleanup
costs when they leave because they will leave. Ask Taylor and Bay County about their paper mills and decommissioning that they're having to deal with right now. We need to make sure there's no automatic tax abatements and any incentive requires a separate public affirmative vote. Now, here's why people are afraid and
why they're not wrong. These things are physically huge. They take more electricity on the top end than Panama City, Tallahassee, and Gainesville combined. This is something that we need to deal with. We need to be serious about it because as you've heard the surveillance
cameras are on one end, the job loss from automation is on the other end and the physical environmental footprint is what puts it all together. Please ban these. Please stop them and I look forward to helping in any way I can. Thank you. >> Thank you. Next speaker, Tim Stoddle Mueller.
I'd just like to register uh my opposition to any data center development as well just based on um their unsustainability. It's my understanding that any chip within 18 months uh is outdated and needs to be replaced. The water costs and
electricity costs are catastrophic. And we're on top of a really special water resource in our aquafer here. And I think that like we should be preserving this for future generations. Thank you. >> Final speaker on this item, calling
Stanley Sims, but I think he might have left. >> Okay, great. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> Um, commissioners, if you recall, I I requested this item come back to the board. Um, I'm I'm going to look to someone for a motion so we can have some conver so we can um conversate on it.
But I think I've been pretty clear about where my position is. Uh, one thing I I'll say before we look for a motion, I do believe that we should identify um in our comp plan or wherever necessary the definition of small scale data centers and the large scale data centers. I
think it's important that we adapt our comp plan with time so that way they're clearly defined. With that being said, I have Commissioner Maddox in queue. So, Commissioner Maddox. >> Hey, Mr. Chair. Um, I will go ahead and make the motion for option two.
>> Uh, so here's where I am on it. Um, There is a there is a time and a place for data centers. I believe that we need to take our time over the next 12 months to figure out if we're going to have them here anywhere. Where is the appropriate appropriate
area within Leyon County to have them? Um, I think of them much like solar farms and I and I understand what you all the things that you talked about uh with with noise and the danger and all that kind of stuff, but if if it if it's an industry that we can bring here, but
put it strategically in places that aren't in the middle of our neighborhoods, places that that are suitable for that type of uh of facility, I'm not opposed to it right now. What I'm opposed to is putting it
near neighborhoods, putting it near our our constituents and and the and the negative effect ne the negative effects that it has on them. Um, according to I think it's Roitz or what it is, housing
within half a mile of data centers lose roughly 2.8 2.8% of its value as opposed as opposed to houses further away. It's it's not just it's not just affecting our water sources. It's not just affecting our environment, but it's it's
affecting the the the viability of neighborhoods within uh Neon County or other areas where data centers are placed. And so um I think I I'm I'm going to go with option two, which which will be the 12 month moratorum. But if
we're going to move in this direction, I think we need to have conversations over the next 12 months to really really dig into this, research it, find out what it is, find out if if if it if in anywhere in Leyon County would be suitable. If we find out that there's no piece of land
in the rural area or anywhere else where it's suitable, then I say we put a full stop motator on it. But right now, as it sits, staff has given us the option of option two, which is a 12-month mortorium. And I'm very, very comfortable with that. And I'm be honest with you, if if this commission is not,
you know, in uh in favor of having the conversation and and looking and doing the research to figure out where it goes, then I'm I'm I'm very well put on just going ahead and just continuing that moratorum. But I think it would be expedient for us to learn more about it over 12 years and be able to to speak um
in a more educated way about it and understanding if there is land that's in Leon County that's suitable or not. And I think the biggest thing that that that really even if we put it away from the urban core, away from neighborhoods, the thing that still kind of bothers me is
that how much water it uses in a water source and trying to protect that. And so there there's a lot of issues running through my head. I don't know enough yet to say that I totally do not want them here at all. I know that I am not in a place where I'd be willing to to to
approve one coming to Leyon County right now without um more research and and and us having a better plan about how we use them where they go. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Thank you, Commissioner Madak. Very well said. I got Commissioner Proctor, the vice chairman, and Commissioner
Cummings. Commissioner >> Chairman, thank you very much. Um Mr. Chairman, I um just weighed in with the county attorney to see if there were any uh uh bases that would uh deny uh us considering 18 month uh versus a
12-month. Let me tell you why. Uh commissioners, I believe that um if we do 18 months, it takes us through 26 and it takes us through 27 to give the consideration. Uh I think that u 12
months with what we may have on our plates to contemplate this could uh very easily um um slip through and we'll be dealing with with financial crisis and um I just think
that um to be safe about it as well as to give ourselves uh the time. I'm not superstitious that to say that I I believe that a odd year. Um I have nothing against 2027, but I'd like to offer substitute motion of 18month mortorium.
>> I'll accept the amendment unless you I'll just give you the motion if you want. >> No, probably if you take that. I would like to see 18 months. >> Option two with 18 months. Um it is amended by um Commissioner Maddox. Who second the motion? Commissioner Miner, do do you maintain the second?
>> Okay, great. There is um that's my motion. >> Okay, great. Thanks. Thank you, Commissioner Proctor. Um, Mr. Vice Chair, >> thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I'm very happy we're doing this. I think a decade from now, whoever's on this dis
with Commissioner Proctctor um will look back and be very glad that we put this 18-month hold on large scale data you power users and large scale data centers to have time to look at it before we make long-term permanent
decisions. And I think we talked about a lot this this meeting and we don't have to talk more about this for significance, but I think this is some a decision we're going to come back to 10 years from now and this county is going to be better off for it. Thank you. >> Thank you, uh, Commissioner Cummings.
Then we got the immediate past chairman. >> Uh, thank you, Mr. Chair. I support uh the well amendment to the motion uh that's on the floor and I think data centers are a major concern
throughout in entire state of Florida and and one of the things that we know is that rural areas are more vulnerable to um to the data centers because they look at the revenue that it's going to bring in but then it
also has an adverse effect with escalation of electricity and water usage and and what have you. Um I think the 18 months is fine, Mr. chair, but
in attending the FAT conference a couple of weeks ago down in Orlando, I had the opportunity to talk to uh several county commissioners from from down south where they're they are also grappling with um
with this issue as well. And one of the commissioners told me that what they were doing is they were preparing an ordinance to spe to specify what data centers had to adhere to. In
other words, uh it has to be a certain area of land. they had to be responsible uh for their own utility services and not adversely affect uh other customers. there was a provision she was telling me
to deal with uh noise control uh building size storm water and I know we would deal with storm water as well but my point is this I think a 18-month moratorum is fine but I would like for
us to add to that um a provision pro um commissioner proctor that during that 18month period that we look at specific specifics to uh govern. If if we decide
at some point uh that a data center is appropriate here that we have specific elements that the data center has to adhere to that so that it won't adversely affect water consumption uh
adversely uh increase noise is is certain and we we're not alone. So I don't think we have to reinvent the wheel of Mr. County Administrator and he was he was at that meeting as well. But I would want us not to just have a 18month moratorum but be proactive
uh during that 18month period and maybe have staff come back uh with some recommendations uh that would govern data centers in our county. >> Um Commissioner I'm going to I'm going to on point on that with that comment. I was going to ask staff a
question and I think it's going to um knock out your concern at the same time. Mr. K administrator. So with this agenda item part of this agenda item and in the spirit of what I wanted to request as it came back to us is that over the next 12
to 18 months while we're in the moratorum staff would basically be doing all the research digging come like thinking about you know what it is it would look like as we lay out not only the definition of a small scale and large scale data center but um if we
were ever going to entertain them coming in the future. These are the these are the things the boxes that they would have to check. >> That's exactly what we would do over the next 12 to 18 months. >> That that good would that satisfy your concerns? >> So an agenda item would come back
>> Mr. 18 months >> in addition to the 18. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Okay. So that would so the so basically we would have an agenda item come back at the end of the moratorum with like an update. This is what we've done research-wise. This is what it would look like. that would come back to our board before before we release the
mortorium. >> It would >> including recommendations as well. Okay. >> On point. >> Thank you. >> I would like for it to come back before >> maybe somewhere 12 months, 15 months. So we have a few months and deal with it.
>> If that's the direction of the board, that's what we'll do. >> Cool. That the motion. Mr. Cummings, you satisfied? >> It was a I think >> No, no, no. It was his motion. But are you satisfied with the like >> double code of my concern? Absolutely. >> Yes, ma'am. Okay, great. Um, meet the
past chairman, Commissioner Welch. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, you know, I have really not leaned in on this data center issue over the last six months as this has become like the new boogeyman of uh of political
rhetoric. And I, you know, listen, I don't know what a data center is. I don't know what a data center does and I don't know the impact that a data center has. And I feel like 90% of the people who talk to me about their opposition to data centers also don't know those
things. So, um, you know, my here's my take on this. I think the biggest threat to our community is our lack of economic development, our lack of creating private sector economic investment, jobs
for our young people, jobs for the kids graduating from our colleges and universities, people who want to stay here, invest here, and make a living here. And so if a data center
economy provided thousands and thousands of jobs in our county that were highpaying techno technical uh sector jobs, then I'm going to want to know, you
know, exactly what the impacts are of a data center. I mean, are we and look, I'm I'm fine with a moratorium. I'll support whatever the board's wishes here. 12 months, 18 months, that's fine. But if in 12 months from now, you know, somebody comes to our comes to our
governments and says, "Hey, I want to, you know, create 4,000 jobs making $100,000 a year in a data center, and I'm going to build my own power plant to power it, and I'm going to recharge our aquifer with cleaner water than I take
out of it." Um, are we saying that's not something we would be interested in? I'm not willing to say that at this point in time. Um, so I think all of this is a bit premature and I think that, you know, we see all these counties and all these government officials around the
state and the country sort of taking this anti-data center approach. I tend to agree with Commissioner Maddox's sentiment on this is like what if a data center is an economic boon and it does not harm the environment in the way that everybody thinks it does. does not
create decibel noise the way everybody says it does. I just think a lot of that stuff is um is is blown out of proportion. I mean, I don't know what a hypers scale data center is. I've never seen one. I've I mean, you know, I know there's reports and think tanks and
studies and all this stuff. So, I just want to put that out there for our board to sort of keep an open mind if we can on some of these issues, especially as it pertains to economic development. I mean, you know, our our city government has substantial resources in terms of land availability at its airport. It
owns its own utility. Um, I mean, you're telling me if if a data center came in here and said, "Hey, we'll invest, you know, hund00 million in expanding our power plant to accommodate our own power consumption and that we can create a framework regulatory speaking through
the county with all the check boxes we're talking about to ensure that that this does not harm the environment, that it does not harm our aquifer, that it does not take more power than it provides back and etc., etc. I think that's a conversation we need to remain
open to. Um, especially in our town where again I say I think our biggest existential threat in Tallahassee and Lyon County is the fact that we do not provide enough of an opportunity for the kids who are graduating from our schools
to stay here. Uh, my own children, right? I've said this many times. I want my kids to stay here. I want my grandkids to stay here. I want them to be able to find jobs here. And right now I don't know if they're going to be able to do that. And so just want to make sure that we're putting this all in perspective. I know we're like, you
know, this is the topic dour of the political class right now in terms of, you know, creating a boogeyman out of an idea. And I just want us to be careful about how we approach that. So I'll support the moratorum. Um, but I just want to say again that I'd be willing to
revisit that if a proposal came forward that actually benefited our community in a tangible way that we could verify and regulate. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> Thank you, Mr. Media Pass Chairman. Commissioners, I'm going to weigh on this item now. Um, I think Commissioner
Welch brings up a great brings up multiple great points and that's kind of why I think the moratorum is necessary because I think that so much technology has changed in the world so quickly and I mean we're seeing all over the nation
the the the race to have some of these data centers because they're necessary for for the growth in technology. I think it's important that we understand the impacts of them on our community and we define them in our comp plan and we be delicate with the time and that way
we're careful before just opening the door to them without any regulation. And so I I I agree with what um Commissioner Wel said. Commissioners, I just want to say that to you all before we vote on this item. Very thankful for staff for
bringing this back. Very happy with the quick turnaround. Um, I think everyone's provided great insight on this. Um, to our neighbors who who may be watching or reading about this in in the news in the next coming days, I just want you to know that, you know, this board always
takes the position that we feel is best for our neighbors. And um, you know, not to throw any shade, you know, at the city across the street, but I know that this came to their board just recently, and they didn't even want to entertain the conversation on naming them in their comp plan. And so the fact that we can
sit up here and have a matured conversation with with each and every one of us and to be able to move our community forward and really being what this is, this is about being proactive about the changing dynamic of economics and technology as it tries to make its
way into Florida. So I'm very proud to be up here with you all and and deliver another a win for our constituents. Commissioner Proctor, close us out, then we're going to vote. Um, chairman, I I wouldn't want to be, you mentioned the city. I wouldn't want us to be arrogant
um uh so arrogant as to disallow citizen participation in this important issue. I mean, I realize we're not selling the hospital and just among our own uh four four of us can control what happens to a house. People are giving away a a golf
course and a graveyard. But I believe um a issue of this magnitude uh the energies of uh opposition to it that similar to the uh charter revision uh committee that we had we had a
distinguished uh a profound group of uh diverse uh professionals scholars neighborhood uh participants. I'd like to see us build into uh this model that as staff is u um
leading or we have to pay a a consultant to u take the charge on this a professionals professional because we can't um as commissioner uh has pointed out this is one that we can't make a mistake on. Um, you can give away a
hospital and rebuild another one, but um, young man said the aquafer is at stake. Uh, you can't create a new aquifer, you just can't. Uh, where do you dump the the the the U waters? Um, I
don't know the engineering once you dump this kind of water and it's spent. Um, there's no second bite. to take 30, 40, 50 years environmentally to correct itself if um and we've talked in this
community commissioners as you all know about the sensitivity of the wall color springs and that's always has something to do with um nitrogen levels but I'm not sure Vince what the levels of is it nitrogen that comes out of these things
is it uh something very highly toxic radioactive Um, is this like a nuclear power plant? I don't know. We don't know. And so, but what I do know is that we should not uh pull pull the trigger to go forward on
something that includes every duck, every bird, every boy and girl and citizen. Uh, not only our county, but where the water and the spent water is discharged. Um that's why um I would
love to see um if this board is open to it uh a citizen panel impanel to give deliberation consideration because like commissioner Welch um I'm not an expert at it but we had an array of beautiful
minds assemble for the charter review and you know FAMU has a water program uh a water um what's the word for water and um academics what's that Oh. Um, >> something like that. All those words. Uh, those kind of words like that and
experts >> like that. And u now you know wet I could have guessed wet. Now I was talking about the big words uh you know hydraology or something. >> Mr. Proctor comm uh the county ministry wants to chime in real quick. >> Oh yes sir. You uh thank you Mr.
Chairman commissioners. uh on the um the issue that Commissioner Proctor was speaking to on citizen involvement. What I'd recommend that we do on projects like this and I have every confidence obviously we're we're in good company right now around the country and and and our staff is going to have access to the
best information and we're going to bring you back the best possible u um guidelines relative to all this with respect to land development regulations and zoning categories and all that. What I'd recommend though is that um we give the board the the the flexibility for us
to within the timeline that Commissioner Maddox talked about bring you the big moving parts first and when we start to refine we could then engage citizens because what could happen in the process is that u you know you run the risk of if you start that process too early we
bring you back recommendations where you are you know you may be in opposition to u you know some of the the citizen comments and and and and that sort of thing. Give us the ability to to hit the broad strokes, get your direction on that, and then we could do the
refinement process with obviously in a very inclusive uh process. Anyway, just just food for thought. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. um Nefal, you can tell Vince has been around me a long time because he was reading my mind, you know, and uh he was reading my mind, but
I I want Commissioner um O'Keefe to know I could have thought of the word wet myself, but thanks for having me. Um that's what I was thinking about. He just said, >> "All right, Commissioner P. We're going to take us for a vote." >> Good. Good. All right. All right. We have a motion
moved by Commissioner Maddox, second by the vice chairman. Um, all those in favor of the motion signify by saying I. >> I. >> Any opposed? >> I. >> Passes unanimously. We are on item number 22.
>> 26. You say >> 22. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, this agenda item is consideration of the engagement of outside council to assess standing and the constitutionality of Senate Bill 1134 and other potential causes of
action. Um there was a previous direction uh for staff to bring back this item. I at that meeting expressed concerns about uh the county standing to bring a constitutional challenge
>> because I even at that time was familiar with the public official standing doctrine to some extent um in an attempt to avoid the potential for hiring outside counsel and expending that money if it looked like standing was going to be like a threshold problem and bringing
a constitutional challenge. uh we did that research internally. Uh that information is briefly outlined in your agenda item. Uh I can say for you fairly conclusively that uh public official standing doctrine would preclude
uh the county from challenging the constitutionality of Senate Bill 1134. Now, um you know, a a another potential option at some point could potentially be, and this is referenced in the agenda item as well, a declaratory action to
the extent the board has finite questions about the legality or its rights or obligations related to implementing specific portions of the legislation, then that's not a challenge
to the Constitution. ality of the legislation. That would be an opportunity for the board to seek judicial um it's not advice. It's not an advisory
opinion. A a a judicial decision from a court about whether certain things are or are not permissible under the new legislation. uh and it specifically what the county's rights and obligations are, but those have to be very specific.
Again, it's not intended to be advisory. It's not a backdoor to challenge the constitutionality of the legislation. Um but declaratory actions are a tool and if the board wanted to at some point in the future move in that direction on
very discreet issues or concerns, the board would have that authority to do that. I'm happy to answer any questions the board has about the bill, about anything in the agenda item. Um, and I do not believe we have do we have any speakers?
>> We do have just a couple of speakers on this item. Mr. chairman. Uh the first speaker, Darell Picket going once. Paul Erenss, >> please your name and address for the record, please. >> All right. Good evening, uh commissioners and all
others. My name is Paul Arens. I live at 1706 Beachwood Circle in Tallahassee. I'm a retired state employee. I believe diversity, equity, and inclusion, which are the concepts banned by Senate Bill 1134,
go to the very heart of our identity as a society. We must not accept the narrow-minded, privileged, exclusionary, beed restrictions opposed by officials currently in charge of our state government. We are entitled to be free from the atmosphere of fear and uncertainty that
this law creates. I believe this threat to our essence leads to a need to challenge this law. And if local government lacks standing in house to file legal action against it, outside council is a priority. But first, there
should be an inventory of what specific activities are likely to be targeted and the levels of risk attached to each one. This urgent but methodical assessment, including an opportunity for public input, should be done expeditiously in coalition with other local governments
and statewide associations so that the legal challenges will be coordinated and concerted. First things first, quantify the threat, be part of organizing an alliance which then hires outside counsel and
stand up and fight back. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. Final speaker on this item, Stephanie Schwarz. >> She had to leave early. Um, I have some comments from her, but I'll save them for questions from mine. >> Okay, great.
>> Commissioner Maddox, you're recognized. >> Um, Mr. Chair, I'm I'm going to take a shot in the dark here and make a a motion for option number two. >> Okay, we have a motion on the floor for
option number two. Moved by Commissioner Maddox. I will second the motion. We're in discussion. >> Thank you. So, Madame Attorney, are there other jurisdictions or other entities that have challenged Senate Bill 1134?
>> No. >> No. Okay. Um, Mr. Administrator, do you know of any conversation going on at Florida Association and counties pertaining to Senate Bill 1134? >> Uh, Mr. Chairman, Commissioner, not on
the legal front. Um, ma'am attorney, if we did go down the road of option number one, could you go back through your explanation of of what, where, and when? >> So outside council, one of the things
that they would be retained to look at again is standing. Um, again, we've done that review in house. So standing is kind of a threshold issue. In order to bring a to file a lawsuit,
to bring a claim, someone has to have standing. And uh there's been it's really old. It's been around a really long time. It's in in our case, it's called the public official standing doctrine. Mhm. >> And it expressly precludes
governments from challenging legislation um even if they believe it's unconstitutional. Um the case law on that has been around a really long time. There are two exceptions to that. Those are identified
in your agenda item. Uh the first one is the public funds exception. Um but as the court fairly recently cautioned uh in that case was from 2008. It's fairly recent in this juristp prudence area.
This is a really narrow exception. Uh and the cost to comply with the legislation or the new law is insufficient to trigger that exception. Okay. So if there's some sort of a if
the new law requires some sort of gross expenditure of funds like if it's unfunded mandate or something like that then possibly that particular public funds exception could apply. That is not what we're looking at here. Um the other
exception uh to the public official standing doctrine um is called the personal injury exception and that is where a lo a local government official in their individual capacity can show some type of personal injury.
Um but that cannot grow out of their obligation uh of the oath of office or their official position. So no meaning that um no particular commissioner even uh in their individual
capacity as a commissioner in their formal capacity would have standing because this exception would not apply to them. >> Okay. So so that is why a direct challenge to the constitutionality of
this statute is not available to us as a local government. Now, does that mean that other entities or individuals might have standing that are not governmental entities? Possibly. um >> haven't heard anything about that yet,
but I but I can tell you that um you know, I've um at recent conferences for the bar, for fa um I've been talking with county attorneys from all over the state uh and
generally there's the same consensus that this standing issue would be extremely problematic and would be basically I mean, we wouldn't be successful on the merits of anything because we wouldn't even get to the merits of any constitutional challenge. Um,
also talked with um someone at the since I don't really run so much in the municipal circles, talked with someone from the Florida League of Cities. Um, they are also currently unaware of any municipalities that are looking to challenge the constitutionality of Senate Bill 1134.
um so you know have had our ears to the ground but the standing issue seems to be just a a problem. So, if we were hiring a uh we're retaining outside counsel m attorney, are you can I sum it
up to say we be retaining outside counsel to find something that you that the county attorney's office didn't fund? >> Yeah, you could try. Yeah. >> So, and and that retaining of outside counsel could cost us estimated Could
you estimate that cost? >> It would be thousands for sure. >> Yeah. So, here's where I am, y'all. Um, I don't like it any more than anybody else on this dis likes it, but I believe in the u expertise and I believe in
I believe in the assessment of our county attorney's office. And what I what I don't want to do is I don't I don't want to put money into something that the county attorney's office and and others across the state, other municipalities and other associations have said that we have no standing on.
So if if there are other entities like she said there there there could be outside private entities that may have standing but we don't have standing. And so I I don't I don't want to spend money on something that we already know and which
is that we we we don't have standing and and so I'm I'm looking for other ways as we have a discussion for us to deal with this issue as I don't as like I said I don't I don't like it any more than anybody else but I don't want to throw money into a hole to get the same answer
from an outside council that we got from my county attorney's office which is we we don't have standing. So that's why I made a motion for option number two, looking for another creative way for us to deal with this issue that we that that nobody on this dis um really wants
to uh put into action. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Uh Commissioner Miner. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um Commissioner Maddox, good good points. Um,
after reading the new statute and discussing it with our county attorney, um, it appears that under these changes to Florida law, um, Leyon County will no longer be able to recognize or support Lyon County's Emancipation Day on May
20th. Uh, as you all know, Leyon County was the very first county to make Emancipation Day a holiday. Um, in addition to Emancipation Day not being permitted to be recognized by Lyon County, that also applies to Women's
History Month, Black History Month, Pride Month. And I was talking with the county attorney about what our options might be to to address it. And I think for now, the best step in my opinion is to bring an agenda item back that would
basically add this to our legislative priorities for 2027. is to urge bills that would put the Emancipation Day, Women's Month, Women's History Month, Black History Month, Pride Month in Florida law, which would permit us to
continue to recognize those. So, Commissioner Maddox, if you'd accept a friendly amendment to to basically add to your motion to have an agenda item come back. Um, we've got some time on this, but to have an agenda item come back where we could deliberate uh making those part of our legislative
priorities. Thank you, >> Mr. Vice Chair. Then Commissioner Cummings. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, when we when we talked about this two meetings ago, uh, I made the motion to
consider outside counsel because we were told there wasn't capacity in the office to do this work and that that's why there's a lot going on and that's why we need to hire outside counsel. So, we had a vote to bring that back. What changed to make it so that once we were
considering considering outside counsel, we had capacity? >> We didn't bring it back in June because that would have been too soon, but we just made the time on this threshold fundamental issue of standing. If we'd found that there was potential for standing, uh, that would be something
different because we definitely don't have capacity to litigate. File, preparing and drafting pleadings, filing pleadings. The work that comes with actual litigation is very, very different than researching a discrete issue on
standing. and was trying to do it in an effort not to have the county spend money on something if it looked like the threshold standing issue was going to be a problem. Okay. Uh of all the different decisions
and how things apply uh like was mentioned uh recognizing uh you know county's Emancipation Day or Black History Month or Women's History Month or Hispanic Heritage Month. Have all the counties and county attorneys that that
we're in communication with interpreted it consistently? Is there any county that reads it a different way on a particular allowable or unallowable activity or is it all been clear and uniform? >> There's actually a a task force that's
been created by FAKA. Uh they've met twice so far. Uh all of this analysis is underway. So there is no consistency or uniformity. I can tell you because everyone is still in the middle of running their own analyses.
But I can also say that there is a lot of confusion about what is and is not permissible. In part because during debate on the floor of this bill,
questions were asked of the bill sponsor and he was shooting from the hip and was asked questions like, "Hey, will we be able to celebrate Black History Month?" Yes, you will. All these things when if you look at the plain language of
125.595 as of January 1 will not be permissible. And so people really want to rely on the representations that were made by the bill sponsor on the floor and that is understandable
from the legal perspective. Where that becomes very problematic is legislative intent is not the judicial philosophy that we are operating under in the state of Florida. Textualism is
the judicial philosophy not only in Florida but in many parts of this country. And if and it really becomes but is there gray? Yes. It becomes a legal risk tolerance for this board in some areas. I'm going
to be very conservative in my advice to this board because there is strict liability for violation. Commissioners can be suspended from office. The county can be sued and be held liable for fees and costs if we're
found to have violated the law. There is no guidance out there at this point. There's no case law. It's all too new. There was no authority in the bill to authorize an agency to to engage in rulemaking so that certain of these terms that are used could be further
defined in rulem. So people really are grappling with how to implement and apply this new law on a case-bycase basis dependent on what they have in their own
jurisdictions. And some things are pretty standard and uniform. Commissioner Miner mentioned some of them like Pride Month, Black History Month, uh Women's History Month, and those sorts of things. And people are trying to look for ways to shoehorn
uh what they want to still continue to celebrate and fund and promote and recognize and honor into the exceptions in the legislation. But it from a legal perspective makes it
very very difficult to advise this board that something is okay when it is not in the black and white letter of the statute. What I hear is there's confusion,
there's ambiguity, and that uh by by the nature of uh the the severe risk, our county attorney will take a very conservative decision on case by case issues, which is what
we're facing. Um and so the the um you know, initially when I requested this item, I want to challenge the constitutionality and all of that. Um, and I'd love to see that happen, but what I see in the analysis is that's not necessarily going to play out. But I'm
interested in the declaratory process to clarify ambiguities because it is very important that we know, for example, can the canyon county recognize Black History Month or Pride Month on
Facebook? >> Was that a question to the county? question. That's a question of county. >> It sounds like from what I heard, no. >> No. >> Okay. Can an individual commissioner march in a pride parade? >> Uh I would say you have rights in your
individual capacity, but to the extent you are trying to represent the county in that action, that would be inadvisable. >> No proclamation. >> And would there be could we make proclamations? >> Yeah. So what proclamations? I asked
that last time. >> Not for things that fall within the definition of DEI and that are not expressly enumerated in one of the exceptions. >> Could I wear this shirt that says David O'Keefe Commissioner and in the Pride Commission? I don't have a pride proclamation from anybody, but I'm in
the Pride parade and people recognize me as Commissioner O'Keeffe. If you are wearing if you have something that is designating you as affiliated with the county in your capacity as a county commissioner, what I would tell
you is that you are running the risk of enforcement action under this bill. >> Okay. But there is some ambiguity. You're you're you're saying this not up and down, but I you should be careful. >> Yes. >> Okay.
which is to to it's not your fault, but to be fairly unclear answer, right? And and I'd like to be able to know because I don't think any of us want to stop any of the activities that we've been doing based on the values of our community. We
want to comply up to the required compliance of this law. Um, and so to me, there are questions about specific instances. And while we may, we have what has been very clearly said would be
a very careful and conservative approach from our county attorney, I don't think that's what our constituents demand of us. I think I'm going to give you a a tax analogy. When you do your taxes, you take every deduction, you take every
credit you can, everything allowed by law, and you pay the minimum taxes you are legally required to. That's not shoe warning. That's not cheating. You do not pay a penny more than you have to in taxes. That is that is following the law to the
exact law and complying to the amount you're only exactly to comply. You don't pay an extra 10% in taxes because you're not quite sure about one of the deductions. You find out and you comply exactly to where you're meant to comply to. We owe it to our constituents to
find that out. And I think if it's unclear exactly what we are allowed to do, that is what we should look at. And so I'm not so because I because I I respect everyone's
on the same page about not liking any of what we're having to do. I'm I'm going back and forth between offering another motion, but my my point is what I would really like to see is have outside counsel to review any ambiguity that we
have and to have an an outside counsel take a clear yes, we can tell you you are allowed to post on Facebook or not post on Facebook. You are allowed to sponsor the Jewish food festival. you are allowed or not allowed to do the
harambe cultural festival. In the case of clarity, you are you're not allowed to do CSWG if they change things. We need to have a list of what you just can't do, which it sounds like we've identified some of the things we know we can't do, but if there are other things
we are not sure of, we need clarity. And that's what the declaratory judgment process would go for. That's that's what I would like to see us do. and um for the sake of order uh leave it there. >> Mr. Vice Chair, you know, you're more than welcome to from your office send an
email to the attorney general and ask for attorney general opinion. >> So, I am more than able to, but uh the thing about attorneys is there's a reason there's courts and judges and the just like so this is not exactly the
same, but this is similar to uh the what was called the don't say gay law a couple years ago. >> Mr. Vice Chair, I'm going to move on to other commissioners and I can come back to you. I want I have other commissioners in the queue, but I I want to I want to continue so everyone has equal opportunity to speak. So, Commissioner Cummings, you're
recognized. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh this is certainly um an area that uh leaves us with a lot of with a lot of questions. Um,
and I've heard the legal opinion about standing whether or not we have a case in controversy whether or not those two exemptions exemptions apply to us as county commissioners.
And I think we would be I don't know what's happening. I think we would be jeopardizing the county if we went forth in that respect. But I wanted to follow up uh on the
declaratory judgment and I know there's a you know a doctrine with the court against providing advisory uh opinions. the attorney general sometime does, but
it's not necessarily binding from the attorney general. So with the co from the court standpoint, uh I'm just grappling with whether or not such an inquiry about the parameters
of the law would be um rise to the level of just an advisory opinion uh which the courts shy away from. Madam Power.
>> Yeah. So, it's a really long quote and it's very legal ease and it probably made most people's eyes glaze over. But a declaratory action, it it is possible, but there's again it can't be advisory.
It needs to be a bonafideed actual present practical need. It has to be based on present ascertained or ascertainable facts or present controversy. Um, and it has to really deal with a a a
bonafideed legitimate question about a right obligation uh that is currently unknown or uncertain. So, it can't be speculative. It would be something if the county wanted to do
this, we'd have to really specifically identify the areas that we are uncertain about and that we are seeking declaratory relief for the judge to tell us what it means and what's permissible or what's not permissible. Um, you know,
I think there are potentially ways to do that. Um, there are a lot of potential ambiguities in the legislation. There are undefined terms which is always problematic. Again, they use recognizing and honoring in places. They use
supporting in places. They use funding in others. That does that mean if they don't have funding in one exception that you that you can't fund or another one and so it just means that it's a ministerial thing that you can do to recognize
uh you know, Mother's Day, which actually is something that we could do. we've started making our lists of what we know we can do uh based on the exceptions. Um, you know, there are certain things that as we move forward,
we have real legitimate questions about and we if the board wants to try to gain certainty on that that the declaratory action is the route to go for that. Now, I will tell you it's not a fast process.
I mean, it is lit. I mean, it is filing a court proceeding. So, we're at the subject and the mercy of the court in terms of scheduling and all of that stuff. So, this isn't something that if the board wanted to move forward on that, it's like you'd have an answer before January 1. I firmly believe you
would not have an answer by January 1, but you would get an answer and that could provide you with some certainty on discreet things. Um, you know, the somebody might ask the attorney general for an opinion of some sort on different things. I will tell you though that is
not a safe harbor for this body because it is advisory only. So, you know, that's that doesn't necessarily protect the board even or the county even if the AG takes an opinion on something specific.
>> Uh, thank you, Madam C. So, let me let me ask you this though. So, we would be relying on a judge to interpret that statute and plug in holes where the legislature
refused to find specifics. And my concern is whether or not the judge would say he has authority to do that because there are a lot of well, we don't have any definitions number one in the legislation. So, I'm just wondering
if that would be a waste of time because are we asking a judge to now define where we need definitions? We're asking the the court to clarify this with no direction. He the the judge, he or she
would just be pulling out of thin air in my opinion. and the opinion from the court might very well not even protect the county. I mean, there's so many nuances, so many directions it could go in. Um,
would that be precedent to to protect us, you know? >> Yeah. I mean to your point um we would have to establish that these are there's a bonafide need that there's a present
uh controversy of some sort. I mean and again we would have to be very narrow in what we requested uh the court to give us declaratory relief for. So would we potentially get a for example if we wanted to say under
this specific provision that authorizes us to recognize and honor certain monuments and the people and the individuals and people uh related to that. Does that mean that we can celebrate um you know women's history
month? I mean, we might get an answer on that if there if the court's willing to give us that, but it then only applies to that. Um, you know, there's a slavery memorial that we can recognize. Um, does that mean that we can celebrate Black
History Month? I mean, the court could tell us that. I can tell you what I think the court is going to rely on fundamentally, going back to what I said before. There is, you know, legislative intent these days is dead.
Courts will not look at legislative intent. They are not going to care what a bill sponsor said on the floor during debate. I think even in this deck action context, a court is going to look at the
plain language of what the text said. Now, if a court says based on the fact that there's uh you know a slavery memorial and you're allowed to recognize that by extension that means that you can um c
celebrate black history month. I do think if someone were to challenge us on that that would provide protection to the county. Um if you know a commissioner is suspended for taking official action on that uh that is
something that we would definitely use in the defense of the commissioner. Um that provides more protection than an AG opinion would. So going going that route uh madam
counter attorney then would notice be given to the legislature to the president of the senate speaker of the house so that they would respond and perhaps provide you know briefs and what have you on the issue >> I'm sure >> they would have to be given notice
correct so then they're going to just sit down and let the judge out to clear blue sky give his opinion without any any type direction so in other words going that route It is is is nothing that we can put our
hats on to say it would be favorable anyway because there would clearly be some opposition. Right. >> There is no certainty that we would get the answers that we want even in a deck action even if a court's willing to
opine. >> Now one last question Mr. Chair. Yes ma'am. Um, is there any precedent for legislation like this that that's just very ambiguous or not directional
to go back to the president of the the Senate and the speaker of the house uh and request some implementing uh directions on this particular statute uh because there's no effort, you know,
just point out the deficiencies and it's leaving um counties, cities, municipalities in limbo as to how to proceed and and I don't know if that would be our lobbyist or but has that ever
occurred? Are you familiar with that ever occurred, Mr. County Administrator, madam county attorney? No, but I think as the the the ramifications of this legislation and the impacts related to implementation
uh actually start to take effect that there will be a push not only by governmental entities but by by external parties who have historically been funded by local governments. and maybe the unintended consequences of some of
this stuff that may result in the filing of a bill to amend the legislation to either provide more express exceptions to define terms >> um that sort of thing. It could very well be on the legislative agendas of
various governmental entities to to seek that. and and I know the Southern Pover Poverty Law Center does a lot of litigation uh in in this area. Do do we know if anything has been filed by them or by by
any entity in any uh court? And I think since it's what uh legislation, it would have to be the the uh siters of the lawsuit would have to be filed here in Lyon County because this is where state government is headquartered, right? Are
we familiar with anything being being filed? >> Nothing has been filed. I understand that that there is discussion among some groups to potentially file something, but uh nothing has been
filed or come to fruition yet. >> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Thank you. Um Commissioner comes. I'm going to Commissioner Proctor, then back to the vice chair, and then we're going to vote on the item. Chairman, I'm just want the board to understand I'm having extraordinary discomfort talking about
and I'm not one who ducks and run from a conversation, but this is um you know, us procers have been in Leyon County since the 1700s. We got statues around buildings around our footprint all through history. Um I am feeling some
kind of way and I'm I'm really going to dismiss myself to go home. I don't want to talk about um how bad I feel about uh the collapse of uh DEI and stuff like that. I'm looking around this room.
Nearly every black person in this room got their head down. Um I don't know why their heads are down. I'm just looking and observing. Um u maybe they too feel some kind of way uncertainty about their futures of maybe
feeling abandoned from their past they can't talk about it can't be remembered uh librarian can't have it in the in the library can't talk about black history hell I don't want to talk about this no more in fact I'm going to go Mr. Chairman I'm sorry I can't take no more
>> all right commissioners Mr. Mr. Vice Chairman, you bring us in for the landing on this vote. >> No, go ahead, commissioner. Chairman, >> what' you say? Okay. All right, commissioners. Um, who move who made the motion? Commissioner Maddox, who second the motion?
>> Uh, second. >> Option two. >> I'm sorry. I I second the motion. >> Option two. >> Um, all those in favor of option two moved by uh Commissioner >> I'm sorry. >> As amended. Thank you. as amended. Um >> how is it amended?
>> Y >> basically it was u adding have an agenda item come back uh so that we can explore adding a legislative priority for um Emancipation Day, Women's History Month, Black History Month, Pride Month in Florida statutes.
All right. Uh everyone understand the motion? Right. All those in in favor of the motion signify by saying I. I. >> All oppose. >> Nay. passes uh 51 with I'm sorry 41 with um Commissioner Proctor out of the
chambers and um Commissioner Welch had to had to jump off. So this just us for the rest of the meeting. Commissioners um we are now on full board appointments to the animal shelter advisory board. Item number 23, Mr. County Mission. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman, commissioners.
Item C is the board's full consideration of an appointment for two eligible applicants and uh as you see we've got uh or or as you two um uh spots to fill and you've got three eligible applicants that are provided here for you. Uh we're
recommending option one and seek your appointments. >> Mr. Chairman, I move to appoint Tiffany Santer and Dr. Shauna Autry. >> We have to motion moved by the vice chair. >> Seconded by uh Commissioner Maddox. Any discussion?
Seeing none, um all those in favor to appoint the recommended um appointees by the vice chairman signify by saying I. >> I. >> All oppose. Passes uh unanimously. Five 50. And now we are on commissioner
discussion. Actually, wait. No, I guess conclude me. Go to my any any other speakers on uh non-aggenda items? Mr. County Administrator. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We have no further speakers. Okay, great. Um, we now go to discussion items from the
county attorney and county administrator. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, I have two matters. Uh the first is uh as outlined in a memo that I sent to the board, uh there is a new proposed uh opioid uh
litigation settlement that's been profered by outside council with their recommendation. It's with the distributor. The amount that the county would receive in settlement is approximately $152,000. Um, I support uh outside council's
recommendation uh to uh approve the settlement and uh request authorization to assign the necessary documentation on behalf of the board if the board is so inclined. >> So move Mr. Chairman.
>> So moved by the Commissioner Miner uh for the county attorney's recommendation. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Second by Commissioner Cummings. Any discussion? Mr. Vice Chairman, Mr. Vice Chairman, >> thank you. Real quick, my understanding is this one's a little different in that
there are some limits on uh information sharing on the parties. >> It doesn't preclude the issuance of documentation in response to public records requests because that's the law, but uh it would uh mean that the county
would not issue like press releases and that sort of thing. That's correct. >> Thank you. >> Great. Um, I'm sorry. Oh, yeah. Yeah. Sorry. All those in favor of the motion on the floor signify by saying I. I.
>> Any opposed? Passes. 5. Madam Attorney, you still the floor. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh the other matter uh that I have for you this evening is um as was outlined in another memo that I sent to you uh in the
ongoing uh issues that we're having with the city of Tallahassee about fire services. Uh as you all know uh the board last year took a vote to terminate the agreement um between the city and the county for fire and EMS services. Uh
the county subsequently received a letter from the city manager to our county administrator uh stating such that uh putting this the county on notice that city commission was terminating the interlocal agreement. At
the end of the current term on September 30th of 2028, uh we subsequently made a public records request for the asset list uh of assets that would transfer to the county from the city upon termination under the
interlocal agreement. Uh we did receive a document uh that seemed underinclusive but was entitled agreement termination. Um >> agreement what? >> Termination. >> Okay. >> Um the city has subsequently changed its
position. It's now saying that the agreement is not expiring or it's not terminating. It is expiring. Uh and so um they have said, well, we're willing to negotiate with with you for the cost and maybe the transfer of assets. That's
we're open to that uh unless you want to terminate earlier uh than that. And that was in a letter from um the city attorney to me after a number of months of pressing. Um we did finally get that
position from uh the city on June 3rd. Um we need board direction on what the board wants to do as a result of the city's new position on the transfer of assets. Um, I outlined in my memo three
potential options. One of which is engage in dispute resolution about what termination and expiration mean under the agreement. Uh, I also uh indicated to you in that memo that uh the pros and cons of that. U pros, you'd get an
answer. Uh con, it's no guarantee you get the one you want, although I feel very good about our legal position with that. But also as importantly, that process would take at least 6 to 7 months. And if in fact the county is going to stand up its own fire
department, that is prolonged uncertainty in the meantime about costs or assets and ultimately what assets we would potentially even get. Uh option number two, uh basically say,
"Okay, fine, city. We'll just negotiate for everything." um assets and the transfer of fire stations and that sort of thing. Um the risks of that um would include it increased cost above and beyond what is
already provided for under the interlocal agreement. Uh and also the the position they might take that they're not going to transfer certain assets period. uh which we think based on certain for certain reasons we think that there's a high likelihood that they would take the position they are not
going to transfer certain of those assets um if we don't fight them on that. Uh the third option and this is common in agreements you have termination for cause provisions and basically what that says is when either
party uh can notify the what they call the breaching party uh how they've materially breached the agreement give them a certain amount of time in this case 30 days to cure and if they don't they say okay the agreement is
terminated. Um that's different than um what the city did before. Um that is an option here. Um it would definitely trigger the asset transfer provisions under the interlocal agreement because
there would be no question that it's a termination. Um, it wouldn't put us practically speaking in any different position than we are now because the position we're in now is this agreement is terminating or expiring or whatever phrase you want to
call it on September 30th of 2028. So, what this does is it puts us in the best position most quickly to know which assets we would definitely get in the event we have to stand up our own fire department. It does not foreclose the
ability or the opportunity for the city or the county at some point before termination of the existing agreement to come together and try to work things out and enter into a new agreement. But given all of the pros and cons and the timing and everything else, uh the
recommendation is to authorize staff to uh issue the notice of termination for cause, which would give them the 30-day cure time frame. And if they don't, make it official, say we're terminating for cause, and
keep keep it moving. I'm happy to answer any questions. >> Thank you, Madam Attorney. Um what is your what is your recommendation um on this? You know, if if you if if the board what what what direction do
you think postures the county in the best position um that you would like to see from us? >> Initiate the termination for cause process under the agreement. and it provides certainty about the transfer of
assets in the event that we end up going our separate ways on September 30th of 2028. >> I'm not coming for a second commission. Here's here's where I think um I want to I want to backtrack real quick. Um September of last year, I vividly remember on this dis um there was a
debate about whether to even ask the city for the asset list particularly because I remember I wanted to know whether or not they even intended to transfer the assets. And so that process took six months which
intentionally was dragged on. Um, and I kind of anticipated that, you know, they would continue to play these these games. Um, however, I believe that we should continue down
the path that we have gone down the last 10 to 12 months. Um, I also truly do believe based on talking to all the political candidates that are running for um, election and city elections that
after November, I do believe that there'll be a sentiment to want to come together with the county and um, look at formula form for forming a new agreement that postures the city and the county in a good in a good direction. However,
we can't plan for that, right? We can we can expect that but I think it's important that we posture ourselves and moving forward that until we have this workshop that's coming when Mr. County administrator >> be in September at your workshop date in
September. >> So we'll have we plan on having a fire workshop that'll have all the results back from the county administrator's operational consultant and the county attorney's uh financial consultant which I think will give us a big picture. But in the meantime, you know, our county
attorney's done a a incredible job representing us well, representing Leyon County residents well. And so what I really want to do is posture ourselves to give her whatever tools she needs to make sure that she can continue to fight on behalf of Leyon County residents. So,
um, that's no motion on the table. I just, that's just my opinion. I hate that Commissioner Proctor and Commissioner Walter aren't here. I hate that we're missing two commissioners to kind of hear the full board's opinion. But um I have uh Commissioner Maddox, Commissioner Cummings, and Commissioner Miner in the queue. >> Madam Attorney, do we have Do we What's
the What's the expediency behind this decision? >> So the consultant is scheduled to come back in September. As the county administrator said, >> right now doing nothing means there is complete uncertainty about whether we
get fire stations 10 through 14, whether we get fire station 15, whether we get any of the apparatus, and even if so, how much it will cost. >> This provides certainty about what we
can count on based on the transfer of assets provision in the interlocal agreement. so that the consultant when they come back in September has that information. Otherwise, the ass I would assume the assumption they're going to have to operate under
is that we won't get any of that because that is potentially worst case scenario. Otherwise, they can't count on us getting those assets or what that cost might be. >> Mr. Max has the floor. >> Thank you. Um, Mr. Administrator. Okay.
I I' I've never said anything different. I'm and I'm not going to say anything different today. I want an agreement. I want a new agreement. I want us to go get to the table and negotiate a new agreement. And I I believe that um we may be in a better situation or even
now. Who knows? You know, there's some conversations over there where I've heard a couple commissioners say that they're maybe looking forward to us doing a new agreement prior to um the election coming in in November. But I want a new agreement. And so
when I had the conversation earlier with the county attorney, what I told her, I I needed time to think about it because I'm trying to I'm trying to put us in in the best position to get to that point, not for us to create our own station cuz I mean, I've I met with with with TPD and the fire association and and just
it's much more complicated than us just moving in that direction. Um I'm trying to get us to a new agreement. Well, what would preclude us from, Mr. Administrator, what what would preclude us from having a conversation with the city to see if they're willing to come
back to the table and look at what renegotiating a new new agreement that would take place after 28 look like? What or precludes from that? >> No, I think that's exactly what your September workshop is going to do. You're going to be provided with all of that information. However, we're on a timeline at this point. And I think one
of the things I would just add to what the county attorney said is that um she provided a couple of options for getting legal clarification one that's more expedited. I think the result would be the same. This it's unambiguous in in the agreement in terms of the
disposition of the assets and and the um the reason why that's the grounds for which that that um that provision would be exercised and this is um this certainly is the that exact uh condition. Uh so again I think that the legal result would be the same. However,
as the county attorney noted, this um timeline gives us the opportunity for the board to have options. Well, we we may agree with you that, you know, a renegotiation with the city may be the board may determine is the most viable option, but you're going to need to have the other option there. Uh because it
does take two to come to that agreement. And so your September uh meeting workshop will um provide all the information you'll need to to give us that direction. So if we go to the termination for breach in 30 days they have the cure. They don't cure in 30 days. When does the termination take place?
>> We would identify September 30th of 2028 because practically speaking we need we would need every single day possible between now and then to stand up our own fire department. >> What was the first option you said? >> Um dispute resolution. dispute resolution
>> which if we go all the way through to arbitration binding arbitration could easily take six to seven months and there's the additional cost and everything else associated with that and we have no reason to believe that the city would try to expedate any part of that process.
>> Okay. So dispute resolution negotiate or terminate for breach. We terminate for breach then and they have 30 days to cure. If they don't cure within those 30 days, then what happens? >> It's terminated, but >> it it's confirmed that the agreement will terminate on September 30th of 2028.
>> And then the whatever is in the contract will have to execute, which means they will have to transfer those stations no matter what their interpretation is. >> We've terminated we've terminated, not expired. We've said we we're terminating at that point. >> Correct. >> Correct. >> Yeah. >> Yes. So basically, point point of
clarification, what the city did, they they terminated >> and now they're saying it wasn't a termination, it was an expiration, right? Because really what happened, they didn't read the contract and they they they jumped out impulsively. >> And so now they're trying to backtrack. And so what she's saying is, "All right,
you don't have to terminate. We can terminate." >> Mhm. >> So I I I like the guidance. Sorry. >> I um I'll make the motion. I I'll reluctantly make the motion to terminate for breach. >> Second
>> staff recommendation. Um, and I say reluctantly because like I said, I'm trying to get back to the table to negotiate what this new deal looks like, but as county administrator said and and the county attorney said, we we need to be a we
need to know what those numbers look like without uh just in case we have to move in another direction. And if we negotiate, I'm not sure with the way things have been working lately that we're going to get uh that we're going to get the the timing that we need to
make those decisions, nor are we going to get a good deal. Um, and if dispute resolution is just like negotiating, so you get about the same thing there. Uh, so I I'm I'm I'm reluctantly ready to go ahead and terminate for breach. just I
wish we were able to just go across the street ask could we go ahead and negotiate right now and they say yes. Um I'm I'm wondering if if as at a part as a part of the motion can I county attorney uh madam attorney you give me
some guidance on this? Can that be the first step that we ask them first? Hey we really would like to renegotiate what this thing looks like what what the what the new deal looks like in 28. Are you guys willing to go come to the table? If they say no, then we tell them that we
are going to terminate for breach. Is that possible, madam attorney, to to go with those steps? >> And obviously I would defer, but I just wanted to make one point which is um I think your September workshop again would be very helpful be so that because you'd know what you'd be negotiating at
that point in time. >> Cool. >> Yeah. >> All right. I'll make the motion for staff recommendation. >> I I second that motion. I will say I I just >> I'm going to I'm going to say it quickly, Mr. Chair. I know you're trying to get this meeting with me. I just >> I hate >> that we're in this situation.
>> It it should it should be much simpler than this. I don't think there's anybody in our city or county that wants us wants to see us split ways with the city on this deal. It should it should be that we were able to sit down and have a
conversation and move forward with renegotiation understanding that the agreement that we had in place is is a little outdated. But instead, we're sitting here back and forth fighting about a station that's needed or not
needed and and having to Well, now you're saying you're expired. Well, if you're expired, if it's expiring, why can't we negotiate now to make sure that we're in place, that that the county is safe and in place and not having to even entertain the thought of putting together putting up a a fire station if
you want to move to saying that you're expiring now instead of terminating, but instead we got to play this this this chess game, this BS, man, where you got to say now we're going to terminate just so we can get the numbers that we need to cover our behinds in case the city wants to now say that they're not going
to do anything with us at the end at the end of the term. It's it's just it's one city, one county, man. Like, we shouldn't have to go through all this to to to figure out how we're going to to cover fire safety when you got one city in one county. It's just disappointing.
Commissioner Max, before I go to Commissioner Cummings, I just want to say to your to your credit and to your compliment. Um I think along the way, especially all through last summer, the county made multiple good faith efforts um from offering a 17% uh which was just
5% below where they were to I'm sure you talked to the to several commissioners over there. I talked to the mayor. I talked to other commissioners there and um there was really just no sentiment to budge at all and work with the county. So, um, I I say that because I know you
made plenty of good faith efforts. I know we all made plenty of good faith efforts. And so, I look forward to there being a new commission there to I think we'll see this through. But, Commissioner Cummings, Commissioner Miner, then um uh the Vice Chairman. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just very briefly,
I I think um the staff recommendation puts us in a a strong position whether or not um we are in a position later on to negotiate or not. I still think we need
to have that that particular letter in place, the notice since we want to play games with termination or expiration. I think it puts us in a in a stronger position. I look forward to the workshop of Mr. Mr. County Administrator, but I'm
certainly hoping and I think we all are that uh at some point before the expiration of the contract that we will come to the table with the city and work it out. I I strongly believe that we'll do that, but I think this puts us in a
stronger position to be able to do that and negotiate it. So, thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Commissioner Cummings. Commissioner Miner, then Vice Chairman. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate it. Support the motion on the floor. I think option three is is the way to go. Um, but I want to point out a couple
things. Um, by Commissioner Maddox, I I the best thing for this community in the city and in the county is for us to have an interlocal agreement similar to what we already have, maybe with some tweaking, but that is the best thing
that can serve the people who live here. Folks out there don't care if the county wins a battle over the city or the city wins a battle over the county. They don't care about any of that. All they want to make sure of is that they have highquality fire service coverage at an
affordable price. That's what our job is is to provide that to the people who live here. Um I'm I I agree with Commissioner Maddox. I I think there's a majority on the city commission now to bring back to bring this back to the table and negotiate something. Uh I I
think smart for us to wait until the workshop in September when we have the consultants report. uh Fitch and Associates. These this is a nationally recognized firm that does analysis on fire service coverage for communities. Once we have that report, we'll know exactly what we need to negotiate. Um
the question that currently exists is, are we expiring or are we terminating? All this does with option three is make sure that we all know we're terminating. And so if any city commissioners are out there listening, I want you to to I want this to be clear. This is not another
shot across the bow. This is not us throwing another bomb over at you uh and a tit for tat. This is simply us removing the ambiguity for this. So if we do have to pursue a separate county fire service, we know exactly where we stand as of tonight and we can start
those uh start that work. We can't afford to wait another day. Um but I do think the smart thing for us is to work on those parallel tracks. We need to work towards have a separate county fire service in case we have to go in that direction. But I am cautiously optimistic the day will come either with
this current city commission or with the commission that's formed in November that uh we will come back to the table and negotiate something uh that serves the entire county with interlocal agreement because that serves best the people who live here. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> Well said, Commissioner Miner. Well
said, Mr. Vice Chair. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. It's maybe the the biggest issue we're going to be facing and it's unfortunate we need to be in this issue. We we need need to be here. Um I
in in this disagreement every time we make a decision I like to think what is the worst possible reaction we might get. I think that's a prudent thing to do. So, is there any ability for our
partners to the city if we uh declare termination in response to their termination slashexiration that they say we know you dated it for the end of the agreement, but too bad, so sad you said the terminator word and we're not going to provide fire next
month. We haven't identified any case law that would allow them to dictate the date of termination. No. >> Perfect. Thank you. And their initial termination notice was for the end of the current agreement. >> The end of the third term, which is
September 30th of 2028. That's correct. >> Thank you. >> And that's what your letter will say, right? >> That's correct. >> Same date. >> Double check that date. We need make sure there's no mistakes. It's got to be 2028. Actually, put 2030 on there. see if they accept it. Um,
part of filing termination is doing what's best for all the citizens in the county that we represent and the city that we represent because we're at a point where we need to protect our citizens in what the agreement says. and they said if this agreement ends then we get to share some
of the assets that make sense in the county and our partner is saying no we're not honoring that part of the agreement and this is procedural way while we are trying to resolve everything to protect our ability to plan to up stand up a fire department if we are forced to which to be clear I'd
say generally speaking we are being generally speaking it's not the preference I think of this board to have to stand up a separate fire I believe we stand ready to negotiate a significantly different agreement that
meets the needs financially of what the city has now that we're at this point. And so, but we have to plan for the worst and that's what we are doing. November, not November to any of my colleagues across the street listening
who represent me by the way personally as me as well as many other I believe we all stand here ready to fix this. What will you need to make this work so we can provide fire service? How much will it cost? What is the timeline?
What's the structure changes? We need to make this work. We've got a lot to do for our community and we stand here ready to make this work. Thank you. >> Need to vote. Okay, great. Um, thanks for all the dialogue, commissioners. Um,
we have a motion by Commissioner Maddox, second by myself. Um, all those in favor of the motion on floor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Passes unanimously with uh Commissioner Proctor and Welch outside the chambers. Madam Attorney, any other business to
discuss? >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> Mr. County Administrator. >> I have nothing, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. >> Okay, great. Um, Commissioner Cummings, you're recognized. >> Oh, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I I would like for us to uh
to recognize Miss Ariana. She's Tallahass Democrat reporter. She was here. >> She's still here. >> If she can stand to This is her last night time covering the county commission. She's relocating back home.
>> What? >> To South Florida. >> What? What are we doing wrong? >> Can she say something? >> Uh uh. We we've certainly we've certainly enjoyed >> we we've enjoyed seeing you every meeting and covering us. Would you like
to say anything? >> Yeah, Arian, I just want to say I appreciate the good articles, but the bad ones I don't know. It's >> on I think this is like my only time ever speaking here because I don't come
for um comment. Okay, heard. Um, no. I just wanted to thank all of you in the community for opening your arms to me. As someone who's not from Tallahassee, I know that can kind of rum rub people the wrong way. Um, but um, I kind of said it a little bit
in the post that I made on Facebook, but before moving here, I'd never come to Tallahassee to visit, nor for like a school trip or anything. Um, I didn't have friends or family that came to FSU, so I had nothing tying me here. But now I get to leave knowing so many different
people, having made so many different connections. Um, and you all have taken part in uh, my first ever job out of school, building that um, first few years of journalism for me, which have been incredible. So, I leave fully
fulfilled, really happy to go back home. Um, I'll be with my parents and my brother again. So that's something you can't um can't be mad at. But um this was like a huge step in adulthood and being by myself. So it was really appreciative to just have all of you be
so supportive and so welcoming. So yeah, I think that's Yeah, >> we will see you again. >> Thank you. >> I'll visit for sure. >> I mean Well, Mr. Chair, we can't do one not do that one. So let's um I move that we give her a proclamation. I'll second
the motion. >> Motion on the floor to uh uh depart with Ariana with a proclamation from Lyon County government. Moved by Commissioner Maddox. Second by myself. >> Any discussion? >> All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I.
>> Congratulations. We'll miss you and we'll keep in touch. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Yeah. Mr. Chair, I also want to recognize our county administrator who made the Wall Street Journal. He said, "Oh,
>> the only guy that ever did it for losing money, >> there's there's been a few, >> but he was uh quoted in the Wall Street Journal and it lets you know the caliber of county administrator that we have uh very distinguishable
uh what best county administrator in the world at at at one one year or so. So, we appreciate you, Miss County Administrator, and it was a great article. As a matter of fact, if if you guys haven't if you haven't read it, but of course he's he's talking about
uh our future as far as the the cut in property taxes and he I like his quote. He says it's not a haircut, it's a amputation with the loss in in the advorum taxes. So anyway, congratulations on on that article. Uh
Mr. Chair, I also um want to mention there has been an historic preservation initiative to honor uh Dr. Charles Evans. He was a professor school of business and
industry at Florida&M University for over 30 years. And he was also um Oh, okay. He was also uh the president, the local president of the NAACP,
but there has been a legislative appropriation to have a historic marker placed in his honor. It won't cost the county anything, but there is a request
for the marker to be placed uh in his honor on the Leyon County Courthouse grounds. So, I'd like to move for an agenda item to come back for staff to look at
placing uh that historical marker on the courthouse grounds someplace. And I think to do that would would certainly be a great honor and great distinguishing honor for Dr. Charles L.
Evans. And this is the honor. Did you have more? >> So could you could you repeat the motion? >> Yeah, that was minor. You had to pass out. >> Oh, okay. Oh, okay. Thank you. Thank you. Here you go. Uh my motion, I move for an agenda item to come back for
staff uh to look at um placing the historical um marker that has already been paid for through a legislative appropriation somewhere on the courthouse grounds in
an appropriate location. >> I'll second that. Um can I ask a question though? >> Yes, >> Mr. administrator. The uh civil rights walk that's across the street. Who owns that? The city. >> Oh, the sidewalk. >> Yeah. Across the street.
>> The former clerk of court. That one. >> City. City. >> Okay. >> I'll second that. >> Okay. >> Mr. Chair, is there a way we can if we unanimously vote that we can pass it now and you don't need an agenda item? >> If you if it's unanimous. Yes. >> Uh but I'm not sure if it's any
parameters. That's why I said an agenda item. But just that you have a policy that requires the agenda item, but I think procedurally there's probably something you can do. >> I I would recommend at a collegiality have the agenda item because Commissioner Pro and Welch aren't here. If all of them are here, I'd have no problem with that.
>> I'm sure Commissioner Pro would want to >> vote on Yeah. >> And maybe recommend a location as well. >> Yeah, everyone's good with that. Yeah. >> Honestly, uh, Commissioner Collins, I was thinking if we could put it I wanted across cuz I spoke to Miss Evans as well. I wanted it across the street like right there where that civil walk civil
rights walk is, but maybe on our side of the street. I just I just think that connectivity between the civil rights >> on the opposite side of the street from >> Well, I wanted it over there, but maybe we put on our side like right there near the sidewalk. Anyway, we'll figure it out. But yeah, >> Mr. Chairman, on point.
>> Um I think Dr. Connie called all of us, right? Which is great. It's a hard person to say no to. I just want to point out the the printout that I distributed uh while Commissioner Cummings was talking is a uh example rendition. It's not the actual marker. It will be manufactured uh and paid for
by the legislative appropriation, but that is just a an example of what it could be. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> Thank you. Um all right. All those in favor of Commissioner Cummings uh requested agenda item who was second by the vice chairman, I believe. Um say by saying I >> I.
>> Any oppose? passes 50. Next item, Commissioner Cummings. >> Yes, I I have another item. Uh Dr. Valencia Matthews is a dean of the FAMU College of Arts and Humanities and Social Sciences. But every year for the
last 30 years, she has uh conducted what they call the ICE uh theater summer camp for summer youth. And at the end of of each summer camp, they do this great production. uh this year was a musical,
but the downside is the last ice camp um was held this summer and their last production was last was last weekend. So, it's been a long uh ride for Dr. Valencia Matthews, but what she says is
that they're looking at going in a different direction. But I just applaud her for the fact that they engaged our children every summer. I think it was probably a six week to two month summer
program. And this past weekend that performance uh by those uh by children, it was it was awesome. It was a musical. They danced. They did whatever. But anyway, uh I said all that to say I I move for a proclamation
uh in honor of uh Dean Valencia Matthews for her hard work and her engagement of our children during the summer and also for her um advancement of the art and
exposing our children to to art and humanities for the last 30 years. >> I'll second that. You taking all my thunder? I'll second that. I had it on my list. >> You went Sunday? Yeah, I went Friday. It was awesome. >> It was. >> Okay. So, could you restate what that is? The motion is
>> there's my motion for pro proclamation >> for who? >> For Dr. Valencia. E. >> Yeah, I'll second that. >> Second by Commissioner Maddox. >> Yeah, I'll second it. For sure. >> Commissioners got that. >> All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. >> Any opposed? Passes unanimously. 5.
Uh, and I don't see him in here, but Chanty gave me these beautiful flowers. So, I want to thank him. Best uh, aid on planet Earth. So, I want to thank him for for those flowers as well. Mr. Chair, that's all I have. Thank you.
>> Thank you. U, Commissioner Cummings, Mr. Vice Chair. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I have been hearing from, uh, a number of residents. It's a continuing thing, but especially as they look at their
property insuranceances, folks who are outside of 1,000 ft of a fire hydrant, um, which is a significant issue, particularly for unincorporated areas who are served by Talquin. Um, and so I would like to request an agenda item to come back with information about how
many buildings or residences uh in the county are outside of 1,000 ft of a fire hydrant and what options are available for neighborhoods or communities to extend the high pressure lines. Um,
whether there's grants or opportunities. Um, I'd like that item to come back. >> Awesome. I'll second that motion. And uh just for what it's worth, we we dealt with something like that on Smith Creek Road and um the county was able to put a a well in one of the volunteer fire stations. So it's been pretty helpful. Got great feedback from the volunteer
fire department out there. Um I like where your head's at on it. >> Uh Mr. Chairman, you'll be glad to know the firefighters were quick to let me know when I met with them that the chairman got a high fre high volume well in his volunteer fire. So So good job. >> Yeah, appreciate that.
Um all those in favor of the motion um as requested by uh the vice chairman signify by saying I >> I >> passes 50. Mr. pressure. >> Yeah. I had a this this um in one of our items we had I noticed at the end that we put the public notice in the
Tallahassee Democrat and it surprised me because I remember they changed the statute a couple years ago that said you don't have to do that because everybody has the internet and we were going to save a bunch of money by putting all of our public notices on the county website and in a paper binder for people who
don't want to use a computer. They can come see it. So, am I misunderstanding? Why are we are we still putting things in the Democrat for notice? >> The ones where we're legally obligated to do so. >> And I see whispering. I'll wait.
>> Some things are still statutoily required to be published in the paper. So, we do still do that. >> Gotcha. Or do we publish them anywhere else? Is it only in the Tallahassee Democrat? >> It's it's in the in the paper newspaper of general circulation, which is the Tallahassee Democrat.
>> Cool. And so that we've defined that there's a we the newspaper of general circulation in Tallahassee is Talis Democrat. >> Yes. >> Okay. What other advertising I know we have the Leyon link and things like that for print media do we publish in?
>> We publish um not necessarily the legal ads but our other information in the capital outlook as well as talis reports >> and anywhere else. What? >> That's generally it for the inmarket advertisement. >> Gotcha. Rough numbers
for the that's all. Let's just say that's all the Leon link, right? Let's separate legal notices. We got the Leon link which is our monthly or quarterly. What's going on? We put that in the Democratic reports and capital outlook rough numbers. What's our allocation to those
>> ads for the Democrat which are HR recruitment, the county link, things like that. It's probably north of about $150 to $160,000 in the Tallahassee Democrat. Uh Capital Outlook for display ads similar is about 45 42,000 and then
Tallassi reports is about 8,000. >> Okay. Um thank you. Uh it was brought up by another uh by a citizen and I asked and it was reminding me by that. I just asked because um a couple years ago we talked about we used to advertise online for for one of those publications but
there was objectionable content on there and we said we don't want our name next to those uh things but the paper is different and so I just wanted to know what our policy was or if how do we decide what is
a news of record right we don't want to get in we don't want to get into this person this person that person I just want to make sure that we stay clean and how do we do that in whatever records we choose to publish in >> content is difficult to make that
determination. Certainly the board could we do not have a standalone policy when it comes to content. Again we look at circulation and and and we look at what would be the appropriate ad to have in which uh publication but we do not enter
into that um decision-m based on content. >> Perfect. no item or anything like that, but that makes sense. Sort of a cost per circulation. How how much are we paying to get eyes on our information? Can you just email me the cost that we put in
each publication versus their circulation? >> Yes. >> Perfect. Thank you. That's all I had. >> Thank you, Mr. Vice Chair. Commissioner Miner. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I I had three things to bring up, but two of them were already brought up by people before me,
so uh uh so we're good on that. Um, the last thing I had was to wish Commissioner Cummings a happy birthday. >> Happy birthday. >> Turns 22 tomorrow, right? >> All right. >> So, I was walking through the hallway this morning and there's this ornate decoration over Commissioner Cummings's
door. Happy birthday with streamers and all that. It's incredible. And uh, so I want to thank you. Happy birthday tomorrow. Tomorrow. And then I also want to thank, you know, my birthday came and went and I got Bupkus on my door. So, I don't know where.
>> Anyway, happy birthday. Thank you very much. That's all I got, Mr. Chairman. >> Thank you, Commissioner Miner. Uh, Commissioner Maddox. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, well, I had Dr. Matthews on there, Dr. uh, Attorney Cummings. Commissioner Cummings took care of that for me. Um, the thousand
friends of Florida is celebrating their 40 years of advocacy and citizen engagement. They were here tonight. I want to ask for a proclamation recognizing them in those 48 years. >> Great. Proclamation requested by Commissioner Maddox, second by that Commissioner Miner. All those in favor signify by saying I.
>> I. >> Want to recognize Commissioner Cumins birthday. Happy birthday. But also want to recognize for her, if you remember last year, she came in here and she uh she fought hard uh to to get um school uh shoes for school uh in our budget and
um wanted to to to thank her for that and say I'm proud that we'll it's in our budget for the next couple years. So, thank you for your hard work and your uh determination on that. Uh, Commissioner Cummings. Um, also
I believe that's it. Great meeting tonight, Mr. Chair. Uh, we had 65 speakers tonight. Want to thank staff for their patience and for uh, staying in there with us. And, uh, also wanted to thank those who came out to speak. We had a lot of young people come tonight.
And I I want to say, man, it it was it was it was a breath of fresh air to see those young people come here and advocate on behalf of the things they believe in. says a lot about the generations to come and so I want to thank them for their advocacy and Mr. Chair, you did a great job of of leading us through it. Want to also thank those
speakers for working with us. A couple times Mr. Chair took the time down to 90 seconds and uh there was no complaining. Uh a lot of folks came in here and they they did what they had to do and they abided by the chair's direction. So tonight was a good night. Tonight was a good night. and I enjoy being on this commission and I'm fortunate to be a
part of uh one of the best commissions in the state of Florida and nationwide. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Thank you, Commissioner Maddox. I appreciate the understanding on that because if you if you factor if you do the math on the amount of speakers we had, um we would still be debating items right at 10:15. And so just trying to be respectful of your time, respectful of
everyone's time who was here, so everyone felt the opportunity to speak and and feel heard. Um, it's important to me that as we have these big controversial items that, you know, people look at the county and and they leave here and they think, you know, hey, I felt heard and I appreciate the way that the meeting was conducted. I
also want to say I appreciate you all. You know, I know um I kind of cut a couple commissioners short uh briefly speaking and commissioner, I just I want people to I want to keep the debate moving forward and um hope Commissioner Proctor and Mr. Vice hope you guys don't take that offensively. I just want to
keep the dialogue going so we can move forward on these items. Um, Commissioners, I only really have one thing. Commissioner Cummings, I had you first on the list to wish you happy birthday. That's already been handled. Um, Ariana, you're on the list. That's already been handled. Um, believe it or
not, my son turns one in next week. Time flies. It's crazy. >> Yeah, I know. It's crazy. Well, I got a bunch of gray hairs coming in. Um, so, uh, I know what that no sleep's like. I'm going to look like Vince soon. Um, commissioners, I I want to propose something. Um, I want to make it I want
to request an agenda item to come back at our next meeting. Um, I I met with with Vince and director of tourism, Carrie Post, about just kind of a a program that's kind of a concept right now that I want to hear y'all's feedback, but really I'm not asking
anyone to commit to anything. I really just want a staff analysis to come back an agenda item. But, you know, this year has been, well, at least the start of the year was a a record start to tourism. And so when when you when you
go back and you kind of get in the weeds of like what what drove that, we had the World Cross Country Championship in January, which is something new for the community in the month of January where we would typically would not have such a
big event such as that in the start of the year. Brought in Vince, how many people? 10 to 12,000 people. Um then in February we had Savannah Bananas at Do Campbell Stadium. Um generated over $10 million in economic impact. Um
I think they had they sold over 80,000 tickets throughout the weekend. Um I have some data related to that. There was a 38.6 increase in out of market visitors to Tallahassee during that window. 48.7% of attendees traveled more than 50 miles to attend. um strong
demand across the hospitality sector with elevated hotel occupancy, increased downtown activity. And then the next month we had PBR which was the start of spring break weekend when typically people are leaving our
community and I don't recall how many people they they sold but I was there for the first night and half the stadium was packed with people and so really what what I want to do is basically propose an agenda item that we
create a program in tourism that is designated for working with our collegiate partners, FAMU, TSC, and FSU, tailored to only using our big facilities in the community. Bragg
Stadium, but Lawson Center, the Civic Center, Dope Campbell Stadium, and then TSC would be their um their auxiliary fields, which I believe they've held a big concert there in the past. Um over the last few weeks, I've met with um President McCulla. I've met with um
President Marvin Johnson um spoke to President Murdall and from a conceptual standpoint, you know, they are supportive of a a program like this. And the vision of this is to really drive
tourism in times of the year when tourism is not really present. And what I mean by that is not funding, you know, Florida State football games or basketball games, not funding FAMU games, but um for example, FAMU homecoming, they do a big concert in the
in the Lawson Center every year. Um allow help them to go bring an artist in. Um Florida State has some really large scale events planned for next year and the year after in Dope Campbell Stadium. I think we should look at having a seat at the table to help
driving talent into Dope Campbell Stadium. Morgan Walland just recently went to Gainesville and sold out um unfortunately the swamp backto-back nights Friday and Saturday
sold out the stadium. Hotels within a 100 mile radius of Gainesville were sold out. Um, I knew friends from all over that traveled all over from Georgia, panhandle, South Florida to go to that concert. And so when I look at that and I'm like, wow. Like, you know, Doe
Campbell Stadium is way better than than Gainesville. Tallahassee is way better than Gainesville. And so I want us to be able to attract mega events like that to Tallahassee. Um, when talking with Vince and talking with Carrie, one thing
that's important is I don't want to disrupt any other tourism funding. I think that's important that everyone maintains the current level of funding. However, um, I would like to give staff direction to kind of conceptualize this a little bit, maybe give you all an opportunity to talk with staff over the next couple months before we have our
next meeting and kind of put something on paper for us to to vote on. But, um, commissioners, what do you think? >> Mr. Chair, I love it. I love it. Uh, and I will if you'll I'll I'll make the motion. >> Yeah, if you don't mind. Yeah, great. >> And here's why. Because it gives it gives us an opportunity to work with
those universities to activate the space that we've invested in. Um, when we well me in particular um when I made the decision to um give that $5 million to FAMU for the state for their stadium and give it to FSU for 20 million to for to
FSU for their stadium. The vision there was that eventually that we would be able to use that it would we be able to use those assets to bring in tourism, bring in uh Savannah Banana, which I've never seen, but heard it was cool. Uh in in in concerts like that, it would
become more of a public asset for us to be able to use and recoup some of that investment back uh from the from the dollars that we that we invested in. And so this is another quiver in that uh another bow, another arrow in that quiver to make sure that we're we're optimizing the potential of the
investments that we've made in those facilities. And so I I love it. I love it. So I'm looking forward to what's happening. >> And to your credit, Commissioner Maddox, I believe you um you and one of the retreats pushed for a uh um strategic initiative that was something close to this, right? Um, and so, uh, I'll second
I'll second the motion, but, um, any other commissioners want to chime on this? Yeah, Mr. Vice Chair. >> Uh, just putting in a pitch to get a demolition derby in the Do Campbell. >> No, listen, we should be going for I mean, I'm laughing, but like we should be going for big events. We should be
competitive. I mean, we're the capital of Florida. Uh, we have amongst all our facilities, we have the infrastructure already available. If you think about what we do on Florida State football games, right? We're bringing in 70,000 people in and out in a day. So, uh, law
enforcement, they have the logistics down. You know, we have we have the first responding resources. This is what we do already. There's no reason why we can't be, you know, one of the concert destinations for Florida. There's no reason we can't do that. >> I think it's a great idea, Mr. Chair.
Cooperation. >> Awesome. >> Different groups. I appreciate your leaders. Yes, ma'am. >> Just to just underscore what the chairman said, these conversations have been happening at the staff level. So, the timing is very good. And um uh as you know, we've been participating in
some of these events anyway, but to formalize that, the timing is again really good. We'd be happy to bring the item. >> Yeah, Commissioner. >> It's a bright idea. Looking forward to have the agenda item come back. >> Thank you. And just so y'all just so you know my vision for it is this is something that would be basically a line
item funding only for mega events. Like they have to be able to say, "Hey, we're bringing in 25,000 people to be able to even apply for the money." That's what I'm visioning. I'm just throwing a number out, right? But I'm envisioning that it's, you know, it separates from what we currently do by sponsoring, you
know, 5,000 here, 5,000 here. This is made for big events that uh bring in tens of thousands of people. So, >> so is a motion for an agenda item? >> Yes, ma'am. Yes, ma'am. So, >> I second. >> Okay. >> Need a second. >> I I second it already, but I appreciate anyways. Thank you, Commissioner Mad.
Any other conversation related to that? All right. Motion moved by Commissioner Maddox to bring that back to the agenda item at our September meeting. Second by myself. Um, all those in favor signify by saying I. I. >> Thank you, Commissioners. I appreciate the willingness and openmindedness as well. Commissioners, that's all I got.
Uh, it's 10:25 p.m. I appreciate um everyone's collaboration and I'll see you all in September. Have a great break. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Happy birthday. Happy birthday. things that you would need after an emergency to in order to maintain uh
your existence as such time as we can get additional services to you. This is just building the idea getting people in the mindset of being prepared and it gives an opportunity for different agencies, social agencies to come out and educate people and provide information so forth and it's just
giving people the tools that they will need in order to be resilient during an emergency. I thought it was an excellent idea that the city and the county are working together because at the end of the day, we all have to work together for the safety of all of our citizens. Actually,
I never thought about getting a bucket. You know, I put everything in like plastic bags and things like that, but I never thought to get a bucket. But I think that's a even excellent idea cuz a bucket at the Part: 2
All right, commissioners. I will call this meeting into order at 2:59 p.m. We got a long agenda. Might be worth starting a minute early. Um so I will first call Commissioner Miner uh to do the invocation and pledge of allegiance.
>> Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Um today we have uh a great guest with us today to deliver the invocation. Reverend Dr. Robert Gibbs. Um, Reverend Gibbs is a retired United Methodist minister who served for 42 years with the Florida annual
conference. He served as pastor to churches in Tallahassee, Miami, Englewood, Brandon, and Lakeland, and as campus minister at the University of Central Florida, and Rollins College. He and his wife Brenda retired in Tallahassee 2016. But as you all
probably know, he has not slowed down. Uh throughout his ministry, Bob has been active in social justice and recently played a major role in the Capitol Area Justice Ministry, which successfully advocated for additional funding for affordable housing in Lyon County. Uh
Reverend Gibbs, thank you very much for joining us today. Would you be so kind as to deliver today's invocation? >> Thank you very much. May we pray? Holy and loving God, author of all that is good and righteous and just, thank
you for the hope and promise that another day of life brings. And thank you for the blessing of living in a nation where we have the responsibility and privilege of electing those who serve and lead us. I pray your guidance today and your strength on those working
in all levels of government and on the people they serve. Bless now, oh God, our Leyon County Commissioners and staff members. Bless their work for all of us and their commitment and dedication to the tasks of governing. Give them your grace and our county and its people.
Give them discernment and understanding of the dayto-day issues before them and the wisdom and strength to make the best decisions for all concerned. We thank you also, oh God, that we have the opportunity as citizens to attend and participate in these important
areade for our benefit and well-being. May we never take our open and participatory government for granted. And now, oh God, I ask that you would bless the family members and loved ones of these officials as they continue to love and support them in their lives and
in their very important work. And I pray all these things in your most holy name. Amen. >> Amen. >> I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands one nation
indivisible with liberty and justice for all. >> Thank you commissioners. Before we get on to awards and presentations, um I am looking to entertain a motion to allow Commissioner Welch to participate online. >> Moved, Mr. Chairman.
>> Thank you. We have a motion moved by Commissioner Miner, second by Commissioner Maddox. Any discussion? All those in favor of the motion signify by saying I. >> I. >> Passes unanimously with Commissioner Proctor and Commissioner Welch out of the chambers. Commissioner Welch, can you hear us? Okay.
>> Yes, sir. Can you guys hear me? >> Yes, sir. So, if you want to speak, just kind of chime in to give me a little reminder that you're you're you're in the queue. >> You got it. Thank you. >> Thank you, Commissioner. All right. We have First up, we have a proclamation recognizing Legal Services of North
Florida's 50th anniversary. Commissioner Cummings, you have the floor. Uh thank you uh Mr. Chair. Uh I'd like to ask the executive director of legal services of North Florida to come and join me and anybody else that she would
like to bring. Miss Lesie Perau. And Mr. Chair, I'd like to say too that it gives me great pleasure to present this proclamation to Legal Services of North Florida because when I finished high um high school when I graduated law
school from the University of Florida, Legal Services of North Florida was my first employer and I thoroughly enjoyed it. So, the proclamation reads, "Oh,
all right. The proclamation reads, "Whereas Legal Services of North Florida was founded on August 25th, 1976 to serve residents across the Florida panhandle and for the last 50 years has
advanced access to justice through civil legal assistance to residents who otherwise could not afford representation. And whereas throughout its history, Legal Services of North Florida has worked to ensure justice is not determined by income, age,
disability, or circumstance, and has bridged the gap between the courts and clients to provide critical legal help and housing stability, family safety, public benefits, consumer protection,
health care access, veterans issues, and other essential civil legal needs and has promoted fairness, stability, and opportunity through legal advocacy, education, and partnerships with local
governments, courts, human service providers, and the legal community. And whereas by serving children, adults, seniors, veterans, survivors of abuse, people with disabilities,
and families facing crisis, Legal Services of North Florida has strengthened communities, promoted stability, and upheld the promise of equal justice under the law. And whereas the 50-year legacy of Legal Services of
North Florida reflects the dedication of its attorneys, parallegals, staff, volunteer attorneys, law students, and community supporters whose service has improved the lives of countless individuals and families in Leyon County
and throughout North Florida. And whereas the 50th anniversary of Legal Services of North Florida in 2026 marks a significant milestone that recognizes its long-standing commitment to justice, service, and community
impact across North Florida. Now therefore, be it proclaimed by the board of county commissioners of Lyon County, Florida, that we recognize and celebrate the 50th anniversary of Legal Services of North Florida, and express
appreciation for five decades of service, advocacy, and steadfast commitment to civil justice, and encourage residents to join in the celebration. The board further commends Legal
Services of North Florida for its enduring dedication and positive impact on the lives of individuals, families, and communities. Dated this 14th day of July 2026 is signed by our
chair, our chairman, all the commissioners, and attested by our county admin administrator. Congratulations. We are so proud of all the work that you all do. >> Would you like to HAVE
Thank you so much, Commissioner Cummings. I'm very grateful for um the the time you've taken on on this proclamation. Um thank you to the entire uh commission for the support that you've given us. This is where we started. We started in Tallahassee 50 years ago. we were just one office here
and and now we've grown to 16 counties, but this is this is where where this is home and this is uh the support that the commission has given us over the years and the partnership that we've had in addressing things from uh mobile home park closings to the foreclosure crisis,
a pandemic, uh disaster response and recovery. Just that partnership and being able to work with you all in in addressing those things has been really critical and I think really left an impact on the county. I did want to just recognize some of the folks that are up here with me. So, Connie Davis is uh
started with us as a what? Intake staff? >> Secretary. >> Secretary. Um she she now is is one of our grants administrators. She's been with us for 43 years. Um and you KNOW um and and you know it is that kind of
dedication from our team that really um is the strength and the backbone of our organization. Kathy Greenwald is our uh senior disaster coordination attorney. She works to build um the disaster response efforts that we have here in Lyon County. When the tornadoes hit a
couple years ago, we were ready to go because we already had the skills and the and the people on staff who knew how to respond to that disaster. And then Dana Brooks with Phasic and Brooks is uh serves on our advisory board and is also supporting us in this 50th anniversary and we wanted to to include her in this
as well. And then Charlotte Waters is our director of communications with the with the camera. So, but um just thank you so much uh for for for this honor uh for this proclamation and for your continued support. And thank you, Commissioner Cummings.
>> Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, next we have our 2026 neighborhood recognition program. I'm going to pass it back over to our chairman at the lect turn to take
control. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Vice Chair. Ladies and gentlemen, today I have the pleasure of presenting the awards for the 2026 Leyon County Neighborhood Recognition Program. For 45 consecutive years, Leyon County and the Council of Neighborhood
Associations have recognized the neighborhoods and neighbors whose dedication to service and commitment to one another strengthen our community and make Leyon County a great place to live, work, and play. Before I announce this year's winners, I would like to invite a
representative from Kona to the podium to share a few remarks. Good afternoon, commissioners. Uh Mr. Long, um Miss Woods, um 45 years of recognizing um the best and brightest in
our neighborhoods. Um, strong communities are really a patchwork of neighborhoods. And to all of these winners, like to say congratulations and thank you for what you do. Um, and as we struggle sometimes to define what a
neighbor is, um, just look around, look at these winners today and look at the work that it takes to make it all work and let's celebrate each other as we celebrate these neighborhoods. Thank you for the opportunity and I look forward to many more years of working with our
county. Thank you. Thank you. We'd like to thank Kona for its leadership, commitment, and long-standing partnership in building a stronger community. And with that, let's recognize our 2026 award winners. After the announce announcements, I will
invite one representative from each of the winning neighborhoods as well as the neighbor of the year to share a brief remark and then we will take one big group photo at the end of the presentation in front of the dis commissioners. Also, if um if any of you would like to come, if you're a district commissioner, one of our atlarge
commissioners to come take a picture with the award-winning neighborhood in your district, please feel free to do so. And for the first award of small neighborhood of the year, this year's small neighborhood of the year used resident feedback to drive meaningful
improvements, including enhancements in its neighborhood entrance, restoring a stormwater pond, and leading beautifification efforts that strengthen community pride and sustainability. Congratulations to the Aendale Neighborhood Association,
our 2026 small neighborhood of the year. Let's give them a ROUND OF APPLAUSE. MR. CHAIR, DO YOU WANT US TO wait till the end for the best neighborhoods or go ahead and comment on them? >> You just did it apparently. Um, we'll keep it going. You want to you want us
would you like to say anything now? >> Aendale just one of the best neighborhoods. And in fact, I appreciate people coming out to help pick up trash uh right out front of it. Y'all didn't have much trash to pick up, so I appreciate that. >> Thank you, Mr. by sharing our next award,
large neighborhood of the year. This year's large neighborhood of the year strengthened its community through educational programs, neighborhood events, beautifification projects, and public safety initiatives while planning its first ever Jazz in the Park
celebration, and championing a community grocery store to expand food access and economic opportunity. This year's large large neighborhood of the year award goes to Griffin Heights Neighborhood Association. >> Thank you.
>> Do now? >> Go ahead. Go ahead. >> Okay. Good afternoon, chairman, commissioners, um distinguished guests, neighbors, um on behalf of Griffin Heights Neighborhood Association. It's an honor to receive this award. None of
this is possible without community partners, um churches in the area, volunteers, board members, and everyone that's take the place um of making Griffin Heights a better place. We appreciate you all
allowing us to receive this award and great things are happening in Griffin Heights. So keep looking out. We're doing greater and bigger things. And thank you again to our next award, unincorporated neighborhood of the year. This year's
unincorporated neighborhood of the year demonstrated outstanding community stewardship through infrastructure improvements, sustainability initiatives, longstanding tradition traditions that fostered strong neighborhood connections and service.
Join me in congratulating the Highrove Homeowners Association. Let's give them a hand. Um, Miss Woods told me I had 30 seconds, but I see three minutes here. Um, I just want to thank the commission and Commissioner Welsh, if you if you're out
there, that we brought it home for District 4. Um, we uh we try to go ahead and and and be people first in our community. Um this year we did a uh a food drive with Braden Smith who was
working is here who uh did as part of his application to West Point. Um and we brought in over a thousand cans of of of food and we were able to go ahead and uh and get it to a lot of needy people. Um,
and we will continue to do improvements and uh and try to be people first in in High Grove in the northeast part of the county. Thank you. >> Thanks so much. Congratulations. Congratulations. >> To our next award winner, this goes to neighbor of the year. Since joining the
neighborhood just last year, this year's neighbor of the year has made an extraordinary impact through selfless service, compassionate support of neighbors, and dedicated leadership, serving as our treasurer of the homeowners association in volunteering
countless hours to improve neighborhood amenities. It is my pleasure to present the 2026 neighbor of the year award to Michelle Olsen of the Lafayette Oaks community. Please join me in congratulating Michelle.
>> Thank you. I'm a little speechless right now. It's been an honor. We're so excited. We just moved here from Denver a year and a half ago and uh we have just hit the ground running with in our neighborhood taking care of everybody that we could find that needed help. Um,
I couldn't do anything without the help of my husband. He's here with me. He's always by my side and always willing to participate in everything that I get us into. So, and there's more to come. Thank you.
>> If the the representative from Aenddale neighborhood is here, I know would you like to speak at the D as well? >> Just real quick. Absolutely. >> Uh mainly I just wanted to thank the uh board of county commissioners and Kona Daniel of course for giving all the
neighborhoods an opportunity to participate in this recognition program. Uh I'd like to thank the board of directors for Aenddale for their contributions to make it such a great place to live. Uh special thanks to uh board member Linda Willis for the many
times that she's had to trace through the woods and braid the poison ivy trying to keep our green space safe and looking beautiful. And lastly, our president, Olivia Jordan. Uh her leadership and her passion and her energy is why we won this award. Thank
you. Thank you all. Congratulations to all our neighborhood winners and our and our neighbors. In closing, before we we take a group picture, I just want to say this. Um, it takes a village and having strong neighborhoods and strong neighbors are a testament to that. So,
thank you all for all the hard work you do to making Leon County a a better place to live for everyone. Thank you, >> Commissioner Cummings. >> Uh, thank you, M. Mr. Vice Chair. I I think I would be be remissed if I didn't congratulate all the neighborhoods and
especially uh our neighbor of the year, Miss Michelle Olsen, who lives in my neighborhood. So, we're so we're so proud of you. Uh but Mr. Peek and all of
you all throughout the year, uh you not only look out for your neighborhoods, but you also look out for others as well. And so we are just proud of um High Grove, Arendelle, >> Griffin Heights,
>> Lafayette Oaks, uh Griffin Heights, um and I tell you, Aenddale, right, Aenddale, um we are better community because of all
of the work of the neighborhoods and the neighbors that live in the neighborhood. that uh you help to make our community and our streets safer for our children and for the families as well. So, thank
you all so much. Continue the continue the good work because we want Leyon County and all of our neighborhoods to be the best and the safest place that they can be for us to live and for our children as well. So, thank you, Mr. Vice Chair,
Mr. >> Vice, Mr. Chairman, >> Mr. Proctor, go ahead. >> Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Vice Chair. Uh, congratulations to each of our neighborhoods of the year. Um, no doubt u you take great pride in being a U
neighborhood of the year and u America's greatest uh county uh in the United States. That's significant. Uh Griffin, um look out district one. I I I know who you is and where you at. And we're very
proud that Griffin um a neighborhood uh possibly you could say that I grew up in on Dover Street. Um I don't know if you call it Frenchtown, Griffin Heights, Springfield. You know, good good work.
And um to neighborhood of Aendale um I I I didn't think that Mr. Stanley Sims was a contender for the neighbor of the year. I wasn't sure about it, but uh I just just want to say that I was hoping uh that Mr. Sims wouldn't get y'all's neighborhood disqualified. He's
such a strong advocate and this and that and what you know, you can't have a one neighbor like that in one hood, you know. So, for all that you do to love and keep Mr. Sims up in the in the hood who who does good in the hood, um congratulations to you and
Stanley. Uh, I didn't know you was all like that. And congratulations to your neighborhood. >> Amen. >> Thank you, Commissioner Maddox and Commissioner Meer. >> Thank you, Mr. Vice Chair. Um, first things first, I was going to say the same thing. Um, when they said Aenddale, I was almost shocked, but y'all deserve
an extra sign for getting neighborhood of the year and you got Stanley Sims as your neighbor. Man, that's pretty extraordinary. No, really. Um, I'm telling you, if it was the city, they might not have got it. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'mma stop. I'mma
stop. I'm stop. Um I'm going stop. It's too much. So I wanted to say um >> perception is not reality. And I think we saw that here today. Perception is not reality. Um for as much uh negative press, some of the negative things that
we hear about some size of town, Griffin Heights is the large neighborhood of the year. Deserves another ROUND OF APPLAUSE. AND I I I hope uh with the news that that that they are neighborhood of the year, they dispel some of the the the
stereotypes and the perceptions that come along with certain size of towns. I would invite those other neighborhoods to take trips uh to Griffin Heights to see what they're doing there being as though they are not just a neighborhood of the year, but the large neighborhood of the year. So, it's very inviting over
there. You know what I'm saying? You don't don't bring no food. They got their own. Um, but I'm telling you, Griffin Heights is a is a place that everybody should visit. Everybody should should go by and see and see some of the great things they're doing there. So, I wanted to take an opportunity to really really praise Griffin Heights for uh
dispilling uh the perception of of of a side of town that does not deserve such. Hi, Grove over on uh District 4. Thank you for all you're doing. uh look forward to to many many many many good things coming in the years and the way you're holding up the the flag for for
district 4. And to our neighbor of the year, you say you've been here a year and you're already the neighbor of the year. That's that's pretty special. Um you all didn't get to see my point of view of when she received when I when that young
lady received neighbor of the year, but what touched me most was that her family, especially her husband, was in tears. I watched him wipe tear after tear after tear coming out of his eyes for how proud he was of his wife and that that touched me. And so I want to
take opportunity to thank you uh for picking Leyon County as your home and not just picking Leyon County as your home, but coming here and becoming the neighbor of the year. So you go back and tell those folks where you came from that we're taking much better care of you here than they were there. We look forward to many years to come. Um to all
those who u won awards today, thank you to Kona, our leader Leroy Peek. Thank you for all you do for our community. We look forward to continue to partner with you. >> Commissioner Miner, >> Commissioner Miner. >> Thank you, Mr. Vice Chair. You know, with with Aendale, I I think the
criteria was facetime from neighbors coming to county commission meetings, right? I think that's why we got the Aenddale in there. But listen, seriously though, um we all spend more time in our neighborhoods than any place else pretty much, right? Um we talk a lot about what
makes Lyon County special. This is a great community. It really truly is. One of the reasons, one of the biggest reasons why this is such a special place is because of our neighborhoods. And we all, of course, we live in our own neighborhoods, too. But we spend a lot of time in other neighborhoods, whether
it's, you know, canvasing for running for office or going to neighborhood events, HOA meetings, and we see how incredible our neighborhoods are. Uh to, you know, walk around in an evening and see, you know, neighbors walking
together, to see people joining together to walk their dogs. I mean, it's just it's the fabric of what Lyon County is all about and uh it's the thing that makes u Lyon County a place worth living in. So, thanks to all the winners, thanks to all the neighbors out there
who may not have won today, but who do the the heavy work every single day um making sure that your neighborhood is a great place to live. So, thanks to the winners. Thanks to everyone out there who's active in their neighborhood association and is just working to to to bring neighbors together uh in your own
particular street. Thanks so much. >> Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner Welch, would you like to close us out? Commissioner Welch, would you like to close us out? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just wanted to give a a quick shout out to High Grove once again, a perennial powerhouse in
the neighborhood of the year competition. I expect that we will at some point establish a neighborhood of the decade award. And if High Grove can get it for 10 straight years, they should win. I'm just putting my vote in now. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. And we will now take a group
picture. >> All right, let's not forget that. Are we all coming around the front of the DAS? We only have one. >> If I can get some of you to come in this way, that would be helpful. If we could get the board to shift to the right a little bit.
>> There you go, Commissioner Meyer. Perfect. >> Thank you. Okay. >> All right. Looks great. >> On three. >> Yep. Everyone looking at me. One, two, three. >> Do a couple more.
One, two, three. >> Looks great. Thank you. >> Thank you. Our pleasure. >> Yeah, that's good. Commissioner F, you're recognized. >> Mr. Chairman, commissioners, ladies and gentlemen, uh want to take a quick quick
uh moment to uh recognize uh three of our outstanding summer uh youth interns uh and all of them from district 1. Recognize, if you please stand, uh Miss Destiny Pompei. Miss Destiny,
>> my Sunday school student. >> That's your Sunday school student. Hey. All right, Destiny. Stay keep remain standing. Jordan Sanders. >> Jordan here. >> You got to work in the back. >> All right. Um, and Nia Thompson.
All right. Thank you all. The these young ladies are going to be working with my aid, uh, Miss M. Rachel Holmes and so far they've gotten started off to a um extraordinary summer and we believe that for the rest of the month uh it's going to be a wonderful
experience. We thank you all for working with your your district office for the summer. Thank you. >> Thank you, Commissioner Proctor. Uh all right, uh Mr. K administrator Ron Citizens heard on consent and non-aggended items. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good afternoon, commissioners. You've got quite a number
of speakers on consent and non-aggended items. Uh I'll start with the virtual speakers. Let me just make a a quick announcement though. I see on the subject line that a a large number of the speakers are uh speaking on flock cameras. Of course, you're uh you're
welcome to speak, invited to speak. Uh but just to to remind the board that you do have an item coming back on that issue specifically at your next meeting just as a public service announcement and and a reminder to the board. With that, we'll start off with virtual
speakers. First up, Max Harmon. What was the name commit? >> Max Harmon. >> Max, are you there? >> Our next speaker, Mr. County Administrator. >> Next speaker, Susan Gil.
>> Calling Susan Gil. >> I'm here. >> Thank you, Mr. I'm here. >> We can hear you. You have three minutes. >> Okay. Uh my name is Susan Gil. I'm a resident of Lyon County and a volunteer with Mom's Demand Action for Gunsense in
America. I want to express my concern about the library policy to remove the prohibition on carrying or displaying a weapon in the library. Our state has a long history of designating and protecting sensitive location to protect our communities, especially in places
where children and families are heavily present. By rolling back firearms restrictions in Lyon County Public Libraries, local officials are stripping away protections from a vital, sensitive place. We must draw a hard line. Our
community hubs are places for growth and safety, not environments where everyday citizens should have to face the risk created by the presence of firearms. Libraries are common gathering spaces for children and families to grow and learn, and guns have absolutely no
business being there. We know that firearms don't belong in certain environments due to the risk of unintentional shootings, child access, and other risk factors. This undermines public safety and basic common sense. Public libraries exist to serve the
entire community by providing a welcoming space to pursue learning without interference. Forcing community members, parents, staff to tolerate the presence of firearms, including openly carried long guns and rifles
replaces a peaceful environment with anxiety, tension, and ultimately danger. Our local leaders should recognize these concerns and stand for the safety of our sensitive special areas. Even as the state interprets court rulings in this
arena, public safety should be everyone's paramount concern. >> Thank you. The the next speaker is Max Epstein. >> Max Epstein. Hello, commissioners. Good to see you
again. It's been a while. I just wanted to say congrats to Griffin Heights first. My mom lives in Griffin Heights and she has some awesome neighbors. I think two of them right now are helping her repair her water line. Um she loves her neighborhood. Here to talk about Lake Mson real fast and then a couple
comments on the fire services um fee. I just wanted to address briefly the uh Lake Mson update agenda item that we got two months ago. I just was able to review it just now. Just want to say we have not been communicated within from
the county in over a year for any reason to do with Lake Mson updates, questions, anything like that. You remember about a year ago I came and I sounded the alarm that it looked like the nitrogen levels were going up and it
turns out that we did violate the TMDL for nitrogen coming into the lake last year. This is from the county report. You see it on the top and you see the potential for it to keep going. If we violate it again in the next two years, it becomes impaired once again. Uh
according to the state, it's not a great trend. Could it come down? Yes. And then we wanted to look at the what's coming out of the lake. And within the agenda item, it says the highest sample was actually excluded. So they took a
bunch of samples and the highest one they excluded the county did saying, well, it's just too high, so it can't be right and didn't include it in the calculations. The agenda item is correct, saying that there are no quote unquote requirements downstream except
for actual nutrient criteria. that's that's set out for other streams. Well, if you include that sample, we are there right at the limit not just for an imaginary TMDL, but way higher than what
the actual uh TMDL should be. Okay, I'm not explaining that very well, but basically there was a sample that was excluded that lowered the uh nutrients what was looked at coming out of the lake. It's not good. And as far as we
can tell, the water quality from the lake is exactly the same as it was 10 years ago, which is worse. All the data that we have shows that the water quality is worse and where it was about 10 years ago. I wanted to also address the misquote in the newspaper saying we're all on the same page. I thought we
were on the same page because we finally got out in the air that the state never said to not dredge the lake. The state, the EPA never said that. I thought we're more on a better footing, but it would be nice to have an actual
agenda item come back where we could discuss this all. I had a couple quick things to say about the fire services agreement, which is becoming as concerning to me as I think Lake Mson with all of this going on, which I saw a
ree yesterday that had a lot of um information in it. From what I can understand, this board is going to have to have a fully staffed firefighting uh unit by 2028, no matter what.
Well, you know, I don't have enough time and clearly my mind is not in the right place to discuss this. I don't have enough time. I'll have to come back. But this is very concerning what we're seeing about the lake and these fire service agreement. We need an agenda
item to come back in August so we can talk about it because it's a big deal. Um, I won't ask for more time. Christian, you probably won't give it to me. >> Thank you, Mr. County. Mr. County Administrator, >> speaker Douglas Han, >> just just for the the for the record, we
just had an agenda item on Lake on Lake Mson uh two months ago and the county will have a workshop related to fire service fee in September where we will give the public a very detailed update. So, thank you. Next speaker, Douglas Han.
>> Commissioners, I'm here to speak on again the policy to allow firearms in the library. This makes absolutely no sense. Um, libraries should be a safe spot for children, for parents. Uh, we
know that there's a problem with firearms in this country, in this county. There are shootings constantly. We need safe spaces. I came in here today to speak to you and I passed through a metal detector. My bag passed through a metal detector. So, I was
unarmed. Please be compassionate and protect our children at the same degree that you do. If you want to remove the protections in the library, remove them downstairs. Thank you. >> Next speaker, Tim Statel Mueller to be followed by Devin Nobles.
Commissioners, thank you for hearing me today. Um, I'm looking around the room and I'm seeing a lot of familiar faces. Uh, in the past two weeks, I've made it my business to educate as many people as possible about the flock cameras that have been up in our community.
Uh, how they work, who they're owned by, where the information goes, and how this information can be used to weaponize both against citizens as well as also how to discriminate in a variety of other ways. For background, block safety cameras are
based out of at it's a company based out of Atlanta. The cameras are referred to as automatic license plate readers, ALPRs. This is a misnomer. They're cameras, and they do no reading. The reading is done at the data center where this
information is sent. As we know, artificial intelligence capabilities are increasing exponentially currently. And the amount of information that can be gathered from the images that are taken is increasing
alongside. Um the company doing the processing of the actual image data is Palunteer. Palunteer is a company owned by Peter Teal, a Republican mega donor who we also get to be grateful to for the camp
the entire career of JD Vans. Pardon me. I'm a little uh flustered right now. Um, these cameras have been sold as safety products to protect our community and to
apprehend criminals. Um, when I tell people about these cameras and how they work, specifically when it comes to the software by Palunteer, um, they usually tend to perk up when I tell them that Palunteer software has
been used in places like Ukraine and Palestine to target weapon systems. Um all this information is being collected by a private corporation is being analyzed by a
separate private corporation which is then cross-referenced with all the other data about us that's out there. This includes probably, this is conjecture, but probably all the data that was stolen by Doge, government
data, financial records, cross reference with all your movements, your buying behavior. What emerges is an information profile that's so granular that if the federal government were to collect it,
they'd need a warrant unambiguously. So, but because a private corporation is doing this, for some reason, it's allowed. And that's unacceptable. And the other thing is that in a time of increasingly
autonomous decision-m, uh, is this the time? Okay, I'm so sorry. Uh, these are bad. There's a city commission meeting on August 26th where um
>> I want to draw people together to sir. Excuse me, sir. You got you got to bring it home. Thank you. >> I'm so sorry. >> Thank you. DEON. Good afternoon everybody. Good afternoon my commissioners. I am Devon Nobles and I'm standing here today to state my
clear and unequivocal opposition to these expansion and adoption of these flock cameras in our communities. First, mass surveillance systems in a country predicated upon freedom is a bit ironic to say the least. Tracking thousands of
thousands of innocent s citizens who are just trying to drive drive drive to work, drop their kids off at school or go to the grocery store is an overreach into our privacy. We are told these systems about are about public safety. But there is oftent times a chasm in
between theory and actual practice. As a computer engineer myself, graduated from FAMU FSU College of Engineering, I look at Flock Technical Architecture and I see a system that has a lot a lot of liability. There are devices mounted on
public poles. They are inherently insecure and and an independent security research has already confirmed these suspicions. They have proven that many deployed flock cameras have been exposed to interfaces to o that are open to the
internet without password protection and this allows anyone access to the live camera feed and its data. However, anyone would plan to uh interact with these uh cameras. Hackers with basic wireless to tools can probe
these cameras and use that data for whatever means they feel like they want to do it with. And history shows us that the people with this access to the data and even the data itself cannot always be trusted. Multiple law enforcement officers have already been found to be
abusing the system to track their exes and other romantic interests. Armed police have swarmed an innocent couple in Minnesota because the flot camera misread their license. Federal agencies have already inappropriately been accessing this data, which the person before me already
said would require a warrant. Women have been tracked across state lines to be tracked about their uh their health care decisions made for their own personal bodies. A luxury we all have the privacy of of
having through HIPPA. This system also exposes many municipalities and have already exposing these municipalities to class action lawsuits and flock safety is not footing the bill for that. This system does not filter out the
elite. These cameras will log every single vehicle that passes them include including yours. Everybody in this rooms, they'll be placed on the roads leading to this building, this office, our neighborhoods, our homes, and if a
bad actor breaches this network, which anybody that can watch a YouTube video will be able to do this because their security is so lax. They'll be able to use that data to track any of you, what you doing, your spouses are doing, where your kids go to school, and that
information for all of us as well. So I just ask that please we ask the question do we want our mass surveillance state to be here in Tallahassee and do we want to expose our local tax dollars to defending massive civil rights lawsuits. Thank you. Thank you.
Philip Jackson Philip Jackson to be followed by Jonathan Garner. Philip Jackson to be followed by Jonathan Garner. Phil Jackson, >> Jonathan Garner. Okay, here we go. >> Good afternoon. How's it going? I wanted
to voice my opposition to consent item number four, specifically attachment one. I believe very strongly that law enforcement is a public good and a service to the community. I also believe that the militarization of law
enforcement damages law enforcement's relationship with the community. Armored vehicles look like great fun to drive, but I don't know that they belong in my neighborhood. I wanted to specifically also mention
the increase in surveillance. A significant portion of my career has been in working large live events. And to be perfectly candid, more than once while working Fourth of July at Tom Brown Park, I've looked out across the field and thought that we
should have better surveillance in that situation. However, to blanket our county, to blanket our community with AI translated video surveillance is a gross invasion of my privacy.
Thank you for your time. Jonathan Garmin. Uh Jonathan Gardner, 3687 Donovan Drive, 32309. Uh Commissioner Welch is my representative. Uh Mr. Chair, permission to hand out some papers to the commission? >> Sure, you can bring them to me. Thank
you. Thank you for asking, by the way. >> As that rolls around, thank you to all the speakers ahead of me for bringing attention to this issue. Commissioners, uh, on the first page, this is from agenda item number four, attachment number one, issue number 33, which is
specifically the license plate trailer cameras. Uh, so I have highlighted on that the main issue that comes around with uh people's problems with these license plate reader systems and that is the data sharing capabilities. So, as a
previous speaker has noted, uh these can create very granular looks into what the Supreme Court calls uh intimate windows into the private lives of our citizens. And that is the main issue here. Um
they are going to be shared across the United States. It doesn't matter if it's flock, it doesn't matter if it's another vendor. If it has this data sharing capability, it will most likely be used for this purpose. On the second page, uh I have outlined some policy line items
that you could possibly consider based on my research. Uh specifically looking at data retention and data sharing. I think that is the main issue if we come down to the crux of it of of what people are concerned about um on their invasions to privacy. Uh for an example,
uh page three has a flock uh license plate camera trailer. Uh that is an example of what one of these might be. Uh the next page is what uh it outlines covert mobile solutions. Uh this is a
company called Leonardo. They have come under scrutiny um recently because of one of their software capabilities uh which is even more invasive than the license plate readers. On uh page five you get a example of that directly from
their web page. Now, what their software, Signal Trace, does is it pairs um electronic device data that you're carrying around in your car with your license plate read. And commissioners, it is not a far stretch to believe that say a friend of yours or a family member
is riding in the same vehicle of you and your electronic devices have been seen with their electronic devices traveling together and uh now you know associations uh even if it's just a co-orker that brought you to work once. And so that is the the main issue is the
data sharing, the profile building. Um on page two, I give an example of some comprehensive policy that Austin, Texas implemented. Uh I encourage you please look into uh what they did as you consider the future agenda item. Um what
it does is it provides proactive measures for the commission to consider before these are implemented on people and invading their privacy. Thank you very much. NICHOLAS CARLSTEAD. Nicholas Carlstead to be followed by Sarah Reed Vineyard.
>> Hello. Uh I just wanted to take issue uh with for agenda item four uh part one attachment one of the of the agenda item. Uh and specifically I take issue with issue 33 uh the automated license plate readers for reasons that have already been said
better than I can say. So thank you for your time. Sarah Reed Vineyard to be followed by Jackson Nuller. Good afternoon, commissioners. My name is Sarah Reed Vineyard. I'm a full-time film and television actor, a wife, and a
mom living here in Tallahassee. My children attend Buck Lake Elementary and the School of Arts and Sciences. My husband and I have served as foster parents here in Lyon County, and we're proud members of Temple, Israel. This community is where we've chosen to build our lives. When I graduated high school,
I knew I wanted to become a professional actor. One of the biggest reasons I chose Louisiana State University for college was because Louisiana had recently passed film incentive legislation. While I was in school, I worked on productions like Pitch Perfect and American Horror Story. I was
learning in the classroom during the day and after class, stepping onto professional film sets and putting my training to immediate use. That opportunity existed because the productions were there in my backyard. Today, more than 15 years later, I'm still making my living as an actor, but
right now, I'm raising my family here in Lyon County. Many of us spend hours driving to Atlanta, Orlando, Tampa, and beyond because that's where the productions are. Every time I travel for work, I'm staying in hotels, eating at restaurants, buying gas, all contributing to somebody else's local
economy. More of that economic activity needs to happen right here at home. I understand the purpose of this incentive program isn't simply to create jobs for local actors. It's to bring investment from outside our community into Lyon County. That means hotel rooms filled,
restaurants busy, rental cars on the road, local businesses serving productions, and new dollars flowing into our economy. I've seen that model work firsthand. But I've also seen something else. When productions come, they don't bring every employee with them. They hire locally whenever they
can because it's practical and because local professionals know the area. In Louisiana, I watch productions hire transportation drivers, makeup artists, security officers, carpenters, settled actors, animal trainers. You get the idea. These jobs stay in the community
while the investment comes from the outside. Leon Connie has already beautiful natural landscapes, historic architecture, nearby beaches, and creative professionals who are ready to work. Florida used to be a place where actors came to work. Leyon County needs
to become part of that story again. What's the point of touting our worldclass film school in the theater programs if all of our talent seek opportunity elsewhere immediately upon graduation? I came here today so you could put a face to the people this decision affects. When you picture someone who
would benefit from this program, picture someone like me. Yes, I'm a regular Tallahassee mom, but I'm also represented by the top talent agency in our state. I have multiple national commercials, one show on Hulu and one premiering on Netflix this Thursday with
Will Frell. I was able to build a career because another state invested in my industry. I'd love for the next generation of artists to have those same opportunities without having to leave this community they call home. Thank you for your time. >> Jackson Nuller to be followed by Elijah
Rodriguez. Jackson Nolder. >> Thank you. While we wait for our next speaker, I would like to acknowledge we have uh one of our colleagues from the city commission here. Uh Commissioner Jeremy Matlo. Thanks for joining us this afternoon. Greetings, commissioners. Uh, I come
for, uh, item number four. Like many of my compatriots around here, uh, we're concerned about the surveillance state that is becoming more and more prevalent across America. Under Florida laws of uh concealing
various uh foyer requests, we cannot know the location of any one of these security cameras and we are therefore forced to assume that we are always under surveillance. I know in public we have no reasonable
expectation of privacy. That's the buzz phrase that's going around, reasonable expectation of privity. Privacy. But that is the legal minimum provided by the Fourth Amendment. Should our rights be as low as the law allows? If you've done nothing wrong, you have
nothing to fear, right? Nothing to fear. Is that how we treat any other constitutional guarantee? If you're innocent, do you not have a right to remain silent? If you're innocent, do you not have the right to an attorney? The presumption of innocence means that
surveillance must be justified and not that we must justify a desire for privacy. In addition, the data retained and compiled into comprehensive timestamped databases of your daily whereabouts are is held for a minimum of 30 days.
No, these systems may not say someone's a Methodist, but when they say you're at Karen Methodist Church every Sunday, then you start to build a picture. They also don't say if you're a recovering alcoholic, but if they see the same card at AA meetings off Monday Road, then
it's not hard to build a defa detailed profile of what where someone lives, works, and warships. A profile of where your kids go to school, your vices, and your medical needs. Being watched changes how people act, not just because it can deter crime. It
also deters going to rallies, speaking out against power, and dozens of other activities. Wrong is defined by whoever is in power. Laws can and will change. And once a criminal once what once was criminal will be legalized and what once
was legal will be criminalized. By trusting mass surveillance now, you are not only trusting the current law and its enforcement, but every law yet to be written. If someone followed me from my front door every moment I was outside, I'd get a restraining order. But if a
private company puts up hundreds of cameras to do the exact same thing, it's called protecting the peace. I urge you to force a cancellation of agreements with Flock, Axon, Axis, and Milestone.
Thank you for your time. Elijah Rodriguez. Elijah Rodriguez to be followed by Addis DeFazio. Elijah Rodriguez. Addis DeFazio. Good afternoon, commissioners. How are
you? >> Please state your name and address for the record. >> Uh 600 West Virginia Street. >> What was your name? >> Elijah. >> Elijah. Okay. Thank you. So, I would like to talk about uh the flawed cameras. Um, we're headed towards
a dystopian future and it's horrible. This is not the country that I want to grow up in where I have to worry about my information and other people's information being sold to Tel Aviv. America is being controlled by Israel and is sold by Apac. Our our politicians
are getting so much money from them and they want to just mass control and surveil. This isn't China. This is America. We're supposed to be free. Home of the brave. But it's not turning into that because of the new world order funded by the
satanic pedophile elites that are running this country. And it's horrible. We have to stop this. We have to ban these flock cameras. These are one step into the new world order into the agenda that these elites are trying to do. And
I love our commissioners here. I think they do want the best for us. But show that by listening to us and banning these flock cameras because it's one step at a time to track where people are going. MSAD agents are killing innocent
Americans. That's how they're going to do it. by tracking every single everybody who's against Israel, who's against the state. You know, you know what I mean? They're they're going to, oh, he's against this. Let's go get him. MSAD is already sacrificing. Well, just
today, just this summer, Nolan Wells was sacrificed by MSAD and killed by MSAD agents to start a race war agenda. But guess what? With these flock cameras, they're gonna keep on doing this stuff. And even more, even tracking
our children and hurting our children. The elites are going to do whatever they can to make our lives an absolute hell hole. We So, we have to do fight by banning these cameras. That's step one
because it's this is ridiculous. This is like a dystopian movie. I don't feel like this is America anymore. This this is China. Meanwhile, we have Netanyahu wanting to destroy this country along with George Soros and Claude Schwab and Bill Gates.
They can all go to hell. We cannot let American citizens be harmed. We cannot let American in innocent Americans die. We have to protect our families and children by with these flot cameras. It's absolutely
horrible. Free Palestine. I'm done here. Thank you. Next speaker, please. >> Addis Dasio. Addis DeFazio to be followed by Angelina Lashi Lashier.
>> Hey, I have to say my address, right? >> Okay. 1571 Stone Road. Okay. Uh I'm a little bit nervous, but I'm going to talk. Uh with with technologies when technologies of control are perfected, incarcerity will bleed into society. We
are a society of control. This is a slippery slope. With Ring cameras, smart watches, Teslas, AI deep fakes, flock cameras, etc., we are priming ourselves for a prison society where once you are deemed an enemy, which often means poor and unable to properly consume or the
wrong political party. A case will be built against you and you will be nothing more than biomatter to be used by the state and its corporate partners. Your bodies will prop up a prison industrial complex which as we can see leads to fat checks for the for-profit
prisons and the contractors within them. Predictive policing goes handinhand with mass surveillance with companies such as PRP pole and clear view AI. A form of unaccountable unaccountable corporate techno government governance is latent
if not already present. I do not merely want to be biomatter for the state. And it's and if none of that resonates, uh, your grandkids can easily be watched by creepy hackers. Thank you,
>> Angelina Lache to be f followed by Carl Braxton. >> Thank you, Angelina Lache. Ladies and gentlemen, before we get to the next speaker, I just want to a friendly reminder for everyone. Let's try to maintain a level of decorum where we're not um calling people out by their by their religion or race or where they're
from. Let's just keep it keep it civil. We've had a bunch of good speakers, but let's let's continue the dialogue, but let's maintain a level of decorum in the chambers. Thank you. >> How's everyone doing? My name is Angelina Luche. I have some documents. Do I have permission to bring them?
>> Sure. Yes, ma'am. Thanks so much. >> Could you reset your name and address again, please? >> Yes. My name is Angelina Luché. Um, my address is 3070 Mission Road. Um, I'm going to start by with this. I'm
speaking about housing and anyone in here who's dealing with housing issues, if you would like to link up with me afterwards, I'm here for it. Good afternoon, commissioners. My name is Angelina Lache. Statistically, at least one person in this room has faced
an eviction. I'm not asking anyone to raise their hand, and I'm not one of those people. But if I ever was to have faced an eviction, I would rather it be for a fault of my own and not because of a system that I am dependent on. When slavery was first ratified, the people
in Gston, Texas did not know that they were free. However, that did not change the rules and that did not mean they were not free. I say that because we have a similar situation going on with the housing authority where systems federally are changing but they are not
updating the people at the bottom. US county commissioners have absolute power over the county's money and budget. But in order for the budget to be implemented properly, the people at the top must inform the people at the bottom. On May 29th, I reached out
directly to how Tallahassee housing authority administrator and I reported an ongoing calculation issue. If you look at the paper in the email, if you add those three numbers up, they don't even add up to what they said they added up. And that's just sad. Our housing our
housing staff operator director Marco Muon and executive director Miss Andrews are calculating independent income as W2 structured income. They are leaving out the IRS 72 cents which actually increase
to 76 cent per mileage. They are not deducting those calculations correct. Furthermore, the system is failing to apply the mandatory 500 dependent child deduction and is increasing rent portions without giving families the
legally required 30-day advanced notice. I've already handed you all the paper. I want to encourage the commissioners because I know you guys partner with housing on other things. I want to encourage you all to partner with Dr. Andrews and Dr. Marco Mong to audit the
files, not just one file, all the files. Let's protect our working families, ensure our housing staff are fully informed, and update these systems so that there are no other families to live under the weight of uncorrected
administrative mistakes. On the hierarchy of needs, shelter is the priority. Thank you. Thank you. Carl Braxton. Carl Braxton to be
followed by Daniel Kobe. >> Please your name and address for the record. >> Carl Carl Braxton is second. 2614 West Tennessee. >> Thank you. >> How are you guys doing today? >> Yes, sir. How are you? >> I'm doing all right. Um my neighbors have said a lot in regard to the
technology um in question, so I won't waste too much time. I am here as well to express my opposition to technology as a tool for surveillance. Um I do have a question. Uh do you guys answer questions? >> Unfortunately, this is not the time of the meeting where we answer questions.
This is just public comment. However, um at the 6:00 public hearing time, that is the opportunity where commissioners can ask answer questions. It's just board policy. >> Okay. In that case, I'll save the question. But I am just here to express my opposition to technology as a tool
for surveillance. >> Okay, that's all. That's good. Sir, sir, sir. Um, so you I mean, if you want to stay to six, you you're more than welcome. We address at the end of the meeting, but if you want to pose your question now, we can take it up later. We just can't
answer your question right now in this segment. >> And I would stay till 6, but I'm actually on my lunch break right now. I just had to show face on behalf of my neighbors. >> Okay. Um uh appreciate the hustle. Yeah. Yeah. You know, um the question I do have though is before approving the spending plan and agenda item four. Can
you guys explain like what oversight, transparency, and accountability measures will like be in place with these technology purchases? Um how the public, how our neighbors will be able to evaluate whether they're used effectively and
appropriately? And do we have policies in place right now to uh like safeguard what they're capable of, what they can do? >> Thanks so much. Great question. >> Am I able to like hear the answer to that question at the >> No, actually because we're probably
going to take it up right after public speakers. >> Yeah, >> that we'll be able to answer that question. So you won't have to wait that long because it's a part of the agenda item. It's been pulled agenda item on the form has been pulled. So you'll be Daniel Kobe can be followed by Aari Richardson.
>> Hi, I only heard about this very recently, but I'm also here >> your name and address for the record. >> Of course, I'm Daniel KBI. That's 1325 West Tharp Street. Um, I am also here to uh
project uh my opposition to the flot cameras and related technology. It's disappointing that anyone in your position would want to know any of this information.
I'm I don't understand what this who this benefits. It's not benefiting me. I'm not going into the cameras and I don't know, looking up information about other people. What is that going to do
for my life? It just makes me a creep if I do that. It doesn't benefit um our protection. It just makes us all feel anxious to be alive. And I don't really understand
why we would even be interested in that. Other people have been more eloquent, so I'll save the rest of my time for other people. >> Thanks so much. Next speaker, >> Desari Richardson. >> Good afternoon, y'all. >> How's it going? Please take your name and address for the record. >> My name is Aariah Richardson, 1911 T
Panelay. Had the opportunity to feed a couple of y'all this past Sunday. Good to see y'all again. My name is Azariah Richardson and I'll be voicing concerns on behalf of my community about flock technology. When powerful surveillance technology integrated into our communities without proper public conversation, one question becomes
impossible to ignore. What's the system for accountability? To be clear, the issue isn't with the cameras themselves. The concern is what happens when powerful tools are introduced without transparency, oversight, and accountability. A quick online search
can reveal exposed administrative interpaces connected to surveillance systems. If technology designed us designed to protect us is vulnerabilities, especially relating to our data, what happens when the wrong people find them? And how can this technology provide the reassurance of
safety when it's clear that these vulnerabilities are very easy to find? There have already been reported cases around the country of law enforcement officers allegedly misusing license plate reader systems for personal reasons, including improperly tracking people they knew, like an ex-girlfriend.
That's exactly why oversight is imperative. No system should rely solely on the assumption that everyone with access will operate accordingly. Technology is not inherently good or bad. A firearm is in dangerous simply because it exists. But before you decide, $20 million is better invested
in surveillance than a number of things the city has begged for for so long. You must answer us this question. How can we trust and ensure that the technology will not be abused? History tells us that trust alone is not enough. Trust is built by showing the public exactly how
abuse is prevented, investigated, and punished. And that's why I think Tallahassee has fallen short. Thank you. Thank you, Alexandria O'Connell. Alexandria O'Connell to be followed by our final speaker in this section of the
agenda, Stanley Simmons. >> Hello. >> Hi. Please set your name and address for the record. Alexandria O Connell 313 Paul's Drive here to speak about flock cameras. Plenty of good information's been shared. I don't know if you guys remember me, but I was here a few weeks ago when it was only me and one other speaker discussing our concerns with
block cameras. So, I'm glad to see more people out here today. Thank you. Um, you guys can look up all of the good clean statistics of why these things don't work. Uh, but some fun ones are that one in 10 plates scan misread the
state. Uh this recently happened in Pensacola, which is very near to us, where a man uh had to go to court for a flock traffic cam violation, uh when he was out of town documentedly that entire time. Uh we've talked about the fact
that these have been targeting specifically women and their misuse. Uh CEO Garrett Langley has labeled his uh critics the and the anti-flock advocates as terrorists uh multiple times. So, I guess I'm a terrorist here now, as well
as many of your concerned citizens, which is disturbing in and of itself. Um, for a company that pretends to care about democracy, it's a private tech company. They take that money from their data sales, and there's no consent process for that. Uh, there hasn't been
any consent process, as far as I'm aware of, between uh residents, the county, and the city here. if we want these in our neighborhoods, near our homes, uh on the highways, and pretty much in every uh space possible.
Less than 1% of cars scanned were connected to a crime or wrongdoing. So, they don't prevent crime or solve crimes. Um, just as well, I would also like to mention that this money could be spent towards civic services or
community supported infrastructure that can actually reduce crime and has a documented history of doing so. And if you want to have county data or resident data, then shouldn't the county at least own it and not a private company? Um, I would urge you to look at the
situation in Cleveland where there's been a lot of civil upset. Uh, and there was a vote taken to end the contract, not renew it with Flock cameras, uh, that passed. And after that contract expired, those cameras were still running. There was no municipal contract
held and a private company was still collecting municipal data. uh that should be very concerning to anybody um but particularly you guys who are responsible for when that data creates uh civic and criminal charges.
I'd also like to just mention with uh regards to the film incentive that it's good for AV. I'm an AV company owner and that means it's good for me. So I'm also really into that. Thank you. >> Thank you. All right,
ladies and gentlemen, we have three more speakers. If anyone would like to speak, now is the window to put the the your your speaking card in. Um after this after in the next few minutes, we're going to close the window on speaking cards so we can move on with the agenda. So, if anyone else would like to speak, please put your speaking card in now so
we can make sure everybody is heard. Thank you. Next speaker. >> My name is um well, let me use my professional voice because we got a lot of people here tonight. My name is Stanley Sims. I reside in the prestigious neighborhood of Aendale,
1320 Aendale. I too think that flock cameras are dangerous. By the way, the little dog is mine. But I believe Tallahassee reports is more dangerous
because this is not a computer. This is a person who is personally attacking elected officials. And what bothers me at night, uncontributing, paying for this mess.
Now, he say it's a newspaper. I say it's a blog or National Inquirer. I challenge everyone in this room, everyone. even you commissioners to find a positive
article that Tallahassee report has ever since its existence have written about Jeremy Matlo you won't find one let me bring something else to your attention find a negative
article about Ree or the mayor here and I'll just give you my award I just won tonight. You cannot and let me give you another little cookie to chew on.
You will find that you will find more negative articles when blacks was in leadership. Now we got white folks leading. You can't pay this man to write something negative about the city of Tales DESPITE
them cheating on a $4 million grant, DESPITE their $250,000 vi um assistant city managers sitting in a meeting sitting in negative Texas. See, flop cameras can't do all that.
But this man here is just as dangerous. And what I am asking you as county officials is to instruct staff no longer to put any more of my money towards this mess. This is mess.
And we shouldn't be paying for mess. It's a it's a word that you use here cuz the chairman said the decorum in the room. The other mess is the fire services.
When does terminate means terminate or is this one of those things like bill depends on what iss boom shakala mason beagle. Mason Beagle to be followed by uh
Dar Alfred. >> Mr. Chairman, I I can't read, but I thought it was a good picture of Matt Matt Low. I didn't know what the words meant, but please your name and address for the record. >> Yes, sir. I am Mason Beagle. I live on 525 Collins Drive. I personally just
find the implementation of flock cameras to be very existentially disturbing. I just don't like living in a world where all of our actions are going to be constantly monitored and surveiled because I know that, you know, with with surveillance, it's not just if you're committing a crime. It's also if you're
doing something embarrassing, something notably transgressive that I feel can be held against you, even if you're not necessarily someone who's a target of the state. And like we see that in terms of like private instances of cops tracking their exes or you know someone
was talking about following cars to their religious locations or AA meetings. I find that extremely disturbing. I think a lot of people should have a right to be vulnerable in public and be able to pursue things for their own well-being without having to
worry that in pursuing those things they are putting themselves at risk. Um that's all I really wanted to say. >> Thank you so much. Dar Alfred to be followed by Jade uh Derelamo. >> Hey, good evening everybody.
Um my name is Daryl Darwave Maker Alfred. I'm currently a candidate for Tallahassee City Commission C3. My address is 814 West Tharp Street. Uh I'm here to stand in opposition to the flock cameras all around this city. I'm having conversations every day. Each one of you
have had to run for office and speak to constituents and majority of them are telling me that they're not in support of this. Um, block cameras are sold as a crime fighting tool, but we shouldn't pretend that the conversation ends there. Data collection is only step one.
When you build the infrastructure to collect everyone's movements, you've created something far more powerful than a camera. You've created a database. And in the age of artificial intelligence, databases become influence and prediction. they become power. They're not just surveilling us. We're talking
about putting moratoriums up for mass data centers that are processing each and every one of our movements, companies that own these uh even our social media. It's all connected and it's not just about uh watching us. It's about consolidating our information,
profiling us, not just for preventing crime, but for directing us. And that's the next step of this. uh whenever our algorithm is customly built to each one of us and they can suddenly have connections to everything about us. Um this isn't just about preventing crime.
This is about changing the shape of our democracy and so we should be all be staunchly against this. Thanks for the time. >> D uh D Geraldo >> last last speaker. >> Yes. Thank you. Please state your name and address for
the record. >> Yes, it's J. Deramo. U my address is exempt. >> So I want to address the flot camera situation. Um >> perfect. >> Can you hear me? Okay, thanks.
So I want to address the flot camera situation. uh namely what is currently happening with it in terms of the fact that it's obfuscatory when you try to
when you try to get procurement information from a city commission which is notoriously less cooperative with the public than the county commission which is why I'm glad to be addressing you all today. There's a problem when a private citizen
issues seven public records requests, five of them are closed within 48 hours. Some of which were never given an invoice, you know, for a fee to pay to access that information. And perhaps one of which is issued a fee
of $1.35 million against statute. Statute says that if you're going to charge for public records fulfillment, it must be proportionate to the pay rate of the lowest paid employee capable of accessing that information.
I don't like to measure issues in intention because intention is opaque. actions are transparent and the public demands to know how much of their money is going to be spent on a
private technology that is largely going to be implemented against everyone's understanding of how it actually functionally works. In the patents for the flock technologies, there are several features that discuss tracing aspects that are
largely expansive. It is not as simple as automatically reading a license plate. These are expandable technologies. I would like to see these workshopped. I would like to see pressure from this commission and from other civic groups on the city commission, on the
Tallahassee Police Department, and on other law enforcement agencies before we proceed with a technology that frankly, to my knowledge, was never brought before the public to assess if it was even in demand. And in an age of identity politics,
divisiveness, and weaponized politics, I believe that a technology like this can only serve to harm us and divide us further. So, please reconsider pouring any more public money behind
this. I appreciate you. >> Thank you. Mr. C administrator, how many of the speakers are looking to speak on item number four? >> The remaining the remaining speakers, three speakers. >> Okay, great. Uh, ladies and gentlemen, here's what we're going to do. I pulled
item number four before the meeting. So, that means everyone who has a speaker card will be able to speak on it. What I want to do, I'm going to go ahead and go to voting on con uh consent and then we will come back to item four like literally in 30 seconds. >> Move consent. >> Perfect. So, we have a motion for consent.
>> Second. >> Second. >> Okay, great. Before we before we vote on consent, I just want to give a quick kudos real quick. Didn't want to pull the item, but I love the tourism item related to film. Um, it's a great program. I believe Commissioner Maddox
proposed that in one of our recent uh workshops. I think it is um a great diversification of how we how we promote tourism and diversifying in different industries and I love it. I think it's going to bring in um a lot of different
businesses and and and really shine another light and another sense on Leon County. So uh good work u Mr. um good work uh Commissioner Maddox. >> Thank you Mr. Chair. >> Uh Mr. Vice Chair. >> Thank you Mr. Just to be clear for the folks in the audience who spoke on consent 11, we're going to get to number
four and 11 separate from what we're about to vote on. >> Correct. >> Mr. Immediate past chairman, any comments on consent? >> Uh, no, sir. Thank you. >> Okay, great. All those in in favor of consent with items number four and 11
pulled, signify by saying I. >> I. >> Any opposed? I >> Okay, passes unanimously. So now we're back on number comm um agenda item number four which I pulled. So how many speakers we have? >> Four.
>> Four. Okay. Please put your speaker cards in so that way we can uh get to debating the item. >> Mr. Chair. >> Sure. Thank you. Um for the speakers who already spoke, thank you for coming out tonight. Mr. Chair, thank you for
pulling the item and your foresight uh for pulling the item. Um, I did want to make it clear that and I'm I'm going to ask the sheriff's the sheriff's office representative to come up. Um, the the the you call it flock cameras, I think it's fusion or something like that in the agenda item. Um, that's for that's
pass through funding for outer for counties outside of Leyon County. We are the regional hub and so those funds come into us and then we in turn give those funds out to um I think it was Liberty Wakulla and a couple more and so um I
want to confirm it but ma'am come on up. Will you confirm to me that none of the other grant dollars that are in that package will be spent on flock cameras? >> That's correct. So, and and and am I correct in saying that the monies that's in there, the 440,000 that's in there
for flock cameras and training is for outer counties. What are those counties? Who are those counties? >> Wakulla, Jefferson, Liberty, and Taylor. >> Exactly. So, so does Lyon County have does Leyon County Sheriff's Office use that technology as as current? >> Not as part of this grant. No. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh, so what I would
like to do, Mr. care if you allow it is I would make a motion for the rest of those grants and take out the piece specifically the 440,000 specifically for flop cameras in that technology. >> I'll second the motion for discussion.
>> Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> All right. So, we have a motion on the floor. Everyone understand the motion on the floor? >> Okay. Uh I seconded by myself. Um >> I do have one more question. >> Um I'm sorry. If we So, this motion passes, that money is denied. What's the next step to those outline counties?
>> We'll have to go back to the DEOC council and review how they want to spend those dollars. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> I got a question. >> Go ahead. I'm going to I'm going to weigh on this item, but go ahead. Go ahead. >> You know, speakers have brought so many elements, so many points, and the reason compelling
uh to be concerned about these uh cameras is the number of people being shot on the streets by ICE. Uh it's unclear who ICE reports to. Uh all this picture taken associated with ICE. Uh
who is ICE's boss? Um is ICE under the state? Is ICE under the county? Is ICE under People don't know who ICE is? Um and when you sue ICE for his conduct, uh do you go to the FBI and sue Mr. Patel or is he at a party? Um what what
happens? So I'm alarmed. And as you all know, uh, hell, you all heard me say that we don't need to put these cameras in no school district. Uh, I got tickets in the school districts not knowing, no notice,
other people getting bumped by, money's being raised and as has been pointed out by speakers, the ownership of the cameras and the promotion of the cameras benefit select U. corporate owners
who've pushed these on legislators uh who've received contributions major from the the camera owners. There's a connection in this network of uh espionage um a totalitarian type of u as I was
listening to speakers I was thinking about um Jay Edgar Hoover um and the strength of a Hoover to have information so to speak on on people uh whether erroneous or not but us not knowing who
ICE is um is is is u and people getting shot weekly all over the country. Uh this is um and someone said this is not America. Uh these are very important points. And so my concern is that we
have a government uh that's operating uh above the government that we know uh perhaps um alongside underneath external to uh who is this new government? Uh
it's amazing. And so I wanted to state for the record uh commissioners um that I'm sure that we're on the side of everything that we're hearing in the direction which this motion goes. Um I I stand with it supporting.
>> Thank you, Mr. Vice Chair. >> Thank you. I stand in support of um what we heard today and the motion and uh at a time when it's easy to say, well, we're just local
and it's outside of our hands. Um I'm proud to be part of a board that is willing to do everything within our authority to make sure that we stand with principles of the people in our community. So, I appreciate the motion and uh support it.
Thank you, Commissioner Cummings. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I I support the motion as well, but I I just want to uh ask the maker of the motion as Commissioner Maddox
um moving forward with that. Do we envision workshop? What do we en envision or anticipate? >> Yeah. So the chair chairman, you can speak to it. Um the chairman asked for a workshop to come back specifically on
those camera agenda item to come back specifically on on flight cameras and that surveillance >> and it should be coming up soon >> in our next meeting. So >> Oh, that's right. We've already had that at a couple meetings before. Yes, ma'am. So it's coming back. >> So So I didn't ask for it because the chairman had already had the foresight
to ask for it. And so we anticipate that once that agenda item come back hopefully we'll get some clarification and some information regarding to the usage extent of the usage whether or not um there's any any room for any
direction I guess from from the board and if we're satisfied then that particular uh incumbrance on that particular amount of federal funds will we'll have some direction on that >> yes that what we anticipate after the workshop.
>> Okay. >> Oh yes ma'am. >> Thank you. Thank you >> Mr. Chairman. I'm ask one other inquiry. >> Um to what extent uh are we compelled or forced to receive monies even though I
don't believe all money is good money. Uh but in this area of uh domestic espionage um we've been forced to uh receive monies uh receive um tools,
surveillance tools. Um it's like none of us governments are in control. We're being voluntto what we're going to do and we have to march to the beat. uh increasingly we feel uh that we can't
speak on this issue. We're being told we can't talk about that. Uh our roles of advocacy uh in several areas uh including um property taxes and that's
the number one thing that we do is set tax millage rates. Um but the one critical thing that we do uh is property taxes. But we're told that with respect to amendment three uh there are limits
to what the very core uh nature and the character of um of um work that we do and as an instrument for setting property rates and raising the property taxes. uh we there are things we can't
talk about. So I don't know uh the whole role of being a government official is feeling flaky and um and I think that to the extent that uh this matter uh weakens, undermines and makes us not
only look like flakes but to the extent that we also feel like flakes because what once we uh had sole discretion to do to set uh we're being that's being chipped away and Uh there's not much
platform. Uh we're on uh automatic control and we're not uh setting the uh thermostat. Uh we're we're just merely the thermometers. Um and we're not setting the temperature and I'm I'm very
concerned in in a number of ways. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> Thank you, commissioners. Here's what we're going to do. I'm going to weigh in on this item. So, it's going to be a little bit untraditional. I'll weigh on this item. We're going to go to um the public speakers and then we're going to vote. Right. Um
ladies and gentlemen, I I want to say this. In our May meeting, I requested a agenda item to come to our come come to us and it's coming in our September meeting that lays out the full purview that we
have and at the local government level um to manage or prohibit or to enforce or to remove um LPRs and flock cameras. I want to be very clear about my position. I love our law enforcement. I support
our law enforcement. However, I hate those damn cameras and I I think they are an invasion of privacy. I don't like seeing them driving in neighborhoods. Uh I just drove to uh
Panama City Beach um over Memorial Day weekend and they're everywhere. And so I I I hear you and we hear you in regards to how you all feel. And I want to make that very clear. Um, I can't speak for
my colleagues, but I can say that typically this board takes a position where everyone feels heard. And so I want you to trust that this item is going to come back in our September meeting. Everyone have an opportunity to speak on it. Our staff is doing a full
analysis on it and we will be able to make a decision with having all of the information. So, I want you all to know, I don't want anyone to leave here today and think that we don't hear you or that we're just forcing a more funding on
this. Commissioner Maddox's motion basically approves funding for surrounding counties, but is holding the piece for Lyon County. And I imagine we will circle back to this when we have the agenda item come back to us in the September meeting. And I I I wanted to I
wanted to lay that out so everyone knows and the public knows that we've heard you all. Um we understand that technology is evolving and with that policy needs to change. And me personally um I feel what you all feel and I I don't like my privacy being
encroached on particularly as we go through our everyday lives. So um I believe Commissioner Maddox has a quick question. I do want to get the public speakers. Yeah. >> You have a question? I just want to make a comment. >> I just I just want to correct something, Mr. Chair. Okay. >> Um the the motion takes out all funings
related to LPR block cameras and and um as I understand it because of a timing issue, >> we won't be able to come back and review it later. It'll just they'll have to go back and they'll have to figure out something else to spend that money on. So it will it will take out all monies
for us and surrounding counties related to the to LPRs and fly county. Thanks for the point of clarification, Commissioner Cummings. >> Yeah. I just wanted to >> Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. No, I just wanted to uh get the county commissioners. I I the county
administrator I know we have the agenda item coming back and I know they're working on it. uh but to the extent that the grant I guess that particular portion of it uh will be paused for the most part uh depending on what we do at
the um when at our next meeting or when the agenda item comes back or when we if we have a workshop how does that affect adversely affect Leon County and the surrounding counties as well? >> Thank you Mr. Chairman Commissioner. I think for the surrounding counties, I'd
have to we'd have to regroup with the sheriff's office. I'm not sure at least what the fiscal um agent relationship is there or if it's a regional coordination type of a thing, but we'd have to get with uh them to decide uh what our alternatives are based on this direction. Here you are.
>> That's correct. Those LPRs are supposed to go to Wakulla, Taylor, Jefferson, and Liberty. So, not Leyon County. So, we are the pass through. So, we'll have to figure out where that funding is going to go. Okay. Or like what will it be used to buy? Okay. Thank Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I
just want to also just thank the citizens for coming today uh giving us their input. And as I often say, we are here to represent to represent you. You you elected us and we are here to listen to your concerns,
allow you to voice your concerns, and I think uh you should feel good about the fact that we've heard you and we've taken action in a positive manner to address your concerns. So, thank you all so much for being here. >> Thank you, Commissioner Cummings. Um,
ladies and gentlemen, I want to remind you we have an agenda item coming back in September that'll be dedicated just to the item. It'll be a general business item. Mr. County Minister, I want to get back to the remaining public speakers. Um, I want our our timekeeper to set a time of 90 seconds per speaker and then
we'll take a vote on the item. Thank you. >> Next speaker, Messiah Mims to be followed by Evan Dunlap. Good afternoon. My name is Mia Mims and my address is 1832 Jackson Bluff.
All right. I am here to speak on um the agenda item number 11. Sorry, I didn't know it when I was writing it over there. Um I am a former teacher at Pal Elementary School. I taught third and fourth grade and I was teaching during my first year when we had the shooting at FSU. And Pimeu is less than a mile
from FSU. And I only had two of the 40 students that I teach that day on lockdown. And I could only imagine what it would be like for someone to come into our school with a weapon and cause harm to those students. So if I don't want to feel that fear in an elementary
school, I definitely don't want to feel that fear in a Lyon County government library where people come to enjoy books, enjoy the programming, and get the resources that they need. So definitely think about um how much sense that makes. THANK YOU
>> Evan Dunlop to be followed by Katherine Fid. >> Thank you so much. Just a friendly reminder ladies and gentlemen, we're on agenda item number four. So I do appreciate Miss Nims's comments and they are duly heard, but uh we do have that item coming back as a separate um pulled item on number 11. But just wanted to
thank you for your comments. Yeah. Thanks, speaker. >> Evan Dunlap. Believe he's making his way up. >> Hi, my name is Evan Dunlap. I live at 1612 Glenway Drive. Uh, this is another item on the flock safety concerns that I
have as a citizen. Uh, I've noticed a lot of extra flock safety cameras going up around town and I know that this is reliant on uh, you know, outside counties for the budget item. Uh, but I just wanted to pose a specific example of some of the vulnerabilities that we
could have even on the cameras that are inside city limits. CVE202559407 hard-coded Java keystorm password contains private key. Falcon and Sparrow license plate readers ship with the development Wi-Fi credentials of test FLCK stored in clear text. This includes
the key storage for the password flock habiki 17. through a list of simple commands. You can set it up with uh to autoconnect to an evil twin wireless network with this Wi-Fi interface brought up and the Wi-Fi interface can be brought up by pressing
the button on the back of the camera for 3 seconds and then pressing the button three times in a row. All of this information has been clearly documented and reported to Flock over a year ago and still has not been patched according to Miter of Homeland Security as of July
13th 10:30 a.m. when last I checked. This does not include the research that was conducted by Ben Jordan over a year and a half ago that allowed him and his team to connect to and take control of ALPR cameras and they could view or modify the footage, install malware on
them, use hard-coded credentials to lead to other places. One of those credentials let them track real time GPS location of police vehicles. These are security vulnerabilities that are unacceptable in any public safety
infrastructure no matter what. Uh, thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Katherine. Katherine Fid to be followed by Ural Uriel um Janella and my apologies if I butcher
your name. >> Um, hello. Thank you for hearing me today, commissioners. Um, I additionally had concerns about the flock cameras. A lot of my peers have eloquently um, described a lot of the concerns that I have as well. Um, but additionally, I think, uh, it's dishonest as the company to market them as license plate readers
when I see them often times on bike trails. I'm a bike commuter around the community. I don't see how those are necessary on bike trails as bikes don't have license plates. I think they're surveilling um, a lot more than they let on. Additionally, I think flock kind of
reduces um innocent until proven guilty. I think a lot of the information you see I've seen examples um a lot where they're used to kind of chase certain people and pursue incorrect convictions. So I think um it reduces the need for like good oldfashioned detective work um
and relies too much on AI and surveillance systems. Additionally, I believe it is people for the prison industrial complex. And then another thing that I didn't hear anyone mention today is I've seen flock drones around the community. So, they have drones as well, and that to me is really concerning. Um, they have this
highlighted. You can look online. They actually like this is included in like what they say as their surveillance stuff. Um, that is a complete other concern of mine. Um, I'd also like to comment on agenda item 20, which is the annexation of a large parcel of land in northern Florida. Um, to me, Florida is
synonymous with protection of our wetlands and our wildlife. Um, Tallahassee itself is a biodiversity hotspot of a lot of different animals and plants. Um, my dad said when he was younger he'd go drive across country and there would be like a lot of like bugs splattered on his windshield. And I've
just seen a huge reduction of bugs. I've seen a huge reduction of birds and just like wildlife in general. I don't think it's beneficial for our communities and I don't think it's beneficial for our city in general to be um taking this majority wetland and wildlife area and to put what another strip mall and like
mass consu like this isn't even for like small businesses. These are all like huge commercial areas. Um, a lot of people pay money for fishing licenses to feed their families. Um, this is also reducing that. Um, additionally, there have been studies that have shown that
um, hot the timer went off. >> Thank you so much for for your comments. >> Final speaker. >> Hello, my name is Oriel. Excuse me. Uh, thank you for having me. Um I this is my first time speaking. I
just wanted to take a moment to talk about uh Amendment 4. We're talking about the flock cameras. Uh a lot of the other folks who've gotten up here have talked about a lot of the reasons where these do not I feel like fit in our society. And I think the biggest thing that I want to bring to this is my
experience of coming to talk to you. Um I talked to a lot of people at work throughout my community who expressed one of three things. One is they had no idea what a flot camera was or any of these surveillance things. The other one was they stood in serious observation
in they stood seriously against it. And then the third was uh basically defeat. We'd already lost the battle. And one of the things that we've already talked about is that this money would go through to other counties. But the reality is these these cameras do exist here in Tallahassee now within our
county. And so what I'm asking for me as well as the other people who I'm here representing because it was the middle of the day and they could not make it here is for you to represent us and get these out of our city. You are our representatives. You have been charged with this responsibility to represent
our point of view. Not a single person that I know has been in favor of them staying. All right, that concludes your speakers. Mr. Chairman, >> everyone who spoke on item number four, I appreciate you all for for being here and I appreciate the decor remained in the chambers. Commissioners, we have a motion on the floor moved by
Commissioner Maddox, second by myself. Um, any more discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor of the motion signify by saying I. >> I. >> Any opposed? I >> Commissioner Walsh, are you in the affirmative?
>> Yes, sir. >> Okay, passes unanimously. Um and uh we are now on item number 11. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Item number 11 was pulled by Commissioner O'Keefe. It is an update to your library policies. Happy to answer any questions you might have.
>> Mr. Vice Chair, you're recognized. >> Sure. Um I'm going to make a motion for staff recommendation for discussion purposes. >> Okay. Here we have uh staff recommendation option one. >> Yes. >> Okay. Moved by the vice chair. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Second by Commissioner Cummings. Mr.
Vice Chair. >> Thank you very much. So um there's a number of issues with this as some uh speakers talked about before I I get to that. Actually, I'll start there. Um one of the policy changes here is to uh
remove a prevention to have firearms brought in libraries. And as we've been briefed and in previous items, this is uh related to either a court ruling or a statute that says people can open care in Florida and the only exceptions are
courouses, which we happen to have a commission chamber in the courthouse. Can can we get an explanation uh just confirming the cause and any of why we're changing that policy in this
document? and what opportunities we have to not change this item. >> Go ahead, Madam Turner. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh there was a court ruling uh
late last year that invalidated a statute. Uh now we cannot prohibit people from open caring in libraries. >> Period. We are preempted by state law. And
if the commission takes action to try to prohibit open carry in libraries in violation of state law, there is a statute that provides for multiple consequences for the county and county commissioners who try to do that.
>> Thank you. And so this is is there any discussion uh or do we know if anyone at the state legislature is talking about sort of a law cleaning this up that allows that
community areas like libraries um are allowed to have exemptions? Is that a possibility as a legislative priority? >> Good afternoon. Um yes, Commissioner. This last session, um, a couple bills were filed specifically to clean up this
long gun loophole. Um, however, neither of the bills were ever scheduled in committee. Um, however, uh, given that this is a remaining issue, I do highly anticipate it to come back for next session and, uh, we are planning on including it in our priorities
recognizing, um, the issues that we're facing at our own facilities. >> Thank you. Okay. Um, all right. Um, my other questions are about this these policy changes at first seem
very straightforward as far as uh um administrative stuff, but my concern is a number of them make it harder for some 16 to 17 year olds to get library cards. And so, um, I have some questions and I want to confirm some numbers on the
record. Um, so we have uh currently when does someone become delinquent? Anyone, not not a minor, but an an adult. When a library card holder has fines, uh, when do we turn off their ability to borrow more items?
>> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Commissioner, I'll defer to Pamela. >> Thank you, Commissioner. So, excuse me. We turn off those fines when they are 42 days delinquent. Um, however, we have many ways that people can
um I'm sorry that they can kind of wave those fines. So, you have a one-time waiver. We also offer payment plans and um a person can also appeal to the director. We have a form that um I
can wave those fines. I can go in and look at the situation. >> Okay. And is it is it accurate that we currently have um about 3,100 16 and 17 year olds in Leanne County who have library cards? >> That's accurate.
>> Okay. And anyone under 16 can get a minor card that is managed sort of by their parents. >> That's correct. >> Okay. And this policy change, if we accepted it, would make 16 and 17 year olds essentially treated like those
minors. And instead of being able to get their own library cards, they have to have a parent apply with them. And there's some other requirements. Is that a fair assessment? >> That is correct. >> Okay. Is there what is the problem we're fixing here?
So 16 and 17 year olds are not fiscally responsible for those cards and overdue fines or um books that they may have lost or anything like that. So they sit in this holding pattern. We cannot send them to collections. We can't collect fines. That's one of the main reasons
why we are changing this policy. And do they get currently do they get treated like any other person where after 40 >> 42 days >> 42 days we basically turn off they can't borrow anything more so we don't have any more risk of them borrowing and
losing or damaging items. >> That is correct. >> Okay. And and can can you confirm on the record for the numbers me numbers for me of 16 and 17 year olds currently 1,220 have fines? That is correct. >> For a total of $3,500.
>> That's correct. >> So, uh, and a number of those aren't late, right? That's somebody doesn't have to be someone who's 42 days late. Could be someone who dropped off a DVD late yesterday. >> Yes. >> Okay. So, Okay. Um, this policy, when
does someone become delinquent? This policy talks about uh a the policy adds that for a 16 and 17year-old, they can only get a library card. uh if their parent applies with them and that parent
is not delinquent on their own library card, when does someone become delinquent? >> Actually, someone becomes delinquent day 22. >> Day 22. >> Yes. >> Okay. And um uh
if it says that's the rule, your parent has to be in good standing, can't owe 22day or older fines to get a library card as a 16 or 17 year old? >> Yes. >> What happens if you already have a library card and your parent who is your
sponsor then becomes delinquent? Are we proactively, you know, pausing your access as a 16, 17-year-old? >> No, we're not. >> It's only as you get it. >> Yes. >> Okay. And let's see. If someone
uh is delinquent at 42 days and their access is shut off, they can't borrow more books. >> That's correct. >> They can't lose more DVDs. >> That's correct. >> They can't borrow kayaks and computers and mess them up. >> They cannot. >> So, my point is that our exposure is does not continue as far as a financial
implication. >> They can still come into the library. They can >> and still use the library. >> Yes. >> Yes. Um Okay. the there's also more strict uh renewal requirements, right? Uh in this policy, uh every two years you have to come in
and provide documents, the same documents you do when you get your library card, like something proving you live here. Um right now you can just renew online, which I love. I've renewed. Um and uh I love getting the library books on my Kindle. So my question is like is that that change is
to prevent people who no longer live here from keep using from keeping using the library card. >> So actually commissioner there's always been a 2-year renewal policy. We we just have actually put it in the policy >> and um you will be able to renew online.
So that really didn't change. We just wanted to make sure that it was something that was in the policy and people knew that that was >> Gotcha. Okay. And then there's does anything in this about a parent
being delinquent uh change how we treat the people under 16? >> No, that's not >> okay. Um let's see here. And then we have in here, this is not
new, but we already h we have in here that we can refer people to collections after $100 in fines and uh over 90 or over quarterly billing. Uh when was the last time we sent anyone collections agency for library fines?
>> So, we haven't sent anyone to collections since before 2020. >> Okay. So, I'm gonna um and like again, what's the most expensive thing at the library someone can borrow and not return? >> The most expensive thing that we have is
our laptops, which are about $899. >> Gotcha. Okay. And um Okay. And that's not changing. We It just there it says that the county instead of the county attorney can send to collections. So, I'm going to set that to the side for the moment. And
then another important question is is is back to the security issue. Um we have um right now we have private security at hourly private security at the main library and in the past we've had
sheriff's officers and so when I learned that uh you have to be in you can't the state has ruled you can't prevent people from bringing open carry into the library I think well perhaps we ought to have real deal sheriff's deputies in there which you can pay sheriff's
deputies hourly off duty to to do that. What would be the cost impact if we said, "Hey, all right, let's switch some private." And no shade to the private security. My dad was hourly private security and he would have told you a sheriff's office or deputy would be better. But what would that cost us if
we said let's step up the security since this is a thing? >> Yeah, I think I think Pamela has a specific >> Yes, I do. So, um the cost of a of a sheriff's deputy is $180,000 a year. We currently pay about $80,000 a year for our private security.
>> Excellent. And then since this law's changed, how many incidences have we've had of people open carrying and causing any issues at a library? >> Zero. >> Okay. Um All right. Thank you. Um so, um colleagues, uh the reason I pulled
this was because of the library is the 16 and 17year-old issue. I think at this time we should be making it easier and doing nothing to make it possible to be harder at all for a 16 and 17year-old to access library materials. And it may
seem administrative here, but what what the difference is is you're you would if we accept this policy that requires that that requires an an adult to apply and allow a 16 17year-old to get a library card, which is new. And we require that
adult to not have any delinquent fees, which is new. You have different classifications of 16 and 17 year olds. Some 16 and 17 year olds have parents that will go to the library during business hours and fill out the form. Some 16 17 year olds have parents who
will make sure they don't have any fines. But I don't think for those some 16 17 year olds don't have parents that will do that or can't do that. enter into this policy, a 16 or 17 year old who's their parent won't come down or go online and sign them up for a card or
who won't pay their own adult fines keeps that 16 and 17year-old from borrowing books and items from the library. This item in its face says it has no fiscal impact. And so I don't see why we should make any change that would
punish a 16 or 17-year-old who wants to borrow books if their parents are not active and upto-date and current. And so I am going to amend my motion to have staff recommendation option one leaving
out any of the changes to eligibility for 16 and 17 year olds. >> Okay. Okay. So, we have uh the vice chairman has a proposed amendment to his motion. Um is there a second? >> I'll second for discussion. >> Okay. So, Commissioner Proctor second
for discussion. I have uh you is that it Mr. Vice Chair? Okay. I got um Commissioner Maddox and mine are in the queue. Commissioner Maddox. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. I I actually had the same question about the six. Why are we making it so tough for the 16 uh 17 year olds to get library cards? But now
I kind of understand. You said about right now we have about 3,100 um 16 17 year olds. >> We do. >> That's 1,700 1,220 of them >> are delinquent. That's right. >> That's correct. >> Is that the highest percentage? I mean like if you if you compare that to
everybody else seems >> that's about correct. That's about a third of our 16 17 year olds uh o are >> and at that point once they become delinquent >> they're unable to check out. they're
unable to check out, but they're also um you have no other way to cure. If if let's say the let's say you're 15, right? You go delinquent. Um does the parent become responsible at that point? >> That's correct. >> Okay. Uh so if the 16 17 year old, we
got about a third of them that are delinquent. Okay. If they go delinquent, they have no there's no other way to recoup that asset or that fee besides getting it from that 16 to 17 year old. That is correct. >> And that 16 16 or 17 year old will not
be able to uh use any assets from the library until until it's cured, which means in most cases that those 1220 some odd people likely won't be able to use your services. Correct. >> They will. That is correct. They will not be able to check out. >> They'll be able to check out, but they'll be able to come in.
>> They can come in. Um, it's I like your motion, Commissioner O'Keefe, but I wish there was a way that we could I like your motion, but you said what where's the problem? I also hear the
problem. When you got a third of a certain class of folks that are delinquent, that that that serves as a problem. It shows the lack of responsibility when it comes to being able to um return the asset or return asset undamaged. And so, of course, you
know me, I'm always looking for a middle ground. I don't I don't want to I don't want to make it tougher. So, I do agree with your motion. And honestly, as I think of it, I don't think there's other another remedy. maybe um when when a 16 or 17year-old goes
through the process of getting a library card or when anybody goes through the process of getting a library card, what does that process look like? >> So, you can get a library card online and there's a form that you would fill out online and we will be uploading documents that prove that you are Leyon
County >> Mhm. >> um resident >> and that's it. >> Yes. and our staff review that information and then send you your card. >> Commissioner O'Keefe, given given the situation, because again, it's obvious it's a problem. Third third of the kids
not, you know, returning an inquent status. I'm thinking maybe if we had them go through not only just getting the library card, but then like an educational period where, you know, it's like a video or something that talks to them about, you know, how the system
works, the consequences of not returning and all that kind of stuff as also a part of it. Does that help or does that I mean I I'm trying to figure out a way to to to to hit that middle ground of of going the extra step to make sure they
understand the responsibility that comes with a library card, right? And also dealing with the problem of a third of our 16 and 17 year olds are delinquent. Um I'm not even sold on going as far as what I'm speaking right now. I just think it is something that obviously if
you got a third of them there's a piece that's missing for them for those for those young folks. There's a piece that's missing there that we're not providing that might keep them from becoming a part of that that 1220 cuz nobody wants I mean you you if you got a library card you go there you want to be able to check stuff out. I wonder if the
responsibility is on us. What responsibility do we have to make sure that we're taking extra step to educate our young folks as to the consequences to not uh to not returning the asset or returning the asset undamaged. So I I I'll wait to hear other discussion about
it, but I'm I'm just I'm working in my mind right now because that the problem is pretty bright to me as I as I see it. I just wonder we not necessarily making it harder for them to get a library card but taking another step to educate those who do get the library card as to what
the consequences is if if the asset isn't returned. Um now is this a common thing? Does is I mean I'm sure you've talked to other libraries and stuff like that. Is it a common thing amongst young folks of a 16 17 year old? >> So there are various counties have
various ways of dealing with this. Um some of the larger counties actually do 18 um at just as we're proposing now. Um so it's like I said it it is probably split
halfway I would say. Okay. >> Um what we're really trying to do is we want to make sure that there is a person that is responsible for these things that student that people are checking out. Uh 16 year olds can come into the library. 16 to 17 year olds can, you
know, check out a laptop in the library for in library use. And so, you know, if something happens to that laptop, can't do anything. >> Yeah. >> We can't we cannot charge them or anything like that, we can't send them to collections because they're in that,
you know, they're in that little period where they're 16 and 17. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Thanks, Chair. >> I got Commissioner Miner, Proctor, and Cummings. And then we're going to vote on a motion. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Miss Monroe, I'm sorry. I had some more follow-up questions. So, um,
really good discussion on this. I have a hard time taking library cards away from 16 and 17 year olds, 3,100 of them. Um, but at the same time, I also recognize our need to protect resources and assets that belong to the library, that belong to taxpayers. So, you just said a second
ago that um a 16 and 17year-old with a library card that is not co-signed by the parents could come in and check a laptop. If that laptop is not returned, we have no recourse to claim damages for that lost laptop. Correct.
>> That's correct. >> You know, Commissioner Maddox was talking about a middle ground. And one thing I want to kind of bring up an idea is I I I have a hard time taking library cards away from 3,100 16 and 17 year olds. But what I do want to do is make
sure we protect the assets so that if someone needs a laptop, that laptop remains there so that other people can use them. One one thing I want I want to suggest is perhaps we continue the policy of of providing library cards to 16 and 17
year olds but for expensive equipment like laptops like kayaks maybe there's a dollar amount threshold that requires a parent to cosign it. >> It's a great idea. um that that would be is I know that that adds a little complexity to the you know to the
workflow here in terms of making that actually implemented uh in the IT system but that would be something that would be a good compromise. You know we still have the 42-day you know deadline of of fees and if if they are not able to return books and other materials that
are less than say $100 um they aren't allowed to check anything more until they bring those other items back or pay the or pay the fine. But for some of the expensive items that belong to taxpayers, I think it makes sense for us to require a parental signature with um parental responsibility for those
expensive items because they belong to taxpayers. Is that something that you would find amendable, Mr. O'Keefe? >> Um uh respectfully I wouldn't. Um I could explain why, but you you can tell me if it's appropriate to do that now or wait till it comes back to me.
>> If I don't mean to. What I'd like to do is is is request a substitute motion to >> I just want to I just want to point out >> kids can borrow laptops plenty long now and of all the teens they still only owe
$3,500. >> So more than that amount has not walked out the door on laptops for all the teens. That's why. And I recognize the fact that a 16 and 17-year-old that 16 or 17 year old that doesn't doesn't have a laptop at home needs a laptop and that
the only resource they might have is checking out from the library. But at the same time, they need to have responsibility to return that back. And so, um, I I I glad you started this conversation. It's an important one to have and I I mean no disrespect, but I'd like to have a a substitute motion that
would adopt that policy change to Commissioner O'Keefe's motion. >> Okay. Yes. So, we have a substitute motion um by Commissioner Miner. Could you clean the motion? >> Yes. So, essentially Commissioner O'Keefe's motion um with the one exception which is that we would still
continue to allow library cards to be checked out by 16 and 17 year olds without parental permission. However, there's a there's a cost threshold to that such as like was $100 or whatever the um M. Monroe would would deem appropriate where anything above $100
that they would check out would require a parental signature and require the parent to pay for those fines should those items not be returned um intact. >> Okay, great. Is there a second to that motion?
I'll second the motion myself. Um, the reason I'm gonna second that and I see I got Proctor Cummings in the vice chair in in um in the queue. And so the reason I want to substitute the motion is because I I love the spirit where you're at. Mr. Vice Chair, I as I was reading the item, I agreed. I don't think that
we should be u making it harder for kids to be able to check a book out of the library. However, we have a duty to taxpayers. It's not it's not our assets. is taxpayers assets to make sure that um things are being returned so that everybody can use them. And I like where
your head's at. I think it's it's it's a common ground where the more expensive items need parental signature and then, you know, everyday items such as books, school supplies, whatever it may be, kids still have access to it, which I think is is is super important. So, I think it threads the needle very well of
enforcing responsibility while making sure our kids have the ability to use um you know, literature and things to help them be successful in school. I think it's a great balance. Um I'm going to go to Commissioner Cummings and then um Proctor then O'keefee. >> Thank Thank you, Mr. Chair. And thank
you, Miss Monroe, for all of the uh information. But I I just want to know from um a factual standpoint, are we having issues with big ticket items being returned to
the library? >> Not with 16 and 17 year olds? >> No. Okay. So, we having a major problem with books being returned. >> So, we have over $3,500 in fines for the 16 and 17 year olds. It's about um like
Commissioner Maddox said um 1,200 people or 16 and 17 year olds. Oh, $3,500. >> 1,200 minors with a total of about $3,500 in fines. Correct. >> And that's 16 and 17 year olds. That's specifically that group. Yes. >> 16 17 year old. What What is the
procedure in place for collecting the fines? So, a person is sent an email that's or however they or text message, however they get their information that
their book or items are due. And then we send another one and that's 21 days. And then we send another one at 42 days saying, you know, your items are due, we're going to bill you for them. And
then after that it they get on a on a list. So we continue to try to collect but their card gets barred. Do you well do you know right off the percentage of the collections that you all have done compared to overall fines?
>> I'm sorry. Could you repeat the question? >> Do your percentage of collections as compared to the overall fines? So we have acrewed so far um
we've got close to and this is total this is not just um that group close to uh half a million dollars since 2021 in outstanding bills.
Um, bills paid, we have 227,000. >> 227,000. And and and let me ask you this. So the fines are based on the number of days delinquent and not on the value of the item that hasn't been returned. Is that
is that correct? >> That is correct. So um we have library of things are of course go under different fines but um all books 10 cents per day. >> Okay. Now you've already indicated that no big ticket items are are among the
delinquency >> for the for the for those for those 16 >> 16 except for the 16 and 17 uh year olds. So if we tie the parents, say we raise the
rate, uh the age uh and tie the parents to the to the minors, do you have any information based on what you have collected where when you contact the
parents, they're more susceptible to paying the fines or bringing the bringing the books back or bringing the items back. >> I'm sorry, Commissioner. I don't have that information, but I can get it for you. >> I'm sorry. What now? >> I'm sorry. I don't have that information. >> Oh, you don't? Okay. I'm sorry you don't
have that information. Um, Mr. Chair, I I tend to um I'm concerned about cutting off um the ability of those uh 16 17 18 year
olds to to have library card. I think most of us that have raised our children, my son had his he had his library card. I had I had mine. Uh but we I guess we have to assume that parents would be a little more
responsible. But then again, at that age, they might not even be aware of the delinquent nature of the items that their children, you know, that their children has. But uh Commissioner um
minor to to your um substitute motion based on what Miss Monroe says, those big ticket items are not among the delinquency. We are just talking about
everyday items that have not been returned and the delinquency has accumulated based on the number of days that they are out. Am I correct? So, you know, I I like the middle ground compromise, but I
was trying to determine what the issue was, and the issue is not big ticket items. You you see what I'm saying? So, I'm not sure if that would give any any relief to Miss Monroe and her staff in in trying to, you know, to to regulate,
you see what I'm saying, the returns of of the books and and having someone responsible for the return. >> Mr. Chairman, of course. >> Thank you, Mr. Mr. Chairman. I appreciate it. Commissioner Cummings, thanks for the question. I I see it as I think M. Monroe has has established that
there's not been a history of of problems with the big ticket items. However, this would be more of a preventative measure. Uh especially if there's a 16-year-old watching right now that thinks that they can check out a book or a laptop and and not bring it back. Um that this would be more of a preventative measure. If if there's not
an issue right now, that's that's all well and good, but my concern is that in the future, uh if if this should happen, we would have some type of recourse to get that asset back. Uh, and just one last question, Mr. Chair. Can I ask Miss Monroe your your opinion about that that
compromise? Would that uh relieve or alleviate some of the issues that you and your staff deal with move moving forward as >> Absolutely. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Thank you, Commissioner. I'm going to go to um Go ahead. No go brief. I'm going
to I'm going to let the vice chairman close out. Proctor, you want to speak on it? >> I do, but I'm I'll yield to the chairman. Mr. Russian. Thank you. Uh, so you said that if someone's delinquent, this is anybody. If someone's delinquent, they can still come to the
library and check out assets, books, laptops, whatever. >> Yeah. >> I mean, they can't take them, but they can come and use them within the library. Correct. >> Yes. Yes. >> I just I just think overall if someone is delinquent,
period. Right. There's there's nowhere that you can go that you can go and you can take something and then come back to that place and still use the asset. I I don't care if you're 16, 17, or 21. If you if you take something out of somewhere, you just don't you don't bring it back and you can come back and you can still use it long as you're
inside. I mean, I just I just think there should be some kind of consequence. May maybe even to the point cuz you said how how much in delinquent delinquencies do we have >> um overall? >> Total close to 5 million. I mean, I'm sorry, no, not 5 million. close to 500,000.
>> And this isn't just 16 and 17 year olds. What do you guys think about the idea of if you are delinquent at the library? If you are delinquent, you take something out, you lose it, you you don't bring it back. Not only can you not only can you not check things out, but you also can't
use things use assets within unless you bring that back or you pay that f that that delinquency. I mean it may be a little rough but at the same time I I I I think >> Commissioner Proctor wants to talk on a point. >> Let me just say u commissioners um we
we're in a critical point a lot of the points coming here now the dumbing down of America uh AI and I'm almost dreading going back to uh teach constitution law the fall because everybody writes a perfect
paper. I don't care what topic you put out. all students bring just uh PhD level uh responses and it's not plagiarism. I think that we should not make the library a punitive space where 16 and 17
year olds and u I've never watched a study but at some point around 14 15 16 17 uh the separation of those who commit to being scholars uh those who develop critical minds uh
those who really focus and lock in on something that leads them forward somewhere. That's a critical stage. Um, and we we don't need to tie punitive uh
uh measures uh to students. Uh I think Joe Biden said we're fighting for the soul of America. And a part of that soul has been free flow of information. But if you owe the library uh $1.39 cent for
some book, you say 10 10 cent a day, you owe $1.40 for the book and you can't get that free flow of information. Uh we're warning young people that ages think about getting a um voter registration card. Um I'm not sure
perceptionally at 1617 if you know the difference between a voter card and library card but the library card is punitive and just casually thinking about it my maybe my voter card carries a penalty. Uh once upon a time uh it did
carry a penalty if you was not tight and right but after 1965 presumably um you could vote without uh pole taxes and literacy exams etc. intimidation, but this is a form of intimidation.
Um, if you're poor, um, to be intimidated that you don't have $5 to pay for the late fee, um, in that building is not for me. and you cut off, you deny yourself. Um, you recognize the
class of individual um, and students are no more wealthier than their parents are. And you self-impose that the public library is not was not intended for you and your use. And I'm not sure how
incrementally um, we accept our place in society. Um, and I'm not sure how we cut ourselves off from access, self-imposed, but I believe that um, many students at
1617 are searching for the future and the free flow option to go and do I want to go to Harvard or do I want to go to Howard? Um, do I want to go to Yale or do I want to go to Spellelman? these these questions and and I think uh
commissioners that what we would want to promote is uh intellectual curiosity. Uh what we want to promote are young people feeling free to go to resource centers. Um, that's why we're doing what date is
the 25th reopening of the grand grand uh >> the 25th anniversary of the BL Perry >> library. And we're doing a new fresh grand opening to re-engage the community, to receate, to lift up, to uh
to allow for that presence of a resource center for the community to use, to come to um embrace and their ideas that exceed what comes on television. That's why we have these centers. We got one
out there um down there by y'all's neighborhood. Uh we got one in Commissioner Welch's neighborhood. We got one out there in um y'all's neighborhood. And we've county has been careful to make information available.
I'm not sure. I'm confused by the substitute motion and all of this right here. What I'm trying to say is that my bottom line, let us not do anything that 16 year olds per perceive that that's another place to get a penalty from.
That's what all these people came in the audience about these cameras. These cameras, I went to Orlando the other day. I'm like, "Oh, lord. I don't know how many tickets I'm going to get when I get, you know, but I'mma get them." So, let's not create more penalties in in the public library. Commissioners, I'm
going to go to um Commissioner Maddox briefly. Commissioner Welch has not spoke on this item and then if it's a if it's the board's will, I would like to vote on the substitute motion and if it fails, we can come back to more discussion. >> Mr. Chair, I'd like to speak on substitute motion after.
>> Okay. Um please please >> I think I got something. Hear me out. All right. Those fees of that of young folks, right? I'm still looking for a way to cure. Okay. What if do volunteers
at at the library? >> That's correct. >> Okay. What does that look like? What do you use them for? What do you What do they do? >> They um help shelf books. They help with programs. >> Okay. >> They do a great many things. >> And if you had to monetize, you know, how much you you receive off of those
volunteer hours and work work-wise, could you be able would you be able to? Uh, >> I could not, Commissioner. I'm sorry. >> Where I was going to go with it is I still want to give those young folks a way to to to and this is not original
idea. I want to thank Bruce Stroble and Serena Williams for helping with this. Um, what if we gave them the opportunity to work off their um, delinquencies for 16, 17 year olds? >> We're not going to have a chain game.
Commission Pro Mr. Proctor Commission. Commissioner Proctor, let him speak. >> Would you accept that as a friendly amendment? >> No. >> All right. >> Okay. Commissioner Walsh, you're in the queue.
Yeah. Just point of point of order, everyone. We have a substitute motion by Commissioner Miner, seconded by myself, just so everyone's clear. Commissioner Walsh, you're in the queue. Go ahead and speak. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Can you guys hear me? >> Yes.
>> Okay. Thank you. Um, you know, listen, on this issue, I don't really know why we're having this conversation. I think that we're in a posture where we may potentially have to discuss closing libraries or charging fees to enter libraries
if we have property tax reform. We view libraries as public services, a public service in which, you know, people can go gain knowledge. I mean the word literally means like you know house of books um in Latin
uh house of wisdom in in Islamic countries. I mean like the the whole point here is that people have access to information. I understand the the fiscal angle that we're trying to get at here. But I really feel like it's like a not
really a problem that's deserving of this much debate and this much conversation. I mean, I would be willing to maintain the status quo on this item. I don't know why we're even having this discussion. I definitely don't like the idea of um of
allowing young people an opportunity to work off their debts. I mean, we're a public service. Libraries are a public service. This is an item in which this is something that we provide to a community. Yes, there should be some sort of maybe
way that we, you know, create some underwriting for big ticket items, but the majority of these are small ticket items. So, I'm willing to support the substitute motion reluctantly and I agree. I appreciate the effort at compromise, but I think
that I don't necessarily know why we're even discussing this at all. That's my comments, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. immediate immediate past. Chairman um Commissioner Cummings, you said you had brief comments. >> Yeah. Yeah. Just briefly. Yeah. I just wanted to I think I asked this question
but we got off. Um is there a redemption period um for delinquency where you advertise to everybody from this date to that date turn in your turn
in your material, turn in your books. So, there's about a I want to say a 24-hour period, but I'd also like to say that um a person can wait can't get their library fines waved. We have a one-time waiver for library fines just
at the desk without even coming to me. Um and that's also an option as well as if someone has overdue fees, they can also opt into a payment plan. So, we try to offer many ways so that their fines are paid. Um,
I just wanted to make sure that I gave you that information as well. >> Okay. And then my my other question is the collection process other than notices. They're not sent to the county attorney or outside council to to collect through the parents or anything.
Right. It's just a letter that comes from the library. Right. >> It it would be a letter. We send our list to the county attorney's office, but we have not collected since 2020. >> Okay. And the letters go
>> letters out to >> letters would go out to >> to 16 and 17 year olds. >> They would go out to Yes. because they got their cards independently, but we can't collect from them, so they're not going out. >> Okay. But we never considered
a period of maybe five days to advertise um every from August the 1st to August the 10th is redemption bring your material bring that's delinquent and your slate will be wiped clean. Now some
libraries perhaps maybe not here uh but I have been involved with some libraries that has a um a redemption period. Bring your material during this time. Doesn't matter what the delinquency amount is but you turn it in and we'll wipe this
slate clean. Have we thought about doing something like that? >> That is something that would be decided by the commission and you'd let us you' give us that direction. >> Okay. Thank you. Thank you Mr. >> Thank you. Mr. briefly take us home because we're going to vote on this item. >> Thank you. Real quick, the uh $3,100 of
fees for the teens, they're not delinquent. How much of that is delinquent and and how many people is that? >> Those are the total fees owed was 3,100. >> Yes. So 30 35
>> Sorry, 35. The 3500 actually delinquent. >> Yeah. Uh that is delinquent. That would be delinquent. >> That's all the Okay. Yes. >> Okay. Um what was the funding source for the big items? The laptops, the kayaks, the library of things, wasn't it? Wasn't it the foundation of friends of the
library? >> So, it's various um laptops and hotspots, things like that. They are um some of them are grant funded, some of them are also, you know, the county pays for. And our library of things program is um funded by our friends of the
library when they give us a check every year. >> Perfect. The the the last thing I'll say is my fundamental objection is some 16 and 17 year olds do not have parents that will work this out with them and some
do. And I don't want any 16 or 17year-old who who lost a book and doesn't have the money and doesn't have parents who will clear for them. We want them in the library. They used to give us free pizza for reading books. We ought to be we ought to be giving books to 16-year-olds for free. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Vice Chair. All right, here's what we're going to do. We're going to vote on this item. Um, substitute motion made by Commissioner Miner, seconded by myself. All those in favor of the substitute motion signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. Any opposed? >> I.
>> No. >> Okay. So, it pass. I mean, it's 33 with Commissioner Proctor outside of the chambers. So, the motion fails. So, we're back on the original motion. Restate the motion. The motion is to accept staff recommendations for all the
policy changes except changes to 16 and 17y old library card policies and eligibility. >> So that would >> second. >> Yes, ma'am. So that so you're saying that um Mr. Vice that the policy would not change. You're saying so >> correct 16 or 17 would be treated the
same. That part would not change. >> Okay. So we have a motion on the floor back to the original motion made by the vice chairman, seconded by uh Commissioner Cummings. All those in favor of the motion signify by saying I. >> I. >> Any opposed? >> I. >> Passes unanimously. All right,
commissioners. We're going to It's 5:35. We'll reconvene at 6 o'clock for public hearings. Heat. Heat.