The Groves, July 21st, uh 5:30 p.m. --------- I'll begin with uh a call to order, uh a pledge of allegiance, and a moment of silence, please. Thank you. Roll call, please. >> Council member Stevens. >> Present.
>> Council member Cain. >> Present. >> Council member Coleman. >> Present. >> Vice Mayor Sood. >> Present. >> Mayor El Remy. >> Present. >> Acting Town Manager Oaks. >> Present. >> Outside Council Janika Simpson. >> Present. >> And for the record, Miss Miss Simpson is
present on Zoom. >> Thank you. Additions, deletions, and modifications. No, thank you. All right, that brings us to the single >> motion to approve the agenda. >> Thank you. >> Second. >> A motion to approve the agenda by Council member Cain, seconded by Council
member Coleman. All those in favor. >> Aye. >> Aye. Opposed, hearing none, motion passes 5-0. Uh this is a singular agenda, and it is on the updates for the investigation regarding
the Town Manager, and uh additional information received. I will pass it off to Special Counsel Simpson for her update. >> Yes, good evening, everyone. Um as far as the update is concerned with the investigation, um we have had the
opportunity to speak with several individuals regarding a variety of matters. One of which that we were able to include which involved the improper conduct conducted by the town manager friends
Stephen Romaglia. And with that, I believe I included it in my email exchange. We were able to conclude from multiple witness interviews that Mr. Romaglia engaged in improper conduct by way of diverting the
staff's carrying out the notice requirement in the resolution I believe 2026-01. And with that, she based on our discussions with multiple
individuals, she instructed the staff to delay the implementation requirement outlined in the resolution. Due to the fact that it could possibly negatively impact the outcome of the election and in doing so
could potentially impact her future as the town manager. And as it pertains to the other issues, there's a couple of other individuals that we have to speak with. It's just our schedules have kind of been conflicting. Some have been out of town.
Some have just simply been unavailable. But we plan to continue the investigation pending the outcome of this meeting in regards to the preparation and submission of the FEMA claims. And I think that that is about it for
now. I mean, I'm open to any questions that anyone may have so that I can expand if necessary. >> Okay, I have a light on Councilmember Cain. >> Yeah. Are you aware, Ms. Simpson, that FEMA has categories and that mitigation is one of the categories. They have A, B,
C, and D. They have mitigation categories. They have prevention categories. From what I've read in your email, you are alluding that the FEMA reports, which were put in by Mr. Gallant, who sat here and reported out to us that he put them in, were somehow
not proper because they were not for storm damage, but were for mitigation. And since FEMA has mitigation categories and came and did not one, but two on-site visits to the funding requested area, and they seem to
and and they still have approved the funding, I'm wondering why this is an issue. >> Uh yes, Ms. Cain. I think my email may be a bit misconstrued as it wasn't to speak to any mitigation efforts on behalf of the town in regards to the FEMA claims. Um in a latter portion of
my email that spoke to that issue in particular, I shed light that we were focused in regards to the investigation as to the preparation and the submission of the claims, not to any mitigation efforts. >> Which was done by Mr. Gallant.
He he sat right here at two council meetings and told us that he did it. >> Yes. >> Okay. All right. Just want to be clear on that one. I have another question on the Middle Road issue, but I'll defer to my other council members and come back to me. >> Okay. Let's proceed.
>> Hello, Ms. Simpson. Can you hear me okay? >> Yes, I can hear you just fine. >> We can't hear you pretty good enough. Can we increase the volume? I don't know. Can you hear what You're good? All right, good. Good. Thank you. Okay. So, you sent us an email
with an investigation report, but you haven't shared that email with the public. I think the time for being vague and masking information sharing with public is over. It's costing the town hundreds of thousands of dollars
to keep the town manager paid if this information is true. We want specifics. Who were the candidates that were being conspired against in the election interference claim? >> Um, it wasn't that they were being
conspired against, um, but the two individuals that, um, the outcome of the implementation of the notice requirements, I believe were Todd McClendon and you as well, uh, Vice Mayor Minnie Sood. >> Okay, so Vice Mayor Minnie Sood was
conspired, or let's use the word the town manager wanted Minnie Sood to lose so that Todd McClendon can win. Is that true? >> I can't say that that's true because that is not the information, the characterization of it is not what I received from the individuals that I,
um, interviewed. It was just that the implementation of the resolution, um, as far as the notice requirements could negatively impact Todd McClendon's race, which would ultimately impact or potentially impact, uh, Francine
Romagli's role as town manager. >> Okay. So, let me restate again. She took some action to alter the election outcome so one particular candidate can win. Is that correct? >> Again, Vice Mayor Sood, I I don't think
the characterization, um, for legal purposes [clears throat] would be proper. >> Okay. All right, let me go to the next question. Simple yes or no. >> Okay. >> You said that the in your paragraph number two that the election interference investigation is complete.
Is this Is this allegation substantiated? Yes or no? >> Yes. >> Okay, so what is the what is the outcome of that investigation? Can you state in the pure legal words what is the outcome? >> Um, yes, I and just to be clear as well,
um, it's election interference is a a pretty high burden. So, you know, Tom and I spoke about kind of lowering that into just stating that there was improper conduct. Um, which would go towards the the duty of the
town manager. But, in conclusion, yes, um, we found that the town manager acted inconsistent with her duties and responsibility as town manager, which would include, you know, following the implementation of the resolution, as well as misguiding um, the staff to, you
know, disregard the council's directives in carrying out the notice requirement outlined in the resolution, which we find under the contract is wholly improper. >> Okay. Understood. So, in this said election interference matter or misconduct, you
can call it, town manager expects expresses expressly directed, that's your word, expressly directed, I would expressly I mean clearly, intentionally directed the staff to delay the implementation of resolution number
2026-01 to impact the election outcome. Did the act of delaying resolution number 2026-01 actually happen? Yes or no? >> Uh, yes, the the staff did not >> Thank you. Next question. Was the town
manager working on her own or working with others to let's use the word unfair whatever word you use interf- I would say the word interfere with elections, but I'm you can say misconduct. Did she work with others or did she just work on
her own? >> It was on her own. She She advised the staff to carry out her directives against the directives of the council members, but it was a solo act. >> Is your investigation going to reveal that that
she was entirely on her own in this action? >> Oh, It already has. >> Okay. Okay. Does the town manager um this particular matter um does it fall within misfeasance,
malfeasance, neglect of duty, ethics, or I'm using the word or. Misfeasance or malfeasance or neglect of duty or ethics or misconduct provision of her employment agreement or and or you can
say all of the above. What is the answer? >> Yes, it does. Um more specifically under um subsection B for determination by town with cause, it will fall under subsection two and then subsection C. >> Okay.
>> Which would speak to the neglect of the duty. >> Does this action relate to, as your special counsel, I'm asking you this question, does this action relate to for cause termination of the employment agreement, yes or no? >> Yes.
>> Okay. There are two other matters in progress and uh there is an additional third matter that is also here. Um and this relates to the OIG letter. So,
my understanding is that OIG, Palm Beach County OIG, identified serious unresolved deficiencies in the town's 2024 audit. And they repeatedly asked the former town manager to demonstrate that the corrective actions have been
implemented. Despite multiple follow-up requests and nearly two years, the town apparently failed to provide the documentation necessary to satisfy the OIG. So, the what happened now is that OIG is
telling us that they are going to flag our town. They are going to um they are going to basically it's it's going to result in additional cost and reputation loss to us if we don't respond by a certain date. So, here is my question. Does the
budget management, financial reporting, and implementation of corrective actions for the audit the are these the fundamental responsibilities of the town manager as per her contract? >> Yes. >> Okay. So, is this continued lack of
follow-through now exposes the town to additional administrative and legal costs, increased audit scrutiny, and reputation harm? Is this a failure on the part of town manager to fulfill her job responsibility? Yes or no? >> Yes.
>> Okay. So, I'm again using the word or. Does this amount to neglect of duty or misfeasance or malfeasance under her employment agreement? And if so, either of the or is okay for termination, does it support termination for cause?
>> Yes. >> Yes or no? >> Yes. >> Okay. Is there any additional evidence needed before the council to act for termination for cause in addition to these two? Are these two issues one or
the two or the both or a pattern of this behavior is it enough as you are a special counsel now, is this enough for the council to now vote as a council on termination for cause? Yes or no? >> Yes.
>> Okay. Can the remaining investigations, financial investigation, FEMA, cooking the book investigation if that is true, continue after the termination? So, if we terminate if we decide to terminate her, does it interfere with your investigation? If we said, "Continue the
investigation." Does it in any way or shape inhibit your investigation? Yes or no? If we specifically [clears throat] Right? No? >> Right, no, it doesn't. >> Correct. Okay. Who else should we notify on the on
these very disturbing claims? Like state at the state level, at the county level, who are the other authorities we should notify timely as we are finding these issues and who else should be involved? >> Um we're currently researching to determine the answer to that question in
regards to for example any ethic boards that may need to be apprised of, you know, the actions that have taken place. We're doing research on that and I can get you all an answer as to that by the end of this week. >> Thank you.
>> All right, Council member King. >> No. >> He hasn't put his light on. >> Okay. So, regarding Middle Road, Council asked a number of questions that needed to be answered before that notice could be sent out.
They were questions that needed to be answered by Palm Beach County, who owns the road, and by the post office. They were questions such as how long would you be able to keep the address on Okeechobee Boulevard? Would mail still be delivered there if it was addressed to Okeechobee Boulevard? Valerie, have we ever
received the answers to those questions? >> I'm sorry, can you repeat your question? >> Sure. The Council directed >> Mhm. >> that before the notices were sent out that we wanted information in there for people such as how long they would be able to keep
their address, whether mail would still be delivered if it was labeled Okeechobee, and we were supposed to get staff was supposed to get in touch with Palm Beach County and find out whether this was even possible. Do we have the answers to those questions to this day? >> Uh I would have to find out because at
the time well, I don't know because the previous manager was working on that directly with the attorney and I believe the community standards director. >> So, in fact, the letters weren't ready to be sent out. >> Um as far as I know, we were just directed not to proceed. So.
>> But the letters were not ready to be sent out because there was no information to put in the letter. >> I can't answer that question. I don't know. >> Well, I can. Um, so, you say your investigation is complete. Have you spoken to the accused? Have you spoken to Francine?
Don't you think that that would be prudent as part of an investigation to speak to the person that's being accused? >> At this juncture, no. We spoke to the the individuals that participated in the meeting. And also to your point on in regards to the letters not being ready,
neither of the participants made reference to Francine mentioning that the letter simply wasn't ready because there was some information that was pending. It was just more so of a a delayed tactic to hold off from getting the notices out.
>> Okay. And are you aware that that resolution has subsequently been repealed by this current council? >> Yes, but the meeting that took place was prior to the the repeal of the resolution. >> Okay. Just making sure you're aware of
that. Okay. That's all I have on that for right now. >> All right, Vice Mayor Sood. Be brief, please. >> Yes, please. Yeah, I was not going to be on the dais if that had been successful. So, yeah, I agree. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So, here is my question to the two
council members who have repeatedly said no to the termination, especially Ms. Key. You are the mayor. All these issues happened under your leadership. This is an opportunity for you to believe and to make decisions. >> Wonderful. >> Special counsel,
okay, special counsel has presented her report. >> Wonderful. >> I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I cannot have I can't go to Mr. Einstein, the scientist, and say create a time machine, recreate the effects in front of you so you can play in the real time replay. That doesn't happen. We have an independent
counsel. She did the investigation and she is now telling you there is not one but two matters at this time for court and there are and there are many more. She hasn't even completed that. Thank you very much. >> Okay, well the independent counsel also told us that two subsequent meetings that our best bet was to pay the 20
weeks and be done with this and you ignored her advice at that time so >> Okay, thank you. >> Thank you. >> Uh council member Coleman >> The Just review what you said. This middle road resolution that got delayed right? You said what had an adverse
effect on Mr. McClendon's can candidacy? >> Yes. >> Mr. McClendon's candidacy. >> so. Let me double check my notes >> No, not Mr. Sood who just said he was going to it would have caused him not to get elected.
>> You are reading a little bit off. >> Okay. >> No, I'm I'm listening to what's being said. I'm listening to what's being said. >> Getting clarified. >> Am I correct in what you I mean I heard >> Is that going to help? >> Sorry. >> Um I'm sorry. Could you repeat your
question? It was a bit I'm done. >> You stated that it would have had an adverse effect on Mr. McClendon's candidacy. >> I mentioned Mr. McClendon and Vice Mayor Sood. >> Okay. No, yeah, I think you actually said Mr. McClendon.
But that's fine. Um >> Mhm. >> Okay. Um I'm still trying to find this backup with all these interviews and whatever. I all I got was the OIG thing so >> There there aren't interviews. >> Oh, I thought that was stated earlier
too. >> There was an email stating there were two additional interviews still to be conducted. >> Oh, I thought there was >> That was an >> I thought it was made it sound like there was like some transcripts to read or something. >> No. Nothing >> So we're still waiting to meet with somebody else or some other person. >> She She still has
I'm sorry, Ms. Simpson, you still have I think one other witness still to speak with. >> Yes. >> Okay. Um do you two have your lights on for particular reason? >> Well, I I'd like another follow-up, but if we speak first >> Okay, so I believe the termination with
cause must be considered tonight. This issue is costing town hundreds of thousands of dollars by keeping her on payroll, giving her vacations, and all sort of goodies. A for cause termination would protect taxpayers from paying severance for conduct that violated the very basic
duties this manager was trusted to do. At the same time, the termination should not end the investigation. The investigation matters including financial interviews scheduled for tomorrow and FEMA should continue. And we should get a complete factual record so that we can address any
institutional failure in the future. So, this is my recommended immediate motion. Three motions actually. First, I move that the town council terminate Ms. Francine Remiglia employment as a town manager and terminate her
town manager agreement with cause effective immediately sec pursuant to section 13B or other actions of the employment agreement. Second, I further move that specific contractual grounds constituting for cause as identified the town manager as
identified the town council be on the record uh be incorporated into the written notice of termination and the written notice be issued as soon as practicable. And third, I further move that the town records, electronic communication devices,
financial documented documents, FEMA records, and any related information to these investigation be preserved today. Anybody who's involved should be investigated and the special counsel should continue and complete the investigation
and provide counsel with a final written report. Thank you. >> We have a motion. We have a second. >> I'll second. >> We have a motion um as per the record cuz I don't think I could repeat that
verbatim. Uh I'll I'll let it stand um and uh Kent will probably have to go back and get that from the record. Um by Vice Mayor Sood and and a second by uh Council Member Stevens. And um do we have any public uh comments on this item? >> No, Madam Mayor. >> Okay.
Um you've got your light on, Council Member Kent. >> I just have one more question and that is is fiscal responsibility still our main priority in the town? We have 10 weeks left on this contract. We have a number here that we would pay. We've been told by this attorney and
other attorneys that litigation is going to cost $100,000 or more. I I think this is a ridiculous motion. I think that at this point the only move is to ride this out and let the con- let the
contract end at the end of September. >> Right. Any >> As a resident >> Would you Would you like to come up and speak? Then then please come up and speak and then fill out a card. Can someone make sure the microphone is on or for Ms. Betts?
>> I'm only going to be up there a second. As a resident of the town and I represent several of my neighbors also, which I have not obviously, placed on the comment card. We are through with this.
This woman has done a variety of things that were against her contract with us. She does not need to be paid any more money. The two council members that are sitting up there, that are her good friends, and
I have no idea what she has on you, because obviously she has something on you because you can read the same stuff I'm reading and your neighbors are reading. I don't understand why you sit there and say we should give her any more of the
benefit. And as far as paying money out, I vote that we pay it out to the attorney to go after her for not handling her business the way the contract was written and what the people of Loxahatchee
deserve. Thank you. >> Madam Mayor, I have uh one more comment card, uh Cindy Scrunchey. >> Okay. >> Do you need to fill anything more on there? >> No. >> Okay. >> Thank you. Uh Cynthia Scrunchey, 15349 Collecting Canal.
Um honestly, I second everything this lady just said. I don't understand why you're even dragging this out. It has gone on long enough. Ms. Cain, your numbers for $100,000 for litigation fell out of the sky. Being
married to a lawyer for 30 years, trust me, I promise you. >> Please. Please. >> I can Thank you. There's no factual information that would support a $100,000 expenditure.
The former the former town manager has shown over and over and over again. Her her malfeasance, misfeasance, you you know, she's lied, she's const- she's she's done things to the residents of
this town that you should be ashamed of yourselves for even considering continuing this nonsense. You and Paul, I respect you highly, but you know, this is it's so black and white.
Be sure >> I address the entire board. >> I I am addressing the entire board. Thank you then. For all of you to not excuse to to dismiss this lady today with prejudice is is unexcusable. From the residents that I mean, you've
heard it from everybody who's gotten the information that she has done the things that she's done as much as you want to try and cover it up. It's true. She has misrepresented herself in this town, she
has lied, she has done things, you know, that are just against every resident that lives here and yet you want to make excuses for it. You should be ashamed of yourself. All of you for not doing what needs to
be done. She needs to be terminated with cause. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Madam Mayor, the next part I have is Susan Collins. >> Thank you for the time.
I have to say the last council meeting I came to was the one where we discussed the increase in compensation for this individual. I was horrified then. I'm even more horrified now. To be held hostage for hundreds of thousands of dollars
for someone with this track record is outrageous. Our taxes are super high here. I don't mind paying for community improvements. I don't mind paying for social services. I really, really, really strenuously object
to getting ripped off. And this individual has ripped us off. The service levels here are appalling. Particularly for what we pay, but in any construct of a community manager.
You have only to drive down this road right here to see that it took a year to fix an intersection that I personally would question was even necessary. But let's just take it on faith that it was necessary for anyone to drive through that intersection and say, "That was a
well-managed project. These are people who are looking out for the community." It's like it's a joke. And to say, "Oh, but we're afraid of litigation." You apparently have all kinds of lawyers and independent counsel who have documented
this behavior. You shouldn't lose that lawsuit, guys. And yes, it does take some money to defend it. We'd have been way ahead of the game if y'all had pulled the trigger when this stuff came to light originally, and we wouldn't be sitting here talking about spending hundreds of thousands of
dollars more. I I I don't know what else you would need, but I can tell you I am furious. And I'm sure that I am not the only one. You guys got to do your jobs. >> Thank you. >> Madam Mayor, the last card I have is
Lisette Vasquez. >> Good afternoon. Lisette Vasquez on Diego Drive. The first big mistake was not to do a background check on this person. She was hired without any reference.
She was given the benefit of the doubt without a background check. Publicly we know she was fired from Delray Beach because of a major um thing that she did over there. It's all over the news. It's in the papers. If
you do the research, you're going to find that in Google. And I was surprised to see that someone with her background was hired in this town. She had a great opportunity to shine and
really do a good job here. Um and she didn't. And I can attest to that because me and my husband we are victims of her vicious actions. She has done a lot of harm to us that is irreparable.
Unfortunate Unfortunately, someone like us we couldn't hire a lawyer because we don't have the money to do so. But under that incident situation that we felt so trapped I was the first one to call her out.
I was the first one to call her out and a lot of people looked at me like if I was crazy. I went to the church where you guys meet every Tuesday of the month, whatever. People looked at me like if I was crazy. That was 4 years ago. I try to talk to
you to some of you. Oh, she's doing a great job. I sat down and just watched because I knew one day a lot of things were going to come to light.
I know a scam when I see one. And the first day that I sat down with her I knew we were in trouble. Luckily, you know, things are coming out to light and shine. And we have an opportunity to do things
right. Terminate her contract. If you terminate her contract, she's going to have to pay her own lawyer and in court with her own money to take this wherever she wants to take it if she decides to do so.
We deserve better. Terminate her contract. No more No No No one more cent. No more money for this lady. And put yourself in our shoes. Put yourself in the shoes of the people
that called you many times and asked you, "Hey, this is happening to me. We're going through this." Oh, she's doing a great job. You know, and I I wasn't the only one. The reason that I'm here now is because I found out that a lot of people in this
town were going through things just like we were. And I'm just glad to see that finally this is coming to to light and that the investigation is on and there's cause they have found >> Thank you. >> enough. >> Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> Uh Ms. Simpson, uh before I take the vote, uh just to reiterate, you feel that the town is in a strong legal position to take a action of termination with cause this point. >> Yes, that is correct, Madam Mayor. >> And And should a lawsuit ensue, we're in
a a strong legal position to defend that decision. >> Yes, that's life loss truth. >> And the additional uh information that may come to light with these additional interviews still remaining, that would not weaken the town's position regarding what we have
so far. >> No, because those are separate issues. >> Great, thank you. Uh no more public comment, correct? >> No, ma'am. >> All right. Um Oh, sorry. >> It's okay. >> Council member Coleman. >> Um yeah, just want to address a couple things.
I'm not personal friends with Francine. Um, I know that >> Is this just speaking back to the public? >> I'm allowed to talk, right? >> Yes, but >> Okay. I'm just I want to address some things. >> All right. >> Right? If that's okay. Mr. Sue got to pontificate his motion.
>> Okay. >> Three parts. So, I'm not personal friends with her by any stretch of the imagination. Um, I think when we sat down here a few months ago and
I I'm sorry. I butcher your name every time I say it and I'm trying not to. And the attorney, the special attorney, um, you know, explained us that our best fiscal responsible course of action, fiscally responsible course of action, would have been to settle it
because the bill could get up towards $100,000. That was the statement that was made, right? And being as most everybody sitting up here spoke about wanting to be fiscally responsible
and not having a clear There was a line that could be drawn and things like this and not having a clear definition, right? So, to to say that we're dragging this out, no. I I it was it was you know, three members voted for this special
investigation to spend another $12,000 toward it. Okay. Whatever, but there was not to me, everything that was being shown wasn't this slam dunk, here you go, how it is. Ms. Simpson now speaks more
clearly as to they found some more stuff and they found more evidence and things like that. The stuff before was, you know, I'm not a lawyer by any stretch of the imagination and I could poke holes in it. So, you know, it wasn't a fear of litigation. It was just trying to be
fiscally responsible for for town. And at that point in time, that's that's where where it was. So, just to set the record straight, thank you. >> Right. Okay. >> I didn't give her a raise. I voted against it. >> Please. I'd like a roll call on this vote.
>> You said pontificate. I could pontificate a little bit. Look, here is the deal, guys. And council, I'm addressing to the council. These are the people sitting here who gave her a gold medal, a golden parachute. >> Okay, I'm Council member Sood. >> I will change Let me Let me reiterate.
>> Please, I would like to get the vote. We're at 6:05 tonight. >> Let me finish. >> You got >> a little minute. >> Yeah. >> So, the point here is there is something called financial responsibility, there is something called fiscal responsibility, and there is something called public trust.
This is public trust. Okay? So, this is not Okay, save [clears throat] $10,000. What is the trust in our government? Who knows what's happening behind the scenes? Thank you. >> Thank you. So, uh the motion is to terminate with cause. I would like a roll call vote, please.
>> Council member Stevens. >> Yes. >> Okay. Council member Cain. >> No. >> Council member Coleman. >> Yes. >> Vice Mayor Sood. >> Yes. >> Mayor El-Rayes. >> Yes. >> Motion passes 4 to 1.
>> Thank you. This concludes the special meeting, and we will move on to the workshop. Thank you. >> Sure. >> Take a 5-minute break. >> 5-minute break for the workshop? >> Yes, for for those who have to hit the loo.
>> Yes. >> That's what we're not allowed to be really familiar with. >> Mhm. Part: 2
It generally runs from 6:00 to 8 and uh it is an opportunity for the public to to bring up any issues with the council. In addition, we've got some uh some things on our our plate tonight that have uh been uh sort of missed in the
past to discuss in further detail. So, we will be discussing some specific things as well as um taking some comments from the public as needed. So believe we're beginning with the uh the strategic plan that we uh committees to
bring back something the staff had worked up a little work uh sheet for the members of the different committees to put forward their ideas on on strategic plan structuring so we could get to a
strategic plan that was more actionable versus something that was just uh kind of a pie in the sky. I hope so. I think the last one we were waiting to hear from was the red gak committee and here at the moment if you'd like up if
you have anything in these notes you want to elaborate on um just for the record I believe what was it our June workshop when we did this last I think it was our June and and we were waiting for these notes I don't know why we have
two Yeah. >> Oh. Oh. >> Oh, okay. >> So, >> are you going to get up, Darcy, and speak? Okay. >> Okay. >> Whoa. You weren't among the chosen.
>> So, so just a little bit. We've got um the the previous workshop we did go through a lot of this. We we I've got notes from that that I have to compile recax uh information. So I would ask my
fellow council members, would you like me to just take this information and incorporate it into what we've already gotten and then compile the notes from our last workshop to include these suggestions as well and then we can have kind of a broader perspective. >> I think that sounds like a great
strategy. Okay. And maybe you could get it to us >> by the next workshop. >> Before the next workshop, so we could actually so we could actually digest it and look at it and have something intelligent to say since it's going to be a multi-page document.
>> It will be. Yeah, I I can certainly work. >> I was hoping maybe a week's lead time dive would be really great. >> Okay. Okay. I I'll be out of town from Thursday to Wednesday, but I'll get on it. You you may you may Yeah, we can also pass that mic around if anybody would
like that one as well. >> So I missed a few meetings but I did watch some via Zoom. Um you all had gotten other information and this is just adding to it. >> Correct. Each committee has submitted already what they've put together. >> Right.
have received these things go in and out have received uh what they have submitted >> and a lot of them were eerily similar. >> Mic drop literally. >> Well, we we discussed it as a as a committee and then we submitted them
privately individually I should say. Um, but there's some things in here that were not addressed um because they were submitted individually. Like for example, I'll just the road naming.
We were all myself was under the impression that each committee member was going to submit individual names for each roads and then you all were going to decide on which names you liked. The same with the trails at Aldi's and Sunsport.
So you guys are suggest >> the trails. >> The trails. >> Yeah. Oh, I didn't know if you had seen that part before. So that's um you know, I'm just jumping around here, but section three. So instead of like oh trails on a- road
but meet me at this one says Anahena accessway were like I said we I was under the impression that each individual council member would submit a list of names for each road and then you would >> in each trail >> for each trail road trail. Yeah. So, a
road would start with an A or however the other the person decided to name it be. This is what I submitted that name each each trail with the letter starting with the road to represent. >> Okay. But this is all they've given you. So, I don't know if other committee
members will be sending you their suggestions and then you as the council pick which ones you like the best or which ones you agree upon. >> Yeah, you've got a couple committee members back there. Did you all submit already to staff your your worksheets that you did? Okay.
>> Okay. So, I'll just make sure that they get them to me so that I have them all when I compile everything and then we'll now we're going to have a small encyclopedia. Just saying once I get it all >> put it together. So, yeah, I'll make sure that gets that gets included. And
in reading this also, I think there should be more of a um as far as with the rural denomination, I think there should be a more um stress or more of a priority for our tree canopy. Whether the mitigation is I
don't think I mean, who cares? They pay a fine. Whoopdedoo. They can cut down 100-y old trees and they pay a fine. What does that do? There should be more enforcement. There should be um more incentives for property owners to plant native trees and not clear cut fields
and you know throw up some palms. I mean it's it's important. It's part of the rural rural community. >> Um I did talk to Craig at our meeting. The canals are disgusting. They need to be cleaned up. But I guess there is a a
permit or some not a permit um grant to have that done. Have you are you aware of a grant for the canal cleaning? >> Okay. Not sure what he's what he's referring to, but >> that was just my understanding. Or maybe he's just going to have the town do it.
>> Maybe somebody named Grant. >> Okay. >> Grant to bond or something. I don't know. Maybe >> perhaps Ulisses. I I think he's a little dusty at this point, but okay. And there's been several meetings where we have discussed um maybe annexing or
trying to look into accessing for lack of a better term the property behind the hospital that's sitting there next to Vince Ramos or Vince Ramos, however you pronounce it. >> Oh yeah, >> that would be a great >> would be uh I know HCA now I don't know
if they're part of that that parcel. >> I know >> with little to no I mean That's their their parking. So, it's not part of the town. >> Correct. It's >> wrong. >> Well, that's what I'm saying. We should >> But it is part of the water, >> right?
>> And if we have tree mitigation money, my understanding is like a million dollars in there. Let's >> about 750,000. >> Okay. Let's use that to buy some property for a park or to treat plant trees or find a piece of property that has old growth that we can preserve because these new people coming in, they
want to make everything's going to be polo and there's going to be nothing left. >> Okay. >> So, that's all I have. All right. So, yeah, absolutely. >> Okay. >> Oh, my name is Darcy, by the way. >> Darcy Darcy has given you permission to ask her questions.
>> Nice to meet you. And we have other members of the committee here. Nice to meet you as well. >> Can I ask you this question? So um what is the priority? Right? We have all these great ideas but if we don't have a list of the priority nothing will get
funded. So let me ask you this. If you have to choose top three priorities for the next six to 12 months what would that be? >> Yeah. >> Okay. Um well we are I'll go first. Um, we are the RT gag committee, which is roads, equestrian trails
>> with a big emphasis for myself on the equestrian trails. I've been here 25 years. Our trails used to be the dirt roads. We have nothing other than the canal sides, which are dangerous if there's very little room for air. I don't know if you're a horse person, but your horse spooks in the water you go.
>> There's nowhere else to ride. We're trying to get connectivity, but we're still the only thing that's connecting us are the are the canals. Mhm. >> So that would be my priority one. >> Okay. >> Number two would be preservation. The rural preservation, tree
preservation, quality of life preservation, low commercial, which is part of the preservation. >> I don't have a >> I'd like to have the horse park over there instead of a soccer field that
nobody uses. that actually was part of my meeting with Sarah Baxter and the parks and recreation lady was there and uh that uh they are looking into doing that. Uh the question was you know how
much of the like the field would it involve is there like a baseball diamond over there as well I believe. So they are actually toying with that idea and I think you've also talked about it as well. >> They've since like exercise made them more people oriented,
which of course is dangerous when you're going through their course. I mean, I know I've been through those trails over there and people walking their dogs like you come around the corner. >> Yeah, the startle factor. Yeah. Off >> leash particular. Um, so yeah, an expansion of
what already exists and maybe a dedication be an awesome thing. I think it would help too to have some kind of a crossing which I've talked to Craig about by the public works place so that if you like I parked at the park or the
people park and then I rode this way and then back to the Aldi trails. So the only part that I was not super comfortable with was the crossing of D road. >> Yeah. Yeah. We talked previously and we
had actually in the TPA for two crossings, horse crossings, but I know you guys worked on the design of that for a while. So, >> well, that the D road one would be right back here like that, >> right? What else? >> I I'm glad to see so much movement in
the code enforcement department and that's always been big for me because I just don't think that there should be illegal businesses on our main road. Those are mine. Can I ask you this question? >> Sure. >> Somebody sees an illegal business. >> Anish, can you turn on your microphone?
>> Somebody sees an illegal business, right? >> Can you hear me? Yes. >> I can hear. >> If somebody sees an illegal business, maybe those guys are conspiring so I don't speak. >> Why can't somebody report about it? If we don't know about it, see what I see
is people have lot of hidden anger. They see somebody's lights on all night and they see somebody doing bad, but they don't report. I can tell you why. >> Vice Mayor, if I could tell you how many times these places on Okobia have been
reported, this is for years and years. >> So, you think it's already in our system? Could you be send Look, I what I request is could you send a list of those addresses to us? >> Absolutely. >> Thank you. >> So, so you do understand when you file a code complaint?
>> Yeah. >> Right. You don't just report it to Anita or >> Joe. I know. When you file a code complaint, >> you have to put your name on the code complaint. That's state law. It's been like that for about four years now. A lot of people don't want to do that. They're upset. >> They're upset cuz their neighbors
running a diesel mechanic shop right next to their house and dumping oil and all kinds of stuff, but they don't for fear retribution. They just don't, you know, whatever. And then when you say you got to put your name on the complaint, a lot of people don't put their name on the complaint. High Park's the exception. I think they all put
their name on a complaint, right? >> So, so yeah. So, I mean that that's that's what you're do. So, you know, yes. Have has Okachobee been complained about for years? Absolutely. Katie's right. But to to that point, how many code complaints were filed or how many
was it? Hey, council person so and so, this is an issue and council person so and so puts it on a back burner or whatever because you know I don't know if Katie brings you something and you know are you putting your name on the complaint because turn it in. >> I was going to ask that question in a
second but you had some point. >> I was saying retaliation. >> Okay. So let me ask this. This manager disappeared. Okay. So I was told recently that a town staff if they see something they can report something. Now
I was also told and that's why I brought up in the last meeting that our 10 or 11 or 12 people who are in the field they go on every road mowing they do all these things they have eyes they see what's happening and >> yes yes
that too and I have asked for you're absolutely right and that's why I asked them to report data on their productivity how many miles they mowed how much time the machine is on what is the productivity per person and so on and so forth and I hope that they will present that but I was told that if they
see something they can do they can put that report right so my question maybe you are more experienced here why can't our staff who's in the field report such issues is that allowed >> it is allowed >> and then they're on the record and they
have to be part of a magistrate hearing and then so >> you know it's it's like a double-edged sword and do you want noncertified in code enforcement employees reporting things and do you want proactive code enforcement? Because what comes along
with proactive code enforcement is somebody citing you because your yard is more than just I'm just saying that's what comes with it. It's it's a whole either you do proactive code enforcement or you do >> complaint >> complaint driven or life and safety. And
right now we're complaint driven and life and safety. >> Correct. So I'm saying complaint driven life and safety and add one more category in it called commercial like this diesel shops and all these bad guys are >> we are being proactive at this point
it's no longer just complaint driven >> be chubby right >> it's expanding because as as Mr. Ramsey Buckley has reported to council that once get one person gets busted, they turn in their buddies who are doing it too because well if I'm going to have to
comply Joe >> he's doing it. No, not you Joe. >> Other Joe. >> Some other Joe. >> So >> it is growing. It has expanded beyond. So I guess that's kind of complaint driven because they got blessed. So but
it trust me it it's the broken window theory that Mr. Buckley has presented to us. it it's expanding. It's it's what we anticipated would happen when when we said let's go for Okachobee and um it's long overdue and and I do think that
it's um it's going to have a huge impact. Um, >> and I think for the people >> closures that we're moving forward with. >> I think for the people that like to let their bea seed, >> right, which to let your bea seed has to get kind of tall. It's more driven toward improper use or illegal use of of of land.
>> And and those city folks call it vermin. We call it wildlife out here. So, we actually like to give the wildlife a place to hang out. >> We like to give the something to eat. >> But it does get a, you know, especially the invasive grasses that grow like eight feet tall. That crazy stuff they brought in for cows that they won't eat. Um so the goats do they don't even care
about >> so could you give us the just the name of the roads don't give us specific so we can as mayor said we can direct our towns Okchobee we are focusing let's do the >> no Manish we don't need this >> okay we okay >> we're very I don't think anybody who
drives to this town is not aware of people who are breaking the rules >> and that's the other issue right can you see it >> yes >> that's yeah >> and I was going to say they started off as a compliment that it is going for. >> Yeah, people people call me all the time with things and then I just call the
town manager and and get them taken care of. Whatever. Just say that you need to look into this. >> I have a report that there's 50 RVs parked behind here. They're cutting down all the trees at the Browning's house. Stop them, please. Now, you know, that kind of thing. >> And then what do you do once they're gone? They're gone with trees, for
example. >> Oh, you find Sorry. >> Well, that's I mean, >> well, unfortunately, we don't have a time machine, right? No, I but's >> just don't feel like the punishment fits. There are >> we had talked actually and and I found I was doing a lot we had talked at the
last meeting about how there's mechanisms in place for like site plans of of commercial sites, right? We get approval, right? We get approval of the vegetation. We have to approve what they put in there and everything. And we talked about how we need to come up with
something for homeowners so they can't say like the people who brought the Browning's house, well, we didn't know, you know, and then continue to do it the next day. So, they knew then. Um, and we said that there wouldn't it be great if there was something to give people who
bought like to give to all the real estate agents and give people who bought it. And guess what I found that she >> when I was cleaning, I was going through this like I had to redo a whole room and I had this big four-door file cabinet and I found one and it's in that pile and I meant to bring it tonight, but I
will bring So, we actually did have one at some point and so I will bring it in. I'm not saying it's perfect. I didn't really read through the whole thing, but it looked like a really good jumping off point of something that we could give to people when they buy. And then they at the very least can't claim ignorance.
Like Lisa said, we can't stop them from, you know, from doing what they do on a Sunday afternoon, you know, which purposely was with masses and intent. Um, but we can find them heavily, you know, so >> maybe something can be put on the town website, too. >> The fact sheet we've actually said
develop it, put it on the website, print it out, put it in the lobby, >> create the wheel. We've got a wheel >> to this action item taking away. We'll I think this process is not transparent. We'll come up with a complaint driven proactive hybrids out of the system. What else? >> Turn your microphone back on.
>> I do have one more thing. I'll keep an eye. Um, so we were discussing about getting easements for trails and are supposed to be, I don't know, 15 feet, 30 feet, something like that. >> Who does that? Who can approach? Because at this point with all the properties that are for sale, you want to approach
the seller, not the buyer. So, if they could give the town the easements for the multi-use trails prior to listing or prior to selling, we are more likely to be able to get them as opposed to approaching the buyer who just bought the property and I don't want to do it.
>> And why would they give it to us for free? >> I don't know. >> Why would they care? >> I'm just asking. You know, >> some have are they expecting >> they're going to get connectivity? >> Do they expect something in return? >> How they maintain it? As someone who lives on a road, I' I've given an
easement. The the three actually about 9/10en of North Road is my property that I pay taxes on. >> Yeah. Same here. >> So, I've given I've given No, that's not accurate. Um, so I've given that easement. So, why would the person on the canal side do it for the same reason that I do it for everybody who wants to
travel down North Road, they would do it for everybody who wants to use a trail there? I mean, it's >> used in the canal, but we gave we gave it up years ago as as a as a maintenance ease. >> Okay. So let me ask you this. When the road was constructed, right, we downside gave us the easement and we gave
everybody gave their property like on the for the road payment. We did. I did at least. Anyway, my point is for the trails. Are you saying that it should be like um not just a nice to have but actually a system in place? So we have
>> Well, that's I've been trying to get that answer all along. >> Okay. >> I've been working on it for about 15 years. So, and Manish, are you not aware that we're trying to go for a linear trail park? >> No, I know. I'm saying I'm asking you in in my mind, are you saying the reg what is the regulation or the some sort of an
ordinance? What would >> I like to know maybe the seller doesn't know there's an option that hey, I could donate some of the propert and it's not even a donation. They still own the property. It's just they're allowing an easement like you have telephone, >> right? >> You know, what is it 20 ft, 30 ft? I don't know the width and the town
maintains it. So, basically they mow it. Is this in addition to the right ofway? >> Yes. This these are private easements. >> Be similar to one that was uh given by big dog and by um >> Yeah. I don't see people on the canal bank doing that. >> I I'm not saying along the canal. I'm
saying to cut through from road to road. >> Oh. Oh. Like we used to have from 161st to a road connect. >> Yeah. E to F or >> Yeah. Okay. because there's a road that's actually a town road and there's one piece one property that's blocking it from being able to access it.
>> Well, even if that's now is the time to approach it. >> But even if we don't get it given as a road, we get it given as a maintenance easement that we can use for >> it's a greenway is what it is. >> Greenway. Let me let me tell you this. So I travel a lot and a few days ago I saw a village like us. They had
something called nighttime bike ride. They started at 10 p.m. The bikers put their little lights on and these are residents and they 10 to 12 they just went around the town. The people were giving them coffee. I I I think that on the weekends I should see our horses
going, you know, people I have a horse by the way. If I see that other people are doing it, I'll be encouraged to do it. So I think the culture of letting people be outside walking and taking their animals out in a responsible way, we should encourage that. So if you have
a map that shows where are those choke points like you said there is a property there there could you send that information at least for me >> we have that >> we have that >> oh you have that okay can I is good I'm learning >> you can't solicit for an ement >> I'm just going to put that out there right >> okay >> staff it's another task that falls upon
staff >> council members cannot res >> sure absolutely begging >> there's there's a mechanism in place for folks to give an east that Yeah, there's sections of of canal,
call them canal bank, whatever, and there that we don't even have maintenance easement for. >> No, I I'm talking more of a connector talking about that, but it's all >> Listen, if the roads were paved, we roads were not paid, we wouldn't be asking for somewhere to ride. >> Amen.
>> Darcy, how how have you been trying to seek that info? >> Um, well, I've asked Virginia, who's a real verbally. >> Verbally. >> Just email staff. >> Yeah. Could you >> um and I have no problem even approaching the real say, "Hey, you got this property listed. Could you approve?"
>> That's not what he's talking about. He's >> We'll have an actual legal >> Well, I I'm just trying to find out who can approach the property owner. >> Email staff and get all the information. >> There's actually >> there's a process. >> The process there's an interest. So,
>> could you please share that process with us? I'm new on the blog. Well, when she emails staff, she can copy all of us and we'll get a copy of your >> a map, too. I don't know. They probably know when they're asleep. Yes. Thank you. >> Drive past Manisha's house on the on the on the park side on the canal bank. Make
sure you hollered. >> I don't know where Manisha lives. >> He lives on road to put a little >> you maybe you will put a mark on my property and you will ask. >> Yeah. >> Taylor Farm. Yeah. >> Oh, so here's another thing that Taylor. >> I hope you don't ask me, but that's
okay. At the end of E- Road turning into North there is a big sign. >> Are you familiar with it? Taylor Farms sponsored it. >> I would like to know if we could approach >> businesses to sponsor a sign like that. The town and >> I have said that from the beginning.
Businesses should absolutely I I would like our town of Lockxahhatchee signs that are out old and no paint and looks horrible to look like Yes. Yes. But paint nice landscaping. Let the businesses sponsor that. >> I'm more specifically talking about the
>> Yeah, that too. That too. All signage across the boundary markers. Businesses will be put a little board. I would do it. I will be the first one. >> You're talking about adopt a road or adopt trail. >> Yeah. Something like that. >> So I will send an email. >> Yeah. >> To the town asking what's the proper way
of soliciting the businesses to sponsor the sign >> is exactly like the one that Taylor Farms did. Same size, same >> Yeah. something that that has to come back to council. >> Excuse me, Darcy. Are you talking about the brown ones? The brown, right? Oh, I love those. Okay. >> Okay.
>> I have one, but it's >> Yeah, that's the only one I've ever seen. And I >> thank you. Thank you so much. >> That's it. Okay. Awesome. Thank you. >> Any public comments on that? >> We'd all love to see our trails. Um, and
I know that count the council has directed staff to look into the the linear park designations and um I know that yeah I know that uh there's working on some of that as far as zoning um potential zoning um things that needed to be put in place. So awesome.
Thank you so much. Um I don't the order of the the agenda is not so important. I would like to jump to the RV ordinance because this was something that we had directed we wanted on our workshop. Uh so at the workshop at the council meeting
when this came up um I know council member Kane you you said you didn't recall us limiting it to two no matter what size the the um the property. Is that something we want to reconsider going back up from two?
Can I suggest something if you don't mind? >> That's what we're here for. >> No, I I would like us to, you know, like anything when you make a major decision, you have a framework. You go from very high level decision to low-level decisions. First question is, does every
household in Lock Sahhatche Grove have to have an I mean, in your mind, do you think every household should have an RV for personal use and for rent? >> So, please open. >> Yes. page. >> Now I see what it is. I'm saying we are
a workshop. We are discussing. >> Yes, >> this may answer your question. >> Okay, >> these are the notes from our March workshop. And if this thing goes out one more time, I'm going to shout at it. >> No, no, no. I understand the I'm asking
from you as a individual member. Public is sitting here. I want you to tell me your con concept or your thinking. So, Vice Mayor Sud, this is about the fourth iteration of the RV concept. >> Yes. >> It started off extremely >> difficult to comply. It required like a
concrete apron almost like a tub that this thing sat inside of. Is it me? Is it doing it again? >> It's just cuz I have no voice. Um so that then it came down to what the council did I believe in 1920 where then
it was up to four for because the state maximum is the campground is over four. Uh so then it got even crazier in 2024. There was an ordinance that allowed it on vacant land. So now we have vacant land with an allowance depending on the
size of the parcel up to four RVs. So, we scaled it back um in our workshop and I think Paul, I think you made a lot of these suggestions and I thought they were great. So, we we wanted to high five. We wanted to basically
>> help the homesteaded residents of the town. >> So, some of our elderly people that look at this as as a offset on some of their their cost of of maintaining their property. So, uh, instead of just letting any parcel, you know, whether it had a home on it or it was vacant, we
scaled it back to you have to have a homesteaded residential structure on the parcel. It was a maximum of two, no matter the size, and under 2 acres, it was one. We did not touch personal RVs. We didn't touch personal
horse trailers that had a living component or a car toy hauler that had a living component. >> Everybody's entitled to one or to whatever >> recreational devices or a boat or a horse trailer. I mean, I have a horse trailer, a cart,
>> right? Council member Coleman. Yeah. He asked for what is the definition of an RV? Uh I pointed out uh to staff, I sent uh Miss Gardner Young these uh bunk houses that are mostly brought in for emergency like a FEMA situation where
you have a huge influx of of people from out of state, whether they're electric, cable, whatever they're coming in for. Some of these things sleep up to 42 people. So we wanted to make sure that those things got addressed. I didn't see that addressed in the ordinance as it was written.
>> Okay. So let me let me can I ask my question once again? I want from everybody to sh this is a workshop. You have to tell me specifically. Do you think everyo okay let me put this I request that you share if you can and I want to hear from public. Do you think every homestead place in Lok Sahachi
Grove if I hear you are saying every uh homestead place in Lok Sahachi Grove or resident or whatever that is no matter the size in your mind they should have the right to have one RV defined by whatever X is that what you're saying one RV or two RV
>> I believe the distinction in the ordinance minut >> so what we what we did was we took away any restrictions on what people own personally who have homesteaded property. >> I don't think that's what he's asking. >> Okay. But what the ordinance refers to
is rentals? Okay. And and that's what we're talking about is rentals. >> But that's not what he's you're am I right in saying you're asking do does this council believe that every homesteaded home should be allowed at least one RV? >> One RV. Yes. That as a rental as a rental.
>> As a rental and one whatever. How many RVs? One. You can say one personal Frank, frankly, >> yeah, if >> it was me, if you a reason to have additional housing and this this goes back to the original and Paul might remember better than me when this was
brought up, it was supposedly for the equestrian influx of the winter staffing needs. This was to help provide the message staffing. >> That was the message, >> right? And then it started to incorporate needing like gardeners and
landscape, you know, gardeners on properties. >> There was people that argued successfully that, you know, if you're allowing it for the equestrians, you should allow it for the other people. So, it kind of expanded. The effort here was to tailor it back down to if you
have a home, it has to be homesteaded in order to do it. Because now we're seeing a lot more investment properties out here where people are renting the homes, renting the properties. they're not homesteaded, they would not be allowed a rental RV slot. So, it tailors it and
and streamlines it down to the the ones that are homesteaded. >> So, homestead meaning you you're saying owner should live in the same homestead law. >> I know I know I know I could be home. Okay. So, so you're saying is >> homestead property and you're saying in
your mind they must they have the right to have at least one rental. >> Yes. Yes. >> I mean my my question to you is why wouldn't they? Okay. So, no, no, I'm just asking is that buses? >> But I'm just to be fair, why why would
why would a nursery or an equest a barn, a leasing barn, a horse hotel as I like to call them, right? Why would those be any different than somebody that just owns 5 acres? >> Okay, so my answer is >> I that's current climate. Our in our current
climate our town flourishes based on the fact that we are in a residential and and I think one of the core feature is 5 acre is the minimum size of any new or any valid so-called our in our town
charter or our rules and regulations. So 5 acre in my mind if you let let's assume this I have so many houses next to let's say if everybody start putting one RV for rent and one RV for personal use just imagine how many RVs we are
going to have so why not I this is a new business I buy a property here small home okay maybe.5 acre and now I'm putting two RVs and making money is that what you can't rent a private RV >> no no >> and you have to live in that house
>> so I live in that house and I start renting Airbnb. One RV. >> And I think if that was the case, we would already see that happen. >> No, no, it's okay. Now times have changed, right? People are looking for on Instagram. People are looking to make quick money, nice, creative. >> People have been renting RVs in this in this area. Not just here in our town,
but in this area for the last for the last 10 years. Yes. So it's not current. It's not today. >> No, I know. I have my property used to do that before I bought it. And they have RVs all over 10 acre four RV platforms. But my question is are in your mind every homestead no matter the
size in your mind should have an RV that can generate income for them. >> Manish we're we're proposing that if you have two acres under two acres you can have one rental RV. >> Okay. So that's what I mean. Every homestead no matter the size less than
two have one rented rent renting RV. >> One potential rental RV. >> And in your mind that's Airbnb is okay with that? Yes, >> it's a rental. >> It's a rental. The maximum what we got here is the maximum rental period is 6 months. >> I know the uh the was it the
you guys reviewed it, right? The uldc had recommended a a time frame between I believe November 1st and April 30 days has September, April, April 30th. >> So fix fixed six months not moving >> a fixed six months was the suggestion.
Um, so you know, it always comes down to balancing, you know, the the need to to offset some of the seasonal influx, trying to benefit the residents, trying to benefit the the equestrians. Um, in
this case, we also allowed one caretaker because our rules do allow a caretaker um RV on property. >> So, do state agriculture laws, which we can't really Right. But I think well yeah um so we we required a certain um
maximum or minimum of permitted septic permitted electric and at least 80% of the parcel had to be bonafideed a uh through the >> So bonafide a is a condition. Yes. >> No. >> That's for that's for something without a home. >> That's the only thing. Yeah. Like a
nursery. >> Okay. >> Right. You can have a because by state law they're allowed to have a caretaker's quarters. Right. So in order to have that caretaker's quarters, you have to invest probably over $10 to $20,000 before you can even put RV there, right? That's part of the stipulation is you have to have X, Y, and Z. So it's not like I can just have
go throw some plants on a property and then go throw an RV on it and rent it out. >> So So I think Manish, you're coming into this a little late in the game. >> Can I can I hear from >> Hold on. Can I finish my statement? >> You're coming into this a little late in the game, right? I I don't think this
council wants to stop allowing RVs in the town, right? So, so I think what it is is we've seen it expand. We're trying to contract it. We're trying to contract it down to something more manageable. We've heard from staff that it's an inordinate
amount of time and money to enforce it. So, we had we had scaled it back that you were going to require people to come in to get a permit. The permit was going to be very simple. They made they made a statement under perjury that you are
saying I have a legal septic and I have a legal electric or I'm having it legally pumped out by um a provider and it was going to be a simple fee to try to start gaining compliance without adding to staff time. So that I believe
was what we had worked out in our workshop. Is that your recollections? >> Okay. So now go ahead. Listen, I have come late but I have a vote and so does Joe. So we let me ask my question here. Here is the point. You are saying you are you are restricting in my mind
you're expanding. If every household no matter or not everybody under two acres starts having one RV for rental. What is the impact on the population of this town and the traffic and all the public service impacts? >> You need to go back and review. You need
to go back and hold on. You need to go back and review the current ordinance. It's more than what we're proposing. This is a scaledback version from 202407 which expanded agriculture land up to 10 acres for RVs. No home.
>> Yes. >> No barn, no nothing. >> Can can I Yeah. Could could I invite some public comments or somebody from the committees who can >> Mr. Austin has spoken repeatedly on this. He's very aware.
>> Oh, this is his favorite topic. That and that and the planes. >> Yeah. Yeah, it's it's >> it's a little sensitive. >> You can you can you can sit down, buddy. >> This is easier. But um I've been warning about this because of all the loopholes
in it and all the people who took advantage of it. And the nice people like that sweet lady Jane who comes here all the time who wants to follow all the rules, they get screwed because they try to do the right thing. And all these, >> you know, creeps go behind the back and, you know, run out as many as they can behind their bushes. But there's a
reason why Wellington is so strict on this. Wellington is one, if you have five or more acres, two, if you have 10 or more, and that's it. If you're under five acres, Wellington doesn't give you anything. There's a reason for that because this is getting out of control. And that's why I warned
about when I they pass 6 months at a time and I try to say no you got to make it for the equestrian season November to April. Now I have a neighbor 2 and a half acres but he does it right. He has two people come well one now and they stay the season. If they leave early he doesn't replace them. They're not there
for a month and then someone else comes in for two weeks someone else. That's a KOA and that's what this program has turned into. There's so many holes in it. people take so many advantages of it that I'm afraid it's going to come back and backfire on the good people like Anita's trying to follow rules Jane
follows the rules >> well what what has happened is those people aren't even attempting to follow the rules there's been actually very little permits what do we say like 32 or something like that I'm one of the 32 >> also now that we're finally getting to the point where the town has some teeth
like these properties you voted to >> escape well maybe we'll stop being the suckers of Palm Beach County where just go to Lockachi Grove and do anything you want and have five boats behind your house and six buddies campers and you're turned your lot into an >> well and that's code enforcement issue >> and also to to your point these people
move they hop they hop around. I mean I know we have a there's a place on FOD where at least once a month I drive by and I'm like they're back and I call town hall and I'm like there's at least 10 RVs parked along the back fence line of this property. They go over they
clear them out and I see them. I see them going down the road and turning down northward and going past me. I don't know where they go. They go up E road. I don't know where they go up there for some period of time until they get turning there and then within a couple of months they're back again. So the people that I mean to Lisa's point
the this the intention of this is to help us get something in place so we can identify the people who are following the rules so that it's easier to target the people who aren't following the rules. >> Unfortunately it cost the town money and
unfortunately it cost the town money. You are correct. It needs to be stringent. You need to have teeth for the fines. Yes. And it needs to slowly get around that these people who aren't complying and it needs to be during equestrian season, not year round rentals. We have year- round rentals
right now. People who live here year round and they could even actually get addresses and vote and it's ridiculous. >> Can I ask you this question? Are you recommending that under five acres should be no RV? >> I want to go Wellington does it for a reason. >> No. Are you What is your recommendation?
Are you staying below under five acres? No. Are we for rent? >> Well, there's some equestrians that are under five acres. If they can prove that has equestrian reason and that's making a burden harder on the town, which is a exemption, they're not going to get a exemption. >> We were trying to simply >> Yeah, they are.
>> Yes, they can. Okay. So, >> exemption on acre, but not much exemption. A exemption and that's okay. If >> they could somehow prove that it's there for equestrian season, >> not for Airbnb, you are not in the favor of that. not moving. People aren't coming and going every two weeks, every
couple months. >> Okay, that's exactly what I was telling you. Why are we opening up for Airbnb? Simply say equestrian. >> No, but >> we're not opening up for Airbnb. That's reading. >> No, no. Okay. When you say for rent, >> I'm sorry, Mr. Austin. Are you >> Thank you.
>> You can you can hang on to the microphone if you want. >> You can stay if you don't mind, please. Okay. So, under five acre egg, equestrian purpose, 6 months fixed. Is that is that what >> I think I think trying to
control the tenants and that that was something that came out of the uldc that we should we should get their ID and stuff. I'm frankly not for that. I I think that's going to add way again way too much step. I I think the point of trying to scale this down, scale the
permit down to something was to teach people compliance, to try to find out who's willing to go to town hall and check a box, write a check for 50 bucks, right? Who are those people? And once you identify people who are willing to comply, you're in the medical field.
This this is a a psychological game. Basically, you're trying to figure out who is willing to comply. You'll always have the properties that are not going to comply. They're always going to cost the town money. Uh this is a de facto density increase. It's a problem for us. It puts traffic on the road. It it puts
people in the town. That that's always going to be a concern. But the idea was can we can we get the benefit and then can we get people to come compliant and become willing to start a simple process and then over the course of a year or
two start to tighten the the and make things more stringent to see what's the threshold of compliance where people who were previously willing are no longer willing. Right? So, it's either going to be you make it zero and nobody does it
and then we go around and we just enforce it everywhere we see it or we try to start with something that that starts to restrict the number of RVs allowed and we start to see people willing to come compliant that this ordinance for me went too far. It said
every permit requires an inspection. That raises cost. We don't need an inspection. You're signing under perjury that you have these things in place. If you get caught, it's expensive. If you if you are not doing what you said, it's expensive. So, if you break the rules
that are pretty generous, it's expensive. So, again, I think the the mentality of what we tried to work on was let's scale it back, scale back staff involvement, try to get people compliant by a super simple process.
You're you're coming in saying, I want to revamp the whole thing. >> That's what it's about, Kenny. Now you spoke for 3 minutes. Can I speak now? >> Sure. >> Okay. Please don't interrupt. Okay. Here here is what my thinking. Here is what my thinking. Yes. Ready? >> Sorry. Yeah. This is
>> Okay. Here is my thinking here. Please. I have to share my thinking. It's a workshop. Sorry. I'm here. I'm aboard. >> Okay. I don't believe that every house in the town has to have a renting ar. >> We don't allow. >> Okay. Wait. Can I please complete my Let
me complete Why are you interrupting false statement? It's every homestead. >> Can I Okay, let me I'm coming down the chain. Let me finish. You can you can interrupt after your turn. Okay, let me complete. If you keep on interrupting, it will keep going.
>> Okay, listen. First of all, this is my thinking everybody. People are here very clear. We do not want to be an RV town. Committee after committee said we have to be a rural town. Point number one. Point number two, we do not want every
every homestead place, no matter the size, to have a renting RV. Sorry, I'm not on board. There will be thousands and hundreds of RVs. We are not ready for that. Third, there has to be a minimum size at which you can have an RV
for a or equestrian purposes only. Period. No Airbnb, no business, your A or equestrian purposes only. 6 months are fixed. That's where I am. Thank you. >> Okay. You want to put that in writing? >> Okay. Yeah. Yeah. Of course.
>> Can you use a mic? Sorry. Just so it's it's recorded and whatnot. >> Yeah. It helps put it on the recording. Thank you. >> It's Susan, correct? >> It is. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> So, I don't have an RV. I don't plan to have an RV. So, just for compliance purposes, I'm good. But
I see that we're conflating short-term rentals and concerns about the people who pursue those with what I'm going to call property owner rights. Like I'm getting older. I
don't know. Weird [ __ ] happens when you get to be my age. Maybe I'll decide that I want to go like give up my horse farm and go travel the country and I'm gonna buy an RV. like I don't think you can tell me that it's not okay for me to have a personal vehicle to go on
vacation, right? Even though I have less than 5 acres, right? And and I get that you're saying like, oh, maybe for a homesteaded property, it's okay to have a personal vehicle. And then I think about what are the inter intermediate uses. So if I have I have my little horse farm, right? I have my personal horses. I don't rent stalls or do any
training or whatever, but every single person I've ever hired to to take care of my horses while I'm at my work has wanted housing. >> Mhm. >> I don't have housing. Makes it harder, right? Like I could see an environment
like that where it be reasonable to give somebody a decent place to live because they're taking care of my horses and that could be a it's typically a full-time job if it's only it's an equestrian use, right? But if it's only 6 months, a what do I do with that person at the end of 6 months?
>> Well, you actually the RV if that person's a caregiver of the property under Florida state law. If you're agriculture, then it's a caretaker and they can be there year round. >> Understood. But but what I'm hearing is like, well, you know, that becomes problematic. Maybe because
>> we have rules and and I looked at the regulations when it came out because I was so frustrated trying to find some help and I'm like maybe I'll just buy the freaking thing and like, oh, I guess you can't do that. It was really brutal. >> It's different. You're not renting it. >> Understand? But like you could
characterize it as a workaround. Oh, I'm not renting anything. I This is a part of their compensation, right? And now now you have yet another loophole >> program so hard to implement. >> Correct. >> Right. So >> but I I think you can separately if the concern is these short-term rentals and
having property overrun. There are plenty of communities and plenty of precedent where towns have said we're not good with Airbnb. We don't allow short-term rentals. Period. And that solves the problem whether they're in an ADU, an RV or or in my guest house. like
two separate things I think between >> can I add to first of all nobody is putting any restriction on your personal RV you can have a personal RV that's not it is about it's about renting your RV to make money now if you have a caretaker or you're you know horse
person staying due to there is no issue with that we are talking about >> saying that's an easy workound >> yeah no okay well that's that's where the challenge is well linked I5 understood just now they have put restriction that under five acres now you tell me horse maybe 2 and a half
acres at least can you have a horse farm in.5 acre or one you have real people okay so okay all right there is an exception to that they can come to us for that exception my point is >> but we are say what we are saying is we are not this is my personal thinking and
I would love your feedback we are saying don't allow Airbnb don't just have everybody no matter the size as long as their homestead have an RV for renting don't do that just do it for equestrian or a purposes or if you have other
statemandated requirement but don't open it up for let me rent for Airbnb let me do whatever >> so so you're tell so what you're telling me >> she asked first >> oh she was asked oh they make okay my bad >> yeah no long statement >> I was horrified when I heard about the
potential RV park I don't think that's the we signed up for when we moved here I I personally would be perfectly happy if we didn't have you know the uh commercial rentals. I don't know what you would call it like not for the purposes of maintaining the type of character. Yeah, 100% I would be
supportive of. >> Thank you. You're welcome. >> Paul, what would you say? >> So, I mean the issue the issue is you know what you're what you're saying is you're saying as long as you're a you can do whatever you want, right?
I can go I can go buy 20 acres today and if I don't want to be a I don't want to have to be agg or I could own 20 acres for the last 20 years and I've never been agg, right? But I've had my horse farm. I decide I'm going to rent out a couple barn stalls, whatever. I go get
bonafide a go to the county and get except an exemption. Right? So, so to say I have to be agg, right? So on her twoacre horse farm, if she's not renting stalls, she's not bonafideed a she's not running
a business, right? So she's that takes her out of the out of the game unless she's doing as a caretaker's quarters. So nobody's saying Airbnb here. >> But wouldn't caretaker still require a >> caretaker require a because it's a state thing. So it still requires the A. to to
say that oh well but and like Tracy said somebody's going to say oh well I'm not renting it. >> So Paul let me let me >> I'm trying to understand where you're going with that. >> My my my point is is is Manish is saying oh if you're a you're cool under five acre no no under five acres over five
acres a you get one just like Wellington if you're a you're you're a if it's a nursery equestrian etc. as the non-ag guy sitting at the table, right? Which I am totally in support of a before that gets blown out of proportion like it does, right? I mean, I'm just not a
bonafide agricultural business now. I don't have, you know, some bees on my property. >> You don't get the egg protection is what your point is. >> So, so it to me as somebody who's lived here since he was two years old, I get where's my protection, right? I think what we've come up with, >> your protection is your homestead. my
homestead. But yeah, under what we've written up, >> correct? >> I'm addressing the solely a >> Got it. >> You know, classification. >> Yeah. >> I mean, I'm all for what I'm sorry, Miss Collins. Was that your name? I'm all for
what Miss Collins said, putting a a ban on, you know, saying that you can't have Airbnbs and things like that. But I think once again, you get back to enforcement. I mean, how do you how do you enforce something like that? I mean, you got to have what a staff member that's like, I
don't know, combing websites to look for Airbnb. I mean, I'm not I'm I I believe that when we realized how out of proportion this this thing had gotten with our first our pilot year and then our first year of the program and how
much money and staff time it costs that we dearly don't have. um we tried to simplify and narrow this down a little bit and I think that that's what this iteration is and you know I'm perfectly
happy with this iteration. I I disagree with you, Lisa, in that um I I do think we should know who's renting when there's renters, but I I'm I mean, I'm okay with it not being in there, but I'm just saying that I do think that, you know, it's it's something that um that
should be known as particularly because there's things like sex offenders and other things that, you know, we we unfortunately people do rent to bad people sometimes. So, I do think we should know, but then that gets into I can see your point where that gets into the rights about what about the person
like me who rents out a room in their house like you know and you don't require them to do it. So, so that's speaking to your point of everything being on a on a fair even keel, right? Not giving more rights to somebody who has agg than somebody who doesn't have a
um so I I like what we have here is what I'm gonna Okay, wait. Can we bring it back to a council meeting as a discussion item because at this point it's not in second reading form anymore. So should we direct staff to bring this back at the August meeting for discussion item?
>> Can I first add to comment for a second? Okay. So >> Paul come out Christine. >> Yeah. >> Go ahead. >> Go ahead. >> So while you're while she's coming sorry uh you have to wait for a minute. Um, regarding egg, do you know that I have
an A and many people here do have an A? >> I just said I'm the only person I know. I know at this table, but do you know that it doesn't come for free? Do you know you have to maintain so many expenses? A real business, you have to run an egg business. >> Perfectly aware. So, what I'm saying is my thinking is if you are not an egg,
sorry, get an egg. I This is my thinking. I'm sorry if it sounds >> so you want to discriminate against the people that are that are in the town. If you have a If you have a >> absolutely is all day long, sir. >> If you have a >> absolutely >> can let me finish. If you don't have an
egg, but you have equestrian or some agricultural use and you can demonstrate that for whatever reason you don't want to get agg but you are actually an egg. Is that what you're saying? You are actually an egg. >> No, I'm saying there's a lot of there's a lot of misconception to be agg you
have to get agricultural exemption through the county. That's not the case. That's only if you want to break on your taxes. Number one. Number two, just because I own I mean I there's plenty of people around this town that don't have agg that own large format pieces of property. I'm not one of them. Mine's
only two and a quarter. I'm sorry, but you know to to to discriminate against the people on the smaller parcels and the people that are not aggression. It absolutely is. >> Okay. Can I can I So I'm saying >> you ask me a question. I'm trying to answer. >> Let me give you a proposal. I'm saying
if it is for a or agriculture or something that town allows for that use then yes. But you you agree with me. It's not for Airbnb or renting. >> I I said this doesn't >> Hold on, gentlemen. >> We're going to bring this back to a council meeting. We can't vote on
anything tonight. So I The horse is dead. Okay. Uh it's a it's a saying. >> Yeah. >> Hopefully not rotten when you start. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Okay. >> I'm on the ULDC committee.
>> Yes. >> We were the ones that were talking about this most recently. >> Yes. >> It was brought forward to us not with the entire thing. We were to um address whether we thought two or three
locations per location was the number we decided on. two two RV slots, trailer sites, whatever the heck it was. And it made no
difference whether you had a small parcel or you had a 20 acre, 30 acre, whatever. That's what we decided on when it came to the meeting a week or so ago. You guys looked at that and you immediately were upset.
>> We weren't We weren't upset. We weren't upset. We were more >> Let me finish. >> Go ahead. I have the floor. >> Yeah. >> Okay. You were immediately upset that that didn't go with what you were thinking. Well, based on what we were
given for instructions and and so on in our meeting, we made our choice and it was two. And we said we didn't care what people's acreage was because we realized so that everybody in town would have a
right. We know that there's some places that have what one and a half or two acre is your smallest >> some smaller ones. >> We have halfacre parcels in this town. >> Really? Where do we have halfacre >> and green? 147. >> Okay.
>> Yeah. >> Well, I thought they caught that. That would be our lots, not our land mass. >> Yeah. >> Of our lots. >> So, so we agreed in our meeting that it was two. We didn't want three. As far as
the ID for someone being in one of these trailers or RVs or whatever. >> We said first off, we didn't want any bunk house. Now, I don't know if you got that in there, but we said no bunk house because that to us means that there
would be too many people and that would be going strictly against what we were told to choose, which was the two or three. We chose two. Now, as far as the ID, I was the one that was very adamant about ID. Now, I'm not saying that you
have to run a polygraph. I'm not saying that you have to run a criminal background which is going to tie anybody up. I live on five acres. That's the backside of a 10acre piece. The person next to me has 10 acres. They
have trailers on their site. They're seasonal horse people. Okay? And they give their gate code out to everybody and their brother. and I share the gate. So when I go in and out and any time of
the day, I have no idea who's going to be there. I came home one night late and I saw two people that I'd never seen there before. Now, the owner of the property is long gone. These are just two people that are wandering around. I
asked them, "How did they get in?" Oh, they had the code to the gate. Okay. still didn't know who they were. I asked them for ID. They wanted a hemha and I said, "It's either show me your ID so that I can see that your ID matches your face or I'm
calling 911 and get a cop out here cuz clearly I've never seen you here before. You have no right to be on the property. These people are gone. They're closed up for the season and I'm the one that gets to deal with you." They showed me the
ID. I think that whoever rents or whatever land owner is is having these spaces, they should at least have pictured ID of whoever this person is to back their themselves up if they don't
want to give it to the town because say for instance it's Melinda Gates or her kids which I know are equestrians, okay, staying on their property that's fine. And I understand that. But
if without the pictured ID, he could say he's John Smith. He could say he's you. Without that, I don't know. >> Well, as it turned out, the person four months later had a big theft on their
property. So, so >> or change it when you >> and I think >> I think Miss Betts, I think your your personal circumstance with your neighbor in a shared driveway, that's obviously a problem if they're sharing this code. If
there wasn't an RV actively on the property and the property owner was gone, that's a whole different scenario than asking people for ID that are living on the RVs while Correct. So my point my point is your request for the RV people to give an ID
for for this is a different that's a different problem. They broke in is basically what they did. They were burglars. So okay and as far as committee being asked to do two RVs or three RVs or we did not direct that. That would have been something staff
asked you right. So I don't know why that was asked because we had scaled it back. question. >> No, that's not what that's not what she said. She said that as a committee they were tasked with whether if they would go to a maximum of three. We did not ask
for that. >> Yeah, >> we did not ask the committee to answer that question. >> Yeah, that's my point. >> That wasn't our direction. That wasn't our direction. >> Whether you guys accept it or not, that's just >> correct. I think correct. And we did
have it. >> Can you use the microphone? >> Eliminate. >> Yeah. >> The ID would partially eliminate the problem that you're talking about on that one road that has the 20 RVs that just all of a sudden appear and then as
someone else said, you drive by and and they're like scooted out. >> Okay. Well, I I think council gets to take the the suggestions by committees and and we weigh that against >> everything else that we have to weigh it against. One >> second, please. >> So, I I appreciate you spending the time
on committees because it's frustrating if you're not sitting up here as a decision maker and it's even more frustrating if you're not the in the majority of the decision makers and you don't get your way. >> We have a lot of committee members sitting in the audience. >> We do. We do. And let me tell you, the frustration,
>> the frustration by C, >> the frustration by council on what came back had nothing to do for me with what was suggested. It was that >> this ordinance, we had said, "Let's get it to committee so we can get it back for a second reading." I had concerns at
the first reading about some of the things that I think went too far for what we were hoping to establish as kind of a simple buy in. Yeah. a simple buy in by people to start complying. >> Right. >> So it was not a personal affront to
council >> snippets of what you were wanting us to give you an answer. >> That would be staff that would be staff and and we will direct staff that you guys are allowed to review the whole thing in its entirety. >> Can I Okay. Can can I please add my
first of all I appreciate your comments and I'm with you on the it this is me 100%. We don't want unknown people in our backyard when our children and grandchildren are playing around. This is my Please can I don't interrupt. Thank you. We we have to Yeah. Why are
you making comments from If you want to comments, please come here. >> It's a workshop. It's open discussion. >> I'm not inter We have an order in the workshop. You can come and comment. You can't interrupt like this. >> Make your point. >> Please. >> Okay. So, I'm sorry. I'm polite, sir.
I'm just saying please follow the rules. Okay. So, um I am thank you for your comments, right? I agree with your ID policy 110%. Now, let me ask you this. You said in your committee the purpose
of the RV was equestrian or related. Is that true? You you do not in your committee you do not want Airbnb or any other purpose but equestrian. And your and your recommendation, if I understand, is six months and fixed. Is that correct?
Okay. All right. Paul is not here. All right. >> Robert. Robert. Yeah. I'm sorry. >> Thank you. I appreciate First of all, thank you for your work. We are counting on you. Okay. One more comment. >> Are you suggesting that November through
April only for RVs? >> That's what the committee suggested. So what happens if I have family but and I don't but they want to come down for summer visit me stay in an RV for two three months summer >> time rental >> rental personal RVs >> yes
>> that was said we said that at the beginning >> there is no restriction on personal >> no restriction >> no restriction >> your living quarters your toy hauler your camper >> your RV your horse trailer yeah >> doesn't matter to acreage size >> no ma'am >> if you want to look like a used car lot apparently that's your prerogative >> but
>> well listen I mean >> question agurism Um, >> we have we have answered repeatedly. >> Yeah, we said that >> personal is not affected by this ordinance. >> It wasn't clear. >> We we just went down a rabbit hole. We said it at the beginning of this meeting
as well. We went down a rabbit hole and my son's fallen on hard times. I want him to live there for eight months. >> Charging him rent. It's your RV. I I have so Daveen, you know, lives in my RV on my property for not rent. The other question I have is what are we doing about agurism? Because
>> thank you all for coming. >> 20 >> RVs, 20 cabins. If you're agurism, you can have whatever you want. >> No, you can't. That's not completely true. Agurism can, according to the opinion, can bring them in for an event on a on a limited event specific
timetable. So it might be a weekend or >> and they were basically telling us how to get away with agurism. Well, that's that's going to be that's going to be curtailed. >> Okay. Could you speak to me, please? I want to know more about that issue. What are they telling you to do? >> But we're not No, hold on. Hold on.
>> Yeah, we're not that's we're not on that topic. >> We're going to talk about the legal model. So, I'm going to wrap this up. >> Okay. Do you have any >> Thank you. >> All right. Thank you. >> Thanks for coming, Joe. >> No, we're not talking about agurism right now. >> It's not on the agenda. a whole another
tourism and are we are you >> we're not going to talk about that there there's an AG opinion that you can look up it's it's recent >> I want to know AG opinion look up no I want a proper that I can look I'm saying what is the official answer for the council why are we not looking at act tourism and are we I'm asking a question
>> we're not it's not our problem the AG has an opinion it's it's associated with events only it's not about having agurism allows you to have RVs on your property like an RV campground. >> But that's what you if you're telling me
people can have two RVs or three RV for purposes. So you're saying it's not allowed for acturism other than that AG opinion, whatever they allow. Is that >> correct? Correct. That that's not the case. If we want legal to come back with that, we'll direct that when we bring this back at the August meeting.
>> Yeah. Can you please, this is my ask. Can you please I want an opinion on the town attorney's opinion on this matter. Actism. >> We can add that to discussion item. So the AG opinion and a tourism >> give that direction at the next meeting.
>> Well, we can ask for that as a result of this workshop. So going to the legal model. So we're coming up on a year. We have 40 minutes left of this meeting. We're going up on a year of
the in-house model. And uh I think that there has been enough questions around uh deliverables of time. Um we've got some some contracted vendors working out of contract. Contracts have expired, not
been renewed. I think we've got one contractor hasn't been paid since September for work done. Uh so I think that the questions that had been posed at the meetings were are there enough resources dedicated to this in-house
model and then that kind of negates the argument of we're going to save money and we're going to have this one undivided attention individual focused on these things or are we going to look at going back out into legal? So I I don't think this came forward at the end
of our last uh meeting. Uh we brought some we've got two outside law firms interested in a letter of interest. So I believe this is going to be on our August 4th agenda as well. Uh so as a
workshop item, we're not obviously voting on this, but um I guess the question is is is this council uh happy with the in-house model? Is are there things we'd like to see maybe additional resources dedicated to it? Um
do we need to look at going out? Are we looking at a hybrid? What are we going to be looking at moving forward? Yeah. And I think that uh that the to-do list is not kind of there and I don't know if it's like I said like a resources or what the case may
be. I mean >> it's probably gotten quarterly reports, >> right? So I think we need to look at it globally. I think I don't think we need to just go oh what we >> think I think it's I mean I think we have to be fair. Okay. And I think what we what we have to be fair about is that
and and by the way, I'm I'm not like really advocating one way or the other, but I think we need to be fair that we we said we would give the in-house a year to see how it worked. We're almost at the end of that year. Um but we didn't because of circumstances, we
didn't devote what we promised, right? We promised a parallegal and then that person got pulled away to do other stuff. like we didn't devote the resources but I'm not sure at this point that the
workload that we have can be managed by even a full-time in-house person with a parallegal. Um I I just think that um we have >> uh can I speak specifically about I don't know if anybody else has spoken to the
attorneys but I had I had a lovely convers can I speak specifically? Okay. Um, I had a lovely conversation with Gemma Torcivia. Um, and her firm just seems to be uniquely uh positioned to to help our town. First
of all, the price is very fair. It's like $18,000 a month. It's a it's a boutique firm. Um, it's like 18 grand a month. Um but what I really really liked about her firm was that every single one of the attorneys barring one served
worked in a city previously. >> Yeah. They held >> so they all held jobs in a municip municipal government and I think that's like fabulous because they know what it is to be in the trenches and they know the particular challenges that we have. Now, my meeting that I was supposed to
have yesterday with the other firm, um, no one here ever started the Zoom, so it never happened. Um, so yeah, uh, so it's rescheduled. So, um, >> I've yet to meet with them. I >> I have yet to meet with them, but I believe we met with them at the last the
last round, so I I kind of vaguely remember them, but I want to give them the benefit of seeing them. But I think that, you know, from when I was talking to Gemma, she's got like, you know, this guy's got land use and this guy's does, you know, they they they have specialties, but they function really as
a team. And I was really straight with her, you know, really because I had a lot of problems with her father's firm, which was before us because a lot of times we would get things that would come like, you know, one lawyer would give an opinion and then it would go back and then a different lawyer in the
firm would give a different opinion or whatever. And you know, I I was very frank with her about those things that that that was the problem that you know, we had a lot of things that weren't getting accomplished under that model. Um, and she really put my mind at ease that her firm um just doesn't operate
that way. That she loves her father and they get along really well, but she just runs a different kind of law firm. Um, so I mean, you know, I think our two choices are to either really, really truly devote the proper resources to the
in-house model and see whether we want to continue it or to go ahead and go with this boutique, I loved it, boutique law firm. >> Let's let's call it boutique law firm, which is, you know, smaller but has
these people that are really um like like our kind of people. Well, I think that's why we said months ago. We remember we had this conversation months ago >> and Todd and both said that we would be the first ones to vote if it wasn't working. >> No, what I'm saying is we months ago we had the conversation of we wanted to see
all major contracts 6 months prior. We don't want this last minute stuff happening. Remember that conversation we had and I think that's why we're having that conversation now, right? Is the hey, how little temperature check, how's this working? What's it look like? D >> and yet we don't have a town manager contract coming up. But that's okay.
That's another thing. >> Well, as of tonight, we have 90 days to start the process. So, >> two two two days. But anyhow, >> uh Joe, you're leaning forward like you're going to say something. >> I don't know tonight. Joe,
what do I have? >> To finish my statement, I would be okay with either either of those things. Um and I don't want to rule out Mason Jagger. Having not spoken to them, but I I really really really like Gemma. >> Okay. >> Sorry. Yeah. >> No, no. To answer your question, what do
I have? Today is my 25th wedding anniversary. >> Congratulations. >> I am here. And I am here. >> Silver. >> Better be taking her someplace good tonight. >> Yes. Now, we're we're going to get out.
>> We're we're getting out early in the morning, heading down to the Keys. Uh going to hang out down there for a couple of days. So, looking forward to We hadn't been away together in over 21 years. >> Jenny, God bless you. Welcome to owning a horse farm. We cannot leave only together with a horse. >> Happy anniversary, Jenny.
>> I mean, when they break a water in the in the stall, somebody has to be there to fix it. And that's usually this guy. So, um >> Well, if you get a call while you're gone, just call me. >> Well, what you ask, >> we all have resources. >> Which one of your seven phones call? >> I'll send you Lisa. >> Perfect.
>> Oh, awesome. >> She'll be on a >> I'll be in Vermont. >> She'll be in Vermont. Yeah. >> Um No, that was elegant. I I agree with where you were going with that. Um I met with them as well. I thought, wow, just the experience, the tools, the different people and that they discussed and
talked about. Yeah, I was I was fairly excited after our discussion. So, I'm feeling really good about that. And to your question, yeah, I think I think now's the time. I think it's go time, especially after after our decision tonight, and it was a big one. And um but uh yeah, I think the in-house um and
I I do want to meet with with our attorney because this is more of a one-on-one discussion and I feel that that needs to be had. But uh but I Yeah. So I'll just leave it at that because I mean I think that's the way that it needs to be handled moving forward. >> Yeah. And I I do think that um I do
think that the devotion of additional internal resources kind of negates the argument of cost savings. So um it it's actually going to be about the same what we're spending right now. So um to devote more internal resources
would actually exceed that. So no we didn't take his parallegal away. So um so anyway Mr. Sud you don't have your microphone on this >> metro. She is the person who should be guiding us. You should be coming forward
and share some comments on fact. Do you have Yeah, go ahead. Come on in. Well, you have analysis. Okay. If I may, real quick before Tracy starts. The the the the flag hasn't been waved either. You know, that's my whole
thing is is the flag the hand hasn't gone up going, "Hey, listen. I need I need more. you know, we we said, you know, we approved this and this with the contract and we knew there might be some need for additional resource and I haven't yet heard I need the additional
resource, but you know, that's >> Yeah, I I think there's other other concerns too, but um you're you're absolutely correct. Yeah. So, >> I mean, the whole purpose the whole purpose of going to the in-house model was to save money. As we know, the last two years were >> it's on and it's working. She just has
to talk really close. The last two years were highly bloated because things whatever whatever was happening was happening. What we're spending right now and I don't think people really realize everything is just his salary. It's not it's his salary, payroll taxes,
retirement, health insurance, his leave and other benefits that he gets. On top of that, the legal assistant parallegal salary, payroll taxes, retirement, health leave, and other benefits. Additional administrative support charged to legal work if we're actually
doing that. Um outside counsel, special counsel, litigation council, labor council, land use council, insurance council, paid all by the town, legal research services, software subscriptions, Florida bards, continuing legal education, travel, conferences,
equipment, office expenses, settlements, severance exposure, transition costs, and recruitment or procurement expenses. That's a lot. >> Yeah. I think though the the budget has a a a line of what 20 220 I think for legal right now. I know the parallegal
is also the executive administrative assistant. So there is time split. Um so she is a portioned under part of legal. >> Have you guys been given any of these expenses as a whole? Do we know exactly? >> No, we have not been given these expenses as a whole. We we've only been
given the budget line item. So We thought it might be cost cutting, but I think that the main reason that we considered trying it for a year was that our hope was that having a dedicated lawyer here all the time with a
knowledge of the history of the town would provide >> would be a benefit. >> It would be a benefit, you know, with all the extra meetings and the committee meetings and all that stuff. And so I think I think that that was that was a big well that was for me a bigger factor than than cost savings. Although we did
spend like half a million dollars on bloated legal fees the year before and like 450 the year before that. So no matter what it was, it was definitely a cost saving. But no, we haven't been given a number of what it costs. >> But it would be nice to know what other councils that we've had to use because it couldn't be done inhouse.
>> Yeah. But some of those other councils have been in place for a while. So you got to think about the different um >> areas of expertise, right? >> Yeah. Right. >> Foreclosures, >> the foreclosure, etc. Those kind of things like some of those have been in place.
>> The foreclosures are paying for >> certain Yeah. Certain cases have been in place for a while. >> Yeah. Well, that's you know, but we have one case in particular that's been >> Yes. >> ongoing for for years. So before any of us, >> I think she's not done yet. Go ahead.
>> I know. Well, I I don't but I I think I think I think at this point I think at this Hold on, Manish. I think at this point we've decided that we're going to look at outside counsel. I think it comes down to a timeline. >> You know, are we looking at the budget the the new budget cycle? Are we looking
at the end of the contract? I think that that's something that council should be considering at the August 4th meeting. Should we be bringing this back and and discuss this at the August 4th meeting? council. >> Yes. Yes. I think it's >> question answer,
>> but I would like clarification on that. >> So, are you proposing that we we break this contract? >> I'm saying that we need to look at this from a from a budgetary standpoint and possibly look at are we going to do this in the new budget cycle? Are we going to do are we going to wait for the contract and bring it back at the beginning of
the calendar year? So, I think that's what we have a discussion item on the >> on the on the agenda. >> So, okay. >> Okay. What? So there are two things quality and quantity right productivity and effectiveness as they call it.
>> I understand your argument. Do you have any comments on the model? Is it effective? >> I don't think the model is effective. >> It's not effective. >> No, because I don't think there's any parameters that are is guiding who's telling him what to do. Obviously, the council should be telling him certain
things to do. Um >> how is his work being quantified? Um, there's so many things that >> I think this is going to be irrelevant. >> Council is moving toward a different direction. I think that we should be getting quarterly reports. I think that
we should be we should have um we should expect a certain turnaround time. I mean, we've got contracts that are still not executed. >> We can't even get >> our agendas on time. >> No. So, are you saying your observation is the quality is not there? >> Correct.
>> Okay. I think I I think given that information and we have to look deeper and I saw a report which was shared I don't know if you saw the report 35 >> I did not >> uh I was amazed when I saw that at that report and now think about it for a
second we had we just made a major decision and it showed us that internal controls were not in place right we have an audit that wasn't responded to and if I remember last time Mr. Kurts was the person responsible for financial
operations you remember right >> and and under his oversight all these issues that are coming out are happening so I am sort of thinking wait a second am I having a faith in our town council's leadership shouldn't he be the
control in place to report >> town council's leadership is great >> no no I I mean control meaning like we have a town manager we have a town attorney they both independently we control the town manager by having an independent council. I don't know if
that is independent enough because >> council is what he's referring to. Yes. >> Yeah. >> Council council specifics Jeff. Mr. Jeff. >> All right. Mr. Curts, if you're listening, I'm sorry. >> No matter who the council is, it's a Yeah.
>> So, I'm saying is this issue has to be looked into in the next How many votes are needed to look into this issue? In other words, if we want to >> we can't vote on anything today. >> No, I'm not I'm asking bringing it forward to the next agenda. In two weeks, we'll be discussing this. I'm
just I don't know if the answer I thought last time I checked it's a 4-1 vote. >> No, you're you're talking about termination of the >> decide to I'm just thinking because I'm planning ahead. What is the plan? Like >> we can't discuss that tonight. We're bringing it forward to the August 4th meeting as a discussion item.
>> Okay. Well, my comments are the following. I'm going to talk to Mr. Curts. He requested a one-on-one. Some of these things will be in private. Some of them will be in public. And my question is, where were you, Mr. Kurts, when all these things >> You don't need to share this. You don't need to share this. So
>> I think the biggest thing is timeliness and performance. >> Yeah, that's right. It is timeliness and performance. Thank you. >> Okay. But I think council has those general questions as a whole. So we all agree we'll see it in two weeks. So perfect. Uh council order and procedure.
All right. Uh, I think that we all got we all got those. Um, >> yeah, I'm still making notes on that. >> Okay. When we all got the ones that I think was it Wilton Manners? Is that the ones? Was that the ones from the city that were shared with us? >> I think it was Naples. >> Naples. Was it Naples? I couldn't
remember what city. >> Naples has a strong mayor. >> So, >> they have a strong mayor in Naples. >> That's not the one that I read. The one that I read said that the mayor didn't have any more power than but in the middle was to that's why I'm saying I'm still making notes and I have
some questions and I have questions for >> Naples has a strong mayor >> legal except yet in the middle it was very strong mayor seeming at the beginning it was seemed like no >> which may be the way that we're moving I mean maybe we want a strong mayor maybe we want to go out for a referendum and have that maybe that's something we want
maybe we don't want council uh you know manager >> any that's another discussion That's another that's what I'm saying. It's another discussion to be had is whether we even want that anymore and want to have a strong mayor. But to model redoing under the current structure after a strong mayor model
strikes me as not >> I don't I don't think we're structuring I think we were just cherrypicking rules. >> Right. Right. >> Well again cherrypick rules that applied. I I'm just giving my opinion in a strong >> I let me ask you could you could I ask where it is coming from? What is the
need for all this? Where is it coming? There's rules and >> our council uh rules and order and procedure, they get reviewed on a regular basis. >> Okay. >> Uh like all things, those of us who've been in Barnes, it's amazing. No matter what rule you make, people will break.
>> And just when you think you've made a rule for everything, somebody comes up with something like, "I never thought I had to have a rule about that, but apparently I need a rule." So, but Right. Or it's 9:00 at night and the horses have all been put to bed. What
are you doing here? >> Okay. So, >> so what are you proposing? What in your thought process? You obviously Naples or somebody shared. What is the what what change you want to >> Valerie Oaks manager shared it with us as a comparison.
>> Uh I think that it doesn't matter what policy we have if we don't follow it. So >> yeah, >> you know, and some of this has gotten a little monstrous over time and maybe scaling it back and and kind of tailoring it to >> We talked about this months ago. Yeah, we did. >> We did. We I think the beginning of the
year we were talking about reviewing this and bringing this for review and it's just taken this long. So, we we a lot of time and I think yeah to to your point that's why I say I'm I'm I have some clarification that I wanted and I'm not done with my notes but you know it was it was you know there definitely
some some rules in there to Anita's point that kind of seem strong Mary because it it is that a term strong Mary >> strong mayor. Oh, I didn't I I might not have got that far. Yeah, >> it's like a rock song. >> Yeah, I know.
But yeah, so but in the beginning it it clearly states that it's not. But then as you go progress through, you know, it kind of So, and some things are kind of understandable. You call special meetings, right? We don't I don't call a special meeting. >> Actually, council can.
>> Oh, really? I thought well the way they do it and again we just cherry pick but the way they do it is either the mayor or we would have to vote and and we would have to be in a consensus to call >> that's >> that you can actually send in I think three three council members can request a special
>> it was three yeah >> but and there also seven because I did Google how many people sit on their board so the numbers would have to be looked at they are seven versus are five so and some things were strong majority that might could be simple majority you know just things like that. >> So, you want to bring this maybe back at
our August workshop once we've had time to compare those? >> I think so. And get some clarification on a couple things. >> Someone can provide us with, you know, a couple of more examples of different ones. Uh, >> right. >> Not necessarily ours that have the same
format that we have because I think that's relevant. >> And we will have uh attended the uh League of Cities um by then. And um so it' be interesting maybe when we're networking with other uh elected
officials, you know, kind of asking them, you know, if they've been working on their rules, if maybe they had a suggestion for us. Uh >> okay. Can I add my um can I ask you a question, Miss Kane? Why do you think it's a strong mayor oriented? What observation? Do you have any particular
points that led you to make the >> No, no, no. This No, no. I know. No. Okay. Is there any rule? Is there any rules? >> She got on the she got >> the manager sets the agenda and the mayor can change it or something.
>> That's what I wanted to make sure you're okay. >> It did. It did state and as I was reading it did state that you could that a council person could, you know, add a council meeting say I want, you know, I would like this on a Yeah. >> It kind of
gets up situation. Look, here is my thinking. Okay, >> my thinking is mayor position is ceremonial. No special powers, some but not to keep an order. That's it. So
that's my comment. Thank you. >> Say we need to take control more of the hiring and firing and we need to I've heard you make statements that are >> relevant and counter contradict what you're saying right now. Okay.
>> That are relevant to having a strong mayor. So, I'm simply saying that as part of this process, we might consider I believe we would have to go out for a referendum, but we might we might consider going out for a referendum to have a strong mayor. Maybe we don't want a strong mayor, but we might. It would
sure get rid of the town manager problem. Um, but anyhow, >> okay, can I now let me add here, we have a referendum that is sitting on the paper collecting dust. Town manager and the town attorney should be fired with 32 vote and that needs to be codified on
dust. already passed. >> Okay, it passed. What I'm saying is we need to enforce that. Okay, we are stuck in the past. That's why it took so long. >> I don't know what >> I'm saying. If what I'm getting at is the ability to fire a town manager, ability to fire a town
>> council or No, no, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. Let me finish. Ability to fire a town officer as you call it should be a 32 vote. >> It already >> charter officer and and it is and let's keep it that Yes. Yes. I'm saying keep it that way. I'm not in the favor of
giving ways guys can >> that has nothing to do with it. >> I know I know I know what it's going to do with I'm saying is I don't believe I don't believe mayor should have any special powers. You are one of the council members. This is my opinion. This is a workshop. My input is yes we
elect a mayor. It is ceremonial. Period. That's it. >> I don't know how that's changing under these these discussions. But >> a >> as far as uh potentially looking at restructuring government here, I think
that when we went to the employee model, that was probably I mean, it's probably fortuitous that it's taken this long to maybe reconsider that. But I think with the employee model, we've certainly seen some abilities as the executive board of
of the council running running the town that we've seen how some of the previous charter language did limit that ability. And I know there's a lot of reasons to not have a strong mayor. Um, and and
that's been Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Sounds >> and that's something that you know >> if you talk Yeah. If you talk to the original council members, they were
pretty adamant at not be a strong mayor um thing and and then the li the term limits came in as as part of that as well. >> Right. But I think also if you go if we're not saying that's what we're saying, but if you talk about transitioning to that employee model, you go back to a contracted model and
say say that there's an issue with that contractor and you dissolve that relationship with the contractor and the new contractor comes in. Now you're changing everything over because they're not going to go with what that old guy was doing. Nope, we do it this way and this is how we're going to do it. You need a new software. you need to do this
it gets very whereas you know you bring in a new manager and they they got to work within the system you know what I'm saying and and kind of revamp the system right not just come in and go oh no no we do it this way we use mutico not whatever >> right
>> gvoft or whatever >> you know what I'm saying so I I think it's you know but I there's some good language and if we're cherrypicking I think we can cherrypick and we can you know we've all sat here and said you know We want to make things better. We want to look at things and and kind of
>> there's some things that need to be tweaked and redefined and things like that. So, I I think, you know, parsed language, you know, maybe we need to look at that and how we're structured because maybe some stuff was added that needs to be taken out. Maybe maybe we need to add some stuff to that we've noticed over our tenures, you know, on
here. So, but yeah, I don't >> but I mean this clearly speaks to how how you speak from the deis and two others and this and that and the other and things like so. >> Sure. >> Yeah, but I'm hoping the discussion thing is good. >> Yeah,
>> that's all we're saying. >> And we've got about 13 minutes left. So, do you have any updates for us on the uh veterans? >> Oh, you're Oh, yeah, understandable. But >> so I
>> somebody who lives in town who makes baskets is going to have a table where they make baskets because old tiny and have some for sale. Um and I have someone who makes sourdough bread and they're going to bring that sourdough
some of it for sale. And also I asked them to try to have like an educational component of it. like could they bring like some starter yeast or something like that for um for Yeah. Yeah. to to kind of show people how that's done. So, those are the two things that those are two of the
things I talked to. Um I've talked to a couple of oldtime town residents who have uh agreed to be there to represent their families and I'm still working on that. And I'm kind of waiting myself for more detail from town staff before I
reach out to the founders to invite them because I know that in the past we had some negative feedback from a couple of the founders who like it wasn't what they thought when they got here was going to happen. So I want to be able to be really specific about what's going to happen and and what they're what what
bang they're going to get for their buck for the ones that have to travel. So um as far as my responsibilities that's what I've done. I know that um Robert talked to Mike Carroll and he will not be able to be here with his helicopters and things like that. He has another
obligation that weekend or that day. Um and but that he is working on getting like antique cars. So the uh so like an antique car show kind of thing. Um and somebody brought the concept we had talked about the concept of like a bake sale and I don't know where I was the
other day but somebody started talking about a cakewalk which is like musical chairs with a cake. Yeah. Yeah. So, um, >> and the prizes for the cake. Yeah. So, that would be, so I thought, well, that might be kind of fun to have people donate the baked goods and then have a cakewalk. So, um, I mean, because it's
like I'm I'm thinking old school games and things that are fun. >> Huh? >> Egg and spoon. >> And maybe an egg and spoon race would be good. Yeah. So, these are just all things that I've personally the Yeah, the those will be good. These are all things I've been um personally working
on, but I can't tell you what the rest of the committee >> any like food trucks or entertainment. >> These are all the things I've been working on. I can report out to you, but I cannot tell you what staff has been doing because I our meeting was canled. >> Okay guys, I since we have 10 minutes
and we have to get Joe out, I have one important issue I want to bring. PBSO, we have a budget process started for the upcoming year. I would like to propose we take a legal opinion from a proper law firm on what are the obligations of
the town to have a contract in place because PBSO has reported us to the governor's office and all that stuff. We don't know where that issue stands. What the the PBSO said that they reserve all the rights. So I want to know where we
are in that contract. It is on pause. It's on hold. It's terminated. So, we want to put this as a discussion item on the August agenda. >> Hold on. Hold on. >> That's my >> We do. We want this as an agenda item on the August. I don't
>> I don't It's full. >> Okay. So, >> so how do you how do you advise people to plan the budget if they don't know PBSO is happening? >> There is no PBSO. >> There's no PBSO. >> So, you want to just go around with no PBSO? >> We have PBSO. We already
>> I'm asking with no town contract. You think >> we don't need a car with our name on it with a guy sitting at the church. >> Okay. Is that your opinion? Calm down. Okay. Wait, wait, wait, wait. >> Keep your brother guys, guys. It's a workshop. I'm asking question. >> That's the biggest Okay. Here, here is
the thing. So, am I hearing it correctly? You're saying there is no legal statutory obligation whatsoever to have a PBS. That's >> correct. Yes. There is no no requirement to have enhanced legal hold on enhanced service levels.
The letter you're referring to to four different state officials was dated April 1st. It's now it's now almost August. We've heard zero response. >> Can I Okay, I'm asking. >> Not to mention not to mention Palm Beach County is looking to revamp how the
>> Yes. And we will be taxed more. I know that. Okay. So, I'm asking a simple question. Is your is your opinion that is this your opinion like there's no required or did you ask a lawyer to give you a letter to do so? >> Huh? Several several can research >> can you share those several things with
me? >> It's on the record. >> Okay. Which which record is it? >> It's on the record meetings multiple meetings. >> Okay. So is it okay if I ask our town council which is Mr. Kurtz today that is can he give it in writing that based on his legal opinion? He >> has. Yes.
>> No I have seen his opinion. I have spoken to him on multiple time he he has alluded to talking to attorney general of the state and attorney general of the state said sorry I can't give you any opinion because this is not I can opine on so I'm asking did you have a letter
that from our town attorney that says you do not require PBSO contract with the town do you have an absolute letter legal >> memorandum attached to an agenda agenda okay can you share okay what ag what date is that >> a public records request >> go back. What is it?
>> Just put it in chat GPT and ask when the >> chat GPT are you? So, let me understand it. You're saying it's already a done deal. >> The December one or the November one. >> So, you have no problem if I ask our town council to put it on the record. Yes. Illegal record. >> You can do whatever you want.
>> Okay. Good. Thank you. That's >> You can do a public record. >> No. No public record. I'm going to ask this specific question to the town council that >> any any council member can ask our town attorney a question if you would like I want to take your
>> we are not required there's other towns >> thank you I'll ask the council thank you >> hey Cassie what was the town that in Valuchia County that recently did this as well it was >> I believe Pearson Florida or something like
There was no there was no hysteria. There was no public craziness about it. There was no threats by the Valuchia County Sheriff because the sheriff by US constitution is a constitutional position. We all pay in our county taxes
for county level service. The service cannot be less than what is provided to the county around us. If the town wants to have county level service and and the residents don't vote us out because we made that decision, that's fine. The
enhanced level service is not a state statute. It is not required by our charter. There was an ordinance adopted to the contrary and we are not in any legal hot water to do what we are doing today. >> Okay, good. Thank you for your statement. But I want to hear from our town and I will ask.
>> Thank you. I I don't look you have your opinion. I don't care about opinion. I care about the legal I want a legal memorandum that says that says guys we have a clear legal opinion you are not required to have a PBSO contract individually directly for enhanced let
me have the direct okay if it is there I apologize I will bring that letter and I'll share it >> he'll he'll share it with you though he's already written >> I will thank you >> any public comments we've got about five minutes of you can talk about anything >> I have one this is just a statement good
rules do not control people. They create a consistent process that works regardless of who is sitting on this dis and serving on staff. >> Okay. >> Oh. Oh, that was >> good. Stage wisdom. >> Such on a tear. >> Stage wisdom.
>> So, happy 25th anniversary to the Stevens >> and um thank you everybody who came out tonight. I I'm surprised I still have a voice. >> And we're going to adjourn early. >> Motion to adjurnn. a favor. Blah blah
blah blah blah. It's a workshop. Oh yeah, this all looks like