--------- We'll call this meeting to order. Today is Tuesday, April 22nd, and this is the regular meeting for the Putnham County Board of Commissioners. Um, if we can ask Chaplain Ted Stackpole to please come forward for the invocation, and the pledge of allegiance will be led by
Commissioner Alexander. Please rise if you're able to do so. Let us pray. Heavenly Father, we pause at the beginning of this meeting to acknowledge you, our creator, our sustainer, and the source of all wisdom. We thank you for the privilege of
serving this community, and we ask for your guidance and grace over the decisions made here today. Lord, we lift up our leaders, grant them clarity of mind, unity of purpose, and hearts grounded in compassion and integrity. May their work reflect justice,
humility, and a sincere desire to seek the good of all people in Putham County. Today especially, we remember and pray for the most vulnerable among us, our children. April is National Child Abuse Prevention Month. And we grieve that there are little ones in our midst who
face harm. Instead of safety, fear instead of peace, pain instead of love. We ask you, God of mercy, to protect them. Strengthen the hands of those who care for them. parents, teachers, social workers, and foster families. Equip our community to be
vigilant, courageous, and committed to creating a safe, nurturing world where every child can grow and thrive. Let our policies, our service, and our hearts reflect a deep commitment to protecting children and honoring their dignity. Let your justice roll on like a river and
your righteousness like a neverfailing stream. May your peace rest on this room and may your presence guide every word spoken and every decision made. In Jesus name I pray. Amen. Amen. Good morning everyone. Please join me in the pledge
allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. We'll go right into our
approval of the minutes. Madam Chair, I make a motion we approve the minutes uh for March 25th as stated in our packet. Second. Have a motion and a second. Any discussion? All in favor say I. I. All right. Motion passes. We'll go right
into presentation with reading of the proclamation by Commissioner Alexander for re for the SMA healthcare mental health awareness month. So if you guys want to come forward just come up to the podium. Good morning, guys. Thank you for
joining us. As uh most of you know, I uh visit with this commission uh or this committee once or so a month, once or twice a month. And um it's really been eye opening to me to learn about the uh people that are out supporting our folks
with mental health issues, our homeless folks. and um it's something I've never really been exposed to and it uh it's it's been touching and I appreciate everything you guys do. With that being said, I'd like to proceed with the proclamation regarding our group uh
Putnham County proclamation number 2025-026. A proclamation to recognize May 2025 as Putnham County Mental Health Awareness Month. Whereas mental health is a part of overall health, whereas mental health sustains an individual's
thought processes, relationships, productivity, and ability to adapt to change. And whereas the consequences of not addressing mental health and psychosocial development for children and adolescence extend to adulthood and
limit opportunities for leading fulfilling lives. And whereas increased empathetic responses reduces the stigma of those incarcerated and struggling with mental illness who should be given the opportunity of restorative rather
than punitive treatment. Whereas through public education and civic activities, Putnham County remains engaged in the promise to address the challenges facing people with mental illness. And whereas mental health awareness month is an
opportunity to increase public understanding of the importance of mental health and to promote the identification and treatment of mental health. And whereas community understanding and available supports and
services can greatly impact a person's ability to handle their stress and struggle and move forward. And whereas promoting mental health and wellness leads to a higher overall productivity, better educational outcomes, lower crime
rates, stronger economies, lower health care costs, improved family life, improved quality of life, and increased lifespan. And whereas each business, school, government agency, healthc care
provider, faith-based organization, nonprofit agency, and citizen shares accountability for the community's mental health needs has a responsibility to promote mental wellness and support prevention efforts.
Now therefore, be it proclaimed that the Putham County Board of County Commissioners proclaims the month of May 2025 as mental health awareness month. Done, ordered, and adopted this 22nd day
of April 2025. Very nice. Madam Chair, I'll move to approve the proclamation. Second. All right, we have a motion, a second. All in favor say I. I. I. All right. Yay. Welcome to come up with your picture.
Yep. I'll just pass that off. My mental health already. Show me everybody. in a second. Thank you. Absolutely. Next, we have proclamation
2025-027, St. John's River Water Management District Water Conservation Month. Thank you. We have POP Putnham County Proclamation 2025027. Whereas water is a basic and essential need of every living creature. Whereas the state of Florida Water
Management District and Putnham County are working together to increase awareness about the importance of water conservation. And whereas Putnham County, the state of Florida, has designated April, typically a dry month when water demands are most acute as
Florida's water conservation month to educate citizens about how they can help save Florida's precious water resources. Whereas Putnham County has always encouraged and supported water conservation through various educational programs and special events. Whereas
every business, industry, school, and citizen can make a difference when it comes to conserving water. Whereas every business, industry, school, and citizen can help by saving water, thus promote healthy economy and community. Whereas
Putnham County will engage, excuse me, will encourage citizens and businesses to focus on evaluating their irrigation systems for potential efficiencies and enhancements. Now therefore, let it be resolved by the virtue of the authority
invested in me as a commissioner of the board of Punham County Commissioners to hereby proclaim the month of April as water conservation month. Putham County, Florida is calling upon each citizen and business to help protect our precious resources
by practicing water saving methods, becoming more aware of the need to save water. For this the 27th year of water conservation month there will be a special focus on irrigation system evaluations done order and adopted this
22nd day of April 2025. Madam chair I move to approve this pro proclamation. Second motion in a second. All in favor say I. I. I. All right. Motion passes. Sylvia, would you like to speak before
we do a picture? Sure. Just real quick. Good morning, Chair Council. Thank you for letting me uh celebrate your water conservation month for April. I've done a lot of these all over the 18 counties that the district covers
and I start feeling like Chicken Little. The sky is falling. The sky's is falling. We're running out of water. We're running out of water. But I think all of us have seen that after COVID population in Florida has exploded and along with population comes building houses, building commercial businesses
which puts a major strain on the aquifer which we get all our clean drinking water from. We've have been just sat around doing nothing. Reclaimed water has drastically increased which helps out a lot. Most of the builders will put water efficient appliances in all the the new
homes. That helps out a lot. We can narrow it down now to one major thing, irrigation. 50 to 60% of our fresh water we use for watering the plants, water in our our yards. And it's just when you hear those numbers, it's it's kind of
crazy. So that's where we're putting our focus now. Now, when we start talking about um irrigation, it's kind of hard because government can't do this for us anymore. I mean, we could do reclaim water. can build things, but government can't do
this. This has to come from all of us. It has to come from neighbor to neighbor going over and when you see, we've all seen it, where your sprinkler head shoots straight up in the air as you're driving to work or you're watering the street or you're watering every day. That's where we have to go talk to our
neighbor. Not mean, just, hey, did you know this? Because I don't know about you, but when I come home from work, the last thing I think about is, oh, wonder what my uh irrigation setting set at. Do I have any broken head? No, it's not like that. You know, everybody's tired. Everybody's got lives to run. So,
helping each other either, you know, helping them fix it, helping them reset that the the uh your your tones or your irrigation sensors. The last thing is is we can beat this, but we have to work together and I think that's what Putinham does best. Neighbor helping neighbor. That's
how we win this fight. Thank you, chair. Thank you, councel. Thank you. We Commissioner Harvey, you're recognized. Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, do want to say, you know, years ago, I didn't think much of water conservation until my son-in-law took me down to a trade show, a conservationist trade show down
Orlando and turned me on to drip irrigation. Yes. I mean, I have all the sprinkler heads that I can blow all this water out, but it's amazing that little drip irrigation on a single plant will do for it. And the less water that we
actually spend. The lakes in West Putinham right now are in terrible shape. I mean, I could use actually eight feet of water in my lake to get it to where it's normal. And people go, "Eightt of water?" Yeah. That's that's how bad they are. So conservation in
rural Florida, that's an easy thing because we all know, we all live on wells. We're not going to let the water hose run because we hear that water pump running. We go, "Something's running out there. They got a broken pipe." We know that, but and we also don't have 4 inches of St. Augustine grass or other
grass mandated by HOAs to have to do this. We know we know water conservation and um I just know that sometimes on a regional effort rural Florida takes it on the chin for other areas and we all need to be working together because one
day you're going to turn that wa you're going to turn that faucet on and water might not be there and that's what you want most importantly. So I appreciate your efforts and madam chair thank you for the opportunity to to talk about that. Absolutely. Thank you. Bill, would you like to come up and get a picture?
Yes ma'am. Someone can come. Well, you should come on this side. Thank you. All right, going into um employee of the month. Excuse me, Lori Parker.
Good morning. Good morning. Um we're here to recognize uh employee of the month and for the second quarter employee of the month is Brier Tilton. Um as you know Brier is the budgeting specialist and he's done a phenomenal
job since we um he was hired and Julian's going to say a few words. Thank you. Good morning, commissioners, and thank you again for giving us an opportunity to highlight some of our um best employees. Brier was selected employee
of the month, and in his nomination, um it goes on and on about how he goes above and beyond. So, he does all the stuff budget related, but he's the first one to go, "Hey, what do you need help with?" um when we activate at the EOC, he keeps all the dollars together and where the budget is, but he also is the
first one to go, "Hey, I'll help in the kitchen or I'll wash dishes or it doesn't matter what it really is. When there's a need and if he can help, he's the first one to jump in and say, "I want to do it." He's also the calmst of the budget department, which comprises of me and Brier. So, um, he's the one
that's always even keeled and very calm and very patient with all the end users as they work through trying to figure out their budgets through development as well as all year long as we run into, hey, the money's in the wrong spot and what do I do? And a lot of those a lot of times those end departments are panicked when that call comes in. And
Brier's the calm voice that goes, here's how we're going to get it done. And um, he always finds a way to get them there. So, it is my honor and pleasure to um recommend or honor Brier Tilton this morning as employee of the month. Very good. Thank you. Thank you. I guess I can speak uh real
quick, but um Doug and Julianne and Jr., they all have great strengths that like I can work towards and see. Um I'm extremely grateful for Miss Julianne. She's like a wonderful boss. She's an excellent role model and then she's there for me just
to listen to me talk or if I have weaknesses I feel like she helps me strengthen those. So, and then I'm super grateful for my parents for helping me um all the years and push me to be better. And then lastly, I think my favorite thing about working at the
county is the people. Honestly, I think work is kind of work, but here the people make it feel like home. I can't I was thinking about listing off names, but I'll be like listing names for an hour. But everywhere from like public works to the procurement department to HR to my friends at the front desk, uh,
everybody's super nice and I'm so grateful for those friends. So, thank you. Thank you, Brier. Who taught you how to cook? You did. All right. Three. One, two, three. All right. One, two, three. All right, Miss Lori Parker, employee of
the quarter. Um, the employee of the quarter is um she, if she could come up, Brooke, she's on her way up. Um, Brooke Wart, she is employee of the quarter for first quarter. And, um, with this, she gets
her certificate and a check for $500. Woohoo! All right, here you go, Brooke. James is now we know who did finally say something. You're welcome. I want to say something. I'll say this. We was here a couple of weeks ago and everything I said then holds true today. So, uh, all I can say is you're welcome.
We are proud of her very much so. Uh, she's uh done a lot since the last meeting. We have launched several things. One of one in particular is our uh she's worked with the fire rescue for uh hydrants that do hydrant map and checks and verification stuff like that.
So that's something that's uh that's been published and out now. So we are very proud of her. But um thank you for all that you do. I'm just kidding. Thank you. Thank you. Are you buying lunch today? You're not going to make it.
Commissioner. Are there any speaker cards, Miss Ashley? Before we go into our planning and development impact fee study presentation, I'm going to take a point of privilege and have a few um comments
regarding impact fee study beforehand. Ashley, I'll take all the cards that you have, please. So, we'll call on Mr. Woodward to come up and speak. Good morning, sir. Good morning. Uh,
would with the chair's permission, I would prefer to defer my comments until after the president. Absolutely. I just didn't want anybody to not have a chance, but if you want to do it afterwards, it's not a problem. I I might be able to comment more intelligently after I've heard the president. No problem. All right. Is that the same for you, Mr. Miner? Would
you like to wait until after? All right. So, we'll make sure you do that. Um, Steve Miller, he has some handouts here. Thanks, commissioners, and thanks for having me up here. Um, my name is Steve Miller. I'm the president of an organization called Save Rodman
Reservoir. Um, you guys are all familiar with Rodman. You know, it can be a contentious issue at times. And it's kind of quite fitting that it's water conservation day and we have the water management district rep here. And um you know, I don't know if you guys know this
or not, probably all of you do. Back in 2015, the city of Jacksonville, Jport, Jack's Chamber of Commerce, and the Riverkeeper got together and decided it was time for uh Rodm to go without reaching out to anybody local. The only
way everybody found out about it was when it hit the news in Jacksonville. Um right now there's a similar situation with the Florida Senate. There is a proposal by Jason Broer who's the
seminal county representative with for there's an appropriation of six and a quarter million dollars for ordering DP to come up with a plan to do the partial partial restoration for excuse me I get nervous you know I can do this all day long with music in the
background but standing in front of Mike kind of get a little little squirly so anyway Um the the money is allocated to FD for implementing coming up with a plan to implement the partial restoration with
work starting in 2026 and completed by 2035. several issues. You know, um I'll start off on one thing that really irritates me more than anything
is when I found out about this and I started calling around to local representatives, state level, county level, city level, nobody knew anything about it, you know, and it's the same tactic that went on the last time. Um to
me, that's the bigger concern. You got people who are outside the district, who don't live here, who don't deal with, who don't realize what Rodman means to the area dictating what's going to happen. And without any local outreach, it's
um it's concerning. And so if you look at Rodman, I gave you guys a letter that I wrote to the local representatives highlighting some of the things. If you look at the explosive growth that was referenced um and you look at the watershed and the impacts,
every water quality issue the state of Florida has is man-made. The more people there are, the more issues you're going to have. Rodman is the only filter in the whole uh Okawaha basin that removes that is has a proven track track record
of nutrient reduction. They hold a study up that was done by John Henrikson that says that there will be nutrient load increases to the St. John's River and those can be offset by mitigation in other places. The problem with that is
there's no defined offsets for mitigation and nutrient load reductions anywhere in any of the proposals to remove the dam. The other side of that is if you look at the technical data, the baseline for nutrient load
calculations were based on a background level that is a standard level, not actually what's coming from Silver Springs, which is three to four times higher than that nutrient load level. And I've been watching it for five or six years now.
So you got a bit you got several issues. We don't you know Rodman has been uh uh identified by St. John's River Water Management District for potentially providing 30 million gallons a day if needed for
municipal reasons purposes down the road. So why why would you want to do two things? Take out a potential water source, take out the only filter and add nutrient loads to the St. John's River, which would be directly across the river from Waka, that every year you can read
in the paper about the algae blooms. All you're doing is providing more food. It makes absolutely no sense. I would like to see this commission reach out to Senator Broer, reach out to all the local representatives and let the state know
that we're not going to take this being dictated what's going what goes on in our county by people from other places. And we, you know, like I say, there's two issues. One, not including any local
representation when you're doing that. And second is water quality issues, water quantity issues. I think they're all interrelated and I think it's something that you guys need to address with the state to make sure that this funding does not go through. Thank you. Um, Commissioner Harvey,
you're recognized. Thank you, Madam Chair. In all fairness and disclosure, I am the executive director of Save Rodman. uh cannot be a board member due to the ethics commission when I first started here um made sure that that
would not be happening. I do want to talk about something that Mr. Miller just said. Um you know, water quality is very important to us and I just mentioned the the lakes in western Putham County. If you're in Grandon at the Clay Ranch, you're 99 feet above sea
level. When you get to my house, you're around 55 feet above sea level. When you get to Rodman or Lake Okawaha, you're 19 feet above sea level. 21 billion gallons of fresh water, 19 feet above sea level.
St. John's River is sea level, period. It moves very slowly going north. I took a reporter out there, Roger Weider, with Channel 12 News one time and I said, "Roger, I'll drink out of the spillway or out of the lake right now if you promise to drink off the Jacksonville
landing." And he said, "That's not the same water." And I said, "Yeah, it is because it goes north into St. John's and goes out into the Atlantic Ocean. So, you're going we might have to treat it a little bit. You're going to have to treat it a lot." And it is the same water. And that's what people don't
realize. Mr. Underwood, Cecil Underwood son, Tommy Underwood, um, actually has done studies with water management showing them the data that when the draw down happens, what happens to the lakes in West Putham and eastern Elatchua
County. So, it's very important that this watershed remains intact. Yeah. None of us would want to dig a ditch across Florida ever again. And that that was an idea that started to move commerce or for wartimes or whatever the
story was at that moment. But truly, we do not need saltwater intrusion in our freshwater areas. And this is a a prime example, and I'll finish up my statement with this. We do have people in Tallahassee watching this right now. Um
truly, I've been up there about this issue, but you're right. It's time for this thing called Lake Okawaja to be put to bed once and for all and let us make the decision of what
we want to do. Not some senator from CMI area who who who is reliant on other maybe a term limited out to move on to a second. I don't know what he's up to, but I'm just going to say this. It's
time for our citizens to make that decision, not somebody to make it for us. And that failed with Jacksonville and it's going to fail again. I hope so. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. I agree. And and you know, some outreach to Marian County from you guys to kind of coordinate this. I don't know how the
political atmosphere is there concerning Rodman. And I know there's a lot of misinformation and how do you say it? It's not exactly untrue, but you know, when you take a part of a paragraph and a part of
another paragraph and make it sound like it's something and it's not, that's what we face all the time in dealing with trying to keep the true uh situation concerning water in Rodman. Thank you. Um, Commissioner Alexander, you're recognized. Yes, sir. That um
that term you're referring to, they use it in washing machines, too. It's called a spin. But, uh, speaking from personal experience, um, when you were referring to the nutrient levels in the river, I genuinely have some concerns about that. I live on Forester Point, East Palada,
and the eelgrass reduction in my area after the hurricane, I believe it was 2017 due to the purge. I mean, there's multiple facets of why they say it it occurred, but there is no eel grass where at one time we had hundreds of
yards of eel grass off of my dock. And I have true concerns regarding the nutrient discharge and what effect that may have on the water quality of the river and the effect. Um, I've been working with the mighty river recovery team and they're um partnered with the
riverkeeper, but I think that if we employed a biological study to assess what the nutrient discharge would do to trying to increase or resurrect these eel grass beds, we may find some common ground there because, you know, now is
definitely not the time to add any additional nutrient discharge to the river in my opinion. And not that I'm a biologist, but I do live on the river and I understand what the effects are. So, um, that might be something you want to, uh, engage as well, commissioner, and I appreciate that. And, you know, I
think there are a lot of goals that we do have in common with a riverkeeper. Um, but, you know, water quality, as I said, is strictly all our issues are man-made. Yep. Um, and we're going to, you know, there's potential for three and a half million more people living in
just the St. Jones River Water Management Territory in the next 25 years. If you don't think that's going to have an impact on the water quality, well, yeah, we have the opportunity to supply that water from our pre-existing reservoir that we're destroying versus, you know, withdrawing that from the
aquifer. So, I think there's some common ground there that we can find. Uh, not necess, you know, and it doesn't necessarily involve removing the dam. So, maybe we should approach it from that angle. One of the other uh things that just kind of amazes me is we're
spending between state and federal funds billions of dollars building reservoirs statewide to treat water through natural processes. Rodman should be the poster child. I mean, we've got a 50-year record of what happens. So, why the same
people who sued the state to spend more money to build reservoirs want to tear one out that functions? I I just can't find the logic in that. So, and I certainly appreciate you guys listening to me and I do hope you will take some action and and address the state, address all the representatives that you
can reach out to and and just tell them it's time we put this thing to bed. I mean, the the next action needs to be beyond stopping this funding is saying what do we have to do to memorialize that Rodman will be there forever. I want to share with you a little bit. Um
about three or four years ago, DP spent $1.8 million out of their operating budget to repair and maintain Rodman. And by doing so, they said that that created and confirmed that the repairs were done and the dam is structurally
safe. Um Representative Payne had that done when he was in office and so I'm very familiar with it. So, it doesn't make sense that the legislature would spend an additional funds to tear down something they just put $2 million close to $2 million in to keep it and to make
it safe. Um, so I think that, you know, one of the things that hopefully the governor won't let that through. If he's truly worried about efficiency and effectiveness, then why would you why would you spend good money after bad, right? I So, so I I think that needs to to I mean, bad money after good. I don't
know the the right way to say it, but you know what I'm saying. And that article you referenced said uh it talked about tourism in there and it said that it would be an economic boom by creating tourism. Well, tourism is already available because you can access the springs through the St. John's River. You just have to go through the lock.
It's not that you can't get there. So, I don't understand that that tourism could still take place um to the tune of I think there was quoted in the article of $200 million. I'd like to see the the data that supports that. I don't know that that's true. And as far as campgrounds, we have Rodman Campground.
We have campgrounds south of of Rodman that are constantly full. And to your point, most of the people that were commenting on that article or who were quoted were from Marian County, out of county. And there was the study that was done when Representative Payne was in office. 80% of the people that responded
to that survey never have been on the Aqua River. They don't live in the area. What they did was they lobbied for people who um think that the dams need dam needs to be torn down. However, those people have never even been there. That's one of the questions on the study. Have you been there? Have are you
on on are do you live on the river? You know, have you been there? And the answer is no. So, that study is truly tainted because it has 80% of people who have no interest in it other than they've got the sound bite and they're going to vote on the sound bite. So, I I
think what you guys should do is work with um you know, continue to move forward. If you want to do a um a u you know something to where you're sending collectively a letter to all of your representatives as well, I think that would be very helpful. But particularly the governor's office, the
governor needs to know that it's you know he we just put two million the state just put $2 million practically in this dam. Why would you want to tear it down? I I agree and and I have reached out uh the letter that I gave you guys modified for I sent one to Senator
Broer. It's a little less flattering probably. Yeah. Uh and I sent one to the governor also. And um the you know, like you said, a lot of the people that voted to remove the dam don't have a clue about it. They haven't read the studies. You know, I might be a nerd. I read
studies. I I find out stuff I don't know all the time. I Google is your best friend when you're reading a study and it talks about utrification. What the heck is that? Let me look it up. Right. So, I looked at all these studies and I went back and looked at them just a couple months ago and um you know, I
found out the baseline that they used was off to start with. So, what what is the true nutrient load that's going in the river? And so, you're right. It's a it's a big more people buy into what they hear, right, and never investigate
to find out what they should know, right? And and that's what we face every day with that. Well, thank you for coming forward and and speaking. Thanks for having me. Yep. Appreciate it. Y'all have a good day. Thank you board for allowing that um to happen. I know it was a little I took a point of
privilege, but I didn't want Mr. Miller to be here all day while we go through the rest of the the the agenda. All right. Now, we'll have excuse me, planning and development for the impact fee study presentation. Good morning, commissioners. Uh, please assist me in welcoming Nilgen Camp and
Brian Mance, our consultants for the Putnham County impact fee study. Good morning, commissioners. I'm Negan Camp with Benish. I will cover the non-utility fees and my colleague Brian Muntz will cover the utility fees.
Okay. So this uh presentation starts with a brief background review and then the technical study and next steps. As you know you are continuing to experience growth. Uh on average the last four
years the resident is that better? Okay. uh you average about 600 new residential permits which is all putting pressure on the infrastructure. Uh the county placed their impact fees under moratorium in
2006. So we are treating these fees as new fees basically hasn't been uh being used or charged for a long time. And aside from the utility fees, uh there's interest in developing fees in about five service areas, and that's what I'll
cover. Impact fees by definition are a one-time capital charge to new development. They cover the cost of new capital facilities. So, they can only be used for additional capital, not for maintenance or uh resurfacing, restructuring, and so forth. But they do
free up general tax dollars for those programs. So they indirectly help them. They help implement the capital improvement plan and their main goal is to maintain the level of service uh and they calculate cost of growth and they are most needed when there are high
growth levels and limited alternative funding in Florida. The impact fees were governed by case law since 1980s and it relates two key component uh are covered under dual rational nexus which says that there has to be a study
demonstrating the fees are proportionate to the need created by new development and that the fee payer receives a benefit which is achieved through benefit districts when needed as well as a list of capacity adding projects either in the CIP or in a master plan
that shows that why you need the fees and what will be funed. with the fees. And then uh in 2006 we had the impact fee act passed. It had several changes since then. Some of its key requirements are that the fees be based on most recent and localized data.
There's a minimum of 90-day notice requirement after adoption before they become effective. If there's a challenge to the fee, now the government has the burden of proof. used to be the other way around. In 2021, we had House Bill 337
passed. This applies only to existing fees. So, this doesn't apply to the fees that we are discussing today. But it is important for you to know because once you set the fees, you will have a limit how much you can increase them going forward. So it basically says peace
cannot be increased more than 50% and those increases has to be phased over up to four years. There's an exception clause um that requires demonstrating extraordinary circumstances and the increase has to be approved by twoth3 of the governing body. So again this
doesn't apply right now but this something to keep in mind. And then we had a uh house bill 479 passed uh last year. It requires interlocal agreement if both the cities and counties are collecting for
transportation impacts in a jurisdiction and then studies need to be completed and adopted in 12 months and they need to use data available within the past four years. In terms of uses of impact fees again they are for capacity addition. So
for example, some examples um on transportation, these fees are only for roadways classified and collectors and above. They are not for neighborhood local streets and it could be new roads, lane additions, intersection
improvements, dirt to pave on collectors and above, rightway purchase, roundabouts, new traffic signals if they improve the flow of traffic. We are measuring uh level of service for transportation in terms of speed of travel. So any improvement on collectors
and above that improves that speed and reduces congestion can be found with impact fees. In other areas, for example, fires, rescue could be new stations, expansion of existing stations, land purchase, new again, additional
vehicles, uh equipment, not replacement, but additional law enforcement inventory is limited to vehicles. So that same type of thing, new additional vehicles, government buildings, uh again new buildings, expansion of existing
buildings, land and similarly for parks, it could be parkland and new additional recreational facilities. Technical study is using a consumptionbased methodology which is very common in Florida. It charges new growth for the value of the infrastructure that is consuming. And
the way it's calculated, it is basically guarantees that the new development is not being charged for existing deficiencies, which is one of the legal requirements. So basic impact fee formula looks at cost to add capacity. That's really the value of your capital
inventory. And then it looks at how the county is funding capacity projects. To the extent that you are using taxes, a portion will come from future development. So that amount is subtracted so that we are not charging new development once through
the fee and once through the tax and then that net cost gets multiplied by demand which is measured in terms of travel for transportation and population for the other fees. This is just showing you um the
sample the basically a summary of the fees for several sample land uses and you can kind of see for single family it's about 7700 in total and the larger two fees are the roads and government buildings and then this slide provides
the same information for single family adding the water and wastewater. So you can see in total it's almost like 16,000 and the most of that is is under wastewater and transportation. Again I'll go through
each of these service areas. Uh and in each one you'll see a pattern. We start with the inventory level of service co cost credit demand and the calculated fee.
So, fire rescue, uh, the inventory includes 14 stations owned by the county. It's about 65,000 square feet of building space, almost 50 acres of land, as well as vehicles and equipment. In all the cost estimates for buildings and
land, uh, we review anything that county has built or has estimates for going forward. We supplemented that information with the insurance values of existing buildings as well as data from other jurisdictions. Uh in the case of land again anything that county bought
uh or has appraisals estimates for was in consider and then we also review all vacant land sales from the property appraiser database of similar size parcels throughout the county. So with that, uh, the building costs range from
for fire rescue $125 per square foot to $350 per square foot depending on type of building and the land was estimated at 30,000 per acre. Uh, as far as level of service for impact V purposes, we are looking at it
as a population per station. So it's about 5,000 people that each station is handling. Obviously their operational uh level of service is more response time but just for capital purposes we are looking at st population per
station. So the total capital asset value with buildings, land, uh vehicle and equipment is about 52 million. That divided by the population gives us about value of $740 almost. And that represents the
investment community has made into fire rescue infrastructure up to this point. So that's our starting point to charge the new development. uh we then subtract a credit and in in your case there were no expansion projects within the we t what we
typically do for the credit component we look at how you funded capacity projects past five years and what's program in the CIP uh we didn't have any in that time period so then we did use a 20% credit um discount based on what we
observe in other jurisdictions just to give you the flexibility to be able to use non-impact fee funding going forward forward. So that uh results in a net cost of about $590 per
resident. And then that figure multiply by residents per unit give us the final fee. So it's about $920 for single family per dwelling unit. Non-residentidentials are mostly per thousand square foot. And you can kind of see some
examples. And then this slide and next slide provides comparison to other jurisdictions. So in these we wanted to show you the study date that's pretty much the first row uh just so you know how old their studies are as well as the
assess portion which is either a policy decision or an artificial cap because of that new legislation where they cannot increase more than 50%. So, this group of jurisdictions are ranging anywhere from $230 to about
$1,200 per home for single family and these two are about 670 to 780. Law enforcement uh the inventory includes vehicles and equipment and the buildings and land are included as part
of general government buildings. So this law enforcement impact fee is strictly vehicle based real equipment level of service measured in terms of officers per residence which is about 2.4 and then um per officer uh per
person that value divided by population gives us $155 uh per person which again represents the investment up to this point. uh there was some general fund utilize for vehicles. So that generated a
credit. So then the cost minus credit results in about$1 to $115 per person. And those figures multiply by residence per units gives us a fee. It's about 100 almost $150 per uh single family
home. So in this comparison, we just wanted to find other counties that their law enforcement is strictly vehiclebased. So the we have two counties like that and there are I'm sure others but I'm those are the two that we are aware of. So theirs is
ranging from $155 to $180 per res uh per home. Government buildings they again they provide general government services, court services, law enforcement, correctional are included here as well. So, it's altogether
350,000 square feet, 60 acres of land, and the building values range from $125 per square foot to $450 for the jail buildings. And land was estimated at 20,000 per acre. Again, level of service is
measured in terms of square foot per resident, which is almost five square feet. And again anytime we use the existing level of service for the calculations we are making the assumption that county will continue to provide that going
forward. Uh so the total asset value is about 104 million divide by population gives us a value of about uh $1470 again representing the investment the comm community has made up to this point.
uh there were both contributions from general fund as well as there is a outstanding debt service related to the jail. So those generate a credit. So the net cost after that credit ranges from $815 to 960. Those
multiply by residence per unit results in a fee of about $1270 for single family. Um and then again various fees for non-residential. So in this example we just to make it the comparison apples to
apples we added government buildings law and jail everything together and same thing for the other jurisdictions just because different jurisdictions configure their fees differently. So here this is your your 1400 is both the law enforcement vehicle plus the
government buildings that compares to in this slide uh anywhere from 8 or 600 610 to about 1,600 in other jurisdictions as well as and then in this one about 500 to
1900 parks and recreation ation. So again that's the investment the community made but you do have an adopted level of standard in the case of parks which is two acres and we use the lower of the two because uh if we haven't achieved it we can't use it but
if there's no intention going forward which is reflected toward the standard then we cannot charge for it. So we are using the two acres. uh land value is estimated about 20,000 per acre and on-site development cost another 10,000 so altogether 30,000
which results in a cost land cost of $60 per resident. In addition to land there's recre there's a value for the recreational facilities which uh ends up about $190 per resident. So altogether it's about
$250 per resident cost. Again here we didn't have any expansion projects within the time frame that we reviewed. So we did use the 20% based on other jurisdictions. So that result in a net cost of
$200 and and park impact fees are charged only to residential land uses. So we are using uh again residence per unit for different residential categories. So that the fee range is
anywhere from 210 to about four uh $445. So compared to the other jurisdictions that single family home uh of 445 is um basically within the range of other jurisdictions which are here ranging
anywhere from 312 to about 2500 almost. So transportation fees are calculated a little differently. So I just kind of want to show you the formula real quick. We start with how much one lane mile is
costing and then how much capacity is carrying. So those two divide and we are looking at and I'll talk about this both county and state roads improvements. So that cost divide by capacity gives us about
$345 value per vehicle miles of capacity. That's basically to say every time we add a car to the roadway system for them to travel is costing that infrastructure $345. Sort of a unit cost. An average home generates 32
vehicle miles daily travel. So those two multiply gives us the total total cost of 11,000. And then we subtract the credit other revenue sources and that net fee ends up being about 4,900. So this is what we what you have here is
an what we call a networkwide fee. So it includes all roads that are collectors and above city, county, state. Um there are jurisdictions who charge only for county roads but there are more jurisdictions more common that
collects for all of them and partially because you set the standard you prioritize the projects to some level and um state is not in the impact B business. So you know you can do either way. Projects built with these revenues
should add capacity to those type of roads. So in the case of state roads, some jurisdictions use the impact fees for local match or they may improve a road that's parallel to a state road which helps that state road as well or they may just advance some right away.
So those are some examples. Uh demand for transportation is measured in terms of three variables. how many trips each land use generates daily, how long those trips are, and how many of them are new trips because of that land use. So, we don't charge for
pass by trips. And the data sources are national uh data as well as Florida studies and the travel demand model. On the cost side, this is not just in transportation, in all your
fees. Um this chart kind of shows the cost trends and we had that 0506 boom and then we went into the great recession. Costs went down and then they started increase again but then since the pandemic that level of increase heightened. So you can kind of see that toward the end of this
chart. So in the case of county costs uh your all your improvements basically um were limited to dirt to pave roads. So that's what we use because that's what you are planning to build. Um on the
state improvements again we looked at any state projects in the county and then supplemented that with other jurisdictions. So that resulted in a construction cost of about 5 million per lane mile which means if it's a one mile
of road with two lanes is 10 million. Um and then with all the other variables that go to building a cost the design right away uh and CI the total cost ends up being about 7 million per lane
mile. We then looked at how much capacity each type of road generates and blended them by their um project their lane miles. So that resulted in a combined cost per capacity of $345.
On the credit side, again, this is just like the cost. It includes all revenue sources. So really primary contributions are coming from state investment in the county. So that's the bulk of it. There's about 24 million 23 and a half is coming from state on an annual
basis. One thing we'd like to mention when we do transportation impact fees, the question comes up that you know they have a dedicated revenue source. Why the fuel taxes are not enough and fuel tax pennies fuel taxes are on a per gallon basis and the state taxes are indexed
but local taxes are not allowed to be indexed. All other revenue sources are indexed sales tax and so on. So between inability to index and the fuel efficiency a penny in mid90s is only worth maybe half its value. And that's
why we are seeing more and more fuel tax revenues being only enough for potentially maintenance really not leaving much for capacity projects. So overall uh the single family uh fee for uh for this for all
roads ends up being about 4,900 per unit. And this compares it to this slide and next slide compares it to other jurisdictions. Um this is Klay County has multiple fees ranging from uh 800 to about
7,000 and then uh this group of counties uh ranging anywhere from 1,600 to about 10,000 or so. We then also look at the need to have the benefit districts for all fees. And again, this is to demonstrate that
fee payer receives the benefit. In the case of fire, law and government buildings, the services are countywide. You know, fire stations help each other. The trucks go, they don't necessarily are limited to their immediate area. Same thing with the police vehicles and
then the government buildings, the you know, your courts and everything serves the entire county. So those in th in those cases the benefit district is countywide for transportation and parks that tend to be more localized. Uh we reviewed any natural barriers uh
developable area sizes. We looked at uh tra in the case of transportation travel from one district to other or where people are traveling. Uh and then we looked at where your improvements are and in the case of parks your inventory. And uh we propose to have two districts
basically divided by the river. We don't want to have too many districts if we don't need to because then the pools of money become so small that it's hard to build projects. But we do want to demonstrate benefit. So again this is just showing you the summary of the fees. So
non-utility fees amounting about 7700. The um two largest ones are government buildings and roads. And then when we add the utilities, uh it's about 16,000 and again the highest ones are transportation, wastewater
followed by water. We then looked at the uh revenue projections for that. Basically reviewed your residential permitting and did a range um low end based on last two years of permitting, high-end based on past five
years. So with these uh we think that again we broke it down by area but the county could generate 1.7 to 6 million annually uh depending on the permitting levels and also depending on which
fee. So before I turn it over to Brian maybe I'll stop here answer any questions you may have or if you like he can go through and however he'd like. All right Commissioner Harvey you're recognized. Well, first, Madam Chair, thank you. But I do want to get some direction from you on how you want to
proceed. Um, there's 200 and some odd pages here, and I can probably have five questions per page, but I'm not going to go there today. So, um, I realize this is a first time out of the box, if you will. So, um, but but I have one
question and and then I'll let our chair lady, uh, continue the meeting. page 21 because I got a call this morning from our sheriff about a different uh item and I said, "I was expecting your call
once you saw the impact fee." And um so we were talking about it, but what kind of glares to me is that we're using 63,000 residents. When you started your presentation, you went
76,000 residents. Um, and I saw some of that during your presentation, different numbers from from years back. And I guess because it shows that we're at 2.04 officers per thousand. Well, we
know that we're spread out so big that it's not just about per thousand. It's about land mass, too. So, I don't know. I don't know why you use 63,000 when our current number is 76 and
you started off with 76. Law enforcement service area is uninccorporated county only. The cities have their own not in this county. I mean we all help each other. So no they do and then exactly you all help but their primary
focus is unincorporated county or primary responsibility. Uh that's why okay and and also the that does make it makes sense now but I just I'm a little confused but I'm not gonna ask anymore because there's going to be a lot. Well the city of Pa has 10,000 and they do
their own impact piece and lock and well not Christmas city. All right. Any other questions from the DAS? All right. Um let me see. I have a couple things here. um on the very beginning um when I think it's your
third slide in where it says background purpose and we talked about it says average 600 residential permits per year for the past four years. Um that's simply the county permits
that includes the city too. That's what my question was. I thought it must Okay, that makes sense. Um and then on legal requirements. You have HB479 requires interlocal agreements by October 1st, 2025 between cities and
counties if both charging for transportation impacts. So, um the city of Palaca does already have uh impact fees and I believe that includes transportation. So, you're saying that
that's required. We would have to so if the county decides to charge in the city also then the fees need to be coordinated that they are not double charging. But if the county only charges unincorporated county or other cities that doesn't have it then you don't have
a conflict. Madam chair. Yeah. My book is not right with your book. My page three is not your page. I don't know what you're talking I'm on page 63. Okay. because mine starts differently.
Okay, there we are. I was trying to find that. Okay. I know. I need them, too. Well, no, I'm way down. Okay. All right. I think I have one more. Thank you. Um, and then on your countywide residential permitting, I don't know
what slide number it is, but it was our page 78, you have from 21 to 24, 580 per year for year 20 22 23 to 24 160. Yeah. 160.
Okay. So, are you including 20 24 year numbers in both of those? No, just on the high end. Okay. Just on the five-year average. Okay. All right. Those are my questions. I just had some clarity. Need some clarity. Anybody else? Yes, ma'am. I have a question. Go
ahead, Commissioner Alexander. So, primarily this this involves the unincorporated areas of Putnham County. Whereas when we would have a development that would share resources between the county and the city, we have to
establish an interlocal agreement by October of 2025 only if both the county and the city is collecting in the city transportation impact fees. So for example, you if you
implement your fee, so technically if the city didn't have the fee, you would collect automatically countywide. I mean this fee is calculated countywide basis, but the city does have those fees city. So then that's the decision if if you would like
to collect in the city then there has to be some agreement between you and the city. What portion of the fee will go to them? what portion of the fee will uh be staying in the staying with the county and the main purpose is so that there's
no double charging. If they are charging for full impact and then we add on top of it the county there's double charging. So that's that I think that was the primary goal of that bill. So an example of that would be I'm sorry example of that would be if the city has permitted a development to go within the
city boundaries. However, they're using a county road to access the property. Is that an example? Yes, that's an example. So, in the city, you have county roads, state roads. And that's the thing about transportation. It's a very integrated system. It's very hard to draw a boundary and be done with it. Not like
other service areas. So then who collects for that? Who makes the improvement? All those and is it mandated that this needs to be established by October of 2025? Yes. if if you are going to charge in the
city. So, are there I guess there I would assume there are other municipalities and counties that we can mirror their agreements or have something structured because that's a pretty short time frame to work that out considering we meet twice a month. Correct. And involve and collaborate
with our city commissioners. So, this is going to be a challenge. Right. All right. So, um, you want, you said you have somebody else come up. Yes. Okay. You go on your pages. I found it now. Thank you.
And now we're going back. Oh, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I thought we were going to go to the next steps. Are we going to do this presentation and then discuss the next steps? come back to next step. Okay. All right. We want we will have to come back to next steps. Yes. Go ahead.
Good morning, commissioners, members of the public staff. My name is Brian Mance. I'm with uh Govers and I'm here to present the results of the water and wastewater impact fee study.
So uh as as Negan touched on uh uh to pro provide a little bit of background on impact fees, they do support a policy of growth paying for growth. They do help to uh especially for water and wastewater impact fees. They help to reduce the need for monthly user rate
increases. They are very common in the utility industry. They're used to pay for either growth related capital projects or growth related debt service. And as Negan mentioned in her presentation, there are dual rational nexus requirements established through case law where the fees have to relate
to the capital expenditures for growth and they have to be proportionate to the benefit received. Uh as far as the water and wastewater impact fee calculation method methodology, we considered the uh uh cost of existing capacity allocable to
serve growth. No grant-f funed, contributed, or quote cost-f free infrastructure was included in the calculations. We also considered the costs reflected in the most recent multi-year capital improvement program. Uh the level of service standards for one equivalent residential connection,
which would be like a a you smallest meter size uh is would be we was used 300 gallons per day for water and 240 gallons per day for wastewater. The water level of service is cons uh standard is consistent with what's in
the county's uh comprehensive plan 2045. So the proposed water and wastewater impact fees per equivalent residential connection are 2,65 for water and 5,455 total
8,60. One thing that's uh that you know we we use as a reasonable check is the calculated cost per gallon uh uh which which uh as you can see is $868 and uh for water and per per
gallon. That's basically the fee divided by the level of service. And for wastewater it's $22.73. The cost of wastewater uh treatment capacity has increased dramatically over the past few years. uh other utilities are having to spend over
$40 per uh per gallon for wastewater treat capacity. The reason why our calculated uh fee is $22.73 is that we're assuming that consistent with um uh history, the county will receive a tremendous amount
of grant funding for this infrastructure. We've assumed 75%. As far as the uh impact piece schedule, we're proposing a dual approach where uh the the fee is charged either by the estimated flow of the development times
the the cost per gallon of capacity or based on the on the meter size the uh with higher meter sizes paying a higher uh impacting. it would be a greater of u approach and we we think that that would be uh um you know it's a it's a
reasonable two twopronged approach. So as far as the the uh impact fees how they compare uh you can see that they're uh compare uh comparable to those of other
utilities. Uh how uh I should say that uh you know a lot of times you'll find that impact fees haven't been reviewed for 20 years and so some of some of the uh some of the local governments on the lower end of the the the uh the
comparison may not have reviewed their fees. I I can say the trend is we're seeing more um as someone that does a lot of these the we're seeing uh the the uh calculated fees trend significantly
um where we're we're seeing more fee calculations closer to what uh the city of Groveland is is uh is is is charging and they're they're of course on the on the uh right end of the of the spectrum and again a comparison
An impact fee comparison is not a report card on how well a utility is performing because there are a lot of reasons why impact fees differ among utilities and you know one of the things I just mentioned was that the time elapsed since the last impact fee review uh the
uh you know the source of supply the type or complexity of treatment uh historical grant funding of infrastructure which in the county's case has been significant uh administrative policies to charge something lower than than what could be supported. Uh level of service, level of
service standards, all these different factors uh cause impact fees among different local governments to to be different. And so again, it's not a report card. As far as the potential water and wastewater impact fee revenue, it's going to depend on how quickly uh
there are uh um how how quickly the the equivalent residential connections uh connect. But we're estimating that, you know, based on the amount of capacity uh that that's recognized with with the county's planning and the level of service
standards on how how much how many equivalent res residential connections uh could uh could be supported. We're looking about $16 million over the life of the uh that that could be uh um that
the county could collect over the next uh you know several years. And that's again assuming 95% utilization of capacity. You you never see utilities that are 100% uh utilized. So our recommendations are to
adopt the proposed water and wastewater impact fees. Uh they do support growth paying for growth. They're based on the most recent and local data. They help to reduce the need for future user rate adjustments and because of affordability concerns, that's what I the trend I'm
seeing is is that more local governments are wanting to increase the impact fees to to the the uh the uh the maximum amount that that could be justified. Uh they do help to reduce the need for financing capital improvements, which means you have you would be paying lower
interest in issuance costs. Uh and again they can be used uh for to pay for expansion related debt allowing user rate revenues to be used for um other purposes and and of course you know we would recommend that the the county would update the impact fees whenever
the capital plans costs or funding sources change significantly. So that's my presentation. Are there any questions from from the board? Commissioner Harvey you're recognized. Thank you Madam Chair. And just talking water and wastewater real
quick. Um the only wastewater plant we have is in East Palaka. Okay. Um is this these feed based on what we're using now? And and let me qualify that. Let's say there's a big development going north on 17 where we don't have a plant.
You know that we might have to build a new plant. Let's say that we have a place in West Putham that's going to need a wastewater plant that we don't have a plant. the cost of of that would be significantly different. Those assessments would be a lot more than the
one we if we're going to be using it on the current facility that we have. Correct. Right. The the the the current wastewater impact fees assume the expansion of your current wastewater facility. And that's one of the reasons why we're showing a large uh you know a
a substantial uh wastewater um impact fee. you know, that's, you know, $5,000 because that cost of capacity um is is substantial even though we are assuming that that the the county would get 75% u you know external funding or grant
funding. So, one followup, would it make sense for us if we're going to do something like this to have different districts set up around the county for the potential of future development of a new system? um because that's going to
be a standalone highly costly at that point I'm sure because nothing's going down in cost. So you know I'm sure the 10 years from now that cost will be more. So probably look at East Palaca as its own district and look at some of the
other areas of the county south Putinham West Putinham North Putnham as getting their own districts for that reason. Yeah. Yeah. Could you you can certainly have different impact fees. you know, this these impact fees are uh deal with the East Palatka system, but but
certainly you could have different impact fees for different districts if it makes sense to do so. I mean, you'd have to look at your your capital plans um how much external funding you would get through those fees and and whether it would make make uh sense or whether you could support a a fee. Thank you.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Commissioner Alexander. No, ma'am. My question was answered. Are there any questions from staff? All right. So, I guess the question that I have is what's next? So, I'm not sure which one of you will be taking that. What's our next
steps? Yeah, that just the last slide I think. I can't. Okay. and the local agreement I mean you can that needs to be done by October 1st only if you are starting to charge in the city
by then. So if the city if the fee is first implemented in unincorporated area and then while city and the county uh get into an agreement on that you don't have to have it until you start charging in the city if that makes sense. So it could be a phased adoption
in a way. We can do it at the health side as well. Okay. So, the next steps are depending on board input to staff the preparation of the ordinance and we have a legal sub who's working on the ordinance, draft
ordinance right now and then would like to submit to the county attorney and so on. And then uh and then it's really going to adoption hearing. And that's your normal process of adopting uh ordinances if it's two hearing or one hearing, however you'd like to do. And
then the fees become effective 9 days after adoption. That doesn't apply to water and waste water, the 90-day limit. Right. Because Right. Yeah. However, there there are some some uh customer notification requirements that through the billing system, all customers have to be notified of of of the of the
impact of any water and wastewater uh rate or or uh impact pack any rates, fees or charges have to uh customers have to be noted notified through the billing process. And that that's again just for
utilities. All right, Commissioner Harvey. Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, I see your next steps board input. So, now we're going to probably go back and look at this and dissect it and ask our 500 questions that we have to staff and to
you and and go from there. So, I guess my first question is do we do we run everything through our staff and then they they answer to you they're going to send it to you first and then you'll send it back or Absolutely. Yeah. Yeah, we can. That's
probably more efficient if okay if we get a one combined and then we can respond and send it all. And what about our public input? Because I do see some of our partners in the room today and you know that's that's really important to them too because this is you know we
didn't have impact fees or we had them but we never instituted them and this is something now that growth is coming and we want to be orderly and we want to be fair about it. We want to get our partners. So how do we get that input? Uh so different jurisdictions handle that differently but you can have a
stakeholder presentation uh which you can invite uh you know the builders you know chamber of commerce those who are interested you can do it that way they can give their input during the work sessions here.
Um I think usually and some communities set up a group sort of a impact the advisory that includes also citizens as well as state builders and stakeholders. And and a final question for you. I get the other parts of the
implementation part, but you know, in one of your slides, you referenced Elatchua County and how they their rates were pretty much single was 114 and double was 220. They just kind of used an arbitrary rate. Didn't look like they
used. So what what is happening is two things is um there there are some jurisdictions they buy down the fees like St. John's uh St. John's County used to do that they buy bought down the non-residential fees with sales tax for
a long time. So that's a policy decision. The other one that arbitrary percentage is happening because of that 50% limit. You cannot increase any single fee more than 50%. Meanwhile, demand component changes. So the
percentage of adoption is no longer the same from one land use to the other. So that's an unintended consequence of something that we are technically not supposed to do with impact fees. Everybody should pay the same percentage. But because they put this 50% increase
of every single item. So if one fee was going up, you know, over time like how many people per housing unit changes, you know, how how much uh the travel or demand like the new trip data comes. So demand component shifts. So it's not
like everybody is at the same relation as the last study. So then when you put that 50% gap, that ruins the proportionality basically. But my my follow-up question on that is real simple. Let's just say, let's pick on fire, the fire department, and let's say
that the fee is $1,000 that you're recommending based on your study today. What's the maximum we can go to that we say we disagree with that thousand? We don't think that that's the right number. So, we're going to have to have some basis to make that go up, right?
So, how do we make that or down? Or down. Yeah, one or the other. So, down is can be a policy decision. You can say we will adopt fire fees at 80%. Okay, that that's you can't to go above what your study shows is you either need to
show new data. Um I basically there has to be some data that says okay we think this rate is too low because you estimated fire station cost too low here we have a bid that shows twice that
something like that you know. So basically just a square footage justification for something as simple as that or if the square footage was low incorrect for example we didn't you know yeah we just have to find a component that would justify the increase based on your study. Correct. Okay. And you
referenced roads you know so much per mile for one lane. But you know roads are different. A flat road is one thing. If you go out to West Putin where elevations are tremendous that road is going to be a lot more because of drainage. So there's going to be
variations in that. So we need to be very mindful of that and set those rates where where it benefits our partners or you know so right we we basically looked at your actual improvements
uh and we use whatever you did historically and what you programmed so it's a blend of all those type of different projects and it's an average and impact fees are an average they are not anybody's personalized impact I mean because there's no way to handle it that
way. So they are average around the service area. Thank you, Madam Chair. Commissioner Alexander. Thank you, Madam Chair. Um quick question. Um in your experience, once um say the commission did decide to implement the um the
impact fees, you said there's a 90day uh start time on that. Correct. And my question I guess would be re um regarding the builders, developers and such. At what point do they become
responsible for those if they've already drawn up have they pulled permits or at what point do they forgo that and when are they uh when are they going to be forced to pay those? So most jurisdictions collect at building permit. Um but but I'm saying at so at
that point in time when they like say we started at June 29th if they had pulled their u initial building permit June 28th they're not going to be imposed those fees but as of June 29th you're going to get it. Yes. And the building department will be very busy in June.
Good morning Zach. Okay. I just want to establish a timeline on that. So and and some some collect at the se Excuse me. All right. Thank you very much. And there's a time frame on when we need to
make a decision as well because um it's once you do the study, it's only good for a certain period of time. We we don't have a exact time frame, but I mean yes, within the first may I wouldn't exceed more than six months of
a adoption period. Yeah, I thought there was something in statue about that. That's why I'm asking that you have to do it within a certain period of time. So the the new statutory changes from the point of engagement with your consultant to the point of adoption, you only have 12 months. So the legislature
didn't want uh local governments to be using outdated data as the basis for them um providing special assessments for impact. So um we are running out of time. So was this from the point of presentation, the point of presentation
or the point of engagement? point of engagement when we first engage with them and when well it doesn't it doesn't exactly define the beginning point. It's not is it the day we get the contract or is it when we collect our data or is it when we have our first kickoff meeting.
So that's the part that's not defined but in in my mind the latest point we can use is probably when we got the data so that data is not older than Rich what do you think on that? So because the law changed midstream for a lot of people,
what a number of my clients and other local governments are doing is um because there was a request a long period of time, a request for data, um they were amending the contracts to start on the date where the data was actually provided for analysis.
Where would that put us as Putnham County? What date is that for us? I'm looking up. Okay. Okay. Thank you. All right. Are there any other questions? I think we're going to take a a threem minute recess and then we'll um Thank
you for your presentation. You'll stick around for some more questions. Thank you. in this meeting. Thank you for the presentations. We have some public speaker cards. We're going to move in regarding the subject matter. Mr. Michael
Woodward, thanks for being here today. We always appreciate you coming. It's good to be appreciated. That's right. Michael Woodward, 517 South Francis Street, Interlock. As I've said before, uh
impact fees aren't about growth versus no growth. They're about whose lunch money pays for whose lunch. uh is uh is new development going to pay the costs for the additional infrastructure that the public needs to provide to that new
development or is the burden of that cost going to fall back on the existing tax base. So, I'm glad to see the county moving forward with this because I don't like paying for other people's lunch. I have some specific comments about uh
information on table ES1 which uh it's page 86 of of your agenda packet. I don't know if that lines up with what you actually have there. I think it's uh page correct ES3 of the report.
And one of the things that I noticed there is that uh this this schedule it charges all single family dwelling units the same. If they're detached, if they're attached, that's different. But there's no difference
according to the size. And it hardly seems fair that the impact fee for a two-bedroom,000q ft bungalow would be just as large as the impact fee
for a five- bedroomedroom 3500 square ft house. And I just want to point out to the board for your future consideration that there are alternative methods for uh how those fees are structured. The
impact fee statute itself mentions number of bedrooms and square footage as alternatives for uh the uh establishing the impact fee charge for residential units. And as you'll see from from this
chart, all the other types of development do have a per square foot per thousand square foot charge on there. So, uh, you might consider going forward discussing with your consultants, uh, running some numbers
for a tiered system of impact fee charges that would be more fair to the people who are building smaller homes. Uh, another thing I want to point out about this this schedule and the numbers on
it is as the consultants pointed out, you do have the policy option of going with a number lower than the number that is shown here. What the number show, what the number here shows, however, is representation and a fairly conservative
one of what the cost will be to the county taxpayers uh for the services the uh the uh increase in capital expenditures for infrastructure to be able to provide the
services that this new development requires. So as you can if you consider going lower, consider that each increment you go lower is putting some of that burden back on the existing tax base rather than leaving it with the
development that is actually going to be creating and using that demand. So again it gets back to the question of who's paying for whose lunch. Uh also another factor to consider is as your consultants
mentioned there is some uh restriction in the statute about increasing a fee once it is established. There a lot of hoops to jump through, time delays, limitations on what
percentage you can increase it and so forth. So if you start out lowball, you may find yourself in a difficult position when you want to keep up with inflation. So I leave you with those thoughts. Thank you. Those are all very good points. Thank
you, Mr. Miner. You're recognized. David Miner, 116 Sheffy Road. I understand a lot of the things that have been said and stuff and this fees that I've seen here scare me to death. I've been working on a a text amendment to try to get my children a home uh built
on a farm piece property that we've purchased and uh I've already got my oldest one's house done. We haven't had to pay an impact fee. My children, in my opinion, and I know I don't see it the way you all do, are not going to affect any type of impact because the fact is
they already live here. They were born here. I've been here since 75. My wife was born here. So, we're already paying taxes. We're already living here. We've already crossed that bridge. I'd rather see people that want to move in and do a development. Now, you can call this uh
property that we're doing a development if you want to, but it's a family subdivision. We got some hoops to go through with a text amendment, what have you, but we're already paying the taxes. We're already paying fees. We're already paying for schools that we don't use. There are just so many things that we
pay for already. And to do this to do this uh this more money, if you're looking at $8,000 as an impact fee in just round numbers because we're not in the area where we have a sub tank and all that, I've got four houses built for
my quadruplets. Okay. So, that's $32,000 that I've got to pay when we're going to have our we'll have our own wells, our own septic tanks. I have to do the uh road base which I've already done. Well, there's a lot of things that we have to do. How is that affecting the cost of
the county? Now, we're on Highway 17, that property is. So, we're not affecting any county roads. The effectiveness that we can come up with is okay, but you're going to use the roads going to the store and stuff, but we already do. If they stayed
living with me, we're already affecting it. There should be some waiverss on people that's already paid their share in the community, okay? Exemptions or discounts or something. I'm just It just scares the mess out of me to try to help my children so I didn't have to they
didn't have to work and live as hard as I did when I was younger. So, I want to see something be implemented if I understand the impact fees. I even thought about I'd rather see them pay uh uh charge for more for gas taxes and use that as an impact fee because the
fact is then everybody is sharing it and that way we pay for our own lunches right so if everybody I like that term that was pretty good um but uh the the fact is if you only got 30% people that live in Putham County that pays property
tax anyway there's so many exemptions and so many and they don't improve their life their self they just They're where they were 20 years ago, 30 years ago. So here I've improved myself and because I've improved myself and want to improve my family, I've got to pay an impact fee
that I've not impacted Putin County. I've actually developed part of Putnham County. I mean, I've done quite a few buildings and quite a few development and stuff. So I've paid my impact fees out of my pocket. Thank you. So that that does bring up a
good qu question and a good point. Um, is there a way that you can exempt out current residents? So, Madam Chair, I'll let our consultants address some of that issue because they're the ones that as part of our engagement with them that would have to defend this in court if it ever got
challenged. I mean, the general principle for the most part is that the application of the assessments has to be fairly aortioned based on the use. The other thing I also just want to quickly mention is that because we talk about impact fees and sometimes this gets confused. The school board has their own
ability to levy impact fees which have nothing to do with us. So no matter what ours are, someone who creates development, the school board may not have the same type of exemption that is being requested or that may ultimately be approved by this board. Yeah, thanks for saying that. That is that's a very
true statement. Thank you. So the impact fees are attached to the buildings and they we can they are not necessarily differentiated by who buys that building. It's pay one-time payment for the life of the building. Different families will live there. Uh even in the
case of the gentleman who's building home for his kids, the kids probably will have families. Their impact will increase over time. And if they sell that property, uh that value stays with it. So it had it's it just one-time payment. If anybody else buys that building, tears
it down, builds a lot the same type of building, they don't pay an impact fee. It's a credit against it. So, so there is really no mechanism that makes it exception for family or non-family. The only exemptions that the law allows is
for affordable and workforce housing. Uh for the qualify affordable workforce housing, we're able to discount the fees or wave them. uh otherwise uh in some cases you know the counties bought down fees just like I mentioned about St.
John's County like economic development uh type of initiatives by using some other revenue source. Okay. All right. There any other questions? Yes, ma'am. I have one. Could you define workforce housing for me,
please? Yes. It's um up to 120% of the a uh area median income. Families who make up to 120% of the area median income uh qualify for you know if if it's a house
that that they can afford um then it's qualified. So it's like less than 30% of their income goes to housing and their income is either 120% or less than average median income of the
area. That's like a formula. Okay. There's a there's a statute that defines it and this ex uh in the impact v act they refer those those who qualify under that uh you can reduce them and usually your housing department may be
using ship funds those are the same type of housing typically we don't have a very high medium median income here in average median area income so just asking a question thank you
all Okay. All right. Back to the board for discussion and how we want to proceed. Commissioner Harvey. Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh, I think based on the information, you know, this is our first
sniff of the apple. Didn't even get a real big bite of it. I do think we need to probably go into a workshop session very, very soon. um time is not in our favor here and also invite our stakeholders to that our constitutional
the people that are affected by it our business community uh there um now we have time to look at it but within a few probably within 30 days we need to be looking at getting together and doing this and moving this ball forward that's
my opinion thank you madam chair I would agree with Mr. Harvey, uh, time is of the essence. Um, again, I understand Mr. Woodward's um, argument, but at the end of the day, it doesn't matter what size house you have. It's
the same size fire truck that's coming. It's the same amount of police officers. It's the same what are they? Chopper pumps, water system. Um, you're receiving all of that. And, you know, I've raised a family. I know that my first house was
smaller, but I had a lot more people in it. And as I my children have grown and they've exited the home, my houses have grown larger because my wealth has increased, but I've got fewer people there. So it's it's kind of a slippery slope. And you know, you would be relying on people to be honest about the
number of people that are living in a home. You know, I've seen people 10 or 20 in a house depending upon the conditions. So it's kind of hard to do that. But when you have hard data as to a house, you know, that that's what the impact fees and it just it seems to make
things more difficult the more uh criteria you add to it. I appreciate what you're saying. And as far as Mr. minors questions. Um, I would love to see that, but I don't understand the legality and based on what I'm hearing,
I don't think there is a legality for a type of portability as we would see in um taxes. Um, we've we've talked about it and we would love to see something like that because I agree with you, we've been here, we paid our dues to live in Putnham County. Um, but
undoubtedly your children will have an impact on the county. They'll have wives or daughter or husbands either way, children, additional vehicles. So, there will be an additional burden at some point. Um, I don't know how we fix that.
But I I do sympathize with what you're saying because I've been here my entire life. My family's been here their entire life and we've paid that those fees. So, I I don't know what the solution is, but I understand what you're saying, Mr. Miner.
Okay. Any other comments? All right. So, it looks like we've um we want to move forward with a workshop. We are missing a commissioner today. Um he had some surgery. That's why Commissioner Palisier's out. So, in respect for him, he we obviously need to
um make sure that we have a workshop where he can have his input as well. Um so, we wish him the best, but we'll see him hopefully in a few days he'll be back on his feet. Um so, a workshop is sounds like what we're looking at, Mr. Suggs. um a workshop for the future um
with some stakeholders and uh public meeting business community. So you have to go through a public hearing process in order for adoption anyway. You can combine the two things where you invite stakeholders to the public hearing process where I think for you as a commission it would have that kind of
feel like a workshop but it would also enable you to take votes um based on the um feedback that you get during those meetings. At that time, would we have the draft? Um, would we have the draft? You could you can ask the consultants
for it. Okay. Yes. I think we would like to I that's what I would like to see is if we're going to, you know, go forward then I think we would have the need to have the draft um ordinance to take a look at as well. Do we need to make a motion for a workshop? Yes, please. I'd
like to make a motion that we hold a workshop engaging our community partners uh regarding the adoption of the impact fees. Second. We have a motion on the floor and second. Any discussion? All in favor
say I. I. I. All right. So, move forward. Before we um I do want to mention we have the honorable Annie Davis from city of Palaca with us. Um PLA city commissioner. We also have um Denise Vogelstein from the Florida
Association of Counties Trust. And we have Laura Palvis from the Putnham County Chamber as the executive director. Benji Bates, pre president of Putnham Chamber is also here. And Palaca City Attorney Jane West is also in the audience. So we just want to recognize you and thank you for being
here. All right, moving on. Madam Chair. Yes, sir. So just for clarification, are you are you looking to combine that first public hearing? Yes. Okay. Thank you. All right, good morning. Uh, this is, uh, for the record, Michael Graves, Planning and Development Services. We
are discussing reszone 25-00001. Uh, Miss Kathleen Kelch is requesting a zoning map amendment from Agriculture Estate Planned Unit development and residential one to Agriculture Estate on an 18.14 acre property located at 205 St. John's Drive
in Palaca to establish consistent zoning and allow for development. The surrounding zoning is consisting of uh agriculture estate and residential one. The subject site has a feature land use category of rural residential according to the national wetland index wetlands
layer and the FEMA flood zone layer on the GIS reference map. Lands do not appear to contain wetlands and is located in FEMA flood zone XX500 and a small portion of AE which is a special flood hazard area. Uh should the applicant's request be approved, the parcel will be eligible
for building permits to construct a single family residence adhering to the regulations of the agriculture state zoning district as well as any other developments allowed by right in the AE zoning district. Here you can see an aerial overview of the property, the future land
use, the split zoning, and it is staff's recommendation to approve the request to amend the zoning map amendment from agriculture estate plan unit development and residential one to agriculture estate. Uh staff finds that the proposed resoning is consistent with the goals,
objectives, and policies of the adopted comprehensive plan and meets the location requirements of the agriculture state zoning district provided in the land development code and the comprehensive plan. In their March 12, 2025 meeting, the Putnham County Planning Commission unanimously voted to
recommend approval of the same request. Uh, this is going to be meeting one of two as the size of the property indicates that we have to have a second meeting to approve a reszone. Any questions? Commissioner Harvey. Thank you, Madam Chair. I I do have a
question and it might be better for Zach at this point, but you can try it if you'd like to take a stab at it. In the request, it says remove the undeveloped PUD, which elsewise renders the property ineligible. Zach, you and I had a talk a long time
ago about some of these old PUDs and correct me if I'm wrong because sometimes I hear what I want to hear and I do admit that. Um, but you said some of these PUDs or I heard some of these PUDs expire on their own after a certain
time frame. So why didn't this one just expire on its own? So even when the P for the record, Zachary Baker, uh when the PUD expires, it doesn't necessarily mean that all the entitlements go away or revert back to
what the land originally was. What it does is it it renders that property undevelopable because the PUD was governing what you could do, but then it expired. So now there's a essentially it's a broken PUD that we can't utilize.
Um, so within that uh legal description, that's where that zoning is located. So that portion of the property would be unbuildable um unless it followed the the regulations established in that PUB, but when it expires, those regulations no longer exist. So it's almost like a
no man's land, if you will. Um, it's worth noting too that the the other the majority of that property could um have some development on it, but this is also a measure to make consistent the zoning on the property. So, we know exactly
what setbacks to assign. We know what the allowed uses are, and we don't have to waver between some imaginary line that nobody can actually go out and point their finger to to say, "Well, you can't have a shed there. That's residential one property. It has to be 12 feet this way, you know, so we're
making it consistent is more or less the top priority here. Well, Zach, thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. Are there any other questions for staff? Commissioner Newold. Yes. Just a clarification on those expired PUDs. So if if this applicant decided they wanted
to utilize that existing PUD, they would have to come back and get it reestablished, which I'm assuming would be less ownorous than developing a new PUD. Uh that is correct. They would need to reestablish the PUD. They would have to either go through the process again
or perform a PUD amendment. uh of note is that the PUD that was proposed there was going to be a multifamily development with a bit of uh commercial mixed in as well as institutional uh and because of the area we can't really support that in the modern day. So more
than likely they would not be able to reestablish this exact same PUB. Okay. Thank you. That that gives me some insight on the process. Anyway, I appreciate it. Thank you. Do we have any speaker cards for this subject matter? Is there anybody in the audience who would like to speak for or against this
issue? All right, coming back to the board. Madam Chair, Madam Chair, since seeing no one wants to speak, I move this to our next meeting on May 13th. I believe that's our first meeting in May uh at 9:00 that we'll hear this again.
Second. All right, I'm have a motion and a second. All in favor say I. I. I. All right, motion passes. We'll make we'll hear this for the second time on May 13th. Madam Chair, uh an email went out yesterday afternoon. Item B under uh planning and zoning uh public hearings
has been withdrawn. The application was withdrawn by the applicant yesterday afternoon. All right. Okay. Going on into consent agenda items. This portion of the agenda is the designed to allow citizens an opportunity to bring matters to the attention of the board. It is not
reasonable to expect that the board will engage in debate or deliberation about matters on which the board has received no prior information as part of the agenda. Please limit your time to three minutes. Public comment cards are conveniently placed at the meeting room entrance and should be submitted prior to the meeting to the deputy clerk who
sits to the right of the podium. Madam clerk, do we have any cards? Is there anybody who wants to speak on agenda items only? All right, seeing none, um, back to commissioners. Uh, anybody would like to push uh to pull something? Not
push. Pull. Commissioner Harvey, I have none. Thank you. Commissioner Newold. None to pull. Commissioner Alexander. No, ma'am. None to pull. And I have none. Madam Chair, I'd like to move a motion that we can approve the consent agenda items A, B, C, D, E, F, and G.
I'll second that. Have a motion, a second. Any discussion? All in favor say I. Motion passes. All right, moving on into uh new business. We have our 2025 second quarter budget reports.
Where's our employee of the month? Here he comes. Hello again. Um y'all ready? Yes. Okay. So, we're going to start with the general fund. Uh, we're looking at revenue sources. So, for taxes, wait,
hang on. First off, I'm gonna government budgets are cyclical. So, your taxes are going to be higher in the front end and then lower in the back end, and it's going to trickle in. So, for taxes, we're at 85% received. Um, permits, fees, and special assessments,
we're at 53%. Intergovernmental, which includes your grants, your like state revenues, state share revenues, is at 74%. Your charges for services um are at
39%. And then your fines and forfeitures are a little low at 7%, but I believe that'll pick up by third quarter. And then other revenue is at 164%. And this includes your um rent for the buildings around the county, interest, and then
mostly the reason you're seeing it high is we had a surplus sale of land. So that's why it's pretty high at 164%. Um then we're going to go to expense objects. So for personnel services, we're at 53% which is about
right where we want to be. Um and that can just be depending on the bi-weekly pay and things. Uh operating expenses are 40% for the general fund which is good. Uh capital outlay is set at 10% which does look low but we also
have a big fair project in there that's that takes up part of it and then the commissioner accounts and then just random capital projects in there. So that happens. Capital is big projects or buildings or equipment. And so that's more or less it can be higher or lower
depending on just how people are spending that money. Um and how far along projects are. Um grants and aids were at 67%. Sorry I'm bad with the microphone. And uh your grants and aids include anything from the county health
unit to like the Lee Conley house ride ride solution. anything like that that goes out from the county and then other financing uses mostly transfers are at 50%. And then our reserves are at 14,58923. So do y'all have any questions
on the general fund? I do. I do. Um if this is only the first quarter, how could you be at 50% for personnel? This is this quarter two. We're midway through the year, but it says some for some of those for quarter one. That's my bad. I didn't update those. That's I'm sorry. It's for
quarter two. Okay. Everything should say Q2. I'm so sorry. It's okay. That's That's just me. Okay, that makes sense. Don't worry. We're This is a Q2 report. We're midway through the year. I apologize. That's just my Excel sheet. That was my only
question. Okay. I'm sorry. It's okay. Any other questions? Yep. Okay. So, now we're in the transportation fund. So, for our revenue sources, we have taxes which is at 52% and that's our N 9th cent and local option tax. And then permits,
fees, and special assessments are at 32%. Our intergovernmental intergovernmental, which is again state revenue, share proceeds and like grants and things like that, is at 36%. Um charges for services are at zero,
other revenue is at 32%. And then we're going to move down to expenses. So our personnel services are at 46%, operating is at 47, and then capital outlay is at 63%. And all of those are right where you kind of want them to be. Um because
if your operating is too low at halfway through the year, then you're not utilizing your dollars. But if it's too high, then you're overspending budget. And same with personnel. you want to be at 50 because people work 50% of the year. And then for our reserves, we have $1,785,274. And again, this is Q2, so I
think all of my uh top titles are going to say Q1. I apologize. Any questions on the transportation fund? Okay, so now we're going to move along to the fire fund. And this is uh
your adorum taxes. just kind of similar to how the general fund is. And um but this is your firearm MSBU uh taxes, but uh it's at 87% and then intergovernmental is at 33%. Charges for services are at zero
and then other revenue is at 88%. All in all, we're at 73% revenue for this fund. Um, and then when we move down to expenses, uh, you'll see that personnel services are only at 25%, but the fire fund can fluctuate depending on how much
overtime and things are going on. So, theirs can change, but uh, we're looking good on that. Operating expenses, they're at 25%. And then capital outlay is at 22%. So all in all, we've expensed 24% of
this fund and the reserves are at 680,555. Any questions on this fund? Um the sanitation fund has for permits, fees, and special assessments 67% of the revenue received. Intergovernmental, they've received
100%. Charges for services, they've received 45%. And then fines and for forfeitures, they received some money, but there was originally nothing budgeted for that, so there's not a percentage. And then other revenue um is at 118%. And this is just
high interest in miscellaneous revenues. Um and then when we move down to our expense objects, you'll see that for personnel services, we're at 47%. Operating is at 41, and capital outlay is at 10%. So, and they just have
a lot of mandated improvements and big projects and those things take longer. So, that's why that's rather low on capital, but the operating and personnel looks good. So, all in all, expensed out, we're at 33% for the total. And then they have 37
875. Um, they have 37 million in the reserves and that 2 million of that is for regular reserves, 11 is for future projects, and then 24 is for escrow. Any questions on the sanitation fund? Okay, now this one I did have
another scrier's error. So, um, at the little bottom you'll see the chart that breaks up the reserves. The reserves for future projects is correct and the reserves for debt is correct. I did not update the continued reserves, but the reserves in the chart like the the
reserves that say 1.793 where it says that that's the correct number. Okay, I do apologize for that. So 1.793 is the correct number. All right. So for the revenue source intergovernmental, we're
at 9%. This is grants. So you're waiting on reimbursements or things from like that. So it is going to be low just depending on how far along projects are in that reimbursement prog progress is. Um charges for services is at 38% but they always expect to get more
customers. So I think that's the end goal. um other revenue is at 83%. So all in all um they've only collected 12% of their revenue, but again it's a very heavily grant focused revenue base. So if those projects aren't done and the
reimbursement isn't back, then you're not going to see that. Um and so two of those major projects are the FD septic to sewer and then I believe the Army water phase modernization project. So, both of those are rather large projects and if you don't get those, you'll
you'll get the grant reimbursement back when those are more completed. Um, so for personnel services, they're at 52%. Operating, they're at 29%. Capital outlay, they're at 10%. And then debt service, they're at
29%. And the debt service is the bonds, loans, and interest payments for all of their things. So again, you'll see that there's not a lot of capital outlay right now. So you're not going to see a lot of that front end uh intergovernmental grant revenue. That make sense?
Okay. And again, the 1.793 is the correct reserve amount. Um any questions? And then lastly, we have St. John's Harbor Water Plant, which this is a rather new fund.
Um we have 44% received for our uh charges for services and that's just mostly potable water charges. Um other revenue is already at 100% received. And then so we go down to the personnel
services, it's only at 4% for the year. Operating is at 50% which is exactly want what we want to see. Capital outlay hasn't spent anything yet. And then debt service is at 70 17% and that's the debt service is the principal USDA bond. Um
and then their reserves are 1 million55,296 and I believe that was funded through uh the commission the county. It was and so that million dollars is from the counties. Yeah, I believe it was interest free. Yes, that's true. So and that was a loan too.
Yeah, it's like that. Yeah. Yeah, that's the principal USDA. Any questions on that? And like I said, this is a rather new fund, so it doesn't have many comparisons to last year, but we are keeping track of it and reporting it to
you guys. And then the last page is the Putham County Board of County Commissioners capital outlay accounts. So these are y'all's accounts for y'all's commissioner dollars. And you'll see there's an original budget column and in that you'll see the 200,000 that everyone got each year and then if you
had any carry forward dollars. So the current budget to the right of that shows how it is all split up. Do y'all have any questions on that one? Y'all can take a look look at that too. Say mine for example. Yeah. Um if you
take the 175 plus 200 that gives you 375 then minus the 35 and the 10 and the 330 is your balance. Yeah. So, in the current budget column on your capital outlay line is what your current unallocated dollars are. And
Commissioner Alexander, as you pointed out, your 24 carry forward was directed by Commissioner Turner, which was prior to you. Um, and then of the ones for you, that's just that bottom line. Correct. I got it. Okay.
Thank you, Mr. New. We're going to need you to spend spend some money. I'm working on it. I'm teasing. He's got ideas. It's everything, right? Better hang on. But I got some ideas. That's right. Hold on. Hold on tight. Hold on tight. And I might be needing
some of your help, too. Okay. Okay. I understand. Thank you, Brier. You did a great job. Y'all have any questions for me? Any questions for Brier? Thank you. And I do apologize for the Q2 issue. I'll make sure to have Q3 on the next. This is how you learn. Yeah. You
don't make the same mistake twice, do you? Public comment on miscellaneous items. Do we have any uh anybody who wants to speak on miscellaneous items? All right. Going into I have one. Thank you.
Thank you. Um Tiffany, is it Croer? All right. Right up here to Yep. Right up here to the podium, please. Please set your name and address for the record. Thank you so much. My name is Tiffany Croer, uh 195 Horseman Club Road. Good morning and thank you for your time and
commitment to our community. I'm here to represent the residents on Horseman Club Road. We're frustrated and we're fed up with uh the reckless driving and the high-speed drivers. Putnham County has a reputation for its charm and its friendly uh family friendly environment,
and this is slowly deteriorating due to the careless driving. uh that's happening. We've lo had two families that have lost pets uh one of them being my own due to careless and speeding drivers. I was personally hit with a
mirror of a car while collecting my mail. Last night I was woke up at 4:00 a.m. with high-speed revving of a vehicle coming off of 19. Drivers are turning off a 19 and resuming their highway speeds. The police have attempted to make their presence known
and we greatly appreciate them. We appreciate the efforts of the Putham County Sheriff, but the reality is that they can't be here all the time and the nature of this street being a cutthrough from Highway 19 to 20 leaves too much opportunity for unnecessary
traffic. Even the school buses are flying down the road. Every single neighbor along this road has voiced their intense concern for the increase in traffic. We'd like to know what practical solutions are being made to keep our families safe. The school is already bringing increased traffic of
large trucks that have no respect for the speed limit. And soon there will be children involved. And if something is not done, it will not be a matter of if something happens, but when something happens. We're ve very grateful for the attempts of the sheriff's office, but we need a permanent solution that will slow
people down regardless of police presence. We have a narrow road with deep runoffs on either side and no sidewalks. The speed limit is already inappropriate at 35 miles per hour. We're a partially agricultural neighborhood with horseback riding, children, and disabled
homeowners. According to the FDOT regulations, we should be at 25 miles hour. Rumor has it that this is being addressed, but honestly, a posted sign means nothing as it's already being proven by the careless drivers. It's been said speed bumps can cause a
liability. It's frustrating to us as homeowners that a reckless driver's liability is more important than that of the residents who live here. Children, pets, and disabled parents could be injured or killed. My father lives with me and is legally blind. He keeps independence by riding his bicycle to
local senior homes to read to the seniors, and he likes to take himself to his own doctor's appointments. Please hear us and help us to keep our family safe and avoid a tragedy that will be devastating not only for the families but to our community. Thank you. Thank you,
Miss Tiffany. Thank you for coming and speaking. Um, most of the commissioners know here I was raised on Horseman Club Road and I am uh very aware of the dangers and the speeding because it's a cut through from Highway 19 to Silver Lake Drive and on
down to Stokes Landing Road. Um, a lot of younger folks, a lot of younger families. Um, our house, um, we built it at the corner of Horseman Club in Silver Lake Drive. So, Friday nights, we got to hear all of the loud pipes, the revving motors. So,
we fully understand um or I fully understand uh what you're saying. As far as a solution to it, I've spent many a sleepless night on that corner thinking about um one of those trucks getting sideways and coming through the front door or one
of my children's windows, which are on the right hand side of the house. If you'll notice, that yellow and white house has a large oak tree in the front yard that was left there on purpose. So, um I don't know what solutions to offer, but I'm hoping that my other commissioners could provide some
insight. Um they've got a lot more experience than I do in this m of this nature. So, um, I'm hoping Larry or excuse me, Commissioner Harvey or Commissioner Wilkinson may have some experience and some insight that they can provide or even our legal counsel of
what what could possibly be done. Well, I'll be glad to talk about it. You know, you've heard me say even when it comes to animal control, it's personal responsibility. It's all about driving the speed limit. And if we need to lower the speed limit on that road, then so be
it. Um, it was taught to me during the break about a speed bump, but those things don't work. They actually cause problems in some areas. So, we don't really want to look at that. But if people would just do that, I like the flashing lights. I think sometimes people speed and they're not realizing
they're speeding. They might be distracted or something. I like the ones that say, "You're going this fast." And that makes people kind of go, "Oh man, I messed up a little bit. Maybe I wasn't paying it. Maybe the kids were talking. Maybe the radio was too loud. Maybe my
favorite song was on. I don't know the deal." But I think that gets your attention more than anything is when you realize, "Oh, I'm doing wrong. Give me another opportunity to do right." And I think that's always been a problem. And I think with the added traffic at the
new school that's going to be done. Yeah. Yeah, you know, I drove down it Sunday afternoon headed to um the the cemetery. I was doing a little private thing there and um and I hate to say this, but even on our rideway, there's Ephesus built out
there, there's concrete mailbox things. If you pulled over, you would you'd be in trouble. And we got to start looking at those things when it comes to those country roads because they're no longer country roads anymore. They're speedways. They're They
are They're big. So, I think some type of enforcement more uh with with flashing lights, you're going this fast, slow down. I think that helps out a lot. What are your guys you guys thoughts on um maybe creating a pilot program um
regarding implementing a roundabout of a more rural nature there at the intersection of Silver Lake and Horseman Club and possibly at uh what's the one midway down? I mean somewhere in there. Yeah. Davis Lake. And then there's also
the little um little development there. Yeah. Yeah. Maybe putting something like that in there to to slow that traffic because you know the signs are great, but you physically have to slow down to go through a roundabout or it's going to be a pretty rough ride. You're saying a roundabout on on the state road or the
county road? Maybe on the county road. Uh maybe start at We haven't done that before. No, maybe something to try. I'm not saying you couldn't. This to me, this is an enforcement issue. I would encourage her to make sure she speaks in front of the school district. Um, let them know the problems they have. We
already have a a speed limit that she admitted people aren't following. Oh, yeah. And so, putting a sign with a lower number doesn't really make a difference. And um I do think that she can go or somebody from the neighborhood could ask the county sheriff's office to put up one of those flashing signs that
because we I did that in Bon when we were having an issue. Um and it does help for a little bit and then eventually they stop paying attention to it, but it does slow them down for a little bit for a little bit, but it's a temporary solution. I I'd like to see maybe explore around about what the cost might be and just see if it works there and if it is maybe it would be
successful in other areas we're having trouble if it's not a a really high cost. Yeah, like I said, we just haven't designed one of those or done those before. Um, whatever. You're certainly free to to talk to staff and see if that's a doable thing. Um, I guess that
would be JR and J or excuse me, Mr. In that particular location, we would need some board direction because land acquisition is going to be an issue for a roundabout at at Horseman Club. Yeah, gotcha. Gotcha. And as far as speed bumps, um, that's a law enforcement issue as well. Speed
bumps are law enforcement. Um we've not typically put speed bumps down. Is that correct? Right. That is correct. There's actually kind of, you know, when you talk to FDOT, the traffic people, there's a pro and a con to it, right? People may slow down for the bump, but then they actually speed up faster than
what they were going normally between bump to bump. Um, now obviously it's y'all's, you know, board direction, but but there's definitely pros and cons to each of those solutions or obstacles, challenges, and opportunities as they come. But historically, we've not done
that because it's a law enforcement. That's correct. Role. That's correct. Terry, did you have something, Mr. Suggs? No, it's it coming from a smaller municipality. Uh you know, we were responsible for uh putting in speed
humps in our municipality. Our public works department did it after studies. But that's probably something else we probably need to do is a traffic study and and and get with the sheriff's office because we actually put out some uh u notification signs that let people know like commissioner Harvey was saying
and do some type of study and notification those folks and see if we can do education wise and then uh you know certainly the roundabout is an option but it is going to be an expensive option I'm afraid. So roundabout. Yeah. Yes sir. Go ahead Mr.
Nol. Commission, I have seen um recently in school zones where there will be a permanent sign up that recognizes your speed as opposed to a temporary one. And I think a lot of people are under the the misunderstanding, maybe misconception that hey, this thing is
watching me. It's it's it is uh catching my speed in comparison to the posted speed and oh, is this thing taking a picture of my tag? Am I going to get a ticket here at some point in the in the game? And I some municipalities have gone to in school zones have gone to that you know that excess but I think
this does I mean it's a feeder between there's going to be a school out there that's a feeder between two highways. Well remember the school zone um the school district could ask if we wanted to to participate in the school zone uh ticketing and um we didn't take take
that up. Yeah, I I get it. But I've seen it in other communities, but you know, when people see that that sign registering their vehicle, they just they go, "Oh, oh, yeah. I've been there that the red and light red and blue lights flash and speed flashing." It's like, "Oh, man." Yeah. It does have an
effect. Maybe an option. Yeah. And and you really can't put a value on on a child's life. I mean, there's nothing more precious. And if if it's $100,000 or $50,000 to to save a kid's life, what I mean, really, Mich as you as you travel through Waka, it's just a municipality. I mean, the
streets are small, narrow. It's kind of same old same. They have those exact signs on every entrance into the town of Waka, right? you're coming out of a 55 mph zone coming from the south by division of forestry and it goes to 35 it tells you right there it flashes at you um the they actually have a speed
trailer at the north end of town um but coming in even off the um east traveling westbound into it they have same sign it's a speed limit sign with a small display screen on the bottom that flashes at you when you're speeding um so I mean if we you guys want us to look at something like that I mean we can definitely bring back some adjustments
but I I do keep in mind that all those have an expense, right? So, with those, we're going to have to do look at something because we're not in public works accustomed to buying speed radar detected um devices on the bottom of our signs. So, there is some infrastructure upgrade costs that are going to be
associated with those we could bring back to you. Go ahead. In conjunction with WA, I mean, WA is known if you go through there. I mean, you've got that sign, but their their enforcement arm puts a hammer down on you, too. So, if we do put those in,
if we could get this the sheriff to spend a little extra time at the beginning, it'll get the reputation for you speed here, you're in trouble. It is not far beyond that sign that there is a officer sitting. So, um it it is being enforced on the back side of that sign as well. Yes, blue light therapy is not
just only effective for skin cancer. Well, it sounds like that might be a solution. Can you get a cost for that on that road? Yes, ma'am. We'll be happy to as kind of a model of what that would look like. You know, if there's some other other areas in the county that need it as well. Is that what you're wanting, Commissioner Alexander? Sorry,
I have a mitt in my mouth. Is that what you're wanting, Commissioner Alexander? Yes, ma'am. Okay. All right. Thank you. Moving on into appointments. Commissioner Nubal, do you have any appointments? I'm afraid I do not. No problem. Commissioner Alexander.
No, ma'am. Not today. Commissioner Harvey, I have none. And I have none. Clerk of court. Uh, comments. Good morning, Madam Chair and commissioners. I have nothing for the board this morning. It's good to see everybody. Thank you.
County attorney. Nothing today, Madam Chair. Thank you. County administrator. Nothing today, Madam Chair. All right, going into commissioner comments, starting with Commissioner Newold. Thank you. Um, just a couple little quickies to bring up. Um, we've got the
Boston Blueberry Festival this uh, weekend on Saturday and I know a lot of the commissioners will be participating and and many other staff. That's a an amazing event. I hadn't last year was the first time I'd gone there in years and oh my gosh, what a what a blowout.
And it's it's great to see Putnham County putting on such a a fantastic and Boston putting on such a fantastic event. um competing with that down in Crescent City, we have Springfest. Uh the city and I don't know there's an entity down the municipal entity is
putting that on, but the historical society is going to be doing a a um a history walk down Central Avenue and a local band of players are doing historical talks in historical garb. Anyway, it's kind of a fun deal.
So, if you can make it from Boston to Crescent City, please do. Um, a little more serious note, the fairgrounds project, the building project there is going to be ramping up soon. Uh, there'll be a lot of activity there. Um, I'd like to see a little more
back and forth and and information share between um the fair board and and the commission. I think there'll be it's time for that. Uh, right now given this specific project and and I'd like to to be a part of that process if I could.
I've been involved with that board in the past and have a good relationship. We would like to see that relationship between their board and our board continue in a positive manner and and um I don't know what it would take to do that. I mean, I'd be willing to to be a
liaison if that fits the bill, but um anyway, I I think that's great. I think we can do a wave in support of that and um and because we all can't attend the meetings obviously because um Sunshine Law, but if you want to start attending the meetings on behalf of the county commission and and I think
there is a a little bit of a gap and that could help with that, I I would be for that. So any everybody wants to wave in support. All right, looks like you got it. Okay, thank you. Thank you for for your willingness. Yep. Yep. On a little side note though, Commissioner Hubble, if you if you would come back
and and brief us on what's going on. Absolutely. Because I'd like to know too, and I'm sure the rest of us will. Yeah. And that and that's really what I had in mind. It's it's that's going to be a great project for the community. Um it's it's it's going to be complicated. It's going to take a bit of doing, but
in the end, it's going to be a great asset. And something that's been in my side since the day I got here is that floor in that building. And I before I ever leave this office and I don't know when that's coming, I want to see that floor get done. I'm just saying. Well,
we'll see if we can get you to participate. Is that natural travertine commissioner or what are we looking at? We'll do what we got to do. Rodney comments. Thank you. Okay, Commissioner Alexander. Not a whole lot that I can wanted to add
today. I think I've said more than enough, but um I do want to applaud uh Commissioner Nubold for uh taking the lead and wanting to get involved with the fair board. And it's something I you know I repeat frequently um each one of
these commissioners that are in place now brings a different skill set uh to the DAS and um Jr. excuse me, Commissioner Newolt has been involved with the fair for years. So it just makes perfect sense for him to get back in there and provide
that input to the fair board, the engineers and staff and be able to be that liaison between the commission and uh and us. So um that's that's really it. I just, you know, it's great to see people utilizing their talents and their
abilities to move Putham County forward. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Harvey. Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm going to be a little more on a personal note if you could pass these down if you don't mind. Sure. I am very much considering and this is today I want to
make the announcement that I'd like to run for the second VP of the Florida Association of Counties. I have done that before. I meet all the eligible requirements which are very uh ownorous on some people. Um came in short the
last time I ran but just by a few votes. And I believe that it's time to have a qualified person from Putnham County, Northeast Florida, represent the Florida Association of Counties. It will only benefit our county to have that person
there. And what I need from you, from this board, is a letter allowing me that I have the u the uh approval of this board to be able to serve in that arena. If I so get elected, come at convention
in June. I'll I'll support that. Do we need to make a motion to provide him with a letter? No, I can't. Go ahead. We do. Well, I would like to make that motion, Mr. Harvey. Thank you for uh supporting Pton County. All right, we have a motion and a second. And a second. All in favor
say I. I. Discussion, Mr. Suggs. Yes, ma'am. Madam Chair, uh thank you for giving me an opportunity to speak this morning on this matter here. Uh Commissioner Harvey spoke to me about this yesterday and I'm going to do a
shameless plug here. Um you know, eight years in going to conferences and and hanging out with uh Commissioner Harvey and I will tell you that there is no one in the state of Florida that outworks Commissioner Harvey at the conference.
uh he's done a tremendous job not only for Putnham County representation in Putham County but throughout the state and uh uh Miss Young and I were actually at the conference when we witnessed the flash come running through the room and uh on his broadband presentation and
again someone that works tirelessly for for another uh broadband for Putham County. So, uh, I'm excited to see, uh, Commissioner Harvey doing this and and, uh, Commissioner, anything you need from from me, um, staffwise and and personal
wise, you just let us know because I think it is a a golden opportunity for Putton County to have someone representing us at that level of the state. So, thank you for doing this. Thank you, sir. You have anything else? No, I'm good. You're good. Okay. Thank you all very
much. So, a couple things. Boss Blueberries already been mentioned. It's this Saturday beginning at 800 a.m. Get out there early if you want to have some blueberry pancakes. I'll be taking your money at the door. Um, do have a question regarding animal services building. I'm tired of
seeing it on social media. When are we ever going to get that thing done? And I'm sorry to put you on the spot, but I'm I'm just tired of seeing it. And I know you guys have worked really hard with the contractor. I know you have. Um the last word I had was the end
of April, but we're at the end of April. Um the building's not done. Um the trying to put this the best way I can. We're still working diligently trying to get it there. Um day by day, uh to give you an exact date, I'm not
sure. Um I think as we push hard, I mean, we're getting close, but to give you a drop dead date opening. I don't have it for you today. Listen, if you need paint, I'm a good painter. If you need me to go paint, I'm not good at construction, but I can paint. I can decorate. I can move
furniture. But no, seriously, it is something that's um people are really um asking about continuously. Um so, anything you can do to help? I know you've been working side by side with the I'll reach out to the contractor again today and get a drop dead date to have it completed and it go from there.
Mr. Mr. Saxs, I'm sorry. You have comment, Mr. SGS. Okay. Oh, I have a I have a comment on that. Okay, go ahead. If it's if it's not done by the next commission meeting, I'd like to have them in here and ask them what's up. They gave us an April deadline and
they're not done and I want to know why. Okay, Mr. Harvey, you have any comments? I do. Go ahead. You know, this isn't the first deadline we've gotten and um the hope hopeful deadline. Um it was going to be done by Thanksgiving. It was going to be
done by Christmas. It was and now we're looking at the end of April. Uh but I I like what Commissioner Wilkinson said. Maybe she said it in fun, but I can rake. I can I'm not a good builder, but I can sure paint. I can do things. J.R.
if we need to have a workday out there. Like you're serious. I mean, I'm I'm all serious about, you know, getting out there and trying to get this because it's it's been a long long road. And I mean, I I can tell you that one of the first things when I got here was animal
services building and it's still here today. So, it is time to bring that plane in for a landing. And if we need to light up the runway, let us know what we need to do and I'll be glad to get out there and do it. Okay. So, I hear you. It's not raking the yard. It's not
doing that. At some point, we were given a goal that sometimes is unachievable. Okay. That building's cost was $1.5 million. We were given a budget of $8.95. We hit impass with the first two
construction companies at the board's direction. We get the low bid in these projects. With that, here we are. Yeah. It's un We were given an unrealistic task. If you guys would have said we had
1.5 million, there would be dogs in that facility out there. That's not what we were given. We were given $895,000 to build a million half dollar building. So, that's kind of where we are today. And you know what? I appreciate you saying that and just calling it out because it's the truth.
And that is the truth. And so, and I've watched staff um try to value engineer this thing as much as they can and on a regular basis. And this is the challenge we face. And you and what is it that Klay Countyy's build one for?
$26 million. Yeah.$ 26 million. And we don't even have a million dollars on this. So, so this is a discussion we have to have as a board. And and I'm glad we're having it because if there's, you know, there has there hasn't been any change orders on this project that cost any extra. I think we're up to
change order 41, but they've all been in deductions because we've had a direct owner purchase all the material. Yeah. Uh we've paid that out. I' had to ask Miss Nicole. That's exactly right. The last one I know was 41, but they were 42. They were all in the deduction going down because
I can't hear you, Miss Julian. That's part of the contingency we made to cut every single dime down to a budget was that every single time we could save 7%, we told them, "Okay, we're not going to give you that those dollars. We're going
to try to buy it direct." And so now we've also on the back side made 42 individual purchases for trinkets, pieces, and parts that the contractor needs to do what he's trying to accomplish just for the public, not trinkets, but like real real material,
cabinets, steel, welding, ords. So, are we saying that the the delay may have been on our timeline of purchasing or we have a shortage of money or did the timeline is not a delay? I'm not I'm not attacking you
guys. I just, you know, the contractor I would assume gave us the deadline of when they anticipated completion of this project. So, I'm not saying that it's you guys. I want to understand if they gave you that deadline, why they aren't there. is I mean is that where we got this time frame of the end of April or
is that a number that you guys came up with? No, you guys have done a fantastic job with the amount of money you've given. Don't don't discount what I'm saying. I just want to understand why we're not there if that's the goal that the contractor gave us. Right. So, I mean it every change order causes a
delay, right? Because he's got to submit it to us. We've got to do the deduction. He's got to sign for it. We've got to order the pieces and parts. We got to get them to the job. We have to every time say, "Hey, your cabinets are here." I'm just going to use cabinets for an example, but it's it was every small
piece. It was the load of steel to weld the the the kennels. It was the, you know, the concrete that was on the ground. Every one of those, he has to approve that. So, he has to submit to us the stuff. We have to do a deductive change. We have to submit it back to them. We had to get the vendor engaged. If we' have had realistic expectations
set out in the front where we could have turned the project loose and they could have done it much like a fire station that's being built in the west end of the county that came in a budget that we had. It was a realistic project. It is said subject to open in August because
there has been no built-in delay because we turned them over a shovel ready project. This is not the definition of a shovel ready project. This has been hey where can we get from here right? what what's the next step? And that's been the delay in building animal control facility. We hit impass with the
construction company at 1.5 million. We didn't have it. So then we were told to go back and we and we narrowed it down. We finally found a contractor. I don't want to put all the onus on him. We found a contractor said, "I'll do it for $895,000. You guys can have a new animal control facility." We got to give him a little grace in this project, too,
because he's got a overwhelming project that truly I'm sure today he don't want to be there either. Um because I mean it's it's we've have negotiated and built and took every opportunity away from him and sometimes that's not fair either. So I want to give him some grace
in this project as well. I understand. Okay. Well, you know, it's it's it's great that we've had this discussion because you know when we as commissioners are posed these questions of why isn't it done? Why isn't it done? Now we can say well this is the justification for that because I wasn't
aware of that and you know so I can you know it's very easy for me to convey that. I just need to know that. So, you know, no, and I'm not taking pot shots, y'all. Please don't assume that I'm doing that. I just needed something to go back to the constituents with to justify where we're at in the project.
And if it's because we created delays because we're saving money to get a better finished product, yeah, I'm okay with that. And I assume that most people would be if it takes you another couple weeks to get a better product. Yeah. Thank you guys. Mr. Sykes, did you have
some comments? Yes, ma'am. Just uh just a couple of comments on this. Um you can see and hear uh frankly the uh the level of not only frustration but the the the desire to get this building finished by
uh Deputy Administrator Grimes because a lot of the a lot of times this falls on Deputy Grimes as the operations person in Puth County to to pull these projects together and he was given a an unbelievable task uh of of trying to get
this done. But I think that's the message that needs to get out to those folks that are on Facebook and uh is that you know not only are we trying to build a new facility but we're also trying to do it in a manner for which it's the most cost effective. Okay. And
sometimes that takes a little more time. And uh but in all honesty, what staff's hope is and and quite frankly mine as your county administrator is when we go out for a bid on a realistic project and we get a realistic bid process done and
and the numbers come back in, uh that we're given an opportunity to move forward with with the bid that comes in. and don't put the ownership on your staff uh to value engineer this thing to a point to where as you can see it's
taken 6 8 n months longer but not only is it taking that much time to get the building uh completed but it's eating up their time as well that could be well spent doing something else uh all in the all in the attempt to to try to save a
dollar and listen no one no one wants to be more efficient than than your staff here when it comes to taxpayers dollars, but at some point we got to be realistic in our expectations. And that's all I'd ask moving forward. Yep. I understand that completely. And and part of that responsibility falls back on on this
commission because when when did we initially receive the funds for that animal shelter? 10 years? No. Eight years. And I know we we we had a delay there, too. No, the only legislative appropriation we
received, we completed those costs within the year we received them. Okay. So, we received a half million dollars from the legislature and that went to site work and infrastructure in order to get us where we could build the facility because they had to be spent a number of time. The rest of this project was
funded from your better place funds. Okay. Important to delay was the original location did not was not suitable. We had to relocate. Yeah, I get that. Thank you guys. Commissioner Harvey, and correct me if I'm wrong, and I I I appreciate J.R. your candidness,
and you're right, but anytime we do a project, and I believe this one was design build, right? It was our first our first toe in the water on what we call design build because we had some commissioners that really wanted to explore that area. Um, I would recommend
not again, but you know, I'm just going to say that that we tried. We tried and it you know did we save some money yet. Did we value engineer it down? Yeah. But even on our old other buildings that we take the the lowest bid. We just saw that at the landfill where the
contractor could not fulfill those responsibility on the low bid and we had to go in there and the bonding company settled up with us and we were able to move forward. So, it's it's that's how government is. And us in the private sector that owned our own business, we
wouldn't put up with that. We would say, "I want this done in two months, and you gave me a deadline, and why are we I mean, we wouldn't do that." But government and again, this was a first design bill. I don't think I'll ever
want to go back down that road again. And and I don't mean that bad. Maybe we learn things. Maybe we could be better at it, but I I do agree that it was an unrealistic situation. Thank you, Madam Chair. So, go ahead, Julian. So, just point of clarity here, design build is
not a bad process. Design bid build is not a bad process, but they're intended to be all-incclusive. I.e., we said we wanted to design build, but then we started tinkering with design build. So don't adversely judge design build
process by a project for which we interjected some frankly impossible goals to. Um so we may very well find a a great project that would be design build in the future, but we're going to need to go
when the design build firms come back with their proposals and you're looking at anywhere from a million to $2.5 million. That's where we were. Then we got to be realistic if we're going to build what we say we want. This is this is a spread as to where it's going to
be. We took that number and then we chopped it in. what Klay County is building an animal shelter for that doesn't have any more excuse me any more room than what we're going to have and that's the bottom line and so 26 times of what we have what
we're putting in this building is what it costs in Klay County which is unbelievable and and I mean we didn't have $26 million to put in animal services we didn't have $2 million to put in animal services so I where I'm at and where my question would be is what
can we do from a board's perspective to help bring this thing to a landing? Is there any suggestions you have? Is there any things you want us to do? I mean, in all seriousness, this is a very serious question. Do you need a little bit more money? I mean, what do you need that
would help this? I know once you're in the process, you're in the process. And where are we like 90% done? Probably 80%. I don't know what the number would be. We're really close. We still have some things that we have to do outside the contract at the building, right? But we got to get the building done so we can do the things on the outside that
need to be done. That's where I think we're in the workday scenario, right? We still got fences to put up that's outside of this contract. We have other things to do because it was easier for us to engage a fencing vendor versus trying to run it through a contractor and pay that extra 20% or whatever the
markup is on on fencing. So, your staff still has a ton of work to do when the contractor's gone. So, then we got to start engaging the other folks together. We still got to pave the road going in. We still have to do some of the other stuff that has to be done. But in in an attempt to save dollars, we said, "Well, we'll take that on ourselves outside of
the projects. That's why some of this stuff got brought down some." I don't know that it's necessarily a need. I the the contractor's balancing this job with many others, right? Probably many others where he's actually making money. I think that's probably where we kind of are in a pecking line is to be
completely open and honest. Yeah. I mean, the guy's got a payroll to meet that he can't meet at our facility because in fairness, we beat him down so bad he probably ain't making a lot of money, right? Um, so he's building this thing some sometimes I want to say out the goodness of his heart. I mean, and how far do I push that guy, right? To push to the point where he wants to walk
off the job. Okay. I mean, we can do that. I mean, that and I and I know that's not where we want to head as as as I I want the building done just as much as you do and as much as the citizens do because I don't like this question format we're in at the moment because I don't have all those answers, right? Um, I would I mean I can we sit
down with him on or talk to him on a regular basis. We can have meetings trying to set milestones. Some of them get met in a pretty reasonable amount of time. Others take a little delay. I think we're really close. I mean, there's some punch list items that still need to be done inside the building. I'll be happy to meet with him
again this week and try to get a realistic expectation of when he can be done. Um, and if you guys want to set a deadline for me to tell him it has to be done by X date, be happy to deliver the message. No, I I see your point very much so. I think what we're what we want to know is how number one, how can we
help? That's that's our first question. Is there something that this board can do that would help you in this process that I think you have the support of the board? Um I I agree and I never thought we didn't have support of the board. I don't know that there's anything I can do inside the contract, right? The only thing inside the contract that makes it
better is we give him more money. The problem is that's not an option, right? Because it was bid through procurement, right? So I I don't I know I think the easiest thing to do is moving forward if we could have a realistic project and it's nothing against you guys but when
when something comes in at a million and a half dollars to try to take it and make it at a 50%. That's really just let's not do it right from your staff perspective. Let's not do it again. Yeah. Because that's truly where we are today is from your staff's perspective is a 50% project that you want 100%
results on that the following county did it for 26 times the amount. Yep. That's at some point this thing becomes unrealistic, right? And that's kind of where we are today is the unrealistic approach to a finish line because it'd be just as easy for that guy to say today, right? But we're trying to help
him get to a finish line and it takes day in and day out. There's he can always put so much cost on that job right now. And I think that's where it is. I mean, we're down to the we purchase we're purchasing the cabinets, right? When we're purchasing cabinets, we're getting really really really close um to the final touches of this
building. the electrical is completed. Um I know they're waiting on an inspection so they can get the permanent power turned on to the facilities. So we are getting really really close with that portion of it. But then we still got probably a little while some site work type stuff. I'm not saying we can't
move some of the facilities out there, but we still have some site work improvement that we need to do that is outside of that contract. Right. Okay. Well, and one of the things I know um what does it hold like 90 90 88 88 and we already know that on day one we're
going to be over capacity because we're already we stay over capacity and it's not for lack of adoption events. It's not for lack of staff doing their best to get animals out. Um, so can we when we're looking at this
and if we have to bid it out separately, which we I know we would, but or unless we do it in-house, I'd like to see some runs with dog houses or some kind of cover so that you could put um, you know, I've seen that at other facilities. So besides what you have
inside the building, you also have areas where there are fencing and areas that they could be housed outside. Um, if you go down to I went down and visited Ark Rescue down in Crescent City. So, they have, you know, chain link fence areas and in that they have a an area for the
dogs to get out of the weather. They have water, food, all of the things. Um, so I would like to see is if we're going to if we have to have more than 88 animals, you know, and I know you can share some p some kennels can be shared. I I know that. Um, I don't want us to be
in day one putting animals inside the office like we're happen to now. And so I'd like to have a solution to that as well. Now, I understand that we couldn't build it big enough, right? And we could put it for 500 dogs and we'd probably have 500 dogs in it. That's the reality.
But at the same time, I don't if we're creating a good environment for our staff to work in, then it's hard for me to say it's okay for you to have three three dogs in your office. um and then three dogs in the next office and four dogs down in the corner of the building. Um are there certain circumstances,
yeah, you might have a dog who's pregnant and they're watching it to, you know, in those kind of things or one sick and so they have it closer so they can watch it. But the reality is I don't think we should have that many dogs in the office space. So our current um
design and and plan operationally is that the dogs will not be housed inside the office. We can look at the at any number of kennels, outdoor kennels in addition to the 88 space that you desire. Please keep in mind that all 88 of those animals in a kennel also need
playyard and exercise space during the day. Right? So at some point what we currently have designed or will be at the end of the day is a number of different playards with play features so that those animals can get exercise for healthy emotional well-being, physical
needs, right? Um, so the more animals we add, the more play space and opportunity we have to also provide. We can add as many and as much as you want or you have room and budget for. Okay. Go ahead. No, we'll talk later. Yeah. All right. Well, is there
any other discussions regarding animal services? No, I I I just, you know, even though this discussion was a little tense, I think it it needed to happen. And you know, the the uh implementation of this was before you got the three new commissioners that you have and I
appreciate where you're at. Um I've had to work with contractors and you know, a lot of what we did was low bid and then you had to value engineer it and then you know the end user would not be satisfied with the project or the deadline. So, um I just want to reiterate that uh we are here to help
and you know especially myself and I know that the rest of the commission I think they feel that way now. Um we we recognize the problems here and um we we definitely respect your opinion and look for direction on future projects. We really do appreciate the hard work that
that because basically you're working as a project manager. You are amongst all the other hats you wear around here. So we appreciate that. Yes. Um, finishing my um, comments. Impact fees. I want to say thank you to the board for listening today and um, moving it forward to a
workshop. Um, since I've been here, I've always said that, you know, it shouldn't be on the backs of our existing um, taxpayers to pay for new growth and, um, that's where I stand. So, I having growth, paying for growth makes completely sense to me. And um I'm
hoping that as we move forward, we'll see um some big differences in how we handle handle that going forward. And I just want to remind everybody that we have a 1:30 workshop today in this board room. With that, is there anything else to come before the board? All right.
This meeting Part: 2
If we can have Mr. Commissioner Harvey lead us in the invocation and followed by the pledge of allegiance by myself. Go ahead. Please stand if you're able to do so. Father, we thank you, Lord, for today, a day we've never experienced before in our
life. Father, give us wisdom directly from your throne room on how to handle our situations today. Father, give us give us guidance and let us be in your perfect will today to move Putham County forward, Father, in this land development code and other issues that
are coming up. We ask all this in Jesus name. Amen. Amen. Please join me in the pledge. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with
liberty and justice for all. Thank you. First, we'll start with public comment. This portion of the agenda is designed to allow citizens an opportunity to bring matters to the attention of the board. It is not reasonable to expect that the board will engage in debate or deliberation about
matters on which the board has received no prior information as part of the agenda. Please limit your time to three minutes. We have one speaker card so far, Mr. Michael Woodward. Thank you, Mr. Woodward, for being here today. Thank you for having me. Good
afternoon. Michael Woodward, 517 South Francis Street, Interlock. Uh I'm back to talk again about the gnarly issue of uh whether the location of emergency services facilities of any type or size should be allowed as a matter of right in CPO and C1. Uh you
may recall that uh the recommendation of the planning commission was to leave that requirement alone as it is in the current LDR uh where uh uh special use permit is required. I think what it really comes down
to is the question of whether or not you believe that any type and any size of emergency service facility is automatically going
to be compatible in any location anywhere on any type of street in CPO or C1. uh the current LDR reflects the position that that is
not the case that there will be places where some such facilities some of the time some places will not be compatible. Perhaps they could be made compatible with the addition of certain uh modifications to the site plan which
often happens in the uh special use permit process. I think it would be very very rare for an occasion to come along where uh the decision would be made on a case-byase basis by the zoning board of adjustment
or the administrative deviation committee that a particular uh emergency service facility was not at all compatible in a location. But if that did happen, it would probably be for a darn good
reason. And it wouldn't mean that facility wouldn't get built. It would just mean it would get built somewhere else, somewhere more appropriate, somewhere better, better better for the community, better perhaps even for the emergency services. You have to keep in mind that
if you're going to have a if you're going to say there are places that possibly are not always fully compatible, then you have to have a process for a case-byase determination. And to have a good process, you need to give notice and
opportunity to the public. So that the people who have those professional offices, the pastors of those churches, the small business owners who know better than anybody else their communities and the traffic conditions on the streets and roads that they operate on will have the opportunity to
have some input into that process and perhaps bring to the table information that nobody had thought of before because they hadn't been living with it. I I just one thing I I just want to
say I would not want to tie the county's hands any more than anybody else with the important goal of getting emergency services facilities located dispersed throughout the county where they need to be. We just made need to make sure that
the exact places where they land are the are good places for them. Okay, thank you for your comments. Mr. Baker, are you doing a presentation? And Mr. Helms, I know we
started to go through this last time, but um now I think that we're going to concentrate on this entire um LDC change. Um, so I would like to see that you go through the sections and then if the board has questions during that time, we can or we can hold till
the end. Does the board have a preference? Depending upon the amount of questions that we have, we might need to address them as we go individually because I think there's going to be more, I hate to say it, more questions than I'll be able to hold and remember till the end. Quality answer. Yeah, I was sort of thinking the same thing.
That's fine. Yes, ma'am. Okay. Would you all like me here or in my normal position? You're fine. Long as we can see what you're Are you bringing? We're just going over the paperwork or is there a presentation on the There's no presentation prepared, Madam Chair. Uh for the record, Zachary
Baker, Planning and Development Services. Um I have the strike through underline in front of me. I've also got a blue pilot pen. It's my preference. So, uh we can go ahead and get through it. at the direction of the board. Do you
just want me to read what the the proposed changes would be? Yeah, I think so. Okay. So, within the allowed uses for the commercial professional office zoning district, we have included emergency services by right strucken
emergency or struck emergency services with a special use permit. We've also added accessory dwelling units occupied by owner or tenant of existing commercial use as a special use permit um allowed use. Um as we look through um
4581 for commercial neighborhood, we'll see the exact same changes. When we get to commercial retail C2, um emergency services was already a use allowed by Wright. So the only thing changing here is we're proposing to add accessory dwelling unit
occupied by owner tenant of existing commercial use as a special use permit requirement. And then for C3, same as previously mentioned, accessory dwelling units um as a use with a SUP.
uh for the let's see here um it's worth noting too in the 45-83 subp paragraph A we struck major and minor from the uh the purpose paragraph because later on
in the the text amendment we've also removed the distinguishment between major and minor because we have no thresholds or measurable parameters by which we define a major or a minor. Okay, because that was going to be one of my questions.
Uh, so C4, same thing. We're removing major and minor and then we are adding accessory dwelling units as a use with a special use permit. Okay, so let's just stop for a second. Um, so to Mr. Woodward's point,
um, why are we putting emergency services in? I mean obviously we can there's already a process in place. So why do we need to add these to each one of these options? So the uh the whole idea behind making emergency services allowed uses by right
um in these two zoning districts was quite frankly to make it easier for the county to build out that infrastructure as our community needs it. Um, and it's worth noting too that there there are sighting requirements that both, you know, emergency services personnel looks
at to make sure that, for lack of better words, they're in the middle of that service area that is uh deficient. Um, but there's also going to be, you know, do we have enough land to get two ambulances and a fire truck and parking for the staff that are there and the
well and the fire suppression equipment and meet the setbacks and so on and so forth. So, um, some of our subdivisions have smaller lots and some of them are zoned CPO and C1, but I wouldn't foresee
an emergency service facility on anything less than an acre. Um, so I don't know that we're going to have a huge issue with um, putting those uses right on top of some other use. Um, it's also worth noting too that we allow
hospitals by right in CPO, which has a lot more emergency service traffic than an emergency service station would have. Okay. Commissioner Harvey. Thank you, Madam Chair. And I also think um, Zach, along these lines that, you know, in the
past we've had a committee or so look at properties where we need fire service or emergency services at. And I think it I think it benefits us greatly to have it in there by right. I don't think anybody
would mind having emergency services in a zoning district. I just cannot see that. So, and I also think it cuts down on the the red tape of us going through our own process. You know, sometimes that bewilders me. Why does government
have to go through the same process? I mean, I realize we're government, but it's kind of we're own I guess we're we're watching our own hen house if you don't mind. But I see the point. But I think it's I think by right
it gives us the opportunity to move faster and create a better environment. That's all. Thank you, Madam Chair. Commissioner Alexander. I agree with Mr. Harvey on that. So basically, we're just eliminating a step, but you're still going to have public input and you're still going to have consideration before
anything is placed and they have the ability to come and voice concerns before the commission. But we have the right to move forward without going through the special use permit. Well, I don't know that there would be a whole lot of public input because we would be effectively eliminating the special use
permit requirement, but the development review committee is a requirement for new developments and that is posted. Um it's it's on the building out front here. We give a week notice on that. So, right. So, we have the opportunity to put it where it best suits, not just
dictated by EMS. So, sure. And we could create another policy that for emergency services and these zoning districts, you know, we have to let the public know that the DRC is happening at two weeks ahead or whatever the discretion of the
com the commission may be. Sounds good. Remind me um and let's go through who's on the development review committee. Not the person's name, but the positions. We have a representative from public works. we have a representative from. So, you've got building, you've got planning and zoning, you've got
public works, um you also have recreation, uh do department of health, St. John's River Water Management District, and then we send it out to like the school board, um FPL, Clay Electric, I mean the
it's also in our packet here who our our members would be. Give me just one moment. Sheriff's Office is one. Okay. So, it would be planning, building, public works. Uh, I don't have a page number, but it's section
45886. Um, I'd say probably twothirds through your packet. Um, and I know I remember us doing this. I just wanted to get myself refamiliarized with it. Yes, ma'am. So, voting voting members of the DRC would be planning, building, public works,
sheriff, emergency services, recreation, property appraiser, Putham County School District, Putnham County Fire Marshall, I see, and Putnham County E911 addressing. Non- voting would be Department of the Navy, Naval Air Station, Jacks, County Forester, H32 and
33. All applicable utility providers, water management districts, both of them, St. John Zanswani, uh, Florida Department of Transportation, Florida Department of Health, Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Agriculture Center, Natural Resource Conservation Service, and the Army Corps of
Engineers. Okay. And as far as accessory dwelling unit occupied by owner tenant of existing commercial use, is that because you're seeing more people buying commercial properties and and living in the in like a an attached or above apartment? Is
that what you're seeing? Well, so no, ma'am. Truthfully, the uh the comprehensive plan within the commercial future land use category allows for residential development for those um business owners or business tenants to
uh live on their property for security purposes. But our land development code has no provision by which they could make application for those residential units. It will it will also serve as a future proof so that we can have um you know commercial on the bottom and
residential on top. Um there would need to be some work done if we would ever want to intend that I own the business but I rent to Brian who's not in any way affiliated with my business. What we're currently proposing we wouldn't have to
worry about that. It would be the owner or the tenant. and through lease agreements or deeds, they would have to prove that they are the owner or tenant. Okay. Are there any questions so far? Yes. Yes. Yeah. I'm a little uh reticent
in falling behind the, you know, allowing emergency services with just by right. I mean, if there were some asurances or language put in there that it can be public noticed and there can be um ample
logical comment, I I may be okay with it. But it's, you know, I'm I'm all for having the robust services and having them where we need them, but it may not be often that we get in too much of a pickle there. But I'm
comfortable having that decision come to us and us as commissioners have to make a hard decision. So anyway, just a little commentary there. Is there any action to be taken from that comment? Well, special use permits wouldn't come
to the commissioners as it stands. So, as it's written today, it would go through a committee who could grant the special use permit. But remember, in order for us to build a fire station, that starts at the board and the process of what the design looks like and the
budget for that and the location. This is simply with respect to regulations on permits, if it's eligible for the permit, right, to occupy that space. So, it's not emergency services may be a bad example because there's going to be a litness of steps a new fire station goes
through like the one at Bayen Powell. We went through numerous years of legislative appropriations and conversations about locations and why this area and the radius by which it needed to be in order for to help our ISO ratings and all of those
conversations take place. This with regard to Zach's area is regulating what checklist needs in order for it to be issued a valid building permit. And not everything is going to be a fire station. And so like when we look at like when we look at the one in floor
home, it's a I don't know maybe a substation. It's an it's a double wide trailer that's sitting there a work trailer where they house two ambulances and they rotate. So that's would still fall under the emergency services. It would our goal is to move away from that
model and move into the um the synergies created when you put fire and rescue together of course in future um instances. So yes, um that just kind of big picture idea. This is only a piece of the puzzle that you're seeing with
respect to how the public would know a new emergency services facility was being was coming about. Commissioner Al, are you done? Commissioner Alexander. So there's so what what you're telling us there's still plenty of checks and balances in there and we're just taking
out an what looks to be an unnecessary step to streamline the process. Yeah. Well, so the goal of when Zach reviewed it was emergency services fits by its very nature in commercial districts. So
aside from the not bypassing the board in any other respect, but aside from all of the other checks and balances, the the intent of the commercial district and area that it operates in is very compatible with what you see with an emergency service operation.
Okay. All right. So, it doesn't sound like there's an action item on that. Is there Did you Or you presenting an action item, Commissioner New? Okay. All right. All right. As we move along in section
45-106, this would be use of structures. Um staff is proposing the addition of non-residential farm buildings for bonafide farms as a as an accessory use that can be established on residential
property prior to the primary use. Um there is a statute um Julian I'm sorry Miss Young and I went over it. Um there's a statute that essentially says if you have a uh bonafide farm, in other words, a green belted property, it
doesn't have to be zoned agriculture. It can be zoned residential one. Um but if you are a bonafideed farm, you are entitled by the state to have a non-residential farm building for the purposes of that farm. So we're more or less just aligning with statutes whereby
statutes would override local zoning anyhow. Okay, I think that would make sense. Everybody's good. Okay. Y and 45-109 for accessory uses and structures allowed in each zoning district. Um we're we're really looking at the table
here which is table 2.04A. Um and we have added uh for the accessory dwelling unit. We've just made it with a special use permit with conforming commercial use. So just aligning the text amendment with this
table. uh 45-110. We've added a provision which would allow property owners to place a well or pump house which are less than 60 square feet and less than 8 ft in height. Uh be permitted within any
setback given there is at least 3 ft of separation from the property line. Okay. Does anybody have any issues with that? All right. moving forward. Madam Chair, do I have your permission to skip over like commas and spaces? Oh,
yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. No, I want to hear them all. I'd like not to. All right. Um, let's see. Some of these code sections are long. Bear with me. Section 45-131. Is that where we're at?
Um, not not not yet. We'll we'll get that one. Not yet. So, come on. I'm ready. Still in 45110. Uh, we got rid of an extra premise and an extra use that was within the text.
I'm not seeing that. You're not seeing that. I saw 4510, but you just Oh, 11. No, it's it's 110. Okay. You're just saying strike through premises. Striketh through premises and strikethrough use. They're they're leftovers. Okay.
All right. 45131 recreational vehicles as temporary shelters. And please keep in mind during this discussion, uh these are the um additional standards for a temporary
occupancy of a recreational vehicle. Um so with that said, our code enforcement department and Z Lawrence has stepped up behind me as the expert on this matter. Uh code enforcement has been having some difficulty enforcing
our our policy with the magistrate for code cases. Uh so it is at the recommendation of the code enforcement department that we include the following sentence. Under no circumstance is an RV
to be stored, left, or abandoned on a vacant property. Vacant is defined as having no dwelling unit on the property. That same sentence would be added to subparagraphs two, which is residential zoning districts, and three, which is
agricultural zoning districts. Commissioner Harvey. Thank you, Madam Chair. This is the one that gave me a major heartburn and because the last few words subject to rem removal and my
question is by who? So we have struck that language. Um we would not be including the subject to removal uh or RVs in violation of this provision or subject to removal. That would no longer be in the code if adopted as presented
today. So, who would we It would still come under a fine basically. Okay. Okay. I'm good with that then. As long as because I don't want to spend taxpayer money trying to go in there and remove something and sure nothing to get back. I mean, you know, good. I'm good with
that then. Thank you. So, is anybody else? Yeah. So, we would have the ability to compel them to clean up the property by imposing fines and putting a lean on the property until such fines were paid or the for before or the uh
vehicle was removed. Correct. Getting several nods of affirmation right now. So, good. Yeah. I just want to make sure that we've got some teeth for you guys to go out, you know, to clean this stuff up. I mean, that was the ultimate goal, I believe. And then additionally, they could seek the same forgiveness that
other code cases do in front of the board. Once compliance is reached, if the board would like to forgive those soft costs, they would go through that same process. So, I have a different perspective. So, I'll just go ahead and share my perspective.
Um, I think this is a property rights issue and we're taking away somebody's property rights. If if you have a piece of vacant land and you want to put your camper there and leave it, I don't know why it hurts. If the neighbor says it's an eyesore, well, guess what? If we start getting rid of every eyesore in
Putham County, you'll need a much bigger LBC than this. And from a safety perspective, um I'm understanding that the reason one of the reasons you guys are wanting to do this is because it gets rid of people living in campers. If that's the case, then why don't we adjust or make our LDC stronger for the
for the fact we already have codes for people living in campers? So, is that is this mostly because we are having people living in campers? Yeah. Yeah. So, um this was established um because of the amount of cases that we have going before the magistrate. So, currently we're sitting um and this is a
guesstimate of this. So, we have uh over 2,000 cases open right now for code enforcement. We have uh 659 of them are related to people living in RVs on and it could be care of premises and living in RV. It's a variety of those but as a
whole the 659 so it's about 40%ish of what we have are open codes cases are for RVs parked on vacant pieces of property and we're not talking about a guy parking it there for a week or a month and it's the grass is cut. We're talking about der that is out there.
That's what these codes cases are. And so meeting with the magistrate um and and Zeke can speak to more of this. Um in meeting with them, this gives them the availability that the magistrate says we have better teeth to not throw out the case because if we don't take a picture every single for the amount of
days that are there, they throw it out. And so he says we don't have enough in what we have currently. And this is what his our recommendation would be to give us more teeth to be able to derelick out of there and to find them. Um uh it's not going to clean up instantly, right? But it gives us availability to do that.
So that's why we thought we already have that though. I thought we already have that if you're living in a camper, you get you got to you get fined and the process works. It worked on the neighborh. I mean they were living in the camper that you that our codes enforcement went out, left them a note. Well, I don't know what happened, but it
all I know is they no longer live there and they move the camper off the property. So again, we're talking about the people who are not compliant. And so when they're not compliant, they say they're not going to move. When we take it to the court case, they're not it's it's not working. and that's why this is being given to us. Um, and what we have
and I can let Z speak to more of that. Yeah, that would be good. First thing I'd like to say is it's it's a hardship. It's a burden of proof. It's on us. And if they deny living in it, we prove it. We don't work 24 hours a day. We don't work on weekends. They say they come and visit one night here and one
night there. It's a us against them. We go by neighbors. They won't come in and testify 90% of the time. only have one occasionally that will come in and say I see them there all the time every day that helps us with our proof but otherwise the burden of proof we have none so we're trying to focus more on
the derelic part if it's not kept if it's not registered if it's not tagged if they have trash and debris everywhere we we subcategory into a car premises because that RV without a tag on it or if it's derelict flat tires it's carrot
premises I don't even worry about the RV code so that part is is a lot easier. You can prove that the pictures show it's not wellkept. It's not maintained. They're definitely causing a problem. Okay. So, you brought up a very good point. Does somebody have to call this
in? Yes, we do have to have a complaint from the public and it's public knowledge. And right now, we already have a lot of people that are living in campers. A huge problem that we have is nobody's calling it in. Yes, ma'am. That's true. I mean, because some people
I know some obviously we've got 650 something that somebody has called in. I know several in my own neighborhood that are living in campers. Nobody's going to call it in because they're they're polite. They watch out for people. They keep their yard maintained and they help others and we don't want to call them in
because it's not going to do anything to them. They have nowhere else to go, right? And they will leave and go back to up north or wherever they're from during the hurricane season. They're only there during the But they're like I say, it's registered. is tagged, right? It follows the DOT regulations, which
that that's where that it's just we're just trying to get rid of the ones that are derelic and really causing problems. That's usually where there's either squatters, somebody that doesn't own the property and they're staying in them. And even for a temporary amount of time, I don't I don't want to have to prove
they're living in it. They're just staying there enough to cause the care of premises and giving the giving the neighbors grief, right? I I mean I guess whenever I see these things and I know we make we're making changes, we don't get to pick and choose, right? I mean
that's we don't get to pick and choose. And so if you have a neighbor who um comes down and stays on their property two weeks a year and leaves her camper and then goes back and comes back and they're in and out, they're allowed to do that. Um however, under this rule, they wouldn't be allowed to. But the
idea that that we're saying, "Well, we probably wouldn't bother them, but this the rule's still in place. If we get a complaint, we have to go back." Yeah. And if you get the complaint, if the neighbors mad because they don't like them, then they're going to call it in and then it's up to us to to make them move their camper. Correct. It to me,
this is a hard stop because you you cannot have your camper on a piece of property. My I gave the example yesterday to staff. My son has a piece of property um and his um his buddy got divorced and the buddy got the camper out of the deal. The wife got the house. He didn't have any place to go. He said,
"Hey, where can I put my camper? I'm going to go live with somebody else, but I don't have any place to store my camper. I don't really want to pay." And my son said, "Go ahead and go park it on your on my property. It's not it's nobody's doing anything on it." So, he's up there parking and then that's what's happening. Nobody's complained. It's not
been an issue. He's not doing any dumping. But if this were to go into place, he's now illegal and my son could get in trouble because his he he was nice enough and kind enough to let his buddy park his his camper there. And I that's where I that's a good example
that I've used because, you know, but I understand there's not that many of those compared to the ones that are causing problems. Correct. Yeah. Correct. Yeah. Commissioner Harvey, thank you, Madam Chair. Appreciate that conversation.
Um, let's find a way to solve this problem. So, what I'm hearing Commissioner Wilkinson say is there's a vacant piece of property. What if it what if they grew blueberries on the property? Can they have a accessory structure on the
property being a camper for example? I mean, I understand the plight, but let me before you answer that because I'll give you time to think about the last meeting we were at here and we had this come up. I was headed home and they were digging a trench from Friday to get garbage picked up.
They're not paying that. We are now. We're going to pick up the tab on that. And if you go past my house around the corner, there is a motor home that was been driven into the woods and left there on a cleared lot.
So, I understand the plight of both. I think maybe we can find some type of compromise here that if it's if it's property that's maintained or continuous to property that I own, maybe that's the solution. U because I I I understand. I
mean, there's good people out there. there's bad people at it, but at the end of the day, these people are buying homes and they got a travel trailer sitting beside them that somebody's living in and we know that. So, answer how we can solve Commissioner Wilkinson's because if we
can make it a a farm type operation. So, so the other thing and I can get um we have talked through this uh thoroughly as a staff and and so we have come up with the multiple of ideas um and and so I'll let maybe J.R. wants to talk a little bit about um we talked about how
um when we have a RV at a site, there's no 911 911 address. And so if something does happen at that area, you know, so for me, the power, water in and out, sewer, you know, water well, and then um a 911
address is probably one of my that's one of my in my brain my top three things that I would want to have at that site because if something does happen, they're going to call us and and I can't speak for them, but I know they have trouble finding the places. And so, um I know that is a problem that we would have to address. So, if it was a we
talked about an an SUP that they would have to do to apply for that. So, we'd give them an avenue that we could do that and that's definitely something we can we can walk down. Um, there are going to be some qualifications I think that would we need for just safety wise. Um, because we need to look at that electric, right? And and so to make sure
they're doing it correctly, we don't get someone hurt or, you know, cause a fire. And so, um, that is something maybe we can go down. I have no trouble doing that. And I don't know if that's something um that you would like to for us to do. We we have talked through that. Um but it would be really up to
you guys to give us direction. We we're in the example that I'm given. I mean there is a 911 address and it he keeps the grass mode and he pays over $1,200 a year for his vacant lot. So he's paying his fair share. Um so it's a little bit different. He's probably It might be an
anomaly, but but when I'm telling him when he's looking at what we're voting on, he goes, "Mom, I cannot believe you're even thinking about this because I'm going to automatically I can't I can't park somebody's camper on there." And to say that somebody has to go and pay when you own land that you're required to go park your camper on a
paid lot instead of on the property that you bought. And and if the intention truly is is we're getting rid of people who are living in campers, then why don't we make the code that that is for living in campers stronger or harder or give you more give you more under that
part? If that if that's really the issue is we've got people living in campers and they're living there illegally and you don't have enough teeth, then let's change that part of the code instead of creating a new one that's taken somebody's property rights from them where they're where they have to go if
they've got an extra camper. they have to go and put it in storage. That's where I'm at. I I totally support the problem that we have. Support you guys in understanding that we have a problem with people living in campers in the county illegally and that there's some health and safety issues and some of
them are doing it doing it decently and their property is clean and then you got a whole bunch that aren't. But if again people have to call it in. So if people aren't calling in, she can't go out there and just start looking at campers on pieces of property and start writing tickets or or
code fi vote code violations. So I just feel like where it's a property for me it's a property rights issue. I'm sorry, Commissioner Harvey, were you done? Well, I I don't know if I'm Go ahead. Yes. Go ahead. So something maybe the piece of the puzzle that that we're all
missing when we talk is you're right. What what Z and the team brings is a case that originated because someone's living in the camper and we have codes that allow that.
But the county is responsible for the burden of proof of occupancy. And the quasi judicial system of the magistrate essentially has stipulated to the team that unless you can prove to me everyday
occupancy then they haven't met the metric of living in the RV against code. So the magistrate's response back was if we prohibit the vacancy being an undeveloped lot right and and and this
is where we try to get ideas from you guys. what are we where where's our end goal? Where are we trying to get to? Um then the magistrate does have teeth without the over burdensome um task that it would take to prove that
every day for the last 90 days this person's been living in the RV because it can't be vacant. It can't be abandoned on a vacant lot. And so what does it look like if we find a happy medium? Where's y'all's vision as to
where we go and how we are able to assist the citizens that are calling those complaints in with people living intermittently or even full-time that I can't that that the codes officer can't prove is occupying that place to the
magistrate. How do we is there I think back to you know when I was a kid we had to take our car down for an inspection each year but um is there any way we
could enforce an annual inspection for RVs in Putham County that would give them the opportunity to go out and look and see if it was livable and if it was compliant with standards that we set forth either for storage or for residency. I mean, first you're you're talking
about creating a whole new set of regulations, cost, manpower. I know. And I don't know what solution is, but that's I don't know. Yeah, that would give you the ability to come and see if if they were living there without, you know, without 90 days worth
of proof and if they were also hooked up because, you know, you've got the potential of raw sewage being dumped. You've got poor electrical connection, which is a safety and a fire hazard. Um, again, you don't have a 911 address, and if they're tied temporarily in the power to the house, you're putting that house at risk. Uh, their septic system at
risk. Um, they're not paying trash fees. They're not paying any type of taxes. So, there's there's got to be some way to regulate it, but there's also got to be some way to allow people to use their property and have their own doicile that can't afford a standard house at this point. So, I mean, it's I don't know
where we go. JR, you're recognized. Yeah. I just would like to speak on an operational standpoint. Commissioner Alexander just hit on a little bit. Ours are the ones that don't have a 911 address and we get paged to 100 Main
Street or a medical emergency on Main Street and it goes for two miles. We don't know where we're going, right? And in our world, time is of the essence. I mean, I'll use yesterday for example, south side of that fire, five abandoned
home sites. They're not registered with our county. I can look it up through GIS. They're not supposed to be there, but they're inside of that area yesterday where our crews are actively engaged in a wildland fire operation. How many of those out there? I mean, and that's the problem is we it's us trying to find them, right? We
look on GIS, we look on the aerials, we look, you know, get using all the technology available to us to formulate a plan on how we're going to protect all these structures. Well, now there's five of them sitting out there on the south side of this fire that I've got to commit a resource to every single one of
those during this operation to try to protect the homes or the abandoned mobile home or whatever. And that and we've had completely had to change our tactics, right? And I know we're speaking about RVs. Let's talk about sheds, people living in sheds. Before a
when we got paged to a shed fire, that was a very lowrisisk call, right? because people don't normally occupy them. Now we're running 911 calls to people in sheds. So now we have to change a tactic on and the approach we
have to take for that. So we're putting our crews at risk because number one, they don't are not up to a building code standard of a normal house. So when we put a crew that's going to have a roof that collapses sooner, walls that are going to fail faster, are not intended
for the heat, now we're putting crews in there to try to make sure these things are not occupied because anymore we're going to more occupied dwellings that look like a shed, look like an RV that aren't there normally. They haven't gone through the process. So they don't come
with smoke detectors. They don't come with any type of built-in things. So, we're putting stoves in without in and these things without a hood. So, the construction is a lot different in these things than what is to the normal day-to-day living. And from my side, it's very difficult to find these things
because people just randomly putting them on lots out there. And then they have a medical emergency. We can't find them. And that takes time. And that's that's the part from our side that becomes difficult is as we're talking about this, we need to wait for them to register whether it's a 911 address or something because a lot of our parcels are not 911 address. They don't get them
until they come in here. They start to pull the temporary power or the power for the construction site. They got to pull a well permit. They got to pull a septic permit. But then they're putting them on site without any of these necessities in order to drive a 911 address for Now, you may have one out there. Somebody went through and made a
911 address on a piece of property. But a lot of these don't even have them. And a lot of times the people that are in these things, they don't even own the property, right? So they abandoned them on somebody else's land. Just like yesterday, the land owner is going to be responsible for that fire, right? It's not the person that would potentially be
staying in that RV. It's the land owner. So, whenever somebody goes out there and they have a campfire, that homeowner is going to be held responsible. You start taking bulldozers and aircraft and all that stuff, just yesterday's scenario, that bill could be quite substantial to a homeowner that has or a landowner that has no idea they're even even there. So,
so to your point, if this if this LDC had been put in place, would that have made a difference yesterday? No, it wouldn't have because somebody would have had to call it in. somebody would have had to call it in and said there's five people on this property or five structures on this property. If they haven't done it already by changing this
code, they're still not going to do it. I I take your point, but to another point I'd like to make is when our crews do call in to code enforcement to tell them about it, they don't have the tools to go out and fix it because our fire marshall will report to code enforcement when there is a fire on that property
and they report it. Then it goes to the magistrate and he can't do anything about it because he doesn't have the substance. But they can already do that under the LDC with them living in a camper. If there's if you've got five structures out there and people are living in it, does our LDC allow them to do that? No. But but that's where the
the concern is. That's the challenge that we're bringing to you guys. The LDC doesn't. But the magistrate doesn't take the fire marshall's word or Z's word if she's visited three times over 90 days as burden of proof of occupancy. it. His
interpretation for the magistrate to take action to impose a fee and to say that they're in violation of that is that they would have to go out every single day and prove occupancy. Commissioner Harvey. Thank you, Madam
Chair. Along the lines of Commissioner Alexander's conversation about special use permit, we do that with the medical hardships, right? So a medical hardship, you have to renew that every year, right? And
so we have two different types of medical hardships. One would be for a secondary dwelling unit like a mobile home or a house. That would be annually through a temporary use permit and it also gets goes through the building permit process. We do have a provision
in the temporary RV occupancy that would allow property owners to um utilize whether it's a natural calamity, a health risk issue, I mean loss of property, some hardship like that would also benefit them through a temporary
occupation. So, let me go down this road. Let's say that we're going down the road a special use permit and and you, Zach, get a special use permit to put your travel trailer on your vacant piece of property. And on that special use,
you we ask if you're going to put power. We ask you if you're going to put septic. We ask if you're going to put garbage out. And then we charge you a fee. And we also charge you a fee every year to come by and renew that special use permit. And if we see that Zach has
put his garbage out there, then we know that there's an issue there. We already know that. And we're allowed then to come onto the property because we told you in the front when you ordered a special use permit, we were going to come and inspect that during the year.
Maybe that solves a problem. And maybe Commissioner Wilkinson's son's friend pays $25 for the special use permit or her son does and then every year he renews it for 25 bucks. I don't care the number. I'm just saying maybe that
starts solving the problem because the problem right now is again and I agree with Commissioner Wilkinson to a point. You can't we can't go on the property. I can't turn in my neighbors. I mean, I don't want to start doing all that. Y'all can't drive by and look. But
if you had a special use permit that had here's what we're going to be following you on, you can go check that out every day. You don't have to worry about occupancy mean occupancy anymore. You just have the permit and it spells out
because again, you put garbage out. I saw your garbage cans. You don't pay a garbage fee. We're going to assess you now. Those types of things. Just saying along those lines. Yeah. So, so to continue and I'll get I know we've got some lights on but I just want to make sure we all understand. So, so section
seven um is something that was proposed by staff as I guess you know if it if the commission wants something in place then that would be staff's recommended language to start with. Okay. I I do
appreciate that very much. Um, Commissioner Newold J.R. touched on this idea of people living in sheds and tents and and all this jazz. Um, I'm running across this situation in my district and um, apparently there's no prohibition of
that. You can live in anything you want here. no prohibition to live in a tent, a barn, a shed. Um, is that the case? No, sir, that would not be the case. So, um um a shed
would be an accessory structure. And when you get into um it's actually a code section that's in your packet, 45106. It touches on accessory uses and structures that are allowed. Um, and which it states in
residential zoning district, an accessory structure may not be placed on the property and use prior to establishment of a principal use or structure unless the property owner has submitted a development permit application that includes plans for the principal structure and a site plan
showing the location of the proposed principal structure in relation to all property lines and other structures. with the exception of docks, boat houses, and once amended non-residential farm buildings for a bonafide farm. So,
if if somebody approached us and said, "I'd like to put this shed on my property," and they didn't meet the criteria for the placement of that shed, we would not issue a zoning permit or a building permit for that use, they could
they could apply for a um a special use permit or a variance to to have it there for a temporary time. Um, and that's really not the problem. It's the ones that don't come in and ask and they put six of these on their on their property,
then how do you go about remedying that? So, that one we actually are able to to take care of. So, we either have the um his name's Justin Dunn. I don't know what his his job title is, but he goes and he gets unpermitted construction.
Um, and then we've also got our code enforcement staff that can go out and get those uses that are not adhering to this particular section. So, in that case, oftent times the remedy is um an after the-act variant or special use
permit or maybe by then they're ready to submit plans for a home of some sort. Um, but we do have a a method in place to address those issues, the sheds. Again though, it it would depend on property owners calling it in for us to
be knowledgeable about it. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Suggs. Thank you, Madam Chair. The only concern and and I spent some time in code enforcement and and Z I I understand where you're coming from. tough is the
the the issue is we're we're charging our code officers to go out and do a violation notice of violation for someone living in a in an RV. Special magistrates not accepting testimony and saying if without a daily proof of such violation that we're not going to be
able to move forward with it. So I see where you guys are coming from and I can see where where Chair Wilkinson's coming from. But I all due respect, I want to make sure that we see both sides of the property right issues because those folks that are living next to those folks and dealing with that they have
some property rights too, you know. So it it's a very slippery slope that we're on, but we I'd like the dialogue, but we we really need to try to find a way to to be able to give you guys the tools that you need because the last thing that we want to have to do is be able to
tell someone that's filed a a legitimate complaint that we can't do anything. You know, that's that's a that's a tough position to put staff in. Commissioner Alexander. Yes, ma'am. Um, regarding the the vacant properties that um Mr. Grimes was referencing in the fire
yesterday, what potential is there um to force property owners to add I mean, if constituent safety is paramount, I mean, at the end of the day, that's that's the top thing. You know, if you're if you have a emergency call, you need to be able to go get to them.
um that they are required to have a 911 address for any property that there is any doicile on and if they don't then we can forcibly remove or find them till such time that they comply
right but if we if we get that if we have that information I think we have that in place already I think this is just a situation Mr. Well, he said he had five of them out there. Yeah, but they were just they threw up some campers and temporary shelters. Yeah, it wasn't where there was a a bonafide
structure on the property. Yeah. No, this is just a Yeah. Palmetas drove the RV through the Palmetas, parked there, set camp, you know, and a lot of times there's nobody even living in these to be perfectly honest with you. They're just abandoned. And I think that's part of to their
point is that they just get abandoned. They're not coming back. Um, I mean, it's not like they come visit them frequently or anything like that, right? If there's no 911 address, they have the that would give them the ability to to grab that or to find that property owner
to allow them to pull it out of there. I can't speak to that. I don't I don't work in codes, but I mean sometimes that'd be difficult, too, because sometimes there's been a 911 address issued for the property that they never did use the intended use for it. So, I
mean, I can go there today and apply for a 911 address, right, with the intent of pulling a permit or well, septic, whatever. That's your first stop, right, is to get that 911 address. It does help your provider. It does help. That was, you know, talking about that Main Street example that you used earlier being two
miles long. At least you had a point sure people. So I mean there's there's so many different facets and problems in this this one issue here. So where you start so Zach on your um your your new added language. So when
you're at paragraph 3 sub paragraph 6 um page 14 for us under no and this is under agriculture zoning district excuse me under no circumstance is an RV to be stored left or abandoned on a vacant property. Bacon is defined as having no
dwelling unit on the property. Then paragraph seven gives you an gives them an out. Seven um says parcels greater than five acres may be approved to have an RV as a temporary use if approved by special use permit subject to the following conditions. I know we haven't
got that to that yet. And this has all been added since our last review. So I appreciate that. I think I can get there. But when you when you're at paragraph six, don't you have to say except for you except except for paragraph 7
because you specifically said under no circumstances is it to be stored, abandoned, or left on the property. But then under partial se on paragraph 7, they can get a temporary use. Yes, ma'am. And I mean at at the I know you just came together last night, right?
Well, not last night, but yeah. Um, we would we would be able to add Yeah. unless u pursued as follows below and however it needs to be read. Okay, I'm get I'm getting there with you. So, you're saying vacant is defined as
having no dwelling unit on the property. I I don't know what the wording is. Exclusions on under except for whatever the wording is for paragraph 7. So, paragraph seven gets me there because in the situation that that would allow somebody if they have greater than five acres and you are I think you're looking
at more of the where you see somebody's just going to leave a camper for good purposes and just storing is probably going to be on an agriculture zoning five acres or more. I do think that I mean how we have no idea how many we have of those
situations. Um the biggest problem we have is people going out and putting up or staying in places that they don't even own. Yeah. Okay. You do you want to go over that with everybody or you want to move on? Yes, ma'am.
Um, so the language reads for uh item seven and and beyond. Parcels greater So, this is in the a zoning district. Parcels greater than 5 acres may be approved to have an RV as a temporary use if approved by a special use permit
subject to the following conditions. An E911 address shall be assigned to the property before a special use permit application can be submitted and the applicant shall provide proof that an E911 address has been issued. The RV must be registered with
the Florida Department of Motor Vehicles. The applicant shall provide proof of current registration at the time of application for the special use permit. The RV and the property subject to the special use permit shall be in common ownership.
The RV shall be lawfully connected to an outside source of electrical service, portable water well, and septic or sewer facilities that have been installed pursuant to permits issued by the Planning and Development Services Department, the Florida Department of Health, or a municipal utility service.
Failure to provide proof of such improvements within 90 days of approval of the special use permit shall render render any approval null and void and the RV will be subject to paragraph 3B6 above. The special use permit shall only
be valid for 6 months. If renewal of the special use permit is not complete, the RV will be subject to paragraph 3B6 above. Okay. So, I'm good with you except for on seven I don't know why it has to be common ownership. The RV and
property subject to special use application. You're saying the application You're saying the RV and the property has to be in the same name? Yes, ma'am. Why? So that I can't go buy five acres and then let a bunch of people rent their RVs on my land.
Can we Can I have Go ahead. Can we just limit it to one and as long as you have like a lease agreement or family member or something? Yeah. Or something. Can we limit it to one RV with a lease agreement so I can lease to Brian the dollar that he can park his RV there? I
mean, as long as we show that, you know, there's something there. I I don't have a problem with that. We can um so why don't we limit it to number and have some type of chain, you know, like some agreement in place. May
maybe not a lease because then you're getting into commercial activities. Um maybe just allow it for immediate family. I would be good with that. That's we can we can do written permission from the property owner. Okay. Something like that. Some change.
Okay. Anybody the thing that so it would have to be the property owner making the application correct unless they designate that individual as their agent. Okay. Um but with written permission from the land owner will be able to get there. Okay. Yeah. Initiated
by property owners. Good. You're just trying to How many times can you renew? We we didn't define that but the whole again the whole idea here is temporary RV. And I'm good. I think six months is fair. I'm I'm fine with that part. Well, uh, Commissioner Harvey brought up a
good point. I mean, if if somebody a special use permit's 150 bucks, so 150 bucks every six months. Do we want to be able to cap it at twice, you know, once a year? I mean, because otherwise we might end up with people that rather
than a mortgage and paying taxes and all the other stuff, they're just paying 15. say if renewal of the special use permit is not completed but we don't signify how many times you can renew. Right. Well, and that's again with the whole intent here being uh temporary. I I
guess the implication here was you you could renew it one time for a total of one year. But after the year it' be kind of up to you all how you want to I agree then it no longer was temporary to your point. I do agree with you on that. Okay. See, I can be a little I can
compromise a little. All right. So, I'm making notes here. So, we want it to be only one RV and um written permission from property owner for others to to stay there. And this is is to park your camper
there. It's not staying there. I mean, right. This is for parking your camper there. No, ma'am. This would be for living occupancy for both. You could do both. Yeah, you could do both. Written permission from property owner
and then um it can only be renewed once. Okay. Renewed once. That's five acres or greater. That's correct. It'd be on five acres or more. Um, real quick
clarification. Um, if I come in and I get my special use permit for my land and then I renew it five years down the road, two years down the road, can I renew it again ever? I wouldn't see why not. Um, we're trying to
get we just don't want to see that turn into a permanent home. So they would have to essentially wait six months before returning or a year or whatever. Okay. So you have to put something in there. Okay. How large is that piece that your son's keeping his You got
almost eight acres. Eight acres. So he qualifies under that. Gotcha. And I'm just using that as an example. Sure. I mean um Okay. And we will add except for in item six above.
All good. So, where did we fall in the residential district? So, there is no similar provision in residential zoning. They're just not allowed unless you're building a home, which we already have that in in the LC. So you can right there's there's essentially there's
three ways you can get away with temporary resident or occupancy in residential districts. It's site clearing for 60 days, home construction for 180 days with opportunity to renew or if you're visiting a friend or family member at their home and it can be their
RV or your RV. I don't know that we made the situation any better. Well, We'd have to ask them. Yeah, we can we can let you know in a few months. No, I mean if if we're
trying to prevent people from living in mobile homes on a travel trailer in a travel trailer, um we just gave them the ability to do it. And the only what I was trying to just simply say is people
should be able to store a camper, not live in it, but just store their camper. But the point that the from from your perspective and the magistrate's perspective is you can use that to get rid of them versus versus the whole you got to have
a Z. What do you got to tell them every you got you got to record every time you went out there and you've got to testify that they Yes, ma'am. We just testify to what we see and what we deduce from evidence that is really substantial. I
mean, all of this kind of misses the point. The only people that are going to adhere to this are the honest folks. That's exactly right. Good people that want to just store their camper there and come visit and fish once every two or three months for a weekend. That eliminates them and they're going to do it. They're going to abide by it because
they're the good people. We're not getting any closer to getting rid of the bad ones. If and that that was kind of what we were all discussing. We for two years we've been discussing this. If they could if you could find a way to allow people to store or park their RVs
on a vacant lot by permit or whatever, that excludes everybody else. Then we can go after everybody else and people won't be so afraid to call them in if they know we can get them. That's why they won't call us because they know our hands are tied. They know we can't prove
they're living in it. I don't care. Let's not try to prove they're living in it. Let's just They got a derelict camper on a lot. They didn't get a permit for it. got to go period into a statement. So allowing people to get some kind of weight that they can be there, those are the good folks. They're
going to pay the money, they're going to they're going to adhere to our rules. If they have to have well and septic and and power to do that, great. 911 address comes along with all that to solve that problem. Only the good people are going to do that. Then that excludes everybody
else. We can go after all of the others. And 80% of those others end up being care premises. Has nothing to do with RV code. We can go after them for the derelict camper, untagged, unregistered, unkempt property, making a mess. We can go after all of those people without
question. It seems like a much more straightforward process. I'm kind of simple. Yeah. Sorry. No, I appreciate your input. I'm glad you're here and that you are giving your input. What kind of documentation does the magistrate require?
Well, if it's if if like I say they're unregistered, untagged, easy. Photograph proof. If they got flat tires or the windows are busted out, Gerald photograph proof. But far, that's why I say we don't we don't even want to try to we can't even try to prove they're
living in it because you would have to be 247 to prove that. People hang up a clothes line after they went fishing. They were there staying two nights out of the month. They gonna hang up a clothes line. Sure. But if they've maintained their whole entire property and kept it and when they leave it's nice and neat. I know a lot of people
that pay monthly to have their yard mowed around their camper and it's only stored there. Some of them don't ever spend the night there. They just come change clothes, get in their boat, go out, come back and leave. Those are the people I'd like to help, right? Allow them to do that because they'll pay the
money. Mhm. You know, that makes that makes us a little bit more money and and takes a whole lot of cases off of us so that we can go after the ones that are not supposed to be there. What I'm asking is what does the magistrate require? A picture every day of someone being there or something similar to
that. Um, so you'd have to go out Yeah. for proof of to prove they're living there. Yeah. For how what time frame? I I it enough to satisfy him. We've never really been able to do it, but we've usually had something else to piggyback off of. If he just says, "I'm
not going for the living in, but definitely the care premises, unregistered, inoperable vehicles, things like that." We get that order easily. It's just the living in. I don't If they admit to us they're doing it, then we can testify that they
told us they were actually living there. That's That's when it's 100%. Other than that, it's just kind of a I don't I don't know what our rights are as a government and the county, but I've got game cams that transmit back to my phone every day of who comes and goes into what's going on in my property.
So, I don't know if you need 45 days of somebody coming and going on that camera or you need 30 days or what we're allowed to do as far as surveillance on prop county rightways. I'm not sure that would infringe on anybody's right to privacy. I don't know. So, that would that would get into a legal matter that I So, I'd have to ask Mr. Cando, but
there are options. Commissioner Harvey. So if we're not gaining anything in this conversation, we're talking agricultural five acres or more, right? That's correct. Is that our main complaints or is it the 75 by 125?
It's a smaller lot, especially in Yeah. So if we're not, you know, in this business, the unintended consequence is always catch the good guys. And that's where I'm at. Yeah. Unfortunately. So we're beating a dead horse here. We're really trying to go after the 75
by125 lot owner who pulls it in and could care less about it. Those are the people we need to go after. This this might be too much not enough juice for the squeeze. So if you leave that that under no circumstances is a RV to be stored left blah blah blah blah under
paragraph two for residential zoning districts but you just took it out for agriculture. Is that what you're saying? That's what I'm saying. Why not just take it out for egg and then if that becomes an issue come back to it but I mean honestly it's
not the issue right now. Yeah. I don't want to give I mean I I didn't want to sub I appreciate what we're trying to do but I I just want if somebody has a big piece of property and they want to store their camper there they should be able to. Couldn't we put that as I hear it? We want to leave 2F but we want to
remove 3B6. and and seven. Were you putting seven in as a way to try to help with six? More or less. We were the the whole idea there was to give some provision that could allow for a
more seasonal occupancy. Yeah. And we do have that. And right now the see they they have 14 days they can stay unless they're building a well as it as it reads right now for both residential and for agriculture. It states RVs may be used
as a temporary shelter on residentially or agriculturally zoned property containing an existing dwelling unit without need for a temporary use permit under the following conditions. And then it lists you know oh I see the 90 days.
Yes ma'am. So the the whole idea was that if I wanted to come visit Aunt Commissioner Wilkinson, I could come and stay in either your RV or my RV at your house. But if she's got less than five acres,
that's okay. I I got more than that. Still you say auntie's house. Yeah, I see what you're saying. But then you go but then you went on to say under no circumstances could be stored so they could come and visit and take their camper with them. You were just saying
they couldn't leave. Correct. Unless it's your camper and it's your home, but that's a different story. Could we not put a permitting component into this and and give the code enforcement officers enough teeth
to give them something to work with for for what? to allow storage. Oh, this one you have to have an existing um dwelling unit. Yeah. So, when it when it comes to vacant lots and people storing RVs, that
would become a non-conforming use. Um because recreational vehicle storage is uh like C3 zoning district. Um, I mean, we we would have to do some some other legislative work in different sections of the code to tie it all
together, but it could be done. Tony, did you want to speak? Uh, honestly, there's I there's too many directions that I could go in with this. And I think that this really more uh hits on what Z runs into specifically in West Putnham as far as uh what I've seen
myself and just running in those areas. It's not so much Yes, you do have I've I've driven by places that I'm assuming could be drug dwellings, uh rundown campers. It's not even so much that.
It's so many different issues. It is uh myself and county administration saw this the other day. There was a brand new camper from out of state that I'm assuming owns this lot. He is setting up solar panels out there. No no water, no septic, no overhead lines running to to
power his camper or whatnot. Uh, so I just I'm going to assume that he's not, you know, not a resident at Dun Creek that spends half their time in Michigan, half their time in Florida, and, you know, down here to Brimfish. He's looking to live on that resident. I'm now I'm assuming uh I've also had
instances of people with campers and rideways where I have had to tell them, "You cannot you cannot live here." Well, I haven't cleared off my property yet. I said, "It doesn't matter. You can't you can't just park your camper in the rightway." Uh I have a an instance right now where
I have had a resident call in West Putham and specifically the first call that I got from her she said well my uh to come up the hill he'll he will get stuck. So my first assumption was well you know what maybe they're looking to put a mobile home there or they're building a house you know they've got to
have the portaotty there for construction. No there's two handy houses on that on that lot. the portaotty is there for their their use I guess to maybe stay compliant or otherwise. I'm not I wish I knew the land development code better. I really
do. But there there are if that is something that I run into also as well with the residents. They do not want to call in on their neighbors whenever they read articles on a PLA Daily News about some dispute uh in some of those areas and
someone gets shot. that that was actually told to me by a lady that lives uh in I Boulevard south of 20 and and I actually called in the uh the code uh on the individual because I I personally I'll put my name on anything doesn't matter to me but and and and actually
that out because the individual that we sent the code case in on he is he has greatly cleaned up where he's at. I I really think that's a success story but it's there's uh 200 different places that I could tell you about. There's a place on you uh main road that is
outside the MSBU between Bayen Power Road and Royal Way. The people started out with a camper. It's a bright yellow camper right there on the side of U Main Street. You can't miss it. They have since moved in a mobile home. I'm whenever I say a mobile home, probably
late 70s, early 80s mobile home. There's no power, no septic, no nothing tied to it. I mean, I don't know how they moved it in there permitting wise or otherwise or who they found to bring it in for them, but you know, at that point, well, then we're missing out on revenue from the county for uh
permitting and and and anything else. So, it's it is I would implore anyone to go out there and just ride and look. And really, I I mean, I think that that is the biggest thing that Z or myself or anybody else is going to run into is
that we would want we want to see it cleaned up. And I understand that it's not an easy task to do that, but there's got to be something moving forward because it is I started this job in 2023 and just seeing the slide presentation
earlier about building permits in the county and everything seemed to go up in 2022. I can already see the growth. Like the wrong growth is coming into those areas. Yes, it really is. I mean, in uh handy houses, outdoor showers, whenever
they've got four or five pallet screwed together with a shepherd's hook for a bag of water, that's I mean, they're living there. So, we want to just do whatever we can to disseminate the information that you need as far as helping
specifically code enforcement out to where they can they can try to I don't know, move move forward. Yeah, absolutely. I get it. I get it. I get I have a a lady I know that does a lot of home health care out in that area and I get pictures every day.
I recognize what you're saying. Um, yeah, and that's the thing we've got to come up with some way to give Z and code enforcement the authority to to do something about it, but I don't know. It's a it's a tough job because there's people that are disadvantaged and they're trying to do
better and, you know, it's it's tough. Oh, I I I totally understand that and and believe me and someone that has specifically had to deal with uh at one point in time looking to build a house or buy a house and I understand it's not easy. Nothing's easy, especially if
you're on a fixed income, single income, or otherwise. But we it you still need to try to do it the right way as as much as you can. That's right. Absolutely. And you can't be you can't have a reputation as a county that fosters this type or
allows this type of development. And we have to figure out a way to allow Z to do her job. And that brings up another point. I mean, even if I know if if that's all I did was call in code cases, say twice a week, I guarantee I could probably come
up with another three to 400 within the next, I don't know, two, three months, easy. I find them all over the place. So, like I said, we just we want to make sure that you know what we see and and if you have any questions, please ask.
Yeah, we don't we obviously don't have all the answers and we will take input from I mean staff, the community, you guys. We are 100% behind finding a solution. I mean Mr. Suggs, Mr. Grimes, Miss Young, Rich, anybody that can
provide some input and we need to find a solution. Okay, so back to paragraph 7 I through 1 through 4. The intention of this paragraph was for making people have a the E911
address that are going to stay in a camper. Yes, ma'am. In the a zoning district on acre properties five acres or more to give some provision for seasonal occupancy without the the dwelling unit being on site. Okay. So,
this is what you wanted. This is what staff wanted. This is what the magistrate wanted. Section 7 1 through 4 was a recommendation by the board of county commissioners to staff to incorporate some allowance for those
larger tracks of land to be used on some sort of temporary or intermittent occupancy for recreational activities and to find a path. The direction staff was given was to make some sort of recommendation back to you on a path
that would in would keep the integrity of health and safety at the forefront for all of the community but still allow that citizen who may own a larger track of land and wanting to use it recreationally to have a camp of sorts.
I gotcha. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Yes. Go ahead, Commissioner Harvey. I'm sorry. That's fine. Um Tony, I appreciate your comments and you're right. We probably both could write out there, but that's not the discussion
we're having right now. 75 by 125 lots. I stop and say to people, what are you doing? You know, you got to have a a home here before you do that. And then you'll see them pack up and go somewhere else, probably deeper in the woods. you can actually access that property by
health safety reasons, right? When you see that they're they're putting their sewage on the ground or something like that. I beg to differ because the other week we um I was told that they could go on the
property for D and DO can go forward. Yep. But the county does not have any authority to go with code enforcement to go on that private property. So we if we see and Tony sees it, I mean I know he
sees it every day, but if he sees it, he can turn that into do and they can go out there and inspect the property. They can and and they but most often times they're not putting it on top of the ground. They're digging a hole. They're putting a barrel in it. They're doing it unpermitted, you
know, the old old style way. and the O can't go out there and probe it and decide, you know, do they have a septic or not. Um, they just have to if they happen to find some other code issue there, they can turn it into
codes and that's, you know, the tough way around. But they talk to our legislators and I will tell you that some of them are getting an appetite to revisit this because they really even in their own neighborhoods, they're finding
this out. Um, so I can tell you that in the case that was in my neighborhood, they said they didn't live in the camper, but then they provided codes with receipts for having their for having their camper pumped out over like a six months period. So if they weren't
living there, I'm not quite sure why they needed their their tank pumped out. But they're an example that really kind of voluntarily complied, right? the minute the codes enforcement case was opened, had that gone to magistrate, we would have all been powerless with the way the code stands today. And that's
where the magistrate kind of gave some feedback with, okay guys, we understand it's a problem and it certainly is something to be addressed. Here's and that's where this started was magistrate's recommended language for the solution. And then where we go, how
we get to the end solution is and and what that ends in solution looks like is why the whole team of staff is here trying to get from you guys where where are we trying to get. Okay. I think we've beaten this section to
death. You okay with seven? Yeah. As I understand it, 2F is to remain, 3B6 is to be removed, and 3B6 will then become whatever seven I through Go back. I'm sorry. What?
3B6 two F stands. Two F stands. 3B6 is to be removed and then 3B6 will become all of the language in seven with the immediate family or something in that nature. One RV written
permission from the property owner and then a renewal one time or whatever the case. Okay. And then um I just I'd be remiss if I didn't mention um the the trash assessment fee is is typically linked to a certificate of occupancy for
a building permit. So there won't be a trash trash assessment fee collected through an e- permit or a driveway permit. So I don't know if there's something May I address that? Absolutely. Because being on the solid
waste committee before, if it has the potential to produce garbage, we charge a fee there. There's no there's no accessibility on that property. But but if we're allowing mobile home, I mean a travel trailer on there with an E 911
number, it has the potential to produce garbage. Correct. Sure. So, and we don't let them off the hook on solid waste assessment if it has the potential. Correct. So when they come in for their special use permit, should there be some something that
trips that? Is that what you're saying? That's what I'm saying. Yes. I just don't know what mechanism that would be because typically it's a building permit, a certificate of occupancy for a home or business or something similar. Maybe
We got to eat this elephant one bite at a time, guys. I know. All right. Thank you for that note. Just leave it in there. We're going to leave it alone, I guess, for now. We don't I don't know what else to do. Do I don't know that you're going to have that many of these. We don't know until we
really get down that road. I don't know. Okay. The areas that are really concerning are the ones where they're I mean the lots right right there where you can see it. Can I ask a question before we Yeah, you can ask whatever you want. So, I know Jay's not here to answer this,
but doesn't WastePro have certain numbers that they pick up and don't they notify us if they I mean, I know not all the time, but they're supposed to notify us if four more residents on the street going Yes, sir. They they do. We have a
solid waste role and y'all approve it every year as part of the development of the budget. But that role is based off on the permits when the occupancy is completed, then we add that to the solid waste role. And so you would add it at
any time during the year. Um, but there is no mechanism by which we would add a solid waste role by anything that could produce trash because anything in the county could produce trash. Um, and so
there isn't an automatic application or even way to build that individual. I don't send a trim notice to a camper. It's not paid through the RV registration at DMV. Um, and that's where your solid waste fee is assessed
after that initial partial year when you when you begin occupancy. But I have had a case where a customer complained their garbage wasn't picked up. Jay went out there and found out that they didn't even pay the assessment and I don't know what became of that, but So that's
correct. So if so let's say the solid waste adjustment fee or the solid waste adjustment committee at some point had deemed them exempt and then she had repaired that home and to a state where she was now occupying it. So that scenario certainly happens. It would
again go back through the building department and they would pay a partial fee it for whatever pr-rated portion of the year that they would continue to get services until that next year began and then it would come on the trim notice. I got it. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. Well, all this is temporary in
nature, right? Supposedly one year at the max. Well, I mean, it would allow provisions for them to be there for six months dayto day. Gotcha. I agree with that. Yeah, I know. And I'm I'm kind of speaking out of turn because I'm not
King Trash himself, but I I've heard that uh we have nonresidential contracts and I don't know if it would be helpful if we could make them have a small dumpster. That might be a solution. Um but that would be that's your
non-residential. Um, but then you'd be talking about a small dumpster for a camper and probably not a good landing zone for the dumpster or anything like that either. And in all fairness, um, Commissioner Paliser is not here today.
So, I don't see us passing this today. Just me personally. Um, unless I've got, you know, three commissioners that are just de definitely want it to go through. I see us as this is a workshop. We're working through these issues. when Commissioner Palisier gets back, he can watch the videos and we'll have we'll
unfortunately have to go through this again um or at least touch on it and figure out how we so I think we have some time to see how we can resolve some of these issues. Yes, ma'am. All right, moving along. Um
45-165 for artificial ponds. Uh staff is proposing the addition in the setback section. Unless approved by a variance, existing and proposed residential structures and accessory structures shall conform to the waterfront
principal building setbacks of the applicable zoning district as measured from the top of the bank of the artificial pond. Um, in subp paragraph D, we are also specifying that a site work permit must be obtained for the completion of the
pond. Good. Just let me know when I need to stop. Uh, in 45-186 for mobile home park, uh, a lot of the changes herein were just making consistent the capitalization of mobile home park, excuse me, manufactured home
park. Um, we are also suggesting to strike the language and B9 must be submitted to the public works department. Approval of the design and implementation of this plan must be obtained from public works. That's done through DRC. Striking entirely emergency
storm shelters shall be provided as required by article 10 of this code. No such regulations exist. and 45-401, we're adding canals to the different types of water bodies. And
45-501 table 7.02A. The only change that we're seeing here is in the residential 2 zoning district making the impervious surface area 50% to be consistent with all other
single family zoning districts. 45 uh-611 subp paragraph D. This is where we're removing uh D2 specifically. This is where we're removing they are further categorized into major or minor
collectors. 616. This section comes from our public works department. Um, sub paragraph B2 proposing the addition of or high-performance polyropylene for cross
drain material. Isn't that the one that I didn't care? I mean, if there's a future design that's better than PVC or Yeah, this is this is essentially where we stopped last time. Well, can we just say unless Okay. Yeah,
I think you did. Unless otherwise approved by public works director. I'm fine with that because there might be a brand new product that comes out that's better than everything we're dealing with. Yeah. So, um sorry, Madam Chair.
Apolog There there was additional language proposed in table 7.10K approved pipe material and this is where it actually lists the different types of material. So we've added galvanized to corrugated steel pipe or
arch. We've struck batuminous coated corrugated steel. We've added side drain only for the corrugated highdensity polyethylene pipe. And then we've added corrugated high performance polyropylene. Um, so that's that's kind
of what's being suggested by public works. 45-636 to clean up some of the language for use of easements for driveway access. And A, we've added shared
um, and then in C, Madam Chair, In fact, this is where I kind of I think we stopped actually here because I was telling the board how important it was, but driveway access serving up to two residential because I've got some in my
neighborhood, one that has four residential uh ones that are served by one access. Yes, sir. And that would be a private road to public works standards. So, this section it was never a private road. It
was just an easement, but but it happened years and years ago. 40 years ago, right? And and so this would be for new Okay. New easements. Yes, sir. Okay. Um and and we typically utilize this whenever we have a lot split uh for a
piece of property that has frontage on a county maintained road. They would provide an easement to the property behind them. So now, if I was to have four homes, I would put in a private road with a culde-sac type situation. You would design it in accordance to our private roads which is stipulated in
article 7 division 10. Thank you. Thank you. Yes sir. So uh in in subsection C we're adding the restriction in any event when three or more residential units are accessed by an easement the access shall conform to design standards for private roads. Yeah, that's good.
Um and 797, this is for uh previously approved developments. When we are trying to vest these developments for use, um we're proposing a reduction of the minimum width to be approved by the uh public
works director from 35 ft down to 30 ft. Where you at? Uh that was in 797 45-797 uh C1. Okay. Mine's not red line. Oh, there it is. It's just not red line. Okay, got it.
And 45-836. Subsection 8, we're striking the applicant shall provide the department the name and contact information, i.e. address and phone number for all above abuing property owners that will be impacted by the deviation. We do this on
our own already. Yep. Um and then in 13 we're just clarifying. So the reduction amounts are staying the same. We're just making them read a little easier. So front yard reductions up to 20 feet so long as 10 foot of separation is maintained between the structure and the
property line. And then it's similar language for the rest. uh sideyard reductions up to 15 feet with as long as three foot of separation is maintained. Rear yard reductions up to 15 feet so long as 3 foot of separation is maintained and there is no water
body. And then appendix 9 is is after these reserved LDC sections 45 837 to 850. Um and appendix nine is associated with our cross-section of a right-of-way um grading plan. Uh so we're seeing
similar language here. In other words, uh for ingress and egress access, which is less than 30 ft in width, um has to go to the board of county commissioners for approval. Anything greater than 30 ft would be approved by the public works director.
And then we're also including language stating in all cases in which a new access right ofway is proposed, such right of way shall conform to article 7, division 10 45886. We're proposing
um to reinstate the voting and non- voting members of the development review committee. This is language that was previously approved. So why did you strike out A?
You just made it one sentence. Yes, ma'am. So A is when we we last amended this language uh July of last year in 2024. And that language was the development review committee shall be composed of representatives of various
county departments and regulatory agencies having a direct interest in new development and redevelopment including but not limited to planning and development services, public works, emergency services, sheriff's office, and department of health. Um whereas the DRC really functions better if we know
who's required to be at those meetings and who's not necessarily required so that we have a quorum and we can pass them. Okay. And 961 we're striking a leftover this code. Um, I'm skipping punctuation
stuff. And 45-1032, the scope of section for subdivision review. Um, we're just clarifying what a lot of record means. And then we've added legally conforming parcels existing as of July 1, 2024. Uh,
that sentence is relevant when staff is trying to decide, can they do a lot split or do they have to do some other subdivision type? Hey, Zach. We're going to take a few minutes break. Sure. Thank you. Thank you, Zach. This meeting will now,
this workshop will now reconvene. We are on section 45-1032. Thank you, Madam Chair. Did you want me to Yes. Okay. Um so in in 1032 we're just specifying what a lot of record is
and then um added legally conforming parcel that existed as of July 1, 2024. This information is relevant for staff to determine if a lot split is eligible or not. In 451033 we are replacing exempt
subdivision with boundary line adjustment because that's what the exempt subdivision is actually doing. 451047 remedies for illegally subdivided lands. Uh there was a a typo and a referenced section in A1. So we
clarified that. Um and then for C, we're saying that a vesting determination could be approved by the board of county commissioners or administrative deviation committee. And we are saying administrative deviation committee. Why? Um because the
uh within the vesting determination code section, it says that the property owner has to exhaust all administrative remedies before seeking board approval. And then um unrelated to code language
uh I brought a vesting determination to the BOCC about two years ago and at that point in time the request was if it's um if the density is higher than four units an acre it goes to some other board before it comes to the BOCC. So they had
a recommendation in that case it was the planning commission. Okay. So they'll So it's still a double process. They have to go through the deviation committee. It says or Yes, ma'am. So they would go to the
administrative deviation committee first. Okay. And then if the deviation committee couldn't get there, then we would send it to the ZBA and then at that point you all would be able to pull it from ZBA to BOCC. So we added an
extra step in this process. um we're not adding an extra step in the process. We've already been going through the ADC there. There's our code is very intertwined and in many places you can point and say it has to go to the ADC, but in this remedy for
illegally subdivided lands, it didn't point to the ADC. So, we're just making it consistent and clarifying here. Okay. N 451051 C1A. This is new language that's being
added. The intent is to make the subdivision process easier for a property owner or quicker, I should say. So, at the time of submittal, except for a type one subdivision subject to Florida Statute Chapter 177, any
application for a type of subdivision may include a signed document from any professional surveyor and mapper certified in the state of Florida other than the surveyor or surveying firm that prepared the survey depicting the proposed subdivision, verifying that the
survey map and legal description are correct. Okay. What's the review process? I got it. Yep. Um All right. And under 451052, we've added some provisions here
for what's called a de facto lot split. This is something that county staff have been doing for my tenure here. Um we've just added legislation in place so that we can kind of create a system by which someone can pursue a de facto lots
split. Um and without reading the entire thing, a deacto lots split is when a single parent parcel is bifurcated by a road, a railroad, a body of water, a parcel under separate ownership that's been developed, so on and so forth. So rather than having them go through a
survey and um you know going through a lot split, they could just get a legal description for the property and record it, break them apart. Okay. And then there's been some changes in article 13, our definitions. We added
a definition for canal which is a natural or man-made portion of submerged lands which connect to a navigable waterway provide a habitat for protected species and are permanent in the sense that massive improvements are required to restore canals to unsubmerged lands.
We added a definition for de facto lot split with the sections that is uh applicable for the de facto lot split. Um let's see I can't recall I
think the de the yeah development has a very lengthy definition. Um so on A13 we included and or covert or other drainage structure. Getting to the end here. Within the definition of structure,
instead of it saying a thing construction, we put an improvement constructed. Um, in the definition for water body, we included the word canals. And that would be it. All right. Are there any questions from
the board? Go ahead, Commissioner Alexander. U as the junior member of this team um I have a a question regarding how we move forward with this. Um are we capable of
approving this as presented if we remove the section regarding the mobile home for or excuse me the RVs for further discussion later? Yes, you are. Okay. Okay. But but remember if you have a two two vote you
you it's a it's a um it's a it doesn't move forward. It's understood. Understood. And in the effort and essence of time management. It sounds like most of this is pretty cut and dried and to prevent having to review all of this again. Um I would like to
Come on, man. You don't want to go through this again? No. I got other things to do. I think Zach and staff have done a great job on the majority of this and there's just a few questions left to move forward on the rest of it. But I think if we pull uh that portion of it, um if it's okay with this with
you guys, I'd like to make a motion that we approve as presented removing the portion pertaining to the RVs. Madame Chair, may I? Yes. Commissioner Alexander, we can actually approve this language today. Um, I think
the direction that we can do is is from this workshop Mhm. tell staff what you want us to bring back for the first of two public hearings. So, we need two on this. Yes, sir. And today wouldn't count as one. And and that's kind of the one thing just to be mindful of is that if
you later decide what you want the RV regulations to be, you're going to do two hearings for that, too. So, so our moving forward then we would have to approve that section for this first meeting and then we would follow up with a second
uh portion of the or second ver or second viewing of this at the next meeting for final approval and then we would still have two meetings regarding the RV with the anticipated changes. So I I suppose if the appetite of the board is to to move forward on the easy stuff,
right, and take out RVs, the staff direction would be bring us back everything except for 45131. And then how we address 131 would be another workshop or some similar um meeting as
what we're doing today. But nonetheless, when you change the text, there has to be two BOCC readings. Yeah. So what what we'll do today is um to your point and I think what you're trying to accomplish is that we um we recommend that to move forward
with the changes that we have talked about today and then it would then have go into two public hearings, two public meetings for the RVs for the entire package and then that way we're not splitting it up. You could do the you can't the whole thing has to be brought twice has to be brought for forward
twice. The whole text amendment has to be brought twice. And then if we remove a section out of what's brought to the next two meetings, at any point when we change that section, it would have to go through two meetings. Yeah. So for your point, instead of waiting until
Commissioner Peliser's here, you're saying we could go ahead and move forward with what changes we've discussed today and then we would move into the two public two more public hearings readings which are required. Yes, ma'am. Okay. So the motion
is do you want to talk about the changes and then he could just um talk about the changes? Um so I guess my question to the commission would be when I bring it back for the first reading, first of two readings. Do
we want the RV language in or out? We want you're you're on the floor, not me. I think there's still a lot of discussion on RV language, so we may have to readress that. But I think that the changes that have been requested here can be made and brought back before the board for a initial reading. And
then the secondary thing I believe that the RV portion we are going to have to revisit in another workshop. Um and then because there are going to be more changes to it. So it it'll still have to go for another couple of readings. Is that correct?
Okay. Let me Thank you. Rich Rich agreed. Is that correct? All right. So when I bring this back, it'll be the packet that we have today as discussed. So it'll include the RV section and the the changes to I want to
find it so that we're all on the same page. So I will bring back with the packet 45131 the changes for 2F which is the residential subcategory. the removal of uh 3B6 which was the circumstance is
a vac RV to be stored left or abandoned and then seven will be replacing six. Yeah, that's what I'm going to bring back. Yes, correct. And everything else, of course. And everything else. Okay. So, you have a
motion on the floor as discussed. Do we need a motion? Do we need a motion? What do we need to be doing here? I'm sorry. All right, that's our directions. Yeah, just I'm waving in support. Yep, we're all good. I think we're just tired, so it's been a long day. Make it happen,
Zach. Good. Thank you. All right. Is there anything else? Thank you for your patience with us, Zach. Thanks for explaining. Not on this topic. Oh, not on this topic. Thank you. Oh, so the part second part of our
workshop included um county and city joint meeting agenda. So we um I asked you guys if there was any particular subject you wanted to discuss with the city and um this is our time to discuss this openly because it's the only time we can discuss these things and so items
that you would like to see a joint meeting on. Commissioner Harvey, you know, Madam Chair, we I have done this when I was chairman. I think it's a great idea. We did it with Palaca. We did it with Interlock. And I don't think we ever went south and picked up those.
But um but I do want to caution you because the last time I think we had one with the city of Palaca, it was more about their annexation versus ours. And we know our boundaries and our
boundaries don't ever get questioned. Uh it's their annexation that gets questioned a lot, their boundaries. So, um I I'm all for moving forward if it if the conversation is just about
annexation. There's that's their I mean, you kind of have to stay in our lane, if you will, and I think that's up to them. But if there's other topics that we can discuss, I'm all for it. When you say annexation, you're talking about extending extending utilities without
annexation like we like I had mentioned at the meeting. That would be great. But I but if we're talking boundaries, you know, if they want us to try to do something with their B, we can't do that. And that's what the conversation came about the last time. Right. So you
started one direction and end up in another. Big actually what we started with the mayor folded up his stuff and thought he was done. So that's the way we can world too if we need to. extended so extended utilities um without annexation for economic development was
the conversation that we had before. All right, that's a great subject, Commissioner Alexander. So, that's going to roll right into our uh initial discussions on interlocal agreement regarding the impact fees.
Correct. There you go. Yeah. I mean, we initially Yeah. I mean, we did not Yes. And and I'm I'm with Mr. Harvey. Um, as far as starting in one direction and ending up with another, um, I think we need to have a a set rigid agenda and
adhere to that. So, all right. I'm I'm the probably one of the worst defenders about getting off on a tangent. Y'all y'all steer me if necessary, and we'll try and steer them, too. So, Okay. All right. Um, T, Mr. Suggs.
Yes, ma'am. Uh just wanted to follow up on Commissioner Harvey's conversation and just to uh notify the board that uh I have received a uh email communication from the city manager that they would like to talk about municipal boundaries,
but I did tell them the city manager that I thought that conversation would be best if we started at our level first and then uh move to the Lord to to the board at a future date if necessary. All right. So So we have three new commissioners. So, let's just let's just
say what we need to say. Um, the conversation that happened before was about squaring up the municipal boundaries. The conversation, and Mr. Grimes, please help me out if I if I get something wrong here. Uh, they did, the previous
regime wanted to square off the boundaries, but at the same time, they want those municipal boundaries, but then also uh be able to pull the revenue from those parcels at the same time from the county to the city. Right. And so, uh that conversation, uh each time it was
brought up, had never really got off the ground a whole lot and it certainly didn't at the board level. And uh you know, from what I understand probably about three, four years ago is that the Mr. Grimes and his folks as well as the city fire department fixed that
situation amongst themselves having to get all of us involved with it uh and how they want to uh reciprocate services back and forth. And so uh it it's hasn't came back up since then. And so uh you know but that was where that was a couple of
opportunities for them to bring that to the board and it never went anywhere. And obviously it wants to come back up now, but knowing the history that we had, I I told Miss Cardi it would be best if we started that conversation at mine at her level. Well, correct me if
I'm wrong and Rich, you might be able to. The state legislators a few years ago was going to do some type of cleaning up boundaries for municipalities. I remember that a bill going through the house or something about that. But, you know, again, we
don't change our boundaries. Our boundaries are the same. It's the cities that continually annex out and go out and that's the problem and we can't do anything about that. I can't fix their problem. As much as I would love to go,
y'all need to clean this up. I can't. And and they can't expect us to clean it up because like I said, our boundaries don't change. So, I'm sorry. No, it's okay. I think also um I'll use myself since I've as an example. Um we have three commercial
properties. Um out of those three, only two of them are in the city boundaries. One of them's not. And quite frankly, I don't want it to be and I shouldn't have to unless I want it to be. And I think there are other citizens, especially business owners, who feel the same way.
They have stayed out of annexation for a particular reason and um whatever it may be. And so they shouldn't be forced to to be boxed in just to just to clean up a boundary. If services are being provided and and um especially uh
safety, if that's been worked out between the two entities, then I don't I don't see a need to square up. And the only reason I brought this up is because I just want to make sure that if we're going forward as a body that we you guys know the history. Um and that and I think that's fair. Um and so I just
wanted to have the conversation. Turn your mic on, please. Yeah, I'd like to get a little education from Mr. Suggs um before we go into these meetings so I have a better comprehension of how this process works and what their attempted goals were with
what our goals are and how they align or if they align. Um, so that again we we we all we seem to always attempt to go in with a united front on this commission and I want to maintain that. So I want to understand the process if you have time to do that. Exactly. Which
is why I wanted to to just bring that up in discussion. Um, and I mean they get they do send us the annexation notices. We just got one for like 16 acres that's going to be that's that and so we do get notified um if
they're annexing into the city on different properties. So we do get that. So I think the process works and then if we have a reason to dispute it we have the opportunity to do so. I don't think we ever have particularly. Um again it's up to the land owner. I mean that's a choice they're making.
Commissioner Duvall did you have anything? Um not a whole lot from my end. I'm assuming these workshops would be done one with palaca, one with present city, one with interlocking. How how does this Well, I don't know that that we we haven't done them with other municipalities as far as I know. I think
again it would have to be as we have interlocking. Oh, we have interlocking unless there's a specific subject matter. We just don't want to go in and and set up a meeting and nothing get accomplished. if there's some goals that we're trying to work with together. If it's a matter of they just want to hear from us, then as the chair I can go down
or you can go down since it's your district and say, "Hey, we're here. What do you need from us?" and have that kind of conversation. Glad to do that with all the mun municipalities. But, um, I just think that it's I don't know that if we have something specific to talk to them about, then yes, I would say let's
have a meeting, which is what we're trying to do here with the city is we had some specific items that's been brought up. And I would appreciate that that same uh little educational piece with uh with staff so I can get familiar with these issues with with the city of Palaka and
I will I will reach out to to Crescent City and see what issues might arise and if you don't mind mad I I try to attend the town of Enkins u meetings uh on a monthly basis and I know
Commissioner Pickkins tried to do that some some I don't know monthly but as much as he possibly could but you know just pop your head in the door and see if they have any issues and again if they do we'll be glad to meet with them I mean we're all in the same boat trying to roll in the same direction but again
having meetings for meetings if they have a specific purpose good meetings and I think um you know mostly what they're looking for support whether they're buying for a grant or that kind of stuff that they know that they can get a letter of support from
Um so if I'm hearing correctly um we do want to have a meeting with city of Palaca and that would regard in regards to economic development slash extending utility boundaries um without annexation if they'll have that conversation with us. Um potentially an interlocal
agreement if we move forward with impact fees and that would be basically it. And so we create a formal agenda or we rely on them or it would be No, that we would have the meeting here and it would be an agenda item I believe um like a separate meeting. Um Miss Young, did you have
something so that we all understand the the impact fee discussion is only needed if the county desires to charge an impact on a city building. Yeah, that's the way it was explained this morning. I think that
that's um yeah only if there's a property that and she actually said there wasn't an out for that. She didn't say you had to do that. Not not so if we apply them to the city it'll be the entire municipal boundary of the city any building department with the city.
If we're going to apply ours to theirs a duplication so we wouldn't get to pick and choose the ones on the outskirts or the ones in a geographical area. Okay. So then I was not understanding that correctly. That's what I was afraid of. Maybe some Well, and we've had meetings
and meetings and meetings with them. So that's what I wanted to make sure we were crystal clear on the application here. So if if the only thing that moves forward is a building permit in the unincorporate incorporated areas, you
need no interlocal agreement with the city. If you're going to apply county impact fees on top of city impact fees where there's a duplication of impact fees, then you need an interlocal agreement for how the duplication of
impact fees are going to be spent. Boy, that would be parallel. Yes. And so and that would that would as it relates to any service that would be um cooperative, right? So transportation is an easy example. Fire rescue would not be although rescue
is um some portion of general government would be although some portion would not be uh parks and wreck would not because the city has their own parks and wreck. So we would we would then go through and determine which ones we were going to try to apply a county impact fee and a
city impact fee to and ones we wouldn't for anyone we do. It's going to be across the board in the whole entire municipal boundaries of the city. And that's what you'd have to have an interlocal agreement on as to how that's going to tie together. Yeah. I mean,
does anybody have an idea of how often that actually happens in actual practice? So, it would be every single CO issued within the city of Palatka, but I mean it's I I should have asked the the the contractor today that, you know, how often do they see that in practice where
they overlap with other municipalities? Oh, I I follow you. We can get that answer. We can ask her in her professional opinion. Yeah, I'd be curious to know. Do we have a duplication of It just seems like it's something to stay away from. Yeah. And we have What about the potential for a
development that may straddle the boundary of the city and encroach into the uninor. So it would fall by where the building permit is. If the permit location is in the 911 address inside the annex portion of the city, it would
be a city impact fee. If the building permit falls where the unincorporated area is, then it would be the county's impact fee. But I just didn't want to get you guys too far down in Pandora's box if that wasn't your desire in the beginning.
I see what you're saying. So the example I used this morning was probably not a good example. I don't think she understood what you were applying. Fair enough. So we're going to discuss um economic development and you Extending
utilities. Is that good with everybody? That would be a great place to start. That'd be a great place to start. Thank you, Nicole. Okay. I don't think we want to get it too contentious on the first meeting. No, I do. That's that was the whole point. All right. I know that one of the
subject matters that they've been wanting to bring up, and I'll just go ahead and put this out there since we've already almost done. Um, they have wanted to discuss homelessness. Um, we did have the person who's running the homeless coalition come in front of the
affordable housing committee and give us an update on what they're doing and some options. Um, she is also asking to come to the next board meeting at the county to present and um, I'll probably let her do that on the agenda. She had some different ways of of maybe coming up
with some ideas. Who is that? Um, her name's uh, Georgia Mitchell. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So, anyway, I don't I don't know that that's a subject matter we want to get into until we have more information.
So, all right. Anything else to come before the the board or for the greater good? Yes, ma'am. If I can, please. uh public, as you all know, uh we uh we have a planned
um trip up to DC coming up to go up and meet with some of our uh uh federal folks up there on some of our projects, particularly the uh Army Corps uh with the uh bargeport as well as the w our portable water project. And so we'll be
meeting with some of our elected officials up there, uh, most likely, uh, Senator Fine and and, uh, Senator Scott and some others while we're up there. The schedule right now looks like it's going to be May
20th. That's a Tuesday going up, but meetings possibly on Wednesday and if necessary, Thursday. As you know, we don't get our schedules until later. Uh so uh you know we'll be uh looking at going up there that week. So if
anybody's interested, I need to get the uh get your information if you plan to attend so I can let our federal lobbyist know so he can arrange whatever uh transportation as well as meetings and space is is going to be a premium while
we're up there. So, uh, I just need to get a head count and, uh, you know, so this is, um, a followup to our meetings that we've had up there last year as well. Right. Will you be making the reservations or do we need to do that or I'm going to wait and get back with Mr.
Gabaton when I know who all will be wanting to attend so we can make uh, make the reservations at one time. I will get the uh, hotel information for Mr. Gabaton and then we can we can make the reservation. I can make the reservation for everybody. It doesn't matter. We had a Putham County
Development Authority meeting that morning, but we could, you know, we can reschedu that. That's not an issue. Yeah. Like I said, he's we spoke last night about six o'clock. So, uh, when I get more information, that's kind of where we're at right now. It's it's a
fluid it's it's always fluid, just like it is when we go to Tallahassee. We'll schedule days up there, but we won't have a schedule, you know, until until right before we leave. the the 20th most likely through the 22nd late in the afternoon, fly back or
fly back the next morning because like I said, we won't have uh we won't have our schedule set when we make the reservations. So, we just have to be be mindful of that. Madam Chair, yes, Mr. Suggs, thank you for bringing that to our attention. And I would encourage um
I know this is going to sound like a big bill, but truly when we go up there as a group, we make a big presence and we usually come back with um with the bacon, if you will. So, um it's good for us to be seen. It's good for us to to
tell our story about Putnham County and um and I look forward to that trip. I honestly do for that reason that we get to walk the halls of Congress and tell them about Putinham County. Well, we got two major projects. Yeah. You know, and and they uh the word of project, which
is our our dredging project for the bargeport, has been included now in both the House and the Senate. So, now we're looking at funding. So, u I'm going to be meeting with uh thanks to Commissioner Harvey with some folks this Thursday from Senator Fine's office and
I mean uh Congressman Fine's office now. And uh and one of the things that we'll be talking about is uh getting our appropriations requests in and they're due in May and so we need to get that done sooner rather than later. That was a conversation with our lobbyist last
night. So uh you know we'll be working on that as well. But this is uh you know we we this is the year that we need to push. Uh we've gone up there before and it was a good year to go up there and just say thank you, you know, for all the help that we've received previous
this year's request, you know, and our project got moved from the CAP 107 funding level to the WA project. So now we need to go back up and and push a little bit on on getting some funding back into that project. So I agree.
Right. Thank you for your comments. Um public comment on miscellaneous items. Does anybody has any public comments? I see a new person in the audience. Hi Ethan. We have Ethan from the new planner. All right. Thank you. With any
anything else? All right. This meeting is adjourned.