All right, good evening everybody. Uh, welcome to the March meeting of the Blush County Charter Review Commission. Um, guess the first order of business uh, after being called to order is ask Madam Secretary if you'll do a roll call. >> Mr. Watts >> present. >> Miss Nory
>> here. >> Miss Bright here. >> Mr. Clayton >> here. >> Mr. Ingram, >> I knew you guys were similar, but >> Mr. Clayton >> here, >> Mr. Ingram >> here, >> Mr. Johnson >> here,
>> Miss Quiet >> here, >> Mr. Lewis >> here, >> Miss Mizy >> here, >> Mr. Parker here, >> Mr. Sakinovski, >> Miss Shriber here, >> Mr. Toland, >> Miss Wheeler, >> Miss Walford. >> Thank you. >> Okay, I think we got a full house.
That's great. Good to see everybody. Um, so I'm not going to get into a whole lot in the way of welcoming remarks. Just thank everybody for being here this evening. Um, I want to thank our committees. We're going to get into a couple of u, uh, committee um, action items here in a couple minutes, but um, I think the committees have done a
really good job of the work that we needed them to do and focus on. So, we'll get to that here in a few minutes. But, uh, first and foremost, we've got our minutes from the February 9th, uh, commission meeting. Is there a motion to approve the minutes?
Got a motion for Mr. Lewis. >> Got it like four seconds. >> Anybody want to claim it? >> Pat gets it. >> Can you tell me who those were? Sorry, sir. >> Uh motion by Dwight Lewis and second by Pat Nory. >> Thank you.
>> All right. Any discussion on the motion? All in favor signify by saying I. >> Any opposed? All right. Minutes are approved. Um moving on to general business. We've got a couple items of a couple folks here for public participation. So, let me call them up.
Uh, first one is Patricia Miles. >> Welcome. If you could just state your name and and address for the record. >> You need the full address. >> Close enough. >> My name is Patricia Miles. I live in Port Orange, Florida, and I'm here
representing the Valuchia County Cultural Alliance. And I would like to read from a letter from Julia Turillo and it is uh for friends and colleagues who supported us in our quest for getting our grants funding.
She says, "I'm happy to tell you that after four months of work, we scored a victory at the county council. Not perfect, but a start." So, thank you all of you from this group who did stand up and uh uh support us in
the many ways that you did. We appreciate your comments spread through the social media as well. We had over a 100 people in the chamber that spoke on the issue for almost two hours. Many of you wrote to the council members or
talked with them to give them your opinion. There was no question that the arts and culture had support in that room. The vote was 5 to2. Councilman Reinhardt, Johannes, Sant Santiago, and
Dempsey stood by their pledges to support the funding. Councilman Kent voted no. Councilman Robbins voted no as well. Chairman Brower argued against the funding, but then voted yes. So, it was
a partial victory because the county council has agreed to fund this year's grants in without including the grants for the shoestring theater or the Athens and without restoring those funds originally earmarked for those two organizations to the general pool. In
addition, there was discussion amongst the council members about doing away with the program entirely. They agreed that there would be no funds for next year, but have not agreed on exactly how to make that happen. We hope that they
will not do away with the cultural council since that group has other chores besides distributing the grant money. We want that structure to remain in place in preparation for the time when we have more pro- arts county
council. Please be alert for our next steps. VCCA will continue to work to ensure that cultural funding continues in Valuchia County and we will continue to need you and your support to make that happen. Again, thank you so much
from our hearts, the Valuchia County Cultural Alliance. >> Thank you very much. >> We appreciate you coming out and sharing that with us. Thank you. All right. Next uh speaker is Katherryn Pente. Good evening, Commission. Katherryn
Pante, address protected. I'm here today because our county attorney has cited the failed Sarasota County Charter Amendment as a reason we cannot protect our own parks and preserves the way Elatcha County has done successfully for 17 years. With respect, that is not an applesto apples
comparison. In 2018, Sarasota voters passed an amendment that said in plain English, "The county shall not sell or give away any county owned parks or preserves." Period. No exceptions, no process. It was a flat absolute prohibition that took away the board of county commissioners statutory power
under Florida law to manage county property. In 2019, Circuit Judge Hunter Carroll struck it down, ruling that those sections were hopelessly inconsistent with Florida law and that voters simply cannot strip the board of its authority granted by state statute. That is nothing like the Elatcha County
provision we are asking you to support. Elatchua section 1.7 does not ban anything. It creates a voluntary registry of protected public places. The board of county commissioners decides by a supermajority vote at a public hearing with specific conservation, recreation, or cultural properties deserve the
highest protection. Only those chosen properties require a countywide referendum before they can be sold or converted. The board keeps every bit of its authority under Florida statute 125.35. It simply adds one extra democratic safeguard for the lands we all cherish most. Sarasota tried to handcuff the
board. Elatchua gave the board a tool to protect what matters while keeping full legal flexibility. Valuchia can do exactly what Elatchua did legally, safely, and without conflict. Our proposal follows the model that has stood unchallenged for nearly two decades. The amendment being brought
forward tonight is only slightly better than the one this commission already voted to place on the ballot. It still leaves the door wide open for the sale of conservation land through a vague term, public purpose. That phrase is broad and easily manipulated and it weakens the protections that voters believe they were funding. Valuchia
County taxpayers paid to protect this land through the Valuchia Forever program. It was purchased for conservation, not for future commissions to reinterpret and sell off. At a time when a sitting council member continues to challenge and undermine the conservation program, the need for a stronger protection has never been
clear. The Elatchua County style charter amendment would ensure that conservation land cannot be sold without the direct approval of voters. These lands belong to the people who paid for them. The people of Valuchia County deserve the final say in protecting them. I respectfully ask you to look past the Sarasota red herring and give our
residents the same common sense protection that Elatchua voters enjoy. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you for your time. I appreciate it. Okay. Uh that's the end of our public participation. I don't see anybody else here present unless Will, you have something you want to add to the the
conversation. All right. Uh then we'll move on and we've got a report from the uh Mr. Parker as chair of the government structure and housekeeping subcommittee. You want to address your item? >> I need a motion to approve minutes from
the February 9th meeting. >> So moved. >> We have a motion. Is there a second? >> Second. >> All those Any discussion? All those in favor say I. >> I. Any opposed? Motion passes. And just to clarify for the minutes, I think that
was unanimous by the members of the subcommittee and a few others that were cheering them on. Okay, moving on to item 5C. Um, we've got a report and recommendation from our other one of our other subcommittees. U, Mr. Senowski, can you talk about the
drafting and recommendation subcommittee activities from February? >> Thank you. Sure. Uh, good evening everyone and thanks. It's nice to have everyone here tonight. Um if uh to get started, if you would pull out the um it
says May 2026 on it. It has the uh council uh members of the council's names on the top. That's that's the um the work product from our subcommittee and that's what we're here to discuss and present for um review and um
approval and whatever manner the uh commission decides. So, just to get the Would you rather me just u just discuss how we got there or just go ahead and move it, have it moved and then start the discussion? >> Why don't we go ahead and move it and start the discussion um and you can do a
brief overview of each of the elements in it. >> Very good. So, um I'd like So, that document that that we just referred to if um I'd move for its approval and if there's a second we'll get started on that. >> Got a second from Miss Munisi. >> Very good. Thank you. Okay. So we met
twice in the last month and it was very productive. Um both times staff was super. The members were all in attendance. We had zero absences. So it was great to and we were very productive. One night we the first night we we worked two hours. Second night we stayed within our the Parker rule of one
hour. So that was good. Um anyway, uh it was uh we went through each of the uh items that was referred to us and um we tweaked the language, we reviewed it. Um between the first meeting and the second meeting, uh a couple members were tasked
with working with staff uh to to produce the final um recommended language. And with that, um we had a I think a very good report. it I it just basically encapsulates the desires um that as we understood them anyway uh of the
commission. So if you haven't had a chance to um look it over, I'll just re review quick quickly. The first item was uh to have it uh to recommend that the council uh consider having in its annual
scheduling uh at least two meetings on the east side. Um there is a provision for special meetings and one of those provisions of course is advertising but it also um specifies the agenda so there's no surprises and people don't feel like they weren't in the county
seat or something like that. So that's all that language is included. Um next one was the idea uh to have a dedicated funding source for public transportation. The concept here was uh originated with the public and we felt that it was better as a recommendation
to um particularly considering the county's investment in Sunrail and its other public transportation services to try to re research and identify um and ultimately implement a dedicated funding source similar to what we had for roads.
Um third item was the to create an al alternative alternative enforcement mechanism for environmental standards. We learned it's not in this language here, but we learned that when there is a disagreement and as we we did, if you remember, we had a presentation by folks from the um who were involved with the
the environmental plan or what the the group that what's it called? >> Uh Valuchia growth management committee, >> right? The growth management count committee. So they said that boy if it's if we ever do have conflict and it's very rare but then it would end up having to be a lawsuit and we you know
hearing that and getting the input from the public and then we felt that there has to be at least some form of communication other than just simply staff level and that and and or going to court. And so um the concept here would
be to establish um a um a reporting system so that on an annual basis the county receives basically a status report of compliance with its countywide standards and that would just facilitate
the kind of communication and conflict resolution to prevent um issues. Uh next item which is of course timely was the cultural funding one. Um the obviously we knew that this was being at least this year's funding
was going to be reconsidered by the council. Um the idea here was just to incorporate the concept that yes there the the county's comp plan does have a commitment even though it may be aspirational it's it is there and it's
it is the sense of the group from our earlier meetings. nothing I I don't think has changed that we do urge the county to support arts and cultural activities. Uh next item was the an interlocal committee for infrastructure
coordination. The the genesis of that was members of the public being concerned and of obviously members of this commission being concerned about uh storm water issues uh infrastructure investment. There is currently no let's
say uh let's say transparent way of saying that on an annual basis a report is made to a group of both the uh representatives at the county level and a municipal level of exactly what the status of such investments are. So this
would create not only and this was done in conjunction with um public works as well as the uh county attorney staff uh to create an advisory committee with representation from the counties and municipalities to coordinate information sharing, planning, permitting,
construction, finance and maintenance of countywide or interconnected public infrastructure. In other words, not just storm water but basically the the kind of infrastructure we have there but not roads because roads is a separate issue. um and then create a reporting mechanism
so that each July 1st it will be updated. So that is there's no use of creating commission without having information that it's going to be publicly assessing and that would help guide future in uh infrastructure investment. And last uh but not least
the forever land acquisition proceeds. This one was again something that relates to a lot number of the other issues we've talked about. Again the commission decided to make this a recommendation. The concept is that yes, the tradition of in this county is that
uh proceeds from from Foreverland transactions uh are are generally put back in the Valuchia Forever fund. We know that the that legally you can't necessarily handcuff, but it's basically
urged the council to um maintain that tradition. So with that, if I can help with any questions or any member that was in participating, if there's any questions from anyone else, be happy to look at them. But >> are there any questions for Mr. Saknowski >> or any other members of the the
committee? >> Any discussion on the language that's as proposed? >> Yes, sir. >> I think you're m >> You would think I'd remember that. >> I just had a question about moving the meetings to the east side of the county.
First of all, do we have any metrics that we can measure to see whether the attendance improve improves or not by moving? And then perhaps more importantly because of of what's coming out of Tallahassee and reductions in property taxes on the future, what's the
cost going to be of holding meetings outside of the norm? My concern would be is and it's just some thought for the committee is if we do this, what's the fiscal impact going to be on the county when we're looking at $110 million shortfall perhaps on the future in the
next budget cycle? Yeah, we uh just we didn't specifically discuss that issue, but if you recall, we did have the before it got to us, it was approved at this level and the the question was regarding sort of the the technicalities of of having a meeting on
this this side and the the uh wisdom of that. And when we looked at the language of the special meetings since the since agenda items were very specific um we didn't think that would be run into too much of an issue as far as attendance is concerned of course the the the
attendance that matters at these meetings is the members themselves and I can tell you from communication with at least the one member on the east side his response was only two on east side. So, what I'm saying is there there I don't think that there is any I don't
think there's any sense of of um concern over having just two. Um there may be actually some movement to wanting more than two. But I think that uh even if they ended up with zero, we're just we're leaving it up to them. We're just saying this is what the input
is. But you have some valid points. I don't I don't have any particular information on cost. But for example, if it were held here uh just as an example, the It would cost probably about the same as what our meetings cost. >> I I live in southeast Valuchia County, so having meetings on the east side of
the county obviously benefits me. I live down in the metropolis of Sula, but I'm just looking towards the future is what we should be doing here on this committee and you know, my concern is we have a really big hole coming down the line with the whole property tax thing and it's just a concern just just for some thought.
>> Yeah, it's well taken. >> Sure. >> Yes, Mr. >> Who's recognizing me? you or >> yeah I don't know who to I think she was I think >> okay we'll go to Amy and then come over to Ben >> I I had those same concerns and I know that we have uh and I brought that up at the main meeting and then again at the
subcommittee meeting that we have concerns about the fact that you have everyone upstairs listening to county council meetings >> and they can all come down give their input and go back to work whereas if we have it on the east side they've got to take a day off of work or travel back
and forth or maybe not be able to give input because they're trying to work over there and the meetings over here on the east side. So, I brought that up twice and then Miss Shriber had some very good points about having it be on the east side and so we as a committee
as a subcommittee unanimously agreed that we would recommend this to county council. It doesn't mean and I know every year it's something that they can consider doing. They have the power to do that and every year they decide to continue to do all of them on the west side. So they already have the authority
to do it but we unanimously agreed that there's nothing wrong with recommending it. >> Mr. Johnson >> I have some problem with recommending and the reason part of it is is he spoke a m minute minute ago we don't know what kind of budget hole we're going to have
and in the past I spoke on the fact of our our staff who we have to take and we move them it would lose one at least one day of total product productivity and if it's a night meeting you're going to lose two days of productivity with your
staff. So, gathering them all up, paying the mileage, taking them out of their work environment. Um, I I'd just say leave it alone if the county wants to do it. They had that option to do it. But if we tell them, it kind of puts them on a spot that I disagree with. Really, I
think leave it alone or it's it's a it's not costeffective. And you can say what you like. These people that do all of this, it takes them a while to do that. The only other option is to set up a meeting room somewhere full-time which takes away a room somewhere which is
further expense on designing putting room together and not the room not being available for normal use. So I I just assume leave that alone. >> So if I just want to say and just in terms of staff I think I think I really
do think that in at least historically the concept of having special meetings is specific topics. So I would envision this as just my guess that if we did if the council did decide this and again it's merely a recommendation that they consider east side is that it would be about issues that matter to them and
it's not trying to bring the whole county seat to Daytona Beach or wherever it would be. It would be those items on the agenda which is would you know would be relatively minor. >> Okay. M. Traver. >> Um, I just wanted to say they choose what meetings, right? if whether it's
the 9:00 am or the 4 pm. And I'm a little surprised because when this came up and we all discussed this the first time, Ben, you seemed you were the one that brought up making a recommendation as opposed to a motion because I was sitting next to you and I was really strong on doing a motion for an
amendment, but I understood the overall um and there were recommendations from the public for every month and I said I didn't think that was feasible and you said it comes up over and over and I even asked uh Miss Billy Wheeler and discuss
because it's come up so many times and so that's why two meetings of their choice. >> What what came up so many times that I said >> um it was stated that it comes up every year about holding >> I never said that because
>> No, I didn't say you said that. I'm saying it came up and this seemed like a compromise because there is no amendment and it's simply a recommendation. And I pointed out to Miss Nory during our subcommittee, if it doesn't work, the council, this isn't a mandate, they
get to choose the meeting, whether it's 9:00 a.m. or 4 p.m. or what month or what meeting. Um, if they don't like it, they won't do it. I think everyone knows as well as I do that if they don't like something, they don't do it.
>> Well, it's it's interesting how much this conversation kind of mirrors the conversation we had at the at the committee meeting. And at the end of the day, when we looked at how the council goes about setting its meeting schedule at the beginning of the year, you know, our suggestion was, you know, because we
talked about the financial impact of it, we talked about the staff impact of it. Um, at the end of the day, you know, we heard that this is a recurring request of both the council and I think we heard it at the 2016 charter review uh commission meeting as process as well that you know there's a there's a push
for it. I think the way that we've phrased it is basically look at it council decide to do it or not do it. It's completely up to you. We just wanted to transmit the input through. I would be more more well I would support if we put in there instead of
recommended to that we say on occasion I would be you know that we recommend on occasion each year maybe >> well we we took the language as it was given to us we didn't modify that this this commission's already approved the language once so we're just we're just asking for an approval for the package
>> just just noting that the language currently says occasionally yeah >> be held But here's what I'm going to add the two >> right >> down here. >> So this so the italics language is the actual recommendation. You good with that? >> Okay. >> Okay. I'd like to unless there's further
discussion I'd like to move it so we can go to the other items. >> So So we've got I think that's the uh end of the process here. Mr. Lewis. >> Yeah. You know, if you if I don't know how many of you came to the echo meeting, but I was there and I can tell
you if people are interested in what's going to agenda, they'll be there. >> True. >> They pack the place and uh so I don't think m pushing some over here is going to make any difference in who's coming. They come when they have something of
interest. They don't come when there's and I don't care if it's over here or over there. I think it's a waste of money to try to change them all around. >> Yeah, >> that's my position. >> And again, I think this the way that the language is phrased here, it doesn't require anybody to do anything other
than think about it. And if for all the reasons that have been stated tonight, the council decides not to do it, then they're fully within their rights to not do it. >> Um, >> any any further discussion? So, we've got a motion and a second right now to move the language as presented. Uh,
>> I second. I I don't know if anybody's >> we we got the second. So unless there's any further discussion or any revisions um to that language, then I'll just call the question. Um all in favor? >> I any opposed? >> All right, Mr. Chairman,
>> thank you very much. Yep. >> I as I had sent out a request, I don't know where you wanted me to place that, whether it be under general business or whether it be under other business. I was going to do it under other business, but I think we could certainly take it up under general business and add an item D.
>> Okay. >> Um, so I will recognize Miss or Vice Chair Nory. >> Thank you. Um, this was included in your agenda packet and is specific to the amendment that we had proposed the ballot language for the establishment of
a registry that increases county council voting requirements for transfer conservation land. First of all, I want to acknowledge that um the Elatchua model is a great model. It did not come out of committee as as an accepted. So,
we moved with what we had which was the supermajority. Um personally, I do like the Elijah model, but but my job as as committee subcommittee chairman was to move some legislation. So, I want to read exactly what I had written because I don't know that
everybody had had a chance to read it. And I also have a letter from U. Melissa Lamers who I think most of you know was uh she serves on ENRACK and she also co-chared the uh re resolution the excuse me the reauthorization of the
echo and bullish forever referendums back in 2020. So this is my letter to you. In light of recent language has come to my attention is my intent to offer an amendment to the charter review committee at our next meeting that would be tonight regarding protection of our
conservation lands. This language further protects Valicia County conservation lands and aligns our amendment with the recent language that has been adopted by the Florida House and Senate and is now on the way to the governor's desk. That language was unanimously adopted by both of those and
this does align with them. The measure requires at least 30 days public notice and mandates that key information including the parcels involved, the conservation justification and land valuations be posted online before any action is taken and that is House Bill
441 and Senate companion bill 548. Uh and then the key information can be found in the paragraph uh surplus of stateowned lands at least 30 days before any meeting of the acquisition and restoration council or the board of trustees to review the proposed sale of
conservation lands. Division of state lands must publish the following information on its website. The parcels of stateowned land for sale and a statement from the division explaining why the lands uh are no longer needed for conservation purposes. The House and
Senate bills are designed to strengthen transparency and establish clear procedures when the state considers selling or exchanging conservation lands. At their core, the bills are intended to to ensure accountability and openness in decisions affecting
Florida's conservation lands. By adding this additional language to our amendment, we will we will be following the state leading protecting our conservation lands. I'm not going to read uh Melissa's complete thing, but I do want to say that she she offers her
support. I urge you to at a minimum add the requirement that the county council find that the property is no longer needed for conservation purposes prior to any disposition and better still to make it consistent with the state by requiring notification to the public at
least 30 days prior to making the decision to surplus land. And she thanks everybody for their service. So, uh, with that, I'd like to make an a motion for an amendment and see if I get a second on it. >> Second. >> Okay. So, I think from a technical
standpoint, this would be a motion to reconsider the approval we had at our last meeting. Is that >> you know, I spoke I spoke directly to Russ about that and he said he thought just an amendment with that they would go back and redo the language. >> I defer to council. >> Anybody have an objection with doing it
the most efficient way? All right. So, there's a motion to >> to add language to add language providing for a 30-day notice prior to the sale and a statement from the county explaining why the lanes are no longer needed for for conservation.
>> So, basically the motion is to conform it to the newly adopted state >> requirement. Yes. >> Okay. Got a motion. That's the understanding of the second. >> I agree. All right. >> Any discussion on that motion? >> I would like to discuss. Um, so
there's no mechanism currently for selling our conservation lands as nothing's ever been brought for forward for sale according to the attorney at the county for 25 years. And these amendments that we're discussing here, do nothing but establish a method for the lands to be sold. They do not
protect what the voters voted for, which was perpetuity when they voted. I believe I don't think that anybody questions what the voters thought they were voting for. So the letters of support for the program that have been coming in from cities and organizations to the county are a good representation
of expectations. I have seven letters, one from the city, well from the cities of Edgewater, Orman Beach, Deltona, Daytona Beach, and Daytona Beach Shores, one from the Indian River Lagoon Council, and 1000 Friends, which is also
in the packet in support of the program. Orman Beach specifically points to perpetuity and partnerships in their letter as support. What we're doing is not what the public voted for. I just want to point that out. It really does not protect what the public voted for. I
understand what we're voting on. It's not what the public voted on. And these I'm going to hand over to I'm assuming Miam. >> Okay. Thank you. I did send them in by email, but um it was between two and
three o'clock today and uh John did not get them, >> but that's up to all of you if you want them forwarded. I'm more than happy to have him do that. >> That it's my understanding I I got those letters, but those are not specific to this amendment. They're specific to the discussion coming up in the next
meeting. Is that correct? No, >> they're general letters that were asked for and they actually Orman Beach specifically states perpetuity and partnerships. >> Okay, I'm going to recognize Miss Munzi. >> I may be completely wrong and if I am,
somebody please let me know. But I thought we discussed the fact that right now the Valuchia County Council has the authority to sell conservation lands if they deem it useful for the public good or whatever it was we said. So we know
right now county council if they decide that it's within you know the needs of the public good that they can sell conservation lands right now. Is that correct? >> That's correct. >> So this just adds an extra layer of protection that says you can't just outright do that. You've got to publish
it. You've got to tell us why and >> and it brings it into the state standard. >> And it brings us to the state standard in line with that. That's why I I seconded that. >> Okay. >> Any any other discussion? Mr. Ch, do you want to chime in on that? >> I would just point out that the law uh
while it has passed both houses up in Tallahassee, it has not been presented to the governor at this time for signing. And there is reason to believe that the governor may ultimately veto it. That's neither a given nor I'm just saying that it's not the law yet.
>> Not final yet. >> Mr. Ring, Mr. Dyer, has your staff had an opportunity to review this yet? I I haven't heard anything from you about this yet and I feel that your opinion on this may be important. >> I if this is something that you want to bring forward I think you can
>> um the you know it's been commented on I we're not aware of them selling land in the past. Occasionally you might get an imminent domain case brought by another agency but we're not we can't control that. Um,
so, um, but yes, I think you could lawfully do this if you choose to do so. >> Okay, that sounds great. I I like adding another layer to protect our citizens and all. While we're mirroring state statute in the charter, could I propose
some other state statute so we can just add to the charter? Because this to me seems like we already have it in one place and the charter is really for things that affect us locally. And my concern is we mirror state statute and everything we do with
our charter. We don't really have a reason for our charter anymore. And so my concern with this is, thank you for the update. We don't know that the governor is going to sign it. We don't know that this is actually going to be lost. So at the very least, I would want to table this item until we know for
sure that this is actually going to get passed through the governor and that this could apply to what we're trying to do here. And then it would be a separate item, I'm sorry, a separate item away from stuff that we've already approved because this is coming so late in the process.
>> Let me just clarify just to make sure we're we're clear on kind of how standards what may apply here. So as we have already voted, we've added the requirement in for the registry. We've added in the supermajority requirement as our recommend our ballot language
that would be going forward. motion right now. Um, as I understand the bill that's been adopted by the House and the Senate, it is a binding bill on legis on on state agencies. It's not binding on local agencies. >> That is correct.
>> And I understand the motion is basically to incorporate that same standard into the ballot language that's been proposed. Is that accurate? >> That's accurate. >> Okay. So accurate. >> I guess Mr. ing just to that one particular point because the bill as proposed right now at the state level
only applies to state agencies. It wouldn't apply to the county. Okay. So, >> thank you, Mr. Chair. Yeah. Okay. Miss Miy >> and whether the governor signs it or not, I feel like it's important to us as a county. We our citizens have made it
clear twice in a row that this is important to them. Almost 76% of our population has said this is important to us. conservation lands are important to us. So when our county council believes that it's in the good of the majority of
people to sell some conservation land, you know, that may come up, you know, that may come up. We need a fire station someplace so badly and the county council decides that it's the greater good for us to have a fire station someplace than just have land sitting. You know, that's that's a valid point.
However, the public should know that. The public should have an opportunity to hear why enough time to make their their comments on it >> and make comments on it. And I believe even with this, wouldn't the county council continue to have ultimate
authority to make that decision with our input and everything? But they'd still have the ultimate authority. >> Yes. >> All it does is give us an opportunity to say, >> "Hey, why are you doing this?" And the reason for that is, you know, we've talked about before. I think state law sets our process for basically the
county commission to disposing of its assets. So, we're preempted there. We think some of these other things that are added are permissible because they do not conflict with state law. >> Right. >> Mr. Sakovski. >> Thanks. Okay. So I I I uh have seen
I haven't read the letters that that um Shyber is mentioning but I have seen stuff on social media then I constrain myself from answering them. I just read them. But there is a lot of misconception in based on that and based
on these letters that I have no doubt that people and I think I did vote on one of the uh echo things uh that it was the concept for many voters is it's in perpetuity but the reality is it's it's not and so that
fact exists now. So whether we we I think in essence it might be a benefit to the public to let them know that this is the process that we are suggesting because there is no process right now other than the fact that the unbeknownst to many
people the county council can do this. So, I'm I'm in favor of, you know, ex explaining it further and get and creating the process because it's a a process that we can that the voters approve is better than one that they
really don't realize they exist. Anyway, um with that, the only thing I would recommend and when they when you all word smith it, um because they I way I hear the amendment is to mirror the language, but I would just add the word because they talk about here. >> Um
>> let's let's see if we get an amendment successful amendment to >> No, no, no. Talking about I don't want to have to add another amendment to the amendment thing. I just want to just say when they're word smithing it just to make sure they include the concept of leasing as a specific one because one issue I have seen in other counties
there where 99year leases are occurring and that's neither a devestature or a transfer technically. So unless you can you just want to add the word leasing in there that's all when they word smith it. >> All right well let's uh let's take a vote on the on the motion that's on the floor right now and we'll see if we need
to get into word smithing. So, any further discussion on the motion to amend our prior ballot language that was approved? I think what we would do is then have that ballot language, if the motion passes, come back at our April meeting so we can finalize that along with the report, which we'll talk about
a little bit in in our next item. Um, that everybody's understanding. All right. Any further discussion on that motion? All in favor signify by saying I. >> I. Any opposed? So I think I have two three. Raise your
hand if you were an A. One, two, three. Okay. So I think that's >> Yes. I think that was 11 to three. Is that my math right? I've been looking at spreadsheets all day. I can't tell you. Okay. All right. So that motion passes
um to amend the language that we've already approved. Um, so staff, unless anybody else has any input on that, um, Mike and and GIF and all the, uh, great drafters at the county attorney's office, if you'll bring that revised language back to us at the April meeting, I think we can then finalize it
and probably have some more discussion on the right words. >> Can I just say thank you to everybody who for this support? I think this is really important. >> You just did. So there you go. >> All right. Um if there's nothing else under general
business, uh moving on to the organizational items, um talking about our next steps, um I largely just did. Um I think we have u I want to congratulate and thank all of you um through the committee process and through the work that we've done here. Um we are perhaps on target to largely
wrap things up at our next meeting. Um I think staff is working on the general report. We approved the transmitt letter and the the recommendation letter. um this evening. So I think by the next meeting, Mr. Booker, is that right? That we should have our final report to look
at and bless and and uh and now this additional tweak to the ballot language for the uh environmental lands. >> That that is the goal. Yes, sir. >> Okay. So, we have the at least the prospect of finishing one meeting early. >> Yes. Yeah. We're >> Mr. Parker, does that sit well with you?
>> All right. Is there um I think then for the for the next uh meeting we will have um I believe we're going to have the final report is going to be going to the drafting committee to do a onceover. That meeting is set for I heard there was some changing on that meeting. Mr.
Shaknowski, do you want to address that? >> Thank you. Yes. So, um our understanding and I've spoken with staff and and um about this. Uh we actually set up two potential meeting times. Uh we can do one or both. Uh and if we do just one, we have to decide this evening which
one. Uh the idea is that we weren't sure exactly how much uh work there would be. The way I understand it at this point, there's one of the functions we're going to do is try to just massage exactly the most effective form of presentation. Uh there's some boiler plate that's in
there such as our bios, photos, things like that. It ends up being I think at this stage around 56 pages. Uh there'll be an executive summary. No one we I don't remember last time I read a 56-page document and remembered everything in it. So I figure that the
way we do it is the main objective. I think that at this stage we probably can get that done at one meeting. So um just in terms of the the folks that are on that subcommittee uh I just want to get a sense so we can uh John's already reserved both so they're both advertised
but we don't have to meet both times. Uh what would be better the 16th or the 23rd is really the question. The 17th is a com a council meeting, so it would be a little easier for staff to be on the 23rd. >> I can't make
>> right. I remember that. And that's one of the reasons we did the 17th, but but >> we had agreed on the 16th. >> 16th is still best for me if that still works. So, I'm I'm very comfortable with with proceeding as we planned and that still allows us if unforeseen
expectations come up to come up to meet again on the 23rd because it'll be already advertised. So, let's stick with the 16th. And John, what was the time again on the 16th, please? >> We had settled on four o'clock. >> We'll stick with four. Okay. Um I think that's I didn't know what was
advertised, but one other note that it will not be in this room because this room was unavailable. Uh, could you explain which exact room it'll be? >> Can we I assume you're going to send a notice out on that? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> But but but just so everyone gets a visual while we're here.
>> There's a room downstairs that's to the far right of where all of the kiosk are for the airlines. Um, we'll have signage out there so that you all know, but but you basically go by Delta JetBlue and and almost exit the building where the
room is. And it's it's it's a large room. So you Will anybody be looking for lost luggage while we're in there, too? It sounds like a lost luggage room, >> but it is on the first floor. >> Okay. >> All right. >> So, the 16th of 4 p.m. >> Okay. >> Thank you. All right. So, we'll have our
follow-up meeting there. Our goal will then be, I presume, to have the final report on the April agenda, um along with the updated ballot language. Um and that's all I had for the agenda at the next meeting. Is there any other business from any member of the commission?
meeting. >> Seeing none, is that a motion to adjurnn? >> Motion to adjurnn. >> All right, got a motion and a second. All right, we're ajourned. Not everyone.