--------- Mic check. 1 2 3 4. Mic check. 1 2 3 4. What's that? It's a story. Hello. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Welcome to the Valuchia County Council meeting. The meeting will begin in 10
minutes. Heat. Heat. N. Hey, hey, hey. Happy. Hey. Hey. Hey, hey, hey. Hey, hey,
hey, hey. Hey, hey, hey. Hey, hey, hey. Heat. Hey, heat. Hey, heat. Welcome to the Valuchia County council meeting. The meeting will begin in 5
minutes. Hey, are you okay? beyond. Everything. together. Hey Hey, hey, hey. Hello.
Do it. Welcome to the Valuchia County Council meeting. The meeting will begin in 2 minutes. Dr. We will call the January 8th, 2026 Valuchia County Council meeting to order at 9:03.
Um, in uh just a minute, I will ask you to stand if you care to stand for uh the invocation. We do not have a uh a minister to lead us this morning. So, we will just have a moment of silence and
and then we'll go directly into the uh pledge of allegiance. So, if you would stand with me To the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands one nation under God indivisibley
and justice for all. Carissa, would you call the role? >> Mr. Robbins >> here. >> Mr. Santiago >> here. >> Mr. Dempsey, Mr. Johansson, >> Mr. Kent, Mr. Reinhardt >> here,
>> Mr. Brower >> here. Uh, Councilman Kent is not here today, which is very unusual. He's had a a family emergency and u go along without him today. Um, public
participation, do we have any Okay. When I call your name, just come to the podium here. There is a uh a button on your left that will raise it up and down. We need the microphone to be right at your mouth so that everyone can hear you. You will have three
minutes to talk about anything that uh applies to the county, something that we might be able to uh act on in in the future. Um first up this morning is Keith Chester. And if you would also tell us where
you're from. You don't need to give your entire address for safety reasons, but just tell us what uh what city, what part of the county you're from so that your representative uh knows. >> We ready? >> Yes. >> Keith Chester Dand, as we enter into the new year, I want
you to start thinking about our young people and the harm we've done to them. In the early 80s, the first time home buyers age was uh in the in the 20s, early 20s. Currently, the first-time
home buyers ages are between 38 and 40. Why is that? It has to do with affordability. I bought my first home when I was in my early 20s as a on a small town police officer salary
here in Valuchia County. Since then, we've added thousands in impact fees. We've transferred our burdens for us older, more established people to our young people through Save Our Homes. Currently, I pay about a thousand a
year. Somebody buying my house, a young person would pay between four and 5,000. It's not fair. We've transferred our burdens. County of Valuchia added Valuchia County Fire Services in 1984, which before that was mostly volunteer.
Blush County took beaches over in 87. Cultural funding was started in ' 89. 2000 we had started Echo. 2000 we started Forever.
2000 started the children and families funding here in Valuchia County. 2007 Sunreil was adopted. 2012 we took over EVAC. 2018, amendment 10 was passed and those
constitutional officers have now increased our budget drastic budgets drastically and we need to do something about it. It's got to stop. In 2001, the county adopted a 10% public service tax on utilities. Last
month alone, mine was $27. that directly impacts the homeownership. We have a gas tax. It was started in 996 per uh for I'm sorry in 86 six six uh 6
cents and uh 99 5 cents. 2005 Avalorum taxes added for capital improvements for schools and half cent sales tax added for essentially the same thing for schools in 2001.
And we must not forget we have three hospital authorities in Valuchia County that now take about $50 million a year out of our economy and they're funded through property taxes. And through those we're actually paying in in some
cases for a health card program that funds health care for those who are here illegally. It's got to stop. We need reform. We're killing our children. It's not fair to them. Let's start thinking about our young people and quit being so damn selfish.
>> Thank you for your comments. Next, we have uh Punch Inlet Town Council member Skip White. Welcome, Skip. Welcome also to the supervisor of elections I see sitting over there.
Thank you for coming, Lisa. Skip White, Poninlet Town Council. Happy new year to Valuchia County Council on staff. I'm here today representing the residents of Poninlet and Ponlet Council. On behalf of all of us, I want
to say a heartfelt thank you for your invaluable help and support with the North Beach Renourishment Project. We especially personally want to thank Jessica Niles for your outstanding leadership and unwavering support throughout this effort.
This project, which is now nearing completion, certainly had its ups and downs. It sparked numerous calls and emails from residents filled with questions and concerns. But no matter what, I could always depend on getting a
quick, reliable response from you both. These answers might not always have been the ones that made our residents happy, but they were always factual and transparent. And what I truly appreciate is my calls and emails would go out no matter the
time of day or even the day of the week, including Saturdays and Sundays. I'd get a quick, prompt response every time. Thank you for that level of dedication. It made all the difference.
In my view, the project success boil down to three key ingredients. Work, trust, and communication. You might wonder why I put communication third. Well, it's simple. If you don't have trust, you can communicate all you
want, but no one will truly listen. To wrap up, I want to share a quick story that captures the real impact of your work. When our beaches finally reopen of Lucia County residents for walking both north and south, a familiar face approached my wife Jane and me during
our morning walk. This resident whom you we used to see every day had a huge smile on her face. She said, "My heart has been blocked, but now it's open." In that moment, it hit me. This isn't just
about sand and dunes. It's about restoring joy, connection, and the sense of freedom we all cherish. Again, thank you, Felia County, for making this possible. We couldn't have done it without you. Happy New Year and
continued collaboration. Thank you. Thank you, Skip. Patty Gartenback. >> Does this work? >> Yes, it does. >> Can you hear me? Okay, good. Good morning, chairman, Councilman, and county staff. My name is Patty
Girtinbach from Orman Beach. I purchased my home in Valuchia County in 2005 after considering homes from Key West to Flaggler Beach. My husband and I decided on Valuchia County for many reasons. Chief among them the beaches and abundance of green spaces. I don't know
the background of all of you, but I know at least some of you were lucky enough to grow up here in Valuchia County. While I have enjoyed and benefited from having the opportunity to live in many places across the United States, I count my lucky stars that I ended up here. As I learned about Felucia County, I
learned that we all, you and I, have several past leaders to thank for preserving this special place, such as Doris Leaper, Reed Hughes, and of course, Walter Borman, who we can thank for saving the loop, a special area that draws hundreds of people in tourist dollars here each year. I have written
to all of you from time to time, but this is my first time speaking at the count council meeting. I came here today because of an item I saw on the workshop agenda. I don't envy you guys what you have ahead of you at the workshop this afternoon. Perhaps it would save you all
time if you just crossed off the first item on potential goals. In perpetuity means forever when I along with the majority of the voters approved continuing Valuchia forever. It was with the understanding that you would be protecting these lands forever. You would be protecting our drinking water
supply and lands that are used for flood control forever. It is with the understanding that I understand that the partnerships and appraisals are based on the land being protected forever. It's easy to forget sometimes with all the pressures you have to consider with
today's budgets and goals. But I urge you to keep in mind past community leaders that did what was right to preserve our community for us today and for future generations. Leaders that recognized Valuchia County is blessed with environments that offer unique sources of pride and revenue. our
wetlands, springs, rivers, lakes, aquafer, beaches, forests, estuaries, and marshlands. Felucia Forever is a money maker. Imagine what our community would be like if we didn't protect our drinking water supply. What will happen to our tax base if areas continue to
flood? Felucia Forever is a critical tool in protecting our aquafer and flood planes. I point this out because Felia Forever is intimately tied to our quality of life and safety. I urge you, please do not mess with Valuchia forever. A majority of your constituents
voted for it. It more than pays for itself in both tangible and intangible ways. Its criteria are based on wellestablished criteria used by other state and federal agencies. Felia Forever is a promise to your constituents that the land will be
preserved forever. Thank you. >> Thank you, Steve Wonderland. Good morning and happy new year. My name is Steve Wonderly. I live in Daytona Beach and I'm also speaking regarding Valuchia Forever. I was the political action committee agent of record, the
pack agent in 2020 for the Echo Valuchia forever campaign which worked to reauthorize Valuchia Forever and Valuchia Echo. I also had a hand in building the campaign website that explained Valuchia Forever and Valuchia Echo to the public. We went to great
pains to make sure that the issue was clear. The public understood and they voted in favor. It's a big deal when people vote in favor of taxing themselves, even when it's a small amount like it is with Valuchia Forever. But when people
understand that they'll come out ahead by having the tax, that the benefits that it will yield are more than worth it, then you get what you saw with Valuchia forever, over 75% support. Part of what convinced people to vote
for Valuchia forever was the forever part. If the proposal had been merely to protect land temporarily, the vote would have turned out very differently. But as it was, people understood that voting for Valuchia forever meant protecting sensitive land forever.
The prices paid for the land and the conservation easements under the program have been based on the premise that the land would be held and protected in perpetuity. The people voted to tax themselves understanding that the land purchased
would be protected in perpetuity. To change that after the fact, after the people have voted, would be to pull a bait and switch. Please don't even consider doing that. Please stand by the promise made to the people to protect Valuchia forever lands forever. Thank
you. >> Thank you. Uh John Nicholson, there you are. Switch seats. >> John Nicholson, Daytona Beachside. I don't know what I missed, but I don't know what they're talking about for the
Valuchia forever. Um, Daytona Beach, as you know, contributes what 20 million or so to this event. And uh we don't get a dime back, but I absolutely consider Blue Forever is forever. Uh secondly, I don't know if any of you
will have noticed that A1A is being worked on over on the beach side. Uh they've replaced all the trees with signage. Uh every I think someone told me there's 38 crossings planned. There are 28 signs per crossing. So that'll be
over a thousand some odd signage. So there will be no um landscaping down A1A from now on. It will all be signage. And it is ugly. So if you get a chance, go to the core area. That's all you see is signage. It is
terrible. It's really ugly. You thought that curvature was bad. Where do you see the signage? And then they took all the landscaping out that they had just put in and put in asphalt and striped it. So you can't park there. So all you see is all this land with asphalt signage uh
striped. Uh, secondly, with regard to Daytona Beach, I've been coming for years telling you to take a look at it. You've looked at it. Stacy looked at it. One, the PE card. It's It's not an issue. All right. It's 30 years old. It
has to do with the wordage. People were allowed to buy excessive lunches. Uh, we've known that for 20 years. Um, it's about time we look at it, but it's no big deal. Nobody's been stealing lots of money. One was like a
$1.95. To me, that's not a big amount. Um the slush fund and the money from um COVID. Now, that's a different story. Uh we may end up with people going to I hope go to jail over misspending it. All
right. Uh but that's where that's coming down the pike. the reefs. I would David is the only one that has even given glimmer of of recognition that there is a need to block this water before it
hits the shore. There's no sense in replacing that uh sand year after year after year. That's expensive. The whole idea of a barrier reef is it protects the land beyond it. the reefs that we put offshore would protect our
tourist industry, our homes that are on the ocean. So, I would ask that we look at that very carefully, where we could put reefs and how we would place them. And last year, uh lastly, the pay attention to Daytona Beach's um lawsuit
for the ACLU. We have 20,000 new people in Daytona Beach that are all stuck in one zone. We have one zone that is half the entire city with 30,000 people in it. >> Thank you. Thank you, >> Chris Nard. >> Good morning. I'm Chris Nard and I'm the
CEO of a business called Fortify Financial. Operate in the state of Florida and we are a PACE finance here in the state. Um, we operate under a business called the Florida Pace Funding Agency, which is a special district that allows us to write this business and
bond it. Um, in 2022, they were granted a judicial bond validation that allowed them to write statewide. Uh, we started in Valuchia County in 2023, had tremendous demand and received hundreds of applications right out of the chute.
uh Valuchia and the Valuchia tax collector objected to this. Fortify stopped writing but not um before we had financed you know roughly a hundred properties for $7 million several million dollars in Valuchia and what we
do is hurricane hardening improvements. Valuchia the tax collector objected along with some other counties sued in the second district where the judicial validations are issued to have it overturned. The court ruled in favor of
the Florida Pace Funding Agency, said they had to be put on the tax role. Um, everybody still objected and appealed it to the Supreme Court. Supreme Court ruled on December 12th, 18th, something in there. And again, ruled in the FPFA's
favor and said the assessments had to be on the tax role. Uh, you know, now that this has run its course in the court system in Florida, th this has been hugely expensive for Fortify. I'm sure it's been hugely expensive for the
taxpayers to finance these lawsuits, and it's been disruptive to the homeowners that don't have their payments on the tax bill. We'd love to get this behind us. Um, and we'll do anything we can to work with county to do this. Now, you
handled it very well. Um, probably better than anybody else because when this occurred, you sent a letter to all of the property owners that said, "You have this obligation. We're not going to put it on the tax roll. You may be contacted to pay it directly, and it may
appear on your tax roll at a later date." Nobody else did that. So, it was handled much better here. um of these 70 or 80 transactions that are not on the tax roll, only about 30% of the people that have paid directly. So, we need to
try to get these on the tax bill before this next cycle because we don't want homeowners to continue to fall behind because when they do, there's less of a chance that the mortgage company will pay the escrow and the taxes and catch
everybody up. And when they don't do that, if that's what occurs, it'll be a difficult situation for all. So again, thank you. Um, you guys handled it well. The court system has run. This has been hugely expensive and we'd love to put it behind us at this point.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you, Chris Peterson. >> Uh, thank you, Chris Peterson for Fortify. Um, just to make one more comment. this um the fact that the Supreme Court did uphold the lower court's ruling does not mean that we can operate here without an ILA. So we did
on once y'all said we don't want you here, we stopped. We actually then went and took our bill that we were already working on. We added a home rule clause. We took it to Tallahassee under SB770. Fought for that and ended up getting that passed. That passed on July 1 of
2024. So from that point forward, we need to have an ILA and and we kind of fall that under if you don't want to share, we don't want to be here, right? If if this isn't something you want to, you know, PACE financing that that does, you know, new roofs and hurricane improvements, if that's not something that you want to offer for your for your residents, that's fine. Um, so we're not
going to operate here anymore. However, that doesn't mean that those assessments that were originated during that period aren't valid because that was proven uh to be true. So again, really looking forward to resolving this issue and thank you again for your time. Thank you. Uh Patricia Miles,
>> Mr. Chairman, point of order. The the clapping is is disrupting the meeting in his commentary. So, if we could address it, it's it's unnecessary. He's not being recognized to speak or to address the audience. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Patricia Miles.
>> Good morning, um Chairman Brower and the esteemed council members here. Um, I am Patricia Miles. I live in Port Orange, Florida. I have been an arts advocate for 60 years. I am here today to speak
on behalf of the Valuchia County Cultural Alliance and also to speak on behalf of our marginalized populations, our children and our seniors. It is devastating that the impact of the zero
grant monies has created. Our citizens, your constituents, have fewer arts participating learning events available at this time because of the lack of the release of the promised grant funding. They are limited by time
schedules, adequate placement arts venues, and they need local arts teachers who are creative, well-trained, skilled at building relationships, and capable of making long-term commitments to our local programs. Our cultural arts
organizations continue to try to provide their arts opportunities. We were blindsided and are now forced to find invisible heroes to offer financial funding and connect with local partners. These situations require significant
time and financial adjustments. We are trying every day to create infrastructures to make everything work. Funding like this is often unstable and success hinges on leadership connections and political prowess. and it takes time
and long-term commitment to to our agenda. These necessary arts opportunities continue to provide your constituents a sense of belonging, identity, affirmation, and skill development. They
establish artful sanctuaries in our communities and bring a sense of aesthetic to our county. They offer holistic factors for both mental and physical health, creating life satisfaction. They provide creatives for our
technologies. Excuse me. They provide creatives for our communities and foster generative connections where creativity and technology intersect. They teach all of us to acknowledge, affirm, and celebrate
the past, present, and future of all of our citizens. VCCA will be sending out another survey this late spring regarding the arts and funding. We would appreciate it you taking the time to
return it to us so that we can share the results with all of the voters in Valuchia County. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Adam Maker, Adam Macker, Deerry, Florida. You know, part of our problem here is none of you
actually give a about what any of us are saying. And Mr. Brower, I will before you comment, let me tell you that is constitutionally protected speech. >> I I know it is. I would ask you just to have respect for the people in the room, though. I have respect for everybody here except for you, sir. You want to know why? I came here with every
intention. Every intention when I came here was to diss this man. I swear to God it was. I was waiting for Donald Dempsey to do something so I could make fun of him. But unfortunately for all of you, he's looks like Albert Einstein sitting next to the rest of you,
especially you, Mr. Brower. And Dum Dum that's not here today. >> You're welcome, Don. >> You are welcome, Don. You know, uh, I I guess you didn't receive my complaint. I've already submitted a complaint against Mr. Kent about three weeks ago. I'm assuming that's why he's not here
today because he contested me on constitutionally protected speech and you thanked him for it. I've been I'm lucky to be alive right now because of a murder plot in my life. I'm here speaking about it in front of the county and you thanked Mr. Kent for basically
shaming me and curtailing my speech. So, I'm here for one reason, and that is to accept your apology. If you apologize to me today, right now, I won't sue the out of you. If you do, I will sue your ass. So, the floor is yours, sir.
>> I have nothing to say. >> Have a great one. >> Thank you, Lloyd Bowers. Let me first start by saying happy new year. >> It's so nice to see a calm face. >> Thank you, chairman. Uh Lloyd Bowers, Daytona Beach, Florida. Um, Chairman
Brower, council members, uh, I'm here to respectfully ask this council to reconsider your decision to deny funding for the current cycle for cultural grant applications, the process you approved on February 18th, 2025, and for which based upon your decision, the cultural
council accepted the grant applications, held its hearing, scored the applications, and then were presented to you for approval. You've heard all of the arguments over the past year about economic engines, educational partners, community builders. I'm not here to
speak about that. By setting aside the scored recommendations for the current grant cycle and refusing to approve those recommendations, we risk undermining the integrity of every county grant process and the expectations of residents who rely on the programs that are offered. Many of
these organizations, as Miss Miles just said, have already budgeted for the year based on the established timeline. They've planned performances, exhibitions, youth programs, community events, events that reach thousands of residents and visitors. Without this funding, some of those programs simply
are not going to happen. Now, I understand that budgets are tight and priorities must be weighed carefully. But the cultural council's revised program, which you approved on February the 18th, should be honored. If you overturn that process, it sends a message that even
when organizations follow every rule, meet every requirement, and earn the scores, the outcome can still be dismissed. That uncertainty discourages participation, weakens our cultural sector, and ultimately harms the county.
Today, I'm asking you simply to restore the funding for this grant cycle as recommended. Not simply because these organizations deserve it, but because the process deserves it. Please reconsider your decision and thank you. >> Thank you for your comments, Morgan.
Danny, >> he removed his speaker card. Cameron Vinrren. >> Good morning, chair, council, and staff. My name is Cameron Vincent. I am the vice president of the Valuja County Cultural Alliance. I am also the executive director of Art House Foundation.
Hi guys. Happy New Year. It's been a while. I know you missed me. Um, I just wanted to um I wanted to speak to you today about, drum roll, the cultural grant. I understand that you have a large amount of responsibility on your shoulders.
However, I think that there's an aspect of this grant and the process um that maybe has been overlooked. The we're fighting for the young families. We're fighting for the
children and other um taxpayers that benefit from this program. We've given you states numbers. The return on investment, you guys make 100% return on investment and taxpayer funds. And that's not anything to do with the
amount of free and reduced services that we provide for your residents that can't afford it. Let's look at the youth aspect. Every single one of you I know has been involved in a municipal a municipality meeting where there are
kids going crazy. They're feral. I have to start next week the calls to over 217 families to let them know that their scholarships will not be available this year. These children cannot their families cannot afford to send them to another
camp, cannot afford to send them anywhere. And so they stay at home while their parents are at work. What do you think they're going to be doing? They're not going to be volunteering their time. These programs, especially for the youth, work to strengthen our younger
generation, to put them on the right track, and to prevent any juvenile delinquency. We instill value. Not everyone is a sports kid. These programs are important and vital, especially to our poverty-stricken
families in Valuchia County who voted for you. They can't afford to send their kids to camp. They can't afford these programmings that bring joy and life to our residents, to these children. I understand that money is tight and I understand that you are trying to find
funding for this motocross facility, but please I I need to challenge you right now before you take your word back and before you chop this. I I challenge each of you to read at least five of the applications. Your appointed cultural
counsel has read all 30 33. Read five, some of you four each before you make this decision. Please, and go to your financial advisor, take the states cited numbers that we've given you and ask them if
this is a smart way to cut off this revenue building and revenue earning program that has been so successful and has helped so many residents. We're not asking for handouts. We're asking to help the residents. Thank you.
>> Thank you, Cameron. Julia Trillo. Good morning and happy new year. Julia Truillo, Daytona Beach. Um Cameron did not mention and I wanted to quickly say that uh in response to uh Councilman Santiago's challenge back way back when
um the uh VCCA and its partners put together a food drive that uh raised over $1,000 for Second Harvest and submitted uh to local charities multiple tons of uh useful food. So, we are
pleased and uh to report that and also to let you know that our partners are working with their community to keep everyone strong. This morning, I just want to read quickly into the record a email that you all received from Ellen
Wintermouth of Cinematic Daytona. Dear members of Valuchia County Council, I am writing to strongly urge the council to immediately restore, allocate, and increase funding for Valuchia County arts and culture grants. The current proposed amount of 611,000 is
inadequate, and the continued delay in allocation is already causing real harm to community-based cultural organizations across the county. Arts and culture funding is not optional, symbolic, or expendable. These grants support year-round public programming,
education, tourism, workforce participation, and small nonprofit sustainability. When funding is withheld or underfunded, programs are canceled, staff hours are cut, partnerships dissolved, and communities lose access to affordable cultural experiences.
The county's cultural organizations plan their seasons and buds budgets in good faith based on the county's long-standing commitment to these grants. Leaving funds unallocated while organizations are expected to operate responsibly is not fiscal prudence. It
is destabilizing. Moreover, holding arts and culture funding at 611,000 or treating it as negotiable fails to keep pace with inflation, population growth, and demonstrated public demand. Arts organizations deliver a measurable
return on investment. They generate economic activity, attract visitors, activate downtowns, and enhance Valuchia County's quality of life. They do this with modest public support, strict reporting requirements, and a long record of accountability. To underfund
or delay this program undermines years of successful public policy. Valuchia County has publicly stated its commitment to development, tourism, and livable communities. Those priorities cannot be met while arts and culture funding is minimized or sidelined.
Restoring and increasing arts and culture funding above 611,000 is not only reasonable, it is necessary. I respectfully but firmly call on the council to release arts and culture grant funds and increase the allocation.
Arts organizations are ready to serve. What they need now is a county government willing to honor its commitments. Thank you for your attention to this urgent matter. Sincerely, Ellen Wintermouth are in city. >> Thank you for your comments. Katherine Pante.
>> Good afternoon, council. I'm here today to ask that Valuch Forever program remain fully intact exactly as voters approved it. Valuch Forever is not a council created policy. It is a voter-approved program passed and renewed by the voters of Valuchia County. The public was clear. We voted
for conservation. We voted for the approved millage rate. And we voted for this program to exist in perpetuity. The council could not have the authority. The council should not have the authority to reduce millage, weaken the program or modify it into something less than what voters approved. Doing so disregards the will of voters and
undermines trust in our local government. Conservation matters deeply in this community. Valuchia forever protects our water, wildlife, farmland, and natural spaces. Resources that once lost cannot be replaced. That is why voters chose to support this program twice. The message from residents is
simple and consistent. Protect Valuchia Forever, fully fund it, and honor the vote. I urge this council to respect the will of the people and ensure that Valuchia Forever remains intact exactly as approved for today and for future generations. Thank you. >> Thank you for your comments, Melissa
Lamers. Okay, same with Nancy Vaughn. Thank you. Thank you. Then it looks like that concludes the uh public participation for the opening segment of the meeting. Um I would uh we'll move to item one.
I'll ask the council uh to for their approval of the agenda as written. >> Motion to approve. Second >> motion to approve by Vice Chair Reinhardt, second by Councilman Robbins. >> All in favor say I. >> I.
>> And the uh Don, did you vote on that to approve the agenda? That's approved uh six unanimously six to zero. Item two,
resolution 2026, organization of the Valuchia County Council. >> Motion to approve. >> Second. We have a motion to approve by Vice Chair Reinhardt. Second is by Councilman Danny Robbins.
Any uh questions, discussion? All in favor say I. >> I. >> All opposed. And that motion that item is approved six to zero. Item three
uh resolution election of county council vice chair for 2026. And for this item, I'm going to do something unusual and and move the uh gavl to the current vice chair um so
that I can also make a motion. Um Councilman Robbins. Chair, I'd like to make a motion to nominate um our atlarge representative Jake Johansson for vice chair 2026. >> Okay, Jake Johansson. Oh, I'm sorry.
>> Oh, go ahead. >> Jay Johansson, do I hear a second? I'll second it. >> Second by Davis Santiago. >> Any other nominations? >> I will um make an unusual nomination because I've learned that there's no
term limits on vice chair. I would like to uh nominate uh Matt Reinhardt uh for vice chair again in recognition of the uh excellent job that you've done so far. >> Thank you. Uh nomination for Matt Reinhardt by Councilman Brower. Do I
hear a second? >> Second. Johansson definitely >> second Johansson. Any other nominations? >> I don't have a problem with either either one of you guys. You say no. I I don't know how we would handle the vote though, >> unless >> look at our legal handle the first one
first. >> So you have two nominations. You could take a make a motion to select one of them if you wish. >> I would rather not do a vote on one of you in the in the denial. Um, >> so can we get a motion to accept one?
>> Who cares? >> Where are we again? >> We just need a We need a motion to accept one of the one of the nominations. >> I'd make a motion to accept uh Matt Reinhardt. >> I I'm okay with the Matt Reinhardt. >> Motion made by Mr. Brower uh for myself
and seconded by David Santiago. >> Third by Johansson. All in favor say I. >> I. >> For Matt. >> Matt. >> Yes. >> He's got a good haircut. >> Motion carry 6. Thank you very much.
>> You're welcome, Jake. >> Toss them back. Thank you, Jake. >> Thank you, gentlemen. >> Okay. Okay. Item four, uh, resolution adopting 2026 county council meeting schedule. Um, before we start this,
there's two names up. I think they're old. Okay. Um, George, I've I'll recognize uh you your name was up first. >> Yeah, we we put in the uh proposal uh you know, based on the standard two
meetings uh per month. Uh but however, this council in the past has uh elected to only have one meeting in uh July and one meeting in December. So I just want to point that out that if you want to make changes um based on what's
proposed, of course, that's fine with us. also point out that there's a uh in September we uh have slightly changed off of our normal scheduling to accommodate uh the school board for when
it comes to budget which we have to do. And then I will also point out that I think two of our uh meetings fall on election days coming up this year. So you got your uh August uh the second meeting in August falls on a primary and
of course the November meeting falls on election day. So uh just want to point that out for your discussion. Okay. Uh Councilman Johansson, you have questions for staff or >> no comments. All right.
>> Okay. Uh, Councilman Santiago, do you have a question? >> I think I have comments. >> Okay. Uh, Councilman Jake Johansson. >> Thank you, sir. Um, uh, I I do, uh, obviously I'm running for election and
August 4th or August 18th and November 3rd. Um, I I think my mind would be elsewhere. Uh having said that um uh if if we can't consider moving that uh to a
different day of the week or a different week uh then I can live with um with having it here. I I would probably ask to be excused for one of them. But uh uh I would like to consider moving both of
those by a day or two if possible. >> Okay. Any comment from the rest of the council? Councilman Santiago. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I have no problem with the request. Um, is there anything that prevents us from doing it on the Monday before
>> staff? I know it's a question. Okay. Um, and then the other comment, Mr. Chair, >> oh, >> let's let's finish. >> Okay. >> That one. I Jake, you rarely miss a meeting. I think it would be fine. I I'd rather
unfortunately have you miss a meeting than change a schedule for for one person. That just my feeling. I do appreciate the fact that you'd prefer not to miss a meeting. Um but it gets really confusing to the public when we we move the schedule from Tuesdays to
another day when they're used to Tuesdays. And so that that's just uh my feeling on that. >> Um >> okay, Council Santiago. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. I I I I don't I don't see it moving it for one meeting. I think that election day is an important day for a lot of people. Um,
and also our electorate, people that may want to just prefer to either be campaigning or advocating for something or, um, going out to vote. So, um, I think the reason why we're doing this schedule so early, so it's on notice for everyone to see. So, I mean, I'm
interested to see if the council's okay with it. But, um, I I guess in order to put closure to this particular part of the request, Mr. Chairman, I'll make a motion uh for a change for as of now to move the August
>> Hold on, I got to get my thoughts right here. >> 18th, >> the August 18th meeting would be on held on August 17th and the November 3rd meeting held on November 2nd. Same time as it would normally be.
>> Second, >> same times, but we just move it to a Monday. the Monday before. You got a problem with that? >> Uh, so it would be November 2nd and August 17th instead of the 18th and the 3rd. >> It' be on the Monday.
>> Give him this phone. >> Okay. While he's looking, is there any other discussion on >> I did want to add one more thing, Mr. Chair. >> Okay. Um, regarding I think we've always done as as our county chair uh county manager has addressed, we've always done
July and uh closest to Christmas. Um, I'm okay with adopting that same theory, the closest days to that. Um, gives people times in between there also for whatever they want to do preh
holidays or post holidays. So December 15th >> uh to to eliminate the 15th and eliminate the 7th as been presidents >> of July. >> July. Sorry. Did I >> second? >> Second
and and Don, you want me to modify my SK my request and say no court dates also? >> Exactly. Thank you. >> We send that to the judges. Good. There we go. That's all I have, Mr. Chair.
Okay. So the motion on the table is to uh move August 18th on a Tuesday to August 17th on a Monday, November 3rd on a Tuesday to November 2nd on a Monday to
eliminate December 15th and to eliminate uh July 7th and um are there any other questions? Okay, then we'll move to discussion and I would like to approve this for December 15th and July 7th, but
um I'm going to I'm going to have to vote no on this for the moving of August and and November. I remember how you know I sat up here on election day. It was painful, but but I did I wouldn't have requested to move it for for my
convenience for election day. Um because it's really not about us. It's about the people out there and I want them to have some consistency in in when we and when we meet. So that that's that's my only thought. Uh David
>> Jim, I'll just add to that. I I I I agree. I I'd seen the date. It was a stressful day for a lot of people in the meeting. Um, but I will say if anybody had made that request back then, I would have had the same position. It's not about the individual for me. It's uh it's about the request overall for
everyone. So, um, that's why I'm okay with it today. I would have been okay with it last year, too. >> Okay. Uh, so the mo I I don't see anybody else that wants to speak on it. So, the motion on the floor stands uh moving the
18th to the 17th, the 3rd to the 2nd, eliminating December 15th and July 7th. Uh all in favor say I. >> I. >> I. >> Any opposed? I And I believe that passes uh 5 to one. >> Mr. Brower, can you clarify who is the
seconder on that? You can do all four. >> Yeah. Danny. >> Uh, Councilman Robbins. Okay. Um, we will move to the consent agenda and I would like to ask to pull
item H for a vote. Does any other count uh Councilman Robbins? >> Uh I don't have anything. Chairman, uh motion to approve the consent agenda minus item H.
>> Before I but probably jumped ahead because I didn't get to ask any other council member if they had an item they would like to uh move for a vote or just for a uh for a comment after the vote. Seeing none, then the motion on the
floor is to approve the agenda as written um except for v item H which will be taken separately. And um as it turns out we have a number
of uh participants here, residents who would like to also speak on item H. So, uh, the motion is to approve everything but H. Was there a second on that? >> Yes, I
>> vice chair Matt Reinhardt makes a second. All in favor say I. >> Any opposed? >> And the agenda is approved six to zero except for uh H. Are you going to talk about item H?
>> Yes, sir. Thank you, Gus. >> Good good morning and happy new year to everyone. Uh Gus Sbrano, assistant uh county manager. Um chairman, vice chairman, council members. It's a pleasure to be here. I'm here to speak on item H. Uh it's an
amendment to number one number one assignment number one with Rebel Group um Inc. for public private partnership consulting services for the motocross ATVU TV trail riding facility. This item
is really about risk management and long-term stewardship uh of the property in question. It's not selecting an operator or approving uh a construction. We're we're not in that phase uh at this point. This item is also about protecting county land finances and
public interest for 30 years. The mocross facility will be delivered through a ground lease that governs county land and public interests for 30 to 40 years. This is a long-term commitment. These agreements succeed or fail based on how well financial
assumptions, risk allocation, performance standards are structured at the front end. Rubble Group Americas provides specialized P3 expertise that county staff do not routinely perform
financial modeling, market realism testing, and structuring lease terms that protect the county in the long term. >> Gus, >> yes. >> Could I just ask you a couple questions because I don't think anybody else had >> uh questions or
any um >> Absolutely. >> any problem with the item. Um, what did we pay Hund Hund Strategic for their consultation >> for which they came back with a $10 million price tag that we refused?
>> Sure. >> Have Brad come up and Brad? >> Yes, sir. So, uh, to add the motocross facility because we did the feasibility and, um, pro-forma, we did not do the needs assessment based on council's
direction. It was less than $10,000 to add motocross to the larger Hunden study. >> Okay. So, we paid $110,000. Um, they came back with with a a huge price tag and we asked that it would be
reduced to three a.5 million. How does that change the project? Is it originally it was uh a pretty pretty large project with uh practice tracks, competition tracks, a
facility to train people? Is that now reduced to just pra to what? >> Right. Well, that's one of the things we looked at in phase one uh with rebel group uh and staff. uh that is what is feasible uh within our constraints and
our constraints primarily being the echo funding which is at $3.5 million that's what we have to work with. So what was what was was found to be the best in in the market research that was done etc and interviewing other uh track uh operators and developers etc was that uh
a private sector model with a ground lease was the best approach >> basically limiting county involvement financially uh but always providing the oversight um so that would be the best model so that we moved away from uh the
the original Hunden idea and how much involvement the county would have. So yes, it reduces scope as of our involvement putting it more on the private sector which is I I think is laudable. Personally, I've been involved in a number of P3 projects and this is
what we're intending to do here. We're trying to bring an expertise where the private sector can do it better than the county or any government can do it. So um that limitation was provided by listening to you all hearing that limit the expenditure the county has and we
did it based on the echo funds which was three and a half million most of those funds about 2.5 million for the purchase of the property and uh the remainder um has been used uh in part there's still $935,000 left but in in the due
diligence that's necessary because there's it's wetlands and we have to delineate the area that's that's quote unquote developed able for this type of use. So, I hope that answers your question. >> Yeah. Is the three and a half million one-time money from Echko or is that yearly or one time?
>> One time. >> Okay. Um, attorney Michael Dyer, we've talked um repeatedly in in meetings about uh liability. You've assured me that we're
we're fine. people would sign a waiver and and I believe this is what I want to be corrected on if I'm wrong that we would require this private company coming in to uh have insurance. >> Yes, sir. Russ Brown, deputy county
attorney. That's correct. The agreement requires them to have a certain amount of insurance and to make us an additional shirt. I don't know if our risk manager is here now, but Okay. Yes. There's >> Does anybody know if there's insurance available for a motocross? >> I believe there is. the marketplace. I
mean, they're my understanding is they go out and get insurance now at other venues in the state. So, the market should dictate that. >> Okay. >> I've I've talked to various track owners and they've told me no, there's uh they have to go it alone because there's nobody wants to ensure it. So, I I would
like to uh to make sure of that. Um and Mr. Sheriff, if I may, when the RFP proposal goes out, the responses that come back, that would be one of the considerations that somebody would say if they're having a problem with that.
And so, at that time, we would have to address it. >> Okay. I think this will probably pass with the council. Um, I'm just going to I I've gone along with this because I wanted to get the information to see uh what it would cost, what it would look
like, um what it would do for the county, and I I I can't do it uh anymore. I'm going to I'm a hard no on this. This is a as I see it, a hole into which we're going to
continue to ask taxpayers to shovel money. Um because once we've spent $4.6 million for the land, let's cut it in half, you know, 2.3 just for this part of it. We've paid Hunden. Now we're gonna pay Rebel a couple hundred,000.
I think it's going to continue to come back and come back because after spending this much money, we're not just going to walk away from the investment. Um, we're going to keep shoveling money um into it. Uh I I know that people will
bid on it. We've got we've got a local man that that owns a track, lives in Pon Inlet. They were represented here this morning. They weren't even asked about this to get any consultation. they would have given us consultation without without uh expense. We've got Pax Track
in in uh Flaggler County um that hasn't been asked for any expertise on on the money involved in a in a track, the upkeep, the maintenance. It's it's horrendous the amount of money that it takes just to maintain uh a track with
irrigation and constant grooming. Um it's it's a highly expensive sport and there's not I haven't found anybody yet that says they're making um uh a profit on this. It's maintained because the
people that do it love it. Um so for for me right now where we are in the county, we're looking at at a huge unknown of how we're ever even going to be funded in in the future. What's what's going to happen with property taxes? There's
going to be a change. I'm not willing to take on another expense. Even if it's even it's just if it is just $3.5 million from Echo. We're already past that if if we're honest on where we what we've done so far. Um
I'm not willing to go into the future with the state telling us, you know, you got you're on your own. Um you can't have property taxes. We're not going to fund this. We're not going to fund that. We're we should be at a at a point on this dis where we're looking at how can
we cut expenses. We've got a year to prepare until this goes to the voters. If it goes on the ballot, I guarantee you voters are going to they're going to vote to get rid of property taxes. Nobody likes them. Everybody hates them. And so that gives us a huge um problem.
So um that that's where I am. Uh I'm I'm an I just I just think we need to cut it here. I'm glad that we bought the land. That land is will be a beautiful place for uh a county park. We've got a a very
um competent uh park and recreation division. I I hope and and I'll I'll lose half the uh the audience here, but I hope that we continue with the plans um to have this have an area that's open for recreational riding for our own
residents, Valuchia first, and and get out of the business of the county thinking that we can go in business. Let's focus on our core responsibilities and not take on another one. So, that's where I am. Uh, Councilman Santiago.
>> Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think I just want to bring a little what I think would be clarity to what's what's being portrayed out there. Um, we've already purchased the land as the chairman said, and those were echo funds that we used. So there weren't any
general fund dollars that have been allocated at from where where it was spent yet from the general fund which it affects our tax role as you >> we're cautious about which I agree with your caution but um for everyone that just heard that no tax dollars from a
general fund went to this all right so that's technically irrelevant to where we are at today and the additional monies that are budgeted for this will not affect your tax role. bow. Um, so clarifying that
the I'm not first I'm not a motocross guy. I have nothing against motocross. So I think it's an interesting sport to watch if I want to watch it when I do watch it rarely. But it's about for me from the beginning is about having the diversification of opportunities for our
community. Not every We build baseball fields, we build football fields, we build tennis courts, we build pickle ball courts, right? And if there's a community here that would benefit from a
motocross and you bring in private sector, correct me if I'm wrong, none of the other things that you all pay your tax dollars from have a public private partnership. Please stop me if I was wrong. This will be the first one where private money will come in to help
support it. So, Mr. Chair, it's actually the opposite. It is really a lower risk. Your proposal of saying let's do something uh for I think you said Fuchia first and have other people will cost you more money because it'll come from the general
funds 100% from the public. So fiscally, this is the best path to go. I appreciate your your commentary that said you've had a lot of success in working with P3. So George, thank you
for assigning him because he's the man to do this and it is it's been the wave of the future for a long time to bring private sector to join government in successful ventures. Um, and the liability thing that'll be addressed. There's plenty of markets out there if
they really look for it. Um but again my motive is to appro apply a diversification for folks and the property did not come out of tax rolls folks. Don't be fooled by that um from general fund and P3 is the way to go. I wish we could
do other parts with P3s. What what's really happening here folks there's an underlying layer and I'm not accusing you of this Mr. Sure, you can speak to yourself, but there's an underlying level just to allow anything in there, right? That's really the underlying thing. But for
those that are not familiar with the parcel, also when we bought the parcel, where we're proposing to put this facility is already been damaged. It's not pristine land. It's I don't want to put a really derogatory word on it, but it's not anything worth keeping the way
it is. So, we're flipping it to something that the community can use. the remainder of the land will be preserved in conservation. So, so my my last comment to the folks that have um that are interested in this topic,
genuinely interested with with real facts, ask us because there's a lot of deception out there of what's really happening. Um, and always understand, this is probably more of a statement for everything. understand people's underlying motives and and why some
people are putting things out there. Um, and don't believe social media. Thank you. >> Okay, before we go on, Jake or Don, um, I've kind I've pushed this out of sequence. I thought everyone had questions for for Gus. Um, if you both
have comments, >> questions. >> Would you >> you have a question? Yes, sir. Question. How about you, Don? question or comment or both? >> May have a question following Jake, but then it'll be comment. >> Okay, let's do the questions and then we have three people from the public who
would like to speak and then we'll go back to our comments after we hear them. Uh Jake Johansson, >> um guess if if we approve this, you know, the the chairman brings up some things I don't know to be true or not, but if we
have not communicated with local people, um and and now we have information that there are local people, whether you had that before or not, um if we approve this, um we don't have to execute right away, right? we can go talk to these two
people that that uh the chairman brought up and anybody else local that Don I'm sure is aware of if we haven't talked to them yet uh prior to executing and if we find the answers that we need from those two people which may or may not happen
um then then then we can or don't have to execute this this task assignment but if we don't find the answers then we go ahead and and run with these folks. Is that right? >> Yeah. This is an iterative process and these consultants revel are part of the
team that is trying to move this project forward in the best way possible. Again, reducing risk and maximizing opportunity. Uh this is not unusual and this is a a phase. We've finished phase one. We've done an assessment. We've determined the path forward which I've
mentioned is the ground lease. There has been extensive discussions with providers and operators. Extensive. We can certainly talk to the two mentioned. We have no issue with that. There are more or less successful operators. Uh we will be looking at bids
from likely successful operators because they want to expand their operations. So um you know it's like any business. Um some will be successful and some won't and some will want to move forward and expand and some won't. So um
there's many points at which we can sort of stop this or change this. Uh we've explained the options we have in front of us. Um it is a pretty straightforward uh option. Uh but at the same time all the elements that are necessary in a P3 in a public private partnership are
still there. We still have to make sure that the lease has all the provisions that are clear that limits our ability or limits liability in the future. uh make sure that a lot of the analysis and assumptions are clear and uh we have the expertise on board. My expertise has
been to bring together teams that handle P3s and I have to tell you that the next phase which is the competitive phase is very critical because it can completely turn the project around
on a positive way. Um uh I've seen where $25 million of bond money was not used because in a competitive situation uh a $40 million project by the private sector was provided to the community. So it it is it is not this project but it's
a golf project. So it's a recreational project and um this is what the benefit of each of these stages are. each of them provide a certain benefit and as we move forward uh we have opportunities to align things. Uh we're never never uh
hesitant to get more information because that's exactly what we need the maximum amount of information. But there's been extensive extensive research done on different providers. So um but we'll absolutely uh continue to reach out to others
>> and and my following question is I know the answer to it but this is a standard this is a standard step in the P3 process in almost every P3 process. Yes, >> it it is a standard step in any kind of
partnership really. I mean you uh what's been done here I don't find at all unusual. Um um this it's really the scale and the scope of the project that's different. Uh but again it's like everything else. You want to make sure that you cross your tees and dot your
eyes and uh I would not remove uh or weaken our ability to maximize the opportunity here. Uh hence the the assistance of nationally reputable company like Rebel who's on the line by the way if you have any specific questions about their work or their uh
of what they've done. Um but of course staff is here to talk about it further but yes it is it is a standard step. Uh normally you actually have it uh structured somewhat differently. Uh in my experience the uh P3 consultant
through the state piggyback contract will get a percentage of the value of the project >> which is not what I recommend. >> Got it. >> Yeah. Um the chairman mentioned that this is
we're we're basically going to come back to the pot yet again for the next step and the next step and we're going to keep coming. Is there any way you can uh share with us what give us some expectations about what's
coming next so we can be familiar with it so we're so it doesn't if this gets approved we don't go see you're coming back again >> right well as far as we're just talking about these consultants when you're talking about coming back >> I'm I'm talking about the entire project until till we get one. So, you got these
consultants for $195,000. What pot of money are you going to ask for next for the next step in this iterative process to get u um a um uh get get um a motocross facility built? If that's
>> I I wish I can guarantee you a certain money that you will spend on >> money. But but what's next? What's next is uh this brings us to contract execution stage which is basically we'd have a contract with a provider and operator. Uh that's what would be next. That means we would have negotiated uh
what they're going to do based on our expectations through the RFP. Um that process may there are going to be some negotiations there and uh we will have to make some decisions about what we're willing and not willing to do at that point. But but
we will not ask a consultant to help us with that RFP. We >> do it in house. >> That's part of this. >> This brings us this particular task assignment brings us to contract execution which is Yeah. >> So so no more consultants will get no
more money from the pot >> before we start negotiating. We we we are working we have worked with this consultant to actually reduce their scope and leverage staff >> um to reduce the amount of money being
used. Yes, we're cognizant of that. So, uh our intention is not to come back uh with additional um requests for this consultant. Yes. Thank you very much. >> That's all I have chairman. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh questions, Don? Yes.
Questions, please. We're not reinventing the wheel by doing this P3 with a motocross operator. Correct. >> How do you mean by reinventing the wheel? >> Well, there there's already one in place in Pasco County Day City. That's been going on for 40 plus years. >> Yes.
>> Right. Right. Successfully. >> Right. >> I think it's the same operator the whole time >> and we've looked into that model. >> Yes. And then there's another one in Panagorta, either the city or the county, and that's a motocross piece public private partnership. And the owner of that is
one of the applicants for this project. Correct. And we've looked into that extensively. >> Right. >> And then PK County, uh, they have one, >> right? >> Bone Valley. That's a public private partnership, correct? And the operator of that is one of the ones bidding on
our >> It's a public public. Bone Valley is public public. >> Okay. but with one of the applicants for this project. So, we've got two applicants >> who are already involved. >> They're not applicants at this point. We have no >> I mean, I know, but there's people who have spoken here in the past about the benefits of this project. >> Yes.
>> So, we can only assume maybe they're interested. >> Yes. >> Also, we have lost several motocross facilities in this area to developers. Correct. Tampa Tampa motocross facility got
bought out by a developer. Correct. Uh there was one spider that got bought. The initial spider got bought out. Uh Hard Rock that was in Ocala got bought out. These are all motocross facilities that have closed down. Correct. And isn't it fair to say that most of them have been bought out by developers?
>> I I could not speak to that with my tenure here. I've been here too short. >> You're aware of that? >> Yes. >> Well, okay. Let me cut to the chase then. Where in Valuchia County can a a dad take his 8-year-old son to go ride a dirt bike legally? Where? >> Nowhere.
>> Nowhere. All right. Thank you. >> Okay. If that's uh it with the questions, I'll come back for comments. Let's hear from the members of the public who wanted to speak on this. Connie Colby, followed by Keith Chester, followed by
Katherine Pante. Which one? Good. Good morning, Connie Colby. Um, Orman Beach. Um, this item I think should be an agenda item, not just on the consent agenda. It's a highly controversial item. We have no details,
very limited opportunity for input from the residents. We're being asked to commit to writing trails um 30-year financial obligation and public private partnership without constituents input. Many or most who
voted believe that this should be a private end private endeavor built on non-conservation land. Um, regarding the 2020 referendum, whose ballot language is frequently brought up, I refer to page five of the entire
referendum. An oversight committee was formed in order to ensure the proceeds are used solely to finance acquisition, restoration, construction, and improvement of recreation, historic, and cultural facilities for public use.
The county council shall appoint electors to an advisory oversight committee to provide for ongoing review of all projects under consideration and to make recommendations to the county council. Um, the way this project has been forced
on the public and excluded from review of the purchased property is a slap in the face to the advisory board who was commissioned to offer recommendations to the council for all echo applications. I have
um July 10th, 225, the committee was told that the council had approved money for motocross being told um and they were told that there were no plans and since it's a DCE project, DC project,
neither Echo or Valia Forever had to be consulted. Um I have the um review of that from the notes from that meeting. This project was permitted to bypass the
evaluation process. There were no plans timetable plan for pro public access and use cost of the operations or protection of inf infrastructure which are requirements. Um,
how this has this rebel plan been reviewed by the echo committee? That money is being $195,000 from echo funds. It should have been reviewed by the echo review committee
and I have not seen any proof that that's been done. the this plan has gone from BMX to motocross to trail riding and spent or signed millions of dollars over three years. >> Thank you. Thank you very much. Uh Keith
Chester Keith Chester Dan to my fellow citizens and neighbors. If you voted for ECHKO in the first place and you didn't fully understand the rules and you didn't fully understand that there could be direct expenditures
by this county council and that they didn't need to go before that echo committee. Shame on you. I fought like hell to have a hold put on
echo going back to the voters in 2020 and few stood beside me. This is one of the reasons why I wanted those rules changed. I saw many deficiencies in the program and I saw where it could be better and I saw what the future held for
failings and we've had many of them now. But shame on you for voting for it if you are now upset with where it's going and what it's funding. And for my environmental friends and neighbors who are complaining that it's being placed on environmental land using
echo dollars and forever dollars, I say, "Where in the hell were you when the bulldozers started going through the forest to create bicycle trails?" Those bicycle trails were all fine. Most people supported them. But now we're all
upset that property that's already disturbed is going to be used for this purpose. I will tell you that I'm not thrilled with the idea of having a motocross facility that's going to cost the taxpayers $3
million, but I wasn't thrilled either for the $3 million that went into the public private partnership for a pickle ball court facility in Holly Hill. And I raised hell about that too to no avail. And I tell my fellow citizens, where
have you been when the money that we we invested hundreds of thousands of dollars into the Dutton House? And then it was ended up we got the money back, but we didn't get all the tax dollars back. And it ended up
being sold off to a private friend of the single board president years ago. Where were you? You said nothing. Then the Dam Museum was sold off by the same lady who was the board president of
the Dutton House. Then the board president of the Dam Museum was sold off. The Dam Museum was sold off to the same investor friends. Where were you? You've been silent. Now all of a sudden
you're up in arms over this. I think it's a bunch of BS. You should have been paying attention all along. I'm not for it, but I wasn't for all those other things. Now you need to be paying attention to the Lillian House and what's going on with that
project. >> Thank you for your >> Nobody was at the meeting with me complaining about that the other day either. >> Keith, time is up. Katherine Pante. Does he have a card in here? Uh, Brian White. >> Good morning. Thank you, Council. Brian
White, New Smyrna Beach. Um, Mr. Chair, council, I just want to make one clarification for the record. There seems to be an implication that because echo funds don't come from the general fund that taxpayers are somehow not paying for all this and that's just not
true. Echo is funded by taxpayers through a voter approved property tax levy. These are real dollars paid every year by Valuchia residents and businesses. The fact that they are restricted funds doesn't make it free money. That distinction does matter because
this council has already eliminated arts funding that benefits the entire community while now being willing to spend millions of taxpayer dollars, echo funds, on a motocross facility that serves a very narrow user base. When the arts funding was cut, we were told the county had to focus on core
responsibilities. But when it comes to high-cost recreational facilities, suddenly those same taxpayer dollars are available. You can't have it both ways. If these are taxpayer dollars that they are, then this council has an obligation to spend them in a way that reflects
voter intent and broad public benefit, not niche interests and pet projects. Echo funds are not a loophole, they're a trust, and that trust is being strained. Thank you, Katherine Pante. Good morning, council. Members of this
council cited core government responsibilities as justification for rescending previously approved arts funding. The rationale appears to function as a post hop cover for Councilman Robbins morality based objections rather than a consistently applied standard. If this standard is to
have any credibility, the council owes the public a clear explanation of how a taxpayer funded motocross facility characterized by high cost, significant liability, and limited public reach qualifies as a core governmental function. That explanation is especially warranted because this project was
placed on the consent agenda, bypassing meaningful public scrutiny. The procedural choice is deeply troubling given that the council simultaneously rescended arts funding that had already been approved through the budget process and served thousands of residents countywide. It is both hypocritical and
ethically indefensible to expect those same residents to subsidize Councilman Dempsey's motocross project. To date, the county has already incurred substantial costs for the motocross project, excluding staff time and indirect expenses. These include 128,000 paid to Huntington Strategic Partners
after the council directed the removal of the needs assessment that would have justified the project. 4.6 million from Valuchia Forever and Echo funds to purchase land under the premise of conservation without informing either committee of the intent to build a motocross facility. 125,000 consulting
contract with the Rebel Group for a public private partnership and an additional 195,000 now proposed on the consent agenda. Based on the current spending and projected development costs, taxpayers could ultimately be responsible for as much as 20 million, not including ongoing operational
expenses or long-term liability. The continued search for a private partner further suggests that this project is not independently viable. Equity and access must also be considered. Motocross is a highcost niche activity accessible to a few, while the eliminated arts funding supported
broadly accessible programs countywide at a total cost of 695,000. This inconsistency cannot be reconciled. A costly recreational facility serving a limited population cannot reasonably be defined as a core government responsibility. While arts funding
serving thousands is eliminated on the same basis. Accordingly, this item should be removed from the consent agenda. the motocross project terminated and the previously approved arts funding reinstated. Thank you. I do have one more thing to add. Every motocross
facility that I have looked up that had been sued because somebody was injured, if the landowner was separate from the person actually operating the facility, they shut it down because they were sued in the process. Thank you,
>> John Nicholson. John Nicholson, Daytona Beachside. Everything that's been stated is true. All right. There's no getting around it. But you have to look at the wording. David has said we've already paid for it. The property is there. Whether we
use it or not is up to us. It could be stay uh remain as part of um Luch forever. Doesn't have to be used, but the highest and best use is to put in a motocross. Now, everybody keeps putting
that it's Don's pet baby. All right? Things that are brought here are brought here for a reason. All right? Nobody brings it here because they have no interest in it. They bring it here because they have an interest in it or they have been aware of something. Now, when it stopped in the beginning at $10
million, Don goes, "Nope, not that's not what they want." All right. I'm saying yes, that's what you want. Two, this public private partnership, David, is not new. All right. If I'm not mistaken, George, we own the land
underneath the speedway. How much money have we put into the speedway? How much money have they asked? How much tax money has gone into the speedway? We've not, from what I understand, we've never paid a dime to them. They've done it on their own. They
are not a charity case. They are a benefit to us. Not all of us have race cars. I mean, Don may have a couple of race cars sitting in there somewhere, but most of us don't have a race car. So, it's a niche area. Not everybody is
in I've been to what, one race in 40 years that I've been here. I don't go to them. All right. It's not my cup of tea. I don't play pickle ball. I don't have knees for it anymore. But pickle ball, there's not a lot of people playing pickle ball. Not in the millions anyway.
But we have a pickle ball for a reason. And if we're going to do this, and I hope we do, that we look at it so that it makes money from us. We make money off the land that we lease to the speedway in
advertisement. There are people all the way around the world that has heard of the speedway. It's advertised. Every time they advertise a race, it's as if we're paying for advertisement for free. All right. When if if we do this, we
have to be able to make it enough to be uh tournament-wise. They have to have tournaments here. They have to have races here. If we don't do that, we end up losing on the back end. When the city built the uh pickle uh the um skateboard
park in Daytona Beach, they decided to save $100,000, they paid $750,000 for it. If they put in another $100,000, they could have races there. It would fill up our hotel rooms, our restaurants. We could have made money off of it. Pennywise, pound foolish. Thank you.
>> Thank you, CJ Harris. All right, good morning. Greetings everybody. I'm CJ. Um, I am the owner of Pax Tracks Motocross Park, the closest motocross facility to this um project. Just so you guys know, I am for motocross 100%. Uh, my pass cross with
Dawn almost every weekend at a racetrack. How deep am I into motocross? My son's legal name is actually Moto. Okay. Now, there has been a lot of things thrown around here today. Um, back to the consultant, they have not
reached out to the three closest tracks to this project. If I was going to open a business, I think I would get information from the three closest tracks to help me figure out if it's worth opening or not. Um,
Don said there's tracks closing down all over the place. There is unfortunately, but that's because there's not enough business to run it. Uh, Tampa MX did close. If it was that successful, he would have bought a piece of property right next to it. Hard Rock is closed. It's still for sale. The land is sitting
there. You could go buy it right now. Um, we are all private business owners. The two people that come and talk on every other me meetings about this, that are for this, that own other facilities are private business owners. If I thought that there was enough business
to be successful in the land, I would buy the land myself and build a track. What makes me an expert on this? I've owned and operated motorcycle businesses in Valuchia County for the last 20 years. I had a motorcycle shop in Daytona, sold it successfully. It was
called the Moto. um my business partner who's my father on all my businesses. He is part of uh he still lives in Valuchia County so he's a Valuchia County resident. I'm in Banell but I don't think you guys have the whole gist of what you're doing and what you're spending. I know we keep saying Don I
know you really want this but it will shut me down. You take 30% of our business we're out. Orlando will be out. So what's going to happen is you're going to open a motocross track. Realize it's way too much work for you guys. You're going to close it down. So now you won't have packs. You won't have Orlando and you won't have Valuchia
County. What's going to happen? Jeff is the only city councilman that's reached out to me and asked any kind of questions. I've been very open. If you guys have any questions, let me know. I'm here to answer anything. Um, yeah, I think that's all I got. So,
thanks. >> Thank you. Thank you all for coming in. Uh, okay. Now, we're back to discussion. Uh, Councilman Dempsey, >> CJ, first thing. You don't remember our golf cart ride at Monster Mountain 3
years ago? >> Yep, I do. >> Where we talked about this very project? >> Yep. And I told you it would be successful as a night track, not >> chairman. >> Okay. Yeah. >> Okay. Local tracks. The only local track has been reached out to. Okay. The problem,
and I've been there, we go maybe once a year to PAX. like PAX has been there since Rob started it in the early 90s. Yeah, great facility. I have no problems with it. The problem is they don't run at night anymore because of the expenses of lighting. I know that was
I'll leave that alone. But they don't run at night. If you look at their schedule, which is posted on their social media, they go until uh afternoons until dark. The problem is it's like I pulled it up before. I think it was 50 minutes from the land to
there. Deltona is probably well over an hour to get to his place to ride. So when you're a normal average family, dad or mom gets off work at 5:00, you load up the bikes Monday through Friday,
get off of school, and you're going, you can't go to PAX to ride. As much as I'd love to be able, we used to ride there at night when when my son was young, you know, we used to ride there at night when it was lit. It was great. And that's when Rob had it. But there's nowhere to go now. I don't and I've said
it before. I don't think this is going to affect packs at least Monday through Friday because I don't think anybody south of the land goes there or south of Daytona or I mean it's too far. You can't feasibly do it. They need a more local place to ride. I have no
complaints about packs. I chair I think you're being lied to when you're go on your phone right now and look up X Insurance motocross. There's motocross insurance. Absolutely there is. So, you've been lied to by by saying there's
no insurance. Go look. We just had Ricky Carmichael, which is a mini major in Daytona, right at the speedway, have it every year during bike week. Registration was Monday. And I'm sure CJ
tried to register his son Moto for the same event. That place, I think there's approximately 2,000 entry slots. It was sold out in the first two hours. the computers went down. It failed. Um, finally everybody was
able to get registered who was there's countless people on the waiting list. We just had uh the mini Olympics which was uh you know up in Gainesville and they had I believe another record year of attendance, biggest event in the world.
So to say that this sport is a dying sport or it's just a little niche sport for a small percentage of people is is not true. And my point is there, this isn't for me. I mean, even though PAX is the closest, we only go there once. We we ride in other places further away and
but Pax is a great place. I this is not intended to hurt them one bit, but there's got to be a place for local kids, especially the southern Valuchia kids and southeast Valuchia kids to go ride after. I mean, we've most of us have had dirt bikes as a kid. That was
one of my most favorites thing. I think Charles Schulz had a um he got an Oscar or an Emmy for Christmas episode, Thanksgiving episode, and then you're a good sport, Charlie Brown. And look it up. That's all about motocross. That was all about when motocross
introduc was introduced in the 70s and how big it was. You got an Emmy for that episode. Motocross is huge. There's a ton of kids that do this stuff. I did it as a kid and I could go ride anywhere. Now, that's not available for kids. And I, you know, I know a lot of people
are mad at me because I vote against moratoriums and I don't always vote the way the environmentalists want me to vote. And I can't help but think sometimes that this is just a way of getting even with me. But I hate I hate the fact that kids are going to suffer.
eight-year-olds who want to go ride their dirt bike after work and they can't because of fiscal responsibility. All of a sudden, your fiscal responsibility. We got aund I think it's 130 mile I call
it the scorched earth river to sea road. 130 miles of paved asphalt. We kick in 1.5 million I think every year through echo. Nobody burps about that. But we're going to spend three million
on giving these kids somewhere to go because all the land they used to ride on, kids where my son used to ride, my oldest son 30 years ago, can't go anymore because it's all developed. We got to give them somewhere to go. There's nowhere to go. This is not for me. As much as you might want to make it
for me, it isn't. It's for these kids who want to go ride their dirt bikes. And it's offensive to me that you guys are going to hurt them by trying to gig me. Skateboard parks, nobody cares. Pickle ball, nobody cares.
That's all. Thanks, guys. Councilman Robbins. Thank you, Chairman. Uh, Don, I think I think more people hear you um and maybe don't say anything um than than you can uh wonder. You know, um
I've been doing this for a little bit as well and and I I often feel uh at times the the way you do, but um it's our job to get the information out there. There's a lot of disinformation. There's a lot of um that stuff going on. Um, but we're going
to go ahead and and wrap this up. I just have a couple questions. Brad, >> sir, >> give us a quick crash course education on um, Echo, right? What can Echo be used for? >> Outdoor recreation. This is outdoor recreation.
>> Okay, cleared that up. Any questions? None. Okay. Um, was it determined? This was determined that it was outdoor recreation. >> Yes, sir. >> Uh, Mr. Dyer, Russ, uh, Mr. Brown as well a
few meetings ago. Uh, you had provided a state statute, uh, that alleviated the county from liability. U, can you go over, do you have that readily available? I don't sir, but there is a state statute that basically holds us harmless from um
risk what is it like elevated risk recreational uh exercise as long as we're not negligent. But that typically, you know, we're not going to be the operator either. So there's another layer here where there would be additional insured status. Uh we would require the operator to identify defendant holdless. They do their own
release presumptively and have to get their insurance and make additional insurance. So there's added layer of protection >> and and and just to wrap things up just for some some clarity, echo funds cannot be used for storm water. They can't be used for some of these general operating
uh expenses uh with the arts. Uh they can't be used for some of these core responsible areas. They have to be used for environmental, cultural, historical or outdoor recreation. If you don't like the outdoor recreation, that doesn't
mean it's not you're not able to do the outdoor recreation, right? If you don't like it, don't use it. But we are a community and we have every walks of life that we are trying to c to service or or cater to here to make this community better. Um, Don,
don't take it too hard. We're all we're all experiencing the madness. So, uh, keep doing what you're doing. You're doing a good job. Thanks. >> Okay. Uh, Councilman Santiago, >> two things, Mr. Chair. Um, one of our speakers said that um incorrectly
said that this land is conservation land that this is being put on. That is absolutely not true. Want to make that clear. This is not designated conservation land. With that, Mr. Chair, we are going to beat this dead horse. I move to approve agenda item H.
David Santiago moves to approve item H. The second was by Councilman Robbins. Okay, Don, did you have something else to say? >> I just had a question for George if I could real quick. Yeah, I'm going to get hammered for this later, but I'm going
to let you ask your question because I think it's important and and Danny did as as well as ask a question after questions were over. Um, but I think we have to do that in order to get the information that you need to make a a vote. So,
>> okay, George, are you may I ask the question? Thank you. Are you at liberty to be able to disclose who are the interested has anybody reached out to you about potentially being an operator that you're at liberty to disclose or not? >> I'm not really at liberty, but I can
tell you people have and we're coming into that phase. Someone asked the phase part of it, you know, as we move closer to procurement. I hesitate into, you know, delving into because we don't want to um um you know,
first of all make any kind of uh guess on something, but you'll know who the people are when we go into the procurement phase. It'll be open competitive bid and we'll see. But yeah, I've been approached of other people. Um so I know there'll be probably three or
four reputable organizations that will uh put in a proposal. >> If Mr. Harris or anybody else locally wants to put in a bid, we'll do as well. >> Yeah. And we're not at that. See, we haven't even put out a solicitation yet. That's coming and then that'll be advertised, I'm hoping, here at the end
of January. And then that's then proposals will will come in. And so, as we enter that phase, that's the other things, you know, we don't go talk to these um you know, we put it out for bid, so to speak, but we don't go talk to them. That would be like me going to talk to an asphalt
company uh and say, "Hey, you know, what would be your favorite uh type of asphalt or something?" We don't we don't solicit any of that information. We try it's got to be a pure uh uh solicitation. So, that's one of the reason we don't reach out and talk. We put it out as an advertisement and
then they come to us with their proposals. >> Thank you. >> That's all. >> Okay. Um, I'll wrap this up with my final comment. Um, I Don, I I I'm asking you to remember that
I have never accused you of doing this for your personal benefit or because your son is in it. I think you're doing it because you love the sport and you understand the sport a heck of a lot better than I do. And I think you're doing it because you think it would be
good for Valuchia County and a good business. Period. I don't question your motives. I never have. I've never questioned that this is appropriate for an echo. It is outdoor um at sports. I I get hammered by the public sometimes
because they don't believe that this is passive. Well, we're not restricted to just passive outdoor events with echo. Um in my opinion, I'm not against it for environmental reasons. I've gone to courses and and and
rode them. And as I'm as I'm driving over them in a golf cart, I see deer prints everywhere. Um I see alligators in the field. I see uh birds that are on the endangered species list there. Um with nests, they're breeding. Everybody
says that doesn't happen um with because motocross the noise scares them off. I don't think it's an environmental hazard. My issue with it is that I don't think it's our place um to invest in
business. Um our our place is to provide essential services with a dwindling amount of resources. Yes, we build um all kinds of sports fields. Gus mentioned, Gus, I'll also say I I'm I'm
not angry at anybody on county staff. You're doing exactly what we asked you to do. I've been part of this all along. I voted for every step of the way because I wanted to see where we're going and and after my research and after seeing where we're going,
I I see a money pit um that we're always going to be obligated to. The problem is there's a lot of people that play softball. There's a lot of people that play pickle ball. Somebody says it's dying. The Holly Hill course is is pretty busy. Um what I don't see is I
see a lot of people that ride dirt bikes. Don, I don't see them all competing in motocross. In fact, our two closest tracks actually close down on opposite days because they share the same 20 riders. So, in order to stay in
business, they're they're working with each other to make sure that um the limited number of people that are involved in motocross have a place to go and don't put either one of them out of business. There's not the problem with
this is there's not enough uh riders here. Now, I know I think you're envisioning that you bring people from all over the country uh for events and that the events would would make money.
And um I I don't want to use county tax dollars, Echo, or any other dollars um to provide for somebody in in Michigan or Pennsylvania or wherever else. I want this open um for dirt bike riders in
Valuchia County that can go and ride recreationally with their with their families and enjoy the sport that they love. That's the vast majority of of people. You're absolutely right. I've said it time and time again that there
is not one single foot in Valuchia County where you can ride legally in in uh a dirt bike. So, it's it's done illegally or in on private property. Let's make it let's make it legal. We've got ball fields. We've got everything
else. Gus mentioned a golf course. There's a lot of people that play golf. There's a lot of people that ride recreationally and we can we can give them space. Uh Mr. Santiago is exactly right. This this property has already been decimated by the previous owner. Um
it was going to be developed. We saved it from that. I'm glad that we bought it and it lends itself to recreational riding which would help uh the sport um and even help motocross. So um I'm not against anybody here. I'm not against
staff. Um I'm wondering why we didn't hire Rebel First instead of Hunden that we paid I'm told today only $10,000 to tell us that it's a $10 million project. Um, so now we're going to try and do it
at 3.5 million. I just don't think it's possible and I think it comes back to the taxpayers again and again. So, um, with that, I I I'm sorry. I'm going to vote vote no on it because I don't think it's our responsibility. Councilman
Robbins. >> Uh, thank you, Chair and Council. I just I just hope everyone's um kind of listening to the words, Don, and if you you break down some of what's being said because it's political salad, I think, at best. Uh you know, we hear we hear statements
like uh we're not in business. We don't have to be in in in or we have no place to invest in business. Meanwhile, the same people that are promoting this stuff and saying this stuff, they're giving away tax dollars to Aello and Breeze and all these other places. They're also voting for public housing and government subsidies to no end.
Right. I think this is a good project. I think it's going in a in a correct uh uh direction. And um you know, and when we say not not same thing, not to use money to provide for everyone else. Break this whole thing down. It's just it's just
words with uh with really no meaning. Appreciate it. Can we call for the vote, please? Thank you. Okay. Carissa, would you call the role on item H? The motion is to approve it as proposed. >> Mr. Robbins?
>> Yes. >> Mr. Santiago? >> Yes. >> Mr. Dempsey. Mr. Johansson? >> Yes. >> Mr. Reinhardt? >> Yes. >> Mr. Brower? >> No. And the motion passes five uh to
one. Okay, thanks Gus. That brings us to item six, which is the chair's 2026 assignment for council members to committees. And I'm not making uh any changes as we have
uh currently on those assignments. Um Councilman Santiago. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um generally speaking, I'm okay with the appointments. The the only one that that I can't and I I I said this uh last year um is I can't my work schedule is not
allowing me to participate in the TPO. Um and I know my name's there, but I haven't been going to the meetings. I thought it was I was going to put as an alternate last year, but I might have missed that. Everything else that I'm assigned to, Mr. Chair and council, I'm okay with. But if y'all want to leave my name there as CPO, that's fine. But I
just can't uh attend. >> Okay. Um I think it's a a requirement that we have five council members. We have two uh Don and Troy that can't because of their work schedule. So, it's a a dilemma. Um we understand I
understand that it's it's an issue. your name's there. Um, >> I'm happy what you guys represent as well. I just wanted to make it make the statement again for >> Okay. Councilman Johansson. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I see Reinhardt before me, but
I'll I'll take my turn. Um, >> the the TPO is is there any is there any consideration to asking them to possibly look at alternative times and dates? I don't
know what works for David, but um I know that we very rarely can get five people there. And and the other question I have is knowing David's not there, do we do we ping on Don and Troy every month to
see if they're available as the alternates or do we just go go without without a full compliment? I'm I'm not aware but uh those would be questions I have.
Also, I I think uh all of us um at at one point or another can't can't make all of these meetings. Uh I'll of the same boat as I was last year. Uh I rely heavily on you, Chairman Brower. My my intent was to go to the rail commission
meetings as often as I could, but as you are aware from your meetings there that I rarely make it because of uh conflicts. Um but um uh I have the same issues with
human services and um and uh the other human services advisory board and um the other local one that I'm on. Um and and but but I'll I'll do my best to attend. Uh but I can't I
can't get 100% participation. >> What was the other one? Human Services and >> Human Services Advisory Board and uh there's one more. Hold on. >> That's the one in Banell, right? >> No, that's here. >> Oh,
>> that's here. >> Planning Committee, Central Florida. >> Shoot. >> No issues there. >> Maybe I'm missing the other one, but yeah, humans. Uh affordable housing. >> Yeah, affordable housing will have to be done by an agenda item. It's not a chair
appointment. >> Yep. That's That's why I can't find it. It's >> I didn't do that to you. >> Yeah. No, that those those are the two I I have a problem making both of those. Uh um but but I endeavor to do the best I can and I don't think anybody else is
in a position do any better. So >> yeah, that's that's the issue. And on the rare occasion I've missed Sunrail, you have been able to fill in and I appreciate. >> Yeah, definitely within Definitely with Pat's knowledge, but Yes, sir. Yes. Okay. >> Thank you.
>> Uh, Councilman Robbins. >> Matt, did you want to go? >> I just was going to mention I'm sorry. That's okay. >> Are you still here? >> Yeah, I'm here. >> Vice Chair Matt Reinhardt. >> I was just going to mention uh for the record, I'm good with where I'm at um with the ones that are assigned, plus I
have additional ones that I've done that are not assigned, so I'm good. >> Okay. Councilman Robbins. Thank you, Chair. Yeah, everything's uh again good. I did notice this go around with East Central Florida Regional Planning
Council. Great organization, but a lot of times they're in Orlando. Um I know Mr. Johansson, that's that that's his thing. Do we have to have two people? I think
No, I I I honestly I I tune in uh because of my schedule. You know, some of these things you can't make all of them. it's physically impossible, but you'll you can make 99% of them. Um, but I I I do uh coordinate, you know, with him. Uh, if he's not going to be there,
well, I'll go, you know, and or or vice versa. But, uh, it's hard on the, you know, it's difficult. Plus, you got to build the taxpayers for mileage and all this stuff. >> Do we need to on that? Do we know? >> I think we do, but I'll find out if that's >> Yes. Yes, we do. I I'm the vice chair,
so I'm pretty much locked in every meeting, but uh we need two reps and and he as long they they accept remote, so that's been working out for us. And there hasn't been uh I go to all the TPO meetings and the executive committee, we
we always have a a quorum. Uh David, there's no nailbiter uh votes. You know, a lot of this stuff is either following state law or D or this or that the other agency. Uh, it's more formalities, but I I've never seen a problem with with a um
uh not having a quorum. So, I wouldn't I wouldn't beat yourself up too bad about that. Everything else is good. Okay. Yeah. I So, we will keep it the same. If there's any changes after further discussions with uh council members, we'll I'll let you know. But
with the understanding that everybody can't make it to every every meeting. >> Motion to approve as presented. >> So we have a motion to approve by uh Vice Chair
Reinhardt and the second was by Councilman Robbins. All in favor say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? Motion carries six to zero. And that brings us to the second public participation. I have two. Did you gain
any more? Okay. Uh, first up will be Melissa Lamers. Nancy Vaughn will go second. Melissa Lamers, District 4. Happy New Year. I'm vice chair of the Echo Valuchia Forever Alliance, the successor to the pack that ran the campaign to
reauthorize Valuchia Forever. Among potential 2026 goals that you've included for your workshop is modifying Valuchia Forever to a noninerpetuity program. We'd like to provide some perspective. When Valuchia Forever was first approved in 2000, Forever meant
just that. In 2020, when 75.6% 6% of voters reauthorized it to protect drinking water supplies and the land around our lagoon, lakes, rivers, and springs that hold flood waters. They knew what they were voting for, that the land would be preserved forever. They
had more than 30 years of experience to go by. To conserve land, Valuchek Forever acquires it outright and employs conservation easements. The appraisals used to acquire the land or easement were and are based upon perpetuity.
Taxpayer dollars were and are spent under that assumption. By law, conservation easements are perpetual. Conservation easements used by Florida Forever and the Rural and Family Lands Protection Program, premier sources of match funding for Valuchia Forever, only
allow a conservation easement to be extinguished quote by judicial proceedings in a court of competent jurisdiction end quote if quote unexpected circumstances arise in the future that render the conservation purposes of the conservation easement
impossible, impractical or unfeasible to accomplish. That's the standard established by the Internal Revenue Service for charitable constitutions contributions associated with conservation easements. It's clearly focused on ensuring the perpetuity of
the conservation restrictions. Baluchia Forever partnerships which provide match funding have resulted in an incredible return on investment. Since 2020, they've provided $4 for every $1 we've invested. By jointly owning property
with entities like Florida Forever or the Water Management District, Valuchia Forever not only stretches taxpayer dollars, but often there are beneficial land management agreements as well. This fis fiscally responsible best practice of Valuchia Forever that gives a solid
return on t tax dollars was something we highlighted in our campaign and we continue to promote. We know there'll be a full discussion of Valuchia Forever in the near future as agreed in your last meeting. We ask that you table the idea of making a fundamental change to the
very heart of Valuchia Forever on your list of goals for the year. We're confident that once you learn more about the program, you'll agree with the more than twothirds of voters in Valuchia County who wanted 20 more years of what's been a phenomenally successful, transparent, and financially sound
program that delivers on what voters wanted. Thank you. And thank you for permitting up with the wonkiness. Appreciate it. >> Thank you, Nancy Vaughn. Good morning. Oops. Good morning, Chair Brower and uh council. And good morning
um Mr. Rectenald and staff. Um thank you all for your time and attention this morning. I My name is Nancy Vaughn. I live in District 3 and I um and I'm here representing the League of Women Voters of Valuchia County as its president. The league has been a strong proponent of
Valuchia Forever since its inception, supporting both the 2000 and 2020 initiatives. Among the many reasons of unyielding support are the program's stated intentions to prot protect drinking water supplies and the land surrounding our local springs, lakes,
and rivers that manage flood waters. Clean, safe water, and flood mitigation were top voter priorities in 2020 2020 pre-election polling. And I think it's safe to say they remain so today. The methodology followed by Valuchia Forever
is tried and true. The evaluation project process, objective criteria, transparent acquisition process and partnerships with other entities ensure a wise use of tax taxpayer funds. The structure of Alutia Forever is tried and
true. uh both pres the structure of Forever both past and present has served our county well. Regarding today's workshop, I understand that one potential 2026 goal is to modify Valuchia Forever into a non-perpetuity program. This change
would directly oppose the intent of the citizens who voted for land conservation program titled Valuchia Forever. My request today is that you continue this structurally sound program in its current form and honor the will of the voters. Thank you very much today for
your time and consideration. Thank you. Uh John Nicholson, >> John Nixon, Daytona Beach. A couple of things. one with regard to motocross. Uh I ask you to think about going it in in phases. I understand Don wants a minimal
course. That's what he's always pushed. Just a place for the kids to go. Uh so if there's only a few kids that show up, fine. We have a uh motocross for just a couple of kids. If it comes out to be successful and it's booming, then we have a plan to extend it, which I hope
that would happen so that we could again again create another um Daytona International Speedway. All right, I like that idea. Uh secondly, affordable housing. I came before you before uh for years I've made a comment to take a look
at what's happening in Daytona Beach. Uh they're looking at our finances now and finding problems. Take a look at uh Glad Morris Landing. I'm asking you, you put a $1.8 million into that. There's a potential problem there. Um
a slum. And I don't want you guys to to create money thinking you're creating affordable housing for the average policeman, firemen, when it's really you're creating a slum. So, I'm asking you to to look into that. And if there is a problem with the city creating not
what you want, that you stop working with the city. you stop giving them money, echo, whatever, so that they can literally if they make a commitment to you guys, they follow through. And uh lastly, I would again ask you to put a a representative onto the CRA. It's going
for 10 more years. A lot of damage can be done in 10 years. So, I'm asking you to put a uh representative on the Main Street CRA so the money is spent wisely because I'm going to almost guarantee you when they look at this audit and
they look at the CRAAS, you're not going to be happy with what they find. Thank you, >> Wendy Anderson. Welcome to a new year all of you. My name is Wendy Anderson. I live in District 1 and um and I'm here to make a
few remarks about your workshop coming up in a few minutes. Um as all of you um move into your county workshop later today to set your priorities for 2026, I urge you to consider what may be the most important matter facing the county, the council, and all local governments
across the state. Over the past couple of decades, Tallahassee has chipped away at home rule by preempting the ability of our local governments to make the best decisions for our communities based on each location's unique geography and culture. Last year, Senate Bill 180
stripped away your ability to update our ordinances for storm water management and other development codes that could address our county's extreme flood risks. The response from local governments within Valuchia County and across the state ranged from joining statewide lawsuits to fight SB180
and to gently offer our state legislators language to consider amending the statute. How is that working out? Several bills have been in the hopper of legislative committees this past fall and winter that will further erode home rule. SB718 is one
that will undermine local government's abilities to make decisions about water quality and land management issues. If SB80 cut you off at the knees, SB718 will remove your arms. As county leaders, I urge you as
individuals and as a collective body to use your leadership roles to coordinate a countywide effort to fight SB718. Please use your state lobbyists to fight this existential threat. Please use your
seats on the round table of elected officials to coordinate efforts among the 16 cities and 22 townships of Valuchia County to create a unified position of all local governments within the county protect to protect all of
your abilities to set standards that protect our Felia communities and to demand that the projects built in our communities meet those standards. Please use your positions on the Florida League of Cities and join the Thousand Friends of Florida to present a unified voice
across the state that enough is enough. Please organize a meeting with the county within the county of our legislative delegation ASAP ASAP to ask them to carry this sentiment back to Tallahassee. Not a meeting where
local governments go in to kiss their rings and tea up asks for appropriations, but one where you sit with them in what is an election year for them too and demand that they represent us in the
communities of Lucia County and to do so without fear of retaliation. The county government is uniquely positioned to be this leader to connect the states and the to connect the cities and the state and I ask you to make this a priority. Thank you. Thank you
>> for your comments. Keith Jester, >> gentlemen, each and every one of you have children. Most of you have young younger adult children. In some of our private conversations, you've told me about how you've some of you have told me how you've helped your children
purchase homes. Some of you have told me how you've had children stay with you in your home at uh longer because of finances and the struggles young people are having. I listed 15 things today for you where
within Valuchia County, we've created those struggles and we've made them worse. I told you when I was a young police officer, I was able to buy a home working in a small town, my first small home, I was able to buy that in my early
20s. And now people are having to wait till they're in their late 30s. We have to fix it. Government has been the problem, not the solution. We've added taxes and taxes and burdens and
burdens and and every time somebody comes up here from the cultural groups or any other group, they say it's for the children. The best thing you can do for the children is is allow your young adults and others
to keep as much money as they can to provide for their own families. Get government out of the way. If you want your child or if your your children want your grandchildren to go to an art program, let them be able to
afford to pay for it. Having a good good home and a good home environment and home ownership builds generational wealth which is very important but that is far more than important than
going to an some after school program. And let us be honest every time we come up here and we're throwing these different poster children up when we're asking for money for our organizations. And it happens every time. Heard it today.
When it happens to be children, we already fund schools to the tune of over a billion dollars a year. Through the schools, there's a plethora of art programs. There's even a charter school in Lake
Helen that is dedicated to the arts that we help fund. So, please put the young people first. Get government out of their way. And I will tell you, I grew up here, lived here all my life. All my life. And when I was growing up here and
I was a young adult here and starting out, the traffic the roads were much better. the traffic issues were a lot less and it's got to be where I don't even like to go out anymore. Let's fix what you're supposed to be
fixing. >> Thank you, >> Katherine Pante. Good morning, council. Regarding chapter 72 that was heard in front of this council a few months back. I submitted a public records request for all emails sent to the council members
and was informed that the cost would be $1,700. I responded that this fee was excessive. I then submitted a follow-up request asking that the emails be attached to the related agenda item so they would be accessible to all Valuchia County residents. This approach was
previously used for the motocross item on April 15th. Therefore, I see no reason why this request cannot be accommodated at no cost to residents. So, that is my request that they all be attached to that agenda item. The state preeemptions should also be the main
priority of this council workshop today. That should be at the top of the list, not, you know, disembowing Valuchia forever. And Keith, in reference to the arts, the arts the arts program >> to the microphone, >> I'm going to address it to you guys, but
I just wanted Keith to know this. the arts funding did support um programs that were in the schools in Valuchia County schools. I know they went to Pace Center for Girls and I know they also um had a program for autistic children down in Port Orange at Art House. Thank you.
>> Thank you. And that concludes uh public comment for the close of our meeting. We will move into uh discussion from staff and council members. Uh, County Manager George Rectenwald. >> I have nothing today.
>> County Attorney Mike Dyer. >> Nothing at this time. Thank you. >> County Council. Uh, today we start with Councilman Robbins. >> Save it for the workshop. >> Okay. Uh, Councilman David Santiago.
>> Um, yeah. Um, two a couple things, Mr. Chair. Um, Mr. Mr. Chester, I got to I'm going to compliment you because you're consistent in your messaging. Um, from the first day I got here serving, so I have to compliment you there. And I think shortly after the first time I met
you when I was in the council, I'd agreed that our young people were being pushed out of further and further home ownership. So, I I applaud your motive towards that and we do need to do more. I'll agree with that. how we get there
is just just the tough part and I I I uh I think the council has done some steps. It's been baby steps. I'll admit those compared to other counties. Um but we have more to do. We'll find out more in this session today what more we'd like to do. Um but I agree with your your
your your goal and and what you've said and what's really happened. Um and then um to our council and uh staff, you know, Mr. It's been asked about the Main Street
CRA, right? And you know, I don't want to make it specifically about Daytona, but do we have I I represent this council on the Spring Hill CRA and do we have a council member that repres
has a representation in the other CRAAS? No. >> Is that because the way they were formed initially, it showed up what the body would be, the makeup of the body? I'm guessing. >> Yeah, basically.
>> I think it's it's worth something asking about um you know, I have my own personal feelings on CRAAS anyway though. Um, and then the other question I had the PACE funding, can can
staff give us a uh >> an update on that? It's what we had some business owners came here and represented that the uh the cases they've won. Um, do we have to make any comments on the CRA CRA process? I'm sorry, not the CRA, PACE funding.
>> Pace funding. the comments that were made here earlier today. >> I'm sorry. I was trying to follow up on your question that you asked earlier while you're asking. So, what's your question again? >> So, we had two individuals give us an update according to them regarding the Florida Supreme Court rulings and other
rulings regarding PACE funding that they have won from the industry. Do we have to take any action? >> Yeah. So, I sent you an email yesterday um on January 20th. I was going to bring forward an agenda item
uh recommending we dismiss a case that we had filed here locally on the dispute. And the dispute was uh you know, I'm pleased to hear the PACE providers come in and say, well, they realize they need a local agreement
with the county. That was not their position originally. the state law has been changed. So, um in light of the ruling at the Supreme Court level um which was in favor uh on in favor of the
pace companies on that bond validation issue. Um I really my recommendations I think the concern that the council and other counties around Florida had raised has been resolved by the new statute. Um the other issue they raised with the I
think the second speaker expressed an interest in having in a local agreement with the council. That's a separate that'd be a policy issue for you to consider. Um there are issues on both sides on that. They're not really
legal. I do think for them to operate under state law now going forward they need our local agreement with you. >> Okay. Thank you for that. So, I will bring that item for if that's okay, January 20th. >> Thank you. And then the other thing I I I was going to ask I forgot I'd make the
public ask. I haven't gone through the line lately, but I recall >> at one time we had stopped or or changed our security screenings to come in. It's Are we still doing the normal security screenings? I know there was
some law some issue, >> right? Yeah, the law changed. So, >> but does the law prohibit us from doing a security screening or it says certain people can do can exercise their rights? >> That's a discretionary function, sir. Um, and you know, at this time, the
legislaturator's got some uh pending change to the statute that would, if passed this session, put some of those prohibitions back in place as applies to what the uh court case changed. So, >> no, I Okay. be determined is what I
would say by the legis. >> And what are our options? I mean, you may not have the answer right now, but >> for >> any type of screening >> currently, again, that's a that's a law enforcement. >> The courthouse is still doing it. I went to the courthouse the other day. >> Yes, sir. Some of that's different. Okay.
>> Because it's the courthouse, you got some criminal proceedings going over there and different things. It depends on the type of building, the type of government function. Um there's some other issues and and it's a discretionary function of law enforcement for the screening. I'd like to know in in the interim between now
and any legislation passed if you can give us an update hopefully at our next meeting if the council is agreeable um on what options that we have still I get it people have certain rights but um I don't think we should just keep it as a mute point people are getting more and
more extreme out there every day um and um we see examples of it almost every meeting these this time and I think for the safety >> what I what I would recommend is what you're going to hear back is it's a law enforcement decision and what they're willing to
force. I think they need to be part of that discussion. >> Absolutely. >> Because uh it's not something that's been driven by your staff. >> Yeah. You know, I guess the discussion should be is not not I I get it what we can't do. I I want to know what can we can do.
Does that make sense? Without violating people's rights, which I I respect. And unless there's objection to that, Mr. Sure. I I'd like to ask staff to do that. Give us an update. >> I certainly don't have an objection and I I would like to know right now today
what is allowed because the way I understand it what's been presented to staff for their understanding is you notice the metal detectors are gone. Mhm. >> Um, so I think it's permissible that that in this building, in this room,
anybody can carry a firearm, including you and I. Is that true or false? >> That's as the current law stands, uh, based on the changes, that's a generally a true statement. >> Okay. Um, I would just encourage I think law
enforcement needs to be a part of this discussion because they provide the services. >> Yeah. Because and I'll just to again give us the update, but I think when you take away certain security protocols and your approach
to security internally didn't change because I didn't see any changes there. Um, was all that thought process given? I'll leave leave that for thought. Can we just discuss that? Um, >> thank you. Thank you.
>> Yeah. I just want to be clear. We're here because of a court decision. >> I know. I know. >> So, the legislature can take this issue up, but it's something local governments around the state have had to grapple with. >> I know. >> And a lot of people are not happy with
the state we're in. But um so that's where we are. Again, it's not something your staff isn't >> I I realize that I want to know what we can do, >> right? And that bill in Tallahassee is pending, like I said, for this session to kind of go back to the status quo
before the court case. >> What we can do is write it up, share it with you, and then we be prepared to speak to it the next meeting. But it's that's no problem. >> Thank you. And Mr. Chair, I think the rest of the items I have are uh well, Mr. Chair, I don't know if this
would you would consider it to be part of our workshop, but I do want to discuss uh again uh the West Falucia Hospital Authority or our hospital authorities um what we're going to do with that. Um I I know we've have very limited power over it, but we can influence some of that. Um and the the
the burden that that's putting on our taxpayers. >> We can do that at the workshop. You think? At least give staff direction. Okay. Okay. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm done. >> Uh, Councilman Dempsey. >> Nothing now. I've got some things I want to address at the workshop, though.
>> Thank you, Councilman Johansson. >> Couple things, sir. Uh, councelor committee updates. Uh, uh, as mentioned earlier, we belong to the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council. On, uh, February 25th, uh, we're having
the annual Diamond Awards. So, I go to that every year. Uh, this year, Via County does have a winner, the Marine Discovery Center won the Innovative Places Award. Uh, the good news is the
award ceremonies at the Brandon Center on February 25th. So, I um hope more than just I can make it. Uh, uh, it's great that we have a a winner this year. And also uh there's a R2C leadership
summit uh which is the art of what's next and that's on February 26 and 27th. Uh tickets are available at the uh East Central Florida Regional Planning Center website. Um
and uh uh Ben Bartlett and myself will be conf we're well apparently we're confirmed speakers but uh um uh there's there's quite a batch of speakers that will be
talking everything from environment uh to tourism. uh the Federal Railroad Administration will have a rep there. Um some folks from the hospitality industry, some
folks from I think Visit Florida will be there u from all over the east central Florida region um speaking on various topics. Uh it it should be interesting. Um
done with committee updates. Now, I I'm We talk about affordable housing. It was brought up in public comment about our our youth and and I may have complained that that my sons graduated
from college and came home to live for a little while while they struggled to find their dream job of which uh they have. Um, but lowering the price of housing or giving
them more money. And if I gave my sons more money in their pocket, they're going to go to Chick-fil-A and they're going to go to Starbucks and they're going to spend it on Air
Jordans or or Vans or whatever the hell the shoe of of dour is. Um they may save a lot. My both my graduated kids save a lot of money, but
they don't know what they're saving for. They just know that we taught them to save. Uh, I know countless youth that have worked hard, gone to not the public's deli, but to BJ's deli and
bought discount cheap day old ham that's in the day old locker and bought a house. So when you hearken back to when you were a ch child and your parents said, "Well, when we were kids, we had well, we're doing the same
thing." Um uh we instill that that culture of saving in our kids or we don't. We send them to Chick-fil-A and McDonald's and Starbucks um because we do it ourselves
um and we we instill that culture. So, I'm all about putting money in in our young adults pockets. I'm all about trying to give them every opportunity to buy a house, but it takes effort as well
on their part. And it's not just something that the government ought to work hard to give them without having them do some hard work as well. Um, and I and I think that's important. That's just another variable to
consider. Lastly, uh I look forward to our our workshop uh this afternoon. Uh I hope we don't get mired down in some of the details from
the emails that were sent to all of us. uh we can talk about it but I don't want to spend hours uh talking about a particular program when we should be talking about strategic goals. Uh, so I
hope we take that to heart after lunch and and go downstairs and and have some candid discussions about where we want to go and maybe even what what our core responsibilities are at the macro level so we can move forward this year. Um,
and then lastly regarding uh SB718 and the hospital taxing authorities, uh, David, um, I've been spending a lot of time doing a lot of studying on how we can not fix that, but become more
transparent and and how that money is used and where it's going. And uh uh it's a tough nut to crack, but uh I think we can get there between uh our our leverage with our our lobbyist, our
help with our uh uh county attorney, and some folks in the delegation for both that and SP 718. Thank you. >> Thank you, uh Vice Chair Reinhardt.
Thank you, chair. Um, I've got a few things since we didn't have a meeting in December or only the one. Um, first off, um, the question was I wanted to bring it up added on, uh, Mr. Santiago brought about the the Main Street CRA representation. My understanding is we
could, George, that could be something we could look into of having representation. I know I'm on a lot of boards, but that is something that's right there in my district, and I'm asked a lot about that. So I hope to assign >> I would be more than happy to do it if permissible but Paulo I see
>> yeah so so um I think uh Mr. Santiago mentioned Spring Hill. Spring Hill is unique because that is a CRA jointly created by the county and the city. Um and they um picked the agency as in there's two representatives from um the
county, two representatives from the city and then there's another one. um the statute is very specific about how an agency is created and once you pick one it is very difficult if not impossible to go to the other. So all the my understanding is all the other
CRAAS are the creating local government which is the city is the agency and you can't modify that because it's a statutoily created scheme. >> So the >> so that answer is no. >> The answer is is my understanding of statute is the answer is >> that was an attorney folks the answer is
no. Yeah, but is that I just I'm sorry, Mr. Mr. Chairman, if I could help Matt a little bit. >> Yeah, go ahead. >> Um, if we can get a a a clearer answer on that you can't meaning we can't force them or they can request their own change.
>> The answer I think the answer is going to be both because it is difficult even for the agency itself to change from one form of um what the agency is to another. um it's like they have to do a a entirely different analysis and I
think I can't remember which way it goes but once you pick one it is barred to go to the to the other um appointed method. >> Yeah Matt I'll I'll just add this. So I I'd like to get a like a deeper analysis on that is can we do that with a willing
partner and then we can make the ask. Oh, they >> they appoint >> the city of Daytona appoints >> can research that further and bring more information. >> I appreciate it. >> So, you're saying there's a chance. Okay. Um, the other thing uh with what
Mr. Santiago brought up and and I I understand what Mr. Brown said about the presence of law enforcement out there and we have them here and I thank you gentlemen for being here. We appreciate that. Um, but as far as screening purposes, if for nothing else, just having knowledge,
uh, of who's coming in here with a weapon, I'm just going to say it. Um, so there was a little bit of activity earlier when the gentleman was disruptive and he left his bag in here and I don't know if anybody else caught notice, but I got a little nervous when they came in and tried to when they got the duffel bag. A million thoughts ran
through my head. So, I'd like to know uh if for nothing else, even if they say, "Okay, you know, you can permit it under statute, but our deputies are aware of who has a weapon." I just think that's that's a great idea. So, I'm just going to leave
it at that. And >> again, >> I know you're going to bring it back, but I just want to put that >> Have a conversation with the sheriff's office. >> I I agree. They need to be part of it because I'm just pointing out. Absolutely. That is not could agree more. >> That has not been their position. >> Okay. 104. Um the other things um
recently I had a a meeting with um the Daytona Tortugas on um the possibility of a Valuchia day uh for our Valuchia County employees and I know I've uh spoken with staff about that. U Michael Ryan, thank you very much for responding and and I saw the email already. Uh
you're putting that project into work. I think it's a great idea. We do it for the cities and now we're going to have one for the county. I think that's a phenomenal idea. So, um, the want to talk about collaboration with our city governments. We've referred to
it a couple times today. Even the smallest issues are big issues. Uh, going back to Daytona, those of you that uh either live in the area or have driven down that way. Uh, right when I first got elected, I talked about uh an enhancement of Beville Road as it's a
main thoroughfare coming into the city. And I have asked uh FDOT since I've been in office about the possibility of putting lighting up there. Uh unbeknownst to me at the time, so was Commissioner Cantou uh from Daytona. So
the two of us continue to work on it and uh if you notice if you drive down that way, it's lit up. So and it's a very nice entrance way as you're coming into the city and I think it's it's uh much needed in safety. Uh FDOT, that's what we played on the words uh safety as they were with. So, that was excellent work
and I commend Daytona and Commissioner Cantou for her help on that as well and FDOT. Thank you very much. Um, if you haven't had the opportunity to visit the Valuchia Countyy's new animal shelter, uh, resto council, I took the opportunity to go down there and see it.
Um, I I would encourage you to do the same. I I want to commend our animal control staff uh for what they've done and how they've turned that around. I know I asked uh a couple meetings ago about the possibility of using inmates, maybe going to that program that we used to
have, but um I do like George, I like your idea of utilizing the inmates to let's now seeing it, you know, I'm an eyes on person. Uh seeing the condition of the building, it's not bad, but it could be better and I think we could utilize those inmates to to help make it better. So, I appreciate that. Thank you
very much. Um the second chance initiative, um our job fairs, we were doing them quarterly. We have since moved them back to twice a year as we saw. Uh the need isn't for four times. We did one on December 11th. We found out not as many of the vendors showed up
because they were already fully staffed for the holidays. Um I think it's a great program. We will continue it and we are getting more applicants of of jobs. And those that are listening, I would encourage you to continue to reach out to um the jail or or find out how
you can be part of that. um a quick success story about that. I've been asked probably more times than anything, not just on who could help, but what kind of success stories, and I'm not going to bore you with a bunch of them, but uh one of them while I was there on December 11th, uh we had u career source
there. And the gentleman came up and asked the question of an inmate uh what are his uh qualifications? And he specifically gave a lot of HVAC terminology. It was it was obvious that he was certified in such work. Uh the
career source individual asked the inmate, "When do you get out?" He said, "Tomorrow morning." He said, "I need you to be at my office at 9:00. You have a job." Uh another and that's great. We've never had that happen. Another interesting story is one of the uh second chance employees or one of the employees that that work for our
re-entry group uh was out in the public at a shopping market. an individual approached her, asked her, verified her name. She said, "Yes, you work at the jail." "Yes." A little reluctant to answer, but she answered. Uh and he said, "I just want to thank you because your forklift certification program, uh
once I got certified, which is the one course that we do at the jail that we do certify in. Um I was able to land a job the minute I got out. I was able to provide for my family. I did everything that I wanted to do and I want to thank you." So, those are great success stories and we're hearing more and more
of them. These are putting people back to work. It's lowering the recidivism rate in Valuchia County, which is a tax burden on this county because it's one of the biggest eaters of our budget and the general fund is a jail operation. As we approach the legislation that's coming about, we need to be concerned
about that. So, that being said, and lastly, sorry to bore you. I try to move quickly. Something that is very near and dear. We talked about board assignments and one of the boards that I took on responsibility of being a part of when I was asked
uh was the Valuchia County Domestic Abuse Council. And the reason I chose this was for many reasons, but one of the main reasons was every parents well it should be every parent's nightmare is to get certain phone calls. And a phone call that I received when I was working
at the jail was how my daughter, and I've asked her permission to tell this story, how she was abused by her ex, literally pulled her own gun on her, held it to her head, and we could have been having a lot different conversation right now if it didn't go the right way. That being said, I want to find out uh
how do we gain more resources, especially on the west side of the county, with respect to domestic violence. Uh how do we make this preventable? We can't. However, I will point out a very big factor in Valuchia County. Usually, you want to be first or second in something. It's a good thing.
This is not good. Valuchia County, you are number four in the state of Florida for domestic violence cases. Number four. That's not something we need to be proud of. We need to find ways to bring that down. Approximately 10 million people experience some form of domestic
violence annually each year in the United States. Almost one in two women, that's almost 50% uh and more than four in 10 men in the United States reported some sort of uh domestic violence. According to the statistics gathered by the National
Network to End Domestic Violence in 2022, there were 2,410 women killed in a single victim single offender incident, an average of more than six homicides each day. Uh, and there's a lot more statistics I won't bore you
with, but I wanted to point out one. Uh, in Valuchia County, the rate of domestic violence, uh, per 100,000 people is 72% higher than the national average. Valuchia County, as I stated, was number four. Uh, in 2020, I'm sorry, let me
back up. In Florida, domestic violence offenders resulted in approximately 200 deaths each year, just in this state, accounting for approximately 20% of the murders annually in the state of Florida. Perpetrators are typ typically men, while survivors are predominantly
women. One-third of domestic violence perpetrators in Florida have known the about the do not contact order. I will tell you that there is a do not contact order presently for or some variation of that for my daughter that has not stopped him. So that being said, I bring
all this to your attention, gentlemen. Uh in Tennessee, the state of Tennessee, January 1st, 2026, they enacted a law called the Savannah's Law. Savannah's Law was named after an offduty officer, police officer, Savannah Pucket, 22-year-old Robinson County deputy, who
was murdered in her home in 2022 by her then ex-boyfriend, shot and killed her, suffocated the dog, and then lit the house on fire. They have started a law that would require anybody convicted of domestic
violence to register. You say, "Well, what does that do?" Well, I know as a dad I want to know who my daughter's dating. I want to know as a person if you're out there in the single field, you want to know who you're dating. You would able to have that resource. That's just one aspect of it. I'm just going to
point that out. So, knowing that we have passed the threshold of what legislation we could ask for from the state of Florida for this year. Being on that board, I have asked our CEO that we should attack this uh for the 2027 session. However, I didn't want to sit
on my hands and wait. So, after speaking with our legal uh and staff, uh I asked if an ordinance could be initiated uh that would require anybody in Valuchia County convicted uh convicted of domestic violence to register in
Valuchia County. My hopes are the state of Florida sees the seriousnesses. I know they see it, but they would understand that we're serious about it and maybe other counties in the state of Florida would pick up the ball as well. Um, obviously this is I I'd like to make that motion that we do that um for staff
to bring that information back because it's not I would like to be agended. Okay, we have a motion on the floor by Matt Reinhardt, seconded by Councilman Robbins to bring information back on making uh those convicted of domestic violence
be on a >> local registry in Valia County. This >> Valia County. >> Yeah, we can't do it for the state until Yeah. Okay. >> Yes, sir. It would be an ordinance. Yes, sir. >> Motion by Matt Reinhardt. Again, second by Councilman Robbins. Uh, any
questions? >> Just to bring back information, correct? >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Comments? All in favor say pardon me. >> Um, all in favor say I. >> I. >> Any opposed?
And it's approved. Six to zero. >> Thank you very much. I appreciate, gentlemen. Lastly, uh um I want to thank you for your confidence again this year to um take the role on as vice chair. >> Motion to reconsider. >> Well, now that I spoke too much, you notice how I put that at the end, right?
So, denied. So, that's all. Thank you, chair. >> Okay. You're welcome. Just a couple of things. Most of it come up in the workshop, but it was asked this morning um Senate Bill 180. How's it worked out?
There's lawsuits going. There's an amendment process going. So, I I want to bring the public up to date on how it's going. First, Mike, and I'm sorry I didn't talk to you about doing this beforehand, but I know for from the perspective of lawsuits,
they've had their first challenge in court, um, which did not go well. Can you just update us? It's not dead, I know, but can you update us on where the lawsuit uh from some of our cities and other counties stands?
>> I believe there was a motion to dismiss filed by the both the plaintiffs and the defendants and each were denied. I don't believe there's a written order out yet. It just happened. So, um the case
um would continue beyond that preliminary stage. >> Okay. as to the uh it was actually Russ is wrong. It was an injunction. It was a request for an injunction that was denied. >> Right. >> Uh excuse me. Um
Senate Bill 180 just looked this morning. Um it's still early because sess session hasn't quite started, but you have an amendment filed by Senator Digglia who was the original sponsor of Senate Bill 180. I have not seen a house
companion bill yet. >> That's a problem. Okay. Thank you. Um and that brings us to the uh political angle, the amendment process. Um the senator that uh first u
authored that bill has uh as you just said um written amendments that are not everything that we wanted uh but it's a big step forward. Um the you know Valuchia County and
other counties have submitted amendments to the Florida Association of Counties and um ours were accepted and other counties amendments were accepted put together in a package given to the uh uh Florida legislature.
most of uh the senator's um uh amendments on on his own uh reflect what we've given him and and a little a little more going from a 100 miles to 50 miles of a hurricane. Um so they're
they're improvements. The problem is it ain't going to pass without a house bill. And so I agree with uh uh somebody in the public, I think it was Wendy Anderson that said we we need to get with our Valuchia delegation. Um I know
I'm personally going to ask them please, one of you guys write a a companion bill for the House. Um, I would like to see the the council remain active and and and I'll say about 180 and and and the
in my opinion the horrible start of this legislation. Our county legal staff is and I don't know if John Booker is in the back. Um, our U think there he is. Um, John Booker is
our legislative aid to Tallahassee. We have uh uh lobbyists there. They've already been working on what's happening in the legislature for weeks before the session ever started and have been kept up uh
kept us informed. um currently have three pages of um bills that would preempt uh local governments, counties, and cities from from doing um things that we currently do now to protect our own citizens. It's going to it's a
serious session. There's a lot of things that um we need to to fight. U if we get rid of 180 and it's replaced by Senate Bill 718 and House Bill 479,
we're still in in dire straits. Um so I I want to I'm going to ask for for two things from the council. Um, let me just continue with a couple of the the key bills that were, you know, probably the
most egregious in my opinion is the House Bill 479, Senate Bill 718, land and water management. It would prevent us from doing anything to manage our water quality, water quantity, wetlands. Um, it prevents us from doing some
things in storm water, as does another uh bill that's been presented. Um, I think we need to take a really strong stance uh against these bills um uh against Senate Bill 718, House Bill 479.
We also um uh Mike, I assume your and and John Booker will continue to keep us updated because it's it is early. There'll be amendments. They could get worse. They could get better. Um, so if you would just continue to uh keep us um
in informed. Um, Senate Bill 208 and 399, land use and development regulations, um, would prohibit local land development regulations from um, requiring the denial of or conditioning or delaying the approval of residential
development on the basis of a lack of compatibility. Again, it just strips away um things that we can do to protect our our own residents and decide how our county should be developed. House Bill
239, Senate Bill 558, standards for storm water systems. House Bill 399, and Senate Bill 208, land use and development regulations. And I could go on, but I just I want to stop there and ask uh the council even at this early
stage if um we I would like us to send uh a letter to the Valuchia delegation um and to the Florida legislature as a whole asking for uh them to oppose Senate Bill 718 and
House Bill 479 in in the House. I think we need to get in on that early and put the uh put the brakes on it. They they need to be uh defeated. Um uh the Senate Bill um
180, we need to get a a companion bill in the House. Um, and while I I will ask our local uh Valuchia delegation if they would step up and do that, um, I think it would be powerful for the whole county council to u come together and
and request that as well. Um, so if nobody makes a motion, I'll pass a gavl in a minute. Yeah, I see several. Uh, David Santiago, you were there. >> Okay. First, do you have questions or comments?
>> Um, question and comment. >> Start with a you have a question. >> There's no motion, so it's really discussion. >> I just had a a question, chair. I may not have a problem with anything that you're requesting, but I I'm going to need to know what I'm supporting and not
supporting. I I heard about 15 bills. Is there any way can you compile that, get it to the uh attorney to research? We need to know what we're we're what we're voting on. >> Well, I got I got this from the attorneys, >> but our county attorneys are sending this to the council members.
>> I I I get it, but there's also a hundred of them on there. Can you compile the ones that you >> Yes. >> Okay. >> But I'm I'm asking for too. Senate Bill 718 and then the old Senate Bill 180. Senate Bill 718 has a House bill. That's
that's the one I think we should direct our attention to uh right now. >> Legal, do you have any input on on those two uh as it stands right now? What we can and cannot do already? What we're what can um we we what can we do?
>> Um I think you can uh relay your request to the legislators on it. It's similar to me than the situation we're in when Senate Bill 180 was pending. Um, it's definitely the has preemptive effect on
local government authority. If council wishes, we'll be back uh before you uh on January 20th. We could bring forward an agenda item that provides more briefing on that and the effect and a
draft letter if you like. I just know uh just from previous conversations, there's certain thing that we can that we can't do. For instance, so some things with water and and and whatnot, we're going to need to know some of that the the meat and potatoes of this rather
than trying to buffalo something through and >> Okay, >> so the subject of water, uh there already is a tremendous amount of state regulation on water. Um this takes it a step further.
Thank you. >> Uh, Councilman Santiago. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. And that's what I was going to suggest. If we can at our next meeting have a more detailed update on the what the pieces of legis I'm not opposed to what you're proposing, Mr. Chair, but I don't know enough yet to
really make a uh the titles sound very scary, right? Um, but I think I'd love for our staff to give us a more in-depth presentation and then make take action. That's only 10 days or 11 days away. Um, and I think session starts next week. It won't move that fast in the beginning. I
can assure you that the first week is not very productive. >> Um, and then the other thing regarding the the companion bill um to the change of 180, it certainly would be great to have a a companion bill. Um, in the event
that a companion bill doesn't come up, there's still opportunities to do amendments to other bills to insert it in there in the future. So I don't want you to think that if something doesn't happen before the bill filing deadline, there's still other avenues. We just have to find a bill that's germanine to the topic and often there are several of
those that are very >> comprom Yeah. >> Could you share it with us? >> I it's not promising. I would certainly say that. Um, and the fact that there are some other bills that are that are of concern, um, and they have companions
on both sides is not promising either. So, um, it that's that's those are the facts. >> Yeah, we need facts. Facts are friendly. >> Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Okay. Uh, Councilman Dempsey. >> Yeah, Chair. I just Yeah, I'm in support
of that, too. I think we're all favoring home rule. We all prefer to make decisions on local issues as opposed to delegating it to the state. But I I'd like to bring along with this how much if we're going to write a a petition to the legislature supporting local, you
know, home rule. Uh I'd also like to have a study on how much of our home rule we're giving away on all these conservation easements. I was going to bring this up at the workshop, but I think it's very important to bring up and we don't want to be hypocritical. We don't want to sit here and complain to the state. You're taking away all our
local control and all our home our home rule. But we've already given away almost 37% of our control of Valuchia County properties as it relates to water. No, all these easements say no commercial water wells. So, we're
talking about preserving all this water for the future through VA forever. But yeah, we're giving away all the rights to it to the state and the feds. We are giving away all our local. So I want staff when they come back with this uh for discussion. I'd like to talk about that as well because if our goal
is to basically give away all our local >> You're going to bring that up at the >> at the workshop. >> Okay, good. >> I'll bring it up at the workshop. But I mean, if we're going to do this, I want to make sure that we can look ourselves in the mirror after we send this letter and say, do we really want local control as we give away
up to 50% of our local control over water and land use? That's all. >> Mr. Chairman, if I got to add, we could also get an update from Florida Association Counties. We're one of 67, so I'm sure others are definitely worried about it and if there's any action being taken from Florida
Association of Counties. >> Yes. And the League of Cities. So, uh, Don, uh, Vice Chair Reinhardt. >> Thank you, Chair. So, do you need a motion in order for staff to bring back more information and some options for us? >> Yes. >> So, I'll make that motion.
>> Okay. >> I'll second it. a motion to bring back information on on uh Senate Bill 180 and Senate Bill 718. Okay. And then uh Okay. Any any questions on that? Any discussion? All
in favor say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? >> And then >> Brower, can you clarify who the second was? >> David Santiago. And then also uh Councilman Robbins.
I had a question for David. David, we've been here, two of us have been here since 2021. Okay. I don't remember in in in prior years the amount of pre um preeemptions that we're seeing from a legislature standpoint.
Are you able to give Have you ever seen this before? Have you ever seen this kind of uh precedence? Um I I don't want to start anything but this is it seems ab abnormal. Um are you
able to comment? I don't want to put you in a position. >> I I'll comment without saying names. Obviously I still know people in in in the process. Right. And the general theme that I'm hearing obviously we're seeing a lot more preeemptions especially in the areas when it comes to development and things like that. Um the
what I am hearing is that you know we have 67 counties and I don't know how many hundreds of cities and they're hearing a lot of instances where people's property rights are being violated uh based on state law. That's what I'm hearing and um what the only
tool that they have at that point is to take it back. That's what I'm hearing and there's a lot of that occurring from what I'm being told throughout the state u violating people's rights and the state is uh state leaders are looking to take a lot of that back because of the behavior.
>> Okay. >> Okay. and and uh Councilman Johansson. >> Yeah. And I want to kind of add to that based on based on my time up up in Tallahassee is that the there is
statewide a slow the growth movement and and you have basically the legislature and the governor welcoming everybody down, right? So those forces kind of uh um oppose each
other. So it's a battle between come on down. We want economic development and people, right? We're inviting people from everywhere to come down here and and we have people who are down here, whether we were born and raised down here or we came down here
later, but we like it the way it is and we don't want it to get any bigger. We don't want Valuchia County to be Orlando. Um uh so we fight hard for that and and and so these these preeemptions
um um meet the needs of the state that are inviting people down. Um I I think as you always hear I do there's a win-win somehow. there is a a compromise or or satisficing if you will sacrifice
and satisfy. Um but that's not done via um sticking people in the eye um with with suing people back and forth and preempting people back and forth. I I think having our candid conversation,
not 5 days before session starts, but when session's out of session, to have candid conversations about where we are, where we want to go, we need to understand as at a as a citizenry
what the state is trying to do. And if you don't like what the state's trying to do, then change who the state is. If you don't want people invited down here right now, you got somebody who's inviting them and and and
I I still think there's a happy medium. I'm not saying vote the governor out. I'm tend to believe what he's doing is the right thing to a certain degree. Um I come from an area of New York that that stopped economic development and
that place is dead now. It's it's like Buffalo was and and where I come from in Rochester. It is. Kodak's gone. Xerox is gone. Basham's gone. All those people are gone. And that place is not a good place to be living. I don't want to I
don't want to drive us to that. Uh so I I think there's I think there's conversations to be had. We all know our our elected representatives to the state. We know Senator Leak. We know Senator
Wright. We know Representative Traymont Partington Barnaby. We know them. We've had conversations with them. Continue to have those conversations instead of just flying the flag and and getting mad at
each other. I think there's a compromise in there. It's all I have. Thank you. >> Uh thank you. Um yeah, I think that's important that we talk to our local people. I met with Mr. Pardington on Saturday and shared the same concerns
um with him and I think that's important to do that. I I think I misunderstood you that you said we should talk about this after the session, not 5 days before. In general,
issues that we know are going to be issues and and we knew based on SP 180 last year and and we did that with SP 180. >> Um >> Okay. Not that we knew that 718 was
coming up. >> No, we didn't. >> But but you can expect that this session and next session there will be things coming up. We need to work harder. Work maybe possibly with our lobbyists. Keep your ear to the ground. Find out what's
happening. Go to the fact meetings. Find out what other counties are doing. I I know I know that that these representatives and senators don't wake up during committee weeks and decide to
do this. So, we have to continue to work hard and you know, I'm a military guy. We got to check our intel out and find out what's going on during the year so we can judge and adapt. and and we also need to
think about what we say in public and how it affects our legislature. Uh because if if we stick our foot in our mouth, and I'm very very very capable of doing that, uh
the reaction is he said this, I'm going to take care of that with a preeemption. and and I I I personally believe that the handful of of lawsuits got them got them on edge and started
looking at how they can preempt to prevent other uh lawsuits. So, uh something to think about. >> Thank you. Uh, Mike Dyer, I don't uh I don't think this requires adding it to a next agenda, but could could you write
have your staff write a letter or or just a memo to the council on CRAAS of what options are for ending them? I I know that many of them are terming out,
you know, uh in what 2035, but they can also be terminated. Um if you if you would just let us know that. No, you don't have to do it tomorrow. Just uh >> um since it's come up and it comes up repeatedly.
>> No, happy to do that. And I know John Booker's already started the PowerPoint presentation on the legislation. He's already up to slide 12. >> Okay. Yeah. And I I wanted to thank you. You know, I do hear in in the public that we don't do anything with all these
bills that come up. You've been letting us know this for weeks and weeks. And you did that last session. We knew about 718 or 180 when it first reared its ugly head and warned us that this could be really bad. And it and then it got
worse. Um, so I I appreciate that the staff does that. Um, and um, just keep doing it. We we need to know what's what's happening. Lastly,
July 4th of this year will be our 250th anniversary. And I'm not sure that the county has anything planned or local cities, but I would like to Oh, good. Here comes movement. um if there's something planned and and if not, how can we work with the cities to uh to
celebrate our 250th birthday? >> Yes, it was the direction of this council last year to um work with the city of Dairy to co-sponsor an event and drone show. So, it will be in addition to the fireworks show, but a drone show as well. So we've um Carmen is working
on that and we have an a a a framework in place as to what will be provided and how it will be marketed >> on the 4th. >> Yes, sir. >> On that date. Okay. Thank you for the update. >> All right. Um that's all that I have. It's 12:06. So we will adjourn for lunch
and then come back for the workshop. >> We're doing a uh and we're doing a picture. >> We're not doing a picture. We're we're missing somebody. And I try >> I would say that that please keep Troy's family in your in your prayers.
>> And so yeah, the the afternoon meeting if we break at 12 now. Do you need any more time downstairs or is it ready to go? >> We need about 20 minutes to transition. So >> okay, why don't we say 1:00? >> I think that'd work. At 1:00, we will
have the workshop uh on the first floor for those of you that want to come. Part: 2
continue the meeting with item seven, council workshop. Uh we're going to start with goals. I'm going to turn it over to Herb and you're gonna walk us through this. >> All right. Thank you. Well, good afternoon. Thank you for the opportunity again and uh thank you for having a
slightly different format. Hope to have just kind of a general conversation with you here with ease and flow. Uh but one of the things in the morning mentioned several of you said that you had additional items you want to talk about. I got the one from Councilman Santiago about West Valuchia Hospital authority.
Any others you'd like to add? We'll put them on the list. Not going to discuss them yet. I just want to get them on the screen. >> Can we see the list again? >> Yeah. Uh c can you pull up the regular PowerPoint now and go to uh the potential goal slide?
[clears throat] >> There you go. >> Yeah. Here here the goal for this. So anything you'd like to add to this? We'll add West Faluchia Hospital Authority. Anything else? I want to put on there discussions regarding affordable housing.
>> Okay. Affordable housing. Can you add it? >> Sorry, she can't hear me. Can you add affordable housing to that list? >> Uhhuh. >> Just put it up front. We We'll catch it there. Anything else? >> Efficiency.
Uh yeah, I was gonna go to the core services. >> Yes, sir. >> Cultural council funding. Okay. Can you hear that? >> Okay.
and West Valuchia Hospital Authority. >> Okay. >> And obviously we can add stuff if y'all come up later. It's not a one chance. Uh I'd like to go to the slide soon as you can about changes. Very first one.
Very slide two or three I think. >> Two or three. No, no, back. Go, go to the start. Just go back to the start. Be go back to the start. >> Okay. >> All right. There you go. All right. One of the things when I was able to talk to
you, I asked you about changes that might be coming your way. This is your list here that we have. Uh, and I' I'd like to sort of marry one of these on here with one of your goals, which is about looking at core services.
uh because uh the property tax reform could have a fairly significant impact. My first question of you is obviously we don't know what the legislaturator is going to do. We don't know what they'll produce. We don't know what the governor accept. We don't know what the Supreme Court might accept this ballot language.
We don't know what the voters would do. We don't know a whole lot of we don't know. But do you think this is a reasonable likelihood that you might be faced with this? And by that I don't mean 50% even. It could be 25%. Uh, so I'd just like to have a quick discussion about that. Do you think this is a real
issue that you might be having to deal with from a budgetary perspective in a year or two years? >> You mean the elimination of property taxes? >> Yes sir. Homestead property. >> Okay. And I want to just remind everybody at the uh at Michael's suggestion uh you got to key your mic when you want to speak. I think
everybody knows that. But >> because this is being recorded, >> um, >> if I can just get your perspectives on that first. >> I'll start with it. I think that I think the governor wants it. He's uh a lame duck governor, so I don't know
if he'll get everything he wants like he like he usually does, but he's he wants it. Um we see a lot of bills in the legislature. Um, I hear John Booker can probably shed a lot more light on this, but I hear reports from Tallahassee that he's
pretty adamant that he wants it and that we will have to fend for ourselves. Local counties, small uh, fiscally restrained counties might get some help from the state. Um, but we there's what,
five or six bills already filed that deal with this in one way or another. So, I think we'll see something. I have no idea what the final outcome will be. >> Sure. Okay. Councilman, >> thank you. I think we'll see something on certainly on the uh as a reference on
the ballot. >> Mhm. >> Um but I don't think it'll be anything that we'll be dealing with for probably a few years though fiscally um effect fiscal effects I should say. >> Okay. >> Um that's just because there's too many unknowns still. So, it's going to be do
Flidians want to eliminate property taxes? It's going to probably be fairly vague and it goes back to the Tallahassee if it passes and then they figure out options. >> Okay. >> So, if it passes, which I agree with the chairman, probably have a huge vote to pass. Um, but I think we're still uh
years out before the effects of it. Oh, >> okay. >> Because being impractical, there's just too much too many wheels have to turn >> for implementation of anything. So, uh uh I think whatever fiscal decisions we make, we should just make them here uh
for the next budget and policy changes and priority changes. Let's just just make them because they're good or not good >> and then let the chips fall where they may based on the referendum and what the legislature says. >> Okay. All right. Just hear from the rest of you how you think about that.
>> I I don't disagree with any of that. I I I think that that as as the legislature moves forward that whatever so it so it goes on the referendum, it gets voted and and and then they'll come
up with an execution plan and I can't imagine it would take any less than 3 to 5 years to to establish it. So we're talking about what six six years down the road. We can't We can't sit here and go for six years.
>> Okay. >> We'll we'll we'll be even worse shape than than uh than if they just rip the bandage off. >> So, >> again, same thing, but I think it's going to be a few years from now that we see the impacts of it. But I agree that
we can make the decisions now, even if they did nothing and said, you know what, this is a bad idea. We're not going to go that direction. We become more fiscally responsible because we're tightening the belts. Um, so I think it's a good thing that we discuss that now. I think it has to be part of that goal setting. Um, only, you know, a lot
can change in Tallahassee in one day and then a lot can stall in Tallahassee. But I know from just a few weeks ago from one of our local legislators that uh, in just a a one-on-one conversation that any bill that he's seen thus far, uh,
he's not he doesn't see it having legs. But look what happened, you know, just in a couple weeks, we have, you know, no activity on Senate Bill 180 on a comparison bill, you know. So, and I agree with what what Mr. Santiago said
before in the meeting that, you know, that was good information to have, uh, kind of reading between the lines, if you will, uh, knowing what you've experienced in the past and if something doesn't have a comparison bill, that doesn't look good for that bill. if
something has a comparison bill like taking away preempt or more preeemption that could be bad as well. Um, so I appreciate that perspective. So that's something also we have to continue to pay attention to as things are assigned to committee because I'm sure there are little telltales in committee that could
happen that uh we should be aware of that, you know, whether or not this will go forward or not. But I I do either way I think by by addressing this now we're ahead of the ball game. >> Um I I think it's important. Okay, Councilman Robbins. >> Good. Okay, >> Councilman D. Okay. Okay. So, the
consensus is something's going to be on the ballot. It may be three, four, five years before fiscally it really starts to impact you. Would that >> That's our best guess. >> Best guess. Yeah. It's all we're guessing. >> Okay. All right. Uh, we asked that
because I did a workshop with your staff and we went through an exercise with the worst case scenario if this occurred. And I'll ask Brian to share those numbers with you just quickly. Uh, and we did that in the context of what are the core services that you really want
to should be dealing with. And you know, this was only a four-hour conversation. We didn't get any great depth on it. But one of the key things was as we staffed, we looked at every department and even with those departments that you call public safety that you know you want to
protect the most, there were still things that could be moved and changed in there, you know. Uh so part of my my question to you is is to do you want to really move ahead and have your staff start thinking about these things from a contingency
perspective? Not that you're ready to pull any triggers necessarily, although you may find things you want to go ahead and do. Uh, but what we do think about is that's a fairly exhaustive and intense exercise. There's a lot of work because you got to look at every department, not at department level, but
down to the program than the details and what needs to what can be changed, what needs to stay the same, what can be eliminated. Uh Ron, why don't you just quickly show them the big numbers that it would it would be under the worst case scenario.
>> Okay. Well, in front of a in front of you, I've placed a a a sixpage set of documents uh that is uh related to
uh the major taxing funds that we have and the format is the same on each one of these uh sets of documents. It it goes through a calculation of the estimated impact of the loss of homestead property taxes. The first page that you're looking at is the general fund and the law enforcement
fund. Of note, uh I've combined these two together for this analysis because if we were to no longer have homestead property tax revenues for the law enforcement fund, all of the bills that we're seeing so
far have held law enforcement harmless. And the way that they do that is officially that the budget for the sheriff cannot be any lower than it was for fiscal year 26 or 27, whichever is higher. Uh HJR201,
which is the one that uh eliminates homestead property taxes, um goes into effect January 1st, 2027. I know that council, you just discussed how you might not uh think that this applies for three, four,
five years uh and maybe HJ2R1 is is no longer going to move forward and maybe it's going to be changed. And hopefully that is the case that we have more time to adjust. But if if that were the case, uh one of the things that we're faced
with in the law enforcement fund and with the sheriff uh sheriff's department is his budget would not be any lower than fiscal year 26 or 27 in 28. They're contemplating that 28 is the year that this gets that this gets imp uh implemented.
So, we've looked at uh combining these two for analysis purposes because we are capped at 2 mills for the law enforcement millage. And if the sheriff's budget by law can be no lower than it was in 26 or 27 in order to fund
that type of budget, you could no longer do it with the two mills that is that is allowed by the law enforcement mill. So, you would be looking at funding the sheriff's budget in the in the general fund again. So, we've just combined them back together for the purposes of this analysis.
Looking at uh the details from the property phraser uh as far as the properties that are in the county and the different taxing districts, each taxing fund will have a different percentage impact. The unincorporated area has a much higher percentage of homestead properties than the
incorporated areas do. So the first page is for the countywide 37.5% of our property tax revenue is from homestead properties. It's an estimate of 114 million of
revenue lost. Although if we no longer levy those taxes, we would no longer be paying CRAAS. So the impact is $110 million. I'm going to skip ahead to try to keep it at a higher level. What are we what
are we doing with our general revenues which most of which are property taxes? You got three uh under under the second yellow line, you got three uh main categories. Mandated payments essentially public safety and core
administrative services. Those three areas combined are $283 million. Of the $342 million of general revenues we get, most of which are property taxes. That's 83% of our funding in these general revenues goes
towards this purpose. All remaining services are $58 million a year. I'll go back to the very first uh number that I said about the general fund. We're looking at a potential revenue loss of $ 110 million a year.
Even if you were to somehow find a way to eliminate all remaining services, which is a comprehensive list of things, uh the spending on those, you would only be about halfway there. So, if uh if you did not address this
from the revenue side of of of the equation and you continued to look for expenditure reductions, you would have to find the very last number on this page, $51 million within mandated payments, public safety, and core
administrative services. The mandated payments are just that. A large portion of that is the sheriff's budget which would legally not allowed to decrease. Uh another portion of it would be the uh property appraiser and the tax collector
which are approved by the state and once the state approves those budgets they're set absent some further action by the state via an appeal or something like that. But for all intents and purposes they're set. So those mandated payments,
most of them are are just that they're they're not going to go away. So you have you would have to look at those other lines if you're not looking at revenue. So here's the mathematical reality of this. If you're not going to look at public safety and you're not
going to look at mandated payments and you have to have a core administration, you've got $51 million to find and and no way to find it on the expense side of the equation. So, you're looking at an additional revenue source. And the most
logical of those revenue sources would be uh for that 51 million. I'm not even talking about the fact that the other 58 million still needs to be addressed. There's a lot of important services in that $58 million. All of our funding for parks and veteran services and the a
center. Uh all of our beach related uh uh programs, the subsidy that we that we provide to the beach, $17 million a year. There's a lot in this. So, it's not even realistic to say that we could cut $58 million in the all remaining
services. So, mathematically, you're faced with a lot of services that I think you'll be hardressed to have reductions to. So, you're going to have to tackle it on the revenue side of things. And let's remember what HJ R201
does. It exempts homestead properties. Doesn't exempt property taxes in general. So what is left? What is left is businesses uh resident uh non-h homestead residentials which includes mostly
rental properties and uh investment properties. So that is the gist of this spreadsheet. There are five more of these that go fund by fund. We're going to have impacts in every single fund. The only
other one that I'll cover is the municipal service district unless council wants me to to go into more depth or or or I feel we feel the need to to do that on the municipal service district which is page 306 of the attachment that you have.
I'll spend a little bit more time on general revenues because it's a little more important on this fund. Property taxes are only 52% of our general revenues in this fund. And the general revenues are those revenues that we can spend freely on on various services.
They're not generated directly by that service. They're not restricted to that service. They're the general revenues. Utility taxes are 27% of those general revenues. They make up a big chunk of
this fund. If we were to uh lose our homestead properties uh in this fund, it would be a $10 million reduction, you can see the same set of services that I've listed there. If there were any alteration to the utility
tax, we'd also be facing the same set of decisions to make. Um with that, I think I'll leave it there. >> All right. >> Absent any questions. >> Yes, sir. Please. >> Yeah. I just want to chime in. I mean that the the the the resolution I think
that you're referencing. Um it doesn't take into account the the public statements. That's why I I I don't think that's what we wind up dealing with. It doesn't take the public statements from the governor's office and others in leadership that clearly state that they have to find a way to make up for loss
revenues for the local government, whether it's a sales tax increase and some other fees. So there'll be other revenue options, but we don't know, right? I really hope so. >> Yeah, we don't know what we don't know.
And for me, I I I think this is great to know what the impacts would be. So, thank you for that. But I don't think we should go down this rabbit hole with the assumption of responding to the legislature and what may happen because
we don't know, right? Um, go back to my opening statement, Mr. Sure. When I said I I I'd like to have the conversation that was opened, you know, a few months ago to talk about I think like you mentioned today, what are core services that we should look at and should continue to move forward and then
respond to the legislature when >> when they do get to the meat. >> Well, and that's really the key strategic question I'm asking. Obviously, this thing is hanging out there, >> but do you want to really engage in a substantive analysis the core services this county is providing?
>> Uh, and and and partially, you know, how and to what degree do you want to be involved in that versus staff doing that and and bringing you the stuff? And if you want to be involved, it is a lot of work, a lot of meetings to be honest about it. But yeah, let me go ahead. So
to further the discussion, I I think that that the state uh with with the governor and the legislators right now are trying to help
some counties trim fat >> and there's some out there. So I go back to Mr. Santiago's comment uh that that we concentrate on our what are our core
services uh you look at the all remaining services on any one of these uh uh documents that Ryan put out and and if if it happens the way you know cut
cut all homestead taxes and and uh whatever's left is what you get to spend. I I I can find ways to make up that money. It's not going to be pretty, but but we have things that we want to do
for our community. They're they're almost needs, but they're still wants. Um and the question is do we want to spend that money for those wants now or do we look at our core services and look at probably all those
remaining services and and and say let's get leaner which means programs get cut if in fact that's what we want to do. The other option is what we do right now is is what we want. We're we're not
overspending. we're spending where we want to spend and and if the state uh uh says we're overspending, then then let the voting public decide, >> right? Because if if you cut, let's say,
uh um okay, we can't afford vot, we can't afford the general fund subsidy of votran, so we get rid of it, send the buses away. Either people learn to live with that or they come to us and complain that there's no buses and we
say, "Well, we're sorry. This this this tax uh referendum you voted for that that's the result and it'll get it'll get turned over." It's going to take a long time. That that's why I don't think it'll ever get to that. I think people
will will will start to get keen on what they won't be getting that they want borderline think they need and and uh come to the conclusion that this isn't the best interest of of them. I just met somebody in the hallway on the way down
here and and that was she goes, "What what are we going to do about all these services?" I said, "Well, we'll see." So, um I I I think for for this this particular session and I do believe
follow-on sessions as as we talked about that we and I think council needs to be involved because it's it's taking things away if we want what are our core services and and at to what extent we
want to fund them uh especially as they apply I think as they apply to any revenue source but especially as they apply to the uh general fund and uh the the property tax. Um and and then we
work with our uh our state delegation to make sure that the that the the makeup the sales tax or whatever it takes is is going to be sufficient. Um our county doesn't have it half as bad as a lot of
the more rural counties. They can barely afford what they're doing now. So, um I I say we concentrate on the on the core and get down in the nitty-gritty and spend some time with you throughout the year to so your position. Yeah. Let's do it. And the council needs to be involved in
>> and and and have it and have it have it reflect in next year's budget and and that will satisfy my frustration of setting a budget and then changing it down the line. Okay. So, uh, le let's
set a budget with some with some analysis and, uh, work and then go from there. >> Okay. >> Sure. >> You kind of scared me on the transportation thing just a little, but you know what? You're right. Um, but also being involved, absolutely, we need to, but um, when we're trying to sit
here today and define what core responsibilities are, I think many of us agree on a lot of them, but there's some of us that disagree on some, too. So, and we're all conservatives, but you know, the way I view a corresponsibility
may be a little different from what Mr. Robbins does or Mr. Santiago or whatever. And I respect that and but I also at the same time get their point of view, but I think one of your biggest challenges is going to come up with a definition of what we think is core. >> Well, and I will just share with you,
I've worked a couple of counties going through this process. It took a full budget season and probably 10 to 20 workshops with council. There's a lot to discuss in here. I mean, you have your perspective. It's not I just can't say it's just not simple. It It's well worth
it and it makes a huge difference in the end. Uh but it's a lot of effort. >> It's like defining affordable housing. Yeah. Define affordable housing. Define core responsibilities. I mean, everybody's got a different view. Jacob, >> do do you have uh you had just mentioned
that uh you did this in another area. >> Do you have a go by to that to help us narrow this stuff down where we don't have to have possibly them 1020 meetings or hey this is what they looked at we can does this make sense? I have a lot of stuff but still you know there there's seven of you and there's seven
different perspectives and uh and it you know you you got to talk about every department you have at a tremendous level of detail program to to get it. So I I wouldn't want to promise, you know, this is not a 5 hour exercise. This is just substantive.
>> I'm going I'm going to use this long talk and then you'll know which one of us I just had a question for David because he just said something that would be really good news if I understood you correctly. You're getting information that Tallahassee says they would give us ideas for funding and not
just say you're on your own. >> Um, no. Partially yes and no. not ideas for funding, but what other funding mechanisms that would that they want to support that would be available that they would accept to be available to us. >> Um they know that they just can't strip
away this these numbers from us completely. They there's there no they're not going to do that. >> Um now what they give us as an option whether it's a increase in sales tax and we get a portion of that whatever I don't know. So, they're going to make us raise taxes. [laughter] May
>> maybe I don't know. But, um, in the interest of uh giving a maybe a little direction, if I can give us down this path, um, you know, I look at the only area I'm looking all remaining services. That's really the only choices we have. Everything else is is mandated according
to what Ryan said. Um, you know, I've I've been I started at the bottom of this list. Um, the Growth Management Commission. I've been vocal for three years in a row saying, "Why do we even have this? Let's get rid of it." Um, that's $241,000. I know we're not in
budget season yet, but we don't need that. There's no there's no uh statutory obligation for that that I'm aware of. >> It's right here. >> Oh, the front page. >> 241,000. Right. um you know and I don't know the ins and outs of every one of
these um uh items or or I should say departments but within just listening to the titles I don't know what within them is mandatory I'm sure there's some health services or
things like that that we get dollars from federal or state that we have to do so I would appreciate whatever the next steps are whenever it is is to give us Mhm. >> within these categories. >> Yeah. >> What's doable for us and what's not?
>> And and and David, we talked about this a few meet about a year year and a half ago when it came to to some of this redundancy and bureaucracy and red tape that that costs us real real money. But going through our system, soup to nuts,
everything, anything that's above state and federal law that we do locally, right, >> is on the table. >> Is on the table. And that rolls over into positions that rolls over into all this extra time and stuff and and compound huge throughout the you know so
I think it's good starting >> and councilman by by setting forth a few principles like that that really does speed up the process because you may say okay this fits there and y'all have indicated you're really willing to but just look at it and say no >> but al also her too this this is about
the third time we've gone over in my tenure here on the council okay it's never come to fruition There's coming to a point right here where we got to you know what or get off the pot. >> Well, I think we need to do Danny in that case is set timelines. >> It's on us to set timelines. We have a
very capable staff >> and if we say this is what we want by a certain date, then I expect them to deliver. If they can't, then they'll tell us. >> Bring back a menu, you know, kind of thing. >> The timelines is what's key. That's the accountability fact for all of us.
>> Jake. Oh, sorry. Oh. Um and and Mr. Chair and I'll stop with this one for now. Um I think absent whatever the legislaturator is doing, this is a good exercise that we should be doing anyway. >> So and then wherever the chips fall, I think Danny encompassed it well.
>> If it's not a mandatory thing by federal or state requirement, it should be on the table for discussion. >> Okay. >> And can we can we say not not just property tax? I mean, can we expand that? that federal fund. I don't care.
John brings it up all the time. I don't I don't want those federal funds. I don't want to do that. Um maybe we look at things that are fedally funded and decide whether we want >> Well, you want to do it or not. >> You mean the carrot that they dangle?
>> Okay. Well, I I'll just say I hear directions so we can move another topic. Direction is you want to move forward with this. you want to do it for fis upcoming fiscal budget. Uh and you've given at least three principles here. Uh everything's on the table. Uh those
things there's no duplication. If it's been done by somebody else, it's on the table for sure. And and let's look at even the use of federal dollars. Don't limit yourself simply to general fund. Uh so it's a really thoroughgoing look at at your funding sources and your operations.
>> So when when do you start punching your numbers again for the year? prepping >> the budget starts in I thought you were pointing at me. >> I mean [laughter] they're already doing it. >> They're already doing it. Good. Thank you for that. So, you know, again, for
timelines, Danny, I I I'm looking and I think maybe staff could tell us not, but we have to have that that information in my opinion and no later than March that information to make decisions to give them guidance, >> okay, >> on what we do want to keep or not keep.
>> Okay. So, in other words, um, tell us what are the mandatory things within those buckets, >> right? And where how much money is being spent in those and then we make decisions. >> Let me weigh in a little on that. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. >> That might not be quite >> I think you'd be looking a little
farther into the year on that because, you know, some of it's quantifying what we already have and then and then pulling back is based on what you're saying. But I wanted to throw the purpose of why we wanted to talk a little bit about the the uh what's happened in Tallahassee is is how is so
how we how do we strategize knowing that something's likely going to happen. We don't know to what extent. So the question you know number one I would like just to cover us a little bit uh and we have made some inquiries with the
delegation. And I'd like the permission from you all to go to the delegation and show the kind of the Valuchia County story over the last 5 years because we have driven down our millage rate over that period of time. Our story basically
is one that you know uh I'm not arguing whether good, bad or ugly, but we went through amendment 10. We had to change the format of this government and we still were able to drive down the millillage doing that. We worked with the constitutionals. We got a separate
mill for law enforcement. So, we've done a lot of things that I think are were very prudent and been effective. And I want the people to know that and and I do know that we're not usually mentioned as a target county because of that hard
work we've done leading up to that. But I also don't think we should be collateral damage uh that comes out of something because there's a few counties in the in the state that maybe haven't gotten that message. You've given it that message. You guys have already led us a lot in that direction. And I think
you should, you know, be proud of that and and take that forward, but I want you to know we're already, you know, you can ask the department heads that are in here. uh you know uh there every budget season there's a lot of tears and a lot
of uh a lot of cutting and a lot of a lot of things happen. So uh we've always been fiscally conservative and we'll continue and we've made a lot of uh uh movement area as I used to say to uh Jim Cameron over there we we're going we
sharpen the pencil every year. So, uh, if if I could have that permission from you guys, I'd like to be able to tell that story and and maybe the effect a little bit. We've developed a or developing
uh, you kind of a one or two page thing we could give to them to show that and maybe uh, again uh, maybe what some of the effect would be if if if they went too far. Okay. >> If I if I still have the spot because he was responding to me. I think that's a
great idea, George. in my my opinion and I think you're right. We're not one of the bad actors. We're probably a model I would say amongst our 67 uh partners. Um and I I would be okay with going to sell our story because I got a phone call uh
I don't know when they first started talking about this property tax thing from somebody in Tallahassee that said they were they were tasked with looking across the state and they said, "Wow, Valuchia's done it right." That was the comment that was said to me. Valuchia is not a bad actor. Um, so yes, I think we
should sell our story. Um, I think I I I I personally wanted to kind of separate the two because for this particular what I just kind of gave direction to well suggestion I should say um was that we're often talking about core we keep talking about core uh uh priorities and
let's just put that to bed. That's why I said you know let's discuss that for future. >> Yeah. And I think we're there on that. And I guess the other part that I wanted to bring up and again why we laid that out ahead of time is again I think we can work on with the core and start
setting a direction. Uh but this is a big ship and it ain't easy to turn it on a dime changes that we would want to make. You talk about Tallahassee. Well, there might be things in here that we decide we want to do. Do you want to cut them out immediately or do you want to phase them out? And you got to have time to to
do that. So, it's not a matter of just tomorrow, boom, we're not funding that anymore. Maybe we give uh you know, because these are I will tell you and you look at this list, there's not a lot of things in there that you know, every everybody
uh we are not the federal government. We're at the front lines of a lot of things and we're out there with the people every day and that money goes to those things. So I I want I'm very confident that you know uh that we we're
conservative for my entire career here and certainly over the last five years. So we need time to steer that ship. And then the other thing I just would consider because I was here when we had other reforms. Um again we were almost
punished for being out ahead. So, you know, we can make the decision on where we want to go, but when you really want to pull the trigger, depending on what the legislation could read, if they're [clears throat] going to put a cap, per se, on, you know, well, you can't spend
any more than last year, and I've artificially driven down last year. I may have hurt us in inadvertently by doing that. And I just want to make sure that again, we're we're we're taking this thing, but there's a time, you know, when you would want to do that. maybe a time when you might want to wait
till you actually have to uh just the same as we as we go in that direction and that would give us time again to phase some of these things out if if that's what's needed which is a little bit more humane in in some of these areas and I and I because I will say you look at some of these things that are even remaining or mandated however you
want to look at what level I mean you mentioned whatever is federally uh mandated but there are other things that we'll we will have to look at you take like the beach services, you know, I mean, do you want to, you know,
you know, we try to lifeguard 40 miles of beach, you know, do we do we change the model and do we say we're going to lifeguard in front of only in front of parks? Are we going to do, you know, uh, other things that we do? Do we want to change the model of how we do it?
Because that's going to take that and that can't be done overnight. >> Well, that's just a great example of all the things you need to think through. last year. >> That's, you know, I didn't think of it like that, George, when you talked about, you know, you you got to wait to see what the state's going to do when you talk about if you've already trimmed
back for this year and then all of a sudden they said you can't go any higher and yet you've done more damage than good. So, that was a good perspective to bring in. You know, looking back um the last 10 years, I mean, worked for the county for 30 years prior to this and the last 10 years of my career was
around that budget. And when we first started that process, everybody got their wish list and said, "Okay, pick your wish list. This is what you want." Everybody got excited. By the end of year 10, when we got that, we weren't so excited because we knew 85% of that was going to get cut. So, I think that the
mentality of our staff right now already knows that, you know, based on, you know, they've been here for a long time as much as me, so they see that. Um, so, but I appreciate the perspective on that. I do agree that we need to uh give our story. We're seeing so much of it like uh we discussed the tourist
development issue and that TDT tax that keeps coming up every year and the possible cuts from the state um because of what's happening in other counties and I won't name them. We all know who they are. Uh we're not the same. So, and I know Herb you're getting to that and I I won't >> sure
>> I won't go I know it was on there but we wanted to see what's going to happen first because we we wanted to at least lobby for the fact to say hey could we have a carve out >> goals >> does Valuchia County need to be we're already doing it right so why should we be penalized so I think you know giving
the history of Valuchia County all aspects of our of our taxing u needs to be done so we can at least have our voices heard with that thank you Okay, >> George, I think you have the direction to tell the story document and we have a direct Sorry, >> just one thing I want to circle back on
from uh earlier in the year that I don't want to forget about is uh looking forward with that roads program. I know Suzanne and George and Ben and every Lori and and and um we've started adding some funds and adding some projects to that. I don't want to let off the gas. I
know it's just one more issue, but it's a big issue that that we can't um that we can't push aside where it comes into this equation. We'll have to we'll have to figure that out. Uh and then to, you know, looking at those little fees and taxes, just like I brought up the
utility tax, the uh utility commission, largest utility hike in Florida's history, but how can we save other monies here on this end? I know Ryan and George put together something something good. So hopefully we can look at that and uh keep some money in some pockets.
So >> I just wanted to close out try to close out. I know George you said March was not good. Um >> I think when can we have the discussion the discussion on what our core responsibilities are? >> I think you the way to do it we we used
to do something called mini work many mini budget workshops. Uh I think some of you might have been here. Uh when you first got on, we did them. Uh we kind of got away uh from them. I think there was maybe a little
bit of interest that uh waned, but from what I'm seeing, I think we ought to start going through these services, maybe each meeting, pick a couple of them and uh and work our way towards uh April and May when that things really start
getting solidified more into May. And uh and I think that might be, you know, where you could >> uh you know, bring us to a point. And I will say when we've done them in the past, we tend to then the budget process at
the end because you've worked on it through the year. >> It's easier. >> It's a lot easier when you get to uh uh September. council. >> If if we do that, I caution you to pay attention. I don't want to go through a whole year
of Ryan telling me what each department's going to budget for and go, "Do I have consensus here?" Yeah, we're good. All right. Ajourned. And then we get to the budget and we approve it and and then we get to
some item that's on the consent. We pull it and we hatchet it all the hell because we don't want to spend money on that after, by the way, we've already sent out the bill for the taxes. I want to tax people for what we need it for,
not for what we think we need it for because we didn't pay attention during the year. So, if we're going to put staff through all these massinations every twice a month and we get briefed on what they want to do, they're asking
us for tacid approval to proceed with that unless something else comes up. I mean, things change. I get that. But we have to we can't just take the brief and go, Ryan, great job. Ben, good job. Mike, good job. Um, we got to pay attention.
Um, the these budget briefs are extremely important if they're going to do the detailed work. The tough decisions like we made on on uh cultural arts, what we made on uh votran and a couple places. Um, those are the kind of
discussions that need to be had during these budget discussions when they're offered up. And and if you got a good idea, we need to start thinking about it now so when they come up, well, if you know it now, give it to George now so he can think about it and figure out how to
put it in the brief instead of uh instead of waiting the last minute. La last minute budgeting is is awful on staff and it's awful on the on the public and if we can avoid it, I I think that's an important piece. Thanks. The
only addition I would make to what Georgia says, I would recommend y'all as a council adopt some general principles that that guide that in the sense of we don't want any duplication. You know, give staff some guidance about we're willing to take these things off the table here some criteria because that
will help them because it's not just a budget workshop and numbers. It's really are these how core these services to us, you know. So, okay. So, we have direction on that. Move forward, Mr. Chairman. Sorry. Well, I'm not sure I have direction on it. We'll let's find
out. All right. The what when we got in here, one of the members of the public um asked me, "What is a core government? What do you even mean by that?" I know what I mean. For me, it's an essential service that government is is required
to provide. Um and you can say or should provide. Um, I was hoping that we would go through at least broad categories and see where we all agree what a core government responsibility
is instead of waiting till each department comes up and we discuss their budget or that's how y'all want to do it. That that's fine. I think it would help us to all know what what we're thinking um what a core responsibility
is. Just real quickly, I I've got five categories, each with things in it. Number one is public safety and protection. Number two is infrastructure. A lot of things there. Number three is environmental management, storm water parks, coastal
things like that. Number four, public services. Um permitting airport, ocean center, uh more things. And number five, essential support services for one through four. all of these all the staff people that are required to do the
things that we asked them to do. Um I don't know if there's if anybody has any more and if nobody really wants to kind of flesh that out. What are the things in those categories that we think are are core? We've got people sitting over here from the arts community that
>> are hoping that we will make that a core responsibility. >> Is it? I don't know. Go ahead. >> I I think Mr. Sure. You know, I I was listening to your list carefully and I think you know, if we look at the all remaining services section, right?
>> I think most of those with the exception of vote train, I don't think you said anything regarding transportation. Did I miss that? >> It's in there. Public services. >> Oh, okay. So, they're kind of sort of outlined there, right? Um, for the most part what you described, I think what we
need to what I think George right I like reason I like George's suggestion now is what within those >> is staff providing right and what's mandatory so we can take eliminate those and what's optional going to about what Danny said >> and then we decide do we want to
continue the optional stuff I don't I don't know those details and I think that I think the the monthly uh updates per section are going to be helpful to me at least and then say, "Yeah, I like that or and I don't like that." But I think you described almost everything there. There's a portion of essential
services within all of those that we should provide. >> Mr. Chairman, in the staff workshop, we took your your list there. We we didn't deal with administrative stuff, but those top four and then we had discussions about each of those and and even down within that there was
differences about, well, some programs here are really core, others are not. So, it was it was a good solid discussion. that took they were very serious about it. But it it it just revealed to me that you can take any one of these and within there there are things you have choices about that you
may not want to do >> at the big level is that >> uh let's do that. We want to do it monthly, quarterly, whatever. We just we just have to absolutely >> probably twice a month. And what I would suggest >> every meeting >> we've kind of started that work by the
way he has like you said the way he's got this laid out there's probably not a lot of reason >> to spend a lot of time on those mandated areas that we've got. I'm not saying that there might be some piece or portion of it that we we could look at
but and we will but uh I think we're it's the remaining services area going through those that's where we're talking and and then that's the area that we we'll have to possibly make some decisions. I mean there are things like
you know you mentioned the roads uh we certainly it's very important but we do fund it from different ways. So maybe we can't do the general fund subsidy in future years if if that's the uh direction you guys want to go, but
you're still going to have gas tax and you still have impact fees. So it's not, you know, so it's laid out kind of in that way that I think we put our effort there in the all remaining services area. Otherwise, you know, we're probably already a couple months behind
if if we try to do everything we do. So we we'll focus in on that and then you essentially are leaving the core again there'll be areas and parts of that because some of those core services support the other things and if the other things get less you
know then then that'll obviously you know uh there'll be less of those other functions in there. So in some of the administration area you know they're they're sized based on what they're supporting. if they're supporting a smaller organization, then there
obviously won't be as many of it. And again, if I have time to do that, >> we do it with attrition. We do it with other things. We don't do it with, >> you know, massive cuts. And and again, I unfortunately have been through this before. And uh so we do have some
experience in you know how you steer it and and and how you uh go and if we and again that's why I wanted that backdrop is we're thinking because you know whether it's the people can't afford it or the state mandates it one or the other we know we've got to be
conservative. So I think that's >> George is there anything that the VGMC is going to be doing for the rest of the year that's detrimental to keep it running for the rest of the year? I'm trying to save 240,000. >> Well, that's a that's something >> tenant being man advisory board.
>> Yeah. Well, I think might have to have some >> who's on it >> help with that one, but that's actually in the charter >> that you have, >> but we can unfund it. >> You can it the purpose it serves of course now is is it's intergovernmental conflict. you know, if there's uh you're
working together with uh the cities and the county, that's where it could be. >> I that's what I was sold before. I never liked it from the beginning, by the way. You know, that made very clear >> the remedy on that would be to, you know, which you can put something on the
charter as a council. >> You could eliminate BGMC. >> That's true. as a proposed council. >> But but the charter the charter correct me if I'm wrong. The charter doesn't dictate a dollar amount. >> It does not. >> So we can unfund it.
>> Who >> I know I'm >> Who is who is on the commission? Is it current staff members or additional staff members? >> Representatives of each city in the county as representatives. >> If we're going to be serious about cutting
>> they're getting paid. Okay. >> No, I think it's just dispenses. Sorry. All right, y'all have a lot of other items we'd like to get through here. That's an important one. It's not going to get lost. So, okay. >> It's on the list. But just to clarify though, just so you know, and we could follow up, but the way that the charter
reads now, >> uh, the VGMC itself must adopt an annual budget by twothirds vote, >> $1. >> The council may amend that budget upon a twothird vote. All right.
>> So, let's just say this. I plan to bring it up at our next council meeting because we can't vote here today. We can't vote today, but I plan to bring up VGMC on the chopping block at the next council meeting. >> And y'all will start as soon as George is ready uh meetings in every council meeting, picking out some particular
area and you'll start going through it with the idea of at least having a plan as well as some decisions made for this budget. I'd like to go through the rest of items as goal. These are not listed any priority item. just as they happen to go up and so we'll just take them and I'd like to hear your direction. Uh
Valuchia uh modify Buchal area to a non-perpetuity program. Uh any discussion on that? Heard some this morning obviously. So anybody like to talk about that >> as a goal? >> I don't sure >> I don't know really uh right now if
that's even an issue. Uh it's a non-issue. hasn't hasn't really come up and that may be something to I mean is it is is it part of our essential I don't think it really fits into the essential services right now Don if you had questions about it I mean
>> well I think it's essential I think we got to address it because we keep adding uh more and more of these acquisitions I think the goal has been stated at 50% we're already at 37% >> but but Don I don't think you can get we can't get hung up on that 50% it doesn't
say that anywhere fair. That was a a vision of uh uh four administrations ago. Um but you know, as this county evolves, uh we have the right of approval or not approval just like we did on that bonding issue a couple weeks
ago where we said, "Hey, this isn't the best interest of the residents of the county. We're not doing this." Guess what? We didn't approve it. So, we have that voting uh power uh to to to control some of that stuff. So, I think we need to establish parameters though that the
uh the advisory board when they're actually investigating all these potential easements that they have some parameters they have to work within. Two things that concern me um about these easements is the perpetuity that we're literally putting
land restrictions or conditions for stuff for 500 years from now, thousand years from now. And we actually think that we know what's best for Valuchia County in 500 years, >> right? >> We have put restrictions on these
easements. And everybody wants There's a couple things that really concern me. One, everybody here wants home rule. Everybody's against SB 180. Everybody wants local control. But yet we have systematically with
every easement given away our home rule, our local control. We cannot get back 37% of our county without the state or without the feds because we have linked
up in all these purchases, I guess, with good intentions to try and get more bang for our buck. But the problem is we've ins snared ourselves with the state and the feds. >> But but I I and I and I think there's a way to to handle this even going forward
in the future. We >> Oh, I thought you were going to throw it at me. [laughter] >> We have Go ahead, Jake. It's fine. >> We have plans where we see >> future growth going out in certain areas 100 years from here. future fire
stations, you know, possibly sheriff's office and emergency services. If there's a piece of property that gets in the way of those plans and we go to buy it under one of those programs, there could be an you can put an asterisk in the contract if we need it this for a
section for a fire. I mean, right or wrong, George and uh or county manager, >> you know, if if we have to do something for the the the public need and it's not purchased yet, we can probably work that into a into a contract. >> But what if it's needed 100 years from
now and we've already, you know, bound that property in perpetuity? I'm not talking >> I'm talking about new properties, new properties that we're going to be acquiring through that program. My goal is to make sure that we have these parameters set that we're no longer even
soliciting purchases in perpetuity. >> So then we have to purchase all that locally that we can't ask the state for partners. You know what I mean? >> Do we see that's I don't mind conservation. You know, if you look at the referendum I gave it to Carissa to put up. If you look at the ballot and it
was said today by somebody uh from the public that it was voted on in perpetuity. It was not. The the voters never voted to make this in perpetuity. The voters never voted to intertwine ourselves with state and federal
governments. >> Where's the language? >> Can't see it. [laughter] >> Cover your right eye. >> Nowhere was it ever put in forever on the ballot that we were obligating ourselves.
Yeah, if you can zoom that out. It's the bottom one, Carissa. There you go. Even more all the way out. >> Go ahead, Maestro. >> Keep going. >> Read it for us. >> You can see it. Okay, that's for you. [laughter] Okay, there you go. Now, go down a
little bit. Okay, right there. That's the ballot. That is what the people voted for. Show me anywhere where it says in perpetuity. show anywhere where it says we're going to give up our home rule control that we are actually going to bind ourselves and
be bound by the desires of the state or the feds 500 years from now we have we can't even get beach driving back and that was done less than 30 years ago or about 30 years ago and the state the chair even said yeah dealing with the states I think you said a
nightmare or an impossibility and that's only trying to get beach driving back which we've been trying for the last five years. Imagine a 100 years from now when you're like, "Okay, I want to go ahead and do a commercial water well. Everybody here wants to preserve the water." But in these contracts, in these
easements, we're signing away no commercial water wells ever. Ever in a third of our county with the goal of it being half the county. We want to preserve fresh water. I don't like toilet for tap. I don't like all this this injection into the aquifer. I
don't want that. you know, they may actually pollute our aquifer and we are basically making half of our county off limits for a well. >> Where does it say that? >> It says it in the Yes, it's right here. It's paragraph 5 5.11
of that last one we had at the last meeting. Commercial water wells prohibition is absolute. These are all the list of things that the property owner cannot do or anybody can do. And it says here, prohibition is absolute. no commercial
water wells notwithstanding any other provisions of this easement agreement. >> Is that required or is that something we've added? >> Why not? >> We don't add it. What he's talking about is the fact that these easements are tied in with the state and you know whatever state agency we have several. I
will say on the water uh that's commercial wells uh not necessarily public wells. We could >> but that doesn't agricultural is commercial. No, you can't. We're trying to protect the agriculture for our farmers and they can't water their
crops. I've talked to Mr. Bartlett about this and that's actually included in the definition is commercial water wells includes agricultural wells. So here we are trying to preserve our water, trying to preserve farmland and the farmers 100 years from now or 500 years from now or
god knows when they can't even water their crops. >> I just think we need to be looking into this stuff. >> Okay. Well, thank you. >> Yeah, sure. I I hope you don't mind me not being emotional, Don. Um, but but as
I understand it, uh, the people who own these properties that we protect, >> property rights, >> can go to the state and apply for Florida forever, >> right? >> On their own. >> Yes. >> So, so you're talking about our our
right to control. It's not your property. >> That's right, >> Mike. Now, wait a minute. I listen to your little >> Yes, sir. >> passionate apply. [laughter] So, so I understand where you're coming from,
but as as a property owner, if I want to conserve my land and I want to get a couple million dollars and preserve this land in perpetuity and use Florida forever for it and apply
and get it, then I want to be able to do that because it's my Right. >> It's your rule. >> No. >> See, Mike, you want to explain to him about the rule against perpetuities and how it's against public policy for a private individual to bind a piece of
property forever because you can't because if King George 200 and some years ago said this property will never be no houses except for more than 100. You can't do that. We're not >> I I understand that perpetuity legally
can be challenged. I I get that. But as a property owner, if the state's going to give me $5 million to conserve my property in perpetuity, and I have no intent to do anything with it except for farm
and and raise cattle and have fun on it and go fish, then I'm going to take that money and I'm going to conserve the property because I don't want a developer developing on it as far as my perpetuity.
Well, so so that's my right, right? >> No, it's not. The government can do it and that's my concern. The king can do no wrong, right, Mike? >> Yeah. I >> And what I'm saying is what I'm saying is I don't want as a county to control
people's ability or inability to use Florida forever. >> There's there's a principle called rule against a restraint on alienation. It's against public policy. the rule against perpetuities is void. If I sat there and said this property
>> So you're arguing this the stage Florida forever law rules. >> Well, I'm not that's your job when you get up there. But >> I'm saying from a local level, I don't mind these conservation easements. That's fine. People want it. I think that's what they voted for. They want to
have land preserved. But first thing that concerns me is that we're entwining or we're going into bed with the state and the feds. Just like with beach driving, we had full control of beach driving until we gave it away. Now that we've given it away, in order
for us to get it back, we have to get the blessing of the state. They haven't given us the blessing blessing. So here we are. We can't put driving back on the beach. Same thing could very well happen. >> Beach is public property. These conservation easements are private property and large. No, we're
contracting with the state with these partners that kick in 20%. >> We in in one or two particular cases, but you don't have to partner with the county. A private land owner can do Florida forever without any other
municipality or government. >> If you remember at the last meeting, I asked Mr. Burbal, I said, "What percentage are we entangled with either the state or the feds for funding >> for that particular?" >> No, no, he said the overwhelming majority. all but maybe a handful are
were intertwined. So my concern is later on when we want to undo the future county leaders want to undo this. They they can't just undo it. If we had the ability to leave it just in local control because we all want local control. We don't like SB80. We don't
like what they're doing with uh 718. We don't like the state telling us what to do with our own Valuchia County property. But we're giving it away with every one of these easements. Every time we take on a partner, we're giving away our local control. How can you in one
breast say you're against that SB180, but yet you're just giving for pennies on the dollar, you're giving away our local control to the state or the feds. That's what I don't like. And especially, we talked about this before, when fossil fuels run out, whenever that is. Stanford says 50 years, Trump says
200 years, but it's going to happen at some point. And when that happens, we've restrained oursel against solar that you can't have solar farms on any of this property. Half of the county, the goal, 37% of the county as it sits now, you can't put solar on. And I would venture
to say most of this property is the most remote, probably the best the best property for a solar farm. But now we've contracted away all our rights to put solar farms someday on these properties because it's in perpetuity. >> Councilman, you offered a very
articulate thing. What's the action you'd like to take this council to take >> so that we could discuss this in a format and put more constraints, make it a hundred years. Um, you know, get rid of the restrictions of of no solar farms or no and the most important thing is
let's quit entangling ourselves with the state or the feds. Let's set the parameters. Nothing was on the ballot about perpetuity. Nothing was on the ballot about partnering up and giving away our local control to the states and the feds. I'd like to pull that back. >> Okay. so that we're not doing that
anymore. So any future acquisitions is county only. >> So basically, you'd like to have a workshop with this council looking at those parameters, what you want to keep, what you want to change, right? Look at restructuring. Can I get consensus on where you want to move forward with that particular item? Simply a workshop on on this.
>> I'm okay with more dialogue. I think I need >> and that's what I was going to say. I need to learn more. I know where you're going and I think it's it's I compliment you for going there because you're trying to be visionary for the future when where when none of us are here, right? >> Um you know, mistakes of the of the
past, right? Um and I don't know enough about this part of the of the law. I understand also there may be when it serves a public good. I'm going to say it in my own way. Sometimes you can get around these perpetuity uh clauses too when it serves a greater good. But that's just my basic knowledge of this.
Um I what I am concerned with just initially was I didn't know we had that many restrictions and that many uh uh requirements from these partners. So I I think if it's a negotiation it's got to be a negotiation which means that we
should be at the table. So it's worthy of more discussion. >> Yeah. >> Let me go to the manager if I could. >> Well I just going to point out you guys already sent us in that direction from that other item. So, we'll we'll make sure these uh items are discussed. I mean, you asked to really review the
A-list and the parameters uh of when we do an easement so we can put that together uh in a future meeting. >> Yeah. And I not not to and I don't know I don't think we're going to talk about it today, but also um I think a lot of the dialogue we had last time was around
um make sure we we we uh at least for me we fine-tune our selection process. I know we have a committee that goes through it. Um I wasn't a fan of that last parcel that we discussed, the $24 million one, and I think my colleagues weren't a fan of it either. >> Um
>> so it's a broader look, not just a criteria, but the process itself. >> Yes. Yes. >> Okay. >> Because and I'll just say this so they understand where my head is. >> There's there got to be a ton of other properties that might be better suited and I'll just use that one as an example. Right in the middle of a rural
area. Um especially if you're gonna play plus+ plus that was my opinion then. >> Well not just that David but environmentally sensitive that too areas >> not up you know no not buildable uplands surrounded by a city. [laughter] >> Okay let's go to the next item.
>> Second chance program. Anybody in the room wants to do about that? Okay. >> So I had asked uh staff a while back to we we started we have started that process. I know we're in phase one and it goes to different phases. Um I'm not sure what more I I always get
that look every time I bring it up uh from council, but um I I can't stress the importance of this enough. When you talk about core responsibilities and I was thinking of this when we said it and you talk about public safety, I think uh the chairman, myself, many others that's
one of the biggest priorities is public safety and that is a core responsibility. I don't think anybody will deviate from that. But when you talk about talk about that and what I'm trying to give an example, what would keep them from coming back to
jail? Uh recidivism. I preach that all the time. Let's take that the recidivism part. One of the biggest parts of our budget uh that we contend with when we talk about general fund right here that we all remaining or I'm sorry above that when
we talk about uh mandated payments we have to we have to deal with the jail but one of the biggest lack of a better word consume consumer of our budget is the jail operation and it is in every county uh depending on the size. So if we can reduce that in
any way, any way, whether it be food cost, whatever, I think that was the the emphasis behind it when I started this. The other thing was to um make them more productive members of society. Many of the individuals that we have in jail, they're not from out of town. They're
locals. They're [clears throat] people that live right in our neighborhoods. Um and one of the biggest things I said before, and I'll say it time and time again, every time you had that conversation with them, they talked about why do you keep coming back to jail? they couldn't they couldn't get that job. We started the first pro part of the process and by reaching out to
the community talking about uh this issue with some of our business leaders uh individual companies that have been reluctant to hire anybody with a criminal history are now going in that direction. We're seeing
the big Sams and Walmart and and Amazon and those individuals that are that are coming to the table that want to hire them. That's good news. So, I think if we don't look at this to protect our interest in the county to pro uh to help with our our what we spend on I I think
it would be detrimental at this point. So, >> hey Matt, do you do you have is there any data that shows that the recism is how much of it is Valuchia County residents? >> Oh, on Valuchia County, I think we can get that. I I'm looking at Randa right
now. Um, I know that we had a number that was quoted to me on recidivism on how it's lowered just once since we started and we're talking about a double-digit percentage. Uh, can we attribute that to the second chance? It's coincidental that it's happening ever since we started the second chance
initiative >> but the second chance would be main well I don't know the full programs but >> well I'll tell you what this David I think it is it is attainable uh that's information that can be obtained because when you look at the addresses of individuals that were arrested they're
county residents so I think we can we can find that information out uh and I'm looking at Randa and she's shaking her head yes but uh I think we can get that information >> cuz I'm I'm hoping that because this will require an investment, right? >> Yes. >> So my point, >> every county that I talked to that has a
program of this nature, uh, when we visited locally here in Marian County, when we first started this in Manatee County, Bvard County has it and we have counties now reaching out to director Deore, how do we get one started in our county? So, you know, we're not recreating the wheel. We're just doing
what they're doing. Not just I'm I'm mentioning counties in Florida. This is being done nationally. This is being done all over the world. Uh because this is something that uh they want to see over. You know, they're paying a lot of money for these jail operations and everybody's looking for ways to reduce
recidivism and this is a big one. You know, we already have the education programs. We have the training c uh opportunities in there. So, it wasn't just about a farm and and that's, you know, that was an original goal. I >> I know where you're going. I want to cut you off for a second cuz I I know where
your heart is and I know you does because we've recently done a lot a few things. Fair to say that >> we have done uh the welding, we have done the forklift, the flagger. We're talking about some more programs coming up too. >> Yeah. And because you know you have to
look at also and I don't know the answer to this, you know, the diminished returns, right? Because we have to see the efforts that we've already put in there >> um and see what the results are. I think it we just can't keep throwing money at it. >> We're not and and the one I'm referring to by these programs, a lot of them are
volunteers that are coming in to do it. So, we're not we're not talking about spending any money. When we had that uh cooperation with Daytona State, they came to the table and said, "It's our equipment. We're going to bring it to you." Originally, they wanted us to bring the inmates out there. That comes with not just a security aspect of it, but it comes with a cost aspect of it.
And we said, "No, they came to the jail to do it." The barbering program, Daytona State said, "Hey, listen. We're getting ready to replace our chairs, our barber chairs. You want them? >> Yeah, absolutely. I got you. >> So, you know, these aren't these aren't. And but in all fairness, in full disclosure, I'm sorry, one more thing.
>> We are also identifying what programs are not working. >> So, the original goal of the welding program, we were very excited about that. We thought welding in our community would have been great. We're not seeing that return. So they're not getting out as we intended them to do to
go to Daytona State to register for the actual full-fledged class. So Daytona State is talking about sunsetting that program, but we have another program on the horizon to to start up. >> Council, I'm sorry. >> You have a comment on >> We're talking about county council goals
>> and right now we're talking about barber chairs. So I I want to get back up. I think I think bullet two if it fits in any one of what I agree the the chairman's uh core responsibilities
it's in public service somewhere I I think if we leave it at recidivism this is this is an agenda item >> right so recidivism is a public service let's let's get it down >> okay
>> and and Matt being the guy on the on the on the council that knows about all this stuff, we can keep on putting putting our sharpen our pencil, come up with great great ideas to keep those people out of jail. >> Okay. So, I'll just continue to part of
your your budget process. You'll look at it. You'll look at it during the budget process. Beach nourishment, what's the issue here? >> I don't know. We'll put that on the the uh on the list. But I'll just say that >> something's got to we have to come up with some other scientific ways because
we're just throwing dollars on the beach. >> It came up this morning that somebody said beach protection first. I don't which remember which one of us it was. >> It doesn't stop. So I think beach repress uh protection and reourment could be >> is that a goal or I think it probably
fits under the uh um last year's goal too increase efficiency and effectiveness of government operations. Um but it's it's something that we have to be aware of. >> Okay. I think Suzanne actually Suzanne,
>> if I could just interject briefly, you received via email and then a hard copy this morning uh some important information. One of our requirements when we received $82 million from the state was to do a comprehensive beach
study. We are in the last stretches of completing that study uh in approximately two to three months. I think we're going to be towards the end of that and a presentation to you on the findings of what that study says I think will be important for you all to hear.
Having said that, there's no money associated with this study. It is just outlining the options that the engineers have uh determined may be feasible and a lot of them are combination options just so that I have said that. So please take
a look at those materials. Uh some of them are very important including an economic study that I'll put your attention to that's in there and we'll be back to you in the about a quarter. >> Okay. All right. So that item's coming back to you. Nothing to do at the
moment. And let's go to uh the next two items together. The storm water flooding and some further analysis of the factors leading to flooding which obviously have to do as part of your stuff. You know, y'all put a lot of emphasis on this last year as an important thing to move
forward together. [clears throat] >> Yeah, that's the next two together. >> Yeah. Uh >> yeah. What what's on the I I know we really doubled down on this. What's on the horizon? What how are we looking uh with this? >> I mean, it should always be a priority.
>> What you got now is you have every single basin >> in the in the county being studied. You've got I think on the next meeting There'll be actual construction projects that you'll be approving. These were some of the ones where cities
already had shovel ready uh flood projects. So, they're coming out of the ground as well. You have the the uh flooding um uh committee that uh the work committee from the round table. So, I mean all of that's being
addressed. uh the the basin studies [clears throat] you know are kind of the scientific analysis of these at least how these basins operate.
So I don't know um and I think that's the first step in any kind of solution is trying to figure out how all of these operate and what then what you could do given certain size storms. So, I would say we're on track on both
of those now. And if you guys want more, fine. But you have quite a lot of work going on in it right now. So, >> yeah, I would say we kicked off the year. I'm sorry. Did you already >> We kicked off the year last year and and
made tremendous progress. We passed, I think, seven different uh principles to help do this and then we had to wipe every one of them out when Senate Bill 180 came about. Um, so
I I'm I'm proud of the work that we did and looking forward to uh to getting back to it. But the things that you just mentioned, George, we can do all that. It doesn't change. It's a lot more restrictive or um so I think we just keep plowing
ahead. you else want to add? >> Yeah, I'm I'm sure we all probably I don't know I I definitely put those two in there in during my conversation and the thought process is is we had to roll back a lot of things, but
there's nothing stopping us from working with uh uh lo local developers are easy to work with. that uh uh any developer that comes in and keep on pushing the the voluntary efforts of of those um uh
of some of those mitigation strategies that we had to roll back. [clears throat] Um does it come at a additional cost to them and then eventually additional cost to the homeowner? Yes. But I think in the long run uh we may benefit from that as long
as we as as long as we indicate to them why we think it's important and as we move forward the I think the question is uh if we're able do we do we want to increase not the requirements but the
request for requirements now um to to go to a a 100redy year 500 year thousand-y year flood event. I a rain event. I I don't know if we do. Uh but I think that conversation ought to be had and then we talk to um developers. I think the basin
studies will give us a good idea of where we are with that. Um, and the other thing I think is important is how much can we mitigate with public infrastructure that that would that would take it away
so we don't have to put additional uh requirements on developers uh if we don't need to and what's the cost of that? And I I think that'll come out in the project list after the basin study with the cost um uh that we all choke
on, I'm sure. Uh but but that's kind of where I want to go this year with those. >> Okay. All right. So it's really starting to take that data and then talk about the policy implications of it as it as you get it. So Okay. >> Yeah. >> All right. >> So it it should be a goal storm water.
>> We'll retain it. >> Athletic facilities. >> I think the question there is >> is that done? >> I think Troy >> might have been Troy. Okay. >> Are y'all yall comfortable with the pace
of development of athletic facilities you have? Is there any major gap that you concern? >> I think between I think between the the county and the cities were, you know, we got one coming up, right? I think we're doing fine. >> Okay. >> All right.
>> Well, the the little league fields, I know there was part of that I think it was the Hunden study down in uh Orange City with the >> veterans >> on Veterans Memorial. Yeah, we were talking about little league fields and football practice fields and soccer fields down there. Is that I haven't seen anything come across.
>> Well, it's it's in our it's in our planning right now. I mean we we haven't u started uh engineering or anything yet but I think the idea we had remember we we kind of went from a basic plan and
then a maybe a P3 uh for competitive fields and everything but I think our uh marching direction right now is to at least get some uh fields in place uh a smaller project than we originally talked about with the
ability to expand can it to eventually um into a P3 or or tournament size uh >> on veterans. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Great. >> Yeah. So that again but all that I I would say uh when it's all talking now
uh we'll see what happens with uh with what we're going to have for money. So >> I mean you could get to the point where you don't even have the money to operate >> what you have. [clears throat] >> Okay. So there's work being done but but okay with the item of millage reduction.
I know you already had a large conversation at the start about the budget this year. Is there any comments anybody wants to make at that uh at this point or is it we'll see as the process goes. >> Okay. >> I was just say I think that and the next
one are covered and and we're in that direction. >> We talked about increased involvement of clearly all be there. So we covered that. We talk about defining quality of life service levels. Uh, and you know, one one approach to budgeting is define the service level
that you want and this is what it cost. Uh, George, I don't know where y'all are at with that or whether that's a need to do. I can't remember that where it came from. >> Yeah, I think we would roll it into that. Uh, because those are going to be the areas. I mean, these are going to be
quality of life type issues. um >> that'll be determined how we fund or not, >> right? And what level? >> Okay. All right. So, that's just going to occur naturally as part of the process here. Okay. Uh continue efficient time management of the
meetings and that was comment about how well y'all manage your time together. >> That's got to be Jake. [laughter] >> I don't keep notes. >> That might have been that might have been a prince. Why don't you go ahead and spit? You're in favor of that, right?
>> Yeah, absolutely. I I like getting work done. >> Okay. All right. >> But but I'm more than willing to say the same thing five times to see if I can change your minds if you guys >> What was that? >> So, by saying it more than by saying it more than once, you know, maybe we can
get done and get on to more business and get to council comments. That is if if if we are more efficient with the way we speak instead of maybe wax and poetic about things of an irrelevant nature, we could maybe take the time to Oh, I'm
sorry. [laughter] >> Excellent example there. >> Thank you for the [laughter] example. >> Okay. You know, I'll say in the interest of efficiency, I think along with what you're saying, Jake, you know, when we get our council comments, um I I try to
take the approach on council comments, um if there's something that I need the group to agree to, then I'll bring it up, right? Um that to me is being efficient. I need you guys. So, I want to see if the council likes the idea. I
think again, that should be the threshold for that. I I don't need to know where you had breakfast yesterday. Okay. >> I did. >> But and I think that's more efficient for everyone. If we're talking about efficiencies time,
>> um I would I would suggest use that as your threshold. If it's important for the body to take action and give direction to staff, bring it up. Other than that, 99.9 of the things things that we we could inquire or discuss, we can go directly to to to our staff. Um,
so in the interest of times, if it's something that you can do offline, do it offline. That's just my thoughts. That's how I operate. >> Okay. So, one additional criteria might be we we bring a comment if if we need a >> I want to know where Matt had breakfast yesterday. [laughter] >> Okay.
Yes, sir. >> I respect that. Um, oftentimes though, you know, we're >> Okay. Um, >> I thought that was Jake. >> I Oh, I thought it was. >> So, I respect that. But there often
times that we do it for the public information as well. You could say, "Well, you could go out in social media." Um, or didn't you read it on my social my my social media platform? And I can tell you, David, I don't follow you. So, UH, [laughter] so that wouldn't be much to read because
I don't really post this. >> Oh, here we go again. Social media is a >> I do, but no, I'm just saying. So, we we do it a lot of times forformational purposes as well. Um, >> talking efficiency, I don't have a problem with that. >> I agree. And if we can short shorten that, I I respect that. And oftentimes
we'll make it just about that. But, um, >> listen, my my oral ring tells me I don't have to sleep at night, so there's no time [laughter] to catch up. I'll leave it at that. >> All right. Thank you. >> I love you, brother. Okay, let me add one thing to that just real quick be because it's a lot of some of this falls
on me and the way that the meetings are conducted >> and within this goal there was a little breakdown that I thought was really helpful. It's what we all agreed on when staff makes the presentation then we all ask questions then we hear from the public and then we
discuss it. And I I try and do that. It happened again today that two Danny and and Don both wanted to ask a question after all was that I will always defer to them. If y'all don't want me to, I'm probably still going to do it until you
throw me off. But I think it's important for any one of you to be able to ask a question if the public brings up something you think, "God, I should have answer asked that." Our goal is not just to be as fast as possible, but it's to be as responsible and efficient as
possible and and get it right. So, >> I I concur. Okay. >> I I think I think the the 10-minute conversation before you get to your question is the problem at the beginning during questions. If if we can be more
succinct, not more succinct, we've been doing a great job of it, but every once in a while We never get to the question until you say, "Is there a question in there?" And then it comes. So, >> okay. But at the end, >> dy loaded. Yeah. Okay. >> I think we're okay. >> So, Mr. Chair, I think council's
comfortable how you're managing it. So, >> okay. Let's go to the topic of affordable housing. >> Yes, sir. Is there any municipalities or any areas in Valuchia County that don't do maybe some of the government subsidized or
affordable housing? Was it does Port or does Port Orange do it or or >> don't do what >> some of that affordable housing pushes >> and stuff like that? Workforce. Do we know of any that that don't do it or
>> uh Susan got something? >> Yeah, >> I I do. I we can provide more information, but by and large the state and federal monies that come through for affordable housing come to the county, right? >> The exception being Daytona Beach and Deltona. So when you ask, do the others
do it? They only do it through us because by the state and federal structure, they come to counties. So, it's up to them to say, "Hey, thanks, but no thanks for >> or to have projects within their cities being vying for the dollars, which we do
provide quite a bit. In fact, mostly." >> Danny, I threw that on there, not from the perspective, at least for me, for more government programs. Um, I think there are plenty of government programs out there. I wanted the discussion is from government bureaucracy that leads
to cost because that's a major driver to the cost of constructing a home, remodeling a home, whatever it might be. Um, and we did a we did some good stuff was a year almost two years ago. I can't even remember when we got rid of the CST. We got rid of the uh the business
tax thing, right? Because we felt that why does government have to be there taking money at the troth? For what reason? what public good does it do other than the government now taking money from you, right? There's there's no return for the public other than a revenue source for government. Um, so I
threw it on there from that perspective. I I think there's more dialogue. We had a lot of good dialogue last year. We made a few changes. I think um Donna, she's right there. Um, she reminded me and Susan reminded me some of the changes we made last year. Um and I
think there's still opportunities there where on cost drivers uh fees um >> what makes properties unaffordable. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> So you'd like to continue that analysis some more. >> Yeah. I mean the legislature has a couple bills right now that are
addressing some of these things like ADU. Now Valuchia County is great. We did some ADU changes. >> Yeah. We made some ADU changes a few years ago that made it more uh flexible. One of the things that I've been vocal about uh uh is is is impact fees on
ADUs. I've talked to staff about it. Why why does an ADU if you want to build a mother-in-law suite, why do you have to pay impact fees to put a an ADU up or why do you have to do I get the permitting for inspections, right? But um it's just another opportunity for government grab of money. So, um, the
legislature is pushing an effort on promoting ADUs to allow people to have, uh, on their properties, smaller units, which could be family. They could rent it to someone and it's a revenue source for them. I think we can be a driver in
um, eliminating fees associated with that. So, um, Oh, I see George went up >> last year. No, I just I we'll continue to look at those things. I I will want to point out like the impact fee part of it. If we take uh
your mother-in-law's car away so that she's not driving on the road, then I I might agree with you. But uh but again, depending on where it is, and we'll look at that, but there are impacts to the infrastructure when you add more people in. And that's the theory behind, you
know, having an impact fee on some of these things. as you're putting if you're putting more people on >> on the road. So, it's not just a grab. It's just the way we're set up. But I think again to your point, if we want to make things more affordable, I'm sure that's an area that wouldn't kill us if we if you just didn't want to have that.
But I I don't want you to think we're just we're just grabbing, you know, there's a theory behind it and it's at least people do drive until a certain age. You know, I think in the grand scheme of things I'd like to give some, you know, there are people that probably >> we have
>> shouldn't be driving still, but they are. >> I think in the grand scheme of things though, you know, I'm using the terminology of affordable housing, right? >> It that's something that we can easily give up to help people whether the property owner or the family um to do something. So, that's just one example.
>> Sure. >> Yeah. I I want to ask a question. when we uh it was brought up by a constituent who's I think sitting behind me, but anyways, there's a property over in Daytona, for example, that I think money was committed to through the state for
affordable or maybe been the Fed for affordable housing. What kind of follow-up do we have with those properties where even though the money's funneled through us, do we have a say in how the because it's from what I'm understanding, there's news in the paper about it, the the TV, it it's a a
nightmare of a property and everybody talks back to the county. >> We we've had conversations with the city about the property you're talking about. Now, what we've been told, >> and I'm ignorant to this, I didn't know what >> we've been told by the city, you know, that's a mixed, >> you know, not every house in there, not every apartment is is uh
>> section, >> right? It's uh I think it's only a smaller percentage. Let's just let's just say it's a quarter off the top of my head, >> but the calls when they when they analyze it, the calls to the police aren't all they're not coming from those units. They're coming from other units.
And and when I say that's good to know um because I know we have done section 8 housing for part properties like uh Cape Norris uh they're on Cape or um Beville Road and Clive Morris. That's a successful one that they haven't had the
issues and they they have a small percentage and we just upped that last year if I'm not mistaken to how many units we can we can do. So that's a successful one. So I didn't want something that was necessarily going to throw the baby out with the bath water and do away with all of I just wondered, >> yeah, >> to what extent do we follow up on that? And it's good to hear that we're having
those conversations. See, I see Brad chomping at the bit over there. >> Okay. >> All right, >> George. Okay. Yes, sir. >> County manager, do those properties have a property manager or if they're section 8, is it government's responsibility to
He's standing up now? Brad can weigh in on it, but those are all the properties you're talking about. Those are large apartment complexes that I know have property managers and stuff in there. I mean, but Brad, you want to add anything? >> I would just say that um yeah, they all
have property managers and um we've been out to Clyde Morris multiple times and the issues are being addressed quickly. Um there was an instance over one of the last storms that we had where the city of Daytona Beach actually asked to shut
off the water to the complex for a certain amount of hours. Um I think it was 12 hours or less to save their plant at one point. Um and they did that but there were some complaints for residents that it was 3 or 4 days and that was not the case u when we investigated it. So
we have been out there multiple times. the management company continues to provide solutions um to problems that may arise. Um but they're getting payments from us each year and we're making sure that those issues are addressed uh in order before we make those payments to them.
>> All right. Okay. Thank you. Let's go to the next item. Cultural council funding. Any comments about that? >> So this is when I when I asked the question about >> Okay. um what is core responsibilities this is one of them I think is and I know that there along my colleagues they
don't think it is and and I respect that but I what I also when and I think uh Mr. Johansson kind of hit on this earlier when we committed to something and Santiago did as well. When we committed to something and then
I'm just going to call it like it is ninth inning we pulled the rug and said no we changed the we changed the rules and I think that if you want government to to trust you we just kind of tore away at that. So that's a bigger conversation about cultural funding in the future.
>> Well that that will roll into the what you just I'm talking about this year. So >> you're really talking about the the process. >> Well, and and I had written it down as you know when when our chair had said what are his core responsibilities? That's one of mine because I think it
relates you could relate it. Yeah, it's a stretch but you could relate it to public safety and other things when you talk about uh the kids that are out there with nothing to do and we have a lot of great organizations out there that are providing services to our community uh
you know that that won't won't have that. what are they going to do? So, and then tend to get into trouble and if we can keep them away from that preventatively. I mean, >> this is how this works. >> All right. Go ahead. >> Yes, sir. That's how it works. You >> see, I just don't want to be left out and not having [laughter] done it at
all. >> Gman, I put it on because when we uh ended that last meeting when we defunded the council, we we left an open end. I mean, we have to give them direction on what to do for the the remaining years. I mean, we didn't tell them what to do
this year. And I've been asked by Mr. Bowers and uh so you know we've got to either vote to end it as of this year so they don't take any more applications >> uh but we got to wrap this up one way or the other. Uh
I think I had proposed this at that same meeting. Uh I don't think it carried but the main goal is to um give direction to the cultural council on what to do this year and the following years. >> Okay. I honestly have had some sleepless
nights for the very reason that Matt talked about and Jake is that we kind of pulled the rug out from under them. I don't like it. I wish I could go back and change my vote on that day because I feel like if I could go back and vote no back then, it would have been fair, but
to make them go through the process, do the interviews, do the applications, and then kind of blindside them with a no, um I don't think it's fair. So, I'd like to I don't know if we do it here at the next meeting, but talk about maybe I was
thinking fund them this year and uh take the offset it with echo. >> So, if we give them the full 611 or whatever minus I guess the uh shoestring and the Athens, but whatever we give them, we offset it off
of echo funding. Okay. So this year and then if we want to end it, end it. But I think there needs to be one more discussion. I guess I'm glad Troy's not here because he didn't want that. [laughter] But I think we need to either vote now or at a later date and talk about what direction we want to give the
Cultural Arts Council about accepting more applications this year and if we want to fund them, take it out of offset it with the echo aotment. And >> so basically you'd like to really put that as an agenda for the next meeting. >> I think an agenda.
>> Yeah. >> There there are two sort there are two things. One is the current thing and then then your your future funding that obviously will roll out of your bigger discussion here of what what you're going to keep. Uh right. So but that there is a specific item about a a prior
council decision that at least couple of you would like to revisit. Could I just get some direction or at the rest of the council whether you want to do that or not? >> Do you feel like bring it back up? >> Well, bring back up the solution.
>> Okay. >> It's not a Okay. >> Okay. >> All right. So, you can you can bring it back up in the next meeting because you were on the majority side of the vote. So, >> I'll bring up VGMC and you'll bring that up. Is that all right? >> Okay. But Don Don just remember though if it goes nowhere again we still have
to either dissolve the cultural council yes or no >> or right >> um or you know there was even uh talks talks with the to talks with the community about possibly reimbursing them for any costs incurred last year.
So it'd be a healthy you know might be a good discussion. So >> okay. All right. So you bring that up the next meeting then obviously as you look at everything you're going to talk to cultural council be part of that review. >> Okay. Westia hospital authority.
>> We need we need legal guidance. We need consensus. >> We need legal consensus. [laughter] >> We need legal and and leadership guidance on how do we do that? >> Yeah. >> Okay. All right. >> Are are we are we still are we clear of all lawsuits with them right now?
>> They're all done. Um the uh the county has been paid for all amounts invoiced. >> All I know is we've been paid for what we've invoiced. Uh which is what we wanted. So we have gotten there
>> and and you know they're they're established by >> not by us, >> right? They were created by special law and law approved at referendum. >> Yeah, >> that's right. >> All right. Got some more. >> So, we we need the state's help to get
rid of it. >> Yes, sir. >> And then if we get rid of it, how do we pay the Medicaid? >> Yeah. The um a portion of what they would be paying now. Well, the that and the uh hikra amount, it's another AC
nice acronym that would follow the county >> general fund. >> We we >> can we set up our own tax district to do that? >> That's one of the things that >> if you want to talk about again I can
redistribute. We did a memo on some possibilities. There is something that we identified that we thought we could impose. uh is now turning funding source for it. Um I know you in the past as a council
have talked about merger whether it be a merger with another hospital district or dissolution. All those are things that require action by the legislature. >> Yeah. And I don't I I get the feeling that the other hospital districts are not
too interested in doing that uh for for a few reasons. So, um, and and I out of ignorance, I I don't know how that money is spent. I I've not been able to figure it out. And, and so, >> yeah, >> I want to work to get
>> Well, I can say >> we need options is all we need. >> Well, I uh, you know, from I don't want to speak for George, but I think I can. You can punch me if I I'm wrong, but you know, the dispute about funding the
Medicaid costs was a big one, went on for several years. That's now done. So, we're relieved at that. You know, if you want to talk about other issues associated with them about, you know, seeking a legislative change to merge
them or so on, that's another issue. >> All right. [clears throat] like to go to some other items we'd like to have some direction on. George has already talked the bottom item, but let's start with fire assessment fee. George, >> yeah, I brought that up, you know, based
again where Ryan was uh discussing, you know, the issue that you would have to deal with some of these on the revenue side. Now, maybe Tallahassee does provide uh some different revenue options, but certainly one that's uh out
there and used is the fire fire assessment fee to replace what you would lose if you uh were doing a if you were to lose property tax in the fire fund. It's a separate fund. It's funded uh you know via property tax that's on your
bill. It also uh is partly funded by the general fund because it does work in the cities as well when it comes to uh technical rescue and their hazmat team. So the problem and and maybe depending
on the implementation time that's been given some of those bills like I as was pointed out at least in their form today look like you would start seeing an effect as early as two years from now. It takes about two and a half
years to establish a fire fee. So that's why uh if you'd like us to do some uh work at least with the beginning of what it would take get some uh do some exploration around that uh area uh I would need direction to to get that
because it would probably uh take a few years to do. >> I'm I already talked to you about it. I I like the idea of getting started. Uh, is would the intent be I mean first blush would the intent be to hire a
consultant to to work through the fee structure or is this something that that we're capable of doing in house? >> Well, we we'll try to do as much as we can, but I think there will be at least some part where we have to have some consulting work. I I I would suggest we
get started inhouse for now because this is going to come at a cost and and uh I I did it once and the end result was no fee. And the reason it was no fee I'll share with everybody is is because the fee is consistent across the board.
Right now we tax people according to their property. So uh uh the people with with bigger homes pay more. um if we go to a fee, everybody gets the flat rate, including the people on the fixed
income. So, um uh it it it kind of hurts. And when when one of the goals of of getting rid of property tax is to put more money back in people's uh uh pockets, uh this is going to take a
little bit more out of some people's pockets that can afford it. And I I was add too just so everyone understands it can't in its current form it couldn't replace uh property tax fully because there's parts of the fee
>> right >> that uh you have to have a a direct nexus. So you know there are part fire department does things that would have to be funded uh differently. So, so yes, uh, so
it would, uh, it would bring more people also in to paying a fee because there are properties today that are, uh, >> exempted from the tax uh, that would not be exempted necessarily from a fire fee. So >> Jim,
>> and that was going to be my question. Who would pay? Is it just unincorporated Valuchia? All of Valuchia, businesses, rentals, >> unincorporated, the current fire district today, which we do have by contract. You have uh cities that have elected to be in our district.
>> So does apartment complex in unincorporated Valuchia pay it a fee? I know they do property taxes. Well, the other they well that's what we would study and what the fee would be, you know, and obviously that'd be a different category. So, it could
probably have a different fee than say a a house for instance. But I will tell you, you got to get into things like I say, churches that don't pay anything now uh might pay a fee and then there'll be possibly
uh agriculture and other areas that uh enjoy uh tax relief might not in a fee situation. >> I think we need information. >> Go ahead at staff level to start working out. >> Yeah, we we got to have the information.
Okay. Uh we've covered al anything else on alternative revenue. George covered everything you want to cover there. >> Well, yeah. I mean the fire assessment and then you've got the uh other revenue options. Uh again along the same idea if we've
got other areas that we could replace. We may again a lot of this depends. We'll know a little bit more I think after the session. uh we won't know the final outcome if it goes to uh until after it goes through for an election but but [clears throat] I would again I
would say as much as possible we want a head start uh to be looking at what other revenue options could be out there um and any comment on the legislative priority list covered it enough >> I think we got that with basically what
I asked about the delegation okay can we move the goal slide Okay, here are our current goals. Uh let's just look at them. Uh clearly goal two, you know, you've addressed that today in terms of the core services. So
that will start moving forward and you agreed to some time every every meeting which will get your 8 to 10 meetings that I talk about. Uh let me go back to goal one. Anything else? any questions you have about goal one and the progress on it?
>> Okay. >> All right. Goal three. Obviously, y'all heard some discussion about that this morning. Uh and you you've also got some other athletic facilities and George has talked about how that may impact as you go forward with the budget. So, that
one's moving. Fiscal stewardship. Obviously, that's fits right well with the conversation this morning. Y'all are continuing the emphasis on that. uh solutionoriented culture. George has done a lot of work as staff. The uh and I just want to compliment your staff. The exercise I went through them was not
a pleasant one because we really went through it. I mean, you'd have to do stuff and it wasn't fun and they stayed with it and they gave really substantive response. So, I think that culture is clearly exhibited here. Uh leader and resiliency practices.
Councilman Johansson. >> Yep. >> So there it is. But but we we don't talk about it a lot. I don't but we do it a lot. I think I think storm water and
flooding is part of that. Uh uh I think all the the the building stuff we're doing to make our our buildings a little more resilient to not only weather but everything else
we're doing it um >> to each >> it's it's such an in encompassing goal. Uh I guess we just got to put some meat into the stuff underneath it. So I'm good. Okay. And economic prosperity.
You've obviously had that. You know, goals take multi-year. You guys okay with these brand remaining in place? Is there anything you want to see added to it? >> A lot of it what we talked about can fit in any one of those categories. >> Yeah. I think the >> You don't need to go into the weeds on
it like I did earlier. >> All right, gentlemen. Well, let me just go around. Any uh final comments you'd like to make today, Councilman Dempsey? >> Nope. >> Okay. Sound of I'll leave the chair to last. Councilman Robbins, any final comments? How's it?
Sheriff, if you wrap up anything else for next council meeting, thank you for doing this again. >> Thank you. Thank you.