Well, Welcome to the Valuchia County Council meeting. The meeting will begin in 10 minutes. Hey, hey, hey. Hey, hey, hey. Hey,
hey, hey. Hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey,
hey, hey, Hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey. Hey, hey,
hey, hey, hey. Hey, hey, hey. Welcome to the Valuchia County Council meeting. The meeting will begin in five minutes. Hey,
hey, hey. Hey everybody. Young next time. Baby. Hey. Baby. Hey,
hey, hey. Welcome to the Valuchia County Council meeting. The meeting will begin in 2 minutes. That was wild. Really? Okay, good morning. We will call the uh December 2nd, 2025 Valuchia County
Council meeting to order at 9:01. Um I will give you a a brief uh synopsis of how we will start. Um, in just uh a moment, um, I will, uh, invite Diana
Dixon up from the Central Florida Free Thought Community for our opening invocation and ask you to stand. You can stand if you care to, and then we will go right into the uh, pledge of allegiance. And so, Diana, if you want
to come up and start us off for the day. Good morning everyone. Thank you for the opportunity to begin this meeting. This morning we take a moment to reflect on the shared responsibilities we hold as
members of one community. Each person in this room has a chosen path of service and a choice and that choice matters. The work done here shapes neighborhoods, supports families, and helps create the conditions in which people can live with
dignity and opportunity. Let us pause help let this pause help us settle into a spirit of cooperation, patience, and commitment to the common good. Writer and activist James Baldwin
once said, "We are responsible for the world in which we find ourselves. if only because we are the only sentient forces that can change it. His reminder calls us to approach today's discussions
with clarity, courage, and care. May this meeting be guided by thoughtful listening and genuine respect. May the decisions made here reflect fairness, evidence, and a sincere desire to improve the lives of all the residents,
including those whose voices are not always heard. and may each person at this table feel supported in the work ahead. Thank you. And may this time together move our community forward with wisdom and compassion.
To theublic stands, one nation indivisible. Okay, good morning. It's good to see everybody here. We always start our uh meetings with public participation. Um, I don't see any, but I feel like
it's walking up behind me. >> Is that you? Did you hear it? Okay, before I start uh public participation, uh I'm going to ask the clerk, Cararissa, to call the role so that you know who you are speaking to. Carissa, would you call the role, please?
>> Mr. Reinhardt, >> here. >> Mr. Robbins, >> here. >> Mr. Santiago, >> here. >> Mr. Dempsey, >> here. >> Mr. Johansson, >> here. >> Mr. Kent >> here. >> Mr. Brower >> here. Thank you. So, we do have a full
quorum this morning. When I call your name, if you will come up to the uh podium, there is a a button on the left hand side of the podium that if you push it, it will go up or down to adjust to your height. Please make sure that there is a microphone near your speaking voice
so that everybody can hear you and and the people listening online can hear you. You have three minutes to talk about uh anything that pertains to county uh business. And um uh we just ask that you be respectful of
those uh uh in the room and those listening in of all ages. First we have uh Salvatore Gintoi. Close. Oh, got it.
>> All right. Well, good morning. My name is Salvatore Geni. I'm with SMA Healthcare and I'm here to provide you with a brief update on our services in Valuchia County. So, we provide a robust array of health care services here in Valuchia. We have primary care, we have
pharmacy, we do outpatient counseling as well as residential treatment and inpatient crisis stabilization. Uh we provided treatment services to over 21,000 citizens of Valuchia in our last fiscal year. Valuchia County
comprises about 54% of our total revenue across our sixcount footprint. We had 98 million in total revenue. Um 96 million in expenses. As a nonprofit, any margin goes back into staff pay as well as
program improvement. Uh, one of those programs that we finished improving at the beginning of this year was the Chatbell Crisis Center that's located over at 1150 Red John. Uh, we completed a renovation there to eliminate the institutional look and feel of that
building. Um, as well as improve patient and staff safety. Um, we also started a graduate medical education program for psychiatry. So, we're now training doctors to become psychiatrists. It's a four-year rotation program. And uh the
goal there is to help with uh addressing the shortage of psychiatrists that we have here in Florida. Um the most exciting news that I have for you today is that we're going to be doing a ribbon cutting uh over in Dand at 1255 Stone Street. That is our new West Faluchia
outpatient care center. Uh Mr. Reinhardt will be speaking. Thank you so much for that, sir. We do hope that you can join us. Uh this building will provide a full continuum of outpatient care uh in West Feluchia. It's 22,000 square feet. It's going to have outpatient counseling,
medication assisted treatment, um psychiatric medication management, and eventually we're going to have primary care and pharmacy there as well. And then just in closing, I wanted to remind everybody that we are available 247 365 through our crisis line. That's 1
800539-4228. That's a free service. Uh the mobile crisis response team can come to anybody's location in Valuchia County given an hour's time. I'm happy to provide any of you with a tour of any of our facilities. All you have to do is call and if you have any questions, just
let me know. Thank you so much for your time this morning. >> Thank you for your comments. Uh Adam Macker, Adam Macker, Deerry, Florida. Uh, last month I presided provided this council with nine affidavits of criminal
conspiracy. I have another one to add to the list today. Um, to catch you up to speed with where I'm at, I came up here because there was a murder plot on my life. People wanted me dead. I believe Sheriff Chitwood is collected is connected to those people. So, I came up here, rode my bicycle because my license was suspended because of fraud to meet
with Chitwood. I was unable to get a meeting. I'm going to do the same thing again when I leave here. I'm going to go up there and sit in his office and try to schedule a meeting. I was lucky enough to meet with uh Inspector Gordon who advised me that my all my complaints are being told. Now, there's evidence
left, right, and center on my website of financial crimes and all types of hideous stuff. Um, but he advised me that my latest two complaints, which I brought a copy for both of you, for all of you because I'm going to provide them to you. That way, if I have to submit a complaint to the commission on ethics, I
have everything, you've had everything presented to you properly. My last two complaints were submitted in August and uh October of this year. In August, I submitted both federal depositions. I provided you a copy with that, Jeff, already. Um in which in which Stickles
lied under oath claiming he doesn't own multi-million dollar properties that were purchased in cash, appear to be purchased in cash according to the background check. Well, Inspector Gordon had let me know that I had the wrong stickles. So, I did my research last night. I did background checks again and
when Jason Scott Stickles, Els, his number one alias is Jason Stickles Les. Okay, so we can go ahead and add real estate fraud and forgery to this police officer and it's being covered up by internal affairs, you know, and my life
has been destroyed by corruption in this county. I I would like all I know you don't answer many questions, but I would like you to think about what is it how does it feel to be on the council of what is likely the most corrupt county in the entire United States. I mean, my life was stripped away from me. Fraudulent uh um judgments reported to
my credit profile. I had almost perfect credit in 2021, almost 850. My credit dropped hund I mean, it's it's in the in the [ __ ] now. Um I'm just fed up and I'm honestly done asking for justice. I'm demanding it. Um, today I'm providing you service again with the uh
with the the complaints, the two the two the last two complaints and the affidavits. I'm sorry, the background checks of Jason Stickles. Dawn, you're staring at me pretty hard over there. You're a lawyer, right? Mediocre at best, but nonetheless, you are a lawyer and so you can make sense out of this.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that it's the same person falsifying information. just because we have police officers and and corrupt law enforcement that continues to hide it. It's just unfair. It's not acceptable. You know what I mean? And I've had enough. It's like my 12-year-old son
for he suffered with this for 5 years. We don't even have a vehicle because my license was suspended by fraud. I just want justice. So, I'm going to provide you guys with service and that way if you don't do your job properly, I can I can submit a complaint to the Commission on Ethics. >> Thank you for your comments, >> Chairman. Point of order.
>> Excuse me. And what's your point? >> Um would would you mind chairman um reminding the public when they come up to their meeting um that we respectfully request that they don't use foul language? We have women and children not only in these chambers but listening
online. And I find it wildly inappropriate for anybody to have to listen to language that you know we don't allow children to listen to. Uh there's there's ratings and and it was inappropriate. This is not a back and forth right now. We don't do that.
That's not the way our rules operate. And I'm a I'm a rule follower. So I so I won't so I won't respond to your outburst cuz you're out of line. >> You're going to you're going to have to be in order or you'll be escorted out. >> But I'm out of line.
>> Okay. All right. Um Councilman Kent, I think you just did that quite uh effectively. We we have a um you
welcome to the uh Valuchia County Council meeting. the the your right to speak, your first amendment right is is really um important and and sometimes um that happens. Um
and chairman, if I if I may, and that's why I said respectfully request the speakers not to use foul, inappropriate language. you know, we've been counseledled by our very competent legal
team that we are limited with um what we can demand from the public when they get up here and speak. Um but we can request that they not use that type of inappropriate language that I don't want
my wife to hear and I don't want my children to hear. And I think there's many others in our community that think similarly to me. There's a time and place for it. The time is never I'll let him figure out the place.
Right. And which is why I start every meeting with making that uh request. You just made it again. I honestly wished you would have done it at the last meeting. That was pretty disrespectful. If it ever happens again, trust me, I I
will because there's not much that I I regret and I regret that I didn't speak up at that moment to help you get control of the situation, but understood. >> Thank you, chairman. >> Okay. Thank you.
>> Okay. Uh unfortunately, Wendy Anderson, you're next. Not unfortunately for for us, but for you. I know I don't have to ask you to watch your language. >> Well, you know, I do have to talk about a dirty thing, but I'll try to keep the language clean.
>> Speaking of uh pool. >> All right. Thank you, Chairman Brower and council members. I am Dr. Wendy Anderson and I live in Dand district 1. I'm making a brief announcement this morning to fulfill a requirement by the Florida D to recruit homeowners for a
state funded study. I am an environmental science professor at at Stson University. As a faculty member affiliated with Stson's Institute for Water and Environmental Resilience, which is Stson's Environmental Research and Community Outreach Arm, I have been working on water quantity and quality
issues in Central Florida for the past 11 years. We all understand that septic tanks are one of many of one of the many contributors to the nutrient pollution that causes algaal blooms in our springs, lakes, and rivers, including the St. John's River and the Indian River Lagoon. Nearly two years ago,
Chairman Brower, you introduced me to the entrepreneurs at Riovation who have developed a costeffective drop-in system for use in existing septic tanks that they claim can reduce nitrogen in septic effluent by the state standards of at
least 65%. Subsequently, Stson applied in July 2024 for funding from the Florida Department of Environmental Protections innovative technology for harmful algolooms program to serve as the independent third-party testing organization to evaluate the
effectiveness of these products. This project was ranked number one out of 54 applications for this program in 2024. Our contract with D is now underway. So, the Stson Institute for Water and Environmental Resilience invites
residents of the Lake Bearsford Terrace and Lake Beersford Palms neighborhoods along the north end of Hon Road to attend anformational meeting on December 16th at 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. at the Sander Stson Aquatic Center at 2636
Alhhamra Avenue in Dan to learn about an opportunity to participate in this research project that is focused on improving septic system performance. We are seeking 40 households 40 households to participate in this study at no cost to the homeowner. Selected participants
will receive a free septic tank pumpout and inspection. An evaluation of tank suitability for the study. Random assignment to one of the four experimental treatment groups with different configuration of biomaze products. This includes eight controls with no products installed with
bi-weekly performance monitoring for one year. option to keep and finally an option to keep the installed air raator and biomase system at no cost or have it removed at no cost at the end of the study. For full details um on the project scope, site eligibility,
homeowner responsibilities, and contact information, please review the website at www.stetson.edu backf. Thank you. Thank you very Thank you very much for that update. This is huge. I'll talk
about it in our closing comments. Um David Juel. I'm David Juwel from Orman Beach Unincorporated Valuchia County. Yesterday I visited Orman Beach Planning and Development Department seeking facts
surrounding a St. John's River water management warning letter which has a city airport sports complex construction site currently shut down. The city site was pumping dirty water into A14 canal
which collects to the Grover Branch Creek which flows into portions and through Valuchia County and emptying into Tamoka River. Uh along with this 7 acres of excavations have occurred so far at this
site. My questions were also about a $400,000 grant which the city of Orman Beach received between 2014 and 2016 from the EPA to assess pollution at the airport.
What were the findings? I spoke to Orman Beachch director of planning and development. He was aware of the grant but nothing of the findings or even if the assessment had been done. He offered he referred me to Mr. Alex
Schuman, a city engineer who I have not heard back from yet. I'd like to read from page three of the original application to the EPA. These are the city's words. The city has
concerns over unknown and potentially significant contamination that may have been associated with 15 years of past activities at the former US military base once located in the airport area.
Petroleum products and hazardous materials commonly found on military bases include chlorinated solvents, petroleum fuels, engine maintenance products, pesticides, toxic heavy chemicals, radioactive
materials, lead paint, asbestous containing materials. The airport has been a builtup, but potential contaminations have not been delineated nor removed to the city's knowledge.
Toxic substances have been used on this site. Love Canal in Niagara Falls, New York, was responsible for birth defects and children as young as three years old dying from cancer. Discovery was in
1977. The commission is active today. $98 million in compensation so far and 200 million in the courts still remain. We don't need another love canal in Valuchia County. This is where our
children play. >> Thank you, Mr. Juul. Would you will be contacted. Um, Angela Para morning. In case you don't remember, my name is Angelo Perah. I live in Dand. I'm a playwright, a college instructor
of performing arts, a painter, and the author of Playwriting for Dummies. Many arts folks over the past months have emphasized to you the economic benefits of funding the arts. Every dollar earmarked for the arts brings in $2 in economic benefits. Business.
If your financial advisor told you that making an investment of $612,000 would within a year pay off double that, wouldn't you jump at it? Something I think that hasn't been brought up is the health benefits of the arts. For instance, the American
Psychological Association says visual arts can bring enjoyment and encouragement. Expressing oneself through the arts can also have physical and mental health benefits. The World Health Organization points out art can help us process difficult
emotions in times of emergency and challenging events. The creation and enjoyment of the arts help promote wellness and so on. To be fair, Tria was unable to find any authoritative references to the health benefits of
motocross racing. Even after hundreds, maybe even thousands of your constituents have protested the withholding of arts funding and even after 19 former Valuchia council county council members
signed a letter opposing the freeze. Why are we still needing to come before you about this? My guess is that some of you are having trouble walking back that harmful decision. Dale Carnegie, author of How to Win
Friends and Influence People, said, "Keep your mind open to change at all times. It is only by examining and re-examining your opinions and ideas that you can progress." Another quote, "Mistakes are always forgivable forgivable if one has the
courage to admit them." That was said by the noted Asian guru Bruce Lee. Lastly, the late Australian theologian Desmond Ford said, "To change one's mind is the best evidence that one has won."
An artist, as an artist and one of your constituents, I ask, now I plead with you to hear us. Does it make any sense to withhold funding from over 30 nonprofit organizations that serve your constituents? Thousands of children,
teens, adults, seniors, thousands. Please, please reconsider that suffocating decision. What a post Thanksgiving gift it would be if you changed your minds. Thank you. >> Thank you for your comments, Lloyd
Bowers. Floyd Bowowers, Beachside Daytona. Before I start, Councilman Dempsey, as a fellow member of the Florida Bar, you are an excellent lawyer, and I want to make sure the room knows. >> Good morning. >> Give him 10 more seconds.
>> Thank you. Good morning, Chairman Brower. Morning, members of the council. Thank you for your ongoing service to our community. I don't think that people thank you enough for what you do up here. Um, I'm here today to let you know how truly humbled I am by the recognition you complain you proclaimed
on November the 18th, naming that day Lloyd Bowowers day in association with the unveiling of my plaque outside of the council chamber. It's a tremendous honor, not just for me, but for all those who have contributed to making Valuchia a truly special place. But
today, I come before you with a simple request. A request that is focused on upholding a decision that you already made on February the 18th. I'm asking you to maintain the cultural grant process approved by you on February the 18th after all the work that was done by
the cultural council and allow those funds for this year to be distributed to the arts organizations through the review process as we presented to you by the cultural council. I know there are concerns about public funding for the arts and I respect those perspectives. However, this this request is not about
asking for future commitments. It's about honoring the work that you've already approved. These grants are not just funding for the sake of funding. They represent an investment in the local artists, local organizations, and local cultural programs that make Valuchia County vibrant and unique. The
process that was set in motion early this year is one that's already been reviewed, discussed, and agreed upon. By upholding it for this year, you can ensure those grants are distributed to the organizations and individuals who rely on them to continue their important work for this year without needing to
revisit the broader policy decisions for the future. I understand that funding is always a delicate issue, but these grants are a way to support the arts in a meaningful structural manner that you've already established. By allowing this process to go forward for this
year, you can continue to provide crucial support to our local arts organizations and honor those decisions already made. Thank you again for your time. Thank you for your service to Valuchia County and for considering this request that you reconsider your decision. I hope you will uphold your
prior decision, approve the grants that have already been put in place, and continue to support the cultural landscape that enriches us all. Thank you. >> Thank you. Uh Ronald Scott, so forgot to uh to ask you when you whenever all the speakers come forward,
just tell us where you live in the county. You don't have to give your full address for safety reasons, but your representatives up here would like to know where you where you reside. >> Okay. My name is Ronald Scott. I live in Victoria Gardens. Uh I retired from the sheriff's
department after 28 years and I found I was going to run for sheriff in 2016 till I found all the files were rigged. They were missing
up on up there right now is for the Medal of Valor. That was given to me in front of the county council here. When I went to speak to the council last time where Mr. Kent is sitting,
Johnson started yelling and screaming at me and swearing at me that I was a liar. Now I brought in just part of the things This medal of valor was given to me in front of the county council. Council decides to name a day after me, which
human resource has an open day. They have no idea why it's there. Johnson says it does not exist. Okay. The next thing was my education. Leah, Law Enforcement Assistance
Administration. I signed a contract with them to go to Rollins. They took care of rounds. They took care of all my degrees till the last day. In turn, I had to work minimum three years in law enforcement. I was in Valuchia County Sheriff's
Department at the time. I received a bachelor's and master's degree with honors. They're not my file. I was told FDLE even sent a letter to Sheriff Chitwood to IIA.
He decided Rollins was not good enough for the file. That's not in there. Dr. Kelly put it in 34 years later. This is just part of the awards.
I asked Johnson why. My answer was education in this county is worthless. The only thing that means anything in this county is your name. Now working patrol, we had heard of evidence missing, property missing.
There are no checks and balances in this county. No one investigates the sheriff's department. The property can be missing. Nothing will be done. When the cases are closed, where does things go? We don't know. there's nothing going on with it.
I've tried everything to get things straightened out. It was a waste of time. I can name all different places that I called, including the uh ethics committee. They sent a letter to him. They told me
at first I could sue him. I'm not looking to sue him. There's a lot of people that retired from the sheriff's department. I can't be the only one. >> I found Thank you for your comments. >> Okay.
>> Morgan, Denny, morning. Um, Morgan Denny, uh, Historical Mission City. I was at the last county council meeting and I asked you if we wanted a meeting with Mr. Bartlett and, um, Mr. for rectum Walt and Susan Kchin and a few other people
to get them all in one room and you said that you would ask. Did you ask? >> Yeah. Let me let me stop you be before you continue on. Our rules say that we don't do what we're doing right now because we would never get through this meeting if we have a conversation. I met
with every one of those. Your case is under investigation. It's it's in code enforcement and there'll be a resolution to it. I can't make that any faster. That's where you are. >> I'm confused on on >> I know you are.
>> We going to get our meeting or no? >> Uh chairman, point of order. >> What? >> Yes. What is it? >> You have expressed to the public and this gentleman that this is not part of our rules. We don't do a back and forth and the back and forth is continuing. My recommendation, take it or not, is he can ask his questions. He has his three
minutes. He can do whatever he wants. But the second we engage back and forth, we're breaking our rules. I appreciate that you shared it, but he's continuing to ask the questions. >> So, if you have a statement that you'd like to make, go go ahead and make it. >> Uh, well, I was um at your town hall
meeting and um like say you jump for 15 minutes said communication, communication, communication. You don't call anybody back. Mr. Bartlett said, "We need property. Got to have property. Got to have property for retention." He's bent over backwards to give away
the the property that we're wanting the the rightway that was dedicated to the public forever. And as we speak, it was uh it'll be a year ago, January, they put a stop work order on this gentleman out there. He had he's wide open, hasn't
quit. He's here recently built bridges, put fences over this rideway. And like I told you before, Mr. Bartlett has been personal between him and us and he is abusing his power and there's no doubt
about it. And once again, we would like to have this meeting. And uh you said something to me at the end of the meeting at the uh the town hall meeting when I told you that we've been trying to get a hold of uh Mr. Breenwall for three years and you looked at me and you said, "Well, he's taking the candy." Can
you tell me exactly what that means? >> I never said that. That's a lie. And I and that is an absolute lie and I'm not going to entertain this any any longer. >> People standing next to me, I had to turn around and ask them, "What does that mean?" Every did you hear what he said? And they said, "That's exactly
what he said. Take your head." No. All you want. That's what you said. Thank you for your time. I guess we're not getting our meeting. >> I'll call the Commission on Ethics myself. That says a lot. about who we're hearing from. Uh Tim
Smith. >> Hello. Hello. My name is Tim Smith. I live in Mission City, New Smrna incorporated, Blush County. Um been dealing basically the same thing with Mr. Danny there. We've had water issues for been dealing with this whole thing
for like since January of 2023. Um in contact with Mr. Bartlett numerous meetings and he has done some things, you know, to try to help out some of the problems. I've had a meeting back on August of last year, Mr. Robbins was at
that meeting that was at Mr. Styler's house property for some of this issues that we're having. Um, we all kind of as neighbors that were there, quite a few of us, Mr. Bartlett, like I said, Mr. Robbins, uh, Mr. Styler had his engineer there, his lawyer there, and
we were under the assumption that this rideway was supposed to go east to west per Mr. Bartlett. And that got changed that day is going north. And when you east to west, it's only, if you look at you guys' maps that we got from the
county for the rideway, it's six like a little over 600 feet straight. That plan sent it like six blocks to the north. which to me I think that's a a long longer run restriction because you got to make an elbow turn but we agreed to
it per Mr. Robbins was there too that was then a year ago they dug a Mr. Mr. Styler's only last dug really anything on his property. County hasn't really done anything. Um, here we are still still got water
problems and that ditch that goes to the north that we all agreed on that has to go through other people's priv private property. And none of them people said that they agreed to that. And at that meeting we had that day, they said everybody was on board and said, "Oh,
no. Mr. Styler did, Mr. Bartlett did, Mr. Styler's attorney said that day, "Oh yeah, all them people agreed to that." I've talked to them people and and them people they like we they weren't even there and they should have been invited there if they're going to use their property. Why weren't they even at that meeting? I questioned that. Thought I
thought that was pretty strange. But after I talked to them, they said, "We didn't agree to none of that." So that plan to me, plan B is out the window. We still got a water problem. Why can't we just go straight with it for 600 some feet instead of going six blocks to the
north? just don't make sense. Cost effective for the city or the county. The county came out. I had the county come out. They uh Lewis Drivet came out prior to that meeting and they put a 36 inch culvert under the street right there. Spent a day digging the street up. They know that that's where the water has to go through our our area
right there. Why would you spend the money and the resources to do that and then it just stops like right there? Don't make sense. You know, it's like Mr. Denny said, Mr. Styler. He come to my house last week, matter of fact, knocking on my door. I don't have a problem, Mr. Styler. If he wants to do
whatever he wants on his property, that's his thing. But I have a problem with water, you know. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Uh, Richard, that's what I was going to say. Richard Malazowski. I'm uh from also
Mission City um 369 Ralph Avenue. Um we have a mosquito ditch that runs behind our property. Right. What they're proposing with Mr. Stitler's property is to actually divert the water down a mosquito ditch and route it to Pioneer
Trail. If you know where Pioneer Trail is and where those mobile homes are and how they have flooded, routing more water there is just irresponsible. I've actually taken some of the the topographic reports. I'm a graduate of University of Texas. I have some friends
at Texas A&M, which is the foremost qualified water management school in the world in in the country, probably in the world. And I showed them the maps and they say it should go directly back where that easement is, right through that right away. And they said it
doesn't have to be a ditch. It could be it could be a you know a culvert a a you know a drainage thing so that way Mr. Stitler could then build over top of his property but to route it down a mosquito
ditch that they never get cleaned out in 10 years where I live that's never been cleaned out and and and route it down Pioneer Trail and flood those people out. I don't know. It doesn't feel good. So the ask
is, and it doesn't have to be now, is that we look at this and really take a genuine look about what we're going to do for the people of Mission City versus one person. This is about the whole community. And
you see three people here, but there are so many more that have to work, that have jobs, that are taking care of their families because maybe they have a sick one that's on hospice, right? It's the community that I live in. It It's
We honestly I I respect you all, but we expect better. That's what we expect. And we just don't understand why when we ask for meetings, people don't show up. I've been to them. They just don't show.
And they work for us, don't they? Thank you. I'm I'm done. Thank you for your comments, John Nicholson. John Nicholson, Daytona Beachside. Couple of things on your consent agenda.
Items H and Y. H is your uh missing middle affordable housing. I'm not quite sure exactly what that is. But I asked you several months ago to look into Clyde Morris Landing. Uh because the police are out there all the time, the
sheriff's office out there all the time evicting people. Is that what you're planning for affordable housing? I ask you to look into what went wrong with the affordable housing on Clyde Morris Landing so that we don't repeat it. So
before you do this, would you look into what exactly what are the uh demographics that causes the police to be there uh 7 days a week, 365 days a year before we continue it. Uh secondly,
on why the parking garage, um 20 years ago when you expanded the ocean center, uh the city said you didn't have to build the parking garage immediately because you were short of funds and you did it in house to save funds. Well, it's been 20 years and the parking
garage is not there. And we need it. We need it desperately because the Peabody, the ocean center, etc. But where do the cars go? You see backups all the time when the Peabody and the Ocean Center have events at the same time. We need to look at the parking garage there.
I miss every year uh the first week in March. I'm told you did not discuss what core responsibilities for the county was during that meeting. Generally, I attend every single meeting that you have and you've never discussed publicly what
core responsibilities for the county were. and you denied the arts because it's not the core responsibility. So what is the core responsibility? You may have discussed it in a workshop but I've not heard about it anywhere. So it's
imperative to me that I understand why you're doing what you're doing. If you explain it and say well we we have to worry about our u finances. We're worrying about uh downtown in the economy. We we don't want to uh be
underwater etc. I can understand that. But then tell us what your core responsibility so we know in advance what you're going to cut out. Uh dog beach. I talked to my city commission about the dog beach and the response the response between the county and the
city. Apparently there were no response. Why did Orman city of Orman get to make a response and support the dog beach? But we lost half of our city and there was no asking of uh the the the city. I
think it's a cooperative. If the city if it's in the city um jurisdiction, you should work with the cities. And lastly, um I don't have time, but I will talk about the Kirk issue and what happened last week. Thank you.
>> Thank you for your comments. A fan of Pananski. writing my speech. Um, thank you very much uh for taking the me for taking the time uh to talk to us. It's my second or third. It's my third time now and public speaking is still not fun. I don't like
it. But I just wanted to come up here and to express some of the same things that you keep hearing that we need to fund the arts. I don't understand why a movie that might have been controversial maybe when you all were
growing up or something or like before I was born is controversial still and enough to remove the art funding especially that Athens took out their bid. So they said, "Okay, you have a problem with us. we're going to take it out. Please fund the rest of the arts.
Like, that's that's where we need to be focused. We need more community engagement. We need that's why I'm here really is that I want to do something to It's a disheartening time sometimes and I have two daughters. I know you said
you had five daughters, I I think, which I commend you. I stopped at two. No, thank you. Um, but I want a community and a world that they can grow up in, that their children can grow up in, that they can be safe in and not just safe, but happy and flourish and art
programming. And that is some of the things that is desperately needed. Now, it's not going to affect my kids because I am middle class. I can take them places. I can afford to buy something or do this. But it is going to affect kids that don't have that. Kids that are in foster care situations, kids that are in
kinship care situations. I am a social worker with hospice, which people say is depressing, but I wanted to be a social worker with kids. That's what I wanted to do when I first started working. Did that for like six months. Cried every night. Couldn't do it because the
system's broken. And we can't fix that here. But we can try to help other people navigate that system better. make sure they have more supports, make sure they feel heard, make sure that there is
community engagement. Um, I was a little disappointed earlier with I mean, I think that people should be called out, but I think that calling out the sword and not calling out the n-word, you know, like months back. I was listening live on that one with my kids weren't in
the car yet. I was in Caroline, but and I was surprised that no one said anything. I mean, I get it was probably shocking and like, but call out that I understand that's not what we're supposed to do. There's no back and forth and like engagement and that it would take forever because I'm already out of time and I had other things I was
going to talk about. But um basically just that I think there needs to be more openness um between all of us and just encouraging talking with your community before you decide something like the Charlie Kirk thing, you know, talking to that
historically black neighborhood and maybe, you know, realizing that might not have been the best place. Not that there was a best place, but anyway, it's it is what it is. But thank you. Thank you for your comments. Uh Shyra
Aosta. No, not going up. Good morning, council. I hope you all had a wonderful Thanksgiving and you're all still working off all the food and all the time with family because sometimes that needs to be worked off as well. Um Shira
Acasta, resident of the land. Love it here. Uh here again to ask for the arts funding to be restored. Um the residents of Valuchia County clearly find this issue important. Um, and uh, we're hoping that you choose to
continue to represent your constituents. Um, we aren't sure which constituents you're representing by continuing to withhold the funding. Um, as you've heard, um, I know nothing I'm saying is a surprise. Um, but that's at 2 minutes
and 14 13 12 11 left. Thank you. >> Thank you for your comments. Uh, Jalissa Mckendry. Mckendry. You're going to have to correct your name when you get up here. >> My name is Jalisa McIntyre. It's like
McDonald's. Um, >> beautiful. >> So, um, my topic has nothing to do with any of the items on your agenda. I am from an organization called Sunrise Community. We represent people with intellectual disabilities. We provide residential services and adult day
training facilities. Um, Commissioner Reinhardt has visited our location before and so has um, Commissioner Johannes. Um, and I'm just here to sort of come speak at the council meeting and spread awareness about what it is we do um, in Daytona Beach. We have several
locations. We've I' feel like I've emailed a couple of you to come out and visit. that two of you have made it out and I'm still hoping for the rest of you. Um, and I just want to spread awareness about what it is we do. We always seek support from the community. We are nonprofit. We are a fairly large nonprofit. I've bought
someformational cards if I'm allowed to give this out. I'm not sure that sort of just tells you about our organization in all the states that we're in. We are heavily concentrated throughout the state of Florida and we're over in Daytona Beach. And you know, we also our personal support, we also offer
supported employment. They do make ornaments. So they sell those. They also run a wood shop. They also work in the kitchen. We provide employment. We provide residential. Yeah, we try to do the best we can for people with intellectual disabilities.
So if you would like to visit, please come out. We are seeking support. Um some of these guys, we are their only family during the holiday season. So you guys get to go home to yours. They're here with us. So, whatever you can do, however you can support, however you can
come out, spread awareness, talk talk to local businesses, we're here. Thank you. >> Thank you. And if you would just hand those to the clerk here on your right, she'll distribute them to all of us. Thank you very much for your service. >> Okay. And that uh concludes
public comments for this part of the meeting. Move into uh item one, approval of the agenda. Do I have a motion to approve? >> Motion to approve. Second. >> Motion was made by Vice Chair Reinhardt.
Second uh by Councilman Robbins. >> All in favor say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? And agenda is approved as written seven to zero. Uh now we we will move to the consent
agenda. I'll ask uh two questions. First, is there any items that you would like to uh comment on after we vote? >> I Yes, Chairman, just for a comment, uh item CC >> CC
>> and I'll add to that list for comments, Mr. Chair, item V, W DNU. >> Great. And I echo David on. >> What's that spell? >> Um VWD. >> Sounded like a cheerleader there, didn't I?
>> VW DD SNU. >> That's correct. >> Okay. Just for comment. >> Comment. And I have one for a vote when you're ready. >> Okay. Uh Councilman Robbins. >> Thank you, Chair. I'd like to vote on discussion item H and also talk about um
item L and M. You can make those for a vote as well. H, L, and M. All for a vote. Okay. >> One for a vote. Also, >> Councilman Dempsey. >> Uh, Danny got mine. That's
>> okay. So, we have uh we have one item for a comment. CC. Um, we have uh VW, DD, SU, H, L, and M. All four votes.
>> No. Okay. Yours are only for >> mine. Yeah. And then I want to add a I want to add a in there for a vote. >> A >> A for a vote. >> And sure, what were the other ones for a vote? >> For a vote, we have uh A now. Um we have
H, L, and M. >> Mike. M is in Mike. >> M is in Mike. >> Chairman, you ready for a motion? >> I am. Motion to approve the consent agenda as presented by staff absent
items A, H, L, and M. >> Second. >> Second is by Councilman Santiago. >> Okay. All in in favor of those changes, um, please say I. >> I.
>> Any opposed? And let's start with the comment on CC. Thank you, chairman. Um, council, I just wanted to publicly thank you for your support. This is in the most northern section of district 4, and
I believe Miss Conson can throw a rock from her house to how close this is to her as well. Um, but this is a safety issue and a realignment. Uh there will hopefully be a single four-way intersection there at Old Kings
Road, Old Dixie Road, and Ross Common Drive. And I I just want to say that I received an email from Commissioner Dance,
Commissioner Andy Dance, County Commissioner Andy Dance, District 1. And just briefly, council, I'll just tell you he writes, "Councilman Kent, I wanted to send a quick note of support for item CC on the council's December 2nd agenda. It's very exciting to see
the re realignment plan for Old King's Road coming to fruition. I especially want to thank you for hearing me out on this issue numerous times over the years. The agenda item references both the road design and a path that intersects with Ross Common. My hope is that the design includes a path
extending from the county line to the new intersection, allowing old Kings Road residents to walk and bike safely to the stores in the public shopping center. Thank you again for advancing this critical safety infrastructure improvement with my regards, Andy. And I just want the council to know um there
is definitely a partnership with Flaggler County that will be happening to make this come to fruition. I just wanted to say thank you to you gentlemen. Okay. Uh, while you're at it, we have two members of the public that wanted to
speak on that issue as well. So, why don't we why don't we do that now? Uh, Roberta um, Poetta and then also Sally Arnoff. >> Good morning, chair and commissioners. Um, I'm one of those residents. I'm also
an HOA board member for Halifax Plantation Phase 1 and I'm here representing them. I don't have any written comments to submit, but I just want to say thank you for the meeting that we had earlier this year with Miss
Conan and uh com conversations with Mr. Kent about said intersection. Whenever there's a uh major accident on I95, north or southbound, Old Kings gets heavily impacted. In fact, we have
people because their GPS will take them through a section of our our HOA to try to avoid some of the traffic because that intersection is a nightmare. Um, how it it's it's
how it got to be that way, I'm not not sure except to speculate that uh because it was such a rural area until about 20 years ago with subsequent development of Halifax and the extension to the south of Halifax and Plantation Bay. And now
we have radiance coming on board um with about another 1,600 homes projected just north of old Dixie about two miles north. It's going to be a cluster cluster you know what. So I'm trying to keep it clean. Um, but I'm over 60, so
the filter sometimes slips. So, my apologies in advance. But anyway, I just wanted to say reiterate my thanks, my HOA's appreciation for paying attention to this intersection and getting it squared away
and hopefully sooner, as soon as possible. Thank you. >> Thank you for your comments. Uh, Sally Arnoff. Sally Arnoff. I am in Sugarmill Plantation which is in Flaggler County and we abut on uh Valuchia County. I
would like just to again reiterate our thank you. We have worked on this issue for quite some time and it's nice to see that I am around when you are solving it. So, thank you again for straightening out that intersection, taking the proper way of doing it rather
than the cheap way and rerouting it to form a new intersection at Ross Common. Thank you. >> Thank you for your comments. Okay, that takes care of CC. Um, do you want to uh start with me,
>> Mr. Brower? >> Pardon me. You also have a com a public comment form for item W. >> I do. I was going to do that when we got to item W. >> Um, Mr. Chairman, if if it's okay with you, I think VW, DD, SST, and you are
all along the same general topics. I think our engineer or one of our Well, maybe whoever's going to speak about it, let's just say that can come up. >> Okay, hold up a second. In that case, if we're going to do all these together, then let's hear from uh Sean Finley
first who wanted to speak on item W and then we'll have his comments to consider. >> Good morning, uh Council Chair and CH, um council people. Um Sean Finley, assistant city manager, public works director for city of Warren Beach. I just want to take this time this morning to thank you for the infrastructure gr
grant that you awarded us this morning. This is a transformative grant. This this is one that was long time coming. It's one that's been hung up in the HMG process for a long time. The size of the project is one that will transform and hopefully eliminate flooding in our
Central Park neighborhoods. And beyond that, I want to thank you all for your transform 386 program because that is a program that really is is working for us. And I think this is a pro project that really exemplifies why that. Um, Donna and Ben have been nothing but great to work with and and and thank you for thank you again for your
consideration of this grant and thank you for awarding it to us this morning. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. On on those that I pulled for discussion, I wanted to see if staff whoever Donna or Ben or Ben and Donna can give us a a quick uh
synopsis of what these five or six projects encompass. >> So, we're covering VWDS and >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. All right. So V, Donna Butler, director of office of recovery and resiliency.
V is a task assignment with Half Associates for Spruce Creek wershed. I'm going to let Ben talk a little bit about it too. There are two phases to this. >> Yes sir. So phase one is currently underway and that encompasses the uh area subbasin of the of the Spruce Creek
wershed which is the B21 canal. This phase two covers the remaining portion of the Spruce Creek wershed. Uh this is an area uh that this council identified as a priority back when we first started looking at these wersheds, it was one of the areas that has uh experienced a
considerable amount of flooding. So, as with all of these uh watershed analysis, subbasin studies, not just the ones from the county, but the ones from the city, the ultimate goal with these is to develop a series of projects that are feasible, that have an impact to uh
reducing flooding in these areas so that we have a roadmap, if you will, to to identify or to have projects that we know will work. And we can once funding is secured for those projects, we can move forward with design, permitting, and ultimately construction.
All right. Uh W is our third round of projects. We just came to you with round two. Found out about Orman's project and asked them if they were able to apply. Pona Inlet had been awarded under round two. They had uh originally started with
four pieces of property. uh ended up buying one very quickly after you all right after you all approved their their project last time for three parcels of property. They had a willing seller that said either buy it now or we're gone. So
they had to withdraw because we couldn't modify it after you approved it. The project becomes federalized as soon as they submit it. So we had to do that change. So we gave them the opportunity to reapply for the remaining two. These four parcels are going to turn um be
create a complete storm water system across the street and moving out um forward. Then you just heard from Sean Finley. This is a substantive project in the city of Orman Beach. This was their first time coming to us. So almost all of the cities now have come forward with
projects in these three rounds. >> That covers D. D is very similar S D. Sorry. So DD um actually I'll let Tad speak to that one because that's an acquisition of property that was flooded.
>> Yes. Actually DD is not part of the CDBGR. This is actually part of our road project on Orange Camp where we're making corrections to the uh storm water issues that are occurring on that western end closest to 1792 as well as the traffic snarl in that area. We had some willing sellers on the north side
of the road and so we've been working through purchasing. This is the second uh parcel that we've it's actually two parcels but the second pair of parcels that we've purchased on that northern side. So we're just working with those property owners. Uh some of them don't want to repair after the last hurricane.
So we're taking advantage of the uh reduced price opportunity that we're getting in that that area. And uh this is a purchase with local option gas tax. >> Thank you. You want to go? Was there I'm sorry. Was >> that was STNU?
>> STNU. Yes, sir. So, um S is a uh is a similar just what I explained. A lot of the cities come in and requested uh these flood studies to identify the locations where they experienced flooding and develop a a series of projects that can address it. This one
is for Lake Helen and then um T is a same type of situation for Daytona Beach Shores. >> Awesome. And it's these two are funded through transform 386 plan. >> Thank you. And and staff, thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and and colleagues and to the members of the audience. I I felt it important enough to have at least
some information on these projects because, you know, we often get criticized we're not doing anything on flooding. And this is another example that that's not true. We're we're we're spending millions and millions of dollars throughout our county addressing flooding concerns. Um, and this is a
another product that of the continued products we've been doing over almost two years now. So, thank you staff. You all doing a good job. Keep up the good work. And thank you, Mr. Chair. And whenever you're ready for a, I'll deal with that one. >> Uh, Councilman Johansson.
>> Thank you, sir. I'd just like to reiterate what David said. Um, you know, a lot of times, uh, folks ask us via email or or whatever, what are you doing for the flooding? And here's gosh, eight items, seven items that that
all have to do with flooding or studies that will lead to projects uh down the down the line. So, um, you know, every time Donna Butler comes up here, she's she's either telling us what projects are coming or or, uh, or or Ben is doing
task assignments. So, we want to keep up the the good work. Uh, government money takes a long time to get here. It takes a long time to allocate, but but we're in the execution phase now. So, it's pretty cool to watch these come up uh,
every other meeting or so uh, in bulk with tens of millions of dollars. So, uh my hats off to the staff for working so hard. I know it's been painful, but uh we're in the execution stage and it's a
beautiful thing. Thanks, >> Vice Chair Reinhardt. >> Thank you, Chair. Uh to echo what Mr. Santiago, Mr. Johansson just said um not just the seven or eight projects today. What everybody needs to realize, look at the projects we've done in the past with
respect to Port Orange, South Daytona. These are major projects. Orman, uh and it just continues and I think it was said best by Mr. Johansson saying we're we're in the exciting execution phase of this now. Donna, thank you very much because uh she always brings up good news. Good news to the people of this
county that have experienced this type of floating. Ben, Tad, you guys also, thank you so much. You and your teams. Ben, I had a question and I asked you yesterday. I'm sorry to make you walk back down, but uh I don't know if you got enough enough work out at the turkey rod run this this weekend, but you know,
we're going to give you a little more. I know you answered this yesterday, but refresh my memory. Um the area for W, and I'm glad you brought that up for Pon Inlet. Um, and I understand now that they did have three, had to go back and I understand the reasonings now, but
does that help the area behind I know I asked this and just does it will it some way help the area be those residents that are behind the um, uh, science center, you know, that have experienced that flooding? I've received many calls during the during the storm. >> I think this is a different area. This
is >> it is a different area and I saw the connectivity, but I saw it was close by, so I didn't know if it would help in some way. You know, everything's close by in Ponentlet. >> Yeah. Throw a rock, >> but uh I believe this area they it's a south turn road just north of Beach Street. They have >> Okay. So, it may not help them.
>> It's not directly. I think what they have is a series of um uh closed basins, believe it or not, in Pon Inlet where they have some low areas and they're >> so there's nothing really I don't know if we can do anything. >> I know that they're looking at that area as well. um they haven't requested
project specific for that but this is also one area where they >> and I saw if you looked at the map if you had the opportunity to look at the agenda and see the map I mean this this almost gives once those properties are purchased and you if you do something with respect to to retention how much it
will connect all those current water basins that are there so >> right and they're taking advantage of some lots that haven't been built on >> will they have connectivity under the roads >> yes >> okay so that's even better okay thank you very much. Appreciate it. >> Thank you, chair. >> Thank you, Councilman Santiago.
>> Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just thought another thing when when my colleagues spoke regarding, you know, all the the good projects that we've done, you know, for the past year that that relate to um infrastructure and flooding and I started thinking, you know, maybe I
don't know George or George's communications team can talk like I know we have our social media presence out there and I'll occasionally see a posting from um Valia County informing things and I think they're very informative. So I appreciate the messaging. I wondered if is there any
investment behind that and I I think the terminology is boosting or something like that. Do do we do any um um paid marketing to get our message out to the public? Cuz you know I still sometimes uh the >> short answer is yes. >> We do
>> we do boost uh we haven't done any uh print u adver uh paid advertisement lately but I think we've done uh a lot of boosting >> the digital side. >> He can explain uh what he does. >> Sure. and and as he's coming down
because you know oftent times you see social media posts that are halftruths false uh completely false and I don't know where they come from um and I think we need to put our message out there stronger and stronger >> yes sir we do boost uh we also have partnered with uh the cities recently
and brought together what you know as the pin group and invited them to participate also because a lot of these programs um overlap boundaries so and we recently um I want to say about two months ago launched a dedicated newsletter just to flooding and storm water. >> Good. Good. And and I'll expand on this
and the in and the obvious attacks that will come on social media after this, but I don't care. Um because, you know, we have individuals in this county that thrive on misinformation to just drive people to view their their data,
whatever they're spewing. And I think we need to be aggressive in combating the accuracy of that information and putting out the true factual information from the county. So, keep up the good work. Any additional tools you need, please, George, get that to us because um that
narrative needs to stop and we just need to deal with the truth. Thank you. Thank you. >> Thank you. Let's uh take the ones now that we're going to vote on alphabetically. So, that means we will start with item A, the airport parking rate adjustment.
>> Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, Cyrus, thank you for uh putting this together and um you know when I read it again today, actually minutes before our meeting, I went through that item again and uh our airport is doing fantastic as you know I've said several times. Um
anytime there's a fee increase though I'm a little sensitive to it. Um so I had a couple questions. Um do we track data on who's utilizing the parking like where they're from and things like that? Well, good morning, gentlemen. Cyrus Gallum, aviation and
economic resources. Uh, we do track as much data as we can. The majority of people that use our airport, of course, are Valuchia County residents that are using our parking facilities. So, that is correct. >> Okay. If you had to throw a number at it, and I won't hold you to it, you
know, give me a wag, you know, um, I won't spell that out. Well, so the the the parking facilities at the airport are probably going to be for our local residents that are here that are using the facilities or people that are coming from Flaggler County for instance or
Bvard County even in some instances Semino County, neighboring counties that will come and use either for long-term or short-term parking purposes. >> I know our our airports are largely regulated by federal rules also. My question, I guess, as I prepared for
that is, do we know if there's permissible to have a Valuchia County resident discount? >> So, that would be a grand assurance violation for us if we were to discriminate or impose different rates
or fees based on locations that users are from. >> I was afraid you were going to say that, but I wanted to ask it anyway. >> I understand. I I do see the fee the fee isn't that big of an increase. I I'm I'm happy that
you didn't go up to the top. So >> So we I I challenge staff to really do their due diligence and do market analysis on how much people are paying at some of the neighboring airports that we are competing with and so we are well
in line with the median for that. uh the purpose for needing to increase the rates. Of course, this past weekend, we uh had the pain of progress where we ran out of parking in our long long-term
parking facility and with JetBlue coming uh beginning this Thursday, we're going to have some continuing challenges with our parking infrastructure. So, I do have some short-term plans that we're trying to address, but ultimately my vision is to have a parking facility, a
parking garage, and continue to have positive cost customer interactions. Also, in 2026, we'll be bringing before this council a new parking operator. And with that new parking operator, we're going to bring in some new technology that's going to
help us more effectively uh collect revenues and and find different ways to use our parking facilities more effectively. >> And you answered my follow-up question to that, but I got another follow-up to that. Is sir, the additional fund is the
parking a enterprise style fund or that just goes into the general coffers for the airport? It is a a part of the airport general revenue fund that is part of the enterprise fund. Yes. >> And this additional 625,000
projected income. Um do you have you all have plans for it or you going to set it aside for future parking or what can you tell us? >> Absolutely. So that parking revenue system that we want to bring on board is going to cost us an estimated $1.3 million. This will help offset that
capital cost. But I'm also trying to find other ways and working with the state now on trying to find a way to fund a parking garage. Also talking to some of our stakeholders and partners that may be using our parking facilities as well to potentially partner up in
funding a parking facility or parking garage that could be multi-use. So I'm looking at all alternatives right now. And so that money gives us the flexibility to do that. >> Thank you, Cyrus. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> You're welcome. Councilman Robbins. >> Thank you, Chair Cyrus. real quick. Uh how much do we have in reserves?
Reserves for uh the airport. >> For the airport, we are approximately and that may be a better uh Ryan Oski uh question here. I I think with the security system project and some of the grants that we've had to pay matching fees were somewhere in the $20 million
range. >> Yeah, I would say they're all spoken for because he has like he said, these are good problems. Yeah, we've got uh with JetBlue and everything coming on, but we'll be looking at um just regular uh upgrades
uh associated with that. Gates have to be uh updated and they're old. We got air conditioning that needs to be replaced. So, we're saving up for those uh those projects uh here in the near future. >> I understood. And Mr. Santiago, I had the sense at first that you wanted to
try to give the taxpayers, you know, a break. Um and I didn't know if there was something we were looking at that could be done. >> We need to get him to change the federal law. >> There you go. >> All right. Thank you, >> Vice Chair Reinhardt. >> Thank you, Chair. This question may be
something George could answer as well. When you hit on that, the fact that David, it was a great question um with respect to how we can possibly assist the citizens of Bush County since primarily it's used. But I also understand the limitations the feds put on that and that we can't charge
different from residents that similar to what we have with the beach. Correct. Because we have to actually buy down out of the general fund to make those >> Well, the beach is a little bit different because the beach issues same philosophy. Well, the beach part, right? Same philosophy. The issue there with the beaches, it's a charter issue. >> Charter.
>> Yeah. But it's the same philosophy where we have >> I hear this is a federal law. >> Federal law. Okay. All right. I guess I was trying to think also outside the box a little bit. Okay. Thank you. Councilman Kent. >> Thank you, Chairman. Um, Mr. Santiago, I I love where you went with that. Thank
you um for trying uh to to give some more relief to our residents. I um I I knew Cyrus is going to tell us what he told us, but I love that you went there and you asked the question. And you know, Cyrus, I am appreciative that of
course you added the information about the survey of um surrounding airports and similarsized airports. And I love that we're still with this rate increase, we're not there where the highest are. Not even near some of those, like $29 a day. That's you know,
for some of those. Um so I I am appreciative of that. And the $20 million council in reserves doesn't um bother me as much because you got to have money to leverage money
from many groups. I mean, we've heard our state representatives say, "Don't just come to us asking for help. Show us where where you can participate in this as well." And I love that we've got some real dollars to participate um and help help make positive changes uh at our airport. Thank you.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you. Just quickly, I wanted to to add I'm I'm for this vote. I I think you've done a uh a good job with a minimal increase. And we say all the time up here that we let it go way too
many years sometimes before fees are raised. But none of us like to raise fees because it's it's really just another tax on constituents, but we we have to pay um for the services that we're providing. Yeah. $20 million sounds like a lot of money, but the the
uh county manager is right. It's it's spoken for. you you have places for that in the future. And that's the beautiful thing about the the enterprise fund of the airport is there's so many things that you're able to do that you're not taking uh uh general fund uh money from
from taxpayers. It comes from your own general fund, from the the enterprise fund. Um it's well managed. you do a a great job and I appreciate the work that you've done to to to keep this as low as possible but uh but reasonable. So, um
Councilman Santiago, >> sorry, Mr. Chairman, I just thought of another thing. I apologize to council, too. Um but it's somewhat related to what we're talking about, and I felt I could have brought it up in comments, but I felt it the timing is right right now because we're investing now more in the garage, right, in the parkings and
what we're preparing for with this increase. But I also felt compelled as we launch JetBlue this week, right? >> Thursday. >> Yeah, this Thursday we we launched the first flights of JetBlue for Boston, I believe. Right. It's the first >> Boston and New York JFK. >> Okay. Thank you. And and I still think
again about the previous hearing that we had when we approved the funding of JetBlue and and even the history, right, that some had concern legitimate concerns with. I wanted to expand on Cyrus. I'm not telling you how to do your job, but I just want to throw ideas at the end. I hope that
all of our friends that are involved in tourism are fully engaged with this JetBlue because it's a big big deal. And that also should include our hotel ears. Um, and um, I'm a fan of many of them and I
think some of them still have opportunities to step up for this county. I won't name names, but I hope we can have a um I hope we could have a dedicated um I already get beat up on social media,
right? I don't need anymore. >> Um I hope we could have a dedicated um I'll use the word task force with all of those involved groups for a dedicated conversation on making sure that these recent airline expansions including
JetBlue have an extra emphasis on making sure that it's successful. Um, you know, um, some of my colleagues took a a bold move and supported this given the history. So, I want to make sure that we don't get to I told you so. So, whatever
you need, George Cyrus, please bring to this council, let's not treat it. What I'm trying to say, let's not treat it like we treat any of the previous expansions. I think this one requires additional emphasis. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Councilman Dempsey. Yeah, just as a followup to what David was talking
about, you look like a proud mama up there. I mean, you should be. You have every right to boast your most recent accomplishment. Jet Blue, like I said last time, was a huge, huge game for the county. I just just to follow up on what
David was saying, are we expanding our tourism marketing overseas now? Because we now are basically an international uh destination. Are we going to expand our tourism board money to London, to
France, wherever um to try and lure the international to Daytona? >> So, I haven't had those conversations with our CBBS quite yet and they're actually going to be a part of our celebration on Thursday the 4th and
bringing on JetBlue. Uh however, yes, that will be a discussion that we will have and we will definitely try to look at expanding our reach now that we have this access to Europe. >> Yeah, exactly.
>> All right, great good news. Thank you. >> Deputy County Manager Suzanne Conchin. >> Uh to Mr. Dempsey's question. I will just say because this morning Lori Lori Campbell Baker with uh the Halifax Advertising Authority shared an article
in the London Times. So they were working uh they are working with uh international uh groups to promote our area and there's a very nice feature uh on Valuchia County in that article. So wanted to share that.
>> Yeah. And it really it it spoke about all of Valuchia County. It was a It was a great article. A guy that rode his bike from Key West to uh to Maine. I thought it said he went on to Maine, but anyway, there was a big chunk of it about
Daytona Beach and Pon Inlet, West Faluchia, all over. So, okay. I don't see any more uh comments. Um do I have a motion to approve item A? >> Motion to approve. >> Second. Motion to approve by David
Santiago, second by Vice Chair Reinhardt. Um, any other questions? All in favor say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? And item A is approved. 7 to zero. Thank you for your time. Uh,
that takes us uh to uh item H. Chair. I just had a couple quick questions. I just wanted to really confirm um that uh this was renewing our opting out. >> Correct. So this item um it's a proposed
resolution that will renew your opt out of the missing middle certification. This was the item that we brought as a special meeting last year and at that time um you opted to um approve the missing middle tax exemption. At this time, our data has not been received
from Shimberg, but we are anticipating it between mid and late December as long as that supports the ability to opt out. This resolution will enable us to do that by December 31st. >> Thank you. Motion to approve. >> Okay, we have motion to approve by
Councilman Robbins, second by Dave Santiago. >> Any other questions? All in favor say I. I. Any opposed? And item H is approved 7 to zero. That takes us to item L. Um
request to approve and execute a land lease management agreement for the Florida Forever Acquired Carter Quail Ranch. 1339 acres. >> Yes, sir. >> Talk to us a little bit about this. >> So, this is a Carter Quail Ranch. which
is 1300 acre piece that came through our program. This council put on the A-list as a priority. Our team met with the Florida Forever staff and asked them to um purchase this property for us and they did for $18 million. Uh they own
they have full title of the property. Um which is typical of state properties. Um before they will buy them, there's a a jurisdiction or some agency has to be the manager of the property. um when we asked them to purchase this property for us, we said we would become the manager.
So, this is just affectuating that uh agreement. >> Thank you, Brad, and uh the team for putting this together. I know there's a lot of uh great things coming about it. I was what I wanted to ask um and I'm and I'm going to support this, but I
want to see what kind of leeway we had. I know we were limited trying to find my notes again um of what we can do on the on the property. Can somebody speak to that? >> Sure. So, it's resource-based recreation. Um we the the way that this
process will play out once we sign this agreement with the state, we have to do some public hearings and have a management advisory group essentially that develops the management plan. Um, but we have engaged with Castle Bay Design and have a preliminary list of
some of the things that we would like to see on the property which we have uh overhead for you. So, you can see uh looking at some preliminary elements of the site uh and facilities. This is is subject to change, but I think this is a good starting point for
the conversation. It's different items than we typically would have on conservation lands. Um, our outstanding resource stewardship director has also had some initial conversations with FWC about having a small game um, uh,
wildlife management area and hunting area, which is not typical in Central Florida. So, it would make us unique. Um, so there's multiple options we have and uh, a council member will be appointed to that advisory group as
well. and and what kind of leeway if we have any suggestions we would like to make. Um I see like eco buggy tours, you know, which are the the um off-road buggies, big tires, stuff like that. Um something we talked about is is ATV
usage uh on this and uh an easement to access possibly other county owned properties. Uh where are we at with that? >> So we can certainly ask the state for um to do that. It has to be resource-based recreation. We've had a conversation and
strategy discussion internally that constant usage as trails may not be approved, but if we did certain weekends out of the year, it may be acceptable. But at the end of the day, they will be the one that decides and we will ask as part of the process. We continue as we
as we are evaluating properties we get in the door for Valuchia forever continue to evaluate them for ATV use as a potential but using a echo as the funding source. >> Is that something we need to make the recommendation now?
>> No, we'll include it. We we heard you loud and clear. >> Okay. I just I didn't I didn't see it on here. Um cuz I I see there may be um a conflict there with with the equestrian area, you know, and in in in looking at this. I'm
just trying to look for um balance because we have thousands of acres where uh in Tiger Bay, for instance, where the equestrians have the full reign of this and and the the UTVs, the dirt bikes, the enduro, stuff like that, they don't
have anything per se. Uh, and I know that that would be a conflict even though I support the equestrian use 110%. I'm just want to if we have to pick one, I'm trying to create a balance here. >> Yes, sir. >> Um, and I just don't want there to them to come back and say, "Well, you got equestrian on here. You can't do it."
Then it gets thrown in our >> We have some more options. So, this connects this is an expansion of Deep Creek Preserve. Um, so we're actually connected to the Deep Creek Preserve by the um southwesterly corner. >> Okay. see where the a property line is
there. Uh we have some more options because we wholly own uh Deep Creek uh on that property. Um so >> and would be able to use that for instance as like an easement to to access it. >> Well, we could Yeah, we can. It's very wet back there, so you may need to come
across Deep Creek, but we'll the entrance to Deep Creek Preserve, but uh as the conversations progress with the state, we'll keep you informed. But we've we've heard council loud and clear about having ATV riding trails. >> We'll cross that creek when we get there. >> Yeah. And there's a potential we
included as part of the conceptual plan a potential to have some of those also at the motocross site as well. >> Sounds good. Uh motion to approve. >> Second. Joe Hansen. >> We have a motion to approve uh by Councilman Robinson.
>> I just had a quick question. Chairman >> by Councilman Joe Hansen. And first question uh Troy Kent. Yeah. Um, the preliminary plan, um, I mean, it covers a lot of great recreation uses. I just didn't see number seven, the zipline
climbing ropes course. I don't see a seven on there. So, I don't know if you could tell us where it's going to be. It It's not on there. I I've I've looked like 35 times. So I I think the plan for that was to because it is probably the largest facility expense that we would
have is to go to a state model where they hire a concessionaire to run and take on the liability of that. So we would probably designate space for it towards the front and allow them to pick that. That's been some initial conversations that we've had.
>> Okay. Uh any other questions or comments? We have a motion to approve by Councilman Robbins, second by Councilman Johansson. All in favor say I. >> I. >> Any opposed. That passes six to zero. We'll get Matt's vote when he when he comes back
in. The same Brad for um the following I believe the following item. >> Item m. >> Yeah. With um McMillan Ranch. >> Yes. >> Just want to highlight whatever you >> Yes. So this is uh actually if we have a PowerPoint I believe
if not I have a a map for council's consideration. Um, so this is uh essentially the core of the Valuchia Conservation Corridor and this is the last puzzle piece of a a corridor of about 7,000 acres that we
have that runs south from Lake Ashby down to Maytown Road. And so it's buffers uh Lake Ashb um the Lake Ashby Canal I believe which turns into Deep Creek. Um so this is again protecting as you can see that comes out of the
property there out of the south of Lake Ashby. Um you know that is um that's a floodway essentially. So again the southern or the northern tip the yellow property that you see on this map is the McMillan Ranch. So as you can see we've
worked with the water management district to acquire the 6,000 acres to the south of that. And then across 415 you see Deep Creek Reserve um and other a easements that we've bought. Interestingly, the white is what is on
our A-list right now for purchase. So, we're really trying hard to fill in those gaps as we um complete the conservation corridor that was established 20 years ago using the wildlife corridor science. But this is an essential piece. It's got uh it is an
it's an expensive easement. I will be very honest with you about that. And it's why the McMillan have been very gracious with us. When we got the appraisals back in, we went to the district and asked for some partner funds to um ease the burden on our Valuchia forever funds and they've
agreed to that as a good partner. Um, but it's really the last the last piece there on Lake Ashby that will provide some water resource protection which is in the ballot language and and I and I appreciate that Brad and just explain it a little bit. Um, what activities are
they going to just for the public uh that they're going to still be able to do? I know there's they're they're cattle ranchers, right? They're cow. >> Are they going to keep that? Uh, >> they are. So the aggiesment when we included the uh farms and forest lands in the ballot language in 2020 that
really opened up a new opportunity for us to engage um some property owners who want to have a little bit more flexibility than an a conservation easement which if you go into a conservation easement you are essentially saying I will be a cow calf operator forever because it's a low
impact. We're giving flexibility. We were following the state's lead in the department of a easement document. Um providing some flexibility as the market changes. You know, um they can change operations so long as it's low impact. It can't be a concentrated feeding
operation. There's there's prohibitions, but they still have the rights. And um again, we're trying to balance both fee simple purchases and conservation easement purpose or purchases that will stay on the tax role and be managed by those property owners.
>> Thank you. >> Yes, sir. >> Motion to approve. >> We have a motion to approve by Councilman Robbins. Is there a second? >> Second, Joe Hansen. >> Second by Councilman Joe Hansen. >> Any other uh questions? David Santiago.
>> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Brad, did I hear you say um that it's uh wetlands? Mostly? >> No, this is property is mostly upland. What you say 10 to 20% is wet? 20 20 to 30% wetlands.
>> Oh, okay. Okay. And then also, I wasn't sure if I heard you correctly. Did you say it's a an expensive purchase? That's why you asked for help or >> It is an expensive easement. Yes. >> Um and and and why is it expensive? Is it because it's more than the uh praisal? No, it's not more than it's
it's a little bit more than the average of the appraisals. Um, it's not more than so it won't require a supermajority vote. Um, it's prime it's primed for development. It's if you look at it, it's got extensive frontage along 415.
There's uh utilities within a mile and nearly a mile of shoreline on Lake Ashby. So, if you look at the environmental aspects, but also the development aspects, that's why you're seeing it come in. >> Understood. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> And why we got two supplemental support
letters from Elasha Conservation Trust and Conservation Florida. We asked them to look at it and pro if they felt it was the price um you know was was right for lack of a better term to weigh in and they've included letters of support
in the packet. >> Are they going to leave some of the cows behind? >> No. The No. >> Think they have a stake. >> Councilman Dempsey. Um, couple questions for uh Brad. Uh, Brad,
did you ever happen to uh find out the percentage of our Valuchia Forever properties that were partners with with either a federal, state or municipality? >> Yes, sir. So um in the so the 2000 program 2000 to 2020 um you
know we our approach has always been to use partners and in that the 2000 to 2020 we use $77 million of local fund local funds and $40 million of partner funds. What we have is a lot of times properties that have we share joint
title on. We can do that with the water management district. We cannot share joint title with the state. So the only properties and you talk about ones that people would know the larger properties that we have owned outright is a a large portion of Longleaf Pine Preserve um a
couple thousand acres and Deep Creek Preserve. With that being said, it was part of a alternative water supply um solution that was proposed. So $5 million came from our utility to support the purchase of Deep Creek as well. So those are the two big ones that we
wouldn't have. Uh I think you're concerned about the the bureaucracy of you know people changing or you know if we have partners it complicates you know if needs change. So >> okay so what what percentage of I think
we're at 37% now the county has throughever. >> Yes sir. >> Okay. How much >> not? So it's been all partners. So it would be federal, state and local. So it's all partners. >> It is. So Canaveral National Seashore, Woodruff, Hard Island, which is managed
by the Dead Water Management District. So it's us and all of our partners. It's >> 30%. >> How much if you can tell me how much of that is with the state, let's say, >> or a state agency?
>> So the the district would probably um we we have the data. I just don't have it off the top of my head. I would say the largest the largest uh government land owner is the the federal. So if you look at Canaveral
National Seashore and Woodruff. >> Okay. So the majority of our partners are the feds and then probably the second biggest is the state. Is that fair to say >> partners in acquisition or partners in conservation? So >> well I mean contractually in bed with
>> state probably more than federal. >> Okay. >> Yes sir. And for instance, in this uh item M, are the contracts in item in is are the contracts on these other acquisitions pretty much the same as the one in item M? >> So this easement um yes. So the easement
is very similar language. Yes. >> So if we wanted to get out of this out of this con contractual obligation, we have to get the blessing of the state or the feds whoever our partner is. >> Yes, sir. Is that >> right? Okay. Um, that's all the
questions I have with Mr. Burbal. I would like to make comments. I don't know if you want me to do it now or wait until after David Andy. >> Let's let's finish with questions first and then I'll I'll come back to you. Uh, Councilman Robinson, did you have a question or comment? Councilman
Santiago. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. question is do including this one when we do these acquisitions do we look at the um economic the fiscal impact to the county as it pertains to tax roles >> $5,000 this will take off the tax roles
>> okay and then we do that as part of all every single one we analyze that um >> I will say this one's higher it's unusually high a lands are typically taxed at a much lower rate >> okay well good I'm glad we look at it because obviously the then the burden
becomes more on the remaining taxpayers. So, >> yes, sir. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Uh for comments, uh Don Dempsey. >> Yeah. Um guys, I think we got to step back and look at the the
forest and not the trees. The overall picture of what we're doing here kind of scares me and it kind of hit me recently. Uh you know, none of us here are in favor of SP 180, right? I think we've all touted that we want local control. We don't like big brother
telling us what to do. The state for instance, we don't like them telling us what to do, nor do we like the feds telling us how to run our local business. And um and we've petitioned the legislature to give us back our control of our own property here. But
yet what we're doing is we're selling off our rights to control our own property. I mean, we've got 37% of the county's property right now entangled with the state or the feds. We're in bed
with them. If we want to undo something on one of these agreements, we have to get their blessing. We've just basically sold away our local home rule. 37% of our county we have no control over now
because we're in bed with the state or the feds. And what really scares me about this is the word in perpetuity. That's a long time. 400 years ago this year, the Indians sold Manhattan for $24
worth of trinkets. And now I bet they wish they hadn't done that 400 years later. What scares me, and I'd like for to hear all your input, Stanford University did a article back on May 23rd of 2019. When fossil fuels
run out, what next? And so I'm going to ask you guys, what are we going to do when fossil fuels run out? Their article says that oil will end in 2050, gas will end in60, coal will end in 2090. That could be propaganda or it
could be the truth. I don't know. But I think we can all agree that at some point fossil fuels will be gone. And then what's left? Solar, wind, or nuclear? I don't think you know you felt the fall back with Belvadier. Imagine a nuclear reactor coming into Valuchia
County. Are windmills even feasible in Valuchia County with hurricanes? So that only leaves solar. And yet paragraph 5116 of the contract says no solar farms. Period. No solar farms. So what
are we leaving our future generation every time we enter into one of these? 100 years from now, 200 years from now, whenever we do run out of fossil fuels, what are we leaving them to work with? We're leaving them entangled with the state bureaucracy, with the federal
bureaucracy. I, you know, there's an old saying, the road to destruction is paved with good intentions. I think we all have good intentions here in trying to conserve our environment, but are we really doing future generations justice when we're entangling them with the state and
federal governments to supply their own energy someday? When fossil fuels are gone, what are we leaving them? I've said this in previous meetings. The word in perpetuity scares the the Jesus out of me. I don't like that. You know, in law, in common law, there was the rule
against perpetuities. You're not supposed to restrain the use of property beyond a life and being in 21 years. You know, it's it's a restraint on alienation. It's a public policy doctrine that you cannot encumber property for future generations. I mean,
imagine if the Dutch when they bought this said, "Okay, no more roads, no, they don't even know what a telephone was back then, let alone telephone poles or pavement or cars or I mean, things change." And I understand we're trying to do good for
the environment, but the word in perpetuity, are we really that are we all prophets? Do we really know what the environment's going to be like in 200 years? That we're contractually binding oursel to the state and we're contractually
binding oursel to the feds. If we want home rule and local control, why are we basically selling our rights away for beads? I mean, and 200 years ago, our predecessors in these chairs may say, "What were they thinking? They sold off all our rights to control our own
property for $2 million." I mean, it's one thing if we want to do this and use just county money for county purposes and only the county, but this idea of taking on partners, I understand, Dr. Burbal, it you're doing great with our money. you're stretching
our dollar as far as he can. But I think the problem is that we're going to be entangled with these other government agencies in the future and they may really have a mess on their hand when it comes time to find alternative sources of energy. Solar farms, I mean, all this
green area that we're looking at, a lot of that might be prime locations for a solar farm to to give us power. I don't know. I don't know what a 100 years from now is going to look like, but we're contracting ourselves against it for the next, you know, in perpetuity. That's a
long that's beyond Christ's return. We're encumbering this property. So, that's why I'm I'm a no on this. I really would like for us to put this on another agenda and really discuss if in perpetuity is really the best interest
of our generation and future generations and whether or not um you know just just to give better clarity because our goal apparently is 50% of the county to be owned through one of these types of programs and I'm really worried that if we're going to entangle
and give away our local control for half of the county property It's just I think it's something that we need to really explore. So, I I would ask that we table this. And I I don't know if this is going to make or break us, but I I just I I know it's going to come up on item six as well, and I don't want to
regurgitate this all in item six, but it's the same thing. It's just I really want to talk about this at some point before we give away too much. >> Thank you guys. >> Councilman Robbins. >> Uh thank you, Chair. Don, you do bring up some some valid
points here, but also too, if if you break down uh the property, we heard that 20 to 30% um is is wet. It's not buildable. It's probably not feasible to even get uh wetland credits. So, it leaves you with
150 acres out there. It's 5 or 10 acre lots. If it's RC, it's 20. So, what are we really getting? 10 or 15 lots um out of this that are probably buildable according to the zoning and the comp plan. And that's just off the top of my head in my memory and I I I could be a little off, but it just gives a
ballpark. You know, that area is is not going to have um high density. Uh you know, it could be proposed, but it most likely wouldn't be approved because it's not um um like everything else out there. So, you know, at the end of the
day, it is it is a lot of a lot of money and and Brad, I don't know the feasibility um to to to keep it local. What what would be our options um to to keep it local so we are possibly in in control uh a little or a little bit more in the
driver's seat where we're not so locked in if we have to do a Hail Mary 50, 60 years. You got to admit Don does have some points here. So >> yeah, I we talked at length this morning about this. I my response jokingly was
it's called Valuchia Forever, not Valuchia temporary. Um but the for this one for this one I think the um we would not take the district's $500,000 and we could do it. We have the money in our
land acquisition reserves. Um but one of the things I think that it gives a let me back up a little and just that number one this if it is a conservation easement it has to be in perpetuity. There's state statutes that say it has
to be in perpetuity. Um at the federal level um if it's not in perpetuity the the t the property owner cannot access the tax benefits associated with um sales like this. Um, so I will say the department of a is doing some different
stuff and we talked a little bit about that where they're doing some term um easements. Um, you know, I think M councilman Dempsey has some valid concerns, you know, about bureaucratic entanglements and, you
know, um, you know, the practical realities of having to get things changed. But there is flexibility in the documents that we provide. Um, and some things the resource stewardship director can approve. Like if they're changing an a operation to something and it's not on
the prohibited list, then whoever's sitting in Nick's seat, it won't have to go to the district um can approve that. So there is some flexibility for folks. But if the ultimately it needs to be modified, it can be by all parties.
>> So we're still left with perpetuity. >> Yes, sir. >> There's no opt out. No way out. Exogen circ, you know, whatever the case. There's no way out. Period. Just so we're clear. >> I don't I am not aware of any. Okay, the
attorney standing up. >> Sabrina Slack, assistant county attorney going on with Mr. Dempsey. Speaking of, it's a common law. There is the doctrine of cypra which uh if you want to go deep into your uh bar review course cypre is
uh uh for perpetuity cypra can set it aside if it is impossible or that it was not predicted at the time. So going on with this Stamford uh analogy, if it came to the point where you had no fossil fu fuels and you needed solar power, the common law doctrine of cyp
prey would then allow you to go to court and ask for your perpetuity easement to be set aside because of the impossibility or the necessity of something to be changed in the future. So even though it is perpetuity, it is the law. So there are lawyers and there is another doctrine called cyp prey
which you can set aside a perpetuity. Yes, we don't need to >> have nothing else. >> But that would be assuming we this was unforeseeable. We can foresee that fossil fuels are going to go at some point. So we can't claim we didn't know we were going around. >> Well, to answer his question, there is
the one way out. >> Well, yeah, force majour type of >> correct >> logic. Yes, Councilman Johansson. >> Thanks. Um, I I I think with with this property
uh in general that that if if a we can buy it with our own money, that that'd be great. But you know, we talk about the fossil fuel, the loss of of power. Um, we here at Luc County don't do a lot of
power brokering. That's usually done at the state. And if we're um if we're partnered with the state and the state wants to put power somewhere um I'm I'm sure we would find ways to to
do that. Um uh my thoughts. Uh secondly, it's easy to say no uh to putting solar, to put wind, to put nuclear or
you mentioned Belvadier until there is no power then all of a sudden some of those things become very considerable. Uh and and I'm talking nuclear. Um, so I I I wouldn't
be so scared about people being scared about nuclear as as more and more of those smaller um energy plants and whatever else we have come available. I mean there's there's there's risk in everything we do. Uh but more people die
in the damn highway than they do of nuclear fallout. So, um I I think once once we discuss things like that, what I don't want to do I I do want to get to doing it ourselves, but what I don't want to do is scare people into thinking
that that we got to stop doing what we're doing. Um last thing is 50% is something we've all talked about. It's nothing that I recall that we've
agreed to. So that 50%'s a goal. Um some say we might not even be able to afford 50%. So it's great. Let's let's aim higher than we are this week, next week. Uh but but
let's not get liquored up on 50% like we made it a a policy until we all talk about our core responsibilities in January or February whenever we're going to do that. And one
of them is that we mandate 50% but we're not there yet. Thank you chairman. Councilman Kent. >> Thank you. And Mr. Dempsey, if if you're trying to convince me with this talk of running out of fossil fuels to buy an electric car, I already told you
I will never buy one until their prices come down and when the batteries catch on fire, they stop burning after three days. So that's not happening. But I also wanted to tell you, you know, you mentioned this and I was like, what is Don talking about and running out of
fossil fuels in 40 50 what in the world? So, so yeah, when you do a search, it talks about oil approximately 47 to 56 years, natural gas 49 to 52, coal 133 to 139. But then you look a little deeper. This says United States has enough
technically recoverable oil to last approximately 227 years at current consumption rates according to the Institute for Energy Research. And then it asks, what country has the most reserves of oil? the United
States. What c what state has the most reserves? Alaska. So, you know, Secretary of State um William Seawward who uh um was it William Seabird? Seawward's folly. Yeah. Yeah. It was William Seawward. Secretary of State who did that great deal with Russia to
purchase Alaska. Well, it really it wasn't a folly. It was one of the best land purchases ever. Um maybe not as good as the New York you talked about there down in Manhattan but but but close. And it just reminded me
council to bring that up because then we also have people and and Don don't take it this way. I don't I truly don't mean this as a fear-mongering from you by saying that. But you'll hear people come and fearonger us. They haven't recently about water because we've had a tremendous amount of it fall from the
sky. So, they haven't been fear-mongering us about Florida's going to run out of water. Hey, Florida's never running out of water. And if you want, I'll meet you over at Silver Glenn uh Springs or any spring you choose if they'll let you swim at the spring head. And I'll challenge you
to swim down to the bottom of the spring head without being pushed out with incredible force of the water being pushed out. And where is that force coming from? Oh, that's right. Because the aquafer is jam-packed full of water underneath of it and it has to come out
somewhere. Sort of like oil spurts out of the ground. Water spurts out of the ground. We're not running out of water. And I'm going with the 227 years, Don. Not running out of oil. >> Um as as well, but I appreciate your points that you brought up um because
you had my buying bone there for a moment about not taking the $500,000, but then you listen to Dr. for Burbball. And it sounds like even if we don't take that, we're still locked in. We're uh in perpetuity. So, thanks,
Don. Um you caught me by surprise. I didn't know you were going to bring this argument with um um with fossil fuel. Um I agree with with Mr. Kent. That's and I think with with you, too. I think you actually touched
on it that we've been hearing this we're going to run out of gas in 50 years for about 80 years. You know, it's um I I don't know where we are with that. I'm I'm going to I'm going to take the other side of what Mr. Kent just said. I I
think we do have some some water problems, but the thing that really got me that you said was that we're selling our rights away. We're not. This isn't our property. It's private property. And when a private property owner wants to
sell his land for development, everybody screams private property rights. So when a property owner wants to put his land in conservation for perpetuity because that's what he wants his legacy to be, why is that not private property rights
as well? Why? It's a willing seller program. They're coming to us saying, uh, we would like to sell this, uh, property or or put it in, uh, conservation. Um, so I I don't look at it as us selling, um, selling our rights
away. We're allowing our residents to do with their property, what they want it to do. And and frankly, I'm more concerned with water in 50 years or in the next 10 years um than I
am with with fossil fuels. We we've got a company. I'm trying to get them to come to Valuchia because the owner lives in Dan. They're stationed their their laboratories are in Sanford right now. They're making hydrogen gas out of algae. They can do it in a very small
footprint. And the hydrogen gas, the the fuel cells that they're making, um can run in they can fuel cars, tractors, almost almost anything that gasoline can do. Um it can be done very safely. They take the fuel cells. They shoot them
with highowered rifles to see if they're going to blow up. The hydrogen doesn't blow up because it's such a stable source. Um and so so I think there is technology in in the future. But Troy mentioned go to um Silver Glenn Springs
and look at the water. The the fact is Silver Glenn Springs already has saltwater intrusion and it it's killing the vegetation in that spring. This is a far west um spring. We usually have saltwater intrusion on the east coast,
but we have it at Silver Glenn. And our state hydraologist says that the the the reason that we have it there is because we're pumping water faster out of our aquifer than it can be replenished. And so now we have two cities that are in
Valuchia County that are looking at injecting partially treated sewage water into the aquifer so that they don't run out of their cup limits. Um it it's an issue. So I look at this land. I said we need this a as our sponge. We need this
to help retain water um so that we're not injecting sewage water and polluting far more than just Valuchia County or being forced to go to um uh toilet to
tap water again. So to to me this is protecting future generations. It's protecting um water which is a requirement for for life. Um, so I'm uh I'm I'm a big yes vote on on this.
Um, Don, I'll hand it back to you. >> Yeah. Um, okay. And like I said, I never claimed we're going to run out in 2050 of gas or Stanford University said that, not me. Okay. So, I don't know what you think of Stanford or not. If you think
they're full of crap, then so be it. When do you think we're going to run out of fossil fuels? I >> I have no idea. I think it's going to be replaced but >> with what >> it's uh with what >> with hydrogen with not with solar farms, not with wind farms. They're they're
>> by they're not good sources >> by current technology. I mean I Yeah, I don't know when we're going to run out of fossil fuels, but I think we can all agree at some point we will. We're entering it. We're not Our forefathers wrote the Constitution and that was supposed to last for future
generations. We're what we're doing is drafting property usage and restrictions on property usage in perpetuity forever. Are we that arrogant that we really think we know what's going to be the
source of power in 300 years from now? Because this is still going to be on the books. Half of our county is going to be constrained by your desires now when you don't know what the power source is going to be in 300 years.
Okay, you might think 200 years or 15, it's still going to happen. So, what what right do we have to tie the hands of future leaders when we we don't even know what the state of the county is going to be in
150 years. But we have the audacity to sit here and say, "Well, we know better. We know what's right 200 years from now." I mean, come on, guys. We >> We have the audacity to tell the property owner, "No, you can't do with it what you want." >> The the common law that's been the the
restraint on alienation. Uh the purpose is to restrict freedom of future property owners to deal with the property as they see fit. Okay. What if the what if the king of England, oh King George, back in 1770 said all the colonies have to only have one one
cottage per acre? What if that was the what if that was the rule? But King George back in 1770 said that's the way it's going to be in the colonies from here on out. I mean guys, I'm not talking about a hundred years from now or two. I mean,
that's the whole purpose of restraints on alienation and rules against perpetuities. You cannot restrict property and tie its hands till Christ's return. >> And that's what you guys are doing. And what I don't like about this is we're we all sit here and tout that we don't want
we want local control. We want the freedom to do with our property. We're selling off all our rights to determine what we're going to do with the with the properties, half the properties potentially here in Valuchia County with the state's blessing and we're have a contractual relationship with them now
and then whoever that property owner is in the future, they may able to tie our hands contractually. I mean, water is a big issue and part 51.11 says we can't do anything with commercial water wells on the property. We're going to restrict half of the county
uh uh their right to use that for commercial water source. I mean, who knows where we're going to be in a couple hundred years from now. I I it really does not set well with me that we are actually defining generational usage of the county's property and encumbering it. If it's a
hundred years, okay, maybe that's one thing. But in perpetuity really scares me. and in tying ourselves up with the state and feds when we need to change the policy and the terms of these agreements. They may not be the warm and fuzzy uh people that
we hope they will be. I mean, apparently we have problems now with St. John's Water Management getting the stuff that we want done. We we I mean, when we wrote that letter to the state wanting to reverse SP 180, they didn't just say, "Oh, yeah, sure. You bet. We're going to work with you." No. So, what makes you
guys think they're going to be so easy and friendly to work with in a hundred years or 200 years when we're all dead and gone and there's a whole new clean slate of players? What makes you think they're going to be so willing to work with us the way we want to have them work with us? This is really scary territory that I think we're going into
and that's why I'm against it. I'd really like to have a full discussion at a later date about how we're going to use all this money with Felia forever and what terms and I don't think the voters ever voted to uh give away local control when they signed the referendum.
I mean, if you're saying they wanted to go ahead and buy properties for conservation, okay, but did they also want to entangle ourselves with the feds and and basically contract away our right to local control? Because that's what you can sit there and look at it
from a telescope or a microscope. Every one of these contracts we're signing away local control. We're getting in bed with the state and the feds and now we have to go through them if we want to change anything. I don't like it. >> Thanks. Okay. Uh Vice Chair Matt Reinhardt.
>> Thank you, Chair. Um Don, you can tell you're an attorney, so but um No, I say very good. Very good. Um although when Sabrina got up, you two went at it, I was lost. So, but I'll leave it at that. That's why we hire
attorneys. That's why I never became one. Um I do like the conversation. Don, you brought up some very valid points. You did, trust me. Um but I tend to lean on the other side of having individual property rights as well. And and when we talked about the information coming from
Stanford, I'm going to bring some levity to it and say, you know, these are the guys on the West Coast that decided to join the ACC. So, I'm just going to leave it at that. So, um, but see, I did make a few laughs. All right, that's good. Um, technology, you know, the the
the term current technology that you brought up, but I'm going to bring up one say future and advanced technology. There are things that we watched on TV. I took my first ride, now I'll never buy one, but I took my first ride, or I shouldn't say I'll never buy one. I I plan on never buying one uh in a
electric vehicle and you know you program I didn't know this but they program it in and it literally drives itself to your destination and you can take over at any time but I thought to myself we're we're already in the world of the Jetsons. Think about it. They're already talking
about having the ability to have vehicles fly. >> You're still in the Flintstonones >> and Exactly. And you know, and and I'm going to because of that, David, I was going to leave this one out, but I'll bring a little more levity to it when I say that we all enjoy our trucks. David enjoys his Vega. So,
the rest of us have trucks, you know, real real vehicles. And then sorry, but uh anyways, um I guess what scares me and and I I see why that the perpetuity remark scares you. I get
that. I think what scares me is the fact that when Mr. Burbal made the the comment that this could be open to development. Let's read the current temperature in our county where everybody's all against seeing so much being built. And I guess that's, you
know, I look at that as well when I make that decision. So, but I do respect what you said. I really do. Um, but I I I won't argue with you because I know I'm not the attorney. So, that's all, Chair. Thank you, >> Councilman Robbins. Hopefully we can we can put this to bed here soon. But >> hopefully we're still on the consent
agenda. Uh Don, something to consider. State federal parks a lot are in perpetuity, right? If you look it up, look what happens. Fracking, oil lines, golf courses, lodges. Look at Yellowstone. Look at all these places, right? Some of this stuff
I I I get the legal mumbo jumbo, but it's only as good as the paper it's written on. Things things change really quick. Let's be honest here. Let's be I get what you're saying. I get what you're saying. I and and I happen to agree with you. Uh and just to add with it and then and then shut up hopefully
um is is we have an affordability issue here um in in Valuchia County. Uh and one thing that I uh even though I do support this this program for for agriculture and preserving that because we we have to have food, right? Without without food,
we we don't exist. Um but on the affordability uh we're buying up so much land uh as well that's buildable maybe 15 20 lots tops here um that uh in my lifetime um uh being 40 uh
these prices uh just because of um u supply and demand I I think what scares me uh long term is is we're going to have prices like uh like bokeh where our kids their kids are not going to be able to afford the affordability in Valuchia County with all his land purchases is is
going to be out the window soon in my opinion and that's that kind of scares me as well. You know, to add to your to to to your argument, but if you want to have a future conversation on on maybe set a limit, uh set a threshold, right?
Um I'd be open to having that, but >> yeah. So, Councilman Santiago, >> thank you. Um regarding this one, I I'm okay with with approving it, but Don, I think your points are worthy for more
conversation. I I feel that way. Um I don't know enough about the particulars, but generally speaking, I get it. Um and I think it's worthy for this for this team to set aside some time to talk about that for a future contract because this is just a contract. This is
negotiated. Someone put it in there to say in perpetuity, it was someone's idea and both parties continued to agree. it doesn't mean that we can't discuss it or change the terms for future purposes. So, it's all part of the conversation, right? Um, and what what I had this one
wise person tell me everything is permanent until you change it, right? Um, so I just want to acknowledge your comments and I think they're worthy of more conversation and maybe we can change the narrative and flip the script and put more uh, lack of a better term,
more power on our side. I mean, if they're if they're giving us 500,000 and we're putting 1.5 1.6, we're putting in 2 million. Why is the powers evenly divided? I don't know. That doesn't make sense to me. I don't think that's good negotiating. And I'm not blaming our
team, but for half a million dollars and we're putting in two million, do we want to put them in equal um rights as us? I think it's worthy of a discussion how we deal with these in the future. We're not there today, so I'll be okay with this
one. But I think what you've done is you've opened the door for better positioning the county in the future possibly. So, thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Okay, let's bring item in to a to a vote. Uh the vote is to uh approve the
purchase of 213 acres of the McMillan property. Um Chrissa, would you call the role? >> Mr. Reinhardt? >> Yes. >> Mr. Robbins? Yes. >> Yes. >> Mr. Santiago.
>> Yes. Can we rename it Bedrock for Matt >> instead of the McMillan Ranch? >> Mr. Dempsey. >> No. No. >> Mr. Johansson. >> Yes. >> Mr. Kent. >> Yes. >> Mr. Brower. >> Yes. And so the uh the approval is uh
the purchase is approved six to uh zero and six to one. I'm sorry. You're not a zero, Don. Yeah, but I'm I need to go back to item L, you are out. And Matt adds his yes vote to that. So that was
unanimous 7 to zero on L. And I believe that covers the consent agenda at 11:13. Um, >> thank you guys. Valia forever was a great line.
It's what they tell you. It's not Valuchia. Okay. One of those days. Item three, um, county attorney and county manager annual performance evaluation.
Motion to approve. And, uh, I'm I'm glad this came up early on the agenda, late in the morning. Um, uh, everybody lose electricity.
Just me. several. Anybody else lose their screen besides Mr. Kent and I? >> Okay. Um I don't know if if since I can't see my screen, if anybody wants to speak to this, um I will
>> Mr. Johansson does. >> Pardon me. >> Mr. Johansson is the only person. >> Okay. So, so far I think we'll probably there'll be several people to speak, but Jake Johansson, if you want to start. >> Yeah. Did we get a motion in a second? Did Did that happen?
>> Um, a motion. >> I think Danny made the motion to approve >> to uh >> Yeah, >> I'll make the second. >> Okay. >> Yeah. I mean, that's that's that's my question. It's just a presentation, right? >> I just
>> Okay. So, it's a salary adjustment. C can you update us on Mike Dyer's uh batting average? It was a thousand last year. >> Yeah, it's >> it's no longer. Yeah. Um uh so I'll make comments, chairman. I um >> now it's back. We we've had a
>> we've had a a a pretty I don't want to say turbulent turbulent year, but we've had an interesting year. and and I believe that that the um the county manager has has navigated um
some some of the barriers we've put in his way, some of the barriers that that nature has put in his way, and some of the barriers that um u that that an organization has put in his way and and he's he's piloted the the ship quite
well. Um uh same can be said in in my opinion from from our legal help. Um now I know that that the county attorney is uh conservative. He he
and his staff do the best they can to protect us. Um even even when when we won't won't accept the help and and uh put ourselves out there anyhow. Um uh but but at the end of the day uh I have
never with either one of them assumed that their best interest or their interest isn't what is best for our community. Uh uh and and they work very hard to make sure that our community is
is getting all that we can get and being all we can be. um uh straight up. Uh it amazes me occasionally being a ex city manager how how neutral they can stay and uh uh I
very much appreciate that. Uh I I don't always get what I want to do when I ask if we can do something, but but they are um in at least in my interaction with them
always working toward trying to get me to Yes. or or maybe uh maybe not the way you want to go, Jake, but look at this route over here and and can guide me to somewhere that's a that's a win-win for the community and
um um and and gets me where I want to go. Um re regarding in particular uh the Valuchia values veterans um they they unbelievably unbelievably
uh beat my expectations. So uh that goes down to the staff and everything they've done. uh every every division or department director has done a phenomenal job supporting uh George uh
our policies and uh moving forward with things such as transform 386 values veterans roads and bridges uh Ryan with the budget and and and others uh it's just been phenomenal for me and
and I'm uh I'm proud to be part of the organization. Thank you. Councilman Kent. >> Thank you, Chairman. I um no surprise to you, gentlemen. I I like the instruments that they give us to use for their
evaluation. I I like that it's concrete. I like that it's in the record. They can have it. They can look at it, discuss it with uh with me or each of us individually. And I'm going to go over that right now. First, I'm going to do Michael Dyer. Um for the public listening online, the scale is one to five. One is
unsatisfactory. Two is needs improvement. Three is meets expectations. Four exceeds expectations. Five is outstanding. Again, this is for Michael Dyer. Legal competency, you have a five from me. Outstanding. Problem solving
decision-making. A four exceeds expectations. Management of the department, a four. Management of litigation claims, a four. You were a thousand. Batten a thousand. But there's that one. That one.
Management style, a four exceeds expectations. Interaction with county manager, a four exceeds expectations. Relationships with county council, a four. Community relations and ethics, a three meets expectations. And there are
notes. Ethics is a five. But I have asked for two years for our county attorney to make himself available to the public to no avail. Communications is a four. Intergovernmental relations is a four. Council member comments,
Michael Dyer continues to do a great job as our county attorney. I continue to believe public relations with our residents would get better if you met the public in an informal setting at a minimum of two times a year. Michael has
a solid legal team. He has made very wise decisions with his personnel and legal team. We are fortunate to have Michael Dyer as our county attorney. Mr. Dyer, any questions about my evaluation? You're a public employee, so we have to do this publicly. That's that's this is
part of it. Um, Mr. Rectenwald, county manager. He has the same scale from one to five. One is unsatisfactory, two is needs improvement, three meets expectations, four exceeds expectations, and five is outstanding. His leadership is a four. Exceeds expectations.
Decision-making, judgment, a four. Coordination, a four. Planning and organization, a four. Legislative, a four. Budgeting, a four. Financial management, a four. Job knowledge, a five, outstanding adaptability, a four.
Interpersonal relationships, a four. Community relations meets expectations, a three. I have comments at the end for that. Motivation and leadership, a four. Section two, communication skills with the council, a four. Exceeds expectations with the press, a four.
Access, a four. Activities, a four. With his staff, a five. Outstanding. And with residents, business, and the general public, a four. General member observation comments. George continues to do a great job as
our county manager. When community members want to meet with county manager, he always makes himself available. I continue to believe public relations with our residents would get better if you met with the public in an informal setting at a minimum of two
times a year. George continues to put the right managers in the right positions. And I know this is George's evaluation and we don't get to evaluate the managers, but Suzanne Konchin, you have impressed me every month that I continue to be an elected member on this
wonderful council. You continue to impress me. But now back to George. George continues to put the right managers in the right positions. Your department heads are all phenomenal. The county is fortunate to have George Rectenwald as our county manager. I'll wait for all the other comments and
council I'm prepared at the end of the comments to make a motion for a salary increase for both Mr. Rectenwald and Mr. Dyer. >> Okay, Vice Chair Matt Reinhardt. >> Thank you, Chair. Um, I'll start with Mike.
>> Sure. No, I'm just kidding. Um, I'll go back to something I said two years ago, something I said last year, and I have to say it again. And and consistency is important to me. Um, you've never varied from that. And and this is I know oftent times the the
public may see this as we're just giving all this praise, but I'll be critical where it needs to be, and I really can't in either in either sense. So, we often praise George, and I'll get to George in a second about the individuals that he brings on team-wise and what makes you
look better and what makes him look better. You have the same with your attorneys. So, I mean, I can go on and I can't name them all, but every every time I'm involved, whether it be the TDC or some of the other boards that I sit on where we have the opportunities to, and I call
it an opportunity to be able to make sure that we have county legal there to represent us to make sure that that I don't mess up. And you have great great members of your team and they need to be commended as well. They're a reflection of you and
what you've done. you are consistent and I and that may not sound like a great word, but it is to me and I appreciate what you do. Um, what I was getting at before when I said it two years ago and I'll say it this year, I tease when I'll think of something and
it relates to legal and um I have an individual that I speak to on a consistent basis about things and I I won't name her, my wife. Um, and she'll say, you know, you need to you need to reach out to to Mike about that. And I'm like, I'm not going to bug
him right now. You know, it's 9:00 at night. Okay, but don't forget. And I'll tell you that. And you say, well, you can call me anytime. And I think you mean that. So hopefully I never have to put that to that test. But um I know some do. >> He never answers my call.
>> He never Well, there's a reason. It's it's you drive a Vega. But anyways, but I thank you for a job well done. Um, and and going on to George, some words that I picked,
neutrality, optim op opportunistic. I can't even say the words. And a for a phrase that we use in corrections, firm but fair. different context with your staff than
what we use with the inmate population, but you are you're firm and fair. Um, with every project that we brought up and and I'm getting my wheels going on things and I get excited about projects and I drive Randa and Joe Deore crazy, I
know, and I apologize. Not really. Um, about some of the projects we want with the second chance. These are things that you always keep in mind that this is a 30-year dream of mine. And the excitement about it is just that. It's that it's coming to fruition. And that is exciting. So, but you also know how
to tell me to pump the brakes and why. So, you don't just say, "Matt, pump the brakes." But this is why. when we talked about some other projects related to it and I don't see the activity and I ask you and or oftentimes before I even get a chance to ask you say hey by the way
this is what we want to do first and this is why I love the explanation and I I truly appreciate that I don't tell you at the time but I do I truly appreciate it and how you work with us and how you work with your staff doesn't stop there
uh I have five cities municipalities ities in my my district. Um, and I also familiarize myself with other members of the of the county. I like to go to a lot of different events. It's known. Um, and
I oftentimes hear from the city managers about the great working relationship not just with the county but with George Rectimal and Suzanne. And I'll bring Suzanne also into that conversation because you two work so closely
together. So, and if you ever disagree, you're doing a great job by not showing it. So, but I I too want to thank you for being the great planner, uh the person that utilizes IPC skills that others in my former line of work could
take note from. And I've had the opportunity to work with you for a lot more than just being on council, you know, for the the time that you were uh at Road and Bridge and and as a county manager before, you know, when I was still with the county. to thank you also for a job well done. And I'll leave it
at that, >> Councilman Santiago. >> Wow. Following this love fest. Look at this. >> I was cheering up there for a second. I want you to know that. >> I just called down for tissues. Seriously.
>> Let me compose myself. I'll be brief. You know, both of you know how how I feel. You know, I had to tell you though, Mike Dy, I had my Mike Dyer baseball card and the value dropped on it when I looked online because it was a thousand average and I was like, "Darn it, I'm gonna put it up for auction." Um, Mike, your your legal team, you and
your leadership, good. I got no problems with it. I've had I've been fortunate enough to had exposure during my career on many levels of working with legal teams. You guys are top-notches without a doubt. My only thing that I do push you guys occasionally publicly is like
how do we push that envelope sometimes in that creativity space, right? I've said that how do we get to a yes? You know, I want I I'd love to I'm going to continue to push you as long as people send me back to how do we get to a yes and obviously still follow the law,
right? So, I enjoy that research and working with your team. Your team has been very good in communicating with me and and sometimes hearing my my crazy ideas. I'll say it. And how do we get to a yes with uh sometimes crazy ideas or innovative ideas depending who you talk
to. So, um top-notch. I don't really have to say anything more there. Um you guys, the countyy's lucky that we have you and your team. George, um I don't know what much they'll say. You know, I think Matt said it all. Um
I I think we're we're led well. I mean, we really are led well. I have no no worries. You know, I don't bug I don't really bug George much. I don't call him. Um he's a good administrator. Uh if he's got a problem he's got to share with me. I know it's a serious problem because he's calling me, right? Um other
than that, I let him manage the county, which is what we hire him to do. And um I I I don't worry at night that we don't have good leadership addressing um not only in times of crisis, which we've had some um as far as natural disasters. Um
and I think you manage the um the uh other challenges that you know, county government are are dealing with, you know, today's you know, volatile world. So, um I think you've a good balance and I think you got respect from probably most sides
because of it. Um and you have well intentions and with a very difficult uh communications world that we're dealing with. So, you do well with it. Continue to not that you're not, but continue uh hold your head up high and do I know
you're doing the right thing. So, um I hope you stay with us for many, many, many more years. Thank you. And I'll support the uh the raise when when it comes up. Thank you, >> Troy. Your name's up again. Was that going to be for a raise? Yes. Okay. Then I'll >> the talk of one. Yes.
>> I'll I'll wait um on that. The uh I said earlier, I'm glad this came up early on the agenda, but not early in the day. Um because what happened this morning in the opening comments um not only was
untrue, but I I'm sorry that George, that you had to sit here and listen to that. That's a strange way to ask a council for help. Um, what he's referring to is a public meeting with
two of your directors there with me. And what I said when he said that that that's a lie. It absolutely is. In fact, you've heard me talk for well longer than you want to now, but for almost five years. It's not even a phrase that
would ever enter my mind. And if I if I thought you were corrupt, I'd say he's corrupt or he's he's taking the the candy is um it's absurd. And um
but unfortunately, you get that. Mike gets that a lot. We all get that a lot. Every one of us up here is corrupt and and you you're on the take and Mike's on. It's part of the life of service in the public. We we ran
for it. Um we invested money in it and we try and do the right thing and and um and when a vote doesn't go somebody's way, they think it's it's corrupt. It has never entered my mind that you
are um taking taking cash on the side for your job. However, when I look at how you're paid compared to other county managers, one might think, well, maybe he should because you you're one of the lower paid ones um in the in the state
of Florida. And I think that's probably because you're penalized that you didn't come as a as a county manager from a you weren't recruited from another county with a high salary and you worked your way up from behind a shovel in road and
bridge to um you worked with your hands, your head, and your heart to get to where you are. I've watched you in meetings with all of your staff, with all of the directors. They respond to you not out of fear, but out of respect because they trust that when you tell
them something, you're going to keep your word. You don't ask them to do anything unethical. You do push them pretty hard to get things done. And um so for for me I I spend a lot of time on
on the third floor and I see how you and Mike um operate and um you deserve every dollar that you are are made and and the 1% more that that Troy's going to suggest here. Um
nobody wants your job. I I don't want your job. It never ends. It's the calls continually come and when somebody says he doesn't answer calls, you probably don't answer all the thousands of calls that come in. But I know you answer
calls because I hear about it. I know that you meet with the public because you've met with me in the public. Michael Dyer has met with me with the public, not not with open groups, but in the office here. And so, um,
I again, I'm I'm sorry that that was said in public and that you had to hear that. It's not true for the public that wants to know. I I'll get criticized for saying this, that we're all patting you on the heads and making your heads flat. But you have, you both have jobs that
require far more than 9 to5. It never ends. And the stress level is really, really high. Uh, frankly, I don't know how you do it. I'm glad that you're here. I appreciate the relationship that you have, you and I have developed that
we can be honest and frank and e and even when we don't agree, I I don't think I can't remember a time when we really had a heated argument. Um, but we have disagreed and we can do it honorably and and work through it. Um,
so, um, Michael Dyer, I think I I told you when I handed you your evaluation, um, today um, I haven't given George's yet, and in fact, I'm going to send them both by
email so that it it is public, uh, record. Um, Michael, I think I've spent more time with you this year than any year that I've been here because it has been a year with with problems and challenges and and issues and most of the my last year I didn't vote for a
raise for either one of you and it was based on um uh just fiscal uh challenges and pressures and some issues that we were facing. For for George, it had to do with the with corrections. Uh, well,
I've worked through that and I've investigated it and I've seen what happens and and as often happens, you were unfairly accused of of of being a heartless uh whatever what sometimes it's really
one of the most difficult things that a manager has to do is terminate somebody um or allow them to uh to resign. Um, nobody likes doing that, Mike. and some of the most pressing
things that we have faced this year when I have gone to you to talk with it. You knew what was coming. You knew I was going to do it and you you had already prepared it. Senate Bill 180 when I went and said could can you write amendments
to this and um you handed them to me basically you said I'll email you had already done it um because you hate this as much as we do having local control take taken away my my biggest
um not a pl complaint but a point of encouragement and it's unfair is that um I think you're too cautious. However, I think I gave you a five on that because it's your job to be cautious. It's your
job to protect us from from lawsuits and and while you're cautious, um you always you did this morning with me, you always give me options for getting to that yes, to getting to where you want to go. And that's
that's all I can ask for is your legal professional opinion. Um, so I you I'm I'm glad that you're both here. I've worked with with other county attorneys here and county managers. I I started
being confronted with both in 1975 when we were having issues on the beach. And um I still remember their names. I won't mention them now, but you are a vast improvement uh both of you as far as as far as your legal and professional
knowledge, but also your uh willingness to communicate with this council and with staff. >> Even uh even Russ >> even No, I'm I'm not talking about any of your staff. Um yeah. Yeah, that's part
of part of the good that I see in you. You you have how many attorneys are on the third floor? I always tell people there's 10. >> Yeah, there's 11. >> Okay. That >> Well, I'm not including Russ. So, um it's uh you actually downsized when
you we did >> when you took over and you've you've driven that pretty hard to keep uh to operate within the fiscal constraints that this council uh keeps placing on us for for good reason.
So, uh, Don Dempsey. >> Yeah. I just I have the same accolades for both George and Mike. Uh, Mike, you've, uh, every time we've talked about legal issues and stuff, you always seem to know your subject matter. Um,
and Russ is always there to help us with the big words. Uh, so nothing but praises for the legal team and, uh, and as well as everybody else. And then George. Um, yeah. I I just have nothing but respect for you. You uh you're a
common sense guy. You're very approachable. You're easy to talk to. Um it I mean, you literally juggle chainsaws for a living. And uh you've got competing powers pulling you from both sides at all times. And I I don't I
wouldn't want your job. And uh but you seem to be very good at it from my perspective. So I just have nothing but praises for you and Mike. Uh that's all. Thank you guys. >> Thank you, Councilman Robbins. Thank you, U Chair and and members of council.
Just like to make a suggestion. If you look at all this stuff, uh here I don't know what the motion was going to be, but I'll just go down this uh the current managers making uh 271. Uh let's just
say 272. Brevard 297, Sarasota 284, Lake 281, St. John's 347 seminal 283 and 354 for Orange. But if you look at the population and look at employees and whatnot, you're going to see we're the
third highest populationwise uh out of out of all these regional um counties. And same thing pretty much goes with the attorney. Uh, I don't know
what the motion was going to be in terms of the race, but there there's kind of a disparity here if if you actually look at this. And I'd recommend maybe getting the county manager and the attorney up to speed to probably where they should
be. And and also too, if you get a second, I've been seeing this now for five years um for for what they put in. If you put them these folks in a private company, they're they're million plus dollar employees. Just being honest with you,
2500 employees. Um, but go look in a private company. Uh, CEOs, what what what what some of them are making. So, um I don't know how to put that into motion, but the county manager based with the
population, he's making way less than uh than even Seol and Lake. I mean, our populations are are much and demands much more there. So, um, and look at Daytona
291 and he's a city manager, you know. So, um, but, uh, nothing's, you know, what can uh, Mr. Kent, can can you help me can you help me here? Uh, get get
these boys uh, and girls up to um, right >> probably the uh, where they should be. >> Well, it depends. It depends on Chairman. May I >> uh Yes. Are you done? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. It it depends. Um Councilman
Robbins, it depends on if if this council is so inclined to do a one-time salary adjustment. Um I can I can tell you I don't know that I'm there yet. And I'm going to tell you why.
George Rectenwald and Michael Dyer have never come to me and said to me privately, "Hey, we're grossly underpaid and and we would like to be made whole." Um, we've not had that conversation. So, because I haven't had that conversation with them, um, my belief is that maybe
they don't believe that they are. But, you bring up a very good point and I'm really glad that you you went through and and talked about some of those places. Um, I'm I'm not even going to talk about a city that's going to pay their city manager close to $300,000. Like I'm not even like we've got other
fish to fry and I'm I'm not even addressing that. But I'll go with Michael Dyer first and that is with 11 attorneys that he helps run in any private sector job. You're right,
Mr. Robbins, he would be making well over a million dollars. his firm would be making well over a million dollars. But he chose to be our county attorney and I'm so glad he did. Mr. Rectumald, how many thousand employees? 2,000. What? How many
employees do you have >> around 2500? >> That's what I thought. >> What are their names? >> Um, the star and the A's. No. >> And and the same thing goes for Mr. Rectenwald, him running any type of
Fortune 500 business, which he would be probably close to it with 200 employees, he also would be making well over a million dollars. So, I agree with you, Mr. Robbins, but he didn't choose that. He he has chosen his his professional
life to be a public servant and um and to work in in the public domain. And and with that, there are some good things and some bad things. And I think that's with with any job. I could be convinced possibly to do a
one-time salary adjustment. I could if if there was enough um common sense that I heard from this council about why, but I'm going to tell you where I am with both of them. Um I I spoke with our human resource
director just to make sure my memory was right, and we gave all of our general employees a 4% raise. I can tell you there are people in the public who are kicking and screaming going 4%. They already make a bloated salary. How dare you give them 4%. They need 1% or they need 0%. They make way more than you
know your public works. Come on. >> They of course well read I'll read it now. They'll be videoing me right now and putting me on social media ripping me apart for advocating to be fair to our county manager and county
attorney. And that's what I think a 4% raise does for both of them. Uh check my math, somebody, but I believe it's a little over $10,000 raise for for both of them. Um but a 4% raise is appropriate. I am
totally against giving uh general employees a 4% and saying well you know what to these two gentlemen we're going to give you each 18% because we like you. You know, if you and if you don't give the 4%, then you start looking at that
compression issue and you do that enough times and now you really do have an an instance where you have to do a huge one-time salary adjustment where you got to say, "Hey, you know, uh to keep these gentlemen here from being poached from elsewhere, you know, we got to give them
a $30,000 increase each just to keep them here." and if they were to ever leave and your salary is that low, you have a difficult time uh bringing in some good qualified uh people for that position. So, my motion is first for
Michael Dyer. My motion is and and I know there's other names that have popped up and I I want to remind you I could possibly be convinced for a onetime salary increase, but I'm not leaning that way. I am leaning towards a uh 4%
raise. uh for Michael Dyer and then after we get done talking about that one, council, I will be making a motion for a 4% raise for George Rectenwald as well. Thank you. >> Get a second. >> Second
>> second for you're you separating just the attorney 4%. They are two different uh individuals, two different positions, and I don't want to muddy the waters, so I'm going to do them separately. >> Okay. Troy Kent makes a motion. Don
Dempsey makes the second and uh uh Jake Johansson. >> Thank you, sir. Uh my comments are are regard regarding the the salaries. Um, in in my time wearing the George hat uh
at the city, I I never knew I don't think anybody that sat in that group that that would go up to their council, save one, and say, "I'm way underpaid."
uh that group of city managers and the county manager including the one prior to George was was very um very humble about what they do and and you know my mantra was I'm I told my council I'm
never going to ask for a race and if council doesn't want to give me one and and I can fend fend for myself elsewhere better then then then then it's time to go and um my council always gave me what I thought was fair when it
was fair and the budget allowed it. Um I I I don't think when you get in these positions uh positions of public trust, positions of public leadership that that by and large um they feel comfortable
asking for money. um how hard is it for elected officials in a lot of places to ask for money on on their own election cycle? U so I don't I don't want to I don't want to
lay that bar down and say well they haven't asked for it um uh so let's not give it to them. Um but having said that your motion leads me in a different direction. Um
it's it's tough as a as a leader of an organization that big uh to take a big raise a lot bigger than your staff is. Uh especially when you got the seven of us up here uh talking about fiscal responsibility and and being good
stewards of the tax dollar. But but part of an effective organization, we all just talked about the evaluation is to is to pay people what they're worth. And that's the biggest problem in in in in
public service is we can't pay people what they're worth in private because we don't work private sector. We don't demand uh a price for the goods. Um uh
we force people to pay for them. So so they they get paid a little bit less and hopefully we make it up for them uh with the pension and and u not a guarantee but uh you work hard for us and and and
you'll be fine in the long run. Uh, so, you know, going through both of these, uh, I I think we're close to the right place. I I hate comparing because every county is a little bit different, but we have to make sure we're aligned. So, uh,
neither one of these two gentlemen leaves us. That's all I have. Thank you, >> Vice Chair Reinhardt. >> Thank you, Chair. Um, thinking and and Mr. Johansson brought a few words that I had written down
thinking about that used the word humble and that's true. I don't think Mr. Rectald or Mr. Dyer are going to come up and ask council because they're uh not met fairly in the salary department. So, I think back to the 2500 employees that
we gave the 4% increase to, which I thought was awesome, and I think about what are their specific duties and everything from a guy that operates machinery to the officer at the jail that turns keys to the deputy that uh protects our
streets, which that could be a different story because I think that they're worth a lot to how we operate the ocean how we I mean I can go through them all but remember who leads all of them
and he sits right there. So his responsibility is a lot bigger if you ask me that's how I view it than what not to diminishing any person one person employee their responsibility but he the buck stops with him if they have issues
uh with the way a department is run normally he's the one that gets the email he's the one that has to respond he's the one that takes the heat in the media so that's why I lean more to that, you know, and not comparing to what one
person does. I'm sure that they've also when you talk about they had opportunities, you're right, they are public in the public domain. Uh, Mr. Kent, you're 100% correct. They chose that position. But we have all said and I think yourself included has said it's like running a
business. I'm quoting you, myself, too. I said it too. It is like running a business and they could turn that road and and run a business and get paid a lot more. You're absolutely right. And I'm sure they've been head-hunted
on occasions. They're not going to tell you that. When I was in and working for the county for for 30 years, I never asked and went in and asked for a raise. Not once in 30 years. I was appreciative of the fact that I got 1% 2% 3%.
very appreciative. I took the advancement opportunities not for the money because let's face it, they're not paid enough, but because I enjoy being in that leadership position. I enjoy teaching
other people. When you talk about teaching other people, that's what George is doing. He's not just a supervisor, he's a teacher. Same with Mike. It does bother me when I've looked at it
before. Uh when you when you think about comparing counties, Semino County for example, making a lot more, but uh you know, I'll play devil's advocate here a lot more. Their tax base is a lot higher from what I read. Smaller county, but it
is a lot higher. But there are others that get and and I'm with you. I don't want to compare it to an individual city because that's a whole different conversation. I I agree with you 100% on that. But with other counties, yeah, I think the argument I think the conversation needs to be had. So, I'll
I'll be waiting to hear um what the rest of my colleagues say with respect to myself and and where I believe Mr. Johansson's going and Mr. Robbins. >> Councilman Santiago. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mike, I'm waiting.
The the value of the baseball card is still going up and down. I'm waiting to see where that lands. See where I'm going to vote on this. Um but no, the but funnies aside, you know, I bet this is uncomfortable for you guys. I get it. Um you know, the way the way I look at I'm okay with a salary adjustment and I
think we should do one versus just a flat rate. Um, you know, I look at the value of the individual and what they bring to the organization and, you know, and and having the wrong person in that role, what the expense could be or the exposure could be. You
know, any bad decisions these guys make can cost the county millions of dollars, right? But we have a lot of trust in them given the review that we gave um that that that potential risk is minimized. Um, so without going too much
on my soap box, I think both of them should be as close to 300,000 as possible that this council would support. I think that's a fair salary. Um, not just because of the comparisons, but considering the conspira comparisons
also, but the work and the responsibility they have and the professional experience they have, that's that's a bargain in my opinion. If I was running a if I was running a business, that's a bargain. Um, and I think we should get close to that as as possible.
>> Yeah. And I don't I don't I think I could defend that decision. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Uh, Troy, I agree with your proposal on 4% for each of them. We're really just talking about the county attorney right
now, but I can I can speak to to both as I think everybody is. Um, I I think it's uh appropriate um especially since they negotiate with all of our employees um every year, especially first
responders. And I just I think if we if we gave them a what they would perceive as a giant pay raise, I can't imagine how that would affect negotiations. Well, you know, you're trying to give us, you know, 2%
and you just got this big. But I think to be fiscally conservative, um, yeah, if they were George and and Mike both serve in a capacity of a Fortune 500 company,
they would make a lot more money somewhere else. But this is where they chose to work and serve, and they do it well. I I think it's I just think it's appropriate to give them the same uh 4%
that um uh other employees got. Councilman Robbins. Yes, Chair, your favorite uh Councilman. Um quit winking at me, Troy.
Uh Mr. Kent, I just did some quick math here. um difference between four and 5% you're looking at uh 2700 change for for for George 25 and change for for the attorney. Um
would you be willing to amend your motion to the 5%? We'll come back. We'll look at this maybe uh workshop or think tank it uh to get those uh guys maybe closer here in the future. but also to uh and chairman to to what you had uh kind of hit on and and and and some
others in terms of keeping in line with the employees, you have to remember too uh that that we just approved um additional days off for our employees. And if you look at the uh or or the numbers and compute that that's three days off is is is huge. Uh I've been in
those shoes. I've been on those midnights, it it it's horrible. uh especially when you don't have employers that that uh that don't value you. So, you know, um our our employees are getting taken care of and we've made great strides to to uh get everybody up
to kind of industry standards uh in some sort of balance. Uh Mr. Kent, I'm throwing it out there. I think um we might be splitting hairs, but I believe uh 2,700 bucks and 20 another 2500
um would be a a a solid place to land in the meantime. And then we can come back if you're willing to uh amend your motion. Uh you'll have my vote. Um county manager and the county attorney's names are both up. Did you want to
preempt Troy or Troy or let him finish? Chairman, I was going to ask that I I yield to both Mr. Beal to Mr. D. I want to hear from them. >> Yes. Uh thank you. First of all, uh thank you very much. I mean, this kind
of conversation, my valuation, Mike's too, and Mike's going to jump in here and say the same thing. We've we've discussed this. I mean, we uh we would be uncomfortable uh taking anything more than what the general uh raise was for
everybody else. And that and while I appreciate the the sentiment and it does mean a lot to me, I know it means a lot to Mike, that's not worth the risk of what you're talking about. But I do think about everybody from Road and Bridge and uh Solid Waste and Out of the
Jail and all the various places. And you know, I I just am blessed to be able to run a team as great as the team we have today. And my evaluation, and I know Mike feels the same way, and he can
speak, my evaluation really is a reflection of the entire team here, and I just appreciate that. Thank my team, thank Suzanne, thank Gus and all the department heads and everybody on down that does that, but I would be uncomfortable taking anything
more than the general population of 4%. And I'd be I just I know Mike I want to take all the thunder, but it's uh I know you've talked he feels the same way. >> Mike, are you mad now? >> No. No, I agree. I mean, George said it
uh spot on. I I agree with them wholeheartedly and I do appreciate the comments today. Um I have a great team that I work with that I would not want to do the job without and uh I think you
we have a great group of people that we work with that are committed uh to their jobs, happy to be here, enjoy it. I couldn't ask for anything better. So thank you. I just canceled the auction, Mr. Chair. >> Councilman Kent,
>> thank you. >> Keep in the card. >> Councilman Kent discussing the >> attorney. Thank you, Chairman. And um I'm I'm not surprised by both of your comments. Uh you you both uh this past year especially have taken it on the
chin, as many of us elected have as well, from some members of the public. And guess what? That's that's part of this deal. Um, but I'm not surprised by your comments because you're both excellent at what
you do and you're top-notch managers and leaders and lawyers and this county is fortunate to have you. Um, David, I am not against the idea of
workshopping this specific topic and and I'll make a a separate motion after we deal with these raises to have a workshop to discuss specifically these things. A one-time salary adjustment for our manager and our attorney. I want the
last time we did any type of salary adjustment for any of our employee groups. I want a comprehensive list of what every manager and lawyer are paid in likes counties, counties nearby,
um, and their total package from the car to retirement, I mean, health, everything, you know. So, we have a real a real opportunity to look at that before we make a decision on that one-time salary adjustment, which may or may not come. And and looking at these
gentlemen, they don't even want that. They don't they don't even want us to do that. But there are times when it's needed. It's happened for police and fire in the past. It's happened for general employees. Sometimes you have to adjust things because things get out of whack. Sometimes you have elected
leaders who go for 10 plus years and don't want to give a raise and things have gotten out of whack and you've or elected leaders that don't raise the water and sewer rate. It's gotten out of whack and you've got to adjust it. So, I'm not against that. And I'll just say
Mr. Reinhardt, he is the one who answers the calls, but he's also the one who makes the top salary in this county. Blue, you know, this this part of it. So I I don't I just didn't want that to go by without without stating that. And and Mr. Santiago, if we got to about
300,000, if my math is right, that would be somewhere of like a 12% increase for Mr. Rectumald and about an 18% increase for Mr. Dyer. Just so we have those numbers out there. But this this um Mr. Dempsey is going to go next, but my my motion because of what they said, Mr.
Robbins, um I'm not going to increase it by the 1% because they're right. it it would create problems that we don't we don't need. And I think this is fair. >> Councilman Dempsey. >> Yeah, I I I'm glad to hear you say that,
Troy, because uh I'm good with the 4%. And just to kind of put it in perspective, um you know, we all took this job for to serve the community, not just for the money. And I think George and Mike did the same thing. And uh you know, God will honor that someday. And
uh but just to put it in perspective in the legal field at least um Mike at his now will be what 265 something in that neighborhood. He's making what a Supreme Court justice makes in Florida. He's
making more than a DCA judge over on in Daytona. They only make 223. A circuit judge only makes 196,000 a year. my wife, a county judge, gets 186,000 a year. And so, um, Mike, you're at the
pinnacle of government uh, attorney uh, pay, I should say. And so, the state attorney, I think, manages what, 70ome attorneys and countless staff, and I think he makes less than 200,000 a year. So, I think you're right on pace. You
deserve every penny you get. You do a wonderful job. This is not a slate on your worth. It's just you've chosen to be a a public servant in your capacity. And so I think looking at your uh cohorts, the Supreme Court judges and
all that stuff, I think you're paid in proportion to what they're getting. George, I have no idea what other county managers are making, but you again deserve everything that you're making. You do a great job. I'm really appreciative of both you and Mike saying you're only wanting 4% and nothing more out of fairness to the rest of the
county employees. So, I'll just leave it at 4% with that. Thanks, guys. Okay, we have one member of the public who would like to speak to this before we vote. Uh, John Nicholson. Um, as one member of the 600,000 bosses
that you have that put you in your seat, we expect you to hire the best to run our city, our county, uh, all our public properties appropriately. Uh, the idea of giving uh, a raise to the city
manager and, uh, the attorney to $1 million is a bit much for most of us. We are not that rich of a county that a million dollars is chump change. Um 5% I'm fine with but I understand the 4%
concept because everybody gets 4% which is the minimal. I mean you I wouldn't be embarrassed if you did not give 4%. All right. You have to do that. Um I'm wondering well because let me just say I'm extremely happy with the both of
them. All right. Uh, and you brought up my city. Uh, my city manager admits he's way overpaid. All right. And that's a problem in my city. We are not a very wealthy city, but our commissioners have
no concept of money. So, they just spend. They don't care. They just open up the books and say, "We'll just raise taxes." So, um, we don't do that in the county. You're very fiscally conservative, so I would not imagine you
giving a million or the 5%. Um, I believe both of them are extremely happy with the way they're being treated. Uh, the 100% batting average is a bit high,
but both of them uh, yep, but both of them do extremely well for us as citizens. the comment made that um they are not approachable. I have not found that problem. I speak to Mike
rarely um to um county manager all the time. Just walk up and talk to them just like anybody else. They're very very approachable. They're very very knowledgeable. So we the public and I wish there were hundred more people behind me coming up
to speak and I don't know how much you would hate that but we have to know how well is everything is going and I believe the county knows that and so your vote I would ask you if it's possible give them a cruise. It's not a
raise. So, they both go to the Bahamas or wherever. They and their wives, they take a as a bonus. You're not giving them a perpetual easement. Um, this is just a one-time gift for they're
running the county. Thank you. >> Wow. I'd like to hire John Nicholson to negotiate on my behalf for >> any type of negotiation I have for my salary in the future. John will talk privately.
>> We're going to talk about John's salary. >> Okay. One more member of the public. Um I think it's a T. You spoke before, didn't you? No one does. Um, I'm sorry. So, I'm a social worker. I wasn't even planning on talking about this at all, but hearing
the debate and everything. The thing that gets me is that we say this a lot. You chose this. You know, you choose this. You do this because you love it. We do that to social workers. We do it to teachers. We do we do it to nurses. They have to I mean, they seem happy. That's great. 4%. Like you said,
definitely give them 4% because that's just like the minimum. like as long as you're not bad at your job, you should get a raise because things cost more money because even though 265 like when I heard that I was actually very shocked that it was that high even I'm happy
it's not a million. I don't think it's ever going to be a million but you have to be competitive. So like I think what you were saying like getting a team together and saying what are the benefits? What are the extra things? Like why why does someone choose this?
It can't just be you love it because people also have to feed their kids and take care of their house and aging parents and think life. Everyone thinks that they're closer to being a millionaire than they are to
being homeless. And the truth is we're all closer to the other side than we would like to admit. It takes one tragedy, one major illness, one problem that pops up for you or for
someone you love that can derail things. So, we can't not pay people what they're worth, especially if they're good people, if they're great. And I went to these and I don't understand half of what goes on here, but it seems like they and honestly it seems like some of you guys don't, but they do. It's
they're the ones who know this is what we're supposed to do now. This is what we have to do now. We have to do this part because there are rules which we need rules. And I agree with a lot of you who very stickler with like the rules. Yes, that's the constitution. When you stop when you start stripping
away rules, that's when we get into problems. So anyway, that was all. I'm sorry. I just wanted to say give them 5% even if even if they don't want it. That's just what you want. Anyway, >> thank you. The motion on the floor is uh
a 4% raise for the county attorney. Um I don't see any other questions or debate. All All in favor of the 4% raise for Michael Dyer, please say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? >> Chairman, I'll make a motion at this
time to um for our county manager, George Renwald, to receive a 4% raise. >> Second. Okay. Any u questions? All in favor say I. I. >> Any opposed? And the county attorney and
the county manager both uh are awarded a 4% raise. >> Chairman, I make a motion to break for lunch. >> I didn't hear a second.
Okay. Uh we will take um it's 1212. Let's come back at one o'clock. >> Well, we got a lot of other stuff. Come down. Heat. Heat. Hey, hey, hey. Heat. Heat.
Welcome to the Valuchia County Council meeting. The meeting will begin in 10 minutes. Heat. Heat. Hey, hey, hey. Hey, hey, hey.
Hey, hey, hey, hey, hey. Hey, hey, hey, hey,
hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey. Hey, hey, hey, hey,
hey, hey, hey, hey, hey. Hey, hey, hey, hey, hey,
hey, hey, hey, hey, Hey, hey, hey. Hey, hey,
hey, hey, hey. Welcome to the Valuchia County Council meeting. The meeting will begin in five minutes. Hey, hey, Hey.
Hey. Wonder. I know it feel. I feel it. Welcome. Welcome to the Valuchia County Council meeting. The meeting will begin
in 2 minutes. Heat. Heat. Not your I give you money. >> Go sit down. Okay, we'll we will resume the uh county council meeting at 102.
We are at item four, which is uh the uh nonadvalorum revenue by >> chairman. Before we begin with that, I know this a little out of order, but before our our break for lunch, I had said that I was going to do something and I did not do it. And I like to be a
man on my word. if you're okay with it. Chairman, I I said I was going to make a motion and hopefully get a second. Um my motion is that before the month of August is complete, we will have a workshop, this council will to possibly
discuss a salary adjustment for our county manager and county attorney. >> Second. >> Second. >> Comment on that, Mr. Chair? >> Uh yes. >> Um Troy, I think Your comments also
earlier I may be wrong included I think some other positions and I feel that if we're going to do it we probably should consider that. >> No what I had said earlier was that I know in the past there have been some salary rate done for other positions. Um I haven't
had any of those come to my attention that they need to be looked at right now. So I I was specifically just going to keep it to these two positions because of the conversation we had earlier today. I didn't want today to get away from us without having an opportunity to see if we wanted to
discuss it. And if we do, I think before August is an appropriate time to make changes there. And if if there's a problem with anybody any other unionized group, that's George's responsibility to bring that to us and say, "Hey, we may want to talk about a salary adjustment
for this group or that group." So, >> thank you for that clarification. And if I if I may, would you be open to uh in the motion giving George latitude to when we have that discussion any
positions he feel that um may have any vulnerabilities or challenges to bring up added to it. Does that make sense? Like or director of X Y and Z. >> Will it get you there with me on this? Yeah, if it'll get you there with me, I will. And George, it's entirely appropriate for you to come to that
meeting and have no group that needs a salary adjustment. But if there is one, yes, I think it would be an appropriate time to discuss that as well. >> Perfect. >> Yep. I'll I'll make that change if the seconder will agree. >> Yes. Good. >> Danny was a second. >> Yes.
>> I had Matt down. >> Matt, are you okay? >> All right. >> Okay. Councilman Robbins >> on what he just said. Yeah, your name was up. I thought you might have a question or an addition. Uh, all right.
We have a motion on the table that before August, we would have a workshop on possible salary adjustments. >> Yes. >> All in favor, please say I. >> I. >> I. >> And any opposed?
I >> Thank you, chairman. I just think they made it clear this morning what they >> chairman that uh I'll make a motion to approve item four. >> I'll second it. I think we have the presentation in our packets. >> Okay. Uh item four, the motion was made
by uh Councilman Robbins to approve. Second was um David Santiago. Are there any questions, comments? Told you yesterday this is what was going to happen.
>> I'm I'm here for any questions. >> Okay, I don't there does not appear to be any. All in favor say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? And item four is approved unanimously. Item five, contract with Ajax Building
Company for the construction, management, and general contracting of the mosquita control services facility. Motion to approve. >> Second. >> Motion to approve uh by Councilman Robbins. Second was by Councilman
Santiago. Any questions for uh Mr. Bartlett? Any comments? All in favor of approving item five, please say I. >> I. I. >> Any opposed? And that motion carries. Also 7 to zero.
Item six, resolution authorizing of reimbursement and preliminary matters of limited tax general obligation bond issuance for Valuchia Forever Lands Acquisition. to approve.
>> A second. >> Mr. Santiago makes the motion to approve. Second came from Councilman Kent. And we have one member of the public who would like to speak. Um
Tana Dansky. Pardon? in response. I didn't even know that this was happening until uh Don brought it up and brought up and I actually was very happy to hear a
u politician talk about climate change and actually being concerned about it because I feel like we've moved away from that recently. Um, and I keep coming back up here because I just I care deeply about um uh the future for not not just uh for my children, but for
their children and locking it into uh perpetuity. I mean, I don't even know. I I don't even understand why that ban is even in there in the first place. It seems ridiculous. Although, it also seems like in like legal speak it can be undone. But that's like asking for the crisis to happen and just continuing to
kick the can down the hill, which is what we've done with climate change. It's what we continue to do. I have family that lives out in Vegas, the lake there, that's their primary source of water, like Lake me um has uh receded so much that
they're actually uncovering like mob hits from like the 70s. I mean, that's how much water is gone. No one wants it wants to talk about it because talking about it means change. Talking about it means probably increasing taxes which no one wants to do too because everything
costs money as you see here. Like it was 100 million whatever that was. That was a lot. I don't want this job. This sounds awful. Like trying to manage that much money is stressful. But clearly we have it to do things when
we need to when there is support um from above. So, I just feel like that was an important thing. And it's important too to when you're looking at statistics, you know, uh, Stanford, I didn't get a chance to look up where the other one comes from, but it's not about finding the outliers
that match what you believe. It's about going with consensus because science changes. Not a scientist, but it changes it. You go with what the consensus is, what the majority believe today. And sometimes that can change. had changed with like Alzheimer's. We thought it was
plaques and tangles. It's not plaques and tangles. That was like years of research down. But we know that something is happening. We know that changes are coming. These are not things that are really
being argued about in the scientific community. Scientists aren't going, "Oh, do we think this is really going to happen?" No, they're going, "How many species are we going to lose before somebody does something?" Like, there's species that are done for like the polar bears. Like, there's no bringing them
back. Like, I mean, they're not gone yet, but they will be because the damage has been done. So, let's stop that for our kids for the future if not for now. And even if it if if it's 200 years from now, slavery was like five generations
ago. Like, that's that comes faster than anyone thinks. and it's your kids kids. So, >> thank you. There's two names on the board. Is that for this for item six? >> Yes, sir. I just have a couple questions. >> Okay. Councilman Robbins.
>> Thank you, Chair. uh for this bond for um land acquisition. We have pieces of property that we're that we're targeting to to use this on or I didn't see any in there. I'll let
Brad address that. >> Yes, sir. We're in a position now where, you know, we've spent conservatively um to this point and acquiring properties, but we have about five in the hopper that we could use these funds for. Is is there some sort of exigent
circumstances to take out? Um because I I the reason I asked Brad um and I'd like to see the figures uh through the duration of the bond whether it's 15 years. I believe it's it's what the agenda item said, you know, but if you look at the bond, the same u rates like
we did for the sheriff's office, which was like a core need, the uh mosquito control core need um some of these tickets will double if not triple over the course of that the life of that bond. So, uh even if we pay it
off early, it's still going to cost a a lot more. Do we have uh is there anything putting these properties in jeopardy um to justify spending that kind of Bob to to >> Yeah. So I think that if you look at the
the the rapid rise in land prices um you know the uh Dean Stewart or Sanders real estate Saunders real estate um you know they are the big conservation player in in
the state and 72,000 acres um was lost of a lands or conservation future conservation properties to um development uh residential solar or commercial development. in 2024. So if you look at the price of a lands, USDA
tracks um 13.4% last year. It's a number that of the increase in uh cost per acre for a lands, the highest in the nation in Florida. And you know, the census tells us there's a thousand people moving to Florida a day. So there's lots
of pressures that will continually um you know, they'll have escalating prices. These are ones that are approved and are on the A-list. >> I get uh do we have any exe? We we can't control the market. We can't control uh the amount of people that that move
here. And really, you know, we had that study where uh the whole county was about 6,000 people per year per Clay Urban uh study a year or two ago. But but what I'm interested in is is seeing
making sure that if we're paying premium, right, premium for this um that that we're getting something that's environmentally sensitive, right? Uh and and that um uh and and that we have to have if there's a road going through, if
there's something else. But um I'd like to see a list and and I I see it in there. I'd like to see that a chance to see that um list of properties we're looking to to uh to use this money for.
Um because to council and David, something that you had brought up um several meetings ago, as you can see, we're taking property off the tax roles as as quick as quick as you possibly
humanly can. But we we want to diversify or this council has set some some goals to diversify our tax base with commercial industrial properties and future development and and uh I mean we're not really planning for future development. There's going to be no
development. Um prices are going to be skyhigh. So I think Don kind of hit the nail on the head earlier where we got to look at this possibly a little bit closer. um and make sure this is the direction we
absolutely want to go because we're we are creating a an issue um in my opinion. One of the things I will say if I may, uh when I sat down earlier, my team corrected me that the $5,000 will not come completely off the tax roles
because it's still privately owned. So, they will still pay a majority of those taxes. Whereas, if we were to buy a fee simple, they would completely come off the tax role. If I can ask a followup question to that. I know Danny still has the floor >> because if I may share >> because it's a a conservation easement
basically, right? Okay. >> So to answer your question, Councilman Robbins, this is something my team presented that that uh is working through the hopper right now. So, we have a a very large piece um that is a
one square mile of conservation um that this council has put on the A-list. It's the Town Gardens project and inclusive of 2 through 7. So, um Riverbend, this is the basically the keystone piece of the Vuchia conservation corridor. When
we looked at the map earlier and I said the white pieces are the ones, >> excuse me. >> Yeah, >> the the white pieces. So this is that 1300 acre piece um that is directly next to our dearing preserve. So it will expand our preserve um and it's on the
river on Maytown. So um that's a keystone piece for us because it it completes the southern end of the corridor. >> Does this have Brad? Does this have to be done right now? >> I'm afraid we'll lose these properties if we don't do it.
If I may, this um this is the preliminary matters resolution. This is not the actual approval of the bond. I do realize just like the last one that we build like a series of things. We started with the preliminary matters of $und00 million and then you just
approved the bond issuance. The plan right now is to bring back the bond resolution at the second meeting in January. We believe that we have u a major property purchase lined up for that same
meeting that that would uh be what's using the majority of that debt. Um there's a reason that you have not seen this bond until the fiveyear mark after forever was authorized because we don't want to take out debt and pay interest
unless we actually have properties that are that are lined up and and ready to be purchased. So if you were to get to the point where we actually do this is more like the concept. Are you willing to take out debt if we have the properties lined up
when January comes we'll have the property agenda item at the same time that uses up the majority of this debt and then you could make that decision at that point in time. This is more of like the concept. Do you want to
go ahead and use that authorization that the voters gave you and and have staff do a bunch of work because I don't there's a reason I bring this preliminary matters. There's a lot of work, a lot of staff time goes into putting all these bond documents together. The last one was 200 pages of documentation
that a majority of it involves my time uh putting together and reviewing as well as staff time. So this is more the concept as opposed to actually taking out the debt. Are you okay if we have those properties lined up when we bring it together
do this? >> Thank you, council. Um I' I'd need to see a little bit more detailed um than a couple stars and some round circles uh to to vote on this personally. I'm not saying I'm I'm for
it or against it, just to make a uh a decision u to to go forward. I don't want to put these guys through uh all this 200page paperwork uh with bonds and all and all this stuff. So, um I'd like to see what it's going to cost
over the duration of the uh of the loan or the bond. Um and and to Mr. Burba's uh point too, yeah, the land value could increase, but it al also could decrease uh as well. um record foreclosures. I
won't get into comments, but there's there's 100 different variables here that I think we need to consider, and I'd need a little bit more information on this before I can vote. >> Okay, Don Dempsey, >> Ryan, I don't know if you can come back up real quick. How much do we generate a
year on our blue ship forever? At the current property uh tax base, yes, it's about $12 million a year. >> 12 million. So, we're borrowing roughly three three years into the future. >> The proposed financing would be for 15
years. It's about three years worth of revenue, but we wouldn't want to use we you want to spread it out so you still have revenue coming in in the future years for other purchases that come in. And is it you is it possible that we could be issuing the same type of bond
for road construction or storm water >> budget management projects? >> This bond here is a limited general obligation bond which means we are pledging up to a certain millillage the full faith and credit of the county which is only allowable when you have a
bond referendum which is what was approved by the voters five years ago. So you could not issue the same type of debt for roads unless we held another referendum vote. >> It would have to be by referendum, not by council vote. >> If if you wanted to do a general
obligation bond, what we did two items ago was a nonadvalorum bond. And those are a covenant or promise to pay uh from available non-advalum proceeds because due to constitution, you have to have voter approval from for advorum bonds.
So we could take out other debt related to roads if necessary. In fact, I believe at the road workshop it was discussed the the possibility of taking out debt against impact fees like we did uh 21 22 years ago. U so there there are other options for taking out debt that
don't require voter approval. >> All right. Thank you, Councilman Santiago. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think I made the motion for this if I recall and I'm reconsidering my support on it. And I think that's why it's good that we have this dialogue and debate and conversations because new
things come to light. Um, that being said, with this map that was put up, I asked staff to to um focus in on that yellow. Um, what what is that? Is that what you were talking about, Brad? And and what is the price tag of that? Does that say 27
million? >> Yes, sir. So, it is um it's a council approved project. So, all of these are on the A-list. >> No, I get it. forget it. >> Um the is $27 million. It's 660 acres on the urban rural fringe. Has 27,000 cars
go by it each day. So it'll be highly highly utilized. We have actually um partnered with um the city of the land and the school board um to make this deal come to fruition essentially to to present it to council.
>> Development rights or purchase? Um >> it's a fee simple purchase. >> It's a fee simple purchase. Um, you know, one thing that struck with me, Danny, what you said was, and I know it was your words, and it wasn't necessarily staff's words, so I I want to repeat them so I get some clarity.
And that there were there sensitive lands, I think, things that we should protect. Um, and when I think of those things, I think sensitive is it's it's um environmentally sensitive, right? Whether it's wetlands or something of that nature. But we have we have
ordinances that protect us from that being utilized anyway, right? Because if I remembered when uh Clay gave us the last presentation on wetlands, we had almost no wetlands that the county had approved to be developed on. I the the one the area that we did was in the the
landfill because we had to do it to expand the landfill. But outside of that, Valuchia County generally doesn't allow almost no development on wetlands. So why would we pay for wetlands saying that we're concerned with conserving
wetlands if we don't let people build on wetlands? So I just it brought another thought to my head, Danny. So um somebody help me here. I'm stuck right now. So I think when you talk about environmentally sensitive, this is a
piece that uh is a basin essentially and northwest land has over two miles. You can see the little little lake Talmage uh or the the Talmages. Um so four lakes um you know mostly uplands over 70.
>> This is surrounded with development Brad. I know it's on our list. I'm not beating up on you and you know I'll just say hindsight or second thought whatever you want to call it, whatever the criticism will come with it. Um but I don't see this as a corridor
connector. It's a buying a piece in the middle of >> development >> development. So it's green infrastructure is the way that we look at it. So water resource protection, it's protecting the area
from flooding essentially. Um so all of those lakes that are that are all of the water bodies that go up and down Taylor Road are connected to this piece as well. >> But those areas flooded already, didn't they? >> In the last storm. So by keeping it does it protect it from flooding?
>> This is relief. >> Getting into debate. >> This is relief. >> I'm sorry. I don't want Brad. You do a great job. I I have no issues. It's not a think Brad thing. >> But to my colleagues, >> you know, the conversations that you mentioned earlier today about, you know, we really need to hone in what we're
buying and why we're buying and what the terms and conditions are along with some of the comments that Danny made. And then I and hearing the comments about environmentally sensitive stuff. I could and I'm not an engineer or anything like
that, but I'll bet there's probably a lot more environmentally sensitive areas that we could buy that are not that are more contiguous to the I think the terminology that's used often by staff. Uh uh the wildlife corridors, things of those natures. Um, and I know
we're not here to approve that one here today because I know it's on our list, but this is a funding mechanism. Yep. >> To approve a $27 million purchase that I am now struggling with. >> Um, I I would ask for the opportunity to sit down with you and talk about how um
this property serves the the objectives of Forever. Um, you know, I I think that I was I would be honest with you, caught a little off guard that we were focusing on this property because we have several. Um, but it will be >> I think it was the biggest number.
That's the only reason. I don't even know where it was until I you pull it up in the map. >> Correct. Um but I think if you look at the this is a self-contained ecosystem so you're going to have green infrastructure benefits um flood water control um you know filtering of water
quantity and water quality are the two things this thing this property does two of those things those things um I would ask for the opportunity to be more articulate and sit down with you to talk about it >> Mr. Mr. Chairman, I'm happy to to receive the invite from Brad. Um, second
to the concerns about this one only because it was the highest number and it's shining to me on the graph. Um, second to that, um, I also now given the the thought process and concerned, do I really want to put Valuchia forever in a position where
we're using three years of its funding um, when other opportunities may or may not come up for us to make more quicker decisions? So, um, I'm I'm going to, Mr. Chairman, and I, you know, I don't know the rules on this. Uh, Mike or or or Gus, I made the motion. >> Can I help you, David?
>> If if you'll withdraw your motion, then I'll be happy to if you want time with Dr. Burbal, I'll be happy to um ask that this item come back to us in the next two months if that's okay. >> Fair enough. I I want to >> Will you withdraw? >> I want to withdraw my motion. Okay. Support it. Then um council I'll make a
motion at this time to um uh move this item uh to time certain of uh before the March meeting so that staff has time to meet with those that would like it individually.
>> Second. >> So the mot the motion on the floor has been withdrawn. A new motion put on the table by Mr. Kent to um table this until uh March. Second was by Mr. Chair,
>> Councilman Robbins or Mr. Kent, if if we could if we can get details of of all the properties so we can see the full scope of of their uh their environmental value or their surrounding, you know, the zoom out on Google to see what's around it.
>> Dr. Burbal, you hearing what he's wanting? He's hearing it. I >> and I like that idea, too. because you know just to buy some of these properties blind I shouldn't use blind but just to buy property to buy property is probably not
smart but I have two other questions as well it's a lot of money and it ties the hands for a few years so if if we need if a member one member needs some time to discuss it with staff it doesn't mean it's a dead issue that's why I'm making this motion to table it so it's not a dead issue because it could be right now
if we voted on this so I'm trying to breathe breathe life into this by allowing this to be continued before our first meeting in March. >> Yeah. I I want to take a pause just for a second because we're And you have more questions for Dr. Burbal?
>> Yeah, just two quick questions. >> Um uh I'd like to hear from the county manager. I I have a feeling we're just >> Go ahead. If you don't mind, thank you. I think we went down a rabbit hole. Uh, I think you got to go back to what was
said by the CFO Ryan. We're not here to discuss those properties today. Those are why we're trying to set up for the general obligation bond. Uh, you you would you haven't bought anything. You wouldn't be buying anything until they
came back. What he was trying to do is have it set up so we could have a deal if we were to make a deal, bring back an actual sale, and have a way to pay for it. uh at a particular meeting. I mean, that could get put off easily uh you
know, a couple of months what you're asking for, but it would be nice if we knew as Brian said, this is the concept that we're going to borrow money because that is by the way the purpose of the forever 2 mills. Uh really all that is Mike has
explained in the past was really uh the ability to to borrow against those those u millillage. So at the end of the day if you would agree to the concept uh each of these purchases would be done um
uh individually as as they come up. So it's not you're not agreeing to buy the land today. you know, all you're doing is saying, "Hey, if we go forward with these five or six major properties, are you okay with us issuing a bond is the way to pay for it?" Or, because I've
already heard today, you know, he can go on out and start searching for partners, St. John's Water Management and other people like that, and tie the property up. This particular property that came up on there, by the way, I would argue, and I would like to talk with you, too, uh, you know, I hear all the time about
the lack of use of the property. Well, here's a piece of property environmentally sensitive and has recreational value and use within walking distance of of a lot of our citizens. So, I I I would say this is a very unique and very good piece of property. It does have flood val uh
flood protection value. No one has flooded along that lake yet. Uh that's another discussion, but you have a canal system that's being studied today. um and a system that connects all those lakes, by the way, which makes even more recreational possibilities
uh for that property. Is school board's interested in that property as well? Uh because they'd like to move the Dand um uh FFA farm over to next to their school and the city of Dand also is interested
uh in working with us on that property. So, you got a lot of interest in that particular property. We can talk about that more, but that's not the decision today. Today was just are you okay with the concept of issuing bonds to pay for it or do you want us to go uh at with
the other way we've been doing it with um you know seeking partnerships from St. John's and D and USDA and all the other ways he's leveraged money. And Council Miss Santiago, after hearing that, does that give you comfort or do you still want time to meet with staff? Because that's going to make me decide
if I'm going to withdraw my motion or not. >> Um I I'm still struggling with it. I'll tell you why. And if I may >> then I'm not withdrawing my motion >> because you know it I want to know why all of a sudden because it's been in existence for a while the program and
now are we now just creating a program for specific parcels because it's or are we going to keep the the question is like you said George do we want to stay the current system we've been using for I'm going to guess I don't know how many years 8 10 years. >> Well really well we on the last go round
we borrowed all the money right off >> in the beginning >> the bath in the beginning. Okay. Ryan's explaining is rather than pay interest and everything for many more years, he's got the ability to be a little bit more precise in his borrowing and and and the
timing of the borrowing just like he did also with the uh with the landfill project, which is going to save us money in the long run. So, again, great work on his staff in figuring this out. And that's what he's trying to do. He says, you know, but you got to know when you're going to make a land deal, you
got the you got to we have the money in the bank ready to go or at least we know that's the concept and we'll have it because it'll be pre uh pre-approved. >> I guess I know it's not my turn, Mr. Chair, but show I guess where I'm struggling still. >> Oh, I'm struggling. Maybe what threw me
off, George, is that that price tag of 27 million in the middle of a urban area. um when we often talked and again I know we're not here to discuss that property but when I seen the chart it threw me off and then I got scared saying what do we really want to start
borrowing money for a property that's the middle of an urban area and are there better properties I don't know but so Troy I I don't know the answer but I'm still stuck >> okay is there other questions before we
>> two questions >> Councilman Robbins for Brad or for Brian Brad, how does this if future councils for instance because the referendum said up to 0.2 mills, right? What happens if
future count we have this big debt because it's going to burn a hole in our pockets the minute we approve this, right? The money's going to be there. Got to spend it. What happens if future councils don't fully fund that point to where how
are we going to pay for this? Is this going to now hit the general fund? Are we going to um sell fairy dust? Uh how is it going to appear? This is a uh this form of debt limited general obligation and general
obligation in general is a it's set up with specific statutes and probably even the constitution uh has some things about this as well. Bond attorneys could help us if if we need further clarification, but there's definitely statutes that are in play. You are
setting up a separate mill when we had forever before, >> right? You actually, if you go back and look at your um tax bills and your trim notices from five years ago when the old program was in place, you actually had two different levies for forever. You had the debt service levy and the
operating levy. They added to 02 mills, but you don't have an option anymore once if you actually issue the debt, you have to levy the exact amount of taxes. There's no roll back calculation. There's none of that comes into play. You've committed to the bond holders to pay them and levy the right amount of
taxes to do so. So in other words, in just simple samsula terms for me, it locks us in. It locks in future >> to that debt service millage portion. Yes. >> Okay. Okay. Okay. George, you were done. We're
actually still in questions. Did you have questions, Don? Are you ready for debate? Then I'll >> Okay, I'll I'll start. I'm disappointed that I I I agree with George that we kind of got ahead of ourselves. I understand the hesitation and the price
tags, but we'll all get to look at those when they come back and those properties and decide. What we have done in the past, as we were just told, is that we borrowed all the money up front. We if there's any any staff member um worth
our trust and respect, I think we all agree it's Ryan. Um you know, we've already evaluated the attorney and the county manager, but Ryan Osowski is extremely fiscally conservative with our taxpayer dollars. And he's doing it
this way so that we're not paying more than we have to pay, but so that we also have money in the bank, so to speak, so that when these guys come back with land, we can actually buy it. And it's funded by the most popular program we
have in Valuchia County, Valuchia Forever, that 72% of the voters voted for. And it said in that ballot initiative um that uh we would uh that we could borrow um uh money through
bonds for this. It's all there that's all this is trying to do is set that in place so that Brad and his staff can go about their work and have money to purchase land when it comes up. We're not purchasing any land right now. I
it's a it's a little bit of a change from what's in the presentation, but I do want to I I consulted with bond counsel and I want to >> put something out there just for for thought. Um this authorization of a reimbursement resolution, there's actual IRS regulations were that we're that
we're um utilizing so that you can use tax exempt debt ahead of the actual issuance. You actually have up to two years from the date that you declare your intent to reimburse to do the actual bond. So,
what we could do as long as you have this intent declared from the IRS's perspective, taxexempt bond regulations, as long as you have the intent declared, you you have up to two years to actually issue the bond. So, we could accumulate property
purchases to the point uh borrow from the general fund until we get to the point where we've accumulated enough to justify taking out the debt. And then you could wait uh to actually issue that debt until you've got all
those purchases lined up. You in theory could um you know exactly what you're using your debt for at that point. You'd be reimbursing yourself uh out of the general fund. Uh, but this authorization for reimbursement resolution is what sets that up. It sets that 2-year window
up for the IRS. Doesn't have to be done today. It could still very well be continued until January. That's I don't want to make it sound like there's an alarm or anything, but that is really what the reimbursement resolution is about. It's about starting that clock. Everything you buy from here on out
would then be eligible for that future bond issuance within the next two years to be the use of those proceeds. You can't actually with IRA and sorry for the details but you cannot reimburse yourself for expenditures in the past
prior to a bond issuance without this resolution. >> So that brings up two questions for for me. You just said we could borrow from the general fund but we're borrowing from the general fund money that Valuchia forever mill rate puts in the
general fund. the Valuchia Forever Mill while and I don't want to get confused between the things that Mike has talked about that legally we're right now we're this is like a general fund type millillage but we still account for it separately everything you've ever seen that uses the 02 mills we have today
goes into the Valuchia forever land acquisition fund we do not co-mingle those two together while legally they might be uh as Mike has mentioned before the forever funds are not co-mingled with general fund right Okay. >> So instead of borrowing from the 12
million a year that from the military and Valia forever, we would borrow from general fund. >> Yes. And in fact the previous forever issuance there was a long-term advance from the general fund that was repaid over
uh at least 10 years. That's not what I'm proposing here. What I'd be proposing here would be you accumulate some purchases till you get to the point where you need to you absolutely have enough. You've borrowed enough from the general fund and then we issue the official debt for that. And when you
borrow from the general fund, that's not free. There would still be an interest rate that would be in play because you'd want to pay back the general fund the interest that it's losing from being able to invest those funds. But it does avoid the formal debt if you wanted to
go that route. >> Okay. and and I like that. But you said that uh the motion right now is to table into March that we could do that and it wouldn't hurt the process you just described.
>> It just starts approving this starts the two-year time frame where everything that you buy within that two-year period would be eligible for a future bond issuance to to be reimbursed. >> And chairman, just for clarification, I said up until March if Mr. Santiago
meets with staff tomorrow and he feels good about it. I I'm expecting staff would bring this back in January. I I just wanted you to know it doesn't have to be March. >> Yeah, I I know what you're trying to save it because you you saw it fizzling out in in flames and and apparently you
don't want it to. I don't want it to. I'm hoping that this would fail and we could approve it um to start it now and under the u explanation that Ryan just laid out for us. Um,
yes sir. Tell us who you are. >> I am Ken Artton. I'm with the law firm of Bryant Miller and Olive. We serve as bond counsel to the county on all of your financings. The reimbursement concept was u put in place by the IRS to
allow you to use cash to buy something. Okay? In this case, environmentally sensitive lands or police cars, garbage trucks. But if you use your cash, there's rules in the Internal Revenue Code that says, "Well, then you can't go finance it with tax exempt bonds." If
you spent your cash more than 60 days before your bond issue closes, the reimbursement resolution, which is what we refer to, this resolution is draws a line in the sand. Okay? It says, "Hey, we got the intent sometime in the future
to issue bonds and reimburse our general fund if we should borrow from the general fund to buy those police cars or garbage trucks." That's all this resolution. It does not authorize the debt. It doesn't authorize any acquisitions. It just allows you some
flexibility to amass, you know, the sites that you guys approve and then when you're ready, you go and you can reimburse that general fund if you so use your cash that way. That's all this does. >> That's a that's a great explanation. You
have a question for him? >> I got a question. Yes. Go ahead, Don. >> So, does this all presuppose that we are going to keep the millage at 0 2? >> You you are capped at 02. Yes, you can. you can go up to 0 2 to pay the debt service. >> So in order to get this type of option,
do we have to maintain it at 0 2? Because we have the discretion to lower this at this point at least to lower it to 0.1. >> It has nothing to do with your millage rates. Nothing at all. >> So we're not required to maintain a certain >> are not required. They are completely
unrelated issues >> until you get >> until you issue the debt. >> Right. Okay. That's okay. That's my question. So, we spent 27 million on a piece of property. Now, we have to maintain the 0.2 millillage and we've taken away. Is that right?
>> I can join this party as well. >> Another council member Jay Glover from PFM Financial Advisors. So, we are the county's financial adviser when you access the capital markets to fund projects. So, once you issue the debt, you will be required to levy a millage
rate to cover that debt service. uh the actual debt service on this proposed issuance I just pulled up for Ryan is about $2.6 2.7 million over the remaining term of the levy. So you will have to levy at least enough to cover that $2.7 million which is much
less than 2.2 mills. So you're not requiring yourself to levy 2 mills but you're requiring yourself to levy enough to cover that $2.7 million worth of annual debt service once you issue the debt. >> Okay. Thank you. What does that equate to in millillage?
>> It's uh about 0.04 the last time I calculated. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> All right. Good questions. Uh Matt, you have a a question? >> Well, no questions. >> Vice Chair Reinhardt. Hold on one second.
>> Uh uh David or Danny, do you have questions? >> Good. >> Good. Danny, did you have questions or you have debate? Okay. Well, go ahead while while uh Councilman Santiago >> thinks of his question. Let's cut that off.
>> So, Chairman, I'm with you on this. Um I like the idea of the fact that the the the issuance is there. It's it's protecting us. Ryan gave a very good explanation. Gentlemen, you gave you just brought me home on that. >> So, uh with the fact that it doesn't
authorize a debt, it doesn't authorize acquisitions. Um it it sets some money there and I like the fact that when these properties come up, we'll vote on it. We can have these long lengthy discussions about specific properties then, but I don't want to have to go
back through this again just to get to there if that makes any sense. So I'm I'm with the original. Um but I also totally understand what Mr. Kent did. I thank you for that by trying to keep it alive. So, >> yes, Councilman Santiago,
>> question just to follow up on what Matt just said. Um, staff, um, if this is approved, you don't have the authority to decide even if it's on the list to execute on a bond on a property. Is that an accurate statement? >> No. Coun council has to approve the
bonds that just like we did with the last one. your preliminary your authorization for reimbursement resolution and preliminary matters for the last bond issuance the $und00 million that you just approved that was done back in October and that was to set the timeline because we had actually issued the we issued the contract for
the sheriff's office building so we wanted to make sure that we were covered for anything we spent on the sheriff's office building up to the point where you actually issued the debt which was today >> but you don't have to do it in that short of a period of time you have up to two years >> and and so the individual properties we will
bill discussed. So, um, you know, I'm I'm I'm going to follow up on you and let's make a deal day here. I feel like I'm on the show, right? Um, I get it that this is just starting the process and make it a tool available for us in whether we use the tool or not is
still up to us. >> Um, and and and for point of clarification, this is before all the keyboard warriors come after me also again, this is not about getting rid of for the forever funding. I think it's a good program. I think we have to just be smart and constantly review what we're
doing. That's all part of this. Um that being said, uh Troy, I think I can go back to saying, okay, we going to I can vote for this individually. However, can I get I think what this conversation has opened the door that we need to go back and relook at our lands that we're uh
we've approved. Um, and if if you could agree to that, saying bring back the list and maybe because our council continues to evolve in different ways. All right. Some think good, some think bad, but if you could agree to bring back the list for us and let's have a
good dialogue on what we want to do with preserving lands and this tool is still available for us. Chairman, I'm going to withdraw my motion, which means um it's that motion is now gone. And I'm going to make a new motion to approve item number six. And I'll add to that motion
that we ask staff to bring back our our list of priorities that we looked at for this this program. >> Okay. So approving this now >> a motion to approve is made by Troy Kent with and that would happen today but
staff would then in a follow-up meeting bring the list back and uh vice chair Reinhardt makes that second. >> I want to have a healthy conversation on what we think that should be.
>> Okay. And I don't see that that brought up any further questions. >> No. >> Okay. comment or question, >> whatever. >> You're the only one that >> comment, guys. I'm still uh I'm a no on this only because I don't like I don't
like the fact that we can borrow into the future to buy more conservation land. We're already number two in the state. It scares me that we're rushing towards a 50% acquisition rate, that we are going to basically encumber half of the property in the county. Um, again,
these are forever, literally, not temporary, forever in perpetuity acquisitions. And I I'd like to hold this off until we could have a full-blown discussion on what direction we really want to go with these property
acquisitions. I don't like setting up a vehicle that not only we can buy with what we have or in reserves, but we can borrow onto the future. And this is a vehicle that we're not only creating for ourselves, but we're creating it for future councils.
And I just don't it's like giving a teenager a credit card. You know, the first thing you teach your kids about fiscal responsibility is you only spend or buy what you have, you know, which you can pay pay for in cash. If you're going to use credit and live on credit
your whole life, that's just a it's it's not a way to go and be fiscally responsible. I don't think we should create a mechanism to borrow against future um millages for Valuchia forever. I I think we should be we should just limit
ourselves to buy what we have in our pocket and we shouldn't be borrowing against future um millages that we may or may not get in the future. So I I just I don't like this credit card type of mechanism being put into place for Valuchia forever acquisitions. We just
did a huge one for the sheriff's office. that makes a lot of sense because the sheriff needs it. I don't know if we're necessarily in need of buying up to 50% of the the county in conservation land. So, I just until we have our full-blown discussion on what we want our goal to
be, I really don't like having this in place. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you, Councilman Santiago. >> Comments on that. And Don, that's where I kind of soda was also. I was just trying to I don't know where the council's council is going to lie, but I
like your concept and I think that's the probably the the best way to go. Um that's all I got to say. >> Councilman Robbins, thank you chair and and David and Don, you know, something I want to make sure and I'm I'm on the
same the same page pretty much with you all. I'm not saying I'm a no on this, but what I don't want to get in the habit of, you know, there's um, you know, me and David get picked on quite a bit. We're opinionated at times and
>> dickheaded at times, but call it the way it is. And and I want to make sure that we are buying properties that are really environmentally sensitive. Now, if you got 10,000 homes around it, like some of these things, what the hell are we doing, right?
But what I don't want to see is take a good program like this and use it as the easy way out to not put in a a development application because people don't want to go through the um or go through, you know, the the squeaky wheels and deal with a development
application in unincorporated Valuchia. And I'm not saying I've seen it happen, but I I I do have ears and I've I've heard certain things like, "Hey, this is an easier way to do it to get paid and stuff." not saying uh but so uh at the
end of the day I want to protect this this program for what it's intended. Look at these properties because you can bet your last dollar the minute the minute we approve these. There's going to be five five properties here that we're going to be told we must approve or the world is going to end. So I want
to make sure that we're all doing the right the right thing and and and picking the right properties uh and doing it for the right reasons to protect this great program. So, thank you, >> Vice Chair Reinhardt. >> Thank you, Chair. One more comment and thank you, Mr. Robbins, for that. And I think that's what you we're just talking
about, what we're going to do for each property is look at each one individually. And to go back to Mr. Dempsey, I love the fact that you're passionate about that and you're sticking to your guns on that. Um, but going back to like you said, we took bond issue out for the sheriff's office.
It was a good idea. He needed it. We don't know if we necessarily need to take those until we see that we do. All this does is guarantee it. So when we get to that point, we can say, "Yeah, okay. We do need this one." Because we're talking about an individual
properties, we can say, "Yeah, we do need that one. You're right. And this is why because there's flooding right down the street from your house or whatever. I'm just, you know, I'm using the hypotheticals. Or we want to uh the development for this particular area is
really not a good idea. It's not sound. It's not that would be a good idea to go ahead and buy that property because what do they say? If you don't want to develop it, buy it. Correct. So, that's what that's that's all I that's where my mind is at when it
comes to that. I understand what you're saying, but at the same time, that's where my mind is at is we don't want to use that money for buying land up to go to the 50%. Okay? Let's leave the number out of it. We don't want to buy the land
what until we do. So this just guarantees it if that makes any sense. So thank you. >> Uh Councilman Dempsey. >> Sure, >> Matt. Yeah, I'm not saying no to this. I'm just saying can we postpone this
until we have a full discussion on what what direction we really want Felucia forever to go. I'm not poo pooing having this. I'm just saying let's do it all in one big conversation so we can have clear direction. Do we really want to hit that 50% mark? Do we really want to buy everything up? Do we still want to
have partnerships with the state and entangle our land with them? You know, those types of discussions along with having bonds available for the reasons that you're talking about. So, that's all. I'm not saying no. I'm just saying can we postpone it into one general
discussion? That's all. >> Okay. Uh, Councilman Santiago. >> Sorry, Mr. Sure. But real quick, now that we're at and out of respect for Troy too, trying to be a dealmaker and me trying to deal back, I I think we should honor uh Don Dempsey's request. Uh he's just asking for time like where
you were initially, Troy, for me. I felt enough respect for him to let's give the time because I kind of have those similar questions. That was the foundation of my my position shortly ago, but at the interest of trying to make a deal, but >> I think we should honor Don's request.
So, if the motion stays, I'll vote no because of that reason. >> Okay. Yeah. And that's the way to do it. We've changed the motion three times. Let's vote on this. If it fails, then you can make another motion. I think it's it's really essential to approve this today and give them the tools that
they need um to to carry this very popular program uh forward and and be ready. So, Carissa, would you call the role? And let me restate the motion one more time. It's just to approve item six and then
bring back to a uh a later meeting the list of properties that are on the A and B list. All the properties. So, that's the motion for today. Did you >> don't have a question about it? Just if I may, the I know that we want to bring
them back and we'll certainly bring them back for a council discussion, but the evaluation criteria criteria that's approved by this council aligns with the ballot language. So, you know, water resource protection, environmentally sensitive land, public access, all of those things that the way that we've
evaluated the properties to date are using the ballot language. So, if we add additional, that's certainly fine, but we've got to keep in mind the ballot language. Correct. Uh, Councilman Dempsey, >> if I could ask you a question, Brad. The ballot though doesn't say that we need
to partner up with other government entities, does it? That's that's my concern. >> The ballot does not, but the the resolution that implemented the ballot language talks about partnerships. One of the criteria, we talked about this this morning, was for to be on the A-list is there has to be a potential
partner. Now, if that polic there's a separate policy direction, um you know, we'll certainly we're here to honor the policy direction of this council. >> Yeah. I I mean, I for one would rather see no partner and have the county have completed control of their own property
in the future as opposed to entangling ourselves with the state or the feds in the future and then having to un untangle that web we have with them for some other purpose in the future. So, that's all. Mr. Mr. Chair, Councilman Santi, >> just to clarify what Brad was saying
was, yes, I get the ballot language like like you said, but we still have to ratify the actual properties, correct? >> The buck stops with us with the decision on the properties. >> Yes. So, you have initially approved them to go on the A-list all of these properties, but we bring back every
contract to you for final decision. >> Gotcha. Yeah. So, we still have the authority to say yes or no. >> Yes, sir. Actually, >> thank you. >> Okay. Cararissa, the motion is to approve item six as stated, but uh to at a future
meeting bring back the list of properties A and B list for the council to re-evaluate. >> Okay, Chris, would you call the role, please? >> Mr. Reinhardt? >> Yes. >> Mr. Robbins? >> No.
Mr. Santiago, >> no. >> Mr. Dempsey, >> no. >> Mr. Johansson, >> no. >> Mr. Kent, >> no. >> Mr. Brower.
>> Yes. And the motion is lost. Five to two. >> Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion. >> Okay. >> Mr. Chairman, I move that uh council direct staff to put on the agenda sometime soon. I hope they get that message. I won't say a day, but for
discussion on the bonding process for for for Lucia forever. Um to include before that a discussion on the properties on the list uh for
acquisition and to include discussion on accomplishments that we want to accomplish with spending this money if that makes sense. I think staff can put that together. >> Accomplishments for militia forever
>> correct to have discussion on it. So, we're all clear. >> Okay, that's the motion by David Santiago. The second I think I heard from Councilman Robbins. A second. Okay, Brad,
aren't the the accomplishments I thought we were locked in by the ballot language? >> We are. And we also the the advisory committee presents an annual list of accomplishments to this council and a plan of work for the next year.
>> Mr. Chairman, just to bring clarity for you, I I think I know maybe it wasn't clear. I want us to have the discussion so we have an understanding of what we're trying to accomplish. Just a discussion and overall uh briefing on it. Okay. >> Not that I want to change it. I want to
make sure we understand it. >> Okay. >> That help you? Uh yes. Yeah, it helps. >> What I'm saying, >> Councilman Dempsey. >> Yeah. And in this motion, uh David, are you talking about us being able to re-evaluate how we what the criterion
are for the A-list or the Blist? because I personally would like to see the partnership with another state agency or federal agency to be a negative as opposed to a positive because I want to I want whatever we buy to be completely within Valuchia Countyy's control under the home rule
type of theory that we that this county council controls future use of that land and you know for whatever reason but so that I'd like to be part of the discussion >> that is part of my intent that's what I mean about the the what we want it to look like what should it look like the
goals. >> Okay. Uh any questions on the motion? Motion is to uh bring back a a soon uh future agenda um to discuss the funding
pro process uh and the um uh what is the intent and accomplish what are we trying to accomplish with Valuchia Fever just so we can all understand it. >> Yes. And then um
uh and then the properties on the list for acquisition. >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. Questions, comments? U is there an idea when that can come back
on an an agenda? This is the only meeting in December. probably the second meeting in January or the first meeting in February. >> Did that hurt your process at all? >> I I just want to reflect, Mr. Chairman,
for the record. Brad said no to that question. >> You didn't hear his head rattled. >> Well, public the public the public didn't. That's why I said for the record, >> it doesn't cause any delay for him. >> Okay. Yeah. And they actually the public had no idea who I was asking. So yeah, I
I asked Dr. Burbal who's oversees this this program. Okay. All in favor of the motion, please say I. >> I. >> I. >> And any opposed? And so this will come back to us. Item seven, purchase on sale agreement
for 1680 Dunl and Port Orange for the property appraiser. >> Motion to approve. Second. >> We have a motion to approve by uh Councilman Robbins and a second by Vice
Chair Reinhardt. Good afternoon. Larry Bartlett, Felicia County Property Appraiser. And uh I heard somebody move to approve already. That's great. So, thank you for that. Um
I'm talking to here today with Jim Corbett. Talk to buying this building in Port Orange is a good idea. Our planning team had thought this would be a good idea and as part of the plan, this would allow us to close our three satellite
offices in Holly Hill, Orange City, and New Smyrna Beach. So, I've got a a slide presentation not too long. I guess it's not queued up yet. There it
is. All right, that's the building. And uh it's going to allow us 4,000 square ft more than what we have now in in our satellite offices. So, it's a uh we think it's a good idea.
And hopefully I can explain to you folks why it is. You know, it's been my experience that uh most people don't know what we do and typically they they confuse us with the tax collector
and especially they would confuse us with the tax people before we had a tax collector, but now we have one and everybody knows that we write our checks to Will Roberts and not me. So that's good. So in a nutshell, what we do is create a
tax role. And the tax role is made up of my house and your house, public shopping centers, gas stations, car dealerships, um even railroad tracks.
So we value all that and what we do is we create a pie of property in Valuchia County and then you gentlemen decide how much of that pie you're going to need to provide roads, police and fire
protection and all the things that we know as civilization. So, oops. Okay. So, here's the tax roll. And
as you can see, it's a lot of different things. Mostly residential properties. Of the residential properties, a little over 50% are homestead properties. And we have commercial and all the various things you see there.
And what we do is we value all those things 383,000 parcels every year per statute. And we uh down.
Okay. So this is uh a comparison of what we call just value as opposed to taxable value. And the uh the difference between the two is is because of the items on the on the right there. Most importantly, the
homestead. We've got a lot of exemptions and part of our job is to make sure that people understand what they're entitled to and we make sure that it's applied fairly because nobody likes to pay taxes. I don't like to pay taxes, but I'm okay
with it if everybody pays their fair share. So, our core mission is the tax role. And as you can see from this chart, we
have a a certain amount of appraisers, commercial and residential, uh that help us put that tax role together. And as you can also see, parcel counts have steadily risen throughout Valuchia County.
And we are now looking at Dearing Park, Avalon Park, and Omen Crossings adding another 30,000 commercial and residential parcels. And we expect we're going to need 20% more
appraisers to do our job. So, we need the space. And we think that the building in Port Orange will meet the bill. And we can close the three satellite
offices with the uh associated uh savings from uh private landlord rentals and and the uh the maintenance problems that have developed uh in Holly Hill and Orange City. And frankly, we'd
rather have Jim Corbett and his fast reaction team come take care of our problems rather than landlords people. So with that, Jim is here. I'm let him take over. >> Jim, you you here? >> Okay.
>> Good afternoon, Mr. Chair, council staff. I'd be happy to answer any specific questions you have about the property. >> Uh, Councilman Santiago, >> no questions. I just wanted to thank Mr. Bartlett. He and I had a productive meeting uh yesterday. So, I appreciate your time. I'm ready to vote.
>> Vice Chair Reinhardt. >> Thank you, Chair. Just a comment. Um, I think I was particularly interested in the fact that you can close all three satellite offices. Those are the only three that you have, correct? >> Correct. >> So, that closes all three of them and just keeps everything centralized and >> that's >> we keep the land, but yeah. Okay. Very
good. >> All right. So, no, no for nothing else. Thanks, chair. >> Okay. All right. There's no other questions, any any uh debate or comments? The motion is to approve uh purchase and
sale agreement for this uh property on Dunlton at 3,500,000. Councilman Kent. >> Yeah. And and it is a brief question. Mr. Bartlett, um what kind of savings did you say this was going to when you and I met, you mentioned an amount of money. I think that by closing those
three satellite offices, this is going to save >> 250. And then you found this location in Port Orange. I mean, nothing in Orand. >> Can I kind of kind of find the the building you needed in Orand? >> Thank you. That's all.
>> Well, as you know, I'm an Orman guy myself and we looked, but you know, this place is centrally located and, you know, it's got good parking. So, yeah, we we like this building. >> I have a follow-up question to that. Since Beering Park is going to be closer
to Deltona, did you look in Deltona? >> We looked all over the place. We're the property appraiser. Okay, let's uh let's vote on item seven. The motion is to approve the purchase. All in favor say I.
>> I. I. Just wish it was an orand. >> Who opposed it? >> Okay, it's approved seven to to zero. >> Thank you, council. >> Thank you. Item eight is uh proposed vacation of a portion of the second addition to Carninal.
>> Motion to approve. We have a motion to approve by Councilman Robbins and so far no second and a second by Councilman Dempsey. Any questions for Tad? All in favor of the uh of the vacation.
I always wonder if the public hears us talking about vacations if they think it's >> He takes a lot of vacations. >> I love it. I love vacation. This >> I'd certainly make a motion for that. >> Yes. Okay. All in favor say I. >> I.
>> Any opposed? And item eight is approved. 7 to zero. Uh item nine um off beach parking and beach access fee revisions. >> Motion to approve. Motion to approve by
Councilman Kent and second by Councilman by Councilman Robbins. We do have a member of the public who would like to speak uh to this unless there's any questions from council to staff.
>> Nope. >> Okay. Um John Nicholson. John's feeling bad because one other member of the public has spoke more times today than he has >> and she will be >> so he's trying to catch up. >> Well, both Jake and David lost. They but
they bet three, you know. So, no, I'm way more than that. No, I'm just worried about the uh the fees. Uh when we hike it to 30, we had a problem in Daytona Beach with the hotels. They kept racking their uh rates up. So every bike week,
every race week, the fees kept going up, the fees kept going up and eventually uh those people staying in hotels stayed in the land, they stayed in Orlando and bust in. So I'm very aware that we think there's a tremendous value to our beach
and it is all right, but there's a tipping point. So, I'm asking you to be wary of the tipping point that we don't get to the point where we no longer are affordable because we're known as an affordable beach, an affordable vacation. We don't want to tip that
scale. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. Seeing not seeing any uh questions or debate from council. Uh then all in favor of um the revisions to the beach parking and beach access fee,
please say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? And item nine is confirmed seven to zero. Item 10 is a resoning from neighborhood commercial
B2 to the general commercial B4 or 2.4 acres on Glenwood. Motion to approve. >> Morning, council. >> You didn't think you were going to get to speak, do you? >> Hold on one sec. Uh, Councilman Robbins, you had the motion,
>> and the motion was to approve. David Santiago seconded the motion. >> Thank you. Good afternoon, council members. Ray Tiner, growth management uh uh director. Uh this is a resoning as you stated from neighborhood commercial B2 to general commercial uh B4.
Um the property um is located off the corner of Glenwood Road and North Spring Garden Road. It's right there in the square on the uh southwest corner. Uh it's currently vacant. uh surrounded by uh commercial to the north um to the
east and the property right here is to the south. uh what they're proposing to do and the reason for the uh uh the resoning is that the existing zoning of B2 uh allows for only uh 5,000 um uh
square feet of commercial and the owner of the property desires to have um a little bit more. Uh they have a preliminary site plan that showed about 9,500 square ft of commercial. Uh it's appropriately located on a hard corner.
It's surrounded by uh commercial and uh on October 16 16th the uh planning and land development regulation commission uh unanimously approved uh 70 to forward the city council for for their approval.
Uh we did have one speaker uh that was opposed to it. They expressed some concerns regarding uh some environmental impacts and traffic congestion. our environmental team uh did review uh the property and found no significant environmental uh impacts that would
occur on the property. And as far as traffic congestion, as as you know, when a technical site plan comes in, we would require a traffic analysis and that would be reviewed at that time, but I can tell you that the level of service on the roads uh will not be impacted for
our adopted level of service. So, uh, the motion is recommended for approval and we're here for questions and the the applicant's representative is also here if you have any questions for him. >> Okay. Thank you very much. I should also say this is a quasi judicial hearing.
Does any council member have any exparte they would they need to declare? >> Not at all. >> Spoke with the attorney for the applicant. >> Pardon me. >> Spoke with the attorney for the applicant. >> You did. Okay. >> Okay. two members spoke with the
attorneys. Um, uh, I don't have a question for you. Thank you for the presentation. I I just wanted to add to it a little bit. I'm really familiar with that area. Um, I'm
there probably every day. Um, and from what I see of the of the plans to this point, it still seems like it fits very well into that neighborhood center because it's really retail that that
neighborhood can enjoy. Um, so I I don't have an issue um with this. There's been failed businesses in and out of there for a long time. Not in this exact property, but on that corner. So, um, this this
could be a a good improvement. So, all right. Any other questions, comments? All for, uh, approving this reszoning. >> Uh, >> the applicant does want to have a few words. >> I'm sorry. Okay. Don't talk yourself out
of it. I'm not going to do that. I I don't want to uh talk myself out of anything. It sounds like you're going in the right direction. I do want to correct one thing. Uh, is we're looking at a 12,000 foot facility. the nine I think it's 9200 is um the uh the shop
that my client wants to open and have a little bit extra for a coffee shop or something like that. So that was I just wanted to clarify that. >> Okay. All right. All in favor of the resoning, please say I. >> I.
>> Any opposed? And item 10 is approved seven to zero. >> Thank you. Item 11 is also a quasi judicial uh hearing on a reszoning from the rural residential zoning
classification to the rural agricultural a we don't usually see them go this direction of of a less >> uh and second >> less dense less uh >> okay and while I was rambling I think uh Councilman Robbins made a motion to
approve and vice chair uh Reinhardt made the second. >> Thank you, council members. This is a reszoning from rural residential zoning classification to a rural agriculture. It is uh located it's it's approximately
9.81 acres. It's located just south of Mud Lake Road. Uh you can see it's a vacant piece of property approximately a little bit less than 10 acres. right now uh the the the purpose the
existing zoning right now for rural residential um does not permit for uh standalone um farming animals or agricultural uses. So the owner of the property would like to change the resoning to allow to have uh farm
animals on that property without having a primary structure and that's the primary reason for the uh the resoning application. Should be noted that the existing zoning of the property allows for one unit per acre. So technically
they can probably do about nine residential units. So some would call this a down zoning um that the proposed uh zoning would um call for only a half acre. So, they're they're going from nine units to basically one unit if they
wanted to build a residential um uh development there. Um the planning board uh recommended approval at their October 16th, 2025 um public hearing. We did have two speakers in opposition. They expressed concerns regarding uh
potential agricultural impacts such as noise and maybe odor uh issues. uh and they're located uh just to the east in a culde-sac uh at a 1acre piece of property. Uh the planning board uh commission uh voted 6 to1 to forward the
item to county council with a recommendation of approval. The one um Mrs. Bush uh was opposed to the project, didn't think that it met the comprehensive plan that it was out of character for for the area for those for
this type of use. and I'm here for uh any questions you may have. >> Okay. Uh before I open it up for questions, does anyone have any experte to declare? >> I don't none. Okay. Uh for questions, Councilman Santiago. >> Thank you. The intent of the owner is to
be able to put uh wild um livestock on the property without the residential property. Is that what you said? >> That's that's correct, sir. The >> what extent? >> Uh I what I understand is maybe cows uh on the property and maybe some sheep. Do you have an aerial of the property?
>> What's that, sir? >> Do we have an aerial of the property? >> Are the property owners here? >> So, what's what's around it? I I see to the right there looks like a house >> to to the west you have the uh Lake
Woodruff National uh wildlife refugee right there. It's a to the left. And then uh to the east uh you can see that's where you have um the culde-sac of some uh 1acre lots. I think there's probably eight or nine oneacre lots just
to the east. Those where the where the two residents came from. Uh to the south you have uh agriculture um as well. >> Okay. >> Um and then to the west you have a mix of residential and agriculture uses. Yes. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Vice Chair
Reinhardt. >> Thank you, Chair. You said or didn't say that there are other uses being in the neighboring area as far as ag or not agriculture but uh farm animals of any type. >> Uh yes sir. If if you look at the uh
existing zoning map, you can see the agriculture too and the grain allows for agricultural uses. >> So that that individual if they don't already could have farm animals on that without bringing anything to for >> they can. Yes. on the A2 that's just
south of the property and and what you see in the green the A3 they are allowed to have agricultural uh farm animals without a >> it was just brought up we can't distinguish we can't uh discriminate for individuals for agriculture my
understanding or Paulo can you >> so um >> if it's if they get uh uh if their pro if their property is classified as agriculture by the property appraiser >> then we cannot not uh uh any of our regulations that are in conflict with
best management practice of agriculture fall away. So, they can do agricultural use. The issue with this property is it's not zoned for primary agriculture. You can't do commercial and it doesn't have an agricultural classification yet, >> but like was just said, some of the adjacent properties already have that.
So, okay. Thank you. Thank you, chair. >> Okay. Any other questions? any debate and the owners not here didn't care to speak. >> Okay. Then uh all in favor of the re
reszoning please say I >> I. >> Any opposed? >> David, did you did David vote? >> I Okay, then it's approved seven to zero. Item 12, um, ordinance 2025-26,
reasonable accommodations for certified recovery residents. >> Yes, sir. Uh, recently, uh, the state uh, enacted some legislation, uh, formerly known as Senate Bill 954. Do you want to go ahead and get it? >> Sure.
>> Okay. I was going to do it for you. Um Morgan Swank, assistant county attorney. Um Senate Bill 954 uh requires uh all local governments to implement a process for reasonable accommodations for uh certified recovery
residents by January 1st of 2026. Uh these residences are uh for assistance with um uh sobriety for individuals. Um they are group homes are permitted by rights under most uh classifications. Uh
this would just set up a process under which individuals who are seeking to set these up in the county could request um accommodations from um the land use and zoning um requirements. It does set up the process by which they would apply to
the county to do so. Um and it's um we we've limited it to ensure that we are not uh contravening uh Senate Bill um 180. So we have limited what's required under the statute um and just to allow them the process on how to do
so. Um and this did go before PLDRC on November uh 20th. There was no public participation. Um the members did discuss the appeal period being longer. I believe 90 days was what was uh
suggested. Um and so it has now been forwarded to you all for approval. >> Okay. Thank you very much. Uh Councilman Santiago, >> questions. Questions? >> Yes, Mr. Chair. um does when the legislature passed this law
um they there's some levels, correct me if I'm wrong, of preeemption here that pretty much allow these facilities to go up almost anywhere. Is that a really big exaggeration? >> Uh so this recent one is a little bit
different. So in 2018 2019 the one when we were already we're already preempted. So there's a preemption that basically said every single local government you must allow these recovery residences as an allowed use in all your residential zoning categories. Now they've taken it a step further and they but otherwise
you can regulate them in terms of like zoning parking height you know all sorts of the things but it's allowed use. This is taking it a step further and saying for those recovery residences that go into the state's voluntary certification process or program and they get that
certification, you have to have a another process that allows for a reasonable accommodation for these certified facilities to all of your other land development regulations. So, you know, parking standards, um, uh, setbacks, height provisions,
>> you can't make any accommodations. You can't make any extra steps because of that. >> Um, it's it's a little bit like you can you can regulate, but it puts, um, it puts the thumb on in favor of the recovery residences. um to the extent that our regulations conflict with the
best management practices of these certif certified residents. >> Describe to me anybody that can from staff what is one of these facilities? >> They're sober houses. So they're for sobriety. So it's for for you know for >> how many people typically in a sobriety
house? >> It depends I believe um anywhere from five to 16. There are various levels under certification. There's up to like four levels. Okay. um where it ranges from they're just there for a few hours to they're there
247 with 247 like kind of help. So there's there's a range of certifications >> 5 to 16. It range from there. >> And my interpretation of this law, by the way, folks, is that it could you could be in a residential neighborhood
and they could sell your neighbor's house. And guess what? Tomorrow, if they get the certification, you could have up to 15, 16 people there, depending on the size of home. That is a recovery house. And again, I I I'm sensitive to the individuals that need the help, but I
think this law also went too far from the legislature amongst others. I don't like it. My question is to staff, I know what are the consequences if we do not ratify this right now. We're not following a state mandate. Um,
so a certified recovery residence who seeks um reasonable accommodation, they can challenge and sue potentially get attorney's fees. Potentially we could get a mandamus order from um a judge
saying, "Hey, the state has mandated you to pass an ordinance. You didn't do so." >> Understood. Figured that'd be the answer. Um to my colleagues, um I don't like this one. Yeah. You you made a comment earlier that I forget the
term you used. This is an example of preeemption. >> Yes, >> I know. >> Very much so. >> I know. >> Uh and um I would say that we've had local governments are all racing trying to meet this January deadline to adopt this. This is one of the bills that came
out of the last session. >> Yeah. Um, this has I mean it's in his infancy, but this has some far-reaching individual community uh consequences that I don't think our legislature really thought out. >> No. And it may be one of those that they
have to make changes in the future to react to what >> they're going to have to it's. It's going to happen. Um, I'm voting no. >> That it his questions brought up uh two questions for me. One is if I understood
his question and your answer, the preeemption is that this could go in any house anywhere in Valuchia County. >> Uh they're considered group homes. Group homes are treated the same way as residences. Um it's now these only apply
to certified recovery facilities. So that's that's an entire state process. It's pretty ownorous. There's three certified um facilities here in Valuchia County that we can track on the state website. Um, so yeah, >> but now knowing this process, sorry to
cut you off, Mr. But no, now they're savvy. They know that this process is eligible for them that they can just go in anywhere, any neighborhood, they're going to go get certified and they know you can't do nothing about it because only having three right now is not a >> they can do that now um for so as as an
allowed use. They just have to meet all of our other regulations. But now they don't have to >> meet all of our >> there's there's an analysis involved in it because it's we have to have a process. So the analysis is okay does your regulations conflict with the best matchment practices of these certified
recovery residences and because they are certified under the state's uh program. We would look at okay is there a reasonable accommodation we have to make for you to comply with that state certification. But I recommend that you know and this
is probably discussion for a future meeting. But if you want to take a position on this and ask for some changes to what's adopted, it can be added to your legislative platform request. I know there's been a lot of focus on Senate Bill 180 this
session because of the huge impacts, but let's face it, the legislature passes a lot of laws each session. Some of which the consequences aren't very apparent until you're at this stage. >> Well, that and that brings up my my last question was
uh if we don't approve this um did you just say were you Were you saying that we should approve this and then go back and ask them for changes or not approve it and tell them approve it until you get make these changes?
>> I don't think we have a choice. I think we have to adopt it. I think seeking changes to that state law and working with partners to articulate what the real concerns are. It that's what I would recommend. >> So this is why I said this morning
you're very cautious to uh because that's your job to keep us out of trouble. So if we were to uh not approve this, what happens from the state? >> Uh we could get it. You know, I Paulo
mentioned that probably the most readily thing we would face is you get somebody that wants to open one of these that sues us, challenges a decision to not to not comply with the statute, which frankly we would lose. Um the other is
it's possible the state brings enforcement action sues to enforce state law. I think you know option one is probably more likely just because there's so many jical governments out there but but that would come before us anyway if anybody wanted to to have
concerns with the bill with with our inaction. I'll just say it could you would bring it to us possibly. >> Yeah. I mean, I you know, I I was asked this question at a charter review meeting. I Sometimes we're told before they sue us, sometimes we're not.
>> Got you. But you'll get the letter either way. Mr. Chairman, I move to deny this item. >> Okay. Okay. The motion is to uh deny by Councilman Santiago and the second was by Councilman Robbins
for that denial. Uh Jake, your name was up. Did you >> I I took it down. >> Okay. >> Okay. Uh any other questions? Uh debate. Don Dempsey.
>> Yeah. I just um Mike, actually I'll ask or Paulo, either one. Uh would this subject us to a lawsuit if we went and denied this? Would this subject us to a lawsuit for ADA violations? Um I think it's a separate cause of
action for recovery residences. Um reasonable accommodations are typically associated with um ADA. You make reasonable accommodations for disabilities. Here it's for the use of the recovery facility itself. So I'm not
sure >> somebody might try to twist that into an argument. I think the biggest issue we're facing is we wouldn't be non-compliant with state law. Okay. Because my understanding is that um drug drug addiction is a disability
under the ADA. And if I'm wrong, >> no, they may certainly try to use that to butress an argument for a violation as possible. But I think you know the biggest thing
is the reason why Morgan presented it here is this is one of the things that was passed by the legislature. It's state law that we're obligated to follow until changed.
>> I mean if if it was an ADA violation that could end us in federal court and potentially paying their legal fees. Correct. >> Yeah. This is, you know, I I wish I had a different answer. This is one of those cases where we don't have a choice,
>> but that ADA standard applies right now. >> State law. >> No, I know that. But that ADA standard applies right now regardless. >> Yeah. But all my point is somebody may try to use that to buttress argument. I think the big thing is you have a state law that says we shall do this. >> I know what you're saying. But I I
wanted Donna to know that ADA uh concern applies right now because we currently have rules around these homes on where they can go. So you're concerned? >> My concern is if we tell them, okay, tell a homeowner you cannot convert this
to a rehab facility that might subject us to a lawsuit from the homeowner saying that we're violating the ADA. >> And I think the denial today as it stands would keep our current ordinances in place. So, I want to clarify. Our current ordinances allow this type of facility.
>> Correct. It's a group home in every single zoning category. >> I understand. But there are additional steps they have to go through >> today. >> Today. >> Mike, do you think that could still get us caught in the web? >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> Sure. We're in We can get caught in the
web today. Sorry, Mr. Chairman. I'm out of order. Under today's under today's ordinance that we have, let's say it doesn't come to we're in the web anyway. So by denying this what the in effect what's happening in the legislature is they're taking away those additional
requirements that we have could be parking or the setbacks and things like that. That's all that this ordinance does. It strips away those additional things on yes you can go there but you have to do x y and z. Yeah, I you know this to me is
>> uh and I've had conversations with each of you many of you I should say uh separately but you know Paulo is kind of the master of a list of preeemptions that were subject to by the legislature and I think pilot it's what over 200
in counting every session from big to small this is a smaller one big one this last session was simple 180 huge preeemption. So, you know, I wish I could sit here and tell you that those
changes in state law that we are not comfortable with or we object to on very valid policy reasons that can excuse us from following the state law. I I can't give that advice to you. So, and I think you know that. So
>> I don't know if I don't want to jump in front of you. >> No, I was going to say I'm real uncomfortable with just not following the directive of the legislature. I just Yeah, >> I think we need to fall in ranks. >> I get it. >> Santiago, >> I get it. I get it. And and and and it
might sound different from my previous comments in the past, right? Um, I just see this one as a real direct hit to potential homeowners. I mean, you I'm going to guess one goes up right next to you tomorrow, whatever it is,
your value of your home just divebombed, right? And is that fair to you? I I don't think so. Um, I think the legislature uh in this one just overreacted to a problem similar to others. I'll say 180, right? There was an overreaction.
um and um didn't see the out potential consequences of this. Um now if if an individual property business owner that wants to come with us come against us will hear about it one time or another whether
they notice us uh by court uh filing right here to the chairman. you'll be first to know because you sign all those uh uh and or someone to contact uh this county attorney then you know that doesn't prohibit us from acting at that point if we want to you know we can
always act at that point and and and make a decision are we willing to take the risk to go further and I understand your concern because I've made that same comment but this one hits homes individual homes potentially that is could be bad thank you Mr. Yeah, that's
what makes this one so difficult because there there's a consistency standard that um and Don is being very consistent. I'm wavering on this apparently like you are because this is this is egregious to to neighborhoods,
but so was Senate Bill 180. It was just as could be just as harmful to neighborhoods. And yet the the argument not here on this council but I think in Deltona and Edgewater was that if you don't uh go along with it if you don't
withdraw your your moratoriums then you're not upholding your oath to the Florida Constitution. And we did all of us up here swore an oath to follow the Constitution. And that's why our county attorney can't tell us to do anything different than that. Um so it's I hate
it. This is a horrible preeemption. Um, so anyway, >> I think Mike doesn't want his batting average to go down. That's what I'm concerned with. >> I I I just there's there's got to be a legislative fix to this, you know, and I
I would say, >> did you write the amendments yet? >> We can, but you know, I mean, I've been practicing now 26 years. This is the worst worst really I've seen it on preeemptions, local government authority.
So um yes and there's a lot of other issues coming. So I wish I could sit here and say that we have the independent authority but we are subordinate to the legislature >> by the constitution. >> We are we are um so either way this vote
goes I would I think this council is in agreement right now that well we'll find out in a minute. I I'll ask that we let the legislature know that here's the changes that we think would be um accomplish the same goal there. There's
obviously a need for this, but so it accomplishes the goal without ruining u entire neighborhoods. So the motion on the floor is to um is to deny item 12.
>> We have Yes. Thank you. I we have one member of the public that would like to speak on this. Uh John Nicholson. >> This is his last chance. So >> yeah, I think David, you need to know it. Uh Daytona Beach had a problem with
a property called uh Peabody House from Peabody Auditorium. All right. The owners uh rehabbed the house to historic standards. All right. The neighborhood was um decreed by the city to be a historic neighborhood.
A gentleman came in, bought the house, said he went on uh honeymoon with his wife, and his partner turned it into a halfway house. All right. 24 people in a three-bedroom house. All right. The cars were parked all over, blocking driveways. People were missing things.
When they needed to to buy liquor or whatever, they would take them, pawn them, etc. So it became an absolute zoo and it took two years to get them below the amount that they're supposed to have. So it's not an easy thing that people like to have in their
neighborhoods and it does destroy neighborhoods. So if there's anything you can do because right now we're stuck with it. All right. Don't make it any worse than it already is because it's horrible as it is. Thank you. >> Thank you. Uh Kissa, would you call the role on this one because I have no idea
where it's going to go. And the the the motion is to deny. So a yes vote is to deny. A no vote is um against denial. >> Mr. Reinhardt. >> No. >> Mr. Robbins.
>> A yes vote. It means we deny it. It means >> it means the motion fails and we'd have to start over if you wanted to approve it. So it's it's yes to deny or no that it ends this. >> Yeah. So the motion on the floor is to
reject the proposed ordinance in front of you. If you vote yes, you're voting to reject the ordinance. If you vote no, you're voting to keep the ordinance. But as the chair mentioned, she had to have a new motion to accept that. >> Mr. Santiago.
>> Yes. >> Mr. Dempsey. Mr. Johansson. >> No. >> Mr. Kent. >> Yes. >> Mr. Brower. >> No. I didn't hear Mr. Robbins. I am.
Yes. >> You said yes. Okay. >> I'm buying houses next to everybody that voted for us. >> Joking. I'm joking. >> So, the motion fails by one vote. >> Um,
does uh any council member wish to make another motion to approve? >> Motion to approve. Motion to approve item 12 is made by Vice Chair Reinhardt. Second comes by Don Dempsey.
I don't think we have to discuss this all again. Would you call the role again and see if it reverses? >> Mr. Reinhardt? >> Yes. >> Mr. Robbins? >> No.
>> Mr. Santiago? Mr. Dempsey, >> yes. >> Mr. Johansson, >> yes. >> Mr. Kent, >> no. >> Mr. Brower, >> yes. And Mr. Santiago,
the vote, the motion is to approve the ordinance. >> No. >> Okay. And it passes by one vote. So, how many houses I got to buy? >> Four. Okay.
>> So, the motion passes. >> The motion passes. >> And uh I guess I just would mention you can mention it and or you don't have to, but do you want to have a discussion about directing staff to update your legislative platform or take a position on that bill?
>> Yes, absolutely. Is there Danny before you step out is I don't know if you heard the uh the attorney's question but is it the consensus of the council that we bring this back for
discussion on telling the legislature how they need to correct this? >> Yes. Yes. >> Okay. >> Yes. >> Okay. forward. >> I'm sorry, Mr. Chair. I see Paulo there. I wanted to expand since we're staff is bringing back stuff to us. Can Paulo,
since he's the preeemption king, bring back to us other pending legislations that have preeemption consequences? >> Sure. The session hasn't started, but we already have a list. >> Yeah, because the bill's already being filed, right? Yeah. >> Yeah.
>> What we could do is send it out, study it between now and January, and we'll be ready to discuss it. Sounds good. Sounds good. Thank you. >> Okay. Item 13. Um, we've discussed
before and the the council uh um this is the beach driving opening up between Speedway and somewhere on the north side down towards Auditorium um Boulevard. the council approved a
first step which was to uh speak to the property owners in that area. Correct? >> Yes, that's correct. >> Okay. And so today we we've done that. Um I'm hoping that we will take it a step further. So if if you want to just
kind of bring us up to date and then also if you would tell I believe there's three options that we could take today. >> Sure. Um, so, uh, this is the chair's request. This is basically the presentation that you saw back in April. Um, so I'm just going to go through that
really quickly. So, uh, just his history lesson 1996. There was an ordinance to take away beach driving upon um, uh, meeting uh, parking space standards. Uh, in 2000 that condition was met because 1500 parking spaces were met um, with
the parking garage. So, the public beach driving is not permitted in that area. that there are four legal issues that we previously identified. One is the statutory prohibition. Beach driving is illegal in the entire state of Florida. Felia County operates under an exception to that statute. The second one is the
um ITPHCP um which isn't so much of an issue here because this is considered an urban area where under that permit beach driving would be allowed under the federal permit. Um it is disallowed by other means. The third one is contractual
issues. Um, you know, there's there's a reason why the the this area was removed and 1500 spaces were removed. There is a um development order, development agreement between, I think, Ocean Walk and the previous Agnes Park, Hilton, and the city of Daytona Beach that was
conditioned upon the removal of beach driving from ISB all the way to Seab Breeze. The fourth one is customary use. Customary use is uh, you know, the mechanism that we have to regulate the beach. The beach is technically private
property, but because of customary use, it's a public beach, right? You can't you can't, you know, use the normal private property rights to keep people from the beach. So, for all intents and purposes, it's a public beach, but it's technically still private property. Um,
so this is the area we're talking about. It's a urban area under the HCP. It's from ISB, International Speedway Boulevard, to Auditorium Boulevard. Um, so because it is uh unlawful and illegal to allow beach driving or even
restore beach driving under the state law, you need a legislative change to remove that prohibition. So this section 16158 provides a mechanism to remove beach driving by three-fifths vote, but specifically does not provide a mechanism to restore it or to add um new
beach driving areas. Um, so what we would need is actually a new bill, a special bill or or general bill allowing county council to restore beach driving in a specific area um on a permanent or temporary basis. We've already done something like this um for the Legends
Beach Parade that operates under a special local law that allows for beach driving or in an area where beach driving is not allowed um for the purpose of reenacting a historic race event. So these are the other two issues that I briefly mentioned the contractual
commitments um that you know is contract based. So you know you have a uh uh uh uh protections of contracts under the the US and state uh constitution and also we have customary use. So customary use as I mentioned is an exception to the traditional property right to
exclude others. Um it is specific that it has to be um you know ancient, reasonable, without dispute and free from interruption. Um so those are the criteria. Uh you know a local government can always abandon customary use and
once it's abandoned it cannot be restored. So um this is the kind of the the if you can read it not really but these are the the parcel maps um for the proposed area. It shows the potential underlying fe simple owner of the public beach all the way to the meanhigh water
line. Majority owner is actually the city of Daytona Beach. Um so here's the updates um since our last meeting. So the county manager staff did reach out to the property owners along the uh proposed area. They received five letters of opposition, one verbal opposition to the concept of expanded
beach driving. They received a one letter of support and one verbal support to the concept of expanded beach driving. So that's where we are. Um it's yes, that's that's kind of where we are. And so your proposals are or your
options are we can continue to proceed forward. Um, I don't think we met the deadlines for this legislative session, but you can start on some of the other aspects such as potentially uh gathering easements because you need to satisfy
all four criteria and if any one of them fails then you can't restore beach. >> What are the Tell me the four again. >> Sure. >> The four criteria. >> Uh, it's the it's the four aspects that So, these are four independent legal issues. um and you need to satisfy every
single one of them. So, one is a statutory prohibition. It is currently illegal, so you need to change the law, right? Uh second one is pretty easy is the ITP and HCP. So, whether or not that's a that's just a tweak or updating the service, you know, that's that's done. Third is you need to address the contractual issues. And the fourth is
you need to address customary use. And that's what I mean by establishing, you know, ga gathering easements is the safest conservative way to address that. And you're saying that's required? >> Well, these are the way to handle all of the identified legal issues to restoring beach driving
>> the customary use asking the property owners. Um, and why is that? >> Uh, we do not own the beach. Uh, we don't own. >> Yes. So, it is it's it's a public beach. Um, customary use has been interpreted
under case law to be kind of specific types of uses. So you can separate a specific customary use and you can abandon a specific customary use. So you can abandon beach driving but still have um the nor the you know pedestrian or
surfing or sunbathing or things like that. >> Okay. That's what we So the safest way to address the customary use issue is to um buy or get easements specifically saying okay you know um we're restoring
the um the public public vehicular uses. >> Okay. kind of the easiest way to probably all of you have heard me describe it this way before, so I apologize, but if you look up and down
north and south of the beach and you look at a a survey of all the properties, they call them upland properties, but the the properties up on the sand dunes along a beach, they may vary on how far east they go. there's
not a uniform line. Mo much of the beach that we're used to, you know, parking on, maybe sitting on that soft sand is actually private property. Um, but
Valuchia County, Daytona probably had litigation over the years to establish customer use. Customer use is a judicial construction uh that allows a public to have access
to property they don't own if as Paulo said certain conditions are met and we have that here. So uh but it's unusual in that it's still private property but the public has a right to access it and
so that uh that is what Paulo is speaking about >> right one one other question sort of related to that is when we did this successfully for the uh turn parade that
happened very quickly um within a couple meetings it seemed like why What allowed us to uh to do that then? >> That was that actually did get a special local law. >> It did. Mhm. >> That you know you'd have to get a legisl
you had a legislative sponsor and you had >> was leak a sponsor or just >> you have to get what a house and senate sponsor from your delegation. >> Um and you know you need outstanding community support for that activity.
>> Okay. I want I wanted the people that are here to to listen to that too because there's this isn't going to get approved today. There's some hurdles that we have to continue to jump through and and have been for a while and I appreciate the work that that staff has
already done to get us here. Um we have uh I'm going to open it up to questions for staff and then let's listen to the public and then we can debate this. But um uh Councilman Johansson,
>> thank you, sir. Um Paulo, so you know, we've we've talked a lot about customary use like for the time I've been here. Uh can that how long
do we have to do something for it to be considered customary use? The standard is ancient since time immemorial, which is 20 years. >> Got it. 20 years. >> There's actually case law on that. >> How long
How long was there beach driving in that area before it was >> quite quite a >> over 20 years, right? >> So >> 112. So they
they changed their customary use or or or took away that right when they took the the cars off the beach. Correct. >> Correct. >> So >> well I I want to say that >> maybe
>> of the elements. >> I will hold you to it. >> I I won't deduct his evaluation next year if you're >> No. And the answer Paula is giving you he's trying to be cautious. >> Sure. where all are because we don't want to concede anything. >> Yep. Yep. >> You know, so when he talks about
easements, getting easements, that would be a way around the customer use issue or you duke it out in court. >> Well, so based on the based on the input we saw so far, there's some there's some people that don't want it. So, I wouldn't think they would say, but but
I'll sign these for you. Um so so then my next question is is the the parking or the uh yeah the on beach parking hasn't been there for how long? >> Since 2000 >> which is 25 years. So So now do we have
a customary use that that that there isn't driving? Is that now a customary non non-use if you will? >> Uh it's I mean we do put cars on the beach in that area. Yeah, >> you have uh a lot of our our
concessions, our um uh emergency, our uh beach cleanup. Um >> so in that area, we can't use that argument, correct? Or or or >> it's a little more of a stretch defend. >> That would be the argument used against
us. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. All right. Um, and and my last question is I I think somebody said, and if you if you measure it, that the city of Daytona
is the largest land owner. >> Yes. And if I recall, I didn't hear you said a couple people were for it, a couple people against it, but in in our packet, one of those people that haven't responded is the largest land owner,
which is the city of Daytona, or have they subsequently? >> They we have not heard formally from the city of Daytona. >> Oh, they're they're a little preoccupied these days, I guess. >> So, uh on this map, this ownership map, anything in light pink that is owned by the city of Daytona. Um, in fact, this
map is actually slightly outdated. They have purchased um Senior Frogs parking lot. I believe they >> Okay. All right. Is that is that something that that we expect like we'll get back to you or not
responsive? >> They we have communicated to that to them. They have not relayed a date when that's going forward, >> but they're but they're definitely aware. It's not like our email went to junk and they haven't read it. All right, that's all the questions I have.
Thank you so much, Paula and Mike. >> Thank you, Councilman Santiago. >> Yeah, I don't know who can answer this, but what's remind me or share with me what's the uh I know we have from my my recollection from the last time we discussed this was we had small business owners in the area that were very
supportive of doing this and then some of the bigger hotelers and others were against it. Is that an accurate description? Yes, that's what we're we're we've we in this area we've got limited responses. We have five letters from um
uh owners in you know that beach area who are opposed to it. We had one letter who is um you know supporting the idea plus you know a verbal on each side. Does anybody have any information on
economic future investments in the area? what anything in the pipeline things like that that are uh that I may not be aware of. Actually, I'm not aware of anything in that area. I mean, I think those are those are things we should consider in the decision making.
>> We're aware of uh uh potential development uh in that area. Yes. So, >> nothing that can be shared yet? Uh I don't know if we can share it but I mean there's definitely people that are
if the I think representatives here >> let me ask a direct question. Is there any hotel investments additional hotel investments coming to the area? >> Yes. >> You're going to hear from Rob. >> Okay. Then >> there's also an existing hotel that I think changed hands that intends to invest uh in an upgrade
as well. >> Okay. Thank you. I I look forward to hearing. Thank you, Chair. >> Vice Chair Reinhardt. >> Thank you, Chair. Um, just a couple questions, Paulo. I think one of them Jake just asked uh with respect to the city of Daytona Beach hasn't responded at all as far as formally responded.
>> That's correct. >> We've heard uh actually I know of have seen it and heard it where the mayor himself, but he's only one vote uh has publicly stated that he's not in favor of it. He did that at a public meeting, but again,
he's just one person. Um, are we currently working with the city and and I know this answer to this question, but for the purpose of education, George and I had discussed this working with that being said, are we currently working with the city of Daytona Beach to supply more parking on
Main Street? >> Yes. >> Of property we own on Main Street, >> right? We have property on Main Street. Have we received local delegation support whether it be formally or orally or
>> uh John >> at least the ones I've talked to have not >> they have not so um and and I'm not going to name names but the individuals that I spoke with prior to the local delegation meeting over here in Dan were not >> um
what would be and you said we've already passed that threshold if we if we did find somebody to support it both on the legislative side and the Senate side. Um we have passed that threshold as far as filing a bill for this session. >> That's correct. >> Okay.
What would be and maybe uh our beach director up there, Miss Malf could answer this. What is the busiest part you would say of the beach? In other words, could this benefit Well, that area that area is certainly
um uh could be a very busy area. We do have a lot of uh pedestrian traffic in that area, but you have lots of areas in Daytona that are the busiest. >> Depends on the time and what event. That makes sense. >> Yeah. How many >> near ISB uh to Silver Beach usually.
>> Okay. So from that area that we're asking to go to go towards >> those areas fill up the first >> um and then for you as well and I don't expect you to know an exact number how many incidents revol where driving is available now how many
incidents involving uh incidents with pedestrians uh versus a car >> uh well that you know that depends too I don't have an exact number but usually they um occur in areas that are driving
as opposed to non-driving areas. >> I know that we've get we've we've received a a lawsuit just recently with respect to that. So that's why I was asking the question. >> Yeah. I mean that usually happens in the driving areas >> that could happen allwhere. So right now a lot of the ebikes
>> I want to be fair to you know I mean and and I'm and to bring it everybody's attention. I know it looks like the direction of questioning that I have >> shows that I'm veering in in a certain direction. That's not true. Um, I'm asking these questions because they're tough questions and they're questions we're going to have to ask in order to
make an educated decision and um, to be honest, I think I was the one that asked this. It's a motion to bring it back. So, um, so thank you for your answers. I appreciate that. And I understand you can't give the the exact, but I got an idea. Thank you.
>> Thank you, chair. >> Just just one more question, Paulo, for for you and clarification. I think Matt had just said that we missed the legislative session this time. The reason for that is is because the
Valuchia legislation has their own rules and >> they're also there also constitutional and state rules to get a special local bill. Um they need to advertise that you were a seat that um you have a the legislative delegation is seeking a
local bill to the legislature. That's what um occurred through a lot of coordination to to get the Legends Parade um going through. So there's a >> and that's where I was going. We did we had us a sponsor for that. So it still could be done. I don't know that we have
a sponsor. I know what I'm told, but um till you see it in, you know, see them here raising their hand. If we had a sponsor, it could allow something to be done this session. I don't want I'm not an expert on the state legislative. I
think it might be too late. That's true. >> Right. Because you have this the special legislative delegation rules for the Valuchia County um delegation and then you have a constitutional and state statute timelines where um you need to advertise a that you're seeking a
special local bill advertised in a general newspaper and then there's there's an entire process for that. I you by the by the letter of their rules it's too late but it it worked for the first term parade because we had a sponsor
>> is all is all I'm saying. >> Are you here to add something? >> Okay. Nice tie. >> Um Councilman Rhino. >> Yeah. I just wanted I saw uh Mr. Booker come up so I didn't know if you had more information with respect to that to the
And I know that >> I I know. Sorry, John. I didn't want to put you on the spot, but you walked up. So you you're fair game. >> John Booker, government affairs. I will say that that the process for the Legends Parade was probably a 6 to8 month >> was it time >> and it was only for a specific time of
the year and this we're we're talking about something being sponsored for >> indefinite. >> Correct. So, it may and I don't know. I can't speak for the person that sponsored it, but that may have been the reason why they entertained the idea because it was for a specific event and not for opening
up like we're talking about now. >> I couldn't >> You don't We don't know. We don't know. I don't want to speculate. >> But we could do this like we do a lot of other beach things and say we'll do it at trial for a year like we did the dog beach one time. But anyway, >> I'm sorry. Thank you very much. Appreciate the >> interrupting you. Uh, Councilman
Robbins. >> Thank you, Chair. When was the last time we heard this? Do you remember? Was it a year? >> August. >> Last April. >> April. >> Thank you, Paulo. I I council, I'm just wondering, you know,
before we propose this stuff or or, you know, put it on the the agenda, why didn't we garnish this support prior if that's what wanted to be accomplished? And and also to uh get some some hard uh
commitments for for for Eve Spence. The last thing I want to do is waste anybody's time. But we we know the issues. We've heard this issue four times. We know it has to be done. And you know, I just I feel like we're here
we are in the fourth quarter with the shot clocks already and the buzzer's already gone off. But, you know, it doesn't look good. And and now we're trying to ram it down people's throats.
Uh, and this is more than just u uh like the special one-day parade. This is something permanent and and where we need uh landowner support uh and and state support. And I don't, you know, hate to be the bearer of bad news, but I I don't see it. So, um, thanks.
>> Okay. No, there's no ramming down the throat. Um Danny, and there are people and not just me, but some of the people in the audience that have been um gathering support from local and successfully from
local representatives. So, uh, let's go to the public and then we can we can hash it out and see where we are. Uh, for the U
John Nicholson, I was going to guess where you were, but I don't think you've changed your mind. John Nicholson 413 North Graham we have it in Daytona Beach a block from the beach block from the no drive beach. Um
we fought this several times. All right. Um what I wish Pablo had done it says receive five letters of opposition. Who were the opposition? Are they 90% of the property owners on the beach if
they oppose it? 90% is a high number. If the 7-Eleven and one other property, small property owner said yes, they're very minor. Um, the people that are asking for this are down Main Street. They're two and three blocks away and
they're not involved in this. Uh, the people that are involved do not like driving on the beach for specific reasons. All right. Besides the development now development, if if you go over Main Street Bridge or any of our
bridges, if you look between Main Street and Seab Breeze, all those seven tall buildings were all built after driving came off the beach with tiff funds. Then we got a city manager who had no
interest on the beach side. And if you look to the right, all those tall buildings, all two of them were built in the 50s. So we've had nothing in that area because of the city manager. Now we have the possibility of having two,
three or four hotels going in in that location. We haven't had that in 20 years. And if they did, we did have people come in the last 20 years and they were voted down. We had nine buildings voted down from that area
because of the city manager and the commission at that time. All right. This is a very volatile issue. They're saying there's nothing happening. Well, because we voted it down. All right. So, if you put the driving back on the beach and the two people that are talking about
putting hotels there walk away, when are we ever going to get development in that area? Now, it's unfortunate when that approach closed, it was the highest grossing revenue for the county on that approach alone.
What brought everybody there is no longer there. There are only three buildings of those 17 buildings are left. So, if you have three of 17, why does anybody want to go to that location? There's no draw anymore.
They're hoping to bring back something that's been gone for 25 years. People are not going to come back just to park on that beach to walk down Main Street. What Main Street needs to focus on is getting the city to give them the money
that should have been given to them 25 years ago. That was their money maker. People driving down Main Street to go to the beach. When they stopped, nobody drove down Main Street because there wasn't any need to go. So, I'm asking you to oppose this. >> Thank you for your comments. Uh, Gabriel
Wazniaak, Chairman Brower, members of the council, I stand before you today as the chairman of the Libertarian Party of Valuchia County to speak in favor of item 13. We are here to discuss restoring beach driving from International Speedway Boulevard to Auditorium Boulevard. But fundamentally, we are here to discuss
who owns the beach, the people of Valuchia County or the corporate interest that line its shores. From a perspective of liberty, the removal of beast driving in this corridor in 2000 was not an improvement. It was an enclosure of the commons. For generations, driving on our sands was a customary right, a unique tradition that
maximized public access to public land. When the government severed that right, trading it away for parking garages and developer promises, it effectively privatized the public access. I have read the agenda pack and I have read the letters from the opposition, Boardwalk at Daytona, Ross Hotel Partners, Portman
Holding and the Hilton. Their message to this council is loud and clear and frankly it's chilling. They are essentially threatening to withhold investment if you do not maintain a sanitized vehicle-free zone that benefits their bottom line. This is the
definition of crony capitalism. These entities want the taxpayer funded government to enforce a restriction on the public so that their private developments can enjoy exclusivity of a private beach atmosphere without paying for the land. They are asking the state to act as their private security force, keeping the locals in their cars away from the tourists in their hotels. The
libertarian position is simple. Public land should remain accessible to the public. When you ban cars from the beach, you are engaging in a soft form of discrimination. You are borrowing the elderly, the disabled, and the young families who cannot haul coolers and chairs hundreds of yards from a garage to the waterline. You are telling the citizens of this county that their tax
dollars pay for the beach, but their access is secondary to the aesthetic preferences of a developer from Atlanta. We hear arguments about safety and the tragic accidents listed in the agenda packet are heartbreaking. But in a free society, the answer to risk is not prohibition. It is responsibility. We do not ban cars from International Speedway
Boulevard because there are accidents. We enforce traffic laws. We do not ban swimming because of rip tides. We advise caution. To ban vehicles entirely is the lazy authoritarian approach to risk management. It punishes the law-abiding majority for the actions of the few. The opposition claims the 1996 ordinance was
a deal. Driving would cease if parking garages were built. But civil liberties and public access should never be bargaining chips. Just because a previous government sold our rights for concrete parking spaces 25 years ago does not mean this council is bound to perpetrate that error forever. Item 13
represents a choice. You can bow to the pressure of the traffic-free lobbyists who have view our beach as an extension of their hotel lobbies. Or you can stand for the individual. You can restore the historic customary rights of the people to access their coastline in the very manner that made Valuchia County famous.
Do not let this beach become a gated community for corporate elite. Vote to engage the legislative delegation. Vote to restore access. Give the beach back to the people. Thank you for your time and please vote with your conscience. >> Thank you.
Uh Ricky Garris. Hello council members. My name is Rick Garris. I live in Daytona Beach and I support the idea of reopening driving on the beach from ISB to auditorium. Some of the reasons I support beach driving in this area are as follows. Number one,
it will be easier. It will provide easier beach access for many of the people who cannot walk far and those that would prefer to park on the beach and not have to carry their belongings across A1A, which is a far greater safety concern than cars driving 10 miles an hour on the beach. It will help
to stimulate the local economy like it used to do back in the 90s when that area was packed full of people parking their cars in front of the boardwalk. They would walk up and down the boardwalk patronizing the businesses in that area. Number three, I don't see one good thing that has come from closing
the beach driving in that area and most of the small businesses are struggling as a result. We have tried this experiment of closing the driving on the main core Daytona tourist area and what good has it brought us. Many of the small businesses have closed and that
area is dead most of the time. I have fond memories of being able to drive on the beach both day and night. I remember when we could park on the beach until 1000 p.m. and visit the boardwalk, band shell, and the bar restaurants in between. Those were the good old days.
And now we have a chance to bring that back. Please share with me one success that has come from closing the beach to cars besides giving a hotel developer what they want at the expense of the residents that enjoy beach driving and easy access.
Removing driving in that area has been a huge take. There are plenty of non-driving beaches that pe that people can visit. What brought visitors to Day Daytona was beach driving. Getting rid of it has brought us to where we are today, a hollow shell of what we were.
Please help fix this problem by not keeping the status quo. Please vote to restore the world's most famous speech similar to how it was. Thank you for your time and God bless. Thank you. Uh Tom Catherine.
Oh my lord, eyeballs are going. Hi everybody. Uh Tom Caffrey, uh Daytona Beach, owner of World's Most Famous Brewery, current president of the Main Street Merchants Association and uh realy pros assured. Um, I'm here on behalf and I again want
to thank uh Chairman Brower and the entire council for hearing this as well as staff. Um, I don't really know where I'm going to go with this because I I'm kind of a loose cannon as many know, but I I want to start with maybe the Hilton. You know, when the Hilton was built, they vacated Ocean Avenue and that was
their ask. They didn't ask to remove Beach driving. So, I don't know where that may have gone after the 1992 resolution to remove that, but the Hilton was required to have retail, commercial, and everything else on the
boardwalk level as part of the requirement to vacate Ocean Avenue. They're required to keep that. They were required to have playgrounds, and they don't have any of that any longer. They were required to not have suites. They are all suites now. Those were not allowed in the original agreement. So, I
don't know where that stands as it is now, but that's an important aspect of where the things fall. But to that point, the new owners now bought the Hilton. The reason why they bought it is the current the past owners were going to lose the flag because Hilton was
going to take it. So now this new owners invested the money and hopefully they will follow that commitment to to do that. And that would be great if they did. I remember the Hilton swimming underneath the swim out pool, going into the Hilton, walking up into the spa. It
was one of the greatest places. They also allowed without band access to walk up to the Hilton, enjoy the bar, all of the other things that were there. It was one of the best pool hopping places around. It was a fantastic place. I loved it. But they didn't try to remove beach access. So, I don't know where
that's come from, but that wasn't part of the original moniker of that place. The beach access removal came from the ocean walk. the ocean walk was designed. That's where that came from. So maybe the Hilton jumped on to that in 1996 or 2000. I don't know. But their contract
with the city and the county was only to remove Ocean Avenue and vacate that. Um, the other things that I was going to touch on is just I wasn't notified and maybe it doesn't matter to the governing
list, 100 ft, 100 yards, whatever that number might be, but I don't know of anybody on Main Street or A1A for that matter that was asked about the beach. And and so as far as the stakeholder comment, five things, one the other, I don't know of anybody that was asked. So
I think that that's important. One of the other things that I I really lose track of is this section is so important to this community. It's the only section that there are no hotels on that are massive. You can enjoy the beach, enjoy the sunlight, and enjoy all of that. And
if we get more hotels there, I think it'd be a mess. So, thank you everybody. Thank you. Uh, Mike Dennis. >> Good afternoon. My name is Mike Dennis. I live at 177 uh Blue Heron uh Lake
Circle in Orman Beach. Uh I have lived in Daytona Beach a long time. I was in the sixth grade when Lee Petty won the first 500. Yeah, Richard's daddy. Um, I dare say I've been here longer than any
of you guys and and lady. Um, we the history I want to open up to you is in the opposition letters there was several of them that talked about I the potential of an investment and a lot of
the discussion earlier was uh about other topic was actual contracts. We have had more potential in investments that uh the probably the best one was Van Avenue where the
property owner on both sides of the approach came to the council and said, "Hey, if you uh abandon this, sorry, I'll build a an approach over here." Sounds good. Those two properties are
still empty today, 20 years later. Now, um then, uh my pet peeve is the original, um uh Hard Rock. I lived on Linux Avenue at the time. Uh the approach was abandoned.
Angered me. I was going to use a different word. Um and and that's still a empty lot. And then you go further north uh you'll uh the longboard project but that was a
result of a earlier project that started like in 2004. That's more than 25 years ago uh when uh Vermont Avenue was abandoned. And then what the one I like is the uh George Anderson family's
parking lot. Every 3 to 5 years or so, the city of Daytona Beach extends the temporary uh status of their parking lot. Why? Because it's a placeholder for the super duper potential
uh snazzy hotel. We're talking about potential and I can, you know, show me one example of where the potential uh became reality. I don't see any with that. I would uh wish that you
would approve the furtherance of of this process and you know uh look it up. Lee Petty was the first guy. Thank you. Uh Doug Pettit. Good afternoon. Doug Pett 129 Magnolia Orman Beach. Chairman Brower and council
members, I'm here today to add my voice once again to those residents in the county asking to restore beach driving on that portion of the beach between International Speedway Boulevard and Auditorium in Daytona. I guess the theme of my comments this afternoon would be
what do you got to lose? Um, as all of you know, the beach in Daytona was once the hub of tourist activity and economic energy for the region. As an adolescent, I recall my family coming to Daytona Beach from Maryland on family vacations,
bypassing much closer Ocean City and Myrtle Beach to come to Daytona because my dad said you could drive on the sand in Daytona. As a college student in the mid70s, I remember planning all year to make the annual spring break trek to Daytona Beach. It was a vibrant and
exciting area, nothing like what we experience today. There can be no question from anybody with an ability to rationally evaluate cause and effect that the decision to close Beats driving in this area led to the dramatic economic downturn. Blighted, rundown
buildings and transients now occupy an area that once teamed with tourists looking to participate in the experience of the world's most famous beach and spend their money in pursuit of that experience. We only have to look at the decision of the county council in 1996
to close beach driving as the genesis for the current decline. Since that time, we've witnessed campaign after campaign from marketing experts and the convention and visitor gurus to revitalize the area to no avail. There have been all sorts of taxpayer funded
gimmicks to bring back the economic vitality of the area without success. The marketing people will trying to justify their existence will tell you to look at the hotel occupancy statistics to see the value of their work. I say
that events like bike week, biketoberfest, the NASCAR races, and the turkey ride are organic events that generate their own tourism. It's what's happening when those visitors go home that leads to the blight and decay we see in the beach area today. The county
is investing significant funding in the reimaging of the Ocean Center, a county facility that has never fulfilled its true potential. This creates a prime opportunity to allow this investment to pay off by re-energizing a vital
destination area where people want to come. Restoring Beats driving in the questioned area is a key step to achieving that success. And keeping with the theme of my comments that we've just we've tried about everything else, what have you got to lose?
Recently, you had the courage to and the foresight to take the chance on Dog Beach, a hugely successful venture. Why not demonstrate that same courage again by opening up beach driving? Thank you. >> Thank you for your comments. Uh Rob
Merrill. Looks like I'm on an island with John Nicholson today. Not the first time. Actually believe a lot of things John tells you guys. Rob Merrill for the record with Cobb Cole One Daytona Boulevard and Woodland Boulevard in Vand. Um I'm here representing the
Anderson family, Lake George Anderson's family and the folks who were referenced earlier who are looking to answer to David's question who left hopefully bringing you guys a new hotel uh on the beach right across from your ocean center. Uh we've been working with the county staff, city staff for several
months now. Um in fact, what's being talked about here has I think given rise to a lot of the hesitation that's been happening both from our our financers and others on this project. Um I know I sound like the bad guy to some folks out here bringing you maybe hundreds of millions of dollars of investment. You
guys have said consistently for the Ocean Center to succeed and for this this area of town to succeed, we need good hotels. And that's what we're here to bring you. both hotels and other what they call exper experiential retail. So, dining, uh, retail, uh, things that
involve activity, people to be outside and doing things. Uh, that's what we're trying to bring for this piece of property. It's been part of George Anderson's vision for for many years. Um, there were some questions about why it was never done. I think some of you may know, uh, there was an a lawsuit that lasted for many, many years that
just was finally finished and settled within the last year and a half. I think that's why we're here. We're back now able to bring forward his vision. And I think I what I would suggest, Mr. Chairman, is you said that you couldn't say yes to this today. And I would agree with that. There's a lot of things that need to happen, but I would suggest that
you could say no to it. Um, and to me, a lot of what's happening is perception, not reality as far as the way it's affecting the the economics of this project I'm telling you about. Um, if you say no, then at least we know you guys are not going to continue to let
this fester. Um, you do have that opportunity and that's what I urge you to do today. There were several letters as some of which were mentioned that came from folks that had lots of good reasons for this, including my partner Jessica Ga. Some of those were legal reasons that have already been discussed. Others are, I think, reasons
that you guys already know setting up on the deis. I'm not going to go through those. I don't have time. You guys don't give me that much time. Uh, and so, uh, I will say that if you have any questions about the project, be happy to talk to you guys about it so you understand what we're doing. But David, and answer your question, there is the
potential for private investment coming to this location that will be threatened by a decision to move this forward. >> Thanks. Thank you. Uh Bobby Gdaddy, you said while he's walking down here,
you sent the best written letter on this subject that I've read, but I didn't get it till we had all broke for lunch. So, I didn't know if if anybody else I don't know if the rest of the council got to read it,
but you line by line express the probably what you're about to tell us. >> I don't really have long to talk today because I have to pick my kids up. So, but what I would say is I live on Main Street. I am there 24/7. I have a family that I raised on Main Street. We are
blocks from the beach. Whether you're a block or a block away, our hearts in that area. And I've grown up here. I went to Seabbze High School, lived in Port Orange, ended up going to Seabbze. I've watched the area go from a certain point in Promises and so forth as time went and it just doesn't seem the same.
I remember sitting in my car driving down A1A going all the way from Bair Plaza excited to come down to Main Street and coming all the way to get to Main Street and that was it was vibrant. It was full of life and it's just felt like the economy whatever is happening
here has just gone down. I am highly involved within the community. We are involved with the Main Street Merchants. My wife is the uh vice president for Main Street Merchants. We've hosted huge events out here trying to bring back a light to the area. Daytona's invested all kind of money to bring back this
beautiful entrance into the beach for what? We're known as Daytona Beach, the world's most famous beach. You take that right from the people that deserve to drive on it. What's the point in having it as a world famous beach? We'll just be like Tampa. We'll just be like anything else in Fort Lauderdale and all
these other areas. I think the surrounding businesses, if you've watched how the businesses have come from skyrocket in the 80s, early 90s, it was fun and now I'm even living there and above my business. Not struggling too bad. I don't even know what it's
like to lose 45 to 50% of a revenue. And I've talked to the uh the Humphre who are right across the street from us. They've been there since 78. She said, "Bringing back the beach would be awesome because yes, you get to drive down Main Street. you get to come down that street where it's pinpointed if you
look it up on Google and it comes right down to there and if we could bring that back I believe that the areas the surrounding businesses whether you have a hotel that gets built or not to take the beach away from us isn't right who's not to say another hotel wants beach
driving that will be put there senior frogs if you allow these people to park on the beach it helps people get there and be a part of whatever else is going on you have all these events bike week and all these things that bring uh all kind of money into the town. But if we allow to bring back during the summer,
I'm sitting at Disney World and I'm chilling with my family, it gives us an excuse to come down and enjoy the beach just for a day. That's why we're the world's most famous beach. Help the economy, help the people that are around it, and help us bring back what what rightfully we pay taxes for.
Thank you. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank thank you all for uh for coming and speak speaking. Um Gabriel, you did a you did a good job. I want to meet you afterwards. Okay. Oh, good. The um
I wasn't fast enough getting my name up, so we we have several people that want to speak first. Um Michael Dyer, I want to start with with you. You've been up there for a while. >> That was an old request. I apologize. >> Okay, moving right along. Uh, Councilman
Kent, >> thank you, Chairman. You know, whenever you um when you do any type of experiment, you you eagerly await the results and you want to make sure there's only
really one variable, of course. And I think that we can honestly say after 25 or 30 years if you want to say after this decision was made there are
two words to describe the results of this experiment and those words to me are epic failure. I was born, as you all know, you've heard me say, in that Halifax hospital.
And I can remember surfing Main Street Pier and having to park over a mile away to walk down and surf the pier because it was so jam-packed full of people. We have had Main Street merchants come in
here and tell us that their business dropped 50% the first year. Who in their right mind in 1996 would have made the decision for your busiest
approach in all of Valuchia County to strangle and cut off the financial lifeblood? It blows my mind that that happened and we're hearing about a possible
investment. Well, let's not talk about possible investments. Let's talk about real investments that people have put in the main street who are struggling every day and they're just asking to say open up
that section of beach. I I am completely for this. I will continue to speak with our legislators if we get approval from this council. I I disagree with the one
comment from the podium about, you know, you're right. You know, you can't make this happen now, but you can kill it. I I don't I don't want to kill this. Back in 1992 and 1993, Taco Bell
at that location had the number one sales in all of North America. It was jammed up from lunchtime until 4 in the morning. Taco Bell is not there anymore, as are hundreds of other businesses
because a group of people decided to basically make a private beach. And that's what you do when you shut off access to the beach. You basically make a private beach for the land owners that own that beach. And they'll come in here and say, "No, it's not a private beach.
People can come there." but they can't because there's no real parking and people aren't walking a mile to go get some good waves and shoot the pier at the Main Street Pier. Um, epic failure in my mind as a result of
this experiment. It has not fared well and you heard individuals say it earlier, but they are constantly trying to in a gimmicky type of way throw money at this problem. Come up with a new
idea. Let's do a drop the ball at Main Street. We're going to try to make people want to come down there. Open up the beach and let that thoroughare continue. And it's not going to change overnight, but give it some time.
And um Taco Bell may come back also. Thanks, >> Councilman Santiago. >> I don't know if the applause was for Taco Bell, but I favor Del Taco. I like Del Taco better. Um Taco Bell
plot. I may not get applause for this afterwards, but you know, Troy, I I appreciate your perspective and and I I don't think opening the beach is the solution to their problem. No, I don't I
don't I think it's economic investment. Um, I'm fortunate enough in my in my day job, I get to travel throughout the state and oftentimes near beach towns, popular ones, and I see the investment that occurs in a lot of beach
communities that make it vibrant. Um, make it active, make it businesses be successful. Um, I wasn't here in the 80s. Um, but I'll tell you what, my personal opinion, and no insult to anyone, but when I drive to the beach, I feel like I've gone back to the 80s.
when I go back in the area, I feel like I've got I'm going into a slight time warp that there hasn't been much investment in that area. I think that's why it got stuck in the 80s. I know the gentleman, he had to go to get his children, but it got stuck in the 80s
because investment hasn't come. And I think there's other potential opportunities. I'm not a hotel year. Um, but I hear from hotel years that they want to invest more in that community. Um, hotel years bring people to the
community which bring people to your shops. We got an expert over here. >> Please, we're I'm going to have to have order in the we're going to ever get through this. >> So, if people don't have places to stay, they're not probably going to come. And
we hear even from our ocean center individuals are our people that promote the ocean center. We get held back from getting types of venues and investment here in our ocean center because of the hotel situation. Not only because of the the amount of rooms available, but the
caliber of the rooms that people are expecting now that that level has increased. Um, and now I'll just even use the most recent thing. We have JetBlue now, right? We're hopefully we bring more people into Daytona Beach, it's going to help these businesses. I
hope they go visit the beach. I hope they go buy at their stores. Right. Bringing people to Daytona Beach is what's going to help their businesses in my opinion. Not saying that you can now drive past these columns is going to maybe a slight thing, but I don't think
that's the economic success button for them. We need investment in Daytona Beach. I see it all across this state. It's a lot of nice stuff happening out there. Good quality. Um, and I
we have driving today, right? It's not like if we didn't have driving, I'd get it. But we have driving on the beach. Um, these areas I don't think is going to I think it's a false hope. It's just my opinion, folks. You can disagree with it. I respect yours. Um, but I think we
should favor sending a clear message to people that want to invest in that area. Let's put this situation to rest today. Yay or nay. Right. I'm going to vote no, but let's put it to rest and send a clear message to um these folks who hope
that this is going to solve their business issues or to the individuals that want to invest in Valuchia County uh so they can now start spending those dollars if we vote no to invest in this area and hopefully uplift it. But I've
said it before, I've said it probably 20 times since I've been here. Daytona Beach is the economic engine of Valuchia County. investment needs to occur there. And no insult to them, they are stuck in the 80s.
We need to find ways to get investment in here. And we're hearing from people in the investment world, a solution to this in the in the vote of a no is a potential moving forward. So, I'm repeating myself, Mr. Chair, but I appreciate the time and everybody's
opinions. I'm ready to vote no. >> Okay. Thank you. um that we have been sending a clear message for 30 years, at least for for 25 years because it was in 2000 when a previous county council decided to shut
down the beach from uh East ISB all the way to Seabbze Boulevard with a promise that that would bring investment. It hasn't come. The investment has come to that area has come from people like sit before us out here today. hard-working
families that are the backbone of of Main Street right now, but the backbone of America. Most businesses that hire people and keep our economy thriving are small businesses with nine or fewer employees. And so when I can't I can't
look at these people and say, you know, you're not investing in our community. You don't deserve to have a spot here. You're the ones that have gutting it out. You're the ones that have have dug in and are providing good services and fun places for us to come. Can can you
put those pictures up that I had that I gave you earlier? I want to go through real quickly some somebody said, "How long have you had it?" Um, long enough to where there used to be I thought this was the one with horses, but um we had Troy's horses on on the be those are
pretty old cars here. What kind are they, Don? Um, next picture. Um and and then and then we we upgraded the uh the automobile and and we ended up with this th this is in the area that we're talking about. It
was packed with people. It was packed with with people that could park easily there. granny, their cooler, their floats, all the stuff they wanted for the day and walk across A1A from the from the
parking garage and try and find a spot. They're not doing it. They're not investing in this area because we've made it impossible for them to get there. There is nothing like the experience of going to this beach and parking your car, your van or your truck and having your own little section of
beachfront property with everything you need to enjoy the day surrounding your vehicle. That's what made Daytona Beach the most popular beach in Florida. That's what made us the world's most most famous beach. Um, next this this is the the pier. It used to thrive. It's
not thriving anymore. Next picture. Um, the boardwalk. It's I I worked on the beach for 10 years. You could hardly move on the boardwalk. There was so many people here. You see a few cars there. It was packed with with automobiles that fed Main Street, that fed the boardwalk.
They would come enjoy the day and then go up um and spend their money on Ma. I spent my money on Main Street. I don't think any of you were there then. Um next picture. Um the rats hole. one of the one of the most fun places on uh on on Main Street was there. It was always
full of people. Um next picture. This is what it looks like now. Not because they're not investing, but because we took their customers away. We told them we don't care about you. We closed the dog on beach. We closed that that Coina
Arch that we just invested. I don't know how much money Day Daytona invested in that that says welcome to Daytona Beach. no entrance. It makes no sense at all. That's why That's why it's that way. And Rob, I'm sorry. I have a lot of respect for you, but for you to come in here now
and say that uh uh two weeks of having this on the agenda is what's um holding up investors, that's disingenuous. U I I hope I misunderstood you that if we go through with this, it will hold them up. And if it holds them up, I say so long.
Goodbye. I would like to have motel here that respect our history, that respect the people that live here, that respect the people that are putting their hard work and labor into this part of the beach to make it a a a successful, thriving community. We got to give them
their car, their their customers back. And and yeah, I want just like David said, I want to see uh uh another motel there. I want to see somebody come in and and revive the the plaza before it just completely deteriorates. We need both, but um I'm
I'm going to save my time to get to what what the ask is today, but to um to say we're stuck in the 80s, I I wonder when was the last time you went to Flaggler Avenue. I mean, Flaggler Avenue is what Main Street used to be. It's all mom and
pop stores that are that are a lot of you can't even go there on the weekend as a I don't as a resident because you can't find a place to park. It's it's so visible. Go to Cocoa Beach. I go there twice a year and it's you go down the street there. There's plenty of mom and
pop stores and and uh John Surf Shop. So, um let's respect our our history. Uh Matt Reinhardt. >> Thank you, Chair. So, I asked a while back if we could bring this back, getting more
information at least from those stakeholders, from the state, from all those things that needed to be met. You know, we've received a couple answers. Um, what was it? Five of the six of the actual property owners that are not willing to do it. Um,
and then of course nothing really from the city of Daytona, which is is concerning. at least I'd like an answer, you know, one way or another. But, um, I also do understand why maybe the state hasn't taken it. They have bigger fish to fry right now with property tax issues and, uh, what the governor's
asking them to do. I get that. Um, I kind of want to know because like we could go through all this work and then the state still has nothing no interest in in pursuing it later. Troy, I hope you're successful, you know, when you talk to them. Uh, I've talked to a couple, they're not, but that's that's
now, you know, that like anybody's mind can change. I like the pictures, by the way. They were awesome. I remember that. You know, I grew up here in Valuchia County. Been here since 1970. Uh, I said it before, graduated from Dand High, but I spent more time over here in Daytona.
Um, but yeah, David, I was allowed in Deltona back then. So the old boardwalk picks, you know, that that that pier that nothing looks the same. It doesn't look that way now. The businesses don't exist. Um, that's very
true. The businesses are not uh I I love the idea of the the the comparison of Flaggler Avenue. I'd love to see it like that. Unfortunately, Flaggler Avenue and Main Street are two different business dynamics, completely different. Um, and the businesses that are there, from at
least my understanding, and correct me if I'm wrong, but some of the business owners, the buildings that are there on Main Street right now that are vacant, those people have those they they own those parcels for the purpose of bike week and they make enough money during
bike week to sustain that building. Therefore, they sit vacant the rest of the year where nobody else can can lease it. So until we change that mindset, too, how do we bring those businesses back? I know the city of Daytona is working on a on a project for Main Street right now. I'd be curious as to
see what the the results of that are as well. Um, you talked about investors, having investors come in. We saw the idea of a big investor and how successful that can be. Thank you. Uh, from what Hayatt Brown brought to the Esplanade, he wanted an improvement. He
has an investment in this in this area. He grew up here, so he wanted to see that. And he has been extremely successful. He doesn't stop there. He believes in, and I'm not going to get into this question, this issue, Troy, by the way, arts, but he believes in them,
you know, and he believes in investing into the arts area. So, he's made a major investment. We had the opportunity last night to attend the the opening of now what will be referred to as the Brown, no longer the Moab. And that's from the huge investment from Hayatt and
Cece. So there is investment. If you can find that that's great. Going back to the hotel issue what Robert brought up. I sit and I chair on the TDC the tourist development council. We meet in the ocean center and from the very first meeting to current. We have said in
order to have the Ocean Center be successful is a lot what we're doing right now and also to have a staple hotel. The Hilton is not it. It's not it. If you know what the H and it's to no fault
of the current or the the management that's there, but hopefully they'll get there, but we do not have that staple hotel. So, it was said in the meeting, which I thought was kind of unique, is they said, "We're not going to have the success of the Ocean Center until we have the Staple Hotel. The Staple Hotel will not come here until the Ocean
Center is more successful." So, I'll leave it at that. Carissa, I have a couple other concerns. If you could bring up the picture. This was taken the other day. These are just legitimate concerns that need to be addressed. This is on a low tide. This
was taken yesterday. this picture 12-1. So in the 22 foot of stretch, which is the widest stretch that you would be able to drive under, which was there and has always been there, you have I think the highest distance on the south side is 11'4 in. And then go
to the the north side if you could. And on the north side, that same 22 span is 10'9 in. If we get any type of natural accretion of sand, that will change dramatically. So there's less and and we're talking
about traveling under that pier in order to get to the area that you're talking about. That's that's connected those two sides of the area that you're talking about open up. That is a concern that needs to be mentioned. So if you want cars to travel, they got to be able to travel up underneath. Now
16 or I'm sorry, 10 foot 9 in seems like a lot. Have you taken a Every one of us up here except for David owning the Vega has a level level the size of your truck. See what some of the trucks are. And I'll leave it at that. Thank you, Chair.
>> Councilman Kent. >> Thank you, Chairman. Yeah, my uh my '06 Tundra could make it under that no problem. Just so we're all on the same page. But uh Mr. Santiago, you know, you brought up the 80s and man, I sort of wish you wouldn't have because I don't
know of an era with better music. better hair. >> And >> I had hair back then >> and I I believe it and I'm gonna tell you because I've got four minutes and 40 seconds left. One of my favorite restaurants is in Orman Beach. It's called Mario's. If you've not been, I
highly recommend you go. Great Italian food. Uh I recommend the chicken Marsala. But when you walk in there, it's like you walked back into 1982. And they were making some upgrades. And I said to the owner, "No." Like this is one of the reasons I love this place is
I I I dig that. I I kind of like that. But the Ocean Walk happened since this. So why does it look like the 80s? That's what this was about, right? Get rid of Beach Drive-In because Oceanwalk didn't want it, right? So the Ocean Walk
happened and um I can't tell you how many businesses have come and gone from uh from the Ocean Walk. my family, my my son and wife and I used to love going to that little movie theater there. Um, that's that's no longer. And and I'll
just tell you that area, you know, Matt beat me by five years. He's been here since 70. I wasn't born till 75. So Matt has me on on when he was here first. But I'll tell you, before it was the Hilton and then
another hotel, it was the Marriott. And that when it when it was the Marriott, that place was thumping down there. It was it had a it had a Sunday brunch with prime rib and crab legs. It was like 17
18 bucks back in the day, but all you can eat. But that area was thriving during that time period. and you could
enter and exit the beach at Main Street. And I mean, don't take it from me. I mean, listen to the the business owners that live there and and the drop off in business that they had. And talk to the county about where their
busiest approach was. And we've mentioned Flaggler Avenue in New Simrna, which what great synergy New Simra has. But you take away the beach access at Flaggler Avenue and watch what
would happen. Uh hello Main Street. Main Street. You want to show New Simra what would what they would turn into? Tell them to come down and and uh take a look at your businesses. Have Mr. Brower bring the one slideshow down of the uh of the businesses on Main Street
currently, the sad picture that he has because that's what would happen to Flaggler Avenue if you cut off that access. And I was screaming and yelling as a city commissioner Orman Beach because you couldn't get on the beach in Orman Beach at Granada. They kept saying soft sand, but I'm like, you're killing the businesses in Orman Beach because
you won't let people on the beach at Granada. There is a direct correlation. I haven't heard from everybody up here, but it doesn't sound too positive, which bums me out. But, um, I think that this
is absolutely the fix that's needed is, you know, an experiment happened. The results have been tragic. So, let's reverse that decision and let's let it slowly grow back to its
vibrancy that we know it can be because it was like that before in the 80s and the 90s. Place was thumping busy, super busy. And it's because they had access. And if you did that to Flaggler
Avenue, you would you would choke out their businesses and kill them just like this terrible slow death has happened on Main Street. Thanks, >> Councilman Robbins. >> Thank you, Chair. Um I think we're hearing some valid points.
We've we've heard them in the past, but I think we we can also agree that it's just um not one one thing, and that's not to offend anybody, but the one major thing that that that I haven't heard, I'm going to just read off some some history here.
Daytona's rise to fame. In the early 90s, City began promoting itself as a spring break destination and MTV took notice, broadcasting live shows from Daytona Beach starting in ' 86, the world capital of spring break,
right? I wish I could have been here. I was born in ' 85. So, uh, uh, but MTV's broadcast, energetic atmosphere to millions and network officially dubbed Daytona Beach the world capital of spring break. might have been Woodstock.
Massive crowds. By 1989, the event drew an estimated 4 to 500,000 students annually. Okay. Throughout the year, live music, right? We're working on bringing back live music and live events. Corporate sponsorship. The popularity led to a boom in corporate
sponsorships and focus on events like spring games to channel student energy throughout the years. Right. >> Pornovore. just to we're we're exceeding our time limit on the six hours. So I just wanted to make a motion to extend the meeting till 4:30.
>> So we can hear >> second. >> Okay. All in favor of sending the meeting till 4:30, please say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? Okay. >> Yes. I'm opposed. >> Okay. One opposed. >> I I'll try I'll try to wrap this up.
>> Uh and then it goes into and these aren't my I don't you know caught some criticism. uh uh last time we had this um which uh I respect people's opinions but then there's reality uh so uh at the
end of the day uh just looking on on different news articles here the downfall and shift in focus public safety uh issues the massive influx of students in 198 19 1989 created significant problems including extreme overcrowding traffic gridlock and a
surge in disorderly conduct amongst other things hotel and balcony problems As many of you know, there's been a lot of rundown uh hotels that have plagued the area for years. That's why we're obviously having to build back uh chaotic atmosphere led to damage in
hotels, sever incidents, student falling from balconies, one with uh several fatalities. City's response to city's uh efforts back in the day to manage the situation such as proposing hotels, pay for police response, and growing perception of a negative reputation led
officials to re-evaluate the event. Parting ways with MTV, Daytona Beach and MTV could not agree on terms and the network moved its spring break broadcast elsewhere, such as San Diego in 1994. That's when you really started seeing the crash um new
direction. And in the years following, the city shifted its strategy to focus on more family oriented events and spring family beach breaks. The large-scale student party era ended. Right? So, with that being said, we all know, uh, granted, I didn't experience
uh that area, but I did experience uh late 90s, early 2000s. Um, there's other contributing factors to why this area has suffered throughout the years. And in my opinion, and only in my
opinion, unless we get the city on board with their view, right, with their view of what they want their city to be like, because it's theirs,
unless we get state legislators on board, unless we get these easements. Right now, guys, we're peeing in the wind. For the last four or five years, we could say whatever we want to what the
decline. There's much more uh going on here. If it was up to me, we would have never gotten rid of it, right? Uh I think we have all fought to uh make that oath to say we are we would not get get rid of any more beach, which
I'm not in support of, but There's other things that happened here. But to put this year after year after year after year, council, when there's other circumstances that were out of our control, that are still out of our control that are always going
to be out of our control. Uh to keep putting that on this council and uh making us kind of the bad guys, that that ain't right either. And that's not right. putting putting these these folks that are trying to earn a living here uh continuously in this role and portray as
if we can just wave a wand in the 80s or 90s are going to come back. It's not going to happen. And if it was a bad spot to begin with and not a money maker, a lot of folks wouldn't be there. I sure wouldn't be make have a business there if it wasn't going to make money. Um, what I am
willing to do is continue to promote what's going to bring people here to fit the county's vision, to fit the um, Daytona's vision, try to be the best partner we can, but until we get some money there and to until we get people back there in that kind of volume,
you're never going to see the 80s and 90s again. Um, I got 10 seconds. County attorney, what can we what Let's get through the nonsense. What can we get done today if if this council so so chooses what what can we really vote on
today? >> Well, I think the agenda item and was brought forward at the chair's request. So, if he sees a different way, please correct me. But the idea is do we proceed or not with this proposal? if
you do decide to proceed. Um, I know John Booker is here. He can speak to conversations he's had with different members of the delegation. We need to get a sponsor sponsors uh for the House and Senate. Um, do you want to
direct your staff to start engaging with the property owners to uh see if they would consent to an easement, would sell us an easement? does require funding discussion for a different day. Um those would be the
first two issues. The third is um there what is unique about this stretch that I is not going to occur in most sections of the beach if we were talking about this is you got a development
agreement between the city and the owners of the Hilton uh ocean ocean walks shops. Um that is why I want to hear from the city
you know what their position is because they approached us to remove the beast driving but that development agreement is between I believe the CRA um the city and that developer. So um do
they agree or consent to this? because I do think you all need to know that to know what we're facing. >> Council, real quick to sum this up and I appreciate just a little leeway here. This has come up four or five years in a
row. I I I can't remember the and it might have been the chairman that brought it up all four or five years. Sometimes we have to ask ourselves why isn't this getting any traction? Why aren't these people coming to the table? Why isn't the city jumping on this? If
this is the case, why aren't the land owners jumping on this case? If if that's the case, why aren't we getting these easements? Why aren't our state and state representatives and state senators chomping on this? This isn't old news. This is I mean, it's been all over
social media, but it's been the same thing four or five years just spinning our just doing a burnout. But, you know, at at what point we talk about being being efficient and effective. This is neither to keep doing it this away. Um,
with all due respect, I don't know what the answer is, Councilman Dempsey. >> Yeah. I uh it's almost like I'm having a crazy dream here because um it's exactly what
I was talking about about these conservation easements getting entangled with other branches of government. These uh council members back when they took driving on the beach had good intentions, but now we all agree that taking driving
off the beach was the worst thing they could have done. To me, it's actually worse than Sunreil because this is in perpetuity. I hate to use the P word again, but it's in perpetuity. That council in from the 96 council took
driving off the beach and we're stuck with it. And we have to deal now with the legislature and all these entangled partners that they created. And I'm not optimistic that this is going to happen. Like Danny says, this is the fifth year in a row. it ain't going to get
untangled because that council back in 96 created that entanglement. And so now here's the later council having to deal with it. I feel bad for you guys because I agree with Jeff and Troy. I used to take my son down to the
boardwalk all the time. That place was a boom. I used to be a prosecutor when MTV was there and that place was flooded with people. It really was incredibly successful at the time. I have my own theories why maybe Main Street has dried
up, but um I know MTV leaving was huge. I think we contributed to it because we had jails. You might like this, Matt, but we had jails in the Ocean Center parking lot. I used to work it. We used to have Yeah, we had around they just take them spring breakers and arrest them and take their money and then send
them back out and arrest them the next day for more open containers. And I Yeah, the next day or that night. And so I I think that we were so tough on them that we drove them out. Uh plus the other reasons MTV pulled out and all
that, but you know, I I don't necessarily like Daytona 1. I think that's hurt you guys. I think all this money into Beach Street. Beach Street's been revitalized. Daytona 1 is now a a hub to the detriment of the Main Street
merchants. I know Johnny from Rock and Ride. I mean, I've known him forever. and uh he's told me what's happened to his business. I can't solely say though that it's because of beach driving that Main Street has suffered. I wish I could sit here and say that and and be some
great economist, but I I can't honestly say that. I think there are several factors that have hurt you guys. And you know, I I just if Rob's told me what his client's proposing, it seems like a wonderful idea. I hope if we just get
rid of this so they feel comfortable. He said the lawsuit's over a year and a half ago. Okay, if we put this to bed, are they going to put their money where their mouth is? Are they going to move forward with this? Are we going to get something next to Ocean Center that's
going to be symbiotic and feed off each other? Because I've heard the same thing that Ocean Center, a lot of these events are not coming to the Ocean Center because there's no hotels for these people to stay. And so I I don't know if that's true or not, but you know, if they don't show up, maybe we can have
another discussion about driving back on the beach. Um I hate the fact that the county council back then gave up gave up beach driving because I I really think it that did hurt you guys. But now, you know, what's the fix? I don't
even think we're going to get legislators that are going to support this. Um, I think it's I'm pessimistic about it, but I'd like to see if we did just put this to bed that they would act quickly and give us something to give hope so that we can get um the energy
back to Main Street. And I would love to see some sort of assistance for the Main Street merchants to revitalize the Main Street, kind of like what they did with Beach Street and Daytona 1 or whatever we could do to help them or, you know, whatever. But, uh, I'm I'm very
sympathetic to you guys because I know at one time it was a boom a boom town down there, but I I I'm not optimistic that we're going to get anywhere because we're too entangled with all these other um government entities and potential lawsuits if we restore it. So, um, I'm
for just putting it to bed and hoping that Rob's clients really get on the stick quickly. Thank you guys. >> Thank you. Uh, I'm sorry to hear that you usually are one of our stronger supporters for the public. I did allow
you to use the P word. Um, but I I think that I think it does a disservice to the people that sit out here and and the people that have have invested on businesses on Main Street.
And I would say for me the proof of um when we closed down that section of beach, there's some there's some disagreement here, some debate. Did that really have anything to do with hurting the businesses? I don't care about the surveys. Uh Mrs.
um fine and all the you know, she doesn't want cars on the beach. Um the most accurate thing to me is asking the people that were there that had businesses. And when we closed it down, their their uh customers stopped coming.
You know who their customers were? They were us. They were that was the locals beach. Um everybody went there. We enjoyed Main Street and it was so it wasn't just a summer source of customers. It was year round and that's
why it it thrived. And um several of you have said that this is different than um uh than Flaggler Avenue. It is it's it's better. And you know, Flaggler Avenue, you have Canal Street, which is kind of the the um the upper scale, and then you
get to Flag, and it's just fun. Um and all kinds of crazy shops and some excellent excellent uh restaurants. Well, here we have Beach Street that is now becoming more upper scale and Main Street that could be fun again if we if
we let their customers come back. And and the boardwalk um says the uh the same thing that it it kill them. I've talked to the owners there. Um so I I'm sorry that some of you feel like
I'm putting this burden on you. Everybody says, "I wouldn't have taken the cars off the beach. You know, I wasn't for it and I wouldn't do it now." Well, I'm giving you an opportunity to rectify that huge mistake. And yes, it's a heavy lift. It's going to be hard when
you got to work with the legislature. Um, but I still think it's worth a try for that um section of of Beach. It's it's a small section of beach that needs to be reinvigorated. Putting bringing
more motel there just makes it a private beach. I'm not opposed to the motel coming, but let them respect the heritage of Valuchia County and and the uh the 125 year history of of uh being
able to to have real beach access through an automobile. So, Mike, we're almost out of time again. Um, I I've heard from several people that they've talked to legislators and there's no support there, then they're not telling
us all the same thing because I've talked to legislators and they said they would support this. But until they put it in writing or come here and say it, then so I'm I'm going to go after some sponsors. Jake Johansson is going to speak next. He's running for Senate. we
could ask him to be a sponsor in the in the Senate. Um, so we need we need sponsors and um uh you said we could go go talk to the
the upland property owners, Mike, and try and I think we need to talk to um Daytona Beach first and foremost and I'll work on sponsors if um so so I'm going to do that regardless if we need
uh a motion And I think we do to allow a conversation to continue with Daytona Beach. Um, do you need that to take another step, Mike or George? Uh, if the direction you have now was what you gave in April, you
directed management to get with upland property owners, which they have, uh, engage the city of Daytona Beach and engage our legislative delegation. They've done all of those things. So, they can continue to work on those unless you give a different direction.
But that's the last direction you gave. >> Okay. But I think I think we need to continue because we What are the upland property owners only the ones whose property touches the uh the seaw wall there? >> Yeah. It's basically the beachfront properties. Yeah.
>> So, it doesn't include all the affected businesses on Main Street and East ISB. No, not that they're not part of the conversation, but they would not be the properties that would have the c potential customer use argument, >> even though they have a big stake in it.
I understand that. >> Okay. Uh then I'm I'm going to ask for uh somebody to make a motion that we continue the efforts. And I I know you don't want to hear this, Danny, but I'll
I'll bring it back. um and uh and try it again. I probably have brought it up every year because to me it's that important. I'm asked so often to rectify this situation and um and give these
merchants a a chance to thrive. I got a I'll finish with this. I I I got an email from a guy that I was a fellow lifeguard with. His parents did very well. they had a a business that serves small businesses. And he wrote a letter, I think, to probably to send it to you
guys, too, that said, "We don't need to help these small businesses on Main Street. We need real investors." And I thought, how how shortsighted was that from somebody who grew up in a family that was a small business and grew and then served um dozens of other small
businesses through uh being their supplier. Um, I want to support the small businesses here and give them an opportunity to to expand and grow and be a bigger business and make that section of uh of Beach exciting again. Uh, Jake
Johansson. >> Sorry, I think Danny's got a question first and I'll make a motion. >> I just have two quick questions and I'll shut up and chair, I need a promise from you uh before I I I ask you a question not to get mad. We're having a good We're having a good meeting. But
>> no, on a serious note, guys, have we and something to think about, have have we approached u the city of Daytona Beach kind of like you approach us cuz cuz that's where a lot of a lot of this is. And I I I feel bad um that you're kind of being bounced around like a pingpong
ball, you know? It it really stinks. Um but uh the reality uh you guys know the reality of of of this and and and and and chair my my question we we've had five five years five years for you to garnish this
support of the land owners the um um whether it be the hotelers the the the businesses the legislatures nobody nobody's touching this the city of Daytona Beach which is probably one of those most important no one is touching this with 10 foot pole, a 20 foot pole
or a 50- foot pole. Uh you know, but we have to ask ourelves why is there a different approach we can do? Is there different things that we can do? I don't know what the answer is. Uh but to to keep going down this road that the same thing and it just drags us through the
mud when a lot of this stuff is is is is out of our control and a lot of this work, chairman, uh the leg work hasn't been done before it's been put on the agenda. Um, so I'll help you out where I can. That's that's the deal I can. But this this this is getting crazy.
>> I think you asked me that, so I'll answer real quick before Jake speaks. Um, I have done the leg work and I have garnered their support. I've garnered this well well some of them were here. People are are working right now, especially the people that run business on on Main Street. But we've garnered
the support of the public. It's it's a it's very popular with the public. Um, so this will put it out before the public again and then we'll we'll uh you know, you'll see if it is or isn't. What I'm asking is where are the
legislators? Because this information hasn't changed in 5 years. Where are the legislators? Where's the city of Daytona Beach? And and and uh what else? Uh and where are the the land owners handing over their easements? These
things haven't changed, chair. >> Yeah, I know. >> Okay, but but where are these people? We can have everybody and their mother keep coming here, but if we don't have those three things, we're dead in the water, right? But we've had 5 years to do it, and we keep on leading folks on. It's
not their fault. I'm sorry. It's getting frustrated. I'm getting really frustrated. Something's got to change here. >> Yeah, I agree. >> I agree. Uh Jake Johansson.
>> Thank you, Chairman. Um there's been some great conversation here really. I'm I've obviously sat over here on the far right and listened a lot to it. um our legislative delegation is not going
to help us unless we can get buy in from all the stakeholders. And when I say all the stakeholders, uh those those are the the legal customary use folks on the beach. Um
that that's the city uh who's one of those uh land owners. Um and and that's anybody else, which we have some supporters here today. Um but right now we have a a bunch of people
that that are not for it that are those land owners. Um and and we have a legislative delegation which isn't going to budge without everybody getting in the room and doing the kumbaya.
Uh we have been unable to do that for a couple of years the whole time I've been here. Uh so as as much as I would like to try to make something happen, uh I'm not
going to quit trying I'm going to quit trying to push a rope. Uh you can't push a rope. So, uh, I would like to make a motion, uh, to not move forward and to wrap this up
with, uh, uh, uh, no beach parking or driving in that area, uh, uh, until the situation gets better, until our legislative delegation changes, until
I don't know when, but but not Not in my lifetime. Uh not not here while while I'm sitting in this seat. So uh I I would like to do does it need to be time?
Does it need to be time? Then then I vote no that we don't move forward and uh this is the end of the discussion on beach driving. That's my motion. >> Second. >> Okay. Okay, Jake Johansson makes a motion to not move forward. Seconded by
David Santiago questions, debate. Am I allowed to ask Mr. Merryill a question? >> I would I don't know what our rules say, but go but go ahead. If I can ask Tom
Caffrey a question. >> Yeah, >> I was just going. >> We have four minutes. Mr. >> Can you come up so we can hear? >> Just a quick question. >> No, I I just hearing that I know I've talked to you about your project. I
think it's a great idea and you said that this uncertainty of beach driving issue was kind of holding your clients back. What we're about to vote on today, would that be sufficient >> to give your clients the comfort they need to move forward? Because I don't want to see it sit stagnant for another 10 years or so. I'd like I'm hoping with
this vote that your client will affirmatively go forward and bring us something new to that area because I think that's is what we really need. >> I I heard you asking about it earlier too, Don, and I, you know, I can't tell you what somebody's going to do or not do. I can tell you there has been a chilling effect and mayor, to your point
about the using the D-word on me. I hate that the disingenuous word. I wasn't talking about the last two weeks. I was talking about the last four years we've been talking about this. There has been a chilling effect for these guys. There there are people there talking about the financial world about whether they can bring this project forward. This is this
is a lot of big project, a lot of money. And the answer is yeah, this has created a chilling effect. That's why I'm here. That's why they paid me to be here. That's why they wrote you letters. Um can I say that the project is definitely going to happen as a result of you guys saying no? Of course not. But I can tell you that it will absolutely have an
effect. If this goes the way it started to go just now, it will have an effect on them and their ability to finance this project. Absolutely. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Yeah. It's unusual, but I think it was
important to allow you to do that. Um Okay. So, we wait another 30 years and maybe somebody from Atlanta will help us throw our locals under the bus, take their beach away from them.
>> Let's vote. Mr. Chair, we got two minutes. >> Uh, Chris, would you call the role? >> Mr. Reinhardt? >> Yes. >> Mr. Robbins? >> Mr. Santiago? >> Yes. >> Mr. Dempsey? >> Yes. >> Mr. Johansson? >> Yes. Mr. Kent,
>> no. >> Mr. Brower, >> no. And the motion fails uh 5 to two. >> Um >> Mr. Chair, I can I make a motion to
postpone the next two items till a future meeting? Can can uh >> second? >> I think we can fit 15. >> You want to do 15 then? Therefore, >> all right. I make make a motion then for >> we have a motion and a second for the
>> postponing. >> Oh, okay. >> I didn't hear the second. Thank you. >> Second. >> Okay. So, you just postponed item 14. >> We have a motion and a second to postpone the last two items till next
meeting. I thought he amended it to 15. >> I was going to amend it to >> I don't I don't care. >> Okay. Either way, that's fine. >> Okay. There's a motion in a second to postpone the other thing other two items of January. Uh all in favor say I.
>> I. >> Any opposed? I. And the motion passes and we are adjourned at 4:30. I would the beach driving >> chair chair Mr. Mr. Chair, >> I I'd like to clarify that the last
motion um failed >> passed five to two, not failed. >> Have a good night.