May 04, 2021 Regular Meeting

[1. CALL TO ORDER]

[00:00:07]

>> IT COME TO ORDER PLEASE EVERYONE HAVE A SEAT. THIS IS THE REGULAR MEETING MAY 4, 2020 OF THE CITY COMMISSION. CITY CLERK WILL YOU PLEASE CALL

THE ROLL. >> WE ARE UNDER CDC GUIDELINES SO PLEASE WEAR YOUR FACE MASS.

SOCIAL DISTANCING THERE IS NO STANDING IN THE ROOM. REVEREND THOMPSON YOU WILL BE ALLOWED TO DO THAT BECAUSE YOU'RE SPEAKING SOON. WE WILL CONDUCT THIS MEETING WITH DIGNITY AND RESPECT TO EACH OTHER. WILL YOU LEAD US IN THE PLEDGE

AND THE IMPLICATION WILL BE BY REVEREND THOMPSON. >> I PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE OF THE FLAG OF UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD

INDIVISIBLE WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. >> PLEASE REMAIN STANDING.

REVEREND THOMPSON WITH THE NEW ZION MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH WILL HAD.

>> LET US PRAY, OUR FATHER AND OUR GOD, WE WANT TO SAY THANK YOU.

THANK YOU FOR LIFE, HEALTH AND STRENGTH. WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR MANY BLESSINGS. WITH THANK YOU FOR YOUR MULTITUDE OF TENDER MERCIES.

WE THANK YOU FOR HOW YOU HAVE WATCHED OVER FERNANDINA BEACH, FLORIDA.

WE INVOKE YOUR PRESENCE IN THIS MEETING OF THE FERNANDINA BEACH CITY COMMISSION.

BLESS ALL WHO WILL PARTICIPATE. GOD BLESS FERNANDINA BEACH FLORIDA, AND GOD BLESS THE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL OF GOBBLERS GOD'S CHILDREN SAY . >> MOUNT TO THE NASSAU HUMANE

[4.1 PRESENTATION - NASSAU HUMANE SOCIETY]

>> WELCOME. A LITTLE HEARTBREAKER. >> SHE IS VERY FOCUSED SPIRIT.

>> YOU HAVEN'T BROUGHT ANY -- YOU HAVE NOT ADOPTED ANY OF THE BIG DOGS.

THIS IS J COMPANY IS UP-TO-DATE ON HIS SHOTS. HE WAS SPAYED AND NEUTERED THIS MORNING SO HE IS READY TO GO. HE WILL GET BIGGER BAIT -- VERY PLAYFUL.

>> HE IS FULLY GROWN. >> 55 POUNDS. I WOULD SAY AT LEAST.

BUT ESQ. >> HE IS VERY CUTE. THANK YOU FOR BRINGING HIM.

GOOD NIGHT EVERYONE. >> WE HAVE TO PROCLAMATIONS, ITEM 4.3 PEACE OFFICERS MEMORIAL

[4.2 PROCLAMATION - "PEACE OFFICERS MEMORIAL DAY" AND "NATIONAL POLICE WEEK"]

SHE FOXWORTH. >> WELCOME. I SEE YOU BROUGHT SOME FRIENDS WITH YOU. LET ME MOVE DOWN SO WE CAN ALL GET TOGETHER HERE.

>> WELCOME EVERYONE. LET'S WELCOME EVERYONE TOGETHER. ALL OF THE PEACE OFFICERS.

DON'T BE SHY. >> THEY DON'T HAVE MASK. >> THEY CAN WAIT OUTSIDE.

>> THE PROCLAMATION READS AS FOLLOWS. THE PRESIDENT OF UNITED STATES DESIGNATED MAY 15, 2021, AS PEACE OFFICERS MEMORIAL DAY, AND THE WEEK IN WHICH IT FALLS AS NATIONAL POLICE WEEK AND WHEREAS THE MEMBERS OF OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES PLAY AN ESSENTIAL ROLE AND TAKE PART IN RIGHTS AND CREDENCE OF THE CITIZENS OF OUR COUNTRY AND WHEREAS, IT IS IMPORTANT THAT ALL FLORIDA CITIZENS RECOGNIZE THE UNIQUE CHALLENGES AND

[00:05:05]

AND, WHEREAS THE POLICE CHIEF, WAS SHOT AND KILLED IN THE LINE OF DUTY, IN 1930 WHILE SERVING THE CITIZENS OF FERNANDINA. NASSAU COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPUTY JOE ROBINSON, 1891, CHIEF DEPUTY EVERETT JOHN AND JEREMIAH MATTIX , WERE ALL SHOT AND KILLED IN THE LINE OF DUTY WHILE RESPONDING TO VIOLENT CALLS. AND WHEREAS, OUR COMMUNITY WAS SHOCKED AND SADDENED, BY THE TRAGIC AND SUDDEN DEATH OF NASSAU COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPUTY ERIC OLIVER WHO LOST HIS LIFE IN THE LINE OF DUTY ON NOVEMBER 22, 2016. AND WHEREAS, BY THEIR FAITHFUL AND LOYAL DEVOTION TO DUTY, OUR LOCAL POLICE OFFICERS HAVE ESTABLISHED AN HONORABLE AND ENDURING LEGACY OF PUBLIC SERVICE WHICH IS CHERISHED WITHIN OUR COMMUNITY AND WOVEN INTO THE FABRIC OF OUR HISTORY. THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF FERNANDINA BEACH, FLORIDA WE CALL UPON ALL POLICE AGENCIES AND MUNICIPALITIES TO OBSERVE FRIDAY, MAY 15, 2021 AS PEACE OFFICERS MEMORIAL DAY. CONGRATULATIONS.

THE ONLY BAD THING ABOUT TONIGHT, I HAVE HAVE FOUR OF OUR OFFICER ASKED IF THAT COULD BE OUR STATION DOG. WE MAY HAVE TO GET A STATION DOG NOW.

I WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU MAYOR, THE COMMISSION AND ON BEHALF OF THE MEN AND WOMEN, WE WANT TO THANK YOU FOR RECOGNIZING PUBLICLY POLICE WE CAN POLICE MEMORIAL DAY.

I ALSO WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT AND THE CITY MANAGER FOR HIS SUPPORT AND PARTNERING WITH US SO WE CAN KEEP THE COMMUNITY SAFE. I ALSO WANT TO THANK THE COMMUNITY THAT WE SERVE. WE SERVE A COMMUNITY THAT WILL ELITES FORM PARTNERSHIPS WITH US AND BRING THEIR CONCERNS FORWARD SO WE CAN WORK WITH THEM TO MAKE THIS COMMUNITY A SAFER PLACE.

I BELIEVE THE CITY IS A GOOD EXAMPLE OF A POLICING MODEL, ESPECIALLY A LOCAL POLICING MODEL. WE HAVE POLICE OFFICERS WHO ARE EMPATHETIC TO THE NEEDS OF THE COMMUNITY, RESPONSIVE, WE HAVE A CITY COMMISSION THAT YEAR AFTER YEAR HAS UNDERSTOOD THE NEEDS OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND WE HAVE A COMMUNITY THAT IS WILLING TO BRING THEIR CONCERNS TO US.

WE ARE THANKFUL AS A GROUP, THAT WE CAN SERVE THIS COMMUNITY. WE ARE ALSO AWARE THAT WE CAN ALSO IMPROVE. BECAUSE OF THAT, WE HAVE RECENTLY ADOPTED A NEW SET OF CORE VALUES. WE ENCOURAGE THE OFFICERS TO USE THE CORE VALUES TO DELIVER THEIR POLICE SERVICE SO THEY CAN GAIN THE PUBLIC'S TRUST. WE INVITE THE COMMUNITY TO LOOK O OUR WEBSITE TO LOOK AT OUR CORE VALUES AND MISSION STATEMENT.

ANOTHER THING WE ARE DOING IS WE ARE IN DISCUSSION AT THIS POINT WITH STARTING POINT BEHAVIOR HELP TO CREATE A RESPONSE TEAM TO RESPONSE TO ISSUES WITH MENTAL HEALTH, ALCOHOL AND DRUG DEPENDENCY. THESE ARE ISSUES WE ARE OFTEN BROUGHT INTO, TO TAKE ACTION, BUT THESE MENTAL HEALTH PROFESSIONALS WOULD BE BETTER TO BRINGING LONG-TERM CARE TO THESE SITUATIONS. SWITCHING GEARS, I'M THANKFUL THAT THE FERNANDINA POLICE DEPARTMENT HAVE NOT LOST A MEMBER SINCE 1930. WE WORK IN AN ENVIRONMENT THAT IS UNPREDICTABLE, AND SITUATIONS THAT CHANGE EVERY DAY. BECAUSE OF THAT WE PREPARE THE OFFICERS WITH TRAINING AND PROVIDE THEM WITH THE EQUIPMENT THEY NEED TO DO THEIR JOBS.

THE SUPPORT ISSUE THAT WE HAVE FROM THE COMMISSION IS GREAT. I HAVE A APPRECIATION FOR THE

[00:10:11]

I WOULD LIKE TO HIGHLIGHT TWO INCIDENTS THAT OCCURRED LAST MONTH.

ON APRIL 21 THEY RESPONDED TO A LOCAL APARTMENT COMPLEX. THE NEIGHBOR SAID THEY HEARD SOMEONE SCREAMING FOR HELP. OFFICERS ARRIVED AND THEY HEARD YELLING COMING FROM THE APARTMENT. THEY KNOCKED ON THE DOOR NO ONE ANSWERED AFTER SEVERAL ATTEMPTS THEY KICKED THE DOOR DOWN. ONCE THEY GOT INSIDE A MAN WAS RUNNING THROUGH THE LIBERAL.

THAT GRAB THE WOMAN AND GOT HER OUT OF THE HOUSE. THEY WENT INTO THE APARTMENT WITH THE MAN WAS HOLED UP IN THE BATHROOM. ONCE THEY SORTED THINGS OUT, THE WOMAN DOWNPLAYED THE ISSUE AND WE BELIEVED TO PROTECT HER BOYFRIEND BUT WE FOUND HE WAS WANTED INTO STATES FOR ARMED ROBBERY AND POSSESSION OF A FIREARM BY CONVICTED FELON.

THEY JUST CAME TO FERNANDINA BEACH THE DAY BEFORE AND STAYING IN THE APARTMENT WITH A RELATIVE. IN THIS CASE, THE OFFICERS WENT INTO A SITUATION NOT KNOWING WHAT WAS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT DOOR. THEY DIDN'T KNOW THE DANGERS BUT THEY KNEW IT WAS THEIR DUTY TO PROTECT SOMEONE THEY THOUGHT WAS IN TROUBLE.

INSTEAD THEY APPREHENDED AN ARMED ROBBER WHO MAY HAVE STARTED COMMITTING ROBBERIES IN

OUR OWN COMMUNITY. >> ON APRIL 24 THE OFFICERS WERE CALLED TO AN AREA WHERE THE CITY AND COUNTY INTERSECT, THEY RESPONDED TO SHOTS FIRED, MEMBERS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD HEARD SHOTS BEING FIRED. THEY DID NOT KNOW WHERE THEY WERE COMING FROM.

THE OFFICERS FOUND A MAN HOLDING A PISTOL. THEY HAD TO NEGOTIATE WITH THEM AND ASK HIM TO DROP THE GUN. SUDDENLY WITHOUT ANY EXPLANATION, HE PUT THE GUN TO HIS HEAD AND TOOK HIS OWN LIFE. RIGHT IN FRONT OF THEM AS THEY WERE HELPLESS TO STOP HIM.

AND THAT FEW MINUTES OF PLEADING WITH HIM TO DROP HIS GUN THEY HAD TO THINK OF THEIR SAFETY AND CONTAINING THEM SO HE DID NOT GET BACK INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THEY HAD TO THINK ABOUT WHAT THEY WOULD SAY TO APPEAR WONDER IF HE WAS TRYING TO COMMIT SUICIDE BY COP OR WHAT WAS GOING ON. THEY HAD TO THINK EVENT TO SHOOT THEM, WHO WOULD SECOND-GUESS THEM HOME WITH THE MEDIA PORTRAY IT AND HOW LONG BEFORE A LAWSUIT WAS FILED.

AFTER HE TOOK HIS LIFE THEY WONDERED IF THEY COULD HAVE SAID SOMETHING DIFFERENT FOR DIFFERENT OUTCOME. THEY HAD TO MAKE SURE THE SCENE WAS SECURE BECAUSE AN INVESTIGATION WAS COMING. THEN AFTER WATCHING A MAN TALK TAKE HIS OWN LIFE, THEY HAD TO GO BACK AND HANDLE A DOMESTIC DISPUTE AT A CONVENIENCE STORE, DRUG STATUS BAR AND MORE.

OFFICERS WENT HOME AT 6:00 A.M. AND CAME BACK THE NEXT NIGHT. THEY ARE DEDICATED TO THEIR COMMUNITY. OVER THE LAST YEAR, EVEN AS COVID HAS TAKEN ITS TOLL, THE OFFICERS HAVE COME TO WORK AND DID THEIR JOB. THESE ARE A COUPLE OF EXAMPLES.

OUR OFFICERS CAN ONLY DO THIS WITH YOUR SUPPORT AND THE COMMUNITY SUPPORT.

THAT SUPPORT IS GREATLY APPRECIATED AND WE APPRECIATE EVERYONE IN THIS ROOM FOR DOING THAT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THESE PEOPLE RIGHT HERE. >> AGENDA ITEM 4.3 PROCLAMATION OF NATIONAL PRESERVATION MONTH.

[4.3 PROCLAMATION - "NATIONAL PRESERVATION MONTH"]

>> WE ALSO HAVE SEVERAL MEMBERS IN THE COMMUNITY FROM THE RESTORATION FOUNDATION.

>> TERRIFIC, WELCOME. >> SO THE PROCLAMATION READS AS FOLLOWS WHERE AS AUTHORIZED BY THE NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT OF 1966, THE NATIONAL REGISTER ON HISTORICAL PLACES IS PART OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM TO COORDINATE AND SUPPORT PUBLIC AND PRIVATE

[00:15:02]

WHEREAS HISTORIC PRESERVATION IS A PROTECTIVE TOOL FOR MANAGING GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT, REVITALIZING NEIGHBORHOODS, ENERGIZING THE ECONOMY FOSTERING LOCAL PRIDE AND KEEPING CHARACTER. WHEREAS, IT'S IMPORTANT TO CELEBRATE THIS ROLE AND THE CONTRIBUTIONS MADE BY DEDICATED INDIVIDUALS IN HELPING TO PRESERVE TANGIBLE ASPECTS OF THE HERITAGE THAT HAS SHAPED US LESS PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY. HISTORIC PRESERVATION IS RELEVANT ACROSS THE NATION FROM ALL AMERICANS OF ALL AGES AND ALL WALKS OF LIFE AND ALL TECHNIC BACKGROUNDS. WHEREAS, FERNANDINA BEACH IS FORTUNATE TO HAVE A PLETHORA OF NATIONAL REGISTERED HISTORICAL HERITAGES, HOMES AND BUSINESSES MUSEUMS RESTAURANTS AND CEMETERIES AND WHEREAS FERNANDINA BEACH CONTINUES TO DEMONSTRATE ITS COMMITMENT TO PRESERVATION AS IT GROWS AND DEVELOPS THROUGH ONGOING HISTORICAL WORK AND SURVEYS THE NOMINATION OF SIGNIFICANT STRUCTURES AND NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORICAL PLACES, THE PROTECTION OF TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOODS THE INTEGRATION OF ELEMENTS WITH REDEVELOPMENT AND RECOGNITION, REHABILITATION AND RESTORATION OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES.

WHEREAS FERNANDINA BEACH IS A PRESERVED AMERICAN COMMUNITY AND CERTIFIED LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNDER THE NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT AND THEREFORE, BY VIRTUAL OF ME AND THE AUTHORITY INVESTED ME AS MAYOR OF THE CITY OF FERNANDINA BEACH FLORIDA TO PROCLAIM MAY 20, 21 AS NATIONAL PRESERVATION MONTH, CONGRATULATIONS. .

IS DONE AND COMPLETE PARTNERSHIP WITH OUR COMMUNITY MEMBERS AND SPECIFICALLY WITH SPECIFIC

ORGANIZATIONS. THANK YOU FOR ALL YOU DO. >> DOES ANYONE ELSE WANT TO

SPEAK. >> WE ARE OPEN, COME SEE US. >> THANK YOU.

[5. PUBLIC COMMENT REGARDING ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA OR ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA]

>> ALL RIGHT, WE ARE ON AGENDA ITEM FIVE PUBLIC COMMENT REGARDING ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA OR ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. I THINK I HAVE, ONE PARTY, MR. STEPHEN MURPHY LET ME FIND YOU. MR. MURPHY, WELCOME, STATE YOUR

NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. >> MR. MAYOR COMMISSIONERS, THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY.

YESTERDAY THE CITY OF FERNANDINA BEACH AND THE GOLF COURSE LOST A FAMILY MEMBER.

PHILLIP CLAY DANIEL PASSED AWAY PERFORMING HIS DUTIES EPIC OF COURSE.

I WANT TO PERSONALLY AND PROFESSIONALLY THINK THE MAINTENANCE STAFF AND THE FIRST RESPONDERS WHO CAME TO VIGOROUSLY TRY TO SAVE HIS LIFE. IT WAS A WONDERFUL THING TO SEE.

CLAY WAS A 58-YEAR-OLD ATHLETE. HIS YOUNGER YEARS HE PLAYED PROFESSIONAL BASEBALL FOR THE CINCINNATI REDS, PITTSBURGH PIRATES AND RANGERS. AFTER PLAYING FOR YEARS, AFTER HIS PLANE YEARS HE WAS A SCOUT FOR THE REDS, THE DIAMONDBACKS AND MORE.

LATER IN LIFE, HE FOLLOW ANOTHER PASSION OF GROWING GRASS AND KEEPING IT GREEN.

THE GOLF COURSE, MUCH LIKE THE ATHLETIC FIELDS HE PLAYED ON FOR SO MANY YEARS CAP GRASS UNDER HIS FEET. THIS IS WHERE HE FELT MOST COMFORTABLE.

CLAY DANIEL WILL BE REMEMBERED AS A KIND SOUL WITH A POSITIVE ATTITUDE, WITH A JOKE ON HIS LIPS AND A SMILE IN HIS HEART. MAY GOD BLESS YOU AND KEEP YOU SAFELY IN HIS ARMS.

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. .

[00:20:14]

YOU DID THAT WELL. >> IF YOU WILL STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

>> CHRISTINA 996 ( INDISCERNIBLE ) FERNANDINA. ON APRIL 30, 2021 FOR CITY ATTORNEYS LEGAL ASSISTANT ASSISTANT INFORMED ME, WHEN I PHONED HER, THAT IN TRANSCRIBING THE VIDEO OF THE APRIL 20 MEETING ABOUT E PIKES IT HAD BEEN DETERMINED THAT THE COMMISSION HAS HAD A VOTE TO ALLY -- ALLOW ONLY CLASS ( INDISCERNIBLE ) E BIKES.

THIS DETERMINATION IS CONTRARY TO WHAT I HAVE HEARD AT THE MEETING THAT I WAS WATCHING LIVE FROM HOME WHICH WAS THAT FOUR COMMISSIONERS VOTED FOR A CLASS ONE AND 2E BIKES.

SINCE THERE SEEMS TO BE A MISUNDERSTANDING ABOUT E PIKES AND THE POPULATION, I WANT TO OFFER CLARIFICATION. ALL THREE CLASSES OF E BIKES ARE PADDLE ASSISTED.

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A MODEL ONLY E BIKE. 2E PIKES HAVE ASSIST CAPABILITIES, IN THE DISH TO PETAL ASSISTANCE. BOTH HAVE A MOTOR THAT CEASES TO PROVIDE ASSISTANCE WHEN THE SPEED IS 20 MILES PER HOUR. BOTH ARE PADDLE ASSISTED.

CLASS TWO AS AN ADDED FEATURE THAT MAY BE USED TO ASSIST THE WRITER AND WHEN NEEDED.

THIS FEATURE CAN BE BENEFICIAL TO PEOPLE YOUNG AND OLD, WHO MAY NEVERTHELESS HAVE MOBILITY CHALLENGES DUE TO INJURIES, OR ENDURANCE. THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE FEDERAL REGULATIONS ON THE SUBJECT UP CLASS TO E BIKES THAT BECAME EFFECTIVE, AS MODIFIED E BIKE REGULATIONS TOO AND I QUOTE, MAKE CLEAR THAT USING THIS ON A BIKE IS ONLY PROHIBITED IF IT IS DONE FOR AN EXPERIENCE -- EXTENDED PERIOD OF TIME.

THIS ALLOWS WRITERS TO BENEFIT FROM THROTTLE ONLY POWER FOR A LIMITED DURATION AND THAT IS IMPORTANT. I HOPE THAT ANY CONFUSIONS THERE MAY HAVE BEEN ABOUT CLASS TO E BIKES ARE CLEARED UP. I RESPECTIVELY SUGGEST THE CITY FOLLOWED THE PARKS REGULATIONS AND ALLOW CLASS 2E BIKES FOR THEIR MODIFICATION OF USING THEM FOR LIMITED DURATIONS ALONG WITH THE 10 MILES PER HOUR SPEED LIMITS, THESE ARE SENSIBLE SOLUTIONS.

THE PARK SERVICE ALSO MODIFIED A STATEMENT THAT E BIKES MUST HAVE AN ELECTRIC MOTOR OF LESS THAN 750 WATTS. THEY MODIFIED THAT TO THE TONE THEY MUST NOT BE MORE THAN 750 WATTS. THAT WAS THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE.

THEY SAID THE CARE FOR THESE REGULATIONS, WERE ALSO SENT IN AN E-MAIL.

I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT TO HAVE ACCURATE INFORMATION. THIS IS ACCURATE INFORMATION PER THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. I HAVE ALSO SENT YOU A DOCUMENT WITH THE FLORIDA STATUTES ON E BICYCLES AND I ADDED IN GREEN, THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE REGULATIONS.

YOU CAN SEE SIDE BY SIDE, WHERE THE MISTAKES HAVE BEEN MADE. IN ADDITION I NOTICED THE COUNTY LUMPED ALL OF THE CLASSES TOGETHER STATING THEY ARE NOT ALLOWED BECAUSE THEY HAVE A MUCH HIGHER SPEED LIMIT. THEY DO NOT. CLASS THREE DOES BUT NOT CLASS TWO. I JUST WANTED TO STEP OUT OF MY SAFE APARTMENT, COME HERE AND

SAY THAT SO THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT

[00:25:04]

AND I JUST WANTED TO KNOW IF THAT IS STILL THE CASE. >> I DID NOT GO BACK AND WATCH THE VIDEO, BUT I THOUGHT, THAT IT WAS CLASS ONE AND CLASS THREE.

LET ME READ YOU CLASS ONE AND PREPARED FOR THE SAME DEFINITION EXCEPT 1 GOES 20 MILES POWER.

THE PADDLE ASSIST FUNCTION THAT THE MOTOR DOES NOT FUNCTION OVER 20 MILES PER HOUR AND 28 MILES POWER FOR CLASS THREE. CLASS 2E BICYCLES, WHICH IS WHAT I THOUGHT, AND JUST TO BE CLEAR, SHE MAY HAVE SPOKEN TO KATIE IN MY OFFICE BUT IT WAS AT MY DIRECTION AND SHE WOULD HAVE ANSWERED THAT WAY. CLASS TWO ELECTRICAL BICYCLES BY STATE STATUTE WILL, I DON'T KNOW THE MANUFACTURER STAY, I KNOW WHAT THE DEFINITION WE HAVE BEEN THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE.

IT MEANS AN ELECTRIC BICYCLE EQUIPPED WITH A MOTOR THAT MAY BE USED EXCLUSIVELY TO PROPEL THE ELECTRIC BICYCLE. MEANING YOU CAN USE THE THROTTLE ONLY.

CLASS WANTED THREE BIKES AS DEFINED BY STATE LAW, THEY ARE PADDLE ASSIST ONLY.

IT IS USED TO HELP YOU PETAL AND YOU CAN USE THE THROTTLE ONLY. BUT IT DOES HAVE A MAXIMUM SPEED OF 20 MILES POWER. SO, WHATEVER WE SAID LAST TIME, I HOPE THAT MAKES IT CLEAR WHAT

CLASS 1-3 ARE. >> I THINK OUR MOTION WAS ALLOWED.

THE THROTTLE ONLY WHERE YOU DON'T HAVE TO PETAL. THAT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING.

>> MAY I SAY SOMETHING. >> HANG ON. >> THAT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING OF

THE MOTION. >> IT WAS CLASS ONE INTO AND NO CLASS THREE.

EXACTLY WHAT SHE MENTIONED IS WHAT I REMEMBER HEARING AND I REMEMBER VOTING ON IT.

>> THAT IS WHAT WAS SAID. >> MEANING YOU DO NOT WISH TO HAVE ALLOWED A BICYCLE NO MATTER

HOW IT IS PROPELLED THAT GOES 2. >> CORRECT. >> GOTCHA.

>> DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO ADD. IF YOU WOULD COME UP HERE

PLEASE. THANK YOU. >> FROM WHAT I HAVE HEARD AND WE HAVE GOTTEN E-MAILS IF THAT IS THE CASE CLASS ONE AND CLASS TWO IS WHAT WE USE.

>> THE REASON I MENTIONED THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE TAKE ON THIS IS BECAUSE THERE HAS BEEN CONFUSION. SO, I THINK TO STOP THE CONFUSION MY SUGGESTION WOULD BE THAT YOU USE THEIR VERBIAGE WHICH IS TO SAY FOR LIMITED DURATIONS.

THAT MEANS YOU CANNOT CONTINUOUSLY AND EXCLUSIVELY, JUST USE THE THROTTLE.

IF YOU FOLLOW THEIR LANGUAGE, I THINK WE WOULD BE FINE. >> THANK YOU.

>> WELCOME SIR. STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

>> JOHN, 4441 BEING STREET. BASED ON THE DISCUSSION I AM GUESSING YOU ARE TIRED OF TALKING ABOUT E BICYCLES BUT THERE IS CONFUSION AND IT NEEDS TO BE CLEARED UP.

IT WOULD BE NICE TO GET IT RIGHT SO WE DON'T HAVE MULTIPLE READINGS.

GREAT MIND ME TOO TALK ABOUT CLASS TO AT THE END. I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE MAIN POINTS. MOTORIZED VEHICLES DON'T BELONG ON OUR TRAILS.

I AM CONVINCED IF YOU SAY ELECTRIC OR MOTORIZED, CERTAIN HEADS WILL EXPLODE.

IT IS A TERM THAT COVERS MOTORIZED WHEELCHAIRS TO JUSTICE.

LEGISLATION IS WRITTEN AND SOME PEOPLE SAID I DON'T CARE ABOUT THE LAW THEY ARE MOTORIZED AS WELL AS A BIKE WITH A SMALL MOTOR HAS AN IMPACT THAT A NON- E BICYCLE DOESN'T.

SECONDLY, E BICYCLES ARE SPEEDING EVERYWHERE AND EVERYONE HAS A STORY ABOUT WHEN SOME ALMOST HIT THEM. CRITICS ARE FIXATE ON THE FACT THAT THEY ARE GOVERNED TO 20-28 MILES POWER WHICH MEANS THEY SPENT TIME AT THAT SPEED. I SEE CARS CAPABLE OF GOING

[00:30:07]

LAST WEEK, THE NATURE PRESERVE WAS CHARTERED WHICH REFERS TO CERTAIN USES COMMONLY UNORGANIZED SUCH AS WILDLIFE OBSERVATION WALKING AND BIKING ACCESSIBILITY IS A CONCERN FOR SEVERAL POINTS FOR A WIDE RANGE OF PEOPLE INCLUDING THE PHYSICALLY DISABLED.

ACTIVITIES THAT WILL ( INDISCERNIBLE ) LIKE HUNTING AND FISHING.

PROPONENTS OF THE BAND WOULD BE STRICT ACCESS IS PREMISED ON UNPROVEN CLAIMS THAT BIKES ARE DAMAGING THE GREENWAY AND ALLOWING E BIKES WOULD MAKE IT WORSE.

TO SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT, EBAY'S -- THE BIKES HAVE BEEN ALL OVER THE ISLAND FOR YEARS.

WE ARE PACKING THIS FOR BOARD SERVICE AND ASSESSING THE INFRASTRUCTURE.

SHORT OF BLOWING UP THE BRIDGES, WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH IT AND BANDS ARE NOT THE ANSWER.

IN CLOSING I THINK THE ISSUE HAS BEEN OVERHYPED. I GET THE IMPRESSION SOME LOOK AT THIS LIKE THE INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS. I DON'T THINK THERE IS A NEED TO BY ANY MEANS BANNED THE E BIKES. WE DO HAVE THE SPEED LIMIT IN PLACE AND THAT IS A GREAT EQUALIZER. THERE IS A FIXATION ON THE PROBLEM AND YOU DON'T HAVE TO PETAL. THE BIG ADVANTAGE, THE HARDEST PART IS GETTING STARTED.

WE ARE VERY AND IT TAKES A WILD TO GET UP. >> THANK YOU.

COMMISSIONER. >> MY LIGHT IS ON BECAUSE I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE, I WANT TO LOOK AT THE TABLE TO MAKE SURE I SAID WHAT I SAID WHICH IS WE WANT TO ACCEPT CLASS WANTED CLASS TO. I WANT TO MAKE SURE WHEN IT COMES BEFORE US AT THE NEXT MEETING, IT WILL HAVE THAT LANGUAGE. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO FOLLOW-UP AND SAY I WILL STILL VOTE NO ON IT BUT I DID WANT TO COMMENT ON THE EXEMPTIONS.

>> WE WILL MAKE SURE TO WATCH IT. IT IS ON THE NEXT AGENDA AND

WHAT IS THERE IS WHAT YOU VOTED ON. >> ALL RIGHT, MR. VINCE VIPER, WELCOME. CAN YOU STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE.

>> VINCENT FEINBERG, AS I HAVE PROVIDED PICTURES, THIS IS WHAT OUR DRIVEWAY LOOKS LIKE.

IT HAS BEEN TWO DAYS SINCE IT HAS RAINED. SOME OF OUR MEMBERS SPOKE LAST WEEK, AND WE TOOK A LOOK AT THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT WHICH IS ABSURD OF $80,000.

WHEN I WALKED IN I SAW THAT THERE WAS A SLIDE UP THAT SAID $600,000 TO REPAIR A ROAD IN THE CITY. I THINK THE CITY DOES HAVE THE RESPONSIBILITY, WE DO SEE IT AS A CITY ROAD IT DOES HAVE TO BE REPAIRED. I THINK IT BEHOOVES THE CITY TO PURSUE THE LAWSUIT FURTHER WITH CPH OR WITH WHOEVER DESIGNED THE ROAD.

IF THE CITY HAD RESPONSIBILITY, WHICH I AM SURE THEY DO IT NEEDS TO BE CONSIDERED THAT IT IS PURSUED AND THE MONEY IS PUT TOWARDS FIXING THE ROAD AND THE DRAINAGE PROBLEM.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. >> CITY ATTORNEY WE ARE PURSUING A RESOLUTION IS NOT CORRECT?

>> THERE IS NO SETTLEMENT. THE ORIGINAL SETTLEMENT WAS REJECTED FOR $80,000.

THERE IS NO SETTLEMENT. WE, THE CITY IS, AND I SPOKE TO JOHN WAS THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE BOARD FOR THE HOA HE SAID HE WILL COMMUNICATE WITH THE CITY ON IT.

I HAVE SPOKEN WITH HIM. THE CITY HAS HIRED ANOTHER CONSULTANT.

WE HAVE THE REPORT FROM THE CONSULTANT EXPERT THAT GAVE US TWO DIFFERENT OPTIONS ONE FOR 2,000,001 FOR 3 MILLION. THAT IS TO INSTALL THE DRAINAGE AND DEMO THE ROAD AND THE

[00:35:01]

THE $2 MILLION WAS ONLY TO REPLACE THE CURB AND GUTTER AND NOT THE ENTIRE DRIVEWAY.

WHAT WE NEEDED TO DO WAS LOOK AT SOME OTHER OPTIONS AND ALL THE WAY FROM S A BLAST JUST GOING IN THERE AND MAKING THE STREET LOOK BETTER AND RESURFACING IT EVERY FIVE YEARS, THEN WE GO ALL OF THE WAY TO WHAT THE REPORT SAID, TO COMPLETELY DEMO THE ROAD, PUTTING A NEW BASE, BUT NOT TO INCLUDE THE DRIVEWAYS. ONE OF THE THINGS, I SPOKE WITH MR. COLLINS ABOUT, IT WAS, WE DID LOOK TOGETHER ON THE COMPUTER AT AN AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH.

NOT THAT THIS MAKES THE DRIVEWAYS BETTER, BUT A LOT OF PEOPLE JUST DON'T KNOW.

IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD, IT LOOKS LIKE THE DRIVEWAYS ARE 30 FEET LONG.

FROM THE AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS, 15 FEET OF THAT FROM THE CURB INTO THE DRIVEWAY IS SITTING ( INDISCERNIBLE ). MR. COLLINS DID NOT KNOW THAT. I ASKED HIM TO MAKE SURE HE EXPLAINS THAT TO YOUR NEIGHBORS SO THAT EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS THAT, THAT IS PART OF THE PUBLIC'S DRIVEWAY. I CANNOT ANSWER THE QUESTION ONLY YOU CAN ABOUT HOW FAR WE WILL GO. WE WANT TO BRING BACK ESTIMATES SO YOU CAN PICK WHAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO DO. WE WILL PROBABLY GO INTO AN EXECUTIVE SESSION WITH YOU ALL, BUT WE CAN DO THAT WHEN A LAWSUIT IS PENDING. THE TRANSCRIPT WILL BE AVAILABLE AT THE END OF IT. WE WILL ASK YOU FOR DIRECTION AND WE WILL GO TO MEDIATION

AGAIN. >> THANK YOU. SO THERE IS NO SETTLEMENT.

MRS. JUDY ( INDISCERNIBLE ). >> HELLO I BELIEVE THAT 617 SPANISH WAY.

THE OTHER THING I WANTED PEOPLE TO BE AWARE OF IS THE DANGER. I HAVE SEEN KIDS FALL, THAT IS THE CITY'S RESPONSIBILITY IF THEY FALL ON THE STREET. IF THEY FALL AT THE END OF MY DRIVEWAY, IT IS THE CITY'S RESPONSIBILITY. WE CHIDE TO KEEP THAT OUT OF IT.

IT IS IMPOSSIBLE. IMPOSSIBLE TO DO. IT IS SO WET, ALL OF THE TIME.

WE DON'T HAVE TO SPRINKLE THAT. BUT WE HAVE TO KEEP IT NICE. THERE IS SO MUCH.

THE OTHER THING, I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE GUY WHO WHEN YOU'RE BUILDING A DEVELOPMENT A DEVELOPER PUTS THE STREET IN. YOU SAID SOMETHNG ABOUT, THE AREA BEING 1.2 FEET LOWER THAN IT SHOULD BE. WHO DID THE INITIAL INSPECTION. YOU BUILD A HOUSE AND YOU HAVE PEOPLE COMING IN LEFT AND RIGHT. WHO INSPECTS THE ROADS BEFORE THE HOUSES WERE BUILT.

THAT NEW DEVELOPMENT OFF OF 14TH, IT HAS BEEN INSPECTED. THEY ARE BUILDING HOUSES NOW.

NO DITCHES. YOU PUT THE DRAINAGE AND YOU FEEL IT AND THAT IS IT.

YOU PUT NEW SOD IN. SO, THAT IS WHAT I WANTED TO SAY.

THERE ARE A LOT OF OLDER PEOPLE AND NOW WE ARE GETTING YOUNGER PEOPLE SO THAT IS DANGEROUS.

>> THANK YOU MA'AM. ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENTS? I SEE NONE SO I WILL CLOSE

[6. CONSENT AGENDA]

THE ZANY COMMISSIONER WANT TO PULL AN ITEM. >> I RECOMMEND APPROVAL.

>> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. ANY DISCUSSION.

THERE IS NO DISCUSSION. IF YOU WILL CALL THE BOAT. (ROLL CALL).

>> THE MOTION PASSES 5-0. ITEM SEVEN, RESOLUTIONS. ITEM 7.1 AMENDED AND EXTENDED

[7.1 AMENDED AND EXTENDED - EMERGENCY ORDER – COVID-19 - MANDATORY MASKS]

[00:40:04]

EMERGENCY ORDER. >> THIS IS IN LIGHT OF THE GOVERNOR'S EXECUTIVE ORDER.

CAN YOU CLARIFY THE ORDER. THERE ARE TWO OF THEM. ONCE SAID THAT I AM SUMMARIZING IMMENSELY. ONCE SAID THAT, THE LOCAL COVID RESTRICTIONS ARE SUSPENDED.

I AM PREEMPTING THE EXECUTIVE ORDER AND THE SECOND ONE IS, LOCAL RESTRICTIONS WILL BE INVALIDATED AS OF JULY 1. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT WE APPROVE THE ORDINANCE WITH THE EXCEPTION OF CHANGING FROM MANDATORY TO OPTIONAL AND PERSONAL CHOICE OF USING A MASK.

>> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. CITY MANAGER WHICH YOU PUT UP THE SLIDES.

COUNTY EMERGENCY SERVICES AS, NOT BEEN UPDATING US ON DAILY INFECTION RATES.

I WANT TO GIVE THIS DATA, JUST SO WE KNOW WHAT IS HAPPENING IN THE COMMUNITY AND WHERE WE STAND. THIS IS INFORMATION. SO, THIS FIRST SLIDE YOU SEE THE RED LINE. THE RIGHT IS THE PAST TWO WEEKS. YOU CAN SEE THE INCREASE IN THE NUMBER OF CASES HAVING BEEN REPORTED. LEFT OF THE REDLINE IS THE PREVIOUS TWO WEEKS. THAT GIVES YOU A MONTH WORTH OF TRENDING FOR REPORTING OF DAILY CASES. AS OF THIS MORNING, NASSAU COUNTY IS RATED A VERY HIGH RISK OF EXPOSURE TO COVID-19. YOU CAN SEE AT THE BOTTOM OF THE SLIDE THAT HOSPITALIZATIONS ARE UP 5% TEST POSITIVITY IS UP 5% AND ONLY 33% OF THE POPULATION OF NASSAU COUNTY IS VACCINATED.

THE POINT I WILL MAKE ON THE LAST STATEMENT IS THAT ONE MONTH AGO WE WERE AT 25%.

THAT MEANS WE HAVE ONLY GAINED 7% MORE VACCINATIONS IN A MONTH HERE THAT IS VERY LOW.

LAST SLIDE. HERE IS THE REASON WHY WE ARE HERE.

SO FOR THE PAST TWO WEEKS WE HAVE AVERAGE 16 DAILY CASES PER 100,000.

FOR US TO DROP TO HIGH RISK, THERE NEEDS TO BE 11. SO, THE TREND IS WE ARE AT VERY HIGH RISK. THAT IS THE LATEST DATA FOR EVERYONE'S AWARENESS AND INFORMATION. THANK YOU. I WILL NOT OPEN THIS UP FOR DISCUSSION. ANY COMMISSIONERS? COMMISSIONER ROSS.

>> THE PURPOSE OF A MASK ORDINANCE, IS A POLITICAL STATEMENT TO ME, TO PREVENT THE TRANSMISSION OF THE DISEASE. THAT IS THE SOLE PURPOSE OF THAT.

THE CDC IS STILL RECOMMENDING INDOORS, PEOPLE CONTINUE, WHETHER THEY ARE VACCINATED OR NOT TO MAINTAIN DISTANCE, PHYSICAL DISTANCING AND WHERE A MASK.

THAT IS THE MEDICAL RECOMMENDATION. >> I THINK THAT IS AN EXCELLENT.

THE CDC IS RECOMMENDING THEM AND I THINK WE SHOULD RECOMMENDED NOT REQUIRED.

I WANT TO CLARIFY WHAT WE VOTE ON. WE ARE VOTING ON, WE ARE VOTING TO MAKE THE REQUIREMENT A RECOMMENDATION AND IT WILL BE A PERSONAL CHOICE AS TO WHETHER OR

NOT YOU CHOOSE TO WEAR A MASK SO THANK YOU FOR THAT GREAT MOTION. >> VICE MAYOR.

>> YES, BASED ON WHERE WE ARE AT. WE HAVE HAD 125 PEOPLE DIED.

[00:45:06]

THE TDC REQUIRES THEM. NOT THE TDC, THE CDD. THE MILITARY STILL DOES.

YOU STILL HAVE TO WEAR THEM WHEN YOU GO INTO HOSPITALS AND DOCTORS OFFICES AND THE STORES DEPENDING ON WHAT THEIR CORPORATE THING IS. AT THIS POINT IN TIME, WE SAID IT IS A PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. WE HAVE TO HONOR WHAT IS GOING ON AND I THINK IT IS THE RIGHT CHOICE. AS YOU LOOK AROUND YOU SEE WHAT IS GOING ON.

WHEN WE FIRST IMPLEMENTED THIS PEOPLE KNEW THEY HAD TO DO IT AND IT WAS IMPORTANT TO THEM.

YOU GO OUT TODAY AND YOU WILL SEE DIFFERENT THINGS. WE DON'T NEED PEOPLE FIGHTING ABOUT MASK. I THINK IT IS THE RIGHT CHOICE AND I THINK THE TIME IS RIGHT.

THANK YOU. >> MY COMMENTS ARE AS FOLLOWS. WE HAVE SEVERAL EVENTS IN MAY.

THEY ARE ALL OUTDOORS SOUNDS ON CENTER I THINK IS THIS FRIDAY. WE KNOW WHAT HAPPENS WITH SOUNDS ON CENTER. 400 PEOPLE. AGAIN WE ARE ASKING PEOPLE TO BE RESPONSIBLE, NOT ONLY FOR THEIR OWN HEALTH AND SAFETY BUT THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF OTHER PEOPLE. IF YOU HAVE THE VIRUS, YOU RISK SPREADING IT TO OTHER PEOPLE BUT NOT SOCIAL DISTANCING. SO, THAT BECOMES PROBLEMATIC IN AND OF ITSELF.

THE CITY MANAGER. IF THIS IS APPROVED, HOW WILL WE OPERATE CITY BUILDINGS AND CITY EMPLOYEES. WILL THIS BE RECOMMENDED THAT THEY WEAR A FACE COVERING WHAT WILL WE DO? I WILL STRONGLY ENCOURAGE CITY STAFF TO WEAR A FACE COVERING BUT AS THEY RECOMMEND AND AS THE MAYOR POINTED OUT IT WILL BE A PERSONAL CHOICE BUT I ENCOURAGE YOU IF YOU ARE INTERACTING WITH THE PUBLIC, I ENCOURAGE YOU TO CONTINUE TO WEAR A FACE COVERING UNLESS YOU HAVE BEEN VACCINATED. MY SECOND QUESTION IS, IS THIS MEETING, WHAT WILL BE THE GO FORWARD PLANS BEFORE INCREASED CAPACITY AND ATTENDANCE? I BELIEVE WE DISCUSSED THIS THAT IS SOLELY THE OPINION OF YOU WE WANT TO MAINTAIN SOCIAL DISTANCING WHICH IS DIFFERENT THAN THE MASK WE WILL OPERATE UNDER THIS CONFIGURATION BUT AGAIN, THIS IS YOUR DISCRETION, ESPECIALLY YOURS MR. MAYOR AS TO HOW YOU WANT THIS ROOM TO BE ORGANIZED AND TO FUNCTION.

>> THAT PROMPTED SOME LIGHTS. COMMISSIONER YOU WERE FIRST. >> I HOPE WE CAN GO BACK TO NORMAL. WE ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE HERE TO TALK AND THEY HAVE TO STAND OUTSIDE. I FEEL WE CAN BRING THE PEOPLE BACK IN, I SAY LET THEM COME.

I AM NOT AFRAID OF HEARING WHAT THE PEOPLE HAVE TO SAY AND I WELCOME THEM.

>> COMMISSIONER STURGES. >> I FEEL THE SAME WAY BRADLEY DOES.

I THINK IT IS TIME TO GET BACK TO NORMAL. I CANNOT TELL YOU HOW MANY PEOPLE I HAVE TALKED TO THAT THINK THIS IS RIDICULOUS. WE WATCH THEM EAT ACROSS THE STREET WITH NO MASK ON. IF THEY CALL THEY WILL MAKE SOMEONE ELSE SICK.

WHATEVER CONDITION INSIDE OF THIS ENVIRONMENT, IF WE HAVE A NORMAL PACKED HOUSE WE CONSIDER WEARING A MASK. THAT COULD BE AN OPTION BUT OTHER THAN THAT, I THINK NORMAL WOULD BE GREAT. COMMISSIONER ROSS WE ARE ANYTHING BUT NORMAL.

WE HAVE A HIGH TRANSMISSION RATE WITH THAT INFECTION WITH DISEASE THAT IS NOT NORMAL.

I THINK, WE ARE MIXING POLITICS AND MEDICINE. I DISAGREE.

I THINK THERE IS A HIGH INFECTIOUS RATE I AM NOT OPPOSED TO HEARING PEOPLE I AM OPPOSED

[00:50:01]

IF YOU LOOK AT INDIA AND OTHER COUNTRIES, THEY ALL THOUGHT INDIA THOUGHT EVERYTHING WAS FINE AND LOOK AT WHERE THEY ARE TODAY. I THINK WE ARE BEING PREMATURE AND I THINK THE SMART THING WOULD BE TO STAY THE COURSE AND KEEP DOING THINGS THAT KEEP US

SAFE. BUT AS MR. BEING SAID,. >> WE NEED TO GIVE THE CITY MANAGER SOME DIRECTION. VICE MAYOR, YOU ARE VERY AWARE OF THE CDC GUIDELINES? DO YOU KNOW THE LATEST GUIDELINES FOR INDOOR MEETINGS. THEY ARE REQUESTING FACE COVERING SPIRIT I THINK THAT, YOU HAVE TO PAY ATTENTION TO THE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE, THE SOCIAL DISTANCING. SUPER SWEATERS, WE HAVE HAD THINGS GOING ON.

I THINK WE DO BEST JUDGMENT. WE DON'T NEED TO PACKED THE HOUSE BUT WE HAVE TO BE CAREFUL AND WHAT DAVE SAID IS APPROPRIATE. WE MAY AT SOME POINT, WE MAY REQUIRE A FACE COVERING IF THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE. I THINK THAT JUDGMENT, WE LOOK AT WHAT IS GOING ON. THIS TOWN HAS BEEN PACKED FOR A MONTH.

I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE JUDGMENT ON THEIR. WE KNOW WHEN IT WILL GET BUSY.

WE CAN CERTAINLY HAVE MORE CHAIRS. MY REAL CONCERN IS THAT, AS YOU GO OUT. WHEN WE STARTED THIS, EVERYWHERE YOU WENT PEOPLE WERE FACE COVERING. YOU GO TO PUBLIX NOW YOU'RE SEEN IT LESS NOW YOU SEE PEOPLE WHO ARE CHALLENGING A. PEOPLE KNOW, PEOPLE KNOW IF THEY'VE BEEN VACCINATED IF YOU WANT TO GO OUT, IT IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY. THE SAME APPLIES HERE.

IF YOU DON'T WANT TO COME IN AND YOU ARE NERVOUS, DON'T COME INSIDE.

>> THANK YOU SIR. MR. ROSS. THAT YOU KEEP SAYING THE CITY IS BACK. THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN INDOOR AND OUTDOOR EXPOSURE.

IF YOU ARE COUGHING OUTSIDE IT IS HIGHLY UNLIKELY TO SPREAD THE DISEASE.

IT IS INDOOR EXPOSURE AND THE VENTILATION HERE IS NOT THE BEST.

SO, I WOULD CAUTION THAT COMING BACK TO THE STATUS QUO IS NOT IN THE BEST DECISION.

>> SO LET ME ASK A FEW QUESTIONS HERE. FIRST OF ALL, IF WE PASS THIS ORDINANCE, RECOMMENDING MASKS IF SOMEONE WALK INTO THE ROOM WE CANNOT MAKE THEM WEAR A MASK IS

THAT CORRECT? >> CORRECTED THAT OPTION IS OUT OF THE WINDOW.

WHOEVER WILL BE SITTING HERE, IT IS THEIR PERSONAL CHOICE ON IF THEY WANT TO WEAR A FACE COVERING HER NOT. LET'S DISCUSS THAT POINT. COMMISSIONER ROSS.

WHY IS IT, THAT A HOSPITAL CAN SAY, WHY CAN A PUBLIC HOSPITAL SAY, WEARING A MASKS IS MANDATORY BY THE CITY MINUTES WILL BUILDING CANNOT. GOOD QUESTION.

WHEN YOU SAY PUBLIC HOSPITAL. >> ANY HOSPITAL. IF THEY ARE PRIVATE BUSINESS THEY COULD SAY ANYTHING. THEY CAN SAY YOU CAN'T BRING A WEAPON INSIDE IF THEY WANTED THEY CAN SAY DON'T COME TO MY STORE AS AN INVITEE. A PUBLIC HOSPITAL MAY BE DIFFERENT BUT IT IS PROBABLY LIMITED PUBLIC FORM VERSUS HERE WHICH IS AN OPEN PUBLIC FORUM.

[00:55:01]

DON'T WEAR A FACE COVERING. >> THAT IS OFF OF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.

>> I BELIEVE NOW IS THE TIME, I THINK NOW IS THE TIME TO DO IT. IF YOU WANT TO GET VACCINATED THAT IS YOUR CHOICE. IF YOU WANT TO WEAR A MASK THAT IS YOUR CHOICE.

NO ONE IS GETTING A CITATION FOR THIS MANDATE. I BELIEVE NOW IS THE TIME.

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU MR. MAYOR. THIS IS MY FINAL POINT ABOUT THIS. WE HAVE THE, I THINK WE ARE ACCEPTING THE GOVERNOR'S EXECUTIVE ORDER, IN FACT IT WILL BE ON JULY 1. THIS IS OUR LAST CHANCE TO DO IT OURSELVES. ARE WE GOING TO DO IT OR WAIT UNTIL IT IS DONE TO US.

I SAY LET'S GO AHEAD AND MAKE IT NICE AND EASY. SO, THANK YOU.

>> OKAY, YES, SIR. >> IF THE GUIDANCE IS TO RETURN TO NORMAL, DO THOSE DIRECTIONS APPLY TO ALL OF THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS WE WILL NO LONGER HAVE REMOTE PARTICIPATION, THAT

WE EXPECT ALL BOARD MEMBERS TO BE PHYSICALLY PRESENT. >> HANG ON, WE WILL GET TO THAT QUESTION. I WANT TO DEAL WITH THIS ROOM FIRST.

REMIND ME TOO COME BACK TO YOUR QUESTION. SO, NOT TO BE ARGUMENTATIVE, I THINK IT IS TIME. MORE PROBLEMATIC IS PACKING THIS ROOM, KNOWING THAT SEVEN OUT OF TEN PEOPLE ARE NOT VACCINATED. SO COMMISSIONER STURGES SAYS, YES YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO NOT WEAR A MASK. BUT YOU DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT TO INFECT ME.

SORRY, NO. I AM NOT GOING THERE. SO, PACKING THIS ROOM IS REALLY ROLLING THE DICE AND DANGEROUS GIVEN THE VACCINATION RATE. I THINK WE ARE BEING RECKLESS, IF WE WERE TO TAKE THAT COURSE OF ACTION. I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE HAVE A GRADUATED ATTENDANCE, LET'S BUILD UP AS THE VACCINATION RATE INCREASES.

YES, WE COULD HAVE MORE PEOPLE IN THE ROOM. WHAT IS THE CAPACITY?

>> 130. >> LET'S INCREASE IT TO 25%. RIGHT NOW THERE ARE HOW MANY

PEOPLE? >> 12. >> SO, ONE FOURTH OF 130 IS 30 PEOPLE. SO, LET'S SAY 30 PEOPLE FOR THE NEXT MEETING.

LET'S KEEP LOOKING AT THE DATA. I SEE MR. ROSS SHAKING HIS HEAD BUT, THIS IS WHAT WE ARE LEFT

WITH IF YOU SAY RECOMMENDED. >> I DID NOT SAY THAT. >> I UNDERSTAND, BUT I AM TALKING TO MY PANEL. IF WE SAY RECOMMENDED, WE CANNOT MAKE PEOPLE WALK IN HERE AND WHERE A MASK. THE ONLY THING WE CAN DO IS CHECK TO SEE IF THEY HAVE BEEN VACCINATED, WHICH I DON'T THINK WE WILL BE DOING THAT. WHAT IF WE GO 25%.

THEN CHECKED THE DATA. >> WHY NOT 24%, 29%. >> PICK A NUMBER.

A GRADUATED AMOUNT. >> YOU ARE THE MAN OF SCIENCE. WHAT IS THE BASIS OF WHAT YOU ARE PROPOSING. THE CDC WOULD SAY HOW MANY FEET A PART DO PEOPLE HAVE TO BE, IT IS SUPPOSED BE 6 FEET. BUT THEY SAY 3 FEET APART, THEN YOU HAVE PEOPLE 3 FEET APART THAT IS A MORE RATIONAL BASIS THAN JUST PICKING A NUMBER WHAT IS RECOMMENDED INDOORS BY THE CDC. I THINK IT IS 3 FEET. IF YOU WANT TO DO SOMETHING, DO

3 FEET. >> MY ONLY ARGUMENT THAT SEEMS OBVIOUS TO ME IS THAT EVERY

[01:00:02]

IT'S THEIR CHOICE TO BE VACCINATED WE NEED A DECISION ON THIS.

>> THERE IS SUPPORT FOR MAKING THE MASK RECOMMENDED BUT WHY DON'T WE LEAVE SOCIAL DISTANCING UNTIL THERE IS MORE DATA AVAILABLE. THIS IS ABOUT PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY AND PEOPLE WILL GET THE DISEASE AND THAT IS THE WAY IT IS.

>> WHY DON'T WE TAKE THE TIME TOMORROW, OR THIS EVENING TO FIND OUT WHAT THE CDC REQUIREMENTS ARE ON SOCIAL DISTANCING AND APPLIED THEM TO THE COMMISSION MEETINGS.

IT IS 3 FEET, LOOK AT THAT. THEY ACTUALLY TALKED ABOUT DIFFERENT NUMBERS.

THE MASK IS A PERSONAL CHOICE OR OPTIONAL BUT THE CITY COMMISSION IS BASED ON SOCIAL CDC

REQUIREMENTS. THAT'S PRETTY EASY. >> 'S THAT IS FIND THE NUMBER WILL BE CLOSE TO 24 CHAIRS IF IT IS 3 FEET NOT 6 FEET. I AM FINE WITH THAT.

I HAVE CONSENT FROM THE REVIEW. >> DOES THAT NEED TO BE PART OF THE LANGUAGE IN THE EMERGENCY ORDINANCE? WE WILL GO ON THE UPDATED BECAUSE THE CDC JUST UPDATED

THEIR GUIDELINES. >> IF THAT IS THE DIRECTION, WE WILL JUST SEND YOU THE UPDATED WEEKLY CDC GUIDELINES AND THAT IS HOW WE WILL FUNCTION IN THIS ROOM AND WITH THE OTHER BOARDS.

THE VIRTUAL ATTENDANCE BY MEMBERS OF THE BOARD MEMBERS IS NOW COMING IN PERSON.

[01:05:03]

WE DO ALLOW APPLICANTS AND RESPONDENTS TO ATTEND VIRTUALLY. THERE IS NOTHING ILLEGAL ABOUT THAT EVEN WHEN EVERYTHING GOES BACK TO NORMAL, THAT IS STILL ALLOWED.

I GUESS MR. MARTIN AND I, ARE YOU OKAY WITH THAT BEING ALLOWED? IT IS 2021. IT MAKES IT EASIER FOR SOME. IN SOME CASES, I KNOW YOU LIKE TO SEE PEOPLE IN PERSON BUT IT WILL SAVE US ON CONSULTING FEES TOO.

>> ONCE THE MOTION PASSES WHEN DISTORTED IT'S GOING TO AFFECT THIS IS IMMEDIATE IT IS AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE. IT IS EFFECTIVE TONIGHT, AS SOON AS YOU PASS IT.

SO ANYONE IN THE ROOM COULD TAKE THEIR MASK OFF. >> YES.

PLEASE REMEMBER YOU ARE EXTENDING THE LOCAL STATE OF EMERGENCY THAT DOES NOT HAVE TO DO WITH THE GOVERNMENT. WE NEED TO DO THAT TO ENSURE COVID FUNDING FOR ANY EXPENSES

THE CITY HAS. >> VICE MAYOR. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS.

MY LAST COMMENT IS, I GAVE THIS QUOTE TO THE MEDIA. I WAS DISAPPOINTED IN THE GOVERNOR BECAUSE I SEE HIS DECISION AS HE HAD THE ABILITY OF THE CITY COMMISSION TO MAKE THE BEST DECISIONS FOR THE CITIZENS INSTEAD OF HAVING THE STATE STEAMROLL US.

IF YOU KNOW WHAT IS GOING ON IN THE STATE, THEY ARE DOING MORE AND MORE TO TAKE LOCAL DECISION-MAKING AWAY. THAT IS DANGEROUS. I FIND THAT VERY DISTURBING.

>> CITY CLERK WILL YOU CALL THE BOAT. >>

( INDISCERNIBLE ). >> WEARING A MASK WOULD BE AN OPTIONAL, PERSONAL CHOICE.

>> THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. (ROLL CALL).MOTION PASSES 4-1.

>> I ASSUME EVERYONE HERE HAS BEEN VACCINATED. >> DOESN'T MATTER?

[7.2 BUDGET AMENDMENT - BUILDING DEPARTMENT]

-- DOES IT MATTER. >> WE ARE NOW ONTO ITEM SEVEN-POINT TO.

BUDGET AMENDMENT BUILDING DEPARTMENT. >> THIS IS FOR A BUDGET TRANSFER FOR $72,000 THIS WOULD ALLOW FOR THE PRIVATE PROVIDER TO DO CONSTRUCTION WHICH WOULD EXPEDITE AND THE CITY PREVIOUSLY APPROVED VENDORS FOR THIS SERVICE AND INCLUDE IN LIST WAS CHARLES ABBOTT, AND THAT IS WHO THE CITY IS UTILIZING FOR THE PLANNED REVIEWS.

>> I RECOMMEND APPROVAL. >> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. , ANY DISCUSSION ON THE BUDGET AMENDMENT? I SEE NONE. DEPUTY CLERK IF YOU WILL PLEASE

CALL THE VOTE. (ROLL CALL). >> IT PASSES 5-0.

[7.3 BUDGET AMENDMENT - MARINA]

>> THIS IS A BUDGET AMENDMENT. THIS IS TO TRANSFER 30,000 DOLLARS FROM THE MARINA CONTRACTUAL ACCOUNT TO THE PROMOTION ACCOUNT. PART OF THE MONEY IS FOR THEIR PROMOTIONAL ACTIVITIES. I WANT TO PRESENT TO YOU A COPY OF THEIR HOT OFF OF THE PRESS, CUSTOM PUBLICATION AND IT FEATURES FERNANDINA BEACH THROUGHOUT THE ISSUE.

[01:10:05]

WILL BE AVAILABLE DOWNTOWN. I HAVE ONE FOR MRS. ROBERTS. >> DO WE HEAR A MOTION ON ITEM

SEVEN-POINT 3. >> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. I WILL MAKE ONE CLARIFICATION.

THIS IS A TRANSFER OF MONEY FROM ONE MARINA ACCOUNT INTO ANOTHER. THIS IS NOT ADDITIONAL EXPENDITURES. JUST SO EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS THAT.

ALL RIGHT DEPUTY CLERK, CAN YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. (ROLL CALL).

[7.4 PROPOSAL APPROVAL - FLORIDA AIRFIELD MAINTENANCE, JV]

>> IT PASSES 5-0. >> ITEM 7-4. PROPOSAL APPROVAL, FLORIDA AIR

FIELD. >> THIS IS A GRANT FUNDED PROJECT TO RESTRIPED RUNWAY 527.

>> RECOMMEND APPROVAL. >> DO I HAVE A SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ANY DISCUSSION ON THE APPROVAL. I SEE NONE. CALL THE ROLL.

(ROLL CALL). THAT MOTION PASSES 5-0. ITEM SEVEN .5 FLORIDA DEPARTMENT

[7.5 GRANT AGREEMENT AMENDMENT - FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (FDOT)]

OF TRANSPORTATION GRANT AGREEMENT. >> THERE IS MONEY LEFT OVER FROM THE GRANT FOR THE RUNWAY STRIPE INC. IS TO TRANSFER THE EXTRA MONEY INTO THE AIRPORT ANGER

EXPANSION PROJECT. >> RECOMMEND APPROVAL. I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ANY DISCUSSION ON THE GRANTS. I SEE NONE. DEPUTY CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE

VOTE. (ROLL CALL). >> THAT MOTION PASSES 5-0.

[7.6 GOLF COURSE MANAGEMENT RFP]

MAYOR PROVIDED ME COMMENTS FROM GOLF PROFESSIONALS. AND COMMISSIONER ROSS THIS MORNING SAID HE HAD SOME COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS BUT I HAVE NOT HEARD SO I'M ALL EARS

IN TERMS OF WHAT YOU WANT TO DO. >> I NEED A MOTION IN A DISCUSSION TO TALK ABOUT THIS.

I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. COMMISSIONER ROSS. I HAVE A NUMBER OF QUESTIONS.

FIRST OF ALL ON THE PAGE 148 IT SAID INCREASE THE ROUNDS HAVE NO IDEA HOW THEY CAME UP WITH 20% I DON'T KNOW IF THAT IS FEASIBLE. I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S PRACTICAL I DON'T KNOW IF PEOPLE WANT TO DO

THAT SOMEHOW WE RESOLVE THAT? >> THAT IS THE TECHNICAL QUESTION.

WOULD IN TERMS OF PLAY, THIS PROVISION IS NOT SOMETHING I DREAMED OF.

WE TOOK SEVERAL DIFFERENT LEASE MANAGEMENT RVS AND WE PUT THINGS IN THERE, MORE THAN WHAT YOU PROBABLY NEED BUT I WANTED TO KEEP THAT IN THERE TO SEE IF IT WAS SOMETHING YOU WERE

INTERESTED IN DOING. >> I SAY LEAVE IT IN. WHEN THEY COME, WE WILL SEE IF

THEY AGREE AND IF WE SEE AN INCREASE OF 20% PER YEAR. >> WE ARE REQUIRING.

>> WHERE'S REQUIRING NO WE ARE SAYING THIS IS SOMETHING WE WANT TO SEE FROM YOU.

MY NEXT QUESTION IS ON PAGE 248. IT SAYS, NECESSARY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS WHAT ARE THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS. WHAT ARE THE ONES THAT ARE NECESSARY?

I'M ASKING. >> UNFORTUNATELY THE RP IS NOT IN THE AGENDA PACKET.

[01:15:05]

>> S IT IS, IT'S EXHIBIT ONE. >> I WILL FIND IT COMICAL HEAD WHICH PAGE ARE YOU ON, 248.

IT GOES THROUGH THIS WHOLE THING BUT IT DOESN'T TALK ABOUT, IT DOES NOT SAY WHO WILL PAY FOR THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS HE SHAKING HIS HEAD. WHAT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS WE EXPECT AND WHO WILL PAY, THAT IS MY NEXT QUESTION. GOING THROUGH IT, AND WE HAD DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THIS IT WAS UNCLEAR WHAT WE WOULD REQUIRE SO, WHO WILL PAY FOR THIS.

ARE WE GOING TO REQUIRE THE CONTRACTOR OR WILL THIS GUARANTEE.

>> IF I DON'T GET THE ATTACHMENT I WOULD ATTACH THE FIVE YEAR IMPROVEMENT PLAN.

THERE IS A DIFFERENCE WHEN SOMEONE COMES INTO THE LEASE. ESPECIALLY IF IT IS LONG TERM.

THIS LEASE, WE CAN MAKE IT REALLY LONG-TERM. THAT IS PROBABLY NOT ENOUGH TIME TO PUT IN SUBSTANTIAL IMPROVEMENTS IF SOMEONE WANTS TO LEASE THE COURSE.

FOR A MANAGEMENT COMPANY THE STANDARD IS THE CITY PAYS AND THEY ARE OPERATING IT.

>> I HAVE TWO LIGHTS ON. IS IT RELATED TO THIS QUESTION? >> NO IT'S ANOTHER ISSUE.

>> WHAT I'M CLARIFYING IS, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS. >> I THINK WE DO NEED TO STIPULATE WHAT WE PLAN ON, WHATEVER WE WILL BUDGET OR TRY TO PUT IN ON A YEAR-TO-YEAR BASIS AND WE NEED TO SAY IT IN THE CONTRACT SO THEY KNOW, WE PREVIOUSLY DID $220,000, WHATEVER THE NUMBER IS. THAT IS THE SUBSIDY. PART OF THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT, WHATEVER THAT NUMBER IS IT NEEDS TO BE STIPULATED WHETHER IT IS 50, 100,000, THERE NEEDS TO BE A NUMBER. WE NEED TO COME UP WITH THAT NUMBER.

> WE DO THAT IN THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN. SO UNLESS THERE ARE CHANGES IF WE WANT THIS TO GO OUT BEFORE THE NEW BUDGET IS APPROVED THEN I WOULD ATTACH THE PLAN FOR THE GOLF COURSE. AS NUMBERS, IT HAS YEARS THE CITY INTENDS TO BUDGET FOR THOSE

IMPROVEMENTS AND WHAT THEY ARE. >> IF THAT LINES UP WITH OUR BUDGET OR WHAT OUR BUDGET IS

SUPPOSED TO LINE UP WITH, THINK THAT IS THE RIGHT ANSWER. >> IF WE DO THAT, AND I AM NOT SAYING THAT WE SHOULDN'T DOES THAT LOCK US INTO THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN IF A GROUP SAYS THIS IS WHAT WE BASED OUR RFP ON AND SO, ARE WE LOCKING OURSELVES INTO THAT? WE WOULD NOT WE WOULD IF WE INCLUDE IT IN THE CONTRACT. THE WAY WE HAVE THE MANAGEMENT COMPANY CONTRACTED WE INCLUDED AS CONTRACT DOCUMENTS AND WE DO HIERARCHY.

WE START WITH THE RFP THE RESPONSE TO THE RFP. NOT UNTIL WE ACTUALLY SIGN WILL

WE BE BOUND TO DO THAT. >> WHO WILL PAY FOR THE GOLF CARTS.

IT IS A MANAGEMENT COMPANY. ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT? I THINK HE MADE A GOOD POINT IF WE USE THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN, THEY WILL BASE THERE ARE FB BASED ON THAT. WE CAN SELECT ANYONE WE WANT REGARDLESS OF WHAT THEY PUT IT

BASED ON THE NEEDS OF THE CITY BUT IT MAY BE MISLEADING. >> WHAT WE ARE DOING IN THEORY, WE ARE ELEVATING ALL OF THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FOR THE GOLF COURSE TO PRIORITY ONE.

I THINK IT IS SOMETHING WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT. >> IF MY DIRECTION IS TO ATTACH

[01:20:04]

LIKE TO DO. THEY WON'T NECESSARILY GET DONE. >> THE OTHER ISSUE I WANT TO BRING THE. THIS CAN BE DONE IN THE RFP I WOULD LIKE TO THOUGH WHAT THE COST WOULD BE TO RUN 18 HOLES VERSUS 27. I WILL EDITORIALIZE A LITTLE BIT WHEN YOU SAY THERE'S NO COST, HOW CAN THAT BE I WANT TO SEE WHAT THE COST IS.

THERE ARE THINGS THAT WE CAN DO THAT CAN BE RELATIVELY INEXPENSIVE.

>> NOW IS THE TIME. AND OPERATING AGREEMENT FOR 18 HOLES.

LET ME BUILD ON WHAT THE VICE MAYOR JUST SAID. CITY MANAGER, HUMOR GOING TO HAVE THE HANDOUTS, I THINK WE TALKED ABOUT THAT YESTERDAY. I THINK THEY WERE SENT.

THEY WERE SENT BUT WE TALKED ABOUT HAVING A PRINT OUT. >> I DON'T HAVE THE PRINT OUT.

SO BUILDING UPON WHAT HE SAID. I TALKED TO A MANAGER WHO SAID, THE ADVANTAGE OF HAVING 27 HOLES , YOU CAN CLOSING YOU CAN ROTATE. YOU ALWAYS HAVE 18 HOLES OF GOLF IN GOOD CONDITION, WHILE YOU WORK ON THE ( INDISCERNIBLE ). IN.

IN OTHER WORDS AS WEAR AND TEAR TAKES PLACE ON THE OPENING TEAM, YOU GET THE NINE THAT IS RESTING UP TO SPEED AND NOW YOU CLOSE ANOTHER ONE THAT HAS WEAR AND TEAR, SO YOU ARE ALWAYS ROTATING NINE HOLES. THAT IS THE WAY TO LOWER THE MAINTENANCE COSTS AND LOWER THE

WEAR AND TEAR. >> I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM BUT 18 HOLES, IF WE DON'T EVER, IT CAN BE AN OPTION. I WOULD BE INTERESTED TO SEE WHAT THE COST WOULD BE.

I AM GOOD WITH MOVING FORWARD IN ANSWERING THE QUESTIONS. I THINK THE KEY WILL BE THE SELECTION AND WHAT THE NUMBERS ARE, AND WHAT WE ARE ASKING FOR AND WHAT WE PAY FOR.

>> COMMISSIONER ROSS HAS THE FLOOR. ARE WE RELATING THIS TO THE

CAPITAL QUESTION. >> YOU ANSWERED MY QUESTION. ON EXHIBIT NINE IT SAYS IMPROVEMENTS. WHAT IMPROVEMENTS DOES THE CITY EXPECT THIS OPERATING GROUP OR THE LESSEE TO DO IT IS NOT ARTICULATED HERE. I DON'T KNOW.

>> IT IS HARD FOR SOMEONE TO BID ON SOMETHING WHEN YOU DON'T KNOW , I MEAN, I READ ALL OF THE THINGS YOU SAID YOUR CONSULTANT SAID, ALL OF THOSE ARE NOT INCORPORATED, DO WE EXPECT THEM TO DO ALL OF THOSE THINGS, I'M JUST ASKING. TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, I WAS EXPECTED TO HAVE THE MATERIAL FRONT OF ME I WAS GOING TO INCORPORATE ANY ONE OF THE CHANGES INTO THE RP. THIS IS THE EXPERT THIS GUY HAS RUN 50 GOLF COURSES IN

COMPLEXES. >> I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT.

>> HE SUPPLIED US SIX PAGES, WHY DON'T WE TABLE THIS UNTIL WE GET THAT PRINTED OUT.

THAT WOULD BE MY RECOMMENDATION. >> BEFORE WE TABLE IT CAN I SAY THIS.

COMMISSIONER ROSS CONTINUED. >> IT HAS TO BE MADE CLEAR IF WE LEASE THIS THE LACEY BRUSH BACK POLITELY SEE PAYS THE TAXES WHICH WILL BE SUBSTANTIAL. I'M JUST OWN YOU THAT.

THAT WAS NOT IN HERE. AND AGAIN, ON EXHIBIT B IT SAYS INC. LONG OVERDUE REFURBISH THIS

[01:25:08]

THOSE ARE MY BASICS. >> I WILL SAY THE LESS HE THE TAXES BUT THERE ARE OPTIONS.

SOMEONE COULD COME AND SAY I JUST WANT TO LEAD -- LEASE THE FOOD AND BEVERAGE, THE TAXES ARE GOING TO BE TAXES BUT NOT FOR ALL OF THE ACREAGE THEY ARE PAYING TAXES.

THEY'RE STILL PERSONAL TAXES. I WILL MAKE SURE THAT IS CLEAR. >> WE ARE GOING TO TABLE THIS OR ADD ADDITIONAL INFORMATION NEXT LINE I JUST CARE ABOUT THE GOLF COURSES WILL MAINTAIN AND SERVES

THE COMMUNITY. >> THERE IS A $200,000 SUBSIDY WE HAVE BEEN DOING HERE.

IF YOU GO THROUGH THIS, I DID MARK THE PAGE, THEY SAID THERE WILL BE NO SUBSIDY.

THE CITY WON'T SUBSIDIZE THIS. YOU MAY WANTED TO BE ALL OF THESE THINGS BUT WHAT IF IT GETS

PUT INTO THE PRICE ARE WE WILLING TO SUBSIDIZE OR NOT. >> I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO PUT

THAT IN. >> WE NEED TO PUT THAT IN THERE. THAT WILL BE A DECISION MADE.

>> SO WE ARE CLEAR, WE WANT TO ADD THE EXPERT EDITS AND HAVE THE RFP COME BACK TO OUR NEXT

MEETING. >> THAT WILL BE JUNE 1. SO, NOTICING THAT, JUST REALIZE WE ARE PUSHING THIS CLOSE TO THE BUDGET AND THAT A LOT OF THIS WILL DEPEND ON HOW MUCH MONEY WE ARE WILLING TO COMMIT TO THE GOLF COURSE. WHOEVER TAKES THIS OVER WILL WANT TO KNOW WHAT THE BUDGET COMMITMENT IS FROM THE CITY. THAT IS WHY I SAID I THOUGHT WE MIGHT RESOLVE WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THE GOLF COURSE. THOUGH IDEA WAS TO RESOLVE THAT SO WE COULD GIVE THE CITY ATTORNEY OR WHOEVER WAS DOING THIS, THAT INFORMATION BUT WE STILL HAVEN'T DECIDED HOW MUCH WE WILL SUBSIDIZE AND THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE NEED TO WAIT FOR THE RVD. IF WE SAY THIS IS WHAT WE ARE GOING TO COMMIT TO, WE WILL. I'M NOT SURE HOW YOU COME UP WITH AN RFP WITHOUT DOING THIS.

>> THAT WAS OUR PROBLEM. BILLY CASPER CAME EVERY YEAR. THEY DID NOT SAY WHAT WE NEED,

WE SAID THIS IS WHAT YOU GET. >> THAT IS NOT NECESSARILY TRUE. >> THAT IS WHAT THEY SAID TO ME.

>> THE BUDGET GETS PREPARED IN CONCERT WITH ALL OF THE DEPARTMENT BY DEPARTMENT SUBMIT A BUDGET. THE CITY MANAGER HAS AN IDEA OF WHETHER IT NEEDS CUTS BUT THEY ARE THE ONES, WHO CAN'T TALK TO ABOUT THE LAST FIVE YEARS BUT THEY PREPARED THEIR OWN BUDGETS AND SUBMITTED IT. IT IS NOT LIKE HE PREPARED IT AND SAID THIS IS WHAT YOU WILL

DO FOR THE BUDGET. >> THAT IS AN OPPOSITE. >> AS USUAL I'M JUST TRYING TO

GET TO THE FACTS WHERE. >> WE WILL GET RESPONSES BASED ON THE CRITERIA WE PUT IN.

IT WILL SAY IT WILL COST YOU THIS MANY DOLLARS AND WE WILL DECIDE IF WE WILL SPEND THAT

[01:30:02]

WE MAY FIND THE INDUSTRY STANDARDS ARE WAY UP THERE AND TO MEET THEM WE MAY HAVE TO

SUBSIDIZE. >> THAT IS NOT BELTWAY THIS RFP IS WRITTEN.

MY CORRECT? >> WAS A QUESTION? >> BASICALLY, WHAT I THINK I HEARD IS THAT THE RFPS ART STANDARDS AND MAYBE THE STANDARDS ARE NOT WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT BUT WHAT IS NOT IT'S ( INDISCERNIBLE ) YOU'RE ASKING A COMPANY, TO RESPOND TO A BID LIKE THIS YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT HOURS OF SOMEONE'S TIME AND MONEY.

I THINK, ONCE YOU PUT SOMETHING OUT THERE CONCRETE FOR THEM TO BID ON, IT'S INAPPROPRIATE.

>> THE MORE YOU TELL SOMEONE THEY ARE BIDDING ON SOMEONE, YOU NEED SPECIFICATIONS.

THE MORE YOU CAN TELL SOMEONE WHAT YOU WANT, THE BETTER THEY CAN BID ON IT.

I'M NOT BEING CRITICAL. IT'S LOOSEY-GOOSEY. YOU'RE GOING TO COME BACK WITH ALL KINDS OF BIDS AND WHO KNOWS WHAT YOU WILL GET OUT OF THAT BECAUSE IT IS NOT CONCRETE.

>> AND I WILL SAY TOO. THE PURCHASING AGENT, PUT TOGETHER THE MAIN THINGS THAT GO INTO AN RP -- RFP I DON'T KNOW CRAB ABOUT GOLF COURSES. I'M DOING MY BEST.

I REACH OUT TO AN EXPERT AND HE HAS NOT SENT ANYTHING BACK TO ME.

THIS IS WHAT I INTENDED EVEN THOUGH IT IS GOING SLOWER THAN I THOUGHT.

I WOULD SAY, JUST A GUESS BASED ON THE BUDGET, THE PANDEMIC AND ALL OF THAT, THE MONEY THAT WE BUDGET OR THE GOLF COURSE WILL BE SIMILAR TO WHAT WE BUDGETED THE YEAR BEFORE.

IF YOU HAVE A MANAGEMENT MONEY -- COMPANY COME IN THEY WILL EXPECT BACK.

I WOULD MOVE TO TELL THEM, UNLESS YOU WANT THE STANDARDS RAISED, OR THE EXPERT SAY WE NEED TO OVERSEE BUSINESS, YOU ARE RAISING THE STANDARD AND THE COST THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO BUDGET FOR THE GOLF COURSE. I WOULD ONLY SAY, BEFORE JUNE 1, IF THIS WILL RAISE THE STANDARD APPLE GOLF COURSE TO ANOTHER LEVEL, ONLY IF SOMEONE COMES INTO LEASE, THAT ALMOST NEVER HAPPENS. IT WILL BE A LOT OF MONEY. ARE WE GOING TO GIVE THEM THAT

MONEY. >> I BELIEVE, INCORPORATING THE VERBIAGE, THEY WILL TIGHTEN UP THIS ARTICLE. THEY WILL ANSWER A LOT OF THE QUESTIONS.

BUT IF ANYONE SITS HERE AND THINKS THAT IT IS BUSINESS AS USUAL, AND WE WILL KEEP THE GOLF

COURSE AS IS, WHY ARE WE GOING THROUGH THIS EXERCISE? >> YOU'RE ASKING ME? I AM HAPPY KEEPING IT THE WAY IT IS. I THINK WE ARE SPENDING TOO MUCH MONEY ON IT. THAT IS MY PERSONAL OPINION. I'VE SAID THAT BEFORE.

THIS IS NOT A NEWSFLASH. I AM NOT A GOLFER BUT MOST PEOPLE TELL ME, IT'S OKAY BUT IS NOT GREAT BUT IT IS AFFORDABLE. IF WE PUT OUT THIS RFP AND THE CITY WILL BID ON IT, ARE WE

[01:35:05]

DO WE HAVE ANY BLOWBACK FROM THAT. >> THIS COULD INVALIDATE WHAT WE HAVE DONE BECAUSE AS YOU SAID THEY SPENT A LOT OF TIME PUTTING IT TOGETHER.

>> WHY DON'T I GIVE YOU ALL A CHANCE WHAT HE IS SAYING IS APPELLEE TRUE I DON'T HAVE TO KNOW ABOUT GOLF TO KNOW THIS. THEY ARE RAISING THE QUALITY OF THE GOLF COURSE BY THE IMPROVEMENTS AND THE STANDARDS OF HOW HIGH THE GRASS IS CUT ON THE DIFFERENT AREAS.

THAT ALL TAKES MORE MONEY, FERTILIZER, ALL OF THAT STUFF. I THINK YOU HAVE TO GIVE ME DIRECTION, IS THAT THE DIRECTION YOU WANT TO GO AND IF NOT, I NEED TO KNOW THAT BECAUSE

PUTTING THE STANDARDS OUT THERE IS A WASTE OF EVERYONE'S TIME. >> IF YOU JUST WANT BOOK GOLF COURSE AS IS, WHY ARE WE HAVING THE MOST EXPENSIVE PERSON IN THE CITY PUT TOGETHER AN RFP WHEN WE CAN DECIDE AND SAY, CITY RUN IT. WE WOULD SAVE OURSELVES $90,000. CITY RUN IT, REPORT BACK TO US.

SO, IF THE GOAL IS NOT TO IMPROVE IT AND STATUS QUO, WE ARE GOING THROUGH A LOT OF WORK TO GET TO THAT PLACE WHEN WE COULD EASILY MAKE A DECISION AND JUST DIRECT BUT CITY MANAGER TO

PUT TOGETHER THE GOLF COURSE STAFF,. >> WE HAVE ALL SPOKEN.

I AM LOOKING AT THE GROUP. >> USING THESE STANDARDS WILL IMPROVE THE GOLF COURSE.

THEY ARE NOT THE STANDARDS WE ARE OPERATING ON NOW. WE WOULD EXPECT THE CITY, IF THEY RESPOND, TO ALSO MEET THOSE STANDARDS. WOULD IT BE A CHALLENGE IF WE ACCEPTED IT? WE DECIDED THAT ON THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE CITY.

TO YOUR POINT OF, WHAT BOTHERS ME IS THIS PROCESS AND HOW IT STARTED IN JULY AND WAS DELAYED.

I DID NOT LIKE THE PROCESS, THE RFP BECAME TRANSPARENT. I CAN SEE THE POINT.

I AM NOT A GOLFER EITHER. IT'S OKAY YOU PLAY THE COURSE. >> I'M NOT A GOOD GOLFER.

>> I NEVER SAID THAT. >> WE ARE GOING THROUGH A BIG EFFORT.

IF THE DECISION IS THEY WANT TO GO ANNOUNCE I CAN EXCEPT THAT AND I WOULD SUPPORT THAT.

>> I NEED TO HEAR FROM OTHER COMMISSIONERS WITHIN THE CITY MANAGER.

>> I AM NOT OPPOSED. I THINK WITH DIRECTION, THEY HAVE SUPPLIED WHAT WE HAVE NOW YES THEY NEED IMPROVEMENT. I KNOW IT WON'T BE IF WE ARE NOT HOLDING OURSELVES TO THAT STANDARD THERE IS NO WAY WE CAN'T IMPROVE. I THINK IT IS ALL ABOUT MONEY.3 HOW MUCH MONEY WE WANT TO SPEND, OR BRING IN A STAFF TO MANAGE THE COURSE.

IT IS ALL ABOUT MONEY. >> THE POINT IS TO FIND OUT THE OPTIONS OUT THERE.

THE REASON WE WENT THROUGH THIS IS TO SEE WHAT CHOICES WE HAVE. WE GOT RID OF OUR OLD MANAGEMENT COMPANY AND WE WANT TO SEE WHAT ARE OUR OPTIONS. I AM STILL PRO RFP.

[01:40:11]

I WOULD STILL VOTE FOR THAT, BUT NOW IT IS MY TURN. >> MY FINAL COMMENT IS THE FOLLOWING, YOU ARE CORRECT. IF YOU PUT AN RFP, THAT ANY MANAGEMENT COMPANY WOULD WANT TO IMPROVE THE GOLF COURSE. THE STANDARDS THAT WE ARE SETTING ARE DESIGNED AROUND THAT. THE REASON WE GOT RID OF BILLY CASPER'S BECAUSE WE ALL AGREED THE GOLF COURSE HAD COME INTO DISARRAY. THAT IT WAS NOT THE QUALITY A MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE SHOULD BE. SO, BUT DECISION IS WE CAN GO THROUGH THE PROCESS BUT DOES IT STAY STATUS QUO, KEEP AS IS OR DO WE HAVE IMPROVED CONDITIONS. COMMISSIONER ROSS, YOU CAN

SPEAK. >> I DID NOT GET RID OF BILLY CASPER.

IT WAS BASICALLY TO SAVE MONEY. THAT IS MY RECOLLECTION. WE WILL NOT BE SAVING MONEY.

>> I THINK WE WILL SPEND MORE MONEY SPIRIT WE ARE BACK TO THE QUESTION.

>> IF YOU DO DECIDE TO DO AN RFP, I DUMPED THIS IN THE CITY ATTORNEY'S LAP, I SHOULD NOT BE INVOLVED NOR SHOULD MR. MURPHY, THAT SHOULD BE THE TEAM THAT PUTS TOGETHER THE CITY RESPONSE.

WE HAVE NOT BEEN INVOLVED WITH PREPARING THE RFP I HEAR ABOUT THAT EVERY DAY I WILL HAVE EVERY RESPONSE THAT YOU EXPECT FROM OUTSIDE PROVIDERS. THAT BEING SAID I THINK IT DOES A DISSERVICE TO THE CURRENT CITY STAFF THAT THEY DO NOT DESIRE TO IMPROVE THE COURSE.

THEY RECOGNIZE THAT WHEN WE SAY WE WANT TO KEEP THE STATUS QUO, THAT IS NOT ACCURATE.

WE WANT TO IMPROVE THE GOLF COURSE. WE'RE TRYING TO IMPROVE IT.

BUT AS IT HAS BEEN SAID, HOW MUCH MONEY DO YOU WANT TO PUT INTO IT.

I THINK WE ARE ON THE RIGHT PATH, I THINK WE HAVE SAVED MONEY WITH THE ELIMINATION OF THE FORMER MANAGEMENT COMPANY AND THE DEBT SERVICE AND THE ENHANCE REVENUES, I THINK WE CAN DO IT. BUT AT THE SAME TIME, WE HAVE TO BE PREPARED TO RESPOND TO THE RFP. IF YOU DON'T, CITY STAFF IS COMMITTED TO IMPROVING THE GOLF

COURSE AND NOT RESTING ON THE STATUS QUO. >> I STAND CORRECTED.

WHEN I SAID THE STATUS QUO, IT HAS BEEN IMPROVED, THAT IS BECAUSE OF THE RESOURCES.

WHAT I ADMIT IS WE WILL USE THE SAME AMOUNT OF RESOURCES OR LESS, WE WON'T PLAY THE SHUFFLE GAME ANYMORE, TO KEEP THE GOLF COURSE GOING FORWARD. SO I STAND CORRECTED.

I BELIEVE THE CITY STAFF HAS MADE GREAT IMPROVEMENTS. I WILL CALL THE VOTE ON THE MOTION. THE MOTION WAS TO APPROVE THE RFP AS PRESENTED.

>> THERE WERE NO AMENDMENTS THERE WERE NO AMENDMENTS TO THE MOTION.

[01:45:03]

PLEASE CALL THE VOTE. (ROLL CALL). >> THAT IS THE PLACE I WANTED TO GET TO, NOW WE CAN CONTINUE DISCUSSING. GO FORWARD, KEEP IT WITH THE CITY, WHAT IS YOUR PLEASURE GENTLEMAN. HAVE THE CITY ATTORNEY COME BACK WITH AN AMENDED RFP. I WOULD LIKE TO COME BACK WITH CHANGES AND WE TAKE A LOOK AT IT. WE CAN MAKE A DECISION AT THAT POINT.

>> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? >> CAN WE TAKE A BREAK?

>> OF WHAT WE ARE ASKING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO DO IS TAKE THE STUFF WE HAVE AND ROLL IT IN AND COME BACK IN A MONTH FROM NOW AND LOOK AT IT AGAIN. THE PURPOSES, WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW, BEFORE HE GOES THROUGH THE WORK, THIS IS A LOT OF WORK, AM I CORRECT.

YOU AREN'T LOOKING AT A LOT OF WORK HERE. ARE WE COMMITTED, WHEN YOU ARE PUTTING THESE THINGS AND, THE PRICE OF GOLF WILL GO UP THERE, WE COMMITTED, DO WE WANT, ARE WE COMMITTED TO PUTTING OUT A PROPOSAL THAT BASICALLY SAYS, WE WILL INCREASE THE COST OF THE GOLF COURSE TO GET TO A BETTER PLACE FASTER. ARE WE COMMITTED TO THAT.

>> I WILL RESPOND. SO, KEEP IN MIND, WHEN I ASKED THESE GENTLEMEN TO LOOK AT THE RFP, THE GOAL, WAS TO MAKE THE GOLF COURSE PROFITABLE. SO THAT IT IS NOT IN DEBT.

GET RID OF THE SUBSIDY. IN CRAFTING THE RFP, THEY ALL AGREED, THE GOLF COURSE NEEDS IMPROVEMENT BECAUSE YOU ARE ON A RESORT ISLAND. THERE ARE THE CITIZENS WE SERVE AND THE TOURISTS THAT COME HERE. THERE ARE FIVE GOLF COURSES ON THE ISLAND.

ONE IS PRIVATE. THERE ARE FOUR GOLF COURSES WHERE YOU CAN PLAY.

SO I WOULD SAY, I KNOW GREEN FEES AND CART FEES. I WOULD SAY OUR RATES ARE LOW.

THIS IS A RESORT ISLAND. PEOPLE COME HERE TO PLAY GOLF. THERE NEEDS TO BE A DISCIPLINE LEVEL QUALITY. I CAN TELL YOU IT IS NOT. THE RFP WAS INTENDED, AND ANYONE WHO WILL TAKE IT OVER, OUR GOAL IS TO MAKE IT PROFITABLE. DO YOU WANT IT TO BE PROFITABLE.

RUNNING IT AS IS, WE WILL LOSE MONEY. COMMISSIONER ROSS.

>> THIS WAS NOT THERE UNTIL NOW. PROFITABLE MEANS, THEY WILL MAKE MORE MONEY.

>> WE WILL NOT LOSE MONEY. THERE IS NOTHING IN HERE. WE TOOK OUT THE PART THAT SAYS, WE WILL NOT SUBSIDIZE, WE TOOK THAT OUT. IF WE ARE TAKING THAT OUT, MAYBE WE SHOULD PUT THAT BACK IN. THIS DOES NOT TELL ME, IS THE NUMBER ONE OBJECTIVE TO BE PROFITABLE OR HAVE IT IMPROVED, AND IF IT IS IMPROVED, HOW MUCH MORE MONEY ARE WE WILLING TO PUT

[01:50:03]

THE MORE SPECIFIC YOU CAN MAKE IT, THE BETTER RESULTS YOU WILL GET.

SO, WHAT IS IT THAT WE WANT OUT OF THE GOLF COURSE. WHAT I WANT, IS THAT IT IS AFFORDABLE SIMILAR TO MANY OF THE OTHER THINGS WE HAVE HERE. IT IS NOT TOP-OF-THE-LINE OR BOTTOM OF THE LINE BUT IT IS AFFORDABLE SO THE PEOPLE CAN PLAY HERE AT A REASONABLE COST.

THERE'S NOT MANY PLACES YOU CAN PLAY GOLF FOR THIS AMOUNT. BUT THAT IS WHY PEOPLE WHO LIVE HERE LIKE IT. IT IS AN AMENITY. IT IS NOT ABOUT MAKING A PROFIT.

SO, HOW ARE WE GOING TO DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY. ANY ROAD WILL GET YOU THERE.

RIGHT NOW, I DON'T KNOW WHERE WE ARE GOING. HOW DO YOU DEFINE A BETTER GOLF COURSE, OR IS IT TO GET GOLF AND KEEP THE FEES THE SAME SO LOCAL PEOPLE CAN PLAY, THAT IS WHERE WE ARE. TO RESPOND? JUST AS WE TALK ABOUT THE RECREATION FACILITIES AND WE HAVE COUNTY RESIDENTS, WE CHARGE EVERYONE THE SAME RATE.

YOU CAN BE FROM ALASKA AND YOU GET THE FERNANDINA RATE. THERE IS A FLAW IN THE PRICING RIGHT THERE. SO, IT SHOULD BE AFFORDABLE FOR THE TAXPAYERS WHO SUPPORT THE AMENITY THAT THEY CHARGED TO VISITORS ONE IF YOU ARE CITY YOU PAY MORE.

GUESS WHAT, IF YOU ARE FROM OUT OF STATE, THIS SHOULD MEET THE NEEDS THAT IT IS A LOCAL TAX PAYERS AMENITY. THAT IS HOW YOU DO BOTH. THAT IS WHO THE CUSTOMER SPEAKS TO. IS NOT ISOLATED TO JUST CITY RESIDENTS.

>> I THINK WE ARE GIVING THE GOLF COURSE AWAY. I THINK IF WE DECIDE WE WANT TO MAKE AN IMPROVEMENT, IT IS A MATTER OF MONEY, IT IS NOT ROCKET SCIENCE.

IT IS MOWING THE GRASS CORRECTLY, HIRING THE RIGHT MANAGEMENT COMPANY, IF WE PUSH IT OFF FOR A LITTLE WHILE AND SAY, HOW CAN YOU IMPROVE THE GOLF COURSE CONSISTENTLY, THIS IS WHAT WE WILL SPEND, IT WILL BE CHEAPER FOR THE CITY TO RUN IN AND GIVE IT TO AN OUTSIDE COMPANY THAT WILL MAKE MONEY. THEY ARE NOT DOING IT FOR FREE. THE TRASH THAT WILL COME UP AND RUNNING A BUSINESS, I DON'T KNOW HOW THE CITY COULD RUN IT, IF WE GET BETTER RESULTS IF THEY HAVE THE SAME SPECS. IT IS ALL ABOUT THE SPECS AND THE MONEY.

>> I AM GOING TO MAKE A MOTION. >> WE HAVE A MOTION. VICE MAYOR MADE A MOTION.

>> YOU WITHDRAW YOUR MOTION. >> I MAKE A MOTION WE HAVE THE CITY GO FORWARD AND RUN THE GOLF COURSE FOR ONE YEAR END THE OPERATION IS REVIEWED AFTER ONE FULL BUDGET YEAR, THAT WOULD

[01:55:09]

COURSE AND HAVE IT REVIEWED FOR THE BUDGET YEAR 2022-2,023. >> SECOND.

>> IF WE PASS THIS, PEOPLE WORKING AT THE GOLF COURSE, WE WILL HIRE THEM FULL-TIME?

>> THAT IS UP TO THE CITY MANAGER. >> CAN YOU TALK ABOUT THAT?

>> WE WOULD POST WELL POSITIONED, ALL OF THE STAFF RIGHT NOW IS LISTED AS TEMPORARY AND SEASONAL. WE WOULD GO THROUGH THE HIRING PROCESS TO EXAMINE CURRENT EMPLOYEES AND WE ARE STILL LOOKING FOR ADDITIONAL EMPLOYEES.

THEY ARE LISTED RIGHT NOW AND SEASONAL EMPLOYEES WITH A TERM OF EMPLOYMENT NOT TO EXCEED

SEPTEMBER 30. WE WILL HAVE TO. >> PASSING THIS MOTION WOULD

CHANGE THEIR STATUS OF EMPLOYMENT? >> YES.

>> OUR PERSONNEL POLICY INDICATORS A TEMPORARY EMPLOYEE THERE ARE A NUMBER OF DAYS YOU CAN SERVE. THEY CAN'T DO IT UNDER OTHER CONDITIONS UNDER THE PERSONNEL POLICY. IT'S BECAUSE OF THE CLASSIFICATION SPIRIT.

>> THIS REQUIRES THE CITY MANAGER TO PLAN AND THAT PLAN SHOULD ADDRES THE SHORTFALLS.

>> I THINK THE CITY MANAGER WILL TAKE OVER THE GOLF COURSE AND TAKING OVER THAT, WILL COME UP

WITH A PLAN WHICH THEY WOULD DO ANYHOW,. >> MY POINT IS, THEY ARE NOT

INDEPENDENT,. >> I AM SAYING, WE ARE SATISFIED WITH THE CONDITION OF THE GOLF

COURSE. AS WE MOVE FORWARD TECH -- >> WE MAY NOT BE SATISFIED BUT WE ARE SATISFIED WITH THE PRICE WE ARE PAYING. (ROLL CALL).

>> IT PASSES 4-1. >> I DID NOT VOTE.

>> BEFORE YOU TAKE A BREAK, MAYOR YOU SAID I WAS THE MOST EXPENSIVE EMPLOYEE WORKING ON THIS BUT I ASSURE YOU MY FRIENDS KNOW I AM THE CHEAPEST PERSON IN THE CITY.

>> YOU ARE THE MOST EFFICIENT AND EFFECTIVE.

>> CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING IS BACK IN SESSION. WE ARE ON AGENDA ITEM SEVEN.

[7.7 LEASE AGREEMENT AMENDMENT, ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION - FHB AIRCRAFT HANGARS LLC]

[02:00:05]

>> ANY DISCUSSION? HOW DOES THIS AFFECT WHEN, THE TAX STRUCTURE.

THEY WOULD BE TAX AND THEY COULD RESELL IT TO THE ORIGINAL OWNER? >> YES, IF THEY SOLD IT THAT

WOULD GENERATE MORE TAXES. >> IF THEY PUT THEM IN, AND THEY WOULD BE VALUED.

>> I WANTED TO ASK THE QUESTION BECAUSE I WANTED NATE. >> WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE HANKER DISCUSSIONS AS A PRIVATE DEVELOPER BUILDING AND RELEASING IT OUT.

THE TAXES WOULD BE APPLIED. INDIVIDUAL OWNERSHIP OF THE HANKER UNITS.

THERE WOULD BE AN EXEMPTION AND THEN DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT. I'M NOT SURE, BUT THEY ARE HELPING US TO LOOK AT THAT THAT IS ONE OF THE DISCUSSIONS TAKING PLACE.

WE WILL GET SOME HELP ON THE. >> YOU BY HANKER ONE, AND IT IS VALUED AT WHATEVER, HE RESELLS

IT AND THE TAXES INCREASE. >> THAT IS TRUE. >> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? IF YOU CAN CALL THE VOTE, PLEASE. (ROLL CALL).

[7.8 LEASE ASSIGNMENT - PEMBROKE PINES]

>> IT PASSES 5-0. >> 7-POINT 8. LEASE ASSIGNMENT.

THIS DOES INCLUDE A VEHICLE PARKING LOT AND IT IS LEASED FROM THE AIRPORT.

THERE IS A BUYER FOR THE MEDICAL FACILITY, SO THE LEASE HAS TO BE TRANSFERRED.

>> RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. >> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ON 7.8 ANY DISCUSSION? PLEASE CALL THE VOTE. (ROLL CALL) IT PASSES 5-0. ITEM 7.9 AGREEMENT APPROVAL WDI

[7.9 AGREEMENT APPROVAL - WGI]

-- WGI. >> WE HAVE A RESOLUTION TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE CITY W G.I. WE DID RECEIVE AN WTI WAS RATED AS THE BEST THE CITY HAS NEGOTIATED THE AGREEMENT AND THE INTENT IS TO DO VISIONING SESSIONS FOR APPROXIMATELY $100,000 IN THE FIRST YEAR THEN MOVE FORWARD.

>> RECOMMEND APPROVAL. >> DO I HAVE A SECOND? >> I SECOND FOR DISCUSSION

PURPOSES. >> I HAVE A SECOND FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES.

COMMISSIONER ROSS. >> FIRST OFF, IT HAS TO DO WITH, >> COMMISSIONER ROSS I DO HAVE

THE SPEAKER. D WANT TO HEAR THAT? >> YOU ACTUALLY HAVE THREE

SPEAKERS. >> >> I ONLY HAVE ONE OTHER SHEET.

[02:05:25]

>> GOOD EVENING, I AM THIRD CHAIR OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD.

I WANT TO GIVE HISTORY FOR THE NEW COMMISSIONERS. THIS PROJECT STARTED OVER ONE YEAR AGO AND THE ORIGINAL PLAN WAS TO WORK IN THE, THE LAND. THERE WAS $100,000 PUT INTO THE BUDGET SO THERE WAS MONEY TO MOVE THIS FORWARD. DURING CONVERSATIONS WITH THE DIFFERENT COMMISSIONERS WE WERE ASKED BY THIS COMMISSIONER, INSTEAD OF WORKING, GO INTO A SESSION AND THIS WAS DONE IN 1999 AND UPDATED IN 2005. IN FACT THEY WERE PART OF THE ORIGINAL GROUP. MUCH HAS CHANGED SINCE THEN, IT MADE SENSE TO REDO AND REWORK THE SESSION SO WE WENT BACK, AND AS FOR, A PROPOSAL TO DO THE COMPONENT WHICH THEY PROVIDED AND IT IS INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET. WE ARE READY TO START.

WE CAN START WORKING BEFORE THE END OF THE MONTH, THE FULL PAB, HAS APPROVED THIS PROPOSAL AND THIS REQUEST AND WE ARE ALSO, ALL OF US ARE READY TO MOVE FORWARD.

WE STRONGLY URGE YOU TO MOVE THIS PROJECT FORWARD. THE COST IS REASONABLE FOR THE WORK THAT WE WILL DELIVER, THEY ARE AN APPROVED VENDOR THIS IS NOT A MATTER OF CREATING A POWERPOINT AT THE END OF THE DAY AND PUTTING IT IN YOUR BINDER LIKE MANY OF THESE THINGS GET DONE. WE WILL WORK CLOSELY WITH WGI TO PULL IN THE APPROPRIATE ALSO THE PLAN ON HOW TO GET THROUGH THIS. THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT STEP GETTING READY TO WORK ON THE COMP PLAN AND THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE WHICH IS A MORE IMPORTANT COMPONENT.

I URGE YOU TO PASS THIS. WE JUST NEED YOUR APPROVAL SO WE CAN GET STARTED.

>> ANGELA THAT I PRONOUNCE THAT CORRECTLY? >> GOOD EVENING.

WE ARE THE CONSULTANTS THAT WERE SELECTED FOR THIS PROJECT I JUST WANT TO SAY WE ARE ANXIOUS AND COMMITTED TO STARTING THIS PROJECT AND WORKING WITH THE CITY.

I THINK IT WAS FORWARD THINKING TO MAKE THE CHANGE FROM WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY REQUESTED.

IT IS AN IMPORTANT STEP, AND TO REALLY BE THE GUIDE FOR THE NEXT 20 YEARS.

I AM AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. >> CHAPTER ONE, CHAPTER ONE DOES THAT ENCOMPASS THE 100,000? OR IS IT PART OF CHAPTER TWO. WHAT ENCOMPASSES CHAPTER

1 WORKS. >> PHASE ONE OF THE SCOPE? >> I'M LOOKING AT THE EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY. >> I AM LOOKING AT THE DRAFT OUTLINE.

CAN YOU ANSWER THAT QUESTION. >> THIS HAS CHAPTER 1-CHAPTER TWO.

[02:10:50]

SCOPE. >> MR. MAYOR, FOR THE REST OF YOUR COMMISSIONERS THIS IS LISTED IN THE AGENDA PACKET AS AN AGENDA VERSION TO POINT OUT. THAT IS PART OF YOUR PACKAGE SO YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO PULL IT UP ONLINE. WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET ADD THIS

IS THE -- THIS IS THE ENTIRE OUTLINE. >> THANK YOU.

COMMISSIONER ROSS, THERE ARE NO OTHER SPEAKER SO YOU HAVE THE FLOOR.

>> THANK YOU. WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY IS NUMBER ONE, I WANT TO COMMEND THE PLANNING BOARD FOR COMING UP WITH THE PORT AUTHORITY FACILITY'S OFFICE.

THEY HAD IT THERE BEFORE, AND PUT IT INTO A WORKABLE DOCUMENT. THE PLANNING STAFF SAID, WHEN THIS STARTED THEY HAD THE 20 HOURS PER WEEK ON THE PLANNERS HAD TEN HOURS PER WEEK.

THIS WAS DONE AND THEN WE BROUGHT IT UP INTO 05. -- WE BROUGHT IT UP IN 2005.

IF YOU GO THROUGH THIS SOME OF THESE HAVE BEEN RESOLVED SOME OF THEM HAVEN'T.

I DO NOT THINK, $100,000, $100,000 FOR A VISION PLAN IS A REASONABLE AMOUNT FOR PEOPLE TO HIRE A CONSULTANT TO TELL THE CITIZENS OF THE CITY, WHAT THEY WILL THEY WILL GO THROUGH THE EXISTING CONDITIONS. WE ALL KNOW THIS WE ALL KNOW THE HOUSING.

WE DON'T WHAT THE COMMERCIAL I THINK THIS IS AN EFFECTIVE USE OF MONEY.

WE ARE GUESTS IN THE FUTURE, YOU WRITE A SERIES OF QUESTIONS THAT YOU SUBMIT THEM TO EXPERTS AND COME UP WITH THEIR ANSWERS TO PREDICT THE FUTURE AND THINK YOU PUT THAT INTO A DOCUMENT.

WHAT I WOULD HOPE IS THAT, WHAT THEY DID BACK IN 2020, THEY TOOK A LIST OF PEOPLE WHO REPRESENTED A VAST PART OF THE COMMUNITY. THEY ARE PROPOSING THAT DO NOT BRING IN, I WILL SAVE THE USUAL SUSPECTS, IT IS THE SAME THING OVER AND OVER AGAIN. IF YOU GO BACK TO THE 2028 STEERING COMMITTEE THAT PEOPLE FROM THE SIERRA CLUB, LARGE REPRESENTATIVES, I WOULD THINK WE CAN FIND 50-100 PEOPLE WHO ARE EXPERTS IN THE COMMUNITY WHO CERTAINLY KNOW AND ASK THEM WHAT IS YOUR VISION, AND WE HAVE 11 POINTS AND OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHAT ARE YOUR PLANS AND HAVE THEM WRITE IT AND PRODUCE IT, EITHER THE STAFF CAN DO IT OR HIRE SOMEONE AND THEN COME TO

[02:15:03]

WHAT DO PEOPLE WANT, TAKE THAT LIST OF PEOPLE. I'M JUST FLUSHING, THIS IS AN IDEA. TAKE THAT LIST OF PEOPLE WHICH IS A LARGE LIST AND GET THEM TO PARTICIPATE AND GET SOMEONE FROM EACH HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. WE DON'T DO THAT.

WE DON'T GET THE WHOLE COMMUNITY. I WANT TO HEAR WHAT THE WHOLE COMMUNITY HAVE TO SAY. I HAVE ANOTHER ONE HERE. THEIR VISION STATEMENT, IS ONE PAGE. A VISION STATEMENT IS AND IT GOES THROUGH EACH ONE OF THESE MAJOR TOPICS, WHAT DO THE PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY WANT TO SEE. WE ARE SPENDING $100,000 TO COME UP WITH ANOTHER PLAN THAT WILL CORRECT THE SPIRIT HELP MANY OF YOU, WERE EVEN AWARE THIS EXISTED? I HAVE TO AS PEOPLE, NO ONE KNOWS ABOUT IT.

A ONE-PAGE DOCUMENT THAT WE CAN USE, THIS IS OUR VISION. THIS IS OUR LONE STAR.

WE CAN GET THE PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY TO COME UP WITH THE PROCESS TO COME UP WITH THE VISION WITHOUT GOING THROUGH THE STEPS THAT THE CONSULTANTS DO. TRIED AND TRUE WILL CONSULTANTS DO WHETHER THEY COME IN WITH THAT SHREDS OR OTHER THINGS. I HAVE BEEN THROUGH THIS.

IT IS THE SAME PEOPLE, THEY ARE GOOD PEOPLE BUT THE SAME PEOPLE THEY DON'T REPRESENT A LOT OF PARTS OF THE COMMUNITY FOR A LOT OF REASONS. SO I WILL NOT VOTE TO SPEND $100,000 OR A PLANT WHICH I DON'T THINK WILL BE PARTICULARLY HELPFUL.

I DO THINK, I WOULD LIKE THE PAB TAKE THE LEAD. THEY DID THE LEAD ON PUTTING SOMETHING LIKE THIS TOGETHER. THE SAME THING WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

I WOULD HOPE THE PAD WOULD TAKE THREE MONTHS AND DO THIS LIKE THEY DID THE ONE BEFORE.

WE DON'T NEED TO SPEND $400,000 WITH $300,000, IN MY OPINION. THE LDC IS ANOTHER STORY.

I THINK THAT NEEDS TO GO OUT TO THE PROFESSIONALS ONCE WE HAVE THESE TWO THINGS.

SO I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING SPENDING $100,000 FOR A STUDY THAT I THINK WILL NOT GET US

ANYWHERE. >> MOVING FORWARD, THEY I HAPPEN TO BE ON THE PAB, WHEN WE DID WRITE THE WHOLE THING. I THINK THEY WILL COME UP WITH GOOD INFORMATION, WE DON'T HAVE A CLUE WHAT'S GOING ON HOPEFULLY, THIS AND THE CONSULTANTS CAN COME UP WITH SOMETHING. THE GOVERNMENT AS RUN-ON CONSULTANTS THE THIS WILL HAVE TO GO OUT. I DO SUPPORT IT. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT WE DID PUT OUT AN RFP WE DID ACCEPT BIDS THIS WAS A REQUESTS FOR QUALIFICATIONS.

[02:20:04]

BUDGETED BEFORE THIS YEAR END GO AHEAD INTO A VISION. >> I UNDERSTAND, I GUESS MY FOLLOW-UP QUESTION IS, SO THE COMMISSION BEFORE US, APPROVED THIS AND WE PUT IT IN THE BUDGET

>> IF YOU COULD ANSWER THE QUESTION. >> IN THE BUDGET THERE WAS $87,000 PUT IN AND THEN THERE WAS $25,000 AND THE CITY PLANNING DEPARTMENT WE COULD NEVER COME TO AN AGREEMENT ON WHAT THE JOB WAS SUPPOSED TO BE AND WHAT IT DOES.

SO WE STARTED, MS. GIBSON ACTUALLY WROTE AN RFP FOR THE REWRITE.

IT WAS THEN CHANGE TO AN RF REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS. SO THAT, THE VENDORS CAME THROUGH THE PROCESS, AND WE ENDED UP WITH FOUR, THAT THEY DID A FULL DAY SET OF DISCUSSIONS ON AND WE RANK THEM AND THEY CAME OUT, FROM THAT.FORWARD, WE WOULD START DISCUSSIONS WITH W G.I. SO THE CITY COMMISSION, DID IN FACT APPROVE THEM AS THE PREFERRED VENDOR FOR THIS PROJECT. THERE IS APPROXIMATELY $100,000 AND THE BUDGET BETWEEN WHAT WAS SITTING IN THE BUDGET AND THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT'S BUDGET, AND THAT CITY COMMISSION ASKED US TO REFOCUS ON PUTTING TOGETHER A VISION PLAN, WHICH IS MORE THAN JUST A FIVE PAGE POWERPOINT. IF I'M DOING VISION FOR 2025, I DO NOT NEED TO TALK TO A BUNCH OF 70-YEARS-OLD SPIRIT -- 70 -YEAR-OLDS.

>> I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION. THIS WAS UNANIMOUSLY VOTED ON AND WE HAD CONTRADICTIONS IN THE

[02:25:28]

PLANET WE NEED TO FIX IT. >> OF VISION PLAN, IS IMPORTANT. IT DRIVES THE ( INDISCERNIBLE ) I THINK SPENDING $100,000 TO DO WHAT OTHERS CAN DO FOR MUCH LESS MONEY, WITH MUCH LESS, WE HAVE A BUNCH OF EXPERTS HERE. WE NEED TO TALK TO THE CONSERVATION PEOPLE.

WE NEED TO TALK TO THE CHAMBER. WE NEED A BROAD BREATH, 100 PEOPLE WHO ARE WILLING TO COMMIT THEIR TIME, TO COME UP WITH WHAT I AM PROPOSING, OF WHAT THE CITY WANTS TO DO.

I JUST BELIEVE, INSANITY IS DOING THE SAME THING OVER EXPECTING DIFFERENT RESULTS.

THIS IS THE CONSULTANT RESULT. WE HAVE HAVE A LOT OF DEDICATED, SMART PEOPLE ON THIS COMMITTEE.

I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO SPEND $100,000. I READ THROUGH THIS.

I DON'T NEED TO HAVE A GS REPORT TO ASK SOMEONE WHAT DO YOU WANT THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM TO LOOK LIKE OR EVEN TAKE TEN YEARS. I, I HAVE CHANGED AS I HAVE DONE IN THIS JOB. I HAVE BECOME DISILLUSIONED WITH CONSULTANTS.

WE SPEND A LOT OF MONEY ON THEM AND NOT MUCH HAPPENS. IT IS JUST ANOTHER PAN -- PLAN.

I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT GETS US TO WHERE WE WANT TO GO. HERE WE HAVE A PLAN, THAT NOBODY KNOWS ABOUT, I AM LOOKING FOR INVOLVING THE COMMUNITY IN A WAY TO TRY SOMETHING DIFFERENT TO GET THE COMMUNITY TO SAY, I THINK THEY WILL SAY WE WILL KEEP IT THE WAY IT IS.

WE LIKE FERNANDINA BEACH. I DON'T THINK I NEED A CONSULTANT TO SPENT $100,000 TO SAY THAT. I LIKE THE PARK SYSTEM. I DON'T NEED TO SPEND $100,000

TO GET THE ANSWER. THAT IS WHAT I BELIEVE. >> I JUST WANTED TO TURN ON MY

LIGHTS AND SPEAK. >> THAT IS THE ONLY THINK I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH ERIC.

[02:30:02]

>> I CANNOT SUPPORT SPENDING THAT KIND OF MONEY, HOW DO YOU COME UP WITH A DIVERSE GROUP OF PEOPLE, AND WHAT KIND OF QUESTIONS, AND TAKE QUESTIONS, THERE ARE 11 PARTS TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. WHAT DOES THE COMMUNITY WANT TO SEE.

THEY ARE THE EXPERTS, THEY LIVE HERE. THEY KNOW WHAT THEY WANT.

>> WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IS A SECOND MOTION TO REFER THIS TO COME BACK WITH SIX WEEKS, WITH A

PLAN. >> SO, IF YOU HOLD UP YOUR PIECE OF PAPER, ANY ONE PAGE, SO I HAVE LED MANY COMPANIES THROUGH THE PROCESS. HERE IS WHY MOST FAIL, THEY ARE ABSENT OF A STRATEGY AND IMPLEMENTATION PLAN. MOST VISIONING DOCUMENTS, YOU SPEND MONEY ON A CONSULTANT, AND I SAW CLIENTS TAKE THAT VISION AND STICK IT ON THE SHELF BECAUSE THEY WERE SO BUSY DOING THE DAY TO DAY OPERATION OF THE COMPANY TO KEEP THE LIGHTS ON.

THAT IS NUMBER ONE. VISION WITHOUT STRATEGY AND IMPLEMENTATION IS USELESS.

NUMBER TWO, I BELIEVE STAGE II OF THIS PROJECT, AND IN OUR DISCUSSIONS ARE PLANTED $300,000 $300,000 FOR THE PAST TWO MONTHS COMMISSIONER ROSS AND OUR WORKSHOPS OF ASSETS, HOW WOULD WE PAY FOR XYZ HOW WILL WE PAY FOR THIS. GUESS WE CAN INVEST $100,000 TO GET THIS DONE. WE DON'T HAVE $300,000. WE NEED $300,000 FOR INFRASTRUCTURE. MY FEAR IS EVEN AS WE GO FORWARD, THIS WON'T GO ON THE SHELF UNTIL WE HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO FUND IT. HERE IS MY OTHER POINT.

THIS COMMISSION CHANGES EVERY TWO YEARS. IF YOU WANT TO KNOW WHY STRATEGY AND IMPLEMENTATION FAILS IN THE CITY, IT IS BECAUSE THE COMMISSION CHANGES SEATS, EVERY TWO YEARS. AND THE VISION OF THE IDEA OF WHAT THIS CITY IS ABOUT AND THE PRIORITIES, THEY CHANGE EVERY TWO YEARS. ALL YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT IS THE WATERFRONT PARK AS THE PRIME EXAMPLE OF THE MONEY SPENT ON THE PARK AND THE COMMISSION TURNED OVER AND THEY CHANGE THEIR MIND EVERY TIME. MY FEAR IS IN THE INVESTMENT OF THE 100,000 LEAKAGE PHASE ONE DONE AND THEN THE CRITICAL PART OF IMPLEMENTATION, WE CANNOT FUND IT. THAT IS MY FEAR. I AM NOT AGAINST SPENDING BECAUSE WE AGREED TO DO IT AND WE THOUGHT IT WAS A GOOD IDEA, THEY SELECTED A CONSULTANT, BUT THE RETURN ON INVESTMENT, IS THE STRATEGY. AND WHEN ARE WE GOING TO GET TO THAT. IF SOMEONE HAS A SOLUTION TO THAT QUESTION SO THE VISION STATEMENT I AGREE, THAT IS THE FIRST STEP. AND THE STRATEGY IS THE SECOND STEP WHICH IS THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. WE DO A VISION STATEMENT THEN WE DO IT SIMILAR TO WHAT WE DID LAST TIME. WE GO THROUGH EACH ONE OF THE IMPLEMENTATIONS AND DO THE PAB AND DO WE GO OVER THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, UPDATE.

IT DOES NOT HAVE TO BE REWRITTEN IT JUST NEEDS TO BE UPDATED. THAT WOULD BE THE PLAN.

I DON'T THINK THAT PLAN COSTS $400,000. THEY MAY NEED SOME CONSULTING FOR ADDITIONAL HELP BUT IT IS NOT $400,000. THAT IS WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST.

[02:35:02]

>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THIS? >> WHEN WE REWROTE THE PLAN, WE'VE LOOKED AT HOW MANY POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES WE'VE MET. WE ONLY MET ONE THIRD OF THEM.

WE TALKED ABOUT THAT. WHEN YOU GO OUT, JUST COPYING OVER IS NOT THE ANSWER.

WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN THERE IS SOMETHING WE'VE NEVER DONE.

WE HAVE CONSULTANTS AND PEOPLE, IN THIS AREA, I THINK THEY CAN BE OF VALUE.

THE COMPOUND WILL NOT CHANGE THE REQUIREMENTS TO BE THERE. YOU ARE RIGHT.

THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SHOULD NOT JUST BE REWRITTEN IT SHOULD BE ELIMINATED SOME CHANGE.

>> ANY OTHER THOUGHTS ON THIS. HEARING NONE, DEPUTIES CAN YOU CALL THE VOTE?

>> CAN YOU. REPORTER: THE MOTION. >>

>> WHAT IS THE AGREEMENT WITH PHASE ONE COLLECTS. >> COMMISSIONER ROSS?

>> NO. (ROLL CALL). >> I WAS TRYING TO ( INDISCERNIBLE ). WE SUPPORTED WHEN THE MONEY WAS APPROVED WE SUPPORTED IT.

WE SUPPORTED THE SELECTION. I THINK WHEN YOU SUPPORT SOMETHING, ORIGINALLY, AND THERE WERE OTHER MEMBERS WHO SUPPORTED IT. I DON'T THINK IT WAS $300,000

GOING FORWARD. >> THANKS FOR STOPPING. THAT MOTION PASSES 3-2.

[8.1 CODE AMENDMENT - PARADES]

>> WE ARE JUST BRINGING THE TITLE OF. AND ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF FERNANDINA BEACH AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF VERSIONING OF EACH BY AMENDING CHAPTER 65, RECREATIONAL FACILITIES AND SPECIAL EVENTS BY CREATING ARTICLE WON IN GENERAL AMENDING SECTIONS ONE, TWO, AND THREE TO INCLUDE DEFINITION GENERAL PROVISIONS BY REPEALING AND RESERVING SECTIONS 4-9 AMENDING SECTIONS 11-29 BY THE REAR RIDGE THE CURRENT GOAL TO FIT THE WITHIN SAID ARTICLE BY CREATING SECTION 31 AND 32 UNDER ARTICLE TWO TO INCORPORATE CURRENT CODE UNDER SAID ARTICLE BY REPEALING

[02:40:06]

APPLICATION. >> I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE. >> A SEVEN DAY APPLICATION.

>> OF EMOTION AND A SECOND PERIOD I HAVE A PUBLIC SPEAKER ON THIS.

>> SHE HAS WORKED VERY HARD. >> IF YOU WILL STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

>> FIRST I WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU FOR APPROVING THE WGI PROJECT, WE WILL NOT DISAPPOINT YOU. WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THE FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY AS ALL OF YOU. THAT EVENING, ( INDISCERNIBLE ) I WOULD LIKE TO APPLAUD THE CITY ATTORNEY ENTER STAFF AND UPDATING THE ORDINANCE. OVER THE LAST YEAR THE CITY HAS SEEN UNPLANNED AND UNAPPROVED PARADES AND EVENTS. I THINK THERE MAY HAVE BEEN ONE, BUT THEY DID NOT HAVE PROPER PLANNING FOR THE SHORT NOTICE EVENT AND NOW THERE IS AN ORDINANCE THAT IS BETTER THAN BEFORE, AND I LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING HOW IT WILL WORK IN THE FUTURE. TIMING, FEES AND THE ABILITY TO ADJUST ON AN AS-NEEDED BASIS.

THE CHANGE HAD TO DO IT MY CONCERNS ON TIMING. IT CHANGES THE APPLICATION FEE.

JUST TO GIVE YOU PERSPECTIVE, OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS THE CITY HAS WAIVED 45% OF ALL PARADE PERMITS. CLEARLY THE COST TO APPLY FOR A PARADE PERMIT IS NOT AN ISSUE.

I ALSO DID INFORMATION AS REQUESTED TO UNDERSTAND WHAT WAS THE COST TO THE POLICE FOR THE PARADES AND MARCHES. BASED ON INFORMATION, IT WAS MINOR.

IN FACT, I DON'T SEE WHERE THE POLICE ARE TRYING TO CHARGE FOR CLOSING STREETS WHILE AN EVENT GOES ON. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE ARE CAUTIOUS AND CONSERVATIVE AND ANY ADDITIONAL CHARGES, THE COST OF OFF DUTY POLICE SUPPORT IF REQUIRED WILL BE PAID TO THE OFF-DUTY POLICE OFFICER AND THAT WILL CONTINUE. WE ARE LIVING IN A SECOND CIVIL RIGHTS ERA AND IT STARTED WITH THE DEATH OF TRAVE ON MARTIN AND HE HAD FEVER PITCH WITH THE MURDER OF GEORGE FLOYD. WE WILL SEE PUBLIC SPEECH TYPE EVENTS AND THE COMING MONTHS AND YEARS. I WANT TO THANK THE CITY AND THE POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR SUPPORTING THE CITIZENS TO SPEAK OUT FAIRLY AND EQUITABLY WITHOUT SIGNIFICANT AND BURDENSOME REDTAPE. I BELIEVE THIS NEW ORDINANCE IS A BIG MOVE IN THAT DIRECTION AND

FOR THAT I ASKED YOU TO APPROVE THIS ORDINANCE. >> THANK YOU.

WAS THERE A MOTION? >> COMMISSIONER ROSS. >> I WILL SUPPORT THIS MOTION BUT I WILL LIKE TO MAKE ONE CHANGE. I WOULD SAY THE PERMIT DENIED THAT INSTEAD OF THE APPEAL GOING TO THE CITY MANAGER, ( SPEAKING AWAY FROM MICROPHONE) IF WE DENY

A PERMIT IT GOES? >> IS ACTUALLY CITY COMMISSION. >> IT IS A SHORT FUSE, SEVEN

[02:45:14]

>> I WOULD LIKE TO AMEND IT TO DO THAT. >> I WILL AMEND THE MOTION TOO.

>> MR. MAYOR, I BELIEVE I CAN ACCEPT AS THE MOTION MAKER I CAN ACCEPT THIS IN A FRIENDLY

MANNER. I ACCEPT YOUR AMENDMENT. >> SO COMMISSIONER YOUR LIGHT IS

ON. >> I ACCEPT YOUR MOTION. >> SO, THE REALITY IS, WE DID HAVE A PARADE LAST THURSDAY. THAT WILL KEEP HAPPENING. THERE IS NOT ANYTHING WE CAN DO ABOUT IT BECAUSE IT IS NOT OUR CULTURE TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT. OUR CULTURE IS A FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION, A FREEDOM OF GATHERING, AND AS LONG AS YOU DO IT IN A PEACEFUL AND ROMANTIC MANNER IT WILL NOT ENDANGER ANY OTHER PEOPLE. I AGREE WITH YOUR AMENDMENT, IT IS ONE OF THESE THINGS THAT WE CAN PUT IT ON THE BOOKS, BUT THE INFORMAL SHRIMP FESTIVAL PARADE WILL KEEP HAPPENING, AND THE PROTESTS WILL CONTINUE TO HAPPEN.

I SUPPORT THE PARADE AMENDMENT, BUT I WANT TO MAKE THAT CLEAR. MR. ROSS.

>> IF THE CITY ATTORNEY WOULD COME BACK, WITH THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE RECENTLY PASSED

LEGISLATION, I THINK IT WAS CALLED THE ANTI- RIOTING LAW. >> HOUSE BILL NUMBER 1.

>> THERE WAS A LOT ABOUT SPONTANEOUS THINGS. HOW WILL THAT AFFECT THIS?

>> DEPUTY CLERK, CALL THE ROLL. (ROLL CALL). >> I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT, HOW THAT AMENDMENT WAS DISMAYED, THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT WHATSOEVER.

THAT IS DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE DECIDED TO DO. THAT IS HOW I RECOMMENDED SINCE 2009 WE DON'T HAVE TO VOTE ON THE MAIN MOTION AND WE COULD AMEND.

I AM JUST SAYING. IT'S YOUR RULES. I JUST WANT YOU TO KNOW I AM PAYING ATTENTION. AND A WAIVER FOR FEES IS STILL 60 DAYS, IN ORDER TO GET YOUR

FEES WAIVED YOU STILL HAVE TO HIT THE DEADLINE. >> ITEM A POINT TO -- ITEMS

[8.2 NOISE - PLAINLY AUDIBLE]

8-POINT TO NOISE PLAINLY AUDIBLE. >> IT WILL NOT TAKE TOO LONG FOR ME TOO READ THIS. A COUPLE OF CHANGES THAT WERE RECOMMENDED AND THE LANGUAGE I PROMISED YOU FOR THE EXEMPTION AND I REALLY JUST NEED TO READ IT INTO THE RECORD.

ORDINANCE 2021-15 AMENDING CHAPTER 42 ARTICLE FOUR NOISE BY AMENDING SECTION 140 LEGISLATIVE FINDINGS AMENDING SECTION 141 DEFINITIONS AMENDING SECTION 142 RELATING TO APPLICABILITY AMENDING SECTION 143 FOR CLARITY AMENDING SECTION 144 TO INCLUDE MEASUREMENT STANDARDS AMENDING SECTION 145 TO ENUMERATE RESTRICTIONS, AMENDING SECTION 146 RELATED TO ENFORCEMENT, AMENDING SECTION 147 FOR CLARITY, AMENDING SECTION 148 PROVIDING EXCEPTIONS, AMENDING SECTION 149 PROVIDING FOR VARIANCES, CREATING SECTION 150, ADMINISTRATIVE POLICIES PROVIDING FORCE VARIABILITY AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. IN SECTION 42 -- 141 I WOULD LIKE TO OFFER AMENDMENTS TO WHAT YOU SEE BEFORE YOU. THIS IS THE THIRD OR FOURTH TIME YOU HAVE SEEN IT BUT IT IS BACK TO THE FIRST READING AND IT WILL COME BACK TO YOU IF IT IS

[02:50:01]

SHOULD NOT BE UNDER COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. >> ARE YOU KEEPING UP WITH THAT?

>> I HAVE IT ALL WRITTEN DOWN. >> THANK YOU. I HEARD YOUR KEYBOARD GOING

FURIOUSLY. >> THE DEFINITION OF MUSIC AMPLIFICATION OR REPRODUCTION EQUIPMENT SHOULD BE CHANGED TO AMPLIFIED SOUND, I WANT TO THANK THE CITIZEN AND ATTORNEY FOR SOME OF THESE SUGGESTIONS. AMPLIFIED SOUND TO REPLACE MUSIC OR REPRODUCTION BECAUSE THERE COULD BE MANY NOT JUST MUSIC. UNDER SECTION 42, THIS IS WHERE THE TIMES, THE CITIZEN SHOWED ME THAT, I GOT THE TIME WRONG. THE FOLLOWING RESTRICTIONS APPLY FOR MIXED USE IN CERTAIN DISTRICTS,. THIS IS NOISE AS PLAINLY AUDIBLE AT A DISTANCE OF 25 FEET IT SHOULD SAY 11:00 P.M. UNTIL 3:5D SATURDAY. THAT IS LATE NIGHT HOURS.

FOR DAYTIME HOURS, IT SHOULD CHANGE AND SAY NOISE AT A DISTANCE OF 150 FEET FROM ITS SOURCE FROM THE HOURS OF 4:00 P.M. UNTIL 9:59 P.M. MONDAY-THURSDAY 4:00 P.M. UNTIL 10:59 P.M. ON FRIDAY, SATURDAY NOON UNTIL 11:59 P.M. AND NOON UNTIL 11:59 P.M. ON SUNDAY.

UNDER THE EXCEPTIONS. I WILL READ IT INTO THE RECORD, NOISE GENERATED BY INDUSTRIAL OPERATIONS LOCATED IN AREAS ZONED I1 OR I2. THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SUBSECTION WOULD NOT APPLY WHEN A NUISANCE APPLIES OR ILLEGAL OPERATIONS OF ANY SECTION THAT

OPERATIONAL OR ANCILLARY ACTIVITIES. >> THANK YOU MA'AM.

DO I HAVE A MOTION? >> RECOMMEND APPROVAL. >> SECOND.

>> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. I HAVE SPEAKERS ON THE NOISE ORDINANCE, LET'S PROCEED WITH

THE SPEAKERS. PAUL. >> STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS

FOR THE RECORD. >> ( INDISCERNIBLE ) JUST HERE REALLY QUICK I AM HERE TO SAY, I AM NOT SURE HOW THE WHOLE NOISE PEACE AND MUSIC GOT TO CITY GOVERNMENT.

I'M A LITTLE FIRED UP ON THIS ONE. IT IS SO UNIQUE TO THE TOWN, ESPECIALLY THE DOWNTOWN AREA. WHEN I CAME TO FERNANDINA BEACH, THE ONE THING THAT TURNED ME ON THE MOST, IT IS THE FIVE WITH THE MUSIC. FOR MYSELF, I DO GO TO THE BARS, NOT REALLY A DRINK, I'M NOT AN AVID DRINKER, I ACTUALLY GOES -- GO MORE FOR THE MUSIC.

I'M BAFFLED OF THE CITIZEN OF THE CITY, HOW SOMETHING HAS TURNED SO COMPLEX.

IT SEEMS TO ME FROM WATCHING THE WHOLE EVENT THERE WERE MULTIPLE COMPETING VOICES WITHIN THE COMMUNITY. WHEN IT SHOULD BE, HAVE THE MUSIC, AVID END AT 10:00 P.M.

[02:55:06]

YOU'RE JUST GOING TO COMPLICATE A SIMPLE THING THAT IS PART OF FERNANDINA.

I DO HAVE A QUESTION. HOWEVER I NEED TO GET THE ANSWER WHETHER IT IS IMMEDIATELY OR IF I CAN SIMPLY DO SOMETHING FOR THE CITY MANAGER. I WANT TO KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE COMPLAINED ABOUT THE MUSIC? HOW MANY COMPLAINTS CAME IN FROM DECEMBER UNTIL NOW?

DOES ANYONE KNOW? >> IT IS NOT MUSIC. IT IS NOISE COMPLAINTS AND OVER 150 IN THE CITY. I BROUGHT UP THE STATISTICS. THIS IS NOT ABOUT MUSIC, THIS IS

ABOUT VOLUME. IT IS NOT ABOUT MUSIC. >> MY SECOND QUESTION, OF THE

150, WAS IT WON HUNDRED 50 DIFFERENT COMPLAINTS? >> YES.

I AM THINKING OF A NUMBER OUT OF MY HEAD. >> OUT OF THE 150 IT ALL CAME

FROM THE BUSINESS DISTRICT? >> NOTE, FROM THE WHOLE CITY. >> OKAY, THANK YOU.

>> STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. >> I LIVE AT 22 SOUTH SECOND STREET. I GET UPSET WHEN THEY SAY 10-11 EVERY NIGHT.

IT IS EVERY NIGHT OF THE WEEK. IT IS SO MILD, THERE IS NOWHERE IN MY HOME I CAN GO TO GET AWAY FROM IT. THAT IS A SEVERE ISSUE FOR ME. THIS PAST WEEKEND THE BOATHOUSE PLAYED LOWER SO WHEN I CAME INSIDE I DID NOT HEAR IT AND I THOUGHT WONDERFUL.

THERE ARE A FEW THINGS THAT DID NOT AFFECT OUT THE PATRIOTS ENJOYED THE MUSIC.

IT DID NOT SLOW DOWN VISITS AND I COULD GO INTO MY HOME AND NOT HEAR IT.

IT PROVES THAT LOWERING THE VOLUME WILL NOT AFFECT THEIR BUSINESS.

THERE WAS AN ARTICLE WRITTEN, THE CITY COMMISSION HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS.

THIS WAS COMPLAINTS BY CITIZENS THAT WERE AFFECTED BY THIS. NO ONE WANTS TO BAN LIVE MUSIC BEING PLAYED OUTSIDE. I WOULD JUST LIKE FOR THEM TO BE EQUITABLE ON THE VOLUME.

SOMETHING WE BOTH CAN LIVE WITH. THAT IS ALL I HAVE TO SAY. >> MR. MICHAEL RITTER.

>> IF YOU WILL STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. >> MY NAME IS MICHAEL RITTER I LIVE AT 409 CEDAR VERNON IN THE BEACH, FLORIDA. I HAVE BEEN ACCUSED OF STATING THAT THE CITY COMMISSIONERS ARE TRYING TO PUT A STOP TO ALL LIVE MUSIC.

I WANT TO GO ON RECORD AND SAY I HAVE NEVER SAID THAT AND I DON'T BELIEVE THAT.

I BELIEVE YOU ARE TRYING TO WORK TOWARDS A COMMON GOAL. I DON'T THINK YOU ARE TRYING TO PUT A STOP TO BUY THE MUSIC. I DO BELIEVE THE PRESIDENT ORDINANCE IN FRONT OF YOU TONIGHT, WILL TECHNICALLY PUT A CO BOSCH ON ALL LIVE MUSIC. THE REASON FOR THAT IS, ANY INSTRUMENT IS AUDIBLE FROM 150 FEET, TOTALLY ON AMPLIFIED. A HUMAN VOICE IS AUDIBLE.

NOT AMPLIFIED. THAT IS NOT A REALISTIC GOAL OF. TO PROVE THIS, I WENT OUT TODAY WITH MY WIFE. SHE STOOD ON THE STREET AND I PLAYED THIS GUITAR I SAID IF YOU

[03:00:05]

I MOVED 200 FEET, ONE CORD, HER HAND WAS UP. SHE SAID SHE PROBABLY COULD HAVE AVERTED OVER 200 FEET. THIS LITTLE GUITAR. TO PROVE THE POINT, I JUST WANT TO SHOW YOU. EXCUSE ME.

CAN YOU HEAR THAT. I AM RUNNING OUT OF TIME HERE. THAT IS AGAINST THE NOISE ORDINANCE. THAT IS 200 FEET OUTSIDE. I THINK THE ORDINANCE THAT YOU ARE PROPOSING IS TOO RESTRICTIVE AND I AM REQUESTING THAT, YOU GO BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD AND COME UP WITH AN ORDINANCE THAT WILL WORK PROPERLY FOR THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY.

>> AMY. >> STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

>> MY NAME IS AMY I LIVE AT 2702 MCGREGOR BOULEVARD, FERNANDINA BEACH, I ALSO OWN PROPERTY ON ASH STREET IN BERNADINO, FLORIDA WHICH IS THE PATIO PLACE RESTAURANT WHICH USED TO HAVE MUSIC AND AS IT NO LONGER BECAUSE OF THE CURRENT ORDINANCE.

THE MARINA REPAIR, BEACH WALK AU PAIRS, IMPACT FEES, PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT, A MILLION BLUFF.

ROAD MAINTENANCE, BEACH PARK AND YET AGAIN, THE NOISE ORDINANCE. ALL PROJECTS, DUTIES AND PLANS MISMANAGED IN THE PAST TEN YEARS THAT I'VE LIVED HERE, I DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW OUR CITY CAN GET INTO SO MANY LAWSUITS. DOMINATE LAWSUITS DO WE NEED TO HAVE.

MY WISH FOR THIS WONDERFUL CITY IS THAT THE CITIZENS BAND TOGETHER HOLD MEETINGS, INTERVIEW CANDIDATES AND VOTE IN A COMMISSION AND CITY MANAGEMENT TEAM THAT HAS BUSINESS MANAGEMENT EXPERIENCE. TO RUN THE CITY AS A BUSINESS. CREATE LONG-TERM GOALS.

PROJECT PLANS AND HOLD PEOPLE ACCOUNTABLE. THE NOISE ORDINANCE IS ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF COMPLETE MISMANAGEMENT OF WHAT IS NEEDED TO COMPLETE A PROJECT.

THIS IS A PROJECT, A TASK FORCE SHOULD HAVE BEEN CREATED, CITIZEN REPRESENTATION AND HEADED UP BY THE CITY, INSTEAD OF THE COMMISSIONERS VISITING A FEW BUSINESSES TO DISCUSS THE ISSUE. T BECAUSE THE OWNER, I WAS NOT APPROACHED.

THE CITY LAWYER CAME UP WITH TWO DIFFERENT PROPOSALS AND BRIEFLY EXPLAINED IT IN ONE READING AND DECIDED ON DECIBEL METER SPIRIT IN THE SECOND MEETING IT WAS CHANGE.

ONE COMMISSIONER PERSUADED THE MAJORITY TO REVERT TO THE OLD ORDINANCE.

TO MY KNOWLEDGE. THIS IS THE FOURTH TIME A NOISE ORDINANCE HAS COME TO

COMMISSION. >> YOU ADDRESS YOUR COMMENTS TO ME.

>> I'M SORRY, I DID NOT REALIZE THAT. CHIP WAS THE COMMISSIONER TO PERSUADE THE CHANGE. HE WAS AWARE, AND I QUOTE HIM AT THE END OF MY CITATION MEETING WHERE HE TOLD ME, IF I HELPED HIM SUPPORT, HE WOULD GET THIS FIXED.

I WONDER HOW IT IS NOW THAT HE HAS SAID THE CURTAIN THAT'S RIGHT CURRENT ORDINANCE IS WHAT WE WILL GO AWAY. IF WE MOVE FORWARD THERE ARE MANY MORE ISSUES AND POSSIBLY A LAWSUIT. WE DO HAVE SOME BASIC INFORMATION THAT IS NOT DEFINED.

[03:05:06]

150 FEET. >> THANK YOU MA'AM. YOUR TIME HAS EXPIRED.

THANK YOU. >> SIR, IF YOU WILL STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS PLEASE.

>> GOOD EVENING. FROM YOUR MAGAZINE, FROM YOUR MARINA, WELCOME, DINE AND DRINK AT ONE OF OUR BREWERIES OR DISTILLERIES. THAT IS WELCOME TO THE CITY.

MUSIC IS PART OF THAT SCENE DOWN HERE. IT IS PART OF THE RESTAURANTS.

THEY WALK AROUND AND THEY GO TO LOCATIONS. WHEN HER 25 FEET, I CAN TELL YOU I CAN HEAR EVERYTHING. THERE LIES THE PROBLEM. EVERYONE KNOWS WHAT IS GOING ON, IT IS PART OF THE SCENE. THE QUESTION IS HOW DO WE FIX IT.

AS YOU SAID, I DON'T THINK YOU WANT OTHER PEOPLE THIS WON'T BE THE ANSWER FOR US EITHER.

MAYBE WE GET A GROUP TOGETHER, SIT DOWN AND WORK THE ISSUE INSTEAD OF THROWING OUT RULES THAT DON'T WORK BUSINESSES NEED TO MAKE A LIVING LET'S FIGURE OUT AN ANSWER.

I WOULD WORK A PROJECT LET'S FIND AN ANSWER THAT WORKS FOR THE COMMUNITY AND MOVE FORWARD

FROM THERE. >> I HAVE BEEN VACCINATED. I WILL MOVE THIS WHILE I SPEAK.

MARGARET DAVIS 2162 AGAIN, TALKING ABOUT THIS ISSUE I APPLAUD ALL OF YOU FOR RETAINING THE STANDARD WHICH HAS BEEN LONG FELT TO BE PROPER AND IS THIS VERSION THAT THE CITY I ENCOURAGE OR SUPPORT OF IT IT HAS WORKED WELL WITH THE COMMUNITY WITH THE EXCEPTION OF A FEW HICCUPS WHEN THE ENTITIES COME IN AND THEY DON'T WANT TO COMPLY WITH THE EXISTING ORDINANCE. I DID WANT TO SAY, BASED ON THE HOURS, THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY READ, I THINK I THINK YOU WOULD ONLY WANT THAT TO GO TO 7:00 A.M. AND FROM THERE IT WOULD GO TO 100 FEET. OTHERWISE, YOU HAVE THIS BEING MORE QUIET.

YOU MAY WANT TO TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION. THIS IS INCLUDING LARGE CITY SO

I WOULD ENCOURAGE THIS ORDINANCE. >> STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. SO, I AM HERE TO SAY THAT, I BELIEVE THIS IS NOT THE SOLUTION WE NEED. I AM CURIOUS ABOUT THE METRIC IN TERMS OF WHAT WILL HAPPEN.

[03:10:08]

I FEEL THAT, THEY HAVE BEEN TRYING TO BE CONSIDERATE OF THE COMMUNITY.

WE WILL HAVE HARMONIOUS COMMUNITY. I KNOW THE OLD HOUSE AND SOME OF THE VENUES ARE MAINTAINING DIALOGUE AND I THINK THAT IS IMPORTANT.

ALSO, WITH THE BOATHOUSE, I KNOW THEY ARE WILLING TO SPEND MONEY TO MITIGATE THE SOUND.

REALLY, I THINK THE COMMUNITY CAN COME UP WITH SOLUTIONS TOGETHER.

I DON'T THINK THIS WILL BE THE BEST THING. I LIKE THE OPTION THAT WE HEARD BEFORE. I THINK MOVING FORWARD, AND POSSIBLY LOOK AT GETTING A TASK FORCE TO SEE IF WE CAN REALLY TRY TO EXPAND OUR DIALOGUE TOGETHER TO FIND A GOOD SOLUTION BECAUSE, -- THE OTHER THING IS, I THINK US AS A MUSIC INDUSTRY WE ARE NOT EXEMPT.

I'M CURIOUS ABOUT THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THAT. IF WE CAN GIVE PRIVILEGE TO ONE

INDUSTRY, AND NOT AND I WANT TO THANK YOU GUYS FOR THAT. >> IN MY MIND THERE ARE TWO ISSUES. THE FIRST ISSUE HOW DO WE MEASURE HOW LOUD SOUND CAN BE.

SO THERE IS BASICALLY TWO WAYS. THE SOUND METER WAY AND THEN THERE IS THE PLAIN STANDARD.

BACK IN 1949, IN THE SUPREME COURT DECISION, THE SUPREME COURT SAID, THE CONTENTION THAT THE SECTION IS SO VAGUE IT IS ON ENFORCEABLE AND THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT THE LOUD STANDARD.

THE OBJECTION IS LOUD. WHILE THOSE ARE ABSTRACT WORDS, THEY HAVE REQUIRED CONTENT THAT CONVEYS ACCURATE CONCEPTS OF WHAT IS GIVEN. THE SUPREME COURT, OF FLORIDA, WHICH HAS BEEN RECORDED MANY TIMES SAYS, THUS WE FIND THE PLAINLY AUDIBLE STANDARD IS NOT UNCONSTITUTIONALLY VAGUE. WHAT THAT MEANS, THERE IS A STANDARD IF YOU CAN HEAR IT.

IT IS PLAINLY AUDIBLE. AND THAT HAS BEEN FOUND TO BE CONSTITUTIONAL.

TEAC THE SECOND ISSUE, SOUND METERS AND MORE. THE SECOND ISSUE, AND MORE CONTENTIOUS IS WHERE DOES THAT STANDARD APPLY? WHERE SHOULD YOU NOT BE ABLE TO HEAR A SOUND OR VOICE OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT. THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION AND THE FLORIDA CONSTITUTION GUARANTEES PROTECTION UNDER LAW ALL PEOPLE SHOULD BE TREATED EQUALLY, AND IN A CASE CALLED OPERATIONAL'S RESCUE SAID THE FOLLOWING, ALTHOUGH IN MANY LOCATIONS WE EXPECT INDIVIDUALS TO AVOID SPEECH, WHEN THEY TALK ABOUT SPEECH THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT MUSIC AND SO ON. THEY DO NOT WANT TO HEAR THE HOLD IS DIFFERENT.

WE ARE OFTEN CAPTIVE OUTSIDE OF THE HOME AND SUBJECT TO SPEED AND THAT DOES NOT MEAN WE MUST

[03:15:10]

THUS, WE HAVE REPEATEDLY HELD INDIVIDUALS ARE NOT REQUIRED TO WELCOME UNWANTED SPEECH INTO THEIR HOMES AND BASED ON THAT I WANT TO PROPOSE THE FOLLOWING. WE MAY HAVE EXCEPTIONS AND FINES AS PUT FORTH. AND THAT WE ADD DEFINITION OF NOISE.

NUMBER TWO WE MAINTAIN THE AUDIBLE STANDARD AND THE IF YOU CAN HEAR IT IN YOUR OWN HOME IF YOU CAN PROTECT PEOPLE AND THEIR HOMES TO NOT HERE OUTSIDE SOUNDS THIS IS THE HOURS SUNDAY-THURSDAY AND FRIDAY AND SATURDAY AND NIGHTS. GIVE THE NOISES PLAINLY AUDIBLE AT THE PROPERTY LINE IT IS A VIOLATION. IF YOU CAN'T HEAR IT AT NIGHT, IT IS A VIOLATION. BASICALLY THIS SIMPLIFIES AND IF YOU CAN HEAR IT IN YOUR OWN HOME, AND I GUESS IF YOU TOOK THE GUITAR AND WENT OUTSIDE, YOU COULD NOT HEAR IT.

IF YOU TAKE THAT, YOU CANNOT HEAR PEOPLE'S VOICES. WHY SHOULD WE NOT HAVE A NOISE ORDINANCE. THIS IS THE ENTIRE CITY. THIS HAS TO DO WITH BARKING DOGS , WHY SHOULD YOU NOT HAVE THE SANCTITY OF YOUR OWN HOME TO BE QUIET.

NUMBER TWO, I DON'T CARE IF THE GREEN TURTLE IS PLAYING MUSIC IF IT DOES NOT COME ONTO MY PROPERTY, AND AT 2:00 A.M. IF NO ONE CAN HEAR IT WHO CARES. SO, I THINK THIS IS ONE WAY, OF HOW WE MIGHT SIMPLIFIED THIS. IT HAS BEEN DONE IN OTHER PLACES.

INSIDE OF YOUR OWN HOME, IT IS TOO LOUD. IT GETS RID OF THE DISTANCES AND MAKES THINGS MUCH SIMPLER. I RAN THIS BY A FEW CITIZENS. SHE SAID THIS IS PERFECT.

SHE PROVED WHAT SHE SAID, THAT THE LAST TWO NIGHTS, SHE DID NOT HEAR THE MUSIC.

THIS MAY BE SOMETHING THAT MAKES IT SIMPLE THERE IS NO MEASURING, THERE'S NOTHING ELSE.

IT IS BASICALLY INSIDE OF YOUR PROPERTY AT HOME ALL OF THE TIME.

THIS MAKES THE WHOLE THING SIMPLE. >> ARE YOU SUGGESTING AMENDING

THE ORDINANCE? >> YOU ARE MAKING A MOTION TO AMEND COLLECTS.

>> YES, I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO AMEND. >> HE IS MAKING A MOTION TO AMEND. TO AMEND THE ORDINANCE THAT WE HAVE A MOTION ON.

WHO MADE THE MOTION. YOUR COMMENTS? >> I DON'T DISAGREE WITH THEM

BUT I DON'T ACCEPT IT. >> VICE MAYOR WILL STOP YOU FOR A SECOND PERIOD THERE WAS A

QUESTION ON THE AMENDMENT. >> I HAVE COMMENTS ON THE AMENDMENT.

[03:20:10]

>> HE DOES NOT HAVE TO ACCEPT IT. I MADE A MOTION.

NO ONE SECOND IT DOES ANYONE SECOND THIS AMENDMENT? COMMISSIONER, PLEASE CONTINUE.

>> I NO LONGER HAVE COMMENTS ON THE AMENDMENT. >> LET'S START BY NOT TALKING ABOUT MUSIC. I WANT TO TALK ABOUT HOW RESTRICTIVE THIS IS.

THERE ARE A NUMBER OF THINGS. A TYPICAL DAY, WHEN I GET HOME I LIKE TO MOW MY LAWN.

I LIKE TO MOW MY LAWN, THAT IS WHAT I DO. BUT A LAWN MORE CAN BE HEARD, I THINK THE NEW ORDINANCES 100 FEET AWAY. EITHER WAY, YOU CAN HEAR A LAWN MORE ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE OTHER END OF THE STREET. A LOT OF PEOPLE WILL SAY NO ONE WILL EVER COMPLAIN BUT SOMEONE COULD. IF ANY OF THOSE HOUSES COMPLAIN, IT WOULD BE A LEGITIMATE NOISE COMPLAINT AND THE POLICE COULD COME.

THEY COULD TURN OFF MY LAWN MORE LET'S GO FURTHER. WE TOOK OUT THE EXEMPTION FOR CHURCH BELLS. YOU CAN HEAR CHURCH BELLS, YOU CAN HEAR THEM ALL AWAY DOWN TO DOWNTOWN. WHEN YOU HEAR THEM, YOU HEAR THEM AND PEOPLE WILL SAY, NO ONE WILL COMPLAIN AGAINST THE CHURCH BELLS BUT WITH THE CURRENT ORDINANCE SOMEONE COULD COMPLAIN AND IT WOULD BE VALID. THAT BRINGS YOU TO THE MUSIC. WE ARE NOT DEBATING BUT I AM TRYING TO COME UP WITH SOMETHING WHERE THERE IS A REASONABLE VOLUME.

I JUST HAVE TO POINT OUT, FOR MULTIPLE REASONS THIS IS UNREASONABLE.

IT IS UNREASONABLE BECAUSE IT IS RESTRICTIVE AND ON TOP OF THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE A REASONABLE LEVEL, ONE THAT CITIZENS, AND I AM OPPOSED TO ANYTHING WE HAVE TO MEASURE BUT I AM OPPOSED TO, I DON'T WANT PEOPLE, I DON'T WANT TO HAVE THE POLICE DETERMINE IF IT IS A VIOLATION OR NOT. THERE IS A MIDDLE GROUND COMPROMISE.

I AM GOING TO VOTE NO. >> , I CAN'T DO IT. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE, MAYBE WE START THE COMMITTEE, WHERE WE GET MEMBERS TO COME TOGETHER. BUT I WILL VOTE NO.

>> THIS HAS WORKED FINE FOR YEARS. YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WHEN THE NEW FACILITY COMES IN. IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, THEY ARE COMMITTED AND IT HASN'T HAPPENED YET, DON'T FORGET, CHIP MADE A POINT, THIS IS THEIR HOME.

THIS IS NOT ANTI- MUSIC, THIS IS PROTECTING RIGHTS TO LIVE IN THEIR HOMES, AND THEY HAVE THAT RIGHT. IT'S NO BIG DEAL, I DON'T KNOW WHAT EVERYONE IS CONCERNED ABOUT, WE DON'T GET A LOT OF NOISE COMPLAINTS THE BOATHOUSE HAS TO MAKE, I HAVEN'T SEEN ANY CHANGES THAT THEY HAVE MADE. IT MAY HAVE TONED DOWN A LITTLE BIT THEY CERTAINLY DO ON TUESDAY NIGHTS BUT THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT PUTTING IN BARRIERS, I THINK, I HAVE NO PROBLEM, LET THE COMMUNITY COME UP. THIS TOWN WAS NOT BUILT ON ROCK 'N' ROLL IT WAS BUILT ON SHRIMP VOTERS. MUSIC IS NICE. YEARS AGO IT WASN'T A BIG THING BUT PEOPLE LIVE HERE THERE BRIGHT SPIRIT THAT IS THE WAY IT IS.

[03:25:03]

DON'T HAVE ANYTHING DIFFERENT. >> EVERYONE IS SHAKING THEIR HEADS ABOUT PEOPLE LIVING IN THEIR HOMES, BUT IF YOU HEAR IT IN YOUR HOUSE, IT IS TOO LOUD. I AM HEARING A MIXED MESSAGE.

DO YOU BELIEVE, THAT YOU SHOULD HAVE TO LISTEN TO SOMEONE ELSE'S MUSIC OR DOG OR SOMEONE ELSE'S WHATEVER IN YOUR OWN HOME, INSIDE OF THE HOUSE. I'M JUST ASKING.

>> VICE MAYOR DO YOU WANT TO RESPOND? >> I THINK THAT IS UNREALISTIC.

>> IN MY HOUSE I HEAR THE KIDS WALKING BY GOING TO SCHOOL. >> ARE YOU RESPONDING?

>> SCHOOL BUSES ARE PEOPLE GOING BY. I THINK IT IS EXTREME.

I THINK, WHEN YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT LIVING NEXT TO A BAR, THAT IS DIFFERENT.

I'M NOT GOING TO COMPLAIN ABOUT THE KIDS NOT GOING TO SCHOOL, AND I DON'T THINK PEOPLE DO.

>> NOT EVERYONE'S HOUSES BUILT THE SAME. THAT CAUSES A PROBLEM.

NOT EVERYONE'S HOUSE IS IN THE SAME RELATION TO THE BAR. NOT EVERYONE'S HOUSE, HAS THESE VARIABLES THAT CREATE A PROBLEM. I LIKE YOUR IDEA, LIKE THE IDEA OF IT.

THE PROBLEM IS, THERE ARE TOO MANY VARIABLES. THAT HOUSE MAY NOT HAVE INSULATION. IT MAY NOT EVEN HAVE INSULATION. I DON'T KNOW.

>> SOME THINGS HAVE TO BE ADJUSTED. WE ARE DEALING WITH AN AREA WITH ONE PARTICULAR ISSUE. YES, THERE ARE 150 COMPLAINTS BUT THEY ARE NOT ABOUT MUSIC.

THEY ARE ABOUT THIS INSTANCE. JUST LIKE LYNN SAID. HERE IS MY RESPONSE.

>> YOUR IDEA IS VERY INTERESTING, BUT THE REASON I AM OPPOSED IS, I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD IMPOSE A NOISE ORDINANCE. YOU HAVE TO READ INSIDE OF SOMEONE'S HOME.

I DON'T WANT TO BE IN A WORLD WHERE WE ARE ENFORCING LAWS BY SAYING THE ONLY WAY WE CAN ENFORCE IT IS HAVE THE POLICE GO INSIDE. I CANNOT SUPPORT THAT.

PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO HEAR NOISE IN THEIR HOUSE. IS NOT ABOUT MUSIC IT'S ALSO ABOUT SOUND. WE TALK ABOUT EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAW.

IT HAS TO BE THE SAME FOR EVERYONE. INSIDE OF YOUR HOME YOU SHOULD NOT HAVE TO LISTEN TO SOMEONE ELSE'S NOISE. APPARENTLY YOU DON'T FEEL THE SAME WAY. BUT YOU ARE RIGHT, 100 FEET, 14U PICK.

I DON'T KNOW. TAMMY DID NOT LIKE ME CALLING IT CAPRICIOUS.

[03:30:06]

>> ARE YOU DONE. >> I AM TRYING,. >> THESE ORDINANCES, OUR ORDINANCE THAT IMPOSE FINES OR PENALTIES FOR VIOLATING A NOISE ORDINANCE.

THE WHOLE POINT OF PICKING THE NUMBER OF FEET, IT IS NOT CAPRICIOUS, WE HAVE DEBATED IT HERE. THERE WAS AN ATTORNEY THAT DECIDED IT WAS CAPRICIOUS AND TOLD EVERYONE WHO CAME OUT TO SPEAK. IT IS NOT CAPRICIOUS.

THE POINT IS, YOU PUT THE PUBLIC ON NOTICE OF WHAT YOU EXPECT. YOU PICK A NUMBER WHICH IS HERE TONIGHT, AND FROM HERE ON OUT, WHEN IT PASSES, IF IT PASSES, EVERYONE KNOWS WITH YOU EXPECT.

IT IS NOT WE PULLED IT OUT OF THE AIR. WE GAVE IT LATITUDE, TO THE LIVE MUSIC SCENE DOWNTOWN BY GOING FROM 100-150. IT IS NOT CAPRICIOUS.

AS LONG AS EVERYONE IS ON NOTICE. I JUST WANT TO REMIND YOU.

OUR ORDINANCE DOES NOT SAY SOMEONE COMPLAINTS, YOU GET A $250 FINE.

THEY HAVE TO DO A WRITTEN WARNING, NOT UNTIL EVERYTHING IS IN PLACE.

>> ALL RIGHT, WE ARE AT THE MOMENT OF DECISION. I AM NOT GOING TO BEAT A DEAD HORSE. I SHOWED THE EFFECTIVE RANGE OF 150 FEET-200 FEET AT THE LAST MEETING WHERE THAT WOULD EXTEND TO. I THINK CLEARLY AUDIBLE.

THE POLICE WOULD BE NONSTOP WITH COMPLAINTS, AND I BELIEVE, SHE CAN CALL THE POLICE DEPARTMENT EVERY NIGHT AND COMPLAIN. THIS IS A TOTALLY INEFFECTIVE ORDINANCE.

I DON'T KNOW WHETHER MY COMMISSIONERS ARE AWARE OF THIS BUT THE PALACE SALOON, SUBMITTED AN APPLICATION, NOT ONLY IS THIS NOT GOING TO BE STATUS QUO, WE WILL HAVE MORE MUSIC WHICH WILL EXTEND DOWN TO MR. ROSS'S NEIGHBORHOOD. THIS DOES NOT SOLVE THE ISSUE OF, PRESERVING LIVE MUSIC DOWNTOWN AND THE VIBRANCY, AND THE PEACE AND QUIET FOR THE PEOPLE NOT ONLY WHO RESIDE DOWNTOWN, BUT THE GUESTS WHO RESIDE AT THE HAMPTON INN AND THE MARINA. SO, EARLIER YOU SAID THE DEFINITION OF INSANITY IS DOING THE SAME THING OVER AND OVER. THEY ONLY INCREASED IT BY 50 FEET.

IT IS INEFFECTIVE. DEPUTY CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.

(ROLL CALL). >> THAT ORDINANCE PASSES THREE HAPPEN TO.

IS THERE ANOTHER READING? >> THERE IS ANOTHER READING SCHEDULE.

[9. CITY MANAGER REPORTS]

>> ALL RIGHT, WE ARE ON ITEM NINE. THE CITY MANAGER REPORT.

>> THANK YOU. I WILL BE VERY BRIEF. FOR THOSE OF YOU INTERESTED THE LAW ENFORCEMENT MEMORIAL SERVICES TOMORROW AT 10:00 P.M. I'M CURRENTLY SLATED TO GIVE

[03:35:01]

IT WILL BE EARLY MORNING. COMMISSIONER ROSS AND COMMISSIONER STURGIS MAY NOT FIT

INTO MY CAR. >> IT IS A SMALL CAR. >> DON'T TAKE IT PERSONALLY.

>> THAT IS TOMORROW, THIS IS FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES THROUGHOUT THE COMPANY -- COUNTY. IF YOU RIDE SEPARATELY, I RECOMMEND THAT YOU LEAVE EARLY, LEAVE HERE NO LATER THAN 9:00 A.M. I LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR

PARTICIPATION. >> I DID PROVIDE CORRESPONDENCE IT INDICATES THAT, THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE ANOTHER ARMY OF CONTRACTORS ON SITE THURSDAY, THE INTENT IS WE WILL HAVE FOOD

THIS WEEKEND. >> ANY QUESTIONS. >> BRIEFLY I WOULD LIKE TO

[11. CITY CLERK REPORTS]

IT'S FOR SOMEONE WITH A FINANCIAL INTEREST OR BACKGROUND.

WE DO HAVE AN EMPTY SEAT ON THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. WE DO HAVE ONE VACANT SEAT AS OF

RIGHT NOW THAT I AM AWARE OF AND THAT IS APPOINTMENT SCHEDULED. >> COMMISSIONERS, VICE MAYOR,.

[12. MAYOR/COMMISSIONER COMMENTS]

>> SATURDAY, 8:00 A.M., 10:00 P.M., MLK, THERE IS A FOOD GIVEAWAY, SATURDAY AT 2:00 P.M.

THERE WILL BE A BENCH DEDICATION FOR MISS ASHLEY. I ATTENDED IT ALONG WITH BRADLEY AND IT IS MENTIONED, THE MUSEUM IS OPEN WITH THE NEW EXHIBITS. IT IS WELL WORTH THE TRIP.

>> THANK YOU SIR, LIFE IS STILL GOOD. >> IT IS MY TEN MEETING I JUST THINK, I REALLY APPRECIATE IT WATCHING THE RETIREMENT, I THOUGHT THAT WAS AN EXCELLENT

GATHERING. I THINK WE ARE INC. GREAT AUNTS. >> I DON'T KNOW IF THEY WILL

FUND A MASTER PLAN. >> SO ONCE AGAIN, CONDONE DISTANCES -- CONDOLENCES TO THE FAMILY, I WANT YOU TO HAVE THOUGHTS AND EVERYONE HAS PRAYERS I WAS AT THE GOLF COURSE THIS MORNING, THEY WERE FIRST RESPONDERS TO RESUSCITATE HIM. AND OF COURSE, HE WAS VERY

[03:40:05]

ST. MARY'S AND A, WHICH I PARTICIPATED IN. COMMISSIONER ROSS WAS THERE AS WELL HAULING JUNK. TWENTY-FOUR SITES, FOUR COUNTIES, 8 TONS.

8 TONS OF DEBRIS, I CAN TELL YOU SOME OF THE STUFF, TVS, FENCING, IT IS APPALLING WHAT PEOPLE DON'T BUT WELL DONE. AND THEN YOU WILL REMEMBER SEVERAL WEEKS AGO WE HAD RECYCLING. THE NUMBERS CAME IN. 3300 POUNDS OF FOOD COLLECTED IN THAT EVENT. 16,000 POUNDS ( INDISCERNIBLE ) 300 GALLONS OF OIL.

14,000 POUNDS OF SHREDDED PAPER, APPROXIMATELY 800 VEHICLES CAME THROUGH.

AND WITH THAT, I WISH EVERYONE WELL. COMMISSIONER ROSS, YOU WANT THE PRIZE. WITH THAT WE ARE ADJOURNED.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.