[7.1 NONPROFIT GRANT FUNDING RESOLUTION 202188 AWARDING SPECIFIC NONPROFIT AGENCIES GRANT FUNDING IN FISCAL YEAR 2021/2022; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Synopsis: Awards specific nonprofit agencies grant funding in fiscal year 2021/2022.]

ITEM 7, NONPROFIT GRANT FUNDING.

I HAVE SEVERAL SPEAKERS ON THIS.

SO COMMISSIONERS WOULD LIKE TO HEAR SPEAKERS PRIOR TO A MO

MOTION? >> YES.

>> I HEAR ONE YES. >> YES.

>> I HAVE TWO YESES. >> YES.

>> FIRST SPEAKER IS PEGGY BULGER.

>> OH, MY GOODNESS. >> TALK YOUR TIME.

YOU ALL CONSENTED WAY TOO FAST. >> PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND

ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD PLEASE. >> YES, HI, I AM PEGGY BULGER, 1949 SPRING BROOK ROAD FERNANDINA BEACH, 32034.

>> THANK YOU. >> AND THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME THIS EVENING. I'M HERE TO SPEAK ON JUST A SPECIFIC ISSUE. AND I WANT TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUNDS. I FIRST CAME TO FERNANDINA BEACH IN 1976 TO RESEARCH A FILM DOCUMENTARY FOR PBS CALLED "FISHING ALL MY DAYS." IT IS THE STORY OF FERNANDINA'S ROLE AS THE BIRTHPLACE OF MODERN SHRIMPING INDUSTRY AND THE UNITED STATES. AND AT THAT TIME IN 1976, THERE WERE NEARLY 100 SHRIMP BOATS LEAVING THE HARBOR FROM FERNANDINA EVERY DAY. A NET MAKING SHOP HERE ON SECOND AVENUE, THE BURR BANKS, NEXT TO A MARINE HARDWARE AND PROVISION STORE NEXT DOOR WHILE SHRIMP AND FISH PROCESSING PLANTS THRIVED THE AMELIA RIVER.

TODAY, MOST OF THAT IS GONE. ITS STORY OF FERNANDINA'S PAST AS A CENTER FOR FISHERIES, SHRIMPING AND MARITIME SKILLS IS ONE THAT MANY OF OUR NEW REST DENTS AND MOST VISITORS KNEW NOTHING ABOUT. WHEN I MOVED HERE PERMANENTLY IN 2011, I KNEW THAT I WANTED TO VOLUNTEER MY SERVICES TO HELP KEEP THIS PROUD STORY ALIVE.

THE AMELIA ISLAND MUSEUM OF HISTORY HAS BEEN WORKING TO DOCUMENT, PRESERVE AND PRESENT THE COMPLEX HISTORY OF OUR ISLAND NATION. ISLAND FOR OVER 40 DECADES.

FOUR DECADES. SORRY.

OVER THE YEARS, THE MUSEUM HAS WORKED HAND IN HAND WITH THE CITY TO PROVIDE ESSENTIAL SERVICES BY MAINTAINING A PROFESSIONAL ARCHIVE OF IRREPLACEABLE HISTORICAL RECORDS, PHOTOS, ARTIFACTS, AND ORAL HISTORY RECORDINGS, BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, TEN YEARS AGO WE ENTERED INTO A PARTNERSHIP THAT HAS BEEN A WIN-WIN EFFORT FOR BOTH THE CITY AND THE MUSEUM. THE CITY NEEDED TO CREATE AND MAINTAIN A WELCOME CENTER FOR OUR WATERFRONT FOR A MINIMUM OF 20 YEARS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE FEDERAL GRANT THAT WAS REC RECEIVED. THE MUSEUM AGREED TO CREATE AND STAFF THE WELCOME CENTER SH SHRIMPING MUSEUM FOR THE CITY, PROVIDING THE SERVICE SEVEN D DAYS A WEEK.

THIS FULFILLED THE GRANT OBLIGATIONS FOR THE CITY BUT AT THE SAME TIME, THE CENTER HAS PROVIDED THE MUSEUM WITH A M MUCH-NEEDED DOWNTOWN PRESENCE AND A MORE CENTRAL LOCATION TO BEGIN THE EDUCATION OF THE PUBLIC, TO BRING THEM OVER TO THE MUSEUM. THIS PARTNERSHIP HAS BEEN AN UNQUALIFIED SUCCESS. AND WE HAVE BEEN LOOKING FORWARD TO THE NEXT TEN YEARS OF THE GRANT FULFILLMENT OBLIGATION AND BEYOND. SO I AM ASKING THAT THE COMMISSIONS. THERE HAVE BEEN TALK --

[BEEPING] >> THANK YOU.

>> SUSAN WHARTON. >> MY NAME IS SUSAN MARTIN, 73 LONG POINT DRIVE IN FERNANDINA BEACH.

GOOD EVENING. I HAVE A STORY SIMILAR TO PEGGY'S. I STARTED VOLUNTEERING AT THE MUSEUM 11 YEARS AGO. I WAS JUST ENCHANTED BY THE HISTORY HERE AND THE SENSE OF PLACE THAT THIS SMALL ISLAND BROUGHT. I AM A SMALL-TOWN GIRL, AND THIS WAS THE RIGHT PLACE FOR ME TO LAND.

I HAVE JUST STEPPED DOWN AS BOARD CHAIR AS THE MUSEUM.

I FORGOT MY TAG BECAUSE I WAS WORRIED GETTING MY UMBRELLA

[00:30:05]

OPEN FROM THE CAR. STEPPED DOWN AS BOARD CHAIR OF THE MUSEUM IN 2020. AFTER ANY FIRST THREE -- TWO TERMS ON THE BOARD AND WITH TONS OF HELP JUST COMPLETED OUR $400,000 CAPITAL CAMPAIGN FOR THE REN SAVINGS ARE THE MUSEUM.

BUT TODAY WE ARE TALKING OF THE LINE ITEM FOR THE MUSEUM.

AND THE SERVICES THAT PEGGY OUTLINED THAT WE -- WE OFFER IN RETURN FOR THAT LINE ITEM GRANT TO THE MUSEUM.

WE DO STAFF THAT RIGHT NOW SIX DAYS A WEEK, BUT IT WILL BE BACK TO SEVEN NOW THAT WE ARE OUT OF COVID.

THAT TOTALS 2001 HOURS PER YEAR AND MINIMUM WAGE AND WE ARE ALL REQUIRED WE WILL BE HAPPY TO GET MINIMUM WAGE, $17,000 OF WAGES FOR EXTRA EXTRAABLY STAFFING THE WELCOME CENTER AND SHRIMPING MUSEUM. WE PAY THE INSURANCE FOR THAT BUILDING THAT COMES OUT TO $ $2500 A YEAR.

BUT WHAT I REALLY WANT TO DO IS WHAT I SAID EARLIER OF THE SENSE OF PLACE. AND WE WELCOME OVER 3500 PEOPLE IS YEAR TO THAT BUILDING. MANY OF THEM ARE BOATERS THAT COME FROM THE MARINA. MANY OF THEM ARE NOT.

THEY COME FROM THE TRAIN STATION AND EVERYBODY ELSE ON CENTER STREET. I DON'T THINK ANYONE IS BETTER PREPARED TO WELCOME THOSE VISITORS THAN OUR MUSEUM VOLUNTEERS. WE TELL THEM ABOUT OUR LITTLE ISLAND AND SUGGEST WHAT THEY MUST AND SHOULD SEE WHILE THEY ARE THERE. AND FOR A MOMENT OR TWO IN THE SENSE OF PLACE THAT IS SO DEER TO THIS -- DEAR TO THIS TOWN, TO THE MUSEUM AND TO THE REST DENTS WHO ARE AWARE OF THAT SENSE OF PLACE. AND IT IS A SPECIAL PLACE.

IF THEY ARE INTERESTED WE INVITE THEM TO THE MUSEUM.

WE ARE OPEN SEVEN DAYS A WEEK AND WE WISH THEY DO COME AND LIKE OTHER VISITOR. THE ONE WE DON'T ASK IS WHERE DO THEY EAT BECAUSE WE MAINTAIN A STRICT NEUTRALITY POLICY ON THAT AND I SEE NO NOT EVEN ONE ADVANTAGE FOR THE CITY ALTER THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE MUSEUM AND SHRIMPING CENTER AND MUSEUM -- IT IS A LONG NAME. OUR STAFF AND THE MANY VOLUNTEERS WHO SPENDS THEIR TIME THERE.

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

>> CHAD CHARLIN. PLEASE SAY YOUR NAME AND

ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. >> CHAD CHARLIN.

FERNANDINA BEACH. I'M HERE IN SPEAK IN FAVOR FOR GRANT FUNDING FOR KEEP NASSAU BEAUTIFUL.

I STARTED VOLUNTEERING WITH KEEP NASSAU OF THE FIRST OF THE YEAR AND SIX MONTHS SINCE I HAVE BEEN INVOLVED WITH THE ORGANIZATION PUTTING NATIVE PLANTS ON THE BEACH DUNES TO SUPPORT RESILIENCY AND HELPING A PROJECT FOR POLLINATOR BEDS FERNANDINA BEACH MIDDLE SCHOOL. TALKING TO THE GARDEN CLUB THERE ABOUT EDUCATION AND THE BENEFITS OF NATIVE PLANTS AND INCREASINGLY COLLABORATING WITH FERNANDINA BEACH MAIN STREET TO INCORPORATE MORE NATIVE PLANTS INTO ITS LANDSCAPING.

WORKING WITH KEEP NASSAU BEAUTIFUL VOLUNTEERS LIKE MYSELF LENDING OUR TIME AND EXPERTISE.

YOU MAY KNOW KEEP NASSAU BEAUTIFUL FOR BEACH COLLECTION AND TRASH PICK-UP AND ALL THE HARD, SWEATY THANKLESS WORK CLEANING UP OUR BEACHES AFTER THE HOLIDAYS.

WHAT WERE YOU DOING ON MEMORIAL DAY EVENING? KEEP NASSAU BEAUTIFUL WAS ON THE BEACHES CLEANING UP TRASH.

AND KEEP NASSAU BEAUTIFUL DOES A LOT MORE AND A LOT MORE FOR ME. I AM MORE ENGAGED WITH MY COMMUNITY. THE FIRST TIME I HAVE SPOKEN BEFORE YOU. MET FRIENDS AND POTENTIAL BUSINESS PARTNERS AND PUT IN WHAT I WOULD SAY COUNTLESS VOLUNTEERS HOURS. THINKING OF TALKING TO YOU I STARTED ADDING THEM UP AND WHEN I GOT TO 50, STOPPED.

I AM HARDLY ALONE IN THAT. MY MOM HAVE STARTED VOLUNTEERING WITH ME BECOMING MORE A PART OF THE COMMUNITY AND KEEP NASSAU BEAUTIFUL HAVE HUNDREDS OF VOLUNTEERS PUTTING IN THOUSANDS OF HOURS OF COMMUNITY SERVICE THROUGH THEIR LEADERSHIP ANNUALLY. ALL FOR THE BENEFIT OF FERNANDINA BEACH, ALL AT NO COST TO THE CITY.

AND THOSE TENS OF THOUSANDS OF HOURS OF GRUBBY, SWEATY, THANKLESS EFFORT, I HOPE YOU WILL BE ABLE TO SEE THAT NOT ONLY DO THEY HAVE VALUE BUT THE INCREDIBLE RETURN THERE ON THE SMALL INVESTMENT THAT THE ORGANIZATION ASKED FOR ANNUALLY AND I HOPE YOU CONTINUE SUPPORTING THEM TO THE LEVEL

[00:35:01]

WHICH THEY ARE SEEKING. I WANT TO LET YOU KNOW THAT IN THE FIRST SIX MONTHS OF THE YEAR THE ORGANIZATION HAS WON TWO STATEWIDE AWARDS. ONE NOR ITS -- THROUGH URBAN FORESTRY THROUGH THE TREE DISTRIBUTION PROGRAM AND THE OTHER THROUGH THE STATEWIDE KEEP AMERICA BEAUTIFUL PROGRAMS FOR ITS SOCIAL MEDIA EFFORTS. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. OUR LAST SPEAKER IS PHYLLIS DAVIS. WELCOME, MA'AM.

>> THANK YOU. >> WELL, GOOD EVENING.

FIRST THING I WOULD LIKE TO SAY IS I AM HONORED TO BE UP HERE AFTER TWO WONDERFUL LADIES WHO RETIRED TONIGHT.

I WORKED WITH BOTH OF THEM. THEY ARE NOT HERE BUT I WILL

MISS THEM. >> GIVE US YOUR NAME AND

ADDRESS. >> DON'T YOU ALL KNOW ME.

PHYLLIS DAVIS. MY PERSONAL RESIDENCE 2850 FIFTH AVENUE FERNANDINA BEACH, FLORIDA.

AND I AM DIRECTOR OF THE MUSEUM OF HISTORY.

AND I WILL JUMP IN. GOOD EVENING.

THANK YOU FOR ALL DO YOU FOR OUR CITY, COMMISSIONERS.

IT IS A HARD JOB AND I APPRECIATE WHAT YOU DO.

I'M HERE TO GIVE A REVIEW MUSEUM.

UNIQUE DRAW IS OUR HISTORIC ASPECT.

WE HAVE A VERY RICH 4,000-YEAR HISTORY THAT ATTRACTS PEOPLE FROM ALL OVER THE COUNTRY. OUR MUSEUM IS EVEN MORE IMPORTANT NOW THAN EVER IN THAT WE HELP PRESERVE, PROTECT AND INCLUDE AND EDUCATE THE CITIZENS OF OUR COMMUNITY, WHETHER LONG-TERM OR TEMPORARY OF OUR RICH AND DIVERSE HIS HISTORY. WE HAVE AN EXTENSIVE ARCHIVAL COLLECTION THAT HOUSES 1221 OBJECTS, 4872 PHOTOGRAPHS, 4134 ARCHIVAL PIECES SUCH AS MAPS AND DOCUMENTS, 4128 LIBRARY BOOKS. IF YOU HAVE BEEN KEEPING TRACK, 11,655 ITEMS IN OUR TINY LITTLE ARCHIVAL SPACE.

IT IS A MIRACLE, LET ME TELL THE YOU.

THE MUSEUM OF HISTORY IS A 4TH YEAR.

WE ARE A PREMIERE MUSEUM IN NASSAU COUNTY WITH 522 MEMBERS AND OVER 80 VOLUNTEERS WHO IN 2021 ALONE HAVE PROVIDED OVER 3,000 HOURS OF VOLUNTEER TIME. DURING TREMENDOUS COVID TIME HOST 25,000 VISITORS TO MUSEUM AND NOT THERE THIS YEAR AND HOPE TO BE BACK THERE SOON. MOST RECENTLY, THE MUSEUM COMPLETED A 400,000 PLUS RENOVATION THAT INCLUDED MUCH NEEDED MAINTENANCE ON THE INSIDE AND OUTSIDE OF THE BUILDING AND A COMPLETE REIMAGINATION OF ALL OF THE EXHIBITS FOR A MORE INTERACTIVE AND INCLUSIVE EXPERIENCE TO OUR VISITORS. WE HAVE PARTNERED WITH THE CITY ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS INCLUDING AS PEGGY SAID CREATING EXHIBITS, STAFFING AND MAI MAINTAINING A PRESENCE AT THE WELCOME CENTER AND SHRIMPING MUSEUM, DESIGNED AN OUTSIDE DISPLAY PANEL FOR THE GREENWAY, ASSISTED THE CITY ON HISTORICAL MATTERS RELATED TO THE HISTORICAL SURVEY, THE GREENWAY RESEARCH AND PARTNER WITH THE PRESERVATION WORKSHOPS AN WRITING LETTERS OF SUPPORT FOR GRANT APPLICATIONS AN MAINTAIN A RESEARCH LIBRARY BY CITY EMPLOYEES, DEVELOPERS, REA REALTORS, JOURNALISTS, AUTHORS AND RESIDENTS.

AND CURRENTLY ASSISTING CITY WITH AT MUSEUM QUALITY EXHIBIT AT THE PECK CENTER HIGHLIGHTING THE VERY IMPORTANT ISSUE.

SOME OF THE OTHER WAYS WE ENDEAVORED TO SERVE OUR COMMUNITY IS MAKING FIELD TRIPS TO NASSAU COUNTY STUDENTS TO NO CHARGE TO THE SCHOOL OR THE STUDENTS.

HISTORY BASED LECTURES MANY ARE FREE AND OPEN TO THE PUBLIC.

HOLDING AN ANNUAL APPRECIATION EVENT FOR FREE ENTRY.

AND CHILDREN ACTIVITIES. 2019, WE SAW 250 PARTICIPANTS OF ALL AGES AT THAT EVENTS. OUR VETERANS HISTORY PROJECT THAT ALLOWED US TO RECORD OVER 270 VETERAN INTERVIEWS WITH NASSAU COUNTY AND I WILL FINISH AND THANK YOU FOR LISTENING BECAUSE IF WE DON'T PRESERVE OUR HISTORY, WHO WILL.

>> THANK YOU, MA'AM. ALL RIGHT.

WE START ANY DISCUSSION, ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

SO THE RESOLUTION SAYS, TO ANSWER COMMISSIONER BEAN.

THE RESOLUTION SAYS GRANT FUNDING WILL BE BUDGETED IN VARIOUS AMOUNTS BASED UPON THE AGENCIES SELECTED.

DOESN'T SPECIFY ANYTHING. THE RESOLUTION DOES NOT SPECIFY

AMOUNTS OR AGENCIES. >> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

I MOVE THAT WE DO SOMETHING SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT.

I MOVE THAT WE SEPARATE THIS LIST INTO TWO DIFFERENT LISTS AND DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT WITH EACH ONE.

THAT IS MY MOTION. MY MOTION -- AND I CAN GO INTO

MORE DETAIL WHAT THAT IS. >> PLEASE DO.

>> SO THIS -- LET ME START BY SAYING THANK YOU TO ALL THE

[00:40:03]

ORGANIZATIONS THAT PUT IN THESE GREAT APPLICATIONS.

I HAVE PERSONALLY WORKED WITH MOST OF THE ORGANIZATIONS ON THIS LIST. AND I AM PROUD YOU ARE ALL HERE TONIGHT. BUT THERE ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS TO CONSIDER HERE. TWO DIFFERENT LISTS THAT I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE ARE TAKING A LOOK.

THE FIRST LIST IS SERVICES. IT IS WE HAVE CONTRACTS WITH VARIOUS OFFERINGS IN OUR COMMUNITY, AND WE HAVE ENGAGED THEM AND WE HAVE AGREED TO PAY A SPECIFIED AMOUNT IN RETURN FOR A SERVICE. AND THAT -- AND THE PRIME EXAMPLE OF THAT IS ACTUALLY THE RUMOR.

THE MUSEUM WE HAVE ENGAGED IN A CONTRACT WITH THEM AND HAVE SAID HE WOULD GIVE $15,000 IN PERPETUITY WITH THE CONTRACT WE SIGNED AND IN RETURN STAFF OUR SHRIMPING MUSEUM AND WELCOME CENTER AND THIS IS A GOOD DEAL FOR THE PEOPLE OF FERNANDINA BEACH WHICH IS WHY WE HAVE THAT CONTRACT.

ANOTHER EXAMPLE IS KEEP NASSAU BEAUTIFUL.

THEY ARE ACTUALLY IN OUR BUDGET AS A LINE ITEM UNDER THE SANITATION SECTION AND NOT RELATED TO BEING A GRANT.

IT IS IN RETURN FOR THE SERVICES THEY PROVIDE OUR COMMUNITY. WE HAVE A LINE ITEM IN THE BUDGET ALREADY. IT IS NOT PART OF THE GRANT.

IT IS PART OF A CONTRACT THAT WE HAVE SIGNED WITH KEEP NASSAU BEAUTIFUL. I MOVE THAT WE SEPARATE THE LIST OUT BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT -- THE OTHER PART OF THE LIST.

I WILL GET TO THAT PART OF THE LIST IN A SECOND.

THERE ARE A FEW OTHER MEMBERS OF OUR COMMUNITY THAT I BELIEVE ARE IN THIS -- IN THIS BASKET, FULL, THEY PROVIDE VALUABLE

SERVICES. >> CAN I JUST.

>> SO WE MOVE THIS ALONG. YOU ARE MAKING A MOTION.

YOU WANT TWO LISTS. SO DESCRIBE ONE AS SERVICES.

WHY DON'T YOU DESCRIBE THE SECOND AND THEN IF WE GET A SECOND, THEN YOU CAN GO INTO DETAIL OF WHAT THESE ARE.

>> THE OTHER WOULD BE THE GRANTS.

WE HAVE GRANT ALLOCATIONS. AND IF I COULD ELABORATE.

>> AN EXAMPLE OF A GRANT. >> NOW THE GRANTS -- AND THAT IS WHAT I WOULD SAY IS CURRENTLY WE DON'T HAVE A BUDGETED AMOUNT FOR GRANTS. IN FACT I AM A NEW COMMISSIONER AND COME ON -- I WAS SURPRISED TO LEARN WE ARE ASKING PEOPLE TO ASK US FOR MONEY. AND THIS -- ESPECIALLY SINCE THERE ARE PEOPLE ON THIS -- WE HAVE COMMISSIONERS UP HERE THAT ARE ADVOCATING FOR TAX INCREASES.

AND SO WE HAVE PUT OUT A REQUEST FOR GRANTS AND I JUST WANT TO TALK AGAIN I AM OPPOSED TO RAISING TAXES THIS YEAR.

>> OKAY, COMMISSIONER. WHAT IS AN EXAMPLE OF A GRANT.

WOULD THE RIGHT WHALE FESTIVAL BE A GRANT?

>> I WOULD CONSIDER THAT A GRANT.

>> A MOTION. >> SECOND.

>> NOW YOU HAVE A SECOND. SO NOW WE HAVE DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION AND HAVE A LIST ONE FOR SERVICES.

TWO FOR GRANTS. LET'S HAVE THE DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT. MAKE SENSE.

OKAY. >> GO AHEAD, CONTINUE.

>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN THAT LINE ABOUT THE GRANTS.

MY LINE ABOUT THE GRANTS WHAT WE ESSENTIALLY HAVE IS A BLANK CHECK FROM THE PEOPLE OF FERNANDINA BEACH.

WE HAVE THIS BLANK CHECK AND AT PUBLIX AND SHOPPING AND DOING ALL THESE GREAT THINGS THAT HE CAN DO WITH THE PEOPLE OF FERNANDINA BEACH AND I PERSONALLY BELIEVE.

NOT TALKING OF CONTRACTS AND TALKING ABOUT GRANT ALLOC ALLOCATIONS. AND WHAT MY POINT WILL BE SAYING IS THAT -- WE NEED TO DECIDE HOW MUCH MONEY WE ARE GOING TO GIVE TO NONPROFITS. I BELIEVE IT IS TOO EARLY TO SPIN THAT NOW. I BELIEVE IT IS TOO EARLY TO SET THAT NOW. I THINK WE NEED TO GRANT THE DISCUSSION BECAUSE THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS THAT HAVEN'T HAPPENED YET. MONEY COMING FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. WE ARE NOT SURE WHAT WILL HAPPEN WITH THE PROPERTY TAXES. WE ARE NOT SURE.

I AM OPPOSED TO RAISING TAXES BUT WE ARE HAVE -- NO IDEA HOW MUCH MONEY WILL BE AT THE END. WE ARE PUTTING THE CART WELL BEFORE THE HORSE. WE ARE BUDGETING BACKWARDS.

AND I WOULD LIKE TO PULL OUT THE CONTRACTS, PAY OUR CONTRACTS, WHICH INCLUDE THE MUSEUM, WHICH INCLUDE KEEP NASSAU BEAUTIFUL, VANDZ THAT DISCUSSION AT A LATER TIME WITH BUDGETING THE PROCESS. THANK YOU.

>> THOUGHTS, NOBODY HERE HASED A VIS KATEED TAX INCREASES.

NUMBER TWO, YOU SAY A CONTRACT WITH THE MUSEUM.

WE DO HAVE AN ORDINANCE THAT WAS BACK BUT IN THE ORDINANCE THERE WAS NO SET AMOUNT OF MONEY AND I WILL TELL YOU IT SAYS A BUDGET PROCESS EVERY THAT WE HAVE BUDGET TO STAFF

[00:45:23]

THE WELCOME CENTER SO THAT IS WHAT IT SAID.

NO AMOUNT OF MONEY AND IF YOU GO THROUGH THE BUDGETS OVER THE YEARS, MOST THEM ARE THE $10,000 RANGE OR LESS.

MOST $10,000 OR LESS. I DO AGREE WITH THAT BEING A BUDGET ITEM AND TAKING THAT OUT OF THIS PILE NUMBER TWO, WHAT THEY NEED TO DO -- WHAT IS BENEFIT TO THE PUBLIC AND WHAT RESTRICTIONS ARE THERE BECAUSE HANDING OUT MONEY FOR ANY RESTRICTIONS AND GIVING IT FREELY AND THAT I THINK WE SHOULD BE AVOIDING. WHEN WE SHOULD NOT BE GIVING TO ORGANIZATIONS THAT RESULT AND BENEFITS ONLY TO OUR MEMBERS AND NOT TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC, AND I LIKE YOUR IDEA OF A CONTRACT WITH ALL THESE -- NOT JUST GRANTS, BUT WITH ALL NONPROFITS TO PERFORM CONTRACT-BASED SPECIFIC SERVICES. SO NASSAU BEAUTIFUL GOING TO DO X, Y AND Z AND PAY THEM BACK OF PART OF THE BUDGET.

AND CONTROLS IN PLACE BECAUSE OF THE SPENDING AND NEEDS CAN BE SERVICES WHICH OTHERWISE WOULD NOT BE PROVIDED WHAT THE CITY SHOULD BE PROVIDING BUT IS NOT BEING PROVIDED.

I WANT TO POINT OUT THAT WE TALK ABOUT BUDGET.

BACK IN '16-'17, FY CITY BUDGET THE CITY SPENT 4 1,000 ON THESE GRANTS INCLUDING THE MARINE MONEY IS WHICH YEARS WERE THOSE

COMMISSIONER ROSS? >> YOU GOT THE LIST, '16 AND '17. 41,356.

'18-'1955. THIS YEAR 2030.

SO A TRAUMATIC INCREASE OF WHAT WE ARE SPENDING OF THIS.

I DISAGREE THAT WE ARE DOING THIS BACKWARDS.

WE NEED TO GIVE CITY STAFF AN IDEA HOW MUCH WE WANT TO SPEND AS PART OF OUR BUDGET ON THE SEWERS OF SERVICES.

WE ARE HERE TO SET POLICY, PART OF THE POLICY IS TO SAY WHAT WE ARE WILLING TO SPEND FOR THESE SERVICES.

SO THAT IS MY THOUGHTS. >> THANK YOU, SIR.

VICE-MAYOR? >> I AGREE 100% OF PULLING THE TWO OUT. THERE ARE SERVICES, WHICH IS THE MUSEUM OUTPERFORMING AND THERE IS AN AGREEMENT IF THERE IS AN EXTRA DOLLAR AMOUNT AND KEEP NASSAU BEAUTIFUL IS IN THE SANITATION BUDGET. AND WITH ALL THE REST, I HAVE CONCERN THAT WE ARE PICKING WINNERS AND USERS.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE REST OF THEM REVIEWED AS TO -- AS TO WHAT IS THE BENEFIT AND SPECIFICALLY WHAT ARE THEY PERFORMING. WE GAVE $500,000 AWAY FOR CO COVID, WHICH WE RECOVERED HALF OF IT FROM -- FROM SOME MONEY.

BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE AND SOME OF THE AGENCIES CAME IN AND I REMEMBR BARNABAS COMING IN AND DOING A PREN PRESENTATION ON WHAT THEY SPENT THE MONEY ON.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT EVERYTHING WE GIVE WE HAVE AN IDEA OF WHAT THAT AGENCY IS IN TERMS OF SALARY AND HAVE CRITERIA ESTABLISHED AND WE COULD USE THE CRITERIA TO VIEW THE REST. RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATIONS THAT CAN BE A QUESTION TO SOME PEOPLE.

WE ARE PICKING THINGS AND I WOULD LIKE TO SEE WHAT IS THE BENEFIT OF THE COMMUNITY TO ESTABLISH SOME KIND OF CRITERIA AND ALONG WHAT CHIP IS SAYING WITH HOW MUCH ARE WE WILLING TO SPENDS. LIKE AMERICA'S YOUTH, AND HAD NO COST AND DO WE WANT TO GIVE THEM MONEY.

AND THEN THE RIGHT WHALE FESTIVAL.

THAT MAY BE FUN, BUT NOT TOO EXCITED ENDORSING SOMETHING LIKE THAT MA WE SPEND PLENTY OF MONEY ON TOURISM.

[00:50:02]

BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE CRITERIA FOR THIS, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE FORWARD WE VOTED THAT WAY AND WE ARE NOT PICKING NUMBERS WHEREVER WE GO. AND I THINK -- YOU KNOW, AT ONE TIME -- I DON'T THINK ANYBODY HERE DID 2,000 DISCRETIONARY MONEY EACH AND WE SHOULDN'T BE PICKING WINNERS ON PERSONAL FEELINGS OPINION WE SHOULD BE PICKING WINNERS ON THE BASIS OF WHAT THEY PERFORMED AND THAT WILL BE EVALUATED.

I THINK -- COMMISSIONER STU STURGES?

>> I THINK I AM GOING TO HARP ON FEDERAL JUST A LITTLE BIT AND I THINK IF WE DON'T HAVE A CRITERIA SET UP FOR THIS PROCEDURE WHICH DOESN'T SOUND LIKE WE HAVE A REIGNING CRITERIA THAN WE SHOULD FOLLOW UP WITH THAT IN A FAST MANNER AND I ALSO LIKE WHAT HE IS SAYING PUT THE CART BEFORE THE HORSE FOR THE BUDGET AND PUT THE PAUSE BUDGET ON AND COME UP WITH A CRITERIA -- DIRECT THE STAFF TO COME UP WITH A

CRITERIA. >> ANYBODY ELSE? ALL RIGHT, LET ME HERE WHAT HE HAS TO SAY AND THEN I MIGHT

WANT TO SAY SOMETHING. >> CITY MANAGER.

>> WE ARE ALL PROVIDED WITH A COPY OF THE ACTIONS OF THE SERVICES THEY PROVIDE SO I THINK IT IS INCUMBENT UPON YOU AS THE POLICY CENTER TO COME UP WITH A CRITERIA WHAT NEEDS TO BE FUNDED. IN THE PAST THIS HAS BEEN A STAFF EXERCISE, BUT AGAIN, GIVEN DIFFERING PRESSURES ON THE BUDGET CITY STAFF NEEDS DIRECTION FOR YOU AS A CITY COMMISSION WHAT NUMBER WE PUT IN THE BUDGET.

YOU WILL BE VOTING ON THE BUDGET, SO YOU HAVE ALL THE APPLICATIONS WITH CHA THEY DO FOR THE COMMUNITY AND HOW MUCH MONEY THEY REQUESTED. STAFF NEEDS DIRECTION FOR YOU AS TO WHAT YOU PUT IN THE BUDGET.

POINT OF DISCUSSION. BREAK THIS INTO NOT WHO TO FUND. WHAT IS ON THE FLOOR IS THE LIST ONE OF SERVICES AND TWO WHICH IS GRANT OFFERINGS AND LET'S DEAL WITH THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR AND WE CAN ADDRESS

PARTS B AND C OF THIS. >> I CALL THE QUESTION.

>> I HAVE A CALL THE QUESTION. I CALL THE QUESTION.

CITY ATTORNEY. DOES IT NEED TO BE AN ANONYMOUS

VOTE. >> I CALL THE QUESTION.

>> PLEASE CALL THE QUESTION AND THE VOTE.

>> BRADLEY BEAN: YES CEINGZ CEINGZ YES.

>> COMMISSIONER STURGES. >> YES.

>> DIVIDING INTO A LIST OF SERVICES AN GRANTS.

NOW DO I HEAR ANOTHER MOTION? COMMISSIONER BEAN.

>> BRADLEY BEAN: IS THERE A SPECIFIC MOTION YOU WERE

LOOKING FOR, MR. MAYOR. >> SO -- SO THE TOPICS ON THE TABLE IN MY DISCUSSIONS WITH THE CITY MANNER IS, ONE, WHAT IS THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT YOU WANT TO DEDICATE TO FUNDING YOUR LIST OF SERVICES AND GRANTS THAT IS ONE AND LET ME FINISH MY STATEMENT BECAUSE I WOULD WANT -- I WOULD LIKE FOR THIS BODY TO CONSIDER SOMETHING ELSE.

AND WHAT I WOULD LIKE -- AND THESE -- AND DOES THIS COME UP -- THIS COMES OUT OF THE OPERATING FUND, CORRECT THE 5.5 MILLION IN RESCUE FUNDS CAN GO TO FUND NONPROFITS.

NOW REMEMBER, THAT THOSE FUNDS ARE VERY LIMITED IN THEIR USE.

SO THAT IF WE WERE TO DEDICATE A PORTION OF RESCUED FUNDS THIS YEAR FOR NONPROFITS, THAT WOULD FREE UP OPERATING MONEY WE WOULD USE FOR MOST ANYTHING IN THE CITY.

SO IF YOU DECIDE -- TAKE $100 GRAND OUT OF RESCUE FUNDS AND HAVE 5.4 MILLION TO USE FOR STORMWATER AND 200 5.3 MILLION.

[00:55:03]

BUT THE BEAUTIFUL OF USING RESCUE FUNDS IS SPECIFICALLY TARGET FROM NONPROFITS THIS YEAR IT TAKES IT OUT OF THE OPERATING BUDGET FUNDING. SO I LEAVE YOU WITH THAT THOUGHT. NOW, COMMISSIONER BEAN.

>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WHAT I -- WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO BRING UP NEXT IS THAT -- THAT IS UP IN THE AIR.

SO FIRST I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT -- WHEN WE SAY SERVICES, WHAT I MEAN ARE THINGS THAT ARE CURRENTLY IN THE BUDGET.

AND THEY ARE NOT NECESSARILY IN OUR GENERAL FUND.

THEY ARE IN SANITATION FUND AND THEY ARE IN COMMUNITY, I BELIEVE, FOR THE MUSEUM. SO WHEN I SAY -- WHEN MADE TWO LISTS, TAKE THEM OFF OF THE GRANT LIST.

PUT THOSE IN AND CONTINUE -- I DON'T THINK THEY SHOULD BE CONSIDERED IN THE SAME LINE-UP AS OTHER GRANTS AND SECONDLY AND THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS IN THE AIR.

AND I WOULD BE VERY HESITANT TO SET A NUMBER BASED ON THE ASSUMPTION WE ARE GOING TO GET MONEY FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. AND THEN WE DON'T GET THE MONEY AND THEN WE HAVE TO RAISE TAXES TO MEET THE OBLIGATIONS THAT WE JUST INCURRED UPON OURSELVES. I WOULD BE HESITANT TO SATURDAY NUMBER WE NEED TO MAKE SURE ALL OF OUR FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS ARE SQUARED AWAY AND A GREAT AMOUNT OF ORGANIZATION.

>> COMMISSIONER ROSS. >> THE REASON I VOTED AGAINST THE PREVIOUS RESOLUTION BECAUSE ALL THESE SHOULD BE IN THAT BUCKET IF WE WERE GOING TO BE GIVING MONEY WE WILL BE PRO PROVIDING A SERVICE THAT THE CITY DOESN'T SURVIVE.

AND THAT'S WHY I VOTED AGAINST I DO BELIEVE THAT THE MARINE MUSEUM SHOULD BE IN THAT, AND I ALSO BELIEVE AND I JUST SAID THAT THE REST OF THE NONPROFITS SHOULD BE IN THAT TOO BECAUSE SHOULD BE PROVIDING A SERVICE AND A PUBLIC SERVICE AND WHAT THEY ARE PROVIDING AND WE NEED TO KNOW WHAT THAT IS.

>> WHEN IS THE TENTATIVE BUDGET THAT YOU PROPOSE COMING OUT?

>> CAN YOU REPEAT THAT ONE MORE TIME.

>> THE TENTATIVE BUDGET PROPOSED COMES SPOUT ONE DAY BEFORE THE SECOND MEETING IN JULY.

I DON'T HAVE MY CALENDAR. AND YOU GUYS SET THE BUDGET, ZERO IN THE BUDGET THAT IS PRESENTED TO YOU.

>> I DON'T THINK WE WILL HAVE WHOLE LOT MORE INFORMATION ON JULY 19 THAN RIGHT NOW. I AM CURIOUS WHAT YOU HAVE TO

SAY. >> VICE-MAYOR?

>> I THINK THAT IS FINE 58 GRAND FOR THE MUSEUM AND THE LINE ITEMS AND THE REST WILL PUT TOGETHER AND LOOK TOGETHER.

AND SOUNDED LIKE WE ARE $900,000 SHORT FROM STATE REVENUE. THEY WILL ASK FOR MORE TONIGHT KNOW 500 OR MILLION EVEN THOUGH OUR CONSULTANT DOESN'T LIKE IT.

>> I AM NOT SURE WHERE WE ARE AND LET ME SUM THAT UP.

A, WE DON'T HAVE ANY DOLLAR AMOUNT.

WE HAVE NOT SET -- ESTABLISHED A DOLLAR AMOUNT FROM THE.

FROM THE TENOR OF THE CONVERSATION.

WE WANT TO POSTPONE THIS. TABLE THIS DISCUSSION, HOWEVER, I WOULD URGE UPON MY FELLOWS WE SPEND 40 MINUTES IN THE WORKSHOPTALKING ABOUT HOW ARE WE GOING TO PAY FOR THINGS.

HOW ARE WE GOING TO PAY FOR THINGS AND AS COMMISSIONER ROSS JOINTLY POINTED OUT WE FUNDED NONPROFITS FIVE YEARS AGO AND THIS IS 200 GRAND. WE ARE STRAPPED SO AT SOME

[01:00:03]

POINT WE ARE GOING TO DECIDE HOW MUCH ARE WE GOING TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE NONPROFITS THAT ARE WORTHY AND PUT AN ASTERISK BY THAT SAYING DID GO ON CHAR TIE NAVIGATOR WHICH IS AN INDEPENDENT ORGANIZATIONS THAT RATES ON EFFECTIVENESS TO USE THE MONEY THEY COLLECT FOR THE INTENDED PURPOSE AND NOT ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS. AND ONE, TWO, THREE FOUR, FIVE, SIX OF THESE NONPROFITS ARE NOT RATED BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T TURN IN THEIR FINANCIALS. I AM NOT READY AND I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH OF THE CITY MONEY IS GOING TO GO TO THE INTENDED PURPOSE AND THAT TO ME IS PROBLEMATIC.

AND TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, COMMISSIONER ROSS DO WE WANT TO TABLE THIS OR CONTINUE DISCUSSION ON HOW MUCH FUNDING THAT WE WANT TO AT LEAST SUGGEST TO THE CITY MANAGER PUT IN A PROPOSED BUDGET. COMMISSIONER ROSS.

>> MY QUESTION IS WE TABLE IT UNTIL WHEN? TO THE FELLAS. TAKES SOME TIME TO DO.

AND KICK IT DOWN THE ROAD TO THE NEXT MEETING.

>> YOU WILL GET THE BUDGET I PROPOSE ON BEHALF THE CITY STAFF AND AFTER THAT IT BEC BECOMES.

ANY TIME FOR THE LAST AND FOUR, THIRD TUESDAY IN SEPTEMBER AND ONCE GET TO ME AND ADVICE AND ALTER THE BUDGET INCLUDING THE

NONPROFIT LINE. >> SO EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS.

WE CAN SET A NUMBER, BUT DU DURING.

DURING BUDGET REVIEW PROCESS, WE CAN CHANGE THAT NUMBER AND WE CAN CHANGE THE FUNDING TO THE NONPROFITS.

SO JUST BECAUSE WE SAY SOMETHING ON MONDAY, WE CAN CHANGE IT ON FRIDAY. CORRECT? YES, SIR. COMMISSIONER ROSS.

>> WE ARE ONLY TALK OF WHAT WE SUSPEND AND WE HAVEN'T TALKED ABOUT HOW MUCH WE GOT TO SPEND AND WHEN DOES THAT NUMBER BECOME CLEAR? BECAUSE REALLY NICE WHAT YOU ARE GOING TO SPENDS BUT IF YOU ONLY HAVE SO MUCH TO SPEND AND

WHEN DOES THAT NUMBER. >> THAT NUMBER WILL BE PART OF THE PROPOSED BUDGET SHARED WITH YOU ON JULY 19.

>> WHEN DOES THE CITY COMMISSION DECIDE HOW MUCH

MONEY THEY ARE GOING TO SPEND. >> THE FOLLOWING TUESDAY LAST TUESDAY IN JULY YOU WILL SET THE MAXIMUM MILLAGE RATE AND THIS WILL BE THE UPPER SCALE OF THE AMOUNT OF MONEY YOU HAVE TO

SPEND AS A CITY COMMISSION. >> BY THE END OF JULY, WE WILL

KNOW HOW BIG OUR WALLET IS. >> YES, SIR.

>> AND AS HE LIKES TO SAY LET YOUR WALLET BE THE GUIDE AND

SET THE UPPER LIFT. >> COMMISSIONER STURGES.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. ANNUALLY YOU ARE SAYING LAST YEAR WE SPENT $41,000 WHAT WAS THE DOLLAR AMOUNT.

>> INCLUDED IN YOUR POCKET WAS THE HISTORIC TREND AND GROWN.

>> IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE TO ME AND LOOKING AT THIS AND SAW IT HAS HISTORICALLY GONE UP DRAMATICALLY IN THE 2021 BUDGET AND OWN SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCE THAT IT HAS GOT APPROVED.

AND THAT IS 100 AND ROUGHLY $50,000 BETWEEN 16 AND 20.

FOUR YEARS. IT IS WHAT I THOUGHT I FALL AND

[01:05:03]

MAKE SURE I KNOW WHAT I AM UNDERSTANDING.

ESPECIALLY THE WAY ALL THE DISCUSSION HAS GONE AND PEOPLE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THE NUMBERS AND MAKE IT REAL SHORT BUT I CAN SAY WAS TENTATIVELY FOR $100,000 IN THE BUDGET AND NEGOTIATE LATER IN A FEW WEEKS WHEN WE HAVE SOME ANSWERS.

>> THAT A MOTION, SIR? >> I MADE A MOTION.

>> A SECOND IF? >> I WILL SECOND THAT.

>> A MOTION AND A SECOND. THE MOTION IS TO PLACED 100,000 IN PLACEHOLDER TO THE BUDGET. AND DO WE HAVE A SECOND?

AND COMMISSIONER BEAN. >> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

I THINK COMMISSIONER STURGES IS VERY MUCH ON THE RIGHT TRACK.

WE NEED TO PICK A NUMBER FIRST AND THIS WILL BE BUDGETING FORWARD AND PICK THE INVERSE OF THAT.

MY IDEA NUMBER IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT.

I WOULD SAY LET'S GO BACK TO THE FISCAL YEAR.

DEFINITELY PREPANDEMIC. I WOULD BE OKAY WITH HAVING THAT NUMBER IN THERE WE CALL IT A PLACEHOLDER UNTIL SUCH TIME WE NEED TO SEE WHAT THE FINAL BUDGET IS BECAUSE I AM VERY OPPOSED TO RAISING TAXES. I WISH TO GO TO THE ROLL-BACK RATE. WHATEVER WE NEED TO DO TO MAKE

THAT HAPPEN, WE WILL. >> COMMISSIONER BEAN SO WE UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT OF -- WE ARE TALKING OF THE $41,000.

>> TALKING ABOUT THE YEAR AFTER THAT.

>> THE 52. >> SOUNDS LIKE A GOOD NUMBER TO ME. IF I HAD.

>> JUST TO CLARIFY. JUST FOR CLAY IF I OCCASION.

>> YES, MR. MAYOR. >> VICE-MAYOR.

$100,000 AND A MOTION AND A SECOND, AND THAT DOES NOT INCLUDE THE MUSEUM. THAT IS CORRECT?

IS. >> THAT'S CORRECT.

>> AT LEAST THE WAY I UNDERSTAND IT.

>> THAT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING. >> COMMISSIONER ROSS?

>> RONALD ROSS: THAT IS WHAT I WANTED TO CLARIFY.

THE MOTION AS I UNDERSTAND IT THAT NASSAU BEAUTIFUL AND THE MUSEUM OF HISTORY THAT THEY ARE GOING TO NEGOTIATE A BUDGET WITH THEM AND THAT WILL BE IN THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.

AND THAT ADDITIONALLY, THAT WE ARE GOING TO PROPOSE A PLACE

HOLDER OF $100,000. >> BASICALLY.

>> SO THE TOTAL WILL BE $115,000.

>> $120,000. >> THANK YOU FOR DOING THE M

MATH. >> COMMISSIONER BEAN.

>> BRADLEY BEAN: THANK YOU. I WOULD LIKE TO CLARIFY MY MOTION I MADE EARLIER. I WISH FOR NO NEGOTIATION.

I WISH IT TO BE THE 15 AND 5 CURRENTLY IN THE BUDGET.

I WANT IT TO JUST SAY, AND AGAIN, I WILL MAKE SURE WE ARE CLEAR TO THE COMMUNITY THAT $100,000 IS PLACEHOLDER AND DO SOMETHING AND NOT EXACTLY THAT. WE WILL SEE.

COMMISSIONER ROSS. >> I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT ALL NUMBERS IN THAT BUDGET ARE NEGOTIABLE.

>> EXCELLENT. I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO PLACED 100,000 AS A PLACE HOLDER IN THE BUDGET FOR NONPROFIT FUNDING. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE CALL THAT

VOTE. >> COMMISSIONER STURGES.

>> YES. >> YES.

>> BRADLEY BEAN: YES. >>MIKE LEDNOVICH: YES.

>> THAT MOTION PASSES 5-0. ALL RIGHT, ITEM 7.2.

[7.2 EMINENT DOMAIN SETTLEMENT RESOLUTION 202189 REJECTING SETTLEMENT IN THE CASE OF CITY OF FERNANDINA BEACH V. THE O’STEEN COMPANY, ET AL.; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Synopsis: Rejects the settlement offer in Case No.: 2020CA000146 in the Fourth Judicial Circuit for Nassau County, Florida.]

THIS IS IMMINENT DOMAIN SETTLEMENT.

>> YOU GUYS ARE LEAVING? [LAUGHTER]

>> THE GOOD STUFF IS YET TO COME.

>> IF WOULD YOU FOR THE PUBLIC JUST TAKE US THROUGH A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE EMINENT DOMAIN PROPERTY THE REASON THE CITY IS PURSUING THE PROPERTY AND WHERE WE ARE.

>> SURE. >> THANK YOU.

>> THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS JUST NORTH OF PARKING LOT A AND THE MARINA AND SOUTH OF WHAT THE CITY CURRENTLY OWNS WHEN WE TOOK DOWN THE WAREHOUSE. AND HOPEFULLY EVERYBODY KNOWS WHERE THAT IS. VACANT PIECE OF PROPERTY.

AND BASED ON THE PLANS FOR WATERFRONT PARK AND SOME ENGINEERING, THE FRONT STREET IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE NEEDED WHEN ALACHUA RAILROAD CROSS SOMETHING OPEN AND THE RESILIENCY OF SEAWALL AND THE RESILIENCY PLANNING THAT THE COMMISSION IS DOING TLIRS AT LEAST TWO SIDES OF THE SUBJECT

[01:10:01]

PROPERTY BE TAKEN AND OWNED BY THE ANY ORDER TO MAKE ROOM FOR A SEAWALL. AND FOR THE ROAD AT THE VERY LEAST. IN OUR COMPLAINT, THIS IS ALL DONE UNDER CHAPTER 70 OF THE -- OF THE FLORIDA STATUTES AND CHAPTER 73, I BELIEVE. AND IT IS A PARTICULAR PROCESS.

SO AT FIRST, THE PROPERTY OWNER THAT THE CITY MADE AN OFFER TO THE PROPERTY OWNER FOR $850,000 TO PURCHASE THE PROPERTY WHICH WAS ABOVE TWO APPRAISALS THAT THE CITY HAD GOTTEN ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO. WE KNOW THE VALUES HAVE GONE UP. SO WE FILED THE SUIT BECAUSE COULDN'T AGREE ON A PRICE OUTSIDE OF COURT AND WE NEEDED TO GET THE PARK IMPROVEMENTS, THE ROAD AND RESILIENCY PROGRAMMING DONE AND THIS TAKE TIME AND WE FILED THE LAWSUIT AND CAME TO THE CITY COMMISSION TO ASK YOU ACTUAL PROSECUTE THAT AND ALLOW ME TO DO THAT. WE DID.

AND THE VERY FIRST THING BEFORE WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME AND MONEY WITH ATTORNEYS ON WHAT WE CALL THE DISCOVERY PROCESS THAT IS EXCHANGING DOCUMENTS AND DEPOSITIONS AND ALL THAT.

WE WENT TO A MEDIATION. THE MEDIATION ON JANUARY 22 OF THIS YEAR. AND AT THE MEDIATION, AFTER ABOUT FOUR OR FIVE HOURS OF TALKING ABOUT EACH OTHER'S NEEDS AND WANTS, WE CAME UP WITH THERE IS AN APPRAISER THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER ATTORNEY KNEW OF IN TALLAHASSEE.

A RETIRED PROFESSOR FROM FLORIDA STATE AND SAID WE COULD LIVE WITH WHATEVER THE APPRAISED AMOUNT IS.

THAT IS WHAT THE CITY WILL PAY AND THAT IS WHAT THE OWNER WOULD ACCEPT. FOR WE IN GOOD FAITH LEFT MEDIATION AND SAID, THAT'S FINE.

WE MADE CONTACTS WITH THE APPRAISER.

WE HIRED THE APPRAISER TO DO AN APPRAISAL.

WHEN WE GOT THE APPRAISAL BACK AND THE APPRAISAL NUMBER WAS FAR THEIR THAN WE THOUGHT AND WENT INTO LOOKING THROUGH IT.

THE BASIS -- THE BASES FOR THE APPRAISAL NUMBERS AND USUALLY THAT IS COMPARABLE SALES AND OTHER DATA.

WE WENT THROUGH THAT. IT AND THAT THERE WAS NOT A GOOD COMPARISON. THERE WERE NOT COMPARABLE PROPERTIES THAT WERE BEING USED.

FOR EXAMPLE, THERE WERE INLAND PROPERTIES THAT HAD SOLD THAT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITHFRONT AND WAS USED.

IT IS OUR BELIEF THAT THE APPRAISAL WAS FLAWED AND THE RESOLUTION BEFORE YOU AND NONE OF THIS IS A SURPRISE BECAUSE, OF COURSE, WE HAVE AN EXECUTIVE SESSION OTHERWISE KNOWN AS A SHADE MEETING COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO TO DISCUSS THIS.

2.3 MILLION FAR EXCEEDS WHAT WE THINK THAT THAT PROPERTY IS WORTH. AND AND DOESN'T EVEN COME CLOSE, SO WHAT WE WOULD RECOMMEND DOING IS -- WHEN WE LEFT MEDIATION, THE CITY MANAGER AND I SAID IN GOOD FAITH. WE WOULD RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF WHATEVER THE AMOUNT WAS AND WE COULD NOT DO THAT BASED ON THE PARTICULAR APPRAISAL AND PROJECT THE 2.3 MILLION AS THE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY AND NOT ALLOW US TO SETTLE THE CASE AND FURTHERMORE, WE FEEL SO STRONGLY THAT THE APPRAISAL IS FLAWED THAT THERE IS A STATEWIDE PEER REVIEW BOARD FOR REAL ESTATE APPRAISALS AND WE RECOMMEND THAT WE SEND THAT TO THE -- TO THE STATE PEER REVIEW BOARD TO FIND OUT EXACTLY HOW FLAWED IT IS. I AM NOT EXACTLY SURE HOW THE PROCESS G GOES, BUT WE THINK IT NEEDS TO BE REVIEWED OF WHAT WE HAD TWO OR THREE YEARS AGO AND THAT'S WHERE WE ARE, AND WE EXPECT THAT APPRAISAL WILL COME IN FAR LESS THAN THE 2.3

MILLION. >> SO THIS EVALUATION WAS DONE

BY PROPERTY RESEARCH. >> THAT THANK IS THE APPRAISER THAT WAS RECOMMENDED BY THE -- THE COUNCIL FOR THE PROPERTY

OWNER. >> OKAY.

>> OKAY, SO -- THE RESOLUTION IS TO REJECT THIS APPRAISAL.

DO WE NEED A MOTION? >> MOVE TO APPROVE AND ALL THE OTHER -- RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE STAFF.

>> SECOND. >> SECOND.

>> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SE SECOND.

COMMISSIONER ROSS, YOUR LIGHT IS ON.

>> IT IS NOT ON. >> FOR THE MOMENT.

>> CRIES MAYOR. >> THE PURPOSE OF SENDING THIS TO AN INDEPENDENT APPRAISAL ASSOCIATION.

[01:15:02]

TELL ME ABOUT THAT AND WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THAT TO GET

ANOTHER PERSON. >> BECAUSE IF THIS LAWSUIT CONTINUES -- WE DON'T KNOW -- WE HAVE NOT SPOKEN WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER OR THEIR COUNSEL ABOUT WHAT WE THINK THAT THE -- THAT THE APPRAISAL IS FLAWED. AND SO WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE -- THAT THIS PEER REVIEW GROUP THAT DOES THIS VERY THING IS -- THERE IS NO COST TO IT THAT I KNOW OF.

IF THERE IS, THERE IS DIMI DIMINIMUS.

BUT TO FIND OUT WHAT IT SEEMS TO US IN OUR LITTLE BIT OF RESEARCH OF COURSE WE ARE NOT PROPERTY OR REAL ESTATE APPRAISERS. THERE IS A RIGHTS ISSUE ON THAT PROPERTY THAT WAS NOT EVEN ADDRESSED IN THE APPRAISAL.

>> BUT IT DOESN'T CARRY ANY WEIGHT.

>> IT COULD IN COURT. >> WE ARE NOT GOING.

>> WELL, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE HAVE DEFINITIVELY MADE THAT.

THAT IS WHY I ASKED FOR IT TO BE PART OF OUR RECOMMENDATION AND PART OF YOUR MOTION. IF YOU DON'T -- IF YOU WERE NOT

INTERESTED. >> MY POINT IS THAT -- WHAT DOES IT ACTUALLY -- WE ARE GOING TO GET ANOTHER APPRAISAL AND THEY ARE GOING TO COME IN AND PREPARE THOSE APPRAISALS.

THIS COULD GO ON FOREVER. >> IT CAN, YEAH.

>> SO SPEAKING OF THIRD PARTY, I DON'T KNOW ACTUALLY WHAT THOSE GUYS -- WHAT THAT CAR CARRIES.

>> LET ME CLARIFY IN DISC DISCUSSION.

VICE-MAYOR, SO -- SO THE MOTION ON THE TABLE IS TO REJECT THIS

APPRAISAL. >> IT IS TO APPROVE.

TO MAKE IT CLEAR, TO APPROVE. YOU VOTE NO --

>> NO, NO, YOU VOTE -- THE MOTION WOULD BE TO APPROVE THIS RESOLUTION AS WRITTEN, AND AS WRITTEN, IT SAYS REJECT.

>> REJECT. >> REJECT THE APPRAISAL.

>> A YES VOTE TO REJECT. >> IF YOU READ THE TITLE IT

SAYS "REJECT." >> A YES VOTE TO REJECT.

>> IF YOU WANT TO ARTICULATE. YOU SAY I MOVE TO REJECT THE --

>> CORRECT. NOW TO RESPECT THE VICE-MAYOR'S POINT, IF WE WANT TO HAVE A FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MERITS OF PURSUING EMINENT DOMAIN, WE CAN DO THAT AFTER WE ACT ON THE MOTION, OKAY. SO, COMMISSIONER BEAN.

>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I HAVE YET TO PUBLICLY COMMENT ON THIS CASE BECAUSE IT IS NOT COME BEFORE THE CITY COMMISSION SINCE I TOOK OFFICE, BUT IDEALLY I AM OPPOSED TO EMINENT DOMAIN. I DO NOT LIKE IT.

I FEEL FOR OUR CITIZENS THAT WE ARE JUNCTIONLY DOING THIS.

I AM OPPOSED TO THIS AND I WISH TO NOT -- I WOULD WISH THAT WE DO NOT PURSUE TAKING THIS GUY TO THE BOARD.

I HOPE WE END THE COURT CASE. I HOPE WE DO NOT.

CEASE AND DESIST OURSELVES. I WOULD LIKE TO GO NO FURTHER.

I THINK WE CAN REASONABLY WORK WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER TO IMPROVE THE SEAWALL AS DID IN FT. LAUDERDALE AND WITHOUT OWNING ALL THE PROPERTY. IT CAN HAPPEN.

I BELIEVE THAT WILL HAPPEN AS THE BEST-CASE SCENARIO FOR US

AND STOP BURNING MONEY ON THIS. >> I WOULD HAVE TO AGREE WITH BRADLEY. I WANTED TO TALK BRIEFLY, BUT I DON'T WANT TO GET IN THE WEEDS BECAUSE WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR, BUT I TRULY THINK THAT WE ARE WASTING MONEY.

AND I THINK THAT BASED ON THE APRAISZAL YOU MIGHT OUT THAT THERE WILL BE MORE MONEY. THAT OUR REAL ESTATE IS GOING SO UP SO QUICK, THAT SOME PEOPLE MIGHT DISAGREE WITH T THIS, BUT I WILL TAKE AT LEAST TEN SECONDS TO EXPLAIN THAT THE COMPS WERE A BUILDING ACROSS THE STREET.

A COMP A BUILDING DOWN THERE. NONE OF THE COMPS WERE A WATERFRONT LOT AND ON THE ISLAND WAS VERY PRECIOUS AND EXPENSIVE. HOW MINIMAL RIGHTS ARE ON THE WATER AND DOESN'T REALLY MA MATTER.

ULTIMATELY YOU HAVE THAT WATER FRONT AND WE CAN PUT THE SEAWALL THERE AND WORK WITH A PROPERTY OWNER AND GET THE SIDEWALK THAT WE NEED THERE FOR OUR WATERFRONT PARK AND EMINENT DOMAIN TAKING HIS PROPERTY. SO ANY WAY, THAT IS MY OPINION ON IT AND THAT'S WHY I FEEL THE SAME WAY.

>> COMMISSIONER ROSS. >> RONALD ROSS: SO, FOR THE LAST FOUR YEARS THE NUMBER ONE VISION OF THIS COMMISSION HAS BEEN TO CREATE RESILIENT WA WATERFRONT.

TO HAVE ROADS DOWNTOWN, ONE STREET THAT WORKS.

TO HAVE PROTECTION FROM S SEAWALL.

AND TO CREATE SOME MORE GREEN SPACE.

THAT HAS BEEN OUR NUMBER ONE -- THE LINCHPIN OF THAT TO CREATE THAT, UNFORTUNATELY, IS THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY.

[01:20:02]

HOURS WERE SPENT TRYING TO WORK WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER TO WORK WITH THE CITY, TO ACCOMPLISH THAT.

AND IT DIDN'T HAPPEN. AND I AGREE WITH YOU.

EMINENT DOMAIN IS A DRASTIC STEP.

AND ONLY TAKEN AT LAST RESORT. BUT THE LAST RESORT WAS THAT.

AND IF YOU WANT TO -- IF YOU WANT TO WALK AWAY FROM THIS, WE CAN DO THAT, BUT YOU ARE WALKING AWAY FROM FIXING CENTER STREET. YOU ARE WALKING AWAY FROM ALACHUA STREET. YOU ARE WALKING AWAY FROM RESILIENCY FROM THE DOWNTOWN. TO TALK TO ME AND SAY THAT HE -- THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER WILL WORK WITH US, IT HAVEN'T WORKED SO FAR. SO I THINK WE SHOULD CONTINUE TO PROCEED. THAT IS THE WAY I WILL VOTE TO -- IF YOU WANT TO APPROACH THE PROPERTY OWNER AND FIND OUT IF HE IS GOING TO GIVE US -- TO PUT IN THE ROAD AND THE CURVE AND THE SEAWALL 20 FEET OF HIS PROPERTY AND PUT THE SEAWALL AROUND THE PROPERTY. THAT IS AN OPTION WHAT I POINTED OUT IN THE SHADE MEETING A FIVE-FOOT, SIX-FOOT WALL WALKING AROUND THE SIDEWALK AND HIS PROPERTY WHEN YOU TALK OF FT. LAUDERDALE WITH THE SEAWALL, THEY WOULD HAVE TO DO THAT AFTER THE WHOLE ISLAND AND WHAT YOU ARE SAYING IS YOU ARE GOING TO -- THIS ENTIRE ISLAND IS GOING TO DO THAT AND IF YOU DON'T DO IT WHICH IS WHAT -- IF YOU ARE AUDITED THE CITY WILL GO AND BUILD.AND DISCHARGE THE PROPERTY OWNER.

WHY WOULD WE PUT A SEAWALL OF A PROPERTY AND INCREASE THE VALUE FOR SOMEONE ELSE. I CAN'T IMAGINE WHY I WOULD VOTE FOR THAT. IF YOU WANT TO WALK AWAY FROM THE WATERFRONT RESILIENCY, THAT IS FINE.

BUT YOU ARE BASICALLY UNR UNRAVELLING FOUR YEARS WORTH OF WORK. ALL OF THESE PLANS THAT WE SPENT MONEY, TIME AND EFFORT ON TO PROVIDE RESILIENCY AND PREVENT FLOODING DOWNTOWN AND PROVIDE A WALKABLE CITY.

SO, THAT IS WHAT I BELIEVE. >> VICE-MAYOR?

>> THE WATERFRONT RESILIENCY HAS NOT BEEN -- THE WATERFRONT.

THE RESILIENCY ASPECT CAME UP WITH THE STANDARD.

THE PARK HAS BEEN A GOAL FOR 80 YEARS OR HOWEVER LONG WE HAVE BEEN THERE. IF WE WALK AWAY FROM THIS, WE DO NOT WALK AWAY FROM THE RESILIENCY AND THE BID TONIGHT AND WE CAN BUILD THE SEAWALL, THE RESILIENCY.

WE ARE NOT WALKING AWAY FROM RESILIENCY IF THAT IS THE IS ISSUE. WHAT WE ARE WALKING AWAY FROM IS THE FOOTPRINT OF THE PROPERTY WHICH WILL BE ADJ ADJUSTED. FIRST YEAR I WAS ON THIS, OUR GOAL WAS STORMWATER. AND THE PARK HAS ALWAYS BEEN THERE AND CHANGED EVERY YEAR. RESILIENCY IS NOT GOING TO BE THERE AND NOT WALKING AWAY FROM IT.

WE DON'T BUILD A SEAWALL AROUND IT.

THERE ARE WAYS TO BUILD A SEAWALL FOR THE WHOLE NORTH E END. AND SO, I MEAN, IT'S -- IT'S -- IT -- THEY ARE GOING TO ASK US TO -- THAT IS RESILIENCY.

THAT IS THE MOST CRITICAL AREA, AND WE HAVE TO ADDRESS THAT.

AND WE TALK -- WE CONSTANTLY TALK ABOUT THAT AND WE TALKED ABOUT HOW WE CAN DO THAT AND ASSESS IT.

AND WE CAN MOVE IT ALL THE WAY UP.

SO WE ARE NOT WALKING AWAY FROM THE WATERFRONT.

WE ARE WALKING AWAY FROM THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY ON THE WA WATERFRONT. AND I BELIEVE WE CAN STILL OPEN ALACHUA. NOTHING TO DO WITH THE CENTER

STREET SIDEWALKS. >> SO I AM GOING TO, AGAIN, FOCUS US ON THE MOTION AT HAND. AND, AGAIN, I AM NOT CUTTING OFF THE CONVERSATION. WHAT I AM SAYING IS, IF WE WANT TO ENTERTAIN. STOP AND HALTING THE PURSUIT OF EMINENT DOMAIN, WE CAN HAVE THAT DISCUSSION.

SOMEONE CAN MAKE A MOTION. AND THEN WE CAN DEBATE IT AND MAKE A DECISION. LET'S DECIDE ON THE ISSUE OF

REJECTING THE APPRAISAL. >> MR. MAYOR, IF I MAY, THE CURRENT MOTION AS IT STANDS IS TWO IN ONE.

I BELIEVE THE CURRENT MOTION IF I MAY SAY, IT -- REJECTS THE APPRAISAL AND ALSO PURSUES FURTHER IMMINENT DOMAIN ACTION AND YES VOTE IS PROJECTING IT. AND WITH THAT IN MIND I WILL HAVE TO VOTE NO BECAUSE I -- WE NEED TO SEPARATE THE MOTIONS

[01:25:03]

OUT. I SO MOVE -- SO THIS IS A MOTION THAT SIMPLY REJECTS THE CURRENT OFFER.

THE YES VOTE WILL SIMPLY REJECT AND A ANOTHER MOTION AFTER.

>> CORRECT. CAN WE -- LET'S CALL THE VOTE

ON THE APPRAISAL. >> SLOW DOWN.

HE JUST MADE A MOTION TO AMEND. >> TO AMEND.

>> I AM SECONDING THAT MOTION. >> AND THEN -- I AM MAKING A FRIENDLY ONE. IF YOU DON'T ACCEPT IT, THAT'S FINE. WE CAN VOTE ON IT.

>> I DON'T ACCEPT. >> WAIT A MINUTE, REPEAT THE -- LET'S CALL TIMEOUT. REPEAT WHAT THE AMENDMENT IS.

>> THE AMENDMENT WILL SIMPLY -- THE AMENDMENT WILL SIMPLIFY, AND THE AMENDMENT IS THE MOTION ON THE TABLE JUST SAY WE WILL ONLY REJECT THE IMMINENT DOMAIN SETTLEMENT THERE.

>> AND THE AMENDMENT VOTE WILL EMINENT DOMAIN.

>> REJECT THE CASE OF THE CITY OF FERNANDINA BEACH VERSUS THE O'STEEN COMPANY. SO WE HAVE A -- WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON AMENDMENT SO WE NEED TO CALL

THE VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT. >> THAT'S CORRECT.

>> SO LET THE CITY CLERK CATCH UP.

OKAY. AND WILL YOU CALL THE VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT. EVERYONE UNDERSTAND THE

AMENDMENT. >> BRADLEY BEAN: YES.

>> COMMISSIONER STURGES. >> YES.

>> RONALD ROSS: NO. >>MIKE LEDNOVICH: YES.

THE AMENDMENT PASSES. WE NEED -- COMMISSIONER ROSS,

YOUR LIGHT IS ON. >> I CALL THE QUESTION ON INITIAL MOTION NOW. SO MADAM CLERK, IF YOU -- A YES VOTE REJECTS THE -- THE APPRAISAL.

OKAY, SO PLEASE CALL THE VOTE. >> THAT PASSED 5-0.

SO TO BE CLEAR, WE VOTED TO ADD THE EMINENT -- THE PURSUIT OF

EMINENT DOMAIN. >> NOT WHAT WE VOTED ON AT ALL.

>> WE VOTED ON TO REJECT. >> THE SETTLEMENT.

>> THAT IS ALL YOU VOTED ON. >> OKAY, THANK YOU.

>> NOW I MOVE TO STOP PURSUING EMINENT DOMAIN.

>> AND COMMISSIONER ROSS. >> FIRST OF ALL, I HEARD MANY TIMES BAIT AND SWITCH AND WHEN WE STARTED DOWN THIS, SPENT TIME, MONEY AND EFFORT ON THIS AND WE HAVE FIVE CITY CITY COMMISSIONERS -- I BELIEVE IT WAS FIVE.

AT LEAST FOUR. WHO AGREED TO THIS PROCESS AND PART OF THE PROCESS IS TO GO THROUGH EMINENT DOMAIN.

IT IS TRUE THAT -- THAT HAS CHANGED.

BUT I WAS SKEW ERRED BY SOME FOR NOT SUPPORTING WHAT PREVIOUS COMMISSIONERS HAD DONE BEFORE.

AND SO -- SUCH IS LIFE. EMINENT DOMAIN.

THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY IS THE GRAVAMAN OF THIS AND AT LEAST GO BACK AN GET ANOTHER APPRAISAL AND -- THE BOARD THAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT LOOKING AT A PROPOSAL IS A STATE BOARD AND NO COST AND THAT WAS A FLAWED AND I BELIEVE WE NEED TO PROVE THAT THAT WAS A FLAWED APPRAISAL.

AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT APPRAISED PROPERTIES, COMPARING IT TO NONWATERFRONT PROPERTY

[01:30:10]

>> YOU THINK WE SHOULD GO FORWARD AND FIND OUT WHAT OUR

OPTIONS ARE. >> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

>> I WOULD POSIT THAT WE DON'T NEED THIS TO MAKE IT A BEAUTIFUL PARK. I HOPE WE WORK WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER AND THAT'S WHAT I HOPE. AND JUST BECAUSE WE SPENT MAN HOURS, THAT DOESN'T MAKE IT RIGHT.

>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS BEFORE I WRAP THIS UP?

>> WE'RE MAKING A FINANCIAL DECISION AND SO I'LL CONCLUDE THIS DISCUSSION AND, OF COURSE, YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO COUNTER ANYTHING I SAY, BUT FOR THE PUBLIC, THIS WAS DISCUSSED IN THE SHADE MEETING AND MANY OF THE POINTS, AND SO PLEASE UNDERSTAND THAT THE LATEST APPRAISAL, CITY MANAGER, THIS IS THE FOURTH APPRAISAL ON THIS PROPERTY, IF I AM CORRECT.

>> CORRECT. THE CITY CONDUCTED 2 AND THE APPRAISAL AS REPRESENTED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY WAS THE THIRD 1 BY THE DEFENDANT'S ATTORNEY AND YES, THE FOURTH IS UNDERWAY.

>> SO THIS IS THE FOURTH AND HOW MUCH MONEY HAS THE CITY EXPENDED

DOING APPRAISALS? >> EACH IS $3,000.

>> OK. AND SO THIS WILL BE THE THIRD AND SO ABOUT 10 GRAND IN, THANK YOU, , SIR.

>> IRREGARDLESS OF WHAT THIRD APPAISAL, IT WILL BE REJECTED AND LEAVING US THE ONLY GO TO COURT, MY BELIEF IS ON THIS BOARD, THERE ARE 4 COMMISSIONERS WHO ARE NOT WILLING TO EXPEND THE MONEY, NOR JUSTIFY GOING TO COURT TO TAKE SOMEONE'S MONEY AND THAT IS MY POSITION. I AM NOT GOING TO COURT TO TAKE SOMEONE'S PROPERTY THAT IS NOT AN EMERGENCY.

THERE ARE ALSO DISCUSSED IN THE SHADE MEETING OTHER FINANCIAL MECHANISMS TO BUILD A SEAWALL IN THE GAP FROM THE PROPERTY TO THE PARKING LOT AND NORTH TO THE PORT IN ORDER TO PROTECT THE BE DOWNTOWN AND THE ISLAND FROM FLOODING.

AND GIVEN THOSE ALTERNATIVES, I AM IN SUPPORT.

YOU THINK WE ARE SPINNING OUR WHEELS OR EXPENDING STAFF TIME, CITY, MONEY AND ENERGY ON AN ERRAND DOOMED FOR FAILURE.

SO YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. >> I MAKE A MOTION WE STOP THE PROCEEDINGS RIGHT NOW AND WE LITERALLY STOP THE EMINENT DOMAIN LAWSUIT AND WE PURSUE THE HOMEOWNER AND MOVE FORWARD.

[01:35:04]

>> I THOUGHT THAT WAS THE DISCUSSION.

THAT'S A MOTION TO THAT'S ON THE TABLE.

>> I WASN'T SURE IT WAS. >> IT IS THE MOTION.

>> SO WITHOUT DISCUSSION, WILL YOU PLEASE CALL THAT VOTE.

(ROLL CALL). >> SO THAT MAGNIFIES *R MOUSES EVER EVER EVER MOUSES EVER EVER EVER

>> WE ARE BACK IN SESSION AND ON 7.3, REFINANCE.

[7.3 REFINANCE MARINA RESOLUTION 202190 AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF ITS CITY OF FERNANDINA BEACH, FLORIDA, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT REFUNDING REVENUE NOTE, SERIES 2021, IN THE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF NOT TO EXCEED $10,587,000 TO REFUND THE ISSUER’S LINE OF CREDIT NOTE, SERIES 2019 AND LINE OF CREDIT NOTE, SERIES 2018 AND ITS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT REVENUE NOTE, SERIES 2016B; PROVIDING THAT THE NOTE SHALL BE A LIMITED OBLIGATION OF THE CITY PAYABLE FROM NONAD VALOREM REVENUES BUDGETED, APPROPRIATED AND DEPOSITED AS PROVIDED HEREIN; PROVIDING FOR THE RIGHTS, SECURITIES AND REMEDIES FOR THE OWNER OF THE NOTE; MAKING CERTAIN COVENANTS AND AGREEMENTS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Synopsis: Approves the execution of various documents pertaining to the Marina and the issuance and refunding of the Marina debt.]

>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WE HAVE A RESOLUTION TO REFINANCE EXISTING MARINA DEBT AND THERE ARE 3 NOTES AND 2 IN THE LINES OF CREDIT TO REFINANCE THE RECOVERY FROM HURRICANE MATTHEW AND EARLIER CAPITAL UPDATE, 2016-B, REFINANCING NOTE AND APPROXIMATELY 10.$5 MILLION AND AN INTERESTING RATE OF APPROXIMATELY 2.45% AS DISCUSSED WITH SOME YOU IS A HIGHER INTEREST RATE THAN THE 3 NOTES, BUT MAKES IT MANAGER BUT STRETCHING OUT OVER A LONGER COURSE OF TIME.

STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND THERE IS ASSISTANCE AND IF YOU CARE TO ASK QUESTIONS, GEORGE OR MISS TESTA.

OFF PROVE I SECOND. >> WE I WOULD LIKE A LITTLE MORE

DETAIL. >> I'M WITH HILLTOP SECURITIES AND I SERVE AS YOUR FINANCIAL ADVISOR AND WE DID NEGOTIATE AN OPTION TO USE FEMA MONIES ONCE A YEAR TO PREPAY DURING THE FIRST 5 YEARS AND THE NOTES ARE PREPAYABLE IF YOU REFINANCE BUT YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO IMMEDIATELY GO AHEAD AND PAY

DOWN ONCE A YEAR. >> AND DOES THAT CUT THE

PAYMENT? >> WHAT IT DOES, LIKE A MORTGAGE OR WHATEVER, YOU HAVE A PRINCIPAL PAYMENTS EVERY AREA YR AND YOU CHOP IT OFF A MATURITY. YOU HAVE $3 MILLION, ONCE YOU PAY OFF THE PRINCIPAL, IT MIGHT BE A 17-YEAR DEAL, WHICH, OBVIOUSLY, MEANS THAT YOU'LL GET LOWER INTEREST EXPENSE, BUT YOU'LL STILL HAVE TO MAKE YOUR REQUIRED PRINCIPAL PAYMENTS.

BUT THIS GIVES YOU ULTIMATE FLEXIBILITY.

>> GIVES US MORE FLEXIBILITY. >> VERSE HAVING NO PREPAYMENT.

ABOUT THE INTEREST RATE. >> RIGHT, WHAT WE DID IS THAT WE WENT OUT FOR AN RFP AND OPENED IT UP TO A STREET AND WE ENDED UP GETS 3 BIDS AND I JUST WANT TO MENTION TO YOU IN TODAY'S ENVIRONMENT, MOST BANKS DO NOT LIKE TO GO OUT LACKING INTEREST RATES FOR 20 YEARS. THEY PREFER TO DEAL WITH SHORTER PERIOD OF TIME, USUALLY BETWEEN 7 TO 15 YEARS AND WE HAVE 3 BANKS THAT ENDED UP SUBMITTING PROPOSALS, AND BOTH THE INTEREST RATES, THIS WAS THE LOWEST 1, 2.45 AND THE HIGHEST 12.77.

AND I WAS VERY IMPRESSED AND, REALLY, I WANT TO THANK THE STAFF FOR THE TIME AND EVERY THAT THEY PUT IN.

THEY WERE ABLE TO ANSWER ANYBODY'S QUESTIONS WITH THE FINANCING AND, OBVIOUSLY, BASED UPON THE INTEREST RATES, THE CITY RECEIVED, YOU I THINK, GD INTEREST RATES AND 3 BIDS FOR 20 YEARS IS SOMETHING THAT YOU SHOULD BE PROUD OF.

>> MARK, SO YOU'RE SAYING, BASICALLY, THAT IF WE CAN MAKE 1 PAYMENT A YEAR FOR THE FIRST 3 PAYMENTS FOR THE FIRST 5 YEARS AND TECHNICAL, WE CAN MAKE 5 PAYMENTS TOTALLY AND THE REST

AFTER THAT -- >> FEMA MONIES.

>> ONLY FEMA AND THAT'S WHAT MY QUESTION WAS AND THAT'S A WHY I'M DRIVING THIS AND LET'S SAY WE HAD A WINDFALL THAT WASN'T FEMA AND WANTED TO PAY DOWN THIS DEBT?

>> YOU WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO DO IT FOR FIVE YEARS.

>> AFTER FIVE YEARS, YOU CAN PREPAY IT AT ANY TIME WITH 1%

[01:40:01]

AND NO PENALTY AT ALL. >> THAT'S ALWAYS A STEP.

>> I GOT IT. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION, SIR. >> SO MADAM CLERK, WOULD YOU CALL THE VOTE, PLEASE. (ROLE CALL)

>> THAT PASSED 5-0. >> AND 7.4.

[7.4 AWARD OF ITB #2105 SGS CONTRACTING SERVICES, INC. RESOLUTION 202191 AWARDING ITB #2105 TO SGS CONTRACTING SERVICES, INC. TO UPGRADE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT CLARIFIER A; AUTHORIZING EXECUTION; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Synopsis: Awards ITB #2105 to SGS Contracting Services, Inc. for Wastewater Treatment Plant Clarifier A upgrades.]

>> THIS THIS IS BID 21.05 TO CY AT THE WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANT WHICH HAS REACHED THE END OF THE SERVICE LIFE AND THIS IS BUDGETED IN THE IMPROVEMENT PLAN AND BIDS WERE RECEIVED AND LOW

BID IS $434,700. >> APPROVED.

>> SECOND. >> I HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND AND CITY MANAGER, WHAT'S THE LIFE OF A CLARIFIER, EXPECTED

LIFE? >> I WILL DEFER.

>> I'M SORRY, I'M THE UTILITY'S DIRECTOR.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. >> THIS WAS INSTALLED, I BELIEVE, IN THE '70S AND PART OF THE ORIGINAL TREATMENT TRAIN FOR THE PLANT AND THIS WILL BRING IT UP TO DATE WITH OUR SECOND TREATMENT TRAIN IN A VERY SIMILAR SYSTEM AND SO WE HAVE CONSISTENCY ACROSS ALL OF THE FACILITIES.

>> SO 40 PLUS YEARS. >> I BELIEVE THAT'S HOW LONG

IT'S BEEN IN SERVICE. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS OR COMMENTS? SEEING NONE, MADAM CLERK, IF YOU CAN CALL THE VOTE. (ROLE CALL)

>> THAT MOTION PASSED 5-0. >> ITEM 7.5.

[7.5 AWARD OF ITB #2102 T. G. UTILITY RESOLUTION 202192 AWARDING ITB #2102 TO T.G. UTILITY FOR SITE WORK AND INSTALLATION OF A NEW UNDERGROUND STORMWATER DETENTION VAULT AND PUMP STATION SYSTEM IN STORMWATER MASTER PLAN AREA 5; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Synopsis: Awards ITB #2102 to T.G. Utility and authorizes the City Manager to negotiate a professional services contract.]

>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. AND THIS FOLLOWS ON THE CITY'S PREVIOUS STORM WATER MASTER PLAN COMPLETED SEVERAL YEARS AGO AND THE STORMWATER MASTER PLAN IDENTIFIED SEVERAL PROBLEM AREAS AND REFERRED TO AS AREA 5, FIVE FROM THE AMELIA RIVER AND SEVERAL OLD PIPES AND DETERIORATE PIPES ARE BEGINNING TO FAIL AND WE DID PUT IT OUT TO BID AND 1 SUBMITTAL IN RESPONSE FROM THE RECOMMENDED VENDOR, TG UTILITY AND THE ES ESTIMATED T IS $2.5 MILLION AND IN FULL DISCLOSURE, RIGHT NOW THE CITY HAS APPROXIMATELY $565,000 IN THE BUDGET THIS YEAR AND $565,000 IS INCLUDED IN THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN NEXT YEAR WHICH LEAVES US SHORT BY 1.2 MILLION OR 1.$3 MILLION AND CITY STAFF WILL RECOMMEND THAT RESCUE LAND PLAN FUNDS BE USR SEWER WORK WHICH IS A SPECIFIED WORK FOR THE FUNDS.

>> RECOMMEND APPROVAL. >> I SECOND.

>> ANY DISCUSSION? >> VICE MAYOR.

>> THIS A5 IS THE PLAN IN THE S PROJECT AND THEN WE HAD

HURRICANE MONEY. >> THIS WILL HAVE A MUCH BROADER IMPACT, ESPECIALLY LOTS UNDERDEVELOPED THAT DO NOT HAVE STORMWATER AVAILABLE DUE TO THE SIZE AND ORIENTATION OF THEIR

PROPERTIES. >> THANK YOU, SIR.

>> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, MADAM CLERK, CALL THE VOTE. (ROLE CALL).

>> THAT MOTION PASSED 5-0. >> AND ITEM 7.6, FINAL PLAT

[7.6 (QuasiJudicial) FINAL PLAT APPROVAL CRANE ISLAND PHASE 2D RESOLUTION 202193 ACCEPTING AND APPROVING “CRANE ISLAND PHASE 2D” FINAL PLAT, PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD CASE 20210002; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Synopsis: Accepts and approves the plat titled "Crane Island Phase 2D," as the final plat.]

APPROVAL, CRANE ISLAND, QUASI JUDICIAL.

[01:45:04]

>> IF THERE AREN'T AFFECTED PARTIES HERE AND THAT'S JUST RESIDENTS OF THE CITY THAT MAY HAVE AN INTEREST IN THIS, THIS IS ANOTHER PHASE OF CRANE ISLAND.

SO THIS YOU WILL VOTE BECAUSA RESOLUTION AND WE DON'T COME BACK FOR SECOND READING LIKE ORDINANCES.

FIRST, ON BEHALF OF CITY ALL OF THE RECORD INCLUDES THE DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED TO YOU IN THE STAFF REPORT AND THE PLANNING BOARD'S RECORDS AND THAT WILL BE STAFF'S TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE AND YOU HAVE THAT IN DOCUMENT FORM AND THEN SUBMIT PHOTOGRAPHS AND DOCUMENTS AND THE PARTIES, WHICH ARE THE CITY AND CRANE ISLAND OR MR. HILLMAN CAN CALL WITNESSES. THE CITY HAS NO WITNESSES, THEY CAN CROSS-EXAMINE AND I SEE THERE ARE TO AFFECTED PARTIES THAT WISH TO SPEAK. AND ANY AFFECT PARTY OR THE APPLICANT, CRANE ISLAND WISHES TO APPEAL THE DECISION, THAT APPEAL MUST BE FILED WITH THE COURT IN 30 DAYS OF THE CITY COMMISSION'S DECISION. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT FROM THE COMMISSIONERS OR MEMBERS? SO I YIELD THE PODIUM TO MR. HILLMAN? AND IF YOU'LL STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.

>> I'M JOHN HILLMAN AT 1,001 WHITE STREET AND I'LL BE BRIEF.

THIS IS A CONTINUANCE. THIS IS ON THE SOUTHERN END OF OUR ISLAND AND WE HAVE 6 PROPERTY OWNERS THAT WOULD LOVE TO BUILD A HOME AND WE'VE BEEN WORKING HARD THE LAST COUPLE OF MONTHS TO GET READY FOR THE PLAT PROCESS AND NOTHING SUBJECT TO ADD, WHETHER SEEKING YOUR APPROVAL AND I PROMISE WE MAY HAVE 1 MORE PLAT APPROVAL AND WE'LL BE DONE.

AND THAT'S IT. THANK YOU.

>> ANY QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER ROSS?

>> THIS IS THE CITY ATTORNEY. >> OK.

>> BUT THANK YOU. >> THIS IS GEORGE W. GEORG.

>> THERE IS UNIT APPROVED AND THROUGH.

>> THIS WAS ALL BROUGHT ON BY A COURT ACTION?

>> SO NO REAL CHOICES. >> NOT REALLY.

>> DO WE NEED RECOMMENDED APPROVAL?

>> I MOVE TO APPROVE. >> I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE.

DO I HAVE A SECOND. >> SECOND.

>> I HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND. >> COMMISSIONER ROSS?

>> THE ONLY THING I WOULD LIKE TO SAY, I DON'T THINK CRANE -- R FLOOD PLAIN AND THERE ARE A NUMBER OF APPELLATE COURT CASES THAT HAVE COME OUT OF IT AND I WILL SYMBOLICALLY VOTE AGAINST THIS AND I JUST BELIEVE -- AND YOU'VE DONE -- YOU DID A WONDERFUL JOB AND I THINK IT WOULD HAVE BEEN MORE WONDERFUL

IF IT STAYED THE WAY IT WAS. >> THANK YOU, SIR.

>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, MADAM CLERK, CALL THE VOTE.

ROLE CALL (ROLE CALL)

>> THE MOTION PASSED 4-1. >> ITEM 8, ORDINANCE, FIRST READING AND WE ARE ON 8.1, DECIBEL RESIDENT.

[8.1 DECIBEL MEASUREMENT ORDINANCE 202121 AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF FERNANDINA BEACH, FLORIDA BY AMENDING CHAPTER 42, ARTICLE V, NOISE, BY AMENDING SECTION 140 LEGISLATIVE FINDINGS; AMENDING SECTION 141 PROVIDING FOR APPLICABILITY; AMENDING SECTION 142 DEFINING TERMS; AMENDING SECTION 143 ESTABLISHING MAXIMUM PERMISSIBLE SOUND LEVELS; AMENDING SECTION 144 ESTABLISHING MEASUREMENT STANDARDS; AMENDING SECTION 145 IDENTIFYING PROHIBITED NOISE DISTURBANCES; AMENDING SECTION 146 IDENTIFYING EXEMPT NOISES; AMENDING SECTION 147 PROVIDING JOINT AND SEVERAL LIABILITY; AMENDING SECTION 148 DETAILING ENFORCEMENT RESPONSIBILITY; AMENDING SECTION 149 PROVIDING FOR ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES AND NOTICES OF VIOLATION; CREATING SECTION 150 FINES AND PENALTIES; CREATING SECTION 151 VARIANCES; CREATING SECTION 152 ADMINISTRATIVE POLICIES AND PROCEDURES; CREATING SECTION 153 SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Synopsis: Amends Chapter 42, Article IV regarding noise restrictions to provide for a decibel measurement standard.]

I'LL MAKE A PROVISO BEFORE WE BEGIN READING THIS ORDINANCE IN THAT 2 WEEKS AGO AT OUR WORKSHOP, WE HAD CONSENSUS OF SETTING THE DECIBEL LEVEL AT 75 75-DECIBELS AND IF YOU READ THIS, YOU HAVE 2 INCIDENTS OF A 65-DECIBEL LEVELS AND SO I BELIEVE TO BE UNIFORM, THIS NEEDS TO BE CHANGED TO 75-DECIBELS. OF COURSE, I DO NOT HAVE THE POWER TO DO THIS MYSELF AND THIS NEEDS TO BE A UNILATERAL

[01:50:04]

DECISION OF ALL OF THREE OF US. >> I SECOND YOU.

>> SECOND YOU, AND THE AMENDMENT.

>> YOU MAY AGREE -- >> I MAKE A MOTION OR AN

AMENDMENT MOTION. >> I SO MOVE EVERYTHING THAT THE MAYOR JUST SAID AND IF THAT CAN BE SUMMARIZED INTO A MOTION, I

WOULD LIKE TO MOVE SO. >> SECOND.

>> SO I HAVE A MOTION TO STANDARDIZE THE DECIBEL LEVEL IN

THE ORDINANCE TO 75 75-DECIBE. >> JUST SO I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING IS THAT YOU'RE APPROVING EVERYTHING ELSE WITH THE EXCEPTION OF WHAT IS IN TABLE ONE UNDER RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY CHANGE THOSE 65-DECIBEL LEVELS TO 75.

IS THAT CORRECT? >> YES, THAT'S CORRECT, OR ANOTHER WAY APPROACH IT, YOU CAN DELETE THE TABLE AND TYPE IN 75 BECAUSE THERE WOULD BE NO DISTINCTION.

IT WOULD BE UNIFORM. >> THERE'S A BIG DISTINCTION BECAUSE IN THE NIGHTTIME, IT'S TIME TO 55.

>> YES, EXCELLENT. >> AND 65 TO 75 IN TABLE ONE.

>> AND THAT'S FOR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY AND NONRESIDENTIAL PROPERTY WOULD REMAIN THE SAME. IS THAT CORRECT?

IS THAT WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON? >> CORRECT.

IS THAT YOUR UNDERSTANDING? >> NONRESIDENTIAL REMAINS AS

LISTED? >> AND WE ARE GOOD TO GO.

>> LET'S CUT TO THE ANGST, I'M OPPOSED TO 75.

I WOULD GO TO 70. WE'LL VOTE AGAINST IT FOR THAT VERY REASON AND I THINK THAT'S TOO LOUD FOR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY, BUT AS MY COLLEAGUE SAYS AND KNOWS HOW TO COUNT THE ROOM AND SO, I MOVE TO CALL THE QUESTION.

>> I DO HAVE SOME -- AT LEAST ONE SPEAKER ON THIS.

SO I WOULD LIKE TO -- >> THAT'S FINE.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE SPEAKER, MISS MARGARET DAVIS.

>> MAY I READ THE TITLE BECAUSE OTHERWISE WE'LL BE BACK.

>> LET US NOT GET AHEAD OF OURSELVES AND PLEASE CONTINUE.

>> ORDINANCE 2021-21, ORDINANCE OF THE CITY, AMENDING AMENR 42, ARTICLE 5 NOISE, PROVIDING FOR APPLICABILITY AND AMENDING 42, DEFINING TERMS, AMENDING 143, ESTABLISHING MAXIMUM PERMISSIBLE SOUND LEVELS AND AMENDING 144, ESTABLISHING LEVELS AND IDENTIFYING PROHIBITED NOISE DISTURBANCES AND AMENDING 146, EXEMPT NOISES AND AMENDING 147, JOINT LIABILITY AND DETAILING RESPONSIBILITY AND AMENDING 149, PROVIDING FOR ENFORCE THE PROCEDURES AND NOTICES OF CREATION AND 150, FINES AND PENALTIES, CREATING 151, VARIANCES AND CREATING 152, ADMINISTRATIVE POLICIES AND PROCEDURES AND CREATING 153 AND PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE AND I KNOW MISS MARGARET DAVIS WILL MAKE HER WAY UP HERE AND THANK YOU FOR ALL OF THE WORK YOU'VE DONE AS A RETIRED ATTORNEY HERSELF AND SHE HAS A LOT OF EXPERIENCE DRAFTING LEGISLATION

AND THANK YOU. >> MISS DAVIS, IF YOU WOULD STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE.

>> MARGARET DAVIS, 2162, FIRST AVENUE.

AND AS I'VE SAID BEFORE, I KNOW WE ALL WANT AN EFFECTIVE NOISE ORDINANCE THAT PROTECTS THE HEALTH AND QUALITY LIFE OF ALL CITY RESIDENTS, ESPECIALLY IN THEIR HOMES WHILE PROVIDING A VIBRANT, YET REASONABLE, LIVE MUSIC SCENE.

I BELIEVE THAT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE BEFORE YOU AMENDED IT TO BE 75 FOR RESIDENTIAL. I THOUGHT THIS WAS AN EXTRAORDINARY COMPROMISE BECAUSE IT ACHIEVED THAT GOAL.

IT PROVIDED HIGHER NOISE LEVELS THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE CITY, MUCH HIGHER THAN I ADVOCATED, BUT IT WAS LOWER DECIBEL LEVELS THAN

[01:55:01]

PREFERRED BY THE MUSIC VENUES. BUT THAT IS WHAT COMPROMISE IS ABOUT. BOTH SIDES GET LESS THAN IDEAL.

WITH THE 75-DECIBEL LEVEL FOR NONRESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES, THAT ALLOWS THE BEACH TO BOAST THAT IT JOINS SARASOTA, KEY WEST AND JACKSONVILLE THIS HAVING THE LARGEST NOISE LEVEL FOR COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES IN ALL OF FLORIDA.

I KNOW THAT IS WHAT YOU OFF WANT.

YES, SOME PLACES MAY NEED TO IMPLEMENT NOISE ABATEMENT, BUT WITHOUT QUESTION, THAT LEVEL IS MUCH HIGHER THAN WHAT IS PERMITTED UNDER THE LONG-STANDING AUDIBLE ORDINANCE.

AND 75-DECIBELS FOR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES IS A DIFFERENT STORY AND AT 65 BEST 65-DECIBELS E IMPOSING A LOWER LEVEL FOR HOSPITALS AND SCHOOLS, AS WELL AS RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES WHICH IS SUBJECTLY SIGNIFICANTLY. THIS IS ONLY 60 OUTSIDE, AND 65 IS MUCH MORE ANNOYING THAN ME AND LOUDER IN THIS CITY, INCLUDING YOURSELVES. I WOULD HAVE PREFERRED TO SUCK IT UP AND DEAL WITH THE LOUDER AND MORE NOISE INTRUSION INSIDE MY HOME AND NOW, I'M GOING TO HAVE TO GO TO 75 AND THAT ACTUALLY COULD CAUSE THE CITY TO HAVE A LEGAL CHALLENGE BECAUSE YOU'RE HIGHER THAN THE RECOMMENDED HEALTH LEVEL FROM THE WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION AND EPA AND SO, THE CITY WILL BE UNABLE NOW WITH THE LEVEL WITH RESIDENTIAL PROMPTS PROPERTO SATISFY YOU PROTECT THE WELL-BEING OF THE CITIZENS INCLUDING AS THE SUPREME COURT SAYS, THEIR RIGHT TO PRIVACY AND QUIET ENJOYMENT IN THEIR HOMES. SO IN SHORT, I WOULD STRONGLY URGE YOU TO SUPPORT THE ORDINANCE WITH THE 75 FOR NONRESIDENTIAL AND 65, BUT I CANNOT IN ANY WAY RECOMMEND THAT YOU VOTE FOR A 75-DECIBEL LEVEL FOR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES.

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, MA'AM, AND THANK

YOU FOR YOUR ASSISTANCE. >> VICE MAYOR.

I THOUGHT THIS WORKED PRETTY GOOD, BUT I WILL SUPPORT THE MOTION AND I THINK WITH NEED AN ORDINANCE AND MOVE FORWARD AND WHAT I DO BELIEVE IS THAT WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE PROVIDE THE EQUIPMENT AND THE PEOPLE TO ENFORCE THIS

ORDINANCE. >> THANK YOU, SIR.

SO THE FIRST VOTE IS ON THE AMENDMENT FOR A UNIFORM

75-DECIBEL. >> HE AMENDED THE WHOLE THING.

>> THE MOTION STANDS AS AMENDED AS A ONE-SHOT DEAL.

>> OK. >> IS THAT CORRECT?

>> WITH HAVE ANOTHER SPEAKER. OK,.

>> COMMISSIONER ROSS. >> I AM OPPOSED TO 75-DECIBELS AND RECEIVING PROPERTY AND YOU THINK THAT'S TOO LOUD FOR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES AND 65 FOR MARYLAND, WHERE I LIVE, WAS ACCEPTABLE AND I WOULD GO TO 70, BUT 75 IS EXCESSIVE AND I WILL

VOTE AGAINST IT. >> I GET THE LAST WORD AND I WILL RELATE THE FOLLOWING TALE. LAST WEEK, I HAD DINNER AT THE BOATHOUSE AND SAT AT THE VERY END TABLE WITH A PARTY OF FIVE OTHER FOLKS AND, OF COURSE, TOOK OUT MY NOISE METER.

THE MUSIC LEVEL AT MY TABLE AT THE VERY END HERE ON ASH WAS 84-DECIBELS. SO I COULD TELL YOU STANDING AT THE FRONT DOOR OF CITY HALL, WHICH IS JUST A LITTLE FURTHER AWAY, AT 75-DECIBELS, THEY WILL BE IN VIOLATION OF THIS NOISE ORDINANCE EVERY SINGLE NIGHT. I MET WITH MR. HUNTLEY REGARDING THE NOISE ABATEMENT MEASURES AND HE PROMISED UNTIL THE SKY TURNS BLUE THEY WERE WORKING ON IT.

AND I INFORMED MR. HUNTLEY THAT THEY HAD APPROXIMATELY FOUR WEEKS TO DO SOMETHING BEFORE A NOISE ORDINANCE BECAME LAW OF THE CITY. AND ALSO INFORMED HIM OF MY DINNER AND THAT HE WOULD BE IN VIOLATION EVERY SINGLE NIGHT IF

[02:00:06]

THEY PLAYED THE MUSIC AT THE VOLUME THEY WERE PLAYING IT.

ANYWAY, I SUPPORT THE ORDINANCE. AND YOU DO HAVE A SPEAKER, MR. ERNST, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK.

>> I'M SORRY? FOOD TRUCKS, THANK YOU.

>> WILL YOU PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.

POWER (ROLE CALL) >> AND THAT MOTION PASSED 4-1.

>> SECOND READING SCHEDULED JUL. >> I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION.

>> COMMISSIONER ROSS? >> HOW LONG WILL IT TAKE THE POLICE FORCE TO BE ABLE TO ENFORCE THIS?

>> IT WILL PROBABLY TAKE 30 TO 60 DAYS ONCE WE GET PASSED THE SECOND READING, WHICH WE'VE BEEN HERE BEFORE.

>> AND THE EXPECTED COST OF THAT ENFORCEMENT.

>> THIRTY-FIVE TO $50,000. >> THANK YOU.

>> AND CAN YOU BREAK DOWN THAT COST?

>> APPROXIMATELY SEVEN SOUND METERS, TWO CODE ENFORCEMENT AND 40 SWORN OFFICERS AND TWO CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS.

>> DID YOU NEED FUNDING FOR THAT $50,000?

>> EVENTUALLY, YES. WE WILL HAVE A PROPOSAL ONCE WE

NEGOTIATE A SECOND READING. >> GREAT.

SO FOR BREVITY, WE'LL HAVE THAT AT THE FUNDING REQUEST, THANK

YOU. >> WE ARE ONTO 8.2, ALCOHOL.

[8.2 ALCOHOL ORDINANCE 202122 AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF FERNANDINA BEACH, FLORIDA BY AMENDING CHAPTER 10, ALCOHOL, BY CREATING SECTION 1, POLICY AND INTENT; AMENDING SECTION 2, DEFINITIONS, TO INCLUDE HIGHWAY AND MOTOR VEHICLE; AMENDING SECTION 3, NUDITY, TO INCLUDE AN EXCEPTION FOR BREASTFEEDING MOTHERS; BY AMENDING SECTION 4, POSSESSION OF OPEN CONTAINER IN VEHICLE, TO INCLUDE EXCEPTIONS FOR LICENSED CHARTER OR CHAUFFEUR SERVICES AND TO DEFINE PENALTIES; BY AMENDING SECTIONS 1, 2, 3, 4, AND 5 TO EDIT FOR CLARITY WITHOUT CHANGING THEIR MEANING; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Synopsis: Adds certain definitions and exemptions to the Code of Ordinances in Chapter 10 relating to alcohol and edits that chapter for clarity.]

ORDINANCE 2021-22, ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY, AMENDING THE ORDINANCES OF THE CITY BY AMENDING CHAPTER 10, ALCOHOL, BY CREATING SECTION ONE, AMENDING SECTION 2, DEFINITIONS TO INCLUDE HIGHWAY AND MOTOR VEHICLE, AMENDING 3, NUDITY FOR BREAST FEEDING MOTHERS BY AMENDING 4, POSSESSION OF OPEN CONTAINER IN VEHICLE, TO INCLUDING LICENSED, CHARTER OR CHAUFFER SERVICES BUO EDIT FOR CLARITY AND FOR

PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. >> THANK YOU.

DO I HAVE A MOTION? >> I WOULD LIKE A MOTION TO PASS THIS WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENT, THAT IN SECTION 10.4, THAT SECTION A AND B BE STRUCK AND SIMPLY READ UNLAWFUL FOR ANY PERSON TO POSSESS ANY CONTAINER IN VEHICLE AS IN 2.6, 1936 IN

THE CITY. >> I SECOND.

>> OK, A MOTION AND A SECOND, ANY -- I HAVE A PUBLIC SPEAKER ON THIS. MR. DALY.

>> WHILE MR. DALY IS COMING UP, BECAUSE A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE STATE STAT CONSTITUTE STATUTE SAYS, BASICALLY, THE STATE STATUTE SAYS AN OPEN CONTAINER IN A VEHICLE, BECAUSE 316 IS THE TRAFFIC CODE FOR THE STATE, IF IT'S A VEHICLE FOR HIGHER, A LIMOUSIN, CHARTER BUS, A TOUR BUS, YOU CAN HAVE AN OPEN CONTAINER AS LONG THE DRIVER OF THE VEHICLE DOES NOT HAVE THAT OPENER CONTAINER THEIR POSSESSION AND WE GOT MORE RESTRICTIVE IN OUR SECTIONS A & B WHERE WE RECONSTRUCTED E TYPES OF VEHICLE AND IT DEALS

WITH VEHICLES FOR HIGHER AND . >> COMMISSIONER ROSS, DID YOU HAVE A COMMENT ON WHAT THE CITY ATTORNEY JUST SAID BEFORE WE GET

TO THE PUBLIC SPEAKER? >> THE CHANGES AND I THINK WHAT YOU WILL SAY MUTE. IT FOLLOWS THE STATE STATUTE GOING BETWEEN THE CITY AND WHAT WE PROPOSED WAS YOU COULDN'T HAVE IT IN AN UBER CAR AND THIS ALLOWS FROM ONE SECTION OF THE CITY TO THE OTHER, YOU DON'T KNOW WHETHER YOU'RE ENTERING THE CITY OR COUNTY AND JUST UNIFORM AND EASY FOR THE POLICE TO

[02:05:03]

ENFORCE AND THE POLICE HAVE NO PROBLEM ENFORCING THIS AND THOUGHT IT WAS FINE TO ENFORCE THE STATE STATUTE AND CAN WE ALLOW CONTAINERS IN VEHICLES TO HIRE AND YES.

>> MR. DALY, STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS?

>> DANIELLE DALY, AND I RUN HISTORIC TOURS AND OVER THE PERIOD OF TIME THAT WE HAVE A FRANCHISE WITH THE CITY, IT IS A FREQUENT REQUEST FOR SMALLER GROUPS.

WE RUN UP TO A MAXIMUM OF 15-SEAT VEHICLES AND SMALLER PARTIES BOTH AS VISITORS AND TOURISTS PEOPLE THAT ARE ON THE ISLAND AND WHEN THEY ARRIVE, BEFORE THEY CHECK IN.

FOR ONE EXAMPLE, TO GET ON BOARD AND BOARD AND ONE OF THE REASONS I'M ADVOCATING THE SMALLER GROUPS, THE FLOODGATE TO HAVE LARGE COACHES, YOU KNOW, LARGER VEHICLES, OPEN BUSES, ET CETERA, THAT CAME INTO THE ISLAND WITH 40, 30, 40, 50 PEOPLE WITH LARGE AMOUNTS OF ALCOHOL AND I DO NOT ADVOCATE THAT.

THE VEHICLES HAVE 12 OR 15 AND THEY'RE ENCLOSED VEHICLES, SOUND-PROOFED VEHICLES VEHO NOT HAVE NOISE ISSUES AND WE'VE BEEN RUNNING OVER 18 MONTHS ON THE ISLAND AND ONE OF THE REASONS I WANT TO INTRODUCE THIS, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, WOULD LIKE THIS PETITION PASSED IS SO WHEN PEOPLE DO WANT TO COME ON BOARD, RATHER THAN ME TURNING THEM DOWN BECAUSE OPEN CONTAINERS IN FLORIDA IS ILLEGAL, THEN OVER THE 90 MINUTES OF THE TOUR, THEY CAN HAVE ONE OR TWO GLASSES OF WINE OR BEER OVER WHATEVER ES. WHATEVER ELSE.

AND THEN TO INTRODUCE THE USE OF PLASTIC CUPS SO THERE'S NO GLASS. SO IN THE LIKELY EVENT OF ACCIDENTS, THERE'S TO LIABILITY OF GLASS ON THE BUS.

>> THANK YOU, SUR. >> THANK YOU.

SIR. >> THANK YOU.

>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS. >> SEEING NONE, MADAM CLERK.

(ROLE CALL). >> MOTION PASSED 4-1.

[8.3 MOBILE FOOD TRUCKS ORDINANCE 202123 AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF FERNANDINA BEACH, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING CHAPTER 26, BUSINESSES, BY REPEALING ARTICLE III, FOOD VENDORS AND FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS IN ITS ENTIRETY, BY CREATING A NEW ARTICLE III TITLED MOBILE FOOD TRUCKS; BY CREATING SECTION 66, PURPOSE, BY CREATING SECTION 67, DEFINITIONS, BY CREATING SECTION 68, GENERALLY; RESERVING SECTIONS 6990; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Synopsis: Replaces Article III, Food Vendors and Food Establishments of Chapter 26 of the Code of Ordinances with a new Article III titled Mobile Food Trucks.]

>> ITEM 8.3, MOBILE FOOD TRUCKS. >> AND SECOND READING FOR THE

LAST ORDINANCE IS JULY 20TH. >> ORDINANCE 2021-3, AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES FOR THE CITY BY AMENDING CHAPTER 26, BUSINESSES BY REPEALING ARTICLE 3, FOOD VENDORS AND FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS IN THE ENTIRETY BY CREATING A NEW ARTICLE 3, TITLED MOBILE FOOD TRUCKS AND CREATING 66, PURPOSE, BY CREATING 67, DEFINITIONS AND 68 GENERALLY AND RESERVING SECTION 69-90, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND EFFECTIVE DATE.

UP UNTIL NOW, THE CITY HAS PROHIBITED MOBILE FOOD VENDING.

AND THAT MEANS THAT IN ZONING DISTRICTS AND ON CITY RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND OWNED PROPERTY, PARKS AND SO FORTH.

THE STATES OF FLORIDA, THIS LEGISLATIVE SESSION, THEY CALL THEM MOBILE FOOD DISPENSARIES AND I THINK COMMISSIONER ROSS WILL ADVOCATE USING THAT DEFINITION INSTEAD OF MOBILE FOOD TRUCKS AND THE STATE PROVIDED A DEFINITION.

AND WITH THIS ORDINANCE, IT SAYS THAT ON CITY PROPERTY AND ON CITY RIGHTS-OF-WAY, THEY'RE PERMITTED WITH THE CITY MANAGER.

WE'RE CAREFUL WITH THE LANGUAGE BECAUSE WE CANNOT REQUIRE AND OCCUPATIONAL LICENSE OR A REGULATORY PERMIT PROCEDURE TO HAVE THEM OPERATE AT ALL, BUT ON CITY PROPERTY, WE'RE SAYING THEY WILL BE REGULATED THROUGH THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE AND SPECIAL EVENTS, WE HAVE SEEN THEM FOR YEARS AT CENTRAL PARK WHEN WE HAVE SPECIAL EVENTS AND THAT'S GOING TO CONTINUE AND THE DIFFERENCE NOW WILL BE THAT ON PRIVATE PROPERTY, THEY WILL BE PERMITTED ON PRIVATE PROPERTY AND WE HAVE HAD INQUIRIES FROM MOBILE FOOD TRUCK OWNERS THAT OWN PROPERTY AND THEY WANT TO PUT ON A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY A FOOD TRUCK THERE AND BE ABLE TO HAVE PEOPLE COME UP FROM THE PUBLIC AND SERVE THEIR FOOD THAT WAY AND SO, THIS IS ALLOWING IT AS THE STATE DOES BUT REGULATING IT SOMEWHAT AND I KNOW COMMISSIONER ROS HAS ROSS H.

[02:10:01]

>> DO I HAVE A MOTION? >> I MAKE A MOTION WE PASS THIS WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS THAT NUMBER ONE, YOU WERE HANDED THESE AMENDMENTS BUT SECTION 26:27 CHANGES THE DEFINITION AND MATCHES WHAT THE STATE SAYS AND NUMBER -- AND THEN ALLOW 26:28 SO WE ALLOW FOOD TRUCKS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY WERE PROPERLY ZONED AND ONLY ALLOW FOOD TRUCKS ON CITY PROPERTY AND RIGHT-OF-WAY WITH THE CITY MANAGER DESIGNEE AND TAKING CARE OF THE SHRIMP FEST AND ALL OF THE OTHER EVENTS AND THAT'S WHAT

I MOVE. >> I HAVE MOTION AND DO I HAVE A

SECOND? >> I'LL SECOND IT.

>> A MOTION AND A SECOND. I DO HAVE TWO SPEAKERS ON THIS