[1. CALL TO ORDER]
[00:00:10]
>> CALLED TO ORDER THE DECEMBER 7, 2021 CITY COMMISSION MEETING. MADAME CLARK, WILL YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. (ROLL CALL).
>> THANK YOU. PERSONAL DEVICES AS I ALWAYS SAY AT THE START OF THE MEETING, PUT THEM ON SILENCE OR AIRPLANE MODE OR TURNED THEM OFF. THAT WOULD BE APPRECIATED.
I LOOK FORWARD TO THE DAY WHEN I SAY WE ARE NOT UNDER COVID-19 GUIDELINES BUT WE STILL ARE. THE OMICRON VARIANT RIGHT NOW.
SO PLEASE TAKE WHATEVER MEASURES YOU NEED TO PROTECT YOUR HEALTH AND SAFETY. AND VICE MAYOR, IF YOU WILL LEAD US IN THE PLEDGE AND REMAIN STANDING FOR THE INVOCATION BY
SAMANTHA ROGIC. >> I PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT SPANS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD INDIVISIBLE WITH LIBERTY AND
JUSTICE FOR ALL. >> MAYOR, COMMISSIONERS AND STAFF AND CITIZENS AND GUESTS. LET ME THANK YOU FOR INCLUDING ME IN TODAY'S PROCEEDINGS. THE WORD IMPLICATION COMES FROM A WORD THAT MEANS TO CALL UPON. AND INFINITIVE THAT DENOTES A QUESTION TO WHOM AND WHAT DO WE CALL UPON.
HISTORICALLY, AND EVEN TODAY WE SEEK WISDOM AND GUIDANCE FROM GOD OR FROM YOU BUT TODAY AT THE THRESHOLD OF THE NEW YEAR I INVITE YOU TO CALL UPON ONE ANOTHER.
LEAD US INVOKE OUR FELLOW HOMO SAPIENS WHO HAVE LEARNED THAT WORKING TOGETHER AS A WHOLE ENHANCES AND BENEFITS THE INDIVIDUAL IMMENSELY. WHAT WE LACK OR STRIVE FOR IN OURSELVES LET US FIND IN OTHERS WHO SHARE OUR PASSION FOR SERVICE. IN THE WORDS OF THE POET, NO MAN IS AN ISLAND. EVERY MAN IS A PIECE OF THE PART. AS A LONG-TERM RESIDENT AND FORMER EMPLOYEE OF THE CITY, AND A MEMBER OF THE FLORIDA HUMAN ASSOCIATION I CHAMPION THIS NOTION.
AS ONE OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL FRAMERS SAID MY RIGHT IS A MAN IS THE RIGHT OF ANOTHER AND IT BECOMES MY DUTY TO GUARANTEE AND POSSESS. LET US FULFILL THIS DUTY, OBLIGATION TO REPRESENT AND MANIFEST THE WILL OF THE GOVERNED, OUR FELLOW CITIZENS. LET OUR SHARED EXPERIENCE COLOR US AND OTHER EXPERIMENTATION AND LIGHTNESS ALL.
LET US PURSUIT TRUTH FOR A BETTER WAY TO SERVE OUR PEERS BY AN EXTENSION OF OURSELVES AND TO FOSTER WELL-BEING FOR ALL.
AGAIN THE WORDS OF THOMAS PAINE. THOSE WHO EXPECT TO REAP THE BLESSINGS OF FREEDOM MUST SUPPORT IT.
YOU HAVE OUR SINCERE GRATITUDE FOR SETTING AN EXAMPLE OF SERVICE WE MUST ALL FOLLOW. THANK YOU AND HAPPY HOLIDAYS TO
ALL OF YOU. >> ALL RIGHT ITEM FOR PART ONE A
[4.1 PRESENTATION - NASSAU HUMANE SOCIETY]
PRESENTATION BY THE NASSAU HUMANE SOCIETY.>> YOU CAN TAKE THAT TO THE NIGHT SHIFT.
MARSHA IS TEN MONTHS OLD AND SHE HAS A BROTHER.
>> DID YOU SAY TEN MONTHS OLD? >> AS.
79 POUNDS AND THIS IS HER FIRST OUTING.
WE BROUGHT HER AND HER BROTHER AND TODAY.
HER BROTHER IS LIGHTER IN COLOR. BUT HE DOESN'T GO THROUGH DOORWAYS. HE DOESN'T GO THROUGH.
SHE WAS NOT AMAZED AT ALL. THE OTHER DOGS WERE IN HER FACE.
SHE GOT IN THE CAR. SHE WAS FINE.
SHE IS A BIG TEDDY BEAR. I WOULD SAY A BIG TEDDY BEAR.
BUT THAT'S IT. SO DO YOU WANT A TINY PUPPY OR A
[00:05:05]
HUGE PUPPY. YOU HAVE A CHOICE.>> REMIND US AGAIN THE PROCESS FOR ADOPTING A DOG OR A PET?
>> WE WILL DO A MEET AND GREET. BRING YOUR OTHER ANIMALS IN WITH YOU. AND THEN IF YOU HAVE PETS AT HOME WE CAN DO THAT WITH YOU. FILL OUT AN APPLICATION.
YOU ARE GOOD TOO. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR
BRINGING HER. >> THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.
NOW I WILL TRY TO GO. >> THAT IS A FRIENDLY DOG.
[5. PUBLIC COMMENT REGARDING ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA OR ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA]
>> WE WILL MOVE ON TO ITEM FIVE REGARDING ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA. AS YOU MAY OR MAY NOT KNOW, THE AGREEMENT PROPOSED BY THE CITY IS ON THE AGENDA FOR APPROVAL TOMORROW NIGHT. SO CHAIRMAN, I WILL NOT RESTRICT YOU TO 3 MINUTES I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT THAT WE CONTINUE.
>> THANK YOU. I'M HERE TO LET YOU KNOW TOMORROW NIGHT WE WILL BE VOTING ON THE TWO INTERLOCAL AGREEMENTS WON FOR THE CHANNEL ALIGNMENT AND ONE FOR THE WORDING THAT WE CAME OUT WITH. I WANT TO THANK THE CITY MANAGER FOR THE CHARGER REALIGNMENT AND AGREEMENT THAT IS SOMETHING WE HAVE NEEDED FOR A LONG TIME. I DON'T KNOW WHY WE DID NOT GET IT DONE. WHEN HE CAME IN I PROMISE THEM WE WOULD GET IT DONE AND WE DID. I THINK IT IS A GOOD AGREEMENT IT HAS PROPER WORDING FOR BOTH SIDES THAT ONE I AM SURE WE WILL GET APPROVED. THE OTHER AGREEMENT, THE CHARTER WORDING IS AN EXCELLENT AGREEMENT.
I THINK IT WILL WORK. IT WILL WORK FOR BOTH SIDES.
THERE ARE SOME RESTRICTIVE THINGS AND IT BUT WE HAVE AGREED TO LIVE BY THAT. I THINK THAT IS IMPORTANT FOR US TO COME INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH EACH OTHER, WORK TOGETHER AND TRY TO SOLVE THE ISSUES THAT HAVE BEEN DIVIDING US FOR A LONG TIME. I WORKED HARD ON THIS WITH OUR ATTORNEY AND I WANT TO PERSONALLY THANK TAMMY FOR WORKING WITH PATRICK AND GETTING THE BUGS WORKED OUT, THERE WERE SOME DIFFERENT VERSIONS THAT CAME OUT AND WE WORKED TOGETHER TO GET THE WORDING CORRECT. I THINK IT WILL GO WELL WITH THE COMMISSION TOMORROW NIGHT. I KNOW WE WILL HAVE A 4-1 VOTE ON IT BUT I AM NOT SURE WHERE ONE PARTICULAR COMMISSIONER WILL GO ON IT BUT WE SHOULD NOT HAVE ANY PROBLEMS AND WE CAN GO FORWARD FROM HERE. I WAS WORRIED BECAUSE THE LEGISLATION DEDICATION -- DELEGATION MEETING WAS SCHEDULED FOR THE SAME DAY. WE COULDN'T DO ANYTHING BEFORE THAT. I ASKED THEM TO CHANGE THE DATE.
IM HOPING WITH THE APPROVAL TOMORROW IT CAN BE DONE AWAY WITH ALTOGETHER. I ALSO SPOKE TO PATRICK AND ASKED HIM TO TALK TO TAMMY AND TALK TO YOU TO GET A MEETING TOGETHER NEXT MONTH. WE WANT TO IRON OUT WHATEVER AGREEMENTS WE NEED TO AND TRY TO GET A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT OUR GOALS ARE AND HAVE A BETTER RELATIONSHIP WITH THE CITY. WE ARE PART OF THE CITY AND WE WANT TO DO THE RIGHT THING. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, I
APPRECIATE THAT. >> ANY QUESTIONS?
>> COMMISSIONER. >> I JUST WANT TO THANK THE COACH FOR BEING WITH US TODAY AND I APPRECIATE THE TIME.
[00:10:03]
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU SIR.
>> ITEM SIX-POINT ONE, THERE ARE NO OTHER PUBLIC SPEAKERS.
>> THERE ARE A FEW AGENDA ITEMS. >> THE CONSENT AGENDA, IF ANYONE
[6. CONSENT AGENDA]
WANTS SIX-POINT ONE UP WITH A PULLED.>> I RECOMMEND APPROVAL. >> I WANT TO PULL IT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES. IF I MAKE, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU IT IS NO LONGER RELEVANT. THE STATE HAS LET THEIR STATE OF EMERGENCY EXPIRE SO THE REASON WE HAD IT ON THERE WAS TO ALLOW FOR FUNDING THAT THE CITY EXPENDED BUT THAT REQUIRED THE STATE TO HAVE AN EMERGENCY STATE IN PLACE TOO.
BUT THIS IS THE FIRST STEP. STAFF RECOMMENDS YOU TAKE THIS
[7.1 VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION AGREEMENT - 1995 CLINCH DRIVE]
OPPORTUNITY AND LET THIS EXPIRE. >> SO IT IS PULLED OFF OF THE
AGENDA. >> RESOLUTIONS ITEM 7.1.
ANNEXATION AGREEMENT, 1995. >> I'M NOT LOOKING AT THE AGENDA
ITEM. >> THAT IS THE ONLY ITEM.
>> THANK YOU. >> ON THESE ANNEXATION AGREEMENTS. WE HAVE THE PARCEL ON THE SCREEN, THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL, IF THAT IS POSSIBLE.
>> MS. GIBSON IS AN EXPERT AT DOING THAT.
>> UNFORTUNATELY ALL I HAVE IS,. >> THIS IS A VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION AGREEMENT. IT IS A REQUEST FOR DRINKING WATER SERVICE TO BE BROUGHT TO THE PROPERTY, CURRENTLY THERE IS ONE SINGLE-FAMILY HOME ON THE PROPERTY, IT WAS BUILT IN 2018 IF THE BRAND-NEW HOUSE ASKING FOR PORTABLE -- PORTABLE WATER
SERVICE. >> I'M SORRY I ANITA MOTION
>> SO I SPOKE TO THE HOMEOWNER AND THEY WANT TO PUT IN CITY WATER IT DOESN'T AFFECT OUR WETLANDS FORMS.
>> COMMISSIONER. I JUST WANT TO SAY BRIEFLY THIS IS ODD. THIS IS THE SAME ROAD THAT GOES OUT WHERE THE OTHER WATER AND SEWER WILL GO.
THIS WILL NOT CONNECT AND TWO YEARS LATER WE HAVE A PROPERTY ON THE SAME LINE. I AM JUST STATING, I THINK IT WILL HAPPEN A LOT FASTER. THIS WILL PAY FOR THE CITY
[00:15:07]
SERVICE. >> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? I SEE NINE, MADAME CLERK WOULD YOU CALLED THE VOTE PLEASE?
>> THE MOTION PASSED 5-0. ITEM SEVEN-POINT TO SPECIAL
[7.2 SPECIAL EVENT CO-SPONSORSHIP]
EVENT COSPONSORSHIP. THIS IS RELATED TO A RESOLUTION ABOUT THE COMMISSION SEVERAL YEARS AGO THAT EACH ENTITY THAT HAS FIVE EVENTS. THESE ARE BASED UPON LONG JEVITY AND SO THE FIVE EVENTS, FOURTH OF JULY, AND IN ADDITION TO THAT THEY RECOMMENDED WAVING THE CITY PROPOSED EVENTS ARE VICTIMS ON CENTER AND ONE EVENT TO BE DETERMINED LATER.THE ONLY CHANGE TO THIS YEAR, RESOLUTION IS THE EVENT ORGANIZERS IN THE PAST HAVE BEEN RESPONSIBLE FOR ONLY PREPAYING POLICE AND FIRE FEES BUT BECAUSE OF ONGOING TRASH ISSUES THE ORGANIZERS WILL NOW BE RESPONSIBLE FOR TRASH COLLECTION DURING THEIR EVENT WHETHER THEY WANT A CONTRACT OR USE VOLUNTEERS THE CITIES WILL MONITOR THE CITY IS RESPONSIBLE FOR REMOVING TRASH. COMING UP WITH BUT TRASH
COLLECTION. >> I HAVE A MOTION AND THE
SECOND PERIOD DISCUSSION,. >> PEOPLE WANT TO VOLUNTEER AND THE CITY WILL MONITOR IT. LET'S SAY THEY HAVE ENOUGH VOLUNTEERS TO TAKE CARE OF THE JOB.
IF THEY DO A GREAT JOB THE CITY DOES NOT CARE TO COLLECT THE MONEY. IT'S ONLY IF THEY HAD VOLUNTEERS WERE WERE LOOSE LOSING VOLUNTEERS WHEN THEY MONITOR IT WE HAVE TO PAY TO CLEAN IT UP. SO WE WILL MONITOR THAT INSIGHT YOU WILL BE REQUIRED TO PAY BECAUSE LAST YEAR IT WAS A
NIGHTMARE. >> JUST MAKING SURE WE HAVE A PLAN. BECAUSE IF THEY USE VOLUNTEERS THAT'S GREAT, BUT THE TRASH CAN BE A LOT.
>> PRICE MAKER YOUR LIGHT WAS ON.
>> I SUPPORT THIS BUT I WANT TO MAKE THE POINT, AND THE WATER FRONT PARK ISSUE, WILL IT BE ON THE WATERFRONT ALWAYS.
WE BUILT TALK ABOUT IT LATER BUT I THINK THE MAJOR CONSIDERATION IS WE ARE WAVING THE CITY FEES BECAUSE A LOT OF TIMES THE FEES ARE RELATED TO THE CITY PARKING LOTS.
SO WHERE IT IS LOCATED IS IRRELEVANT.
>> DO YOU ANTICIPATE CITY MANAGER IN 2022 THE CURRENT
LOCATION WILL BE IN JEOPARDY? >> I WOULD NOT THINK SO.
>> THANK YOU. >> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? I SEE NONE, MADAME CLERK PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.
(ROLL CALL). >> IT YOU AUTHORIZE ME TOO
[7.3 AUTHORIZATION TO DEFEND - CENTER STREET RESTAURANT GROUP]
DEFEND ANY ACTION BROUGHT AGAINST THE CITY AS MANY OF YOU[00:20:01]
KNOW THE RESTAURANT CENTER STREET RESTAURANT GROUP IS THE LESSEE WITH THE CITY AND WE HAVE AN APPEAL HEARING AND THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT DENIED THE APPEAL MEANING THEY FILED AN APPEAL AND A MOTION TO STAY BUT CITY'S DECISION.THE JUDGE APPROVED THE MOTION TO STAY ALLOWING THEM TO CONTINUE OCCUPYING THE RESTAURANT UNTIL THEY GET THE HEARING ITSELF THAT WILL BE SOMETIMES CONNECTION YEAR END I'M ASKING BUT I FIGURE I WOULD GIVE IT OPPORTUNITY TO DO AN UPDATE.
THE UPDATE TO THAT IS THE CITY'S NEXT ACTIONS AFTER AFTER THEY TESTED ONE OF THE BEAMS THAT RUN UNDERNEATH THE RESTAURANT WHICH IS WHERE THEY FOUND AND TESTED SOME REBAR WAS CORRODED AND THEY ARE WORKING TO REPAIR THAT AND GETTING THE CITY'S APPROVAL TO DO THAT. THE CITY AS A LOT MORE BEAMS AND STRUCTURES TO TEST. WE ARE WORKING ON GETTING THAT SCHEDULED. THAT COMES AT A COST.
IT IS SOMEWHERE NEAR $40,000 MAY BE A LITTLE LESS.
THE CITY DOES HAVE TO DO THAT TESTING IN ORDER TO WORK WITH CENTER STREET RESTAURANT GROUP. THEY HAVE FOUR YEARS LEFT ON THE LEASE. WE HAVE TWO THINGS HERE.
FIRST LET'S HAVE A MOTION ON THE AUTHORIZATION.
>> RECOMMEND APPROVAL. >> NOW WE CAN HAVE DISCUSSION.
WE HAVE TWO THINGS. WE HAVE THE HEARING AND THE INSPECTION ON THE AREA SURROUNDING THAT THE CITY IS
RESPONSIBLE FOR. >> WE ARE NOT ASKING SPECIFICALLY FOR APPROVAL TO DO THE TESTING.
ONLY AUTHORIZATION. >> ONE IS ONLY INFORMATIONAL.
>> ALL RIGHTS, VICE MAYOR. >> WE ARE -- JUST REMEMBER WHAT HAPPENED IN SOUTH FLORIDA. ALL RIGHT COMMISSIONER.
>> I DID SIT THROUGH THE HEARING WITH THE JUDGE.
ONE WAS TIED AND I WILL BRING UP THE FACT THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE STAND ON THE DECK AND THAT IS A HUGE LOAD.
PARTICULARLY I DON'T KNOW WHAT WILL HAPPEN BUT I WONDER IF THAT
SHOULD BE ALLOWED. >> WITHOUT THE CITY ENGINEER THAT SHOULDN'T BE ALLOWED. BACK WHERE THE TABLES ARE THERE'S NOTHING WE CAN DO ABOUT THAT.
ON THE SOUTH SIDE ON THE EAST SIDE AND WE DON'T LEASE THAT AND WE CAN DO THAT. MY PLAN IS, I WILL SEND A NOTICE AND ASKED THAT NO ONE GATHERED THERE.
THEY CAN CONTROL THE CROWD SPIRIT.
>> THERE ARE FIREWORKS EVERY NIGHT.
WE WILL LET THEM FULLY UNDERSTAND.
WE WILL TELL THEM TO CLOSE THE AREA OFF.
REMEMBER THE PATRIOTS -- PATRONS CAN STILL GO THERE BUT PUTTING UP A BLOCKADE MAY NOT BE THE BEST IDEA.
WE HAVE TO LET THE POLICE KNOW IF THEY SEE A CROWD GATHERING.
[00:25:04]
>> I HEAR WHAT LYNN IS SAYING. AND FOR THE THE NORTH SIDE AND THE EAST SIDE WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE REPORT, IT DOES NOT TAKE A ROCKET SCIENTIST TO SEE WHAT THIS WEEK AREAS.
IF IT'S JUST LIMITING ANYONE THEY WOULD NORMALLY VISIT INSIDE OF THE RESTAURANT. I KNOW THAT IS SAFE ENOUGH.
SINCE WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE OTHER PART YET, I CAN TURN
MY LIGHT OFF. >> I WOULD LIKE TO TALK ABOUT THE $40,000. CAN YOU STATE WHAT THE $40,000
IS FOR. >> THE CONCRETE BEAMS, THEY ARE ABOUT 18 INCHES THAT SURROUND THE PERIMETER OF THE BUILDING AND SOME OF THE INSIDE WHICH IS UNDERNEATH THE RESTAURANT.
MOST OF THOSE WOULD SAY MOST OF IT BELONGS TO THE CITY AND THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CITY. THEY WERE ALL TESTED.
THEY WANT TO TEST BEYOND THE IMAGING PAY -- IT'S LIKE UP BIOPSY. THEY PULLED THAT OUT.
AND DETERMINE HOW MUCH OF THE REBAR AS IMPLODED BECAUSE THE THICKNESS OF THE REBAR DETERMINES HOW MUCH STRENGTH THE BEAMS HAVE. THEY DID THAT AND TESTING AND THEY DETERMINED THAT THE REBAR HAS WORN AWAY.
THE CITY SAYS IT IS FINE AND IT CAN BE FIXED AND IT CAN WITHSTAND THE LOAD. THE CITY HAVING MANY MORE OF AREAS THAT ARE VERY CONCERNING. WE NEED TO DO BIOPSIES THERE.
OTHERWISE WE HAVE EXPERTS WHO ARE DISAGREEING THE ONLY WAY TO GET FURTHER INTO IT IS TO LOOK AT LOCATIONS.
>> AND IF WE CLEAR IT THERE WON'T BE A LAWSUIT ANYMORE.
THAT WOULD BE MY EXPECTATION, EVERYTHING WOULD BE DROPPED AND REGARDLESS IF WE SPEND THE MONEY, TO FURTHER THIS LAWSUIT, WE WILL HAVE TO SPEND THE $40,000 TO TEST?
IS THAT RIGHT? >> I'M NOT SURE WHAT YOU MEAN.
>> WE ARE AUTHORIZING CONTINUATION OF THE LAWSUIT.
MY QUESTION, WHEN I AM GETTING TO IS THAT, I AM SEEN A CASE WHERE WE AGREED TO DEFEND THE LAWSUIT, THEN WE SPEND MONEY AFTER AND IT PROVES THIS WAS FINE ALL ALONG.
SO, WHAT I AM THINKING ABOUT, IS THERE A WAY WE CAN SPEND THE MONEY NOW, AND CONFIRM IT IS OKAY AND THEN WE DON'T HAVE TO
[00:30:01]
SPEND THE 15TH. >> FIRST ABOUT THE CITY -- THIS IS COVERED BY THE CITY'S INSURANCE COMPANY AND I AM LOOKING AT THE BACKUP RIGHT HERE.
THERE IS NO DEDUCTIBLE. THERE SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN A $15,000 EXPENDITURE EXCEPT FOR WHAT THE CITY HIRED.
THERE IS NO DEDUCTIBLE. THE CLAIM WAS FILED BY THE RESTAURANT GROUP SO WE ARE DEFENDING IT.
AS SOON AS WE GET SOMETHING LIKE THAT, IT WAS SENT TO THE CITY'S INSURANCE COMPANY. THEY ASSIGNED COUNSEL THAT I'VE WORKED WITH TO DEFEND THE CITY AND THERE IS NO COST, NO DEDUCTIBLE. I SEE IT SAYS 2500 AND THAT IS AN OKAY CHECK THAT'S NOT TRUE. THIS IS OUR LIABILITY INSURANCE THEY ARE PAYING FOR THE ATTORNEYS.
THE COST WILL BE EXPENDED DIRECTLY BY THE CITY TO GET THIS MOVING THERE HAS BEEN NO ACTUAL COST TO THE CITY SO FAR.
INSURANCE COMPANY IS TAKING CARE OF THAT.
THE $40,000 WOULD BE THE FIRST THING WE TALKED ABOUT BUT IT HAS
BEEN LESS THAN $10,000. >> I WOULD LIKE TO JUST AS, THEY ARE STAYING IN THE BUILDING UNTIL I SAY WE DO THE TESTING AND PROCEED WITH FURTHER LEGAL ACTION.
I WANT TO CONFIRM WHAT WE ARE SAYING AND I WOULD LIKE TO SEE
THAT DATA. >> FIRST OF ALL, LET'S PAINT THE PICTURE. THE PICTURE IS THERE IS A STAY BECAUSE THERE IS DISPUTE ON THE REBAR.
OUR ENGINEERS SAYS THE INSPECTION IS NOT SAFE.
WE ARE STILL SAYING THE BUILDING IS UNSAFE.
THE INSPECTION OF THE PILLARS WILL NOT SAVE THEM.
WE ARE STILL ARGUING THE BUILDING IS NOT SAFE.
THAT IS BECAUSE OF THE DESTRUCTIVE INSPECTION.
ONE IS NOT DEPENDENT ON THE OTHER.
IT COULD HELP, I SAID GOOD, IN THE POSITIVE IF FOR SOME REASON THE ENGINEERS DO NOT THINK SO WITHOUT DOING THE BIOPSIES IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THE REINFORCING REBAR IS IN BETTER SHAPE THAN WE THINK. OUR ENGINEERS SAY WE WILL TAKE A LOOK AT. I THINK THE POINT IS THE CITY IS NOT EXPENDING THE ONLY THING LEGAL IS TESTING THAT THE CITY
WILL DO. >> ABOUT 40,000-DOLLAR NUMBER
THAT YOU USE, IS. >> YOU ARE CORRECT THAT IS RIGHT THERE. I AM JUST BRINGING IT UP.
[00:35:01]
THANK YOU SIR. >> BASICALLY IT IS BETWEEN 20-$40,000 FOR US TO DO THE TESTING.
>> ADDRESS BUT CITY ATTORNEY YOU MUST TURN YOUR LINE ON PLEASE.
>> GO AHEAD YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. >> SO, IT IS SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 20-$60,000. YOU JUST HIT IT.
>> I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD COST THAT MUCH, I KNOW WE ARE NOT GOING INTO THIS AND I DON'T WANT TO GO INTO IT TOO MUCH FURTHER BUT I CAN BREAK IT DOWN AND SAY, WE DO THIS TEST FOR $40,000 AND WE FIND THAT OUR STRUCTURAL ENGINEER THAT THE CITY HAS HIRED SAYS, IT IS REALLY BAD. THIS REBAR IS RUSTED.
WE HAVE BROKEN CONNECTIONS. THIS IS REALLY NOT SAY.
HERE'S THE PROOF YOU'RE LOOKING AT.
NOW, WHERE DOES THAT PUT US ON THE LEASE.
I WILL DIVE INTO THE NEXT SUBJECT.
>> BRIEFLY, I WANT TO DIVE INTO IT.
FORGET ABOUT IT. NOW WE SAY WHERE ARE WE WHEN THE CITY'S RESPONSIBILITY IS THE BEAMS.
I WILL POSE THAT QUESTION. >> THEN YOU HAVE EVERYTHING CAN BE FIXED FOR A PRICE. THE PROBLEM WITH FIXING ANYTHING THAT WILL BE $150,000 OR MORE, THAT IS MY BALLPARK AND THAT'S NOT MUCH MONEY TO DO THESE FIXES, AND THEN WILL IT BE OVER THE 30% OF THE BUILDINGS VALUE AND EVERYTHING HAS TO BE BROUGHT UP TO CURRENT STANDARDS. IT IS POSSIBLE THAT EVEN IF THE CITY IS WILLING TO DO THE REPAIRS WE CANNOT DO IT WITHOUT VIOLATING THE ORDINANCE AND EXCEEDING THE THRESHOLD.
THE NEXT STEP, WILL YOU SIT DOWN AND FIND OUT WHAT IT IS THE CITY HAS TO PAY TO GET OUT OF THE LEASE.
>> DO I STILL HAVE MY MOMENT? >> I WANT TO -- I DON'T WANT TO GO DOWN THE RABBIT HOLE TOO FAR. THE MOTION ON THE FOUR IS WE HAVE MOTION AND IF THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, WILL YOU CALL THE PADGETT PASSES 5-0. NOW IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO ASK ABOUT CITY ATTORNEY ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS.
>> IT WILL BE A DOLLAR AMOUNT THAT WILL BE STRENUOUS.
I HAVE OF FILLING BECAUSE THE CITY'S RESPONSIBILITY IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY. IF WE CANNOT BRING THE BUILDING UP TO STANDARD, WHERE DOES THAT PUT US HERE I AM JUST MAKING THIS VERBAL AND PUTTING IT ON THE RECORD.
I HAVE A FEELING IT WILL GO BADLY AND I DON'T MEAN THAT IN A GOOD WAY. OUR CONCERN, THE CITY'S CONCERN IS FOR SAFETY. I AM JUST MAKING IT A STATEMENT THAT HOPEFULLY IT IS BOTH CITIES ENDEARMENT TO SPEND THE MONEY, AND THAT IS WHERE THE PROPER APPRAISAL THEY BE TO THE BENEFIT OF THE CITY BECAUSE IT MAY BE LESS MONEY FOR US TO REPAIR IT THEN A DECENT LAWSUIT. THAT IS ALL I HAD TO SAY.
[7.4 AWARD OF RFP 21-03 - HARMARI]
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THAT MATTER?
>> ITEM 7.4, AWARD OF RFP 21-03 HAMARI.
SOLICITING THE SYSTEM. >> RESORT RENTAL OFTEN REFERRED TO AS NLRB BE BOTH ARE ONLY ALLOWED IN SPECIFIC AREAS.
[00:40:02]
THERE HAS BEEN A PROLIFERATION OF THOSE USES OUTSIDE OF THEAREA. >> BETTER PROMOTIONAL AND
DISCUSSION. >> SEVEN-POINT FOR PAST 5-0.
[7.5 AWARD OF ITB 21-08 - HAYWARD CONSTRUCTION GROUP, LLC]
7.5, AWARD OF ITB21 -- ZERO EIGHT.HAYWARD CONSTRUCTION GROUP LLC. >> THIS IS FOR THE RESTORATION OF THE HANDRAIL AT THE SEASIDE SUBDIVISION WALKWAY.
IT IS IN THE AMOUNT OF $99,000. >>
>> THIS GOES FROM THE DEVELOPMENT OVER TO THE STREET
>> THANK YOU SIR. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION.
>> THE CITY DID NOT PUT THAT WALKWAY IN.
>> IT WAS A CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY. MADAME CLERK, WILL YOU PLEASE
CALL THE VOTE. >> THE MOTION PASSES 5-0.
[7.6 AWARD OF RFP 21-11 - WESTERN SPECIALTY CONTRACTORS OF AMERICA]
THE AWARD OF RFP 21 -- 11. >> THE CITY APPLIED FOR AND RECEIVED FUNDING TO SUPPORT THE RESTORATION OF THE WERE.
THE CITY SOLICITED PROPOSALS AND RECOMMEND A PROPER TO THE CONTRACTORS OF AMERICA IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $1.2 MILLION. THIS WILL BE CONDUCTED IN THREE PHASES SO THE FIRST PHASE US ON THE EASTERN SIDE.
DUE TO THE EFFORTS OF JACOBS THE CITY DOES HAVE APPLICATIONS
PENDING. >> RECOMMEND APPROVAL.
>> WE HAVE $500,000 FROM THE STATE NOW.
WE HAVE ASKED FOR $1 MILLION IN THIS REQUEST AND I BELIEVE THERE
WAS ANOTHER GRANT. >> INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET IS THE BUDGET AMOUNT FOR THE ENTIRE PROJECT BUT WE ARE SOLICITING ADDITIONAL STATE FUNDING FOR THE PROJECT.
>> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? I SEE NINE.
MADAME CLERK, BOVOTE. >> 7.7 AWARD OF ITB2201.
[7.7 AWARD OF ITB 22-01 - VETERANS FUEL MANAGEMENT]
>> IT IS TO REPLACE EXISTING FUEL TANKS.
THIS PROJECT IS THE AMOUNT OF $99,000 SPOKE.
>> THIS PROPOSAL HAS A 20% CONTINGENCY.
HOW ARE WE WRITING THE CONTRACT? IT IS WRITTEN FOR THE BID NUMBER AND THE CONTINGENCY IS IN THE BUDGET.
>> >> WE DID NOT PUT THAT IN THE
CONTRACTED WEEK? >> TYPICALLY, WE GET YOUR APPROVAL, AND THEN WE SIGN IT. BUT MY POINT IS.
>> THE CONTINGENCY SHOULD BE THERE WITH THEY DON'T KNOW ABOUT
IT. >> WE KNOW WE KNEW -- WE HAVE TO REMOVE THE TANKS FIRST, TO DETERMINE EXACTLY WHAT KIND OF FOOTPRINT WE WILL PUT IN. WE KNOW THE NUMBER BUT THEY ARE
[00:45:04]
NOT AWARE OF THAT YET. >> BUT WE KNOW IT IS COMING.
>> SEEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, MADAME CLERK WILL YOU CALL THE BO MADAME CLERK WILL YOU CALL THE VOTE.
[7.8 ADOPTION OF CONCEPT "E"]
ITEM NUMBER 7.8. ADOPTION OF CONCEPT E.>> BEFORE YOU YOU HAD CONCEPT E BEFORE YOU FOR THE LAST TWO
>> DO I HAVE A SECOND? >> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
I DO HAVE THREE SPEAKERS WHO WOULD LIKE TO TALK ON THIS SUBJECT. THE FIRST SPEAKER IS MICHAEL
>> CAN YOU HOLD ON ONE SECOND. I HAVE BEEN HANDED A HANDOUT AND I WANT TO GIVE YOU MY FULL ATTENTION.
>> THANK YOU COMMISSIONER. PLEASE CONTINUE.
>> MICHAEL SHARP FERNANDINA BEACH, FLORIDA.
I WILL SPEAK FOR THE PEOPLE WHO DON'T WANT YOU TO RAISE ALBERT TAXES. I WILL READ YOU THE LAST E-MAIL.
WE HAD 143 RESPONSES TO A SURVEY TO SUPPORT THE PARK DESIGN.
MOST CITIZENS DO NOT WANT TO GET INVOLVED.
THEY DEPEND ON YOU. THIS REPRESENTS A BAD BUSINESS DECISION. THE TAXPAYERS RELY ON YOU TO MAKE GOOD DECISIONS NOT JUST FOR AESTHETICS BUT FOR THE BUSINESS OF RUNNING A CITY GOVERNMENT WELL.
I KNOW SOME OF YOU FEEL PRESSURED TO GET SOMETHING GOING EVEN IF IT IS FLAWED TO, AND THAT IS A TERRIBLE IDEA.
>> IF YOU WERE RUNNING THE CITY GOVERNMENT AS A GOOD BUSINESS YOU WOULD KNOW THAT. THE PLANT, JUST TO GET THINGS STARTED AT SOME OF THE MOST POORLY AND EGREGIOUS SPENDING.
THE IDEA THAT WE SHOULD PUT 16 GOLF COURSES ON THE WATERFRONT IS OFFENSIVE AS IT BENEFITS A SMALL PART OF THE COMMUNITY AND ONLY INCLUDED BECAUSE OF A PERSONAL INTEREST OF ONE OF YOU.
THE REST OF YOU CANNOT BELIEVE THIS SHOULD BE THE WAY.
DO YOU REALLY WANT TO SADDLE THE TAXPAYER BASE WITH THIS EXPENSE INSTEAD OF CREATING A WATERFRONT EXPERIENCE THAT WE CAN ALL ENJOY AND IT WOULD PUT MONEY BACK INTO THE CITY.
I NEED YOU TO HAVE IMAGINATION AND THINK ABOUT WHAT COULD ADD TO THIS. WE PAY FOR EVERYTHING IN THE CITY. OUR COMMUNITY PAYS FOR EVERYTHING. I HAVE NOTHING AGAINST IT THE CLUB IS GREAT AND I AM SURE THEY ARE FINE PEOPLE BUT OUR CITY DOES NOT NEED TO SUBSIDIZE THAT. I URGE YOU TO TAKE ANOTHER LOOK, THINK ABOUT SOMETHING ELSE AND LOOK AT OTHER SMALL COMMUNITIES AND SEE WHAT THEY ARE DOING BUT DO NOT SADDLE US WITH MORE
I JUST HAVE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS ON THIS I THINK THERE ARE TOO MANY MOVING PARTS. YOU HAVE EMINENT DOMAIN PROPERTY THAT IS NO LONGER PART OF THE PROJECT THAT NEEDS TO BE
[00:50:03]
RETHOUGHT. WE DON'T NEED EMPATHY TO SPIRIT IF SOMEONE ONCE EYEBALLED CONCERT, BECAUSE $1,000 TO RENT A STAGE. IT'S JUST NOT A GOOD USE OF TAXPAYER DOLLARS. I'M ALSO CONCERNED ABOUT THE COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS THAT WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY ARE AND WHAT THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO REPRESENT.I THINK THERE ARE PARKING ISSUES.
IF YOU WANT TO VOTE RAMP DOWNTOWN YOU NEED ADEQUATE BOAT PARKING THAT I DON'T SEE THAT IN THIS PLAN.
IT IS A BEAUTIFUL PLAN BUT NOT THE RIGHT PLAN FOR HEARING TODAY. WE NEED TO SPEND MONEY ON RESILIENCY NOT AMPHITHEATERS AND BUILDINGS AND THINGS THAT WON'T BRING THE RIGHT VALUE TO THE CITY.
VERY QUICKLY, THEIR LAWYERS WERE CLEVER REDIRECTING THE ATTENTION AWAY FROM THE SITE. EIGHTEEN YEARS AGO I STARTED KAYAKING IN A LOW TIDE. MASSIVE HOLES.
THE WHOLE STRUCTURE IS FAILING. PLEASE REMEMBER THAT.
IF YOU'RE WALKING DOWN THE BOARDWALK AT THIS IS ROUTED THROUGH YOU WILL STILL FALL THROUGH.
THAT'S WHAT I HAD TO STAY. FOCUS ON THAT AND MAKE SURE IT MOVES QUICKLY. 7-8 YEARS AGO WE HAD APPROVAL TO OPEN ALACHUA RAILROAD CROSSING AND WE HAVEN'T DONE THAT.
LET'S FOCUS ON WHAT WILL SAVE TAXPAYERS MONEY.
>> THE WATERFRONT PARK, THERE IS 1.8-$2 MILLION OF BEAUTIFICATION AND I SUPPORT WHAT THE PREVIOUS SPEAKER SAID.
SHE'S SAID IT ELOQUENTLY. THAT 1.8 MILLION-$2 MILLION COULD BE USED TO MOVE THE SEAWALL FURTHER NORTH, PROTECTING THE CITY AND THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND BUSINESSES FROM FLOODING. WE SAW WHAT HAPPENED A FEW WEEKS AGO WITH THE NOR'EASTER. WHY BUILDS UP AND PUT THINGS OUT THERE IF YOU WILL GET FLOODED WASTE OF MONEY.
I HAVE HAD ARGUMENTS THAT PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO BENEFIT THE PROPERTY OWNERS. WILL YOU BUILD A SEAWALL, THAT INVITES INVESTMENT INTO THE PROPERTIES WHICH CREATES BUSINESSES THAT PRODUCE CITY TAXES.
YOU ARE INVESTING IN THE CITY AND AS THE GENTLEMAN SAID THERE'S ONLY SO MANY OF US HERE WE HAVE MORE BUSINESSES PRODUCING TAX REVENUE IT TAKES A LOAD OFF OF US.
>> THE LAST SPEAKER IS MARION PHILLIPS.
>> MARION PHILLIPS I LIVE AT 724 SOUTH SIX STREET FERNANDINA BEACH, FLORIDA. I ALWAYS SPEAK WHEN I COME UP HERE AND TALK ABOUT. OUR WORKING WATERFRONT IS ONE OF THE LAST IN AMERICA AND WE NEED TO PROTECT IT.
I AM AGAINST AN AMPHITHEATER AND THE COURTS BEING THERE, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE AT THE PARK OR TOWARDS THE BEACH.
I AM NOT UP AGAINST THOSE THINGS BUT I DON'T THINK THEY BELONG ON THE WATERFRONT. WE ARE THE BIRTH PLACE OF THE MODERN STRIP AND INDUSTRY. WE NEED TO BRING THOSE SHARES -- SHRIMP BOATS BACK. WE NEED THIS SO PEOPLE CAN GO DOWN AND ACTUALLY SEE WHAT WE ARE ABOUT IN BERNARDINO.
WE JUST NEED TO PROTECT IT AND I APPRECIATE YOU LETTING ME SPEAK.
>> ALL RIGHT, THAT IS ALL THE PUBLIC COMMENTS WE HAVE BEEN VICE MAYOR YOUR LIGHT IS ON. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR.
>> I WILL NOT REPORT THIS. CLIENT POINTED OUT THE PROBLEMS AND WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A CONCEPT THAT ORIGINALLY HAD THE SIMMONS PROPERTY WHICH WAS 8 ACRES AND WAS ORIGINALLY SUPPOSED TO HAVE THE ONE ON ONE BUILDING WHICH WAS ANOTHER 7.5
ACRES. >> HAVE TO CITY MANAGER PUT THE
[00:55:01]
PLAN ON THE BOARD. I THINK THAT WOULD HELP US IN THIS DISCUSSION. I THINK IT WILL HELP YOU MAKEYOUR POINTS. >> WHILE WE ARE WAITING I WILL.OUT SOMETHING IMPORTANT. WE ARE DOING A SHORELINE STABILIZATION IN PARKING LOT C AND D THAT HAS A BOARDWALK AND A RUNNING BENCH INCLUDED. SO FOR THOSE WHO DON'T THINK WE ARE MOVING, WE ARE MOVING ON CERTAIN THINGS AND THAT WILL BE SIGNIFICANT ADDED TO THE AREA. I DON'T KNOW IF WE WANT TO CALL THEM GAZEBOS, THE ONES THAT EXIST THERE NOW.
SO, IF YOU REMEMBER WAY BACK, AND WHEN WE HAD THE DISCUSSION ON EMINENT GENTLEMEN, THE PROPERTY WAS IMPERATIVE IN WE TALKED ABOUT THE PROPERTY FOOTPRINT INCLUDING THE BUILDING. WHAT YOU HAD WAS 101 GOT DROPPED OFF IN THE CONCEPT. WHAT YOU GOT WAS YOU WENT FROM 11 ACRES YOU REDUCED THE SIZE BY 15%.
SO, WHAT YOU ELIMINATED WAS ALL OF THIS.
WHEN YOU ELIMINATE THIS TO VOTE ON THAT IS CRAZY AND MY MIND.
WHEN AS YOU MOVE FORWARD THERE ARE MANY ISSUES THERE.
BUT CONCEPT IS ELEVATED THAT HAS SUPPOSEDLY BEEN DROPPED OFF.
IT HAS THE AMPHITHEATER THE EVALUATION BY THE PEOPLE, THERE WERE ONLY 148 PEOPLE WHO EVALUATED AND THAT IS INSIGNIFICANT. IF YOU WANT TO GO BACK TO THE 2015 PARKS AND REX, THE NUMBER ONE THING THE CITIZENS WANTED AND THIS WAS A BIGGER SAMPLE, THEY WANTED BIKE TRAILS AND THEY WANTED GREEN SPACE. WHAT WERE DOING IS TAKING THE GREEN SPACE OUT AND IT IS GOING THE WAY.
IT'S NOT THERE. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS YOU DO HAVE SOME ISSUES WITH THE PARKING.
PARKING DOES NOT BOTHER ME, I WALK A LOT.
BUT PARKING IS AN ISSUE, A BIG ISSUE.
SO TO APPROVE A CONCEPT, A WHOLE CONCEPT LIKE THAT WHEN YOU TOOK 15% OFF AT YOU DID NOT ADJUST FOR IT IS CRAZY, IN MY MIND, I WOULD NOT DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
AS FAR AS THE INPUT I HAVE SEEN NOTHING THAT PEOPLE WANT ALL OF THIS COMMERCIAL. THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO WANT MARKETING BUT I AM NOT SO SURE RESIDENTS WANT MARKETING AND I HAVE NOT SEEN ANYTHING THAT SHOWS ME THAT.
THOSE ARE THE REASONS I WILL BOTH KNOW.
I WANT TO POINT OUT, THIS IS A LIVING SEASHORE.
THIS IS A WALK THIS IS A WALL OF.
AND THEN YOU HAVE THE SHELTER. SO THIS IS A PROBLEM.
I TALKED TO CITY MANAGER, WHAT DID YOU.
I SAID LET'S COME BACK IN A MONTH WITH THE PLAN.
I'VE MENTIONED BRETZ BECAUSE THAT'S A SIGNIFICANT ISSUE.
IT WILL COST A LOT MORE THAN $150,000.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? I SEE A LOT OF REACHING BUT NOT
A LOT OF LIGHTS. >> I DID NOT WANT TO WAIT ALL NIGHT. I HAVE THE SAME CONCERNS.
MY BIGGEST CONCERN IS, AND I KNOW WE BEAT THIS TO DEATH AND I
[01:00:06]
HAVE HEARD EVERYONE'S OPINION AND E-MAILS AND PHONE CALLS AND I'VE ALSO HEARD IT VERBALLY. MY PROBLEM IS AS A BUILDER AND SOMEONE DOING CONSTRUCTION, YOU COME UP WITH A CONCEPT, A PLAN AS YOU FOLLOW IT AND CONSTRUCT. WITH US APPROVING THE CONCEPT THE PARTS ARE STILL MOVING AND I DON'T BIG I CAN AGREE WITH THAT THE REASON IS BECAUSE THE PARTS ARE STILL MOVING.TOO REALLY HAVE A HARD TIME, I HAVE NO IDEA HOW TO GET 148 PEOPLE TO RESPOND WHEN WE HAVE 15,000 PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN THE CITY. IF WE ALL OF A SUDDEN DID ONE ITEM LIKE PUT UP A 6,000 SQUARE-FOOT SPACE TO THE LEFT OF WHERE THE NEW ATLANTIC SEAFOOD WOULD BE, SOMEBODY WILL PROBABLY LOSE THEIR MIND, ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.
REGARDLESS, AND WHATEVER HAPPENS WITH BRETT WILL COME TO FRUITION WHETHER IT IS ONE EURO-4 YEARS. AND WHATEVER HAPPENS TO THE PROPERTY WILL MAKE THE DECISION. BUT I HAVE A HARD TIME KNOWING WE DID GET THE PROPERTY BECAUSE I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD TAKE ANYONE'S PROPERTY UNLESS IT IS NEEDED.
ARCING IS AN ISSUE, ESPECIALLY BOAT PARKING AND I WANT THIS APPROVED WITH MORE PEOPLE. AT LEAST 5% OF THE POPULATION, RULE NUMBER ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IS THE SEAWALL THAT IS WHAT I WILL SUPPORT AS WELL AS WHATEVER AMENITIES THE CITIZENS WANT. I HAVEN'T HEARD ENOUGH TO APPROVE IT WITHOUT CITIZEN ENGAGEMENT.
>> I WILL THROW A NUMBER OF SAY NUMBER SIX.
OUR CITY HAS BOUGHT AND PAID FOR SIX DIFFERENT PLANS AND WE HAVE REJECTED ALL OF THEM. THAT IS JUST IN MY LIFETIME.
I CAN REMEMBER THESE NUMBING BEFORE BEING REJECTED REJECTED.
THIS IS ONE OF THOSE PLANS AND IT'S A GOOD PLAN.
I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT SOME GREAT THINGS ON THIS, THERE'S A LOT OF MISCONCEPTIONS HERE. PEOPLE ARE SAYING THERE WILL BE A PARKING PROBLEM BUT THERE IS PARKING THERE AND WE ARE ATTEMPTING TO BE AS PARKING NEUTRAL AS POSSIBLE.
THERE'S THE SAME NUMBER OF TRAILER PARTS THAT WE HAVE.
WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO LAUNCH BOATS FROM THE ARENA AND PARKED THESE IN THE BOAT PARKING. ANOTHER MISCONCEPTION IS, I HAVE SEEN IT ON THE CLAUSE, IT WILL TAKE AWAY CULTURE FROM THE TOWN.
I WOULD SAY THIS IS THE OPPOSITE THIS IS CREATING A PLACE WHERE PEOPLE CAN COME, GATHER AND ENJOY.
PEOPLE WANT A PLACE WHERE WE CAN COME, GATHER AND WATCH THE SUNSET. THAT IS SOMETHING WE CURRENTLY DON'T HAVE. TWENTY YEARS AGO WHEN I WAS SMALL, THE GAZEBO IS THE SAME ONE THAT WAS THERE WENT MY DAD WAS A KID. WE HAVE DONE NOTHING TO UPKEEP THE WATERFRONT AND IT HAS GOTTEN WORSE.
THIS ISN'T JUST BUILDING A WATERFRONT THIS IS MAKING SURE WE HAVE A NICE PLACE TO GO AS A COMMUNITY.
THIS IS THE WORKING WATERFRONT PLAN IT KEEPS THE BUSINESSES THERE. AS THE YEARS HAVE GONE ON, TIMES HAVE CHANGED. THE BUSINESS NEVER LEFT THIS WATERFRONT. THEY ARE STILL THERE.
AND I HAVE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO GO TO MANY OF THEM.
THERE IS THE RIVER CYCLE. I WENT TO THE GRAND OPENING.
THESE BUSINESSES ARE THERE AND RIGHT NOW WE ARE LETTING THEM DOWN BY NOT HAVING A PLACE FOR THE CUSTOMERS TO COME AND ATTEND. WE ARE NOT LOOKING OUT FOR THE FISHING BOATS. WHAT I ASKED TODAY IS TO THINK
[01:05:04]
ABOUT THE FUTURE AND THIS IS THE FUTURE.THIS IS CLEARLY NOT SOMETHING WE WILL FIGURE OUT TONIGHT.
WE JUST ADDED TO THE PILE AND IT MAY BE DISAPPOINTING TO SEE IT GOING THIS WAY BUT I AM IN FAVOR OF THE PLAN AND IT DOES HAVE A LOT OF POSITIVE ASPECTS I WOULD LIKE TO SEE GOING FORWARD.
>> COMMISSIONER ROSS. >> FIRST I WANT TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE COMMENTS MADE BY THE SPEAKERS.
THIS IS NOT ABOUT IT BEING A BUSINESS.
IT IS NOT RETURN ON INVESTMENT. THERE IS NO RETURN ON INVESTMENT IN MANY OF THE THINGS THAT WE DO FOR THE QUALITY OF THE CITY OF LIGHT. RUNNING A GOVERNMENT IS NOT LIKE RUNNING A BUSINESS. WHAT'S BUILT THERE, OR PROPOSE TO BE BUILT THERE WILL COST ABOUT $5,000 AND THEY CAN BE GONE IN A HEARTBEAT. LET'S A PLACEHOLDER AND UP A PLACE WHERE PEOPLE CAN ENJOY IT IS GREAT AND IT CAN BE USED FOR OTHER PURPOSES. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE NOISE IS ABOUT. THE MONEY COMES FROM THE IMPACT FEE FUNDS THAT CANNOT BE USED FOR RESILIENCY.
IT HAS TO BE USED FOR PARKS AND RECREATION.
I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO WHAT THE COMMISSIONER SAID.
THIS IS THE SIX PLAN AND I AM NOT ENAMORED WITH THIS PLAN OR THE STRONG. MAY BE A WAY FORWARD INSTEAD OF COMING UP WITH A PLAN, WHY DON'T WE, WHY DON'T CITY STAFF COME TO US AND ASKED FOR GUIDANCE FOR GOING FORWARD.
THIS IS AN INCREMENTAL BUSINESS. WE HAVE STARTED PUTTING IN WHAT I CONSIDER TO BE, A SEAWALL RESILIENCY AND A RIVERWALK THAT WILL EXTEND FROM WHERE THE COURTS ARE TO WHERE THE BULL TRAP IS. THAT IS BEING DONE AS WE SPEAK.
MAYBE WE COULD AGREE ON PRINCIPLES THAT WE CAN AGREE TO FOR CITY STAFF SO WE CAN MOVE FORWARD IN AWAY AND COME BACK LET US KNOW HOW WE COULD MEET THE CRITERIA.
THE FIRST THING WE NEED IT WAS FLOOD.
THE NEXT WAS A RIVERWALK. A RIVERWALK STARTING WHERE IT WILL BE ON FRONT STREET AND GOING ALONG SO PEOPLE COULD WALK ALONG THE RIVERFRONT AND HAVE THAT EXPERIENCE.
I THINK THAT IS SOMETHING THE COMMUNITY COULD AGREE ON.
FRONT STREET RIGHT NOW, IF YOU ARE A PEDESTRIAN YOU TAKE YOUR LIFE IN YOUR HANDS. IF YOU'RE ON A BICYCLE YOU TAKE YOUR LIFE IN YOUR HANDS. WE WANT TO MAKE IT SO IT IS PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY SO PEOPLE WILL COME TO ENJOY THE WATERFRONT. THE NEXT ONE IS TO MINIMIZE PARKING NEXT TO THE RAILROAD TRACKS.
WE HEARD THAT THAT SHOULD BE THE GOAL.
HOW DO WE APPROACH THAT. THE NEXT ONE IS TO OPEN ALACHUA STREET. THAT IS PART OF THIS.
THE NEXT ONE IS NO RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.
I DON'T THINK IT WILL BE CHANGE. FINALLY, AND I DID NOT KNOW HOW TO WORD THIS BUT I PUT ANY BUILDING ON THE WATERFRONT SHOULD BOOST ACTIVITY IN THE SURROUNDING SPACES.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE ARTICLES ON HOW TO BUILD AN INTERESTING
[01:10:01]
WATERFRONT, THEY SAY BUILD ACTIVITIES PEOPLE WANT TO GO TO.YOU CAN HAVE CHAOS, YOU CAN HAVE A SMALL PARK OR RESTAURANT OR OTHER THINGS. WILL THINGS THAT ARE INTERESTING TO PEOPLE. INSTEAD OF ADOPTING A PLAN B HELP THE CITY STAFF COME BACK WITH THIS IS HOW WE CAN MOVE FORWARD. I'M NOT INTERESTED IN ANOTHER PLAN THAT WE WILL ALL ARGUE ABOUT.
THAT IS WHAT I WANT TO HEAR DISCUSSED.
>> COMMISSIONER ROSS HAS ASKED FOR RESPONSE.
I'M ASSUMING YOU WANT TO RAISE MORE COMMENTS.
>> LET ME MAKE THE SUGGESTION. LET US DEAL WITH THE MOTION ON CONCEPT E AND DEPENDING ON HOW THAT GOES, COMMISSIONER ROSS, I SUGGEST YOU MAKE A MOTION ON YOUR PRINCIPLES SO WE FOLLOW A PROCEDURE YOU WANT INPUT ON WHAT YOU JUST SAID.
>> WHEN YOU SAY CONCEPT E ARE WE VOTING ON THIS SPECIFIC MAP? WHAT I WILL SUPPORT IF YOU ARE USING THIS AS A CONCEPTUAL THING. I'M ADVOCATING PRINCIPLES.
>> LET ME GO BACK TO THE WORKSHOP.
WE STARTED WITH A SURVEY AND THEN HAD A DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS PLAN. THE CONSENSUS OF THE COMMISSION WAS TO PUT THIS SPECIFIC PLAN ON THE AGENDA FOR A VOTE.
>> RUNS YOUR QUESTION,. >> THAT IS WHY THIS IS ON THE SCREEN. THIS SPECIFIC SET OF DETAILS.
THAT IS WHY WE ARE DISCUSSING THIS.
THAT IS HOW THAT CAME ABOUT. >> IF YOU DON'T SUPPORT CONCEPT E I SUGGEST YOU PUT THIS ON THE VISITING SECTION FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION. WE ARE GETTING EXPERIENCE WITH THIS SO IN THE FIFTH YEAR MAY BE WORTH CONSIDERING.
>> COMMISSIONER ROSS, WHERE YOU DONE DO YOU WANT TO YIELD THE FLOOR? CANTRELL.
>> VICE MAYOR GO AHEAD WITH YOUR POINT AND I WANT TO COME BACK TO COMMISSIONERS ROSS QUESTION ABOUT PRINCIPLES BEING.
>> I DON'T WANT TO BEAT A DEAD HORSE, BUT I WILL.
>> WE ARE VOTING ON DOING THIS. WE DON'T OWN THIS PROPERTY.
WE ARE VOTING ON DOING THAT, WE CAN DO ALL OF THAT.
>> WEEKEND TAKE A SCREENSHOT AND THEN VOTE ON THAT.
WHAT IS OUR PROCEDURE WENT PUBLIC SPEAKERS PUT IN A REQUEST AFTER THE PUBLIC SPEAKING SEGMENT HAS BEEN CONCLUDED?
>> ONCE YOU HEAR ABOUT PUBLIC COMMENTS YOU CLOSE IT AND THAT BECOMES YOUR DISCUSSION. SO IT'S THAT DISCRETION OF THE MAYOR. I WILL ALLOW THIS BECAUSE I
BELIEVE IN PUBLIC INPUT. >> EXACTLY THAT CORRECT?
[01:15:05]
>> MY NAME IS AMY DEAN I LIVE AT 112 NORTH 14TH STREET.
I LOOKED AT YOUR SURVEY FOR THIS, AND IT ONLY GAVE OPTIONS FOR WHAT WE WERE LOOKING FOR AS FAR AS DESIGNS LIKE THE THEATER.
IT DID NOT NECESSARILY SAY IF THERE WAS ANYTHING ELSE, ANY OTHER OPTIONS. THAT IS WHAT I NOTICED.
WE HAVE OPTIONS ON HOW WE WANTED IT TO LOOK OR WHAT WAS GOING ON LIKE WHAT WE THOUGHT MAY BE A GOOD IDEA TO HAVE DOWN THERE.
>> I DO NOT SEE ANY MORE LIGHTS SO I WILL SAY MY PIECE.
HERE IS WHAT I BELIEVE. I BELIEVE SIX PLANS HAVE BEEN REJECTED BECAUSE THE MESSAGE IS LEAVE IT A LOAN.
THAT IS WHY NOTHING HAS PASSED. IT HAS BEEN THIS WAY FOR 50 YEARS. IT HAS BEEN TALKED ABOUT FOR 100 YEARS. THE MESSAGE IS, MY FEELING HAS ALWAYS BEEN, THE ATTRACTION AND WE LOST THE PLAN.
THE ATTRACTION IS THE RIVER. THE RIVER IS THE ATTRACTION AND WHY YOU GO THERE. ONCE THAT WALKWAY IS COMPLETED WITH THE OBSTRUCTION. THAT IS THE ONLY REASON PEOPLE DON'T WALK DOWN HERE, THEY THINK IT IN SPIRIT BUT NOW YOU WILL BE ABLE TO GO ALL ALONG THE RIVER. WHEN I MET WITH THEM, I SAID TO HIM, NO COMMERCIAL. NO COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS ON THIS PROPERTY. THE RIVER IS THE ATTRACTION.
I DO BELIEVE IN BEAUTIFICATION. I THINK THERE IS LANDSCAPING I THINK THE POINT ABOUT THE KIOSK IS CORRECT IT NEEDS REFRESHMENT.
MY FEELING IS LEAVE IT A LOAN. IT IS THE RIVER.
PEOPLE WANT TO ENJOY THE RIVER. I WON'T SUPPORT THIS, BUT I DO AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER ROSS WE DO NEED TO MOVE THE BALL FORWARD. THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THE CITY HAS SPENT, I MET WITH THE CITY MANAGER AND HE SHOWED ME THE
PLANS. >> I NO LONGER CAN SPEAK.
THAT IS MY FEELING. I BELIEVE WE SHOULD CALL THE VOTE ON CONCEPT E AND THEN FOLLOW-UP WITH A DISCUSSION ON PRINCIPLES. I THINK COMMISSIONER ROSS IS CORRECT LET'S GET CONSENSUS ON WHAT WE WANT.
WE CAN HAVE THAT AS THE FOUNDATION FOR GOING FORWARD.
UNLESS THERE ARE ANY OTHER CONCEPTS I WILL ASK THE
COMMISSIONER TO CALL THE VOTE. >> THE MOTION FAILED 1-4.
>> NOW LET'S TALK ABOUT THE PRINCIPLES OF CONCEPT E.
WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO START? VICE MAYOR.
>> I THINK IT IS GOOD CONCEPT. I THINK FOR SURE, WE HAVE COMMITTED TO THAT, WE ARE BUILDING 2.5 THE GO LIVE SEGMENT SIX. WE ARE ASKING FOR LEGISLATIVE MONEY. WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT BONDING.
I THINK WE AGREED TO EXTENDED. >> CAN WE TAKE THESE ONE AT A TIME. CAN WE ADD FOR CONSENSUS.
I WILL LET YOU CONTINUE. PRINCIPLE ONE.
SUPPORT FROM THE VICE MAYOR. >> I WOULD SAY YES BUT THIS DOES
[01:20:06]
SEEMED LIKE A VISIONING IDEA. I KNOW WE HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO WANT TO BE APPOINTED BUT I REQUEST WE MOVE IT TO VISIONING BUT IF WE'RE GOING TO DO IT WE NEED TO DO IT THIS WAY.>> I HEARD AN ALTERNATIVE TO MOVE THIS TO VISIONING.
>> I THINK WHEN YOU MOVE THIS, -- THE PRINCIPAL DISCUSSIONS OF WHAT WE WANT ON THE WATERFRONT WILL BE TOPIC NUMBER ONE.
ON VISIONING. >> I WILL PROVIDE A LIST OF TOPICS AND I WILL LET YOU PRIORITIZE.
>> SOME LIGHTS CAME ON WHILE I WAS PONTIFICATING.
>> I WOULD ASK EVERY COMMISSIONER COMES UP WITH WHAT THEY HAVE SO WE CAN HAVE A MEANINGFUL DISCUSSION AHEAD OF
TIME. >> I WOULD FOLLOW-UP THAT IF YOU CAN SUBMIT THOSE TO WAS -- SO WE CAN SEE THEM IN ADVANCE THAT
WOULD BE GREAT. >> VICE MAYOR, YOUR LIGHT IS
STILL ON. >> SO, WE ARE DONE WITH CONCEPT
[7.9 BEACH RENOURISHMENT SERVICES FUNDING / BUDGET AMENDMENT - MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING UNIT]
E. BEACH NOURISHMENT.>> YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU A REQUEST TO SUPPORT ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, A REQUEST FOR FUNDING WHICH WILL BE THROUGH THE TAX UNIT. THEY NEED TO PREPARE FOR THE 2024 NOURISHMENT SO THEY WANT $21,000.
>> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. >> I WANT TO TALK ABOUT WHAT WE ARE DOING NOW. FUNDING WHAT WILL BE FISCAL YEAR 24 WHICH WILL BE THE PROJECT. IF IT CAN BE DONE IN 2024.
WE DID LOSE RECENTLY WITH THE HIGH TIDE.
THE COST OF THAT WILL PROBABLY BE $60 MILLION.
IM BASING THAT ON THE 2018 PROJECT AND HALF OF IT WAS $32 MILLION. WHERE WE STAND NOW THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PAYS A PERCENTAGE AND WE DON'T HAVE A CONTRACT AND WE WOULD HAVE TO RENEW IT. THEY HAVE ABOUT $2 MILION.
IF WE DID NOT GET THE STATE MONEY, OUR SHARE WOULD BE $70 MILLION. LAST TIME WAS KIND OF WEIRD THAT TDC PAID BUT THEY WILL NOT HAVE THAT MONEY.
THAT IS JUST SOMETHING TO KEEP IN MIND AS WE MOVE DOWN THE
LINE. >> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION, PLEASE
[7.10 BUDGET AMENDMENT - GOLF DEPARTMENT]
>> IT PAST 5-0. >> SEVEN-POINT TEN,.
>> THIS IS REALLOCATING THE COST AT THE GOLF COURSE FROM THE CALL CENTER AS ROOT REQUESTED AND THIS DOES NOT CHANGE THE GOLF COURSE BUDGET BUT THE FUNDING WILL BE REPORTED TO YOU.
>> ARE MOVED TO APPROVE. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. MADAME CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE
VOTE. >> THE MOTION PASSES 5-0.
IT IS 725 P.M.. >> CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF
[01:25:12]
DECEMBER 7, 2021. WE ARE ON ITEM EIGHT.[8.1 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT - PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS]
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT. >> ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BY REPLACING GOLD NINE WITH PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS ELEMENTS AS REQUIRED BY FLORIDA STATUTE, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND AND EFFECTIVE DATE PLEASE OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
>> ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON A .1.
SEE NO ONE, WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
>> A MOTION UNDER SECOND, ANY DISCUSSION, MADAME CLERK IF YOU
WILL CALL THE VOTE BELIEVES. >> THIS IS A NEW REQUIREMENT THE STATE LEGISLATURE WITH A REQUIREMENT ON ALL CITIES FOR A PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS ELEMENT AND THE LEGISLATORS PUT IN THE STATUTE AT A MINIMUM WHAT HAS TO BE IN THERE.
THAT IS WHAT THIS COVERS IT IS POSSIBLE WE HAVE HAD SOME DIFFERENT VERSIONS MODIFIED THEY HAVE PROPOSED SOME CHANGES, NASSAU COUNTY HAS ACCEPTED SOME AND WE WILL AFTER THIS IS ADOPTED BECAUSE IT HAVE TO BE ADOPTED, WE WILL WORK WITH THE PLANNING BOARD TO LOOK AT LANGUAGE THAT MAY BE MORE LIKE NASSAU COUNTY WE ARE GETTING THIS IN PLACE SO WE CAN MOVE ON
BUT WE CAN ALWAYS CHANGE IT. >> ARE WE READY TO MOVE ON.
[8.2 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT - PORT FACILITIES ELEMENT]
A.TO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT.>> ORDINANCE 2021 AND ORDINANCE AMENDING THE COMFORTS PLAN BY INCORPORATING GOAL NINE PORT FACILITIES ELEMENT INTO GOAL 5 CONSERVATION AND COASTAL MANAGEMENT AS A SUB- ELEMENT AS REQUIRED BY FLORIDA STATUTE 163.3178 SUB TO SUB K PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND PROVIDING FOR AND EFFECTIVE DATE PLEASE
OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND I DO HAVE ONE SPEAKER.
>> SO SHE IS AVAILABLE IF WE HAVE QUESTIONS.
DOES ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON A POINT TO.
I SEE NO ONE I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
>> GO AHEAD SURGE PERIOD. >> I WOULD LIKE TO AMEND POLICY WHERE IT SAYS IT IS AMENDED FROM TIME TO TIME INSTEAD OF SAYING AS OF DECEMBER 7 AND ALSO AS DEPICTED ON THE FUTURE LAND MAP.
>> I HAVE A MOTION TO I HAVE A SECOND.
>> A MOTION AND A SECOND. >> YOUR LIGHT IS STILL ON.
>> COMMISSIONER. >> THANK YOU I WOULD LIKE TO POSE A QUESTION, HOW WOULD THAT CHANGE WHAT WE ARE VOTING ON?
>> IT IS SPECIFIC TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP IF TODAY'S DATE IS PUT IN THERE. AMENDED FROM TIME TO TIME MEANS IT WOULD BE THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AT ANY TIME, NOW AND INTO
THE FUTURE. >> I WOULD FURTHER LIKE TO TAKE UP THE OFFER TO ANSWER A QUESTION IF THAT IS OKAY.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT IS HOW IT WAS ASKED BY THE PLANNING
[01:30:06]
ADVISORY BOARD, THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING.>> THAT WAS MY QUESTION IS IT STILL RECOMMENDED.
>> THAT IS WHY I WAS SURPRISED TO SEE IT IN YOUR.
>> VICE MAYOR. >> THIS IS SIGNIFICANT IN TERMS OF THIS AMENDMENT IF APPROVED LOCAL, THIS IS A BIG DEAL THIS BRINGS TOGETHER A DIVISIVE RELATIONSHIP.
IT ALSO BRINGS COMPLIANCE TO ISSUES THAT ARE IMPORTANT TO THE CITY SO I COMPLEMENT THE PORT AND WE WILL SEE YOU TOMORROW
NIGHT. >> WE WILL WAY FOR APPROVAL.
>> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? I SEE NONE, MADAME CLERK CALLED
THE VOTE. >> COMMISSIONER STURGIS.
>> CAN I JUST MAKE ONE COMMENT. THIS WAS FIRST WRITTEN SIX YEARS
[8.3 VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION - 2754 & 2766 BAILEY ROAD]
AGO. IT HAS BEEN A LONG TIME COMING.>> ITEM A .3 VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION.
>> AND ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF VERNON ENTITY BEACH FLORIDA 4.85 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT 2754 AND 2766 BAILEY ROAD PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND AND EFFECTIVE DATE PLEASE OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. WE HAD A QUASIJUDICIAL HEARING BUT WE STILL HAVE TO HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING TONIGHT.
>> BEFORE I PROCEED, CAN WE HAVE THE AREA OF THE PARCEL DISPLAYED
PLEASE. >> CAN YOU BLOW THAT UP A
GREAT, THANK YOU. >> I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK
ON A .3. >> PLEASE COME FORWARD.
>> MY NAME IS AMY DEAN 11,214TH STREET.
I WAS WONDERING WHAT THIS LAND WOULD BE USED FOR?
>> RESIDENTIAL. >> SO WE ARE NOT SELLING IT FOR
THE HARVEST DAY CARE? >> NO MA'AM.
>> THEY ARE HARVESTING AT THE MILL.
YOU'RE NOT SURE BACK? SOMEONE SHOULD PROBABLY LOOK
INTO THAT. >> ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT? I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND RECOMMEND APPROVAL.
I DO HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. >> I DO HAVE A NUMBER OF QUESTIONS CAN CITY STAFF OR THE APPLICANT'S ANSWER?
>> I AM CURIOUS, FOR THE RECORD. >> SO I'M CURIOUS AS TO IS THIS SIMILAR. WHERE WE ARE HAVING THE PROBLEM OF THE WATER BUBBLING UP WILL THEY HAVE TO PUT A LOT OF
FILLINGS IN THERE TOO? >> BASED ON THE MITIGATION IT
WILL BE A LIMITED AMOUNT. >> THANK YOU FOR THAT ANSWER.
HOW MANY UNITS CAN YOU PUT ON THIS?
>> APPROXIMATELY EIGHT. >> OUT MANY CAN YOU PUT ON WITH
>> THE DIFFERENCES FIVE UNITS. YOU ONLY PUT 13 UNITS IN HERE?
>> THAT'S ALL WE CAN GET. BASED ON YOUR ZONING IT DOESN'T MATTER THE LAND USE I CAN ONLY DO SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.
>> HAS THERE BEEN A TRAFFIC STUDY ON THIS?
>> NO, SIR. WE WILL HAVE TO DO THAT FOR THE COUNTY ONCE WE MAKE THE CONNECTION.
>> HAS THERE BEEN A TREE ANALYSIS FOR REMOVAL?
>> WE ARE IN THE PROCESS. WE HAVE HAD TO SEND THE SURVEY
[01:35:07]
ARE A FEW TIMES BECAUSE THEY MISSED STUFF.>> THAT ANSWERS MY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. >> ANY OTHER COMMENTS?
>> SO, IN THEIR APPLICATION IT SAID ANNEXATION AND THE REZONING APPLICATION REQUESTING ANNEXATION FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. AND THE PROPERLY AS A RIGHT TO DEVELOP THIS WHETHER THE CITY IS ANNEXED OR NOT.
THE PROPERTY OWNER WANTS TO INCREASE THE PROFIT, THE ANNEXATION MUST UNDER SECTION TWO OF THE RESOLUTION IT SAYS IT IS DEEMED TO BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY THAT THE LAND ABOVE DESCRIBED THE ANNEXED INTO THE CITY.
THIS DOES MEET THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS WITH THE CITY IS UNDER NO OBLIGATION TO ANNEX ANY PARCEL THAT MEETS JUST THE ANIMAL REQUIREMENTS. SINCE FISCAL IMPACT TAX REVENUE GENERATED THROUGH THE PROPERTY, BUT THERE IS NO ANALYSIS TO THE MAGNITUDE OF THAT INCREASE THERE HAS BEEN NO ANALYSIS OF THE INCREASE OF COST OF SERVICES OR TRAFFIC CONGESTIONS THERE IS NO ANALYSIS OF THE PRE-PRESERVATION HOW TO IMPACT THE QUALITY OF THE RESIDENCE. AND NO ALTERNATIVE TO DRAINING THE ANNEXATION ALLOWING ONLY THE AMOUNT OF DEVELOPMENT ALLOWED BY THE DEVELOPMENT. I BELIEVE APPROVING THIS ANNEXATION PUT THE PROFITS AHEAD OF PRESERVING THE QUALITY OF LIFE. IF THIS IS NOT IN THE BEST INTEREST OF PRESERVING THE QUALITY OF LIFE, ALLOWING FOR MORE HOUSES, LESS MATURE TREES, MORE CONGESTION I WILL OPPOSE THIS AS CURRENTLY WRITTEN BUT I WOULD LIKE TO REFER BACK TO STAFF WHICH IS PROVIDING ENOUGH SEWER AND WATER FOR WHAT IS ALLOWED. AND THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS.
>> VICE MAYOR. >> WE DO HAVE A MOTION AND A 2ND AND I SUPPORT THIS FOR A FEW REASONS.
NUMBER ONE THEY WILL BUILD THIS ANYWAY.
WHETHER YOU THINK THEY ARE SUSCEPTIBLE, WE HAVE TRIED TO ELIMINATE SEPTIC SPIRIT AS IT TURNS OUT, THEY CAN BUILD 15-16 UNITS BECAUSE THEY CAN DO DUPLEXES.
BY ZONING THEY CAN DO TO ANY AND AN IMPORTANT ISSUE IS THAT BY ANNEXING THEM THEY COME UNDER THE CITY'S LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. YES THEY DO.
>> VICE MAYOR, MAKE YOUR POINT. AND IF YOU WANT TO REBUT TURN
YOUR LIFE OFF -- LIGHT OFF. >> IT IS IN THEIR CONTROL.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
>> COMMISSIONER STURGIS. >> VERY BRIEFLY I WILL SAY I AGREE WITH WHAT LYNN SAID AND IF THEY WILL DEVELOP IT ANYWAY I DON'T THINK THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN 4-5 HOUSES WILL MAKE A DIFFERENCE. CURRENTLY THERE IS A LOT OF CITY RESIDENTS AROUND THE PROPERTY. I THINK IT'S A GOOD THING TO AN EXTENT THERE'S NO CHANGE IN THE ZONING AND IT WILL ONLY BE 13 HOMES. I WILL SUPPORT THIS BECAUSE I
THINK IT IS A GOOD IDEA. >> ANY OF OUR COMMENTS?
>> I APOLOGIZE, YOU ARE CORRECT, IT IS NOT FUTURE ANNEXATION, YOU
ARE CORRECT. >> I WILL JUST ADD THIS IS A DIFFICULT DECISION. DENSITY IS AN ISSUE ON THE ISLAND AND IN THE CITY. BUT SEPTIC TANKS ARE IN ISSUE.
YOU ARE TRYING TO BALANCE THESE TWO THINGS, AND IN TRYING TO REACH YOUR DECISION, I SEE BOTH SIDES OF THE ISSUE.
>> ONE ALTERNATIVE THAT CAN BE EXPLORED IS WE CAN ONLY OFFER
[01:40:05]
ANNEXATION -- NOT ON THIS ONE. >> COMMISSIONER ROSS IS REFERRING TO IN THE FUTURE, WHEN YOU HAVE VOLUNTARY AGREEMENTS WITH NONCONTIGUOUS PROPERTIES WHERE THEY CONTRACT.
I THINK THERE YOU COULD SAY, IF YOU ARE ONLY ALLOWED TO PUT EIGHT UNITS HERE, THAT IS WHAT WE WOULD EXPECT YOU TO DO LIKE AND -- LIKE A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
BUT FOR THIS THERE IS ALWAYS CONTIGUOUS TO THE CITY SO WE CAN CONTRACT, I DON'T THINK IT IS RIGHT TO CONTRACT AWAY THEIR RIGHT TO 13-15 UNITS AND TELL THEM THEY CAN ONLY HAVE A.
WHEN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE PROVIDES FOR MORE.
>> THAT IS WHAT I WAS GOING TO STATE WE HAVE TO FOLLOW COLD, WHATEVER THE CITY HAS THAT IS WHAT WE NEED TO FOLLOW.
THAT IS JUST MY 2 CENTS. >> I TALKED TO THE AGENT REPRESENTING THE OWNERS THIS AFTERNOON.
ANNIE TOLD ME THAT WE COULD CONDITIONALLY ANNEX AND PLACE A
LIMIT OF 13 RESIDENTS. >> I AM NOT COMFORTABLE PUTTING A LIMIT. YOU ARE NOT APPROVING A CONTRACTOR APPROVING A NEW ORDINANCE.
I DON'T THINK IT IS LEGALLY CORRECT.
I THINK YOU GET INTO A TAKING SITUATION.
WERE PASSING A REGULATION BYPASSING AND ORDINANCE.
IF YOU SAY -- YOU ARE FORCING IT.
IT IS NOT AN ARM'S-LENGTH NEGOTIATION.
>> THEY ARE NOT HELD TO THE LIMIT.
THEY CAN BUILD 20. >> OUR COLD LIMITS THEM.
>> I SENT YOU ALL TODAY, -- THAT'S FINE.
THAT ANSWERS MY QUESTION. >> ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THIS?
>> CITY CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.
>> CALLING THE VOTE. >> THIS PAST THREE HAVE BEEN
[8.4 FUTURE LAND USE MAP ASSIGNMENT - 2754 & 2766 BAILEY ROAD]
TOO. FUTURE LAND USE MAP ASSIGNMENTS.>> ORDINANCE 2021 -- 31 AND ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF FERNANDINA BEACH FLORIDA ASSIGNING LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL FOR THE LAND LOCATED AT 2754 AND 2766 BAILEY ROAD PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND EFFECTIVE DATE PLEASE OPEN THE
PUBLIC HEARING. >> IT IS OPEN.
WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK? I DON'T SEE ANY ONE OF WILL
CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
>> I SEE NO LIGHTS, CALL THE VOTE.
[8.5 ZONING MAP ASSIGNMENT - 2754 & 2766 BAILEY ROAD]
>> THAT PAST THREE HAPPEN TO. ITEM A .5, ZONING MAP
ASSIGNMENT. >> AND ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF FERNANDINA BEACH FLORIDA ALSO -- LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL FOR FIVE -- 4.5 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT 2754 AND 2766 BAILEY ROAD PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. >> THE MOTION AND A SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION? I SEE NONE MADAM CLARK PLEASE
CALL THE VOTE. >> CALLING THE VOTE.
[9. BOARD APPOINTMENTS]
THAT MOTION PASSED 302. >> WE ARE ONTO ITEM NINE BOARD APPOINTMENTS. COMMISSIONERS, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT, WE TAKE THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD FIRST SINCE WE HAVE I BELIEVE FIVE CANDIDATES FOR TWO POSITIONS.
SO I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE THAT TO THE TOP OF THE LIST AND DEAL WITH THAT FIRST. ANY OBJECTIONS?
>> THAT IS FINE. >> OKAY SO 946 PLANNING ADVISORY
[01:45:02]
BOARD. IF YOU WOULD RECALL, IN THE PAST MEETING WHERE WE HAD THE SAME MEETING, I KNOW COMMISSIONER BEING WAS NOT IN FAVOR OF THAT. I WOULD STILL LIKE YOUR THOUGHTS ON FORCED RANKING, AND IF WE DON'T USE IT, WHAT IS THE ALTERNATIVE. LET ME OPEN THAT DISCUSSION FIRST. COMMISSIONER ROSS?>> IT IS THE SAME METHOD USED WHEN YOU HIRE SOMEONE AND THERE ARE MULTIPLE APPLICATIONS, INSTEAD OF AS WE HAVE DONE IN THE PAST WHO CAN MAKE IT TO THE LIGHT FIRST.
IT IS BASICALLY RANKING THEM YOUR PREFERENCES FROM 1-6.
AND COUNTING THE BALLOTS AND SEEING WHO IS THE FIRST CHOICE AND SO ON. I THINK THAT IS THE EASIEST WAY
TO PROCEED. >> THE ALTERNATIVE, THE ALTERNATIVE VIEWPOINT, IT DISCOURAGES INVOLVEMENT.
IF YOU SEE A LIST AND SEE YOURSELF LAST IT IS NOT GOOD FOR YOU OR YOUR FUTURE INVOLVEMENT AND I WOULD LIKE TO ENCOURAGE THE APPLICANTS TO BE INVOLVED. SO FORCING RANKINGS AND MAKING A LIST, IS NOT SOMETHING I WILL PARTICIPATE IN.
I WILL GIVE YOU THE TOP PERSON THAT I THINK IS THE ANSWER.
WHAT I WOULD PROPOSE IS THIS METHOD WHICH WOULD WORK WHICH IS WHERE WE HAVE A TOP CHOICE AND WE ALL HAVE THE NUMBER ONE RANKING. WE ALL SAY WHO THAT IS.
I HAVE A FEELING, THAT WILL CLEAR UP AND WE WILL NO.
HAD WE DONE THIS LAST TIME, AFTER WE SAID OUR FIRST CHOICE IT WOULD HAVE BEEN 4-1. AND WE WOULD HAVE PICKED -- DONE IT WITHOUT HESITATION. IF THERE WAS NO CLEAR ANSWER WE WOULD GO TO THE NEXT ROUND. THIS DOES NOT COME UP WITH A NEW WAY. THIS ONLY HAPPENS ONCE PER YEAR LET'S MAKE SURE WE DO IT RIGHT. THANK YOU.
>> IF I UNDERSTAND YOUR PROPOSAL CORRECTLY, UNDER YOUR METHODOLOGY NO ONE FINISHES LAST YEAR YOUR FIRST, SECOND OR TIED
FOR THIRD. >> UNDER MY METHODOLOGY WE ALL SAY OUR FIRST CHOICE. THEN THERE IS AN ANSWER OR WE NEED MORE INFORMATION WE GO TO THE SECOND CHOICE.
WE ARE RANKING BUT WE ARE SAYING ONE AND A TIME.
WE ARE CREATING PUBLIC RECORDS WHEN WE CREATE THE LIST.
EVEN IF THEY ARE ON SECRET LIVES.
I DON'T THINK IT IS APPROPRIATE FOR US TO FORCE THE RANK.
>> I'M SORRY VICE MAYOR. >> I AGREE WITH CHIP.
I THINK THE WAY WE DID IT BEFORE, WE MADE A MOTION AND THAT IS NOT THE WAY TO DO IT. WE REVIEWED WHAT THEY ARE, IT'S NOT DEROGATORY. WE PICK THOSE WHO ARE MOST QUALIFIED FOR THE JOB. IT WILL BE INTERESTING, THIS IS THE ONLY WAY WE WILL DEAL WITH IT TONIGHT.
SO, I THINK IT IS FAIR I THINK IT IS BETTER THAN THE WAY WE DID
IT BEFORE. >> I DID KNOW IF YOU LOVE YOUR
LIGHT ON. >> YOU CAN TURN IT BACK ON.
>> I WANTED TO MAKE SURE. >> I THINK THIS IS THE MOST DIPLOMATIC METHOD. WILL YOU BREAK THIS, THAT THE PERSON IN THE LAST IS A BETTER THAN THE PERSON IN THE FIRST.
IT'S ALL ABOUT YOU RANK YOURSELF.
WHAT CLASS DO YOU THINK YOU ARE IN.
AS FAR AS I AM CONCERNED THIS IS FAIR.
IT IS BASICALLY A VALID AND WE ARE SAYING WHO WE WANT TO RUN THESE POSITIONS. I LIKE THE SYSTEM AND I AGREE WITH CHIP THIS IS A GREAT SYSTEM AND I THINK THIS IS THE WAY TO
[01:50:01]
DO IT. >> TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION OF WHO SAYS THAT PERSON IS LAST IN IS YOUR ME AND WHOEVER IS RANKING THEM. WE ARE LITERALLY SAYING THAT PERSON IS LAST. AND FURTHERMORE, I SIMPLY WILL NOT RANK. WHEN YOU GIVE ME THE BALANCE I WILL PUT THE FIRST CHOICE DOWN, THAT IS WHAT I WILL DO.
I WILL NOT RANK. I DON'T THINK IT IS SOMETHING I HAVE TO DO SO I WILL TELL YOU MY FIRST CHOICES AND I WILL BE
>> I AGREE. RANKING PEOPLE ONE THROUGH FIVE I THINK IT IS DEFEATING. WHEN ALL WE HAVE TO DO IS PICK ONE AND TWO. ESSENTIALLY YOU ARE BREAKING SOMEONE FIRST AND 2ND AND THEN YOU HAVE TWO PEOPLE TIED FOR THIRD PERIOD NO ONE IS LAST. I WOULD PREFER THAT WE WOULD SAY WHO OUR FIRST CHOICE IS GIVEN OVER LAST EXAMPLE BUT I AM IN THE MINORITY. JUST BECAUSE I HAVE MAYOR I WILL NOT USE THE MAYOR CARD. I WILL ACQUIESCE TO THE MAJORITY HAPPENS DATING NIGHT OPPOSITION. I WILL ALSO FOLLOW COMMISSIONER BEINGS LEAD AND I WILL NOT RANK THESE PEOPLE.
I WILL TELL YOU MY 1ST AND MY SECOND AND THAT IS MY PREROGATIVE. LET US PROCEED.
FILL OUT YOUR BALLOT. WITH 1 OR 2.
>> ASKED THAT WE HAVE DISCUSSION BEFORE WE FILL OUT THE BELLY.
WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT THE PEOPLE WE WILL BULLDOG BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW ALL OF THE INFORMATION AT THE TABLE.
>> I THINK THAT IS A VALID POINT THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THAT UP.
>> I AM READY TO DISCUSS. >> WE HAVE TWO INCUMBENTS.
VICTORIA AND TO NOT REAPPOINT THEM AT A CRITICAL TIME WOULD BE CRAZY. THAT IS MY ONE INTO.
>> I JUST WANT TO BUILD ON WHAT YOU SAID.
THEY HAVE ONLY BEEN ON THE BAB A LITTLE MORE THAN A YEAR.
>> SHE WAS AN ALTERNATE AND SHE BECAME PERMANENT.
>> SO THEY ARE RELATIVELY NEW. >> THANK YOU.
>> I WOULD JUST SAY THAT PRETTY MUCH EVERYONE IS RELATIVELY NEW.
>> COMMISSIONER YOUR LIGHT IS ON.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO PLACE MY SUPPORT FIRMLY BEHIND ONE OF THE APPLICANTS. THERE ARE A FEW THINGS THAT MAKE THEM STAND OUT. HE IS THE APPLICANT HERE WITH US TONIGHT IN PERSON. AND HE E-MAILED US AND GAVE US HIS BACK STORY AND HIS RESUME IN THE E-MAIL WHICH HIGHLIGHTS THE WONDERS HE HAS DONE FOR THE CITY SO FAR.
HE HAS A LOT OF EXPERIENCE AS A WORKING PROFESSIONAL THAT WILL ADD A LOT. I WILL SUPPORT HIM AS MY NUMBER ONE. LET ME FOLLOWING UP.
SHE HAS DONE A A LOT OF WORK. I WOULD LOVE TO SEE HER BACK ON.
>> COMMISSIONER ROSS. >> I WOULD AGREE WITH VICE MAYOR KRIEGER AND SUPPORT VICTORIA WHO DID AN EXCEPTIONAL JOB LEADING THE STUDY FOR BEACH WALK OVER HIS.
I DON'T THINK ANYTHING COULD HAVE DONE BETTER.
I THINK SHE DOES A MARVELOUS JOB.
SHE HAS A LOT OF EXPERIENCE. SHE BRINGS A DIFFERENT VIEW THAN OTHERS. AND I WILL SUPPORT HER.
AS FOR THE OTHERS, I WILL LEAVE MY COMMENTS.
>> THANK YOU SIR. >> COMMISSIONER BEING YOUR
[01:55:04]
LIGHTEST SALON, WERE YOU GOING TO SAY SOMETHING ELSE?>> NO. >> I DON'T SEE ANYMORE LIGHTS I WILL BE SUPPORTING VICTORIA, COMMISSIONER BEING.
>> HOW IS THE VOTING CALCULATED? FOR THE PEOPLE RANKING ARE WE GOING TO GIVE THEM A RANKING BASED ON THAT?
>> YOU'RE ASKING ABOUT MY BALLOTS.
>> WE ARE PARTICIPATING IN A RANK SYSTEM.
I WOULD LIKE TO ASKED HOW WILL THE TOP TWO ONCE WE FACTOR IN
OUR VOTES BE DETERMINED. >> I BELIEVE EVERYONE IS VOTING
FOR 1-TO. >> IT IS IMPORTANT TO ME BECAUSE LET ME TELL YOU WHAT THIS OPENS UP.
YOU COULD RANK PEOPLE BASED ON HOW YOU KNOW OTHERS WILL VOTE AND I DON'T WANT DO THAT. BUT I WANTED TO BRING THAT UP AS A POSSIBILITY. I WANTED TO KNOW HOW THE SYSTEM
WORKS SO WE CAN DO IT. >> THIS JUST SAYS WHO HAS THE VOTES AND WHICH INDIVIDUALS HAVE THE VOTES.
>> LET ME GIVE YOU SOME HYPOTHETICAL SITUATIONS.
I HAVE SEEN THIS GO DIFFERENT WAYS.
SO INFORM US VOTING, WHAT IF THAT PERSON WAS RANKED LOWER ON SOMEONE ELSE'S CARD WOULD THAT AFFECT THE VOTES.
IF ONE APPLICANT GETS THREE VOTES IT'S THE MAJORITY.
WHOEVER GETS THE MAJORITY, WHOEVER GETS THE MOST VOTES WHEN. YOU ARE CASTING YOUR BALLOT FOR WHOEVER GETS THE MOST VOTES WHEN THE SEA.
>> I WOULD DESCRIBE THIS THIS WILL ALLOW SEATS THAT WILL EXPIRE. I DON'T THINK IT IS A FORCED
>> YOU WILL RECALL WHEN WE DID THIS BEFORE, WE CAN AVENUE CONSISTENCE GOING FORWARD WHEN THIS ARISES.
THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL. DO YOU WANT TO VOTE BECAUSE I
>> WHEN YOU HAD THIS OF THAT IS WHO THEY WILL WIN.
[02:00:11]
YOU HAVE A TWO THEY HAVE OR TO. WHEN YOU ADD THEM UP THIS IS MATHEMATICAL. THAT IS ALL I WANT TO SAY.I THINK THIS IS A PERFECT SOLUTION.
DO I NEED TO PUT MY NAME ON IT. THIS IS FOR THE NONVOTING
>> I'M A MOTION IN THE SECOND PERIOD.
>> I WILL WAIT BECAUSE SHE IS TALLYING THE VOTES.
>> WILL CALL THE VOTE. >> THAT MOTION PASSES 5-0.
AND I WILL GIVE HER A CHANCE TO TALLY THE VOTES.
LET'S JUST TAKE A MINUTE. >> WE CAN MOVE ON TO THE BOARD
OF TRUSTEES. >> THOUGH, LAND OF MOVEON.
>> THERE IS NO VALID BECAUSE NONE WAS REQUIRED.
WE HAVE ONE CITY COMMISSION VACANCY AND ONE APPLICANT.
>> DO WE NEED TO VOTE ON THAT? >> OKAY WE HAVE A MOTION IN THE
[02:05:01]
SECOND. WILL YOU PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.>> ALL RIGHT HISTORIC DISTRICT COUNCIL.
>> I MOVED TO A POINT THESE STUPID.
>> A MOTION IN THE DISCUSSION. I SEE NONE, CITY CLERK COULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.
>> THE PASSPHRASE -- 5-FOOT 0. >> THE NEXT ONE IS PARKS AND.
>> I US THAT THIS IS PUT INTO. >> I WANT TO APPOINT PHILIP
>> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND PERIOD.
>> I WILL NOT BE VOTING FOR CHAPMAN WHO SAID THIS BOARD SHOULD BE ABOLISHED AND I CAN'T SUPPORT SOMEONE WHO HAS THAT
PUBLIC DEMEANOR. >> THANK YOU, SIR.
>> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION. >> MADAME CLERK WILL YOU CALL
THE VOTE. >> A PASSES FOR EVERYONE.
>> I NOW MOVE TO APPOINT THOMAS CAMERON.
>> SECOND. >> MOTION AND THE SECOND.
>> TOM, WE TALK OFTEN, HE REPRESENTS THE YOUTH LEAGUES IN THE CITY. I THINK -- THANK YOU FOR STEPPING UP. I THINK IT IS TIME WE HAD SOME YOUTH REPRESENTATION. SO I WILL SUPPORT THIS.
MADAME CLERK, WILL YOU PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.
>> THAT PAST 5-0. >> GOLF COURSE ADVISORY BOARD.
>> I REMOVED TO AVOID LEE MURRAY AND SIMPSON.
>> SECOND. >> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND,
ANY DISCUSSION? >> OF MY ONLY COMMENT IS THAT, THEY HAVE HAD PROBLEMS GETTING A QUORUM -- ELECTED ME.
THEY MISS A COUPLE. MADAME CLERK, WILL YOU PLEASE
CALL THE VOTE. >> THAT PAST 5-0.
AND FINALLY, THE MARINA ADVISORY BOARD.
>> HE HAS WITHDRAWN HIS APPLICATION.
>> I AM SORRY. >> THREE VACANCIES.
>> DO WE HAVE A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION?
>> THE MOTION PASSES 5-0. >> THE RESULTS OF THE OTHER
ONES? >> FIRST, WE WILL MAKE IT EASY THANK YOU FOR FILLING OUT THE BALANCE BUT THERE ARE NOW THREE SEATS AVAILABLE AND THREE CANDIDATES APPLYING.
MR. ANGLIN IS NOT SEEKING REAPPOINTMENT AND THAT WAS DISCOVERED THAT HE IS NOT SEEKING REAPPOINTMENT.
SO WE HAVE THREE SEATS OPEN. >> TWO OF THE PEOPLE APPLIED
[02:10:03]
>> THEY ARE GIVING HIM THAT'S RIGHT FOR THE NON- SITTING RESIDENT, I CAN TELL YOU HE ALREADY RECEIVED EVERYBODY'S
VOTE FOR THAT SEED. >> HE'S NOT SITTING RESIDENT.
PLEASE CALL THE VOTE. >> THEN WE HAVE ONE VACANCY AND
HE IS SEEKING REAPPOINTMENT. >> CALLING THE VOTE.
>> FOR THOSE SEEDS WE HAD FOUR VOTES, YOU ALL DID A RANKING AND THE EASY WAY TO EXPLAIN THIS, WE WILL DO FOUR FOLKS -- ACTUALLY FIVE. I DID NOT WAY 1-2 COMMISSIONER BEING AND IT WILL NOT MAKE A DIFFERENCE.
THESE ARE ALL PUBLIC RECORDS. TWO COMMISSIONERS HAD MATTHEW L, IF I PRONOUNCE IT PROPERLY AT ONE VOTE.
AND BARBARA HAD THREE VOTES. VICTORIA HAD EVERYBODY'S VOTE.
WE HAVE TWO SEATS. >> I'M SORRY FOUR.
>> THEY EACH HAD FOUR VOTES. AND TO WORK FORMAT.
>> I MOVED TO APPROVE. >> SECOND PERIOD.
>> HAVE A MOTION UNDER SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION?
I DON'T SEE ANY. >> THAT MOTION PASSES 4-1.
>> WE WERE TALKING ABOUT WAITING, ANOTHER WAY TO DO IT IS TO TAKE THE ACTUAL NUMBER, AND IT WOULD NOT HAVE MADE ANY DIFFERENCE PUTTING ONE AHEAD OF THE OTHERS.
IF LET'S TAKE VICTORIA FOR EXAMPLE IF SHE HAD THREE COMMISSIONERS, THE ONES WITH THE MOST MEAN THEY ARE FURTHER DOWN THE LIST. THE LEASE NUMBERS ADDED UP.
>> MA'AM PLEASE. >> YOU SEE WHERE I'M GETTING, THAT WAS ANOTHER WAY TO DO IT BUT IT WASN'T NECESSARY TONIGHT.
>> IT WOULD HAVE MADE A DIFFERENCE BECAUSE ON MY SCORE VICTORIA HAD A 0, BECAUSE I DID NOT VOTE.
>> IF YOU WANT ME TOO ADD THAT UP, WE HAD NUMBER ONE AND NUMBER TWO. SOME DID ALL OF THEM.
I'M HAPPY TO OUT OF THE POINTS. >> THE WAY WE SELECTED, WE DID
ADD THEM UP. >> IT WAS VERY OBVIOUS THAT BARBARA AND VICTORIA WERE GETTING THE 1ST AND 2ND
>> ESSENTIALLY WHAT I DID WAS, IN MY BUILDING BITE NATURE OF NOT PUTTING ANYONE ON THEIR, I GAVE EVERYONE A 0.
I LIKE VICTORIA FIRST OF ALL. AND THIS CONVERSATION I WAS TRYING TO AVOID BY NOT RANKING. THIS ALSO IS UNFAIR.
I FEEL LIKE MY CANDIDATE WAS SLIGHTED.
I'M UPSET. WE REJECT HIM EACH TIME.
OH WE WILL RECONSIDER. >> PROCEDURALLY, WOULD YOU ADD
[02:15:04]
UP THE POINTS. >> I WILL HAVE IT DONE BY THE
TIME OF MY REPORT. >> WHILE WE ARE GETTING THE
[10. CITY MANAGER REPORTS]
TABULATION ON THE POINTS. CITY MANAGER,.>> ISAIAH INDICATED, I WANT TO COMMEMORATE THE VETERANS OF PEARL HARBOR DAY, I WILL BE OUT OF THE OFFICE AND WE DO HAVE TICKETS ON CENTER ALSO ON FRIDAY, IS THE EMPLOYEE SERVICE RECOGNITION THE CITY OFFICE WILL BE CLOSED DECEMBER 23-24.
AS I SHARED WITH YOU FEMA HAS AGREED TO EVERY PENNY.
THE CITY WILL RECEIVE THIS THROUGH THE STATE OF FLORIDA.
THEY HAVE DONE ALL OF THE PAPERWORK.
THEY DO HAVE TO GO THROUGH WHAT WE CALL A LARGE-SCALE NOTIFICATION. NAFTA LET MEMBERS KNOW THAT AN AWARD OF THAT MAGNITUDE IS BEING PROVIDED.
THE CITY SAID WE SHOULD HAVE ACCESS TO THE MONEY RELATIVELY
>> I HAVE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS. I SAW THAT THIS CONCEPT DOES NOT
EXIST DO WE HAVE MANY DECISIONS? >> TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT SHE WANTS NEXT. RIGHT NOW SHE HAS AN EXISTING
LEASE. >> CAN YOU MAKE THE CITIZENS AWARE OF THE NUMBER OF VACANCIES WITHIN THE CITY AND TALK ABOUT THE CITY'S STRUGGLES WITH HIRING GIVEN THE EMPLOYMENT CLIMATE NATIONALLY AND IN THE STATE AND IN OUR REGION CAN YOU TALK ABOUT
THAT? >> SHE PUTS TOGETHER A MONTHLY REPORT AND I CAN PROVIDE THE CURRENT VACANCIES.
IT IS A CHALLENGE WE DID MAKE A STEP TO INCREASE MINIMUM WAGE TO $15 AN HOUR FOR ENTRY-LEVEL, THAT IS NOT REQUIRED AND THE STATE OF FLORIDA GOES THERE IN A COUPLE OF YEARS BUT BECAUSE OF THE EMPLOYMENT CONDITIONS, AND THE DIFFICULTY ATTRACTING LABOR AT THOSE RATES, WE DID INCREASE THE WAGE TO $15 PER HOUR.
WE HAVE HAD SUCCESSFUL UNION NEGOTIATIONS AND IT SHOULD BE ON THE NEXT AGENDA BUT WE ARE LOOKING AT SOME CHALLENGES FOR SOME OF THE BLUE-COLLAR POSITIONS WHICH ARE BEING WOOED BY OTHER POSITIONS. POLICE OFFICERS FIRE OFFICERS, BUT WE HAVE HAD PRODUCTIVE NEGOTIATIONS WITH BOTH THE GENERAL LABOR AS WELL AS FIREFIGHTERS.
IT WILL BE A CHALLENGE GOING FORWARD AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO HAVE DISCUSSIONS TO LET YOU KNOW THE IMPACT.
THERE ARE KEY PEOPLE BEING OFFERED DOUBLE IF NOT TRIPLE THE AMOUNT WE ARE PAYING SOME OF OUR KEY PERSONNEL.
WE NEED TO LOOK AT HOW TO RETAIN THEM.
>> DO YOU SEE ANY ADJUSTMENTS IN THE BUDGET REGARDING SALARY.
DUE TO THE LABOR SITUATION WE HAVE A LOT OF POSITIONS UNFILLED. WE ARE NOT PAYING SALARIES AT THIS POINT BUT THAT IS SOMETHING WE ARE TRACKING.
WERE TRACKING IT AS WE GO FORWARD.
>> I HOPE WE PUT THE TOPIC ON HOW WE WILL MAINTAIN A CITY
[02:20:03]
WORKFORCE. IF WE DON'T HAVE PEOPLE TO WORK AND FIRE AND RESCUE AND THE OTHER DEPARTMENTS, THE PEOPLE THAT DO THE WORK, THE CITY WILL NOT FUNCTION.HOW WE WILL FINANCE THAT, I HOPE THAT WILL BE A TOPIC OF
DISCUSSION. >> INTERVIEW AT THAT TO THE
AGENDA. >> WE CAN PRIORITIZE THOSE AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO LOVING THOSE DISCUSSIONS.
[11. CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS]
>> HE ACTUALLY GOT THE SECOND-HIGHEST NUMBER.
>> IF YOU ARE GOING TO UNDO THAT, SOMEBODY -- RECONSIDER AND
HAVE IT PASSED BY A MAJORITY. >> I NEED A MOTION TO
>> >> I'M GOING TO GO THROUGH THIS IT'S PUBLIC RECORD. COMMISSIONER ROSS, STURGES AND VICE MAYOR KRIEGER ALL CHOSE TO RANK 1-6 FOR ALL OF THE CANDIDATES. WHATEVER NUMBER WAS ASSIGNED NEXT TO IT AND MAYOR CHOSE TO RANK 1-2.
-- WANTED TO SO THE OTHERS HAD 0 IN TERMS OF THE NUMBER BESIDE THEM. I TOOK THE ACTUAL NUMBER HE GOT TO NUMBER FIVE THEIR COUNTRIES NAME I PUT FIVE FOR THAT COMMISSIONER. THE ONE THAT HAD THE LAST FAVOR.
VICTORIA HAD FOR CITY COMMISSIONERS ASSIGNED FIRST PLACE WERE NUMBER ONE. ONE COMMISSIONER 0 AND THAT ADDED UP TO FOUR. SHE IS BY FAR THE ONE THAT WOULD GET 1C. HE GOT THIS.
BARBARA CROSWELL. IF YOU'RE GOING TO RECONSIDER, OTHERWISE IF YOU DON'T GET THREE TO RECONSIDER IT WOULD BE
VICTORIA AND BARBARA APPOINTED. >> CAN I MOVED TO RECONSIDER BECAUSE I VOTED NO BACK. SOMEONE ELSE SHOULD MOVED TO RECONSIDER, SOMEONE ELSE DID RANK BASED ON THOSE NUMBERS CLEAR THERE IS SOMEONE UP HERE WHO WOULD LIKE THIS.
>> YOU HAVE TO HAVE A MOTION TO DISCUSS.
>> I NEED A MOTION TO RECONSIDER.
DO I HAVE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER THE VOTE.
>> IT FAILS. >> THEY WERE REAPPOINTED.
>> I NEED A MOTION. >> I MOVED TO SUSPEND THE ROLES
THEN RECONSIDER. >> I HAVE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER. DO I HAVE A SECOND?
>> HE CAN'T MAKE A MOTION BECAUSE HE IS ON THE WRONG SIDE OF THE VOTE. IT ONLY HAS TO BE SOMEONE WHO
VOTED POSITIVE. >> YOU ARE RIGHT.
THAT IS CORRECT. >> IT FAILS FOR LACK OF --
>> I WILL RECOGNIZE VICE MAYOR 1ST AND COMMISSIONER SURGES
SECOND PERIOD. >> BOOKED TO PEOPLE REAPPOINTED WHO HAD THE MOST VOTES FROM THE COMMISSIONERS, YOU CANNOT USE THE SCORE WHEN COMMISSIONERS FAILED TO FULL UP -- FILL OUT
[02:25:02]
THE SCOREBOARD. >> IF THEY WOULD HAVE PUT DOWN THE NUMBERS THEY WOULD HAVE COME OUT ON TOP.
>> I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY WHAT JUST HAPPENED.
BY ME NOT VOTING, THE WAY WE ADDED THEM UP EVEN THOUGH I ATTEMPTED TO MAKE THIS CLEAR, IT SHOULD BE THE INVERSE OF WHAT WE JUST DID. I GAVE THEM ESSENTIALLY A 0.
IF YOU AND SOME OF BAN THE LAST NUMBER, THE WAY WE ADDED THEM UP MEANS THE PEOPLE I DID NOT WANT GOT NO SCORE FROM ME MEANING THEY WERE AHEAD OF THE TWO PEOPLE I RANKED 1ST AND 2ND.
IT IS UNREAL AND CRAZY. EVEN WITH ME VOTING 0, EVEN WITH ME GIVING MATT AN EXTRA POINT, IF ANYTHING SHOULD HURT HIM ON MY SCALE, HE STILL WONDERS VOTE AND WE WILL NOT UNDO IT.
WHAT JUST HAPPENED IS CRAZY. AT THE VERY LEAST WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THE RULES WERE CRYSTAL CLEAR.
IN MY OPINION NOT ONE THAT IS BOTH.
IT'S NOT MY OPINION IS WHAT HAPPENED.
HE WON BOTH -- AND WE VOTED TO APPROVE SOMEONE ELSE.
>> >> AS MY GRANDMOTHER ONCE SAID IF YOU HAVE NOTHING NICE TO SAY DON'T SAY ANYTHING AT ALL SO I
>> OBVIOUSLY, THIS IS A MESS. >> THIS IS NOT OUR PROUDEST MOMENTS. THAT IS MY FEELING.
SO, COMMISSIONERS THIS IS ON THE WORKSHOP WE HAVE TO COME UP WITH A METHODOLOGY SO OUR VOLUNTEER CITIZENS DO NOT GO THROUGH THIS.
>> THAT IS ALL I HAVE TO SAY. PART OF WHAT MAKES THIS DIFFICULT ISSUE ALL HAVE TO AGREE OR FOLLOW THE MAJORITY.
YOU CANNOT HAVE THREE COMMISSIONERS RANKING ALL OF THE COMMISSIONERS OR VICE VERSA. ONLY ASSIGNING A 1ST AND A SECOND SPOT. THAT WILL SKEW THE WHOLE THING.
>> LET'S MOVE ON. I MOVED TO VOTE AGAIN NEXT WEEK.
THIS VOTE IS NO GOOD. I MOVED TO TABLE IT BECAUSE IT IS UNREAL. I THINK IF WE LOOK AT THE TAPE, THIS WILL SHOW THIS IS UNFAIR TO THE PEOPLE INVOLVED.
WE TABULATED THE VOTES BACKWARDS THAN WHAT THEY WERE.
>> I'M MOTION WE VOTE AGAIN AT THE NEXT MEETING.
>> YOU CAN'T VOTE FOR A MOTION TO BE RECONSIDER BECAUSE YOU ARE ON THE WRONG SIDE AND NOW I WILL SAY MY PIECE.
YOU WANTED TO GET YOUR MAN IN OUR FIND THAT OFFENSIVE BECAUSE YOU GAINED THE SYSTEM AND WE AGREED TO A METHOD AND THEN YOU GAINED IT. THE VOTE -- THE VOTE SINCE TO BE MORE DECIDED WE VOTED FOR IT, AND I THINK WE JUST NEED TO MOVE ON. I THINK WE NEED TO VOTE ON IN THE FUTURE SO IT DOESN'T HAPPEN AGAIN.
>> COMMISSIONER ROSS YOU SHOULD INCLUDE ME IN THE GAME HE PRETEND YOU GAMED THE SYSTEM TOO.
>> THAT IS WHERE WE DID NOT HAVE CONSENSUS ON THE METHODOLOGY.
WE NEED TO REACH CONSENSUS. IT'S ON THE WORKSHOP LET'S REACH CONSENSUS ON THE METHODOLOGIES. THAT WAY WE CAN AVOID THIS IN THE FUTURE. VICE MAYOR.
>> THAT IS ALL FINE. THOSE TWO SELECTED HAD THREE
[02:30:02]
VOLTAGE FROM THREE COMMISSIONERS, THEY 1.LET'S NOT MAKE THIS DEROGATORY. THEY WERE SELECTED BECAUSE THREE OF US FELT THEY WERE NUMBER ONE AND NUMBER TWO.
THAT IS WHAT HAPPENED WHEN YOU OPT OUT AND YOU HAVE THE SYSTEM THAT WASN'T FUNCTIONING, I DON'T THINK THAT WAS AN INTENT.
THOSE TWO PEOPLE HAD VOTES. THEY WERE SELECTED.
>> A I WILL SAY BARB WAS ON NUMBER TWO FOR THE BALANCE.
THAT IS THE END OF THAT DISCUSSION.
PLEASE CONTINUE. >> PORT AUTHORITY HAS SAID EARLIER THEY WILL BE VOTING TOMORROW ON THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT SPIRIT WITH REGARD TO THE CHANNEL, I ASSUME THAT WILL PASS IF THE SECOND ONE THAT DEALS WITH ALL OF THE ITEMS THAT THE CITY AS REQUESTED, THE LOCAL BILL THAT WILL BE DISCUSSED, IF THE PORT AUTHORITY VOTES TO APPROVE AS WRITTEN, ARE YOU ARE WILLING TO PROVIDE THE CITY MANAGER AND I WITH CONSENSUS THAT WE CAN HAS TO CANCEL THE SPECIAL MEETING ON THE LOCAL
>> THAT IS ALL I HAVE, THANK YOU.
[13. MAYOR/COMMISSIONER COMMENTS]
>> THANK YOU SIR. THANK YOU MR. MAYOR IT IS THE EIGHTH IT -- 80TH ANNIVERSARY OF PEARL HARBOR.
ON THE OTHER SIDE, IT HAS BEEN A FULL YEAR BEING ON THE COMMISSION THIS IS MY 24TH MEETING.
>> I ATTENDED THE CHRISTMAS PARADE IT WAS A NICE EVENT.
BY THE TIME I GOT EVERYTHING DONE AND IT WAS TOO LATE FOR ME TOO MAKE IT THERE BUT I DO WANT TO SAY, I'M REALLY SAD THAT I MISSED THE EVENT. THERE WAS A LOT OF STUFF THAT GOES ON TO DECEMBER. LASTLY I WANT TO THANK THE STAFF AND DALE AND TAMMY, SECURING THE FEMA, ALL OF THE EFFORT AND THE WORK IT TOOK THROUGH FEMA. ANYONE WHO HAS DEALT WITH FEMA, THEY NOTE IT IS DIFFICULT. I AM PROUD OF OUR STAFF, THAT IS
IT. >> ALL RIGHT, VISION 2045.
THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD WILL HAVE A PRESENTATION THEY WILL KICKOFF PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THE DRAFT FOR THE COMMUNITY VISION.
EVERYONE IS WELCOME AND ENCOURAGED TO ATTEND AND THEY ARE DOING IT BY ZOOM I AM TOLD. THE PUBLIC INPUT WILL CONTINUE.
IT WILL HAPPEN FOR FOUR WEEKS. TAKE RECOGNITION OF POLICE OFFICER HANK LEE WHO IS CELEBRATING 23 YEARS WITH FERNANDINA BEACH PD. HE WAS RECENTLY SOUND THE -- ASSIGNED THE PAPER TRAIL. COMMISSION WISHES AND SUCCESS AND APPRECIATES HIS COMMITMENT TO SERVE AND TO PROTECT OUR
[02:35:03]
COMMUNITY. CONGRATULATIONS OFFICER LEE.>> A BUSY WEEK FOR CHRISTMAS AND HOLIDAY ACTIVITIES.
THE SECOND ANNUAL ILLUMINATED PROCESSION IS ON THURSDAY.
THERE WILL BE A GATHERING AT THE WELCOME CENTER.
PEOPLE WILL HAVE LANTERNS THERE IS ACTUALLY NO REAL FIRES AND THERE IS A PROCESSION GOING THROUGH DOWNTOWN.
THERE WILL BE FIREWORKS AND FOOD TRUCKS.
THAT WILL BE THURSDAY. AND THEN DICKENS BEGINS ON FRIDAY. THAT IS FRIDAY THROUGH SUNDAY.
ACCORDING TO THE SCHEDULE THERE ARE FIREWORKS EVERY NIGHT.
IT IS A BUSY WEEK DOWNTOWN. IF YOU PLAN TO ATTEND COME EARLY SO YOU CAN PARK. IT IS NICE TO HAVE DICKENS BACK
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.