[1. CALL TO ORDER]
[4.1 AUTHORIZATION TO DEFEND - MERRY COALSON, DAVID COALSON, TAINA CHRISTNER]
[00:05:08]
. >> IN THIS CASE, THERE ARE TWO
[00:05:11]
GROUPS OF CITIZENS. THE PETITIONERS AND THE RESPONDENTS. AND I BELIEVE THE PETITIONERS IN THIS CASE HAVE A PLAUSIBLE, LEGAL CLAIM.I DO NOT BELIEVE IT IS FAIR FOR THE CITY TO SIDE WITH AND DEFEND ONE GROUP OF CITIZENS OVER ANOTHER GROUP OF CITIZENS.
I BELIEVE THE RESPONDENTS SHOULD SOLELY BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DEFENSE OF THIS PETITION AND THAT THE CITY SHOULD NOT PARTICIPATE IN DEFENSE AGAINST ANOTHER GROUP OF CITIZENS.
I WILL BE VOTING AGAINST. >> ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION?
>> SEEING NONE, I HAD ONE QUESTION, HARRISON POOLE.
WHAT WE'RE AUTHORIZING IS DEFENSE OF THE CITY ITSELF IS
THAT CORRECT? >> SO WHAT WE'RE AUTHORIZING IS US TO DEFEND OURSELVES AS A CITY THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE AUTHORIZING
IN. >> CLARIFICATION IS THE CITY IS ONE OF THE RESPONDENTS SO YOU'RE DEFENDING THE ACTION TAKEN BY THE CITY. IN THIS CASE THIS WAS THE VOTE OF THIS COMMISSION WITH THE PROPERTY.
>> DEFENDING OUR OWN ACTION. WITH THAT, I WILL HEAR THE VOTE.
COMMISSIONER ROSS, YOU'VE ALREADY VOTED.
>> COMMISSIONER AYSCUE, YES. >> YES.
AND DID I RECEIVE A REQUEST TO SPEAK ON THIS? I'M SEEING A RAISED HAND.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. EXCELLENT.
THERE ARE TWO REQUESTS TO SPEAK ON THIS.
I APOLOGIZE FOR NOT SEEING THIS BEFORE THE VOTE.
>> I'M BRYN BYRON. FERNANDINA BEACH.
GENTLEMEN, I AM DISGUSTED, DISAPPOINTED THAT THE CITY HAS MADE A DECISION WHICH REQUIRES THEM TO DEFEND THEIR FAILURE TO FOLLOW THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 01.03.5.
THE RESULT OF THIS COURSE IS A LACK OF RESPECT AND CONFIDENCE FOR BOTH CITY COMMISSIONERS AND SOME CITY STAFF.
THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY. >> THANK YOU.
>> WE ALSO WELCOME MS. JACKIE WILKING TO THE PODIUM.
>> I AM IN COMPLETE AGREEMENT WITH THE FORMER SPEAKER.
I'VE BEEN A RESIDENT HERE THE LAST 20 YEARS.
OKAY. I AM IN COMPLETE AGREEMENT WITH HER.
ALONG WITH THEM, THERE WERE SUPPOSED TO BE OTHERS, I ABSOLUTELY OPPOSE THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY.
THAT CONCERN BEING THE COMMISSION'S DISREGARD OF LDC .01.03.05 AND THE FACT THAT THE PAB ON TWO OCCASIONS ADVISED THAT THOSE REQUIREMENTS BE FOLLOWED BEFORE FORWARDING TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FOR ACTION.
THAT WAS OUR PUBLIC COMMENT FAR ITEM.
ANY FURTHER COMMENT TO SPEAK ON THAT?
[4.2 LEASE AGREEMENT - OCEAN HIGHWAY AND PORT AUTHORITY]
SEEING NONE CITY CLERK, WE GOOD TO GO? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALL RIGHT.WITH THAT, WE WILL MOVE ON TO ITEM 4.2 LEASE AGREEMENT OCEAN HIGHWAY AND PORT AUTHORITY. COMMISSIONER GEORGE, PLEASE PRESENT THIS ITEM.
[00:10:04]
THIS IS LEE AGREEMENT OCEAN HIGHWAY AND PORT AUTHORITY.IT APPROVES THE LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY AND OPA.
>> SECOND. >> MOTION AND SECOND.
COMMISSIONER ROSS. >> I READ THE LEASE AGREEMENT.
THE CHARGE THAT THE CITY IS PROPOSING IS $8.43 PER RENTABLE SQUARE FOOT. THAT THE RENT INCLUDES SEWER, WATER, TRASH, COMMON AREA OF MAINTENANCE, AND ELECTRICITY.
IT'S A LOADED RENT. THE CITY DID A STUDY BACK IN 2019 TO DETERMINE WHAT THE RENT APPLICABLE RENTS FOR THAT RENTAL SPACE SHOULD BE. AND THIS CAME UP WITH THE NUMBER $17.34. SO MY QUESTION IS WHY ARE WE SUBSIDIZING THE RENT WITH THE THE OCEAN HIGHWAY PORT AUTHORITY AND GIVING THEM A RENT THAT IS ABOUT MORE THAN 50% OFF MARKET RENT. THIS IS NOT A FINANCIALLY STABLE THING. WE HAVE A BUILDING.
THE BUILDING HAS COSTS. AND THOSE COSTS NEED TO BE DEFERRED. NEED TO BE PAID FOR.
AND PART OF THE WAY EH WITH PAY FOR THEM IS THROUGH LEASES.
THERE ARE A NUMBER OF LEASES IN THAT BUILDING.
MOST FOR CHARITIES. I LOOKED AT THEIR RATES AND YOU ARE CORRECT THAT THEY'RE ALSO PAYING THAT RATE OF $8.43.
WHICH IS GETTING SUBSIDIZED. I DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH SUBSIDIZING CHARITIES BUT I THINK THAT THE CITY TAXPAYERS SHOULD BE AWARE THAT WE ARE -- THAT IS A SUBSIDY TO VARIOUS
CHARITIES WHICH IS FINE. >> FOR CHARGING THE HALF THE MARKET RATE WE ARE NOT FURTHERING OUR CAUSE OF PAYING FOR THE BUILDING. SO THE BUSINESS MODEL THAT WE'RE ADOPTING IS THAT WE'RE CHARGING LESS.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE REASON. FOR A SERVICE THAT WE'RE PROVIDING AND THAT IS NOT A FINANCIALLY-STABLE POSITION TO GO FORWARD. SO I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR IN STAFF AND CITY COMMISSIONER WHY WE'RE CHARGING HALF -- MORE THAN HALF OF THE -- BEHALVES THE MARKET RATE BACK IN 2019.
>> IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT WE'RE CHARGING $8.43 TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE OTHER LEE SEES AT THIS POINT.
THEY HAVE EXISTING LEASES AND TRYING TO GET INTO A DEAL OF DIFFERENT LEASE RATES FOR DIFFERENT ENTITIES.
JUST A LITTLE BIT MORE COMPLEX FOR THIS.
SO THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING. WE'RE FOLLOWING WHAT WE'RE CHARGING EVERYBODY ELSE AT THIS TIME.
>> AND THE OTHER PEOPLE IF YOU LOOK AT WHO THEY ARE ARE ALL -- WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ONE ARE ALL CHARITIES.
>> YES. >> LAST TIME I THINK THE OCEAN HIGHWAY AND PORT AUTHORITY IS NOT A CHARITY.
>> THE SPREADSHEET FROM 2009'S STUDY SHOWED $7.25 PER SQUARE FOOT. WE INCREASED IT DUE TO CPI INCREASES. THERE'S NO OTHER WAY TO FIGURE THE USE OF WHAT WE WOULD BE CHARGING TO ACTUALLY COME UP WITH THAT NUMBER. THE STUDY SHOWS THAT MARKET RATE
IS $17.34. >> I BELIEVE IT WAS BECAUSE THEY WERE ALL CHARITIES AND -- OKAY. SO CLARIFY MR. GEORGE, A FEW THINGS YOU SAID THERE. THERE IS NONCHARITIES THERE
PAYING THIS RATE. >> THE MAJORITY OF THE RENTER OR LEASEES ARE CHARITIES BUT I THINK THERE ARE TWO OTHERS.
SO 843 WAS A CPI INCREASE. UNDERSTOOD.
ALL RIGHT. WELL, I APPRECIATE THOSE COMMENTS. LET'S GO TO VICE MAJOR STURJIS.
>> WHAT YOU'RE TILLING ME IS WE'RE IN LINE WITH ALL THE REST OF THE PEOPLE THERE IN MY OPINION I DON'T KNOW WHY WE WOULD PICK ON THE POOR IF THERE ARE OTHER ENTITIES EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE NOT NONPROFIT ENTITIES AT SOME POINT WE COULD GO UP ON THE RATES BUT WE WOULD HAVE TO GO -- WE SHOULD GO UP ON RATES OF EVERYBODY THERE. CORRECT?
>> AND PART OF THE PROBLEM IS WE GOT SOME THAT ARE IN EXISTING
[00:15:02]
LEASES SO WE DON'T WANT TO BREAK THAT SO WHEN IT COMES TIME TO RENEW THEIR LEASE WE'LL LOOK AT WHAT THEIR RATE IS AND ADJUST ACCO ACCORDINGLY.>> OKAY. SO WE CAN ALWAYS PUT AN ADJUSTMENT INTO THE LEASE THAT WE'RE GOING TO WRITE CORRECT?
>> OR IS THERE AN AREA OF ADJUSTMENT?
>> WHEN IT COMES TIME FOR RENEWAL, WE CAN ALWAYS NEGOTIATE
THAT RATE. >> HOW LONG IS THE LEASE FOR?
ONE YEAR I BELIEVE. >> SO IT CAN BE ADJUSTED YEARLY.
>> ALL RIGHT. AND THEN COMMISSIONER AN SON.
I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF SEEING THESE LEASES MAKE THEIR WAY TOWARDS FAIR MARKET VALUE. I THINK THAT'S WITH SUPPORTING STRUCTURES THAT WE HAVE. I WOULD BE IN SUPPORT OF MAKING SOME EXEMPTION FOR NONPROFITS. THE CITY SHOULD NOT BE SUBSIDIZING OTHER BUSINESSES TO MAKE MONEY.
>> ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A FINANCIAL MODEL HERE.
WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE FISCALLY PRUDENT.
THERE'S A MODEL HERE WHERE EH WE HAVE AN ENTITY THAT DOESN'T PAY US -- WE'RE IN LITIGATION WITH OVER PAYING US THEIR FEE THAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO PAY US AND NOW WE'RE GIVING THEM A BREAK OF MORE THAN HALF AND THE STUDY HE IS CORRECT.
IT CAME UP WITH $7.43 BUT WHAT THE STUDY SHOWED IS IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN $17.41. A DECISION WAS MADE AT THAT TIME AND THE ONLY -- THE CHARITIES THERE, I HAVE THE LIST OF THEM BUT THE ONLY ONE THAT'S NOT A CHARITY IS CROWN CASTLE AT&T.
THE REST OF THEM INCLUDING THE EPISCOPAL CHILDREN SERVICES ALL PROVIDE CHARITIES. I HAVE NO PROBLEM SUBSIDIZING CHARITIES BUT THE TAXPAYER SHOULD KNOW THE EXTENT WE'RE SUBSIDIZING THEM. THAT'S NUMBER ONE.
NUMBER TWO THIS IS A NEW LEASE. SO WHY WOULD WE GO INTO A NEW LEASE WHERE THE OCEAN HIGHWAY PORT AUTHORITY WHICH HAS NOT -- WE'RE IN LITIGATION WITH BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT PAYING US THE FEE THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO PAY THAT WAS NEGOTIATED MORE THAN -- IN 1985, SO THEY COULD PUT THE PORT THERE.
IF THEY HAD NOT PUT THE PORT THERE THAT LAND WOULD BE GENERATING TAXPAYER REVENUE FOR ALL THOSE YEARS.
THE DEAL WAS WE -- THE CITY AT THAT TIME CHANGED THE ZONING TO ALLOW THE PORT TO GO THERE AND SO TOOK IT OUT OF PAYING TAXES AND AS PART OF THAT WITH THE $50,000 A YEAR.
AND NOW THEY'RE REFUSING TO PAY THAT AND NOW ALL THESE YEARS LATER WE'RE GOING TO GIVE THEM A RENTAL DECREASE OF 50% OFF MARKET RATE. NOW MAYBE YOU WANT TO CONSIDER THIS AS AN IDEA, PUTTING THAT -- THIS RATE IN THE $50,000 AND JUST HAVE THEM SETTLE AS PART OF THE SETTLEMENT AND HAVE THEM -- THEY CAN HAVE 388 SQUARE FEET WHICH IS A SMALL AMOUNT OF SPACE AS PART OF THAT SETTLEMENT. BUT I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THE CITY SHOULD BE SUBSIDIZING ALL THESE THINGS AND THEN WE'RE TELLING THE TAXPAYERS WE'RE NOT GOING TO RAISE YOUR TAXES.
HOW ARE YOU GOING TO PAY FOR EVERYTHING? I KEEP GOING BACK TO THAT. WE DON'T WANT TO -- WE DON'T WANT TO CHARGE MARKET RATE. WE WANT TO CUT FEES.
WE WANT TO DO ALL THESE THINGS AND WE KEEP HANDLE OUT THESE SWEETHEART DEALS AND THIS IS ONE.
WE PRETEND LIKE THE BUILDING IS GOING TO TAKE CARE OF ITSELF.
>> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER ROSS.
>> SO I'LL FINISH MY THOUGHTS HERE.
NUMBER ONE IF OUR DEFINITION IS THAT IT NEEDS TO BE -- FIRST OF ALL I'LL SAY IF THAT IS OUR DEFINITION IF OUR DEFINITION IS IT CAN'T MAKE PROFIT IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT HAS TO BE A NONPROFIT MEANING THE PORT IS A GOVERNMENT BODY THEY'RE NOT A BUSINESS THEY'RE A GOVERNMENT BODY I FURTHER MORE THINK WE NEED TO REPHRASE THE QUESTION. THE QUESTION RIGHT NOW IS WHY ARE WE CUTTING THE PORT A GOOD DEAL WHEN THE QUESTION REALLY SHOULD BE WHY DO YOU WANT TO PICK ON THE POOR AND CHARGE MORE THAN EVERYBODY ELSE. THAT'S A QUESTION THAT I THINK
IS THE BIGGER ONE HERE. >> UNDERTHE RULES WE HAVE, I GET
[00:20:07]
TO SPEAK AS LONG AS I WANT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.>> I'M NOT PICKING ON THE PORT. I'M NOT PICKING ON THE PORT.
THEY HAVE COME TO US AND THEY'VE COME TO THANK YOUS AND THEY WANT TO LEASE. I HAVE NO PROBLEM GIVING THEM A LEASE. THE LEASE SHOULD BE AT MARKET RATE AND THEY SHOULD BE TREATED LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE.
THEY'RE NOT A CHARITY. THEY HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY -- THEY HAVE AN -- THEY'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAKING MONEY AND RUNNING THAT PORT. THEY SHOULD BE PAYING MARKET RATE FOR HERE. THEY PAY MARKET RATE TO THE COUNTY TO USE THEIR FACILITY WHEN THEY -- COUNTY DOESN'T GIVE THEM A DEAL TO USE THEIR ROOM. THEY PAY MARKET RATE.
THEY PAY WHAT EVERYBODY ELSE PAYS.
SO WHY ARE WE -- WE CONTINUALLY GIVE ALL THE MONEY AWAY AND THEN WE WONDER WHY THINGS AREN'T TAKEN CARE OF.
THAT BUILDING AND JEREMIAH CAN SPEAK TO IT IF HE WANTS TO.
THAT BUILDING IS AN OLD BUILDING.
IT TAKES A LOT OF MAINTENANCE AND WE'RE GOING TO GIVE THAT ANOTHER LEASE. YES.
IT'S THE PRINCIPLE OF THE THING. WE ARE NOT GENERATING ENOUGH MONEY TO TAKE CARE OF OUR ASSET ISES.
THAT'S THE PROBLEM. I'M NOT PICKING ON THE PORT.
THIS COULD BE ANYBODY ELSE WHO CAME IN HERE AND WANTED THIS LEASE.
I WOULD RAISE THE SAME QUESTION WITH EVERYONE.
THIS IS A NEW LEASE. THIS IS NOT RENEWING AN OLD LEASE AND I AGREE WE SHOULD HONOR OUR OLD LEASES AND WHEN THEY COME UP TALK ABOUT WHETHER YOU'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO SUBSIDIZE. I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT. I THINK WE SHOULD SUBSIDIZE.
MOST OF THE ENTITIES THAT ARE IN THAT BUILDING ARE USEFUL TO THE COMMUNITY. I AGREE WE SHOULD SUPPORT THEM.
THE OCEAN HIGHWAY DOESN'T CONTRIBUTE TO THIS COMMUNITY IN THE SENSE THAT IT DOESN'T TAKE CARE OF THE POLICE, FIRE, KIDS, THEY'RE A GOVERNMENT ENTITY AND SHOULD BE WILLING TO PAY THEIR OWN WAY AND SHOULD HAVE TO. THAT'S WHY I'M NOT PICKING ON THEM AND I'M NOT TRYING TO STICK IT TO THEM AS YOU SAID.
I AM SIMPLY ASKING THEM TO PAY WHAT EVERYBODY ELSE PAYS.
>> CAN I MAKE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION TO RAISE IT TO MARKET VALUE IN
>> I BELIEVE IT WAS COMMISSIONER AYSCUE.
>> DO YOU ACCEPT IT? >> THAT'S RAISING IT.
IT'S COMPLETELY CHANGING THE MOTION.
THE MOTION IS TO -- >> COMMISSIONER --
>> THE MOTION IS TO ACCEPT THE LEASE AGREEMENT AS WRITTEN.
IF WE'RE GOING TO RAISE IT TO MARKET RATE THAT'S NOT A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT. THAT'S ESSENTIALLY SAYING THAT WE'RE GOING TO COMPLETELY CHANGE THE RESOLUTION.
THAT'S NOT EVEN CLOSE. THAT'S BASICALLY SAYING I DON'T
AGREE WITH THE LEASE AGREEMENT. >> UNDERSTOOD.
THANK YOU. YOUR POINT TAKEN THAT IS AN UNFRIENDLY AMENDMENT AND WILL YOU NOT ACCEPT IT.
>> THERE YOU GO. >> ALL RIGHT.
SO WITH THAT WE CALL THE QUESTION.
>> YES. I LOOK FORWARD THE MEETING NEXT
[4.3 ACCEPTANCE OF FUNDS – FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (FDOT)]
MOVING ON DOWN TO THE LAST ITEM ON OUR CONSENT AGENDA.
LET'S GO TO THE ACCEPTANCE OF FUNDS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION FDOT. >> THIS IS 2023-111.
IT'S BASICALLY WE GET AN ANNUAL REIMBURSEMENT FROM THEDOT FOR THE LIGHTING AGREEMENT. TO HELP PROVIDE MAINTENANCE ON THAT. THIS PAST TIME IT WAS ABOUT $38,000. THAT COVERS OUR COST. SO IT'S REALLY A GOOD DEAL FOR US TO GET THAT REIMBURSEMENT SO STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.
>> THE REASON I TOOK IT OFF -- SORRY.
THE REASON I TOOK IT OFF THE AGENERAL DAN.
THIS IS WHAT THE CITY SHOULD BE DOING.
WE'RE TAKING -- WE'RE RELIEVING THE STATE OF SOME DUTIES TO TAKE CARE OF THESE ROADS. THEY'RE PAYING US BACK AT THE COST WE'RE INCURRING. WE'RE BREAKING AID OR ABET.
THAT IS THE WAY OF DOING BUSINESS.
THIS IS -- IT'S NOT A GREAT DEAL.
IT'S WHAT WE SHOULD BE DOING WITH EVERYTHING.
WE CAN'T AFFORD TO BE A FISCAL CONSERVATIVE YOU HAVE TO PAY FOR WHAT YOU SPEND. AND WE'RE SPENDING THE MONEY.
THEY'RE PAYING US. BREAKS EVEN.
IT'S FINE. SO I THINK THAT THIS IS THE KIND OF NEGOTIATION THAT SHOULD BE GOING ON ENTIRELY.
>> COMMISSIONER AYSCUE. >> YES.
[5.1 FENCING PROJECTS APPROVAL]
[00:25:02]
>> MOVING ON THE LIST. RESOLUTION 5.1.
FE FENCE PROGRESS APOLOGETICS APPROVAL.
-- FENCING PROJECTS APPROVAL. >> THIS RESOLUTION IS BEFORE YOU TONIGHT FOR THREE OF THE FENCING PROJECTS THAT WE ALREADY KIND OF DISCUSSED AT THE PREVIOUS MEETINGS WHERE YOU AWARDED THE BID TO MAE CONTRACTING. WE WENT OUT AND WORKED WITH THEM BASICALLY GOT THE PRICES ON EACH OF THE DIFFERENT PROJECTS.
THESE THREE CAME UP AS OVER 20,000 SO WE WANTED TO COME BACK AND BRING THESE TO YOU. THE BASEBALL FIELDS AND FOOTBALL FIELDS WILL FOLLOW THE SAME FOOT BIT.
CHAIN LINK FENCE, THE CEMETERY FENCE WE'RE LOOKING AT A PICKET STYLE BLACK ALUMINUM SIX FOOT TALL FENCE.
HOWEVER, THAT'S GOING TO GO THROUGH A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT BODIES FOR THEIR CONSENSUS AND APPROVAL.
IT'S GOING TO GO TO THE PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE. RESTORATION FOUNDATION.
FRIENDSES OF THE CEMETERY GROUP TO SEE IF THEY LIKE THE FENCING DESIGN. TO SEE IF THEY LIKE WHERE WE'RE THINKING OF HAVING THE FENCE. SO THIS IS TO APPROVE THE PURCHASE BUT NOT THE DETAILS. THE PRICE FOR THE CEMETERY FENCE IS HIGH. THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY WHERE THEY MAY CHANGE DESIGN. PROBABLY LESS REMOVED A GATE.
LIT BE LESS. SO THE PRICE YOU HAVE THE HIGHER PRICE.
AND I'LL ANSWER QUESTIONS. >> ALL RIGHT.
LET'S GO TO COMMISSIONER ROSS. >> I HAVE TO QUESTIONS.
NUMBER ONE, MY UNDERSTANDING IS WHAT WE'RE APPROVING I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO PROBLEM WITH THE TWO FENCES FOR THE SOFTBALL FIELDS AND BASEBALL FIELDS. FOR THE CEMETERY, I UNDERSTAND WE'RE APPROVING THAT WE'RE NOT -- WE'RE APPROVING THE CONCEPT OF PAYING FOR THIS -- BUT ANY FENCE THAT WILL BE INSTALLED WILL GO THROUGH THE PARKS AND RECREATION, ACC, AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK HERE FOR FINAL APPROVAL.
>> IF THE COMMISSION WISHES TO HAVE THEIR OPINION ON THE D
DESIGN. >> MY NUMBER TWO QUESTION IS THAT WHY IS THIS NOT COMING OUT OF THE PERPETUAL CARE FUND.
THERE'S OVER $1.2 MILLION IN THERE THAT'S FOR USES SUCH AS THIS TO TAKE CARE OF THE CEMETERY AND WHY IS IT COMING
OUT OF PARKS AND REC? >> IF THAT'S THE DIRECTION WE CAN CERTAINLY LOOK AT THAT. THERE ARE OTHER NEEDS OF THE CEMETERY THAT WE ARE LEAVING THAT FUND ALONE FOR THE TIME BEING. BECAUSE THIS CAN BE FUNDED THROUGH THE GENERAL PARK FUND THAT YOU ALREADY HAVE.
>> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS WITH THE CONTINGENCY THAT FINAL APPROVAL COMES BACK TO THE CITY COMMISSION AND NUMBER TWO THAT INVESTIGATE LOOKING AT THE PERPETUAL CARE FUND AS A
POSSIBLE FUNDING SOURCE. >> THERE ALREADY IS A MOTION AND
SECOND ON THE TABLE. >> SORRY.
>> SO WE CAN HEAR THAT. IT WAS A MOTION BY -- THERE WAS NOT? THAT'S LAST ONE.
NEVER MIND. OKAY. YOUR MOTION IS ON THE
>> ABSOLUTELY. DOES IT HAVE A SECOND?
>> ALL RIGHT. SEEING NONE THAT MOTION FAILS.
>> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION AS IS.
>> SECOND. >> I'LL MAKE A SECOND.
>> MOTION AND SECOND. NOW ANY DISCUSSION?
>> THANK YOU. I JUST DO LIKE MR. ROSS' POINT.
I UNDERSTAND WHAT THE BALL IDE- FIELD -- THE FIELDS ARE.
WHAT THAT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE. I WOULD LIKE THE CITY COMMISSION TO HAVE SOME SORT OF DIRECTION ON WHAT THE CEMETERY FENCING IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE WHEN IT'S FINISHED.
THAT'S THE ONLY THING THAT I'M CONCERNED WITH.
>> LET ALONE WHAT WE CAN'T PLAN FOR.
>> TELL ME ABOUT THE FENCE FOR THE BALLPARK.
IS IT MUCH DIFFERENT THAN THE FENCE WE CURTLY HAVE? JUST A NICER FENCE? DIFFERENT LAY JUT?
[00:30:02]
WHAT ARE WE LOOKING ATS HERE. >> THE BASEBALL FIELDS AND FOOTBALL FIELD ARE GOING TO FOLLOW THE SAME FOOTPRINT.
JUST NEW FENCING BECAUSE IT'S RUSTED OUT AND CURVED AND
FALLING APART. >> SO AN UPGRADE ON THE CURRENT FENCE. THE FENCE AT THE CEMETERY.
HOW WILL THAT -- TELL ME ABOUT THAT.
IN THE SAME LOCATION. NEW FEBRUARYS?
>> YEAH. WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO THE THREE ENTITIES THAT I PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED IS A SIX FOOT -- THE STREETS THAT GO THROUGH THE CEMETERY, ONE OF THEM IS PINE STREET. I'M NOT THINKING THE OF THE NAMES OF THEM. DELAYS SLE STANDARD GATES.
>> THAT WILL BE A DECORATIVE GATE THERE.
AND THEN BASICALLY THE CEMETERY WILL BE OPENED IN THE MORNING AND CLOSED IN THE EVENING. THAT'S THE POINT OF IT SO WE'LL BE OPENING ESSENTIALLY FIVE GATES.
IT'S GOING TO GO ALONG 14TH STREET AND WRAP AROUND TO THE INTERSECTION RIGHT BEFORE PINE STREET MAGNOLIA AND PINE TO KIND OF HAVE THE WHOLE THING SECURED. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING.
BUT, YES. WE CAN CERTAINLY BRING IT BACK
TO YOU ALL FOR FINAL APPROVAL. >> UNDERSTOOD.
ALL RIGHT. I HAVE ONE MORE ON COMMISSIONER
ROSS. >> GOING BACK TO AFFORDABLE CARE. YOU ARE CORRECT THAT'S WHAT IT'S THERE FOR BUT ONCE THAT RUNS OUT THE CITY IS ON THE HOOK FOR IT NO MATTER WHAT SO USING TIME AND MONEY THAT WE'RE GETTING A SMALL AMOUNT OF INTEREST ON THAT MONEY AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT TAKING CARE LATER ON AND USING THAT MONEY NOW WHEN YOU DO A RETURN ON INVESTMENT ON THE MONEY IT'S MUCH MORE PERHAPS MUCH MORE USEFUL TO USE THAT MONEY NOW AS OPPOSED TO TEN YEARS FROM NOW WHEN YOU'RE GOING TO USE IT. THE CITY IS ON THE HOOK FOR TAKING CARE OF THAT CEMETERY IN PERPETUITY.
$200,000 A YEAR THAT MONEY WILL RUN OUT.
IT WILL THE RUN OUT IN FOUR TO SIX YEARS.
THE THINKING IS USE THE MONEY NOW BECAUSE THE MONEY IS GOING TO BUY MORE NOW THAN TEN YEARS FROM NOW.
20 YEARS FROM NOW. NUMBER ONE.
NUMBER TWO, WHAT YOU'RE COMMITTING TO TONIGHT IF YOU PASS THIS IS THAT THEY'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH ALL THESE THINGS AND COME UP WITH A FENCE AND PUT NIT.
WHAT I DON'T WANT TO HAPPEN IS AS SOON AS THAT FENCE STARTS GOING IN THERE WILL BE SOMEBODY WHO COMPLAINS.
SO WE ARE -- AND I DON'T WANT TO STOP DOING THAT SO WHAT WE'RE AGREEING TO IF WE PASS THIS AS IS WITHOUT GOING BACK AND LOOKING AT IT IS THAT THEY'RE GOING TO GO FORWARD AND PUT THIS FENCE IN. AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE AGREEING TO. I THINK THE CEMETERY SHOULD BE FENCED. PUSHING THAT FOR FIVE YEARS.
I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THE PLAN. I THINK THE FENCE IS
IT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE THIS. >> LITTLE MORE CURVED ON THE
GREATS. >> LITTLE MORE CURVED.
BUT YEAH THAT'S FINE. I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THIS BUT WHAT I DON'T WANT TO HAPPEN IS WHAT OFTEN HAPPENS IS SOMEBODY STARTS COMPLAINING WHEN YOU START PUTTING IT IN AND THEN WE GO WELL WE DIDN'T APPROVE THAT.
SO IF YOU WANT TO BRING IT BACK AND APPROVE IT I THINK THAT WOULD BE A BETTER IDEA JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY IS IN AGREEMENT THAT THIS IS WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO.
BUT I WILL SUPPORT THIS AS IS BUT I THINK A BETTER PLAN WOULD BE TO LOOK AT THE AFFORDABLE CARE PLAN AND TO LOOK AT
>> THIS IS A BUDGETED ITEM IN THIS CURRENT YEAR'S BUDGET.
>> WE HAVE FUNDS FOR IT. THIS IS GOING TO BE USING THE GENERAL PARK IMPROVEMENTS. $285,000 IN THAT FUND.
>> WHICH IS BUDGETED IN GENERAL FOR PARK IMPREACHILY --
IMPROVEMENTS. >> AND FENCING IS A TOP
THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER AYSCUE.
>> I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER ANTON.
I DON'T WANT TO TOUCH THE FUNDS. I UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT OF SAYING IT'S CHEAP TORE BUY IT NOW THAN FIVE YEARS FROM NOW.
COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THAT AND I HONESTLY DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH BRINGING IT BACK. WITH THAT IN MIND IT SOUNDS LIKE BASED ON WHAT I'VE HEARD EVERYBODY SAY IT SOUNDS LIKE THE MOTION IS GOOD AS IS WITH THE ADDITION OF WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE A PICTURE OF THE CEMETERY FENCE PLANS WHEN THEY'RE READY AND SO I THINK THIS WOULD. THIS IS DIFFERENT THAN LAST.
THIS WOULD BE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.
[00:35:03]
COMMISSIONER ANTON ARE YOU WILLING TO ACCEPT THAT?AND I HAVE A REQUEST TO SPEAK.
>> FESORGET IT. YOU GUYS JUST TOOK CARE OF IT.
>> I'LL TELL YOU WHO IS EXCITED ABOUT NEW BALLPARK FENCES.
WE'RE EXCITED TO WORK WITH YOU ON THAT.
WE HAVE AN AMENDED MOTION. PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
>> COMMISSIONER ANTON. >> YES.
[5.2 SOLE SOURCE VENDOR APPROVAL - LOU’S POLICE DISTRIBUTORS]
>> MAYOR BEAN >> HEADING DOWN THE LINE WE'RE GOING TO ITEM 5.2. SEOUL SOURCE VENDOR APPROVAL FOR LOU'S POLICE DISTRIBUTORS.
>> GOOD EVENING. WHAT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU IS A REQUEST TO APPROVE POLICE -- LOU'S POLICE DISTRIBUTORS TO BE SOLE SOURCE VENDOR FOR OUR NEW HANDGUNS. THEY'RE EIGHT YEARS OLD. THEY HAVE CONVENTIONAL SITES.
THE NEW HANDGUNS ARE A WHOLE DIFFERENT GENERATION.
THEY SHOOT MUCH BETTER. THEY'RE MORE ACCURATE.
THEY'RE EASIER TO CONTROL AND WILL COME AT RED DOT SITES WHICH IS THE LATEST AND GREATEST. WE ARE GETTING A BYE BACK COST ON OUR GUNS NOW. AND THE ADDITIONAL FUNDING WILL NOT COME OUT OF GENERAL FUND BUT OUT OF THE LAW ENFORCEMENT RECOVERY AND FEDERAL FORFEITURE FUNDS.
>> THANK YOU, CHIEF. >> MOTION.
>> MOTION FOR APPROVAL. >> SECOND.
>> ANY DISCUSSION. >> I HAVE A QUESTION.
>> I KNOW NOTHING ABOUT BEGIN GUNS BUT I WATCH A LOT OF SPY MOVIES. IS THE RED DOT THING WHERE THE
>> WHAT'S THAT? >> THE RED BOT IS BASICALLY A LITTLE -- DOT IS BASICALLY A SCREEN ON TOP OF THE GUN WITH A RED DOT ON IT SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO USE THE SITES.
YOU POINT YOUR RED DOT WHERE YOU WANT THE BULLET TO GO SO YOU CAN KEEP BOTH EYES OPEN AND SEE ALL YOUR PERIPHERAL VISION, ACQUIRE
A TARGET QUICKER AND FASTER. >> NO LITTLE LASER.
>> I'M DISAPPOINTED. [LAUGHTER].
>> THANK YOU. WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE.
>> YES. >> COMMISSIONER ANTON.
[5.3 SOLE SOURCE VENDOR APPROVAL - J. COLLINS ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, LLC]
SEOUL SOURCE VENDOR APPROVAL. >> APPROVAL FOR J COLLINS ENGINEERING AS A SOLE SOURCE VENDOR FOR THE PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING STUDY FOR THE WASTE WATER TREATMENT FACILITY.
THIS COST WILL NOT EXCEED $70,652.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. >> MOTION FOR APPROVAL.
>> MOTION AND SECOND. >> COMMISSIONER ROSS.
>> I CAN ASK MY QUESTIONS? >> YES.
>> YOU ARE RECOGNIZED TO SPEAK. >> THIS IS BROKEN DOWN INTO TWO POTS OF MONEY. ONE WHEN WE DO THE RENEWAL OF OUR CON ASSUMPTION PERMIT AND DISCHARGE -- CONSUMPTION PERMIT AND DISCHARGE. 20,000.
I THINK IT'S 29,000 AND CHANGE GOES TO THAT AND THEN 40,000 GOES TO WHICH IS BASICALLY LOOKING AT WHAT HAS BEEN REFERRED TO AS SENATE BILL 64. IS THAT CORRECT?
>> THIS IS CORRECT. >> ALL RIGHT.
SO MY QUESTION IS: COLLINS BACK ON AUGUST OF 2022 DID A STUDY,
CORRECT? >> I BELIEVE SO, CORRECT, YES.
>> IT'S RIGHT HERE. WHICH I READ.
AND I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING WHY WE'RE SPENDING $40,000 TO THERE'S A $5,000 EXPENSE IN THERE TO REVIEW THE RECORD.
$4,445 IN THERE. THEY WROTE THE STUDY NOT LESS THAN A YOU'RE AGO. WHY ARE WE PAYING THEM $5,000 TO LOOK AT IT AGAIN? I MEAN I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT -- THE NEW STUDY -- HELP ME OUT.
WE HAVE THIS STUDY AND BASICALLY WHAT THIS STUDY SAYS IS HOW -- WHAT WE'RE REQUIRED TO DO IS TAKE ALL OUR DISCHARGE FROM THE SEWER TREATMENT PLANT AND GET RID OF IT SOMEWHERE ON THE ISLAND. IS THAT A FAIR STATEMENT?
>> THAT IS A PRELIMINARY STUDY. WE'RE REQUIRED TO UPDATE IT I BELIEVE EVERY YEAR BY THE REQUIREMENTS FOR DP AND --
[00:40:13]
>> WHY SPEND $40,000 THAT BASICALLY GO BACK.
WHAT ARE WE GETTING FOR $40,000. I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THE 30,000 FOR THAT. WHAT I'M HAVING PROBLEMS WITH IS WHY PAY $40,000 FOR A CONSULTANT AND BELIEVE ME I READ ALL THESE REPORTS AND THIS IS OKAY. I MEAN, THEY BASICALLY SAID THERE'S NOWHERE TO PUT THE WATER.
THAT'S WHAT THEY SAID. THEY SAID THERE'S A 20 INCH -- 12 INCH PIPE THAT GOES DOWN TO THE LOCAL GOLF COURSE.
WE CAN GET PART OF THE WATER OUT THERE.
IRRIGATION AND I THINK THAT'S A GOOD THING THAT WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW. THAT PIPE HAS BEEN THERE FOR YEARS. WE CAN'T -- THERE'S NO PLACE TO GET RID OF THE REST OF THE WATER BECAUSE -- A RETENTION POND, TANK, WHAT NOT. AND SO WHAT ARE WE PAYING THE $40,000 TO TELL US THEY DIDN'T ALREADY TELL US IN THIS?
>> YOU'RE FINE. >> I BELIEVE THE LINE ITEM THAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO IS RECORDS RESEARCH.
THAT IS ON THE PROPOSAL FOR THE PERMIT RENEWAL.
AND THAT IS -- THAT'S I THINK $29,000 PROPOSAL FOR OUR WASTE WATER PLANT PERMIT. SO THAT ONE IS THE PRELIMINARY
>> SO THAT'S WHAT THAT RESEARCH IS.
IT'S NOT ASSOCIATED WITH THE REPORT THAT HE JUST PREPARED.
>> IT'S REVIEW OF RAILROADS. I APOLOGIZE.
>> YEAH. SO THAT'S OUR REGULATORY RECORDKEEPING SINCE THE LAST TIME THAT PERMIT WAS RENEWED.
SO GETTING UP TO SPEED WITH EVERYTHING THAT'S HAPPENED SINCE
THAT PERMIT WAS RENEWED. >> NOT THE PERMIT.
WHAT I'M INTERESTED IN IS THE STUDY -- THE PERMIT I HAVE NO PROBLEMS WITH. NO PROBLEMS WHATSOEVER.
WE NEED TO DO THAT. I AGREE WITH THAT.
WHAT I'M HAVING PROBLEMS WITH IS THE PER OR WHATEVER IT IS FOR REVIEWING THAT REPORT. MAYBE IT'S FLIPPED.
MAYBE I GOT THE NUMBERS WRONG. I GOT THE NUMBERS WRONG.
IT'S 40 GRAND FOR THE PERMIT RENEWAL.
>> SO THE UPDATE AND MAYBE YOU GOT A DIFFERENT TAKE FROM THAT REPORT. SO I THINK THE -- IT IS FEASIBLE BUT HAS NOT BEEN IN NORTHEAST FLORIDA BUT ULTIMATELY THAT'S WHAT MAJORITY OF THE WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANTS IN THE AREA ARE PLANNING FOR. SO IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE TO CONTINUE TO REFINE OUR PLAN AND LIKE YOU SAID THE -- THE 12 INCH DRAIN WE HAVE IN THE GOLF COURSE IS THERE AND USABLE BUT WE HAVE TO ADD HIGH LEVEL DISINFECTION TO OUR TREATMENT PLANT. FILTRATION TO MAKE THAT WATER OF A QUALITY THAT WE CAN STONED THE GOLF COURSE.
SO WE NEED SPECIFICS ON THOSE SYSTEMS. WHERE WE'LL FIT THEM IN OUR PLANT.
WHAT THAT'S COSTS. A PUMPING SYSTEM TO PUMP THAT TO THE GOLF COURSE. ABOUT A MILLION GALLONS OF STORAGE FOR THAT FINISHED WATER BEFORE WE CAN SEND IT OUT TO THE END USER. SO THAT'S WHAT THE STUDY YOU HAVE IS VERY PRELIMINARY. THAT GAVE US A GENERAL DIRECTION AND NOW EACH YEAR TO DEP WE HAVE TO PROVIDE AN UPDATE WITH MORE DETAIL ON WHAT OUR COST IS GOING TO BE, WHERE WE'RE GOING TO FIT IT IN THE THE FACILITY, AND HOW WE'LL MAKE IT WORK.
THAT'S WHAT THIS NEXT LEVEL OF STUDY IS GOING TO AND THAT'S WHY IT'S -- WE'RE HAVING THE SAME CONSULTANT PREPARE THAT BECAUSE
HE'S ALREADY ON THE SAME TRACK. >> AND YOU THINK WE'RE GETTING
GOOD VALUE FOR OUR MONEY. >> I DO THE.
>> OKAY. THANK YOU TEA THE -- OKAY. THANK YOU.
>> ALL RIGHT. SO WITH ALL THAT BEING SAID ANY
>> SO VICE MAYOR MADE THE MOTION AND COMMISSIONER ANTON MADE THE
[5.4 PROPOSAL APPROVAL - ASPHALT PAVING]
YES. HEADING ON DOWN THE LINE MOVING TO ITEM 5.4. PROPOSAL APPROVAL FOR ASPHALT
PAVING. >> IF YOU CALLED SEVERAL MONTHS AGO WE DELETED THE ASPHALT PAVING WORK AT FIRE STATION TWO
[00:45:02]
BECAUSE OF HIGH COST. AND WE WERE ABLE TO NEGOTIATE WITH KUDZU WHO IS AN ONGOING CONTRACTOR WE USE AROUND THE CITY AND THEY PROSLIDED A COST OF $80,655.66.THAT ACCELERATED COST WAS OVER # HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS FROM THE FIRE STATION. THIS IS A BETTER DEAL AND THIS IS GETTING THEM ON THE CONTRACT TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT WORK.
>> ANY DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER ROSS.
>> JUST ONE -- I'M GOING TO VOTE FOR THIS I THINK.
MY QUESTION IS IF YOU GO HERE AND LOOK AT THE PROJECT COST ESTIMATE, THERE IS FOR PERM I CAN'T BELIEVE ASPHALT AND -- PERM ABLE ASPHALT AND IT'S $60.70 A SQUARE YARD AS OPPOSED
TO $15.43 A SQUARE YARD. >> CORRECT.
>> AND IN OUR DISCUSSIONS THAT WE'VE HAD WITH OTHERS, THE ASPHALT DOESN'T WORK WELL AT ALL.
>> IT'S MY PROFESSIONAL OPINION THAT I DO NOT BELIEVE THE PERM I CAN'T BELIEVE ASPHALT DOES WHAT IT HAS CLAIMEDED TO DO.
>> SO WE'RE PAYING FOUR TIMES THE PRICE FOR SOMETHING THAT IS REQUIRED BY OUR LAND DEVELOPED CODE CORRECT?
>> CORRECT. >> AND JUST LOOKING DOWN THE ROAD TWO WEEKS WE'RE ALSO GOING TO RENEW THAT SAME REQUIREMENT IN OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SO MY QUESTION IS AND MAYBE STAFF CAN NOODLE THIS IN THE MEANTIME IS WHY ARE WE REQUIRING PERVIOUS PAVEMENT WHICH OBVIOUSLY COSTS THE CITY AND CONTRACTORS WHEN IT DOESN'T REALLY WORK? JUST SOMETHING I WOULD HOPE STAFF WOULD ADDRESS IS ALL. I WILL PASS THIS.
I UNDERSTAND THAT WE'RE DOING THIS BECAUSE IT'S A CODE REQUIREMENT. IS THAT CORRECT?
>> ALL RIGHT. WITH THAT WE HAVE -- MY QUESTION IS ABOUT OUR FIRE STATION IN GENERAL.
THAT PROJECT IS STILL UNDER BUDGET CORRECT?
>> I'LL BRIEFLY JUMP IN HERE BUT BASED ON CHIP'S DISCUSSION, SO WE SHOULD LOOK AT THE LDC GETTING RID OF THE PERMEABLE
SURFACE? >> I'M SURE FOR EVERY ONE OF ME THAT SAYS IT'S NOT USABLE OR NOT -- THERE'S PROBABLY TEN
PEOPLE WHO BELIEVE THAT IT IS. >> ALL RIGHT.
I JUST WANT A LITTLE FEEDBACK AS WELL IF IT SOUNDS LIKE WE COULD REDUCE IT, I DON'T THINK UNFORTUNATELY RED TAPE WE WANT OUR FIRE STATION TO BE COMPLETED ON TIME.
SO WE'LL MOVE FORWARD. THANK YOU.
[5.5 PROPOSAL APPROVAL AND BUDGET AMENDMENT - KUDZE 3 TRUCKING AND PAVING ]
>> YES. >>> PROPOSAL APPROVAL AND BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR -- THAT WAS -- NO THIS IS DIFFERENT.
THIS THE IS DIFFERENT KUDZU 3 TRUCKING AND -- KUDZE 3 TRUCKING
>> OKAY. >> SAME VENDOR DIFFERENT PROJECT. A CONTINUATION OF THE DOWNTOWN PARKING IMPROVEMENT EXPANSION AND THIS IS THE DOWNTOWN PARKING IMPROVEMENT IS NOT BUDGETED SO THIS IS A BUDGET AMENDMENT AND APPROVAL NEEDED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE PARKING LOCALITY IMMROVMENTS, PARKING LOT RIGHT TO THE WEST OF CITY HALL.
>> MOVE TO APPROVE. >> SECOND.
>> ANY DISCUSSION? CITY CLERK.
>> COMMISSIONER ANTON. >> YES.
[5.6 PROPOSAL APPROVAL - INSITUFORM TECHNOLOGIES, LLC]
PROPOSAL AL PICK-AND-ROLL INSITUFORM TECHNOLOGIES, LLC.
>> RESOLUTION 23-117 APPROVING A PROPOSAL FOR LINING FROM
INSITUFORM. >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION.
>> SECOND. >> MOTION AND SECOND.
AND I'LL LEAVE IT UP TO WHO SECONDED.
COMMISSIONER ROSS. >> I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN ANSWER THIS QUESTION, BUT ANDRE I SENT YOU AN EMAIL AND YOU PRELIMINARILY ANSWERED IT. WE'RE ONLY DOING 2% A YEAR OF
[00:50:04]
OUR SEWER SYSTEM. CORRECT?>> SEWER MAIN? >> THIS IS THE LATERALS GOING UP
OFF THE MAIN. >> SO WE'VE ALREADY DONE 36% I
THINK IS WHAT -- >> WE HAVE DONE --
>> I DON'T HAVE THAT EMAIL WITH ME.
>> 26.TEA%. >> AND WE'RE ONLY DOING 2% A
YEAR. >> OVERALL BUT THAT'S NOT INCLUDING THE -- WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CLAY.
>> ALL RIGHT. LET'S GET TO THE CHASE.
HOW MUCH CLAY DO WE GOT LEFT? >> PROBABLY -- WELL IF -- PROBABLY ALREADY DONE ABOUT 50% OF THE CLAY.
CLOSE. >> BUT WE'RE ONLY DOING 2% MORE
A YEAR. >> BUT THAT 2% IS ADDING ALL OF THE SEWER MAIN SGLN SO WE'RE NOT EVEN DOING THAT WITH THE CLAY.
SHOULD WE BE SPENDING -- SHOULD WE BE SPENDING MORE MONEY DOING THESE CLAY PIPES SOONER? THAT'S ALL I'M REALLY ASKING? ARE WE SPENDING ENOUGH MONEY FIXING BECAUSE ONCE THE PIPE
BREAKS IT'S A PROBLEM. >> IT'S A WEIRD NUMBER BUT WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE CLAY THERE'S ONLY CLAY IS ALMOST ALL DOWNTOWN. ALL NEW SUBDIVISIONS ARE PVC.
SO WE'VE DONE ABOUT HALF OF DOWNTOWN.
SO WHEN YOU GO LOOK AT IT THAT WAY BUT THE 2% YOU'RE LOOKING AT IS THE OVERALL 80 MILES OR SEWER LINE THAT WE HAVE.
>> ALL RIGHT. WE'LL ADDRESS IT LATER BUT MY
CONCERN IS ARE WE DOING ENOUGH. >> YES.
>> WE HIT THE WORST ONES FIRST AND NOW WE'RE JUST GOING TO EACH ONE RIGHT ON DOWN EVERY CLAY LINE GETS LINED EVENTUALLY.
>> AND EVENTUALLY MEANS HOW MANY YEARS? LONG TIME. OKAY. THANK YOU.
>> I HAVE A QUESTION. SO MOST OF THESE CLAY LINES WE'RE HAVING TO FINISH ARE ALMOST ALL DOWNTOWN CORRECT?
>> YES, SIR. >> I MEAN, SO ULTIMATELY, WHEN WE RELINE THESE IF WE DO A RENOVATION DOWNTOWN LIKE A BIG RENOVATION OF OUR DOWNTOWN AREA HOW MANY WOULD IT TOUCH AND WOULD IT -- WE JUST KEEP SYSTEMICALLY DOING IT WILL WE HAVE TO UPDATE AT THAT POINT IF WE RIP OUT THE STREET AND REDID THINGS AND THAT'S WHERE I'M GETTING TO MY POINT.
I KNOW IT'S A BIG QUESTION. >> SO THIS LATERAL LINE IS TO YOUR QUESTION RIGHT HERE TO SECOND THE MAIN HAS ALREADY BEEN LINED AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO LINE FROM THE MAIN ALL THE WAY UP TO THE SERVICE ALL THE WAY UP TO THE PARKING LOT ALL THE WAY UP TO THESE BUILDINGS BECAUSE THEY'RE BUILT UP TO THE PROPERTY LINE.
>> MY ONLY QUESTION IS I DON'T WANT US TO HAVE TO -- WHEN THESE CLAY PIPES COLLAPSE, THE ROAD COLLAPSES AND EVERYTHING ELSE COLLAPSES AND YOU'RE OUT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT AND BLAH BLAH. ARE WE DOING THIS FAST ENOUGH TO MEET DEMAND OF THESE OLD CLAY PIPES.
>> YES, SIR. >> AND WE'RE NOT --
>> WE'VE DONE THE WORST ONES FIRST AND WE'RE SYSTEMICALLY
WORKING OUR WAY DOWN. >> THANK YOU.
[5.7 FRANCHISE AGREEMENT - JEFFERS CARRIAGE LLC]
>> YES. >> THAT PASSES 5-0 SET HEADING ON DOWN THE LINE TO ITEM 5.7. FRANCHISE AGREEMENT WITH JEFFERS
CARRIAGE LLC. >> 2023-118 APPROVE AING NONEXCLUSIVE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT WITH JEFFERS CARRIAGE, LLC, FOR
[00:55:01]
A SIGHT SEEING BUSINESS USING ELECTRIC CARRIAGES MULTISEAT PROBABLY SIX SEATS AT THE MOST.IT WILL BE SET UP WHERE HE PICKS UP.
THE CITY WILL WORK WITH THE VENDOR ON THE ROUTE AND LOCATIONS OF PICKING UP AND DROPPING OFF.
HE'LL START OFF WITH ONE CARRIAGE AT A TIME BUT HOPEFULY GO TO TWO. DEPENDING ON HOW THE BUSINESS GOES WOULD COME BACK AND SEE WHETHER HE NEEDS TO DO MORE OR NOT. THAT WOULD COME BACK TO US
>> MOVE TO APPROVE. >> SECOND.
>> MOTION AND SECOND. COMMISSIONER ROSS.
>> MY ONLY QUESTION IS HOW DID WE SET THE FRANCHISE FEE WHICH IS I THINK 1,000 -- I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT IT WAS.
$1,250. >> THAT I CAN'T ANSWER.
I THINK TAMMY WOULD HAVE THAT ANSWER FOR US.
>> I CAN GET THAT FOR YOU. >> JUST DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S -- I'M JUST CURIOUS HOW WE CAME UP WITH THAT NUMBER OUT OF THE --
>> ANNUAL FEE, YES. >> FRANCHISE FEES ARE
>> ALL RIGHT. ANNUAL FEE FROM THE MASTER FEE
SCHEDULE. >> AND ONE OTHER QUESTION.
WE'RE NOT -- WHERE ARE THEY GOING TO -- IT SAYS FRONT AND CENTER. THEY'RE NOT GOING HAVE A
STATION? >> WE'LL GET THAT WORKED OUT BUT WHEN I TALKED TO HIM. THE VENDOR HE WAS THINKING ABOUT THIS ONE UNLOADING THE PARKING SPOT RIGHT ON ASH AND THEN HE ALSO WANTS TO DO ONE TO GO -- IT WOULD BE SOMEWHERE AROUND THE HOTEL DOWN ATLANTIC AVENUE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, EVERYONE. WE'LL CALL THE VOTE.
>> COMMISSIONER ANTON. >> YES.
[5.8 GOLF CART PURCHASE & SURPLUS]
THAT PASSES 5-0. 5.8 GOLF CART PURCHASE AND
THIS IS A 60-MONTH CAPITAL FINANCING AGREEMENT FOR THE PURCHASE OF 80 ELECTRIC GOLF CARTS AND ONE HAULER FOR THE DRIVING RANGE. THE CURRENT FLEET IS IN DISREPAIR AND IT'S BEYOND ITS USEFUL LIFE.
TYPICALLY GOLF CARTS ARE REPLACED EVERY FIVE YEARS.
WE'RE IN YEAR SEVEN. WE ARE CURRENTLY REPAIRING AND FIXING ABOUT 8 GOLF CARTS A WEEK SO IT'S A SIGNIFICANT EXPENSE FOR LABOR AND PARTS. THE TOTAL IMPACT IS $834,628 WHICH WOULD BE PAID OVER FIVE YEARS.
AT THE THE END OF FIVE YEARS WE WILL OWN THE FLEET.
WE EXPECT TO OFFSET THIS BY SELLING OUR CURRENT CARTS WHICH WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY $200,000 FOR THE SALE OF OUR CURRENT CARTS. I'M NOT ASKING FOR MONEY I'M SIMPLY ASKING YOU TO APPROVE THE PURCHASE.
THE GOLF COURSE OPERATION WILL COVER THE COST FOR THIS.
>> MOTION FOR APPROVAL >> SECOND.
>> ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER ROSS.
>> I'M JUST CURIOUS WHAT THE FINANCING FEE IS.
>> THE COMPANY THAT WE'RE PURCHASING THEM FROM GAVE US THE MONTHLY RATE THAT THEY TYPICALLY USE.
ONCE WE HAVE APPROVAL THEY WILL GIVE US THE FEE BUT THIS IS THE TOTAL RIGHT THERE THAT WE WOULD BE PAYING.
>> AND IF WE CHOOSE TO SELL THESE EARLIER, NOT HOLD ONTO THEM ALL FIVE YEARS WE CAN DO THAT?
>> INSTEAD OF TAKING THE WHOLE FLEET FIVE YEARS FROM NOW TURNING IT OVER IF WE SAID THREE YEARS FROM NOW WE WANT TO GET RID OF 30 OR WHATEVER THAT IS FEASIBLE UNDER THIS FINANCING
IN. >> ONCE WE HAVE THE FINANCING AGREEMENT I CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
>> I WOULD APPRECIATE THAT. >> OKAY.
>> ALL RIGHT. SOT WITH THAT, WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND. ! COMMISSIONER.
[5.9 SOLE SOURCE VENDOR APPROVAL AND BUDGET AMENDMENT - BEARD EQUIPMENT COMPANY ]
THAT PASSES 5-029 APPROXIMATE.# SEOUL SOURCE VENDOR APPROVAL AND BUDGET APPROVAL. THIS IS FOR PURCHASE AND APPROVAL FOR A USED 300 GALLON SPRAY RIG ATTACHING TO ONE OF OUR CURRENT UTILITY VEHICLES. IT WILL ALLOW US TO COVER MORE
[01:00:02]
ACREAGE IN A LESS AMOUNT OF TIME WITH BETTER COVERAGE ON THE GOLF COURSE. SIGNIFICANT LABOR SAVINGS.THE COST IS $24,682. AND HOW WE PLAN TO FAYE FOR THIS IS ONE OF OUR CURRENT APPROPRIATIONS WE HAVE MONEY FOR THIS. AND IT'S A HIGHER PRIORITY THAN THAT. SO WE DO INTEND TO IMPROVE THE CART PASS INTERNALLY WITH THE USE OF ASPHALT THAT WE ALREADY
CURRENTLY HAVE ON SITE. >> ABSOLUTELY.
>> RECOMMEND FOR APPROVAL. >> SECOND.
>> I HEAR THE MOTION AND SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? THANK YOU. I HAVE TO SAY THIS IS AMAZING.
I'M HEARING THAT THE GOLF COURSE IS TAKING CARE OF THEIR OWN.
AND I KNOW YOU'RE GOING TO NEED HELP IN THE FUTURE BUT I LOOK FORWARD TO GOOD THINGS AND THIS IS A GREAT THING.
THIS IS A GREAT THING THAT YOU'RE TAKING CARE OF YOUR OWN.
YOU'RE MANAGING IT. AND WE'RE MOVING EVERYTHING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. KEEP UP THE GOOD JOB.
>> THANK YOU. AND I ALSO BEFORE YOU GO I WANT TO ECHO THAT. I WAS JUST AT THE COURSE RECENTLY AND IT LOOKS GREAT. SO THANK YOU FOR ALL THE WORK
YOU'VE BEEN DOING ON THAT. >> THANK YOU.
[6.1 CODE AMENDMENT - PURCHASING]
PASSES 5-0. >>> ORDINANCE SECOND READING FOR
CODE AMENDMENT PURCHASING. >> THANK YOU.
HERE HARRISON POOLE FILLING IN FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY.
ORDINANCE 6.1 CODE AMENDMENT PURCHASING.
AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES BY AMENDING CHAPTER 2.
ADMINISTRATION ARTICLE VII FINANCE BY AMENDING SECTION 421 DEFINITIONS BY AMENDING SECTIONS 426 AND 444 TO INCREASE THE CITY MANAGER'S SPENDING AUTHORITY FROM $20,000 TO $25,000 BY AMENDING -- -- THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING.
>> OF COURSE. IF IT'S A PUBLIC HEARING I'LL OPEN IT UP.
ANYONE LIKE THE CHANCE TO SPEAK ON THIS MATTER? SEEING NONE, BECLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
DO I HEAR A MOTION. >> TO APPROVE.
WITH THAT IS THERE ANY COMMISSION DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE CITY CLERK. PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
>> COMMISSIONER ANTON. >> YES.
>> COMMISSIONER ROSS. >> CASE.
[7.1 ARTS AND CULTURE NASSAU]
>> THAT PASSES 5-0. >>> BOARD APPOINTMENTS.
>> I MAKE -- >> MOTION AND SECOND.
IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, CITY CLERK, PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL. >> COMMISSIONER ANTON.
>> YES. >> COMMISSIONER ASKEW.
>> YES. >> CONGRATULATIONS ONCE AGAIN FOR RETURNING TO TARTS AND CULTURE BOARD.
>> NOW WE GO TO ITEM 8, PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGE AG AGENDA. I HAVE NO MORE REQUESTS TO SPEAK. ANYONE IN THE ROOM WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ABOUT ANY ITEM?
[9. CITY MANAGER REPORTS]
SEEING NONE. CITY MANAGER REPORTS.>> MR. GEORGE. >> I ONLY HAVE ONE ITEM AND I THINK MOST OF Y'ALL CHANNELLED THIRD DEGREE TOO.
OVER THE WEEKEND 4TH OF JULY WE HAD SIGNIFICANT RIP TIDES.
OUR YOUNG OCEAN RESCUE GUYS DID AN AMAZING JOB.
THERE WERE 11 RESCUES ON FRIDAY. AT LEAST SEVEN ON SATURDAY.
AND I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY MORE ON SUNDAY BUT THEY WORKED THEIR TAILS OFF AND FORTUNATELY EVERYBODY WAS OKAY. ONE IS STILL IN 2 HOSPITAL BUT THEY DID AN INCREDIBLE JOB CONSIDERING HOW SEVERE THE RIP TIDES WERE AND THE CROWD OF OVER 20,000 A DAY AT THE BEACH. KUDOS TO OCEAN RESCUE GUYS.
THAT'S ALL I HAVE. >> THANK YOU.
>> WE HAVE A QUESTION. COMMISSIONER ROSS.
>> THREE QUESTIONS ACTUALLY. NUMBER ONE, COULD YOU SPEAK ABOUT THE VETO AND HOW THAT'S GOING TO AFFECT OUR MILLION
DOLLARS FROM THE GOVERNOR? >> WE PUT IN FOR A GRANT FOR A MILLION DOLLARS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE WATERFRONT PROJECT. IT CAME DOWN TO THE LAST TWO WEEKS AND IT WAS ON THE GOVERNOR'S DESK AND HE MADE THE DECISION TO VETO IT ALONG WITH PROBABLY ABOUT $411 MILLION OF OTHER GRANTS FROM THROUGHOUT THE STATE.
[01:05:02]
SO WE HAVE NOT GOTTEN AN OFFICIAL REASON.HE JUST VETOED IT SO WE DO NOT HAVE THAT MONEY FOR CONSTRUCTION
WHEN TIME COMES. >> THANK YOU.
NUMBER TWO, THE BEACH HARMONIZATION PLAN WE PASSED AT THE LAST MEETING. WHAT WE WERE GOING TO PURSUE IS USING THAT VEHICLE TO FUND THE REPLACEMENT OF THE BOARDWALK AT SEASIDE. CAN YOU -- WHAT'S THE NEXT STEP
IN THAT? >> I'VE REACHED OUT TO DETERMINE WHAT OUR NEXT STEP IS AND HOW WE MOVE THIS FORWARD IF THERE'S AN AGREEMENT THAT HAS TO BE SIGNED OR WHAT KIND OF DOCUMENT OR INSTRUMENT WE GOT TO DO TO KEEP THIS MOVING FORWARD SO I'VE REACHED OUT TO HIM AND EXPECT TO HEAR BACK FROM HIM.
>> AND MY THIRD ISSUE IS THAT THERE ARE NOW THREE ENGINEERING REPORTS THAT RECOMMEND CLOSING THE BUILDING UNTIL IT IS REPAIRED. I MEAN UNLESS THE COMMISSIONERS ---ERS OBJECT I HAD LIKE TO ASK -- I WOULD LIKE TO OBTAIN A STATEMENT FROM THE CITY'S LIABILITY INSURANCE COMPARER AND THE RESTAURANT GROUP'S LIABILITY INSURANCE CARRIER THAT THE INSURANCE COMPANIES WILL COVER THE CITY IF THERE ARE ANY INJURIES OR DEATHS FROM AN ADVERSE EVENT CAUSED BY THE SUB STRUCTURE'S POOR CONDITION.
IN OTHER WORDS WE HAVE INSURANCE POLICIES.
I WOULD LIKE TO SEND A LETTER SAYING WE RECEIVED THESE REPORTS AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU KNOW ABOUT THEM BECAUSE THAT'S YOUR DUTY AND THAT -- AND GET IT IN WRITING THAT THEY'RE WILLING TO PROVIDE LIABILITY COVERAGE IF THERE SHOULD BE -- THE CHANCES OF IT ARE VERY SMALL BUT IF IT SHOULD HAPPEN ARE WE COVERED.
>> I'LL DO THAT. >> DO I HEAR ANY OTHER COMMENTS
FROM COMMISSIONERS? >> I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT WE'VE BEEN DOWN THAT ROAD WITH OUR LIABILITY INSURANCE.
OUR CITY ATTORNEY EXPLAINED IT PRETTY WELL.
>> IT IS OUR OBLIGATION TO SEND THEM THE REPORT AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU'RE AWARE OF THEM.
OKAY. WE HAVE NEVER DONE THAT. AND IF WE ARE -- ARE YOU GOING TO COVER US IF THERE'S AN EVENT BECAUSE WHAT INSURANCE COMPANIES DO AND I'VE WORKED WITH A LOT OF CASES OVER THE YEARS WORKING FOR LAWYERS WHO REPRESENT THIS SIDE OF THE AISLE THEY DON'T WANT TO
PAY. >> I'VE NEVER HEARD IT IN WRITING THAT WE'VE DONE THAT. I THINK THAT'S A PRUDENT THING TO DO WHEN THERE'S ALTHOUGH IT'S A SMALL RISK THE REASON YOU GET
INSURANCE IS FOR BIG EVENTS. >> I DON'T THINK WE'RE OBLIGATED. I DISAGREE WITH CHIP.
I THINK THIS IS RIDICULOUS. I THINK IT'S A WITCH HUNT TO CONTINUE TO HARASS THEM. I THINK WE NEED TO MOVE IN.
WE'VE GOT THE REPORTS. THE BUILDING OFFICIALS MADE HIS RULING. THE CITY MANAGER WENT OVER IT.
WE'RE DECEMBER OF 2025 A YEAR BEFORE DECEMBER OF 2025 THIS COMMISSION WILL ENTERTAIN WHAT HAPPENED WE'RE GOING TO DO AND START WORKING ON IT. SO THAT WILL BE DECEMBER OF 2024. I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY RISK AND I'LL EVEN GO SLEEP THERE EVERY NIGHT WITH A TENT RIGHT NOW. THOSE COLUMNS ARE SOLID CONCRETE AND JUST BECAUSE A 68 PILLARS ARE SITTING 88 PILLARS THERE'S NO COMPROMISE. THERE'S NO STRUCTURAL LOAD.
WE'RE NOT PUTTING TRACTOR TRAILERS ACROSS IT.
THAT'S IT. I'VE MADE MY STATEMENT.
THANK YOU. >> ECONOMIESER ASKEW.
>> I WOULD PREFER TO WAIT FOR HER TO BE HERE TO ASK THAT QUESTION. I'M MORE COMFORTABLE WITH GETTING HER FEEDBACK ON IT AND SEEING DIRECTION THAT SHE WOULD PROVIDE. THAT'S JUST WHERE I AM WITH THE
[01:10:03]
SITUATION WITH BRETTS. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE WHAT ALL THAT SHE'S DONE IN DISCUSSIONS WITH BRETTS OR NOT AND THEN GOFROM THERE. >> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER
AYSCUE. >> THE SHORT ANSWER TO THIS IS
NOT AT THIS TIME. >> SO THE -- IS THE SHORT ANSWER I'LL BRING IT UP AT THE NEXT MEETING.
>> THAT'S FINE. >> NO PROBLEM.
>> ALL RIGHT. >> BUT IN THE MEANTIME, I THINK WE'RE BASICALLY BARE ON THIS ISSUE.
THAT'S MY OPINION. >> THANK YOU.
[10. CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS]
>> APPRECIATE YOU. >> THANK YOU.
STAND IN CITY ATTORNEY REPORT? >> I DO.
NEW MEXICO ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 286011 SUB PART 8 FLORIDA STATUTE CITY ATTORNEY TAMMY BACH REQUESTS ADVICE IN AN EXECUTIVE SHADE SESSION HELD AT CITY HALL CONFERENCE ROOM JULY 18TH, 202329 MATTERS ARE AS FAR AS, BEACH -- FERNANDINA BEACH VERSUS THE OCEAN HIGHWAY AND PORT AUTHORITY.
THIS MEETING IS NOT OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AND MAY ONLY BE ATTENDED BY THE COMMISSIONERS, CITY ATTORNEY, AND CITY MANAGER.
A COURT REPORTER WILL BE IN ATTENDANCE.
ALSO THE CITY ATTORNEY'S DEPARTMENT IS FINALIZING THE QUARTERLY LITIGATION REPORT WHICH WILL BE AVAILABLE NO LATER
THAN THE BEGINNING OF NEXT WEEK. >> THANK YOU.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR OUR CITY ATTORNEY.
>> THAT WAS ON THE 18TH AT 4:00? >> YES, SIR.
[11. CITY CLERK REPORTS]
>> THANK YOU. >> JULY 12TH THERE'S BEEN A QUESTED A JOINT MEET, THE CITY COMMISSION IN JOINT CHAMBERS.
WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND ESTABLISH THAT MEETING.
JULY 12TH, 578 P.M. WE'LL BE HERE IN CHAMBERS.
ON JULY 18TH SHADE MEETING AT 4:00 P.M. IN THE CONFERENCE ROOM. FOLLOWED BY A WORKSHOP OR CRA EXECUTIVE BOARD MEETING. I HAVEN'T FLESHED THAT OUT YET.
THAT WILL BE AT 5:00 FOLLOWED BY THE REGULAR MEETING.
THREE MEETINGS ON JULY 18TH. >>> THANK YOU.
[12. MAYOR/COMMISSIONER COMMENTS]
>> THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER REPORTS.
>> COMMISSIONER ROSS. >> THANK YOU.
I ALSO WOULD LIKE TO GIVE KUDOS TO THE OCEAN RESCUE PEOPLE FOR WHAT THEY DID. IT'S SORT OF AMAZING THOUGH THAT THERE WAS A RED FLAG FLYING WHICH MEANS YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO GO IN THE WATER AND ALL THESE PEOPLE WENT IN THE WATER.
SO THERE ARE SOME COMMUNITIES THAT THERE'S CONSEQUENCES FOR DOING THAT. I DON'T KNOW THAT WE SHOULD PURSUE THAT BUT THAT IS SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT.
NUMBER TWO, I WANT TO SHOUTOUT THE FIRST AND FOR PUTTING ON THE FIREWORKS DISPLAY YESTERDAY WHICH I THOUGHT WAS PRETTY GOODALL THOUGH IT WAS PRETTY HOT.
IT WAS VERY NICE DISPLAY AND THE PEOPLE THAT FUNDED THAT ARE THE CITY COMMISSION AND ALL THE CITY AND THE FPU SHUTOUT TO THEM FOR FUNDING THAT EVERY YEAR. AND THEN FINALLY, IF YOU GO DOWN AND WALK ON THE BOARDWALK BETWEEN BRETTS AND THE BATHROOM BUILDINGS, THEY HAVE HAD REPAIRS THERE NOW ON THE BOARDWALK AND ARE DOING A VERY NICE JOB WITH THAT AND SHOUTOUT TO THE CITY FOR DOING THAT. AND THE MARINA FOR KEEPING IT UP. THAT'S ALL I HAVE.
>> COMMISSIONER ANTON. >> IF YOU FOR THE GREAT CHANGES AT OUR COURSE. I WAS LUCKY ENOUGH TO GO THROUGH A SPRING ANALYSIS SESSION WITH HIM AND SEE WHAT HE'S HOPING TO BRING AS VALUE TO THE MEMBERS AND I'M EXCITED TO SEE THAT THE COURSE DOES GO AND BECOME EVEN BETTER.
>> COMMISSIONER AYSCUE. >> I WANT TO ECHO THIS WEEKEND WAS VERY BUSY. I WAS AT WORK MOST OF THE WEEKEND SO I KNOW THAT OCEAN RESCUE WAS QUITE BUSY BUT ALSO I WOULD LIKE TO THANK OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT, FIRE DEPARTMENT, AND EVEN THE BEACH RANGERS. THEY WERE BUSY AS WELL.
I COULD HEAR THEM ON THE RADIO. IT WAS A JAM PACKED WEEKEND.
I CAN ASSURE YOU. AND EVERYONE DID A GREAT JOB AT THE CITY. PHENOMENAL.
AND I KNOW THAT THERE WAS OTHER STAFF THAT WAS ON CALL AND THEY WERE -- YOU KNOW, WORKING HARD AS WELL AND JUST AN EXTREMELY SUCCESSFUL JULY 4TH WEEKEND AND JUST WANT TO THANK EVERYBODY. THANK YOU, MAYOR.
[01:15:03]
>> THANK YOU. I JUST WANT TO ECHO WHAT JAMES HAS ALREADY SAID AND I'VE ALREADY TOUCHED ON AT ONE TIME BUT I THINK -- I CAN'T WAIT TO SEE WHAT WE HAVE IN STORE FOR OUR CITY GOLF COURSE. AND I CAN REMEMBER SITTING IN THIS SEAT NOT TOO LONG AGO WITH EVERYBODY WANTING TO BREAK OUT THE PITCH FORKS AND TORCHES AND SUB OUT OUR GOLF COURSE.
I THOUGHT IT WAS A BAD IDEA THEN AND I STILL THINK IT'S A BAD IDEA NOW. BECAUSE NOW WE'RE MAKING PROFIT AND WITH A LITTLE BIT OF HELP AND WITH A LITTLE BIT OF NURTURING OUR COURSE AND NURTURING OUR GOLFERS I HAVE A FEELING WE'RE GOING HAVE A GREAT COMMUNITY THAT'S GOING TO ENJOY THAT GOLF COURSE WHEN IT BECOMES A DIAMOND FOR THE CITY BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT I SEE IT'S GOING TO BE.
IT'S GOING TO BE A BEAUTIFUL COURSE WITH A LOT OF HIGH REVIEWS AND IT'S ONLY UP FROM HERE.
>> AND I WANT TO CLOSE OUT WITH A FEW THINGS.
NUMBER ONE, IF YOU READ THE NEWSLETTER YOU SAW THAT MAYOR SAPP GOT HONORED THERE. WHAT A MAN HE IS.
SHOUTOUT TO HIM. THANK YOU FOR THAT.
AND THANK YOU TO THIS COMMISSION BECAUSE WE -- LATER THIS FALL.
SO STICK AROUND FOR THAT IT'S GOING TO BE ANNOUNCED SOON.
I GOT STATS ABOUT THIS OCEAN RESCUE STRAIGHT FROM OUR DEPARTMENT, THE CHIEF. WOULD YOU BELIEVE THAT THE 20,000 PEOPLE ON OUR CITY BEACH IS ONLY THE GUARDED AREAS.
WE DON'T HAVE NUMBERS ON THE UNGUARDED AREAS.
THAT'S A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT KAISER PERMANENTE O-- CAME OUT O THE BEACH. WITH THAT 27 RESCUES AND 14 SWIM ASSISTS. 31 DIFFERENT MEDICAL EMERGENCIES. AND TWO WERE A MAJOR TYPE.
ONE IS STILL IN THE HOSPITAL. WE'RE PRAYING FOR HIM.
AND FINALLY OUR BEACH RANGERS HAD 145 ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS OF DIFFERENT KINDS AND THEY ACTUALLY CLOSED SEASIDE PARK BECAUSE OF CAPACITY ISSUES ON SEVERAL DIFFERENT TIMES OVER THE WEEKEND. SO WOW.
WHAT A BIG WEEKEND FOR OUR FIRE DEPARTMENT.
BIG SHOUTOUT TO THE BACK TO SCHOOL BOUNCEBACK SCHOOL EVENT.
EVERYBODY SPONSORED REALLY MADE THAT A HOMETOWN EVENT.
I APPRECIATE EVERYONE COMING OUT LAST NIGHT AND HAVING A GOOD TIME DOING THAT. WITH THAT, WE'LL SEE YOU IN TWO WEEKS. HAVE A GOOD TIME.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.